alphaFeedback

WorksMathematics

A universal group of type F∞

AI contributions
  • unreleased internal OpenAI model
View details
Ancillary data
Formal proof, 5 proof or workflow links
View

Abstract

We construct a single group of type F∞ containing every finitely presented group. Its finitely generated subgroups, up to isomorphism, are exactly the finitely generated recursively presented groups. This answers the F∞ form of the higher-dimensional Higman embedding question.

Introduction

A group has type FnF_n if it admits a classifying CW complex with finite nn-skeleton, and type F∞F_{\infty} if it admits one classifying complex with finitely many cells in every dimension. Here a classifying complex is a connected CW complex with the given fundamental group and contractible universal cover; it may have infinitely many dimensions. Type F2F_2 is equivalent to finite presentability.

Theorem 1.1. There exists a group HH of type F∞F_{\infty} such that every finitely presented group admits an injective homomorphism into HH.

The common target gives an exact description of its finitely generated subgroups. A finitely generated group is recursively presented if it admits a presentation on finitely many generators with a recursively enumerable set of relators.

Corollary 1.2. A finitely generated group embeds in HH if and only if it is recursively presented.

Proof. If GG is finitely generated and recursively presented, Higman’s embedding theorem places it in a finitely presented group [6], which embeds in HH by Theorem 1.1. Conversely, HH is finitely presented because it has type F∞F_{\infty}. For a finitely generated subgroup G≤HG \leq H, represent its generators by words in a finite presentation of HH. Enumerate all words in the chosen generators, and dovetail finite derivations from the ambient relators proving that their substituted words are trivial. Recording the successful words enumerates exactly the defining relators of GG.

This answers the F∞F_{\infty} form of the higher-dimensional Higman embedding question, stated for finitely generated recursively presented groups in [4 Question 1.3]. The theorem imposes no word-problem hypothesis on the input.

Context and construction

For a commutative unital coefficient ring Λ\Lambda, a group GG has type FPn(Λ)FP_n(\Lambda) if the trivial ΛG\Lambda G-module Λ\Lambda has a projective resolution with finitely generated terms through degree nn; write FPnFP_n for Λ=Z\Lambda= \mathbb{Z}. For n=∞n = \infty, finite generation is required in every degree. Leary proved that every countable group embeds in a group of type FP2FP_2 [8]. Fournier-Facio and Zaremsky show that, for each n∈N∪{∞}n \in\mathbb{N} \cup\{\infty\}, embeddings of all finitely generated recursively presented groups into recursively presented groups of type FPnFP_n would imply embeddings of all finitely presented groups into groups of type FnF_n [4], Theorem A]. They also prove that the rope-trick groups of their Definition 1.5 fail type FP3(Q)FP_3(\mathbb{Q}) for infinite inputs with nontrivial free-presentation kernel [4], Definition 1.5 and Theorem B]. This obstruction is specific to those rope-trick groups.

The proof of their conditional theorem uses a universal finitely presented group, an embedding through an intermediate overgroup and back, and an ascending HNN extension. They relate this strategy to earlier work of Baumslag–Dyer–Miller and Fournier-Facio–Löh–Moraschini [4], Section 2].

For the universal finitely presented group UU of Lemma 2.2, Proposition 4.1 gives a finite presentation of a group W^\widehat{W} equipped with two finite families of homomorphisms from UU, sharing a distinguished map ι:U→W^\iota: U \to\widehat{W}. Faithful models in tensor product algebras verify that ι\iota is injective. Finite presentability of W^\widehat{W} then lets universality supply an embedding κ:W^→U\kappa: \widehat{W} \to U:

U→ιW^→κU,f=κιU \xrightarrow{\iota} \widehat{W} \xrightarrow{\kappa} U,\qquad f=\kappa\iota

Postcomposing the two families by κ\kappa gives homomorphisms from UU to itself, with the injective endomorphism ff as their common distinguished map (Corollary 4.2). The group UU embeds in the associated ascending HNN extension

H=T(U,f)=⟨U,t∣t−1ut=f(u) (u∈U)⟩H=T(U,f)=\langle U,t\mid t^{-1}ut=f(u)\ (u\in U)\rangle

which is finitely presented by Lemma 5.2. Theorem 5.1 proves that HH has type F∞F_\infty.

The finite idempotent systems, the group enlargement, and the ascending-torus criterion are shared with the companion [9], Sections 2.1, 2.3–2.5, and 3.1]. We give local proofs of the algebraic identities and geometric criterion.

The geometric step begins with a uniform filling statement for ordinary integral chains. In the homogeneous chain model, restricting relative vertex differences to a finite subset of UU leaves only finitely many simplex types up to common left translation in each degree. For each positive degree and finite input set of relative differences, Proposition 6.2 chooses one exponent and one finite output set. That iterate of ff sends every integral cycle using the input differences to the boundary of a chain using the output differences. The filling lengths and coefficients may vary with the cycle.

The finite diagrams supply these fillings by induction. For each ℓ∈{2,3}\ell\in\{2,3\}, the diagram is indexed by idempotents over Fℓ\mathbb{F}_\ell. Orthogonal sums correspond to pointwise products of homomorphisms with elementwise commuting images. Lemma 3.1 says that an additive assignment has its value at the identity annihilated by ℓ\ell. In degrees n≥2n\ge2, the chain diagonal includes mixed terms from lower degrees, so the corresponding cycle classes are not automatically additive. Using lower-degree fillings, the induction constructs, below degree nn, a controlled chain homotopy from the map induced by an iterate of ff to the constant map. Lemma 6.1 uses it to remove the mixed terms. For each input cycle, both diagrams then give additive assignments into the homology of the same bounded chain complex. Their common value at the identity idempotent is represented by the image of the input cycle under an iterate of ff. It is annihilated by both 2 and 3, and hence vanishes.

For an arbitrary set I\mathcal{I}, put M=(ZH)IM=(\mathbb{Z}H)^{\mathcal{I}}. A cycle in the tensor complex computing Hi(U,M)H_i(U,M), i>0i>0, decomposes in each coordinate into finitely many ordinary cycles in left UU-cosets, with one finite set of simplex types common to all coordinates. The uniform filling statement supplies one exponent and output set for these cycles, so their fillings reassemble into one tensor chain. In the ascending HNN sequence of Section 7, the map FF combines ff on chains with multiplication by the stable letter on coefficients. The fillings make FF locally nilpotent on Hi(U,M)H_i(U,M) for i>0i>0: every class is killed by some power of FF. Thus 1−F1-F is invertible there, and exactness gives Hn(H,M)=0H_n(H,M)=0 for every n≥2n \ge2. Since HH is finitely presented, Lemma 7.1 turns this vanishing into geometric finiteness. At each stage, the cellular cycle module is finitely generated; via Hurewicz, those generators have sphere representatives. Attaching cells along these spheres stage by stage produces one classifying complex with finitely many cells in every dimension.

Conventions

All groups are discrete. Group homology has integral coefficients unless stated otherwise, and coefficient modules are right modules. Products indexed by arbitrary sets always mean direct products, not direct sums.

A universal finitely presented group

We will place a finite collection of homomorphisms inside one finitely presented overgroup and then embed that overgroup back into the original group. For this purpose we need a finitely presented group containing every finitely presented group. We recall its construction from Higman’s embedding theorem [6]: every finitely generated group with a recursively enumerable presentation embeds in a finitely presented group. No decidability assumption on the word problem occurs in this theorem.

The base-group embedding and finite-generation construction below follow the classical embedding methods of Higman, B. H. Neumann and Hanna Neumann [7]; we include the arguments in the form needed here. We first record an elementary form of base-group injectivity for HNN extensions. Here the countable case is sufficient.

Lemma 2.1. Let DD be a countable group, let D1,D2D_1,D_2 be subgroups of DD, and let θ:D1→D2\theta:D_1 \to D_2 be an isomorphism. The natural homomorphism from DD to

⟨D,t∣t−1dt=θ(d)(d∈D1)⟩\langle D,t \mid t^{-1}dt=\theta(d)\quad(d\in D_1)\rangle

is injective. Here the presentation includes all relations of DD.

Proof. Let DD act faithfully on Ω=D×N\Omega=D\times\mathbb{N} by left multiplication in the first coordinate. The restrictions to D1D_1 and D2D_2 are free actions, each with countably infinitely many orbits. Match their orbit sets bijectively. For each matched pair choose a base point xx in the D2D_2-orbit and a base point yy in the D1D_1-orbit, and define

T(θ(d)x)=dy(d∈D1).T(\theta(d)x)=dy\quad(d\in D_1).

