arXiv:1602.04130v2 [] 12 Dec 2016

Bad irreducible subgroups and singular locus for
character varieties in P SL(p, C)
Clément Guérin∗

Abstract
We give the centralizers of irreducible representations from a finitely
generated group Γ to P SL(p, C) where p is a prime number. This leads
to a description of the singular locus (the set of conjugacy classes of representations whose centralizer strictly contains the center of the ambient
group) of the irreducible part of the character variety χi (Γ, P SL(p, C)).
When Γ is a free group of rank l ≥ 2 or the fundamental group of a closed
Riemann surface of genus g ≥ 2, we give a complete description of this
locus and prove that this locus is exactly the set of algebraic singularities
of the irreducible part of the character variety.

Keywords :Representation variety · Character variety · Irreducible representations · Centralizer of irreducible representations · Orbifolds · Fuchsian
groups representations
Mathematics Subject Classification (2000) 20C15 · 15A21

Contents
1 Introduction

2

2 Bad subgroups in P SL(p, C)

6

3 The character variety into a virtually abelian semidirect product
10
4 A domain of injectivity for ϕ

14

5 The intersection pattern in the singular locus

17

6 The free group case

21

7 The closed surface group case

24

∗ University of Luxembourg, Campus Kirchberg Mathematics Research Unit, 6, rue Richard
Coudenhove-Kalergi, L-1359, Luxembourg. e-mail : clement.guerin@uni.lu

1

8 Orbifold singularities and algebraic singularities

30

A Group cohomology

35

1

Introduction

Let G be a complex reductive group, e.g. GL(n, C), SL(n, C) or P SL(n, C). A
proper subgroup P of G is parabolic if G/P is a complete variety. A subgroup
H of G is irreducible if H is not contained in a parabolic subgroup of G. A
subgroup H of G is completely reducible, if for any parabolic subgroup P of G
containing H, there is a Levi subgroup L of P such that H is contained in L.
Throughout the paper, if G is a group, Z(G) denotes its center and if H is a
subgroup of G, ZG (H) denotes the centralizer of H in G. If H is an irreducible
subgroup of G, we say that H is good if ZG (H) = Z(G) and bad else. Sikora
proved (see [Sik12], Corollary 17) that a completely reducible subgroup H of G
is irreducible if and only if its centralizer ZG (H) in G is a finite extension of
Z(G).
Let Γ be a finitely generated group, a representation from Γ to G is irreducible
(resp. completely reducible, good, bad ) if ρ(Γ) is. While Schur’s Lemma implies
that all irreducible representations in SL(n, C) or GL(n, C) are good, there
are many examples in the literature of bad representations in other complex
reductive algebraic groups (see Proposition 3.32 in [FL12]). Roughly speaking,
our goal in this paper is to study bad representations from a finitely generated
group to P SL(p, C) when p is a prime number. We make a brief recall of some
notions on representation/character varieties (see [Sik12] and also [LM85] for a
complete exposition).
The set of representations from Γ to G is denoted Hom(Γ, G). It is an affine
algebraic set. Indeed, if Γ is generated by r elements, Hom(Γ, G) can be cut out
from Gr by polynomial equations. As a result, there is a universal representation
algebra R(Γ, G) (see Paragraph 5 in [Sik12]) such that Hom(Γ, G) corresponds to
the set of maximal ideals of R(Γ, G). Remark that R(Γ, G) may not be reduced
(i.e. it could non-trivial contain nilpotent elements). As a result, it is useful to
define the schematic representation variety Hom(Γ, G) as the spectrum of the
ring R(Γ, G). By definition, the set of C-points of Hom(Γ, G) is Hom(Γ, G).
From Section 2 to Section 7 included, we will only be interested in the C-points
of the representation variety. However, the tangent spaces computed in Section
8, are, a priori, tangent to the schematic representation variety Hom(Γ, G)
and it is necessary to introduce this scheme for this reason. There are two
natural topologies on Hom(Γ, G). One is the Zariski topology, the other is the
transcendental topology (induced by the topology of G as a complex group). In
this paper, we will mostly consider the second topology.
We denote Homi (Γ, G) the set of irreducible representations from Γ to G.
Since being non-irreducible is a closed condition, the set Homi (Γ, G) is open in
Hom(Γ, G) (see Proposition 27 in [Sik12]).
2

The adjoint group G/Z(G) acts on Hom(Γ, G) by conjugation. If ρ : Γ → G
is a representation, its conjugacy class will be denoted [ρ]. Roughly speaking,
the character variety is the quotient of Hom(Γ, G) by this conjugation action.
However, in order to obtain an interesting geometric structure on the quotient
we need to consider the GIT quotient Hom(Γ, G)//(G/Z(G)). It is only defined
when G is reductive. This quotient will be called the character variety of Γ
into G and will be denoted χ(Γ, G). By definition, there is an algebraic map
Ψ : Hom(Γ, G) → χ(Γ, G) which induces bypduality an isomorphism between
C[χ(Γ, G)] and C[Hom(Γ, G)]G = (R(Γ, G)/ (0))G . Likewise, one may define
the schematic character variety X(Γ, G) as the spectrum of C[Hom(Γ, G)]G =
R(Γ, G)G .
It turns out that χ(Γ, G) can be identified to the set of closed orbits in
Hom(Γ, G) for the conjugation action. The projection Ψ sends a representation
ρ to the unique closed orbit contained in the topological closure of [ρ]. Since [ρ]
is closed if and only if ρ is completely reducible, Ψ restricted to the subset of
completely reducible representations is the usual projection on a quotient space.
In particular, if we denote χi (Γ, G) the subset of conjugacy classes of irreducible representations in χ(Γ, G), then χi (Γ, G) can be identified to the
usual quotient Homi (Γ, G)/(G/Z(G)). Remark that the action of G/Z(G) on
Homi (Γ, G) is proper by Proposition 1.1 in [JM87]. In our paper, the singular
locus of the character variety of Γ into G is the set χiSing (Γ, G) of conjugacy
classes of bad representations.
A closed point x in a (possibly non-reduced) algebraic scheme X is simple if
it belongs to a unique irreducible component and the dimension of its Zariskitangent space coincides with the dimension of the unique irreducible component
containing it. A point x in X is an algebraic singularity in X if it is not a simple
point. In particular, χi (Γ, G) or Xi (Γ, G) may contain algebraic singularities.
Remark that being a simple point of the schematic representation (resp.
character) variety is stronger than being a simple point of the representation
(resp. character) variety, see Paragraph 9 in [Sik12]. Following its terminology,
we say that a representation is scheme smooth (resp. smooth) if it is a simple
point of Hom(Γ, G) (resp. Hom(Γ, G)). We use the same terminology for
conjugacy class of representations.
The question whether the singular locus of the character variety coincides
with the set of algebraic singularities of the irreducible part of the (schematic)
character variety or not is discussed in Section 8. Proposition 15 states that
for G = P SL(p, C) and Γ a free group of rank ≥ 2 or a closed surface group of
genus ≥ 2, these sets are the same. This statement cannot be generalized to any
finitely generated group Γ and complex reductive group G because of Examples
2 and 3.
When Γ is a free group over l ≥ 2 generators, then Hom(Γ, G) = Gl and
Homi (Γ, G) being open in it, is a manifold. When Γ is a closed surface group of
genus g ≥ 2 and G is reductive, it can be shown that Homi (Γ, G) is a manifold
(all its points are scheme smooth, c.f. Proposition 37 in [Sik12], see also Paragraph 1.2 in [Gol84]). Since the action of G/Z(G) on Homi (Γ, G) is proper and
3

its stabilizers are finite, the quotient space χi (Γ, G) is, in these cases, an orbifold. The singular locus we defined above is the orbifold locus of χi (Γ, G), i.e.
the set of points with a non-trivial local isotropy. This geometric interpretation
as the set of orbifold singularities of an orbifold is our first reason for studying
this singular locus. However, it appeared that this locus was well defined for
any finitely generated group and that most results we obtained were true for
any finitely generated group, even if χi (Γ, G) is not an orbifold.
From Section 2 to the end of the paper, we only focus on the case G =
P SL(p, C) with p a prime number. For some proofs, it is necessary to deal
with the case p = 2 separately from the case p odd. When this is the case,
we will systematically assume p odd, leaving p = 2 to the reader. Anyway, for
p = 2, most of these results have already been obtained by Heusener and Porti
in [HP04].
In the sequel we will need a few notations. Fix a prime number p. Denote
π the natural projection from SL(p, C) to P SL(p, C). To simplify some proofs,
it is easier to see matrices M ∈ SL(p, C) as automorphisms of CZ/p with the
canonical basis indexed by Z/p. In particular their lines and rows will be indexed
by 0, . . . , p − 1.
For any matrix M ∈ SL(p, C), we will denote M its projection in P SL(p, C).
D will denote the subgroup of diagonal matrices in SL(p, C) and ξ will be a
primitive pth root of the unity. When p is odd, the diagonal matrix D(ξ) is
defined by (D(ξ))i,i := ξ i for 0 ≤ i ≤ p − 1. To any bijection σ of Z/p, we
associate the corresponding permutation matrix Mσ ∈ GL(p, C). Finally, c will
denote the
(0, 1, . .. , p − 1)√of Z/p.
√cyclic permutation

 When p = 2, we define
−1
0
−1
0
√
D(ξ) :=
and Mc := √
. We prove, in Section 2 :
0
− −1
−1
0
Theorem 1. Let p be a prime number and H be a bad subgroup of P SL(p, C).
Then, there are two cases :
• ZP SL(p,C) (H) is isomorphic to Z/p × Z/p. In which case H is conjugate
to the group hD(ξ)i × hMc i and ZP SL(p,C) (H) = H.
• ZP SL(p,C) (H) is isomorphic to Z/p. In which case H is conjugate to K ⋊
hMc i where K is a non-trivial subgroup of D, different from hD(ξ)i and
invariant by the action of hMc i, in particular ZP SL(p,C) (H) is conjugate
to hD(ξ)i.
For p = 2, this is implied by Remark 3.11 and Remark 4.3 in [HP04]. As a
result, any bad representation from Γ to P SL(p, C) is conjugate to a representation into D ⋊ hMc i. Therefore, the natural inclusion of Homi (Γ, D ⋊ hMc i)
into Homi (Γ, P SL(p, C)) induces a surjective map ϕ from χi (Γ, D ⋊ hMc i) onto
χiSing (Γ, P SL(p, C)). This will give a parametrization of the singular locus.
For any ρ in Hom(Γ, hMc i), define Hρi := {ρ ∈ Homi (Γ, D ⋊hMci) | q ◦ρ = ρ}
i

and Hρ be its projection on the character variety. Then χi (Γ, D ⋊ hMc i) is the
4

i

i

union of all Hρ . In section 3, we give a cohomological description for Hρ . In
Section 4, we prove :
Theorem 2. Let Γ be a finitely generated group, p be a prime number and ρ
be a non-trivial morphism in Hom(Γ, hMc i). Then ϕ|Hρ i is a homeomorphism
onto its image.
i

As a result, χiSing (Γ, P SL(p, C)) is a union of a finite number of ϕ(Hρ )
whose geometry is given by cohomology groups. At the end of Section 4, we
briefly justify that we only need to chose, for any normal subgroup K of index
p in Γ, one ρK in Hom(Γ, hMc i) whose kernel is K to get χiSing (Γ, P SL(p, C)).
To sum up :
[
i
χiSing (Γ, P SL(p, C)) =
ϕ(HρK )
K⊳Γ
[Γ : K] = p

i

The subset ϕ(HρK ) will be called the pseudo-component associated to K.
When Γ is a free group these are the irreducible components of the singular
locus (this is not true for all Γ). In Section 5, we study the possible intersections between different pseudo-components. Recall that the p-rank of Γ is by
definition dimZ/p (ΓAb /pΓAb ).
Theorem 3. Let Γ be a finitely generated group, p be a prime number. Let r
be the p-rank of Γ. Then :
1. χiSing (Γ, P SL(p, C)) is the union of

pr −1
p−1

pseudo-components.

2. The intersection of two different pseudo-components is finite of cardinal
p − 1. All its elements are conjugacy classes of abelian irreducible representations.
3. Conversely, any conjugacy class of abelian irreducible representations belongs to exactly p + 1 pseudo-components.
r

r−1

−1)
4. There are exactly (p −1)(p
conjugacy classes of abelian irreducible
p2 −1
representations from Γ to P SL(p, C).

