GROUPS AND POLYTOPES

arXiv:1611.01857v1 [math.GT] 6 Nov 2016

STEFAN FRIEDL, WOLFGANG LÜCK, AND STEPHAN TILLMANN
Abstract. In a series of papers the authors associated to an L2 -acyclic group Γ an invariant
P(Γ) that is a formal difference of polytopes in the vector space H1 (Γ; R). This invariant is
in particular defined for most 3-manifold groups, for most 2-generator 1-relator groups and
for all free-by-cyclic groups. In most of the above cases the invariant can be viewed as an
actual polytope.
In this survey paper we will recall the definition of the polytope invariant P(Γ) and we
state some of the main properties. We conclude with a list of open problems.

1. Introduction
1.1. The Grothendieck group of polytopes. A polytope in a finite dimensional real
vector space V is defined as the convex hull of a finite non-empty subset of V . Given a
polytope P we denote by
P := {−x | x ∈ P}
the mirror image of P in the origin.1 We say that two polytopes P and Q are translationequivalent if there exists a vector v ∈ V with v + P = Q. We denote by P(V ) the set of all
translation-equivalence classes of polytopes in V .
The Minkowski sum of two polytopes P and Q in V is defined as the polytope
P + Q := {p + q | p ∈ P and q ∈ Q}.
This turns P(V ) into an abelian monoid, where the identity element 0 is represented by any
polytope consisting of a single point.
Q

P
0000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111
1111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000
0000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111

111
000
000
111
000
111

111
000
000
111

+

P +Q
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111

11
00
00
11
00
11

0000000
1111111
1111111
0000000
0000000
1111111
0000000
1111111
0000000
1111111
0000000
1111111
0000000
1111111
0000000
1111111
0000000
1111111
0000000
1111111
0000000
1111111
0000000
1111111

=

11
00
00
11
00
11

111
000
000
111

11
00
00
11

11
00
00
11

Figure 1.
It is straightforward to show, see e.g. [Sc93, Lemma 3.1.8], that P(V ) has the cancellation
property, i.e. for any P, Q, R ∈ P(V ) with P + Q = P + R we have Q = R. We denote
Date: November 8, 2016.
2000 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 20J05; Secondary 20F65, 22E40, 57R19 .
Key words and phrases. Finitely presented group, L2 -acyclic groups, polytopes, BNS invariant.
1In the literature the mirror image of P in the origin is often denoted by −P. In our paper −P will have
a very different meaning.
1

2

STEFAN FRIEDL, WOLFGANG LÜCK, AND STEPHAN TILLMANN

by G(V ) the set of all equivalence classes of pairs (P, Q) ∈ P(V )2 , where we say that
(P, Q) ∼ (P ′ , Q′ ) if P + Q′ = P ′ + Q. Note that G(V ) is an abelian group, and since P(V )
has the cancellation property it follows that the map P(V ) → G(V ) given by P 7→ (P, 0)
is a monomorphism. We will use this monomorphism to identify P(V ) with its image in
G(V ). Given P and Q ∈ P(V ) we may write P − Q = (P, Q). We refer to G(V ) as the
Grothendieck group of polytopes.
Now let Γ be a group. We write P(Γ) = P(H1 (Γ; R)) and we say a polytope in H1 (Γ; R)
is integral if all the vertices lie in the image of H1 (Γ; Z) → H1 (Γ; R). Similarly we write
G(Γ) = G(H1 (Γ; R)) and we say an element in G(Γ) is integral if it can be represented by
the difference of two integral polytopes.2 A group homomorphism ϕ : Γ → Π induces natural
homomorphisms ϕ∗ : P(Γ) → P(Π) and ϕ∗ : G(Γ) → G(Π).
1.2. L2 -acyclic groups and the Atiyah Conjecture. We say that a group Γ is of type F
if it admits a finite model for K(Γ, 1). (A group of type F is well-known to be torsion-free,
see e.g. [Br82, Corollary VIII.2.5] for a proof.) We say Γ is L2 -acyclic if all its L2 -Betti
(2)
numbers bn (Γ) vanish. The following gives examples of L2 -acyclic groups of type F .
(1) Fundamental groups of admissible 3-manifolds (here a 3-manifold is admissible if it
is connected, orientable, irreducible, its boundary is empty or a disjoint union of tori,
and its fundamental group is infinite).
(2) Free-by-cyclic groups, i.e. groups that can be written as a semidirect product F ⋊ Z
with F a free group.3
(3) Torsion-free groups with two generators and one non-trivial relator.
We refer to [LoL95, Theorem 0.1], [Lü02, Section 4.2] and [DL07] for proofs that these groups
are indeed L2 -acyclic of type F .
In this paper we are mostly interested in groups for which the Whitehead group is trivial. It
is conjectured that the Whitehead group is trivial for any torsion-free group. This conjecture
has now been proven for large classes of groups. For example the Whitehead group is known to
be trivial for all torsion-free hyperbolic groups [BLR08], all virtually solvable [We15] and the
aforementioned three types of groups, see e.g. [AFW15, (C.36)] and [Wa78, p. 249 and p. 250]
for details. We refer to [KLR16, Theorem 2] for a detailed list of all groups for which it is
currently known that the Whitehead group is trivial.
Furthermore, for the most part we want to restrict ourselves to groups that satisfy the
Atiyah Conjecture. A torsion-free group Γ satisfies the Atiyah Conjecture if given any (m×n)matrix A over Z[Γ] the L2 -dimension of the kernel of the map rA : l2 (Γ)m → l2 (Γ)n defined
by v 7→ v · A is a natural number. The class of torsion-free groups that are known to
satisfy the Atiyah Conjecture is considerably smaller than the class of torsion-free groups
for which it is known that the Whitehead group is trivial. We refer to [LiL16, Theorem 2.3]
for a comprehensive summary of what is known about the Atiyah Conjecture. For us it is
of interest that the Atiyah Conjecture is known for fundamental groups of most admissible
3-manifolds and for free-by-cyclic groups, see e.g. [AFW15, (H.21)] and [Li93, Theorem 1.5].
In the following we refer to a group with trivial Whitehead group and which satisfies the
2The

invariants of a group π we will define later on will lie in G(H1 (π; R)). In fact they will lie in a
subgroup given by polytopes with integral vertices. Therefore it makes sense to study the polytope group of
integral polytopes, which has also been studied in its own sake by Funke [Fu16].
3Strictly speaking these groups should be called “free-by-infinite cyclic.” But we follow the common convention to just say free-by-cyclic.

GROUPS AND POLYTOPES

3

Atiyah Conjecture as a Wh-AC-group. It is an open question whether all torsion-free groups
are Wh-AC-groups.
1.3. The polytope invariant of L2 -acyclic groups of type F . In Section 2 we will use
Reidemeister torsion over an appropriate skewfield to associate to an L2 -acyclic Wh-ACgroup Γ of type F an integral element P(Γ) of G(Γ). We refer to P(Γ) as the polytope
invariant of Γ. In Section 3.1 we will see that there exists an L2 -acyclic Wh-AC-group Γ of
type F such that neither P(Γ) nor −P(Γ) is represented by an actual polytope.
The following theorem summarizes some of the structural properties of this invariant. We
refer to Section 2.3 for details.
Theorem 1.1.
(1) Suppose A, B and C are L2 -acyclic Wh-AC-groups of type F . Let
ϕ : C → A and φ : C → B be monomorphisms. We consider the corresponding amalgamated product A ∗C B and denote by a, b and c the monomorphisms from A, B and
C into A ∗C B. Then A ∗C B is also L2 -acyclic of type F . Furthermore, if A ∗C B is
a Wh-AC-group, then
P(A ∗C B) = a∗ (P(A)) + b∗ (P(B)) − c∗ (P(C)).
(2) Let
i

∗
1 → K −
→
G → B→1
be an exact sequence of groups of type F . Suppose G is a Wh-AC-group and K is
L2 -acyclic. Then
P(G) = i∗ (P(K)) · χ(B).
(3) If Γ is the fundamental group of an aspherical n-dimensional manifold M and if Γ is
an L2 -acyclic4 Wh-AC-group of type F , then

