G-coupling functions arxiv: v1 [math.oc] 18 Oct 2012

Transcription

1 Optimization Vol. 00, No. 00, Month-Month 200x, 1 26 G-coupling unctions arxiv: v1 [math.oc] 18 Oct 2012 MORALES SILVA D.M. 1, RUBINOV A.M. 2 and SOSA W. 3 1 SITMS, University o Ballarat, Victoria 3353, Australia @s2.ballarat.edu.au 2 SITMS, University o Ballarat, Victoria 3353, Australia. a.rubinov@ballarat.edu.au 3 IMCA, Universidad Nacional de Ingeniería, Jirón Ancash 536, Lima 1, Lima, Perú, sosa@uni.edu.pe (Received 00 Month 200x; In inal orm 00 Month 200x) GAP unctions are useul or solving Optimization Problems, but the literature contains a variety o dierent concepts o GAP unctions. It is interesting to point out that these concepts have many similarities. Here we introduce G-coupling unctions, thus presenting a way to take advantage o these common properties. Keywords: General conjugation theory; non convex optimization; equilibrium problems; gap unctions Mathematics Subject Classiications: 1 Introduction For solving non-convex optimization problems, a tool that is becoming more important is generalized conjugation. In this paper we introduce a amily o coupling unctions, the G-coupling unctions, which will allow us to see in a dierent way duality schemes. The usual properties ound in the literature ( [11], [13]) are related to a ixed coupling unction, but here we consider (or a speciied unction ) a amily o coupling unctions. These coupling unctions are motivated by gap unctions. It is interesting to point out, that many o these(gap) unctions have similar properties. However, in some cases they are unctions o one vector and it is important, since they are linked to speciied optimization problems, that those unctions have zeros. G-coupling unctions will be deined as unctions in two variables and they might not have zeros. Even more, given a speciied proper unction, it is shown that a sub-amily o this amily o coupling unctions satisies many

2 2 interesting properties. In Section 2, we describe how many gap unctions have similar properties, which are useul or the deinition o G-coupling unctions. In Section 3, it is ound the deinition o G-coupling unction with properties related to generalized conjugation using this amily o unctions and a ixed proper unction. InSection 4, it can beseenhow theseideas canbeappliedin theequilibrium Problem. 2 Motivation In several works already published, there can be ound deinitions o GAP unctions or particular problems. Now we present 3 concrete examples. In [4], it is consider the ollowing Variational Inequality Problem: (VIP) Find x 0 C, such that, y T(x 0 ) with y,x x 0 0 x C, where T is a maximal monotone correspondence (i.e., u v,x y 0 or every u T(x), v T(y) with x,y C and i there exists v, such that u v,x y 0, or all x,y C and or all u T(x), then v T(y)). It is ound as a GAP unction the ollowing one: h T,C (x) := sup v,x y, (v,y) G C(T) where G C (T) = (v,y) : v T(y), y C} and C is a non-empty closed convex set. This unction happens to be non-negative and convex, and it is equal to zero only in solutions o (VIP). The theory o the Equilibrium Problem begun with the paper written by Blum and Oettli [3]: (EP) Find x K, such that (x,y) 0, y K, where K IR n is a non-empty closed convex set and : K K IR is a unction that satisies: i) (x,x) = 0, or all x K. ii) (x, ) : K IR is convex and l.s.c. iii) (,y) : K IR is u.s.c.

3 3 The GAP unction is deined as ( [8], [13]): sup (x,y) i y K g (y) := x K + in other case. In this case, the unction g is non-negative, convex and l.s.c. and i it vanishes at x 0, then x 0 is a solution o (EP). In [16], the Extended Pre-Variational Inequality Problem is considered: (EPVIP) Find x 0 IR n, such that F(x 0 ),η(x,x 0 ) (x 0 ) (x), x IR n, where F : IR n IR n, η : IR n IR n IR n and : IR n IR + }. In this work, the GAP unction is min[ F(x),η(y,x) (x)+(y)], y IR n which is non-positive and it only reaches the value zero in solutions o (EPVIP). In all these examples, gap unctions are used to transorm an special Equilibrium Problem (or example the VIP is a particular class o EP) into a minimization problem. Now our attention is ocused in using coupling unctions that could be related, at least in some general aspect, to GAP unctions. Thereore these unctions must link both primal and dual variables. Since these coupling unctions must be related to a sense o gap, we consider these unctions as non-negative and with 2 arguments. Let us remember that or the minimization problem, the convex conjugation theory allows us to generate a dual problem and there is implicit another concept o gap unction (see [6]): consider α = in[(x) : x IR n ]. (P) Deine a unction ϕ : IR n IR p IR, where IR = IR,+ }, satisying ϕ(x,0) = (x), x IR n. Then ϕ will be called a perturbation unction and the unction h : IR p IR deined by h(u) = in x IR n ϕ(x,u)

