RELATIVE RIPS MACHINE

arXiv:1612.07884v1 [] 23 Dec 2016

PEI WANG
Abstract. We study isometric actions of finitely presented groups
on R-trees. In this paper, we develop a relative version of the Rips
machine to study pairs of such actions. An important example of
a pair is a group action on an R-tree and a subgroup action on its
minimal invariant subtree.

Contents
1. Introduction
2. Background
3. Overview of relative Rips machine
4. Relative Rips machine
4.1. Process I
4.2. Process II
4.3. Process III
5. Machine Output
5.1. Special case
5.2. General case
6. A partial order on band complexes
Appendix A. Thin Type components
A.1. Review.
A.2. Structure of Thin Type.
A.3. Shortening Thin Type
References

1
4
13
21
21
23
29
32
32
40
41
43
43
47
51
53

1. Introduction
The Rips machine is an important tool in the study of group actions
on R-trees, see [BF95] [GLP94]. In Bestvina and Feighn’s version, they
describe this machine as moves on a class of 2-complexes equipped with
measured laminations, called band complexes.
Date: April 4, 2018.
1

2

PEI WANG

A band complex is constructed in the following way (see more details
in Definition 2.10). A band B is a space of the form b×I where b = [0, a]
is an arc of the real line and I = [0, 1]. b × {0} and b × {1} are called
bases of B. A union of bands Y is a space obtained from a disjoint
union Γ of intervals by attaching a finite collection of bands through
length-preserving homeomorphisms from their bases into Γ. Each band
is assigned a weight according to the attaching map. A band B has
weight 0 band if it is an annulus (Definition 2.4). Y denotes the union
of bands obtained from Y by omitting weight 0 bands. A subset of a
band of the form {point} × I is called a vertical fiber. A leaf of Y is
a class of the equivalence relation generated by x ∼ x0 if {x, x0 } is a
subset of some vertical fiber of a band. Y is then naturally foliated by
its leaves. A band complex X is a relative CW 2-complex based on a
union of bands Y with 0-, 1-, and 2-cells attached along leaves.
Band complexes arise in the study of group actions on real trees via a
process called resolution (Definition 2.12). Let G be a finitely presented
group acting on an R-tree T by isometries, a G-tree for short, and X
be a band complex with fundamental group G. A resolution is a Ge to T , such that f maps
equivariant map f from the universal cover X
each lift of a leaf to a point in T . Every G-tree T has a resolution
[MS88], and one may study T through analyzing its resolutions.
The Rips machine is used to classify band complexes. The machine
takes as input an arbitrary band complex X and puts it into a normal
form – whose underlying union of bands Y is a finite disjoint union
of components each of which is one of the following four types: simplicial, surface, toral and thin. The latter three are called minimal
components. Almost every leaf of a minimal component is dense.
In this paper, we develop a relative version of the Rips machine to
study pairs of group actions on R-trees. To motivate the construction, for a given G-tree TG and a finitely presented subgroup H < G,
consider a minimal invariant H-subtree TH ⊂ TG . Let XH be a band
complex resolving TH and XG containing XH be a finite 2-complex with
fundamental group G. One may put a band complex structure on XG
eH → TH to a resolution r̂ : X
eG → TG .
by extending the resolution r : X
Here the two band complexes XH and XG along with the inclusion
between them, denoted by (XH ,→ XG ), is an important example of a
ι
pair of band complexes. In general, a pair of band complexes (X → X 0 )
consists two band complexes X, X 0 and a morphism ι : X → X 0 which
is locally injective when restricted to the underlying union of bands
(Definition 3.3).

RELATIVE RIPS MACHINE

3

The input of the relative Rips machine is a pair of band complexes
ι
(X → X 0 ). The machine is made of moves (Section 2) on pairs of
ι
band complexes. If (X → X 0 ) resolves a pair of trees (T ,→ T 0 )
ι∗
ι
and (X ∗ → X 0∗ ) is related to (X → X 0 ) by a sequence of moves,
ι∗
then (X ∗ → X 0∗ ) also resolves (T ,→ T 0 ). This machine converts
an arbitrary pair of band complexes into a pair of band complexes in
ι
normal forms. Moreover, for a pair (X → X 0 ), eventually only weight
0 bands in X map into weight 0 bands in X 0 . Based on these, we have
the following results.
ι
Given a pair of band complexes (X → X 0 ) with the underlying pair
ι
of unions of bands (Y → Y 0 ), let Y0 ⊂ Y be a component and Y00 ⊂ Y 0
be the component containing ι(Y0 ). If Y00 is simplicial, then so is Y0
since only for simplicial component, every leaf is compact. If Y00 is a
minimal component, we show:
ι

Theorem 5.10. (Part I) Let (Y0 → Y00 ) be a pair of components.
Suppose that Y00 is a minimal component, then Y0 is either a minimal
component of the same type as Y00 or Y0 is simplicial.
Using the normal form obtained from the Rips machine, one may
check that a finite cover of a minimal component is a minimal component of the same type. The reverse direction is clearly false for toral
components (see Remark 5.11). In the case that Y00 is a surface or thin
component, we get:
Theorem 5.10. (Part II) Y0 is a surface or thin component if and
ι
only if, the relative Rips machine eventually converts (Y0 → Y00 ) into a
0
ι∗
0
pair (Y0∗ → Y0 ∗ ) with the property that Y0∗ is a finite cover of Y0 ∗ .
Now back to our motivation, let H < G be two finitely presented
ι
groups and (XH → XG ) be a resolving pair for (TH ,→ TG ). Denote the
underlying unions of bands for XH and XG by YH and YG respectively,
we have:
Corollary 5.12. Suppose that YH and YG are both single surface components or both single thin components and that π1 (YH ) generates H,
π1 (YG ) generates G. If TG has trivial edge stabilizers, then [G : H] is
finite.
Corollary 5.12 paritially generalized Reynold’s main result in [Rey11a]
to the setting of all finitely presented groups.

4

PEI WANG

The motivation for building the relative Rips Machine is its applications to the elementary theory of free groups. In section 6, we define a
partial order on band complexes as follows.
Let ι : X → X 0 be a morphism between two band complexes. To
simplify the notation, suppose that every component of Y , the underlying union of bands of X 0 , has a non-empty preimage. Then we say
that X < X 0 if one of the following holds.
• Different components of Y map into the same component of Y 0 .
• A component of Y and its image in Y 0 have different types.
• There exists a component Y0 ⊂ Y of surface or thin type has the
property that the relative Rips machine will eventually convert
Y 0 into a proper cover of its image.
Based on Theorem 5.10, we obtain the following proposition which
will be used for induction arguments in [BFW].
Proposition 6.3. Every sequence of band complexes, X1 < X2 < . . . ,
eventually stabilizes.
The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 reviews the Rips machine. Among the three types of minimal components, thin type is the
most interesting and the least familiar. In Appendix A, we provide
proofs for a few known facts on thin components. As an application,
we prove a generalization of Sela’s shortening argument for thin components. Section 3 gives basic set-up for the relative Rips Machine.
Section 4 describes the three processes of the relative Rips machine. In
Section 5, we discuss the machine output and prove Theorem 5.10 and
Corollary 5.12. In Section 6, we define the partial order < on band
complexes and prove Proposition 6.3.
It is a great pleasure to thank my advisor Mark Feighn who introduced me to Rips machine, shared his knowledge and ideas with me,
and suggested the possibility of a machine studying pairs of group actions.
2. Background
In this section we briefly review basic definitions and list some useful
properties without proofs about the Rips machine, see detail in [BF95].
Definition 2.1. A real tree, or an R-tree, is a metric space T such
that for any x, y in T there is a unique arc from x to y and this arc is
isometric to an interval of the real line.

RELATIVE RIPS MACHINE

5

Let G be a group. A G-tree T is an R-tree with G acting on the
left by isometries . A G-tree is minimal if it has no proper G-subtree.
Given an R-tree T and x ∈ T . A connected component of T − x is
called a direction at x. We say that x ∈ T is an ordinary point if there
are exactly two directions at x. A vertex is a point which is not an
ordinary point. An R-tree is simplicial if the set of vertices is discrete.
Definition 2.2. A real graph Γ is a finite union of compact simplicial
R-trees. In particular, each interval of these trees is identified with an
arc of the real line.
Let I = [0, 1]. A band B is a space of the form b × I where b = [0, a]
is an arc of the real line, see Figure 1. b × {0} and b × {1} are called
the bases of B. A vertical fiber is a set of the form {point} × I. A
subset a vertical fiber is vertical, for example the set consisting {x, x0 }
in Figure 1. Similarly, a subset of b × {point} is horizontal.
A band has an involution δB given by reflection in b × { 21 }, known
as the dual map. We may identify b with one base of B. Two bases of
B then denoted by b and dual(b).
dual(b)
x0
x
b

Figure 1. The band B = b × I
Definition 2.3. Let B1 , . . . , Bn be bands and Γ be a real graph. For
each base bi of a Bi , let fbi be a length-preserving homeomorphism
from bi to Γ. A union of bands is the quotient space Y of the disjoint
union Γ t B1 t · · · t Bn modulo the union of the fbi ’s.
Definition 2.4. A band B = b × I = [0, a] × [0, 1] (or each of its bases)
of a union of bands Y is assigned a weight according to the attaching
map. B is a weight 0 band if it is an annulus obtained by attaching
(z, 0) and (z, 1) to the same point of Γ for every z ∈ b. B is a weight 21
band if it is a Mobius band obtained by attaching (z, 0) and (a − z, 1)
to the same point of Γ for every z ∈ b. Otherwise B is a weight 1
band. A block is the closure of a connected component of the union of
the interiors of the
P bases, see Figure 2. The complexity of a block
is max{0, −2 + weight(b)|b ⊂ block}. The complexity of Y is the
sum of the complexities of its blocks.

6

PEI WANG

b2

p1
b1

p2

p3
b3

Figure 2. Suppose that b1 , b2 and b3 are three bases. Then the
closed segment from p1 to p2 is a block and the closed segment
from p2 to p3 is another block.

Definition 2.5. A leaf of Y is an equivalence class of the equivalence
relation on Y generated by x ∼ x0 if {x, x0 } is a vertical subset in Y .
The decomposition of Y into leaves is a foliation with a natural
transverse measure, see [MS88]. A Cantor-type self map on Y can be
constructed such that Y is being laminated as well, see, for example in
[Hat88]. So Y is considered equipped with both measured lamination
and measured foliation. We switch freely between these two terms for
our advantage.
Remark 2.6. Let Y be a union of bands constructed by gluing bands
to Γ where Γ is a disjoint union of finite compact simplicial trees.
According to [BF95, Lemma 6.1], after applying a finite sequence of
moves on Y , we may assume that Y has the following property.
(A1): Its underlying real graph Γ is a disjoint union of edges. Each
edge is either a block or meets no bands.
We will make assumption (A1) for all union of bands throughout the
rest of this paper unless otherwise mentioned.
Definition 2.7. Let Y be a union of bands with underlying real graph
Γ. For z ∈ Γ denote by NΓ (z, ) the closed -neighborhood of z in Γ.
If z ∈
/ Γ we take NΓ (z, ) to be empty. For a band B = b × I of Y ,
z = (z, t) ∈ b × I = B, and  > 0, let NB (z, ) be the closed horizontal
segment {(x0 , t) ∈ B||x − x0 | ≤ }. For z ∈ Y , define N (z, ) to be the
union of NΓ (z, ) and of the NB (z, ) over all B containing z. A subset
of Y is horizontal if it is a subset of Γ or if it is contained in a single
band and is horizontal there. Let s, s0 ⊂ Y be horizontal and let p be
a path in a leaf of Y . We say s pushes into s0 along p if there is a
homotopy H of s into s0 through horizontal sets such that
• for every z ∈ s, H({z} × I) is contained in a leaf, and
• there is z0 ∈ s so that p(t) = H(z0 , t) for all t ∈ I.
Given a horizontal s and path p in a leaf with p(0) ∈ s, we say that s
pushes along p if there is a horizontal set s0 such that s pushes into s0
along p.

RELATIVE RIPS MACHINE

7

As subset S of Y is pushing saturated if given a path p with
p(0) ∈ S and  > 0 such that N (p(0), ) pushes along p then p(1) ∈ S.
Definition 2.8. Let Y be a union of bands. A connected component of
Y is minimal if every pushing saturated subset contained in that component is dense in Y and is simplicial if every leaf in that component
is compact. Based on assumption (A1), we include in this description
a special class of simplicial components, naked real edges, which are
components of the real graph Γ that meets no bands (or what we might
call degenerate bands)
A priori it is possible that a component of Y is neither minimal nor
simplicial. However, with a little extra restriction on leaves of Y , a
component is either minimal or simplicial.
Proposition 2.9. [BF95, Proposition 4.8] Let Y be a union of bands.
There are only finitely many isotopy classes of compact leaves in Y .
Suppose that no leaf of Y has a subset that is proper, compact and
pushing saturated. Then, the following holds.
• Each component of Y is either simplicial or minimal.
• Each simplicial component of Y is an I-bundle over some leaf
in that component.
• Only finitely many leaves of Y contain a proper pushing saturated subset.
From the construction, the fundamental group of a union of bands
Y is a free group. To study actions of a general group, relations are
needed. Thus additional cells are attached to Y to build a 2-complex
as follows.
Definition 2.10. A band complex X is a relative CW 2-complex
based on a union of bands Y . X is obtained from Y with 0, 1, and
2-cells attached such that
• only finitely many (closed) cells of X meet Y ,
• the 1-cells of X intersect Y in a subset of Γ,
• each connected component of the intersection of Γ and a 2-cell
of X is a point, and
• each connected component of the intersection of a band of Y
and a 2-cell of X is vertical.
Intersections between attaching cells and Y are call attaching regions.

8

PEI WANG

Notation 2.11. Here is a terminology convention. If X is a band
complex then Y is always the underlying union of bands and Γ is always
the underlying real graph. Similarly, the union of bands for X 0 is
Y 0 , etc. Further, Y denotes the union of bands obtained from Y by
omitting weight 0 bands.
A leaf of a band complex X is a leaf of Y . Similarly, a minimal
or simplicial component of the lamination on X (i.e. Y ) is called a
minimal or simplicial component of X for short. The complexity of
X is the complexity of Y . The transverse measure on Y can then be
integrated along a path in X. A generalized leaf of X is an equivalence
class of points of X under the equivalence relation x ∼ x0 if there is
a path in X joining x and x0 with measure 0. X ∗ ⊂ X is a band
subcomplex if X ∗ is a band complex with underlying real graph Γ∗ ⊂ Γ
and underlying union of bands Y ∗ ⊂ Y .
Let G be a finitely presented group and T be a G-tree. A band
complex associated to T can be obtained in the following way.
Definition 2.12. Let X be a 2-complex whose fundamental group is
e → T , where X
e
G. A resolution for T is a G-equivariant map r : X
is the universal cover of X, such that the image of a generalized leaf
e is a point and r embeds the lifts of bases of bands in X. We say
of X
that X a resolving complex.
Proposition 2.13. [BF95, Proposition 5.3] Let G be a finitely presented group. Every G-tree T has a resolution.
For a given G-tree T , let X a band complex resolving T . The goal
of the Rips machine is to put this arbitrary band complex X into some
normal form, further through which one can study structures of T and
G. There is a list of six moves (M0)-(M5) that can be applied to a band
complex described in [BF95, section 6]. These moves are elementary
homotopic moves with respect to the underlying measured lamination.
If a band complex X 0 is obtained from a band complex X by a sequence
of these moves, the following holds.
• There are maps φ : X → X 0 and ψ : X 0 → X that induces an
isomorphism between fundamental groups and preserve measure.
e → T is a resolution, then the composition f ψ̃ : X
e0 → T
• If f : X
e 0 → T is a resolution, then so is
is also a resolution, and if g : X
e → T.
g φ̃ : X

RELATIVE RIPS MACHINE

9

• φ and ψ induce a 1 − 1 correspondence between the minimal
components of the laminations on X and X 0
We now briefly describe four of these six moves that are extensively
used in later sections (following their original labels in [BF95]) .
(M2) Subdivide a band. Let B = b × I be a band, and let x
be a point in the interior of b. We obtain Y 0 by splitting B down the
vertical fiber {x} × I. There are now two fibers over x. To obtain X 0 ,
first attach a new 2-cell D to Y 0 along the two copies of {x} × I. Then
attach the cells of X to X 0 so that collapsing D in X 0 recovers X. D
is called a subdivision cell.
(M3) Cut Γ. Let z be a point of Γ that does not meet the interior
of any base. Γ0 is Γ split open at z. Let Z be the set of points in Γ0
which lies over z. Attach to Γ0 the cone over Z. This added a collection
of new 1-cells and a new 0-cell in X 0 . To complete this move, attach
bands and cells to X 0 so that collapsing the above cone recovers X.
(M4) Slide. Let B = b × I and C = c × I be distinct bands in
X. Suppose that fb (b) ⊂ fc (c). Then a new band complex X 0 can
be created by replacing fb by fdual(c) ◦ δC ◦ fc−1 ◦ fb . This is a slide of
b across C from c to dual(c). We say that c is the carrier, and b is
carried. See Figure 3.

