Cohomology of infinite groups realizing fusion systems
Muhammed Said G\"undo\u{g}an, Ergun Yalcin

TL;DR
This paper investigates the cohomology of infinite groups modeling fusion systems, especially those arising from finite groups, and establishes relationships and differences in their cohomological properties.
Contribution
It relates the cohomology of infinite group models to that of finite groups and explores cohomological differences for specific groups like GL(n,2).
Findings
Cohomology of Robinson models differs from that of the finite group for GL(n,2), n≥5.
Established a long exact sequence for cohomology of centric linking systems with twisted coefficients.
Analyzed signalizer functors and their role in the cohomology of infinite group models.
Abstract
Given a fusion system defined on a -group , there exist infinite group models, constructed by Leary and Stancu, and Robinson, that realize . We study these models when is a fusion system of a finite group and prove a theorem which relates the cohomology of an infinite group model to the cohomology of the group . We show that for the groups , where , the cohomology of the infinite group obtained using the Robinson model is different than the cohomology of the fusion system. We also discuss the signalizer functors for infinite group models and obtain a long exact sequence for calculating the cohomology of a centric linking system with twisted coefficients.
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.
Cohomology of infinite groups realizing fusion systems
Muhammed Sai̇d Gündoğan
and
Ergün YalçIn
Department of Mathematics, Bilkent University, 06800 Bilkent, Ankara, Turkey
[email protected], [email protected]
Abstract.
Given a fusion system defined on a -group , there exist infinite group models, constructed by Leary and Stancu, and Robinson, that realize . We study these models when is a fusion system of a finite group and prove a theorem which relates the cohomology of an infinite group model to the cohomology of the group . We show that for the groups , where , the cohomology of the infinite group obtained using the Robinson model is different than the cohomology of the fusion system. We also discuss the signalizer functors for infinite group models and obtain a long exact sequence for calculating the cohomology of a centric linking system with twisted coefficients.
1. Introduction
Let be a discrete group. If has a finite -subgroup such that every -subgroup of is conjugate to a subgroup of , then is called a Sylow -subgroup of . The fusion system is defined as the category whose objects are subgroups of , and whose morphisms are given by maps induced by conjugation by an element in . In general, a fusion system is a category whose objects are the subgroups of a finite -group and whose morphisms are injective group homomorphisms satisfying certain properties. We say a fusion system is realized by a discrete group , if has a Sylow -subgroup such that .
When a fusion system satisfies some further axioms that mimic Sylow theorems, it is called a saturated fusion system. Fusion systems realized by finite groups are the main examples of saturated fusion systems. There are exotic saturated fusion systems that are not realized by a finite group. However it has been shown independently by Leary and Stancu [13] and Robinson [17] that given a saturated fusion system , there is always a discrete group that realizes . These infinite group models are constructed as fundamental groups of certain graphs of groups.
In this paper, we consider these infinite group constructions for a fusion system which is already realized by a finite group . We find these infinite group models interesting from the point of view of group cohomology and cohomology of categories, even in the case where is realized by a finite group. The main aim of the paper is to prove a theorem which relates the cohomology of the fusion system of a group to the cohomology of an infinite group model that realizes and to provide an infinite family of examples where these two cohomology groups are not isomorphic.
Let be a finite group and be a Sylow -subgroup of . If there is subgroup which includes as Sylow -subgroup such that , then we say controls -fusion in . We say is -minimal if it has no proper subgroup that controls -fusion in . Assume that is -minimal and let be an infinite group realizing the fusion system obtained by either the Leary-Stancu model or the Robinson model (using subgroups of as vertex groups, as described in Remark 2.11). Then we show that there is a surjective group homomorphism whose kernel is a free group on which acts by conjugation (see Section 3 for details).
The homomorphism satisfies some extra properties that makes it a storing homomorphism (see Definition 3.1). In the case where there is a storing homomorphism which takes a Sylow -subgroup of to a Sylow -subgroup of , one can relate the mod- cohomology of to the mod- cohomology of via a direct sum decomposition (see Theorem 3.3). As a consequence we obtain the following.
Theorem 1.1**.**
Let be a fusion system of a finite group . Assume that is -minimal, and let denote the infinite group realizing obtained by either the Leary-Stancu model or the Robinson model (as in Remark 2.11). Then there is a group extension where is a free group, and there is an isomorphism of cohomology groups
[TABLE]
where denotes the abelianization of .
In [14, Thm 1.1], Libman and Seeliger considers the cohomology of an infinite model group when is any saturated fusion system. In this case there is a map from the classifying space of to the -completion of the associated centric linking system . They showed that the -algebra homomorphism induced by the map splits, and the splitting is given by the restriction map . This gives an isomorphism
[TABLE]
(see Section 2.4 for details). As a consequence of Theorem 1.1 we obtain that if is a fusion system realized by a finite group that is -minimal, then the kernel of the restriction map is isomorphic to
In Section 4 we give some examples of storing homomorphisms and show that the mod- cohomology of an infinite group constructed using the Leary-Stancu model is not in general isomorphic to the cohomology of the fusion system that it realizes. For the Robinson model, we show that the groups for give infinitely many such examples.
Theorem 1.2**.**
Let for , and let be the Sylow- subgroup consisting of upper triangular matrices in . Suppose that is the infinite group realizing constructed using the Robinson model. Then .
In Section 5, we consider finite group actions on graphs and show that under certain conditions group actions on graphs can be used to obtain infinite group models realizing fusion systems. For a finite group with -rank equal to 2, we introduce a new infinite group model whose vertex groups are normalizers of elementary abelian -subgroups (see Theorem 5.7).