P(Γ) = (−1)n+1 · P(Γ) ∈ G(Γ).
The polytope invariant is in general rather difficult to calculate. The following theorem
summarizes what is known for special classes of groups. In the interest of readability we
keep the language somewhat informal. We refer to Section 3 for more carefully formulated
statements.
Theorem 1.2.
(1) If N 6∼
= S 1 × D 2 is an admissible 3-manifold that is not a closed graph
manifold, then P(N) equals the dual of the Thurston norm ball. In particular P(N)
is an integral polytope and it determines and is determined by the Thurston norm.
(2) If Γ is a group that admits a presentation π = hx, y|ri such that r is non-empty,
reduced and cyclically reduced, then P(Γ) can be easily read off the word r.
(3) If N is a closed admissible 3-manifold that is not a graph manifold and if N admits
a CW-structure with one 0-cell, two 1-cells, two 2-cells and one 3-cell, then P(N)
can be determined immediately from the corresponding chain complex of the universal
cover.
It follows in particular from Theorem 1.2 that for 3-manifolds to which (2) or (3) applies
one can easily obtain the Thurston norm from the fundamental group or the chain complex.
4The

Singer Conjecture [Sin77][Lü02, p. 421] predicts that M has zero L2 -Betti numbers if and only if
χ(M ) = 0.

4

STEFAN FRIEDL, WOLFGANG LÜCK, AND STEPHAN TILLMANN

Next we turn to the question of what information the polytope invariant contains. The
following theorem gives a partial answer to that question. It is again formulated in a slightly
informal way, the precise statements will be given later in Sections 4 and 5.
Theorem 1.3.
(1) If N 6= S 1 × D 2 is an admissible 3-manifold that is not a closed graph
manifold, then we can mark some of the vertices of the polytope P(π1 (N)) such that
a class φ ∈ H 1 (π1 (N); R) pairs maximally with a marked vertex if and only if it
represents an element in the BNS-invariant [BNS87] Σ(π1 (N)).
(2) Let Γ be a group with b1 (Γ) = 2 that admits a presentation π = hx, y|ri such that r is
non-empty, reduced and cyclically reduced. Then the following hold:
(a) The “thickness” of P(Γ) is determined and determines the minimal complexity
of “HNN-splittings” of Γ along groups.
(b) We can mark some of the vertices of the polytope P(Γ) such that a class φ ∈
H 1 (Γ; R) pairs maximally with a marked vertex if and only if it represents an
element in the BNS-invariant Σ(Γ).
(3) [Funke–Kielak] If Γ is an descending HNN-extension of a free group on two generators,
then the geometry of P(Γ) is closely related to Σ(Γ).
Most of the results in this paper are already explicit or at least implicit in our previous
papers [FT15, FST15, FL16a, FL16b]. Only Theorem 1.2 (3) is a completely new statement.
The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2 we will use Reidemeister torsion to introduce
the polytope invariant P(Γ) for any L2 -acyclic Wh-AC-group Γ of type F . Furthermore we
prove several statements regarding polytopes and Reidemeister torsions that will in particular
imply Theorem 1.1. In Section 3 we give a more detailed discussion of the various statements
of Theorem 1.2. In Sections 4 and 5 we will explain in more detail the statement and the
references for Theorem 1.3. We conclude this paper with a long list of questions in Section 6.
Acknowledgments. We wish to thank the many people who shared their ideas and insight
with us as we developed the subject. We are especially grateful to Nathan Dunfield, Florian
Funke, Dawid Kielak and Kevin Schreve for their contributions.
The first author is supported by the SFB 1085 “Higher invariants” at the University of
Regensburg, funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG). The second author is
financially supported by the Leibniz-Preis granted by the DFG and the ERC Advanced Grant
“KL2MG-interactions” (no. 662400) granted by the European Research Council. The third
author is partially supported under the Australian Research Council’s Discovery funding
scheme (project number DP140100158).
2. Definition of the polytope invariant of groups
2.1. Review of division and rational closure. Let R be a subring of a ring S. The
division closure D(R ⊆ S) ⊆ S is the smallest subring of S which contains R and is division
closed, i.e., any element x ∈ D(R ⊆ S) which is invertible in S is already invertible in
D(R ⊆ S). The rational closure R(R ⊆ S) ⊆ S is the smallest subring of S which contains
R and is rationally closed, i.e., for any natural number n and matrix A ∈ Mn,n (R(R ⊆ S)),
if A is invertible over S, then A is already invertible over R(R ⊆ S). The division closure
and the rational closure always exist. Obviously R ⊆ D(R ⊆ S) ⊆ R(R ⊆ S) ⊆ S.

GROUPS AND POLYTOPES

5

Consider a group Γ. Let N (Γ) be the group von Neumann algebra which can be identified
with the algebra B(L2 (Γ), L2 (Γ))Γ of bounded left Γ-equivariant operators L2 (Γ) → L2 (Γ).
Denote by U(Γ) the algebra of operators that are affiliated to the group von Neumann
algebra, see [Lü02, Section 8] for details. This is the same as the Ore localization of N (Γ)
with respect to the multiplicatively closed subset of non-zero divisors in N (Γ), see [Lü02,
Theorem 8.22 (1)]. By the right regular representation we can embed CΓ and hence also ZΓ
as a subring in N (Γ). We will denote by R(Γ) and D(Γ) the division and the rational closure
of ZΓ in U(Γ). Summarizing we get a commutative diagram of inclusions of rings
ZΓ
/

N (Γ)



D(Γ)



R(Γ)
/

U(Γ).

We will use these inclusions to identify each ring with its monomorphic images.
The following lemma is well-known to the experts, full references are given in [FL16b,
Lemma 1.21].
Lemma 2.1. Let C∗ be a finite chain complex of free left-ZΓ-modules. Then the following
assertions are equivalent:
(1) The L2 -Betti numbers of C∗ are all zero.
(2) The R(Γ)-chain complex R(Γ) ⊗ZΓ C∗ is contractible.
Lemma 2.2. Let Γ be a group. If Γ is torsion-free and if Γ satisfies the Atiyah Conjecture, then the rational closure R(Γ) agrees with the division closure D(Γ) of ZΓ ⊆ U(Γ).
Furthermore, D(Γ) is a skew field.
This lemma is proved in [Lü02, Lemma 10.39] for the Atiyah Conjecture over C with the
division closure of C[Γ] instead of the division closure of Z[Γ], but the proof verbatim implies
Lemma 2.2.
2.2. The polytope homomorphism. Throughout this section let Γ be a torsion-free group
that satisfies the Atiyah Conjecture. By Lemma 2.2 D(Γ) is a skew field. Our goal is to
associate to any element in the multiplicative group of units D(Γ)× = D(Γ) \ {0} an integral
element of G(Γ). We outline the main steps in the construction and refer to [FL16a], where
this map was first introduced, for more details.
Write H := H1 (Γ; Z)/torsion and view H as a multiplicative group. Let pr : Γ → H be
the canonical projection and K be the kernel of pr. Choose a map of sets s : H → Γ with
pr ◦s = idH . We denote by Z[K] ∗s H the ring, often referred to as the crossed
P product of
Z[K] and H, whose underlying abelian group is given by finite formal sums h∈H ah h with
each ah ∈ Z[K] and for which multiplication is extended from the multiplication on Z[K] by
the rule g · h = s(g) · s(h) · s((gh)−1) · gh for g, h ∈ H and by the rule h · k = (hks(h)−1 ) · h
for h ∈ H and k ∈ K. It is straightforward to see that Z[K] ∗s H is a ring and that
Z[Γ] → Z[K] ∗s H
P
P
ag g 7→
ag gs(pr(g))−1 · pr(g)

g∈Γ

g∈Γ

6

STEFAN FRIEDL, WOLFGANG LÜCK, AND STEPHAN TILLMANN

is a ring isomorphism,
which we will sometimes use to identify these two rings. Given a
P
non-zero element h∈H ah h ∈ Z[K] ∗s H we consider the integral polytope
P

P
ah h = (convex hull of h with ah 6= 0) ∈ P(H) = P(Γ).
h∈H

Defining D(K) ∗s H analogously, given any non-zero element f ∈ D(K) ∗s H we obtain the
corresponding polytope P(f ). Since D(K) is a skew field, in particular a domain, we obtain
from elementary arguments that for any non-zero f, g ∈ D(K) ∗s H we have
(1)

P(f · g) = P(f ) + P(g).