B

B

C

C

Figure 3. Slide B across C.
Definition 2.14. Let B = b × I be a band of Y . A subarc J of a base
b is free if either
• b has weight 1 and the interior of J meets no other base of
positive weight, see Figure 4, or
• b has weight 21 , the interior of J does not contain the midpoint
of b, and b and dual(b) are the only positive weight bases that
meet the interior of J.

10

PEI WANG

A

J
B

J0
C

Figure 4. J is a free subarc, whereas J 0 is not
(M5) Collapse from a free subarc. Let B = b × I be a band, and
let J ⊂ b be a free subarc. First use (M2) to subdivide weight 0 bands
meeting J, until a base of any such band meeting J is contained in J. In
doing this, we may have introduced new subdivision cells into X. Then
use (M4) to slide the weight 0 bands that meet J over B to dual(b).
Call the result X ∗ . New subdivision cells introduced by subdivision
become annuli in X ∗ , so we call them subdivision annuli. Further,
relative 1- and 2-cells whose image intersect interior of J × [0, 1), are
naturally homotoped upwards to dual(b).
If b has weight 1, collapse J × I to dual(J) ∪ (∂J × I) to obtain
0
X , see Figure 5. Typically, the band B will be replaced by two new
bands. But if J contains one or both endpoints of b, say x, then we
also collapse {x} × I. Thus B is replaced by 1 or 0 band.
If b is of weight 21 , we may subdivide B over the end-point of J
nearest the midpoint of b such that J is contained in a band of weight
1 ([BF95, Lemma 6.5]). Then we can collapse from J as before.
dual(J)

J
C

Figure 5. Collapse from a free subarc J: first use (M2) to subdivide the weight 0 band C into three bands and slide the middle
one across B. Subdivison annuli are attached between two red
loops and two blue loops. Then collapse J ×I to dual(J)∪(∂J ×I)

In this paper, we will need a few additional moves listed below.
(M6) Attach a band: Glue b × I to X via a measure-preserving
map from b × ∂I to its underlying real graph Γ that transverse to the
measured lamination.

RELATIVE RIPS MACHINE

11

(M7) Adding an arc to the real graph: Add an extra segment
c of the real line to Γ. A special case is enlarge Γ by gluing one end
point of c to an end point of Γ.
(M8) Attach a disk 1: Attach a 2-disk D to X along a loop in the
relative 1 skeleton of X (i.e. the union of bands Y and 1-cells in X)
whose measure is zero.
Remark 2.15. Note that unlike the moves in [BF95], (M6)-(M8) may
change the fundamental group of X. But we never perform such moves
alone. For example, right after a (M6) - attach a band, we always
perform some (M8) - attach a disk (multiple times if needed) to make
sure that the resulting band complex X 0 has the same fundamental
group as X and remains resolving the same tree as X.
Proposition 2.16. [BF95, Lemma 6.1] By applying a sequence of
moves to a band complex X, we may arrange that no leaf of the complex
has a subset that is proper, compact, and pushing saturated.
Proposition 2.9 and Proposition 2.16 imply the following. After possibly a sequence of moves, we may always assume that each component
of the measured lamination on X is either simplicial or minimal. The
Rips machine is designed to study one minimal component at a time.
It consists of two processes (made of sequence of moves): Process I and
Process II. Neither process increases complexity.
Roughly speaking, each step of Process I is a (M5)-collapse a free
subarc (see details in Section A.1); each step of Process II is a combination of a (M4)-slide and a (M5)-collapse a free subarc (see details in
Section 4.2).
Fix a minimal component Y0 of Y . First, Process I is successively
applied until no base of Y0 has a free subarc. It is possible that Process
I continues forever. In this case, as a machine output, we say that Y0
is of thin type (also called Levitt or exotic type). If no base has a
free subarc then Process II is successively applied until the complexity
of Y0 decreases then go back to Process I. It is possible that Process
II continues forever. In this case, as a machine output, Y0 is either of
surface type or of toral type (also called axial type) (depending
on Y0 ’s local structure). Thus eventually only one of the processes is
applied, and it continues forever. After knowing the type of Y0 , we
continue by choosing another component in Y .
1This

is a general version of (M00 ) in [BF95].

12

PEI WANG

Definition 2.17. In applying the Rips machine to Y0 , we will obtain
an infinite sequence Y0 , Y1 . . . where each component is obtained from
the previous by a process. Further, there exists an integer N such that
only a unique process (either Process I or Process II) is applied after YN
and Complexity(Yn ) = Complexity(Yn+1 ) for all n > N . For n > N ,
we say that Yn is in a standard form. A band complex is standard
if its every minimal component is standard.
Definition 2.18. Given a union of bands Y , let q ∈ Y be a point and
lq ⊂ Y be the leaf containing q. Each component dp of lq − q is called
a direction of Y at q. A direction is infinite if the corresponding
component of a leaf is infinite. In particular, for every q ∈ Γ, a band
in Y containing q determines a unique direction at q. Denote the
direction set at q by Tq Y .
For each q ∈ Y , we define its index by
iY (q) = #{infinite directions at q} − 2.
The limit set ΩY of Y is the set of points in Y whose index is at least
zero. Its intersection with the real graph (i.e. ΩY ∩ Γ) is called the
limit graph.
It is proved in [BF95, section 8] that each type of component in Y
can be characterized in the following fashion.
Proposition 2.19. Let X be a band complex and Y be the underlying
union of bands. Application of the Rips machine puts X into a standard form. Each component Y0 of Y belongs to one of the four types:
simplicial, surface, toral and thin. Moreover, for a fixed component Y0 ,
let ΩY0 be its limit set (i.e. ΩY ∩ Y0 ) and ΓY0 = Γ ∩ Y0 be its underlying
real graph. Then
(1) Y0 is a simplicial component if and only if ΩY0 is empty;
(2) Y0 is a toral component with rank n > 2 if and only if ΩY0
contains infinitely may points of positive index;
(3) Y0 is a surface component if and only if iY (q) = 0 for every
interior point q in Y0 and the closure of ΩY0 is Y0 ;
(4) Y0 is a thin component if and only if there are finitely many
points in ΩY0 have positive index and ΩY0 ∩ ΓY0 is a dense Gδ
set in ΓY0 .
Associated to a band complex is a GD which is a generalization of
the GAD defined in [BF09].
Definition 2.20. A generalized decomposition, or GD for short, is a
graph of groups presentation ∆ where some vertices have certain extra

RELATIVE RIPS MACHINE

13

structure. Namely, the underlying graph is bipartite with vertices in
one class called rigid and vertices in the other called foliated. Further
each foliated vertex has one of four types: simplicial, toral, surface and
thin.
A band complex X is naturally a graph of spaces where vertex spaces
are components of Y (with attaching 2-cells that is glued along its
leaves) and the closures of connected components of the complements of
Y . An edge corresponds to a connected component of the intersection
of the closures of sets defining two vertices. The GD associated to X,
denoted by ∆(X), is the graph of groups decomposition coming from
this graph of spaces.
3. Overview of relative Rips machine
Given a group acting on an R-tree, one may ask how its subgroups act
on their corresponding minimal subtrees. In Section 3 and Section 4,
we will construct a relative version of the Rips machine to study such
subgroup actions. The relative Rips machine takes as input a pair of
band complexes (see Definition 3.3): two band complexes X and X 0
ι
with a morphism ι : X → X 0 , denoted by (X → X 0 ). The goal of this
machine is to understand the relation between structures of X and X 0
by putting both X and X 0 into some normal forms simultaneously. As
with the Rips machine, this relative Rips machine studies one pair of
ι0
ι
components (Y0 →
Y00 ) ⊂ (Y → Y 0 ) at a time. To be more precise,
for fixed minimal component Y00 of Y 0 , let Y0 (possibly simplicial) be
a component of Y such that ι(Y0 ) ⊂ Y00 and ι0 be the restriction of ι
on Y0 . In general, for a fixed Y00 , there are finitely many choices for Y0 .
To simplify the notation, we will first work on the special case where
there is a unique choice for Y0 . Then in Section 5.2, we will justify the
machine described under this special setting for the general case.
Definition 3.1. Let X and X 0 be band complexes. A map between
their underlying real graphs ι : Γ → Γ0 is a morphism if every edge of
Γ has a finite subdivision such the restriction of ι to each segment of
the subdivision is an isometry. A map between their unions of bands
ι : Y → Y 0 is a morphism if it restricts to a morphism of real graphs and
takes each band of Y homeomorphically to a subband of Y 0 . Finally, a
relative cellular map ι : X → X 0 is called a morphism if its restriction
to the underlying union of bands is a morphism. An inclusion of a band
subcomplex into a band complex is an example of morphism.
Definition 3.2. Let Y , Y 0 be two unions of bands and ι : Y → Y 0
be a morphism. For a point q ∈ Y , ι is locally injective near q,

14

PEI WANG

if there exists a neighborhood of q in Y such that the restriction of
ι to that neighborhood is injective. ι is an immersion if ι is locally
injective near any point q ∈ Y . Further let p = ι(q) ∈ ι(Y ) ⊂ Y 0 . ι
is locally surjective near q, if for any neighborhood Uq of q, there
is a neighborhood Up of p with the property that Up ⊂ ι(Uq ). ι is a
submersion if ι is locally surjective near any point q ∈ Y . We say ι
is a local isomorphism if ι is an immersion and also a submersion.
Definition 3.3. Given two band complexes X and X 0 , we say they
ι
form a pair if there is a morphism ι : X → X 0 , denoted by (X → X 0 ).
ι0
ι
Correspondingly, (Y → Y 0 ) is a pair of unions of bands. (Y0 →
Y00 )
0
0
is a pair of components where ι0 = ι|Y0 , Y0 ⊂ Y and Y0 ⊂ Y are
components with the property that ι0 (Y0 ) ⊂ Y00 .
Definition 3.4. Let H < G be two finitely presented groups, TG be
a G-tree, TH ⊂ TG be a minimal H-subtree. (TH ,→ TG ) is called a
ι
pair of trees. Further let (XH → XG ) be a pair of band complexes.
ι
We say (XH → XG ) resolves (TH ,→ TG ) if there exist resolutions
eG → TG and rH : X
eH → TH such that the following diagram
rG : X
commutes.
r
eG ................G.................... TG
X
.
ι̃

.
..........
....
...
...
...

.
.........
..
...
...
..
... .....
....

r ....................
eH ...............H
. T
X
H
Remark 3.5. Similarly as for all moves in the Rips machine, all moves
that will be described for pairs of band complexes obey the following
ι
ι
ι
rule. If (X → X 0 ) and (X ∗ → X 0 ∗ ) are related by a move and (X →
ι
X 0 ) resolves (TH ,→ TG ) then (X ∗ → X 0 ∗ ) also resolves (TH ,→ TG ).
We now discuss some further assumptions that one can make for a
ι
pair (X → X 0 ).
Given a band complex X, according to [BF95, Lemma 6.1], we may
always arrange that no leaf of X has a subset that is proper, compact,
and pushing saturated by a sequence of moves. This further allows
us to make the assumption that its underlying union of bands Y is a
disjoint union of components. In fact, we can arrange this assumption
ι
for a pair of band complexes (X → X 0 ) as well. There are only finitely
many proper, compact, pushing saturated subsets of leaves in X and
X 0 (since each of such subsets contains at least one vertical fiber in the
boundary of Y ). Firstly, we may remove all such “bad” subsets of leaves

RELATIVE RIPS MACHINE

15

in X by (M2) and (M3) as in [BF95, Lemma 6.1]. Denote the resulting
band complex by X ∗ . A morphism ι∗ : X ∗ → X 0 is defined as the
following. On the level of union of bands, ι∗ is the composition of the
inclusion Y ∗ ,→ Y and ι : Y → Y 0 which remains an morphism. ι∗ maps
subdivision annuli newly created by (M2) and cones in Γ(X ∗ ) newly
created by (M3) to the ι-images of the corresponding split vertical
fibers and split vertices. And ι∗ remains the same as ι on all the other
attaching cells. Secondly, we may then remove such “bad” subsets
in X 0 by (M2) and (M3) to obtain X 0∗ and these moves are disjoint
from ι∗ (X ∗ ) since leaves of X ∗ no long contain any “bad” subsets.
ι
(X ∗ → X 0∗ ) is a pair satisfying the desired assumption. Hence, from
ι
now on we will assume that for a pair of band complexes (X → X 0 ),
the following holds.
• (A2): No leaf of X or X 0 has a subset that is proper, compact,
and pushing saturated. In particular, their underlying unions
of bands Y and Y 0 are unions of disjoint components.
In Definition 3.1, a morphism ι : X → X 0 takes each band of Y
homeomorphically to a subband of Y 0 . In general, it may not hold on
the level of generalized bands. The following lemma allows us to work
only with generalized bands.
ι

Proposition 3.6. Let (Y → Y 0 ) be a pair of union of bands. ι can
be converted into a morphism that takes each generalized band of Y
homeomorphically to a sub-generalized band of Y 0 by a finitely sequence
of moves.
Proof. Let BY be a generalized band of Y and its image in Y 0 be
b Y = ι(BY ).
B
b Y is contained in a single generalized
(1) We may assume that B
0
b Y is contained in the union of two or
band BY 0 in Y . Otherwise B
more consecutive generalized bands in X. In this case, we can horizontally (transverse to the foliation) subdivide BY into several generalized
bands such that the image of each of these is contained in a single
generalized band, see Figure 6;
(2) We may assume that there is no two or more consecutive generalized bands B1Y , B2Y . . . of Y map into the same generalized band of
Y 0 . Otherwise, let biY and dual(biY ) be the bottom and top bases of BiY ,
i = 1, 2, . . . . Then dual(bYi−1 ) ∪ biY − dual(bYi−1 ) ∩ biY is a union of free
subarcs. After collapsing these free subarcs, B1Y , B2Y , . . . form a new
longer generalized band, whose image in Y 0 is a single sub-generalized
band. See Figure 7;

16

PEI WANG

B1Y
Subdivide BY horizontally

BY

B2Y

Figure 6. The figure shows the case where Y is identified with
its image in Y 0 , i.e. Y ,→ Y 0 . Blank rectangles represent generalized bands in Y 0 . The gray parts are generalized bands in Y .

B2Y
Collapse J1 and J2

J1

BY

J2
B1Y

Figure 7. This is the case where Y ,→ Y 0 . In this picture,

dual(b1Y ) ∪ b2Y − dual(b1Y ) ∩ b2Y = J1 ∪ J2 .

b Y ) = l(BY 0 ) i.e. B
b Y is a sub(3) Finally, we may assume that l(B
b Y ) < l(BY 0 ). One of the bases of B
bY
generalized band. Otherwise l(B
is a type I free subarc. This implies that one of the bases of BY is a free
subarc of type I and so the whole BY can be collapsed. See Figure 8.
Collapse BY
BY

Figure 8. This shows the case where Y ,→ Y 0 .
The number of generalized bands in Y 0 is bounded. So after finitely
many moves, ι maps every generalized band in Y to a sub-generalized
band in Y 0 .

