Last update: 10 January 2014
Proposition 2. Let Then admits an antiautomorphism, denoted which fixes the generators
Proof. | |
where is a free group on generators and is generated, as a normal subgroup, by the elements together with the elements Now has an antiautomorphism fixing the generators We denote this by for Put If is odd, If is even, If the first case is conjugate to and in the second is conjugate to Thus It follows that and hence has an antiautomorphism fixing |
Proposition 3. Let and let be an dimensional complex vector space. Define by for Then is a representation of
Proof. | |
Obvious. |
Keeping in mind that the connection between the representations and of is further clarified by
Proposition 4. Let and let denote the matrix for the Hermitian form with respect to the basis By abuse of notation, for we let denote the matrix for the linear transformation in the basis Then
Proof. | |
We view all matrices as elements of which have been written with respect to the basis of column vectors for and we write for if Then letting we compute and Since we have the result. |
Corollary 2. Let If is non degenerate, the representations and are equivalent.
Proof. | |
Since this is immediate from Proposition 4. |
Definition: Let and let and be two distinct vertices in We say and are connected if and only if there is a finite sequence of vertices in such that there is an edge between and If any two distinct vertices in are connected, is said to be connected.
Definition: A connected graph is said to be a linear graph if the vertices of can be numbered so if there is no edge joining the and vertices. Thus a linear graph looks like Coxeter [Cox1967] has introduced the convenient abbreviation for such a graph and we shall make use of it later. For a linear graph Coxeter [Cox1967, p.130] gives a representation of by matrices. Using the identity one sees that this representation is precisely the representation of Proposition 3.
Consider a graph with the stipulation that for Thus all the generators for are involutions. These Coxeter groups have been studied extensively [Bou1968]. Note that since we have and thus the form is precisely the form of [Bou1968, p.90] and the representation of is exactly the representation of [Bou1968, p.91].
We will be interested in determining when the linear group acts irreducibly on It is clear that if the graph is not connected then will decompose as the direct product of the subgroups corresponding to the connected components of since each of these subgroups operates non trivially only in the subspace of generated by those basis vectors corresponding to the vertices of the connected component of
Proposition 5. Suppose is connected. Let Then
(1) | acts trivially on and |
(2) | If is stable under then |
Proof. | |
We will write to denote the value of for For (1) take Now Thus if we have and hence Since all generators of operate trivially on we are done. We now consider (2). Assume there is some basis vector Let be any other basis vector. We shall show also. Since is connected there is a sequence of vertices such that there is an edge in between and By relabeling we can assume this sequence is We now show by induction that for If this is our hypothesis. So assume with Now and hence Since the fact that implies Thus every basis vector is in and we have a contradiction. Hence no basis vector is in Now let and let Then and this vector must be in also. Hence and |
We can now give two conditions sufficient to insure that the linear group associated with a connected graph acts irreducibly on The first of these is
Corollary 3. Suppose is connected. If is non degenerate on then acts irreducibly on
Proof. | |
This is immediate from Proposition 5. |
The second condition can be stated as
Corollary 4. Let be connected. Assume is finite. Then acts irreducibly on
Proof. | |
Suppose false. Then a direct sum of two proper non zero subspaces stable under Applying Proposition 5 we obtain and Hence a contradiction. |
One very interesting and obvious question to ask about the groups under consideration is which of these groups are finite. A necessary condition is given by
Proposition 6. Let be connected. If is finite, then the Hermitian form is positive definite.
Proof. | |
Certainly the finiteness of implies that of Since is a finite linear group there is a positive definite Hermitian form stable under the action of [Bur1955](section 195). But we are assuming that is connected; so we can apply Corollary 4 to yield that acts irreducibly on Now by [Bur1955](section 206), the space of Hermitian forms invariant under a finite irreducible linear group is one dimensional and is also invariant under Thus there is some non zero scalar such that Applying both sides to we obtain Hence is a positive real number. Thus being a positive real scalar multiple of the positive definite form is also positive definite. |
Definition: Let is said to be positive definite if and only if the corresponding Hermitian form is positive definite and we denote by the collection of all the positive definite graphs We also put and we remark that if and only if all the connected components of are in
Because of Proposition 6 it is of interest to determine all the graphs To this end we begin with a definition.
Definition: Let A graph is said to be a subgraph of and we write if can be obtained from by performing any of the following operations in any order subject to the restriction that after each operation is performed the graph thus obtained is still in
1) | Removing some of the vertices together with all adjoining edges. |
2) | Decreasing the marks on some of the edges. |
3) | Decreasing the marks on the vertices subject to the restriction: if there is an edge in joining the vertices and then where are the marks on in and are the marks on in |
Proposition 7. Suppose is positive definite. If is a subgraph of then is also positive definite.
