Abstract
For a prime number \(\ell \) we say that an oriented pro\(\ell \) group \((G,\theta )\) has the Bogomolov–Positselski property if the kernel of the canonical projection on its maximal \(\theta \)abelian quotient \(\pi ^{\mathrm {ab}}_{G,\theta }:G\rightarrow G(\theta )\) is a free pro\(\ell \) group contained in the Frattini subgroup of G. We show that oriented pro\(\ell \) groups of elementary type have the Bogomolov–Positselski property (cf. Theorem 1.2). This shows that Efrat’s Elementary Type Conjecture implies a positive answer to Positselski’s version of Bogomolov’s Conjecture on maximal pro\(\ell \) Galois groups of a field \(\mathbb {K}\) in case that \(\mathbb {K}^\times /(\mathbb {K}^\times )^\ell \) is finite. Secondly, it is shown that for an \(H^\bullet \)quadratic oriented pro\(\ell \) group \((G,\theta )\) the Bogomolov–Positselski property can be expressed by the injectivity of the transgression map \(d_2^{2,1}\) in the Hochschild–Serre spectral sequence (cf. Theorem 1.4).
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Introduction
By an \(\ell \) oriented profinite group for a prime number \(\ell \) we understand a profinite group G together with a continuous homomorphism of profinite groups \(\theta :G\rightarrow \mathbb {Z}_\ell ^\times \), where \(\mathbb {Z}_\ell ^\times \) denotes the group of units of the ring of \(\ell \)adic integers \(\mathbb {Z}_\ell \). An \(\ell \)oriented pro\(\ell \) group \((G,\theta )\) will be simply called an oriented pro\(\ell \) group. For a field \(\mathbb {K}\), we denote by \(G_{\mathbb {K}}=\mathrm {Gal}(\bar{\mathbb {K}}^{\mathrm {sep}}/\mathbb {K})\) its absolute Galois group, where \(\bar{\mathbb {K}}^{\mathrm {sep}}\) denotes a separable closure of \(\mathbb {K}\). For any prime number \(\ell \), \(G_{\mathbb {K}}\) carries naturally the cyclotomic \(\ell \)orientation \(\tilde{\theta }_{\mathbb {K},\ell }:G_{\mathbb {K}}\rightarrow \mathbb {Z}_\ell ^\times \) (cf. Example 2.1 and [26, (1.3)]). The following conjecture formulated by L. Positselski in [20, Conjecture 2] was motivated by an earlier conjecture of F. Bogomolov (cf. [2] and [20, Conjecture 1], see also Remark 3.3).
Conjecture 1.1
Let \(\mathbb {K}\) be a field containing a primitive \(\ell {\mathrm {th}}\)root of unity, and also \(\sqrt{1}\) if \(\ell =2,\) and set
Then the maximal pro\(\ell \) Galois group of \(\root \ell ^\infty \of {\mathbb {K}}\) is a free pro\(\ell \) group.
A profinite group G admits a maximal pro\(\ell \) quotient \(G(\ell )=G/O^\ell (G)\), where \(O^\ell (G)\) is the closed normal subgroup of G being generated by all proq Sylow subgroups for all prime numbers \(q\not =\ell \). Apart from \(\mathrm {ker}(\theta )\), an oriented pro\(\ell \) group \((G,\theta )\) contains the distinguished closed subgroups
and
—the former introduced in [10]—i.e., \(I_\theta (G)\) is the closure of the isolator (cf. §66 [12]) of \(K_\theta (G)\) in \(\mathrm {ker}(\theta )\). An oriented pro\(\ell \) group \((G,\theta )\) is said to be \(\theta \) abelian, if the subgroup \(K_{\theta }(G)\) is trivial and if \(\ker (\theta )\) is a free abelian pro\(\ell \) group (in this case G is a free abelianbycyclic pro\(\ell \) group for \(\ell \not =2\), cf. Remark 2.2). By definition \(K_\theta (G)\) is a closed normal subgroup of G contained in the Frattini subgroup \(\Phi (G)=\mathrm {cl}(G^\ell \cdot [G,G])\) of G. Note that
so that the quotient \(\mathrm {ker}(\theta )/K_\theta (G)\) is an abelian pro\(\ell \) group, and \(I_{\theta }(G)/K_\theta (G)\) is its torsion subgroup. In particular, if \(\theta :G\rightarrow \mathbb {Z}_\ell ^\times \) is trivial (i.e., \(\theta \) is identically equal to 1), then \(K_\theta (G)\) coincides with the closure of the commutator subgroup of G.
Every oriented pro\(\ell \) group \((G,\theta )\) admits a maximal \(\theta \)abelian quotient \((G(\theta ),\bar{\theta })\), where \(G(\theta )=G/I_\theta (G)\) and \(\bar{\theta }:G(\theta )\rightarrow \mathbb {Z}_\ell ^\times \) is the homomorphism induced by \(\theta \). Namely, \((G(\theta ),\bar{\theta })\) is \(\bar{\theta }\)abelian and one has a canonical surjective homomorphism
of oriented pro\(\ell \) groups satisfying the following: for every morphism \(\psi :(G,\theta )\rightarrow (A,\theta ^\circ )\) of oriented pro\(\ell \) groups onto a \(\theta ^\circ \)abelian pro\(\ell \) group \((A,\theta ^\circ )\) there exists a unique morphism of oriented pro\(\ell \) groups \(\psi ^{\mathrm {ab}}_\theta :(G(\theta ),\bar{\theta })\rightarrow (A,\theta ^\circ )\) such that \(\psi =\psi ^{\mathrm {ab}}_\theta \circ \pi ^{\mathrm {ab}}_{G,\theta }\) (cf. Proposition 2.3).
The hypothesis of Conjecture 1.1 on the primitive \(\ell {\mathrm {th}}\)roots lying in \(\mathbb {K}\) implies that the maximal pro\(\ell \) quotient \(G_{\mathbb {K}}(\ell )\) of the absolute Galois group \(G_{\mathbb {K}}\) carries naturally an \(\ell \)orientation
So, Conjecture 1.1 predicts that \(I_{\tilde{\theta }_{\mathbb {K},\ell }}(G_\mathbb {K}(\ell ))\) is a free pro\(\ell \) group contained in the Frattini subgroup \(\Phi (G_\mathbb {K}(\ell ))\) of \(G_\mathbb {K}(\ell )\) (cf. Proposition 2.6 and § 3.1). At this point it should be mentioned that in fact one has to deal with two properties of oriented pro\(\ell \) groups. The oriented pro\(\ell \) group \((G,\theta )\) is said to be Kummerian, if \(I_{\theta }(G)=\mathrm {ker}(\pi ^{\mathrm {ab}}_{G,\theta })\) is contained in the Frattini subgroup \(\Phi (G)\) of G. This property can be reformulated in several different ways (cf. Proposition 2.6). Bearing this fact in mind we say that the Kummerian (cf. §2.3) oriented pro\(\ell \) group \((G,\theta )\) has the Bogomolov–Positselski property, if \(I_\theta (G)=\mathrm {ker}(\pi ^{\mathrm {ab}}_{G,\theta })\) is a free pro\(\ell \) group. For example, the oriented pro\(\ell \) group \((G,\mathbf {1})\), where \(\mathbf {1}\) is the trivial \(\ell \)orientation on G, is Kummerian if, and only if, the maximal abelian pro\(\ell \) quotient \(G^{\mathrm {ab}}=G/G^\prime \) is a free abelian pro\(\ell \) group, and has the Bogomolov–Positselski property if, and only if, it is Kummerian and the closure of the commutator subgroup of G is a free pro\(\ell \) group.
The class of oriented pro\(\ell \) groups \(\mathbf {ET}_\ell \) of elementary type is the smallest class of oriented pro\(\ell \) groups containing \(\mathbb {Z}_\ell \) with all its \(\ell \)orientations, all Demushkin pro\(\ell \) groups with their natural \(\ell \)orientation (cf. [26, Proposition 5.2]) and which is closed with respect to free products in the category of oriented pro\(\ell \) groups and fibre products (cf. Sect. 5.3). The Elementary Type Conjecture formulated by Efrat [8] predicts that for every field \(\mathbb {K}\) containing an \(\ell {\mathrm {th}}\)root of unity (and also \(\sqrt{1}\) if \(\ell =2\)) satisfying \(\mathbb {K}^\times /(\mathbb {K}^\times )^\ell <\infty \) the oriented pro\(\ell \) group \((G_\mathbb {K}(\ell ),\tilde{\theta }_{\mathbb {K},\ell })\) must be of elementary type. The first main purpose of this paper is to establish the following theorem relating the Elementary Type Conjecture with Conjecture 1.1.
Theorem 1.2
Every oriented pro\(\ell \) group of elementary type has the Bogomolov–Positselski property.
From Theorem 1.2 one concludes the following (cf. Proposition 5.13):
Corollary 1.3
Let \(\mathbb {K}\) be a field containing a primitive \(\ell {\mathrm {th}}\)root of 1 (and also \(\sqrt{1}\) if \(\ell =2),\) such that the quotient \(\mathbb {K}^\times /(\mathbb {K}^\times )^\ell \) is finite. Then Conjecture 1.1 holds true in the following cases:

(a)
\(\mathbb {K}\) is finite;

(b)
\(\mathbb {K}\) is a pseudo algebraically closed (PAC) field, or an extension of relative transcendence degree 1 of a PAC field;

(c)
\(\mathbb {K}\) is an extension of transcendence degree 1 of a local field;

(d)
\(\mathbb {K}\) is \(\ell \)rigid (for the definition of \(\ell \)rigid field see [32, p. 722]);

(e)
\(\mathbb {K}\) is an algebraic extension of a global field of characteristic not \(\ell \).
By the Norm Residue Theorem (cf. [11, 31, 33, 34]), the mod \(\ell \)Milnor Kring \(K_\bullet ^M(\mathbb {K})/\ell \) of a field \(\mathbb {K}\) is isomorphic to the cohomology algebra \(H^\bullet (G_{\mathbb {K}}(\ell ),\mathbb {F}_\ell )\) provided \(\ell \not =\mathrm {char}(\mathbb {K})\) and \(\mathbb {K}\) contains a primitive \(\ell {\mathrm {th}}\)root of unity. Moreover, L. Positselski showed in [20, Theorem 1.4] that Conjecture 1.1 is a consequence of a strong Koszulity property of the cohomology algebra \(H^\bullet (G_{\mathbb {K}}(\ell ),\mathbb {F}_\ell )\).
Our second objective is to establish the following criterion ensuring the BogomolovPositselski property of an abstract oriented pro\(\ell \) group \((G,\theta )\). Surprisingly, it only depends on lowdimensional group cohomology, but in a sophisticated way (cf. Theorem 4.5).
Theorem 1.4
Let \((G,\theta )\) be a Kummerian oriented pro\(\ell \) group with a quadratic \(\mathbb {F}_\ell \)cohomology algebra \(H^\bullet (G,\mathbb {F}_\ell )\), and let
be the canonical extension of pro\(\ell \) groups. Then G has the Bogomolov–Positselski property if, and only if, the transgression map
is injective.
Remark 1.5
As \(\mathbf {s}\) is a Frattini pro\(\ell \) cover (i.e., \(I_\theta (G)\) is contained in the Frattini subgroup of G, cf. Sect. 3.2), inflation yields an isomorphism \(j^1:H^1(G(\theta ),\mathbb {F}_\ell )\rightarrow H^1(G,\mathbb {F}_\ell )\). Since \(H^\bullet (G,\mathbb {F}_\ell )\) is quadratic, inflation may also be considered as a surjective homomorphism of graded \(\mathbb {F}_\ell \)algebras
where the leftside term of (1.7) is the exterior algebra generated by \(H^1(G(\theta ),\mathbb {F}_\ell )\) (cf. Sect. 4.1). By [20, Theorem 1.4], \((G,\theta )\) has the Bogomolov–Positselski property provided \(H^\bullet (G,\mathbb {F}_\ell )\) is a Koszul \(\mathbb {F}_\ell \)algebra and \(\mathrm {ker}(j^\bullet )\) is a Koszul \(H^\bullet (G,\mathbb {F}_\ell )\)module (cf. [20, §3.3]). Hence the natural question arising in this context is, whether one can express \(\mathrm {ker}(d_2^{2,1})\) in terms of \(\mathrm {Ext}^{s,t}_{H^{\bullet }(G,\mathbb {F}_\ell )}(\mathbb {F}_\ell ,\mathrm {ker}(j^\bullet ))\), \(s\not =t\).
2 Oriented pro\(\ell \) groups
For a pro\(\ell \) group G and a positive integer n, \(G^n\) will denote the closed subgroup of G generated by the nth powers of all elements of G. Moreover, for two elements \(g,h\in G\), we set
and for two subgroups \(H_1,H_2\) of G, \([H_1,H_2]\) will denote the closed subgroup of G generated by all commutators [g, h] with \(g\in H_1\) and \(h\in H_2\). In particular, \(G'\) will denote the closure of the commutator subgroup of G.
2.1 \(\ell \)Orientations of profinite groups
Let \(\mathbb {Z}_{\ell }\) denote the ring of \(\ell \)adic integers, and let \(\mathbb {Z}_{\ell }^\times \) denote its group of units. Note that \(\mathbb {Z}_\ell ^\times \) is a virtual pro\(\ell \) group, in more detail:

