We use the notation of the statement. Algebraic manipulations of dot products use Bilinearity and Symmetry of the Dot Product on R n \mathbb{R}^n R n , and ∥ v ∥ 2 = v ⋅ v \lVert v\rVert^{2}=v\cdot v ∥ v ∥ 2 = v ⋅ v is claim 1 of Elementary Properties of the Euclidean Norm on R n \mathbb{R}^n R n . For x ∈ R n x\in\mathbb{R}^{n} x ∈ R n let ϕ x ( z ) = f ( z ) + 1 2 ∥ x − z ∥ 2 \phi_{x}(z)=f(z)+\tfrac{1}{2}\lVert x-z\rVert^{2} ϕ x ( z ) = f ( z ) + 2 1 ∥ x − z ∥ 2 as in Existence and Uniqueness of the Proximal Minimiser of a Convex Function and The Proximal Map of a Convex Function on R n \mathbb{R}^n R n §proximal-map , so that J ( x ) J(x) J ( x ) is the unique point at which ϕ x \phi_{x} ϕ x attains its least value.
Throughout we use the identity, valid for all x , y , z ∈ R n x,y,z\in\mathbb{R}^{n} x , y , z ∈ R n and θ ∈ R \theta\in\mathbb{R} θ ∈ R and obtained by expanding with Bilinearity and Symmetry of the Dot Product on R n \mathbb{R}^n R n ,
∥ x − ( y + θ ( z − y ) ) ∥ 2 = ∥ x − y ∥ 2 − 2 θ ( x − y ) ⋅ ( z − y ) + θ 2 ∥ z − y ∥ 2 . (E) \bigl\lVert x-\bigl(y+\theta(z-y)\bigr)\bigr\rVert^{2}=\lVert x-y\rVert^{2}-2\theta\,(x-y)\cdot(z-y)+\theta^{2}\lVert z-y\rVert^{2}. \tag{E} x − ( y + θ ( z − y ) ) 2 = ∥ x − y ∥ 2 − 2 θ ( x − y ) ⋅ ( z − y ) + θ 2 ∥ z − y ∥ 2 . ( E )
Claim 1. Suppose first that J ( x ) = y J(x)=y J ( x ) = y , and let z ∈ R n z\in\mathbb{R}^{n} z ∈ R n . For θ ∈ R \theta\in\mathbb{R} θ ∈ R with 0 < θ ≤ 1 0<\theta\le1 0 < θ ≤ 1 put y θ = y + θ ( z − y ) = θ z + ( 1 − θ ) y y_{\theta}=y+\theta(z-y)=\theta z+(1-\theta)y y θ = y + θ ( z − y ) = θ z + ( 1 − θ ) y . Convexity of f f f gives f ( y θ ) ≤ θ f ( z ) + ( 1 − θ ) f ( y ) f(y_{\theta})\le\theta f(z)+(1-\theta)f(y) f ( y θ ) ≤ θ f ( z ) + ( 1 − θ ) f ( y ) , and (E) gives 1 2 ∥ x − y θ ∥ 2 = 1 2 ∥ x − y ∥ 2 − θ ( x − y ) ⋅ ( z − y ) + 1 2 θ 2 ∥ z − y ∥ 2 \tfrac{1}{2}\lVert x-y_{\theta}\rVert^{2}=\tfrac{1}{2}\lVert x-y\rVert^{2}-\theta(x-y)\cdot(z-y)+\tfrac{1}{2}\theta^{2}\lVert z-y\rVert^{2} 2 1 ∥ x − y θ ∥ 2 = 2 1 ∥ x − y ∥ 2 − θ ( x − y ) ⋅ ( z − y ) + 2 1 θ 2 ∥ z − y ∥ 2 . Adding, and using ϕ x ( y ) ≤ ϕ x ( y θ ) \phi_{x}(y)\le\phi_{x}(y_{\theta}) ϕ x ( y ) ≤ ϕ x ( y θ ) ,
ϕ x ( y ) ≤ ϕ x ( y ) + θ ( f ( z ) − f ( y ) ) − θ ( x − y ) ⋅ ( z − y ) + 1 2 θ 2 ∥ z − y ∥ 2 . \phi_{x}(y)\le\phi_{x}(y)+\theta\bigl(f(z)-f(y)\bigr)-\theta\,(x-y)\cdot(z-y)+\tfrac{1}{2}\theta^{2}\lVert z-y\rVert^{2}. ϕ x ( y ) ≤ ϕ x ( y ) + θ ( f ( z ) − f ( y ) ) − θ ( x − y ) ⋅ ( z − y ) + 2 1 θ 2 ∥ z − y ∥ 2 .
