GSOS: Gauss-Seidel Operator Splitting Algorithm for Multi-Term Nonsmooth Convex Composite Optimization
the above mentioned methods S-APG, PA-APG and its en-
hanced version APA-APG all need a strict restriction on the
nonsmooth functions {g
i
(x)} that each g
i
(x) must be Lip-
schitz continuous. In addition, some primal-dual parallel
splitting methods (Briceno-Arias et al., 2011; Combettes
& Pesquet, 2007; 2008; Condat, 2013; V
˜
u, 2013) gener-
alized from traditional operator splitting, such as forward
backward splitting method (Chen & Rockafellar, 1997) and
Douglas Rachford splitting method (Eckstein & Bertsekas,
1992), can also solve the multi-term nonsmooth convex
composite optimization problem (1). Different from pri-
or work, Raguet et al. (Raguet et al., 2013) proposed an
efficient primal operator splitting method called general-
ized forward backward splitting method using the classic
forward backward splitting technique, which has shown
the superiority over numerous existing primal-dual splitting
methods (Monteiro & Svaiter, 2013; Combettes & Pesquet,
2012; Chambolle & Pock, 2011) in dealing with variation-
al image restoration problems. All the above mentioned
methods for problem (1) with n ≥ 3 share a common
feature that they all split the nonsmooth composite term
P
n
i=1
g
i
(x) in the Jacobi iteration manner, i.e., parallelly.
This is one of the main differences between existing split-
ting methods and our proposed method in this paper.
To split the nonsmooth composite term
P
n
i=1
g
i
(x) more
efficiently, we propose a novel operator splitting algorithm
to solve problem (1) by harnessing the advantage of Gauss-
Seidel iterations, i.e., the computation of the proximal
mapping of the current function g
i
(x) uses the proximal
mappings of g
j
(x) for all j < i which have already
been computed ahead. In addition, to further improve the
algorithm’s efficiency, we leverage the over-relaxation
acceleration technique. What’s more, we provide a new
strategy that the over-relaxation stepsize can be determined
adaptively, ensuring a larger value to accelerate the algo-
rithm. The most important is that the convergence of our
proposed GSOS algorithm is established by a newly devel-
oped analysis technique. In detail, given an invertible linear
operator R, we first argue that the optimal solution set
[∇f +
P
n
i=1
∂g
i
]
−1
(0) of problem (1) can be recovered
by the zero point set
(R
∗
)
−1
S
R, ∂g+A◦∇f◦A, N
V
−1
(0).
This is fulfilled through adopting the tool of operator
optimization theory, in which the composite operator
S
R, ∂g+A◦∇f◦A, N
V
is generalized from the definition of
the composite monotone operator S
λ,A,B
in (Eckstein
& Bertsekas, 1992). Next, by unitizing the definition of
the -enlargement of maximal monotone (Burachik et al.,
1998; 1997; Burachik & Svaiter, 1999; Svaiter, 2000),
we establish a key property for S
R, ∂g+A◦∇f◦A, N
V
,
that is, gph
S
R, (∂g+A
∗
◦∇f◦A)
[]
, N
V
⊆
gph
R
∗
[(R
∗
)
−1
S
R, ∂g+A
∗
◦∇f◦A, N
V
]
[]
. Based on
this observation, we equivalently reformulate the GSOS
algorithm as a two-step iterations algorithm. Then, the
global convergence of the proposed GSOS algorithm is
easily established based on this reformulation.
The closest algorithm to our proposed GSOS algorithm
is the generalized forward backward splitting method pro-
posed by Raguet et al. (Raguet et al., 2013). By carefully
selecting the scaling matrix H in the forthcoming GSOS
algorithm, it is easy to check that GSOS covers the gener-
alized forward backward splitting method as a special case.
Another highly related algorithm to our proposed GSOS al-
gorithm is the matrix splitting method (Luo & Tseng, 1991;
Yuan et al., 2016). Choosing the scaling matrix H suitably,
the proposed GSOS algorithm can inherit the advantage of
the matrix splitting technique which has shown the efficien-
cy in (Yuan et al., 2016) for coping with a special class of
coordinate separable composite optimization problems.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. In Section 2,
we first give the definitions of some useful notations which
can make the paper much more readable. We also establish
some lemmas and propositions based on monotone opera-
tor theory (Bauschke & Combettes, 2011), which are the
key to the convergence of the GSOS algorithm. In Section
3, we present the proposed GSOS algorithm and then an-
alyze its convergence and iteration complexity. In Section
4, we conduct numerical experiments on overlapping group
Lasso and graph-guided fused Lasso problems to evaluate
the efficacy of the GSOS algorithm. Finally, we draw con-
clusions in Section 5.
2. Preliminaries and Notations
Let Y =
Q
n
i=1
X
i
be the product space of X
i
with X
i
= X
for all i ∈ {1, 2, · · · , n}. Let V be a linear space and V
⊥
be its complementary space with the following definitions
V =
y ∈ Y | y
1
= · · · = y
n
, V
⊥
=
y ∈ Y |
n
X
i
y
i
= 0
.
Let I
X
: X → X be the identity map and E
Y
:
X → Y be a block linear operator defined as E
Y
=
I
X
· · · I
X
∗
. Let A : Y → X be a linear oper-
ator defined as Ay =
1
n
E
∗
Y
y =
1
n
P
n
i=1
y
i
. Hence, its
adjoint operator A
∗
: X → Y is defined as A
∗
x =
1
n
E
Y
x.
Let H, R : Y → Y be block lower triangular linear invert-
ible operators satisfying (R
∗
)
−1
= H and H + H
∗
0.
Moreover, H is defined as
H
1,1
0 · · · 0
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
H
n−1,1
· · · H
n−1,n−1
0
H
n,1
· · · H
n−1,n
H
n,n
, (3)
where H
i,j
: X → X is a linear operator for all (i, j) ∈
{1, · · · , n}. It is worthwhile to emphasize that H
i,i
is also
possible to be a lower triangular linear operator satisfying