arXiv:1503.01863v4 [] 12 Feb 2016

Dynamics of flat actions on totally disconnected,
locally compact groups
Colin D. Reid∗
University of Newcastle, School of Mathematical and Physical
Sciences, Callaghan, NSW 2308, Australia
colin@reidit.net
December 25, 2017

Abstract
Let G be a totally disconnected, locally compact group and let H
be a virtually flat (for example, polycyclic) group of automorphisms of
G. We study the structure of, and relationships between, various subgroups of G defined by the dynamics of H. In particular, we consider
the following four subgroups: the intersection of all tidy subgroups for
H on G (in the case that H is flat); the intersection of all H-invariant
open subgroups of G; the smallest closed H-invariant subgroup D such
that no H-orbit on G/D accumulates at the trivial coset; and the group
generated by the closures of contraction groups of elements of H on G.

Keywords: T.d.l.c. groups, tidy theory. MSC2010: 22D05

Contents
1 Introduction

2

2 Preliminaries
14
2.1 Tidy theory for cyclic actions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.2 Flat groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
2.3 Metrizability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
3 The relative Tits core
24
3.1 Prior results on stability of the contraction group . . . . . . . 24
∗

The author is an ARC DECRA fellow. Research supported in part by ARC Discovery
Project DP120100996.

1

3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5

Invariance of contraction groups and the relative Tits core
Relative Tits cores and elementary groups . . . . . . . . .
Subgroups containing relative Tits cores . . . . . . . . . .
Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4 The
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5

nub of a flat group
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Invariant uniscalar subgroups . . . . .
Tidy subgroups in quotients . . . . . .
Flatness below . . . . . . . . . . . . .
A decomposition theorem for the nub

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

5 Residuals
5.1 Preliminaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.2 A sufficient condition for a non-distal action
5.3 Eigenfactors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.4 Almost flat actions . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.5 The Mautner phenomenon . . . . . . . . . .
5.6 Subgroups of finite covolume . . . . . . . .

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

25
28
32
33

.
.
.
.
.

35
35
36
40
42
45

.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.

47
47
52
57
59
64
67

6 Open envelopes
6.1 Reduced envelopes of an almost flat subgroup . .
6.2 Compact normal subgroups of reduced envelopes
6.3 Cocompact envelopes and subnormal subgroups .
6.4 Faithful weakly decomposable groups . . . . . . .

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

69
69
70
75
76

1
1.1

.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.

Introduction
Background

Since the groundbreaking article [30] of G. Willis in 1994, a suite of tools
for studying totally disconnected, locally compact (t.d.l.c.) groups G has
been developed using the dynamics of the action of automorphisms of G
on the space of compact open subgroups of G. The key concepts are the
scale, which is a measure of how far an automorphism α fails to normalize a
compact open subgroup, and tidy subgroups, which are the compact open
subgroups that have the least displacement under α. The scale is a numerical invariant that can be thought of as analogous to the spectral radius in
operator theory, and moreover it turns out that the tidy subgroups form
a class of subgroups on which the action of α is especially well-behaved,
with important structural characterizations. This area of research may thus
be termed scale theory or tidy theory. The trivial case of tidy theory
is when there exist arbitrarily small compact open subgroups that are αinvariant; in this case, we say α is anisotropic. More generally, a group of

2

automorphisms is defined to be anisotropic if every element is anisotropic,
and G is anisotropic if Inn(G) is anisotropic.
Tidy theory has since been generalized from actions of cyclic groups to
endomorphisms ([35]) and also to flat group actions, which are defined to
be actions of a group H on the t.d.l.c. group G, such that there exists a
compact open subgroup U that is tidy for every element of H. The theory
of flat groups was introduced in [33], although the term ‘flat’ itself appeared
slightly later (see [1], which also gives a more geometric presentation of the
results in [33]). The class of flat groups is surprisingly large: for instance
all finitely generated nilpotent groups of automorphisms are flat, and all
polycyclic groups of automorphisms are virtually flat. Nevertheless, flat
groups possess a special structure: given a flat group H, the set of uniscalar
elements Hu (that is, the normalizer of any compact open subgroup that
is tidy for H) forms a normal subgroup of H, and the quotient H/Hu is a
torsion-free abelian group. If H is flat of finite rank, that is, H/Hu is
finitely generated, then the tidy subgroups for H admit something akin to
an eigenspace decomposition.
Tidy theory has also been deepened, especially in the case of actions of
Z, by the investigation of the role played by certain subgroups in controlling
the dynamics. The contraction group con(α) of an automorphism α, that
is, the set of elements x ∈ G such that αn (x) converges to the identity, plays
a critical role in tidy theory. One can show that α is anisotropic if and only
if both α and α−1 have trivial contraction group.
An important fact for the theory of t.d.l.c. groups (which does not hold
for connected locally compact groups) is the result of Baumgartner–Willis
and Jaworski ([2],[12]) that the contraction group also controls contraction
relative to a closed subgroup: specifically, if K is an α-invariant closed
subgroup of G, then the set of elements x ∈ G such that αn (x)K converges
to K in the coset space G/K is precisely con(α)K. This suggests the idea
of decomposing the action of α into an ‘anisotropic’ action on the coset
space G/K, where K is the smallest closed subgroup containing con(α) and
con(α−1 ), and a residual action on the subgroup K itself. As we shall see,
this idea can be usefully generalized to flat group actions.

1.2

The relative Tits core

Contraction groups were used in [6] to define the Tits core G† of a t.d.l.c.
group G:
G† := hcon(α) | α ∈ Inn(G)i.
In this paper, we consider the notion of the relative Tits core of the set
A of automorphisms of G (or a subset of G):
G†A := hcon(α) | α ∈ A ∪ A−1 i.
Of particular interest is the case when A is a singleton (in which case we
define G†α = G†{α} , and it will transpire that G†α = G†hαi ), or when A is a flat
3

group of automorphisms. In fact, the invariance properties of the relative
Tits core will allow us to work in many cases with subgroups A of G that
are almost flat, that is, such that some closed cocompact subgroup of A
is flat on G. (In particular, virtually flat groups of automorphisms can be
interpreted as almost flat in this sense.)
Remark 1.1. A similar notion has been studied in the context of Lie groups,
where given x ∈ G, the group hcon(x), con(x−1 )i is called the Mautner
subgroup associated to x; see [9].
The relative Tits core is defined in terms of the contraction groups of
individual elements of A. However, in the case that A is a flat subgroup
such that A/Au is finitely generated (or A contains a cocompact subgroup
of this form), we shall see that G†A plays an important role in the action of
A as a whole.
Using the results of [2] and [6], we will obtain some invariance properties
of the relative Tits core. Like the scale function, the relative Tits core G†x
of x ∈ G remains constant under sufficiently small perturbations of x.
Theorem 1.2 (See Proposition 3.7 and Theorem 3.8). Let G be a t.d.l.c.
group.
(i) Let x ∈ G and let U be a compact open subgroup of G that is tidy for
x. Let u, v ∈ U and let n ∈ Z \ {0}. Then
G†x = G†uxn v .
S
Consequently, G†x = G†X , where X = n∈Z U xn U .
(ii) Let X be a subset of G and let Y be the set of all elements y ∈ G such
that con(y) ≤ G†X . Then Y is a clopen subset of G. In particular,
G†X = G†X .
Corollary 1.3. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let H be an almost flat subgroup
of G. Then NG (G†H ) is open in G.
In particular, G†g has open normalizer for all g ∈ G. This contrasts with
the normalizers of con(g) and nub(g): see §3.5.
Another interesting case of invariance concerns subgroups that are either
cocompact or of finite covolume.
Theorem 1.4 (See §3.2). Let G be a t.d.l.c. group, let H be a closed subgroup
of G and let K be a subgroup of H. Suppose that K is either cocompact in
H or of finite covolume in H (or both). Then for all h ∈ H, there exists
k ∈ K and t ∈ G†k such that con(h) = tcon(k)t−1 . As a consequence,
{G†h | h ∈ H} = {G†k | k ∈ K},
and hence G†H = G†K .
4

In [6], it was shown that if D is a dense subgroup of the t.d.l.c. group
G that is normalized by G† , then G† ≤ D. Here is a relative version of this
result.
Theorem 1.5 (See §3.4). Let G be a t.d.l.c. group, let D be a subgroup of
G (not necessarily closed), and let X ⊆ D. Suppose that there is an open
subgroup U of G such that U ∩ G†X ≤ NG (D). Then G†X ≤ D.

1.3

The nub of a flat group

Let H be a flat group of automorphisms of the t.d.l.c. group G. The nub
nub(H) of H is the intersection of all tidy subgroups for H. This generalizes
the notion of the nub of an automorphism introduced in [34]; in particular,
nub(α) = nub(hαi).
For a general flat group, the nub is more mysterious than in the cyclic
case. The difficulties emerge already in the case that H is uniscalar. For
instance, nub(H) can have proper H-invariant open subgroups (see Example 4.1). However, we are able to obtain some structural results for the
nub. The nubs of the subgroups of H are all normal in nub(H), and nubs
of uniscalar flat groups have open normalizer (see Corollary 4.6). If H has
a uniscalar normal subgroup L such that H/L is polycyclic, then the nub of
H can be written as a product of nub(L) and finitely many nubs of cyclic
subgroups of H.
Theorem 1.6 (See Theorem 4.19). Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let H be a
flat group of automorphisms of G. Let L be a uniscalar normal subgroup of
H such that H/L is polycyclic. Then there is a finite subset {α1 , α2 , . . . , αn }
of H such that
nub(H) = nub(L)nub(α1 )nub(α2 ) . . . nub(αn ).
The automorphism groups H satisfying the hypotheses of Theorem 1.6
are exactly the flat groups H of finite rank (that is, H/Hu is finitely
generated); one can then always take L = Hu . In Theorem 1.6, we make
the hypothesis that H/L is polycyclic, rather than setting L = Hu , in order
to gain insight into the nubs of some possibly uniscalar groups. In particular,
we obtain the following corollary.
Corollary 1.7. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let H be a polycyclic flat group
of automorphisms of G. Then there is a finite subset {α1 , α2 , . . . , αn } of H
such that
nub(H) = nub(α1 )nub(α2 ) . . . nub(αn ).

1.4

Residuals

Let G be a topological group. The discrete residual Res(G) of G is the
intersection of all open normal subgroups of G. More generally, given a
5

group H of automorphisms of G, one can define ResG (H), the discrete
residual of H on G, to be the intersection of all open H-invariant subgroups of G. It is straightforward to show that the action of H on the
coset space G/ResG (H) is distal. One can also define the distal residual DistG (H), which is the smallest closed H-invariant subgroup of G such
that H acts distally on G/DistG (H). We also define the 1-distal residual Dist∗G (H), which is the smallest closed H-invariant subgroup of G such
that no H-orbit on G/Dist∗G (H) accumulates at the trivial coset. (In general Dist∗G (H) ≤ DistG (H), and it is not clear if this inequality can be
strict, but certainly Dist∗G (H) = {1} if and only if DistG (H) = {1}.) Evidently Dist∗G (H) contains the contraction group of every element of H, so
G†H ≤ Dist∗G (H).
One can iterate the process of taking the discrete residual of an action,
to produce a (possibly transfinite) descending chain of closed subgroups of
G such that H has residually discrete action on each factor, terminating
in a group Res∞
G (H), which is the largest H-invariant subgroup of G that
has no proper open H-invariant subgroup. It is straightforward to show
(see Lemma 5.3) that no H-orbit on G/Res∞
G (H) accumulates at the trivial
coset.
In general, one thus has the following inclusions:
G†H ⊆ Dist∗G (H) ⊆ AG (H) ⊆ ResG (H),

(1)

where AG (H) is either DistG (H) or Res∞
G (H).

1.5

A characterization of compactly generated uniscalar flat
subgroups

Compactly generated subgroups of G that normalize a compact open subgroup can be characterized in several ways.
Theorem 1.8 (See Theorem 5.13). Let G be a t.d.l.c. group, let H be a
compactly generated closed subgroup of G, acting by conjugation, and let K
be a closed H-invariant subgroup of G.
Then the following are equivalent:
(i) DistK (H) is compact;
(ii) ResK (H) is compact;
(iii) H normalizes a compact open subgroup of K.
Moreover, if any of the above conditions is satisfied, then
nubK (H) = ResK (H) = Res∞
K (H) = DistK (H)
and H acts ergodically on nubK (H), with nubK (H) = Dist∗K (H) in the case
that nubK (H) is metrizable.
6

The following corollary, which is a strengthening of [5, Corollary 4.1],
follows from the special case H = K and DistK (H) = {1}.
Corollary 1.9. Let G be a distal t.d.l.c. group. Then every compactly generated closed subgroup of G is a SIN group.
Nilpotent groups are distal, so Corollary 1.9 also immediately implies the
main theorem of [31], that compactly generated nilpotent t.d.l.c. groups are
SIN groups. However, as noted in [31], there are non-SIN nilpotent t.d.l.c.
groups, so distal t.d.l.c. groups are not SIN groups in general.
We also obtain the following corollary from Theorems 1.6 and 1.8. Write
nub2G (H) for nubnubG (H) (H).
Corollary 1.10. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let H be a finitely generated
flat group of automorphisms of G. Then the action of H on nub2G (H) is
ergodic. If in addition Hu is finitely generated, then nub2G (H) = nubG (H).

1.6

The discrete residual of the action of an almost finiterank flat subgroup

If G is a metrizable t.d.l.c. group and H is a compactly generated flat subgroup of G (or more generally, H has a cocompact subgroup of this kind),
we can say more about the relationships between the subgroups in (1) using
tidy theory, even in the case that ResG (H) is not compact. In particular,
all the groups in (1) are actually equal, except that G†H may be properly
contained in DistG (H).
Theorem 1.11 (See Theorem 5.17). Let G be a t.d.l.c. group, let H be a
compactly generated closed subgroup of G, and suppose there is a cocompact
closed subgroup K of H such that K is flat on G.
(i) The following subgroups of G are all equal to ResG (H):
ResG (K), G†H nubG (K), G†H nubG (Ku ), DistG (H), Res∞
G (H).
(ii) The normalizer of ResG (H) in G is open. Indeed, ResG (H) is normalized by every tidy subgroup for the action of K on G.
(iii) H is anisotropic and flat on NG (G†H )/G†H .
(iv) G†H is a cocompact normal subgroup of ResG (H). Indeed, ResG (H)/G†H
is the nub of the action of H on NG (G†H )/G†H .
(v) If G is metrizable then Dist∗G (H) = ResG (H).
We highlight the particular case when H has a polycyclic subgroup with
cocompact closure.
7

Corollary 1.12 (See §5.4). Let G be a t.d.l.c. group, let H ≤ G, and suppose
there is a polycyclic subgroup K of H such that K is cocompact in H. Let
V be the set of open H-invariant subgroups of G. Then {V /G†H | V ∈ V} is
a base of neighbourhoods of the trivial coset in G/G†H .
In particular, if every element of the polycyclic subgroup H has trivial
contraction group, then there exist arbitrarily small open normal subgroups
of G normalized by H. (Compare [23, Theorem 4.1].)
Theorem 1.11(ii) also has the potential to limit the possibilities for
ResG (H) in terms of the normal subgroup structure of compact open subgroups. The following is an illustration of this idea.
Corollary 1.13 (See §5.4). Let G be a non-discrete t.d.l.c. group, let H be a
compactly generated closed subgroup of G, and suppose there is a cocompact
closed subgroup K of H such that K is flat on G. Suppose that every compact
open subgroup U of G is just infinite, that is, every non-trivial closed
normal subgroup of U has finite index. Then the following dichotomy holds:
(a) If H normalizes a compact open subgroup of G, then there is a base of
neighbourhoods of the identity in G consisting of compact open subgroups
normalized by H;
(b) If H does not normalize any compact open subgroup of G, then ResG (H)
is the unique smallest open subgroup of G normalized by H.

1.7

The Mautner phenomenon and subgroups of finite covolume

If H is a subgroup of G and D is a subgroup of G normalized by H,
there is a smallest closed H-invariant subgroup Dist∗G/D (H) of G such that
Dist∗G/D (H) ≥ D and the conjugation action of H on G/Dist∗G/D (H) is such
that no orbit accumulates at the trivial coset. It is clear that Dist∗G/D (H) ≥
Dist∗G/E (H) whenever D ≥ E. The residual K = Dist∗G/H (H) is of particular significance: K is then a t.d.l.c. group containing H such that
K = Dist∗K/H (H), and for any such group, a version of the Mautner phenomenon applies.
Theorem 1.14 (See §5.5). Let G be a topological group and let H be a
subgroup of G such that G = Dist∗G/H (H).
Let X be a topological space admitting an action of G by homeomorphisms, such that the map G → X; g 7→ gx is continuous for all x ∈ X.
Let x ∈ X; suppose that x is fixed by H, and that no H-orbit on X \ {x}
accumulates at x. Then x is fixed by G.
Given a subgroup H of G of finite covolume, we can use the Mautner
phenomenon to obtain a restriction on Dist∗G/H (H), and hence on G† (which
is the same as the relative Tits core G†H , by Theorem 1.4).
8

Theorem 1.15 (See §5.6). Let G be a metrizable t.d.l.c. group, let H be a
closed subgroup of G of finite covolume,
T let U be the set of identity neighbourhoods in G and define K(H) := U ∈U HU H.
(i) We have
G† ≤ Dist∗G/H (H) = K(H).
(ii) The group D = Dist∗G/H (H) is the unique largest closed subgroup D of
G such that H ≤ D and H acts ergodically on D/H.
Corollary 1.16. Let G be a metrizable t.d.l.c. group, and suppose that G†
is dense in G; equivalently, in every Hausdorff quotient G/N of G, some
element has non-trivial contraction group. Let H be a subgroup of G of finite
covolume. Then H acts ergodically on G/H by left translation.

1.8

Reduced envelopes of flat subgroups

Definition 1.17. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let X ⊆ G. An envelope
of X in G is an open subgroup of G that contains X. Say an envelope E
of X is reduced if, whenever E2 is an envelope of X, then |E : E ∩ E2 | is
finite.
The circumstances under which a subgroup of G has a unique smallest
envelope are quite special: consider for instance the case of a compact subgroup of G that is not open. However, there are general circumstances under
which reduced envelopes exist, and when they exist, they are clearly unique
up to commensurability. If H ≤ G normalizes a compact open subgroup U
of G, then HU is a reduced envelope for H. More generally, if H is a flat
subgroup of G, a natural candidate for a reduced envelope for H is the group
hH, U i, where U is tidy for H. We confirm that hH, U i is indeed reduced
provided that H/Hu is finitely generated. In fact, we obtain a reduced envelope for H ≤ G whenever H has a closed cocompact subgroup K such that
K is flat and K/Ku is finitely generated (so in particular, every polycyclic
subgroup of G has a reduced envelope).
Theorem 1.18 (See §6.1). Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let K be a closed
flat subgroup of G such that K/Ku is finitely generated.
Let U be a compact
T
open subgroup that is tidy for K and let U0 = k∈K kU k −1 .
(i) The product G†K U0 is the group generated by all K-conjugates of U .
Hence hK, U i is a reduced envelope for K in G, and moreover
hK, U i = G†K U0 K.
(ii) Let H ≤ G such that K is cocompact in H. Then H has a reduced
envelope in G, and every reduced envelope for H in G is also a reduced
envelope for K in G. Moreover, given any reduced envelope E of H,
then G†H H is a cocompact subgroup of E.
9

We obtain further restrictions on reduced envelopes in the case that the
almost flat subgroup is subnormal.
Theorem 1.19 (See §6.3). Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let H be a compactly
generated closed subnormal subgroup of G. Suppose that there is a cocompact
subgroup of H that is flat on G. Let E be a reduced envelope of H. Then
the following holds:
(i) H is a cocompact subgroup of E.
(ii) We have
E † = H † and Res(E) = Res∞ (E) = Res(H) = Res∞ (H).
In particular, both E † and Res(E) are subgroups of H characterized by
the internal structure of H.

1.9

Non-closed contraction groups

Let W be the class of t.d.l.c. groups that admit a non-degenerate faithful
weakly decomposable action on a Boolean algebra. As observed by P.-E.
Caprace, G. Willis and the author in [8], W includes many of the known
examples of groups in the class S of non-discrete, compactly generated,
topologically simple t.d.l.c. groups G. The class W is considerably larger
than just S ∩ W : for instance, if G is a t.d.l.c. group with trivial quasicenter and W contains some open subgroup of G, then W contains every
open subgroup of G, and also every closed normal subgroup of G.
By [8, Corollary K], given G ∈ S ∩ W , then some g ∈ G has non-closed
contraction group. We can use the structure of reduced envelopes to extend
this result to all of W : given G ∈ W , either all contraction groups in G are
trivial or there exists a non-closed contraction group in G.
Theorem 1.20 (See §6.4). Let G be a non-trivial compactly generated
t.d.l.c. group. Suppose that G has a non-degenerate faithful weakly decomposable action on a Boolean algebra. Then exactly one of the following holds:
(i) G is anisotropic and has arbitrarily small non-trivial compact normal
subgroups.
(ii) There exists g ∈ G such that nub(g) is non-trivial, in other words,
con(g) is not closed.
Corollary 1.21. Let G be a non-trivial t.d.l.c. group. Suppose that G has
a non-degenerate faithful weakly decomposable action on a Boolean algebra,
and suppose there exists g ∈ G such that con(g) 6= {1}. Then there exists
h ∈ G such that con(h) is not closed.

10

1.10

Example: Neretin groups

Let q ≥ 2 and let Tq be the locally finite tree in which every vertex has q + 1
neighbours. Given a set A of vertices, write Tq \ A for the subgraph of Tq
induced by the vertices V Tq \A. A spheromorphism of Tq is an equivalence
class of graph isomorphisms from Tq \ A to Tq \ B, where A and B are finite,
and two such maps are considered equivalent if they agree except on finitely
many vertices. Note that if Tq \A has no vertices of degree ≤ 1, then any two
equivalent isomorphisms of Tq \ A are actually equal as graph isomorphisms.
The set of all spheromorphisms of Tq then forms a group under composition,
the Neretin group Nq , which carries a t.d.l.c. group topology generated as
follows: a basic neighbourhood UA of the identity, where A ranges over the
finite subtrees of Tq , is given by all isomorphisms of the graph Tq \ A that
leave invariant each component of this graph. This group was introduced in
[20].
By [14], Nq is a compactly generated simple group. There is a nondegenerate faithful weakly decomposable action of Nq , given by the action of
Nq on (the clopen subsets of) the space of ends of Tq , so in fact Nq ∈ S ∩W .
Moreover, Nq contains a copy of Aut(Tq ) as an open subgroup. Unlike
Aut(Tq ), the group Nq possesses a diverse collection of relative Tits cores
and of flat subgroups of arbitrarily large finite rank, and thus provides a
relatively straightforward illustration of some of the concepts in this article.

A family of open subgroups Let q ≥ 3 be odd and let n be a positive
integer, let An be the set of vertices of Tq of distance less than n from some
fixed vertex and let Sn = An+1 \ An . Then Tq \ An is a forest of (q + 1)n
trees, with each tree having a unique vertex v ∈ Sn of degree q, and all other
vertices have degree q + 1. Form a graph Γn,q by adding edges to Tq \ An
between the vertices of Sn , so that each vertex of Sn is joined to exactly one
other vertex in Sn (this is possible as |Sn | is even). Then Γn,q is a forest
consisting of (q + 1)n /2 trees, each of which is isomorphic to Tq . The group
Un,q = Aut(Γn,q ) has the following structure:
Y
Aut(C) ⋊ Sym(C),
Un,q ∼
=
C∈C

where C is the set of components of Γn,q and each of the groups Aut(C) is
isomorphic to Aut(Tq ). Note that Aut(Tq ) has a simple open subgroup of
index 2, which we denote Aut(Tq )+ , and correspondingly Aut(C)+ is the
simple subgroup of Aut(C) of index 2. Moreover Un,q is an open subgroup
of Nq in a natural sense. For each component C of Γn,q , we regard Aut(C)
as a direct factor of Un,q in the natural way, and we choose some fixed
isomorphisms between the components in order to specify Sym(C) as a finite
subgroup of Un,q . Now fix n and q and let G = Nq .
11

Relative Tits cores Let g ∈ Un,q . Since Un,q is open, we have G†g =
Q
(Un,q )†g . By raising g to a suitable power we may assume g ∈ C∈C Aut(C).
In this case, by considering the situation of Aut(Tq ) (see Example 3.16 below), it is straightforward to see that for each of the components C of Γn,q ,
either (Un,q )†g contains Aut(C)+ (if the action of g on C is hyperbolic) or
(Un,q )†g has trivial intersection with Aut(C) (if the action
of g on C is not
Q
hyperbolic). In particular, all of the direct products C∈C ′ Aut(C)+ occur
as relative Tits cores of G, where C ′ is any subset of C. In this situation,
it is straightforward to show that G†g is closed and cocompact in hG†g , gi,
although G†g does not necessarily contain any non-zero power of g: for instance, g could act as a hyperbolic element on the component C1 and as
an elliptic element of infinite order on another component C2 , and then G†g
would only take account of the hyperbolic component for g. As expected
from Corollary 1.3, the normalizer of G†g is an open subgroup of G; indeed,
in this case we see that NG (G†g ) contains a finite index subgroup of Un,q ,
although G†g is not necessarily normal in Un,q . More generally, if H is any
subgroup of Un,q , we see that
Y
G†H =
Aut(C)+ = ResG (H)
C∈C ′

where C ′ is some subset of C.

