alphaFeedback

WorksMathematics

Invariant random subgroups of the finitary special linear group over a finite field

AI contributions
  • AI
View details

Abstract

An invariant random subgroup of a discrete group is a conjugation-invariant probability measure on the space of its subgroups. We confirm a conjecture of Simon Thomas and classify the invariant random subgroups of the finitary special and general linear groups over a finite field. These are shown to be stabilizers of random tuples of vectors and functionals. The classification uses the character theory of the finitary special linear group established by Skudlarek and the theory of the invariant random subgroups of the finitary permutation group established by Vershik. In addition, we classify the invariant probability measures for several natural actions of these finitary groups.

Introduction

Let qq be a prime power and Fq\mathbb{F}_q the finite field of order qq. Consider the finitary special linear group SL∞(Fq)=⋃nSLn(Fq)\mathrm{SL}_{\infty}(\mathbb{F}_q)=\bigcup_{n}\mathrm{SL}_n(\mathbb{F}_q). The group SL∞(Fq)\mathrm{SL}_{\infty}(\mathbb{F}_q) consists of all infinite matrices AA over the field Fq\mathbb{F}_q satisfying Aij=δijA_{ij}=\delta_{ij} for all but finitely many pairs of indices i,j∈Ni,j\in\mathbb{N} as well as the requirement det⁡A=1\det A=1.

Our main goal is to classify the invariant random subgroups of the group SL∞(Fq)\mathrm{SL}_{\infty}(\mathbb{F}_q). This means the following. To any given discrete group GG we associate its space of subgroups Sub⁡(G)\operatorname{Sub}(G). This is a compact space endowed with the Chabauty topology. The group GG is acting on Sub⁡(G)\operatorname{Sub}(G) by homeomorphisms via conjugation. An invariant random subgroup of GG is a probability measure on Sub⁡(G)\operatorname{Sub}(G) preserved under this action. One example is a Dirac point mass δN\delta_N at some normal subgroup N◃GN\triangleleft G. The most general example is the stabilizer distribution of some probability measure preserving action of GG. We denote the convex set of all invariant random subgroups of GG by IRS⁡(G)\operatorname{IRS}(G). An invariant random subgroup of GG is called ergodic if it is an extreme point of the convex compact set IRS⁡(G)\operatorname{IRS}(G). Invariant random subgroups were introduced in [1]. See e.g. [10] for a survey.

We show that the invariant random subgroups of SL∞(Fq)\mathrm{SL}_{\infty}(\mathbb{F}_q) can be described by means of certain natural probability measure preserving actions. Consider the infinite-dimensional vector space V=∏n∈NFqV=\prod_{n\in\mathbb{N}}\mathbb{F}_q over the field Fq\mathbb{F}_q. The group SL∞(Fq)\mathrm{SL}_{\infty}(\mathbb{F}_q) admits the standard action on VV, namely A⋅v=AvA\cdot v=Av. In addition, let V^\widehat{V} be the same underlying vector space as VV, equipped with the dual action of the group SL∞(Fq)\mathrm{SL}_{\infty}(\mathbb{F}_q), namely A⋅φ=(A−1)tφA\cdot\varphi=(A^{-1})^{t}\varphi.

For each k,ℓ∈N0=N∪{0}k,\ell\in\mathbb{N}_0=\mathbb{N}\cup\{0\} consider the vector space Vk,ℓ=Vk×V^ℓV^{k,\ell}=V^k\times\widehat{V}^{\ell} equipped with the natural product SL∞(Fq)\mathrm{SL}_{\infty}(\mathbb{F}_q)-action. Note that Vk,ℓV^{k,\ell} is a compact abelian group and let Haar⁡k,ℓ\operatorname{Haar}^{k,\ell} be its Haar probability measure. The stabilizer map Stab⁡SL∞(Fq):Vk,ℓ→Sub⁡(SL∞(Fq))\operatorname{Stab}_{\mathrm{SL}_{\infty}(\mathbb{F}_q)}:V^{k,\ell}\to\operatorname{Sub}(\mathrm{SL}_{\infty}(\mathbb{F}_q)) induces an invariant random subgroup of SL∞(Fq)\mathrm{SL}_{\infty}(\mathbb{F}_q) denoted μk,ℓ\mu_{k,\ell} as the pushforward of the measure Haar⁡k,ℓ\operatorname{Haar}^{k,\ell}. Notice that μ0,0=δSL∞(Fq)\mu_{0,0}=\delta_{\mathrm{SL}_{\infty}(\mathbb{F}_q)}. In addition, let μ∞=δ{1}\mu_{\infty}=\delta_{\{1\}} denote the Dirac measure at the trivial subgroup. Our main result is the following.