One can compare this theorem to the well-known example when p = 2 and
Γ = F2 = ha, bi is a free group over 2 generators (see Example 4.4 in [HP04] or
Corollary 10 in [Sik15]).
Example 1. First, the natural map π ∗ from SL(2, C)2 = Hom(F2 , SL(2, C)) to
P SL(2, C)2 = Hom(F2 , P SL(2, C)) is onto. The automorphism group of this
orbifold cover is the Klein group (Z/2)2 : (i, j) · (A, B) := ((−1)i A, (−1)j B).
On the other hand, an old result of Vogt states that χ(F2 , SL(2, C)) = C3
by sending [ρ] to (tr(ρ(a)), tr(ρ(b)), tr(ρ(ab))).
Since π ∗ induces a map from χ(F2 , SL(2, C)) = C3 to χ(F2 , P SL(2, C)), we
can identify χ(F2 , P SL(2, C)) to χ(F2 , SL(2, C))/K where the action of K is
given by (i, j) · (x, y, z) := ((−1)i x, (−1)j y, (−1)i+j z).
5

2

Computing the invariant ring C[x, y, z](Z/2) , one identifies χ(F2 , P SL(2, C))
to {(X, Y, Z, T ) ∈ C4 | T 2 = XY Z} and explicitly computes π ∗ (x, y, z) to be
(x2 , y 2 , z 2 , xyz). Removing three non-irreducible points, the set of branch points
for π ∗ is, by definition, the singular locus of the orbifold χiSing (F2 , P SL(2, C)).
The set of branch points is easily computed to be the union of X = Z =
T = 0, Y = Z = T = 0 and X = Y = T = 0. Each of them (minus one
non-irreducible point) corresponds to one of the three pseudo-components in
the theorem above. Any two of them intersect in one single point whose coordinates are X = Y = Z = T = 0. It corresponds to the abelian irreducible
representation a 7→ D(ξ), b 7→ Mc and thus fully agrees with the aforementioned
theorem.
When Γ = Fl is a free group of rank l ≥ 2, we prove in Section 6 (see
Corollary 3) that χiSing (Fl , P SL(p, C)) is connected of dimension (p − 1)(l − 1).
In [FLR15], Florentino, Lawton and Ramras compute higher homotopy
groups of the irreducible part of free groups character varieties into Gn :=
SL(n, C) or GL(n, C) : πk (χi (Fl , Gn )) (see Theorem 5.4 in loc. cit.).
In Remark 5.7, they conjecture that for any complex reductive group G and l
big enough, π2 (χgood (Fl , G)) = π1 (G/Z(G)) provided that we can bound above
the dimension of bad representations. The dimension count we obtained directly
leads to the validity of the conjecture when G = P SL(p, C) for (l−1)(p−1) ≥ 2.
In Section 7, we study the case when Γ = π1 (Σg ) is a closed surface group of
genus g ≥ 2. Corollary 5 states that χiSing (π1 (Σg ), P SL(p, C)) has p connected
components (given by the Euler invariant). Jun Li’s Theorem in [Li93] implies
that π0 (χ(π1 (Σg ), G)) is equal to π1 (G). Therefore, when G = P SL(p, C), each
connected component of χ(π1 (Σg ), P SL(p, C)) contains one unique connected
component of χiSing (π1 (Σg ), P SL(p, C)).

2

Bad subgroups in P SL(p, C)

In this section, we classify, up to conjugation, bad subgroups in P SL(p, C).
More precisely, we prove :
Theorem 1. Let p be a prime number and H be a bad subgroup of P SL(p, C).
Then, there are two cases :
• ZP SL(p,C) (H) is isomorphic to Z/p × Z/p. In which case H is conjugate
to the group hD(ξ)i × hMc i and ZP SL(p,C) (H) = H.
• ZP SL(p,C) (H) is isomorphic to Z/p. In which case H is conjugate to K ⋊
hMc i where K is a non-trivial subgroup of D, different from hD(ξ)i and
invariant by the action of hMc i, in particular ZP SL(p,C) (H) is conjugate
to hD(ξ)i.
The main idea to prove this theorem is to pull-back the problem in SL(p, C)
using π. For A ∈ SL(p, C) and λ ∈ C, we denote Eλ (A) = {v ∈ CZ/p | Av =
λv}.
6

Lemma 1. Let n ≥ 1 and A, B be two matrices in GL(n, C). Assume [A, B] =
λIn where λ ∈ C∗ .Then, for µ ∈ C, we have BEµ (A) = Eλµ (A).
Proof. The assumption implies that BA = λ−1 AB. For any v ∈ CZ/n , we have
the following equivalences : v ∈ Eµ (A) ⇔ Av = µv ⇔ BAv = µBv ⇔ ABv =
λµBv i.e. Bv ∈ Eλµ (A). Therefore, BEµ (A) = Eλµ (A).
This directly leads to :
Proposition 1. Let p be a prime number and H be a bad subgroup of P SL(p, C).
Then, up to conjugation, D(ξ) belongs to ZP SL(p,C) (H).
Proof. Assume p odd. Let H be π −1 (H) and U be π −1 (ZP SL(p,C) (H)). Since
ZP SL(p,C) (H) is non-trivial, it follows that U contains an element u which is
not central. Furthermore, since H is an irreducible subgroup of SL(p, C), its
centralizer is Z(SL(p, C)) by Schur’s lemma.
As a result, there exists h0 ∈ H such that [h0 , u] 6= Ip . However, since h0
and u commute, it follows that [h0 , u] belongs to Z(SL(p, C)). Therefore, there
exists 0 < k < p such that [h0 , u] = ξ k Ip .
Applying Lemma 1, h0 acts on the spectrum of u by multiplying by ξ k . Let
µ be an eigenvalue of u, since ξ k is a non-trivial primitive pth root of the unity,
u has p different eigenvalues µ, ξ k µ, . . . , ξ k(p−1) µ. Finally, since u is a matrix of
dimension p, its eigenspaces have dimension 1 and u is conjugate to the diagonal
matrix with µ, ξ k µ, . . . , ξ k(p−1) µ on the diagonal. Since det(u) = 1 and p is odd,
we see that µ is a pth root of the unity. Therefore, u is conjugate to D(ξ).
Because of this proposition, we compute the centralizer of D(ξ) in P SL(p, C).
Lemma 2. Let p be a prime number. Then ZP SL(p,C) (D(ξ)) = D ⋊ hMc i where
hMc i acts on D by conjugation.
Proof. Assume p odd. Let U := π −1 (ZP SL(p,C) (D(ξ))). For 0 ≤ k ≤ p − 1,
we have [D(ξ), Mck ] = ξ k Ip by straightforward computations. It follows that
U contains both the group D and the matrix Mc . Conversely, if u ∈ U then
[D(ξ), u] = ξ k Ip for some k and therefore :
[D(ξ), uMc−k ] = D(ξ)uMc−k D(ξ)−1 Mck u−1
= D(ξ)uD(ξ)−1 ξ −k u−1 since [D(ξ), Mc−k ] = ξ −k Ip
= ξ −k [D(ξ), u] = Ip .
Hence, u is the product of an element in the centralizer of D(ξ) in SL(p, C)
(which is D, since D(ξ) is diagonal with pairwise distinct eigenvalues) with
some power of Mc . As a result, U = D ⋊ hMc i and projecting this equality in
P SL(p, C), we have ZP SL(p,C) (D(ξ)) = D ⋊ hMc i.
When p = 2, the proof is slightly different since there is a non-trivial intersection between D and hMc i, however D and hMc i still have a trivial intersection.
7

Proposition 2. Let p be a prime number and H be a bad subgroup of P SL(p, C).
Then, there is a non-trivial subgroup K of D such that H is conjugate to K ⋊
hMc i.
Proof. We denote q the natural projection D ⋊ hMc i → hMc i. Combining
Proposition 1 and Lemma 2, H is conjugate to a subgroup of D ⋊ hMc i. We
identify H to this subgroup of D ⋊ hMc i.
If q(H) were trivial then H would be contained in D which is not irreducible,
therefore q(H) is not trivial. Let x be in π −1 (H) such that q(x) = Mc . Then :


λ0


..
x=
 Mc .
.
λp−1

−1
If s denotes a diagonal matrix where si,i = λ−1
for 0 ≤ i ≤ p − 1
0 . . . λi
then sxs−1 = Mc . If t := (det(s))1/p s then txt−1 = Mc and t is diagonal of
determinant 1. Therefore, H is conjugate in D ⋊ hMc i to a subgroup H ′ of
D ⋊ hMc i which contains Mc . Since Mc belongs to H ′ , we have that H ′ =
Ker(q|H ′ ) ⋊ hMc i. Since H ′ needs to be irreducible, it is clear that Ker(q|H ′ )
cannot be trivial.

Similar to Lemma 2 (although it is written in a different way since it will be
used with Lemma 4 later), we have :
Lemma 3. Let p be a prime number and g ∈ SL(p, C) such that [g, Mc ] ∈
Z(SL(p, C)). Then, g = P (Mc )D(ξ)k where P ∈ C[X] and k ≥ 0.
Proof. Assume p odd. Since Mc has pairwise distinct eigenvalues (like D(ξ), its
minimal polynomial is X p −1), any matrix commuting with Mc can be written as
a polynomial in Mc . Like in Lemma 2, if [g, Mc ] = ξ k Ip then [gD(ξ)−k , Mc ] = Ip
and therefore, what is written above implies that there is a polynomial P such
that gD(ξ)−k = P (Mc ) and we are done.
Lemma 4. Let p be a prime number. Let (d0 , . . . , dp−1 ) and (d′0 , . . . , d′p−1 ) be
two p-tuples of complex diagonal matrices. Then :
p−1
X

dj Mcj

=

p−1
X
j=0

j=0

d′j Mcj ⇒ ∀ 0 ≤ j ≤ p − 1, dj = d′j .

Proof. Assume p odd. For 0 ≤ j ≤ p − 1, and for 0 ≤ i, k ≤ p − 1, we have :

(dj )i,i if i − k = j mod p
j
(dj Mc )i,k =
0
else.
As a result :




p−1
X
j=0



dj Mcj 

= (dk−i mod p )i,i .
i,k

8

Applying this expression to both (d0 , . . . , dp−1 ) and (d′0 , . . . , d′p−1 ), we easily
see that the equality of the sum of matrices in the assumption implies the
equalities dj = d′j for j = 0, . . . , p − 1.
Proposition 3. Let p be a prime number, K be a non-trivial subgroup of D
which is stable by the conjugation action of Mc . Then :

hD(ξ)i × hMc i if K = hD(ξ)i
ZP SL(p,C) (K ⋊ hMc i) =
hD(ξ)i
else.
Proof. Since D(ξ) commutes with D ⋊ hMc i, hD(ξ)i is, in any case, included in
ZP SL(p,C) (K ⋊ hMc i).
Let x be in ZP SL(p,C) (K ⋊hMc i). By Lemma 3, there exist complex numbers
a0 ,. . . , ap−1 and 0 ≤ k ≤ p−1 such that x = (a0 +a1 Mc +· · ·+ap−1 Mcp−1 )D(ξ)k .
Let d be in K. Then, there is 0 ≤ t ≤ p − 1 such that dxd−1 = ξ t x. We also
have :


dxd−1 = 

p−1
X
j=0






aj dMcj d−1  D(ξ)k = 

p−1
X




aj dMcj d−1 Mc−j Mcj  D(ξ)k .
|
{z
}
j=0
diagonal

Therefore, we apply Lemma 4 to get aj dMcj d−1 Mc−j = aj ξ t for j = 0, . . . , p−
1. Assume aj is non-zero for some j > 0, then [d, Mcj ] belongs to Z(SL(p, C))
j
and therefore, d commutes with Mc . Since j 6= 0 and Mc is of order p, d
commutes with Mc . Since d is diagonal, Lemma 3 implies that d belongs to
hD(ξ)i.
As a result, if K is not equal to hD(ξ)i then aj = 0 for all j > 0 and x
belongs to hD(ξ)i. It follows that the centralizer of K ⋊ hMc i in P SL(p, C) is
hD(ξ)i.
If K = hD(ξ)i then taking d = D(ξ) above, we have aj [D(ξ), Mcj ] = aj ξ t .
Therefore aj (ξ j − ξ t ) = 0. As a result, aj = 0 if j 6= t and therefore x belongs
to hD(ξ)i × hMc i. We proved that the centralizer of hD(ξ)i × hMc i is contained
in hD(ξ)i × hMc i, since this group is abelian, its centralizer in P SL(p, C) is
itself.
Remark 1. Let K be a non-trivial hMc i-invariant subgroup of D. Then K ⋊
hMc i is completely reducible. Since they also have finite centralizers (using this
proposition), Corollary 17 in [Sik12] implies that they are irreducible.
Theorem 1. It is a direct consequence of Proposition 2 which states that any
bad subgroup H is conjugate to K ⋊ hMc i where K is a non-trivial subgroup of
D and of Proposition 3 which gives their centralizer.

9

Our next order of business is to describe χiSing (Γ, P SL(p, C)) when Γ is
a finitely generated group. Denote Homi (Γ, D ⋊ hMc i) the set of irreducible
representations from Γ to P SL(p, C) whose image is contained in D ⋊ hMc i.
By definition, this set is included in Homi (Γ, P SL(p, C)). We denote ι the
inclusion. It induces a map ϕ on the character variety and we have the following
commutative diagram :
Homi (Γ, D ⋊ hMc i)

ι

// Homi (Γ, P SL(p, C))

ϕ


// χi (Γ, P SL(p, C))

mod P SL(p,C)

mod D⋊hMc i


χi (Γ, D ⋊ hMc i)

From Theorem 1, we immediately deduce the following corollary :
Corollary 1. Let p be a prime number and Γ be a finitely generated group.
Then χiSing (Γ, P SL(p, C)) = ϕ(χi (Γ, D ⋊ hMc i)).
Therefore, to describe the singular locus, it suffices to describe χi (Γ, D ⋊
hMc i) (Section 3) and the behavior of ϕ (Sections 4 and 5).