In Section 6, we discuss signalizer functors for infinite group models (see Definition 6.1 for a definition of signalizer functor). In the case where is the -fusion system of a finite group , we calculate the signalizer functors in terms of normalizers in the kernel of the storing homomorphism . For arbitrary fusion systems we show that for every -centric , the mod- homology of the group is zero in dimensions greater than (see Proposition 6.5). In dimension 1 the homology group functor defines an -module. We denote this module by . As a consequence of the vanishing of homology groups of at dimensions greater than 1, we obtain the following theorem.
Theorem 1.3**.**
Let denote the transporter category for an infinite group model defined on the -centric subgroups of , and let be the associated linking system defined by a signalizer functor . Then for every -module , there is a long exact sequence
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
where denote the -module obtained from via the quotient functor .
The paper is organized as follows: In Section 2 we give necessary definitions and preliminary results that we use in the rest of the paper. In Section 3 we consider graphs of groups with a storing homomorphism and prove Theorem 1.1. In Section 4 we consider some examples of storing homomorphisms and prove Theorem 1.2. In Section 5, we consider group actions on graphs and show that in some cases a group action on a graph can induce an infinite group model realizing the fusion system of the group. In Section 6 we discuss signalizer functors for infinite group models and prove Theorem 1.3.
Acknowledgement: The second author is supported by a Tübitak 1001 project (grant no. 116F194).
2. Definitions and preliminary results
In this section we introduce necessary definitions and preliminary results for the rest of the paper. The readers familiar with fusion systems and graphs of groups can skip most of this section. The standard reference for definitions on fusion systems is [9] and for graphs of groups is [20].
2.1. Fusion systems
Let be a finite -group. A fusion system on is a category whose objects are the subgroups , and for every the morphism set consists of injective group homomorphisms with following properties:
- (i)
For all we have , where is the set of all homomorphisms induced by conjugation with elements .
- (ii)
For any morphism , the isomorphism , and its inverse , are morphisms in .
Let be a discrete (possibly infinite) group, and let be a finite -subgroup of . We say is a Sylow -subgroup of if for every -subgroup there is a such that . When is a Sylow -subgroup of a discrete group , the fusion system is defined as the fusion system on whose morphisms are defined as the set of all maps induced by conjugations by elements in . If a fusion system satisfies some additional axioms it is called a saturated fusion system (see [9, Def 1.37] for a definition). If is finite group with a Sylow -subgroup , then the fusion system is saturated.
Let be a fusion system, and let and be two subgroups in . If there is an isomorphism in , then we say and are -conjugate and denote this by . A subgroup is called fully -normalized if for every with . A subgroup is called fully -centralized if for every with . We say is -centric if for every . A subgroup is called -radical if , where denotes the largest normal -subgroup in a group .
If for a finite group with a Sylow -subgroup , then is fully normalized in if and only if is a Sylow -subgroup of (see [9, Prop 1.38]). A subgroup is -centric if and only if is the Sylow -subgroup of (see [9, Prop 4.43]). In this case we have where denotes the largest normal subgroup of whose order is coprime to . A -subgroup in is called -centric if it satisfies this property.
We say a -subgroup of is -radical if . Note that a subgroup is -radical if and only if . Hence in general being -radical and -radical are different conditions. However, the following holds.
Lemma 2.1**.**
Let be finite group with a Sylow -subgroup , and let be a subgroup of . If is -centric and -radical, then is -centric and -radical. In general the converse does not hold.
Proof.
We have seen above that is -centric if and only if is -centric. Assume that is not -radical. Then there is a -subgroup of such that . Since is -centric, , hence . Since has order coprime to , we have . This gives that is a nontrivial normal -subgroup in . Hence is not -radical.
To see that the converse that does not hold, let be the dihedral group of order 24 and let be the normal cyclic subgroup of order . The centralizer of in is the cyclic subgroup of order 12, so is -centric. Since , is -radical. However is not -radical since (see [2, pg 11]). ∎
Given a -group , the largest fusion system on is the system where morphisms from to are all injective homomorphisms . This fusion system is denoted by . In general is not a saturated fusion system. The fusion system generated by a collection of morphisms is defined as the smallest subfusion system of that includes all the morphisms . We denote this fusion system by .
Alperin’s theorem for fusion systems states that if is a saturated fusion system, then is generated by -automorphisms of fully normalized, -radical, -centric subgroups of (see [9, Thm 4.52]).
2.2. Graphs of groups
A graph consists of two sets and , called the edges and vertices of , an involution on which sends to where , and two maps which satisfy . Each edge is considered as an oriented edge, with origin and terminus . The pair is called an unoriented edge.
Definition 2.2**.**
A graph of groups consists of a connected nonempty graph together with a function assigning
(i) to each vertex of a group and to each edge of a group , such that for all , and
(ii) to each edge , a monomorphism .
The fundamental group of a graph of groups is a group that can be described by giving a presentation. Let denote the free group with a basis given by the edges of . For this presentation we denote the edges of by and write for the image of under the monomorphism . Let denote the quotient group of the free product
[TABLE]
by the normal subgroup , where is the normal closure of the relations
[TABLE]
for all and . Let be a maximal tree in , then we define the group to be the quotient group of subject to the relations if . It can be shown that the isomorphism class of does not depend on the maximal tree that is chosen (see [20, Proposition 20]). We call the group , the fundamental group of , and denote it by .
There is also a topological description of the fundamental group of a graph of groups as the fundamental group of a topological space. For a discrete group , let denote the classifying space of . For each edge , there is a continuous map induced by the group homomorphism .
Definition 2.3**.**
The total space of the graph of groups is defined as the quotient space of
[TABLE]
by the identifications
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Using van Kampen’s theorem and some other arguments, it is possible to show that the fundamental group of is isomorphic to the group defined above (see [8, Prop 23, pg 204]). The space has a contractible universal covering, so it is a classifying space for the group (see [13, Thm 22]).
