The classification of surfaces with p_g=q=1 isogenous to a product of curves
Giovanna Carnovale, Francesco Polizzi

TL;DR
This paper classifies all algebraic surfaces with geometric genus and irregularity equal to one that are constructed as quotients of products of two curves by a finite group, enriching the understanding of their structure.
Contribution
It provides a complete classification of surfaces with p_g=q=1 that are isogenous to a product, a previously unresolved problem in algebraic geometry.
Findings
Complete classification of surfaces with p_g=q=1 that are isogenous to a product.
Identification of all possible group actions on product of curves.
Structural insights into the geometry of these surfaces.
Abstract
A projective surface S is said to be isogenous to a product if there exist two smooth curves C, F and a finite group G acting freely on C \times F so that S=(C \times F)/G. In this paper we classify all surfaces with p_g=q=1 which are isogenous to a product.
IdSmall |
||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Group
|
Type | |||||
| unmixed | ||||||
| unmixed | ||||||
| unmixed | ||||||
| unmixed | ||||||
| unmixed | ||||||
| unmixed | ||||||
| unmixed | ||||||
| unmixed | ||||||
| unmixed | ||||||
| unmixed | ||||||
| unmixed | ||||||
| unmixed | ||||||
| unmixed | ||||||
| unmixed | ||||||
| unmixed | ||||||
| unmixed | ||||||
| unmixed | ||||||
| unmixed | ||||||
| unmixed | ||||||
| unmixed | ||||||
| unmixed | ||||||
| unmixed | ||||||
| unmixed | ||||||
| unmixed | ||||||
| unmixed | ||||||
| unmixed | ||||||
| unmixed | ||||||
| unmixed | ||||||
| unmixed | ||||||
| unmixed | ||||||
| unmixed | ||||||
| unmixed | ||||||
| unmixed | ||||||
| unmixed | ||||||
| unmixed | ||||||
| mixed | ||||||
| mixed | ||||||
| mixed |
IdSmall |
||
|---|---|---|
Group
|
||
IdSmall |
||
|---|---|---|
Group
|
||
IdSmall |
||
|---|---|---|
Group
|
||
IdSmall |
IdSmall |
||
|---|---|---|---|
Group
|
Group
|
||
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
The classification of surfaces with
isogenous to a product of curves
Giovanna Carnovale, Francesco Polizzi
Dipartimento di Matematica Pura ed Applicata, Università di Padova, Via Trieste 63, 35121 Padova, Italy.
Dipartimento di Matematica, Università della Calabria, Via Pietro Bucci, 87036 Arcavacata di Rende (CS), Italy.
Abstract.
A smooth, projective surface is said to be isogenous to a product if there exist two smooth curves , and a finite group acting freely on so that . In this paper we classify all surfaces with which are isogenous to a product.
Key words and phrases:
Surfaces of general type, isotrivial fibrations, actions of finite groups
2000 Mathematics Subject Classification:
14J29 (primary), 14L30, 14Q99, 20F05
0. Introduction
The classification of smooth, complex surfaces of general type with small birational invariants is quite a natural problem in the framework of algebraic geometry. For instance, one may want to understand the case where the Euler characteristic is , that is, when the geometric genus is equal to the irregularity . All surfaces of general type with these invariants satisfy . In addition, if then the self-intersection of the canonical class of is equal to and is the product of two genus curves, whereas if then or and both cases are completely described ([CCML98], [HP02], [Pir02]). On the other hand, surfaces of general type with are still far from being classified. We refer the reader to the survey paper [BaCaPi06] for a recent account on this topic and a comprehensive list of references.
A natural way of producing interesting examples of algebraic surfaces is to construct them as quotients of known ones by the action of a finite group. For instance Godeaux constructed in [Go31] the first example of surface of general type with vanishing geometric genus taking the quotient of a general quintic surface of by a free action of . In line with this Beauville proposed in [Be96, p. 118] the construction of a surface of general type with , as the quotient of a product of two curves and by the free action of a finite group whose order is related to the genera and by the equality . Generalizing Beauville’s example we say that a surface is isogenous to a product if , for and smooth curves and a finite group acting freely on . A systematic study of these surfaces has been carried out in [Ca00]. They are of general type if and only if both and are greater than or equal to and in this case admits a unique minimal realization where they are as small as possible. From now on, we tacitly assume that such a realization is chosen, so that the genera of the curves and the group are invariants of . The action of can be seen to respect the product structure on . This means that such actions fall in two cases: the mixed one, where there exists some element in exchanging the two factors (in this situation and must be isomorphic) and the unmixed one, where acts faithfully on both and and diagonally on their product.
