TORSION LENGTH AND FINITELY PRESENTED GROUPS

arXiv:1604.03788v2 [] 31 Aug 2016

MAURICE CHIODO AND RISHI VYAS
Abstract. We show that a construction by Aanderaa and Cohen used in
their proof of the Higman Embedding Theorem preserves torsion length.
We give a new construction showing that every ﬁnitely presented group
is the quotient of some C ′ (1/6) ﬁnitely presented group by the subgroup
generated by its torsion elements. We use these results to show there is a
ﬁnitely presented group with inﬁnite torsion length which is C ′ (1/6), and
thus word-hyperbolic and virtually torsion-free.

1. Introduction
It is well know that the set of torsion elements in a group G, Tor(G), is not
necessarily a subgroup. One can, of course, consider the (normal) subgroup
Tor1 (G) generated by the set of torsion elements in G, but then other problems
emerge: the quotient of G by this subgroup is not necessarily torsion-free. This
process can be iterated, however, to give rise to an ascending chain of normal
subgroups of G: the ordinal for which this chain stabilises is called the torsion
length of G and denoted by TorLen(G). This notion first appeared in [7],
where we began a preliminary investigation of this invariant. The definition is
repeated as Definition 2.3 below.
One of the main results of [7] was the following theorem:
Theorem. [7, Theorem 3.3] There is a family of finitely presented groups
{Pn }n∈N such that:
1. Pn+1 / Tor1 (Pn+1 ) ≅ Pn ,
2. TorLen(Pn ) = n.
We then showed that a construction used to prove a classic embedding theorem of Higman, Neumann and Neumann (every countable group embeds into a
2 generator group) preserves torsion length. This fact, used with the theorem
mentioned above, allowed us to arrive at the following result:
2000 AMS Classification: 20E06, 20F05, 20F06, 20F10, 20F65.
Keywords: Torsion, torsion length, Higman Embedding Theorem.
The ﬁrst author was partially supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation grant FN
PP00P2-144681/1. This work is part of a project that has received funding from the European
Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Sklodowska-Curie
grant agreement No. 659102.
The second author was partially supported by Israel Science Foundation grants 170/12
and 253/13, the Center for Advanced Studies in Mathematics at Ben-Gurion University of the
Negev, and by the Israel Council for Higher Education.
Date: April 3, 2018.
1

2

MAURICE CHIODO AND RISHI VYAS

Theorem. [7, Theorem 3.10] There exists a 2-generator recursively presented
group Q for which TorLen(Q) = ω.
This paper aims to extend [7, Theorem 3.10]. In Theorem 5.7, we prove the
following:
Theorem. There exists a finitely presented group F with TorLen(F ) = ω.
We do this by showing that a particular construction used in a proof of the
Higman Embedding Theorem preserves this invariant.
Let us be more precise. The Higman Embedding Theorem [10] states that a
finitely generated, recursively presented group embeds into a finitely presented
group. There are many proofs of this result, but these arguments share a common theme: they are all constructive. One must begin with a finite generating
set for the group, and an algorithm that computes its relations, and then explicitly build a finitely presented group from this data. In this paper we pick
a particular construction, due to Aanderaa and Cohen [1, 2] and presented in
[8], examine it in detail, and conclude that the torsion length of the finitely
presented group so constructed is the same as that of the recursively presented
group that we started with.
The existence of a finitely presented group with infinite torsion length is then
an immediate consequence of [7, Theorem 3.10]: take the recursively presented
group constructed in loc. cit. and apply the Aanderaa-Cohen construction.
The final section of this paper is concerned with improving Theorem 5.7.
The following result appears as Theorem 6.9.
Theorem. There exists a finitely presented word-hyperbolic virtually special
group W with TorLen(W ) = ω. In particular, W is virtually torsion-free.
This is done using small cancellation theory. Of particular importance is the
following theorem, whose content is contained in Proposition 6.4 and Theorem
6.7; this result is also of independent interest. Combined with Theorem 5.7, it
proves Theorem 6.9.
Theorem. Let P = ⟨x1 , . . . , xm ∣ r1 , . . . , rn ⟩ be a finite presentation with all
relators freely reduced, cyclically reduced, and distinct. For any k ∈ N, define
the finite presentation Ptk ∶= ⟨x1 , . . . , xm , t ∣ (r1 t)k , . . . , (rn t)k , tk ⟩. Then Ptk
presents a C ′ (2/k) small cancellation group. Moreover, for k ≥ 12, we have
Ptk / Tor1 (Ptk ) ≅ P and so TorLen(Ptk ) = TorLen(P ) + 1.
A part of the above theorem appeared in the work [4] of Bumagin and Wise;
see Remark 6.10.
1.1. Notation. A presentation P = ⟨X∣R⟩ is said to be a recursive presentation
if X is a finite set and R is a recursive enumeration of relations. A group G is
said to be finitely (respectively, recursively) presentable if it can be presented by
a finite (respectively, recursive) presentation. If P, Q are group presentations
denote their free product presentation by P ∗ Q: this is given by taking the
disjoint union of their generators and relations. If g1 , . . . , gn are elements of a
group G, we write ⟨g1 , . . . , gn ⟩ for the subgroup in G generated by these elements

