CO-RANK OF WEAKLY PARAFREE 3-MANIFOLD GROUPS

arXiv:1711.10659v1 [math.GT] 29 Nov 2017

SHELLY HARVEY† AND EAMONN TWEEDY
Abstract. Recall that a group is called large if it has a finite index subgroup which surjects onto a
non-abelian free group. By work of Agol and Cooper-Long-Reid, most 3-manifold groups are large;
in particular, the fundamental groups of hyperbolic 3-manifolds are large. In previous work, the
first author gave examples of closed, hyperbolic 3-manifolds with arbitrarily large first homology
rank but whose fundamental groups do not surject onto a non-abelian free group. We call a group
very large if it surjects onto a non-abelian free group. In this paper, we consider the question of
whether the groups of homology handlebodies - which are very close to being free - are very large.
We show that the fundamental group of W. Thurston’s tripus manifold, is not very large; it is known
to be weakly parafree by Stallings’ Theorem and large by the work of Cooper-Long-Reid since the
tripus is a hyperbolic manifold with totally geodesic boundary. It is still unknown if a 3-manifold
group that is weakly parafree of rank at least 3 must be very large. However, we more generally
consider the co-rank of the fundamental group, also known as the cut number of the manifold. For
each integer g ≥ 1 we construct a homology handlebody Yg of genus g whose group has co-rank
equal to r(g), where r(g) = g/2 for g even and r(g) = (g + 1)/2 for g odd. That is, these groups
are weakly parafree of rank g and surject onto a free group of rank roughly half of g but no larger.

1. Introduction
Let M be a compact, connected, orientable 3-dimensional manifold. If M is irreducible and has
non-empty incompressible boundary and M is not covered by a S 1 × S 1 × I, then it was shown by
D. Cooper, D. Long, and A. Reid [CLR97] that π1 (M ) is large. Recall that a group is said to be
large if it has a finite index subgroup that maps onto a non-abelian free group. In addition, using
work of F. Haglund and D. Wise, I. Agol1 [Ago13] showed that if M is closed and irreducible and
π1 (M ) is not finite or solvable then π1 (M ) is large (see also [AFW15, Diagram 4]). As a result,
we see that most 3-manifold groups are large. One could then ask what is the minimal size of the
index one needs or if even if π1 (M ) itself maps onto a non-abelian free group.
Definition 1.1. Let G be a group. We say that G is very large if it admits a surjective homomorphism onto a non-abelian free group.
In 2002, the first author gave examples of closed hyperbolic 3-manifold groups with arbitrarily
large first homology rank but that are not very large. By Agol’s theorem, these examples are all
large.
Theorem ([Har02]). For each n ≥ 1, there is a closed, orientable, hyperbolic 3-dimensional manifold Mn such β1 (Mn ) = n and π1 (Mn ) is not very large.
In fact, it was shown that the groups cannot even map onto F/F4 where F is the free group of
rank 2 and F4 is the 4th term of the lower central series of F [Har02, Proposition 3.3]. See also
work by C. Leinger and A. Reid [LR02], A. Sikora [Sik05]), and I. Gelbukh [Gel15, Gel17].
Key words and phrases. cut number, co-rank, 3-manifold, homology handlebody, fundamental group, large, weakly
parafree.
†
The author was partially supported by National Science Foundation grants DMS-1309070 and DMS-1613279
and by a grant from the Simons Foundation (#304538 to Shelly Harvey).
1Agol proved the case when M is hyperbolic; the other cases were known. See [AFW15] for more details.
1

