arXiv:1801.02347v2 [] 3 Apr 2018

GROUPS ACTING ON ROOTED TREES AND THEIR
REPRESENTATIONS ON THE BOUNDARY
STEFFEN KIONKE
Abstract. We consider groups that act on spherically symmetric rooted trees
and study the associated representation of the group on the space of locally
constant functions on the boundary of the tree. We introduce and discuss the
new notion of locally 2-transitive actions. Assuming local 2-transitivity our
main theorem yields a precise decomposition of the boundary representation
into irreducible constituents.
The method can be used to study Gelfand pairs and enables us to answer
a question of Grigorchuk. To provide examples, we analyse in detail the local
2-transitivity of GGS-groups. Moreover, our results can be used to determine explicit formulae for zeta functions of induced representations defined by
Klopsch and the author.

1. Introduction
The objects of interest in this article are groups which act on spherically symmetric rooted trees. This means, they act on a tree T with a distinguished vertex
ε, called the root, such that every two vertices having same distance from the root
have the same finite number of neighbours. The set Ln of vertices which have distance n from the root is called the n-th level of the tree. Whenever a group G acts
on T by root-preserving automorphisms, then G also acts on the boundary ∂T of
T . The boundary is the set of all infinite rays starting at the root and it is equipped
in a natural way with a profinite topology. The action of G on ∂T gives rise to
representations of G on spaces of functions on the boundary. These representations
should contain information about the action of G on T and, conversely, it would
be desirable to understand such representations via the geometric properties of the
action of G on T .
An interesting and natural example of such a representation is the unitary representation ρ(2) of G on L2 (∂T , µ), where µ is the Aut(T )-invariant probability
measure µ on the boundary. This representation decomposes as a Hilbert space
direct sum of infinitely many finite dimensional irreducible representations; c.f. [3].
By contrast, for certain weakly branch groups the associated Koopman representation of G on L2 (∂T , ν) is irreducible for most Bernoulli measures ν 6= µ; see [16].
In a similar vein, the representation of a weakly branch group G on ℓ2 (G/ StG (ξ))
for a point ξ ∈ ∂T is irreducible; see [3].
Date: April 5, 2018.
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 20E08; Secondary 20E18, 43A65, 22D30.
Key words and phrases. Groups acting on rooted trees, GGS-groups, Gelfand pairs, representation zeta functions.
The research was supported by DFG grant KL 2162/1-1.
1

2

S. KIONKE

In L2 (∂T , µ), however, the locally constant complex-valued functions C ∞ (∂T , C)
form a dense subrepresentation and the structure of the unitary representation ρ(2)
is completely determined by the structure of the representation ρ∂,C on C ∞ (∂T , C).
We will review this close relationship in Section 2.3 below and we will use it to
translate results concerning ρ(2) to the representation ρ∂,C . Our objective is to
describe a decomposition of ρ∂,C into irreducible constituents in terms of geometric
data.
One way to approach this problem is via distance transitive (or 2-point homogeneous) actions on metric spaces; these are isometric actions which are transitive on
equidistant pairs of points. It is well-known that a distance transitive action of a
finite group H on a finite metric space (X, d) yields a multiplicitiy-free representation of H on C[X]; see [10, Ex. 2.5]. In other words, (H, StH (x)) is a Gelfand pair
for every x ∈ X. We refer to [9, 15, 22] for an introduction to Gelfand pairs. Suffice
it to mention that finding and understanding Gelfand pairs is an important issue
in the representation theory of groups with applications to statistics and probability theory; see for instance [10, 14]. Distance transitive actions of groups on the
boundary of finite trees were frequently used to construct Gelfand pairs of finite
groups; see [12, 13, 29]. Five examples of Gelfand pairs arising from groups acting
on infinite rootes trees (e.g. the Grigorchuk group) are discussed in [4].
In the appendix of [8] Bekka, de la Harpe and Grigorchuk refined the distancetransitivity method and obtained an explicit description of the irreducible constituents of the boundary representation ρ∂,C under the assumption that G acts
distance transitively on every level. In this case the boundary representation ρ∂,C
contains, apart from the trivial representation, exactly one irreducible summand of
dimension |Ln | − |Ln−1 | for all n ∈ N. The account in [8] is based on unitary representations and can be translated via the remarks in Section 2.3 to apply to ρ∂,C . A
direct argument is contained in [25, Thm. 6.3]. As a consequence, the representation is multiplicity-free and gives rise to a Gelfand pair (G, Pξ ) of profinite groups
where G is the closure of G in the automorphism group G = Aut(T ) and Pξ is a
parabolic subgroup, i.e. the stabiliser in G of a point ξ ∈ ∂T .
Here we generalise the result of Bekka, de la Harpe and Grigorchuk by assuming
only a weak version of distance transitivity and by working over a general field F of
suitable characteristic. In fact, the representation on locally constant functions can
be defined over an arbitrary base field F . Indeed, the space C ∞ (∂T , F ) of locally
constant F -valued functions on ∂T carries a representation of G by imposing
ρ∂,F (g)(f )(ξ) = f (g −1 ξ)
for all g ∈ G, f ∈ C ∞ (∂T , F ) and ξ ∈ ∂T . The nature of the representation
depends strongly on the characteristic of the underlying field and on whether it
divides the Steinitz order of G. Here we say that the characteristic of F divides the
Steinitz order of G, if it divides the order of some finite continuous quotient of G.
One extremal case, where T is the p-regular tree, F is of characteristic p and G is
contained in a Sylow pro-p subgroup of Aut(T ) is studied in [21]. Here, however,
we will consider the opposite case and assume that the characteristic of F does not
divide the Steinitz order of G. In this case, the representation ρ∂,F is semi-simple,
i.e., decomposes as a direct sum of finite dimensional irreducible representations.
A spherically transitive action of G on T will be called locally 2-transitive, if for
all distinct vertices u, v ∈ Ln the common stabiliser StG (u)∩StG (v) acts transitively

REPRESENTATIONS ON THE BOUNDARY OF ROOTED TREES

3

on D(u) × D(v). Here D(u) denotes the set of descendants of u, that is, the
neighbours of u which lie in the next level Ln+1 . In fact, every distance transitive
action is locally 2-transitive; see Lemma 4.
For a vertex v let Irr0F (v) denote the set of non-trivial irreducible F -representations
π of StG (v) which occur with non-zero multiplicity m(π, θv,F ) in the permutation
representation θv,F of StG (v) on F [D(v)]. Our main result provides a precise description of the irreducible constitutens of ρ∂,F .
Theorem 1. Let G ≤ G act locally 2-transitively on T . Assume that F is a field
whose characteristic does not divide the Steinitz order of G.
0
The induced representation IndG
StG (v) (π) is irreducible for every π ∈ IrrF (v). The
decomposition of ρ∂,F into distinct irreducible constituents is given by
M
M
ρ∂,F ∼
m(π, θvn ,F ) IndG
= 11F ⊕
StG (vn ) (π),
n∈N0 π∈Irr0F (vn )

where vn denotes an arbitrary vertex of level n and 11F is the trivial representation
on F .
In particular, the representation ρ∂,F is multiplicity-free if and only if θv,F is
multiplicity-free for every vertex v. For F = C this implies the following localglobal principle.
Theorem 2 (Local-global principle). Let G ≤c G be a closed subgroup which acts
locally 2-transitively on T . Let Pξ ≤ G be a parabolic subgroup. Then (G, Pξ ) is
a Gelfand pair if and only if (StG (v), StG (u)) is a Gelfand pair for every vertex v
and descendant u ∈ D(v).
On one hand, the local-global principle can be used to construct Gelfand pairs
of profinite groups. Indeed, if the number of descendants of every vertex is a prime
or the square of a prime, then the local pairs (StG (v), StG (u)) are Gelfand pairs; for
details we refer to Corollary 1. On the other hand, we use the local-global principle
to construct branch groups G ≤c G such that (G, Pξ ) is not a Gelfand pair for every
parabolic subgroup Pξ of G; see Example 3. This answers a question of Grigorchuk;
see Problem 10.1 in [20].
In Section 4 we study the local 2-transitivity of GGS-groups, named after the
famous finitely generated, infinite torsion groups of Grigorchuk [19] and Gupta and
Sidki [23]. These groups attracted considerable interest recently and the reader
is refered to the monograph [5, Sec. 2.3] and the articles [17, 18, 32] for more
information. Here we consider (generalised) GGS-groups which act on a pk -regular
rooted tree. In this case every vertex in the tree T has exactly pk descendants
for a prime number p. Theorem 4 characterises the defining vectors with locally
2-transitive associated GGS-groups. It follows from Remark 3 that our criterion is
always satisfied if p is an odd prime and k = 1. The following result is a consequence
of Theorem 4.
Theorem 3. Let p be an odd prime number and let T be the p-regular rooted tree.
Every GGS-group Ge ≤ Aut(T ) acts locally 2-transitively. Moreover, (Ge , Pξ ) is a
Gelfand pair for every parabolic subgroup Pξ ≤c Ge .
This result confirms a conjecture mentioned by Bartholdi and Grigorchuk in the
very last sentence of [4]. We remark that the unique GGS-group which acts on the
rooted binary tree does not act locally 2-transitively (see Remark 4). However it is
still true that (Ge , Pξ ) is a Gelfand pair.