4 4 will be called the marginal unction. Observe that α = h(0) = in x IR n ϕ(x,0) = in x IR n (x). Considering now h, the convex bi-conjugate (see [10]) o h one has: where Then, making β = h (0), one has h (0) h(0) = α h (0) = sup[ u,0 h (u ) : u IR p ]. β = in u IR ph (u ). (Q) (Q) is called dual problem o (P) and in general we have β α. It is said that there is no duality gap whenever h (0) = h(0). It is easy to prove that h (u ) = ϕ (0,u ), and i we deine the unction k : IR n IR by k(x ) := in u IR pϕ (x,u ), then β = k(0). This analysis is summarized in the ollowing scheme: α = in(x) (P) β = inh (u ) (Q) ϕ(x,0) = (x), x IR n ϕ (0,u ) = h (u ), u IR p h(u) = in ϕ(x,u) x k(x ) = in u ϕ (x,u ) α = h(0) β = k(0) β α. I h is proper and convex, a necessary and suicient condition or ensuring that there will be no duality gap ( β = α) is that h be l.s.c. at 0 (in general ϕ l.s.c. does not imply that h would be l.s.c.). Further more, i h is convex, l.s.c. and 0 ri(dom(h)), then α = β and the dual problem has at least one optimal solution, and i u is an optimal solution o (Q) and ϕ = ϕ, then x is an optimal solution o (P) (x)+h (u ) = 0.

5 5 Consider now the unction g : IR n IR p IR deined by: g(x,u ) = (x)+h (u ). This unction vanishes at (x 0,u 0 ) i and only i x 0 solves the primal problem and u 0 solves the dual one. In addition, this unction is non-negative and i the irst variable is kept ixed, the unction is convex and l.s.c. It is clear now, which properties are satisied or many gap unctions. 3 Generalized Conjugation Deinition 3.1 A non-negative unction g : IR n IR m IR will be called a G-coupling unction, i there exists a non-empty closed set C IR m such that: (D1) dom(g) = IR n C, which means that g : IR n C IR and g(x,x ) = + or every x / C. (D2) in x IR n, x C g(x,x ) = 0. Deine F n,m = g : IR n IR m IR : g is a G-coupling unction}. Not every G-coupling unction has zeros: Example: Deine on IR 2 g(x,x ) = exp(x+x ). Then g F 1,1 (C = IR) is continuous and it does not have any zeros. Proposition 3.2 Let g F n,n and C IR n be the non-empty closed set linked to g. The ollowing statements hold i) I lim (x,x ) + g(x,x ) = +, with (x,x ) IR n C and g is l.s.c. then ε>0 (S g (ε) = (x,x ) IR n C : g(x,x ) ε}). ii) I g is lsc on IR n C and there exists M > 0 such that S g (M) is bounded, then (x,x ) : g(x,x ) = 0} = ε>0s g (ε). Proo

6 6 i) It is well known (see [1]) that lim (x,x ) + g(x,x ) = + is equivalent to the act that all the level sets S g (ε) are bounded. The statement ollows rom the lsc o g. ii) It ollows rom the lsc o g. Let us turn our attention now to how the amily o unctions F n,m will allow us to establish duality schemes or, at least, the minimization problem. It is important to point out that in the ollowing we consider an unusual type o duality: is kept ixed and g F n,m, or a given m IN, is variable. Consider a proper unction : IR n IR + }. For a given m IN take g F n,m. Deine g : C IR + } and gg : IR n IR + } as ollows (or example see [9], [11] and reerences therein): g (x ) := sup x IR n g(x,x ) (x)} x C, gg (x) := supg(x,x ) g (x )} x IR n, x C where C is the closed set linked to g. In some cases, it would be better to consider a g F n,m which satisies: (D3) C is convex and g(x, ) : C IR is a convex and l.s.c. unction or each x in IR n. With this, we have the ollowing: Lemma 3.3 Let : IR n IR + } be a proper unction and given m IN. I g F n,m, then which implies g (x )+(x) g(x,x ) 0, (x,x ) IR n C, (x) g (x ), (x,x ) IR n C. Furthermore, i g satisies (D3), then g is a convex l.s.c unction. Unless it is mentioned, not every g F n,m satisies (D3). It would be interesting to know which condition either a G-coupling unction g or the unction must satisy in order that the unction g be proper, because with this one would have a non-trivial unction related to. The ollowing lemma ensures the existence o such a unction g F n,m or any