After [Be96], examples of surfaces isogenous to a product with appeared in [Par03] and [BaCa03], and their complete classification was obtained in [BaCaGr06].
The next natural step is therefore the analysis of the case . Surfaces of general type with these invariants are the irregular ones with the lowest geometric genus and for this reason it would be important to provide their complete description. So far, this has been obtained only in the cases ([Ca81], [CaCi91], [CaCi93], [Pol05], [CaPi06]).
The goal of the present paper is to give the full list of surfaces with that are isogenous to a product. Our work has to be seen as the sequel to the article [Pol07], which describe all unmixed cases with abelian and some unmixed examples with nonabelian. Apart from the complete list of the genera and groups occurring, our paper contains the first examples of surfaces of mixed type with . The mixed cases turn out to be much less frequent than the unmixed ones and, as when , they occur for only one value of the order of . However, in contrast with what happens when , the mixed cases do not correspond to the maximum value of but appear for a rather small order, namely .
Our classification procedure involves arguments from both geometry and computational group theory. We will give here a brief account on how the result is achieved.
If is any surface isogenous to a product and satisfying then , , are related as in Beauville’s example and we have . Besides, if such surfaces are necessarily minimal and of general type (Lemma 2.1).
If is of unmixed type then the two projections , induce two morphisms , , whose smooth fibres are isomorphic to and , respectively. Moreover, the geometry of is encoded in the geometry of the two coverings , and the invariants of impose strong restrictions on , and . Indeed we have so we may assume that is an elliptic curve and . Then is the Albanese morphism of and the genus of the general Albanese fibre equals . It is proven in [Pol07, Proposition 2.3] that ; in particular this allows us to control . The covers and are determined by two suitable systems of generators for , that we call and , respectively. Besides, in order to obtain a free action of on and a quotient with the desired invariants, and are subject to strict conditions of combinatorial nature (Proposition 2.2). The geometry imposes also strong restrictions on the possible and the genus of , so the existence of and and the compatibility conditions can be verified through a computer search. It is worth mentioning that the classification of finite groups of automorphisms acting on curves of genus lesser than or equal to could have also been retrieved from the existing literature ([Br90], [Ki03], [KuKi90], [KuKu90]).
If is of mixed type then the index two subgroup of corresponding to transformations that do not exchange the coordinates in acts faithfully on . The quotient is isomorphic to the Albanese variety of and (Proposition 2.5). Moreover may only be , or , hence is at most (Proposition 2.10). The cover is determined by a suitable system of generators for and since the action of on is required to be free, combinatorial restrictions involving the elements of and those of have to be imposed (Proposition 2.6). Our classification is obtained by first listing those groups for which exists and then by looking at the admissible extensions of . We find that the only possibility occurring is for so that is necessarily (Propositions 4.1, 4.2, 4.3).
In the last part of the paper we examine the structure of the subset of the moduli space corresponding to surfaces isogenous to a product with . It can be explicitly described by calculating the number of orbits of the direct product of certain mapping class groups with acting on the set (of pairs) of systems of generators (Proposition 5.1). In particular it is possible to determine the number of irreducible connected components and their respective dimensions, see the forthcoming article [Pe08].
Our computations were carried out by using the computer algebra program GAP4, whose database includes all groups of order less than , with the exception of (see [GAP4]). For the reader’s convenience we included the scripts in the Appendix.
Now let us state the main result of this paper.
Main Theorem**.**
Let be a surface with , isogenous to a product of curves. Then is minimal of general type and the occurrences for , , , the dimension of the moduli space and the number of its connected components are precisely those in the table below.
Here IdSmallGroup denotes the label of the group in the GAP4 database of small groups. The calculation of is due to Penegini and Rollenske, see [Pe08], except for the cases marked with , which were already studied in [Pol07]. The cases marked with also appeared in [Pol07], but the computation of was missing.
This work is organized as follows.
In Section 1 we collect the basic facts about surfaces isogenous to a product, following the treatment given by Catanese in [Ca00] and we fix the algebraic setup.
In Section 2 we apply the structure theorems of Catanese to the case and this leads to Propositions 2.2 and 2.6, that provide the translation of our classification problem from geometry to algebra. All these results are used in Sections 3 and 4, which are the core of the paper and give the complete lists of the occurring groups and genera in the unmixed and mixed cases, respectively.
