<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!DOCTYPE article  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v3.0 20080202//EN" "http://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/3.0/journalpublishing3.dtd"><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" dtd-version="3.0" xml:lang="en" article-type="research article"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">AJCM</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>American Journal of Computational Mathematics</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2161-1203</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Scientific Research Publishing</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4236/ajcm.2022.122011</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">AJCM-117159</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="Discipline-v2"><subject>Physics&amp;Mathematics</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>
 
 
  A Class of Smoothing Modulus-Based Iterative Method for Solving Implicit Complementarity Problems
 
</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Cong</surname><given-names>Guo</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Chenliang</surname><given-names>Li</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref><xref ref-type="corresp" rid="cor1"><sup>*</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Tao</surname><given-names>Luo</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="aff1"><addr-line>School of Mathematics and Computing Science, Guilin University of Electronic Technology, Guilin, China</addr-line></aff><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>09</day><month>05</month><year>2022</year></pub-date><volume>12</volume><issue>02</issue><fpage>197</fpage><lpage>208</lpage><history><date date-type="received"><day>20,</day>	<month>April</month>	<year>2022</year></date><date date-type="rev-recd"><day>15,</day>	<month>May</month>	<year>2022</year>	</date><date date-type="accepted"><day>18,</day>	<month>May</month>	<year>2022</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement>&#169; Copyright  2014 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. </copyright-statement><copyright-year>2014</copyright-year><license><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</license-p></license></permissions><abstract><p>
 
 
  In this paper, a class of smoothing modulus-based iterative method was presented for solving implicit complementarity problems. The main idea was to transform the implicit complementarity problem into an equivalent implicit fixed-point equation, then introduces a smoothing function to obtain its approximation solutions. The convergence analysis of the algorithm was given, and the efficiency of the algorithms was verified by numerical experiments.
 
</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>Implicit Complementarity Problem</kwd><kwd> Smooth Function</kwd><kwd> Smoothing Modulus-Based Iterative Method</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><body><sec id="s1"><title>1. Introduction</title><p>Complementarity problems arise widely in many applications of science and engineering, such as elastic contact, economic transport, boundary problems in fluid dynamics, convex quadratic programming and inverse problems [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.117159-ref1">1</xref>]. In this paper, we consider the implicit complementarity problems (ICP) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.117159-ref2">2</xref>]: find vectors z , w ∈ R n , such that</p><p>z − m ( z ) ≥ 0 , w = M z + q ≥ 0</p><p>( z − m ( z ) ) T ( M z + q ) = 0 .</p><p>where M ∈ R n &#215; n is a given matrix, q ∈ R n is a given constant vector, m ( ⋅ ) is a mapping from R n into itself, and if the mapping m ( ⋅ ) is a zero mapping, the ICP reduces to linear complementarity problem (LCP).</p><p>ICP was introduced into the complementarity theory as a mathematical tool in the study of some stochastic optimal control problems, it was first proposed by Bensoussan and Lion in [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.117159-ref3">3</xref>]. After decades of research and development, people have obtained the existence theorem of solutions to the implicit complementarity problem [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.117159-ref4">4</xref>], and proposed many effective methods for solving implicit complementarity problems. Such as fixed-point method [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.117159-ref5">5</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.117159-ref6">6</xref>], projection iteration method [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.117159-ref7">7</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.117159-ref8">8</xref>], Schwarz method [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.117159-ref9">9</xref>] etc. Apart from that Zheng and Qu [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.117159-ref10">10</xref>] established a hybrid method for solving implicit complementarity problems with superconvergence, numerical examples show that this method has higher accuracy and faster convergence than some existing methods. Tian et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.117159-ref11">11</xref>] proposed an unconstrained and differentiable penalty method for solving the implicit complementarity problems. Xia and Li [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.117159-ref12">12</xref>] firstly constructed modulus-based matrix splitting iterative method for solving nonlinear complementary problems. Then Hong and Li [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.117159-ref13">13</xref>] presented modulus-based matrix splitting iterative method (MMS) for solving the implicit complementarity problems, and analyzes its convergence. Wang et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.117159-ref14">14</xref>] given new convergence conditions of MMS when the system matrix is a positive-definite matrix and an H + -matrix. On their basis, Yin et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.117159-ref15">15</xref>] proposed a class of accelerated modulus-based matrix splitting iteration methods to solve the implicit complementarity problems. Zheng and Vong [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.117159-ref16">16</xref>] proposed a modified modulus-based matrix splitting iterative method to solve the implicit complementarity problems. Wang and Cao [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.117159-ref17">17</xref>] constructed a two-step modulus-based matrix splitting iterative methods (TMMS) for solving implicit complementarity problems, numerical experiments show that this iterative method is more effective than the MMS methods.</p><p>Dong and Jiang proposed modular iteration method in [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.117159-ref18">18</xref>]. Its main idea is to transform the linear complementarity problems into an equivalent fixed-point equation system, and then solve it. Foutayeni et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.117159-ref19">19</xref>] constructed a smoothing function to approximate the linear complementarity problems, and proposed a class of modified Newton methods and m + 1 -step iteration methods to solve the linear complementarity problems, obtaining an effective smoothing numerical algorithm. In this paper, we extend this method to solve the implicit complementarity problems. Firstly, we transform the implicit complementarity problems into an equivalent implicit fixed-point equation system. Since it is a non-differentiable system of absolute value equations, we introduce a smooth function to approximate the original problem. Then we construct a class of smoothing modulus-based iteration method for solving the approximated system of equations. Finally, we analyze the convergence of the new method, and verify its effectiveness by numerical experiments.</p><p>The organization of the paper is as follows. In Section 2, we establish the smoothing modulus-based iteration method for solving the implicit complementarity problems. The convergence of the smoothing modulus-based iteration method is presented in Section 3, and the numerical results about the new methods are shown and discussed in Section 4. In addition, some conclusion is given in Section 5.</p></sec><sec id="s2"><title>2. The Smoothing Modulus-Based Iterative Method</title><p>In this section, we consider the following implicit complementarity problems (ICP): Given matrix M ∈ R n &#215; n and constant vector q ∈ R n , and m ( ⋅ ) is a mapping from R n into itself, find vectors z , w ∈ R n , such that</p><p>z − m ( z ) ≥ 0 , w = M z + q ≥ 0 ( z − m ( z ) ) T ( M z + q ) = 0. (1)</p><p>Let z − m ( z ) = β ( | x | + x ) , w = α ( | x | − x ) , transform the implicit complementarity problems into a fixed-point equation:</p><p>( α I + β M ) x = ( α I − β M ) | x | − M ⋅ m ( z ) − q , (2)</p><p>where α , β are two positive constants and I ∈ R n &#215; n is the identity matrix.</p><p>Let g ( z ) = z − m ( z ) . Since g ( z ) is an invertible function, then z = g − 1 ( β ( | x | + x ) ) . The implicit fixed-point equation of (2) is changed as following,</p><p>( Ω + A ) x = ( Ω − A ) | x | ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ − M ⋅ m ( g − 1 ( β ( | x | + x ) ) ) − q , (3)</p><p>where Ω = α I ∈ R n &#215; n , A = β M ∈ R n &#215; n .</p><p>Lemma 1. (a) If the solution of the implicit complementarity problems (1) is ( z , w ) , then x = 1 2 ( z − m ( z ) β − w α ) is the solution of (3).</p><p>(b) If the vectorx satisfies (3), then z − m ( z ) = β ( | x | + x ) , w = α ( | x | − x ) is the solution of (1).</p><p>Proof. According to Theorem 2.1 in [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.117159-ref13">13</xref>], we can similarly prove it.</p><p>For the implicit fixed-point Equation (3), let F ( x ) be a vector function:</p><p>F ( x ) = ( Ω + A ) x − ( Ω − A ) | x | + M ⋅ m ( z ) + q , (4)</p><p>where Ω = α I ∈ R n &#215; n , A = β M ∈ R n &#215; n .</p><p>Due to | x | , F ( x ) is non-differentiable. We introduce a smoothing vector function from R n → R n [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.117159-ref19">19</xref>]</p><p>( x 2 + e − c ) 1 2 = ( ( x 1 2 + e − c ) 1 2 , ( x 2 2 + e − c ) 1 2 , ⋯ , ( x n 2 + e − c ) 1 2 ) T ,</p><p>where c is a large positive integer.</p><p>Substitute it into the function (4), we can get a smoothing function:</p><p>F c ( x ) = ( Ω + A ) x − ( Ω − A ) ( x 2 + e − c ) 1 2 + M ⋅ m ( z ) + q   ,</p><p>where Ω = α I ∈ R n &#215; n , A = β M ∈ R n &#215; n .</p><p>Lemma 2. When c → ∞ , F c ( x ) uniformly converges to F ( x ) .</p><p>Proof. According to Corollary 2.1 in [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.117159-ref19">19</xref>], we similarly prove it. When c → ∞ ,</p><p>( x 2 + e − c ) 1 2 converges uniformly to | x | . Therefore, F c ( x ) uniformly converges to F ( x ) .