The local metric dimension is one of many topics in graph theory with several applications. One of its applications is a new model for assigning codes to customers in delivery services. Let G be a connected graph and V(G) be a vertex set of G. For an ordered set W={x1,x2,…,xk}⊆V(G), the representation of a vertex x with respect to W is rG(x|W)={(d(x,x1),d(x,x2),…,d(x,xk)}. The set W is said to be a local metric set of G if r(x|W)≠r(y|W) for every pair of adjacent vertices x and y in G. The eccentricity of a vertex x is the maximum distance between x and all other vertices in G. Among all vertices in G, the smallest eccentricity is called the radius of G and a vertex whose eccentricity equals the radius is called a central vertex of G. In this paper, we developed a new concept, so-called the central local metric dimension by combining the concept of local metric dimension with the central vertex of a graph. The set W is a central local metric set if W is a local metric set and contains all central vertices of G. The minimum cardinality of a central local metric set is called a central local metric dimension of G. In the main result, we introduce the definition of the central local metric dimension of a graph and some properties, then construct the central local metric dimensions for trees and establish results for the grid graph.
Citation: Yuni Listiana, Liliek Susilowati, Slamin Slamin, Fadekemi Janet Osaye. A central local metric dimension on acyclic and grid graph[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(9): 21298-21311. doi: 10.3934/math.20231085
[1] | Kung-Chi Chen, Kuo-Shing Chen . Pricing green financial options under the mixed fractal Brownian motions with jump diffusion environment. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(8): 21496-21523. doi: 10.3934/math.20241044 |
[2] | Jiali Wu, Maoning Tang, Qingxin Meng . A stochastic linear-quadratic optimal control problem with jumps in an infinite horizon. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(2): 4042-4078. doi: 10.3934/math.2023202 |
[3] | Xueqi Wen, Zhi Li . pth moment exponential stability and convergence analysis of semilinear stochastic evolution equations driven by Riemann-Liouville fractional Brownian motion. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(8): 14652-14671. doi: 10.3934/math.2022806 |
[4] | Noorah Mshary, Hamdy M. Ahmed, Ahmed S. Ghanem . Existence and controllability of nonlinear evolution equation involving Hilfer fractional derivative with noise and impulsive effect via Rosenblatt process and Poisson jumps. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(4): 9746-9769. doi: 10.3934/math.2024477 |
[5] | Rajesh Dhayal, Muslim Malik, Syed Abbas . Solvability and optimal controls of non-instantaneous impulsive stochastic neutral integro-differential equation driven by fractional Brownian motion. AIMS Mathematics, 2019, 4(3): 663-683. doi: 10.3934/math.2019.3.663 |
[6] | Kinda Abuasbeh, Ramsha Shafqat, Azmat Ullah Khan Niazi, Muath Awadalla . Nonlocal fuzzy fractional stochastic evolution equations with fractional Brownian motion of order (1,2). AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(10): 19344-19358. doi: 10.3934/math.20221062 |
[7] | Ramkumar Kasinathan, Ravikumar Kasinathan, Dumitru Baleanu, Anguraj Annamalai . Well posedness of second-order impulsive fractional neutral stochastic differential equations. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(9): 9222-9235. doi: 10.3934/math.2021536 |
[8] | Noorah Mshary, Hamdy M. Ahmed . Discussion on exact null boundary controllability of nonlinear fractional stochastic evolution equations in Hilbert spaces. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(3): 5552-5567. doi: 10.3934/math.2025256 |
[9] | Weiguo Liu, Yan Jiang, Zhi Li . Rate of convergence of Euler approximation of time-dependent mixed SDEs driven by Brownian motions and fractional Brownian motions. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(3): 2163-2195. doi: 10.3934/math.2020144 |
[10] | Xiuxian Chen, Zhongyang Sun, Dan Zhu . Mean-variance investment and risk control strategies for a dynamic contagion process with diffusion. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(11): 33062-33086. doi: 10.3934/math.20241580 |
The local metric dimension is one of many topics in graph theory with several applications. One of its applications is a new model for assigning codes to customers in delivery services. Let G be a connected graph and V(G) be a vertex set of G. For an ordered set W={x1,x2,…,xk}⊆V(G), the representation of a vertex x with respect to W is rG(x|W)={(d(x,x1),d(x,x2),…,d(x,xk)}. The set W is said to be a local metric set of G if r(x|W)≠r(y|W) for every pair of adjacent vertices x and y in G. The eccentricity of a vertex x is the maximum distance between x and all other vertices in G. Among all vertices in G, the smallest eccentricity is called the radius of G and a vertex whose eccentricity equals the radius is called a central vertex of G. In this paper, we developed a new concept, so-called the central local metric dimension by combining the concept of local metric dimension with the central vertex of a graph. The set W is a central local metric set if W is a local metric set and contains all central vertices of G. The minimum cardinality of a central local metric set is called a central local metric dimension of G. In the main result, we introduce the definition of the central local metric dimension of a graph and some properties, then construct the central local metric dimensions for trees and establish results for the grid graph.
In 2014, Li et al. [1] suggested a new class of inverse mixed variational inequality in Hilbert spaces that has simple problem of traffic network equilibrium control, market equilibrium issues as applications in economics and telecommunication network problems. The concept of gap function plays an important role in the development of iterative algorithms, an evaluation of their convergence properties and useful stopping rules for iterative algorithms, see [2,3,4,5]. Error bounds are very important and useful because they provide a measure of the distance between a solution set and a feasible arbitrary point. Solodov [6] developed some merit functions associated with a generalized mixed variational inequality, and used those functions to achieve mixed variational error limits. Aussel et al. [7] introduced a new inverse quasi-variational inequality (IQVI), obtained local (global) error bounds for IQVI in terms of certain gap functions to demonstrate the applicability of IQVI, and provided an example of road pricing problems, also see [8,9]. Sun and Chai [10] introduced regularized gap functions for generalized vector variation inequalities (GVVI) and obtained GVVI error bounds for regularized gap functions. Wu and Huang [11] implemented generalized f-projection operators to deal with mixed variational inequality. Using the generalized f-projection operator, Li and Li [12] investigated a restricted mixed set-valued variational inequality in Hilbert spaces and proposed four merit functions for the restricted mixed set valued variational inequality and obtained error bounds through these functions.
