Bounded cohomology of transformation groups
Michael Brandenbursky, Michal Marcinkowski

TL;DR
This paper introduces a new method for constructing classes in the bounded cohomology of transformation groups of Riemannian manifolds, demonstrating infinite dimensionality of their third bounded cohomology under certain conditions.
Contribution
It presents a novel approach to bounded cohomology of transformation groups and establishes conditions for infinite dimensionality of their third bounded cohomology.
Findings
New method for constructing bounded cohomology classes.
Infinite dimensionality of third bounded cohomology under certain conditions.
Applicable to groups like $Homeo_0(M,)$, $Diff_0(M,vol)$, and $Symp_0(M,)$.
Abstract
Let be a complete connected Riemannian manifold of finite volume. In this paper we present a new method of constructing classes in bounded cohomology of transformation groups such as , and (in case is symplectic). As an application we show that, under certain conditions on , the bounded cohomology of these groups is infinite dimensional.
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.
Bounded cohomology of transformation groups
Michael Brandenbursky and Michał Marcinkowski
Ben Gurion University of the Negev, Israel
Institute of Mathematics, Polish Academy of Sciences, Wrocław, Poland
Abstract.
Let be a complete connected Riemannian manifold of finite volume. We present a new method of constructing classes in bounded cohomology of transformation groups such as , and . As an application we show that for many manifolds (in particular for hyperbolic surfaces) the bounded cohomology of these groups is infinite dimensional.
Key words and phrases:
Bounded cohomology, homeomorphism groups, diffeomorphism groups, symplectomorphism groups
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification:
20,51
Let be a complete connected Riemannian manifold with empty boundary and of finite volume, and let be the induced (by the Riemannian metric) measure on . Denote by the group of all -preserving compactly supported homeomorphisms of , and by the connected component of the identity of . For a group we denote by the bounded cohomology of . In this paper we define and study the homomorphism:
[TABLE]
Note that is the bounded cohomology of the discrete group , see Section 1 for definitions.
The map can be seen as a generalization of the construction given by Gambaudo-Ghys [14] and Polterovich [23], which in particular was extensively used in the study of several conjugacy invariant norms on transformation groups [1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 14]. This construction was restricted only to non-trivial homogeneous quasimorphisms, that is, to a certain subspace of the second bounded cohomology. In this paper we deal with bounded cohomology in all dimensions.
The map can be also defined for the exact and the reduced bounded cohomology. Moreover, another advantage of is that it has a counterpart that works for the ordinary cohomology in all dimensions. However, the case of the ordinary cohomology seems to be less natural for our construction and harder to work with.
Let us note, that every homomorphism has abelian image. Since bounded cohomology of abelian groups is trivial, the induced map is trivial. However, admits an interesting measurable cocycle (homomorphisms are particular examples of measurable cocycles), which we construct in Section 2 and use to define .
By definition preserves the measure . This property is essential, since it is known that can not factor through larger groups such as , see Remark 4.2.
We use the map in order to show non-triviality of the third bounded cohomology of many transformation groups . Below we describe three main families of examples we focus on:
- •
is a complete Riemannian manifold of finite volume, is the measure induced by the Riemannian metric and .
- •
is a complete Riemannian manifold of finite volume, is the volume form induced by the Riemannian metric and , i.e., it is the identity component of the group of compactly supported volume-preserving diffeomorphisms of .
- •
is a symplectic manifold admitting a complete Riemannian metric, and , i.e., it is the identity component of the group of compactly supported symplectomorphisms of . We think of as a subgroup of , where is induced by the volume form and it is finite.
Let be a group and let denote the reduced exact bounded cohomology of (see Section 1). Denote by the real linear dimension of and by the free group of rank .
Theorem A**.**
Let be as above and suppose that surjects onto . Then for every there exists a monomorphism
[TABLE]
where is either , or , or .
Let , where is the center of .
Theorem B**.**
Let be as above and suppose that embeds hyperbolically into , where is a finite group. Then for every
[TABLE]
where is either , or , or .
The notion of hyperbolic embedding was defined in [11]. Note that the statement of Theorem B holds if is a center-free acylindrically hyperbolic group, since such a group always admits a hyperbolically embedded , see [22, Theorem 1.2] and [11, Theorem 2.24]. Examples of acylindrically hyperbolic groups include:
- (1)
non-elementary hyperbolic groups and relatively hyperbolic groups, 2. (2)
mapping class groups of hyperbolic surfaces and outer automorphism groups of non-abelian free groups, 3. (3)
most -manifolds groups, 4. (4)
right angled Artin groups that are not direct products.