Example 2.4**.**
Two well-known examples of graph of groups are amalgamations and HNN-extensions. If is a graph with one unoriented edge and two distinct vertices, and if and are the vertex groups and is the edge group with two monomorphism , denoted by and , then the fundamental group is the amalgamated product
[TABLE]
For the HNN-extension, we take the graph as a graph with one unoriented edge and one vertex, i.e. the graph is just a loop. If the vertex group is , the edge group is , and its monomorphism is the identity embedding and , we obtain the HNN-extension
[TABLE]
When is a finite graph as it is assumed to be throughout this paper, one can express the fundamental group as a finite sequence of amalgamations and HNN-extensions. Because of this it is important to understand these two examples of graph of groups. ∎
One of the key properties of graphs of groups is that vertex groups embed into the fundamental group of graphs of groups.
Lemma 2.5** (Lemma 19, pg. 200, [8]).**
Let be a graph of groups, let be a connected subgraph of . Then the natural homomorphism is a monomorphism. In particular, for any vertex of , the natural homomorphism is a monomorphism.
Note that the natural map is the map induced by inclusion of into the free product . Using the topological description of the fundamental group, it can also be described as the map induced by the inclusion of into the total space .
2.3. Groups acting on graphs
Let be a group acting on a graph . We say acts without inversion if for every edge in and every . Sometimes this type of action is called a cellular action. Throughout the paper we will assume that all actions on graphs are without inversion. Assume that is a connected graph. Then we can define a graph of groups on the graph using the -action on . The vertex groups of are the stabilizers of vertices of under -action. The details of the construction of this graph of groups can be found in [20, Section 5.4]. The first structure theorem of the Bass-Serre theory is the following:
Theorem 2.6** (Theorem 12, pg. 52, [20]).**
If is the fundamental group of a graph of groups , then there is a tree on which acts without inversions such that the graph of groups associated to the action on is isomorphic to .
The tree is usually called the universal cover of the graph of groups , and its construction is described in [20, pg. 51].
The second structure theorem of the Bass-Serre theory is in some sense a converse to Theorem 2.6. Let be a group acting on a graph without inversions, and let be the associated graph of groups where . If , then there is a group homomorphism that takes the elements in to the corresponding stabilizer subgroups in and takes the HNN-extension generators to the corresponding group elements in . There is also a map of graphs from the universal cover of to the graph .
Theorem 2.7** (Thm 13, pg. 55, [20]).**
*With the above notation and hypothesis, the following properties are equivalent:
(i) is a tree.
(ii) is an isomorphism of graphs.
(iii) is an isomorphism of groups.*
One of the consequences of Theorem 2.7 is that if a group acts freely on a tree then is a free group. We can also conclude the following.
Corollary 2.8** (Cor 1, pg 212, [8]).**
If is a subgroup of the fundamental group of a graph of groups such that the intersection of with every conjugate of subgroups is the trivial group, then is free.
In the situation described before Theorem 2.7, even for an arbitrary graph , the homomorphism is surjective if is connected (see [20, Lemma 4, pg 34]). From the way is defined it is easy to see that the kernel of meets every conjugate of a vertex group in the trivial group, hence by Corollary 2.8, the kernel of is a free group.
2.4. Graphs of groups realizing fusion systems
Given a saturated fusion system defined on a finite -group , there are two different constructions of a discrete group with Sylow -subgroup , due to Leary and Stancu [13] and Robinson [17], such that . In both of these constructions the group is the fundamental group of a graph of groups. We first state the result by Leary and Stancu, which defines as an iterated HNN-extension of the group and does not require the fusion system to be saturated; it works for any fusion system.
Theorem 2.9** (Leary and Stancu, [13]).**
Let be a fusion system on a -group generated by isomorphisms for . We define a graph of groups where is the graph having only one vertex and edges . We define the vertex group and edge groups . The morphisms are the inclusions and the morphisms are composed with inclusions of into . Then the fundamental group realizes the fusion system , that is
As an example of the Leary-Stancu model, consider the group
[TABLE]
at prime . The unique Sylow -subgroup of is . The morphism defined by generates the fusion system . In this case the Leary-Stancu model gives the infinite group
[TABLE]
We will come back to this example later in Example 4.1 when we discuss cohomology of infinite group models.
We now describe the Robinson model for realizing fusion systems.
Theorem 2.10** (Robinson [17]).**
Let be a fusion system on a -group generated by the images under injective group homomorpisms for . We define a graph of groups , where has vertices and edges between and for . The vertex groups are and for . The edge groups are and monomorphisms , are inclusions. Then the fundamental group realizes the fusion system .
Robinson’s theorem is proved also in [13, Thm 3]. Note that to apply Robinson’s model to a particular fusion system, we need to start with a collection of subgroups such that images of generate the fusion system . Such a collection always exists for a saturated fusion system, but does not exist for an arbitrary fusion system (see [13, Section 4]).
Given a saturated fusion system , a family of subgroup in is called a conjugation family if is generated by morphisms in the normalizer fusions system . By a theorem of Goldschmidt [11], the family of -centric and -radical subgroups in form a conjugation family. For each , the normalizer fusion system is realized by a finite group with a Sylow -subgroup isomorphic to (see [9, Thm 3.70]). Hence if we take the groups in Theorem 2.10 as these model groups and the subgroups as their Sylow -subgroups, then the infinite group obtained using the Robinson construction will realize the fusion system .
Remark 2.11**.**
If is a fusion system realized by a finite group with a Sylow -subgroup , we take the subgroups in the Robinson model as the normalizers where is the family of all fully normalized, -radical, and -centric subgroups of . For the edge groups we take the Sylow -subgroups for every . When we refer to the Robinson model for a fusion system realized by a finite group , we will always assume that the collection of groups and appearing in Theorem 2.10 are chosen as described here.
