WorksMathematics
Transfer kernels and the Schur multiplier
Abstract
In this article we prove that if is a normal subgroup of a finite group with cyclic, then the kernel of the transfer map equals times the order of the cokernel of the natural map .
In this article we will prove that the capitulation kernel in cyclic unramified extensions is bounded in terms of the Schur multiplier of Galois groups. We include the relevant background information, and the actual proof takes up little more than a page. We begin with the history of the transfer map, present an elementary introduction to the Schur multiplier, describe the connection with the capitulation kernel in unramified abelian extensions of number fields, and give a proof of the conjecture in two special cases (of which the proof for groups with commutator groups of order 2 is longer than the general proof), and finally give the proof of the main result, which actually takes up less than a page.
The Transfer Map
One of Hilbert’s conjectures on what we now call Hilbert class fields concerned the capitulation of ideal classes. If is a number field with Hilbert class field , then the principal ideal theorem states that every ideal in becomes principal in . More generally, let be an unramified abelian extension, let be the Hilbert class field of , let be its Galois group over , and let . Since , we have . The map induced by sending an ideal in to is called the transfer of ideal classes; its kernel consists of classes of ideals that become principal in . Artin’s reciprocity law induces a corresponding homomorphism (also called transfer) from to :
This allowed Artin to reduce the principal ideal theorem to a statement in group theory: If is a finite group, then the transfer map is the trivial map. The name transfer (Verlagerung) was introduced by Helmut Hasse in his report [6]. The transfer map is defined as follows. Let be a subgroup of finite index in a finite group ; write . For each and each there is an such that for a permutation of . Then defines a homomorphism whose kernel contains . Thus induces a homomorphism
called the transfer map.
The transfer map was first used by Issai Schur in his article [13] published in 1902. It was Schur’s student Arnold Scholz who pointed out this fact in his Jahrbuch review (JFM 60.0895.01) of Iyanaga’s article [7] on the principal ideal theorem, which appeared in 1934 (contrary to the claims in [3 p. 166–167], it was not Iyanaga who had credited Schur with inventing the transfer map). Here’s what happened: Issai Schur wanted to publish the results of his PhD student Roberto Frucht in his journal, the Mathematische Zeitschrift. His co-editor Leon Lichtenstein objected to publishing a thesis in the journal and mentioned that Schur’s recent related results had appeared in Crelle’s journal. Thus Schur asked Hasse whether he would publish Frucht’s manuscript, and Hasse agreed to do that. When reading the submission (see [4]), Hasse noted similarities between some of Frucht’s formulas and those appearing in Furtwängler’s proof of the principal ideal theorem. He asked Schur whether he could explain these similarities, but Schur did not answer this question immediately.
When Artin visited Schur in September 1930 (Artin’s parents-in-law were living in Berlin), Artin worked on the proper definition of his -series at ramified primes, and he talked with Schur about these things. Schur picked up Hasse’s report [6] and discovered that Artin’s transfer map in Furtwängler’s proof was the same map he had used in 1902. In a letter (see [15]) to Hasse written on December 30, 1930, he explained the connection in detail.
We do not know whether Scholz learned about Schur’s priority from Hasse or from his former teacher himself. Scholz used the transfer map after giving a talk in Hamburg in 1928, where he must have talked to Artin. Scholz later gave his student G. Hannink a topic on the transfer for his dissertation (Verlagerung und Nichteinfachheit von Gruppen, Kiel 1935).
Only in the 1970s was it discovered that the first example of the transfer map is Gauss’s Lemma in the third proof of the quadratic reciprocity law (see [12] and [17]).
The Schur multiplier
The results in this section are well known; see e.g. [9]. The Schur multiplier of a finite group is an important invariant that plays a major role in the investigation of class field towers. A group extension
is called a central extension if is contained in the center of ; in particular, is abelian. The group extension is called a stem extension if is contained in the commutator group of . Schur has shown that for central stem extensions
the order of is bounded, and that the groups for which the order of is maximal are all isomorphic. In this case, is called the Schur multiplier of , and the group extension is called a Schur cover of . The Klein 4-group has Schur multiplier , and its Schur cover groups are the dihedral group and the quaternionion group of order 8.
In our proof below, we will use the following standard facts on Schur multipliers (see [9]).
