On the multiple holomorph of groups of squarefree or odd prime power order
Cindy Tsang

TL;DR
This paper investigates the structure of the quotient group T(G) related to the holomorph of finite groups, showing it is elementary 2-abelian for squarefree order groups and not a 2-group for certain p-groups of small nilpotency class.
Contribution
It proves T(G) is elementary 2-abelian for all finite groups of squarefree order and identifies cases where T(G) is not a 2-group among certain p-groups.
Findings
T(G) is elementary 2-abelian for all finite squarefree order groups.
T(G) is not a 2-group for some p-groups with nilpotency class at most p-1.
Results extend understanding of the multiple holomorph structure for specific group classes.
Abstract
Let be a group and write for its symmetric group. Define to be the holomorph of , regarded as a subgroup of , and let denote its normalizer. The quotient has been computed for various families of groups , and in most of the known cases, it turns out to be elementary -abelian, except for two groups of order and some groups of odd prime power order and nilpotency class two. In this paper, we shall show that is elementary -abelian for all finite groups of squarefree order, and that is not a -group for certain finite -groups of nilpotency class at most .
| Family | Number of groups | |||
| No | ||||
| No | ||||
| No | ||||
| Yes | ||||
| No | ||||
| No |
| Family | Number of groups | |||
| No | ||||
| No | ||||
| No | ||||
| Yes | ||||
| No | ||||
| No | ||||
| No | ||||
| No | ||||
| No | ||||
| No | ||||
| No | ||||
| No | ||||
| No | ||||
| No | ||||
| No | ||||
| Yes | ||||
| Yes | ||||
| No | ||||
| Yes | ||||
| Yes | ||||
| No | ||||
| No | ||||
| No | ||||
| No | ||||
| Yes | ||||
| No | ||||
| No | ||||
| No | ||||
| No | ||||
| No | ||||
| No | ||||
| No | ||||
| Yes | ||||
| Yes |
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.
On the multiple holomorph of groups
of squarefree or odd prime power order
Cindy (Sin Yi) Tsang
School of Mathematics (Zhuhai), Sun Yat-Sen University
[email protected] http://sites.google.com/site/cindysinyitsang/
Abstract.
Let be a group and write for its symmetric group. Define to be the holomorph of , regarded as a subgroup of , and let denote its normalizer. The quotient has been computed for various families of groups , and in most of the known cases, it turns out to be elementary -abelian, except for two groups of order and some groups of odd prime power order and nilpotency class two. In this paper, we shall show that is elementary -abelian for all finite groups of squarefree order, and that is not a -group for certain finite -groups of nilpotency class at most .
Contents
1. Introduction
Let be a group and write for its symmetric group. Recall that a subgroup of is said to be regular if the map
[TABLE]
is bijective, or equivalently, if the -action on is both transitive and free. For example, both and are regular subgroups of , where
[TABLE]
denote the left and right regular representations of , respectively. Further, recall that the holomorph of is defined to be
[TABLE]
Alternatively, it is not hard to verify that
[TABLE]
Then, it seems natural to ask whether has other regular subgroups whose normalizer is also equal to . This problem was first considered by G. A. Miller [15]. More specifically, put
[TABLE]
In [15], he defined the multiple holomorph of to be
[TABLE]
which clearly acts on via conjugation, and he showed that this action is transitive. Hence, the quotient group
[TABLE]
acts regularly on and so has the same cardinality as . In fact, we have
[TABLE]
and in the case that is finite, we also have
[TABLE]
These facts are easy to show, and a proof may be found in [20, Section 2] or [13, Section 1], for example. Let us mention in passing that regular subgroups of the holomorph, not just the ones which are normal, have close connections with Hopf-Galois structures on field extensions and set-theoretic solutions to the Yang-Baxter equation; see [8, Chapter 2] and [9].
The study of did not attract much attention initially other than [15] and [14]. But recently, T. Kohl, who was originally interested in Hopf-Galois structures, revitalized this topic of research in [13]. His work then motivated the calculation of for other groups . Note that for non-abelian , we have because the element is non-trivial, where is the involution permutation on . It turns out that is elementary -abelian (including the trivial group) in all of the following five cases.