7 7 m IN, taking as a starting point a natural condition on which must be imposed i is the objective unction o a minimization problem. Lemma 3.4 Let be as beore. Then is bounded rom below i and only i, or every m IN, there exists g F n,m such that g is proper. Proo Suppose that in >, then or a m 0 IN ixed, consider g F n,m0 as ollows: (C = IR m0 ) thus g(x,x ) = x i x dom() 0 i x / dom(), g (x ) = x in x IR m0, which is clearly a proper unction and since m 0 IN was ixed arbitrarily, the result is satisied or every m IN. Take m 0 IN and g F n,m0 such that g is proper. Let us suppose that in =, rom [13] we can see that this implies that in gg =. Then: ( ) = in gg = in sup[g(x,x ) g (x )] x IR n x C ( ) sup in [g(x,x ) g (x )] x C x IR n sup( g (x )) = in x C x C g (x ), which means in x C (g (x )). Then in x C g (x ) = +, which implies that g is not proper and we have a contradiction. Thereore, in >. Notice that this proo also states, in particular, that there exists g F n,m or every m IN which satisies (D3) and g is proper. Henceorth, consider only unctions such that in > and or some ixed m IN, g F n,m will be such that g is proper. Let it be F n = : IR n IR + }, is proper, in > } and

8 8 γ g, : IR n IR m IR + } deined by: γ g, (x,x ) = with m IN, g F n,m and F n. Deine (x)+ g (x ) i x C + otherwise. F n,m := g F n,m / g is proper and inγ g, = 0}, observe that γ g, might not be in F n,m, since γ g, can take the value + or some (x,x ) IR n C. Lemma 3.5 F n,m is non-empty or all m IN. Proo Given m IN, deine g F n,m by: g(x,x ) = x i x dom() 0 i x / dom(). It is easy to check that g belongs to F n,m with C = IR m (this example also proves that unctions can be ound in F n,m which satisy (D3)). Now consider (P) min x (x) with F n. Taking g F n,m, deine the dual problem related to g: Since (D g ) min x C g (x ). in γ g,(x,x ) = in (x)+ in (x,x ) IR n C x IR n x C g (x ) = 0 = in x IR n(x) = in x C g (x ) = sup x C [ g (x )]. This means that there is no duality gap between the primal problem (P) and its dual (D g ) or every g F n,m.

9 9 The next theorem states that given n,m IN, the correspondence deined by is a closed correspondence (see [17]). F : F n F() = F n,m, F n,m Theorem 3.6 Take F n and C IR m the non-empty closed convex set. I there exist k : dom() IR, g k : IR n C IR, sequences o unctions (k IN), such that k converges uniormly to (in dom()), g k F n,m k satisies (D3) or every k IN and g k converges uniormly to a unction g (in IR n C), then g F n,m and it satisies (D3) (extend g to IR n IR m by only taking g(x,x ) = + whenever x / C). Proo Let us prove irst that g F n,m. Since g k converges uniormly to g, given ε > 0, there exists N IN such that i k N then g k (x,x ) g(x,x ) < ε, (x,x ) IR n C. Hence g k (x,x ) ε < g(x,x ) < g k (x,x )+ε, (x,x ) IR n C. Taking in x,x C (remember that ing k = 0 or all k IN): ε < in x,x C g(x,x ) < ε. Then in g < ε. And since ε > 0 is arbitrary, one has that ing = 0. Now we prove that g(x, ) : C IR is convex and l.s.c. or all x IR n. g(x, ) is convex: let x IR n be ixed arbitrarily. Since or all k IN, g k (x, ) is convex, one has that given x 1,x 2 C and t [0,1]: Making k + : g k (x,tx 1 +(1 t)x 2) tg k (x,x 1)+(1 t)g k (x,x 2). g(x,tx 1 +(1 t)x 2 ) tg(x,x 1 )+(1 t)g(x,x 2 ), which proves that g(x, ) is convex. g(x, ) is l.s.c.: take λ < g(x,x ). There exists N IN such that g N (y,y ) g(y,y ) < ε, (y,y ) IR n C,

10 10 where ε = g(x,x ) λ. 2 Hence λ < λ+ε = g(x,x ) ε < g N (x,x ). Since g N (x, ) is l.s.c., then there exists V(x ) C, a neighborhood o x, such that i y V(x ) then Reducing g(x,y ): λ+ε < g N (x,y ). λ+ε g(x,y ) < g N (x,y ) g(x,y ) < ε. Thereore, i y V(x ), then λ < g(x,y ). Thus g(x, ) is l.s.c. or all x IR n. This proves that g F n,m. It remains to prove that g F n,m. For doing this, let us show that ( gk converges uniormly to g. Let ε > 0 and N IN such that i k N then g k (x,x ) g(x,x ) < ε 4, (x,x ) IR n C and k ) k IN k (x) (x) < ε 4, x IRn. Fix k N and take x C arbitrarily, then gk k (x ) ε 2 < g k(x,x ) k (x ), or some x IR n. Hence gk k (x ) ε < g k (x,x ) k (x ) ε 2 < g(x,x ) (x ) g (x ), and so gk k (x ) ε < g (x ). This proves that gk k (x ) g (x ) < ε. On the other hand: g (x ) ε 2 < g(x,x ) (x ), or some x IR n,

