Subgroups of mapping class groups related to Heegaard splittings and bridge decompositions (Q2634850)

For a Heegaard splitting \(M = H_1 \cup_S H_2\) of a closed orientable 3-manifold \(M\) into two handlebodies \(H_j\) along a Heegaard surface \(S\), let \(\text{MCG}_0(H_j)\) be the subgroup of the mapping class group of \(H_j\) of mapping classes represented by (orientation-preserving) homeomorphisms of \(H_j\) homotopic to the identity, and let \(G_j\) be the image of \(\text{MCG}_0(H_j)\) in the automorphism group of the curve complex of the surface \(S\). The group \(G\) generated by \(G_1\) and \(G_2\) acts on the curve complex of the surface, and each orbit of this action is contained in the homotopy class of some curve in \(M\). ``In this paper, we study the structure of the group \(G\) and examine whether a homotopy class can contain more than one orbit. We also show that the action of \(G\) on the projective lamination space of \(S\) has a non-empty domain of discontinuity when the Heegaard splitting satisfies \(R\)-bounded combinatorics and has high Hempel distance.'' In such a context, it has been asked by Minsky when the set of vertices in the curve complex of \(S\) represented by simple closed curves which are null-homotopic in \(M\) is equal to the orbit under \(\hat G\) (the orientation-reversing version of \(G\)) of the meridians of \(H_1\) and \(H_2\) (i.e., bounding disks in \(H_1\) or \(H_2\)). As the authors note, the same question makes sense also for bridge spheres defining bridge decompositions of knot and link exteriors in the 3-sphere, and Lee and Sakuma proved, among other results, that in the context of bridge decompositions the answer to Minsky's question is, in fact, positive [\textit{D. Lee} and \textit{M. Sakuma}, Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. (3) 104, No. 2, 359--386 (2012; Zbl 1250.57015)]; see also their research announcement in [Electron. Res. Announc. Math. Sci. 18, 97--111 (2011; Zbl 1225.57009)], and in the present paper the authors study to what extent these results remain valid also in the context of Heegaard splittings (for example, \(G\) is again isomorphic to to the free product \(G_1*G_2\), for Heegaard splittings with sufficiently high Hempel distance).