One-relator group

From testwiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Template:Short description In the mathematical subject of group theory, a one-relator group is a group given by a group presentation with a single defining relation. One-relator groups play an important role in geometric group theory by providing many explicit examples of finitely presented groups.

Formal definition

A one-relator group is a group G that admits a group presentation of the form

Template:NumBlk

where X is a set (in general possibly infinite), and where r∈F(X) is a freely and cyclically reduced word.

If Y is the set of all letters x∈X that appear in r and X′=X∖Y then

G=⟨Y∣r=1⟩∗F(X′).

For that reason X in (Template:EquationNote) is usually assumed to be finite where one-relator groups are discussed, in which case (Template:EquationNote) can be rewritten more explicitly as

Template:NumBlk

where X={x1,…,xn} for some integer n≥1.

Freiheitssatz

Template:Main

Let G be a one-relator group given by presentation (Template:EquationNote) above. Recall that r is a freely and cyclically reduced word in F(X). Let y∈X be a letter such that y or y−1 appears in r. Let X1⊆X∖{y}. The subgroup H=⟨X1⟩≤G is called a Magnus subgroup of G.

A famous 1930 theorem of Wilhelm Magnus,[1] known as Freiheitssatz, states that in this situation H is freely generated by X1, that is, H=F(X1). See also[2][3] for other proofs.

Properties of one-relator groups

Here we assume that a one-relator group G is given by presentation (Template:EquationNote) with a finite generating set X={x1,…,xn} and a nontrivial freely and cyclically reduced defining relation 1≠r∈F(X).

  • A one-relator group G is torsion-free if and only if r∈F(x1,…,xn) is not a proper power.
  • Every one-relator group is coherent. [5] That is, every finitely generated subgroup is finitely presented.
  • A one-relator presentation is diagrammatically aspherical.[6]
  • Suppose the element r∈F(x1,…,xn) is of minimal length under the action of Aut⁡(Fn), and suppose that for every i=1,…,n either xi or xi−1 occurs in r. Then the group G is freely indecomposable.[9]
  • A one-relator group G given by presentation (Template:EquationNote) has rank n (that is, it cannot be generated by fewer than n elements) unless r∈F(x1,…,xn) is a primitive element.[12]
  • Let r,s∈F(X) where X={x1,…,xn}. Let N1=⟨⟨r⟩⟩F(X) and N2=⟨⟨s⟩⟩F(X) be the normal closures of r and s in F(X) accordingly. Then N1=N2 if and only if r is conjugate to s or s−1 in F(X).[14][15]
  • Let G be a one-relator group given by presentation (Template:EquationNote). Then G satisfies the following version of the Tits alternative. If G is torsion-free then every subgroup of G either contains a free group of rank 2 or is solvable. If G has nontrivial torsion, then every subgroup of G either contains a free group of rank 2, or is cyclic, or is infinite dihedral.[17]
  • Let G be a one-relator group given by presentation (Template:EquationNote). Then the normal subgroup N=⟨⟨r⟩⟩F(X)≤F(X) admits a free basis of the form {ui−1rui∣i∈I} for some family of elements {ui∈F(X)∣i∈I}.[18]

One-relator groups with torsion

Suppose a one-relator group G given by presentation (Template:EquationNote) where r=sm where m≥2 and where 1≠s∈F(X) is not a proper power (and thus s is also freely and cyclically reduced). Then the following hold:

  • The element s has order m in G, and every element of finite order in G is conjugate to a power of s.[19]
  • Every finite subgroup of G is conjugate to a subgroup of ⟨s⟩ in G. Moreover, the subgroup of G generated by all torsion elements is a free product of a family of conjugates of ⟨s⟩ in G.[4]
  • Newman's "spelling theorem"[20][21] Let 1≠w∈F(X) be a freely reduced word such that w=1 in G. Then w contains a subword v such that v is also a subword of r or r−1 of length |v|=1+(m−1)|s|. Since m≥2 that means that |v|>|r|/2 and presentation (Template:EquationNote) of G is a Dehn presentation.
  • G has virtual cohomological dimension ≤2.[22]
  • G is coherent, that is every finitely generated subgroup of G is finitely presentable.[24]
  • The isomorphism problem is decidable for finitely generated one-relator groups with torsion, by virtue of their hyperbolicity.[25]
  • G is virtually free-by-cyclic, i.e. G has a subgroup H of finite-index such that there is a free normal subgroup F◃H with cyclic quotient F/H.[27]

Magnus–Moldavansky method

Starting with the work of Magnus in the 1930s, most general results about one-relator groups are proved by induction on the length |r| of the defining relator r. The presentation below follows Section 6 of Chapter II of Lyndon and Schupp[28] and Section 4.4 of Magnus, Karrass and Solitar[29] for Magnus' original approach and Section 5 of Chapter IV of Lyndon and Schupp[30] for the Moldavansky's HNN-extension version of that approach.[31]

Let G be a one-relator group given by presentation (Template:EquationNote) with a finite generating set X. Assume also that every generator from X actually occurs in r.