</p><p>From Lemma 2, we know that if x * is the solution of F c ( x ) = 0 , then x * converges to the solution of F ( x ) = 0 . And F c ( x ) = 0 is a smooth nonlinear system of equations, so we can use classical Newton method to solve it, in order to get a better initial value, we use following modulus-based iteration method.</p><p>Algorithm 1. (Modulus-Based Iteration Method)</p><p>Step 1: Given ε &gt; 0 , z 0 ∈ R n , set k = 0 .</p><p>Step 2: 1) Calculate the initial vector x 0 = 1 2 ( z k − w k − m ( z k ) ) , set j = 0 ,</p><p>2) Iterative Computing x j + 1 ∈ R n by solving the equations</p><p>( Ω + A ) x j + 1 = ( Ω − A ) | x j | − M ⋅ m ( z k ) − q (5)</p><p>3) z k + 1 = β ( | x j + 1 | + x j + 1 ) + m ( z k )</p><p>Step 3: If RES ( z k ) = | ( M z k + q ) T ( z k − m ( z k ) ) | &lt; ε , then stop.</p><p>Otherwise, set k = k + 1 and return to Step 2.</p><p>According to Remark 1 in [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.117159-ref13">13</xref>], x k → x ∗ , when k → ∞ . Therefore, there esists some k 0 , ‖ x k 0 − x * ‖ &lt; δ , δ &gt; 0 is a constant. That means that x k 0 is a better approximation vector. So we can construct the following new algorithm.</p><p>Algorithm 2. (Smoothing Modulus-Based Newton Method)</p><p>Step 1: Given ε &gt; 0 , c &gt; 0 , set k = 0 .</p><p>Step 2: Get the initial vector x 0 through Algorithm 1.</p><p>Step 3: Compute F c ( x k ) ,</p><p>F ′ c ( x k ) = ( ∂ f 1 ( x k ) ∂ x 1 ∂ f 1 ( x k ) ∂ x 2 ∂ f 1 ( x k ) ∂ x n ∂ f 2 ( x k ) ∂ x 1 ∂ f 2 ( x k ) ∂ x 2 ⋯ ∂ f 2 ( x k ) ∂ x n ⋮ ⋮ ⋱ ⋮ ∂ f n ( x k ) ∂ x 1 ∂ f n ( x k ) ∂ x 2 ⋯ ∂ f n ( x k ) ∂ x n ) ,</p><p>Δ x k = − ( F ′ c ( x k ) ) − 1 F c ( x k ) .</p><p>Step 4: Compute</p><p>x k + 1 = x k + Δ x k , z k + 1 = β ( | x k + 1 | + x k + 1 ) + m ( z k ) .</p><p>Step 5: If ‖ x k + 1 − x k ‖ 2 &lt; ε , then stop and output</p><p>z = β ( | x k + 1 | + x k + 1 ) + m ( z k + 1 ) ,</p><p>w = α ( | x k + 1 | − x k + 1 ) .</p><p>Otherwise, let x k = x k + 1 , z k = z k + 1 , k = k + 1 , return to Step 2.</p><p>The classic Newton method needs to choose a good initial vector for better convergence. We introduce the parameter ξ 1 , ξ 2 , and use the following iterative sequence to improve the classical Newton method.</p><p>{ y k = x k &#177; ξ 1 F ′ c ( x k ) − 1 F c ( x k ) , x k + 1 = y k − ξ 2 F ′ c ( x k ) − 1 F c ( y k ) . (6)</p><p>We take ξ 1 = ξ 2 = 1 , and use the modified Newton method to solve F c ( x ) = 0 .</p><p>Algorithm 3. (Modified Smoothing Modulus-based Newton method)</p><p>Step 1: Given ε &gt; 0 , c &gt; 0 , set k = 0 .</p><p>Step 2: Get the initial vector x 0 through Algorithm 1.</p><p>Step 3: Computing F c ( x k ) , F ′ c ( x k ) .</p><p>Step 4: Use (6) compute x k + 1 , and</p><p>z k + 1 = β ( | x k + 1 | + x k + 1 ) + m ( z k ) .</p><p>Step 5: If ‖ x k + 1 − x k ‖ 2 &lt; ε , then stop and output</p><p>z = β ( | x k + 1 | + x k + 1 ) + m ( z k + 1 ) ,</p><p>w = α ( | x k + 1 | − x k + 1 ) .</p><p>Otherwise, let x k = x k + 1 , z k = z k + 1 , k = k + 1 , return to Step 2.</p><p>On the basis of the modified Newton method, we do m + 1 -step iterations in the iterative process, and then construct a smoothing modulus-based m + 1 -step iteration method to solve the implicit complementarity problem, and the iterative sequence is as follows:</p><p>{ y 1 k = x k &#177; F ′ c ( x k ) − 1 F ( x k ) y 2 k = y 1 k − F ′ c ( x k ) − 1 F ( y 1 k )                                 ⋮ y m k = y m − 1 k − F ′ c ( x k ) − 1 F ( y m − 1 k ) x k + 1 = y m k − F ′ c ( x k ) − 1 F ( y m k ) (7)</p><p>we use the m + 1 -step iterative method to solve F c ( x ) = 0 .</p><p>Algorithm 4. (Smoothing Modulus-Based m + 1 -step Iterative Method)</p><p>Step 1: Given ε &gt; 0 , c &gt; 0 , set k = 0 .</p><p>Step 2: Get the initial vector x 0 through Algorithm 1.</p><p>Step 3: Computing F c ( x k ) , F ′ c ( x k ) .</p><p>Step 4: Use (7) compute x k + 1 , and</p><p>z k + 1 = β ( | x k + 1 | + x k + 1 ) + m ( z k ) .</p><p>Step 5: If ‖ x k + 1 − x k ‖ 2 &lt; ε , then stop and output</p><p>z = β ( | x k + 1 | + x k + 1 ) + m ( z k + 1 ) ,</p><p>w = α ( | x k + 1 | − x k + 1 ) .</p><p>Otherwise, let x k = x k + 1 , z k = z k + 1 , k = k + 1 , return to Step 2.</p></sec><sec id="s3"><title>3. Convergence Theorem</title><p>In this section, we give the convergence of the above algorithms.</p><p>Theorem 1. If x ∗ is the solution of the system of equations F c ( x ) = 0 , the iterative sequence { x c k } is second-order convergent in a neighborhood of x c ∗ .</p><p>Proof. According to the convergence theorem of Newton method, it can be obtained that the iterative sequence generated by Algorithm 2 converges to the solution x ∗ of the equation F c ( x ) = 0 with the order two in a neighborhood of x c ∗ .</p><p>Theorem 2. For nonlinear vector functions F c ( x ) = 0 , define the sequence:</p><p>{ y k = x k &#177; ξ 1 F ′ c ( x k ) − 1 F c ( x k ) , x k + 1 = y k − ξ 2 F ′ c ( x k ) − 1 F c ( y k )</p><p>if x ∗ is the solution of the system of equations F c ( x ) = 0 , when ξ 1 = &#177; 1 , ξ 2 = 1 , Algorithm 3 converges to x ∗ with order three.