Theorems A and B imply that bounded cohomology of is non trivial in dimension , which is a new result. Indeed, due to a theorem of Soma [28], the dimension of the third reduced exact bounded cohomology of is continuum, and hence we obtain the following
Corollary**.**
If the conditions of Theorem A or Theorem B hold, then
[TABLE]
Unfortunately we are not able to obtain a similar result for , since nothing is known about the dimension of . We also would like to mention that versions of Theorem A and Theorem B hold in a more general setting, see Remark 4.1.
We construct non-trivial classes in out from non-trivial classes in . There is a nice family of elements in , that are represented by cocycles which are defined in terms of volumes of geodesic simplices in the hyperbolic -space . The elements of , which are constructed from such classes in Theorem A, have similar geometrical description, see Remark 3.3.
We would like to mention that elements of can be interpreted as bounded characteristic classes of foliated -bundles with holonomy in . Such classes were studied in the case of ordinary cohomology for groups and , see e.g., [18, 19, 20, 21, 24, 25]. The classes constructed in this paper are of entirely different nature.
Acknowledgments. Both authors were supported by SFB 1085 “Higher Invariants” funded by Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft. The second author was supported by grant Sonatina 2018/28/C/ST1/00542 funded by Narodowe Centrum Nauki.
1. Preliminaries
1.A. Bounded cohomology
Bounded cohomology was defined in a seminal paper of Gromov [15]. Let us recall basic definitions.
Let be a group. A function is called homogeneous, if for every and every we have
[TABLE]
The space of bounded -cochains is defined by
[TABLE]
Let be the ordinary coboundary operator . The bounded cohomology of , denoted , is the homology of the chain complex . Note that is a subcomplex of the space of all homogeneous cochains, hence we have a homomorphism called the comparison map. The exact bounded cohomology, denoted , is defined to be the kernel of the comparison map. A bounded class belongs to if it is the coboundary of a cochain. It is non-trivial, if it is not the coboundary of a bounded cochain.
On we have the supremum norm denoted by . This norm induces a semi-norm on , i.e., if , then
[TABLE]
Let
[TABLE]
Since is a seminorm, is a linear subspace of . The reduced bounded cohomology is defined by
[TABLE]
Note that equipped with the induced norm, again denoted by , is a Banach space. The exact reduced bounded cohomology is a Banach subspace of defined by
[TABLE]
1.B. Measurable cocycles and bounded cohomology
Let be a topological group, a discrete group and a measurable space. Suppose that acts on by measure preserving homeomorphisms. A map is called a measurable cocycle, if for every the map is measurable and for all and for almost all we have
[TABLE]
Note that if is a point, then is a homomorphism from to .
We show that a measurable cocycle induces a homomorphism on bounded cohomology
[TABLE]
To define , we first define a map by the formula:
[TABLE]
where .
The next proposition shows, that is well-defined and commutes with . Hence we can define
[TABLE]
where and .
Proposition 1.1**.**
Let be a group, and let . Then the following holds:
[TABLE]
is a -measurable function on , commutes with the coboundary , and is a homogeneous cocycle.
Proof.
The function defined by
[TABLE]
is -measurable and is continuous. Thus their composition is -measurable.
Commutativity of and follows directly from the definition of .
Let , we have:
[TABLE]
The above equalities follow from the cocycle condition, the homogeneity of and the fact that is -invariant. ∎
We conclude this section by noting that maps similar to were used in the study of ordinary continuous cohomology of Lie groups [16] and geometry of solvable and amenable groups [26, 27].
2. Definition of
In this section we construct the homomorphism
[TABLE]
2.A. The cocycle
Denote by the identity component of the group of compactly supported homeomorphisms of . Let be a basepoint and let be the subgroup of all homeomorphisms in that fix . Consider the following fiber bundle
[TABLE]
where is the evaluation map at the basepoint , i.e., for , and is the fiber of .
Let be induced by .
Proposition 2.1**.**
The image of is contained in the center of .
Proof.
Let , , be a loop in based at the identity and . Then is a loop based at represented by . Let , , be an arbitrary loop in based at . The image of the map given by contains and , thus these loops commute in . ∎
Let us consider the long exact sequence of homotopy groups of the fibration :
[TABLE]
It follows from this exact sequence that . We define
[TABLE]
to be the composition of the map
[TABLE]
and the quotient map .