3

The character variety into a virtually abelian
semidirect product

This section will be devoted to the description of χi (Γ, D ⋊ hMci). This requires
group cohomology and its computation in terms of cochains. Definitions and
results needed for this paper are given in Appendix A.
We recall that hMc i naturally acts on D by conjugation. Let q be the natural
projection of the semidirect product D ⋊ hMc i onto hMc i.
Given a group morphism ρ in Hom(Γ, hMc i), we remark that it makes of
D a multiplicative Γ-module since hMc i acts by conjugation on D. When it is
necessary to specify the action, we will denote Dρ this Γ-module.
For any ρ in Hom(Γ, hMc i), define Hρ := {ρ ∈ Hom(Γ, D ⋊hMc i) | q ◦ρ = ρ}.
The representation variety is a disjoint union of such sets :
[
Hom(Γ, D ⋊ hMc i) =
Hρ .
ρ∈Hom(Γ,hMc i)

Furthermore :
Proposition 4. Let Γ be a finitely generated group, p be a prime number and ρ
be in Hom(Γ, hMc i). Then the following map is a well-defined homeomorphism
f:

Hρ
Z 1 (Γ, Dρ ) −→
.
u
7−→ (γ 7→ u(γ)ρ(γ))
10

Proof. Any group morphism ρ from Γ to D ⋊ hMc i can be uniquely written as
the product of a map uρ : Γ → D and q ◦ ρ. In particular, for any ρ ∈ Hρ :
ρ(·) = uρ (·)ρ(·).
It boils down to understand under which conditions on u : Γ → D the map
ρ from Γ to D ⋊ hMc i defined as the product of u and ρ is a group morphism.
For two elements γ, γ ′ in Γ, we compute :
ρ(γγ ′ ) = u(γγ ′ )ρ(γγ ′ )
and ρ(γ)ρ(γ ′ ) = u(γ)ρ(γ)u(γ ′ )ρ(γ ′ ) = u(γ)γ · u(γ ′ )ρ(γ)ρ(γ ′ ).
As a result, ρ is a group morphism if and only if u(γγ ′ ) = u(γ)γ · u(γ ′ ) for
all γ, γ ′ in Γ, i.e. if and only if u is a 1-cocycle from Γ to Dρ . It follows that :
Hρ
Z 1 (Γ, Dρ ) −→
u
7−→ (γ 7→ u(γ)ρ(γ))
is a well-defined bijection. This map is continuous and its inverse is the
push-forward of the projection on the first factor for D ⋊ hMc i which is, also
continuous.
There is a similar decomposition for the character variety.
For g ∈ D ⋊ hMc i

and ρ a representation from Γ to D ⋊ hMc i, q gρ(·)g −1 = q(ρ(·)). As a result,
Hρ := {[ρ] ∈ χ(Γ, D ⋊ hMc i) | q ◦ ρ = ρ} is well-defined and :
[
χ(Γ, D ⋊ hMc i) =
Hρ .
ρ∈Hom(Γ,hMc i)

Since the actions of Γ and hMc i on D commute, the conjugation action of
hMc i on D induces an action on H 1 (Γ, Dρ ) (by acting on the coefficients).
Proposition 5. Let Γ be a finitely generated group, p be a prime number and ρ
be in Hom(Γ, hMc i). Then the following map is a well-defined homeomorphism
f:

Hρ
H 1 (Γ, Dρ )/hMc i −→
.
[u] mod hMc i
7−→ [γ 7→ u(γ)ρ(γ)]

Proof. Let u1 and u2 be in Z 1 (Γ, Dρ ) and ρi := ui ρ be the corresponding
element in Hρ . Then ρ1 is conjugate to ρ2 in D ⋊ hMc i if and only if there is
k

g = d Mc in D ⋊ hMc i such that gρ1 (γ)g −1 = ρ2 (γ) for all γ ∈ Γ. This is
−1
k
−k
for all γ ∈ Γ. Therefore, ρ1 is
equivalent to u2 (γ) = dγ · d Mc u1 (γ)Mc
 k
−1
conjugate to ρ2 if and only if there exists k such that u2 Mc · u1
belongs
to B 1 (Γ, Dρ ).
With this equivalence, we deduce that the bijection f in proposition 4 induces
the wanted bijection :
f:

Hρ
H 1 (Γ, Dρ )/hMc i −→
.
7−→ [γ 7→ u(γ)ρ(γ)]
[u] mod hMc i
11

Remark that f makes the following diagram commute :
Z 1 (Γ, Dρ )

f


H 1 (Γ, Dρ )/hMc i

f

// Hρ

// Hρ

Since f is continuous and the projection from Z 1 (Γ, Dρ ) to H 1 (Γ, Dρ )/hMc i
is open, it follows that f is continuous. Likewise, since f −1 is continuous and
−1
the projection of Hρ onto Hρ is open, it follows that f
is continuous.
Let ρ be a morphism from Γ to hMc i. We will need later a more explicit
computation of H 1 (Γ, Dρ ), when we fix particular examples of Γ.
Proposition 6. Let Γ be a finitely generated group, p be a prime number and
ρ be a non-trivial morphism from Γ to hMc i. Let γ0 ∈ Γ verifying ρ(γ0 ) = Mc .
Then the restriction map from Γ to K induces an homeomorphism between


f (γ0p ) = Ip
.
H 1 (Γ, Dρ ) and f ∈ Hom(Ker(ρ), D)
f (γ0 γγ0−1 ) = Mc · f (γ), ∀γ ∈ K
Proof. To simplify the proof, we denote K := Ker(ρ). We have an exact seρ
// hMc i
// K
// Γ
// 1 . Since Γ acts on D
quence of groups 1
via ρ, we may write the first terms of the Inflation-Restriction sequence (see
Proposition 17).
K

H 1 (hMc i, Dρ )

Inf

// H 1 (Γ, Dρ )

Res//

H 1 (K, Dρ )hMc i

T

// H 2 (hMc i, DρK ) .

The subgroup K acts trivially on D so that H 1 (K, Dρ ) = Hom(K, D) by
Lemma 13. The Inflation-Restriction sequence becomes :
H 1 (hMc i, D)

Inf

// H 1 (Γ, Dρ )

Res//

T

// H 2 (hMc i, D) .
(1)
Applying Lemma 14, with G being hMc i, g being Mc and M := D :
H 1 (hMc i, D) =

Hom(K, D)hMc i

Ker(NormeD )
Im(TraceD )

(2)

Let b be a diagonal matrix with coefficients b0 , . . . , bp−1 on its diagonal :

 −1
b0 bp−1


..
b(Mc · b)−1 = 
.
.
−1
bp−1 bp−2

Let c ∈ D then define bp−1−i := c0,0 · · · ci,i . Since c0,0 · · · cp−1,p−1 = det(c) =
1/p
1, an induction on i shows that bi b−1
(this
i−1 = ci,i . Multiplying b by det(b)
12

does not change the equation), we may even assume that det(b) = 1 and then
TraceD (b) = b(Mc · b)−1 = c.
Therefore, Im(TraceD ) = D. Equation 2 implies that H 1 (hMc i, D) is trivial. The exact sequence 1 implies that the restriction morphism Res is an
isomorphism between H 1 (Γ, Dρ ) and the kernel of the Transgression map T .
Furthermore, the restriction map is clearly continuous and open on its image.
From Appendix A, we know that the action of hMc i over Hom(K, D) used
to define Hom(K, D)hMc i in the Inflation-Restriction sequence is defined by :

Mc · f (γ) := Mc · f (γ0−1 γγ0 ), for γ ∈ K and f ∈ Hom(K, D).

Finally, Paragraph 10.2 in [DHW12] contains an explicit formula to compute
the Transgression map when the kernel acts trivially (their formula is written
additively, here it is written multiplicatively). If f ∈ Hom(K, D)hMc i then T (f )
is the cohomology class of the following 2-cocycle on hMc i :

Ip
if 0 ≤ k, l ≤ p − 1 and k + l < p
k
l
t(f )(Mc , Mc ) =
(3)
f (γ0p )−1 if 0 ≤ k, l ≤ p − 1 and k + l ≥ p

Assume that f is in the kernel of the Transgression map then t(f ) is a 2coboundary in B 2 (hMc i, Dρ ) ; i.e. there is a map g : hMc i → D such that
for all k, l in {0, . . . , p − 1} : t(f )(Mck , Mcl ) = g(Mck )Mck · g(Mcl )g(Mcl+k )−1 . In
particular, for k = 1 and l < p − 1 : g(M l+1 ) = g(Mc )Mc · g(Mcl ). An induction
shows that g(Mcl ) = g(Mc ) . . . Mcl−1 · g(Mc ). For k = 1 and l = p − 1 :
f (γ0p )−1 = g(Mc )Mc · g(Mcp−1 ) = g(Mc ) . . . Mcp−1 · g(Mc ) = Ip .
|
{z
}
NormeD (g(Mc ))

Therefore, if f is in Ker(T ) then f (γ0p ) is trivial. Conversely, using Equation 3,
if f (γ0p ) is trivial then f is in Ker(T ). Combining this with the explicit definition
of the action of hMc i on Hom(K, D) :

Ker(T ) = f ∈ Hom(K, D)

f (γ0p ) = Ip
f (γ0 γγ0−1 ) = Mc · f (γ), ∀γ ∈ K



Since we have already proved that the restriction morphism is an homeomorphism between H 1 (Γ, D ρ ) and Ker(T ), we are done.
Remark 2. If ρ : Γ → hMc i is trivial, then any representation in Hρ has its image
included in D and therefore cannot be irreducible. If ρ : Γ → hMc i is non-trivial
then a representation ρ in Hρ is irreducible if and only if it is not conjugate to
hMc i (Remark 1), if and only if Ker(q|ρ(Γ) ) is not trivial. It follows that a
representation ρ belonging to Hρ is irreducible if and only if its corresponding
1-cocycle (via the correspondence of proposition 4) is not a 1-coboundary.

13

i

Remark 3. We denote Hρi the set of irreducible representations in Hρ and Hρ
their conjugacy classes up to conjugation by D ⋊ hMc i. We have :
[
i
χiSing (Γ, P SL(p, C)) =
ϕ(Hρ )
(4)
ρ∈Hom(Γ,hMc i)
ρ non-trivial

i

In the next section we will prove that ϕ restricted to Hρ is an homeomorphism onto its image. Therefore, Propositions 5 and 6 will eventually give a
topological understanding of the singular locus.

4

A domain of injectivity for ϕ

Theorem 2. Let Γ be a finitely generated group, p be a prime number and ρ
be a non-trivial morphism in Hom(Γ, hMc i). Then ϕ|Hρ i is a homeomorphism
onto its image.
We first need to prove :
Proposition 7. Let Γ be a finitely generated group, p be a prime number and
ρ be a non-trivial morphism in Hom(Γ, hMc i) and ρ, ρ′ be two irreducible representations in Hρ . If there exists g ∈ P SL(p, C) such that g · ρ = ρ′ then
g ∈ D ⋊ hMc i.

Proof. Let γ0 ∈ Γ such that ρ(γ0 ) = Mc . Since ρ, ρ′ are in Hρ there exists
d0 , d′0 , . . . , dp−1 , d′p−1 such that :

d0

ρ(γ0 ) = 

..





.
dp−1



′
Mc and ρ (γ0 ) = 

d′0

..

.
d′p−1




Mc .

Like in proposition 2, there are g1 and g2 ∈ D verifying g1 ρ(γ0 )g1−1 = Mc
and g2 ρ′ (γ0 )g2−1 = Mc . Since g · ρ = ρ′ , Mc = (g1−1 g2 g)Mc (g1−1 g2 g)−1 .
Let us denote h := g1−1 g2 g. We have just seen that h centralizes Mc . Lemma
3 implies that there are a0 , . . . , ap−1 ∈ C and an integer s ≥ 0 such that :
h=

p−1
X

ak Mck D(ξ)s .

k=0

Since g1 · ρ is irreducible, there is γ ∈ Γ such that g1 · ρ(γ) is diagonal and not
trivial. Remark that γ belongs to Ker(ρ) and therefore g2 · ρ′ (γ) is diagonal as
well. Let h1 , h2 ∈ D verifying h1 = g1 · ρ(γ) and h2 = g2 · ρ(γ). By definition of
h, there is l ≥ 0 verifying hh1 h−1 = ξ l h2 . Hence :
p−1
X

ak Mck D(ξ)s h1

=ξ

k=0

l

p−1
X

k=0

14

ak h2 Mck D(ξ)s .

Applying Lemma 4, we have ak Mck D(ξ)s h1 = ak h2 Mck D(ξ)s , for 0 ≤ k ≤
p − 1. Since D(ξ)s commutes with h1 : ak (Mck h1 − ξ l h2 Mck ) = 0 holds for
0 ≤ k ≤ p − 1. Assume there are 0 ≤ k1 < k2 ≤ p − 1 verifying ak1 6= 0 and
ak2 6= 0. Then h1 = ξ l Mc−k1 h2 Mck1 and ξ l h2 = Mck2 h1 Mc−k2 and therefore :
h1 = Mck2 −k1 h1 Mck1 −k2 .
Since Mck2 −k1 = Mck2 −k1 and ck2 −k1 is a cyclic permutation of order p, the
equation above implies that h1 = g1 · ρ(γ) is trivial, which is a contradiction.
As a result, there is a unique k such that ak 6= 0 and h belongs to D ⋊ hMc i.
Since g = g2−1 g1 h, g also belongs to D ⋊ hMc i.
To finish the proof of Theorem 2, we need to deal with the topology :
Theorem 2. Proposition 7 proves that ϕ|Hρ i is injective. We recall the diagram
Homi (Γ, D ⋊ hMc i)

ι

// Homi (Γ, P SL(p, C))

ϕ


// χi (Γ, P SL(p, C))

mod P SL(p,C)=ψ2

mod D⋊hMc i=ψ1


χi (Γ, D ⋊ hMc i)

We will denote ψ1 the projection mod D ⋊ hMc i and ψ2 the projection
mod P SL(p, C). Since they are projections by a topological group action, ψ1
and ψ2 are both continuous and open. Since ι is induced by the inclusion of
D ⋊ hMc i into P SL(p, C) which is a homeomorphism onto its image, ι is also
a homeomorphism onto its image and Im(ι) is a closed subset of P SL(p, C).
Since ψ2 is continuous and ψ1 is open, ϕ is continuous and, in particular, ϕ|Hρ i
is continuous. Our next order of business is to show that ϕ|Hρ i is open in its
image. We restrict the diagram to Hρi :
Hρi

ι|Hi

ρ

ψ1|Hi

ψ2

ρ


i
Hρ

// Homi (Γ, P SL(p, C))

ϕ|H

ρ

i


// χi (Γ, P SL(p, C))

Since each Hρi is closed and Homi (Γ, D ⋊ hMc i) is a finite disjoint union of
such Hρi ’s, each Hρi is open in Homi (Γ, D⋊hMc i). It follows that ψ1 restricted to
Hρi is still continuous and open and ι restricted to Hρi is still an homeomorphism
onto its image. The group P SL(p, C) acts properly on Homi (Γ, P SL(p, C))
(Proposition 1.1 in [JM87]), i.e. the following function is proper :

ζ:

P SL(p, C) × Homi (Γ, P SL(p, C)) −→ Homi (Γ, P SL(p, C))2
.
(g, ρ) 7−→ (g · ρ, ρ)

