Square-free class sizes in products of groups

arXiv:1703.08363v1 [] 24 Mar 2017

M. J. Felipe · A. Martı́nez-Pastor · V. M. Ortiz-Sotomayor

∗

Abstract
We obtain some structural properties of a factorised group G = AB, given that the
conjugacy class sizes of certain elements in A ∪ B are not divisible by p2 , for some
prime p. The case when G = AB is a mutually permutable product is especially
considered.
Keywords Finite groups · Soluble groups · Products of subgroups · Conjugacy
classes
2010 MSC 20D10 · 20D40 · 20E45

1

Introduction

All groups considered thorogouth this paper are finite. Over the last years, many
authors have investigated the influence of conjugacy class sizes on the structure of finite
groups. In the meantime, numerous studies in the framework of group theory have
focused in factorised groups. In this setting, a central question is how the structure of the
factors affects the structure of the whole group, in particular when they are connected by
certain permutability properties. The purpose of this paper is to show new achievements
which combine both current perspectives in finite groups. More precisely, our aim is to
get some information about a factorised group, provided that the conjugacy class sizes
of some elements of its factors are square-free.
The earlier starting point of our investigation can be traced back to the paper of
Chillag and Herzog ([5]), where the structure of a group in which all elements have
square-free conjugacy class sizes was first analysed. Next, in [6], Cossey and Wang
localised one of the main theorems in [5] for a fixed prime p, that is, they considered
conjugacy class sizes not divisible by p2 , for certain prime p. Later on, this study was
∗

The first author is supported by Proyecto Prometeo II/2015/011, Generalitat Valenciana (Spain),
and the second author is supported by Proyecto MTM2014-54707-C3-1-P, Ministerio de Economı́a, Industria y Competitividad (Spain). The results in this paper are part of the third author’s Ph.D. thesis,
and he acknowledges the predoctoral grant ACIF/2016/170, Generalitat Valenciana (Spain). The authors wish to thank John Cossey for helpful conversations during his last visit to Valencia.
Instituto Universitario de Matemática Pura y Aplicada (IUMPA), Universitat Politècnica de València,
Camino de Vera, s/n, 46022, Valencia, Spain.
B: mfelipe@mat.upv.es, anamarti@mat.upv.es, vicorso@doctor.upv.es

1

improved by Li in [12], and by Liu, Wang, and Wei in [13], by replacing conditions
on all conjugacy classes by those referring only to conjugacy classes of either p-regular
elements or prime power order elements, using the classification theorem of finite simple
groups (CFSG). These authors also first obtained some preliminary results in factorised
groups. This research was extended in 2012 by Ballester-Bolinches, Cossey and Li in [2],
through mutually permutable products. More recently, in 2014, Qian and Wang ([14])
have gone a step further by considering just conjugacy class sizes of p-regular elements
of prime power order (although not in factorised groups).
In the context of factorised groups, and aiming to obtain criteria for products of
supersoluble subgroups to be supersoluble, several authors have considered products in
which certain subgroups of the factors permute (see [3] for a detailed account). In this
scene, we are interested in mutually permutable products, factorised groups G = AB
such that the subgroups A and B are mutually permutable, i.e., A permutes with every
subgroup of B and B permutes with every subgroup of A (see also [4]). Obviously, if A
and B are normal in G, then they are mutually permutable.
We recall that, for a group G, the set xG = {g −1 xg : g ∈ G} is the conjugacy class
of the element x ∈ G, and xG denotes the conjugacy class size of x. If p is a prime
number, we say that x ∈ G is a p-regular element if its order is not divisible by p, and
that it is a p-element if its order is a power of p. Moreover, if n is an integer, let np
denote the highest power of p dividing n. The mth group of order n in the SmallGroups
library [8] of GAP will be identified by n#m. The remainder notation is standard and
is taken mainly from [7]. We also refer to this book for details about classes of groups.
In this paper, motivated by the above development, at first we focus on the case of
p-groups, extending for factorised groups the well-known Knoche’s theorem (see [11]).
Theorem A. Let p be a prime number and let P = AB be a p-group such that p2 does
not divide xP for all x ∈ A ∪ B. Then P ′ 6 Φ(P ) 6 Z(P ), P ′ is elementary abelian
and |P ′ | ≤ p2 .
Our next goal in the paper is to prove the following theorem, regarding mutually
permutable products.
Theorem B. Let G = AB be the mutually permutable product of the subgroups A and
B, and let p be a prime such that gcd(p − 1, |G|) = 1. If p2 does not divide xG for any
p-regular element x ∈ A ∪ B of prime power order, then:
(1) G is soluble.
(2) G is p-nilpotent.
(3) The Sylow p-subgroups of G/ Op (G) are elementary abelian.
In the particular case when G = A = B, we recover [14, Theorem A] (see Section 3,
Corollary 3.5). We remark that both results use the CFSG.
Moreover, in relation to the third assertion, we have found a gap in one of the
statements in [6, Theorem 1], as it is reported in Remark 3.7 (a).
On the other hand, we point out that it is possible to find examples of groups factorised as a product of two (mutually permutable) subgroups which satisfy the hypothe2

ses of Theorem B for some fixed prime p and, however, there exist elements x ∈ A ∪ B
such that p2 divides either xA or xB (see Remark 3.7 (b)).
The next theorem generalises the last assertion of [2, Theorem 1.3] regarding p-soluble
groups, by considering only prime power order elements:
Theorem C. Let G = AB be the mutually permutable product of the subgroups A and
B, and let p be a prime. Suppose that for every prime power order p-regular element
x ∈ A ∪ B, xG is not divisible by p2 . If G is p-soluble, then G is p-supersoluble.
In the line of [5, Theorem 1] and [6, Theorem 2], if we consider all prime numbers, then
we obtain some information about the structure of the derived subgroup of a factorised
group G.
Theorem D. Let G = AB be the product of the subgroups A and B, and assume that G
is supersoluble. Suppose that every prime power order element x ∈ A ∪ B has square-free
conjugacy class size. Then:
(1) G′ is abelian.
(2) The Sylow subgroups of G′ are elementary abelian.
(3) F(G)′ has Sylow p-subgroups of order at most p2 , for every prime p.
If we limit our conditions only to p-regular elements, as a consequence of Theorems
B and C, we obtain the following result which extends [2, Corollary 1.5] (see Corollary
4.3) for prime power order elements, and also a theorem of [12], for products of groups.
Theorem E. Let G = AB be the mutually permutable product of the subgroups A and B.
Suppose that for every prime p and every prime power order p-regular element x ∈ A∪B,
xG is not divisible by p2 . Then G is supersoluble, and G/ F(G) has elementary abelian
Sylow subgroups.
We remark that the first statement in Theorem D is not further true under the weaker
hypotheses of the above theorem, even for arbitrary groups not necessarily factorised,
as pointed out in [14]. Indeed, as a result of Theorem E, the supersolubility condition
in Theorem D can be exchanged by the mutual permutability of the factors.
On the other hand, with the stronger assumption that all p-regular elements of the
factors (not only those of prime power order) have conjugacy class sizes not divisible
by p2 , we get extra information about the orders of the Sylow p-subgroups of G/F (G),
extending partially [6, Theorem 2].
Theorem F. Let G = AB be the mutually permutable product of the subgroups A and
B. Suppose that for every prime p and every p-regular element x ∈ A ∪ B, xG is not
divisible by p2 . Then the order of a Sylow p-subgroup of G/ F(G) is at most p2 .
In summary, when dealing with mutually permutable products, the next corollary
follows directly from the above theorems.
Corollary G. Let G = AB be the mutually permutable product of the subgroups A and
B. Suppose that xG is square-free for each element x ∈ A ∪ B. Then G is supersoluble,
3