2

SHELLY HARVEY† AND EAMONN TWEEDY

In this article, we are interested in the fundamental groups of 3-dimensional homology handlebodies. Their fundamental groups are very close to being free; they are weakly parafree, and hence
the question of whether they are very large becomes much more subtle and interesting question.
Recall that M is a homology handlebody of genus g if it has the same homology groups as a
3-dimensional handlebody of genus g; that is, H̃1 (M ) ∼
= Zg and H̃i (M ) = 0 for i 6= 1.
Remark 1.2. If M is a homology handlebody of genus g and G = π1 (M ) then by Stallings’
Theorem [Sta65], G is weakly parafree of rank g; that is,
F (g)/F (g)k ∼
= G/Gk
for all k ≥ 1 where F (g) is the free group of rank g and Gk is the k th term of the lower central
series of G.
Thus, groups of homology handlebodies of genus g look quite similar to free groups of large rank
as g increases. In particular, one cannot hope to use the lower central series quotients to obstruct
being very large.
It was shown in [Ker01, p. 44] (see also Proposition 2.2 in [Har02]) that if the fundamental
group of M is very large then there is an infinite cyclic cover whose first homology has positive
rank as a left Z[t±1 ]-module. The examples in [Har02] were shown to have torsion (as a Z[t±1 ]
module) in first homology for every infinite cyclic cover and hence their groups could not be very
large. However, this obstruction also fails for homology handlebodies. In fact, the rank of the first
homology of any poly-torsion-free-abelian covering space of M is maximal. Recall that a group Γ
is poly-torsion-free-abelian (PTFA) if it admits a normal series {1} = G0 C G1 C · · · C Gn = Γ
such that each of the factors Gi+1 /Gi is torsion-free abelian. If A is a finitely generated left module
over ZΓ with Γ PTFA then it has a well defined rank as a ZΓ-module. Note that any free abelian
group is PTFA.
Remark 1.3. Let Γ be a PTFA group. If M is a 3-dimensional homology handlebody of genus
g, then by [COT03, Lemma 2.12] for any non-trivial homomorphism φ : π1 (M ) → Γ, the covering
space Mφ associated to φ satisfies
rankZΓ H1 (Mφ ) = g − 1.
We show in Lemma 2.2, that if π1 (M ) is very large then there is a Z2 covering space of M ,
Mφ , such that H1 (Mφ ) has a Z[Z2 ] summand. Using this, we show that W. Thurston’s tripus is
a homology handlebody of genus 2 whose group is not very large. It is known to be hyperbolic
manifold manifold and hence is large by Agol’s theorem.
Proposition 2.5. Let T be W. Thurston’s Tripus manifold. Then π1 (T ) is a weakly parafree
group of rank 2 that is large but not very large.
It is unknown if there is a homology handlebody of genus g ≥ 3 whose group is not very large.
All of the examples that the authors have considered with g ≥ 3 have been shown to be very large.
Question 1.4. If Y is a homology handlebody of genus g with g ≥ 3, is π1 (Y ) very large? More
generally, if G is a finitely presented group with H1 (G) ∼
= Zg for g ≥ 3 and H2 (G) = 0, is G very
large?
Often a homology handlebody group is very large. In this case, we ask what is the maximal
rank free group that arises as the quotient of the group. The cut number of M , c (M ), is defined
to be the maximal number of components of a compact, orientable, 2–sided surface F properly
embeddedWin M such that M r F is connected. Hence, for any n ≤ c (M ), we can construct a map
f : M → ni=1 S 1 such that the induced map on π1 is surjective. That is, there exists a surjective
map f∗ : π1 (M )  F (n), where F (n) is the free group of rank n. Conversely,
if we have any
Wn
1
epimorphism φ : π1 (M )  F (n), then we can find a map f : M → i=1 S such that f∗ = φ.