(a)
if \(\ell \ne 2\) then the Sylow pro\(\ell \) subgroup of \(\mathbb {Z}_\ell ^\times \) is \(1+\ell \mathbb {Z}_\ell =\{1+\ell \lambda \mid \lambda \in \mathbb {Z}_\ell \}\), which is free pro\(\ell \) cyclic;

(b)
if \(\ell =2\) then \(\mathbb {Z}_2^\times =1+2\mathbb {Z}_2\simeq \mathbb {Z}/2\times (1+4\mathbb {Z}_2)\), and the factor \(1+4\mathbb {Z}_2\) is isomorphic to \(\mathbb {Z}_2\).
An oriented pro\(\ell \) group \((G,\theta )\) is a pro\(\ell \) group G together with a continuous group homomorphism \(\theta :G\rightarrow \mathbb {Z}_\ell ^\times \). Moreover, \((G,\theta )\) is said to be torsionfree if \(\ell \ne 2\), or if \(\ell =2\) and \(\mathrm {im}(\theta )\subseteq 1+4\mathbb {Z}_2\)—observe that in a torsionfree oriented pro\(\ell \) group \((G,\theta )\), G need not be a torsion free pro\(\ell \) group, e.g., \((\mathbb {Z}/\ell ,\mathbf {1})\) is a torsionfree oriented pro\(\ell \) as \(\mathrm {im}(\mathbf {1})=\{1\}\).
Oriented pro\(\ell \) groups where introduced by Efrat [8] under the name “cyclotomic pro\(\ell \) pairs”. For an oriented pro\(\ell \) group \((G,\theta )\), \(\mathbb {Z}_\ell (1)\) will denote the continuous left \(\mathbb {Z}_\ell [\![G]\!]\)module which is isomorphic to \(\mathbb {Z}_\ell \) as an abelian pro\(\ell \) group, such that \(g\cdot v=\theta (g)\cdot v\) for every \(g\in G\) and \(v\in \mathbb {Z}_\ell (1)\) (cf. [26, § 1]). Conversely, if a pro\(\ell \) group G comes endowed with a continuous left \(\mathbb {Z}_\ell [\![G]\!]\)module M which is isomorphic to \(\mathbb {Z}_\ell \) as an abelian pro\(\ell \) group, then M induces an orientation \(\theta :G\rightarrow \mathbb {Z}_\ell ^\times \) by \(\theta (g)\cdot v=g\cdot v\) for every \(g\in G\) and \(v\in M\), such that \(M\simeq \mathbb {Z}_\ell (1)\).
The fundamental examples of oriented pro\(\ell \) groups arise in Galois theory (cf. [10, § 4]).
Example 2.1
For a field \(\mathbb {K}\), let \(\bar{\mathbb {K}}^{\mathrm {sep}}\) denote a separable closure of \(\mathbb {K}\), and let \(\mu _{\ell ^\infty }\) denote the group of roots of 1 of \(\ell \)power order lying in \(\bar{\mathbb {K}}^{\mathrm {sep}}\). If \(\mathbb {K}\) contains a primitive \(\ell {\mathrm {th}}\)root of unity, then \(\mu _{\ell ^\infty }\) is contained in the maximal pro\(\ell \) extension \(\mathbb {K}(\ell )\) of \(\mathbb {K}\). As \(\mu _{\ell ^\infty }\simeq \mathbb {Z}[\frac{1}{\ell }]/\mathbb {Z}\) and \(\mathrm {Aut}(\mathbb {Z}[\frac{1}{\ell }]/\mathbb {Z})\) is isomorphic to \(\mathbb {Z}_\ell ^\times \), the action of the maximal pro\(\ell \) Galois group \(G_{\mathbb {K}}(\ell )=\mathrm {Gal}(\mathbb {K}(\ell )/\mathbb {K})\) of \(\mathbb {K}\) on \(\mu _{\ell ^\infty }\) fixes the primitive \(\ell {\mathrm {th}}\)roots of unity, and induces the \(\ell \) cyclotomic character
In particular,
Furthermore, one has \(\mathrm {im}(\tilde{\theta }_{\mathbb {K},\ell })=1+\ell ^f\mathbb {Z}_\ell \)—where f is the positive integer satisfying \(\mu _{\ell ^\infty }\cap \mathbb {K}^\times =\ell ^f\)—in case \(\mu _{\ell ^\infty }\cap \mathbb {K}^\times \) is nonempty and finite, and \(\mathrm {im}(\tilde{\theta }_{\mathbb {K},\ell })=\{1\}\) if \(\mu _{\ell ^\infty }\subseteq \mathbb {K}^\times \). The continuous \(G_{\mathbb {K}}(\ell )\)module \(\mathbb {Z}_\ell (1)\) induced by the cyclotomic character is called the 1st Tate twist of \(\mathbb {Z}_\ell \) (cf. [19, Definition 7.3.6]), and for every \(n\ge 1\), \(\mathbb {Z}_\ell (1)/\ell ^n\) is isomorphic to the \(G_{\mathbb {K}}(\ell )\)module of the \(\ell ^n\)th roots of 1.
Note that oriented pro\(\ell \) groups form a category \(\mathbf {Or}_\ell \), i.e., for \((G,\theta ), (H,\theta ^\prime )\in \mathrm {ob}(\mathbf {Or}_\ell )\) a morphism of oriented pro\(\ell \) groups \(\phi :(G,\theta )\rightarrow (H,\theta ^\prime )\) is a continuous group homomorphism \(\phi :G\rightarrow H\) of pro\(\ell \) groups satisfying \(\theta ^\prime \circ \phi =\theta \).
For an oriented pro\(\ell \) group \((G,\theta )\) one has the following constructions.

(a)
Let N be a normal subgroup of G such that \(N\subseteq \mathrm {ker}(\theta )\). Then one has an oriented pro\(\ell \) group
$$\begin{aligned} (G,\theta )/N:=(G/N,\bar{\theta }), \end{aligned}$$where \(\bar{\theta }:G/N\rightarrow \mathbb {Z}_\ell ^\times \) is the orientation induced by \(\theta \).

(b)
Let A be an abelian pro\(\ell \) group. Then one has an oriented pro\(\ell \) group
$$\begin{aligned} A\rtimes (G,\theta ):=(A\rtimes G,\tilde{\theta }), \end{aligned}$$where \(gag^{1}=a^{\theta (g)}\) for all \(g\in G\) and \(a\in A\), and \(\tilde{\theta }=\theta \circ \pi \), where \(\pi :A\rtimes G\rightarrow G\) is the canonical projection.
2.2 The maximal \(\theta \)abelian quotient of an oriented pro\(\ell \) group
Let \((G,\theta )\) be a torsionfree oriented pro\(\ell \) group. Then \(G/\mathrm {ker}(\theta )\simeq \mathrm {im}(\theta )\) is torsionfree, and thus either trivial or isomorphic to \(\mathbb {Z}_\ell \). Therefore, the epimorphism \(G\twoheadrightarrow G/\mathrm {ker}(\theta )\) splits, and since \(ghg^{1}\equiv h^{\theta (g)}\bmod K_\theta (G)\) for every \(g\in G\) and \(h\in \mathrm {ker}(\theta )\), one concludes that
Remark 2.2
By (2.1), if \((G,\theta )\) is a torsionfree \(\theta \)abelian oriented pro\(\ell \) group, then it is isomorphic to the oriented pro\(\ell \) group \(\mathrm {ker}(\theta )\rtimes (\mathrm {im}(\theta ),\mathrm {Id}_{\mathrm {im}(\theta )})\). Conversely, if A is a free abelian pro\(\ell \) group, and \((\bar{G},\theta )\) is an oriented pro\(\ell \) group satisfying \(\mathrm {ker}(\theta )=\{1\}\), then the oriented pro\(\ell \) group \((G,\tilde{\theta })=A\rtimes (\bar{G},\theta )\) is \(\tilde{\theta }\)abelian, since \(\mathrm {ker}(\tilde{\theta })=A\) is a free abelian pro\(\ell \) group, and as \(ghg^{1}=h^{\tilde{\theta }(g)}\) for every \(g\in \bar{G}\) and \(h\in A\) and thus \(K_{\tilde{\theta }}(G)=\{1\}\).
Let \((G,\theta )\) be an oriented pro\(\ell \) group. Put \(\bar{G}=G/I_\theta (G)\) and let \(\bar{\theta }:\bar{G}\rightarrow \mathbb {Z}_\ell ^\times \) denote the induced orientation. Since the quotient \(\mathrm {ker}(\theta )/I_\theta (G)\) is torsionfree (cf. Sect. 1), the oriented pro\(\ell \) group \((G(\theta ),\bar{\theta })\) is \(\bar{\theta }\)abelian. This group together with the canonical projection
has the following universal property.
Proposition 2.3
Let \((G,\theta )\) be an oriented pro\(\ell \) group, let \((A,\theta ^\circ )\) be an oriented \(\theta ^\circ \)abelian pro\(\ell \) group, and let \(\psi :(G,\theta )\rightarrow (A,\theta ^\circ )\) be a continuous homomorphism of oriented pro\(\ell \) groups. Then \(\psi \) factors through \(\pi ^{ab}_{G,\theta },\) i.e., there exists a (unique) continuous group homomorphism
satisfying \(\psi =\psi ^{\mathrm {ab}}_{G,\theta }\circ \pi ^{\mathrm {ab}}_{G,\theta }\).
Proof
As \(\psi \) is a homomorphism of oriented pro\(\ell \) groups, and as \((A,\theta ^\circ )\) is \(\theta ^\circ \)abelian, one has
As \(\mathrm {ker}(\theta ^\circ )\) is torsionfree, this implies that \(\psi (I_\theta (G))=\{1\}\). Hence the induced homomorphism \(\psi ^{\mathrm {ab}}_{G,\theta }:G(\theta )\rightarrow A\) of oriented pro\(\ell \) groups has the desired properties. \(\square \)
Remark 2.4
Let \((G,\theta )\simeq A\rtimes ((G,\theta )/\mathrm {ker}(\theta ))\) be a torsionfree \(\theta \)abelian oriented pro\(\ell \) group. Then for every subgroup H of G one has
and thus the oriented pro\(\ell \) group \((H,\theta \vert _H)\) is split \(\theta \vert _H\)abelian (cf. [26, Remark 3.12]).
2.3 Kummerian oriented pro\(\ell \) groups
Let \((G,\theta )\) be an oriented torsionfree pro\(\ell \) group. Since \(\mathrm {im}(\theta )\subseteq 1+\ell \mathbb {Z}_\ell \), the action of G on the quotient \(\mathbb {Z}_\ell (1)/\ell \) of the continuous Gmodule \(\mathbb {Z}_\ell (1)\) is trivial, i.e., \(\mathbb {Z}_\ell (1)/\ell \simeq \mathbb {F}_\ell \) as a trivial left \(\mathbb {Z}_\ell [\![G]\!]\)module. In the proof of the subsequent proposition we will make use of the following
Fact 2.5
Let A be an abelian pro\(\ell \) group, and let B be a closed subgroup of A which is a direct summand of A satisfying \(B\subseteq A^\ell \). Then \(B=\{0\}\).
Proof
Let \(A=B\oplus C\). Then \(A^\ell =B^\ell \oplus C^\ell \), and as \(B^\ell \subseteq B\), and \(B\cap C=\{0\}\) one concludes that \(B\subseteq B^\ell \), i.e., \(B=B^\ell =\Phi (B)\). Hence \(B=\{0\}\). \(\square \)
A torsionfree oriented pro\(\ell \) group \((G,\theta )\) is said to be Kummerian if the following equivalent properties are satisfied.
Proposition 2.6
Let \((G,\theta )\) be a torsionfree oriented pro\(\ell \) group. Then the following are equivalent:

