Paper detail

Restricted normal cones and the method of alternating projections

The method of alternating projections (MAP) is a common method for solving feasibility problems. While employed traditionally to subspaces or to convex sets, little was known about the behavior of the MAP in the nonconvex case until 2009, when Lewis, Luke, and Malick derived local linear convergence results provided that a condition involving normal cones holds and at least one of the sets is superregular (a property less restrictive than convexity). However, their results failed to capture very simple classical convex instances such as two lines in three-dimensional space. In this paper, we extend and develop the Lewis-Luke-Malick framework so that not only any two linear subspaces but also any two closed convex sets whose relative interiors meet are covered. We also allow for sets that are more structured such as unions of convex sets. The key tool required is the restricted normal cone, which is a generalization of the classical Mordukhovich normal cone. We thoroughly study restricted normal cones from the viewpoint of constraint qualifications and regularity. Numerous examples are provided to illustrate the theory.

preprint2012arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.