arXiv:1610.02672v1 [math.GR] 9 Oct 2016

Internal and external duality in abstract polytopes
Gabe Cunningham
University of Massachusetts Boston
and
Mark Mixer
Wentworth Institute of Technology
October 11, 2016
Abstract
We define an abstract regular polytope to be internally self-dual if its selfduality can be realized as one of its symmetries. This property has many
interesting implications on the structure of the polytope, which we present
here. Then, we construct many examples of internally self-dual polytopes. In
particular, we show that there are internally self-dual regular polyhedra of
each type {p, p} for p ≥ 3 and that there are both infinitely many internally
self-dual and infinitely many externally self-dual polyhedra of type {p, p} for p
even. We also show that there are internally self-dual polytopes in each rank,
including a new family of polytopes that we construct here.
Key Words: abstract polytope, self-dual polytope, regular polytope
AMS Subject Classification (2010): 20B25, 52B15, 51M20, 52B05

1

Introduction

Whenever a polytope is invariant under a transformation such as duality, we often
describe this as an “external” symmetry of the polytope. In the context of abstract
regular polytopes, self-duality manifests as an automorphism of the symmetry group
of the polytope. For example, the n-simplex is self-dual, and this fact is reflected
by an automorphism of its symmetry group Sn+1 . Since the symmetric group Sn+1
has no nontrivial outer automorphisms (unless n + 1 = 6), we see that in general the
1

self-duality of the simplex must somehow correspond to an ordinary rank-preserving
symmetry. What does this mean geometrically? What other polytopes have this
property that self-duality yields an inner automorphism?
In this paper, we define a regular self-dual abstract polytope to be internally
self-dual if the group automorphism induced by its self-duality is an inner automorphism. Otherwise, a regular self-dual polytope is externally self-dual. Our search
for internally self-dual regular polytopes started with the atlas of regular polytopes
with up to 2000 flags [2]. Using a computer algebra system, we found the following
results on the number of regular polytopes (up to isomorphism and duality).
Rank
3
4
5

Total
3571
2016
258

Self-dual
242
156
15

Internally self-dual
54
2
1

Externally self-dual
188
154
14

Table 1: Data on dualities of small regular polytopes
The internally self-dual polyhedra we found include examples of type {p, p} for
3 ≤ p ≤ 12 and p = 15. In rank 4, the only two examples are the simplex {3, 3, 3}
and a toroid of type {4, 3, 4}. In rank 5, the only example is the simplex {3, 3, 3, 3}.
The data suggest that there are many internally self-dual polyhedra (although
many more externally self-dual). Indeed, we will show that there are internally selfdual polyhedra of type {p, p} for each p ≥ 3. The data in ranks 4 and 5 seem less
promising as far as the existence of internally self-dual polytopes. We will show,
however, that there are several families of internally self-dual polytopes in every
rank. Furthermore, due to the ubiquity of symmetric groups, it seems likely that
in every rank, there are many polytopes that are internally self-dual for the same
reason as the simplex.
In addition to the existence results mentioned above, we explore the consequences
of a self-dual polytope being either externally or internally self-dual.
The paper is organized as follows. In section 2 we briefly outline the necessary
definitions and background on abstract polytopes. Section 3 consists of basic results following from the definition of an internally self-dual polytope. In section 4,
more structural results about internally self-dual polytopes are examined. Section 5
includes existence results regarding both self-dual regular polyhedra and self-dual
polytopes of higher ranks. Finally, in section 6, we highlight a few open questions
and variants of the problems considered here.

2

2

Background

Most of our background, along with many more details can be found in from [9].
An abstract n-polytope P is a ranked partially ordered set of faces with four defining
properties. First, P has a least face F−1 of rank −1, and a greatest face Fn of rank n;
here if an F ∈ P has rank(F ) = i, then F is called an i-face. Faces of rank 0, 1, and
n−1 are called vertices, edges, and facets, respectively. Second, each maximal totally
ordered subset of P contains n + 2 faces. These maximal totally ordered subsets of
P are called flags. Third, if F < G with rank(F ) = i − 1 and rank(G) = i + 1, then
there are exactly two i-faces H with F < H < G. Finally, P is strongly connected,
which is defined as follows. For any two faces F and G of P with F < G, we call
G/F := {H | H ∈ P, F ≤ H ≤ G} a section of P. If P is a partially ordered
set satisfying the first two properties, then P is connected if either n ≤ 1, or n ≥ 2
and for any two faces F and G of P (other than F−1 and Fn ) there is a sequence
of faces F = H0 , H1 , . . . , Hk−1 , Hk = G, not containing F−1 and Fn , such that Hi
and Hi−1 are comparable for i = 1, . . . , k. We say that P is strongly connected if
each section of P (including P itself) is connected. Due to the relationship between
abstract polytopes and incidence geometries, if two faces F and G are comparable
in the partial order, then it is said that F is incident on G.
Two flags of an n-polytope P are said to be adjacent if they differ by exactly one
face. If Φ is a flag of P, the third defining property of an abstract polytope tells us
that for i = 0, 1, . . . , n − 1 there is exactly one flag that differs from Φ in its i-face.
This flag is denoted Φi and is i-adjacent to Φ. We extend this notation recursively
and let Φi1 ···ik denote the flag (Φi1 ···ik−1 )ik . If w is a finite sequence (i1 , . . . , ik ), then
Φw denotes Φi1 ···ik . Note that Φii = Φ for each i, and Φij = Φji if |i − j| > 1. An
n-polytope (n ≥ 2) is called equivelar if for each i = 1, 2, ..., d − 1, there is an integer
pi so that every section G/F defined by an (i − 2)-face F incident on an (i + 1)-face
G is a pi -gon. If P is equivelar we say that it has (Schläfli ) type {p1 , p2 , . . . , pn−1 }.
The automorphism group of an n-polytope P (consisting of the order-preserving
bijections from P to itself) is denoted by Γ(P). For any flag Φ, any finite sequence
w, and any automorphism ϕ, we have Φw ϕ = (Φϕ)w . An n-polytope P is called
regular if its automorphism group Γ(P) has exactly one orbit when acting on its
flags of P, or equivalently, if for some base flag Φ = {F−1 , F0 , F1 , . . . , Fn } and each
i = 0, 1, . . . , n−1 there exists a unique involutory automorphism ρi ∈ Γ(P) such that
Φρi = Φi . For a regular n-polytope P, its group Γ(P) is generated by the involutions
ρ0 , . . . , ρn−1 described above. These generators satisfy the relations
(ρi ρj )pij =  (0 ≤ i, j ≤ n − 1),