(i)
the map \(H^1(G,\mathbb {Z}_\ell (1)/\ell ^n)\longrightarrow H^1(G,\mathbb {F}_\ell )\) induced by the epimorphism of discrete left Gmodules \(\mathbb {Z}_\ell (1)/\ell ^n\twoheadrightarrow \mathbb {Z}_\ell (1)/\ell \simeq \mathbb {F}_\ell ,\) is surjective for every \(n\ge 1\) (cf. [10]).

(ii)
The quotient \(\mathrm {ker}(\theta )/K_\theta (G)\) is a free abelian pro\(\ell \) group.

(iii)
The oriented pro\(\ell \) group \((G,\theta )/K_\theta (G)=(G/K_\theta (G),\bar{\theta })\) is \(\bar{\theta }\)abelian.

(iv)
\(K_\theta (G)\) is isolated in \(\mathrm {ker}(\theta ),\) i.e., \(I_\theta (G)=K_\theta (G)\).

(v)
The group \(H_{\mathrm {cts}}^2(G,\mathbb {Z}_\ell (1))\) is a torsionfree \(\mathbb {Z}_\ell \)module.

(vi)
\(I_{\theta }(G)\subseteq \Phi (G)\).
(Here \(H_{\mathrm {cts}}^*\) denotes continuous cochain cohomology as defined by Tate [30]).
Proof
For G finitely generated the equivalence between (i) and (ii) was shown in [10, Theorem 5.6], and the equivalence between (ii) and (iii) follows from Remark 2.2. For general G the equivalences were shown in [24, Theorem 1.2]. The equivalence between (i) and (v) is shown in [26, Proposition 2.1], and (iii) \(\Leftrightarrow \) (iv) is a direct consequence of (2.1) and Remark 2.2. Hence (i)–(v) are equivalent. As \(K_\theta (G)\subseteq \Phi (G)\) one has (iv) \(\Rightarrow \) (vi). Thus it remains to show that (vi) \(\Rightarrow \) (iv). Let \(\pi :G\rightarrow G/\Phi (G)\) denote the canonical projection, and let
denote the induced map—note that \(K_\theta (G)\ker (\theta )^\ell =\ker (\theta )^\ell [G,\ker (\theta )]\), by (1.1). As \(\mathrm {im}(\theta )\)—which is isomorphic to either \(\mathbb {Z}_\ell \) or \(\{1\}\)—is projective, the 5term exact sequence associated to the Hochschild–Serre spectral sequence yields an exact sequence
Thus, by Pontrjagin duality, \(\pi _*\) is injective. Note that
is a direct summand of the abelian pro\(\ell \) group \(\mathrm {ker}(\theta )/K_\theta (G)\) (cf. Sect. 1). Since \(\pi (I_\theta (G))=\{1\}\) by (vi), and since \(\pi _*\) is injective, one concludes that \(I_\theta (G)\subseteq K_\theta (G)\cdot \mathrm {ker}(\theta )^\ell \). Hence \(I_\theta (G)/K_\theta (G)=\{1\}\) by Fact 2.5. \(\square \)
Example 2.7

(a)
If \((G,\theta )\) is a torsionfree \(\theta \)abelian pro\(\ell \) group, then, by Proposition 2.6(ii), \((G,\theta )\) is Kummerian, as \(K_\theta (G)=\{1\}\) and \(\mathrm {ker}(\theta )\) is free abelian by definition.

(b)
If G is a free pro\(\ell \) group, then by Proposition 2.6(v) the oriented pro\(\ell \) group \((G,\theta )\) is Kummerian for any orientation \(\theta :G\rightarrow \mathbb {Z}_\ell ^\times \), as \(\mathrm {cd}(G)=1\) (cf. [19, Proposition 3.5.17]).

(c)
If \((G,\theta )\) is an oriented pro\(\ell \) group with trivial orientation \(\theta \equiv \mathbf {1}\), then \((G,\theta )\) is Kummerian if, and only if, the abelianization \(G^{\mathrm {ab}}\) is a free abelian pro\(\ell \) group (cf. [10, Example 3.5(1)]).
The following result is a consequence of Kummer theory (cf. [10, Theorem 4.2]).
Theorem 2.8
Let \(\mathbb {K}\) be a field containing a primitive \(\ell {\mathrm {th}}\)root of 1 (and also \(\sqrt{1}\) if \(\ell =2).\) Then \((G_{\mathbb {K}}(\ell ),\theta _{\mathbb {K},\ell })\) is a torsionfree Kummerian oriented pro\(\ell \) group.
From Proposition 2.3 and Proposition 2.6(iv), one concludes the following fact.
Corollary 2.9
Let \((G,\theta )\) be a Kummerian torsionfree oriented pro\(\ell \) group. Then \((G/K_\theta (G),\bar{\theta })\) is the maximal \(\theta \)abelian quotient of G.
3 The Bogomolov–Positselski property
3.1 Bogomolov’s conjecture
Let \(\mathbb {K}\) be a field containing a primitive \(\ell {\mathrm {th}}\)root of 1 (and also \(\sqrt{1}\) if \(\ell =2\)), and let \(\mathbb {L}=\root \ell ^\infty \of {\mathbb {K}}\) denote the compositum of all radical extensions \(\mathbb {K}(\root \ell ^n \of {a})\), with \(a\in \mathbb {K}^\times \) and \(n\ge 1\), i.e.,
The maximal pro\(\ell \) Galois group \(G_{\mathbb {L}}(\ell )\) of the field \(\mathbb {L}\) is equal to the pro\(\ell \) group \(K_{\tilde{\theta }_{\mathbb {K},\ell }}(G_{\mathbb {K}}(\ell ))\) associated to the oriented pro\(\ell \) group \((G_{\mathbb {K}}(\ell ),\tilde{\theta }_{\mathbb {K},\ell })\) (cf. [10, Theorem 4.2]). Observe that the \(\ell \)cyclotomic character associated to the maximal pro\(\ell \) Galois group of \(\mathbb {L}\) is the trivial \(\ell \)orientation \(\mathbf {1}:K_{\tilde{\theta }_{\mathbb {K},\ell }}(G_\mathbb {K}(\ell ))\rightarrow \{1\}\subseteq \mathbb {Z}_\ell ^\times \).
Motivated by a conjecture formulated by Bogomolov [2]—see Remark 3.3, L. Positselski stated the following conjecture on the pro\(\ell \) group \(G_{\mathbb {L}}(\ell )=K_{\tilde{\theta }_{\mathbb {K},\ell }}(G_\mathbb {K}(\ell ))\) (cf. [20, Conjecture 1.2]).
Conjecture 3.1
Let \(\mathbb {K}\) be a field containing a primitive \(\ell {\mathrm {th}}\)root of 1, and also \(\sqrt{1}\) if \(\ell =2\). Then the maximal pro\(\ell \) Galois group \(G_{\mathbb {L}}(\ell )\) of \(\mathbb {L}=\root \ell ^\infty \of {\mathbb {K}}\) is a free pro\(\ell \) group.
Conjecture 3.1 is the motivation for the following definition.
Definition 3.2
A Kummerian oriented pro\(\ell \) group \((G,\theta )\) is said to have the Bogomolov–Positselski property if the subgroup \(K_\theta (G)\) is a free pro\(\ell \) group.
Hence, Conjecture 3.1 may be restated as follows: if \(\mathbb {K}\) is a field containing a primitive \(\ell {\mathrm {th}}\)root of 1 (and also \(\sqrt{1}\) if \(\ell =2\)), then the oriented pro\(\ell \) group \((G_{\mathbb {K}}(\ell ),\tilde{\theta }_{\mathbb {K},\ell })\) has the BogomolovPositselski property.
Remark 3.3
The original formulation of Bogomolov’s conjecture states that if \(\mathbb {K}\) is a field containing an algebraically closed field then the (closure of the) commutator subgroup of the Sylow pro\(\ell \) subgroup of the absolute Galois group \(G_{\mathbb {K}}\) of \(\mathbb {K}\) is a free pro\(\ell \) group. Furthermore, the (closure of the) commutator subgroup of the maximal pro\(\ell \) Galois group \(G_{\mathbb {K}}(\ell )\) should be a free pro\(\ell \) group as well (see also [3, Conjecture 6.2] and [18, § 3.1.2], where the conjecture is stated for function fields).
In [20], Positselski observed that the only essential part of the condition about the algebraically closed subfield of \(\mathbb {K}\) is that \(\mathbb {K}\) should contain all the roots of 1 of \(\ell \)power order. Consequently, he formulated the following conjecture (cf. [20, Conjecture 1.1]): the pro\(\ell \) Sylow subgroup of the absolute Galois group \(G_{\mathbb {L}}\), with \(\mathbb {L}=\root \ell ^\infty \of {\mathbb {K}}\) and \(\mathbb {K}\) an arbitrary field, is a free pro\(\ell \) group, i.e., \(\mathrm {cd}_\ell (G_{\mathbb {L}})\le 1\) (or, equivalently, \(G_{\mathbb {L}}\) is \(\ell \)projective, cf. [29, §I.3.4, Proposition 16]). Note that this conjecture is stronger than Conjecture 3.1, and likely hard to approach, while—as stated by Positselski himself, cf. [20, § 1.3]—the latter is closer to Bogomolov’s original conjecture.
Example 3.4

(a)
Let \((G,\theta )\) be a torsionfree \(\theta \)abelian oriented pro\(\ell \) group. Then \((G,\theta )\) is Kummerian (cf. Example 2.7(a)), and by Proposition 2.6(iv) one has
$$\begin{aligned} I_\theta (G)=K_\theta (G)=\{1\}. \end{aligned}$$So, \((G,\theta )\) has the Bogomolov–Positselski property.

(b)
Let \((G,\theta )\) be an oriented pro\(\ell \) group with G being a free pro\(\ell \) group. Then \((G,\theta )\) is Kummerian by Example 2.7(b), and it has the Bogomolov–Positselski property as every closed subgroup of G is again a free pro\(\ell \) group.

