GROMOV-HYPERBOLICITY OF THE RAY GRAPH AND
QUASIMORPHISMS ON A BIG MAPPING CLASS GROUP

arXiv:1802.02715v1 [math.GT] 8 Feb 2018

JULIETTE BAVARD

The goal of these notes is to translate1 [Bav16], which was written in French in
September 2014.
Abstract. The mapping class group Γ of the complement of a Cantor set in
the plane arises naturally in dynamics. We show that the ray graph, which is
the analog of the complex of curves for this surface of infinite type, has infinite
diameter and is hyperbolic. We use the action of Γ on this graph to find
an explicit non trivial quasimorphism on Γ and to show that this group has
infinite dimensional second bounded cohomology. Finally we give an example
of a hyperbolic element of Γ with vanishing stable commutator length. This
carries out a program proposed by Danny Calegari.

1. Introduction
1.1. Big mapping class group and dynamics. Let S be a connected, orientable
surface, which is not necessarily assumed to have finite topological type (i.e. S can
be a compact surface with infinitely many punctures, or a surface with infinite
genus, etc). The mapping class group of S, that we will denote by MCG(S), is the
group of preserving orientation homeomorphisms of S up to isotopy. If we know
many characteristics of mapping class groups of finite type surfaces, those of infinite
type surfaces have been less studied. However, as Danny Calegari explained in his
blog "Big mapping class groups and dynamics" [Cal09a], those "big" mapping class
groups appear naturally in dynamical problems, in particular through the following
construction (see [Cal09a]).
Let us denote by Homeo+ (R2 ) the group of homeomorphisms of the plane which
preserve the orientation. Let G be a subgroup of Homeo+ (R2 ). If the orbit G · p of
a point p ∈ R2 is bounded, then there exists a morphism from G to MCG(R2 − K),
where K is either a finite set, or a Cantor set. Indeed, the union K̃ of the closure
of the orbit G · p with the bounded connected components of its complement is a
compact set, invariant by G, and whose complement is connected. The group G
acts on the quotient of the plane that we get by collapsing each of the connected
components of K̃. This quotient is homeomorphic to the plane (by a theorem of
Moore). The image of K̃ in the quotient is a subset K of the plane, which is totally
disconnected. Up to replace K by one of its subset, we can assume that K is
minimal, i.e. every orbit G · q with q ∈ K is dense in K. Because K is compact, it
is either a finite set, or a Cantor set. This construction gives us a morphism from
G to MCG(R2 − K).
The mapping class group of R2 minus finitely many points has a finite index
subgroup isomorphic to a braid group quotiented by its center, and thus has been
1

Any improvement/comment on this translation is welcome at juliette.bavard@univ-rennes1.fr.
1

2

JULIETTE BAVARD

well studied. In this paper, we will focus on the other case, where K is a Cantor
set. We will denote:
Γ := MCG(R2 − Cantor).
In [Cal04], Calegari proves that there exists an injective morphism from Γ to
Homeo+ (S1 ). In particular, this is the first step to show that a subgroup of diffeomorphisms of the plane which preserves orientation and which has a bounded orbit
is circularly orderable. To establish more properties of the group Γ, we carry here
out a program proposed by Calegari in [Cal09a].
1.2. The ray graph. A central object in the study of mapping class groups of
finite type surfaces is the curve complex. This is a simplicial complex associated
to each surface, whose simplexes are the sets of isotopy classes of essential simple
closed curves on the surface which have disjoint representatives. The Gromovhyperbolicity of this complex, established by Howard Masur and Yair Minsky (see
[MM99]), is a strong tool to study these groups. In the case of the group Γ that
we care about, the curve complex of the plane minus a Cantor set is not very
interesting from a large scale point of view: it has, indeed, diameter 2. Danny
Calegari suggested to replace this complex by the ray graph, and defined it in the
following way (see Figure 1 for examples of rays):
Definition (Calegari [Cal09a]). The ray graph is the graph whose vertex set is the
set of isotopy classes of proper rays, with interior in the complement of the Cantor
set K, from a point in K to infinity, and whose edges (of length 1) are the pairs of
such rays that can be realized disjointly.

∞
α

β

γ
α

γ

β

Figure 1. Example of three rays on the sphere, and the associated
subgraph of the ray graph: d(α, β) = 2 and d(α, γ) = d(β, γ) = 1.
We prove here the following results:
Theorem (2.6). The ray graph has infinite diameter.
Theorem (3.15). The ray graph is Gromov-hyperbolic.
Theorem (4.2). There exists an element h ∈ Γ which acts by translation on a
geodesic axis of the ray graph.
These results allow us to see Γ as a group acting non trivially on a Gromovhyperbolic space. We then use this action to construct non trivial quasimorphisms
on Γ.

RAY GRAPH AND QUASIMORPHISMS ON A BIG MAPPING CLASS GROUP

3

1.3. Quasimorphisms and bounded cohomology. A quasimorphism on a group
G is a map q : G → R such that there exists a constant Dq , called default of q,
which satisfies the following inequality for all a, b ∈ G:
|q(ab) − q(a) − q(b)| ≤ Dq .
The first examples of quasimorphisms are morphisms and bounded functions. These
examples are called trivial quasimorphisms. We say that a quasimorphism q is non
n
trivial if the quasimorphism q̃ defined by q̃(a) = limn→∞ q(an ) for all a ∈ G is not
a morphism.
The space of classes of non trivial quasimorphisms on a group G, that we will
denote by Q̃(G), is defined as the quotient of the space of quasimorphisms on G
by the direct sum of the subspace of bounded function and the subspace of real
morphisms on G. Note that the existence of non trivial quasimorphisms on G is
equivalent to the existence of non zero elements in Q̃(G).
The space Q̃(G) coincides with the kernel of the natural morphism which sends
the second group of bounded cohomology Hb2 (G; R) of G in the second group of cohomology H 2 (G; R) of G (see for example Barge & Ghys [BG88] and Ghys [Ghy01]
for more details on bounded cohomology of groups). The study of this space Q̃(G)
gives information on the group G: for example, we know that it is trivial when G
is amenable (see Gromov [Gro82]), or when G is a cocompact irreducible high rank
lattice (see Burger & Monod [BM99]).
In [BF02], Mladen Bestvina and Koji Fujiwara proved that Q̃(G) has infinite
dimension when G is the mapping class group of a finite type surface. This result has
many consequences, and in particular the authors proved that if H is an irreducible
lattice in a connected semi-simple Lie group with no compact factors, with finite
center, and of rank greater than 1, then every morphism from H to the mapping
class group of a finite type surface has finite image.
These results, as well as potential applications in dynamics, motivate the research
of non trivial quasimorphims on MCG(R2 − Cantor) proposed by Calegari [Cal09a].
We show here the following result:
Theorem (4.9). The space Q̃(Γ) of classes of non trivial quasimorphisms on Γ has
infinite dimension.
In particular, this implies that the stable commutator length is unbounded on Γ.
1.4. Stable commutator length. When G is a group, we denote by [G, G] its
derived subgroup, i.e. the subgroup of G generated by commutators. For all a ∈
[G, G], we denote by cl(a) the commutator length of a, i.e. the smallest number of
commutators whose product is equal to a. We defined the stable commutator length
of a by:
cl(an )
.
scl(a) := lim
n→+∞
n
In particular, this quantity is invariant by conjugation (see Calegari [Cal09b] for
more details on the stable commutator length). The study of this quantity is related
to non trivial quasimorphisms by a duality theorem: Christophe Bavard proved in
[Bav91] that the space of classes of non trivial quasimorphisms on a group G is
trivial if and only if all the elements of [G, G] have vanishing scl.
In the case of Γ that we are interested in, Danny Calegari showed in [Cal09a]
that if g ∈ Γ has a bounded orbit on the ray graph, then scl(g) = 0. This property

4

JULIETTE BAVARD

distinguishes the action of Γ on the ray graph from the action of mapping class
group of finite type surfaces on curve complexes: indeed, Endo & Kotschick [EK01]
and Korkmaz [Kor04] proved that Dehn twists (which have bounded orbits on curve
complexes) have positive scl.
In the finite type setting, we now know how to characterize precisely the elements with vanishing scl in terms of the Nielsen-Thurston classification (see Bestvina, Bromberg & Fujiwara [BBF]). For Γ, one could ask whether the converse of
Calegari’s proposition is true: do every elements of Γ with vanishing scl have a
bounded orbit on the ray graph? We exhibit here a loxodromic element of Γ with
vanishing scl (Proposition 5.1), proving that a characterization of the elements of Γ
having vanishing scl would be more refined that the classification between elements
having bounded or unbounded orbits.
1.5. Ideas of proofs.
1.5.1. Infinite diameter. In Section 2, we construct a sequence of rays (αk )k which
is unbounded in the ray graph, proving that the ray graph has infinite diameter.
∞
a1

a2

a3
Figure 2. Construction of a2 from a1 , and of a3 from a2 .
This sequence is constructed by induction from the following idea: if we consider
a representative a1 of some ray and an arc a2 which forms a "tube" in a small
neighborhood around a1 (as in figure 2), then any arc which is disjoint from a2 and
which represents a ray has to starts at infinity and to stop on a point of the Cantor
set, without crossing a2 . Such an arc has to "follow a1 " before it could possibly
escape the tube drawn by a2 and reach a point of the Cantor set.
Now if a3 is an arc representing a ray and which draws a tube in a small neighborhood of a2 (see figure 2), the same phenomenon is true: any arc disjoint from a3
has to "follow a2 " before it could possibly escape the tube drawn by a3 and reach
a point of the Cantor set.