Subtracting ϕ x ( y ) \phi_{x}(y) ϕ x ( y ) and dividing by the positive number θ \theta θ ,
( x − y ) ⋅ ( z − y ) ≤ f ( z ) − f ( y ) + 1 2 θ ∥ z − y ∥ 2 for every θ with 0 < θ ≤ 1. (x-y)\cdot(z-y)\le f(z)-f(y)+\tfrac{1}{2}\theta\lVert z-y\rVert^{2}\qquad\text{for every }\theta\text{ with }0<\theta\le1 . ( x − y ) ⋅ ( z − y ) ≤ f ( z ) − f ( y ) + 2 1 θ ∥ z − y ∥ 2 for every θ with 0 < θ ≤ 1.
Since this holds for all such θ \theta θ , we get ( x − y ) ⋅ ( z − y ) ≤ f ( z ) − f ( y ) (x-y)\cdot(z-y)\le f(z)-f(y) ( x − y ) ⋅ ( z − y ) ≤ f ( z ) − f ( y ) , that is f ( z ) ≥ f ( y ) + ( x − y ) ⋅ ( z − y ) f(z)\ge f(y)+(x-y)\cdot(z-y) f ( z ) ≥ f ( y ) + ( x − y ) ⋅ ( z − y ) . As z z z was arbitrary, x − y ∈ ∂ f ( y ) x-y\in\partial f(y) x − y ∈ ∂ f ( y ) by Subdifferential of a Real-Valued Function on a Convex Subset of R n \mathbb{R}^n R n §subdifferential .
Conversely suppose x − y ∈ ∂ f ( y ) x-y\in\partial f(y) x − y ∈ ∂ f ( y ) and let z ∈ R n z\in\mathbb{R}^{n} z ∈ R n . Taking θ = 1 \theta=1 θ = 1 in (E) gives
1 2 ∥ x − z ∥ 2 = 1 2 ∥ x − y ∥ 2 − ( x − y ) ⋅ ( z − y ) + 1 2 ∥ z − y ∥ 2 , \tfrac{1}{2}\lVert x-z\rVert^{2}=\tfrac{1}{2}\lVert x-y\rVert^{2}-(x-y)\cdot(z-y)+\tfrac{1}{2}\lVert z-y\rVert^{2}, 2 1 ∥ x − z ∥ 2 = 2 1 ∥ x − y ∥ 2 − ( x − y ) ⋅ ( z − y ) + 2 1 ∥ z − y ∥ 2 ,
while f ( z ) − f ( y ) ≥ ( x − y ) ⋅ ( z − y ) f(z)-f(y)\ge(x-y)\cdot(z-y) f ( z ) − f ( y ) ≥ ( x − y ) ⋅ ( z − y ) . Adding these,
ϕ x ( z ) − ϕ x ( y ) ≥ 1 2 ∥ z − y ∥ 2 ≥ 0 , \phi_{x}(z)-\phi_{x}(y)\ge\tfrac{1}{2}\lVert z-y\rVert^{2}\ge0 , ϕ x ( z ) − ϕ x ( y ) ≥ 2 1 ∥ z − y ∥ 2 ≥ 0 ,
so y y y attains the least value of ϕ x \phi_{x} ϕ x , and J ( x ) = y J(x)=y J ( x ) = y by the uniqueness in Existence and Uniqueness of the Proximal Minimiser of a Convex Function §minimiser .
Claim 2. Let y ∈ R n y\in\mathbb{R}^{n} y ∈ R n and q ∈ ∂ f ( y ) q\in\partial f(y) q ∈ ∂ f ( y ) , and put x = y + q x=y+q x = y + q . Then x − y = q ∈ ∂ f ( y ) x-y=q\in\partial f(y) x − y = q ∈ ∂ f ( y ) , so J ( x ) = y J(x)=y J ( x ) = y by claim 1. Since R n \mathbb{R}^{n} R n is open and convex, The Subdifferential of a Convex Function on an Open Convex Set is Nonempty §nonempty shows that ∂ f ( y ) \partial f(y) ∂ f ( y ) is nonempty for every y y y , so every y ∈ R n y\in\mathbb{R}^{n} y ∈ R n is a value of J J J .