3

(1)

where pii = 1 for all i, 2 ≤ pji = pij if j = i − 1, and
pij = 2 for |i − j| ≥ 2.

(2)

Any group hρ0 , . . . , ρn−1 i satisfying properties 1 and 2 is called a string group
generated by involutions. Moreover, Γ(P) has the following intersection property:
hρi | i ∈ Ii ∩ hρi | i ∈ Ji = hρi | i ∈ I ∩ Ji for I, J ⊆ {0, . . . , n − 1}.

(3)

Any string group generated by involutions that has this intersection property is called
a string C-group. The group Γ(P) of an abstract regular polytope P is a string Cgroup. Conversely, it is known (see [9, Sec. 2E]) that an abstract regular n-polytope
can be constructed uniquely from any string C-group. This correspondence between
string C-groups and automorphism groups of abstract regular polytopes allows us to
talk simulatneously about the combinatorics of the flags of abstract regular polytopes
as well as the structure of their groups.
Let Γ = hρ0 , . . . , ρn−1 i be a string group generated by involutions acting as a
permutation group on a set {1, . . . , k}. We can define the permutation representation
graph X as the r-edge-labeled multigraph with k vertices, and with a single i-edge
{a, b} whenever aρi = b with a < b. Note that, since each of the generators is an
involution, the edges in our graph are not directed. When Γ is a string C-group, the
multigraph X is called a CPR graph, as defined in [11].
If P and Q are regular polytopes, then we say that P covers Q if there is a welldefined surjective homomorphism from Γ(P) to Γ(Q) that respects the canonical
generators. In other words, if Γ(P) = hρ0 , . . . , ρn−1 i and Γ(Q) = hρ00 , . . . , ρ0n−1 i, then
P covers Q if there is a homomorphism that sends each ρi to ρ0i .
Suppose Γ = hρ0 , . . . , ρn−1 i is a string group generated by involutions, and Λ is a
string C-group such that Γ covers Λ. If the covering is one-to-one on the subgroup
hρ0 , . . . , ρn−2 i, then the quotient criterion says that Γ is itself a string C-group [9,
Thm. 2E17].
Given regular polytopes P and Q, the mix of their automorphism groups, denoted
Γ(P)  Γ(Q), is the subgroup of the direct product Γ(P) × Γ(Q) that is generated by
the elements (ρi , ρ0i ). This group is the minimal string group generated by involutions
that covers both Γ(P) and Γ(Q) (where again, we only consider homomorphisms that
respect the generators). Using the procedure in [9, Sec. 2E], we can build a poset
from this, which we call the mix of P and Q, denoted P Q. This definition naturally
extends to any family of polytopes (even an infinite family); see [10, Section 5] for
more details.
The comix of Γ(P) with Γ(Q), denoted Γ(P)  Γ(Q), is the largest string group
generated by involutions that is covered by both Γ(P) and Γ(Q) [3]. A presentation
4

for Γ(P)  Γ(Q) can be obtained from that of Γ(P) by adding all of the relations of
Γ(Q), rewriting the relations to use the generators of Γ(P) instead.
The dual of a poset P is the poset P ∗ with the same underlying set as P, but with
the partial order reversed. Clearly, the dual of a polytope is itself a polytope. If P ∗ ∼
=
P, then P is said to be self-dual. A duality d : P → P is an order-reversing bijection.
If w = (i1 , . . . , ik ), then we define w∗ to be the sequence (n − i1 − 1, . . . , n − ik − 1).
For any flag Φ, finite sequence w, and duality d, we have Φw d = (Φd)w∗ .
If P is a self-dual regular n-polytope, then there is a group automorphism of Γ(P)
that sends each ρi to ρn−i−1 . If ϕ ∈ Γ(P), then we will denote by ϕ∗ the image of
ϕ under this automorphism. In particular, if ϕ = ρi1 · · · ρik , then we define ϕ∗ to be
ρn−i1 −1 · · · ρn−ik −1 . Thus, if Φ is the base flag of P and Φϕ = Φw , then Φϕ∗ = Φw∗ .