Freeness and the orbit matching make TT a permutation of Ω\Omega. For every d∈D1d\in D_1 it satisfies Tθ(d)=dTT\theta(d)=dT, and hence T−1dT=θ(d)T^{-1}dT=\theta(d), as permutations of Ω\Omega. Sending tt to TT therefore defines an action of the displayed group whose restriction to DD is faithful. The natural map from DD must be injective. □

Lemma 2.2. There exists a finitely presented group UU into which every finitely presented group embeds.

Proof. Effectively list all finite presentations, renaming their generators so that the generating alphabets are disjoint. Let CC be the group given by the union of these presentations. Its generators can be effectively numbered c0,c1,…c_0,c_1,\ldots, and its relators can be effectively enumerated. Each group on the list embeds in CC: the homomorphism induced by its generators has a left inverse obtained by killing all generators of the other presentations.

It remains to place CC inside a finitely generated group with recursively enumerable relators. Form

D=C∗⟨a,p⟩,vi=aipa−i(i≥0),D=C*\langle a,p\rangle,\qquad v_i=a^ipa^{-i}\quad(i\ge0),

where ⟨a,p⟩\langle a,p\rangle is free of rank two. The elements viv_i freely generate their subgroup: in any product of nonzero powers of the viv_i with consecutive indices distinct, consecutive powers of pp are separated by nonzero powers of aa, so free reduction cannot give the identity. The elements civic_i v_i also freely generate their subgroup, because the projection D→⟨a,p⟩D \to\langle a,p\rangle killing CC sends them to the viv_i. Consequently vi↦civiv_i \mapsto c_i v_i extends to an isomorphism between these two free subgroups of DD.

By Lemma 2.1, DD, and hence CC, embeds in

V=⟨D,q∣q−1viq=civi(i≥0)⟩.V=\langle D,q\mid q^{-1}v_iq=c_i v_i\quad(i\geq0)\rangle.

The identities

ci=q−1viqvi−1c_i=q^{-1}v_iqv_i^{-1}

show that VV is generated by a,p,qa,p,q. More precisely, it has a presentation on these three generators obtained by substituting the displayed word for every cic_i in the relators of CC. The substitution turns each HNN relation into an identity. Thus it and the natural map into VV are mutually inverse homomorphisms, so this is indeed a presentation of VV. Its relators are recursively enumerable. Higman’s embedding theorem now embeds VV in a finitely presented group UU. Every finitely presented group embeds in CC, then in VV, and finally in UU. □\square

Below we use only the existence of the subgroup embeddings supplied by Lemma 2.2.

Two finite systems of idempotents

The finite diagrams used in our construction are indexed by idempotent operators over F2\mathbb{F}_2 and F3\mathbb{F}_3. Their essential property is elementary: an additive assignment to either diagram forces the value at the identity to be annihilated by the corresponding prime. These diagrams and their additivity argument are shared with the companion [9], Section 2.1, Lemma 2.1. We give the complete argument before realizing them by homomorphisms of groups.

For ℓ∈{2,3}\ell\in\{2,3\}, let DℓD_\ell be the unital Fℓ\mathbb{F}_\ell-algebra of operators on the free vector space with basis {0,1}N\{0,1\}^{\mathbb{N}} generated by l0,l1,r0,r1l_0,l_1,r_0,r_1. Here lil_i prefixes the symbol ii, and rir_i deletes an initial ii, sending basis vectors with the other initial symbol to zero. Writing II for the identity operator, we have

rilj=δijI,l0r0+l1r1=I.(3.1)r_i l_j=\delta_{ij}I,\qquad l_0r_0+l_1r_1=I. \tag*{(3.1)}

For a finite binary word vv, let lvl_v prefix vv, let rvr_v delete vv when it occurs as a prefix and give zero otherwise, and put Ev=lvrvE_v=l_vr_v. Thus EvE_v projects onto the span of the sequences beginning with vv.

If (v1,v2,v3)(v_1,v_2,v_3) is a prefix-free list, then

(lvirvj)(lvkrvm)=δjklvirvm.(l_{v_i}r_{v_j})(l_{v_k}r_{v_m})=\delta_{jk}l_{v_i}r_{v_m}.

These operators are nonzero matrix units, so their span is a copy of M3(Fℓ)M_3(\mathbb{F}_\ell). We use three such algebras, connected by shared diagonal projections. Write

A=E00,A0=E000,A1=E001,B′=E01,C′=E1.A=E_{00},\qquad A_0=E_{000},\qquad A_1=E_{001},\qquad B'=E_{01},\qquad C'=E_1.

Their defining lists, diagonal projections, and identity operators are

prefix listdiagonal projectionsidentity
(00,01,1)(00,01,1)A,B′,C′A,B',C'II
(000,01,1)(000,01,1)A0,B′,C′A_0,B',C'A0+B′+C′A_0+B'+C'
(001,01,1)(001,01,1)A1,B′,C′A_1,B',C'A1+B′+C′A_1+B'+C'

Table 3.2.

The last two identities are not II, while A=A0+A1A=A_0+A_1 and A0A1=A1A0=0A_0A_1=A_1A_0=0. Let Pℓ\mathcal{P}_{\ell} be the union, as a set of actual operators in DℓD_\ell, of all idempotents in these three matrix algebras. It is finite and contains II. An operator belonging to two of the algebras has just one index in Pℓ\mathcal{P}_{\ell}.

Two operators EE, PP are called orthogonal if EP=PE=0EP=PE=0. The relations below include all orthogonal pairs whose sum belongs to Pℓ\mathcal{P}_{\ell}, even when the pair does not belong to a single one of the three matrix algebras. In particular, they include A=A0+A1A=A_0+A_1, whose summands come from the two smaller support algebras.

Lemma 3.1. Let ℓ∈{2,3}\ell\in\{2,3\}, let TT be an abelian group, and let (zE)E∈Pℓ(z_E)_{E\in \mathcal{P}_{\ell}} be elements of TT. Suppose that

zE+P=zE+zP(3.3)z_{E+P}=z_E+z_P \tag*{(3.3)}

whenever EE, PP, E+P∈PℓE+P\in \mathcal{P}_{\ell} and EP=PE=0EP=PE=0. Then ℓzI=0\ell z_I=0.

Proof. We first compare the values of rank-one idempotents within any one of the three matrix algebras. For a column vector u∈Fℓ3u\in\mathbb{F}_\ell^3 and a row covector λ\lambda with λu=1\lambda u=1, write

x(u,λ)=zuλ.x(u,\lambda)=z_{u\lambda}.

Fix a nonzero vector v∈ker⁡λv\in\ker\lambda. We claim that the difference

x(u+v,λ)−x(u,λ)(3.4)x(u+v,\lambda)-x(u,\lambda) \tag*{(3.4)}

does not depend on the vector uu subject to λu=1\lambda u=1.

Take another such vector u′u'. Suppose first that u′−uu'-u and vv are linearly independent. They form a basis of ker⁡λ\ker\lambda, and hence u,u′−u,vu,u'-u,v form a basis of Fℓ3\mathbb{F}_\ell^3. There is consequently a covector μ\mu satisfying

μu=μu′=0,μv=1.\mu u=\mu u'=0,\qquad\mu v=1.

The identity

uλ+vμ=(u+v)λ+v(μ−λ)u\lambda+v\mu=(u+v)\lambda+v(\mu-\lambda)

expresses one rank-two idempotent as two orthogonal sums of rank-one idempotents. Indeed, λv=μu=0\lambda v=\mu u=0 on the left, while λv=(μ−λ)(u+v)=0\lambda v=(\mu-\lambda)(u+v)=0 on the right; all four rank-one factors have their defining covector equal to one on their defining vector. Applying (3.3) gives

x(u+v,λ)−x(u,λ)=x(v,μ)−x(v,μ−λ).(3.5)x(u+v,\lambda)-x(u,\lambda)=x(v,\mu)-x(v,\mu-\lambda). \tag*{(3.5)}

The same covector μ\mu gives the same right-hand side for u′u', proving the claim in this case.

If u′−uu'-u lies in the span of vv, choose w∈ker⁡λ∖⟨v⟩w\in\ker\lambda\setminus\langle v\rangle and put u′′=u+wu''=u+w. Both u′′−uu''-u and u′′−u′u''-u' are independent of vv. Comparing first uu with u′′u'' and then u′u' with u′′u'' proves the claim in general. The kernel of λ\lambda has dimension two, so this argument also works over F2\mathbb{F}_2; no choice of a third nonzero scalar is being used.