- •
finitely generated abelian groups ; see [15, 14, 5].
- •
finite dihedral groups of order at least ; see [13].
- •
finite dicyclic groups of order at least ; see [13].
- •
finite perfect groups with trivial center; see [6].
- •
finite quasisimple or almost simple groups ; see [20].
Nevertheless, there are examples of groups for which is not elementary -abelian. In [13, Section 3], it was noted that is non-abelian (but still a -group) for two groups of order . Also, in [7, Proposition 3.1], it was shown that is not even a -group for a large subfamily of
- •
finite groups of odd prime power order and nilpotency class two.
In this paper, we shall consider two new families of finite groups . First, in Section 2, we shall show that is elementary -abelian for
- •
finite groups of squarefree order.
This was motivated by [4], in which all cyclic regular subgroups of for of squarefree order were enumerated, and these correspond to Hopf-Galois structures on cyclic field extensions of squarefree degree. Then, in Section 3, we shall show that is not a -group for a subfamily of
- •
finite -groups of nilpotency class at most .
We shall state the precise statements of our results in Theorems 2.1 and 3.1 below. We chose not to include them here because more notation would have to be introduced.
In view of the known results so far, it seems natural to ask whether there is a finite non-nilpotent group for which is not elementary -abelian or not even a -group. By calculating the size of the set in (1.4), which equals the order of , we have checked in Magma [3] that such a group does exist. However, among the non-nilpotent groups of order at most , the quotient is not a -group only for [2], where
[TABLE]
and they are all solvable. Let us end with the following question.
Question 1.1**.**
Is a -group for all finite insolvable groups ?
It would also be interesting to find out whether is a -group for most finite solvable (non-nilpotent) groups , and if so, to give an explanation.
2. Groups of squarefree order
Throughout this section, let denote a finite group of squarefree order. It is known, by [16, Lemma 3.5], that admits a presentation
[TABLE]
where , and is coprime to whose multiplicative order mod is equal to . Note that , which is squarefree by assumption, so
[TABLE]
Following [4, Proposition 3.5], let us write
[TABLE]
Observe that by definition and the fact that , we have
[TABLE]
For each divisor of , define to be the multiplicative order of mod . Since and divides , we have . Also, let us define
[TABLE]
Note that this set depends only on the values of and . We shall prove:
Theorem 2.1**.**
The group is elementary -abelian of order .
Remark 2.2*.*
The number is indeed a power of . To see why, define a graph as follows.
- •
The vertex set of is the set of distinct prime factors of .
- •
Two vertices are joined by an edge if and only if .
Since is squarefree, for any divisor of , we have . Hence, a pair with lies in if and only if for each connected component of , the primes in either all divide or all divide . We then deduce that , where is the number of connected components in .
To prove Theorem 2.1, recall that has the same size as . Below, we shall use (1.4) to give a description of the elements of in terms of certain congruence conditions.
2.1. Preliminaries
Let denote the set of integers coprime to and write for Euler’s totient function.
Lemma 2.3**.**
We have
[TABLE]
where and are the automorphisms on determined by
[TABLE]
Moreover, we have the relations
[TABLE]
Proof.
See the proof of [4, Lemma 4.1]. ∎
It is easy to see that we have the relations
[TABLE]
where is to be interpreted as the multiplicative inverse of mod for negative. Following [4, (5)], for and , let us define
[TABLE]
with the empty sum representing zero. Then, as in [4, (6)], we have
[TABLE]
Using this, a simple induction on shows that
[TABLE]
We shall frequently use above relations without referring to them explicitly. In what follows, consider an arbitrary element
[TABLE]
of . The next lemma is essentially [4, Lemma 4.2].
Lemma 2.4**.**
For any , we have
[TABLE]
where we define
[TABLE]
Proof.
