Weak density of orbit equivalence classes and free products of infinite abelian groups
Takaaki Moriyama
Graduate School of Mathematical Sciences, The University of Tokyo, Komaba, Tokyo 153-8914, Japan
[email protected]
Abstract.
We show that if a countable group G is the free product of infinite abelian groups, then for every free, probability-measure-preserving (p.m.p.) action of G, its orbit equivalence class is weakly dense in the space of p.m.p. actions of G.
This extends Lewis Bowen’s result for free groups.
1. Introduction
In this paper, we are concerned with the space of probability-measure-preserving (p.m.p.) actions of a countable group, elaborated in Kechris’ monograph [7].
Before stating our main result, let us briefly review some known results on the space of p.m.p. actions.
Throughout the paper, let G be a countable group, and let (X,μ) be a non-atomic standard probability space unless otherwise stated.
Let Aut(X,μ) be the group of all measure-preserving Borel automorphisms of (X,μ), where two of them are identified if they agree μ-almost everywhere.
The weak topology on Aut(X,μ) is defined as the topology generated by the sets
[TABLE]
for S∈Aut(X,μ), ε>0, and a finite Borel partition P of X.
It is known that Aut(X,μ) is a Polish group with respect to the weak topology ([7, §10 (A)]).
We mean by a p.m.p. action of G on (X,μ) a homomorphism from G into Aut(X,μ).
Let A(G,X,μ) denote the set of all p.m.p. actions of G on (X,μ), and let FR(G,X,μ) denote the set of all essentially free p.m.p. actions of G on (X,μ).
As being in [7], the set A(G,X,μ) is naturally identified with the subspace of the product space ∏GAut(X,μ) equipped with the product topology of the weak topology.
For α∈A(G,X,μ) and g∈G, we write gα=α(g).
We say that two actions α,β∈A(G,X,μ) are measure-conjugate if there exists R∈Aut(X,μ) such that gαx=RgβR−1x for all g∈G and μ-almost every x∈X.
We then write α=RβR−1.
For α∈A(G,X,μ), let [α]MC denote the set of all actions β∈A(G,X,μ) that are measure-conjugate to α.
The space A(G,X,μ) reflects many analytic properties of the group G.
For example, for every infinite amenable group G and for every α∈FR(G,X,μ), the set [α]MC is weakly dense in A(G,X,μ) ([2, §3.1]; see also [7, Remark, p.91]).
By contrast, every non-amenable group G has an uncountable antichain in FR(G,X,μ) with respect to the pre-order of weak containment ([10, Remark 4.3]).
We say that α∈A(G,X,μ) is weakly contained in β∈A(G,Y,ν) (denoted by α≺β) if for any Borel subsets A1,…,An⊂X and any finite subset F⊂G and any ε>0, there exist Borel subsets B1,…,Bn⊂Y such that for any g∈F and i,j∈{1,…,n}, we have
[TABLE]
For two actions α,β∈A(G,X,μ), it is known that α is weakly contained in β if and only if α belongs to the weak closure of [β]MC ([4, Theorem 2.3]).
For more details on the weak topology on A(G,X,μ) and weak containment, we refer the reader to [4] and [7].
We say that two actions α,β∈A(G,X,μ) are orbit equivalent if there exists R∈Aut(X,μ) such that Gαx=RGβR−1x for μ-almost every x∈X.
By definition, two measure-conjugate actions in A(G,X,μ) are orbit equivalent.
For α∈A(G,X,μ), let [α]OE denote the set of all actions β∈A(G,X,μ) that are orbit equivalent to α.
Lewis Bowen proved the following:
Theorem 1.1** ([3, Theorem 1.1]).**
Let G be a free group with at most countably many generators.
Then for any α∈FR(G,X,μ), the set [α]OE is weakly dense in A(G,X,μ).
Some applications of this result are given in [3, Remarks 1 and 2].