3
3.1

Internal self-duality
Basic notions

As just noted, if P is a self-dual regular n-polytope, then there is a group automorphism of Γ(P) that sends each ρi to ρn−i−1 . When this automorphism is inner, there
is a polytope symmetry α ∈ Γ(P) such that αρi = ρn−i−1 α for 0 ≤ i ≤ n − 1. We
use this idea to motivate the following definitions.
Definition 3.1. Suppose P is a regular self-dual polytope. An automorphism α ∈
Γ(P) is a dualizing automorphism (or simply dualizing) if αρi = ρn−i−1 α for 0 ≤
i ≤ n−1 (equivalently, if αϕ = ϕ∗ α for every ϕ ∈ Γ(P)). A regular self-dual polytope
is internally self-dual if it has a dualizing automorphism. Otherwise, it is externally
self-dual.
Depending on the automorphism group of a polytope, we can sometimes determine internal self-duality without knowing anything deep about the polytope’s
structure.
Proposition 3.2. Suppose P is a regular self-dual polytope, and that Γ(P) is a
symmetric group. Then P is internally self-dual unless Γ(P) ∼
= S6 and P has type
{6, 6} or {4, 4, 4}.
Proof. For k 6= 6, the symmetric group Sk has no nontrivial outer automorphisms,
and so a self-dual polytope with this automorphism group must be internally selfdual. Up to isomorphism, there are 11 regular polytopes with automorphism group
S6 ; eight of them are not self-dual, one of them (the 5-simplex) is internally selfdual, and the remaining two (denoted {6,6}*720a and {4, 4, 4}*720) are externally
self dual [8].
5

It would perhaps be possible to find other abstract results of this type, but they
could never tell the whole story. After all, it is possible for the automorphism that
sends each ρi to ρn−i−1 to be inner, even if Γ(P) has nontrivial outer automorphisms.
So let us shift our focus away from the abstract groups.
What does it mean geometrically to say that P is internally self-dual? Let Φ be
the base flag of P, and let Ψ = Φα for some dualizing automorphism α. Let ϕ ∈ Γ(P)
and suppose that Φϕ = Φw . Then
Ψϕ = Φαϕ
= Φϕ∗ α
∗

= Φw α
= (Φα)w

∗

∗

= Ψw .
In other words, every automorphism acts on Ψ dually to how it acts on Φ.
Definition 3.3. We say that flags Φ and Ψ are dual (to each other) if every auto∗
morphism acts dually on Φ and Ψ. That is, if Φϕ = Φw , then Ψϕ = Ψw .
Note that if P is regular and Ψ is dual to Φ, then in particular Ψρi = Ψn−i−1 .
Proposition 3.4. A regular polytope P is internally self-dual if and only if its base
flag Φ has a dual flag Ψ.
Proof. The discussion preceding Definition 3.3 shows that if P is internally selfdual, then Φ has a dual flag. Conversely, suppose that Φ has a dual flag Ψ. Since
P is regular, there is an automorphism α ∈ Γ(P) such that Ψ = Φα. Then for
0 ≤ i ≤ n − 1,
Φαρi α−1 = Ψρi α−1
= Ψn−i−1 α−1
= (Ψα−1 )n−i−1
= Φn−i−1 .
So αρi α−1 acts on Φ the same way that ρn−i−1 does, and since the automorphism
group acts regularly on the flags, it follows that αρi α−1 = ρn−i−1 for each i. Thus α
is a dualizing automorphism, and P is internally self-dual.

6

Proposition 3.4 provides an intuitive way to determine whether a regular polytope
is internally self-dual: try to find a flag that is dual to the base flag. Let us consider
some simple examples. Let P = {p}, with 3 ≤ p < ∞. Fix a vertex and an edge
in the base flag Φ. In order for Ψ to be dual to Φ, we need for Ψρ0 = Ψ1 , which in
particular means that ρ0 fixes the vertex of Ψ. Now, whenever p is even or infinite,
the reflection ρ0 does not fix any vertices, and so P must be externally self dual (See
Figure 1). When p is odd, then there is a unique vertex v fixed by ρ0 . Furthermore,
there is an edge incident to v that is fixed by ρ1 . The flag Ψ consisting of this vertex
and edge is dual to Φ, and so in this case, P is internally self-dual. Indeed, when
p is odd, then the automorphism (ρ0 ρ1 )(p−1)/2 ρ0 is dualizing. The following result is
then clear.
Proposition 3.5. The p-gon P = {p} is internally self-dual if and only if p is odd.