Theorem 1.1. The ergodic invariant random subgroups of the group SL∞(Fq)\mathrm{SL}_{\infty}(\mathbb{F}_q) are

IRS⁡ergodic(SL∞(Fq))={μk,ℓ:k,ℓ∈N0}∪{μ∞}.\operatorname{IRS}_{\mathrm{ergodic}}(\mathrm{SL}_{\infty}(\mathbb{F}_q))=\{\mu_{k,\ell}:k,\ell\in\mathbb{N}_0\}\cup\{\mu_{\infty}\}.

These are pairwise distinct.

Theorem 1.1 has been conjectured by Simon Thomas [28]. One reading of Theorem 1.1 is as a far-reaching generalization of the fact that the group SL∞(Fq)\mathrm{SL}_{\infty}(\mathbb{F}_q) is simple and admits no finite-index subgroups. The weak-* topology on the space IRS⁡ergodic(SL∞(Fq))\operatorname{IRS}_{\mathrm{ergodic}}(\mathrm{SL}_{\infty}(\mathbb{F}_q)) is such that μ∞\mu_{\infty} is the only accumulation point of the points μk,ℓ\mu_{k,\ell} (see Theorem 8.2). In particular IRS⁡(SL∞(Fq))\operatorname{IRS}(\mathrm{SL}_{\infty}(\mathbb{F}_q)) is a Bauer simplex, c.f. [15].

There is an alternative interpretation of each invariant random subgroup μk,ℓ\mu_{k,\ell} as the stabilizer of a uniformly random point in the direct product of two infinite Grassmannian spaces Gr⁡k(V)×Gr⁡ℓ(V^)\operatorname{Gr}_k(V) \times\operatorname{Gr}_{\ell}(\widehat{V}) (see § 7.5.2 for details).

It is interesting to note a difference between the topological and measurable dynamics of the SL∞(Fq)\mathrm{SL}_{\infty}(\mathbb{F}_q)-action on its Chabauty space of subgroups. Thomas [31] has classified the minimal closed orbits (i.e. uniformly recurrent subgroups) for this the action. The only such orbits are the trivial ones, namely the singleton {N}\{N\} where N={I}N=\{I\} or N=SL∞(Fq)N=\mathrm{SL}_{\infty}(\mathbb{F}_q).

Example. It is a consequence of Theorem 1.1 that the only meaningful information that can be “extracted” given a random tuple x=(v1,…,vk,φ1,…,φℓ)∈Vk,ℓx=(v^1,\ldots,v^k,\varphi^1,\ldots,\varphi^\ell)\in V^{k,\ell} of kk vectors and ℓ\ell functionals with the purpose of defining an invariant random subgroup is its pointwise stabilizer. At first glance, this might seem surprising. For instance, one might be tempted to consider the stabilizer of a flag defined by xx or of its projectivization. It turns out that all such ideas eventually lead to the same class of invariant random subgroups. For example, let v∈V1,0v\in V^{1,0} be a generic vector. It is easy to see that Haar⁡1,0\operatorname{Haar}^{1,0}-almost surely one has

{A∈SL∞(Fq):Av=v}={A∈SL∞(Fq):Av=λv for some λ∈Fq}.\{A\in\mathrm{SL}_{\infty}(\mathbb{F}_q):Av=v\}=\{A\in\mathrm{SL}_{\infty}(\mathbb{F}_q):Av=\lambda v\text{ for some }\lambda\in\mathbb{F}_q\}.

We also consider the finitary general linear group GL∞(Fq)=⋃nGLn(Fq)\mathrm{GL}_{\infty}(\mathbb{F}_q)=\bigcup_n\mathrm{GL}_n(\mathbb{F}_q). It is defined analogously to the group SL∞(Fq)\mathrm{SL}_{\infty}(\mathbb{F}_q) with the requirement that the determinant is non-zero. Certainly SL∞(Fq)\mathrm{SL}_{\infty}(\mathbb{F}_q) is a normal subgroup in GL∞(Fq)\mathrm{GL}_{\infty}(\mathbb{F}_q) of index q−1q-1. Given a fixed multiplicative subgroup K≤Fq×K\leq\mathbb{F}_q^\times, a fixed pair k,ℓ∈N0k,\ell\in\mathbb{N}_0 and a tuple x∈Vk,ℓx\in V^{k,\ell} there is an associated subgroup

Stab⁡GL∞(Fq)K(x)={g∈GL∞(Fq):gx=x and det⁡g∈K}.\operatorname{Stab}^{K}_{\mathrm{GL}_{\infty}(\mathbb{F}_q)}(x)=\{g\in\mathrm{GL}_{\infty}(\mathbb{F}_q):gx=x\text{ and }\det g\in K\}.