Proof. | |
We order the vertices of in such a way that are the vertices of We will denote the marks on the vertices and edges of by the usual and and those of by and We let be the matrix for with respect to the basis and we let be the matrix for with respect to the basis We claim Since for all and if there is an edge joining and in then Now implies and thus So assume Now in general, Hence if there is no edge in joining and and thus So assume there is an edge in joining and Then we have so Also, implies Hence i.e., Now assume the proposition is false. So there is a vector such that For each write and define Put Then implies We have which is a contradiction. |
Definition: Let be an matrix over Let for denote the matrix formed by the upper left hand corner of i.e., The principal minors of are the scalars
If we say is positive definite if and only if for all and if and only if all
We will be using the following fact from linear algebra.
Proposition 8. is positive definite if and only if all the principal minors of are positive.
Proof. | |
See [Hal1958]. |
If we write for and we denote by the collection of all graphs in such that but if then We also put
Theorem 2. The connected graphs in are precisely those in List 1. (The subscript on the letter denoting the graph indicates the number of vertices.)
Theorem 3. The connected graphs in are precisely those in List 2. (The subscript on the letter denoting the graph is one less than the number of vertices.)
We will prove Theorems 2 and 3 simultaneously.
Lemma 2.
(a) | |
(b) | |
(c) | |
(d) | |
(e) | |
(f) | |
(g) | |
(h) | |
(g) |
Proof. | |
(a) See [BGr1971, p.58]. (b) If this is a trivial computation. So assume Expanding along the first row we find (c) If this is an easy calculation. So we assume Expanding along the last column we have (d) See [BGr1971, p.59]. (e) Again expanding by minors we obtain For proofs of (f) through (i) see [BGr1971, pp.60-61]. Notice that the principal minor of (respectively is just (respectively and thus the combination of Proposition 8 and parts (a), (b), and (d) of Lemma 2 justify the presence of these graphs in List 1. Note further that because of Proposition 7, no graph which has any of or as a subgraph can be positive definite and hence is to be excluded from List 1. |
We can now begin in earnest to prove Theorems 2 and 3. It is obvious that
Step I. We will determine the connected graphs in and the connected graphs in Suppose is connected. Thus is with Now the matrix for in the basis is the first principal minor of which is So by Proposition 8, will be positive definite if and only if Now Thus, if and only if and if and only if Since both arguments lie in the interval over which cosine is strictly decreasing we have if and only if and if and only if The solutions to (2) subject to the restrictions and if is odd are given in [Cox1962, p.96] and reproduced here: These are precisely the graphs in List 1 with two vertices. The solutions to (3) subject to the restrictions above occur in [Cox1974, p.111] and we give them here also: Now by the definition of a subgraph it is easy to verify that if and if then Thus if occurs amongst those graphs just listed, we have So every proper subgraph of is positive definite and these graphs comprise the set of connected graphs in as indicated in List 2.
Step II. We determine all linear graphs in and all linear graphs in Let be linear. Thus is Putting and we find (after using some trigonometric identities) that We will determine the linear graphs in first. The condition that is Since if (4) is to hold, we cannot have both and So one of them must be Without loss of generality, Hence, so is
Now if Thus if (4) forces or Comparing the left side with the first term on the right we see so in particular But comparing the left side with the last term on the right we see that and thus So we must have and But substituting these values in (5) yields a contradiction. Hence,
If then and (4) becomes which holds if and only if or
If (4) becomes Comparing the left side with the second term on the right we see we must have or Substituting in (6) we obtain and thus is arbitrary in this case. Substituting in (6) we obtain or which forces
If and (4) becomes which forces
Thus forces to be one of:
Now for such the first principal minor of is obviously positive and the second principal minor is the determinant of the Hermitian form associated with the graph obtained from by deleting its third vertex. One quickly determines by referring to Step I that the graphs so obtained have positive determinants. We have thus enumerated all the linear graphs in and we mention that these are precisely those linear graphs with three vertices in List 1.
