Forking and JSJ decompositions in the free group II
Chloé Perin

Rizos Sklinos

arXiv:1801.07908v1 [] 24 Jan 2018

January 25, 2018

Abstract
We give a complete characterization of the forking independence relation over any set
of parameters in the free groups of finite rank, in terms of the JSJ decomposition relative
to those parameters.

1

Introduction

In [Sel13], Sela proves that the first order theory of torsion free hyperbolic groups, and thus
in particular that of free groups, is stable. This amazing result implies the existence of a
good notion of independence of tuples of elements over any set of parameters, akin to that
of algebraic independence in algebraically closed fields. It was thus natural to ask whether
there was a way to characterize this notion of independence (called forking independence) in
a purely group theoretic way.
In [PS16] we gave such a description for two families of parameter sets: when the parameter
set A is a free factor of the free group F, and at the other extreme, when A is not contained
in a proper free factor of F.
In the first case, we showed two tuples b and c are independent if and only if there is a free
product decomposition F = Fb ∗ A ∗ Fc such that b ∈ Fb ∗ A and c ∈ A ∗ Fc , in other words if
and only if the tuples live in "different parts" of the Grushko decomposition of F relative to
A. In the second case, we proved that two tuples b and c are independent if and only if they
live in "different parts" of the pointed cyclic JSJ decomposition of F relative to A. Note that
under the assumption that A is not contained in a proper free factor of F, there is a canonical
JSJ decomposition for F relative to A, namely the tree of cylinders of the deformation space.
The aim of the present paper is to complete this description for any set of parameters. In
this setting, there is no canonical JSJ decomposition - we thus give a condition in terms of
all the pointed cyclic JSJ decomposition for which the minimal subtree of the smallest free
factor FA is the tree of cylinders (we call such decomposition of F standard pointed cyclic
JSJ decompositions). Our main result is:
Theorem 1: Let A ⊂ F be a set of parameters and b, c be tuples from F. Then b is independent
from c over A if and only if there exists a standard cyclic JSJ decomposition Λ of F relative
min
to A in which the minimal subgraphs Λmin
Ab , ΛAc of hA, bi respectively hA, ci intersect at most
in a disjoint union of envelopes of rigid vertices.
(For a precise definition of minimal subgraphs and envelope of a rigid vertex, see Definition
3.4, for standard JSJ decompositions see Definition 3.12).

1

We also give in Theorem 3.15 an even more general characterization of forking independence, stated in terms of all pointed cyclic JSJ decompositions, not just standard ones (for
definitions of the various JSJ decompositions see Section 3).
Before Sela’s work proving the stability of torsion free hyperbolic groups, only the families of
abelian groups and algebraic groups (over algebraically closed fields) were known to be stable.
For these families it was fairly easy to understand and characterize forking independence.
But there is a qualitative difference between the already known examples of stable groups
and torsion-free hyperbolic groups: a group elementarily equivalent to an abelian group is an
abelian group and likewise a group elementarily equivalent to an algebraic group is an algbraic
group. This is certainly false in the case of torsion-free hyperbolic groups: an ultrapower of a
non abelian free group under a non-principal ultrafilter is not free. Even more, by definition,
a non finitely generated group cannot be hyperbolic.
The difficulty in describing forking independence arising from this easy observation is
significant. A priori, even for understanding the independence relation (provided by stability)
in natural models of our theory, one has to move to a saturated model of the theory. The
main problem with that is that we have very little knowledge of what a saturated model of the
theory of nonabelian free groups look like. In [PS16] we managed to overcome this difficulty
by using the assumptions we imposed on the parameter set A. When A is not contained in
any proper free factor, there are a number of useful results available. Model theoretically: F is
atomic over A (see [PS16], [OH11]). This enables us to transfer a sequence witnessing forking
from a big model to F. More importantly we have a natural candidate for a formula witnessing
forking: in an atomic model every type is isolated, and by homogeneity (see [PS12], [OH11]),
this means that the orbit of any tuple under AutA (F) is definable. Geometrically, under our
assumption, we have a very good understanding of AutA (F): the canonical JSJ decomposition
of F relative to A enables one to describe the restricted automorphisms up to a finite index,
i.e. one understands the modular automorpshism group M odA (F).
The paper is structured as follows: in Section2, we recall the essential facts and results
about stability and forking we use in the sequel. In Section 3, we give definitions and results
regarding actions on trees and JSJ decompositions. This enables us to state the two main
results, Theorem 3.14 and Theorem 3.15. At the beginning of Section 4, we show that the
conditions outlined in Theorem 3.15 are in fact equivalent to those of Theorem 3.14. We then
proceed to show one direction of Theorem 3.14, namely that if two tuples lie in essentially
disjoint parts of some standard pointed cyclic JSJ decomposition for F relative to A, they
are independent. Finally, in Section 5, we show that if in any standard pointed cyclic JSJ
decomposition of F relative to A, the minimal subgraphs of Ab and Ac intersect in more than
a disjoint union of envelopes of rigid vertices, then b and c are not independent over A.

2

Stability

A detailed account of the background on stability needed for this article has been already
developed in [PS16, Section 2], thus for avoiding repetition we only state here the notions and
results of fundamental importance to this article.
We fix a stable first-order theory T and we work in a “big” saturated model M of T , which
is usually called the monster model (see [Mar02, p.218]). Capital letters A, B, C, . . . denote
parameter sets of small cardinality, i.e. cardinality strictly less than |M|.
Definition 2.1: A formula φ(x̄, b) forks over A if there are n < ω and an infinite sequence
2

(bi )i<ω of tuples in M such that tp(b/A) = tp(b¯i /A) for i < ω, and the set {φ(x̄, bi ) : i < ω} is
n-inconsistent (i.e, any subset of n formulas is inconsistent).
| B) if there is no formula in tp(ā/B)
A tuple ā is independent from B over A (denoted ā ^
A

which forks over A.
Forking independence satisfies certain axioms, a full list of which we have recorded in
[PS16, Section 2]. We give next those important for this paper.
| C if and only if ā ^
| B and ā ^
| C;
Fact 2.2: Let A ⊆ B ⊆ C. Then ā ^
A

A

B

| B if and only if acl(āA) ^
| acl(B).
Fact 2.3: Let A ⊆ B. Then ā ^
A

acl(A)

In the above fact and for the rest of the article the algebraic closure acl is understood as
the imaginary algebraic closure acleq .
Definition 2.4: Let A ⊆ B be sets of parameter, and let p ∈ Sn (A). A non forking extension of p over B is a complete type q ∈ Sn (B) containing p such that no formula φ(x̄, b) ∈ q
forks over A. A type p over A is stationary if for any A ⊂ B, the type p admits a unique
non-forking extension over B.
Fact 2.5: Every type over an algebraically closed set A, i.e. A = acl(A), is stationary.
The following lemma has been proved in [PS16, Lemma 2.10].
Lemma 2.6: Let M |= T . Let b, A ⊂ M, and M be countable and atomic over A. Suppose
that the set X ⊂ M defined by a formula φ(x̄, b) contains a non empty almost A-invariant
subset (i.e. a subset that has finitely many images under Aut(M/A)). Then φ(x̄, b) does not
fork over A.
Fact 2.7: Let M ≺ M. Let X ⊂ M be a set definable over M. Then X ∩ M is definable over
M.

3

Trees

For this section we use the notations and framework of [GL17].
Let G be a finitely generated group. A G-tree is a simplicial tree T together with an action
of G on T . A cyclic G-tree is a G-tree whose edge stabilizers are cyclic (possibly finite or
trivial). We will only consider cyclic G-trees in this paper.
We say a G-tree T is minimal if it admits no proper G-invariant subtree. Note that unless
otherwise mentioned, the G-trees we will consider are not minimal.
If H is a finitely generated subgroup of G, it is a standard result that there is a unique
subtree of T preserved by H on which the action of H is minimal. We denote it by THmin .
Definition 3.1: Let T be a G-tree, with corresponding graph of groups Λ, and let H be a
finitely generated subgroup of G. The minimal subgraph Λmin
of H in Λ is the image of THmin
H
under the quotient map.
If A is a subset of G, a (G, A)-tree is a G-tree in which A fixes a point. A (not necessarily simplicial) surjective equivariant map d : T1 → T2 between two (G, A)-trees is called a
domination map. It sends edges to paths in T2 . We then say that T1 dominates T2 . This is
equivalent to saying that any subgroup of G which is elliptic in T1 is also elliptic in T2 .
3

A surjective simplicial map p : T1 → T2 which consists in collapsing some orbits of edges
to points is called a collapse map. In this case, we also say that T1 refines T2 .

3.1

Cylinders and envelopes

Definition 3.2: Let T be a G-tree with infinite cyclic edge stabilizers. A cylinder in T is an
equivalence class of edges under the equivalence relation given by e ∼ f iff Stab(e) and Stab(f )
are commensurable (see Example (3) of Definition 7.1 in [GL17]).
Note that cylinders are subtrees. The stabilizer of a cylinder is the commensurator of the
stabilizer of any one of its edges e, i.e. the set of elements g such that gStab(e)g −1 ∩ Stab(e)
has finite index both in Stabe and in gStab(e)g −1 .