As in [3, Theorem 1.2], it turns out from orbit equivalence rigidity that some non-amenable groups do not satisfy the conclusion of Theorem 1.1.
In addition to this, any countable group with property (T) does not satisfy the conclusion of Theorem 1.1.
In fact, if a countable group G has property (T), then the set of all ergodic p.m.p. actions of G on (X,μ) is closed in A(G,X,μ) and has no interior (see [7, Theorem 12.2, i)], the proof of which is based on [6, Theorem 1]).
It follows from the result of [2, §3.1] mentioned above that all infinite amenable groups satisfy the conclusion of Theorem 1.1.
Bowen asked the following:
Question 1.2** ([3, Question 1]).**
Which countable groups G satisfy the conclusion of Theorem 1.1?
For example, do all strongly treeable groups (e.g., PSL(2,Z)) satisfy this conclusion?
The goal of this paper is to present a new class of examples of such groups in the following:
Theorem 1.3**.**
Let G be the free product of at most countably many, countably infinite abelian groups.
Then for any α∈FR(G,X,μ), the set [α]OE is weakly dense in A(G,X,μ).
Toward the proof of Theorem 1.3, in Section 2, we generalize Bowen’s lemma of good partition [3, Lemma 4.2]. In Section 3, we prove Theorem 1.3. In contrast with Bowen’s proof of Theorem 1.1, our proof of Theorem 1.3 depends on Foreman-Weiss’ argument in the proof of [5, Theorem 16] and the Rohlin lemma for tiles due to Ornstein-Weiss [9, II. §2, Theorem 5]. For our purpose, we slightly strengthen the conclusion of the Rohlin lemma for tiles, assuming that the acting group is abelian (Lemma 3.2).
We note that our proof of Theorem 1.3 cannot be applied to the case when G is the free product of finite groups, for example, PSL(2,Z).
Acknowledgments.
The author would like to thank his supervisor, Professor Yoshikata Kida, for his helpful comments and enormous support.
The author would also like to thank the anonymous referee for the careful reading of the paper and many helpful suggestions.
This work was supported by the Program for Leading Graduate Schools, MEXT, Japan.
2. A lemma of good partition
The aim of this section is to show Lemma 2.1, which extends [3, Lemma 4.2] to that for the free products of infinite amenable groups.
Let α∈A(G,X,μ).
For a finite subset F⊂G and a function f on X, we define the averaging function AFα[f] on X by
[TABLE]
for x∈X.
Let θ:(X,μ)→(W,ω) be the ergodic decomposition map for the action α with disintegration μ=∫Wμwdω(w).
We then set μx=μθ(x) for x∈X and also call the disintegration μ=∫Xμxdμ(x) the ergodic decomposition of μ with respect to the action α in the sequel if there is no cause of confusion.
Lemma 2.1**.**
Let G1,…,Gk be countably infinite amenable groups and define G as the free product G=G1∗⋯∗Gk. Let α∈FR(G,X,μ) and let α∣Gi denote the restriction of α to Gi for each i∈{1,…,k}.
Then for any probability measure π on a finite set A and any ε>0, there exists a Borel map ψ:X→A such that ψ∗μ=π and the following holds:
For each i∈{1,…,k}, if μ=∫Xμxidμ(x) is the ergodic decomposition of μ with respect to α∣Gi, then
[TABLE]
Proof.
The proof basically follows that of [3, Lemma 4.2].
We may assume that π is not a measure supported on a single point of A.
Fix i∈{1,…,k} and pick a Følner sequence {Fni}n∈N for Gi. Let si denote the Bernoulli action Gi↷(AGi,πGi), which is defined by (gsiy)(h)=y(hg) for g,h∈G and y∈AGi. We set Cai={y∈AGi∣y(e)=a} for a∈A. Then we have
[TABLE]
for any y∈AGi. If there is no cause of confusion, we often regard AFnisi[1Cai] as the function on AFni defined by the right-hand side of the above equation. According to the L1 version of the mean ergodic theorem (for example, see [8, Theorem 4.23]), we have
[TABLE]
for every a∈A. This implies that there exists ni∈N such that if n≥ni, then
[TABLE]
and therefore
[TABLE]
We set n0=maxi∈{1,…,k}ni.