Associated to a saturated fusion system there is a centric linking system (see [9, Def 9.35]) and the triple is called a -local finite group. The cohomology of the -local finite group is defined to be the cohomology of the -completion of the realization of the linking system . It is shown in [6, Thm B] that the cohomology of a -local finite group is isomorphic to the subalgebra of -stable elements in , denoted by . We define the cohomology of the fusion system as the inverse limit
[TABLE]
and it is easy to see that these two definitions for coincide.
In general the cohomology of a fusion system may be different than the cohomology of an infinite group that realizes it. The following theorem by Libman and Seeliger [14, Thm 1.1] explains the relation between these two cohomology groups.
Theorem 2.12** (Libman and Seeliger, [14]).**
Let be a saturated fusion system defined on a finite -group , and let be an infinite group realizing , constructed using the Leary-Stancu model or the Robinson model. Then the map splits as an -algebra map and has an image isomorphic to that gives
[TABLE]
The proof of this theorem uses results from the homotopy theory of linking systems. We will give later another proof for this theorem for fusion systems realized by a finite group.
3. Graphs of groups with a storing homomorphism
In this section we use the definitions and notation introduced in the previous section.
Definition 3.1**.**
Let be a graph of groups and be a finite group. A group homomorphism is called a storing homomorphism if it is surjective and for any vertex group with inclusion map , the composition is injective.
The kernel of a storing homomorphism has a trivial intersection with for each vertex group , hence by Corollary 2.8, the kernel of is a free group. Therefore, we have an exact sequence
[TABLE]
where is a free group. This gives a -action on the abelianization induced by conjugation in .
By Theorem 2.6, the fundamental group acts on a tree without inversion in such a way that the isotropy subgroups of the vertices of are conjugate to the vertex groups of . The -action on induces an action of on the quotient graph . From this we obtain a -action on .
Lemma 3.2**.**
There is a -module isomorphism between and .
Proof.
Let denote the quotient map which takes a point to its -orbit . Fix a vertex , and let . By covering space theory, there is an isomorphism given by the map that takes an to the path homotopy class , where is a path from to .
Let be the induced isomorphism between the abelianization groups . We have a commutative diagram
[TABLE]
where and are the abelianization maps. To show that is a -module isomorphism, it is enough to show that for every and , the equality holds for every such that .
We have where is a path from to . For , we have . Note that
[TABLE]
in . Since annihilates the -action, we have
[TABLE]
This gives
[TABLE]
in . Note that is a loop at whose homology class is equal to . Hence we have as desired. We conclude that is a -module isomorphism between and . ∎
Theorem 3.3**.**
Let be a graph of groups and let . Suppose that has a Sylow -subgroup and that there is a storing homomorphism that takes a Sylow -subgroup of to a Sylow -subgroup of . Then, there is an isomorphism
[TABLE]
where is the kernel of .
Proof.
To simplify the notation we will denote the images of vertex groups and edge groups under also by and . Let and be the tree on which acts with isotropy given by . Consider the -action on the graph . Since is connected, is also a connected graph.
The cellular cochain complex for with coefficients in gives an exact sequence of -modules
[TABLE]
The -action on permutes the cells in , hence we have
[TABLE]
where and are orbit representative sets for edges and vertices in , respectively. Since has a Sylow -subgroup, there exists a vertex group containing a Sylow -subgroup . This means in the subgroup also includes a Sylow -subgroup of . From this we conclude that the map splits since is not divisible by . We can divide the exact sequence in 3.1 into two sequences
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
where the first sequence splits. By Shapiro’s lemma, the first sequence gives an isomorphism
[TABLE]
From the second short exact sequence, we also obtain a long exact sequence. By adding to two consecutive terms in this sequence and by using the isomorphism in 3.2, we get
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
The group acts on a tree with the same isotropy subgroups as the -action on . This gives a similar long exact sequence from the -action on :
[TABLE]
Since the maps in the middle coincide, by the five-lemma we obtain an isomorphism
[TABLE]
By Lemma 3.2 we have
[TABLE]
Hence the proof is complete. ∎
Remark 3.4**.**
Theorem 3.3 is a generalization of [4, Lemma 3.1]. The proof we give here is very similar to the proof in [4]. There is an alternative approach to proving Theorem 3.3 using the Lyndon-Hochschild-Serre spectral sequence [7, Thm 6.3] for the extension
[TABLE]
We use this approach later in the proof of Theorem 1.3.
In Theorem 3.3, the assumption that the fundamental group has a Sylow -subgroup is necessary, as the following example illustrates.
Example 3.5**.**
Let . Then has no Sylow -subgroup since the subgroups and are not conjugate to each other in . Note that if we take and define the storing homomorphism by taking and to the generators of , then the kernel of is the subgroup . We have where , and for all . Hence, the isomorphism in Theorem 3.3 does not hold in this case.
Now we are ready to prove Theorem 1.1.
Proof.
Let be a finite group with Sylow -subgroup . Suppose that has no proper subgroups that control -fusion in . Let denote the infinite group realizing the fusion system constructed according to the Leary-Stancu model, as explained in Theorem 2.9. Let denote the group homomorphism that takes to and the generators to the group elements where is an element in such that for . Note that the image of controls -fusion in , hence by our assumption above is surjective. The only vertex group of is , and the restriction of to is injective, hence is a storing homomorphism.
Now let denote the infinite group obtained using the Robinson model with vertex groups for a collection of -centric subgroups , where is a star-shaped graph with the center having vertex group . In this case the group is generated by the subgroups in , so is defined as a map that takes the subgroups injectively to the subgroups in . It is easy to see that in this case too, is a storing homomorphism.