</p><p>Proof The Taylor expansion of the function F c ( x k ) at x ∗ :</p><p>F c ( x k ) = F ′ c ( x ∗ ) ( x k − x ∗ ) + 1 2 F ″ c ( x ∗ ) ( x k − x ∗ ) 2 + ο ( ‖ x k − x ∗ ‖ 3 ) . (8)</p><p>For (8), let r k = x k − x ∗ , we have</p><p>F c ( x k ) = F ′ c ( x ∗ ) ( r k + 1 2 F ″ c ( x ∗ ) ( r k ) 2 + ο ( ‖ r k ‖ 3 ) ) , (9)</p><p>F ′ c ( x k ) = A = F ′ c ( x ∗ ) [ I + F ′ c ( x ∗ ) − 1 F ″ c ( x ∗ ) r k + ο ( ( r k ) 2 ) ] . (10)</p><p>Then</p><p>A − 1 = [ I − F ′ c ( x ∗ ) − 1 F ″ c ( x ∗ ) r k + ο ( ( r k ) 2 ) ] F ′ c ( x ∗ ) − 1 . (11)</p><p>Let r y k = y k − x ∗ , According to (11), that</p><p>r y k = y k − x ∗ − ξ 1 A − 1 F ′ c ( x k ) = ( 1 − ξ 1 ) r k + ξ 1 2 F ′ c ( x ∗ ) − 1 F ″ c ( x ∗ ) ( r k ) 2 + ο ( ( r k ) 3 ) . (12)</p><p>Which leads to</p><p>A r y k = F ′ c ( x ∗ ) ⋅ [ I + F ′ c ( x ∗ ) − 1 F ″ c ( x ∗ ) r k + ο ( ( r k ) 2 ) ] ( 1 − ξ 1 ) r k + ξ 1 2 F ′ c ( x ∗ ) − 1 F ″ c ( x ∗ ) ( r k ) 2 + ο ( ( r k ) 3 ) . (13)</p><p>From (8),</p><p>F c ( y k ) = F ′ c ( x ∗ ) ⋅ ( r y k + 1 2 F ′ c ( x ∗ ) − 1 F ″ c ( x ∗ ) ( r y k ) 2 + ο ( ( r y k ) 3 ) ) . (14)</p><p>On the other hand</p><p>r y k + 1 = x k + 1 − x ∗ = y k − x ∗ − ξ 2 A − 1 F c ( y k ) . (15)</p><p>Equivalent to</p><p>A r y k + 1 = A r y k − ξ 2 F c ( y k ) . (16)</p><p>Applying formula (11), (13) and (14), we have</p><p>A r y k + 1 = F ′ c ( x ∗ ) ⋅ ( I + F ′ c ( x ∗ ) − 1 F ″ c ( x ∗ ) r k + ο ( ( r k ) 2 ) ) r k + 1 , (17)</p><p>A r y k − ξ 2 F c ( y k ) = F ′ c ( x ∗ ) ⋅ ( ( 1 − ξ 1 ) ( 1 − ξ 2 ) r y k + ( 1 − ξ 1 2 − ξ 2 ( 1 − ξ 1 + ξ 1 2 2 ) )       ⋅ F ′ c ( x ∗ ) − 1 F ″ c ( x ∗ ) ( r k ) 2 + ο ( ( r k ) 3 ) ) . (18)</p><p>In order to get r k + 1 = ο ( ( r k ) 3 ) , the constants ξ 1 and ξ 2 must satisfy:</p><p>{ ( 1 − ξ 1 ) ( 1 − ξ 2 ) = 0 1 − ξ 1 2 − ξ 2 ( 1 − ξ 1 + ξ 1 2 2 ) = 0 , (19)</p><p>by solving the above equations, we can get ξ 1 = &#177; 1 ,   ξ 2 = 1 . The theorem is proved.</p><p>Theorem 3. If x ∗ is the solution of the system of equations F c ( x ) = 0 , Sequence</p><p>{ y 1 k = x k &#177; F ′ c ( x k ) − 1 F ( x k ) y 2 k = y 1 k − F ′ c ( x k ) − 1 F ( y 1 k )                                 ⋮ y m k = y m − 1 k − F ′ c ( x k ) − 1 F ( y m − 1 k ) x k + 1 = y m k − F ′ c ( x k ) − 1 F ( y m k ) (20)</p><p>for any positive integer m, the sequence produced by Algorithm 4 is converges to x ∗ with order m + 2 .</p><p>Proof. We use the mathematical induction method to prove it. Obviously, when m = 1 , the sequence is third-order convergent from Theorem 2, and the theorem holds. Then we assume that m − 1 ≥ 1 holds, we have</p><p>y m − 1 k − x ∗ − F ′ c ( x k ) − 1 F c ( y m − 1 k ) = ο ( ( r k ) m + 1 ) . (21)</p><p>The following proves that holds for m, namely</p><p>r k + 1 = y m k + 1 − x ∗ − F ′ c ( x k ) − 1 F c ( y m − 1 k ) = ο ( ( r k ) m + 2 ) . (22)</p><p>Combine formula (20) and assumption (21), we can get</p><p>r m k = y m k − x ∗ = ο ( ( r k ) m + 1 ) , (23)</p><p>F ′ c ( x k ) r k + 1 = F ′ c ( x k ) r k − F c ( y m k ) . (24)</p><p>Using the expansion of F ′ c ( x k ) and F c ( y m k ) at x ∗ , we obtain</p><p>F ′ c ( x ∗ ) [ I + ο ( r k ) ] r k + 1 = F ′ c ( x ∗ ) [ I + ο ( r k ) ] r m k − F ′ c ( x ∗ ) r m k − ο ( ( r m k ) 2 ) . (25)</p><p>From (24), then we got r k + 1 = ο ( ( r k ) m + 2 ) . The theorem is proved.</p></sec><sec id="s4"><title>4. Numerical Results</title><p>In this section, we use numerical examples to examine the numerical effectiveness of smoothing modulus-based iterative methods from aspects of number of iteration steps (denoted by “IT”), elapsed CPU time in seconds (denoted by “CPU”), and norm of absolute residual vectors (denoted by “RES”). RES is defined as:</p><p>RES = a b s ( ( M z k + q ) T ( z k − m ( z k ) ) ) ,</p><p>where z k is the kth approximate solution to the ICP.</p><p>In this paper, all calculations are run on a machine with a CPU of 1.8 Hz and a memory of 8G, and the programming language is MATLAB (2018b). We choose the z 0 = ( 0 , 0 , ⋯ , 0 , 0 ) T , large positive integer c = 30 , ξ 1 = ξ 2 = 1 , ε = 10 − 6 , α = β = 1 .</p><p>We will compare our smoothing modulus-based iterative method with accelerated modulus-based matrix splitting iteration methods, and its iteration coefficient is 1.6 [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.117159-ref15">15</xref>]. The abbreviations of methods are listed in <xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref>.</p><p>Example 4.1. Let p is a positive integer, n = p 2 , consider the implicit complementarity problem (1), when M ∈ R n &#215; n is a tridiagonal block matrix, q is a vector</p><p>M = ( S − I 0 ⋯ 0 − I S ⋱ ⋱ ⋮ 0 ⋱ ⋱ ⋱ 0 ⋮ ⋱ ⋱ S − I 0 ⋯ 0 − I S ) ∈ R n &#215; n , q = ( − 1 1 ⋮ ( − 1 ) n − 1 ( − 1 ) n ) ∈ R n</p><p>where S = t r i d i a g ( − 1 , 4 , − 1 ) ∈ R p &#215; p is a tridiagonal matrix, I ∈ R p &#215; p is an identity matrix, the point-to-point mapping m ( z ) = ( z 1 , z 2 , ⋯ , z n ) T . The numerical results are listed in <xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref>.</p><p>Example 4.2. Let p is a positive integer, n = p 2 , consider the implicit complementarity problem (1), when M ∈ R n &#215; n is a tridiagonal block matrix, q is a vector</p><p>M = ( S − 0.5 I 0 ⋯ 0 − 1.5 I S ⋱ ⋱ ⋮ 0 ⋱ ⋱ ⋱ 0 ⋮ ⋱ ⋱ S − 0.5 I 0 ⋯ 0 − 1.5 I S ) ∈ R n &#215; n , q = ( − 1 1 ⋮ ( − 1 ) n − 1 ( − 1 ) n ) ∈ R n</p><p>where S = t r i d i a g ( − 1.5 , 4 , − 0.5 ) ∈ R p &#215; p is a tridiagonal matrix, I ∈ R p &#215; p is an identity matrix, the point-to-point mapping m ( z ) = ( arctan ( z 1 ) , arctan ( z 2 ) , ⋯ , arctan ( z n ) ) T . The numerical results are listed in <xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref>.