TORSION LENGTH AND FINITELY PRESENTED GROUPS

3

and ⟪g1 , . . . , gn ⟫G for the normal closure of these elements in G. Let ω denote
the smallest infinite ordinal. Let ∣X∣ denote the cardinality of a set X. If X
is a set, let X −1 be a set of the same cardinality as and disjoint from X along
with a fixed bijection ∗−1 ∶ X → X −1 . Write X ∗ for the set of finite reduced
words on X ∪ X −1 .
1.2. Acknowledgements. We thank Henry Wilton, Mark Hagen and Ben
Barrett for their assistance in preparing Section 6, and Andrew Glass for general
comments and suggestions.
2. Torn (G), HNN extensions and Britton’s lemma
Definition 2.1. [6, Definition 3.1] Given a group G, inductively define Torn (G)
as follows:
Tor0 (G) ∶= {e},
Torn+1 (G) ∶= ⟪ {g ∈ G ∣ g Torn (G) ∈ Tor (G/ Torn (G))} ⟫G ,
Torω (G) ∶= ⋃ Torn (G).
n∈N

Observe that Tori+1 (G)/ Tori (G) = Tor1 (G/ Tori (G)).
Lemma 2.2. [6, Corollary 3.4] G/ Torω (G) is torsion-free. Moreover, if f ∶
G → H is a group homomorphism from G to a torsion-free group H, then
Torω (G) ≤ ker(f ), and so f factors through G/ Torω (G).
Definition 2.3. [7, Definition 2.5] The Torsion Length of G, TorLen(G), is the
smallest ordinal n such that Torn (G) = Torω (G).
HNN extensions play a critical role in this paper; we briefly introduce them
here.
Definition 2.4. Let G be a group, and suppose there are isomorphisms ϕi ∶
Ai → Bi for 1 ≤ i ≤ n, where Ai and Bi are subgroups of G. Define the HNN
extension G∗ϕ1 ,...,ϕn with stable letters t1 , . . . , tn by
−1
G∗Fn
G∗ϕ1 ,...,ϕn ∶= (G ∗ Fn )/⟪{t−1
,
i ati ϕi (a ) ∣ a ∈ Ai , 1 ≤ i ≤ n}⟫

where {t1 , . . . , tn } is a free generating set of Fn .
If ϕi = idAi for all 1 ≤ i ≤ n, we write G∗A1 ,...,An for G ∗ϕ1 ,...,ϕn .
Definition 2.5. Let G∗ϕ1 ,...,ϕn be an HNN extension with stable letters t1 , . . . , tn .
−1
Then a ti -pinch is a word of the form t−1
i gti where g ∈ Ai or ti gti where g ∈ Bi .
A word w is said to be reduced if no subword of w is a ti -pinch for any i.
Theorem 2.6 (Britton’s lemma, [11, Theorem 11.81]). Let H = G∗ϕ1 ,...,ϕn be
an HNN extension with stable letters t1 , . . . , tn , and let w be a word in H. If
w = e in H, then w contains a ti -pinch as a subword, for some i.
Corollary 2.7. Let G∗ϕ1 ,...,ϕn be an HNN extension. Then G embeds into
G∗ϕ1 ,...,ϕn .
Given a group G we write ⟨G; X∣R⟩ to denote (G ∗ FX )/⟪R⟫G∗FX , where R
is any subset of G ∗ FX .

4

MAURICE CHIODO AND RISHI VYAS

3. Good subgroups of HNN extensions
The notion of a good subgroup was introduced in [8, Proposition 1.34], and
named so in [13, Definition 2].
Definition 3.1. Let H = G∗ϕ1 ,...,ϕn be an HNN extension. A good subgroup of
G with respect to the HNN extension H is a subgroup K ≤ G ≤ H such that
ϕi (K ∩ Ai ) = K ∩ Bi for all 1 ≤ i ≤ n.
Lemma 3.2. [8, Proposition 1.34] Let H ∶= G∗ϕ1 ,...,ϕn be an HNN extension
of G with stable letters t1 , . . . , tn . Suppose K ≤ G is a good subgroup of G with
respect to the HNN extension H, and let ψi ∶ K ∩ Ai → K ∩ Bi be the restriction
of ϕi to K ∩ Ai . Let K ′ be the subgroup of H generated by K and t1 , . . . , tn .
Then, the natural map
νK ∶ K∗ψ1 ,...,ψn → K ′
is an isomorphism. Moreover, K ′ ∩ G = K.
We now study good subgroups which are normal.
Definition 3.3. Let H ∶= G∗ϕ1 ,...,ϕn be an HNN extension of G with stable
letters t1 , . . . , tn . Let K ⊴ G be a good subgroup of G with respect to the HNN
extension H. Let ϕi ∶ Ai /(K ∩ Ai ) → Bi /(K ∩ Bi ) be the induced isomorphism
for each 1 ≤ i ≤ n. Define the following HNN extension with stable letters
t1 , . . . , t n :
HK ∶= (G/K)∗ϕ1 ,...,ϕn
There is a surjective homomorphism
φK ∶ H ↠ HK
which sends g ↦ gK for all g ∈ G, and ti ↦ ti for all 1 ≤ i ≤ n.
Lemma 3.4. Let G be a group, and H ∶= G∗ϕ1 ,...,ϕn an HNN extension of G
with stable letters t1 , . . . , tn . Let K ⊴ G. Then K is a good subgroup of G with
respect to the HNN extension H if and only if ⟪K⟫H ∩ G = K in H.
Proof.
⇐: Assume that ⟪K⟫H ∩ G = K in H. Take 1 ≤ i ≤ n and suppose x ∈ Ai ∩ K.
We know that ϕi (x) ∈ Bi : we need to verify that ϕi (x) ∈ K. However, it is
H
H
immediate that ϕi (x) = t−1
i xti ∈ ⟪K⟫ , and thus that ϕi (x) ∈ ⟪K⟫ ∩ Bi =
H
⟪K⟫ ∩ G ∩ Bi = K ∩ Bi ; it follows that ϕi (Ai ∩ K) ⊆ Bi ∩ K. The inclusion
ϕi (Ai ∩ K) ⊇ Bi ∩ K can be proved in a similar fashion.
⇒: Suppose K is a good subgroup of G with respect to the HNN extension
H, and take φK as in Definition 3.3. Then it is clear that K ≤ ⟪K⟫H ∩ G ≤
ker(φK ) ∩ G ≤ K; the last inequality here is a consequence of Theorem 2.6. 
Lemma 3.5. Let H, K and φK be as in Definition 3.3. Then ker(φK ) = ⟪K⟫H .
Proof. The containment ⟪K⟫H ⊆ ker(φK ) is immediate.
Let x ∈ ker(φK ). We induct on the total number of occurrences of ti or t−1
i
over all the i’s, where 1 ≤ i ≤ n, in the normal form of x in H: if x has none,
then x ∈ K.

