COCYCLE SUPERRIGIDITY FOR TRANSLATION ACTIONS
OF PRODUCT GROUPS

arXiv:1603.07616v1 [math.DS] 24 Mar 2016

DAMIEN GABORIAU, ADRIAN IOANA, AND ROBIN TUCKER-DROB
Abstract. Let G be either a profinite or a connected compact group, and Γ, Λ be finitely
generated dense subgroups. Assuming that the left translation action of Γ on G is strongly
ergodic, we prove that any cocycle for the left-right translation action of Γ × Λ on G with
values in a countable group is “virtually” cohomologous to a group homomorphism. Moreover, we prove that the same holds if G is a (not necessarily compact) connected simple
Lie group provided that Λ contains an infinite cyclic subgroup with compact closure. We
derive several applications to OE - and W∗ - superrigidity. In particular, we obtain the first
examples of compact actions of F2 × F2 which are W∗ -superrigid.

1. Introduction
1.1. Background. In the last 15 years, a lot of progress has been made in the classification
of measure preserving actions of countable groups on probability spaces, up to orbit equivalence (see the surveys [Sh04, Po07, Fu09, Ga10, Va10]). Recall that two probability measure
preserving (p.m.p.) actions Γ y (X, µ) and Λ y (Y, ν) are called orbit equivalent (OE) if
there is an isomorphism of the probability spaces θ : X → Y which identifies the orbits of
the actions: θ(Γx) = Λθ(x), for almost every x ∈ X. For amenable groups, the classification
problem has been completely settled since the early 1980s: all ergodic p.m.p. actions of
infinite amenable groups are orbit equivalent [Dy59, OW80, CFW81].
On the other hand, the non-amenable case is far more complicated, and its study has uncovered a beautiful rigidity theory. In sharp contrast to the amenable case, it was shown that
within certain families of non-amenable group actions, OE implies isomorphism of the groups
and conjugacy of the actions. The first such rigidity phenomenon was found by R. Zimmer,
in the context of actions of higher rank semisimple Lie groups, by using his influential cocycle
superrigidity theorem [Zi80, Zi84]. Deducing OE rigidity from cocycle superrigidity results
has since become a paradigm in the subject. Remarkably, also by using Zimmer’s cocycle
superrigidity theorem, A. Furman proved that “most” ergodic p.m.p. actions Γ y (X, µ)
of higher rank lattices, including SLn (Z) y Tn for n ≥ 3, are OE superrigid [Fu98]. More
precisely, any free p.m.p. action Λ y (Y, ν) which is OE to Γ y (X, µ) must be (virtually)
conjugate to it. Since then, numerous striking OE superrigidity results have been discovered
in [MS02, Po05, Po06, Ki06, Io08, PV08, Fu09, Ki09, PS09, TD14, Io14, CK15, Dr15].
Many of these results have been obtained by applying techniques and ideas from S. Popa’s
deformation/rigidity theory. In all of these cases, one proves that much more than being
OE superrigid, the actions in question are cocycle superrigid [Po05, Po06, Io08, PV08, Fu09,
D.G. was supported by the C.N.R.S. and the ANR project GAMME (ANR-14-CE25-0004).
supported by NSF Career Grant DMS #1253402 and a Sloan Foundation Fellowship.
1

A.I. was

2

DAMIEN GABORIAU, ADRIAN IOANA, AND ROBIN TUCKER-DROB

PS09, TD14, Io14, Dr15]. The starting point was Popa’s breakthrough [Po05] showing that
any cocycle for a Bernoulli action Γ y (X0 , µ0 )Γ of a property (T) group Γ with values in
a countable (more generally, a Ufin ) group is cohomologous to a group homomorphism. In
subsequent work, Popa was able to remove the property (T) assumption on the group Γ by
requiring instead that Γ is a product of two groups, one infinite and one non-amenable [Po06].
The second author then obtained a cocycle superrigidity theorem for ergodic profinite actions
of property (T) groups Γ. This shows that any cocycle for such an action with values
in a countable group is virtually (i.e. after passing to an ergodic component of a finite
index subgroup of Γ) cohomologous to a group homomorphism [Io08, Theorem B]. For a
generalization of this result to compact actions of property (T) groups, see [Fu09].
Motivated by the analogy with Popa’s cocycle superrigidity theorems [Po05, Po06], it was
asked in [Io08, page 340] whether the conclusion of [Io08, Theorem B] holds for product
groups, such as Γ = F2 × F2 . The interest in this question was especially high at the time,
since a positive answer combined with N. Ozawa and S. Popa’s work [OP07] would have
lead to the (then) first examples of virtually W∗ -superrigid actions. A positive answer was
obtained in [OP08, Theorem C] for certain profinite actions of product groups, but only
for cocycles with values into residually finite groups, and thus the desired W∗ -superrigidity
results could not be derived. So, while examples of W∗ -superrigid actions were eventually
found in [Pe09, PV09] using different methods, the original question remained open.
1.2. Cocycle superrigidity. In this paper we settle the above question. More precisely,
we prove that profinite (and more generally, compact) actions of product groups are cocycle
superrigid, under fairly general and essentially necessary conditions (see Theorem A and
Remarks 1.3 and 1.4).
Before stating our main results, let us recall some terminology. Let Γ y (X, µ) be a nonsingular action of a countable group Γ on a standard (finite or infinite) measure space (X, µ).
Let ∆ be a Polish group. A measurable map w : Γ × X → ∆ is called a cocycle if it satisfies
the identity w(g1 g2 , x) = w(g1 , g2x)w(g2 , x), for all g1 , g2 ∈ Γ and almost every x ∈ X. If
δ : Γ → ∆ is a homomorphism, then the formula w(g, x) = δ(g) defines a “constant” cocycle. Two cocycles w1 , w2 : Γ × X → ∆ are cohomologous if we can find a measurable map
ϕ : X → ∆ such that w1 (g, x) = ϕ(gx)w2 (g, x)ϕ(x)−1, for all g ∈ Γ and almost every x ∈ X.
Definition 1.1. A nonsingular action Γ y (X, µ) on a finite measure space (X, µ) is
called strongly ergodic if it does not admit a non-trivial sequence of asimptotically invariant sets [Sc80, CW81]. More precisely, any sequence of measurable sets An ⊆ X such that
µ(gAn ∆An ) → 0, for all g ∈ Γ, must satisfy that µ(An )(1 − µ(An )) → 0. A nonsingular
action Γ y (X, µ) on an infinite measure space (X, µ) is called strongly ergodic if the above
condition holds when µ is replaced with an equivalent probability measure on X.
Remark 1.2. For p.m.p. actions Γ yσ (X, µ), strong ergodicity is implied by, and usually
deduced from, spectral gap. The latter means that there is no sequence of unit vectors
Fn ∈ L2 (X) ⊖ C1 which are almost invariant, in the sense that kFn ◦ σg − Fn k2 → 0, for all
g ∈ Γ.
Given a locally compact Polish group G, we denote by mG a fixed left invariant Haar measure.

COCYCLE SUPERRIGIDITY FOR TRANSLATION ACTIONS OF PRODUCT GROUPS

3

Theorem A. Let G be a compact Polish group and Γ, Λ < G countable dense subgroups.
Consider the left-right translation action Γ × Λ y (G, mG ) given by (g, h) · x = gxh−1 , for
g ∈ Γ, h ∈ Λ, x ∈ G. Assume that Γ acts strongly ergodically and Λ is finitely generated.
Let w : (Γ × Λ) × G → ∆ be a cocycle in a countable group ∆.
Then the following hold:
(1) Assume that G is a profinite group and Γ is finitely generated. Then there exists an
open subgroup G0 < G such that the restriction of w to (Γ0 × Λ0 ) × G0 is cohomologous to a
homomorphism δ : Γ0 × Λ0 → ∆, where Γ0 = Γ ∩ G0 and Λ0 = Λ ∩ G0 .
(2) Assume that G is connected and G̃ is a simply connected locally compact group together
with a continuous onto homomorphism p : G̃ → G such that ker(p) < G̃ is discrete. Then
the “lifted” cocycle w̃ : (Γ̃ × Λ̃) × G̃ → ∆ given by w̃((g, h), x) = w((p(g), p(h)), p(x)) is
cohomologous to a homomorphism δ : Γ̃ × Λ̃ → ∆.
Before giving concrete families of actions to which Theorem A applies, let us make a few
remarks regarding its hypothesis and related results.
Remark 1.3. Theorem A covers general “separately ergodic” compact actions of product
groups, under a mild strong ergodicity assumption. Indeed, recall that a p.m.p. action
Γ y (X, µ) is called compact if the closure of Γ in the automorphism group of (X, µ) is
compact. Left-right translation actions on compact groups are clearly compact. Conversely,
it can be shown that any compact p.m.p. action of a product group Γ ×Λ whose both factors
Γ and Λ act ergodically and freely is conjugate to a left-right translation action.
Remark 1.4. Strong ergodicity is a necessary condition for cocycle superrigidity with countable targets. Indeed, let Γ yσ (X, µ) be an ergodic but not strongly ergodic p.m.p. action.
Assuming that every finite index subgroup of Γ acts ergodically, it was shown in [Ke10, Corollary 27.5] that σ admits cocycles into any countable group ∆ 6= {1} which are not cohomologous to homomorphisms.
Remark 1.5. Several results in the literature establish cocycle superrigidity for general
separately ergodic actions of products of locally compact Polish groups [MS04,FM07,BF13].
In these results, one assumes that the target group ∆ is a group acting isometrically on a
negatively curved space [MS04] or a semi-simple algebraic group [FM07, BF13]. Theorem A
establishes cocycle superrigidity for a large, but specific class of actions of product groups.
On the other hand, it imposes no additional assumptions on the target group ∆, other
than being countable. The first such cocycle superrigidity results, where no assumptions are
placed on the target group ∆, besides being countable or more generally Ufin , were obtained
by S. Popa [Po05, Po06] in the case of Bernoulli actions of property (T) and product groups.
Remark 1.6. Part (1) of Theorem A generalizes [OP08, Theorem C] which derived the
same conclusion under the additional assumptions that Γ and Λ have property (τ ), the
action Γ × Λ y (G, mG ) satisfies a certain growth condition, and ∆ is residually finite.
Theorem A applies to a wide class of actions. Indeed, there is an extensive literature providing examples of translation actions on compact groups which have spectral gap and hence
are strongly ergodic. In the next two examples, we give an overview of these results, focusing
separately on the cases when G is a profinite group or a connected compact Lie group.