and both G/ F(G) and G′ have elementary abelian Sylow subgroups. Moreover, G′ is
abelian, and both groups G/ F(G) and F(G)′ have Sylow p-subgroups of order at most
p2 , for each prime p.
In Section 3 we prove Theorems A, B and C, which refer to class sizes not divisible
by p2 , for a fixed prime p. Theorems E, D and F, which consider square-free conjugacy
class sizes (for all primes), are proved in Section 4. In both cases we will illustrate the
scope of the results presented with some examples.

2

Preliminary results

We use the following elementary properties frequently, sometimes without further
reference.
Lemma 2.1. Let N be a normal subgroup of a group G, and let p be a prime. Then:
(a) xN divides xG , for any x ∈ N .
(b) (xN )G/N divides xG , for any x ∈ G.
(c) If xN is a p-element of G/N , then there exists a p-element x1 ∈ G such that
xN = x1 N .
We need specifically the following fact about Hall subgroups of factorised groups. It
is a reformulation of [1, 1.3.2] which is convenient for our purposes. We recall that a
group is a Dπ -group, for a set of primes π, if every π-subgroup is contained in a Hall
π-subgroup, and any two Hall π-subgroups are conjugate. In particular, all π-separable
groups are Dπ -groups for any set of primes π, and all groups are Dπ -groups when π
consists of a single prime.
Lemma 2.2. Let G = AB be the product of the subgroups A and B. Asume that A, B,
and G are Dπ -groups for a set of primes π. Then there exists a Hall π-subgroup H of G
such that H = (H ∩ A)(H ∩ B), with H ∩ A a Hall π-subgroup of A and H ∩ B a Hall
π-subgroup of B.
We collect here some results on mutually permutable products, which will be very
useful along the paper.
Lemma 2.3. Let the group G = AB be the product of the mutually permutable subgroups
A and B. Then we have:
(a) ([3, 4.1.10]) G/N is the product of the mutually permutable subgroups AN/N and
BN/N .
(b) ([3, 4.1.21]) If U is a subgroup of G, then (U ∩ A)(U ∩ B) is a subgroup, and
U ∩ A and U ∩ B are mutually permutable. Moreover, if N is a normal subgroup of G,
then (N ∩ A)(N ∩ B) is also normal in G.
Theorem 2.4. ([4, Theorem 1]) Let the non-trivial group G = AB be the product of the
mutually permutable subgroups A and B. Then AG BG is not trivial.
4

The following lemma will be essential in the proofs of our theorems.
Lemma 2.5. ([2, Lemma 2.4]) Let p be a prime, and Q be a p′ -group acting faithfully
on an elementary abelian p-group N with |[x, N ]| = p, for all 1 6= x ∈ Q. Then Q is
cyclic.
The next result is the first assertion of Theorem A in [14], which uses the CFSG.
Theorem 2.6. Let G be a group. For a fixed prime p with gcd(p − 1, |G|) = 1, if p2
does not divide xG for any p-regular element x ∈ G of prime power order, then G is
soluble.
Finally, the later lemma, which is a nice result due to Isaacs, will be very useful in
the proof of Theorem D.
Lemma 2.7. ([10, 4.17]) Let K be an abelian normal subgroup of a finite group G, and
let x ∈ G be non-central. Then |CG (x)| < |CG (y)|, where y = [k, x] and k ∈ K is
arbitrary.

3

Class sizes not divisible by p2 , for a fixed prime p

The well-known Knoche’s theorem (see [11]) asserts that if P is a p-group, p a prime,
then the conjugacy class sizes of P are square-free if, and only if, |P ′ | ≤ p. We begin
this section by proving Theorem A, which clearly extends it for factorised groups.
Proof of Theorem A. Since |P : CP (x)| ≤ p for each x ∈ A ∪ B, it follows
Φ(P ) 6 CP (x). Therefore, Φ(P ) commutes with both A and B, so P ′ 6 Φ(P ) 6 Z(P ).
Hence P/ Z(P ) is elementary abelian, and xp ∈ Z(P ) for all x ∈ P . Since P ′ 6 Z(P ) and
[x, y]p = [xp , y] = 1 (see [7, A - 7.3(a)]) for any x, y ∈ P , it follows that P ′ is elementary
abelian. Now it remains to prove that |P ′ | ≤ p2 .
Let [x, y] be a generator of P ′ . Since P ′ 6 Z(P ) and y = ya yb with ya ∈ A and
yb ∈ B, then [x, y] = [x, ya yb ] = [x, yb ][x, ya ]yb = [x, yb ][x, ya ] ∈ [P, B][P, A] . Thus
P ′ = [P, B][P, A]. Clearly, [P, B] is elementary abelian. Suppose [P, B] 6= 1, and let
1 6= [x, z] and 1 6= [x′ , z ′ ] be two generators of [P, B], with x, x′ ∈ P and z, z ′ ∈ B. We
distinguish three cases in order to prove that h[x, z]i = h[x′ , z ′ ]i:
i) Suppose first z, z ′ ∈ B \ Z(B). Let b ∈ B \ (CP (z) ∪ CP (z ′ )). Since |P : CP (z)| = p
then P = CP (z)hxi. Moreover, b ∈
/ CP (z) implies that 1 6= [b, z] = [xi t, z] = [xi , z] =
i
i
[x, z] , where b = tx with t ∈ CP (z). On the other hand, P = CP (b)hzi so z ′ =
z j k, with k ∈ CP (b). Hence 1 6= [b, z ′ ] = [b, z j k] = [b, z]j = [x, z]i+j . Finally, as
b ∈ P = CP (z ′ )hx′ i, then b = (x′ )m s with s ∈ CP (z ′ ). Therefore 1 6= [x, z]i+j =
[b, z ′ ] = [(x′ )m s, z ′ ] = [x′ , z ′ ]m , and recall that [x, z] and [x′ , z ′ ] both have order p. Thus,
h[x, z]i = h[x′ , z ′ ]i.
ii) Now suppose z, z ′ ∈ Z(B). Then B 6 CP (z) ∩ CP (z ′ ). There exists w ∈ P \
(CP (z) ∪ CP (z ′ )). Therefore, w = wa wb with wa ∈ A and wb ∈ B 6 CP (z) ∩ CP (z ′ ), so
wa ∈ A \ (CP (z) ∪ CP (z ′ )). Arguing analogously as in case i) with wa instead of b, we
conclude that h[x, z]i = h[x′ , z ′ ]i too.
5