We set Fi=Fn0i for the ease of symbols and set F=⋃i=1kFi.
We claim that there exists a Borel map ψ:X→A such that ψ∗μ=π and for each i∈{1,…,k}, if we define a map Ψi:X→AFi by Ψi(x)(g)=ψ(gαx) for x∈X and g∈Fi, then
[TABLE]
where we set M=∣A∣∣F∣.
Indeed, by [1, Theorem 1], the Bernoulli action G↷(AG,πG), denoted by s, is weakly contained in any free p.m.p. action of G on (AG,πG).
Since both (X,μ) and (AG,πG) are non-atomic standard probability spaces, there exists a measure-space isomorphism R:(X,μ)→(AG,πG). Then we see that s belongs to the weak closure of [RαR−1]MC by [4, Theorem 2.3].
This implies that there exists an automorphism S∈Aut(AG,πG) such that if Ca={y∈AG∣y(e)=a} denotes the cylindrical subset for a∈A, then
[TABLE]
for any (ag)g∈F∈AF. Let ψ:(X,μ)→(A,π) be the measure-preserving map defined by the condition ψ−1(a)=R−1S−1(Ca) for each a∈A. Then
[TABLE]
for any (ag)g∈F∈AF, which implies our claim.
We prove that the map ψ is a desired one. Fix i∈{1,…,k}. We set
[TABLE]
By inequalities (2.1) and (2.2), we have
[TABLE]
Let μ=∫Xμxidμ(x) be the ergodic decomposition of μ with respect to the action α∣Gi.
Then ∫Xμxi(Zi)dμ(x)=μ(Zi)<ε2 and hence
[TABLE]
Suppose that a point x∈X satisfies μxi(Zi)≤ε.
Note that for any a∈A and any x′∈X, the following equation holds:
[TABLE]
Therefore for any a∈A, we have ∫XAFisi[1Ca](Ψi(x′))dμxi(x′)=(ψ∗μxi)(a) and
[TABLE]
Hence
[TABLE]
3. Proof of the Main Theorem
A key ingredient of the proof of Theorem 1.3 is the Rohlin lemma for tiles.
For a countable group G, we say that a finite subset T of G is a tile for G if there exists a subset C⊂G such that the family {Tc}c∈C is pairwise disjoint and G=⋃c∈CTc. First let us recall the following fact due to Ornstein-Weiss:
Lemma 3.1** ([9, II.§2, Theorem 5]; see also [12, Theorem 3.3]).**
Let G be a countable amenable group and T a tile for G. Let G↷(X,μ) be an essentially free p.m.p. action.
Then for any ε>0, there exists a Borel subset B⊂X such that the family {tB}t∈T is pairwise disjoint and μ(⋃t∈TtB)>1−ε.
Assuming that G is abelian, we strengthen Lemma 3.1 into the following, which will be important in the proof of Theorem 1.3:
Lemma 3.2**.**
Let G be a countable abelian group and T a tile for G. Let G↷(X,μ) be an essentially free p.m.p. action.
Then for any ε>0 and any Borel subset A⊂X with μ(A)<ε/2, there exists a Borel subset B⊂X such that the family {tB}t∈T is pairwise disjoint, μ(⋃t∈TtB)>1−ε, and A∩B=∅.
Proof.
Since G is amenable and T is a tile, it follows from Lemma 3.1 that there exists a Borel subset W⊂X such that the family {tW}t∈T is pairwise disjoint and μ(⋃t∈TtW)>1−ε/2.
We choose an element t0∈T such that μ(t0W∩A)≤μ(tW∩A) for any t∈T. Then μ(t0W∩A)<ε/(2∣T∣) because otherwise the inequality μ(A)≥∑t∈Tμ(tW∩A)≥ε/2 would hold, which contradicts our assumption.