We shall use induction. The case is clear. Suppose now that the claim holds for . Then, we have
[TABLE]
Plainly, we have , and the exponent of simplifies to
[TABLE]
which is clearly equal to . This proves the claim. ∎
Lemma 2.5**.**
The element has order and satisfies
[TABLE]
precisely when
[TABLE]
Proof.
We may assume (mod ), for otherwise by Lemma 2.4 because . In this case, for any , we have
[TABLE]
Suppose that has order and (2.1) holds. For any , we then have
[TABLE]
This clearly yields . The above also implies that (mod ). To see why, consider the set
[TABLE]
where denotes the multiplicative order of mod . Also, let denote the multiplicative order of mod , and note that (mod ) for . Since is squarefree, we then deduce that
[TABLE]
It follows from (2.2) that
[TABLE]
But we also know that
[TABLE]
This leads to a contradiction unless is empty. It follows that for all prime divisors of . Since is squarefree, this implies that (mod ), as claimed. The converse is easily verified. ∎
Lemma 2.6**.**
Assume that is coprime to . Then, the element has order precisely when
[TABLE]
Proof.
By Lemma 2.4, the stated conditions are equivalent to . In this case, the order of is exactly because for any , the exponent of in the expression for in Lemma 2.4 is , and is coprime to .∎
2.2. Congruence criteria
In this subsection, let us fix two elements
[TABLE]
of . In order to compute , we shall determine exactly when
[TABLE]
are all satisfied. By Lemma 2.5, we may and shall assume that
[TABLE]
Then, for any , using Lemma 2.4, we compute that
[TABLE]
This expression shall be used repeatedly in the subsequent calculations.
Lemma 2.7**.**
We have precisely when
[TABLE]
Proof.
On the one hand, we have
[TABLE]
On the other hand, from (2.4) and the fact that , we have
[TABLE]
The claim then follows by equating the exponents of and . ∎
Lemma 2.8**.**
Assume that has order . Then, we have
[TABLE]
precisely when
[TABLE]
Proof.
For any , from (2.4) we know that
[TABLE]
Thus, for (2.5) to hold, necessarily . In this case, since has order , the equality (2.5) holds if and only if for each , the set
[TABLE]
runs over all residue classes mod , which is equivalent to the coefficient of being invertible mod . This proves the claim. ∎
Lemma 2.9**.**
Assume that is coprime to , that has order , and that
[TABLE]
Then, we have is normal in precisely when the conditions
- (1)
There exists such that
[TABLE] 2. (2)
There exists such that
[TABLE] 3. (3)
There exists such that
[TABLE] 4. (4)
There exists such that
[TABLE] 5. (5)
For every , there exists such that
[TABLE]
are all satisfied. Here, the are independent of each other.
Proof.
By (2.6), the subgroup is normal in if and only if for each in some set of generators of , we have
[TABLE]
Now, clearly is generated by , and for . Since
[TABLE]
these three equations impose no condition. Next, we compute that
[TABLE]
as well as that
[TABLE]
Since , by comparing the exponents of , we see from (2.4) that
[TABLE]
necessarily. Since has order , we may assume that these are equalities in . Notice that and . Hence, the claim now follows by comparing the exponents of and in the above with those in (2.4). ∎
Let us make a useful observation. Given a prime divisor of , recall that (mod ) and that denotes the multiplicative order of mod , so in particular (mod ). For , we then have the relation
[TABLE]
We are now ready to give criteria for the conditions in (2.3) to all hold.
Proposition 2.10**.**
The five conditions in simultaneously hold precisely when the conditions
- (a)
We have and . 2. (b)
*We have and . * 3. (c)
For each prime and , we have
[TABLE] 4. (d)
For each prime and , we have
[TABLE]
are all satisfied.
Proof.
First, suppose that all of the conditions in (2.3) hold.
