On a measurable analogue of small topological full
groups
François Le Maître

arXiv:1608.07399v1 [math.DS] 26 Aug 2016

August 29, 2016
Abstract
We initiate the study of a measurable analogue of small topological full
groups that we call L1 full groups. These groups are endowed with a Polish group topology which admits a natural complete right invariant metric.
We mostly focus on L1 full groups of measure-preserving Z-actions which are
actually a complete invariant of flip conjugacy.
We prove that for ergodic actions the closure of the derived group is topologically simple although it can fail to be simple. We also show that the closure
of the derived group is connected, and that for measure-preserving free actions
of non-amenable groups the closure of the derived group and the L1 full group
itself are never amenable.
In the case of a measure-preserving ergodic Z-action, the closure of the
derived group is shown to be the kernel of the index map. If such an action is moreover by homeomorphism on the Cantor space, we show that the
topological full group is dense in the L1 full group. Using Juschenko-Monod
and Matui’s results on topological full groups, we conclude that L1 full groups
of ergodic Z-actions are amenable as topological groups, and that they are
topologically finitely generated if and only if the Z-action has finite entropy.

Contents
1 Introduction
1.1 L1 full groups of measure-preserving transformations . . . . . . . . .
1.2 Some topological properties of L1 full groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.3 Outline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

2
2
4
7

2 Preliminaries
8
2.1 Basic ergodic theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.2 Graphings, equivalence relations and full groups . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.3 Entropy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
3 L1 full groups of graphings
14
3.1 Definition and first properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
3.2 The closure of the derived group is topologically generated by involutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
1

3.3
3.4
3.5

Dye’s reconstruction theorem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Closed normal subgroups of the closure of the derived group . . . . . 23
Link with topological full groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

4 L1 full groups of Z-actions
4.1 The index map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.2 A characterization of supports of n-cycles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.3 The L1 full group is generated by induced transformations along with
periodic transformations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.4 Escape time and non-simplicity results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4.5 Density of topological full groups, amenability and finiteness of the
topological rank . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5 Further remarks and questions
5.1 Non-amenability . . . . . . . . . . .
5.2 Absence of a natural closure property
5.3 Lp full groups . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.4 Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1
1.1

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

30
. 30
. 32
. 33
. 36
. 39

.
.
.
.

41
41
41
43
44

Introduction
L1 full groups of measure-preserving transformations

The study of (invertible) measure preserving transformations on standard probability spaces has a long and rich history stemming from its connections with various
fields such as statistical mechanics, information theory, Riemannian geometry or
number theory. Over the years, various invariants have been introduced in order
to classify such transformations, although a result of Foreman, Rudolph and Weiss
shows that such a classification cannot “reasonably” be obtained for all measurepreserving transformations [FRW11].
The most well-behaved measure-preserving transformations are probably the
compact ones, i.e. those which arise as translation by a topological generator
in a compact abelian group (for instance, an irrational rotation is a compact transformation). Indeed, ergodic compact transformations are completely classified up to
conjugacy by the countable subgroup of the circle S1 consisting of all the eigenvalues
of the associated Koopman unitary (for an irrational rotation this is just the group
generated by its angle). To be more precise, a theorem of Halmos and von Neumann states that two such transformations T and T 0 of a standard probability space
(X, µ) are conjugate iff spec(T ) = spec(T 0 ) where spec(T ) is the group consisting of
all the λ ∈ S1 such that there is a non-null f ∈ L2 (X, µ) satisfying f ◦ T = λf . So
an ergodic compact transformation T is entirely described by the countable group
spec(T ).
The purpose of this paper is to initiate the study of a Polish group [T ]1 called
the L1 full group which one can associate to a measure-preserving transformation T .
Its main feature resembles that of the spectrum of compact transformations: two

2

ergodic measure-preserving transformations T and T 0 are flip-conjugate1 and if and
only if [T ]1 is abstractly (or topologically) isomorphic to [T 0 ]1 .
The idea for this group comes from full groups, which were defined by Dye as
subgroups of the group Aut(X, µ) of measure-preserving transformations of a standard probability space (X, µ) satisfying a strong closure property. The most basic
example of a full group is the full group of a measure-preserving invertible aperiodic
transformation T , which consists in all the measure-preserving transformations U
such that for almost all x ∈ X, there exists n ∈ Z such that U (x) = T n (x). This
full group is denoted by [T ] and every U ∈ [T ] is then completely described by the
cocycle map cU : X → Z defined by the equation
U (x) = T cU (x) (x).
Note that the full group [T ] only depends on the partition of the space into orbits
induced by T : it is an invariant of orbit equivalence. A theorem of Dye states
that all measure-preserving ergodic transformations are orbit equivalent [Dye59],
thus making the associated full group a trivial conjugacy invariant for such transformations. To obtain an interesting invariant, we will place an integrability restriction
on the cocycle maps.
Definition 1.1. The L1 full group of an aperiodic measure-preserving invertible
transformation T on a standard probability space (X, µ) is the group of all U ∈ [T ]
such that
Z
|cU (x)| dµ(x) < +∞.
X

The L1 full group is endowed with a natural metric given by the L1 metric
when viewing elements of [T ]1 as cocycle maps X → Z. Such a metric is actually
complete, separable and right-invariant (see Proposition 3.4) so that L1 full groups
are cli2 Polish groups.
Theorem 1.2 (see Thm. 4.2). Let T and T 0 be two measure-preserving ergodic
transformation of a standard probability space (X, µ). Then the following are equivalent:
(1) T and T 0 are flip-conjugate;
(2) the groups [T ]1 and [T 0 ]1 are abstractly isomorphic;
(3) the groups [T ]1 and [T 0 ]1 are topologically isomorphic.
There are two results behind this theorem: the first is a reconstruction result à la
Dye which says that any isomorphisms between L1 full groups must be a conjugacy
by a measure-preserving transformation. The second is Belinskaya’s theorem [Bel68,
Cor. 3.7], which states that if two ergodic transformations share the same L1 full
group, then they must be flip-conjugate.
Two measure-preserving transformation T and T 0 are flip-conjugate if there is a measurepreserving transformation S such that T 0 = ST S −1 or T 0 = ST −1 S −1 .
2
A Polish group is cli if it admits a compatible left- (or equivalently right-) invariant metric
1

3

There are natural and well-studied analogues of full groups and L1 full groups in
the context of Cantor dynamics. Given a homeomorphism T of the Cantor space C,
its (topological) full group [T ]t is the group of all homeomorphisms U of the Cantor
space such that for all x ∈ C there is n ∈ N such that U (x) = T n (x). This full group
turns out to completely determine the partition of the Cantor space into orbits up
to a homeomorphisms. Such partitions are entirely described up to homeomorphism
in terms of the set of invariant measure: by a theorem of Giordano, Putnam and
Skau [GPS95], two minimal homeomorphisms T and T 0 of the Cantor space are orbit
equivalent if and only if there is a homeomorphism S such that S(MT ) = MT 0 where
MT denotes the set of T -invariant Borel probability measures. As in the measurable
case, an element of the topological full group of an aperiodic homeomorphism T
is completely described by the associated cocycle map cU : C → Z defined by
U (x) = T cU (x) (x).
The analogue of L1 full groups is sometimes called the small topological full
group and is also defined by putting a restriction on cocycles. Namely, given a
homeomorphism T of the Cantor space C, its small (topological) full group [T ]c
is the group of homeomorphisms U of the Cantor space whose cocycle map cU
is actually continuous. A result of Giordano-Putnam-Skau in complete analogy
with Theorem 1.2 states that when T is minimal, the flip conjugacy class of T is
completely determined by its small topological full group [T ]c (see [GPS99]). In the
end, L1 full groups can be seen as the missing piece in the following picture.

Topological setup

Measurable setup

Orbit equivalence

[T ]t = {U ∈ Homeo(C) :
∀x, U (x) = T cU (x) }

[T ] = {U ∈ Aut(X, µ) :
∀x, U (x) = T cU (x) }

Flip conjugacy

[T ]c = {U ∈ [T ]t :
cU is continuous}

[T ]1 = {U ∈ [T ] :
cU is integrable}

1.2

Some topological properties of L1 full groups

Theorem 1.2 implies that every ergodic theoretic property of a measure-preserving
transformation T should be reflected algebraically in the group [T ]1 . However since
the latter is an uncountable group, it is quite hard to find a purely group-theoretic
property allowing us to distinguish two L1 full groups. But as we already pointed
out, we also have at our disposal a Polish group topology, which provides richer tools
to study [T ]1 . Before we present our results, let us mention a fundamental tool for
the study of L1 full groups and topological full groups.
Given an aperiodic measure-preserving transformation, one defines the index

4

map I : [T ]1 → R by putting
Z
cU (x)dµ(x).

I(U ) =
X

If T is a minimal homeomorphism, we define the index map the same way picking
an invariant measure µ so as to view T as a measure-preserving transformation. The
resulting index map can be shown not to depend on the chosen invariant measure
[GPS99].
We can now give various descriptions of the closure of the derived group of the
1
L full group of an ergodic measure-preserving transformation.
Theorem 1.3 (see Cor. 4.20). Let T ∈ Aut(X, µ) be ergodic. Then D([T ]1 ) is equal
to the following four groups:
• the kernel of the index map,
• the connected component of the identity,
• the group generated by periodic elements and
• the group topologically generated by involutions.
Since the index map actually takes values into Z we conclude from the first item
of the above theorem that the (topological) abelianization of the L1 full group of an
ergodic transformation is always equal to Z.
In the context of topological full groups of minimal homeomorphisms, it is also
true that the index map takes values into Z, but its kernel is often much larger than
the derived group. Nevertheless, Matui succesfully computed the abelianization of
[T ]c in K-theoretic terms and gave examples where this abelianisation is not even
finitely generated (see [Mat06]). So the situation for L1 full groups is much simpler
with respect to the (topological) abelianization.
An important feature of the derived group of the topological full group of a
minimal homeomorphism is that it is a simple group. The following result is a
natural analogue.
Theorem 1.4. Let T be a measure-preserving transformation. Then T is ergodic if
and only if D([T ]1 ) is topologically simple.
This result is actually true in a greater generality for L1 full groups of graphings
as defined by Levitt [Lev95], see section 3.4. We also prove that D([T ]1 ) is never
simple using the fact that there are many Borel sets whose escape time is not integrable (see section 4.4). Let us now seek finer invariants.
The topological rank of a separable topological group is the minimal number
of elements needed to generate a dense subgroup. The main result of this paper
is that the topological rank of the L1 full group of an ergodic measure-preserving
transformation T is related to the entropy of T .
Theorem 1.5. Let T ∈ Aut(X, µ) be ergodic. Then the following are equivalent
5

(1) the L1 full group [T ]1 is topologically finitely generated;
(2) the closed subgroup D([T ])1 is topologically finitely generated;
(3) the transformation T has finite entropy.
A crucial tool in the previous theorem is Matui’s characterization of finitegeneratedness of topological full groups [Mat06, Thm. 5.4]. He proved that the
derived group of the topological full group of a minimal homeomorphism T is finitely
generated if and only if T is a subshift. He also characterised finite-generatedness of
the whole topological full group of T in terms of a strictly more restrictive condition.
In our context the situation is again simpler: Theorem 1.5 shows that for an ergodic
measure-preserving transformation T , the L1 full group of T is topologically finitely
generated if and only if the closure of its derived group is.
In order to use Matui’s aforementioned results so as to prove Theorem 1.5, we
establish the following important connection between L1 full groups and topological
full groups.
Theorem 1.6 (see Thm. 4.28). Let T be a minimal homeomorphism of the Cantor
space and let µ be an invariant measure. Then D([T ]c ) is dense in D([T ]1 ) and [T ]c
is dense in [T ]1 .
Our proof of Theorem 1.5 also relies on a deep theorem of Krieger which characterizes finite entropy transformations as those which can be realised as uniquely
ergodic minimal subshifts [Kri72]. It would be nice to have a purely ergodic-theoretic
proof of Theorem 1.5.
Theorem 1.6 has another interesting consequence. Recall that a topological
group is amenable if whenever it acts continuously on a compact space, the action
admits an invariant Borel probability measure. Juschenko and Monod have proven
that the topological full group of any minimal homeomorphism of the Cantor space
is amenable [JM13]. Using the Jewett-Krieger theorem we obtained the following
result.
Theorem 1.7. Let T be an ergodic measure-preserving transformation. Then the
L1 full group of T is amenable.
Note that since [T ]1 surjects onto Z via the index map, it is not extremely
amenable. However it would be intersting to understand wether the kernel of the
index map is extremely amenable. Let us now end extend these kind of questions
to the setup of measure-preserving actions of finitely generated groups.
Definition 1.8. Let Γ be a finitely generated group acting in a measure-preserving
manner on a standard probability space (X, µ). The full group of this action is
denoted by [Γ] and defined by
[Γ] = {T ∈ Aut(X, µ) : ∀x ∈ X, T (x) ∈ Γ · x}.
Let S be a finite generating set for Γ. Then every Γ-orbit is naturally equipped with
a Schreier graph metric dS , and we let the L1 full group of the Γ-action be the group
[Γ]1 of all T ∈ [Γ] such that the map x 7→ dS (x, T (x)) is integrable.
6

The definition of this group does not depend on the choice of a finite generating
set, and the L1 full group [Γ]1 has a natural Polish group topology. The following
result is a counterpart to Theorem 1.7.
Theorem 1.9 (see Thm. 5.1). Let Γ be a finitely generated non amenable group
acting freely in a measure-preserving manner on (X, µ). Then neither [Γ]1 nor
D([Γ]1 ) are amenable.
It would be interesting to understand which amenable finitely generated groups
admit measure-preserving free actions with an amenable L1 full group. It is also
natural to seek for generalizations of our results relating topological rank and entropy
in this context.
Finally, we should stress out that L1 full groups are not invariants of L1 orbit
equivalence but only of L∞ orbit equivalence (see Corollary 5.3). I do not know
wether they are complete invariants of L∞ orbit equivalence: if [Γ]1 = [Λ]1 , does it
follow that Γ and Λ are L∞ orbit equivalent?

1.3

Outline

This paper is organised as follows. Section 2 begins with some general facts from
ergodic theory. We then recall the definition of graphings, which provide a natural
setup for L1 full groups. The section ends with a few basic facts from entropy theory.
In section 3 we give the definition of the L1 full group of a graphing and establish
some basic properties such as stability under taking induced transformations. We
show that the closure of their derived group is topologically generated by involutions
and hence connected. We then establish that L1 full groups of ergodic graphings
satisfy a reconstruction theorem: any isomorphism between them arises as the conjugacy by a measure preserving transformation. We also use involutions to prove
that the only closed normal subgroups of the closure of their derived group are the
obvious ones when the graphing is aperiodic (Theorem 3.23). From this we conclude
that the graphing is ergodic if and only if the closure of the derived group of its L1
full group is topologically simple. Finally, we relate topological full groups to L1 full
groups in terms of density.
Section 4 contains the main results on L1 full groups of Z-actions. We first
prove Theorem 1.2 and then continue by defining the index map and studying its
behaviour with respect to induced transformations. We then study involutions more
closely by characterizing the Borel sets which arise as supports of involutions (and
more generally those which arise as supports of n-cycles). After that, we show that
the L1 full group of T ∈ Aut(X, µ) is generated by transformation induced by T
along with periodic transformations, using the work of Belinskaya. We then show
that D([T ]1 ) is never simple. Finally, we prove Theorem 1.7 and Theorem 1.5, using
the fact that the topological full group is dense in the L1 full group.
In section 5 we first prove Theorem 1.9. We then show that L1 full groups are
not stable under “L1 cutting and pasting”. After that we make a few observations
about Lp full groups which are defined analogously and we conclude with some more
questions.