iii) Finally, suppose z ∈ B \ Z(B) but z ′ ∈ Z(B). Let z ′′ = zz ′ ∈ B \ Z(B). Therefore,
we have [x′ , z ′′ ] = [x′ , z ′ ][x′ , z]. If [x′ , z ′′ ] = 1 then 1 6= [x′ , z ′ ]−1 = [x′ , z], and applying
case i) to both [x, z] and [x′ , z] we conclude that they generate the same cyclic group of
order p. On the other hand, if [x′ , z ′′ ] 6= 1 and [x′ , z] = 1, then we apply again the first
case. Finally, if both [x′ , z ′′ ] 6= 1 6= [x′ , z] then they generate the same cyclic group by
case i) again. Thus 1 6= h[x′ , z ′ ]i = h[x′ , z ′′ ][x′ , z]−1 i 6 h[x′ , z ′′ ]i. Since the last one has
order p, it follows h[x′ , z ′ ]i = h[x′ , z ′′ ]i. So we have h[x′ , z ′ ]i = h[x′ , z ′′ ]i, which is equal to
h[x, z]i by i) again.
In conclusion, if [P, B] 6= 1, then it has order p. Analogously with [P, A]. Hence
|P ′ | = |[P, B][P, A]| ≤ p2 and this establishes the result.
Example 3.1. The converse of the above result is not true in general, in contrast
to Knoche’s theorem. Let P be the group of the Small groups library of GAP with
identification number 32#35, which is the product of a cyclic group of order 4 and a
quaternion group of order 8. Then its derived group is P ′ = C2 × C2 , and P ′ = Φ(P ) =
Z(P ). Nevertheless, there are elements in the quaternion group with conjugacy class size
equal to 4.
Example 3.2. Let G = Q8 × D8 be the direct product of a quaternion group and a
dihedral group of order 8. Then every element contained in each factor has conjugacy
class size equal to either 1 or 2, so Theorem A applies. However, there are elements in
G with conjugacy class size divisible by 4, and Knoche’s result cannot be applied.
Now we proceed with a key result in the sequel.
Proposition 3.3. Let G be a group, and let p be a prime. Suppose that N is an abelian
minimal normal subgroup of G, which is a p′ -group. Then:
(1) If G is p-nilpotent, and xG is not divisible by p2 for every element x ∈ N , then
|Op (G/N Op (G))| ≤ p.
(2) If K/N Op (G) = Op (G/N Op (G)) has order p, and P is a Sylow p-subgroup of
K, then CN (P ) = 1.
Proof. (1) Suppose that the result is not true, and let G be a counterexample
of minimal order. Since the hypotheses are inherited by quotients, we may assume by
standard arguments that Op (G) = 1, and then also Φ(G) = 1. Since N is abelian, by a
Gaschütz’s result ([9, 4.4]) N is complemented, that is, G = N S with N ∩ S = 1. We
may assume that G/N is not a p′ -group, so Op (G/N ) ∼
= Op (S) 6= 1 by the minimality
of G. Let P be a Sylow p-subgroup of S (so P is a Sylow p-subgroup of G). Hence
it follows Op (S) ∩ Z(P ) 6= 1. Let Z be a minimal normal subgroup of Op (S) ∩ Z(P ).
Since S is p-nilpotent, we get S = P L, where L is normal in S and P ∩ L = 1. It
follows that [L, Z] 6 [L, Op (S)] 6 L ∩ Op (S) = 1, so Z 6 Z(S). Note that CN (Z) is
normal in G = SN . Consequently, by the minimality of N , we have either CN (Z) = 1
or CN (Z) = N . If CN (Z) = N , then Z 6 Z(G), which implies that Z 6 Op (G) = 1, a
contradiction. So we may affirm CN (Z) = 1, for every minimal normal subgroup Z of
Op (S) ∩ Z(P ).
6

Now let 1 6= x ∈ N such that a Sylow p-subgroup of CG (x), say P0 , is contained in P ,
so P0 = CP (x). By the hypotheses, xG p = |G : CG (x)|p = |P : P0 | is not divisible by
p2 , so it follows either |P : P0 | = 1 or |P : P0 | = p. The first case yields P = CP (x) and
then x ∈ CN (Z) = 1, a contradiction. Therefore, we may assume that |P : P0 | = p, and
so P0 is normal in P . In addition, since Op (S) ∩ Z(P ) is abelian, by the minimality of Z,
we have either P0 ∩ Z = 1 or P0 ∩ Z = Z. The last case gives Z 6 CP (x), a contradiction
again. Hence, P0 ∩ Z = 1 and it follows that P = P0 × Z and |Z| = |P : P0 | = p. We
only need to see that Z = Op (S) to finish the proof.
Note that Z(P ) = Z(P )∩P0 Z = Z(Z(P )∩P0 ), so it follows Z(P )∩Op (S) = Z(Z(P )∩
P0 ) ∩ Op (S) = Z(Z(P ) ∩ P0 ∩ Op (S)). If Z(P ) ∩ P0 ∩ Op (S) 6= 1, since it is normal in
Op (S) ∩ Z(P ), we can choose a minimal normal subgroup Z1 of Op (S) ∩ Z(P ) such that
Z1 6 Z(P )∩P0 ∩Op (S). But then Z1 6 P0 = CP (x), so x ∈ CN (Z1 ) = 1, a contradiction.
Therefore, we may assume that Z(P ) ∩ P0 ∩ Op (S) = 1. On the other hand, we have
Op (S) = Op (S)∩ZP0 = Z(P0 ∩Op (S)). If P0 ∩Op (S) is a non-trivial subgroup of P , since
it is normal in P , we have a contradiction with Z(P ) ∩ P0 ∩ Op (S) = 1. Consequently
we get the final contradiction Z = Op (S). The first assertion is then established.
(2) Let K/N Op (G) = Op (G/N Op (G)), which has order p, and let P be a Sylow psubgroup of K. Then K = P N . Moreover, [K, N ] is normal in G and [K, N ] = [P, N ] 6
N so, by the minimality of N , we have either [P, N ] = 1 or [P, N ] = N . The first case
leads to K = P × N , and then P 6 Op (G), a contradiction. Thus we have [P, N ] = N ,
and by coprime action it follows CN (P ) = 1.
Note that every dihedral group of order 2q (for q an odd prime) verifies the hypotheses
of the above proposition (take p = 2).
Theorem B (3) is indeed an immediate consequence of the next more general result.
Theorem 3.4. Let G = AB be a soluble group, which is the mutually permutable product
of the subgroups A and B. Assume that G is p-nilpotent for a prime p. If p2 does not
divide xG for any p-regular element x ∈ A ∪ B of prime power order, then G/ Op (G)
has elementary abelian Sylow p-subgroups.
Proof. Suppose that the result is false and let G be a minimal counterexample. We
may assume by the minimality of G that Op (G) = 1, and therefore Φ(G) = 1 too. By
Theorem 2.4, we can assume that there exists a minimal normal subgroup N of G such
that N 6 A. Moreover, N is q-elementary abelian, for some prime q 6= p. Furthermore,
since N ∩ Φ(G) = 1, by Gaschütz’s lemma we may write G = SN , with S ∩ N = 1.
Let P be a Sylow p-subgroup of S (so it is a Sylow p-subgroup of G). Let T = Op (S).
By the minimality of G we have T ∼
= Op (G/N ) 6= 1, and by Proposition 3.3 (1) it holds
|T | = p. We may choose 1 6= x ∈ N such that P0 = CP (x) is a Sylow p-subgroup of
CG (x). Since CN (T ) = 1 by Proposition 3.3 (2), it holds that P0 6= P , |P : P0 | = p, and
P0 ∩ T = 1. Hence P = P0 × T . Finally, since P0 ∼
= (P N/N )/ Op (G/N ), which
= P/T ∼
is elementary abelian by the minimality of G, it follows that P so is, and this leads to
the final contradiction.
Proof of Theorem B. Note that the quotients of G satisfy the hypotheses.
Moreover, if N is a normal subgroup of G such that N = (N ∩ A)(N ∩ B), then N
7