Claim 3. Put y = J ( x ) y=J(x) y = J ( x ) and y ′ = J ( x ′ ) y'=J(x') y ′ = J ( x ′ ) . By claim 1, x − y ∈ ∂ f ( y ) x-y\in\partial f(y) x − y ∈ ∂ f ( y ) and x ′ − y ′ ∈ ∂ f ( y ′ ) x'-y'\in\partial f(y') x ′ − y ′ ∈ ∂ f ( y ′ ) , so claim 1 of Elementary Calculus of the Subdifferential of a Convex Function , applied with U = R n U=\mathbb{R}^{n} U = R n , gives
0 ≤ ( ( x − y ) − ( x ′ − y ′ ) ) ⋅ ( y − y ′ ) = ( x − x ′ ) ⋅ ( y − y ′ ) − ∥ y − y ′ ∥ 2 , 0\le\bigl((x-y)-(x'-y')\bigr)\cdot(y-y')=(x-x')\cdot(y-y')-\lVert y-y'\rVert^{2}, 0 ≤ ( ( x − y ) − ( x ′ − y ′ ) ) ⋅ ( y − y ′ ) = ( x − x ′ ) ⋅ ( y − y ′ ) − ∥ y − y ′ ∥ 2 ,
which is the asserted inequality.
Claim 4. With y = J ( x ) y=J(x) y = J ( x ) and y ′ = J ( x ′ ) y'=J(x') y ′ = J ( x ′ ) , claim 3 and Cauchy-Schwarz Inequality for the Euclidean Dot Product give
∥ y − y ′ ∥ 2 ≤ ( y − y ′ ) ⋅ ( x − x ′ ) ≤ ∥ y − y ′ ∥ ∥ x − x ′ ∥ . \lVert y-y'\rVert^{2}\le(y-y')\cdot(x-x')\le\lVert y-y'\rVert\,\lVert x-x'\rVert . ∥ y − y ′ ∥ 2 ≤ ( y − y ′ ) ⋅ ( x − x ′ ) ≤ ∥ y − y ′ ∥ ∥ x − x ′ ∥ .
If y = y ′ y=y' y = y ′ the asserted inequality is clear; otherwise ∥ y − y ′ ∥ > 0 \lVert y-y'\rVert>0 ∥ y − y ′ ∥ > 0 by claim 3 of Elementary Properties of the Euclidean Norm on R n \mathbb{R}^n R n and we may divide by it. Thus J J J is Lipschitz with constant 1 1 1 .
Claim 5. Let h ∈ R n h\in\mathbb{R}^{n} h ∈ R n . If h = 0 h=0 h = 0 then A h = 0 Ah=0 A h = 0 by claim 3 of Linearity of the Matrix-Vector Product and the Quadratic Form as a Double Sum and both sides vanish, so assume h ≠ 0 h\neq0 h = 0 . Let ε ∈ R \varepsilon\in\mathbb{R} ε ∈ R with 0 < ε ≤ 1 0<\varepsilon\le1 0 < ε ≤ 1 . By Differentiability at a Point for Maps Between Euclidean Spaces there is δ > 0 \delta>0 δ > 0 such that ∥ J ( x + k ) − J ( x ) − A k ∥ ≤ ε ∥ k ∥ \lVert J(x+k)-J(x)-Ak\rVert\le\varepsilon\lVert k\rVert ∥ J ( x + k ) − J ( x ) − A k ∥ ≤ ε ∥ k ∥ whenever 0 < ∥ k ∥ < δ 0<\lVert k\rVert<\delta 0 < ∥ k ∥ < δ . Choose t ∈ R t\in\mathbb{R} t ∈ R with 0 < t 0<t 0 < t and t ∥ h ∥ < δ t\lVert