We denote by T = (D(K) ∗s H) \ {0} the set of all non-zero elements of the domain
D(K) ∗s H. We can form the Ore localization T −1 (D(K) ∗s H)—a proof of this fact is for
example given in [DLMSY03, Theorem 6.4] or [Lü02, Example 8.16]. There exists a canonical
isomorphism
∼
=
→ D(Γ),
T −1 (D(K) ∗s H) −
which we will use to identify these rings, see e.g. [Lü02, Lemma 10.69]. (Again the lemma
in [Lü02] is stated for the division closure of C[G] but it also holds with the same proof for
the division closure of Z[G].) Now let h = f g −1 ∈ D(Γ) = T −1 (D(K) ∗s H) be non-zero. We
define
P(h) := P(f ) − P(g) ∈ G(Γ).
It follows from (1) that this is well-defined and that this map defines a group homomorphism
P : D(Γ)× → G(Γ). Since the target is abelian this descends to a group homomorphism
P : D(Γ)× /[D(Γ)× , D(Γ)× ] → G(Γ).
One easily checks that this homomorphism is independent of the choice of s.
2.3. The polytope invariant of an L2 -acyclic group of type F . Given a ring R we
denote by K1 (R) the usual K1 -group, as defined in [Sil81, Ro94]. If K is a skew field, then
the Dieudonné determinant, see [Sil81, Corollary 4.3 on page 133] and [Ro94], gives rise to
an isomorphism
∼
=
×
×
×
det : K1 (K) −
→ K×
ab := K /[K , K ].
In the following, given a torsion-free group Γ that satisfies the Atiyah Conjecture we will use
this canonical isomorphism to identify K1 (D(Γ)) with D(Γ)×
ab .
Definition.
(1) An L2 -acyclic pair (X, ϕ) consists of a finite connected CW-complex and
(2)
(2)
a homomorphism ϕ : π1 (X) → Γ such that bi (X, ϕ) = 0 for all i. Here bi (X, ϕ)
denotes the L2 -Betti numbers of the covering space of X corresponding to ϕ, viewed
as a Γ-CW-complex.
(2) Suppose that (X, ϕ : π1 (X) → Γ) is an L2 -acyclic pair and suppose that Γ is torsione the universal cover
free and that it satisfies the Atiyah Conjecture. We denote by X
of X. By picking orientations of the cells of X and by picking lifts of the cells of
e we can view C∗ (X)
e as a chain complex of based free Z[π1 (X)]-left modules.
X to X
e as a chain complex of based free D(Γ)-left
Similarly we can view D(Γ) ⊗Z[Γ] C∗ (X)
modules. We had assumed that (X, ϕ) is L2 -acyclic. Together with Lemmas 2.1
e is acyclic. We denote
and 2.2 this implies that the chain complex D(Γ) ⊗Z[Γ] C∗ (X)

GROUPS AND POLYTOPES

7

by τ (X, ϕ) ∈ K1 (D(Γ))/ ± Γ = D(Γ)×
ab / ± Γ the corresponding torsion as defined in
[Mi66]. Furthermore we define the polytope invariant of (X, ϕ) as
P(X, ϕ) := −P(τ (X, ϕ)) ∈ G(Γ).
The minus sign in the definition of P(X, ϕ) might initially be a little surprising. This
choice of sign ensures that in many situations of interest, the polytope invariant P(X, ϕ) lies
in P(Γ), i.e. it indeed can be represented by a polytope.
The following proposition summarizes some of the key properties of the polytope invariant
of an L2 -acyclic pair. The proof of the proposition follows from standard properties of
Reidemeister torsion and the fact that the map P : K1 (D(Γ)) → G(Γ) is a homomorphism.
We refer to [FL16b, Theorem 2.5] for details.
Proposition 2.3. Let (X, ϕ : π1 (X) → Γ) be an L2 -acyclic pair and suppose that Γ is a
torsion-free group that satisfies the Atiyah Conjecture.
(1) (Induction) If δ : Γ → Π is a monomorphism to a torsion-free group Π that satisfies
the Atiyah Conjecture, then P(X, δ ◦ ϕ) = δ∗ (P(X, ϕ)), where δ∗ : G(Γ) → G(Π) is
the induced map.
(2) (Simple homotopy invariance) If f : W → X is a simple homotopy equivalence of
CW-complexes, i.e. if Wh(f ) = 0 ∈ Wh(π1 (X)), then P(W, ϕ ◦ f∗ ) = P(X, ϕ).
(3) (Homeomorphism invariance) If f : W → X is a homeomorphism, then we have
P(W, ϕ ◦ f∗ ) = P(X, ϕ).
Now we can make the following two definitions.
(1) We say that a group Γ is L2 -acyclic of type F if it admits a finite K(Γ, 1) and if all
its L2 -Betti numbers vanish. If Γ is a Wh-AC-group, then we define
P(Γ) := P(X, id)
where X is any finite K(Γ, 1). It follows from Proposition 2.3 (2) that this definition
does not depend on the choice of X. We refer to P(Γ) as the polytope invariant of Γ.
(2) Let M be a compact manifold and let ϕ : π1 (M) → Γ be a homomorphism to a
group Γ that satisfies the Atiyah Conjecture. As above we say that (M, ϕ) is L2 (2)
acyclic if bn (M, ϕ) = 0 for all n ∈ N0 . Now suppose that (M, ϕ) is L2 -acyclic. We
pick a CW-structure X for M and we define P(M, ϕ) := P(X, ϕ). It follows from
Proposition 2.3 (3) that this definition does not depend on the choice of X. Sometimes
we write P(M) := P(M, id).
The following proposition collects a few more structural properties of the polytope invariant. These are again a consequence of [FL16b, Theorem 2.5].
Proposition 2.4.
(1) Let X = A ∪C B be a decomposition of a finite CW-complex X
into two connected CW-complexes A and B such that C := A ∩ B is also connected.
Let ϕ : π1 (X) → Γ be a homomorphism to a torsion-free group Γ that satisfies the
Atiyah Conjecture. We denote by a : A → X, b : B → X and c : C → X the inclusion
maps. If (A, ϕ ◦ a∗ ), (B, ϕ ◦ b∗ ) and (C, ϕ ◦ c∗ ) are L2 -acyclic, then (X, ϕ) is also
L2 -acyclic and
P(X, ϕ) = a∗ (P(A, ϕ ◦ a∗ )) + b∗ (P(B, ϕ ◦ b∗ )) − c∗ (P(C, ϕ ◦ c∗ )).

8

STEFAN FRIEDL, WOLFGANG LÜCK, AND STEPHAN TILLMANN

(2) Let
i

1 → F −
→ E → B → 1
be a fibration of finite CW-complexes. Let ϕ : π1 (E) → Γ be a homomorphism to a
torsion-free group Γ that satisfies the Atiyah Conjecture. If (F, ϕ ◦ i∗ ) is L2 -acyclic,
then
P(E, ϕ) = χ(B) · i∗ (P(F, ϕ ◦ i∗ )).
(3) Let M be an n-dimensional closed orientable manifold and let ϕ : π1 (M) → Γ be a
homomorphism to a group Γ that satisfies the Atiyah Conjecture. If (M, ϕ) is L2 acyclic, then
P(M, ϕ) = (−1)n+1 · P(M, ϕ) ∈ G(Γ).
It is clear that Theorem 1.1 is an immediate consequence of Propositions 2.3 and 2.4 and
the definitions.
3. Examples
3.1. Elementary examples. We first consider the infinite cyclic group hti. In this case we
take X = K(hti, 1) = S 1 . The cellular chain complex of the universal cover of R is then
isomorphic to
·(1−t)

