Abstract
For a finite group G we investigate the difference between the maximum size \({{\mathrm{MaxDim}}}(G)\) of an “independent” family of maximal subgroups of G and maximum size m(G) of an irredundant sequence of generators of G. We prove that \({{\mathrm{MaxDim}}}(G)=m(G)\) if the derived subgroup of G is nilpotent. However, \({{\mathrm{MaxDim}}}(G)-m(G)\) can be arbitrarily large: for any odd prime p, we construct a finite soluble group with Fitting length two satisfying \(m(G)=3\) and \({{\mathrm{MaxDim}}}(G)=p\).
Similar content being viewed by others
1 Introduction
Let G be a finite group. A sequence \((g_1,\ldots ,g_n)\) of elements of G is said to be irredundant if \(\langle g_j \mid j\ne i\rangle \) is properly contained in \(\langle g_1,\ldots ,g_n\rangle \) for every \(i\in \{1,\ldots ,n\}\). Let i(G) be the maximum size of any irredundant sequence in G and let m(G) be the maximum size of any irredundant generating sequence of G [i.e. an irredundant sequence \((g_1,\ldots ,g_n)\) with the property that \(\langle g_1,\ldots ,g_n\rangle =G\)]. Clearly \(m(G)\le i(G)=\max \{m(H)\mid H\le G\}.\) The invariant m(G) has received some attention (see, e.g., [1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 9]) also because of its role in the efficiency of the product replacement algorithm [6]. In a recent paper, Fernando [3] investigates a natural connection between irredundant generating sequences of G and certain configurations of maximal subgroups of G. A family of subgroups \(H_i\le G\), indexed by a set I, is said to be in general position if for every \(i\in I\), the intersection \(\cap _{j\ne i}H_j\) properly contains \(\cap _{j\in I}H_j\). Define \({{\mathrm{MaxDim}}}(G)\) as the size of the largest family of maximal subgroups of G in general position. It can be easily seen that \(m(G)\le {{\mathrm{MaxDim}}}(G)\le i(G)\) (see, e.g., [3, Propositions 2 and 3]). However, the difference \({{\mathrm{MaxDim}}}(G)-m(G)\) can be arbitrarily large: for example if \(G={{\mathrm{Alt}}}(5)\wr C_p\) is the wreath product of the alternating group of degree 5 with a cyclic group of prime order p, then \({{\mathrm{MaxDim}}}(G)\ge 2p\) but \(m(G)\le 5\) [3, Proposition 12]. On the other hand, Fernando proves that \({{\mathrm{MaxDim}}}(G)=m(G)\) if G is a finite supersoluble group [3, Theorem 25], but gives also an example of a finite soluble group G with \(m(G)\ne {{\mathrm{MaxDim}}}(G) \) [3, Proposition 16].
In this note we collect more information about the difference \({{\mathrm{MaxDim}}}(G)-m(G)\) when G is a finite soluble group. In this case m(G) coincides with the number of complemented factors in a chief series of G (see [4, Theorem 2]). Our first result is that the equality \({{\mathrm{MaxDim}}}(G)=m(G)\) holds for a class of finite soluble groups, properly containing the class of finite supersoluble groups (see, e.g., [8, 7.2.13]).
Theorem 1
If G is a finite group and the derived subgroup \(G^{\prime }\) of G is nilpotent, then \({{\mathrm{MaxDim}}}(G)=m(G).\)
However, already in the class of finite soluble groups with Fitting length equal to two, examples can be exhibited of groups G for which the difference \({{\mathrm{MaxDim}}}(G)-m(G)\) is arbitrarily large.
Theorem 2
For any odd prime p, there exists a finite group G with Fitting length two such that \(m(G)=3, {{\mathrm{MaxDim}}}(G)=p\) and \(i(G)=2p.\)
Notice that if G is a soluble group with \(m(G)\ne {{\mathrm{MaxDim}}}(G)\), then \(m(G)\ge 3\). Indeed, if \(m(G)\le 2\), then a chief series of G contains at most two complemented factors and it can be easily seen that this implies that \(G^{\prime }\) is nilpotent.
