Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 55 references

Metric subregularity forces a limiting BCQ exactly in Asplund spaces.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-04 17:13 UTC pith:NW33KMFG

load-bearing objection The Asplund characterizations are unproved: the counterexample uses a non-Asplund Y, but the forward BCQ theorems are solid and worth referee time. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2509.11004 v1 pith:NW33KMFG submitted 2025-09-13 math.OC

Metric Subregularity of Multifunctions and Applications to Characterizations of Asplund Spaces

Zhou Wei , Michel Thera , Jen-Chih Yao This is my paper
classification math.OC MSC 90C3190C2549J5246B20
keywords metric subregularityAsplund spacelimiting BCQcoderivativenormal coneconic inequalityerror boundsvariational analysis
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper establishes that, for a closed multifunction between Banach spaces, metric subregularity (a set-valued error bound) implies a dual 'limiting BCQ' inclusion—normal vectors to the solution set must lie in the coderivative image—precisely when the underlying space is Asplund. In Asplund spaces the implication always holds, and if it holds for every closed multifunction into any Asplund space, the space itself must be Asplund. The same pattern is proved for weaker 'fuzzy' inclusions built from Fréchet normal cones and for conic inequalities. This ties classical error-bound-to-BCQ results to the Asplund geometry and shows that the Asplund property is the exact dividing line for such dual certificates.

Core claim

The central claim is Theorem 3.1: a Banach space X is Asplund if and only if every closed multifunction F from X into any Asplund space Y that is metrically subregular at a point (xbar, ybar) satisfies the limiting BCQ at every nearby solution point x, meaning N(F^{-1}(ybar), x) is a subset of D*F(x, ybar)(Y*). The forward direction is proved using the fuzzy sum rule for Fréchet subdifferentials and the Asplund-space representation of limiting normal cones as sequential limits of Fréchet normals, yielding the containment with an explicit scaling. The reverse direction constructs, from any non-Asplund space, a specific closed multifunction built from an equivalent norm with a strong asymmetry

What carries the argument

The limiting (Mordukhovich) normal cone and coderivative, defined as sequential outer limits of Fréchet normals, are the main objects. The proof relies on the fuzzy sum rule for Fréchet subdifferentials in Asplund spaces, on the Banach–Steinhaus theorem for bounded normals, and on a counterexample multifunction built from an equivalent asymmetric norm on a non-Asplund space. The asymmetry condition on the norm (inequality 3.12) is what makes the constructed multifunction fail the BCQ while remaining metrically subregular.

Load-bearing premise

The characterization rests on classical Asplund-space calculus rules (the fuzzy sum rule and the sequential-limit representation of limiting normals) for the forward direction, and on a renorming theorem guaranteeing that every non-Asplund space admits an equivalent norm with a specific asymmetry property for the counterexample; if either tool fails, the equivalence collapses.

What would settle it

Concrete observation: exhibit a non-Asplund Banach space X and a closed multifunction F: X → Y into an Asplund space Y that is metrically subregular at (xbar, ybar) but for which some normal vector x* in N(F^{-1}(ybar), x) is not in D*F(x, ybar)(Y*). The paper's converse predicts such a multifunction exists for every non-Asplund space; testing a specific candidate such as c_0 or another classical non-Asplund space would settle the claim. Alternatively, verify the asymmetry condition (3.12) explicitly for the norm constructed in the paper's counterexample to ensure the construction is sound.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

