TETRAVALENT EDGE-TRANSITIVE CAYLEY GRAPHS OF
FROBENIUS GROUPS

arXiv:1606.07541v2 [] 29 Aug 2016

LEI WANG

Abstract. In this paper, we give a characterization for a class of edge-transitive
Cayley graphs, and provide methods for constructing Cayley graphs with certain symmetry properties. Also this study leads to construct and characterise a new family of
half-transitive graphs.

keywords. Frobenius group, Edge-transitive graph, Coset graph, Cayley graph
1. Introduction
Graphs considered in this paper are assumed to be finite, simple, and unless stated
otherwise, connected and undirected. For a graph Γ , let V Γ , EΓ and AutΓ denote
its vertex set, edge set and the full automorphism group, respectively. If there exists a
subgroup X 6 AutΓ is transitive on V Γ or EΓ , then the graph Γ is said to be X-vertex
transitive or X-edge transitive, respectively. A sequence v0 , v1 , . . . , vs of vertices of Γ is
called an s-arc if vi−1 6= vi+1 for 1 6 i 6 s − 1, and {vi , vi+1 } is an edge for 0 6 i 6 s − 1.
The graph Γ is called (X, s)-arc-transitive, if X is transitive on the s-arcs of Γ ; if in
addition X is not transitive on the (s + 1)-arcs, then Γ is said to be (X, s)-transitive.
In particular, a 1-arc is simply called an arc, and an (X, 1)-arc-transitive graph is called
X-arc transitive.
A graph Γ is called a Cayley graph if there exist a group G and a subset S ⊂ G \ {1}
with S = S −1 : = {g −1 | g ∈ S} such that the vertices of Γ may be identified with the
elements of G in such a way that x is adjacent to y if and only if yx−1 ∈ S. The Cayley
graph Γ is denoted by Cay(G, S). Throughout this paper, denote by 1 the vertex of
Cay(G, S) corresponding to the identity of G.
It is well-known that a graph Γ is a Cayley graph of a group G if and only if the
full automorphism group AutΓ contains a subgroup which is regular on vertices and
isomorphic to G. In particular, a Cayley graph Cay(G, S) is vertex-transitive of order
|G|. However, a Cayley graph is of course not necessarily edge-transitive. Thus, characterizing the Cayley graphs which are edge-transitive is a current hot topic in algebra
graph theory. For instance, see [9, 19, 29, 31] for those with valency 4, see [17] for a
classification of connected edge-transitive tetravalent Cayley graphs of square-free order,
and [5] for a classification of normal edge-transitive Cayley graphs of Frobebius groups
of order a product of two primes. In this paper, a characterization is given of tetravalent
edge-transitive Cayley graphs of a class of primitive Frobenius groups. This study provides a method for constructing edge-transitive graphs of valency 4, and is then applied
to construct a new family of half-transitive graphs. To state this result, we need more
definitions.
Date: August 30, 2016.
1

2

LEI WANG

For an X-vertex-transitive graph Γ and a normal subgroup N ✁X, the normal quotient
graph ΓN induced by N is the graph which has vertex set V ΓN = {uN | u ∈ V Γ } such
that uN and v N are adjacent if and only if u is adjacent in Γ to some vertex in v N .
Furthermore, if the valency of ΓN equals the valency of Γ , then Γ is called a normal
cover of ΓN .
For an integer m > 3, we denote by Cm[2] the lexicographic product of the empty
graph 2K1 of order 2 by a cycle Cm of size m, which has vertex set {(i, j) | 1 6 i 6
m, 1 6 j 6 2} such that (i, j) and (i′ , j ′ ) are adjacent if and only if i − i′ ≡ ±1 (mod m).
A group G is said to be a Frobenius group if and only if G has the form G = W :H
such that each non-identity element of H centralises no non-identity element of W , that
is, xy 6= yx for any x ∈ W \ {1} and y ∈ H \ {1}. In particular, G is called a primitive
Frobenius group if H acts irreducibly on W , refer to [7].
Let F be a field, R be a group and V be an FR-module. Suppose that V = V1 ⊕· · ·⊕Vr
(r > 1), where Vi are subspaces of V which are transitively permuted by the action of R.
We call R imprimitive on V if there exists such decomposition. Otherwise, R is called
primitive on V .
Theorem 1.1. Let G = W :H ∼
= Zdp :Zn be a primitive Frobenius group, where d, n are
integers, and p is a prime. Assume that Γ is a connected tetravalent X-edge-transitive
Cayley graph of G, where G 6 X 6 AutΓ . If X is soluble, then one of the following
statements holds:
(1) G is normal in X, and X1 6 D8 ;
p
(2) G ∼
= D2p , Γ ∼
= Cp[2] , and AutΓ ∼
= Z2 :D2p ;
(3) X = W :((N:H).O) with soc(X) = W × L, and X1 = N.O, where N ∼
= Zl2 with
2 6 l 6 d, L ∼
= 1 or Z2 , and O ∼
= 1 or Z2 , satisfying the following statements:
(a) there exist x1 , . . . , xd ∈ W and τ1 , τ2 , . . . , τd ∈ N such that W = hx1 , x2 , . . . , xd i,
hxi , τi i ∼
= D2p and N = hτi i × CN (xi ) for 1 6 i 6 d;
(b) H does not centralise N, and H is imprimitive on W ;
(c) X/(W N) ∼
= Zn or D2n , and Γ is X-arc-transitive if and only if X/(W N) ∼
=
D2n ;
(4) ΓW ∼
= C n2 [2] , Γ is a cover of ΓW and X = W :((NH).O) such that
(i) X1 6 N.O, N ∩ H ∼
= Z2 , and H normalizes N, but H does not centralise
l
∼
N, where N = Z2 with 2 6 l 6 n2 , 4 divides n, and O ∼
= 1 or Z2 ;
(ii) W is the unique minimal normal subgroup of X, and H is imprimitive on
W;
(iii) X/(W N) ∼
= Z n2 or Dn , and Γ is X-arc-transitive if and only if X/(W N) ∼
=
Dn ;
(5) X = ((W N):H).O and Γ is X-arc-transitive if and only if X/(W N) ∼
= D2n ,
d
∼
∼
where W = Z2 , N is a 2-group, and O = 1 or Z2 .
Remarks on Theorem 1.1.
(a) The Cayley graph Γ in part (1), called a normal edge-transitive graph, is studied
in [27]. Furthermore, if X = AutΓ , then Γ is called a normal Cayley graph,
introduced in [32].
(b) H acts irreducibly on W if and only if n does not divide pm − 1 for any proper
divisor m of d (such n is called a primitive divisor of pd − 1), refer to [6, Proposition 2.3].

EDGE-TRANSITIVE CAYLEY GRAPHS

3

(c) Lemma 4.4 and Lemma 4.5 show that every group X satisfies part (3) or part (4)
if and only if H is imprimitive on W , see Constructions 3.3 and 3.5. In addition,
H is imprimitive on W if and only if there exists some prime k dividing d such
d
that n divides k(p k − 1), see [6, Proposition 2.8].
Theorem 1.2. Using the notation defined in Theorem 1.1, if X is insoluble, then one
of the following holds:
(1) G ∼
= Z4p :Z5 , X = W.X and ΓW ∼
= K5 , where soc(X) ∼
= A5 , and Γ is constructed
as in Construction 3.9;
(2) G ∼
= K5,5 − 5K2 , where soc(X) ∼
= A5 , and
= Z4p :Z10 , X = W.(X × Z2 ), and ΓW ∼
Γ is constructed as in Construction 3.11;
(3) Γ is isomorphic to one of the graphs listed in Table 1.
TABLE 1: Graphs which are not normal edge-transitive.
AutΓ
G
(AutΓ )1
2
PSL(3, 3):Z2
D26
Z3 :GL(2, 3)
PGL(2, 7)
D14
S4
PGL(2, 7)
Z7 :Z3
D16
PGL(2, 7)
Z7 :Z6
D8
PSL(2, 23)
Z23 :Z11
S4
PGL(2, 11)
Z11 :Z5
S4
PGL(2, 11) × Z2 Z11 :Z10
S4

Γ
Example
Example
Example
Example
Example
Example
Example

3.13
3.13
3.14
3.15
3.16
3.16
3.17

A graph is said to be half-transitive if its automorphism group acts transitively on the
vertex set and edge set but intransitively on the arc set. Constructing and characterising
half-transitive graphs was initiated by Tutte (1965), and is a currently active topic, see
[18, 21, 22, 23] for references. Theorem 1.1 provides a method for characterising some
classes of half-transitive graphs of valency 4. The following theorem is such an example.
Theorem 1.3. Let G = W :hhi ∼
= Zdp :Zn be a primitive Frobenius group, where d > 1
is odd, p is an odd prime, and n is an integer. Let Γ be a connected tetravalent edgetransitive Cayley graph of G. Assume that hhi is primitive on W . Then AutΓ = G:Z2 ,
Γ is half-transitive, and Γ ∼
⌋, (n, i) = 1, and
= Γi = Cay(G, Si ), where 1 6 i 6 ⌊ n−1
2
Si = {ahi , a−1 hi , (ahi )−1 , (a−1 hi )−1 }, where a ∈ W \ {1}.
Moreover, if pr i ≡ ±j (mod n) for some r > 0, then Γi ∼
= Γj .
2. Preliminary results
In this section, we quote some preliminary results, which will be used in the subsequent
sections.
For a core-free subgroup H of X and an element g ∈ X\H, let [X:H] := {Hx | x ∈ X},
and define the coset graph
Γ = Cos(X, H, H{g, g −1}H)
with vertex set [X:H] such that Hx and Hy are adjacent whenever yx−1 ∈ H{g, g −1}H.
Then Γ is well-defined, and X induces a subgroup of AutΓ acting on [X:H] by right

4

LEI WANG

multiplication, namely, α : Hx → Hxa for x, a ∈ X. Label v, w the two vertices of Γ
corresponding to H and Hg, respectively. Then we have the following lemma.
Lemma 2.1. For a coset graph Γ = Cos(X, H, H{g, g −1}H), we have
(a) Γ (v) = {Hgh|h ∈ H} ∪ {Hg −1h|h ∈ H};
(b) Γ is X-edge-transitive and X is transitive on the vertices of Γ ;
(c) Γ is connected if and only if X = hH, gi;
(d) H ∩ H g = Xvw , the stabilizer of the arc (v, w), where H g is the conjugate of H
by g;
(e) the valency of Γ equals
(
|H:H ∩ H g | if HgH = Hg −1 H,
val(Γ ) =
2|H:H ∩ H g | otherwise;
(f) Γ is X-arc-transitive if and only if HgH = Hg −1 H, which yields that HgH =
HoH for some (2-element ) o ∈ NX (Xvw ) \ H with o2 ∈ Xvw (refer to [17]). (An
element o in the group X is a 2-element if its order is a power of 2).
Moreover, for any X-edge-transitive graph Σ, if X is transitive on V Σ, then the map
x
u → Hx with x ∈ X gives an isomorphism from Σ to Cos(X, H, H{g, g −1}H), where
u ∈ V Σ, H = Xu and g ∈ X \ H with ug ∈ Γ (u).
The vertex stabilizer for s-arc-transitive graphs of valency 4 is known (refer to [30]).
Lemma 2.2. Let Γ = (V Γ , EΓ ) be a connected (X, s)-transitive graph of valency 4.
Then s and the stabilizer X1 are listed in the following table,
s
2
3
4
7
2
5
X1 A4 , S4 Z3 × A4 , (Z3 × A4 ).Z2 , S3 × S4 Z3 :GL(2, 3) [3 ]:GL(2, 3)
where [35 ] is a 3-group of order 35 .
Let Γ = (V Γ , EΓ ) be a connected graph. Assume that X 6 AutΓ is transitive on
both V Γ and EΓ . Then we have an important conclusion in the next lemma.
Lemma 2.3. Let N ✁ X. If Γ is of valency 4 and X/N is insoluble, then Γ is a normal
N-cover of ΓN .
Proof. Pick any vertex u ∈ V Γ . Let B be an orbit of N acting on V Γ , which contains
u. By Lemma 2.2, the stabilizer Xu is a {2, 3}-group. In particular, Xu is soluble. Let K
be the kernel of X acting on ΓN . Then Ku ✂ Xu , so Ku is soluble. Since N is transitive
on B, we have K = NKu . Note that K/N ∼
= Ku /(N ∩ Ku ), K/N is soluble.
= NKu /N ∼
Then X/K ∼
= (X/N)/(K/N) is insoluble because X/N is insoluble. So AutΓN is also
insoluble, hence ΓN is not a cycle. Since Γ is connected and the valency of ΓN is a divisor
of the valency of Γ , we conclude that ΓN is of valency 4, and the lemma holds.