Let and let be a measurable section of , i.e., for almost all . We define a measurable cocycle
[TABLE]
by the following formula
[TABLE]
It follows immediately from the definition that satisfies the cocycle condition.
2.B. Example of a section s
Let us consider the following set:
[TABLE]
The set is called the cut locus of . The Hausdorff dimension of is at most , see [17]. Thus , and . Let and let be a point-pushing map that transports to along the geodesic. We choose these point-pushing maps such that they define a continuous section . Since we regard as a measurable map it is enough to define on a full measure subset of .
Let us now take a closer look at the cocycle defined by such . Let and . The element has a simple geometrical interpretation. It can be constructed as follows: let , , be any isotopy in connecting the identity to . Let be the concatenation of the geodesic from to , the path , , and the geodesic from to . It is clear that is a loop based at . Denote its homotopy class by . The element is a coset represented by .
2.C. The definition of
Let be a measurable cocycle given by a measurable section . We define
[TABLE]
Note that the quotient map has an abelian kernel. It follows from [15, Section 3.1] that the induced map
[TABLE]
in an isometric isomorphism, hence takes the following form:
[TABLE]
Let be a subgroup of . The composition of with the restriction map gives
[TABLE]
Usually we abuse the notation and write instead of .
2.D. Standard cohomology and exact bounded cohomology
Let be the section defined in Subsection 2.B and . We show that for such , a similar map can be defined for the ordinary cohomology. Note that in the case of the ordinary cohomology the definition requires more effort then in the case of the bounded cohomology. The reason is that now cocycles are not bounded and we need to show that the integral exists.
Let , and . Consider the function . It follows from Proposition 1.1 that it is measurable. Integrability follows from Lemma 2.2 below, since every measurable function with essentially finite image is integrable. Note that Lemma 2.2 holds only for sections described in Subsection 2.B, and in general not every section induces an integrable function. We define
[TABLE]
It follows immediately from Proposition 1.1 that and commute and that is homogeneous. Hence induces
[TABLE]
Let and is induced by the inclusion. Define
[TABLE]
Let us discuss Lemma 2.2. Since in this lemma measure preservation does not play any role, it is natural to extend the cocycle to . Namely, let
[TABLE]
be defined by the same formula as , i.e,
[TABLE]
where . Let be a measurable space and be a measurable function. We say that has essentially finite image, if there exists a full measure subset , such that has a finite image in .
Lemma 2.2**.**
For every the map has essentially finite image.
Proof.
Let and be an isotopy between the identity and . The union of the supports is a compact subset of . Recall that admits a complete Riemannian metric. Hence there exists such that the geodesic ball of radius centered at contains . Note that for each lying in the full measure subset of the element is trivial in . Hence it is enough to show that the set , where belongs to the full measure subset of , is finite in . We consider as an element of .
The group admits a fragmentation property with respect to any open cover of , see [12, Corollary 1.3]. Hence the ball can be covered by finite number of balls with the following property: can be written as a product of homeomorphisms such that the support of lies in . Since is a smooth manifold, for each there exits a smooth ball , such that it is -close to and such that it is -homotopic to , see smooth approximation theorem [7, Theorem 2.11.8]. Note that satisfies the cocycle condition. It means that
[TABLE]
Hence it is enough to prove that the set where belongs to the full measure subset of is finite in .
The ball is smooth, thus it has finite diameter . The group of homeomorphisms of a ball is connected. Every path inside can be free -homotoped to a path in and hence to a path whose Riemannian length is less than the diameter . Thus can be represented by a path whose Riemannian length is less than , where is the radius of the geodesic ball which contains . By Milnor-Svarc lemma [8] the word length of is bounded in . ∎
We have the following commutative diagram
[TABLE]
It follows that can be restricted to the exact part of the bounded cohomology.
[TABLE]
Remark 2.3**.**
We would like to point out that is the space of non-trivial homogeneous quasimorphisms on [10, Chapter 2], and is the map defined by Polterovich [23].
2.E. The reduced bounded cohomology
It is straightforward to see, that is a contraction. Hence it defines a map on the reduced bounded and the reduced exact bounded cohomology.
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
3. Proofs
Let be a complete Riemannian manifold of finite volume, and is either or . If, in addition is a symplectic manifold, then may also be . Throughout this section we consider the map induced by , where is the section defined in Subsection 2.B.