Flat groups and nubs Let C ′ be a subset of C. For each C ∈ C ′ , choose
some gC ∈ Un,q that has hyperbolic action on C (with displacement distance
1) and trivial action on the other components. Then H = hgC | C ∈ C ′ i is
a finitely generated free abelian subgroup of G. It is easily seen that H is
flat on G and Hu = {1}, so H is flat of rank |C ′ |. The nubs of the elements
gC acting on G are non-trivial (again by considering standard properties of
Aut(Tq )), but nevertheless it is easily seen that
Y
Y
Y
nubG (H) = nubG (
gC ) =
nubG (gC ) =
nubAut(C) (gC ),
C∈C ′

C∈C ′

C∈C ′

illustrating Corollary 1.7.

Reduced envelopes Let H be as before. Then we can find a finite subgroup of Un,q that permutes C faithfully in a manner compatible with the
actions of the elements gC , in order to form a semidirect product
L = H ⋊ (Sym(C ′ ) × Sym(C \ C ′ ))
12

such that {gC | C ∈ C ′ } is a conjugacy class of L. Then L is not flat, since
its derived group is not uniscalar, giving an example of a virtually flat group
that is not flat (see also Example 2.21). However, as in Theorem 1.18(ii), L
has a reduced envelope in G. In fact, there is a reduced envelope E of L is
of the following form:
Y
Y
E=(
Aut(C) ×
KC ) ⋊ (Sym(C ′ ) × Sym(C \ C ′ ))
C∈C ′

C∈C\C ′

where KC is a compact open subgroup of Aut(C) (for instance, for KC one
could take the fixator in Aut(C) of C ∩ Sn ). Indeed, every finitely generated
subgroup of Un,q will have a reduced envelope of this form for a unique
C ′ ⊆ C. Moreover, in light of the structure of relative Tits cores, all such
reduced envelopes can be realized as a reduced envelope of a cyclic subgroup.
In the above discussion, it is important to note that given an element
g ∈ Un,q , the concepts of relative Tits core, nub and reduced envelopes of g
in Nq are all defined purely in terms of the structure of Nq as a topological
group and the choice of g as an element of Nq , without any direct reference
to Un,q , nor to the nature of Nq as a group of tree spheromorphisms. So we
can recover some relatively complicated subgroups of Nq , such as the groups
Q
+
C∈C ′ Aut(C) , as invariants of the pair (Nq , g) where g is a suitably chosen
element of Nq .

1.11

Open questions

If a t.d.l.c. group G has dense Tits core, as in the hypothesis of Corollary 1.16, then clearly it has no non-trivial discrete quotient. As far as the
author is aware, it is possible that the converse holds for compactly generated t.d.l.c. groups G. By [2, Theorem 3.8] and [5, Theorem A], Question 1
below reduces to the case where G is topologically simple, so it also suffices to determine whether or not G† can be trivial for G ∈ S , where S is
the class of non-discrete, compactly generated, topologically simple t.d.l.c.
groups.
Question 1. Let G be a compactly generated t.d.l.c. group such that
Res(G) = G. Is G† necessarily dense in G?
An affirmative answer to the following would answer the previous question, but also have important consequences for the structure of elementary
groups. (See §3.3 for further discussion.)
Question 2. Let G be a non-elementary (in the sense of Wesolek [28])
second-countable t.d.l.c. group. Must there exist some non-trivial element
g such that g ∈ G†g ?

13

Corollary 1.10 and Corollary 1.7 give partial affirmative answers to the
following question (in particular, it is completely solved in the case that H
is polycyclic), but the full answer is not clear. Example 4.1 below shows
that some restriction on the structure of the flat group is necessary. An
affirmative answer to Question 3(ii) would imply an affirmative answer to
Question 3(i).
Question 3. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let H be a finitely generated flat
group of automorphisms of G.
(i) Is the action of H on nub(H) ergodic?
(ii) Does there exist a finite subset {α1 , α2 , . . . , αn } of H such that
nub(H) = nub(α1 )nub(α2 ) . . . nub(αn )?
The proof of Theorem 1.20 and the known examples of groups in W
suggest affirmative answers to the following questions. Note that by Corollary 1.9, to answer Question 4(ii) affirmatively it is enough to show that
under the given hypotheses, G is distal.
Question 4. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group. Suppose that G has a non-degenerate
faithful weakly decomposable action on a Boolean algebra.
(i) Let g ∈ G such that nub(g) = {1}. Does it follow that con(g) = {1}?
(ii) Suppose that G is compactly generated and anisotropic. Does it follow
that G is a SIN group?

Acknowledgement
I thank Pierre-Emmanuel Caprace, Riddhi Shah, Phillip Wesolek and George
Willis for their very helpful comments and suggestions. I also thank the
anonymous referee for a very thorough and helpful report with many good
suggestions for improvements. In particular, Riddhi Shah alerted me to [24,
Theorem 3.1], which led to a proof of Theorem 1.8, §3.3 is based on a suggestion of the referee and discussions with Phillip Wesolek, several examples
are based on suggestions by George Willis, and the proof of Theorem 1.4 is
partly based on an argument shown to me by George Willis.

2

Preliminaries

For the purposes of this article, all homomorphisms are required to be continuous. Given a topological group G, Aut(G) denotes the group of automorphisms of G, that is, permutations of G that are both group automorphisms and homeomorphisms. Given X ⊆ G and Y ⊆ Aut(G), we say X is
Y -invariant if α(X) = X for all α ∈ Y .
14

Throughout, we adopt the convention that any definition given for automorphisms of a group G also applies to an element g of the group, acting
via the automorphism x 7→ gxg −1 . Similarly, definitions given for sets of
automorphisms also apply to subsets of the group itself. In fact, the distinction between subgroups and automorphisms will turn out to be largely
inconsequential, since a t.d.l.c. group G with a group of automorphisms H
can be extended to a t.d.l.c. group G ⋊ H in which G is open, and we are
concerned with properties of the action of H that are invariant on restricting
the action to an open H-invariant subgroup.
The following classical result is a defining feature of the theory of t.d.l.c.
groups, and will be frequently used without comment.
Theorem 2.1 (Van Dantzig, [10]). Let G be a t.d.l.c. group. Then the
compact open subgroups of G form a base of neighbourhoods of the identity.

2.1

Tidy theory for cyclic actions

Let G be a t.d.l.c. group, let α ∈ Aut(G), and let U be a compact open
subgroup of G. Define the subgroups
\
\
U+ =
αn (U ); U− =
αn (U ).
n≥0

n≤0

Then U is tidy above for α if U = U+ U− ; equivalently, there exist
subgroups V and W of U such that U = V W , α(V ) ≥ V and α(W ) ≤ W .
It is tidy below for α if the group U++ := {g ∈ G | ∀n ≪ 0 : αn (g) ∈ U }
is closed.
A tidy subgroup for α is a compact open subgroup that is both tidy
above and tidy below. More generally, a compact open subgroup U is said
to be tidy (above, below) for a set of automorphisms A if it is tidy (above,
below) for each element α ∈ A. Some caution is required here, as a compact open subgroup U may be tidy for A without being tidy for the group
generated by A (see [33, Example 3.5]).
The scale s(α) is the minimum value of the (necessarily finite) index
|α(U ) : α(U ) ∩ U | as U ranges over the compact open subgroups of G. We
say α is uniscalar if s(α) = s(α−1 ) = 1; equivalently, α is uniscalar if it
leaves invariant a compact open subgroup of G.
These concepts originate in [30], where it was shown that a tidy subgroup
exists for every automorphism of a t.d.l.c. group.
Theorem 2.2 ([30] Theorem 1 and [32] Theorem 3.1). Let G be a t.d.l.c.
group and let α ∈ Aut(G). Then there exists a tidy subgroup for α. Indeed,
given a compact open subgroup U of G, then U is tidy for α if and only if
|α(U ) : α(U ) ∩ U | = s(α).
Some equivalent formulations of the tidy below property are effectively
15

given in [30]. We can thus take any of the equivalent statements in Lemma 2.3
below as the definition of tidiness below, without any danger of ambiguity.
Lemma 2.3 (See [30] Lemma 3 and its corollary). Let G be a t.d.l.c. group
and let α ∈ Aut(G). Define
U++ := {g ∈ G | ∃m ∈ Z : ∀n ≤ m : αn (g) ∈ U };
U−− := {g ∈ G | ∃m ∈ Z : ∀n ≥ m : αn (g) ∈ U };
LU := U++ ∩ U−− .
Then the following are equivalent.
(i) U++ is closed;
(ii) U−− is closed;
(iii) LU ≤ U ;
(iv) U++ ∩ U = U+ ;
(v) U−− ∩ U = U− .
Proof. In [30], conditions (i)–(iv) are shown to be equivalent to the condition
that U is tidy, under the assumption that U is tidy above. However, we can
bypass the assumption that U is tidy above by noting (as in [30]) that any
compact
T open subgroup V can be replaced with the tidy above subgroup
U = ni=0 αi (V ) for n large enough. We see that U+ = V+ , U++ = V++ ,
U−− = V−− , LU = LV and LV ∩ V ≤ U . So V is tidy below if and only if
U is tidy below, and U is tidy below if and only if any one of the equivalent
statements (i)–(iv) is satisfied, which can all be translated to corresponding
statements for V . One can see the equivalence of (iv) and (v) by noting that
replacing α with α−1 reverses the roles of (iv) and (v), but has no effect on
(iii).
There are strong restrictions on the dynamics of α on orbits that intersect
a tidy subgroup. In particular, an α-orbit cannot leave the tidy subgroup
U and then return to it, and any forward or backward α-orbit that escapes
from U is necessarily unbounded.
Lemma 2.4 ([33] Lemma 2.6). Let G be a t.d.l.c. group, let α ∈ Aut(G),
let U be a compact open subgroup of G that is tidy for α and let u ∈ U .
(i) The set {αn (u) | n ≥ 0} is bounded (that is, relatively compact in G)
if and only if u ∈ U− .
(ii) The set {n ∈ Z | αn (u) ∈ U } is an interval in Z.

16

For a fixed automorphism α, the behaviours of the classes of tidy above
and tidy below subgroups are somewhat divergent. Tidy above subgroups
can be thought of as ‘small enough’; in particular, they form a base of
identity neighbourhoods, by the following result:
Proposition 2.5 ([30] Lemma 1). Let G be a t.d.l.c. group, let α ∈ Aut(G)
and let U be a compact open subgroup of G. Then there exists n (depending
on U and α)
T such that for all intervals I ∈ Z of length at least n, the
intersection i∈I αi (U ) is tidy above for α.
Tidy below subgroups are instead ‘large enough’, in a way that is characterized by the nub nub(α) of α. The nub is the intersection of all tidy
subgroups for α; it also admits several other equivalent definitions, as described in [34].
Proposition 2.6 ([34] Corollary 4.2). Let G be a t.d.l.c. group, let α ∈
Aut(G) and let U be a compact open subgroup of G. Then U is tidy below
for α if and only if nub(α) ≤ U . In particular, if U is tidy below for α and
V is a compact subgroup of G such that V ≥ U , then V is tidy below for α.
Theorem 2.7 ([34] Theorem 4.1). Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let α ∈
Aut(G). Then nub(α) is the largest closed subgroup of G on which α acts
ergodically and the largest compact subgroup of G that has no proper open
α-invariant subgroups. In addition, nub(α) = con(α) ∩ con(α−1 ).
We note that both the contraction group and the nub are invariant under
replacing α with a positive power.
Lemma 2.8. Let G be a topological group and let α ∈ Aut(G).
(i) Let n be a positive integer. Then con(α) = con(αn ).
(ii) Let n ∈ Z \ {0}. Then nub(α) = nub(αn ).
Proof. Suppose n is a positive integer. We have con(αn ) ≥ con(α), since
(αni )i∈N is a subsequence of (αi )i∈N . Let x ∈ con(αn ) and set xi = αi (x).
Then the sequence (xni )i∈N converges to the identity. Since αj is a continuous automorphism and αj (xk ) = xj+k for all j, k ∈ Z, it follows that
the sequence (xj+ni )i∈N converges to αj (1) = 1. Hence (xi )i∈N converges
to the identity, since it can be partitioned into finitely many subsequences
(xj+ni )i∈N for 0 ≤ j < n, each of which converges to the identity. In other
words, x ∈ con(α), completing the proof of (i).
Part (ii) now follows immediately from part (i) and Theorem 2.7.
We see that if U is tidy (above, below) for α, then it is also tidy
(above,below) for αn , for any n ∈ Z \ {0}. (For tidiness above, the converse is false: for example, if α acts on the group Zp × Zp by swapping the
two copies of Zp , then Zp × pZp is tidy for α2 , but it is not tidy above for
α.)
17

Lemma 2.9. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group, let α ∈ Aut(G), let n ∈ Z \ {0} and
let U be a compact open subgroup of G.
(i) If U is tidy above for α, then it is tidy above for αn .
(ii) U is tidy below for α if and only if it is tidy below for αn .
Proof. Given Lemma 2.3, observe that α and α−1 play symmetrical roles in
the definitions of tidy above and tidy below. Thus we may assume n > 0.
If U is tidy above for α, then U = V W with α(V ) ≥ V , so αn (V ) ≥ V ,
and α(W ) ≤ W , so αn (W ) ≤ W . Thus U is tidy above for αn , proving (i).
Part (ii) follows immediately from Proposition 2.6 and Lemma 2.8.
A characterization of when nub(α) is trivial is given in [2].1
Theorem 2.10 (See [2] Corollary 3.30 and Theorem 3.32). Let G be a t.d.l.c.
group and let α ∈ Aut(G). Then con(α) = con(α)nub(α), and nub(α) = 1
if and only if con(α) is a closed subgroup of G.
Applying the scale function to inner automorphisms defines a function
from G to the positive integers. This function is continuous (with respect
to the discrete topology on N), due to the stability properties of the tidy
subgroups.
Theorem 2.11 (Willis [30]). Let G be a t.d.l.c. group.
(i) Let U be a compact open subgroup of G. Let X be the set of elements
x ∈ X such that U is tidy for x. Then X is invariant under left and
right translations by U , in other words, X is a union of (U, U )-double
cosets. In particular, X is a clopen subset of G. In addition, for all
n ∈ Z, if x ∈ X then xn ∈ X.
(ii) The function s : G → N is continuous when N is equipped with the
discrete topology. Indeed, if U is tidy for x ∈ G, then s(x) = s(y) for
all y ∈ U xU .
(iii) Let α be an automorphism of G. Then the collection of tidy subgroups
for α is invariant under the action of α and closed under finite intersections.
Proof. (i) X is a union of (U, U )-double cosets by [30, Theorem 3], and any
union of left cosets of a fixed open subgroup is clopen. Given x ∈ X, then
xn ∈ X for all n ∈ Z by Lemma 2.9.
(ii) is [30, Theorem 3 and Corollary 4].
1

In [2], the authors often assume that the t.d.l.c. group G is metrizable, but only do
so in order to appeal to [2, Theorem 3.8]. The metrizability assumption was later shown
to be superfluous by Jaworski ([12, Theorem 1]), so the remaining results of [2] are also
valid for t.d.l.c. groups in general.

18

(iii) It is clear that the collection of tidy subgroups for α is invariant
under the action of α. The fact that this collection is closed under finite
intersections is [30, Lemma 10].
The scale function is well-behaved under positive powers.
Lemma 2.12 ([30] Corollary 3). Let G be a t.d.l.c. group, let α ∈ Aut(G)
and let n > 0 be a natural number. Then s(αn ) = s(α)n ; equivalently,
|αn (U ) : αn (U ) ∩ U |1/n = s(α)
for every compact open subgroup U that is tidy for α.
Given α ∈ Aut(G) and n > 0, then |αn (U ) : αn (U ) ∩ U |1/n = s(α) if and
only if U is tidy for α. However, the same equation holds asymptotically as
n → +∞ for any given compact open subgroup U . Thus the s(α) can be
thought of as a kind of spectral radius for α.
Theorem 2.13 ([18] Theorem 7.7). Let G be a t.d.l.c. group, let α be an
automorphism of G, and let U be a compact open subgroup of G. Then
|αn (U ) : αn (U ) ∩ U |1/n → s(α) as n → +∞.
We derive the following result from Theorem 2.13; it can also be derived
easily from [32, Proposition 4.3].
Corollary 2.14. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group, let α be an automorphism of G
and let K be an open subgroup of G such that α(K) = K. Then sG (α) =
sK (α), and every compact open subgroup of K that is tidy for α on K is
also tidy for α on G.
Proof. Let V be a compact open subgroup of K. Then V is open in G, so
by Theorem 2.13, we have
sG (α) = lim |αn (V ) : αn (V ) ∩ V |1/n = sK (α).
n→∞

The assertion about tidy subgroups follows from Theorem 2.2.
An automorphism α is anisotropic if the set of compact open α-invariant
subgroups of G forms a base of identity neighbourhoods, and isotropic if it
is not anisotropic. Given a t.d.l.c. group G and a group H acting on G (or
a subgroup H of G), we say H is uniscalar or anisotropic respectively on G
if all the automorphisms of G induced by H are so. ‘Uniscalar/anisotropic
subgroup’ should be understood in this relative sense.
Anisotropic automorphisms are necessarily uniscalar. In general, a uniscalar automorphism need not be anisotropic, however certain local structures
of the group G can force all uniscalar automorphisms to be anisotropic: for
example, if some (equivalently, every) compact open subgroup U of G is
19

topologically finitely generated and virtually pro-p, then U admits a base
of identity neighbourhoods consisting of characteristic subgroups, so any
automorphism leaving U invariant must be anisotropic.
Contraction groups and the nub can be used to characterize when an
automorphism is uniscalar or anisotropic.
Proposition 2.15. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let α ∈ Aut(G).
(i) We have s(α) = 1 if and only if con(α−1 ) is relatively compact.
(ii) Suppose that α is uniscalar. Then α is anisotropic if and only if nub(α)
is trivial.
(iii) If con(α) = con(α−1 ) = {1}, then α is anisotropic (and conversely).
Proof. For part (i), see [2, Proposition 3.24].
Suppose that α is uniscalar. Then a compact open subgroup of G is tidy
for α if and only if it is α-invariant. If α is anisotropic, then evidently the
intersection of all α-invariant subgroups for α is trivial, so nub(α) = {1}.
Conversely if nub(α) = {1}, consider a compact open subgroup U of G and
an α-invariant compact open subgroup V of G. Then by the compactness of
V \ U , there exists a finite set {V1 , VT
2 , . . . , Vn } of α-invariant compact open
subgroups of G such that W = V ∩ ni=1 Vi ≤ U . Now W is an α-invariant
compact open subgroup; since U was an arbitrary compact open subgroup of
G, we conclude by Van Dantzig’s theorem that there exist arbitrarily small
compact open α-invariant subgroups of G, that is, α is anisotropic, proving
(ii).
If α is anisotropic, then clearly con(α) = con(α−1 ) = {1}. Conversely, if
con(α) = con(α−1 ) = {1}, then α is uniscalar by part (i) and nub(α) = {1}
by Theorem 2.7, so α is anisotropic, proving (iii).

2.2

Flat groups

A group of automorphisms H of G is flat if there exists a compact open
subgroup U of G such that U is tidy for H, that is, for all α ∈ H, U is
tidy for α. More generally, any group acting on G (such as a subgroup of
G acting by conjugation) is said to be flat on G if it induces a flat group
of automorphisms, and ‘flat subgroup’ should be understood in this relative
sense. (Note that if H is a closed subgroup of G, then H may be flat on
itself without being flat on G.)
A class of groups that are evidently flat are groups H ≤ Aut(G) such
that H leaves invariant a compact open subgroup of G. More generally, it
is easily seen that in any flat group H, and given any tidy subgroup U for
H, the set of elements of H that leave U invariant form a normal subgroup,
the uniscalar part Hu of H, which does not depend on the choice of U .

20

The uniscalar part itself could potentially be any group that acts by
automorphisms on a compact open subgroup of G. However, the quotient
H/Hu has a special structure, as first described by Willis in [33]. In particular, the following holds:
Theorem 2.16 ([33] Theorem 4.15). Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let H be
a flat group of automorphisms of G. Then H/Hu is a torsion-free abelian
group, and every non-identity element of H/Hu is a finite power of an indivisible element.
The (flat) rank of a flat group is the minimum number of generators
of H/Hu .
Some sufficient conditions for a group to be a finite-rank flat group were
given in [33], with further generalizations in [26].
Theorem 2.17 ([26] Theorems 4.9 and 4.13). Let G be a t.d.l.c. group, let
H be a group of automorphisms of G, and let K be a normal subgroup of H
such that K leaves invariant a compact open subgroup of G.
(i) If H/K is finitely generated and nilpotent, then H is flat.
(ii) If H/K is polycyclic, then H has a flat subgroup of finite index.
Example 2.21 below shows that finitely generated polycyclic groups need
not be flat, and an example given after [26, Theorem 4.13] shows that finitely
generated soluble groups need not be virtually flat.
We see from Theorem 2.17 that flatness of finite rank persists on restricting the action to a closed invariant subgroup.
Corollary 2.18. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let H be a flat group of
automorphisms of G of finite rank. Let K be a closed H-invariant subgroup
of G. Then H is flat of finite rank on K.
Proof. Let U be a compact open subgroup of G that is tidy for H and let
L be the uniscalar part of H acting on G. Then U is L-invariant, so U ∩ K
is also L-invariant, and H/L is finitely generated and abelian. Hence H is
flat of finite rank on K by Theorem 2.17.
In discussions of flat subgroups of t.d.l.c. groups, it is convenient to work
with closed subgroups. We note that the flat property is well-behaved under
closure.
Lemma 2.19. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let H be a flat subgroup of G.
Then H is a flat subgroup of G and Hu is an open subgroup of H.
Proof. We see that Hu is open by Theorem 2.11, since it consists of the
uniscalar elements of H. Also by Theorem 2.11, any compact open subgroup
that is tidy for H is also tidy for H, so H is flat.
21

Definition 2.20. A subgroup H of a t.d.l.c. group G is almost flat (on G)
if H has a closed cocompact subgroup K such that K is flat on G. Say H
is almost finite-rank flat if in addition K can be chosen so that K/Ku is
finitely generated.
It is not clear at present whether an almost finite-rank flat subgroup is
necessarily virtually flat, that is, has a subgroup of finite index that is flat
on G. Virtually flat subgroups however need not be flat, as the next example
shows. In any case, almost (finite-rank) flat subgroups will be sufficiently
well-behaved for most purposes in the present paper.
Example 2.21. Let K = Qp ⋊ hti, where Qp is open in K and t acts on Qp
as multiplication by p, let G = K ≀ C where C is a finite non-trivial cyclic
group acting regularly, and let H be the polycylic subgroup hti ≀ C = B ⋊ C,
where B ∼
= Zn . Observe that no non-trivial element of B is uniscalar,
so in particular the derived group of H is not uniscalar. Hence H is not
flat. However, the finite index subgroup B of H is flat: indeed, there are
arbitrarily small tidy subgroups for B of the form Znp .
Note that if H is a closed compactly generated subgroup of G that is
almost flat, then it is almost finite-rank flat: any cocompact flat subgroup
K is compactly generated, so that K/Ku is finitely generated.
We also introduce a notion that is stronger than being flat, and is not
satisfied in general even by cyclic groups.
Definition 2.22. A group of automorphisms H of a t.d.l.c. group G is
smooth (on G) if the tidy subgroups for H on G form a base of neighbourhoods of the identity.
Note that H is uniscalar and smooth if and only if H normalizes arbitrarily small compact open subgroups. Given Van Dantzig’s theorem, this
situation is in turn equivalent to H having small invariant neighbourhoods (SIN) in its conjugation action on G: A SIN action on a topological
group is one for which there exist arbitrarily small neighbourhoods of the
identity left invariant by the action.
Although a subgroup can have virtually flat or virtually smooth action
on G without having flat action, the (relative) flat and smooth properties
are inherited from cocompact uniscalar subgroups.
Lemma 2.23. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group, let H be a closed subgroup of G.
Suppose there is a closed subgroup K of H such that K is cocompact in H
and such that K is flat and uniscalar on G. Then every open K-invariant
subgroup of G contains a compact open K-invariant subgroup of H. In
particular, H is flat and uniscalar on G, and if K is smooth on G, then so
is H.
Proof. Suppose that K is flat on G, and let O be an open K-invariant
subgroup of G. Then there is a compact open subgroup U of G that is
22

tidy for K; by replacing U with U ∩ O, we may assume U ≤ O. If K is
smooth, then U can be made arbitrarily small. Since K is uniscalar, in fact
K normalizes U . Now H = XK, where X is a compact set, so
\
\
V =
hU h−1 =
xU x−1
x∈X

h∈H

is a compact open subgroup normalized by H such that V ≤ U . In particular
H is uniscalar on G, and also V is tidy for H, so H is flat on G. If K is
smooth, then V can be made arbitrarily small, so H is smooth.