We set B=(t0W)∖A. Then the family {tB}t∈T is pairwise disjoint since G is abelian and the family {tW}t∈T is pairwise disjoint. Moreover, we have μ(B)>μ(W)−ε/(2∣T∣) and hence μ(⋃t∈TtB)=∣T∣μ(B)>∣T∣μ(W)−ε/2>1−ε.
Therefore the set B is a desired one.
∎
For finite subsets F,T⊂G and ε>0, we say that T is (F,ε)-invariant if ∣T△gT∣<ε∣T∣ for every g∈F.
We say that a countable amenable group G is monotilable if there exists a Følner sequence {Fn}n∈N for G such that each Fn is a tile for G. The following fact is briefly mentioned in [9, I.§2, p.22] and the proof of [11, Theorem 2]. We give its proof for the reader’s convenience.
Proposition 3.3**.**
Every countable abelian group is monotilable.
Proof.
Let G be a countable abelian group.
If G is finitely generated, then G is isomorphic to the group Zr⊕C for some non-negative integer r and some finite abelian group C. In this case, if we set Fn=([−n,n]r∩Zr)⊕C, then Fn is a tile for G and {Fn}n∈N is a Følner sequence for G, which proves the proposition.
Suppose that G is not finitely generated. Since G is countable, there exists an increasing sequence {Gm}m∈N of finitely generated subgroups of G such that G=⋃m∈NGm. Considering the right coset decomposition of G, we see that every tile for Gm is also a tile for G. Then for any finite subset F⊂G and any ε>0, choosing m∈N such that F⊂Gm, we have an (F,ε)-invariant tile T for Gm, which is also an (F,ε)-invariant tile for G. Thus the proposition follows.
∎
For the proof of the main result, we also need the following:
Lemma 3.4**.**
Let G1,…,Gk be countably infinite amenable groups and define G as the free product G=G1∗⋯∗Gk. Then the set of all actions α∈A(G,X,μ) such that for each i∈{1,…,k}, the restriction α∣Gi is essentially free and ergodic is weakly dense in A(G,X,μ).
Proof.
Let β∈A(G,X,μ). Let F⊂G be a finite subset, let ε>0, and let A1,…,An⊂X be Borel subsets.
We choose an N∈N and a finite subset Fi⊂Gi for each i∈{1,…,k} such that F⊂(F1∪⋯∪Fk)N.
We set L=(F1∪⋯∪Fk)N.
Since Gi is amenable, the set of all essentially free ergodic p.m.p. actions of Gi is weakly dense in A(Gi,X,μ) ([7, Proposition 13.2]). Hence, for each i∈{1,…,k}, we can choose an essentially free ergodic p.m.p. action αi of Gi on (X,μ) such that for any h∈Fi, l∈L and j∈{1,…,n}, we have
[TABLE]
Let α be the action of G on (X,μ) defined by α∣Gi=αi for each i∈{1,…,k}.
Using the inequality
[TABLE]
for g1,g2∈G and a Borel subset A⊂X, we have μ(gαAj△gβAj)<ε for any g∈F and j∈{1,…,n}, which completes the proof of the lemma.
∎
We now prove our main result for the free product of finitely many, countably infinite abelian groups:
Theorem 3.5**.**
Let G1,…,Gk be countably infinite abelian groups and define G as the free product G=G1∗⋯∗Gk. Suppose that α∈FR(G,X,μ) and β∈A(G,X,μ). Let F⊂G be a finite subset, let ε>0, and let A1,…,An⊂X be Borel subsets.
Then there exists γ∈[α]OE such that for any j∈{1,…,n} and g∈F, we have μ(gγAj△gβAj)<ε.
Therefore for any α∈FR(G,X,μ), its orbit equivalence class [α]OE is weakly dense in A(G,X,μ).
Proof.