4

S. KIONKE

1.1. Applications to zeta functions of representations. Let G be a profinite
group and consider, for every n, the number rn (G) of irreducible n-dimensional
complex continuous representations of G. We assume that G is representation
rigid, this means, that the numbers rn (G) are all finite. The paradigm of representation growth postulates that the asymptotic behaviour of the sequence (rn (G))n∈N
contains information on the structure of the group G. In recent years this line of investigation stimulated a considerable amount of new results; see e.g. [1, 2, 24, 30, 31]
and the survey [26] as well as references therein. Here once again groups which act
on regular rooted trees provide a class of examples with remarkable properties –
for self-similar branched groups this was discussed by Bartholdi in [7]. His results
apply, in particular, to the Gupta-Sidki p-groups which will also be considered in
Section 4 below. The special case of iterated wreath products was studied already
in [6].
In many examples the numbers rn (G) grow at most polynomially in n and it is
natural to investigate the asymptotic properties using the Dirichlet series
ζG (s) =

∞
X
rn (G)
,
ns
n=1

which is called the representation zeta function. For certain self-similar branch
groups Bartholdi’s method [7] allows the efficient computation of the coefficients
rn (G) using a functional equation of ζG . However, it is worth noting, that in general
explicit formulae for ζG are quite difficult to obtain; see [1, 2] for an extensive
treatment of compact p-adic Lie groups of type A2 (such as SL3 (Zp )).
Facing this difficulty it might be fruitful to break the problem into smaller pieces
by counting only certain subsets of all representations. In the recent preprint [25]
B. Klopsch and the author developed such a more flexible approach to representation zeta functions which is based on the following observation. The representation
zeta function at s − 1 is
ζG (s − 1) =

∞
X
rn (G)n
=
ns
n=1

X

π∈IrrC (G)

dim(Vπ )
dim(Vπ )s

and the dimension dimC (Vπ ) of an irreducible complex representation (π, Vπ ) of G
is equal to the multiplicity of π in the regular representation of G on the space
of locally constant functions C ∞ (G, C). Equivalently, it is the multiplicity in the
regular representation of G on L2 (G) with respect to the Haar measure; see Section 2.3. Let (ρ, Vρ ) be an admissible smooth representation of G; see Section 2.2
for the definition of smooth representations. Such a representation decomposes into
a direct sum
M
m(π, ρ)Vπ
Vρ =
π∈IrrC (G)

over the finite dimensional irreducible complex representations of G which occur
with finite multiplicities m(π, ρ) ∈ N0 . Under suitable assumptions it is natural to
investigate the Dirichlet series
X
m(π, ρ)
,
ζρ (s) =
dimC (Vπ )s
π∈Irr(G)

REPRESENTATIONS ON THE BOUNDARY OF ROOTED TREES

5

which will be called the zeta function of the representation (ρ, Vρ ); for the details
we refer to [25]. As observed above, the zeta function of the regular representation
equals ζG (s − 1). Here the results of [25] will not be used. It is sufficient to know
that this setting provides a wealth of examples, where explicit formulae for zeta
functions of representations can actually be determined; see [25, Sect. 7].
Theorem 1 provides a new way to obtain explicit formulae for zeta functions of
representations. We return to the situation where G ≤c G is a closed locally 2transitive subgroup of the automorphism group of a spherically symmetric rooted
tree T . Theorem 1 yields a formula for the zeta function of the representation ρ∂,C
on the boundary
X
X
m(π, θvn ,C )
(1)
ζρ∂,C (s) = 1 +
.
s
s
|L
n | dim(Vπ )
0
n∈N0 π∈IrrC (vn )

Since ∂T ∼
= G/P for a parabolic subgroup P , the representation ρ∂,C is isomorphic
to the smoothly induced representation IndG
P (11C ); see Section 2.2 for the definition
of smooth induction.
In certain cases, this makes it possible to use formula (1) to determine the zeta
function of a smoothly induced representation. Let G be any profinite group with
a closed subgroup P ≤c G. If one can realise the homogeneous space G/P as the
boundary of a spherically symmetric rooted tree T with a locally 2-transitive action
of G, then formula (1) describes the zeta function of IndG
P (11C ). We give an example
to illustrate the usefulness of this approach in Section 3.4.
2. Preliminaries from representation theory
Here we review some preliminary results from representation theory. Let F
be a field. Recall that for an abstract group H, a subgroup S ≤ H and an F representation (π, Vπ ) of S, the representation induced from π is the representation
of H on the space
IndH
S (π) = {f : H → Vπ | f (sx) = π(s)f (x) for all s ∈ S}.
by the right regular action, i.e. ρ(h)(f )(x) := f (xh) for all f ∈ IndH
S (π) and all
x, h ∈ H. We remark that sometimes this is also called the coinduced representation.
2.1. Representation theory of finite groups. In this short subsection H denotes a finite group and F denotes a field whose characteristic does not divide the
order of H. Under these assumptions Maschke’s theorem implies that the group
algebra F [H] is a semisimple F -algebra (see e.g. [28, XVIII Thm. 1.2]). In particular, every representation of H on an F -vector space decomposes as a direct sum
of finite dimensional irreducible representations.
Moreover, we recall that every action of H on a finite set A gives rise to a
representation ρA,F of H on the vector space
nX
o
F [A] =
ca a | ca ∈ F
a∈A

of formal F -linear combinations of the elements in A by imposing ρA,F (g)(a) = ga.
We collect two preliminary results from the representation theory of finite groups.

6

S. KIONKE

Lemma 1. Assume that H acts on finite sets A and B. If the diagonal action of
H on A × B is transitive, then
dimF HomF [H] (F [A], F [B]) = 1.
In particular, the trivial representation is the only irreducible F -representation of
H which occurs in both F [A] and F [B].
Proof. The space of F -linear maps HomF (F [A], F [B]) is equipped with an H-action
via (h·ϕ)(a) := hϕ(h−1 a) for all a ∈ A. We note that the H-invariants in this space
are exactly the H-equivariant linear maps. Since A is finite, there is an isomorphism
of F [H]-modules
HomF (F [A], F [B]) ∼
= F [A × B]
We conclude that
HomF [H] (F [A], F [B]) ∼
= F [A × B]H
= HomF (F [A], F [B])H ∼
where F [A × B]H denotes the space of H-invariants. Since H acts transitively on
A × B, the space of H-invariants in F [A × B] is one-dimensional.

Lemma 2. Let S ≤ H be a subgroup. Given an irreducible F -representation (π, Vπ )
of S so that
dimF EndF [S] (π) = dimF EndF [H] (IndH
S (π)),
then the induced representation IndH
S (π) is irreducible.
Proof. Since π is irreducible, the endomorphism algebra E = EndF [S] (π) is a division F -algebra. The induction functor provides a homomorphism of F -algebras
J : E → EndF [H] (IndH
S (π)). Since E is a division algebra the homomorphism J is
injective. The assumption on the dimensions implies that J is actually an isomorphism. In particular, EndF [H] (IndH
S (π)) is a division algebra and, hence, does not
contain non-trivial idempotent elements. By Maschke’s theorem the representation
EndF [H] (IndH
S (π)) is semi-simple, i.e. every subrepresentation is a direct summand.
Therefore the non-existence of idempotent elements implies that IndH
S (π) is irreducible.