Proposition 3.6 allows us to make the following assumption. In the
rest sections of this paper, a band always meant to be a generalized
band unless otherwise stated.

RELATIVE RIPS MACHINE

17

• (A3): A morphism between two band complexes always represents the morphism it induced on the level of generalized bands.
Definition 3.7. Let Y be an union of bands and B1 , B2 be two distinct
bands (both have length 1, i.e. the original bands, not the generalized
bands) in Y . If a base of B1 is identified with a base of B2 , we say
that these two bands have a common base, denoted it by b. Further
suppose that the bases of B1 and B2 other than b are either identified
or contained in different blocks. Let φ : B1 → B2 be the linear homeomorphism fixing b. Define “ ∼ ” be the equivalence relation on Y such
that x ∼ φ(x), for all x ∈ B1 . The quotient space Y / ∼ is still an union
of bands. Call the quotient map f : Y  Y / ∼ a fold of bands.
In general, if a base b1 of B1 overlaps a base b2 of B2 (B1 overlaps
B2 for short), i.e. b1 ∩ b2 = o 6= ∅, and further the dual positions
of o in dual(b1 ) and in dual(b2 ) are either identified or contained in
different blocks (see Figure 9), we may fold the subbands 2 determined
by the common segment o in B1 and B2 (the shaded parts in Figure 9).
Moreover, we may also fold two generalized bands with a common base
or an overlap if they have the same length.

B1

b2

o

b1

Identify shaded parts
in B1 and B2 to obtain B3

B3

o

B2

Figure 9. B1 and B2 are two bands in Y . Their bases overlap
at a segment o. Fold the subbands in B1 and B2 determined by o
to obtain a new band B3 .

Remark 3.8. Recall we assume that a given union of bands Y has the
structure constructed in Definition 2.10, in particular (A1) is satisfied.
ι
Roughly speaking, for a given pair of band complexes (X → X 0 ) (with
ι
its underlying pair of unions of bands (Y → Y 0 )), we will fold Y according to the morphism ι : Y → Y 0 to get a new union of bands Y 1
2Here“subband”

is abused for the case where o is a single point

18

PEI WANG

(= Y / ∼) which is “closer” to Y 0 . In general, the real graph ΓY 1 of Y 1
obtained after folding is a simplicial forest (does not satisfies (A1) ).
To fix this, we could do subdivision. However, the problem is that we
may have to fold infinitely many times and the underlying real graph of
the limiting union of bands may not be simplicial anymore. To bypass
ι1

this, whenever ΓY 1 fails (A1), we will replace (Y 1 → Y 0 ) by a new pair
ι1∗

(Y 1∗ → Y 0 ) resolving the same pair of trees and in addition,ΓY 1∗ satisfies (A1). This replacement procedure is discussed in Proposition 3.10.
Definition 3.9. Let ι : Y → Y 0 be a morphism between two unions of
bands where ΓY is a simplicial forest and ΓY 0 is a union of edges and
B1Y , B2Y be two generalized bands in Y that have an overlap. Let the
overlap be o = b1Y ∩ b2Y where b1Y ⊂ B1Y and b2Y ⊂ B2Y are bases. Denote
ι(b1Y ) ∩ ι(b2Y ) by ob. o and ob are segments. We say the overlap between
B1Y and B2Y is wide if o and ob have the same length.
ι

Proposition 3.10. Let (X → X 0 ) be a pair of band complexes where
ι
ΓX is a simplicial forest. We may replace (X → X 0 ) by a new pair
ι∗
ι
(X ∗ → X 0 ) such that it resolves the same pairs of trees as (X → X 0 )
does and the restriction of ι∗ to the underlying real graphs ι∗ : ΓX ∗ →
ΓX 0 is an immersion. In particular, all overlaps between bands are
wide.
Proof. The restriction of ι to the underlying real graphs ι : ΓX → ΓX 0
is a morphism between graphs, which can be realized as composition of
finitely many folds (for graphs) and an immersion [BF91]. Let X ∗ be
the resulting band complex obtained from X by folding ΓX according
ι
to ι. Let ι∗ : X ∗ → X 0 be the induced morphism. (X ∗ → X 0 ) is then
a new pair of band complexes with the desire property.

ι

Proposition 3.11. Let (X → X 0 ) be a pair of band complexes where
ΓX is a simplicial forest. After a finite sequence of folds between graphs
ι
and folds between unions of bands, we may replace (X → X 0 ) by a
ι∗
new pair (X ∗ → X 0 ) such that it resolves the same pairs of trees as
ι
(X → X 0 ) does and ι∗ : Y ∗ → Y 0 is an immersion.
Proof. We may assume that ι : ΓX → ΓX 0 is an immersion by Proposition 3.10. Suppose that ι : Y → Y 0 is not an immersion. Then there
exists a band BY 0 ⊂ Y 0 which has two preimages B1Y , B2Y ⊂ Y with the
property that B1Y and B2Y have an wide overlap. Now, fold B1Y and B2Y
according to the overlap. Let the resulting band complex be X ∗ and
ι∗ : X ∗ → X 0 be the induced morphism. In particular, ι∗ maps BY ∗
into BY 0 where BY ∗ = B1Y ∪ B2Y / ∼f old is the new band in Y ∗ . Apply

RELATIVE RIPS MACHINE

19

Proposition 3.10 again if necessary to make sure that ι∗ : ΓX ∗ → ΓX 0
is an immersion. The number of generalized bands in Y ∗ is less than
the number in Y due to the fold. Therefore, after finitely many steps
of folding, ι∗ will be an immersion.

Proposition 3.11 allows us to make the following assumption to any
ι
given pair of band complexes (X → X 0 ).
• (A4) The restriction of ι to the level of unions of bands ι : Y →
Y 0 is an immersion.
Let Y00 be a minimal component of Y 0 . Its ι-preimage may consists
several components in Y . In each step of the relative Rips machine,
we will preform moves on Y00 first, then apply induced moves to its
preimages and modify ι correspondingly. To simplify our notation, we
will now focus on a special case satisfying (A5), then come back to the
general case in Section 5.2.
• (A5) For a fixed minimal component Y00 in Y 0 , its ι-preimage is
either empty or a unique component Y0 .
Remark 3.12. Here we note that to describe a morphism ι : Y → Y 0
between two unions of bands, one only need to specify a well-defined
map between some neighborhoods of their underlying real graphs. Since
morphisms map every generalized band BY in Y homeomorphically
to a sub-generalized band in Y 0 . A map between neighborhoods of
ΓY and ΓY 0 is well defined if for any BY ∈ Y , neighborhoods of its
bases map to dual positions that uniquely determine a band BY 0 in Y 0 .
Such map induces a unique morphism from Y to Y 0 (up to homotopies
within bands) by sending BY to BY 0 . Moreover, for a given morphism
ι : Y → Y 0 , to show ι is an immersion (a submersion), one only need
to check local injectivity (surjectivity) near the real graphs. We will
use this fact throughout the rest sections.
ι

Let (X → X 0 ) be a pair of band complexes with their underlying
ι
unions of bands (Y → Y 0 ). In Section 4, often several moves described
in Section 2 will be applied as units. We list these combinations of
moves here for a better reference.
(M9) Subdivide X at a point. Let q ∈ Γ be a point on the real
graph of X. We obtain a new band complex X ∗ by apply (M2) subdivide
a band to bands with the property that one of whose bases contains q
as an interior point in Y . X ∗ is well-defined since there are only finitely
ι∗
many such bands in Y (See Figure 10). (X ∗ → X 0 ) is a new pair of

20

PEI WANG

band complexes with immersion ι∗ defined as follows. On the level of
union of bands, ι∗ : Y ∗ → Y 0 is the composition of inclusion Y ∗ ,→ Y
and ι : Y → Y 0 . On the level of attaching cells, ι∗ maps subdivision
cells newly created from splitting to their corresponding vertical fibers
in X 0 and remains the same on all the other attaching cells.

Figure 10. There are three generalized bands B, C, D containing point q. In particular, one base of B and both bases of
C contain q as an interior point. Therefore (M2) is applied three
times during the move of subdividing X at q.
(M10) Subdivide X 0 at a point. Let p ∈ Γ0 be a point on the
real graph of X 0 and q1 , . . . , qn ∈ Γ be its ι-preimages in X. Using
(M9), we may subdivide X 0 at p to obtain X 0 ∗ . To form a new pair
ι∗
(X ∗ → X 0 ∗ ), we can then obtain X ∗ by subdividing X at q1 , . . . , qn and
define ι∗ : X ∗ → X 0 ∗ to be the induced map from ι. In particular, ι∗
maps newly created subdivision cells in X ∗ to the corresponding newly
created subdivision cells in X 0 ∗ .
(M11) Duplicate a segment of Γ. Let c be a segment of Γ. First,
using (M6) we add an extra segment c0 of length l(c) to Γ. Then
applying (M7) we attach to Y a new band C = c × I via measurepreserving maps c × {0} → c and c × {1} → c0 . It is clear that there
are two copies of c in the new Y and the new Y resolves the same tree
as the original one. In particular, a band B ⊂ Y with one of its bases
b contained in c can now be attached to the new Y either along c or c0
(slide B across C).
We will use (M11) to solve the problem of keeping ι as an immersion
in the situation that there exist overlapping bases in Y mapping to disjoint bases after the application of certain moves on Y 0 . See Section 4.2
for details.
Notation 3.13. For the rest of this paper unless otherwise stated, we
will use the following notation:

RELATIVE RIPS MACHINE

21

ι

• (X → X 0 ) is a pair of band complexes satisfying (A1) − (A5);
ι
• (Y → Y 0 ) is its pair of underlying unions of bands;
ι0
• (Y0 →
Y00 ) is a pair of components where Y0 ⊂ Y , Y00 ⊂ Y and
ι0 = ι|Y0 .
• Denote ι(Y ) ⊂ Y 0 by Yb and ι(Y0 ) ⊂ Y00 by Yb0 ;
• BY ⊂ Y is a generalized band with bases bY and dual(bY )
(Similarly for other generalized bands, e.g. cY and dual(cY ) for
CY ⊂ Y , bY 0 and dual(bY 0 ) for BY 0 ⊂ Y 0 ).
4. Relative Rips machine
We will describe the relative Rips machine in this section. This
machine consists three processes (sequences of moves): Process I, Proι0
ι
cess II and Process III. Fix a pair of components (Y0 →
Y00 ) in (X →
X 0 ). In each step of Process I and Process II, we first apply a move to
Y00 . It is the same move one would apply to Y00 in the Rips machine.
Then we apply moves to Y0 and modify ι0 correspondingly so that ι0
remains an immersion. Successive application of Process I and Process
II will convert Y00 into its standard form (Definition 2.17), whereas Y0
may not be in its standard form yet. In particular, there may exist
weight 1 bands in Y0 mapping to weight 0 or weight 12 bands in Y00 .
Such bands in Y0 are called pre-weight 0 bands or pre-weight 12 bands.
Process III is then needed to deal with such bands (Section 4.3). After
finitely many steps in Process III, one will obtain a new pair of compoι0
nents, denoted still by (Y0 →
Y00 ), with the property (∗1 ) that Y00 is in
a standard form and bands in Y0 have the same weights as their images
ι0
Y00 ). Propin Y00 . The machine then go back to Process I with (Y0 →
erty (∗1 ) ensures that Process III will not appear again. In Section 5,
as machine output, we will show that one is able to tell the type of
Y0 as the machine successively applied and the machine will eventually
also convert Y0 into a standard form if Y0 is of the surface or thin type.
ι0
Once we finish analyzing (Y0 →
Y00 ), we continue by choosing another
pair.
ι

ι∗

0
4.1. Process I. Let (Y0 →
Y00 ) be a pair of components. (X ∗ → X 0 ∗ )
ι
is defined to be a pair of band complexes obtained from (X → X 0 ) by
the following operation. Find, if possible, a maximal free subarc JY 0
ι∗
of a base bY 0 in Y00 . If such a JY 0 does not exist, define (X ∗ → X 0 ∗ ) =
ι
(X → X 0 ) and go on to Process II. Else in Y00 , use (M 5) to collapse
from JY 0 to get Y10 . If there are several JY 0 ’s to choose from, abide the
same rule as the Rips machine (see a review in Section A.1).

22

PEI WANG

Now we need to make corresponding changes for Y0 and ι0 to obtain
Y1 and ι1 . There are two cases depending on whether the collapsed
region in Y00 , i.e. the union of JY 0 and the interior of JY 0 = JY 0 × In
(JY 0 is identified with JY 0 × {0}), intersects Yb0 . If the collapsed region
in Y00 does not intersect Yb0 , let Y1 = Y0 and ι1 = ι0 .

B3
JY

B3
Collapse from JY 0 in Y00

J1 J2
0

Collapse from J1 , J2 , in Y0
B1

B2

B2

Figure 11. The figure is showing the case that Y0 is identified

with Yb0 near JY 0 . Blank rectangles are bands in Y00 and gray parts
are bands in Y0 .

Otherwise let {Ji }i=1,...,n be the set of preimages of JY 0 ∩ Yb0 in Y0 , and
let Ji be the base of Ji whose ι0 -image is contained in JY 0 . Since ι0 is
an immersion, Ji ’s are also free subarcs. Y1 is produced by collapsing
from {Ji }i in Y0 . Then restricting ι0 to Y1 , we get ι1 : Y1 → Y10
(See Figure 11). In particular, ι1 maps subdivision annuli created by
collapsing from {Ji }i to subdivision annuli created by collapsing from
JY 0 .
For the case where JY 0 is contained in a weight 21 band, each Ji is
contained in either a weight 21 or weight 1 band. The above process
is well defined. In more detail, suppose that the band containing JY 0
is BY 0 of weight 12 and the band containing Ji is BiY . Let w be the
midpoint of the base bY 0 of BY 0 . Recall that to collapse from JY 0 , we
first replace BY 0 by bands of weight 0, 21 , and 1 (In the degenerate case
where w is one end point of JY 0 , there is no weight 21 ) so that JY 0 is a
free arc contained in a weight 1 base, see [BF95, section 6]. In each BiY ,
we can do the corresponding replacement such that each Ji is contained
in a weight 1 band. We may then collapse from JY 0 in Y00 and collapse
from Ji ’s in Y0 as described above.
In either case, let the resulting pair of band complexes containing
ι1
ι∗
(Y1 →
Y10 ) be (X ∗ → X 0 ∗ ). ι∗ is the same as ι1 when restricted to

RELATIVE RIPS MACHINE

23

Y1 and is the same as ι on other components. Thus ι∗ remains an
ι∗
immersion. We then continue by applying Process I to (X ∗ → X 0 ∗ ).
Moreover since restricting to X 0 , all we have done are exactly the
same as Process I of the Rips machine, so the following holds (See a
proof in the first item of Proposition A.5).
∗

Complexity(X 0 ) ≤ Complexity(X 0 ).
4.2. Process II. Follow the same notation as above, we now describe
ι
Process II which again will produce from (X → X 0 ) another pair of
ι∗
band complexes (X ∗ → X 0 ∗ ). Process II will only be applied after
Process I. So, in this section, we also assume that Y00 has no free subarc
(Y0 may contain some free subarcs), i.e. for each point z ∈ ΓY00 , we
have
(∗2 ): the sum of weights of the bases containing z is at least 2.
In particular, if the Rips machine constructed in [BF95] takes Y00 as
an input, its Process II will be applied. Moves described below for Y00
(to obtain Y10 ) is in fact a review for Process II of the Rips machine.
We may orient ΓY00 and order the components of ΓY00 . This induces a
linear order on ΓY00 . Let K be the first component and z be the initial
point of K. Let bY 0 be the longest base of positive weight containing z,
chosen to have weight 1 if possible. Further let BY 0 be the generalized
band with bY 0 one of its bases. The union of bands Y10 is the result of
the composition of the following two operations.
Operation 1 (Slide) Y00 → Y00∗ : Slide from bY 0 all these positive weight
bases contained in bY 0 (except bY 0 and dual(bY 0 )) whose midpoint is
moved away from z as a result of the slide.
Operation 2 (Collapse) Y00∗ → Y10 : Collapse from the maximal free
initial segment of bY 0 .
Now, we only need to define Y1 and ι1 : Y1 → Y10 . Once Y1 and ι1
have been properly defined, since
Complexity(Y10 ) ≤ Complexity(Y00 )
and if they are equal, (∗2 ) holds for Y10 ([BF95, Proposition 7.5]), we
are in position to apply Process II again. Process II is then successively
applied unless the complexity decreases at some stage. We then say
Process II sequence ends and go back to Process I.
In the following, we describe how to obtain Y1 and ι1 by cases depending on whether Yb0 intersects BY 0 .

