arXiv:1710.03069v1 [math.CO] 9 Oct 2017

WALLS IN MILNOR FIBER COMPLEXES
ALEXANDER R. MILLER
Abstract. For a real reflection group the reflecting hyperplanes cut out on the
unit sphere a simplicial complex called the Coxeter complex. Abramenko showed
that each reflecting hyperplane meets the Coxeter complex in another Coxeter complex if and only if the Coxeter diagram contains no subdiagram of type D4 , F4 ,
or H4 . The present paper extends Abramenko’s result to a wider class of complex
reflection groups. These groups have a Coxeter-like presentation and a Coxeter-like
complex called the Milnor fiber complex. Our first main theorem classifies the groups
whose reflecting hyperplanes meet the Milnor fiber complex in another Milnor fiber
complex. To understand better the walls that fail to be Milnor fiber complexes we
introduce Milnor walls. Our second main theorem generalizes Abramenko’s result
in a second way. It says that each wall of a Milnor fiber complex is a Milnor wall if
and only if the diagram contains no subdiagram of type D4 , F4 , or H4 .

1. Introduction
For a real reflection group the reflecting hyperplanes cut out on the unit sphere a simplicial complex called the Coxeter complex. Abramenko [1] showed that each reflecting
hyperplane meets the Coxeter complex in another Coxeter complex if and only if the
Coxeter diagram contains no subdiagram of type D4 , F4 , or H4 .
The present paper extends Abramenko’s result to a wider class of complex reflection
groups. These groups have a Coxeter-like presentation and a Coxeter-like complex called
the Milnor fiber complex. Our first main theorem (Theorem 1) classifies the groups whose
reflecting hyperplanes meet the Milnor fiber complex in another Milnor fiber complex.
To understand better the walls that fail to be Milnor fiber complexes we introduce
Milnor walls. These are walls with a type-selected set of chambers generating a Milnor
fiber complex. Milnor walls in Coxeter complexes are walls that are Coxeter complexes.
Our second main theorem (Theorem 2) thus generalizes Abramenko’s result in a second
way: it says each wall of a Milnor fiber complex is a Milnor wall if and only if the diagram
contains no subdiagram of type D4 , F4 , or H4 .
As a benefit of Theorem 2 we find that Abramenko’s result extends to give yet another
equivalent condition in a curious classification [5, Theorem 14] with already 11 equivalent
conditions coming from invariant theory, cohomology, combinatorics, and some group
characters related to adding random numbers.
1.1. Fix a nonnegative integer n ≥ 0 and a finite group G of the form
h r1 , r2 , . . . , rn | ripi = 1, ri rj ri . . . = rj ri rj . . . i 6= j i

(1)

where pi ≥ 2, the number of terms on both sides of the braid relation is mij = mji ≥ 2,
and pi equals pj if mij is odd1. The empty set (when n = 0) generates the trivial group.
1For m odd the braid relation says (r r )(mij −1)/2 r = r (r r )(mij −1)/2 so that r is conjugate to r .
ij
i j
i
j i j
i
j
1

2

A. R. MILLER

1.2. Preliminaries. Call a group presentation of the form (1) admissible. Koster [3]
classified admissible presentations and found that the groups are precisely the finite direct products of finite irreducible Coxeter groups and Shephard groups. The classification
implies no group has two different admissible presentations. Write R = {r1 , r2 , . . . , rn }
and call n the rank of G.
1.2.1. The classification uses a graphical notation for admissible presentations. The
diagram Γ of (1) has for each ri a vertex labeled pi , and for each pair ri , rj with mij > 2
an edge labeled mij that connects ri and rj . We agree to suppress the minimal labels
(2’s on vertices and 3’s on edges). We say Γ is connected if it has exactly one connected
component; the diagram with no vertices is not connected. By subdiagram of Γ we mean
a diagram gotten from Γ by removing any number of vertices and all their incident edges.
1.2.2. Write G = G(Γ) and let Γ1 , Γ2 , . . . , ΓN be the connected components of Γ. Then
G = G1 × G2 × . . . × GN ,

Gi = G(Γi )

(2)

where the empty product is the trivial group. It follows that admissible diagrams are
the unions of connected ones. Koster classified the connected ones. Table 1 lists them.
The groups are the finite irreducible Coxeter groups and Shephard groups. Each comes
from just one diagram. Finite irreducible Coxeter groups are the ones with all vertices 2.
Shephard groups are the ones with linear diagram
p1

q1

p2

q2

p3

...

pn−1 qn−1 pn

(3)