2.2. Representation theory of profinite groups. Let H denote a profinite
group and let F be a field. A representation (ρ, Wρ ) of H on some (possibly
infinite dimensional) F -vector space Wρ is called smooth if every w ∈ Wρ has
an open stabilizer in H. This means, that Wρ is the union of finite dimensional
subrepresentations on which the action of H factors through some finite continuous
quotient of H. In particular, a finite dimensional representation is smooth exactly
if it factors over some finite continuous quotient of H. We will impose a condition
on the characteristic of F , which ensures that smooth representations decompose
into direct sums of finite dimensional irreducible representations.
Definition 1. We say that the characteristic of F does not divide the Steinitz order
of H, if char(F ) does not divide the order of any finite continuous quotient of H.
This definition alludes to the Steinitz order of a profinite group in terms of
Steinitz numbers. We refer to [34, Chapter 2] for the definition of the Steinitz
order of a profinite group. Here this connection will not be important.
Assume now that char(F ) does not divide the Steinitz order of H. The key
observation is that, since smooth representations of H are unions of representations

REPRESENTATIONS ON THE BOUNDARY OF ROOTED TREES

7

of finite quotients, Maschke’s theorem implies that every smooth representation
(ρ, Wρ ) of H over F is a direct sum of isotypic components, i.e.
M
Wρ (π)
Wρ =
π∈IrrF (H)

where the sum runs over all smooth irreducible F -representations of H. The isotypic
component Wρ (π) isomorphic to a direct sum of copies of π: the number m(π, ρ)
of copies is called the multiplicity of π in ρ. The representation ρ is said to be
admissible, if all multiplicities are finite; in other words, all isotypic components
are finite dimensional.
For convenience we recall the concept of smooth induction. Let S ≤c H be a
closed subgroup and let (π, Vπ ) be a smooth representation of S. The representation
smoothly induced from π is a representation of H on the space
IndH
S (π) = {f : H → Vπ | f loc. constant and f (sx) = π(s)f (x) for all s ∈ S}.
The representation of H is given by the right regular action, i.e. ρ(h)(f )(x) :=
f (xh) for all f ∈ IndH
S (π) and all x, h ∈ H. In particular, if π is the trivial
representation on a one dimensional F -vector space, then IndH
S (π) is the space
C ∞ (H/S, F ) of locally constant F -valued functions on the homogeneous space H/S.
The representation of H on C ∞ (H/S, F ) is always admissible.
2.3. Unitary versus smooth representations. Let G be a profinite group and
let G ≤ G be a dense subgroup. We consider the homogeneous space X = G/P
for a closed subgroup P ≤c G. The pushforward measure µ of the normalized
Haar measure on G is a regular G-invariant Borel probability measure on X. We
consider the representation of G on the complex Hilbert space L2 (X, µ) defined
by (ρ(g)h)(x) = h(g −1 x) for all h ∈ L2 (X, µ) and g ∈ G. In this situation, the
properties of the representation ρ|G of G on L2 (X, µ) are essentially determined by
the representation of G (or G) on the space C ∞ (X, C) of locally constant C-valued
functions on X. This relation seems to be well-known, however, we could not find
a good reference. We include a short discussion, since this method can be used to
interpret our results in the framework of unitary representations.
Proposition 1. In the situation above the following statements hold.
(1) The subspace C ∞ (X, C) is dense in L2 (X, µ).
(2) Every closed irreducible G-subrepresentation of L2 (X, µ) is G-stable and
contained in C ∞ (X,
L C).
(3) Let C ∞ (X, C) = ϑ∈Irr(G) V (ϑ) be the decomposition of the G-representation
on C ∞ (X, C) into isotypic components. The isotypic components V (ϑ)
are finite dimensional and pairwise orthogonal in L2 (X, µ). In particular,
L
L2 (X, µ) is isomorphic to the Hilbert space direct sum c ϑ∈Irr(G) V (ϑ).

Proof. First we consider (1). Every f ∈ C ∞ (G,
R C) provides a convolution operator Tf ∈ B(L2 (X, µ)) given by Tf (h)(x) = G f (g)h(gx)dg with respect to the
normalized Haar measure on G. Since f is locally constant, the function Tf (h) is
locally constant for every h ∈ L2 (X, µ). Let ε > 0 and h ∈ L2 (X, µ) be given.
The multiplication map G × L2 (X, µ) → L2 (X, µ) is continuous, hence there is an

8

S. KIONKE

open normal subgroup K Eo G such that kh − ρ(k)hk2 < ε for all k ∈ K. Let
f ∈ C ∞ (G, R) be a positive function supported in K with total mass one, then
Z
f (k)kh − ρ(k −1 )hk2 dk < ε
kTf (h) − hk2 ≤
G

and we conclude that C ∞ (X, C) is dense in L2 (X, µ).
Let V ⊆ L2 (X, µ) be a closed irreducible G-subrepresentation. It follows from
the continuity of the map G× L2 (X, µ) → L2 (X, µ), that V is also G-stable. By the
Peter-Weyl theorem every irreducible unitary representation of the compact group
G is finite dimensional; see [27, Corollary 5.4.2]. Moreover, G is profinite and the
no-small-subgroup argument shows that the representation of G on V factors over
∞
some finite continuous quotient.
L We deduce that V lies in C (X, C).
∞
Finally, let C (X, C) = ϑ∈Irr(G) V (ϑ) be the decomposition into isotypic components as in (3). Since the representation is admissible, the isotypic components
are finite dimensional. For the fact that distinct isotypic components are orthogonal
we refer to [27, Lemma 3.4.21].

3. Locally 2-transitive actions on rooted trees
3.1. Notation. Let (Xi )i∈N be a sequence of finite sets. Throughout, mi = |Xi |
denotes the cardinality of Xi and we assume mi ≥ 2 for all i ∈ N. For every n ∈ N0
we define
n
Y
Xi ,
Ln :=
i=1

this is the set of finite sequences (x1 , . . . , xn ) with xi ∈ Xi . Here we use the
convention that L0 consists of exactly one element: the empty sequence ε. The
spherically symmetric rooted tree
F∞T = (V (T ), E(T )) (based on (Xi )i∈N ) is a graph
on the set of vertices V (T ) = n=0 Ln and there is an edge between u ∈ Ln and
v ∈ Ln+1 exactly if u is a prefix of v. The distinguished element ε ∈ L0 is called
the root of T . In addition, if mi = m for all i, then we say that T is the m-regular
rooted tree. The set Ln is called the n-th level of T . For a vertex u ∈ Ln the
set of descendants D(u) consists of all vertices in Ln+1 which are incident to u. If
u = (x1 , . . . , xn ) and y ∈ Xn+1 , then we write uy for the descendant (x1 , . . . , xn , y)
of u.
The group of root-preserving automorphisms G = Aut(T ) of T is a profinite
group. A neighbourhood base of open normal subgroups is given by the pointwise
stabilisers G(n) of the n-th level, i.e.,
G(n) = {g ∈ Aut(T ) | ∀u ∈ Ln

gu = u}.