2 Groups whose derived subgroup is nilpotent
Definition 3
A family of subgroups \(H_i\le G\), indexed by a set I, is said to be in general position if for every \(i\in I\), the intersection \(\cap _{j\ne i}H_j\) properly contains \(\cap _{j\in I}H_j\) (equivalently, \(H_i\) does not contain \(\cap _{j\ne i}H_j\)).
Note that the subgroups \(\{ H_i \mid i \in I\}\) are in general position if and only, whenever \(I_1 \ne I_2\) are subsets of S, then \( \cap _{i \in I_1} H_i \ne \cap _{i \in I_2}H_i\) (see, e.g., Definition 1 in [3]).
Lemma 4
Let \(\mathbb F\) be a field of characteristic p. Let V a finite dimension \(\mathbb F\)-vector space, let \(H= \langle h \rangle \) where \(h \in \mathbb F^*\) such that \(\mathbb F=\mathbb F_p[h]\) and set \(G=V \rtimes H\).
If \(M_1, \ldots , M_r\) is a set of maximal subgroups of G supplementing V, then
where W is a \(\mathbb F\)-subspace of V and K is either trivial or a conjugate \(H^v\) of H, for some \(v \in V\).
Proof
By induction on r we can assume that \(T_1=M_1 \cap \ldots \cap M_{r-1}= W_1 \rtimes K_1\), where \(W_1\) is a subspace of V and \(K_1=\{1\}\) or \(K_1 = H^v, v \in V\). The maximal subgroup \(M_r\) is a supplement of V, so we can write \(M_r=W_2 \rtimes H^{w}\), where \(W_2\) is a subspace of V and \(w \in V\). For shortness, set \(T_2=M_r\) and \(T=T_1 \cap T_2\). Since \(W_1\) and \(W_2\) are normal Sylow p-subgroups of \(T_1\) and \(T_2\), respectively, their intersection \(W=W_1 \cap W_2\) is a normal Sylow p-subgroup of T. In the case where T is not a p-group, then \(T = W \rtimes K\) where K is a non-trivial \(p'\)-subgroup of T. Then K is contained in some conjugates \(H^{v_1}\) and \(H^{v_2}\) of the \(p'\)-Hall subgroups of \(T_1\) and \(T_2\), respectively. In particular, there exists \(1\ne y \in K\) such that \(y=h_1^{v_1}=h_2^{v_2}\) for some \(h_1, h_2 \in H\). It follows that \(1\ne h_1=h_2 \in C_H(v_1-v_2)\). From \( C_H(v_1-v_2)\ne \{1\}\), we deduce that \(v_1=v_2\). Thus we have \(T_1=W_1 \rtimes H^{v_1}, T_2=W_2 \rtimes H^{v_1}\) and \(T=W \rtimes H^{v_1}\). \(\square \)
Corollary 5
In the hypotheses of Lemma 4, if \(M_1, \ldots , M_r\) are in general position, then
-
(1)
\(r \le \dim (V)+1\);
-
(2)
if \(r= \dim (V)+1\), then, for a suitable permutation of the indices, \(\bigcap _{i=1}^{r-1} M_i=H^v\) for some \(v\in V\), and \(\bigcap _{i=1}^{r} M_i=\{1\}.\)
Proof
Let \(n=\dim V\). Since the subgroups \(M_1, \ldots , M_r\) are in general position, the set of the intersections \(T_j=\cap _{i=1}^{j} M_i\), for \(j=1, \ldots , r\), is a strictly decreasing chain of subgroups. By Lemma 4, \(T_i=W_i \rtimes K_i\), where \(W_i\) is a \(\mathbb F\)-subspace of \(W_{i-1}\) and \(K_i\) is either trivial or a conjugate of H. Note that \(n-1=\dim W_1 \ge \dim W_{i} \ge \dim W_{i+1} \). Moreover, if \(\dim W_{i} = \dim W_{i+1}\) for some index i, then \(W_i=W_{i+1}\) and, since \(T_i \ne T_{i+1}\), we have that
-
\(K_1, \ldots ,K_{i}\) are non-trivial;
-
\(K_{i+1}= \cdots = K_r=\{1\}\).