One can usually assume that #X≥2 (since otherwise G is cyclic and whatever statement is being proved about G is usually obvious).

The main case to consider when some generator, say t, from X occurs in r with exponent sum 0 on t. Say X={t,a,b,…,z} in this case. For every generator x∈X∖{t} one denotes xi=t−ixti where i∈ℤ. Then r can be rewritten as a word r0 in these new generators X∞={(ai)i,(bi)i,…,(zi)i} with |r0|<|r|.

For example, if r=t−2btat3b−2a2t−1at−1 then r0=b2a1b−2−2a−22a−1.

Let X0 be the alphabet consisting of the portion of X∞ given by all xi with m(x)≤i≤M(x) where m(x),M(x) are the minimum and the maximum subscripts with which xi±1 occurs in r0.

Magnus observed that the subgroup L=⟨X0⟩≤G is itself a one-relator group with the one-relator presentation L=⟨X0∣r0=1⟩. Note that since |r0|<|r|, one can usually apply the inductive hypothesis to L when proving a particular statement about G.

Moreover, if Xi=t−iX0ti for i∈ℤ then Li=⟨Xi⟩=⟨Xi|ri=1⟩ is also a one-relator group, where ri is obtained from r0 by shifting all subscripts by i. Then the normal closure N=⟨⟨X0⟩⟩G of X0 in G is

N=⟨⋃i∈ℤLi⟩.

Magnus' original approach exploited the fact that N is actually an iterated amalgamated product of the groups Li, amalgamated along suitably chosen Magnus free subgroups. His proof of Freiheitssatz and of the solution of the word problem for one-relator groups was based on this approach.

Later Moldavansky simplified the framework and noted that in this case G itself is an HNN-extension of L with associated subgroups being Magnus free subgroups of L.

If for every generator from X0 its minimum and maximum subscripts in r0 are equal then G=L∗⟨t⟩ and the inductive step is usually easy to handle in this case.

Suppose then that some generator from X0 occurs in r0 with at least two distinct subscripts. We put Y− to be the set of all generators from X0 with non-maximal subscripts and we put Y+ to be the set of all generators from X0 with non-maximal subscripts. (Hence every generator from Y− and from Y− occurs in r0 with a non-unique subscript.) Then H−=⟨Y−⟩ and H+=⟨Y+⟩ are free Magnus subgroups of L and t−1H−t=H+. Moldavansky observed that in this situation

G=⟨L,t∣t−1H−t=H+⟩

is an HNN-extension of L. This fact often allows proving something about G using the inductive hypothesis about the one-relator group L via the use of normal form methods and structural algebraic properties for the HNN-extension G.

The general case, both in Magnus' original setting and in Moldavansky's simplification of it, requires treating the situation where no generator from X occurs with exponent sum 0 in r. Suppose that distinct letters x,y∈X occur in r with nonzero exponents α,β accordingly. Consider a homomorphism f:F(X)→F(X) given by f(x)=xy−β,f(y)=yα and fixing the other generators from X. Then for r′=f(r)∈F(X) the exponent sum on y is equal to 0. The map f induces a group homomorphism ϕ:G→G′=⟨X∣r′=1⟩ that turns out to be an embedding. The one-relator group G' can then be treated using Moldavansky's approach. When G′ splits as an HNN-extension of a one-relator group L, the defining relator r0 of L still turns out to be shorter than r, allowing for inductive arguments to proceed. Magnus' original approach used a similar version of an embedding trick for dealing with this case.

Two-generator one-relator groups

It turns out that many two-generator one-relator groups split as semidirect products G=Fm⋊ℤ. This fact was observed by Ken Brown when analyzing the BNS-invariant of one-relator groups using the Magnus-Moldavansky method.