2.3

Metrizability

A topological space (or group) is metrizable if it is homeomorphic to a
metric space. Not all t.d.l.c. groups are metrizable, and for the most part
we do not need to restrict to the metrizable case, but occasionally it will be
necessary to do so. Here are some equivalent conditions.
Lemma 2.24. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group. Then the following are equivalent.
(i) G is metrizable;
(ii) G is first countable, that is, there is a countable base of neighbourhoods
of the identity;
(iii) G contains a Polish (that is, separable and completely metrizable) open
subgroup;
(iv) Every compact subgroup of G has only countably many open subgroups;
(v) Every non-discrete compact subgroup of G is homeomorphic to the
Cantor set;
(vi) G is either discrete or homeomorphic to a disjoint union of copies of
the Cantor set.
Proof. It is clear that if U is a compact open subgroup of G, then G is
homeomorphic to a disjoint union of copies of U (via the partition of G into
left cosets of U ), so G is metrizable if and only if U is metrizable. The
other properties are also stable on passing between G and U . Hence we may
assume G is profinite. It is also clear that each of the conditions (iii), (iv),
(v) and (vi) implies metrizability.
By [36, Proposition 4.1.3], G is metrizable if and only if it is an inverse
limit of a countable sequence of finite groups. An inverse limit of countably
many finite groups is evidently first countable. Conversely, by Van Dantzig’s
Theorem any base of neighbourhoods of the identity in a t.d.l.c. group can be
replaced by one of the same size consisting of compact open subgroups, so a
first countable profinite group G has a base of neighbourhoods of the identity
23

consisting of countably many open subgroups, from which we conclude that
G is an inverse limit of a countable sequence of finite groups, and that G has
only countably many open subgroups in total (since only finitely many open
subgroups of a compact group can contain a given open subgroup). Hence
(i) and (ii) are equivalent and (i) implies (iv).
Under the assumption that G is an inverse limit of a countable sequence
of finite groups, it is easily verified that G is either finite or homeomorphic
to the Cantor set, and thus G is Polish; moreover, every closed subgroup of
a Polish group is Polish. So (i) implies (iii), (v) and (vi), completing the
proof that all six conditions are equivalent.

3

The relative Tits core

Contraction groups in t.d.l.c. groups have useful stability properties, which
translate well to the context of relative Tits cores. In particular, the group
G†X is less sensitive to the choice of X than one might expect, as will be
shown in Theorem 3.8 below. First, we recall some prior work on stability
properties of contraction groups.

3.1

Prior results on stability of the contraction group

The following result on contraction groups was proved by Baumgartner–
Willis for metrizable t.d.l.c. groups, then extended to the general t.d.l.c.
case by Jaworski. (The analogous assertion does not hold in general for
connected locally compact groups: see [13, Example 4.1].)
Theorem 3.1 ([2] Theorem 3.8, [12] Theorem 1). Let G be a t.d.l.c. group,
let α ∈ Aut(G) and let H be a closed subgroup of G such that α(H) = H.
Let O(G) be the set of all identity neighbourhoods in G. Define
′

conG/H (α) := {x ∈ G | ∀U ∈ O(G) ∃n ∀n′ ≥ n : αn (x) ∈ U H}.
Then conG/H (α) = conG (α)H.
In particular, combining Theorem 3.1 with Proposition 2.15, we have a
criterion for an automorphism to have anisotropic action on a subquotient
of G.
Corollary 3.2. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group, let α ∈ Aut(G), and let H and
K be closed α-invariant subgroups of G such that K is normal in H. A
sufficient condition for α to have anisotropic action on H/K is that G†α ≤ K.
If H is open in G, this condition is also necessary.
The stability of contraction groups was also investigated in [6].
Proposition 3.3 ([6], Lemma 4.1 and Corollary 4.2). Let G be a t.d.l.c.
24

group. Let g ∈ G and let U be a compact open subgroup of G that is tidy
above for g. Then for every u ∈ U , there exists t ∈ U+ ∩ con(g−1 ) such that
con(gu) = tcon(g)t−1 .
Proposition 3.4 ([6], Proposition 5.1). Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let
A be a (not necessarily closed) subgroup of G. Given any g ∈ A, if con(g)
normalizes A, then con(g) ≤ A. In particular, any normal subgroup of G
containing g also contains con(g).
We note the following variant of Proposition 3.3 for convenience.
Corollary 3.5. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group. Let g ∈ G and let U be a compact
open subgroup of G that is tidy above for g. Then for every u ∈ U , there
exists t ∈ U+ ∩ con(g −1 ) such that
con(ug) = tcon(g)t−1 .
Proof. Let V = g−1 U g; note that V is tidy above for g. We have ug = gv
where v = g −1 ug ∈ V , so by Proposition 3.3, there exists t ∈ V+ ∩ con(g−1 )
such that
con(ug) = con(gv) = tcon(g)t−1 .
Moreover, V+ = g−1 U+ g ≤ U+ by the definition of U+ , so t ∈ U+ ∩con(g−1 ).
There is a straightforward condition for when the contraction group of
an element is the same as its contraction group acting on a closed subgroup.
Lemma 3.6. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group, let g ∈ G and let K be a closed
hgi-invariant subgroup of G. Then conK (g) = con(g) ∩ K. In particular, we
have K † = G†K if and only if G†K ≤ K.
Proof. Let g ∈ G. Given u ∈ conK (g), then for all open subgroups U of G,
we have gn ug −n ∈ K ∩ U ≤ U for n sufficiently large, since K ∩ U is an open
subgroup of K. Thus u ∈ con(g) ∩ K. Conversely, given u ∈ con(g) ∩ K,
then g n ug −n ∈ K for all n ≥ 0 by hypothesis, so given an open subgroup U
of G, we have gn ug −n ∈ K ∩ U for n sufficiently large. Since the subgroups
K ∩U form a base of identity neighbourhoods in K as U ranges over the open
subgroups of G, it follows that u ∈ conK (g). Thus conK (g) = con(g) ∩ K.
The last conclusion is clear.

3.2

Invariance of contraction groups and the relative Tits
core

Let us consider the implications of Proposition 3.3 for conjugacy classes of
contraction groups, and hence of relative Tits cores.
25

Proposition 3.7. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let g ∈ G and define Lg =
hcon(g), con(g −1 )i. Let U be an open subgroup of G that is tidy for g, let
u, v ∈ U and let n > 0.
(i) There exists t ∈ U ∩ Lg such that
con(ug n v) = tcon(g)t−1 .
(ii) We have Lugn v = Lg and G†ugn v = G†g . In particular, the normalizers
of Lg and G†g both contain U , and are thus open subgroups of G.
Proof. By Lemma 2.8, we have con(g) = con(g n ), and by Lemma 2.9, U
is tidy for g n ; thus we may assume n = 1. By Proposition 3.3, there is
t1 ∈ U ∩ con(g−1 ) such that con(gv) = t1 con(g)t−1
1 . In particular, con(gv) ≤
−1
−1
Lg . Similarly, con(v g ) is conjugate to con(g−1 ) under the action of
con(g), so con(v −1 g−1 ) ≤ Lg . Now U is tidy for gv by Theorem 2.11,
so by Corollary 3.5, there is t2 ∈ U ∩ con(v −1 g−1 ) such that con(ugv) =
t2 con(gv)t−1
2 . Now set t = t2 t1 , and observe that t ∈ U ∩ Lg and that
con(ugv) = tcon(g)t−1 .
Since con(g) ≤ Lg and con(ugv) is Lg -conjugate to con(g), we have
con(ugv) ≤ Lg . Likewise con(v −1 g−1 u−1 ) ≤ Lg , so Lugv ≤ Lg . By the same
argument Lg ≤ Lugv , since U is tidy for ugv, so Lugv = Lg . The proof that
G†ugn u′ = G†g is similar.
We are now able to give several invariance properties of relative Tits
cores.
Theorem 3.8. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let X be a subset of G. Let Y
be the set
Y = {g ∈ G | con(g), con(g −1 ) ≤ G†X }.
Then the following properties hold.
(i) Y is a clopen subset of G that contains all anisotropic elements of G.
(ii) Let g ∈ G and let n be a non-zero integer. Then g ∈ Y if and only if
gn ∈ Y .
(iii) The normalizer of Y is closed in G and is equal to the normalizer of
G†X in G.
(iv) Suppose there exists a compact open subgroup U of G such that for all
g ∈ X, there exists V ≥ U such that V is tidy for g. (For example,
X could be a union of finitely many flat subgroups of G.) Then U ≤
NG (G†X ); in particular, NG (G†X ) is open in G.

26

(v) Let R = G†X . Then

R† = G†R ≤ G†X ,

so R ⊆ Y . In particular, if G†X is dense in G, then G†X = G† .
Proof. Let us note first that G†X = G†Y , by the definition of Y .
(i) We see from Proposition 3.7 that Y is open. Evidently Y contains
all anisotropic elements of G.
Let k ∈ Y . Then there is a compact open subgroup U of G that is tidy
for k, and moreover we have h ∈ kU for some h ∈ Y . Hence G†k = G†h by
Proposition 3.7, so G†k ≤ G†Y = G†X , in other words k ∈ Y . Hence Y is
closed.
(ii) follows immediately from Lemma 2.8.
(iii) We have NG (Y ) ≤ NG (G†X ), since G†X = G†Y is determined by G
and Y . Given g ∈ NG (G†X ) and y ∈ Y , then
G†gyg−1 = gG†y g−1 ≤ gG†Y g−1 = G†Y ,
so gxg −1 ∈ Y . Since y ∈ Y was arbitrary we have gY g−1 ⊆ Y , and by
symmetry in fact gY g−1 = Y . So g ∈ NG (Y ) and hence NG (Y ) = NG (G†X ).
Let N = NG (Y ), let r ∈ N and let y ∈ Y . Then r can be approximated
in G by elements of N , so given a compact open subgroup U of G that is
tidy for ryr −1 , there exists s ∈ N such that s ∈ U r. By Proposition 3.7 we
have G†ryr−1 = G†sys−1 , and since s ∈ NG (Y ) we have G†sys−1 ≤ G†Y . Since
y ∈ Y was arbitrary (in particular, independent of the choice of r), we have
rG†Y r −1 ≤ G†Y , and by symmetry in fact rG†Y r −1 = G†Y , so r ∈ N . Hence
N is closed.
(iv) Let U be as in the statement. Then by Proposition 3.7, we have
†
Guxv = G†x for all u, v ∈ U and x ∈ X. Hence G†X = G†U XU , so G†X is
normalized by U .
(v) Let g ∈ G†X . Then g = u1 u2 . . . un , where ui ∈ G†xi for some xi ∈ X.
Thus g ∈ G†Z , where Z is a finite subset of X. By part (iv), H = NG (G†Z )
is clopen. We see that con(g) ≤ H, since H is a g-invariant neighbourhood
of the identity, and hence con(g) ≤ NG (G†Z ). By Proposition 3.4, it follows
that con(g) ≤ G†Z , and hence con(g) ≤ G†X . Since g ∈ G†X was arbitrary, we
conclude that G†X ⊆ Y , and since Y is closed by part (i), we in fact have
R ⊆ Y , that is, G†R ≤ G†X .
Given r ∈ R, we have seen that conG (r) ≤ G†X , so conG (r) ≤ R. It
†
follows from Lemma 3.6 that in fact conG (r) = conR (r). Hence R† = RR
=
†
GR .
We now prove Theorem 1.4, starting with a lemma.
Lemma 3.9. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let G ≥ H ≥ K such that H and
K are closed and K is cocompact in H. Let h ∈ H and let U be a compact
27

open subgroup of G. Then there exist a, b ∈ Z and v, w ∈ h−b U hb such that
a > 0 and vha w ∈ K.
Proof. Let R = hhiK. Then R/K is a closed, hence compact, subspace of
H/K. The sequence (hi K)i∈N thus has an accumulation point rK say in
the topology of H/K, where r ∈ R.
We see that there exist i, j ∈ Z with j > i such that {hi , hj } ⊆ U rK.
Moreover, since r ∈ hhiK, we can write r as r = uhb k for some u ∈ U , b ∈ Z
and k ∈ K, so in fact {hi , hj } ⊆ U hb K, and hence ha ∈ U hb Kh−b U , where
a = j − i > 0. After rearranging, we have vha w ∈ K for v, w ∈ h−b U hb .
Proof of Theorem 1.4. Let us first consider the case when K is dense in
H. Given h ∈ H and a tidy subgroup U for h, we have h = ku for some
k ∈ K. Now U is tidy for k by Theorem 2.11, so by Proposition 3.3, there
is t ∈ con(k−1 ) ≤ G†k such that con(h) = tcon(k)t−1 , and we have G†h = G†k
by Proposition 3.7. So from now on, we may suppose that K is closed in H.
Let h ∈ H and let U be a compact open subgroup of G that is tidy for
h. We claim that there exist a > 0, k ∈ K and u and v in a tidy subgroup
for h such that k = uha v.
We first consider the case when K has finite covolume in H and let µ
be an invariant probability measure on H/K. Then (H ∩ U )K/K is a nonempty open subset of H/K, so µ((H ∩ U )K/K) = ǫ > 0; by translation
invariance, µ(hn (H ∩ U )K/K) = ǫ for all integers n. By finite additivity of
the measure, there exist distinct integers i < j such that
hi (H ∩ U )K ∩ hj (H ∩ U )K 6= ∅.
In particular, ha (H ∩ U ) has non-empty intersection with (H ∩ U )K where
a = j − i > 0, so there exists u, v ∈ H ∩ U and k ∈ K such that ha v = u−1 k.
Now suppose instead that K is cocompact in H. By Lemma 3.9 we
obtain the equation uha v = k, where a > 0, u, v ∈ h−b U hb for some b ∈ Z
and k ∈ K. Note that h−b U hb is tidy for h by Theorem 2.11.
In either case, we see by Proposition 3.7 that G†k = G†h , and moreover
there exists t ∈ G†h = G†k such that con(h) = tcon(k)t−1 . The remaining
assertions are now clear.
The following corollary is now clear from Theorem 1.4 and Theorem 3.8(iv).
Corollary 3.10. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let H be an almost flat subgroup of G. Then NG (G†H ) is open in G.

3.3

Relative Tits cores and elementary groups

We note some interesting features of the group T = G†H in the case that H
is a compactly generated subgroup of G (even just the case that H is cyclic
is interesting enough).
28

(1) It is clear that H does not normalize any proper open subgroup of T .
From this, one can easily deduce that L = T H is compactly generated.
Indeed, L = hH, U i for any compact open subgroup U of L.
(2) In general, it is possible that T contains H, intersects H trivially, or
some intermediate situation. In general, there is little insight to be
gained from the hypothesis that T ∩ H is trivial, since for instance this
situation will occur whenever G is a semidirect product N ⋊ H, where
H is any finitely generated group (equipped with the discrete topology)
that acts by automorphisms on the t.d.l.c. group N . On the other hand,
the existing literature suggests that an important special case is when T
is non-trivial and cocompact in T H. (Even when H is cyclic, this is not
the same thing as asking if T ∩ H has finite index in H; recall §1.10.) It
then follows from Theorem 3.8 and Theorem 1.4 that
T = G†H = G†K = T † .
Thus we have a compactly generated t.d.l.c. group T with dense Tits
core; in particular, T has no proper open normal subgroups. One can
then apply [5, Proposition 5.4] to conclude that every proper closed
normal subgroup of T is contained in a maximal one, and that T has n
topologically simple quotients for some positive integer n. In particular,
it follows that T does not have any non-trivial elementary quotients in
the sense of Wesolek (see [28]), so that both T and G itself are nonelementary.
If G is an elementary t.d.l.c. group and g ∈ G\{1}, we conclude from the
above observations that g 6∈ G†g . Conversely, as indicated by Question 2, the
author does not know of any counterexamples to the following statement:
(∗) Let G be a non-elementary second-countable t.d.l.c. group. Then
there is some non-trivial element g such that g ∈ G†g .
The statement (∗) is probably too ambitious and reflects a lack of knowledge of examples, but even weaker results of this kind could be highly significant for the general theory of t.d.l.c. groups. Proving (∗) to be true in
general would prove all of the following statements:
(A) Given a compactly generated t.d.l.c. group G, then Res(G) = G if and
only if G† is dense in G.
(B) Given a compactly generated t.d.l.c. group G with no non-trivial discrete quotients, then G† is the unique smallest dense subnormal subgroup of G. If G is topologically simple, then G† is abstractly simple.
(C) A second-countable t.d.l.c. group G is elementary if and only if there
does not exist K E H ≤ G such that H/K is non-discrete, compactly
generated and topologically simple. (The ‘only if’ follows from the fact
29

that every closed subgroup of an elementary group is elementary; see
[28, Theorem 1.3].)
(D) The set E of closed subgroups of Sym(N) that are elementary secondcountable t.d.l.c. groups belongs to the Effros-Borel σ-algebra of Sym(N).
(E) Letting E be the class of elementary second-countable t.d.l.c. groups
and writing ξ(G) for the decomposition rank of G (see [28, §4.3]), then
the supremum of {ξ(G) | G ∈ E } is a countable ordinal, which is
achieved by ξ(G) for some G ∈ E .
The derivation of (B) from (A) is given in [6]. The last two statements
require some further explanation.
Let X be a Polish space and let F be the set of all non-empty closed
subsets of X. The Effros-Borel σ-algebra of X is the smallest σ-algebra
E(X) on X containing the sets
{F ∈ F(X) | F ∩ U 6= ∅}, U ⊆ X open.
If X is a locally compact space, E(X) coincides with the Borel σ-algebra of
the Vietoris space. In general, there is no standard topology on F(X), but
nevertheless E(X) is isomorphic to a standard Borel σ-algebra; for instance,
a suitable isomorphism is induced by identifying X with a Gδ -subset of the
Hilbert cube.
The supremum α of {ξ(G) | G ∈ E } is achieved by G ∈ E if and only
if α < ω1 : if the supremum is achieved, then α must be countable by the
definition of the decomposition rank, and conversely if α is countable, then
it is the supremum of {ξ(Gi ) | i < ω} for a countable sequence (Gi )i<ω of
elementary groups; one can then construct a local direct product G of the
groups (Gi )i<ω (see [28]) so that ξ(G) = α.
One can show (analogous to the situation with elementary amenable
discrete groups; see [29, §6.4]) that E is a Π11 -set and the decomposition
rank function ξ is a Π11 -rank on E. In particular, we have E ∈ E(Sym(N)) if
and only if the image of E under ξ is bounded below ω1 . Since every secondcountable t.d.l.c. group is isomorphic to a closed subgroup of Sym(N), we
conclude that the statements (D) and (E) are equivalent.
It remains to deduce (D) from (∗); here we use the invariance properties
of the relative Tits core to prove an unconditional result about the class of
t.d.l.c.s.c. groups that satisfy (∗).
Lemma 3.11. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let P (G) be the set of elements
g of G such that hgi is an infinite discrete group and every open subgroup
normalized by g contains a non-zero power of g.
(i) Every element g ∈ P (G) is isotropic.
(ii) Given g ∈ G isotropic, then g ∈ P (G) if and only if G†g is cocompact
in hG†g , gi.
30

(iii) P (G) is open in G.
(iv) P (G) is non-empty if and only if there exists g ∈ G \ {1} such that
g ∈ G†g .
Proof. Let g ∈ P (G). If g is anisotropic, then g normalizes arbitrarily small
compact open subgroups of G. In particular, g normalizes some compact
open subgroup U of G. By the definition of P (G), we also have gn ∈ U for
some non-zero integer n. Thus hgiU consists of only finitely many cosets of
U , so it is compact. This contradicts the condition that hgi should be an
infinite discrete group. Thus g is isotropic, proving (i).
Now let g ∈ G be isotropic and let T = G†g .
If T is cocompact in hT, gi, then every open subgroup that is normalized
by g contains T , and every open subgroup containing T contains a finite
index subgroup of hT, gi, hence also contains a non-zero power of g. So
g ∈ P (G). Conversely, if T is not cocompact in hT, gi, then hgT i is a
non-compact subgroup of NG (T )/T , so hgT i is an infinite cyclic group that
has trivial intersection with every compact open subgroup of NG (T )/T . At
the same time, gT has anisotropic action by conjugation on NG (T )/T by
Corollary 3.2, so gT normalizes a compact open subgroup V /T of NG (T )/T .
Moreover NG (T ) is open in G by Proposition 3.7, so V is open in G. Thus
V is an open subgroup normalized by g that does not contain any non-zero
power of g, proving (ii).
Now suppose g ∈ P (G). Then g is contained in a compact open subgroup
V /T of NG (T )/T by the characterization of P (G) given in part (ii). Since
NG (T ) is open in T , in fact V is open in G. Given a compact open subgroup
U of G that is tidy for g and u ∈ U , then u normalizes G†g and G†g = G†gu . We
now observe that for all h ∈ gU ∩V , then h is isotropic on G (so in particular,
hhi is an infinite discrete group) and the group G†h = G†g is cocompact in
hG†h , hi, so that h ∈ P (G) by part (ii). Hence P (G) is open in G, proving
(iii).
Given g ∈ P (G) and U tidy for g, we see by part (ii) and Proposition 3.7
that gn u ∈ G†g = G†gn u for some u ∈ U and non-zero integer n. Conversely,
if g ∈ G \ {1} is such that g ∈ G†g , then clearly g is isotropic, and hence
g ∈ P (G) by part (ii). Thus P (G) is non-empty if and only if g ∈ G†g for
some non-trivial g ∈ G, proving (iv).
Theorem 3.12. Let S = Sym(N≥0 ) and let E ∗ be the set of closed locally
compact subgroups G of S such that for all g ∈ G \ {1} we have g 6∈ G†g .
Then E ∗ ∈ E(S).
Proof. By the Kuratowski–Ryll-Nardzewiski selector theorem, there is a sequence (dn )n∈ω of measurable functions dn : F(S) → S such that for each
F ∈ F(S), the set {dn (F )}n∈ω is a dense subset of F . Let us fix such
31

a sequence dn . Fix also a countable descending chain (Un )n≥0 of clopen
symmetric neighbourhoods of the identity in S, forming a base of identity
neighbourhoods in S.
Let F ∗ be the set of closed locally compact groups G of S such that
there exists g ∈ G \ {1} for which g ∈ G†g . Let Li be the set of subgroups G
of S such that G ∩ Ui is compact. The conditions of being a subgroup and
having compact intersection with an open set are measurable conditions on
non-empty closed subsets of S. Thus Li ∈ E(S).
Now let G ∈ L0 . Then G is locally compact, and by Lemma 3.11, we
have G ∈ F ∗ if and only if the open set P (G) is non-empty. In turn, P (G)
is non-empty if and only if dn (G) ∈ P (G) for some n. Write gn := dn (G).
Then gn ∈ P (G) if and only if the following formulae (quantified over N≥0 )
are both satisfied:
∀a∀b : gnb+1 6∈ Ua ;
∀c∃d∀e∃f, k1 , . . . , kf , l1 , . . . , lf : dk1 (Vc,n,l1 ) . . . dkf (Vc,n,lf ) ∈ Ue gnd+1 ;

(2)
(3)

where
Vc,n,l := gnl (Uc ∩ G)gn−l ∪ gn−l (Uc ∩ G)gnl .
Specifically, (2) is equivalent to stating that hgn i is infinite and discrete, and
(3) is equivalent to stating that for every identity neighbourhood U in G,
then there is a positive power gnd+1 of gn that can be approximated by words
in the hgn i-conjugates of U , so that gnd+1 is in the (necessarily closed) group
generated by the hgn i-conjugates of U . These formulae impose a measurable
condition on gn , and so ‘there exists n such that gn satisfies (2) and (3)’ is
a measurable condition on G. We therefore conclude that F ∗ ∩ L0 ∈ E(S),
so E ∗ ∩ L0 ∈ E(S).
The same argument shows that the sets E ∗ ∩ Li are in E(S). Note that a
subgroup G of S is closed
Sand locally compact if and only if G∩Ui is compact
for some i. Thus E ∗ = i≥0 (E ∗ ∩ Li ), so E ∗ ∈ E(S) as required.
The statement (∗) is then equivalent to asserting that E ∗ = E. In
particular, we see that (∗) implies (D) as claimed.