- (a)
By Lemmas 2.5 and 2.8, we have and . 2. (b)
Since (mod ), we have have (mod ) by Lemma 2.7. From Lemma 2.6, we then see that
[TABLE]
This yields (mod ) because is coprime to and hence to . 3. (c)
For each prime and , we have (mod ) by Lemma 2.9(4). From Lemma 2.6, we then see that
[TABLE]
This yields (mod ) because is coprime to and hence to . By Lemma 2.7, we also have
[TABLE]
which implies that (mod ). 4. (d)
For each prime and , we have (mod ) by Lemma 2.7. From Lemma 2.9(2), we then deduce that
[TABLE]
which implies that (mod ). The other two congruences follow directly from Lemma 2.9(1),(3).
We have thus shown that (a) through (d) are all satisfied.
Conversely, suppose that (a) through (d) are all satisfied. Then, clearly has order by Lemma 2.5. Hence, it remains to verify that the conditions in Lemmas 2.6, 2.7, 2.8, and 2.9 hold. Since is squarefree, it suffices to check them mod as well as mod for each prime divisor of .
- (i)
Lemma 2.6: It is obvious that
[TABLE]
Since (mod ), we also clearly have
[TABLE]
For , using (2.7), for any we compute that
[TABLE]
Since is coprime to , we have (mod ), and the above yields
[TABLE]
We have thus shown that has order . 2. (ii)
Lemma 2.7: The conditions there clearly hold so . 3. (iii)
Lemma 2.8: For any , observe that
[TABLE]
Since is coprime to , it follows that the above expression on the left is coprime to . We have thus shown that is regular. 4. (iv)
Lemma 2.9: By (a) and (iii) above, there exist such that
[TABLE]
To exhibit the existence of claimed in Lemma 2.9, simply take
[TABLE]
In each part of Lemma 2.9, the first congruence then clearly holds, and for , the second congruence also holds. For , observe that
[TABLE]
and so the second congruence holds in parts (1), (2), and (3). Also, note that by (iii) above, we have (mod ). We then compute that
[TABLE]
which verifies the second congruence in part (4), and similarly that
[TABLE]
which verifies the second congruence in part (5) since is coprime to . We have thus shown that is normal in .
This completes the proof of the proposition. ∎
In order to compute the actual group structure of , we shall also need to understand the map defined in (1.1).
Proposition 2.11**.**
Assume that the conditions to in Proposition 2.10 are all satisfied. Then, for any , we have
[TABLE]
where we define
[TABLE]
and is such that . Moreover, we have
[TABLE]
Proof.
The first claim follows from (2.4). The congruence mod is also clear since (mod ) and (mod ). For a prime , recall that
[TABLE]
For , we have (mod ), and so the claim is clear. As for , observe that
[TABLE]
by (iii) and (i) in the proof of Proposition 2.10. Since (mod ) in this case, we deduce that
[TABLE]
as claimed. This proves the proposition. ∎
2.3. Proof of Theorem 2.1
Let us first make a definition.
Definition 2.12**.**
Given a tuple of integers, we shall say that is admissible if the conditions (a) to (d) in Proposition 2.10 are all satisfied. The admissibility of depends only on its class mod , where
[TABLE]
In the case that is admissible, define
[TABLE]
which satisfy (2.3) by Proposition 2.10. Further, define
[TABLE]
An explicit description of was given in Proposition 2.11 and the above is only to remove the negative sign in the exponent of for convenience.
Recall that has the same size as . By (1.4), we plainly have
[TABLE]
From Lemma 2.3 and Proposition 2.10, we then deduce that
[TABLE]
We shall now compute this number.
Proof for the order.
Consider a pair with . Below, let be an arbitrary prime divisor of , and we shall count the admissible tuples
[TABLE]
under the restriction that
[TABLE]
Since is squarefree, this is equivalent to
[TABLE]
Since is squarefree and , there exists satisfying
[TABLE]
exactly when . Hence, for , we get no admissible tuple satisfying (2.9). So let us assume that . Once we impose (2.9), in order for to satisfy the conditions in Proposition 2.10, the classes mod and mod are uniquely determined. Note that mod , we have
- •
choices of ,
- •
choice of .
Similarly, mod for , we have
- •
choice of and ,
- •
choices of ,
- •
choices of .
