SIGNATURES OF SURFACE BUNDLES AND STABLE
COMMUTATOR LENGTHS OF DEHN TWISTS

arXiv:1804.01798v1 [math.GT] 5 Apr 2018

NAOYUKI MONDEN

Abstract. The first aim of this paper is to give four types of examples of
surface bundles over surfaces with non-zero signature. The first example is
with base genus 2, a prescribed signature, a 0-section and the fiber genus
greater than a certain number which depends on the signature. This provides
a new upper bound on the minimal base genus for fixed signature and fiber
genus. The second one gives a new asymptotic upper bound for this number in
the case that fiber genus is odd. The third one has a small Euler characteristic.
The last is a non-holomorphic example.
The second aim is to improve upper bounds for stable commutator lengths
of Dehn twists by giving factorizations of powers of Dehn twists as products
of commutators. One of the factorizations is used to construct the second
examples of surface bundles. As a corollary, we see that there is a gap between
the stable commutator length of the Dehn twist along a nonseparating curve
in the mapping class group and that in the hyperelliptic mapping class group
if the genus of the surface is greater than or equal to 8.

1. Introduction
1.1. Notation. In here, we introduce notation. Let Σrg be a compact oriented
surface of genus g with r boundary components, and let Mrg be the mapping class
group of Σrg , that is the group of isotopy classes of orientation preserving selfdiffeomorphisms of Σrg such that diffeomorphisms and isotopies fix the points of the
boundaries. For simplicity, we write Σg = Σ0g and Mg = M0g . For a subsurface
Σ of Σrg , let M(Σ) denote the subgroup of Mrg generated by elements whose the
restrictions on Σrg − Σ are identity. We denote by i(a, b) the geometric intersection
number for two simple closed curves a and b on Σrg .
For two elements φ1 , φ2 in Mrg , the notation φ2 φ1 means that we first apply φ1
then φ2 , the conjugation φ2 φ1 φ−1
2 of φ1 by φ2 is denoted by φ2 (φ1 ), and we write
[φ1 , φ2 ] for the commutator of φ1 and φ2 . We denote by tc the right-handed Dehn
twist along a simple closed curve c on Σrg . Since Mrg is generated by Dehn twists
[13], every element can be written as a product of Dehn twists. If we consider an
element in Mrg without explicit factorization as a product of Dehn twist, then we
suppose that its certain factorization is given and fixed.
A surface bundle over a surface is a fiber bundle that the fiber and the base are
closed oriented surfaces. If the fiber and the base are Σg and Σh , respectively, then
we call this the Σg -bundle over Σh . For the total space X of this bundle, we denote
by σ(X) the signature of X. We write it simply σ when no confusion can arise.
In this paper, we introduce the symbol “≡P ” in Section 2.3. If the reader is
interested only in the results on the (stable) commutator length, then he or she
may replace “≡P ” by “=” and skip Section 2.1, 2.3, 5 and 6.
1

2

N. MONDEN

1.2. Surface bundles over surfaces with non-zero signature. Even though
to consider surface bundles over surfaces is one simple way to get 4-manifolds,
many fundamental problems on such bundles remain open. Problems about surface
bundles with non-zero signature are exemplified as one of them.
Euler characteristics multiply for fiber bundles. In contrast, this property does
not hold for the signature. Equivalently, there is a surface bundle over a surface
with non-zero signature. Such examples were first exhibited by Atiyah [2] and,
independently, Kodaira [26]. Since then, many examples of surface bundles with
nonvanishing signature have been constructed (see e.g. [22, 14, 9, 8, 41, 16, 1, 23]).
A Σg -bundle over Σh gives some restrictions on the signature σ. For example,
σ must be divisible by 4, and it vanishes if h ≤ 1 or g ≤ 2 using Meyer’s signature
cocycle and Birman-Hilden’s relations [7] of M2 (see [38, 39]). Hence, the case of
g ≥ 3 and h ≥ 2 is interesting. The existence of an example of g = 3 and σ 6= 0
was shown in [38, 39], and explicit examples were constructed in [14, 41, 16, 23]. In
particular, for any integer n, there is a Σ3 -bundle over Σh with σ = 4n if h ≥ 7|n|+1
(see [23]). An example of h = 2 and σ 6= 0, which solves Problem 2.18 (A) in [25],
was first given by Bryan-Donagi [8]. Precisely, it satisfies g = 4k 3 − 2k 2 + 1 and
σ = 8(k 3 − k)/3 for any integer k ≥ 2. Thus, we notice that g and σ in the example
of h = 2 take discrete values compared to h and σ in the examples of g = 3. If the
example of [8] has a 0-section (i.e. a section of self-intersection zero), then the genus
of a fiber can extend to g ≥ 4k 3 − 2k 2 + 1 using “section sum operations”. However,
the author does not know whether it admits a 0-section or not. The motivation for
the next result comes from these observations.
Theorem A. For any integer n, there is a Σg -bundle over Σ2 with σ = 4n if
g ≥ 39|n|. In particular, it admits a 0-section.
Meyer [38, 39] also proved that for every g ≥ 3 and n, there is a Σg -bundle over
Σh with σ = 4n. Motivated by this result, Problem 1.1 below, which is a refined
version of Problem 2.18 (A) in [25], was posed by Endo [14]. Solving Problem 1.1 is
equivalent to computing the minimal genus of the surfaces representing the n times
generator of H2 (Mg ; Z)/Tor for fixed g ≥ 3 and n (see [32]).
Problem 1.1 (Endo [14]). Let hg (n) be the minimal h such that there exists a
Σg -bundle over Σh with σ = 4n. Determine the value hg (n).
Upper bounds on hg (n) were given in [14] after the initial work in [41, 16, 23].
A sharper bound given by Lee [23] is hg (n) ≤ 5|n| + 1 for g ≥ 6. As a corollary of
Theorem A, we can compute hg (n) for the special case and give it’s upper bound
for g ≥ 39 by pulling back the bundle to unramified coverings of Σ2 of degree |n|.
Corollary 1.2. For any n, hg (n) = 2 if g ≥ 39|n|, and hg (n) ≤ |n| + 1 if g ≥ 39.
Kotschick [32] first gave the lower bound on hg (n). The best known bound was
obtained by Hamenstadt [20]: 3|n|/(g − 1)+ 1 ≤ hg (n). Since the upper bound with
the same shape as the above lower bound, in which g appears in the denominator,
was given in [16], we next turn to study the asymptotic behavior of hg (n). This
is natural since the base genus and the signature grow linearly in a sequence of
bundles by pulling back by covers of the base of a given bundle. We consider the
following problem posed by Mess (see Problem 2.18 (B) in [25]).
Problem 1.3 (Mess [25]). Let Hg := lim

n→∞

hg (n)
. Determine the limit Hg .
n

SIGNATURES OF SURFACE BUNDLES AND STABLE COMMUTATOR LENGTHS OF DEHN TWISTS
3

The limit exists and is finite and interpreted as the Gromov-Thurston norm of
the generator of H2 (Mg ; Z)/Tor (see [32]). The lower bound 3/(g − 1) ≤ Hg is
immediately obtained from the result of [20]. For any g ≥ 3, the upper bound on
Hg was first given in [16]. This bound was improved as follows: Hg ≤ 6/(g − 2)
for even g, Hg ≤ 9/(g − 2) for g = 3k ≥ 6 and Hg ≤ 14/(g − 1) for odd g (see
[8, 9, 23]). Since there is a gap between the even and odd g cases, we fill it.
Theorem B. If g is odd, then, for any integer n, there is an Σg -bundle over Σ6|n|+5
with σ = 4(g − 1)n. Therefore, Hg ≤ 6/(g − 1) for odd g.
We next focus on surface bundles over surfaces with small Euler characteristics.
The Euler characteristic of a Σg -bundle over Σh is 4(g − 1)(h − 1). The smallest
known example is that of [23] (g = 3, h = 8 and σ = 4). We slightly improve it.
Theorem C. There exists a Σ3 -bundle over Σ7 with σ = 4 and a 0-section.
Finally, we give non-holomorphic examples with non-zero signature. Thurston
[42] showed that the total space of a Σg -bundle over Σh is symplectic for g ≥ 2.
Then, the following question arises: for which values of g and h the total space
of a Σg -bundle over Σh with σ 6= 0 does not admit a complex structure? If a
holomorphic surface bundle is isotrivial, then σ = 0 (see [8]), and there are simple
examples with σ = 0 that is non-isotrivial and whose total space can not be complex
(see [4]). From this, we need the assumption on σ 6= 0. Baykur [4] showed that for
any positive integer N and for any h ≥ 3, there exists g > N such that there are
infinite families of (pairwise non-homotopic) 4-manifolds with σ 6= 0 admitting a
Σg -bundle over Σh and not admitting any complex structure with either orientation
(The same holds for any g ≥ 4 if h ≥ 9). Using Theorem 4 (2) of [4] and Theorem A,
we see that the same is true for h = 2 (i.e. the smallest h satisfying σ 6= 0).
Corollary 1.4. For any integer n and for any g ≥ 39|n| + 1, there are infinite
families of (pairwise non-homotopic) 4-manifolds with σ = 4n admitting a Σg bundle over Σ2 and not admitting any complex structure with either orientation.
1.3. Stable commutator lengths of Dehn twists. Since the monodromy factorization of a Σg -bundle over Σh is a factorization of the identity as a product of h
commutators in Mg , techniques constructing commutators and reducing the number of them are required to prove Theorem A, B and C. We apply the techniques of
(stable) commutator lengths on Mg to the results on surface bundles. Especially,
Theorem D (1) below will be used to show Theorem B.
Let [G, G] be the commutator subgroup of a group G. For x ∈ [G, G], the
commutator length clG (x) of x is defined to be the smallest number of commutators
whose product is equal to x. The stable commutator length sclG (x) of x is the limit
clG (xn )
.
n→∞
n
Note that the limit exists. We define clG (x) := ∞ if x ∈
/ [G, G], sclG (x) :=
sclG (xk )/|k| if x ∈
/ [G, G] but xk ∈ [G, G] for some k and sclG (x) := ∞ if xk ∈
/ [G, G]
for any k. From the results of [7] and [40], sclMg (x) < ∞ for g ≥ 1. Since
Dehn twists are the most fundamental generators of Mg , computing clMg (tc )
and sclMg (tc ) is the natural problem. Korkmaz and Ozbagci [29] showed that
clMg (tc ) = 2 if g ≥ 3. Therefore, our next problem is to the calculate clMg (tnc )
for any n and sclMg (tc ). However, since it is difficult to compute clG and sclG in
general, it makes sense to give estimates on clMg (tnc ) and sclMg (tc ).
sclG (x) = lim

4

N. MONDEN

A lower bound on sclMg (tc ) was given by Endo-Kotschick [17]. Consequently,
Mg is not uniformly perfect, and the natural homomorphism from the second
bounded cohomology of Mg to its ordinary cohomology is not injective, which were
conjectured by Morita [37]. For technical reasons, they showed that |n|/(18g − 6) +
1 ≤ clMg (tnc ) for any n if c is a separating curve. This gives 1/(18g − 6) ≤ sclMg (tc )
for a separating curve c. This assumption was removed by Korkmaz [27], and the
above results were extended to positive multi twists in [5]. In [27], an upper bound
on sclMg (tc ) was also given. He showed that sclMg (tc ) < 2/30 for a nonseparating
curve c if g ≥ 2. On the other hand, there is an estimate sclMg (tc ) = O(1/g) for
any simple closed curve c, so limg→∞ sclMg (tc ) = 0 (see [33] and also [10]). Such
an explicit upper bound on sclMg (tc ) was given in [11] if c is nonseparating, and in
[36] if c is separating. However, they don’t give an factorization of tnc as a product
of commutators realizing limg→∞ sclMg (tc ) = 0 explicitly.
The purpose is to give sharper upper bounds for stable commutator lengths of
Dehn twists giving explicit factorizations of powers of Dehn twists as products of
commutators. We call a simple closed curve s on Σg the separating curve of type
h if s separates into two components with genera h and g − h for h = 1, 2, . . . , [ g2 ].
To state our results, let s0 be a nonseparating curve on Σg and let sh a separating
curve of type h on Σg . Our main results are following.
Theorem D. Let g ≥ 2 and h ≥ 2. For any integer n, we have the following.
10(g−1)n

