Generalized monotonicity and convexity for locally Lipschitz functions on Hadamard manifolds

Similar documents
OPTIMALITY CONDITIONS FOR GLOBAL MINIMA OF NONCONVEX FUNCTIONS ON RIEMANNIAN MANIFOLDS

Characterization of lower semicontinuous convex functions on Riemannian manifolds

Generalized vector equilibrium problems on Hadamard manifolds

Monotone Point-to-Set Vector Fields

Invariant monotone vector fields on Riemannian manifolds

Monotone and Accretive Vector Fields on Riemannian Manifolds

Weak sharp minima on Riemannian manifolds 1

Variational inequalities for set-valued vector fields on Riemannian manifolds

Steepest descent method on a Riemannian manifold: the convex case

Chapter 3. Riemannian Manifolds - I. The subject of this thesis is to extend the combinatorial curve reconstruction approach to curves

2 Preliminaries. is an application P γ,t0,t 1. : T γt0 M T γt1 M given by P γ,t0,t 1

Local Convergence Analysis of Proximal Point Method for a Special Class of Nonconvex Functions on Hadamard Manifolds

LECTURE 15: COMPLETENESS AND CONVEXITY

APPLICATIONS OF DIFFERENTIABILITY IN R n.

Proximal Point Method for a Class of Bregman Distances on Riemannian Manifolds

HOMEWORK 2 - RIEMANNIAN GEOMETRY. 1. Problems In what follows (M, g) will always denote a Riemannian manifold with a Levi-Civita connection.

Chapter 2 Convex Analysis

Two-Step Methods for Variational Inequalities on Hadamard Manifolds

H-convex Riemannian submanifolds

Course 212: Academic Year Section 1: Metric Spaces

II. DIFFERENTIABLE MANIFOLDS. Washington Mio CENTER FOR APPLIED VISION AND IMAGING SCIENCES

A splitting minimization method on geodesic spaces

arxiv:math/ v1 [math.dg] 24 May 2005

A NOTION OF NONPOSITIVE CURVATURE FOR GENERAL METRIC SPACES

Riemannian geometry of surfaces

Local convexity on smooth manifolds 1,2,3. T. Rapcsák 4

Strictly convex functions on complete Finsler manifolds

The nonsmooth Newton method on Riemannian manifolds

ON GAP FUNCTIONS OF VARIATIONAL INEQUALITY IN A BANACH SPACE. Sangho Kum and Gue Myung Lee. 1. Introduction

Pogorelov Klingenberg theorem for manifolds homeomorphic to R n (translated from [4])

Steepest descent method with a generalized Armijo search for quasiconvex functions on Riemannian manifolds

A CHARACTERIZATION OF STRICT LOCAL MINIMIZERS OF ORDER ONE FOR STATIC MINMAX PROBLEMS IN THE PARAMETRIC CONSTRAINT CASE

Inexact Proximal Point Methods for Quasiconvex Minimization on Hadamard Manifolds

MONOTONE OPERATORS ON BUSEMANN SPACES

FUNCTIONS ON RIEMANNIAN MANIFOLDS

Unconstrained Steepest Descent Method for Multicriteria Optimization on Riemannian Manifolds

C 1 regularity of solutions of the Monge-Ampère equation for optimal transport in dimension two

Steepest descent method on a Riemannian manifold: the convex case

Continuity. Matt Rosenzweig

Lecture 11. Geodesics and completeness

Mathematical Programming Involving (α, ρ)-right upper-dini-derivative Functions

Analysis Finite and Infinite Sets The Real Numbers The Cantor Set

Stabilization of Control-Affine Systems by Local Approximations of Trajectories

Optimization and Optimal Control in Banach Spaces

About the Convexity of a Special Function on Hadamard Manifolds

Minimizing properties of geodesics and convex neighborhoods

A LOWER BOUND ON THE SUBRIEMANNIAN DISTANCE FOR HÖLDER DISTRIBUTIONS

MATH 51H Section 4. October 16, Recall what it means for a function between metric spaces to be continuous:

Differentiable Functions

arxiv: v1 [math.ca] 5 Mar 2015

Hopf-Rinow and Hadamard Theorems

ON A CLASS OF NONSMOOTH COMPOSITE FUNCTIONS

Functional Analysis. Franck Sueur Metric spaces Definitions Completeness Compactness Separability...