24

PEI WANG

C1Y 0
z

JY 0

C2Y

C2Y 0

z0
J1

BY 0

BY

Figure 12. The figure is showing a case where Y0 is contained

in Y00 near BY 0 . Bands in Y00 are blank rectangles and bands in
Y0 are shown in gray. Suppose that in Y00 , BY 0 is the carrier, then
C1Y 0 will be carried and C2Y 0 will not. J1 is shown in red.

Let JY 0 be the maximal free initial segment of bY 0 produced in operation 1 and let the sub-generalized band collapsed in operation 2 be
JY 0 . We may further assume that:
(∗3 ): In Y00 , Yb0 intersects some generalized band that is carried in
operation 1.
Otherwise, if further Yb0 also has no intersection with the interior of
JY 0 , we are done by letting Y1 = Y0 and ι1 = ι0 ; If Yb0 only intersects
JY 0 (See Figure 12), let the set of preimages in Y0 of these intersections
be J1 , . . . , Jk . Let Ji be a base of Ji as in Process I. Y1 is obtained by
collapsing from all Ji ’s in Y0 and ι1 is the restriction of ι0 on Y1 .
Under assumption (∗3 ), there are now two cases.
Case 1: Yb0 has no intersection with the carrier BY 0 .
Let cY be a base of a generalized band CY in Y0 . If ι0 (cY ) is contained
in a base that is carried by BY 0 , we also say cY is carried. Otherwise,
we say cY is non-carried. According to Remark 3.12, to define Y1 and ι1
we only need to work on some neighborhood of ΓY0 in Y0 . The definition
of Y1 and ι1 will be made block by block depending on whether bases
contained in that block are carried.
Let I be a block of ΓY0 . If every base contained in I is non-carried,
Y1 and ι1 are defined to be the same as Y0 and ι0 near this block.
If every base contained in I is carried, then define Y1 to be the same
as Y0 near this block. ι1 is defined by mapping every base cY ⊂ I to
the dual position of ι0 (cY ) in dual(bY 0 ). To be more precise, let CY 0 be
the band in Y00 containing the ι0 -image of CY , where CY ⊂ Y0 is the
band with one of its bases cY . During the operation Y00 → Y10 , CY 0 is
slid across BY 0 to a new position in Y10 . ι1 is defined to map CY into
CY 0 ’s new position in Y10 . Otherwise,

RELATIVE RIPS MACHINE

25

(∗4 ): Within a block I, some bases are carried and some bases are
not.
Near blocks satisfying (∗4 ), Y1 is defined as a composition of the following two operations.
Operation 10 (Slide) Y0 → Y0∗ : Let the union of carried bases within
I be ω = ω1 ∪ · · · ∪ ωk , where each ωi is a connected component of ω.
Near I, we define Y0∗ by modifying Y0 as below. Use (M11) to duplicate
each ωi by first adding a new copy of ωi to ΓY0 and then attaching a
new band Ωi = ωi × [0, 1] along ωi and its new copy. Denote the other
base of Ωi (the new copy of ωi ) by dual(ωi ) (See Figure 13). In I,
every carried base cY is contained in some ωi . Slide each band CY that
corresponds to some cY across Ωi . Do this modification on every block
satisfying (∗4 ) and call the resulting union of bands Y0∗ .
By the above construction, Y0∗ is the same as Y0 away from a neighborhood of Ωi ’s. To define ι∗0 : Y0∗ → Y00 ∗ , we only need to describe
the map near Ωi ’s. In ΓY0∗ , firstly, consider a block that contains
some ωi . All bases other than ωi ’s in this block are non-carried bases
came from Y0 . So define ι∗0 = ι0 near these bases and further define
ι∗0 (ωi ) = ι0 (ωi ) ⊂ bY 0 . Secondly, consider a block of ΓY0∗ containing
some dual(ωi ). Each base, cY , other than dual(ωi ) in this block is a
carried base came from Y0 . Thus define ι∗0 to map cY to the new position of ι0 (cY ) in Y 0∗ and define ι∗0 (dual(ωi )) = dual(ι0 (ωi )) in dual(bY 0 ).
Finally, let the unique subband of BY 0 determined by the image of ωi
b i . Define ι∗0 (Ωi ) = Ω
b i.
and the image of dual(ωi ) be Ω
∗
Now let’s check that ι0 is an immersion. Near the blocks of ΓY0∗
containing some ωi ’s, ι∗0 is the restriction of ι0 to all bands other than
Ωi ’s. The fact that ι0 is an immersion and Yb0 does not intersect BY 0
implies that ι∗0 is injective near these blocks. Near the blocks of ΓY0∗
containing some dual(ωi )’s, ι∗0 is injective for the same reason.
Operation 20 (Collapse) Y0∗ → Y1 : Let Yb0∗ ⊂ Y 0 ∗0 be the image of Y0∗
under ι∗0 . By the construction of operation 10 , Yb0∗ may intersect JY 0
(Images of Ωi may intersect JY 0 ). The intersection part will collapse in
this operation. Exactly the same as in Process I, let the set of preimages of these intersections be Ji ’s. Y1 is obtained by collapsing from
Ji ’s in Y0∗ . ι1 is then defined to be the restriction of ι∗0 to Y1 . Hence, it
is an immersion since ι∗0 is.
Case 2: Yb0 intersects BY 0 .

26

PEI WANG

BY 0

BY 0

b
Ω

Y 0:
CY 0

AY 0

AY 0

CY 0

dual(ω)
Ω
Y:

ω

Ω

ω

CY

AY

CY

dual(ω)

ω
AY

AY

CY

Figure 13. The shaded part is Yb (within Y 0 ).
Operation 00 (Subdivide) Let B1Y , . . . , BkY be generalized bands of Y0 ,
whose images under ι0 are contained in BY 0 . For each BiY , denote its
base that maps into bY 0 by biY0 . Further let the end points of biY be
zi and zi0 and the block of ΓY0 containing biY be Ki . If zi or zi0 is an
interior point of Ki , subdivide Y0 at that point using (M9). Denote
the resulting union of bands still by Y0 . Each band in the new Y0 is
a subband of an original band in Y0 . So the original ι0 induces a map
from the new Y0 to Y00 . The induced map, denoted still by ι0 , remains
an immersion since every block in the new Y0 is contained in an original
block of Y0 .
As a result of operation 00 , we may assume the following property
for each block K of Y0 .
(∗5 ) For the set of generalized bands {CY |cY ⊂ K}, either none
of {ι0 (CY )} intersects the interior of BY 0 or exactly one of {ι0 (CY )}
intersects the interior of BY 0 . Further in the latter type, the band whose
ι0 -image intersects BY 0 is one of {B1Y , . . . , BkY }.
Operation 10 (Slide) Y0 → Y0∗ : In Y0 , for blocks of the former type
in (∗5 ), we proceed exactly as in case 1 to get Y0∗ and ι∗0 . Otherwise,
for a block K, let BY (one of {BiY }) be the generalized band that map
into BY 0 with one of its bases bY = K mapping into bY 0 . Further let
CY ⊂ Y0 be a generalized band with one of its bases cY contained in
bY , and let the band in Y 0 containing its ι0 -image be CY 0 . Then Y0∗
is obtained by sliding every carried CY across BY . ι∗0 is defined by

RELATIVE RIPS MACHINE

27

mapping CY (possibly in a new position of Y0∗ ) into CY 0 (possibly in a
new position at Y00 ∗ ). It is well-defined since CY is carried if and only
if CY 0 is carried. Thus ι∗0 is also an immersion.
Operation 20 (Collapse) Y0∗ → Y1 : Define Ji ’s as in case 1 and collapse
from Ji ’s to get Y1 . In particular, for a given block K in the latter type
of (∗5 ), if its image under ι0 is contained in JY 0 , all bases other than
bY in this block must be carried. Therefore such K’s become free arcs
in Y0∗ , and hence completely collapse. Restricting ι∗0 to Y1 , we get ι1
which is indeed an immersion since ι∗0 is.
ι

0
Y00 ) be a pair of components where Y00
Proposition 4.1. Let (Y0 →
ι1
ι0
Y10 ), . . . be
is either of surface or thin type, and (Y0 →
Y00 ), (Y1 →
a sequence of pairs of components formed by Process I and Process II.
There exists an integer N such that for all n ≥ N , Ybn ∩ BYn0 is a unique
sub-generalized band where Ybn is the image of Yn in Yn0 and BYn0 ⊂ Yn0
is a positive weighted generalized band. Further let B1Yn , . . . , BkYnn be
n bj
BYn contains a
generalized bands in Yn that map into BYn0 , then ∩kj=1
vertical fiber that is in the limit set ΩYn0 .

Proof. By construction, there exists an integer N0 ≥ 0 such that for
ιi
Yi0 ) with i ≥ N0 , Yi0 is in a standard form.
any pair (Yi →
ιn
First assume that there exists some (Yn →
Yn0 ) with n ≥ N0 with
the desire property:
(∗6 ) For any generalized band BYn0 of a positive weight in Yn0 , Ybn ∩BYn0
n bj
is a unique sub-generalized band and ∩kj=1
BYn ∩ ΩYn0 6= ∅.
ιn+1
0
We now check that property (∗6 ) also holds for (Yn+1 → Yn+1
).
ιn+1
ιn
0
0
Suppose that (Yn+1 → Yn+1 ) is obtained from (Yn → Yn ) by Process I (i.e. Y00 is a thin component). Let JYn0 ⊂ Yn0 be the collapsed
region. If Ybn does not intersect the interior of JYn0 , then Yn+1 = Yn
and property (∗6 ) is automatically preserved. Otherwise, we need to
check property (∗6 ) for images (Notation A.3 ) of the band BYn0 con0
0
taining JYn0 . Let BYn+1
be an image of BYn0 in Yn+1
(BYi0 may have two
images if the collapse is an I3 -collapse, see Section A for more detail.)
0
. Note that
and {BjYn+1 }j ⊂ Yn+1 be the set of ιn+1 -preimages of BYn+1
j
j
each BYn+1 is an image of some BYn . One of the vertical boundaries of
0
JYn0 is contained in BYn+1
, denoted by l1 . According to the inductive
kn b j
assumption, ∩j=1 BYn ∩ ΩYn0 is not empty. Let l2 be a vertical fiber
k
bj
in it. ∩ n+1 B
either contains l2 (and we are done) or contains a
j=1

Yn+1

28

PEI WANG

0
neighborhood of l1 in BYn+1
. For the latter case, since limit set of a
0
thin component Yn+1 is a prefect set, (∗6 ) still holds.
ιn+1
ιn
0
Yn0 ) by Process
) is obtained from (Yn →
Suppose that (Yn+1 → Yn+1
0
II (i.e. Y0 is a surface component). If BYn0 is not the carrier for the
0
0
step from Yn0 to Yn+1
, (∗6 ) holds for BYn+1
since there is a natural
j
j
bijection between {BYn+1 }j and {BYn }j , and ιn+1 (BjYn+1 ) is identified
with ιn (BjYn ) for all j. Assume that BYn0 is the carrier. Yn0 is a surface
type implies that no (M11) duplicate a segment of the real graph is
0
applied from Yn → Yn+1 . In particular, preimages of BYn+1
in Yn+1
j
are all produced from BYn by collapsing. Follow the same argument as
above for Process I, (∗6 ) also holds.

Secondly, we show that there exists some n > N0 such that (∗6 )
ιn
holds for (Yn →
Yn0 ).
Thin Case. In general, for a generalized band BY00 in Y00 , Yb0 ∩ BY00
consists of finitely many sub-generalized bands. Given two generalized
bands B1Y0 , B2Y0 ⊂ Y0 , let BjYi be an image of BjY0 in Yi for j = 1, 2.
(∗7 ) Claim that for i sufficiently large, B1Yi and B2Yi map to the same
b 2 contains a vertical fiber in the
b1 ∩ B
band BYi0 ⊂ Yi0 if and only if B
Yi
Yi
limit set.
The ‘if’ direction of the claim is clear. To prove the ‘only if’ direction,
b 2 does not
b 1 ∩B
suppose that B1Yi and B2Yi map to the same band and B
Yi
Yi
contain any vertical fiber in the limit set. Then there exists a vertical
b 1 and the interior of
fiber l0 ⊂ BYi0 , lying between the interior of B
Yi
b 2 , that is not in the limit set. There exists some m > 0 such that l0
B
Yi
collapse from Xi+m → Xi+m+1 . Then then images of B1Yi and B2Yi in
0
Yi+m+1 map into different bands in Yi+m+1
. So the claim (∗7 ) holds.
We may pick n sufficiently large such that (∗7 ) holds for all choices
of BY00 ’s and BY0 ’s. Thus property (∗6 ) follows.
Surface Case. If Y00 is a surface component, then eventually only
Process II is applied. For m > N0 , Ym0 is in a standard form and there is
an infinite subsequence m = m1 < m2 < . . . such that Ym0 i is a scaling
down version of Ym0 i−1 . Thus all generalized bands in Ym0 are getting
thinner and their limits are the boundary leaves. Therefore, over all
components of ιm (Ym ) ∩ BYm0 , only the one containing the limiting
boundary (if there is any) survives till the end. Thus ∩k1m BYm contains
a neighborhood of the limiting boundary and so we are done.


RELATIVE RIPS MACHINE

29

Definition 4.2. Let ι : Y → Y 0 be a morphism between two unions
of bands. ι is graph like if each generalized band in Y maps onto a
generalized band in Y 0 . If ι is a graph like immersion, we say ι is a
partial covering map. Further an immersion ι is an almost partial
ι0
ι
covering map if every pair of components (Y0 →
Y00 ) ⊂ (Y → Y 0 ) has
property (∗6 ) described in Proposition 4.1.
Thus Process I and Process II will eventually convert Y 0 into a standard form and turn ι0 : Y0 → Y00 into an almost partial covering map
ι
when Y00 is a surface or thin component. We say (Y → Y 0 ) is eventually
stabilized in this case.
ι

0
4.3. Process III. Let (Y0 →
Y00 ) be a pair of components and BY00 ⊂
0
Y0 be a generalized band. If weight(BY00 ) = 1, then all of its preimages
in Y0 also have the same weight. On the other hand, if weight(BY00 ) = 0
or weight(BY00 ) = 12 , it is possible that instead of having the same
weight as weight(BY00 ), some of its preimages in Y0 have weight 1 3.
Such a weight 1 preimage is called a pre-weight 0 band or a preweight 12 band (depending on the weight of BY00 ). Moreover, we say
that ι0 : Y0 → Y00 has a certain property up to weight 0 bands if the
restriction of ι0 to the preimage of Y00 in Y0 has that property.
One goal of the relative Rips machine is to convert both Y00 and Y0
ι0
ι1
into some normal form simultaneously. Let (Y0 →
Y00 ), (Y1 →
Y10 ), . . .
be a sequence of pairs of components formed by Process I and Process
ιn
II. As from Section 4.2, (Yn →
Yn0 ) stabilizes for sufficiently large n.
We would like to conclude that Yn is also in a standard form by then.
However, Yn may fail to be standard due to the existence of pre-weight
0 or pre-weight 21 bands (see Example 4.3). In Process III, we will “get
rid” of pre-weight 0 bands and pre-weight 21 bands. Intuitively, since
two bases of a pre-weight 0 (or 12 ) band have the same image in Y00 ,
we may then collapse pre-weight 0 and pre-weight 12 bands by viewing
them as ultra thick real graphs. More detail are discussed below.