(F0) . This is a finite abelian group annihilated by .
(F1) (Hopf’s formula) If with free, then .
(F2) If is abelian, then
In particular, if is cyclic.
(F3) If is a central stem extension, then any set of lifts to of a generating set of generates . In fact, if is the subgroup generated by the lifts, then ; as is central, , hence and .
Next we prove a special case of the Ganea sequence (see [9]):
Lemma 1. Let be a central subgroup of a finite group . Then
Proof. Write and let be the preimage of , so and . By (F1), , and is induced by the identity of (note ). Its image is , hence
Consider . An element with , lies in if and only if ; so , and . Since is central, , hence and . Finally (if and then ). □
Theorems of Furtwängler and Kisilevsky
Furtwängler [5] observed that if a number field has 2-class group of type , then the 2-class group of its Hilbert 2-class field is trivial or cyclic; the 2-class field tower of then terminates at in the first case and at the second Hilbert 2-class field in the second. In addition, the Galois group of is either the Klein 4-group , a dihedral group, a semi-dihedral group or a quaternion group. Kisilevsky [10] studied this situation in detail and showed that the Galois group is determined by the capitulation in the three unramified quadratic subextensions , and of . In the following, let denote the capitulation kernel in and the subgroup of ideal classes corresponding to via Artin’s reciprocity law. The following table contains the results of Furtwängler and Kisilevsky; in the last column we have added the order of the Schur multiplier of :
| capitulation | ||
| 2 | ||
| 1 | ||
| 2 | ||
| 1 | ||
| 1 |
Table 1.
Here , and denote the dihedral, the quaternion and the semi-dihedral group of order . In the case we have , where is the quadratic subextension of for which is a dihedral group.
One cannot fail to notice that if the Schur multiplier is trivial, then for each quadratic unramified subextension of . Computing capitulation kernels for other groups of order 16 with trivial Schur multiplier suggests the following conjecture:
Conjecture 1. If the Galois group of the second Hilbert class field of a number field has trivial Schur multiplier, then in each unramified quadratic subextension of , exactly one nontrivial ideal class capitulates:
We can formulate this conjecture without any reference to number fields by replacing the capitulation kernel with the kernel of the transfer map: If is a finite 2-group with trivial Schur multiplier, then for each subgroup of index 2 in .
Computing the kernels of the transfer maps for 2-groups of small order with nontrivial Schur multiplier suggests that much more is true:
Conjecture 2. For every finite 2-group and each subgroup of index 2 in we have
This conjecture goes back to [11 (7.20)]; there I have proved that if is a number field whose -class field tower terminates with and where , then for every cyclic unramified -extension we have
Jack Schmidt and Derek Holt have verified this inequality for all 2-groups of order .
The natural generalization of our conjecture to arbitrary -groups is the following result, which is a special case of Theorem 7.
Theorem 2. For each finite -group and each subgroup with index we have
The more general conjecture that
for non-cyclic subgroups is not true: the groups [?, ?] and [?, ?] have Schur multiplier of order 2 and possess two subgroups of index 4 in which the kernel of the transfer map has order 16.
Simple Cases
Theorem 2 is easy to prove when the group is abelian:
Proposition 3. If is an abelian 2-group, then .
Proof. Write . Since is abelian, . For the transfer is , and for it is . So is the squaring map and . Write ; then . By (F2), , hence . But
which is true for all . Equality occurs exactly for , or with . □
A similar proof for groups with requires considerably more work; we include it here because it involves classifying all 2-groups with and trivial Schur multiplier.
Proposition 4. If is a 2-group with of order 2, then .
Proof. Assume that (where is central and , so ), of rank , and .
. For , with . Modulo the transfer therefore becomes squaring , so and .
. Apply Lemma 1 to ; then has order 2, hence , and for , .
. Then , so the conjecture holds.
, . Then and .
, (). The bound 4 suffices if . The remaining case is , where must be smaller than .
The groups in the remaining case are, as we will show below, the quaternion group if has order 8 and the modular groups of order . For these groups, it is well known that the result is true. □
Call a finite 2-group a -group if and . Let
Lemma 5. Let be a -group.
(a) .
(b) If has order 2 and , then is again a -group.
Proof. (a) is central; apply Lemma 1 with : gives .