TORSION LENGTH AND FINITELY PRESENTED GROUPS

5

Assume that for some i, either ti or t−1
appears at least once in x. By
i
−1
Britton’s lemma φK (x) has a subword of the form ti ati where a ∈ Ai /(Ai ∩ K)
−1
′
or ti bti where b ∈ Bi /(B ∩ K). Thus x has a subword of the form t−1
i a ti where
′
′ −1
a ∈ Ai K or ti b t where b ∈ Bi K. Without loss of generality, we assume the
former.
′
−1
This subword t−1
i a t is of the form ti akti , where a ∈ Ai and k ∈ K. But
−1
ti ati = b ∈ B, for some b ∈ B. We can therefore write x as λ1 t−1
i akti λ2 =
−1
−1
H
−1
λ1 bti kti λ2 . Observe that ti kti ∈ ⟪K⟫ , and thus that ti kti λ2 = λ2 y where
y ∈ ⟪K⟫H . We can therefore rewrite x = λ1 bλ2 y; from this we see that λ1 bλ2 ∈
ker(φK ). By induction, we have that λ1 bλ2 ∈ ⟪K⟫H . This tells us that x ∈
⟪K⟫H .

Corollary 3.6. Let H, K and HK be as in Definition 3.3. Then φK induces
an isomorphism
≅

φK ∶ H/⟪K⟫H Ð→ HK .
4. The Higman embedding construction
The Higman Embedding Theorem states that a finitely generated, recursively presented group can be embedded in a finitely presented group. In this
section we provide an overview of a proof of this result, introducing notation
and constructions that will be used later in this note.
4.1. Simulating a modular machine by a finitely presented group. We
begin by describing how a modular machine can be simulated by a finitely
presented group. This construction is then used in a proof of the Higman
Embedding Theorem.
The idea is to follow the construction in [8, pp.266–268]. This was derived
from [1], where a detailed exposition of modular machines can be found. We
felt, however, that the exposition in [13] was slightly clearer, so we replicate
here the argument presented there (the differences are only slight).
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)

Define the group K ∶= ⟨x, y, t ∣ [x, y] = e⟩.
For all (r, s) ∈ Z2 , define the word t(r, s) ∶= y −s x−r txr y s ∈ K.
Let T ∶= ⟨{t(r, s)}(r,s)∈Z2 ⟩ ≤ K.
Observe that T is free with basis {t(r, s)}(r,s)∈Z2 .
Observe that T = ⟪t⟫K .
For M > a ≥ 0, N > b ≥ 0, define
M,N
Ka,b
∶= ⟨t(a, b), xM , y N ⟩ ≤ K,
M,N
Ta,b
∶= ⟨{t(α, β) ∣ α ≡ a mod M, β ≡ b mod N }⟩ ≤ T ≤ K.

(7) Let (i, j) ∈ Z2 , and m, n ∈ Z. Observe that T ∩ ⟨t(i, j), xm , y n ⟩ is free
with basis {t(r, s) ∣ r ≡ i mod m, s ≡ j mod n}. In particular,
M,N
M,N
T ∩ Ka,b
= Ta,b
.

6

MAURICE CHIODO AND RISHI VYAS

(8) Observe that the correspondence t ↦ t(a, b), x ↦ xM , y ↦ y N induces
an isomorphism
M,N
K → Ka,b
.
This isomorphism sends t(u, v) to t(uM + a, vN + b) and thus induces
an isomorphism
M,N
T → Ta,b
.
(9) Let M = {(ai , bi , ci , R) ∣ i ∈ I} ∪ {(aj , bj , cj , L) ∣ j ∈ J} be a modular
machine with modulus m.
(10) The maps in step (8) induce, for each i ∈ I and j ∈ J, isomorphisms
2

φi ∶ Kam,m
→ Kcmi ,0,1 ,
i ,bi
2

1,m
.
ϕj ∶ Kam,m
→ K0,c
j
j ,bj

(11) Form the HNN extension
KM ∶= K∗{φi }i∈I ,{ϕj }j∈J ,
with stable letters {ri }i∈I and {lj }j∈J . Note that KM is finitely presented.
(12) Define the subgroup T ′ ∶= ⟨T, {ri }i∈I , {lj }j∈J ⟩ ≤ KM , where T is as in
step (3).
∗
(13) Define the set H0 (M) ∶= {(α, β) ∣ (α, β) Ð→ (0, 0)}.
M