A subgroup G ≤ G is said to act spherically transitive on T , if G acts transitively
on the level Ln for every n ∈ N. Clearly, every root-preserving automorphism also
preserves the levels setwise. For g ∈ G and a vertex u ∈ Ln , we define the label of g
at u to be the unique permutation g(u) ∈ Aut(Xn+1 ) such that g(ux) = g(u)g(u) (x)
for all x ∈ Xn+1 .
The boundary ∂T of T is the profinite set
Y
∂T :=
Xi ,
i∈N

which can be considered as the set of infinite, non-backtracking paths in T starting
at the root. The automorphism group G acts continuously on ∂T . We observe that

REPRESENTATIONS ON THE BOUNDARY OF ROOTED TREES

9

a subgroup G ≤ G acts spherically transitively on T if and only if its closure G ≤c G
acts transitively on ∂T . The stabiliser of u ∈ Ln in G will be denoted by StG (u).
The stabiliser Pξ of a point ξ ∈ ∂T in G is called a parabolic subgroup of G. All
parabolic subgroups are conjugated in G, whenever the action of G is spherically
transitive.
3.2. Local 2-transitivity: Definition and examples.
Definition 2. A subgroup G ≤ G acts locally 2-transitively on T , if G acts spherically transitive and for all n ∈ N and every pair u, v ∈ Ln of distinct vertices, the
group StG (u) ∩ StG (v) acts transitively on D(u) × D(v) via the diagonal action.
Remark 1. It is worth noting, that a group G acts locally 2-transitively if and
only if its closure G does.
We give two examples of actions that are locally 2-transitive. First, we discuss
iterated wreath products. For every i ∈ N, let Gi ⊆ Aut(Xi ) be a transitive
subgroup. We denote the collection (Gi | i ∈ N) of these subgroups by C. The
iterated wreath product defined by C is the closed subgroup GC of G which consists
of all elements which have only labels in C, i.e.
GC = {g ∈ G | ∀n ∈ N0 ∀u ∈ Ln g(u) ∈ Gn+1 }.
Lemma 3. Let C be a collection of transitive subgroups. The action of the iterated
wreath product GC on T is locally 2-transitive.
Proof. It follows immediately from an inductive argument and the fact that every
Gi ⊆ Aut(Xi ) is transitive, that the action of GC is spherically transitive. Now,
let u, v ∈ Ln be distinct elements of the n-th level. The group StG (u) ∩ StG (v) acts
on D(u) × D(v) like Gn+1 × Gn+1 , thus the action is transitive.

Second, we argue that the notion of locally 2-transitive actions weakens the
notion of distance transitive actions. The shortest-path distance on T induces a
metric d on every level Ln . A group G ≤ G is said to act distance transitively on T ,
if for all n ∈ N and all u1 , u2 , v1 , v2 ∈ Ln with d(u1 , u2 ) = d(v1 , v2 ), there is some
g ∈ G so that gui = vi for all i ∈ {1, 2}.
Lemma 4. Let G ≤ G. If G acts distance transitively on T , then the action of G
is locally 2-transitive.
Proof. Clearly, a distance transitive action is spherically transitive. Let u, v ∈
Ln be distinct vertices. Every pair of descendants u′ ∈ D(u) and v ′ ∈ D(v)
satisfies d(u′ , v ′ ) = d(u, v) + 2. Therefore, if G acts distance transitively on T , then
StG (u) ∩ StG (v) acts transitively on D(u) × D(v).

Example 1. Here we construct, using iterated wreath products, groups which act
locally 2-transitively, but not distance transitively.
Let H be a finite group with |H| > 2. We define Xi = H for all i. The associated
tree T is the rooted |H|-regular tree. Let Gi = H ⊆ Aut(Xi ), where H acts on
itself by multiplication from the left. The collection C = (H|i ∈ N) defines the
iterated wreath product GC = . . . H ≀ H ≀ H group. By Lemma 3 the group GC acts
locally 2-transitively on T .
We verify that GC does not act distance transitively. Since |H| ≥ 3 we find
pairwise distinct elements x, y, z ∈ H. We obtain three vertices in L2 : u1 = v1 =

10

S. KIONKE

(x, x), u2 = (y, x) and v2 = (z, x) with d(u1 , u2 ) = 4 = d(v1 , v2 ). Every element
h ∈ H which satisfies hx = x is already the identity element. Therefore, an element
g ∈ GC with gu1 = u1 has label g(ε) = Id and acts trivially on the first level. In
particular, gu2 6= v2 and we deduce that GC does not act distance transitively.
Example 2. We discuss an example of a group which acts spherically transitively
but not locally 2-transitively. Let T be the rooted binary tree, i.e. Xi = {0, 1} for
all i. We consider the group G which is generated by two elements a, b ∈ G. The
automorphism a simply swaps the two elements of the first level, i.e.
a(u1 x) = (1 − u1 )x.
for all u1 ∈ {0, 1} and x ∈ Ln . The automorphism b is defined recursively by the
rule
(
(0)a(x) if u1 = 0
b(u1 x) =
(1)b(x) if u1 = 1
for u1 ∈ {0, 1} and x ∈ Ln . The group G is infinite and generated by two elements
of order two, which implies that G is isomorphic to the infinite dihedral group D∞ .
Clearly, G acts transitively on the first level L1 . Using induction it follows that
G acts indeed spherically transitive. We will see that the action of G on T is not
locally 2-transitive.
Consider the vertices on the second level and their descendants.

1

5 3

7 4

8

2 6

Figure 1. A numbering of the vertices on the third level.
If we number the vertices on the third level as in Figure 1, then the generators
a and b act on the third level like reflections of the regular octagon as indicated
in Figure 2. In particular, the action factors through the dihedral group D8 . The
1

2

a

8

3

7

4
6

5

b
Figure 2. The action on the third level.
vertices of the second level correspond to pairs of opposite vertices in the octagon.
Now, if we choose two neighbouring pairs of opposite vertices, say {1, 5} and {2, 6},
then the intersection of the two stabilisers consists merely of the identity and the
point reflection in the center. Clearly, this group with two elements cannot act
transitively on the 4-element set {1, 5} × {2, 6}.

REPRESENTATIONS ON THE BOUNDARY OF ROOTED TREES

11

Later the following characterisation of locally 2-transitive actions will be useful.
Lemma 5. Let G ≤ G be a spherically transitive group. Choose a vertex un ∈ Ln
for every n ∈ N0 . The group G acts locally 2-transitively on T if and only if for
every n ∈ N and every v ∈ Ln with un+1 ∈
/ D(v) the group StG (un+1 ) ∩ StG (v) acts
transitively on D(v).
Proof. Assume first that G acts locally 2-transitively and let v ∈ Ln (n ≥ 1)
be given such that un+1 ∈
/ D(v). Let u ∈ Ln be the predecessor of un+1 and
observe that u 6= v. By assumption the group StG (u) ∩ StG (v) acts transitively on
D(u) × D(v), thus StG (un+1 ) ∩ StG (v) acts transitively on D(v).
Conversely, let x, y ∈ Ln with x 6= y be given. Let (a, b), (c, d) ∈ D(x) × D(y).
Since the action of G is spherically transitive, there is g ∈ G such that ga = un+1 .
By assumption there is an element h ∈ StG (un+1 ) ∩ StG (gy) such that hgb = gd.
Thus γ1 = g −1 hg ∈ StG (a) ∩ StG (y) satisfies γ1 b = d. By the same argument,
we find γ2 ∈ StG (d) ∩ StG (x) such that γ2 a = c. Now γ2 γ1 ∈ StG (x) ∩ StG (y)
satisfies γ2 γ1 a = c and γ2 γ1 b = d. We deduce that the action of StG (x) ∩ StG (y)
on D(x) × D(y) is transitive.

3.3. The representation on the boundary. Let G ≤ G. We fix a field F whose
characteristic does not divide the Steinitz order of G. In the case where G acts
spherically transitive, this assumption implies that char(F ) ∤ mn for every n ∈ N.
For every n ∈ N the group G (and G) acts on the level Ln and we obtain, as above,
an associated representation ρn,F of G on the space
nX
o
F [Ln ] =
cu u | cu ∈ F .
u∈Ln

Similarly, for every vertex u ∈ Ln the stabiliser StG (u) acts on the descendants
D(u) and we obtain an associated representation θu,F of StG (u) on F [D(u)]. As
G acts on the boundary ∂T , we obtain a natural representation ρ∂,F of G on the
space C ∞ (∂T , F ) of F -valued locally constant functions on ∂T . More precisely, we
define
ρ∂,F (g)(f )(ξ) := f (g −1 ξ)
for all g ∈ G, f ∈ C ∞ (∂T , F ) and ξ ∈ ∂T . In fact, the boundary representation can
be described in various ways. First, it is the direct limit of the level representations
ρn,F , i.e.,
ρ∂,F = lim ρn,F .
−→
n∈N

Moreover, if G is spherically transitive, then ∂T ∼
= G/P for any parabolic subgroup
P of G. It follows from the definition of smooth induction (see Section 2.2) that
ρ∂,F = IndG
P (11F ).
0
Let v ∈ V (T ) and let (θv,F
, F [D(v)]0 ) denote the complement of the onedimensional trivial subrepresentation inside (θv,F , F [D(v)]). As a vector space
o
n X
X
cw = 0 .
cw w |
F [D(v)]0 =
w∈D(v)

w∈D(v)

Let Irr0F (v) denote the set of irreducible F -representations of StG (v) which occur
0
with non-zero multiplicity in θv,F
.