CO-RANK OF WEAKLY PARAFREE 3-MANIFOLD GROUPS

3

After making the f transverse to a non-wedge point xi on each S 1 , Fi = f −1 (xi ) will give n disjoint
surfaces F = ∪Fi with M r F connected. Hence one has the following elementary group-theoretic
characterization of c (M ), as in the closed case.
Theorem ([Jac72, Theorem 2.1]). The cut number c (M ) of M is the maximal integer n such that
there is a surjective homomorphism φ : π1 (M )  F (n) onto the free group of rank n.
The maximal rank of any free quotient of group is called its co-rank. Hence the co-rank of
π1 (M ) is the same as the cut number of M . This is also referred to as the inner rank of π1 (M )
[Lyn59] as well as the non-commutative first Betti number of M [AL86]. For each g, we
construct an example of 3-dimensional handlebody of genus g whose groups maps onto a free group
of rank r(g) (roughly half of g) but no larger.
Theorem 2.1. For each g ≥ 1, there is a compact, connected, orientable 3-dimensional homology
handlebody Yg of genus g with c(Yg ) = r(g) where
(
g
if g is even
2
r(g) = g+1
if g is odd.
2
We expect that this may be optimal.
Question 1.5. If Y is a compact, connected, orientable 3-dimensional homology handlebody of
genus g, is c(Y ) ≥ r(g)?
Acknowledgements. The first author would like to thank Michael Freedman for asking her about
the cut number of homology handlebodies. We would like to thank John Hempel, Neil Fullarton,
and Alan Reid for helpful conversations.
2. Main Theorem
The proof of Theorem 2.1 is almost immediate once we construct examples of homology handlebodies Y2 and Y3 of genus 2 and 3 repectively with c(Y2 ) = 1 and c(Y3 ) = 2. We let Y2 will
be Thurston’s tripus manifold T ; we prove π1 (T ) is not very large in Subsection 2.2. We let
Y3 = Y , a particular genus-3 string link complement; we construct Y and prove that c(Y ) = 2 in
Subsection 2.3.
Theorem 2.1. For each g ≥ 1, there is a compact, connected, orientable 3-dimensional homology
handlebody Yg of genus g with c(Yg ) = r(g) where
(
g
if g is even
2
r(g) = g+1
if g is odd.
2
Proof. For each integer g ≥ 1 we shall construct a homology handlebody Yg of genus g with
c(Yg ) = r(g). Because r(1) = 1, we may choose Y1 to be a handlebody. Let Y2 = T and Y3 = Y ,
where T is Thurston’s Tripus manifold (see Figure 1) and Y is the string link complement from
Figure 2. Then by Propositions 2.5 and 2.6, c(Y2 ) = 1 = r(2) and c(Y3 ) = 2 = r(3). If g ≥ 4, we
define Yg inductively as the boundary connected sum Yg = Yg−2 \Y2 . By Theorem 3.2 of [Jac72],
the cut number is additive under boundary connected sum and so c(Yg ) = c(Yg−2 ) + 1. Since it is
also the case that r(g) = r(g − 2) + 1, it follows by induction that c(Yg ) = r(g) for all g ≥ 0.

2.1. Preliminary notions and lemmas. Before we prove that c(Y2 ) = 1 and c(Y3 ) = 2, we shall
determine some obstructions to a group having a non-abelian free quotient. To do this, we look at
the first homology (and relative first homology) of free abelian covering spaces of the manifolds.
We note that the co-rank is known to be algorithmically computable [Mak82, Raz95] for finitely
presented groups; however, the algorithm seems difficult to use in practice.

SHELLY HARVEY† AND EAMONN TWEEDY

4

Let X be a path connected topological space and φ : π1 (X) → Γ be a surjective group homoπ
morphism. We define Xφ −
→ X to be the covering space of X corresponding to φ. Recall that the
group of deck translations of Xφ → X is identified with Γ making H1 (Xφ ) into a left ZΓ-module.
Ker(φ)
Moreover, for any group G and surjective homomorphism φ : G → Γ, [Ker(φ),Ker(φ)]
has the structure of a left ZΓ-module

 where the module action is given as follows. Let γ ∈ Γ and g ∈ Ker(φ).
Then γ [g] := hgh−1 for any h ∈ G such that φ(h) = γ (here [g] denotes the equivalence class
Ker(φ)
as left
of g). In the case that G = π1 (X), we have that H1 (Xφ ) is isomorphic to [Ker(φ),Ker(φ)]
ZΓ-modules.
Lemma 2.2. Let G be a group and Γ = Zm with m ∈ {1, 2}. If G is very large, then there exists
a surjective homomorphism φ : G → Γ such that
Ker(φ)
∼
= ZΓ ⊕ A
[Ker(φ), Ker(φ)]
for some left ZΓ-module A. In particular, if M is a compact, connected, orientable 3-manifold with
π1 (M ) very large, then there is a surjective homomorphism φ : π1 (M ) → Γ such that H1 (Mφ ) has
a ZΓ summand.
Proof. Since G is very large, there is a surjective homomorphism ψ 0 : G  F where F is the free
group of rank 2. Let ψ : F  Γ be a surjective homomorphism and φ = ψ ◦ ψ 0 . Then ψ induces a
surjective ZΓ-module homomorphism
ψ:
Since