The symbol p1 [q1 ]p2 [q2 ]p3 . . . pn−1 [qn−1 ]pn (unique up to reversing term order) is shorthand for the linear diagram (3).
1.2.3. G has a representation analogous to the canonical one for Coxeter groups. Fix a
vector space V over C of dimension n. A reflection in GL(V ) is an element of finite order
whose fixed space V r = ker(r − 1) is a hyperplane, and a finite reflection group is a finite
group generated by reflections. Finite Coxeter groups have a canonical representation
as a real reflection group that we view as a reflection group by extending the base field.
In general the diagram Γ encodes a canonical faithful representation of G as a reflection
group G ⊂ GL(V ) in which each r ∈ R is a reflection [3]. With this identification the
reflections in G are precisely the non-identity elements that are conjugate to a power of
a generator r ∈ R. Call G irreducible if the CG-module V is irreducible. This happens
if and only if Γ is connected. Shephard groups are irreducible; the trivial group is not.
1.2.4. Shephard and Todd classified the finite irreducible reflection groups and named
exceptional ones G4 , G5 , . . . , G37 . Not all of them are Coxeter or Shephard groups. The
Coxeter ones have another set of names that we also use. For example H3 and G23 both
refer to the same Shephard group in Table 1.
1.2.5. Finite reflection groups on V are also the finite groups acting linearly on V whose
algebra of invariant polynomial functions P on V (with respect to gP (v) = P (g −1 v))
is generated by n = dim V homogeneous algebraically independent polynomials Pi . The
basic degrees di = deg Pi are unique and numbered so that d1 ≤ d2 ≤ . . . ≤ dn . If G is
irreducible, then by the classification (see Table 1):
(i) d1 ≥ 2 with equality if and only if G is a Coxeter group.
(ii) d1 < d2 so that P1 is unique up to a constant factor.
If G is irreducible, then FG = P1−1 (1) is called the Milnor fiber of G.

WALLS IN MILNOR FIBER COMPLEXES

3

1.2.6. According to details in §2.1 there is a unique (up to G-isomorphism) abstract
simplicial complex ∆ = ∆(G, R) with simplices (labeled by) the cosets gGI of standard
parabolic subgroups GI = hIi (I ⊂ R) with face relation “gGI is a face of hGJ ” ⇔
gGI ⊃ hGJ , and with G acting on ∆ by left translation g.hGI = ghGI . This is the
classical abstract description of the Coxeter complex when G is a Coxeter group [10].
Call ∆ the Milnor fiber complex of G. It has an explicit geometric realization in V that
is G-homeomorphic to an equivariant strong deformation retract of the Milnor fiber FG
if G is irreducible [9]. In general it is described in §2.1 as the join of the Milnor fiber
complexes of the irreducible factors Gi of G.
Maximal simplices in ∆ have dimension n − 1 and any two can be connected by a
sequence of them in which consecutive terms share a face of codimension 1 so that ∆ is a
chamber complex and maximal simplices are called chambers. A general simplex gGR\I
has vertex set {gGR\{r} : r ∈ I} and dimension |I| − 1. The set I ⊂ R is uniquely
determined by gGR\I . Call I the type of gGR\I and write type (gGR\I ) = I.
1.2.7. The simplices of ∆ that are fixed pointwise by a reflection of G form a subcomplex
we call a wall. Since an element g ∈ G fixing a simplex hGR\I ∈ ∆ effects a typepreserving permutation of the vertices hGR\{r} (r ∈ I) the simplex is in fact fixed
pointwise by g and so the walls of ∆ are
∆r = {σ ∈ ∆ : rσ = σ},

r ∈ G a reflection.

(4)

1.3. Our first theorem extends Abramenko’s result to Milnor fiber complexes.
Theorem 1. Each wall of the Milnor fiber complex ∆ is again a Milnor fiber complex if
and only if the diagram of G contains no subdiagram of type D4 , F4 , H4 , G25 , or G26 .
We prove Theorem 1 in Section 2 by first reducing to the case where G is irreducible
and then using the classification together with some enumerative and topological results
about ∆ that relate to the invariant theory of G.
1.3.1. We recover Abramenko’s result from Theorem 1 by Proposition 10, which tells
us that for Coxeter complexes all walls that are Milnor fiber complexes must be Coxeter
complexes.
Corollary (Abramenko). Each wall of a Coxeter complex is again a Coxeter complex
if and only if the diagram contains no subdiagram of type D4 , F4 , or H4 .

1.4. Our second theorem generalizes Abramenko’s result in another way. The observation is that walls in Milnor fiber complexes can still hold Milnor fiber complexes of the
same dimension in the sense that certain types of chambers in the wall generate a Milnor
fiber complex. We make this precise with the definition of Milnor wall in Section 3, and
then we prove the following theorem which also implies Abramenko’s result.
Theorem 2. Each wall of the Milnor fiber complex ∆ is a Milnor wall if and only if
the diagram of G contains no subdiagram of type D4 , F4 , or H4 .
Remark 1. In [5, Theorem 14] we proved that if G is irreducible, then the diagram of
G contains no subdiagram of type D4 , F4 , or H4 if and only if the Foulkes characters
φ0 , φ1 , . . . , φn for G depend only on fixed-space dimension in the sense that φi (g) = φi (h)
whenever dim V g = dim V h . See [5, Theorem 14] for 9 other equivalent conditions.

4

A. R. MILLER

2. Milnor fiber complexes
In this section we prove Theorem 1 after some preliminaries. §2.1 defines the Milnor fiber
complex. §2.2 defines walls. §2.3 develops some topological results. §2.4 develops some
enumerative results. §2.5 gives a combinatorial description of the Milnor fiber complex
for the full monomial groups. Then in §2.6 we prove Theorem 1.
Recall that the connected components Γi of Γ partition R into disjoint sets Ri so that
G = G1 × G2 × . . . × GN ,

Gi = hRi i.