If this is right

  • In Asplund spaces, every metrically subregular closed multifunction satisfies the limiting BCQ at nearby solution points, giving a dual certificate for error bounds.
  • The equivalence characterizes Asplund spaces: any non-Asplund space admits a closed multifunction into an Asplund space that is metrically subregular yet violates the limiting BCQ.
  • For conic inequalities, metric subregularity implies an exact inclusion involving cone-relative Mordukhovich subdifferentials, and this implication characterizes Asplund spaces.
  • Fréchet-based fuzzy inclusions are necessary in Asplund spaces but, applied to all conic inequalities, only give sufficient conditions for a space to be Asplund, not necessary ones.
  • The results recover known error-bound/BCQ theorems for scalar inequalities as special cases, showing the Asplund property underlies them.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The construction in the converse uses Y = X^2 with an ℓ1-norm, suggesting the characterization is robust to the choice of the target Asplund space.
  • The sharp dividing line hints that other 'error-bound implies dual condition' results in variational analysis likely hold exactly in Asplund or reflexive spaces, and that the fuzzy-versus-limiting distinction reflects a hierarchy of dual certificate strength.
  • A natural extension is to metric regularity rather than subregularity, or to Hölder-type subregularity, where analogous Asplund-space characterizations may hold.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper introduces a limiting Basic Constraint Qualification (BCQ) for closed multifunctions, defined via Mordukhovich normal cones and coderivatives, and proves that in Asplund spaces metric subregularity implies this BCQ. It also proves a fuzzy Fréchet version, gives applications to conic inequalities, and claims converses that characterize Asplund spaces through the validity of these implications for all Asplund target spaces Y. The forward Asplund-space directions are developed with a consistent proof template: renorm the product space, apply the fuzzy sum rule to the distance function associated with the graph, and pass to weak* limits on dual balls. The advertised characterization directions, however, contain a quantifier error in the construction of counterexamples: the proofs use Y := X^2 with the l1 norm, a space that is not Asplund when X is not Asplund, while the statements quantify over all Asplund Y.

Significance. If the main theorem were established, it would give a clean dual necessary condition for metric subregularity and would place the classical Lewis--Pang BCQ result in the context of Asplund spaces. The forward implication, metric subregularity => limiting BCQ for closed multifunctions between Asplund spaces, is a genuine and useful result, and the fuzzy version and the applications to conic inequalities are of interest. The finite-dimensional sharpening in Theorem 3.6 and the composite-convex results in Theorems 3.7--3.8 also add value. However, the converse half of the central characterization is not proved: the counterexample Y = X^2 is inadmissible under the theorem's hypothesis that Y be Asplund. Since the title and abstract advertise characterizations of Asplund spaces, this is a load-bearing gap rather than a cosmetic one.

major comments (3)
  1. [Theorem 3.1, proof of (iii)=>(i), Eqs. (3.13)--(3.18)] The proof assumes X is not Asplund and constructs Y := X^2 equipped with the l1-norm. The text itself notes 'Then Y is not the Asplund space.' But statement (iii) quantifies over every Asplund space Y. Since X embeds isometrically as a closed subspace of X^2 and the Asplund property is hereditary to closed subspaces, X non-Asplund implies X^2 non-Asplund. Thus the construction is outside the quantifier in (iii); it disproves at most the weaker statement with arbitrary Banach Y. The same inadmissible Y is used in Theorem 3.2(iii)=>(i), Theorem 4.1(iv)=>(i), and Theorem 4.3(ii). This invalidates the converse half of the paper's main characterization claim.
  2. [Theorem 3.1, proof of (iii)=>(i), Eq. (3.15)] In proving N(A2, 0) = {(0,0)}, the proof begins: 'Let x* = (z*,λ) ∈ N(A2, ¯x). Then there exist (z_k,α_k) ... and (z*_k,λ_k) ... such that (z*_k,λ_k) ∈ bN(A2,(z_k,α_k)).' This uses the Mordukhovich--Shao representation of the limiting normal cone as a sequential outer limit of Fréchet normals. Section 2 explicitly states that this representation is valid only in Asplund spaces. But the proof is in the non-Asplund case, so the representation is not available; the definition (2.1) involves bN_epsilon normals. The same computation is reused in Theorem 4.1. Thus even for the inadmissible Y, the key normal-cone computation is not justified as written.
  3. [Theorems 3.1--4.3, overall converse strategy] The central equivalence (i)<=>(iii) in Theorem 3.1 requires: if X is not Asplund, then there exists a closed F with an Asplund target Y such that metric subregularity holds but the limiting BCQ fails. The manuscript instead constructs examples with Y = X^2. To repair the characterization, the authors need either an admissible construction with Asplund Y (for instance, reducing to the scalar case Y = R via [45] or to a finite-dimensional cone encoding, if valid) or a substantive weakening of the theorem statements. This is not a local correction to the proof; it affects the advertised main result.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Theorem 3.1, proof of Eq. (3.8)] The displayed inequality before 'This and (3.7) imply' should read d(u, F^{-1}(\bar y)) rather than d(x, F^{-1}(\bar y)); the current expression is inconsistent with the subsequent substitution of the metric subregularity estimate.
  2. [Theorems 3.3 and 3.4] The statements of Theorems 3.3 and 3.4 list only item '(ii)' and do not include the corresponding '(i)' items; the numbering should be corrected.
  3. [Sections 3 and 4] The phrase 'Y is not the Asplund space' should be 'Y is not an Asplund space'. Also, the renorming condition (3.12) is applied to z ∈ Z, so the text 'on Y' before Y is defined is confusing; it should say the equivalent norm is on Z.
  4. [Abstract and conclusion] The abstract states that the fuzzy inclusions yield characterizations of Asplund spaces, but Theorem 4.3 gives only a necessary or a sufficient condition depending on direction. The abstract and conclusion should be aligned with the actual strength of the theorems after the converse issue is resolved.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: central Asplund characterization proofs are derived from stated assumptions and standard external lemmas. The converse proof contains a quantifier gap (non-Asplund test space), which is a correctness issue, not circularity.