(c)
Let
$$\begin{aligned} \begin{aligned} G&= \langle \, x,y,z\,\mid \, [x,y]=z, [x,z]=[y,z]=1\,\rangle \\&= \left\{ \left( \begin{array}{ccc} 1 &{} a &{} c \\ 0 &{} 1 &{} b \\ 0 &{} 0 &{} 1 \end{array} \right) \,\mid \,a,b,c\in \mathbb {Z}_\ell \right\} \end{aligned} \end{aligned}$$be the Heisenberg group over \(\mathbb {Z}_\ell \), and set \((G,\mathbf {1})\), where \(\mathbf {1}:G\rightarrow \mathbb {Z}_\ell ^\times \) is the trivial orientation. Then \(K_\theta (G)=G^\prime \simeq \mathbb {Z}_\ell \) is the cyclic pro\(\ell \) subgroup generated by z, and \(G^{\mathrm {ab}}\simeq \mathbb {Z}_\ell ^2\). Hence \((G,\theta )\) is Kummerian by Example 2.7(c), and it has the Bogomolov–Positselski property. Nevertheless, G does not occur as the maximal pro\(\ell \) Galois group of any field containing \(\mu _{\ell ^\infty }\) (cf. [23, Example 5.4]).
3.2 Selfisolated pro\(\ell \) groups and Frattini pro\(\ell \) covers
Let G be a pro\(\ell \) group, and let \(H\subseteq G\) be a subgroup. The isolator of H is the subgroup
(cf. [12, § 66]). We say that H is selfisolated if \(\mathrm {Iso}(H)=H\). In particular, if N is a normal subgroup of G, then G is selfisolated if, and only if, the quotient G/N is a torsionfree pro\(\ell \) group. The following fact is almost straightforward.
Fact 3.5
Let \((G,\theta )\) be a torsionfree \(\theta \)abelian oriented pro\(\ell \) group. Let N be a normal subgroup of G contained in both \(\mathrm {ker}(\theta )\) and \(\Phi (G)\). If N is selfisolated, then \(N=\{1\}\).
Proof
By Remark 2.2, \(\Phi (G)\cap \mathrm {ker}(\theta )=\mathrm {ker}(\theta )^\ell \). As \(N\subseteq \mathrm {ker}(\theta )\) is an isolated subgroup, it is a direct summand of \(\mathrm {ker}(\theta )\). Thus by Fact 2.5, N is trivial. \(\square \)
Fact 3.5 has the following consequence.
Proposition 3.6
Let \((G,\theta )\) be a torsionfree Kummerian oriented pro\(\ell \) group. Let \(N\trianglelefteq G\) be a closed normal, selfisolated, subgroup of G contained in \(\mathrm {ker}(\theta )\) satisfying
Then \(N=K_\theta (G)\).
A Frattini pro\(\ell \) cover of pro\(\ell \) groups is a short exact sequence of pro\(\ell \) groups
satisfying \(N\subseteq \Phi (G)\). One also says that \(\tau :G\rightarrow \bar{G}\) is a Frattini pro\(\ell \) cover of \(\bar{G}\). One may characterize those pro\(\ell \) groups which may be completed into Kummerian oriented pro\(\ell \) groups with the Bogomolov–Positselski property as follows.
Theorem 3.7
A pro\(\ell \) group G may be completed into a Kummerian oriented pro\(\ell \) group \((G,\theta )\) with the Bogomolov–Positselski property if, and only if, G is a Frattini pro\(\ell \) cover (3.2) of \(\bar{G},\) where \((\bar{G},\bar{\theta })\) is a \(\bar{\theta }\)abelian oriented pro\(\ell \) group and N is a free pro\(\ell \) group.
Proof
If \((G,\theta )\) is Kummerian with the Bogomolov–Positselski property, then, by Proposition 2.6, \((G/K_\theta (G),\bar{\theta })=(G,\theta )/K_{\theta }(G)\) is \(\bar{\theta }\)abelian and \(N=K_{\theta }(G)\) is a free pro\(\ell \) group by Definition 3.2. This shows one implication.
Conversely, if \((\bar{G},\bar{\theta })\) is \(\bar{\theta }\)abelian, then the epimorphism of oriented pro\(\ell \) groups \((G,\theta )\rightarrow (\bar{G},\bar{\theta })\) factors through \((G,\theta )/I_{\theta }(G)\) by Proposition 2.3. Hence \(I_\theta (G)\subseteq N\), while \(N\subseteq \Phi (G)\) by hypothesis, thus \((G,\theta )\) is Kummerian by Proposition 2.6:(vi). Thus, \(I_\theta (G)=K_\theta (G)\) by Proposition 2.6:(iv), and since
Proposition 3.6 yields \(N=K_\theta (G)\), i.e., \((G,\theta )\) has the Bogomolov–Positselski property. \(\square \)
4 The Bogomolov–Positselski property and cohomology
4.1 Quadratic cohomology and the Norm Residue Theorem
Let G be a pro\(\ell \) group. The cohomology groups \(H^n(G,\mathbb {F}_\ell )\), \(n\ge 1\), where \(\mathbb {F}_\ell \) is the trivial Gmodule isomorphic—as abelian group—to \(\mathbb {F}_\ell =\mathbb {Z}/\ell \mathbb {Z}\), come endowed with the bilinear cupproduct
which is associative and gradedcommutative, i.e., \(\beta \cup \alpha =(1)^{st}\alpha \cup \beta \) for \(\alpha \in H^s(G,\mathbb {F}_\ell )\) and \(\beta \in H^t(G,\mathbb {F}_\ell )\) (cf. [19, Chap. I, § 4]). Thus,
is a connected \(\mathbb {N}_0\)graded, gradedcommutative, associative \(\mathbb {F}_\ell \)algebra.
For an \(\mathbb {F}_\ell \)vector space V, let \(\mathbf {T}^\bullet V\) denote the \(\mathbb {F}_\ell \)tensor algebra, i.e.,
The \(\mathbb {N}_0\)graded associative \(\mathbb {F}_\ell \)algebra \(\mathbf {A}_\bullet \) is said to be generated in degree 1, if the canonical homomorphism \(\phi _\bullet :\mathbf {T}^\bullet \mathbf {A}_1\rightarrow \mathbf {A}_\bullet \) of \(\mathbb {N}_0\)graded associative \(\mathbb {F}_\ell \)algebras is surjective. Moreover, \(\mathbf {A}_\bullet \) is said to be quadratic, if it is 1generated and \(\mathrm {ker}(\phi _\bullet )=\langle \mathrm {ker}(\phi _2)\rangle \), i.e., the ideal \(\mathrm {ker}(\phi _\bullet )\) is generated in degree 2.
Definition 4.1
A pro\(\ell \) group G is said to be \(H^\bullet \) quadratic if \(H^\bullet (G,\mathbb {F}_\ell )\) is a quadratic algebra.
For an \(\mathbb {F}_\ell \)vector space V, let \(\varvec{\Lambda }^\bullet V=\mathbf {T}^\bullet V/\langle \, v\otimes v\mid v\in V\,\rangle \) denote the exterior \(\mathbb {F}_\ell \)algebra spanned by V, and \(\mathbf {S}^\bullet V=\mathbf {T}^\bullet V/\langle \, v\otimes ww\otimes v\mid v,w\in V\,\rangle \) denote the symmetric \(\mathbb {F}_\ell \)algebra spanned by V. Then G is \(H^\bullet \)quadratic if the cupproduct induces an isomorphism of graded \(\mathbb {F}_\ell \)algebras
where \(\varvec{\Xi }^\bullet =\varvec{\Lambda }^\bullet \) if \(\ell \) is odd, and \(\varvec{\Xi }^\bullet =\mathbf {S}^\bullet \) if \(\ell =2\). Moreover,
By the Norm Residue Theorem, if the field \(\mathbb {K}\) contains a primitive \(\ell {\mathrm {th}}\)root of unity, then the maximal pro\(\ell \) Galois group \(G_{\mathbb {K}}(\ell )\) is \(H^\bullet \)quadratic (cf. [21] or [26]).
Remark 4.2
Let \(\ell =2\) and let G be a pro2 group. Then one has \(\alpha \cup \alpha =0\) for every \(\alpha \in H^1(G,\mathbb {F}_2)\) if, and only if, the map
induced by the epimorphism of trivial Gmodules \(\mathbb {Z}/4\rightarrow \mathbb {F}_2\), is surjective (cf. [26, Fact 7.1]). In particular, if \((G,\theta )\) is a torsionfree Kummerian oriented pro2 group, one concludes that \(\alpha \cup \alpha =0\) for all \(\alpha \in H^1(G,\mathbb {F}_2)\). This is the case for \((G_{\mathbb {K}}(2),\tilde{\theta }_{\mathbb {K},2})\), with \(\mathbb {K}\) a field containing \(\sqrt{1}\), i.e., \(H^\bullet (G_{\mathbb {K}}(2),\mathbb {F}_2)\) is quadratic and also a quotient of the exterior algebra \(\varvec{\Lambda }^\bullet H^1(G_{\mathbb {K}}(2),\mathbb {F}_2)\).
Example 4.3
Let \((G,\theta )\) be torsionfree \(\theta \)abelian oriented pro\(\ell \) group. Then G is a torsion free powerful pro\(\ell \) group (cf. [5, Chap. 4, § 1]), and
for finitely generated free abelian pro\(\ell \) groups \(A_i\). Thus by M. Lazard’s theorem (cf. [14]) one has \(\varvec{\Lambda }_\bullet H^1(G,\mathbb {F}_\ell )\) (see, e.g., [26, Theorem 3.13]), and hence G is \(H^\bullet \)quadratic.
4.2 Quadratic cohomology and the Bogomolov–Positselski property
Let \((G,\theta )\) be a torsionfree Kummerian oriented pro\(\ell \) group. The short exact sequence of pro\(\ell \) groups
induces the 5terms exact sequence in cohomology
(cf. [19, Proposition 1.6.7]). As \((G,\theta )\) is Kummerian, one has \(I_\theta (G)\) \(=K_\theta (G)\subseteq \Phi (G)\) (cf. Proposition 2.6(iv)). Hence \(\mathrm {inf}_{ G(\theta ),G}^1\) is an isomorphism and \(\mathrm {res}^1_{G,I_\theta (G)}\) is the 0map. As \((G(\theta ),\bar{\theta })=(G,\theta )/I_\theta (G)\) is \(\bar{\theta }\)abelian, one has
(cf. Example 4.3). If in addition G is \(H^\bullet \)quadratic, then \(H^\bullet (G,\mathbb {F}_\ell )\) is a quotient of \(\varvec{\Lambda }^\bullet H^1(G,\mathbb {F}_\ell )\) (cf. Remark 4.2). In particular, the inflation map \(\psi ^\bullet =\mathrm {inf}_{ G(\theta ),G}^\bullet \) induces a surjective homomorphism of \(\mathbb {N}_0\)graded \(\mathbb {F}_\ell \)algebras
satisfying
Since \(\mathrm {res}^1_{G,K_\theta (G)}\) is trivial, one concludes from 4.5 that \(d_2^{0,1}\) is injective, \(\mathrm {im}(d_2^{0,1})=\mathrm {ker}(\psi _2)\), and \(H^2(G,\mathbb {F}_\ell )\simeq H^2( G(\theta ),\mathbb {F}_\ell )/\mathrm {im}(d_2^{0,1})\). Thus, as \(H^\bullet (G,\mathbb {F}_\ell )\) is quadratic, one has
4.3 A cohomological criterion
Let \((G,\theta )\) be a Kummerian torsionfree oriented pro\(\ell \) group which is \(H^\bullet \)quadratic. Let \((E_r^{s,t},d_r^{s,t})\) denote the Hochschild–Serre spectral sequence with coefficients in \(\mathbb {F}_\ell \) associated to the short exact sequence (4.4), i.e.,
with differentials \(d_r^{s,t}:E_r^{s,t}\rightarrow E_r^{s+r,tr+1}\) satisfying \(d_r\circ d_r=0\) (cf. [19, Chap. II, § 4]). In particular, by (4.7) one has \(E_2^{\bullet ,0}\simeq \varvec{\Lambda }^\bullet H^1(G,\mathbb {F}_\ell )\). For \(\alpha \in E_2^{s,0}=H^s( G(\theta ),\mathbb {F}_\ell )\), \(s\ge 0\), and \(\beta \in E_2^{0,1}=H^1({I}_\theta (G),\mathbb {F}_\ell )^{ G(\theta )}\), one has
(cf. [19, Chap. II, Example 4.5]).
Proposition 4.4
Let \((G,\theta )\) be a torsionfree Kummerian oriented pro\(\ell \) group with G being \(H^\bullet \)quadratic. Then