(1) clMg (ts0
) ≤ |n| + 3, and therefore sclMg (ts0 ) ≤ 1/(10g − 10),
5(g−1)n
) ≤ [(7|n| + 9)/2], and therefore sclMg (ts1 ) ≤ 7/(10g − 10),
(2) clMg (ts1
[g/h]n
) ≤ [(|n| + 3)/2], and therefore sclMg (tsh ) ≤ 1/(2[g/h]).
(3) clMg (tsh
In particular, there are factorizations of powers of Dehn twists as products of commutators realizing the above upper bounds for the commutator lengths.
Sharper upper and lower bounds were given in [35, 11, 36] if g = 2.
Let Hg be the hyperelliptic mapping class group of Σg , that is the subgroup
of Mg consisting of all elements that commute with isotopy class of some fixed
hyperelliptic involution. Since Mg = Hg if g = 1, 2, we have sclMg ≡ sclHg . In
general, for a subgroup H of a group G, we have sclG (x) ≤ sclH (x). By 1/(8g +4) ≤
sclHg (ts0 ) (see [35]) and Theorem D (1), we obtain the following corollary.
Corollary 1.5. If g ≥ 8, then sclMg (ts0 ) < sclHg (ts0 ).
From [40], we have clMg (tnc ) < ∞ for any n if g ≥ 3. In contrast, clM1 (tns0 ) < ∞
(resp. clM2 (tns0 ) < ∞ and clM2 (tns1 ) < ∞) if and only if n ≡ 0 (mod 12) (resp.
n ≡ 0 (mod 10) and n ≡ 0 (mod 5)). Even though sclM1 (ts0 ) = 1/12 (see Remark
12n
4.5 in [11]), to my knowledge, clM1 (t12
s0 ) is still unknown. We determine clM1 (ts0 ).
5
10
It was shown in [29] (resp. [31]) that ts0 (resp. ts1 ) in M2 is written as products
5
of 2 commutators (resp. 6 commutators). Hence, clM2 (t10
s0 ) ≤ 2 and clM2 (ts1 ) ≤ 6.
We generalize the results to 10n and 5n and improve the result of [31] slightly.
Theorem E. For any integer n, we have the following.
(1) clM1 (t12n
s0 ) = |n| + 1,
(2) clM2 (t10n
s0 ) ≤ |n| + 1,
(3) clM2 (t5n
s1 ) ≤ [(7|n| + 3)/2].
In particular, there are factorizations of powers of Dehn twists as products of commutators realizing the above upper bounds.

SIGNATURES OF SURFACE BUNDLES AND STABLE COMMUTATOR LENGTHS OF DEHN TWISTS
5

1.4. Outline. The outline of the paper is as follows. In Section 2, we introduce
some relators in Mrg and a signature formula for achiral Lefschetz fibrations given by
Endo-Hasegawa-Kamada-Tanaka [15]. They will be used to compute the signatures
of surface bundles over surfaces. Section 3 exhibits techniques to write certain
elements as products of commutators and to reduce the number of commutators.
In Section 4–8, we give the proofs of the main results.
Acknowledgements. I wishes to express my gratitude to H. Endo, S. Kamada and
K. Tanaka for their explanations on [15] and helpful comments, to A. Akhmedov
and R. I. Baykur for their interests and asking me the existence of the bundle
in Theorem A and to M. Korkmaz for his comments. I am especially grateful to
H. Endo with whom I discussed the subject matter of this paper. The author was
supported by Grant-in-Aid for Young Scientists (B) (No. 16K17601), Japan Society
for the Promotion of Science.

2. Relators in mapping class groups and a signature formula
In this section, we present the signature formula for achiral Lefschetz fibrations
given in [15]. When we consider an achiral Lefschetz fibration, we obtain its global
monodromy in the mapping class group of the fiber. The result in [15] says that
we can compute the signature of the total space of the fibration by “counting the
numbers of certain relators” included in the global monodromy.
The outline of this section is as follows. We give a brief summary of the global
monodromy of an achiral Lefschetz fibration in Subsection 2.1. In Subsection 2.2,
we describe four fundamental relators and the infinite presentation of Mg given by
Luo [24]. In Subsection 2.3, we review the result of [15].
2.1. The global monodromy of an achiral Lefschetz fibration. We briefly
describe the global monodromy and the section of an achiral Lefschetz fibration.
Let g ≥ 2. Roughly speaking, a genus-g achiral Lefschetz fibration π : X → Σh
is a smooth fibration of a 4-manifold X over Σh with regular fiber Σg and finitely
many singular fibers. The singular fibers are classified two types: of type +1, and
of type −1. Each singular fiber is obtained by collapsing a simple closed curve v on
Σg , called the vanishing cycle. Note that if π has no singular fibers, then it is an
Σg -bundle over Σh . When we give a genus-g achiral Lefschetz fibration X → Σh
with n singular fibers of type ǫ1 , ǫ2 , . . . , ǫn whose vanishing cycles are v1 , v2 , . . . , vn ,
where ǫi = ±1, we obtain the following relator (up to cyclic permutations), called
the global monodromy of π, in Mg :
(1)

tǫv11 tǫv22 · · · tǫvnn [X1 , Y1 ][X2 , Y2 ] · · · [Xh , Yh ] = id.

Conversely, if we give the above relator, then we get a genus-g achiral Lefschetz
fibration X → Σh with n singular fibers of type ǫ1 , ǫ2 , . . . , ǫn whose vanishing cycles
are v1 , v2 , . . . , vn .
A genus-g achiral Lefschetz fibration π : X → Σh with the global monodromy (1)
admits a (−k)-section (that is, s : Σh → X such that π ◦ s = idΣh and [s(Σh )]2 =
−k) if and only if there exists a lift of (1) from Mg to M1g as
tǫve11 tǫve22 · · · tǫvenn [Xe1 , Ye1 ][Xe2 , Ye2 ] · · · [Xeh , Yeh ] = tk∂ ,

6

N. MONDEN

where ∂ is the boundary curve on Σ1g , tvei is a Dehn twist mapped to tvi under the
map M1g → Mg induced by the inclusion Σ1g → Σg , and similarly, Xej and Yej are
mapped to Xj and Yj , respectively.
By the result of [15], the signature of X is determined by “the numbers of certain
relators” of Mg included in (1). In the next subsection, we introduce the relators.
2.2. Luo’s infinite presentations of mapping class groups. In [15], they employ an infinite presentation of Mrg given by Luo [24]. To state it, we introduce
four fundamental relators in Mrg .
Definition 2.1. Let a, b be simple closed curve on Σrg .
• If a is a trivial, then ta = id, so we call it the trivial relator and write
T := ta .
• Let c = tb (a). Then, we have the relation tc = tb ta t−1
b , called the primitive
braid relation. Therefore, we obtain the primitive braid relator
−1
P := t−1
c tb ta tb .

• Let a, b be simple closed curves on Σ11 bounded by c with i(a, b) = 1 as in
Figure 1. Then, the 2-chain relation tc = (ta tb )6 holds in M11 . This gives
the 2-chain relator
6
C2 := t−1
c (ta tb ) ,
• Let x, y, z be the interior curves on Σ40 as in Figure 2, and let a, b, c, d be
the boundary curves on Σ40 as in the figure. Then, the lantern relation
ta tb tc td = tx ty tz holds in M40 . Then, we have the lantern relator
−1 −1 −1
L := t−1
d tc tb ta tx ty tz .

Figure 1. The curves
a, b, c on Σ11 .

Figure 2. The curves
a, b, c, d, x, y, z on Σ40 .

Luo [24] gave the following infinite presentation of the mapping class group Mrg .
Theorem 2.2 ([24]). Mrg has an infinite presentation whose generators are the set
of all Dehn twists and whose relators are T , P , C2 and L.
In the rest of this subsection, we present variations of the primitive braid relator
P . They are used throughout this paper. Before it, we give the following lemma.
Lemma 2.3. Let f be a product of k Dehn twists in Mrg . For a a simple closed
−1
curve on Σrg , tf−1
is a product of k primitive braid relators.
(a) f ta f

SIGNATURES OF SURFACE BUNDLES AND STABLE COMMUTATOR LENGTHS OF DEHN TWISTS
7

Proof. Let f = tǫbkk · · · tǫb22 tǫb11 , where ǫi = ±1 and each bi is a simple closed curve on
Σrg . For simplicity, we set c0 = a, ci = tǫbii (ci−1 ) for i = 1, 2, . . . , k, so ck = f (a).
−ǫi
ǫi
is a primitive braid relator if ǫi = 1, and Piǫi is the
Then, Piǫi = t−1
ci tbi tci−1 tbi
−1
−1
conjugation of the inverse of the primitive relator t−1
ci−1 tbi tci tbi by tbi if ǫi = −1
−1
since tbi (ci ) = ci−1 from ci = tbi (ci−1 ). Here, we write
i
Piǫi = Vi t−ǫ
bi

tǫbii tci−1 . Note that
for i = 1, 2, . . . , k, where Vi = tc−1
i
(2)

ǫk
ǫ2 ǫ1
−1
Vk · · · V2 V1 = t−1
ck tbk · · · tb2 tb1 tc0 = tf (a) f ta

Here, let us consider the following conjugation Qǫi i of Piǫi :
Qǫi := (Vk · · · Vi+2 Vi+1 )Piǫi (Vk · · · Vi+2 Vi+1 )−1
−1
i
= (Vk · · · Vi+2 Vi+1 Vi )t−ǫ
.
bi (Vk · · · Vi+2 Vi+1 )

Then, from (2) we have
−ǫk
−1
−1
1 −ǫ2
Qǫ11 Qǫ22 · · · Qǫkk = Vk · · · V2 V1 t−ǫ
.
b1 tb2 · · · tbk = tf (a) f ta f

This finishes the proof.



−1
as a primitive relator, so
From Lemma 2.3, we can regard the word t−1
f (a) f ta f
−1
−1
we use the same letter P for tf (a) f ta f , and we call the relation f ta f −1 = tf (a)
the primitive braid relation again. Moreover, the two well-known relations, called
the commutative and the braid relations, are also the primitive braid relations.

Definition 2.4. Let a, b be two simple closed curves on Σrg .
• Let f be an element in Mrg . Then, we have the primitive braid relator
f ta f −1 = tf (a) and the primitive relator
−1
P := t−1
.
f (a) f ta f

• If i(a, b) = 0, then tb (a) = a. Therefore, we have the commutative relation
ta tb = tb ta in Mrg and the commutative relator
−1
P := t−1
a tb ta tb ,

• If i(a, b) = 1, then ta tb (a) = b. Then, the braid relation ta tb ta = tb ta tb
holds in Mrg . This gives the braid relator
−1 −1
P := t−1
b ta tb ta tb ta .

2.3. A signature formula. We now present the work of [15]. Since (1) is normally
generated by T, P, C2 , L from Theorem 2.2, we can count the number of these four
relators included in (1). This fact is the key to state the result in [15].
Theorem 2.5 ([15], Proposition 2.9). Let n± (R) be the number of a relator R±1
included in the global monodromy of a genus-g achiral Lefschetz fibration π : X →
Σh , where R = T, P, C2 , L. We set n(R) = n+ (R) − n− (R). Then, we have
σ(X) = −n(T ) − 7n(C2 ) + n(L).
Remark 2.6. Originally, Proposition 2.9 in [15] is stated in terms of a graphical
method, called the “chart” description.