</p><p>From <xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref> and <xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref>, for different problem of size n, we list the iteration steps, the CPU time and the residual norms with respect to AMSOR, SMN, MSMN and SM(m + 1) methods. It can be seen that all methods converge quickly. Among these methods, SMN, MSMN and SM(m + 1) methods require</p><table-wrap id="table1" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref></label><caption><title> Abbreviations of methods</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >AMSOR</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Accelerated Modulus-based Matrix Splitting Iteration Methods</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >SMN</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Smoothing Modulus-based Newton Methods</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >MSMN</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Modified Smoothing Modulus-based Newton Methods</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >SM(m + 1) (m = 3)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Smoothing Modulus-based m + 1 -step Iterative Methods</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><table-wrap id="table2" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref></label><caption><title> Numerical results of Example 4.1</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >Method</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >n = 400</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >n = 1600</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >n = 3600</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="4"  >n = 6400</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >IT</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >CPU</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >RES</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >IT</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >CPU</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >RES</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >IT</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >CPU</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >RES</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >IT</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >CPU</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >RES</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >AMSOR</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.038</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.41e−07</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.59</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.51e−07</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.25</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.50e−07</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >20.14</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.75e−07</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >SMN</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.021</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.21e−05</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.32</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.48e−05</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.98</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.03e−04</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.96</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.29e−04</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >MSMN</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.027</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8.84e−16</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.21</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.45e−14</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.83</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.19e−14</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.88</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.10e−13</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >SM(m + 1)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.017</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.73e−10</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.20</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.96e−14</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.78</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.65e−13</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.54</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.02e−09</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><table-wrap id="table3" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref></label><caption><title> Numerical results of Example 4.2</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >Method</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >n = 400</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >n = 1600</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >n = 3600</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >n = 