also inherits the hypotheses. (Observe that this occurs, for instance, if either N 6 A or
N 6 B.)
(1) We first see that G is soluble by induction over |G|. Since every group of odd
order is soluble, we may affirm that p = 2 because gcd(p − 1, |G|) = 1. By Theorem 2.4,
we can assume that there exists a normal subgroup M of G such that 1 6= M 6 A. If
M < G, then M is soluble by minimality. Analogously G/M is also soluble, and then
so is G. If M = G, we apply Theorem 2.6.
(2) Suppose that the result is false and let G be a counterexample of minimal order.
Since the quotients of G inherit the hypotheses, the class of p-nilpotent groups is a
saturated formation, and G is soluble, we may assume that G possesses a unique minimal
normal subgroup N , with N = CG (N ) = F(G). If N is a p′ -group, since G/N is pnilpotent by the minimality of G, it follows that G is p-nilpotent, which is a contradiction.
Thus, we may assume that N = Op (G). By Theorem 2.4, we can assume without loss of
generality that N 6 A, and that there exists a minimal normal subgroup E/N of G/N
such that either E/N ≤ A/N or E/N 6 BN/N . In the first case, we have E 6 A. In
the second case, it follows E = E ∩ BN = N (E ∩ B) 6 (E ∩ A)(E ∩ B) 6 E. Therefore,
we have E = (E ∩ A)(E ∩ B), where the factors are mutually permutable by Lemma 2.3
(b). In both cases, E is normal in G and E verifies the hypotheses. Hence, if E < G,
then E is p-nilpotent by the minimality of G. Since N = Op (G), we get that E/N is
q-elementary abelian for some prime q 6= p, so it follows that E = QN , with Q the
normal Sylow q-subgroup of E. Hence, Q is normal in G which implies that E = N , a
contradiction.
Therefore, we can assume that E = G. So we have G = E = N Q, where Q is
an abelian Sylow q-subgroup of G. By Lemma 2.2, we may assume that Q = (Q ∩
A)(Q ∩ B), with either Q ∩ A 6= 1 or Q ∩ B 6= 1. Suppose first that Q ∩ B 6= 1, and
take 1 6= x ∈ Q ∩ B. Let E1 = hxiN , which is normal in QN = G. Hence, we have
E1 = hxiN 6 (E1 ∩ B)(E1 ∩ A) 6 E1 . If Q ∩ B = 1, then G = A and we can choose
1 6= x ∈ Q, so that E1 = hxiN is normal in QN = G. Thus, in both cases, we have that
E1 inherits the hypotheses and, if E1 < G, it follows that it is p-nilpotent. Therefore
hxi is a normal Sylow q-subgroup of E1 , which is again a contradiction. Consequently,
we may assume that G = E1 = hxiN , for some q-element x.
Note that CN (x) is normal in G = hxiN , since N is abelian. By the minimality
of N , it follows that either CN (x) = 1 or CN (x) = N . The second case leads to
x ∈ CG (N ) = N , a contradiction. Hence, it follows that CG (x) = CG (x) ∩ N hxi =
hxi CN (x) = hxi. Then xG = |G : CG (x)| = |N hxi : hxi| = |N | , and so |N | = p, by the
hypotheses. Now, we get that hxi ∼
= G/N = NG (N )/ CG (N ) is isomorphic to a subgroup
of Aut(N ) ∼
C
,
the
cyclic
group
of order p − 1. Hence, |hxi| divides both p − 1 and
= p−1
|G|, which contradicts the fact that gcd(p − 1, |G|) = 1. This finishes the proof of the
p-nilpotency of G.
(3) It follows from Theorem 3.4.
In the particular case when G = A = B we recover:
Corollary 3.5. ([14, Theorem A]) Let G be a group. For a fixed prime p with gcd(p −
1, |G|) = 1, if p2 does not divide xG for any p-regular element x ∈ G of prime power
8