8

N. MONDEN

From Theorem 2.5, we notice that primitive braid relators are not needed for
the computation of σ(X). Equivalently, if we have an achiral Lefschetz fibration
π ′ : X ′ → Σh with the monodromy obtained by applying primitive braid relations
to that of π : X → Σh , then σ(X) = σ(X ′ ) holds. For this reason, we introduce
the following notation.
Definition 2.7. Let P be a primitive braid relator in Mrg .
• Let V and V ′ be elements in Mrg with V ′ V −1 = P ǫ , where ǫ = ±1. Set
W := U1 V U2 ,
W ′ := U1 V ′ U2 ,
where U1 and U2 are elements in Mrg . Then, we can construct W ′ from W
using P as follows:
(U1 P ǫ U1−1 )W = (U1 P ǫ U1−1 )U1 V U2 = U1 V ′ U2 = W ′ .
When W ′ is obtained from W by applying a sequence of the above operations (i.e. by using the primitive braid relations), we denote it by
W ≡P W ′ .
• We say that W can commute with W ′ modulo P if the next relation holds:
W · W ′ ≡P W ′ · W.
• Let W1 , W2 , . . . , Wn be elements in Mrg . If the relation
W1 W2 · · · Wn−1 Wn ≡P Wn W1 W2 · · · Wn−1
holds, then we call it a cyclic permutation.
Remark 2.8 below collects fundamental properties of Definition 2.7. We will use
it (without specifying) repeatedly.
Remark 2.8. Let f, X1 , X2 be elements in Mrg , and let a, a1 , a2 , . . . , ak be simple
closed curves on Σrg . We follow the notation of Definition 2.7.
−1
, we set V = tf (a) , V ′ =
(1) For a primitive braid relator P = tf−1
(a) f ta f
−1
f ta f , U1 = X1 , U2 = X2 . Then, we have

X1 · tf (a) · X2 ≡P X1 · f ta f −1 · X2 .
−1
(2) For a primitive braid relator P = tf−1
, we set V = f , V ′ = t−1
(a) f ta f
f (a) f ta ,
U1 = tf (a) , U2 = id. Then, we have

X1 · tf (a) · f · X2 ≡P X1 · f · ta · X2 ,
In particular, for any element f , the Dehn twist along a boundary curve ∂
of Σrg can commute with f modulo P from f (∂) = ∂.
(3) A cyclic permutation always holds for a relator R for the following reason:
if we set R = tǫa11 tǫa22 · · · tǫakk , where ǫi = ±1, then ta−1
Rtak R−1 is a primitive
k
−1
−1
braid relator from R(ak ) = ak . Therefore, for P
= Rt−1
tak , when
ak R
′
−1
we set V = R, V = tak Rtak , U1 = tak and U2 = id, we have
tǫk ≡P tǫakk · tǫa11 tǫa22 · · · tǫak−1
tǫa11 tǫa22 · · · tǫak−1
k−1
k−1 ak

SIGNATURES OF SURFACE BUNDLES AND STABLE COMMUTATOR LENGTHS OF DEHN TWISTS
9

3. Lemmas
This section exhibits techniques to prove the main results.
From Section 2, we see that we need to write relators as a product of commutators. The next lemma will be useful for constructing commutators. The special
cases were used in [21], [29] and [6].
Lemma 3.1. Let a1 , a2 , . . . , an and b1 , b2 , . . . , bn be simple closed curves on Σrg . If
there is an element f in Mrg mapping (a1 , a2 , . . . , an ) to (b1 , b2 , . . . , bn ), then for
any integers k1 , k2 , . . . , kn , the following holds:
−k2 −k1
n
≡P [tka11 tka22 · · · tkann , f ].
tka11 tka22 · · · tkann t−k
bn · · · tb2 tb1
i −1
Proof. By the primitive braid relations and (f tai f −1 )−ki = f t−k
, we have
ai f

−k2 −k1
−k2 −k1
n
n
= tka11 tka22 · · · tkann · t−k
tka11 tka22 · · · tkann t−k
bn · · · tb2 tb1
f (an ) · · · tf (a2 ) tf (a1 )
−k2 −k1 −1
n
.
≡P tka11 tka22 · · · tkann f t−k
an · · · t a2 ta1 f
−k2 −k1
k1 k2
kn −1
n
By t−k
, we obtain the required formula.
an · · · ta2 ta1 = (ta1 ta2 · · · tan )



The next three lemmas are used to construct an element f in Lemma 3.1.
Lemma 3.2. Let a, b, c be nonseparating curves on Σrg such that i(a, b) = i(b, c) =
1. Then the following holds.
(1) tb tc ta tb maps a to c. It maps (a, c) to (c, a) if i(a, c) = 0,
(2) ta tb tc maps (a, b) to (b, c) if i(a, c) = 0.
Proof. Since ta tb (a) = b, tb tc (b) = c, tc tb (c) = b and tb ta (b) = a, and ta (c) = c,
tc (a) = a and ta tc = tc ta if i(a, c) = 0 (see Definition 2.4), (1) follows from
tb tc ta tb (a) = tb tc (b) = c,
tb tc ta tb (c) = tb ta tc tb (c) = tb ta (b) = a,
and (2) is obtained as follows:
ta tb tc (a) = ta tb (a) = b,
ta tb tc (b) = ta (c) = c.

Lemma 3.3. Let a, b, c, α, β, γ be nonseparating curves on Σrg such that i(a, b) =
i(b, c) = i(α, β) = i(β, γ) = 1. Suppose that a (resp. γ) is disjoint from α, β, γ
(resp. a, b, c). Then, tb tc ta tb · tβ tγ tα tβ maps (a, α) to (c, γ). It maps (a, c, α, γ) to
(c, a, γ, α) if c (resp. α) is disjoint from a, α, β, γ (resp. γ, a, b, c).
Proof. Since a (resp. γ) is disjoint from α, β, γ (resp. a, b, c), we have
tb tc ta tb · tβ tγ tα tβ (a) = tb tc ta tb (a) = c,
tb tc ta tb · tβ tγ tα tβ (α) = tb tc ta tb (γ) = γ
by the farmer part of Lemma 3.2 (1). By a similar argument, the latter part of
Lemma 3.3 follows from that of Lemma 3.2 (1). This finishes the proof.

Lemma 3.4. Let a, b, c, α, β, γ be nonseparating curves on Σrg such that i(a, b) =
i(b, c) = i(α, β) = i(β, γ) = 1. Suppose that a, c (resp. β) are disjoint from α, β, γ
(resp. a, b, c). Then, tβ tγ · tb tc ta tb · tα tβ maps (a, α) to (c, γ).

10

N. MONDEN

Proof. Since a, c (resp. β) are disjoint from α, β, γ (resp. a, b, c), by tα tβ (α) = β,
tβ tγ (β) = γ (see Definition 2.4) and the farmer part of Lemma 3.2 (1), we have
tβ tγ · tb tc ta tb · tα tβ (a) = tβ tγ · tb tc ta tb (a) = tβ tγ (c) = c,
tβ tγ · tb tc ta tb · tα tβ (α) = tβ tγ · tb tc ta tb (β) = tβ tγ (β) = γ,
and this finishes the proof.



The key lemma of this paper is following.
Lemma 3.5. Let a1 , a2 , . . . , am+1 be disjoint simple closed curves on Σrg . If there
is an element f in Mrg such that f (ai ) = ai+1 for i = 1, 2, . . . , m, then we have the
following relations in Mrg for any integers k1 , k2 , . . . , km+1 :
k +k +···+k

k

m+1
k1 k1 +k2
,
(1) tka11 tka22 · · · tam+1
· · · tka1m+k2 +···+km , f ] · ta1m+12
m+1 ≡P [ta1 ta2
km+1
k1 +k2 +···+km+1
k1 +k2 +···+km
k1 k1 +k2
k1 k2
, f ],
· · · tam
· [ta1 ta2
(2) ta1 ta2 · · · tam+1 ≡P tam+1
k1 +k2 +···+km+1
km+1
−k1 −k2 −···−km
−k1 −k1 −k2
k1 k2
].
· · · tam
· [f, ta1 ta2
(3) ta1 ta2 · · · tam+1 ≡P tam+1

Proof. For abbreviation, set Ki := k1 + k2 + · · · + ki . Then, we have
m+1
m
3 −K3
2 −K2
1 −K1
· tK
· · · taKmm ta−K
· tK
· tK
= tK
tka11 tka22 · · · tkam+1
am+1 .
a3 ta4
a2 ta3
a1 ta2
m+1
m+1

This relation and the commutative relations give the following three relations:
−K2 −K1
−Km
Km
m+1
1 K2
· tK
≡ P tK
tka11 tka22 · · · tkam+1
am+1 ,
a1 ta2 · · · tam · tam+1 · · · ta3 ta2
m+1
−K2 −K1
−Km
Km
K1 K2
m+1
≡ P tK
tka11 tka22 · · · tkam+1
am+1 · ta1 ta2 · · · tam · tam+1 · · · ta3 ta2 ,
m+1
K2 K1
−K1 −K2
m
m
m+1
· tK
· · · ta−K
≡ P tK
tka11 tka22 · · · tkam+1
am · · · ta2 ta1 .
am+1 · ta2 ta3
m+1
m+1
i −1
f
Here, by the primitive braid relation tai+1 ≡P f tai f −1 and (f tai f −1 )−Ki = f ta−K
i
for i = 1, 2, . . . , m, we obtain

−Km
Km
−K2 −K1
−Km
Km
2 −K1 −1
1 K2
1 K2
ta1 f ,
· · · ta−K
≡ P tK
tK
a1 ta2 · · · tam · f tam
a1 ta2 · · · tam · tam+1 · · · ta3 ta2
2
K2 K1
−K1 −K2
K2 K1
m
m −1
m
m
1 −K2
f · tK
· · · ta−K
· tK
ta3 · · · ta−K
ta−K
am · · · ta2 ta1 .
am · · · ta2 ta1 ≡ P f ta1 ta2
m
m+1
2
Km −1
1 K2
2 −K1
m
ta1 = (tK
· · · ta−K
Hence, the relations (1)–(3) follow from ta−K
a1 ta2 · · · t am )
2
m
−Km −1
−K1 −K2
K2 K1
Km

and tam · · · ta2 ta1 = (ta1 ta2 · · · tam ) .

The next four lemmas are used to reduce the number of commutators.
Lemma 3.6. For elements X1 , X2 , Y1 , Y2 in Mrg with Xi Yj ≡P Yj Xi , we have
[X1 , X2 ][Y1 , Y2 ] ≡P [X1 Y1 , X2 Y2 ].
Proof. It follows from
X1 X2 X1−1 X2−1 · Y1 Y2 Y1−1 Y2−1 ≡P X1 Y1 X2 Y2 Y1−1 X1−1 Y2−1 X2−1 .

Lemma 3.7. For any three elements X, Y, Z in a group G, we have
[X, Y ][Y, Z] = [XZ −1 , ZY Z −1 ].
Proof. The equation immediately follows from the following computations:
[X, Y ][Y, Z] = XY X −1 Y −1 · Y ZY −1 Z −1 = XY X −1 ZY −1 Z −1 ,
[XZ −1 , ZY Z −1 ] = (XZ −1 )(ZY Z −1 )(ZX −1 )(ZY −1 Z −1 ) = XY X −1 ZY −1 Z −1 .


SIGNATURES OF SURFACE BUNDLES AND STABLE COMMUTATOR LENGTHS OF DEHN TWISTS
11

Lemma 3.8. Let X, Y be element in Mrg . For any integer n, we have
(1) (XY )n = X (Y )X 2 (Y ) · · · X n (Y ) · X n ,
(2) (XY )n = X n · X −n+1 (Y ) · · · X −2 (Y )X −1 (Y )Y .
Proof. The equations immediately follow from
(XY )n = (XY X −1 )(X 2 Y X −2 ) · · · (X n Y X −n )X n ,
(XY )n = X n (X −n+1 Y X n−1 ) · · · (X −2 Y X 2 )(X −1 Y X)Y.

Lemma 3.9. Let X and f be elements in Mrg such that X is the product X =
X1 X2 · · · Xn satisfying Xi · Xj ≡P Xj · Xi for i 6= j, Xi+1 · f ≡P f · Xi and
X1 · f ≡P f · Xn . Then, we have
X · f ≡P f · X.
Proof. We obtain the claim as follows:
X1 X2 · · · Xn−1 Xn · f ≡P X2 X3 · · · Xn X1 · f ≡P f · X1 X2 · · · Xn−1 Xn .

4. Scl of the Dehn twist along a nonseparating curve
We first give the proof of Theorem D (1) since some results in it will be used in the
proofs of Theorem A, B and E. Note that since Dehn twists along two nonseparating
curves s0 , s′0 (resp. two separating curves sh , s′h of type h and a separating curve
sg−h of type g − h) are conjugate, and a conjugate of a commutator is again a
commutator, it suffices to prove Theorem D and E for some nonseparating curve
(resp. separating curve of type h).
In order to prove Theorem D (1), we present the 3-chain relator and factorize
its n-the power as a product of commutators and Dehn twists. The factorization
will be used to show Theorem A, C, D (1) and E (1) and (2).
Definition 4.1. Let a, b, c be simple closed curves on Σ21 bounded by d, d′ with
i(a, b) = i(b, c) = 1 and i(c, a) = 0 as in Figure 3. Then, we have the 3-chain
relation td′ td = (ta tb tc )4 in M21 and the 3-chain relator
−1
4
C3 := t−1
d td′ (ta tb tc ) .

Figure 3. The curves a, b, c, d, d′ , s1 , z on Σ21 .
The next proposition is the key result in Section 4. We will use some equations
in the proof to show Theorem A, C, D (1) and E (1) and (2).
Proposition 4.2. In the notation of Definition 4.1, for any integer n, there are
elements V1 , W1 , V2 , W2 , . . . , V|n|+1 , W|n|+1 in M21 such that the following holds in
M21 :
−n −n
C3n ≡P t12n
b [V1 , W1 ][V2 , W2 ] · · · [V|n|+1 , W|n|+1 ] · td td′ .