4

DAMIEN GABORIAU, ADRIAN IOANA, AND ROBIN TUCKER-DROB

Example 1.7. If Γ is a subgroup of SLn (Z), n ≥ 2, then its congruence subgroups are
given by Γ(m) = ker(Γ → SLn (Z/mZ)), for m ≥ 1. If G is any profinite completion
of SL2 (Z) with respect to a sequence of congruence subgroups (e.g. G = SL2 (Zp ), for a
prime p), then as a consequence of Selberg’s 3/16 theorem [Se65], the translation action
Γ y (G, mG ) has spectral gap. Recently, this result has been vastly generalized, following
a 2005 breakthrough of Bourgain and Gamburd [BG05]. Specifically, let Γ < SLn (Z) be
any subgroup which is Zariski dense in SLn , for some n ≥ 2, and let G be any profinite
completion of Γ with respect to a sequence of congruence subgroups (e.g. take G to be the
closure of Γ in SLn (Zp ), for a prime p). Bourgain and Varjú’s work [BV10] then implies that
the translation action Γ y (G, mG ) has spectral gap. For the most recent developments in
this direction, see [SG16ab] and the references therein.
Example 1.8. In the early 1980s, it was shown that for all n ≥ 2, there exists a countable
dense subgroup Γ < G := SO(n + 1) such that the translation action Γ y (G, mG ) has
spectral gap (see [Ma80, Su81, Dr84]). In recent years, there have been remarkable advances
in extending this result to more general translation actions on connected compact Lie groups.
Thus, Bourgain and Gamburd proved that if Γ < G := SU(d) is any countable dense
subgroup whose elements consist of matrices with algebraic entries, for some d ≥ 2, then
the translation action Γ y (G, mG ) has spectral gap (see [BG06, BG11]). More generally,
Benoist and de Sacxé recently showed that the same conclusion holds if G is an arbitrary
compact connected simple Lie group [BdS14].
Part (2) of Theorem A applies in particular if G is a connected simple compact Lie group and
Γ, Λ are countable dense subgroups such that Γ acts strongly ergodically and Λ is finitely
generated. Our next theorem generalizes this result to non-compact such Lie groups G.
Moreover, it shows that the finite generation assumption on Λ can be removed in this case.
Theorem B. Let G be a connected simple Lie group, Γ, Λ be countable dense subgroups,
and consider the left-right translation action Γ × Λ y (G, mG ). Assume that Γ acts strongly
ergodically and Λ contains a torsion-free element s such that the closure of hsi in G is
compact. Let G̃ be the universal cover of G with the covering homomorphism p : G̃ → G.
Let Γ̃ = p−1 (Γ) and Λ̃ = p−1 (Λ).
Let w : (Γ × Λ) × G → ∆ be a cocycle in a countable group ∆.
Then the “lifted” cocycle w̃ : (Γ̃ × Λ̃) × G̃ → ∆ given by w̃((g, h), x) = w((p(g), p(h)), p(x))
is cohomologous to a homomorphism δ : Γ̃ × Λ̃ → ∆.
As we explain next, the conditions of Theorem B are satisfied by a large class of actions. In
particular, Theorem B applies if G = SL2 (R) and Γ, Λ are any countable dense subgroups
with Γ ⊆ SL2 (Q).
Example 1.9. Let G be a connected simple Lie group. Generalizing results of [BG06,
BG11, BdS14] in the case G is compact, it was very recently shown by Boutonnet, SalehiGolsefidy, and the second author that the translation action Γ y (G, mG ) is strongly ergodic
for any countable dense subgroup Γ < G whose elements consist of matrices with algebraic
entries [BISG15].
Remark 1.10. Let G be a connected simple Lie group and denote by A the set of s ∈ G
such that hsi is compact. If G = SL2 (R), then A = {s ∈ G| |Tr(s)| < 2} ∪ {Id}, hence

COCYCLE SUPERRIGIDITY FOR TRANSLATION ACTIONS OF PRODUCT GROUPS

5

A has non-empty interior. In general, A has non-empty interior if and only if the rank of
G is equal to the rank of its maximal compact subgroups; otherwise, A ⊆ G has zero Haar
measure (see Lemma 5.2).
For a subgroup Λ < G, consider the following condition: (⋆) Λ contains a torsion-free element
s ∈ A. By using the above result, it follows that if G = SL2 (R) or G = Sp2n (R), for n ≥ 1,
then (⋆) holds for any countable dense subgroup Λ < G. On the other hand, if G = SLn (R),
for n ≥ 3, then there exist countable dense subgroups Λ < G for which (⋆) fails (see Corollary
5.4 and Remark 5.5).
1.3. Orbit equivalence superrigidity. In the rest of the introduction we present several
consequences of Theorems A and B. We start by pointing out that the left-right translation
actions considered there are OE superrigid. To this end, we first review some terminology.
Definition 1.11. Let Γ y (X, µ) and ∆ y (Y, ν) be free ergodic nonsingular actions.
• The actions are conjugate if there exist a nonsingular isomorphism θ : X → Y and a
group isomorphism δ : Γ → ∆ such that θ(gx) = δ(g)θ(x), for all g ∈ Γ and almost
every x ∈ X.
• The actions are stably orbit equivalent (SOE) if there exist measurable non-null sets
A ⊆ X, B ⊆ Y , and a nonsingular isomorphism θ : A → B such that θ(Γx ∩ A) =
∆θ(x) ∩ B, for almost every x ∈ A.
• We say that ∆ y Y is induced from an action ∆0 y Y0 of a subgroup ∆0 < ∆
if Y0 ⊆ Y is a ∆0 -invariant measurable subset such that ν(gY0 ∩ Y0 ) = 0, for all
g ∈ ∆ \ ∆0 .
Remark 1.12. There are two canonical ways of producing SOE actions: by induction and
by taking quotients. To explain this, let ∆ y (Y, ν) be a free ergodic nonsingular action.
• If ∆ y Y is induced from ∆0 y Y0 , then the identity map idY0 : Y0 → Y0 ⊆ Y
witnesses that the actions ∆0 y Y0 and ∆ y Y are SOE.
• If Σ < ∆ is a normal subgroup such that the action Σ y Y has a measurable
fundamental domain A ⊆ Y , then the actions ∆ y Y and ∆/Σ y Y /Σ are SOE, as
witnessed by the map A ∋ y 7→ Σy ∈ Y /Σ.
Remark 1.13. Let G be a locally compact Polish group. If g, h ∈ G, then {x ∈ G|gxh−1 =
x} has positive Haar measure if and only if g commutes with an open subgroup G0 < G and
h = kgk −1, for some k ∈ G. Thus, if the centralizer of every open subgroup G0 < G in G
is trivial, then the left-right translation action Γ × Λ y (G, mG ) is free, for any subgroups
Γ, Λ < G.
Corollary C. Let Γ, Λ < G as in Theorem A (1). Assume that any open subgroup of G has
trivial centralizer in G. Let ∆ y (Y, ν) be any free ergodic nonsingular action of a countable
group ∆.
Then ∆ y (Y, ν) is SOE to the left-right translation action Γ × Λ y (G, mG ) if and only
if ∆ y Y is induced from ∆0 y Y0 and ∆0 y Y0 is conjugate to the left-right translation
action (Γ ∩ G0 ) × (Λ ∩ G0 ) y (G0 , mG0 ), for some open subgroup G0 < G.
Moreover, ∆ y (Y, ν) is OE to Γ × Λ y (G, mG ) if and only if the above holds and we
additionally have that [G : G0 ] = [∆ : ∆0 ].

6

DAMIEN GABORIAU, ADRIAN IOANA, AND ROBIN TUCKER-DROB

Corollary D. Let Γ, Λ < G as in Theorem A (2) or as in Theorem B. Consider the notation
Γ̃, Λ̃ < G̃ and put Z = ker(p). Assume that Γ and Λ contain no non-trivial central elements
of G. Let ∆ y (Y, ν) be any free ergodic nonsingular action of a countable group ∆.
Then ∆ y (Y, ν) is SOE to the left-right translation action Γ × Λ y (G, mG ) if and only if
∆ y Y is induced from ∆0 y Y0 and ∆0 y Y0 is conjugate to (Γ̃ × Λ̃)/Σ y G̃/Σ, for some
subgroup Σ < Z × Z which contains {(g, g)|g ∈ Z}.
Moreover, if G̃ is compact, then ∆ y (Y, ν) is OE to Γ × Λ y (G, mG ) if and only if the
above holds and we additionally have that |Σ| = [∆ : ∆0 ] |Z|.
1.4. W∗ -superrigidity. A free ergodic p.m.p. action Γ y (X, µ) is called W∗ -superrigid if it
can be “recovered” entirely from its group measure space von Neumann algebra, L∞ (X) ⋊ Γ.
In precise terms, this means that any free ergodic p.m.p. action ∆ y (Y, ν) which gives rise
to an isomorphic von Neumann algebra, L∞ (X) ⋊ Γ ∼
= L∞ (Y ) ⋊ ∆, must be conjugate to
Γ y (X, µ).
The first families of W∗ -superrigid actions were discovered following a surge in activity in
2009-2010. The existence of (virtually) W∗ -superrigid actions was established by J. Peterson
in [Pe09]. Shortly after, S. Popa and S. Vaes obtained the first concrete families of W∗ superrigid actions [PV09]. The second author then showed that Bernoulli actions Γ y
(X0 , µ0 )Γ of icc property (T) groups Γ are W∗ -superrigid [Io10]. Subsequently, several large
classes of W∗ -superrigid actions were found (see for instance the introduction of [Dr15]).
N. Ozawa and S. Popa proved that if Γ y (X, µ) is a free ergodic p.m.p. compact action of
a product of non-abelian free groups Γ = Fn1 × ... × Fnk for k ≥ 1, then L∞ (X) is the unique
Cartan subalgebra of L∞ (X) ⋊ Γ, up to unitary conjugacy [OP07]. As a consequence, any
free ergodic p.m.p. action which satisfies L∞ (X) ⋊ Γ ∼
= L∞ (Y ) ⋊ Λ must be orbit equivalent
to Γ y (X, µ) [Si55]. In combination with Corollaries C and D, this fact leads to the first
examples of W∗ -superrigid compact actions of F2 × F2 .
Q
Corollary E. Let S be a non-empty set of primes, and denote K = p∈S P SL2 (Zp ). View
P SL2 (Z) as a dense subgroup of K, via the natural diagonal embedding. Let Γ < P SL2 (Z) be
a finitely generated non-amenable subgroup, and denote by G its closure in K. Let ∆ y (Y, ν)
be any free ergodic p.m.p. action of a countable group ∆.
Then L∞ (G) ⋊ (Γ × Γ) ∼
= L∞ (Y ) ⋊ ∆ if and only if we can find an open subgroup G0 < G
and a finite index subgroup ∆0 < ∆ such that [G : G0 ] = [∆ : ∆0 ], the left-right translation
action (Γ ∩ G0 ) × (Γ ∩ G0 ) y (G0 , mG0 ) is conjugate to ∆0 y Y0 , and ∆ y Y is induced
from ∆0 y Y0 .
Since P SL2 (Z) is dense in K, by the Strong Approximation Theorem, Corollary E implies
that the left-right translation action P SL2 (Z) × P SL2 (Z) y K is virtually W∗ -superrigid,
for any non-empty set of primes S. Moreover, since P SL2 (Z) ∼
= (Z/2Z) ∗ (Z/3Z), the group
Γ can be chosen to be a non-abelian free group of arbitrary rank.
Corollary F. Let G = SU(2). Let ϕ = arccos( ab )/2, for integers a, b with0 < |a| <b and
eiϕ
0
1
a
and
=
6
±
.
Let
Γ
<
G
be
the
dense
subgroup
generated
by
the
matrices
A
=
b
2
0 e−iϕ

COCYCLE SUPERRIGIDITY FOR TRANSLATION ACTIONS OF PRODUCT GROUPS

7




cos ϕ i sin ϕ
B =
. Let ∆ y (Y, ν) be any free ergodic p.m.p. action of a countable
i sin ϕ cos ϕ
group ∆.
Then L∞ (G) ⋊ (Γ × Γ) ∼
= L∞ (Y ) ⋊ ∆ if and only if the left-right translation action Γ × Γ y
(G, mG ) is conjugate to ∆ y (Y, ν). Moreover, the same holds if Γ is replaced by any of its
non-amenable subgroups.
Note that as a consequence of [Sw94], Γ is isomorphic to F2 (see the proof of Corollary F).
2. Cocycle rigidity for translation actions
The purpose of this section is twofold. Firstly, we introduce and discuss basic properties
of the uniform metric on the space of cocycles. Secondly, we recall criteria for untwisting
cocycles for translation actions on compact and locally compact groups. These criteria will
be used in the proofs of our main results.
2.1. The uniform metric on the space of cocycles. Let Γ y (X, µ) be a nonsingular
action of a countable group Γ on a probability space (X, µ). Let ∆ be a countable group.
Given two cocycles w1 , w2 : Γ × X → ∆, we consider the uniform distance given by
dµ (w1 , w2 ) = sup µ({x ∈ X|w1 (g, x) 6= w2 (g, x)}).
g∈Γ

Whenever the measure µ is clear from the context, we will use the simpler notation d(w1 , w2 ).
Lemma 2.1. Let Γ y (X, µ) be a p.m.p. action of Ra countable group Γ. Let w1 , w2 : Γ×X →
∆ be cocycles into a countable group ∆. Let µ = Y νdρ(ν) be an integral decomposition of
µ, where ρ is a Borel probability measure on the space Y of Γ-invariant Borel probability
measures on X.
Z
Then dµ (w1 , w2 ) ≤
dν (w1 , w2 ) dρ(ν) ≤ 4dµ (w1 , w2 ).
Y

Proof. The first inequality is obvious. Towards proving the second inequality, we denote by
c the counting measure of ∆. Given any Γ-invariant Borel probability measure ν on X, we
define a measure preserving action Γ y (X ×∆, ν×c) by g·(x, h) = (gx, w1 (g, x)hw2(g, x)−1 ),
and let πν : Γ → U(L2 (X × ∆, ν × c)) be the associated unitary representation. For η ∈
L2 (X × ∆, ν × c) we denote by kηk2,ν the corresponding 2-norm.
Let ξ : X × ∆ → C be the characteristic function of X × {1∆ }. Then kξk2,ν = 1 and
(2.1)

kπν (g)ξ − ξk22,ν = 2 ν({x ∈ X|w1 (g, x) 6= w2 (g, x)}), for every g ∈ Γ.