11 11 whence g (x ) ε < g(x,x ) (x ) ε 2 < g k(x,x ) k (x ), and so g (x ) ε < gk k (x ). With this, it is shown that ε < gk k (x ) g (x ) or an arbitrary x C. Thereore ( gk k ) k IN converges uniormly to g (in C), and it is immediate to see that g is proper and 0 (x)+ g (x ) k (x)+ gk k (x )+ε, x dom(), x C where ε > 0 is arbitrary and k is large enough. Taking Thereore 0 in (x,x ) IR n C ((x)+g (x )) ε. in one has: (x,x ) IR n C in (x,x ) IR n C ((x)+g (x )) = 0 and g F n,m. This theorem proves a more diicult situation, the case when g k F n,m k satisy (D3) or all k IN. For the general case, just omit the two items and change C or the non-empty closed set linked to g. Consider now g F n,m. Deine l : IR m IR + } as ollows: l(x ) = g (x ) i x C + i x / C. (1) Lemma 3.7 Let g F n,m satisy (D3), l be deined like in (1) and l (x) = sup x,x l(x )}, i 0 ri(dom(l )). Then the ollowing statements are x IR m equivalent: i) l (0). ii) (D g ) has a solution. Proo l (0) x such that l (0)+l (x ) = l (0)+l(x ) = 0. This is equivalent to l(x ) = l (0) = sup x IR m l(x )} = in x IR ml(x ) = in x C g (x ),

12 12 but in x C g (x ) = in + then l(x ) +, thereore x C and l(x ) = g (x ) = in x C g (x ). Theorem 3.8 x is a solution o (D g ) and x is a solution o (P) i and only i γ g, (x,x ) = 0. Proo x and x are solutions o (P) and (D g ) respectively i and only i (x) = in = in g = g (x ) (x)+ g (x ) = γ g, (x,x ) = 0. Deinem(γ g, ) := (x,x ) IR n C : γ g, (x,x ) = 0},ortheprevioustheorem, (x 0,x 0 ) belongs to m(γ g,) i and only i x 0 is a solution o (P) and x 0 is a solution o (D g ). Take F n and g F n,m. Deine the set R(γ g, ), as ollows: ( R(γ g, ) := Sγg,(x,x )(γ g, ) ), (x,x ) IR n C where S λ (γ g, ) stands or the λ-level set o the unction γ g, and or A IR p, S λ (γ g, ) := (x,x ) : γ g, (x,x ) λ}. A := d IR p : x k } k IN A,t k } k IN 0 : t k x k d}, with the convention, = 0} the ollowing properties are satisied (see [1]): Lemma 3.9 Let it be A,B IR p. The ollowing are true: i) A is a closed cone. ii) A = 0} i and only i A is bounded. iii) I A B then A B. iv) A = (A). v) I A is a cone, then A = A. vi) I (A i ) i I is a amily o sets in IR p, we have that ( i IA i) i I A i.

13 13 The proo o the next Lemma ollows rom: item (vi) o Lemma 3.9, the deinition o R(γ g, ) and the act that m(γ g, ) = Sγg,(x,x )(γ g, ) ) (. Lemma 3.10 (m(γ g, )) R(γ g, ). (x,x ) IR n C Note that, i R(γ g, ) = 0}, then rom Lemma 3.10 m(γ g, ) is bounded (may be empty). Lemma 3.11 Let λ k } k IN be a sequence such that lim λ k = 0 and λ k > 0 k + k IN. I m(γ g, ) =, then R(γ g, ) = (S λk (γ g, )). Proo We only need to show that u k IN k IN k IN (S λk (γ g, )) R(γ g, ). Indeed, take (S λk (γ g, )), then u (S λk (γ g, )) k IN. For each (x,x ) IR n C (arbitrarily ixed), we have that 0 < γ g, (x,x ) (because m(γ g, ) = ). Since lim λ n = 0, we have that there exists q IN such that λ q n + γ g, (x,x ). So, S λq (γ g, ) S γg,(x,x )(γ g, ). It implies that (S λk (γ g, )) ( Sγg,(x,x )(γ g, ) ) ( and so u Sγg,(x,x )(γ g, ) ). The statement ollows. For the next Lemma, consider that the unction γ g, is l.s.c. (it can be obtained, or example, i and g(x, ) x IR n are l.s.c.). Lemma 3.12 m(γ g, ) = i and only i (m(γ g, )) R(γ g, ) Proo I m(γ g, ) =, then (m(γ g, )) = 0} and γ g, (x,x ) > 0 (x,x ) IR n C. From, item (ii) o Proposition 3.2, we have that ( S γg,(x,x )(γ g, ) ) are unbounded (x,x ) IR n C. Now, consider λ k } k IN such that lim λ k = 0 and λ k > λ k+1 k IN. Take u k (S λk (γ g, )) with k + ( u k = 1 k IN. Since λ q λ k k IN and q k, we have that Sλq (γ g, ) ) (Sλk (γ g, )) and u q } q k (S λk (γ g, )) k IN and so any cluster point o u k } k IN belong to (S λk (γ g, )) k IN. From Lemma 3.11 we have that any cluster point o u k } k IN belong to R(γ g, ). So, the statement ollows. It is equivalent to show that: I m(γ g, ), then R(γ g, ) = (m(γ g, )). Indeed, we know that S 0 (γ g, ) = m(γ g, ). So, we have that, R(γ g, ) (S 0 (γ g, )) = (m(γ g, )). The statement ollows. Theorem 3.13 Given n,m IN, F n l.s.c. and g F n,m such that g(x, )