For a normal edge-transitive Cayley graph Γ = Cay(G, S), let Aut(G, S) = {α ∈
Aut(G) | S α = S}, we have a simple lemma.
Lemma 2.4. Let G = W :hhi ∼
= Zdp :Zn be a primitive Frobenius group, where d, n are
integers, and p is a prime. Let Γ = Cay(G, S) be connected of valency 4. Assume that
AutΓ has a subgroup X such that Γ is X-edge-transitive and G ✂ X. Then X1 6 D8 .

EDGE-TRANSITIVE CAYLEY GRAPHS

5

Proof. Since Γ is connected, we have hSi = G, and so Aut(G, S) acts faithfully on S.
Hence Aut(G, S) 6 S4 . By [10, Lemma 2.1], we obtain X 6 NAutΓ (G) = G:Aut(G, S). So
X1 6 Aut(G, S) 6 S4 . Suppose that 3 divides |X1 |. Then X1 is 2-transitive on S. Hence
Γ is (X, 2)-arc-transitive, and all elements in S are involutions, see for example [15].
Pick any s ∈ S. Write s = σhi where σ ∈ W and i is an integer. Recall that s is an
involution, we obtain that h2i = 1. By [8, Proposition 12.10], Aut(G) ∼
= Zdp :ΓL(1, pd ).
For a finite group T , it is known that the action of Aut(T ) on T /Z(T ) is permutationally isomorphic to the conjugation action of Aut(T ) on Inn(T ). Since G ∼
= Inn(G), it
follows from the above fact that we may identify G with Inn(G) a normal subgroup of
Aut(G). Then write Aut(G) = W :M.L, where M ∼
= Zd . Without loss of
= Zpd −1 , and L ∼
generality, we may assume that h belongs to M, refer to [6, Proposition 2.5]. For that
case, (hi )η = hi for any η ∈ M.L. Take any θ ∈ Aut(G), θ has the form xyz, where
x ∈ W , y ∈ M, and z ∈ L. By easy calculations, we have sθ = shi , where s ∈ W . It
follows that for each a ∈ S, a has the form ahi with a ∈ W because X1 is transitive on
S. Recall that hSi = G, we have h = (σ1 hi )(σ2 hi ) · · · (σm hi ) where σj ∈ W for each j.
Since W ✂ G and h 6= 1, we obtain h = hi . Consequently, hhi ∼
= Z2 . By the definition
of G, we have G ∼
= Zp :Zp−1 . However, since X1 is 2-transitive
= D2p , and thus Aut(G) ∼

on S, we conclude that X1 ∼
= A4 or S4 , which is impossible. Therefore, X1 6 D8 .
Finally, we quote a result about simple groups, which will be used later.
Lemma 2.5. (Kazarin [12]) Let T be a non-abelian simple group which has a 2′ -Hall
subgroup. Then T = PSL(2, p), where p = 2e − 1 is a prime. Furthermore, T = GH,
where G = Zp :Z p−1 and H = Dp+1 = D2e .
2

3. existence of graphs satisfying Theorem 1.1 and Theorem 1.2
In this section, we first construct some examples of graphs satisfying Theorem 1.1.
The following construction produces normal edge-transitive Cayley graphs admitting
a group X satisfying part (1) of Theorem 1.1.
Construction 3.1. Let p > 5 be a prime such that p is a primitive divisor of 2p−1 − 1.
p−1
Let G = W :hhi ∼
= Z2 :Zp be a Frobenius group. By [8, Proposition 12.10], we have
p−1
Aut(G) ∼
= Z2 :GL(1, 2p−1).Zp−1 , where Zp−1 is the group of Frobenius automorphisms.
Arguing similarly as Lemma 2.4, we may write Aut(G) = W :M:L, and h belongs to
M, where M ∼
= Zp−1 . For this case, we may identify W with a field
= Z2p−1 −1 , and L ∼
F: = F2p−1 of order 2p−1 and there exists α ∈ F of order p such that hhi acts on each
x ∈ W by h : x = αx. By the definition, G is a primitive Frobenius group.
Let F# = hωi, and let σ be a Frobenius automorphism of order 2. Then ω σ = ω 2
Let X = G:hσi, and let g = ω

p−1
2 2 +1

p−1
2

.

h. Set

Γ (2, p − 1, p) = Cos(X, hσi, hσi{g, g −1}hσi).
Lemma 3.2. Let Γ = Γ (2, p − 1, p) be a graph constructed in Construction 3.1. Then
Γ is a connected normal X-edge-transitive Cayley graph of G of valency 4.
Proof. By the definition, hσi is core-free in X, and hence X 6 AutΓ . Now X = Ghσi
and G ∩ hσi = 1, and thus G is regular on the vertex set [X:hσi]. So Γ is a Cayley graph
of G, which has order 2p−1 p.

6

LEI WANG
p−1

Let Y = hg, σi. Noting that p > 5, we conclude that 2 2 6≡ −1(mod 2p−1 − 1). It
implies that ω σ 6= ω −1. However, since ασ = α−1 , we have that hσ = h−1 . Furthermore,
σ induces an automorphism of G. Then we have
g σ = (ω 2

p−1
2 +1

h)σ = (ω σ )2

p−1
2 +1

hσ = ω 2

p−1
2 +1

p−1

h−1 .

p−1

Let g = g σ g. Then g = ω 2(2 2 +1) α. Denote by ℓ the integer 2 2 − 1. Recall that p is
a primitive divisor of 2p−1 − 1, we conclude that (p, ℓ) = 1. Thus g ℓ = αℓ belongs to Y .
p−1

So does α. Consequently, ω 2(2 2 +1) belongs to Y , and so h belongs to Y . Since hhi acts
irreducibly on W , we obtain that X = Y . Thus Γ is connected. It is straightforward to
show that hσi ∩ hσig = 1, and hence hσi ∩ hσig has index 2 in hσi. Since X 6 AutΓ , it
follows that Γ is not a cycle. By Lemma 2.1, Γ is connected, X-edge-transitive and of
valency 4.

Remark. In fact, the graphs in Construction 3.1 really exist. For example, p =
5, 11, 13, 19, and so on.
The following construction produces edge-transitive graphs admitting a group X satisfying part (3) of Theorem 1.1 with L ∼
= Z2 , and O = 1.
Construction 3.3. Let X = W :(N:hhi) ∼
= Zdp :(Zd2 :Zn ), where p = 2ℓ m + 1 be an odd
prime, m > 3 is an odd number, and ℓ > 1, such that W ∼
= Zn
= Zd2 , and hhi ∼
= Zdp , N ∼
satisfy
(a) d > 1, d divides m, and 2md is a primitive divisor of pd − 1;
Q
(b) W = di=1 hxi i, where xi = (1, . . . , 1, x, 1, . . . , 1) with o(x) = p for each i;
p−1
Q
(c) N = di=1 hτi 2 i, where τi = (1, . . . , 1, τ, 1, . . . , 1) with xτ = xr and r p−1 ≡
1 (mod p) for each i;
p−1

(d) h = c1 τ12m (12 . . . d), where c1 = (c, 1, . . . , 1) with xc = x, τ x = τ , and o(c) = 2.
Let y = (x1 h)−1 . Set
Γ (p, 2, n) = Cos(X, N, N{y, y −1}N).

Lemma 3.4. Let Γ = Γ (p, 2, n) be a graph constructed in Construction 3.3, and let G =
W :hhi. Then Γ is a connected tetravalent X-edge-transitive Cayley graph of Frobenius
group G, and G is not normal in X.
Proof. By the definition, N is core-free in X, and hence X 6 AutΓ . Now X = GN and
G ∩ N = 1, and thus G acts regularly on the vertex set [X:N]. So Γ is a Cayley graph
of G. Obviously, G is not normal in X.
Let H = hhi. Suppose that C: = CH (W ) 6= 1. Then C = hhℓ i, where ℓ divides
2md. Write ℓ = l1 d + l, where 0 6 l1 < 2m, and 0 6 l < d. Let τ = τ1 τ2 · · · τd , and
p−1
c = c1 · · · cd , where ci = (1, . . . , 1, c, 1, . . . , 1) for each i. If l = 0, then hℓ = c τ 2m l1
p−1
ℓ
and so xh1 6= x1 , a contradiction. Thus l 6= 0. Then hℓ = c τ 2m l1 hl . Let (l, d) = k.
Let k ′ = l/k, and d′ = d/k. Relabeling if necessary, we may rewrite {1, . . . , d} =
{11 , . . . , ij , . . . , kd′ }. Without loss of generality, we may assume that hl = h1 · · · hk ,
p−1

p−1

p−1

ℓ

p−1

)(i1 i2 · · · id′ ). Then xh11 = x1r 22m
where hi = (ci1 τi12m )(ci2 τi22m ) · · · (cik′ τik2m
′
because 11 6= 12 , a contradiction. Thus H acts faithfully on W .

(l1 +1)

6= x11

EDGE-TRANSITIVE CAYLEY GRAPHS

7

We claim that H is fixed-point-free on W . Let U = hw | w h = w, w ∈ W i. If otherwise,
then U is a proper subgroup of W . By Maschke’s Theorem, V can be decomposed as
W = U × V such that H normalises both U and V . By the definition of U, H is fixedpoint-free on V . Let k = dim(V ). Then k < d. By the above paragraph, we conclude
that 2md divides pk − 1, contrary to our assumption. This establishes the claim. So G
is a primitive Frobenius group.
p−1

For y defined in Construction 3.3, let z = y −1y τ 2 = x21 . Then x1 belongs to hN, yi.
So does xi for 1 6 i 6 d. It follows that hN, yi = X. Thus Γ is connected. It furthermore
implies that hci belongs to X, and so soc(X) = W × hci.
p−1

Let σi = τi 2 where 1 6 i 6 d. Finally, as σiy = σi−1 for 3 6 i 6 d, σ1y = σd and
y
y
σ2 = x21 σ1 , we obtain that N ∩ N y = hσ2 , σ3 , . . . , σd i ∼
= Zd−1
2 . That is to say, N ∩ N
has index 2 in N. Since X 6 AutΓ , Γ is not a cycle. By Lemma 2.1, Γ is connected,
X-edge-transitive and of valency 4.