Subdifferential representation of convex functions: refinements and applications

Computers and Mathematics with Applications

1.4 The Jacobian of a map

Available online at J. Nonlinear Sci. Appl., 10 (2017), Research Article

DIFFERENTIAL GEOMETRY, LECTURE 16-17, JULY 14-17

Convex Functions and Optimization

ALEXANDER LYTCHAK & VIKTOR SCHROEDER

Proximal point algorithm in Hadamard spaces

Journal of Inequalities in Pure and Applied Mathematics

Some Properties of the Augmented Lagrangian in Cone Constrained Optimization

Solutions to Problem Set 5 for , Fall 2007

On the construction of ISS Lyapunov functions for networks of ISS systems

1. Gradient method. gradient method, first-order methods. quadratic bounds on convex functions. analysis of gradient method

LECTURE 16: CONJUGATE AND CUT POINTS

MA102: Multivariable Calculus

Course Summary Math 211

Smooth Dynamics 2. Problem Set Nr. 1. Instructor: Submitted by: Prof. Wilkinson Clark Butler. University of Chicago Winter 2013

How to Reach his Desires: Variational Rationality and the Equilibrium Problem on Hadamard Manifolds

SECOND-ORDER CHARACTERIZATIONS OF CONVEX AND PSEUDOCONVEX FUNCTIONS

Selçuk Demir WS 2017 Functional Analysis Homework Sheet

Stable minimal cones in R 8 and R 9 with constant scalar curvature

New Class of duality models in discrete minmax fractional programming based on second-order univexities

Local semiconvexity of Kantorovich potentials on non-compact manifolds

Intrinsic Geometry. Andrejs Treibergs. Friday, March 7, 2008

Terse Notes on Riemannian Geometry

Convexity in R n. The following lemma will be needed in a while. Lemma 1 Let x E, u R n. If τ I(x, u), τ 0, define. f(x + τu) f(x). τ.

Journal of Inequalities in Pure and Applied Mathematics

Viscosity approximation methods for the implicit midpoint rule of nonexpansive mappings in CAT(0) Spaces

Iowa State University. Instructor: Alex Roitershtein Summer Homework #5. Solutions

Immerse Metric Space Homework

Nonlinear equations. Norms for R n. Convergence orders for iterative methods

Course 224: Geometry - Continuity and Differentiability

CLARKE CRITICAL VALUES OF SUBANALYTIC LIPSCHITZ CONTINUOUS FUNCTIONS

AFFINE IMAGES OF RIEMANNIAN MANIFOLDS

On isometries of Finsler manifolds

1 Directional Derivatives and Differentiability

THROUGHOUT this paper, we let C be a nonempty

Pythagorean Property and Best Proximity Pair Theorems

The Inverse Function Theorem 1

AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE THEORY OF EXTREMA

Relaxed Quasimonotone Operators and Relaxed Quasiconvex Functions

SHRINKING PROJECTION METHOD FOR A SEQUENCE OF RELATIVELY QUASI-NONEXPANSIVE MULTIVALUED MAPPINGS AND EQUILIBRIUM PROBLEM IN BANACH SPACES

arxiv: v1 [math.oc] 21 Mar 2015

Real Analysis Math 131AH Rudin, Chapter #1. Dominique Abdi

Lecture Notes in Advanced Calculus 1 (80315) Raz Kupferman Institute of Mathematics The Hebrew University

FIRST ORDER CHARACTERIZATIONS OF PSEUDOCONVEX FUNCTIONS. Vsevolod Ivanov Ivanov

Richard F. Bass Krzysztof Burdzy University of Washington

Transcription:

Generalized monotonicity and convexity for locally Lipschitz functions on Hadamard manifolds A. Barani 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Abstract. In this paper we establish connections between some concepts of generalized monotonicity for set valued mappings and some notions of generalized convexity for locally Lipschitz functions on Hadamard manifolds. M.S.C. 2010: 58E17, 90C26. Key words: Generalized convexity; generalized monotonicity; mean value theorem; generalized gradient; set valued mapping; Hadamard manifolds. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 1 Introduction The convexity of a real valued function is equivalent to the monotonicity of the corresponding gradient function, see [8]. The relation between generalized convexity of functions and generalized monotone operators has been investigated by many authors, for example see [7, 13]. However, in various aspects of mathematics such as control theory and matrix analysis, nonsmooth functions arise naturally on smooth manifolds, see [10, 15]. Generalized gradients or subdifferetials refer to several set valued replacements for the usual derivatives which are used in developing differential calculus for nonsmooth functions. The concept of generalized gradient of locally Lipschitz function was introduced by F.H. Clarke, see [4]. On the other hand, a manifold is not a linear space. Rapcsák [14] and Udriste [17] proposed a generalization of convexity which differs from the others. In this setting the linear space is replaced by a Riemannian manifold and the line segment by a geodesic. In recent years several important notions have been extended from Hilbert spaces to Riemannian manifolds (see for example [1, 2, 3, 10, 18]). In particular the notion of monotone vector fields was introduced by Németh [12]. This notion has been extended by Da Cruz Neto et al. and Li et al. to the case of set valued mappings (see [5, 11]). The organization of the paper is as follows: In Section 2 some concepts and facts from Riemannian geometry are collected. In Section 3 we give a mean value theorem for locally Lipschitz functions defined on Hadamard manifolds. Finally in Section 4 we introduce some notions of convexity and monotonicity of set valued mapping on Hadamard manifolds. Differential Geometry - Dynamical Systems, Vol.15, 2013, pp. 26-37. c Balkan Society of Geometers, Geometry Balkan Press 2013.

Generalized monotonicity and convexity 27 30 2 Preliminary In this section some facts in Riemannian geometry are collected (see [9, 17]). Let M be a n dimensional Riemannian manifold with a Riemannian metric.,. p on the tangent space T p M = R n for every p M. The corresponding norm is denoted by p. Let us recall that the length of a piecewise C 1 curve γ : [a, b] M is defined by L(γ) := b a γ (t) γ(t) dt. 31 32 33 34 35 36 By minimizing this length functional over the set of all such curves with γ(0) = p and γ(1) = q, we obtain a Riemannian distance d(p, q). The space of vector fields on M is denoted by X(M). Let be the Levi-Civita connection associated to M. A geodesic is a C smooth path γ whose tangent is parallel along the path γ, that is, γ satisfies the equation dγ(t)/dt dγ(t)/dt = 0. Any path γ joining p and q in M such that L(γ) = d(p, q) is a geodesic, and it is called a minimal geodesic. Levi-Civita connection induces an isometry P t 2 t 1,γ : T γ(t1 )M T γ(t2 )M so called parallel translation along γ from γ(t 1 ) to γ(t 2 ). The exponential mapping exp : T M M is defined as exp(v) := γ v (1), where γ v is the geodesic defined by its position p and velocity γ v(0) = v at p and T M is an open neighborhood in T M. The restriction of exp to T p M in T M is denoted by exp p for every p M. A function f : M R is said to be locally Lipschitz if for every z M there is a L z 0 such that for every x, y in a neighborhood of z we have f(x) f(y) L z d(x, y). 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 Recall that for every x M there exists a r > 0 such that exp x : B(0 x, r) B(x, r) and exp 1 x : B(x, r) B(0 x, r) are Lipschitz. We recall that a simply connected complete Riemannian manifold of nonpositive sectional curvature is called a Hadamard manifold. If M is a Hadamard manifold then exp p : T p M M is a diffeomorphism for every p M and if x, y M then there exists a unique minimal geodesic joining x to y. A geodesic triangle (p 1 p 2 p 3 ) in a Hadamard manifold M is the set consisting of three distinct points p 1, p 2, p 3 M called the vertices and tree geodesic segments γ i joining p i+1 to p i+2 called the sides where i 1, 2, 3(mod 3). Theorem 2.1. Let (p 1 p 2 p 3 ) be a geodesic triangle in the Hadamard manifold M. Denote by γ i+1 : [0, l i+1 ] M the geodesic segment joining p i+1 to p i+2, l i+1 := L(γ i+1 ) and set θ i+1 = (γ i+1 (0), γ i (l i)) where i 1, 2, 3(mod 3). Then, (2.1) l 2 i+1 + l 2 i+2 2l i+1 l i+2 cos(θ i+2 ) l 2 i. 49 50 51 3 Generalized gradient Now, we recall the concept of generalized gradient and some important properties of this notion from [3, 16].