Finally, mod for , we have
- •
choices of and determines uniquely,
- •
choices of and determines uniquely,
because (mod ). It follows that mod , we have
[TABLE]
admissible tuples satisfying (2.9). Therefore, in total, we have admissible tuples without any restriction, so indeed .∎
A proof of (1.3) was given in [20, Section 2] and the key is that isomorphic regular subgroups of are always conjugates. In fact, by the proof of [20, Lemma 2.1], if and are isomorphic regular subgroups of , via the isomorphism say, then
[TABLE]
For any admissible tuple , by taking
[TABLE]
to be the natural isomorphism, we see that
[TABLE]
Note that and . By (1.3), we then have
[TABLE]
We shall now compute the structure of .
Proof for the structure.
It suffices to show that the exponent of divides two because any group of exponent two is necessarily abelian. Let
[TABLE]
be an admissible tuple and we need to show that . Note that for any , by Proposition 2.11, we have
[TABLE]
where the exponent of is simply because (mod ) by admissibility. Here is as in (2.8) and may be computed explicitly as follows.
First, it is clear that we have
[TABLE]
Next, let denote an arbitrary prime divisor of . Recall that
[TABLE]
by admissibility. Without loss of generality, let us assume that .
Using Proposition 2.11 and (2.7), we compute that
[TABLE] 2.
Using Proposition 2.11, we compute that
[TABLE]
Since is squarefree, we then deduce that
[TABLE]
where are such that
[TABLE]
It follows that
[TABLE]
This shows that so is indeed elementary -abelian. ∎
3. Groups of odd prime power order
Throughout this section, let denote a finite group of order a power of an odd prime , and of nilpotency class . Write for its center and let
[TABLE]
be its lower central series, namely
[TABLE]
Note that for . Write
[TABLE]
For convenience, let us assume that , namely , for otherwise is abelian and the structure of is known. Consider the subgroup
[TABLE]
of the cyclic multiplicative group . Note that
[TABLE]
Further, for each , define
[TABLE]
to be the th power map on . We shall prove:
Theorem 3.1**.**
Assume that . Then, the map
[TABLE]
is a well-defined injective homomorphism.
Let us remark that Theorem 3.1 is motivated by [7, Proposition 3.1]. The latter treats the special case when .
To prove Theorem 3.1, rather than (1.3) and (1.4), we shall use the definition (1.2) directly. For each coprime to , clearly is a bijection that centralizes , whence we have
[TABLE]
For each , let us further define
[TABLE]
Explicitly, for any , we have
[TABLE]
where is such that (mod ).
Lemma 3.2**.**
Let be coprime to and let . Then, we have
[TABLE]
Proof.
This is because sends to . ∎
3.1. Some commutator calculations
In this subsection, let be two arbitrary elements. In the case that , as shown in [18, (5.3.5)], for example, for any , we have the well-known formula
[TABLE]
and using this, it may be verified that (3.2) is a homomorphism. This was in fact the key idea to the proof of [7, Proposition 3.1]. In general, although (3.3) might not hold, the difference is still a product of commutators. This difference was first studied by P. Hall in [11]. For our purpose, we shall use the following so-called Hall-Petresco formula for its description.
Lemma 3.3**.**
For any , we have the formula
[TABLE]
where and for each .
Proof.
See [19, Theorem 3.5] and the discussion after it. ∎
Our idea is to impose conditions on and the nilpotency class , so that we may reduce the formula in Lemma 3.3 to (3.3), even when .
Lemma 3.4**.**
Assume that . Then, for any such that
[TABLE]
*the formula holds. *
Proof.
We may assume that , which means that , whence . Hence, we have , and since for , the formula in Lemma 3.3 may be rewritten as
[TABLE]
For each , observe that divides and hence divides
[TABLE]
because implies has no factor of . Since has exponent by definition, we then deduce that
[TABLE]
Put , which is divisible by . We may then apply the above formula again to the elements and in to obtain
[TABLE]
Again, since has exponent , we have
[TABLE]
This proves the claim. ∎
The next lemma is well-known in the special case . Recall that is said to be regular (as a -group) if for every and , we have
[TABLE]
It is known, by Lemma 3.3, that is regular when . We thank the referee for pointing out that Lemma 3.5 below is true as long as is regular and for giving the following simple proof.