full rationale

The paper's central derivation, Theorem 3.1(i)=>(ii), is a genuine proof: metric subregularity is used to obtain an estimate involving the distance to the graph, the fuzzy sum rule (Lemma 2.1) and Lemma 2.3 are applied to Fr\'echet subgradients of distance functions, and the Mordukhovich/Shao sequential representation of limiting normals in Asplund spaces converts the resulting normals into a coderivative inclusion. The limiting BCQ (Definition 3.2) is not defined in terms of metric subregularity, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. The proof is therefore not circular. The converse directions (iii)=>(i) in Theorems 3.1, 4.1, and 4.3(ii) attempt a contrapositive with Y := X^2, but the text itself states 'Then Y is not the Asplund space.' Since the quantified hypothesis ranges over every Asplund space Y, a non-Asplund test space cannot contradict it. This is a substantive quantifier/omitted-proof problem, but it is a correctness risk, not a circularity: the derivation does not assume its conclusion. Self-citations appear: Lemma 2.5 is 'cited from [46, Lemma 3.1]' and Theorem 3.4 relies on [46, Theorem 3.2]; Remarks 4.2 and 4.4 mention the authors' own [45] and compare with [37]. These are secondary results or remarks, not load-bearing for the main Asplund-characterization proofs of Theorems 3.1, 4.1, and 4.3. No self-definitional, fitted-input, uniqueness-imported, ansatz-smuggled, or renaming pattern is present. Score 2 reflects only minor, non-load-bearing self-citations; the central content is independent.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 6 axioms · 2 invented entities

The paper introduces no empirical free parameters. Its formal machinery rests on standard results in variational analysis and on the specific renorming theorem for non-Asplund spaces. The main new entities are definitions, not postulates with independent physical evidence.

free parameters (1)
  • No fitted numerical parameters
    The paper is a pure proof-based mathematics paper. No data is fitted. Constants like tau, epsilon, delta are existential from the definitions and proofs, not fitted to data.
axioms (6)
  • domain assumption Asplund space property: every continuous convex function on X is Frechet differentiable on a dense G-delta subset.
    This is the definition of the central space class. It is assumed in all main theorems, not derived.
  • standard math Mordukhovich-Shao representation: in Asplund spaces, N(Omega,xbar) = Limsup of bN(Omega,x) as x approaches xbar.
    Invoked in Section 2 and used throughout the proof of Theorem 3.1 to approximate limiting normals by Frechet normals.
  • standard math Fuzzy sum rule for Frechet subdifferentials (Fabian, Lemma 2.1).
    Used as the key calculus tool in the proofs of Theorems 3.1, 3.2, and 3.5.
  • domain assumption Deville-Godefroy-Zizler renorming theorem: if Z is non-Asplund, there exists an equivalent norm ||| . ||| and gamma>0 satisfying (3.12).
    Used in the counterexample constructions in Theorems 3.1, 3.2, 4.1, and 4.3. This is cited from [9] and [15]. The existence of such a norm is a theorem, but its use is load-bearing for the converse directions.
  • standard math Zheng-Ng Lemma 2.4: existence of unit Frechet normals with a certain self-bounding inequality.
    Used in the proof of Theorem 3.7 (ii) to get a point u where the dual condition applies.
  • standard math Lemma 2.5: surjectivity of the derivative transfers normal cone inclusions for pullbacks.
    Used in the composite-convex results (Theorem 3.7 and 3.8) for the mapping Psi(x,y)=(g(x),y).
invented entities (2)
  • limiting BCQ for general closed multifunctions (Definition 3.2) no independent evidence
    purpose: Dual necessary condition for metric subregularity, and the central object used to characterize Asplund spaces.
    This is a definition introduced in the paper. It is a natural extension of Zheng-Ng's BCQ for convex multifunctions, but it is a new concept with no external falsifiable handle. Its value is judged by the theorems.
  • Frechet and limiting subdifferentials relative to a general closed cone K (b∂_K f and ∂_K f) no independent evidence
    purpose: Dual objects for the conic inequality application.
    These are definitions extending standard subdifferentials to vector-valued functions. They are not new physical entities but part of the framework.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 33212 in / 4261 out tokens · 51953 ms · 2026-08-04T17:13:02.327880+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Metric Subregularity of Multifunctions and Applications to Characterizations of Asplund Spaces." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/NW33KMFG