7

2
2.1

Preliminaries
Basic ergodic theory

Let (X, µ) be a standard probability space, i.e. a standard Borel space equipped
with a Borel non-atomic probability measure µ. All such spaces are isomorphic to
the interval [0, 1] equipped with the Lebesgue measure, in particular they admit a
Borel linear order.
We will always work up to measure zero, e.g. for two Borel sets A and B if we
write A ⊆ B we mean µ(B \ A) = 0. For us a partition of a Borel set A ⊆ X will
be a countable family of disjoint Borel subsets of A whose reunion is equal to A up
to measure zero. Note that some of these sets may have measure zero or even be
empty.
A Borel bijection T : X → X is called a measure-preserving transformation
of (X, µ) if for all Borel A ⊆ X, one has µ(A) = µ(T −1 (A)). We denote by Aut(X, µ)
the group of all measure-preserving transformations, two such transformations being
identified if they coincide up to measure zero. An important fact to keep in mind is
that every Borel bijection between full measure Borel subsets of X which is measurepreserving can be seen as an element of Aut(X, µ): there is a measure-preserving
transformation T 0 of (X, µ) such that T (x) = T 0 (x) for almost all x ∈ X.
Definition 2.1. A measure-preserving transformation T is ergodic if every Borel
set which is a reunion of T -orbits has measure 0 or 1. It is aperiodic if all its orbits
are infinite.
A fundamental construction for us will be that of the induced transformation:
given T ∈ Aut(X, µ) and A ⊆ X of positive measure, the Poincaré recurrence
theorem ensures us that for almost all x ∈ A there are infinitely many n ∈ N∗ such
that T n (x). We let nA,T (x) denote the smallest such n, also called the return time
to A. When the transformation T we consider is clear from the context, we will
denote the return time simply by nA .
The transformation TA ∈ Aut(X, µ) induced by T on A by for all x ∈ X,
 n
T A,T (x) if x ∈ A
TA (x) =
x
else.
It can easily be checked that TA is indeed a measure-preserving transformation, and
that moreover for all x ∈ A the TA -orbit of x is the intersection of the T -orbit of x
with A. Also note that (TA )−1 = (T −1 )A
The following lemma is a direct consequence of the fact that the orbits of the
restriction of TA to A are precisely the intersections of the T -orbits with A.
Lemma 2.2. Let S ∈ Aut(X, µ) be a measure-preserving transformation and A ⊆ X
intersects every S-orbit, then S is aperiodic if and only if SA is aperiodic when
restricted to A, and S is ergodic if and only if SA is ergodic when restricted to A.
Definition 2.3. An element T ∈ Aut(X, µ) is periodic if all its orbits are finite.

8

If T is periodic, the Borel set of minimums of T -orbits (for a fixed Borel total
order on X) intersects every T -orbit at exactly one point: it is a Borel fundamental
domain for T . Such fundamental domains actually exist if and only if T is periodic.
A nice way to build a new transformation from a periodic one is to compose it
with a transformation supported on a fundamental domain.
Lemma 2.4. Let T be a periodic measure-preserving transformation, and let A be a
fundamental domain of T . Let U be a measure-preserving transformation supported
on A. Then (U T )A = U = (T U )A .
Proof. Let x ∈ A, let n ∈ N∗ be the least positive integer such that T n (x) = x.
Since A is a fundamental domain for T , for all i ∈ {0, ..., n − 1} we have T i (x) 6∈ A.
Since U (y) = y for all y 6∈ A, we deduce by induction that (U T )i (x) = T i (x) 6∈ A for
all i ∈ {1, ..., n − 1}. In particular (U T )n−1 (x) = T n−1 (x) so (U T )n (x) = U T n (x) =
U (x) ∈ A, which proves that (U T )A = U as desired.
For the equality (T U )A = U , one can run a similar argument or apply the
previously obtained equality to T −1 and U −1 to get (U −1 T −1 )A = U −1 , which by
taking inverses yields (T U )A = U .
Proposition 2.5. Let T be a periodic measure-preserving transformation, and let
A be a fundamental domain of T . Let U be a measure-preserving transformation
supported on A. Then the following equivalences hold:
(1) The restriction of U to A is aperiodic ⇔ U T is aperiodic ⇔ T U is aperiodic.
(2) T restriction of U to A is ergodic ⇔ U T is ergodic ⇔ T U is ergodic.
Proof. It follows from the proof of Lemma 2.4 that A intersects every T U orbit and
every U T orbit. The conclusion then follows from Lemmas 2.4 and 2.2.
Let us observe that one can go the other way around in the above constructions:
starting from an aperiodic transformation T and a Borel set A which intersects
almost every T -orbit, the map TA−1 T is periodic with A as a Borel fundamental
domain and same return time to A as T . This fact is the key idea for the following
result of Belinskaya which we won’t use but which is an important step towards to
the proof of her Theorem 4.1.
Proposition 2.6 (Belinskaya, [Bel68, Thm. 3.6]). Let S and T be two measurepreserving transformations, let A be a Borel subset which intersects every S and
every T -orbit. Suppose that SA = TA and that the return times of S and T to A are
the same, i.e. nA,S = nA,T . Then S and T are conjugate.
We will use the following well-known proposition several times. A proof is provided for completeness.
Proposition 2.7. Let T ∈ Aut(X, µ). There is a partition (A1 , A2 , B1 , B2 , B3 ) of
supp T such that T (A1 ) = A2 , T (B1 ) = B2 and T (B2 ) = B3 .

9

Proof. Since X is a standard Borel space, there is a countable partition (Xi )i∈N of
supp T into Borel sets such that for all i ∈ N, T (Xi ) is disjoint from Xi (see for
instance [EG14, Lem. 5.1]).
We then define by recurrence an increasing family of sets (Yi )i∈N by letting Y0 =
X0 and then for all i ∈ N
Yi+1 = Yi t {x ∈ Xi+1 : T (x) 6∈ Yi and T −1 (x) 6∈ Yi }.
S
Let Y = n∈N Yn , then by construction Y and T (Y ) are disjoint. Moreover, we
have supp T = T −1 (Y ) ∪ Y ∪ T (Y ). Indeed, if x ∈ supp T \ Y there is i ∈ N such
that x ∈ Xi+1 , and since x 6∈ Yi+1 either T (x) ∈ Yi or T −1 (x) ∈ Yi so that in any
case x ∈ T −1 (Y ) ∪ T (Y ).
Since supp T is T -invariant, we conclude that supp T = Y ∪ T (Y ) ∪ T 2 (Y ). Now
let A1 = {x ∈ Y : T 2 (x) ∈ Y } and B1 = {Y \ A1 }. Then since Y and T (Y ) are
disjoint, the sets A1 , A2 := T (A1 ), B1 , B2 := T (B1 ) are disjoint. Let B3 := T 2 (B1 ).
By the definition of B1 the set B3 is disjoint from Y . Moreover since T (B1 ) is disjoint
from Y we also have T 2 (B1 ) disjoint from T (Y ) so that B3 is actually disjoint from
Y t T (Y ). We conclude that A1 , A2 , B1 , B2 , B3 are as desired.
Remark. Note that the proof does not use that T is measure-preserving and actually
works in the purely Borel context.

2.2

Graphings, equivalence relations and full groups

If (X, µ) is a standard probability space, and A, B are Borel subsets of X, a partial
isomorphism of (X, µ) of domain A and range B is a Borel bijection f : A → B
which is measure-preserving for the measures induced by µ on A and B respectively.
We denote by dom f = A its domain, and by rng f = B its range. Given two partial
isomorphisms ϕ1 : A → B and ϕ2 : C → D, we define their composition ϕ2 ◦ ϕ1 as
the map ϕ−1
1 (B ∩ C) → ϕ2 (B ∩ C) given by ϕ2 ◦ ϕ1 (x) = ϕ1 ϕ2 (x). We also define
the inverse ϕ−1 of a partial isomorphism ϕ : A → B by ϕ−1 : B → A and the
equation ϕ−1 ◦ ϕ = idA .
By definition a graphing is a countable set of partial isomorphisms. Every
graphing Φ generates a measure-preserving equivalence relation RΦ , defined
to be the smallest equivalence relation containing (x, ϕ(x)) for every ϕ ∈ Φ and
x ∈ dom ϕ. Given a graphing Φ, a Φ-word is a composition of finitely many
elements of Φ or their inverses. Obviously (x, y) ∈ RΦ iff and only if there exists a
Φ-word w such that y = w(x). Given a Borel set A, its Φ-closure is the reunion
of all w(A) where w is a Φ-word. Say that Φ is ergodic when the Φ-closure of any
non-null Borel set A has full measure.
The full group of a measure-preserving equivalence relation R is the group [R]
of automorphisms of (X, µ) which induce permutations in the R-classes, that is
[R] = {ϕ ∈ Aut(X, µ) : ∀x ∈ X, ϕ(x) R x}.
It is a separable group when equipped with the complete metric du defined by
du (T, U ) = µ({x ∈ X : T (x) 6= U (x)}.
10

The metric du is called the uniform metric and the topology it induces is called the
uniform topology. One also defines the pseudo full group of R, denoted by [[R]],
which consists of all partial isomorphisms ϕ such that ϕ(x) R x for all x ∈ dom ϕ.
Given a measure-preserving equivalence relation R, we denote by MR the σalgebra of all Borel sets A such that T (A) = A for all T ∈ [R]. Consider the Hilbert
space of R-invariant functions, i.e. the set of all f ∈ L2 (X, µ) such that for any
T ∈ [R], one has f ◦ T = f a.e. We denote this closed Hilbert space by L2R (X, µ)
and remark that it consists of all the MR -measurable elements of L2 (X, µ). By
definition R is ergodic if L2R (X, µ) only consists of constant functions. A graphing
Φ is ergodic if and only if RΦ is.
The orthogonal projection ER from the Hilbert space L2 (X) onto the closed
subspace L2R (X) satisfies the following equality, which defines it uniquely: for any
f ∈ L2 (X, µ) and g ∈ L2R (X, µ),
Z
Z
fg =
ER (f )g.
X

X

ER is called a conditional expectation. When A is a subset of X, its characteristic
function is an element of L2 (X, µ), and we call ER (χA ) the R-conditional measure
of A, denoted by µR (A) or µΦ (A) when R = RΦ . Often the equivalence relation R
will be clear from the context and we will simply call µR (A) the conditional measure
of A. Because ER is a contraction for the L∞ norm, µR (A) takes values in [0, 1]. For
those who are familiar with the ergodic decomposition, µR (A) is just the function
x 7→ µx (A) where (µx )x∈X is the ergodic decomposition of R. Given ϕ ∈ [[R]], we
have µR (dom ϕ) = µR (rng ϕ). The following well-known result is a kind of converse
(see [LM15, Sec. 2.1]).
Proposition 2.8 (Dye). Let R be a measure-preserving equivalence relation. Then
if two sets A and B have the same R-conditional measure, there exists ϕ ∈ [[R]]
whose domain is A and whose range is B.
Note that in the ergodic case, the previous proposition implies that any two sets
of the same measure can be mapped to each other by an element of the pseudo full
group of R. A measure-preserving equivalence relation is aperiodic if almost all its
equivalence classes are infinite. The following proposition is well-known, see [LM15,
Sec. 2.1] for a proof.
Proposition 2.9 ([Dye59], Maharam’s lemma). A measure-preserving equivalence
relation R is aperiodic iff for any A ⊆ X, and for any MR -measurable function f
such that 0 6 f 6 µR (A), there exists B ⊆ A such that the R-conditional measure
of B equals f .
Corollary 2.10. Let R be an aperiodic measure-preserving equivalence relation, and
let f : X → [0, 1] be an MR -measurable function. Let A be a subset of X such that
for almost all x ∈ A, one has f (x) > 0. Then there is a countable partition (An )n∈N
of A such that for all x ∈ X and all n ∈ N,
µR (An )(x) 6 f (x).
11

Proof. The proof relies the following basic fact: there is a countable family of MR measurable positive functions fP
n : X → [0, 1] such that for all x ∈ X, we have
fn (x) 6 f (x) for all n ∈ N and n∈N fn (x) = µR (x). Indeed, if for all x ∈ X we let
fn (x) = 0 if µR (A)(x) = 0 and else


 f (x) j
k if n < bµR (A)(x)c
f (x)
f (x) − g(x) if n = bµR (A)(x)c
fn (x) =


0
else,
it is easily checked that such functions satisfy the desired properties. We can now use
the previous proposition to build by recurrence a sequence (An ) of disjoint
subsets
P
of A such that for every n ∈P
N, µR (An ) = fn F
6 f . Then µR (A) = n∈N µR (An )
hence by integrating µ(A) = n∈N µ(An ) = µ( n∈N An ) so that (An ) is a partition
of A meeting all our requirements.
Let us also record the following easy consequences of the previous results.
Lemma 2.11. Let R be a measure-preserving equivalence relation. Then if two
disjoint Borel sets A and B have the same R-conditional measure, there exists an
involution U ∈ [R] whose support is equal to A t B such that U (A) = B.
Proof. By Proposition 2.8 there exists ϕ ∈ [[R]] such that ϕ(A) = B. Then the
involution U ∈ [RΦ ] defined by

 ϕ(x) if x ∈ A
ϕ−1 (x) if x ∈ B
U (x) =

x
else
clearly works.
Lemma 2.12. Let R be a measure-preserving aperiodic equivalence relation and
let C be a Borel subset of X. Then there exists an involution U ∈ [R] such that
supp U = C.
Proof. By Maharam’s Lemma (Lemma 2.9), one can write C = AtB where µR (A) =
µR (B) = µR (C)/2. The previous lemma can then readily be applied.
Remark. In Section 4.2, we will characterise which sets arise as supports of involutions belonging to the L1 full group of T , where T is an ergodic transformation.

2.3

Entropy

The entropy of a countable partition (Ai )I∈I of (X, µ) is the quantity
X
H((Ai )i∈I ) := −
µ(Ai ) ln µ(Ai )
i∈I

where we use the convention 0 ln 0 = 0. It represents the average amount of information we get when we choose an element x ∈ X at random and only learn in
which piece Ai of the partition x is. The following statement was extracted from the
more general Lemma 2.1 in [Aus16]. It shows that cocycle partitions coming from
elements of L1 full groups of Z-actions have finite entropy.
12

Lemma 2.13. Let (An )n∈Z be a partition of X such that
Then H((An )n∈Z ) < +∞.

P

n∈Z

|n| µ(An ) < +∞.

Proof. Some elementary calculus yields the inequality
−t ln t 6 mt + e−m−1
for all t, m > 0. In particular for all n ∈ Z∗ we have
−µ(An ) ln µ(An ) 6 |n| µ(An ) + e−|n|−1 .
P
Summing this P
over n ∈ Z∗ and applying our hypothesis n∈Z∗ |n| µ(An ) < +∞, we
obtain that − n∈Z∗ µ(An ) ln µ(An ) < +∞. So H((An )n∈N ) < +∞ as wanted.
Remark. Austin’s result (Lemma 2.1 in [Aus16]) actually yields that whenever Γ
is a finitely generated group, the cocycle partitions of elements of the L1 full group
of any free Γ-action have finite entropy.
Given two partitions (Ai ) and (Bj ) of X, we let (Ai ) ∨ (Bj ) be their join, i.e.
the partition (Ai ∩ Bj ). We have the following natural inequality (for a proof see
e.g. [Dow11, 1.6.10]).
Lemma 2.14. Let (Ai ) and (Bj ) be two partitions of X. Then
H((Ai ) ∨ (Bj )) 6 H((Ai )) + H((Bj )).
Note that in particular, the join of finitely many partitions with finite entropy
has finite entropy.
Lemma 2.14 enables one to give the classical definition of the entropy of T ∈
Aut(X, µ). First, given a partition Q, we let
!
n−1
_
1
h(T, P) := lim H
T i (P) ,
n→+∞ n
i=0
where the limit exists by subadditivity of the sequence H(
2.14). The entropy of T is
h(T ) =

sup

Wn−1
i=0

T i (P)) (cf. Lemma

h(T, P).