Figure 1: Two cylinders, in blue and red, the cyclic vertices belong to the boundary of each
cylinder while the star vertices do not.
Definition 3.3: The boundary of a cylinder C is the set ∂C of vertices of C which either
are of valence 1 in T or belong to at least two cylinders.
Note that the stabilizer of a vertex v in the boundary ∂C of a cylinder C is infinite cyclic
if and only if v has valence 1 in T .
Given a G-tree T with infinite cyclic edge stabilizers, we can construct the associated tree
of cylinders Tc (Definition 7.2 in [GL17] or Definition 4.3 in [GL11]). It is obtained from T as
follows: the vertex set is the union V0 (Tc ) ∪ V1 (Tc ) where V0 (Tc ) contains a vertex w0 for each
vertex w of T contained in the boundary of some cylinder, and V1 (Tc ) contains a vertex vc for
each cylinder c of T . There is an edge between vertices w0 and vc lying in V0 (Tc ) and V1 (Tc )
respectively if and only if w belongs to the cylinder c.
We get a tree which is bipartite: every edge in the tree of cylinders joins a vertex from
V0 (Tc ) to a vertex of V1 (Tc ). Since the action of G on T sends cylinders to cylinders, the tree
of cylinder admits an obvious G action. The stabilizer of a vertex w0 ∈ V0 (Tc ) is the stabilizer
of the original vertex w, while the stabilizer of a vertex vC ∈ V1 (Tc ) is the setwise stabilizer
of the cylinder C. In a tree of cylinders Tc , cylinders are subtrees of diameter exactly 2 (star
graphs) whose center belongs to V1 (Tc ) and is not contained in any other cylinder.
For a general group G, the tree of cylinders need not have infinite cyclic edge stabilizers.
But if G is torsion-free hyperbolic for example (which will be our case in the sequel since we
deal exclusively with free groups), then the commensurator of an infinite cyclic group is itself
infinite cyclic, so the tree of cylinders does have infinite cyclic edge groups. In this case, by
[GL17, Lemma 7.3(5)], Tc is its own tree of cylinders, i.e. (Tc )c = Tc .
Definition 3.4: Let T be a G-tree with infinite cyclic edge stabilizers which is its own tree of
cylinders. Let v be a vertex in the boundary of some cylinder of T . An envelope of v is a
4

union of edges adjacent to v which meets at most one orbit of edge of each cylinder of T . Let
p : T → Λ be the quotient map to the associated graph of groups. The image of an envelope of
v is a union of edges adjacent to p(v), we call it an envelope of p(v) in Λ.
Remark 3.5: Note that the definition implies that an envelope of p(v) is a star graph, i.e. no
two edges in it have both endpoints in common.

Figure 2: An envelope of v in the tree of cylinders.

3.2

Pointed JSJ tree

We recall the following from Section 4.1 of [PS16].
Deformation space. The deformation space of a minimal cyclic (G, A)-tree T is the set of
all minimal cyclic (G, A)-trees T 0 such that T dominates T 0 and T 0 dominates T . The tree
of cylinders is an invariant of the deformation space [GL17, Lemma 7.3(3)] [GL11, Corollary
4.10].
A minimal cyclic (G, A)-tree is universally elliptic if its edge stabilizers are elliptic in every
minimal cyclic (G, A)-tree. If T is a universally elliptic cyclic (G, A)-tree, and T 0 is any minimal
cyclic (G, A)-tree, it is easy to see that there is a tree T̂ which refines T and dominates T 0 (see
[GL17, Lemma ]).
JSJ trees. A cyclic relative JSJ tree for G with respect to A is a minimal universally elliptic
cyclic (G, A)-tree which dominates any other minimal universally elliptic cyclic (G, A)-tree. All
these JSJ trees belong to a common deformation space, that we denote JSJA (G). Guirardel
and Levitt show that if G is finitely presented and A is finitely generated, the JSJ deformation
space always exists (see [GL17, Corollary 2.21]). It is easily seen to be unique.
Rigid and flexible vertices. A vertex stabilizer in a (relative) JSJ tree is said to be rigid
if it is elliptic in any cyclic (G, A)-tree, and flexible if not. In the case where G is a torsion-free
hyperbolic group and A is a finitely generated subgroup of G with respect to which G is freely
indecomposable, the flexible vertices of a cyclic JSJ tree of G with respect to A are surface
type vertices [GL17, Theorem 6.6], i.e. their stabilizers are fundamental groups of hyperbolic
5

surfaces with boundary, any adjacent edge group is contained in a maximal boundary subgroup,
and any maximal boudary subgroup contains either exactly one adjacent edge group, or exactly
one conjugate of A [GL17, Remark ].
We now restrict our attention to the case where G is torsion free hyperbolic.
Pointed trees of cylinders. We will define pointed JSJ trees - they are not minimal in
general.
Definition 3.6: Let G be a torsion free hyperbolic group and A a non trivial subgroup. We say
(T, vA ) is a pointed cyclic JSJ tree for G relative to A if one of the following alternatives
holds
(i) A is not infinite cyclic, the tree T is in JSJA (G), and vA is the unique vertex of T fixed
by A,
(ii) A is cyclic, the vertex vA has a unique adjacent edge e in T , the stabilizers of both vA
and e are equal to the centralizer C(A) of A, and removing the orbit of e from T gives a
G-tree which lies in JSJA (G).
When we consider the minimal subtree of a subgroup H containing A in such a pointed
tree, we require that vA belongs to THmin . A vertex of a pointed cyclic JSJ tree T for G relative
to A is called rigid if either it is the vertex vA , or it belongs to the subtree of T which lies in
JSJA (G) and is rigid in this subtree. A vertex is called flexible if it belongs to the subtree of
T which lies in JSJA (G) and is flexible in this subtree.
Definition 3.7: A vertex of a pointed cyclic JSJ tree (T, vA ) is said to be a Z-type vertex if
it is distinct from the base vertex vA and its stabilizer is infinite cyclic.
Assume G torsion-free hyperbolic and freely indecomposable with respect to A.
Then, there is a preferred tree in the cyclic JSJ deformation space JSJA (G) - indeed, in this
case the tree of cylinders of JSJA (G) itself lies in JSJA (G) ([GL11, Theorem 2] or [GL17,
Theorem 9.18]).
This enables us to define a preferred pointed cyclic JSJ tree for G relative to A.
Definition 3.8: Let G be a torsion free hyperbolic group which is freely indecomposable relative
to a finitely generated subgroup A. The pointed cyclic JSJ tree of cylinders for G relative
to A is the tree defined by:
(i) if A is not infinite cyclic, T is the tree of cylinders Tc of JSJA (G), and vA is the unique
vertex of Tc fixed by A;
(i) if A is cyclic, there is a unique edge e = (va , p) adjacent to vA , and removing its orbit
from T gives the tree of cylinder Tc of JSJA (G). Moreover, if C(A) stabilizes a cylinder
C in Tc , the vertex p is the center of C.
It will be useful to construct the tree of cylinders from any pointed JSJ tree by a refinement
and a collapse, as the following remark explains.
Remark 3.9: Let G be a torsion free hyperbolic group which is freely indecomposable relative
to a finitely generated subgroup A. If (T̃ , vA ) is any pointed cyclic JSJ tree for G with respect to
A, the pointed cyclic JSJ tree of cylinders (T, vA ) can be obtained from (T̃ , ṽA ) by the following
procedure:
6