Our goal in this paper is to present a problem of generalized vector inverse quasi-variational inequality problems. They propose three gap functions, the residual gap function, the regularized gap function, and the global gap function, and obtain error bounds for generalized vector inverse quasi-variational inequality problem using these gap functions and generalized f-projection operator under the monotonicity and Lipschitz continuity of underlying mappings.
Throughout this article, R+ denotes the set of non-negative real numbers, 0 denotes the origins of all finite dimensional spaces, ‖⋅‖ and ⟨⋅,⋅⟩ denotes the norms and the inner products in finite dimensional spaces, respectively. Let Ω,F,P:Rn→Rn be the set-valued mappings with nonempty closed convex values, Ni:Rn×Rn→Rn(i=1,2,⋯,m) be the bi-mappings, B:Rn→Rn be the single-valued mappings, and fi:Rn→R(i=1,2,⋯,m) be real-valued convex functions. We put
f=(f1,f2,⋯,fm),N(⋅,⋅)=(N1(⋅,⋅),N2(⋅,⋅),⋯,Nm(⋅,⋅)), |
and for any x,w∈Rn,
⟨N(x,x),w⟩=(⟨N1(x,x),w⟩,⟨N2(x,x),w⟩,⋯,⟨Nn(x,x),w⟩). |
In this paper, we consider the following generalized vector inverse quasi-variational inequality for finding ˉx∈Ω(ˉx), ˉu∈F(ˉx) and ˉv∈P(ˉx) such that
⟨N(ˉu,ˉv),y−B(ˉx)⟩+f(y)−f(B(ˉx))∉−intRm+,∀y∈Ω(ˉx), | (2.1) |
and solution set is denoted by ℧.
Special cases:
(i) If P is a zero mapping and N(⋅,⋅)=N(⋅), then (2.1) reduces to the following problem for finding ˉx∈Ω(ˉx) and ˉu∈F(ˉx) such that
⟨N(ˉu),y−B(ˉx)⟩+f(y)−f(B(ˉx))∉−intRm+,∀y∈Ω(ˉx), | (2.2) |
studied in[13] and solution set is denoted by ℧1.
(ii) If F is single valued mapping, then (2.2) reduces to the following vector inverse mixed quasi-variational inequality for finding ˉx∈Ω(ˉx) such that
⟨N(ˉx),y−B(ˉx)⟩+f(y)−f(B(ˉx))∉−intRm+,∀y∈Ω(ˉx), | (2.3) |
studied in [14] and solution set is denoted by ℧2.
(iii) If C⊂Rn is a nonempty closed and convex subset, B(x)=x and Ω(x)=C for all x∈Rn, then (2.3) collapses to the following generalized vector variational inequality for finding ˉx∈C such that
⟨N(ˉx),y−x⟩+f(y)−f(ˉx)∉−intRm+,∀y∈C, | (2.4) |
which is considered in [10].
(iv) If f(x)=0 for all x∈Rn, then (2.4) reduces to vector variational inequality for finding ˉx∈C such that
⟨N(ˉx),y−x⟩∉−intRm+,∀y∈C, | (2.5) |
studied in [15].
(v) If Rm+=R+ then (2.5) reduces to variational inequality for finding ˉx∈C such that
⟨N(ˉx),y−x⟩≥0,∀y∈C, | (2.6) |
studied in [16].
Definition 2.1 [7] Let G:Rn→Rn and g:Rn→Rn be two maps.
(i) (G,g) is said to be a strongly monotone if there exists a constant μg>0 such that
⟨G(y)−G(x),g(y)−g(x)⟩≥μg‖y−x‖2,∀x,y∈Rn; |
(ii) g is said to be Lg-Lipschitz continuous if there exists a constant Lg>0 such that
‖g(x)−g(y)‖≤Lg‖x−y‖,∀x,y∈Rn. |
For any fixed γ>0, let G:RnטΩ→(−∞,+∞] be a function defined as follows:
G(φ,x)=‖x‖2−2⟨φ,x⟩+‖φ‖2+2γf(x),∀φ∈Rn,x∈˜Ω, | (2.7) |
where ˜Ω⊂Rn is a nonempty closed and convex subset, and f:Rn→R is convex.
Definition 2.2 [11] We say that ℷf˜Ω:Rn→2˜Ω is a generalized f-projection operator if
ℷf˜Ωφ={w∈˜Ω:G(φ,w)=infy∈˜ΩG(φ,y)},∀φ∈Rn. |
Remark 2.3 If f(x)=0 for all x∈˜Ω, then the generalized f-projection operator ℷf˜Ω is equivalent to the following metric projection operator:
P˜Ω(φ)={w∈˜Ω:‖w−φ‖=infy∈˜Ω‖y−φ‖},∀φ∈Rn. |
Lemma 2.4 [1,11] The following statements hold:
(i) For any given φ∈Rn,ℷf˜Ωφ is nonempty and single-valued;
(ii) For any given φ∈Rn,x=ℷf˜Ωφ if and only if
⟨x−φ,y−x⟩+γf(y)−γf(x)≥0,∀y∈˜Ω; |
(iii) ℷf˜Ω:Rn→Ω is nonexpansive, that is,
‖ℷf˜Ωx−ℷf˜Ωy‖≤‖x−y‖,∀x,y∈Rn. |
Lemma 2.5 [17] Let m be a positive number, B⊂Rn be a nonempty subset such that
‖d‖≤mfor alld∈B. |
Let Ω:Rn→Rn be a set-valued mapping such that, for each x∈Rn, Ω(x) is a closed convex set, and let f:Rn→R be a convex function on Rn. Assume that
(i) there exists a constant τ>0 such that
D(Ω(x),Ω(y))≤τ‖x−y‖,x,y∈Rn, |
where D(⋅,⋅) is a Hausdorff metric defined on Rn;
(ii) 0∈⋂w∈RnΩ(w);
(iii) f is ℓ-Lipschitz continuous on Rn. Then there exists a constant κ=√6τ(m+γℓ) such that
‖ℷfΩ(x)z−ℷfΩ(x)z‖≤κ‖x−y‖,∀x,y∈Rn,z∈B. |
Lemma 2.6 A function r:Rn→R is said to be a gap function for a generalized vector inverse quasi-variational inequality on a set ˜S⊂Rn if it satisfies the following properties:
(i) r(x)≥0for anyx∈˜S; (ii) r(ˉx)=0,ˉx∈˜S if and only if ˉx is a solution of (2.1).