In both cases there is a storing homomorphism . Since the kernel of a storing homomorphism is a free group, this gives a group extension , where is a free group. Applying Theorem 3.3 to the storing homomorphism gives the isomorphism in the statement of the theorem. ∎
As a corollary of Theorem 1.1, we obtain the following.
Corollary 3.6**.**
Let and be as in Theorem 1.1. Then the kernel of the restriction map is isomorphic to .
Proof.
The image of the restriction map is isomorphic . Hence Theorem 1.1 gives the desired isomorphism. ∎
4. An Infinite Family of Examples
We start with an easy example to illustrate that infinite groups obtained using the Leary-Stancu model may have cohomology groups that are not isomorphic to the cohomology of the fusion systems that they realize.
Example 4.1**.**
Let and . The Sylow -subgroup of is . The Leary-Stancu model is the infinite group
[TABLE]
The storing homomorphism takes to , so the kernel of is . The -action on is trivial, hence Theorem 3.3 gives that
[TABLE]
The cohomology ring of is , where and , and the cohomology ring of is the subalgebra
[TABLE]
We can calculate the cohomology of using the sequence . The LHS-spectral sequence has only two nonzero vertical lines and is identity only at dimensions where mod . From this calculation, we can easily see that and . ∎
We now give another example of storing homomorphisms where is an amalgamation of two finite groups and acts nontrivially on .
Example 4.2**.**
Let , and . We can give a presentation for as follows:
[TABLE]
The group is a store of with storing homomorphism which takes both and to . The kernel of is . In this case acts nontrivially on since . We usually denote this one-dimensional -module by . By Theorem 3.3, we have
[TABLE]
We can calculate the cohomology groups using the sequence of -modules . We obtain that for mod , and [math] otherwise. The cohomology of can be calculated using the long exact sequence for groups acting on a tree. From these we can verify that the isomorphism above holds. In this case the kernel of the restriction map to the Sylow -subgroup is . ∎
In the rest of this section we consider the -fusion system of the group and show that the cohomology of the infinite group constructed using the Robinson model is not isomorphic to the cohomology of the -fusion system for . This gives an infinite family of examples with this property. Examples of groups with this property were already known. In [19, Prop 6.8], it is shown that the mod- cohomology of is not isomorphic to the cohomology of .
To construct an infinite group using the Robinson model for the -fusion system of , we must understand all fully normalized, -radical, -centric subgroups for the fusion system , where and is a Sylow -subgroup of . Since is an algebraic group we will quote some standard results from [3, Sec 6.8] and [21] to describe its -radical and -centric subgroups. We also refer to [15, Appendix B] for some of the results below.
Let be the subgroup of consisting of the upper triangular matrices. Since the order of is and the order of is , the index is odd. Hence is a Sylow -subgroup of . The Borel subgroups of are the conjugates of and (see [21, Thm 6.12]). Parabolic subgroups of are stabilizers of flags , so every parabolic subgroup is conjugate to a subgroup consisting of matrices of the form
[TABLE]
The unipotent radical of is the subgroup of matrices of the form
[TABLE]
We now state a special case of the Borel-Tits theorem (see [3, Thm 6.8.4]) to identify the -radical subgroups of .
Theorem 4.3** (Borel-Tits).**
If then a -subgroup is -radical if and only if is parabolic and is its unipotent radical.
We also have the following observation.
Lemma 4.4**.**
Let be the group of upper triangular matrices in and . Then any unipotent radical of a parabolic group containing is -centric.
Proof.
If is -centric and , then is also -centric. We know that the maximal parabolic subgroup corresponds to the minimal unipotent radicals. Then, it is enough to prove that the statement holds for all maximal parabolic subgroups containing .
Take any maximal parabolic subgroup containing , where is a subgroup of the form
[TABLE]
for some . Then , hence is fully -normalized. This implies that fully -centralized, and hence it is enough to show that . Take any centralizing . If we write
[TABLE]
where and are upper triangular matrices with diagonal entries equal to , then the equation gives that we must have for any . Fix any and . Choosing to have all entries 0 except the -th entry, which is equal to 1, the equality gives that for and for . This gives and . Hence lies in . We conclude that is -centric. ∎
The argument above can be extended to show that for every unipotent radical normal in . This gives that and for these subgroups. In particular, is -radical since is -radical in . We conclude the following.
Theorem 4.5**.**
Let . The subgroup of upper triangular matrices in is a Sylow 2-subgroup of . Let . Then is fully normalized, -radical, -centric subgroup of if and only if is parabolic containing and is its unipotent radical.
Proof.
The first sentence is explained above. Let be a fully normalized, -centric, and -radical subgroup in . By Lemma 2.1, an -centric, -radical subgroup of is -radical, -centric in . Hence by Theorem 4.3, is parabolic and is its unipotent radical. Since is parabolic, for some Borel subgroup . Since Borel subgroups are conjugate, there exists such that . Let . Then . Since is fully normalized, we have . So gives that , which means contains as desired.
For the other direction, assume that is a subgroup of such that is parabolic containing and is its unipotent radical. By Theorem 4.3, is -radical. By Lemma 4.4, is -centric. By the remark after the proof of Lemma 4.4, is -radical. Since , we can also say that is fully normalized. ∎
Now we are ready to prove Theorem 1.2
Proof of Theorem 1.2.