(5)

Let ni and δi be the rank and smallest basic degree of Gi , so that ni = |Ri | ≥ 1,
n = n1 + n2 + . . . + nN , and δi ≥ 2 with equality if and only if Gi is a Coxeter group.
2.1. The Milnor fiber complex. We define the Milnor fiber complex of G to be the
complex ∆ described by the following theorem. The definition is in terms of cosets gGI
of standard parabolic subgroups GI = hIi (I ⊂ R). If G is a Coxeter group, then the
definition is the standard abstract one for the Coxeter complex of G and the properties
that we list are well known, see [10]. The geometric construction of the Coxeter complex
was generalized to include Shephard groups by Orlik [9]. He called this more general
complex the Milnor fiber complex. The abstract definition of the Coxeter complex was
later shown to hold for the Milnor fiber complex in the Shephard case [6]. For details
about the extension of the definition and the properties to the Shephard case see [4].
The general case of the following theorem follows from the Coxeter and Shephard cases.
Theorem 3. The standard parabolic cosets gGI (g ∈ G, I ⊂ R) with face relation
“gGI is a face of hGJ ” ⇔ gGI ⊃ hGJ
is a simplicial complex ∆. Moreover ∆ is a chamber complex with the following structure:
(i) G acts on ∆ by left translation g.hGI = ghGI .
(ii) ∆ has a G-invariant type function ∆ → {subsets of R} given by type (hGR\I ) = I.
(iii) There exists a type-preserving G-equivariant isomorphism
∆∼
= ∆1 ∗ ∆2 ∗ . . . ∗ ∆N ,

∆k = ∆(Gk , Rk )

(6)

where g.(h1 GI1 ∗ . . . ∗ hN GIN ) = g1 h1 GI1 ∗ . . . ∗ gN hN GIN for g = g1 g2 . . . gN ,
gi ∈ Gi , Ii ⊂ Ri , and where type (h1 GR1 \I1 ∗ . . . ∗ hN GRN \IN ) = I1 ∪ . . . ∪ IN .
Proof. For the case where G is a Coxeter or Shephard group see [10] and [4]. For the
general case it suffices to prove (iii). To this end note that the mapping
h1 GI1 ∗ h2 GI2 ∗ . . . ∗ hN GIN 7→ h1 h2 . . . hN GI1 ∪I2 ∪...∪IN
takes ∆1 ∗∆2 ∗. . .∗∆N bijectively onto ∆ in a type-preserving fashion, and is compatible
with the face relation and G-action. In particular ∆ is a simplicial complex.

We require the following lemma [4, Lemma 3.14 with T = R \ U ] which tells us that
each link in a Milnor fiber complex is again a Milnor fiber complex.
Proposition 4. The link of a simplex gGI in ∆ is isomorphic to ∆(GI , I).



2.2. The walls of the Milnor fiber complex. The simplices of ∆ that are fixed
pointwise by a reflection of G form a subcomplex we call a wall. The following proposition
says that a simplex σ ∈ ∆ is fixed pointwise by g ∈ G if and only if gσ = σ. Write
∆g = {σ ∈ ∆ : gσ = σ},

g ∈ G.

Proposition 5. ∆g = {σ ∈ ∆ : σ fixed pointwise by g}.

(7)

WALLS IN MILNOR FIBER COMPLEXES

5

Proof. An element g ∈ G fixing a simplex hGR\I ∈ ∆ effects a type-preserving permutation of the vertices hGR\{r} (r ∈ I) of the simplex. Since no two of these vertices have
the same type, the element g must fix each of the vertices.

Proposition 5 gives the following description of walls.
Proposition 6. The walls of ∆ are
∆r = {σ ∈ ∆ : rσ = σ},

r ∈ G a reflection.

(8)

Equivalently, the walls of ∆ are (up to isomorphism)
∆(G1 , R1 ) ∗ . . . ∗ ∆(Gi , Ri )t ∗ . . . ∗ ∆(GN , RN ),

t ∈ Gi a reflection.

(9)

Proof. The first part is by Proposition 5. The second part follows by Theorem 3(iii). 
As a benefit of (9) we have the following result that reduces the problem of determining when the walls of ∆ are Milnor fiber complexes to the case when G is irreducible.
Proposition 7. Each wall of ∆(G, R) is a Milnor fiber complex if and only if each wall
of each ∆(Gi , Ri ) is a Milnor fiber complex.
Proof. If the wall in (9) is a Milnor fiber complex, then it follows from Proposition 4
that the wall ∆(Gi , Ri )t of ∆(Gi , Ri ) is a Milnor fiber complex. Conversely, if the wall
∆(Gi , Ri )t of ∆(Gi , Ri ) is a Milnor fiber complex ∆(G′i , Ri′ ), then the wall in (9) is the
Milnor fiber complex of G1 × . . . × G′i × . . . × GN .