Definition 2.7 Let B:Rn→Rn be the single-valued mapping and N:Rn×Rn→Rn be a bi-mapping.
(i) (N,B) is said to be a strongly monotone with respect to the first argument of N and B, if there exists a constant μB>0 such that
⟨N(y,⋅)−N(x,⋅),B(y)−B(x)⟩≥μB‖y−x‖2,∀x,y∈Rn; |
(ii) (N,B) is said to be a relaxed monotone with respect to the second argument of N and B, if there exists a constant ζB>0 such that
⟨N(⋅,y)−N(⋅,x),B(y)−B(x)⟩≥−ζB‖y−x‖2,∀x,y∈Rn; |
(iii) N is said to be σ-Lipschitz continuous with respect to the first argument with constant σ>0 and ℘-Lipschitz continuous with respect to the second argument with constant ℘>0 such that
‖N(x,ˉx)−N(y,ˉy)‖≤σ‖x−y‖+℘‖ˉx−ˉy‖,∀x,ˉx,y,ˉy∈Rn. |
(iv) B is said to be ℓ-Lipschitz continuous if there exists a constant ℓ>0 such that
‖B(x)−B(y)‖≤ℓ‖x−y‖,∀x,y∈Rn. |
Example 2.8 The variational inequality (2.6) can be solved by transforming it into an equivalent optimization problem for the so-called merit function r(⋅;τ):X=Rn→R∪{+∞} defined by
r(x;τ)=sup{⟨N(ˉx),y−x⟩X−τ‖ˉx−x‖2X|x∈C} for ˉx∈C, |
where τ is a nonnegative parameter. If X is finite dimensional, the function r(⋅;0) is usually called the gap function for τ=0, and the function r(⋅;τ) for τ>0 is called the regularized gap function.
Example 2.9 Assume that N:Rn→Rn be a given mapping and C a closed convex set in Rn. Let ⋎ and ⋏ be given scalar satisfying ⋎>⋏>0 then (2.6) has a D-gap function if
N⋎⋏(x)=N⋎(x)−N⋏(x),∀x∈Rn |
where D stands for difference.
In this section, we discuss the residual gap function for generalized vector inverse quasi-variational inequality problem by using the strong monotonicity, relaxed monotonicity, Hausdorff Lipschitz continuity and prove error bounds related to the residual gap function. We define the residual gap function for (2.1) as follows:
rγ(x)=min1≤i≤m{‖B(x)−ℷfiΩ(x)[B(x)−γNi(u,v)]‖},x∈Rn,u∈F(x),v∈P(x),γ>0. | (3.1) |
Theorem 3.1 Suppose that F,P:Rn→Rn are set-valued mappings and Ni:Rn×Rn→Rn(i=1,2,⋯,m) are the bi-mappings. Assume that B:Rn→Rn is single-valued mapping, then for any γ>0,rγ(x) is a gap function for (2.1) on Rn.
Proof. For any x∈Rn,
rγ(x)≥0. |
On the other side, if
rγ(ˉx)=0, |
then there exists 0≤i0≤m such that
B(ˉx)=ℷfi0Ω(ˉx)[B(ˉx)−γNi0(ˉu,ˉv)],∀ˉu∈F(ˉx),ˉv∈P(ˉx). |
From Lemma 2.4, we have
⟨B(ˉx)−[B(ˉx)−γNi0(ˉu,ˉv)],y−B(ˉx)⟩+γf(y)−γf(B(ˉx))≤0,∀y∈Ω(ˉx),ˉu∈F(ˉx),ˉv∈P(ˉx) |
and
⟨Ni0(ˉu,ˉv),y−B(ˉx)⟩+f(y)−f(B(ˉx))≤0,∀y∈Ω(ˉx),ˉu∈F(ˉx),ˉv∈P(ˉx). |
It gives that
⟨N(ˉu,ˉv),y−B(ˉx)⟩+f(y)−f(B(ˉx))∉−intRm+,∀y∈Ω(ˉx),ˉu∈F(ˉx),ˉv∈P(ˉx). |
Thus, ˉx is a solution of (2.1).
Conversely, if ˉx is a solution of (2.1), there exists 1≤i0≤m such that
⟨Ni0(ˉu,ˉv),y−B(ˉx)⟩+fi0(y)−fi0(B(ˉx))≥0,∀y∈Ω(ˉx),ˉu∈F(ˉx),ˉv∈P(ˉx). |
By using the Lemma 2.4, we have
B(ˉx)=ℷfi0Ω(ˉx)[B(ˉx)−γNi0(ˉu,ˉv)],∀ˉu∈F(ˉx),ˉv∈P(ˉx). |
This means that
rγ(ˉx)=min1≤i≤m{‖B(ˉx)−ℷfiΩ(ˉx)[B(ˉx)−γNi(ˉu,ˉv)]‖}=0. |
The proof is completed.
Next we will give the residual gap function rγ, error bounds for (2.1).