RAY GRAPH AND QUASIMORPHISMS ON A BIG MAPPING CLASS GROUP

5

It follows from these observations that every ray at distance 1 from the ray
represented by a3 has to begin like a2 , which forces every ray at distance 2 from
a2 to begins like a1 : if for example β is the ray represented by an arc which joins
infinity to the end point of a1 and stays in the north hemisphere, then the distance
between β and a3 in the ray graph is at least 3. Indeed, every arc which begins like
a2 or a1 is not homotopically disjoint from β, thus all the representatives of rays
at distance 1 or 2 from the ray represented by a3 intersect any arc homotopic to β.
We then choose a4 which draws a tube around a3 : every ray at distance 1 from
the ray represented by a4 begins like a3 ; this implies that every ray at distance 2
from a4 begins like a2 ; this implies that every ray at distance 3 from a4 begins like
a1 ; and this implies that the distance between the ray represented by a4 and β is
at least 4.
We can keep going by choosing a5 which draws a tube around a4 , etc. For every
k, we get a ray αk represented by ak , and such that every representative of a ray
which is at distance smaller than k from αk begins like a1 , and thus intersects β.
To make all this discussion rigorous, we define in Section 2 a coding for some rays,
and the sequence (αk )k∈N of the rays which draw the needed "tubes". Using the
coding, we show that this sequence is unbounded in the ray graph (Theorem 2.6),
and that it defined a geodesic half-axis in this graph (Proposition 2.7).
1.5.2. Hyperbolicity. In Section 3, we prove that the ray graph is Gromov-hyperbolic
(Theorem 3.15). We define an other graph X∞ whose vertices are isotopy classes of
simple loops on S2 − K, based on infinity, and whose edges are pairs of such loops
having disjoint representatives. We show that this graph X∞ is Gromov-hyperbolic
by adapting the proof of the uniform hyperbolicity of arc complexes with unicorn
paths, given by Sebastian Hensel, Piotr Przytycki and Richard Webb in [HPW].
We then prove that the graph X∞ is quasi-isometric to the ray graph, which
establishes the Gromov-hyperbolicity of the latter. To this end, we define a map
between the ray graph and X∞ , which sends every ray x ∈ Xr to a loop x̂ of
X∞ such that x and x̂ have disjoint representatives. We prove that this map is a
quasi-isometry.
1.5.3. Loxodromic element. In Section 4, we use again the sequence of rays (αk )k
defined in Section 2, which is a geodesic half-axis in the ray graph. We exhibit an
element h ∈ Γ which acts by translation on this axis (Theorem 4.2). The element
h can be represented by the braid of figure 3. The dots represent the Cantor set
K, and each string carries all the dots of the corresponding subset of the Cantor
set. We show that for all k ∈ N, h(αk ) = αk+1 .
∞

h

Figure 3. Representation of the element h ∈ Γ.

6

JULIETTE BAVARD

1.5.4. Quasimorphisms. We then construct non trivial quasimorphisms on Γ. In
[Fuj98], Koji Fujiwara define counting quasimorphisms on groups acting by isometries on Gromov-hyperbolic spaces, generalizing the construction of Brooks [Bro81]
on free groups. Mladen Bestvina and Koji Fujiwara use this construction to prove
that the spaces of classes of non trivial quasimorphisms on mapping class groups of
finite type surfaces have infinite dimension (see [BF02]). The Gromov-hyperbolic
space that they consider is the curve complex of the surface, and they prove that the
action of the mapping class group on this complex is weakly properly discontinuous.
In particular, this property guarantees the non triviality of some quasimorphisms
given by Fujiwara’s construction.
Now that we know that Γ also acts on a Gromov-hyperbolic graph (the ray
graph), Fujiwara’s construction gives us quasimorphisms on Γ. We then need to
prove that some of them are non trivial. Unfortunately, the action of Γ on the
ray graph is not weakly properly discontinuous (see the beginning of Section 4.1).
However, we can count the "number of positive intersections", and use it to prove
that the axis (αk )k is non reversible (Proposition 4.5). This property generalizes
the fact for h to be non conjugated to its inverse. More precisely, we prove that for
every sufficiently long oriented segment w along this axis (αk )k , if some element of Γ
maps w in a neighborhood of (αk )k , then the image of w by this element is oriented
in the same direction than w. This property of the axis (αk )k , as well as the action
of h on this axis, help us to construct an explicit non trivial quasimorphism on Γ
(Proposition 4.8).
We then use again the element h ∈ Γ, as well as a conjugate of its inverse, to show
using another theorem of Bestvina and Fujiwara [BF02] and the Proposition 4.5 of
non-reversibility, that the space Q̃(Γ) of classes of non trivial quasimorphisms on Γ
has infinite dimension (Theorem 4.9).
1.5.5. Scl. Finally, we give an example of an element of Γ with vanishing scl and a
loxodromic action on the ray graph.
1.6. Acknowledgments. I thank my PhD advisor, Frédéric Le Roux, for his great
availability, his numerous advices, and his careful reviews of the different (french)
versions of this text. I thank Danny Calegari for his interest to this work, and
for suggesting to add an example of a loxodromic element with vanishing scl, in
addition to the questions asked on his blog... I also thank Nicolas Bergeron for his
explanations around hyperbolic surfaces.
This work was supported by grants from Région Ile-de-France2.
2. First study of the ray graph: infinite diameter and geodesic
half-axis
We show here that the ray graph has infinite diameter. We construct a sequence
of rays (αn )n≥0 and we show that this sequence is unbounded in the ray graph.
More precisely, we code some rays by sequences of segments, to be able to handle
them more easily during the proofs. We define with this coding the sequence of
rays (αn )n that we care about. Finally, we show that this sequence is unbounded
in the ray graph, and that it defines a geodesic half-axis in the graph. The results
of this section will be used in Section 4.
2And the author benefits from the support of the French government “Investissements d’Avenir”,
program ANR-11-LABX-0020-01, while translating this text in English.

RAY GRAPH AND QUASIMORPHISMS ON A BIG MAPPING CLASS GROUP

7

2.1. Preliminaries. In the rest of the paper, we will use the following notations,
propositions and vocabulary.
Cantor set K. We denote by K a Cantor set embedded in S2 , and we choose a
point of S2 − K that we denote by ∞. We identify R2 − K and S2 − (K ∪ {∞}). It
is known that if K 0 is another Cantor set embedded in S2 , and if ∞0 is a point of
S2 − K 0 , then there exists a homeomorphism of S2 which maps K 0 on K and ∞0 on
∞ (see for example the appendix A of Béguin, Crovisier & Le Roux [BCLR07]).
Arcs, homotopies and isotopies. Let a : [0, 1] → S2 be a continuous map such that
{a(0)} and {a(1)} are included in K ∪ {∞}, and such that a(]0, 1[) is included in
S2 − (K ∪ {∞}). We call arc this map a, and to simplify we call a again the image
of ]0, 1[ by a. If moreover the map a is injective, we say that a is a simple arc of
S2 − (K ∪ {∞}).
We say that two arcs a and b of S2 − (K ∪ {∞}) are homotopic if there exists a
continuous map H : [0, 1] × [0, 1] → S2 such that:
• H(0, ·) = a(·) and H(1, ·) = b(·);
• H(·, 0) and H(·, 1) are constant (the endpoints are fixed);
• H(t, s) ∈ S2 − (K ∪ {∞}) for all (t, s) ∈ [0, 1]×]0, 1[.
If a and b are simple, homotopic, and if moreover there exists a homotopy H
such that for all t ∈ [0, 1], H(t, ·) is a simple arc, then we say that a and b are
isotopic. David Epstein proved in [Eps66] that on a surface, two homotopic arcs
are necessarily isotopic. In this paper, we will use indifferently homotopy and
isotopy on surfaces.
We say that two isotopies classes of arcs α and β are homotopically disjoint if
there exist two representatives a of α and b of β so that a(]0, 1[) and b(]0, 1[) are
disjoint. We say that two arcs a and b are homotopically disjoint if they represent
two homotopically disjoint isotopy classes. A bigon between two arcs a and b is
a connected component of the complement of a ∪ b in S2 − (K ∪ {∞}), which is
homeomorphic to a disk, and whose boundary of its closure is the union of a subarc
of a and a subarc of b. We say that two proper arcs a and b are in minimal position
if all their intersections are transverse, and if there is no bigon between a and b.
Ray graph.
Definition. A ray is an isotopy class α of simple arcs with endpoints α(0) = ∞
and α(1) ∈ K. We call Cantor-endpoint of α the point {α(1)}.
Definition (Calegari [Cal09a]). The ray graph, denoted by Xr , is the graph defined
as follow :
• The set of vertices is the set of rays previously defined;
• Two vertices are joined by an edge if and only if they are homotopically
disjoint.
Remark. The ray graph is connected. Observe that if two rays α and β have
infinitely many intersections (up to isotopy), then they necessarily have the same
Cantor-endpoint. Thus there exists a ray α0 which is disjoint from α and intersects
β finitely many times (take any ray disjoint from α0 and with a distinct Cantorendpoint). We can then adapt the classical proof of the connectedness of the curve

8

JULIETTE BAVARD

complex, given for example in Farb & Margalit [FM11], Theorem 4.3 page 97, to
find a path between α0 and β.
Preliminaries on isotopy classes of curves. We will use the following results, adapted
from Casson & Bleiler [CB88], Handel [Han99] and Matsumoto [Mat00]. We equip
S2 − (K ∪ {∞}) with a complete hyperbolic metric of the first kind. Its universal
cover is the hyperbolic plane H2 .
Proposition 2.1. Let A and B be two locally finite families of simple arcs of
S2 − (K ∪ {∞}) such that all the elements of A (respectively B) are mutually homotopically disjoint. Assume that for all a ∈ A and b ∈ B, a and b are in minimal
position.
Then there exists a homeomorphism h which is isotopic to the identity by an
isotopy which fixes K ∪ {∞}, and such that for all a ∈ A and b ∈ B, h(a) and h(b)
are geodesic.
Proposition 2.2. Let a and b be two arcs of S2 − (K ∪ {∞}). If ã is a lift of a in
the universal cover, then there exist two points p− and p+ on the boundary ∂H2 of
the universal cover H2 such that ã(t) goes to p− , respectively p+ , when t goes to 0,
respectively 1. We call endpoints of ã these two points. If ã and b̃ are two lifts of a
and b respectively, which have the same endpoints in the boundary of the universal
cover, then a and b are isotopic in S2 − (K ∪ {∞}).
2.2. Coding of some rays.
Equator. Using Proposition 2.1, we choose a topological circle E of S2 which contains K ∪ {∞} and so that all the open segments of E − (K ∪ {∞}) are geodesics
for the previous metric on S2 − (K ∪ {∞}). We call equator this circle. We choose
an orientation on the equator. We call northern hemisphere the topological disk on
the left of the equator, and southern hemisphere the topological disk on its right.
p

Southern hemisphere

Northern hemisphere

p−1
p4

s−1
s4
∞

p3

s0
s3
p0

s1

s2

p2

p1

Figure 4. Choice of an equator, a point p, a sequence of points
in K, and a set of segments.