order, then G is soluble, p-nilpotent and G/ Op (G) has elementary abelian Sylow psubgroups.
Note that if G is the direct product of two symmetric groups of degree 3, then G
verifies the hypotheses of Theorem B for p = 2, but not those of Corollary 3.5. Moreover,
the asumption that gcd(p − 1, |G|) = 1 is necessary, which can be seen by considering
G = A5 , the alternating group of degree 5, and the prime p = 3.
We include here a theorem due to Cossey and Wang [6], which was the initial motivation for our results, to notify a gap that we have found in one of the statements.
Theorem 3.6. ([6, Theorem 1]) Let G be a finite group, and p be a prime divisor of |G|
such that if q is any prime divisor of |G|, then q does not divide p − 1. Suppose that no
conjugacy class size of G is divisible by p2 . Then G is a soluble p-nilpotent group, and
G/ Op (G) has a Sylow p-subgroup of order at most p. Further, if P is a Sylow p-subgroup
of G, then P ′ has order at most p, and if P 6= Op (G), then Op (G) is abelian.
Remark 3.7. (a) The statement “G/ Op (G) has a Sylow p-subgroup of order at most
p” in the above theorem (and so the corresponding one in [13, Theorem 6]) is not true.
To see this, consider the semidirect product G = [C5 × C5 ](Sym(3) × C2 ) (where
Sym(3) is a symmetric group of degree 3), which is the group of the Small groups library
of GAP with identification number 300#25, and the prime p = 2. Then G verifies the
hypotheses of Theorem 3.6 but O2 (G) = 1 and |G|2 = 4. We reveal that this example
has been communicated to us by John Cossey.
(b) The same example shows that the hypotheses in Theorem B for the conjugacy
class sizes of the elements x ∈ A ∪ B are not necessarily inherited by the factors, unless
they are (sub)normal in G. The above group G can be factorised as the mutually
permutable product of A = D10 × D10 and B = [C5 × C5 ]C3 (we checked this using GAP).
It is clear that G = AB satisfies the hypotheses of Theorem B for p = 2, but there are
elements x ∈ A with xA divisible by 4.
Remark 3.8. A natural question is how to extend the last assertion of Theorem 3.6 for
(mutually permutable) products. Concerning this, we show the following example:
Let A = D8 be a dihedral group of order 8 and B = [C5 ]C4 = ha, b | a5 = b4 =
1, ab = a4 i, and consider the prime p = 2. Then G = A × B is a mutually permutable
product of A and B, and G is 2-nilpotent. Moreover, 4 does not divide any conjugacy
class size of elements in A ∪ B. However, O2 (G) = (O2 (G) ∩ A)(O2 (G) ∩ B) = D8 × C2
is not abelian.
Regarding the claim “P ′ has order at most p” in Theorem 3.6, we get the next
extension for factorised groups, as an immediate consequence of Theorem A:
Corollary 3.9. Let G = AB be the product of the subgroups A and B. Assume that G
is p-nilpotent, and that for all p-elements in the factors, p2 does not divide xG . If P is
a Sylow p-subgroup of G, then P ′ 6 Φ(P ) 6 Z(P ), with P ′ elementary abelian of order
at most p2 .

9

In particular, from this fact and Theorem B, we get [13, Theorem 7] as a corollary,
taking G = A = B.
Finally, we prove Theorem C, which is motivated by [2, Theorem 1.3].
Proof of Theorem C. Suppose that the result is false and let G be a counterexample of minimal order. Note that G cannot be simple. Since the class of p-supersoluble
groups is a saturated formation, we may assume that there exists a unique minimal
normal subgroup N of G, and that Φ(G) = 1. By the minimality of G, we get that
G/N is p-supersoluble. Since G is p-soluble, it follows that N is either a p-group or
a p′ -group. In the second case, since G/N verifies the thesis by minimality, we get a
contradiction. Consequently, we may assume that N is p-elementary abelian and we
must show that |N | = p. As Φ(G) = 1 and G is p-soluble with Op′ (G) = 1, by [7, A
- 10.6] it follows that F(G) = Soc(G) = N = CG (N ), and also N = Op (G). Applying Theorem 2.4, we may assume that there exists a minimal normal subgroup Z/N
of G/N such that Z/N 6 AN/N , so Z = Z ∩ AN = N (Z ∩ A). Since G/N is psoluble, it follows that Z/N is either a p-group or a p′ -group. The first case leads to
Z/N 6 Op (G/N ) = Op (G/ Op (G)) = 1, a contradiction. Hence, we may assume that
Z/N is a p′ -group.
Let Q be a Sylow q-subgroup of Z ∩ A, where q 6= p is a prime (so Q is a Sylow
q-subgroup of Z). Therefore Q ∼
= QN/N is a Sylow q-subgroup of Z/N , which acts
faithfully on N . If 1 6= a ∈ Q 6 A, then N = [N, a]×CN (a). By the hypotheses, since p2
does not divide aG = |G : CG (a)|, then neither divides |N : CN (a)| = |[N, a]|, so either
|[N, a]| = 1 or |[N, a]| = p. The first case leads to a ∈ CG (N ) = N , a contradiction.
Thus, Lemma 2.5 yields QN/N is cyclic. Since this is valid for all primes q 6= p, we get
by [10, 5.15] that Z/N is soluble. By the minimality of Z/N , it follows that (Z/N )′ = 1
and Z/N is abelian with cyclic Sylow subgroups. Consequently Z/N = hxN i, where
x∈
/ N and the order of xN is q, for some prime q 6= p.
We may assume that x ∈ Z ∩ A and Z = N hxi. Hence CN (x) = CN (Z). By the
minimality of N , we have either CN (Z) = N or CN (Z) = 1. The first case leads to
x ∈ Z 6 CG (N ) = N , a contradiction. Therefore, since N = [N, x] × CN (x), it follows
|N | = |[N, x]| = p, and this final contradiction establishes the theorem.
Example 3.10. Let G be the symmetric group of degree 4. Then G = AB is a mutually
permutable product, where A denotes the alternating group of degree 4 and B is a Sylow
2-subgroup of G, which verifies the hypotheses of Theorem C, for p = 3.

4

Square-free class sizes
We begin this section with the proof of Theorem D.

Proof of Theorem D. (1) Suppose that the result is false and let G be a counterexample of least possible order. Since G supersoluble, G/ F(G) is abelian, and
so G′ 6 F(G). Moreover, the quotients of G inherit the hypotheses and the class
of metabelian groups is a formation, so we may assume that there exists a unique
minimal normal subgroup N of G with |N | = p, for some prime divisor p of |G|.
10