Theorem 3.2 Let F,P:Rn→Rn be D-ϑF-Lipschitz continuous and D-ϱP-Lipschitz continuous mappings, respectively. Let Ni:Rn×Rn→Rn(i=1,2,⋯,m) be σi-Lipschitz continuous with respect to the first argument and ℘i-Lipschits continuous with respect to the second argument, and B:Rn→Rn be ℓ-Lipschitz continuous, and (Ni,B) be strongly monotone with respect to the first argument of Ni and B with positive constant μBi, and relaxed monotone with respect to the second argument of Ni and B with positive constant ζBi. Let
m⋂i=1(℧i)≠∅. |
Assume that there exists κi∈(0,μBi−ζBiσiϑF+ϱP℘i) such that
‖ℷfiΩ(x)z−ℷfiΩ(y)z‖≤κi‖x−y‖,∀x,y∈Rn,u∈F(x),v∈P(x),z∈{w∣w=B(x)−γNi(u,v)}. | (3.2) |
Then, for any x∈Rn and μBi>ζBi+κi(σiϑF+℘iϱP),
γ>κiℓμBi−ζBi−κi(σiϑF+℘iϱP), |
d(x,℧)≤γ(σiϑF−℘iϱP)+ℓγ(μBi−ζBi−κi(σiϑF+℘iϱP))−κiℓrγ(x), |
where
d(x,℧)=infˉx∈℧‖x−ˉx‖ |
denotes the distance between the point x and the solution set ℧.
Proof. Since
m⋂i=1(℧i)≠∅. |
Let ˉx∈Ω(ˉx) be the solution of (2.1) and thus for any i∈{1,⋯,m}, we have
⟨Ni(ˉu,ˉv),y−B(ˉx)⟩+fi(y)−fi(B(ˉx))≥0,∀y∈Ω(ˉx),ˉu∈F(ˉx),ˉv∈P(ˉx). | (3.3) |
From the definition of ℷfiΩ(ˉx)[B(x)−γNi(u,v)], and Lemma 2.4, we have
⟨ℷfiΩ(ˉx)[B(x)−γNi(u,v)]−(B(x)−γNi(u,v)),y−ℷfiΩ(ˉx)[B(x)−γNi(u,v)]⟩+γfi(y)−γfi(ℷfiΩ(ˉx)[B(x)−γNi(u,v)])≥0,∀y∈Ω(ˉx),u∈F(x),v∈P(x). | (3.4) |
Since
ˉx∈m⋂i=1(℧i),andB(ˉx)∈Ω(ˉx). |
Replacing y by B(ˉx) in (3.4), we get
⟨ℷfiΩ(ˉx)[B(x)−γNi(u,v)]−(B(x)−γNi(u,v)),B(ˉx)−ℷfiΩ(ˉx)[B(x)−γNi(u,v)]⟩+γfi(B(ˉx))−γfi(ℷfiΩ(ˉx)[B(x)−γNi(u,v)])≥0,∀u∈F(x),v∈P(x). | (3.5) |
Since
ℷfiΩ(ˉx)[B(x)−γNi(u,v)]∈Ω(ˉx), |
from (3.3), it follows that
⟨γNi(ˉu,ˉv),ℷfiΩ(ˉx)[B(x)−γNi(u,v)]−B(ˉx)⟩+γfi(ℷfiΩ(ˉx)[B(x)−γNi(u,v)])−γfi(B(ˉx))≥0. | (3.6) |
Utilizing (3.5) and (3.6), we have
⟨γNi(ˉu,ˉv)−γNi(u,v)−ℷfiΩ(ˉx)[B(x)−γNi(u,v)]+B(x),ℷfiΩ(ˉx)[B(x)−γNi(u,v)]−B(ˉx)⟩≥0, |
which implies that
⟨γNi(ˉu,ˉv)−γNi(u,v),ℷfiΩ(ˉx)[B(x)−γNi(u,v)]−B(x)⟩−⟨γNi(ˉu,ˉv)−γNi(u,v),B(ˉx)−B(x)⟩ |
+⟨B(x)−ℷfiΩ(ˉx)[B(x)−γNi(u,v)],ℷfiΩ(ˉx)[B(x)−γNi(u,v)]−B(x)⟩ |
+⟨B(x)−ℷfiΩ(ˉx)[B(x)−γNi(u,v)],B(x)−B(ˉx)⟩≥0. |
Since F is D-ϑF-Lipschitz continuous, P is D-ϱP-Lipschits continuous and Ni is σi-Lipschitz continuous with respect to the first argument and ℘i-Lipschitz continuous with respect to the second argument, we have
‖ˉu−u‖≤D(F(ˉx),F(x))≤ϑF‖ˉx−x‖;‖ˉv−v‖≤D(P(ˉx),P(x))≤ϱP‖ˉx−x‖;‖Ni(ˉu,ˉv)−Ni(u,v)‖≤σi‖ˉu−u‖+℘i‖ˉv−v‖. | (3.7) |
Again, for i=1,2,⋯,m, (Ni,B) are strongly monotone with respect to the first argument of Ni and B with a positive constant μBi,, and relaxed monotone with respect to the second argument of Ni and B with a positive constant ζBi, we have
⟨γNi(ˉu,ˉv)−γNi(u,v),ℷfiΩ(ˉx)[B(x)−γNi(u,v)]−B(x)⟩−‖B(x)−ℷfiΩ(ˉu)[B(x)−γNi(u,v)]‖2 |
+⟨B(x)−ℷfiΩ(ˉx)[B(x)−γNi(u,v)],B(x)−B(ˉx)⟩≥γμBi‖x−ˉx‖2−γζBi‖x−ˉx‖2. |
By adding ℷfiΩ(x)[B(x)−γNi(u,v)] and using the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality along with the triangular inequality, we have
‖γNi(ˉu,ˉv)−γNi(u,v)‖{‖ℷfiΩ(ˉx)[B(x)−γNi(u,v)]−ℷfiΩ(x)[B(x)−γNi(u,v)]‖ |
+‖ℷfiΩ(x)[B(x)−γNi(u,v)]−B(x)‖} |
+‖B(x)−B(ˉx)‖{‖B(x)−ℷfiΩ(x)[B(x)−γNi(u,v)]‖+‖ℷfiΩ(x)[B(x)−γNi(u,v)] |
−ℷfiΩ(ˉx)[B(x)−γNi(u,v)]‖}≥γμBi‖x−ˉx‖2−γζBi‖x−ˉx‖2. |
Using the (3.7) and condition (3.2), we have
(σiϑF+℘iϱP)γ‖ˉx−x‖{κi‖ˉx−x‖+‖ℷfiΩ(x)[B(x)−γNi(u,v)]−B(x)‖} |
+ℓ‖x−ˉx‖{‖B(x)−ℷfiΩ(x)[B(x)−γNi(u,v)]‖+κi‖x−ˉx‖}≥γ(μBi−ζBi)‖x−ˉx‖2. |
Hence, for any x∈Rn and i∈{1,2,⋯,m}, μBi>ζBi+κi(σiϑF+℘iϱP),
γ>κiℓμBi−ζBi−κi(σiϑF+℘iϱP), |
we have
‖x−ˉx‖≤γ(σiϑF+℘iϱP)+ℓγ(μBi−ζBi−κi(σiϑF+℘iϱP))−κiℓ‖B(x)−ℷfiΩ(x)[B(x)−γNi(u,v)]‖,∀u∈F(x),v∈P(x). |
This implies
‖x−ˉx‖≤γ(σiϑF+℘iϱP)+ℓγ(μBi−ζBi−κi(σiϑF+℘iϱP))−κiℓmin1≤i≤m{‖B(x)−ℷfiΩ(x)[B(x)−γNi(u,v)]‖} |
which means that
d(x,℧)≤‖x−ˉx‖≤γ(σiϑF+℘iϱP)+ℓγ(μBi−ζBi−κi(σiϑF+℘iϱP))−κiℓrγ(x). |
The proof is completed.