28 A. Barani 52 53 Definition 3.1. Let f : M R be a locally Lipschitz function. The generalized directional derivative f (y; v) of f at y M in the direction v T y M is defined by (3.1) f (y; v) : = (foϕ 1 ) (ϕ(y); v ϕ ) = lim sup x ϕ(y), 0 (foϕ 1 )(x + v ϕ ) (foϕ 1 )(x), 54 55 56 57 where v ϕ := dϕ y (v), (U, ϕ) is a chart at y and x ϕ(u). Note that the definition of f (y; v) is independent of the chart (U, ϕ) at y. When M is a Hadamard manifold an equivalent definition has appeared in [3, p. 11] as follows, (3.2) f (y; v) := lim sup x y,t 0 f(exp x t(d exp y ) exp 1 y x t v) f(x), 58 59 60 61 where (d exp y ) exp 1 y x : T exp 1 y x (T ym) T y M T x M is the differential of exponential mapping at exp 1 y x. In this paper a set valued mapping X on M is a mapping X : M T M such that for every p M, X(p) T p M. For every p M and v T p M we set X(p), v p := { ζ, v p : ζ X(p)}. 62 63 64 65 Throughout the remainder of this paper M is a finite dimensional Hadamard manifold. Definition 3.2. Let f : M R be a locally Lipschitz function. The generalized gradient (or Clarke subdifferential) of f at y M is the subset c f(y) of T y M = T y M defined by c f(y) := {ζ T y M : f (y; v) ζ, v for all v T y M}. 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 Not that for a locally Lipschitz function f : M R the generalized gradient c f(y) is a nonempty closed convex subset of T y M for every y M. Example 3.3. Let S n be the linear space of real n n symmetric matrices and S n ++ be the symmetric positive definite real n n matrices. Suppose that M := (S n ++,, ) is the Riemannian manifold endowed by the Euclidean Hessian of φ(x) := ln det X and A, B = tr(bφ (X)A), for all X M and A, B T X M. Let Ω S n ++ be an open convex set and I = {1,... m}. Let F i : M R be a continuous differentiable function on Ω. For every i I we define the function F : M R as follows, F (X) := max F i(x). i I 75 Now, F is locally Lipschitz on Ω and we have c F (X) = conv{grad F i (X) : i I(X)}, 76 where I(X) = {i : F (X) = F i (X)}, see [3, p. 34], Lemma 7.3.

Generalized monotonicity and convexity 29 77 78 79 80 Now, we recall the following important properties. If f, g : M R are locally Lipschitz functions and y M then, (i) c (f + g)(y) c f(y) + c g(x). (ii) For all t R it holds that, (tf) c (y) = t c f(y). 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 (iii) If f attains a local extremum at y then, 0 c f(y). Remark 3.4. For a convex function f : M R the subdifferential of f at y M is defined by where f(y) : = {ζ T y M : ζ, exp 1 y x y f(x) f(y), x M} = {ζ T y M : ζ, v y f (y, v), v T y M}, f f(exp y tv) f(y) (y; v) := lim, t 0 t is the directional derivative of f at y in the direction v T y M. When f is a locally Lipschitz convex function we have f (y; v) = f (y; v) and c f(y) = f(y) (see [3, p. 12]). At first we extend the Lebourg s mean value theorem (see [4, p. 75]), to Hadamard manifolds which will be useful in the sequel. Theorem 3.1. (Mean Value Theorem) Let f : M R be a locally Lipschitz function. Then, for every x, y M there exist points t 0 (0, 1) and z 0 = α(t 0 ) such that f(y) f(x) c f(z 0 ), α (t 0 ) z0, 92 93 where α(t) := exp y (t exp 1 y x), t [0, 1]. Proof. Let g : [0, 1] R be a function defined by g(t) := f(α(t)). 94 At first we prove that for every t [0, 1], (3.3) c g(t) c f(α(t)), α (t) α(t). 95 96 97 Fix t [0, 1] and suppose that z := α(t). Since c g(t) and c f(α(t)), α (t) α(t) are intervals in R, so it suffices to prove that for d = ±1 we have max{ c g(t)d} = g (t; d) If we set ϕ(.) := exp 1 z (.) then, (3.4) f (α(t); α (t)d) = max{ c f(α(t)), α (t) α(t) d}. g f(α(s + d)) f(α(s)) (t; d) = lim sup s t, 0 = lim sup ε 0 + s t <ε,0<<ɛ (foϕ 1 )(ϕ(α(s + d))) (foϕ 1 )(ϕ(α(s))).