Hence, F(G) = Op (G) 6 P , a Sylow p-subgroup of G. Since G/ F(G) is abelian,
P = Op (G) = F(G). Hence P = (P ∩ A)(P ∩ B), where P ∩ A and P ∩ B are Sylow p-subgroups of A and B respectively, by Lemma 2.2. Applying Theorem A, we have
P ′ 6 Φ(P ) 6 Z(P ), and P ′ is elementary abelian of order at most p2 . Note that P ′ 6= 1,
because G′ ≤ P .
By Lemma 2.2, we may consider H a Hall p′ -subgroup of G, such that H = (H ∩
A)(H ∩ B), where H ∩ A and H ∩ B are Hall p′ -subgroups of A and B respectively.
Moreover, H ∼
= G/ F(G) is abelian. Let x ∈ H ∩ A be a prime power order element.
Since H 6 CG (x) 6 G, it follows by the hypotheses that xG ≤ p, and so Φ(G) 6
CG (x). Thus Φ(G) 6 CG (H ∩ A), and analogously for H ∩ B. Consequently we get
P ′ 6 Φ(P ) 6 Φ(G) 6 CG (H). Since P ′ 6 Φ(P ) 6 Z(P ), it follows P ′ 6 Φ(P ) 6 Z(G).
In particular, Φ(G) 6= 1 6= Z(G).
If A, B 6 P , then G = P and G′ = P ′ 6 Z(G), a contradiction. Hence we have
either H ∩ A 6= 1 or H ∩ B 6= 1. Assume H ∩ A 6= 1. Let QA be a Sylow q-subgroup of
H ∩ A, for some prime q 6= p. Note that QA 66 Z(G), because Z(G) is a p-group. Let
QA = QA Z(G)/ Z(G), which acts on P = P/ Z(G), which is elementary abelian because
Φ(P ) 6 Z(G) 6 F(G) = P . Suppose w = w Z(G) ∈ CQA (P ). Then [w, y] = 1 for all y =
y Z(G) ∈ P , so [w, y] ∈ Z(G) 6 P . Let k = o(w) denote the order of w. Thus [w, y]k =
[wk , y] = 1. It follows [w, y] = 1 for all y ∈ P , so w ∈ CQA (P ) = CQA (F(G)) = 1. Then
CQA (P ) = 1 and the action is faithful. Let 1 6= αq = αq Z(G) ∈ QA . Therefore P =
[P , αq ] × CP (αq ), with [P , αq ] 6= 1. Moreover, [P , αq ] = P : CP (αq ) = P : CP (αq ) =
|P : CP (αq )| , which divides αG
q , because P is normal in G. Since H 6 CG (αq ) and αq
is a non-central prime power order element in A, it follows αG
q = p, and so [P , αq ] = p.
∼
Applying Lemma 2.5, we get that QA = QA is cyclic. Since this is valid for each prime
divisor q of |H ∩ A|, we deduce that H ∩ A has cyclic Sylow subgroups, but it is abelian,
so H ∩ A is cyclic. Analogously, if H ∩ B 6= 1, then it is cyclic.
Let H ∩ A = hαi. Assume first that 1 6= α is a q-element, for some prime q, and
that G = P hαi. By the above argument, hαi Z(G)/ Z(G) acts faithfully on P , and
[P , α] = |P : CP (α)| = p. Let y ∈ P \ CP (α). If [y, α] = 1, then [y, α] ∈ Z(G) 6
P . Hence [y, α]o(α) = [y, αo(α) ] = 1, so [y, α] = 1 and y ∈ CP (α), a contradiction.
Then [y, α] 6= 1, and since [P , α] = p, it follows [P , α] = h[y, α]i. Therefore we have
[P, α] = [P , α] = h[y, α]i = h[y, α]i, so [P, α] 6 [P, α] Z(G) = h[y, α]i Z(G), and then
G′ = P ′ [P, α] 6 h[y, α]i Z(G) which is abelian, a contradiction.
Hence, we may assume that, for every prime q, if αq is the q-part of α, then P hαq i <
G. Note that P hαq i is normal in G, and P hαq i = (P hαq i ∩ A)(P hαq i ∩ B). Therefore, by
the minimality of G, it follows that (P hαq i)′ is abelian. Notice that (P hαq i)′ = P ′ [P, αq ],
since P is normal in G. Let K = P ′ [P, αq ], which is an abelian normal subgroup of G,
and let t ∈ [P, αq ] 6 K. Then Lemma 2.7 leads to |CG (αq )| < |CG ([t, αq ])|. If p divides
[t, αq ]G we get a contradiction, because [t, αq ]G < αG
q = p. Hence, P 6 CG ([t, αq ])
and [t, αq ] ∈ Z(P ), for each t ∈ [P, αq ]. By coprime action, P = [P, αq ] CP (αq ). Thus
[P, αq ] = [[P, αq ] CP (αq ), αq ] = [P, αq , αq ]. If k is a generator of [P, αq , αq ], then k =
[t, αq ] ∈ Z(P ) with t ∈ [P, αq ], so [P, αq ] = [P, αq , αq ] 6 Z(P ). Since this is valid for each
11

prime divisor q of the order of H ∩ A = hαi, we get:
[P, H ∩ A] = [P, hαq1 i × · · · × hαqt i] = [P, αq1 ] · · · [P, αqt ] 6 Z(P ).
Analogously, if H ∩ B 6= 1, then [P, H ∩ B] ≤ Z(P ). Since G′ = P ′ [P, H] = P ′ [P, H ∩
A][P, H ∩ B], we get G′ ≤ Z(P ). This final contradiction establishes statement (1).
(2) Suppose that the second assertion is not true and let G be a counterexample of
minimal order. We point out that the hypotheses are inherited by every quotient group
of G and, by (1), G′ is abelian. There exists a prime divisor p of |G′ | such that G′ does
not have any elementary abelian Sylow p-subgroup. By the minimality of G, we may
consider that Op′ (G) = 1. Moreover, since G is supersoluble, then G/ F(G) is abelian,
and F(G) = Op (G) = P is a normal Sylow p-subgroup of G such that G′ 6 P . Using
Lemma 2.2 and Theorem A, we obtain respectively that P = (P ∩ A)(P ∩ B), and that
P ′ is elementary abelian with P ′ 6 Φ(P ) 6 Z(P ).
Let GN be the nilpotent residual of G. Note that GN 6= 1; in other case, G is a p-group
and then G′ = P ′ , a contradiction. Since GN 6 G′ , it follows that GN is abelian. By
using [7, III - 4.6, IV - 5.18], we have that GN is complemented in G, and its complements
are precisely the Carter subgroups of G. Accordingly, G = GN H with H = NG (H) a
nilpotent subgroup of G and GN ∩ H = 1. These facts yield G′ = GN × (H ∩ G′ ), and
CGN (H) = 1. On the other hand, the minimality of G implies that G′ /GN ∼
= (H ∩ G′ ) is
N
N
N
elementary abelian, and thus G is not so. If CH (G ) 6= 1, since CH (G ) is normal in
G, by the minimality of G we have (G/ CH (GN ))′ is an elementary abelian group, but
(G/ CH (GN ))′ = G′ CH (GN )/ CH (GN ) = GN CH (GN )/ CH (GN ) ∼
= GN ,
which is a contradiction. Hence, CH (GN ) = 1. In particular, we deduce that Z(G) = 1.
By Lemma 2.2, there exists a Hall p′ -subgroup H0 of G such that H0 = (H0 ∩
A)(H0 ∩ B). Let x ∈ H0 ∩ A be a non-trivial element of prime power order. Since
H0 6 CG (x), it follows that xG ≤ p, and so Φ(G) 6 CG (x). Thus Φ(G) 6 CG (H0 ∩ A),
and analogously for H0 ∩ B. Consequently, we get P ′ 6 Φ(P ) 6 Φ(G) 6 CG (H0 ). Since
P ′ 6 Φ(P ) 6 Z(P ) and G = P H0 , it follows P ′ 6 Φ(P ) 6 Z(G) = 1, which implies that
P is elementary abelian, the final contradiction.
(3) Assume that the result is false and take G a counterexample of minimal order. Consider a prime p such that | F(G)′ |p > p2 . By minimality, we can affirm that
Op′ (F(G)) = 1. Since G is supersoluble, we get that F(G) = Op (G) = P is a normal
Sylow p-subgroup of G. Then, we apply both Lemma 2.2 and Theorem A to get the
final contradiction.
Example 4.1. Let G = A × B be the direct product of two symmetric groups of degree
3. Then G is supersoluble, and every element contained in each factor (not only those of
prime power order) has square-free conjugacy class size, but neither the derived subgroup
G′ nor G/ F(G) are cyclic, in contrast to [6, Theorem 2].
Example 4.2. In view of [6, Theorem 2], it is natural to wonder if we can affirm in the
above result that the Sylow p-subgroups of G′ have order at most p2 . This fact is not
further true, as we show:
12