The regularized gap function for (2.1) is defined for all x∈Rn as follows:
ϕγ(x)=min1≤i≤msupy∈Ω(x),u∈F(x),v∈P(x){⟨Ni(u,v),B(x)−y⟩+fi(B(x))−fi(y)−12γ‖B(x)−y‖2} |
where γ>0 is a parameter.
Lemma 4.1 We have
ϕγ(x)=min1≤i≤m{⟨Ni(u,v),Riγ(x)⟩+fi(B(x))−fi(B(x)−Riγ(x))−12γ‖Riγ(x)‖2}, | (4.1) |
where
Riγ(x)=B(x)−ℷfiΩ(x)[B(x)−γNi(u,v)],∀x∈Rn,u∈F(x),v∈P(x) |
and if
x∈B−1(Ω) |
and
B−1(Ω)={ξ∈Rn|B(ξ)∈Ω(ξ)}, |
then
ϕγ(x)≥12γrγ(x)2. | (4.2) |
Proof. For given x∈Rn,u∈F(x),v∈P(x) and i∈{1,2,⋯,m}, set
ψi(x,y)=⟨Ni(u,v),B(x)−y⟩+fi(B(x))−fi(y)−12γ‖B(x)−y‖2,y∈Rn. |
Consider the following problem:
gi(x)=maxy∈Ω(x)ψi(x,y). |
Since ψi(x,⋅) is a strongly concave function and Ω(x) is nonempty closed convex, the above optimization problem has a unique solution z∈Ω(x). Evoking the condition of optimality at z, we get
0∈Ni(u,v)+∂fi(z)+1γ(z−B(x))+NΩ(x)(z), |
where NΩ(x)(z) is the normal cone at z to Ω(x) and ∂fi(z) denotes the subdifferential of fi at z. Therefore,
⟨z−(B(x)−γNi(u,v)),y−z⟩+γfi(y)−γfi(z)≥0,∀y∈Ω(x),u∈F(x),v∈P(x) |
and so
z=ℷfiΩ(x)[B(x)−γNi(u,v)],∀u∈F(x),v∈P(x). |
Hence gi(x) can be rewritten as
gi(x)=⟨Ni(u,v),B(x)−ℷfiΩ(x)[B(x)−γNi(u,v)]⟩+fi(B(x))−fi(ℷfiΩ(x)[B(x)−γNi(u,v)]) |
−12γ‖B(x)−ℷfiΩ(x)[B(x)−γNi(u,v)]‖2,∀u∈F(x),v∈P(x). |
Letting
Riγ(x)=B(x)−ℷfiΩ(x)[B(x)−γNi(u,v)],∀u∈F(x),v∈P(x), |
we get
gi(x)=⟨Ni(u,v),Riγ(x)⟩+fi(B(x))−fi(B(x)−Riγ(x))−12γ‖Riγ(x)‖2,∀u∈F(x),v∈P(x), | (4.3) |
(4.4) |
and so
ϕγ(x)=min1≤i≤m{⟨Ni(u,v),Riγ(x)⟩+fi(B(x))−fi(B(x)−Riγ(x))−12γ‖Riγ(x)‖2}. |
From the definition of projection ℷfiΩ(x)[B(x)−γNi(u,v)], we have
⟨ℷfiΩ(x)[B(x)−γNi(u,v)]−B(x)+γNi(u,v),y−ℷfiΩ(x)[B(x)−γNi(u,v)]⟩+γfi(y)−γfi(ℷfiΩ(x)[B(x)−γNi(u,v)])≥0,∀u∈F(x),v∈P(x). | (4.5) |
For any x∈B−1(Ω), we have
B(x)∈Ω(x). |
Therefore, putting y=B(x) in (4.5), we get
⟨γNi(u,v)−Riγ(x),Riγ(x)⟩+γfi(B(x))−γfi(B(x)−Riγ(x))≥0,∀u∈F(x),v∈P(x), |
that is,
⟨Ni(u,v),Riγ(x)⟩+fi(B(x))−fi(B(x)−Riγ(x))≥1γ⟨Riγ(x),Riγ(x)⟩=1γ‖Riγ(x)‖2. | (4.6) |
From the definition of rγ(x) and (4.1), we get
ϕγ(x)≥12γrγ(x)2. |
The proof is completed.