Finally, Section 5 is devoted to the description of the moduli spaces.
. All varieties, morphisms, etc. in this article are defined over . By “surface” we mean a projective, non-singular surface , and for such a surface denotes the canonical class, is the geometric genus, is the irregularity and is the Euler characteristic. Throughout the paper we use the following notation for groups:
- •
: cyclic group of order .
- •
: split metacyclic group of order . The group is the dihedral group of order and it will be denoted by .
- •
: symmetric, alternating group on symbols.
- •
If , their commutator is defined as .
- •
If we denote by the inner automorphism of defined as .
- •
IdSmallGroup indicates the label of the group in the GAP4 database of small groups. For instance IdSmallGroup and this means that is the third in the list of groups of order .
The authors wish to thank M. Penegini and S. Rollenske for giving them a preliminary version of [Pe08] and for kindly allowing them to include their results in the Main Theorem. Moreover they are indebted with the referee for several valuable comments and suggestions to improve this article.
1. Basic on surfaces isogenous to a product
In this section we collect for the reader’s convenience some basic results on groups acting on curves and surfaces isogenous to a product, referring to [Ca00] for further details.
Definition 1.1**.**
A complex surface of general type is said to be isogenous to a product if there exist two smooth curves , and a finite group acting freely on so that .
There are two cases: the unmixed one, where acts diagonally, and the mixed one, where there exist elements of exchanging the two factors and then , are isomorphic.
In both cases, since the action of on is free, we have
[TABLE]
hence .
Let , be curves of genus . Then the inclusion is an equality if and are not isomorphic, whereas , the being generated by the involution exchanging the two coordinates. If is a surface isogenous to a product, we will always consider its unique minimal realization. This means that
- •
in the unmixed case, we have and (i.e. acts faithfully on both and );
- •
in the mixed case, where , we have , for .
(See [Ca00, Corollary 3.9 and Remark 3.10]).
Definition 1.2**.**
Let be a finite group and let , and be integers. A generating vector for of type is a -ple of elements
[TABLE]
such that: the set generates ; and . If such a exists, then is said to be -generated.
For convenience we make abbreviations such as for when we write down the type of the generating vector .
By Riemann’s existence theorem a finite group acts as a group of automorphisms of some compact Riemann surface of genus with quotient a Riemann surface of genus if and only if there exist integers such that is -generated and , , and the are related by the Riemann-Hurwitz formula. Moreover, if is a generating vector for , the subgroups and their conjugates are precisely the nontrivial stabilizers of the -action ([Br90, Section 2], [Bre00, Chapter 3], [H71]). The description of surfaces isogenous to a product can be therefore reduced to finding suitable generating vectors. Requiring that has given invariants and imposes numerical restrictions on the order of the group and the genus of the curves and . Our goal is to classify all surfaces with isogenous to a product. The aim of the next section is to translate this classification problem from geometry to algebra.
2. The case . Building data
Lemma 2.1**.**
Let be a surface isogenous to a product with . Then
.
.
* is a minimal surface of general type.*
Proof.
Claims and follow from (1). Now let us consider . Since is minimal and the cover is étale, is minimal as well. Moreover implies either or , . The first case is impossible otherwise and ; thus the second case occurs, hence is of general type. ∎
2.1. Unmixed case
If is a surface with , isogenous to an unmixed product, then , and up to exchanging and one may assume and , where is an elliptic curve. Moreover is the Albanese morphism of and , see [Pol07, Proposition 2.2]. This leads to
Proposition 2.2**.**
[Pol07, Proposition 3.1]* Let be a finite group which is both and -generated, with generating vectors and , respectively. Let be the positive integers defined by the Riemann-Hurwitz relations*
[TABLE]
Assume moreover that , , and
[TABLE]
Then there is a free, diagonal action of on such that the quotient is a minimal surface of general type with , . Conversely, every surface with , isogenous to an unmixed product, arises in this way.
Here, condition ensures that the -action on is free.
Set and ; if is a surface with which is constructed by using the recipe in Proposition 2.2, it will be called an unmixed surface of type .
Proposition 2.3**.**
[Pol07, Proposition 2.3]* Let be an unmixed surface of type . Then there are exactly the following possibilities:*
**
**
.
The following lemma gives a restriction on instead.