(i) we build a refinement T 0 of T̃ by replacing each non Z-type vertex v of T̃ (i.e. v is in
the orbit of ṽA or belongs to at least two cylinders of T̃ ), by the star graph with a central
vertex v 0 and an edge (v 0 , vC ) for each cylinder C containing v. If e was an edge which
was adjacent to v, we attach it to vC where C is the cylinder containing e. Denote the
collapse map T 0 → T̃ by p.
(ii) we build the collapse map q : T 0 → T by collapsing all the edges of T 0 which do not come
from the refinement dual to p.
Assume now that G is torsion free hyperbolic but not necessarily freely indecomposable relative to A. We may consider the Grushko decomposition G = GA ∗ G1 ∗ . . . ∗
Gk ∗ Fl for G relative to A, where GA is the smallest free factor of G containing A and Fl is a
free group of rank l.
Lemma 3.10: If T ∈ JSJA (G), the minimal subtree TGmin
of GA in T is in the cyclic JSJ
A
deformation space for GA relative to A, and the minimal subtree TGmin
of each factor Gi for
i
i = 1, . . . , k is in the cyclic JSJ deformation space for Gi .
Proof. Suppose T ∈ JSJA (G). Let E1 (T ) be the union of interior of trivially stabilized edges
of T . Let T0 , T1 , . . . , Tr be representatives of the orbits of connected components of T − E1 (T )
where vA ∈ T0 . Denote by Hi the stabilizer of Ti . The group G admits a decomposition as
H0 ∗ . . . ∗ Hr ∗ Fs for some s, and A ≤ G0 .
Note that any refinement Ti0 of one of the trees Ti can be extended to a refinement T 0 of
T , since the only edges of T − Ti which are adjacent to Ti are trivially stabilized.
Show first that Ti is universally elliptic among cyclic Hi -trees (respectively (H0 , A)-tree if
i = 0). If T̃i is another cyclic Hi -tree (respectively (H0 , A)-tree if i = 0), we extend it to a
cyclic (G, A)-tree T̃ by adding to the graph of group Γ̃i corresponding to T̃i a set of k trivially
stabilized edges with one endpoint in Γ̃i and the other endpoint with vertex group Hj for j 6= i,
and s trivially stabilized loop attached to some vertex of Γi . Since T is universally elliptic for
(G, A)-trees, the stabilizer of an edge in Ti fixes a vertex of T̃ . Since all the edges of T̃ which
are not in the orbit of T̃i are trivially stabilized, and Stab(e) ≤ Hi = Stab(T̃i ), it must in fact
fix a vertex in T̃i .
On the other hand, each Hi is freely indecomposable: suppose by contradiction that Hi acts
minimally and non trivially on a tree Ti∗ with trivial edge stabilizers. Since Ti is universally
elliptic, there is a refinement Ti0 of Ti which dominates Ti∗ , obtained by replacing vertices
in Ti by the minimal subtree of their stabilizer in Ti∗ (in particular, we only add trivially
stabilized edges). Note that Ti0 must have some trivially stabilized edges, in particular Ti does
not dominate Ti0 - there must be a vertex v in Ti whose stabilizer Stab(v) is not elliptic in Ti0 .
Now Ti0 can be extended to a proper refinement T 0 of T . Note that to get T 0 from T , we only
added trivially stabilized edges, hence T 0 is still universally elliptic. But T cannot dominate
T 0 since Stab(v) is elliptic in T and not in T - this contradicts the maximality of T .
Therefore the decomposition G = H0 ∗ . . . ∗ Hr ∗ Fs of G is in fact a Grushko decomposition
for G, in particular H0 = GA and TGmin
⊆ T0 , s = l, r = k, and we may assume Hi = Gi for
A
i = 1, . . . , k.
We now prove that the minimal subtree of Gi = Hi in Ti is a cyclic JSJ tree for Gi (relative
to A if i = 0). We already know it is universally elliptic since Ti is. By Proposition 4.15 in
[GL17], it is enough to check that the JSJ of any vertex stabilizer in Ti relative to the adjacent
edge groups is trivial. Suppose by contradiction that some vertex v ∈ Ti is such that Stab(v)
7

admits a non trivial JSJ tree Tv relative to the adjacent edge groups. Note that Stab(v) is not
elliptic in Tv . By Proposition 4.15 of [GL17] refining T at v by Tv gives a tree which should
lie in the cyclic JSJ deformation space of G relative to A - a contradiction since in this refined
tree, Stab(v) is no longer elliptic.
Corollary 3.11: If (T, vA ) is a pointed cyclic JSJ tree for G relative to A, and TGmin
is the
A
min
minimal subtree of GA in T , then (TGA , vA ) is a pointed cyclic JSJ tree for GA relative to A.
Proof. If A is not cyclic, pointed JSJ tree is just a regular JSJ tree with a specified vertex, so
this follows immediately from the previous lemma. Suppose thus that A is cyclic. By definition
of pointed JSJ decomposition there is a valence one edge e = (vA , p) in T such that the tree
T 0 obtained from T by removing the orbit of e belongs to JSJA (G).
We now prove that the minimal subtree of GA in T 0 must contain the vertex p. Note that
vertex stabilizers of T belong to conjugates of factors of the Grushko decomposition of G.
Thus for any vertex v, if the stabilizer of v contains a non trivial subgroup of A, it is contained
in GA and thus it stabilizes the path between v and (T 0 )min
GA , in particular if it is not cyclic v
0
min
is in fact contained in (T )GA . If A stabilizes only the vertex p in T 0 , this vertex has noncyclic
stabilizer and must be in (T 0 )min
GA . If A stabilizes a cylinder C, then all the vertices other than
vA in the boundary of C have non cyclic stabilizers and contain a non trivial subgroup of A,
0
thus they all lie in (T 0 )min
GA . By minimality of T , any vertex of the cylinder C lies on a path
joining two vertices of ∂C - this implies that p lies in (T 0 )min
GA .
Hence the minimal subtree of GA in the pointed tree (T, vA ) is exactly the subtree obtained
0 min
from (T 0 )min
GA by adding the orbit of e under GA . By the previous lemma, (T )GA lies in
JSJA (GA ). Hence the minimal subtree of GA in the pointed tree (T, vA ) is the pointed JSJ
tree of GA relative to A.
Standard JSJ decompositions. We finally define standard JSJ decompositions appearing
in Theorem 3.14:
Definition 3.12: Let G be torsion free hyperbolic, let A be a subset of G and let G = GA ∗
G1 ∗ . . . ∗ Gk ∗ Fl be the standard Grushko decomposition of G relative to A. A pointed cyclic
JSJ tree T relative to A is said to be standard if the minimal subtree TGmin
of GA in T is
A
the pointed cyclic JSJ tree of cylinders of GA relative to A, and for each i the minimal subtree
TGmin
of Gi in T is the cyclic JSJ tree of cylinders of Gi .
i
The decomposition Λ associated to T is called a standard cyclic JSJ decomposition for G
relative to A.
We now want to generalize the notion of envelopes in the standard JSJ trees, which have
possibly trivial edge stabilizers (recall cylinders and envelopes were defined for G-trees with
infinite cyclic stabilizers).
Definition 3.13: If G, A and T are as in the definition above, a subtree E of T is an envelope
of a vertex v of T if v ∈ E and there exists and element g of G such that g · E is an envelope
of g · v in one of the trees TGmin
or TGmin
.
i
A
We can now state the main results:
Theorem 3.14: Let A ⊂ F be a set of parameters and b, c be tuples from F. Then b is
independent from c over A if and only if there exists a standard cyclic JSJ decomposition

8

min
Λ of F relative to A in which the minimal subgraphs Λmin
Ab , ΛAc of hA, bi, hA, ci respectively
intersect at most in a disjoint union of envelopes of rigid vertices.

The following is a more general, if slightly more cumbersome, equivalent condition for
independence:
Theorem 3.15: Let A ⊂ F be a set of parameters and b, c be tuples from F. Then b is
independent from c over A if and only if there exists a pointed cyclic JSJ tree T of F relative
to A in which
min and in
1. no surface type vertex or trivially stabilized edges lies both in a translate of TAb
min
a translate of TAc ,

2. if some cylinder C of T contains boundary vertices v1 , v2 such that for each i, there are
min , T min containing an edge of C adjacent to v , then v , v are
translates of each of TAb
i
1
2
Ac
in the same orbit under Stab(C) .
Remark 3.16: Suppose that the conditions of Theorem 3.14 hold, i.e. there exists a standard
min
JSJ decomposition Λ for F relative to A in which the minimal subgraphs Λmin
Ab and ΛAc
intersect at most in a disjoint union of envelopes of rigid vertices. Then the tree T associated
to Λ satisfies condition 1. of Theorem 3.15. To see that the second condition also holds, note
is a pointed tree of cylinders, any boundary vertex of a cylinder is adjacent to
that since TFmin
A
exactly one edge of the cylinder, and if two boundary vertices v1 , v2 of a cylinder C are in the
same orbit under Stab(C), the corresponding edges of C adjacent to v1 , v2 respectively are also
in the same orbit.
In Proposition 4.2, we will show that the converse holds, namely that if the conditions of
Theorem 3.15 are satisfied then the conditions of Theorem 3.14 are satisfied.

4

Proving independence

We start by showing that if there exists a pointed cyclic JSJ tree which satisfies the conditions
of Theorem 3.15, then there exists a standard JSJ tree which satisfies the conditions of Theorem
3.14, plus some additional criterions.

4.1

Normalizing the tree

The following proposition shows that in a JSJ tree for F relative to A, we can assume that
every trivially stabilized edge is adjacent to a translate of vA without changing the intersection
pattern of the minimal subtrees of Ab and Ac.
Proposition 4.1: Let b, c be tuples in a free group F, and let A ⊆ F. Denote by FA the
smallest free factor containing A. Suppose there exists a pointed JSJ tree (T̂ , v̂A ) for F relative
min and T̂ min contains
to A in which no intersection of translates of the minimal subtrees T̂Ab
Ac
trivially stabilized edges. Then there exists a pointed JSJ tree (T, vA ) for F relative to A such
that
1. TFmin
is isomorphic to T̂Fmin
,
A
A
min and T min is the image by
2. the intersection of any translates of the minimal subtrees TAb
Ac
min and T̂ min ;
this isomorphism of the intersection of the corresponding translates of T̂Ab
Ac

9

3. any trivially stabilized edge joins a translate of the distinguished vertex vA to a vertex
which lies in a translate of TFmin
.
A
Proof. We assume without loss of generality that T̂ has no valence 2 vertices adjacent to two
trivially stabilized edges. Note that a trivially stabilized edge of T̂ can belong to a translate
min , or to a translate of T̂ min , but not to both.
of T̂Ab
Ac
We build iteratively a new tree in JSJA (F): set T̂ (0) = T̂ . Suppose we have built the
tree T̂ (k), and suppose there is in T̂ (k) an orbit of trivially stabilized edges both of whose
endpoints are not in the orbit of vA . We build T̂ (k + 1) as follows:
1.