6400</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >IT</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >CPU</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >RES</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >IT</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >CPU</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >RES</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >IT</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >CPU</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >RES</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >IT</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >CPU</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >RES</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >AMSOR</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.040</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.64e−07</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.55</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.46e−07</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.54</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.18e−07</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13.06</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.08e−07</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >SMN</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.025</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.81e−05</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.37</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8.69e−05</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.43</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.64e−04</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.12</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.57e−04</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >MSMN</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.022</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.13e−15</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.18</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.09e−15</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.75</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.51e−14</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.41</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.19e−14</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >SM(m + 1)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.021</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.00e−10</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.14</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.23e−09</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.69</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.50e−09</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.83</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8.83e−09</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>less iteration steps and cost less computing time than AMSOR method, and SM(m + 1) is best.</p><p>Example 4.3. Let p is a positive integer, n = p 2 , consider the implicit complementarity problem (1), when M ∈ R n &#215; n is a tridiagonal block matrix, q is a vector</p><p>M = ( S − I 0 ⋯ 0 − I S ⋱ ⋱ ⋮ 0 ⋱ ⋱ ⋱ 0 ⋮ ⋱ ⋱ S − I 0 ⋯ 0 − I S ) ∈ R n &#215; n , q = ( − 1 1 ⋮ ( − 1 ) n − 1 ( − 1 ) n ) ∈ R n</p><p>where S = t r i d i a g ( − 1 , 4 , − 1 ) ∈ R p &#215; p is a tridiagonal matrix, I ∈ R p &#215; p is an identity matrix, the point-to-point mapping m ( z ) = ( z 1 3 , z 1 3 , ⋯ , z n 3 ) T . The numerical results are listed in <xref ref-type="table" rid="table4">Table 4</xref>.</p><p>Example 4.4. Let p is a positive integer, n = p 2 , consider the implicit complementarity problem (1), when M ∈ R n &#215; n is a tridiagonal block matrix, q is a vector</p><table-wrap id="table4" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table4">Table 4</xref></label><caption><title> Numerical results of Example 4.3</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >Method</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >n = 3025</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >n = 24025</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="4"  >n = 42025</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >IT</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >CPU</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >RES</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >IT</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >CPU</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >RES</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >IT</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >CPU</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >RES</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >SMN</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.576</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.98e−04</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >26.472</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.806e−04</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >269.01</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.890e−04</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >MSMN</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.265</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.35e−14</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8.690</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.265e−13</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >99.93</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.994e−10</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >SM(m + 1)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.192</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.42e−16</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.339</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.996e−14</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >70.03</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.706e−14</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><table-wrap