(14)
(15)
(16)
(17)
(18)

Define TM ∶= ⟨{t(α, β) ∣ (α, β) ∈ H0 (M)}⟩ ≤ K.
′
Define TM
∶= ⟨TM , {ri }i∈I , {lj }j∈J ⟩ ≤ KM .
′
Observe that TM
= ⟨t, {ri }i∈I , {lj }j∈J ⟩.
′
Observe that t(α, β) ∈ TM
iff (α, β) ∈ H0 (M).
Form the HNN extension
′
GM ∶= KM ∗TM

with stable letter q.
(19) Observe that q −1 t(α, β)q = t(α, β) in GM iff (α, β) ∈ H0 (M).
Taking M′ with nonrecursive halting set H0 (M′ ) gives a finitely presented
group GM′ with undecidable word problem.
For our purposes, a useful consequence of the above construction is that we
can simulate any modular machine by a finitely generated group: see step (19)
of Construction 4.1.
4.2. The Higman Embedding Theorem. We now give an overview of the
construction used in a particular proof of the Higman Embedding Theorem,
taken directly from [8, pp.279–281]. We note that this proof originally comes
from [2].
(1) Let C = ⟨c1 , . . . , cn ∣ S ⟩ be a finitely generated recursively presented
group, where S corresponds to the set H0 (M) of a modular machine
M; see step (7). Denote the modulus of M by m. We assume that S
covers all the trivial words in the group.
(2) Re-write every word in C as a word in the free monoid on {c1 , . . . , c2n }
with c−1
i replaced by cn+i .

TORSION LENGTH AND FINITELY PRESENTED GROUPS

7

(3) To each word w = cik cik−1 ⋯ci0 associate an m-ary representation α =
Σkj=0 ij mj .
(4) Define I ∶= {α ∈ N ∣ α represents a word}. That is, α = Σkj=0 βj mj where
1 ≤ βj ≤ 2n.
(5) For α ∈ I, define wα (c) to be the word formed from α.
(6) For α ∈ I, write wα (b), wα (bc) for the words obtained from wα (c) by
replacing ci with bi and bi ci respectively (where {bi }2n
i=1 are a new set of
symbols).
(7) Observe that, for all α ∈ I, we have that wα (c) ∈ S iff (α, 0) ∈ H0 (M ).
(8) Recall the group KM from step (11) of 4.1. Define U ∶= {t, {ri }i∈I , {lj }j∈J };
U is a subset of KM .
(9) Define tα ∶= t(α, 0) ∈ KM .
(10) Form the free product
H1 ∶= KM ∗ (C × ⟨b1 , . . . , bn ∣−⟩) ∗ ⟨d∣−⟩,
and set bn+i ∶= b−1
i for 1 ≤ i ≤ n.
(11) Observe that the sets {tα ∣ α ∈ I} and {tα wα (b)d ∣ α ∈ I} each form
a free basis for the subgroups they respectively generate in H1 . The
correspondence tα ↦ tα wα (b)d extends to an isomorphism ψ between
these subgroups.
(12) Form the HNN extension
H2 ∶= H1 ∗ψ
with stable letter p.
(13) Define the subgroup
A ∶= ⟨t, x, d, b1 , . . . , bn , p⟩ ≤ H2 .
(14) For 1 ≤ i ≤ 2n, define the subgroup
Ai ∶= ⟨ti , xm , bi d, b1 , . . . , bn , p⟩ ≤ H2 .
(15) Observe that for all i, A is isomorphic to Ai via the map ψi induced
by the correspondence sending t ↦ ti , x ↦ xm , d ↦ bi d, bj ↦ bj for all
1 ≤ j ≤ n, and p ↦ p.
(16) Observe that ⟨t, x, d, b1 , . . . , bn ⟩ and ⟨ti , xm , bi d, b1 , . . . , bn ⟩ are both good
in H1 with respect to the HNN extension H2 . Therefore A, and the Ai
for 1 ≤ i ≤ 2n, are all HNN extensions.
(17) Define the subgroup
A+ ∶= ⟨U, d, b1 , . . . , bn , p⟩ ≤ H2 .
(18) Define the subgroup
A− ∶= ⟨U, d, b1 c1 , . . . , bn cn , p⟩ ≤ H2 .
(19) Observe that ⟨U, d, b1 , . . . , bn ⟩ is good in H1 with respect to the HNN
extension H2 . Therefore A+ is an HNN extension.
(20) Observe that A+ is isomorphic to A− via the map ψ+ ∶ A+ → A− induced
by the correspondence sending u ↦ u for all u ∈ U , d ↦ d, bj ↦ bj cj for
all 1 ≤ j ≤ n, and p ↦ p.