3.4

Subgroups containing relative Tits cores

There is no reason for an arbitrary subgroup D of G to contain G†D . For
example, if G is the automorphism group of a locally finite tree, then G†g
is open in G for every hyperbolic element g ∈ G (see Example 3.16), so
certainly G†g 6≤ hgi. However, we can ensure G†D ≤ D under certain circumstances, as stated in Theorem 1.5.
Proof of Theorem 1.5. We may assume that X = X −1 . Let U be an open
32

subgroup of G such that U ∩ G†X ≤ NG (D).
Let x ∈ X. By Proposition 3.7 we have G†x = G†d for all d ∈ V xV , where
V is a compact open subgroup of G that is tidy for x. Since X ⊆ D, there
exists d ∈ V xV ∩ D: for this d, we see that U ∩ G†d = U ∩ G†x ≤ NG (D).
Let u ∈ con(d). Then for n ≥ 0 sufficiently large, we have dn ud−n ∈ U ,
and thus dn ud−n ∈ NG (D). But NG (D) is D-invariant, so u ∈ NG (D), and
hence con(d) ≤ NG (D). In addition, NG (D) contains the open subgroup
U ∩ nub(d) of nub(d). By Theorem 2.7 there are no proper d-invariant
open subgroups of nub(d) , so nub(d) ≤ NG (D). Thus con(d) ≤ NG (D) by
Theorem 2.10. The same argument shows that con(d−1 ) ≤ NG (D), so in
fact G†d ≤ NG (D). Hence by Proposition 3.4, we have G†d ≤ D, so G†x ≤ D.
As x ∈ X was arbitrary, we conclude that G†X ≤ D.
Corollary 3.13. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group, let A be a subgroup of G, and let
B ⊆ A. Then the following are equivalent:
†
(i) GB
≤ A;

(ii) There exists a subgroup H of G such that A is subnormal in H and
G†B ≤ H.
Proof. Clearly (i) implies (ii), as we can take A = H in this case. Suppose
(ii) holds, and let
A = A0 ⊳ A1 ⊳ · · · ⊳ An = H
be a subnormal series from A to H. Suppose n > 0. Then by Theorem 1.5,
†
≤ An−1 , since G†B normalizes An−1 and B ⊆ An−1 . The
we have GB
conclusion now follows by induction on the subnormal degree of B in H.
The following is now clear from Corollary 3.13 and Theorem 1.4.
Corollary 3.14. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let H be a subnormal subgroup
of G. Then G†H = (H)† . If in addition H is closed in G and either cocompact
or of finite covolume in G, then G† = H † .
In particular, we have the following strengthening of [6, Corollary 1.2].
Corollary 3.15. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let S be the set of subnormal
subgroups S of G such that S is cocompact or of finite covolume in G. Then
\
G† ≤
S.
S∈S

3.5

Examples

We give two basic examples that illustrate how the relative Tits core G†g can
depend very little on the choice of element g, even though the groups con(g)
and con(g −1 ) are sensitive to the choice of g.
33

Example 3.16. Let T be a locally finite regular tree of degree at least 3, let
G = Aut(T ), and let g ∈ G. If g is elliptic, that is, g fixes a vertex or inverts
an edge, then con(g) = con(g −1 ) = {1}. Otherwise g is hyperbolic, and the
set of vertices v such that d(v, gv) is minimised forms a bi-infinite path L in
T , the axis of g. Identify L with Z, so that g(0) > 0 and dT (i, j) = |j − i|,
and let π be the nearest point projection from T to L = Z. Let Kn− be
the fixator of the set π −1 ((−∞, n)) and let Kn+ be the fixator of the set
π −1 ((n, +∞)). Then we see that
[
[
con(g) ≥
Kn− and con(g−1 ) ≥
Kn+ .
n∈Z

n∈Z

In fact, con(g) is the set of all elements h ∈ G such that there exists k ∈ L
and a function fh : (−∞, k] → N, with fh (n) → +∞ as n → −∞, such that
h fixes pointwise the ball of radius fh (n) about the vertex n. It is easily
seen that con(g) is not closed in G: in fact, the closure con(g) consists of all
elliptic elements fixing the end −∞ of the axis of g. The normalizer of con(g)
(and also of con(g)) is the stabilizer of −∞, so NG (con(g)) is a closed but
not open subgroup of G. Similarly, nub(g) is the pointwise stabilizer of the
axis of g, so NG (nub(g)) is not open. However the subgroups Kn− and Kn+
−
is a compact open subgroup
are each compact, and the product Kn+ Kn+1
of G, being the stabilizer in G of the directed edge (n, n + 1). In turn, it is
easily seen that the group generated by the stabilizers of the directed edges
(n, n + 1) as n ranges over L is in fact the subgroup G+ of G generated by
all directed edge stabilizers, which is a simple open subgroup of G of index
2. So in this case, every element g ∈ G satisfies either G†g = G+ = G† (if g
is hyperbolic) or G†g = {1} (if g is not hyperbolic).
We will return to a more general class of examples including this one at
the end of the paper (see §6.4).
Example 3.17. (See [21] for a more detailed treatment of a class of examples including this one.)
Let G = SLn (Qp ) and let g be the diagonal matrix diag(λ1 , λ2 , . . . , λn ).
Suppose that
|λ1 |p ≥ |λ2 |p ≥ · · · ≥ |λn |p .
Then con(g) is closed in this case: it is the group of matrices of the form
1 + u, where uij = 0 whenever |λi |p ≤ |λj |p . In other words, con(g) is a
group of block upper unitriangular matrices, with the blocks corresponding
to intervals of (λ1 , . . . , λn ) on which |λi |p is constant. Thus con(g) is the
unipotent radical of a parabolic subgroup P , where P consists of all elements
a of G such that aij = 0 whenever |λi |p > |λj |p . In fact P itself can be
characterized directly in terms of the dynamics of g: it consists of those
elements a ∈ G such that {g n ag −n | n ≥ 0} is relatively compact. We see
also that con(g −1 ) is simply the image of con(g) under matrix transposition.
34

A similar description of contraction groups can be given for all elements
of G that have non-trivial contraction group. So a typical non-trivial relative
Tits core G†g in G is of the form hU, U ′ i, where U is the unipotent radical of a
parabolic subgroup P and U ′ is the unipotent radical of a parabolic subgroup
opposite to P . By [4, Proposition 6.2(v)], the group hU, U ′ i does not depend
on which parabolic P we have, as long as it is proper (in other words, as
long as U is non-trivial). So in fact G†g = G† whenever con(g) 6= {1}; in the
present example, G† = SLn (Qp ) = G.

4

The nub of a flat group

4.1

Introduction

Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let H be a group of automorphisms of G. If H
is flat, the nub nub(H) is the intersection of all compact open subgroups of
U that are tidy for H. More generally we define the lower nub lnub(H) to
be the closure of the group generated by the nubs of the cyclic subgroups of
H. Recall that the action of H is said to be smooth if the tidy subgroups
for the action form a base of neighbourhoods of the identity; in other words,
a flat group H is smooth if and only if nub(H) is trivial.
It is clear from Proposition 2.6 that lnub(H) ≤ nub(H) whenever H is
flat. The following example illustrates that lnub(H) need not be the same as
nub(H), even for uniscalar flat groups, and that the action of H on nub(H)
does not in general have the dynamical properties observed in [34] in the
cyclic case.
Example 4.1. Let V = Fp [[t]], regarded as a profinite vector space over
Fp , and let W be a non-trivial (possibly finite) closed subspace of V . Let
H be the group of continuous Fp -linear maps from V to W under pointwise
addition, and define an action ρ of H on G = V ⊕ W by setting ρ(h)(v, w) =
(v, w + h(v)). Then ρ(H) is a subgroup of Aut(G) (necessarily flat, since
G is compact), and nubG (ρ(H)) = W , since for every subspace V ′ of V of
finite codimension, there exists h ∈ H such that h(V ′ ) = W . In particular,
the action of H on G does not have SIN. However, ρ(H) acts trivially on W
and the group G ⋊ρ H is nilpotent, so there is no non-trivial subgroup K of
G such that Nρ(H) (K) acts ergodically on K, and in particular nub(ρ(h)) is
trivial for every h ∈ H.
Both the nub and the lower nub are well-behaved under closures.
Lemma 4.2. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let H be a subgroup of G. Suppose
lnub(H) is compact. Then lnub(H) = lnub(H). If H is flat, then H is flat
and nub(H) = nub(H).
Proof. Suppose lnub(H) is compact and let U be a compact open subgroup
such that lnub(H) ≤ U , so that nub(h) ≤ U for all h ∈ H. Let a ∈ H.
35

Then by [6, Theorem 1.5], for some open subgroup V of U , then nub(a)
is V -conjugate to nub(h) for all h ∈ aV . Since aV ∩ H is non-empty, we
conclude that nub(a) ≤ U . So in fact
lnub(H) ≤ U ⇒ lnub(H) ≤ U
for all compact open subgroups U , and the converse implication also clearly
holds. Hence lnub(H) = lnub(H).
Now suppose H is flat on G. Then any tidy subgroup U for H is also
tidy for H by Theorem 2.11, and conversely. Hence nub(H) = nub(H).
The nub provides a simple criterion for when a flat group of automorphisms of G has flat action on an open subgroup of G.
Lemma 4.3. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group, let H be a flat group of automorphisms of G, and let K be an open H-invariant subgroup of G. Then
H is flat on K if and only if nubG (H) ≤ K. If nubG (H) ≤ K, then
nubG (H) = nubK (H).
Proof. By Corollary 2.14, we have sG (α) = sK (α) for all α ∈ H, so the tidy
subgroups for H on K are precisely the tidy subgroups U for H on G such
that U ≤ K. If nubG (H) 6≤ K, then no such tidy subgroup can exist, so H
is not flat on K. So suppose that nubG (H) ≤ K. Let V be a compact open
subgroup of K such that nubG (H) ≤ V . Let U be a tidy subgroup for H on
G. Then nubG (H) ≤ U ∩ V , and the collection of tidy subgroups for H on
G is closed under finite intersections, so by a compactness argument on the
open subgroups of U , there exists W ≤ U ∩ V such that W is tidy for H on
G, and hence also for H on K. Thus H is flat on K. We see that given tidy
subgroups A and B for H on G and on K respectively, then A ∩ B is tidy
for H both on G and on K, so nubG (H) = nubK (H).
The following is an immediate consequence of Corollary 2.18 and Lemma 4.3.
Corollary 4.4. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let H be a flat group of automorphisms of G of finite rank. Let K be an open H-invariant subgroup of
G. Then nubG (H) = nubK (H).

4.2

Invariant uniscalar subgroups

We now prove a result on the effect of H-invariant subgroups on tidy subgroups for H, which will allow us to establish some properties of NG (nub(H)).
This result is a variation on [33, Theorem 3.3].
Theorem 4.5. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let H be a flat group of automorphisms of G. Let K beTan H-invariant subgroup of G such that |K : NK (U )|
is finite, and let V = k∈K kU k −1 .
(i) If U is tidy below for H, then V is tidy below for H.
36

(ii) If U is tidy for H, then V is tidy for H. If in addition K is compact,
then V K is also tidy for H.
Proof. It suffices to consider elements α ∈ H individually, so fix α ∈ H.
Suppose for the time being that U is tidy for H.
Since |K : NK (U )| is finite, V is the intersection of finitely many conjugates ofSU , and hence V is a compact open subgroup of G. Note also that
the set k∈K kU k −1 is compact. Since K is α-invariant, for all n ∈ Z we
have
\
\
αn (V ) =
αn (kU k −1 ) =
kαn (U )k−1 .
k∈K

k∈K

Define
\
\
U+ :=
αn (U ); U− :=
αn (U ); U++ = {g ∈ G | ∀n ≫ 0 : α−n (g) ∈ U }.
n≥0

n≤0

The subgroups V+ ,TV− and V++ are defined T
similarly, with V in place of U .
We see that V+ = k∈K kU+ k−1 and V− = k∈K kU− k−1 . Let v ∈ V ∩ U+
and let k ∈ K. Then for all n ≤ 0, we have
[
αn (kvk−1 ) = αn (k)αn (v)αn (k−1 ) ∈
kU+ k−1 .
k∈K

So the backward
{αn (kvk −1 ) | n ≤ 0} is confined to the relatively
S α-orbit −1
compact set k∈K kU+ k . Moreover, we have kvk−1 ∈ U since v ∈ V .
Thus by Lemma 2.4, kvk −1 ∈ U+ , so in fact kvk −1 ∈ V ∩ U+ . Since k ∈ K
was arbitrary, we conclude that V ∩ U+ is normalized by K. In particular,
it follows that
\
kU+ k−1 = V+ .
V ∩ U+ = V ∩
k∈K

Similarly, V ∩ U− = V− .
Note that V++ ≤ U++ , so
V ∩ V++ ≤ V ∩ U++ ≤ V ∩ U ∩ U++ = V ∩ U+ = V+ ,
and hence V is tidy below for α by Lemma 2.3.
Our next aim is to show that V = V+ V− . Given v ∈ V , then a fortiori
v ∈ U , so there exist u+ ∈ U+ and u− ∈ U− such that v = u+ u− . Then
the sequence (α−n (u+ ))n≥0 is confined to the compact set U+ , so has an
accumulation point x say. For all r ∈ Z, we see that α−r (x) is an accumulation point of the sequence (α−n (u+ ))n≥r , and hence also of (α−n (u+ ))n≥0
(which accounts for all but finitely many of the terms of (α−n (u+ ))n≥r ).
Thus αr (x) ∈ U for all r ∈ Z and in fact αr (x) ∈ U+ ∩ U− for all r ∈ Z.
Let p ≥ 0 be such that α−p (u+ ) ∈ V x, that is, α−p (u+ ) = v ′ x for some
v ′ ∈ V . Then v ′ is also an element of U+ , so in fact v ′ ∈ V ∩ U+ = V+ . Now
v = αp (v ′ )αp (x)u− ; we see that v ∈ αp (v ′ )U− (since αp (x) ∈ U− ) and also
37

that αp (v ′ ) = u+ (αp (x))−1 ∈ U+ (since αp (x) ∈ U+ ), and hence we could
have chosen u+ and u− so that u+ = αp (v ′ ) for some p ≥ 0 and v ′ ∈ V+ .
Let us assume that we have done so, and let k ∈ K. Then
α−p (ku+ k−1 ) = α−p (k)v ′ α−p (k−1 );
since α−p (k) ∈ K and V+ = V ∩ U+ is normalized by K, we see that
α−p (ku+ k−1 ) ∈ V+ , in other words ku+ k−1 = u′ for some u′ ∈ αp (V+ ), so
kvk −1 = u′ ku− k−1 . At the same time, kvk −1 ∈ U , so kvk −1 = w+ w− for
−1 ′
u . Since u′ ku− k−1 =
w+ ∈ U+ and w− ∈ U− . Consider the element w+
w+ w− , we have
[
−1 ′
u = w− (ku− k−1 )−1 ∈
(U− kU− k−1 );
w+
k∈K
−1 ′
u ))n≥0 is
since K is α-invariant and α(U− ) ≤ U− , it follows that (αn (w+
confined to a compact set. In addition
−1 ′
u ) ∈ α−p (U+ )V+ ⊆ U+ ,
α−p (w+
−1 ′
u ) is an element of U+ whose forward α-orbit is bounded; it
so α−p (w+
−1 ′
−1 ′
u ∈ U+ ∩ U− .
u ) ∈ U+ ∩ U− , so w+
follows from Lemma 2.4 that α−p (w+
−1 ′
′
−1
′
In particular, u = w+ (w+ u ) ∈ U+ . Since u = ku+ k and the choice of
k ∈ K was arbitrary, we conclude that u+ ∈ V ∩ U+ , so u+ ∈ V+ . Hence
u− ∈ V as well (since u− = u−1
+ v), so u− ∈ V ∩ U− , and hence u− ∈ V− .
Thus we have expressed an arbitrary v ∈ V as a product of an element of
V+ and an element of V− , so V is tidy above for α, completing the proof
that V is tidy for α.
Now suppose K is compact. Since K is α-invariant, we see that

|α(V K) : α(V K) ∩ V K| ≤ |α(V ) : α(V ) ∩ V |.
Since V is tidy for H, the minimum value for |α(W ) : α(W ) ∩ W | (for W a
compact open subgroup of G) is already attained by V , so V K is tidy for
H by Theorem 2.2. This completes the proof of (ii).
Finally, let us relax the assumption that U is tidy, and
T instead assume
that U is tidy below for α. Then there exists U ′ = ni=0 αi (U ) that is
tidy above for α, by Proposition 2.5; in fact U ′ is also tidy below for α
by Proposition 2.6. Each of the groups αi (U ) has only finitely many Kconjugates, because K is α-invariant, soT|K : NK (U ′ )| is finite. We now
apply part (ii) to conclude that V ′ = k∈K kU ′ k−1 is tidy for α. Now
V ≥ V ′ since U ≥ U ′ , so V is tidy below for α by Proposition 2.6, proving
(i).
Corollary 4.6. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let H be a flat group of automorphisms of G.
38

(i) Let L be the closure of the group generated by all H-invariant compact
subgroups of G. Then nub(H) is a normal subgroup of L.
(ii) Let H ′ be a subgroup of H. Then nub(H ′ ) is a normal subgroup of
nub(H).
(iii) Suppose H is uniscalar. Then nub(H) is normalized by every compact
open subgroup of G that is tidy for H. In particular, NG (nub(H)) is
open in G.
Proof. Theorem 4.5 implies that whenever K is an H-invariant compact
subgroup of G and U is a tidy subgroup for H, then U contains a Kinvariant tidy subgroup for H. Thus for any H-invariant compact subgroup
K of G, then nub(H) can be expressed as an intersection of K-invariant
compact open subgroups, so K normalizes nub(H). Hence the normalizer
of nub(H) contains a dense subgroup of L. Since nub(H) is compact and
H-invariant, in fact nub(H) ≤ L and NG (nub(H)) is closed, so nub(H) is a
normal subgroup of L, proving (i).
Given a subgroup H ′ of H, then every compact open subgroup of G that
is tidy for H is also tidy for H ′ ; hence nub(H ′ ) ≤ nub(H). Since nub(H) is
an H ′ -invariant compact subgroup of G, it follows from part (i) that nub(H ′ )
is normalized by nub(H), proving (ii).
Suppose H is uniscalar. Then a compact open subgroup V of G is tidy
for H if and only if V is H-invariant; in this case we have V ≤ NG (nub(H))
by part (i), proving (iii).
The following lemma and corollary can be used to enlarge the uniscalar
part of a flat subgroup.
Lemma 4.7. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let H and K be flat subgroups
of G such that H ≤ NG (K) and K is uniscalar. Let U be a compact open
subgroup of G. Then U is tidy for HK if and only if U is tidy for both H
and K. Moreover, if HK is flat, then sG (hk) = sG (h) for all h ∈ H and
k ∈ K.
Proof. If U is tidy for HK, then clearly it is tidy for both H and K.
Conversely, suppose that U is tidy for H and for K, and let h ∈ H and
k ∈ K. Then U is normalized by K since K is uniscalar, and for all
n ∈ Z we have (hk)n ∈ hn K = Khn , since K is normalized by H. Thus
hn U h−n = (hk)n U (hk)−n for all n ∈ Z. By Theorem 2.13, it follows that
sG (h) = sG (hk), and hence by Theorem 2.2, U is tidy for hk.
Corollary 4.8. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let H be a flat subgroup of G.
Let K be a compact H-invariant subgroup of G. Then HK is flat, and for
all h ∈ H and k ∈ K we have sG (hk) = sG (h).

39

Proof. By Theorem 4.5, there is a compact open subgroup V of G that
is normalized by K and is tidy for H. The conclusion now follows from
Lemma 4.7.

4.3

Tidy subgroups in quotients

The (lower) nub is not in general preserved under passing to quotients,
because a compact open subgroup that is tidy (below) does not necessarily
remain tidy below on passing to a quotient. Indeed, [32, Example 6.5]
gives an example of the following situation: there is a t.d.l.c. group G, an
automorphism α and a closed α-invariant subgroup K of G, such that α has
arbitrarily small tidy subgroups (so nubG (α) is trivial), and yet for every
tidy subgroup U for α on G, the group U K/K is not tidy for α on G/K,
because U K/K fails to be tidy below (in other words, U K/K does not
contain nubG/K (α)).
However, under certain conditions there is good control over the tidy
subgroups, and hence the nub, when passing to a quotient. In particular, it
suffices for the scale to be preserved, as the following lemma shows.
Lemma 4.9. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group, let α be an automorphism of G and
let U be a compact open subgroup of G. Let K be a closed subgroup of G,
such that U ≤ NG (K) and α(K) = K, and write N := NG (K).
(i) We have sN/K (α) ≤ sN (α). Indeed, sN/K (α) divides sN (α).
(ii) If U is tidy above for α, then U K/K is tidy above for the action of α
on N/K.
(iii) Suppose sN/K (α) = sN (α) and that U is tidy for α on N . Then U K/K
is tidy for α on N/K.
(iv) Suppose K is compact. Then
sG (α) = sN (α) = sN/K (α);
moreover, given any V /K ∈ N/K such that V /K is tidy for α on
N/K, then V is tidy for the action of α on G.
Proof. (i) See [32, T
Proposition 4.7].
T
(ii) Let U+ = n≥0 αn (U ) and U− = n≤0 αn (U ). Suppose U is tidy
above for α. Then U K/K = (U+ K/K)(U− K/K), and we have α(U+ K/K) ≥
U+ K/K and α(U− K/K) ≤ U− K/K. So U K/K is tidy above for α.
(iii) Let k = |α(U K/K) : α(U K/K) ∩ U K/K|. It is clear that
k ≤ |α(U ) : α(U ) ∩ U | = sN (α) = sN/K (α).
Since sN/K (α) is already the minimum possible value for k, in fact sN/K (α) =
k, and it follows that U K/K is tidy for α by Theorem 2.2.
40

(iv) Let K ≤ V ≤ N such that V /K is tidy for α on N/K. Then V is a
compact open subgroup of G. Since K is α-invariant, we have
|αn (V /K) : αn (V /K) ∩ V /K| = |αn (V ) : αn (V ) ∩ V |,
for all n ∈ Z. Hence sG (α) = sN (α) = sN/K (α), by Theorem 2.13, so V is
tidy for α on G.
We also note as a general point that intersections of compact subgroups
of t.d.l.c. groups are well-behaved under homomorphisms.
Lemma 4.10. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group, let C be a collection of compact
subgroups of G that is closed under finite intersections and let φ : G → H
be a continuous homomorphism to some t.d.l.c. group H. Then
\
\
(φ(C)) = φ(
C).
C∈C

C∈C

T
Proof. For each T
C ∈ C, we see that φ(C) is profinite, so C∈C (φ(C)) is
profinite. Thus C∈C (φ(C)) is expressible
as an intersection of compact
T
open subgroups of H. Writing D = C∈C C, it is clear that φ(D) is compact,
hence closed, and that
\
(φ(C)) ≥ φ(D);
C∈C

to show the reverse inequality, it suffices toTshow that for every compact
open subgroup U of H, if φ(D) ≤ U , then C∈C (φ(C)) ≤ U . So suppose
U is a compact open subgroup of H such that φ(D) ≤ U . Consider the
set C ′ = {C \ φ−1 (U ) | C ∈ C}. Then C ′ consists ofTcompact sets; it
is closed under finite intersections; and the intersection E∈C ′ E is empty,
since D ≤ φ−1 (U ). Thus ∅ ∈ C ′ , in other
words, C ≤ φ−1 (U ) for some
T
C ∈ C. But then φ(C) ≤ U , and hence C∈C (φ(C)) ≤ U as desired.
Combining the previous two lemmas, we obtain the following stability
properties of tidy subgroups and the nub under passing to a quotient.
Proposition 4.11. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group, let H be a flat group of automorphisms of G and let K be a closed normal H-invariant subgroup of G.
Let R = G/K.
If K is compact, then we have sR (α) = sG (α) for all α ∈ H, and also
nubR (H) = nubG (H)K/K.
If sR (α) = sG (α) for all α ∈ H, then the following holds:
(i) The action of H on R is flat. Indeed, whenever U is tidy for H on G,
then U K/K is tidy for H on R.
(ii) We have
nubR (H) ≤ nubG (H)K/K.
In particular, if nubG (H) ≤ K, then the action of H on R is smooth.
41

Proof. If K is compact, then sR (α) = sG (α) for all α ∈ H by Lemma 4.9(iv).
Now assume that sR (α) = sG (α) for all α ∈ H. Then by Lemma 4.9(iii),
if U is a compact open subgroup of G that is tidy for every α ∈ H, then
U K/K is also tidy for every α ∈ H, proving (i). Thus nubR (H) ≤ U K/K
for every tidy subgroup U for H on G, so by Lemma 4.10, we conclude
that nubR (H) ≤ nubG (H)K/K, proving (ii). If K is compact, then by
Lemma 4.9(iv), every tidy subgroup V /K of H on G/K is the image of a
tidy subgroup V of H on G, so nubG (H) ≤ V for all such V , and hence
nubG (H)K/K = nubR (H).
The following special case will be used later.
Corollary 4.12. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group, let H be a flat group of automorphisms of G, let L be a uniscalar normal subgroup of H and let
K = nubG (L). Let R = NG (K)/K. Then the following holds:
(i) We have sR (α) = sG (α) for all α ∈ H.
(ii) The action of H on R is flat, and moreover nubR (H) = nubG (H)K/K.
Proof. Let U be a a compact open subgroup of G that is tidy for H. The
normalizer of K contains U by Corollary 4.6; in particular, NG (K) is open
and NG (K) ≥ nubG (H). It now follows by Lemma 4.3 that H is flat on
NG (K) and nubG (H) = nubNG (K) (H). We also have sG (α) = sNG (K) (α) for
all α ∈ H by Corollary 2.14. Thus we may assume G = NG (K). Note also
that K is compact. All the conclusions now follow from Proposition 4.11.
So we obtain an action of H on a quotient R = NG (K)/K of an open
subgroup of G, such that the action of H on R retains the important properties of the action of H on G, such as flatness and the scale function, but
now the uniscalar part of H (which is the same subgroup, whether we define
it with respect to G or with respect to R) acts smoothly.