30 A. Barani 98 99 100 101 102 103 On the other hand if v := α (t) and we consider the curve ϕ(α(s)) + vd in T z M then, (3.5) (foϕ 1 )[ϕ(α(s)) + vd] (foϕ 1 )(ϕ(α(s))) lim sup s t, 0 = lim sup ε 0 + s t <ε,0<<ɛ Now, for brevity we set (foϕ 1 )[ϕ(α(s)) + vd] (foϕ 1 )(ϕ(α(s))). β(s, ) := (foϕ 1 )[ϕ(α(s + d))] (foϕ 1 )(ϕ(α(s))), θ(s, ) := (foϕ 1 )[ϕ(α(s)) + v] (foϕ 1 )(ϕ(α(s))). Since foϕ 1 is Lipschitz on an open neighborhood of 0 in T z M we have β(s, ) θ(s, ) sup sup s t <ε,0<<ɛ s t <ε,0<<ɛ (3.6) sup (foϕ 1 )(ϕ(α(s + d))) (foϕ 1 )[ϕ(α(s)) + vd] s t <ε,0<<ɛ K sup ϕ(α(s + d)) ϕ(α(s)) vd, s t <ε,0<<ɛ where K is the Lipschitz constant of foϕ 1. Using the Taylor expansion implies that (3.7) ϕ(α(s + d)) = ϕ(α(s)) + (dϕ α(s) )(α (s)d) + o() d = ϕ(α(s)) + (dϕ α(s) )(α (s)d) + o(). 104 105 106 By combining (3.6) and (3.7) we have β(s, ) sup sup s t <ε,0<<ɛ (3.8) ( K sup o() + s t <ε,0<<ɛ s t <ε,0<<ɛ sup θ(s, ) s t <ε,0<<ɛ (dϕ α(s) )(α (s)d) vd Hence, the right hand side of (3.8) goes to 0 as ε 0 +. By (3.4), (3.5), (3.6) and (3.8) we have ). (3.9) g (t; d) = lim sup s t, 0 (foϕ 1 )[ϕ(α(s)) + vd] (foϕ 1 )(ϕ(α(s))). 107 On the other hand by the definition of directional derivative we get (3.10) f (α(t); vd) = lim sup y 0, 0 (foϕ 1 )(y + vd) (foϕ 1 )(y ). 108 Therefore, by (3.9), (3.10) and definition of lim sup we deduce that (3.11) g (t; d) f (α(t); vd),

Generalized monotonicity and convexity 31 109 110 this completes the proof of (3.3). Now, we define the function h : [0, 1] R as follows (3.12) h(t) := g(t) + t[f(x) f(y)]. 111 112 Since h(0) = h(1) = f(x) there is a point t 0 extremum. Hence, (3.13) 0 c h(t 0 ). (0, 1) at which h attains a local 113 Set z 0 = α(t 0 ). Thus, by using (3.3), (3.12) and (3.13) we get 114 and proof is completed. f(x) f(y) c g(t 0 ) c f(z 0 ), α (t 0 ) z0, 115 4 Strong convexity and monotonicity 116 117 118 119 In this section we establish the relations between (strict, strong) convexity of a locally Lipschitz function f and (strict, strong) montonicity of c f as a set valued mapping. Definition 4.1. Let f : M R be a locally Lipschitz real valued function. Then, (i) f is said to be convex if for every x, y M, f(γ(t)) tf(x) + (1 t)f(y) for all t [0, 1], 120 (ii) f is said to be strictly convex if for every x, y M with x y, f(γ(t)) < tf(x) + (1 t)f(y) for all t (0, 1), 121 122 (iii) f is said to be strongly convex if there exists a constant α > 0 such that for every x, y M f(γ(t)) tf(x) + (1 t)f(y) αt(1 t)d(x, y) 2 for all t [0, 1], 123 124 125 126 127 128 where γ(t) := exp y (t exp 1 y x) for every t [0, 1]. Note that every strongly convex function is convex but the convex is not holds. Example 4.2. Let S M be an open convex set, q M and I = {1,..., m}. Let f i : M R be a continuously differentiable function on S and continuous on S, for every i I. Assume that < inf p M f(p) and for every i I, gradf i is Lipschitz on S with constant L i and {p M : f(p) f(q)} S, inf f(p) < f(q). p M 129 Suppose that f : M R is defined by (4.1) f(y) := max i I f i(y), for all y M.