Remark. The normal quotient ΓW induced by W is a cycle (see Lemmas 4.4 and 4.5).
As a matter of fact, there are several groups which are primitive Frobenius groups
and satisfy Construction 3.3. For example, G = Z37 :Z18 , Z313 :Z18 , Z541 :Z50 , and so on.
The following construction produces edge-transitive graphs admitting a group X satisfying part (4) of Theorem 1.1 with O = 1.
Construction 3.5. Using the notation in Construction 3.3. Assume ℓ > 2. Let N =
p−1
p−1
Q
d−1
2
4m
∼
hτ
Z
,
and
h
=
τ
i
(12 · · · d). Let X = W :hN, hi, and let G = W :hhi. Set
=
2
1
i6=3 i
−1
y = (x2 h) , and
Γ (p, n) = Cos(X, N, N{y, y −1}N).
Lemma 3.6. Let Γ = Γ (p, n) be a graph constructed in Construction 3.5. Then Γ is
a connected tetravalent X-edge-transitive Cayley graph of Frobenius group G, and G is
not normal in X.
p−1

Proof. Obviously, G is not normal in X. Let σi = τi 2 where 1 6 i 6 d. By easy
calculations, σ1y = σd , σ2y = σ1 , and σiy = σi−1 for 4 6 i 6 d. It follows that σ3
belongs to hN, yi, and N ∩ N y = hσ1 , σ4 , . . . , σd i ∼
= Zd−2
2 . At the same time, we obtain
σ3y = x22 σ2 , and hence x2 belongs to hN, yi. So does xi for each i. It implies that
hN, yi = X. Consequently, Γ is connected. Arguing similarly as Lemma 3.4, we can
obtain that G is a Frobenius group, and Γ is X-edge-transitive Cayley graph of G and
of valency 4, the statement follows.

Remark. Clearly, hhi does not normalise N. In other words, X can’t satisfy the
n
properties in part (a) of Lemma 4.4. However, h normalises hN, h 2 i, namely, X satisfies
the properties in part (ii) of Lemma 4.5. Thus ΓW ∼
= C n2 [2] , where N, W , and Γ appear
in Construction 3.5, (see Lemma 4.4 and Lemma 4.5).
The following construction produces edge-transitive graphs admitting a group X satisfying part (5) of Theorem 1.1 with O = 1.
Let n = 3pl11 · · · plss be an odd number, where 3, p1 , . . ., ps are pairwise distinct primes,
and li > 1 for each i. Let G1 = W1 :H1 ∼
= Zd2 :Zn be a primitive Frobenius group. Let

8

LEI WANG

G2 be a subgroup of G1 such that G2 = W2 :H2 ∼
= A4 . Write H1 = hh1 i, and H2 = hh2 i
n
where h2 = h13 .
Let H = hhi where h = (h1 , h2 ). Let V = W1 × W2 , and W = {(w, 1) | w ∈ W1 }. Set
G = W :H and X = V :H.
By the definition, it is easy to show that G is a primitive Frobenius group.
Construction 3.7. Let R = h(w, w), (w, w)hi, where 1 6= w ∈ W2 . Set
Γ (2, d, n) = Cos(X, R, R{h, h−1 }R).
Lemma 3.8. Let Γ = Γ (2, d, n) be a graph constructed in Construction 3.7. Then Γ is
a connected tetravalent X-edge-transitive Cayley graph of G, and G is not normal in X.
In particular, ΓW is a cycle.
Proof. We first prove that R is core-free in X. By the definition of R, we have R ∼
= Z22 .
Assume K 6 R, and 1 6= K ✂ X. Then Aut(K) is isomorphic to a subgroup of S3 . So
we conclude that CH (K) 6= 1, which contradicts the fact that G1 is a Frobenius group.
Thus R is core-free in X. We observe that R ∩ G = 1, it follows that |X| = |R||G|,
and so X = RG. It implies that G is regular on the vertex set [X:R], and hence Γ is a
Cayley graph of G.
3
By the definition of G1 , we conclude that w h1 6= w for any 1 6= w ∈ W1 . It implies
3
3
that (w, w)h (w, w) 6= 1, namely, (w h1 w, 1) 6= 1. Since H is irreducible on W1 , implying
that W1 belongs to hR, hi. So does V . Thus Γ is connected. Arguing similarly as above,
G is not normal in X. Clearly, R ∩ Rh = h(w, w)hi ∼
= Z2 . It follows that R ∩ Rh has
index 2 in R. As X 6 AutΓ , Γ is not a cycle, so that by Lemma 2.1, we obtain Γ is Xedge-transitive and of valency 4. Note that ΓW is a Cayley graph. By [1, Theorem 1.2],
we conclude that ΓW is a cycle.

By Constructions 3.1-3.5, each case of Theorem 1.1 occurs.
We now construct some examples of graphs appearing in Theorem 1.2.
Based on several previous known results, arc-transitive elementary abelian covers of
the complete graph K5 were classified by Boštjan Kuzman [3]. However, for the completeness, we present here a distinct and independent construction.
Let p be a prime such that 5 is a primitive divisor of p4 − 1. Set
V = he1 i × · · · × he5 i ∼
= Z5 .
p

We define an action of A5 on V as follows:
Q
Q
( 5i=1 eλi i )g = 5i=1 eλigi−1 , where g ∈ A5 , and 0 6 λi 6 4 for each i.

By this definition, A5 acts naturally on V . Let ei = e5 e−1
for 1 6 i 6 4. Set
i
W = he1 i × he2 i × he3 i × he4 i.
It is straightforward to show that A5 acts faithfully on W .

Construction 3.9. Let G = W :hhi with h = (12345), and let X = W :N = Z4p :A5 . Let
R = Alt{2, 3, 4, 5} ∼
= A4 , and let g = e1 (15)(24). Set
Γ (p, 4, 5) = Cos(X, R, RgR).

EDGE-TRANSITIVE CAYLEY GRAPHS

9

Lemma 3.10. Let Γ = Γ (p, 4, 5) be a graph constructed in Construction 3.9. Then Γ
is a connected tetravalent (X, 2)-arc-transitive Cayley graph of Frobenius group G, and
G is not normal in X. In particular, Γ is a cover of ΓW , and ΓW ∼
= K5 .
Proof. Let H = hhi. By definition of W , we conclude H is fixed-point-free on W . Since
5 is a primitive divisor of p4 −1, H acts irreducibly on W . That is to say, G is a primitive
Frobenius group. Clearly, N has a decomposition HR. It implies that R is core-free in
X, and hence X 6 AutΓ . Now X = GR and G ∩ R = 1, and so G is regular on the
vertex set [X:R]. Thus Γ is a Cayley graph of G. Obviously, G is not normal in X.
Denote by u and v the vertices R and Rg, respectively. Then Xu = R and Xv = Rg .
Let r = (234). Since Xuv = Xu ∩Xv , a small calculations show Xuv = hri. By Lemma 2.1,
Γ is of valency 4. It is clear that g has order 2, and r g = r −1 . So g ∈ NX (Xuv ). Let
R = hR, gi. Since (15)(24) = (12345)(25)(34), we conclude that e1 h belongs to R. Let
a = (25)(34) and b = (23)(45). By easy calculations, we obtain
−1 b
−1
−1
−1
−1 ab
−1 −1
e1 h(e1 h)a = e1 e2 e−1
3 , (e1 e2 e3 ) = e1 e2 e3 e4 , and (e1 e2 e3 e4 ) = e1 e2 e4 .

Combining the above three equations, we conclude that e3 belongs to R. So does ei
for i = 1, 2, 4. Consequently, W 6 R. Recall that e1 h is inside in R, it follows that
h belongs to R, forcing hR, gi = X. Thus Γ is connected. Since X/W is insoluble,
by Lemma 2.3, Γ is a cover of ΓW . Clearly, ΓW is a Cayley graph of G/W . By [1,

Theorem 1.2], we obtain ΓW ∼
= K5 .
Let p be a prime such that 10 is a primitive divisor of p4 − 1. Let
V1 = he1 i × · · · × he5 i, and V2 = he1′ i × · · · × he5′ i
such that V1 ∼
= V2 ∼
= Z5p . Set T = h(12345)(1′2′ 3′ 4′ 5′ ), (12)(1′2′ )i. It is straightforward
to show that T ∼
= S5 . Then, for any g ∈ T , g acts on Vi (i = 1, 2) as follows:
Q
Q
( 5i=1 eλi i )g = 5i=1 eλigi−1 , where 0 6 λi 6 4 for each i,
Q
Q
λ
λ
( 5i=1 ei′i′ )g = 5i=1 e ′ig′−1 , where 0 6 λi′ 6 4 for each i′ .
i
Q
Q
Let e = 5i=1 ei , and e′ = 5i=1 ei′ . Let ei = ei hei and ei′ = ei′ he′ i for 1 6 i 6 5. Set
W = hw1 i × hw2 i × hw3i × hw4 i where wi = ei e−1
i′ .

Then W ∼
= Z4p . Note that T fixes each element of hei and he′ i. So T induces a faithful
action on W . Without loss of generality, we may assume that T is a subgroup of GL(W ).
Let g = (11′ ) · · · (55′ ). Obviously, g inverts each non-identity element of W .
Construction 3.11. Let G = W :H where H = hh, gi with h = (12345)(1′2′ 3′ 4′ 5′ ). Set
X = W :N = W :(T × hgi) ∼
= S4 ,
= Z4p :(S5 × Z2 ). Let R = h(1234)(1′2′ 3′ 4′ ), (12)(1′2′ )i ∼
and let y = w1 w5 (15)(1′ 5′ )g. Set
Γ (p, 4, 10) = Cos(X, R, RyR).
Arguing similarly as Lemma 3.10, we have the following conclusion in next lemma.
Lemma 3.12. Let Γ = Γ (p, 4, 10) be a graph constructed in Construction 3.11. Then Γ
is a connected tetravalent (X, 2)-arc-transitive Cayley graph of Frobenius group G, and
G is not normal in X. In particular, Γ is a cover of ΓW , and ΓW ∼
= K5,5 − 5K2 .
Here are a few of graphs whose automorphism groups are almost simple.