Apply the claim to the successive vectors u,u+v,…,u+(ℓ−1)vu,u+v,\ldots,u+(\ell-1)v. The ℓ\ell successive differences are equal, and they sum to zero because ℓv=0\ell v=0. Therefore

ℓx(u+v,λ)=ℓx(u,λ).(3.6)\ell x(u+v,\lambda)=\ell x(u,\lambda). \tag*{(3.6)}

The same conclusion is immediate for v=0v=0, so ℓx(u,λ)\ell x(u,\lambda) is independent of uu whenever λ\lambda is fixed and λu=1\lambda u=1. For the covector comparison, work within this same matrix algebra and define a new assignment zE′=zETz'_E=z_{E^{\mathsf T}}. Transposition preserves idempotence and orthogonal sums, so z′z' obeys the same additivity relations. Apply the invariance just proved to x′(v,μ)=zvμ′=zμTvTx'(v,\mu)=z'_{v\mu}=z_{\mu^{\mathsf T}v^{\mathsf T}}. Fixing μ\mu and varying vv now shows that ℓx(u,λ)\ell x(u,\lambda) is independent of λ\lambda whenever uu is fixed and λu=1\lambda u=1. This does not assume that zE=zETz_E=z_{E^{\mathsf{T}}}.

In particular the three diagonal matrix units have equal ℓ\ell-multiples. To see the comparison explicitly, for distinct basis vectors ei,eje_i,e_j take λ=ei∗+ej∗\lambda=e_i^*+e_j^*. First change the covector at eie_i from ei∗e_i^* to λ\lambda, then change the vector from eie_i to eje_j, and finally change the covector to ej∗e_j^*. Each change preserves the ℓ\ell-multiple, giving

ℓzeiei∗=ℓzejej∗.\ell z_{e_i e_i^*}=\ell z_{e_j e_j^*}.

It remains to use the shared projections displayed above. The comparison of diagonal units in each algebra gives

ℓzA=ℓzB′=ℓzC′=ℓzA0=ℓzA1.\ell z_A=\ell z_{B'}=\ell z_{C'}=\ell z_{A_0}=\ell z_{A_1}.

Call this common value q∈Tq\in T. The projection identity A=A0+A1A=A_0+A_1 is an orthogonal sum across the two smaller support algebras. Its three operators belong to Pℓ\mathcal{P}_{\ell}, so (3.3) gives q=q+qq=q+q. Thus q=0q=0. Finally, A+B′A+B' belongs to the first matrix algebra, and I=(A+B′)+C′I=(A+B')+C'. Applying additivity twice yields

ℓzI=ℓzA+ℓzB′+ℓzC′=0,\ell z_I=\ell z_A+\ell z_{B'}+\ell z_{C'}=0,

as required. □

Faithful finite diagram envelopes

The finite idempotent sets P2P_2 and P3P_3 specify only finitely many commutation and multiplication identities. We now realize all these identities in a finitely presented overgroup, without collapsing the common full-identity copy of the input group. A faithful model supplies the injectivity; its own presentation need not be finite.

Proposition 4.1. For every finitely presented group UU there are a finitely presented group W^\widehat W and homomorphisms

kℓ,E:U⟶W^(ℓ∈{2,3}, E∈Pℓ)k_{\ell,E}:U\longrightarrow\widehat W\qquad(\ell\in\{2,3\},\ E\in \mathcal{P}_{\ell})

such that k2,I=k3,Ik_{2,I}=k_{3,I} is injective. For each ℓ\ell, whenever E,E′,E+E′∈PℓE,E',E+E'\in \mathcal{P}_{\ell} and EE′=E′E=0EE'=E'E=0, the subgroups kℓ,E(U)k_{\ell,E}(U) and kℓ,E′(U)k_{\ell,E'}(U) commute elementwise, and

kℓ,E+E′(u)=kℓ,E(u)kℓ,E′(u)(u∈U).k_{\ell,E+E'}(u)=k_{\ell,E}(u)k_{\ell,E'}(u)\qquad(u\in U).

Proof. Fix a finite presentation U=⟨X∣R⟩U=\langle X\mid\mathcal R\rangle. For every pair (ℓ,E)(\ell,E) take a copy of this presentation, with generators xℓ,Ex_{\ell,E} for x∈Xx\in X. Define W^\widehat W by these copy presentations and the following additional relations:

x2,I=x3,I(x∈X),(4.1)x_{2,I}=x_{3,I}\qquad(x\in X), \tag*{(4.1)}
[xℓ,E,yℓ,E′]=1(x,y∈X),(4.2)[x_{\ell,E},y_{\ell,E'}]=1\qquad(x,y\in X), \tag*{(4.2)}
xℓ,E+E′=xℓ,Exℓ,E′(x∈X).(4.3)x_{\ell,E+E'}=x_{\ell,E}x_{\ell,E'}\qquad(x\in X). \tag*{(4.3)}

The last two families run over both values of ℓ\ell and every orthogonal pair E,E′E,E' whose members and sum lie in Pℓ\mathcal{P}_{\ell}. All three lists are finite. The indices are actual idempotents in DℓD_\ell, not separately tagged copies from its three matrix subalgebras. Thus these relations include the orthogonal sums between different subalgebras as well as those within one subalgebra. In particular, the zero idempotent is included; its sum relation with itself gives xℓ,0=xℓ,02x_{\ell,0}=x_{\ell,0}^2, forcing xℓ,0=1x_{\ell,0}=1.

The copy presentations give homomorphisms kℓ,E:U→W^k_{\ell,E}:U\to\widehat W. Equation (4.2) implies that their corresponding image subgroups commute elementwise. It follows that u↦kℓ,E(u)kℓ,E′(u)u\mapsto k_{\ell,E}(u)k_{\ell,E'}(u) is a homomorphism. By Equation (4.3), it agrees with kℓ,E+E′k_{\ell,E+E'} on XX, and therefore on all of UU. Similarly, Equation (4.1) gives k2,I=k3,Ik_{2,I}=k_{3,I}.

To prove that this common map is injective, we construct a faithful model. The same group-level enlargement is used in the companion [9], Section 3.1; we verify all of its needed algebraic properties here. For any group VV and ℓ∈{2,3}\ell\in\{2,3\}, work in the unital algebra

Aℓ(V)=Dℓ⊗FℓFℓ[V],A_{\ell}(V)=D_{\ell}\otimes_{\mathbb{F}_{\ell}}\mathbb{F}_{\ell}[V],

where Fℓ[V]\mathbb{F}_{\ell}[V] is the group algebra with basis indexed by VV. For E∈PℓE\in\mathcal{P}_{\ell} define

jℓ,E(v)=(I−E)⊗1+E⊗v(v∈V).(4.4)j_{\ell,E}(v)=(I-E)\otimes1+E\otimes v \qquad(v\in V). \tag*{(4.4)}

Since EE and I−EI-E are orthogonal idempotents, multiplication gives

jℓ,E(v)jℓ,E(w)=jℓ,E(vw),jℓ,E(1)=1.j_{\ell,E}(v)j_{\ell,E}(w)=j_{\ell,E}(vw),\qquad j_{\ell,E}(1)=1.

Thus these elements are units, with inverses jℓ,E(v−1)j_{\ell,E}(v^{-1}), and jℓ,Ej_{\ell,E} is a homomorphism.

For E,E′,E+E′∈PℓE,E',E+E'\in\mathcal{P}_{\ell} with EE′=E′E=0EE'=E'E=0, rewrite Equation (4.4) as 1+E⊗(v−1)1+E\otimes(v-1). Thus

(1+E⊗(v−1))(1+E′⊗(w−1))=1+E⊗(v−1)+E′⊗(w−1),\left(1+E\otimes(v-1)\right)\left(1+E'\otimes(w-1)\right)=1+E\otimes(v-1)+E'\otimes(w-1),

because EE′=0EE'=0. Reversing the order gives the same answer since E′E=0E'E=0. Hence the images of jℓ,Ej_{\ell,E} and jℓ,E′j_{\ell,E'} commute elementwise, even if vv and ww do not commute. Setting w=vw=v gives

jℓ,E(v)jℓ,E′(v)=jℓ,E+E′(v).j_{\ell,E}(v)j_{\ell,E'}(v)=j_{\ell,E+E'}(v).

Moreover, jℓ,I(v)=I⊗vj_{\ell,I}(v)=I\otimes v is injective: the decomposition Aℓ(V)=⨁v∈VDℓ⊗vA_{\ell}(V)=\bigoplus_{v\in V}D_{\ell}\otimes v distinguishes these elements, since I≠0I\ne0.

Let Wℓ(V)W_{\ell}(V) be the subgroup of Aℓ(V)×A_{\ell}(V)^{\times} generated by all images jℓ,E(V)j_{\ell,E}(V). First form W2(U)W_{2}(U), and then form W3(W2(U))W_{3}(W_{2}(U)). Write jE(2)j_{E}^{(2)} for the first-stage maps and jE(3)j_{E}^{(3)} for the second-stage maps. The group W3(W2(U))W_{3}(W_{2}(U)) receives the two families

αE=jI(3)∘jE(2)(E∈P2),βE=jE(3)∘jI(2)(E∈P3).\alpha_{E}=j_{I}^{(3)}\circ j_{E}^{(2)}\quad(E\in\mathcal{P}_{2}),\qquad \beta_{E}=j_{E}^{(3)}\circ j_{I}^{(2)}\quad(E\in\mathcal{P}_{3}).