h\rVert<\delta t ∥ h ∥ < δ , and put D = J ( x + t h ) − J ( x ) D=J(x+th)-J(x) D = J ( x + t h ) − J ( x ) ; then, since A ( t h ) = t A h A(th)=t\,Ah A ( t h ) = t A h by claim 3 of Linearity of the Matrix-Vector Product and the Quadratic Form as a Double Sum and ∥ t h ∥ = t ∥ h ∥ \lVert th\rVert=t\lVert h\rVert ∥ t h ∥ = t ∥ h ∥ by claim 5 of Elementary Properties of the Euclidean Norm on R n \mathbb{R}^n R n , we have ∥ D − t A h ∥ ≤ ε t ∥ h ∥ \lVert D-tAh\rVert\le\varepsilon t\lVert h\rVert ∥ D − t A h ∥ ≤ εt ∥ h ∥ ; so, writing D t = ( 1 / t ) D D_{t}=(1/t)D D t = ( 1/ t ) D and using claim 5 of Elementary Properties of the Euclidean Norm on R n \mathbb{R}^n R n again,
∥ D t − A h ∥ ≤ ε ∥ h ∥ . (A) \lVert D_{t}-Ah\rVert\le\varepsilon\lVert h\rVert . \tag{A} ∥ D t − A h ∥ ≤ ε ∥ h ∥ . ( A )
Applying claim 3 with x ′ = x + t h x'=x+th x ′ = x + t h and using J ( x ) − J ( x ′ ) = − D J(x)-J(x')=-D J ( x ) − J ( x ′ ) = − D and x − x ′ = − t h x-x'=-th x − x ′ = − t h gives ∥ D ∥ 2 ≤ t ( D ⋅ h ) \lVert D\rVert^{2}\le t\,(D\cdot h) ∥ D ∥ 2 ≤ t ( D ⋅ h ) , and dividing by the positive number t 2 t^{2} t 2 ,
∥ D t ∥ 2 ≤ D t ⋅ h . (B) \lVert D_{t}\rVert^{2}\le D_{t}\cdot h . \tag{B} ∥ D t ∥ 2 ≤ D t ⋅ h . ( B )
By claim 4, ∥ D ∥ ≤ t ∥ h ∥ \lVert D\rVert\le t\lVert h\rVert ∥ D ∥ ≤ t ∥ h ∥ , so ∥ D t ∥ ≤ ∥ h ∥ \lVert D_{t}\rVert\le\lVert h\rVert ∥ D t ∥ ≤ ∥ h ∥ . From (A) and claim 6 of Elementary Properties of the Euclidean Norm on R n \mathbb{R}^n R n , ∥ A h ∥ ≤ ∥ D t ∥ + ε ∥ h ∥ \lVert Ah\rVert\le\lVert D_{t}\rVert+\varepsilon\lVert h\rVert ∥ A h ∥ ≤ ∥ D t ∥ + ε ∥ h ∥ , and both sides being nonnegative,
∥ A h ∥ 2 ≤ ∥ D t ∥ 2 + 2 ε ∥ h ∥ ∥ D t ∥ + ε 2 ∥ h ∥ 2 ≤ ∥ D t ∥ 2 + 2 ε ∥ h ∥ 2 + ε 2 ∥ h ∥ 2 . \lVert Ah\rVert^{2}\le\lVert D_{t}\rVert^{2}+2\varepsilon\lVert h\rVert\,\lVert D_{t}\rVert+\varepsilon^{2}\lVert h\rVert^{2}\le\lVert D_{t}\rVert^{2}+2\varepsilon\lVert h\rVert^{2}+\varepsilon^{2}\lVert h\rVert^{2}. ∥ A h ∥ 2 ≤ ∥ D t ∥ 2 + 2 ε ∥ h ∥ ∥ D t ∥ + ε 2 ∥ h ∥ 2 ≤ ∥ D t ∥ 2 + 2 ε ∥ h ∥ 2 + ε 2 ∥ h ∥ 2 .