By Lemma 3.4, we may assume that for each i∈{1,…,k}, the restriction β∣Gi is essentially free and ergodic. Moreover, using a similar argument as in the proof of Lemma 3.4, we may assume that F is the union F1∪⋯∪Fk, where Fi is a finite subset of Gi.
We take the finite set A and the Borel map ϕ:X→A such that {ϕ−1(a)}a∈A is the Borel partition of X generated by the family {gβAj}g∈F,1≤j≤n. Let ε′=ε/(24∣A∣). By applying Lemma 2.1 to the action α, the probability measure ϕ∗μ on A, and the number ε′, we obtain a Borel map ψ:X→A such that ψ∗μ=ϕ∗μ and for each i∈{1,…,k}, if μ=∫Xμxidμ(x) is the ergodic decomposition of μ with respect to α∣Gi, we have
[TABLE]
Since ψ∗μ=ϕ∗μ and (X,μ) is a non-atomic standard probability space, there exists R∈Aut(X,μ) such that R(ψ−1(a))=ϕ−1(a) for all a∈A. We set α′=RαR−1∈FR(G,X,μ) and set αi=α∣Gi, αi′=α′∣Gi and βi=β∣Gi.
We fix i∈{1,…,k} throughout Claims 3.6– 3.8.
Claim 3.6**.**
There exist Borel subsets Bαi′,Bβi⊂X and an (Fi,ε′)-invariant tile T for Gi such that μ(Bαi′)=μ(Bβi), e∈T, ∣T∣>1/ε′, and the following conditions (1)–(3) and (1’)–(3’) hold:
- (1)
The family {tαi′Bαi′}t∈T is pairwise disjoint.
2. (2)
We have μ(⋃t∈Ttαi′Bαi′)>1−8ε′.
3. (3)
For all x∈Bαi′ and a∈A, we have
[TABLE]
- (1’)
The family {tβiBβi}t∈T is pairwise disjoint.
2. (2’)
We have μ(⋃t∈TtβiBβi)>1−8ε′.
3. (3’)
For all x∈Bβi and a∈A, we have
[TABLE]
Proof.
By the proof of Proposition 3.3, there exists a Følner sequence {Dn}n∈N for Gi such that each Dn is a tile for Gi and contains the identity e.
Note that for any δ∈A(Gi,X,μ) and any Borel subset C⊂X, we have
[TABLE]
for any x∈X.
By the L1 version of the mean ergodic theorem, it follows that for each a∈A, we have
[TABLE]
where E(1ψ−1(a)) is the conditional expectation of 1ψ−1(a) onto the space of αi-invariant functions in L1(X,μ). Then there exists n1∈N such that for every n≥n1, we have
[TABLE]
Recall that μ=∫Xμxidμ(x) denotes the ergodic decomposition of μ with respect to αi. Then E(1ψ−1(a))(x)=μxi(ψ−1(a)) for any a∈A and μ-almost every x∈X. We set
[TABLE]
for n∈N. Then μ(Xnαi)>1−2ε′ for every n≥n1.
If x∈Xnαi, then for each a∈A, we have
[TABLE]
We set Xnαi′=RXnαi. For each g∈Gi and x∈X, by the definition of R and α′, we have gαix∈ψ−1(a) if and only if gαi′Rx∈ϕ−1(a). Combining this with ψ∗μ=ϕ∗μ, for all x∈Xnαi′ and a∈A, we have
[TABLE]
On the other hand, since βi is ergodic, there is n2∈N such that for every n≥n2, we have
[TABLE]
We set Xnβi={x∈X∣maxa∈A∣ADnβi[1ϕ−1(a)](x)−μ(ϕ−1(a))∣≤3ε′}.