In particular there exists at most one index i such that \(\dim W_{i} = \dim W_{i+1}\). As \(\dim W_1 = n-1\), it follows that we can have at most \(n+1\) subgroups \(T_i\), hence \(r \le n+1\).
In the case where \(r=n+1\), we actually have that \(\dim W_{i} = \dim W_{i+1}\) for at least one, and precisely one, index i. This implies that \(W_i=W_{i+1}\) and, setting \(J=\{1, \ldots , n+1\} {\setminus } \{i+1\}\) and \(T=\cap _{l \in J} M_{l}\), we get that \(W_{n+1}\) coincides with the Sylow p-subgroup of T. Since \(\dim W_{n+1}=0\) and \(T\ne 1\) we deduce that \(T = H^v\), for some \(v \in V\). Finally, \(T \cap M_{i+1}=\{1\}\).
\(\square \)
A proof of the following lemma is implicitly contained in Sect. 1 of [3], but, for the sake of completeness, we sketch a direct proof here.
Lemma 6
Let H be an abelian finite group. The size of a set of subgroups in general position is at most m(H).
Proof
The proof is by induction on the order of H. Let \(\Omega =\{ A_1, \ldots , A_r\}\) be a set of subgroups of H in general position. Without loss of generality we can assume that \(\cap _{i=1}^rA_i=\{1\}\). If \(m=m(H)\), then H decomposes as a direct product of m cyclic groups of prime-power order. Let B be one of these factors, and let X be the unique minimal normal subgroup of B. Since \(\cap _{i=1}^rA_i=\{1\}\), there exists at least an integer i such that X is not contained in \(A_i\). It follows that \(A_i \cap B=\{1\}\), hence \(A_i \cong A_iB/B \le H/B\) and
Now, the set of subgroups of \(A_i\)
is in general position, hence, by inductive hypothesis, \(|\Omega ^*|=r-1 \le m(A_i)\). Therefore, \(r \le m\). \(\square \)
Proof of Theorem 1
Since
without loss of generality we can assume that \({{\mathrm{Frat}}}(G)=1\). In this case the Fitting subgroup \({{\mathrm{Fit}}}(G)\) of G is a direct product of minimal normal subgroups of G, it is abelian and complemented. Let K be a complement of \({{\mathrm{Fit}}}(G)\) in G; note that, being \(G^{\prime }\) nilpotent by assumption, K is abelian. Let F be a complement of Z(G) in \({{\mathrm{Fit}}}(G)\) and let \(H=Z(G)\times K\). We have \(G=F\rtimes H\) and we can write F as a product of nontrivial H-irreducible modules
where \(V_1, \ldots , V_r\) are irreducible H-modules, pairwise not H-isomorphic.
By [4, Theorem 2] m(G) coincides with the number of complemented factors in a chief series of G, hence
Let \({\mathcal {M}}\) be a family of maximal subgroups of G in general position.
Let \(M_{0,1}, \ldots , M_{0,\nu _0}\) the elements of \({\mathcal {M}}\) containing F. We can write
where \(Y_{i}\) is a maximal subgroup of H. Note that \(Y_1, \ldots , Y_{\nu _0}\) are maximal subgroups of H in general position, hence, by Lemma 6, \( \nu _0 \le {{\mathrm{MaxDim}}}(H) \le m(H)\).