2.3. Topological results. The following theorem tells us the homotopy type of the
subcomplex ∆g for any element g ∈ G. In particular, it tells us the homotopy type of
any wall ∆r . It is due to Orlik [9] and appears in the proof of his Theorem 4.1 on p. 145
where he observes that ∆g is a deformation retract of the intersection of the fixed space
V g and the Milnor fiber of G, which has an isolated critical point at the origin.
Theorem (Orlik). If G is irreducible and g ∈ G, then the subcomplex ∆g is homotopy
equivalent to a bouquet of (d1 − 1)p many (p − 1)-spheres, where p = dim V g .
If G is reducible, then the homotopy type of a given ∆g is read off from Orlik’s result
and (6). We highlight the case g = 1. This case is used in the proof of Theorem 1 to help
determine if a wall ∆r is a Milnor fiber complex ∆(W, S) for some possibly reducible W .
Proposition 8. Let ni and δi be the rank and smallest basic degree of the irreducible
factor Gi , so that n = n1 +n2 +. . .+nN . Then the Milnor fiber complex of G is homotopy
equivalent to a bouquet of (δ1 − 1)n1 (δ2 − 1)n2 . . . (δN − 1)nN many (n − 1)-spheres.
Proof. The Milnor fiber complex is the join ∆1 ∗ ∆2 ∗ . . . ∗ ∆N of the complexes ∆i of
the irreducible factors Gi , and Orlik’s theorem with g = 1 tells us that ∆i is a bouquet

of (δi − 1)ni many (ni − 1)-spheres. Hence the result.
From Proposition 8 we get the following characterization of Coxeter complexes as
Milnor fiber complexes that are spheres.
Proposition 9. A Milnor fiber complex is a Coxeter complex if and only if it is a sphere.
Proof. Proposition 8 says ∆ is a bouquet of (δ1 − 1)n1 (δ2 − 1)n2 . . . (δN − 1)nN many
(n − 1)-spheres. If N = 0, then ∆ is a single (−1)-sphere and G is the trivial Coxeter
group h∅i. If N > 0, then the inequalities ni ≥ 1 and δi ≥ 2 imply that the number
of spheres equals 1 if and only if each δi equals 2. Hence by §1.2.5(i) the Milnor fiber
complex ∆ is a single sphere if and only if each Gi is a Coxeter group, i.e., if and only
if G is a Coxeter group.

As a corollary of Proposition 9 we have the following.

6

A. R. MILLER

Proposition 10. A wall of a Coxeter complex is a Milnor fiber complex if and only if
it is a Coxeter complex.
Proof. Consider a wall of a Coxeter complex. If it is a Coxeter complex, then it is a
Milnor fiber complex. If it is a Milnor fiber complex, then because it is also a sphere
(being the equator of a sphere) Proposition 9 tells us that it is a Coxeter complex. 
2.4. Enumerative results. We require some enumerative results about the number of
chambers of a wall. Denote by fk (Σ) the number of k-simplices in a complex Σ so that
fk (Σ) = #{σ ∈ Σ : dim σ = k}.
The chambers of ∆ are indexed by elements of G, and the number of elements of
G equals the product of basic degrees d1 , d2 , . . . , dn . Hence fn−1 (∆) equals d1 d2 . . . dn .
Suppose for the rest of §2.4 that G is irreducible. Then Eq. (13) below tells us that
fn−2 (∆r ) equals d1 d2 . . . dn−1 for any reflection r in G. It is natural to wonder then
if a similar formula holds for elements g where dim V g equals n − 2, n − 3, and so on.
Remarkably this turns out to be the case if and only if the diagram of G does not contain
any subdiagram of type D4 , F4 , or H4 . This is Theorem 11 below. It is a consequence
of a collection of observations from [5] about Orlik–Solomon coexponents.
Continue to suppose that G is irreducible. Let L be the collection of all fixed spaces
V g ordered by reverse inclusion, so that V is at the bottom. This is the same as the
lattice of intersections of reflecting hyperplanes. For
P µ the Möbius function of L and
X ∈ L define BX (t) ∈ Z[t] by BX (t) = (−1)dim X Y ≥X µ(X, Y )(−t)dim Y . Then Orlik
[9] (following Orlik–Solomon in the Coxeter case) showed that
X
fk−1 (∆g ) =
BY (d1 − 1)
(10)
where the sum is over all k-dimensional subspaces Y that lie above V g in L. In particular
fp−1 (∆g ) = BX (d1 − 1)

(11)

for X = V g and p = dim X. Furthermore for X ∈ L of dimension p there exist positive
X
X
integers bX
1 ≤ b2 ≤ . . . ≤ bp such that
X
X
BX (t) = (t + bX
1 )(t + b2 ) . . . (t + bp ).