10

LEI WANG

Example 3.13. Let F = GF(p) be a finite field of order p. Let U and V consist of
1-subspaces and 2-subspaces of F3 , respectively.
Case 1: Let p = 2. Define a bipartite graph Γ with bipartite U and V such that
u ∈ U and v ∈ V are adjacent if and only if u + v = F3 . This is the point-line nonincidence graph of the Fano plane PG(2, 2). Furthermore, AutΓ = PGL(3, 2).Z2 , and Γ
is a Cayley graph of G = D14 . For example, refer to [25].
Case 2: Let p = 3. Define a bipartite graph Γ with bipartite U and V such that
u ∈ U and v ∈ V are adjacent if and only if u is a subspace of v. Then Γ is the point-line
incidence graph of the projective plane PG(2, 3). Furthermore, AutΓ = PGL(3, 3).Z2 ,
and Γ is a Cayley graph of G = D26 . Refer to [14, 15], for example.
Example 3.14. Let X = PGL(2, 7). By the Atlas [4], X has a maximal subgroup
H∼
= S4 .
= NH (K) 6 NX (K) ∼
= Z22 . Then D8 ∼
= D16 . Pick a subgroup K 6 H with K ∼
Choose an involution o ∈ NH (K) \ K and an element z ∈ NX (K) of order 3 such that
z o = z −1 . Then ho, zi ∼
= S3 , and o(oz) = 2. Since H is a maximal subgroup of X,
it follows that hH, ozi = X. Let Γ = Cos(X, H, HozH). By the choices of o and z,
we conclude that |H:H ∩ H oz | = 4, namely, Γ is a connected X-arc-transitive graph
of valency 4. By MAGMA [2], we have that X = GH where G = Z7 :Z3 , and thus
Γ is a connected X-arc-transitive Cayley graph of G of valency 4. By Li et al.[17],
AutΓ = PGL(2, 7).
Example 3.15. Let X = PGL(2, 7). Then T = soc(X) ∼
= PSL(2, 7). Take H 6 T
∼
such that H = D8 . Choose an involution o such that o is not in the center of H.
It is simple to check that NH (hoi) ∼
= D16 . Let
= D8 and NX (hoi) ∼
= Z22 , NT (hoi) ∼
NX (hoi) = NT (hoi):hzi for some involution z ∈ X \ T . Take y ∈ NT (hoi):hzi of order
4. Set Γ = Cos(X, H, HxH), where x = z or yz. By Li et al.[17], Γ is a connected
tetravalent arc-transitive Cayley graph of Z7 :Z6 , and AutΓ = PGL(2, 7).
Example 3.16. Let X = PGL(2, 11) or PSL(2, 23). By the Atlas [4], X has a maximal
subgroup H ∼
= S3 be a subgroup of H. Checking the subgroups of X
= S4 . Let L ∼
in the Atlas [4], we conclude that NX (L) = hoi × L ∼
= D12 , where o ∈ NX (L) \ H
is an involution. Set Γ = Cos(X, H, HoH). Since H is a maximal subgroup of X,
ho, Hi = X. It is straightforward to check that |H:H ∩ H o| = 4. Then Γ is a connected
tetravalent X-arc-transitive graph. Moreover, X has a subgroup G which is regular on
the vertices, where G ∼
= Z11 :Z5 or Z23 :Z11 , respectively. We denote by P11,5 and P23,11
the graphs associated with PGL(2, 11) and PSL(2, 23), respectively. By Li et al.[17],
AutP11,5 = PGL(2, 11) and AutP23,11 = PSL(2, 23).
Example 3.17. Let Γ = (V Γ , EΓ ) be a connected arc-transitive Cayley graph. The
standard double cover Γ (2) is the graph with vertex set V Γ ∪ {u′ |u ∈ V Γ } such that
{u, v ′} ∈ EΓ (2) whenever {u, v} ∈ EΓ . For each x ∈ AutΓ , define x̃ : u → ux ,
u′ → (ux )′ . Then AutΓ can be viewed as a subgroup of AutΓ (2) in this way. Define
ǫ : u → u′ , u′ → u. Then ǫ ∈ AutΓ (2) . Set X = hAutΓ , ǫi. Then X = AutΓ × hǫi.
(2)
So Γ (2) is an X-arc-transitive Cayley graph. By Li et al.[17], P11,5 is a Cayley graph of
(2)
Z11 :Z10 , and AutP11,5 ∼
= PGL(2, 11) × Z2 .

EDGE-TRANSITIVE CAYLEY GRAPHS

11

4. Soluble automorphism groups
In this section, let G = W :H ∼
= Zdp :Zn be a primitive Frobenius group. Let Γ =
Cay(G, S) be a connected X-edge-transitive tetravalent Cayley graph, where G 6 X 6
AutΓ . Denote by F the Fitting subgroup of X. If X is solvable, then an important
property of its Fitting subgroup is that it is self-centralized, that is, CX (F ) 6 F . In
what follows, we will determine the graph Γ for the case where X is solvable.
Lemma 4.1. Assume that F is a r-group, where r is a prime. If Γ is a cover of ΓF ,
then F = W .
Proof. Note that W is minimal and normal in G. Then either W 6 F or F ∩ G = 1. If
W 6 F , then F = W as Γ is a cover of ΓF . Thus we assume that F ∩ G = 1.
Let G = GΦ(F )/Φ(F ), and let F = F/Φ(F ). Since Φ(F ) char F , we obtain G can
act on F by conjugation. Clearly, G ∼
= G. In what follows, write G = W :H ∼
= W :H.
Assume first that r 6= p. If W acts trivially on F , then W induces the identity on F .
From [11, p.174, Theorem 1.4], it follows that W acts trivially on F . So W 6 CX (F ) 6
F , against our assumption. Thus W acts nontrivially on F .
Let M = F :G. Let
1 ✂ M1 ✂ M2 ✂ · · · ✂ Mm−1 ✂ Mm = F
be the normal series of F such that each Mi /Mi−1 is a minimal normal subgroup of
M/Mi−1 for 1 6 i 6 m, where M0 = 1.
It is straightforward to show that G normalizes CM1 (W ), and hence CM1 (W ) ✂ M.
By the minimality of M1 , we conclude that either CM1 (W ) = 1 or CM1 (W ) = M1 . If
CM1 (W ) = 1, so that by [13, Theorem 2.7] we have |M1 | = |CM1 (H)||H| . However, Γ is
a normal cover of ΓF , we conclude that |M1 | divides |H|, a contradiction occurs. Thus
CM1 (W ) = M1 , that is, W 6 CM (M1 ). Repeating the above argument for Mi /Mi−1 and
GMi−1 /Mi−1 , we obtain that [Mi , W ] ⊆ Mi−1 for 1 6 i 6 m. It follows that W stabilizes
the normal series of F , and hence W centralizes F , refer to [11, p.178, Theorem 3.2].
It implies that W induces the identity on F , and so W is trivial on F (see [11, p.174,
Theorem 1.4]), namely, W 6 CX (F ), again against our assumption.
Assume now that r = p. Then |F | 6 |W |. Denote by Σ the normal quotient graph
ΓF . If |F | = |W |, then W fixes each vertex of Σ, and hence W 6 F , which is impossible.
Thus |F | < |W |. Set X = X/F . Let FX be the Fitting subgroup of X. It is known that
FX is a p′ -group. Let G̃ = GF/F ∼
= G. Write G̃ = W̃ :H̃. For that case, we conclude
FX ∩ G̃ = 1. It follows that Γ is (X, 2)-arc-transitive, and so Σ is (X, 2)-arc-transitive.
By [26, Theorem 4.1], Σ is a cover of ΣFX or ΣFX = K2 . For the former, arguing as
above, we also obtain W̃ 6 FX , which contradicts FX ∩ G̃ = 1. For the latter, we obtain
p = 2, and |G| divides 25 36 . Since G is a primitive Frobenius group, we have G ∼
= Z22 :Z3 .
So F ∼

= Z2 , and thus F 6 Z(X), again a contradiction. Therefore, F = W .
For a group T and a prime q, by Tq we mean a Sylow q-subgroup of T .
Lemma 4.2. Use the notation defined above, rewrite Γ = (V Γ , EΓ ). Then we have:
(i) If p is an odd prime, then either G ∼
= D2p or W ✂ X;
(ii) If p = 2, then F = O2 (X), and
(a) W < F , ΓF is a cycle, and X = (F :H).O, where O = 1 or Z2 ;

12

LEI WANG

(b) W = F and W ✂ X.
Proof. Suppose that G ≇ D2p . We first claim that W 6 F and F ∩ H = 1. Suppose,
by way of contradiction, that G ∩ F = 1. Since X = GX1 , we obtain |F | divides |X1 |.
From Lemma 2.2, it follows that each prime divisor of |F | is either 2 or 3.
Let K be the kernel of X acting on ΓF . Then X/K 6 AutΓF . Recall that p is a
prime divisor of |W |. Suppose that p > 3. Let B be an orbit of F acting on V Γ . So |B|
divides |F |. If G ∩ K 6= 1, then W 6 K. Let △ be an orbit of W acting on V Γ , which
is contained in the block B. Then | △ | divides |B|, which is impossible. So G ∩ K = 1.
Let G = GK/K. Then G ∼
= G is a Frobenius group. Write G = W :H ∼
= G. If ΓK is a
∼
cycle, then d = 1, and so G = D2p , against our assumption. Thus Γ is a cover of ΓK ,
and then K = F . By Lemma 2.2, GB 6 H. In view of Lemma 4.1, F is a {2, 3}-group.
So is GB because |GB | = |F |. Note that ΓF is G-vertex-transitive. By [16, Lemma 2.1],
Γ (B)
Γ (B)
is a cyclic group of order 2i 3j for i, j > 1. However, GB
is
we conclude that GB
isomorphic to a subgroup of S4 , which is a contradiction. Thus p = 2 or 3.
If F = O2 (X), by Lemma 4.1, ΓF is a cycle. So is ΓK . By the assumption, we
conclude that p = 2, and W 6 K. It follows that K = W.K1 , where K1 is a 2-group.
Since K ✂ X, we have K 6 F , which contradicts the fact that F ∩ G = 1.
If F = O3 (X), then Γ is (X, 2)-arc-transitive. From Lemma 4.1, it follows that
ΓF = K2 . It implies that G ∼
= D6 , against our assumption.
If F = O2 (X) × O3 (X), then Γ is (X, 2)-arc-transitive. By [26, Theorem 4.1], Γ is a
cover of ΓF , ΓF = K2 or F is transitive on V Γ . Assume first that Γ is a cover of ΓF . Let
Y = AutΓF and X = X/F . Then X is a subgroup of Y . Recall that F ∩ G = 1, we have
|GB | = |F |, and hence GB is a Frobenius group of YB . Since ΓF is G-vertex-transitive,
ΓF (B)
ΓF (B)
= A4 , S3 or S4 , refer to [16, Lemma 2.1]. Assume GB
= A4
we conclude that GB
or S4 . Then ΓF is (G, 2)-arc-transitive. From Lemma 2.2, it follows that GB = A4 ,
which implies that |F | = 12. For this case, it is easy to show that W 6 CX (F ) 6 F ,
ΓF (B)
[1]
a contradiction occurs. Assume GB
= S3 . Let GB be the kernel of GB acting on
[1]
ΓF (B). Recall that GB is a Frobenius group, we conclude GB is a 3-group, and hence
O2 (X) ∼
= Z2 . It further implies that W is a 3-group. Let F be the Fitting subgroup of
X. Then F ∩ G = 1. It follows that F is a 2-group. Since |F.F | divides 24 36 , we have
|F | 6 8, and thus W 6 CX (F ), again a contradiction.
Assume now that ΓF = K2 . Then |V Γ | divides 25 36 . Since Γ is a cover of ΓF2 and ΓF3 ,
we conclude that |F2 | = |G22 | or |G2 |, and |F3 | = |G3 |. When p = 3, we have |F3 | = |W |.
Note that W is minimal and normal in G. Then W fixes each vertex of ΓF3 , and thus
W 6 F , which contradicts G ∩ F = 1. For p = 2, and |F2 | = |G2 |, we also obtain the
same contradiction. When p = 2 and |F2 | = |G22 | . Since G is a {2, 3}-group, we conclude
that G ∼
= Z22 :Z3 , and hence |F | = 6. For that case, we easily obtain that W 6 F , again
a contradiction. Similarly, we also exclude the case where F is transitive on V Γ .
Summarizing the above discussion, we obtain W 6 F . Since G is a Frobenius group,
we have F ∩ H = 1, as claimed. Next we process our analysis by several cases.
Case 1: If p > 3, then W ✂ X.
By the previous discussion, we have W 6 Fp . By Lemma 2.2, we conclude that
W = Fp , and hence W ✂ X.
Case 2: If p = 3, then W ✂ X.