We construct Rohlin towers for αi′ and βi. Let m be an integer such that m≥max{n1,n2} and ∣Dm∣>1/ε′. We set A=X∖(Xmαi′∩Xmβi) and set T=Dm. Since μ(Xmαi′)>1−2ε′ and μ(Xmβi)>1−2ε′, we have μ(A)<4ε′. We apply Lemma 3.2 to the tile T and the Borel subset A⊂X, and then obtain Borel subsets Bαi′,Bβi⊂X disjoint from A and satisfying conditions (1), (2), (1’) and (2’). Since Bαi′ and Bβi are disjoint from A, conditions (3) and (3’) also hold. After replacing one of Bαi′ and Bβi into its Borel subsets, we may further assume that μ(Bαi′)=μ(Bβi).
∎
Claim 3.7**.**
Let Bαi′,Bβi⊂X be the Borel subsets and T the tile for G chosen in Claim 3.6.
Then there exist finite Borel partitions {Qsαi′}s=1r and {Qsβi}s=1r of Bαi′ and Bβi, respectively, such that for each s∈{1,…,r}, the following properties hold:
- (a)
The equation μ(Qsαi′)=μ(Qsβi) holds.
2. (b)
For every t∈T, we have tαi′Qsαi′⊂ϕ−1(a) and tβiQsβi⊂ϕ−1(a′) for some a,a′∈A.
3. (c)
There exist a subset Ts⊂T and a permutation σs of T such that ∣T∖Ts∣<7ε′∣A∣∣T∣, σs(e)=e, and for any t∈Ts and any a∈A, we have
[TABLE]
Proof.
We rely on the proof of [5, Theorem 16].
Let {Plαi′}l be the finite partition of Bαi′ generated by {(t−1)αi′(tαi′Bαi′∩ϕ−1(a))}t∈T,a∈A, and {Pmβi}m be the finite partition of Bβi generated by {(t−1)βi(tβiBβi∩ϕ−1(a))}t∈T,a∈A. Since μ(Bαi′)=μ(Bβi), we can take a refinement {Qsαi′}s=1r of {Plαi′}l and a refinement {Qsβi}s=1r of {Pmβi}m such that {Qsαi′}s=1r and {Qsβi}s=1r satisfy condition (a). By the construction of {Plαi′}l and {Pmβi}m, they also satisfy condition (b).
We fix s∈{1,…,r}. We find a subset Ts of T and a permutation σs of T which satisfy condition (c). By conditions (3) and (3’) in Claim 3.6, we have
[TABLE]
for any a∈A, x∈Bαi′ and x′∈Bβi.
For each a∈A, the set {t∈T∣tαi′x∈ϕ−1(a)} is independent of x∈Qsαi′ because of part (b) of the claim, which has been established already. The same is true for βi in place of αi′.
Therefore we can choose a bijection σs:T→T such that σs(e)=e and for each a∈A, we have
[TABLE]
The condition σs(e)=e will be used in the proof of Claim 3.8. We set
[TABLE]
Then ∣T∖Ts∣≤(6ε′∣T∣+1)∣A∣<7ε′∣A∣∣T∣ since ∣T∣>1/ε′, and condition (3.1) holds for any t∈Ts and any a∈A.
∎
For an action δ∈A(G,X,μ), let [δ]SO denote the set of all actions η∈A(G,X,μ) that have the same orbits as δ, i.e., satisfy Gδx=Gηx for μ-almost every x∈X.
Claim 3.8**.**
There exists Si∈Aut(X,μ) such that the action αi′′:=Siαi′Si−1 belongs to [αi′]SO and for any g∈Fi and any j∈{1,…,n}, we have μ(gαi′′Aj△gβiAj)<ε.
Proof.
We define Si∈Aut(X,μ) by Si=σs(t)αi′(t−1)αi′ on tαi′Qsαi′ for s∈{1,…,r} and t∈T and by Si=id on X∖TBαi′. We set αi′′=Siαi′Si−1. Then αi′′∈[αi′]SO, and SiQsαi′=Qsαi′ since e∈T and σs(e)=e.
By condition (3.1), for any s∈{1,…,r}, any t∈Ts and any a∈A, we have
[TABLE]
since Sitαi′Si−1Qsαi′=σs(t)αi′Qsαi′.