14 14 is l.s.c. or all x IR n. The ollowing statements are equivalents. (i) R(γ g, ) = 0}. (ii) m(γ g, ) is nonempty and compact. Proo We need to proo only the implication (i) implies (ii). Indeed, rom l.s.c o and g(x, ) x IR n, we have that γ g, is l.s.c. on IR n C. Since R(γ g, ) = 0}, then rom Lemma 3.10 (m(γ g, )) = 0}. So, rom Lemma 3.12 we have m(γ g, ), here m(γ g, ) is closed. The statement ollows applying Lemma 3.9 item (ii). At this point a natural question arises, i g F n,m, would be there any kind o relation between the optimal points and the optimal values o and gg? The next lemma answers this. Lemma 3.14 For a ixed m IN and every g F n,m, the ollowing are satisied: i) in = in gg, ii) i x 0 is a global minimum o, then x 0 is a global minimum o gg. Proo Remember that gg is deined by: where C is the closed set linked to g. gg (x) = supg(x,x ) g (x )}, x C i) in gg in is always true. On the other hand which implies that g (x )+ gg (x) g(x,x ) 0, x IR n, x C, in gg in x C g (x ). But, since g F n,m one has that in = in x C g (x ), which means in in gg in. Thereore in = in gg.

15 15 ii) gg (x 0 ) (x 0 ) = in = in gg gg (x 0 ), then gg (x 0 ) = in gg. It would be interesting to get a duality scheme which generalizes others like the Lagrangian one. By example, let us consider (x)+h (x ) i x dom(), x dom(h ) g(x,x ) = 0 i x / dom(), x dom(h ) + i x / dom(h ) where h is the objective unction o problem (Q) (section 2) and i in addition h is l.s.c. at 0, one has that g F n,p (with C = dom(h )), even more g h : but g(x,x ) (x) = g (x ) = sup x IR n g(x,x ) (x)}, x C, (x)+h (x ) (x) i x dom() i x / dom() = g(x,x ) (x) = h (x ) i x dom() i x / dom(), thus g h and the classic duality is recovered. (Later on, we will exhibit a more interesting g F n,p, at least in the case o a restricted problem.) Examples: In the ollowing examples, : IR IR + } and g F 1,1. 1) (x) = x 2 and g(x,x ) = (xx ) 2 (C = IR). Calculate g : Then and g F 1,1. g (x ) = sup(xx ) 2 x 2 0 i x } = 1 x IR + i x > 1. g (x,x ) = (x)+ g (x ) = x 2 i x 1 + i x > 1

16 16 2) Take now (x) = x 2 i x 0 + i x < 0 and 1 g(x,x xx +1 i x,x 0 ) = 0 i x < 0, x 0 + otherwise. C = [0,+ [, } g (x ) = supg(x,x 1 ) (x)} = sup x IR x 0 xx +1 x2, x C Then = g (x ) = 1, x C. g (x,x ) = (x)+ g (x ) = x 2 +1 i x,x 0 + otherwise and g / F 1,1. 3) Let (x) = exp(x) and g(x,x ) = exp(x+x ) (C = IR). Then And Thus g F 1,1. g (x ) = supexp(x)(exp(x 0 i x ) 1)} = 0 x IR + x > 0. g (x,x ) = (x)+ g (x ) = exp(x) i x 0 + i x > 0. Now, take two particular g F n,n which have some good properties (see [11]).