RAY GRAPH AND QUASIMORPHISMS ON A BIG MAPPING CLASS GROUP

9

Choice of segments of E. As in Figure 4, we choose a point p in E − {∞} such that
the two connected components of E − {∞, p} both contains points of K. We then
choose a sequence (pn )n∈N of points of K in the connected component of E − {∞, p}
which is on the right of ∞, in such a way so that p0 is the first point of K on the
right of ∞ on E, and pn+1 is on the right of pn for all n ∈ N. We choose a sequence
(pn )n<0 in the same way in the connected component of E − {∞, p} which is on
the left of ∞, such that p−1 is the first point on the left of ∞, and such that pn−1
is on the left of pn for all n < 0. We denote by s0 the connected component of
E − (K ∪ {∞}) between ∞ and p0 , and by s−1 the one between ∞ and p−1 . For all
n > 0, we choose a connected component sn of E − K between pn−1 and pn , and
for all n < −1, a connected component sn of E − K between pn and pn+1 .
S We denote by S the set of topological segments {sn }n∈Z , and by S their union
n∈Z sn .

South

North

p4

∞
p3

p0
γ

p2
p1

Figure 5. Example of a ray γ ∈ XS : in this example, the Cantorendpoint is p0 , the complete associated sequence of segments is
u(γ) = s1 s3 s2 s1 s−1 (p0 ), and we have ů(γ) = s1 s3 s2 s1 s−1 .
Associated sequence. If α is an isotopy class of arcs of S2 − (K ∪ {∞}), we denote
by α# the unique geodesic representative arc of α in S2 − (K ∪ {∞}). We denote
by XS0 the set of isotopy classes of arcs α in S2 − (K ∪ {∞}) between infinity and
a point of the Cantor set (possibly with self-intersection) such that:
(1) E ∩ α# ⊂ S ;
(2) The connected component α# − E which starts at ∞ is included in the
southern hemisphere ;
(3) E ∩ α# is a finite set.
We denote by XS the subset of XS0 which contains the isotopy classes of simple
arcs (i.e. the set of rays which satisfy the three previous conditions).
Let α ∈ XS0 . We can associate to α a sequence of segments in the following way:
we follow α# from ∞ and to its Cantor-endpoint, and we denote by u1 the first

10

JULIETTE BAVARD

segment of S intersected by α# , u2 the second, ..., and uk the k-th for all k, until
we get to the Cantor-endpoint.
We denote by ů(α) this (finite) sequence of segments, and by u(α) the sequence
ů(α) together with the Cantor-endpoint of α. We call it complete sequence associated to α (see Figure 5 for an example). Because the geodesic α# in the isotopy
class α is unique, the sequence associated to α is well defined. More generally, we
will call complete sequence any finite sequence of segments together with a point of
K, such that the sequence of segments does not begin with s−1 nor s0 , and does
not contain any repetition of segments (i.e. ui 6= ui+1 for all i), in order to avoid
bigons.
Lemma 2.3. To each complete sequence corresponds a unique isotopy class of
arcs in XS0 (possibly with self-intersections) between infinity and a point of K. In
particular, if two rays of XS have the same complete associated sequence, then they
are equal.
Proof. Let α and β be two arcs with the same complete associated sequence, let say
u0 ...un (pj ). On the boundary of the universal cover, we choose a "lift" ∞
˜ of ∞: we
can see this point ∞
˜ as the limit on the boundary of any chosen lift of α. We then
lift β from that point ∞.
˜ The universal cover is tessellated by half fundamental
domains corresponding to the lifts of the hemispheres: the boundary of any of these
half fundamental domains is a lift of the equator. We start to lift α and β from ∞
˜
in a same half fundamental domain F0 (which is a lift of the southern hemisphere).
We define (Fi )0≤i≤n as the sequence of the alternative lifts of the northern and
southern hemispheres that are crossed by α̃# . Observe that (Fi )i is determined
by the coding: we go out F0 to arrive in a lift F1 of the northern hemisphere by
crossing the only lift of u0 which is in the closure of F0 . We keep going this way
until we reach the half-domain Fn , which has only one lift p̃j of pj in its boundary.
Thus the two lifts α̃ and β̃ of α and β have the same endpoints. It follows that α
and β are isotopic in S2 − (K ∪ {∞}) (according to Proposition 2.2).

From now on, we won’t make any distinction between an isotopy class of arcs in
XS0 and its complete associated sequence.
2.3. A specific sequence of rays. We construct here a specific sequence of rays,
(αk )k∈N , whose properties will be useful later.
If u = u0 u1 ...un (pj ) is a complete sequence of segments, recall that we denote by
ů = u0 u1 ...un the sequence of segments without the Cantor-endpoint. The inverse
of this finite sequence of segments will be denoted by ů−1 := un ...u1 u0 .
Definition. We define the sequence of rays (αk )k≥0 in the following way:
• α0 is the isotopy class of the segment s0 , with endpoints ∞ and p0 ;
• α1 is the ray coded by s1 s−1 (p1 ) (see Figure 7);
• For all k ≥ 1, αk+1 is the ray defined from αk as in Figure 6: we start at ∞,
we follow αk# until its Cantor-endpoint pk in a tubular neighborhood of
αk# , we turn around this point counterclockwise, crossing the two segments
sk+1 first, and then sk , we follow αk# again in a tubular neighborhood, we
turn around ∞ by crossing s0 first and then s−1 , we follow αk# for the last
time in a tubular neighborhood until its Cantor-endpoint, and we go to the
point pk+1 of the Cantor set without crossing the equator.

RAY GRAPH AND QUASIMORPHISMS ON A BIG MAPPING CLASS GROUP

11

αk+1
∞

s−1
South

α2

North

∞

s−1

s0
s1

s0

North
s−1

South
s1
North

αk

α1

s1
s−1
s−1

South
South

s2
p2
North

p1

s1

sk+1

pk+1

pk

sk

Figure 6. Definition of α2 from α1 , and of αk+1 from αk : representation of the local intersections of these rays with E.
In other words, using the coding, we can define (αk )k≥0 with the following complete sequences:
• α0 = s0 (p0 );
• α1 = s1 s−1 (p1 );
• αk+1 = α̊k sk+1 sk α̊k−1 s0 s−1 α̊k (pk+1 ) for all k ≥ 1.

South

North
p4

∞
p3
p0

p2
p1

Figure 7. On the sphere, representation of α1 = s1 s−1 (p1 ) (dotted line) and α2 = s1 s−1 s2 s1 s−1 s1 s0 s−1 s1 s−1 (p2 ) (plain line).
Remark. If we denote by long(αk ) the number of connected components of αk# − E,
then long(αk ) is odd for all k ≥ 1. Indeed, we have long(α1 ) = 3 (see Figure 6),

12

JULIETTE BAVARD

and by construction long(αk+1 ) = 3 long(αk ) + 2, thus long(αk+1 ) has the same
parity than long(αk ). Hence we are sure to be in the configuration of Figure 6:
the last hemisphere crossed by αk is always the southern hemisphere, thus pk+1 is
always on the left of pk in the local representation that we have chosen (Figure 6).
In particular, when αk+1 turn around ∞, this ray crosses first s0 and then s−1 , to
avoid self-intersections.
2.4. Infinite diameter and half geodesic axis. Let β be a ray, and let ů =
u0 u1 ...un be a sequence of segments. We say that β begins like ů if the first connected component of β# − E is in the southern hemisphere and if the first intersections between β# and E are, in this order, the segments u0 , u1 , ..., un . In particular,
if β ∈ XS , we say that u(β) begins like ů.
Definition. Let A : Xr → N be the map which sends every ray γ ∈ Xr to:
A(γ) := max{i ∈ N such that γ begins like α̊i }.
Because α̊0 is the empty sequence, A is well defined for all γ ∈ Xr . Let us now
prove that A is 1-lipschitz.
Lemma 2.4. Let β and γ be two rays such that d(γ, β) = 1. Then :
|A(γ) − A(β)| ≤ 1.
Proof. Let n := A(β). We denote by β# and γ# the geodesic representatives of β
and γ (see Figure 8). The arc β# first follows the curve representing α̊n : indeed, it
has to cross the same segments, in the same order. There exists a homeomorphism
fixing each point of K and ∞, preserving E, and sending the beginning of β# , i.e.
the component of β# between ∞ and s−1 , on the beginning of αn , i.e. on the
component of αn between ∞ and s−1 . Because the distance between γ and β is 1,
γ# is disjoint from β# and has to escape the grey area, which does not contain any
point of K, in order to end on a point of K without intersecting β# , thus without
crossing the plain line of Figure 8. It follows that γ# has to begin by following one
of the two dotted arrows, which exactly means that γ begins like α̊n−1 . Thus we
get A(γ) ≥ n − 1. The Lemma follows by symmetry between β and γ.

s−1

∞

s0
α̊n

s1

s−1
pn

pn−1

Figure 8. Representation of the local intersections of α̊n with E.
By definition of (αk )k , there is no point of K in the grey area.

RAY GRAPH AND QUASIMORPHISMS ON A BIG MAPPING CLASS GROUP

13

Corollary 2.5. Let β and γ be any two rays of Xr . We have:
|A(β) − A(γ)| ≤ d(β, γ).
Proof. We choose a geodesic in the ray graph between β and γ, and by subadditivity of the absolute value, we deduce this result from Lemma 2.4.

This inequality allows us to minor some distances, and the following theorem follows:
Theorem 2.6. The diameter of the ray graph is infinite.
Proof. By definition of A, we have A(α0 ) = 0 and A(αn ) = n for all n ∈ N.
According to Corollary 2.5, we have d(α0 , αn ) ≥ n.

Proposition 2.7. The half-axis (αk )k∈N is geodesic.
Proof. By construction of the sequence (αk )k∈N , we have d(αk , αk+1 ) = 1 for all
k ≥ 0. We also have d(αk , α0 ) ≥ k for all k ≥ 0 (according to Corollary 2.5). Thus
for all k ≥ 0, we have d(αk , α0 ) = k.