15

Since both P SL(p, C) and Homi (Γ, P SL(p, C)) are locally compact and
Hausdorff, the function ζ is closed. For any closed set F in Homi (Γ, P SL(p, C)),
the set ζ(P SL(p, C) × F ) is closed. Therefore, its projection on the first coordinate P SL(p, C) · F is closed in Homi (Γ, P SL(p, C)).
i
Let U be an open subset of Hρ . We want to prove that ϕ(U ) is open in
i
ϕ(Hρ ). Denote U0 := (ψ1|Hρi )−1 (U ) which is open by continuity of ψ1 . Then
ι(U0 ) is open in ι(Hρi ), hence there exists an open set V in Homi (Γ, P SL(p, C))
such that V ∩ ι(Hρi ) = ι(U0 ).
Let F := V c ∩ ι(Hρi ). Since V c is closed and ι(Hρi ) is closed, F is closed, and
using properness as explained above, its saturation P SL(p, C) · F is closed. Let
V0 be V − P SL(p, C) · F then V0 is open.
By definition, V0 ∩ ι(Hρi ) is contained in V ∩ ι(Hρi ). Conversely, let ρ be in
ι(U0 ) = V ∩ ι(Hρi ), we want to show that ρ is not conjugate to an element of
F (this will imply that ρ belongs to V0 ∩ ι(Hρi )) and we do it by contradiction.
Assume that ρ ∈ P SL(p, C) · F , i.e. there is g ∈ P SL(p, C) such that g · ρ ∈ F .
Since ρ and g · ρ are both irreducible and valued in D ⋊ hMc i by definition,
Proposition 7 implies that g belongs to D ⋊ hMc i. Since ρ belongs to ι(U0 )
and g · ρ does not, U0 is not stable by the action of D ⋊ hMc i, which is in
contradiction with the very definition of U0 . Therefore V0 ∩ ι(Hρi ) = V ∩ ι(Hρi ).
Since ψ2 ◦ ι = ϕ ◦ ψ1 , we have ϕ(U ) = ψ2 (ι(U0 )) = ψ2 (V ∩ ι(Hρi )). Therefore
ϕ(U ) = ψ2 (V0 ∩ ι(Hρi )).
It remains to show that ψ2 (V0 ∩ ι(Hρi )) = ψ2 (V0 ) ∩ ψ2 (ι(Hρi )). The left-hand
side is clearly contained in the right-hand side. Since V0 is stable (by definition)
by the action of P SL(p, C), we have the other inclusion and therefore, we have
the equality.
Finally ϕ(U ) is the intersection of ψ2 (V0 ) which is open (since ψ2 is open)
i
i
and ψ2 (ι(Hρi )) = ϕ(Hρ ). Therefore ϕ(U ) is open in ϕ(Hρ ). The function
ϕHρ i is continuous and open in its image, since it is also injective, it is an
homeomorphism onto its image.
As a result, the singular locus of a character variety in P SL(p, C) is a finite
i
union of topological spaces, namely the ϕ(Hρ )’s, whose topology is given by
Propositions 5 and 6. Before studying the intersections between these spaces,
we remark that some of them may be equal to each other.
Lemma 5. Let Γ be a finitely generated group, p be a prime number and ρ, ρ′ be
two non-trivial elements in Hom(Γ, hMc i). Then, Ker(ρ) = Ker(ρ′ ) if and only if
i
i
there is φ ∈ Aut(hMc i) verifying ρ′ = φ ◦ ρ. When it is true, ϕ(Hρ ) = ϕ(Hρ′ ).
Proof. The equivalence in this lemma is straightforward.
Let φ ∈ Aut(hMc i), then φ is uniquely determined by l ∈ (Z/p)∗ where
l
φ(Mc ) = Mc . We defined c to be the permutation of Z/p sending i to i + 1. Let
16

us now define the permutation σl of Z/p sending i to l × i. We easily see that
σl ◦ c(i) = l × i + l = cl ◦ σl (i). Therefore σl cσl−1 = cl and Mσl Mc Mσ−1
= Mcl .
l
Let M := Mσl if det(Mσl ) = 1 and −Mσl if det(Mσl ) = −1. It follows that the
i
i
i
conjugation by M sends ι(Hρi ) to ι(Hφ◦ρ
). As a result ϕ(Hρ ) = ϕ(Hφ◦ρ ).
Remark 4. Fix a finitely generated group Γ and a prime number p. Then,
for any normal subgroup K of index p in Γ, fix one group morphism ρK in
Hom(Γ, hMc i) verifying K = Ker(ρ). Lemma 5 and the decomposition of the
singular locus in Equation 4 implies the following decomposition :
[
i
(5)
χiSing (Γ, P SL(p, C)) =
ϕ(HρK ).
K⊳Γ
[Γ : K] = p

i

We shall call ϕ(HρK ) the pseudo-component associated to K. When Γ is
a free group, each of these pseudo-components is an irreducible component of
χiSing (Γ, P SL(p, C)) (Remark 7). However, in general it has no reason to be
an irreducible component of the singular locus (the surface group is a counter
example, see Remark 10).

5

The intersection pattern in the singular locus

In this section, we give a description of the intersection pattern between the
different pseudo-components defined above. The next lemma is straightforward
and will be used several times throughout this section.
Lemma 6. Let Γ be a group, p be a prime number and K, K ′ be two different
normal subgroups of index p in Γ. Then Γ/K ∩ K ′ is isomorphic to (Z/p)2 .
Proposition 8. Let Γ be a finitely generated group, p be a prime number and
K, K ′ be two different normal subgroups of index p in Γ. Let ρ : Γ → P SL(p, C)
i
i
be a representation whose conjugacy class belongs to ϕ(HρK ) ∩ ϕ(HρK ′ ). Then
Ker(ρ) = K ∩ K ′ and ρ(Γ) is conjugate to hD(ξ)i × hMc i.
i

Proof. By definition, ρ is both conjugate to a representation in ι(HρK ) and to
i

a representation in ι(HρK ′ ). Let g, h ∈ P SL(p, C) verifying that gρg −1 (resp.
i

i

hρh−1 ) belongs to ι(HρK ) (resp. ι(HρK ′ )). This implies that gρ(K)g −1 ≤ D
and hρ(K ′ )h−1 ≤ D. In particular, ρ(K) and ρ(K ′ ) are both abelian.

Since K and K ′ are different and both of index p in Γ, there is γ1 ∈ K ′ ∩ K c
verifying gρ(γ1 )g −1 = d1 Mc with d1 ∈ D. Let γ ∈ K ∩ K ′ , since gρ(K ′ )g −1
is abelian, gρ(γ1 )g −1 and gρ(γ)g −1 commute. Since gρ(γ)g −1 ∈ D, it also
commutes with d1 and, therefore, it commutes with Mc . By Lemma 3, an
element in D commuting with Mc necessarily belongs to hD(ξ)i. Thus, gρ(K ∩
K ′ )g −1 is included in hD(ξ)i. Likewise, hρ(K ∩ K ′ )h−1 is included in hD(ξ)i.

17

Assume K ∩ K ′ is not included in Ker(ρ). Then, the groups gρ(K ∩ K ′ )g −1
and hρ(K ∩ K ′ )h−1 are both equal to hD(ξ)i. Thus, hg −1 normalizes hD(ξ)i.
k

Let 0 < k < p be an integer such that hg −1 D(ξ)gh−1 = D(ξ) and Mσ
be a permutation matrix such that Mσ D(ξ)k Mσ−1 = D(ξ). Then Mσ hg −1
commutes with D(ξ), whence (Lemma 2) belongs to D ⋊ hMc i. Therefore, hg −1
normalizes D and, in particular K = K ′ which is a contradiction. Therefore
Ker(ρ) = K ∩ K ′ .
Lemma 6 states that Γ/K ∩ K ′ is isomorphic to (Z/p)2 . Therefore, ρ(Γ) is
abelian irreducible. Theorem 1 implies that any abelian irreducible subgroup of
P SL(p, C) is conjugate to hD(ξ)i × hMc i, whence the result.
Remark 5. Assume Γ, p, K and K ′ are given like in the preceding proposition.
This proposition implies that, up to conjugation, any representation ρ whose
i
i
conjugacy class belongs to ϕ(HρK )∩ϕ(HρK ′ ) factorizes through the projection
to Γ/K ∩K ′ in an isomorphism between Γ/K ∩K ′ and hD(ξ)i×hMc i. Therefore,
i
i
to count the number of elements in ϕ(HρK ) ∩ ϕ(HρK ′ ), it suffices to count the
number of isomorphisms between Γ/K ∩K ′ and hD(ξ)i×hMc i up to conjugation
in P SL(p, C).
Let p be a prime number. The group hD(ξ)i × hMc i is a Z/p-vector space
of dimension 2 and has the following Z/p-basis (D(ξ), Mc ). Once the basis is
fixed, it is natural to identify its automorphism group to GL(2, Z/p).
Lemma 7. Let p be a prime number. Then, the subgroup of Aut(hD(ξ)i×hMc i)
induced by the normalizer of hD(ξ)i × hMc i in P SL(p, C) is SL(2, Z/p).

Proof. Assume p odd. We denote Aut0 (hD(ξ)i × hMc i) the subgroup of automorphisms of hD(ξ)i × hMc i which can be realized as the conjugation by an
element of P SL(p, C).
Let V1 := λV0 where V0 := (ξ ij )0≤i,j≤p−1 is the Vandermonde matrix and
p−1
1
λ be det(V0 )− p = (−1) 2p /p. Direct computations lead to V0 D(ξ)V0−1 = Mc−1
−1
−1
−1
and V0 Mc V0−1 = D(ξ). Therefore V1 D(ξ) V1 = Mc and V1 Mc V1 = Dξ .
Thus
V1 
normalizes hD(ξ)i×hMc i and induces by conjugation the automorphism

0 1
on hD(ξ)i × hMc i.
−1 0
i(i+1)

Let S be a diagonal matrix where Si,i = ξ 2 for i = 0, . . . , p − 1. Then
(p−1)p(p+1)
6
= 1 since p is odd. Since S is diagonal, it commutes with
det(S) = ξ
−1
D(ξ) therefore S D(ξ) S = D(ξ). Direct computations show that SMc S −1 =
−1
D(ξ)Mc . Therefore S Mc S = Mc D(ξ). Whence
 S normalizes hD(ξ)i×hMc i
1 1
and induces by conjugation the automorphism
on hD(ξ)i × hMc i.
0 1



0 1
1 1
Therefore, the subgroup generated by
and
is contained
−1 0
0 1
in Aut0 (hD(ξ)i × hMc i) . Since these matrices generate SL(2, Z/p), this group
is contained in Aut0 (hD(ξ)i × hMc i).
18

Conversely, let ψ be in
 Aut0 (hD(ξ)i × hMc i). We denote d its determinant.
1 0
We denote ψd :=
. Since det(ψd−1 ψ) = 1, it follows that the automor0 d
phism ψd also belongs to Aut0 (hD(ξ)i × hMc i).
Let g be in P SL(p, C) verifying for all x ∈ hD(ξ)i×hMc i that gxg −1 = ψd (x).
d
Then g commutes with D(ξ). Furthermore gMc g −1 = Mc . Since Lemma 2
implies that g belongs to D ⋊ hMc i, we may project this equality onto hMc i to
d
get that Mc = Mc and d = 1. As a result det(ψ) = 1 and we are done.
Therefore, we can count the number of elements in the intersection of two
pseudo-components :
Corollary 2. Let Γ be a finitely generated group, p be a prime number and K, K ′
i
i
be two different normal subgroups of index p in Γ. Then ϕ(HρK ) ∩ ϕ(HρK ′ ) is
finite of cardinal p − 1.
i

i

Proof. Following Remark 5, there are as many elements in ϕ(HρK )∩ϕ(HρK ′ ) as
there are isomorphisms between Γ/K ∩K ′ and hD(ξ)i× hMc i up to conjugation.
We fix ψ0 such isomorphism. Since the natural action of Aut(hD(ξ)i × hMci)
on the set of isomorphisms between Γ/K ∩ K ′ and hD(ξ)i × hMc i is transitive, it
suffices to understand under which condition ψ ◦ φ0 is conjugate to φ0 . Lemma
7 implies that ψ ◦ φ0 is conjugate to φ0 if and only if ψ ∈ SL(2, Z/p). Therefore,
i
i
there are |GL(2, Z/p)|/|SL(2, Z/p)| = p−1 elements in ϕ(HρK )∩ϕ(HρK ′ ).
Proposition 9. Let Γ be a finitely generated group, p be a prime number and
ρ be an abelian irreducible representation from Γ to P SL(p, C). Then the conjugacy class of ρ belongs to exactly p + 1 pseudo-components.
Proof. Let K be a normal subgroup of index p in Γ. We first show that the
i
conjugacy class of ρ belongs to ϕ(HρK ) if and only if Ker(ρ) is contained in K.
If some conjugate gρg −1 of ρ belongs to ι(Hρi K ), then Ker(ρ) will be con
tained in Ker q ◦ gρg −1 = K.
Assume that Ker(ρ) is contained in K. Since ρ is abelian irreducible, Theorem 1 implies that ρ is conjugate to a representation gρg −1 from Γ onto
hD(ξ)i × hMc i.
Since K strictly contains Ker(ρ), it follows that gρ(K)g −1 is a subgroup of
index p in hD(ξ)i × hMc i. The group SL(2, Z/p) acts transitively by automorphism on the subgroups of index p in hD(ξ)i × hMc i.
Therefore, Lemma 7 implies that there is h ∈ P SL(p, C) normalizing the
group hD(ξ)i × hMc i and verifying that hgρ(K)g −1 h−1 = hD(ξ)i.
Thus the representation hgρ(hg)−1 is still a representation in D ⋊ hMc i and

i
Ker q ◦ hgρ(hg)−1 = K. Therefore, its conjugacy class belongs to ϕ(HρK ).