EDGE-TRANSITIVE CAYLEY GRAPHS

13

If W < F3 , then Γ is (X, 2)-arc transitive. For this case, ΓF3 = K2 , and so G ∼
= D6 ,
contrary to our assumption. Thus W = F3 , and then W ✂ X.
Case 3: If p = 2, then either ΓF is a cycle, or W ✂ X.
Assume that W < F2 . Since F ∩ H = 1, we know that |F H| = |F ||H|. Note that
|F H| divides |X|, it follows that |F | divides |W ||X1|, and hence |F2′ | divides |X1 |. So
F2′ is a 3-group. If F2′ 6= 1, then Γ is (X, 2)-transitive, and thus it follows from [26,
Theorem 4.1] that Γ is a cover of ΓF2 , a contradiction. So F2′ = 1. By Lemma 4.1, ΓF
is a cycle because |H| is an odd number. Recall that B is a vertex of ΓF . Since Γ is a
Cayley graph of G, we obtain W is regular on B. So K = F = W K1 . Consequently,

X = (F :H).O where O ∼
= 1 or Z2 . This completes the proof of Lemma 4.2.
For the group G ∼
= D2p where p is an odd prime. Applying [17, Theorem 1.1], we have
the following conclusions.
Lemma 4.3. Let G ∼
= D2p , and let Γ be a connected edge-transitive tetravalent Cayley
graph of G. Then we have
(i) Γ is arc-regular, and AutΓ ∼
= D2p :Z4 ;
p
(ii) Γ ∼
= Z2 :D2p .
= Cp[2] , and AutΓ ∼
In the remainder of this section assume that G ∼
6= D2p with p an odd prime, unless
specified otherwise.
Recall that the socle of a finite group R (denoted by soc(R)) is the product of all
minimal normal subgroups of R. Evidently, soc(R) is a characteristic subgroup of R.
We next treat the case where W ✂ X, and the normal quotient ΓW is a cycle.
Lemma 4.4. Let K be the kernel of X acting on ΓW . Then the following statements
hold:
(i) X = ((W K1 ):H).O, and W ∼
= 1 or Z2 ;
= Zd2 , where O ∼
(ii) Assume p is an odd prime. Then we have
(1) G is normal in X, or
(2) G is not normal in X, and
(a) X = W :((K1 :H).O), and H does not centralise K1 where K1 ∼
= Zl2
∼
with 2 6 l 6 d, and O = 1 or Z2 ;
(b) there exist x1 , x2 , . . . , xd ∈ W and τ1 , τ2 , . . . , τd ∈ K1 such that W =
hx1 , . . . , xd i, hxi , τi i ∼
= D2p , and K1 = hτi i × CK1 (xi ) for 1 6 i 6 d;
(c) soc(X) = W × L, where L ∼
= 1 or Z2 ;
(d) H is imprimitive on W .
Proof. Let B be a vertex of ΓW . Since Γ is a Cayley graph of G, we obtain W is regular
on B. Thus K = W K1 , and K ∩ H = 1, where K1 is a 2-group. For that case, ΓW is
a connected Cayley graph. Recall that H is of order n, ΓW is a cycle of size n, say. It
follows that X/K ∼
= Zn or D2n . Further, Γ is X-arc-transitive if and only if X/K ∼
= D2n .
Assume first that p = 2. Since G 6 X and (|K|, |H|) = 1, we conclude that K:H 6 X.
Noting that X/K is isomorphic to a subgroup of D2n , it follows that X = (K:H).O with
O∼
= 1 or Z2 , so we have part (i).
Assume now that p is an odd prime. Furthermore, we assume that G is not normal
in X. If K1 = 1, then K = W , and hence G ✁ X, which contradicts the assumption.
Thus K1 6= 1.

14

LEI WANG

Let U = NX (K1 ). Since K1 5 X, it follows that U 6= X. Noticing that (|W |, |K1|) =
1, we obtain that NX/W (K/W ) = NX/W (W K1 /W ) = NX (K1 )W/W = UW/W . As
K/W ✂ X/W , implying that X = W U. Since W ✁ X, we have that W ∩ U ✁ U.
Furthermore, W ∩ U ✁ W since W is abelian. Then W ∩ U ✁ hU, W i = UW = X.
If W 6 U, then K = W K1 = W × K1 , and hence K1 ✁ X, which is impossible.
Thus W ∩ U < W . Furthermore, note that W is a minimal normal subgroup of X,
we obtain that W ∩ U = 1, and so K ∩ U = W K1 ∩ U = (W ∩ U)K1 = K1 . Now
X/K = UW/K = UK/K ∼
= U/(K ∩ U) = U/K1 , and hence U = (K1 .Ĥ).O, where
∼
∼
Ĥ = Zn and O = 1 or Z2 . Noting that G belongs to X and G = W :H, there exists
some H z 6 U such that G = W :H z is regular on V Γ , where z ∈ W . Without loss of
generality, we may assume that U = (K1 :H).O. Then X1 = K1 .O. Furthermore, since
G is not normal in X, we conclude that H does not centralise K1 .
Set Y = W :(K1 :H). Then Y has index at most 2 in X, and Γ is Y -edge-transitive. It
is obvious that Γ is not Y -arc-transitive. Hence Γ = Cos(Y, K1 , K1 {y, y −1}K1 ), where
y ∈ Y is such that hK1 , yi = Y and K1 ∩ K1y has index 2 in K1 . We may choose
y ∈ W :H = G such that H = hhi and y = hx where x ∈ W . Then K1 ∩ K1y = K1 ∩ K1x
has index 2 in K1 .
−1
We claim that K1 ∩ K1x = CK1 (x). For any σ ∈ K1 ∩ K1x , we have that σ x ∈ K1 ,
−1
−1
and hence σ −1 σ x ∈ K1 . Since x ∈ W and W ✁ W K1 , we obtain that σ −1 σ x =
−1
−1
(σ −1 xσ)x−1 ∈ W . So σ −1 σ x ∈ W ∩ K1 = 1, and then σ x = σ. Thus σ centralises x.
It follows that K1 ∩ K1x 6 CK1 (x). Clearly, CK1 (x) 6 K1 ∩ K1x . So CK1 (x) = K1 ∩ K1x
as required.
Recall that W is a minimal normal subgroup of X and X = W U, we obtain that
W = hxi × hxσ2 i × · · · × hxσd i where σi ∈ U. Then CK1 (xσi ) = (CK1 (x))σi < K1σi = K1 .
The intersection ∩di=1 CK1 (xσi ) 6 CK (W ) = W , and hence ∩di=1 CK1 (xσi ) = 1. Since each
CK1 (xσi ) is a maximal subgroup of K1 , the Frattini subgroup Φ(K1 ) 6 ∩di=1 CK1 (xσi ) =
1. Hence K1 is an elementary abelian 2-group, that is, K1 ∼
= Zl2 for some l > 1. Recall
σi
d
that ∩i=1 CK1 (x ) = 1, it follows that l 6 d. Assume that l = 1. Then K1 ∼
= Z2 and
so K1 6 CX (H). Thus G ✁ X, which contradicts the fact that G is not normal in X.
Hence l > 1, as in part (a).
Since CK1 (x) has index 2 in K1 , there exists some τ1 belonging to K1 such that K1 =
hτ1 i × CK1 (x). Set x1 = x−1 xτ1 . Then x1 6= 1, x1τ1 = x−1
1 and CK1 (x) = CK1 (x1 ), and
hence K1 = hτ1 i×CK1 (x1 ). Noticing that W is a minimal normal subgroup of X = W U,
there exist µ1 = 1, µ2, . . . , µd ∈ U such that W = hxµ1 i ×hxµ2 i ×· · ·×hxµd i. Let xi = xµ1 i
µ
∼
and τi = τ1µi , where i = 1, . . . , d. Then Zl−1
= (CK1 (x1 ))µi = CK1µi (x1 i ) = CK1 (xi ),
2
µi
= x−1
and K1 = K1µi = hτi i × CK1 (xi ). Furthermore, xτi i = x1τ1 µi = (x−1
1 )
i , and so
∼
hxi , τi i = D2p , as in part (b).
Recall that W ∼
= Zdp for an odd prime p. Since G is not normal in X, we conclude
that d > 1. Assume that X has a minimal normal subgroup L 6= W . Then W ∩ L = 1,
and LK/K ✁ X/K 6 D2n . It follows that either L 6 K, or L ∩ K = 1. If L 6 K,
then L is a 2-group. Since K1 is a Sylow 2-subgroup of K, there exists some w ∈ W
such that Lw 6 K1 . It follows that L ✂ K1 , and then L = 1, which is impossible. Hence
L ∩ K = 1, and so L 6 K1 H, and L ∼
= Z2 . Thus soc(X) = W × L, as in part (c).
By the above paragraph, we obtain that CX (W ) = W × L. Let X = X/L, and
G = GL/L ∼
= G. Let K 1 = K1 L/L ∼
= K1 . Write G = W :H. Since H normalizes K1 ,
we conclude that H normalizes K 1 . Note that K 1 H acts irreducibly and faithfully on

EDGE-TRANSITIVE CAYLEY GRAPHS

15

W . By Clifford’s Theorem, W can be decomposed as W = e(U1 ⊕ U2 ⊕ · · · ⊕ Ut ) such
that K 1 normalises each Ui , and all Ui are pairwise non-equivalent and irreducible with
respect to the action of K 1 . Recall that K1 is of order at least 4. It implies that t > 2.
Let Vi = eUi for each i. Rewrite W = V1 ⊕ V2 ⊕ · · · ⊕ Vt . Now H normalises K 1 , we
conclude that H preserves such decomposition. Since the maximal subgroup preserving
such decomposition in GL(W ) is GL(V1 ) ≀ St , implying that H belongs to GL(V1 ) ≀ St ,
forcing H is imprimitive on W . By [6, Proposition 2.8], we are done, as in part (d). 
We now determine the graph Γ for the case where W ✂ X, and Γ is a normal cover
of ΓW .
Lemma 4.5. Assume that Γ is a normal cover of ΓW . Then we have
(i) G is normal in X, or
(ii) G is not normal in X, and
(a) ΓW ∼
= C n2 [2] , and n ≡ 0 (mod 4);
(b) X = W :((NH).O), X1 6 N.O, N ∩ H ∼
= Z2 , and H normalizes N, but H
does not centralise N, where N ∼
= Zl2 with 2 6 l 6 n2 , and O ∼
= 1 or Z2 ;
(c) W is unique and minimal in X, and H is imprimitive on W ;
(d) X/(W N) ∼
= Z n2 or Dn , and Γ is X-arc-transitive if and only if X/(W N) ∼
=
Dn .
Proof. Let H = G/W with H = hhi. Since Γ is a Cayley graph of G, ΓW is a Cayley
graph of H. By [1, Theorem 1.2], either ΓW is a normal Cayley graph or ΓW = C n2 [2] ,
and 4 divides n. It follows that either G is normal in X or ΓW ∼
= C n2 [2] . Suppose that
∼
G is not normal in X. Then ΓW = C n2 [2] , as in part (a).
n
n
Clearly, AutΓW ∼
= Z22 :Dn . Let K ✂ AutΓW such that K ∼
= Z22 . Then we may write
AutΓW = K HO, nwhere O ∼
= Z2 . Let B be a vertex of ΓW , and 1 ∈ B. Choose M 6 K
−1
2
∼
and (AutΓW )B = M O.
such that M = Z2
Let X = X/W . Since X K/K ∼
= HO/(HO ∩ K) where O = 1 or O, we conclude
that X = (X ∩ K)HO, and Γ is X-arc-transitive if and only if O = O. Let K̂ = X ∩ K.
Then K̂ ✂ X, and K̂ ∩ H ∼
= Z2 . Thus X = W.((K̂H).O). Let K be the preimage of K̂,
under X → X/W . Note that G is a Frobenius group, we conclude that the order of W
is odd. By Hall’s Theorem, K = W :N, where N ∼
= Zl2 ,
= K̂. It further implies that N ∼
where l 6 n2 .
Now (|N|, |W |) = 1, we get X/W = NX/W (NW/W ) = NX (N)W/W , and so X =
W NX (N). Since H 6 X, it follows that H w belongs to NX (N) for some w ∈ W .
Without loss of generality, we may assume that H belongs to NX (N). Thus X =
W :((NH).O). By comparing the order, we conclude that N ∩ H ∼
= Z2 . If l = 1, then
NH = H, and so G ✂ X, which contradicts the assumption that G is not normal in X.
Then l > 2. Thus 2 6 l 6 n2 .
Set Y = W :(NH). Clearly, G is a subgroup of Y . Then Y = GY1 . Note that
|
||H||N |
, and |Y | = |G||Y1|, we obtain |Y1| = |N|N∩H|
= |N2 | . Let Y = Y /W .
|Y | = |W|H∩N
|
Since Y1 W/W = Y B , we have Y1 W/W 6 Y ∩ M 6 K̂, and hence Y1 W/W 6 NW/W .
Consequently, Y1 6 N w for some w ∈ W . For simplicity, we may assume that Y1 6 N.
For that case, Y1 has index 2 in N, and hence X1 6 N.O, as in part (b).