id="table5" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table5">Table 5</xref></label><caption><title> Numerical results of Example 4.4</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >Method</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >n = 3025</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >n = 24025</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="4"  >n = 42025</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >IT</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >CPU</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >RES</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >IT</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >CPU</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >RES</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >IT</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >CPU</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >RES</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >SMN</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.432</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.397e−4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >19.706</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.056e−4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >240.62</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.132 e−4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >MSMN</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.266</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.27e−14</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9.798</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.143e−13</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >108.35</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.444e−14</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >SM(m + 1)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.214</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9.65e−15</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.394</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9.060e−14</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >77.316</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.688e−13</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>M = ( S − 0.5 I 0 ⋯ 0 − 1.5 I S ⋱ ⋱ ⋮ 0 ⋱ ⋱ ⋱ 0 ⋮ ⋱ ⋱ S − 0.5 I 0 ⋯ 0 − 1.5 I S ) ∈ R n &#215; n , q = ( − 1 1 ⋮ ( − 1 ) n − 1 ( − 1 ) n ) ∈ R n</p><p>where S = t r i d i a g ( − 1.5 , 4 , − 0.5 ) ∈ R p &#215; p is a tridiagonal matrix, I ∈ R p &#215; p is an identity matrix, the point-to-point mapping m ( z ) = ( z 1 3 , z 1 3 , ⋯ , z n 3 ) T . The numerical results are listed in <xref ref-type="table" rid="table5">Table 5</xref>.</p><p>From <xref ref-type="table" rid="table4">Table 4</xref> and <xref ref-type="table" rid="table5">Table 5</xref>, for the symmetric and asymmetric problem, we list the iteration steps, the CPU time and the residual norms with respect to SMN, MSMN and SM(m + 1) methods respectively, among the three algorithm, SM(m + 1) has the least number of iteration steps, costs the least CPU time, and holds better error accuracy.</p></sec><sec id="s5"><title>5. Conclusion</title><p>In this paper, a class of smoothing modulus-based iteration method for solving implicit complementarity problems is proposed, the convergence of the algorithm is analyzed, and numerical experiments show the effectiveness of the method.</p></sec><sec id="s6"><title>Acknowledgements</title><p>This work was supported by Natural Science Foundation of China (11661027), the Guangxi Natural Science Foundation (2020GXNSFAA159143), and the Innovation Project of GUET Graduate Education (2021YCXS114).</p></sec><sec id="s7"><title>Conflicts of Interest</title><p>The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.</p></sec><sec id="s8"><title>Cite this paper</title><p>Guo, C., Li, C.L. and Luo, T. (2022) A Class of Smoothing Modulus-Based Iterative Method for Solving Implicit Complementarity Problems. American Journal of Computational Mathematics, 12, 197-208. https://doi.org/10.4236/ajcm.2022.122011</p></sec></body><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="scirp.117159-ref1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Ferris, M.C. and Pang, J.S. (1997) Engineering and Economic Applications of Complementarity Problems. SIAM Review, 39, 669-713. https://doi.org/10.1137/S0036144595285963</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.117159-ref2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Pang, J.S. (1981) The Implicit Complementarity Problem. Academic Press, New York.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.117159-ref3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Bensoussan, A. and Lion, J.L. (1973) Nouvelle Formulation de Problèmes de Contr&amp;#244le Impulsionnel et Applications. Comptes rendus de l’Académie des Sciences, 276, 1189-1192.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.117159-ref4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation publication-type="book" xlink:type="simple">Mosco, U. (1980) On Some Nonlinear Quasi Variational Inequalities and Implicit Complementarity Problems in Stochastic Control Theory. In: Cottle, R.W., Gianessi, F. and Lions, J.L., Eds., Variational Inequalities and Complementarity Problems, Wiley, New York, 271-283.