Using this equivalence, there are as many pseudo-components containing the
conjugacy class of ρ as there are normal subgroups of index p containing Ker(ρ).
This is the number of subgroups of index p in Γ/ Ker(ρ) which is isomorphic to
(Z/p)2 . Thus, there are p + 1 of them.
19

We sum up this combinatorial information in one single theorem. Before
that, we recall that if Γ is a group then ΓAb /pΓAb is a Z/p-vector space. Its
dimension is called the p-rank of Γ.
Theorem 3. Let Γ be a finitely generated group, p be a prime number. Let r
be the p-rank of Γ. Then :
1. χiSing (Γ, P SL(p, C)) is the union of

pr −1
p−1

pseudo-components.

2. The intersection of two different pseudo-components is finite of cardinal
p − 1. All its elements are conjugacy classes of abelian irreducible representations.
3. Conversely, any conjugacy class of abelian irreducible representations belongs to exactly p + 1 pseudo-components.
r

r−1

−1)
4. There are exactly (p −1)(p
conjugacy classes of abelian irreducible
p2 −1
representations from Γ to P SL(p, C).

Proof.
1. In Remark 4, we justified that χiSing (Γ, P SL(p, C)) was the union
of pseudo-components associated to K for K normal subgroups of index
p in Γ. Since the set of such normal subgroups isr in bijection with the set
−1
of subgroups of index p in ΓAb /pΓAb , we have pp−1
of them.
2. It is the statement of Proposition 8 and Corollary 2.
3. It is the statement of Proposition 9.
4. On one hand, for each unordered pair {K, K ′ } of different normal subgroups of index p in Γ, there are p − 1 conjugacy classes of abelian irrei
i
ducible representations from Γ to P SL(p, C) in ϕ(HρK ) ∩ ϕ(HρK ′ ) and
 pr −1 
there are p−1 such unordered pairs.
2

On the other hand, for each conjugacy 
class abelian
irreducible represen
p+1
tation from Γ to P SL(p, C), there are
unordered pairs {K, K ′ }
2
of different normal subgroups of index p in Γ for which the conjugacy class
i
i
of this representation is contained in ϕ(HρK ) ∩ ϕ(HρK ′ ).
Let NΓ,p be the number of conjugacy classes of abelian irreducible representations. Then :

NΓ,p


  pr −1 
(pr − 1)(pr − p)
(p + 1)p
p+1
(p − 1)
=
= p−1 (p − 1), NΓ,p
2
2
2(p − 1)2
2

Therefore, the number of conjugacy classes of abelian irreducible reprer
−1)(pr −p)
(pr −1)(pr−1 −1)
sentations from Γ to P SL(p, C) is (p
.
(p−1)p(p+1) =
p2 −1

20

In this theorem, the combinatorial information about the singular locus of
the character variety only depends on the p-rank of Γ. To understand its topology, Section 3 tells us that we need to compute cohomology groups. This is
what we will do for free groups in Section 6 and for surface groups in Section 7.

6

The free group case

Define Γ := Fl to be the free group of rank l ≥ 2. We recall that the abelianization of Fl is Zl . Furthermore the canonical map from Aut(Fl ) to Aut((Fl )Ab ) =
GL(l, Z) is known to be surjective (c.f. [LS12]). Since the set of normal subgroups K of index p is in bijective correspondence with the set of subgroups of
index p in (Fl )Ab = Zl , it follows that Aut(Fl ) acts transitively on the set of
normal subgroups of index p in Γ. Using this, we have :
Proposition 10. Let l ≥ 2 and K, K ′ be two normal subgroups of index p in
i
i
Fl . Then ϕ(HρK ) and ϕ(HρK ′ ) are homeomorphic to each other.
Proof. Let φ be an element in Aut(Fl ) such that φ(K) = K ′ . Then the precomposition by φ−1 provides a homeomorphism from ι(HρK ) to ι(HρK ′ ) whose
continuous inverse is the precomposition by φ. This homeomorphism induces, on
i
i
the character variety, an homeomorphism between ϕ(HρK ) and ϕ(HρK ′ ).
Remark 6. This proposition implies that we only need to focus on one single
pseudo-component. Here we are going to explain, how to construct a particular
normal subgroup of index p in Fl using topological coverings. What we are
mostly interested in is the expression of the generators of K as words in the
generators of Fl . We begin with a disk D and remove from this disk a smaller
disk with the same center. Then we remove along a radius another l − 1 holes.
After a rotation of the disk by an angle of 2π
p , we remove again along a radius
another l − 1 holes. Doing this p times we construct a surface Y with (l − 1)p + 1
holes. Since, by construction, this surface is invariant by a rotation r of order
p we may quotient out Y by hri to construct a new surface X with exactly l
holes. See Figure 1.
Define ψ : Y → X the projection identifying points in Y modulo hri. This
is a Galois cover of X of order p. Therefore, K := π1 (Y ) is a normal subgroup
of index p in π1 (X). Since X is a disk with l holes, the group π1 (X) is freely
generated by loops around each hole, we will denote them x1 , . . . , xl .
On the other hand, a system of free generators for K is given by loops around
the (l−1)p+1 holes which can be identified to xp1 and xi1 xj x−i
1 with 0 ≤ i ≤ p−1
and 2 ≤ j ≤ l (see Figure 1).
k

Since hMc i acts by conjugation on D, it also acts on D by simultaneously
acting on each coordinates. The next proposition relies on the results of Section
3, especially the explicit computations of cohomology groups.
Proposition 11. Let l ≥ 2, p be a prime number.

 l−1Then any pseudo-component
− {(Ip , . . . , Ip )} /hMc i.
in χiSing (Fl , P SL(p, C)) is homeomorphic to D
21

}
xp1

◭

{z

p lines
of
holes

e
hol
−1

s

|

Surface Y

rotation of
angle 2π
p

◭
l
x1 xl x−1
1
◭ x x x−1
1 2 1
xl ◭
◭ x2
|
{z
}
l − 1 holes

projection ψ

Surface X

x1

◮

◭ x2
|

{z
l − 1 holes

xl ◭
}

Figure 1: Construction of a normal subgroup of index p in a free group over l
generators

22

Proof. Using Proposition 10, we only construct the homeomorphism for a unique
pseudo-component. Let x1 , . . . , xl be a system of free generators for Fl . Then
Remark 6 justifies that the subgroup K0 generated by X := xp1 and Yi,j :=
xi1 xj x−i
1 with 0 ≤ i ≤ p − 1 and 2 ≤ j ≤ l is freely generated by these generators
and is a normal subgroup of index p in Fl .
i
i
According to Theorem 2, ϕ(HρK0 ) is homeomorphic to HρK0 . By Proposition 5, we need to compute H 1 (Fl , DρK0 ). Following the notation of Proposition
6, we choose γ0 := x1 . This proposition states that there is an homeomorphism
between


f (xp1 ) = Ip
.
H (Fl , DρK0 ) and f ∈ Hom(K0 , D)
f (x1 γx−1
1 ) = Mc · f (γ), ∀γ ∈ K0
1

Identifying f to the tuples (f (X), (f (Yi,j ))) of images of the free generators
1+p(l−1)

of K0 , Hom(K0 , D) is equal to D
. Furthermore, f (xp1 ) = Ip means that
f (X) = Ip . Whereas f (x1 γx−1
1 ) = Mc · f (γ), for all γ ∈ K0 is equivalent to
f (Yi+1,j ) = Mc · f (Yi,j ) for j = 2, . . . , l and i = 0, . . . , p − 2.
Therefore, the map sending f to (f (Y0,2 ), . . . , f (Y0,l )) defines a natural idenl−1

tification between the space above and D . As a result, there is an homeol−1
morphism between H 1 (Γ, D ρK0 ) and D . This leads to an homeomorphism
between H 1 (Γ, DρK0 )/hMc i and D
l−1

l−1

/hMc i. By Proposition 5, HρK0 is homeo-

morphic to D /hMc i. Finally, in Remark 2, we have seen that HρK0 has only
one point which is a conjugacy class of non-irreducible representations. It is
i
associated to the zero element in H 1 (Γ, DρK0 )/hMc i. As a result, ϕ(HρK0 ) is

 l−1
− {(Ip , . . . , Ip )} /hMc i.
homeomorphic to D
Corollary 3. Let l ≥ 2 and p be a prime number. Then the singular locus of
χi (Fl , P SL(p, C)) is connected of dimension (p − 1)(l − 1).

Proof. Equation 5 implies that the singular locus χiSing (Fl , P SL(p, C)) is a
union of pseudo-components. By Theorem 3, any two pseudo-components intersect. Since they are all connected by Proposition 11, the union itself is
connected.
Proposition 11 also implies that the dimension of a pseudo-component is
(p − 1)(l − 1). Since the intersection between any two pseudo-components is a
finite number of point and we have a finite number of these sets, the topological
dimension of χiSing (Fl , P SL(p, C)) is also (p − 1)(l − 1).
 l−1

− {(Ip , . . . , Ip )} /hMc i is irreducible for the Zariski
Remark 7. Since D
topology, the correspondence given in Proposition 11 implies that the pseudocomponents are the irreducible components of χiSing (Fl , P SL(p, C)).

23

7

The closed surface group case

Let Σg be a closed surface of genus g ≥ 2. We are studying the singular locus of the character variety of the fundamental group of π1 (Σg ) in P SL(p, C).
Basically, our study will follow the lines of the free group case. From the
Dehn-Nielsen-Baer theorem (see [FM11] theorem 8.1), we know that the orientation preserving mapping class group of a surface is a subgroup of index
2 in Out(π1 (Σg )). We denote Out+ (π1 (Σg )) this subgroup of index 2 and
Aut+ (π1 (Σg )) the corresponding subgroup of automorphisms.
The set of normal subgroups K of index p in π1 (Σg ) is in bijective correspondence with the set of subgroups of index p in π1 (Σg )Ab = Z2g . Furthermore, it is
known that Sp(2g, Z) acts transitively on these subgroups. Since the canonical
map from Out+ (π1 (Σg )) on Sp(2g, Z) is known to be surjective (c.f. [FM11],
theorem 6.4), it follows that Aut+ (π1 (Σg )) acts transitively on the set of normal
subgroups of index p in π1 (Σg ). Using this, we have :
Proposition 12. Let g ≥ 2 and K, K ′ be two normal subgroups of index
p in π1 (Σg ). Then, there exists an automorphism φ in Aut+ (π1 (Σg )) such
i
that the precomposition by φ induces an homeomorphism between ϕ(HρK ) and
i

ϕ(HρK ′ ).
Proof. The same proof as for Proposition 10.
Remark 8. This proposition implies that we only need to focus on one single
pseudo-component. Let a1 , b1 ,. . . ,ag , bg be the standard generators of π1 (Σg ) :
π1 (Σg ) = ha1 , b1 , . . . , ag , bg |

g
Y
[ai , bi ] = 1i.

i=1

ap1 ,

−i
i
Then define K to be the group generated
b1 , ai1 aj a−i
1 , a1 bj a1 for 0 ≤ i ≤
p − 1 and 2 ≤ j ≤ g. Replacing the disks in Figure 1 by tori, one may identify
K to the fundamental group of a p-fold Galois cover of Σg . As a result, K is a
normal subgroup of index p in π1 (Σg ). Furthermore K is the fundamental group
of a closed topological surface of genus 1 + (g − 1)p and π1 (K)Ab is isomorphic
−i
i
to Z2+2(g−1)p freely generated by the images of ap1 , b1 , ai1 aj a−i
1 , a1 bj a1 for
0 ≤ i ≤ p − 1 and 2 ≤ j ≤ g.

Proposition 13. Let g ≥ 2, Σg be a closed surface of genus g and p be a
prime number. Then any pseudo-component in χiSing (π1 (Σg ), P SL(p, C)) is


2(g−1)
− {(Ip , . . . , Ip )} /hMc i.
homeomorphic to hD(ξ)i × D
Proof. Using Proposition 12, we only construct the homeomorphism for a unique
pseudo-component. Let a1 , b1 ,. . . ,ag , bg be the standard generators of π1 (Σg ).
Then, Remark 8 justifies that the subgroup K0 generated by A := ap1 , B := b1 ,
Ai,j := ai1 aj a1−i and Bi,j := ai1 bj a−i
1 with 0 ≤ i ≤ p − 1 and 2 ≤ j ≤ g is a
normal subgroup of index p in π1 (Σg ). Furthermore, its abelianization is freely
generated by the images of A, B, Ai,j and Bi,j .
24

i

i

According to Theorem 2, ϕ(HρK0 ) is homeomorphic to HρK0 . By Proposition 5, we need to compute H 1 (π1 (Σg ), DρK0 ). Following the notation of
Proposition 6, we choose γ0 := a1 . This proposition states that there is an
homeomorphism between H 1 (π1 (Σg ), D ρK0 ) and


f (ap1 ) = Ip
.
f ∈ Hom(K0 , D)
f (a1 γa−1
1 ) = Mc · f (γ), ∀γ ∈ K0
Identifying f to the tuples of images (f (X), f (Y ), (f (Xi,j )), f (Yi,j )) of the
free generators of K0Ab , Hom(K0 , D) is equal to D
that f (A) = Ip . Remark that

1+p(g−1)

. f (ap1 ) = Ip means

−1
−1
a−1
[b1 , a1 ](a1 b1 ) = b1 (a1 b1 )−1
1 Ba1 = a1 b1 a1 = b1 (a1 b1 )

g
Y

[ai , bi ]a1 b1 .

j=2
−1
Therefore f (a1 Ba−1
1 ) = f (B). Whence f (a1 γa1 ) = Mc · f (γ), for all γ ∈ K0
−1
is equivalent to f (B) = f (a1 Ba1 ) = Mc · f (B), f (Ai+1,j ) = Mc · f (Ai,j ) and
f (Bi+1,j ) = Mc · f (Bi,j ) for j = 2, . . . , l and i = 0, . . . , p − 2.
Thus, the map sending f to (f (B), f (A0,2 ), f (B0,2 ), . . . , f (A0,g ), f (B0,g )) de-

fines a natural identification between the space above and hD(ξ)i×D

2(g−1)

. As a

2(g−1)

1

result, there is an homeomorphism between H (Γ, DρK0 ) and hD(ξ)i × D
The end of the proof is similar to the free group case (Proposition 11).