Postcomposition preserves the first family’s identities, and precomposition preserves the second family’s identities. Their full-identity maps coincide with the injection jI(3)∘jI(2)j_{I}^{(3)}\circ j_{I}^{(2)}. Notice that the second group algebra is formed from the abstract group W2(U)W_{2}(U); no map between algebras of different characteristics is involved.

These families satisfy every defining relation of W^\widehat{W}. They therefore induce a homomorphism Φ:W^→W3(W2(U))\Phi:\widehat{W}\to W_{3}(W_{2}(U)) for which

Φ∘k2,I=jI(3)∘jI(2).\Phi\circ k_{2,I}=j_{I}^{(3)}\circ j_{I}^{(2)}.

The right-hand side is injective, so k2,Ik_{2,I} is injective as claimed.

We can now bring the entire finite diagram back into a universal group.

Corollary 4.2. Let UU be a finitely presented group containing an isomorphic copy of every finitely presented group. There are an injective endomorphism f:U→Uf:U\to U and homomorphisms hℓ,E:U→Uh_{\ell,E}:U\to U for ℓ∈{2,3}\ell\in\{2,3\} and E∈PℓE\in\mathcal{P}_{\ell}, with h2,I=h3,I=fh_{2,I}=h_{3,I}=f, satisfying all the orthogonal commutation and sum identities of Proposition 4.1.

Proof. Apply Proposition 4.1 to UU. Since W^\widehat{W} is finitely presented, universality supplies an embedding κ:W^→U\kappa:\widehat{W}\to U. Set

hℓ,E=κ∘kℓ,E,f=κ∘k2,I=κ∘k3,I.h_{\ell,E}=\kappa\circ k_{\ell,E},\qquad f=\kappa\circ k_{2,I}=\kappa\circ k_{3,I}.

The map ff is injective, and postcomposition by κ\kappa preserves every required identity and commutation relation.

The ascending-torus theorem

The finite diagrams constructed above will supply all the higher finiteness properties at once. We now state the theorem that makes this possible and give its proof, including the passage from homology to a classifying space with finite skeleta. This ascending-torus criterion and its homological construction are shared with the companion [9], Theorem 2.2 and Sections 2.4–2.5.

For a group UU and an endomorphism f:U→Uf: U \to U, define

T(U,f)=⟨U,t∣t−1ut=f(u) for all u∈U⟩.T(U,f)=\langle U,t \mid t^{-1}ut=f(u)\text{ for all }u\in U\rangle.

This presentation includes all the relations of UU. When ff is injective, it is the ascending HNN extension associated to ff.

Theorem 5.1 (Ascending-torus theorem). Let UU be a group and f:U→Uf: U \to U an injective endomorphism. Suppose that the following conditions hold.

(i) There are a finitely presented group PP and homomorphisms a:U→Pa: U \to P and b:P→Ub: P \to U such that f=baf=ba.

(ii) For each ℓ∈{2,3}\ell\in\{2,3\} there are homomorphisms hℓ,E:U→Uh_{\ell,E}: U \to U, indexed by the finite set E∈PℓE\in\mathcal{P}_{\ell} defined above, with hℓ,I=fh_{\ell,I}=f. Whenever E,E′,E+E′∈PℓE,E',E+E'\in\mathcal{P}_{\ell} and EE′=E′E=0EE'=E'E=0, the subgroups hℓ,E(U)h_{\ell,E}(U) and hℓ,E′(U)h_{\ell,E'}(U) commute elementwise, and

hℓ,E+E′(u)=hℓ,E(u)hℓ,E′(u)(u∈U).h_{\ell,E+E'}(u)=h_{\ell,E}(u)h_{\ell,E'}(u)\qquad(u\in U).

Then UU embeds naturally in T(U,f)T(U,f), and T(U,f)T(U,f) is of type F∞F_{\infty}.

The proof has three parts. First, factoring through a finitely presented group gives a finite presentation of the ascending torus. Second, the two idempotent diagrams give uniformly controlled fillings of ordinary integral cycles after applying an iterate of ff. Finally, these fillings imply vanishing of homology with products of regular coefficient modules. A cellular argument then constructs one classifying space with finitely many cells in every dimension. No word-problem hypothesis is used in any of these steps.

Lemma 5.2. Suppose that f=baf=ba for homomorphisms a:U→Pa: U \to P and b:P→Ub: P \to U, where PP is finitely presented. Then T(U,f)T(U,f) is finitely presented. This assertion does not require ff to be injective.

Proof. Put g=ab:P→Pg=ab: P \to P, and write ss for the stable letter of T(P,g)T(P,g). Define maps on the respective generating groups and stable letters by

Φ:T(U,f)⟶T(P,g),u↦a(u),t↦s,\Phi:T(U,f)\longrightarrow T(P,g),\qquad u\mapsto a(u),\qquad t\mapsto s,
Ψ:T(P,g)⟶T(U,f),p↦tb(p)t−1,s↦t.\Psi:T(P,g)\longrightarrow T(U,f),\qquad p\mapsto tb(p)t^{-1},\qquad s\mapsto t.

For the first map, af=gaaf=ga verifies the defining conjugation relations. For the second, the image of s−1pss^{-1}ps is b(p)b(p), whereas the image of g(p)g(p) is

tb(g(p))t−1=tf(b(p))t−1=b(p).tb(g(p))t^{-1}=tf(b(p))t^{-1}=b(p).

Thus both are homomorphisms. Their composites fix the stable letters and satisfy

ΨΦ(u)=tf(u)t−1=u,ΦΨ(p)=sg(p)s−1=p.\Psi\Phi(u)=tf(u)t^{-1}=u,\qquad\Phi\Psi(p)=sg(p)s^{-1}=p.

Consequently T(U,f)≅T(P,g)T(U,f) \cong T(P,g). If P=⟨y1,…,yr∣R1,…,Rm⟩P=\langle y_1,\ldots,y_r\mid R_1,\ldots,R_m\rangle, choose a word wiw_i representing g(yi)g(y_i) for each ii. The finite presentation

⟨y1,…,yr,s∣R1,…,Rm, s−1yis=wi (1≤i≤r)⟩\langle y_1,\ldots,y_r,s\mid R_1,\ldots,R_m,\ s^{-1}y_i s=w_i\ (1\le i\le r)\rangle

presents T(P,g)T(P,g). No injectivity of gg is required.

The remaining task is therefore higher finiteness. The next section proves the uniform filling assertion; Section 7 uses it to complete the proof of Theorem 5.1.

Uniform fillings with finitely many simplex types

We now prove the chain-level part of Theorem 5.1. Its purpose is to obtain one iterate of ff and one finite set of allowable simplex types that fill every cycle of a specified dimension and input bound. The companion [9] uses the same homological device. It requires neither uniformly short fillings nor an algorithm for finding them.

The homogeneous complex and its bounds

Let E(U)\mathcal{E}(U) be the simplicial set whose qq-simplices are all tuples (u0,…,uq)(u_0,\ldots,u_q) of elements of UU. Faces delete entries, and degeneracies repeat entries. Write C∗(U)C_\ast(U) for its normalized integral chain complex. Thus its basis in degree qq consists of tuples with no two consecutive entries equal; a tuple with consecutive equal entries represents zero. The differential is zero in degree zero, and, for q≥1q\ge1, it is

∂(u0,…,uq)=∑i=0q(−1)i(u0,…,ui^,…,uq).\partial(u_0,\ldots,u_q)=\sum_{i=0}^{q}(-1)^i(u_0,\ldots,\widehat{u_i},\ldots,u_q).

The augmentation ϵ:C0(U)→Z\epsilon:C_0(U)\to\mathbb{Z} sends every vertex to one. Prepending the identity vertex contracts the augmented complex as a complex of abelian groups. Simultaneous left translation gives a free UU-action on the normalized basis, so the augmented complex is also a free resolution of the trivial left ZU\mathbb{Z}U-module. The contraction need not be UU-equivariant.

A bound is a finite symmetric subset A⊆UA\subseteq U containing 11. Let EA(U)\mathcal{E}_A(U) be the simplicial subset of tuples with

ui−1uj∈Afor all i,j,u_i^{-1}u_j\in A \qquad\text{for all }i,j,

and denote its normalized chains by C∗A(U)C_\ast^A(U). The condition is preserved by deleting or repeating vertices, so this is a chain subcomplex. A reduced zero-cycle means an element of the kernel of ϵ\epsilon; in positive degree, “reduced cycle” means an ordinary cycle.