P partition

A partition P is called generating if up to measure zero, the σ-algebra generated
by the T -translates of P is equal to the Borel σ-algebra of X. A more convenient
way to see this for us is in terms of the measure algebra of (X, µ).
Recall that given a standard probability space (X, µ), its measure algebra is
denoted by MAlg(X, µ) and consists of all Borel subsets of X, two such sets being
identified if their symmetric difference has measure zero. It is naturally endowed
with a metric dµ defined by dµ (A, B) = µ(A 4 B) which is complete and separable
(see [Hal50, 40.A]). Then a partition P is generating if and only if the algebra
generated by the T -translates of P is dense in MAlg(X, µ).
13

Kolmogorov-Sinai’s theorem states that whenever P is a generating partition of
finite entropy, one has
h(T ) = h(T, P) < +∞
Conversely, Krieger’s finite generator theorem states that every transformation of finite entropy admits a finite generating partition [Kri70] (moreover, there is such
a partition whose cardinality k satisfies the inequality eh(T ) 6 k 6 eh(T ) + 1).
Krieger then proved that every such transformation is actually conjugate to a minimal uniquely ergodic subshift [Kri72], which will be relevant to us when we connect
topological full groups to L1 full groups (see Section 4.5).

3
3.1

L1 full groups of graphings
Definition and first properties

Let Φ be a graphing, and let RΦ be the measure-preserving equivalence relation it
generates. Such a graphing induces a metric dΦ on the orbits of RΦ by putting for
all (x, y) ∈ R
dΦ (x, y) = min{n ∈ N : ∃ϕ1 , ..., ϕn ∈ Φ±1 such that y = ϕn · · · ϕ1 (x)}.
The L1 full group of Φ, denoted by [Φ]1 , is then defined by
[Φ]1 := {T ∈ [RΦ ] : x 7→ dΦ (x, T (x)) is integrable}.
The triangle inequality implies that [Φ]1 is indeed a group, which we equip with a
right-invariant metric d˜Φ defined by
Z
dΦ (S(x), T (x)).
d˜Φ (S, T ) :=
X

Our first example is fundamental since the study of single measure-preserving transformations is a central subject in ergodic theory.
Example 3.1. Suppose we are given a measure-preserving aperiodic Z-action, that
is, an element T ∈ Aut(X, µ), all whose orbits are infinite. Then Φ = {T } is a
graphing, and we denote by [T ]1 the associated L1 full group. Given S ∈ [RT ],
for all x ∈ X there is a unique cS (x) ∈ Z such that S(x) = T cS (x) (x). The map
x 7→ cS (x) is called the cocycle associated to S and it completely determines S.
The partition ({x ∈ X : cS (x) = n})n∈Z is called the cocycle partition associated
to S. For all x ∈ X and all S, S 0 ∈ [RT ], we have the cocycle identity
cS 0 S (x) = cS 0 (S(x)) + cS (x).
The L1 full group [T ]1 := [RΦ ]1 consists of all the S ∈ [RT ] such that the corresponding cocycle cS is integrable. The metric d˜Φ is then given by
Z
0
˜
dΦ (S, S ) =
|cS (x) − cS 0 (x)| dµ(x)
X

This fundamental example will be explored in Section 4.
14

Example 3.2. Suppose Φ is a graphing, all whose connected components are complete graphs. Then dΦ is the discrete metric: for all (x, y) ∈ RΦ ,

0 if x = y,
dΦ (x, y) =
1 else.
Hence we have [Φ]1 = [RΦ ] and d˜Φ is equal to the uniform metric du .
Example 3.3. Let Γ be a finitely generated group and consider a measure-preserving
Γ-action on (X, µ). If S is a finite generating set of Γ, it defines a graphing which
generates RΓ , and we can consider the associated L1 full group [S]1 . Observe that
if S 0 is another finite generating set, then the metrics dS and dS 0 are bilipschitzequivalent on every orbit with a uniform constant. So the metrics d˜S and d˜S 0 are
bilipschitz-equivalent and we have [S]1 = [S 0 ]1 . We conclude that we can actually
define the L1 full group of the Γ-action by [Γ]1 = [S]1 since it does not depend on
the choice of a finite generating set.
Note that the L1 full group of the action of a finitely generated group comes
naturally equipped with a complete left invariant metric well-defined up to bilipschitz
equivalence. Of course Example 3.1 falls into this category with Γ = Z. Moreover, if
Γ acts freely, every T ∈ [Γ] is uniquely defined by the associated cocycle cT : X → Γ
defined by T (x) = cT (x) · x. Such a cocycle satisfies the cocycle identity cT 0 T (x) =
cT 0 (T (x))cT (x).
Proposition 3.4. Let Φ be a graphing. The metric d˜Φ is complete and separable.
Proof. Let (Tn ) be a Cauchy sequence for d˜Φ . Note that since a Cauchy sequence
converges iff it admits a converging subsequence we can freely replace (Tn ) by a
subsequence.
Clearly for all T, T 0 ∈ [Φ]1 we have du (T, T 0 ) 6 d˜Φ (T, T 0 ), so the sequence (Tn )
is du -Cauchy and admits a du -limit T ∈ [RΦ ]. Up to taking a subsequence, we may
assume that Tn → T pointwise and that for all n ∈ N we have d˜Φ (Tn , Tn+1 ) < 21n .
We deduce that
Z X
dΦ (Tn (x), Tn+1 (x))dµ(x) < 2.
X n∈N

Now for all n ∈ N and all x ∈ X we have
dΦ (Tn (x), T (x)) = lim dΦ (Tn (x), Tm (x))
m→+∞

6 lim

m→+∞

6

X

m−1
X

dΦ (Ti (x), Ti+1 (x))

i=n

dΦ (Ti (x), Ti+1 (x))

i∈N

By integrating this inequality for n = 0 we deduce that d˜Φ (T0 , T ) < +∞ so that
T ∈ [Φ]1 . Moreover this inequality allows us apply the Lebesgue dominated convergence theorem to the sequence of functions x 7→ dΦ (Tn (x), T (x)) to conclude that
dΦ̃ (Tn , T ) → 0. The metric d˜Φ is therefore complete.
15

The separability follows from the line of ideas present in [CLM16, Thm. 3.17].
Namely, let S be a family of involutions such that
[
{(x, s(x)) : x ∈ X} = GΦ ∪ {(x, x) : x ∈ X}
s∈S

and define Γ = hSi equipped with the word metric dS . We consider
the space
R
L1 (X, µ, Γ) of measurable functions taking values in Γ such that X dS (f (x), 1Γ ) <
+∞. Such a space is separable for the natural L1 metric, and [Φ]1 is a continuous
quotient of a subspace of the metric space L1 (X, µ, Γ) (namely, the subspace of
maps f ∈ L1 (X, µ, Γ) such that Tf : x 7→ f (x) · x belongs to Aut(X, µ)), hence
separable.
Remark. Because d˜Φ is right-invariant, the previous Proposition shows that [Φ]1
is a cli Polish group, which means it admits a complete left (or equivalently right)invariant metric compatible with its topology. Examples of cli Polish groups include
all the locally compact second-countable groups (see [Bec98, Prop. 3.C.2]), and nonexamples include the following Polish groups: Aut(X, µ), the group of unitaries of
an infinite dimensional Hilbert space and the group of permutation of the integers.
Using Rohlin’s lemma, it can be shown that whenever T ∈ Aut(X, µ) is aperiodic,
the L1 full group [T ]1 is never SIN (meaning that its topology does not admit a basis
at the identity made of conjugacy-invariant neighborhoods). To our knowledge, such
L1 full groups are the first examples of cli Polish groups which are non-SIN but at
the same time far from being locally compact groups.
A fundamental feature of L1 full groups is that they are stable under taking
induced maps.
Proposition 3.5. Let Φ be a graphing, let [Φ]1 be the associated L1 -full group. Then
for all T ∈ [Φ]1 , we have TA ∈ [Φ]1 , and
d˜Φ (TA , idX ) 6 d˜Φ (T, idX ).
Proof. For all n ∈ N, let An := {x ∈ X : TA (x) = T n (x)}. Then the An ’s form a
partition of A. For all n ∈ N and all 0 6 m < n, we let Bn,m := T m (An ). The
family (Bn,m )06m<n is a collection of disjoint sets.
We now fix n ∈ N. By the triangle inequality, we have that for all x ∈ An ,
n

dΦ (x, TA (x)) = dΦ (x, T (x)) 6

n
X

dΦ (T m (x), T m+1 (x)).

m=0

By integrating and summing this over all n ∈ N, we deduce that
Z
dΦ (x, TA (x)) =
A

n Z
XX
n∈N m=0

Z
dΦ (x, T (x)) 6

Bn,m

dΦ (x, T (x)).
X

To conclude, we note that the left term above is equal to d˜Φ (TA , idX ), while the
right term is equal to d˜Φ (T, idX ).

16

Remark. The above proof is basically the same as that of Kac’s formula [Kac47,
Thm.2’]. We will use this proof again to get later a similar statement in the case of
L1 full groups of Z-actions (see Prop. 4.4).
The following lemma will provide us many involutions in L1 full groups.
Lemma 3.6. Let Φ be a graphing. Then for every involution U ∈ [RΦ ], there
S exists
an increasing sequence of U -invariant sets An ⊆ supp U such that supp U = n∈N An
and for all n ∈ N, UAn ∈ [Φ]1 .
Proof. Let U ∈ [RΦ ] be an involution and for all n ∈ N, let An = {x ∈ supp U :
dΦ (x, U (x)) < S
n}. Since U is an involution and dΦ is symmetric each An is U invariant, and n∈N An = supp U , so µ(supp U \ An ) → 0. By the definition of An ,
each UAn belongs to [Φ]1 .
Theorem 3.7. Let Φ be a graphing. Then [Φ]1 is dense in [RΦ ] for the uniform
topology.
Proof. Because full groups are generated by involutions (see [Kec10, Lem. 4.5]), we
only need to show that every involution in [RΦ ] can be approximated by elements
of [Φ]1 . Let U ∈ [RΦ ] be such an involution.
By the previous lemmaSwe have an increasing sequence (An ) of U -invariant subsets of supp U such that n∈N An = supp U and for all n ∈ N the involution UAn
belongs to [Φ]1 . So µ(supp U \ An ) → 0 and we conclude that du (UAn , U ) → 0 as
desired.

3.2

The closure of the derived group is topologically generated by involutions

As we will see later, given a graphing Φ and T ∈ [Φ]1 , the map A ∈ MAlg(X, µ) 7→
TA ∈ [Φ]1 is not continuous in general. We however have the following very useful
statement.
Proposition 3.8. Let A ⊆ X, let Φ be a graphingSand take T ∈ [Φ]1 . If (An ) is an
increasing sequence of subsets of A such that A = n∈N An then
TA = lim TAn .
n→+∞

Proof. Let k : X → N be defined by TA (x) = T k(x) (x) and similarly for all n ∈ N
define kn : X → N by TAn (x) = T kn (x) (x). Since µ(An 4 A) → 0, we have that
kn → k pointwise. So if we let Bn = {x ∈ X : k(x) 6= kn (x)}, we have µ(Bn ) → 0.
By the definition of Bn we get
Z
d˜Φ (TAn , TA ) =
dΦ (TAn (x), TA (x))
Bn

The triangle inequality now yields
Z
Z
˜
dΦ (TAn , TA ) 6
dΦ (TAn (x), x) +
Bn

Bn

17

dΦ (TA (x), x).

(1)

Since An ⊆ A we have (TA )An = TAn , so Proposition 3.5 yields
d˜Φ (TAn , idX ) 6 d˜Φ (TA , idX ).
By developing the left-hand term we get
Z
Z
Z
dΦ (TAn (x), x) +
dΦ (TAn (x), x) 6
d˜Φ (TA (x), x)).
Bn

X\Bn

X

Since for all x ∈ X \ Bn we have TA (x) = TAn (x), we may rewrite this as
Z
Z
Z
dΦ (TAn (x), x) 6
dΦ (TA (x), x) −
dΦ (TA (x), x)
Bn
X
X\Bn
Z
Z
dΦ (TAn (x), x) 6
dΦ (TA (x), x).
Bn

Bn

We now reinject this inequality into inequality (1) and obtain
Z
dΦ (TA (x), x).
d˜Φ (TAn , TA ) 6 2
Bn

By the dominated convergence theorem we now have
conclude that dΦ (TAn , TA ) → 0 as desired.

R
Bn

dΦ (TA (x), x) → 0 so we

The above proposition is a direct consequence of the dominated convergence
theorem when the sets An are already TA -invariant. We will often use it in this
easier case, but the general statement will appear at a crucial point towards proving
that the closure of the derived group of [Φ]1 is topologically generated by involutions.
Let us for the moment make sure that every involution belongs to the closure of the
derived group.
Lemma 3.9. Suppose Φ is aperiodic. Then every involution in [Φ]1 belongs to the
closure of derived group of [Φ]1 .
Proof. Let T ∈ [Φ]1 be an involution. We can find B ⊆ X such that supp T =
B t T (B). By aperiodicity, there is an involution Ũ ∈ [RΦ ] such that supp Ũ = B
(see Lemma 2.12). We then find C ⊆ B such that B = C t Ũ (C). Lemma
3.6 then
S
yields an increasing sequence of Ũ -invariant sets Bn such that B = n∈N Bn , and
for all n ∈ N, ŨBn ∈ [Φ]1 . We let Cn = C ∩ Bn , and Tn := TCn tT (Cn ) .
Now we define an involution Un in the L1 full group of Φ by

if x ∈ Bn t U (Bn ),
 Ũ (x)
Un (x) :=
T Ũ T (x) if x ∈ T (Bn t U (Bn )),

x
else.
By construction, the commutator [Tn , Un ] is theS
tranformation induced by T on the
T -invariant set An := Bn t T (Bn ), and we have n∈N An = supp T . We conclude by
the previous proposition that [Tn , Un ] → T as desired.