12

S. KIONKE

Lemma 6. Assume that G acts locally 2-transitively on T . Let π ∈ Irr0F (v) and
σ ∈ Irr0F (w) for vertices v, w ∈ V (T ). Then the following statements hold.
(1) The induced representation Iv (π) = IndG
StG (v) (π) is irreducible.
(2) If v ∈ Ln , then dimF Iv (π) = |Ln | dimF π.
(3) Iw (σ) ∼
= Iv (π) if and only if v = tw and π ∼
= t σ for some t ∈ G.
Here t σ is the representation of t StG (w)t−1 given by t σ(g) = σ(t−1 gt).
Proof. Since G acts spherically transitively, we have |G : StG (v)| = |Ln | and assertion (2) follows.
For t ∈ G we write Ht = StG (v) ∩ t StG (w). We apply Mackey’s intertwining
number theorem (see (10.23) in [11]):
dimF HomF [G] (Iv (π), Iw (σ)) =

X

dimF HomF [Ht ] (π|Ht , t σ|Ht )

t∈R

where the sum runs over a set R ⊆ G of representatives for the double cosets
StG (v)\G/ StG (w).
Assume first that v and w lie in the same level of T . Fix t ∈ R and define u = tw
and H = Ht . Clearly, if u = v, then H = StG (v) and dimF HomF [H] (π|H , t σ|H ) is
non-zero exactly, when t σ ∼
= π. In this case the dimension is the dimension of the
endomorphism F -algebra EndF [H] (π).
Assume now that u 6= v. The action of G is locally 2-transitive, this means that
the group H = StG (v)∩StG (u) acts transitively on D(v)×D(u). The representation
π|H is a subrepresentation of (θv,F |H , F [D(v)]) and t σ|H is a subrepresentation of
(θu,F |H , F [D(u)]). By Lemma 1 the trivial representation is the unique irreducible
representation of H which occurs in both F [D(v)] and in F [D(u)]. However, by
assumption π is non-trivial and since H acts transitively on D(v), we deduce that
π|H does not admit a non-zero H-fixed vector. We deduce that π|H and t σ|H do
not share an irreducible constituent; this implies dimF HomF [H] (π|H , t σ|H ) = 0. In
particular, this yields dimF EndF [G] (Iv (π))) = dimF EndStG (v) (π) and we deduce
(1) from Lemma 2. Now the computation above implies (3) provided v and w lie
in the same level.
Finally, assume that v and w lie in different levels, say v ∈ Ln and w ∈ Lm with
n < m. We observe that dimF Iv (π) = |Ln | dimF π ≤ |Ln |(mn+1 − 1) < |Ln+1 | ≤
dimF Iw (σ), and thus the representations are not isomorphic.

Proof of Theorem 1 and Theorem 2. Recall that the representation ρ∂,F on the locally constant functions on the boundary ∂T is the direct limit of the representations ρn,F of G on F [Ln ]. We will proceed by induction on n to show that

(2)

ρn,F ∼
= 11F ⊕

n−1
M

M

m(π, θvj ,F ) Ivj (π).

j=0 π∈Irr0F (vj )

Clearly, ρ0,F = 11F is the trivial representation. Assume that formula (2) holds and
consider ρn+1,F . Let u ∈ D(vn ) be a descendant of vn . Then the following short

REPRESENTATIONS ON THE BOUNDARY OF ROOTED TREES

13

calculation completes the induction step:
StG (vn )
G
∼
ρn+1,F ∼
= IndG
StG (u) (11F ) = IndStG (vn ) IndStG (u) (11F )
G
G
0
∼
∼
= IndG
StG (vn ) (θvn ,F ) = IndStG (vn ) (11F ) ⊕ IndStG (vn ) (θvn ,F )
M
∼
m(π, θvn ,F )Ivn (π).
= ρn,F ⊕
π∈Irr0F (vn )

By Lemma 6 the irreducible representations Ivn (π) are pairwise distinct, therefore
the multiplicities of irreducible representations in ρ∂,F are exactly the multiplicities
m(π, θvn ,F ). We deduce that ρ∂,F is multiplicity-free if θv,F is multiplicity-free for
every v ∈ V (T ). The converse holds as well since vn ∈ Ln was arbitrary.

Now we specialise to the case F = C. The following result provides a simple
method to construct Gelfand pairs of profinite groups.
Corollary 1. Assume that for every i ∈ N the number mi is either a prime or the
square of a prime. Let G ≤c G be a closed subgroup which acts locally 2-transitively
on T . Then (G, Pξ ) is a Gelfand pair for every parabolic subgroup Pξ ⊆ G.
Proof. By the local-global principle, we need to verify that (StG (v), StG (u)) is a
Gelfand pair for every vertex v and descendant u ∈ D(v). Let H denote the image
of StG (v) in the symmetric group Sym(D(v)). We observe that it suffices to verify
that H contains an abelian transitive subgroup A. Indeed, the representation of A
on C[D(v)] is multiplicity-free and thus the representation of H on C[D(v)] cannot
contain an irreducible constituent of multiplicity exceeding 1.
Case 1 : |D(v)| = p is a prime number.
Then H contains an element g of order p, i.e. a p-cycle. We set A = hgi.
Case 2 : |D(v)| = p2 is the square of a prime number.
Let K ≤ H be a Sylow p-subgroup, say |K| = pr . We note that K acts transitively
on D(v). Indeed, suppose that |K/K ∩ StH (u)| ≤ p, then pr−1 divides | StH (u)|
and so pr+1 divides | StH (u)|p2 = |H|. This contradicts the fact that K is a Sylow
p-subgroup. Let g ∈ Z(K) be a non-trivial element in the center of K. If hgi acts
transitively, we can choose A = hgi. Otherwise, we find and element w ∈ D(v)
such that O = {g k w | k ∈ Z} has exactly p elements. The action of K on D(v) is
transitive, so there is some h ∈ K such that hw ∈
/ O. We conclude that the group
A = hg, hi is abelian and acts transitively on D(v).

Example 3. We return to the setting of Example 1 where GC = . . . H ≀ H ≀ H is the
iterated wreath product of some finite group H with |H| ≥ 3. Note that the group
GC is a branch group; see [5, §1.3]. If the group H is non-abelian, then (GC , Pξ ) is
not a Gelfand pair for every ξ ∈ ∂T .
For simplicity, we discuss only for the symmetric group H = S3 . In this case
Xi = S3 is the symmetric group on 3-letters and let Gi = S3 ⊆ Aut(Xi ), where S3
simply acts on itself by multiplication from the left. Therefore T is the 6-regular
rooted tree. For every vertex u, the action of StG (u) on D(u) factors through the
regular representation of S3 .
The regular representation of S3 on C[S3 ] decomposes into two one-dimensional
and the sign characrepresentations, namely the trivial representation 11 =
ter , and a two-dimensional irreducible representation τ =
which occurs twice.
By Theorem 1 the irreducible representations Iv (τ ) occur with multiplicity two in

14

S. KIONKE

C
ρ∂,C = IndG
Pξ (11) for every vertex v where Pξ denotes a parabolic subgroup of GC .
We conclude that (GC , Pξ ) is not a Gelfand pair.