From this we deduce that if η is a πν (Γ)-invariant vector, then
1
(2.2)
dν (w1 , w2 ) = sup kπν (g)ξ − ξk22,ν ≤ 2kη − ξk22,ν .
2 g∈Γ
p
Next, by 2.1 we have kπµ (g)ξ −ξk2,µ ≤ 2dµ (w1 , w2 ), for all g ∈ Γ. Let η ∈ L2 (X ×∆, µ ×c)
be the unique element of minimal k.k2,µ in the
p closure of the convex hull
R of {πµ (g)ξ|g ∈ Γ}.
Then η is πµ (Γ)-invariant and kη − ξk2,µ ≤ 2dµ (w1 , w2 ). Since µ = Y ν dρ(ν), we deduce

8

DAMIEN GABORIAU, ADRIAN IOANA, AND ROBIN TUCKER-DROB

that η is πν (Γ)-invariant, for ρ-almost every ν ∈ Y . In combination with 2.2 we conclude
that
Z
Z
dν (w1 , w2 ) dρ(y) ≤
2kη − ξk22,ν dρ(ν) = 2kη − ξk22,µ ≤ 4dµ (w1 , w2),
Y

Y

which finishes the proof.



Corollary 2.2. Let Γ y (X, µ) be a p.m.p. action of a countable group Γ. Let (Y, ρ)
be a standard probability space and consider the action Γ y (X × Y, µ × ρ) given by g ·
(x, y) = (gx, y). Let w1 , w2 : Γ × (X × Y ) → ∆ be cocycles into a countable group ∆. For
yZ ∈ Y and i ∈ {1, 2}, define the cocycle wiy : Γ × X → ∆ by wiy (g, x) = wi (gx, y). Then
Y

dµ (w1y , w2y ) dρ(y) ≤ 4dµ×ρ (w1 , w2 ).

Proof. Noticing that µ × ρ =

R

Y

(µ × δy ) dρ(y), the conclusion follows from Lemma 2.1.



2.2. Cocycle rigidity for translation actions on compact groups. Let Γ be a countable
dense subgroup of a compact group G, and consider the left translation action Γ y (G, mG ).
If Γ has property (T) and G = lim Γ/Γn is a profinite completion of Γ, then the second
←−
author proved that any cocycle w : Γ × G → ∆ with values into a countable group ∆ is
cohomologous to a cocycle which factors through the map Γ × G → Γ × Γ/Γn , for some n
(see [Io08, Theorem B]). In [Fu09], A. Furman extended this result to cover a more general
class of compact groups, including simply connected compact groups G (see [Fu09, Theorem
5.21]). The proofs of these results rely implicitely on the following criteria for untwisting
cocycles.
Theorem 2.3. Let G be a compact Polish group and Γ < G be a countable dense subgroup.
Let ∆ be a countable group and w : Γ × G → ∆ be a cocycle for the left translation action
Γ y (G, mG ). For t ∈ G, define a cocycle wt : Γ × G → ∆ by wt (g, x) = w(g, xt−1). Assume
1
that for some c ∈ (0, 32
) we have that d(wt , w) < c, for every t in a neighborhood V of the
identity 1G of G.
(1) [Io08, Fu09] Assume that G is a profinite group. Then we can find an open subgroup
G0 < G such that the restriction of w to Γ0 ×G0 is cohomologous to a homomorphism
δ : Γ0 → ∆, where Γ0 = Γ ∩ G0 .
(2) [Fu09] Assume that G is connected and G̃ is a simply connected locally compact
group with a continuous onto homomorphism p : G̃ → G such that ker(p) is discrete
in G̃, and denote Γ̃ = p−1 (Γ). Then the “lifted” cocycle w̃ : Γ̃ × G̃ → ∆ for the
translation action Γ̃ y (G̃, mG̃ ) given by w̃(g, x) = w(p(g), p(x)) is cohomologous to
a homomorphism δ : Γ̃ → ∆.
Proof. (1). For a proof of this part, see [Io13, Theorem 3.1].
(2). This part follows from [Fu09], but for the reader’s convenience, we outline a proof.
Firstly, the proof of [Fu09, Theorem 5.21] implies that for every t ∈ V , we can find a
Borel map ϕt : G → ∆ which satisfies mG ({x ∈ G|ϕt (x) = e}) > 43 and wt (g, x) =
ϕt (gx)w(g, x)ϕt(x)−1 , for all g ∈ Γ and almost every x ∈ G (see also the second proof
of [Io13, Theorem 3.1]). Moreover, for every t, s ∈ V such that ts ∈ V , we have that
ϕts (x) = ϕt (xs−1 )ϕs (x), for almost every x ∈ G.

COCYCLE SUPERRIGIDITY FOR TRANSLATION ACTIONS OF PRODUCT GROUPS

9

Let W be a symmetric neighborhood of the identity in G̃ such that p(W 2 ) ⊆ V . For t ∈ W ,
we define ϕ̃t : G̃ → ∆ by letting ϕ̃t (x) = ϕp(t) (p(x)). Since p(t) ∈ V , we have that
(2.3)

w̃(g, xt−1 ) = ϕ̃t (gx)w̃(g, x)ϕ̃t (x)−1 , for all g ∈ Γ̃ and almost every x ∈ G̃.

Moreover, if t, s ∈ W then p(ts) ∈ V and therefore we have that
(2.4)

ϕ̃ts (x) = ϕ̃t (xs−1 )ϕ̃s (x), for almost every x ∈ G.

Since G̃ is simply connected, the second part of the proof of [Fu09, Theorem 5.21] shows
that we can find a family of measurable maps {ϕ̃t : G̃ → ∆}t∈G̃ which extends the family
{ϕ̃t : G̃ → ∆}t∈W defined above in such a way that the identity 2.4 holds for every t, s ∈ G̃.
Then note that the set of t ∈ G̃ for which identity 2.3 holds is a subgroup of G̃ which contains
W . Since G̃ is connected, we conclude that identity 2.3 holds for every t ∈ G̃.
By arguing exactly as in the end of the proof of [Fu09, Theorem 5.21] it follows that we can
find a measurable map ϕ : G̃ → ∆ such that
(2.5)

ϕ̃t (x) = ϕ(xt−1 )ϕ(x)−1 ,

for almost every (x, t) ∈ G̃ × G̃.

For g ∈ Γ̃, define ψg : G̃ → ∆ by letting ψg (x) = ϕ(gx)−1 w̃(g, x)ϕ(x). By combining 2.3 and
2.4, we derive that for all t ∈ G̃ we have ψg (xt−1 ) = ψg (x), for almost every x ∈ G̃. Fubini’s
theorem implies that there exists δ(g) ∈ ∆ such that ψg (x) = δ(g), for almost every g ∈ G̃.
Since δ : Γ → ∆ is clearly a homomorphism, the conclusion follows.

2.3. Cocycle rigidity for translation actions on locally compact groups. In the proof
of Theorem B we will need the following untwisting result for cocycles of translation actions
on locally compact groups. This result was obtained in [Io14, Theorem 3.1] by adapting the
proof of [Fu09, Theorem 5.21] to the locally compact setting.
Theorem 2.4. [Io14] Let G be a simply connected locally compact Polish group, Γ < G a
countable dense subgroup, and put R = R(Γ y G). Let ∆ be a countable group and w : R →
∆ be a cocycle. Assume that there exist a measurable set A ⊆ G with 0 < mG (A) < +∞,
1
a constant c ∈ (0, 32
), and a neighborhood V of 1G such that for every α ∈ [R|A] and every
t ∈ V we have
mG ({x ∈ A|w(α(x)t, xt) 6= w(α(x), x)}) < c mG (A).
Then there exist a homomorphism δ : Γ → ∆ and a measurable map ϕ : G → ∆ such that
we have w(gx, x) = ϕ(gx)δ(g)ϕ(x)−1, for all g ∈ Γ and almost every x ∈ G.
3. Main technical result
Lemma 3.1. Let G be a locally compact Polish group and Γ, Λ be countable subgroups.
Consider the left-right translation action Γ × Λ y (G, mG ) given by (g, h) · x = gxh−1 , for
g ∈ Γ, h ∈ Λ, x ∈ G. Assume that Γ acts strongly ergodically, Λ is finitely generated, and
G0 = Λ is compact.
Let w : (Γ×Λ)×G → ∆ be a cocycle into a countable group ∆. For t ∈ G, let wt : Λ×G → ∆
be the cocycle given by wt (h, y) = w(h, ty). For x ∈ G and t ∈ G0 , let w x , wtx : Λ × G0 → ∆

10

DAMIEN GABORIAU, ADRIAN IOANA, AND ROBIN TUCKER-DROB

be the cocycles for the right translation action Λ y (G0 , mG0 ) given by w x (h, y) = w(h, xy),
wtx (h, y) = w(h, xty).
Then for almost every x ∈ G, we have that d(wtx , w x ) → 0, as t → 1G0 .
Moreover, if G = G0 (i.e. G is compact and Λ is dense in G), then d(wt , w) → 0, as t → 1G .
Before proving Lemma 3.1, let us outline its proof, whose main idea is inspired by [GTD15].
3.1. Outline of the proof of Lemma 3.1. For simplicity, assume that G = G0 and put
µ = mG . Our goal is to show that d(wt , w) → 0, as t → 1G . This is equivalent to proving
that the sets Bht = {x ∈ G|w(h, x) = w(h, tx)}, for t ∈ G, h ∈ Λ, satisfy
(1) inf µ(Bht ) → 1, as t → 1G .
h∈Λ

To this end, let Ath = {x ∈ G|w(h, x) = w(h, xt−1 )} and Atg = {x ∈ G|w(g, x) = w(g, xt−1)},
for t ∈
Z G, h ∈ Λ, g ∈ Γ.ZIf U ⊆ G is a symmetric conjugation invariant neighborhood of 1G ,

then

U

µ(Bht ) dµ(t) =

U

µ(Ath ) dµ(t), for any h ∈ Λ. Using this fact, (1) reduces to proving
(2) inf µ(Ath ) → 1, as t → 1G .
h∈Λ

To prove (2) we use an idea from [GTD15] on how to employ strong ergodicity. Specifically,
−1
one first notices that g −1Ath △Ath ⊆ G \ (Atg ∩ Aghth h), for any t ∈ G, h ∈ Λ, g ∈ Γ. Thus,
the sets {Ath } are almost Γ-invariant, as t → 1G , uniformly in h ∈ Λ. Since Γ acts strongly
ergodically, it then follows that
(3) sup µ(Ath )(1 − µ(Ath )) → 0, as t → 1G .
h∈Λ