(i) if the orbit does not meet any of the minimal subtrees of Ab and Ac in T̂ (k), we pick
an edge e = (p, q) in this orbit minimizing the length m of a path p, p1 , . . . , pm = vA
to the distinguished vertex vA ;
min (k) of Ab (respectively the minimal
(ii) if the orbit meets the minimal subtree T̂Ab
min (k) of Ac) in T̂ (k), pick an edge e = (p, q) in this orbit which minimizes
subtree T̂Ac
min (k) (respectively in T̂ min (k)) to
the length m of a path p, p1 , . . . , pm = vA in T̂Ab
Ac
the distinguished vertex vA ;

2. subdivide e in m + 1 sub-edges by vertices p, p01 , p02 , . . . , p0m , p0m+1 = q;
3. fold the first m edges thus created along the path between p and vA , that is, identify
(p, p01 ) with (p, p1 ), (p01 , p02 ) with (p1 , p2 ), until (p0m−1 , p0m ) is identified with (pm−1 , pm );
4. subdivide and fold equivariantly all the edges in the orbit of e;
5. if two trivially stabilized edges in the tree thus created are adjacent to a common valence
2 vertex, merge them into one by erasing the vertex.
Note that T̂ (k + 1) is in the same deformation space as T̂ (k), that it has at most as many
orbits of trivially stabilized edges, and that it has strictly more orbits of trivially stabilized
edges one of whose endpoints is in the orbit of vA . Note moreover that the intersection of
min (k + 1) and T̂ min (k + 1) is isomorphic to
translates in T̂ (k + 1) of the minimal subtrees T̂Ab
Ac
the intersection of the corresponding translates of minimal subtrees in T̂ (k) : this is because
whenever we fold an edge of one of these two minimal subtrees, we fold it onto a path in the
same subtree so no new intersection is created.
Thus eventually we get a tree T in which all trivially stabilized edges have at least one
endpoint in the orbit of vA . Suppose the other endpoint v of one of these edges e does not
lie in a translate of TFmin
- we can collapse e equivariantly and the resulting tree still satisfies
A
1 − 2 and every trivially stabilized edge is adjacent to a vertex in the orbit of vA (recall that
min , T min ). If there remain edges of this type in the
e lies in a translate of at most one of TAb
Ac
new tree, repeat. Eventually we get a tree in which 1 − 3 hold.
Now we show that if there exists a JSJ tree T in which the conditions of Theorem 3.15
hold, there is a standard JSJ tree in which the conditions for Theorem 3.14 hold.
Proposition 4.2: Let b, c be tuples in a free group F, and let A ⊆ F. Denote by FA the
minimal free factor containing A. Suppose there exists a pointed cyclic JSJ tree (T̂ , v̂A ) for
F relative to A in which the conditions of Theorem 3.15 hold. Then there exists a pointed
standard JSJ tree (T, vA ) for F relative to A with corresponding graph of groups Λ such that
10

1. any trivially stabilized edge joins a translate of vA to a vertex which lies in a translate of
TFmin
;
A
min
2. the minimal subgraphs Λmin
Ab and ΛAc intersect at most in a disjoint union of envelopes
of rigid vertices.

For this, the following lemma will be useful
Lemma 4.3: Let FA be a free group which is freely indecomposable with respect to a subgroup
A. Suppose (T̃ , vA ) is any pointed JSJ tree for FA relative to A, and (T, vA ) is the pointed JSJ
tree of cylinders for FA relative to A.
To each cylinder C of T , we can associate a cylinder C̃ of T̃ such that the map C 7→ C̃
is one-to-one and equivariant. Moreover, to each boundary vertex v of C we can associate
a boundary vertex ṽ of C̃ of the same type (rigid or surface) such that the map v 7→ ṽ is
equivariant, and if g ∈ FA is such that [vA , g · vA ] contains
• the vertex v, then [ṽA , g · ṽA ] contains ṽ;
• the edge e of C adjacent to v, then [ṽA , g · ṽA ] contains ṽ and some edge of C̃ adjacent
to ṽ.
Proof. Let T 0 , p : T 0 → T̃ and q : T 0 → T be as in Remark 3.9.
Let C be a cylinder in T : if e is an edge of C, Stab(C) is the centralizer of Stab(e). Now
there exists a unique edge e0 ∈ T 0 such that q(e0 ) = e, and Stab(e0 ) = Stab(e). Let C 0 be the
cylinder of e0 : then Stab(C 0 ) is the centralizer of Stab(e0 ) so Stab(C 0 ) = Stab(C). Note that
q(C 0 ) = C. We set C̃ = p(C 0 ) (the image of a cylinder by a collapse map is a cylinder). In
particular we have Stab(C) = Stab(C̃).
Now let v be a boundary vertex of C - in other words, it is a non Z-type vertex of C.
Note that there is a unique preimage v 0 of v by q, since q collapses only edges both of whose
endpoints are Z-type vertices. Define ṽ = p(v 0 ), it is unique by construction. Note that
Stab(v) = Stab(v 0 ) = Stab(ṽ), and that adjacent edge groups of ṽ and adjacent edge groups
of v are commensurable. In particular this implies that ṽ has the same type as v (rigid if there
is no non trivial splitting relative to adjacent edge groups, flexible(surface) otherwise).
Let us prove injectivity: suppose (C̃1 , ṽ1 ) = (C̃2 , ṽ2 ). Then we must have Stab(C1 ) =
Stab(C2 ) so C1 = C2 . We have thus that v10 and v20 belong to the same cylinder. Now
p(v10 ) = p(v20 ), but p does not identify distinct non Z-vertices of a same cylinder hence v10 = v20 .
Thus v1 = q(v10 ) = q(v20 ) = v2 .
^
Equivariance: note that Stab(C) = Stab(C̃) and Stab(v) = Stab(ṽ). Thus Stab((g
· C)) =
Stab(g · C) = gStab(C)g −1 = Stab(g · C̃). Since cylinders are uniquely defined by their
^
stabilizers, we must have (g
· C) = g · C̃. Similarly, non Z-type vertices are uniquely defined
by their stabilizers, so we get that gg
· v = g · ṽ.
Now to see the last property: suppose the boundary vertex v of C lies on [vA , g · vA ]. Note
0
that v, vA are non Z-type vertex, so they have unique preimages by q, denote them by v 0 , vA
0
0
respectively. Now [ṽA , g · ṽA ] = p([vA , g · vA ]) (this is a general property of collapse maps), and
0 , g · v 0 ]). Therefore the unique preimage v 0 of v by q must lie on [v 0 , g · v 0 ].
[vA , g · vA ] = q([vA
A
A
A
But then ṽ = p(v 0 ) lies on [ṽA , g · ṽA ] as requested.
Suppose that the edge e of C adjacent to v lies on [vA , g · vA ]. The unique preimage
0
0 , g · v 0 ], and w 0 is a Z-type vertex so it is distinct from
e = (v 0 , w0 ) of e by q must lie on [vA
A
0
0
0 , g · v 0 ] contains an edge e00 which is adjacent to w 0
both vA and g · vA . Thus the path [vA
A
11