(b) , so by Lemma 1 is onto; thus . Also has order 2. □
Theorem 6. The -groups are exactly and the modular groups , .
Step 1: . By Lemma 5(a), for (). By (F2), . This forces , (for the sum is 0; for it is ). Put ; then .
Step 2: generators and relations. Choose whose images generate with orders and 2. By (F3) (applied to the central stem extension ), . The subgroup is the normal closure of ; being central of order 2, , , central. Also :
Note that has order and if ( forces ).
Step 3: is impossible. We prove by induction on : no -group as in Step 2 has .
: then and , , . has a unique involution, which lies in ; so . But , so is no -group.
: is central (), hence is central of order 2, and . By Lemma 5(b), is a -group. In the images of generate, , , and the abelianization of is with of orders . So is a -group of the type of Step 2 with parameter and , contradicting the induction hypothesis.
Step 4: . Now , has order , and with . Put ; then , .
(): , . If this is , excluded. If then and .
(): if then already satisfy the defining relations of . If (), put . Since ,
as and for ; and . So again satisfy the relations of .
In the last case is a quotient of (generated by satisfying its relations); since (a split extension of by , as ), .
Proof of the Main Theorem
Let be a finite group and a normal subgroup with cyclic of order . For a -group and a subgroup of index , this is automatic ( is normal, and a group of prime order is cyclic).
Fix and set . Since is abelian we have , and since we have . Put (written additively unless stated otherwise). Since is abelian, acts trivially on by conjugation, so the conjugation action of on factors through ; this makes a -module, with (independent of the choice of ). We write for the group of -fixed points and for the norm element. Let be the transfer and the Schur multiplier of ; put and .
Theorem 7. Let be a finite group and a normal subgroup such that is cyclic of order . Then there is an exact sequence
with , and
In particular, for a -group and ,
with equality if and only if is the zero map.
Corollary 8. In the situation of Theorem 7:
(a) divides ; in particular ;
(b) ;
(c) if and only if is onto; thus whenever .
Proof. All three statements follow from , since is a quotient of and iff is onto. □
Proposition 9. Let be a cyclic unramified extension of number fields of degree (unramified at all places, including the infinite ones), let be the Hilbert class field of , and . Then (Section 1), and by Iwasawa’s formula [8] . Hence
Standard facts used
We use the following standard results on the homology groups
(H1) A short exact sequence of -modules gives a long exact homology sequence;
(H2) Shapiro’s lemma: let with acting by left translation. Regard as the trivial -module; then (induced and coinduced modules agree because ), and Shapiro’s lemma [1 III.(6.2)] gives natural isomorphisms for all . Under these isomorphisms,
the augmentation induces the map induced by the inclusion ; [1 III.6]
the map , , induces the transfer ; [1 III.9]
the -endomorphism of given by multiplication by induces on the map induced by conjugation by ; [1 III.8].
(H3) ; ; the Schur multiplier; on the transfer is the group-theoretic transfer ; on the transfer is multiplication by the index [1 III.9].
Two exact sequences
Let with , regarded as a -module via , and let , be the augmentation with kernel . Then : the inclusion “” is clear, and if then . Because is cyclic, the annihilator of in is : indeed (indices mod ) vanishes iff all are equal. Hence gives a surjection with kernel , and . We get
and is multiplication by on . All maps are -equivariant: is an inclusion of submodules; (so acts trivially on in (I)); (so is -linear); and because is commutative.
Sequence (I)
The long exact sequence attached to (I) contains
By (H2) and (H3) this reads
Exactness at and at shows that induces an isomorphism
Sequence (II)
The relevant part of the long exact homology sequence of (II) is
where we used , and on . Under and (the latter induced by ), the map is multiplication by , since . Thus
Exactness at the fourth term gives since multiplication by is injective on , so , is onto, and exactness at gives
Combining the two sequences
Let us collect what we have so far. Since is multiplication by on , the induced map on is the endomorphism . Setting , the exact sequences extracted from the long exact homology sequences fit into the following exact and commutative diagram:
The commutativity of the left square follows from and . Applying the snake lemma then gives us an exact sequence
(which is easily proved by a simple diagram chase in this case), and in particular we have
Proof of Theorem 7
Proposition 10. Let be the preimage of under the natural projection . Then , and we have .