16

LEI WANG

Let C: = CN H (W ). Assume that C 6= 1. Clearly, C is normal in Y . Without loss of
generality, C is minimal in Y . Since H acts fixed-point-freely on W , we have C ∩ H = 1.
Let C be the image of C under X → X/W . Then C is normal and minimal in Y , and
hence C is a subgroup of K̂. It implies that C ∼
= Zℓ2 for some ℓ.
Q n2
Let K = i=1 hσi i. Note that H acts on K by permuting transitively on all σi .
Relabeling if necessary, we may assume h = σπ, where σ ∈ K, and π = (12 · · · n2 )−1 . Let
Q
Q
Q
K B = i6=1 hσi i. Choose B, B̃ ∈ Γ (B) such that K B = i6=2 hσi i and K B̃ = i6= n hσi i.
2
Pick some x ∈ C such that x = σi1 · · · σik , where i1 = 2, and 2 6 ij 6 ij+1 6 n2 . Then
n −i
k
2

i 6 K B ∩C. It follows that ΓW is C:H-edge-transitive Cayley graph of valency
hx, xh
4.
Let Z = (W × C):H. By the above paragraph, Γ is Z-edge-transitive. However, Γ is
not Z-arc-transitive. By Lemma 2.1, Γ = Cos(Z, Z1, Z1 {g, g −1}Z1 ). It is obvious that
Z1 ∼
= Zℓ2 . Now we may assume Z1 = hτ1 , τ2 , . . . , τℓ i. Write h = h(h1 , h2 )i. If τi = (1, c)
for some i, since C is minimal in Z, we conclude that Z1 = C, which is impossible. Thus
n
n
each τi has the form (1, c)h 2 or (u, c)h 2 , where u ∈ W \ {1}, and c ∈ C. Note that n
is divisible by 4. Then we may write g as (v, c′ )h, where v ∈ W , and c′ ∈ C. Assume
n
n
τi0 = (u0 , c)h 2 for some i0 , where u0 6= 1. Then all τi have the form (u0 , c′ )h 2 , where
c′ ∈ C. If τig = τj for some two i, j, it is easy to show that hZ1 , gi is a subgroup of C:hgi,
which is a contradiction. Thus all τig do not belong to Z1 , which leads to the valency
of Γ is greater than 4, again a contradiction. Similarly, we also exclude the other case.
Thus C = 1, namely, NH acts faithfully and irreducibly on W . That is to say, W is
the unique minimal normal subgroup of X. Arguing similarly as Lemma 4.4, we obtain
that H is imprimitive on W , as in part (c).
Clearly, ΓW N is a cycle. Since X/(W N) is transitive on V ΓW N , we conclude that
X/(W N) ∼
= Z n2 or Dn . For that case, Γ is arc-transitive if and only if X/(W N) ∼
= Dn ,
as in part (d).

With the above preparation, we are ready to embark on the proof of Theorem 1.1.
Proof of Theorem 1.1: If G ✁ X, then by Lemma 2.4, we have X1 6 D8 , as in
Theorem 1.1 (1). In what follows, we assume that G is not normal in X.
Assume first that p is an odd prime. By Lemmas 4.3-4.5, if W is not normal in X, we
p
obtain that Γ ∼
= Cp[2] , and AutΓ ∼
= Z2 :D2p , as in Theorem 1.1 (2). If W is normal in X,
and ΓW is a cycle, by Lemma 4.4, part (3) of Theorem 1.1 occurs. If W is normal in X,
and Γ is a cover of ΓW , from Lemma 4.5, it follows that part (4) of Theorem 1.1 holds.
Assume now that p = 2. By Lemmas 4.2 and 4.4, Theorem 1.1 (5) occurs.

5. Insoluble automorphism groups
Let G = W :H ∼
= Zdp :Zn be a primitive Frobenius group. Assume that Γ = (V Γ , EΓ )
is a connected X-edge-transitive tetravalent Cayley graph of G, where G 6 X 6 AutΓ .
In this section, we study the case where the automorphism group X is insoluble.
For a finite group R, the socle of R, denoted by soc(R), is the subgroup generated by
all minimal normal subgroups of R. The group R is said to be almost simple if its socle
soc(R) is a non-abelian simple group.
TABLE 2: Almost simple automorphism groups.

EDGE-TRANSITIVE CAYLEY GRAPHS

17

X
G
X1
2
PSL(3, 3):Z2
D26
Z3 :GL(2, 3)
PGL(2, 7)
D14
S4
PGL(2, 7)
Z7 :Z3
D16
PGL(2, 7)
Z7 :Z6
D8
PSL(2, 23) Z23 :Z11
S4
PSL(2, 11) Z11 :Z5
A4
PGL(2, 11) Z11 :Z5
S4
PGL(2, 11) Z11 :Z10
A4
We now determine the structure of insoluble group X. Denote by R(X) the maximal
solvable normal subgroup of X. We first treat the case where R(X) = 1.
Lemma 5.1. Let N be minimal and normal in X. If R(X) = 1, then CX (N) = 1.
Proof. Note that N is minimal in X. Since R(X) = 1, we have N ∼
= T k , where T is
a nonabelian simple group, and k is an integer. Clearly, Z(N) = 1. Let C: = CX (N).
Since N ✂ X, we have C ✂ X. Suppose that C 6= 1. By our assumption, C is insoluble.
Notice that N ∩ G ✂ G, we conclude that N ∩ G = 1 or W 6 N ∩ G. For the former,
|N| divides |X1 |, and so N is soluble, contrary to our assumption. Thus W 6 N ∩ G.
Similarly, W 6 C ∩ G. It follows that W 6 N ∩ C, a contradiction. Thus C = 1.

Lemma 5.2. If R(X) = 1, then X is almost simple.
Proof. By Frattini argument, we have that X = GXu , where u ∈ V Γ . By Lemma 2.2,
either Xu is a 2-group or |Xu | divides 24 36 . Let N be a minimal normal subgroup of
X. By our assumption, N is unsolvable. So N = T1 × T2 × · · · × Tk , where Ti ∼
= T is a
nonabelian simple group for any i. By [12], we obtain that T is one of the following:
PSL(2, q)(q > 3), PSL(3, q)(q < 9), PSL(4, 2), PSp(4, 3), PSU(3, 8), or M11 .
In what follows, suppose that k > 2. Since W is minimal and normal in G and
N ∩ G 6= 1, we conclude that W 6 N. Let r > 3 be a prime divisor of |T |. Since r
divides |X| and (|W |, |H|) = 1, we conclude that r divides either |W | or |H|. Suppose
first that r divides |W |. Then Ti ∩ W 6= 1 for each i. Let Wi = Ti ∩ W for 1 6 i 6 k.
Q
|N |
|Ti |
Assume that N ∩ H = 1. Then |W
divides |Xu |. So does ki=1 |W
. An inspection of
|
i|
the above simple groups shows T = A5 and k = 2. By Lemma 5.1, X . S5 ≀ Z2 . For this
|N |
case, |W
= 144. By Lemma 2.2, the only possibility is that X ∼
= A5 × A5 . Clearly, this
|
is a contradiction.
Thus N ∩ H 6= 1. Let H = N ∩ H. Since G is a Frobenius group, it follows that H
is a diagonal subgroup of N. Write H = hσ1 σ2 · · · σk i where hσi i ∼
= H, and σi ∈ Ti for
each i. Let Hi = hσi i where 1 6 i 6 k. Then Gi = Wi :Hi is a Frobenius group. For this
|
divides |Xu |.
case, we obtain that |W|N||H|
Let T = PSL(2, q) where q > 3. By [28, Theorem 6.25], we conclude that Gi 6
], Gi 6 D 2(q±1) , Gi 6 A5 , or Gi 6 PGL(2, r), where d = (2, q − 1), and r | q.
[q]:[ q−1
d
d

]. Then W :H 6 [q]k :[ q−1
], namely, N ∩ G 6 [q]k :[ q−1
]. Since
Suppose Gi 6 [q]:[ q−1
d
d
d
d|N |
|N:N ∩G| divides |Xu |, we conclude that qk (q−1) divides |Xu |. If q is even, then (q+1)k (q−

18

LEI WANG

1)k−1 | 24 36 , which is a contradiction because q+1 and q−1 are two distinct odd numbers.
)k−1 | 24 36 . By easy calculations, q = 5 and k = 2. For this
If q is odd, then (q + 1)k ( q−1
2
case, the only possibility is that G ∼
= S5 ≀Z2 . By Lemma 2.2, we have that
= Z25 :Z8 and X ∼
Xu ∼
= S3 ×S4 . Without loss of generality, we may assume that X = (S5 ×S5 ):hσi, where σ
permutes the first and second coordinates. Note that G∩Xu = 1. By MAGMA [2], there
is an element G (up to conjugate) in X, and there are two elements Xu (up to conjugate)
in X such that their intersections equal to 1. Choose w, h ∈ S5 such that o(w) = 5,
o(h) = 4 and w h = w 2. For this case, write G = W :H with W = h(w, 1), (1, w)i and
H = (h, 1)σ. Meanwhile, we choose Xu = h((123), 1), ((12), 1), (1, (1234), (1, (12))) or
h((123), 1), ((12)(45), 1), (1, (1234)), (1, (12))i. It is simple to show that, for the above
two choices, Xu belongs to different conjugate classes of X, and Xu ∩ G = 1. Choose
v ∈ Γ (u). By Lemma 2.1, write Γ = Cos(X, Xu , Xu oXu ), where o ∈ NX (Xuv ) \ Xu
and o2 ∈ Xuv . Since Γ is X-arc-transitive graph, we conclude |Xu :Xuv | = 4, and hence
|Xuv | = 36. In such two cases, again by MAGMA [2], there is no o ∈ NX (Xuv ) such that
hXu , oi = X, namely, Γ is not connected. Suppose that Gi 6 D 2(q±1) or Gi 6 A5 where
d
1 6 i 6 k. Arguing similarly as above, we conclude that q = 4, k = 2, and Gi ∼
= D10
for each i. For this case, the only possibility is that G ∼
= Z25 :Z8 and X ∼
= S5 ≀ Z2 , which
is impossible by the above discussion. Thus Gi 6 PGL(2, r). Write q = pn where p
is a prime, and n is a natural number. Then r = pm , where m | n. Let n = ms with
s > 2. Note that |N:N ∩ G| divides |Xu |. So does |T :PGL(2, r)|k . It follows that
1 m(s−1)
p
(Σsi=1 pm(s−i) )(Σsj=1 p2m(s−j) ) divides 24 36 . By easy calculations, there are no p, n
2
and m satisfying the above equation. Thus this case is excluded.
Let T = PSL(3, q) with q < 9. Assume that q = 2. By Atlas [4], we have Gi ∼
= Z7 :Z3
|N |
where 1 6 i 6 k. Clearly, |W ||H| does not divide |Xu |. Similarly, we can exclude the
other cases. Let T = PSL(4, 2). Again by Atlas [4], we conclude that 35 6 | |Gi | where
1 6 i 6 k. It implies that 5 or 7 divides |Xu |, which is impossible. Arguing similarly as
above, we can conclude T can not equal to other simple groups.
Suppose now that r divides |H|. If r 6 | |Hi |, then r divides |Xu |, which is impossible.
|
Thus r divides |Hi | for each i. Recall that |W|N||H|
divides |Xu |, we conclude that r divides
|Xu |, again a contradiction. Therefore, X is almost simple.