32 A. Barani 130 131 Fix y M. Suppose that satisfies sup i I L i <. Then, the function g : M R defined by (4.2) g(x) := f(x) + 2 d2 (x, y) for all x M, 132 133 134 135 136 is locally Lipschitz and strongly convex with constant α := sup i I L i (see Lemma 4.1 in [3, p. 16]). Now, we give the following definition for a set valued mapping (see [5, 11]). Definition 4.3. Let X : M T M be a set valued mapping. Then, X is said to be (i) monotone if for every x, y M and ζ X(x), η X(y), (4.3) P 0 1,γζ η, exp 1 y x y 0, 137 (ii) strictly monotone if for every x, y M with x y and every ζ X(x), η X(y), (4.4) P 0 1,γζ η, exp 1 y x y > 0, 138 139 (iii) strongly monotone if there exists a constant α > 0 such that for every x, y M and every ζ X(x), η X(y), (4.5) P 0 1,γζ η, exp 1 y x y αd(x, y) 2, 140 141 142 143 144 where γ(t) := exp y (t exp 1 y x) for every t [0, 1]. In the next theorem we introduce some characterizations of convex and strongly convex functions. Theorem 4.1. Let f : M R be a locally Lipschitz function. Then, (i) f is convex if and only if for every x, y M and every ζ c f(y) we have (4.6) f(x) f(y) ζ, exp 1 y x y, 145 146 (ii) f is strongly convex with a constant α > 0 if and only if for every x, y M and every ζ c f(y) we have (4.7) f(x) f(y) ζ, exp 1 y x y + αd(x, y) 2. 147 148 149 150 Proof. We only prove (ii). The prove of (i) is similar. Suppose that f is strongly convex with a constant α > 0. Let x, y M and γ : [0, 1] M be the unique geodesic joining y to x that is, γ(t) = exp y (t exp 1 y x). Then, γ (0) = exp 1 y x and we have f(γ(t)) tf(x) + (1 t)f(y) αt(1 t)d(x, y) 2 for all t [0, 1]. 151 This implies that (4.8) t(f(γ(t)) f(x)) + (1 t)(f(γ(t)) f(y)) αt(1 t)d(x, y) 2. 152 Divide by t > 0 and taking limit in (4.8) implies that (4.9) f(y) f(x) + f (y; v) αd(x, y) 2,

Generalized monotonicity and convexity 33 153 154 where v := γ (0). Since f is convex by Remark 3.4, f (y; v) = f (y; v) hence, inequality (4.9) implies that f(y) f(x) + f (y; v) αd(x, y) 2. 155 Therefore, for every ζ c f(y) we have f(x) f(y) ζ, v y + αd(x, y) 2. 156 157 158 159 160 Conversely, assume that inequality (4.7) holds for every x, y M and every ζ c f(y). Fix t [0, 1] and ζ c f(γ(t)). Now, we define the geodesics θ, β : [0, 1] M as follows θ(s) := γ((1 s)t) for all s [0, 1], and β(s) := γ(s + (1 s)t) for all s [0, 1]. Then, by (4.7) we have (1 t)f(y) (1 t)f(γ(t)) (1 t)( ζ, θ (0) γ(t) + αd(y, γ(t)) 2 ) = (1 t)( t ζ, γ (t) γ(t) + αd(y, γ(t)) 2 ). 161 162 Similarly, tf(x) tf(γ(t)) t( ζ, β (0) γ(t) + αd(x, γ(t)) 2 ) = t((1 t) ζ, γ (t) γ(t) + αd(x, γ(t)) 2 ). By adding these two inequalities we get (4.10) tf(x) + (1 t)f(y) f(γ(t)) α[(1 t)d(y, γ(t)) 2 + td(x, γ(t)) 2 ]. 163 Note that (4.11) d(y, γ(t))) 2 = t 2 exp 1 y x 2 y = t 2 d(y, x) 2. 164 On the other hand by triangle inequality and (4.11) we have (4.12) d(x, γ(t))) 2 d(y, x) 2 + d(y, γ(t)) 2 2 exp 1 y = (1 t) 2 d(y, x) 2. (γ(t)), exp 1 y x y 165 By combining (4.10), (4.11) and (4.12) we obtain that 166 Therefore, f is strongly convex. tf(x) + (1 t)f(y) f(γ(t)) t(1 t)αd(y, x) 2. 167 168 Now, we introduce the relation between convexity of a real valued function f defined on M and monotonicity of c f.