0 → Z[t±1 ] −−−→ Z[t±1 ] → 0.
It follows that τ (X, id) = (1 − t)−1 and therefore P(hti) = −[0, 1] ∈ G(hti) = G(R). In this
case P(hti) is therefore not represented by a polytope.
Now consider A = hsi × F3 , where F3 denotes, as usual, the free group on three generators.
It follows from the above calculation and from Theorem 1.1 (2) that P(A) is represented
by an interval of length −χ(F3 ) = 2. We also consider B = Γ = hti × (F3 × F5 ). (Strictly
speaking we do not know of a proof that B satisfies the Atiyah Conjecture, the following
discussion implicitly assumes that this is the case so that we can define P(B).) Similar to the
above we see that P(B) is represented by minus an interval of length χ(F3 ) · χ(F5 ) = 8. Now
let C = Z and pick a monomorphism ϕ : C → A that factors through a monomorphism C →
F3 and similarly pick a monomorphism ψ : C → B that factors through a monomorphism
C → F3 × F5 . We denote by Γ the corresponding amalgamated product. It is a consequence
of Theorem 1.1 (2) that P(Γ) is a difference of two intervals and it is straightforward to see
that P(Γ) is neither represented by a polytope nor by minus a polytope.
3.2. Groups with two generators and one relator. In general it is very hard to compute
the polytope invariant, the main difficulty lies in determining the Dieudonné determinant of
a square matrix. There is only one situation in which the calculation of the Dieudonné
determinant is straightforward, namely when the matrix is a 1 × 1-matrix. As we will see,
this observation makes it straightforward to determine the polytope invariant for groups with
two generators and one relator.
We say that a presentation π = hx, y|ri is nice if it satisfies the following conditions:
(1) r is a non-empty, reduced and cyclically reduced word, and
(2) b1 (Γπ ) = 2, where Γπ denotes the group defined by the presentation π.

GROUPS AND POLYTOPES

9

Following [FT15] we will associate to a nice presentation π = hx, y|ri a polytope S(π).
The definition is illustrated in Figure 2. First we identify H1 (Γπ ; Z) with Z2 such that x
corresponds to (1, 0) and y corresponds to (0, 1). Then the relator r determines a discrete
walk on the integer lattice in H1 (Γπ ; R) = Z2 and the polytope S(π) is obtained from the
convex hull of the trace of this walk in the following way:
(1) Start at the origin and walk across Z2 reading the word r from the left.
(2) Take the convex hull C of the set of all lattice points reached by the walk.
(3) An elementary argument, using the fact that r is reduced and cyclically reduced,
shows that one can take the Minkowski difference with the square Q of length one,
i.e. there exists a polytope S(π) with S(π) + Q = C.
Figure 2 illustrates the construction of the polytope for the nice presentation
π = hx, y | yx4yx−1 y −1x2 y −1 x−2 y 2 xy −1 xy −1 x−1 y −2x−3 y 2x−1 i.
For the final Minkowski difference see also Figure 1.
(1) take path determined by the relator
yx4 yx−1 y −1x2 y −1 x−2 y 2 xy −1 xy −1 x−1 y −2 x−3 y 2x−1
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111
0000000000000000000000000000000
1111111111111111111111111111111

111
000
111
000
111
000
000
111
000
111

11
00
00
11
00
11

(2) take the convex hull of
the path defined in (1)

11
00
00
11
00
11

S(π)

000000000000000000000000
111111111111111111111111
111111111111111111111111
000000000000000000000000
000000000000000000000000
111111111111111111111111
000000000000000000000000
111111111111111111111111
000000000000000000000000
111111111111111111111111
000000000000000000000000
111111111111111111111111
000000000000000000000000
111111111111111111111111
000000000000000000000000
111111111111111111111111
000000000000000000000000
111111111111111111111111
000000000000000000000000
111111111111111111111111
000000000000000000000000
111111111111111111111111
000000000000000000000000
111111111111111111111111
000000000000000000000000
111111111111111111111111
000000000000000000000000
111111111111111111111111
000000000000000000000000
111111111111111111111111
000000000000000000000000
111111111111111111111111
000000000000000000000000
111111111111111111111111
000000000000000000000000
111111111111111111111111
000000000000000000000000
111111111111111111111111
000000000000000000000000
111111111111111111111111
000000000000000000000000
111111111111111111111111
000000000000000000000000
111111111111111111111111
000000000000000000000000
111111111111111111111111
000000000000000000000000
111111111111111111111111
000000000000000000000000
111111111111111111111111
000000000000000000000000
111111111111111111111111
000000000000000000000000
111111111111111111111111
000000000000000000000000
111111111111111111111111
000000000000000000000000
111111111111111111111111
000000000000000000000000
111111111111111111111111
000000000000000000000000
111111111111111111111111
000000000000000000000000
111111111111111111111111
000000000000000000000000
111111111111111111111111
000000000000000000000000
111111111111111111111111
000000000000000000000000
111111111111111111111111
000000000000000000000000
111111111111111111111111
000000000000000000000000
111111111111111111111111

111
000
000
111
000
111

111
000
000
111
000
111

11
00
00
11

(3) Minkowski subtract the
square of length one

Figure 2. The polytope S(π) for a presentation π
We now view S(π) as an element in P(Z2 ) = P(Γπ ), where we identify Z2 with H1 (Γπ ; Z)
by sending (0, 1) to x and (0, 1) to y. A priori S(π) ∈ P(Γπ ) is an invariant of the presentation
and not of the underlying group Γπ .
The following theorem gives another strong indication that the polytope is an invariant of
the group.
Theorem 3.1. Let π = hx, y | ri be a nice presentation. If Γπ is torsion-free5 and if Γπ is a
Wh-AC-group, then Γπ is L2 -acyclic of type F and
S(π) = P(Γπ ) ∈ P(Γπ ).
Remark. In [FT15, Theorem 1.3] it was shown S(π) is an invariant of the underlying group if
Γπ is residually a group that is elementary-amenable and torsion-free (without the assumption
that Γπ satisfies the Atiyah Conjecture). In [Wi14, Conjecture 1.9] Wise (see also [BK15,
5The

group Γπ is torsion-free if and only if the word r is not a proper power of another word, see e.g.
[LS77, Proposition II.5.17] for details.

10

STEFAN FRIEDL, WOLFGANG LÜCK, AND STEPHAN TILLMANN

p. 2]) conjectured that most hyperbolic groups hx, y|ri act properly and cocompactly on a
CAT(0) cube complex. By Agol’s Theorem [Ag13] a proof of this conjecture would imply that
such groups are virtually special. By [FST15, Theorem 3.8] together with [AFW15, (H.26)]
this would imply that any word hyperbolic torsion-free group with a nice presentation hx, y|ri
is residually a group that is elementary-amenable and torsion-free. Summarizing, a proof of
Wise’s Conjecture would show that S(π) is an invariant of the underlying group for torsionfree hyperbolic groups with a nice (2, 1)-presentation.
Proof of Theorem 3.1. By [LS77, Proposition III.11.1] the 2-complex X corresponding to the
e and we write Γ = Γπ . As
given presentation is aspherical. We denote the universal of X by X
e is isomorphic
usual we view Z[Γ] as a subring of D(Γ). The chain complex D(Γ) ⊗Z[Γ] C∗ (X)
to
!




x−1

rx ry
y−1
0 → D(Γ) −−−−−−→ D(Γ)2 −−−−−→ D(Γ) → 0

∂r
∂r
where rx := ∂x
and rx := ∂x
denote the Fox derivatives [Fo53] of the word r with respect to
the generators x and y. By [DL07] and Lemmas 2.1 and 2.2 this chain complex is acyclic.
Since y − 1 6= 0 ∈ D(Γ) it follows from standard arguments, see e.g. [Tu01, Theorem 2.2] or
[DFL16, Lemma 3.1] that the torsion of the chain complex equals rx · (y − 1)−1 ∈ D(Γ). So
we obtain

e
P(Γ) = P τ D(Γ) ⊗Z[Γ] C∗ (X)
= P(rx · (y − 1)−1 ) = P(rx ) − P(y − 1).

But by [FT15, Proposition 3.5] the polytope S(π) agrees with P(rx ) − P(y − 1) in P(Γπ ). 