4.4

Flatness below

Say H is flat below if there exists a compact open subgroup U of G such
that U is tidy below for all α ∈ H; equivalently (given Propositions 2.5 and
2.6), for all α ∈ H there exists V ≤ U depending on α such that V is tidy
for α. By Proposition 2.6, H is flat below if and only if lnub(H) is compact,
and in this case lnub(H) is the intersection of all compact open subgroups
of G that are tidy below for H.
We note that unlike the flat property, flatness below is inherited from
cocompact normal subgroups, so in particular any virtually flat below group
is flat below. Flatness below is also stable on restricting the action to a closed
subgroup.

42

Lemma 4.13. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group, let H be a closed subgroup of G and
let K be a closed cocompact normal subgroup of H. Then H is flat below
if and only if K is flat below. Indeed, if K is flat below then lnub(H) =
lnub(K).
Proof. If H is flat below, then clearly K ≤ H is as well, so we may assume K
is flat below. Let U be a compact open subgroup of G such that lnub(K) ≤
U , and let h ∈ H. Then the sequence (hn K)n≥0 accumulates at the identity
in the compact group H/K. Using Proposition 2.5, let V be a compact
open subgroup of G that is tidy above for h and let W be a compact open
subgroup of G that is tidy above for k, such that W ≤ V ≤ U . Then there
exist distinct integers i, j ∈ Z such that {hi , hj } ⊆ W K, so hi−j = rks
for some r, s ∈ W and k ∈ K. By [6, Lemma 4.3 and Corollary 4.4],
there exists v ∈ V such that nub(r −1 hi−j ) = vnub(hi−j )v −1 , and there
exists w ∈ W such that nub(ks) = wnub(k)w−1 . Thus nub(hi−j ) is V conjugate to nub(k) ≤ U , so nub(hi−j ) ≤ U . Moreover nub(hi−j ) = nub(h)
by Lemma 2.9, so nub(h) ≤ U . Since h ∈ H was arbitrary, we conclude
that lnub(H) ≤ U , so H is flat below. Since U could be any compact open
subgroup of G such that lnub(K) ≤ U , we have shown lnub(H) ≤ lnub(K);
from the definition, it is clear that lnub(H) ≥ lnub(K), so in fact lnub(H) =
lnub(K).
Lemma 4.14. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group, let H be a subgroup of G and let K
be a closed H-invariant subgroup of G. Then lnubK (H) ≤ lnubG (H), and
if K is open then lnubK (H) = lnubG (H). In particular, if H is flat below
on G, then it is flat below on K.
Proof. Let h ∈ H. By [32, Lemma 4.1], any tidy subgroup for h on G contains a tidy subgroup for h on K. Thus nubK (h) ≤ nubG (h). If K is open,
then nubG (h) ∩ K is an open h-invariant subgroup of nubG (h), so by Theorem 2.7 we have nubG (h) ≤ K. Since nubK (h) is the largest h-invariant subgroup of K on which h acts ergodically, we must have nubK (h) = nubG (h).
The remaining conclusions are clear.
We saw in Example 2.21 that a finitely generated non-flat group H can
potentially be virtually flat, and hence also flat below.
Here are some basic observations about the role of [H, H]-invariant compact open subgroups in the tidy theory of H.
Lemma 4.15. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group, let H be a group of automorphisms
of G and let L be a subgroup of H such that [H, H] ≤ L. Let U be a compact
open subgroup of G, and suppose that U is L-invariant.
T
(i) Let X be a subset of H. Then α∈X α(U ) is L-invariant.
(ii) Let α ∈ H and let β ∈ Lα. Then U is tidy above for β if and only if
it is tidy above for α, and U is tidy below for β if and only if it is tidy
below for α.
43

(iii) Let α, β ∈ H and suppose U is tidy (above, below) for α. Then β(U )
is tidy (above, below) for α.
Proof. (i) We see that L is normal in H, since [H, H] ≤ L. Hence the set of
L-invariant compact open subgroups
of G is preserved by H. Consequently,
T
if U is L-invariant, then so is α∈X α(U ).
T
n
T (ii) nObserve that by part (i), the sets U+ := n≥0 β (U ) and U− :=
n≤0 β (U ) do not depend on the choice of β inside Lα. Thus the validity
of the equation U = U+ U− does not depend on the choice of β inside Lα.
Similarly, the set
[\
U++ :=
β n (U ),
i≥0 n≥i

does not depend on the choice of β inside Lα. Consequently, U is tidy
(above, below) for β if and only if it is tidy (above, below) for α.
(iii) We see that β(U ) is tidy (above, below) for βαβ −1 ∈ Lα. Hence
β(U ) is tidy (above, below) for α by part (ii).
Definition 4.16. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let H be a group of automorphisms of G. A tidying set for H is a subset X of H with the following
property:
(∗) Let U be a compact open subgroup of G, and suppose α(U ) is tidy
for β, for all α ∈ H and β ∈ X. Then U is tidy for H.
Given a finitely generated flat group H of automorphisms, not all finite
generating sets for H are tidying sets (see [33, Example 3.5]). However, the
following is effectively established in the proof of [33, Theorem 5.5].
Theorem 4.17 (See [33], §5). Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let H be a
finitely generated group of automorphisms of G. Then there exists a finite
subset X of H that is a tidying set for H on G.
We thus obtain a ‘tidying above procedure’ for actions of finitely generated groups under certain circumstances.
Lemma 4.18. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group, let H be a finitely generated group
of automorphisms of G, and let X be a finite tidying set for H on G. Let
U be a compact open subgroup of G such that U is tidy below for α, for all
α ∈ X, and such that U has only finitely many conjugates under the action
of [H, H]. Then there is a finite intersection of H-conjugates of U that is
tidy for H on G.
Proof. By Theorem 4.5, the intersection of all [H, H]-conjugates of U is
tidy below for all α ∈ X (since [H, H] is invariant under the action of each
α ∈ X). So we may assume that U is [H, H]-invariant. By Lemma 4.15,
if U is [H, H]-invariant and tidy below for some α ∈ H, then U is also
tidy below for every H-conjugate of α, and so any H-conjugate of U is tidy
44

below for α. It is clear from Proposition 2.6 that the property of being tidy
below for α is closed under finite intersections; hence any finite intersection
of H-conjugates of U is tidy below for α.
Fix a compact open subgroup U of G such that U is tidy below for α, for
all α ∈ X, and such that U is [H, H]-invariant. Let X = {α1 , α2 , . . . , αm }.
We define
T a sequence of subgroups U(i) as follows: U(0) = U , and thereafter
U(i) = |n|≤ki αni (U(i−1) ), where ki is large enough so that U(i) is tidy above
for αi (such a ki exists by Lemma 2.5). Then U(i) is tidy below for αi by
Lemma 4.15(iii), since it is a finite intersection of H-conjugates of U , so in
fact U(i) is tidy for αi . Given j > i, then U(j) is a finite intersection of Hconjugates of U(i) ; each H-conjugate of U(i) is tidy for αi by Lemma 4.15(iii).
Hence U(j) is tidy for αi . In particular, U(m) is tidy for every element of X.
By Lemma 4.15(iii), for all γ ∈ M , the conjugate γ(U(m) ) is tidy for every
element of X. Hence V = U(m) is tidy for H.

4.5

A decomposition theorem for the nub

We can now state and prove a more precise version of Theorem 1.6.
Theorem 4.19. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let H be a flat group of
automorphisms of G. Suppose that L is a uniscalar normal subgroup of H
such that H/L is polycyclic. Then there is a finite subset X of H such that
the following holds:
Let U be a compact open subgroup of G such that nub(L) ≤ U and
nub(α)
T ≤ U for all α ∈ X. Then there is a finite subset Y of H such that
V = α∈Y α(U ) is tidy for H.
In particular, writing X = {α1 , α2 , . . . , αn }, we have
nub(H) = nub(L)nub(α1 )nub(α2 ) . . . nub(αn ).
Proof. Let us suppose for the moment that H/L is abelian. In light of
Lemma 4.9 and Corollary 4.12, we may assume that nub(L) is trivial, in
other words, L is smooth.
Let M be a finitely generated subgroup of H such that H = LM and let
X = {α1 , . . . , αn } be a finite tidying set for M , as given by Theorem 4.17.
Let U be a compact open subgroup of G such that nub(α) ≤ U for all α ∈ X.
We wish to show that there is a finite intersection V of H-conjugates U such
that V is tidy for H.
Let R be the group of automorphisms of G generated by L together with
conjugation by elements of lnub(H). Let U ′′ = U ′ lnub(H), where U ′ is the
intersection of all R-conjugates of U . Since L is smooth and uniscalar and
lnub(H) is compact and L-invariant, we see that U ′ is an open subgroup
of U . Thus U ′′ is a compact open L-invariant subgroup of G and we have
nub(α) ≤ U ∩ U ′′ for all α ∈ X. Now let W = U ∩ U ′′ . We see that
W has only finitely many L-conjugates (since there are only finitely many
45

subgroups between U ′ and U ′′ ). Given Theorem 4.5, the intersection W ′ of
all L-conjugates of W still contains nub(α) for all α ∈ X. (The topological
structure of L is irrelevant to this application of Theorem 4.5, so there is no
harm in treating L as a subgroup of G by replacing G with G ⋊ L.) Given
Lemma 4.18, there is a finite intersection V of M -conjugates of W ′ that is
tidy for M on G. Notice that V inherits L-invariance from W ′ , since M
normalizes L. We conclude by Lemma 4.7 that V is tidy for H.
In particular, lnub(H) ≤ V , so lnub(H) ≤ U , from which we see that
U ′′ = U ′ , so U ′′ is actually a finite intersection of L-conjugates of U . Following through the construction of V , we see that V is itself a finite intersection
of H-conjugates of U , as desired.
By Corollary 4.6, the groups nub(L) and nub(α) for α ∈ H are normal
subgroups of nub(H). Thus the product
K = nub(L)nub(α1 )nub(α2 ) . . . nub(αn )
is compact subgroup of G that does not depend on the ordering of the factors.
We have seen that every compact open subgroup of G that contains K also
contains nub(H); this in fact ensures nub(H) ≤ K, since in a t.d.l.c. group,
every compact subgroup is expressible as the intersection of the compact
open subgroups that contain it. Clearly also
K ⊆ nub(L)lnub(H) ⊆ nub(H),
so in fact
K = nub(L)lnub(H) = nub(H).
The proof of the theorem is now complete in the case that H/L is abelian.
Now suppose H/L is polycyclic, but not abelian. We will prove the
theorem by induction on the derived length of H/L. Let H ∗ /L be the last
non-trivial term of the derived series for H. From the abelian case, we see
that there is a finite subset X1 of H ∗ such that the following holds:
Given a compact open subgroup U of G such that nub(L) ≤ U and
nub(α)
there is a finite subset Y1 of H ∗ such that
T ≤ U for all α ∈ X1 , then
V = α∈Y1 α(U ) is tidy for H ∗ . In particular, nub(H ∗ ) ≤ U .
By the inductive hypothesis, there is a finite subset X2 of H such that
the following holds:
Given a compact open subgroup U of G such that nub(H ∗ ) ≤ U and
nub(α)
T ≤ U for all α ∈ X2 , then there is a finite subset Y2 of H such that
V = α∈Y2 α(U ) is tidy for H.
Combining the two statements, we obtain the following:
Given a compact open subgroup U of G such that nub(L) ≤ U and
∗
nub(α) ≤ U for all α ∈ X1 ∪ X2 , then nub(H
T ) ≤ U , and moreover there
is a finite subset Y2 of H such that V = α∈Y2 α(U ) is tidy for H. In
particular, nub(H) ≤ U .
46

The desired decomposition of the nub now follows in the same manner
as in the abelian case.
We highlight the following special cases of Theorem 4.19. (Here the
product should be understood as a permutable product of subsets of G,
which is not necessarily a direct product.)
Corollary 4.20. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let H be a flat group of
automorphisms of G.
(i) Suppose that H/Hu is finitely generated. Then
Y
nub(H) = nub(Hu )
nub(α)
α∈X

for some finite subset X of H.
(ii) Suppose that H/[H, H] is finitely generated. Then
Y
nub(H) = nub([H, H])
nub(α)
α∈X

for some finite subset X of H.
(iii) Suppose that H has a smooth uniscalar normal subgroup K, such that
H/K is polycyclic. Then
Y
nub(α)
nub(H) =
α∈X

for some finite subset X of H.

5
5.1

Residuals
Preliminaries

Definition 5.1. Let H be a group acting by homeomorphisms on a Hausdorff topological space X. A pair (x, y) ∈ X × X is proximal for the action
if there is a diagonal point (z, z) ∈ X × X that is in the closure of the
H-orbit {(α(x), α(y)) | α ∈ H}; the action is distal if there does not exist
a proximal pair of distinct points.
In this article we will be interested in the case when X = G/K, where
G is a t.d.l.c. group on which H acts by automorphisms and K is a closed
H-invariant subgroup of G. In this situation there are two natural notions
of distality: we say the action is distal if it is distal in the usual sense, and
distal at 1 if no H-orbit accumulates at the trivial coset, in other words,
there is no non-trivial proximal pair of the form (xK, K). A priori, distality
47

at 1 is a weaker notion than distality; the two notions coincide in the special
case that K is a normal subgroup of G, so that X is a group, since in this
case if (xK, yK) is a proximal pair, then so is (y −1 xK, K).
Observe that distal action (at 1) is a residual property.
Lemma 5.2. Let G be a Hausdorff topological group and let H be a group of
automorphisms of G. Let K be a collection of closed H-invariant subgroups
of G such that H is distal (at
T 1) on G/K for all K ∈ K. Then H is distal
(at 1) on G/L, where L = K∈K K.
Proof. Suppose that H is distal on G/K for all K ∈ K. Let (x, y) ∈ G × G
and suppose (xL, yL) is a proximal pair for the action of H on G/L. Then
there is a convergent net (αi (x)L, αi (y)L)i∈I in G/L × G/L with limit zL
say. Given K ∈ K, then (αi (x)K, αi (y)K)i∈I converges to zK, owing to
the natural continuous quotient map G/L × G/L → G/K × G/K. Since
the action of H on G/K is distal, we must have xK = yK, in other words
y −1 x ∈ K. Since K ∈ K was arbitrary, we in fact have y −1 x ∈ L. Thus the
action of H on G/L is distal.
The proof that distality at 1 is a residual property is similar.
Distality at 1 is closed under extensions. Distality is closed under extensions under certain circumstances.
Lemma 5.3. Let G be a Hausdorff topological group and let H be a group
of automorphisms of G. Let (Kα )α<λ be a well-ordered
T descending chain of
closed H-invariant subgroups of G, such that Kα = β<α Kβ whenever α is
a non-zero limit ordinal.
(i) Suppose that H is distal on K0 /K1 , and that for all α such that 1 <
α + 1 < λ, we have Kα ≤ NG (Kα+1 ) and the action of H on Kα /Kα+1
is distal at 1. Then H is distal on K0 /Kα for all α < λ.
(ii) Suppose that H is distal at 1 on the coset space Kα /Kα+1 for all α
such that α + 1 < λ. Then H is distal at 1 on K0 /Kα for all α < λ.
Proof. (i) Suppose there is some α < λ such that H is not distal on K0 /Kα ;
let α be the least ordinal for which this occurs. Clearly α > 1.
If α is a limit ordinal, then H is distal on K0 /Kβ for all β < α, so H is
distal on K0 /Kα by Lemma 5.2.
Suppose α = β + 1 for some ordinal β and let (xKα , yKα ) be a proximal
pair for the action of H on K0 /Kα . Then (xKβ , yKβ ) is a proximal pair,
so xKβ = yKβ ; say y = xk for some k ∈ Kβ . Let (hi )i∈I be a net in H
such that ((hi (x)Kα , hi (y)Kα ))i∈I converges to (zKα , zKα ) for some z ∈ K0 .
Given an open neighbourhood O of 1 in G, we have
hi (x), hi (y) ∈ zOKα
48

for all i sufficiently large. Now hi (y) = hi (x)hi (k), so for i sufficiently large
we have
hi (x) ∈ zOKα ∩ zOKα hi (k−1 ) = z(OKα ∩ Ohi (k−1 )Kα ),
using the fact that hi (k−1 ) ∈ Kβ , so hi (k−1 ) normalizes Kα for all i. In
particular, for all i sufficiently large the set OKα ∩ Ohi (k−1 )Kα is nonempty, so we have hi (k−1 ) ∈ O−1 OKα . By the continuity of the group
operations in G, the sets O −1 O form a base of identity neighbourhoods as
O ranges over the identity neighbourhoods of G. Thus hi (k−1 )Kα converges
to Kα in Kβ /Kα . Since H is distal at 1 on Kβ /Kα by hypothesis, it follows
that k−1 ∈ Kα , and consequently xKα = yKα .
In either case, we obtain a contradiction to the assumption that H was
not distal on K0 /Kα for some α < λ.
(ii) Again we suppose that α is minimal such that K0 /Kα is a counterexample. As before, it is clear that α = β + 1 for some ordinal β > 0.
Let (xKα , Kα ) be a proximal pair for the action of H on K0 /Kα . Then
(xKβ , Kβ ) is a proximal pair, so x ∈ Kβ . But then (xKα , Kα ) is a proximal
pair for the action of H on Kβ /Kα , so x ∈ Kα , so in fact H is distal at 1
on K0 /Kα , a contradiction.
Definition 5.4. Let G be a Hausdorff topological group and let H be a
group of automorphisms of G.
The distal residual DistG (H) is the intersection of all H-invariant
closed subgroups K of G such that H acts distally on G/K, and Dist(G) :=
DistG (Inn(G)). Equivalently in light of Lemma 5.2, the subgroup D =
DistG (H) is the smallest H-invariant closed subgroup of G such that the
conjugation action of H on the coset space G/D is distal. We can also define the distal residual of a coset space: given an H-invariant subgroup K of
G, define DistG/K (H) to be the smallest closed H-invariant subgroup D of
G such that K ≤ D and the conjugation action of H on G/D is distal. Similarly, we define the 1-distal residual Dist∗G/K (H) to be the smallest closed
H-invariant subgroup E of G such that K ≤ E and H acts distally at 1 on
G/E.
The discrete residual Res(G) of G is the intersection of all open normal
subgroups of G, and G is residually discrete if Res(G) = {1}. More
generally, given an H-invariant subgroup K ≤ G, we define ResG/K (H),
the discrete residual of H on G/K, to be the intersection of all open
H-invariant subgroups of G that contain K, and the action of H on G/K is
residually discrete if ResG/K (H) = K.
Define ResαG/K (H) as α ranges over the ordinals as follows: Res0G (H) :=
α
G; Resα+1
G/K (H) := ResResG/K (H)/K (H); and if α is a non-zero limit ordinal,
T
ResαG/K (H) := β<α ResβG/K (H). Then the groups ResαG/K (H) form a descending chain of closed H-invariant subgroups of G, eventually terminating
at some group Res∞
G/K (H) that has no proper H-invariant open subgroups.
49

Indeed, Res∞
G (H) can be characterized as the unique largest closed Hinvariant subgroup K of G such that K has no proper open H-invariant
subgroups.
Lemma 5.5. Let G be a Hausdorff topological group and let H be a group
of automorphisms of G. Let K be a closed H-invariant subgroup of G,
and suppose that K has no proper open H-invariant subgroups. Then K ≤
Res∞
G (H).
Proof. It is enough to show that K ≤ ResαG (H) for every ordinal α. We
proceed by induction on α.
The case α = 0 is immediate.
If α is a non-zero limit ordinal, then K ≤ ResβG (H) for all β < α by the
inductive hypothesis, so K ≤ ResαG (H).
If α = β + 1 for some ordinal β, then K ≤ ResβG (H) by the inductive
hypothesis. Given an open H-invariant subgroup U of L := ResβG (H), then
K ∩ U is an open H-invariant subgroup of K, so K ∩ U = K, that is, K ≤ U .
Thus K ≤ ResL (H) = ResαG (H).
Example 4.1 shows that Res∞
G (H) can be a proper subgroup of ResG (H).
We also see that a residually discrete action is distal (and hence distal
at 1). In particular, it follows that DistG (H) ≤ ResG (H) and Dist∗G (H) ≤
Res∞
G (H).
Lemma 5.6. Let G be a Hausdorff topological group, let H be a group
of automorphisms of G and let K be a closed H-invariant subgroup of G.
Suppose that K is an intersection of open H-invariant subgroups of G. Then
H acts distally on G/K.
Proof. Let K be the set of all open H-invariant subgroups of G that contain
K and let O ∈ K. Then clearly the action of H on G/O is distal, since G/O
is a discrete space on which H acts by permutations. The conclusion then
follows by Lemma 5.2.
Let us now assume that G is a t.d.l.c. group. Since Dist∗G (H) is a closed
subgroup and contraction groups are well-behaved with respect to coset
spaces by Theorem 3.1, we have G†H ≤ Dist∗G (H). So we have inclusions
G†H ⊆ Dist∗G (H) ⊆ AG (H) ⊆ ResG (H)
of closed H-invariant subgroups of G, as stated in the introduction, where
AG (H) is either DistG (H) or Res∞
G (H).
In the case of a group of automorphisms of a profinite group, the existence or non-existence of proper invariant open subgroups is closely related
to whether or not the action is ergodic. The next series of results are based
on results by Jaworski ([13]) for actions on compact groups in general.
50

Proposition 5.7 (See [13] Proposition 2.1). Let G be a profinite group and
let H be a group of automorphisms of G. Then the following are equivalent:
(i) H does not act ergodically.
(ii) There exists a proper open normal H-invariant subgroup N of G.
(iii) There exists a compact H-invariant identity neighbourhood U in G
such that U 2 6= G.
Corollary 5.8. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group, let H be a group of automorphisms
of G and let R be a compact H-invariant subgroup of G. Suppose that H
acts distally on G/R. Then H acts distally on G/Res∞
R (H).
Proof. Construct a descending sequence (Rα )α<λ of closed H-invariant subgroups of R, as far as it is possible to do so, in the following manner:
Set R0 = R.
If Rα has been defined, let Rα+1 be a proper open normal H-invariant
subgroup of Rα if one exists; otherwise terminate.
T If α is a limit ordinal and Rβ has been defined for all β < α, set Rα =
β<α Rβ .
This sequence eventually terminates at some subgroup T = Rα . Given
the construction of T and Lemma 5.3, we see that H acts distally on G/T .
It is also clear from the construction that T ≥ Res∞
R (H). The rule for
terminating the series ensures that T has no proper open normal H-invariant
subgroups. But then by Proposition 5.7, H acts ergodically on T , so T has
no proper open H-invariant subgroups. Hence T = Res∞
R (H) by Lemma 5.5.
Proposition 5.9. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let H be a group of automorphisms of G. Suppose that Res∞
G (H) is compact. Then the following
holds.
(i) Res∞
G (H) is the largest closed subgroup of G on which H acts ergodically.
(ii) Res∞
G (H) is normalized by every compact H-invariant subgroup of G.
∞
∗
(iii) If Res∞
G (H) is metrizable, then ResG (H) = DistG (H).