In each fixed degree, C∗A(U)C_\ast^A(U) has only finitely many basis elements up to left translation. Indeed, translating the first vertex to 11 puts every remaining vertex in AA. These orbits are the simplex types of bound AA. Notice the distinction: a bound restricts each simplex’s relative vertices, not the locations of its vertices in UU, the number of simplices in a chain, or its integer coefficients.

A homomorphism of groups sends a finite bound to a finite bound. We say that a chain operator on C∗A(U)C_\ast^A(U) is controlled through specified degrees if there is a finite bound containing every simplex in all of its output chains in those degrees. For finitely many operators and degrees, separate output bounds may be replaced by their union, with inverses and 11 adjoined. For chains in E(U×U)\mathcal{E}(U\times U), we will also use separate finite bounds in the two coordinates.

A controlled additivity calculation

Let c:C∗(U)→C∗(U)c:C_*(U)\to C_*(U) denote the chain map of the constant vertex map u↦1u\mapsto1. Thus c0c_0 sends every vertex to (1)(1), and cq=0c_q=0 for q>0q>0. The next lemma is an ordinary chain calculation: its homotopies are not required to commute with the UU-action.

Lemma 6.1. Let n≥1n\ge1, let AA be a bound, and let f:U→Uf:U\to U be an endomorphism. Suppose that, for some k≥0k\ge0, the induced chain map F=(fk)∗:C∗A(U)→C∗(U)F=(f^k)_*:C_*^A(U)\to C_*(U) has homomorphisms

Hq:CqA(U)⟶Cq+1(U)(0≤q<n)H_q:C_q^A(U)\longrightarrow C_{q+1}(U)\qquad(0\le q<n)

whose output chains have a common finite bound and which satisfy

∂Hq+Hq−1∂=Fq−cq(0≤q<n),\partial H_q+H_{q-1}\partial=F_q-c_q\qquad(0\le q<n),

where H−1=0H_{-1}=0 and the differential on C0C_0 is zero in this unaugmented equation. Let h1,h2:U→Uh_1,h_2:U\to U be homomorphisms with elementwise commuting images, and put h(u)=h1(u)h2(u)h(u)=h_1(u)h_2(u). Then there is a finite bound BB such that every nn-cycle z∈CnA(U)z\in C_n^A(U) satisfies

[(hfk)∗z]=[(h1fk)∗z]+[(h2fk)∗z]in Hn(C∗B(U)).(6.1)[(hf^k)_*z]=[(h_1f^k)_*z]+[(h_2f^k)_*z]\quad\text{in }H_n(C_*^B(U)). \tag*{(6.1)}

One bound BB may be chosen for any fixed finite collection of pairs (h1,h2)(h_1,h_2) satisfying these hypotheses.

Proof. Extend HH by zero in all degrees q≥nq\ge n, and define the chain map

F′=F−∂H−H∂.F'=F-\partial H-H\partial.

Then F0′=c0F'_0=c_0 and Fq′=0F'_q=0 for 1≤q<n1\le q<n. The truncation Hn=0H_n=0 is important: if zz is an nn-cycle, it gives

F′z=Fz.(6.2)F'z=Fz. \tag*{(6.2)}

Although the two maps need not agree on arbitrary nn-chains, this equality is exactly what will be needed. A common finite output bound controls FF, F′F' and HH in every degree used below; taking boundaries does not enlarge a bound.

We use the classical Alexander–Whitney and shuffle comparison in the setting of Eilenberg–Zilber [3]. We spell out the chain maps and their support control: the later product-module argument requires one finite set of simplex types across all coordinates. The Alexander–Whitney diagonal is

D(u0,…,uq)=∑i=0q(u0,…,ui)⊗(ui,…,uq).(6.3)D(u_0,\ldots,u_q)=\sum_{i=0}^{q}(u_0,\ldots,u_i)\otimes(u_i,\ldots,u_q). \tag*{(6.3)}

We use the tensor differential

∂(a⊗b)=∂a⊗b+(−1)deg⁡aa⊗∂b.\partial(a\otimes b)=\partial a\otimes b+(-1)^{\deg a}a\otimes\partial b.

In the boundary of (6.3), terms on the two sides of an interior cut cancel, and the remaining terms give D∂D\partial. Thus DD is a chain map. It is well defined on normalized chains: if the input has consecutive equal vertices, every summand has a degenerate factor. Both tensor factors retain the input bound.

The shuffle map

S:C∗(U)⊗C∗(U)⟶C∗(U×U)S:C_*(U)\otimes C_*(U)\longrightarrow C_*(U\times U)

sends (u0,…,up)⊗(v0,…,vq)(u_0,\ldots,u_p)\otimes(v_0,\ldots,v_q) to the signed sum over monotone lattice paths from (0,0)(0,0) to (p,q)(p,q). A path contributes the tuple obtained by replacing each of its vertices (i,j)(i,j) by (ui,vj)(u_i,v_j). Its sign is (−1)N(-1)^N, where NN counts pairs of steps in which a vertical step precedes a horizontal step. In its boundary, deleting a corner pairs two paths that traverse the corner in opposite orders; these contributions cancel. The remaining faces are precisely the shuffle of the tensor differential, so SS is a chain map. If either input is degenerate, every path has a step with identical endpoint pairs and hence gives a degenerate output. The map therefore descends to normalized chains and preserves the bound in each coordinate.

Write Δ\Delta for the chain map of the diagonal homomorphism U→U×UU \to U \times U. There is a chain homotopy RR satisfying

∂R+R∂=Δ−SD(6.4)\partial R + R\partial= \Delta- SD \tag*{(6.4)}

and preserving the bound in both coordinates. Here is a direct construction that also verifies this control. On vertices take R0=0R_0 = 0, since Δ\Delta and SDSD agree there. Suppose RR has been defined in lower degrees, and let a=(u0,…,uq)a = (u_0,\ldots,u_q) be a normalized basis simplex of positive degree, with vertex set VV. The chain

Δa−SDa−R∂a\Delta a - SDa - R\partial a

is a cycle: apply the previously established homotopy equation to ∂a\partial a. It lies in the full tuple complex on V×VV \times V. That complex is contracted by prepending any fixed vertex, so prepending (u0,u0)(u_0,u_0) fills the displayed cycle. Choose this filling as R(a)R(a) and extend linearly on the normalized basis. Every coordinate vertex in this construction belongs to VV, which proves the claimed bound. This construction takes place on the normalized basis; degenerate faces have already been set to zero.

Apply (6.4) after FF. Naturality of DD for the vertex map fkf^k gives a controlled chain homotopy from ΔF\Delta F to S(F⊗F)DS(F \otimes F)D. To replace FF by F′F', use the degree-one tensor operator KK defined on homogeneous tensors by

K(a⊗b)=H(a)⊗F(b)+(−1)deg⁡aF′(a)⊗H(b).(6.5)K(a \otimes b) = H(a) \otimes F(b) + (-1)^{\deg a}F'(a) \otimes H(b). \tag*{(6.5)}

The tensor differential and the chain-map identities for F,F′F,F' give

∂K+K∂=(F−F′)⊗F+F′⊗(F−F′)=F⊗F−F′⊗F′.\begin{aligned} \partial K + K\partial&= (F-F') \otimes F + F' \otimes(F-F') \\ &= F \otimes F - F' \otimes F'. \end{aligned}

In particular the sign in the second term of (6.5) cannot be dropped. The operator SKDSKD is controlled separately in both coordinates: it uses only the already controlled maps F,F′,HF,F',H and the bound-preserving maps D,SD,S. No equivariance of HH enters this calculation. Explicitly, the composite homotopy L=RF+SKDL = RF + SKD satisfies

∂L+L∂=ΔF−S(F′⊗F′)D.\partial L + L\partial= \Delta F - S(F' \otimes F')D.

Let zz be an nn-cycle. Since F′F' vanishes in degrees 1,…,n−11,\ldots,n-1, only the terms of bidegrees (0,n)(0,n) and (n,0)(n,0) survive in (F′⊗F′)Dz(F' \otimes F')Dz. The degree-zero factor always maps to (1)(1). Summing the endpoint terms over the whole cycle first, and then using (6.2), gives

(F′⊗F′)Dz=(1)⊗F′z+F′z⊗(1)=(1)⊗Fz+Fz⊗(1).\begin{aligned} (F' \otimes F')Dz &= (1) \otimes F'z + F'z \otimes(1) \\ &= (1) \otimes Fz + Fz \otimes(1). \end{aligned}

This also covers n=1n=1, when there are no intermediate bidegrees. Shuffling a vertex against a chain simply holds that coordinate fixed.