Lemma 3.5**.**
Assume that is regular (as a -group). Then, for any which is a multiple of , we have
- (a)
; 2. (b)
* for all ;* 3. (c)
.
Proof.
Let with . For any , by [10, Theorem 12.4.3 (1)] and regularity, we have the equivalence
[TABLE]
The latter holds because has exponent . This yields , which clearly implies part (a). For any , we have the identity
[TABLE]
By regularity and the fact that has exponent , we obtain
[TABLE]
where and , respectively, belong to the subgroups
[TABLE]
Both of them lie in and thus . Since by part (a), raising (3.4) to the th power gives part (b). Now, by regularity, we also have
[TABLE]
where belongs to the subgroup
[TABLE]
This lies in and so . Replacing by in (3.5) then yields
[TABLE]
But by part (b), we know that
[TABLE]
and this proves part (c). ∎
3.2. Proof of Theorem 3.1
Assume that . In the following, let be such that and (mod ). Let be as after (3.2), and we have (mod . Also, note that divides both and .
First, let and consider the map defined in (3.2). By Lemmas 3.4 and 3.5(a), for any , we may rewrite
[TABLE]
Applying Lemmas 3.4 and 3.5(a),(b) again, for any , we then have
[TABLE]
and this proves that is a homomorphism. By Lemma 3.2 and (3.1), this in turn implies that , so that .
Next, observe that since sends to , we have
[TABLE]
From Lemmas 3.4 and 3.5(c), we then deduce that
[TABLE]
where the last equivalence holds because , which means that the highest power of dividing equals that of . This shows that is well-defined and injective. Clearly is a homomorphism and the theorem now follows.
3.3. Further questions
Theorem 3.1 raises two natural questions:
How often Theorem 3.1 may be applied to show that is not elementary -abelian or not even a -group? 2. 2.
Can be a non--group or can we generalize Theorem 3.1 to the case when has nilpotency class ?
Let us briefly discuss these two questions.
3.3.1. Applicability
In the case that , namely and , from Theorem 3.1 we see that has a cyclic subgroup of order , so in particular
- •
is not elementary -abelian when ;
- •
is not a -group when is not a power of two or .
This was first shown in [7, Proposition 3.1] and some specific examples were given in [7, Section 5].
In the case that , we have , and from Theorem 3.1 we see that has a cyclic subgroup of order , whence
- •
is not a -group when .
However, the condition seems quite restrictive, and in particular it imposes that for . Notice that has order at least , and is said to be of maximal class if its order is precisely .
Lemma 3.6**.**
Assume that is of maximal class and that . Then, the quotient has exponent , namely .
Proof.
See [1, Theorem 9.5].∎
All groups of order have nilpotency class at most . For groups of order , none of them can satisfy and by Lemma 3.6. As for groups of order , it is known that they may be separated into and so-called isoclinism families, respectively. In the two tables below, let us summarize the information of interest to us, which is found in [12, Section 4]. The list of groups of order given in [12] is incomplete and the number of groups in each family stated below is taken from [17, Table 2].
The isoclinism families of groups of order and nilpotency class for .
The isoclinism families of groups of order and nilpotency class for .
Hence, for , there are exactly one and , respectively, groups of order and with and . For both , the ratio
[TABLE]
is quite small and tends to zero as increases. But for , the numerator tends to infinity as increases, and so Theorem 3.1 gives infinitely many new examples (with ) for which is not a -group.
3.3.2. Large nilpotency class
The key ingredient to the proof of Theorem 3.1 is Lemmas 3.4 and 3.5. In view of Lemma 3.5, it seems natural to ask whether Theorem 3.1 may be extended to the case when is only regular but . We thank the referee for suggesting this. However, if is regular but , then is reasonably well-behaved only when is a power of , in which case is not bijective. In fact, by using the SmallGroup library [2] in Magma [3], we found a counterexample.