First, let us present an outline of both proofs. Assumptions of Theorem A and Theorem B imply that there is an embedding such that in both cases is surjective. Indeed, in Theorem A it is straightforward, and in Theorem B we use the result presented in [13], which in particular, implies that if is hyperbolically embedded in , then one can extend a class in to a class in . That is why we require to be hyperbolically embedded. Given an element , we look at the restriction , where the group is carefully embedded in . The construction of the embedding is made in a way such that there is a non-zero real number so that and are close in the norm. It follows that the norm of is positive whenever the norm of is positive.
Let be an embedding and let and generate . A loop in based at represents in a natural way an element of (as the -coset of the homotopy class of ). If we assume that and are represented by simple loops based at . In the next lemma we construct a family of maps such that the diagram
[TABLE]
is commutative up to scaling and a small error controlled by .
Lemma 3.1**.**
Assume that , and are as above. Then there exists a family of homomorphisms , indexed by , satisfying the following property: there exists a non-zero real number , such that for every class we have
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let . Denote by the dimensional closed unit ball, and let . We fix and define an isotopy by
[TABLE]
where , and is a smooth function such that for and . We call the finger-pushing isotopy and the finger-pushing map. Note that and that fix point-wise the boundary of and fix all points for which .
Let be the product of the standard euclidean Riemannian metrics on and . By the theorem of Fubini, the measure induced by is preserved by the map for every and every . In case , we similarly construct the finger-pushing isotopy , which preserves the standard symplectic form on . The precise construction is presented in [2, proof of Theorem 1.3].
Recall that are generators of . We represent and by embedded loops and in which are based at and intersect only at . Note that if this is our assumption, and if then any two elements of may be represented in this way. Let be a closed tubular neighborhood of and let be the isotopy defined by pulling-back via and extending it by the identity outside . If , or , then the Moser trick allows us to choose such that preserves the volume form, and if , then the Moser trick allows us to choose such that preserves the symplectic form . Let
[TABLE]
Note that fixes point-wise . In the same way we define , and . The homomorphism is given by:
[TABLE]
Now we show that there exists a non-zero real number such that for every we have
[TABLE]
To simplify the notation, we identify with its image . First we consider the values of on elements of the form , where . Let be the retraction onto the subgroup generated by that sends to the trivial element. Similarly, we define .
\bullet$$z$$A_{\epsilon}$$A^{a}_{\epsilon}$$A^{b}_{\epsilon}$$\alpha$$\beta$$B_{\epsilon}$$B_{\epsilon}
From the description of in Subsection 2.B, we see that if belongs to the set , then is conjugated to . Similarly if , then is conjugated to and if , then is conjugated to . If , then we do not have any control over the loops we get, but this case is negligible if is small enough. To sum up, we have:
[TABLE]
for some . Let and . Without loss of generality, we assume that . Let . Denote
[TABLE]
Let . We have:
[TABLE]
Denote , where . Thus we obtain
[TABLE]
Recall that conjugation acts trivially on the cohomology, which gives us . Both and are Banach spaces and is a continuous linear map. Hence
[TABLE]
Let be the restriction of to the subgroup generated by the generator . The function equals to the pull-back of the cocycle , namely:
[TABLE]
Moreover, since is trivial, the cocycle defines the trivial class in . It follows that
[TABLE]
The same holds for the integral over . Let
[TABLE]
Note that is a cocycle on . Now we can write:
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Moreover, and . It follows that:
[TABLE]
Hence ∎
Remark 3.2**.**
In what follows we apply Lemma 3.1 for injective . However, Lemma 3.1 holds for every . Injectivity was used only to simplify the notation, when we identified with its image .
Theorem A**.**
Let be a surjective homomorphism. We have
[TABLE]
Proof.
First note that since is onto, the center of is mapped into the center of , hence is trivial on . It means, that induces a surjective homomorphism .
Recall that . If , then we take to be any section of . If , then it is easy to find two embedded loops based at and intersecting only at , such that they generate and there is a retraction . If this is the case, we substitute by this retraction (note that in this case ).