34 A. Barani 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 Theorem 4.2. Let f : M R be a locally Lipschitz function. Then, f is convex on M if and only if c f is a monotone set valued mapping on M. Proof. Assume that f is convex then, c f = f, hence c f is a monotone set valued mapping (see [5, p. 77]). Conversely, suppose that c f is a monotone set valued mapping on M. Let x, y M with x y and t (0, 1). Assume that β : [0, 1] M is the unique geodesic defined by β(s) := γ(s + (1 s)t) for all s [0, 1]. Then, by Theorem 3.1 there exist l (t, 1) and ζ c f(β(l)) such that (4.13) f(x) f(γ(t)) = ζ, β (l) β(l) = (1 t) ζ, γ (a) z1, 177 178 where, a := l+(1 l)t > t and z 1 := α(l). Similarly if we consider the unique geodesic θ : [0, 1] M defined by θ(s) := γ((1 s)t) for all s [0, 1]. 179 Then, by Theorem 3.1 there exist h (0, t) and η c f(θ(h)) such that (4.14) f(y) f(γ(t)) = η, θ (h) θ(h) = t η, γ (b) z2, 180 181 182 where b := (1 h)t < t and z 2 := γ((1 h)t). Now, we define the geodesic µ : [0, 1] M as follows µ(s) := γ(sa + (1 s)b) for all s [0, 1]. Then, by equation (4.13) and parallel translation along µ we get tf(x) tf(γ(t)) = t(1 t) ζ, γ (a) z1 183 184 185 (4.15) = t(1 t) P 0 1,µζ, P 0 1,µµ (1) z2 = t(1 t) a b P 0 1,µζ, µ (0) z2. On the other hand the equation (4.14) implies that (4.16) (1 t)f(y) (1 t)f(γ(t)) = t(1 t) η, γ (b) z2 By adding (4.15) and (4.16) we obtain (4.17) tf(x) + (1 t)f(y) f(γ(t)) = t(1 t) = a b η, µ (0) z2. t(1 t) a b P 0 1,µζ η, µ (0) z2. Since c f is a monotone set valued mapping on M we have (4.18) P 0 1,µζ η, µ (0) z2 0. 186 Therefore, combining (4.17) and (4.18) implies that tf(x) + (1 t)f(y) f(γ(t)) 0, 187 and proof is completed.

Generalized monotonicity and convexity 35 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 Similarly for a locally Lipschitz function f : M R we can see; f is strictly convex on M if and only if c f is a strictly monotone set valued mapping on M. Theorem 4.3. Let f : M R be a locally Lipschitz function. Then, f is strongly convex on M with α > 0 if and only if c f is a strongly monotone set valued mapping on M with 2α. Proof. Let c f be strongly monotone set valued mapping on M with β = 2α > 0. Suppose that x, y M and γ : [0, 1] M is the unique geodesic joining y to x that is, γ(t) = exp y (t exp 1 y x). Assume by contrary that f is not strongly convex on M. Then, for every σ > 0 there exist x 0, y 0 with x 0 y 0 and ζ 0 c f(y 0 ) such that (4.19) f(x 0 ) f(y 0 ) < ζ 0, exp 1 y 0 x 0 y0 + σd(x 0, y 0 ) 2. 197 By Theorem 3.1 there exist t 0 (0, 1), u 0 = γ(t 0 ) and ψ 0 c f(u 0 ) such that f(x 0 ) f(y 0 ) = ψ 0, γ (t 0 ) u0 = P 1 0,ηψ 0, P 1 0,ηγ (t 0 ) y0 (4.20) = 1 t 0 P 1 0,ηψ 0, P 1 0,ηη (0) y0 = 1 t 0 P 1 0,ηψ 0, η (1) y0 = P 1 0,ηψ 0, exp 1 y 0 x 0 y0, 198 where η(s) := γ((1 s)t 0 ) for all s [0, 1]. By combining (4.19) and (4.20) we have (4.21) P 1 0,αψ 0 ζ 0, exp 1 y 0 x 0 y0 < σd(x 0, y 0 ) 2. 199 Since c f is strongly monotone set valued mapping on M with β we have βd(y 0, u 0 ) 2 P 0 1,ηζ 0 ψ 0, η (0)) u0 200 (4.22) By (4.21) and (4.22) we get = P 1 0,η[P 0 1,ηζ 0 ψ 0 ], P 1 0,η(η (0)) y0 = ζ 0 P 1 0,ηψ 0, η (1) y0 = t 0 P 1 0,ηψ 0 ζ 0, γ (0) y0 = t 0 P 1 0,ηψ 0 ζ 0, exp 1 y 0 x 0 y0. (4.23) βt 2 0d(y 0, x 0 ) 2 = βd(y 0, u 0 ) 2 t 0 P0,αψ 1 0 ζ 0, exp 1 y 0 x 0 y0 < t 0 σd(x 0, y 0 ) 2, 201 202 203 204 205 hence, σ > t 0 β which contradicts the arbitrariness of σ. Thus, f is strongly convex on M. Suppose that f is strongly convex on M with θ > 0. We show that θ = α. For every x, y M and every ζ c f(y) and ω c f(x) by using Theorem 4.1 (ii) we get f(x) f(y) ζ, exp 1 y x y + θd(x, y) 2,