.

Unlike the free group case, neither the pseudo-components nor the singular
locus are connected. To have a more refined statement, we introduce an invariant. Let g ≥ 2 and Σg be a closed surface of genus g whose fundamental group is
generated by a1 , b1 , . . . , ag , bg verifying one single relation [a1 , b1 ] · · · [ag , bg ] = 1.
If ρ is a representation from π1 (Σg ) to P SL(p, C), we arbitrarily choose
for each γ ∈ π1 (Σg ), ρ̂(γ) ∈ SL(p, C) such that ρ̂(γ) = ρ(γ). Since ρ is a
representation in P SL(p, C) we have that :
e(ρ) :=

g
Y

i=1

[ρ̂(ai ), ρ̂(bi )] ∈ Z(SL(p, C)).

It is a straightforward verification that e(ρ) only depends on ρ (and not on
the chosen lifts). It is called the Euler invariant. It is invariant by conjugation. We shall see, in the next lemma, that it is also invariant by the action of
Aut+ (π1 (Σg )).
Lemma 8. Let g ≥ 2, Σg be a closed surface of genus g ≥ 2, φ ∈ Aut+ (π1 (Σg ))
and ρ ∈ Hom(π1 (Σg ), P SL(p, C)). Then e(ρ ◦ φ) = e(ρ).

Proof. Let φ be in Aut+ (π1 (Σg )) and ρ ∈ Hom(π1 (Σg ), P SL(p, C)). Consider
the central exact sequence defining P SL(p, C) :
1

// Z(SL(p, C))

// SL(p, C)
25

// P SL(p, C)

// 1

Let [z] ∈ H 2 (P SL(p, C), Z(SL(p, C))) representing this exact sequence.
Then, [ρ∗ z] in H 2 (π1 (Σg ), Z(SL(p, C))) is invariant by Aut+ (π1 (Σg )) since
it leaves invariant the volume form generating H 2 (Γ, Z). Using Poincaré duality,
H 2 (π1 (Σg ), Z(SL(p, C))) and H 0 (π1 (Σg ), Z(SL(p, C))∗ ) = Z(SL(p, C))∗ are in
natural dual pairing. It gives an isomorphism between H 2 (π1 (Σg ), Z(SL(p, C)))
and Z(SL(p, C)). One can check that through this isomorphism, [ρ∗ z] will be
sent to e(ρ). Whence the result.
It leads to the following topological result.
Corollary 4. Let g ≥ 2, Σg be a closed surface of genus g, p be a prime
i
number and K be a normal subgroup of index p in π1 (Σg ). Then ϕ(HρK ) has
exactly p connected components which are the fibers over the Euler invariant.
Furthermore
i

• e−1 (Ip ) ∩ ϕ(HρK ) is homeomorphic to (D
i

2(g−1)

− {(1, . . . , 1)})/hMci.

• for 1 ≤ k ≤ p− 1, e−1 (ξ k Ip )∩ϕ(HρK ) is homeomorphic to D

2(g−1)

/hMc i.

Proof. Proposition 12 which states that Aut+ (π1 (Σg )) acts transitively on components and Lemma 8 which states that the Euler invariant is invariant by action
of Aut+ (π1 (Σg )) imply that we only need to do it for one normal subgroup of
index p in π1 (Σg ). Define a1 , b1 , . . . , ag , bg to be its standard generators and,
−i
i
like before define K0 to be the subgroup generated by ap1 , b1 , ai1 aj a−i
1 , a1 b j a1
for 1 ≤ i ≤ p and 2 ≤ j ≤ g.
Define a group morphism ρk : π1 (Σg ) → D⋊hMc i by ρk (a1 ) := Mc , ρk (b1 ) :=
k

D(ξ) and ρk (ai ) = ρk (bi ) = D(ξ) for 2 ≤ i ≤ g. Since ρk (a1 ) and ρk (a2 )
generate an irreducible subgroup of P SL(p, C), ρk is irreducible. Finally, Ker(q◦
ρk ) contains K0 and is therefore equal to it because they have the same index
i
in π1 (Σg ). Therefore, [ρk ] belongs to ϕ(HρK0 ).
Taking the following lifts ρˆk (a1 ) := Mc , ρˆk (b1 ) := D(ξ)k , ρˆk (ai ) := D(ξ)
and ρˆk (bi ) := D(ξ) for i ≥ 2, the Euler invariant of ρk is e(ρk ) = ξ −k Ip . As
i
i
a result, the map e : ϕ(Hρ ) → Z(SL(p, C)) is onto. Whence ϕ(HρK0 ) has at
least p connected components (the p fibers over e). Proposition 13 implies that
it has exactly p connected components. Therefore, the p connected components
i
of ϕ(HρK0 ) are its fibers over e.
Remark that,
through the homeomorphism of Proposition 13, which sends

2(g−1)
i
ϕ(HρK0 ) to hD(ξ)i × D
− {(Ip , . . . , Ip )} /hMc i, the conjugacy class of
k

ρk is sent to (D(ξ) , D(ξ), . . . , D(ξ)).
−1
As a result, the connected
 2(g−1) component e (Ip ) of the conjugacy class of ρ0
is homeomorphic to D
− {(Ip , . . . , Ip )} /hMc i. For 1 ≤ k ≤ p − 1, the

connected component e−1 (ξ −k Ip ) of the conjugacy class of ρk is homeomorphic

to D

2(g−1)

/hMc i.
26

Remark 9. Applying this corollary, χiSing (π1 (Σg ), P SL(p, C)) has at least p connected components given by their Euler invariants. Our next order of business
is to show that each fiber above the Euler invariant is connected.
Basically, the idea would be to apply Theorem 3 (like in the free group case).
i
i
However, it might happen that ϕ(HρK ) ∩ ϕ(HρK ′ ) ∩ e−1 (ξ k Ip ) is empty. The
necessary and sufficient conditions for this set to be not empty are given in
Proposition 14. To do so, it is necessary to consider π1 (Σg )Ab /pπ1 (Σg )Ab as a
symplectic space.
By symplectic (vector) space, we mean a vector space endowed with a symplectic bilinear form. Let (E0 , ω) be a symplectic space with a linear basis
(x1 , y1 , . . . , xg , yg ). It is a symplectic basis if ω(xi , xj ) = 0 = ω(yi , yj ) for all
i, j and ω(xi , yj ) = 1 if i = j and 0 else. We will use the fact that any vector space endowed with a symplectic bilinear form admits a symplectic basis
and any linear endomorphism sending a symplectic basis to a symplectic basis
is a symplectic transformation. We denote Sp(E0 , ω) the group of symplectic
transformations for (E0 , ω).
Furthermore, if E is a subspace of codimension 2 in E0 then either ω|E is
non-degenerate or it has a kernel of dimension 2 (because ω is non-degenerate).
In the first case, we say that E is non-degenerate, in the second case we say that
E is degenerate.
Lemma 9. Let g ≥ 1 and (E0 , ω) bea symplectic K-linear space of dimension

E, E ′ are hyperplanes in E0
2g. Then, there are, two orbits in (E, E ′ )
E 6= E ′
′
for the action of Sp(E0 , ω) depending whether E ∩ E is degenerate or nondegenerate.
Proof. Let (x1 , y1 , . . . , xg , yg ) be a symplectic basis for E0 . Let E, E ′ be two
hyperplanes in E0 verifying E 6= E ′ .
If E ∩E ′ is non-degenerate we shall find a symplectic transformation sending
E to Span(x1 , x2 , y2 , . . . , xg , yg ) and E ′ to Span(y1 , x2 , y2 , . . . , xg , yg ).
If E ∩ E ′ is degenerate we shall find a symplectic transformation sending E
to Span(y1 , x2 , y2 , x3 , y3 . . . , xg , yg ) and E ′ to Span(x1 , y1 , y2 , x3 , y3 . . . , xg , yg ).
Assume F := E ∩ E ′ is non-degenerate. Let (x′2 , y2′ , . . . , x′g , yg′ ) be a symplectic basis of F . Let u be in E such that E = Span(u) ⊕ F . Since F is
non-degenerate, there exists f0 ∈ F such that ω(u, ·)|F = ω(f0 , ·)|F . Therefore
v := u − f0 is orthogonal to F and E = Span(v) ⊕⊥ F . Likewise, there is v ′ ∈ E ′
verifying E ′ = Span(v ′ ) ⊕⊥ F . Since E0 = Span(v, v ′ ) ⊕⊥ F and E0 and F are
both non-degenerate, Span(v, v ′ ) is non degenerate, whence ω(v, v ′ ) 6= 0.
Let v ′′ := ω(v, v ′ )−1 v ′ then (v, v ′′ , x′2 , y2′ , . . . , x′g , yg′ ) is a symplectic basis of
E0 . Therefore, the linear map ψ sending this symplectic basis to the initial one
(x1 , y1 , . . . , xg , yg ) is the wanted symplectic transformation.
Assume F := E ∩ E ′ is degenerate. Let K := F ⊥ . Then F = K ⊕⊥ F0 where
F0 is non-degenerate. Let (x′3 , y3′ , . . . , x′g , yg′ ) be a symplectic basis of F0 .
27

Let u be in E such that E = Span(u) ⊕ F . Since F0 is non-degenerate,
there exists f0 ∈ F0 such that ω(u, ·)|F0 = ω(f0 , ·)|F0 . Therefore v := u − f0
is orthogonal to F0 and E = (Span(v) ⊕ K) ⊕⊥ F0 . Likewise, there is v ′ ∈ E ′
verifying E ′ = (Span(v ′ ) ⊕ K) ⊕⊥ F0 . We remark that E0 = (Span(v, v ′ ) ⊕
K) ⊕⊥ F0 and therefore Span(v, v ′ ) ⊕ K is non-degenerate.
Since Span(v, v ′ ) ∩ F is trivial and F = K ⊥ , there is y1′ ∈ K verifying
ω(v, y1′ ) = 1 and ω(v ′ , y1′ ) = 0. If v ′′ := v ′ − ω(v, v ′ )y1′ , then v ′′ is both
orthogonal to v ′ and y1′ . Furthermore E ′′ = (Span(v ′′ ) ⊕ K) ⊕⊥ F0 . Finally, there is y2′ ∈ K verifying ω(v ′′ , y2′ ) = 1 and ω(v, y2′ ) = 0. Therefore
(v, y1′ , v ′′ , y2′ , x′3 , y3′ , . . . , x′g , yg′ ) is a symplectic basis and the linear map sending
this symplectic basis to (x1 , y1 , . . . , xg , yg ) is the wanted symplectic transformation.
Remark 10. Let g ≥ 2. Then π1 (Σg )Ab /pπ1 (Σg )Ab is isomorphic to (Z/p)2g .
We denote Φ the natural projection of π1 (Σg ) onto Ep,g := (Z/p)2g . Remark
that there is a natural symplectic form ω on Ep,g which is invariant by the
action of Aut+ (π1 (Σg )). If (a1 , b1 , . . . , ag , bg ) is a standard system of generator
for π1 (Σg ) then (Φ(a1 ), Φ(b1 ), . . . , Φ(ag ), Φ(bg )) is naturally a symplectic basis
of Ep,g for ω.
Proposition 14. Let g ≥ 2, p be a prime number, Σg be a closed surface of
genus g, K, K ′ be two different normal subgroups of index p in π1 (Σg ) and k be
i
an integer between 0 and p − 1. Then, the cardinal of e−1 (ξ k Ip ) ∩ ϕ(HρK ) ∩
i

ϕ(HρK ′ ) is :





1
0
0



p−1

if
if
if
if

k
k
k
k

6 0
=
=0
6= 0
=0

and
and
and
and

Φ(K
Φ(K
Φ(K
Φ(K

∩ K ′)
∩ K ′)
∩ K ′)
∩ K ′)

is
is
is
is

non-degenerate
non-degenerate
degenerate
degenerate

Proof. Lemma 9 justifies that we only need to show this property for one example when Φ(K ∩ K ′ ) is non-degenerate and one example when Φ(K ∩ K ′ )
is degenerate. We denote a1 , b1 , . . . , ag , bg a system of standard generators for
π1 (Σg ).
The non-degenerate case. We define K := Φ−1 (E) and K ′ := Φ−1 (E ′ ) where
E := Span(Φ(b1 ), Φ(a2 ), Φ(b2 ), . . . , Φ(ag ), Φ(bg ))
E ′ := Span(Φ(a1 ), Φ(a2 ), Φ(b2 ), . . . , Φ(ag ), Φ(bg ))
Then K and K ′ are both normal subgroup of index p in π1 (Σg ). Furthermore
Φ(K ∩ K ′ ) is the subspace of Ep,g generated by (Φ(a2 ), Φ(b2 ), . . . , Φ(ag ), Φ(bg )).
Since this is a symplectic family, it follows that Φ(K ∩ K ′ ) is non-degenerate.
For 1 ≤ k ≤ p − 1, define a group morphism ρk from π1 (Σg ) to P SL(p, C)
k

with ρk (a1 ) := Mc , ρk (b1 ) := D(ξ) and ρ(K ∩ K ′ ) is trivial. The image of ρk
i
i
is irreducible and its conjugacy class belongs to ϕ(HρK ) ∩ ϕ(HρK ′ ).
28

Finally, e(ρk ) = [Mc , D(ξ)k ] = ξ −k Ip . As a result, ρ1 ,. . . , ρp−1 leads to
i
i
i
p − 1 different points in ϕ(HρK ) ∩ ϕ(HρK ′ ). Theorem 3 implies that ϕ(HρK ) ∩
i

ϕ(HρK ′ ) contains p − 1 elements. Whence the result.