18

Remark. I do not know wether involutions actually belong to the derived group
itself. As a more general question, when does it happen that D([Φ]1 ) is closed? Note
that full groups of measure-preserving equivalence relations (which are a special case
of L1 full groups by 3.2) are perfect if and only if the equivalence relation is aperiodic
(see [LM14b, Prop. 3.6]).
We will now gradually establish that conversely, the closure of D([Φ]1 ) is topologically generated by involutions.
Lemma 3.10. Let Φ be an aperiodic graphing. Then every periodic element of
[Φ]1 belongs to the closed subgroup of [Φ]1 generated by involutions and hence to the
closure of the derived group of [Φ]1 .
Proof. Let U ∈ [Φ]1 be periodic, and for all n ∈ N∗ let An denote the U -invariant
set of all x ∈ X whose U -orbit has cardinality n. By Proposition 3.8, we have
U = lim U
n→+∞

Sn

i=1

Ai

= lim

n→+∞

n
Y

UAi .

i=2

so it suffices to prove the statement for cycles, i.e. elements U of [Φ]1 for which
there is n ∈ N such that every non-trivial U -orbit has cardinality n. If U ∈ [Φ]1 is
such an element, we may find A ⊆ X such that
supp U =

n
G

U i (A).

i=1

For i ∈ {1, ..., n − 1} we let Ui ∈ [Φ]1 be the involution defined by

 U (x) if x ∈ U i (A)
U −1 (x) if x ∈ U i+1 (A)
Ui (x) =

x
else.
It now follows from the well-known identity in symmetric groups
(1 2 · · · n) = (1 2)(2 3) · · · (n − 1 n)
that U = U1 U2 · · · Un−1 , which proves the first part of the lemma. The “as well as”
part follows from Lemma 3.9.
Lemma 3.11. Let Φ be an aperiodic graphing. The L1 full group [Φ]1 is generated
by elements whose support has Φ-conditional measure everywhere less than 1/4.
Remark. As the proof shows, 1/4 can be replaced by any  > 0, but we won’t need
that.
Proof. First note that by breaking a fundamental domain into pieces of small conditional measure (using Maharam’s lemma 2.9), one can show every periodic element
is the product of elements whose support has Φ-conditional measure everywhere less
than 1/4.
19

Now if T ∈ [Φ]1 , one may write T = Tp T 0 where Tp is periodic and all the nontrivial T 0 -orbits are infinite. By Maharam’s lemma we then find A ⊆ supp T 0 such
that for all x ∈ supp T 0 , we have
0 < µT 0 (A)(x) < 1/4.
Then A intersects almost every non-trivial T 0 -orbit so that T 0 T 0 −1
A is periodic. Since
0
A has T -conditional measure everywhere less than 1/4, the same is true of its Φconditional measure. So the support of T 0 A has Φ-conditional measure everywhere
0
less than 1/4 as wanted, and T = Tp (T 0 T 0 −1
A )T A can be written as a product of
elements whose support has Φ-conditional measure everywhere less than 1/4.
Theorem 3.12. Let Φ be an aperiodic graphing. Then the closure of the derived
group of [Φ]1 is topologically generated by involutions.
Proof. Denote by S the set of T ∈ [Φ]1 whose support has Φ-conditional measure
everywhere less than 1/4. By the previous lemma S generates [Φ]1 . Since S is
moreover invariant under conjugacy, it suffices to show that the commutator of any
two elements of S belongs to the closed subgroup generated by involutions.
So let T, U ∈ S and let B = supp g ∪supp h. There exists an involution V ∈ [RΦ ]
such that B and V (B) are disjoint and supp V = B t V (B) =: A. By Lemma
3.6 there exists S
an increasing sequence (An ) of V -invariant subsets of A such that
VAn ∈ [Φ]1 and An = A.
By Proposition 3.8 we have TAn → T and UAn → U , so it suffices to show that
for every n ∈ N, the commutator [TAn , UAn ] belongs to the closed group generated
by involutions.
To this end, we fix n ∈ N and observe that the set supp TAn ∪ supp UAn is disjoint
from VAn (supp TAn ∪ supp UAn ). It follows that if we let Tn0 = VAn TA−1
V , then Tn0
n An
commutes with both TAn and UAn . So we have
[TAn , UAn ] = [TAn Tn0 , UAn ]
= [(TAn VAn TA−1
)VAn , UAn ]
n
and since taking a commutator means multiplying by a conjugate of the inverse, this
equality implies [TAn , UAn ] is a product of involutions in [Φ]1 . As explained before
[TAn , UAn ] → [T, U ] so this ends the proof.
As a consequence, we can easily derive that the closure of the derived group is
connected.
Corollary 3.13. Let Φ be an aperiodic graphing. Then D([Φ]1 ) is connected.
Proof. By the previous theorem it suffices to show that the group generated by
involutions in [Φ]1 is connected, and we will actually prove that it is path connected.
Let U ∈ [Φ]1 be an involution and let A be a fundamental domain for U . There is
an increasing family of Borel subsets (At )t∈[0,1] such that A0 = ∅ and A1 = A and
for all t ∈ [0, 1], µ(At ) = tµ(A).
Then by the dominated convergence theorem the family of involutions Ut :=
UAt ∪U (At ) is a continuous path from U0 = idX to U1 = U . So every involution in [Φ]1
is connected by a path to the identity, and we conclude that the group generated
by involutions is path connected as desired.
20

For ergodic Z-actions, D([T ]1 ) is actually the connected component of the identity (this follows from Corollary 4.20 along with the above result).
We end this section by refining the fact that the closure of the derived group
is topologically generated by involutions so as to obtain the same statements that
Kittrell and Tsankov had obtained for full groups in [KT10, Sec. 4.2]. The proof
is actually the same as Kittrell and Tsankov’s modulo the use of the dominated
convergence theorem and we reproduce it here for the reader’s convenience.
Let Φ be a graphing and ϕ ∈ Φ. If A is a Borel subset of dom ϕ such that
A ∩ ϕ(A) = ∅, we denote by Iϕ,A the involution in Aut(X, µ) defined by: for all
x ∈ X,

 ϕ(x) if x ∈ A
ϕ−1 (x) if x ∈ ϕ(A)
Iϕ,A (x) =

x
else.
Note that Iϕ,A ∈ [Φ]1 since dΦ (x, Iϕ,A (x)) 6 1 for all x ∈ X.
Theorem 3.14. Let Φ be a graphing. Then the group D([Φ]1 ) is topologically generated by the set
{Iϕ,A : ϕ ∈ Φ, A ⊆ dom ϕ and A ∩ ϕ(A) = ∅} .
Proof. By Theorem 3.12, we only need to show that involutions belong to the group
topologically generated by the set
{Iϕ,A : ϕ ∈ Φ, A ⊆ dom ϕ and A ∩ ϕ(A) = ∅} .
So let U ∈ [Φ]1 be an involution, and let A be a fundamental domain for the
restriction of U to its support. Let (wn ) enumerate the Φ-words, and for each n ∈ N
let
An ={x ∈ A : U (x) = wn (x) and for all m ∈ N if U (x) = wm (x)
then either |wm | > |wn | or m > n}
Then (An ) forms a partition of A and for all n ∈ N, if wn = ϕ1 · · · ϕk , then for all
x ∈ An we have that for all i 6= j ∈ {1, ..., k}
ϕi · · · ϕk (x) 6= ϕj · · · ϕk (x)
by minimality of the length of wn . By the dominated convergence theorem,
U = lim

N
Y

N →+∞

Iwn ,An ,

n=0

so we may actually assume that U = Iϕ1 ···ϕk ,B for some B ⊆ X and ϕ1 , ..., ϕk ∈ Φ±1
such that for all i 6= j ∈ {1, ..., k} and all x ∈ B, ϕi · · · ϕk (x) 6= ϕj · · · ϕk (x).
Since X is a standard Borel space, a well-known argument yields that we may
actually find a partition (Bm )m∈N of B such that for all m ∈ N and all i 6= j ∈
{1, ..., k},
ϕi · · · ϕk (Bm ) ∩ ϕj · · · ϕk (Bm ) = ∅
21

(see for instance [EG14, Lem. 5.2]). Again by the dominated convergence theorem
U = lim

N →+∞

N
Y

Iϕ1 ···ϕk ,Bm ,

n=0

so we may actually assume that U = Iϕ1 ···ϕk ,C for some C ⊆ X such that for all
i 6= j ∈ {1, ..., k},
ϕi · · · ϕk (C) ∩ ϕj · · · ϕk (C) = ∅
Then note that for all m ∈ N and i ∈ {1, ..., k − 1}, the identity
(i − 1 k) = (i − 1 i)(i k)(i − 1 i)
in the symmetric group over {0, ..., k} yields
Iϕi ···ϕk ,C = Iϕi ,ϕi+1 ···ϕk (C) Iϕi+1 ···ϕk ,C Iϕi ,ϕi+1 ···ϕk (C)
so that by a downward recurrence on i ∈ {1, ..., k} we have that Iϕi ···ϕk ,C belongs to
the group generated by
{Iϕ,A : ϕ ∈ Φ, A ⊆ dom ϕ and A ∩ ϕ(A) = ∅} .
In particular, U = Iϕ1 ···ϕk ,C belongs to such a group, as wanted.

3.3

Dye’s reconstruction theorem

We now show that L1 full groups as abstract groups can only be isomorphic through
a measure-preserving transformation, which is a key step in order to see than L1 full
groups of ergodic Z-actions are a complete invariant of flip conjugacy. Fortunately,
the main result that we need for this has already been proven by Fremlin in a much
more general context.
Definition 3.15 (Fremlin). A subgroup G 6 Aut(X, µ) has many involutions if
for every Borel A ⊆ X non-null, there exists a non-trivial involution U ∈ G such
that supp U ⊆ A.
Proposition 3.16. Let Φ be a graphing. The following are equivalent
(1) Φ is aperiodic;
(2) [Φ]1 has many involutions;
(3) D([Φ]1 ) has many involutions;
(4) D([Φ]1 ) has many involutions.
Proof. Note that (2) and (3) are equivalent since every involution in [Φ]1 belongs to
D([Φ]1 ) by Lemma 3.10.
Let us show by contrapositive that (2)⇒(1): if Φ is not aperiodic, then we may
find a non-null set A which intersects every Φ-orbit in at most one point. Clearly
22

every element of [Φ]1 (actually of [RΦ ]) supported in A is trivial, in particular [Φ]1
does not have many involutions.
For the converse (1)⇒(2), suppose that Φ is aperiodic and let A ⊆ X be nonnull. Then by Lemma 2.12, there exists an involution U ∈ [RΦ ] whose support is
equal to A. Now Lemma 3.6 ensures us that there is a non-null U -invariant set A0
such that UA0 ∈ [Φ]1 , witnessing that [Φ]1 has many involutions. So the implication
(1)⇒(2) also holds and we conclude that (1), (2) and (3) are equivalent.
Clearly (4) ⇒ (2), so we now only need to show that (2)⇒(4). Suppose that
[Φ]1 has many involutions and let A be a non-null Borel subset of X. Let U ∈ [Φ]1
be an involution supported in A, let B be a fundamental domain of the restriction
of U to its support. Finally, let V ∈ [Φ]1 be an involution supported in B. Since
B and U (B) are disjoint, U V U V is an involution supported in A and belonging to
D([Φ]1 ) as wanted: D([Φ]1 ) has many involutions.
We denote by Aut∗ (X, µ) the group of non-singular transformations of (X, µ),
i.e. Borel bijections T : X → X such that for all Borel A ⊆ X, one has µ(A) = 0 if
and only if µ(T (A)) = 0.
We can now state and use Fremlin’s theorem, which is a generalization of Dye’s
reconstruction theorem for full groups.
Theorem 3.17 (Fremlin [Fre04, 384D]). Let G, H 6 Aut(X, µ) be two groups with
many involutions. Then any isomorphism between G and H is the conjugacy by
some non-singular transformation: for all ψ : G → H group isomorphism, there is
S ∈ Aut∗ (X, µ) such that for all T ∈ G,
ψ(T ) = ST S −1 .
Corollary 3.18. Let Φ and Ψ be two ergodic graphings. Then every isomorphism
between [Φ]1 and [Ψ]1 is the conjugacy by some measure-preserving transformation.
Proof. By Proposition 3.16 and the previous theorem, if ψ : [Φ]1 → [Ψ]1 is a group
isomorphism then there is S ∈ Aut∗ (X, µ) such that for all T ∈ [Φ]1 one has
ψ(T ) = ST S −1 .
Let f be the Radon-Nikodym derivative of the probability measure S∗ µ with respect
to µ. Since µ is preserved by every T ∈ [Φ]1 , the measure S∗ µ is preserved by every
T 0 ∈ [Ψ]1 . So f ◦ T 0 = f a.e. for every T 0 ∈ [Ψ]1 . But Ψ is ergodic so this implies f
is constant: the measure µ is preserved by S as wanted.

3.4

Closed normal subgroups of the closure of the derived
group

Given a group G ⊆ Aut(X, µ), we denote by GA the subgroup of all T ∈ G such
that supp T ⊆ A. Note that if Φ is a graphing and A is Φ-invariant then D([Φ]1 )A
is a closed normal subgroup of D([Φ]1 ).
We will see that conversely if Φ is aperiodic then all the closed normal subgroups
of D([Φ]1 ) arise in this manner. Our approach is based on the study of closed normal
subgroups generated by involutions.
23

Lemma 3.19. Let Φ be a graphing. If A is a Φ-invariant set then
D([Φ]1 A ) = D([Φ]1 )A = D([Φ]1 )A .
Proof. To simplify notation we let G = [Φ1 ]A , so that we aim to prove that
D(GA ) = D(G)A = D(G)A .
To this end we show that the chain of inclusions D(GA ) ⊆ D(G)A ⊆ D(G)A ⊆
D(GA ) holds.
• We clearly have the inclusion D(GA ) ⊆ D(G)A so that D(GA ) ⊆ D(G)A .
• Next, note that D(G)A is a closed subgroup of G which contains every element
of D(G)A . It follows that D(G)A ⊆ D(G)A .
• For the last remaining inclusion D(G)A ⊆ D(GA ), let T ∈ D(G)A . Then T
is supported on A and is a limit of elements Tn belonging to D(G). Now
note that by definition of the topology T is also the limit of the sequence of
transformations (TnA )n∈N . Moreover each TnA can be rewritten as a product
of commutators of elements supported in A by taking the induced transformations instead, which is harmless since A is invariant by every element appearing
in such a product. We conclude that T ∈ D(GA ) as desired.
We now establish a crucial lemma allowing a better understanding closures of
conjugacy classes of involutions.
Lemma 3.20. Let Φ be a graphing. Let U and V be two involutions such that their
supports are disjoint and have the same Φ-conditional measure. Then V belongs to
the closure of the conjugacy class of U .
Proof. Let A and B be fundamental domains of the respective restrictions of U and
V to their support. Then µΦ (A) = µΦ (B) so there exists an involution T ∈ [RΦ ]
such that T (A) = B and we can moreover assume that T (x) = x for all x ∈ A ∩ B.
For all n ∈ N we let An = {x ∈ A : dΦ (x, T (x)) < n} and Bn = {x ∈ B :
dΦ (x, T (x)) < n}. Since T is an involution and T (A) = B, we also have B
Sn = T (An ).
Note
that
(A
)
and
(B
)
are
increasing
sequences
of
sets
and
that
n
n
n An = A,
S
0
n Bn = B. We now define a new involution Tn

T (x)
if x ∈ An t Bn



V
T
U
(x)
if x ∈ U (An )
Tn0 (x) =
U T V (x) if x ∈ V (Bn )



x
else.
The definition of An and the fact that V, U ∈ [Φ]1 yield that Tn0 ∈ [Φ]1 as well. For
all n ∈ N and all x ∈ X, an easy calculation yields that:
• if x ∈ (A ∪ U (A)) \ (An ∪ U (An )), then Tn0 U Tn0 (x) = U (x),
• else if x ∈ (Bn ∪ V (Bn ), then Tn0 U Tn0 (x) = V (x) and
24