By [12, Table 6.1.3], we have for . We will show that The vertex groups of are the subgroup and the normalizers of fully normalized, -radical, -centric subgroups of . From Theorem 4.5, the vertex groups of are and the parabolic subgroups containing . This gives a long exact sequence
[TABLE]
Note that for any , we have because is a Sylow 2-subgroup of . Without loss of generality, assume that are maximal parabolic subgroups such that, for , we have
[TABLE]
Then we have that . Note that Take any . The restriction of to is the zero homomorphism because is a simple group. If is non-zero, then we have for some . Take any nonzero such that . Since acts on by conjugation and it sends any nonzero element to a nonzero element, we have which is a contradiction. We conclude that
[TABLE]
From this we obtain that
[TABLE]
because in the left hand side two terms are zero as shown above, and for all the other summands we have . This gives that the map in the long exact sequence 4.2 is not surjective. Hence This completes the proof. ∎
5. Realizing fusion systems via group actions on graphs
Let be a finite group acting on a connected graph without inversion. As we discussed in Section 2.3, using the isotropy subgroups of the vertices and edges of , we can define a graph of groups on the graph . Let denote the fundamental group of this graph of groups. The map defined by sending the vertex groups of to the corresponding isotropy subgroups in is a storing homomorphism. The surjectivity of follows from the fact that is connected. We also know that the kernel of is a free group by Corollary 2.8. This gives an extension of groups
[TABLE]
There is an alternative description of the group that is associated to a -action on a graph . Consider the Borel construction . From the description of the total space of it is easy to see that the total space is homotopy equivalent to the Borel construction (see [18, pg. 167]). Hence . The Borel construction gives a fibration
[TABLE]
that induces a long exact sequence in homotopy groups
[TABLE]
Since is connected and is a classifying space of a finite group, we obtain a short exact sequence
[TABLE]
This shows that the map is surjective and its kernel is isomorphic to , which is a free group.
Note that infinite groups obtained in this way may not have a Sylow -subgroup in general.
Example 5.1**.**
Consider the action on a circle with the action . We can view as the realization of the graph with two vertices and two edges. Then the quotient graph is a graph with single edge and two vertices, where vertex groups are at both vertices, and the edge group is . The fundamental group is the free product which is isomorphic to the infinite Dihedral group . In this case does not have a Sylow -subgroup. ∎
We can give a list of conditions on the -action on to guarantee the existence of a Sylow -subgroup in .
Proposition 5.2**.**
Let be a finite group with a Sylow -subgroup , and let be a connected -graph where acts without inversion. If there is a vertex of such that
- (1)
* fixes , and* 2. (2)
for any vertex there exists a path from to for some such that for each , a Sylow -subgroup of the stabilizer group lies in the stabilizer of the edge ,
then the fundamental group associated to the -action on has a Sylow -subgroup that maps isomorphically to under the storing homomorphism .
Proof.
The vertex groups of are the stabilizers of the -action on . Conditions (1) and (2) in the theorem implies the condition (ii) of [14, Prop 3.3]. Condition (i) of this proposition already holds since all vertex groups are finite, hence by [14, Prop 3.3], has a Sylow -subgroup isomorphic to .
Since fixes the point , maps into via the inclusion where is the image of under the quotient map . It is clear that the storing homomorphism takes a Sylow -subgroup of isomorphically onto . ∎
The storing homomorphism can also be used to compare the corresponding fusion systems.
Theorem 5.3**.**
Let be a finite group with a Sylow -subgroup , and let be a connected graph on which acts without inversion. Assume that has a vertex satisfying conditions (1) and (2) of Proposition 5.2. Then after identifying the Sylow -subgroups, we have . Furthermore, if for every -centric, -radical subgroup in , the normalizer fixes a vertex on , then .
Proof.
Let be a morphism in , where . Let . After identifications, is equal to the conjugation map which is a morphism in . Hence .
To prove the second statement, let be a morphism in where is a -centric, -radical subgroup in , and . By the given condition, for some in . Since is a storing homomorphism, it induces an isomorphism between and . This means that there is a such that is equal to the morphism , hence . Since, by Alperin’s theorem is generated by morphisms where is fully normalized, -centric, and -radical. By Lemma 2.1, -centric, -radical subgroups in are -centric and -radical in , hence we can conclude that . ∎
Remark 5.4**.**
If is a -graph which is not connected but such that the quotient graph is connected, then there is a subgroup formed by elements such that for some connected component of . It is easy to see that there is an isomorphism of -spaces. This gives
[TABLE]
If the connected -graph satisfies the conditions in Theorem 5.3, then
[TABLE]
realizes the fusion . In general the fusion system will not be equal to , but in some of the cases we consider below this will be true, and we will have applications to Theorem 5.3 even when the -graph is not connected. ∎
The main example that motivated this section is the action of on the graph of -centric, -radical subgroups of .
Example 5.5**.**
Let be a finite group and be the graph whose vertices are the -centric, -radical subgroups of . There is an edge between and in if . The group acts on by conjugation, and this action is without inversion of edges. The graph is not connected in general but the subgroup that stabilizes a connected component is generated by the stabilizers of vertices of that component. Let be the connected component that includes , then is generated by normalizers of the -centric, -radical subgroups in . The stabilizers are normalizer subgroups , and by Alperin’s fusion theorem they generate the fusion system , so in this case we have .
Let . Consider the -action on the connected graph . If we take as , then the stabilizer of in contains a Sylow -subgroup of . Condition (ii) of Proposition 5.2 can be checked easily. Let be any vertex in . There is a vertex that is conjugate to such that is fully normalized and . Then the path between and formed by a single edge satisfies the required condition because the stabilizer of the edge includes the Sylow -subgroup of , which is . So has a Sylow -subgroup that maps isomorphically to the Sylow -subgroup of . The condition of Theorem 5.3 also holds because for every -centric, -radical subgroup of , the subgroup is the stabilizer of the vertex . Hence realizes .