Lemma 2.4**.**
Let be an unmixed surface of type . Then every divides .
Proof.
Since is a stabilizer for the -action on and since acts freely on , the subgroup acts freely on . By Riemann-Hurwitz formula applied to the cover we have . Thus divides . ∎
2.2. Mixed case
Proposition 2.5**.**
Let be a surface with isogenous to a mixed product. Then is an elliptic curve isomorphic to the Albanese variety of .
Proof.
We have (see [Ca00, Proposition 3.15])
[TABLE]
Since is of mixed type, the quotient exchanges the last two summands, whence . Thus is an elliptic curve and there is a commutative diagram
[TABLE]
showing that the Albanese morphism of factors through the Abel-Jacobi map of the double symmetric product of . ∎
By Lemma 2.1 we have . In this case [Ca00, Proposition 3.16] becomes
Proposition 2.6**.**
Assume that is a -generated finite group with generating vector and that there is a nonsplit extension
[TABLE]
which gives an involution in Out. Let be defined by the Riemann-Hurwitz relation . Assume, in addition, that and that
for all we have
[TABLE]
for all we have
[TABLE]
*Then there is a free, mixed action of on such that the quotient is a minimal surface of general type with , .
Conversely, every surface with , isogenous to a mixed product, arises in this way.*
Here, conditions and ensure that the -action on is free.
Remark 2.7**.**
The surface is not covered by elliptic curves because it is of general type (Lemma 2.1), so the map is ramified. Therefore condition implies that is not abelian.
Remark 2.8**.**
The exact sequence (4) is non split if and only if the number of elements of order in equals the number of elements of order in .
Proposition 2.9**.**
Let be a surface with , isogenous to a mixed product. Then .
Proof.
Let us look at diagram (3). The Abel-Jacobi map gives to the structure of a -bundle over ([CaCi93]); let be the generic fibre of this bundle and . If is the generic Albanese fibre of we have . Let be such that is -generated and . The -cover is branched exactly along the union of “horizontal” copies of and “vertical” copies of ; moreover for each there are one horizontal copy and one vertical copy whose branching number is . Since is an elliptic curve that intersects all these copies of transversally in one point, by Riemann-Hurwitz formula applied to we obtain
[TABLE]
On the other hand the -cover is étale, so we have
[TABLE]
whence . ∎
If is a surface with which is constructed by using the recipe of Proposition 2.6, it will be called a mixed surface of type . The analogue of Proposition 2.3 in the mixed case is
Proposition 2.10**.**
Let be a mixed surface of type . Then there are at most the following possibilities:
- •
;
- •
;
- •
.
Proof.
By Proposition 2.6 we have and , so must be odd and we obtain . Therefore and the only possibilities are .
The case is ruled out because cannot be abelian by Remark 2.7.
If then , so and .
If then , so and .
If then , so and . ∎
We will see in Section 2.10 that only the case actually occurs.
3. The unmixed case
The classification of surfaces of general type with isogenous to an unmixed product is carried out in [Pol07] when the group is abelian. Therefore in this section we assume that is nonabelian.
Following [BaCaGr06, Section 1.2], for an -ple we set
[TABLE]
If is an unmixed surface of type then we necessarily have and . Besides, by Proposition 2.2 we have and by Lemma 2.4 each integer divides . Then we get
Proposition 3.1**.**
Let be a surface with isogenous to an unmixed product of type . Then the possibilities for and , written in the format , lie in the set below:
[TABLE]
Proof.
This follows combining [BaCaGr06, Proposition 1.4] with Lemma 2.4.∎
By abuse of notation, we write instead of .
Now we analyze the three cases in Proposition 2.3 separately, according to the value of . Note that if , , then , , , respectively ([Bre00, p. 91]).
Proposition 3.2**.**
If we have precisely the following possibilities.
Proof.
Since it follows that is -generated and by the second relation in we have . So we must describe all unmixed surfaces of type with , and . By a computer search through the -tuples in Proposition 3.1 we can therefore list all possibilities, proving our statement. See the GAP4 script in the Appendix to see how this procedure applies to an explicit example.
∎
Proposition 3.3**.**
If we have precisely the following possibilities.
Proof.
Since it follows that is -generated and by the second relation in (2) we have . Therefore our statement can be proven searching by computer calculation all unmixed surfaces of type with , , and . ∎
Proposition 3.4**.**
If we have precisely the following possibilities.
Proof.