In [FT15, Section 8] we also deal with presentations of the form hx, y|ri, where r is nonempty, reduced and cyclically reduced, but where b1 (Γπ ) = 1. In this case we can also
‘naively’ define a polytope (i.e. an interval) S(π) in H1 (Γπ ; R) = R and the obvious analogue
of Theorem 3.1 holds.
3.3. 3-manifolds. Let N be a 3–manifold. For each φ ∈ H 1 (N; Z) there is a properly
embedded oriented surface Σ, such that [Σ] ∈ H2 (N, ∂N; Z) is the Poincaré dual to φ. Letting
P
χ− (Σ) = ki=1 max{−χ(Σi ), 0}, where Σ1 , . . . , Σk are the connected components of Σ, the
Thurston norm of φ ∈ H 1 (N; Z) is defined as

xN (φ) := min χ− (Σ) | Σ is a properly embedded surface with PD([Σ]) = φ .
Thurston [Th86] showed that xN is a seminorm on H 1 (N; Z) and elementary arguments show
that xN extends to a seminorm xN on H 1 (N; R). We denote by
T (N) := {v ∈ H1 (N; R) | φ(v) ≤ 1 for all φ ∈ H 1(N; R) with xN (φ) ≤ 1}
the dual of the unit norm ball of xN . Thurston [Th86] showed that T (N) is a polytope with
integral vertices.
The following theorem is [FL16b, Theorem 3.35]. The proof relies on the recent work of
Agol [Ag08, Ag13], Przytycki-Wise [PW12] and Wise [Wi09, Wi12a, Wi12b].
Theorem 3.2. For any admissible 3-manifold N 6= S 1 × D 2 that is not a closed graph
manifold we have
T (N) = 2 · P(π1 (N)) ∈ P(π1 (N)).

GROUPS AND POLYTOPES

11

The combination of Theorems 3.1 and 3.2 gives us the following corollary. This corollary
was first proved in [FST15] using a different approach.
Corollary 3.3. Let N be an admissible 3-manifold such that π1 (N) admits a nice presentation π = hx, y|ri. Then
T (N) = 2 · S(π).
3.4. Closed 3-manifolds with a two-generator fundamental group. The following
theorem says that for “small” closed 3-manifolds one can easily obtain the Thurston norm
from the chain complex of the universal cover. This theorem can be viewed as a version
of Corollary 3.3 for closed 3-manifolds. It applies, in particular, to all closed admissible 3–
manifolds of Heegaard genus equal to two. It is known through work of Kobayashi [Ko88]
and Hempel [He01] in combination with Perelman’s solution of the geometrisation conjecture
that if the splitting distance of a genus two Heegaard splitting of a 3-manifold is larger than
two, then the 3-manifold is hyperbolic (whence admissible). Maher [Ma10] used this fact to
show that most 3–manifolds of Heegaard genus two are hyperbolic.
Theorem 3.4. Let N be a closed admissible 3-manifold that is not a graph manifold. We
write π = π1 (N). Suppose N admits a CW-structure with one 0-cell, two 1-cells, two 2-cells
e is of the
and one 3-cell. The corresponding cellular chain complex of the universal cover N
form
!
!
b11

b12

a1

a2
b21 b22
(c1 c2 )
0 → Z[π] −−−−−→ Z[π]2 −−−−−−−→ Z[π]2 −−−→ Z[π] → 0.
Then there exist i, j ∈ {1, 2} with ci 6= 0 and aj 6= 0, and

T (N) = P(b3−i,3−j ) − P(ci ) − P(aj ).
e is acyclic. It thus
Proof. As we pointed out earlier, the chain complex D(π) ⊗Z[π] C∗ (N)
follows that there exist i, j ∈ {1, 2} with ci 6= 0 and aj 6= 0. Since D(π) is a skew field one
can show, similar to [Tu01, Theorem 2.2], that
−1
τ (N) = c−1
i · b3−i,3−j · aj .

This implies that P(π1 (N)) = P(b3−i,3−j ) − P(ci ) − P(aj ). The theorem now follows from
Theorem 3.2.

4. Marked polytopes
A marked polytope is a pair M = (P, V), where P is a polytope and V is a (possibly empty)
subset of the set of vertices of P. We refer to the vertices in V as the marked vertices. If M
and N are two marked polytopes, then we define the (marked) Minkowski sum M + N of
M and N as the Minkowski sum of the corresponding polytopes, where the marked vertices
of the Minkowski sum are precisely those that are the sum of a marked vertex of M and
a marked vertex of N . An example is given in Figure 3, where the marked vertices are
indicated by a dot.
Marked polytopes appear naturally in many contexts:
(1) Let N be a 3-manifold. A class φ ∈ H 1 (N; R) is called fibered if it can be represented
by a non-degenerate closed 1-form. By [Ti70] an integral class φ ∈ H 1 (N; Z) =
Hom(π1 (N), Z) is fibered if and only if there exists a locally trivial fiber bundle

12

STEFAN FRIEDL, WOLFGANG LÜCK, AND STEPHAN TILLMANN

111111111
000000000
000000000
111111111
000000000
111111111
000000000
111111111
000000000
111111111
000000000
111111111
000000000
111111111
000000000
111111111
00
11
000000000
00111111111
11
000000000
111111111

0110
00000
11111
00000
11111
00000
11111
00000
11111
00000
0111111
00000
11111

marked polytope N

marked polytope M

11111111111111
00000000000000
00000000000000
11111111111111
00000000000000
11111111111111
00000000000000
11111111111111
00000000000000
11111111111111
00000000000000
11111111111111
00000000000000
11111111111111
00000000000000
11111111111111
00000000000000
11111111111111
00000000000000
11111111111111
00000000000000
11111111111111
00000000000000
11111111111111
00000000000000
11111111111111
00000000000000M + N
1111111111111111
00

Figure 3. Example of the Minkowski sum of two marked polytopes.
p : N → S 1 such that p∗ = φ : π1 (N) → π1 (S 1 ) = Z. Thurston [Th86] showed
that we can turn T (N) into a marked polytope M(N) which has the property that
φ ∈ H 1 (N; R) = Hom(H1 (N; R), R) is fibered if and only if it pairs maximally with a
marked vertex. This means that there exists a marked vertex v of M(N), such that
φ(v) > φ(w) for any vertex w 6= v in the underlying polytope T (N).
(2) Let Γ be a torsion-free group. We will now see that we can associate a marked polytope
to a non-zero element in Z[Γ]. (In our subsequent discussion of this assignment we will
use the notation introduced in Section 2.2.) We recall that we have an identification
Z[Γ] = Z[K] ∗s H, where
P H = H1 (Γ; Z)/torsion and K = Ker(Γ → H). Given a
non-zero element f = h∈H ah h we consider the marked polytope M(f ) which is
given by the polytope

P
ah h = (convex hull of h with ah 6= 0)
P
h∈H

where we mark a vertex h of P(f ) if ah = ±k for some k ∈ K. If Z[Γ] is a domain,
then for any non-zero f, g ∈ Z[Γ] we have M(f · g) = M(f ) + M(g).
(3) Let π = hx, y|ri be a nice presentation such that Γπ is torsion-free. We showed
in [FT15, Proposition 3.5] that there exists a unique marked polytope M(π) with
∂r
M(π) + M(y − 1) = M( ∂x
).
The set of marked polytopes in a vector space forms a monoid under Minkowski sum. As
illustrated in Figure 4 this monoid does not have the cancellation property. This implies that
the monoid of marked polytopes does not inject into the corresponding Grothendieck group.
Therefore we can not associate a meaningful notion of a difference of marked polytopes to
an L2 -acyclic group π of type F at this point of time.
111111
000000
000000
111111
000000
111111
000000
111111
000000
111111
000000
111111
00
11
000000
00111111
11
000000
111111

+

01
11111
00000
00000
11111
00000
11111
00000
11111
00000
0111111
00000
11111

=

111111111111
000000000000
000000000000
111111111111
000000000000
111111111111
000000000000
111111111111
000000000000
111111111111
000000000000
111111111111
000000000000
111111111111
000000000000
111111111111
000000000000
111111111111
000000000000
111111111111
1010
000000000000
111111111111
000000000000
111111111111

=

111111
000000
000000
111111
000000
111111
000000
111111
000000
111111
000000
11111111
00
000000
111111

000000
111111
111111
000000
111111
+ 000000
000000
111111
11
00
000000
111111
00
11
000000
111111

Figure 4. The Minkowski sum of marked polytopes does not have the cancellation property.
5. The polytope invariant and intrinsic properties of the group
In Section 2.3 we associated to an L2 -acyclic Wh-AC-group Γ of type F its polytope
invariant P(Γ) ∈ G(Γ). In this section we want to determine information encoded in this
invariant.