Finally, commuting images make

m:U×U⟶U,m(u,v)=h1(u)h2(v)m: U \times U \longrightarrow U,\qquad m(u,v)=h_1(u)h_2(v)

a homomorphism. If two pairs have coordinate differences in B1B_1 and B2B_2, their image difference belongs to h1(B1)h2(B2)h_1(B_1)h_2(B_2). Indeed, the factors from the two image subgroups commute, allowing the two differences to be grouped. This finite set is symmetric and contains 11. Thus applying m∗m_* to all the preceding homotopies retains finite control and proves (6.1): the finite chain m∗Lzm_*Lz fills the difference of its left- and right-hand cycle representatives. For a finite collection of pairs, take the union of the finitely many resulting output bounds.

One iterate fills every cycle of a fixed bound

We now combine the additivity calculation with the two finite idempotent systems. The exponent and the output bound in the next statement are chosen before the input cycle, which is the uniformity needed when passing later to products of coefficient modules.

Proposition 6.2. Assume the hypotheses of Theorem 5.1. For every finite bound A⊆UA \subseteq U and every integer n≥0n \ge0, there are an integer k≥0k \ge0 and a finite bound B⊆UB \subseteq U such that, for every reduced integral nn-cycle z∈CnA(U)z \in C_n^A(U), there is a finite chain y∈Cn+1B(U)y \in C_{n+1}^B(U) satisfying

∂y=(fk)∗z.\partial y = (f^k)_*z.

The chain yy may depend on zz, with no uniform restriction on its length or coefficients.

Proof. We argue by induction on nn. By the finite-presentation factorization f=baf = ba in Theorem 5.1, the subgroup b(P)b(P) is finitely generated and contains f(U)f(U). Choose a finite symmetric generating set SS for b(P)b(P), with 11 adjoined. For every u∈Uu \in U, choose a finite edge path from 11 to f(u)f(u) whose consecutive differences belong to SS. Its chain H0(u)H_0(u) satisfies

∂H0(u)=(f(u))−(1).\partial H_0(u) = (f(u)) - (1).

Extend H0H_0 linearly. For a reduced zero-cycle zz, the constant vertex terms cancel, so ∂H0(z)=f∗z\partial H_0(z) = f_*z. All these paths use the same bound SS, even though their lengths can be arbitrarily large. This proves the assertion for n=0n = 0.

Suppose n≥1n \ge1 and the assertion holds in all degrees less than nn, for every finite input bound. We first construct the partial controlled homotopy in Lemma 6.1 on C∗A(U)C_*^A(U). Start with F=f∗F = f_* and the vertex paths just chosen, which give its homotopy to the constant map in degree zero.

Suppose, for some 1≤q<n1 \le q < n, that F=(fk)∗F = (f^k)_* and controlled operators H0,…,Hq−1H_0,\ldots,H_{q-1} have already been constructed with

∂Hi+Hi−1∂=Fi−ci(0≤i<q).\partial H_i + H_{i-1}\partial= F_i - c_i \qquad(0 \le i < q).

For each normalized basis qq-simplex a∈CqA(U)a \in C_q^A(U), the next homotopy equation asks us to fill

F(a)−Hq−1(∂a).(6.6)F(a) - H_{q-1}(\partial a). \tag*{(6.6)}

This is a qq-cycle. Its boundary is zero by the preceding homotopy equation applied to ∂a\partial a; the remaining constant-map term cq−1(∂a)c_{q-1}(\partial a) is zero, also when q=1q = 1 because the augmentation of a boundary is zero. Moreover, all these cycles have one common finite bound, independent of the basis simplex aa: the current FF sends AA to a finite bound and Hq−1H_{q-1} is controlled.

Apply the induction assertion in degree qq to this common bound. It supplies an integer r≥0r \ge0 and another common finite bound such that (fr)∗(f^r)_* sends every cycle (6.6) to a boundary there. Postcompose FF and the already chosen HiH_i by (fr)∗(f^r)_*. The existing homotopy equations remain valid, since fr(1)=1f^r(1) = 1. For each basis simplex choose a finite filling of its newly mapped cycle and use that filling as Hq(a)H_q(a). Linear extension defines a controlled homomorphism HqH_q, and the next homotopy equation now holds.

There are only finitely many degrees q<nq<n, so this process ends with one power fkf^k and a controlled homotopy to the constant map through degrees less than nn. For n=1n=1 the initial vertex homotopy already suffices. None of these choices is required to be equivariant or computable. In particular, we do not choose one filling on each orbit and then translate it. Uniformity instead comes from the induction assertion applying at each step to every cycle in a single bounded complex.

Apply Lemma 6.1 to every orthogonal relation in both P2\mathcal{P}_2 and P3\mathcal{P}_3. There are only finitely many relations, so there is one finite output bound BB for all of them; enlarge it if necessary to contain the images of the input bound under every hℓ,Efkh_{\ell,E}f^k. For a fixed nn-cycle zz, write

zℓ,E=[(hℓ,Efk)∗z]∈Hn(C∗B(U)).z_{\ell,E}=[(h_{\ell,E}f^k)_*z]\in H_n(C_*^B(U)).

For each ℓ∈{2,3}\ell\in\{2,3\}, the commuting-image and orthogonal-sum identities, together with Lemma 6.1, give

zℓ,E+P′=zℓ,E+zℓ,P′z_{\ell,E+P'}=z_{\ell,E}+z_{\ell,P'}

for every orthogonal triple in that finite system. Here the three maps in each relation are evaluated on the common input fk(u)f^k(u). The two full-identity classes agree because both systems have hℓ,I=fh_{\ell,I}=f:

zI:=z2,I=z3,I=[(fk+1)∗z].z_I:=z_{2,I}=z_{3,I}=[(f^{k+1})_*z].

By Lemma 3.1, this single class is annihilated by both 2 and 3. Hence it is zero, since zI=3zI−2zIz_I=3z_I-2z_I. It therefore has a finite filling in C∗B(U)C_*^B(U). The exponent k+1k+1 and the bound BB were chosen independently of zz, proving the required assertion in degree nn and completing the induction. □\square

Proposition 6.2 is a statement about ordinary integral chains with uniform finite simplex types. Its homotopies need not be equivariant, and it asserts no decision procedure for the word problem of UU. The next step uses precisely this form of control to assemble coordinatewise fillings with product coefficients.

From controlled fillings to finite skeleta

Proposition 6.2 concerns ordinary integral chains. We will apply it coordinate by coordinate to products of regular modules, keeping the finite set of simplex types common to all coordinates. We first explain why the resulting homology vanishing yields geometric, rather than merely homological, finiteness.

All coefficient modules in this section are right modules, and all group homology is integral. For a group JJ and a set I\mathcal{I}, write (ZJ)I(\mathbb{Z}J)^{\mathcal{I}} for the direct product of copies of the right regular module, with coordinatewise action.

A geometric product-module criterion

The following argument combines the product-module finiteness method of Bieri–Eckmann and Brown [1, 2] with the cellular passage to geometric finiteness. We give the argument in the form needed here, including its finite-presentation hypothesis.

Lemma 7.1. Let JJ be a finitely presented group. If

Hn(J,(ZJ)I)=0for every set I and every n≥2,H_n(J,(\mathbb{Z}J)^{\mathcal{I}})=0 \qquad\text{for every set }\mathcal{I}\text{ and every }n\geq2,

then JJ is of type F∞F_\infty. Proof. We construct nested, nn-dimensional CW complexes XnX_n, for n≥2n \ge2, with fundamental group JJ, finite nn-skeleton, and (n−1)(n-1)-connected universal cover. Each passage from XnX_n to Xn+1X_{n+1} will attach finitely many (n+1)(n+1)-cells. A finite presentation complex supplies X2X_2.

Suppose that XnX_n has been constructed, and put Z=X~nZ=\widetilde{X}_n. Thus ZZ is an nn-dimensional, (n−1)(n-1)-connected free JJ-complex. By successively attaching JJ-orbits of cells of dimensions at least n+1n+1 to kill its homotopy groups, extend ZZ to a contractible free JJ-complex YY. There is no finiteness requirement on these auxiliary attachments. Put R=ZJR=\mathbb{Z}J. The augmented cellular chain complex C∗(Y)C_*(Y) is a free left RR-resolution of Z\mathbb{Z}, and Cq(Y)=Cq(Z)C_q(Y)=C_q(Z) is a finite-rank free RR-module for q≤nq \le n.