Namely, let G be a one-relator group given by presentation (Template:EquationNote) with n=2 and let ϕ:G→ℤ be an epimorphism. One can then change a free basis of F(X) to a basis t,a such that ϕ(t)=1,ϕ(a)=0 and rewrite the presentation of G in this generators as

G=⟨a,t∣r=1⟩

where 1≠r=r(a,t)∈F(a,t) is a freely and cyclically reduced word.

Since ϕ(r)=0,ϕ(t)=1, the exponent sum on t in r is equal to 0. Again putting ai=t−iati, we can rewrite r as a word r0 in (ai)i∈ℤ. Let m,M be the minimum and the maximum subscripts of the generators occurring in r0. Brown showed[32] that ker⁡(ϕ) is finitely generated if and only if m<M and both am and aM occur exactly once in r0, and moreover, in that case the group ker⁡(ϕ) is free. Therefore if ϕ:G→ℤ is an epimorphism with a finitely generated kernel, then G splits as G=Fm⋊ℤ where Fm=ker⁡(ϕ) is a finite rank free group.

Later Dunfield and Thurston proved[33] that if a one-relator two-generator group G=⟨x1,x2∣r=1⟩ is chosen "at random" (that is, a cyclically reduced word r of length n in F(x1,x2) is chosen uniformly at random) then the probability pn that a homomorphism from G onto ℤ with a finitely generated kernel exists satisfies

0.0006<pn<0.975

for all sufficiently large n. Moreover, their experimental data indicates that the limiting value for pn is close to 0.94.

Examples of one-relator groups

  • Oriented surface group G=⟨a1,b1,…,an,bn∣[a1,b1]…[an,bn]=1⟩ where [a,b]=a−1b−1ab and where n≥1.
  • Non-oriented surface group G=⟨a1,…,an∣a12⋯an2=1⟩, where n≥1.

Generalizations and open problems

  • If A and B are two groups, and r∈A∗B is an element in their free product, one can consider a one-relator product G=A∗B/⟨⟨r⟩⟩=⟨A,B∣r=1⟩.
  • The so-called Kervaire conjecture, also known as Kervaire–Laudenbach conjecture, asks if it is true that if A is a nontrivial group and B=⟨t⟩ is infinite cyclic then for every r∈A∗B the one-relator product G=⟨A,t∣r=1⟩ is nontrivial.[34]
  • Klyachko proved the Kervaire conjecture for the case where A is torsion-free.[35]
  • A conjecture attributed to Gersten[23] says that a finitely generated one-relator group is word-hyperbolic if and only if it contains no Baumslag–Solitar subgroups.

See also

Sources

References

Template:Reflist

  1. ↑ Template:Cite journal
  2. ↑ Template:Cite journal
  3. ↑ Template:Cite journal
  4. ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 Template:Cite journal
  5. ↑ Template:Cite journal
  6. ↑ Lyndon & Schupp, Ch. III, Section 11, Proposition 11.1, p. 161
  7. ↑ Template:Cite journal
  8. ↑ Magnus, Karrass and Solitar, Theorem N3, p. 167
  9. ↑ Template:Cite journal
  10. ↑ Template:Cite journal
  11. ↑ 11.0 11.1 Magnus, Karrass and Solitar, Theorem 4.14, p. 274
  12. ↑ Lyndon & Schupp, Ch. II, Section 5, Proposition 5.11
  13. ↑ Template:Cite journal
  14. ↑ Template:Cite journal
  15. ↑ Lyndon & Schupp, p. 112
  16. ↑ Template:Cite journal
  17. ↑ Template:Cite journal
  18. ↑ Template:Cite journal
  19. ↑ Template:Cite journal
  20. ↑ 20.0 20.1 Template:Cite journal
  21. ↑ Lyndon & Schupp, Ch. IV, Theorem 5.5, p. 205
  22. ↑ Template:Cite journal
  23. ↑ 23.0 23.1 Template:Cite book
  24. ↑ Template:Cite journal
  25. ↑ Template:Cite journal
  26. ↑ Template:Cite journal
  27. ↑ Template:Cite journal
  28. ↑ Lyndon& Schupp, Chapter II, Section 6, pp. 111-113
  29. ↑ Magnus, Karrass, and Solitar, Section 4.4
  30. ↑ Lyndon& Schupp, Chapter IV, Section 5, pp. 198-205
  31. ↑ Template:Cite journal
  32. ↑ Template:Cite journal, Theorem 4.3
  33. ↑ Template:Cite journal, Theorem 6.1
  34. ↑ Template:Cite book
  35. ↑ Template:Cite journal