Theorem 4.2 For γ>0,ϕγ is a gap function for (2.1) on the set
B−1(Ω)={ξ∈Rn|B(ξ)∈Ω(ξ)}. |
Proof. From the definition of ϕγ, we have
ϕγ(x)≥min1≤i≤m{⟨Ni(u,v),B(x)−y⟩+fi(B(x))−fi(y)−12γ‖B(x)−y‖2},for ally∈Ω(x),u∈F(x),v∈P(x). | (4.7) |
Therefore, for any x∈B−1(Ω), putting y=B(x) in (4.7), we have
ϕγ(x)≥0. |
Suppose that ˉx∈B−1(ξ) with ϕγ(ˉx)=0. From (4.2), it follows that
rγ(ˉx)=0, |
which implies that ˉx is the solution of (2.1).
Conversely, if ˉx is a solution of (2.1), there exists 1≤i0≤m such that
⟨Ni0(ˉu,ˉv),B(ˉx)−y⟩+fi0(B(ˉx))−fi0(y)≤0,∀y∈Ω(ˉx),ˉu∈F(ˉx),ˉv∈P(ˉx), |
which means that
min1≤i≤m{supy∈Ω(ˉx),ˉu∈F(ˉx),ˉv∈P(ˉx){⟨Ni(ˉu,ˉv),B(ˉx)−y⟩+fi(B(ˉx))−fi(y)−12γ‖B(ˉx)−y‖2}}≤0. |
Thus,
ϕγ(ˉx)≤0. |
The preceding claim leads to
ϕγ(ˉx)≥0 |
and it implies that
ϕγ(ˉx)=0. |
The proof is completed.
Since ϕγ can act as a gap function for (2.1), according to Theorem 4.2, investigating the error bound properties that can be obtained with ϕγ is interesting. The following corollary is obtained directly by Theorem 3.2 and (3.5).
Corollary 4.3 Let F,P:Rn→Rn be D-ϑF-Lipschitz continuous and D-ϱP-Lipschitz continuous mappings, respectively. Let Ni:Rn×Rn→Rn(i=1,2,⋯,m) be σi-Lipschitz continuous with respect to the first argument and ℘i-Lipschitz continuous with respect to the second argument, B:Rn→Rn be ℓ-Lipschitz continuous, and (Ni,B) be strongly monotone with respect to the first argument of N and B with respect to the constant μBi>0, and relaxed monotone with respect to the second argument of N and B with respect to the constant ζBi>0. Let
m⋂i=1(℧i)≠∅. |
Assume that there exists κi∈(0,μBi−ζBiϑFσi+℘iϱP) such that
‖ℷfiΩ(x)z−ℷfiΩ(y)z‖≤κi‖x−y‖,∀x,y∈Rn,u∈F(x),v∈P(x)∀z∈{w∣w=B(x)−γNi(u,v)}. |
Then, for any x∈B−1(Ω) and any
γ>κiℓμBi−ζBi−κi(ϑFσi+℘iϱP), |
d(x,℧)≤γ(ϑFσi+℘iϱP)+ℓγ(μBi−ζBi−κi(ϑFσi+℘iϱP))−κiℓ√2γϕγ(x). |
The regularized gap function ϕγ does not provide global error bounds for (2.1) on Rn. In this section, we first discuss the D-gap function, see [6] for (2.1), which gives Rn the global error bound for (2.1).
For (2.1) with ⋏>⋎>0, the D-gap function is defined as follows:
G⋏⋎(x)=min1≤i≤m{supy∈Ω(x),u∈F(x),v∈P(x){⟨Ni(u,v),B(x)−y⟩+fi(B(x))−fi(y)−12⋏‖B(x)−y‖2}−supy∈Ω(x)u∈F(x),v∈P(x){⟨Ni(u,v),B(x)−y⟩+fi(B(x))−fi(y)−12⋎‖B(x)−y‖2}}. |
From (4.1), we know G⋏⋎ can be rewritten as
G⋏⋎(x)=min1≤i≤m{⟨Ni(u,v),Ri⋏(x)⟩+fi(B(x))−fi(B(x)−Ri⋏(x))−12⋏‖Ri⋏(x)‖2−(⟨Ni(u,v),Ri⋎(x)⟩+fi(B(x))−fi(B(x)−Ri⋎(x))−12⋎‖Ri⋎(x)‖2)}, |
where
Ri⋏(x)=B(x)−ℷfiΩ(x)[B(x)−⋏Ni(u,v)] |
and
Ri⋎(x)=B(x)−ℷfiΩ(x)[B(x)−⋎Ni(u,v)],∀x∈Rn,u∈F(x),v∈P(x). |
Theorem 5.1 For any x∈Rn,⋏>⋎>0, we have
12(1⋎−1⋏)r2⋎(x)≤G⋏⋎(x)≤12(1⋎−1⋏)r2⋏(x). | (5.1) |
Proof. From the definition of G⋏⋎(x), it follows that
G⋏⋎(x)=min1≤i≤m{⟨Ni(u,v),Ri⋏(x)−Ri⋎(x)⟩−fi(B(x)−Ri⋏(x))−12⋏‖Ri⋏(x)‖2+fi(B(x)−Ri⋎(x))+12⋎‖Ri⋎(x)‖2},∀u∈F(x),v∈P(x). |
For any given i∈{1,2,⋯,m}, we set
gi⋏⋎(x)=⟨Ni(u,v),Ri⋏(x)−Ri⋎(x)⟩−fi(B(x)−Ri⋏(x))−12⋏‖Ri⋏(x)‖2+fi(B(x)−Ri⋎(x))+12⋎‖Ri⋎(x)‖2,∀u∈F(x),v∈P(x). | (5.2) |
From ℷfiΩ(x)[B(x)−⋎Ni(u,v)]∈Ω(x), by Lemma 2.4, we know
⟨ℷfiΩ(x)[B(x)−⋏Ni(u,v)]−(B(x)−⋏Ni(u,v)),ℷfiΩ(x)[B(x)−⋎Ni(u,v)]−ℷfiΩ(x)[B(x)−⋏Ni(u,v)]⟩ |
+⋏fi(ℷfiΩ(x)[B(x)−⋎Ni(u,v)])−⋏fi(ℷfiΩ(x)[B(x)−⋏Ni(u,v)])≥0,∀u∈F(x),v∈P(x) |
which means that