17 17 Firstly, consider F n such that dom() IR + n then take g Fn,n deined as ollows: x,x + x IR g(x,x + n, x IR + n ) := 0 x / IR + n, x IR + n + x / IR +, n where x,x + = max i=1,...,n x ix i } (here C = IR +). n It is easy to prove that this unction belongs to F n,n and also satisies the ollowing: ( ) g(,x ) : IR n + IR and g(x, ) : IR n + IR are convex, l.s.c. and IPH (increasing positively homogeneous) unctions (with x 1 x 2 i and only i x 1i x 2i or all i = 1,...,n) or every x,x IR n +. Consider now the set o unctions H g deined as: H g := h : IR n IR such that (x,λ) IR n + IR with h(x) = g(x,x ) λ}. Withthisnotation,deinethesupportseto withrespecttoh g,supp(,h g ) : supp(,h g ) := h H g : h(x) (x) x IR n }. It is already proven (see [11]) that, since every h H g is linked to one and only one (x,λ) IR + n IR, we have supp(,h g ) = epi( g ). Let us see what properties are satisied by gg and supp(,h g ). gg (x) = sup [g(x,x ) g (x )] = x IR n + ( gg (x) = sup x IR n + [ x,x + g (x )] x IR n +, in (y) x / IR + n, y IR n recall that in y IR n(y) = sup [ g (x )]. Since the unctions x, + x IR n + g (x ) are increasing convex and l.s.c. or every x IR + n, then gg is increasing convex and l.s.c. on IR + n. g (x ) = sup [g(x,x ) (x)] = x IR n sup [ x,x + (x)] as beore, x dom() the unctions,x + (x) are convex increasing and l.s.c or every )

18 18 x dom() IR n +, thereore g is a convex increasing and l.s.c. unction. With this, one has that supp(,h g ) = epi( g ) is closed, convex and i is non-negative then or every (x,λ) supp(,h g ), t(x,λ) supp(,h g ) or all t [0,1]. Thanks to [11] another interesting property can also be shown. Since IR n + is a convex closed cone, one has that or all x IR n +, gg x i (1), i = 1,...,n where x i is a vector with its components equal to zero except the i-th component which is equal to the i-th component o x and x gg i : [0,+ ] IR + is deined by Secondly, i we consider gg x i (t) := gg (tx i ), t [0,+ ]. x,x x IR g(x,x + n, x IR + n ) := 0 x / IR + n, x IR + n + x / IR +, n where x,x = min i I +(x ) x i x i}, I + (x ) = i : l i > 0} (here also C = IR n + ), then gg is a l.s.c. increasing convex-along-rays (ICAR) unction ( [11]) and we can ind in chapter 3, section 3 o [11] several results about this kind o unction including a condition which guarantees that in some points, the general sub-dierential o the unction gg is nonempty. Remark: The previous results are valid or every g F n,n ( ). which satisies 3.1 Particular Case: Classical Lagrangian Duality Let (P) : min x A (x) be a typical minimization problem, where A := x IR n : h i (x) 0, i = 1,...,m},

19 19 : A IR, h i : IR n IR, are convex l.s.c unctions with i = 1,...,m. Remember that (see [6]) the ollowing is the well known dual problem: (D L ) : min sup λ, h(x) (x)}, λ 0 x A h(x) = (h 1 (x),...,h m (x)). Moreover, x 0 is a solution o (P) and λ 0 is a solution o (D L ) i and only i (x 0,λ 0 ) is a saddle point o the Lagrangian unction L, given by which means, L(x,λ ) := (x)+ λ,h(x), L(x 0,λ ) L(x 0,λ 0 ) L(x,λ 0), x A, λ 0. Deine now g 1 : IR m IR m IR, as ollows: λ,y i y 0, λ 0 g 1 (y,λ ) = 0 i y 0, λ 0 + i λ 0. It can be seen that g 1 F m,m, with C = IR m +. Let g(x,λ ) = g 1 ( h(x),λ ), then g F n,m. Calculating g (λ ) with λ C and (x) = (x) i x A + i x / A. Then g (λ ) = supg(x,λ ) (x)} = sup λ, h(x) (x)}, x which means x A g (λ ) = sup λ, h(x) (x)}, or every λ C = IR + m x A and thus the classical Lagrangian duality is recovered.

20 20 4 The Equilibrium Problem Let : K IR n IR, where K IR n is a non-empty closed convex set, be such that i) (x, ) : IR n IR is a convex l.s.c. unction or every x K. ii) (x,x) = 0, x K. The Equilibrium Problem is deined as ollows: (EP) : Find x K such that (x,y) 0, y K. Pseudo-monotone unctions, which are deined as ollows, are consider in [13]. A unction ϕ : IR n IR n IR would be called pseudo-monotone i or every x,y IR n with ϕ(x,y) 0, we have ϕ(y,x) 0. Proposition 4.1 Let g F n,n and C IR n be the non-empty closed set linked to g. I g is pseudo-monotone, then g(x,y) = 0, (x,y) C C. Proo Since g F n,n, then (x,y) C C, g(x,y) 0 and g(y,x) 0. Thereoreig ispseudo-monotone, it can besaid thatg(y,x) 0and g(y,x) = 0, (x,y) C C. Observe that this proposition airms that the only pseudo-monotone G- coupling unction is the null unction. Take now m IN and g F n,m. Consider now or every x K: (P x ) : in y IR n(x,y) (Dx g) : in x C g x(x ) where g x (x ) = sup y IR n g(y,x ) (x,y)} or every x C (C is the non-empty closed set linked to g) and (x,y) = (x,y) y K + y / K. It would be interesting to know i there exist m IN and a g F n,m which satisy the Zero Duality Gap Property (ZDGP): in y IR n(x,y)+ in x C g x(x ) = 0, x F