GROUPS AND POLYTOPES

13

5.1. The thickness of the polytope invariant and splittings of the group. Given a
polytope P in a real vector space V and given φ ∈ Hom(V, R) we refer to
thφ (P) = max{φ(x) − φ(y) | x, y ∈ P} ∈ R≥0
as the thickness of P in the φ-direction. Since thickness is translation invariant we can also
define thφ (P) ∈ R≥0 for any P ∈ P(V ) and since thickness is additive under Minkowski sum
we can also define thφ (P) ∈ R for any P ∈ G(V ).
Given a polytope P in V we refer to
P sym := { 12 (p − q) | p, q ∈ P}
as the symmetrization of P. This definition extends to a symmetrization map on P(V ) and
G(V ). It is clear that the thickness of P depends only on the symmetrization of P.
The following theorem is now a straightforward consequence of Theorem 3.2.
Theorem 5.1. For any admissible 3-manifold N 6= S 1 × D 2 that is not a closed graph
manifold and any φ ∈ H 1 (N; R) we have
thφ (P(π1 (N))) = xN (φ).
Ideally one would like to generalize the statement of Theorem 5.1 to larger classes of groups.
The first problem that arises is that there is no satisfactory purely group theoretic definition
of the Thurston norm. We refer to [FSW15, FSW16] for several ideas and approaches.
In an attempt to generalize Theorem 5.1 we will work with the notion of a splitting of a
group. Let Γ be a finitely presented group and let φ : Γ → Z be an epimorphism. Let B be
a finitely generated group. A splitting of (Γ, φ) over B is an isomorphism
∼
=

→ hA, t | µ(B) = tBt−1 i
f: Γ −
such that the following hold:
(1) A is finitely generated,
(2) B is a subgroup of A and µ : B → A is a monomorphism,
(3) (φ ◦ f −1 )(a) = 0 for a ∈ A and (φ ◦ f −1 )(t) = 1.
It is well-known, see e.g. [BS78] or [St84, Theorem B*], that any such pair (Γ, φ) admits a
splitting over a finitely generated group. We define the splitting complexity of (Γ, φ) as
c(Γ, φ) := min{rank(B) | (Γ, φ) splits over B},
where rank(B) is defined as the minimal number of generators of B.
Theorem 5.2. Let Γ be a torsion-free group that admits a nice presentation hx, y|ri. Furthermore suppose that Γ satisfies the Atiyah Conjecture. Then for any epimorphism φ : Γ → Z
we have
c(Γ, φ) − 1 = thφ (P(Γ)).
Remark.
(1) In [FSW15] it was shown that the statement of the theorem also holds if π
is the fundamental group of a knot complement. But the equality of Theorem 5.2
does not hold for the fundamental groups of all 3-manifolds. For example, if N is
the 3-torus, then π1 (N) = Z3 and it follows from Theorem 1.1 and the discussion in
Section 3.1 that P(π1 (N)) is a point. In particular the thickness for each φ is zero. On
the other hand it is straightforward to see that for any epimorphism φ : π1 (N) → Z
we have c(π1 (N), φ) = 2.

14

STEFAN FRIEDL, WOLFGANG LÜCK, AND STEPHAN TILLMANN

(2) The inequality c(Γ, φ) − 1 ≥ thφ (P(Γ)) was shown in [FT15, Proposition 7.6] if Γ
is residually a group that is elementary-amenable and torsion-free (without the assumption that Γ satisfies the Atiyah Conjecture). As we remarked after Theorem 3.1,
potentially most torsion-free groups with a nice presentation satisfy this condition.
Proof. The inequality c(Γ, φ) − 1 ≤ thφ (P(Γ)) was shown in [FT15, Proposition 7.3]. As
was suggested to us by Nathan Dunfield, the proof of this inequality follows from a careful
reading of the first step in the proof of the Freiheitssatz.
The proof of the reverse inequality follows along the same lines as the proof [FT15, Proposition 7.6] but one needs to replace the Ore localizations of the elementary-amenable and
torsion-free groups by D(Γ). More precisely, it follows easily from the combination of Theorem 3.6(4) and Lemmas 4.3, 6.12 and 6.13 of [FL16a] together with a slight variation on
Theorem 4.1 of [FL16a]. We leave the details to the reader.

5.2. The polytope invariant and its relation to the BNS-invariant. Let Γ be a finitely
generated group. The Bieri–Neumann–Strebel [BNS87] invariant Σ(Γ) of Γ is by definition
a subset of S(Γ) := (Hom(Γ, R) \ {0})/R>0. We refer to [BNS87] for the precise definition,
but in order to give a flavour of the invariant we recall three properties:
(1) An epimorphism φ ∈ Hom(Γ, Z) represents an element in Σ(Γ) if and only if it
corresponds to an ascending HNN-extension. To be precise: if and only if there exists
an isomorphism
f : Γ → hA, t | A = t−1 ϕ(A)ti
where A is a finitely generated group and ϕ : A → A is a monomorphism, such that
φ corresponds under f to the epimorphism given by t 7→ 1 and a 7→ 0 for all a ∈ A.6
(2) A non-trivial homomorphism φ ∈ Hom(Γ, Z) has the property that φ and −φ represent elements in Σ(Γ) if and only if Ker(φ) is finitely generated.
(3) Σ(Γ) is an open subset of S(Γ).
The first two properties follow from [BNS87, Proposition 4.3] (see also [Br87, Corollary 3.2])
and the third one is [BNS87, Theorem A].
It is shown in [BNS87, Theorem E] that given a 3-manifold N the fibered classes of
H 1 (N; R) = Hom(π1 (N), R) correspond precisely to the classes that lie in Σ(π1 (N)). The
following is now a reformulation of the statement of the first example in Section 4.
Theorem 5.3. Let N 6= S 1 × D 2 be an admissible 3-manifold that is not a closed graph
manifold. Then the polytope P(N) admits a marking with the property that for any nontrivial φ ∈ Hom(π1 (N), R) we have
[φ] ∈ Σ(π1 (N))

⇐⇒

φ pairs maximally with a marked vertex of P(N).

For groups with a nice presentation hx, y|ri we obtain a similar theorem.
Theorem 5.4. Let π = hx, y | ri be a nice presentation. A non-trivial class φ ∈ H 1 (Γπ ; R)
represents an element in Σ(Γπ ) if and only if φ pairs maximally with a marked vertex of
M(π).
6Some

authors, e.g. [FK16], call this a descending HNN-extension. We follow the convention used in
[BS78, BNS87].

GROUPS AND POLYTOPES

15

The theorem is stated as [FT15, Theorem 1.1]. In that paper the theorem is proved using
the generalised Novikov rings of Sikorav [Sik87]. It can also be viewed as a reformulation of
Brown’s algorithm [Br87, Theorem 4.3].
Finally a relationship between the polytope invariant and the BNS-invariant was also found
for a different class of groups by Funke–Kielak [FK16]. In order to state their theorem we
need to introduce a few more definitions.
(1) Let ϕ : π → π be a monomorphism of a group π. We denote by
π∗ϕ := hπ, t | t−1gt = ϕ(g), g ∈ πi
the corresponding descending HNN-extension.7 We refer to the epimorphism π∗ϕ → Z
given by g 7→ 0 for all g ∈ π and t → 1 as the canonical epimorphism.
(2) Let P be a polytope in a vector space V and let φ ∈ Hom(V, R). Following [FK16]
we refer to
Fφ (P) = {v ∈ P | φ(v) ≤ φ(w) for all w ∈ P}
as the φ-minimal face of P.
(3) Let V be a vector space and let S = [P] − [Q] ∈ G(V ). Following [FK16] we say that
φ, ψ ∈ Hom(V, R) are S-equivalent if Fφ (P) = Fψ (P) and Fφ (Q) = Fψ (Q). Note that
this definition is independent of the choice of P and Q.
The following is the main result of [FK16].
Theorem 5.5. Let ϕ : F2 → F2 be a monomorphism of the free group on two generators. Let
φ : Γ := F2 ∗ϕ → R be a homomorphism such that the class [φ] ∈ S(Γ) is not represented by
the canonical epimorphism. Then there exists an open neighborhood U of [φ] in S(Γ) such
that for every non-trivial ψ : Γ → R with [ψ] ∈ U that is P(Γ)-equivalent to φ we have
[−φ] ∈ Σ(Γ)

⇐⇒

[−ψ] ∈ Σ(Γ).