(12)

Orlik and Solomon determined the bX
i ’s for all irreducible Coxeter and Shephard groups.
The tables in [7, 8] list the bX
i ’s for each X ∈ L when G is an exceptional group of rank
at least 3. Following [5] we make the following remarkable observation.
Theorem 11. If G is an irreducible Coxeter or Shephard group, then
fn−2 (∆r ) = d1 d2 . . . dn−1

(13)

for any reflection r ∈ G, and the following are equivalent:
(i) fn−3 (∆g ) = d1 d2 . . . dn−2 for g ∈ G such that dim V g = n − 2.
(ii) fp−1 (∆g ) = d1 d2 . . . dp for g ∈ G and p = dim V g .
(iii) The diagram of G contains no subdiagram of type D4 , F4 , or H4 .
Proof. As stated above, this is a collection of observations from [5] about Orlik–Solomon
coexponents (see [5, Prop. 13(ii), Thm. 14(a)(k), Pf. of Thm. 14]) as we now explain.
For irreducible Coxeter groups, Eq. (13) was observed by Orlik and Solomon [8, p. 271].
In general [5, Thm. 14(g)(k)] is the equivalence (ii)⇔(iii). So it remains to show that (i)
fails for F4 , H4 , E6 , E7 , E8 , and Dn (n ≥ 4). This is implicit in the proof of [5, Thm. 14].
The exceptional cases F4 , H4 , E6 , E7 , and E8 follow from (11) together with the tables
of [8], and as explained in the proof of [5, Thm. 14], (i) fails for Dn since there is a
certain fixed pace Y defined by x1 = x2 = x3 such that BY (d1 − 1) < d1 d2 . . . dn−2 . 

WALLS IN MILNOR FIBER COMPLEXES

7

2.5. Another description of the Milnor fiber complex of the full monomial
group. Fix an integer m > 1. The full monomial group G(m, 1, n) is the group of all
n-by-n monomial matrices (one nonzero entry in each row and column) whose nonzero
entries are m-th roots of unity. Let ζ be a primitive m-th root of unity and denote by
ek the standard column vector in Cn with 1 in the i-th spot and 0 elsewhere. In cycle
notation, the standard generators r1 , r2 , . . . , rn of G(m, 1, n) are the adjacent transpositions (1 2), (2 3), . . . , (n − 1 n), together with (n ζn), where for example (n ζn) is short
for the n-by-n matrix whose i-th column is ζei if i = n and ei otherwise. In general,
a reflection is conjugate to a power of a generating reflection. This gives a total of m
conjugacy classes of reflections: one indexed by (n − 1 n) and the others by (n ζ k n) for
1 ≤ k ≤ m − 1. The Milnor fiber complex ∆ of G(m, 1, n) is realized (see [9]) as the
union ∆ = ∪gC of all translates gC of the simplex
C = {α1 b1 + α2 b2 + . . . + αn bn : α1 + . . . + αn = 1, αi nonnegative real}

(14)

where bk = (e1 + . . . + ek )/k. This leads to the following convenient description of the
Milnor fiber complex. The flag complex ∆(P ) of a finite poset P is the simplicial complex
with elements of P for vertices and flags {x1 < x2 < . . . < xk : xi ∈ P } for simplices.
Proposition 12. Let ∆n be the Milnor fiber complex of G(m, 1, n). Let r be a reflection
in G(m, 1, n). Let Pn be the collection of sets {α1 ei1 , . . . , αk eik } ordered by inclusion,
where the αi ’s are m-th roots of unity, i1 < . . . < ik , and 1 ≤ k ≤ n − 1. Then
(i) ∆n is equivariantly isomorphic to the flag complex of Pn .
(ii) The subposet Pnr = {X ∈ Pn : rX = X} is isomorphic to Pn−1 .
In particular, each wall of ∆n is isomorphic to ∆n−1 .
Proof. As an abstract simplicial complex ∆n is generated by the translates of the chamber C = {b1 , . . . , bn }. Consider the mapping that takes bk = (e1 + . . . + ek )/k to the set
{e1 , . . . , ek }, so that a face {bi1 , . . . , bik } of C (where i1 < i2 < . . . < ik ) goes to the flag
{e1 , . . . , ei1 } ⊂ {e1 , . . . , ei2 } ⊂ . . . ⊂ {e1 , . . . , eik }.
Extend by the action of G(m, 1, n) to an isomorphism from ∆n onto ∆(Pn ). Hence (i).
The reflection r is conjugate to either t = (n − 1 n) or s = (n ξn) for some root of
unity ξ 6= 1. Hence Pnr is isomorphic to either Pns or Pnt . We show that Pns and Pnt are
isomorphic to Pn−1 . Consider X ∈ Pn and write X = {α1 ei1 , . . . , αk eik }. The reflection
t fixes X if and only if either X contains both αen−1 and αen for some α ∈ C, or X
contains neither αen−1 nor αen for any α ∈ C. Hence the following is an isomorphism:
Pnt → Pn−1 given by X 7→ X \ Cen .
The set X is fixed by s if and only if X = X \ Cen , so Pns is isomorphic to Pn−1 as well.