Example 4.3. Let Yn0 be a minimal component in a standard form
and Yn be a double cover of Yn0 . Suppose that BYn0 ⊂ Yn0 is a weight 0
band and its two preimages in Yn are B1Yn , B2Yn . Assume that B1Yn and
B2Yn are both pre-weight 0 bands and they form an annulus in Yn as
shown in Figure 14. Yn is then definitely not in a standard form since
the complexity of Yn goes down if we slide B1Yn across B2Yn .
3Note

that a preimage of a weight 0 band (resp.
band (resp. 0 band).

1
2

band) can not be a weight

1
2

30

PEI WANG

B1Yn

double cover

BYn0

B2Yn

Yn

Yn0

Figure 14. Yn is a double cover of Yn0 . The preimages of a
weight 0 band BYn0 are two pre-weight 0 bands B1Yn and B1Yn .

Definition 4.4. Let Y be a union of bands and BY ⊂ Y be a generalized band with bases bY and dual(bY ). We say a base b ⊂ Y is
wide if b coincides with the block containing it, i.e. any other base
intersecting b is contained in b. BY is wide if either bY or dual(bY )
is wide. Suppose that bY is wide, we may collapse BY by first sliding
all bases contained in bY across BY , and then collapsing BY from bY .
This sequence of move is called collapse a wide band.
More generally, let BY , CY ⊂ Y be two distinct generalized bands
with the property that bY ∩ cY is non-degenerated (not a point). Using
move (M 4) defined in Section 2 (which preserves (A1) for Y ), we can
only slide BY across CY if bY ⊂ cY . However, if we further allow that a
union of bands to have a simplicial forest as its underlying real graph,
BY can be slid across CY as in Figure 15 even without the assumption
that bY ⊂ cY . Let the block containing bY and cY be KY . In fact, we
may slide every band with a base contained in KY across CY . After
all sliding, cY becomes a free subarc and so we collapse it. The new
union of bands produced is the same as viewing CY as an ultra thick
segment of the underlying real graph of Y . This sequence of move is
called collapse a general band.
We are now ready to describe Process III which again will produce
ι
ι∗
from (X → X 0 ) another pair of band complexes (X ∗ → X 0 ) (X 0 remains the same). Process III will only be applied when Y00 is in a standard form and Y0 contains some pre-weight 0 or pre-weight 21 bands.
Suppose that Y0 contains in total Nw (Nw > 0) pre-weight 0 and
pre-weight 21 bands. Let BY ⊂ Y0 be one of them and BY 0 ⊂ Y00 be
the weight 0 (or 12 ) band containing ι0 (BY ). Further let the block
of ΓY0 containing bY be KbY and the block of ΓY00 containing bY 0 (=
dual(bY 0 )) be KbY 0 . Apply either a collapse a wide band move or a

RELATIVE RIPS MACHINE

31

B1Y
B1Y
B3Y

cY
CY

Slide B1Y across CY
Then collapse CY

dual(cY )
B2Y

B3Y
dual(cY )
B2Y

Figure 15. We may slide B1Y across CY even if cY does not

contain bY . If the red dashed B3Y exists, B3Y can also be slided as
shown

collapse a general band move to collapse BY (i.e. slide all bands with
the property that one of whose bases is contained in KbY , across BY
and then collapse BY ). Denote the resulting component by Y0∗ . Let the
block (may not be an edge) in Y0∗ formed in this move be Kb∗Y . Since
ι0 (bY ) = ι0 (dual(bY )), ι0 : Y0 → Y00 induces a well-defined morphism
ι∗0 : Y0∗ → Y00 . In particular, ι∗0 : Kb∗Y → KbY 0 is a morphism between
graphs. Let X ∗ be the resulting band complex corresponding to Y0∗
and ι∗ : X ∗ → X 0 be the morphism that equals to ι∗0 when restricting
to Y0∗ and remains the same as ι otherwise. Further, according to
Proposition 3.11, up to a finite folding sequence, we may assume that
ι∗
ι∗ is an immersion. (X ∗ → X 0 ) is then the new pair of band complexes
ι
produced from (X → X 0 ) by Process III.
Let the total number of pre-weight 0 and pre-weight 12 bands in X ∗
be Nw∗ . It is clear that Nw∗ ≤ Nw − 1 since at least BY is collapsed.
The inequality holds if there are further folding of bands. If other than
bY , there are more pre-weight 0 or 21 bases in KbY , they may become
weight 0 or 12 in Y0∗ . If Nw∗ = 0, we say Process III sequence ends, and
ι∗

then go back to Process I with (X ∗ → X 0 ). Otherwise, we are in the
position to apply Process III again.
ι

ι

0
0
Proposition 4.5. Let (Y0 →
Y00 ) be a pair of components and (Y0 →
ι1
Y00 ), (Y1 →
Y10 ), . . . be a sequence formed by the successively application
of the relative Rips machine. Process III appears only finitely many
times in this sequence. In particular, there exists N > 0 such that for
any n > N , Yn0 is in a standard form, Yn contains no pre-weight 0 nor

32

PEI WANG

pre-weight 12 band and ιn : Yn → Yn0 is an almost partial covering map
when Y00 is a surface or thin component.
ιi+1

ι

i
0
) is obtained from (Yi →
Proof. Suppose that (Yi+1 → Yi+1
Yi0 ) by
Process III. Then the total number of pre-weight 0 and pre-weight 12
bands in Yi+1 is less than the number of Yi due to the collapse of a preweight 0 or pre-weight 21 band. Further possibly some pre-weight 0 or
1
bands become weight 0 or 12 bands and folds between bands may also
2
ιk+1
ιk
0
0
= Yk0 ) be the
) (note Yk+1
be needed. Let (Yk →
Yk0 ) → (Yk+1 → Yk+1
first time that Process III is applied. Then after finitely many steps,
say m steps, the machine will return to Process I. Furthermore, Yk0 is in
a standard form (otherwise Process III would not be applied) implies
0
that any weight 0 (resp. weight 21 ) band in Yk+i
is a sub-generalized
1
band of a weight 0 (resp. weight 2 ) generalized band in Yk0 for any
i > 0. As consequence, that Yk+m contains no pre-weight 0 nor preweight 12 band implies Yk+m+i contains no pre-weight 0 nor pre-weight
1
band for any i > 0. Thus, Process III won’t be applied again. Let
2
N = k + m, and we are done.


5. Machine Output
ι

0
5.1. Special case. For a pair of components (Y0 →
Y00 ), in the relative
Rips machine, eventually either only Process I is applied (Y00 is of thin
type) or only Process II is applied (Y00 is of surface or toral type). In
this section, for a fixed minimal component Y00 , we will examine possible
outputs for the structure of Y0 .

When one of {Y0 , Y00 } is a toral component, the type of the other
one can be quickly determined according to Lemma 5.1. Therefore our
following discussion will focus more on the case of surface and thin
components.
ι

0
Lemma 5.1. Let (Y0 →
Y00 ) be a pair of components with ι0 an immersion, then
(1) If Y0 is a toral component with rank n > 2, then so is Y00 .
(2) If Y00 is a toral component and Y0 is not a simplicial component,
then Y0 is also a toral component .

Proof. (1) Y0 is a toral component implies that there are infinitely many
points in the limit graph of Y0 (Definition 2.18) having positive indexes.
This must also hold for Y00 . So Y00 is a toral component.
(2) Y00 is a toral component implies its dual tree is a line. Therefore
the minimal subtree corresponding to Y0 is also a line. Thus Y0 is a
toral component.


RELATIVE RIPS MACHINE

33

ι

0
Lemma 5.2. Let (Y0 →
Y00 ) be a pair of components. Suppose that
Y00 is a simplicial component, then Y0 is also a simplicial component.
ι0
In particular, for any pair of components (Y0 →
Y00 ), if Yb0 = ι0 (Y0 ) is
simplicial, then so is Y0 .
Proof. Y00 is simplicial implies Yb0 is also simplicial. Suppose that Y0 is
minimal, then every leaf in Y0 is dense, which implies its image is also
dense in Yb0 . This contradicts to that Yb0 is simplicial.


ι

0
For a given pair of components (Y0 →
Y00 ), successive application
of the relative Rips machine will eventually convert ι0 into an almost
partial covering map. The best scenario is that ι0 is in fact a finite
covering map. The type of Y0 is then determined by Lemma 5.3. For
the general case, we will first complete Y0 into a finite cover as in
Lemma 5.6 and Lemma 5.7, then use this constructed finite cover to
study the original pair.

ι

0
Lemma 5.3. Let (Y0 →
Y00 ) be a pair of components with ι0 an immersion. If further ι0 : Y0 → Y00 is also a submersion, i.e. ι0 is a local
isomorphism, then ι0 : Y0 → Y00 is a covering map of finite degree. In
particular, Y0 and Y00 are of the same type.

Proof. It is easy to check that ι0 is a finite covering map, see for example
in [Hat02]. By Proposition 2.19, Lemma 5.1 and Lemma 5.2 we have
the following. If one of {Y0 , Y00 } is simplicial, then both of them are
simplicial. If one of {Y0 , Y00 } is toral, then both of them are toral.
Moreover if one of {Y0 , Y00 } is a surface component, then all but finitely
many points in ΓY00 and ΓY0 are of zero indexes, thus both of them are
surface components. If one of {Y0 , Y00 } is a thin component, then the
limit graphs of Y0 and Y00 are dense Gδ -sets, and so both of them are
thin components.

ι

0
Corollary 5.4. Let (Y0 →
Y00 ) be a pair of components. Suppose that
Y00 is a minimal component in a standard form and Y0 is a finite cover
of Y00 . Further assume that Y0 contains no pre-weight 0 bands nor preweight 12 bands. Then Y0 is also in a standard form.

Proof. By Lemma 5.3, Y0 is a minimal component of the same type as
Y00 . The assumption that Y0 contains no pre-weight 0 band nor preweight 21 band implies that every generalized band BY0 in Y0 and its
image BY00 in Y00 have the same weight. In particular, for any q ∈ ΓY0
and its image ι0 (q) = p ∈ ΓY00 , iY0 (q) = iY00 (p), i.e. p and q have the
same index. Since Y00 is in a standard form, by Proposition 2.19, Y0 is
also in a standard form.


34

PEI WANG

Omitting weight 0 bands of a component does not change the type
ι0
of that component. For a pair of components (Y0 →
Y00 ), suppose that
ι0 is a local isomorphism up to weight 0 bands. The following Lemma
5.5 shows that a similarly conclusion as in Lemma 5.3 also holds in this
case.
ι

0
Lemma 5.5. Let (Y0 →
Y00 ) be a pair of components. Suppose that ι0
is a local isomorphism up to weight 0 bands. Then ι0 : Y0 → Y00 can be
extended into a finite covering map ι00 : Y0∗ → Y00 where Y0 ,→ Y0∗ is a
union of bands. Moreover, we may construct Y0∗ by attaching finitely
many bands to Y0 such that all of these attached bands are either weight
0 bands or may be converted into weight 0 bands after an application
of the Rips machine. In particular, Y0 is a minimal component of the
same type as Y00 .

Proof. We may assume that ι0 is a partial covering map (i.e. In Y00 ,
the image of each weight 0 or pre-weight 0 band of Y0 is a generalized
band, not a proper sub-generalized band). Otherwise, we may archive
this by subdividing weight 0 bands in Y00 and their preimages in Y0
correspondingly. For a given weight 0 band BY00 with base bY00 in Y00 ,
let b1Y0 , . . . , bnY0 ⊂ ΓY0 be preimages of bY00 in the real graph of Y0 . Every
connected component of the union of preimages of BY00 in Y0 is either
a weight 0 band or a consecutive sequence of pre-weight 0 bands.
If ι0 is in fact a local isomorphism, let Y0∗ = Y0 and we are done by
Lemma 5.3. Otherwise there exists some weight 0 band BY00 in Y00 such
that ι0 is not surjective near some bkY0 . Since ι0 is a partial covering
map, there are only two possibilities. One is that no band in Y0 with
base bkY0 maps to BY00 . We may fix this by adding a weight 0 band BkY0
to Y0 along bkY0 and defining ι∗0 to be the map that maps BkY0 onto BY00 .
The other case is that there exits exactly one pre-weight 0 band B
with a base bkY0 mapping onto BY00 . Then B must be one end of a
consecutive sequence of pre-weight 0 bands mapping onto BY00 . One
end base of this sequence is bkY0 and the other end base must be one
0
of {b1Y0 , . . . , bnY0 }, say bkY0 . We may fix this situation by adding a band
B0 to Y0 with one of its bases attached along bkY0 and the other base
0
attached along bkY0 (orient in the same direction) and defining ι∗0 to be
the map that maps B0 onto BY00 .
Apply above attaching rule to every such bkY0 (for a fixed BY00 ) and
for every weight 0 band in Y00 . Let the resulting union of bands be Y0∗ .
ι∗0 : Y0∗ → Y00 is a local isomorphism by construction and so Y0∗ is a finite
covering space of Y00 . Moreover in Y0∗ , we may alter each B0 to a weight
0 band by sliding one of its bases across the consecutive sequence of

RELATIVE RIPS MACHINE

35

pre-weight 0 bands containing B. Denote the resulting union of bands
by Y0∗∗ . Since Y0 only differs from Y0∗∗ by weight 0 bands, Y0 has the

same type as Y0∗∗ , and further the same as Y0∗ and Y00 .
In the proof of Lemma 5.5, for a union of bands Y00 , we started with
a special partial cover Y0 and completed it into a finite cover Y0∗ . More
generally, mimicking the argument for completing a partial cover of
graphs in [Sta83], the following lemma shows that a similar completing
process can be done for any partial cover of band complexes.
ι

0
Lemma 5.6. Let (Y0 →
Y00 ) be a pair of components with ι0 : Y0 → Y00
a partial covering map. Then by adding finitely many arcs to the real
graph ΓY0 (using move (M 7)) and attaching finitely many new bands
to Y0 (using move (M 6)), we may extend ι0 into a finite covering map.
Moreover, assume that Y0 contains no pre-weight 12 bands (resp. preweight 0 bands), then the newly constructed Y0 also contains no preweight 12 bands (resp. pre-weight 0 bands). In particular, on the level of
fundamental groups, π1 (Y0 ) is either a finite index subgroup of π1 (Y00 )
or a free factor of a finite index subgroup of π1 (Y00 ).