Since , it follows that is -generated and by the second relation in (2) we have . Therefore our statement can be proven searching by computer calculation all unmixed surfaces of type with , , and . ∎
4. The mixed case
In this section we use Proposition 2.6 in order to classify the surfaces with isogenous to a mixed product. By Proposition 2.10 we have , or . Let us consider the three cases separately.
4.1. The case
Proposition 4.1**.**
If we have precisely the following possibilities.
Proof.
In this case , so our first task is to find all nonsplit sequences of type (4) for which is a -generated group of order . The three abelian groups of order and are -generated whereas the quaternion group is not.
Since has only one element of order , condition in Proposition 2.6 cannot be satisfied for any choice of . By Remark 2.7 we are left to analyze the possible embeddings of , and in nonabelian groups of order . The groups , and have , and elements of order , respectively. Therefore if denotes the number of elements of order in , by Remark 2.8 we must consider only those groups of order with . The nonabelian groups of order with are and and they all contain a copy of . The only nonabelian group of order with is and it contains a subgroup isomorphic to . The nonabelian groups of order with are and , and only the former contains a subgroup isomorphic to (cfr. [Wi05]).
Summarizing, we are left with the following cases:
[TABLE]
Let us analyze them separately.
We consider the subgroup . Set and . Condition holds because . Condition is satisfied because the conjugacy class of in is contained in the coset while for every we have . Therefore this case occurs by Proposition 2.6.
We consider the subgroup . Set and . Conditions and are verified as in the previous case, so this possibility occurs.
and .
All elements of order in are central so condition cannot be satisfied and these cases do not occur.
We consider the subgroup . Set and . Condition holds because is abelian and . Condition is satisfied because if then . Therefore this case occurs. ∎
4.2. The case
Proposition 4.2**.**
The case does not occur.
Proof.
In this case , so is a group of order which is -generated. There are five groups of order up to isomorphism. By computer search or direct calculation we see that the only one which is -generated is . Thus would fit into a short exact sequence
[TABLE]
A computer search shows that the only groups of order containing a subgroup isomorphic to are and (see GAP4 script in the Appendix). They contain and elements of order , respectively. On the other hand contains elements of order , so by Remark 2.8 all possible extensions of the form (5) are split and this case cannot occur. ∎
4.3. The case
Proposition 4.3**.**
The case does not occur.
The proof will be the consequence of the results below. First notice that, since , the group must be -generated.
Computational Fact 4.4**.**
There exist precisely groups of order which are -generated, namely for . The number of their elements of order is given in the table below:
[TABLE]
Proof..
Slightly modifying the first part of GAP4 script in the Appendix we easily find that the groups of order which are -generated are exactly those in the statement. The number of elements of order in each case are found by a quick computer search: see again the Appendix, GAP4 script . ∎
Computational Fact 4.5**.**
Let . A nonsplit extension of the form
[TABLE]
*exists if and only if the pair is one of the following:
, , , , , , , , , , , ,
, , , , , ,
, , , , , , , , ,
, ,
,
,
, , , , , , , , ,
, ,
, , , .*
Proof..
Assume . Using the GAP4 script in the Appendix we find that the groups of order containing a subgroup isomorphic to are for , . By Remark 2.8 and Computational Fact 4.4, in order to detect all the groups fitting in some nonsplit extension of type (6) with , it is sufficient to select from the previous list the groups containing exactly elements of order . This can be done with the GAP4 script in the Appendix, proving the claim in the case . The proof for the other values of may be carried out exactly in the same way. ∎
Let us denote by and the subsets of elements of order in and , respectively.
Lemma 4.6**.**
Assume and that one of the following situations occur:
- •
;
- •
there exists some element commuting with all elements in .
Then given any generating vector of type for , condition in Proposition 2.6 cannot be satisfied.
Proof.
Since , in any of the above situations is not contained in , so cannot hold. ∎
Computational Fact 4.7**.**
Let be one of the groups appearing in the list of Computational Fact 4.5. Then is not contained in if and only if , , , .
Proof.
See the GAP4 script in the Appendix. ∎
Computational facts 4.5, 4.7 and Lemma 4.6 imply that we only need to analyze the following pairs :
[TABLE]
Proposition 4.8**.**
The case does not occur.
Proof.
