A criterion for nilpotency of a finite group by the sum of element orders
Marius T\u{a}rn\u{a}uceanu

TL;DR
This paper establishes a criterion based on the sum of element orders to determine when a finite group is nilpotent, providing a specific inequality and characterizing the equality case.
Contribution
It introduces a new criterion for nilpotency in finite groups using the sum of element orders and characterizes the equality case explicitly.
Findings
If rac{13}{21}rac{13}{21} ext{ of the sum of element orders exceeds a threshold, the group is nilpotent.
Equality holds iff the group is isomorphic to } S_3 imes C_m ext{ with specific conditions on } m.
The result offers new insights into the structure of finite groups via element order sums.
Abstract
Denote the sum of element orders in a finite group by and let denote the cyclic group of order . In this paper, we prove that if and , then is nilpotent. Moreover, we have if and only if with and . Two interesting consequences of this result are also presented.
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.
A criterion for nilpotency of a finite group by the sum of element orders
Marius Tărnăuceanu
(March 23, 2019)
Abstract
Denote the sum of element orders in a finite group by and let denote the cyclic group of order . In this paper, we prove that if and , then is nilpotent. Moreover, we have if and only if with and . Two interesting consequences of this result are also presented.
MSC2000 : Primary 20D60; Secondary 20D15, 20F18.
Key words : group element orders, nilpotent groups.
1 Introduction
Given a finite group , we consider the functions
[TABLE]
where denotes the order of . In [1], H. Amiri, S.M. Jafarian Amiri and I.M. Isaacs proved the following theorem:
Theorem A**.**
If is a finite group, then
[TABLE]
and we have equality if and only if is cyclic.
In other words, the cyclic group is the unique group of order which attains the maximal value of among groups of order .
Since then many authors have studied the function and its relations with the structure of (see e.g. [2]-[10]). In the papers [4] and [10] M. Amiri and S.M. Jafarian Amiri, and, independently, R. Shen, G. Chen and C. Wu started the investigation of groups with the second largest value of the sum of element orders. M. Herzog, P. Longobardi and M. Maj [6] determined the exact upper bound for for non-cyclic groups of order :
Theorem B**.**
If is a finite non-cylic group and is the least prime divisor of the order of , then
[TABLE]
and the equality holds if and only if with and .
Note that the above function is strictly decreasing on and consequently the largest value of is , which is attained for with odd. Also, for any prime we have
[TABLE]
By using the sum of element orders, several criteria for solvability of finite groups have been also determined (see e.g. [5, 7]). Recall here the following theorem of M. Baniasad Asad and B. Khosravi [5]:
Theorem C**.**
If for a finite group we have
[TABLE]
then it is solvable.
Note that the groups with satisfy .
Finally, we recall a recent result of M. Herzog, P. Longobardi and M. Maj [8], which gives an exact upper bound for for non-cyclic groups of order with odd:
Theorem D**.**
If is a non-cyclic group of order with odd, then
[TABLE]
and the equality holds if and only if with .
Our main result is the following theorem.
Theorem 1.1**.**
If and a finite group and
[TABLE]
then is nilpotent. Moreover, we have if and only if with .
Using Theorem 1.1 and Lemma 2.2, we are able to determine the largest four values of and the groups for which they are attained.
Corollary 1.2**.**
Let be a finite group satisfying . Then , and one of the following holds:
- a)
, where is odd;
- b)
, where is odd;
- c)
* is cyclic.*
In other words, is the fourth largest value of on the class of finite groups.
A generalization of Theorem D can be also inferred from Theorem 1.1.
Corollary 1.3**.**
If is a non-cyclic group of order with odd and , then
[TABLE]
and the equality holds if and only if with .
For the proof of Theorem 1.1, we need some preliminary results from the papers [1] and [6].
Lemma 1.4**.**
The following statements hold:
(([6], Lemma 2.2(3))* is multiplicative, that is if , where are subgroups of satisfying , then ; note that this implies that is also multiplicative;*
- 2)
(([6], Lemma 2.9(1))* ;*
- 3)
(([6], Proof of Lemma 2.9(2))* If be a positive integer larger than , with the largest prime divisor and the smallest prime divisor , then ;*
- 4)
(([1], Corollary B)* If is a cyclic normal Sylow subgroup of then , with equality if and only if is central in ;*
- 5)
(([6], Lemma 2.2(5))* If , where is a cyclic -group, and , then .*
Inspired by the above results, we came up with the following conjecture.
Conjecture 1.5**.**
If is a finite group and
[TABLE]
then is supersolvable. Moreover, we have if and only if with .
2 Proofs of the main results
Throughout this section, given a finite group we will denote by and the smallest and the largest prime divisor of , respectively.
Lemma 2.1**.**
Let be a finite group. If and is not a -group, then it has a cyclic normal Sylow -subgroup, where either or .
Proof.
If is cyclic, we are done. If is not cyclic, then the conditions and (1) imply . Also, we have since is not a -group. By Lemma 1.4, 3), it follows that
[TABLE]
and so there exists with , i.e.