⟨⋏Ni(u,v)−Ri⋏(x),Ri⋏(x)−Ri⋎(x)⟩+⋏fi(B(x)−Ri⋎(x))−⋏fi(B(x)−Ri⋏(x))≥0. | (5.3) |
Combining (5.2) and (5.3), we get
gi⋏⋎(x)≥1⋏⟨Ri⋏(x),Ri⋏(x)−Ri⋎(x)⟩−12⋏‖Ri⋏(x)‖2+12⋎‖Ri⋎(x)‖2=12⋏‖Ri⋏(x)−Ri⋎(x)‖2+12(1⋎−1⋏)‖Ri⋎(x)‖2. | (5.4) |
Since
ℷfiΩ(x)[B(x)−⋏Ni(u,v)]∈Ω(x), |
from Lemma 2.4, we have
⟨ℷfiΩ(x)[B(x)−⋎Ni(u,v)]−(B(x)−⋎Ni(u,v)),ℷfiΩ(x)[B(x)−⋏Ni(u,v)]−ℷfiΩ(x)[B(x)−⋎Ni(u,v)]⟩ |
+⋎fi(ℷfiΩ(x)[B(x)−⋏Ni(u,v)])−⋎fi(ℷfiΩ(x)[B(x)−⋎Ni(u,v)])≥0,∀u∈F(x),v∈P(x). |
Hence
⟨⋎Ni(u,v)−Ri⋎(x),Ri⋎(x)−Ri⋏(x)⟩+⋎fi(B(x)−Ri⋏(x)) |
−⋎fi(B(x)−Ri⋎(x))≥0,∀u∈F(x),v∈P(x) |
and so
1⋎⟨Ri⋎(x),Ri⋏(x)−Ri⋎(x)⟩≥⟨Ni(u,v),Ri⋏(x)−Ri⋎(x)⟩−fi(B(x)−Ri⋏(x))+fi(B(x)−Ri⋎(x)). |
It will require and (5.3),
gi⋏⋎(x)≤1⋎⟨Ri⋎(x),Ri⋏(x)−Ri⋎(x)⟩−12⋏‖Ri⋏(x)‖2+12⋎‖Ri⋎(x)‖2=−12⋎‖Ri⋏(x)−Ri⋎(x)‖2+12(1⋎−1⋏)‖Ri⋏(x)‖2. | (5.5) |
From (5.4) and (5.5), for any i∈{1,2,⋯,m}, we get
12(1⋎−1⋏)‖Ri⋎(x)‖2≤gi⋏⋎(x)≤12(1⋎−1⋏)‖Ri⋏(x)‖2. |
Hence
12(1⋎−1⋏)min1≤i≤m{‖Ri⋎(x)‖2}≤min1≤i≤m{gi⋏⋎(x)}≤12(1⋎−1⋏)min1≤i≤m{‖Ri⋏(x)‖2}, |
and so
12(1⋎−1⋏)r2⋎(x)≤G⋏⋎(x)≤12(1⋎−1⋏)r2⋏(x). |
The proof is completed.
Now we are in position to prove that G⋏⋎ in the set Rn is a global gap function for (2.1).
Theorem 5.2 For 0<⋎<⋏, G⋏⋎ is a gap function for (2.1) on Rn.
Proof. From (5.2), we have
G⋏⋎(x)≥0,∀x∈Rn. |
Suppose that ˉx∈Rn with
G⋏⋎(ˉx)=0, |
then (5.2) implies that
r⋎(ˉx)=0. |
From Theorem 3.1, we know ˉx is a solution of (2.1).
Conversely, if ˉx is a solution of (2.1), than from Theorem 3.1, it follows that
r⋏(ˉx)=0. |
Obviously, (5.2) shows that
G⋏⋎(ˉx)=0. |
The proof is completed.
Use Theorem 3.2 and (5.2), we immediately get a global error bound in the set Rn for (2.1).
Corollary 5.3 Let F,P:Rn→Rn be D-ϑF-Lipschitz continuous and D-ϱP-Lipschitz continuous mappings, respectively. Let Ni:Rn×Rn→Rn(i=1,2,⋯,m) be σi-Lipschitz continuous with respect to the first argument and ℘i-Lipschitz continuous with respect to the second argument, and B:Rn→Rn be ℓ-Lipschitz continuous. Let (Ni,B) be the strongly monotone with respect to the first argument of Ni and B with constant μBi and relaxed monotone with respect to the second argument of N and B with modulus ζBi. Let
m⋂i=1(℧i)≠∅. |
Assume that there exists κi∈(0,μBi−ζBiϑFσi+℘iϱP) such that
‖ℷfiΩ(x)z−ℷfiΩ(y)z‖≤κi‖x−y‖,∀x,y∈Rn,u∈F(x),v∈P(x),z∈{w∣w=B(x)−⋎Ni(u,v)}. |
Then, for any x∈Rn and
⋎>κiℓμBi−ζBi−κi(ϑFσi+℘iϱP), |
d(x,℧i)≤⋎(ϑFσi+ϱP℘i)+ℓ⋎(μBi−ζBi−κi(ϑFσi+ϱP℘i))−κiℓ√2⋏⋎⋏−⋎G⋏⋎(x). |
One of the traditional approaches to evaluating a variational inequality (VI) and its variants is to turn into an analogous optimization problem by notion of a gap function. In addition, gap functions play a pivotal role in deriving the so-called error bounds that provide a measure of the distances between the solution set and feasible arbitrary point. Motivated and inspired by the researches going on in this direction, the main purpose of this paper is to further study the generalized vector inverse quasi-variational inequality problem (1.2) and to obtain error bounds in terms of the residual gap function, the regularized gap function, and the global gap function by utilizing the relaxed monotonicity and Hausdorff Lipschitz continuity. These error bounds provide effective estimated distances between an arbitrary feasible point and the solution set of (1.2).