• else Tn0 U Tn0 (x) = x.
So Tn0 U Tn0 → V pointwise. Moreover the trichotomy above also shows that for all
x ∈ X we have dΦ (x, Tn0 U Tn0 (x)) 6 dΦ (x, U (x)) + dΦ (x, V (x)), so by the dominated
convergence theorem d˜Φ (Tn0 U Tn0 , V ) → 0. We have therefore established that V
belongs to the closure of the conjugacy class of U .
Lemma 3.21. Let Φ be an aperiodic graphing, let U ∈ [Φ]1 be an involution such
that µΦ (supp U ) 6 1/2. Let A be the Φ-closure of the support of U . Then the closed
subgroup generated by conjugates of U by elements of D([Φ]1 ) contains D([Φ]1 )A .
Proof. By Lemma 3.19 we may as well assume that A = X so that our aim becomes
to show that whenever U has support whose Φ-closure is equal to X and which
satisfies µΦ (supp U ) 6 1/2, the closed subgroup generated by conjugates of U by
involutions contains D([Φ]1 ).
So let U be as such, let B = supp U and denote by G the closed subgroup
generated by conjugates of U by elements of D([Φ]1 ). Since µΦ (supp U ) 6 1/2 by
Maharam’s lemma we may find a set C disjoint from B such that µΦ (C) = µΦ (B).
There is an involution V ∈ [RΦ ] supported on B t C such that V (B) = C. For all
n ∈ N we let
Bn = {x ∈ B : dΦ (x, V (x)) < n and dΦ (U (x), V U (x)) < n}
Then
(Bn ) is an increasing sequence of U -invariant Borel subsets
of B such that
S
S
n∈N Bn = B. Let An be the Φ-closure of Bn . Observe that
n∈N An = X, so the
proof will be finished once the following claim is proven.
Claim. For all n ∈ N, the group G contains D([Φ])An .
We now prove the claim. Let n ∈ N; the sets and functions that are to be
defined depend on n but we will omit the subscript n for readability. Let F be a
fundamental domain of the restriction of U to its support, let Fn be its intersection
with Bn , which is a fundamental domain for the restriction of U to Bn .
Let f = µΦ (Fn ) = µΦ (Bn )/2. We know that D([Φ])An is topologically generated
by involutions, so it suffices to show that any involution in [Φ]1 supported in An
belongs to G.
So let W be an involution supported in An . Let D be a Borel fundamental domain
for the restriction of W to its support: then supp W = D t W (D). By Corollary
2.10 we have a partition (Dm )m∈N of D such that for all m ∈ N, µΦ (Dm ) 6 f6 . For
all m ∈ N we let Wm = WDm tW (Dm ) . By the dominated convergence theorem,
W = lim

k→+∞

k
Y

Wm

m=0

so we only need to show that every Wm belongs to G.

25

B

C
Bn

U
V
Fn

Let us fix m ∈ N, and for notational simplicity let Γ = hU, V i ' (Z/2Z × Z/2Z) o
(Fn )
Z/2Z. Since µΦ (Dm ) 6 µΦ10
we can find a subset E ⊆ Fn such that µΦ (E) =
µΦ (Dm )/2 and E is disjoint from Γ(Dm t W (Dm )). Then Γ(E) is disjoint from
Dm t W (Dm ) = supp Wm .
Consider the Γ-invariant set Ẽ = (E t U (E)) t V (E t U (E)) and the involution
Ṽ = VẼ . An easy calculation yields U Ṽ U Ṽ = UẼ so that UẼ ∈ G. Now the support
of UẼ has Φ-conditional measure
µΦ (Ẽ) = 4µΦ (E) = 2µΦ (Dm ) = µΦ (supp Wm ).
Since moreover Ẽ and supp Wm are disjoint, we infer by Lemma 3.20 that Wm belongs to the closure of the conjugacy class of of UẼ . Since we have already established
that UẼ ∈ G, we can conclude that Wm ∈ G. As already observed, this ends the
proof of the claim and therefore of the theorem.
Proposition 3.22. Let Φ be an aperiodic graphing, let T ∈ [Φ]1 and let A be the
Φ-closure of the support of T . Then the closed subgroup generated by conjugates of
T by elements of D([Φ]1 ) contains
D([Φ]1 )A .
Proof. Again by Lemma 3.19 we only need to show that whenever T has a support
whose Φ-closure is equal to X, the closed subgroup generated by conjugates of T by
involutions contains D([Φ]1 ).
Let G be the closed subgroup generated by conjugates of T by elements of
D([Φ]1 ). We start by applying Proposition 2.7 and find a partition (A1 , A2 , B1 , B2 , B3 )
of supp T such that A2 = T (A1 ), B2 = T (B1 ) and B3 = T 2 (B1 ). Let C = A1 t b1 ,
then by construction C ∩ T (C) = ∅ and C intersects every non-trivial T -orbit. Since
the Φ-closure of supp T is equal to X this implies C intersects every Φ-orbit.
Let G be the closed subgroup generated by conjugates of T by elements of
D([Φ]1 ). Let U be an involution in [Φ]1 whose support
is equal to C. For all
S
n ∈ N, let Cn = {x ∈ X, dΦ (x, U (x)) < n}. Then n∈N Cn = C and for all n ∈ N
we have UCn ∈ [Φ]1 . Now since U (C) is disjoint from C we also have that U (Cn )
26

and Cn are disjoint so that [T, UCn ] is an involution belonging to G whose support
is Cn t T (Cn ).
Applying Lemma 3.21
S we deduce that G contains D([Φ]1 )An where An is the
Φ-closure
of Cn . Since n∈N Cn = C and C intersects every Φ-orbit, we have that
S
A
=
X. Moreover the sequence (An ) is increasing, so a direct application of
n∈N n
S
Proposition refprop: weak order continuity yields that n∈N D([Φ]1 )An is dense in
D([Φ]1 ) so that G contains D([Φ]1 ) as wanted.
We can now easily prove our main results for this section.
Theorem 3.23. Let Φ be an aperiodic graphing. Then for every closed normal
subgroup N of D([Φ]1 ) there is a (unique up to measure zero) Φ-invariant Borel set
A such that
N = D([Φ]1 )A .
Proof. Let t = sup{µ(A) : A is Φ-invariant and D([Φ]1 )A ⊆ N }, and let An be a
sequence of subsets of X such that µ(An ) → t and D([Φ]1 )An ⊆ N . Note that
whenever A0 , A00 are two Φ-invariant subsets of X then the group generated by
D([Φ]1 )A0 ∪ D([Φ]1 )A00 is equal to D([Φ]1 )A0 ∪A00 . So we may assume the sequence
(An ) is increasing.
S
Let A = n∈N An , then µ(A) = t. By proposition 3.8 since N is closed we
actually have that N contains D([Φ]1 )A . Conversely, let T ∈ N and let B be the
Φ-closure of the support of T . By Proposition 3.22 the group N contains D([Φ]1 )B .
So N contains D([Φ]1 )A∪B hence µ(A ∪ B) 6 t. But µ(A) = t so B ⊆ A up to
measure zero, hence T ∈ D([Φ]1 A . So D([Φ]1 )A contains N and we conclude that
N = D([Φ]1 )A .
Finally, the uniqueness of A up to measure zero follows from the fact that given
any B ⊆ X of positive measure, there is a non trivial T ∈ D([Φ]1 ) supported in B
(see Proposition 3.16).
Corollary 3.24. Let Φ be an aperiodic graphing. Then Φ is ergodic if and only if
D([Φ]1 ) is topologically simple.
We will see that D([Φ]1 ) and D([Φ]1 ) are never simple when Φ = {T } and
T ∈ Aut(X, µ) is aperiodic (see Theorem 4.26).

3.5

Link with topological full groups

In this section we connect L1 full groups to the well-studied topological full groups.
Since we are dealing with L1 full groups associated to graphings, we need to introduce
their natural topological counterparts.
Let 2N be the Cantor space and let ν be a Borel probability measure on it. A
continuous graphing on the measured Cantor space (2N , ν) is a graphing Φ such
that for all ϕ ∈ Φ, the sets dom ϕ, rng ϕ are clopen and ϕ : dom ϕ → rng ϕ is a
homeomorphism.

27

Definition 3.25. Let Φ be a continuous graphing on (2N , ν). The topological full
group of Φ, denoted by [Φ]c , is the group of all homeomorphisms T of 2N such that
for all x ∈ 2N there is a neighborhood U of x and a Φ-word w such that for all y ∈ U ,
T (x) = w(x).
It follows from compactness that one can think equivalently of the topological
full group of a continuous graphing Φ as the group of all maps obtained by cutting
and pasting finitely many Φ-words along a partition into clopen sets. In particular,
[Φ]c is always a countable group. The most interesting case is when Φ is actually a
countable group acting by homeomorphisms on a compact set (or a generating set
for such a countable group): we then recover the usual definition of the topological
full group.
We denote by [Φ]c−inv denote the group generated by involutions in a topological full group [Φ]c . The following result is an L1 full group version of a result of
Miller [Mil05] for full groups, also proved by Kittrell-Tsankov [KT10, Prop. 4.1] and
Medynets [Med07] in the case of a single homeomorphism.
Theorem 3.26. Let ν be a Borel probability measure on 2N , and let Φ be a continuous graphing on (2N , µ). Then the group [Φ]c−inv is dense in D([Φ]1 ).
Proof. Let us recall that if ϕ ∈ Φ and A is a Borel subset of dom ϕ such that
A ∩ ϕ(A) = ∅, we denote by Iϕ,A the involution in [Φ]1 defined by: for all x ∈ X,

 ϕ(x) if x ∈ A
ϕ−1 (x) if x ∈ ϕ(A)
Iϕ,A (x) =

x
else.
By Theorem 3.14, the group D([Φ]1 ) is topologically generated by such involutions,
so we only need to check that, given ϕ ∈ Φ and a Borel subset A of dom ϕ such that
A ∩ ϕ(A) = ∅, the involution Iϕ,A can be approximated by elements of [Φ]c−inv .
So let ϕ ∈ Φ and let A be a Borel subset of dom ϕ such that A∩ϕ(A) = ∅. Since ν
is regular, there is a sequence (An ) of clopen subsets of 2N such that ν(An 4 A) → 0.
Consider the set A0n := An \ϕ(An ). Note that since ϕ is a partial homeomorphism,
A0n is still clopen, and by definition A0n is disjoint from ϕ(A0n ) so the involution Iϕ,A0n
belongs to [Φ]c−inv . We now have
Z
Z
d˜Φ (Iϕ,A , Iϕ,A0n ) ) =
dΦ (ϕ(x), x) +
dΦ (x, ϕ(x))
A\A0n
A0n \A
Z
Z
−1
+
dΦ (ϕ (x), x) +
dΦ (x, ϕ−1 (x))
ϕ(A\A0n )
=2µ(A0n 4 A).

ϕ(A0n \A)

Moreover since ν(An 4 A) → 0, since ϕ preserves the measure and since A is disjoint
from ϕ(A), a straightforward computation yields µ(A0n 4 A) → 0. We conclude that
d˜Φ (Iϕ,A , Iϕ,A0n ) ) → 0 as desired.
Let us now show that the similar statement that [Φ]c is dense in [Φ]1 is not true
in general.
28

Example 3.27. Consider the odometer T0 on 2N . For every word s with letters
in {0, 1}, we let Ns ⊆ 2N be the set of infinite words which start by s. For every
n ∈ N, let ϕn be the restriction of T0 to N1n 0 , and then let Φ = {ϕn : n ∈ N}.
It is easily checked that the topological full group [Φ]c is the group S2∞ of dyadic
permutations. In particular [Φ]c is locally finite, hence contained in D([Φ]1 ). We
conclude from Theorem 3.26 that [Φ]c = D([Φ]1 ).
However the L1 full group of Φ is equal to the L1 full group of T0 since up to
measure zero they induce the same graph. But T0 has index 1 (see Definition 4.3)
hence cannot belong to D([T0 ]1 ) = D([Φ]1 ), and we conclude that [Φ]c is not dense
in [Φ]1 .
It is well-known that every countable group Γ of measure-preserving transformation of (X, µ) is up to measure zero conjugate by a measure-preserving isomorphism
to a group of homeomorphism of the Cantor space preserving a Borel probability
measure ν (see for instance [Gla03, Thm. 2.15]). Here we check that the same can
be done for graphings so as to be able to apply our density result above in the right
level of generality.
Recall that the group of homeomorphisms of the Cantor space is canonically
isomorphic to the group of automorphisms of the Boolean algebra of clopen subsets
of the Cantor space. Furthermore, the Boolean algebra of clopen subsets of the
Cantor space is the unique countable atomless Boolean algebra (see for instance
[GH09, Chap. 16]). We can now state and prove that any graphing is conjugate to
a continuous one up to measure zero.
Proposition 3.28. Let (X, µ) be a standard Borel space, and let Φ be a graphing
on X. Then there exists a Borel probability measure ν on 2N , a continuous graphing
Ψ on (2N , ν), a Φ-invariant full measure Borel subset X0 of X and Borel measurepreserving injection T : (X0 , µ) → (2N , ν) and a continuous graphing Ψ on 2N such
that
ΨT (X0 ) = T ΦX0 T −1 .
Proof. Let C be a countable separating family of Borel sets containing X. Let D
be set of finite Boolean combinations of sets of the form w(C) or w−1 (C) for w a
Φ-word and C ∈ C. Then D is countable separating, contains the domain and range
of every ϕ ∈ Φ, and is Φ-invariant in the sense that for every ϕ ∈ Φ and D ∈ D,
ϕ±1 (D) ∈ D.
Each atom of D is a singleton since D contains a separating family. Let A be
the reunion of the atoms of D, then A is countable and hence has measure zero. Let
X0 := X \ A, and consider the Boolean algebra DX0 := {D ∩ X0 : D ∈ D}. induced
by D on X0 .
By Stone duality, DX0 is isomorphic to the algebra of clopen subsets of its Stone
space Y . Since DX0 is a countable atomless algebra its Stone space Y is homeomorphic to 2N so we may as well assume that Y = 2N .
By construction every ϕ ∈ Φ induces a Boolean algebra isomorphism between the
Boolean algebra induced by DX0 on dom ϕ and the Boolean algebra induced by DX0
on rng ϕ, so every ϕ ∈ Φ induces a homeomorphism ϕ̃ between the corresponding
clopen subsets of Y . Let Ψ = {ϕ̃ : ϕ ∈ Φ}, we will check that such a continuous
graphing works.
29

We define a map T : X0 → Y by associating to every x ∈ X0 the unique element
T (x) of the Stone space of DX0 defined by x. Since DX0 contains a separating family
of X0 , the map T is injective. Moreover it conjugates the restriction ΦX0 and ΨT (X0 )
by the definition of Ψ. Finally the map T is also Borel since the preimage of a clopen
set belongs to DX0 , so by putting ν = T∗ µ we get the desired statement.

4

L1 full groups of Z-actions

We now focus on L1 full groups of Z-actions, for which we can say a lot more. The
main feature is that for Z-actions, L1 full groups become invariants of flip-conjugacy.
To see this, we need the following fundamental result of Belinskaya.
Theorem 4.1 (Belinskaya, [Bel68]). Let T and T 0 be two ergodic transformations
with the same orbits, and suppose furthermore that T 0 ∈ [T ]1 . Then there exists
S ∈ [T ] such that either
T = ST 0 S −1 or T −1 = ST 0 S −1 .
With this in hand, we can now prove that L1 full groups of ergodic Z-actions are
complete invariants of flip conjugacy.
Theorem 4.2. Let T and T 0 be two measure-preserving ergodic transformation of
a standard probability space (X, µ). Then the following are equivalent:
(1) T and T 0 are flip-conjugate;
(2) the groups [T ]1 and [T 0 ]1 are abstractly isomorphic;
(3) the groups [T ]1 and [T 0 ]1 are topologically isomorphic.
Proof. Clearly (1) implies (3) and (3) implies (2). Suppose that (2) holds and let
ψ : [T ]1 → [T 0 ]1 be an abstract group isomorphism. By Corollary 3.18, there is
S ∈ Aut(X, µ) such that for all U ∈ [T ]1 , we have
ψ(U ) = SU S −1 .
In particular, we have that ST S −1 ∈ [T 0 ]1 . Since ψ is surjective, ST S −1 must
have the same orbits as T 0 . So by Belinkskaya’s Theorem 4.1, ST S −1 and T 0 are
flip-conjugate, so T and T 0 are flip-conjugate. So (2) implies (1), which ends the
proof.