Since µ(Ath ) → 1, as t → 1G , for any h ∈ Λ, and Λ is finitely generated, it is immediate that
(3) implies (2).
3.2. Proof of Lemma 3.1. Let ν be a Borel probability measure on G/G0 which is G-quasiinvariant. We fix a Borel map r : G/G0 → G such that r(G0 ) = 1G and r(x)G0 = x, for
every x ∈ G/G0 . We identify G/G0 × G0 with G via the Borel isomorphism (x, y) 7→ r(x)y,
and denote by µ the Borel probability measure on G obtained by pushing forward ν × mG0
through this isomorphism. Then µ has the same null sets as mG and is invariant under the
right translation action of G0 .
For a non-null measurable set U ⊆ G0 , we denote by mU the normalized restriction of mG0
to U. The proof relies on the following claim.
Claim. For every ε > 0, there is a neighborhood U of 1G0 such that
Z
r(x)
d(wt , w r(x) ) dν(x) dmU (t) < ε.
G/G0 ×U

COCYCLE SUPERRIGIDITY FOR TRANSLATION ACTIONS OF PRODUCT GROUPS

11

Before proving the claim, let us show that it implies the conclusion of the theorem. For any
n ≥ 1, by the claim, we can find a neighborhood Un of 1G0 such that
Z

Z
1
r(x)
d(wt , w r(x) ) dmUn (t) dν(x) ≤ n .
2
Un
G/G0
R
r(x)
This implies that the set X of all x ∈ G/G0 such that Un d(wt , w r(x) ) dmUn (t) → 0,
as n → ∞, is co-null in G/G0 . Fix x ∈ X. If ε > 0, then the set B of t ∈ G0 such that
R
r(x)
r(x)
d(wt , w r(x)) < ε/2 is non-null. Otherwise, we would have that Un d(wt , w r(x)) dmUn (t) ≥
r(x)
r(x)
)
−1 , w
1 t2

ε/2, for all n ≥ 1. Next, for t1 , t2 ∈ B, we have d(wt

r(x)

r(x)

= d(wt1 , wt2 ) < ε. Since
r(x)

BB −1 contains a neighborhood of 1G0 and ε > 0 is arbitrary, we get that d(wt , w r(x)) → 0,
r(x)z
r(x)
as t → 1G0 . Now, if z ∈ G0 , then d(wt , w r(x)z ) = d(wztz −1 , w r(x) ) → 0, as t → 1G0 . Since
the set {r(x)z|x ∈ X, z ∈ G0 } is co-null in G, we conclude that d(wtx , w x ) → 0, as t → 1G0 ,
for almost every x ∈ G. This implies the main assertion.
r(x)

For the moreover part, assume that G0 = G. Recall that d(wt , w r(x) ) → 0, as t → 1G , for
almost every x ∈ G/G0 . Since r(G0 ) = 1G , w 1G = w, and wt1G = wt , the moreover assertion
follows.
We are therefore left with proving the claim.
Proof of the claim. Let S be a finite generating set for Λ. We may clearly assume that
ε < 1. Since Γ acts strongly ergodically on G, we can find a finite subset F ⊆ Γ and some
δ > 0 such that if A ⊆ G is any measurable set with supg∈F µ(g −1A△A) < δ, then either
µ(A) < ε/4 or µ(A) > 1 − ε/4. Let U ⊆ G0 be a symmetric, conjugation invariant, open
neighborhood of 1G0 such that every t ∈ U satisfies
µ({x ∈ G|w(g, x) = w(g, xt−1)}) > 1 − δ/2,
µ({x ∈ G|w(h, x) = w(h, xt−1 )}) > ε/4,

for all g ∈ F , and

for all h ∈ S.

For g ∈ Γ, h ∈ Λ, and t ∈ U, we define the sets Atg = {x ∈ G|w(g, x) = w(g, xt−1)} and
Ath = {x ∈ G|w(h, x) = w(h, xt−1 )}. Fix t ∈ U and h ∈ Λ. For g ∈ Γ we claim that
g −1Ath △Ath ⊆ G \ (Atg ∩ Aghth h).
−1

(3.1)

Indeed, if x ∈ Atg ∩ Aghth h, then w(g, x) = w(g, xt−1) and w(g, xh−1) = w(g, xt−1 h−1 ).
Hence we have that x ∈ Ath if and only if w(h, x) = w(h, xt−1 ) if and only if
−1

w(h, gx) = w(g, xh−1)w(h, x)w(g, x)−1 = w(g, xt−1h−1 )w(h, xt−1 )w(g, xt−1)−1 = w(h, gxt−1),
(the first and last equalities use the cocycle equation for Γ × Λ) i.e., if and only if gx ∈ Ath .
Since t, hth−1 ∈ U, for g ∈ F we have µ(Atg ) > 1 − δ/2 and µ(Aghth ) > 1 − δ/2. Since µ
−1
is right G0 -invariant, we get µ(Atg ∩ Aghth h) > 1 − δ. In combination with (3.1), this shows
that for all g ∈ F we have
µ(g −1 Ath △Ath ) < δ,
−1

so by our choice of δ it follows that
(3.2)

either µ(Ath ) < ε/4 or µ(Ath ) > 1 − ε/4, for all t ∈ U and h ∈ Λ.

12

DAMIEN GABORIAU, ADRIAN IOANA, AND ROBIN TUCKER-DROB

Let Λ′ = {h ∈ Λ|µ(Ath ) > 1 − ε/4, for all t ∈ U}. By our choice of U, for all h ∈ S and
t ∈ U we have µ(Ath ) > ǫ/4, hence by (3.2) this implies that µ(Ath ) > 1 − ε/4. Therefore, Λ′
h th−1
1

contains S. Note that Ath1 ∩ Ah10
h1 th−1
1
h0

x ∈ Ath1 ∩ A

h1 ⊆ Ath0 h1 , for every h0 , h1 ∈ Λ and t ∈ G0 . Indeed, if

−1 −1
h1 , then w(h1 , x) = w(h1 , xt−1 ) and w(h0 , xh−1
1 ) = w(h0 , xt h1 ), hence

−1 −1
−1
−1
w(h0 h1 , x) = w(h0 , xh−1
1 )w(h1 , x) = w(h0 , xt h1 )w(h1 , xt ) = w(h0 h1 , xt ),

i.e., x ∈ Ath0 h1 . Therefore, if h0 , h1 ∈ Λ′ and t ∈ U, then h1 th−1
1 ∈ U and so we deduce that
h th−1

µ(Ath0 h1 ) ≥ µ(Ath1 ∩ Ah10 1 h1 ) > 1 − ε/2. Since 1 − ε/2 > ε/4, it follows from (3.2) that
µ(Ath0 h1 ) > 1 − ε/4, whence h0 h1 ∈ Λ′ . This shows that Λ′ = Λ, hence we have shown that
(3.3)

µ({x ∈ G|w(h, x) = w(h, xt−1 )}) > 1 − ε/4,

for all h ∈ Λ and t ∈ U.

Since U is conjugation invariant and symmetric, by using 3.3, for every h ∈ Λ we have that
(ν × mG0 × mU )({(x, y, t) ∈ G/G0 × G0 × U|w(h, r(x)y) = w(h, r(x)ty)}) =
(ν × mG0 × mU )({(x, y, t) ∈ G/G0 × G0 × U|w(h, r(x)y) = w(h, r(x)yt−1)}) =
(µ × mU )({(x, t) ∈ G × U|w(h, x) = w(h, xt−1 )}) > 1 − ε/4.
Finally let Λ act on (G/G0 × U × G0 , ν × mU × mG0 ) by right translations on the last
component. Define the cocycles w1 , w2 : Λ×(G/G0 ×U ×G0 ) → ∆ by letting w1 (h, (x, t, y)) =
w(h, r(x)y) and w2 (h, (x, t, y)) = w(h, r(x)ty). Then the last displayed inequality implies
r(x)
d(w1 , w2 ) < ε/4. Since w1 (h, (x, t, y)) = wt (h, y) and w2 (h, (x, t, y)) = w r(x) (h, y), by
applying Corollary 2.2 we get
Z
r(x)
d(wt , w r(x)) dν(x) dmU (t) ≤ 4d(w1 , w2 ) < ε,
G/G0 ×U

which proves the claim and the lemma.



4. Proof of Theorem A
In this section, we prove Theorem A. We begin with the following elementary result.
Lemma 4.1. Let G be a locally compact Polish group and Γ < G a countable dense subgroup.
Let ∆ be a countable group, ϕ : G → ∆ be a measurable map, and δ1 , δ2 : Γ → ∆ be
homomorphisms such that ϕ(gx) = δ1 (g)ϕ(x)δ2 (g)−1, for all g ∈ Γ and almost every x ∈ G.
Then there exists an open subgroup G0 < G such that ϕ is constant on every left G0 coset,
i.e. there is a map ϕ̃ : G/G0 → ∆ such that ϕ(x) = ϕ̃(xG0 ), for almost every x ∈ G.
In particular, if G is connected, then ϕ is constant, i.e. there is h ∈ ∆ such that ϕ(x) = h,
for almost every x ∈ G.
Proof. For t ∈ G, define At = {x ∈ G|ϕ(xt) = ϕ(x)}. Then At is invariant under the left
translation action Γ y (G, mG ). Since this action is ergodic, At must be null or co-null, for
every t ∈ G. Let G0 < G be the subgroup of t ∈ G such that At is co-null in G. Since ∆ is
countable, there exists a neighborhood V of the identify in G such that At is non-null, for
every t ∈ V . It follows that V ⊂ G0 and hence G0 is open in G.

COCYCLE SUPERRIGIDITY FOR TRANSLATION ACTIONS OF PRODUCT GROUPS

13

Next, notice that the set {(x, t) ∈ G × G0 |ϕ(x) = ϕ(xt)} is co-null in G × G0 . Let B be the
set of x ∈ G such that ϕ(x) = ϕ(xt), for almost every t ∈ G0 . Fubini’s theorem implies that
B is co-null in G. Let x ∈ G. Since G0 is non-null, we can find y ∈ xG0 ∩ B. Finally, if we
define ϕ̃(xG0 ) := ϕ(y), then the conclusion follows.

4.1. Proof of Theorem A. Let w : (Γ × Λ) × G → ∆ be a cocycle into a countable group
∆. Let v be the restriction of w to Λ × G. For t ∈ G, define the cocycle vt : Λ × G → ∆ by
vt (h, y) = v(h, ty). The moreover part of Lemma 3.1 implies the existence of a neighborhood
1
V of 1G such that d(vt , v) < 33
, for any t ∈ V . We continue by proving separately the two
assertions of Theorem A.
(1) Assume that G is a profinite group and Γ is finitely generated. The first part of Theorem
2.3 implies the existence of an open subgroup G0 < G such that the restriction of v to Λ0 ×G0
is cohomologous to a homomorphism δ : Λ0 → ∆, where Λ0 = Λ ∩ G0 .
Thus, there is a measurable map ϕ : G0 → ∆ such that ϕ(xh−1 )w(h, x)ϕ(x)−1 = δ(h), for all
h ∈ Λ0 and almost every x ∈ G0 . Let Γ0 = Γ∩G0 and define a cocycle τ : (Γ0 ×Λ0 )×G0 → ∆
by letting τ ((g, h), x) = ϕ(gxh−1 )w((g, h), x)ϕ(x)−1.
Let g ∈ Γ0 . Since τ (h, x) = δ(h) we deduce that for all h ∈ Λ0 and almost every x ∈ G0 we
have
(4.1)

τ (g, xh−1 )δ(h) = τ ((g, h), x) = δ(h)τ (g, x).

Next, since Γ is finitely generated and Γ0 < Γ is a finite index subgroup, Γ0 admits a finite
generating set S. For g ∈ Γ0 and t ∈ G0 , let Atg = {x ∈ G0 |τ (g, x) = τ (g, tx)}. By using 4.1,
the beginning of the proof of Lemma 4.1 implies the existence of an open subgroup G1 < G0
such that Atg is co-null in G0 , for every g ∈ S and t ∈ G1 . Moreover, since G1 < G0 has
finite index, after replacing G1 with ∩g∈G0 gG1 g −1, we may assume that G1 is normal in G0 .
Let Γ′0 be the set of g ∈ Γ0 such that Atg is co-null in G0 , for all t ∈ G1 . Then Γ′0 < Γ0 is a
g tg2−1

subgroup. Indeed, if g1 , g2 ∈ Γ′0 and t ∈ G1 , then we have Atg1 g2 ⊇ g2−1 Ag21
g −1 tg1

cocycle property) and Atg−1 = g1 Ag11
1

∩ Atg2 (by the

(by the normality of G1 ).