8

MAURICE CHIODO AND RISHI VYAS

(21) With the isomorphisms defined above, define the HNN extension
H3 ∶= H2 ∗ψ1 ,...,ψ2n ,ψ+ ,
with stable letters a1 , . . . , a2n and k.
(22) Observe that H3 is finitely presented, and C ↪ H3 .
5. Properties of the embedding construction
In this section, the groups C, H1 , H2 and H3 will be as in Section 4.2.
Lemma 5.1. Let X be a subset of C. Then
(1) ⟪X⟫H1 is good in H1 with respect to the HNN extension H2 .
(2) ⟪X⟫H2 is good in H2 with respect to the HNN extension H3 .
Proof. We claim that the following is true:
⟪X⟫H1 ∩ ⟨{tα ∣ α ∈ I}⟩ = {e},
⟪X⟫H1 ∩ ⟨{tα wα (b)d ∣ α ∈ I}⟩ = {e}.
To see this, consider the map λ ∶ H1 → H1 induced by the identity maps on
KM , ⟨b1 , . . . , bn ∣−⟩, and ⟨d∣−⟩, and the trivial map on C.
The map λ, restricted to KM ∗ ({e} × ⟨b1 , . . . , bn ∣−⟩) ∗ ⟨d∣−⟩, is injective, and
thus injective on both ⟨{tα ∣ α ∈ I}⟩ and ⟨{tα wα (b)d ∣ α ∈ I}⟩. However, ⟪X⟫H1
is contained in ker(λ).
This proves the first part of the lemma; we now move to the second.
Take the map λ defined above. It is clear that λ extends to a map λ ∶
H2 → H2 , sending p ↦ p. Again, ⟪X⟫H2 ≤ ker(λ). As before, we see that the
restriction of λ to ⟨KM ∗ ({e} × ⟨b1 , . . . , bn ∣−⟩) ∗ ⟨d∣−⟩, p⟩ is injective. It follows
that ⟪X⟫H2 ∩ A = ⟪X⟫H2 ∩ Ai = {e} for all 1 ≤ i ≤ 2n.
Finally, consider the inclusions
ι− ∶ A− → H2
ι+ ∶ A+ → H2
Step (20) of 4.2 tells us that the restriction of λ to A− is injective with image
A+ , and thus induces an isomorphism λ′ ∶ A− → A+ ; λ′ is inverse to the map ψ+
defined in (15) of 4.2. We see that λ ○ ι+ ○ λ′ = λ ○ ι− ∶ A− → H2 :
A− ❇
λ′



A+

❇❇ λ○i
❇❇ −
❇❇
❇!
/ H2
λ○i+

It is clear that λ ○ ι+ is injective, and thus that λ ○ ι− is as well. Since ⟪X⟫H2 is
contained in ker(λ), we see that ⟪X⟫H2 ∩ A− = ⟪X⟫H2 ∩ A+ = {e}. This proves
the last part of the lemma.

Before we proceed, we need the following observation. It is proved in the
same way that [7, Corollary 2.9] is, by using the torsion theorem for HNN
extensions.

TORSION LENGTH AND FINITELY PRESENTED GROUPS

9

Lemma 5.2. Let G be a group, and ϕ ∶ H → K an isomorphism between
subgroups H, K ≤ G. Let G∗ϕ be the associated HNN extension. Then
Tor1 (G∗ϕ ) = ⟪Tor1 (G)⟫G∗ϕ = ⟪Tor(G)⟫G∗ϕ .
Lemma 5.3. For all m ≥ 0, the following hold:
(1) Torm (H1 ) = ⟪Torm (C)⟫H1 .
(2) Torm (H1 ) ∩ C = Torm (C).
Proof.
By [7, Proposition 2.10], we know that
Torm (H1 ) = ⟪Torm (KM ) ∪ Torm (C × ⟨b1 , . . . , bn ∣−⟩) ∪ Torm (⟨d∣−⟩)⟫H1 .
However, KM , ⟨b1 , . . . , bn ∣−⟩ and ⟨d∣−⟩ are all torsion-free. It follows that
Torm (H1 ) = ⟪Torm (C)⟫H1
for all m. This proves part (1). For the second part, observe that there is a
map µ ∶ H1 → C induced by the trivial map on KM and ⟨d∣−⟩ and the standard
projection to C on C × ⟨b1 , . . . , bn ∣−⟩. The map µ restricts to the identity on C
and sends Torm (H1 ) to Torm (C). The result follows.

Lemma 5.4. For i = 1, 2, and for all m ≥ 0, the following hold:
(1) Torm (Hi+1 ) = ⟪Torm (Hi )⟫Hi+1 .
(2) Torm (Hi ) is good in Hi with respect to the HNN extension Hi+1 .
Proof. We prove this by induction on m. The result is obvious for m = 0.
We now come to the inductive step. Let i ∈ {1, 2}. Assume the statement is true for m. The induction hypothesis tells us that Torm (Hi+1 ) =
⟪Torm (Hi )⟫Hi+1 and that Torm (Hi ) is good in Hi with respect to the HNN
extension Hi+1 . Thus, by Lemma 3.4,
⟪Torm (Hi )⟫Hi+1 ∩ Hi = Torm (Hi ).
Combining these facts, we see that Torm (Hi+1 ) ∩ Hi = Torm (Hi ). As a consequence, the inclusion Hi → Hi+1 induces an embedding
Hi / Torm (Hi ) → Hi+1 / Torm (Hi+1 );
via this, we identify Hi / Torm (Hi ) as a subgroup of Hi+1 / Torm (Hi+1 ).
Using Lemma 3.5 and Corollary 3.6, we see that
Hi+1 / Torm (Hi+1 ) = Hi+1 /⟪Torm (Hi )⟫Hi+1 ≅ ⟨Hi / Torm (Hi ); stablei ∣ relationsi ⟩
where stablei , relationsi are, respectively, the stable letters and relations of the
HNN construction of Hi+1 from Hi . It then follows from Lemma 5.2 that
Tor1 (Hi+1 / Torm (Hi+1 )) = ⟪Tor1 (Hi / Torm (Hi ))⟫Hi+1 / Torm (Hi+1 ) .
The preimage of Tor1 (Hi+1 / Torm (Hi+1 )) in Hi+1 is Torm+1 (Hi+1 ), and the
preimage of ⟪Tor1 (Hi / Torm (Hi )⟫Hi+1 / Torm (Hi+1 ) in Hi+1 is ⟪Torm+1 (Hi )⟫Hi+1 .
Thus Torm+1 (Hi+1 ) = ⟪Torm+1 (Hi )⟫Hi+1 , and (1) is proved for the case m + 1.
We have just proved that (1) is true for m + 1; combining this fact with
Lemma 5.3 (1), we see that
Torm+1 (Hi ) = ⟪Torm+1 (Hi−1 )⟫Hi = . . . = ⟪Torm+1 (H1 )⟫Hi = ⟪Torm+1 (C)⟫Hi .