3.4. An application to zeta functions of representations. The aim of this
section is to use Theorem 1 to compute the zeta function of an induced representation. The definition given in the introduction suffices for our purposes. For
more information on zeta functions of induced representations the reader should
consult [25].
Let R be a compact discrete valuation ring with maximal ideal p ⊆ R and
uniformiser π ∈ p. The residue field k = R/p is finite, say of cardinality q. We note
that the ring R is the ring of integers of some non-archimedean local field (i.e., Qp ,
Fp ((t)) or finite extensions thereof).
The general linear group GLn (R) is a profinite group. For every r ∈ N, we define
the principal congruence subgroup
GLrn (R) = ker (GLn (R) → GLn (R/pr ))
of level r as the kernel of the reduction-mod-pr homomorphism. Let P denote the
parabolic subgroup of GLn (R) which consists of all matrices A = (ai,j ) ∈ GLn (R)
with ai,1 = 0 for all i ≥ 2. We put P r = P ∩ GLrn (R).
Proposition 2. In the above setting let G = GL1N +1 (R). The group G acts locally
2-transitively on a q N -regular rooted tree T such that P 1 is the stabiliser of a point
ξ ∈ ∂T . The pair (G, P 1 ) is Gelfand and the zeta function of the smoothly induced
representation ρ = IndG
P 1 (11C ) is
(3)

ζρ (s) = q N

1 − q −(s+1)N
.
1 − q −sN

Remark 2. We observe that formula (3) only depends on the residue field cardinality q and is, in particular, independent of the characteristic of R. This phenomenon
was observed in several different cases and calls for a deeper investigation; see also
[25, Problem 1.1]. Moreover, we note that formula (3) was known to hold if R is of
characteristic 0 [25, Prop. 7.7].
Proof. Let S be a commutative ring. An element (x1 , . . . , xN +1 ) ∈ S N +1 is called
primitive, if the ideal generated by x1 , . . . , xN +1 is S. We denote by PN (S) the
S-rational points of the N -dimensional projective space, that is
PN (S) = {x ∈ S N +1 | x is primitive }/S ×.
The equivalence class of (x1 , . . . , xN +1 ) in PN (S) will be denoted using projective
coordinates as (x1 : x2 : . . . : xN +1 ).
Consider the tree T whose vertices of level n ∈ N0 are the elements of
Ln = {v ∈ PN (R/pn+1 ) | v ≡ (1 : 0 : . . . : 0) mod p}.
There is an edge between u ∈ Ln−1 and v ∈ Ln if and only if v ≡ u mod pn .
We define un ∈ Ln to be the point un = (1 : 0 : . . . : 0) ∈ PN (R/pn+1 ). The
root of T is the vertex u0 . The boundary ∂T can be (and will be) identified with
∂T = {x ∈ PN (R) | x ≡ u0 mod p}. We fix ξ = (1 : 0 : . . . : 0) ∈ ∂T . For every
n ∈ N the group GLN +1 (R) acts on PN (R/pn ) and the restrictions of these actions
to GL1N +1 (R) provide an action on T . Observe that P 1 is the stabiliser of ξ.

REPRESENTATIONS ON THE BOUNDARY OF ROOTED TREES

15

Step 1: The action of G on T is spherically transitive.
Let v ∈ Ln , say v = (1 : v2 + pn+1 : . . . : vN +1 + pn+1 ) with certain vi ∈ p. Then
gun = v where


1
0 ··· 0
 v2

1


g= .
 ∈ GL1N +1 (R).
..
 ..

.
vN +1

1

Step 2: The action of G on T is locally 2-transitive.
Let v ∈ Ln−1 with v 6= un−1 for some n ≥ 2. Since G acts spherically transitive,
it is sufficient to show that StG (un ) ∩ StG (v) acts transitively on the descendants
D(v); see Lemma 5. Let x, y ∈ D(v) ⊆ Ln . There are 1 ≤ ℓ < n and primitive
vectors x̃ = (x2 , . . . , xN +1 ) and ỹ = (y2 , . . . , yN +1 ) ∈ RN such that x = (1 : π ℓ x2 +
pn+1 : . . . : π ℓ xN +1 + pn+1 ) and y = (1 : π ℓ y2 + pn+1 : . . . : π ℓ yN +1 + pn+1 ). Indeed,
the exponent ℓ is the largest number such that v (as well as x and y) hangs below
uℓ−1 .
Since the primitive vectors x̃ and ỹ satisfy x̃ ≡ ỹ mod pn−ℓ , there is a matrix
n−ℓ
A ∈ GLN
(R) such that Ax̃ = ỹ. Moreover, n − ℓ ≥ 1 and thus the matrix


1 0 ··· 0
0



g = .

 ..

A
0

is an element of StG (un ) ∩ StG (v) such that gx = y.
Step 3: The representation of StG (un ) on C[D(un )] decomposes into pairwise
distinct 1-dimensional irreducible representations.
Let n ∈ N0 . We consider the bijective map D(un ) → k N which maps an element
(1 : π n+1 x2 : . . . : π n+1 xN +1 ) to (x2 + p, . . . , xN +1 + p) ∈ k N . A short calculation
shows that via this identification the stabiliser StG (un ) acts like the additive group
k N on itself by translations. More precisely, StG (un+1 ) is normal in StG (un ) and
the quotient is isomorphic to k N . In particular, C[D(un )] decomposes like the
regular representation of the abelian group k N .
Finally, we deduce from Theorem 1 that (G, P 1 ) is a Gelfand pair. Moreover, the
representation on the boundary ρ∂,C is isomorphic to the induced representation
IndG
P 1 (11C ). It decomposes into a direct sum of the trivial representation and, for
every n ∈ N0 , exactly q N − 1 irreducible representations of dimension q nN . Using
the geometric series we obtain
∞
X
1 − q −(s+1)N
ζρ (s) = 1 +
(q N − 1)q −snN = q N
.

1 − q −sN
n=0
4. Local 2-transitivity of GGS-groups
In this section we look at a famous family of examples: the GGS-groups. For
more information about these groups the reader may consult [5, Sec. 2.3]. One aim
of this section is to prove that GGS-groups which act on a p-regular rooted tree are
locally 2-transitive provided that p is odd (see Theorem 3). In fact, we will work in
greater generality and study generalised GGS-groups which act on pk -regular trees.
Theorem 4 provides a criterion for local 2-transitivity of such groups.

16

S. KIONKE

Let p be a prime number and let k ≥ 1 be an integer. We define X = Z/pk Z. In
this section we define Xi = X for all i ∈ N. The associated tree T is the pk -regular
rooted tree. For convenience, we put m = pk . We note that the tree hanging from
a vertex u is isomorphic to T itself. For every g ∈ StG (u) the restriction of g to
the subtree hanging from u is an element gu ∈ G. In particular, we obtain an
isomorphism
ψ : G(1) → G × · · · × G
{z
}
|
m times

defined as ψ(g) = (g1+mZ , . . . , gm+mZ ).
Let α ∈ Sym(X) be the cyclic permutation α(u) = u + 1. Let a ∈ G be the
automorphism which permutes the vertices on the first level, and consequently also
the trees hanging from them, cyclically according to α, i.e. the label at the root is
a(ε) = α.
Let e = (e1 , . . . , em−1 , em ) ∈ (Z/mZ)m . We say that e is a defining vector if
em = 0 and ei 6≡ 0 mod p for some index i. In most references on GGS-groups the
defining vector is of length m − 1 and the last entry em = 0 is ignored. For our
purposes, however, it is very convenient to consider the additional entry em = 0 to
be part of the defining vector. In addition, it is convenient to define ei+mℓ = ei for
all ℓ ∈ Z, such that we are able to consider the indices of e1 , . . . , em modulo m. We
use a defining vector e to define recursively an automorphism be ∈ G(1) ⊆ G by
imposing
ψ(be ) = (ae1 , ae2 , . . . , aem−1 , be ).
Definition 3. Let e be a defining vector. The subgroup Ge of G generated by a
and be is called the GGS-group defined by e.
Whenever the defining vector is clear from the context, we write G instead of
Ge and b instead of be .
4.1. Aperiodic defining vectors. We say that a defining vector e is periodic
modulo p, if there is a t ∈ {1, . . . , m − 1} such that ei ≡ ei+t mod p for all i.
Otherwise, e is said to be aperiodic modulo p. For every t ∈ {1, . . . , m − 1} we
define the (2 × m)-matrix


e1
...
em
At =
e1+t . . . em+t
with entries in the local ring Z/mZ. The reduction of At modulo p will be denoted
by At .
Lemma 7. Let e ∈ (Z/mZ)m be a defining vector. The following statements are
equivalent.
(1) e is aperiodic modulo p.
(2) At ∈ M2×m (Fp ) has rank 2 for all t ∈ {1, . . . , m − 1}.
(3) Left multiplication with At defines a surjective Z/mZ-linear map from (Z/mZ)m
onto (Z/mZ)2 for all t ∈ {1, . . . , m − 1}.