21 21 where F := } x K : in (x,y). y K (Notice that i F is empty, (EP) would have no solutions.) I there exists such a g, the ollowing are equivalent: x is a solution o (EP). in y IR n (x,y) = 0. There exists x K such that in x C g x (x ) = 0. Lemma 4.2 There exists g F n,n which satisies the ZDGP. Proo Deine g F n,n by: x,y i x K +, y K g(y,x ) = 0 i x K +, y / K + x / K +, where K + := x IR n : x,x 0, x K}, in this case C = K +. Calculate g x(x ), with x F, x C: It is clear that g x (x ) = sup x,y (x,y)}. y K in x C g x (x ) g x (0) = in (x,y) = in (x,y), y IR n y K but or every x C, y IR n one has that g x(x )+(x,y) 0, which implies that we always have in x C g x(x ) in (x,y). Thereore y IR n in x C g x(x ) = in y IR n(x,y) = in x C g x(x )+ in y IR n(x,y) = 0. Finally, there exists g F n,n which satisies the ZDGP. Let us give now another unction g F n,n which also satisies the ZDGP. In this case, this g will generate a duality scheme which has been already studied in [7]. Let i K : IR n IR be deined by i K (x ) := in x K x,x and K := x IR n : i K (x ) > }, the eective domain o i K. (Since i K is a concave u.s.c

22 22 unction, then K is a closed convex set.) Deine then: x,y i K (x ), i x K, y K g(y,x ) = 0 i x K, y / K + i x / K, in this case C = K. Calculate now g x(x ) or x F: g x(x ) = sup [g(y,x ) (x,y)] y IR n = sup[ x,y i K (x ) (x,y)] y K = sup[ x,y (x,y)] i K (x ), y K but x(x ) = sup [ x,y (x,y)] = sup[ x,y (x,y)], then y IR n y K g x(x ) = x(x ) i K (x ). Proposition 4.3 The unction g deined above, satisies the ZDGP. Proo Similar to Lemma 4.2. In [7] a very interesting result can be ound. Theorem 4.4 x is a solution o (EP) i and only i, there exists x K such that x(x ) i K (x ) = 0. This result does not only say that in g x x K (x ) = 0, but that the dual problem (Dg x ) has a solution. In order to prove this, we need irst the ollowing lemma. Lemma 4.5 For every x K and x F, one has: x (x ) i K (x ) 0. Proo From Fenchel s inequality, we have or every x F ixed Then, taking in y K : x,y x(x ) (x,y), x K, y IR n. i K (x ) x(x ) in (x,y) 0, y K

23 23 where the last inequality occurs, since in (x,y) (x,x) = 0. This means, y K x(x ) i K (x ) 0. Proo o Theorem 4.4: I x is a solution o (EP), then x (x) = x (x) = 0 = min(x,y) = min (x,y). y K y K Then, there exists (see [10]) x x (x) ( N K (x)) (where N K (x) stands or the normal cone o K at x) and thus x(x ) x(x ) = x (x)+ x(x ) = x,x = i K (x ), which means x (x ) i K (x ) 0. But thanks to the previous lemma, this implies that x (x ) i K (x ) = 0. Take y K and suppose that there exists x K such that x (x ) = i K (x ), then (x,y) = (x,y) x,y x(x ) = x,y i K (x ) 0. And thus, x is a solution o (EP). 4.1 Particular Case: The Complementarity Problem A particular case o the Equilibrium Problem is the Complementarity Problem, which is deined as ollows: (CP) : Find x K such that T(x) K + and T(x),x = 0, where K IR n is a closed convex cone and T : K IR n is a continuous unction. Considering (x,y) = T(x),y x with x and y in K, the solution set o the (CP) is equal to the solution set o (EP) related to. Let us take g F n,n deined as in the beginning o this section: x,y i x K +, y K g(y,x ) = 0 i x K +, y / K + x / K +.