Pushing forward the measure Haar⁡k,ℓ\operatorname{Haar}^{k,\ell} via the map Stab⁡GL∞(Fq)K\operatorname{Stab}^{K}_{\mathrm{GL}_{\infty}(\mathbb{F}_q)} to the space Sub⁡(GL∞(Fq))\operatorname{Sub}(\mathrm{GL}_{\infty}(\mathbb{F}_q)) gives rise to an invariant random subgroup denoted μk,ℓK\mu^K_{k,\ell}. In addition, we denote μ∞=δ{I}\mu_{\infty}=\delta_{\{I\}}.

Theorem 1.2. The ergodic invariant random subgroups of the group GL∞(Fq)\mathrm{GL}_{\infty}(\mathbb{F}_q) are

{μk,ℓK:k,ℓ∈N0 and K≤Fq× is a subgroup}∪{μ∞}.\{\mu^K_{k,\ell}:k,\ell\in\mathbb{N}_0\text{ and }K\leq\mathbb{F}_q^\times\text{ is a subgroup}\}\cup\{\mu_{\infty}\}.

These are pairwise distinct.

Classification of invariant measures on Vk,ℓV^{k,\ell}

As part of the proof of Theorem 1.1 we are led to classify the SL∞(Fq)\mathrm{SL}_{\infty}(\mathbb{F}_q)-invariant probability measures on the vector spaces Vk,ℓV^{k,\ell}. We find this ergodic-theoretic result to be of independent interest. Here is the most essential case of this classification.