Ker(ψ)
[Ker(ψ),Ker(ψ)]

Ker(φ)
Ker(ψ)

.
[Ker(φ), Ker(φ)]
[Ker(ψ), Ker(ψ)]

∼
= ZΓ is a free ZΓ module, the result follows.



Ker(ψ)
We note that in the previous proof that if m ≥ 3 then [Ker(ψ),Ker(ψ)]
is no longer a free module;
in fact, it is not even projective. Thus, to generalize the previous lemma, we work with relative
homology. Given p ∈ M , let pφ denote the preimage π −1 (p) ⊂ Mφ . The relative homology group
H1 (Mφ , pφ ) has the structure of a left ZΓ-module as before, coming from group of deck translations
acting on the pair (Mφ , pφ ). We have the following generalization of Lemma 2.2, which no longer
restricts us to using free abelian covering spaces.

Lemma 2.3. Let M be a compact, connected, orientable 3-manifold, let p ∈ M , and let Γ be a
quotient of F (n), the non-abelian free group of rank n for some n ≤ c(M ). Then there is a surjective
homomorphism φ : π1 (M ) → Γ such that
H1 (Mφ , pφ ) ∼
= ZΓn ⊕ A
for some left ZΓ-module A.
Proof. Since c(M ) ≥ n, there is an epimorphism ψ 0 : π1 (M, p)  F (n), the free group of rank
n. Letting W denote the n-fold wedge of circles and w ∈ W the wedge point, there exists a map
f : M → W such that f (p) = w and such that the induced map on π1 is ψ 0 . Let ψ : π1 (W, w) → Γ
be a surjective map and φ = ψ ◦ ψ 0 . The map f can be lifted to a map g : Mφ → Wψ sending pφ
to wψ .
We examine the following commutative diagram of modules and module homomorphisms over
ZΓ, where the rows are portions of the long exact sequences of the pairs and all of the vertical
maps are the module homomorphisms on homology induced by g.

CO-RANK OF WEAKLY PARAFREE 3-MANIFOLD GROUPS

H1 (Mφ )
g1

H1 (Wψ )

H1 (Mφ , pφ )
g2

H1 (Wψ , wψ )

H0 (pφ )
g3

H0 (wψ )

5

H0 (Mφ )
g4

H0 (Wψ )

Note first that g4 is an isomorphism and g3 is an epimorphism. Also, since ψ 0 is an epimorphism
it follows that g1 is as well. Together these facts imply that g2 is an epimorphism as well. Since
H1 (Wψ , wψ ) is a free module of rank n, the result follows.

The following easy lemma is most likely well-known but we include it for completeness. This will
be used to prove that the modules arising in the proofs Propositions 2.5 and 2.6 are torsion free.
Lemma 2.4. Suppose R is a unique factorization domain and M is a left module over R with a
presentation of the form
hα1 , . . . , αn | p1 α1 + . . . pn αn i
where pk ∈ R for each k. Then:
(i) If pi and pj are relatively prime for some i 6= j, then M is torsion-free.
(ii) If there is a common factor different than 1 which is mutually shared by all of p1 , . . . , pn , then
M is not torsion-free.
In particular, for n = 2, M is torsion free if and only if p1 and p2 are relatively prime.
Proof. Statement (ii) is obvious. We proceed to prove statement (i). Suppose M has a torsion
element, f1 α1 + . . . + fn αn 6= 0 with fk ∈ R for each k. Then there exists r, s ∈ R (with s non-zero
and not a unit) such that s(f1 α1 + . . . + fn αn ) = r(p1 α1 + . . . pn αn ) in the free R module generated
by α and β. Hence sfk = rpk for each k. We can assume that s and r have no common factors,
otherwise, we could reduce them. So s much divide pk for each k. Hence no pair pi , pj can be
relatively prime.