Proof. ΓY0 and ΓY00 contain only finitely many blocks. Note that ι0 is a
finite covering map is equivalent to that ι0 is a local isomorphism near
every block. Y00 and Y0 can be viewed as graphs by considering each
block as a vertex and each generalized band as an edge. ι0 then can
be considered as an immersion between finite graphs with the property
that each edge in Y0 is mapped exactly onto one edge in Y00 .
The preimages of a block K ⊂ ΓY00 are finitely many blocks K1 , . . . ,
Kn(K) in ΓY0 . Different blocks in ΓY00 may have different numbers of
preimages (n(K) depends on K). Let n = max{n(K)}K . For blocks in
ΓY00 , whose number of preimages is less than n, add extra arcs (move
M 7) to ΓY00 to complete ι0 as a covering map on the level of real graphs.
Then we need to complete ι0 for the level of bands. Let BY00 ⊂ Y00 be a
generalized band. If bY00 and dual(bY00 ) are contained in the same block,
processed exactly as in Lemma 5.5. Otherwise, let the block containing
bY00 be K, the block containing dual(bY00 ) be K 0 and K 6= K 0 . At each
preimage Ki of K, there is either no band or exactly one band BiY0 maps
to BY00 since ι0 is an immersion. The band BiY0 uniquely determines
one preimage of K 0 . Thus each preimage of BY00 in Y0 groups one block
in {K1 , . . . , Kn } with one block in {K10 , . . . , Kn0 }. After paring up like
this, there are the same numbers of {Ki } and {Ki0 } left unpaired. We
may then pair up these left blocks randomly. For each of these new
pairs, (Ki , Kj0 ), attach a new band B∗Y0 = b∗Y0 × IN with the property

36

PEI WANG

that m(b∗Y0 ) = m(bY00 ) and N = l(BY00 ) to Y0 in the following way: glue
b∗Y0 to bY00 ’s preimage in Ki and glue dual(b∗Y0 ) to dual(bY00 )’s preimage
in Ki0 . Further extend ι0 into B∗Y0 by mapping it to BY00 . Do the above
process for all generalized bands in Y00 . It is easy to check that the
resulting union of band is then a finite cover of Y00 .
In the case that Y0 contains no pre-weight 21 (resp. pre-weight 0)
band, the set of preimages of weight 12 (resp. weight 0) bands in Y00
contains only weight 12 (resp. weight 0) bands in Y0 . Restricting ι0 to
the union of weight 12 (resp. weight 0) bands in Y00 , Y0 can be convert to
a finite covering by adding only weight 12 (resp. weight 0) bands. Thus
the new constructed Y0 contains no pre-weight 12 (resp. pre-weight 0)
band.

In the proof of Proposition 5.9, we will need to complete an almost
partial cover into a cover. The following lemma shows that we may
first complete an almost partial cover into a partial cover and then,
using Lemma 5.6, complete the partial cover into a finite cover.
ι

0
Lemma 5.7. Let (Y0 →
Y00 ) be a pair of components and ι0 : Y0 →
Y00 be an almost partial covering map. Then there exists a pair of

ι∗

0
Y00 ) with the property that ι∗0 is a partial covering
components (Y0∗ →
map, Y0 ⊂ Y0∗ and ι∗0 |Y0 = ι0 . In particular, Y0∗ can be constructed by
adding finitely many arcs to the real graphs ΓY0 and attaching finitely
many bands to Y0 .

Proof. Let BY00 be a generalized band in Y00 and BY0 be a generalized
band in Y0 that maps properly into (not onto) BY00 . Further, let bY0
and dual(bY0 ) be bases of BY0 , bY00 and dual(bY00 ) be bases of BY00 . Then
at least one of the endpoints of bY0 , denote it by q, maps to an interior
point p ∈ bY00 . ι0 is an almost partial covering map implies that there
is no other band with its base(s) contained in the same block as bY0
or dual(bY0 ) mapping into BY00 . Otherwise that band must have some
overlap with BY0 which contradicts to ι0 is an immersion. Further
we may assume that within the block containing bY0 (resp. dual(bY0 )),
there is a segment b∗Y0 (resp. dual(b∗Y0 )) maps onto bY00 (resp. dual(bY00 )).
Otherwise, we may obtain b∗Y0 or dual(b∗Y0 ) by adding new arcs to ΓY0
(γ 0 in Figure 16). Then by attaching a new band to Y0 , BY0 can be
extended into a new band whose bases are b∗Y0 and dual(b∗Y0 ). Let the
resulting band be B∗Y0 . We then define ι∗0 be the same as ι0 on Y0
and maps B∗Y0 onto BY00 . Finally since there are only finitely many
generalized bands, Y0 can be completed into a finite partial cover Y0∗
within finite steps.


RELATIVE RIPS MACHINE

37

dual(bY00 )
BY00
Y00 :

p

BY00
bY00

γ0

dual(bY0 )
BY0
Y0 :

q

bY 0

BY0
b∗Y0

Figure 16. The gray part within Y00 is Yb0 .
ι

0
For a pair of components (Y0 →
Y00 ), we will now start to discuss
the type of Y0 when Y0 is not a finite cover of Y00 . In Lemma 5.8, we
will show that if Y00 is a surface or thin component and the relative
Rips machine does not convert ι0 into a map which is surjective (i.e.
Yb0 ( Y00 ), then Y0 must be simplicial. In Proposition 5.9, we will discuss
the case where ι0 is surjective but not locally surjective.

ι

0
Lemma 5.8. Let (Y0 →
Y00 ) be a pair of components with ι0 an immersion. Further assume that Y00 is either of thin type or surface type and
it is in a standard form. If there exists a point p in Y00 with iY00 (p) ≥ 0
such that it has no pre-image in Y0 , then Y0 is simplicial. In particular, the fundamental group of Y0 is an infinite index subgroup of the
fundamental group of Y00 .

Proof. Let Yb0 = ι0 (Y0 ). By Lemma 5.2, we only need to show that Yb0
is simplicial.
Yb0 is a band sub-complex (a closed set) in Y00 . By the assumption, p is
contained in the complement of Yb0 in Y00 . So there exists a neighborhood
of p that is contained in this complement. Without loss, we may assume
that p is an interior point of some band in Y00 . Hence, there exists a
sub-generalized band BY00 in Y00 containing p which is disjoint from Yb0 .

38

PEI WANG

Assume that Yb0 is not simplicial, then by Lemma 5.1, Yb0 is either a
surface component or a thin component. According to Proposition 2.19,
since Y00 is in a standard form, there is a collection of uncountably many
leaves in Yb0 which are 2-ended trees. In particular, they are quasiisometric to lines 4. Further in Y00 , leaves containing these leaves are
also 2-ended trees expect for finitely many. Therefore we may pick a
leaf l in Yb0 which is a 2-ended tree such that the leaf l0 in Y00 containing
it is also a 2-ended tree. l0 is quasi isometric to a line contained in
0
the limit set. Let the line be l (= l0 ∩ ΩY00 ). iY00 (p) ≥ 0 implies that
0
l intersects BY00 infinitely often. Hence, each component of l0 ∩ Yb0 is
either a finite tree or an 1-ended tree. This contradicts to our choice
that l is a 2-ended tree. Thus Yb0 must be simplicial, and so is Y0 .
The immersion ι0 : Y0 → Y00 induces a monomorphism between their
fundamental groups. Since Y0 is simplicial, the minimal translation
length of elements in the fundamental group of Y0 is bounded below
by some positive number . On the other hand, Y00 is a minimal component, so there exists sequence of elements in the fundamental group
of Y00 whose translation lengths converge to 0. Therefore, π1 (Y0 ) is an

infinite index subgroup of π1 (Y00 ).
ι

0
Proposition 5.9. Let (Y0 →
Y00 ) be a pair of components. Suppose
0
that Y0 is a surface or thin component. Then either Y0 is simplicial or
omitting weight 0 bands, the relative Rips machine eventually converts
Y0 into a finite cover of Y00 .

Proof. By Proposition 4.5, we may assume that Y00 is in a standard
form, ι0 is an almost partial covering map and Y0 contains no pre0
weight 0 bands nor pre-weight 21 bands. In particular, ι0 (Y 0 ) ⊂ Y 0 .
0
ι0
Therefore we may ignore weight 0 bands and only work with (Y 0 →
Y 0)
instead. To simplify the notation, without loss, we will assume that
both Y0 and Y00 do not contain any weight 0 bands.
ι

ι∗

0
0
First (Y0 →
Y00 ) can be extended into (Y0∗ →
Y00 ) such that ι∗0 is
a partial covering map as in Lemma 5.7. Then by Lemma 5.6, ι∗0 can
further be extended into a finite covering map e
ι∗0 : Ye0∗ → Y00 . Lemma 5.3
∗
0
implies that Ye0 has the same type as Y0 and Corollary 5.4 shows that
Ye0∗ is also in a standard form.
For Y0 ,→ Y0∗ ,→ Ye0∗ , we may assume that Y0 ( Ye0∗ , or we are
done. If the image of Y0 in Ye0∗ misses any point in the limit set of Ye0∗ ,

4In

the case of surface, all but finitely many of leaves are q.i. to lines, see [BF95,
section 8].

RELATIVE RIPS MACHINE

39

Y0 is simplicial by Lemma 5.8. Otherwise, each sub-generalized band
C ∈ Ye0∗ − Y0 does not contain any point in the limit set of Ye ∗ and so
image of C in Y00 must also do not contain any point in the limit set
of Y00 . In this case, Ye0∗ must be a thin type component since all but
finitely many leaves of a surface component are in the limit set.
By construction, the following diagram commutes.
Y00
ι0

.
..........
..
...
...
...

Y0

...........
. ........
.......
.......
.......
.......
.......
.......
.......
.......
.......
..
..
..
.....
.....
.............................
.............................

e
ι∗0

Y0∗

Ye0∗

ι0
Now consider three pairs of components (Y0 →
Y00 ), (Y0 ,→ Ye0∗ ) and
∗
e
ι0
ι1
ι0
Y10 ), . . . formed
Y00 ), (Y1 →
Y00 ). For any given sequence (Y0 →
(Ye0∗ →
ι1
by the relative Rips machine, the procedure of obtaining (Y1 →
Y10 )
e
ι∗1
ι0
Y 0)
from (Y0 →
Y 0 ) can be viewed as a combination of obtaining (Ye ∗ →
∗

1

0

1

e
ι0
Y00 ) and then obtaining (Y1 ,→ Ye1∗ ) from (Y0 ,→ Ye0∗ ).
from (Ye0∗ →
Let Yei∗ be the induced intermediate finite cover of Yi0 . By above
analysis, images of C’s in Y00 does not contain any point in the limit
set and so fully collapse within finitely many steps (Proposition A.5).
As a consequence, C’s in Ye0∗ also fully collapse within finitely many
steps. Therefore Yn = Yen∗ for sufficiently large n. Thus eventually Yn

is a finite cover of Yn0 .

Following immediately from Proposition 4.5, Lemma 5.1, Lemma 5.3
and Proposition 5.9, we have:
ι

ι

0
Theorem 5.10. Let (X → X 0 ) be a pair of band complexes and (Y0 →
ι
Y00 ) ⊂ (X → X 0 ) be a pair of components. Suppose that Y00 is a minimal
component, then Y0 is either a minimal component of the same type as
Y00 or Y0 is simplicial. Moreover, Y0 and Y00 are both surface or thin
components if and only if the relative Rips machine eventually converts
0
ι
ι∗
(Y0 → Y00 ) into a pair (Y0∗ → Y0 ∗ ) with the property that Y0∗ is a finite
0
cover of Y0 ∗ .

Remark 5.11. It is possible that both Y0 and Y00 are of toral type but
the relative Rips machine does not convert Y0 into a finite cover of Y00
omitting weight 0 bands. For example, let Y0 be a toral component
that is dual to the action of Z3 = hai × hbi × hci on a real line where
a → 1, b → e, c → π. Its infinite index subgroup hai × hbi ' Z2 also
acts on the real line and is dual to a toral component.

40

PEI WANG

Corollary 5.12. Let H < G be two finitely presented groups. Further
let TG be a G-tree with trivial edge stabilizers and TH ⊂ TG be a minι
imal H-subtree. Suppose that (X → X 0 ) is a pair of band complexes,
that X and X 0 resolve TH and TG correspondingly, that Y and Y 0 are
single minimal components of either surface or thin type and that π1 (Y )
generates H, π1 (Y 0 ) generates G. Then [G : H] is finite.
ι

Proof. Apply the relative Rips machine to (X → X 0 ). Since Y is a
surface or thin component, according to Theorem 5.10, the machine
ι
ι
will eventually convert (X → X 0 ) into a new pair (X ∗ → X 0 ∗ ) such
∗
0∗
that Y is a finite cover of Y . Since TG has trivial edge stabilizers,
we may assume that Y ∗ and Y 0 ∗ contain no weight 0 bands ([BF95,
section 8]). Thus Y ∗ is a finite cover of Y 0 ∗ .
Claim that X ∗ is also a finite cover of X 0 ∗ . We may assume that
X ∗ and X 0 ∗ are obtained from Y ∗ and Y 0 ∗ by attaching 2-cells due to
the fact that π1 (Y ) generates H and π1 (Y 0 ) generates G. Because H
is a subgroup of G. If a 2-cell is attached along a loop l in Y ∗ , there
must be a corresponding 2-cell is attached along the image of l in Y 0 ∗ .
Moreover every loop in Y 0 ∗ has finitely many preimages in Y ∗ . If there
is a 2-cell attached along some loop in Y 0 ∗ , there must be finitely many
2-cells attached along all its preimages in Y ∗ . Therefore X ∗ is also
a finite cover of X 0 ∗ . G = π1 (X 0 ∗ ), H = π1 (X ∗ ) and so [G : H] is
finite.

In [Rey11a], Reynold proves that for a given Fn -tree T with very
small action, suppose that T is indecomposable and H < Fn is finitely
generated, the action H on its minimal invariant subtree TH has dense
orbits if and only if H has finite index in Fn . Notice that a band
complex consisting a single surface or thin component is dual to a indecomposable (geometric) tree. Thus Corollary 5.12 is a weaker version
of Reynolds’s result for all finitely presented groups.
5.2. General case. In previous sections, for a given pair of band comι
plexes (X → X 0 ), we always assume (A5): ι is injective between the
sets of components in Y and in Y 0 , to simplify our description. In fact,
the assumption (A5) is not necessary for the relative Rips machine.
Suppose that there are several components Y01 , . . . , Y0k ⊂ Y map to
the same component Y00 ⊂ Y 0 . The relative Rips machine described in
section 4 for a pair can also be applied to a k +1-tuple (Y01 , . . . , Y0k , Y00 ).
Roughly speaking, in each step, we may apply proper moves to Y00 first,
then modify each Y0i separately.
In more detail, if Y00 contains some free subarc, Process I will be applied. First in Y00 , collapse from a free subarc JY 0 to obtain Y10 . Similarly

RELATIVE RIPS MACHINE

41

as in Section 4.1, let J1j , . . . , Jnj j be pre-images of JY 0 in Y0j . Then collapse from J1j , . . . , Jnj j in Y0j for j = 1, . . . , k to obtain (Y11 , . . . , Y1k , Y10 ).
If Y00 contains no free subarc, Process II will be applied. Considering
ιj

0
each (Y0j →
Y00 )j as a pair, Y1j is obtained by modifying Y0j as described
in Section 4.2. A sequence (Y01 , . . . , Y0k , Y00 ), (Y11 , . . . , Y1k , Y10 ), . . . produced by Process I and Process II will eventually stabilize as proved
in Proposition 4.1. Now for a stabilized k + 1-tuple (Yi1 , . . . , Yik , Yi0 ),
if none of Yij contains pre-weight 0 bands or pre-weight 21 bands, continue with Process I. Otherwise, apply Process III to (Yi1 , . . . , Yik , Yi0 ).
1
k
0
(Yi+1
, . . . , Yi+1
, Yi+1
) can be obtained as in Section 4.3 by considering

ιj

i
each (Yij →
Yi0 )j as a pair. Then by Proposition 4.5, Process III appears only finitely many times.
Following exactly the same arguments, all results proved in Section 5.1 hold for pairs of band complexes without assuming (A5).