Proof. Suppose that K is a closed H-invariant subgroup on which H acts
ergodically. Then K cannot have a proper open H-invariant subgroup, so
ResK (H) = K, and hence K ≤ Res∞
G (H); in particular, K is compact.
Observe that if L is an H-invariant subgroup of G and Res∞
G (H) ≤ L, then
∞
Res∞
(H)
=
Res
(H).
Part
(i)
now
follows
from
Proposition
5.7 and part
G
L
(ii) follows from [13, Theorem 2.6].
By Lemma 5.6 and Lemma 5.3, we have Dist∗G (H) ≤ Res∞
G (H). Suppose
∞
R = ResG (H) is metrizable, in other words, R has only countably many
51

open subgroups, and let T be the set of all t ∈ R such that (t, 1) is a
proximal pair for the action of H on R. Then T can be expressed as the
intersection of countably many open H-invariant subsets of R. Since H
acts ergodically on R, every open H-invariant subset of R is dense, so by
the Baire Category Theorem, T is dense in R. Since the action of H on
∗
∗
Res∞
G (H)/DistG (H) is distal at 1, we see that T ⊆ DistG (H), and hence
∗
∞
DistG (H) = ResG (H).

5.2

A sufficient condition for a non-distal action

In this subsection we shall obtain a sufficient condition for a compactly generated subgroup (not necessarily flat) to act non-distally. The argument is to
a large extent a combination of those used in the proofs of [5, Corollary 4.1]
and [24, Theorem 3.1].
First of all, we prove a version of [24, Theorem 3.1], using a similar
argument.
Proposition 5.10. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let Γ be a group of automorphisms
of G. Let L ≤ K be Γ-invariant closed subgroups of G such
T
that k∈K kLk−1 is cocompact in K. If Γ acts distally on G/L, then Γ acts
distally on both K/L and G/K.
Proof. Suppose Γ acts distally on G/L. Then it is clear that Γ acts distally
on X := K/L. Let E be the closure of Γ in X X , the set of all functions from
X to itself. Since Γ acts distally on the compact space X, E is a compact
group of homeomorphisms of X (see [11] Theorem 1).
Let (Ui )i∈I be a descending net of open subsets of G forming a base
of neighbourhoods of identity in G. Suppose (aK, aK) is in the closure of
{(γ(x)K, γ(y)K) | γ ∈ Γ} (as a subset of G/K × G/K) for some a, x, y ∈ G.
Then for each Ui , there exists γi ∈ Γ such that
γi (x)K, γi (y)K ∈ aUi K.
In other words, γi (x) = aui ki and γi (y) = au′i ki′ for some ui , u′i ∈ Ui and
ki , ki′ ∈ K.T The choice of the net (Ui )i∈I ensures that ui → 1 and u′i → 1.
Let M = k∈K kLk −1 . Since K/M is compact, by passing to a subnet we
may assume there are k, k′ ∈ K such that ki M → kM and also ki′ M → k′ M .
Let γ ∈ E be a limit point of (γi )i∈I in X X ; by passing to a subnet we may
assume γi → γ. Let k1 L = γ −1 (k−1 L) and k1′ L = γ −1 ((k′ )−1 L). Then
γi (k1 L) converges to γ(k1 L) = k−1 L in K/L. Thus we see that given any
open neighbourhoods OG and OK of the identity in G and K respectively,
then for i sufficiently large we have
2
γi (xk1 L) = aui ki γi (k1 L) ∈ aOG (OK kM )(k−1 OK L)/L = aOG OK
L/L,

so γi (xk1 L) converges to aL. Similarly, γi (yk1′ L) converges to aL. Since Γ is
distal on G/L, it follows that xk1 L = yk1′ L, so xK = yK. Thus Γ is distal
on G/K, completing the proof.
52

We also note that actions of compact subgroups always have SIN.
Lemma 5.11. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group, let H be a closed subgroup of G,
let K be an H-invariant closed subgroup of G and let M be a compact open
subgroup of H.
(i) The action of M on K has SIN, in other words the open subgroups of
K normalized by M form a base of identity neighbourhoods in K.
(ii) If K is compact, then every open subgroup of K has open normalizer
in H.
Proof. (i) Since M is compact, there exists a compact open subgroup U of
G such that M ≤ U . In particular, U ∩ K is a compact open subgroup of K
that is normalized by M . To show that the action of M on K has SIN, it
suffices to show that the action of M on U ∩ K has SIN. So we may assume
that K ≤ U , so K is compact.
Let U be a base of identity neighbourhoods in U ; since U is profinite, we
can choose U to consist of open normal subgroups of U , which are then in
particular M -invariant. Then the set UK := {V ∩ K | V ∈ U } is a collection
of M -invariant open normal subgroups of UK with trivial intersection. A
standard compactness argument now shows that UK is in fact a base of
identity neighbourhoods in K. Hence the action of M on K has SIN.
(ii) Let A be an open subgroup of K. Since the action of M on K
has SIN, there is a compact open M -invariant subgroup B of K such that
B ≤ A. Since K is compact, B has finite index in K, so there are only
finitely many subgroups between B and K, and hence |M : NM (A)| < ∞.
It follows that A has open normalizer in M , and hence in H.
We now obtain a non-distal action under certain circumstances.
Theorem 5.12. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let H be a closed subgroup of
G. Suppose that there is a compact subgroup K of G such that the following
conditions hold:
(i) K is commensurated by H.
(ii) NH (K) is open in H.
T
(iii) Letting L = h∈H hKh−1 , then L is not open in K;
(iv) There is a closed normal subgroup N of H such that N ≤ NH (K) and
H/N is compactly generated.
Then there is a non-trivial coset kL of L such that the H-orbit of kL accumulates at the trivial coset in G/L. In particular, H does not act distally
on G/L, and hence H does not act distally on G.

53

Proof. Let X be a generating set for H such that N ⊆ X, X is a union of
left cosets of N , x ∈ X ⇔ x−1 ∈ X and X/N is compact. Write X n for the
set of elements of H of the form x1 x2 . . . xn for xi ∈ X; note that X n /N is
′
compact for all natural numbers n and that X n ⊆ X n whenever n′ ≥ n.
Set
\
K(n) =
y −1 Ky.
y∈X n

X n /N

Since N ≤ NH (K) and
is compact, we see that X n is contained in
the union of finitely many (right) cosets of the open subgroup NH (K) of H,
and hence K(n) is the intersection of finitely many conjugates of K. Since
K is commensurated by H, in fact K(n) is an open subgroup of K for all n.
By Lemma 5.11, the normalizer of K(n) in H is also open; by construction
K(n) is also normalized by N . Thus the same argument as for K itself
shows that given m, n ∈ N, there are only finitely many distinct subgroups
of the form y −1 K(n)y for y ∈ X m .
We now have a descending chain K = K(0) ≥ K(1) ≥ . . . of open
subgroups of K with intersection L. A standard compactness argument
then shows that the set {K(n)/L | n ≥ 0} is a base of neighbourhoods of
the trivial coset in the coset space K/L.
For n ≥ 0, define
[
P (n) :=
yK(n)y −1 .
y∈X n

We observe that P (n) is a subset of K, for all n; moreover, P (n) is compact, since it is a union of finitely many closed subsets of K(n). Given
m
g ∈ P (n), there exists y ∈ X n such that y −1 gy ∈ K(n) =
T ≤ n and
−1
−1 ∈ X m , with
z∈X n−m z K(m)z, so in particular, there exists w = yz
z ∈ X n−m , such that w−1 gw ∈ K(m). Thus g ∈ P (m), showing that
P (m) ⊇ P (n). So we have a descending chain
P (0) ⊇ P (1) ⊇ . . .
of compact subsets of K.
Suppose that P (m) ⊆ K(1) for some m, in other words, for all y ∈ X m
we have yK(m)y −1 ⊆ K(1). Then K(m) ⊆ y −1 K(1)y for all y ∈ X m , so
\
K(m) ⊆
y −1 K(1)y = K(m + 1).
y∈X m

By the same argument, K(n) = K(n + 1) for all n ≥ m, so in fact K(m) =
T
n≥m K(n) = L. This is absurd as K(m) is an open subgroup K, whereas
L is not open in K. Hence for all n, P (n) ∩ (K \ K(1)) is non-empty. Now
K \ K(1) is compact, since K is compact and K(1) is an open subgroup of
K. So by compactness, there exists
\
x∈
P (n) ∩ (K \ K(1)).
n≥0

54

Since x 6∈ K(1), we see that xL is a non-trivial element of K/L. On the
other hand, since x ∈ P (n) for all n ≥ 0, we see that x is H-conjugate to
an element of K(n) for all m ≥ 0. Since {K(n)/L | n ≥ 0} is a base of
neighbourhoods of the trivial coset in K/L, it follows that the H-orbit of
xL accumulates at the trivial coset L, so (xL, L) is a non-trivial proximal
pair for the action of H on G/L. In particular, the action of H on G/L is
not distal. It follows from Proposition 5.10 that the action of H on G is not
distal.
The hypotheses of Theorem 5.12 are general enough that the (relative)
Tits core G†H can be trivial, even if H = G and L = {1}: see Example 5.14
below. On the other hand, the sufficient condition for non-distal action
does provide several equivalent characterizations of when the action of H is
flat and uniscalar. We can now state and prove a more general version of
Theorem 1.8.
Theorem 5.13. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group, let H be a closed subgroup of
G, acting by conjugation, and let K be a closed H-invariant subgroup of G.
Suppose that there exists a closed normal subgroup N of H (possibly trivial)
such that N has SIN action on K and H/N is compactly generated.
Then the following are equivalent:
(i) DistK (H) is compact;
(ii) ResK (H) is compact;
(iii) H normalizes a compact open subgroup of K.
Moreover, if any of the above conditions is satisfied, then
nubK (H) = ResK (H) = Res∞
K (H) = DistK (H)
and H acts ergodically on nubK (H), with nubK (H) = Dist∗K (H) in the case
that nubK (H) is metrizable.
Proof. Recall that ResK (H) ≥ DistK (H) ≥ Dist∗K (H). Fix a compact Hinvariant subgroup R of K. Let us consider whether or not the following
statement is true:
(∗∗)
T For every compact open subgroup U of K such that U ≥ R, then
V = h∈H hU h−1 is H-invariant and open in K.
If (∗∗) is true, then H is uniscalar and V is tidy for H, so H is flat and
V ≥ nubK (H). In particular, since U/R can be made arbitrarily small, we
see that R ≥ nubK (H) and also that R ≥ ResK (H).
Suppose instead that (∗∗) is false, with the open subgroup U of K as a
counterexample. Let U ′ be the intersection of all N -conjugates of U ; since
N has SIN action, U ′ is open in U . Fix a compact open subgroup M of H.
Then the action of M on K has SIN by Lemma 5.11, so the intersection W
55

of all M -conjugates of U ′ is open in K; moreover, W is N -invariant, using
the fact that M normalizes N . Let L be the intersection of all H-conjugates
of W , and note that L ≥ R. Then the following are all easily verified:
W is commensurated by Aut(K), so in particular by H; NH (V ) contains
M N and so is open in H; L is a closed but not open subgroup of W ; and
H/N is compactly generated.
It now follows by Theorem 5.12 that there is a non-trivial H-orbit on
K/L that accumulates at the trivial coset. Since L is compact, it follows by
Proposition 5.10 that H does not act distally on K/D, for any closed Hinvariant subgroup D of L. In particular, L 6≥ DistK (H), so R 6≥ DistK (H).
If H is uniscalar and flat on K, then nubK (H) is the intersection of
all compact open H-invariant subgroups of K, in other words nubK (H) =
ResK (H); since ResK (H) ≥ DistK (H), it follows that R 6≥ nubK (H) in this
case.
In particular, we see from the arguments above that if R = DistK (H)
is compact, then there exist arbitrarily small open neighbourhoods V /R of
the trivial coset in G/R such that V is a compact open subgroup of G that
is normalized by H. In particular, in this case H is uniscalar and flat on K
and
nubK (H) = DistK (H) = ResK (H).
Moreover, we see by Corollary 5.8 that DistK (H) has no proper open Hinvariant subgroups, so that DistK (H) = Res∞
K (H).
So (i) ⇒ (iii). The implications (iii) ⇒ (ii) and (ii) ⇒ (i) are immediate,
so (i)–(iii) are equivalent. The fact that H acts ergodically on DistK (H)
now follows from Proposition 5.9(i), and if Res∞
K (H) is metrizable then
∞
∗
ResK (H) = DistK (H) by Proposition 5.9(iii), finishing the proof.
Proof of Corollary 1.10. By replacing G with G ⋊ H (where G is embedded
in the semidirect product as an open subgroup), we may assume H is a
subgroup of G.
The group nubG (H) is compact, so the hypotheses of Theorem 5.13 apply
with K = nubG (H). In particular, nub2G (H) = ResnubG (H) (H) and H acts
ergodically on nub2G (H).
Now suppose that Hu is finitely generated. Applying Theorem 5.13
again, this time with K = G, we see that Hu normalizes a compact open
subgroup, and hence Hu acts ergodically on nubG (Hu ).
Since H is finitely generated, the quotient H/Hu is finitely generated,
so H is flat of finite rank. By Theorem 4.19, we have
n
Y
nubG (αi ),
nubG (H) = nubG (Hu )
i=1

where X = {α1 , . . . , αn } is a finite subset of X. By Theorem 2.7, nubG (αi )
has no proper open α-invariant subgroups; similarly nubG (Hu ) has no proper
open Hu -invariant subgroups.
56

Now let U be an H-invariant subgroup of nubG (H). Then U ∩ nubG (Hu )
is an open Hu -invariant subgroup of nubG (Hu ), so U ≥ nubG (Hu ), and
similarly U ≥ nubG (αi ) for all i. Hence U ≥ nubG (H). Since nubG (H) is
compact, it follows that H has no proper tidy subgroups for its action on
nubG (H), so nub2G (H) = nub(H) as required.
Example 5.14. This example is due to Kepert–Willis and Bhattacharjee–
MacPherson ([15], [3]).
Q
Let F be a non-abelian finite simple group and let R = Z F . Then we
can form a semidirect product R ⋊ Sym(Z), where Sym(Z) has the discrete
topology and acts by permuting the copies of F . Let A be a subgroup of
Sym(Z) with the following properties:
(a) A is transitive on Z;
(b) A is finitely generated as an abstract group;
(c) For all a ∈ A, every orbit of hai on Z is finite;
(d) For all a ∈ A, the symmetric difference of N and aN is finite.
Such a permutation group was obtained by Bhattacharjee and MacPherson:
they show ([3, Theorem 1.2]) that the free group on 2 generators has a
faithful transitive action on Z with the required
Q properties.
For each i ∈ S
Z let Si be the subgroup j≥i F of R; and let S be the
ascending union i≤0 Si , equipped with the topology extending the natural
topology of S0 (so S0 is embedded in S as a compact open subgroup). Condition (d) ensures that A normalizes S, preserving the topology of S, so that
there is a subgroup G = S ⋊ A of R ⋊ Sym(Z), and moreover the subgroups
Si generate a group topology on G, under which G is a t.d.l.c. group. Indeed,
given conditions (c) and (d), we see that each element a ∈ A preserves intervals [j, +∞) in Z where j can be made arbitrarily large, and consequently
a normalizes subgroups Sj such that j → +∞. Such a collection of subgroups forms a base of neighbourhoods of the identity in G, so each a ∈ A
is anisotropic, and indeed G as a whole is anisotropic, that is, G† = {1}.
Conditions (a) and (b) ensure that G is compactly generated (it is generated
by S0 and A) and also that G does not have any non-trivial compact normal
subgroups: indeed, using the transitivity of A, L
it can be seen
L that every
non-trivial normal subgroup of G contains T = Z [F, F ] = Z F , which
already fails to be relatively compact in G.
Although G† is trivial, we can easily see that this example does not
contradict Theorem 5.12: A does not act distally on S, because given any
element t ∈ S such that t(i) = 1 for all i 6= 0 and t(0) ∈ F \ {1}, then the
pair (t, 1) is proximal for the action of A on S.

5.3

Eigenfactors

We recall some of the theory of eigenfactors as set out in [33].
57

Let H be a flat subgroup of the t.d.l.c. group G, and let U be a compact
open subgroup of G that is tidy for U . A U -eigenfactor for H is a closed
subgroup K of U with the following properties:
(a) K is commensurated by H.
(b) The set {hKh−1 | h ∈ H} is totally ordered by inclusion.
(c) K is the intersection of the set {hU h−1 | h ∈ H, hKh−1 ≥ K}.
Theorem 5.15 ([33] Lemma 6.2 and Theorem 6.8). Let G be a t.d.l.c.
group, let H be a flat subgroup of G such that H/Hu is finitely generated
and let U be a compact open subgroup of G that is tidy for H. Then there
are only finitely many U -eigenfactors for H, and U can be expressed as a
product of the distinct U -eigenfactors (in some order).
Theorem 5.15 gives some insight into the structure of the group
hhU h−1 | h ∈ Hi.
Corollary 5.16. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group, let H be a flat subgroup of G
such that H/Hu is finitely generated
U be a compact open subgroup
T and let −1
of G that is tidy for H. Let U0 = h∈H hU h .
(i) Let K be a U -eigenfactor of H. Then there exists h ∈ H such that
K = (con(h) ∩ K)U0 .
(ii) G†H U0 is the group generated by all H-conjugates of U . In particular,
G†H U0 is an open subgroup of G, and U G†H /G†H is normalized by H.
Proof. (i) It is clear that U0 is a U -eigenfactor of H; moreover it is the only
U -eigenfactor that is normalized by H. For any other U -eigenfactor K, we
see that the total order on {hKh−1 | h ∈ H} under inclusion is discrete and
has no minimal or maximal elements, so itTis order-isomorphic to Z. Thus
given h ∈ H such that hKh−1 < K,
hn Kh−n is the intersection
T thenn n≥0
−n
of all H-conjugates of K, so that n≥0 h Kh = U0 .
In other words, h induces a contracting self-map on the coset space K/U0 .
By Theorem 3.1, it follows that K ⊆ con(h)U0 , so K = (con(h) ∩ K)U0 .
(ii) By Proposition 3.7, G†H is normalized by U , so G†H U0 is a group.
We see from part (i) that G†H U0 contains every U -eigenfactor, so by Theorem 5.15, U ≤ G†H U0 . Thus G†H U0 = G†H U . Clearly, G†H U0 is H-invariant,
so the quotient U G†H /G†H is normalized by H.
Let R be the group generated by all H-conjugates of U . Then R ≤ G†H U
since G†H U is H-invariant. On the other hand G†H is a subgroup of R,
since R is open and H-invariant, and also U ≤ R, so in fact we must have
R = G†H U .
58

5.4

Almost flat actions

Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let H be an almost finite-rank flat subgroup of
G. Then ResG (H) is expressible in terms of nubs and contraction groups,
as stated in Theorem 1.11. In fact we will prove a result with slightly more
general hypotheses.
Theorem 5.17. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group, let H be a subgroup of G, and
suppose there is a cocompact closed subgroup K of H such that K is flat on
G and such that K/Ku is finitely generated.
(i) The following subgroups of G are all equal to ResG (H):
ResG (K), G†H nubG (K), G†H nubG (Ku ).
(ii) The normalizers of ResG (H) and Res∞
G (H) in G are open. Indeed,
ResG (H) is normalized by every tidy subgroup for the action of K on
G.
(iii) H is anisotropic and flat on NG (G†H )/G†H .
(iv) G†H is a cocompact normal subgroup of ResG (H). Indeed, ResG (H)/G†H
is the nub of the action of H on NG (G†H )/G†H .
(v) The action of H on NG (ResG (H))/ResG (H) has SIN.
(vi) Suppose that G is metrizable. Then
Dist∗G (H) = DistG (H) = Res∞
G (H).
(vii) Suppose that H is compactly generated. Then
DistG (H) = Res∞
G (H) = ResG (H).
We begin the proof with the case where H is flat and uniscalar, a situation which has several equivalent characterizations.
Lemma 5.18. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let H be a flat subgroup of G.
Then the following are equivalent:
(i) H is uniscalar;
(ii) ResG (H) is compact;
(iii) ResG (H) = nubG (H);
(iv) G†H = lnubG (H).
59

Proof. Suppose that H is uniscalar. Then there exists an H-invariant compact open subgroup U . Moreover, every H-invariant open subgroup O contains a compact open H-invariant subgroup O ∩ U , and since H is uniscalar, the nub of H is precisely the intersection of all H-invariant compact
open subgroups. Thus (i) implies (ii) and (iii). For each h ∈ H, we have
nub(h) = con(h) by [34, Proposition 5.4], so (i) implies (iv).
Conversely, suppose that at least one of (ii), (iii) and (iv) holds. Then
con(α) is relatively compact for all α ∈ H, since we have con(α) ≤ G†H
and con(α) ≤ ResG (H), and both lnubG (H) and nubG (H) are compact. By
Proposition 2.15, it follows that H is uniscalar, so each of (ii), (iii) and (iv)
implies (i). Hence (i), (ii), (iii) and (iv) are all equivalent as required.
Proof of Theorem 5.17. Since the relative Tits cores, discrete residual, (1)distal residual and nub defined with respect to the action of a subgroup
H on a t.d.l.c. group G are all unaffected by replacing H with H, we may
assume that H is closed.
Let K be a cocompact subgroup of H such that K is flat on G and K/Ku
is finitely generated, and recall that G†H = G†K by Theorem 1.4. Consider
the set
N = {U ≤ G | U is tidy for K on G}.
Let T = G†K and let O = NG (G†K ); note that O is H-invariant. By Proposition 3.7, we have O ≥ hN i. In particular, O is open in G, so ResG (H) ≤ O
and ResG (K) ≤ O.
By Corollary 5.16, the group T U is T
a K-invariant open subgroup of G, for
all U ∈ N . By definition, nubG (K) = U ∈N U , so by applying Lemma 4.10
to the quotient map O → O/T , we have
\
(T U ) = T nubG (K).
U ∈N

In particular, we see that
ResG (K) ≤ T nubG (K).
By Theorem 4.19, we have nubG (K) = lnubG (K)nubG (Ku ), and since
nub(k) ≤ con(k) for each k ∈ K, we see that lnubG (K) ≤ T . Thus
T nubG (K) = T nubG (Ku ).
Let us now fix some U ∈ N . Let Y be a K-invariant open subgroup of G.
Then U is Ku -invariant, so Y ∩U is also Ku -invariant, and hence Y ∩U is tidy
for Ku . Thus nubG (Ku ) ≤ Y . In addition, con(k) ≤ Y for all k ∈ K, since
Y is an open K-invariant identity neighbourhood. Hence Y ≥ T nubG (Ku ).
We conclude that
ResG (K) = T nubG (K) = T nubG (Ku ).
60

The image U T /T is normalized by K by Corollary 5.16, so K is uniscalar
and flat on O/T . By Lemma 2.23, H is also flat on O/T , and H is anisotropic
on O/T by Corollary 3.2, proving (iii).
By Lemma 2.23, we see that ResO/T (H)/T = ResO/T (K)/T . Moreover,
every K-invariant open subgroup of G contains T , so in fact
ResO/T (K) = ResG (K) and ResO/T (H) = ResG (H).
Thus ResG (H) = ResG (K), completing the proof of (i).
We have seen that ResG (H) = T nubG (Ku ). Given U ∈ N , then U normalizes T by Proposition 3.7 and U normalizes nubG (Ku ) by Corollary 4.6.
Thus U normalizes ResG (H); in particular, NG (ResG (H)) is open. We see
∞
∞
that O ≥ Res∞
G (H) ≥ T , so in fact ResG (H) = ResO/T (H). By Propo∞
sition 5.9(ii), the group ResO/T (H)/T is normalized by every compact Hinvariant subgroup of O/T ; since H is flat and uniscalar on O/T , it follows
that NG (Res∞
G (H)) is open, completing the proof of (ii).
Since H is flat and uniscalar on O/T , by Lemma 5.18 it follows that
ResG (H)/T = nubO/T (H), proving (iv). A compactness argument then
shows that the H-invariant compact open subgroups of NO (ResG (H))/ResG (H)
form a base of identity neighbourhoods, from which (v) follows.
Now consider the action of H on quotients of O/T . Certainly the action
of H on O/ResG (H) is distal and ResG (H)/T is compact. By applying
Corollary 5.8, we see that DistO/T (H)/T ≤ Res∞
O/T (H)/T , so we have the
inequalities
∗
Res∞
O/T (H)/T ≥ DistO/T (H)/T ≥ DistO/T (H)/T.