Lemma 5.3. Let X be an almost simple group with soc(X) = PSL(2, 7). Assume that
Γ is not (X, 2)-arc-transitive. Then either X = PGL(2, 7), X1 = D8 and G = Z7 :Z6 , or
X = PGL(2, 7), X1 = D16 and G = Z7 :Z3 .
Proof. By Frattini argument, we have that X = GXu , where u ∈ V Γ . Since Γ is not
(X, 2)-arc-transitive, it follows that Xu is a 2-group. Note that G is a Frobenius group.
Checking the subgroups of PGL(2, 7) in the Atlas [4], we obtain G = Z7 :Z6 , or Z7 :Z3 .
Denote by T the socle soc(X). Assume first that G = Z7 :Z6 . Since Z7 :Z3 is maximal
in T , we have X = PGL(2, 7). It follows that Xu ∼
= D8 . Assume now that G = Z7 :Z3 .
Furthermore, assume that X = PSL(2, 7). Then Γ is a connected tetravalent X-edgetransitive Cayley graph, and Xu ∼
= D8 is a Sylow 2-subgroup of X. Choose v ∈ Γ (u).
Then |Xu :Xuv | = 2 or 4. Since Γ is vertex transitive graph, we write Γ as coset graph
Cos(X, H, H{x, x−1 }H), where H = Xu ∼
= D8 , and x ∈ X is such that hH, xi = X; in
particular, x ∈
/ H.

EDGE-TRANSITIVE CAYLEY GRAPHS

19

Suppose that |Xu :Xuv | = 4. Then Γ is X-arc-transitive. By Lemma 2.1, we choose x
such that (u, v)x = (v, u), resulting x ∈ NX (Xuv ) ∼
= D8 . In particular, NX (Xuv ) 6= Xu .
Then |NXu (Xuv )| = 4. Hence NXu (Xuv ) is normal in both NX (Xuv ) and Xu , and
so NXu (Xuv ) ✂ hXu , NX (Xuv )i. Checking the subgroups of PSL(2, 7), we obtain that
hXu , NX (Xuv )i ∼
= S4 , which contradicts the fact hXu , xi = X.
Suppose that |Xu :Xuv | = 2. Then |Xuv | = 4, and hence Xuv ✂ M = hXu , Xv i, so
M ∼
= S4 . By Lemma 2.1, we may choose x such that ux = v. It is clear that Xu and
Xv are two Sylow 2-subgroup of M, there exists some y ∈ M such that Xuy = Xv = Xux .
Hence xy −1 ∈ NX (Xu ) = Xu , so hXu , xi 6 hXu , xy −1 , yi 6 M, again a contradiction.
Thus X = PGL(2, 7).

Lemma 5.2 tells us that if X is insoluble and R(X) = 1, then X is almost simple.
The next two lemmas determine Γ for the case where X is almost simple.
Lemma 5.4. If X is almost simple, then, for u ∈ V Γ , the triple (X, G, Xu ) is one of
the triples listed in Table 2.
Proof. By Frattini argument, we have that X = GXu . Since Γ is a connected Cayley
graph of valency 4, we obtain that Xu is a {2, 3}-group. It follows that X is decomposed
as a product of two solvable subgroups. Denote by T the socle soc(X). By [12], we
conclude that T appears in Lemma 5.2. In what follows, we process our analysis by two
cases.
Case 1: Assume that Γ is (X, 2)-arc-transitive. By Lemma 2.2, |Xu | divides 24 36 .
Assume first that T = PSL(2, q) with q > 3. If q = 5, then G = Z5 and Xu = A4
or S4 , a contradiction. If q = 7, by the Atlas [4], we conclude that X = PGL(2, 7),
G = D14 , and Xu = S4 . Suppose q = 11. Checking the subgroups of PGL(2, 11) in the
Atlas [4], we know that X = PSL(2, 11).O, G = Z11 :(Z5 × O1 ), and Xu = A4 .O2 , where
O = Z2 , and O1 O2 = O, (refer to [18, Theorem 1.5]). Suppose that q = 23. By [17,
Theorem 1.1], X = PSL(2, 23), G = Z23 :Z11 and Xu = S4 .
In what follows, we assume that q 6= 4, 5, 7, 11, 23. Then, by [20, Proposition 4.1],
interchanging G and Xu if necessary, G∩T 6 D2(q+1)/d and [q]✂T ∩Xu 6 [q]:[ q−1
] where
d
].
d = (2, q − 1). Let Tu = T ∩ Xu . Assume that G ∩ T 6 D2(q+1)/d , and [q] ✂ Tu 6 [q]:[ q−1
d
q(q−1)
Then 2 divides |T :T ∩ G|. Since |T :T ∩ G| = |T G:G| divides |Xu |, we conclude that
Γ (u) ∼
q(q−1)
| 24 36 . By easy calculations, q = 9. It follows that Tu
= Z3 or S3 . However,
2
Γ (u)
Γ (u)
Γ (u)
Γ (u) ∼
is 2Tu
✂ Xu
6 S4 , and so Xu
= S3 , which is a contradiction because Xu
Γ (u) ∼
q−1
transitive on Γ (u). Thus [q] 6 T ∩ G 6 [q]:[ d ] and Tu 6 D2(q+1)/d . Then Tu
= S3
Γ (u) ∼
or Z3 , and so Xu = S3 , again a contradiction.
Assume now that T = PSL(3, q) (q < 9), PSp(4, 3), PSL(4, 2), PSU(3, 8) or M11 .
It is clear that T ∩ G 6= 1. Then W 6 T . Suppose that T = PSp(4, 3). Using [20,
Proposition 4.1], T ∩ G = Z42 :Z5 and T ∩ Xu = 31+2
+ :2A4 . For that case, it is clear that
G ∩ Xu 6= 1, a contradiction. Suppose that T = M11 . Then X = M11 . Again by [20,
Proposition 4.1], G = Z11 :Z5 , and Xu = M9 .2, again a contradiction, refer to Lemma 2.2.
Suppose that T = PSL(3, 4). By Atlas [4], we conclude that 35 6 | |T ∩ G|. It implies
that 5 or 7 divides |Xu |, which is impossible. Similarly, T does not equal PSL(3, q) with
5 6 q 6 8, PSL(4, 2), or PSU(3, 8). If T = PSL(3, 3), we obtain that X = PSL(3, 3):Z2 ,
G = D26 and Xu = Z23 :GL(2, 3), refer to [20, Proposition 4.1].

20

LEI WANG

Case 2: Assume that Γ is not (X, 2)-arc-transitive. By Case 1, we only need deal
with the case where T = PSL(2, q) with q > 3. Since Γ is not (X, 2)-arc-transitive, Xu is
a 2-group. Since X = GXu and G ∩ Xu = 1, G contains a 2′ -Hall subgroup of X. Then
G ∩ T contains a 2′ -Hall subgroup of T . By Lemma 2.5, we have that T = PSL(2, q),
T ∩ G = Zq :Z q−1 , and Tu = Dq+1 , where q = 2e − 1 is a prime (see [20, Proposition 4.1]).
2
Suppose that e = 3. Then q = 7. By Lemma 5.3, the statement follows. In what follows,
we assume that e > 5.
Note that Zq :Z q−1 is maximal in T . By [19, Theorem 1.1], we conclude that G =
2
Zq :Zq−1 , and hence X = PGL(2, q), and Xu = Tu = Dq+1. Let v ∈ Γ (u). By Lemma 2.1,
Tuv has index 2 or 4 in both Tu and Tv . Since e > 5, Tuv contains a subgroup C ∼
= Z4 .
It is easily shown that C is normal in both Tu and Tv , and so C ✁ L: = hTu , Tv i. In view
of [28, p.417], each Sylow 2-subgroup of T is maximal in T . Note that Tu is a Sylow
2-subgroup of T , it follows that L = Tu = Tv . By the connectedness of Γ , we obtain L
fixes each vertex of Γ , which is impossible. This completes the proof of Lemma 5.4. 
By [17, Theorem 1.1], we have the following lemma.
Lemma 5.5. Let X be in Table 2, and let T = soc(X). Then we have:
(1) if T = PSL(3, 3), then Γ is isomorphic to the graph given in Example 3.13;
(2) if T = PSL(2, 7), then Γ is isomorphic to a graph given in Examples 3.13, 3.14
and 3.15;
(3) if T = PSL(2, 23), then Γ is isomorphic to the graph given in Example 3.16;
(4) if T = PSL(2, 11), then Γ is isomorphic to a graph given in Examples 3.16-3.17.
We now begin with treating the case where R(X) 6= 1.
Lemma 5.6. If R(X) ∩ G = 1, then G = Z11 :Z10 and X = PGL(2, 11) × Z2 .
Proof. Let X 1 = X1 R(X)/R(X), G = GR(X)/R(X), and X = X/R(X). Since
X = GX1 , we conclude that X = G X 1 . Since R(X) ∩ G = 1, implying that G ∼
=G
is a Frobenius group. Since X is insoluble, Γ is a cover of ΓR(X) , refer to Lemma 2.3.
Let B be a vertex of ΓR(X) , where 1 ∈ B. By Frattini argument, X = G X B . Clearly,
X 1 6 X B , and G ∩ X B 6= 1.
Assume that X is not almost simple. Let N be a minimal normal subgroup of X.
Arguing similarly as Lemma 5.1, we obtain that CX (N) = 1. Suppose that soc(X) =
A5 × A5 . By the definition of G, we conclude that G ∼
= Z25 :Z8 . For this case, X =
((A5 ×A5 ):Z2 ):Z2 is a subgroup of S5 ≀S2 , and X B ∼
= S3 ×S4 . It implies that G∩X B ∼
= Z2 .
By MAGMA [2], there are two elements G (up to conjugate) in X, and there is an
element X B (up to conjugate) in X such that their intersections are isomorphic to
Z2 . Choose B ∈ Γ (B). By Lemma 2.1, write ΓR(X) = Cos(X, X B , X B oX B ), where
o ∈ NX (X BB ) \ X B and o2 ∈ X BB . Since Γ is X-arc-transitive graph, we conclude
|X B :X BB | = 4, and hence |XBB | = 36. Again by MAGMA [2], for each choice of G and
X B , there is no o ∈ NX (X BB ) such that hX B , oi = X, namely, ΓR(X) is not connected.
For other cases, arguing similarly as Lemma 5.2, we exclude these possibilities. Thus X
is almost simple.
Let T = soc(X). By [12], we obtain that T is one of the following:
PSL(2, q)(q > 3), PSL(3, q)(q < 9), PSL(4, 2), PSp(4, 3), PSU(3, 8), or M11 .