3. Gromov-hyperbolicity of the ray graph
Recall that a metric space X is geodesic if between any two points of X, there
exists at least one geodesic, i.e. a path which minimizes the distance between these
two points. We recall the definition of Gromov-hyperbolic metric space. For more
details on hyperbolic spaces, see for example Bridson & Haefliger [BH99].
Definition (Hyperbolic space). We say that a geodesic metric space X is Gromovhyperbolic (or hyperbolic) if there exists a constant δ ≥ 0 such that for every geodesic
triangle of X, each side of the triangle is included in the δ-neighborhood of the two
other sides.
We define a graph X∞ and we prove that it is Gromov-hyperbolic using the same
arguments that those given by Hensel, Przytycki & Webb in [HPW] to prove the
Gromov-hyperbolicity of the arc graph for compact surfaces with boundary. We
then use this hyperbolicity to prove that the ray graph is Gromov-hyperbolic.
3.1. Hyperbolicity of the loop graph X∞ .
Graph X∞ and unicorn paths. We fix a Cantor set K embedded in R2 and we
compactify R2 by adding ∞: we get the sphere S2 .
A simple arc of S2 − K between infinity and infinity (i.e. a simple loop based
at infinity) is said to be essential if it does not bound a topological disk, meaning
that it splits the sphere into two components which both contain points of K.
Definition. We define the graph X∞ as follow:
• Vertices are isotopy classes of simple essential arcs on S2 − K between ∞
and ∞, where we identify two arcs if they have the same image but opposite
orientation;
• Two vertices are joined by an edge if and only if they are homotopically
disjoint.
Remark. We recall that we denote by Xr the ray graph. The graphs X∞ and Xr
are naturally equipped with a metric where all the edges have length 1. The group
Γ = MCG(R2 − K) acts on X∞ (and on Xr ) by isometries.

14

JULIETTE BAVARD

We adapt here the proof from [HPW] of the hyperbolicity of the arc graph of a
compact surface with boundary to prove the hyperbolicity of X∞ .
Let a and b be two simple essential arcs on S2 − K between ∞ and ∞ and which
are in minimal position. We choose an orientation on each of these arcs and we
denote by a+ , b+ the corresponding oriented arcs. Let π ∈ a ∩ b. Let a0 and b0
be the oriented subarcs of a, respectively b, beginning like a, respectively like b,
and having π for second endpoint. We denote by a0 ? b0 the concatenation of these
two subarcs; in particular, it is an arc between ∞ and ∞. Assume that this arc is
simple. Because a and b are in minimal position, the arc a0 ? b0 is essential. Thus
it defines an element of X∞ . The arc a0 ? b0 is said to be a unicorn arc made from
a+ and b+ .
Observe that this arc is uniquely determined by the choice of π ∈ a ∩ b, and that
not all the points of a ∩ b define a simple arc. Moreover, a ∩ b is a finite set, because
a and b have transverse intersections (and ∞ is an isolated puncture). Those there
are only finitely many unicorn arcs made from a+ and b+ .
Claim 3.1. If π and π 0 are two points of a ∩ b defining the unicorn arcs a0 ? b0 and
a00 ? b00 , then a00 ⊂ a0 if and only if b0 ⊂ b00 .
Definition (Total order on unicorn arcs). Let a+ and b+ be two oriented arcs
between ∞ and ∞ on S2 − K, and which are in minimal position. We order the
unicorn arcs between a+ and b+ in the following way:
a0 ? b0 ≤ a00 ? b00 if and only if a00 ⊂ a0 and b0 ⊂ b00 .
This order is total. We denote by (c1 , ..., cn−1 ) the ordered set of the unicorn
arcs between a+ and b+ . In particular, this order corresponds to the order of the
intersection points π when we follow b+ .
We define unicorn paths in X∞ in the following way:
Definition (Unicorn paths between oriented arcs). Let a+ and b+ be two oriented
essential simple arcs between ∞ and ∞ on S2 − K, and which are in minimal
position. The sequence of unicorn arcs P (a+ , b+ ) = (a = c0 , c1 , ..., cn−1 , cn = b) is
called unicorn path between a+ and b+ .
Claim 3.2. Let a and b be two oriented arcs in minimal position and let (c0 , ..., cn )
be the unicorn path between these two arcs. Let a0 and b0 be two arcs in minimal
position and such that a0 , respectively b0 , is isotopic to a, respectively to b, and
oriented in the same direction. We denote by (d0 , d1 , ..., dm−1 , dm ) the unicorn path
between a0 and b0 . Then n = m and ck is isotopic to dk for all k.


This is a consequence of Proposition 2.1.
+

+

Definition (Unicorn paths between oriented vertices of X∞ ). Let α and β be
two oriented elements of X∞ . Let a+ and b+ be two oriented representatives of α+
and β + respectively, and which are in minimal position. Let P (a+ , b+ ) = (c0 , ..., cn )
be the associated unicorn path. For all 1 ≤ k ≤ n, we denote by γk the isotopy
class of ck . We define the unicorn path between α+ and β + by:
P (α+ , β + ) = (γ0 , γ1 , ..., γn ).
Claim 3.3. Every unicorn path is a path in X∞ .
Indeed, for all 0 ≤ i ≤ n − 1, ci and ci+1 are homotopically disjoint. This is
Remark 3.2 of [HPW].


RAY GRAPH AND QUASIMORPHISMS ON A BIG MAPPING CLASS GROUP

15

Remark.
(1) If a ∩ b = ∅, then we have P (a+ , b+ ) = (a, b).
(2) Abusing notations, we will again denote by P (a+ , b+ ) the set of the elements
of P (a+ , b+ ).
The unicorn arcs only depend on the neighborhood of a ∪ b: if we consider a
closed neighborhood of a ∪ b which homotopically equivalent to a ∪ b, then we can
see the unicorn arcs made from a and b as unicorn arcs of the compact surface
defined by the closure of this neighborhood. We are then in the exact same setting
than in [HPW]. This correspondence allows us to see every unicorn path in X∞ as
a unicorn path in the arc graph of a finite type surface. In particular, Lemmas 3.3,
3.4, 3.5 and 4.3 of [HPW] are still true for X∞ . As Proposition 4.2, and Theorem
1.2 are consequences of these Lemmas, we get the hyperbolicity of X∞ . Note that it
seems difficult to deduce the hyperbolicity of X∞ from the hyperbolicity of the arc
graph of only one surface: in the proof of the lemmas, we need to consider different
surfaces, which depend on the elements of X∞ that we are considering. But because the constant of hyperbolicity given by [HPW] does not depend of the surface,
this won’t be an issue. We adapt the proof of [HPW] in our context. Lemma 3.4,
Corollary 3.5, Lemma 3.6 and Propositions 3.7 and 3.10 correspond, in this order,
to Lemmas 3.3, 4.3, 3.5, Proposition 4.2 and Theorem 1.2 of [HPW]3.
Note that the proof of [HPW] does not adapt directly to the ray graph Xr :
indeed, the arc made from two different representatives of rays oriented from infinity
to the Cantor-endpoint goes from infinity to infinity, and thus is not in the ray
graph. If we change the definition by choosing the unicorn arc as the union of the
beginning of a and the end of b, then we get an arc whose isotopy class is a ray,
but Lemma 3.4 is false. This is why we defined the graph X∞ .
Lemmas on unicorn paths in X∞ .
Lemma 3.4 (Unicorn triangles are 1-slim). Let α+ , β + and δ + be three elements
of X∞ , with an orientation. Then for all γ ∈ P (α+ , β + ), one of the elements γ ∗
of P (α+ , δ + ) ∪ P (δ + , β + ) is such that d(γ, γ ∗ ) = 1 in X∞ .
Proof. This is Lemma 3.3 of [HPW].



Corollary 3.5. Let k ∈ N, m ≤ 2k and let (ξ0 , ..., ξm ) be a path in X∞ . We choose
+
an orientation on the ξi ’s. Then P (ξ0+ , ξm
) is included in the k-neighborhood of
(ξ0 , ..., ξm ).
Proof. This is Lemma 4.3 of [HPW].



Lemma 3.6. Let α+ , β + ∈ X∞ be oriented and let P (α+ , β + ) = (γ0 , ..., γn ) be the
associated unicorn path in X∞ . For all 0 ≤ i ≤ j ≤ n, we consider P (γi+ , γj+ ),
where γi+ , respectively γj+ , have the same orientation than a+ , respectively than b+ .
Then either P (γi+ , γj+ ) is a subpath of P (α+ , β + ), or j = i + 2 and d(γi , γj ) = 1
in X∞ .
Proof. This is Lemma 3.5 of [HPW].



3We choose not to translate the proofs of these Lemmas and Propositions, which are very close
to the proofs written in [HPW], and which have been checked in this particular setting (in french!)
in the original paper.

16

JULIETTE BAVARD

Hyperbolicity of X∞ . We can now deduce from the previous lemmas the hyperbolicity of X∞ .
Proposition 3.7. Let G be a geodesic path X∞ between two vertices α and β of
X∞ . Then, for any choice of orientation on α and β, P (α+ , β + ) is included in the
6-neighborhood of G.
Proof. This is Proposition 4.2 of [HPW].



Corollary 3.8. Let G be a geodesic of X∞ between two vertices α ans β. Then
for any choice of orientation on α and β, G is included in the 13-neighborhood
of P (α+ , β + ).
This is a consequence of Proposition 3.7 and of the standard following Lemma4:
Lemma 3.9. Let X be a geodesic metric space. Let G be a geodesic of X between
two points α and β. Let k be a positive integer. If J is a path of X between α and
β which stays in the k-neighborhood of G, then G stays in the (2k + 1)-neighborhood
of J .
Proposition 3.10. The graph X∞ is 20-hyperbolic.
Proof. Let αβγ be a geodesic triangle in X∞ . Let ζ on the geodesic between α
and β. We choose an orientation on α, β and γ. According to Corollary 3.8, there
exists ξ on P (α+ , β + ) such that d(ζ, ξ) ≤ 13. According to Lemma 3.4, there exists
ξ ∗ ∈ P (α+ , γ + ) ∪ P (γ + , β + ) such that d(ξ, ξ ∗ ) ≤ 1. According to Proposition 3.7,
there exists ζ ∗ on one of the two geodesic sides of the triangle, either between α
and γ or between γ and β, such that d(ξ ∗ , ζ ∗ ) ≤ 6. Thus we have d(ζ, ζ ∗ ) ≤ 20. 
3.2. Quasi-isometry between Xr and X∞ . We want to deduce the hyperbolicity
of the ray graph Xr from the hyperbolicity of X∞ . To this end, we show that the
two graphs are quasi-isometric.
Reminder on large scale geometry. We use the following standard definitions and
results (see for example Bridson & Haefliger [BH99]).
Definition (Quasi-isometry). Let X and X 0 be two metric spaces. A map f :
X 0 → X is a (κ, ε)-quasi-isometric embedding if there exists κ ≥ 1 and ε ≥ 0 such
that for all x, y ∈ X 0 :
1
d(x, y) − ε ≤ d(f (x), f (y)) ≤ κd(x, y) + ε.
κ
If moreover there exists C ≥ 0 such that every element of X is in the Cneighborhood of f (X 0 ), we say that f is a (κ, ε)-quasi-isometry. When such a
map exists, we say that X and X 0 are quasi-isometric.
Definition (Quasi-geodesic). A (κ, ε)-quasi-geodesic of a metric space X is a (κ, ε)quasi-isometric embedding of an interval of R to X. For abbreviation, we call
quasi-geodesic any image in X of such an embedding.
Theorem (Morse Lemma, see for example Bridson & Haefliger [BH99], Theorem 1.7 page 401). Let X be a δ-hyperbolic metric space. For all κ, ε positive real
numbers, there exists a universal constant B which depends only on δ, κ and ε,
such that every segment which is (κ, ε)-quasi-geodesic is in the B-neighborhood of
any geodesic between its endpoints.
4Again, we didn’t translate the proof of this Lemma.