12

N. MONDEN

−1
−1 −1
Proof. Let v = ta tc (b). Since a is disjoint from c, t−1
c ta (c) = c and tc ta (a) = a
(see Definition 2.4). By the primitive braid relation and Lemma 3.2 (2), we have

tb tv (a) = tb ta tc tb tc−1 t−1
a (a) = tb ta tc tb (a) = c,
−1
tb tv (c) = tb ta tc tb t−1
c ta (c) = tb ta tc tb (c) = a.

This gives the following two relations:
(3)

tb tv · ta ≡ P tc · tb tv ,

(4)

tb tv · tc ≡ P ta · tb tv .

Note that using the primitive braid relation, we have
ta tb tc ta tb tc ≡ P ta tb ta tc tb tc
≡P ta · tb (ta tc tb tc−1 t−1
a ) · ta tc tc
≡ P ta · tb tv · ta tc tc .
This equation, the relations (3) and (4), the commutative relation ta tc = tc ta and
a cyclic permutation give
C3 ≡P t4a t4c (tb tv )2 td−1 t−1
d′ .
When we take n-th power of this relation, by the property of boundary curves d, d′ ,
the relations (3) and (4) and the commutative relation ta tc = tc ta , we have
(5)

4n
2n −n −n
C3n ≡P t4n
a tc (tb tv ) td td′ .

By this equation and the primitive braid relations, we have
−1 −2
4n 4
2 −1
n −n −n
C3n ≡P t4n
a tc (tb · tb (tb tv tb )tb tv ) td td′
−1
−1
4n 4
n −n −n
≡P t4n
a tc (tb · tb tt−2 (v) tb tv ) td td′ .
b

Here, when we set φ3 := ta tc t3b in M21 , φ3 (b) = ta tc (b) = v and φ3 (t−2
b (v)) =
ta tc tb (v) = ta tc tb ta tc (b). From the commutative and the braid relations, we have
ta tc tb ta tc = ta tc tb tc ta = ta tb tc tb ta .
By Lemma 3.2 (2), we see that
ta tb tc tb ta (b) = ta tb tc (a) = b,
−2
so φ3 (t−2
b (v)) = b. Therefore, φ3 maps (b, tb (v)) to (v, b). This gives
−1
4n 4
n −n −n
C3n ≡P t4n
a tc (tb · [tb tt−2 (v) , φ3 ]) td td′
b

from Lemma 3.1. Therefore, by Lemma 3.8 (2), we obtain the following relation:
(6)

4n 4n
C3n ≡P t4n
a tc tb ·

n
Y

i=1

−4(i−1)

tb

−n −n
([t−1
b tt−2 (v) , φ3 ]) · td td′ .
b

Note that the conjugation of a commutator is also a commutator, and that we have
4n 4n
12n
8n −4n −4n 4n 4n
t4n
· t−4n
(t−8n
t4n
(tb tc tb )
a tc tb ≡ P tb
a tb )tb
b
b

≡P t12n
· t−4n
t4n
t−4n t4n
.
b
b
t−8n (a) b
t−4n (c)
b

b

Since ta tb tc maps (a, b) to (b, c) by Lemma 3.2 (2), we find that t−4n
ta tb tc t8n
b ,
b
−8n
−4n
denoted φ4 , maps (b, tb (a)) to (tb (c), b), so Lemma 3.1 gives
4n 4n
12n
, φ4 ],
t4n
· [t−4n
t4n
a tc tb ≡ P tb
b
t−8n (a)
b

and this establishes the formula.



SIGNATURES OF SURFACE BUNDLES AND STABLE COMMUTATOR LENGTHS OF DEHN TWISTS
13

Theorem D (1) directly follows from Theorem 4.3 below, which will be used to
prove Theorem B, since the left hand side of the equation in it is relator.
Theorem 4.3. Let s0 be a nonseparating curve on Σg for g ≥ 2 and C3,j a 3-chain
relator. For any integer n, there are elements V1 , W1 , V2 , W2 , . . . , V|n|+3 , W|n|+3 in
Mg such that
g−1
Y

n
[V1 , W1 ][V2 , W2 ] · · · [V|n|+3 , W|n|+3 ].
C3,j
≡P t10(g−1)n
s0

j=1

Proof. Let us consider the simple closed curves a1 , b1 , c1 on the genus-1 subsurface
S12 of Σg bounded by d1 , dg−1 as in Figure 4. Then, we obtain the 3-chain relator
−1
4
C3,1 := t−1
dg−1 td1 (ta1 tb1 tc1 ) . By Proposition 4.2, the relation
−n −n
n
≡P t10n
C3,1
b1 [V1,1 , W1,1 ][V2,1 , W2,1 ] · · · [V|n|+1,1 , W|n|+1 , 1]tdg−1 td1 ,

holds in M(S12 ) for any integer n, where Vi,1 , Wi,1 are some elements in M(S12 ).

Figure 4. The rotation r of Σg and the curves a1 , b1 , c1 , d1 , dg−1 , s1,1 , z1 .
Let r be the rotation of Σg by 2π/(g − 1) as in Figure 4. We set
C3,j := rj−1 (C3,1 ),
bj := rj−1 (b1 ),

dj := rj−1 (d1 ),

Vi,j := rj−1 (Vi )

Wi,j := rj−1 (Wi )

for j = 1, 2, . . . , g − 1. Note that bg = b1 , dg = d1 . Then, using the primitive braid
relations, the relation holds in M(rj−1 (S12 )):
−n −n
n
C3,j
≡P t10n
bj [V1,j , W1,j ][V2,j , W2,j ] · · · [V|n|+1,j , W|n|+1 , j]tdj tdj+1

for j = 1, 2, . . . , g − 1. Here, any simple closed curves on Int(rj−1 (S12 )) are disjoint
′
from any simple closed curves on Int(rj −1 (S12 )) if j 6= j ′ , and dj , dj+1 are boundary
curves of of rj−1 (S12 ). Hence, for any elements ej in M(rj−1 (S12 )) and any element
′
fj ′ in M(rj −1 (S12 )), we have ej fj ′ = fj ′ ej by the commutative relations and the
property of boundary curves if j 6= j ′ . From Lemma 3.6 and dg = d1 , we have
g−1
Y

n
C3,j
≡P

g−1
Y

≡P

j=1

|n|+1

t10n
bj ·

j=1

Y

i=1

g−1
Y

t10n
bj ·

g−1
Y

j=1

j=1

[Vi , Wi ] ·

g−1
Y

t−2n
dj

j=1

|n|+1

·
t−2n
dj

Y

i=1

[Vi , Wi ]

14

N. MONDEN

where Vi = Vi,1 Vi,2 · · · Vi,g−1 and Wi = Wi,1 Wi,2 · · · Wi,g−1 . Using Lemma 3.5 (2)
and (3), we see that
g−1
Y

t12n
bj ≡P tbg−1

g−1
Y

≡P tdg−1
t−2n
dj

12(g−1)n

[B, r],

j=1

−2(g−1)n

[r, D],

j=1

12(g−2)n

24n
where B := t12n
b1 tb2 · · · tbg−2
g−1
Y

2(g−2)n

4n
and D := t2n
d1 td2 · · · tdg−2

. This gives

|n|+1
n
C3,j

12(g−1)n
[B, r]
≡P tbg−1

·

−2(g−1)n
[r, D]
tdg−1

·

Y

[Vi , Wi ],

i=1

j=1

Since bj , aj are disjoint from each dg for any j, we have B(dg ) = dg . This gives
12(g−1)n
12(g−1)n
[B, r].
≡P tdg−1
[B, r](dg−1 ) = BrB −1 r−1 (dg−1 ) = dg−1 , so we have [B, r]tdg−1
From this and Lemma 3.7, we obtain
g−1
Y

|n|+1
12(g−1)n −2(g−1)n
tdg−1

n
C3,j
≡P tbg−1

· [BD−1 , DrD−1 ] ·

Y

[Vi , Wi ].

i=1

j=1

Since bg−1 and dg−1 are nonseparating, there exists a diffeomorphism f satisfying
f (bg−1 ) = dg−1 . Therefore, by Lemma 3.1 we have
12(g−1)n −2(g−1)n
tdg−1

tbg−1

10(g−1)n

= tbg−1

2(g−1)n −2(g−1)n
tdg−1

· tbg−1

10(g−1)n 2(g−1)n
[tbg−1 , f ],

≡P tbg−1

and this proves Theorem 4.3 and therefore Theorem D (1).



Remark 4.4. M. Korkmaz spoke an interesting proof giving an upper bound on
sclMg (ts0 ) at Max Plank, 2013 (see [28]). The main idea is to use his result of [27]
and quasi-morphisms and to consider [ g2 ] disjoint genus-2 subsurfaces of Σg with
one boundary. The proof of Theorem D is much inspired by his idea.
5. Surface bundles with base of genus two
In this section, we prove Theorem A.
Throughout this section, we suppose that g ≥ 39. Let us consider Σ1g with one
boundary component ∂ as in Figure 5. Then, we can take 13 disjoint subsurfaces
S1 , S2 , . . . , S12 and S of genus 3 with one boundary component and an element Φ
in M1g such that Φ(Si ) = Si+1 , Φ(S12 ) = S1 and Φ|S = id|S as in Figure 5.
Let α1 , β1 , γ1 , δ1 , ǫ1 , ζ1 , x1 , y1 , z1 be the simple closed curves on S1 as Figure 6,
and let a1 , b1 , s1,1 , d1 , d2 , γ, δ, y, z, ǫ, ζ be simple closed curves on S as in the figure.
We consider the following two lantern relators L1 and L:
−1 −1 −1
L1 := t−1
α1 tδ1 tγ1 tβ1 tx1 ty1 tz1 ,
−1 −1 −1
L := td1 ty tz t−1
δ tγ td2 ts1,1 .

The next lemma was proved in [29].

SIGNATURES OF SURFACE BUNDLES AND STABLE COMMUTATOR LENGTHS OF DEHN TWISTS
15

Figure 5. The subsurfaces S, S1 , S2 , . . . , S12 of Σ1g .

Figure 6. The curves a1 , b1 , s1,1 , d1 , d2 , γ, δ, ǫ, ζ, y, z on S and the
curves α1 , β1 , γ1 , δ1 , ǫ1 , ζ1 , x1 , y1 , z1 on S1 .
Lemma 5.1 ([29]). Set ψ1 = tǫ1 tγ1 tx1 tǫ1 , ω1 = tǫ1 tz1 tβ1 tǫ1 tζ1 tδ1 ty1 tζ1 , ψ = tǫ tγ td1 tǫ
and φ = tζ ty tδ tζ tǫ td2 tz tǫ . The followings hold in M(S1 ) and M(S), respectively:
−1
L1 ≡P [tx1 , ψ1 ] · [ty1 t−1
β1 , ω1 ] · tα1 ,

L−1 ≡P ts1,1 · [tδ t−1
z , φ] · [tγ , ψ],
Proof. Since α1 , β1 , γ1 , δ1 (resp. δ, γ, d2 , s1,1 ) are disjoint from x1 , y1 , z1 (resp.
d1 , y, z) and disjoint from each other, the commutative relations give
−1
−1
−1
L1 ≡P tx1 t−1
γ1 · ty1 tβ1 tz1 tδ1 · tα1
−1
−1
L−1 ≡P ts1,1 · tδ t−1
z td 2 ty · tγ td 1 .

By Lemma 3.2 (2) and 3.3, ψ1 maps x1 to γ1 , ω1 maps (y1 , β1 ) to (δ1 , z1 ), φ maps
(δ, z) to (y, d2 ), and ψ maps d1 to γ. Lemma 3.1 gives the required formulas. 

16

N. MONDEN

For a simple closed curve c1 on S1 appeared in the above, we set ci := Φi−1 (c1 )
which is a simple closed curve on Si , and we write a lantern relation Li := Φi−1 (L1 ).
From Lemma 5.1 and the primitive braid relation, we obtain
ψi = tǫi tγi txi tǫi ,
ωi = tǫi tzi tβi tǫi tζi tδi tyi tζi ,
−1
Li ≡P [txi , ψi ][tyi t−1
βi , ωi ]tαi

for i = 1, 2, . . . , 12. Moreover, we define a 2-chain relator C2,1 to be
.
C2,1 := (ta1 tb1 )6 ts−1
1,1
The following proposition is the key result to prove Theorem A.
e1 in M1 such that
Proposition 5.2. For g ≥ 39, there are elements Ae1 , Be1 , Ce1 , D
g
e1 ],
L1 L2 · · · L12 C2,1 L−1 ≡P [Ae1 , Be1 ][Ce1 , D

To prove Proposition 5.2, we prepare two lemmas (Lemma 5.3 and 5.4).
Lemma 5.3. For g ≥ 39, the following relation holds in M1g :
−12
[X, Ψ][Y A, ΩΦ],
L1 L2 · · · L12 ≡P tα
12
−1
−1
where X := tx1 tx2 · · · tx12 , Ψ := ψ1 ψ2 · · · ψ12 , Y := ty1 t−1
β1 ty2 tβ2 · · · ty12 tβ12 , Ω :=
−11
−2
ω1 ω2 · · · ω12 , and A := t−1
α1 tα2 · · · tα11 .