Hence (ii). The last statement follows: ∆rn ∼
= ∆(Pnr ) ∼
= ∆(Pn−1 ) ∼
= ∆n−1 .
2.6. Proof of Theorem 1. It suffices to assume that G is irreducible by Proposition 7.
Coxeter diagram with no subdiagram of type D4 , F4 , or H4 . In this case, Abramenko
tells us that each wall is a Coxeter complex, and hence a Milnor fiber complex.
Coxeter diagram with a subdiagram of type D4 , F4 , or H4 . Since ∆ is a Coxeter complex,
Proposition 10 tells us that any wall of ∆ that is a Milnor fiber complex must be a Coxeter
complex. But Abramenko tells us that not all walls of ∆ are Coxeter complexes. Hence
not all walls of ∆ are Milnor fiber complexes.
Full monomial groups G(m, 1, n) (m ≥ 2). Proposition 12 says that any wall of the Milnor fiber complex of G(m, 1, n) is isomorphic to the Milnor fiber complex of G(m, 1, n − 1).
Groups of rank 1 and 2. This case is clear.

8

A. R. MILLER

The remaining exceptional groups: G25 , G26 , G32 . Here we use Orlik’s theorem (see §2.3),
Proposition 8, and the cell counts of Theorem 11.
Group G25 . This is the rank-3 group with symbol 3[3]3[3]3. The basic degrees are
6, 9, 12. Fix a wall ∆r . It is 1-dimensional with 54 chambers by (13), and it has the
homotopy type of a 52 -fold bouquet of 1-spheres by Orlik’s theorem. If the wall is a Milnor
fiber complex ∆(W, S), then because ∆(W, S) has dimension |S| − 1 with chambers
indexed by the elements of W , the group W must be a rank-2 group with 54 elements.
If W is reducible, then it must therefore be of the form Zj × Zk for some j, k ∈ N such
that jk = 54 and (j − 1)(k − 1) = 52 by Proposition 8. This is impossible. So W must be
irreducible with basic degrees d1 , d2 satisfying d1 d2 = 54 and (d1 − 1)2 = 52 . But from
the classification (see Table 1) we find that there is no irreducible Coxeter or Shephard
group of rank 2 whose basic degrees are 6 and 9. So no wall of the Milnor fiber complex
of G25 is again a Milnor fiber complex.
Group G26 . This is the rank-3 group with symbol 3[3]3[4]2. The basic degrees are
6, 12, 18. Consider the wall ∆r1 cut out by the generator r1 that commutes with the one
of order 2. It is 1-dimensional with 72 chambers and the homotopy type of a 52 -fold
bouquet of 1-spheres. If it is a Milnor fiber complex ∆(W, S), then W is a rank-2 group
with 72 elements. W must be irreducible because otherwise it is of the form Zj × Zk and
there are no integers j, k ∈ N such that jk = 72 and (j − 1)(k − 1) = 52 . Thus W is an
irreducible rank-2 group whose basic degrees d1 , d2 satisfy d1 d2 = 72 and (d1 − 1)2 = 52 .
Hence d1 = 6 and d2 = 12. According to the classification (see Table 1) there are only
two such groups: the group G5 whose symbol is 3[4]3, and the group G(6, 1, 2) whose
symbol is 2[4]6.
Vertices in ∆(W, S) are cosets whsi i in W of the cyclic groups hsi i for si ∈ S. Edges
of ∆(W, S) are the cosets {w} (w ∈ W ) and the incidence relation is containment. So
∆(W, S) has |W |/|hsi i| vertices of degree |hsi i| for i = 1, 2, and this accounts for all
vertices. It follows from this discussion that the Milnor fiber complex of G5 is 3-regular
(all vertices have degree 3), and the Milnor fiber complex of G(6, 1, 2) has 12 vertices
of degree 6 and 36 vertices of degree 2. We claim that these vertex-degree distributions
are different from the vertex-degree distribution in ∆r1 , and in turn ∆r1 is not a Milnor
fiber complex. To this end it is enough to show that there is a vertex of degree 4 in ∆r1 .
Consider the vertex of ∆ indexed by H = hr1 , r2 i. This vertex is fixed (under left
multiplication) by r1 and therefore belongs to ∆r1 . We claim that it has degree 4 in ∆r1 .
In ∆ the edges incident to H are the cosets of hr2 i and hr1 i in H. The number of these
cosets fixed by r1 therefore equals the degree of H as a vertex in ∆r1 . Since H is the
group G4 with symbol 3[3]3 whose basic degrees are 4 and 6, Eq. (13) tells us that the
number of these cosets in H fixed by r1 equals 4. This concludes the present case.
Group G32 . This is the rank-4 group with symbol 3[3]3[3]3[3]3 and basic degrees
12, 18, 24, 30. Fix a wall. It is 2-dimensional with 5184 chambers and the homotopy type
of a 113 -fold bouquet of 2-spheres. Suppose that the wall is a Milnor fiber complex
∆(W, S). Then W must be a rank-3 group with 5184 elements. It can not be a product
of 3 rank-1 groups Zi × Zj × Zk because no i, j, k ∈ N satisfy ijk = 5184 and (i − 1)(j −
1)(k − 1) = 113 . And it can not be the product of a rank-1 group Zk and an irreducible
rank-2 group H because then for d1 the smallest basic degree of H we would have that
k|H| = 5184 and (k − 1)(d1 − 1)3 = 113 , so that k = 12, d1 = 12, and |H| = 432, while
the only irreducible rank-2 Coxeter or Shephard group with 432 elements is a dihedral
group whose smallest basic degree equals 2. Hence W must be an irreducible rank-3
Coxeter or Shephard group. Therefore the smallest basic degree d1 of W must satisfy
(d1 −1)3 = 113 . But Table 1 shows that no irreducible rank-3 Coxeter or Shephard group
has 5184 elements and smallest basic degree d1 equal to 12.