Figure 1: Adjacent flags and dual flags in a pentagon and a square
Next consider P = {3, 3}, the simplex. Since Γ(P) ∼
= S4 , which has no nontrivial
outer automorphisms, it follows that P is internally self-dual. Nevertheless, let us see
what the dual to the base flag looks like. Consider the labeled simplex in Figure 2,
with vertices {1, 2, 3, 4}, edges {a, b, c, d, e, f }, and facets {L, F, R, D}. Let us pick
the triple Φ = (1, a, L) as the base flag.
To find the dual of the base flag of this simplex consider the action of each of
the distinguished generators of the automorphism group on the vertices, edges, and
facets. We summarize the actions in Table 2.
Since ρ1 and ρ2 both fix the base vertex, we need for their duals, ρ1 and ρ0 , to
fix the vertex of the dual flag. The only possibility is vertex 3. Next, since ρ0 and ρ2
7

Figure 2: A simplex with labeled faces
ρ0
ρ1
ρ2

Vertices
Edges
(1, 2)(3)(4) (a)(b, d)(c, e)(f )
(1)(2, 4)(3) (a, c)(b)(d, f )(e)
(1)(2)(3, 4) (a)(b, c)(d, e)(f )

Facets
(L)(F, R)(D)
(L)(F, D)(R)
(L, D)(F )(R)

Table 2: Symmetries of the labeled simplex
fix the base edge, we need for their duals to fix the edge of the dual flag. The only
edges fixed by both ρ0 and ρ2 are edges a and f , and the only one of those incident
on vertex 3 is f . Finally, since ρ0 and ρ1 fix the base facet, we need for ρ2 and ρ1
to fix the facet of the dual flag, and so the only possibility is R. So the flag that is
dual to (1, a, L) is (3, f, R) (shown in Figure 3).
The process just described is a good illustration of the general process of finding
a dual flag. Let us now describe that process. Suppose P is a regular, self-dual
polytope, with base flag Φ and Γ(P) = hρ0 , . . . , ρn−1 i. A flag Ψ will be dual to Φ if
and only if, for 0 ≤ i ≤ n − 1, the i-face of Ψ is fixed by hρj | j 6= n − i − 1i. So to find
Ψ, we start by looking for a vertex F0 that is fixed by hρ0 , . . . , ρn−2 i. If no such vertex
exists, then Φ does not have a dual flag. Otherwise, once we have found F0 , we now
need an edge F1 that is incident to F0 and fixed by hρ0 , . . . , ρn−3 , ρn−1 i. Since ρn−1
does not fix F0 , the only way that it will fix F1 is if it interchanges the endpoints.
8

Figure 3: A base and dual flag of a simplex
Thus, F1 must be incident on the vertices F0 and F0 ρn−1 . Similar reasoning then
shows that F2 must be incident on all of the edges in F1 hρn−2 , ρn−1 i. Continuing in
this way, we arrive at the following algorithm:
Algorithm 3.6. Suppose P is a regular n-polytope with base flag Φ and Γ(P) =
hρ0 , . . . , ρn−1 i. We pick a flag Ψ = (F0 , F1 , . . . , Fn−1 ) as follows.
1. Set F0 to be a vertex of P that is fixed by hρ0 , . . . , ρn−2 i.
2. Once Fi is chosen, pick Fi+1 to be an (i + 1)-face that is incident to every i-face
in Fi hρn−i−1 , . . . , ρn−1 i.
3. Repeat Step 2 until Fn−1 is chosen.
For simplicity, let us assume for now that P is vertex-describable, meaning that
each face of P is uniquely determined by its vertex-set.
Proposition 3.7. Suppose P is a regular, self-dual, vertex-describable polytope.
Then P is internally self-dual if and only if the procedure described in Algorithm 3.6
finishes successfully.
Proof. If P is internally self-dual, then its base flag Φ has a dual flag Ψ. Let Ψ =
(F0 , . . . , Fn−1 ). Then for each i, the face Fi is fixed by hρj | j 6= n − i − 1i. In
9

particular, since Fi < Fi+1 , it follows that each ϕ ∈ hρn−i−1 , . . . , ρn−1 i, we have
Fi ϕ < Fi+1 ϕ = Fi+1 . Thus, once we have chosen Fi , the face Fi+1 satisfies the
desired properties, and we can continue the process until we have produced Ψ.
Conversely, suppose that the algorithm produced a sequence of faces (F0 , . . . , Fn−1 ).
To show that P is internally self-dual, it suffices to show that ρj fixes every face except for Fn−j−1 . By construction, the vertex-set of each face Fi is F0 hρn−i , . . . , ρn−1 i.
For j < n − i − 1, the automorphism ρj commutes with hρn−i , . . . , ρn−1 i and fixes F0 ,
and so
F0 hρn−i , . . . , ρn−1 iρj = F0 ρj hρn−i , . . . , ρn−1 i = F0 hρn−i , . . . , ρn−1 i.
For j > n − i − 1, we have
F0 hρn−i , . . . , ρn−1 iρj . = F0 hρn−i , . . . , ρn−1 i.
So for j 6= n − i − 1, the automorphism ρj fixes the vertex set of Fi . Since P is
vertex-describable, it follows that ρj fixes Fi itself. Thus ρj fixes every face except
(possibly) for Fn−j−1 . But it is clear that ρj cannot also fix Fn−j−1 , because the only
automorphism that fixes any flag is the identity. This shows that Ψ = (F0 , . . . , Fn−1 )
is dual to Φ.
Corollary 3.8. Let P be a self-dual regular polytope with Γ(P) = hρ0 , . . . , ρn−1 i. If
no vertices are fixed by the subgroup hρ0 , . . . , ρn−2 i, then P is externally self-dual.