but distinct from e0 - such an edge is not collapsed by p, and its image p(e00 ) lies in C̃ and in
0 , g · v 0 ]) = [ṽ , g · ṽ ]. This finishes the proof of the claim.
p([vA
A
A
A
Proof. (of Proposition 4.2) By applying Proposition 4.1 we get a tree (T̃ , ṽA ) which satisfies
the first condition.
By Remark 3.9, we can replace translates of T̃Fmin
by copies of the pointed JSJ tree of
A
cylinders for FA relative to A by the following construction. First, we build a refinement T 0
of T̃ as follows: for each vertex ṽ of T̃Fmin
which belongs to at least two cylinders of T̃Fmin
or
A
A
0
0
is equal to vA , we replace ṽ by a star graph with central vertex v and an edge (v , vC̃ ) for
each cylinder C̃ of T̃Fmin
containing ṽ. If an edge e of T̃Fmin
was attached to ṽ, se attach it
A
A
to vC̃ , where C̃ is the cylinder containing e. If an edge e of T̃ − T̃Fmin
was attached to ṽ, we
A
0
attach it to v . We extend this refinement equivariantly to the orbits of T̃Fmin
. Call the p the
A
0
0
collapse map T → T̃ . We then build a collapse map q : T → T by collapsing all the edges of
min
translates (T 0 )min
FA which do not come from the refinement of T̃FA .
The tree T clearly is a standard JSJ decomposition for F relative to A. It is not hard to
see that a trivially stabilized edge attached to vA gives a trivially stabilized edge attached to
vA , so the second condition also holds.
Let us now see that the tree T satisfies the last condition. Suppose that the minimal
min
subgraphs Λmin
Ab and ΛAc intersect in more than a disjoint union of envelopes of rigid vertices
- in other words, the intersection contains either (i) a trivially stabilized edge, or (ii) a surface
type vertex, or (iii) two distinct edges which belong to a same cylinder of Λ.
min
Recall that the minimal subgraphs Λmin
Ab and ΛAc are the images by the quotient map
min and T min . These trees are unions of translates of paths
T → Λ of the minimal subtrees TAb
Ac
of the form [vA , γ · · · vA ] and [vA , β · · · vA ] by elements of hA, bi and hA, ci respectively where
β ∈ hA, bi and γ ∈ hA, ci.
Case (i) cannot occur since translates of the minimal subtrees of hA, bi and hA, ci in T̃
never intersect in a trivially stabilized edge.
In case (ii), there exist β ∈ hA, bi and γ ∈ hA, bi and g ∈ F such that the intersection
[vA , β · vA ] ∩ g[vA , γ · vA ] contains a surface type vertex v. By Lemma 4.3, the intersection
[ṽA , β · ṽA ] ∩ g[ṽA , γ · ṽA ] contains a vertex ṽ which is also of surface type - a contradiction.
In case (iii), denote by e1 , e2 edges of a common cylinder C of T whose images in Λ are
min
distinct, and lie in the intersection Λmin
Ab ∩ΛAc . Then there exist β1 , β2 ∈ hA, bi; γ1 , γ2 ∈ hA, ci
and g1 , g2 , h1 , h2 ∈ F such that ei lies in gi · [vA , βi · vA ] ∩ hi [vA , γi · vA ] for i = 1, 2. Denote by
v1 , v2 the endpoints of e1 , e2 respectively.
We know by Lemma 4.3 that there exists a cylinder C̃ and boundary vertices ṽ1 , ṽ2 of C̃
such that each of gi · [ṽA , β · ṽA ] and hi · [ṽA , γ · ṽA ] contains ṽi and some edge of C̃ adjacent
to ṽi . Note that since e1 , e2 were not in the same orbit, the vertices ṽ1 and ṽ2 are not in the
same orbit under Stab(C̃). This is in contradiction with the hypotheses of Theorem 3.15.
From Proposition 4.2 and Remark 3.16 we deduce
Corollary 4.4: Let b, c be tuples in a free group F, and let A ⊆ F. Denote by FA the minimal
free factor containing A. There exists a pointed cyclic JSJ tree (T̂ , v̂A ) for F relative to A in
which the conditions of Theorem 3.15 hold if and only if there exists a pointed standard JSJ
min
decomposition Λ for F relative to A in which the minimal subgraphs Λmin
Ab and ΛAc intersect
at most in a disjoint union of envelopes of rigid vertices.

12

In other words, the conditions of Theorem 3.14 are satisfied if and only if the conditions
of Theorem 3.15 are satisfied. Therefore, there remains only to prove Theorem 3.14.

4.2

A special case

We fix a nonabelian finite rank free group F. Let A ⊂ F be a set of parameters and b, c be
tuples coming from F. In this section we will prove one direction of Theorem 3.14 under the
assumption that at least one of the tuples, say b, lives in the smallest free factor FA of F
containing A.
In this case, we may assume that F is freely indecomposable relative to Ac, thus by Theorem
5.3 of [PS16] the orbit X := Aut(F/Ac).b is definable over Ac. But X ⊂ FA , thus by Fact 2.7
the set X is definable over FA .
We first show:
Proposition 4.5: Let b, c be tuples in a free group F, let A ⊆ F, and denote by FA the minimal
free factor containing A. Assume that F is freely indecomposable with respect to Ac, and that
b ∈ FA .
Suppose that there exists a standard pointed cyclic JSJ decomposition Λ for F relative to
min
A in which the minimal subgraphs Λmin
Ab and ΛAc intersect at most in a disjoint union of
envelopes of rigid vertices.
Then the orbit of b under AutAc (F) contains the orbit of b under ModA (FA ).
Proof. We can assume that T satisfies the conclusions of Proposition 4.2. Since T is standard,
is the cyclic JSJ tree of cylinders for FA relative to A.
the minimal subtree TFmin
A
By Lemmata 4.21 and 4.22 of [PS16], we can thus write any θ ∈ ModA (FA ) as
θ = Conj (z) ◦ ρ1 ◦ . . . ◦ ρr
where each ρi is a Dehn twist or a surface vertex automorphism supported on an edge or a
. We want to show that there exists α ∈ AutAc (F)
surface vertex of the pointed JSJ tree TFmin
A
such that θ(b) = α(b).
Lemma 4.21 tells us that up to changing z we can permute the list of support of the ρj min and ρ
in particular we may assume that ρ1 , . . . , ρk all have support in TAb
k+1 , . . . , ρr all have
min
support outside of TAb .
S
min ∩
The hypothesis on the minimal subgraphs for Ab and Ac ensures that g∈F g · TAb
S
min
g∈F g · TAc does not contain any surface type vertex or trivially stabilized edges, and does
not contain two edges of a common cylinder which lie in different orbits. Thus if for some i,
ρi is a Dehn twist about an edge which lies in this intersection, we can apply Lemma 4.9 of
[PS16] to replace it by a product of Dehn twist about edges of the same cylinder which are
representatives of the other orbits of edges, and therefore must all lie outside the intersection.
As a result, we may assume that none of the ρi ’s have support which lies both in a translate
min and a translate of T min .
of TAb
Ac
But now by Lemma 4.26 in [PS16], the image of b by θ is, up to conjugation, the same as
the image of b by ρ1 ◦. . . ◦ρk since ρk+1 ◦. . .◦ρr is the composition of an element of ModAb (FA )
min , and
with a conjugation. Thus we may in fact assume that all the ρj have support in TAb
min
thus outside of any translate of TAc .
Now we want to extend θ to an automorphism α : F → F fixing Ac.
First, we choose an adequate presentation of F: denote by p : T → T 0 the map defined by
min , and write Λ0 for the graph
collapsing all the edges of TFmin
which are not in a translate of TAb
A
13

of groups associated to T 0 . Pick a maximal subtree of Λ0 which does not include any trivially
stabilized edges, lift it to a subtree T 0 of T 0 , and extend this to a Bass-Serre presentation
(T 0 , T 1 , {te }e∈E(T 1 −T 0 ) ) for Λ0 . Note that F = FA ∗ h{te }e∈Etriv+ | i where Etriv+ consists of
all the trivially stabilized edges of T 1 of the form (vA , w) (to fix an orientation). Let v 1 , . . . , v s
min or whose inverse image by p is
be the vertices of T 0 which come from rigid vertices of TAb
not reduced to a point, and let H 1 , . . . , H s be the stabilizers of v 1 , . . . , v s .
Then θ restricts to a conjugation by some element γi on each H i and to the identity
on Stab(vA ) in T 0 . Indeed, the elementary automorphisms ρj are supported on edges or on
min . By Lemma 4.24 of [PS16], the ρ are also elementary
surface type vertices which lie in TAb
j
0
automorphisms associated to T , and moreover they are not supported on translates of any of
the vertices v 1 , . . . , v s .
Define now Ĥ i to be the subgroup generated by H i and all the Z-vertex groups adjacent
to H i by a non trivially stabilized edge (so Ĥ i is generated by H i together with some roots of
elements of H i ). It is easy to see that θ also restricts to a conjugation on Ĥ i .
min ), we see that it intersects
Now since the minimal subtree of Ac in T 0 is contained in p(TAc
the union of translates of (T 0 )min
FA at most in an envelope of a rigid vertex. As a consequence,
each element in the tuple c can be written as a product of the form
−1
−1
g1 (te1 h1 t−1
f1 )g2 (te2 h2 tf2 ) . . . gm (tem hm tfm )gm+1 (∗)

where for each j,
1. gj ∈ Stab(vA ) in T 0 ;
2. there exists an index lj such that ej , fj are trivially stabilized edges, each joining vA to
a vertex in the orbit of v lj ;
3. hj ∈ Ĥ lj .
We now define α ∈ AutA (F) by setting α |FA = θ, and for each i and each edge e ∈ Etriv+
joining vA to a vertex in the orbit corresponding to v i , we set α(te ) = te γi−1 (recall γi is the
element of FA such that θ |H i = Conj (γi )). As we saw, F is the free product of FA together with
the free group generated by the elements {te }e∈Etriv+ so this indeed defines an automorphism
of F. But now it is easy to check using (∗) that α(c) = c, hence α ∈ AutAc (F).
We can now prove:
Proposition 4.6: Let b, c be tuples in a free group F, let A ⊆ F, and denote by FA the minimal
free factor containing A. Assume that F is freely indecomposable with respect to Ac, and that
b ∈ FA .
Suppose that there exists a standard pointed cyclic JSJ decomposition Λ for F relative to
min
A in which the minimal subgraphs Λmin
Ab and ΛAc intersect in a disjoint union of envelopes of
rigid vertices.
Then b is independent from c over A.
Proof. We assume, for the sake of contradiction, that tp(b/Ac) forks over A.
By Theorem 5.3 of [PS16], since F is freely indecomposable with respect to Ac, the orbit
X = AutAc (F) · b of b under automorphisms of F fixing Ac is definable over Ac. Since it is
contained in any set definable over Ac which contains b, we must have that X forks over A.
By Proposition 4.5, the set X contains ModA (FA ) · b. Now ModA (FA ) has finite index
in AutA (FA ) (see [RS94, Theorem 4.4]) so ModA (FA ) · b is a non trivial almost A-invariant
subset. By Lemma 2.6 it cannot fork over A, a contradiction.
14