RAY GRAPH AND QUASIMORPHISMS ON A BIG MAPPING CLASS GROUP

17

We say that B is the (κ, ε)-Morse constant of the hyperbolic space X.
Theorem (see for example Bridson & Haefliger [BH99], Theorem 1.9 page 402).
Let X and X 0 be two geodesic metric spaces and let f : X 0 → X be a quasi-isometric
embedding. If X is Gromov-hyperbolic, then X 0 is also Gromov-hyperbolic.
Quasi-isometry between Xr and X∞ . According to Proposition 3.10, we know that
X∞ is a hyperbolic space. To prove that Xr is also Gromov-hyperbolic, we are
now looking for a quasi-isometric embedding from Xr to X∞ , which would allow
us to conclude using the previous theorem. We will actually prove that the chosen
embedding is a quasi-isometry.
We define a map f : Xr → X∞ which sends x ∈ Xr to any x̂ ∈ X∞ such that x
and x̂ are homotopically disjoint in S2 − (K ∪ {∞}).
Proposition 3.11. The map f previously defined is a quasi-isometry.
Lemma 3.12. Let x̂, ŷ ∈ X∞ and x, y ∈ Xr such that x (respectively y) is homotopically disjoint from x̂ (respectively from ŷ). Then:
d(x, y) ≤ d(x̂, ŷ) + 2.
Remark. In particular, this lemma implies that for all x, y ∈ Xr , d(x, y) − 2 ≤
d(f (x), f (y)).
Proof. We denote by n the distance between x̂ and ŷ in X∞ . Let (µ̂j )0≤j≤n be a
geodesic in X∞ between x̂ and ŷ (in particular, µ̂0 = x̂ and µ̂n = ŷ). We want to
construct a path (µ1 , ..., µn−1 ) of length (n − 1) in Xr , and show that d(x, µ1 ) ≤ 2
and d(µn−1 , y) ≤ 2. For every α in Xr or X∞ , we denote by α# the geodesic
representative of α.
Because (µ̂i )i is a geodesic of X∞ , for all 1 ≤ i ≤ n − 1, (µ̂i )# is disjoint from
(µ̂i−1 )# and (µ̂i+1 )# (except on {∞}). Moreover, (µ̂i−1 )# and (µ̂i+1 )# intersect
outside {∞}. Thus (µ̂i )# splits the sphere S2 into two connected components, and
one of them contains (µ̂i−1 )# and (µ̂i+1 )# . We denote by Ai the other connected
component. Observe that for every 1 ≤ i ≤ n − 2, Ai is disjoint from Ai+1 . For
every 1 ≤ i ≤ n − 1, we choose a ray µi such that (µi )# is included in Ai (such a
µi exists because the µ̂i ’s are essential curves). Hence we have a path (µi )1≤i≤n−1
of length (n − 1) in Xr .
Let us now prove that d(x, µ1 ) ≤ 2: if (µ1 )# intersects x# , then x# is in the
connected component of S2 − x̂# which contains (µ̂1 )# and (µ1 )# . Every representative of a ray which is included in the other connected component of S2 − x̂# does
not intersect neither (µ1 )# , nor x# : thus d(x, µ1 ) ≤ 2. We prove in the same way
that d(µn−1 , y) ≤ 2.

Lemma 3.13. Let x̂ ∈ X∞ . Let x ∈ Xr homotopically disjoint from x̂. Then:
d(f (x), x̂) ≤ 2.
Proof. We denote by x# and x̂# the geodesic representatives of x and x̂, which are
mutually disjoint (expect on {∞}). Because x# is disjoint from x̂# , there exists
an open topological disk U of S2 which contains x# − {∞} and which is disjoint
from x̂# − {∞}. Similarly, because f (x)# is disjoint from x# , there is an open
topological disk V which contains x# − {∞} and is disjoint from f (x)# − {∞}.
Thus U ∩ V contains an open topological disk which contains x# − {∞} and which
is disjoint from (x̂# ∪ f (x)# ) − {∞}. In particular, U ∩ V contains points of K,

18

JULIETTE BAVARD

because it contains the Cantor-endpoint of x# . It follows that there exists a simple
curve ŷ0 ⊂ (U ∩ V) − K of S2 which contains ∞, and whose isotopy class is ŷ ∈ X∞ .
Finally, we have d(ŷ, x̂) = d(ŷ, f (x)) = 1, which completes the proof.

Lemma 3.14. For all x, y ∈ Xr , we have:
d(f (x), f (y)) ≤ d(x, y) + 4.
Proof. Let x, y ∈ Xr and n = d(x, y). If x and y do not have the same Cantorendpoint, we choose a geodesic path (γi )0≤i≤n in Xr between x and y, and such
that for all i, j, γi and γj do not have the same Cantor-endpoint. Such γi exist, up
to change some of the Cantor-endpoint for a neighbor point of K without adding
new intersections with the other γk ’s.
If x and y have the same Cantor-endpoint, we choose for γn a ray which is
homotopically disjoint from y and from f (y), and whose Cantor-endpoint is distinct
from the Cantor-endpoint of x. We then choose a geodesic path (γi )0≤i≤n in Xr
between x = γ0 and γn .
We now choose a small neighborhood Ni of each Cantor-endpoint of γi , homeomorphic to a closed disk, which does not intersect any γk for k 6= i, and such that
the Ni ’s are mutually disjoint. Moreover, we assume that the boundary of Ni is
disjoint from K for all i. If y 6= γn , we also choose some γ̂n disjoint from y. We
define for each γi a curve γ̂i as follow: we follow γi until it crosses Ni , we follow
the boundary of Ni , we follow γi again to ∞. We get this way an element of X∞ .
By construction, for all i between 2 and n−1, we have d(γ̂i−1 , γ̂i ) = d(γi , γi+1 ) =
1. According to Lemma 3.13 applied to γ̂0 disjoint from x = γ0 and to γ̂n disjoint
from y, we get d(γ̂0 , f (x)) ≤ 2 and d(γ̂n , f (y)) ≤ 2. Finally, we have d(f (x), f (y)) ≤
n + 4.

End of the proof of Proposition 3.11: Lemmas 3.12 (for the first inequality) and
3.14 (for the second inequality) give us:
d(x, y) − 2 ≤ d(f (x), f (y)) ≤ d(x, y) + 4.
Lemma 3.13 gives us a constant C = 2 such that every x̂ in X∞ is in a Cneighborhood of f (Xr ), which ends the proof of Proposition 3.11.

Gromov-hyperbolicity of the ray graph. Finally, we have proved the following theorem:
Theorem 3.15. The ray graph is Gromov-hyperbolic.
Proof. This is a consequence of Proposition 3.11 (there exists a quasi-isometric
embedding of Xr in X∞ ), of Proposition 3.10 (X∞ is Gromov-hyperbolic) and of
Theorem 3.2 (if f : X → X 0 is a quasi-isometric embedding and if X 0 is Gromovhyperbolic, then X is Gromov-hyperbolic).

4. Non trivial quasimorphisms
In [BF02], Mladen Bestvina and Koji Fujiwara have proved that the space of
classes of non trivial quasimorphisms on the mapping class group of a compact
surface has infinite dimension. They first proved (Theorem 1 of [BF02]) that if a
group G acts by isometries on a Gromov-hyperbolic space X, then, assuming the
existence of some loxodromic elements satisfying some specific properties in G, the
space of classes of non trivial quasimorphisms on G has infinite dimension. As a

RAY GRAPH AND QUASIMORPHISMS ON A BIG MAPPING CLASS GROUP

19

second step, they proved that if the action of G on X is weakly properly discontinuous (WPD), then there exist some loxodromic elements satisfying the hypothesis
of Theorem 1. Finally, they proved that the action of the mapping class group of a
compact surface on the curve complex is WPD.
An element g of a group G is said to act weakly properly discontinuously on a
space X if for all x ∈ X, for all C > 0, there exists N > 0 such that the number
of σ ∈ G satisfying d(x, σx) ≤ C and d(g N x, σg N x) ≤ C is finite (see for example
Calegari [Cal09b] p74).
Claim 4.1. For all g ∈ Γ = MCG(R2 − Cantor), the action of g on the ray graph
Xr is not weakly properly discontinuous.
Indeed, for all x ∈ Xr , for all N ∈ N, there are infinitely many σ ∈ Γ such that
d(x, σx) ≤ 1 and d(g N x, σg N x) ≤ 1: let U be a neighborhood of a point of the
Cantor set such that U is disjoint from x and from g N x. Then every σ supported in
U fixes x and g N x, and thus satisfies d(x, σx) ≤ 1 and d(g N x, σg N x) ≤ 1. Moreover,
there are infinitely many such σ, because there are infinitely many points of the
Cantor set in U.

It follows that the strategy of [BF02] cannot be directly apply to our setting.
However, we can find explicit elements of Γ which satisfy the hypothesis of Theorem 1 of [BF02], which allow us to prove that the space of classes of non trivial
quasimorphisms on Γ has infinite dimension.
We first find an element h ∈ Γ which acts by translation on the axis (αk )k
previously defined (in Section 2). We then prove, using a "number of positive
intersections", that if w is a sufficiently long segment of this axis, then for all g ∈ Γ,
g can’t reverse this segment in a close neighborhood of the axis (Proposition 4.5).
Finally, we use this Proposition to, on the one hand, construct an explicit non
trivial quasimorphism on Γ, and on the second hand, construct elements of Γ that
satisfy the hypothesis of Theorem 1 of [BF02].
4.1. A loxodromic element of Γ. We want to define a loxodromic element h ∈ Γ
as in Figure 9, where each string sends a subset of the Cantor set to another one,
in such a way so that h maps αk on αk+1 for all k ∈ N (see Figure 10).
K−4 K−3 K−2 K−1

∞

K0

K1

K2

K3

h

Figure 9. Representation of h ∈ Γ.
Because (αk )k∈N is a geodesic half-axis (according to Proposition 2.7), we will
have that (hn (α0 ))n∈Z is a geodesic axis of the ray graph, on which h acts by
translation.