(i)
\(E_\infty ^{s,t}\) is concentrated on the 0th line, i.e., \(E_\infty ^{s,t}=0\) for every \(s\ge 0\) and \(t\ge 1;\)

(ii)
\(E_3^{s,0}\simeq E_\infty ^{s,0}\simeq H^s(G,\mathbb {F}_\ell )\) for every \(s\ge 0\).
Proof
Since \((G,\theta )\) is Kummerian, by (4.6) one has \(E_2^{\bullet ,0}\simeq \varvec{\Lambda }^\bullet H^1(G,\mathbb {F}_\ell )\). For every \(t\ge 0\) there exists a descending separating filtration \((F^kH^t(G,\mathbb {F}_\ell ))_{0\le k\le t}\) satisfying \(F^0H^t(G,\mathbb {F}_\ell )=H^t(G,\mathbb {F}_\ell )\) and
, where \(F^{s+t+1}H^{s+t}(G,\mathbb {F}_\ell )=\{0\}\) (cf. [1, p. 99]). By [19, Chap. II, § 4, Example 1], the composite of the maps
is the s th left edge morphism (cf. [19, p. 99]) and hence coincides with the inflation map \(\mathrm {inf}_{G(\theta ),G}^s\), which is surjective by (4.7). Thus \(F^0H^t(G,\mathbb {F}_\ell )=H^t(G,\mathbb {F}_\ell )\) for all \(t\ge 0\), i.e., \(E_\infty ^{\bullet ,0}\simeq H^\bullet (G,\mathbb {F}_p)\), and consequently \(E_\infty ^{k,t}=0\) for every \(1\le k\le t\). This shows (i).
By (4.11), one has canonical homomorphisms of \(\mathbb {N}_0\)graded \(\mathbb {F}_\ell \)algebras
Moreover, \(\sigma ^\bullet \) and \(\tau ^\bullet \) are surjective, \(\sigma ^k\) and \(\tau ^k\) are isomorphisms for \(k\in \{0,1,2\}\), and their composition is an isomorphism of quadratic \(\mathbb {F}_\ell \)algebras by (4.9). Thus \(\sigma ^\bullet \) and \(\tau ^\bullet \) are isomorphisms which shows (ii). \(\square \)
Let \((G,\theta )\) be a Kummerian torsionfree oriented pro\(\ell \) group, and put \(K_\theta (G)^{\mathrm {ab}}=K_\theta (G)/K_\theta (G)'\). Recall that if \(\mathbb {K}\) is a field containing a primitive \(\ell {\mathrm {th}}\)root of 1 and \((G,\theta )=(G_{\mathbb {K}}(\ell ),\tilde{\theta }_{\mathbb {K},\ell })\), then \(K_\theta (G)^{\mathrm {ab}}\) is a free abelian pro\(\ell \) group, as the oriented pro\(\ell \) group \((K_\theta (G),\theta \vert _{K_\theta (G)})\) is again Kummerian, and since \(\theta \vert _{K_\theta (G)}\) is trivial. The short exact sequence of pro\(\ell \) groups
where \( G(\theta )=G/K_\theta (G)\), defines a cohomology class \(u\in H_{\mathrm {cts}}^2( G(\theta ),K_\theta (G)^{\mathrm {ab}})\) (cf. [19, p. 143]), where \(K_\theta (G)^{\mathrm {ab}}\) is considered as a topological left \(\mathbb {Z}_\ell [\![G(\theta )]\!]\)module and \(H_{\mathrm {cts}}^*\) denotes continuous cochain cohomology (cf. [19, Chap. II, § 7]). Since \([G,K_\theta (G)]\subseteq \Phi (G)\), one has
Thus, the pairing
induces a map
given by \(\phi _u(\alpha )= u\cup \alpha \) (cf. [19, p. 114]).
Theorem 4.5
Let \((G,\theta )\) be a Kummerian torsionfree oriented pro\(\ell \) group with G an \(H^\bullet \)quadratic pro\(\ell \) group. Then the following are equivalent.

(i)
\((G,\theta )\) has the Bogomolov–Positselski property;

(ii)
the differential map \(d_2^{2,1}:E_2^{2,1}\rightarrow E_2^{4,0}\simeq \Lambda ^4H^1( G(\theta ),\mathbb {F}_\ell )\) is injective;

(iii)
the map \(\phi _u\) is injective, i.e., \(u\cup \alpha \ne 0\) for every nontrivial \(\alpha \in E_2^{2,1}\).
If these conditions hold, then the spectral sequence \(E_2^{s,t}\Rightarrow E_\infty ^{s,t}\) collapses at the \(E_3\)page, i.e., \(E_3=E_\infty \).
Proof
By Proposition 4.4(ii), for every \(s\ge 0\) one has \(E_3^{s,0}\simeq E_4^{s,0}\simeq \cdots \simeq E_\infty ^{s,0}\). Since, by definition, \(E_4^{s,0}=E_3^{s,0}/\mathrm {im}(d_3^{s3,2})\), one concludes that the maps
must be the 0maps for every \(s\ge 3\). In particular, \(E_4^{0,2}=\mathrm {ker}(d_3^{0,2})\) is equal to \(E_3^{0,2}\), which is \(\mathrm {ker}(d_2^{0,2})\) by definition. As \(E_r^{s,t}\) is a firstquadrant spectral sequence, one has \(E_{r+1}^{0,2}=\ker (d_r^{0,2})\) and the map \(d_r^{0,2}:E_r^{0,2}\rightarrow E_r^{r,3r}=0\) is the 0map for every \(r\ge 4\). This implies that \(E_3^{0,2}=E_4^{0,2}=\cdots =E_\infty ^{0,2}\). Thus, applying Proposition 4.4(i), yields
i.e., \(d_2^{0,2}:E_2^{0,2}\rightarrow E_2^{2,1}\) is injective.
Moreover, one has \(E_3^{2,1}=E_4^{2,1}=E_\infty ^{2,1}\), as \(E_{r+1}^{2,1}=\mathrm {ker}(d_r^{2,1})/\mathrm {im}(d_r^{2r,r})\) and both maps
are the 0maps for every \(r\ge 3\). Applying Proposition 4.4(i) again yields
i.e., \(\mathrm {ker}(d_2^{2,1})=\mathrm {im}(d_2^{0,2})\).
Thus, if \((G,\theta )\) has the Bogomolov–Positselski property, then \(I_\theta (G)=K_\theta (G)\) is a free pro\(\ell \) group. Then \(H^t(K_\theta (G),\mathbb {F}_\ell )=0\) for every \(t\ge 2\) (cf. [19, Proposition 3.5.17]), and thus \(E_r^{0,t}=0\) for all \(r\ge 2\) and \(t\ge 2\). In particular, the map \(d_2^{0,2}:H^2(I_\theta (G),\mathbb {F}_\ell )^{ G(\theta )}\rightarrow E_2^{2,1}\) is trivial, and hence by (4.17), one has \(\mathrm {ker}(d_2^{2,1})=0\). This proves the implication (i)\(\Rightarrow \)(ii).
Conversely, if \(d_2^{2,1}\) is injective, then, by (4.17), one has \(\mathrm {im}(d_2^{0,2})=\mathrm {ker}(d_2^{2,1})=0\). Since \(d_2^{0,2}\) is injective by (4.16), this implies that \(E_2^{0,2}=H^2(I_\theta (G),\mathbb {F}_\ell )^{ G(\theta )}{=0}\). Since G is a pro\(\ell \) group, the equality \(H^2(I_\theta (G),\mathbb {F}_\ell )^{ G(\theta )}=0\) implies that \(H^2(I_\theta (G),\mathbb {F}_\ell )=0\), and thus \(I_\theta (G)\) is free by [19, Proposition 3.5.17]. This proves the implication (ii)\(\Rightarrow \)(i). The equivalence between (ii) and (iii) follows from [19, Theorem 2.4.4].
Finally, if \(I_\theta (G)\) is a free pro\(\ell \) group, one has \(E_r^{s,t}=0\) for all \(s\ge 0\), \(t\ge 2\), and \(r\ge 2\). Hence, all maps \(d_3^{s,t}\) are trivial, for all \(s,t\ge 0\), so that \(E_3^{s,t}=E_\infty ^{s,t}\). \(\square \)
Question 4.6
Let \((G,\theta )\) be a Kummerian torsionfree pro\(\ell \) group with G being an \(H^\bullet \)quadratic pro\(\ell \) group, and let \((E_r^{s,t},d_r^{s,t})\) be the Hochschild–Serre spectral sequence associated to (4.4). By Proposition 4.4, for every \(s\ge 0\) one has \(E_3^{s,0}\simeq E_\infty ^{s,0}\), and \(E_\infty ^{s,t}=0\) for \(s\ge 0\) and \(t\ge 1\). Moreover, by Theorem 4.5, if \((G,\theta )\) has the Bogomolov–Positselski property, then
i.e., \(E_r^{s,t}\) collapses at the \(E_3\)page. It would be interesting to understand whether (4.18) implies the Bogomolov–Positselski property for \((G,\theta )\). We suspect that the answer should be affirmative. However, we could not find any evidence for this speculation.
Remark 4.7
Let \(\mathbb {K}\) be a field containing a primitive \(\ell {\mathrm {th}}\)root of unity (and also \(\sqrt{1}\) if \(\ell =2\)), put \(\mathbb {L}=\root \ell ^\infty \of {\mathbb {K}}\) and consider the torsionfree Kummerian oriented pro\(\ell \) group \((G_{\mathbb {K}}(\ell ),\tilde{\theta }_{\mathbb {K},\ell })\). The oriented pro\(\ell \) group \((I_{\tilde{\theta }_{\mathbb {K},\ell }}(G_{\mathbb {K}}(\ell )),\mathbf {1})\) is again Kummerian and torsion free, and thus one has
where the latter is a free abelian pro\(\ell \) group [cf. Example 2.7(c)]. Hence, the short exact sequence (4.14) translates into
Recall that by Kummer theory one has an isomorphism of (discrete) \(\ell \)elementary abelian groups \(H^1(\mathrm {Gal}(\root \ell ^\infty \of {\mathbb {L}}/\mathbb {L}),\mathbb {F}_\ell )\simeq \mathbb {L}^\times /(\mathbb {L}^\times )^\ell \), where \(\mathbb {L}^\times =\mathbb {L}\smallsetminus \{0\}\) denotes the multiplicative group of the field \(\mathbb {L}\). Then by Theorem 4.5 the cohomology element \(u\in H_{\mathrm {cts}}^2(\mathrm {Gal}(\mathbb {L}/\mathbb {K}),\mathrm {Gal}(\root p^\infty \of {\mathbb {L}}/\mathbb {L}))\) associated to the extension of pro\(\ell \) groups (4.21) induces a homomorphism
which is injective if, and only if, \(\mathbb {L}\) satisfies Conjecture 3.1. In view of Theorem 4.5, the knowledge of the structure of \(\mathbb {L}^\times /(\mathbb {L}^\times )^\ell \) as continuous \(\mathrm {Gal}(\mathbb {L}/\mathbb {K})\)module, or an arithmetic interpretation of the map \(\phi _{u,\mathbb {L}}\), may contribute to the solution of Conjecture 3.1.
5 Oriented pro\(\ell \) groups of elementary type
5.1 Demushkin groups and onerelator pro\(\ell \) groups
A Demushkin group is a Poincaré duality pro\(\ell \) group of dimension 2, namely, a pro\(\ell \) group G whose \(\mathbb {F}_\ell \)cohomology satisfies the following conditions:

(i)
\(\dim (H^1(G,\mathbb {F}_\ell ))<\infty \);

(ii)
\(H^2(G,\mathbb {F}_\ell )\simeq \mathbb {F}_\ell \);

(iii)
cupproduct induces a perfect pairing \(H^1(G,\mathbb {F}_\ell )\times H^1(G,\mathbb {F}_\ell )\rightarrow H^2(G,\mathbb {F}_\ell );\)
(cf. [19, Definition 3.9.9]). Note that by condition (ii) such a pro\(\ell \) group G has a single defining relation, namely, G may be defined as the quotient F/N of a free pro\(\ell \) group F over a normal subgroup \(N\subseteq F\) generated as a normal subgroup of F by a single element contained in \(\Phi (F)\) (cf., e.g., [19, pp. 231–232]).
A Demushkin group comes equipped with a distinguished orientation \(\eth _G:G\rightarrow \mathbb {Z}_\ell ^\times \), induced by the action of G on its dualizing module, described in [13, Theorem 4]. The orientation \(\eth _G:G\rightarrow \mathbb {Z}_\ell ^\times \) is the only orientation which completes G into a Kummerian oriented pro\(\ell \) group \((G,\eth _G)\) (cf. [26, Proposition 5.2]). The oriented pro\(\ell \) group \((G,\eth _G)\) enjoys also the Bogomolov–Positselski property.
Theorem 5.1
Let G be a Demushkin group, endowed with the canonical orientation \(\eth _G:G\rightarrow \mathbb {Z}_\ell ^\times ,\) and suppose that \(\mathrm {im}(\eth _G)\subseteq 1+4\mathbb {Z}_2\) if \(\ell =2\). Then the oriented pro\(\ell \) group \((G,\eth _G)\) has the Bogomolov–Positselski property.
Proof
Since \((G,\eth _G)\) is Kummerian, by [26, Proposition 5.2], Proposition 2.6(iii) and Remark 2.2, one has \(G/I_{\eth _G}(G)\simeq \mathbb {Z}_\ell ^{d1}\rtimes \mathbb {Z}_\ell \), with \(d=\dim (H^1(G,\mathbb {F}_\ell ))\). Therefore, \(I_{\eth _G}(G)=K_{\eth _G}(G)\) is a subgroup of G of infinite index, and thus it is a free pro\(\ell \) group by [29, § I.4.5, Exercise 5(b)]. \(\square \)
As mentioned above, Demushkin groups have a single defining relation. One may prove the Bogomolov–Positselski property also for 1relator pro\(\ell \) groups G with quadratic \(\mathbb {F}_\ell \)cohomology which can be completed into a Kummerian oriented pro\(\ell \) group \((G,\mathbf {1})\) with a trivial orientation.
Proposition 5.2
Let G be a finitely generated pro\(\ell \) group with a single defining relation such that

(i)
\(H^\bullet (G,\mathbb {F}_\ell )\) is a quadratic algebra;

(ii)
\((G,\mathbf {1})\) is Kummerian.
Then \((G,\mathbf {1})\) has the Bogomolov–Positselski property.
Proof
Since \((G,\mathbf {1})\) is Kummerian, the quotient \(G^{\mathrm {ab}}\) is a free abelian pro\(\ell \) group (cf. Example 2.7(c)). We need to show that \(G^\prime =K_{\mathbf {1}}(G)=I_{\mathbf {1}}(G)\) is a free pro\(\ell \) group.
Since G has a single defining relation, \(H^2(G,\mathbb {F}_\ell )\simeq \mathbb {F}_\ell \) (cf. [19, Corollary 3.9.5]). Moreover, since \(H^\bullet (G,\mathbb {F}_\ell )\) is quadratic, \(H^2(G,\mathbb {F}_\ell )\) is generated by cup products \(\chi \cup \psi \) with \(\chi ,\psi \in H^1(G,\mathbb {F}_\ell )\), so that the cup product from \(H^1(G,\mathbb {F}_\ell )\) to \(H^2(G,\mathbb {F}_\ell )\) is not trivial (see also [22, Proposition 4.2]). Consequently, [35, Corollary 2] yields a short exact sequence of pro\(\ell \) groups
which satisfies the following three properties: N is a free pro\(\ell \) group; \(\bar{G}\) is a Demushkin group; and for every subgroup S of G containing N, the inflation map
is an isomorphism (this last property is shown to hold in the proof of [35, Corollary 2]).
Since G is finitely generated, also \(\bar{G}\) is finitely generated. Moreover, by (5.1) the inflation map \(H^2(\bar{G},\mathbb {F}_\ell )\rightarrow H^2(G,\mathbb {F}_\ell )\) is an isomorphism, and thus by the fiveterms exact sequence (cf. [19, Proposition 1.6.7]) the restriction map
is surjective. Since \((G,\mathbf {1})\) is Kummerian, and since \(\mathrm {res}_{G,N}^1\) is surjective, [24, Theorem 1.2] implies that also the oriented pro\(\ell \) group \((\bar{G},\mathbf {1})=(G,\mathbf {1})/N\) is Kummerian. Hence, the canonical orientation \(\eth _{\bar{G}}:\bar{G}\rightarrow \mathbb {Z}_\ell ^\times \) must coincide with the trivial orientation \(\mathbf {1}\) (cf. [26, Proposition 5.2]). By Theorem 5.1, the oriented pro\(\ell \) group \((\bar{G},\mathbf {1})\) has the Bogomolov–Positselski property, and thus \(K_{\mathbf {1}}(\bar{G})\)—which coincides with \(\bar{G}^\prime \)—is a free pro\(\ell \) group.
Let S be the normal subgroup of G containing N such that \(S/N\simeq \bar{G}^\prime \). Thus, \(G/S\simeq \bar{G}/\bar{G}^\prime \) is abelian, and therefore \(S\supseteq G^\prime \). By (5.1), one has \(H^2(S/N,\mathbb {F}_\ell )\simeq H^2(S,\mathbb {F}_\ell )\), and the term on the lefthand side is trivial as S/N is a free pro\(\ell \) group. Hence, also \(H^2(S,\mathbb {F}_\ell )=0\), and S is a free pro\(\ell \) group (cf. [19, Proposition 3.5.17]). Since \(G^\prime \subseteq S\), and \(\mathrm {cd}_\ell (G^\prime )\le \mathrm {cd}_\ell (S)=1\), \(G^\prime \) must be free (cf. [29, § 3.3, Proposition 14]). \(\square \)
Remark 5.3
Let F be a finitely generated free pro\(\ell \) group, let r be an element of \(\Phi (F)\) and let R denote the normal subgroup of F generated by r. Suppose that \(\ell \ne 2\). By [22, Proposition 4.2] and Example 2.7(c), the pro\(\ell \) group \(G=F/R\) satisfies the conditions (i)–(ii) in Proposition 5.2 if, and only if, \(r\in F'\) and \(r\notin F^p\cdot [F',F]\).
5.2 Free constructions
By [8, § 3], the free product of two oriented pro\(\ell \) groups \((G_1,\theta _1)\) and \((G_2,\theta _2)\) is the oriented pro\(\ell \) group \((G,\theta )\) where G is the free pro\(\ell \) product of \(G_1,G_2\), and \(\theta :G\rightarrow \mathbb {Z}_\ell ^\times \) is the orientation induced by \(\theta _1,\theta _2\) via the universal property of G (see also [26, § 3.4]).
One may extend the above definition to free amalgamated pro\(\ell \) products of oriented pro\(\ell \) groups (we refer to [28, § 9.2] for the definition of free amalgamated pro\(\ell \) products).
Definition 5.4
Let \((G_1,\theta _1)\) and \((G_2,\theta _2)\) be two oriented pro\(\ell \) groups such that \(G_1\) and \(G_2\) have a common subgroup \(H\subseteq G_1,G_2\) satisfying \(\theta _1\vert _H=\theta _2\vert _H\). The amalgamated pro\(\ell \) product of oriented pro\(\ell \) groups of \((G_1,\theta _1)\) and \((G_2,\theta )\) with amalgamation in H is the oriented pro\(\ell \) group \((G,\theta )=(G_1,\theta _1)\amalg _H^{\hat{\ell }}(G_2,\theta _2)\), where \(G=G_1\amalg _H^{\hat{\ell }} G_2\) is the free amalgamated pro\(\ell \) product of \(G_1\) and \(G_2\) over H, and \(\theta :G\rightarrow \mathbb {Z}_\ell ^\times \) is the orientation which makes the diagram
commute.
Note that the morphisms \(\varphi _1\) and \(\varphi _2\) may not be injective (cf. [28, p. 369]). If they are, the free amalgamated pro\(\ell \) product is said to be proper.
If \(H=\{1\}\), then \((G_1,\theta _1)\amalg _H^{\hat{\ell }}(G_2,\theta _2)\) coincides with the free product of oriented pro\(\ell \) groups. In this case we simply write \((G_1,\theta _1)\amalg ^{\hat{\ell }}(G_2,\theta _2)\), instead of \((G_1,\theta _1)\amalg _{\{1\}}^{\hat{\ell }}(G_2,\theta _2)\). Free products of oriented pro\(\ell \) groups preserve Kummerianity (cf. [10, Proposition 7.5]).
Proposition 5.5
Let \((G_1,\theta _1)\) and \((G_2,\theta _2)\) be two Kummerian oriented pro\(\ell \) groups. Then the free product \((G_1,\theta _1)\amalg ^{\hat{\ell }}(G_2,\theta _2)\) is again Kummerian.
We prove that—under certain conditions—if the free amalgamated pro\(\ell \) product of two Kummerian oriented pro\(\ell \) groups with the Bogomolov–Positselski property is again Kummerian, then it has also the Bogomolov–Positselski property.
Theorem 5.6
Let \((G_1,\theta _1)\) and \((G_2,\theta _2)\) be torsion free Kummerian oriented pro\(\ell \) groups with the Bogomolov–Positselski property, with common finitely generated subgroup \(U=G_1\cap G_2\) such that \(\theta _1\vert _U=\theta _2\vert _U\) and that \((U,\theta _U)\) is \(\theta _U\)abelian, where \(\theta _U=\theta _i\vert _U\) for \(i=1,2\). Suppose that

(i)
the amalgamated pro\(\ell \) product \((G,\theta )=(G_1,\theta _1)\amalg _U^{\hat{\ell }}(G_2,\theta _2)\) is Kummerian;

(ii)
the restriction maps
$$\begin{aligned} \mathrm {res}_{G,G_i}^1:H^1(G,\mathbb {F}_\ell )\rightarrow H^1(G_i,\mathbb {F}_\ell )\quad \text {and}\quad \mathrm {res}_{G_i,U}^1:H^1(G_i,\mathbb {F}_\ell )\rightarrow H^1(U,\mathbb {F}_\ell ) \end{aligned}$$are surjective for both \(i=1,2\).
Then \((G,\theta )\) has the Bogomolov–Positselski property.
Remark 5.7

(a)
If U in the statement of Theorem 5.6 is the trivial group, then \((G,\theta )\) is the usual free product of oriented pro\(\ell \) groups, and the two conditions are satisfied by \((G,\theta )\). For condition (i), see Proposition 5.5, and condition (ii) is trivially satisfied. Hence, the Bogomolov–Positselski property is preserved by free products of oriented pro\(\ell \) groups.