Also ( D t − A h ) ⋅ h ≤ ∥ D t − A h ∥ ∥ h ∥ ≤ ε ∥ h ∥ 2 (D_{t}-Ah)\cdot h\le\lVert D_{t}-Ah\rVert\lVert h\rVert\le\varepsilon\lVert h\rVert^{2} ( D t − A h ) ⋅ h ≤ ∥ D t − A h ∥ ∥ h ∥ ≤ ε ∥ h ∥ 2 by Cauchy-Schwarz Inequality for the Euclidean Dot Product and (A), so D t ⋅ h ≤ ( A h ) ⋅ h + ε ∥ h ∥ 2 D_{t}\cdot h\le(Ah)\cdot h+\varepsilon\lVert h\rVert^{2} D t ⋅ h ≤ ( A h ) ⋅ h + ε ∥ h ∥ 2 . Combining with (B),
∥ A h ∥ 2 ≤ ( A h ) ⋅ h + ( 3 ε + ε 2 ) ∥ h ∥ 2 ≤ ( A h ) ⋅ h + 4 ε ∥ h ∥ 2 , \lVert Ah\rVert^{2}\le(Ah)\cdot h+\bigl(3\varepsilon+\varepsilon^{2}\bigr)\lVert h\rVert^{2}\le(Ah)\cdot h+4\varepsilon\lVert h\rVert^{2}, ∥ A h ∥ 2 ≤ ( A h ) ⋅ h + ( 3 ε + ε 2 ) ∥ h ∥ 2 ≤ ( A h ) ⋅ h + 4 ε ∥ h ∥ 2 ,
using ε ≤ 1 \varepsilon\le1 ε ≤ 1 . As ε \varepsilon ε was an arbitrary number with 0 < ε ≤ 1 0<\varepsilon\le1 0 < ε ≤ 1 , we conclude ∥ A h ∥ 2 ≤ ( A h ) ⋅ h \lVert Ah\rVert^{2}\le(Ah)\cdot h ∥ A h ∥ 2 ≤ ( A h ) ⋅ h .
Now suppose there is no unit vector ν \nu ν with ν ⋅ ( A h ) = 0 \nu\cdot(Ah)=0 ν ⋅ ( A h ) = 0 for every h h h , and suppose A h 0 = 0 Ah_{0}=0 A h 0 = 0 for some h 0 ≠ 0 h_{0}\neq0 h 0 = 0 . Let h ∈ R n h\in\mathbb{R}^{n} h ∈ R n and s ∈ R s\in\mathbb{R} s ∈ R . By claim 3 of Linearity of the Matrix-Vector Product and the Quadratic Form as a Double Sum , A ( h + s h 0 ) = A h + s A h 0 = A h A(h+sh_{0})=Ah+s\,Ah_{0}=Ah A ( h + s h 0 ) = A h + s A h 0 = A h , so the inequality just proved, applied to h + s h 0 h+sh_{0} h + s h 0 , gives
∥ A h ∥ 2 ≤ ( A h ) ⋅ ( h + s h 0 ) = ( A h ) ⋅ h + s ( ( A h ) ⋅ h 0 ) . \lVert Ah\rVert^{2}\le(Ah)\cdot(h+sh_{0})=(Ah)\cdot h+s\,\bigl((Ah)\cdot h_{0}\bigr). ∥ A h ∥ 2 ≤ ( A h ) ⋅ ( h + s h 0 ) = ( A h ) ⋅ h + s ( ( A h ) ⋅ h 0 ) .
If ( A h ) ⋅ h 0 (Ah)\cdot h_{0} ( A h ) ⋅ h 0 were nonzero, choosing s s s of the opposite sign and of large absolute value would make the right-hand side smaller than the nonnegative number ∥ A h ∥ 2 \lVert Ah\rVert^{2} ∥ A h ∥ 2 , which is impossible; hence ( A h ) ⋅ h 0 = 0 (Ah)\cdot h_{0}=0 ( A h ) ⋅ h 0 = 0 . Since h h h was arbitrary, the unit vector ν = h 0 / ∥ h 0 ∥ \nu=h_{0}/\lVert h_{0}\rVert ν = h 0 / ∥ h 0 ∥ , whose norm is 1 1 1 by claim 5 of Elementary Properties of the Euclidean Norm on R n \mathbb{R}^n R n , satisfies ν ⋅ ( A h ) = 0 \nu\cdot(Ah)=0 ν ⋅ ( A h ) = 0 for every h h h by claims 1 and 4 of Bilinearity and Symmetry of the Dot Product on R n \mathbb{R}^n R n , contrary to hypothesis. Therefore A h = 0 Ah=0 A h = 0 only for h = 0 h=0 h = 0 , and if A h = A h ′ Ah=Ah' A h = A h ′ then A ( h − h ′ ) = 0 A(h-h')=0 A ( h − h ′ ) = 0 by claim 3 of Linearity of the Matrix-Vector Product and the Quadratic Form as a Double Sum and so h = h ′ h=h' h = h ′ ; that is, h ↦ A h h\mapsto Ah h ↦ A h is injective.