20

JULIETTE BAVARD

K−1

∞

K0

K1

α0
h

α1
h

α2

Figure 10. Action of h on the rays α0 and α1 .
Definition of h. We fix an equator E and some alphabet of segments (sk )k∈Z as in
Subsection 2.2. For all k ∈ Z − {0}, we denote by Kk the points of K between sk−1
and sk on E. In particular, the Kk ’s are clopen subsets of the initial Cantor set K
for all k, thus they also are Cantor sets (any clopen subset of a Cantor set also is a
Cantor set, according to the characterization of Cantor sets as totally disconnected
compact sets without isolated point). We denote by I a connected component of
E − K such that I ∪ {∞} splits the equator into two connected components, so that
one of them contains all the segments sk ’s with k > 0, and the other contains all
the segments sk ’s with k < 0.
CN

I

CS

I

K1

K1
K−1
∞

K0

K−1
∞

K0

Figure 11. CN and CS (the grey area is the northern hemisphere).
Let CN be a topological circle which coincides with the equator E outside a
neighborhood of infinity, and which goes through the northern hemisphere above
infinity. Let CS be a topological circle which coincides with the equator E outside
a neighborhood of infinity, and which goes through the southern hemisphere below
infinity (see Figure 11).
Let t̃1 be a homeomorphism of CN which maps the Cantor subset Kk on Kk+1
for all k ∈ Z, and which is the identity on I. We extend t̃1 to a homeomorphism of
the sphere S2 fixing infinity, and we consider its isotopy class t1 ∈ Γ.

RAY GRAPH AND QUASIMORPHISMS ON A BIG MAPPING CLASS GROUP

21

t1
t2
t1

Figure 12. Definition of h := t1 t2 t1 .
Similarly, let t̃2 be a homeomorphism of CS which maps the Cantor subset Kk+1
on Kk for all k ∈ Z, and which is the identity on I. We extend t̃2 to a homeomorphism of the sphere S2 fixing infinity, and we consider its isotopy class t2 ∈ Γ. In
particular, if we denote by φ the isotopy class of the rotation of angle π around ∞
and which maps for all k ∈ Z the Cantor subset Kk on K−k−1 , then we can choose
t2 = φt1 φ−1 .
Finally, we set h := t1 t2 t1 (see Figure 12).
Action of h on the ray graph. Recall that if there exists a geodesic axis of Xr which
is preserved by some isometry g, and if g has no fixed point on this axis, then the
action of g on Xr is said to be loxodromic, and this geodesic axis is called the axis
of g.
Theorem 4.2. The action of h on the ray graph is loxodromic, with axis (αk )k .
More precisely, h(αk ) = αk+1 for all k ∈ N.
To see that h(αk ) = αk+1 for all k ≥ 0, we represent αk with a graph as in
Figure 13.

1

3

1

Figure 13. On the left, the ray α2 ; on the right, a graph representing it.
Proof. For each ray, we can choose a curve representing it and identify some subsegments of the curve which stay close to each other. We get this way a finite graph
smoothly embedded in S2 and disjoint from all points of K except the Cantorendpoint of the initial ray. At each vertex, the edges go in two directions. Each
edge has a weight, which correspond to the number of subsegments that it carries:
at each vertex, in one of the two directions there is only one edge, and its weight
is the sum of the weights of the edges going in the opposite direction. We can deduce the initial ray from a graph representing it: indeed, it is enough to duplicate
each edge the number of times corresponding to its weight, and then to glue the
subsegments in the unique possible way. We only glue together subsegments which

22

JULIETTE BAVARD

3k−2 3k−3

3k−1

3k−2

1

3k−3

Kk

1

Figure 14. Example of a graph representing the ray αk .
goes in opposite directions, and we want to draw a simple curve, thus there is a
well defined way to glue the subsegments together.
On Figure 14, we draw some specific graph representing αk , for every k ≥ 0. As
there exists a curve ak representing αk which stays in a tubular neighborhood of
this graph, if h0 is a representative of h, we have that h0 (ak ) stays in a tubular
neighborhood of the image of the graph by h0 : the ray corresponding to the image
of the graph is h(αk ).
3k−2 3k−3

1

Kk
αk

3k−1 3k−2 3k−3

t1

1

t1 (αk )
t2

t2 t1 (αk )

t1
3k−2 3k−3

1 Kk+1
h(αk )

3k−1

3k−2 3k−3

1

Figure 15. Image of αk by h.
On Figure 15, we draw a graph representing αk and the successive images of this
graph by the representatives of t1 , t2 and t1 . Thus the final graph is the image of
the graph of αk by h: it represents h(αk ). Moreover, we see that the ray represented
by this graph is αk+1 : hence h(αk ) = αk+1 for all k ∈ N.

4.2. Number of positive intersections. We still denote by Xr the ray graph,
and we orient each ray from infinity to its Cantor-endpoint.

RAY GRAPH AND QUASIMORPHISMS ON A BIG MAPPING CLASS GROUP

α

23

α

β

β

Figure 16. Positive intersection on the left, negative intersection
on the right
Definition (Number of positive intersections). Let I : Xr2 → N ∪ {∞} be the map
which sends any couple of oriented rays (α, β) to the number of positive intersections between two representatives of α and β which are in minimal position (see
Figure 16).
Remark.
(1) This number is well defined: it does not depend on the choice
of representatives for α and β (according to Proposition 2.1).
(2) We do not necessary have I(α, β) = I(β, α).
(3) For all g ∈ Γ, I(g · α, g · β) = I(α, β) (because Γ is the quotient of the group
of homeomorphisms which preserve the orientation).
Case of the sequence (αk )k .
Lemma 4.3. Let β and γ be two elements of Xr such that A(γ) ≤ A(β) − 2, where
A is the map defined at Section 2.4. Then I(γ, β) ≥ 1.
s−1

s0
γ̊

γ̊
s1

s−1
α̊n
pn−1

Figure 17. Illustration of Lemma 4.3 (by definition of (αk )k ,
there is no point of K in the grey area).
Proof. Let n := A(β). Then γ does not begin with α̊n−1 . On Figure 17, we
represent the beginning of β, i.e. α̊n . Every representative of γ starts at infinity
and has to go to its endpoint on the Cantor set: thus every representative of γ
has to leave the grey area. Because γ does not begin with α̊n−1 , γ cannot leave
the grey area by crossing s−1 . Thus γ leaves the grey are by crossing β. The first
intersection is positive, hence I(γ, β) ≥ 1.

Remark.
(1) Because α0 and α1 are homotopically disjoint, we have:
I(α0 , α1 ) = I(α1 , α0 ) = 0 ;

24

JULIETTE BAVARD

(2) We won’t use this result, but note that it is possible to compute precisely
the number of intersections between α0 and αk for all k ≥ 2. We have:
3k−1 + 2k − 3
3k−1 − 2k + 1
and I(αk , α0 ) =
.
4
4
Indeed, denote by (pk , nk ) = (I(α0 , αk ), I(αk , α0 )). We have:
I(α0 , αk ) =

(pk+1 , nk+1 ) = (2pk + nk + 1, pk + 2nk ).
This comes from the construction of (αk )k : we draw a tube around αk−1 ,
and thus we can look at the orientation of the intersections of this tube and
α0 . We then know how to write pk and nk in terms of k.
4.3. Non-reversibility of the axis (αk )k . We denote by B the ceiling of the
(2, 4)-Morse constant of the ray graph (see Section 3.2). We want to show some nonreversibility property for the axis (αk )k (Proposition 4.5), which will be fundamental
for our constructions of non trivial quasimorphisms (Proposition 4.8 and Theorem
4.9). To prove that property, we first need to be able to compare the orientations
of some segments.
Segments with the same orientation. Let X be a geodesic metric space. Let γ1 =
[p1 q1 ] and γ2 = [p2 q2 ] be two geodesic segments of X with the same length, and
oriented from pi to qi . Let γ10 be a geodesic segment (possibly of infinite length)
which contains γ1 . Let C > 0 such that γ2 is included in the C-neighborhood of
γ10 , and such that d(p1 , p2 ) ≤ C. Moreover, we assume that |γ1 | = |γ2 | ≥ 3C. In
this setting, we say that γ1 and γ2 have the same orientation if for all r ∈ γ10 such
that d(r, q2 ) ≤ C, r is on the same side of p1 than q1 on γ10 . Because the length of
γ1 and γ2 is greater than or equal to 3C, we can check that the existence of only
one r satisfying this conditions is enough.
Lemma 4.4. If γ1 and γ2 are segments satisfying the previous properties and which
have the same orientation, then d(q1 , q2 ) ≤ 3C.
Proof. Let r on γ10 such that d(q2 , r) ≤ C. We denote by α the segment of γ10
between p1 and r, and by β the segment between r and q1 .
• First case: if r ∈ γ1 . We have:
|γ2 | = |γ1 | = |α| + |β| ≤ d(p1 , p2 ) + |α| + C.
Hence:
|β| ≤ d(p1 , p2 ) + C ≤ 2C.
Finally, we get:
d(q1 , q2 ) ≤ d(q1 , r) + d(r, q2 ) ≤ |β| + C ≤ 3C.
• Second case: if r ∈
/ γ1 . The segment [p1 , r] ⊂ γ10 contains γ1 (because γ1
and γ2 have the same orientation, thus r cannot be on the other side of p1 on γ10 ).
Hence:
|γ1 | + |β| ≤ d(p1 , p2 ) + |γ2 | + d(q2 , r) ≤ |γ1 | + 2C.
Thus:
|β| ≤ 2C.
Finally, we get:
d(q1 , q2 ) ≤ d(q1 , r) + d(r, q2 ) ≤ |β| + C ≤ 3C.