A presentation for the group is
[TABLE]
Its derived subgroup contains exactly one element of order , namely . It follows that if is any generating vector of type for , then . Since is characteristic in , condition cannot be satisfied for any embedding of into . ∎
By using the two instructions P:=PresentationViaCosetTable(G) and TzPrintRelators(P) and setting in the output
[TABLE]
one obtains the following presentations for , and .
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Computational Fact 4.9**.**
Referring to presentations (7), (8) and (9), we have the following facts.
- •
The group contains exactly one subgroup isomorphic to and one subgroup isomorphic to , namely
[TABLE]
- •
The group contains exactly two subgroups , isomorphic to , namely
[TABLE]
- •
The group contains exactly two subgroups , isomorphic to , namely
[TABLE]
In addition, for every we have
.
* and commutes with all elements in .*
Proof.
See the GAP4 script in the Appendix. ∎
Proposition 4.10**.**
The cases do not occur.
Proof.
By Lemma 4.6 and Computational Fact 4.9 it follows that, given any nonsplit extension of type (6) with as above, condition in Proposition 2.6 cannot be satisfied. ∎
Summing up, we finally obtain
*Proof of Proposition *4.3. It follows from Propositions 4.8 and 4.10.
5. Moduli spaces
Let be the moduli space of smooth minimal surfaces of general type with ; by an important result of Gieseker, is a quasiprojective variety for all (see [Gie77]). Obviously, our surfaces are contained in and we want to describe their locus there. We denote by the moduli space of unmixed surfaces of type and by the moduli space of mixed surfaces of type . We know that , or in the unmixed case, whereas in the mixed one. By a general result of Catanese ([Ca00]), both and consist of finitely many irreducible connected components of , all of the same dimension. More precisely, we have
[TABLE]
Consider the mapping class groups in genus zero and one:
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
One can prove that
[TABLE]
where is the torus ([Schn03], [CattMu04]). This implies that we can define actions of these groups on the set of generating vectors for of type , and , respectively.
If is of type then the action is given by
[TABLE]
If is of type then
[TABLE]
If is of type then
[TABLE]
These are called Hurwitz moves and the induced equivalence relation on generating vectors is said Hurwitz equivalence (see [BaCa03], [BaCaGr06], [Pol07]).
Now let be the set of pairs of generating vectors such that the assumptions in Proposition 2.2 are satisfied; then we denote by the equivalence relation on generated by Hurwitz moves on , Hurwitz moves on and the simultaneous action of on and . Similarly, let be the set of generating vectors such that the assumptions of Proposition 2.6 are satisfied; then we denote by the equivalence relation on generated by the Hurwitz moves and the action of on .
Proposition 5.1**.**
The number of irreducible components in equals the number of -classes in . Analogously, the number of irreducible components in equals the number of -classes in .
Proof.
We can repeat exactly the same argument used in [BaCaGr06, Propositions 5.2 and 5.5]; we must just replace, where it is necessary, the mapping class group of with the mapping class group of the elliptic curve . ∎
Proposition 5.1 in principle allows us to compute the number of connected components of the moduli space in each case. In practice, this task may be too hard to be achieved by hand, but it is not out of reach if one uses the computer. Recently, M. Penegini and S. Rollenske developed a GAP4 script that solves this problem in a rather short time. We put the result of their calculations in the Main Theorem (see Introduction), referring the reader to the forthcoming paper [Pe08] for further details.
6. Appendix
In this Appendix we include, for the reader’s convenience, some of the GAP4 scripts that we have used in our computations; all the others are similar and can be easily obtained modifying the ones below.
Let us show how the procedure in the proof of Proposition 3.2 applies to an explicit example, namely . First we find all the nonabelian groups of order that are -generated. This is done using GAP4 as below; the output tells us that there is only one such a group, namely .
gap> # -------------- SCRIPT 1 ------------------ gap> s:=NumberSmallGroups(24);; set:=[1..s]; [1..15] gap> for t in set do
c:=0; G:= SmallGroup(24,t); Ab:=IsAbelian(G); for g1 in G do for g2 in G do g3:=(g1*g2)^-1; H:= Subgroup(G, [g1,g2]); if Order(g1)=2 and Order(g2)=4 and Order(g3)=12 and Order(H)=Order(G) and Ab=false then c:=c+1; fi; if Order(g1)=2 and Order(g2)=4 and Order(g3)=12 and Order(H)=Order(G) and Ab=false and c=1 then Print(IdSmallGroup(G)," "); fi; od; od; od; Print("\n"); [24,5]
By using the two instructions P:=PresentationViaCosetTable(G) and TzPrintRelators(P) we see that has the presentation , hence it is isomorphic to the metacyclic group .
