Set . Completing the square in the -minimization gives
Thus, with , the steps in terms of the proximal map of are
The factor comes from the squared residual without a prefactor. The proximal map can equivalently be denoted . Since is a finite convex function, it is continuous, and the quadratic makes the proximal minimizer unique.
A general convex may be nondifferentiable, so this last example need not satisfy the full -smooth hypothesis of the preceding part. The formulas nevertheless remain well-defined: only the derivative is used explicitly. If has an -Lipschitz gradient, one may take in the smooth proof, where is the operator norm.
There is also a useful nonsmooth extension. Put , whose Lipschitz gradient constant is . For two updates, retain the mixed-point differences above, let , and let be the difference of the two selected subgradients of at . The input difference is and the output difference is . Monotonicity of gives . The same norm expansion now yields
For , discard the nonpositive term and use . The result is the firmly nonexpansive mapping inequality for the full residual . Fixed points satisfy and , exactly the subgradient optimality condition for the convex objective. Thus the stated algorithm also converges for nonsmooth under this sufficient step bound, provided a minimizer exists; this extension uses monotonicity, not an unavailable gradient of .

Articles by others on the same topic (0)

There are currently no matching articles.