WALLS IN MILNOR FIBER COMPLEXES

9

3. Milnor walls
Write Ω = ∪σ∈Ω {τ ∈ ∆ : τ ⊂ σ} for the simplicial complex generated by a family of
simplices Ω ⊂ ∆. Let R
k be the set of all k-element subsets of R, so that
 
R
= {type σ : σ ∈ ∆, dim σ = k − 1}.
k

R
Definition 1. A wall ∆r of ∆ is a Milnor wall if for some F ⊂ n−1
the subcomplex
(∆r )F = {σ ∈ ∆r : type σ ∈ F }

(15)

is a Milnor fiber complex of dimension n − 2. A proper Milnor wall is a Milnor wall that
is not a Milnor fiber complex.

R
Any wall ∆r can be written as (∆r )F for F = n−1
. Therefore walls that are Milnor
fiber complexes are Milnor walls. These are the non-proper Milnor walls. They are the
only kind of Milnor wall found in Coxeter complexes. This is the following lemma.
Lemma 13. Coxeter complexes have no proper Milnor walls.
Proof. A wall in an (n − 1)-dimensional Coxeter complexes is an (n − 2)-sphere, and
an (n − 2)-dimensional Milnor fiber complex is a bouquet of (n − 2)-spheres. Therefore,
removing any chambers from a wall of an (n − 1)-dimensional Coxeter complex gives
something that is not a Milnor fiber complex of dimension n − 2.

Proposition 14. A wall of a Coxeter complex is a Milnor wall if and only if the wall
is a Coxeter complex.
Proof. Suppose Σ is a Milnor wall of a Coxeter complex. Then Lemma 13 implies that
Σ is a Milnor fiber complex. Since Σ is a wall of a Coxeter complex, it follows from
Proposition 10 that Σ is a Coxeter complex. The other direction is clear: a wall of a
Coxeter complex that is itself a Coxeter complex is a (non-proper) Milnor wall.

Proposition 15. Each wall of ∆(G, R) is a Milnor wall if and only if each wall of each
∆(Gi , Ri ) is a Milnor wall.
Proof. Consider a wall ∆r = ∆(G1 , R1 ) ∗ . . . ∗ ∆(Gi , Ri )t ∗ . . . ∗ ∆(GN , RN ), so that
t ∈ Gi is a reflection, and write ni = |Ri |.
t
Suppose ∆(Gi , Ri )t is a Milnor wall, so
 that (∆(Gi , Ri ) )Fi is a Milnor fiber complex
Ri
of dimension ni − 2 for some Fi ⊂ ni −1 . Put F = {(R \ Ri ) ∪ S : S ∈ Fi }, so that
(∆r )F = ∆(G1 , R1 ) ∗ . . . ∗ (∆(Gi , Ri )t )Fi ∗ . . . ∗ ∆(GN , RN ).

(16)

Since Theorem 3(iii) tells us that a join of Milnor fiber complexes is again a Milnor fiber
complex, it follows that (∆r )F is a Milnor fiber complex of dimension n − 2. Hence ∆r
is a Milnor wall.
r
Now suppose ∆r is a Milnor
 wall. Then (∆ )F is an (n t− 2)-dimensional Milnor fiber
R
complex for some F ⊂ n−1 . The subcomplex ∆(Gi , Ri ) has dimension |Ri | − 2, and
hence no simplex of type Ri . So the wall ∆r has no simplex of type R \ {s} for s ∈ Rj ,
j 6= i. Hence F ⊂ {R \ {s} : s ∈ Ri }. But then for Fi = {S ∩ Ri : S ∈ F } we have (16).
Since (∆r )F is an (n − 2)-dimensional Milnor fiber complex in which (∆(Gi , Ri )t )Fi is
the link of any simplex of type R \ Ri , it follows from Proposition 4 that (∆(Gi , Ri )t )Fi
is a Milnor fiber complex of dimension ni − 2. So ∆(Gi , Ri )t is a Milnor wall.