Proof. Since then Si is disjoint from Si′ for i 6= i′ , any elements in M(Si ) can
commute with any elements in M(Si′ ) modulo P from the commutative relations.
−1
Therefore, by Li ≡P [txi , ψi ][tyi t−1
βi , ωi ]tαi ∈ M(Si ) and Lemma 3.6, we have
−1
−1
L1 L2 · · · L12 ≡P [X, Ψ][Y, Ω]t−1
α1 tα2 · · · tα12 .

By Lemma 3.5 (1) and the definition of the curve αi , we obtain
L1 L2 · · · L12 ≡P [X, Ψ][Y, Ω][A, Φ]t−12
α12 .
Since αi is disjoint from βi , δi , ǫi , ζi , yi , zi for i = 1, 2, . . . , 12 and Si is disjoint from
Si′ for i 6= i′ , A can commute with Y, Ω modulo P by the commutative relations.
Here, ωi , Ω (resp. tyi t−1
βi , Y ) and Φ satisfy the condition of Lemma 3.9 from the
commutative and the primitive braid relations, so Φ can commute with Ω (resp.
Y ) modulo P . Lemma 3.6 and a cyclic permutation give the required formula. 
The next lemma will be also used to prove Theorem C.
Lemma 5.4. There are elements V ′ , W ′ in M(S) such that the following relation
holds in M(S):
C2,1 L−1 ≡P [V ′ , W ′ ][tγ , ψ]t8a1 t4b1 .
Proof. Let C3 be the 3-chain relator in Definition 4.1. By the inclusion ι : Σ21 → Σ11
obtained by gluing a disk along d′ , ι maps (c, d) on Σ21 to (a, c) on Σ11 . Then, from
the map ι∗ : M12 → M11 induced by ι, the trivial relation td′ = id and the braid
relation ta tb ta = tb ta tb gives the 2-chain relator C2 from C3 . From the equation (6)
in the case of n = 1 and ι∗ , the equation
C2 ≡P t8a t4b [V, W ]tc−1

SIGNATURES OF SURFACE BUNDLES AND STABLE COMMUTATOR LENGTHS OF DEHN TWISTS
17

holds in M11 , where V, W are some elements in M11 . Therefore, when we denote S11
by the genus-1 subsurface bounded by s1,1 as in Figure 6, Lemma 5.1 gives
C2,1 L−1 ≡P t8a1 t4b1 [V1 , W1 ][tδ t−1
z , φ][tγ , ψ],
where V1 , W1 is in M(S11 ). Since S11 is disjoint from δ, ζ, ǫ, y, z, d2, and V1 , W1 are in
M(S11 ), V1 , W1 can commute with tδ t−1
z , φ modulo P by the commutative relations.
Lemma 3.6 and a cyclic permutation give the required formula.

We are now ready to prove Proposition 5.2.
Proof of Proposition 5.2. In the notation of Lemma 5.3 and 5.4, since Si is disjoint
from S for any i, Y A, Ω can commute with V ′ , W ′ modulo P using the commutative
relations. Here, for a simple closed curve c on S, ΩΦ(c) = c since Φ|S = idS and
Si is disjoint from S for any i. This gives ΩΦ · tc ≡P tc · ΩΦ, and therefore
ΩΦ can commute with V ′ , W ′ modulo P since V ′ , W ′ are in M(S). Hence, by
Lemma 5.3, 5.4 and 3.6 and a cyclic permutation, we have
′
′
8 4
L1 L2 · · · L12 · C2,1 L−1 ≡P t−12
α12 [X, Ψ][Y A, ΩΦ] · [V , W ][tγ , ψ]ta1 tb1
′
′
≡P [tγ , ψ]t8a1 t4b1 t−12
α12 [X, Ψ][Y AV , ΩΦW ].

Note that tγ , ψ can commute with ta1 , tb1 , tα12 modulo P by the commutative relations since ε, γ, d1 are disjoint from a1 , b1 , α12 . Therefore,
−12
[tγ , ψ][X, Ψ][Y AV ′ , ΩΦW ′ ].
L1 L2 · · · L12 · C2,1 L−1 ≡P t8a1 t4b1 tα
12

Since Si is disjoint from S, tγ and ψ can commute with X and Ψ modulo P from
the commutative relations. Lemma 3.6 gives
(7)

′
′
L1 L2 · · · L12 · C2,1 L−1 ≡P t8a1 t4b1 t−12
α12 [tγ X, ψΨ][Y AV , ΩΦW ].

Figure 7. The separating curve s on Σ1g .
Let S21 be the genus-2 subsurface of Σ1g bounded by s such that it contains
simple closed curves a1 , b1 , α12 (see Figure 7) and disjoint from d1 , γ, ǫ and xi , γi , ǫi
for any i = 1, 2, . . . , 12. Then, we can consider the half twist Hs along s such that
Hs |Σ1g −S21 = id|Σ1g −S21 , Hs (a1 ) = α12 and Hs (α12 ) = a1 . Here we set
H := ta1 tb1 Hs .
Since α12 is disjoint from a1 , b1 , we see that H|Σ1g −S21 = id|Σ1g −S21 , H(α12 ) = b1 and
H(a1 ) = α12 from ta1 tb1 (a1 ) = b1 (see Definition 2.4). Therefore, Lemma 3.1 gives
8 −4 4 −8
8 4
t−12
α12 ta1 tb1 ≡P ta1 tα12 tb1 tα12

≡P [t8a1 t−4
α12 , H].

18

N. MONDEN

By this equation and the equation (7), we obtain
−4
, H][tγ X, ψΨ][Y AV ′ , ΩΦW ′ ].
L1 L2 · · · L12 C2,1 L−1 ≡P [t8a1 tα
12

Note that a1 , b1 , α12 , s are disjoint from d1 , γ, ǫ and γi , ǫi , xi for any i = 1, 2, . . . , 12.
Hence, by H|Σ1g −S21 = id|Σ1g −S21 , the definitions of X, Ψ, ψ and the commutative
relations, we see that t8a1 t−4
α12 and H can commute with tγ X and ψΨ modulo P .
Lemma 3.6 gives
′
′
L1 L2 · · · L12 C2,1 L−1 ≡P [t8a1 t−4
α12 tγ X, ψΨH][Y AV , ΩΦW ],

and the proof is complete.



We show Theorem A.
Proof of Theorem A. Assume that g ≥ 39n and n ≥ 1. Then, we can take n disjoint
subsurfaces S1′ , S2′ , . . . , Sn′ of Σ1g of genus 39 with one boundary component and find
′
a diffeomorphism Φ′ on Σ1g such that Φ′ (Si′ ) = Si+1
. Let
R1 := L1 L2 · · · L12 C2,1 L−1 ,
Ri+1 := Φ′ (Ri ).
Si′

Since
is disjoint from
sition 5.2, we have

Sj′ ,

by the commutative relations, Lemma 3.6 and Propo-

e B][
e C,
e D],
e
R1 R2 · · · Rn ≡P [A,

e B,
e C,
eD
e are some elements in M1 . In particular, we see that this relation
where A,
g
also holds in Mg . This gives a Σg -bundle X → Σ2 with a 0-section for g ≥ 39n.
From the above argument, in the notation of Proposition 2.5, we have
n(T ) = n+ (T ) − n− (T ) = 0 − 0,
n(C2 ) = n+ (C2 ) − n− (C2 ) = n − 0,
n(L) = n+ (L) − n− (L) = 12n − n.
This gives
σ(X) = −1 · 0 − 7 · n + 1 · 11n = 4n
for g ≥ 39n, and this finishes the proof.



6. Surface bundles with fiber of odd genus
This section shows Theorem B and C. To prove them, we prepare some results
(Proposition 6.1 and 6.2 and Lemma 6.3).
Let α1 , β1 , γ1 , x1 , y1 , z1 , x′1 , y1′ , z1′ be the nonseparating curves on the genus-2
subsurface S22 of Σg bounded by δ1 , δ1′ as in Figure 8. We consider the following
two lantern relators:
−1 −1 −1
L1 := t−1
α1 tδ1 tγ1 tβ1 tx1 ty1 tz1 ,
−1 −1 −1 ′ ′ ′
L′1 := t−1
β1 tγ1 tδ ′ tα1 tx1 ty1 tz1 .
1

Proposition 6.1. For any integer n, there are elements X1,1 , Y1,1 , X2,1 , Y2,1 , . . . ,
X|n|+2,1 , Y|n|+2,1 in M(S22 ) such that the following holds in M(S22 ):
−2n
(L1 )2n (L′1 )2n ≡P [X1,1 , Y1,1 ][X2,1 , Y2,1 ] · · · [X|n|+2,1 , Y|n|+2,1 ] · t−2n
δ1 tδ ′ .
1

SIGNATURES OF SURFACE BUNDLES AND STABLE COMMUTATOR LENGTHS OF DEHN TWISTS
19

Figure 8. The curves α1 , β1 , γ1 , δ1 , ǫ1 , ζ1 , x1 , y1 , z1 , x′1 , y1′ , z1′ on S22 .
Proof. Note that α1 , β1 , γ1 , δ1 (resp. α1 , β1 , γ1 , δ1′ ) are disjoint from each other
and z1 (resp. x′1 ). Therefore, by the lantern relations tx1 ty1 tz1 = tβ1 tγ1 tδ1 tα1 and
tx′1 ty1′ tz1′ = tα1 tγ1 tβ1 tδ1′ and the commutative relations, we have
−1
tx1 ty1 t−1
α1 (z1 ) = tβ1 tγ1 tδ1 tz1 (z1 ) = z1 ,
−1
′
′
′
ty1′ tz1′ t−1
γ1 (x1 ) = tx′ tα1 tβ1 tδ1′ (x1 ) = x1 .
1

Using these facts and the primitive braid relations, we obtain
−1
tx1 ty1 t−1
α1 · tz1 ≡P tz1 · tx1 ty1 tα1 ,
−1
tx′1 · ty1′ tz1′ t−1
γ1 ≡P ty1′ tz1′ tγ1 · tx′1 .

These two relations and the commutative relations give
2n 2n −2n −2n −2n
(L1 )2n ≡P (ty1 tz1 t−1
α1 ) tx1 tβ1 tγ1 tδ1 ,
2n 2n −2n −2n −2n
(L′1 )2n ≡P (tx′1 ty1′ t−1
γ1 ) tz1′ tα1 tβ1 tδ ′ .
1

Since x1 , y1 , z1 , x′1 , y1′ , z1′ are disjoint from α1 , β1 , γ1 , δ1 , and x1 , y1 , z1 are disjoint
from x′1 , y1′ , z1′ , by the commutative relations, we have
−2n −2n
−2n −4n −2n
2n
−1 2n
(L1 )2n (L′1 )2n ≡P (ty1 tz1 t−1
· t2n
γ1 tx′1 ty1′ tα1 )
x1 tz1′ · tα1 tβ1 tγ1 · tδi tδ ′ .
i

x′1 , y1′ ,

and α1 , γ1 are disjoint from
Since y1 , z1 are disjoint from
the commutative and the primitive braid relations, we obtain

y1 , z1 , x′1 , y1′ ,

by

−1 −1
−1 −1
−1
−1
−1 2
2 2
(ty1 tz1 t−1
γ1 tx′1 ty1′ tα1 ) ≡P ty1 tα1 tx′1 tγ1 · (tz1 ty1 tz1 )tγ1 (ty1′ tx′1 ty ′ )tα1 · tz1 ty1′
1

−1
≡P ty1 t−1
α1 tx′1 tγ1

·t

ty′ (x′1 )
1

t−1
t
tγ−1
1 tz1 (y1 ) α1

· t2z1 t2y1′ .