10

MAURICE CHIODO AND RISHI VYAS

Lemma 5.1 then tells us that Torm+1 (Hi ) is good in Hi with respect to the
HNN extension Hi+1 .

The next corollary now follows from Lemmas 5.3, 5.4 and 3.4:
Corollary 5.5. For i = 1, 2, 3, and for all m ≥ 0, the following hold:
(1) Torm (Hi ) = ⟪Torm (C)⟫Hi .
(2) Torm (Hi ) ∩ C = Torm (C).
Theorem 5.6. There is a uniform construction that, on input of a recursive
presentation of a group C, outputs a finite presentation of a group H in which
C embeds, with TorLen(C) = TorLen(H).
Proof. This is an immediate consequence of Corollary 5.5, taking H = H3 . As
⟪Torm (C)⟫H3 = Torm (H3 )
for all m, Torm (C) = Torm+1 (C) implies that Torm (H3 ) = Torm+1 (H3 ).
Conversely, since
Torm (H3 ) ∩ C = Torm (C)
for all m, Torm (H3 ) = Torm+1 (H3 ) implies that Torm (C) = Torm+1 (C).
In conclusion, Torm (H3 ) = Torm+1 (H3 ) if and only if Torm (C) = Torm+1 (C),
for any m. Thus the sequences Torj (H3 ) and Torj (C) stabilise at precisely the
same value of j (if at all), and so TorLen(H3 ) = TorLen(C).

Theorem 5.7. There exists a finitely presented group F with TorLen(F ) = ω.
Proof. In [7, Theorem 3.10], we proved that there is a 2-generator, recursively
presented group with infinite torsion length. We now apply Theorem 5.6. 
An interesting exercise would be to construct an explicit finite presentation
of such a group. Theoretically, this could be done by carefully following the
constructions given above. The presentation that arises as the output of such a
process, however, would undoubtedly be very complicated. A more straightforward presentation, perhaps giving a group that arises elsewhere in the literature,
would be interesting.
6. A word-hyperbolic virtually special example
We now show various ways of constructing finitely presented virtually special groups with infinite torsion length. We thank Henry Wilton for initially
suggesting that this is possible and pointing out an alternate way to prove it.
Definition 6.1. Let Γ be an undirected graph on finite vertex set labeled
1, . . . , n, and edge set E. The right-angled Artin group (RAAG), A(Γ), associated to Γ is the group with presentation
⟨x1 , . . . , xn ∣ [xi , xj ] ∀ {i, j} ∈ E⟩.
A group G is said to be special if it is a subgroup of some RAAG. More
generally, a group G is said to be virtually special if it contains a finite index
subgroup which is special.

TORSION LENGTH AND FINITELY PRESENTED GROUPS

11

Every RAAG on n generators can be seen as an HNN extension of a RAAG
on n − 1 generators; it follows that every RAAG is torsion-free, and thus that
virtually special groups are virtually torsion-free.
For the remainder of this section, if P = ⟨X∣R⟩ is a group presentation we
denote by P the group presented by P , and if w ∈ X ∗ is a word in the generators
of P then we denote by w the element of P represented by w.
Definition 6.2. Let P = ⟨X∣R⟩ be a finite presentation where each r ∈ R
is freely reduced and cyclically reduced (as a word in X ∗ ), and where R is
symmetrised (i.e., closed under taking cyclic permutations and inverses).
A nonempty freely reduced word w ∈ X ∗ is called a piece with respect to P if
there exist two distinct elements r1 , r2 ∈ R that have w as maximal common
initial segment.
Let 0 < λ < 1. Then P is said to satisfy the C ′ (λ) small cancellation condition
if whenever w is a piece with respect to P and w is a subword of some r ∈ R,
then ∣u∣ < λ∣r∣ as words.
A group is called a C ′ (λ) group if it can be presented by a presentation satisfying
the C ′ (λ) small cancellation condition.
If P = ⟨X∣R⟩ is a finite presentation of a group G where R is not symmetrised,
we can take the symmetrised closure Rsym of R, where Rsym consists of all cyclic
permutations of words in R and R−1 (with repetitions removed). Then Rsym
is symmetrised and Psym = ⟨X∣Rsym ⟩ is also a presentation of G. In a slight
abuse of notation, we call the presentation P = ⟨X∣R⟩ symmetrised if R is
symmetrised.
The following theorem is a consequence of the substantial results of Agol [3]
and Wise [14].
Theorem 6.3. Let P = ⟨X∣R⟩ be symmetrised and satisfy the C ′ (1/6) small
cancellation condition. Then P is both hyperbolic and virtually special.
Proof. C ′ (1/6) groups are known to be hyperbolic. One then uses [14, Theorem
1.2] and [3, Theorem 1.1] to show that P is virtually special.