We now proceed to determine the linear graphs For a linear graph the expression for appears at the beginning of Step II and we see that the condition that is Again, since we see that if and we must have and Hence, either and and are arbitrary or and is arbitrary. Thus if and (4') forces to be either or Thus we assume without loss of generality that Hence and is We rearrange (4') to obtain Recalling that we see that if we must have and thus In particular, Further, if the first term on the right is positive, the second is now negative and thus comparing the left side with the last term on the right we must have so Hence, forces and Substituting these values in (5') we obtain Thus we may assume If (5') becomes Now since the first term on the right is positive and the second nonnegative, by comparing the left side with the last term on the right we see that so or If we must have and thus also. If the last term on the right is positive and thus comparing the left side with the first term on the right yields so and thus Substituting these values in the equation above we obtain a contradiction. So if is
If we have and going back to (5') we once again compare the left side with the last term on the right and (since the first term on the right is positive and the second, non negative) conclude that so or However, substituting either of these values in (5') yields a contradiction.
If (5') becomes In particular, Now comparing the left with the last term on the right we see and forces Thus or and If we have or and thus So if is either or
If and (5') becomes Thus, and is
We have now shown that if is linear and satisfies then is one of Notice that these graphs are precisely those linear graphs with three vertices occurring in List 2. To complete Step II, we need to show that if is one of the graphs just listed and if then In light of the first parts of Steps I and II, this task amounts to no more than seeing if the subgraph has its connected components occurring in List 1. We omit the details of this verification.
Step III. We will determine all the linear graphs in or in Suppose is linear. Say is Then either by Proposition 7 (if or by definition (if the pair of subgraphs and must lie in Since we have previously determined the linear graphs in we search that list for suitable pSirs and we obtain the following graphs as candidates for membership in
(i) | |
(ii) | |
(iii) | |
(iv) | |
(v) | |
(vi) | |
(vii) | |
(viii) | |
(ix) | |
(x) | |
(xi) | |
(xii) |
The determinants of both (vii) and (viii) are computed to be zero. In (ix), by reducing the 5 to 4 we obtain which has determinant zero as a subgraph. We compute that the determinants for both (x) and (xi) are negative. Finally, in (xii) we can reduce both 5's to 4's to obtain as a subgraph. Hence the linear graphs in are precisely the graphs (i) through (v) and the linear graphs of determinant zero amongst our candidates are the graphs (vi), (vii) & (viii), which we easily see by inspection have the property that all their proper subgraphs are positive definite. We finally remark that graphs (i) through (v) are precisely the linear graphs with four vertices in List 1 and the graphs (vi), (vii) & (viii) are precisely the linear graphs with four vertices in List 2.
Step IV. We will determine all linear graphs in By the same type of reasoning as that used at the beginning of Step III we see that must consist of some of the graphs from the following possibilities:
(i) | |
(ii) | |
(iii) | |
(iv) | |
(v) | |
(vi) | |
(vii) | |
(viii) |
Step V. (a) For the linear graphs in are and (b) For the linear graphs in are
Arguing as we have in the previous steps and using the proof of (a) is an easy induction. Then using, (a) the proof of (b) is an easy induction.
At this point we have determined all linear graphs in We next show that a connected graph in must be a tree and that the graphs are the only connected graphs in which are not trees. This is done in Step VI through Step IX. We remark here that it is obvious that all the proper subgraphs of are positive definite and since by Lemma 2 we have
Step VI. Let denote the cycle If then
Proof. | |
Put and Case (1) None of is three. Then is a subgraph (perhaps not proper) and hence Now the matrix for the form is Thus, Case (2) Exactly one of is Without loss of generality Thus and is a subgraph. So again we must have But the matrix for is and thus Case (3) Two of are Without loss of generality say and are Thus, and if necessary we reduce all of them simultaneously to Further we then reduce to if necessary to obtain as a subgraph. But this cannot be a proper subgraph as Hence |
Step VII. Let denote the cycle If then is
Proof. | |
Note that if all the are the same we can reduce them simultaneously to and then reduce the marks on the four edges to 3's to obtain as a subgraph. But since this cannot be a proper subgraph and hence Thus we can assume that at least two of the edges of are not labelled with the number 3. Further any two such edges cannot have a vertex in common because a glance at List 1 reveals that no linear graph in has both its edges marked with numbers larger than 3. Thus at most two of the edges of can be so marked and hence is a subgraph of Further, is a subgraph and must occur in List 1. Thus one of is 2. Glancing back at we see it does not matter which is 2, so without loss of generality, Thus writing and the matrix for is and giving a contradiction. |
Step VIII. Let denote the 5 cycle If then is
Proof. | |
Arguing as in Step VII we see that if all the are the same we will have So we assume that not all the edges of are labeled with the number 3. Without loss of generality, say Now the subgraph must occur in List 1 and thus implies that is forcing Further we can now conclude that the subgraph is and must also occur in List 1. Glancing at that list we see that must be So and thus as remarked at the beginning of this step. This is a contradiction as we're assuming |
Step IX. Let denote an cycle. If then is
Proof. | |
We may assume Consider any two adjacent vertices and if read of We will show and By relabelling we may assume Now the subgraph must occur in List 1 and hence is either or In either case and Thus |
Now Proposition 7 together with Step IX imply that every connected graph in is a tree and that the graphs are the only connected graphs in which are not trees. Also we have previously determined all the linear graphs in So we must consider non linear trees which leads us to the
Definition: Let and suppose is a vertex of The degree of written is the number of vertices of such that there is an edge in between and We say that is a branch point of if
Our determination of the connected graphs in will be complete if we determine those which contain a branch point.