If M is a maximal subgroup supplementing F, then M contains the subgroup \(U_i = \prod _{j\ne i} V_j^{n_j}\) for some index i. In particular \(M=(U_i \times W_i)\rtimes H^v\) for some \(v\in V_i^{n_i}\) and some maximal H-submodule \(W_i\) of \(V_i^{n_i}\). Set \(C_i=C_H(V_i)\) and \(H_i=H/C_i\). Then \(\mathbb F_i={{\mathrm{End}}}_{H_i}(V_i)\) is a field and \(V_i\) is an absolutely irreducible \(\mathbb F_iH_i\)-module. Since \(H_i\) is abelian, \(\dim _{\mathbb F_i}V_i=1\), that is \(V_i \cong \mathbb F_i\), and hence \(H_i\) is isomorphic to a subgroup of \(\mathbb F_i^*\) generated by a primitive element. In particular we can apply Corollary 5 to the group \(V_i^{n_i} \rtimes H_i\). Let \(M_{i,1}, \ldots , M_{i, \nu _i}\) the maximal subgroups in \({\mathcal {M}}\) containing \(U_i\); say
where \(v_{i,l} \in V_i^{n_i}\). Note that the subgroups \(\overline{M}_{i,l}=W_{i,l} \rtimes H_i^{v_{i,l}}\), for \(l \in \{1, \ldots , \nu _i\},\) are maximal subgroups of \(V_i^{n_i} \rtimes H_i\) in general position, hence, by Corollary 5,
If \(\nu _i \le n_i\) for every \(i \ne 0\), then
and the result follows.
Otherwise let J be the set of the integers \(i \in \{1, \ldots ,r \}\) such that \(\nu _i = n_i+1\). By Corollary 5, we can assume that, for some \(v_i \in V_i^{n_i}\),
Recall that the \(M_{0,j} =F \rtimes Y_{j}\), for \(j=1 , \ldots , \nu _0\), are the elements of \({\mathcal {M}}\) containing F. Our next task is to prove that
is a set of subgroups of H in general position.
Assume, by contradiction, that for example \(C_1 \ge \left( \cap _{i \ne 1} C_i \right) \cap \left( \cap _{ j =1}^{\nu _0} Y_{j}\right) \); then
against the fact that \({\mathcal {M}}\) is in general position. Similarly, if \(Y_{1 } \ge \left( \cap _{i \in J} C_i \right) \cap \left( \cap _{ j \ne 1} Y_{j} \right) \), then
a contradiction.
Now we can apply Lemma 6 to get that \(|\Omega | \le m(H)\). Therefore, we conclude that
and the proof is complete. \(\square \)
3 Finite soluble groups with \(m(G)=3\) and \({{\mathrm{MaxDim}}}(G)\ge p\)
In this section we will assume that p and q are two primes and that p divides \(q - 1\). Let \(\mathbb F\) be the field with q elements and let \(C=\langle c \rangle \) be the subgroup of order p of the multiplicative group of \(\mathbb F\). Let \(V=\mathbb F^p\) be a p-dimensional vector space over \(\mathbb F\) and let \(\sigma =(1,2,\dots ,p)\in {{\mathrm{Sym}}}(p)\). The wreath group \(H=C\wr \langle \sigma \rangle \) has an irreducible action on V defined as follows: if \(v=(f_1,\dots ,f_p)\in V\) and \(h=(c_1,\dots ,c_p)\sigma \in H\), then \(v^h=(f_{1\sigma ^{-1}}c_{1\sigma ^{-1}},\dots ,f_{p\sigma ^{-1}}c_{p\sigma ^{-1}}).\) We will concentrate our attention on the semidirect product
Proposition 7
\(m(G_{q,p})=3.\)
Proof
Since V is a complemented chief factor of \(G_{q,p},\) by [4, Theorem 2], we have \(m(G_{q,p})=1+m(H)=1+m(H/{{\mathrm{Frat}}}(H))=1+m(C_p\times C_p)=3.\) \(\square \)