(b)
By duality, for \(i\in \{1,2\}\) the map \(\mathrm {res}_{G,G_i}^1\), respectively the map \(\mathrm {res}_{G_i,U}^1\), is surjective if, and only if, the map \(\bar{\iota }_{i}:G_i/\Phi (G_i)\rightarrow G/\Phi (G)\) induced by the inclusion \(\iota _{i}:U\hookrightarrow G_i\), respectively the map \(\bar{\iota }_{U,i}:U/\Phi (U)\rightarrow G_i/\Phi (G_i)\) induced by the inclusion \(\iota _{U,i}:U\hookrightarrow G_i\), is injective.
Proof
By [21, Theorem A], U is a uniformly powerful pro\(\ell \) group, and therefore [25, Proposition 5.22] implies that \(G=G_1\amalg _U^{\hat{\ell }}G_2\) is a proper amalgam. Moreover, by hypothesis one has the monomorphisms of \(\ell \)elementary abelian groups \(\bar{\iota }_i\) and \(\bar{\iota }_{U,i}\), with \(i=1,2\) [cf. Remark 5.7(b)]. Hence, also \(\bar{\iota }_U=\bar{\iota }_i\circ \bar{\iota }_{U,i}:U/\Phi (U)\rightarrow G/\Phi (G)\) is injective for both \(i=1,2\).
Let \(\iota _U:U\hookrightarrow G\) be the inclusion of U in G, and for \(i=1,2\), set
Then
Now consider the commutative diagram
where the dotted arrow from U to \(G(\theta )\) is \(\psi _U\). By Remark 2.4, the oriented pro\(\ell \) groups \((\mathrm {im}(\psi _U),\theta \vert _{\mathrm {im}(\psi _U)})\) and \((\mathrm {im}(\psi _i),\theta \vert _{\mathrm {im}(\psi _i)})\) are \(\theta \vert _{\mathrm {im}(\psi _U)}\) and \(\theta \vert _{\mathrm {im}(\psi _i)}\)abelian, respectively. In particular,
where the lefthand side inclusion follows by Proposition 2.3, and the rightside equality follows by Proposition 2.6(iv), as \((G_i,\theta _i)\) is Kummerian for \(i\in \{1,2\}\) by hypothesis. Consequently, the pro\(\ell \) groups \(\mathrm {im}(\psi _U)\) and \(\mathrm {im}(\psi _i)\) are torsionfree, so that \(\mathrm {ker}(\psi _U)\) and \(\mathrm {ker}(\psi _i)\) are selfisolated subgroups of U and \(G_i\) respectively. On the other hand, by duality one has \(\mathrm {ker}(\psi _U)\subseteq \Phi (U)\) and \(\mathrm {ker}(\psi _i)\subseteq \Phi (G_i)\), as the maps \(\bar{\iota }_U\) and \(\bar{\iota }_i\) are injective. Altogether, by (5.2) and (5.4) one has
and thus \(\{1\}= U\cap K_{\theta }(G)\) and \(K_{\theta _i}(G_i)= G_i\cap K_{\theta }(G)\) by Proposition 3.6.
Now, let \(\mathcal {T}=(\mathscr {V}(\mathcal {T}),\mathscr {E}(\mathcal {T}))\) be the pro\(\ell \) tree whose vertices and edges are given by
respectively. In particular, every edge \(gU\in \mathscr {E}(\mathcal {T})\) defines an origin, the \(G_1\)coset \(gG_1\) and a terminus, the \(G_2\)coset \(gG_2\). For \(\overline{gU}\in \mathscr {E}(\mathcal {T})\) the roles of the terminus and origin are interchanged. Then \(\mathcal {T}\) is a second countable pro\(\ell \) tree, with a natural Gaction (cf. [27, Example 6.2.3]). For \(v=gG_i\in \mathscr {V}(\mathcal {T})\) and \(\mathbf {e}=hU\in \mathscr {E}(\mathcal {T})\), with \(g,h\in G\) and \(i\in \{1,2\}\), let \(K_v\) and \(K_{\mathbf {e}}\) denote the stabilizers of v and \(\mathbf {e}\) in \(K_\theta (G)\), respectively. Hence
Since \(K_\theta (G)\) is a normal subgroup of G, for every \(v=gG_i\in \mathscr {V}(\mathcal {T})\) the subgroup \(K_v\) is isomorphic to \(K_\theta (G)\cap G_i=K_{\theta _i}(G_i)\), which is free by hypothesis; while for every \(\mathbf {e}=hU\in \mathscr {E}(\mathcal {T})\) the subgroup \(K_{\mathbf {e}}\) is equal to \(\{1\}\), and hence no nontrivial element of \(K_\theta (G)\) stabilizes an edge. Therefore, by [16, Theorem 5.6], \(K_\theta (G)\) has the following decomposition as free pro\(\ell \) product:
for some subset \(\mathscr {V}'\) of \(\mathscr {V}(\mathcal {T})\), where F is a free pro\(\ell \) group. Hence \(K_\theta (G)\) is the free pro\(\ell \) product of free pro\(\ell \) groups, and thus it is a free pro\(\ell \) group as well. \(\square \)
Example 5.8
Let \((G_1,\theta _1)\) and \((G_2,\theta _2)\) be the oriented pro\(\ell \) groups with
and such that \(\theta _i(x)=1+\ell \) and \(\theta _i(y_i)=\theta _i(y_3)=1\) for both \(i=1,2\). By Remark 2.2, these two oriented pro\(\ell \) groups are respectively \(\theta _1\) and \(\theta _2\)abelian. Set \(U=G_1\cap G_2\)—i.e. U is the subgroup generated by \(x,y_3\). Clearly, \(\theta _1\vert _U=\theta _2\vert _U\), and
which is \(\theta _i\vert _U\)abelian by Remark 2.4. Moreover, it is straightforward to see that the maps \(\bar{\iota }_{U,i}:U/\Phi (U)\rightarrow G_i/\Phi (G_i)\) are injective for both \(i=1,2\). Now let \((G,\theta )\) be the oriented pro\(\ell \) group \((G_1,\theta _1)\amalg _U^{\hat{\ell }}(G_2,\theta _2)\). Then
and \(\theta (x)=1+\ell \), \(\theta (y_j)=1\) for \(j=1,2,3\). Moreover, one has an epimorphism of oriented pro\(\ell \) groups \(\tau :(G,\theta )\rightarrow (\bar{G},\bar{\theta })\), where
and \(\bar{x}=\tau (x)\), \(\bar{y}_j=\tau (y_j)\) for \(j=1,2,3\). By Remark 2.2, \((\bar{G},\bar{\theta })\) is \(\bar{\theta }\)abelian, and thus \(\mathrm {ker}(\tau )\supseteq I_\theta (G)\) by Proposition 2.3. On the other hand, it is straightforward to see that \(\Phi (G)\supseteq \mathrm {ker}(\tau )\), and hence \((G,\theta )\) is Kummerian by Proposition 2.6(vi). Since \((G_1,\theta _1)\) and \((G_2,\theta _2)\) have the Bogomolov–Positselski property by Example 3.4(a), Theorem 5.6 implies that also \((G,\theta )\) has the Bogomolov–Positselski property. Observe that G is \(H^\bullet \)quadratic (cf. [25, Remark 5.25(c)]).
5.3 Pro\(\ell \) groups of elementary type
Let \( (G,\theta )\) be an oriented pro\(\ell \) group, and let A be a free abelian pro\(\ell \) group. Recall that the semidirect product \(A\rtimes (G,\theta )=(A\rtimes G,\theta \circ \pi )\) is the oriented pro\(\ell \) group where \(gag^{1}=a^{\theta (g)}\) for all \(a\in A\) and \(g\in G\), and \(\pi :A\rtimes G\rightarrow G\) is the canonical projection (cf. [8, § 3]).
The following is straightforward (cf., e.g., [10, Proposition 3.6]).
Proposition 5.9
Given an oriented pro\(\ell \) group \( (G,\theta )\) and a free abelian pro\(\ell \) group A, one has \(K_{\theta \circ \pi }(A\rtimes G)=K_\theta (G)\). In particular, \(A\rtimes (G,\theta )\) is Kummerian if, and only if, \((G,\theta )\) is Kummerian; and \(A\rtimes (G,\theta )\) has the Bogomolov–Positselski property if, and only if, \((G,\theta )\) has the Bogomolov–Positselski property.
The family \(\mathbf {ET}_\ell \) of oriented pro\(\ell \) groups of elementary type is the smallest class of finitely generated oriented pro\(\ell \) groups satisfying (cf. [8, § 3])

(a)
the oriented pro\(\ell \) group \((G,\eth _G)\), with G a Demushkin group, is of elementary type;

(b)
the oriented pro\(\ell \) group \( (\mathbb {Z}_\ell ,\theta )\), with \(\theta :\mathbb {Z}_\ell \rightarrow \mathbb {Z}_\ell ^\times \) arbitrary, is of elementary type;

(c)
if the oriented pro\(\ell \) group \( (G,\theta )\) is of elementary type and A is a finitely generated free abelian pro\(\ell \) group, then also the semidirect product \(A\rtimes (G,\theta )\) is of elementary type;

(d)
if \((G_1,\theta _1)\) and \((G_2,\theta _2)\) are oriented pro\(\ell \) groups of elementary type then also the free pro\(\ell \) product \((G_1,\theta _1)\amalg ^{\hat{\ell }}(G_2,\theta _2)\) is of elementary type.
Remark 5.10

(a)
In the original definition of oriented pro2 groups of elementary type one has that also the cyclic group \(C_2\) of order 2, endowed with the nontrivial orientation \(\theta _{C_2}:C_2\twoheadrightarrow \{\pm 1\}\subset \mathbb {Z}_2^\times \), is a pro2 group of elementary type (cf. [8, p. 242]). Since our results always assume oriented pro\(\ell \) groups to be torsionfree, we may safely exclude \((C_2,\theta _{C_2})\) from the above definition of oriented pro\(\ell \) groups of elementary type.

(b)
From the results in [26, § 3.3–3.4], one may deduce that a finitely generated subgroup H of an oriented pro\(\ell \) groups of elementary type \((G,\theta )\) gives rise to a pro\(\ell \) groups of elementary type \((H,\theta \vert _H)\).