Note that the infinite group obtained from this group action is the same as the model given by Libman and Seeliger in [14, Sec. 4.1], which is different than the Robinson model given in Theorem 2.10. This version of Robinson model is interesting from the point of view of the normalizer decomposition of classifying spaces. Let denote the collection of all -centric, -radical subgroups in . The graph is the 1-skeleton of the poset of subgroups in . Since the collection of -centric, -radical subgroups of is a -ample collection, the projection map induces a mod- isomorphism (see Definition 7.7 and 8.10 in [10]). In addition, we have , hence the map induced by gives a mod- cohomology isomorphism if and only if the inclusion map induces a mod- cohomology isomorphism
[TABLE]
It is easy to see that for many groups these two cohomology rings will not be isomorphic, in particular, when the permutation modules for the higher dimensional cells in are not free. ∎
In the rest of the section we consider the group action on the graph of elementary abelian -subgroups of . Through out this discussion, we assume is a finite group with -rank equal to , meaning that has a subgroup isomorphic to but it has no subgroups isomorphic to . Let be the poset of all nontrivial elementary abelian -subgroups in . Since has -rank equal to this is a one-dimensional poset, hence we may consider it as a graph whose vertices are the nontrivial elementary abelian -subgroups of and where there is an edge between and if and only if . The group acts on by conjugation.
Let denote the fundamental group of the graph of groups associated to the -action on . Note that the vertex groups of are the normalizers . By the discussion above, the group can also be described as the fundamental group . In this case the mod cohomology of is known to be isomorphic to the cohomology of . This is a theorem due to P. Webb.
Theorem 5.6** (Webb, [22], Thm E).**
Assume that is a finite group with . Let be the poset of nontrivial elementary abelian -subgroups in , and let . Then is a projective -module for , and there is an isomorphism
[TABLE]
Proof.
The first part is proved in [22, Thm E]. The isomorphism of cohomology groups is given in [22, pg. 153]. ∎
Using Theorem 5.3 we can also conclude the following.
Theorem 5.7**.**
Let be a finite group with , and let be a Sylow -subgroup of . Then has a Sylow -subgroup isomorphic to , and .
Proof.
Since the center of is not trivial, we can take a subgroup of order which lies in . Let be the connected components of , assume that . Define
[TABLE]
Since fixes , it also fixes the component . Hence, we have . Any elementary abelian is connected to by a path in because the elementary abelian subgroup of is connected to both and . For any subgroup , the normalizer normalizes the largest central elementary abelian subgroup of because is a characteristic subgroup of . This means that fixes the vertex in , which lies in . Hence, for all . By Alperin’s fusion theorem, we obtain that
[TABLE]
To complete the proof, it is enough to prove that realizes the fusion system . We argue that in this situation conditions (1) and (2) of Theorem 5.3 are satisfied. For condition (1), we choose the vertex as the subgroup . It is clear that fixes since .
For condition (2), take any in the poset . Since the group fixes the vertex , it also fixes the component , hence . By replacing with an -conjugate subgroup we can assume is a fully -normalized of subgroup of . Since , the subgroup has order or . We will analyze these two cases.
We denote the elementary abelian -subgroups of order and by ’s and ’s, respectively. Since , we have for all because otherwise the group is an elementary abelian group of order , giving a contradiction with .
If for some , then there is an edge between and . The stabilizer of has Sylow -subgroup because is fully -normalized. The subgroup is contained in , which is the stabilizer of the edge between and . Hence, condition (2) is satisfied in this case.
Now assume that for some . Then is contained in . Now we consider the path for the condition (2). Since is fully -normalized, has Sylow -subgroup contained in because if fixes then it fixes . This shows that the edge from to satisfies the Sylow -subgroup condition.
For the first edge from to , if is also fully -normalized then we are done in a similar way. Assume to the contrary that is not fully -normalized. Now, we need to change the path. There is an such that is fully -normalized. is a Sylow -subgroup of , which lies in the stabilizer of the edge to . By taking the -conjugate of the conclusion from the previous paragraph we see that the edge from to also satisfies the Sylow -subgroup condition. Thus each of the edges in the path satisfies the Sylow -subgroup condition, hence by Theorem 5.3, we conclude that has a Sylow -subgroup isomorphic to .
For every -centric subgroup , let be the maximal central elementary abelian subgroup of . Then is characteristic in , so . This means stabilizes . Hence, by Theorem 5.3, we can conclude that .∎
6. Signalizer functors for infinite group models
Let be a saturated fusion system on a finite -group . The centric linking system associated to is a category whose objects are the -centric subgroups of , together with a functor and a monomorphism for each -centric subgroup satisfying certain properties (see [9, Def 9.35] for details). The triple is called a -local finite group and its classifying space is the space . When is realized by a finite group , then -centric subgroups of are -centric in . Hence for every , we have where has order coprime to . In this case the morphisms of the category are given by
[TABLE]
For a discrete group with a Sylow -subgroup , the transporter category is defined as the category whose objects are -centric subgroups of and whose morphisms are given by
[TABLE]
Definition 6.1**.**
A signalizer functor on a discrete group is an assignment for every -centric such that is a complement of in and such that if then .
A signalizer functor is a functor from the transporter category to the category of groups. Given a signalizer functor on a discrete group , we can define a quotient category whose morphisms from to are
[TABLE]
It is proved in [1, Lemma 2.6] that the category is a linking system for the fusion system . For infinite group models and realizing fusion systems, we have the following theorem.
Theorem 6.2** (Libman and Seeliger, [14]).**
Fix a -local finite group and let be an infinite group model realizing obtained by either the Leary-Stancu model or the Robinsion model. Then there is a signalizer function on such that is a quotient of the transporter system .
Theorem 6.2 is proved as part of [14, Thm 1.1] using topological arguments, in particular, using the definition of linking system associated to a map . In the proof it is shown that for each , there is a group extension
[TABLE]
The group has as a Sylow -subgroup, and it is known that the induced fusion system is isomorphic to the normalizer fusion system . If is an infinite group model constructed by the Leary-Stancu model or the Robinson model, then has a Sylow -subgroup isomorphic to , but in general this property is not inherited by subgroups. So, it is not clear that the normalizer group has a Sylow -subgroup.