3.2

Properties of dualizing automorphisms

Now let us return to the algebraic point of view to determine some properties of
dualizing automorphisms.
Proposition 3.9. If α ∈ Γ(P) is dualizing, then α = α∗ .
Proof. If α is dualizing, then for all ϕ ∈ Γ(P), we have that αϕ = ϕ∗ α. Taking
ϕ = α yields the desired result.
Proposition 3.10. If α ∈ Γ(P) is dualizing, then α is not in hρ0 , . . . , ρn−2 i or in
hρ1 , . . . , ρn−1 i.
Proof. Since α is dualizing, ρn−1 = α−1 ρ0 α. If α ∈ hρ0 , . . . , ρn−2 i, then this gives us
that ρn−1 is in hρ0 , . . . , ρn−2 i, which violates the intersection condition (Equation 3).
Similarly, if α ∈ hρ1 , . . . , ρn−1 i, then the equation ρ0 = α−1 ρn−1 α shows that ρ0 is in
hρ1 , . . . , ρn−1 i, which again violates the intersection condition.
10

The following properties are straightforward to verify.
Proposition 3.11. Let P be a self-dual regular polytope.
(a) If α and β are dualizing automorphisms, then αβ is central, and αβ = βα.
(b) If ϕ is central and α is dualizing, then ϕα is dualizing.
(c) If α is dualizing, then any even power of α is central, and any odd power of α
is dualizing. In particular, α has even order.
(d) If α is dualizing, then α−1 is dualizing.
Proposition 3.12. Let P be an internally self-dual regular polytope such that Γ(P)
has a finite center. Then the number of dualizing automorphisms of Γ(P) is equal to
the order of the center of Γ(P).
Proof. Proposition 3.11 implies that the central and dualizing automorphisms of
Γ(P) together form a group in which the center of Γ(P) has index 2. The result
follows immediately.

3.3

Internal self-duality of nonregular polytopes

Generalizing internal self-duality to nonregular polytopes is not entirely straightforward. When P is a self-dual regular polytope, then Γ(P) always has an automorphism (inner or outer) that reflects this self-duality. This is not the case for general
polytopes.
One promising way to generalize internal self-duality is using the notion of dual
flags. Indeed, Definition 3.3 does not require the polytope to be regular, and makes
sense even for nonregular polytopes. Let us determine some of the simple consequences of this definition.
Proposition 3.13. Suppose that Ψ is dual to Φ. Then Ψn−i−1 is dual to Φi .
Proof. Let ϕ ∈ Γ(P). We need to show that ϕ acts dually on Φi and Ψn−i−1 . Suppose
∗
that Φϕ = Φw , from which it follows that Ψϕ = Ψw . Then:
(Φi )ϕ = (Φϕ)i = Φwi = (Φi )iwi ,
whereas
(Ψn−i−1 ϕ) = (Ψϕ)n−i−1 = Ψw

∗ (n−i−1)

and the claim follows.
11

= (Ψn−i−1 )(n−i−1)w

∗ (n−i−1)

,

Since polytopes are flag-connected, the following is an immediate consequence.
Corollary 3.14. If P has one flag that has a dual, then every flag has a dual.
Thus we see that the existence of dual flags is in fact a global property, not a
local one. Here are some further consequences of the definition of dual flags.
Proposition 3.15. Let P be a polytope, and let Φ and Ψ be flags of P.
(a) If Φ and Ψ are dual, then P is self-dual, and there is a duality d : P → P that
takes Φ to Ψ.
(b) Φ is dual to Ψ if and only if Ψ = Φd for some duality d that commutes with
every automorphism of P.
(c) Φ is dual to Ψ if and only if Ψ = Φd for some duality d that is central in the
extended automorphism group of P.
Proof. (a) We attempt to define the duality d by Φd = Ψ and then extend it by
∗
Φw d = Ψw . To check that this is well-defined, suppose that Φw = Φ; we then
∗
need to show that Ψw = Ψ. Indeed, if Φw = Φ, then taking ϕ to be the
identity we have that Φϕ = Φw , whence Ψ = Ψϕ = Ψw∗ , with the last equality
following since Φ and Ψ are dual.
(b) Suppose Φ and Ψ are dual. Then the first part shows that Ψ = Φd for some
duality d. Now, let ϕ be an automorphism, and suppose Φϕ = Φw . We get:
∗

∗

Φϕd = (Φw )d = (Φd)w = Ψw = Ψϕ = Φdϕ.
Thus the automorphisms d−1 ϕd and ϕ both act the same way on Φ, and so they
are equal. So ϕd = dϕ, and d commutes with every automorphism. Conversely,
if d commutes with every automorphism, then
∗