Proposition 6.4. Let P = ⟨x1 , . . . , xm ∣ r1 , . . . , rn ⟩ be a finite presentation, with
all words in R freely reduced, cyclically reduced, and distinct. For any k ∈ N,
define the finite presentation
Ptk ∶= ⟨x1 , . . . , xm , t ∣ (r1 t)k , . . . , (rn t)k , tk ⟩
Then (Ptk )sym is symmetrised and satisfies the C ′ (2/k) small cancellation condition, and thus Ptk is word-hyperbolic and virtually special for all k ≥ 12.
Proof. Let S = {(r1 t)k , . . . , (rn t)k , tk }. We first need to check that every s ∈
Ssym is freely and cyclically reduced. But this follows from the fact that R is
freely and cyclically reduced, along with the strategic placements of the t’s. By
definition, Ssym is symmetrised. We now show that Ssym satisfies the C ′ (2/k)
small cancellation condition.
1. Any cyclic permutation of (ri t)k shares a piece with tk of length at most one
(and no piece with t−k ). Similarly, any cyclic permutation of (ri t)−k shares a
piece with t−k of length at most one (and no piece with tk ). Such pieces have

12

MAURICE CHIODO AND RISHI VYAS

length at most 1/k of either word.
2. Consider shared pieces of cyclic permutations of pairs of words of the form
(ri t)k and (rj t)k . If ri = ab and rj = cd, where a, b, c, d are words, then we
are left with considering words of the form bt(ri t)k−1 a and dt(rj t)k−1 c respectively. As ri ≠ rj , the initial overlap of these can be at most bt ≡ dt, followed
by some overlap of ri and rj (of length at most min{∣ri ∣, ∣rj ∣}, as ri ≠ rj and
t is acting as an end marker). So this initial overlap can have length at most
min{2∣ri ∣, 2∣rj ∣} + 1 which is less than 2/k of the length of either word.
3. By repeating the arguments as in step 2, we can show that cyclic permutations of pairs of words of the form (ri t)−k and (rj t)−k overlap at most 2/k of
the length of either word.
4. We now consider shared pieces of cyclic permutations of pairs of words of
the form (ri t)k and (rj t)−k = (t−1 rj−1 )k . If ri = ab and rj = cd, where a, b, c, d are
words, then the words we are considering must be of the form bt(ri t)k−1 a and
c−1 (t−1 rj−1 )(k−1) t−1 d−1 respectively. An initial overlap cannot involve t or t−1 ,
and thus has length at most min{∣ri ∣, ∣rj ∣}; this is less than 1/k of the length of
either word.
If follows that (Ptk )sym satisfies the C ′ (2/k) small cancellation condition; we
appeal to Theorem 6.3 to finish the proof.

The following standard result was first proved in [9]; see [12, Theorem 6] for
an explicit statement of the result.
Lemma 6.5 ([9, Theorem VIII]). Let P = ⟨X∣R⟩ satisfy the C ′ (1/6) small
cancellation condition. Then an element g ∈ P has order n > 1 if and only if
there is a relator r ∈ R of the form r = sn in X ∗ , with s ∈ X ∗ , such that g is
conjugate to s in P .
Lemma 6.6. Let P = ⟨x1 , . . . , xm ∣ r1 , . . . , rn ⟩ be a finite presentation, with all
words in R freely reduced, cyclically reduced, and distinct. Let Ptk be as before,
with k ≥ 12. Then
k
Tor1 (Ptk ) = ⟪r1 t, . . . , rn t, t⟫Pt
Proof. Clearly {r1 t, . . . , rn t, t} are all torsion elements in Ptk , and so we have
that ⟪r1 t, . . . , rn t, t⟫ ⊆ Tor1 (Ptk ).
To show the converse, it suffices to show that Tor(Ptk ) ⊆ ⟪r1 t, . . . , rn t, t⟫.
So take some torsion element g ∈ Tor(Ptk ) with o(g) = n. By Proposition 6.4,
(Ptk )sym satisfies the C ′ (1/6) small cancellation condition; thus, by Lemma 6.5
g is conjugate to some s with sn = r for some relator r of (Ptk )sym . If r = tk or
t−k then s is a power of t and so g is conjugated into ⟪r1 t, . . . , rn t, t⟫.
Otherwise, sn is equal to some cyclic permutation of some (ri t)k or (ri t)−k ; it
is enough to just consider the first case. Then, there is some cyclic permutation
q of s such that q n = (ri t)k as words in X ∗ .
What word q can we have which satisfies (ri t)k = q n ? If ∣q∣ < ∣ri ∣, then q contains
no t and thus q n contains no t; a contradiction. If ∣q∣ = ∣ri t∣ then q = ri t and so
g is conjugate to q = ri t which clearly lies in ⟪r1 t, . . . , rn t, t⟫. If ∣q∣ > ∣ri t∣ then
q = (ri t)z a, where ri = ab is a decomposition of ri . Thus q n = ((ri t)z a)n , and

TORSION LENGTH AND FINITELY PRESENTED GROUPS

13

this can only be equal to (ri t)k if a = ∅. In this case q = (ri t)z for some z, and
so g is conjugate to q = (ri t)z which lies in ⟪r1 t, . . . , rn t, t⟫.

We have shown that Tor(Ptk ) ⊆ ⟪r1 t, . . . , rn t, t⟫. The proof is complete
Theorem 6.7. Let P be a finite presentation with all words in R freely reduced,
cyclically reduced, and distinct. Then, for any k ≥ 12, Ptk is hyperbolic, virtually
special, and satisfies
Ptk / Tor1 (Ptk ) ≅ P
Thus, in this case, TorLen(Ptk ) = TorLen(P ) + 1.
Proof. This follows immediately from Proposition 6.4 and Lemma 6.6.