Proof. (1) =⇒ (2): Assume that At does not have rank 2. Then the two rows
are linearly dependent and there is λ ∈ Fp such that ei ≡ λei+t mod p for all i.
k
We infer that ei ≡ λm ei+mt ≡ λp ei mod p for all i ∈ {1, . . . , m}. By assumption
ej 6≡ 0 mod p for some j and we conclude λ = 1, i.e., e is periodic modulo p.

REPRESENTATIONS ON THE BOUNDARY OF ROOTED TREES

17

(2) =⇒ (3): Since m = pk , the ring Z/mZ is a local ring. In particular, it
follows from Nakayama’s lemma that the linear map defined by At is surjective
onto (Z/mZ)2 if and only if the linear map defined by At is surjective onto F2p .
(3) =⇒ (1): Let t ∈ {1, . . . , m
P− 1}. By assumption
Pm there is a vector c =
(c1 , . . . , cm ) ∈ (Z/mZ)m such that m
e
c
=
1
and
i
i
i=1
i=1 ei+t ci = 0. In particular, since 0 6≡ 1 mod p, we deduce that ej 6≡ ej+t mod p for some j ∈ {1, . . . , m}. 
Remark 3. Assume that k = 1, that is m = p, where p is a prime number. In this
case every defining vector e is aperiodic (modulo p). Indeed, suppose that ei = ei+t
for all i ∈ {1, . . . , p} and some t ∈ {1, . . . , p − 1}. The element t + pZ generates
the cyclic group Z/pZ and we conclude that ei = ej for all i and j. This yields a
contradiction since ep = 0, whereas by assumption ei 6= 0 for some i ∈ {1, . . . , p−1}
4.2. A criterion for local 2-transitivity of GGS-groups. Let p be a prime
number, let m = pk and let e ∈ (Z/mZ)m be a defining vector. We consider the
GGS-group G = Ge and its subgroup
H = [bk , aℓ ] | k, ℓ ∈ {1, . . . , m − 1} .
Here [bk , aℓ ] = bk aℓ b−k a−ℓ denotes the commutator of bk and aℓ . We write bi =
b , ae1 , . . . , aem−i ). In particular, we have
ai ba−i , so that ψ(bi ) = (ae1−i , . . . , ae−1 , |{z}
i

the identity

ψ([bk , aℓ ]) = ψ(bk b−k
ℓ )

(4)

= (ak(e1 −e1−ℓ ) , . . . , ak(eℓ−1 −e−1 ) , akeℓ b−k , ak(eℓ+1 −e1 ) , . . . , bk a−kem−ℓ ).

Lemma 8. Let u ∈ Ln with n ≥ 1. The group H ∩ StG (u) acts transitively on the
descendants D(u).
Proof. We first verify that the assertion holds for u ∈ L1 . Say u = t + mZ. We
consider the group of labels H(u) = {g(u) | g ∈ H}. Formula (4) implies that
H(u) = hαet −ej | j ∈ {1, . . . , m}i
If et generates Z/mZ, then H(u) contains the element αet −em of order m. On the
other hand, if et is no generator of Z/mZ, then some ej is and thus also et − ej .
We deduce that H(u) is the cyclic group generated by α which acts transitively on
D(u). As a next step, we will show that Hu = {gu | g ∈ H} contains H for u ∈ L1
as above. Consider the following two cases.
Case 1 : et does not generate the group Z/mZ.
In this case et−j generates Z/mZ for some j ∈ {1, . . . , m − 1}. Clearly, then also
et − et−j is a generator. By (4) the group Hu is generated by aet −et−j and the
elements aket b−k for all k. We conclude that Hu = ha, bi = G and thus H ⊆ Hu .
Case 2: et is a generator of Z/mZ. In this case, we use (4) to deduce that the
group Hu contains all elements of the form aket b−k for k ∈ Z. A short calculation
yields
Hu ∋ a−ℓet bℓ bk−ℓ a(ℓ−k)et aket b−k = bk−ℓet b−k = [a−ℓet , bk ]
for all k, ℓ ∈ {1, . . . , m − 1}. Since et is a generator of Z/mZ, we deduce H ⊆ Hu .
Finally, it follows by induction on n ≥ 1, that StG (u) ∩ H acts transitively on
D(u) for all u ∈ Ln .


18

S. KIONKE

For p = 2 we need to exclude a problematic case. We say that the defining vector
e is centered, if em/2 is the only entry of e which generates Z/mZ.
Lemma 9. Let p be a prime. If p = 2, we assume that e is not centered.
Let u, v ∈ L1 with u 6= v. The image of the homomorphism Ψu,v : [G, G] → G×G
defined as Ψu,v (g) = (gu , gv ) contains the subgroup H × H.
Proof. Say u = i0 + mZ and v = j0 + mZ with 1 ≤ i0 , j0 ≤ m. Let i, j ∈
{1, . . . , m} \ {i0 , j0 }. Is is easy to verify that for all k, ℓ ∈ Z the following identities
hold:


(5)
Ψu,v [bki , bℓj0 ] = 1, [akej0 −i , bℓ ] ,


(6)
Ψu,v [bki0 , bℓj ] = [bk , aℓei0 −j ], 1 ,


(7)
Ψu,v [bki0 , bℓj0 ] = [bk , aℓei0 −j0 ], [akej0 −i0 , bℓ ] .

Suppose that ei0 −j is a generator of Z/mZ for some j 6= j0 . Then equation (6)
shows that the image of Ψu,v contains H ×1. However, by (5) and (7) the projection
of Ψu,v ([G, G]) ∩ (H × H) onto the second factor contains H, therefore the claim
follows. By the same argument as above we can conclude if ej0 −i is a generator of
Z/mZ for some i 6= i0 .
Finally, we observe that one of the two cases above applies. Indeed, if p is odd,
then at least one entry of e is a generator and we have i0 − j0 6≡ j0 − i0 mod m.
On the other hand, suppose that p = 2 and i0 − j0 ≡ j0 − i0 mod m. In this case
i0 − j0 = ±m/2. Since e is not centered, there is some j 6= j0 such that ei0 −j
generates Z/mZ.

Theorem 4. Let p be a prime number and recall that m = pk . Let e ∈ (Z/mZ)m
be a defining vector. If p = 2, we assume that e is not centered.
The GGS-group Ge acts locally 2-transitively on T if and only if the vector e
is aperiodic modulo p. In this case (Ge , Pξ ) is a Gelfand pair for every parabolic
subgroup Pξ ≤ Ge
Proof. As a first step, we show that StG (u)∩StG (v) acts transitively on D(u)×D(v)
for all u 6= v in L1 exactly if e is aperiodic modulo p.
Assume that e is aperiodic modulo p. Say u = i + mZ and v = i + t + mZ with
i ∈ {1, . . . , m} and t ∈ {1, . . . , m − 1}. By Lemma 7 (3) left multiplication with the
two row circulant matrix


ei . . .
ei+m−1
ei+t . . . ei+m−1+t

defines a surjective map onto (Z/mZ)2 . In particular, we find c1 , . . . , cm ∈ Z/mZ
such that
m−1
m−1
X
X
cm−j ei+t+j = 0.
cm−j ei+j = 1 and
j=0

j=0

We deduce that the element g = bc11 bc22 · · · bcmm ∈ G ∩ G(1) satisfies g(v) = Id,
whereas g(u) is the cyclic permutation α. Since the same argument applies with u
and v interchanged, it follows that G ∩ G(1) = StG (u) ∩ StG (v) acts transitively on
D(u) × D(v).
Conversely, let t ∈ {1, . . . , m − 1} be arbitrary. Choose u = 1 + mZ and v =
1+t+mZ. Note that an element g ∈ StG (v) which fixes one descendant of v already
acts trivially on D(v). Since the action is locally 2-transitive, we deduce that there