∗

Ψϕ = Φdϕ = Φϕd = (Φw )d = (Φd)w = Ψw ,
and Ψ is dual to Φ.
(c) In light of the previous part, all that remains to show is that, if a duality
commutes with every automorphism of P, then it also commutes with every
duality. If d2 is a duality, then d2 d−1 is an automorphism, and thus:
dd2 d−1 = d(d2 d−1 ) = (d2 d−1 )d = d2 ,
and so d commutes with d2

12

We see that dual flags have several nice properties, even in the nonregular case.
We could define a polytope to be internally self-dual if every flag has a dual (equivalently, if any single flag has a dual). It is not entirely clear if this is the “right”
definition. In any case, we do not pursue the nonregular case any further here.

4
4.1

Properties of internally self-dual polytopes
Basic structural results

Internally self-dual polytopes have a number of structural restrictions. Many of them
are consequences of the following simple property.
Proposition 4.1. If P is an internally self-dual regular polytope, then any regular
polytope covered by P is also internally self-dual.
Proof. Since P is internally self-dual, there is an automorphism α ∈ Γ(P) such that
αρi = ρn−i−1 α for 0 ≤ i ≤ n − 1. If P covers Q, then the image of α in Γ(Q) has the
same property, and so Q is internally self-dual.
Proposition 4.1 makes it difficult to construct internally self-dual polytopes with
mixing, since the mix of any two polytopes must cover them both. The next proposition characterizes which pairs of polytopes can be mixed to create an internally
self-dual polytope.
Proposition 4.2. Let P and Q be regular n-polytopes such that P  Q is polytopal.
Then P  Q is internally self-dual if and only if
(a) P and Q are internally self-dual, and
(b) There are dualizing automorphisms α ∈ Γ(P) and β ∈ Γ(Q) such that the
images of α and β in Γ(P)  Γ(Q) coincide.
Proof. Let Γ(P) = hρ0 , . . . , ρn−1 i and Γ(Q) = hρ00 , . . . , ρ0n−1 i, and let Γ(P)  Γ(Q) =
hσ0 , . . . , σn−1 i, where σi = (ρi , ρ0i ). Let ϕ = (α, β) ∈ Γ(P)  Γ(Q). Then ϕ is
dualizing if and only if α and β are both dualizing, since ϕσi = σn−i−1 ϕ if and
only if (αρi , βρ0i ) = (ρn−i−1 α, ρ0n−i−1 β). Therefore, P  Q is internally self-dual if
and only if there are dualizing automorphisms α ∈ Γ(P) and β ∈ Γ(Q) such that
(α, β) ∈ Γ(P)  Γ(Q). By [3, Prop. 3.7], this occurs if and only if the images of α
and β in Γ(P)  Γ(Q) coincide.
13

Corollary 4.3. If P and Q are internally self-dual regular n-polytopes with “the
same” dualizing element (i.e., the image of the same word in the free group on
ρ0 , . . . , ρn−1 ), then P  Q is internally self-dual.
If we have a presentation for Γ(P), it is often simple to show that P is not
internally self-dual. Indeed, because of Proposition 4.1, all we need to do is find
some non-self-dual quotient of Γ(P). For example, if P is internally self-dual, then
adding a relation that forces ρ0 =  must also force ρn−1 = . Here are some similar
results that are easily applied.
Proposition 4.4. If P is an internally self-dual regular n-polytope, then in the
abelianization of Γ(P), the image of each ρi is equal to the image of ρn−i−1 .
Proof. By Proposition 4.1, the abelianization of Γ(P) must have a dualizing automorphism. Since such an automorphism also must commute with the image of every
ρi , it follows that the images of ρi and ρn−i−1 must coincide.
Suppose P is a regular n-polytope, with m-faces isomorphic to K. We say that
a regular n-polytope has the Flat Amalgamation Property (FAP) with respect to its
m-faces if adding the relations ρi =  to Γ(P) for i ≥ m yields a presentation for
Γ(K) (rather than a proper quotient).
Proposition 4.5. If P has the FAP with respect to its m-faces for some m with
1 ≤ m ≤ n − 1, then P is not internally self-dual.
Proof. If P is internally self-dual, then adding the relation ρn−1 =  to Γ(P) must
force ρ0 = , and this precludes P from having the FAP with respect to its m-faces
for any m ≥ 1.
Corollary 4.6. If P is internally self-dual and e is the unique 1-polytope, then
Γ(P  e) ∼
= Γ(P) × C2 .
Proof. The group Γ(P  e) is either isomorphic to Γ(P) or Γ(P) × C2 . From Proposition 4.5 and [9, Thm. 7A11] we know that Γ(P  e) ∼
6= Γ(P).
Corollary 4.7. If P is internally self-dual and e is the unique 1-polytope, then
(P  e)∗  e is externally self-dual, with automorphism group Γ(P) × C22 .
Proof. In general, (P  Q)∗ ∼
= P ∗  Q∗ , and so (P  e)∗  e is self-dual. Since P is
self-dual and Γ(P  e) ∼
= Γ(P) × C2 , the group Γ(P  e∗ ) is isomorphic to Γ(P) × C2 as
well. Thus Γ((P  e)∗  e) ∼
= Γ(P) × C22 . Furthermore, if you mix (P  e)∗  e with an
edge again, then the automorphism group does not change. Thus, by Corollary 4.6,
(P  e)∗  e must be externally self-dual.