Since Γ′0 contains S, and S generates Γ0 , we conclude that Γ′0 = Γ0 .
Define Γ1 = Γ0 ∩ G1 and Λ1 = Λ0 ∩ G1 . Let g ∈ Γ1 . Since Atg is co-null in G0 , for all t ∈ G1 ,
we get that τ (g, x) = τ (g, tx), for almost every (x, t) ∈ G1 × G1 . Fubini’s theorem implies
that we can find δ(g) ∈ ∆ such that τ (g, x) = δ(g), for almost every x ∈ G1 . Hence, for every
g ∈ Γ1 and h ∈ Λ1 we have that τ ((g, h), x) = δ(g)δ(h), for almost every x ∈ G1 . It follows
that the restriction of w to (Γ1 × Λ1 ) × G1 is cohomologous to the resulting homomorphism
δ : Γ1 × Λ1 → ∆.
(2) Let w̃ : (Γ̃ × Λ̃) × G̃ → ∆ be the “lift” of w. The second part of Theorem 2.3 implies
that the restriction of w̃ to Λ̃ × G̃ is cohomologous to a homomorphism δ : Λ̃ → ∆. Thus,
there is a measurable map ϕ : G̃ → ∆ such that ϕ(xh−1 )w̃(h, x)ϕ(x)−1 = δ(h), for all
h ∈ Λ̃ and almost every x ∈ G̃. Define the cocycle τ : (Γ̃ × Λ̃) × G̃ → ∆ by letting
τ ((g, h), x) = ϕ(gxh−1 )w((g, h), x)ϕ(x)−1.
Let g ∈ Γ̃. Since τ (h, x) = δ(h) we deduce that 4.1 holds for every h ∈ Λ̃ and almost every
x ∈ G. Lemma 4.1 implies that we can find δ(g) ∈ ∆ such that τ (g, x) = δ(g), for almost

14

DAMIEN GABORIAU, ADRIAN IOANA, AND ROBIN TUCKER-DROB

every x ∈ G̃. Hence, for any g ∈ Γ̃ and h ∈ Λ̃ we have τ ((g, h), x) = δ(g)δ(h), for almost
every x ∈ G̃. It follows that w̃ is cohomologous to a homomorphism δ : Γ̃ × Λ̃ → ∆.

5. Proof of Theorem B
5.1. A bounded generation lemma. Before proving Theorem B, we establish a lemma
asserting that if a dense subgroup Λ of a simple Lie group G contains an element which
(topologically) generates a torus, then G is locally boundedly generated by tori generated
by elements in Λ.
Lemma 5.1. Let G be a connected simple Lie group of dimension d, and Λ < G be a dense
subgroup. Assume that Λ contains a torsion-free element s such that the closure of hsi is
compact.
Then we can find g1 , ..., gd ∈ Λ and k ≥ 1 such that the closure Gi of hgi i is isomorphic to Tk ,
Q
for all 1 ≤ i ≤ d, and di=1 (Gi ∩ V ) contains a neighborhood of 1G , for every neighborhood
V of 1G .
Proof. Let G0 be the connected component of the closure of hsi. Since G0 is a non-trivial
connected abelian compact Lie group, it is isomorphic to Tk , for some k ≥ 1. Moreover, if
g ∈ hsi is such that hgi = hsi ∩ G0 , then G0 is the closure of hgi.
Denote by g and g0 the Lie algebras of G and G0 , respectively. Let Ad: G → GL(g) be
the adjoint representation of G. Since Λ is dense in G, the linear span of Ad(Λ)(g0 ) =
{Ad(h)(η)|h ∈ Λ, η ∈ g0 } is an Ad(G)-invariant subspace of g different from {0}. On the
other hand, since G is simple, g admits no non-trivial proper Ad(G)-invariant subspace.
Therefore, there must exist h1 , ..., hm ∈ Λ such the set {Ad(hj )(g0 )|1 ≤ j ≤ m} spans g.
For 1 ≤ j ≤ m, let gj = hj gh−1
∈ Λ. Then the closure Gj of hgj i is isomorphic to Tk .
j
Moreover, since the Lie algebra gj of Gj is equal to Ad(hj )(g0 ), we deduce that g is equal
to the span of gj , 1 ≤ j ≤ m. Thus, we can find a basis b1 , ..., bd of g such that for every
1 ≤ i ≤ d, bi belongs to gji , for some ji ∈ {1, ..., m}.
Define π : Rd → G by letting π(x) = exp(x1 b1 )... exp(xd bd ), for every x = (xi )1≤i≤d ∈ Rd .
Since the derivative of π at 0 ∈ Rd is invertible, the inverse function theorem implies that
π is a homeomorphism between a neighborhood of 0 and a neighborhood of 1G . Let V be
a neighborhood of 1G . Then W = {x = (xi )1≤i≤d ∈ Rd | exp(xi bi ) ∈ V, for every 1 ≤ i ≤ d}
Q
is a neighborhood of 0. Since π(W ) ⊆ di=1 (Gji ∩ V ), it follows that conclusion holds for

gj1 , ..., gjd ∈ Λ.
5.2. Proof of Theorem B. Let w : (Γ × Λ) × G → ∆ be a cocycle into a countable group
∆. Let G̃ be the universal cover of G and p : G̃ → G the covering homomorphism. Let Γ̃ =
p−1 (Γ), Λ̃ = p−1 (Λ), and w̃ : (Γ̃× Λ̃)× G̃ → ∆ be given by w̃((g, h), x) = w((p(g), p(h)), p(x)).
Our goal is to show that w̃ is cohomologous to a homomorphism. To this end, we will
analyze the restriction of w to subgroups of Λ with compact closure. More precisely, for
the next two claims, we fix a finitely generated subgroup Λ0 < Λ such that G0 = Λ0 is
compact and connected. We denote by G̃0 its universal cover, by q : G̃0 → G0 the covering
homomorphism, and put Λ̃0 = q −1 (Λ0 ).

COCYCLE SUPERRIGIDITY FOR TRANSLATION ACTIONS OF PRODUCT GROUPS

15

Claim 1. There exist measurable maps ϕ : G × G̃0 → ∆ and τ : (Γ × Λ̃0 ) × G → ∆ such
that
w(g, q(h), xq(y)) = ϕ(gx, yh−1)τ ((g, h), x)ϕ(x, y)−1,
for all (g, h) ∈ Γ × Λ̃0 and almost every (x, y) ∈ G × G̃0 .
Proof of Claim 1. For x ∈ G and t ∈ G0 , we define cocycles w x , wtx : Λ0 × G0 → ∆ by letting
w x (h, y) = w(h, xy) and wtx (h, y) = w(h, xty). Since Γ acts strongly ergodically on G and
Λ0 is finitely generated, Lemma 3.1 implies that d(wtx , w x ) → 0, as t → 1G0 , for almost every
x ∈ G.
By applying the second part of Theorem 2.3, we deduce that the lift of w x to Λ̃0 × G̃0 is
cohomologous to a homomorphism. Thus, for almost every x ∈ G, we can find a measurable
map ϕx : G̃0 → ∆ and a homomorphism δx : Λ̃0 → ∆ such that
(5.1)

w(q(h), xq(y)) = ϕx (yh−1 )δx (h)ϕx (y)−1, for all h ∈ Λ̃0 and almost every y ∈ G̃0 .

Moreover, we may assume that the map G × G̃0 ∋ (x, y) 7→ ϕ(x, y) := ϕx (y) ∈ ∆ is
measurable. Indeed, consider the action Λ̃0 y (G × G̃0 , mG × mG̃0 ) by right translations on
the G̃0 -component, and a cocycle for this action given by σ(h, (x, y)) = w(q(h), xq(y)). Now,
the ergodic components of this action Λ̃0 y G× G̃0 are of the form {x}× G̃0 , for some x ∈ G.
By equation 5.1 the restriction of σ to every such ergodic component is cohomologous to a
homomorphism. By applying [FMW04, Theorem 3.4 and Corollary 3.11] it follows that σ
is cohomologous to a cocycle which does dot depend on the G̃0 -component. In other words,
there is a measurable map ϕ which satisfies 5.1.
Next, we consider the action Γ× Λ̃0 y (G× G̃0 , mG ×mG̃0 ) given by (g, h)·(x, y) = (gx, yh−1).
Then the formula ρ((g, h), (x, y)) = w(g, q(h), xq(y)) defines a cocycle for this action. We define τ : (Γ×Λ̃0 )×(G×G̃0 ) → ∆ by letting τ ((g, h), (x, y)) = ϕ(gx, yh−1)−1 ρ((g, h), (x, y))ϕ(x, y).
Then τ is a cocycle for the same action as above, and 5.1 gives that
(5.2)

τ (h, (x, y)) = δx (h), for all h ∈ Λ̃0 and almost every (x, y) ∈ G × G̃0 .

Let g ∈ Γ. By combining 5.2 with the cocycle equation for Γ × Λ̃0 we derive that for almost
every x ∈ G we have
τ (g, (x, yh−1))δx (h) = δgx (h)τ (g, (x, y)), for all h ∈ Λ̃0 and almost every y ∈ G̃0 .
Since G̃0 is connected, Lemma 4.1 implies that the map G̃0 ∋ y 7→ τ (g, (x, y)) ∈ ∆ is
constant, for almost every x ∈ G. Together with 5.2 we get that the map G × G̃0 ∋
(x, y) 7→ τ ((g, h), (x, y)) ∈ ∆ only depends on the x-coordinate, almost everywhere, for all
(g, h) ∈ Γ × Λ̃0 , proving the claim.

Next, let R = R(Γ̃ y G̃) and define the cocycle v : R → ∆ by letting v(gx, x) = w̃(g, x),
for every g ∈ Γ̃ and x ∈ G̃. For a measurable set A ⊆ G̃ with mG̃ (A) < ∞, and t ∈ G̃, we
define
c(A, t) = sup mG̃ ({x ∈ A|v(α(x)t, xt) 6= v(α(x), x)}).
α∈[R|A]

We next use Claim 1 to derive that c(A, t) → 0, as t ∈ p−1 (G0 ) converges to 1G̃ . By using
a “bounded generation” argument we will then further show that c(A, t) → 0, as t → 1G̃ .

16

DAMIEN GABORIAU, ADRIAN IOANA, AND ROBIN TUCKER-DROB

This will allow us to apply Theorem 2.4 to v, and conclude that w̃ is cohomologous to a
homomorphism.
Claim 2. Let A ⊆ G̃ be a measurable set with mG̃ (A) > 0 and c > 0. Then there exists an
open neighborhood V of 1G such that c(A, t) ≤ c, for every t ∈ p−1 (G0 ∩ V ).
Proof of Claim 2. By letting h = 1Λ̃0 in Claim 1, we deduce that for almost every s ∈ G̃0 we
have
(5.3)

w(g, xq(s)) = ϕ(gx, s)τ (g, x)ϕ(x, s)−1, for all g ∈ Γ and almost every x ∈ G.