Proof. : For we have, writing multiplicatively, . Since is generated by the classes and is a homomorphism, is generated by these elements; hence is generated by and the commutators , . All of these lie in , so .
is normal in : The subgroup is a -submodule of , because commutes with . The conjugation action of on factors through , hence is stable under all of . So for and we have (as ) and its class in lies in , i.e. .
: The image of in is abelian since . For we have , i.e. in , so commutes with the image of every element of . Since , the group is generated by the images of and , which commute pairwise; hence is abelian and .
Counting: We have shown that , so , because kernel and cokernel of an endomorphism of a finite group have the same order. Since we get . □
Proof of Theorem 7. The exact sequence was established in (5). Hence and . By Proposition 10,
The cokernel is a quotient of , giving the inequality, with equality iff the cokernel is all of , i.e. iff is zero. □
Remarks
In November 2025 I looked at Folk’s article [2]. He said that there is extra capitulation in a cyclic unramified extension if the order of is strictly larger than . He showed that extra capitulation implies the existence of certain central extensions, which in turn, so I hoped, would show that the Schur multiplier of the Galois group of cannot be trivial. Before I found the time to think this through, the AI revolution happened.
Now that the transfer conjecture is proved we might ask conversely how these field extensions corresponding to the cokernel of may be constructed.
Acknowledgement
The proof was found with the help of the free version of Claude in October 2026. Over several sessions, Claude suggested three proofs: the first used spectral sequences, the second replaced everything by explicit calculations based on Hopf’s formula; I chose to present the third version using standard homology groups in my own exposition.
I would like to dedicate this article to the memory of my dear friend Chip Snyder (1946–2026), who kept returning to these questions during the final years of his life. In particular, together with Elliot Benjamin (see [16]) he proved that the transfer conjecture holds in the following case: If is a finite -group and is a maximal abelian subgroup of , then .
References
- [1]K. S. Brown, Cohomology of Groups, Springer-Verlag 7
- [2]D. Folk, Extra capitulation and central extensions, J. Number Theory 50 (1995), 226–232 10DOI
- [3]G. Frei, F. Lemmermeyer, P. Roquette (eds.), Emil Artin and Helmut Hasse. The correspondence 1923–1958, Springer 2014 2DOI
- [4]R. Frucht, Über die Darstellung endlicher Abelscher Gruppen durch Kollineationen, J. Reine Angew. Math. 166 (1931), 16–29 2DOI
- [5]Ph. Furtwängler, Über das Verhalten der Ideale des Grundkörpers im Klassenkörper, Monatsh. f. Math. 27 (1916), 1–15 3DOI
- [6]H. Hasse, Bericht über neue Untersuchungen und Probleme aus der Theorie der algebraischen Zahlkörper, Leipzig 1930 1, 2
- [7]S. Iyanaga, Zum Beweise des Hauptidealsatzes, Abh. Math. Semin. Hamb. Univ. 10 (1934), 349–357 2DOI
- [8]K. Iwasawa, A note on the group of units of an algebraic number field, J. Math. Pures Appl. (9) 35 (1956), 189–192 7
- [9]G. Karpilovsky, The Schur multiplier, LMS Monographs, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1987 2, 3
- [10]H. Kisilevsky, Number fields with class number congruent to 4 mod 8 and Hilbert’s Theorem 94, J. Number Theory 8 (1976), 271–279 3
- [11]F. Lemmermeyer, Konstruktion von Klassenkörpern, Ph. D. dissertation 1995 4
- [12]A. Leutbecher, Das Gauß’sche Lemma ist Beispiel einer Verlagerung, Arch. Math. 23 (1972), 151–153 2DOI
- [13]I. Schur, Neuer Beweis eines Satzes über endliche Gruppen, Berl. Ber. 1902, 1013–1019 2
- [15]I. Schur, Letter to Hasse, December 30, 1930 (cod. Ms. Hasse, 1:1561) 2
- [16]C. Snyder, E. Benjamin, A proof of the abelian cases of the transfer conjecture of F. Lemmermeyer, preprint 2026 10
- [17]W. C. Waterhouse, A tiny note on Gauss’s lemma, J. Number Theory 30 (1988), 105–107 2DOI