14

Corollary 4.8. If P is an internally self-dual polyhedron of type {p, p}, then (P 
e)∗  e is an externally self-dual polyhedron of type {q, q}, where q = lcm(p, 2).
Proof. Let Γ(P) = hρ0 , ρ1 , ρ2 i and let Γ(e) = hλ0 i. For 0 ≤ i ≤ 2, let σi = (ρi , λi ) ∈
Γ(P) × Γ(e), where we take λ1 = λ2 = . Then (σ0 σ1 )p = ((ρ0 ρ1 )p , λp0 ) = (, λp0 ). If p
is even, then this gives us (, ), and so σ0 σ1 has order p. Otherwise σ0 σ1 has order
2p. So P  e is of type {q, p}, and by taking the dual and mixing with e again, we
get a polyhedron of type {q, q}.
In some sense, Corollary 4.7 says that externally self-dual polytopes are at least
as common as internally self-dual polytopes.

4.2

Internal self-duality of universal polytopes

A natural place to start looking for internally self-dual polytopes is the universal
polytopes {p1 , . . . , pn−1 } whose automorphism groups are string Coxeter groups. Let
us start with those polytopes with a 2 in their Schläfli symbol. Recall that a polytope
is flat if every vertex is incident on every facet.
Proposition 4.9. There are no flat, regular, internally self-dual polytopes.
Proof. Suppose P is a flat regular polytope, with Γ(P) = hρ0 , . . . , ρn−1 i. The stabilizer of the base facet is Γn−1 = hρ0 , . . . , ρn−2 i, which acts transitively on the vertices
of the base facet. Since P is flat, it follows that Γn−1 acts transitively on all the
vertices of P. In particular, Γn−1 does not fix any vertices, and thus Corollary 3.8
implies that P is not internally self-dual.
Corollary 4.10. If P is a regular internally self-dual polytope of type {p1 , . . . , pn−1 },
then each pi is at least 3.
Proof. Proposition 2B16 in [9] proves that if some pi is 2, then P is flat.
Next, we can rule out infinite polytopes.
Proposition 4.11. If P is a self-dual regular polytope such that Γ(P) is an infinite
string Coxeter group, then P is externally self-dual.
Proof. Lemma 2.14 in [6] proves that an infinite Coxeter group with no finite irreducible components has no nontrivial inner automorphisms that realize any graph
automorphisms of the Coxeter diagram. Since self-duality is a graph automorphism,
it follows that P cannot be internally self-dual.
15

We can now easily cover the remaining self dual string Coxeter groups.
Theorem 4.12. The only internally self-dual regular polytopes such that Γ(P) is a
string Coxeter group are simplices and p-gons with p odd.
Proof. In light of Corollary 4.10 and Proposition 4.11, the only possibilities left to
consider are simplices, polygons, and the 24-cell {3, 4, 3}. Propositions 3.2 and 3.5
establish the claim for simplices and p-gons. Using a computer algebra system, we
can verify that {3, 4, 3} is not internally self-dual.

4.3

Restrictions on the automorphism group

Based on the data in Table 1 and the restrictions from the previous section, it
seems that regular internally self-dual polytopes could be relatively rare, especially
in ranks other than three. Before exploring some existence results about internally
self-dual polytopes, let us discuss a few natural questions that arise while looking for
examples. First, one might want to know if the existence of internally or externally
self-dual polytopes with a certain group Γ as an automorphism group might depend
on the abstract class of Γ. In a simple way, the answer to this question is yes,
in that if the automorphism group of Γ is isomorphic to Γ itself, then every group
automorphism is inner, and there can be no external dualities of the polytope (as seen
in Proposition 3.2). Otherwise, it seems that the abstract structure of the group does
not provide insight into whether self-dual regular polytopes will be either externally
or internally self-dual. In particular, there are both internally and externally selfdual regular polytopes with simple groups as their automorphism groups; examples
of which can be easily found by considering alternating groups, for example.
Second, while looking for internally self-dual polytopes of higher rank, a natural
question is whether they are built from only internally self-dual polytopes of lower
rank. For example, must the medial sections of an internally self-dual polytope
be internally self-dual themselves? (The medial section of a polytope is a section
F/v where F is a facet and v is a vertex.) Consider the unique self-dual regular
polytope of type of rank four with an alternating group acting on nine points as its
automorphism group (see Figure 4 of [4]). This is easily seen to be internally selfdual, as the duality is realized as an even permutation on the nine points. However,
this polytope is of type {5, 6, 5}, and so its medial sections, being hexagons, are not
internally self-dual; see Proposition 3.5.
Finally, Proposition 4.1 says that if a regular polytope is internally self-dual,
then the only regular polytopes that it covers are also internally self-dual. This is a
stringent requirement, so one might hope that the converse would be true. However,
16

there are externally self-dual polytopes that only cover internally-self dual polytopes.
For example, the unique polyhedron P of type {5, 5} with 320 flags is externally selfdual, and it double-covers the unique polyhedron Q of type {5, 5} with 160 flags,
which is internally self-dual. Furthermore, every quotient of the former (polyhedral
or not) filters through the latter, since the kernel of the covering from P to Q was
the unique minimal normal subgroup of Γ(P). So P only covers internally self-dual
polyhedra, despite being externally self-dual itself.