Step X. Let denote the graph If If or is
Proof. | |
Suppose Case (1) Thus and are subgraphs. Consulting List 1 we see we must have or The first alternative is which is positive definite as remarked after Lemma 1. The second alternative has the value zero as the determinant of its Hermitian form, and all its proper subgraphs are positive definite. Now glancing at List 1 we see that no linear graph in has both its edges marked with numbers larger than 3. We are thus led to the remaining Case (2) Exactly one of the marks on the edges of is not 3. Without loss of generality, Thus is Here again is a subgraph and hence or Subcase (i). Suppose Then is a subgraph and thus with arbitrary or and In the first instance and all its proper subgraphs are positive definite, while in the second instance we can reduce the 5 to 4 to obtain as a proper subgraph yielding a contradiction. Subcase (ii). Suppose Then is a subgraph and thus and Hence is and we compute giving a contradiction. |
Step XI. Suppose is connected and contains a branch point Then is one of
Proof. | |
Step X together with the fact that has determinant zero imply that and that the subgraph of formed by and the three vertices to which is joined is Further all edges of are unlabelled; otherwise some would occur as a subgraph. So all vertices are unlabelled also. So by the classification of positive definite graphs for Coxeter groups [BGr1971, p. 62] is or |
Step XII. Let and suppose is connected and contains a branch point Then is one of
Proof. | |
If Step X forces to contain as a subgraph and hence So we assume Then again by Step X the subgraph of formed by and the three vertices to which is joined is Now if some edge is labelled with number larger than 3 then would have some as a subgraph and hence Thus we can assume all edges are unlabelled. Hence all vertices are unlabelled also. Now if contains another branch point distinct from then would contain some as a subgraph and hence Thus we can assume that is the unique branch point of It follows that is or for the only other graphs which have a unique branch point of degree 3 and have all vertices and edges unlabelled are either (all of which are positive definite) or graphs which contain or as proper subgraphs. We remark that by inspection one easily verifies that each of has the property that all of its proper subgraphs are positive definite and hence these graphs are elements of |
This last step completes the proof of Theorems 2 and 3.
Let be a connected graph. Recalling Proposition 6 we see that if is finite then must occur in List 1. But referring to [Cox1967, pp. 132,133] we see that every graph in List 1 occurs in the table given there and the groups corresponding to the graphs in this table are, according to [Cox1967], finite. So the combination of [Cox1967] and List 1 yields
Theorem 4: Let be connected. Then the following statements are equivalent.
(a) | is finite. |
(b) | is positive definite. |
(c) | occurs in List 1. |
As mentioned before, if with then the representation given by Theorem 1 for the Coxeter group is the same representation as that given in [Bou1968]. Thus, by [Bou1968, p.93], for such is a faithful representation of Now our representation fails to be faithful in general but we can prove the following.
Corollary 5. Let be connected. If is finite, then is a faithful representation of
Proof. | |
By the remarks preceding the corollary we can assume that not all are 2. Now since is finite, appears in List 1. But a glance at List 1 reveals the fact that since not all are must be linear. As remarked before, for such Coxeter [Cox1967] gives a representation of which is the representation of Proposition 3. But according to [Cox1967] this representation is a faithful representation of Now since is finite the form is positive definite so in particular it is non degenerate and thus Corollary 2 yields that and are equivalent representations of and hence is also a faithful representation of |
The fact that is not in general faithful is illustrated in the following example. Let denote the graph in The representation of is given by where One easily sees that has order 3. However, putting where are to be chosen later we see that and Thus if has infinite order and so does In fact by looking carefully at the computations done at the very end of the proof of Theorem 1 one sees that for all the groups associated with connected graphs we have has infinite order but has finite order.
This is a typed version of David W. Koster's thesis Complex Reflection Groups.
This thesis was submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Mathematics) at the University of Wisconsin - Madison, 1975.