Let I\mathcal{I} be the set of all cellular nn-cycles of ZZ, and let M=RIM=R^{\mathcal{I}}. If CC is a finite-rank free left RR-module, the coordinate map is an isomorphism

M⊗RC⟶CI,(mz)z∈I⊗c⟼(mzc)z∈I.(7.1)M \otimes_R C \longrightarrow C^{\mathcal{I}}, \qquad(m_z)_{z\in\mathcal{I}} \otimes c \longmapsto(m_zc)_{z\in\mathcal{I}}. \tag*{(7.1)}

Using this identification in degrees nn and n−1n-1, the family whose zz-coordinate is the cycle zz defines a cycle ξ∈M⊗RCn(Y)\xi\in M \otimes_R C_n(Y). The hypothesis Hn(J,M)=0H_n(J,M)=0 gives

ξ=∂yfor some y∈M⊗RCn+1(Y).\xi=\partial y \qquad\text{for some } y \in M \otimes_R C_{n+1}(Y).

Choose a free RR-basis of Cn+1(Y)C_{n+1}(Y). A tensor is a finite sum, and each chain uses only finitely many basis elements. Consequently we can write

y=∑j=1smj⊗cjy=\sum_{j=1}^{s}m_j\otimes c_j

using finitely many basis elements c1,…,csc_1,\ldots,c_s, even though Cn+1(Y)C_{n+1}(Y) need not have finite rank. Taking the zz-coordinate of the boundary equation gives

z=∑j=1s(mj)z ∂cj.z=\sum_{j=1}^{s}(m_j)_z\,\partial c_j.

Thus the module of cellular nn-cycles in ZZ is generated over RR by ∂c1,…,∂cs\partial c_1,\ldots,\partial c_s.

Because ZZ is (n−1)(n-1)-connected and n≥2n \ge2, the natural Hurewicz map πn(Z)→Hn(Z;Z)\pi_n(Z) \to H_n(Z;\mathbb{Z}) is an isomorphism [5] (Theorem 4.37 and p. 370). Naturality with respect to deck transformations makes it an isomorphism of RR-modules, using the canonical change of basepoint in the simply connected space ZZ. Since ZZ has no (n+1)(n+1)-cells, its nnth homology is its module of cellular nn-cycles. Choose maps of nn-spheres representing the displayed finite list of generators, and attach their JJ-translates to ZZ. Downstairs this attaches finitely many (n+1)(n+1)-cells to XnX_n; upstairs the resulting complex is nn-connected. It is the universal cover of the resulting complex Xn+1X_{n+1}, since cells of dimension at least three do not change the fundamental group. This completes the induction.

Let X=⋃n≥2XnX=\bigcup_{n\ge2}X_n. It has fundamental group JJ and finitely many cells in every dimension. The universal cover of XX is weakly contractible. It is connected and simply connected, and for q≥2q \ge2, cellular approximation [5] (Theorem 4.8) homotopes any map Sq→X~S^q \to\widetilde{X} into the qq-skeleton of X~\widetilde{X}, which is already present in X~q\widetilde{X}_q. That class is killed in X~q+1\widetilde{X}_{q+1}. A weakly contractible CW complex is contractible by Whitehead’s theorem [5] (Theorem 4.5), so XX is a K(J,1)K(J,1).

The ascending HNN sequence

For the rest of the section assume the hypotheses of Theorem 5.1, and set J=T(U,f)J=T(U,f). We will compute the homology in Lemma 7.1 using a tree for JJ. We give the construction explicitly to fix the direction of the coefficient map.

Form the direct limit

L=lim→⁡(U→fU→fU→f⋯ ),L=\varinjlim(U \xrightarrow{f} U \xrightarrow{f} U \xrightarrow{f} \cdots),

and denote its stage maps by ιi:U→L\iota_i: U \to L, for i≥0i \ge0. They satisfy ιi=ιi+1f\iota_i=\iota_{i+1}f. Since ff is injective, each ιi\iota_i is injective and L=⋃i≥0ιi(U)L=\bigcup_{i\ge0}\iota_i(U) is an increasing union. The map

σ(ιi(u))=ιi+1(u)\sigma(\iota_i(u))=\iota_{i+1}(u)

is an automorphism: its inverse sends ιi(u)\iota_i(u) to ιi(f(u))\iota_i(f(u)). In the semidirect product adjoining a letter tt with txt−1=σ(x)txt^{-1}=\sigma(x) for x∈Lx\in L, we have

t−1ι0(u)t=ι0(f(u)).t^{-1}\iota_0(u)t=\iota_0(f(u)).

This gives a homomorphism from JJ to that semidirect product. Conversely, the maps ιi(u)↦tiut−i\iota_i(u)\mapsto t^iut^{-i} are compatible with the direct system and with σ\sigma, and give the inverse homomorphism. Thus UU embeds in JJ. The same description shows that every element of JJ can be written

tput−q,u∈U,p,q≥0.(7.2)t^put^{-q},\qquad u\in U,\quad p,q\ge0. \tag*{(7.2)}

Indeed, an element of L⋊⟨t⟩L\rtimes\langle t\rangle has the form ιp(u)tm\iota_p(u)t^m; increasing pp if necessary makes q=p−mq=p-m nonnegative.

Consider the graph whose vertices and oriented edges are both indexed by the left cosets jUjU, with the edge indexed by jUjU running from jUjU to jtUjtU. The terminal vertex is well defined because

ut=tf(u)(u∈U).(7.3)ut=tf(u)\qquad(u\in U). \tag*{(7.3)}

The homomorphism J→ZJ\to\mathbb{Z} that kills UU and sends tt to 11 defines a height on the vertices. Each edge increases height by one, and each vertex has exactly one outgoing edge. If j=tput−qj=t^put^{-q} is as in (7.2), the forward path of length qq from jUjU reaches tpUt^pU. Every forward ray therefore meets the ray U,tU,t2U,…U,tU,t^2U,\ldots, proving connectedness. An undirected cycle would have a vertex of least height with two outgoing edges, which is impossible. The graph is a tree. Left multiplication gives a JJ-action with one vertex orbit and one edge orbit, and both the chosen vertex UU and the chosen edge from UU to tUtU have stabilizer UU.

Let C∗(U)C_*(U) be the normalized homogeneous resolution introduced in the preceding section. Since ZJ\mathbb{Z}J is free as a right ZU\mathbb{Z}U-module, induction preserves its exactness. We obtain the free left ZJ\mathbb{Z}J-resolution

P∗=ZJ⊗ZUC∗(U)P_*=\mathbb{Z}J\otimes_{\mathbb{Z}U}C_*(U)

of the permutation module Z[J/U]\mathbb{Z}[J/U]. The two endpoint maps on this resolution are the identity and the map

E(j⊗c)=jt⊗f∗(c).E(j\otimes c)=jt\otimes f_*(c).

The second is well defined: for u∈Uu\in U,

jut⊗f∗(c)=jtf(u)⊗f∗(c)=jt⊗f∗(uc).jut\otimes f_*(c)=jtf(u)\otimes f_*(c)=jt\otimes f_*(uc).

It is a left ZJ\mathbb{Z}J-linear chain map, lifting the terminal-vertex map jU↦jtUjU\mapsto jtU.

The mapping cone of 1−E:P∗→P∗1-E:P_*\to P_*, with its natural augmentation, is a free left ZJ\mathbb{Z}J-resolution of Z\mathbb{Z}. To see exactness, first take the homology of P∗P_*: it is concentrated in degree zero and equal to Z[J/U]\mathbb{Z}[J/U]. The remaining two-term complex is the augmented cellular chain complex of the tree, which is exact. Equivalently, the long exact sequence of the cone identifies its homology with that of this two-term complex.

For an arbitrary right ZJ\mathbb{Z}J-module MM, tensoring this free resolution with MM yields the long exact sequence

Hn(U,M)→1−FHn(U,M)⟶Hn(J,M)⟶Hn−1(U,M)→1−FHn−1(U,M),(7.4)H_n(U,M) \xrightarrow{1-F} H_n(U,M) \longrightarrow H_n(J,M) \longrightarrow H_{n-1}(U,M) \xrightarrow{1-F} H_{n-1}(U,M), \tag*{(7.4)}

where MM is restricted to UU in the outer terms. On the chain complex M⊗ZUC∗(U)M \otimes_{\mathbb{Z}U} C_*(U), the map FF is

F(m⊗c)=mt⊗f∗(c).(7.5)F(m \otimes c) = mt \otimes f_*(c). \tag*{(7.5)}

In particular the coefficient multiplier is tt, not t−1t^{-1}.

Products of regular modules

Fix any set I\mathcal{I} and take M=(ZJ)IM=(\mathbb{Z}J)^{\mathcal{I}}. We claim that FF induces a locally nilpotent endomorphism of Hi(U,M)H_i(U,M) for every i>0i>0: each individual homology class is killed by some power of FF.