2.2. Thurston’s tripus manifold has cut number equal to 1. Let T be W. Thurston’s tripus
manifold. That is, T is the complement of the three arcs in S 2 × I as shown in Figure 1. Smoothly
embed S 2 × I in S 3 . Then we see that T is the complement of an embedding of a θ graph in S 3
(where the exterior of S 2 × I can be identified with with the two vertices of the spatial graph).
Note that the tripus is a hyperbolic manifold with totally geodesic boundary and is also a genus 2
homology handlebody.
Proposition 2.5. Let T be W. Thurston’s Tripus manifold. Then π1 (T ) is a weakly parafree group
that is large but not very large.
Proof. Since T is a hyperbolic manifold with totally geodesic boundary [Thu97, Chapter 3], it is
irreducible and has incompressible boundary. Thus by [CLR97], π1 (T ) has a finite index subgroup
with a non-abelian free quotient. That is, π1 (T ) is large.
To show that π1 (T ) is not very large, we use Lemma 2.2. We begin by computing the first
homology of the universal abelian cover of T . We can use the Wirtinger presentation to write down
a presentation for π1 (T ):
π1 (T ) ∼
= a, b, c, d, e, f | ace, bdf, (f c)b(f c)−1 a−1 , (be)d(be)−1 c−1 , (da)f (da)−1 e−1 .
Using the relation that e = (ac)−1 and f = (bd)−1 , we get a simplified presentation:
π1 (T ) ∼
= a, b, c, d | (d−1 b−1 c)b(d−1 b−1 c)−1 a−1 , (bc−1 a−1 )d(bc−1 a−1 )−1 c−1 , (da)d−1 b−1 (da)−1 ac .

6

SHELLY HARVEY† AND EAMONN TWEEDY

Figure 1. Thurston’s Tripus, a hyperbolic manifold with totally geodesic boundary
In fact, the third relation above can be derived from the first two, and thus we can use the
presentation
π1 (T ) ∼
= a, b, c, d | (d−1 b−1 c)b(d−1 b−1 c)−1 a−1 , (bc−1 a−1 )d(bc−1 a−1 )−1 c−1 .
We now change the generating set to {a, B, c, D} where B = ba−1 and D = dc−1 . Let φ :
π1 (T ) → H1 (T ) be the abelianization map. We note that the image of two of the generators, a
and c, under φ give a basis for H1 (T ). To make the notation easier, we will call φ(a) (respectively
φ(c)), a (respectively c). Let Θ = aca−1 c−1 . Since B and D are trivial under φ, they lift to Tφ
and the set {B, D, Θ} generates H1 (Tφ ) as a Z[H1 (T )]-module. It is straightforward to write down
a presentation matrix of H1 (Tφ ) as a Z[a±1 , c±1 ]-module (here the rows are the relations and the
columns correspond to B, D, and Θ):


a + c − 1 a(a − 1) a − 1
.
c(1 − c)
1
c−1
Using row and column operations, we can find a simpler

 
a + c − 1 a(a − 1) a − 1
ac + a − 1
∼
c(1 − c)
1
c−1
0

ac + a − 1
∼
0

ac + a − 1
∼
0

∼ ac + a − 1

presentation:
a2 − a a − 1
1
c−1



a2 − a −a2 c − a2 − ac + a
1
c−1

0 −2a2 c
1 c−1

2a2 c



Since gcd(ac + a − 1, 2a2 c) = 1, Lemma 2.4 implies that H1 (Tφ ) is torsion-free as a H1 (T )-module.
We claim that H1 (Tφ ) is not a free module. To see this, consider the ring homomorphism ξ :
Z[H1 (T )] → Z2 [a±1 , c±1 ] where we reduce the coefficient mod 2. This map endows Z2 [a±1 , c±1 ]
with the structure of a right Z[H1 (T )]-module. If H1 (Tφ ) were free as Z[H1 (T )]-module then the