4.3

Proof of independence in the general case

We want to prove the first direction of Theorem 3.14, namely
Theorem 4.7: Let b, c be tuples in a free group F, and let A ⊆ F. Denote by FA the minimal
free factor containing A. Suppose there exists a standard pointed JSJ decomposition Λ for F
min
relative to A in which the minimal subgraphs Λmin
Ab and ΛAc intersect at most in an envelope
| A c.
of a rigid vertex. Then b ^
Note that by Proposition 4.1, we can assume that T is a standard pointed cyclic JSJ tree
in which any trivially stabilized edge joins a translate of vA to a translate of TFmin
.
A
We first prove the result for particularly simple elements b, c satisfying the following
Definition 4.8: Let T be standard pointed cyclic JSJ tree for F with respect to A in which any
trivially stabilized edge joins a translate of vA to a translate of TFmin
. We say that an element
A
β of F is a sandwich term if the path [vA , β · vA ] does not contain any translates of vA other
than its endpoint, and can be subdivided into three subpaths [vA , u] ∪ [u, v] ∪ [v, g · vA ] where
[vA , u] and [v, g · vA ] are either empty or consist of a single trivially stabilized edge, and [u, v]
lies entirely in a translate of TFmin
.
A
The image of the path [u, v] in ΛFA is called the imprint of the sandwich term β in ΛFA
and denoted by imp(β).
The trivially stabilized edges crossed by [vA , β · vA ] (by extension, their images in Λ) are
called the trivially stabilized edges of the sandwich term β.
For sandwich terms, Theorem 4.7 holds.
min
Proposition 4.9: If β, γ are sandwich terms such that the minimal subgraphs Λmin
Aβ and ΛAγ
intersect at most in an envelope of a rigid vertex, then β and γ are independent over A.

We will in fact prove a more general version of this Proposition, for some specific tuples of
sandwich terms.
Proposition 4.10: Let T be a JSJ tree for F with respect to A which satisfy the conclusions of
Proposition 4.2. Suppose β̄ = (β 1 , . . . , β q ) and γ̄ = (γ 1 , . . . , γ r ) are tuples of sandwich terms.
Let ∆ be a connected subgraph of groups of ΛFA which contains the vertex vA . Assume that
• the trivially stabilized edges associated to elements β j , γ k of β̄, γ̄ respectively are distinct;
• the imprint of any element β j of β̄ lies in ∆;
• the intersection of ∆ with ∪rk=1 imp(γk ) is a disjoint union of envelopes of rigid vertices.
Then the tuples β̄ and γ̄ are independent over A.
Proof. Pick a maximal subtree of ΛFA which extends a maximal subtree of ∆. Lift it to a subtree T 0 of T which contains vA , and extend this to a Bass-Serre presentation (T 0 , T 1 , {te }e∈E(T 1 −T 0 ) )
for Λ which contains a (connected) lift of ∆.
Let T∆ be the connected component of the inverse image of ∆ in T containing vA , and let
H0 be the stabilizer of T∆ .
Now each element of the tuple β̄ = (β 1 , . . . , β q ) can be written as β j = gj tej β0j t−1
g 0 where
e0 j
j

• ej , e0j are trivially stabilized edges of T 1 − T 0 joining vA to a vertex in a translate of T∆ ,
• β0j ∈ H0 ;
15

• gj , gj0 ∈ Stab(vA ).
min . In particular
Moreover, the edges {ej , e0j | j = 1, . . . , q} do not lie in any translate of TAγ̄
0
00
this means F admits a free product decomposition F = F ∗ F where FA ⊆ F0 , γ̄ ∈ F0 and
| ∅ FA γ̄ by Theorem 1 of [PS16].
tej , te0j ∈ F00 for all j. In particular, we get te1 te01 . . . teq te0q ^
q
1
0
0
Let β̄0 = (β0 , . . . , β0 , g1 , g1 , . . . , gq , gq ). The minimal subgraph Λmin
Aβ0 lies in ∆, hence its
min
intersection with ΛAγ̄ is a disjoint union of envelopes of rigid vertice.
| A γ̄. On the other hand,
Since β̄0 ∈ FA we can apply Proposition 4.6 to get that β̄0 ^
| Aβ̄ γ̄. Applying transitivity on
| ∅ FA γ̄ so te1 te0 . . . teq te0q ^
we have that te1 te01 . . . teq te0q ^
1
0
| A γ̄, which implies
A ⊆ Aβ̄0 ⊆ Aβ̄0 te1 te01 . . . teq te0q and γ̄, we get that Aβ̄0 te1 te01 . . . teq te0q ^
| A γ̄ as wanted.
β̄ ^

Remark 4.11: Proposition 4.9 follows from Proposition 4.10. Indeed, denote ∆β (respectively
∆γ ) the imprint of the (single) sandwich term β (respectively γ), and let P be a (possibly trivial)
path from vA to ∆β ∪ ∆γ . Without loss of generality the endpoint of P lies in ∆β - if we let
∆ = P ∪ ∆β , the hypotheses of Proposition 4.10 are satisfied and as a conclusion we get that
| A γ.
β^
Now we will prove that if b, c satisfy the hypotheses of Theorem 4.7, their elements can be
written as a product of sandwich terms which have "disjoint" imprints.
Proposition 4.12: Let F be a free group, let A ⊆ F and let b, c be tuples in F.
Suppose there exists a standard cyclic pointed JSJ decomposition Λ for F relative to A in
which trivially stabilized edges join vA to a vertex of Λmin
FA , and in which the intersection of the
min consists of a disjoint union of envelopes of rigid vertices.
and
Λ
minimal subgraphs Λmin
Ac
Ab
Then there exists sets B and C of sandwich terms such that
1. the intersection
(∪β∈B imp(β)) ∩ (∪γ∈C imp(γ))
is a disjoint union of envelopes of rigid vertices;
2. each element bi of b (respectively cj of c) can be witten as a product of elements of B
(respectively of C);
3. for any β ∈ B and γ ∈ C, the trivially stabilized edges associated to β are distinct from
the trivially stabilized edges associated to γ.
min . We
Proof. Let bj be an element of the tuple b. Consider the path [vA , bj · vA ] - it lies in TAb
subdivide it into finitely many subpaths with endpoints the translates of vA that appear in
[vA , bj · vA ]. Each of these subpaths is thus of the form [g · vA , h · vA ] and contains at most two
trivially stabilized edges which must appear as the first or the last edge of the path (because
any trivially stabilized edge in T is adjacent to a translate of vA ). This means precisely that
min , thus imp(β)
β = g −1 h is a sandwich term, and moreover [vA , β · vA ] lies in a translate of TAb
min
lies in ΛAb . Similarly, each term in the tuple c can be written as a product of sandwich terms
γ such that imp(γ) lies in a translate of Λmin
Ac . This proves the claim.

To prove Theorem 4.7, the idea is to divide up the sets of sandwich terms B and C obtained
above so that they are alternatingly contained in a growing chain of connected subgraphs of
Λ, and then to use Proposition 4.10 inductively to prove the result. The next proposition
summarizes the result obtained from such an inductive application of 4.10.
16