[TABLE]
Suppose first that . Then and thus contains a cyclic Sylow -subgroup of . Since , it follows that is normal in , as desired.
Next assume that . Then and thus . If , then contains a cyclic normal Sylow -subgroup of , as above. If , then contains a cyclic Sylow -subgroup of , and we have . Therefore either , i.e. , or . In the latter case, assume that there exists with . Then will contain a cyclic normal Sylow -subgroup of , and we are done. Assume now that , for all , and put with . Using Lemma 1.4, 1) and 2), one obtains
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
and consequently
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
a contradiction. ∎
In the following lemma we determine all finite nilpotent groups satisfying .
Lemma 2.2**.**
Let be a finite group. If and is nilpotent, then one of the following holds:
- a)
, where is odd;
- b)
, where is odd;
- c)
* is cyclic.*
Proof.
Suppose that is not cyclic. As in the proof of Lemma 2.1, we have again . Let be the decomposition of as a product of prime factors, where , and . Since is nilpotent, it can be written as the direct product of its Sylow -subgroups
[TABLE]
By Lemma 1.4, 1), it follows that
[TABLE]
If there is such that is not cyclic, then (1) gives
[TABLE]
contradicting (2). So, we have
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
This leads to
[TABLE]
and so there exists with , i.e.
[TABLE]
Clearly, this implies that , i.e. possesses a cyclic maximal subgroup. Using Theorem 4.1 of [11], II, we infer that either is abelian of type , , or non-abelian of one of the following types:
, ;
- -
;
- -
;
- -
, .
If , then
[TABLE]
while if is non-abelian, then we get:
;
- -
;
- -
, i.e. ;
- -
.
This completes the proof. ∎
We also state an elementary lemma which will be useful to us in the sequel.
Lemma 2.3**.**
Let be an odd prime and be a cyclic -group of order . Then
[TABLE]
and the equality occurs if and only if and .
We are now able to prove our main result.
Proof of Theorem 1.1. We will proceed by induction on . If is cyclic, we are done. If is not cyclic, then and (1) lead to . Also, we can assume that , i.e. is not a -group. Then has a cyclic normal Sylow -subgroup , where either or , by Lemma 2.1. Now Lemma 1.4, 4), implies that
[TABLE]
and so is nilpotent by the inductive hypothesis.
If , then has a normal -complement and we infer that
[TABLE]
is nilpotent, as desired.
Next assume that . Since , Theorem C shows that is solvable111See Theorem 6 of [6] for an alternative argument., and consequently it has a -complement . Also, since is nilpotent and , by Lemma 2.2 it follows that
[TABLE]
where is odd and is isomorphic with , or . On the other hand, by Lemma 1.4, 5), we get
[TABLE]
and so
[TABLE]
Obviously, if the semidirect product is trivial, then is nilpotent. In what follows, we will prove that if the semidirect product is non-trivial, then , contradicting our hypothesis.
Since is a proper subgroup of , one obtains
[TABLE]
By looking to the structure of maximal subgroups of , we are able to compute the right side of (4). We distinguish the following three cases:
- Case 1.
We have and . Then
[TABLE]
and (3) leads to
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
- Case 2.
We have and . Then
[TABLE]
and (3) leads to
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
- Case 3.
We have and . Then
[TABLE]
and (3) leads to
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Finally, we remark that we have if and only if and , i.e.
[TABLE]
The proof of Theorem 1.1 is now complete.∎
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] H. Amiri, S.M. Jafarian Amiri, I.M. Isaacs, Sums of element orders in finite groups , Comm. Algebra 37 (2009), 2978-2980.
- 2[2] H. Amiri, S.M. Jafarian Amiri, Sums of element orders on finite groups of the same order , J. Algebra Appl. 10 (2) (2011), 187-190.
- 3[3] S.M. Jafarian Amiri, Second maximum sum of element orders on finite nilpotent groups , Comm. Algebra 41 (6) (2013), 2055-2059.
- 4[4] S.M. Jafarian Amiri, M. Amiri, Second maximum sum of element orders on finite groups , J. Pure Appl. Algebra 218 (3) (2014), 531-539.
- 5[5] M. Baniasad Asad, B. Khosravi, A criterion for solvability of a finite group by the sum of element orders , J. Algebra 516 (2018), 115-124.
- 6[6] M. Herzog, P. Longobardi, M. Maj, An exact upper bound for sums of element orders in non-cyclic finite groups , J. Pure Appl. Algebra 222 (7) (2018), 1628-1642.
- 7[7] M. Herzog, P. Longobardi, M. Maj, Two new criteria for solvability of finite groups in finite groups , J. Algebra 511 (2018), 215-226.
- 8[8] M. Herzog, P. Longobardi, M. Maj, Sums of element orders in groups of order 2 m 2 𝑚 2m with m 𝑚 m odd , to appear in Comm. Algebra.