CO-RANK OF WEAKLY PARAFREE 3-MANIFOLD GROUPS

7

left Z2 [a±1 , c±1 ]-module
Z2 [a±1 , c±1 ] ⊗Z[H1 (T )] H1 (Tφ )
would be free as well. However, this tensor product module is presented by the matrix [ac+a+1, 0],
and is thus not free.
Suppose that π1 (T ) is very large. We note that there is a unique covering space of T with deck
transformation group isomorphic to Z2 , up to covering space isomorphism. Hence by Lemma 2.2,
H1 (Tφ ) ∼
= Z[H1 (T )] ⊕ A. Since the rank of H1 (Tφ ) (as a Z[H1 (T )]-module) in our case is 1, it
follows that A must have rank 0 and hence is a torsion module. However, we know that H1 (Tφ )
is torsion-free so A = 0. This contradicts the fact that H1 (Tφ ) is not a free module and the result
follows.

2.3. A genus-3 homology handlebody with cut number equal to 2.
Proposition 2.6. There is a genus 3 homology handlebody Y with c(Y ) = 2.
x

r

a
y
b

c
d

z

s
w

e
f
u

g

t

Figure 2. The homology handlebody Y is the complement of this pure 3-string
link. Generators of π1 (Y ) are labelled.
Proof. Let Y denote the homology handlebody that is the complement in D2 × I of the threecomponent pure string link show in Figure 2. Removing the middle string leaves of with the trivial
string link whose complement is a handlebody. Hence there is a surjective map π1 (Y ) → F (2),
hence c(Y ) ≥ 2.
A presentation of π1 (Y ) can be computed via the Wirtinger presentation:
π1 (Y ) ∼
=



a, b, c, d, e, f, g, zuz −1 w−1 , eze−1 w−1 , xzx−1 y −1 , bxb−1 y −1 , f sf −1 t−1 , crc−1 s−1 ,
r, s, t, x, y, z, u, w ege−1 f −1 , tet−1 f −1 , wdw−1 e−1 , bdb−1 c−1 , sbs−1 c−1 , yay −1 b−1



First notice that the generators a, g, r, u each appear in only one relation, and can thus be
eliminated along with those relations to produce the following smaller presentation:


b, c, d, e, f, bxb−1 y −1 , xzx−1 y −1 , eze−1 w−1 , tet−1 f −1 ,
∼
π1 (Y ) =
s, t, x, y, z, w sbs−1 c−1 , f sf −1 t−1 , bdb−1 c−1 , wdw−1 e−1

SHELLY HARVEY† AND EAMONN TWEEDY

8

We shall obtain an even simpler presentation by combining relations. The first four relations
imply that
x = b−1 yb = b−1 xzx−1 b = b−1 xe−1 wex−1 b = b−1 xt−1 f −1 twt−1 f tx−1 b
Similarly, the last five relations imply that b = f −1 t−1 f bw−1 t−1 f twb−1 f −1 tf . These observations
lead us to a presentation with seven generators and only two relations:
π1 (Y ) ∼
= b, f, t, x, w | b−1 xt−1 f −1 twt−1 f tx−1 bx−1 , f −1 t−1 f bw−1 t−1 f twb−1 f −1 tf b−1
Consider the abelianization map φ : π1 (Y ) → H1 (Y ). Note that φ(x) = φ(w) and φ(b) = φ(f ),
so that the images of b, t, and x give a basis for H1 (Y ). Considering the universal abelian cover
Yφ , we choose a basepoint p ∈ Y and let pφ = φ−1 (p) ∈ Yφ . Using the Fox differential calculus,
we can obtain a presentation for the structure of H1 (Yφ , pφ ) as a left module over Z[H1 (Y )] ∼
=
Z[b±1 , t±1 , x±1 ]. With respect to the generators b, f, t, x, w, a presentation matrix is
(2.7)



btx − bt
x2 − x
bx2 − bx − x2 + x bt − b2 t − btx
tx
btx − b2 tx − bt2 x bt2 x − t2 x − btx + tx + b2 btx − tx + b3 − b2
0
b3 t − b2 t