Here, let f1 := tz1 ty1′ · tǫ1 ty1 tα1 tǫ1 · tζ1 tx′1 tγ1 tζ1 in M(S22 ). By the latter part of
Lemma 3.3, tǫ1 ty1 tα1 tǫ1 · tζ1 tx′1 tγ1 tζ1 maps (y1 , α1 , x′1 , γ1 ) to (α1 , y1 , γ1 , x′1 ). From
that α1 , γ1 , y1 are disjoint from y1′ , ty1′ maps (α1 , y1 , γ1 , x′1 ) to (α1 , y1 , γ1 , ty1′ (x′1 )).
Note that y1′ and x′1 are disjoint from z1 , so ty1′ (x′1 ) is disjoint from z1 . From this, tz1
maps (α1 , y1 , γ1 , ty1′ (x′1 )) to (α1 , tz1 (y1 ), γ1 , ty1′ (x′1 )) since α1 , γ1 , ty1′ (x′1 ) are disjoint
from z1 . Therefore, we see that f1 maps (y1 , α1 , x′1 , γ1 ) to (α1 , tz1 (y1 ), γ1 , ty1′ (x′1 )).
From Lemma 3.1, we obtain
−1
−1
−1
−1
−1
ty1 t−1
α1 tx′1 tγ1 · tty′ (x′1 ) tγ1 ttz1 (y1 ) tα1 ≡P [ty1 tα1 tx′1 tγ1 , f1 ].
1

When we write [X, Y ] =

−1
[ty1 t−1
α1 tx′1 tγ1 , f1 ],

we have

2 2
−1 2
(ty1 tz1 t−1
γ1 tx′1 ty1′ tα1 ) ≡P [X, Y ]tz1 ty1′ .

Since z1 is disjoint from y1′ , the commutative relations and Lemma 3.8 (1) give
([X, Y ] · t2z1 t2y1′ )n =

n
n
Y
Y
2n
[Xi , Yi ] · t2n
[Xi , Yi ] · (t2z1 t2y1′ )n ≡P
z1 ty1′ ,

i=1

i=1

20

N. MONDEN

where [Xi , Yi ] = (t2z

([X, Y ]), which is a commutator since the conjugation of

t2 )i−1
1 y′
1

a commutator is also a commutator. Note that α1 , β1 , γ1 (resp. z1 ) are disjoint from
x1 , z1 , y1′ , z1′ (resp. y1′ ). From the above arguments and the commutative relations
give
n
Y
−2n −2n
−2n −4n −2n
2n
2n 2n
[Xi , Yi ] · t2n
(L1 )2n (L′1 )2n ≡P
z1 ty1′ · tx1 tz1′ · tα1 tβ1 tγ1 · tδ1 tδ ′
≡P

1

i=1
n
Y

−2n −2n
2n −2n 2n −2n
−2n 2n −2n
[Xi , Yi ] · t2n
z1 tα1 ty1′ tβ1 · tx1 tβ1 tz1′ tγ1 · tδ1 tδ ′ .
1

i=1

We set f2 = tζ1 tβ1 tǫ1 ty1′ tα1 tǫ1 tz1 tζ1 and f3 = tǫ1 tz1′ tζ1 tγ1 tx1 tζ1 tβ1 tǫ1 in M(S22 ). By
Lemma 3.3, f2 and f3 in M(S22 ) map (z1 , α1 ) and (x1 , β1 ) to (β1 , y1′ ) and (γ1 , z1′ ),
respectively. Therefore, by Lemma 3.1, we have
2n −2n
−2n 2n −2n
t2n
z1 tα1 ty1′ tβ1 = [tz1 tα1 , f2 ],
−2n
−2n 2n −2n
= [t2n
t2n
x1 tβ1 , f3 ],
x1 tβ1 tz1′ tγ1

and the proposition follows.



Proposition 6.2. Suppose that g is odd. Let s0 be a nonseparating curve on Σg ,
and let Li be a lantern relator in Mg . For any integer n, there are some elements
X1 , Y1 , X2 , Y2 , . . . , X|n|+2 , Y|n|+2 in Mg such that
|n|+2

2(g−1)n

Y

i=1

Li ≡P

Y

.
[Xj , Yj ] · t−2(g−1)n
s0

j=1

Proof of Proposition 6.2. If g = 3, Proposition 6.2 immediately follows from δ1 = δ1′
and Proposition 6.1.

Figure 9. The rotation rk of Σg for g = 2k + 1.
If g = 2k + 1 and k ≥ 2, then there is a rotation rk of Σg by 2π/k as in Figure 9.
In the notation of Proposition 6.1, we write
Lj := rj−1 (L1 ),
k

L′j := rj−1 (L′1 ),

δj := rkj−1 (δ1 ),

δj′ := rkj−1 (δ1′ ),

Xi,j := rj−1 (Xi ),

Yi,j := rj−1 (Yi ),

k

k

k

SIGNATURES OF SURFACE BUNDLES AND STABLE COMMUTATOR LENGTHS OF DEHN TWISTS
21

for j = 1, 2, . . . , k. Note that δj+1 = δj′ , δk+1 = δ1 , Xi,k+1 = Xi,1 and Yi,k+1 = Yi,1 .
For j = 1, 2, . . . , k, Proposition 6.1 and the primitive braid relations give
−2n
(Lj )2n (L′j )2n ≡P [X1,j , Y1,j ][X2,j , Y2,j ] · · · [X|n|+2,j , Y|n|+2,j ] · t−2n
δj tδ ′ .
j

S22

δ1 , δ1′ .

Recall that
is the genus-2 subsurface of Σg bounded by
Any simj−1
2
ple closed curves on Int(rk (S2 )) are disjoint from any simple closed curves on
′
Int(rkj −1 (S22 )) if j 6= j ′ , and δj , δj′ are boundary curves of rkj−1 (S22 ). Hence, for
′

any elements ej in M(rkj−1 (S22 )) and any element fj ′ in M(rkj −1 (S22 )), we have
ej fj ′ ≡P fj ′ ej for j 6= j ′ by the commutative relations and the property of boundary curves. By δj+1 = δj′ , δk+1 = δ1 , the commutative relations and Lemma 3.6 we
have
k
Y
−4n
−4n
(Lj )2n (L′j )2n ≡P [X1 , Y1 ][X2 , Y2 ] · · · [X|n|+2 , Y|n|+2 ] t−4n
δ1 tδ2 · · · tδk ,
j=1

where Xi = Xi,1 Xi,2 · · · Xi,k and Yi = Yi,1 Yi,2 · · · Yi,k , and Lemma 3.5 (1) gives
−4(k−1)n

−8n
−4n
−4n
≡P [t−4n
t−4n
δ1 tδ2 · · · tδk−1
δ1 tδ2 · · · tδk

, rk ] · t−4kn
.
δk

Since from their definition, X|n|+2 , X|n|+2,j (resp. Y|n|+2 , Y|n|+2,j ) and rk satisfy the
condition of Lemma 3.9, by the primitive braid relations, we obtain X|n|+2 rk ≡P
rk X|n|+2 (resp. Y|n|+2 rk ≡P rk Y|n|+2 ). Moreover, since δj is a boundary curve of
′

rkj−1 (S22 ) and disjoint from rkj −1 (S22 ) if j 6= j ′ , X|n|+2 and Y|n|+2 can commute with
tδj modulo P for any j by the commutative relations and the property of boundary
curves. From the above argument, Lemma 3.6 gives
−4(k−1)n

−8n
[X|n|+2 , Y|n|+2 ][t−4n
δ1 tδ2 · · · tδk−1

−4(k−1)n

−8n
, rk ] = [X|n|+2 t−4n
δ1 tδ2 · · · tδk−1

and we obtain the desired conclusion.

, Y|n|+2 rk ],


−1 −1
Lemma 6.3 ([30]). Let us consider the lantern relator L := t−2
a td td′ tc ts1 tz , the
−1
6
4
−1
2-chain relator C2 := ts1 (ta tb ) and the 3-chain relator C3 := t−1
d td′ (ta tb tc ) ,
where the curves are as in Figure 3.

C3 ≡P L · C2 .
Proof. Since a, d, d′ are disjoint from c, z and each other, ta , td , td′ can commute
with tc , tz modulo P by the commutative relations. Combining this with a cyclic
−2
Here, by the braid relation, we have
permutation give L ≡P tz tc td−1 td−1
′ ta ts1 .
ta tb ta tb ta tb ≡P ta ta tb ta ta tb . Therefore, using a cyclic permutation we have
−1
L · C2 ≡P t−1
d td ′ · tb ta ta tb · ta ta tb ta ta tb · tz tc .

By drawing corresponding curves and applying the corresponding Dehn twist, we
find that tb ta ta tb (z) = c. This gives tb ta ta tb · tz ≡P tc · tb ta ta tb by the primitive
braid relation. Using this equation, we have
−1
L · C2 ≡P t−1
d td ′ · tb ta ta tb · ta ta · tc · tb ta ta tb · tc .

We focus on the underlined part. By Lemma 3.2, we have tb ta ta tb (a) = a, ta tb tc (b) =
c and ta tb tc (a) = b. This gives tb ta ta tb · ta ≡P ta · tb ta ta tb , ta tb tc · tb ≡P tc · ta tb tc
and ta tb tc · ta ≡P tb · ta tb tc . Applying them on the underlined parts, we obtain
tb ta ta tb ta ta tc tb ta ≡ P ta ta tb ta ta tb tc tb ta
≡ P ta ta tb ta tc tb ta tb tc .

22

N. MONDEN

By the braid relation and ta tb tc · tb ≡P tc · ta tb tc on the underlined parts, we get
ta ta tb ta tc tb ta tb tc ≡ P ta tb ta tb tc tb ta tb tc
≡ P ta tb tc ta tb tc ta tb tc .
This finishes the proof.



We now prove Theorem B.
Proof of Theorem B. We may assume that two simple closed curves in Proposition 6.2 and Theorem 4.3 are same from the primitive braid relation since there is
an element f in Mg such that f (c) = c′ for any two nonseparating curve c, c′ .
After inserting 5n into n in Proposition 6.2 and applying a cyclic permutation,
by Theorem 4.3 we get
10(g−1)n

Y

Li ·

g−1
Y
j=1

i=1

5|n|+3
n
C3,j

≡P

Y

|n|+3

[Xj , Yj ] ·

j=1

Y

[Vj , Wj ],

j=1

This gives an Σg -bundle X → Σ6|n|+6 for odd g (This construction is called the
“subtraction of Lefschetz fibration” introduced in [16]). By Lemma 6.3, we see that
n(T ) = n+ (T ) − n− (T ) = 0 − 0,
n(C2 ) = n+ (C2 ) − n− (C2 ) = (g − 1)n − 0,
n(L) = n+ (L) − n− (L) = 11(g − 1)n − 0
in the notation of Proposition 2.5. Therefore, we have
σ(X) = −1 · 0 − 7 · (g − 1)n + 1 · 11(g − 1)n = 4(g − 1)n.
This completes the proof.



Remark 6.4. We don’t know the surface bundles constructed in Theorem B admits
a section or not.
In the rest of this section, we prove Theorem C.
Proof of Theorem C. Let us consider the two (sub)surfaces of genus 3 with one
boundary component as in Figure 8 and the left side of Figure 6. Since a1 , b1 are
disjoint from γ, ǫ, d1 , ta1 , tb1 can commute with tγ , ψ(= tǫ tγ td1 tǫ ) modulo P by the
commutative relations. Therefore, a cyclic permutation and Lemma 5.4 give
C2,1 L−1 ≡P t8a1 t4b1 [tγ , ψ][V tδ t−1
z , W φ].
Here, there is an element f in M13 such that f (δ1 ) = a1 and f (δ1′ ) = a′1 , where

Figure 10. The curves a1 , a′1 , b1 , d1 , γ, ǫ on S.
a′1 is the simple closed curve as in Figure 10. By Proposition 6.1 and the primitive
braid and the commutative relations, we have

−1
6
′ 6
2 4
C2,1 L−1 ≡P [X1 , Y1 ][X2 , Y2 ] · · · [X5 , Y5 ]t−6
f (L1 ) (L1 )
a′ ta1 tb1 [tγ , ψ][V tδ tz , W φ].
1

SIGNATURES OF SURFACE BUNDLES AND STABLE COMMUTATOR LENGTHS OF DEHN TWISTS
23

in M13 , where Xi = f (Xi,1 ), Yi = f (Yi,1 ). Let f5 := t2b1 · ta′1 tb1 ta1 in M13 . Since then
ta′1 tb1 ta1 maps (a′1 , b1 ) to (b1 , a1 ) by Lemma 3.2 (2), we see that f5 maps (a′1 , b1 ) to
(b1 , t2b (a1 )). Therefore, the primitive braid relation and Lemma 3.1 give
1

−6 −2 2 2 −2 6
2 4
t−6
a′ ta1 tb1 = ta′ tb1 (tb1 ta1 tb1 )tb1
1

1

−2 2
≡P t−6
a′ tb1 tt2
1

b1 (a1 )

t6b1

−2
≡P [t−6
a′ tb1 , f5 ].
1

Note that ta′1 , tb1 , f5 can commute with tγ , ψ by the commutative relations since
a1 , a′1 , b1 are disjoint from γ, ǫ, d1 . By the above argument, Lemma 3.6 gives

−2
−1
6
′ 6
C2,1 L−1 ≡P [X1 , Y1 ][X2 , Y2 ] · · · [X5 , Y5 ][t−6
f (L1 ) (L1 )
a′ tb1 tγ , f5 ψ][V tδ tz , W φ].
1

in M13 . In particular, this equation holds in M3 , so we get an Σ3 -bundle over Σ7
with a 0-section. Therefore, we have
n(T ) = n+ (T ) − n− (T ) = 0 − 0,
n(C2 ) = n+ (C2 ) − n− (C2 ) = 1 − 0,
n(L) = n+ (L) − n− (L) = 12 − 1
in the notation of Proposition 2.5, and
σ(X) = −0 − 7 · 1 + 1 · 11 = 4.
The proof is complete.