The authors are very grateful to the referees for their careful reading, comments and suggestions, which improved the presentation of this article.
This work was supported by the Scientific Research Fund of Science and Technology Department of Sichuan Provincial (2018JY0340, 2018JY0334) and the Scientific Research Fund of SiChuan Provincial Education Department (16ZA0331).
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
[1] | R. Diestel, Graphs theory, New York: Springer-Verlag Heidelberg, 2005. |
[2] | G. Chartrand, L. Lesniak, P. Zhang, Graphs & Digraphs, 6 Eds., New York: Chapman and Hall/CRC, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1201/b19731 |
[3] | P. Slater, Dominating and reference sets in a graph, J. Math. Phys. Sci., 22 (1988), 445–455. |
[4] | F. Harary, R. A. Melter, On the metric dimension of a graph, Ars Combinatoria, 2 (1976), 191–195. |
[5] |
G. Chartrand, L. Eroh, M. A. Johnson, O. R. Oellermann, Resolvability in graphs and the metric dimension of a graph, Discrete. Appl. Math., 105 (2000), 99–113. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0166-218X(00)00198-0. doi: 10.1016/S0166-218X(00)00198-0
![]() |
[6] |
L. Susilowati, A. Nurrona, U. Purwati, The complement metric dimension of the joint graph, AAIP Conf. P., 2329 (2021), 020003. http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/5.0042149 doi: 10.1063/5.0042149
![]() |
[7] |
M. Feng, B. Lv, K. Wang, On the fractional metric dimension of graphs, Discrete Appl. Math., 170 (2014), 55–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/J.DAM.2014.01.006 doi: 10.1016/J.DAM.2014.01.006
![]() |
[8] |
J. R. Velázquez, I. Yero, D. Kuziak, O. Oellermann, On the strong metric dimension of cartesian and direct products of graphs, Discrete Math., 335 (2014), 8–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.disc.2014.06.023 doi: 10.1016/j.disc.2014.06.023
![]() |
[9] |
L. Susilowati, I. Saadah, R. Z. Fauziyyah, A. Erfanian, S. Slamin, The dominant metric dimension of graphs, Heliyon, 6 (2020), e03633. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e03633 doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e03633
![]() |
[10] |
A. Kelenc, D. Kuziak, A. Taranenko, I. Yero, Mixed metric dimension of graphs, Appl. Math. Comput., 314 (2017), 429–438. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2017.07.027 doi: 10.1016/j.amc.2017.07.027
![]() |
[11] |
A. Kelenc, N. Tratnik, I. Yero, Uniquely identifying the edges of a graph: The edge metric dimension, Discrete Appl. Math., 251 (2018), 204–220. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dam.2018.05.052 doi: 10.1016/j.dam.2018.05.052
![]() |
[12] |
M. Basak, L. Saha, G. Das, T. Kalishankar, Fault-tolerant metric dimension of circulant graphs Cn(1,2,3), Theor. Comput. Sci., 817 (2020), 66–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tcs.2019.01.011 doi: 10.1016/j.tcs.2019.01.011
![]() |
[13] |
L. Saha, B. Das, T. Kalishankar, D. K. Chandra, S. Yilun, Optimal multi-level fault-tolerant resolving sets of circulant graph C(n:1,2), Mathematics, 11 (2023), 1–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/math11081896 doi: 10.3390/math11081896
![]() |
[14] |
F. Okamoto, L. Crosse, B. Phinezy, P. Zhang, The local metric dimension of a graph, Math. Bohem., 135 (2010), 239–255. http://dx.doi.org/10.21136/mb.2010.140702 doi: 10.21136/mb.2010.140702
![]() |
[15] | H. Benish, M. Murtaza, I. Javaid, The fractional local metric dimension of graphs, arXiv: 1810.02882, 2018. https://arXiv.org/abs/1810.02882v1 |
[16] |
G. B. Ramírez, J. R. Velázquez, The local metric dimension of strong product graphs, Graph. Combinator., 32 (2016), 1263–1278. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/S00373-015-1653-Z doi: 10.1007/S00373-015-1653-Z
![]() |
[17] | R. Umilasari, L. Susilowati, S. Slamin, S. Prabhu, On the dominant local metric dimension of corona product graphs, IAENG Int. J. Appl. Math., 52 (2022), 1098–1104. |
[18] |
L. Susilowati, S. Slamin, M. I. Utoyo, N. Estuningsih, The similarity of metric dimension and local metric dimension of rooted product graph, Far East J. Math. Sci., 97 (2015), 841–856. http://dx.doi.org/10.17654/FJMSAug2015_841_856 doi: 10.17654/FJMSAug2015_841_856
![]() |
[19] |
L. Susilowati, M. I. Utoyo, S. Slamin, On commutative characterization of generalized comb and corona products of graphs with respect to the local metric dimension, Far East J. Math. Sci., 100 (2016), 643–660. http://dx.doi.org/10.17654/MS100040643 doi: 10.17654/MS100040643
![]() |
[20] |
L. Susilowati, M. I. Utoyo, S. Slamin, On commutative characterization of graph operation with respect to metric dimension, J. Math. Fundam. Sci., 49 (2017), 156–170. http://dx.doi.org/10.5614/J.MATH.FUND.SCI.2017.49.2.5 doi: 10.5614/J.MATH.FUND.SCI.2017.49.2.5
![]() |
[21] |
S. Klavžar, M. Tavakoli, Local metric dimension of graphs: Generalized hierarchical products and some applications, Appl. Math. Comput., 364 (2020). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2019.124676 doi: 10.1016/j.amc.2019.124676
![]() |
[22] | F. Harary, Graph theory, USA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1969. https://doi.org/10.21236/AD0705364 |
[23] | J. Bondy, U. Murty, Graphs theory, New York: Springer, 2008. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84628-970-5 |
1. | Dimplekumar Chalishajar, K. Ravikumar, K. Ramkumar, A. Anguraj, Null controllability of Hilfer fractional stochastic differential equations with nonlocal conditions, 2022, 0, 2155-3289, 0, 10.3934/naco.2022029 |