@misc{pith2026250911004,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Metric Subregularity of Multifunctions and Applications to Characterizations of Asplund Spaces},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/NW33KMFG}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.11004}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

In this paper, we investigate metric subregularity of multifunctions between Asplund spaces. Using Mordukhovich normal cones and coderivatives, we introduce the limiting Basic Constraint Qualification (BCQ) associated with a given multifunction. This BCQ provides necessary dual conditions for the metric subregularity of multifunctions in the Asplund space setting. Furthermore, we establish characterizations of Asplund spaces in terms of the limiting BCQ condition implied by metric subregularity. By employing Frechet normal cones and coderivatives, we derive necessary dual conditions for metric subregularity expressed as fuzzy inclusions, and we also obtain characterizations of Asplund spaces via these fuzzy inclusions. As an application, we examine metric subregularity of the conic inequality defined by a vector-valued function and a closed (not necessarily convex) cone with a nontrivial recession cone. By using Mordukhovich and Frechet subdifferentials relative to the given cone, we establish necessary dual conditions for the metric subregularity of such inequalities in Asplund spaces. The results based on Mordukhovich subdifferentials characterize Asplund spaces, while those based on Frechet subdifferentials yield necessary or sufficient conditions for Asplund spaces. These conditions recover, as special cases, the known error-bound results for inequalities defined by extended-real-valued functions on Asplund spaces. Overall, this work highlights that the validity of necessary conditions formulated via normal cones and subdifferentials for error bounds of convex or nonconvex inequalities depends crucially on the Asplund property of the underlying space.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

55 extracted references

  1. [1]

    Auslender and J.-P

    A. Auslender and J.-P. Crouzeix. Global regularity theorems.Math. Oper. Res., 13(2):243–253, 1988

    1988

  2. [2]

    Aussel, A

    D. Aussel, A. Daniilidis, and L. Thibault. Subsmooth sets: functional characterizations and related concepts. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 357(4):1275–1301, 2005

    2005

  3. [3]

    D. Az ´e. A unified theory for metric regularity of multifunctions.J. Convex Anal., 13(2):225–252, 2006

    2006

  4. [4]

    H. H. Bauschke and J. M. Borwein. On the convergence of von neumann’s alternating projection algorithm for two sets.Set-Valued Analysis, 1(2):185–212, 1993

    1993

  5. [5]

    H. H. Bauschke and J. M. Borwein. On projection algorithms for solving convex feasibility problems.SIAM Rev., 38(3):367–426, 1996

    1996

  6. [6]

    Burke and S

    J.V . Burke and S. Deng. Weak sharp minima revisited. II. Application to linear regularity and error bounds. Math. Program., 104(2-3, Ser. B):235–261, 2005

    2005

  7. [7]

    F. H. Clarke.Optimization and Nonsmooth Analysis. Wiley, 1983

    1983

  8. [8]

    Deutsch.The role of conical hull intersection property in convex optimization and approximation

    F. Deutsch.The role of conical hull intersection property in convex optimization and approximation. in Approxi- mation Theory IX, V ol. I: Theoretical Aspects (edited by C.K. Chui and L.L. Schumaker), Vanderbilt University Press, Nashville, TN, pp. 105-112

  9. [9]

    Deville, G

    R. Deville, G. Godefroy, and V . Zizler.Smoothness and Renorming in Banach Spaces. Pitman Monogr. Surveys Pure Appl. Math. 64, Longman, Harlow,, 1993

    1993

  10. [10]

    S. Dolecki. Tangency and differentiation, some applications of convergence theory.Ann. Math. Pura Appl., 130:223–255, 1982