7. Proofs of Theorem E (1) and (2)
Since we don’t use the results proved from here to compute signatures of surface
bundles, replacing “≡P ” by “=” and ignoring the numbers of the relators L, T, C2
pose no problem. From now on, we do not write ≡P and relators explicitly.
We use the next result to prove Theorem E (1).
Theorem 7.1 (Bavard [3]). Let h1 , g1 , h2 , g2 , . . . , hk , gk be elements in a group
n
G. Then, forh any
i integer n, ([h1 , g1 ][h2 , g2 ] · · · [hk , gk ]) is written as a product of
|n|
|n|(k − 1) + 2 + 1 commutators.
Proof of Thoerem E (1). In the notation of Proposition 4.2, if g = 1, then d and
d′ are trivial. Therefore, we see that t12n
can be written as a product of |n| + 1
b
commutators in M1 . This gives clM1 (t12n
b ) ≤ |n| + 1 for any integer n.
To obtain a contradiction with sclM1 (ts0 ) = 1/12 (see Section 1.3), suppose that
for some integer k ≥ 1, t12k
can be written as a product of k commutators. Then,
b
Theorem 7.1 gives
hni
) ≤ n(k − 1) +
clM1 (t12kn
+ 1.
b
2
for any positive integer n. Therefore, we have
1
1
sclM1 (t12k
=k− .
b ) ≤ (k − 1) +
2
2
)/12k
(see
Section
1.3),
we
obtain
Since sclM1 (tb1 ) = sclM1 (t12k
b
1
1
1
−
<
.
sclM1 (tb ) ≤
12 24k
12
This contradicts our assumption, which proves the theorem.


24

N. MONDEN

Next, we give a proof of Theorem E (2).

Figure 11. Σ2 and the curves a, b, c, d, e, v on Σ21 .
Proof of Theorem E (2). We consider the relation (5) and embed Σ21 into Σ2 so
that d = d′ (see Figure 11). Lemma 3.8 (2) and the primitive braid relation
t−2i+2 (tv ) = t−2i+1 (ttb (v) ) give
b

b

(tb tv )2n ≡P t2n
b

1
Y

i=n

(tv ttb (v) ).
t−2i+1
b

Here, the primitive braid relations give
6n −4n −2n 4n 2n
10n
4n 2n
(tb tc tb )
· t−4n
(t−6n
t4n
t4n
a tb )tb
a tc tb = tb
b
b

.
≡P t10n
· t−4n
t4n
t−4n t4n
b
b
t−6n (a) b
t−2n (c)
b

b

By combining the above two relations with the relation (5) and using the commutative relations, we obtain
· t−4n
t4n
t−4n t4n
·
C3n ≡P t10n
b
b
t−2n (c)
t−6n (a) b
b

b

1
Y

i=n

(tv td−1 ttb (v) t−1
d ).
t−2i+1
b

Since ta tb tc maps (a, b) to (b, c) by Lemma 3.2 (2), we find that t−2n
ta tb tc t6n
b ,
b
−6n
−2n
denoted f3 , maps (tb (a), b) to (b, tb (c)). Let e be a nonseparating curve as in
Figure 11. Since te td tv te maps (v, d) to (d, v) by Lemma 3.2 (1), tb te td tv te , denoted
f4 , maps (v, d) to (d, tb (v)) by i(b, d) = 0. By Lemma 3.1 we see that
t−4n
t4n
t−4n t4n
= [t−4n
t4n
, f ],
b
b
t−6n (a) b
t−2n (c)
t−6n (a) 3
b

b

b

−1
−1
tv t−1
d ttb (v) td = [tv td , f4 ].

Since the conjugation of a commutator is also a commutator, Theorem E (2) follows.

8. Scl of the Dehn twist along a separating curve
8.1. A separating curve of type 1. We show Theorem D (2) and E (3).
We consider the subsurface S12 in the proof of Theorem 4.3 and the curves
a1 , b1 , c1 , s1,1 , z1 , d1 , dg−1 as in Figure 4. The separating curve s1,1 is of type 1.
Proposition 8.1. For any integer n, there are elements V1′ , W1′ , V2′ , W2′ , . . . , V ′|n| ,
[ 2 ]+1
in M(S12 ) such that the following holds in M(S12 ):
W ′|n|
[ 2 ]+1
tns1,1 = [V1′ , W1′ ][V2′ , W2′ ] · · · [V ′|n| +1 , W ′ |n| +1 ]tndg−1 tnd1 .
[ 2]
[ 2]

SIGNATURES OF SURFACE BUNDLES AND STABLE COMMUTATOR LENGTHS OF DEHN TWISTS
25
2 −1
Proof. From the lantern relation tc1 ts1,1 tz1 = td1 tdg−1 t2a1 , we get ts1,1 = t−1
c1 td1 tdg−1 ta1 tz1 .
Since a1 , d1 , dg−1 are disjoint from each other and c1 , z1 , using the commutative relation and Lemma 3.8 (1), we have
n
−1 n n n n
tns1,1 = (t−1
c1 tz1 ) ta1 ta1 tdg−1 td1
n
−n n n n
(t−1
(t−1
(t−1
= t−1
z1 ) · tc1 ta1 ta1 tdg−1 td1 .
z1 ) · · · t−n
z1 )t−2
c
c
c
1

1

1

From the commutative relations and the primitive braid relations
(t−1
t−2i
tc1 (z1 ) )
c1

and

(t−1
z1 )
tc−2m−1
1

t2m
s1,1 =

m
Y

i=1

=

tt−1
,
−2m−1
(z1 )
c1

(t−1
z1 )
t−2i+1
c1

=

we have

−1
(t−1
t−2i
tc1 (z1 ) ta1 tz1 ta1 )
c1

2m 2m
t2m
· t−2m
a1 · tdg−1 td1
c1

and
=
t2m+1
s1,1

m
Y

i=1

−1
(t−1
t−2i
tc1 (z1 ) ta1 tz1 ta1 )
c1

2m+1
.
ta1 · t2m+1
· t−1
t2m+1 t−2m−1
c1
dg−1 td1
t−2m−1 (z ) a1
1

c1

Since tb1 ta1 tz1 tb1 maps (z1 , a1 ) to (a1 , z1 ) by Lemma 3.2 (1), tb1 ta1 tz1 tb1 tic1 maps
(t−i
c1 (z1 ), a1 ) to (a1 , z1 ) by i(a1 , c1 ) = 0. From the proof of Lemma 6.3, tb1 ta1 ta1 tb1
maps (z1 , a1 ) to (c1 , a1 ). Therefore, when we set φ1 := tb1 ta1 tz1 tb1 t−1
c1 and φ2 :=
(z1 ), a1 ) to
, φ1 and φ2 maps (tc1 (z1 ), a1 ) and (t−2m−1
tb1 ta1 ta1 tb1 · tb1 ta1 tz1 tb1 t2m+1
c1
c1
(a1 , z1 ) and (a1 , c1 ), respectively. Moreover, tb1 tc1 ta1 tb1 , denoted φ3 , maps a1 maps
c1 by Lemma 3.2 (1). Lemma 3.1 gives
−1
−1
t−1
tc (z1 ) ta1 tz1 ta1 = [ttc (z1 ) ta1 , φ1 ],
1

1

t2m+1 , φ2 ],
ta1 = [t−1
t−1
t2m+1 t−2m−1
c1
t−2m−1 (z ) a1
t−2m−1 (z ) a1
c1

1

c1

1

−2m
, φ3 ].
t2m
t−2m
a1 = [tc1
c1

Since the conjugation of a commutator is also a commutator, the proof is complete.

Proof of Theorem D (2) and E (3). If g = 2, then by d1 = dg−1 , we have
′
′
′
′
′
′
10n
t5n
s1,1 = [V1 , W1 ][V2 , W2 ] · · · [V[ |5n| ]+1 , W[ |5n| ]+1 ] · td1 .
2
2

By Theorem E (2), Theorem E (3) is proved.
Note that s1,1 is a separating curve of genus-1. In the notation of proofs of
Theorem 4.3 and Proposition 8.1, we write
s1,j := rj−1 (s1,1 ),

dj := rj−1 (d1 ),

′
Vi,j
:= rj−1 (Vi′ ),

′
Wi,j
:= rj−1 (Wi′ )

for j = 1, 2, . . . , g − 1. Note that dg = d1 . Then, for j = 1, 2, . . . , g − 1, Proposition 8.1 and the primitive braid relations give
′
′
′
′
′
′
5n 5n
t5n
s1,j = [V1,j , W1,j ][V2,j , W2,j ] · · · [V[ |5n| ]+1,j , W[ |5n| ]+1,j ]tdj tdj+1 .
2
2

Here, any simple closed curves on Int(rj−1 (S12 )) are disjoint from any simple closed
′
curves on Int(rj −1 (S12 )) if j 6= j ′ , and dj , dj+1 are boundary curves of rj−1 (S12 ).
′
Hence, for any elements ej in M(rj−1 (S12 )) and any element fj ′ in M(rj −1 (S12 )),
we have ej fj ′ = fj ′ ej by the commutative relations and the property of boundary

26

N. MONDEN

′
′
′
′
′
′
curves if j 6= j ′ . When we set Vi′ = Vi,1
Vi,2
· · · Vi,g−1
and Wi′ = Wi,1
Wi,2
· · · Wi,g−1
,
from Lemma 3.6 and dg = d1 , we have
10n
′
10n 10n
′
′
′
′
′
5n
5n
t5n
s1,1 ts1,2 · · · ts1,g−1 = [V1 , W1 ][V2 , W2 ] · · · [V[ |5n| ]+1 , W[ |5n| ]+1 ] · td1 td2 · · · tdg−1 .
2
2

Moreover, Lemma 3.5 gives
10(g−1)n

[Ts1,1 , r] = [V1′ , W1′ ][V2′ , W2′ ] · · · [V ′ |5n| +1 , W ′ |5n| +1 ] · tdg−1
ts5(g−1)n
1,g−1
[ 2 ]
[ 2 ]
5(g−2)n

[Td , r],

10(g−2)n

10n
20n
and Td = t10n
where Ts1,1 = t5n
. We obtain Theos1,1 ts1,2 · · · ts1,g−2
d1 td2 · · · tdg−2
−1
rem D (2) by [Td , r][Ts1,1 , r] = [Td , r][r, Ts1,1 ], Lemma 3.7 and Theorem 4.3. 

8.2. A separating curve of type h. We give the proof of Theorem D (3).
Let a, b, c, d, e, x, y, z be the nonseparating curves on the genus-h subsurface Sh1
of Σg bounded by the separating curve sh of type sh as in Figure 12.

Figure 12. The curves sh , a, b, c, d, e, x, y, z.
Proposition 8.2 ([6]). For any integer n, there are elements X1 , Y1 , X2 , Y2 , . . . ,
X[ |n|+3 ] , Y[ |n|+3 ] in M(Sh1 ) such that the following holds in M(Sh1 ):
2

2

tnsh = [X1 , Y1 ][X2 , Y2 ] · · · [X[ |n|+3 ] , Y[ |n|+3 ] ].
2

2

Proof. By the lantern relation tx ty tz = tb tc tsh ta , we have tx ty = tb tc tsh ta t−1
z .
Since a, b, c, d, sh , z are disjoint from each other, by the commutative relations and
Lemma 3.8 (1), we have
−n −n
tnsh = (tx ty )n tnz t−n
a tb tc
−n −n
= tx (ty )t2x (ty ) · · · tnx (ty )tnx tnz t−n
a tb tc .