Let be a section of this new and let . We show that is an embedding. The section satisfies the assumptions of Lemma 3.1. Let be the family of homomorphisms from Lemma 3.1. We have
[TABLE]
Note that . Suppose that is a non-trivial class. In the reduced cohomology it means that . Let . We have . Since , then for some small we have . It follows that
[TABLE]
Thus is an embedding. ∎
Remark 3.3**.**
*One can define a non-trivial class in by choosing an isometric action of on the -dimensional hyperbolic space and defining a cocycle to be the signed volume of the geodesic simplex , where . For some , the class defined by has positive norm, see [28]. The classes in which are constructed in Theorem A have similar geometrical interpretation. More precisely, the value of is the average value of the signed volumes of over . Since every takes essentially finitely many values, this average is a finite sum of weighted signed volumes of certain simplices in . *
Theorem B**.**
Let be a finite group and be a hyperbolic embedding. Then
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let . In this case if embeds in , then one can find a retraction . Thus if , the statement follows from Theorem A.
Now suppose that , and let be the homomorphism restricted to . Since , and may be represented by based loops whose intersection is the base-point . Let be the family of maps constructed in Lemma 3.1. We have
[TABLE]
Let us show that . There is a non-zero real number such that for every we have
[TABLE]
Let be such that . Then
[TABLE]
Hence and . Thus and
[TABLE]
Recall that is a hyperbolic embedding. It follows from [13] that the map is surjective. Using the identification we can write that . Thus is surjective and . ∎
4. Questions and final remarks
Remark 4.1**.**
Versions of Theorem A and Theorem B, where is substituted by hold in a more general setting. Namely, they hold for a topological manifold equipped with a regular finite Borel measure which is positive on open sets and zero on nowhere dense sets, and is the identity component of the group of measure-preserving homeomorphisms of . One can also take to be the identity component of the group of volume-preserving diffeomorphisms, or symplectomorphisms of .
Remark 4.2**.**
The map does not factor through (note that from this it follows that the map as well does not factor through ). Indeed, if would factor through , one could construct a non-trivial homogeneous quasimorphisms on , which leads to a contradiction, since for many the group does not admit such quasimorphisms. More precisely, let be a closed connected hyperbolic -manifold. Recall that is the space of homogeneous quasimorphisms on . Since is non-elementary hyperbolic, we have and it follows from [9, Theorem 1.11] that . It is easy to see that
[TABLE]
is an embedding (in the case when is a surface, see [5, Theorem 2.5] for the proof), and hence cannot factor through the trivial group.
Remark 4.3**.**
In this paper we assume that homeomorphisms are isotopic to the identity. This assumption can be dropped if we substitute the group by the mapping class group (such approach was used in [5] for surfaces). Indeed, let
[TABLE]
be the quotient map, where and let be the group of homeomorphisms of fixing . Consider the cocycle
[TABLE]
given by . This cocycle induces the map
[TABLE]
The disadvantage of this approach is that almost nothing is known about when the dimension of is greater than .
We finish this section with a question. Let be a compact Riemannian manifold with negative sectional curvature, and let act by deck-transformations on the universal cover . It is known that there is a common bound for volumes of geodesic simplices in , thus one can define a non-trivial class in a similar way as in Remark 3.3.
Question 4.4**.**
Is the class non-trivial?
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] Michael Brandenbursky. Bi-invariant metrics and quasi-morphisms on groups of Hamiltonian diffeomorphisms of surfaces. Internat. J. Math. , 26(9):1550066, 29 pages, 2015.
- 2[2] Michael Brandenbursky and Jarek K ‘ e dra. Fragmentation norm and relative quasimorphisms. To appear in Proc. Amer. Math. Soc.
- 3[3] Michael Brandenbursky and Jarek K ‘ e dra. On the autonomous metric on the group of area-preserving diffeomorphisms of the 2-disc. Algebr. Geom. Topol. , 13(2):795–816, 2013.
- 4[4] Michael Brandenbursky, Jarek K ‘ e dra, and Egor Shelukhin. On the autonomous norm on the group of Hamiltonian diffeomorphisms of the torus. Commun. Contemp. Math. , 20(2):1750042, 27, 2018.
- 5[5] Michael Brandenbursky and Michał Marcinkowski. Entropy and quasimorphisms. J. Mod. Dyn. , 15:143–163, 2019.
- 6[6] Michael Brandenbursky and Egor Shelukhin. On the L p superscript 𝐿 𝑝 L^{p} -geometry of autonomous Hamiltonian diffeomorphisms of surfaces. Math. Res. Lett. , 22(5):1275–1294, 2015.
- 7[7] Glen E. Bredon. Topology and geometry , volume 139 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics . Springer-Verlag, New York, 1993.
- 8[8] Martin R. Bridson and André Haefliger. Metric spaces of non-positive curvature , volume 319 of Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften [Fundamental Principles of Mathematical Sciences] . Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1999.