6. A partial order on band complexes
We define a partial order on band complexes in this section.
Definition 6.1. A morphism ι : X → X 0 induces a cellular map
φ : ∆(X) → ∆(X 0 ) between their GD’s. We say that a vertex of
∆(X) changes type under the map φ, if the vertex and its image
have different types. For example, a simplicial component maps into a
minimal component.
For a vertex v of ∆(X), let its stabilizer π1 (v) be the conjugacy class
of the subgroup of π1 (X) generated by the union of bands contained
in v. We say v gets bigger if the stabilizer of the image of v strictly
contains the image of the stabilizer of v, i.e. φ(π1 (v)) ⊂ π1 (φ(v)). For
example, a surface component maps to another surface component as
a 2-sheeted cover.
Definition 6.2. For band complexes X and X 0 , we write X < X 0 if
there is a morphism ι : X → X 0 such that:
(1) ∆(X) has more vertices than ∆(X 0 ); or
(2) ∆(X) and ∆(X 0 ) have the same number of vertices and under
the morphism either a vertex changes type or a surface or thin
vertex gets bigger.
Proposition 6.3. Every sequence of band complexes, X1 < X2 < . . . ,
eventually stabilizes.
Proof. Let Yi be the underlying union of bands for Xi and ιi : Xi →
Xi+1 be a morphism such that Xi < Xi+1 holds. It is enough to

42

PEI WANG

consider a special sequence Y0 < Y1 < Y2 < . . . with the property that
ιi
each Yi is a single component of surface or thin type. (Yi →
Yi+1 ) is
then a pair of components. According to Theorem 5.10, up to omitting
weight 0 bands, the relative Rips machine eventually converts Yi into
a finite cover of Yi+1 . In the case of surface components, the length
of a sequence of finite covers is bounded by the absolute value of the
Euler characteristic of Y1 . In the case of thin components, associated
to Yi , there is a graph according to Section A.2: consider each island
as a vertex and each long band as an edge. The length of a sequence is
then bounded by the absolute value of the Euler characteristic of the
graph associated to Y1 .

ι

Remark 6.4. Let (X → X 0 ) be a pair of band complexes. Assume
that the preimage of each component Y00 of Y 0 is not empty. Then either
X < X 0 ; Or ι−1 (Y00 ) is a single component, denoted by Y0 . Moreover,
ι
if Y00 is either a surface or thin component, then (Y0 → Y00 ) further has
the property that the relative Rips machine eventually converts it into
ι∗
a pair (Y0∗ → Y00 ∗ ) where Y0∗ is homeomorphic to Y00 ∗ .
In the case of X < X 0 , we may build a finite collection {X ∗ } of band
complexes following the instruction below such that either X ∗ = X 0 or
X ∗ is an “intermediate” band complex between X and X 0 , i.e. X <
X ∗ < X 0.
Here is a brief description on how to construct X ∗ ’s. Such a X ∗
is called an enlargement of XH . More detail of enlargements will be
discussed in [BFW].
If ι−1 (Y00 ) contains two or more components, X ∗ is obtained by gluing
two of these components together. Let Y01 and Y02 be two distinct
components that map into Y00 and let J be an arc in the underlying
real graph of Y00 with a positive transverse measure. By picking J small
enough, we may assume that J has finitely many pre-images J11 . . . Jn11
in Y01 and finitely many pre-images J12 . . . Jn22 in Y02 with the property
that ι maps each Jji isometrically onto J. We may then build X ∗
by attaching a band B = J × I to Y via a measure preserving map
1
2
0
J × {0} → Jm
and J × {1} → Jm
0 for some m ∈ {1, . . . , n1 }, m ∈
{1, . . . , n2 } 5 (add extra 2-cells if necessary).
If Y00 is a surface or thin component and ι−1 (Y00 ) is a single component
Y0 which is either simplicial or a proper cover of Y00 (omitting weight 0
bands), X ∗ is obtained from X by “replacing” Y0 with Y00 . Let J be an
small arc of the underlying real graph contained in ι(Y0 ) and J 0 be one
5We

may add one band for each pair of segments in {J11 . . . J1n1 , J21 . . . J2n2 } to
get a bigger intermediate band complex.

RELATIVE RIPS MACHINE

43

of J’s preimages in Y0 . Since Y00 is either a surface or thin component,
it has a band complex structure over J, i.e. Y00 can be viewed as a
union of finitely many bands glued to J. Now we may glue a copy of
Y00 to Y0 by identifying J and J 0 . Then adding extra 2-cells if necessary,
the resulting complex is X ∗ .
Appendix A. Thin Type components
A.1. Review.
Fix X be a band complex with underlying union of bands Y . Let
Y0 ⊂ Y be a component. As described in Section 2, Y0 is of thin
type if eventually only Process I is applied. In this section, we will
review Process I and restate some properties proved in [BF95] for our
convenience.
Definition A.1. Let B1 , B2 , . . . , Bn be a sequence of weight 1 bands
in Y . We say that they form a generalized band B provided that :
• the top of Bi is identified with the bottom of Bi+1 and meets
no other positive weight bands for i = 1, 2, . . . , n − 1, and
• the sequence of bands is maximal with respect to above property.
Bi and Bi+1 are called consecutive bands. The bottom of B1 and the
top of Bn are bases of B. For a generalized band B = b × In where
In = [0, n], a vertical fiber is a set of the form {point} × In . A sequence
of consecutive bands Bi , Bi+1 , . . . , Bi+k is called a section of B, where
i ≥ 1, i + k ≤ n. The length of B, denoted by l(B), is n (the number of
bands it contains). The width of B, denoted by w(B), is the transverse
measure of its base b. Let c ⊂ b be a sub-interval, C = c × In is a
sub-generalized band of B. Similarly as for bands, we may talk about
weight of a generalized band.
Definition A.2. For a given band, the midpoint of a base divides the
base into halves. A weight 1 base is isolated if its interior does not
meet any other positive weight base. A half h of a weight 21 base b is
isolated if the interior h meets no positive weight base other than b and
dual(b). A weight 1 base b is semi-isolated if a deleted neighborhood
in b of one of its endpoints meets no other positive weight base. A half
h of a weight 21 base b is semi-isolated if a deleted neighborhood in h
of one of its endpoints meets no positive weight base other than b and
dual(b).
We are now ready to describe Process I of the Rips machine.

44

PEI WANG

Process I. Fix a minimal component Y0 in X. We define X 0 to be the
band complex obtained from X by the following operation. Find, if
possible, a maximal free subarc J of a base b in Y0 . If such a J does
not exist, define X 0 = X and go on to Process II. Now use (M 5) to
collapse from J. If there are several J’s to choose from, abide by the
following rules:
(1) If there is an isolated (half-) base c, set J = c. This is called an
I1 -collapse.
(2) If there is no isolated (half-) base, but there is a semi-isolated
(half-) base c then choose J so that it contains an endpoint of
c. This is called an I2 -collapse.
(3) If there are no isolated or semi-isolated (half-bases), we can use
any free subarc as J. This is called an I3 -collapse.
(4) Generalized bands are treated as units. More precisely, if J
is contained in a base of a generalized band, the collapse is
preformed all the way along the entire generalized band.

Notation A.3. Let X = X 0 , X 1 , . . . be an infinite sequence of band
complexes formed by successive applications of Process I, i.e. X i+1 =
(X i )0 . Further let Y i be the underlying union of bands for X i and
Yi ⊂ Y i be the component corresponding to Y0 . Denote the collapsing
map from Yi to Yi+1 by δi . Omitting weight 0 bands, there is a natural
inclusion Y i+1 ,→ Y i , denoted by ιi .
In Yi , let the number of generalized bands that have positive weight
be ai . We say a generalized band Bi+1 ⊂ Y i+1 is an image of a
generalized band Bi ⊂ Y i , if a section of Bi+1 is contained in Bi as
a sub-generalized band under ιi . In particular, after collapsing a free
subarc in Bi , Bi has no image if it is an I1 -collapse, has exactly one
image if it is an I2 -collapse and has at most two images if it is an
I3 -collapse. It is clear that in all cases l(Bi ) ≤ l(Bi+1 ) when Bi+1 is
an image. A collapse δi is said to be increasing if the length of some
generalized band in Yi is strictly less than the length of one of its images
in Yi+1 .
Lemma A.4. Follow the above notation. For a given collapse δi : Yi →
Yi+1 , we have:
• If δi is an I1 -collapse, then ai+1 = ai −1 and δi is not increasing.
• If δi is an I2 -collapse, either ai+1 = ai or ai+1 = ai − 1. Moreover, δi is an increasing collapse if and only if ai+1 = ai − 1.

RELATIVE RIPS MACHINE

45

• If δi is an I3 -collapse, then ai+1 = ai + 1 or ai+1 = ai or ai+1 =
ai − 1. Moreover, δi is an increasing collapse if and only if
ai+1 6= ai + 1.
Proof. The first item is clear since a whole generalized band vanishes
in an I1 -collapse.
For the second item, let Ci be a generalized band in Yi . Suppose
that one of its bases ci is a semi-isolated base and δi collapses from a
maximal free subarc J ⊂ ci . In Yi+1 , let the remaining part of Ci be C0i
and the image of Ci 6 be Ci+1 (i.e. the generalized band containing C0i ),
see Figure 17. If C0i = Ci+1 , then ai+1 = ai and δi is not increasing.
If C0i ( Ci+1 , then Ci+1 must be the concatenation of C0i and another
generalized band (can not concatenate with more than one band due
to no proper compact subset of each leaf). In this case, ai+1 = ai − 1
and δi is increasing. The third item can be argued in the same fashion.


dual(ci )
C0i

Ci
ci

Collapse J
J

Ai

Yi

Ci+1
A0i

Yi+1

Figure 17. Without the red dashed lines, the picture shows

the case that C0i ( Ci+1 and ai+1 = ai − 1. In particular, C0i and
A0i form a longer generalized band Ci+1 in Yi+1 . If Ai has the red
dashes as its boundary, then C0i = Ci+1 and ai+1 = ai .

Proposition A.5. Let X be a band complex with underlying union of
bands Y and Y0 ⊂ Y be a minimal component of thin type. Suppose that
Y0 , Y1 , . . . is an infinite sequence of components formed by application
of Process I. Then the following holds.
(1) Complexity(Yi+1 ) ≤ Complexity(Yi ) for i = 0, 1, 2 . . . . In particular, eventually the complexity is a fixed number C.
(2) All bands in Y i can be organized into at most NB = 6C + 1
generalized bands for all sufficiently large i.
6C

i

has exactly one image since δi is an I2 -collapse.

46

PEI WANG

(3) Let L be the induced
lamination on Y and the limiting laminaT∞
tion be L∞ = L ∩ i Y i . Then each subband of a band in Y
either fully collapses within finitely many steps or meets L∞ in
infinitely many vertical fibers.
Proof. (1) This follows from the definition of complexity. Suppose that
δi : Yi → Yi+1 is an I3 -collapse. Let the collapsed free subarc be Ji ,
the block containing Ji be βi and the block containing dual(Ji ) be βi∗ .
1
2
βi is necessarily split into two blocks βi+1
, βi+1
contained Γi+1 . Denote
∗
, which may be a single block or
the remaining of βi∗ in Γi+1 by βi+1
a union of two blocks. Then number of bases contained in the union
1
2
∗
βi+1
∪βi+1
∪βi+1
is at most two more than the number of bases contained
∗
in βi ∪ βi . Therefore:
1
2
∗
Complexity(βi+1
) + Complexity(βi+1
) + Complexity(βi+1
)

≤ Complexity(βi ) + Complexity(βi∗ )
Thus Complexity(Yi+1 ) ≤ Complexity(Yi ). Similar analysis can be
done for both I1 - and I2 -collapse.
(2) According to the first item, without loss, we may assume that Yi
has the fixed complexity C. Therefore, in Yi , the number of blocks that
have positive complexity is bounded by C. Recall that the number of
generalized bands in Y i is denoted by ai . Suppose that ai+1 > ai . This
occurs only if δi : Yi → Yi+1 is an I3 -collapse (Lemma A.4). Thus Yi
contains no isolated or semi-isolated bases. Therefore, each block of
complexity 0 consists of two coinciding bases of weight 1, or of a pair
of weight 12 bases that coincides with a base of weight 1. So for a given
generalized band B, either (at least) one of its bases is contained in a
block of positive complexity or B has weight 12 and its bases form a
block of complexity 0 along with another weight 1 base. It follows that
ai is bounded above by 6C, and so ai+1 ≤ 6C + 1.
(3) Assume that B ⊂ Y is a subband that does not fully collapse
within finitely many steps. According to [BF95, Proposition 7.2], I3 collapses occur infinitely often along the application of the Rips machine. So the number of connect components of the intersection between B and Y i goes to infinity with i. Each of these components then
have a nonempty intersection with L∞ and we are done.

Let X be a band complex with underlying union of bands Y . For
a fixed thin component Y0 ⊂ X, let X = X 0 , X 1 , . . . be an infinite
sequence of band complexes formed by application of the Rips machine
with respect to Y0 . In general, it is possible that the process of the
Rips machine that is applied to X i to obtain X i+1 , bounces between

RELATIVE RIPS MACHINE

47

Process I and Process II for a while before it eventually stabilizes with
Process I. Moreover, the complexity of X i may actually decrease at
the beginning stages. Nonetheless, there exists some integer A such
none of these above situations happens after X A . So without loss, for
the rest of Section A, we always make the assumption that in such a
sequence X = X 0 , X 1 , . . . , only Process I occurs and the complexity is
fixed for all X i ’s.
Let B ⊂ Y be a band of positive weight. We say B vanishes along
i
0
the process if B ∩ Y i = ∅ for sufficiently large i (Y ,→ Y ). It is clear
that bands only vanish in I1 -collapses. Since I1 -collapses reduce the
complexity, under our fixed complexity assumption, we may further
assume that only I2 -collapses and I3 -collapses occur along a sequence
X 0 , X 1 , . . . . In particular, no band vanishes.
A.2. Structure of Thin Type.
We will continue with the same notation as in Section A.1. Denote
the union of bases of all generalized bands in Y i by Ei . Then Ei is
a union of at most 2NB closed intervals where NB is the uniform upper bound of the number of generalized bands as in Proposition A.5.
Y i+1 ⊂ Y i implies that the sequence E1 ⊃ E2 ⊃ . . . is nested. According to [BF95, proposition 8.12], max{widths of generalized bands of Yi } →
0 as i → ∞. Therefore, the intersection ∩∞
i=0 Ei consists of at most 2NB
points. Denote these points by e1 , e2 , . . . , en where n ≤ 2NB . Note that
if a vertical fiber of a generalized band in Yi contains some ej , ej must
be an endpoint of that fiber.
A vertical fiber of a generalized band in Yi is short if both its endpoints are contained in {e1 , e2 , . . . , en }.
Let s1 , s2 , . . . , sm be the list of short vertical fibers. Since widths of
bands in Yi converge to 0 with i, each generalized band in Yi contains
at most one sj for i sufficiently large. In particular, m ≤ NB . By
definition of short fibers, we have the following.
Lemma A.6. In Y i , every loop in a leaf is contained in S = ∪m
j=1 si .
Definition A.7. In Yi , we say a generalized band of positive weight
is short if one of its vertical fibers is a subset of a short vertical fiber.
Otherwise, we say a generalized band is long. In particular, for i
sufficiently large, a generalized band is short if and only if it contains
one of {sj }j .
Proposition A.8. Following the same notation as in Proposition A.5,
we have that in Yi ’s:
(1) Lengths of short bands are bounded above by Ls = maxj∈{1,...,m} {l(sj )}.

48

PEI WANG

(2) There exists an integer Ms such that for any i > Ms , Yi contains
exactly m short bands. Further, for all i > Ms , there is a natural
bijection between short bands in Yi and Yi+1 . More precisely,
every short band BYi+1 in Yi+1 is a sub-generalized band of a
short band BYi in Yi (induced by the inclusion Y i+1 ,→ Y i ).
(3) Yi contains at least one long band, for all large i.
(4) For any fixed number k, there exists a number N (k) such that
the lengths of long bands in Yi are all greater than k for i >
N (k). In particular, lengths of long bands are going to ∞ as
i → ∞ in Yi .
Proof. (1), (2) follow directly from Definition A.7.
(3) Since the number of generalized bands in Yi is uniformly bounded,
we only need to show that there are infinitely many increasing δi ’s in
δ0
δ1
the the sequence Y0 →
Y1 →
Y2 . . . . We are going to construct an
infinite subsequence of {Yi }i such that for each Yi in that subsequence,
its corresponding δi is increasing. Firstly, since ai , the number of generalized bands in Yi , is bounded by Ns . There exists a subsequence
A = {Yk1 , Yk2 , . . . } consists all Ykj ’s with the property that for any
fixed j, akj ≥ ai for all i ≥ kj . Starting with Yk1 , if δk1 is increasing,
we continue to check δk2 . Otherwise, by Lemma A.4, either δk1 is an
I2 -collapse with ak1 +1 = ak1 , in which case we delete Yk1 from A (Yk1 +1
must also in A); Or δk1 is an I3 -collapse with ak1 +1 > ak1 , which contradicts to the choice of Yk1 . Since I3 -collapses happen infinitely often
in {Y0 , Y1 , . . . } ([BF95, Proposition 7.2]), A is an infinite set.
(4) Let li be the length of a shortest long bands in Yi . Then the
sequence {li }i is non-decreasing as i → ∞. We need to prove that
the sequence is indeed increasing. Assume that it is bounded above.
Then for all sufficiently large i, li is a fixed number l∗ . Note that each
long band in Yi+1 with length l∗ is a sub-generalized band of some long
band in Yi , which also has length l∗ . This implies that there exists a
sequence of long bands {BYi }i such that BYi+1 ,→ BYi and l(BYi ) = l∗
for all i’s. Thus ∩∞
i BYi ∈ {s1 , s2 , . . . , sm }. But this contradicts the
assumption that BYi ’s are long bands.