RAY GRAPH AND QUASIMORPHISMS ON A BIG MAPPING CLASS GROUP

25

Non reversibility.
Proposition 4.5 (Non reversibility). Let B be the ceiling of the (2, 4)-Morse constant of the ray graph, and let w be a subsegment of the axis l = (αk )k∈Z of
length greater than 10B. For all g ∈ MCG(R2 − K), if g · w is included in the
B-neighborhood of l, then it has the same orientation than w.
In other words, the subsegments of the axis l whose length is greater than 10B are
non reversible: there is no copy of w−1 with the same orientation than w in the
B-neighborhood of l.
Remark. If an element h0 ∈ Γ is conjugated to h−1 by a map ψ, let us denote by
l0 the image of l by ψ, equipped with the opposite orientation of l. This is an axis
for h0 . According to the previous proposition, for all subsegment w of the axis l0 of
h0 whose length is greater than 10B, and whose orientation is the same than the
orientation of l0 , for all g ∈ Γ, if g · w is included in the B-neighborhood of the axis
l, then g · w has the opposite orientation than l.
Proof of Proposition 4.5. We prove the two following lemmas, which allow us to
conclude:
Lemma 4.6. Let m < n be two positive integers and let w = (αm , αm+1 , ..., αn ) be
a subsegment of (αk )k∈N . Let g ∈ MCG(R2 − K) such that d(αm , g · αn ) ≤ B, and
such that g · w is in the B-neighborhood of l, with the opposite orientation than w.
If |w| > 8B + 1, then there exists m ≤ i ≤ n such that A(g · αi+2 ) = A(g · αi ) − 2.
Proof. Because d(αm , g · αn ) ≤ B, we have A(g · αn ) ≤ m + B (according to
Corollary 2.5).
Because g · w−1 and w have the same orientation and the same length, according
to Lemma 4.4, we have:
d(αn , g · αm ) ≤ 3B.
Hence A(g · αm ) ≥ n − 3B (according to Corollary 2.5).
Because A is 1-lipschitz (Lemma 2.4), A(g · w) is surjective on the set of integers
between m + B and n − 3B. By contradiction, if we assume that for all i between
m and n, A(g · αi+2 ) 6= A(g · αi ) − 2, then for all i we have:
A(g · αi+2 ) ≥ A(g · αi ) − 1.
By induction, we deduce:
n−m
.
2
Since A(g · αm ) ≥ n − 3B and A(g · αm ) ≥ n − 3B, we have:
n−m
m + B ≥ n − 3B −
.
2
Hence:
8B ≥ n − m.
A(g · αn ) ≥ A(g · αm ) −

Because we have assumed that |w| > 8B + 1, we are lead to a contradiction.
Lemma 4.7. For all g ∈ MCG(R2 − Cantor) and for all i ≥ 0, we have:
A(g · αi+2 ) 6= A(g · αi ) − 2.



26

JULIETTE BAVARD

Proof. For all f ∈ MCG(R2 − Cantor) and for all β, γ ∈ Xr , we have I(f.β, f.γ) =
I(β, γ). Hence:
I(g · αi+2 , g · αi ) = I(α2 , α0 ) = 0.
By contradiction, if A(g · αi+2 ) = A(g · αi ) − 2, according to Lemma 4.3 we have:
I(g · αi+2 , g · αi ) ≥ 1.
This ends the proof of Lemma 4.7.



The proof of Proposition 4.5 follows:
Proof. By contradiction: assume there exists a copy w−1 as wanted, i.e. some g ∈ Γ
such that the segment g · w−1 = (g · αn , ..., g · αm+1 , g · αm ) is in the B-neighborhood
of the axis l, and has the same orientation than w. Up to compose g by hk for some
k ∈ Z if necessary, we can assume that d(αm , g · αn ) ≤ B. Because |w| > 8B + 1,
Lemmas 4.6 and 4.7 give us the conclusion.

4.4. An explicit non trivial quasimorphism on Γ. Let us first recall the
construction of Fujiwara [Fuj98] of quasimorphisms acting on Gromov-hyperbolic
spaces. We fix some p ∈ Xr . Let w and γ be two paths in Xr . A copy of w is
a path of the form g · w, with g ∈ Γ. We denote by |γ|w the maximal number of
disjoint copies of w on γ, and define:
cw (g) := d(p, g · p) − inf γ (long(γ) − |γ|w ),
where the infimum is taken over all the paths γ between p and g · p. Because Xr
is hyperbolic, the map qw : Γ → R defined by qw := cw − cw−1 is a quasimorphism
on Γ (Proposition 3.10 of [Fuj98]). Moreover, the homogeneous quasimorphism q̃w
n
defined by q̃w (g) = limn→∞ q(gn ) does not depend on the choice of p ∈ Xr .
Let us now prove the following Proposition, which will not be useful to prove
that the space of classes of non trivial quasimorphisms has infinite dimension.
Proposition 4.8. Let (αk )k∈Z be the geodesic axis in the ray graph previously
defined. Let w be a subsegment of this geodesic of length greater than 10B, where
B is the ceiling of the (2, 4)-Morse constant of the ray graph. The quasimorphism
q̃w given by Fujiwara’s construction is non trivial.
Remark. Since we know the hyperbolicity constant of the graph X∞ , we can
deduce from it the hyperbolicity constant on the ray graph, and thus compute B:
hence the segment w can be explicitly chosen.
Proof. Since q̃w is homogeneous, it suffices to show that it is not a morphism in
order to prove that it is non trivial. We first prove that q̃w (h) is not equal to zero,
where h = t1 t2 t1 is the loxodromic element of Γ previously defined. We then show
that q̃w (t1 ) = q̃w (t2 ) = 0: thus q̃w (t1 t2 t1 ) 6= q̃w (t1 ) + q̃w (t2 ) + q̃w (t1 ), i.e. q̃w is not
a morphism.
The first affirmation is a consequence of Proposition 4.5. This is the strategy
described by Calegari in [Cal09b], page 74: if we denote by m the length of w and if
we choose p = α0 , for all k ∈ N we have cw (hkm ) = k and cw−1 (hkm ) = 0. Indeed,
the first inequality is clear, and for the second one, we use Lemma 3.3 of [Fuj98]:
the paths which realize the infimum are (2, 4)-geodesics. Thus they stay in a Bneighborhood of the axis (αk )k , according to the Morse Lemma (3.2). Moreover,

RAY GRAPH AND QUASIMORPHISMS ON A BIG MAPPING CLASS GROUP

27

this neighborhood does not contain any copy of w−1 , according to Proposition 4.5
(see [Cal09b], Section 3.5 for more details). We have:
cw (hkm ) − cw−1 (hkm )
= 1.
k→∞
k
Let us now prove that q̃w (t1 ) = q̃w (t2 ) = 0. We choose p = α0 . For all k ∈ N,
tk1 (α0 ) is the isotopy class of a curve included in the northern hemisphere. Hence
d(p, tk1 · p) = 1. We have cw (tk1 ) = cw−1 (tk1 ) = 0, thus q̃w (t1 ) = 0. Similarly, q̃w (t2 ) =
0. Finally, we have proved that q̃w is a non trivial quasimorphism.

q̃w (hm ) := lim

Remark. To prove that q̃w is not a morphism, we can also prove that Γ is a perfect
group, i.e. that every element of Γ is a product of commutators. The only morphism
from a perfect group to R is the trivial morphism. Since q̃w is not identically zero,
it is not a morphism.
We deduce from a Lemma of Calegari in [Cal09a] that Γ is a perfect group. The
Lemma claims that if g ∈ Γ is such that there exists x ∈ Xr so that d(x, gx) = 1,
then g is a product of at most 2 commutators.
Let g ∈ Γ and x ∈ Xr . We consider a path in Xr between x and gx, and
we denote it by (x = x0 , x1 , ..., xn = gx). Since Γ acts transitively on Xr , for all
1 ≤ i ≤ n − 1 there exists gi ∈ Γ which maps xi+1 on xi : thus gi is the product of at
most two commutators. It follows that g1 ...gn−1 g maps x on x1 , with d(x, x1 ) = 1.
Hence this element is also a product of at most two commutators. Finally, g is a
product of (at most 2n) commutators.
4.5. Dimension of the space of classes of non trivial quasimorphisms on Γ.
Theorem 4.9. The space Q̃(Γ) of classes of non trivial quasimorphisms on Γ has
infinite dimension.
Proof. We use Theorem 1 of Bestvina & Fujiwara [BF02]. Since Γ acts by isometries
on the ray graph which is hyperbolic, it suffices to find two loxodromic elements
h1 , h2 ∈ Γ acting by translation on their axes l1 and l2 , such that l1 and l2 have the
orientation induced by this action, and which satisfy the two following properties
(see [BF02]) :
(1) "h1 and h2 are independent": the distance between any two half axes of l1
and l2 is unbounded.
(2) "h1  h2 ": there exists a constant C such that for every segment w of l2
whose length is greater than C, for every g ∈ Γ, either g · w goes out the
B-neighborhood of l1 , or it has the opposite orientation.
Let us find two such loxodromic elements. We denote by h1 ∈ Γ the element h
previously defined (which acts by translation on the axis (αk )k ). Let φ ∈ Γ be the
isotopy class of the π-rotation around infinity. We assume that K is symmetrically
embedded around ∞, so that φ preserves K and maps each Cantor subset Ki on
−1
K−i−1 . Finally, let h2 := φh−1
. Then h1  h2 according to Proposition 4.5 and
1 φ
the Remark which follows it (the constant C := 10B works, where B is the ceiling
of the Morse constant). Moreover, we will prove that h1 and h2 are independent,
which will conclude the proof.
We proved in Corollary 2.5 that for every n ≥ 2, every ray which is in the
(n − 2)-neighborhood of hn1 (α0 ) begins like α̊2 . Similarly, every ray which is in the
(n − 1)-neighborhood of hn−1
(α0 ) begins like α̊1 .
1

28

JULIETTE BAVARD

α0
h1
α1

h1

h1
α2

α0
h−1
1

α−1
α−2

φα0
h2

h−1
1
h−1
1

h2

φα−1
h2
φα−2

φα0
h−1
2

h−1
2

φα1
h−1
2
φα2

Figure 18. h1 , h2 , their inverses and their actions on some rays
−1
A similar behavior is true for h2 , h−1
2 and h1 . We denote by σ the isotopy class
of the axial symmetry along the equator. In particular, σ is equal to its inverse,
fixes the Cantor set, and is not an element of Γ (because it does not preserve the
orientation). Moreover, because φ is also equal to its inverse, we have:
−1
h2 = φh−1
= σh1 σ −1 .
1 φ
−1
h−1
.
2 = φh1 φ
−1
h−1
.
1 = σφh1 (σφ)

RAY GRAPH AND QUASIMORPHISMS ON A BIG MAPPING CLASS GROUP

29

On the other hand, we have φα−1 = σα0 (see Figure 18). Since αn = hn1 (α0 ),
according to the third previous equality, we have for all k ∈ Z:
φα−k−1 = σαk .
If we extend the "complete sequences" vocabulary defined in Section 2 to the rays
which start in the northern hemisphere, for example by adding ’north’ or ’south’
as first term in the sequence of segments of the ray, we can code the φαk ’s. Using
Corollary 2.5 and the equality above it, we can deduce that (see Figure 18):
• For all n ≥ 2, every ray in the (n−2)-neighborhood of hn2 (φα0 ) = hn2 (σα−1 ) =
σhn−1
(α0 ) begins like φα̊−2 = σα
˚1 ;
1
n
• For all n ≥ 2, every ray in the (n−2)-neighborhood of h−n
2 (φα0 ) = φ(h1 α0 )
begins like φα̊2 ;
n
• For all n ≥ 2, every ray in the (n−2)-neighborhood of h−n
1 (α0 ) = σφh1 φσα0 =
σφhn1 α−1 begins like α̊−2 = σφα̊1 .