Let W be an open neighborhood of 1G̃0 such that for almost every (s1 , s2 ) ∈ W × W we have
(5.4)

c
mG̃ ({x ∈ A|ϕ(p(x), s1 ) 6= ϕ(p(x), s2 )}) ≤ .
2

Put V = q(W ). Then V is an open neighborhood of 1G0 . Fix α ∈ [R̃|A] and let γ : A → Γ̃
such that α(x) = γ(x)x, for almost every x ∈ A. Let t1 , t2 ∈ p−1 (G0 ∩ V ) and let s1 , s2 ∈ W
such that p(t1 ) = q(s1 ) and p(t2 ) = q(s2 ). Assume that 5.3 holds for s ∈ {s1 , s2 } and 5.4
holds for (s1 , s2 ). By using the definitions of v and w̃ and 5.3, for every i ∈ {1, 2} and almost
every x ∈ A we get
v(α(x)ti , xti ) = v(γ(x)xti , xti ) = w̃(γ(x), xti ) = w(p(γ(x)), p(x)p(ti )) = w(p(γ(x)), p(x)q(si ))
= ϕ(p(γ(x))p(x), si )τ (p(γ(x)), p(x))ϕ(p(x), si )−1
= ϕ(p(α(x)), si )τ (p(γ(x)), p(x))ϕ(p(x), si )−1
Since α preserves the restriction of mG̃ to A, by combining the last identity with 5.4 we
derive that mG̃ ({x ∈ A|v(α(x)t1 , xt1 ) 6= v(α(x)t2 , xt2 )}) ≤ c. Since our assumptions hold for
almost every pair (t1 , t2 ) ∈ p−1 (G0 ∩ V ) × p−1 (G0 ∩ V ), so does the last inequality. Since the
function (t1 , t2 ) 7→ mG̃ ({x ∈ A|v(α(x)t1 , xt1 ) 6= v(α(x)t2 , xt2 )}) is continuous, we therefore
conclude that mG̃ ({x ∈ A|v(α(x)t1 , xt1 ) 6= v(α(x)t2 , xt2 )}) ≤ c, for all t1 , t2 ∈ p−1 (G0 ∩ V )
and every α ∈ [R|A]. This proves the claim.

We are now ready to prove the following:
Claim 3. Let A ⊆ G̃ be a compact set and c > 0. Then there exists an open neighborhood
W of 1G such that c(A, t) ≤ c, for every t ∈ p−1 (W ).
Proof of Claim 3. Let d be the dimension of G. By Lemma 5.1, we can find g1 , ..., gd ∈ Λ
and k ≥ 1 such that the closure Gi of hgi i is isomorphic to Tk , for every 1 ≤ i ≤ d, and
Qd
i=1 (Gi ∩ U) contains a neighborhood of 1G , for every neighborhood U of 1G .
Let B be a compact neighborhood of 1G̃ . Then AB d is a compact neighborhood of 1G̃ . By
applying Claim 1, we can find a neighborhood V of 1G such that
c
(5.5)
c(AB d , t) ≤ , for every 1 ≤ i ≤ d and any t ∈ p−1 (Gi ∩ V ).
d

COCYCLE SUPERRIGIDITY FOR TRANSLATION ACTIONS OF PRODUCT GROUPS

17

Let W be the set of t ∈ G̃ that can be written as t = t1 ...td , where ti ∈ B and p(ti ) ∈ Gi ∩ V ,
for every 1 ≤ i ≤ d. Then the first paragraph guarantees that W is a neighborhood of 1G̃ .
Let t ∈ W and consider its decomposition t = t1 ...td as above. If α ∈ [R|A], then we have
{x ∈ A|v(α(x)t, xt) 6= v(α(x), x} ⊆

d−1
[

{x ∈ A|v(α(x)t1 ...ti+1 , xt1 ...ti+1 ) 6= v(α(x)t1 ...ti , xt1 ...ti )}.

i=0

Note that the map As ∋ y 7→ α(ys−1)s ∈ As belongs to [R|As], and that c(A, s) ≤ c(Ã, s),
for every s ∈ G̃ and every compact set Ã ⊂ G̃ containing A. Indeed, the latter inequality
holds because every α ∈ [R|A] extends trivialy to an element of [R|Ã]. By combining these
facts with the fact that ti ∈ B ∩ p−1 (Gi ∩ V ), for all 1 ≤ i ≤ d, and inequality 5.5, we deduce
that
d−1
d−1
X
X
c
c(At1 ...ti , ti+1 ) ≤
c(AB d , ti+1 ) ≤ d · = c,
c(A, t) ≤
d
i=0
i=0
for every t ∈ W , thus proving the claim.



1
mG̃ (A), for any t
Let A ⊆ G̃ be a non-null compact set. Claim 3 implies that c(A, t) < 33
in a small enough neighborhood of 1G̃ . Since G̃ is simply connected, Theorem 2.4 implies
that the restriction of w̃ to Γ̃ × G̃ is cohomologous to a homomorphism δ : Γ̃ → ∆. By
continuing as in the proof of the second part of Theorem A it follows that w̃ is cohomologous
to a homomorphim δ : Γ̃ × Λ̃ → ∆.


5.3. Cyclic subgroups with compact closure. In view of Theorem B it is natural to
wonder for which Lie groups G does every dense subgroup contain an infinite cyclic subgroup
with compact closure. It turns out that the answer is positive if and only if the rank of G is
equal to the rank of its maximal compact subgroups. Equivalently, any maximal connected
compact abelian subgroup (i.e. torus) of G is maximal abelian. The first step towards
proving this is the following lemma.
Lemma 5.2. [Wi02] Let G be a connected Lie group and L < G a maximal compact
subgroup. Let A be the set of g ∈ G such that hgh−1 ∈ L, for some h ∈ G. Let T < L be
a maximal torus. Denote by CG (T ) the centralizer of T in G, and by CG (T )0 its connected
component.
(1) If T = CG (T )0 , then A has non-empty interior.
(2) If T 6= CG (T )0 , then A ⊆ G is null.
We are grateful to Alireza Salehi-Golsefidy for pointing out Lemma 5.2 to us. After proving
Lemma 5.2, we realized that it also follows from [Wi02, Theorem 1]. Nevertheless, we include
a self-contained proof for completeness.
Remark 5.3. Note that L exists and is unique up to conjugation with an element from G.
Also, every compact subgroup of G is contained in a maximal compact subgroup (for all of
this, see e.g. [Bo50]). Therefore, A is precisely the set of g ∈ G such that the closure of hgi
is compact.

18

DAMIEN GABORIAU, ADRIAN IOANA, AND ROBIN TUCKER-DROB

Proof. Since G is connected, L is connected (see e.g. [Bo50]). By the maximal torus theorem,
T < L is unique up to conjugation and every element of L belongs to a conjugate of T .
Let g and l denote the Lie algebras of G and L, respectively. Let Ad: G → GL(g) denote
the adjoint representation of G. Endow g with an Ad(L)-invariant inner product. Consider
the map π : G × L → G given by π(g, l) = glg −1. Let (g0 , l0 ) ∈ G × L. Then it is
easy to see that the rank of the derivative dπ(g0 , l0 ) : g ⊕ l → g is equal to the dimension of
{a+b−Ad(l0 )(b)|a ∈ l, b ∈ g} ⊆ g. Thus, dπ(g0 , l0 ) is surjective if and only if {b−Ad(l0 )(b)|b ∈
g ⊖ l} = g ⊖ l if and only if there is no non-zero b ∈ g ⊖ l such that Ad(l0 )(b) = b. We are
now ready to prove the two assertions.
(1) Assume that T = CG (T )0 . Let l0 ∈ T such that hl0 i is dense in T . Let b ∈ g ⊖ l such
that Ad(l0 )(b) = b. Then {exb |x ∈ R} ⊂ CG (hl0 i) = CG (T ). Hence, exb ∈ T ⊆ L, for every
x ∈ R. This implies that b ∈ l and thus b = 0. By the argument from above we deduce
that dπ(g0 , l0 ) is surjective, for every hence for some g0 ∈ G. Finally, the inverse function
theorem implies that A = π(G × L) has non-empty interior.
(2) Assume that T 6= CG (T )0 . Then we can find an element b of the Lie algebra of CG (T )
which does not belong to the Lie algebra of T . Then b ∈
/ l. Indeed, otherwise {exb |x ∈ R} ⊂
CG (T )0 ∩ L = T . Let l0 ∈ L. Since T < L is a maximal torus, we can find g ∈ L such that
t := gl0 g −1 ∈ T . Then Ad(t)(b) = 0, hence Ad(l0 )(b′ ) = 0, where b′ = Ad(g −1 )(b). Since
b′ ∈
/ l, if b′′ denotes the orthogonal projection of b′ onto g ⊖ l, then b′′ 6= 0 and Ad(l0 )(b′′ ) = 0.
By the above argument, this implies that dπ(g0 , l0 ) is not surjective, for every g0 ∈ G. As
a consequence, for every l0 ∈ L and g0 ∈ G, there is a neighborhood V ⊆ G × L of (g0 , l0 )
such that π(V ) ⊆ G is contained in a proper submanifold and hence is null. It follows that
A = π(G × L) is null.

Corollary 5.4. Consider the notation from Lemma 5.2. Moreover, assume that G is a
semisimple real algebraic group.
(1) If CG (T )0 = T , then every countable dense subgroup Λ < G contains a torsion-free
element s such the closure of hsi is compact.
(2) If CG (T )0 6= T , then there exists a countable dense subgroup Λ < G such that hsi is
discrete, for every s ∈ Λ. Moreover, Λ can be chosen isomorphic to the free group
F2 .
Proof. (1) By [BG02, Theorem 1], Λ contains a free subgroup Λ0 which is still dense in
G. Since A ⊂ G has non-empty interior, any non-trivial element s ∈ Λ0 ∩ A satisfies the
conclusion.
(2) Let a, b denote free generators of the free group F2 and w be a non-trivial word in a and
b. Consider the word map fw : G2 → G, where fw (g, h) is the element of G obtained by
replacing a, b with g, h in the word w. We claim that fw−1 (A) is null.
By [Bo83, Theorem B] (see also [La04, Corollary 5]), the image fw (G2 ) ⊆ G has non-empty
interior. Let Bw denote the set of all (g, h) ∈ G2 for which the derivative dfw (g, h) : g⊕g → g
is surjective. Then Bw is non-empty. Otherwise, by reasoning as in the proof of Lemma 5.2
(2), it would follow that fw (G2 ) ⊆ G is null. Since Bw ⊆ G2 is Zariski-open and non-empty,
we deduce that it is co-null. In particular, fw−1 (A) ∩ Bw is co-null in fw−1 (A).

COCYCLE SUPERRIGIDITY FOR TRANSLATION ACTIONS OF PRODUCT GROUPS

19

If (g, h) ∈ Bw , then since dfw (g, h) is surjective, we can find a neighborhood V(g,h) ⊆ G2 of
(g, h) such that fw−1 (C) ∩ V(g,h) ⊆ G2 is null, for any null set C ⊆ G. Since Bw can be covered
by countably many of the sets {V(g,h) }(g,h)∈Bw , we get that fw−1 (C) ∩ Bw is null, for every
null set C ⊆ G. Since A is null, in combination with the previous paragraph, we derive that
fw−1 (A) is null.
Finally, by [Ku51, Lemma 3], we can find non-empty open sets X, Y ⊆ G such that hg, hi < G
is dense, for every g ∈ X and h ∈ Y . Since fw−1 (A) is null for every w ∈ F2 \ {1}, we can find
[


(g, h) ∈ X × Y \
fw−1 (A) .
w∈F2 \{1}

Let Λ < G be the group generated by g and h. Then Λ is dense in G. Moreover, every
non-trivial element s ∈ Λ is of the form s = fw (g, h), for some w ∈ F2 \ {1}. Thus, s ∈
/ A,
hence the closure of hsi is not compact (see Remark 5.3) and therefore hsi must be discrete.