In order to speed up further computations, we define the sets , given by the elements of having order and , respectively.
gap> G:=SmallGroup(24,5);; gap> G2:=[];; G4:=[];; gap> for g in G do
if Order(g)=2 then Add(G2,g); fi; if Order(g)=4 then Add(G4,g); fi; od;
Then we check whether is actually -generated; if not, it should be excluded.
gap> c:=0;; gap> for l2 in G2 do
for h1 in G do for h2 in G do l1:=(l2h1h2h1^-1h2^-1)^-1; K:=Subgroup(G, [l2, h1, h2]); if Order(l1)=2 and Order(K)=Order(G) then Print(IdSmallGroup(G), " is (1 | 2,2)-generated", "\n"); c:=1; fi; if c=1 then break; fi; od; if c=1 then break; fi; od; if c=1 then break; fi; od; [24,5] is (1 | 2,2)-generated
We finish the proof by checking whether the surface actually exists; the procedure is to look for a pair of generating vectors for satisfying the assumptions of Proposition 2.2.
gap> c:=0;; gap> for g1 in G2 do
for g2 in G4 do g3:=(g1g2)^-1; H:=Subgroup(G, [g1, g2]); for l2 in G2 do for h1 in G do for h2 in G do l1:=(l2h1h2h1^-1*h2^-1)^-1; K:=Subgroup(G, [l2, h1, h2]); Boole1:=l1 in ConjugacyClass(G, g1); Boole2:=l1 in ConjugacyClass(G, g2^2); Boole3:=l1 in ConjugacyClass(G, g3^6); Boole4:=l2 in ConjugacyClass(G, g1); Boole5:=l2 in ConjugacyClass(G, g2^2); Boole6:=l2 in ConjugacyClass(G, g3^6); if Order(g3)=12 and Order(l1)=2 and Order(H)=Order(G) and Order(K)=Order(G) and Boole1=false and Boole2=false and Boole3=false and Boole4=false and Boole5=false and Boole6=false then Print("The surface exists "); c:=1; fi; if c=1 then break; fi; od; if c=1 then break; fi; od; if c=1 then break; fi; od; if c=1 then break; fi; od; if c=1 then break; fi; od; Print("\n"); The surface exists
The script above can be easily modified in order to obtain the list of all admissible pairs ; for instance, one of such pairs is given by
[TABLE]
Finally, here are the GAP4 scripts used in Section 4.
gap> # -------------- SCRIPT 2 ------------------ gap> s:=NumberSmallGroups(36);; set:=[1..s]; [1..14] gap> for t in set do
c:=0; G:=SmallGroup(36,t); N:=NormalSubgroups(G); for G0 in N do if IdSmallGroup(G0)=[18,3] then c:=c+1; fi; if IdSmallGroup(G0)=[18,3] and c=1 then Print(IdSmallGroup(G), " "); fi; od; od; Print("\n"); [36,10] [36,12]
gap> # -------------- SCRIPT 3 ------------------ gap> set:=[2,4,5,6,7,8,12,17];; gap> for t in set do
n2:=0; G0:=SmallGroup(32,t); for g in G0 do if Order(g)=2 then n2:=n2+1; fi; od; Print(IdSmallGroup(G0), " "); Print(n2, " "); od; Print("\n"); [32,2] 7 [32,4] 3 [32,5] 7 [32,6] 11 [32,7] 11 [32,8] 3 [32,12] 3 [32,17] 3
gap> # -------------- SCRIPT 4 ------------------ gap> s:=NumberSmallGroups(64);; set:=[1..s]; [1..267] gap> for t in set do
c:=0; G:=SmallGroup(64,t); N:=NormalSubgroups(G); for G0 in N do if IdSmallGroup(G0)=[32,2] then c:=c+1; fi; if IdSmallGroup(G0)=[32,2] and c=1 then Print(IdSmallGroup(G), " "); fi; od; od; Print("\n"); [64,8] [64,9] [64,56] [64,57] [64,58] [64,59] [64,61] [64,62] [64,63] [64,64] [64,66] [64,67] [64,68] [64,69] [64,70] [64,72] [64,73] [64,74] [64,75] [64,76] [64,77] [64,78] [64,79] [64,80] [64,81] [64,82]