Moreover DistG (H) ≥ T , so in fact DistG (H) = DistO/T (H), and similarly
Dist∗G (H) = Dist∗O/T (H).
If Res∞
O/T (H)/T is metrizable then in fact
∗
Res∞
O/T (H)/T = DistO/T (H)/T = DistO/T (H)/T
∗
by Proposition 5.9(iii), implying that Res∞
G (H) = DistG (H) = DistG (H),
which proves (vi).
Let us now suppose that H is compactly generated. By (iv) we have
ResO/T (H)/T = nubO/T (H), so in particular ResO/T (H)/T is compact.
Hence by Theorem 5.13, we have

DistO/T (H) = Res∞
O/T (H) = ResO/T (H).
Let A represent Dist or Res∞ . In each case it is clear that AO (H) contains T ,
so that AO/T (H) = AO (H), and hence AO (H) = ResO (H) = ResG (H). Furthermore, we have AO (H) ≤ AG (H), since if the action of H on G/AG (H) is
distal or admits a descending series of residually discrete sections, then the
same is true of OAG (H)/AG (H), and hence of O/(AG (H) ∩ O) (here we use
61

the continuity of the natural map from O/(AG (H)∩O) to OAG (H)/AG (H)).
Since in each case we also have AG (H) ≤ ResG (H), we complete a cycle of
inequalities and conclude that AO (H) = AG (H) = ResG (H), so in particular
DistG (H) = Res∞
G (H) = ResG (H),
proving (vii).
Proof of Corollary 1.12. By Theorem 2.17, there is a polycyclic subgroup L
of K such that L is flat on G and L has finite index in K. We therefore
have ResG (H) = G†L nubG (L) by Theorem 5.17(i). We have G†L = G†H
by Theorem 1.4. Since L is polycyclic, Theorem 4.19 ensures that G†L ≥
nubG (L). Hence ResG (H) = G†H . Parts (iii) and (iv) of Theorem 5.17 then
ensure that the action of H on NG (G†H )/G†H is uniscalar with trivial nub,
so this action is uniscalar and smooth, in other words, the open subgroups
of NG (G†H )/G†H normalized by H are a base of identity neighbourhoods.
The desired conclusion for the action on G/G†H follows from the fact that
NG (G†H ) is open in G.
Proof of Corollary 1.13. Suppose that H normalizes a compact open subgroup U of G. It is a general fact that a just infinite profinite group only
has finitely many subgroups of any given index; see for instance [25, Corollary 2.5]. In particular, for each natural number n, the intersection Un of all
open subgroups of U of index at most n is a characteristic open subgroup
of U , and the set {Un | n ∈ N} is a base of identity neighbourhoods in U ,
and hence also in G. We see that Un is normalized by H for each n ∈ N, so
case (a) of the dichotomy is satisfied.
Suppose that H does not normalize any compact open subgroup of G.
It then follows from Lemma 2.23 that the cocompact subgroup K of H also
does not normalize any compact open subgroup of G. Since K is flat, we
conclude that K is not uniscalar and hence con(k) is non-trivial for some
k ∈ K. Consequently G†H is non-discrete, so ResG (H) is non-discrete. Let V
be a compact open subgroup of G that is tidy for K. By Theorem 5.17(ii), V
normalizes ResG (H), so the intersection N = V ∩ ResG (H) is a non-discrete,
in particular non-trivial, closed normal subgroup of V . By hypothesis, V is
just infinite, so N is open in V and hence also in G. Thus ResG (H) is an
open subgroup of G normalized by H; by definition, ResG (H) is contained
in any other open subgroup of G normalized by H. Thus case (b) of the
dichotomy is satisfied.
Using Theorem 5.17, we obtain another characterization of the discrete
residual of an almost finite-rank flat subgroup.
Corollary 5.19. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let H be an almost finite-rank
62

flat subgroup of G. Then ResG (H) = R is the smallest closed subgroup of G
with both of the following properties:
(a) NG (R) is open in G and contains H;
(b) The action of H on NG (R)/R has SIN.
Proof. Let R be a closed subgroup of G satisfying (a) and (b). Then H
normalizes arbitrarily small (compact) open subgroups U/R of NG (R)/R,
and if U/R is such a subgroup, then U is H-invariant and open in G, so
ResG (H) ≤ U . Hence ResG (H) ≤ R.
Now consider ResG (H) = R itself. Then (a) is satisfied by Theorem 5.17(ii) and (b) is satisfied by Theorem 5.17(v).
The fact that G†H is cocompact in ResG (H) allows us to prove a stability
result for discrete residuals on quotients.
Proposition 5.20. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group, let H be an almost finite-rank
flat subgroup of G and let N be a closed normal H-invariant subgroup of G.
Then
ResG/N (H)/N = ResG (H)N /N.
Proof. Let O = NG (G†H ), and note that O is open in G by Corollary 3.10.
We have ResG/N (H) ≤ U N for any open H-invariant subgroup U of G, since
U N/N is also open and H-invariant. In particular, ResG/N (H) is contained
in ON ; similarly, ResG (H) ≤ O. Moreover, H is an almost finite-rank flat
subgroup of ON . Thus we may assume G = ON .
Let T = G†H . Then R = T N is normal in G. By Theorem 5.17(iv), T is
cocompact and normal in ResG (H), and hence R is cocompact in ResG (H)R;
in particular, ResG (H)R is closed in G. We also see that
ResG (H)N = ResG (H)R and ResG/N (H) = ResG/R (H).
Certainly ResG/R (H) ≥ ResG (H)R, since any H-invariant open subgroup
of G/R is the image of an H-invariant open subgroup of G. To finish the
proof, it remains to prove that ResG (H)R ≥ ResG/R (H).
By Theorem 5.17, H is uniscalar and flat on O/T and ResG (H)/T =
nubO/T (H). In particular, ResG (H)/T is an intersection of compact open
subgroups of O/T .
Considering the natural homomorphism from O/T to OR/R, we see by
Lemma 4.10 that
\
ResG (H)R/R =
(U R/R),
U ∈U

where U is the set of H-invariant open subgroups U of O such that U/T
is compact. Given U ∈ U , then U R/R is an H-invariant open subgroup of
G/R, so U R ≥ ResG/R (H). Hence
ResG (H)R ≥ ResG/R (H),
63

as required.

5.5

The Mautner phenomenon

The Mautner phenomenon is a collection of related results of the following
form: given a suitable action of a group G on a set X, and a point x ∈ X
that is fixed by some subgroup H ≤ G, then the stabilizer of x in G necessarily contains not just H, but a much larger subgroup (often G itself) that
depends on the dynamics of the conjugation action of H on G. The concept
originates in the ergodic theory of flows on manifolds, and also plays an important role in the representation theory of locally compact groups: see for
instance [17], [19] and [27]. We can define the phenomenon for topological
groups in general terms as follows.
Definition 5.21. Let G be a group acting on a Hausdorff topological space
X, and let x ∈ X be a fixed point of the action. Then x ∈ X is an isolated
point of the action of G if for all y ∈ X \ {x}, the closure of the G-orbit
of y does not contain x; in other words, no orbit of the action of G on X
accumulates at x.
Let G be a topological group and let H ≤ G. We say that H exhibits
the Mautner phenomenon in G, or more briefly H is an MP-subgroup
of G, if the following condition holds:
(∗) Let X be a Hausdorff topological space admitting a G-action by
homeomorphisms such that the map G → X; g 7→ gx is continuous for all
x ∈ X. Suppose x ∈ X is an isolated point of the action of H. Then x is a
fixed point of the action of G.
We can extract some more familiar versions of the Mautner phenomenon
from this definition.
Proposition 5.22. Let G be a topological group and let H be an MPsubgroup of G. Then the following holds.
(i) Let X be a metrizable space on which G acts continuously, and suppose H acts distally with respect to some metric d for X (that is,
inf{d(hx, hy) | h ∈ H} > 0 for any pair (x, y) of distinct points).
Then every point fixed by H is fixed by G.
(ii) Let X be a topological space admitting a Borel probability measure,
such that G acts continuously and ergodically by measure-preserving
maps. Then the action of H on X is ergodic.
Proof. (i) Let x ∈ X be a fixed point of H and let y ∈ X \ {x}. Then since
(x, y) is not a proximal pair for H, the H-orbit of y does not accumulate at
x. Thus x is an isolated fixed point of H, so x is fixed by G.
(ii) Assume for a contradiction that there exists a measurable subset Y of
X such that 0 < µ(Y ) < 1 and µ(hY \Y ) = 0 for all h ∈ H, and consider the
64

space L2 (X) of square-integrable functions from X to C modulo essentially
zero functions. Then the indicator function φY of Y is (a representative of)
a non-zero element of L2 (X) that is fixed by H. Now L2 (X) is a normed
vector space, so in particular a metric space, on which G acts continuously
by isometries, so φY is fixed by G by part (i). But then µ(gY \ Y ) = 0 for
all g ∈ G, so the action of G on X is not ergodic, a contradiction.
A natural criterion for the Mautner phenomenon can be expressed in
terms of a 1-distal residual. (Note that if H ≤ D ≤ G, then the translation
action of H on G/D is the same as the conjugation action of H on G/D.)
Theorem 5.23. Let G be a topological group and let H be a subgroup of G.
Let D = Dist∗G/H (H). Then H is an MP-subgroup of D. Moreover, H is an
MP-subgroup of G if and only if D = G.
Proof. Suppose H is an MP-subgroup of G, and let R be a closed subgroup
of G such that H ≤ R ≤ G and H acts distally at 1 on G/R by translation.
Then the map G → G/R; g 7→ gxR is continuous for all x ∈ G, and R is
an isolated point of the action of H on G/R. Hence R is a fixed point of
the action of G on G/R by translation, in other words R = G, and hence
Dist∗G/H (H) = G.
Let D = Dist∗G/H (H). It remains to show that H is an MP-subgroup of
D.
Let X be a Hausdorff topological space admitting a D-action by homeomorphisms such that the map D → X; g 7→ gx is continuous for all x ∈ X.
Suppose x ∈ X is an isolated point of the action of H. Then the stabilizer
Dx is a closed subgroup of D such that H ≤ Dx .
Suppose Dx < D. Then by hypothesis, H does not act distally at 1 on
G/Dx . Since H acts distally at 1 on G/D, it follows by Lemma 5.3 that H
does not act distally at 1 on D/Dx , that is, there exists g ∈ D \ Dx such
that the set {hgDx | h ∈ H} accumulates at Dx . Then there are nets (hi )i∈I
and (ki )i∈I in Dx such that (hi gki )i∈I converges to the identity, and thus
(hi gki x)i∈I converges to x. Since x is fixed by Dx , in fact (hi y)i∈I converges
to x, where y = gx. But x is an isolated point of H, so we must have y = x.
Thus g ∈ Dx , a contradiction. Hence our assumption that Dx < D was
false, in other words, x is fixed by D, proving that H is an MP-subgroup of
D.
Theorem 1.14 now follows. We also have the following sufficient conditions for H to be an MP-subgroup.
Corollary 5.24. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let H be a subgroup of G.
Then H is an MP-subgroup of Dist∗G (H)H and of G†H H.
We recall the basic examples Example 3.16 and Example 3.17, where the
relative Tits cores were quite large.
65

Corollary 5.25. (i) Let G be the automorphism group of a locally finite
regular tree of degree at least 3, and let g ∈ G be hyperbolic. Then hgi
is an MP-subgroup of G+ if g ∈ G+ , and hgi is an MP-subgroup of G
if g 6∈ G+ .
(ii) Let G = SLn (Qp ) and let g ∈ G such that conG (g) 6= {1}. Then hgi is
an MP-subgroup of SLn (Qp ).
Under similar hypotheses to Theorem 5.17, we can show that the Mautner phenomenon is controlled by the subgroup ResG (H)H. We first prove a
lemma.
Lemma 5.26. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let H be a closed subgroup of
G. Suppose that the action of H on G by conjugation has SIN. Then the
translation action of H on G/H is distal.
Proof. Let x, y, z ∈ G and suppose there is a net (hi )i∈I in H such that
(hi xH, hi yH) converges to (zH, zH). Let U be a compact open subgroup
of G normalized by H. For i large enough we have hi x, hi y ∈ zU H, so
x−1 y ∈ HU H = U H. Since U can be made arbitrarily small and H is
closed, in fact x−1 y ∈ H, that is, xH = yH.
Proposition 5.27. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let H be a closed subgroup
of G that is compactly generated and almost flat on G. Suppose either that
G is metrizable, or there is a polycyclic subgroup K of H such that K is
cocompact in H.
Then Dist∗G/H (H) = ResG (H)H. In particular, H is an MP-subgroup of
G if and only if G = ResG (H)H.
Proof. Let R = ResG (H). We have G†H ≤ Dist∗G (H) ≤ R. If G is metrizable
then Dist∗G (H) = R by Theorem 5.17. If instead H has a polycyclic subgroup
with cocompact closure, then R = G†H by Corollary 1.12, also ensuring that
Dist∗G (H) = R. So certainly our hypotheses ensure that Dist∗G/H (H) ≥ RH.
On the other hand, by Corollary 5.19, NG (R) is open and the action
of H on NG (R)/R is uniscalar and smooth, in other words, the action of
H on NG (R)/R has SIN. It follows via Lemma 5.26 that H acts distally
on NG (R)/RH by translation. Since NG (R) is open in G, we see that the
action of H on G/RH is distal at 1. Thus Dist∗G/H (H) = RH as required.
The final conclusion follows from Theorem 5.23.
We note the following special case for clarity.
Corollary 5.28. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let H be a polycyclic subgroup
of G. Then H is an MP-subgroup of G if and only if G = G†H H.

66

5.6

Subgroups of finite covolume

We now derive Theorem 1.15 and its corollary, starting with two lemmas.
Lemma 5.29. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let H and K be closed subgroups
of G such that K has finite covolume in G.
(i) If H is an MP-subgroup of G, then H acts ergodically on G/K by left
translation.
(ii) If H acts ergodically on G/K, then given any non-empty open subset
U of G, we have
G = HU K.
If in addition G is metrizable, then the set
\
HU K
U ∈U

is dense in G, where U is the set of compact open subgroups of G.
Proof. (i) We observe that the coset space G/K is a Borel probability
space, on which G acts continuously and ergodically (indeed, transitively)
by measure-preserving maps. Thus by Proposition 5.22, H acts ergodically
on G/K.
(ii) Suppose that H acts ergodically on G/K, and let U be a non-empty
open subset of G. Then U K/K is a subspace of G/K of positive measure, so
the H-invariant subspace HU K/K has a complement of zero measure. Let
V be a compact open subgroup of G, and suppose there is g ∈ G such that
gV ∩ HU K = ∅. Then gV K ∩ HU K = ∅, since HU K is invariant under
right translation by K. In other words, gV K/K is disjoint from HU K/K in
the coset space G/K. But then gV K/K has zero measure, which is absurd.
This contradiction implies that HU K is dense in G.
T
that G is metrizable. Then U ∈U HU K =
T Now suppose in addition
′
U ∈U ′ HU K where U is a countable set of compact open subgroups of G,
since G has a base of identity neighbourhoods consisting of countably many
compact open subgroups (this follows from Van Dantzig’s Theorem together
with Lemma 2.24). The last conclusion follows by the Baire Category Theorem.
Lemma 5.30 (See [22] Lemma 1.6). Let G be a locally compact group, let
H be a closed subgroup of G and let K be a closed subgroup of H. Then K
has finite covolume in G if and only if K has finite covolume in H and H
has finite covolume in G.
Proof of Theorem 1.15. Let D = Dist∗G/H (H). Since H has finite covolume
in G, it also has finite covolume in D by Lemma 5.30. By Theorem
5.23,
T
H is an MP-subgroup of D, and hence by Lemma 5.29, the set V ∈V HV H
67

is dense in D, where V is the set of compact open subgroups of D. So
certainly K(H) contains a dense subset of D. On the other hand, the action
of H on G/D is distal at 1, in other words, the set of H-invariant open
neighbourhoods of the trivial coset in G/D has trivial intersection. Let
O/D be such a neighbourhood; in other words, O is an H-invariant open
subset of G that is a union of left cosets of D, such that D ⊆ U . Then
O = HOD and O is an identity neighbourhood in G, so K(H) ⊆ O. Since
the intersection of all such sets O is just D, we conclude that K(H) ⊆ D,
and thus K(H) = D.
By Theorem 1.4, we have G† = G†H , and it is clear that G†H ≤ Dist∗G (H) ≤
D. Thus G† ≤ D, completing the proof of (i).
For (ii), we see from Theorem 5.23 and Lemma 5.29 that H acts ergodically on D/H. It remains to show that D is the unique largest subgroup
of G such that H ≤ D and H acts ergodically on D/H. So suppose E is
another closed subgroup of G such that H ≤ E and H acts ergodically on
E/H.
By Lemma
5.30, H has finite covolume in E, so by Lemma 5.29, the
T
set L = W ∈W HW H is dense in E, where W is the set of compact open
subgroups of E. Suppose that H is not an MP-subgroup of E. Then by
Theorem 5.23, there exists a proper closed subgroup F of E such that H ≤ F
and H acts distally at 1 on E/F . Since G is metrizable, we see that E/F
is a locally compact Hausdorff metrizable space, so the fact that no H-orbit
accumulates at F ensures that there is a proper H-invariant neighbourhood
O/F of F in E/F that is not dense in E/F : for instance, if we specify a
metric on E/F compatible with the topology, and Bn is the open ball of
radius 1/n around F with respect to this metric, then
S by the Baire Category
Theorem, there exists n ∈ N such that the set h∈H hBn is not dense.
Now O is a neighbourhood of the identity in E, so there is W ∈ W such
that W ⊆ O. Since O is invariant under left translation by H and right
translation by F ≥ H, we have O = HOH. Hence L ⊆ HW H ⊆ O; in
particular, L is not dense in E, a contradiction. Thus in fact H must be an
MP-subgroup of E.
It now follows by Theorem 5.23 that E = Dist∗E/H (H). In particular, if
D 6≥ E, then H does not act distally on E/(D ∩ E), that is, there exists
x ∈ E \ D such that the H-orbit of x(D ∩ E) accumulates at the trivial
coset. But then the H-orbit of xD accumulates at the trivial coset and
xD is a non-trivial element of G/D, so H does not act distally on G/D,
contradicting the definition of D. Thus D ≥ E, proving (ii).
Proof of Corollary 1.16. By Theorem 1.15(i), we have G† ≤ Dist∗G/H (H).
Since G† is dense in G and Dist∗G/H (H) is closed, it follows that Dist∗G/H (H) =
G. Hence H is an MP-subgroup of G by Theorem 5.23, so H acts ergodically
on G/H by Lemma 5.29.
Remark 5.31. The role of the set K(H) has been previously studied by H.
68

Keynes ([16]) under somewhat different assumptions: H is not necessarily
closed and G is not necessarily a t.d.l.c. group, but there exists a compact
subset X of G such that G = XH. Keynes shows in this case ([16, Theorem 2.3]) that the pair (xH, yH) is proximal under the action of G on G/H
by left translation if and only if x−1 y ∈ K(H).

6

Open envelopes

6.1

Reduced envelopes of an almost flat subgroup

Within the class of subgroups normalized by the almost finite-rank flat subgroup H, we can consider the open subgroups of G that actually contain
H.
Definition 6.1. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let X ⊆ G. An envelope of
X in G is an open subgroup of G that contains X. Say an envelope E of X
is reduced if, whenever E2 is an envelope of X in G, then |E : E ∩ E2 | is
finite.
The following observations are immediate from the definitions, together
with Van Dantzig’s theorem.
Lemma 6.2. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group, let X ⊆ G and let H = hXi.
(i) Let E be an envelope for X. Then ResG (H)H is a subgroup of E.
(ii) Suppose that X has a reduced envelope E in G. Then all reduced
envelopes of X in G are commensurate to E, and there is a reduced
envelope E2 ≤ E of the form E2 = hU, Xi, where U is a compact open
subgroup of G.
We now prove the theorem on reduced envelopes from the introduction.
Proof of Theorem 1.18. By Corollary 5.16, the product G†K U0 is the group
generated by all K-conjugates of U . Hence
hK, U i = G†K U0 K = (G†K K)U0 .
Clearly hK, U i is an envelope for K in G. Since every envelope for K contains
G†K K, which is a cocompact subgroup of hK, U i, we see that hK, U i is
reduced, proving (i).
Now consider H ≤ G such that K is cocompact in H. Then G†H = G†K
by Theorem 1.4. Let O = NG (G†H ). Since the action of H on O/G†H is
uniscalar and flat, there exists an H-invariant subgroup A of G such that
G†H ≤ A and A/G†H is a compact open subgroup of O/G†H . Thus E = AH
is an envelope for H in G. Since G†H H is cocompact in E, in fact E is a
69

reduced envelope for H. Since K is cocompact in H, the open subgroup AK
has finite index in E; since every envelope of K contains G†K K = G†H K, we
see that AK is a reduced envelope for K, so E is a reduced envelope for
K. Finally, observe that any reduced envelope E for H must contain G†H H,
and in turn G†H H contains the cocompact subgroup G†K K, so G†H H is a
cocompact subgroup of E. This completes the proof of (ii).
We observe that up to taking closures, the relative Tits core of an almost
finite-rank flat subgroup is realized as the Tits core of any reduced envelope.
Proposition 6.3. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let H be an almost finiterank flat subgroup of G. Let E be a reduced envelope for H in G. Then
†
G†H = EH
= E†.

Proof. Let K be a cocompact subgroup of H such that K is flat on G and
K/Ku is finitely generated. By Theorem 1.18, E is a reduced envelope for
K. By Theorem 1.4 we have G†H = G†K , so we may assume that H = K.
†
Clearly G†H = EH
, since E is an open H-invariant subgroup of G. Since the
Tits core is invariant on passing to an open subgroup of finite index, the
choice of E is inconsequential, and we can arrange for E to normalize G†H
and contain a tidy subgroup for H, so that H is flat on E. Thus we may
assume G = E and that G†H is normal in G.
Let S = G†H H. Then G†S ≤ G†H , since the action of S on G/G†H is
anisotropic, and also G†H ≤ G†S since H ≤ S. So G†S = G†H , and in fact
GS† = G†H .
By Theorem 1.18, S is cocompact in G. Hence G/G†H is anisotropic by
Theorem 1.4, so G† ≤ G†H , and hence G† = G†H .