Recall that a bound is a finite symmetric subset A⊆UA\subseteq U containing 11, and CqA(U)C_q^A(U) is generated by the normalized tuples (u0,…,uq)(u_0,\ldots,u_q) with ui−1uj∈Au_i^{-1}u_j\in A for all i,ji,j. Let Sq(A)\mathcal{S}_q(A) be their finite set of types up to left translation. The first vertex can be translated to 11, after which all other vertices lie in AA, proving finiteness. As CqA(U)C_q^A(U) is free over ZU\mathbb{Z}U on these types, there are natural identifications

M⊗ZUCqA(U)≅⨁s∈Sq(A)MM\otimes_{\mathbb{Z}U}C_q^A(U)\cong\bigoplus_{s\in \mathcal{S}_q(A)}M
≅∏α∈I(⨁s∈Sq(A)ZJ).(7.6)\cong\prod_{\alpha\in\mathcal{I}}\left(\bigoplus_{s\in \mathcal{S}_q(A)}\mathbb{Z}J\right). \tag*{(7.6)}

The second equality interchanges a product with a finite direct sum; no analogous interchange with an infinite direct sum is being used.

Here is a concrete interpretation of (7.6). The free abelian basis of ZJ⊗ZUCqA(U)\mathbb{Z}J\otimes_{\mathbb{Z}U}C_q^A(U) consists of normalized tuples with u0,…,uq∈Uu_0,\ldots,u_q\in U of the form

(ju0,…,juq),j∈J,ua−1ub∈A for all a,b.(ju_0,\ldots,ju_q),\qquad j\in J,\quad u_a^{-1}u_b\in A\text{ for all }a,b.

Each tuple lies in one left coset of UU. Expanding the group-ring coefficients, a tensor chain therefore gives, in each coordinate α\alpha, a finite ordinary integral chain in such coset tuples. There is one bound AA for every coordinate. Conversely, any family of coordinatewise finite chains with a common bound defines a tensor chain by (7.6). Their lengths, coefficients, and group-ring supports need not admit any bound independent of α\alpha.

Every chain in M⊗ZUCq(U)M\otimes_{\mathbb{Z}U}C_q(U) uses finitely many simplex types and consequently belongs to a bounded subcomplex of this form. Indeed, take the union of the finitely many relative vertex differences in its tensor factors, then add their inverses and 11. The inclusion of this bounded complex is injective degree by degree, since its types are a subset of the free basis of Cq(U)C_q(U).

Now let z∈M⊗ZUCi(U)z\in M\otimes_{\mathbb{Z}U}C_i(U) be a cycle, where i>0i>0, and choose one input bound AA for it. In each coordinate α\alpha, split its ordinary chain into its finitely many left-coset components. Each component is a cycle, since the boundary preserves the coset and the coset chain groups form a direct sum. Choose an origin jj in each nonzero component’s coset. Left translation by j−1j^{-1} identifies the component with an ordinary cycle in CiA(U)C_i^A(U). Proposition 6.2 supplies an exponent k≥0k \ge0 and a finite output bound BB that work for every such cycle, in every coordinate and every coset. By (7.5), the map FkF^k changes the origin jj to jtkjt^k and applies fkf^k to the relative vertices. Indeed, on tuples the single-step formula is simply

(ju0,…,jui)⟼(jtf(u0),…,jtf(ui))=(ju0t,…,juit).(ju_0,\ldots,ju_i) \longmapsto(jtf(u_0),\ldots,jtf(u_i))=(ju_0t,\ldots,ju_it).

This also verifies that the formula is independent of the chosen origin.

For each component, choose an ordinary finite filling of its relative image under fkf^k in Ci+1B(U)C^B_{i+1}(U), and translate this filling by jtkjt^k. Sum the fillings within each coordinate. The result is still finite in that coordinate because there were only finitely many nonzero coset components. Different input cosets may have the same output coset; in that case their fillings are simply added. Across all coordinates the bound is still the single finite set BB. Equation (7.6) therefore assembles these fillings into a chain

y∈M⊗ZUCi+1B(U).y \in M \otimes_{\mathbb{Z}U} C^B_{i+1}(U).

The boundary and FkzF^kz lie in the bounded complex for D=B∪fk(A)D=B\cup f^k(A), a finite symmetric set containing 11. They agree in every coordinate by construction. The coordinate identification (7.6) for DD is injective, so ∂y=Fkz\partial y=F^kz in the tensor complex. Thus Fk[z]=0F^k[z]=0, proving the claimed local nilpotence. This argument uses ordinary fillings chosen separately in each coset; it requires no equivariance of the homotopies or fillings in Proposition 6.2.

Completion of the torus theorem

If an endomorphism FF of an abelian group is locally nilpotent, then 1−F1-F is invertible. On an element xx, its inverse is

x+Fx+F2x+⋯ ,x+Fx+F^2x+\cdots,

where only finitely many terms are nonzero. The sum defines a homomorphism, and telescoping verifies both inverse identities. It follows that the two maps 1−F1-F adjacent to Hn(J,M)H_n(J,M) in (7.4) are isomorphisms for n≥2n\ge2. Exactness gives

Hn(J,(ZJ)I)=0(n≥2).H_n(J,(\mathbb{Z}J)^{\mathcal{I}})=0 \qquad(n\ge2).

Only positive-degree local nilpotence was needed: no assertion about H0(U,M)H_0(U,M) enters this conclusion. By Lemma 5.2, JJ is finitely presented. The set II was arbitrary, so Lemma 7.1 proves that JJ is of type F∞F_\infty. The direct-limit construction already proved that UU embeds in JJ. This completes the proof of Theorem 5.1.

Proof of the embedding theorem

We now combine the finite-presentation construction with the geometric criterion.

Proof of Theorem 1.1. Let UU be the universal finitely presented group supplied by Lemma 2.2. Corollary 4.2 gives an injective endomorphism f:U→Uf:U\to U and, for each ℓ∈{2,3}\ell\in\{2,3\}, homomorphisms hℓ,E:U→Uh_{\ell,E}:U\to U indexed by E∈PℓE\in\mathcal{P}_{\ell}. Their full-identity maps are both ff, and they satisfy all the elementwise commutation and orthogonal-sum identities in Theorem 5.1.

The factorization hypothesis of that theorem is automatic here: take P=UP=U, a=id⁡Ua=\operatorname{id}_U, and b=fb=f. Hence H=T(U,f)H=T(U,f) has type F∞F_\infty. Since ff is injective, the natural map U→HU\to H is injective, as established in Section 7. For every finitely presented group GG, choose an embedding G→UG\to U. Its composite with U→HU\to H is the required embedding. The construction of HH is independent of this last choice and of GG.

The construction isolates a useful distinction: finite presentation is needed for the universal group and its diagram envelope, while the faithful models in tensor product algebras are used only to prove injectivity. The higher-dimensional finiteness is obtained afterwards, from the two finite systems and one ascending HNN extension.

References

  1. [1]Robert Bieri and Beno Eckmann, Finiteness properties of duality groups, Commentarii Mathematici Helvetici 49 (1974), 74–83. doi:10.1007/BF02566720.DOI
  2. [2]Kenneth S. Brown, Homological criteria for finiteness, Commentarii Mathematici Helvetici 50 (1975), 129–135. doi:10.1007/BF02565740.
  3. [3]Samuel Eilenberg and J. A. Zilber, On products of complexes, American Journal of Mathematics 75 (1953), no. 1, 200–204. doi:10.2307/2372629.DOI
  4. [4]Francesco Fournier-Facio and Matthew C. B. Zaremsky, Finiteness properties and Higman’s rope trick, preprint, 2026, arXiv:2607.21727v1.
  5. [5]Allen Hatcher, Algebraic Topology, Cambridge University Press, 2002. https://pi.math.cornell.edu/~hatcher/AT/ATpage.html.
  6. [6]Graham Higman, Subgroups of finitely presented groups, Proc. Roy. Soc. London Ser. A 262 (1961), 455–475. doi:10.1098/rspa.1961.0132.DOI
  7. [7]Graham Higman, B. H. Neumann and Hanna Neumann, Embedding theorems for groups, J. London Math. Soc. 24 (1949), no. 4, 247–254. doi:10.1112/jlms/s1-24.4.247.DOI
  8. [8]Ian J. Leary, Subgroups of almost finitely presented groups, Math. Ann. 372 (2018), 1383–1391. doi:10.1007/s00208-018-1689-5.DOI
  9. [9]OpenAI, Simple F∞ overgroups of groups with decidable word problem, OpenAI Math Release preprint OAI:Simple-F-infinity-overgroups-of-groups-with-decidable-word-problem-September-23-2026, 2026.

Paper details

vlnc:W_g6z4ut6t
v1 · latestHistory (1)

published ·

Usage

views · 3

downloads · 0

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

LicenseRef-OpenAI-public

DOI · 10.83295/tsxu-xdjz

Original source

  • Mathematics

unreleased internal OpenAI model · View statement →

Looking for related papers…
Contents