Remark 5.5. It can be easily checked that if n ≥ 2, then the condition T = CG (T )0 holds
for G = SLn (R) if and only if n = 2. Moreover, the condition holds if G = Sp2n (R), for
n ≥ 1, but fails if G = SLn (C), for n ≥ 2.
6. Proofs of Corollaries C and D
This section is devoted to the proofs of Corollaries C and D. To this end, we recall from [Io14,
Lemma 6.2] the following elementary result.
Lemma 6.1. [Io14] Let Γ y (X, µ) be a nonsingular action and ∆ y (Y, ν) be a free
nonsingular action of countable groups Γ and ∆. Assume that there exist nonsingular maps
θ : X → Y , ρ : Y → X, and a group homomorphism δ : Γ → ∆ such that ρ(∆θ(x)) ⊂ Γx
and θ(gx) = δ(g)θ(x), for all g ∈ Γ and almost every x ∈ X. Define Σ = ker(δ), ∆0 = δ(Γ),
and Y0 = θ(X).
Then the action Σ y X admits a measurable fundamental domain, the action Γ/Σ y X/Σ
is conjugate to ∆0 y Y0 , and the action ∆ y Y is induced from ∆0 y Y0 .
Moreover, assume that Γ y (X, µ) and ∆ y (Y, ν) are ergodic and probability measure
preserving. Then for any measurable set C ⊆ X such that the restriction of θ to C is
one-to-one, we have that
[∆ : ∆0 ] ν(θ(C)) = |Σ| µ(C).
Proof. The main assertion is precisely [Io14, Lemma 6.2]. To prove the moreover assertion,
notice that θ∗ µ and ν(Y0 )−1 ν|Y0 are equivalent, ∆0 -invariant probability measures on Y0 .
Since the action ∆0 y Y0 is ergodic (as ∆ y Y is ergodic), we get that θ∗ µ = ν(Y0 )−1 ν|Y0 .
If C ⊆F
X is a measurable set on which θ is one-to-one, then θ−1 (θ(C)) is equal to the disjoint
union g∈Σ gC. Hence,
[∆ : ∆0 ] ν(θ(C)) = ν(Y0 )−1 ν(θ(C)) = µ(θ−1 (θ(C))) = µ(

G

gC) = |Σ| µ(C),

g∈Σ

which concludes the proof of the lemma.



20

DAMIEN GABORIAU, ADRIAN IOANA, AND ROBIN TUCKER-DROB

6.1. Proof of Corollary C. Since the “if” part of the main assertion is easy (see e.g.
Remark 1.12), we will only prove the “iff” assertion. Assume that the actions Γ × Λ y
(G, mG ) and ∆ y (Y, ν) are SOE. Let A ⊆ G, B ⊆ Y be non-null measurable sets together
with a nonsingular isomorphism θ : A → B such that θ((Γ × Λ)x ∩ A) = ∆θ(x) ∩ B, for
almost every x ∈ A.
Since the action Γ×Λ y (G, mG ) is ergodic, we may extend θ to a measurable map θ : G → Y
such that θ((Γ × Λ)x) ⊂ ∆θ(x), for almost every x ∈ G. Since the action ∆ y (Y, ν) is free,
the formula θ(gxh−1 ) = w((g, h), x)θ(x) defines a cocycle w : (Γ × Λ) × G → ∆.
By applying part (1) of Theorem A, we can find an open subgroup G0 < G, a homomorphism
δ : Γ0 × Λ0 → ∆ (where Γ0 = Γ ∩ G and Λ0 = Λ ∩ G0 ), and a measurable map ϕ : G0 → ∆
such that w((g, h), x) = ϕ(gxh−1 )δ(g, h)ϕ(x)−1, for all g ∈ Γ0 , h ∈ Λ0 , and almost every
x ∈ G0 . Define θ0 : G0 → Y by letting θ0 (x) = ϕ(x)−1 θ(x). Then
(6.1)

θ0 (gxh−1 ) = δ(g, h)θ0 (x), for all g ∈ Γ0 , h ∈ Λ0 , and almost every x ∈ G0 .

Next, denote ρ = θ−1 : B → A. Since the action ∆ y (Y, ν) is ergodic, we may extend ρ to
a measurable map ρ : Y → G such that ρ(∆y) ⊂ (Γ × Λ)ρ(y), for almost every y ∈ Y . Let
q : G → G0 be a Borel map such that q(x) ∈ (Γ × Λ)x, for all x ∈ G.
Define ρ0 = q ◦ ρ : Y → G0 . Then ρ0 (∆θ0 (x)) ⊂ (Γ0 × Λ0 )x, for almost every x ∈ G0 . Since
θ0 and ρ0 are nonsingular maps, by using 6.1 and applying Lemma 6.1 we deduce that if we
denote Σ = ker(δ), ∆0 = δ(Γ0 × Λ0 ), and Y0 = θ0 (G0 ), then
• Σ y G0 admits a measurable fundamental domain,
• (Γ0 × Λ0 )/Σ y G0 /Σ is conjugate to ∆0 y Y0 , and
• ∆ y Y is induced from ∆0 y Y0 .
To finish the proof of the main assertion, it remains to prove that Σ = {(1, 1)}. Since Σ
preserves the probability measure mG0 on G0 , we deduce that Σ is finite. Let (g, h) ∈ Σ. Since
Σ is a normal subgroup of Γ0 × Λ0 , we get that (aga−1 g −1 , 1) = (a, 1)(g, h)(a, 1)−1(g, h) ∈ Σ,
for all a ∈ Γ0 . As Γ0 < G0 is dense and Σ is finite, hence closed in G0 × G0 , it follows that
(aga−1 g −1 , 1) ∈ Σ, for all a ∈ G0 . Since Σ is finite, hence discrete in G0 × G0 , and G0 is
profinite, we can find an open subgroup G1 < G0 such that aga−1 g −1 = 1, for all a ∈ G1 .
Since the centralizer of G1 in G is trivial by assumption, we derive that g = 1, and similarly
that h = 1. This proves that Σ = {(1, 1)}.
Finally, assume that A = G and B = Y , i.e. that θ : G → Y is an orbit equivalence. Let
C ⊆ G0 be a non-null measurable set on which θ0 is one-to-one. Then ν(θ0 (C)) = ν(θ(C)).
Since θ is measure preserving, we conclude that ν(θ0 (C)) = mG (C). On the other hand,
by applying the moreover part of Lemma 6.1 to θ0 we deduce that [∆ : ∆0 ]ν(θ0 (C)) =
mG (G0 )−1 mG (C) = [G : G0 ]mG (C). Hence, [G : G0 ] = [∆ : ∆0 ], as claimed.

6.2. Proof of Corollary D. Since the “if” part of the main assertion is easy (see e.g.
[Io14, Example 1.5. (1)]), we will only prove the “iff” assertion. Assume that the actions
Γ × Λ y (G, mG ) and ∆ y (Y, ν) are SOE. Let A ⊆ G, B ⊆ Y be non-null measurable sets
together with a nonsingular isomorphism θ : A → B such that θ((Γ × Λ)x ∩ A) = ∆θ(x) ∩ B,
for almost every x ∈ A.

COCYCLE SUPERRIGIDITY FOR TRANSLATION ACTIONS OF PRODUCT GROUPS

21

Since the action Γ×Λ y (G, mG ) is ergodic, we may extend θ to a measurable map θ : G → Y
such that θ((Γ × Λ)x) ⊂ ∆θ(x), for almost every x ∈ G. Since the action ∆ y (Y, ν) is free,
the formula θ(gxh−1 ) = w((g, h), x)θ(x) defines a cocycle w : (Γ × Λ) × G → ∆.
By applying part (2) of Theorem A or Theorem B, depending on the situation, we can
find a homomorphism δ : Γ̃ × Λ̃ → ∆ and a measurable map ϕ : G̃ → ∆ such that for all
g ∈ Γ̃, h ∈ Λ̃, and almost every x ∈ G̃ we have w((p(g), p(h)), p(x)) = ϕ(gxh−1 )δ(g, h)ϕ(x)−1.
Define θ̃ : G̃ → Y by letting θ̃(x) = ϕ(x)−1 θ(p(x)). Then
(6.2)

θ̃(gxh−1 ) = δ(g, h)θ̃(x), for all g ∈ Γ̃, h ∈ Λ̃, and almost every x ∈ G̃.

Next, denote ρ = θ−1 : B → A. Since the action ∆ y (Y, ν) is ergodic, we may extend
ρ to a measurable map ρ : Y → G such that ρ(∆y) ⊂ (Γ × Λ)ρ(y), for almost every
y ∈ Y . Let q : G → G̃ be a Borel map such that p(q(x)) = x, for all x ∈ G. Then
q((Γ × Λ)x) ⊂ (Γ̃ × Λ̃)q(x), for all x ∈ G.
Define ρ̃ = q ◦ ρ : Y → G̃. It is then easy to see that ρ̃(∆θ̃(x)) ⊂ (Γ̃ × Λ̃)x, for almost every
x ∈ G̃. Since both θ̃ and ρ̃ are nonsingular maps, by using 6.2 and applying Lemma 6.1 we
deduce that if we denote Σ = ker(δ), ∆0 = δ(Γ × Λ), and Y0 = θ̃(G̃), then
• Σ y G̃ admits a measurable fundamental domain,
• (Γ̃ × Λ̃)/Σ y G̃/Σ is conjugate to ∆0 y Y0 , and
• ∆ y Y is induced from ∆0 y Y0 .
Denote by Z(G̃) the center of G̃. Since G̃ is connected and Z is a discrete normal subgroup,
we get that Z ⊆ Z(G̃). Thus, if g ∈ Z, then (g, g) ∈ Γ̃ × Λ̃ acts trivially on G̃. Since the
action ∆0 y Y0 is free, we get that (g, g) ∈ Σ.
To finish the proof of the main assertion, it remains to show that Σ ⊆ Z × Z. Since Σ y G̃
admits a measurable fundamental domain, Ω = {g ∈ Γ̃|(g, 1) ∈ Σ} is a subgroup of Γ̃ which
is discrete in G̃. Let (g, h) ∈ Σ. Since Σ is normal in Γ̃ × Λ̃, for every a ∈ Γ̃ we have that
aga−1 g −1 ∈ Ω. Since Ω < G̃ is discrete and G̃ is connected, we get that aga−1 g −1 = 1, for
every a ∈ Γ̃. Since Γ̃ < G̃ is dense, we conclude that g ∈ Z(G̃). Similarly, we get that
h ∈ Z(G̃). Since Γ̃ ∩ Z(G̃) = Λ̃ ∩ Z(G̃) = Z, we derive that indeed Σ ⊆ Z × Z.
Finally, assume that A = G and B = Y , i.e. that θ : G → Y is an orbit equivalence. Let
C ⊆ G̃ be a non-null measurable set on which ϕ is constant and p is one-to-one. Let h ∈ ∆
such that ϕ(x) = h, for all x ∈ C. Since θ̃(x) = h−1 θ(p(x)), for all x ∈ C, we get that
ν(θ̃(C)) = ν(θ(p(C)). Since θ is measure preserving and p is one-to-one on C, we further
get ν(θ̃(C)) = mG (p(C)) = |Z| mG̃ (C). On the other hand, the moreover part of Lemma 6.1
implies that [∆ : ∆0 ] ν(θ̃(C)) = |Σ| mG̃ (C). By combining the last two identities we derive
that [∆ : ∆0 ] |Z| = |Σ|, as claimed.

7. Proofs of Corollaries E and F
7.1. Proof of Corollary E. Put M = L∞ (G) ⋊ (Γ × Γ). Note that P SL2 (Z) ∼
= (Z/2Z) ∗
+
(Z/3Z) and its non-amenable subgroups have property (HH) from [OP08, Definitions 1].

22

DAMIEN GABORIAU, ADRIAN IOANA, AND ROBIN TUCKER-DROB

By applying [OP08, Corollary A] to the profinite action Γ × Γ y (G, mG ) we get that
L∞ (G) is the unique Cartan subalgebra of M, up to unitary conjugacy. By [Si55], any free
ergodic probability measure preserving action ∆ y (Y, ν) such that L∞ (Y ) ⋊ ∆ ∼
= M is
orbit equivalent to Γ × Γ y (G, mG ).
Next, as a consequence of [BV10, Theorem 1], the left translation action Γ y (G, mG ) has
spectral gap, hence it is stronglyQergodic. Moreover, by the Strong Approximation Theorem,
G is an open subgroup of K = p∈S P SL2 (Zp ). Since the centralizer of any open subgroup
of K in K is trivial, we deduce that the centralizer of any open subgroup of G in G is trivial.
Altogether, we can apply Corollary C to deduce the conclusion.