References

  1. [1]Miklós Abért, Yair Glasner, and Bálint Virág. Kesten’s theorem for invariant random subgroups. Duke Mathematical Journal, 163(3):465 – 488, 2014.DOI
  2. [2]Lewis Bowen, Rostislav Grigorchuk, and Rostyslav Kravchenko. Characteristic random subgroups of geometric groups and free abelian groups of infinite rank. Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 369(2):755–781, 2017.arxiv.org/abs/1402.3705
  3. [3]Patrick Billingsley. Weak convergence in metric spaces. In Convergence of Probability Measures, pages 7–79. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 1999.DOI
  4. [4]Bachir Bekka and Pierre de La Harpe. Unitary representations of groups, duals, and characters. Mathematical Surveys and Monographs. American Mathematical Society, 2020.arxiv.org/abs/1912.07262
  5. [5]Oren Becker, Alexander Lubotzky, and Andreas Thom. Stability and invariant random subgroups. Duke Mathematical Journal, 168(12):2207 – 2234, 2019.DOI
  6. [6]Robert Boyer. Infinite traces of AF-algebras and characters of U(∞). Journal of Operator Theory, 9(2):205–236, 1983.
  7. [7]Robert Boyer. Characters and factor representations of the infinite dimensional classical groups. Journal of Operator Theory, 28(2):281–307, 1992.
  8. [8]Zenon Ivanovich Borevich and Nikolay Aleksandrovich Vavilov. Arrangement of subgroups in the general linear group over a commutative ring. Trudy Matematicheskogo Instituta imeni VA Steklova, 165:24–42, 1984.
  9. [9]Alon Dogon, Arie Levit, and Itamar Vigdorovich. Characters of diagonal products and Hilbert–Schmidt stability. Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 379(02):979–1021, 2026.arxiv.org/abs/2407.11608
  10. [10]Tsachik Gelander. A lecture on invariant random subgroups, 2015. arXiv:1503.08402 [math.GR].arxiv.org/abs/1503.08402
  11. [11]Vadim Gorin, Sergei Kerov, and Anatoly Vershik. Finite traces and representations of the group of infinite matrices over a finite field. Advances in Mathematics, 254:331–395, 2014.
  12. [12]Eli Glasner. Ergodic Theory via Joinings, volume 101 of Mathematical Surveys and Monographs. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2003.DOI
  13. [13]Robert Guralnick and Gunter Malle. Products of conjugacy classes and fixed point spaces. Journal of the American Mathematical Society, 25(1):77–121, 2012.arxiv.org/abs/1005.3756
  14. [14]Robert Guralnick, Tim Penttila, Cheryl E. Praeger, and Jan Saxl. Linear groups with orders having certain large prime divisors. Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society, 78(1):167–214, 1999.DOI
  15. [15]Eli Glasner and Benjamin Weiss. Kazhdan’s property T and the geometry of the collection of invariant measures. Geometric & Functional Analysis GAFA, 7(5):917–935, 1997.DOI
  16. [16]Marshall Hestenes. Singer groups. Canadian Journal of Mathematics, 22(3):492–513, 1970.
  17. [17]Takeshi Hirai and Etsuko Hirai. Characters for the infinite Weyl groups of type B∞/C∞ and D∞, and for analogous groups. In Non-Commutativity, Infinite-Dimensionality and Probability at the Crossroads, pages 296–317. World Scientific, 2003.DOI
  18. [18]William Kantor. Linear groups containing a Singer cycle. Journal of Algebra, 62(1):232–234, 1980.DOI
  19. [19]J. F. C. Kingman. The representation of partition structures. Journal of the London Mathematical Society, s2-18(2):374–380, 10 1978.DOI
  20. [20]Peter Kleidman and Martin Liebeck. The Subgroup Structure of the Finite Classical Groups, volume 129 of London Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1990.DOI
  21. [21]Elon Lindenstrauss. Pointwise theorems for amenable groups. Inventiones mathematicae, 146(2):259–295, 2001.
  22. [22]Arie Levit and Alexander Lubotzky. Infinitely presented permutation stable groups and invariant random subgroups of metabelian groups. Ergodic Theory and Dynamical Systems, 42(6):2028–2063, 2022.
  23. [23]Arie Levit and Alexander Lubotzky. Uncountably many permutation stable groups. Israel Journal of Mathematics, 251(2):657–678, 12 2022.arxiv.org/abs/1910.11722
  24. [24]Felix Leinen and Orazio Puglisi. Positive definite functions of finitary isometry groups over fields of odd characteristic. Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra, 208(3):1003–1021, 2007.DOI
  25. [25]Jack McLaughlin. Some groups generated by transvections. Archiv der Mathematik, 18(4):364–368, 9 1967.
  26. [26]Robert Phelps. Lectures on Choquet’s theorem. Springer, 2002.
  27. [27]Hans-Ludwig Skudlarek. Die unzerlegbaren Charaktere einiger diskreter Gruppen. Mathematische Annalen, 223(3):213–231, 1976.
  28. [28]Simon Thomas. private communication.
  29. [29]Elmar Thoma. Die unzerlegbaren, positiv-definiten Klassenfunktionen der abzählbar unendlichen, symmetrischen Gruppe. Mathematische Zeitschrift, 85(1):40–61, 1964.
  30. [30]Elmar Thoma. Über unitäre Darstellungen abzählbarer, diskreter Gruppen. Mathematische Annalen, 153(2):111–138, 1964.
  31. [31]Simon Thomas. Uniformly recurrent subgroups of simple locally finite groups. Israel Journal of Mathematics, 228(1):321–352, 10 2018.
  32. [32]Simon Thomas. Characters and invariant random subgroups of the finitary symmetric group. Advances in Mathematics, 399:108272, 2022.
  33. [33]Simon Thomas and Robin Tucker-Drob. Invariant random subgroups of inductive limits of finite alternating groups. Journal of Algebra, 503:474–533, 2018.
  34. [34]A. M. Vershik. Description of invariant measures for the actions of some infinite-dimensional groups. Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR, 218(4):749–752, 1974.
  35. [35]A. M. Vershik. Totally nonfree actions and the infinite symmetric group. Mosc. Math. J., 12(1):193–212, 2012.
  36. [36]A. M. Vershik and S. V. Kerov. Characters and factor representations of the infinite unitary group. Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR, 267(2):272–276, 1982.
  37. [37]Dan Voiculescu. Représentations factorielles de type II₁ de U(∞). J. Math. Pures Appl., 55:1–20, 1976.
  38. [38]Robert Zimmer. Amenable ergodic group actions and an application to Poisson boundaries of random walks. Journal of Functional Analysis, 27(3):350–372, 1978.
  39. [39]Robert Zimmer. Amenability. In Ergodic Theory and Semisimple Groups, pages 59–84. Birkhäuser Boston, Boston, MA, 1984.DOI

Paper details

vlnc:W_d52aveg5
v1 · latestHistory (1)

published · Fresh — added to the Hub within the last 30 days

added ·

Usage

views · 0

downloads · 0

A view counts once per browser per day, a download each time the PDF is requested.

CC BY 4.0

Original source

  • Mathematics

AI · View statement →

Looking for related papers…
Contents