Let G = A×B, where A = D14 is a dihedral group of order 14, and B = D14 ×[C7 ]C3
is the direct product of such a dihedral group and a semidirect product of a cyclic group
of order 7 and a cyclic group of order 3 (B has identification number 294#9 in the Small
groups library of GAP). Then G is supersoluble, and satisfies that all prime power order
elements contained in each factor have square-free conjugacy class size, but G′ has order
73 .
Now we proceed with the proof of Theorem E.
Proof of Theorem E. Considering the smallest prime divisor of |G| and Theorem
B, we conclude that G is soluble. Hence, it is p-soluble for each prime divisor p of |G|.
Applying Theorem C, we get that G is p-supersoluble for each prime that divides |G|,
so it is supersoluble.
Now we prove the second assertion by induction on |G|. Let p be an arbitrary prime,
and P be a Sylow p-subgroup of G. We want to show that P F(G)/ F(G) ∼
= P/ Op (G) is
elementary abelian. Since G is supersoluble, we have that G/ F(G) is abelian. Moreover,
we may assume by induction that Op (G) = 1. Therefore, we have that F(G) 6 H 6 G,
where H is a Hall p′ -subgroup of G. Consequently, H is normal in G and G is p-nilpotent.
Finally, by Theorem 3.4 the result is established.
When considering in the above theorem all p-regular elements in the factors, we get
as a corollary:
Corollary 4.3. ([2, Corollary 1.5]) Let the group G = AB be the mutually permutable
product of the subgroups A and B. Suppose that for every prime p and every p-regular
element x ∈ A ∪ B, xG is not divisible by p2 . Then G is supersoluble.
Example 4.4. Consider G = A × B, where A = Sym(3) is a symmetric group of degree
3, and B = Sym(3) × D10 is the direct product of such a symmetric group and a dihedral
group of order 10. Then G satisfies the hypotheses of Theorem E. However there exists
some 2-regular element in B, not of prime power order, such that 4 divides its conjugacy
class size, so Corollary 4.3 cannot be applied.
In the particular case when A and B are normal in G, we obtain [13, Proposition 9].
Corollary 4.5. Let A and B be normal subgroups of G such that G = AB. Suppose
that xG is square-free for every element x of prime power order of A ∪ B. Then G is
supersoluble.
This development has its origins in the contributions of Chillag and Herzog [5, Theorem 1], and Cossey and Wang [6, Theorem 2]. Our next result Theorem F and Theorem
D can be considered somehow extensions of the ones above for (mutually permutable)
products. In fact, Theorem F provides further information on the Sylow subgroups of
G/ F(G).
Proof of Theorem F. Suppose the result is not true and let G be a counterexample of least order possible. Then if P is a Sylow p-subgroup of G, we have |P/ Op (G)| ≥
13

p3 . We can assume by the minimality of G that Op (G) = 1 = Φ(G) = Z(G), so
|P | ≥ p3 . By Lemma 2.2 we can choose P = (P ∩ A)(P ∩ B), with P ∩ A and P ∩ B
Sylow p-subgroups of A and B respectively. By Theorem E, we have that G is supersoluble and G/ F(G) has elementary abelian Sylow subgroups. In particular, P F(G)
is normal in G. Hence Lemma 2.3 (b) asserts that L = (P F(G) ∩ A)(P F(G) ∩ B) is
normal in G, and it is a mutually permutable product. Moreover, P = (P ∩ A)(P ∩ B) 6
(P F(G)∩A)(P F(G)∩B) = L 6 P F(G). If we suppose L < G, by the minimality of G it
follows |P/ Op (L)| = |P | ≤ p2 , a contradiction. Thus, we may assume L = G = P F(G),
and so G is p-nilpotent.
Let N be a minimal normal subgroup of G. We can assume without loss of generality
that it is contained in A by Theorem 2.4. Note |N | = q 6= p. By Proposition 3.3 (1), it
follows |Op (G/N )| ≤ p, and by the minimality of G we have |(P N/N )/ Op (G/N )| ≤ p2 .
Since P ∼
= P N/N , we may assume |P | = p3 . As Φ(G) = 1, [[7], A - 10.6 Theorem]
leads to F(G) = Soc(G). If N is the unique minimal normal subgroup of G, then
P ∼
= NP (N )/ CP (N ) which is isomorphic to a subgroup of Aut(Cq ) ∼
= Cq−1 , so P is
cyclic and elementary abelian, which implies that its order is p, a contradiction.
Now we denote by T the product of all minimal normal subgroups of G distinct of N ,
so T 6= 1 and T ∩ N = 1. It follows F(G) = Soc(G) = N × T . We denote Q1 = Op (P N )
and Q2 = Op (P T ). Since P N ∼
= G/T (and P T ∼
= G/N ), by the minimality of G we
may affirm Q1 6= 1 6= Q2 . On the other hand, since [Op (P N ), N ] 6 Op (P N ) ∩ N = 1,
we have Q1 6 C1 = CP (N ) (analogously Q2 6 C2 = CP (T )). In addition, it follows
C1 ∩ C2 6 CP (F(G)) 6 CG (F(G)) 6 F(G), so C1 ∩ C2 = 1. Let P0 be a Sylow psubgroup of CG (N ) such that P0 6 P . Hence P0 = C1 = CP (N ). In addition, since
N = hxi where x is a q-element contained in A, by the hypotheses it follows that p2 does
not divide xG p = |G : CG (x)|p = |P : C1 |. Moreover, since |P | = |P : C1 | · |C1 | = p3 ,
we may assume |C1 | ≥ p2 , and since 1 6= Q2 6 C2 , we have |C2 | ≥ p. Accordingly
|C1 C2 | = |C1 | · |C2 | ≥ p3 , and since P is abelian, we have necessarily P = C1 × C2 . This
leads to
G = P F(G) = C1 C2 N T = (C1 T ) × (C2 N ).
Suppose T ∩ A 6= 1, and let 1 6= y ∈ T ∩ A 6 C1 T ∩ A. Let 1 6= x ∈ N 6 A.
Then since xy ∈ F(G) ∩ A and F(G) is abelian, we have that xy is a p-regular element,
so by the hypotheses p2 does not divide (xy)G . As G is a direct product, we have
(xy)G = xG y G . In addition, (N × C1 T ) 6 CG (x) 6 G, and therefore xG divides
|G : (C1 T × N )| = |C2 | which is a p-number, so xG = p (recall that Z(G) = 1), and
analogously y G = p, a contradiction. We conclude T ∩ A = 1.
If F(G) = K × M with M normal in G and K a minimal normal subgroup of G
contained in B, by similar arguments we can deduce M ∩ B = 1. This means, in
particular, that neither A nor B can contain two distinct minimal normal subgroups of
G.
On the other hand, since F(G) is the unique p′ -Hall subgroup of G, Lemma 2.2 leads
to F(G) = (F(G) ∩ A)(F(G) ∩ B). Moreover, since F(G) ∩ A = N T ∩ A = N (T ∩ A) = N ,
it follows F(G) = N (F(G) ∩ B). Note that (F(G) ∩ B) ∩ N 6 N with |N | = q so we
distinguish two cases: either (F(G)∩ B)∩ N = N or (F(G)∩ B)∩ N = 1. In the first case
14