We first claim that this module is not free. We use ξ : H1 (Y ) → Z3 [b±1 , t±1 , x±1 ], given by
reducing coefficients modulo 3, to endow Z3 [b±1 , t±1 , x±1 ] with the structure of a right Z[H1 (Y )]module. If H1 (Yφ , pφ ) were a free Z[H1 (Y )]-module, then the left Z3 [b±1 , t±1 , x±1 ]-module
Z3 [b±1 , t±1 , x±1 ] ⊗Z[H1 (Y )] H1 (Yφ , pφ )
would also be free.
Recall that given a rank r module, N , over a multivariable Laurent polynomial ring R, is projective if and only if the rth elementary ideal Er (N ) of N is equal to all of R. We used the
Magma Computational Algebra System [BCP97] to verify that the ideal generated by the 2 × 2
minors of the above matrix, viewed modulo 3, is indeed proper in Z3 [b±1 , t±1 , x±1 ]. Therefore the
Z3 [b±1 , t±1 , x±1 ]-module
Z3 [b±1 , t±1 , x±1 ] ⊗Z[H1 (Y )] H1 (Yφ , pφ )
is not projective and hence not free. It follows that H1 (Yφ , pφ ) is not a free Z[H1 (Y )]-module.
Our Magma source code can be found below. Note that here B = b−1 , T = t−1 , and X = x−1 .

P<x , X, b , B, t , T> := PolynomialRing (GF( 3 ) , 6 ) ;
Q<x , X, b , B, t , T> := quo<P | x∗X−1, t ∗T−1, b∗B−1>;
M := Matrix (Q, 2 , 5 , [ b∗ t ∗ ( x −1) , x ∗ ( x −1) , x ∗ ( b −1)∗(x −1) ,
b∗ t ∗(1−x−b ) , t ∗x , b∗ t ∗x∗(1−b−t ) ,
−t ˆ2∗ x+t ∗x+bˆ2−b∗ t ∗x+b∗ t ˆ2∗x ,
−t ∗x−bˆ2+bˆ3+b∗ t ∗x , 0 , bˆ2∗ t ∗ ( b − 1 ) ] ) ;
Mi := Minors (M, 2 ) ;
I := i d e a l <Q | Mi>;
IsProper ( I )

We now claim that the module H1 (Yφ , pφ ) is torsion-free. After multiplying the second row of
the matrix (2.7) by x, adding b2 − b3 times the first row to the second row, eliminating a generator
and relation, and rescaling several entries by units we obtain a smaller presentation matrix:

CO-RANK OF WEAKLY PARAFREE 3-MANIFOLD GROUPS

9

T
−b3 x + b3 + b2 x − bx2 − tx2 − b2 + x2
−b3 x + bt2 x + b3 + b2 x − btx − t2 x + tx
 4

 −b x + b4 + 2b3 x − b3 − b2 x + btx − tx 
b2 + bx − 2b − x + 1


(2.8)

Now consider the ring homomorphism η : Z[H1 (Y )] → Z[t±1 , x±1 ] generated by the homomorphism H1 (Y ) →< t, x > sending b and t to t and x to x. As before η induces a left Z[t±1 , x±1 ]module structure on
Z[t±1 , x±1 ] ⊗Z[H1 (Y )] H1 (Yφ , pφ )
which has torsion if H1 (Yφ , pφ ) has torsion. We obtain a presentation matrix for the above tensor
module by setting b = t in (2.8) and rescaling several entries by units:
 3
T
−t x + t3 + t2 x − 2tx2 − t2 + x2


t2 − tx + x


3
3
2
2


−t x + t + 2t x − t − x
2
t + tx − 2t − x + 1
We verified in Magma that the first two entries of this matrix (in fact, any two entries) are relatively
prime. By Lemma 2.4, the module is torsion-free.
Thus, H1 (Yφ , pφ ) is a torsion-free module of rank 3. Suppose that π1 (Y ) maps onto a free group
of rank 3. Since β1 (Y ) = 3, there is a unique Z3 covering space (up to covering space isomorphism)
so by Lemma 2.3, H1 (Yφ , pφ ) ∼
= Z[H1 (Y )]3 ⊕ A for some A. Since H1 (Yφ , pφ ) is rank 3, it follows
that A must be a torsion module. However H1 (Yφ , pφ ) is torsion free so A = 0. This contradicts
the fact that H1 (Yφ , pφ ) is not free and it follows that c(Y ) = 2.