The degenerate case. We define K := Φ−1 (E) and K ′ := Φ−1 (E ′ ) where :
E := Span(Φ(b1 ), Φ(a2 ), Φ(b2 ), . . . , Φ(ag ), Φ(bg ))
E ′ := Span(Φ(a1 ), Φ(b1 ), Φ(b2 ), Φ(a3 ), Φ(b3 ), . . . , Φ(ag ), Φ(bg )).
Then K and K ′ are both normal subgroup of index p in π1 (Σg ). Furthermore
Φ(K ∩ K ′ ) is the subspace of Ep,g generated by Φ(b1 ), Φ(b2 ), Φ(a3 ), Φ(b3 ),. . . ,
Φ(ag ), Φ(bg ). Since Φ(b1 ) is orthogonal to Φ(K ∩ K ′ ), Φ(K ∩ K ′ ) is degenerate.
For 1 ≤ k ≤ p − 1, define a group morphism ρk from π1 (Σg ) to P SL(p, C)
k

with ρk (a1 ) := Mc , ρk (a2 ) := D(ξ) and ρ(K ∩ K ′ ) is trivial. The image of ρk
i
i
is irreducible and its conjugacy class belongs to ϕ(HρK ) ∩ ϕ(HρK ′ ).
Finally, e(ρk ) = Ip . Remark that if ρk is conjugate to ρk′ then the bases of
k′

k

hD(ξ)i × hMc i : (Mc , D(ξ) ) and (Mc , D(ξ) ) are obtained by the action of the
normalizer of hD(ξ)i × hMc i. Lemma 7 implies k = k ′ . Therefore ρ1 ,. . . , ρp−1
i
i
leads to p − 1 different points in ϕ(HρK ) ∩ ϕ(HρK ′ ) which all have a trivial
Euler invariant. Theorem 3 implies that their conjugacy classes are the only
points in the intersection, whence the result.
The final result relies on the following geometric lemma.
Lemma 10. Let E and E ′ be two different hyperplanes of V := (Z/p)2g with
g ≥ 2. Let ω be a symplectic form on V . We have two cases :
• If E ∩ E ′ is non-degenerate, there is an hyperplane E0 such that E ∩ E0
and E ′ ∩ E0 are both degenerate.
• If E ∩ E ′ is degenerate, there is an hyperplane E0 such that E ∩ E0 and
E ′ ∩ E0 are both non-degenerate.
Proof. Let (x1 , y1 , . . . , xg , yg ) be a symplectic basis of V . Lemma 9 justifies that
it suffices to prove the lemma for one example in each case.
Let F be the subspace generated by x2 , y2 ,. . . ,xg , yg , E be Span(x1 ) ⊕ F
and E ′ be Span(y1 ) ⊕ F . Then E ∩ E ′ = F is non-degenerate. Let E0 be
the subspace generated by x1 , y1 , x2 , x3 , y3 ,. . . ,xg , yg . Then x2 is a degenerate
vector of E0 ∩ E and E0 ∩ E ′ . Whence the result in this case.
Let F0 be the subspace generated by y1 , y2 , x3 , y3 ,. . . ,xg , yg , E be Span(x1 )⊕
F and E ′ be Span(x2 ) ⊕ F . Then E ∩ E ′ = F is degenerate. Let E0 be the
subspace generated by x1 , x2 , y1 +y2 , x3 , y3 , . . . , xg , yg . Then E0 ∩E and E0 ∩E ′
are both non-degenerate. Whence the result in this case.
i

Applying Corollary 4, e−1 (ξ k Ip ) ∩ ϕ(HρK ) is connected of dimension 2(g −
1)(p − 1). Using Proposition 14 and Lemma 10, this leads to :
29

Corollary 5. Let g ≥ 2 and Σg be a closed Riemann surface of genus g. The
orbifold locus of χi (π1 (Σg ), P SL(p, C)) has p connected components given by the
fibers for the Euler invariant and its dimension is 2(g − 1)(p − 1).
Remark 11. Considering the Zariski topology, we see that for each 0 ≤ k ≤ p− 1
i
and each normal subgroup K of index p in π1 (Σg ), e−1 (ξ k Ip ) ∩ ϕ(HρK ) is an
irreducible component of χiSing (π1 (Σg ), P SL(p, C)).

8

Orbifold singularities and algebraic singularities

Like we said in the introduction, the singular locus χiSing (Γ, G) should be understood as orbifold singularities since, when Γ is a free group or a surface group,
it is the set of orbifold singularities of a well-defined orbifold. A priori, it does
not necessarily coincide with the locus of algebraic singularities of χi (Γ, G). In
Proposition 15, we prove that these two notions coincide when Γ is a free group
of rank ≥ 2 or a closed surface group of genus g ≥ 2 and G = P SL(p, C) with
p prime.
To do this, we recall some facts about tangent spaces to representation varieties and character varieties. If Γ is a finitely generated group , G is a complex
algebraic group, g is its Lie algebra and ρ : Γ → G is a representation, then g
is a Γ-module with the action given by Ad ◦ ρ. This Γ-module will be denoted
gAd◦ρ .
In [Sik12], Proposition 34 (see also [LM85], Chapter 2) Sikora proves that
the Zariski tangent space to Hom(Γ, G) at ρ (denoted Tρ Hom(Γ, G)) can be
identified to this space of 1-cocycles Z 1 (Γ, gAd◦ρ ).
Remark 12. The proof of Proposition 4 is similar to Sikora’s proof. The reason
is that the Zariski tangent space Tρ Hom(Γ, G) can be identified to the fiber of
Hom(Γ, G(C[ǫ])) above ρ where G(C[ǫ]) is naturally isomorphic to g ⋊Ad G.
One can show that the Zariski tangent space to the orbit [ρ] at ρ is exactly B 1 (Γ, gAd◦ρ ). For instance, Weil (in [Wei64]) uses this to prove that
H 1 (Γ, gAd◦ρ ) = 0 implies the local rigidity of ρ (i.e. a neighborhood of ρ in
the representation variety is contained in the conjugacy class of ρ). In particular, any finite group representation is locally rigid.
However, in general, the Zariski tangent space at [ρ] to the schematic character variety X(Γ, G) is different from H 1 (Γ, gAd◦ρ ) (e.g. in [Ben02]). When ρ is
scheme smooth, the link between this tangent space and H 1 (Γ, gAd◦ρ ) has been
studied in [Sik12], Paragraph 13 by Sikora (see also Proposition 5.2 in [HP04])
using Luna’s Étale Slice Theorem. Theorem 53 in [Sik12] states that if ρ is a
scheme smooth completely reducible representation then :



dim T0 H 1 (Γ, gAd◦ρ )//ZG (ρ) = dim T[ρ] X(Γ, G) = dim T[ρ] X(Γ, G) (6)
To prove Proposition 15, we need two lemmas :
30

Lemma 11. Let Γ be either a free group or a closed surface group and G be
a complex reductive algebraic group. Then, for any irreducible representation ρ
from Γ to G, dim(χi (Γ, G)) = dim(H 1 (Γ, gAd◦ρ )).
Proof. If Γ is a free group with l ≥ 2 generators then Z 1 (Γ, gAd◦ρ )) = gl and
B 1 (Γ, gAd◦ρ )) = g/gAd◦ρ(Γ) . Since ρ(Γ) is irreducible gAd◦ρ(Γ) = Lie(Z(G)).
dim(H 1 (Γ, gAd◦ρ )) = dim(gl )−dim(g)+dim(Z(G)) = (l−1) dim(G)+dim(Z(G))
dim(χi (Γ, G)) = dim(Hom(Γ, G))−dim(G/Z(G)) = (l−1) dim(G)+dim(Z(G)).
Whence the result in the free group case. For the surface group case, it is
also classical but more difficult, see [Gol84].
The next lemma is well-known but its proof is written for the convenience
of the reader. Our interest in cyclic quotients (vector spaces quotiented by a
cyclic group action) comes from Theorem 1 which implies that centralizers of
non-abelian bad representations are cyclic.
Lemma 12. Let G be a cyclic group of prime order p generated by g and assume
that we have a linear action of G on CN where N ≥ 0. Then 0 mod G is an
algebraic singularity of the cyclic quotient CN //G if and only if codim(Fix(g)) >
1.
Proof. Up to some change of basis, there are integers 0 ≤ a1 ≤ · · · ≤ aN ≤ p − 1
such that the action of G on CN is given by g ·(v1 , . . . , vN ) = (ξ a1 v1 , . . . , ξ aN vN )
where ξ is a primitive p-th root of the unity. To study CN //G, we only need to
compute its coordinate ring B. Let A := C[x1 , . . . , xN ] be the coordinate ring
of CN . Then B is the subring of A of invariants by the action of G : B = AG .
If codim(Fix(g)) = 0, then A = B and CN //G is everywhere smooth. If
codim(Fix(g)) = 1, then B = C[x1 , . . . , xN −1 , xpN ]. In this case B is isomorphic
to A and, again, CN //G is everywhere smooth.
If codim(Fix(g)) > 1, then let k < N − 1 be such that ak = 0 and ak+1 > 0.
Define m0 := (x1 , . . . , xN ) in A and n0 := B ∩ m0 the maximal ideal in B
associated to 0 mod G. Then n0 contains x1 , . . . , xk , xpk+1 , . . . , xpN . Let u (resp.
v) be the inverse of aN −1 (resp aN ) modulo p, xuN −1 xp−v
is invariant by G.
N
Therefore it belongs to n0 and we have N + 1 elements in n0 which are linearly
independent in the Zariski tangent space n0 /n20 to CN //G at 0 mod G. Whence
0 mod G is an algebraic singularity.
The proof of the following proposition is a generalization of the proof of
Proposition 5.8 in [HP04].
Proposition 15. Let Γ be either a free group of rank ≥ 2 or a surface group
of genus g ≥ 2, p be a prime number and ρ : Γ → P SL(p, C) be an irreducible
representation. Then [ρ] is an algebraic singularity in the schematic character
variety if and only if ρ is bad.
31

Proof. Let ρ be a good representation, since Γ is a free group or a closed surface
group, ρ is scheme smooth. Corollary 50 in [Sik12] implies that [ρ] is scheme
smooth as well since ρ has trivial centralizer.
Conversely, assume ρ is a bad representation. Up to conjugation (Theorem
1) we may assume that ρ is a representation into D ⋊ hMc i. Let K be the kernel
of q ◦ ρ. For the moment, we assume that ρ is not abelian and therefore its
centralizer is hD(ξ)i. In order to
 prove that [ρ] is an algebraic singularity we
prove that dim T[ρ] X(Γ, P SLp ) > dim X(Γ, P SLp ) = dim χ(Γ, P SL(p, C)).
We denote slp (C) the Lie algebra of P SL(p, C). Following Equation 6, we
need to compute H 1 (Γ, slp (C)Ad◦ρ ). For 0 ≤ i, j ≤ p − 1, we denote Ei,j the
matrix with a 1 at the (i, j)-th entry and 0 everywhere else. Let d0 be the Lie
algebra of trace free diagonal matrices in slp (C) and for k = 1, . . . , p − 1, define
dk :=

p−1
M

CEi,i+k .

i=0

Since for 0 ≤ k ≤ p−1, dk is stable by the action of D and Mc , the decomposition
of slp (C) = d0 ⊕· · ·⊕dp−1 as C-vector space is also a decomposition as Γ-module.
H 1 (Γ, slp (C)Ad◦ρ ) = H 1 (Γ, d0,Ad◦ρ ) ⊕

p−1
M

H 1 (Γ, dk,Ad◦ρ ).

(7)

k=1

For 1 ≤ k ≤ p − 1, 0 ≤ i ≤ p − 1, Ad(D(ξ)) · Ei,i+k = ξ k Ei,i+k . Therefore, the
action of D(ξ) on dk is the multiplication by ξ k and so is the induced action of
D(ξ) on H 1 (Γ, dk,Ad◦ρ ).
We recognize a cyclic quotient. Using Lemma 12, we only need to prove that
dim(H 1 (Γ, slp (C)Ad◦ρ )) − dim(H 1 (Γ, d0,Ad◦ρ )) > 1 to end up with an algebraic
singularity at the origin.

If Γ = Fr , then dim Z 1 (Fr , dk,Ad◦ρ ) = r dim(dk ) = rp. Since ρ is irreducible, slp (C)Fr = {0}. Therefore dFkr = {0} and dim (B1 (Fr , dk,Ad◦ρ )) =
p − 0 = p. Therefore dim H 1 (Fr , dk,Ad◦ρ ) = (r − 1)p ≥ 2.
At the end of Paragraph 6 in [Wei64], Weil gives an explicit formula for the
dimension of the first cohomology groups for Fuchsian groups without parabolic
elements acting on C-vector
 spaces. Applying this to the surface group case,
dim H 1 (π1 (Σg ), dk,Ad◦ρ ) = (2g − 2)p ≥ 2 for 1 ≤ k ≤ p − 1.
In any case, Lemma 12 implies that
 


dim T0 H 1 (Γ, slp (C)Ad◦ρ )//hD(ξ)i > dim H 1 (Γ, slp (C)Ad◦ρ ) .

Using Lemma 11 and Sikora’s expression for the dimension of the tangent space
at [ρ] (Equation 6) which applies because ρ is scheme smooth, [ρ] is an algebraic
singularity of the schematic character variety.