Proposition 4.13: Suppose ∆0 = {vA } ⊆ ∆1 ⊆ . . . ⊆ ∆s = ΛFA is a chain of connected
subgraphs of groups of ΛFA .
Fb(s−1)/2c
Let B, C be sets of sandwich terms which can be partitioned as B = i=0
Bi and
Fbs/2c
C = i=0 Ci in such a way that
• no trivially stabilized edge is associated to two elements which belong to distinct sets from
the list {Bi , Cj | 0 ≤ i ≤ b(s − 1)/2c, 0 ≤ j ≤ bs/2c};
S
• for each i, β∈Bi imp(β) lies in ∆2i+1 , and its intersection with ∆2i is a disjoint union
of envelopes of rigid vertices;
S
• for each i, γ∈Ci imp(γ) lies in ∆2i , and its intersection with ∆2i−1 is a disjoint union
of envelopes of rigid vertices.
| A C.
Then B ^
Proof. We prove this by induction on the length of the chain of subgraphs of groups. If s = 1,
we have that the imprint of any term in C is contained in {vA }, hence applying Proposition
4.10 to ∆ = {vA } gives the result.
Suppose it holds for chains of length at most s, and let us prove it for a chain ∆0 = {vA } ⊆
∆1 ⊆ . . . ⊆ ∆s ⊆ ∆s+1 = Λ.
F
F
We prove this for s = 2k, the odd case is very similar. Thus B = ki=0 Bi and C = ki=0 Ci .
We have
| AB ...B
1. B0 . . . Bk−1 Bk ^
C0 . . . Ck . Indeed, the subgraph of groups ∆s satisfies that
0
k−1
the union of the imprints of terms in B0 . . . Bk−1 C0 . . . Ck is in ∆s , and the union of imprints of terms of Bk intersects ∆s in a disjoint union of envelopes of rigid vertices, so the
|A
hypotheses of Proposition 4.10 are satisfied: we get that B0 . . . Bk−1 C0 . . . Ck−1 Ck ^
| AB ...B
Bk so by transitivity C0 . . . Ck ^
B
.
k
0
k−1
| A C0 . . . Ck . This follows from applying the induction hypothesis to the
2. B0 . . . Bk−1 ^
F
chain ∆0 ⊆ ∆1 ⊆ . . . ⊆ ∆s−1 ⊆ ∆s+1 = ΛFA (we skip ∆s ) and to the sets k−1
i=0 Bi and
| A C0 . . . Ck .
C, we get that B = B0 . . . Bk−1 ^
| A C0 . . . Ck .
From 1. and 2. we get by transitivity that B0 . . . Bk ^
We can finally prove Theorem 4.7.
Proof. We may assume that Λ is a standard pointed cyclic JSJ decomposition, in which any
trivially stabilized edge joins a vA to a vertex in Λmin
FA . Let B and C be the sets of sandwich
terms given by Proposition 4.12. Let ΛB and ΛC be the (possibly disconnected) subgraph of
groups obtained by taking the union of the imprints in ΛFA of all the sandwich terms in B and
B
C respectively. Suppose ΛB (respectively ΛC ) is the union of connected subgraphs ΛB
1 , . . . , Λp
C
(respectively ΛC
1 , . . . , Λq ). Note that for any sandwich term β of B whose imprint lies in
B
Λi , the trivially stabilized edges associated to β join vA to vertices in ΛB
i . In particular, two
terms of B ∪ C whose imprints lie in different connected components do not have a common
associated trivially stabilized edge.
We build a sequence of connected subgraphs ∆0 = {vA } ⊆ ∆1 ⊆ . . . ⊆ ∆r = Λ as follows.
C
Suppose we have built ∆i : if ∆i contains all the subgraphs ΛB
j and Λj , we set ∆i+1 = Λ
and we are done.
17

If not, consider all the components ΛB
j which are not contained in ∆i and such that there
is a path in ΛFA between ∆i and ΛB
which
does not intersect any ΛC
j
k in more than a disjoint
union of envelopes of rigid vertices. If such components exist, we build ∆i+1 by adding them
to ∆i together with the appropriate paths joining them to ∆i , and we set Bbi/2c to be the set
of all terms of B whose imprint lies in those components we have added. If not, we consider
components ΛC
j which are not contained in ∆i and for which there are paths in ΛFA between
C
∆i and Λj which does not intersect any ΛB
k in more than a disjoint union of envelopes rigid
vertices (there must be some), and we proceed similarly.
By construction the chain ∆0 = {vA } ⊆ ∆1 ⊆ . . . ⊆ ∆r = Λ and the partitions given for
the sets B and C satisfy the hypotheses of Lemma 4.13 (up to switching between B and C),
| A C.
hence B ^

5

Proving forking

In this subsection we prove the left to right direction of Theorem 3.14, namely:
Proposition 5.1: Let A ⊂ F be a set of parameters and b, c be tuples from F. Suppose that
in any standard pointed cyclic JSJ decomposition Λ for F relative to A, the intersection of
min
the minimal subgraphs Λmin
Ab and ΛAc is not a (possibly empty) disjoint union of envelopes of
rigid vertices.
Then b forks with c over A.
We will prove the following
Proposition 5.2: Let F be a free group, and A ⊆ F a set of parameters. Let b be a tuple in
F, such that F is freely indecomposable with respect to Ab.
There exists a standard pointed cyclic JSJ decomposition Λ for F relative to A with corresponding tree T such that
• for any pair of adjacent non trivially stabilized edge e = (z, x) and e0 = (z, y) lying in the
minimal subgraph Λmin
Ab for which x, y are neither Z-type nor surface type vertices, and
for any adjacent lifts ê = (x̂, ẑ), ê0 = (ẑ, ŷ) of e, e0 in T , if sx , sy are generating tuples for
the stabilizers of x̂, ŷ, then the conjugacy class of (sx , sy ) is in acleq (Ab);
• for any surface type vertex v of Λmin
Ab , and for any lift v̂ of v in T , there is an element g
in the stabilizer of v̂ which corresponds to a non boundary parallel simple closed curve,
and such that the conjugacy class of g is in acleq (Ab).
Proof. Consider the pointed cyclic JSJ decomposition Λ0 for F relative to Ab corresponding to
the pointed cyclic tree of cylinders T 0 . Denote by v̂Ab the vertex stabilized by Ab in T 0 . Note
that by [OHV11], the stabilizer of v̂Ab is exactly the algebraic closure acl(Ab) of Ab. Let H be
the collection of subgroups of acl(Ab) which are either stabilizers of edges adjacent to v̂Ab , or
conjugates of A.
Consider now the free product decomposition of acl(Ab) relative to H, it is of the form
acl(Ab) = U1 ∗ . . . ∗ Us ∗ F
Let T0 be a JSJ tree for acl(Ab) relative to H in which the minimal subtree for each Ui
is isomorphic to the pointed cyclic JSJ tree of cylinders of Ui relative to the subgroups in H
which are contained in Ui .
18

By Lemma in [GL17], a JSJ tree T for F relative to A can be obtained from T 0 by refining
equivariantly the vertex v̂Ab by T0 and then possibly collapsing pairs of edges joining two
surface type vertices. Thus any rigid vertex stabilizer of the image T 0 of T0 under the collapse
map lies in acl(Ab).
min in T is contained in a translate of the image T of T under the
Any translate of TAb
0
0
collapse map. Note also that distinct translates of T 0 intersect at most in a surface type
vertex by construction.
Suppose e = (z, x) and e0 = (z, y) are two non trivially stabilized edge lying in the minimal
0
subgraph Λmin
Ab for which x, y are non Z-type vertices. Then any adjacent lifts ê = (x̂, ẑ), ê =
0
min
(ẑ, ŷ) of e, e in T are contained in the union of the translates of TAb . Up to conjugating the
min
pair (sx , sy ) of generating tuples for the stabilizers of x̂ and ŷ, we may assume ê lies in TAb
itself, so in particular it lies in T 0 . Now ê and ê0 intersect in a Z-type vertex so ê0 also lies
in T 0 . Thus we see that (sx , sy ) ∈ acl(Ab). So in general, we get that the conjugacy class of
(sx , sy ) is in acleq (Ab).
Suppose v̂ is the lift of a surface type vertex lying in a translate of Λmin
Ab . Up to conjugation
we may assume it lies in the image T 0 of T0 by the collapse map. Let v̂ 0 be a vertex in T0
whose image by the collapse map is v̂. Its stabilizer is a subsurface group of the vertex
group corresponding to v̂, and it is a vertex group of the tree T0 hence it lies in acl(Ab). It
must contain an element g corresponding to a non parallel simple closed curve on the surface
associated to v̂. This proves the claim.
The following proposition will help us conclude
Proposition 5.3: Let F be a free group, and A ⊆ F a set of parameters. Let T be a pointed
cyclic JSJ tree for F relative to A. If e = (z, x) and e0 = (z, y) are two non trivially stabilized
edges of T , the conjugacy class of (sx , sy ) is not in acleq (A).
Proof. Up to conjugating (sx , sy ), we can assume that it lies in FA . It is thus enough to show
that the orbit of (sx , sy ) under AutA (FA ) contains infinitely many distinct conjugacy classes.
Without loss of generality the stabilizer of x is not cylic. Let τe be a Dehn twist about e
by some element  of Stab(e). For any m, the equation
γ(sx , sy )γ −1 = (sx , m sy −m )
implies that γ = 1 since hsx i is not abelian. Thus the pairs τem (sx , sy ) lie in distinct conjugacy
classes.
We can now prove Proposition 5.1.
Proof. The proof is split into cases depending on whether there exists a free product decomposition of F separating b and c. Denote by FA the smallest free factor of F that contains A.
Case 1: Suppose that there exists a decomposition F = Fb ∗ FA ∗ Fc for which b ∈ Fb ∗ FA and
c ∈ FA ∗ Fc .
In this case, we build a JSJ tree T for F relative to A as follows: first, apply Proposition
5.2 to the tuple Ab and the group Fb ∗ FA : this gives a JSJ tree Tb for Fb ∗ FA relative to A,
and denote by ΛAb the corresponding graph of groups. It is nothing more than the pointed