36 A. Barani 206 207 and f(y) f(x) ω, exp 1 x y x + θd(x, y) 2 Adding these two inequalities implies that = P 0 1,γω, exp 1 y x y + θd(x, y) 2. 208 209 P 0 1,γω ζ, exp 1 y x y 2θd(x, y) 2. The converse is immediate consequence of theorem 4.1 (ii). Now, we give an example of a strongly monotone set valued mapping. 210 211 212 Example 4.4. Suppose that all assumptions on Example 4.2 holds. Then, the for all i I the functions (4.24) h i (x) := f i (x) + i 2 d2 (x, y) for all x M, and (4.25) g(x) := f(x) + 2 d2 (x, y) for all x M, 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 are strongly convex with constant α = sup i I L i. Now, by Theorem 4.3, the set valued mappings c hi, i I and c g are strongly monotone on S with constant 2α. References [1] A. Barani and M. R. Pouryayevali, Vector optimization problem under d-invexity on Riemannian manifolds, Diff. Geom. Dyn. Syst., 13 (2011) 34-44. [2] A. Barani, S. Hosseini and M. R. Pouryayevali, On metric projection onto ϕ convex subsets of Hadamard manifolds, accepted to Rev. Math. Complut. (DOI/10.1007/13163-011-0085-4). [3] G. C. Bento, O. P. Ferreira and P. R. Oliveira, Proximal point method for a special class of nonconvex functions on Hadamard manifolds, preprint http:// arxiv. org/ 0809.2594v6 [math.oc] 13 Apr 2010. [4] F. H. Clarke, Yu. S. Ledyaev, R. G. Stern and P. R. Wolenski, Nonsmooth Analysis and Control Theory, Grad. Texts in Math. 178, Springer, 1998. [5] J. X. Da Cruze Neto, O. P. Ferreira, L. R. Lucambio Pérez, Monotone pointto-set vector fields, Balkan Journal of Geometry and its Applications 5 (2000) 69-79. [6] O. P. Ferreira, L. R. Lucambio Pérez, S. Z. Németh, Singularities of monotone vector fields and an exteragradeient-type algorithm, Journal of Global Optimization 31 (2005) 133-151. [7] L. Fan, S. Liu and S. Gao, Generalized monotonicity and convexity of nondifferentiable functions, Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications 279 (2003) 276-289. [8] S. Karamadrian and S. Schaible, Seven kinds of monotone maps, Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications 66 (1990) 37-46.

Generalized monotonicity and convexity 37 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 [9] S. Lang, Fundamentals of Differential Geometry, Springer-verlag, Graduate Text in Mathematics, volume 191, New York, 1999. [10] Yu. S. Ledyaev, and Q. J. Zhu, Nonsmooth Analysis on smooth manifolds, (2006), Transactions of the American Mathematicl Society 395 (2007) 3687-3732. [11] C. Li, G. López and V. Martín-Márquez, Monotone vector fields and the proximal point algorithm on Hadamard manifolds, Journal of London Mathematical Society Advance Access published, Page 1-21 (2009). [12] S. Z. Németh, Monotone vector fields, Publicationes Mathematics 54 (1999) 437-449. [13] R. Pini, C. Singh, Generalized convexity and generalized monotonocity, Journal of Information and Optimization Sciences 20 (1999) 215-233. [14] T. Rapscák, Smooth Nonlinear Optimization in R n, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 1997. [15] R. Saigal, Existence of the generalized complementarity problem, Math. Oper. Res., 1 (1976) 260-766. [16] W. Thamelt, Directional Derivatives and generalized gradients on manifolds, Optimization, 25 (1992) 97-115. [17] C. Udriste, Convex functions and Optimization methods on Riemannian Manifolds, Mathematics and its Applications 297, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1994. [18] C. Udriste and A. Pitea, Optimization problems via second order Lagrangians, Balkan Journal of Geometry and its Applications, 16 (2011) 174-185. Author s address: A. Barani Department of Mathematics, Lorestan University, P. O. Box 465, Khoramabad, Iran. E-mail: barani.a@lu.ac.ir, alibarani2000@yahoo.com