Proposition 8
\(i(G_{q,p})=2p.\)
Proof
Let \(B\cong C^p\) be the base subgroup of H and consider \(K=V\rtimes B\cong (\mathbb F\rtimes C)^p\). A composition series of K has length 2p, and all its factors are indeed complemented chief factors, so \(m(K)=2p\). Now by definition \(i(G_{q,p})=\max \{m(X)\mid X\le G_{q,p}\}\ge m(K)= 2p\). On the other hand, \(m(G_{q,p})=3\) and, if \(X<G_{q,p},\) then |X| is a proper divisor of \(|G|=(pq)^p p\) and the composition length of X is at most 2p, so \(m(X)\le 2p\). Therefore, \(i(G_{q,p}) \le 2p\), and consequently \(i(G_{q,p})=m(K)=2p.\) \(\square \)
Lemma 9
\({{\mathrm{MaxDim}}}(G_{q,p})\ge p.\)
Proof
Let \(e_1=(1,0,\dots ,0), e_2=(0,1,\dots ,0),\dots , e_p=(0,0,\dots ,1) \in V\) and let \(h_1=(c,1,\dots ,1), h_2=(1,c,\dots ,1),\dots , h_p=(1,1,\dots ,c) \in C^p\le H.\) For any \(1\le i,j \le p,\) we have
But then, for each \(i\in \{1,\dots ,p\},\) we have
hence \(H^{e_1},\dots ,H^{e_p}\) is a family of maximal subgroups of \(G_{q,p}\) in general position. \(\square \)
In order to compute the precise value of \({{\mathrm{MaxDim}}}(G_{q,p}),\) the following lemma is useful.
Lemma 10
Let \(v_1=(x_1,\dots ,x_p)\) and \(v_2=(y_1,\dots ,y_p)\) be two different elements of \(V=\mathbb F^p\) and let \(\Delta (v_1,v_2)=\{i\in \{1,\dots ,p\}\mid x_i=y_i\}.\) Then
-
if \(|\Delta (v_1,v_2)|=0,\) then \(|H^{v_1}\cap H^{v_2}| \le p;\)
-
if \(|\Delta (v_1,v_2)|=u\ne 0,\) then \(|H^{v_1}\cap H^{v_2}|= p^u.\)
Proof
Clearly \(|H^{v_1}\cap H^{v_2}|=|H\cap H^{v_2-v_1}|=|C_H(v_2-v_1)|.\) If \(\Delta (v_1,v_2)= \varnothing ,\) then \(C_H(v_2-v_1) \cap C^p=\{1\}\), hence \(|C_H(v_2-v_1)| \le p.\) If \(|\Delta (v_1,v_2)|=u\ne 0,\) then
has order \(p^u.\) \(\square \)
Proposition 11
If \(p\ne 2,\) then \({{\mathrm{MaxDim}}}(G_{q,p})=p.\)
Proof
By Lemma 9 it suffices to prove that \({{\mathrm{MaxDim}}}(G_{q,p})\le p.\) Assume that \({\mathcal {M}}\) is a family of maximal subgroups of \(G=G_{q,p}\) in general position and let \(t=|{\mathcal {M}}|.\) Let \(M\in {\mathcal {M}}\). One of the following two possibilities occurs:
-
(1)
M is a complement of V in G : hence \(M=H^v\) for some \(v\in V\).
-
(2)
M contains V : hence \(M=V\rtimes X\) for some maximal subgroup X of H.
If \(M_1\) and \(M_2\) are two different maximal subgroups of type (2), then \(M_1\cap M_2= V\rtimes {{\mathrm{Frat}}}(X)\) is contained in any other maximal subgroup of type (2). Hence, \({\mathcal {M}}\) cannot contain more then two maximal subgroups of type (2). Now we prove the following claim: if \({\mathcal {M}}\) contains at least three different complements of V in G, then \(t\le p.\) In order to prove this claim, assume, by contradiction that \(t>p\). This implies in particular that in the intersection X of any two subgroups of \({\mathcal {M}}\), the subgroup lattice \({\mathcal {L}} (X)\) must contain a chain of length at least \(p-1\).