6. Questions
We conclude this survey with a long list of questions and conjectures.
Conjecture 6.1. If Γ is a free-by-cyclic group, then P(Γ) ∈ G(Γ) can be represented by a
polytope.
Conjecture 6.2. Let Γ 6= Z be an L2 -acyclic Wh-AC-group of type F that admits a 2dimensional K(Γ, 1). Can P(Γ) ∈ G(Γ) be represented by a polytope?
A proof of Conjecture 6.2 also proves Conjecture 6.1.
Before we state our next question we recall that the Thurston norm of an admissible
hyperbolic 3-manifold N is a norm. (This is a direct consequence of the fact that hyperbolic
admissible 3-manifolds are atoroidal, i.e. any embedded torus is boundary parallel, see e.g.
[BP92, Proposition D.3.2.8].) This implies that if N is an admissible hyperbolic 3-manifold
with b1 (N) ≥ 1, then P(N) = P(π1 (N)) is not a point.
Question 6.3. Let Γ 6= Z be an L2 -acyclic Wh-AC-group of type F that admits a 2dimensional K(Γ, 1). Furthermore suppose that Γ is a non-elementary hyperbolic group and
that b1 (Γ) ≥ 1. Does it follow that P(Γ) 6= 0 ∈ G(Γ)?
7In

[FK16] we authors refer to such an HNN-extension as an “ascending HNN-extension”, whereas here
we stick with the convention eastablished above and that follows [BS78, BNS87].

16

STEFAN FRIEDL, WOLFGANG LÜCK, AND STEPHAN TILLMANN

Conjecture 6.4. Let Γ be an L2 -acyclic Wh-AC-group of type F . If Γ is amenable and if Γ
is not virtually Z, then P(Γ) = 0 ∈ G(Γ).
Question 6.5. Let Γ be an L2 -acyclic Wh-AC-group of type F . Is the BNS-invariant related
to P(Γ)? Does an analogue of Theorem 5.5 hold?
In general it might be too optimistic to expect a positive answer. It seems more likely that
the question can be answered in the affirmative if Γ has a 2-dimensional K(Γ, 1).
It is known that the BNS invariants of metabelian and 3–manifold groups are polyhedral.
An affirmative (even partial) answer to Question 6.5 may establish polyhedrality of BNS
invariants for new families of groups, as well as whether the polyhedra are rational or not.
We can therefore also ask the following question.
Conjecture 6.6. Let Γ be a hyperbolic L2 -acyclic group of type F with a 2-dimensional
K(Γ, 1). Then there exists an integral marked polytope M ⊂ H1 (Γ; R) such that a non-trivial
φ ∈ H 1 (Γ; R) represents an element in Σ(Γ) if and only if φ pairs maximally with a marked
vertex of M.
The combination of Theorem 3.6(4) and Lemmas 4.3, 6.12 and 6.13 of [FL16a] shows that
if Γ is an L2 -acyclic Wh-AC-group of type F , then for any epimorphism φ : Γ → Z we have
X

(−1)n+1 · b(2)
n (Ker(φ : Γ → Z)) = thφ (P(Γ)).

n∈N0

Conjecture 6.7. Let Γ be an L2 -acyclic Wh-AC-group of type F and let n ∈ N0 . Then there
exists a polytope P such that
b(2)
n (Ker(φ : Γ → Z)) = thφ (P)
for any epimorphism φ : Γ → Z.
In Section 5.1 we saw that for 3-manifold groups and many two-generator one-relator
groups the thickness of the polytope invariant is related to the complexity of splittings of the
underlying group.
Question 6.8. Let Γ be an L2 -acyclic Wh-AC-group of type F . What information does the
thickness of the polytope invariant contain?
As we mentioned before, the thickness of a polytope is an invariant of the symmetrized
polytope.
Question 6.9. What information does the polytope invariant contain, that cannot be obtained
from the symmetrized polytope invariant?
One partial answer is given by the discussion of the BNS-invariant. This invariant is in
general not symmetric and if the polytope invariant is related to the BNS-invariant it cannot
be symmetric in general. Nonetheless, there are many groups with empty BNS-invariant and
non-symmetric polytope invariant.
Finally we want to discuss which elements of G(Zn ) can be realized as the polytope invariant of a manifold. Here we say that P ∈ G(Zn ) can be realized by a d-dimensional manifold
if there exists a pair (N, ϕ) where N is a closed L2 -acyclic d-dimensional manifold N such
that π1 (N) is a Wh-AC-group and where ϕ : Zn → H1 (N; Z)/torsion is an isomorphism, such
that ϕ∗ (P) = P(N) ∈ G(π1 (N)).

GROUPS AND POLYTOPES

17

From our above results we know that not all P ∈ G(Zn ) can be realized by manifolds. More
precisely, in Proposition 2.4 we showed that polytopes realized by closed orientable manifolds
have a symmetry. Furthermore in Theorem 3.2 we showed that the polytope invariant of an
admissible 3-manifold N 6= S 1 × D 2 that is not a closed graph manifold can be represented
by a polytope. So we can only hope to realize elements of P(Zn ) ⊂ G(Zn ) by 3-dimensional
manifolds.
We have the following realization result.
Lemma 6.10. Let n ∈ N and let P ∈ G(Zn ). For any d ≥ 7 we can realize P + (−1)d+1 P
by a d-dimensional manifold.
Proof. Let F be a free group on n − 1 generators. We set Γ = F × Z. Then K(Γ, 1) is
2-dimensional and it is L2 -acyclic by [Lü02, Theorem 1.35 (4)]. Furthermore Γ is a Wh-ACgroup by [KLR16, Theorem 2] and [LiL16, Theorem 2.3]. We pick an isomorphism ϕ : Zn →
H1 (Γ; Z) and we pick a set-theoretic section s : H1 (Γ; Z) → Γ of the projection map Γ →
H1 (Γ; Z).
Now let P ∈ G(Zn ). We can find a, b ∈ Z[Zn ] with P = P(a) − P(b). We write
ω := s(ϕ(a)) · s(ϕ(b))−1 ∈ K1 (D(Γ)) = D(Γ)×
ab .
It follows immediately from the definitions that P(ω) = ϕ(P) ∈ G(Γ). Now let d ≥ 7. It
follows easily from a slight generalization of [FL16b, Lemma 2.9] that there exists a closed
orientable d-dimensional manifold N with π1 (N) = Γ such that
d+1

τ (N, idπ1 N ) = ω · ω (−1)

∈ K1 (D(Γ)) = D(Γ)×
ab / ± Γ.

It follows immediately that P(N) = ϕ(P) + (−1)d+1 ϕ(P) ∈ G(Γ).