Remark 6.8. One may ask why the introduction of the extra generator t is necessary when constructing Ptk . It is indeed true that, given a finite presentation P =
⟨x1 , . . . , xm ∣ r1 , . . . , rn ⟩, the finite presentation Q = ⟨x1 , . . . , xm ∣ r1k1 , . . . , rnkn ⟩
(where k1 , . . . , kn ∈ N≥1 ) presents a group Q with TorLen(Q) − 1 ≤ TorLen(P ) ≤
TorLen(Q). The reader can easily verify this. However, it is not necessarily the case that Q/ Tor1 (Q) ≅ P . As an example, we can consider P =
⟨x, y, z∣x, y 3 , xy = z 3 ⟩ and Q = ⟨x, y, z∣x3 , y 3 , xy = z 3 ⟩. It is clear that P is just a
presentation for the cyclic group with 9 elements, C9 . On the other hand, by
[7, Proposition 3.1], Q/ Tor1 (Q) ≅ C3 .
Theorem 6.9. There is a finitely presented word-hyperbolic virtually special
group W with TorLen(W ) = ω. In particular, W is virtually torsion-free.
Proof. Let P be a finite presentation of a group with infinite torsion length;
such things exist, by Theorem 5.7. Then, by Theorem 6.7, Pt12 is hyperbolic
and virtually special, and TorLen(Pt12 ) = TorLen(P )+1 = ω. Take W = Pt12 . 
Remark 6.10. The main construction in [4] can be used to obtain a similar
result to Theorem 6.7 above. Given a finite presentation P = ⟨A∣R⟩, we see in
equation (4) of [4, pp. 141] an explicit finite presentation of a C ′ (1/6) group
G and N ⊲ G such that G/N ≅ P , and moreover that P is isomorphic to
Out(N ) ([4, Theorem 11]). Further analysis shows that N = Tor1 (G), normally
generated by 2 elements. However, both the finite presentation of G in [4] and
its manner of construction seem to be substantially more complicated than the
finite presentation Pt12 constructed above
Remark 6.11. In [7, Lemma 2.3] we showed that Tori (H) ≤ Tori (G) whenever
H ≤ G. However, this does not extend to bounding torsion length of subgroups,
even for finitely presented groups. Using the fact that there are finitely presented groups of any torsion length ([7, Theorem 3.3]), including ω (Theorem
5.7), along with the Adian-Rabin construction ([5, Theorem 2.4]), one can show
that given any finitely presented group H, and any ordinal 1 ≤ n ≤ ω, there is a
finitely presented group of torsion length n into which H embeds.
References
[1] S. Aanderaa, D. Cohen, Modular machines, the word problem for finitely presented groups
and Collins’ theorem. Word problems, II (Conf. on Decision Problems in Algebra, Oxford,

14

[2]

[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]

[13]

[14]

MAURICE CHIODO AND RISHI VYAS

1976), pp. 1–16, Stud. Logic Foundations Math., 95, North-Holland, Amsterdam-New
York, 1980.
S. Aanderaa, D. Cohen, Modular machines and the Higman-Clapham-Valiev embedding
theorem. Word problems, II (Conf. on Decision Problems in Algebra, Oxford, 1976),
pp. 7–28, Stud. Logic Foundations Math., 95, North-Holland, Amsterdam-New York,
1980.
I. Agol, The virtual Haken conjecture, Doc. Math. 18, 1045–1087 (2013). With an appendix by Agol, Daniel Groves, and Jason Manning.
I. Bumagin and D.T. Wise, Every group is an outer automorphism group of a finitely
generated group, J. Pure App. Alg. 200, no. 1, 137–147 (2005).
M. Chiodo, Finding non-trivial elements and splittings in groups, J. Algebra. 331, 271–
284 (2011).
M. Chiodo, On torsion in finitely presented groups, Groups Complex. Cryptol. (2) 6, 1–8
(2014).
M. Chiodo, R. Vyas, A note on torsion length, Comm. Algebra, 43, No. 11, 4825–4835
(2015).
D. Cohen, Combinatorial group theory: A topological approach (London Mathematical
Society Student Texts), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, (1989).
M. Greendlinger, On Dehns algorithms for the conjugacy and word problems, with applications, Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 13, 641–677 (1960).
G. Higman, Subgroups of finitely presented groups, Proc. Royal Soc. London Ser. A 262,
455–475 (1961).
J. Rotman, An introduction to the theory of groups; fourth edition, Springer-Verlag, New
York, (1995).
P. Schupp, The word, power and order problems in finitely presented groups, in Word
Problems, eds. Boone, Cannonito, and Lyndon, Amsterdam, North-Holland, 569–589
(1973).
S. Simpson, A slick proof of the unsolvability of the word problem for finitely presented
groups, www.personal.psu.edu/t20/logic/seminar/050517.pdf, 5 pages, unpublished online notes.
D. Wise, Cubulating small cancellation groups, Geom. Funct. Anal. 14, no. 1, 150–214
(2004).

Department of Pure Mathematics and Mathematical Statistics, University of Cambridge,
Wilberforce Road, Cambridge, CB3 0WB, UK.
mcc56@cam.ac.uk
Department of Mathematics, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev,
P.O.B. 653, Beer-Sheva, 84105, Israel.
vyas@math.bgu.ac.il

