On generalized concise words

Conjugacy classes for groups (20E45) Word problems, other decision problems, connections with logic and automata (group-theoretic aspects) (20F10) Commutator calculus (20F12) FC-groups and their generalizations (20F24)

Review text

If \(w = w(x_1,...,x_n)\) is a group-word in variables \(x_1,...,x_n\), the set of all values of \(w\) in \(G\) is denoted by \(G_w\), while \(w(G)\) stands for the verbal subgroup of the group \(G\) generated by \(G_w\). A word \(w\) is called concise if for every group \(G\) whenever \(w\) is finite-valued in \(G\) the subgroup \(w(G)\) is finite. Philip Hall had conjectured that every word is concise and he proved this for every non-commutator word (i.e., a word such that the sum of the exponents of some variable involved in it is non-zero) and for lower central words. \textit{R. F. Turner-Smith} [Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. (3) 14, 321--341 (1964; Zbl 0122.26906)] showed that derived words are also concise and \textit{J. Wilson} [Can. J. Math. 26, 608--620 (1974; Zbl 0255.20023)] subsequently extended this result to all multilinear commutator words (which are words obtained by nesting commutators, but using always different variables). Another proof of conciseness of multilinear commutators was obtained by [\textit{G. A. Fernández-Alcober} and \textit{M. Morigi}, J. Lond. Math. Soc., II. Ser. 82, No. 3, 581--595 (2010; Zbl 1227.20032)]. It was proved by [\textit{G. A. Fernández-Alcober} et al., Commun. Algebra 40, No. 7, 2570--2576 (2012; Zbl 1261.20033)] that the \(n\)-th Engel word \([x,{}_n\,y]\) is concise for \(n\leq 4\). On the other hand, Hall's conjecture was eventually refuted in 1989 by \textit{S. V. Ivanov} [Sov. Math. 33, No. 6, 59--70 (1990; Zbl 0697.20016); translation from Izv. Vyssh. Uchebn. Zaved., Mat. 1989, No. 6(325), 60--70 (1989)].\N\NLater, aiming to enhance the comprehension of words within a free group, the concept of semiconcise words was introduced by \textit{C. Delizia} et al. [J. Group Theory 23, No. 4, 629--639 (2020; Zbl 1467.20023)] where a word is called semiconcise if the subgroup \([w(G),G]\) is finite in each group \(G\) such that \(G_w\) is finite. Of course, concise words are semiconcise. Delizia et al. [loc. cit.] proved that if \(w\) is a semiconcise word and \(z\) is any variable not appearing in \(w\), then the word \([w,z]\) is also semiconcise. It is not known if there exists a semiconcise word which is not concise; however, Delizia et al. [loc. cit.] proved that there exists a word which is not semiconcise. The aim of this paper is to generalize the concepts of concise and semiconcise word. More precisely, let \(w\) be a group-word and \(n\) a positive integer. The word \(w\) is said to be \(\frac{1}{n}\)-concise if, for any group \(G\), the finiteness of \(G_w\) implies that the subgroup \N\[\N[w(G),\underbrace{G,\dots ,G}_{n-1\ \text{ times}}]\N\]\Nis finite. Then, for \(n=1,2\), this new definition gives back the definitions of concise and semiconcise word, respectively. The authors prove in Corollary 4.4 that there exists a word which is not \(\frac{1}{n}\)-concise for any positive integer \(n\). Going further, if \(w\) is a \(\frac{1}{n}\)-concise word, they investigate embedding properties of the subgroup \N\[\N[w(G),\underbrace{G,\dots ,G}_{n-1\ \text{ times}}].\N\]\NA subgroup \(H\) of a group \(G\) is said to be FC-embedded in \(G\) if the set of conjugates \(g^H\) is finite for all \(g\in G\). Furthermore, \(H\) is said to be BFC-embedded in \(G\) if \(g^H\) is finite for all \(g\in G\) and the number of elements in \(g^H\) is bounded by a constant that does not depend on the choice of \(g\). Recall that a group \(G\) is said to be an FC-group if \(g^G\) is finite for all \(g\in G\). Moreover, an FC-group \(G\) is a BFC-group if the number of elements in \(g^G\) is bounded by a constant that does not depend on the choice of \(g\). More generally, given a group-word \(w\), a group \(G\) is an FC\((w)\)-group if the set of conjugates \(g^{G_w}\) is finite for all \(g\in G\). Moreover, \(G\) is a BFC\((w)\)-group if \(g^{G_w}\) is finite for all \(g\in G\) and the number of elements in \(g^{G_w}\) is bounded by a constant that does not depend on the choice of \(g\).\N\NThe main results in the paper are the following.\N\NTheorem A. Let \(w\) be a \(\frac{1}{m+1}\)-concise word for some positive integer \(m\), and let \(G\) be an FC\((w)\)-group. Then the subgroup \N\[\N[w(G),\underbrace{G,\dots ,G}_{m\ \text{ times}}]\N\]\Nis FC-embedded in \(G\).\N\NTheorem B. Let \(w\) be a \(\frac{1}{m+1}\)-concise word for some positive integer \(m\), and let \(G\) be a BFC\((w)\)-group. Then the subgroup \N\[\N[w(G),\underbrace{G,\dots ,G}_{m\ \text{ times}}]\N\]\Nis BFC-embedded in \(G\).\N\NMoreover, the hypothesis on the word \(w\) in Theorem A and Theorem B is necessary. In fact, the authors provide a group-word \(w\) and a BFC\((w)\)-group \(G\) such that \([w(G),\underbrace{G,\dots ,G}_{n-1\ \text{ times}}]\) is not FC-embedded in \(G\).

Cites work

Cited in

(1)

On generalisations of conciseness

This page was built for publication: On generalized concise words

Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q7020050)