References
[AFW15] Matthias Aschenbrenner, Stefan Friedl, and Henry Wilton. 3-manifold groups. EMS Series of Lectures in
Mathematics. European Mathematical Society (EMS), Zürich, 2015.
[Ago13] Ian Agol. The virtual Haken conjecture. Doc. Math., 18:1045–1087, 2013. With an appendix by Agol, Daniel
Groves, and Jason Manning.
[AL86]
Pierre Arnoux and Gilbert Levitt. Sur l’unique ergodicité des 1-formes fermées singulières. Invent. Math.,
84(1):141–156, 1986.
[BCP97] Wieb Bosma, John Cannon, and Catherine Playoust. The Magma algebra system. I. The user language. J.
Symbolic Comput., 24(3-4):235–265, 1997. Computational algebra and number theory (London, 1993).
[CLR97] D. Cooper, D. D. Long, and A. W. Reid. Essential closed surfaces in bounded 3-manifolds. J. Amer. Math.
Soc., 10(3):553–563, 1997.
[COT03] Tim D. Cochran, Kent E. Orr, and Peter Teichner. Knot concordance, Whitney towers and L2 -signatures.
Ann. of Math. (2), 157(2):433–519, 2003.
[Gel15] Irina Gelbukh. Co-rank and Betti number of a group. Czechoslovak Math. J., 65(140)(2):565–567, 2015.
[Gel17] Irina Gelbukh. The co-rank of the fundamental group: the direct product, the first Betti number, and the
topology of foliations. Math. Slovaca, 67(3):645–656, 2017.
[Har02] Shelly L. Harvey. On the cut number of a 3-manifold. Geom. Topol., 6:409–424, 2002.
[Jac72]
William Jaco. Geometric realizations for free quotients. J. Austral. Math. Soc., 14:411–418, 1972.
[Ker01] Thomas Kerler. Homology TQFT’s and the Alexander-Reidemeister invariant of 3-manifolds
via Hopf algebras and skein theory. 2001. Version 3 of the arxiv verion of this paper,
https://arxiv.org/pdf/math/0008204v3.pdf.
[LR02]
Christopher J. Leininger and Alan W. Reid. The co-rank conjecture for 3-manifold groups. Algebr. Geom.
Topol., 2:37–50, 2002.
[Lyn59] R. C. Lyndon. The equation a2 b2 = c2 in free groups. Michigan Math. J, 6:89–95, 1959.
[Mak82] G. S. Makanin. Equations in a free group. Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR Ser. Mat., 46(6):1199–1273, 1344, 1982.
[Raz95] Alexander A. Razborov. On systems of equations in free groups. In Combinatorial and geometric group
theory (Edinburgh, 1993), volume 204 of London Math. Soc. Lecture Note Ser., pages 269–283. Cambridge
Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1995.
[Sik05]
Adam S. Sikora. Cut numbers of 3-manifolds. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 357(5):2007–2020, 2005.

SHELLY HARVEY† AND EAMONN TWEEDY

10

[Sta65]
[Thu97]

John Stallings. Homology and central series of groups. J. Algebra, 2:170–181, 1965.
William P. Thurston. Three-dimensional geometry and topology. Vol. 1, volume 35 of Princeton Mathematical Series. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1997. Edited by Silvio Levy.

Rice University, Houston, TX, USA
E-mail address: shelly@rice.edu
Widener University, Philadelphia, PA, USA
E-mail address: etweedy@widener.edu