Assume that \(H^{v_1}, H^{v_2}, H^{v_3}\) are different maximal subgroups in \({\mathcal {M}}\). It is not restrictive to assume \(v_1=(0,\dots ,0)\). Let \(v_2=(x_1,\dots ,x_p)\) and \(v_3=(y_1,\dots ,y_p)\). For \(i\in \{2,3\}\), it must \(|H\cap H^{v_i}|\ge p^{p-1}\), hence, by Lemma 10, \(|\Delta (0,v_2)|=|\Delta (0,v_3)|=p-1,\) i.e. there exists \(i_1 \ne i_2\) such that \(x_{i_1}\ne 0, x_j=0\) if \(j\ne i_1, y_{i_2}\ne 0, y_j=0\) if \(j\ne i_2\). But then \(|\Delta (v_2,v_3)|=p-2\), hence \(|H^{v_2}\cap H^{v_3}|=p^{p-2}\), a contradiction. We have so proved that either \(t\le p\) or \({\mathcal {M}}\) contains at most two maximal subgroups of type (1) and at most two maximal subgroups of type (2), and consequently \(t\le 4\). It remains to exclude the possibility that \(t=4\) and \(p=3\). By the previous considerations it is not restrictive to assume \({\mathcal {M}}=\{H, H^v, V\rtimes X_1, V\rtimes X_2\}\) where \(X_1\) and \(X_2\) are maximal subgroups of H and \(|\Delta (0,v)|=2\). In particular we would have \(H\cap H^v\le C^3\): this excludes \(C^3\in \{X_1,X_2\}\) but then \(X_1\cap C^3=X_2\cap C^3={{\mathrm{Frat}}}\, H=\{(c_1,c_2,c_3)\mid c_1c_2c_3=1\},\) hence \(H\cap H^v \cap X_1= H\cap H^v\cap X_2,\) a contradiction. \(\square \)
Proposition 12
\({{\mathrm{MaxDim}}}(G_{q,2})=3.\)
Proof
By Lemma 7, \({{\mathrm{MaxDim}}}(G_{q,2})\ge m(G_{q,2})=3\). Assume now, by contradiction, that \(M_1,M_2,M_3,M_4\) are a family of maximal subgroups of \(G_{q,2}\). As in the proof of the previous proposition, at least two of these maximal subgroups, say \(M_1\) and \(M_2\), are complements of V in \(G_{q,2}\). But then, by Lemma 10, \(|M_1\cap M_2| \le 2\), hence \(M_1\cap M_2\cap M_3=1\), a contradiction. \(\square \)
References
Apisa, P., Klopsch, B.: A generalization of the Burnside basis theorem. J. Algebra 400, 8–16 (2014)
Cameron, P., Cara, P.: Independent generating sets and geometries for symmetric groups. J. Algebra 258(2), 641–650 (2002)
Fernando, R.: On an inequality of dimension-like invariants for finite groups (Feb 2015) arXiv:1502.00360
Lucchini, A.: The largest size of a minimal generating set of a finite group. Arch. Math. 101(1), 1–8 (2013)
Lucchini, A.: Minimal generating sets of maximal size in finite monolithic groups. Arch. Math. 101(5), 401–410 (2013)
Pak, I.: What do we know about the product replacement algorithm? In: Groups and Computation, III, pp. 301–347. de Gruyter, Berlin (2001)
Saxl, J., Whiston, J.: On the maximal size of independent generating sets of \(PSL_2(q)\). J. Algebra 258, 651–657 (2002)
Scott, W.R.: Group Theory. Prentice-Hall Inc, Englewood Cliffs (1964)
Whiston, J.: Maximal independent generating sets of the symmetric group. J. Algebra 232, 255–268 (2000)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Detomi, E., Lucchini, A. Maximal subgroups of finite soluble groups in general position. Annali di Matematica 195, 1177–1183 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10231-015-0510-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10231-015-0510-2