    1982

  11. [11]

    A. L. Dontchev, A. S. Lewis, and R. T. Rockafellar. The radius of metric regularity.Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 355(2):493–517, 2003. Metric Subegularity of Multifunctions and Applications to Characterizations of Asplund Spaces 33

    2003

  12. [12]

    A. L. Dontchev and R. T. Rockafellar. Regularity and conditioning of solution mappings in variational analysis. Set-Valued Analysis, 12(1-2):79–109, 2004

    2004

  13. [13]

    A. L. Dontchev and R. T. Rockafellar.Implicit functions and solution mappings : a view from variational analysis. Springer New York, 2009

    2009

  14. [14]

    M. Fabian. Subdifferentiability and trustworthiness in the light of a new variational principle of borwein and preiss.Charles University in Prague, 30(2), 1989

    1989

  15. [15]

    Fabian and B

    M. Fabian and B. S. Mordukhovich. Nonsmooth characterizations of asplund spaces and smooth variational principles.Set-Valued Analysis, 6:381–406, 1998

    1998

  16. [16]

    D. H. Fang, C. Li, and K. F. Ng. Constraint qualifications for extended Farkas’s lemmas and lagrangian dualities in convex infinite programming.SIAM Journal on Optimization, 20(3):1311–1332, 2010

    2010

  17. [17]

    L. M. Graves. Some mapping theorems.Duke Math. J., 17:111–114, 1950

    1950

  18. [18]

    Henrion and A

    R. Henrion and A. Jourani. Subdifferential conditions for calmness of convex constraints.SIAM J. Optim., 13(2):520–534, 2002

    2002

  19. [19]

    Henrion, A

    R. Henrion, A. Jourani, and J. Outrata. On the calmness of a class of multifunctions.SIAM J. Optim., 13:603–618, 2002

    2002

  20. [20]

    Henrion and J

    R. Henrion and J. Outrata. Calmness of constraint systems with applications.Math. Program., 104:437–464, 2005

    2005

  21. [21]

    Henrion and J

    R. Henrion and J. V . Outrata. Calmness of constraint systems with applications.Mathematical Programming, 104(2):437–464, 2005

    2005

  22. [22]

    Hiriart-Urruty and C

    J.-B. Hiriart-Urruty and C. Lemarechal.Convex Analysis and Minimization Algorithms I Fundamentals. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1993

    1993

  23. [23]

    A. J. Hoffman. On approximate solutions of systems of linear inequalities.J. Research Nat. Bur. Standards, 49:263–265, 1952

    1952

  24. [24]

    A. D. Ioffe. Approximate subdifferentials and applications 3: the metric theory.Mathematika, 36(1):1–38, 1989

    1989

  25. [25]

    A. D. Ioffe. Metric regularity and subdifferential calculus.Russian Math. Surveys, 55:501–558, 2000

    2000

  26. [26]

    A. D. Ioffe. Metric regularity—a survey Part 1. Theory.J. Aust. Math. Soc., 101(2):188–243, 2016

    2016

  27. [27]

    A. D. Ioffe. Metric regularity—a survey Part II. Applications.J. Aust. Math. Soc., 101(3):376–417, 2016

    2016

  28. [28]

    A. D. Ioffe.Variational Analysis of Regular Mappings: Theory and Applications. Springer Monographs in Mathematics. Springer, 2017

    2017

  29. [29]

    A. D. Ioffe and J. V . Outrata. On metric and calmness qualification conditions in subdifferential calculus. Set-Valued Anal

  30. [30]

    A. D. Ioffe and J-P. Penot. Subdifferentials of performance functions and calculus of coderivatives of set-valued mappings.Serdica Math J, 22(22):359–384, 1996

    1996

  31. [31]

    A. Y . Kruger. Error bounds and metric subregularity.Optimization, 64(1):49–79, 2015

    2015

  32. [32]

    A. S. Lewis and J-S. Pang. Error bounds for convex inequality systems. InGeneralized Convexity, Generalized Monotonicity: Recent Results (Luminy, 1996), volume 27 ofNonconvex Optim. Appl., pages 75–110. Kluwer Acad. Publ., Dordrecht, 1998

    1996

  33. [33]

    C. Li, K. F. Ng, and T. K. Pong. Constraint qualifications for convex inequality systems with applications in constrained optimization.SIAM Journal on Optimization, 19:163–187, 2008