19

cyclic JSJ decomposition ΛFA associated to the tree of cylinders, to which have been added
some trivially stabilized edges.
Again apply Proposition 5.2, this time to the tuple Ac and the group FA ∗ Fc : this gives a
JSJ tree Tc for FA ∗ Fc relative to A, and denote by ΛAc the corresponding graph of groups.
Here again, this is nothing more than the pointed JSJ decomposition ΛFA with some added
trivially stabilized edges.
We can thus get a JSJ decomposition Λ for F relative to A by adding to ΛFA both sets of
trivially stabilized edges. Both ΛAb and ΛAc are subgraph of groups of Λ. Denote by T the
associated tree.
min
Now since the intersection of the minimal subgraphs Λmin
Ab and ΛAc intersect in more than
a disjoint union of envelopes of rigid vertices, we can assume that one of the following holds:
• there exists adjacent non trivially stabilized edges ê = (ẑ, x̂) and ê0 = (ẑ, ŷ) of T with
x̂, ŷ neither Z type nor surface type vertices, such that if sx , sy are generating tuples
for the stabilizers of x̂, ŷ then the conjugacy class of (sx , sy ) is both in acleq (Ab) and
acleq (Ac);
• there exists a surface type vertex of T and elements g, g 0 in the surface vertex group
corresponding to non boundary parallel simple closed curves such that the conjugacy
classes of g, g 0 respectively are in acleq (Ab), acleq (Ac) respectively.
In the first case, we get that acleq (Ab) ∩ acleq (Ac) contains an element which is not in
| A g 0 by the proof of Lemma 8.7 of
| A c. In the second case, we have that g 6^
acleq (A), so b 6^
| A c.
[PS16], hence we must have b 6^
Case 2: Suppose that we are not in Case 1, that is, there is no JSJ decomposition in which Λmin
Ab
and Λmin
have
no
trivially
stabilized
edge
in
common.
Suppose
moreover
that
there
exists
a
Ac
min ∩ Λmin is
standard pointed cyclic JSJ decomposition Λ in which the intersection Λmin
∩
Λ
Ac
FA
Ab
a (possibly empty) disjoint union of envelopes of rigid vertices.
min
In other words, Λmin
Ab and ΛAc intersect only in trivially stabilized edges and envelopes of
rigid vertices.
Assume for a contradiction that b is independent from c over A. We can write F as
FA ∗ F1 with basis ha1 , . . . , an i ∗ he1 , . . . , em i. Consider the tuple c as a tuple of words
c(a1 , . . . , an , e1 , . . . , em ) in this basis. We now double the free group F over FA and we obtain
F̂ := F2 ∗ FA ∗ F1 where F2 is a copy of F1 with basis he01 , . . . , e0m i. Now consider the tuple c0
defined by c0 = c(a1 , . . . , an , e01 , . . . , e0m ).
There is a natural standard pointed cyclic JSJ decomposition Λ̂ for F̂ relative to A: it is
the "double" of Λ obtained by adding to Λ an extra copy of every trivially stabilized edge.
min
min
Because Λmin
Ab ∩ ΛAc ∩ ΛFA is a disjoint union of envelopes of rigid vertices, we see that
min
the intersection of Λ̂min
Ab and Λ̂Ac0 is a disjoint union of envelopes of rigid vertices.
By the other direction, given by Theorem 4.7, we see that b is independent from c0 over A.
By Facts 2.2 and 2.3 we get that b is independent from c0 over acl(A). By our contradictory
assumption, similarly b is independent from c over acl(A). But by Fact 2.5 every type over an
algebraically closed set is stationary and since c and c0 have the same type over acl(A), they do
have the same type over acl(A)b. Therefore, by homogeneity, they are in the same orbit under
Aut(F̂/Ab). Since Aut(F̂/Ab) preserves FA , the automorphism sending c0 to c and fixing Ab

20

Figure 3: A JSJ decomposition and its double.
sends the decomposition F̂ = F2 ∗ FA ∗ F1 to a decomposition F̂ = F̃2 ∗ FA ∗ F̃1 with b ∈ FA ∗ F̃1
and c ∈ F̃2 ∗ FA . By Kurosh’s Theorem, this induces on F a decomposition F = Fb ∗ FA ∗ Fc
for which b ∈ Fb ∗ FA and c ∈ FA ∗ Fc . But then, we are in Case 1, a contradiction.
Case 3: We place ourselves in the general case. We will find a tuple b0 satisfying:
(i) b0 ∈ acl(Ab);
(ii) there exists a standard pointed cyclic JSJ decomposition Λ for F relative to A in which
min
min
the intersection Λmin
Ab ∩ ΛAc ∩ ΛFA consists only of trivially stabilized edges;
(iii) the minimal free factor containing Ab is the same as the minimal factor containing Ab0 .
Then either we can find a decomposition F = Fb0 ∗ FA ∗ Fc with Ab0 ∈ Fb0 ∗ FA and Ac
in FA ∗ Fc , but Ab is then contained in Fb0 ∗ FA as well, which means we are in Case 1 (for
the original tuple b) - thus b forks with c over A. Or, there is no such decomposition, that is,
Case 1 does not apply to b0 . But then, Case 2 applies by (ii), so b0 and c fork over A. Since
b0 ∈ acl(Ab), we are done.
We now explain how to find such a tuple b0 .
Consider the smallest free factor FAb of F containing Ab. Let Λ0 be a pointed cyclic JSJ
decomposition for F relative to Ab, denote by T 0 its associated tree.
Let H be the collection of subgroups of acl(Ab) consisting of conjugates of A together with
the stabilizers of edges adjacent to the base vertex in T 0 . We want to build a JSJ decomposition
Λ for F relative to A by refining the vertex corresponding to acl(Ab) in Λ0 by a pointed cyclic
JSJ decomposition ∆ of acl(Ab) relative to A and to the incident edge groups.
We choose ∆ as follows: consider the Grushko decomposition U0 ∗ . . . ∗ Ur ∗ Hb of acl(Ab)
relative to H, where A ≤ U0 , the Ui ’s are freely indecomposable, and non-cyclic if i > 0, and
Hb is a free group. For each i, let ∆i be the pointed cyclic JSJ decomposition of Ui relative to
the subgroups in H which lie in Ui . Choose a non surface type vertex vi in each ∆i (it always
contains such a vertex - a Z-vertex adjacent to a surface vertex is enough), with v0 = vA . We
build ∆ from the disjoint union of the ∆i ’s, by adding a trivially stabilized edge (v0 , vi ) for
each i, and rk(Hb ) extra trivially stabilized edges as loops based at v0 .
Let b0 be a concatenation of tuples b00 , . . . , b0r , β̄ where
21

• bj ∈ Uj is a generating set for the non surface type vertex group associated to vj ;
• β̄ is a basis for Hb .
Then the subgroup generated by Ab0 is V0 ∗ V1t1 . . . ∗ Vrtr ∗ Hb where Vj is a subgroup of FA
which is a vertex group of vj and tj corresponds to the trivially stabilized edge joining vj to
the vertex stabilized by A.
We now prove b0 has the required properties:
(i) By construction, bj ∈ Uj ≤ acl(Ab) and β̄ ∈ Hb ≤ acl(Ab). Thus b0 ∈ acl(Ab).
min
min
(ii) In Λ, the intersection Λmin
Ab0 ∩ ΛAc ∩ ΛFA is a disjoint union of envelopes of rigid vertices
min
- this is simply because the intersection Λmin
Ab0 ∩ ΛFA is a disjoint union of envelopes of
rigid vertices.

(iii) If we collapse in Λ all the trivially stabilized edges of ∆, the minimal subgraph Λmin
FAb is
mapped onto a graph of groups for FAb (the smallest free factor containing Ab) without
trivially stabilized edges, and all of whose vertex groups are freely indecomposable with
respect to Ab0 and adjacent edge groups (vertices which already existed before the collapse
are vertices of a JSJ decomposition hence they are rigid relative to adjacent edge groups,
and the unique new vertex has vertex group exactly Ab0 ). This proves that FAb is freely
indecomposable relative to Ab0 , hence it is exactly FAb0 .
This finishes the proof.

References
[GL11]
[GL17]

Vincent Guirardel and Gilbert Levitt, Trees of cylinders and canonical splittings,
Geom. Topol. 15 (2011), no. 2, 977–1012.
, JSJ decompositions of groups, Astérisque 395 (2017).

[Mar02] David Marker, Model theory: an introduction, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol.
217, Springer, 2002.
[OH11]

Abderezak Ould Houcine, Homogeneity and prime models in torsion-free hyperbolic
groups, Confluentes Mathematici 3 (2011), no. 1, 121–155.

[OHV11] Abderezak Ould Houcine and Daniele Vallino, Algebraic and definable closure in free
groups, Annales de l’institut Fourier 66 (2011).
[PS12]

Chloé Perin and Rizos Sklinos, Homogeneity in the Free Group, Duke Math. J. 161
(2012), no. 13, 2635–2668.

[PS16]

Chloé Perin and Rizos Sklinos, Forking and JSJ decompositions in the free group, J.
Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS) 18 (2016), no. 3, 1983–2017.

[RS94]

Eliyahu Rips and Zlil Sela, Structure and rigidity in hyperbolic groups I, Geom.
Funct. Anal. 4 (1994), 337–371.

[Sel13]

Zlil Sela, Diophantine geometry over groups VIII: Stability, Ann. of Math. (2) 177
(2013), no. 3, 787–868.
22