REPRESENTATIONS ON THE BOUNDARY OF ROOTED TREES

19

is an element g ∈ StG (u) ∩ StG (v) = G ∩ G(1) such that g(v) = Id but g(u) has order
m = pk . Since G ∩ G(1) = hb1 , . . . , bm i and (G ∩ G(1))/(G ∩ G(2)) is abelian, we see
k−1
k−1
that there is some j ∈ {1, . . . , m} such that (bpj )(u) 6= (bpj )(v) ; in other words,
em−j+1 6≡ em−j+t+1 mod p. We deduce that e is aperiodic modulo p.
Assume now that e is aperiodic modulo p. The final step is to verify that
for distinct vertices u, v ∈ Ln the action of StG (u) ∩ StG (v) on D(u) × D(v) is
transitive. We proceed by induction on n. The case n = 1 was already discussed
above. Assume now that n ≥ 2. We distinguish two cases.
Case 1 : u and v have the same predecessor w ∈ L1 on the first level. Since G is
fractal (c.f. [33]), we have G = Gw = {gw | g ∈ StG (w)} and the claim follow from
the induction hypothesis.
Case 2 : u and v have distinct predecessors u1 6= v1 on the first level L1 . This
means, u = u1 ũ and v = v1 ṽ. It follows from Lemma 9 that H × H is contained
in the image of the restriction homomorphism Ψu1 ,v1 : [G, G] → G × G. Now, by
Lemma 8 the group H ∩ StG (ũ) acts transitively on D(ũ) and similarly H ∩ StG (ṽ)
acts transitively on D(ṽ). This proves the assertion.
Finally, assume that G acts locally 2-transitively and let Pξ ≤ G be a parabolic
subgroup. Since G is fractal, the action of the stabiliser StG (u) on D(u) factors
through the regular representation of a cyclic group of order m and thus the representation on C[D(u)] is multiplicity-free. By the local-global principle (G, Pξ ) is
a Gelfand pair.

Remark 4. The assumption that the defining vector is not centered for p = 2
is neccessary. Indeed, consider the case p = 2 and k = 1. There is precisely
one GGS-group G acting on the rooted binary tree T ; it is defined by the vector
(1, 0) ∈ (Z/2Z)2 . Note that the defining vector is centered and aperiodic. This is
exactly the group considered in Example 2, where we have seen that G does not
act locally 2-transitively on T . It seems possible that groups with centered defining
vector in general do not act locally 2-transitively.
The closure G of G ∼
= D∞ in G is isomorphic to the pro-2 completion of the
infinite dihedral group D∞ . The group P = hbi is a parabolic subgroup of G
and one can verify by direct calculation that (G, P ) is nevertheless a Gelfand pair.
It seems possible, that a weaker assumption still suffices the prove a local-global
principle for Gelfand pairs.
References
[1] N. Avni, B. Klopsch, U. Onn, and C. Voll, Representation zeta functions of compact p-adic
analytic groups and arithmetic groups, Duke Math. J. 162 (2013), 111–197.
[2]
, Similarity classes of integral p-adic matrices and representation zeta functions of
groups of type A2 , Proc. London Math. Soc. 112 (2016), 267–350.
[3] L. Bartholdi, R. Grigorchuk, On the spectrum of Hecke type operators related to some fractal
groups, Proc. Steklov Inst. Math. 231, (2000), 1–41.
[4] L. Bartholdi, and R. Grigorchuk, On parabolic subgroups and Hecke algebras of some fractal
groups, Serdica Math. J. 28 (2002), 47–90.
[5] L. Bartholdi, R. Grigorchuk, Z. Šuniḱ, Branch groups, Handbook of Algebra, Vol. 3,
Elsevier/North-Holland, Amsterdam, 2003.
[6] L. Bartholdi, P. de la Harpe, Representation zeta functions of wreath products with finite
groups, Groups Geom. Dyn. 4 (2010), no. 2, 209–249.
[7] L. Bartholdi, Representation zeta functions of self-similar branched groups, Groups Geom.
Dyn. 11 (2017), no. 1, 29–56.

20

S. KIONKE

[8] M. B. Bekka, and P. de la Harpe, Irreducibility of Unitary Group Representations and Reproducing Kernels Hilbert Spaces, Expo. Math. 21 (2003), 115–149.
[9] D. Bump Lie Groups, 2nd Edition, Springer-Verlag, New York, 2013.
[10] T. Ceccherini-Silberstein, F. Scarabotti, F. Tolli, Finite Gelfand pairs and their applications
to probability and statistics, J. Math. Sci. 141 (2007), 1182–1229.
[11] C. W. Curtis, and I. Reiner, Methods of Representation Theory, Volume I, John Wiley and
Sons, New York, 1981.
[12] D. D’Angeli, A. Donno, Self-similar groups and finite Gelfand pairs, Algebra Discrete Math.
(2007), 54–69.
[13]
, Appendix: Gelfand pairs associated with the action of G, European J. Combin. 33
(2012), no. 7, 1422–1426.
[14] P. Diaconis, Group Representations in Probability and Statistics, Institute of Mathematical
Statistics, Hayward, CA, 1988.
[15] J. Dieudonné, Éléments d’analyse 6, Chapitre XXII, Gauthier-Villars, Paris, 1975.
[16] A. Dudko, R. Grigorchuk, On irreducibility and disjointness of Koopman and quasi-regular
representations of weakly branch groups, Modern theory of dynamical systems, 51–66, Amer.
Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2017.
[17] G. A. Fernández-Alcober, A. Zugadi-Reizabal, GGS-groups: order of congruence quotients
and Hausdorff dimension, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 366 (2014), 1993–2017.
[18] G. A. Fernández-Alcober, A. Garrido, J. Uria-Albizuri, On the congruence subgroup property
for GGS-groups Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 145 (2017), 3311–3322.
[19] R. Grigorchuk, On Burnside’s problem on periodic groups (Russian), Funktsional. Anal. i
Prilozhen. 14 (1980), 53–54.
, Solved and unsolved problems around one group, in: Infinite groups: geometric,
[20]
combinatorial and dynamical aspects, Progr. Math. 248, Birkhäuser, Basel, 2005.
[21] R. Grigorchuk, Y. Leonov, V. Nekrashevych, V. Sushchansky, Self-similar groups, automatic
sequences, and unitriangular representations, Bull. Math. Sci. 6 (2016), 231–285.
[22] B. H. Gross, Some applications of Gel’fand pairs to number theory, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc.
24 (1991), 277–301.
[23] N. Gupta, S. Sidki, On the Burnside problem for periodic groups, Math. Z. 182 (1983),
385–388.
[24] A. Jaikin-Zapirain, Zeta function of representations of compact p-adic analytic groups, J.
Amer. Math. Soc. 19 (2006), 91–118.
[25] S. Kionke and B. Klopsch, Zeta functions associated to admissible representations of compact
p-adic Lie groups, preprint arXiv:1707.08485 (26 Jul 2017).
[26] B. Klopsch, Representation growth and representation zeta functions of groups Note Mat.
33 (2013), 107–120.
[27] E. Kowalski, An introduction to the representation theory of groups, American Mathematical
Society, Providence, RI, 2014.
[28] S. Lang, Algebra, 3rd Ed., Springer-Verlag, New York, 2002.
[29] G. Letac, Les fonctions sphériques d’un couple de Gelfand symétrique et les chaı̂nes de
Markov, Adv. Appl. Prob. 14 (1982), 272–294.
[30] M. Larsen and A. Lubotzky, Representation growth of linear groups, J. Eur. Math. Soc. 10
(2008), 351–390.
[31] A. Lubotzky and B. Martin, Polynomial representation growth and the congruence subgroup
growth, Israel J. Math. 144 (2004), 293–316.
[32] E. Pervova, Profinite completions of some groups acting on trees J. Algebra 310 (2007),
858–879.
[33] J. Uria-Albizuri, On the concept of fractality for groups of automorphisms of a regular rooted
tree, preprint arXiv:1604.05950 (20 Apr 2016).
[34] J. S. Wilson, Profinite Groups, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1998.
Karlsruher Institut für Technologie, Fakultät für Mathematik, Institut für Algebra und Geometrie, Englerstr.2, 76131 Karlsruhe, Germany.
E-mail address: steffen.kionke@kit.edu