Question 6.3**.**
Does the normalizer group in general have a Sylow -subgroup isomorphic to ? Is it possible to see as an infinite model for the fusion system which is realizable by the finite group and view the above sequence as a sequence coming from a storing homomorphism of a realizable fusion system?
Example 6.4**.**
Let be a fusion system of a finite group with Sylow -subgroup . Assume that is -minimal, and that is an infinite group realizing obtained by either the Leary-Stancu model or by the Robinson model. There is a storing homomorphism whose kernel is a free group . For each , reducing the storing homomorphism to , we obtain a short exact sequence
[TABLE]
where is a subgroup of . By Theorem 6.2, the homomorphism
[TABLE]
is surjective, hence . This gives that fits into an extension of the form
[TABLE]
where . Note that is a finite group whose order is coprime to and is a free group.
One of the consequences of the calculation given in Example 6.4 is that mod- cohomology of the group is zero at dimensions greater than . It turns out that this holds more generally for any saturated fusion system.
Proposition 6.5**.**
Let be a saturated fusion system on a finite -group . Suppose is an infinite group model obtained by either the Leary-Stancu model or the Robinson. Let be the signalizer functor for such that is a quotient of the transporter system . Then for every and for every , we have .
Proof.
Note that has a Sylow -subgroup and . Let be an -centric subgroup of . Since is a subgroup of the fundamental group of a graph of groups with finite vertex groups, it is itself a graph of groups with finite vertex groups. The result follows from the cohomology sequence for a graph of groups once we show that all finite vertex groups of have order coprime to . Let be a finite -group. Then centralizes , hence is a finite -subgroup of . Let be such that . Then is a subgroup of and centralizes . Since is -centric, and is -isomorphic to , we have . This gives that , which implies . Since , we get . We conclude that all finite subgroups of have order coprime to . ∎
The proposition we proved above has consequences for cohomology groups of the category with twisted coefficients. For a commutative ring , an -module is defined as a contravariant functor from to the category of -modules. Let denote the transporter category for defined on -centric subgroups of . The quotient functor gives an extension of small categories
[TABLE]
Theorem 1.2 is proved using a spectral sequence for extensions of small categories. We first introduce necessary definitions. We refer the reader to [16, Appendix A] for details.
Definition 6.6** (Def A.5, [16]).**
Let and be two small categories such that . Let be a functor that is identity on objects and surjective on morphism sets. For each , set
[TABLE]
We say is source regular if for every , the group acts freely on and is the orbit map of this action.
When is a source regular functor, we say
[TABLE]
is a source regular extension, and call the family the kernel of the functor . For a small category , an -module is defined as a functor -mod. Note that the assignment defines an -module since acts trivially on homology groups when denotes a trivial -module. Given a functor and an -module , the -module defined as the composition
[TABLE]
is denoted by .
Proposition 6.7**.**
Let be a source regular functor with kernel . Then for every -module , there is a spectral sequence
[TABLE]
Proof.
There is a standard resolution for calculating the cohomology groups of a small category with coefficients in an -module . For each , let be defined as the -module
[TABLE]
where the sum is over all sequences of morphisms in (see [16, Lemma A.1] for details). The complex gives a projective resolution of the constant functor as an -module. The cohomology of with coefficients in is defined as the cohomology of the cochain complex It is easy to see that
[TABLE]
Hence, we can write
[TABLE]
where is the complex of projective -modules such that
[TABLE]
for every . Alternatively we can consider as the chain complex obtained from by applying the functor introduced in the proof of [5, Lem 1.3].
For the calculation of the cohomology group , there is an hyper-cohomology spectral sequence (see [3, Prop 3.4.3]) with -term
[TABLE]
Since acts freely on for every , we have
[TABLE]
for every , and for every . This completes the proof. ∎
Proof of Theorem 1.3.
Let . The quotient functor is a source regular functor with kernel . Hence by Proposition 6.7, for every -module , there is a spectral sequence
[TABLE]
By Proposition 6.5, for every , hence the -term of the spectral sequence has only two nonzero horizontal lines at with a single differential
[TABLE]
for . The long exact sequence given in the statement of the theorem follows from the fact that -page is a two line spectral sequence. ∎
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] M. Aschbacher and A. Chermak, A group-theoretic approach to a family of 2 2 2 -local finite groups constructed by Levi and Oliver , Ann. of Math. (2) 171 (2010), 881-978.
- 2[2] M. Aschbacher, R. Kessar, and B. Oliver, Fusion Systems in Algebra and Topology , London Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series, 391. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 2011.
- 3[3] D. J. Benson, Representations and Cohomology II , Cambridge Studies in Adv. Math. 30 , Cambridge University Press, 1998.
- 4[4] D. J. Benson and C. W. Wilkerson, Finite simple groups and Dickson invariants , Homotopy theory and its applications (Cocoyoc, 1993), 31–42, Contemp. Math., 188, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 1995.
- 5[5] C. Broto, R. Levi, and B. Oliver, Homotopy equivalences of p 𝑝 p -completed classifying spaces of finite groups , Invent. Math. 151 (2003), 611-664.
- 6[6] C. Broto, R. Levi, and B. Oliver, The homotopy theory of fusion systems , J. Amer. Math. Soc. 16 (2003), 779-856.
- 7[7] K. S. Brown, Cohomology of Groups , Graduate Texts in Mathematics, Springer, 1982.
- 8[8] D. E. Cohen, Combinatorial Group Theory: a topological approach , London Math. Soc. Student Texts 14 , Cambridge University Press, 1989.