7.2. Proof of Corollary F. Let H = SO(3). Then Φ : G → H given by


ℜ(x2 − y 2) ℑ(x2 + y 2) −2 ℜ(xy)

x y
Φ(
) = −ℑ(x2 − y 2 ) ℜ(x2 + y 2) 2 ℑ(xy)  for all x, y ∈ C with |x|2 + |y|2 = 1,
−ȳ x̄
2 ℜ(xȳ)
2 ℑ(xȳ) |x|2 − |y|2
is a continuous onto homomorphism with kernel {±Id} (see e.g. [Ha03, Section 1.6.1]).

If we put c = b2 − a2 , then a simple computation shows that
√
 a


c
1
0
0
b√
b
a
c
a



Φ(A) = −
and Φ(B) = 0
0
b√
b
b
0 − bc
0
0 1

0

√



c
.
b
a
b

/ {0, ± 21 , ±1}, the main result of [Sw94] implies that the subgroup of H generated
Since ab ∈
by Φ(A) and Φ(B) is isomorphic to F2 . Therefore, Γ is isomorphic to F2 as well. Moreover,
−Id ∈
/ Γ. Indeed, otherwise there would be a non-trivial word w in A and B such that
w = −Id. But then, Φ(w) = Id, or in other words the same word w in Φ(A) and Φ(B) is
trivial, which is a contradiction. This shows that Γ does not contain any non-trivial central
element of G.
Next, put M = L∞ (G) ⋊ (Γ × Γ). By applying [OP07, Corollary 4.5] to the compact action
Γ × Γ y (G, mG ) we get that L∞ (G) is the unique Cartan subalgebra of M, up to unitary
conjugacy. Let ∆ y (Y, ν) be a free ergodic probability measure preserving action such that
L∞ (Y ) ⋊ ∆ ∼
= M. By [Si55], this action must be orbit equivalent to Γ × Γ y (G, mG ).
Altogether, since G is simply connected, we can apply Corollary D and deduce that ∆ y Y
is conjugate to Γ × Γ y (G, mG ).

References
[BdS14] Y. Benoist, N. de Saxcè: A spectral gap theorem in simple Lie groups, to appear in Invent. Math.,
preprint arXiv:1405.1808.
[BF13] U. Bader, A. Furman: Algebraic Representations of Ergodic Actions and Super-Rigidity, preprint
arXiv:1311.3696.
[BG02] E. Breuillard, T. Gelander: On dense free subgroups of Lie groups, J. Algebra 261 (2003), 448-467.
[BG05] J. Bourgain, A. Gamburd: Uniform expansion bounds for Cayley graphs of SL2 (Fp ), Ann. of Math.
(2) 167 (2008), 625-642.
[BG06] J. Bourgain, A. Gamburd: On the spectral gap for finitely-generated subgroups of SU (2), Invent.
Math. 171 (2008), 83-121.
[BG11] J. Bourgain, A. Gamburd: A spectral gap theorem in SU (d), J. Eur. Math. Soc. 14 (2012), 1455-1511.

COCYCLE SUPERRIGIDITY FOR TRANSLATION ACTIONS OF PRODUCT GROUPS

23

[BV10] J. Bourgain, P. Varjú: Expansion in SLd (Z/qZ), q arbitrary, Invent. Math. 188 (2012), no. 1, 151173.
[BISG15] R. Boutonnet, A. Ioana, A. Salehi-Golsefidy: Local spectral gap in simple Lie groups and applications, preprint arXiv:1503.06473.
[Bo50] A. Borel: Sous-groupes compacts maximaux des groupes de Lie, Séminaire Bourbaki, 1 (1948-1951),
Exposé No. 33, 271-279.
[Bo83] A. Borel: On free subgroups of semisimple groups, Enseign. Math. 29 (1983), 151-164.
[CFW81] A. Connes, J. Feldman, B. Weiss: An amenable equivalence relations is generated by a single
transformation, Ergodic Th. Dynam. Sys. 1(1981), 431-450.
[CK15] I. Chifan, Y. Kida: OE and W∗ -superrigidity results for actions by surface braid groups, to appear
in Proc. London Math. Soc., preprint arXiv:1502.02391.
[CW81] A. Connes, B. Weiss: Property T and asymptotically invariant sequences, Israel J. Math. 37 (1980),
209-210.
[Dy59] H.A. Dye, On groups of measure preserving transformation. I. Amer. J. Math. 81 (1959), 119-159.
[Dr84] V. Drinfeld: Finitely-additive measures on S 2 and S 3 , invariant with respect to rotations, Funct.
Anal. Appl. 18 (1984), 245-246.
[Dr15] D. Drimbe: Cocycle superrigidity for coinduced actions, preprint arXiv:1512.00093.
[FM07] A. Furman, N. Monod: Product groups acting on manifolds, Duke Math. J. 148 (2009), no. 1, 1-39.
[FMW04] D. Fisher, D. Witte Morris, K. Whyte: Nonergodic actions, cocycles and superrigidity, New York
J. Math. 10 (2004), 249-269.
[Fu98] A. Furman, Orbit equivalence rigidity. Ann. of Math. (2) 150 (1999), 1083-1108.
[Fu09] A. Furman: A survey of Measured Group Theory, Geometry, Rigidity, and Group Actions, 296-374,
The University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London, 2011.
[Ga10] D. Gaboriau: Orbit equivalence and measured group theory, In Proceedings of the ICM (Hyderabad,
India, 2010), Vol. III, Hindustan Book Agency, 2010, pp. 1501-1527.
[GTD15] D. Gaboriau, R. Tucker-Drob: Approximations of standard equivalence relations and Bernoulli
percolation at pu , preprint arXiv:1509.00247.
[Ha03] B. C. Hall: Lie Groups, Lie Algebras, and Representations. An Elementary Introduction, Graduate
Texts in Mathematics, 222, Springer-Verlag, New York, 2003.
[Ki06] Y. Kida: Measure equivalence rigidity of the mapping class group, Ann. of Math. 171 (2010), 18511901.
[Ki09] Y. Kida: Rigidity of amalgamated free products in measure equivalence, J. Topol. 4 (2011), 687-735.
[Ku51] M. Kuranishi: On everywhere dense imbedding of free groups in Lie groups, Nagoya Math. J. 2
(1951), 63-71.
[Io08] A. Ioana: Cocycle superrigidity for profinite actions of property (T) groups, Duke Math. J. 157 (2011),
337-367.
[Io10] A. Ioana: W∗ -superrigidity for Bernoulli actions of property (T) groups, J. Amer. Math. Soc. 24
(2011), 1175-1226.
[Io13] A. Ioana: Orbit equivalence and Borel reducibility rigidity for profinite actions with spectral gap, to
appear in J. Eur. Math. Soc., preprint arXiv:1309.3026.
[Io14] A. Ioana: Strong ergodicity, property (T), and orbit equivalence rigidity for translation actions, to
appear in J. Reine. Angew. Math, preprint arXiv:1406.6628.
[Ke10] A. Kechris: Global aspects of ergodic group actions, Mathematical Surveys and Monographs, 160.
American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2010.
[Ku51] M. Kuranishi: On everywhere dense imbedding of free groups in Lie groups, Nagoya Math. J. 2
(1951), 63-71.
[La04] M. Larsen: Word maps have large image, Israel J. Math. 139 (2004), 149-156.
[Ma80] G. Margulis: Some remarks on invariant means, Monatsh. Math. 90 (1980), 233-235.
[MS02] N. Monod, Y. Shalom: Orbit equivalence rigidity and bounded cohomology, Ann. of Math. 164 (2006),
825-878.
[MS04] N. Monod, Y. Shalom: Cocycle superrigidity and bounded cohomology for negatively curved spaces,
J. Differential Geom. 67 (2004), no. 3, 395-455.

24

DAMIEN GABORIAU, ADRIAN IOANA, AND ROBIN TUCKER-DROB

[OP07] N. Ozawa, S. Popa: On a class of II1 factors with at most one Cartan subalgebra, Ann. Math. 172
(2010), 713-749.
[OP08] N. Ozawa, S. Popa: On a class of II1 factors with at most one Cartan subalgebra, II. Amer. J. Math.
132 (2010), no. 3, 841-866.
[OW80] D. Ornstein and B. Weiss. Ergodic theory of amenable group actions. I. The Rohlin lemma. Bull.
Amer. Math. Soc. (N.S.), 2(1):161-164, 1980.
[Pe09] J. Peterson: Examples of group actions which are virtually W∗ -superrigid, preprint, arXiv:1002.1745.
[Po05] S. Popa: Cocycle and orbit equivalence superrigidity for malleable actions of w-rigid groups, Invent.
Math. 170 (2007), 243-295.
[Po06] S. Popa: On the superrigidity of malleable actions with spectral gap. J. Amer. Math. Soc. 21 (2008),
981-1000.
[Po07] S. Popa: Deformation and rigidity for group actions and von Neumann algebras, In Proceedings of
the ICM (Madrid, 2006), Vol. I, European Mathematical Society Publishing House, 2007, 445-477.
[PS09] J. Peterson, T. Sinclair: On cocycle superrigidity for Gaussian actions, Erg. Th. Dyn. Sys. 32 (2012),
249-272.
[PV08] S. Popa, S. Vaes: Cocycle and orbit superrigidity for lattices in SL(n, R) acting on homogeneous
spaces, Geometry, rigidity, and group actions, 419-451, Chicago Lectures in Math., Univ. Chicago Press,
Chicago, IL, 2011.
[PV09] S. Popa, S. Vaes: Group measure space decomposition of II1 factors and W∗ -superrigidity, Invent.
Math. 182 (2010), 371-417.
[Sc80] K. Schmidt: Asymptotically invariant sequences and an action of SL(2, Z) on the 2-sphere, Israel J.
Math., 37 (1980), 193-208.
[Se65] A. Selberg: On the estimation of Fourier coefficients of modular forms, Proc. Symp. Pure Math. VII,
Amer. Math. Soc.(1965), 1-15.
[Sh04] Y. Shalom, Measurable group theory, European Congress of Mathematics, European Mathematical
Society Publishing House, 2005, p. 391-423.
[Si55] I. Singer: Automorphisms of finite factors, Amer. J. Math. 77 (1955), 117-133.
[SG16ab] A. Salehi-Golsefidy: Super-approximation, I: p-adic semisimple, preprint arXiv:1602.00403, and
Super-approximation II: p-adic and bounded power of square-free integer cases, preprint arXiv:1602.00409.
[Su81] D. Sullivan: For n > 3 there is only one finitely additive rotationally invariant measure on the
n-sphere on all Lebesgue measurable sets, Bull. Am. Math. Soc. 4 (1981), 121-123.
[Sw94] S. Świerczkowski: A class of free rotation groups, Indag. Math., Volume 5, Issue 2, 1994, 221-226.
[Va10] S. Vaes: Rigidity for von Neumann algebras and their invariants, Proceedings of the ICM (Hyderabad,
India, 2010), Vol. III, Hindustan Book Agency (2010), 1624-1650.
[Wi02] J. Winkelmann: Generic subgroups of Lie groups, Topology 41 (2002), no. 1, 163-181.
[Zi80] R. Zimmer: Strong rigidity for ergodic actions of seimisimple Lie groups, Ann. of Math. 112 (1980),
511-529.
[Zi84] R. Zimmer: Ergodic theory and semisimple groups, Monographs in Mathematics, 81. Birkhäuser
Verlag, Basel, 1984. x+209 pp.
[TD14] R. Tucker-Drob: Invariant means and the structure of inner amenable groups, preprint
arXiv:1407.7474.
CNRS, Unité de mathématiques Pures et Appliquées, ENS-Lyon, Université de Lyon, France
E-mail address: damien.gaboriau@ens-lyon.fr
Mathematics Department; University of California, San Diego, CA 90095-1555 (United
States)
E-mail address: aioana@ucsd.edu
Texas A&M Department of Mathematics; Texas A&M University, College Station, TX
77843-3368 (United States)
E-mail address: rtuckerd@math.tamu.edu