α−4

α−3
α−2
α−1

φα−3
φα−4

l2

φα−2 φα−1

α2
α0

α1

l1

φα0
φα1
φα2

Figure 19. Axes of h1 and h2 : this graph is isometrically embedded in Xr .
Finally, for all n ≥ 2, all the elements in the (n − 2)-neighborhood of hn1 (α0 ),
−n
h−n
2 (φα0 ) and h1 (α0 ) respectively, begins like α̊2 , φα̊−2 , φα̊2 and α̊−2
respectively. However, α̊2 , φα̊−2 , φα̊2 and α̊−2 do not have mutually disjoint representatives: these four neighborhoods are disjoint in Xr . Thus the axes l1 and l2
of h1 and h2 are such that the distance between two half-axes is unbounded.

hn2 (φα0 ),

Remark. More precisely, we have for all |n|, |m| ≥ 2 (see Figure 19):
d(hn2 (φα0 ), hm
1 (α0 )) ≥ |n| + |m| − 1.

30

JULIETTE BAVARD

5. Example of a loxodromic element with vanishing scl
Danny Calegari proved that the elements of Γ which have a bounded orbit on
the ray graph have vanishing scl (see [Cal09a]). Let us show here that the converse
is not true.
Proposition 5.1. There exists g ∈ Γ which has a loxodromic action on the ray
graph and such that scl(g) = 0.
Proof. We consider again h1 and h2 , the two loxodromic elements of Γ described
in the proof of Theorem 4.9: h1 is the element h previously defined, and h2 =
−1
φh−1
, where φ is the isotopy class of the rotation of angle π around infinity. Let
1 φ
g := h2 h1 (see Figure 20). Then g is conjugated to its inverse (because φ = φ−1 ),
and thus scl(g) = 0.
Let us show that g has a loxodromic action on the ray graph. To this end, we
construct a geodesic half-axis (γk )k in the ray graph, on which g acts by translation
(as we did before with (αk )k to prove that h is loxodromic).

h1

h2

Figure 20. The element g := h2 h1 .
Definition of (γk )k . The sequence (γk )k is defined similarly to (αk )k , except that:
• to define αk+1 from αk , we used to follow αk and turn around its Cantorendpoint counterclockwise;
• to define γk+1 from γk , we will follow γk and turn around its Cantorendpoint alternately clockwise and counterclockwise (see Figures 21 and 22).
More precisely, we define the sequence (γk )k≥0 by induction as follow:
• γ0 := α0 is the isotopy class of the segment s0 whose endpoints are ∞ and
p0 .
• For all odd k ≥ 1 (clockwise turn): to draw γk+1 , we start at ∞, we follow
γk until its Cantor-endpoint pk (in a tubular neighborhood of γk ), we turn
clockwise around this point, crossing the two adjacent segments, first sk+1 ,
and then sk , we follow γk again in a tubular neighborhood, we turn around
infinity by crossing s0 and then s−1 , we follow γk for the last time in a

RAY GRAPH AND QUASIMORPHISMS ON A BIG MAPPING CLASS GROUP

31

γ0
γ1

γ2

Figure 21. Rays γ0 , γ1 and γ2 .

tubular neighborhood until its Cantor-endpoint, and we go to the point
pk+1 without crossing the equator.
• For all even k ≥ 1 (counterclockwise turn): to draw γk+1 , we start at ∞,
we follow γk until its Cantor-endpoint pk (in a tubular neighborhood of
γk ), we turn counterclockwise around this point, crossing the two adjacent
segments, first sk , and then sk+1 , we follow γk again in a tubular neighborhood, we turn around infinity by crossing s−1 and then s0 , we follow γk for
the last time in a tubular neighborhood until its Cantor-endpoint, and we
go to the point pk+1 without crossing the equator.

32n−4
2n−3

3

32n−5

γ2n−1

...

1
3

2n−4

32n−2

32n−3

3

32n−5

3

1

K2n−1

...

γ2n
32n−1

K2n
1

Figure 22. Graphs representing γk for k odd (above) and k even (below).
Given the similarities between the constructions of (αk )k and (γk )k , we can use
the same arguments than the ones used in Section 2: in particular, Lemma 2.4, its
Corollary 2.5 and Proposition 2.7. We deduce from these results than (γk )k∈N is
geodesic.
The element g acts by translation on (γk )k . By induction, using the graphs representing the rays (as we did before to prove that h is loxodromic), we can see that
g n (γ0 ) = γ2n for all n ∈ N: see Figure 23 for n = 0, Figure 24 for n = 1, and Figure
25 for the general case.


32

JULIETTE BAVARD

γ0
h1

g

h2

1

=
γ2

3

1

Figure 23. Graph representing the image of γ0 by g, where we
decomposed the action of h2 into three smaller parts, as we did
before for h. The two graphs below represent the same ray:
g(γ0 ) = γ2 .

γ2
1
3

h1
3
1

2

3

h2
γ4

32

3

3

3

Figure 24. Action of g on γ2 .

1

RAY GRAPH AND QUASIMORPHISMS ON A BIG MAPPING CLASS GROUP

K2n

...

γ2n
32n−1

33

32n−2

1
h1

32n

32n−1

K2n+1

...
32n−2

1
h2
K2n+2

...

γ2n+2
32n+1

32n

32n−1

32n−2

1

Figure 25. Action of g on γ2n : g(γ2n ) = γ2n+2 .
References
[Bav91]

Christophe Bavard. Longueur stable des commutateurs. Enseign. Math. (2), 37(12):109–150, 1991.
[Bav16]
Juliette Bavard. Hyperbolicité du graphe des rayons et quasi-morphismes sur un gros
groupe modulaire. Geometry & Topology, 20:491–535, DOI: 10.2140/gt.2016.20.491,
2016.
[BBF]
M. Bestvina, K. Bromberg, and K. Fujiwara. Stable commutator lenght on mapping
class groups. arXiv:1306.2394.
[BCLR07] François Béguin, Sylvain Crovisier, and Frédéric Le Roux. Construction of curious
minimal uniquely ergodic homeomorphisms on manifolds: the Denjoy-Rees technique.
Ann. Sci. École Norm. Sup. (4), 40(2):251–308, 2007.
[BF02]
Mladen Bestvina and Koji Fujiwara. Bounded cohomology of subgroups of mapping
class groups. Geom. Topol., 6:69–89 (electronic), 2002.
[BG88]
Jean Barge and Étienne Ghys. Surfaces et cohomologie bornée. Invent. Math.,
92(3):509–526, 1988.
[BH99]
Martin R. Bridson and André Haefliger. Metric spaces of non-positive curvature, volume 319 of Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften [Fundamental Principles
of Mathematical Sciences]. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1999.
[BM99]
M. Burger and N. Monod. Bounded cohomology of lattices in higher rank Lie groups.
J. Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS), 1(2):199–235, 1999.
[Bro81]
Robert Brooks. Some remarks on bounded cohomology. In Riemann surfaces and related topics: Proceedings of the 1978 Stony Brook Conference (State Univ. New York,
Stony Brook, N.Y., 1978), volume 97 of Ann. of Math. Stud., pages 53–63. Princeton
Univ. Press, Princeton, N.J., 1981.
[Cal04]
Danny Calegari. Circular groups, planar groups, and the Euler class. In Proceedings
of the Casson Fest, volume 7 of Geom. Topol. Monogr., pages 431–491 (electronic).
Geom. Topol. Publ., Coventry, 2004.
[Cal09a] Danny Calegari. Big mapping class groups and dynamic. http://lamington.
wordpress.com/2009/06/22/big-mapping-class-groups-and-dynamics/, 2009.
[Cal09b] Danny Calegari. scl, volume 20 of MSJ Memoirs. Mathematical Society of Japan,
Tokyo, 2009.
[CB88]
Andrew J. Casson and Steven A. Bleiler. Automorphisms of surfaces after Nielsen
and Thurston, volume 9 of London Mathematical Society Student Texts. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, 1988.
[EK01]
H. Endo and D. Kotschick. Bounded cohomology and non-uniform perfection of mapping class groups. Invent. Math., 144(1):169–175, 2001.

34

JULIETTE BAVARD

[Eps66]
[FM11]
[Fuj98]
[Ghy01]
[Gro82]
[Han99]
[HPW]
[Kor04]
[Mat00]

[MM99]

D. B. A. Epstein. Curves on 2-manifolds and isotopies. Acta Math., 115:83–107, 1966.
Benson Farb and Dan Margalit. A Primer on Mapping Class Groups. Princeton University Press, 2011.
Koji Fujiwara. The second bounded cohomology of a group acting on a Gromovhyperbolic space. Proc. London Math. Soc. (3), 76(1):70–94, 1998.
Étienne Ghys. Groups acting on the circle. Enseign. Math. (2), 47(3-4):329–407, 2001.
Michael Gromov. Volume and bounded cohomology. Inst. Hautes Études Sci. Publ.
Math., (56):5–99 (1983), 1982.
Michael Handel. A fixed-point theorem for planar homeomorphisms. Topology,
38(2):235–264, 1999.
Sebastian Hensel, Piotr Przytycki, and Richard C.H. Webb. Slim unicorns and uniform
hyperbolicity for arc graphs and curve graphs. arXiv:1301.5577v1.
Mustafa Korkmaz. Stable commutator length of a Dehn twist. Michigan Math. J.,
52(1):23–31, 2004.
S. Matsumoto. Arnold conjecture for surface homeomorphisms. In Proceedings of the
French-Japanese Conference “Hyperspace Topologies and Applications” (La Bussière,
1997), volume 104, pages 191–214, 2000.
Howard A. Masur and Yair N. Minsky. Geometry of the complex of curves. I. Hyperbolicity. Invent. Math., 138(1):103–149, 1999.

Univ Rennes, CNRS, IRMAR - UMR 6625, F-35000 Rennes, France
E-mail address: juliette.bavard@univ-rennes1.fr