EDGE-TRANSITIVE CAYLEY GRAPHS

21

Suppose first that T = PSL(2, q) where q = 5, 7, 11, 23. If q = 5, the only possibility is
that G ∼
= Z5 :Z4 , refer to [17, Theorem 1.1]. For this case, Γ is a Cayley graph of order 20,
by [24, Theorem 5.3], G is normal in X, which is a contradiction. If q = 7, 11 or 23, then
|G| is square-free, refer to Atlas [4]. Again by [17, Theorem 1.1], X = PGL(2, 11) × Z2 ,
G = Z11 :Z10 , X1 = S4 and Γ is isomorphic to the graph given in Example 3.17. Arguing
similarly as Lemma 5.4 with X = G X B in the place X = GX1 , we can exclude other
cases. This completes the proof.

Lemma 5.7. If R(X) ∩ G 6= 1, then we have:
(a) G ∼
= A5 ;
= Z4p :Z5 , X = W.X, and ΓW = K5 , where soc(X) ∼
4
∼
(b) G = Zp :Z10 , X = W.(X × Z2 ), and ΓW = K5,5 − 5K2 , where soc(X) ∼
= A5 .
Proof. Let R = R(X) ∩ G. Assume that R(X) ∩ G 6= 1. From the minimality of W
in G, it follows that R > W . Since X/R(X) is insoluble, by Lemma 2.3, Γ is a normal
cover of ΓR(X) . Hence GR(X)/R(X) 6 AutΓR(X) .
We claim that R = R(X). Let H = HR(X)/R(X). Since Γ is a Cayley graph of G,
implying that ΓR(X) is a connected Cayley graph of H. It follows that |R(X)||H| = |G|,
and hence |R(X)| = |W ||R(X) ∩ H|. So R(X) 6 G, and then R = R(X), as claimed.
Furthermore, it implies that W is a normal subgroup of X. By [1, Theorem 1.2], we
obtain that either ΓW ∼
= K5 and H ∼
= Z5 or ΓW ∼
= K5,5 − 5K2 and H ∼
= Z10 . In the
∼
former case, we easily obtain AutΓW = S5 , and in the latter case, AutΓW ∼
= S5 × Z2 .
Let X = X/W . Since Γ is a cover of ΓW , it follows that X is a subgroup of AutΓW .
Assume first that ΓW ∼
= K5 . Notice that X is insoluble, we conclude that soc(X) ∼
= A5 .
Assume now that ΓW ∼
= K5,5 − 5K2. Since H ∼
= Z10 , and X is insoluble, we obtain
X∼
= L × Z2 where soc(L) ∼
= A5 .
Recall that H is irreducible on W , we conclude that d = 4, refer to [33, Lemma 3.1].

Hence G ∼
= Z4p :Z5 or Z4p :Z10 .
The assertion of Theorem 1.2 follows from Lemmas 5.2-5.7.
6. Half-transitive graphs
In the last section, we aim to prove Theorem 1.3.
Let p be an odd prime, and d > 1 be an odd integer. Let n be a primitive divisor of
pd − 1, and let
G = W :hhi = Zdp :Zn < AGL(1, pd ).
Construction 6.1. Let i be coprime to n such that 1 6 i 6 n − 1, and let a ∈ W \{1}.
Let

Si = {ahi , a−1 hi , (ahi )−1 , (a−1 hi )−1 },
Γi = Cay(G, Si ).
Proof of Theorem 1.3: Let X = AutΓ . Let Γ = Cay(G, S) be connected, edgetransitive and of valency 4. Note that hhi is primitive on W , d > 1 is odd, and p is an
odd prime. By Theorem 1.1 and Theorem 1.2, we obtain that G is normal in X. In
view of [10, Lemma 2.1], we have X = G:Aut(G, S).
By Lemma 2.4, we have that X1 = Aut(G, S) 6 D8 . By [8, Proposition 12.10],
Aut(G) ∼
= Zdp :(Zpd −1 :Zd ). Since d and p are odd, Aut(G) has a cyclic Sylow 2-subgroup.

22

LEI WANG

It follows that X1 = hσi ∼
= Z4 or Z2 . Thus σ fixes an element of G of order n, say f ∈ G
such that o(f ) = n and f σ = f . Then G = W :hf i, and X = G:hσi = (W :hf i):hσi.
Moreover, it implies that all involutions of Aut(G) are conjugate. Recall that G is a
Frobenius group, every involution of Aut(G) inverts all elements of W .
Since Γ is connected, hSi = G and Aut(G, S) is faithful on S. Assume that S contains
an involution. Recall that Γ is X-edge-transitive, we conclude that S consists of involutions. By the proof of Lemma 2.4, G ∼
= D2p , against our assumption. Hence S does not
contain an involution. For that case, we may write S = {x, x−1 , y, y −1} such that either
o(σ) = 2 and (x, y)σ = (y, x), or o(σ) = 4 and (x, y)σ = (y, x−1 ), refer to [27, Proposition 1]. Now x = af i , where a ∈ W and i is an integer. Suppose that o(σ) = 4. Then
2
2
y = xσ = (af i )σ = aσ f i , and a′ f −i = f −i a−1 = (af i )−1 = x−1 = xσ = aσ f i = a−1 f i .
It follows that f 2i = 1, and hence f i has order 1 or 2. If f i = 1, then x = a, and
y = xσ = aσ , belonging to W , and so hSi 6 W < G, which is a contradiction.
Thus f i has order 2. Note that f i inverts each element of W , we conclude that x
has order 2, again a contradiction. Thus σ is an involution, and so (x, y)σ = (y, x),
x = af i , and y = xσ = aσ f i = a−1 f i . In particular, Γ is not arc-transitive, and
S = {af i , a−1 f i , (af i )−1 , (a−1 f i )−1 }.
Since f ∈ G has order n, it follows from Hall’s theorem that there exists b ∈ W such
−1
−1
that hb ∈ hf i. So f b = hr for some r. Let τ = σ b . Then τ centralizes hhi, and X =
−1
G:hτ i. Moreover, S b = {ahir , a−1 hir , (ahir )−1 , (a−1 hir )−1 }. Let ir ≡ j (mod n), and
1 6 j 6 n − 1. Then Sj : = {ahj , a−1 hj , (ahj )−1 , (a−1 hj )−1 }. Note that Γ ∼
= Cay(G, Sj )
is connected. By [19, Lemma 6.2], (j, n) = 1, Γi ∼
= Γn−i , and if pk i ≡ ±j (mod n) for
some k, then Γi ∼

= Γj . This completes the proof of Theorem 1.3.
References
[1] Y. G. Baik, Y. Q. Feng, H. S. Sim, M. Y. Xu, On the normality of Cayley graphs of abelian groups,
Algebra Colloq. 5 (1998) 297-304.
[2] W. Bosma, C. Cannon, C. Playoust, The MAGMA algebra system I: The user language, J. Symbolic
Comput. 24 (1997) 235-265.
[3] K. Boštjan, Arc-transitive elementary abelian covers of the complete graph K5 , Linear Algebra
Appl. 433 (2010) 1909-1921.
[4] J. H. Conway, R. T. Curtis, S. P. Norton, R. A. Parker, P. Wilson, Atlas of finite Groups, Oxford
University Press, Oxford, 1985.
[5] B. P. Corr, C. E. Praeger, Normal edge-transitive Cayley graphs of Frobenius groups, J. Algebraic
Combin. 42 (2015) 803-827.
[6] A. S. Detinko, D. L. Flannery, Nilpotent primitive linear groups over finite fields, Comm. Algebra.
33 (2005) 497-505.
[7] J. D. Dixon, B. Mortimer, Permutation Groups, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1996.
[8] K. Doerk, T. Hawkes, Finite Soluble Groups, Walter de Gruyter Co., Berlin, 1992.
[9] X. G. Fang, C. H. Li, M. Y. Xu, On edge-transitive Cayley graphs of valency four, European J.
Combin. 25 (2004) 1107-1116.
[10] C. D. Godsil, On the full automorphism group of a graph, Combinatorica. 1 (1981) 243-256.
[11] D. Gorenstein, Finite Groups, Harper and Row, 1968.
[12] L. S. Kazarin, Groups that can be represented as a product of two solvable subgroups, Comm.
Algebra. 14 (1986) 1001-1066.
[13] E. I. Khukhro, N. Yu. Makarenko, P. Shumyatsky, Frobenius groups of automorphisms and their
fixed points, Forum Math. 26 (2014) 73-112.
[14] C. H. Li, The finite vertex-primitive and vertex-biprimitive s-transitive graphs for s > 4, Trans.
Amer. Math. Soc. 353 (2001) 3511-3529.

EDGE-TRANSITIVE CAYLEY GRAPHS

23

[15] C. H. Li, Finite s-arc transitive Cayley graphs and flag-transitive projective planes, Proc. Amer.
Math. Soc. 133 (2005) 31-41.
[16] C. H. Li, Semiregular automorphisms of cubic vertex transitive graphs, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc.
136 (2008) 1905-1910.
[17] C. H. Li, Z. Liu, Z. P. Lu, The edge-transitive tetravalent Cayley graphs of square-free order,
Discrete Math. 312 (2012) 1952-1967.
[18] C. H. Li, Z. P. Lu, D. Marušič, On primitive permutation groups with small suborbits and their
orbital graphs, J. Algebra. 279 (2004) 749-770.
[19] C. H. Li, Z. P. Lu, H. Zhang, Tetravalent edge-transitive Cayley graphs with odd number of vertices,
J. Combin. Theory Ser. B. 96 (2006) 164-181.
[20] C. H. Li, B. Z. Xia, Factorizations of almost simple groups with a solvable factor, and Cayley
graphs, arXiv:1408.0350v3 [].
[21] D. Marušič, Recent developments in half-transitive graphs, Discrete Math. 182 (1998) 219-231.
[22] D. Marušič, R. Nedela, On the point stabilizers of transitive groups with non-self-paired suborbits
of length 2, J. Group Theory. 4 (2001) 19-43.
[23] D. Marušič, R. Nedela, Maps and half-transitive graphs of valency 4, European J.Combin. 19
(1998) 345-354.
[24] J. M. Pan, Y. Liu, Z. H. Huang, C. L. Liu, Tetravalent edge-transitive graphs of order p2 q, Sci.
China Math. 57(2) (2014) 293-302.
[25] P. Potočnik, A list of 4-valent 2-arc-transitive graphs and finite faithful amalgams of index (4, 2),
European J. Combin. 30 (2009) 1323-1336.
[26] C. E. Praeger, An O’Nan-Scott theorem for finite quasiprimitive permutation groups and an application to 2-arc transitive graphs, J. London. Math. Soc. 47 (1992) 227-239.
[27] C. E. Praeger, Finite normal edge-transitive Cayley graphs, Bull. Aust. Math. Soc. 60(2) (1999)
207-220.
[28] M. Suzuki, Group Theory I, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, New York, 1982.
[29] X. Y. Wang, Y. Q. Feng, Tetravalent half-edge-transitive graphs and non-normal Cayley graphs,
J. Graph Theory. 70(2) (2012) 197-213.
[30] R. M. Weiss, s-transitive graphs, Algebraic Methods in Graph Theory. 2 (1981) 827-847.
[31] M. Y. Xu, Half-transitive graphs of prime-cube order, J. Algebraic Combin. 1(3) (1992) 275-282.
[32] M. Y. Xu, Automorphism groups and isomorphisms of Cayley digraphs, Discrete Math. 182 (1998)
309-319.
[33] W. Q. Xu, S. F. Du, J. H. Kwak, M. Y. Xu, 2-Arc-transitive metacyclic covers of complte graphs,
J. Combin. Theory Ser. B. 111 (2015) 54-74.
Beijing International Center for Mathematical Research, Peking University, Beijing, 100871, P. R. China
E-mail address: wanglei-2468@163.com(Lei Wang)