According to the above proposition, a generalized band in Yi is short
if and only if its length is less than Ls , for i > max{Ms , N (Ls )}. Otherwise it is long (thus the name).
Definition A.9. {e1 , . . . , en } are defined as above. In Yi , an island is
either
• Type 1 a connected component of the union of short bands
along with the blocks it intersects, see Figure 18, or

RELATIVE RIPS MACHINE

49

• Type 2 a block containing an ej which is not contained in an
type 1 island.
An island is contractible if it is homotopy equivalent to a point. In
particular, every type 2 island is contractible.

Figure 18. A type 1 island I formed by the union of short
bands S1 , S2 , S3 (determined by the union of short fibers showing
in red). B1 , B2 and B3 are long bands, one of whose bases is
contained I. Suppose that Yn+1 is obtained from Yn by collapsing
from J. This preserves the homeomprhism type of I.
Proposition A.10. Let X be a band complex with underlying union
of bands Y and Y0 ⊂ Y be a component of thin type. Suppose that
Y0 , Y1 , . . . is an infinite sequence formed by application of Process I.
(1) There exists an integer MI such that the number of islands in
Yi is fixed for all i > MI . More precisely, let S = ∪m
j=1 si ,
n
E = ∪j=1 ei and NI be the fixed number for islands. NI equals
the number of connected components of S ∪ E.
(2) For i > MI , there exists a natural bijection fi between the set
of islands in Yi and the set of islands in Yi+1 with the following
properties:
(a) The restriction of fi to each island is a homotopy equivalence.
(b) The restriction of fi to S ∪ E is the identity map.
(c) fi maps vertical fibers to vertical fibers
(d) After passing to a subsequence, fi is a homeomorphism on
each island.
Proof. (1) To show the existence of MI , we only need to verify two
facts. One is that eventually distinct short bands either stay connected
or disconnected. The second is that each ej is either always or never
contained in a type 1 island. For i large, let B1Yi and B2Yi be two short
bands in Yi . Without loss, we may assume that s1 ⊂ B1Yi , s2 ⊂ B2Yi are

50

PEI WANG

short vertical fibers determining them. In Yi+j , denote the short band
containing sk by BkYi+j , k = 1, 2. If s1 and s2 share an endpoint, it is
clear that B1Yi+j and B2Yi+j are connected for any j ≥ 0. Otherwise,
there exists an  > 0 such that -neighborhoods of endpoints of s1 and
s2 are disconnected. Since widths of generalized bands in Yi converge
to 0 as i → ∞. There exists M ∗ > 0 such that B1Yi+j and B2Yi+j are
disconnected for all i + j > M ∗ . Similar argument shows that there
exists M ∗∗ such that every ej ∈
/ S is not contained in any type 1
island. Thus for all i > MI = max{M ∗ , M ∗∗ }, every component of
S ∪ E determines a unique island in Yi . So NI equals the number of
components of S ∪ E.
(2) In Yi , let the island determined by a connected component α of
S ∪ E be Iiα . Let fi be the function that takes an island Iiα in Yi to
α
in Yi+1 . It is easy to check that fi is a
its corresponding island Ii+1
bijection.
α
. If Iiα
Now consider the restriction to a fixed island of fi : Iiα → Ii+1
is a type 2 island, (a)-(d) hold for any map that is the identity on ej ∈ α.
α
If Iiα is a type 1 island. Both Iiα and Ii+1
deformation retract to α, thus
(a) and (b). In more detail, for each short band Bi = bi × In ∈ Iiα and
α
, let fi |Bi = h×idIn
its corresponding short band Bi+1 = bi+1 ×In ∈ Ii+1
where h : bi → bi+1 is a surjective map, so (c) holds. Moreover, the
combinatorial type of an island with fixed number of bands is bounded.
After passing to a sub-sequence, (d) holds.

Definition A.11. A generalized band B = b×[0, n] of a band complex
X is naked if the only cells of X meet b × (0, n) are subdivision annuli.
A generalized band B is very naked if b × (0, n) meets no cell of X.
By the definition of {ej }, every block of Yi contains a point in {ej }
for i sufficiently large. Therefore, each base of a long band is contained
in a block and the intersection between this block and some island is
non-degenerate (not a point). Thus, every long band can be viewed
as traveling from one island to another island (maybe the same one).
Moreover, it is showed in [BF95, proposition 8.13] that every long band
is a naked band. Considering each island as a vertex, each long band
as an edge and each weight 0 band attached to a long band as an edge
group, a thin component then has a “graph of spaces” like structure.
In fact, after passing to a subsequence, fi constructed in Proposition A.10 can be extended into a homeomorphism from Yi onto Yi+1 .
It is because that the combinatorial type of a Yi as a union of bands
is bounded. More generally, fi can be further extended to entire band
complexes as follows.

RELATIVE RIPS MACHINE

51

Let {Yi }i be a subsequence such that {fi : Yi → Yi+1 }i are homeomorphisms. In Y0 , let u0 be a non-degenerate horizontal segment.
Inductively define that ui+1 = fi (ui ) ⊂ Yi+1 . Recall that the band
complex containing Yi is denoted by X i
Corollary A.12. Suppose that every contractible attaching region of Yi
is contained in ui . Then after passing to a further subsequence, fi can
be extended into a homeomorphism f i : X i → X i+1 with the property
that f i is the identity map on the closure of the complement of Yi in
X i , for all i.
Proof. Denote the closure of complement of Yi in X i by Z i . Note that
Z i is the same space for all i. Let f i : Zi → Zi+1 be the identity
map. We only need to check that fi is well-defined on attaching regions (intersections between Yi and Z i ). Since every attaching region
is contained in a leaf, if an attaching region is not contractible, it must
be contained in S. Therefore, there fi : Yi → Yi+1 and f i : Zi → Zi+1
are compatible on non-contractible attaching regions (Proposition A.10
bullet (b)). Now, in total, there are finitely many contractible attaching regions, each of which is a point in ui . By the assumption, after
passing to a further subsequence, we may pick fi such that it maps
each contractible attaching region, say p to its image under f i , i.e.
fi (p) = f i (p). Thus, we are done.

Remark A.13. The assumption that every contractible attaching region in Yi is contained in ui in Corollary A.12 can be arranged for any
sequence of band complexes {X i }i as follows. For a fixed contractible
attaching region (a point), suppose that a point q ∈ Zi is attached to
a point p ∈ Yi . Let lp ⊂ Yi be the leaf containing p and p0 be a point in
∈ ui ∩ lp (lp intersects ui infinitely often). We can then slide q across
lp to p0 . As there are finitely many attaching regions, the assumption
holds.
A.3. Shortening Thin Type.
For a band complex X with underlying union of bands Y , let m be
the transverse measure
P on X and B be a set of loops in X generating
π1 (X). Set |X|B := µ∈B m(µ) be the length of X with respect to
B. If a : X → X is a morphism that is also a homotopy equivalence
with the property |X|a(B) < |X|B , then we say that X (w.r.t. B) is
shortened by a.
For the rest of this section, in analogy to Sela’s shortening argument
for surfaces, we will show that length of X can also be shortened using
thin components. First, we will work on a special set of loops.

52

PEI WANG

Definition A.14. Let u be a subarc of the underlying real graph Γ of
X and a point z0 in the interior of u be a basepoint. A short loop
(with respect to u) is a loop p1 ∗ λ ∗ p2 based at z0 where p1 and p2 are
paths in the interior of u and λ is a path within a leaf.
Let Y0 ⊂ X be a thin component, Y0 , Y1 , . . . be an infinite sequence
formed by Process I and X i be the band complex containing Yi (X =
X 0 ). According to [BF95, Proposition 5.8], given any non-degenerated
subarc u of Γ, there exists a generating set of the image of π1 (Y ) in
π1 (X) consisting of short loops with respect to u. In particular, we
may choose ui ⊂ Yi that satisfies the assumption of Corollary A.12.
Now, let B0 be a set of short loops (with respect to u0 ) generating
the image of π1 (Y0 ) in π1 (X 0 ), and B 0 (containing B0 ) be a set of loops
generating π1 (X 0 ) with the property that each µ ⊂ B 0 − B0 is a loop
e ∗ p2 based at z0 where p1 and p2 are paths in u0 and λ
e is a path
p1 ∗ λ
0
0
in Z (the closure of the complement
of Y0 in X ). The length of X 0
P
0
0
with respect to B is |X |B0 := µ∈B0 m0 (µ) where m0 is the transverse
measure on X 0 . For every short loop µ ∈ B0 of the form p1µ ∗ λ ∗ p2µ ,
e 2,
m0 (µ) = m0 (p1µ )+m0 (p2µ ). For every µ ∈ B 0 −B0 of the form p1µ ∗ λ∗p
µ
2
1
e
m0 (µ) = m0 (pµ ) + m0 (pµ ) + m0 (λ).
Note that weight 0 bands do not make any contribution for the length
of a band complex. We may assume that X contains no weight 0 bands.
So there is a natural inclusion ιi : X i+1 ,→ X i which is a homotopy
equivalence. On the other hand, there exists homeomorphism f i :
X i → X i+1 as in Corollary A.12. Let ak : X → X be a map defined as
ak = ι0 ◦ · · · ◦ ιk−1 ◦ f k−1 ◦ · · · ◦ f 0
It is clear that ak is a homotopy equivalence for all k ≥ 0.
Claim ak is a shortening map for large k’s.
Proof. For each short loop µ ∈ B0 , f k−1,0 (µ) = f k−1 ◦ · · · ◦ f 0 (µ) is
a short loop in Yk with respect to uk . Since ιi preserves transverse
measure for all i, ak (µ) and f k−1,0 (µ) has the same measure. Therefore,
m0 (ak (µ)) = mk (f k−1,0 (µ)) → 0 as k → ∞ due to measures of bands in
Yk go to 0 as k → ∞. In particular, for any  satisfying the following,
min{m0 (µ)|µ ∈ B0 } >  > 0,
we may pick k sufficiently large such that m0 (ak (µ)) <  for all µ ∈ B0 .
e ∗ p2 ∈ B 0 − B0 , since ιi and f i are the
Moreover, for every µ = p1µ ∗ λ
µ
identity on Z i , for all i, we have that
e > mk (f k−1,0 (p1 )) + mk (f k−1,0 (p2 )) + m0 (λ)
e
m0 (p1 ) + m0 (p2 ) + m0 (λ)
µ

µ

µ

µ

RELATIVE RIPS MACHINE

53

So m0 (µ) > m0 (ak (µ)) for µ ∈ B 0 − B0 as k → ∞. Therefore, for
sufficiently large k, we have :
X
X
|X|B0 >  ∗ |B0 | +
m0 (µ) >
m0 (ak (µ)) = |X|ak (B0 ) .
µ∈B0 −B0

µ∈B0

Thus X is shortened by ak .



In fact, m0 (µ) for µ ∈ B0 and m0 (p1µ ) + m0 (p2µ ) for µ ∈ B 0 − B0 can
be shortened as much as one wants to by taking k sufficiently large.
Moreover, every generating set of X can be written in terms of B 0 .
Therefore X can be shortened with any given fixed generating set.

References
[BF91]

Mladen Bestvina and Mark Feighn, Bounding the complexity of simplicial group actions on trees, Invent. Math. 103 (1991), no. 3, 449–469.
MR 1091614 (92c:20044)
[BF95] M. Bestvina and M. Feighn, Stable actions of groups on real trees, Invent.
Math. 121 (1995), no. 2, 287–321. MR 1346208 (96h:20056)
[BF09] Mladen Bestvina and Mark Feighn, Notes on Sela’s work: limit groups
and Makanin-Razborov diagrams, Geometric and cohomological methods in group theory, London Math. Soc. Lecture Note Ser., vol. 358,
Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 2009, pp. 1–29. MR 2605174
(2011h:20087)
[BFW] Mladen Bestvina, Mark Feighn, and Pei Wang, Definable and negligible
subsets of free groups.II., in preparation.
[CH14] Thierry Coulbois and Arnaud Hilion, Rips induction: index of the dual
lamination of an R-tree, Groups Geom. Dyn. 8 (2014), no. 1, 97–134.
MR 3209704
[GLP94] D. Gaboriau, G. Levitt, and F. Paulin, Pseudogroups of isometries of R
and Rips’ theorem on free actions on R-trees, Israel J. Math. 87 (1994),
no. 1-3, 403–428. MR 1286836
[Gui98] Vincent Guirardel, Approximations of stable actions on R-trees, Comment. Math. Helv. 73 (1998), no. 1, 89–121. MR 1610591
[Gui00]
, Reading small actions of a one-ended hyperbolic group on Rtrees from its JSJ splitting, Amer. J. Math. 122 (2000), no. 4, 667–688.
MR 1771568
[Hat88] A. E. Hatcher, Measured lamination spaces for surfaces, from the topological viewpoint, Topology Appl. 30 (1988), no. 1, 63–88. MR 964063
[Hat02] Allen Hatcher, Algebraic topology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2002. MR 1867354

54

[MS88]

[Rey11a]
[Rey11b]
[Sel03]

[Sel04]

[Sel05a]
[Sel05b]
[Sel06a]

[Sel06b]

[Sta83]

PEI WANG

John W. Morgan and Peter B. Shalen, Degenerations of hyperbolic structures. II. Measured laminations in 3-manifolds, Ann. of Math. (2) 127
(1988), no. 2, 403–456. MR 932305
Patrick Reynolds, On indecomposable trees in the boundary of outer space,
Geom. Dedicata 153 (2011), 59–71. MR 2819663 (2012f:20129)
, On indecomposable trees in the boundary of outer space, Geom.
Dedicata 153 (2011), 59–71. MR 2819663
Z. Sela, Diophantine geometry over groups. II. Completions, closures and
formal solutions, Israel J. Math. 134 (2003), 173–254. MR 1972179
(2004g:20061)
, Diophantine geometry over groups. IV. An iterative procedure for
validation of a sentence, Israel J. Math. 143 (2004), 1–130. MR 2106978
(2006j:20059)
, Diophantine geometry over groups. III. Rigid and solid solutions,
Israel J. Math. 147 (2005), 1–73. MR 2166355 (2006j:20060)
, Diophantine geometry over groups. V1 . Quantifier elimination.
I, Israel J. Math. 150 (2005), 1–197. MR 2249582 (2007k:20088)
, Diophantine geometry over groups. V2 . Quantifier elimination. II, Geom. Funct. Anal. 16 (2006), no. 3, 537–706. MR 2238944
(2007k:20089)
, Diophantine geometry over groups. VI. The elementary theory of
a free group, Geom. Funct. Anal. 16 (2006), no. 3, 707–730. MR 2238945
(2007j:20063)
John R. Stallings, Topology of finite graphs, Invent. Math. 71 (1983),
no. 3, 551–565. MR 695906 (85m:05037a)