4.1

The index map

One of the specific features of L1 full groups of aperiodic Z-actions is the existence
of a natural homomorphism into R, given by integrating the corresponding cocycles.
We will see later that in the ergodic case, it actually takes values into Z.

30

Definition 4.3. Let T ∈ Aut(X, µ) be ergodic. The index of S ∈ [T ]1 is defined
by
Z
cS (x)dµ(x),
IT (S) :=
X

where cS is the cocycle associated to S ∈ [T ]. When the transformation T we are
considering is clear from the context, we will also simply write the index map as I.
From the cocycle identity cSS 0 (x) = c0S (S(x)) + cS (x) and the fact that elements
of [T ]1 are measure preserving we deduce that the index map is a homomorphism.
We will denote its kernel by [T ]0 .
Our first observation is that taking induced transformations does not change
the index. The proof is very similar to that of Kac’s formula, which should be no
surprise since Kac’s formula corresponds to the case S = T .
Proposition 4.4. Let S ∈ [T ]1 , and let A ⊆ X intersect every non trivial S-orbit.
Then we have the equality
I(SA ) = I(S).
Proof. For all n ∈ N, let An := {x ∈ X : TA (x) = T n (x)}. Then the An ’s form a
partition of A. For all n ∈ N and all 0 6 m < n, we let Bn,m := T m (An ). The
family (Bn,m )06m<n is a partition of the support of S since A intersects every non
trivial S-orbit. We now compute
Z
I(SA ) = cSA (x)dµ(x)
A
XZ
cSA (x)dµ(x)
=
An

n∈N

=

n−1
X

XZ

cS (S m (x))dµ(x),

An m=0

n∈N

the last equality being a consequence of the cocycle identity. We deduce that
I(SA ) =

n−1 Z
XX
An

n∈N m=0

=

XZ
n∈N
Z

cS (S m (x))dµ(x)
cS (x)dµ(x)

Bn,m

=

cS (x)dµ(x)
supp S

I(SA ) = I(S)
The following corollary can also be obtained directly by noting that if S ∈ [T ]1 ,
then on every finite S-orbit the average of nS must be equal to zero.
Corollary 4.5. Let T ∈ Aut(X, µ) be aperiodic. Every periodic element of [T ]1 has
index zero.

31

Proof. Let S ∈ [T ]1 be a periodic element, let A ⊆ X be a fundamental domain
for S (see the paragraph following Definition 2.3). Then SA = idX by definition so
I(SA ) = 0. By the previous proposition we conclude that I(S) = I(SA ) = 0.
One can completely describe the ergodic elements of the L1 full group of T ∈
Aut(X, µ) which are conjugate to T in terms of their index. This will be very useful
to us in the next section.
Theorem 4.6 (Belinskaya, [Bel68, Thm. 3.8]). Let T ∈ Aut(X, µ) be an ergodic
transformation, and let T 0 ∈ [T ]1 . Then T and T 0 are flip-conjugate iff T 0 is ergodic
and I(T 0 ) = ±1.

4.2

A characterization of supports of n-cycles

In full groups of aperiodic equivalence relations, every Borel set is the support of an
involution. Here we will see that this is not true in general for L1 full groups and
give a complete characterization of sets which arise as supports of involutions, or
more generally of n-cycles.
Definition 4.7. A measure-preserving transformation T is an n-cycle if every T orbit has cardinality either 1 or n.
Note that if p is prime, a p-cycle is precisely an element of Aut(X, µ) of order p.
Our result is that n-cycles in L1 -full groups arise only in the most obvious manner:
for instance there is an involution whose support is equal to X if and only if there
exists a Borel set B such that X = B t T (B).
Theorem 4.8. Let T be a measure-preserving ergodic transformation, let A be a
Borel subset of X and let n ∈ N. Then A is equal to the support of an n-cycle if
and only if there is B ⊆ A such that
A = B t TA (B) · · · t TAn−1 (B)
Remark. We should point out however that every Borel set arises as the support
of a periodic transformation all whose orbits have cardinality at most 3 (see Lemma
4.24).
Proof of Theorem 4.8. The sufficiency of the condition is easy: since TA ∈ [T ]1 by
Kac’s formula (see Prop. 3.5), if A = B t TA (B) · · · t TAn−1 (B) we can define an
n-cycle T0 ∈ [T ]1 whose support equates A by putting

F
i
if x ∈ n−2
 TA (x)
i=0 TA (B)
−n−1
n−1
T0 (x) =
T
(x)
if x ∈ TA (B) .
 A
x
else.
For the converse, let us recall that if G 6 Aut(X, µ) and A is a Borel subset of
X, we let GA denote the group of elements of G supported in A. Observe that if T ∈
Aut(X, µ) then for all x, y ∈ A we have dT (x, y) > dTA (x, y) so that [T ]1 A 6 [TA ]1
(we will see in Theorem 5.2 that the inclusion is actually strict). This observation
will be used implicitly in what follows.
32

Suppose that A is the support of an n-cycle T0 , let C be a fundamental domain
for T0 , and consider the transformation S = TC T0 whose support also equates A and
satisfies
A = C t S(C) t · · · t S n−1 (C).
By Proposition 2.5 the restriction of S to A is ergodic. Moreover note that TC =
(TA )C so the the TA -index of TC is ITA (TC ) = 1 by Proposition 4.4. Since T0 is
periodic, its TA -index is equal to 0 by Corollary 4.5 and we conclude that
ITA (S) = 1.
By applying Belinskaya’s theorem 4.6 to the restriction of S to A which is ergodic,
we conclude that TA and S are conjugate by a measure-preserving transformation
U supported in A. But recall that A = C t S(C) t · · · t S n−1 (C) so we have
A = U (C) t TA (U (C)) · · · t TAn−1 (U (C)) hence TA satisfies the desired conclusion
with B := U (C).
Example 4.9. Let T ∈ Aut(X, µ) be a weakly mixing transformation. Then for all
n ∈ N, there is no n-cycle in [T ]1 whose support equates X.
Remark. The existence of B ⊆ A such that A = B t TA (B) · · · t TAn−1 (B) is a
spectral property of TA : it is equivalent to the associated unitary operator on L2 (A)
having e2iπ/n as an eigenvalue.

4.3

The L1 full group is generated by induced transformations
along with periodic transformations

We will now use the index map to find a nice generating set for [T ]1 . Our ideas are
in the direct continuation of Belinskaya’s paper [Bel68]. Let us start by analyzing
the action of elements of [T ]1 on the T -orbits.
A sequence (nk )k∈N of integers is called almost positive if for all but finitely
k ∈ N, we have nk > 0. It is called almost negative if (−nk )k∈N is almost positive,
and a sequence which is either almost negative or almost positive is called almost
sign invariant. It is an easy exercise to check that an injective sequence is almost
positive iff it tends to +∞, while it is almost negative iff it tends to −∞. The
following lemma thus implies that under the identification of a T -orbit with Z via
k 7→ T k (x), every forward S-orbit either tends to +∞ or −∞.
Lemma 4.10 ([Bel68, Thm. 3.2]). Let T ∈ Aut(X, µ) be aperiodic and S ∈
[T ]1 . For almost every x ∈ X such that the S-orbit of x is infinite, the sequence
sign(cS k (x)) is almost sign invariant.
Definition 4.11. An element S ∈ [T ]1 such that for all x ∈ supp S, the sequence
(cS k (x))k∈N is almost positive is called almost positive. If for every x ∈ supp S
the sequence (cS k (x))k∈N is almost negative, we say that S is almost negative.
Note that every almost positive or almost negative element has to be aperiodic
when restricted to its support. Also the inverse of an almost positive element is
almost negative and vice-versa. We have a natural order on every T -orbit which
allows for a more natural formulation of the previous definition.
33

Definition 4.12. Let T ∈ Aut(X, µ) be aperiodic. We define a partial order 6T on
X by x 6T y if y = T n (x) for some n > 0.
Note that 6T is total when restricted to a T -orbit, and that such a restriction
corresponds to the natural ordering 6 on Z via n 7→ T n (x).
We may now reformulate the previous definition as: S ∈ [T ]1 is almost positive
if for almost every x ∈ supp S, S k (x) >T x for all but finitely many k ∈ N.
Proposition 4.13. Let T ∈ Aut(X, µ) be aperiodic. Every element s ∈ [T ]1 can be
written as a product S = Sp S+ S− , where Sp is periodic, S+ is almost positive, S− is
almost negative and these three elements have disjoint supports.
Proof. Let S ∈ [T ]1 . The set of x ∈ X such that the sequence (cS k (x))k∈N is
almost positive (respectively almost negative) is S-invariant. Call this set A+ (respectively A− ). Finally let Ap denote the set of x ∈ X whose S-orbit is finite.
Then (A− , A+ , Ap ) is a partition of X by the previous lemma, and since they are
S-invariant we deduce that S = SA− SA+ SAp . Clearly Sp := SAp , S+ := SA+ and
S− := SA− are as wanted.
Definition 4.14. Let T ∈ Aut(X, µ) be aperiodic. If S ∈ [T ]1 , we say that S is
positive if S(x) >T x for all x ∈ X.
The proof of the following proposition uses the same ideas as in [Bel68, Lem.
3.5].
Proposition 4.15. Let T ∈ Aut(X, µ) be aperiodic, and let S ∈ [T ]1 be almost
positive. Then there exists a positive element S 0 ∈ [T ]1 whose support is a subset of
supp S such that SS 0 −1 and S 0 −1 S are periodic.
Proof. Consider the set A := {x ∈ X : S k (x) >T x for all k > 0}. Note that TA (x)
may be defined as the first element greater than x which belongs to A, so by the
definition of A we have TA (x) 6T SA (x) for all x ∈ A.
Let us show that A intersects every non trivial S-orbit. Let x ∈ supp S. Since
S is almost positive, the sequence (nS k (x))k∈N is almost positive. Let k be the last
natural integer such that nS k (x) 6 0, then by definition S k (x) ∈ A as wanted.
Now for all x ∈ A we have SA (x) >T TA (x) >T x, in particular SA is positive.
Since A intersects every S-orbit, we moreover have that SSA−1 and SA−1 S are periodic,
so S 0 := SA is as desired.
Lemma 4.16. Let T ∈ Aut(X, µ) be aperiodic, let S ∈ [T ]1 be positive and let
A = supp S. Then STA−1 is positive.
Proof. Since S is positive, we have A = {x ∈ X : S(x) >T x}. But then by the
definition of TA ,for all x ∈ A we have S(x) >T TA (x). Since A is TA -invariant, we
deduce that for all x ∈ A, STA−1 (x) >T x. But the support of STA−1 is contained
in A so the previous inequality actually holds for all x ∈ X, and we conclude that
STA−1 is positive.

34

Proposition 4.17. Let T ∈ Aut(X, µ) be ergodic. Then every positive element is
the product of finitely many transformations which are induced by T : for all S ∈ [T ]+
1
there exists k ∈ N and A1 , ..., Ak ⊆ X such that
S = TA1 · · · TAk .
In particular, the index of a positive element is a (positive) integer.
Proof. Note that the index of a positive element has to belong to [0, +∞[, and that
the index of a positive element S is null if and only if S = idX . We prove the result
by induction on bI(S)c.
First, if bI(S)c = 0, suppose towards a contradiction that S is non-trivial. let
A = supp S, by the previous lemma STA−1 is positive. Since T is ergodic, A intersects
almost every T -orbit. Proposition 4.4 thus yields that I(TA ) = I(T ) = 1. So
I(STA−1 ) = I(S) − 1 < 0, but STA−1 is positive, a contradiction.
The inductive step is basically the same: if bI(S)c = n + 1 for some n ∈ N, the
support A of S is nontrivial so that S = TA S 0 where bI(S 0 )c = n.
Theorem 4.18. Let T ∈ Aut(X, µ) be ergodic, then [T ]1 is generated by the set
P er([T ]1 ) ∪ Ind([T ]1 ), where P er([T ]1 ) is the set of periodic elements in [T ]1 and
Ind([T ]1 ) is its set of transformations induced by T .
Proof. By Proposition 4.13 the group [T ]1 is generated by almost positive elements
along with periodic elements. Now every almost positive element is the product of a
positive element by a periodic element (Proposition 4.15) and every positive element
is the product of finitely many induced transformations (Proposition 4.17).
Corollary 4.19. Let T ∈ Aut(X, µ) be ergodic, then [T ]1 is generated by the set
P er([T ]1 ) ∪ {T }, where P er([T ]1 ) is the set of periodic elements in [T ]1 .
Proof. If A is a non-null subset of X, then by ergodicity A intersects almost every T orbit so that TA−1 T is periodic. In other words every induced transformation belongs
to the group generated by periodic elements along with T , and since by the previous
theorem periodic elements along with induced transformations generate [T ]1 we are
done.
Corollary 4.20. Let T ∈ Aut(X, µ) be ergodic. Then D([T ]1 ) is equal to the following three groups:
• the group generated by periodic elements,
• the group topologically generated by involutions and
• the kernel of the index map.
Moreover we have the following short exact sequence
I

1 → D([T ]1 ) → [T ]1 →
− Z → 1.

35

Proof. Denote by Gper the group generated by periodic elements in [Φ]1 , and by
Ginv the group topologically generated by involutions. Note that both are normal
subgroups of [T ]1 . By Lemma 3.10, we have Gper 6 Ginv 6 D([T ]1 ). Since the index
map is continuous and takes values in an abelian group, we also have D([T ]1 ) 6
Ker (I).
Let S ∈ [T ]1 . We may write S as a product of periodic elements and powers
of T by the previous corollary. So modulo Gper , we have S = T n for some n ∈ Z.
So I(S) = n and we conclude that the index map takes values into Z. Moreover if
S ∈ Ker (I) we infer that n = 0 so that S ∈ Gper . So Gper = Ker (I) and since we
have already established that Gper 6 Ginv 6 D([T ]1 ) 6 Ker (I), we conclude that
all these four normal subgroups are equal.
Remark. Note that for topological full groups, the kernel of the index map can be
larger than the derived group due to the fact that some involutions may not belong
to the derived group. Matui has obtained a complete description of the quotient of
the kernel of the index map by the derived group, see [Mat06, Thm. 4.8].