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.117159-ref5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Noor, M.A. (1988) Fixed Point Approach for Complementarity Problems. Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, 133, 437-448. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-247X(88)90413-1</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.117159-ref6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Ahmad, K., Kazmi, K.R. and Rehman, N. (1997) Fixed-Point Technique for Implicit Complementarity Problem in Hilbert Lattice. Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, 93, 67-72. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022645716916</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.117159-ref7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Pang, J.S. (1982) On the Convergence of a Basic Iterative Method for the Implicit Complementarity Problems. Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, 37, 149-162. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00934765</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.117159-ref8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Bai</surname><given-names> Z.Z. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>1996</year>)<article-title>On the Monotone Convergence of the Projected Iteration Methods for Linear Complementarity Problems</article-title><source> Numerical Mathematics</source><volume> 5</volume>,<fpage> 228</fpage>-<lpage>233</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi"></pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.117159-ref9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Zhan, W.P., Zhou, S.Z. and Zeng, J.P. (2000) Iterative Methods for a Kind of Quasi-Complementarity Problems. Acta Mathematicae Applicatae Sinica, 23, 551-556.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.117159-ref10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Zheng, H. and Qu, W. (2020) Superlinearly Convergent Methods for Solving a Class of Implicit Complementarity Problems Based on Sign Analysis. Japan Journal of Industrial and Applied Mathematics, 37, 433-447. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13160-020-00405-3</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.117159-ref11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Tian, B.S., Li, D.H. and Yang, X.Q. (2016) An Unconstrained Differentiable Penalty Method for Implicit Complementarity Problems. Optimization Methods and Software, 31, 775-790. https://doi.org/10.1080/10556788.2016.1146266</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.117159-ref12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Xia, Z.C. and Li, C.L. (2015) Modulus-Based Matrix Splitting Iteration Methods for a Class of Nonlinear Complementarity Problem. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 271, 34-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2015.08.108</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.117159-ref13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Hong, J.T. and Li, C.L. (2016) Modulus-Based Matrix Splitting Iterative Methods for a Class of Implicit Complementarity Problems. Numerical Linear Algebra with Application, 23, 629-641. https://doi.org/10.1002/nla.2044</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.117159-ref14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Wang, A., Cao, Y. and Shi, Q. (2018) Convergence Analysis of Modulus-Based Matrix Splitting Iterative Methods for Implicit Complementarity Problems. Journal of Inequalities and Applications, 2018, Article No. 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13660-017-1593-7</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.117159-ref15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Yin, J.F., Ding, J. and Li, R. (2020) Accelerated Modulus-Based Matrix Splitting Iteration Methods for a Class of Implicit Complementarity Problems. Journal of Tongji University: Natural Science, 48, 1478-1486.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.117159-ref16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Zheng, H. and Vong, S. (2019) A Modified Modulus-Based Matrix Splitting Iteration Method for Solving Implicit Complementarity Problems. Numerical Algorithms, 82, 572-592. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11075-018-0614-z</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.117159-ref17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Cao, Y. and Wang, A. (2019) Two-step Modulus-Based Matrix Splitting Iteration Methods for Implicit Complementarity Problems. Numerical Algorithms, 82, 1377-1394. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11075-019-00660-7</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.117159-ref18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Dong, J.L. and Jiang, M.Q. (2009) A Modified Modulus Method for Symmetric Positive-Definite Linear Complementarity Problems. Numerical Linear Algebra with Application, 16, 129-143. https://doi.org/10.1002/nla.609</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.117159-ref19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">EL Foutayeni, Y., EL Bouanani, H. and Khaladi, M. (2017) An (m+1)-Step Iterative Method of Convergence Order (m+2) for Linear Complementarity Problems. Journal of Applied Mathematics and Computing, 54, 229-242. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12190-016-1006-y</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>