gap> # -------------- SCRIPT 5 ------------------ gap> set:=[8,9,56,57,58,59,61,62,63,64,66,67,68,69,70,
72,73,74,75,76,77,78,79,80,81,82];; gap> for t in set do n2:=0; G:=SmallGroup(64,t); for g in G do if Order(g)=2 then n2:=n2+1; fi; od; if n2=7 then Print(IdSmallGroup(G), " "); fi; od; Print("\n"); [64,9] [64,57] [64,59] [64,63] [64,64] [64,68] [64,70] [64,72] [64,76] [64,79] [64,81] [64,82]
gap> # -------------- SCRIPT 6 ------------------ gap> set:=[5,7,9,11,13,,14,15,16,28,33,35,37,43,45,46,
57,59,63,64,68,70,72,76,79,81,82,112,113,114, 122,126, 127,132,143,156,158,160,164,165,166,172,182];; gap> for t in set do c:=0; G:=SmallGroup(64,t); D:=DerivedSubgroup(G); for d in D do B:=d in Center(G); if Order(d)=2 and B=false then c:=c+1; fi; if Order(d)=2 and B=false and c=1 then Print(IdSmallGroup(G), " "); fi; od; od; Print("\n"); [64,5] [64,33] [64,35] [64,37]
gap> # -------------- SCRIPT 7 ------------------ gap> s:=[33, 35, 37];; I:=[1, 2, 3];; gap> r:=[ [[32,6], [32,7]], [[32,6]], [[32,8]] ];;
for i in I do G:=SmallGroup(64, s[i]); Print(IdSmallGroup(G), "\n"); for N in NormalSubgroups(G) do if IdSmallGroup(N) in r[i] then Print(N, "="); Print(IdSmallGroup(N), " "); Print(DerivedSubgroup(N), "\n"); fi; od; Print("\n"); od; [64,33] Group( [ f1*f2, f3, f4, f5, f6 ] )=[32,7] Group( [ f5, f6 ] ) Group( [ f1, f3, f4, f5, f6 ] )=[32,6] Group( [ f5, f6 ] )
[64,35] Group( [ f1*f2, f3, f4, f5, f6 ] )=[32,6] Group( [ f5, f6 ] ) Group( [ f1, f3, f4, f5, f6 ] )=[32,6] Group( [ f5, f6 ] )
[64,37] Group( [ f1*f2, f3, f4, f5, f6 ] )=[32,8] Group( [ f5, f6 ] ) Group( [ f1, f3, f4, f5, f6 ] )=[32,8] Group( [ f5, f6 ] )
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[Ba Ca 03] I. Bauer, F. Catanese: Some new surfaces with p g = q = 0 subscript 𝑝 𝑔 𝑞 0 p_{g}=q=0 , Proceedings of the Fano Conference (Torino, 2002).
- 2[Ba Ca Gr 06] I. Bauer, F. Catanese, F. Grunewald: The classification of surfaces with p g = q = 0 subscript 𝑝 𝑔 𝑞 0 p_{g}=q=0 isogenous to a product of curves, e-print 𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐡 . 𝐀𝐆 / 𝟎𝟔𝟏𝟎𝟐𝟔𝟕 formulae-sequence 𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐡 𝐀𝐆 0610267 \mathbf{math.AG/0610267} (2006) to appear in Pure Appl. Math Q., volume in honour of F. Bogomolov’s 60-th birthday.
- 3[Ba Ca Pi 06] I. Bauer, F. Catanese, R. Pignatelli: Complex surfaces of general type: some recent progress, (2006), to appear in Global methods in complex geometry , 1–58 Springer-Verlag.
- 4[Be 96] A. Beauville: Complex algebraic surfaces , Cambridge University Press 1996.
- 5[Bre 00] T. Breuer: Characters and Automorphism groups of Compact Riemann Surfaces , Cambridge University Press 2000.
- 6[Br 90] S. A. Broughton: Classifying finite group actions on surfaces of low genus, J. Pure Appl. Algebra 𝟔𝟗 69 \boldsymbol{69} (1990), 233-270.
- 7[Ca 81] F. Catanese: On a class of surfaces of general type, in Algebraic Surfaces , CIME, Liguori (1981), 269-284.
- 8[Ca 00] F. Catanese: Fibred surfaces, varieties isogenous to a product and related moduli spaces, American J. of Math. 𝟏𝟐𝟐 122 \boldsymbol{122} (2000), 1-44.