4.4

Escape time and non-simplicity results

In this section, we show that the closure of the derived group of [T ]1 is never simple.
To this end, we will use the non-integrability of certain escape times.
Let us first recall that given a standard probability space (X, µ), its measure
algebra is denoted by MAlg(X, µ) and consists of all Borel subsets of X, two such
sets being identified if their symmetric difference has measure zero.
It is naturally endowed with a metric dµ defined by dµ (A, B) = µ(A 4 B) which
is complete and separable (see [Hal50, 40.A]).
Definition 4.21. Let T ∈ Aut(X, µ) and A ∈ MAlg(X, µ). The T -escape time of
A is the map τA : A → N defined by
• τA (x) = +∞ if there is no n ∈ N such that T n (x) 6∈ A,
• else τA (x) is the the first integer n ∈ N such that T n (x) 6∈ A or T −n (x) 6∈ A.
By Kac’s theorem, for any Borel set A ⊆ X the T -return time to A is integrable
and its integral is equal to 1. The situation for escape times is however very different.
Indeed, any non-null T -invariant set fails to have an integrable escape time so a
non ergodic transformation admits non-trivial sets with non-integrable escape time.
This is actually true of any measure-preserving transformation in a strong sense as
the following result shows.
Theorem 4.22. Let T be a measure-preserving transformation. Then there is a
dense Gδ of A ∈ MAlg(X, µ) whose T -escape time is not integrable.
Proof. For n ∈ N, let Fn be the set of A ∈ MAlg(X, µ) whose escape time is either
non integrable or has L1 norm stricly bigger than n. We have to show that each Fn
is open dense. To see that Fn is open, first note that for a fixed k ∈ N, if we let
Ak := {x ∈ A : nA (x) = k} then
!
k
[

Ak+1 = A \
Al ∩ T −(k+1) (A) ∪ T k+1 (A)
l=1

36

so that Ak depends continuously
P on A. Now take A ∈ Fn , by definition we may find
N ∈ N big enough so that N
k=1 kµ(Ak ) > n. Such an inequality will remain true
0
for A sufficiently close to A by continuity, so that Fn is indeed open.
Next, to check the density, we will be done if we can build a sequence (Am ) such
that kτAm k1 → +∞ but µ(Am ) → 0. Indeed, then A ∪ Am converges to A and for
any n ∈ N, it belongs to Fn for m large enough.
If the ergodic decomposition of T has a diffuse part, there is a sequence of T invariant sets (Am ) such that µ(Am ) → 0 and kτAm k1 = +∞ by T -invariance.
If the ergodic decomposition of T does not have a diffuse part, then T has to be
aperiodic. So we apply Rohlin’s lemma to T for N = 6m ,  = 21 to get Bm ⊆ X all
whose first 6m translates are disjoint such that 2·61m 6 µ(Bn ) 6 61n . Let
An :=

4m
−1
G

T i (Bm )

i=0

be the reunion of the first 4m translates of the base Bm of the Rohlin tower. We
now compute the integral of the escape time:
4m /2−1

Z
τAm = 2µ(Bm )
Am

= 2µ(Bm ) ·
1 16m
> m·
6
8

X

(i + 1)

i=0
m
4m 42

2

+1
2

which tends to +∞ while µ(Am ) 6 ( 46 )m tends to zero as m tends to +∞.
Remark. For any T ∈ Aut(X, µ) of rank one, it is easily checked that the set of
A ∈ MAlg(X, µ) whose T -escape time is bounded is also dense, but I do not know
wether this is true for any T ∈ Aut(X, µ).
The following corollary of Theorem 4.22 is in sharp contrast with the situation
for full groups of ergodic measure-preserving equivalence relations, which act transitively on elements of MAlg(X, µ) of the same measure.
Corollary 4.23. Let T ∈ Aut(X, µ) be ergodic. There is a dense Gδ of A ∈
MAlg(X, µ) such that for every B ∈ MAlg(X, µ) disjoint of A of the same measure, no element of [T ]1 maps A to B.
Proof. If T maps A to a set disjoint from A, then by definition the L1 -norm of T is
an upper bound of the integral of the escape time of A. By the previous theorem,
this cannot happen for a dense Gδ of A ∈ MAlg(X, µ).
We will now refine the preceding result to establish that for all T ∈ [R] aperiodic,
neither the derived group of [T ]1 nor its closure are simple. We will need the following
lemma, which is essentially contained in [Fat78].
Lemma 4.24. Let T ∈ Aut(X, µ) be aperiodic. For every A ∈ MAlg(X, µ), there
exists a periodic U ∈ [T ]1 whose support is equal to A and all whose orbits have
cardinality at most 3.
37

Proof. Consider the induced transformation TA , which belongs to [T ]1 by Proposition 3.5. Since T is aperiodic, supp TA = A. By a maximality argument, there
is a partition (A1 , A2 , B1 , B2 , B3 ) of A such that TA (A1 ) = A2 , TA (B1 ) = B2 and
TA (B2 = B3 ) (see [Fri70, Lem. 7.2]). We then have a naturally defined periodic
element U ∈ [T ]1 given by

TA (x) if x ∈ A1 t B1 t B2


 −1
TA (x) if x ∈ A2
U (x) =
T −2 (x) if x ∈ B3


 A
x
else.
It is easily checked that U is as desired.
Lemma 4.25. Let T ∈ Aut(X, µ) be aperiodic. For every Borel A ⊆ X, there exists
U ∈ D([T ]1 ) whose support is equal to A and all whose orbits have cardinality at
most 3.
Proof. Consider the transformation U ∈ [T ]1 provided by the previous lemma. Observe that U = U2 U3 where U2 is the transformation induced by U on the set of
points whose U -orbit has cardinality 2, and U3 is the transformation induced by U
on the set of points whose U -orbit has cardinality 3.
U3 is a commutator by the equality (1 2 3) = (1 2)(1 3)(1 2)(1 3) in the
symmetric group over {1, 2, 3}.
Let C be a fundamental domain of the restriction of U2 to its support. Applying
the above lemma again, we find V ∈ [T ]1 all whose orbits have cardinality at most 3
such that supp V = C. We then let Ũ2 = U2 V U2 V −1 ∈ D([T ]1 ) which has the same
support as U2 . Now U 0 = Ũ2 U3 is as desired.
If every A ∈ MAlg(X, µ) were the support of an involution belonging to [T ]1 , one
could take U from the previous lemma to be an involution. However X itself may
fail to be the support of an involution (see Theorem 4.8 and the example thereafter).
Theorem 4.26. Let T ∈ Aut(X, µ) be ergodic. Then neither D([T ]1 ) nor D([T ]1 )
are simple.
The previous theorem follows trivially from the following statement which we
will prove using Theorem 4.22.
Lemma 4.27. Let T ∈ Aut(X, µ) be ergodic. Then there exists S1 , S2 ∈ D([T ]1 )
such that S1 cannot be written as a product of conjugates of S2±1 by elements of [T ]1 .
Proof. Take A ∈ MAlg(X, µ) whose escape time is not integrable, which exists by
Theorem 4.22.
By Lemma 4.25, we may fix S1 ∈ D([T1 ]) whose support is equal to A and
S2 ∈ D([T ]1 ) whose support B is disjoint from A. Now assume
S1 is a product of
S
conjugates of S2±1 by T1 , ..., Tn ∈ [T ]1 . We must have A ⊆ ni=1 Ti (B), but then the
integral of the escape time of A must be less than
n
X

dT (Ti−1 , idX ) < +∞,

i=1

a contradiction.
38

Remark. The two above results result are also true in the more general aperiodic
case, but the non-trivial case is the ergodic one. Indeed, in the non-ergodic case we
can directly use Lemma 4.25 to build two non-trivial elements in D([Φ]1 ) whose supports are T -invariant and disjoint, so the normal subgroups they generate actually
intersect trivially.

4.5

Density of topological full groups, amenability and finiteness of the topological rank

Theorem 4.28. Let T be a homeomorphism of the Cantor space, and let ν be a
non-atomic ergodic probability measure preserved by T . Then the topological full
group [T ]c is dense in the L1 full group [T ]1 .
Proof. By Theorem 3.26, the group [T ]c contains D([Φ]1 ), in particular it contains
every periodic element of [Φ]1 by Lemma 3.10. By Corollary 4.19 the group [T ]1 is
generated by periodic elements along with T , and since T ∈ [T ]c we conclude that
[T ]c = [T ]1 .
So given a measure-preserving ergodic homeomorphism T of (2N , λ), we have the
following chain of Polish groups where each is dense in its successor:
[T ]c 6 [T ]1 6 [T ] 6 Aut(2N , ν).
I don’t know whether the above theorem can be generalised to other finitely generated groups acting by measure-preserving homeomorphisms. Recall however that
this result is wrong for graphings in general (see Example 3.27).
Recall that a topological group is amenable if all its continuous actions on compact spaces admit invariant probability measures. Note that if a topological group
contains a dense subgroup which is amenable as a discrete group, it has to be
amenable itself. We view countable groups as discrete groups. Juschenko and Monod
have shown that topological full groups of minimal Z-actions on the Cantor space are
amenable [JM13]. Since the Jewett-Krieger theorem ensures us that every ergodic
Z-actions can be modelled by a minimal uniquely ergodic homeomorphism (see e.g.
[Pet89]), the previous theorem has the following interesting application.
Theorem 4.29. Let T ∈ Aut(X, µ) be ergodic. Then its L1 full group [T ]1 is an
amenable topological group, and so is the closed subgroup D([T ]1 ).
It would be interesting to obtain a purely ergodic-theoretic proof of the previous
result. The same is true of our next result where we rely on Matui’s work on
finite generation of topological full groups (the commutator group of the topological
full group of a minimal homeomorphism is finitely generated if and only if the
homeomorphism is a subshift of finite type, see [Mat06, Thm. 5.4]). We should also
point out that our proof of (1)⇒(2) is a natural adaptation of his.
Theorem 4.30. Let T ∈ Aut(X, µ) be ergodic. Then the following are equivalent
1. the L1 full group [T ]1 is topologically finitely generated;
39

2. the closed subgroup D([T ])1 is topologically finitely generated;
3. the transformation T has finite entropy.
Proof. (1)⇒(3) Suppose that [T ]1 is topologically finitely generated, and let S1 , ..., Sk ∈
[T ]1 generate a dense subgroup of [T ]1 . For each i ∈ {1, ..., k} and each n ∈ Z let
Ai,n := {x ∈ X : cSi (x) = n}. Since S1 , ..., Sk ∈ [T ]1 , for every i ∈ {1, ..., k} we have
X
|n| µ(Ai,n ) < +∞
n∈Z

Lemma 2.13 thus yields that every partition (Ai,n )n∈N has finite entropy. The partiW
tion P := ki=1 (Ai,n )n∈Z thus has finite entropy. We will show that it is a generating
partition.
Let A be the algebra generated by the T -translates of P. Note that every element
of the group generated by S1 , ..., Sk must have a cocycle partition whose elements
belong to A.
Since P has finite entropy, in order to conclude that T has finite entropy we only
need to check that A is dense in MAlg(X, µ).
For every Borel set A the transformation induced by T on A has support equal to
A and can be approximated by elements of the group generated by S1 , ..., Sk in the
metric d˜T which refines the uniform metric du . So the supports of these transformations form a sequence (An ) whose elements belong to Q such that µ(An 4 A) → 0.
We can conclude that up to measure zero, Q generates the σ-algebra of X. As
explained before, this yields that T has finite entropy.
(3)⇒(2) : If T has finite entropy, Krieger’s finite generator theorem yields that
we can take T to be a minimal subshift of finite type [Kri72]. It then follows from
Matui’s result [Mat06, Thm. 5.4] that D([T ]c ) is finitely generated. So by Theorem
4.28 the Polish group D([T ]1 ) is topologically finitely generated.
(2)⇒(1): Suppose D([T ]1 ) is topologically finitely generated. It follows from
Corollary 4.20 that
[T ]1 = D([T ]1 ) o hT i ,
so [T ]1 is also topologically finitely generated.
We now give a concrete example where the topological rank is equal to 2.
Proposition 4.31. The topological rank of the L1 full group of an irrational rotation
is equal to 2.
Proof. The topological generators that Marks built in [Mar16] to show that the full
group of the ergodic hyperfinite equivalence relation is topologically 2-generated can
readily be used.
To be more precise, consider an irrational rotation Tα on [0, 1[ of irrational angle
α ∈ [0, 1[. Let β ∈ (0, α) be irrational and consider the involution ITα ,[0,β[ as defined
in the paragraph preceding Theorem 3.14.
The exact same proof as Marks’ shows that the group topologically generated by
Tα and ITα ,[0,β[ contains all the involutions ITα ,A where A is any Borel subset of [0, 1[
40

such that A ∩ Tα (A) = ∅ (indeed the uniform and the L1 topology coincide on the
set of involutions of the form ITα ,A so Marks’ proof readily applies). So the group
topologically generated by Tα and ITα ,[0,β[ contains D([Tα ]1 ) by Theorem 3.14. But
by Corollary 4.20 we have
[Tα ]1 = D([T ]1 ) o hT i ,
so the group topologically generated by Tα and ITα ,A is equal to [Tα ]1 which has
thus topological rank at most 2. Since [Tα ]1 is not abelian, we conclude that its
topological rank is equal to 2.
Remark. Matui’s work [Mat13, Prop. 3.2] can also be used to obtain the above
result for irrational rotations of angle α ∈ (0, 1/6).

5
5.1

Further remarks and questions
Non-amenability

Theorem 5.1. Let Γ be a finitely generated non amenable group acting freely in a
measure-preserving manner on (X, µ). Then neither [Γ]1 nor D([Γ]1 ) are amenable.
Proof. Let Γ be a finitely generated non amenable group acting freely in a measurepreserving manner on (X, µ). It follows from Theorem 3.7 that [Γ]1 is dense in
[RΓ ] for the uniform topology. Since Γ is infinite and acting freely, the equivalence
relation RΓ is aperiodic so the group [RΓ ] is perfect by [LM14b, Prop. 3.6]. So
D([Γ]1 ) is also dense in [RΓ ]. Furthermore, the group [RΓ ] is non-amenable for the
uniform topology by [GP07, Prop. 5.6]. So the dense subgroups [Γ]1 and D([Γ]1 )
are not amenable for the uniform topology, in particular they are not amenable for
the thinner L1 topology.
It would be very interesting to understand which amenable groups admit free
actions whose L1 full groups are amenable. Note that by Theorem 4.29, all the free
ergodic Z-actions induce an amenable L1 full group.