    2008

  34. [34]

    W. Li. Abadie’s constraint qualification, metric regularity, and error bounds for differentiable convex inequali- ties.SIAM Journal on Optimization, 7(4):966–978, 1997

    1997

  35. [35]

    W. Li, C. Nahak, and I. Singer. Constraint qualifications for semi-infinite systems of convex inequalities.SIAM Journal on Optimization, 11(1):31–52, 2000

    2000

  36. [36]

    L. A. Lyusternik. On conditional extrema of functionals.Math. Sbornik, 41:390–401, 1934

    1934

  37. [37]

    B. S. Mordukhovich.Variational Analysis and Generalized Differentiation I. Springer, New York, NY , 2006

    2006

  38. [38]

    B. S. Mordukhovich and Y . Shao. Nonsmooth sequential analysis in asplund spaces.Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 348:1235–1280, 1996

    1996

  39. [39]

    B. S. Mordukhovich and B. Wang. On variational characterizations of Asplund spaces. InConstructive, exper- imental, and nonlinear analysis (Limoges, 1999), volume 27 ofCRC Math. Model. Ser., pages 245–254. CRC, Boca Raton, FL, 2000

    1999

  40. [40]

    H. V . Ngai and M. Th ´era. Metric inequality, subdifferential calculus and applications.Set Valued Analysis, 9(1-2):187–216, 2001

    2001

  41. [41]

    J. P. Penot.Calculus without Derivatives. Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol. 266. Springer, New York, 2013

    2013

  42. [42]

    R. R. Phelps.Convex Functions, Monotone Operators and Differentiability. Lecture Notes in Math. 1364, Springer, New York, 1989

    1989

  43. [43]

    Robinson

    S.M. Robinson. An application of error bounds for convex programming in a linear space.SIAM J. Control, 13:271–273, 1975

    1975

  44. [44]

    Thibault.Unilateral Variational Analysis in Banach Spaces

    L. Thibault.Unilateral Variational Analysis in Banach Spaces. World Scientific, 2023

    2023

  45. [45]

    Z. Wei, M. Th ´era, and J.-C. Yao. On error bounds for inequalities in Asplund spaces.Journal of Convex Analysis, to appear

  46. [46]

    Z. Wei, M. Th ´era, and J.-C. Yao. Subtransversality and strong CHIP of closed sets in Asplund spaces.Set-Valued Var. Anal., 32(23), 2024

    2024

  47. [47]

    Wei and J.-C

    Z. Wei and J.-C. Yao. On constraint qualifications of a nonconvex inequality.Optimization Letters, 12:1117– 1139, 2018

    2018

  48. [48]

    X. Y . Zheng. Slater condition for tangent derivatives.Math. Ope. Res., 47(4):3282–3303, 2022

    2022

  49. [49]

    X. Y . Zheng and K. F. Ng. Metric regularity and constraint qualifications for convex inequalities on Banach spaces.SIAM Journal on Optimization, 14(3):757–772, 2004. 34 Zhou Wei et al

    2004

  50. [50]

    X. Y . Zheng and K. F. Ng. Metric subregularity and constraint qualifications for convex generalized equations in Banach spaces.SIAM Journal on Optimization, 18(2):437–460, 2007

    2007

  51. [51]

    X. Y . Zheng and K. F. Ng. Linear regularity for a collection of subsmooth sets in Banach spaces.SIAM Journal on Optimization, 19(1):62–76, 2008

    2008

  52. [52]

    X. Y . Zheng and K. F. Ng. Metric subregularity and calmness for nonconvex generalized equations in Banach spaces.SIAM J. Optim., 20(5):2119–2136, 2010

    2010

  53. [53]

    X. Y . Zheng and K. F. Ng. Metric subregularity for proximal generalized equations in Hilbert spaces.Nonlinear Anal., 75(3):1686–1699, 2012

    2012

  54. [54]

    X. Y . Zheng and K. F. Ng. Stability of error bounds for conic subsmooth inequalities.ESAIM Contr. Optim. CA, 25:55, 2019

    2019

  55. [55]

    Z ˘alinescu.Convex Analysis in General Vector Spaces

    C. Z ˘alinescu.Convex Analysis in General Vector Spaces. World Scientific Publishing Co., Inc., River Edge, NJ, 2002

    2002