F(G) = F(G) ∩ B 6 B. Thus there exists another minimal normal subgroup contained
in B and distinct of N , a contradiction. Hence we conclude (F(G) ∩ B) ∩ N = 1 so
F(G) = N × (F(G) ∩ B).
Now suppose that F(G) is a q-group. Then, since F(G) = Soc(G), it follows that
F(G) is q-elementary abelian. In addition, P ∩ A acts faithfully over F(G). Let 1 6= x ∈
P ∩ A 6 A, then F(G) = [F(G), x] × CF(G) (x), with CF(G) (x) < F(G) since Z(G) = 1
and P is abelian. By the hypotheses, q 2 does not divide xG , and therefore it does not
divide F(G) : CF(G) (x) . Thus we may affirm |[F(G), x]| = q. By Lemma 2.5 we conclude
that P ∩ A is cyclic, and analogously P ∩ B is cyclic too. So they are both cyclic and
elementary abelian, that is, they both have order p. Thus |P | = |(P ∩ A)(P ∩ B)| ≤ p2 ,
a contradiction.
Hence we may suppose that there exists a prime r 6= q such that r divides |F(G)|.
Let 1 6= R be a Sylow r-subgroup of F(G) ∩ B (so it is a Sylow r-subgroup of F(G)).
Then 1 6= R = Or (G) 6 B, and since F(G) = Soc(G), necessarily we have that Or (G) is
the product of the minimal normal subgroups of G with order r. Let M 6 B be one of
those minimal normal subgroups. Arguing exactly in the same way as with N , it follows
F(G) = M ×(A∩F(G)). But A∩F(G) = N so F(G) = N ×M with both minimal normal
subgroups of G, N 6 A and M 6 B. Let P1 be a Sylow p-subgroup of CG (N ) = CG (x)
such that P1 6 P . Then by the hypotheses we have xG p = |P : P1 | ≤ p. Since |P | = p3 ,
it follows |P1 | ≥ p2 . However, P1 is normal in P N so P1 6 Op (P N ) ∼
= Op (G/M ), and
by Proposition 3.3 (1) we have |Op (G/M )| ≤ p. This final contradiction establishes the
theorem.
Example 4.6. Under the hypotheses of Theorem E (even under those of Theorem D),
it is not possible to assure that G/ F(G) has Sylow p-subgroups of order at most p2 , as
the following example shows:
Let {p1 , p2 , . . . , pn } be a finite set of pairwise distinct odd primes, and let G = D2p1 ×
D2p2 × · · · × D2pn be the direct product of dihedral groups of order 2pi , 1 ≤ i ≤ n. Then
G = A×B is a mutually permutable product of A = D2p1 and B = D2p2 ×· · ·×D2pn , and
each prime power order element contained in the direct factors has square-free conjugacy
class size. However, G/ F(G) has order 2n .

References
[1] B. Amberg, S. Franciosi and F. de Giovanni:
University Press, New York, 1992.

Products of groups. Oxford

[2] A. Ballester-Bolinches, J. Cossey and Y. Li: Mutually permutable products
and conjugacy classes. Monatsh. Math. 170 (2012) 305–310.
[3] A. Ballester-Bolinches, R. Esteban-Romero and M. Asaad: Products of
finite groups. Vol. 53 of de Gruyter Expositions in Mathematics, Berlin, 2010.
[4] J. C. Beidleman and H. Heineken: Group classes and mutually permutable
products. J. Algebra 297 (2006) 409–416.
15

[5] D. Chillag and M. Herzog: On the length of the conjugacy classes of finite
groups. J. Algebra 131 (1990) 110–125.
[6] J. Cossey and Y. Wang: Remarks on the length of conjugacy classes of finite
groups. Commun. Algebra 27 (1999) 4347–4353.
[7] K. Doerk and T. Hawkes: Finite Soluble Groups. Vol. 4 of de Gruyter Expositions in Mathematics, Berlin, 1992.
[8] The GAP Group:
GAP – Groups, Algorithms, and Programming.
http://www.gap-system.org, Version 4.7.7, 2015.
[9] B. Huppert: Endliche Gruppen I. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1967.
[10] I. M. Isaacs: Finite Group Theory. American Mathematical Society, USA, 2008.
[11] H. G. Knoche: Über den Frobeniusschen Klassenbegriff in nilpotenten Gruppen.
Math. Z. 55 (1951) 71–83.
[12] S. Li: On the class length of elements of prime power order in finite groups.
Guangxi Sci. 6(1) (1999) 12–13.
[13] X. Liu, Y. Wang and H. Wei: Notes on the length of conjugacy classes of finite
groups. J. Pure Appl. Algebra 196 (2005) 111–117.
[14] G. Qian and Y. Wang: On conjugacy class sizes and character degrees of finite
groups. J. Algebra Appl. 13 (2014) 1350100-1–9.

16