Question 6.11.
(1) Let P ∈ P(Zn ). Does there exist a closed orientable admissible
3-manifold that realizes P + P?
(2) Let P ∈ G(Zn ) and let d ∈ {4, 5, 6}. Does there exist an L2 -acyclic d-dimensional
closed orientable manifold that realizes P + (−1)d+1 P?
The first question seems to be very hard since by Theorem 3.2 it is a reformulation of the
question of which Thurston norm balls are realized by aspherical 3-manifolds. This question
has been open since the 1970’s. The second question might be more accessible, especially in
dimensions 5 and 6. It is conceivable that in dimension 4 the answer depends on whether
one studies topological or smooth manifolds.
References
[Ag08] I. Agol, Criteria for virtual fibering, J. Topol. 1 (2008), no. 2, 269–284.
[Ag13] I. Agol, The virtual Haken conjecture, with an appendix by I. Agol, D. Groves and J. Manning,
Documenta Math. 18 (2013), 1045–1087.
[AFW15] M. Aschenbrenner, S. Friedl and H. Wilton, 3-manifold groups, EMS Series of Lectures in Mathematics (2015)
[BLR08] A. Bartels, W. Lück and H. Reich, Equivariant covers for hyperbolic groups, Geom. Topol. 12 (2008),
1799–1882.
[BP92] R. Benedetti and C. Petronio, Lectures on Hyperbolic Geometry, Universitext, Springer, Berlin, 1992.
[BNS87] R. Bieri, W. D. Neumann and R. Strebel, A geometric invariant of discrete groups, Invent. Math.
90 (1987), 451-477.
[BS78] R. Bieri and R. Strebel, Almost finitely presented soluble groups, Comment. Math. Helv. 53 (1978),
258–278.

18

STEFAN FRIEDL, WOLFGANG LÜCK, AND STEPHAN TILLMANN

[Br82] K. S. Brown, Cohomology of groups, Graduate Texts in Mathematics 87, Springer, 1982.
[Br87] K. S. Brown, Trees, valuations, and the Bieri-Neumann-Strebel invariant, Invent. Math. 90 (1987),
479-504.
[BK15] J. Button and R. Kropholler, Non Hyperbolic Free-By-Cyclic and One-Relator Groups, preprint
(2015)
[DL07] W. Dicks and P. Linnell, L2 -Betti numbers of one-relator groups, Math. Ann. 337, No. 4 (2007),
855–874.
[DLMSY03] J. Dodziuk, P. Linnell, V. Mathai, T. Schick and S. Yates, Approximating L2 -invariants, and the
Atiyah conjecture, Preprint Series SFB 478 Münster, Germany. Communications on Pure and Applied
Mathematics, vol. 56, no. 7 (2003), 839-873.
[DFL16] J. Dubois, S. Friedl and W. Lück, The L2 -Alexander torsion of 3-manifolds, J. Topol. 9, No. 3
(2016), 889–926.
[Fo53] R. H. Fox, Free differential calculus I, Derivation in the free group ring, Ann. Math. 57 (1953), 547–
560.
[Fr07] S. Friedl, Reidemeister torsion, the Thurston norm and Harvey’s invariants, Pac. J. Math. 230 (2007),
271–296.
[Fr15] S. Friedl, Novikov homology and noncommutative Alexander polynomials, Preprint (2015), to be published the Tim Cochran memorial volume of the J. Knot. Thy. Ram.
[FL16a] S. Friedl and W. Lück, L2 -Euler characteristics and the Thurston norm, Preprint (2016),
arXiv:1609.07805.
[FL16b] S. Friedl and W. Lück, Universal L2 -torsion, polytopes and applications to 3-manifolds, Preprint
(2016), arXiv:1609.07809.
[FST15] S. Friedl, K. Schreve and S. Tillmann, Thurston norm via Fox calculus, preprint (2015),
arXiv:1507.05660.
[FSW15] S. Friedl, D. Silver and S. Williams, Splittings of knot groups, Mathematische Annalen 362 (2015),
401–424.
[FSW16] S. Friedl, D. Silver and S. Williams, The Turaev and Thurston norms, Pac. J. Math. 284 (2016),
365–382.
[FT15] S. Friedl and S. Tillmann, Two-generator one-relator groups and marked polytopes, Preprint (2015),
arXiv:1501.03489.
[Fu16] F. Funke, The integral polytope group, Preprint (2016), arXiv:1605.01217.
[FK16] F. Funke and D. Kielak, Alexander and Thurston norms, and the Bieri-Neumann-Strebel invariants
for free-by-cyclic groups, preprint (2016), arXiv:1605.09067.
[He01] J. Hempel, 3-manifolds as viewed from the curve complex, Topology 40 (2001), no. 3, 631–657.
[KLR16] H. Kammeyer, W. Lück and H. Rüping, The Farrell-Jones Conjecture for arbitrary lattices in
virtually connected Lie groups, Geometry and Topology 20 (2016), 1275–1287.
[Ko88] T. Kobayashi, Casson-Gordon’s rectangle condition of Heegaard diagrams and incompressible tori in
3-manifolds, Osaka J. Math. 25 (1988), no. 3, 553–573.
[Li93] P. A. Linnell, Division rings and group von Neumann algebras, Forum Math. 5 (1993), vol. 6, 561–576.
[LiL16] P. Linnell and W. Lück, Localization, Whitehead groups, and the Atiyah Conjecture, preprint (2016)
[LoL95] J. Lott and W. Lück, L2 -topological invariants of 3-manifolds, Invent. Math. 120 (1995), no. 1,
15–60.
[Lü02] W. Lück, L2 -Invariants: Theory and Applications to Geometry and K-Theory, Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete, 3. Folge, vol. 44, Springer, Berlin, 2002.
[LS77] R. Lyndon and P. Schupp, Combinatorial group theory, Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete, Band 89. Springer-Verlag, Berlin-New York, 1977.
[Ma10] J. Maher, Random Heegaard splittings, Journal of Topology (2010) 3 (4), 997–1025.
[Mi66] J. Milnor, Whitehead torsion, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 72 (1966), 358–426.
[PW12] P. Przytycki and D. Wise, Mixed 3–manifolds are virtually special, preprint (2012).
[Ro94] J. Rosenberg, Algebraic K -theory and its applications, Graduate Texts in Mathematics 147, Springer,
New York, 1994.
[Sc93] R. Schneider, Convex bodies: the Brunn-Minkowski theory, Cambridge Univ. Press (1993)

GROUPS AND POLYTOPES

19

[Sik87] J.–C. Sikorav, Homologie de Novikov associée à une classe de cohomologie réelle de degré un, Thèse
Orsay, 1987.
[Sil81] J. Silvester, Introduction to algebraic K-theory, Chapman and Hall Mathematics Series (1981)
[Sin77] I. M. Singer, Some remarks on operator theory and index theory, In K-theory and operator algebras
(Proc. Conf., Univ. Georgia, Athens, Ga., 1975), pages 128–138. Lecture Notes in Math., Vol. 575.
Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1977.
[St84] R. Strebel, Finitely presented soluble groups, in Group Theory: Essays for Philip Hall, Academic Press,
London, 1984.
[Th86] W. P. Thurston, A norm for the homology of 3–manifolds, Mem. Amer. Math. Soc. 59, no. 339 (1986),
99–130.
[Ti70] D. Tischler, On fibering certain foliated manifolds over S 1 , Topology 9 (1970), 153–154.
[Tu01] V. Turaev, Introduction to Combinatorial Torsions, Lectures in Mathematics, ETH Zürich (2001)
[Wa78] F. Waldhausen, Algebraic K-theory of generalized free products II, Ann. of Math. 108 (1978), 135–256.
[We15] C. Wegner, The Farrell-Jones conjecture for virtually solvable groups, J. Topol. 8 (2015), 975–1016.
[Wi09] D. Wise, The structure of groups with a quasi-convex hierarchy, Electronic Res. Ann. Math. Sci. 16
(2009), 44–55.
[Wi12a] D. Wise, The structure of groups with a quasi-convex hierarchy, 189 pages, preprint (2012), downloaded on October 29, 2012 from
http://www.math.mcgill.ca/wise/papers.html
[Wi12b] D. Wise, From riches to RAAGs: 3–manifolds, right–angled Artin groups, and cubical geometry,
CBMS Regional Conference Series in Mathematics, 2012.
[Wi14] D. Wise, Cubular tubular groups, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 366 (2014), 5503–5521.
Fakultät für Mathematik, Universität Regensburg, Germany
E-mail address: sfriedl@gmail.com
Mathematisches Institut der Universität Bonn, Endenicher Allee 60, 53115 Bonn, Germany
E-mail address: wolfgang.lueck@him.uni-bonn.de
URL: http://www.him.uni-bonn.de/lueck
School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of Sydney, NSW 2006 Australia
E-mail address: stephan.tillmann@sydney.edu.au