5.2

Absence of a natural closure property

Full groups as defined by Dye are stable under cutting and pasting a countable
family of elements along a countable partition of X. Here L1 full groups are only
stable under cutting and pasting a finite family of elements, and it seems natural
to wonder if they can be more abstractly characterised. Here we show that L1 full
groups are not “stable under L1 cutting and pasting”, showing that the most natural
closure property one could hope for does not hold.
Theorem 5.2. There exists an ergodic measure-preserving transformation T and a
non-null Borel set A ⊆ X such that [TA ]1 66 [T ]1 .
Remark. A reformulation of the theorem is that the inclusion [T ]1 A 6 [TA ]1 can be
strict. In particular, given S ∈ [T ]1 , it can happen that [S]1 66 [T ]1 .
41

Proof. We fix a Borel partition (Xn )n>1 of X such that for every n ∈ N, µ(Xn ) = 2−n .
4n −1
We then cut each Xn into 4n pieces (Bn,m )m=0
of equal measure (so µ(Bn,m ) = 8−n ).
Let T0 be a periodic transformation such that
• for all n ∈ N and m ∈ {0, ..., 4n − 2}, one has T0 (Bn,m ) = Bn,m+1 and
n

• for all n ∈ N and x ∈ Bn,0 one has T04 +1 (x) = x.
F
Then the set B0 := n∈N Bn,0 is a fundamental domain for T0 . Let U be a
measure-preserving transformation such that supp U = B0 and UB0 is ergodic, and
consider T := U T0 . By Proposition 2.5, T is ergodic. Moreover for all n ∈ N and
m ∈ {0, ..., 4n − 1} we have T (Bn,m ) = Bn,m+1 . Now for all n ∈ N we let
An :=

n −1
2G

Bn,2n m

m=0

and then A :=

G

An .

n∈N

Consider the transformation TA , and note that by construction for all n ∈ N,
n
all m ∈ {0, 2n − 2} and all x ∈ Bn,2n m we have TA (x) = T 2 (x). Now consider the
involution Un defined by
 4n /2
F n /2−1
Bn,2n m
(x) if x ∈ 2m=0
 T
F2n −1
n /2
−4
Un (x) =
T
(x) if x ∈ m=2n /2 Bn,2n m

x
else.
TA

T

B2,0

B2,3

B2,7

B2,11

U3

Figure 1: The construction of U3 . The set A3 is the gray part of the figure.
Note that for all x ∈ An we have dT (x, Un (x)) = 4n /2. We can then compute
dT (Un , idX ) =

n −1 Z
2X

m=0
n

Bn,2n m
n

4
2
×
n
8
2
1
=
2
=

42

dT (x, Un (x))

Also for all x ∈ An we have dTA (x, Un (x)) = 2n /2 so the same computation as before
yields
1
2n 2n
= n+1
dTA (Un , idX ) = n ×
8
2
2
Let U be the involution obtained by gluing together all the Un ’s, namely for all
x∈X

Un (x) if x ∈ An for some n ∈ N,
U (x) =
x
else.
We clearly have
X

X1

= +∞
2
n∈N
n∈N
X
X 1
1
and dTA (U, idX ) =
dTA (Un , idX ) =
= < +∞.
n+1
2
2
n∈N
n∈N
dT (U, idX ) =

dT (Un , idX ) =

We conclude that U witnesses the fact that [TA ]1 66 [T ]1 .
Recall that two actions of finitely generated groups Γ and Λ are L1 orbit equivalent if up to a measure-preserving transformation, they share the same orbits and
for every λ ∈ Λ and γ ∈ Γ, the maps
x 7→ dΓ (x, λ(x)) and x 7→ dΛ (x, γ(x))
are integrable, where dΓ and dΛ are respective Schreier graph distances (see e.g.
[Aus16] for more on this notion). Here we note that although sharing the same L1
full group implies L1 orbit equivalence, the converse does not hold a priori.
Corollary 5.3. There exists two measure-preserving actions of the free group on two
generators F2 such that the identity map is an L1 -orbit equivalence between them but
they do not share the same L1 full group.
Proof. Write F2 = ha, bi, fix T ∈ Aut(X, µ) and A ⊆ X as in the proof of the
previous theorem. Define a measure-preserving F2 -action α1 by α1 (a) = T and
α2 (b) = T . Then define a second action α2 by α2 (a) = TA and α2 (b) = T TA−1 . Since
TA ∈ [T ]1 these two actions are L1 orbit equivalent via the identity map. However
a map U as in the proof of the previous theorem belongs to the L1 full group of α2 ,
but not to the L1 full group of α2 .
Remark. Obviously L∞ orbit equivalence implies conjugacy of the L1 full groups.
It would be interesting to understand wether the converse holds.

5.3

Lp full groups

Let p ∈ [1, +∞]. One can then define Lp full group [Φ]p of a graphing Φ on a
standard probability space (X, µ) by letting
[Φ]p = {T ∈ [RΦ ] : the map x 7→ dΦ (T (x), x) belongs to Lp (X, µ)} .

43

The triangle inequality and Minkowski’s inequality yield that [Φ]p is indeed a group,
and the natural distance d˜pΦ given by
d˜pΦ (S, T ) = kx 7→ dΦ (S(x), T (x))kp
is right-invariant, complete and refines the uniform topology. Moreover Hölder’s
inequality implies that [Φ]q 6 [Φ]p whenever p < q. Note that the L∞ full group
is discrete since dΦ takes values in Z. It is also uncountable hence we view it as a
degenerate case. For p < +∞ however, one can show exactly like for p = 1 that [Φ]p
is separable, so that it is also a Polish group.
The proof that [Φ]1 is dense in [RΦ ] actually implies that [Φ]∞ is dense in [RΦ ]
so that all the [Φ]p are dense in [RΦ ]. Also D([Φ]∞ ) is dense in D([Φ]p ) for all
p ∈ [1, +∞[, but it is not clear wether [Φ]p is dense in [Φ]q for q < p.
The main difference with L1 full groups is that for p > 1 the Lp full groups are
not stable under taking induced transformations. Indeed, given a set A such that
0 < µ(A) < 1 and a map f : A → N of integral 1, one can use Lemma 2.4 to build a
measure-preserving ergodic transformation T whose return time to A equates f . So
if f was chosen not to be in Lp the transformation induced by T on A won’t belong
to the Lp full group of T .
If T is an ergodic measure-preserving transformation, the Lp full group of T is
a complete invariant of flip conjugacy since it also has many involutions and is a
subgroup of the L1 full group. The index map on [T ]1 restricts to its Lp full group
and yields a surjective homomorphism [T ]p → Z. The kernel of this homomorphism
clearly contains D([T ]p ) but it is unclear wether the converse holds, in which case we
would have that [T ]p is dense in [T ]q for q < p by arguments similar of those used for
Theorem 4.28. One way to establish the converse would be to obtain an analogue of
Theorem 4.18. To begin with, we can still write every element of [T ]p as a a product
of three elements of disjoint supports, the first being almost positive, the second
almost negative and the third periodic (the proof of 4.13 readily adapts). But the
problem is to understand wether almost positive elements admit a decomposition
as a product of periodic elements and induced transformations belonging to [T ]p (cf.
Prop. 4.14 and Prop. 4.16 for the case p = 1).
Since D([T ]1 ) = Ker I, a positive answer to the following general question would
also imply that D([T ]p ) = Ker I.
Question 5.4. Let Φ be an ergodic graphing. Is it true that for all p ∈]1, +∞[ we
have the equality
D([Φ]1 ) ∩ [Φ]p = D([Φ]p ),
where the closure in the left term is in the L1 topology while the closure in the right
term is in the Lp topology?

5.4

Questions

We close this paper by recalling some questions scattered through the text and
asking a few more. The first was contained in the previous section.
Question 5.5. Let 1 6 p < q 6 +∞. Is it true that [Φ]q is dense in [Φ]p ?
44

Note that a positive answer for q = +∞ yields a positive answer for every
1 6 p < q 6 +∞. When Φ is a continuous graphing, we obviously have [Φ]c 6 [Φ]∞ .
We thus also ask:
Question 5.6. Let Φ be a finite continuous graphing and 1 6 p < +∞. Is it true
that [Φ]c is dense in [Φ]p ?
Note that the answer is negative if we remove the condition that Φ is finite
(cf. Example 3.27). We have seen that the L1 full group of an ergodic measurepreserving transformation T is topologically finitely generated if and only if T has
finite entropy, and gave examples where the topological rank of [T ]1 is equal to 2.
One could hope that there is a formula linking the topological rank to entropy as is
true for cost and topological rank of full groups [LM14a], but for now we don’t even
know the answer to the following very basic and pessimistic question.
Question 5.7. Let T be an ergodic measure-preserving transformation of finite
entropy. Is the topological rank of [T ]1 necessarily equal to 2?
Using Lemma 2.1 from [Aus16], our proof that if [T ]1 is topologically finitely
generated then T has finite entropy can easily generalised to show that given a
measure-preserving ergodic free action of a finitely generated group Γ, if the L1 full
group of the action or the closure of its derived group are topologically finitely generated then the Γ-action has a generating partition of finite entropy (i.e. the action
has finite Rohlin entropy; see [Sew14] for more on Rohlin entropy). The following question is very general, but answering it for some non virtually cyclic infinite
amenable group would already be very nice (in the amenable case the Rohlin entropy
is equal to the usual entropy by a result of Seward and Tucker-Drob [STD14]).
Question 5.8. Let Γ be a finitely generated group acting freely and ergodically on
(X, µ). Suppose further that the action has finite Rohlin entropy. Is it true that
[Γ]1 has finite topological rank? That D([Γ]1 ) has finite topological rank?
It would also be interesting to try to generalise our structural results on L1 full
groups of ergodic Z-actions to Zn -actions. For instance, given a measure-preserving
ergodic Zn -action, one can still define an index map In : [Zn ]1 → Rn and ask for
analogues of Corollary 4.20.
Question 5.9. Does the index map In take values into Zn when the canonical
generators of Zn act ergodically? Is the kernel of In equal to the closure of the
derived group of [Zn ]?
Our positive answer to this question for n = 1 relied crucially on the decomposition of elements of [T ]1 as products of almost positive, almost negative and periodic
elements of disjoint supports, but it is not clear what an analogue of this in higher
dimension would be so that another approach is probably needed.
We should mention that in the case of a single ergodic measure-preserving transformation T , one can use the ideas from section 4.3 to show that the open unit ball
in [T ]1 only consists of periodic elements. Since those belong to D([T ]1 ) (cf. Lemma
3.10), this yields another way to prove that D([T ]1 ) is open. We thus ask:
45

Question 5.10. Let a finitely generated group Γ act freely on (X, µ) with all its
generators acting ergodically. When does the open unit ball in [Γ]1 only contain
periodic elements?
The fact that for an ergodic measure-preserving transformation T the open unit
ball of the L1 full group only contains periodic elements can be used to show that [T ]1
has Rosendal’s local property (OB) and is (OB) generated, so that by Rosendal’s
work it has a well defined quasi-isometry type as a topological group (see [Ros14]).
This will be the subject of a later work.
Finally, full groups of ergodic measure-preserving equivalence relations can be
seen as special cases of L1 full groups (see Example 3.2). They enjoy the automatic
continuity property as was shown by Kittrell and Tsankov [KT10, Thm. 1.5] and
hence admit a unique Polish group topology.
Question 5.11. Let Φ be an ergodic graphing. Does [Φ]1 satisfy the automatic
continuity property? Is its Polish group topology unique?

References
[Aus16]

Tim Austin. Behaviour of entropy under bounded and integrable orbit
equivalence. ArXiv e-prints, 2016.

[Bec98]

Howard Becker. Polish group actions: dichotomies and generalized elementary embeddings. J. Amer. Math. Soc., 11(2):397–449, 1998.

[Bel68]

R. M. Belinskaya. Partitions of lebesgue space in trajectories defined by ergodic automorphisms. Functional Analysis and Its Applications, 2(3):190–
199, 1968.

[CLM16] Alessandro Carderi and François Le Maître. Orbit full groups for locally
compact groups. accepted for publication in Transactions of the AMS,
2016.
[Dow11] Tomasz Downarowicz. Entropy in dynamical systems, volume 18 of New
Mathematical Monographs. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2011.
[Dye59]

Henry A. Dye. On groups of measure preserving transformation. I. Amer.
J. Math., 81:119–159, 1959.

[EG14]

Amichai Eisenmann and Yair Glasner. Generic IRS in free groups, after
Bowen. to appear in Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 2014.

[Fat78]

Albert Fathi. Le groupe des transformations de [0, 1] qui préservent la
mesure de Lebesgue est un groupe simple. Israel J. Math., 29(2-3):302–
308, 1978.

[Fre04]

D. H. Fremlin. Measure theory. Vol. 3. Torres Fremlin, Colchester, 2004.
Measure algebras, Corrected second printing of the 2002 original.
46

[Fri70]

Nathaniel A. Friedman. Introduction to ergodic theory. Van Nostrand
Reinhold Co., New York-Toronto, Ont.-London, 1970. Van Nostrand Reinhold Mathematical Studies, No. 29.

[FRW11] Matthew Foreman, Daniel J. Rudolph, and Benjamin Weiss. The conjugacy problem in ergodic theory. Ann. of Math. (2), 173(3):1529–1586,
2011.
[GH09]

Steven Givant and Paul Halmos. Introduction to Boolean algebras. Undergraduate Texts in Mathematics. Springer, New York, 2009.

[Gla03]

Eli Glasner. Ergodic theory via joinings, volume 101 of Mathematical
Surveys and Monographs. American Mathematical Society, Providence,
RI, 2003.

[GP07]

Thierry Giordano and Vladimir Pestov. Some extremely amenable groups
related to operator algebras and ergodic theory. J. Inst. Math. Jussieu,
6(2):279–315, 2007.

[GPS95] Thierry Giordano, Ian F. Putnam, and Christian F. Skau. Topological orbit equivalence and C ∗ -crossed products. J. Reine Angew. Math., 469:51–
111, 1995.
[GPS99] Thierry Giordano, Ian F. Putnam, and Christian F. Skau. Full groups of
Cantor minimal systems. Israel J. Math., 111:285–320, 1999.
[Hal50]

Paul R. Halmos. Measure Theory. D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc., New
York, N. Y., 1950.

[JM13]

Kate Juschenko and Nicolas Monod. Cantor systems, piecewise translations and simple amenable groups. Ann. Math. (2), 178(2):775–787, 2013.

[Kac47]

Mark Kac. On the notion of recurrence in discrete stochastic processes.
Bull. Amer. Math. Soc., 53:1002–1010, 1947.

[Kec10]

Alexander S. Kechris. Global aspects of ergodic group actions, volume
160 of Mathematical Surveys and Monographs. American Mathematical
Society, Providence, RI, 2010.

[Kri70]

Wolfgang Krieger. On entropy and generators of measure-preserving transformations. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 149:453–464, 1970.

[Kri72]

Wolfgang Krieger. On unique ergodicity. In Proceedings of the Sixth Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability (Univ. California, Berkeley, Calif., 1970/1971), Vol. II: Probability theory, pages 327–
346. Univ. California Press, Berkeley, Calif., 1972.

[KT10]

John Kittrell and Todor Tsankov. Topological properties of full groups.
Ergodic Theory Dynam. Systems, 30(2):525–545, 2010.

47

[Lev95]

Gilbert Levitt. On the cost of generating an equivalence relation. Ergodic
Theory Dynam. Systems, 15(6):1173–1181, 1995.

[LM14a] François Le Maître. The number of topological generators for full groups
of ergodic equivalence relations. Invent. Math., 198:261–268, 2014.
[LM14b] François Le Maître. Sur les groupes pleins préservant une mesure de probabilité. PhD thesis, ENS Lyon, 2014. 2014ENSL0892.
[LM15]

François Le Maître. On full groups of non-ergodic probability measure
preserving equivalence relations. to appear in Ergodic Theory Dyn. Syst.,
2015.

[Mar16] Andrew Marks. Topological generators for full groups of hyperfinite pmp
equivalence relations. preprint, 2016.
[Mat06] Hiroki Matui. Some remarks on topological full groups of Cantor minimal
systems. Internat. J. Math., 17(2):231–251, 2006.
[Mat13] Hiroki Matui. Some remarks on topological full groups of Cantor minimal
systems II. Ergodic Theory Dynam. Systems, 33(5):1542–1549, 2013.
[Med07] Konstantin Medynets. On approximation of homeomorphisms of a Cantor
set. Fund. Math., 194(1):1–13, 2007.
[Mil05]

Benjamin David Miller. Density of topological full groups. Unpublished note available at https: // dl. dropboxusercontent. com/ u/
47430894/ Web/ notes/ density. pdf , 2005.

[Pet89]

Karl Petersen. Ergodic theory, volume 2 of Cambridge Studies in Advanced
Mathematics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1989. Corrected
reprint of the 1983 original.

[Ros14]

Christian Rosendal. Coarse geometry of topological groups. preprint,
2014.

[Sew14]

Brandon Seward. Krieger’s finite generator theorem for ergodic actions of
countable groups i. ArXiv e-prints, 2014.

[STD14] Brandon Seward and Robin D. Tucker-Drob. Borel structurability on the
2-shift of a countable group. ArXiv e-prints, 2014.

48