24 24 Calculate g x(x ) (x K, x C = K + ): g x(x ) = sup g(y,x ) (x,y)} = supg(y,x ) (x,y)} y IR n y K g x (x ) = sup x T(x),y }+ T(x),x y K g T(x),x x x (x ) = T(x) K + otherwise. But x T(x) K is equivalent to the statement that x T 1 (x +K + ) T 1 (K + ), and this inclusion is true since K is a closed convex cone and x K +. Then Thereore, g x(x ) = (x,y)+ g x (x ) = Calculate now the set F: I x K is such that T(x) K + then T(x),x x T 1 (x +K + ) + otherwise. T(x),y i x T 1 (x +K + ), y K + otherwise. in (x,y) = in T(x),y x = T(x),x, y K y K which means x F. I x K is such that T(x) / K + then there exists y 0 K satisying T(x),y 0 < 0. Thus which means x / F. lim (x,ny 0) = = in (x,y), n + y K

25 25 All these imply that F = T 1 (K + ). Then, given x 0 F, there exists x K + (or example x = 0) such that x 0 T 1 (x +K + ) and: in (x 0,y)+ in y IR n x C g x 0 (x ) = 0, but x 0 F was chosen arbitrarily, thereore Finally, there exists x K such that in y IR n (x,y)+ in x C g x(x ) = 0, x F. in x C g x(x ) = 0 T(x) K + and T(x),x = 0. (2) In [5] the (CP) is considered, when K = K + = IR n + and T is an aine operator, in other words, the case o the Linear Complementarity Problem (LCP). For studying this problem, they propose the ollowing: x is a solution o (LCP), i and only i x satisies: x IR + n, T(x) IRn +, and T(x),x = 0. It is immediate to see that this proposal is identical to (2), thereore by using this g F n,n (the one used at the beginning o this section) we generate a dual problem o (LCP) which has been treated in other works. Conclusions This work gives a basis or a new theory, which we called G-coupling unctions. Logically there are many things to explore, by example: Using G-coupling unctions or a Perturbation Theory. Using G-coupling unctions or generating primal, dual and primal-dual algorithms. Analyze, using G-coupling unctions, the Variational Inequality Problem or the case o non-monotone operators. Given look or a G-coupling unction such that is abstract convex with respect to the class o elementary unction induced G-coupling unction (see [11]).

26 26 Acknowledgement: We would like to express our deep thanks to Dr. David Yost or all his support and suggestions. We also thank to an anonymous reeree or his valuable help to correct the paper. Reerences [1] Auslander, Alred; Teboulle, Marc. Asymptotic Cones and Functions in Optimization and Variational Inequalities. Springer-Verlag New York, INC. (2003). [2] Avriel, Mordecai Nonlinear Programming. Prentice-Hall, INC., Englewood Clis, New Jersey (1976). [3] Blum, E.; Oettli, W. From optimization and variational inequalities to equilibrium problems. Math. Student 63, (1994). [4] Burachik, Regina. Generalized Proximal Point Methods or the Variational Inequalty Problem. Tese de Doutorado, IMPA. (1995). [5] Cottle, R.W.; Pang, J.S.; Venkateswaran, V. Suicient matrices and the linear complementarity problem. Linear Algebra and its Applications 114/115, pp (1989). [6] Crouzeix, Jean Pierre; Ocaña, Eladio; Sosa, Wilredo. Análisis Convexo. Monogaía del IMCA (2003). [7] Martínez-Legaz, Juan Enrique and Sosa, Wilredo. Duality or Equilibrium Problems. Journal o Global Optimization 35, pp (2006). [8] Maugeri, A.; Oettli, W.; Schläger, D. A lexible orm o Wardrop s principle or traic equilibria with side constraints. Rendiconti del Circolo Matematico di Palermo, Serie II, Supp. 48, (1997). [9] Oettli, W.; Schläger, D. Conjugate unctions or convex and nonconvex duality. Journal o Global Optimization 13, pp (1998). [10] Rockaellar, R.T. Convex Analysis. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey (1970) [11] Rubinov, Alexander. Abstract Convexity and Global Optimization. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht/Boston/London (2000). [12] Rubinov, Alexander and Yang Xiaoqi. Lagrange-type Functions in Constrained non-convex Optimization. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht/Boston/London (2002). [13] Sosa Sandoval, Wilredo. Iterative Algorithms or the abstract Equilibrium Problem. Tese de Doutorado, IMPA. (1999). [14] Sosa Sandoval, Wilredo. Introducción a la Optimización, Programación Lineal. XVIII Coloquio de la Sociedad Matemática Peruana (2000). [15] Wright, Stephen J. Primal-Dual Interior Point Methods. Society or Industrial and Applied Mathematics (S.I.A.M.), Philadelphia, (1997). [16] Yang, X. Q. On the GAP unctions o Prevariational Inequalties. Journal o Optimization Theory and Applications Vol. 116, No 2, pp (2003). [17] Zangwill, Willard Nonlinear Programming. A uniied Approach Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Clis, New Jersey (1969).