Fix g∈Fi and j∈{1,…,n} arbitrarily.
We set
[TABLE]
We estimate the measures of L0, L1 and L2. We have μ(L0)<8ε′ by condition (2) in Claim 3.6.
Since the set T is (Fi,ε′)-invariant and g∈Fi, we have ∣T∖gT∣<ε′∣T∣ and hence μ(L1)<ε′∣T∣μ(Bαi′)≤ε′.
Since ∣T∖gTs∣≤∣T∖gT∣+∣gT∖gTs∣=∣T∖gT∣+∣T∖Ts∣, we have
[TABLE]
We claim that μ((gαi′′Aj△gβiAj)∖(L0∪L1∪L2))=0.
Suppose otherwise, i.e., some s∈{1,…,r} and t∈gT∩(Ts∩gTs) satisfy μ(tαi′′Qsαi′∩(gαi′′Aj△gβiAj))>0. By condition (3.2), there exists a∈A such that
[TABLE]
and there exists a′∈A such that
[TABLE]
If μ(tαi′′Qsαi′∩(gαi′′Aj∖gβiAj))>0, then by condition (3.4), we have ϕ−1(a′)⊂Aj and hence tβiQsβi⊂gβiAj. Combining this with condition (3.3), we have ϕ−1(a)⊂gβiAj and hence tαi′′Qsαi′⊂gβiAj, which contradicts the assumption μ(tαi′′Qsαi′∩(gαi′′Aj∖gβiAj))>0.
On the other hand, if μ(tαi′′Qsαi′∩(gβiAj∖gαi′′Aj))>0, then by condition (3.3), we have ϕ−1(a)⊂gβiAj and hence (g−1t)βiQsβi⊂Aj. Combining this with condition (3.4), we have ϕ−1(a′)⊂Aj and hence tαi′′Qsαi′⊂gαi′′Aj, which contradicts the assumption μ(tαi′′Qsαi′∩(gβiAj∖gαi′′Aj))>0.
Therefore we have μ(tαi′′Qsαi′∩(gαi′′Aj△gβiAj))=0 for any s∈{1,…,r} and any t∈gT∩(Ts∩gTs). As a result, we have μ((gαi′′Aj△gβiAj)∖(L0∪L1∪L2))=0 and
[TABLE]
This holds for any g∈Fi and any j∈{1,…,n}.
∎
Let γ∈A(G,X,μ) be the action defined by γ∣Gi=αi′′ for each i∈{1,…,k}. Then we have γ∈[α]OE since α′∈[α]MC and αi′′∈[αi′]SO for every i∈{1,…,k}.
Claim 3.8 shows that γ is the desired action.
This completes the proof of Theorem 3.5.
∎
Proof of Theorem 1.3.
It remains to show the theorem for a free product of (countably) infinitely many, infinite abelian groups. We show this, following [3, Corollary 2.2].
Let G=G1∗G2∗⋯ be the free product of infinite abelian groups Gi with i∈N.
Suppose that α∈FR(G,X,μ) and β∈A(G,X,μ). Let F⊂G be a finite subset, let ε>0, and let A1,…,An⊂X be Borel subsets. We set Hk=G1∗⋯∗Gk for k∈N. Pick k∈N such that F⊂Hk. By Theorem 3.5, there exists an action α′∈A(Hk,X,μ) such that α′∈[α∣Hk]OE and μ(gα′Aj△gβAj)<ε for any g∈F and j∈{1,…,n}. Since α′∈[α∣Hk]OE, there exists R∈Aut(X,μ) such that R−1α′R∈[α∣Hk]SO. We define an action γ∈A(G,X,μ) by γ∣Hk=α′ and gγ=RgαR−1 for g∈Gm with m≥k+1. Then γ is orbit equivalent to α via R and satisfies μ(gγAj△gβAj)<ε for any g∈F and j∈{1,…,n}.
∎