6.2

Compact normal subgroups of reduced envelopes

We can use discrete residuals of the H-action to restrict the action of the
relative Tits core of H on compact subgroups.
Proposition 6.4. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group, let H ≤ G, and let K be a
compact subgroup of G that is normalized by G†H and H.
(i) Every open subgroup of K that is normalized by H is also normalized
by G†H , so ResK (H) = ResK (G†H H).
(ii) The commutator group [G†H , K] is contained in ResK (H).
(iii) Suppose that H is almost finite-rank flat and let E be a reduced envelope
for H. If K is normalized by E, then ResK (H) = ResK (E).
70

Proof. We note that G†H = (NG (K))†H . Thus without loss of generality, we
may assume that K is normal in G.
Let L be an open subgroup of K. Then NG (L) is open in G by Lemma 5.11.
Thus if L is normalized by H, then NG (L) is an open H-invariant subgroup of G, so ResG (H) ≤ NG (L) and in particular G†H ≤ NG (L). Thus
every open subgroup of K that is normalized by H is also normalized
by G†H . Since the normalizer of any closed subgroup is closed, we have
ResK (G†H H) = ResK (G†H H). Hence ResK (H) = ResK (G†H H), completing
the proof of (i).
Let L be an open subgroup of K that is normalized by H. Since NG (L)
is open, there is a compact open subgroup V of G such that [V, K] ≤ L.
Let h ∈ H, let u ∈ con(h) and let k ∈ K. Then for n sufficiently large
we have hn uh−n ∈ V , so
hn [k, u]h−n = [hn kh−n , hn uh−n ] ∈ [K, V ] ≤ L.
Since L is normalized by h, in fact [k, u] ≤ L, so [K, con(h)] ≤ L. In other
words, con(h) ≤ CG (K/L). Since h ∈ H was arbitrary and CG (K/L) is
closed, it follows that G†H ≤ CG (K/L), in other words [G†H , K] ≤ L. Applying this argument to all open H-invariant subgroups L of K, we conclude
that [G†H , K] ≤ ResK (H), proving (ii).
Now suppose that H is almost finite-rank flat. Let E be a reduced
envelope for H; suppose K is normal in E and let L be an open subgroup
of K that is normalized by H. By part (i), the group NE (L) contains
G†H H and thus is cocompact in E by Theorem 1.18; moreover, NE (L) is
open in E. Thus L has only finitely many E-conjugates. Since L has finite
index in K, we conclude that the intersection of all E-conjugates of L is
open in K, so L ≥ ResK (E). Thus ResK (H) ≥ ResK (E); clearly also
ResK (E) ≥ ResK (H), so in fact ResK (E) = ResK (H), proving (iii).
For the rest of this subsection, assume that H is flat and H/Hu is finitely
generated.
By Theorem 4.5, every H-invariant compact subgroup K of G is contained in a tidy subgroup U for H, so in fact K ≤ U0 , where U0 is the
intersection of all H-conjugates of U . We have good control over ResU0 (H)
thanks to the following:
Lemma 6.5 (See [33] Lemma 4.11 and Lemma 6.2). Let G be a t.d.l.c.
group, let H be a flat subgroup of G such that H/Hu is finitely generated,
and let
T U and V be compact open
T subgroups of G that are tidy for H. Let
U0 = h∈H hU h−1 and let V0 = h∈H hV h−1 . Then
U ∩ V0 = V ∩ U0 .
In particular, U0 ∩ V0 is an open H-invariant subgroup of U0 .
71

Given a flat group H of finite rank, define the residual nub rnubG (H)
to be the group
\
rResU0 (H)r −1 ,
r∈G†H

where U0 is as in Lemma 6.5. By Lemma 6.5, U0 only depends up to an
open subgroup on the choice of U , and hence rnubG (H) does not depend
on the choice of U ; in particular, rnubG (H) ≤ U for every tidy subgroup U
for H, and thus rnubG (H) ≤ nubG (H). The residual nub has some further
properties with regard to compact normal subgroups of reduced envelopes.
Proposition 6.6. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group, let H be a flat subgroup of G
such that H/Hu is finitely generated and let K be a compact H-invariant
subgroup of G.
(i) We have ResK (H) ≤ ResU0 (H) ≤ nubG (H), where U0 is the intersection of H-conjugates of any tidy subgroup for H on G.
(ii) If K is normalized by G†H H, then ResK (G†H H) ≤ rnubG (H).
(iii) Let U be a tidy subgroup for H, let E = hH, U i, and suppose K is
normalized by E. Then rnubG (H) is normal in E and the action of E
on KrnubG (H)/rnubG (H) by conjugation has SIN.
(iv) Let L be a uniscalar normal subgroup of H. Then rnubG (L) = nubG (L),
and rnubG (L) is normal in E.
Proof. By Theorem 4.5, there is a tidy
T subgroup U for H such that K ≤
U , and hence K ≤ U0 where U0 = h∈H hU h−1 . Certainly ResK (H) ≤
ResU0 (H) in this case. In turn, we see from Lemma 6.5 that ResU0 (H) =
ResV0 (H), where V0 is the intersection of H-conjugates of any given tidy
subgroup V for H on G. In particular, ResU0 (H) ≤ V for all tidy subgroups
V for H on G, and hence ResU0 (H) ≤ nubG (H), proving (i).
Now suppose K is normalized by G†H H. Then ResK (H) = ResK (G†H H)
by Proposition 6.4, so ResK (G†H H) ≤ ResU0 (H) by part (i). Moreover,
clearly ResK (G†H H) is also G†H -invariant. Hence ResK (G†H H) ≤ rnubG (H),
proving (ii).
Let E = hH, U i where U is tidy for H. We have E = G†H U0 H by
Theorem 1.18. In particular, it follows that
\
\
rResU0 (H)r −1 =
rResU0 (H)r −1 ,
r∈E

r∈G†H

and hence rnubG (H) is normal in E.
Suppose that K is normalized by E. Then KrnubG (H) is also a compact
subgroup of G normalized by E, so we may assume that K ≥ rnubG (H). We
72

have ResK (H) = ResK (E) by Proposition 6.4. The same argument as for
part (ii) shows that ResK (E) ≤ rnubG (H). The open E-invariant subgroups
of K/ResK (E) have trivial intersection; via Lemma 4.10, we conclude that
the open E-invariant subgroups of K/rnubG (H) have trivial intersection. By
a compactness argument, the open E-invariant subgroups of K/rnubG (H)
form a base of identity neighbourhoods, so the action of E on K/rnubG (H)
has SIN, completing the proof of (iii).
Finally, let L be a uniscalar normal subgroup of H. Given a tidy subgroup U for H, then U is normalized by L. We have ResU (L) = ResG (L),
and in turn ResG (L) is just the intersection of all compact open L-invariant
subgroups, so ResG (L) = nubG (L). Now nubG (L) is normalized by H,
since L is normalized by H, and also nubG (L) is normalized by U by Corollary 4.6. Hence nubG (L) is normal in E; in particular, nubG (L) is normalized by G†H . It now follows from the definition of the residual nub that
rnubG (L) = nubG (L), completing the proof of (iv).
Combining Proposition 6.4 with Proposition 6.6, we obtain a restriction
on compact (G†H H)-invariant subgroups of G as follows.
Proposition 6.7. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let H be a flat subgroup of
G such that H/Hu is finitely generated.
(i) Let K be a compact (G†H H)-invariant subgroup of G. Then
[G†H , K] ≤ rnubG (H).
(ii) Let R = G†H rnubG (H). Then every compact normal H-invariant subgroup of R/rnubG (H) is central in R/rnubG (H).
Proof. By Proposition 6.4, we have [G†H , K] ≤ ResK (H), and by Proposition 6.6 we have ResK (H) ≤ rnubG (H). Hence [G†H , K] ≤ rnubG (H),
proving (i).
(ii) follows immediately from (i), noting that if K/rnubG (H) is compact,
then K is compact.
The possibilities for rnubG (H) are mysterious at present, although we
note that in some situations, the fact that rnubG (H) has open normalizer is
a useful restriction.
Proposition 6.8. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let H be a flat subgroup of
G such that H/Hu is finitely generated. Suppose that G†H 6= {1} and that
there is a tidy subgroup U for H such that U is just infinite and not virtually
abelian.
(i) We have rnubG (H) = {1}.
73

(ii) Let K be a compact subgroup of G with open normalizer, such that
H ≤ NG (K). Then K ∩ U = {1}.
T
Proof. Let U0 = h∈H hU h−1 . We divide into two cases: either U0 is open
in U , or U0 is not open in U .
If U0 is open in U , then U0 is itself a tidy subgroup for H and H is
uniscalar. As in the proof of Corollary 1.13, we deduce that in fact H has
SIN action on G. In particular nubG (H) = {1}, so rnubG (H) = {1}.
If instead U0 is not open in U , then rnubG (H) is a subgroup of U that
is closed but not open; moreover, rnubG (H) is normal in U by Proposition 6.6(iii). Since U is just infinite, we conclude that rnubG (H) must be
trivial. This completes the proof of (i).
Let K be a compact subgroup of G, such that NG (K) is open in G and
NG (K) ≥ H. Then certainly NG (K) ≥ G†H . By Proposition 6.7 and part
(i), we see that in fact K commutes with G†H . Now G†H is a non-trivial,
hence non-discrete, subgroup of G, and hence G†H ∩ U is infinite; moreover,
G†H ∩ U is normal in U by Proposition 3.7, so G†H ∩ U is open in U . Thus
K is centralized by an open subgroup of U . Since U is just infinite and not
virtually abelian, it is easily verified that U does not have any non-trivial
finite conjugacy classes, that is, no element of U \ {1} has open centralizer
in U . Thus K ∩ U = {1}, proving (ii).
The group rnub(H) is also relevant for describing the structure of a
compactly generated group that has flat action on itself. (Note that if G is
any t.d.l.c. group and H is a compactly generated flat subgroup of G, then
H is flat on itself by Corollary 2.18.)
Proposition 6.9. Let G be a compactly generated t.d.l.c. group such that
G is flat on itself. Let U be a compact open subgroup of G that is tidy for
G and let U0 be the core of U in G. Then the following holds:
(i) rnub(G) = ResU0 (G) is the largest compact normal subgroup of G on
which G acts ergodically.
(ii) The factor Gu /nub(G) is a SIN group.
(iii) G has SIN action on nub(G)/rnub(G).
(iv) We have nub(G) = nub(Gu )rnub(G).
Proof. It is clear that ResU0 (G) is normal in G, so rnub(G) = ResU0 (G). Let
R be a compact normal subgroup on which G acts ergodically. Then R =
ResR (G); we have ResR (G) ≤ ResU0 (G) by Proposition 6.6, so R ≤ rnub(G).
On the other hand, G acts ergodically on ResU0 (G) by Theorem 5.13. Thus
rnub(G) is characterized as in (i).
74

Given a tidy subgroup V for G, then V is normalized by Gu . In fact
V is itself uniscalar (since it is compact), so V E Gu . By a compactness
argument, we see that the open normal subgroups of Gu /nub(G) form a
base of identity neighbourhoods, so Gu /nub(G) is a SIN group, proving (ii).
The action of G on U0 /rnub(G) is residually discrete, hence a SIN action by
compactness, so the action on nub(G)/rnub(G) also has SIN, proving (iii).
Given g ∈ G, then g acts ergodically on nub(g). Part (i) then ensures
that nub(g) ≤ rnub(G) for all g ∈ G. Applying Theorem 1.6, we see that
nub(G) = nub(Gu )rnub(G), proving (iv).

6.3

Cocompact envelopes and subnormal subgroups

Definition 6.10. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let H be a subgroup of G.
Say H is almost open if there exists an open subgroup L of G such that
H ≤ L and H is cocompact in L; call such an L a cocompact envelope
of H.
Here are some easy observations on this definition, given the results we
have so far.
Lemma 6.11. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group and let H ≤ G.
(i) If H is almost open in G, then every cocompact envelope of H is reduced
and vice versa.
(ii) If H is almost open in G and K ≤ G is such that K is a cocompact
subgroup of H, then K is almost open in G.
(iii) Suppose K ≤ H such that K is closed and normal in G. Then H is
almost open in G if and only if H/K is almost open in G/K.
(iv) If H is almost finite-rank flat, then H has a cocompact envelope if and
only if H is cocompact in G†H H.
Proof. Parts (i), (ii) and (iii) are clear from the definitions. Part (iv) follows
immediately from Theorem 1.18.
Now consider the situation that the compactly generated almost flat
subgroup H of G is subnormal in some open subgroup. This can only occur
under special circumstances, and in particular we find that H is almost open
in G, as stated in Theorem 1.19.
Proof of Theorem 1.19. Let K be a cocompact closed flat subgroup of H.
Note that since H is compactly generated, its cocompact subgroup K is also
compactly generated, and hence K/Ku is finitely generated.
Let E be a reduced envelope of H. Then H is subnormal in E, so by
†
Corollary 3.14, we have EH
= H †.
75

†
By Theorem 1.18, the group EH
H is cocompact in some, hence every,
†
†
reduced envelope for H, so EH
H is cocompact in E. Since EH
≤ H, it
†
†
follows that H is cocompact in E, proving (i). Hence EH = E by Theorem 1.4. We have now proved that E † = H † . Note also that K is cocompact
in E, so E is itself compactly generated and almost flat.
Let
E = H0 D H1 D · · · D Hn = H

be a descending subnormal series from E to H. Then it is clear that
ResE (H) ≤ H1 ; since E is open in G, in fact ResG (H) ≤ H1 . We then
see that ResiG (H) ≤ Hi+1 for all i < n, so in fact Res∞
G (H) ≤ Res(H).
∞
Indeed, Res∞
(H)
=
Res
(H).
Since
H
is
cocompact
in
E, Theorem 5.17
G
ensures that in fact
∞
Res∞
G (H) = ResG (H) = ResG (K) and ResG (E) = ResG (E) = ResG (K)
∞
since E is open, ResG (E) = Res(E) and Res∞
G (E) = Res (E). So we have

Res∞ (E) = Res(E) = Res(H).
By Corollary 2.18, the action of K on H is flat of finite rank. Thus by
applying Theorem 5.17 to the action of H on itself, we obtain Res∞ (H) =
Res(H), completing the proof of (ii).

6.4

Faithful weakly decomposable groups

We apply the results of §6.2 to a class of t.d.l.c. groups considered in [7] and
[8].
Definition 6.12. An action of a t.d.l.c. group G on a Boolean algebra A is
(non-degenerate) faithful weakly decomposable if it is faithful, such
that for all α ∈ A \ {0}, the stabilizer in G of α is open, and the pointwise
stabilizer of the set {β ∈ A | α ∧ β = 0} is non-discrete. We say G is
faithful weakly decomposable if it has a non-degenerate faithful weakly
decomposable action on some Boolean algebra.
The faithful weakly decomposable property implies several structural
properties of G, as described in [7, §5]. In particular, if G is faithful weakly
decomposable, it follows from results in [7] that G has trivial quasi-center,
and given {1} =
6 K ≤ G such that NG (K) is open, then K is not abelian.
The Boolean algebra A can always be taken to be the (global) centralizer
lattice of G, that is the set
{CG (K) | K ≤ G, NG (K) is open};
given K, L ≤ G such that NG (K) and NG (L) are open, if CG (K) and CG (L)
have an open subgroup in common, then CG (K) = CG (L).
76

Moreover, if H is a closed subgroup of G such that NG (H) is open, then
H is also faithful weakly decomposable (by [7, Proposition 5.22]).
The faithful weakly decomposable property also has implications for the
local dynamics of G, as investigated in [8, §6]. In particular, we recall the
following.
Proposition 6.13. Let G be a t.d.l.c. group acting on a Boolean algebra A.
Suppose the action is non-degenerate faithful weakly decomposable.
(i) (See [8, Theorem 6.11]) Suppose that G is compactly generated and
that there is an identity neighbourhood in G that contains no nontrivial compact normal subgroups of G. Then there exists g ∈ G and
α ∈ A such that gα < α.
(ii) (See [8, Proposition 6.7]) Let g ∈ G, and suppose there exists α ∈ A
such that gα < α. Then nub(g) is non-trivial; in other words, con(g)
is not closed.
We can use this result to establish a dichotomy for faithful weakly decomposable t.d.l.c. groups, as stated in the introduction. We begin the proof
of Theorem 1.20 with a lemma.
Lemma 6.14. Let G be a faithful weakly decomposable t.d.l.c. group and
let α be an automorphism of G that is isotropic on G. Let S = G†α ⋊ hαi,
equipped with a topology such that G†α is embedded as an open subgroup of S.
Suppose rnubG (α) = {1}. Then S is compactly generated and has no nontrivial compact normal subgroup, and there exists g ∈ S such that nub † (g)
Gα

is non-trivial.2

Proof. Let T = G†α . By Corollary 3.10, T has open normalizer in G. By
Proposition 6.7, every compact hα, G†α i-invariant subgroup of G commutes
with T .
Let A be the global centralizer lattice of G, on which the action of G
is faithful weakly decomposable by [7, Theorem 5.18]. As explained in [7,
Proposition 5.22], whenever L is a closed subgroup of G such that NG (L) is
open, there is a principal ideal I of A, which can be regarded as a Boolean
algebra in its own right, such that the action of L on I is faithful weakly
decomposable. In particular, this argument applies to L = T . Moreover I is
obtained from A in a canonical way, so the action extends to an action of S
on I. The latter action is not necessarily faithful, but clearly the kernel K
2
For the application it would suffice to restrict to the case when α is an inner automorphism, say conjugation by h ∈ G. However, complications arise in the proof if one considers the closed subgroup S = hG†h , hi of G instead of the semidirect product G†h ⋊ hhi;

in particular, it can happen that S/G†h is an infinite compact group, and in this case it is
not clear whether S can have non-trivial compact normal subgroups.

77

of the action is discrete so K ≤ QZ(S), and in fact QZ(S) acts trivially on I,
so K = QZ(S) and T ∩ QZ(S) = {1}. Thus QZ(S) is a discrete subgroup of
S; also QZ(S) is isomorphic to a subgroup of hαi, so QZ(S) is torsion-free,
and hence QZ(S) has trivial intersection with every compact subgroup of
S. Since T is open in S, we have QZ(S) ≥ CS (T ). Since T and QZ(S)
normalize each other and have trivial intersection, in fact QZ(S) = CS (T ).
Observe that α does not leave invariant any proper open subgroup of T ,
so S = hα, U i, where U is any compact open subgroup of T ; in particular S
is compactly generated. Given a compact normal subgroup N of S, then N
commutes with T , so N ≤ QZ(S) and hence N is trivial.
If QZ(S) = {1}, then S is faithful weakly decomposable and there is
an identity neighbourhood (namely T ) that contains no non-trivial compact
normal subgroup of S, so by Proposition 6.13, there exists g ∈ S such that
nubS (g) is non-trivial; clearly nubS (g) = nubT (g). If instead QZ(S) > {1},
then there exists β ∈ QZ(S) and n > 0 such that βαn ∈ T . Since β
centralizes T , we see that
†
†
†
n
n
Tβα
n = Gαn = Gα and rnubT (βα ) ≤ rnubG (α ) = rnubG (α) = {1}.

The same argument as used for S now shows that T is compactly generated and has no non-trivial compact normal subgroups. Hence by Proposition 6.13, there exists g ∈ T such that nubT (g) is non-trivial.
Proof of Theorem 1.20. It is clear that (i) and (ii) are mutually exclusive.
We may suppose that (ii) fails, that is, every contraction group in G is
closed.
By Proposition 6.13, it follows that G has arbitrarily small non-trivial
compact normal subgroups.
Let us now suppose there exists h ∈ G such that con(h) 6= {1}, so h is
isotropic on G. Since con(h) is closed, nub(h) = {1}, so certainly rnubG (h)
is trivial. Thus by Lemma 6.14, there exists g ∈ S such that nub † (g) is
non-trivial, where S
as g has. Then nub
g′

Gh
†
′
= Gh ⋊ hhi. Let g ∈ G, with the same action on G†h
(g′ ) is a non-trivial compact subgroup of G on which

G†h

acts ergodically, so g′ has non-trivial nub on G. But then con(g′ ) is not
closed, a contradiction. Thus G is anisotropic, so (i) holds.

References
[1] Baumgartner, U. Totally disconnected, locally compact groups as
geometric objects — a survey of work in progress. pp 1–20 in: Geometric
Group Theory - Geneva and Barcelona Conferences (2005), Trends in
Mathematics, Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel, 2007.
[2] Baumgartner, U.; Willis, G.A. Contraction groups and scales of
78

automorphisms of totally disconnected locally compact groups, Israel
J. Math. 142 (2004), 221–248.
[3] Bhattacharjee, M.; MacPherson, D. Strange permutation representations of free groups, J. Aust. Math. Soc. 74 (2003), no. 2, 267–286.
[4] Borel, A.; Tits, J. Homomorphismes ‘abstraits’ de groupes
algébriques simples, Ann. of Math. 97 (1973), 499–571.
[5] Caprace, P-E.; Monod, N. Decomposing locally compact groups
into simple pieces, Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 150 (2011), no.
1, 97–128.
[6] Caprace, P-E.; Reid, C.D.; Willis, G.A. Limits of contraction
groups and the Tits core, J. Lie Theory 24 (2014), 957–967.
[7] Caprace, P-E.; Reid, C.D.; Willis, G.A. Locally normal subgroups of totally disconnected groups; Part I: General theory. Preprint
(2013), http://arxiv.org/abs/arXiv:1304.5144.
[8] Caprace, P-E.; Reid, C.D.; Willis, G.A. Locally normal subgroups of totally disconnected groups; Part II: Compactly generated
simple groups. Preprint (2014), http://arxiv.org/abs/1401.3142.
[9] Dani, S.G. Flows on homogeneous space: a review. In: Ergodic Theory
of Zd -Actions — Proceedings of the Warwick Symposium 1993–4, LMS
Lecture Notes Series 228, CUP, Cambridge, 1996.
[10] Dantzig, D. van. Zur topologischen Algebra. III. Brouwersche und
Cantorsche Gruppen, Compositio Math. 3 (1936), 408–426.
[11] Ellis, R. Distal transformation groups, Pacific J. Math. 8 (1958),
401–405.
[12] Jaworski, W. On contraction groups of automorphisms of totally disconnected locally compact groups, Israel J. Math. 172 (2009), 1–8.
[13] Jaworski, W. Contraction groups, ergodicity, and distal properties of
automorphisms of compact groups, Illinois J. Math. 56 (2012), no. 4,
1023–1084.
[14] Kapoudjian, C. Simplicity of Neretin’s group of spheromorphisms,
Annales de l’institut Fourier 49 (1999), no. 4, 1225–1240.
[15] Kepert, A.G.; Willis, G.A. Scale functions and tree ends, J. Aust.
Math. Soc. 70 (2001), no. 2, 273–292.
[16] Keynes, H.B. A study of the proximal relation in coset transformation
groups, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 128 (1967), 389–402.
79

[17] Mautner, F.I. Geodesic flows on symmetric Riemann spaces, Ann.
Math. 65 (1957), no. 3, 416–431.
[18] Möller, R.G. Structure theory of totally disconnected locally compact groups via graphs and permutations, Canad. J. Math. 54 (2002),
795–827.
[19] Moore, C.C. The Mautner phenomenon for general unitary representations, Pacific J. Math. 86 (1980), no. 1, 155–169.
[20] Neretin, Yu.A. On Combinatorial Analogues of the Group of Diffeomorphisms of the Circle, Russian Academy of Sciences, Izvestiya
Mathematics 41 (1993), no. 2, 337–349.
[21] Prasad, G. Strong approximation for semi-simple groups over function
fields, Ann. Math. 105 (1977), 553–572.
[22] Raghunathan, M.S. Discrete subgroups of Lie groups. Springer,
Berlin Heidelberg New York, 1972.
[23] Raja, C.R.E. Distal actions and ergodic actions on compact groups,
New York J. Math. 15 (2009), 301–318.
[24] Raja, C.R.E.; Shah, R. Distal actions and shifted convolution property, Israel J. Math. 177 (2010), 391–412.
[25] Reid, C.D. On the structure of just infinite profinite groups. J. Algebra
324 (2010), no 9, 2249–2261.
[26] Shalom, Y.; Willis, G.A. Commensurated subgroups of arithmetic
groups, totally disconnected groups and adelic rigidity, Geom. Funct.
Anal. 23 (2013), no. 5, 1631–1683.
[27] Wang, J.S.P. The Mautner phenomenon for p-adic Lie groups, Math.
Zeitschrift 185 (1984), 403-412.
[28] Wesolek, P. Elementary totally disconnected locally compact groups,
Proc. London Math. Soc. 110 (2015), no 6, 1387–1434.
[29] Wesolek, P.; Williams, J. Chain conditions, elementary
amenable groups, and descriptive set theory. Preprint (2014),
http://arxiv.org/abs/1410.0975.
[30] Willis, G.A. The structure of totally disconnected, locally compact
groups, Math. Ann. 300 (1994), 341–363.
[31] Willis, G.A. Totally disconnected, nilpotent, locally compact groups,
Bull. Austral. Math. Soc. 55 (1997), no. 1, 143–146.

80

[32] Willis, G.A. Further properties of the scale function on a totally
disconnected group, J. Alg. 237 (2001), no. 1, 142–164.
[33] Willis, G.A. Tidy subgroups for commuting automorphisms of totally
disconnected groups: an analogue of simultaneous triangularisation of
matrices, New York J. Math. 10 (2004), 1–35.
[34] Willis, G.A. The nub of an automorphism of a totally disconnected,
locally compact group, Ergodic Theory Dyn. Syst. 34 (2014), no. 4,
1365–1394.
[35] Willis, G.A. The scale and tidy subgroups for endomorphisms of totally disconnected locally compact groups, Math. Ann. 361 (2015), no.
1-2, 403–442.
[36] Wilson, J.S. Profinite Groups. Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1998.

81