Example 3.7**.**
Let . The following information may be easily calculated in Magma.
- •
has exponent .
- •
has nilpotency class , namely .
- •
has exponent , namely .
- •
has exponent , namely .
- •
has order .
- •
is a cyclic group.
The last fact implies that is regular as a -group, by [19, (3.13)]. However, running the code below in Magma yields the output .
G:=SmallGroup(729,22);
X:=[x:x in G];
s:=X[82]; // a choice of
x:=X[244]; // a choice of
y:=x^2;
L:=[];
for n in [n:n in [1..27]|GreatestCommonDivisor(n,3) eq 1] do
nt:=InverseMod(n,27); // the $\widetilde{n}\in\mathbb{N}$ in (3.2)
Zx:=(x^(nt)*s^(-1))^n*s^n; // the value of $\zeta_{n,\sigma}(x)$ as in (3.2)
Zy:=(y^(nt)*s^(-1))^n*s^n; // the value of $\zeta_{n,\sigma}(x^{2})$ as in (3.2)
if Zy eq (Zx)^2 then // test if $\zeta_{n,\sigma}(x^{2})=\zeta_{n,\sigma}(x)^{2}$ holds
Append(~L,n);
end if;
end for;
L; // list of mod for which might be in
This implies that there exists such that for all coprime to with (mod ). By (3.1) and Lemma 3.2, it follows that for these , whence is not well-defined.
Let . For any , by regularity we have
[TABLE]
and because has order . Also, notice that since has exponent . It follows that
[TABLE]
This shows that
[TABLE]
Therefore, the power maps with coprime to only give rise to the subgroup of order two in .
Nonetheless, by computing the size of (1.4), which is the order of , we found in Magma that has order and hence is not a -group.
Example 3.7 shows that Theorem 3.1 may not be generalized to all regular -groups. It also shows that there is a (regular) -group of nilpotency class at least for which is not a -group, and the elements in of odd order do not arise from the power maps. It leads to the following questions.
Question 3.8**.**
Give more examples of -groups of nilpotency class for which is not a -group.
Question 3.9**.**
Other than the power maps for coprime to , what are other ways to construct elements in of odd order?
A. Caranti [7] used bilinear maps but his method is specific for -groups of nilpotency class two. It would be interesting to see if there are other methods which work more generally, and in particular, figure out where the elements in of odd order come from for with SmallGroup ID equal to , as well as those in (1.5).
4. Acknowledgments
The author thanks the referee for helpful suggestions which led to the discussion in Subsection 3.3.2.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] Y. Berkovich, Groups of prime power order. Vol. 1 . With a foreword by Zvonimir Janko. De Gruyter Expositions in Mathematics, 46. Walter de Gruyter Gmb H & Co. KG, Berlin, 2008.
- 2[2] H. U. Besche, B. Eick, and E. A. O’Brien, A millennium project: constructing small groups , Internat. J. Algebra Comput. 12 (2002), no. 5, 623–644.
- 3[3] W. Bosma, J. Cannon, and C. Playoust, The Magma algebra system. I. The user language , J. Symbolic Comput., 24 (1997), 23–265.
- 4[4] A. A. Alabdali and N. P. Byott, Counting Hopf-Galois structures on cyclic field extensions of squarefree degree , J. Algebra 493 (2018), 1–19.
- 5[5] A. Caranti and F. Dalla Volta, The multiple holomorph of a finitely generated abelian group , J. Algebra 481 (2017), 327–347.
- 6[6] A. Caranti and F. Dalla Volta, Groups that have the same holomorph as a finite perfect group , J. Algebra 507 (2018), 81–102.
- 7[7] A. Caranti, Multiple holomorphs of finite p 𝑝 p -groups of class two , J. Algebra 516 (2018), 352–372.
- 8[8] L. N. Childs, Taming wild extensions: Hopf algebras and local Galois module theory . Mathematical Surveys and Monographs, 80. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2000.