32

In the free group or closed surface group case, any abelian irreducible representation is a limit of non-abelian bad representations. Since each of them
is an algebraic singularity of the character variety and the set of algebraic singularities is closed, any conjugacy class of bad representations is an algebraic
singularity.
Remark 13. Let X be a (possibly non-reduced) scheme and x be a closed point
of X. A point x is reduced if its local ring does not contain non-trivial nilpotent
elements. A representation (resp. conjugacy class of representations) is scheme
smooth if and only if it is both smooth and reduced. Using Corollary 55 in
[Sik12], one sees that we can forget the ”schematic” in the preceding proposition.
In general, there is no link between the set of algebraic singularities for the
irreducible part of the character variety and the singular locus of the character
variety. The next example is based on the idea of Sikora, c.f. [Sik12], Example
42.
Example 2. Let ρ1 be the trivial representation of Z2 into SL(2, C) and ρ2 be
the unique irreducible representation of the symmetric group S3 into SL(2, C).
Let Γ be the free product of Z2 and S3 and ρ := ρ1 ∗ ρ2 . Then ρ is an irreducible
representation of Γ into SL(2, C).
We denote Hom(Γ, SL(2, C))0 the set of representations in Hom(Γ, SL(2, C))
such that their restriction to S3 is conjugate to ρ2 . Since ρ2 is good and locally
rigid, Hom(Z2 , SL(2, C))×{ρ2 } is an étale slice for the P SL(2, C)-action by conjugation on Hom(Γ, SL(2, C))0 . Therefore, the tangent space to the character
variety at [ρ] is simply the tangent space at ρ1 to Hom(Z2 , SL(2, C)).
Example 42 in [Sik12] justifies that ρ1 is an algebraic singularity of the representation variety Hom(Z2 , SL(2, C)). Therefore, [ρ] is an algebraic singularity
of χi (Γ, SL(2, C)). However, ρ is a good representation.
Example 3. Let Γ = Z/3 × Z/3 and G = P SL(3, C). Define ρ to be an isomorphism between Γ and the unique (up to conjugation) abelian irreducible
group of G. Being
 locally rigid, ρ is scheme smooth. Equation 6 implies that
dim T[ρ] X(Γ, G) = 0 and therefore [ρ] is necessarily scheme smooth as well.
However, ρ is an abelian irreducible representation and, in particular, is bad.

Remark 14. In the proof of Proposition 15, we used the hypothesis that Γ is a
free group or a closed surface group for two different things. The first was to
insure that irreducible representations are scheme smooth (this is what fails in
Example 2). The second was to insure that cohomology groups of Γ into dk are
big enough to use Lemma 12 (this is what trivially fails in Example 3 because Γ
is finite). The modular group in P SL(2, C) leads to a non-locally rigid example
where the second condition fails, see Proposition 16.
Proposition 16. χi (P SL(2, Z), P SL(p, C)) is a manifold for any prime p > 3.
The singular locus of χi (P SL(2, Z), P SL(3, C)) is a singleton. Its unique
point is not scheme smooth.
The singular locus of χi (P SL(2, Z), P SL(2, C)) is a singleton. Its unique
point is scheme smooth.
33

Proof. First, P SL(2, Z) is isomorphic to Z/2 ∗ Z/3 = ha, b | a2 = 1 = b3 i.
Therefore
Hom(P SL(2, Z), P SLp ) = Hom(Z/2, P SLp ) × Hom(Z/3, P SLp ).
Since Hom(Z/2, P SLp ) and Hom(Z/3, P SLp ) are both smooth (because any
closed point is locally rigid whence scheme smooth), Hom(P SL(2, Z), P SLp ) is
also smooth and therefore the open subvariety Homi (P SL(2, Z), P SL(p, C)) is
also smooth. As a result, χi (P SL(2, Z), P SL(p, C)) is an orbifold and conjugacy
classes of good representations are necessarily scheme smooth.
When p > 3, there is no normal subgroup of index p in P SL(2, Z). Equation 5 directly implies that the singular locus is empty, whence the orbifold
χi (P SL(2, Z), P SL(p, C)) is actually a manifold.
p = 3. There is only one normal subgroup of index 3 in P SL(2, Z) (it is
normally generated by a). Any bad morphism from P SL(2, Z) in P SL(3, C) will


−1
−1 , b 7→ Mc because a needs to be of
then be conjugate to β3 : a 7→ 
1
order 2. By definition, there is a single point in χiSing (P SL(2, Z), P SL(3, C)).
p = 2. Likewise, there is only one conjugacy class of bad representations from P SL(2, Z) in P SL(2, C) which is given by β2 : a 7→ Mc , b 7→
!
√
2 −1π
e 3
√
. There is a single point in χiSing (P SL(2, Z), P SL(2, C)).
2 −1π
e− 3
To study, the singularity [βp ] in the character variety one does the exact
same thing as in Proposition 15. Since dim(H 1 (P SL(2, Z), dk,Ad◦βp )) = 1 for
p = 2, 3 and 1 ≤ k ≤ p−1, we may apply the criterion of Lemma 12 and Sikora’s
formula (Equation 6). This leads to the wanted result.
There are more general questions related to the algebraic singularities of the
(schematic) character variety.
• Completely reducible representations which are not irreducible are usually
algebraic singularities of free groups character varieties (see for instance
Theorem 3.21 in [FL12]). But there are, in some cases, non irreducible
representations whose conjugacy class is ”accidentally” smooth on the
(schematic) character variety. It is highlighted in Remark 3.22 in loc. cit.,
one could think of χ(Z, SL(n, C)) = Cn−1 or χ(F2 , SL(2, C)) = C3 whose
all points, even the non-irreducible ones, are smooth.
• The method in the proof of Proposition 15 virtually generalizes to any
Fuchsian groups (by Fuchsian group, we mean discrete subgroup Γ of
P SL(2, R) such that H2 /Γ has finite volume, see [Wei64]). Indeed, for
such groups, irreducible representations are scheme smooth in P SL(p, C),
which allows us to use Sikora’s formula (Equation 6). It would certainly be
interesting to look more closely to non-Fuchsian examples (e.g. Example
2).
34

• Does Proposition 15 remain true if P SL(p, C) is replaced by any complex
reductive group G (in the free group case, it is related to Conjecture 3.34
in [FL12]) ?

A

Group cohomology

The aim of this section is to give a brief overview of the results needed in this
paper for the cohomology of groups. For a complete overview of the theorems
and results about group cohomology, the reader is advised to read [Bro82]. For
this section, the modules will be noted additively (note that in Section 3, the
modules are multiplicative and additive in Section 8).
Let G be a group and M be an additive G-module. We begin with a few
definitions for cocycles of degree 1 or 2 (compare with Chapter III, Paragraph
1, Example 3 in loc. cit.).
The set of fixed points for the G-action of M will be denoted M G .
A 1-cocycle from G to M is a map z : G → M such that for g, h ∈ G, we
have z(gh) = z(g) + g · z(h).
A 1-coboundary from G to M is a map b : G → M such that there is m ∈ M
verifying for g ∈ G, b(g) = m − g · m.
A 2-cocycle from G to M is a map z : G2 → M such that for g, h, k ∈ G, we
have z(g, h) = g · z(h, k) − z(gh, k) + z(g, hk).
A 2-coboundary from G to M is a map b : G2 → M such that there is a map
m : G → M verifying for g, h ∈ G, b(g, h) = m(g) + g · m(h) − m(gh).
For i = 1, 2. The set of i-cocycles (resp. i-coboundaries) is denoted Z i (G, M )
(resp. B i (G, M )). It is straightforward to check that B i (G, M ) is contained in
Z i (G, M ). Remark that they are both abelian subgroups of C i (G, M ) (the set
of maps from Gi to M , also known as the set of i-cochains in this context). The
i-th cohomology group is the quotient H i (G, M ) := Z i (G, M )/B i (G, M ). If z is
a i-cocycle, [z] denotes its image in H i (G, M ).
Remark that H i (G, M ) is actually defined for all i ∈ N but we will only use
the first and the second cohomology groups.
These low-degree cohomology groups are useful in algebra (read Chapter IV
in loc. cit. for applications to group extensions), especially using cochains. In
Section 3 and Section 8, this is the link between the first cohomology group
and semidirect product which is used (see Remark 12). The first example of
computation, which directly follows from the definition, is an easy exercise which
is left to the reader.
Lemma 13. Let G be a group and M be a trivial G-module (that is G acts
trivially on M ) then H 1 (G, M ) = Hom(G, M ).
In a list of four papers, Fox introduced free differential calculus (the second
paper of this list is [Fox54]). It can be used to compute low-degree cohomology
35

of groups (see [Gol84] for instance) especially when the module is a vector
space. In general, computing cohomology groups proves to be difficult using its
definition with cochains and one need to use a more abstract approach.
Let G be a cyclic group with generator g and order n. We define two maps
related to the G-module M :
NormeM :

M
x

−→
MG
Pn−1 i
7−→
i=0 g · x

and TraceM :

M
x

−→
7−→

M
x−g·x

Then, we have in Chapter III, Paragraph 1, Example 2 in [Bro82] :
Lemma 14. Let G be a cyclic group with generator g and order n and M be a
G-module, then H 1 (G, M ) is isomorphic to Ker(NormeM )/ Im(TraceM ).
Although we will not use more than what is contained in this lemma, it
should be acknowledged that the cohomology of cyclic groups is 2-periodic and
the lemma mentioned above is a simple consequence of this fact (see Chapter
VI, Paragraph 9 in loc. cit. for more details).
The following lemma is particularly interesting in Section 8 where the modules considered are C-vector spaces (see Chapter III, Corollary 10.2 in loc. cit.).
Lemma 15. Let G be a finite group and M be a G-module. If the multiplication
by |G| is invertible in M (e.g. if M is a vector space over a field of characteristic
0) then H 1 (G, M ) = H 2 (G, M ) = 0.
The last result we will need is a way to relate the cohomology of a group
with the cohomology of its normal subgroups. Before stating the proposition, we
need to make a few comments. Start with G a group and a normal subgroup N
of G. Let Q be the quotient group G/N with its natural projection p : G → Q.
If M is a G-module then M is also a N -module (by simply restricting the action)
and M N is a Q-module (since M N is both a G-module and a trivial N -module).
For q ∈ Q, we arbitrarily choose xq ∈ G such that xq mod N = q. If z
belongs to Z 1 (N, M ), then one can see that the map zq : n 7→ xq · z(x−1
q nxq ) is
also an element of Z 1 (N, M ). Furthermore, if z is in B 1 (N, M ), then zq is also
in B 1 (N, M ). Therefore, we have a map from H 1 (N, M ) to itself sending [z] to
[zq ]. One can check that this defines an action of Q on H 1 (N, M ) which does
not depend on the lifts xq chosen.
If z is a 1-cocycle from G to M , then its restriction z ′ to N is also a 1cocycle. Furthermore, [z ′ ] can be shown to be a fixed points for the Q-action
on H 1 (N, M ). We denote Res[z] := [z ′ ]. This defines a map Res : H 1 (G, M ) →
H 1 (N, M )Q called the restriction map.
If w is a 1-cocycle from Q to M N , then its push-forward by p, z := w ◦ p :
G → M belongs to Z 1 (G, M ) and we denote Inf[w] := [z]. This defines a map
Inf : H 1 (Q, M N ) → H 1 (G, M ) called the inflation map.
36

The result we are interested in is the decomposition of the cohomology of
G in M using the cohomology of Q and N . The decomposition is called the
Hochschild-Serre Spectral Sequence see Chapter VII, Theorem 6.3 in [Bro82]
(remark that the spectral sequence is given for the homology but also works
for the cohomology). For us, the most useful part of this spectral sequence are
its first terms which give the Inflation-Restriction sequence, see Chapter VII,
Corollary 6.4 in loc. cit. :
Proposition 17. Let G be a group and M be a G-module. Assume we have
the following exact sequence 1 → N → G → Q → 1. Then there is a map
T : H 1 (N, M )Q → H 2 (Q, M N ) called the Transgression map such that the
following exact sequence is exact :

1

// H 1 (Q, M N )

Inf

// H 1 (G, M )

Res

// H 1 (N, M )Q

T

// H 2 (Q, M N )

Remark 15. It is possible to explicitly write down the Transgression map T
defined in the proposition, see Paragraph 10.2 in [DHW12].

References
[Ben02] L. Ben Abdelghani, Variété des caractères et slice étale de l’espace
des représentations d’un groupe. Ann. de la faculté des sciences de
Toulouse 6ème série. 11 (2002), 19-32.
[Bro82] Kenneth S. Brown. Cohomology of Groups. Springer, 1982.
[DHW12] Karel Dekimpe, Manfred Hart and Sarah Wauters. A seventerm exact sequence for the cohomology of a group extension.
arXiv:1103.4052v2 [], 2012.
[FL12] Carlos Florentino and Sean Lawton. Singularities of free group character varieties. Pacific Journal of Mathematics, 260(1):149–179, 2012.
[FLR15] Carlos Florentino, Sean Lawton and Daniel Ramras. Homotopy Groups
of Free Group Character Varieties. arXiv:1412.0272v2 [math.AT], 2015.
to appear in Annali della Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa, Classe di
Scienze.
[FM11] Benson Farb and Dan Margalit. A primer on mapping class group.
Princeton Mathematical Series, 2011.
[Fox54] Ralph H. Fox. Free differential calculus. II : the isomorphism problem
of groups. The Annals of Mathematics, 2nd Ser., Vol. 59, No. 2. (Mar.,
1954), pp. 196-210.
[Gol84] William M. Goldman. The Symplectic Nature of Fundamental Groups
of Surfaces. Adv. in Math. 54 (1984), 200-225.
37

[HP04] Michael Heusener and Joan Porti. The variety of characters in
P SL(2, C). In Bol. Soc. Mat. Mexicana, (3) 10 (2004), Special Issue,
221-237.
[JM87] Dennis Johnson and John J. Millson. Deformation spaces associated to
compact hyperbolic manifolds. In Progress in Mathematics, volume 67,
1987.
[Li93]

Jun Li. The space of surface group representations. In Manuscripta
Math., volume 78(3) : 223–243, 1993.

[LM85] Alexander Lubotzky and Andy R. Magid. Varieties of representations
of finitely generated groups. Mem. Amer. Math. Soc., (336), 1985.
[LS12]

Roger C. Lyndon and Paul E. Schupp. Combinatorial group theory.
Classics in mathematics. Springer, 2012.

[Sik12] Adam S. Sikora. Character varieties. Trans. of Amer. Math. Soc.,
364(10):5173–5208, 2012.
[Sik15] Adam S. Sikora. G-character varieties for G = SO(n, C) and other not
simply connected groups. Journal of Algebra, 429(2015), 324-341.
[Wei64] Andre Weil. Remarks on the Cohomology of Groups. Annals of Mathematics, Second Series, Vol. 80, No. 1, pp. 149-157, 1964.

38