10

A. R. MILLER

3.1. Proof of Theorem 2. It suffices to assume that G is irreducible by Proposition 15.
Suppose that the diagram of G contains no subdiagram of type D4 , F4 , or H4 , and
that G is not G25 , G26 , or G32 . Then Theorem 1 tells us that each wall of ∆ is a Milnor
fiber complex. Hence each wall of ∆ is a Milnor wall.
Suppose now the diagram of G contains a subdiagram of type D4 , F4 , or H4 . By
the irreducibility of G and the classification (Table 1), G must be a Coxeter group.
Then Abremenko’s result tells us that not all walls of ∆ are Coxeter complexes, and
Proposition 14 tells us that the Milnor walls of ∆ are the walls of ∆ that are again
Coxeter complexes. So in this case we conclude that not all walls of ∆ are Milnor walls.
Finally suppose G is G25 , G26 , or G32 . The object is to show that all walls are Milnor
walls. The remainder of the proof explains how this claim follows from Orlik’s original
construction of the Milnor fiber complex ∆ together with some observations made by
Coxeter about the regular complex polytopes associated to G25 , G26 , and G32 .
A regular complex polytope [2, p. 115] is a certain collection P of affine subspaces
in Cn with incidence relation given by proper inclusion subject to some conditions. The
symmetry group of a regular complex polytope is a Shephard group G and the Milnor
fiber complex of the Shephard group is constructed in [9] as a geometric realization of
the flag complex of the poset of simplices of P, whose k-simplices are the flags F =
(F (0) ( F (1) ( . . . ( F (k) ) of faces F (i) ∈ P; see [9, Thm. 5.1]. Index the generators of
the Shephard group starting with 0 instead of 1, so that R = {r0 , r1 , . . . , rn−1 }. Then a
flag F corresponds in the Milnor fiber complex to a coset of hR \ {rdim F : F ∈ F }i,
whose type is {rdim F : F ∈ F }; see [4].
Coxeter considered the section of P by a reflecting hyperplane H. This is the set
{F ∈ P : F ⊂ F ′ ⊂ H for some F ′ ∈ P such that dim F ′ = n − 2}.

(17)

He observed the following [2, pp. 123, 132]: if G = G25 , then each section of P by
a reflecting hyperplane is a regular complex polytope for G(3, 1, 2); if G = G26 , then
each section of P by a reflecting hyperplane is a regular complex polytope for either
G(3, 1, 2) or G(6, 1, 2); and if G = G32 , then each section of P by a reflecting hyperplane
is a regular complex polytope for G26 . These observations translate into the following
statements about Σ = (∆(G, R)r )F for F = {R \ {rn−1 }} and r ∈ G a reflection.
a. If G = G25 , then Σ is isomorphic to the Milnor fiber complex of G(3, 1, 2).
b. If G = G26 , then Σ is isomorphic to the Milnor fiber complex of G(3, 1, 2) or G(6, 1, 2).
c. If G = G32 , then Σ is isomorphic to the Milnor fiber complex of G26 .
Hence if G is G25 , G26 , or G32 , then all walls of ∆(G, R) are Milnor walls.



References
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.

P. Abramenko, Walls in Coxeter complexes. Geom. Dedicata 49 (1994) 71–84.
H. S. M. Coxeter, Regular complex polytopes, 2nd ed., Cambridge University Press, 1991.
D. W. Koster, Ph.D. Thesis. University of Wisconsin, Madison, 1975.
A. R. Miller, Reflection arrangements and ribbon representations. European J. Combin. 39 (2014)
24–56.
A. R. Miller, Foulkes characters for complex reflection groups. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 143 (2015)
3281–3293.
P. Orlik, V. Reiner, and A. V. Shepler, The sign representation for Shephard groups. Math. Ann.
322 (2002) 477–492.
P. Orlik and L. Solomon, Arrangements defined by unitary reflection groups. Math. Ann. 261 (1982)
339–357.
P. Orlik and L. Solomon, Coxeter arrangements. Proc. Sympos. Pure Math. 40 (1983) 269–291.
P. Orlik, Milnor fiber complexes for Shephard groups. Adv. Math. 83 (1990) 135–154.
J. Tits, Buildings of spherical type and finite BN-pairs. Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Vol. 386,
1974.

WALLS IN MILNOR FIBER COMPLEXES

G

Symbol/diagram

Basic degrees

Zm
I2 (2m)
I2 (2m − 1)
G4
G5
G6
G8
G9
G10
G14
G16
G17
G18
G20
G21
G23 (H3 )
G25
G26
G28 (F4 )
G30 (H4 )
G32

m
2[2m]2
2[2m − 1]2
3[3]3
3[4]3
3[6]2
4[3]4
4[6]2
4[4]3
3[8]2
5[3]5
5[6]2
5[4]3
3[5]3
3[10]2
2[3]2[5]2
3[3]3[3]3
3[3]3[4]2
2[3]2[4]2[3]2
2[3]2[3]2[5]2
3[3]3[3]3[3]3

m
2, 2m
2, 2m − 1
4, 6
6, 12
4, 12
8, 12
8, 24
12, 24
6, 24
20, 30
20, 60
30, 60
12, 30
12, 60
2, 6, 10
6, 9, 12
6, 12, 18
2, 6, 8, 12
2, 12, 20, 30
12, 18, 24, 30

G35 (E6 )

2, 5, 6, 8, 9, 12

G36 (E7 )

2, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 18

G37 (E8 )

2, 8, 12, 14, 18, 20, 24, 30

An
Dn+1

2[3]2 . . . 2[3]2[3]2
...

2, 3, . . . , n + 1
2, 4, . . . , 2n, n + 1

G(m, 1, n)
2[3]2 . . . 2[3]2[4]m
m, 2m, . . . , nm
Table 1. (m ≥ 2) The finite irreducible Coxeter and Shephard groups,
their diagrams, and their basic degrees.

Fakultät für Mathematik, Universität Wien, Wien, Austria
E-mail address: alexander.r.miller@univie.ac.at

11