(c)
If \((F,\theta )\) is a torsionfree oriented pro\(\ell \) group with F a finitely generated free pro\(\ell \) group and \(\theta :F\rightarrow \mathbb {Z}_\ell ^\times \) any orientation, then \((F,\theta )\) is of elementary type. Indeed, if \(\theta =\mathbf {1}\), then \((F,\theta )\) is isomorphic to the free pro\(\ell \) product of d copies of the oriented pro\(\ell \) group \((\mathbb {Z}_\ell ,\mathbf {1})\), where d is the minimal number of generators of F. Otherwise, \(\mathrm {im}(\theta )\simeq \mathbb {Z}_\ell \), and the short exact sequence of pro\(\ell \) groups
splits. In this case, let \(\{x_1,\ldots ,x_d\}\) be a minimal generating set where \(\theta (x_1)\ne 1\) and \(\theta (x_i)=1\) for \(i\ge 2\), and let H be the subgroup of F generated by \(\{x_2,\ldots ,x_d\}\), which is free. Then, \((F,\theta )\simeq (H,\mathbf {1})\amalg ^{\hat{\ell }}(\mathrm {im}(\theta ),\mathrm {id}_{\mathrm {im}(\theta )})\), where both factors are oriented pro\(\ell \) groups of elementary type.
From Example 2.7(b), Sect. 5.1, and Propositions 5.5 and 5.9, one concludes that oriented pro\(\ell \) groups of elementary type are Kummerian. I. Efrat’s Elementary Type Conjecture states that if \(\mathbb {K}\) is a field containing a primitive \(\ell {\mathrm {th}}\)root of 1 (and also \(\sqrt{1}\) if \(\ell =2\)) and if the maximal pro\(\ell \) Galois group \(G_{\mathbb {K}}(\ell )\) is finitely generated, then \((G_{\mathbb {K}}(\ell ),\tilde{\theta }_{\mathbb {K},\ell })\) is of elementary type (cf. [6, 7], see also [15, § 10] and [26, § 7.5]).
Example 5.11
The oriented pro\(\ell \) group \((G,\theta )\) as in Example 5.8 is not of elementary type. Indeed, the subgroup of G generated by \(\{x,y_1,y_2\}\) contains a finitely generated subgroup which does not complete into a Kummerian oriented pro\(\ell \) group (cf. [24, Example 5.3])—in particular, G does not occur as the maximal pro\(\ell \) Galois group of a field containing a primitive \(\ell {\mathrm {th}}\)root of unity (and also \(\sqrt{1}\) if \(\ell =2\)). Therefore, \((G,\theta )\) is not of elementary type by Remark 5.10(b).
Theorem 5.12
Let \( (G,\theta )\) be an oriented pro\(\ell \) group of elementary type. Then \((G,\theta )\) has the Bogomolov–Positselski property.
Proof
If G is a free pro\(\ell \) group, then \((G,\theta )\) has the Bogomolov–Positselski property by Example 3.4(a). If G is a Demushkin group and \(\theta =\eth _G\), then \((G,\eth _G)\) has the Bogomolov–Positselski property by Theorem 5.1.
By Proposition 5.9, if \( (G,\theta )=A\rtimes (G_0,\theta \vert _{G_0})\) where A is a free abelian pro\(\ell \) group and the right side factor is an oriented pro\(\ell \) group of elementary type, then \((G,\theta )\) has the Bogomolov–Positselski property—provided that \((G_0,\theta \vert _{G_0})\) has the Bogomolov–Positselski property.
Finally, by Theorem 5.6, if \((G,\theta )=(G_1,\theta _1)\amalg ^{\hat{\ell }}(G_2,\theta _2)\) and both \((G_1,\theta _1)\) and \((G_2,\theta _2)\) have the Bogomolov–Positselski property, then also \((G,\theta )\) has the Bogomolov–Positselski property. \(\square \)
Let \(\mathbb {K}\) be a field containing a primitive \(\ell {\mathrm {th}}\)root of unity, and set \(\mathbb {K}^\times =\mathbb {K}\smallsetminus \{0\}\). Since Kummer theory yields an isomorphism of (discrete) \(\ell \)elementary abelian pro\(\ell \) groups \(H^1(G_{\mathbb {K}}(\ell ),\mathbb {F}_\ell )^\vee \simeq \mathbb {K}^\times /(\mathbb {K}^\times )^\ell \), the pro\(\ell \) group \(G_{\mathbb {K}}(\ell )\) is finitely generated if, and only if, the quotient \(\mathbb {K}^\times /(\mathbb {K}^\times )^\ell \) is finite. One has the following (see [17, Theorem D], and [9] for item (f)).
Proposition 5.13
Let \(\mathbb {K}\) be a field containing a primitive \(\ell {\mathrm {th}}\)root of 1 (and also \(\sqrt{1}\) if \(\ell =2\)), such that the quotient \(\mathbb {K}^\times /(\mathbb {K}^\times )^\ell \) is finite. Then the oriented pro\(\ell \) group \((G_{\mathbb {K}}(\ell ),\theta _{\mathbb {K},\ell })\) is of elementary type in the following cases:

(a)
\(\mathbb {K}\) is finite;

(b)
\(\mathbb {K}\) is a pseudo algebraically closed (PAC) field, or an extension of relative transcendence degree 1 of a PAC field;

(c)
\(\mathbb {K}\) is an extension of transcendence degree 1 of a local field;

(d)
\(\mathbb {K}\) is \(\ell \)rigid (cf. [32, p. 722], see also [4, § 3]);

(e)
\(\mathbb {K}\) is algebraic extension of a global field of characteristic not \(\ell ;\)

(f)
\(\mathbb {K}=\Bbbk (\!(T)\!),\) where \((G_{\Bbbk }(\ell ),\theta _{\Bbbk ,\ell })\) is of elementary type.
Corollary 1.3 follows from Theorem 5.12 and Proposition 5.13.
Data Availability
Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analysed during the current study (required by the Journal’s policy).
References
Benson, D.J.: Representations and Cohomology, II: Cohomology of Groups and Modules. Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics, 1st edn, vol. 31, p. 1. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1991)
Bogomolov, F.A.: On the structure of Galois groups of the fields of rational functions, \(K\)theory and algebraic geometry: connections with quadratic forms and division algebra. In: Proceedings of Symposia on Pure Mathematics, 1992, Santa Barbara, CA, vol. 58, pp. 83–88. American Mathematical Society, Providence (1995)
Bogomolov, F.A., Tschinkel, Y.: Galois theory and projective geometry. Commun. Pure Appl. Math. 66(9), 1335–1359 (2013)
Chebolu, S.K., Minac, J., Quadrelli, C.: Detecting fast solvability of equations via small powerful Galois groups. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 367(21), 8439–8464 (2015)
Dixon, J.D., du Sautoy, M.P.F., Mann, A., Segal, D.: Analytic Pro\(p\) Groups, Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics, 2nd edn, vol. 61. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1999)
Efrat, I.: Orderings, valuations, and free products of Galois groups. In: Seminaire: Structure Algébriques Ordonnées. Univ. Paris VII (1995)
Efrat, I.: Pro\(p\) Galois groups of algebraic extensions of \(\mathbf{Q}\). J. Number Theory 64(1), 84–99 (1997)
Efrat, I.: Small maximal pro\(p\) Galois groups. Manuscr. Math. 95(2), 237–249 (1998)
Efrat, I.: Finitely generated pro\(p\) absolute Galois groups over global fields. J. Number Theory 77(1), 83–96 (1999)
Efrat, I., Quadrelli, C.: The Kummerian property and maximal pro\(p\) Galois groups. J. Algebra 525, 284–310 (2019)
Haesemeyer, C., Weibel, Ch.: The norm residue theorem in motivic cohomology. In: Annals of Mathematics Studies, vol. 200. Princeton University Press, Princeton (2019)
Kurosh, A.G.: The Theory of Groups. Translated from the Russian and edited by K. A. Hirsch, 2nd English edition, 2 volumes. Chelsea Publishing Co., New York (1960)
Labute, J.P.: Classification of Demushkin groups. Can. J. Math. 19, 106–132 (1967)
Lazard, M.: Groupes analytiques \(p\)adiques. Inst. Hautes Études Sci. Publ. Math. 26, 389–603 (1965). (French)
Marshall, M.: The elementary type conjecture in quadratic form theory. In: Algebraic and Arithmetic Theory of Quadratic Forms, Contemporary Mathematics, vol. 344, pp. 275–293. American Mathematical Society, Providence (2004)
Mel’nikov, O.V.: Subgroups and the homology of free products of profinite groups, Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR Ser. Mat. 53(1), 97–120 (1989) (Russian), English translation, Math. USSRIzv. 34 (1), 97–119 (1990)
Minac, J., Pasini, F.W., Quadrelli, C., Tân, N.D.: Koszul algebras and quadratic duals in Galois cohomology. Adv. Math. 380, 107569 (2021)
Minac, J., Pop, F., Topaz, A., Wickelgren, K.: Workshop report “Nilpotent Fundamental Groups”. In: Nilpotent Fundamental Group. BIRS for Mathematical Innovation and Discovery, Banff (2017). https://www.birs.ca/workshops/2017/17w5112/report17w5112.pdf
Neukirch, J., Schmidt, A., Wingberg, K.: Cohomology of Number Fields, Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften, vol. 323, 2nd edn. Springer, Berlin (2008)
Positselski, L.: Koszul property and Bogomolov’s conjecture. Int. Math. Res. Not. 31, 1901–1936 (2005)
Quadrelli, C.: Bloch–Kato pro\(p\) groups and locally powerful groups. Forum Math. 26(3), 793–814 (2014)
Quadrelli, C.: Onerelator maximal pro\(p\) Galois groups and the Koszulity conjectures. Q. J. Math. 72(3), 835–854 (2021)
Quadrelli, C.: 1smooth pro\(p\) groups and Bloch–Kato pro\(p\) groups. In: Homology, Homotopy and Applications (2022). arXiv:1904.04789
Quadrelli, C.: Chasing maximal pro\(p\) Galois groups with 1cyclotomicity (2021, Preprint). arXiv:2106.00335
Quadrelli, C., Snopce, I., Vannacci, M.: On pro\(p\) groups with quadratic cohomology (2019, Preprint). arXiv:1906.04789
Quadrelli, C., Weigel, Th.: Profinite groups with a cyclotomic \(p\)orientation. Doc. Math. 25, 1881–1916 (2020)
Ribes, L.: Profinite graphs and groups. In: Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete. 3. Folge. A Series of Modern Surveys in Mathematics, vol. 66. Springer, Cham (2017)
Ribes, L., Zalesskii, P.A.: Profinite groups, In: Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete. 3. Folge. A Series of Modern Surveys in Mathematics, 2nd edn, vol. 40. Springer, Berlin (2010)
Serre, J.P.: Galois Cohomology, Springer Monographs in Mathematics, Corrected reprint of the 1997 English edition, Translated from the French by Patrick Ion and revised by the author. Springer, Berlin (2002)
Tate, J.: Relations between \(K_{2}\) and Galois cohomology. Invent. Math. 36, 257–274 (1976)
Voevodsky, V.: On motivic cohomology with \({\mathbb{Z}}\ell \)coefficients. Ann. Math. (2) 174(1), 401–438 (2011)
Ware, R.: Galois groups of maximal \(p\)extensions. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 333(2), 721–728 (1992)
Weibel, Ch.: 2007 Trieste lectures on the proof of the Bloch–Kato conjecture. In: Some Recent Developments in Algebraic \(K\)Theory, ICTP Lecture Notes, vol. 23, pp. 277–305. Abdus Salam International Centre for Theoretical Physics, Trieste (2008)
Weibel, Ch.: The norm residue isomorphism theorem. J. Topol. 2(2), 346–372 (2009)
Würfel, T.: Extensions of pro\(p\) groups of cohomological dimension two. Math. Proc. Camb. Philos. Soc. 99(2), 209–211 (1986)
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank I. Efrat, A. JaikinZapirain and P. Zalesskii as well as K. Ersoy, I. Snopce and M. Vannacci for interesting and helpful discussions. The authors would also like to thank the anonymous referee for several helpful comments.
Funding
Open access funding provided by Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore within the CRUICARE Agreement.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Quadrelli, C., Weigel, T.S. Oriented pro\(\ell \) groups with the Bogomolov–Positselski property. Res. number theory 8, 21 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40993022003189
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40993022003189
Keywords
 Maximal pro\(\ell \) Galois groups
 Bogomolov’s Conjecture
 Oriented pro\(\ell \) groups
 Kummerian oriented pro\(\ell \) groups