From the primitive braid relations t2i
(ty ) =
x
and the commutative relations, we obtain
t2m
sh =

m
Y

(ttx (y) )
t2i−1
x

−1
(ty t−1
a ttx (y) ta )
t2i−1
x

and

(ty )
t2m+1
x

= tt2m+1
(y)
x

−2m 2m −2m
tz tc ,
· t2m
x tb

i=1

and
t2m+1
=
sh

m
Y

i=1

(ty ta−1 ttx (y) t−1
a )
t2i−1
x

−1
2m+1 −2m−1 2m+1 −2m−1
tb
tz
tc
.
· tt2m+1
(y) ta · tx
x

SIGNATURES OF SURFACE BUNDLES AND STABLE COMMUTATOR LENGTHS OF DEHN TWISTS
27

Since td ta ty td maps (y, a) to (a, y) by Lemma 3.2 (1), tx td ta ty td and td ta ty td t−2m−1
,
x
denoted φ′ and ψ ′ , map (y, a) and (t2m+1
(y), a) to (a, tx (y)) and (a, y) by i(a, x) = 0,
x
respectively. Moreover, by Lemma 3.4, td tz · te tc tx te · tb td , denoted τ ′ , maps (x, b)
to (c, z). Therefore, for k = 2m, 2m + 1, Lemma 3.1 gives
−1
′
−1
ty t−1
a ttx (y) ta = [ty ta , φ ],
−1
′
tt2k+1
(y) ta = [tt2k+1
(y) , ψ ],
x
x
k −k
k −k
′
tkx t−k
b tz tc = [tx tb , τ ].

Since the conjugation of a commutator is a commutator, this finishes the proof. 
Remark 8.3. The above proof was given in the first draft of [6]. Using Proposition 8.2 it was shown in [6] that for a boundary curve ∂ of Σrg , clMrg (tn∂ ) = [(n+3)/2]
if g ≥ 2 and r ≥ 1, and therefore, sclMrg (t∂ ) = 1/2.
Proof of Theorem D (3). Suppose that g ≥ 3 and h ≥ 2. Let Sh1 be the genus-h
subsurface of Σg with one boundary component sh . When we write g = hk + g ′ ,
where g ′ = 0, 1, . . . , h − 1, there is an element ρk in Mg such that the subsurfaces
Sh1 , ρk (Sh1 ), . . . , ρkk−1 (Sh1 ) are disjoint from each other and ρkk (Sh1 ) = Sh1 . In the
notation of Proposition 8.2, we write
sh,j := ρj−1
k (sh ),
Xi,j := ρj−1 (Xi ),
k

Yi,j := ρj−1 (Yi )
k

for j = 1, 2, . . . , k. Note that sh,k+1 = sh,1 , Xi,k+1 = Xi,1 and Yi,k+1 = Yi,1 . Then,
Proposition 8.2 and the primitive braid relations give
tnsh,j = [X1,j , Y1,j ][X2,j , Y2,j ] · · · [X[ |n|+3 ],j , Y[ |n|+3 ],j ].
2

2

′
is disjoint from ρjk −1 (Sh1 ) if j 6= j ′ , any elements
′
elements fj ′ in M(ρjk −1 (Sh1 )) satisfy ej fj ′ = fj ′ ej from

1
ρj−1
k (Sh )

for j = 1, 2, . . . , k. Since
ej in M(ρkj−1 (Sh1 )) and any
the commutative relations. Therefore, from Lemma 3.6, we have

tnsh,1 tnsh,2 · · · tnsh,k = [X1′ , Y1′ ][X2′ , Y2′ ] · · · [X ′|n|+3 , Y ′ |n|+3 ],
[ 2 ] [ 2 ]
where Xi′ = Xi,1 Xi,2 · · · Xi,k and Y1′ = Yi,1 Yi,2 · · · Yi,k . Moreover, Lemma 3.5 gives
(k−1)n
kn
′
′
′
′
′
′
[tnsh,1 t2n
sh,2 · · · tsh,k−1 , ρk ]tsh,k = [X1 , Y1 ][X2 , Y2 ] · · · [X[ |n|+3 ] , Y[ |n|+3 ] ].
2
2

In particular,
n
2n
(k−1)n
−1
tkn
[X1′ , Y1′ ][X2′ , Y2′ ] · · · [X ′|n|+3 , Y ′ |n|+3 ].
sh,k = [tsh,1 tsh,2 · · · tsh,k−1 , ρk ]
[ 2 ] [ 2 ]

Since Xi,j , Xi′ (resp. Yi,j , Yi′ ) and ρk satisfy the assumption of Lemma 3.9 from their
definitions and the primitive braid relations, we obtain X1′ ρk = ρk X1′ (resp. Y1′ ρk =
1
ρk Y1′ ). Note that sh,j is a boundary curve of ρj−1
k (Sh ) and that sh,1 , sh,2 , . . . , sh,k
are disjoint curves. By the property of boundary curves, the commutative relations
and Lemma 3.6, we have
(k−1)n
−1
(k−1)n
′
′
[tnsh,1 t2n
[X1′ , Y1′ ] = [ρk , tnsh,1 t2n
sh,2 · · · tsh,k−1 , ρk ]
sh,2 · · · tsh,k−1 ][X1 , Y1 ]
(k−1)n ′
= [ρk X1′ , tnsh,1 t2n
sh,2 · · · tsh,k−1 Y1 ],

and the proof is complete.



28

N. MONDEN

References
[1] Anar, Akhmedov, Surface bundles with non-zero signature, Topology Appl. 154 (2007),
2235–2240.
[2] M. F. Atiyah, The Signature of Fibre-Bundles in Global Analysis, Papers in Honor of K.
Kodaira, Tokyo Univ. Press, Tokyo, 1969, 73–84.
[3] C. Bavard, Longueur stable des commutateurs, Enseign. Math. (2) 37 (1991), no. 1-2,
109–150.
[4] R. I. Baykur, Non-holomorphic surface bundles and Lefschetz fibrations., Math. Res. Lett.
19 (2012), no. 3, 567–574.
[5] V. Braungardt and D. Kotschick, Clustering of critical points in Lefschetz fibrations and
the symplectic Szpiro inequality, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 355 (2003), no. 8, 3217–3226.
[6] R. I. Baykur, M. Korkmaz, and N. Monden, Sections of surface bundles and Lefschetz
fibrations, Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 365, (2013), no. 11, 5999–
6016.
[7] J. Birman and H. Hilden, On mapping class groups of closed surfaces as covering spaces,
In Advances in the theory of Riemann surfaces, Ann. of Math. Studies 66 (1971), 81–115.
[8] J. Bryan and R. Donagi, Surface bundles over surface of small genus, Geom. Topology 6
(2002) 59–67.
[9] J. Bryan, R. Donagi and A. Stipsicz, Surface bundles: some interesting examples, Turkish
J. Math. 25 (2001) 61–68.
[10] D. Calegari, scl, MSJ Memoirs, 20. Mathematical Society of Japan, Tokyo, 2009.
[11] D. Calegari, N. Monden and M. Sato, On stable commutator length in hyperelliptic mapping class groups, Pacific Journal of Mathematics, 272 (2014), no. 2, 323–351.
[12] M. Culler, Using surfaces to solve equations in free groups, Topology 20 (1981), no. 2,
13–145.
[13] M. Dehn, Papers on group theory and topology, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1987(Die
Gruppe der Abbildungsklassen, Acta Math. Vol. 69 (1938), 135–206).
[14] H. Endo, A construction of surface bundles over surfaces with non-zero signature, Osaka
J. Math. 35 (1998) 915–930.
[15] H. Endo, I. Hasegawa, S. Kamada and K. Tanaka, Charts, signatures, and stabilizations
of Lefschetz fibrations, Geom. Topol. Monogr. 19 (2015), 237–267.
[16] H. Endo, M. Korkmaz, D. Kotschick, B. Ozbagci and A. Stipsicz, Commutators, Lefschetz
fibrations and the signature of surface bundles, Topology 41 (2002) 961–977.
[17] H. Endo and D. Kotschick, bounded cohomology and non-uniform perfection of mapping
class groups, Invent. Math. 144 (2001), no. 1, 169–175.
[18] B. Farb, Problems on mapping class groups and Related Topics, Proceedings of Symposia
in Pure Mathematics, 74. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2006.
[19] B. Farb and D. Margalit, A primer on mapping class groups, Princeton Mathematical
Series, 49. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
[20] U. Hamenstadt, Signatures of Surface bundles and Milnor Wood Inequalities, preprint,
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1206.0263.
[21] J. L. Harer, The second homology group of the mapping class group of an orientable
surface, Invent. Math. 72 (1982), no. 2, 221–239.
[22] F. Hirzebruch, The signature of ramified coverings, Global Analysis, Papers in Honor of
K. Kodaira, Tokyo Univ. Press, 1969, 253–265.
[23] Ju A Lee, Surface bundles over surfaces with a fixed signature, J. Korean Math. Soc. 54
(2017), no. 2, 545–561
[24] F. Luo, A presentation of the mapping class groups, Math. Res. Lett. 4 (1997) 735–739.
[25] R. Kirby, Problems in low dimensional topology, from: “Proceedings of the 1993 Georgia
International Topology Conference held at the University of Georgia, Athens, GA, August
2-13, 1993”, (William H Kazez, editor), American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI
(1997).
[26] K. Kodaira, A certain type of irregular algebraic surfaces, J. Anal. Math. 19 (1967),
207–215.
[27] M. Korkmaz, Stable commutator length of a Dehn twist, Michigan Math. J. 52 (2004),
no.1, 23–31.
[28] M. Krokamz, Commutator lengths in mapping class groups, Conference on ”Interactions
between low dimensional topology and mapping class groups” co-organized with John
Etnyre and Ursula Hamenstädt, MPIM, Bonn, July 1-5, 2013.

SIGNATURES OF SURFACE BUNDLES AND STABLE COMMUTATOR LENGTHS OF DEHN TWISTS
29

[29] M. Korkmaz and B. Ozbagci, Minimal number of singular fibers in a Lefschetz fibration,
Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 129 (2001), no. 5, 1545–1549.
[30] M. Korkmaz and B. Ozbagci, On sections of elliptic fibrations, Michigan Math. J. 56
(2008), no.1, 77–87.
[31] M. Korkmaz and A. Stipsicz, Lefschetz fibrations on 4-manifolds, Handbook of Handbook
of Teichmüller theory. Vol. II, 271-296, IRMA. Lect. Math. Theor. Phys., 13, Eur. Math.
Soc., Zurich, 2009.
[32] D. Kotschick, Signatures, monopoles and mapping class groups, Math. Res. Lett. 5 (1998),
no.1-2, 227–234.
[33] D. Kotschick, Quasi-homomorphisms and stable lengths in mapping class groups, Proc.
Amer. Math. Soc. 132 (2004), no. 11, 3167–3175.
[34] F. Luo, A presentation of the mapping class groups, Math. Res. Lett. 4 (1997), 735–739.
[35] N. Monden, On upper bounds on stable commutator lengths in mapping class groups,
Topology Appl. 159 (2012), no. 4, 1085–1091.
[36] N. Monden and K. Yoshihara, On stable commutator lengths of Dehn twists along separating curves, J. Knot Theory Ramifications 26 (2017), no. 10, 1750056
[37] S. Morita, Structure of the mapping class groups of surfaces: a survey and a prospect,
(English summary) Proceedings of the Kirbyfest (Berkeley, CA, 1998), 349–406 (electronic), Geom. Topol. Monogr., 2, Geom. Topol. Publ., Coventry, 1999.
[38] W. Meyer, Die Signatur von lokalen Koeffizientensystemen und Faserbündeln, Bonn.
Math. Schr. 53 (1972).
[39] W. Meyer, Die Signatur von Flächenbündeln, Math. Ann. 201 (1973), 239–264.
[40] J. Powell, Two theorems on the mapping class group of a surface, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc.
68 (1978), no. 3, 347–350.
[41] A. Stipsicz, Surface bundles with nonvanishing signature, Acta Math. Hungar. 95 (2002),
no.4, 299–307.
[42] W. P. Thurston, Some simple examples of symplectic manifolds, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc.
55 (1976), no. 2, 467–468.
Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Science, Okayama University, Okayama 7008530, Japan
E-mail address: n-monden@okayama-u.ac.jp