5

Examples of internally self-dual polytopes

In this section we will prove the existence of internally and externally self-dual polytopes with various characteristics. We mainly focus on rank 3, but higher rank
polytopes are also constructed.

5.1

Rank three

First we construct a few families of internally self-dual regular polyhedra. Our main
result is the following.
Theorem 5.1. For each p ≥ 3 (including p = ∞), there is an internally self-dual
regular polyhedron of type {p, p}, and for each p ≥ 4 (including p = ∞), there is an
externally self-dual regular polyhedron of type {p, p}. Furthermore, if p is even, then
there are infinitely many internally and externally self-dual regular polyhedra of type
{p, p}.
We will focus on constructing internally self-dual regular polyhedra; then Theorem 4.12 and Corollary 4.8 will take care of the rest. First we will show that there
is an internally self-dual polyhedron of type {p, p} for each p ≥ 3. The data from [2]
provides examples for 3 ≤ p ≤ 12. We will construct a family that covers p ≥ 7. We
start with a simple lemma.
Lemma 5.2. Suppose π1 and π2 are distinct permutations that act cyclically on n
points and that π1d1 = π2d2 for some d1 and d2 . Suppose that for some positive integer
k, there is a unique point i such that iπ1j = iπ2j for all j with 1 ≤ j ≤ k. Then
d1 = d2 = 0 (mod n).

17

Proof. Since π1d1 = π2d2 , it follows that π2 and π1d1 commute. Then, for 1 ≤ j ≤ k,
(iπ1d1 )π2j = (iπ2j )π1d1
= (iπ1j )π1d1
= (iπ1d1 )π1j .
That is, π1j and π2j act the same way on (iπ1d1 ) for 1 ≤ j ≤ k. By assumption, i was
the only point such that π1j and π2j act the same way on that point for 1 ≤ j ≤ k.
It follows that π1d1 (which is equal to π2d2 ) fixes i, which implies that d1 = d2 =
0 (mod n).
Theorem 5.3. For each p ≥ 7, there is an internally self-dual polyhedron of type
{p, p} such that (ρ0 ρ2 ρ1 )6 is dualizing.
Proof. We will construct a permutation representation graph, and then show that it
is a CPR graph. If p is odd, then consider the following permutation representation
graph:
4

1

5
2

0 2

0

1

6
0

3

1

7

0
2

8

1

9

p−2

0
2

p−1

1

p

0
2

p

2

2

1

If p is even, then then instead consider the following.
4

1

5
2

0 2

0

1

6
0

3

1

1

7

0
2

8

1

9

p−2

1

p−1

2

2

In both cases, it is easy to see that the group is a string group generated by involutions. To verify this, we only need to notice that the subgraph induced by edges
of labels 0 and 2, consists of connected components that are either isolated vertices,
double edges, or squares with alternating labels.
18

If p is odd, then
ρ0 ρ2 ρ1 = (1, 7, 6)(2, 4, 5, 3)(8, 9)(10, 11) · · · (p − 1, p),
and if p is even, then
ρ0 ρ2 ρ1 = (1, 7, 6)(2, 4, 5, 3)(8, 9)(10, 11) · · · (p − 2, p − 1).
In both cases, it follows that (ρ0 ρ2 ρ1 )6 = (2, 5)(3, 4). It is simple to show that this
is in fact a dualizing automorphism. In other words, (ρ0 ρ2 ρ1 )6 ρi acts the same on
every vertex as ρ2−i (ρ0 ρ2 ρ1 )6 .
It remains to show that hρ0 , ρ1 , ρ2 i is a string C-group. Following [9, Proposition
2E16], it suffices to show that hρ0 , ρ1 i ∩ hρ1 , ρ2 i = hρ1 i.
Let ϕ be in the intersection, ϕ ∈
/ hρ1 i. Without loss of generality, we may assume
that ϕ = (ρ0 ρ1 )d1 for some d1 (since if ϕ is odd, then ϕρ1 is also in the intersection
and can be written like that). Now, ϕ is also in hρ1 , ρ2 i. If ϕ = ρ1 (ρ2 ρ1 )d2 for some
d2 , then ϕ2 = , and thus (ρ0 ρ1 )2d1 = . If p is odd, then this only happens if ϕ
is itself the identity, contrary to our assumption. So in that case we may assume
that ϕ = (ρ2 ρ1 )d2 for some d2 . If p is even, then in principle, it is possible that
ϕ = (ρ0 ρ1 )p/2 , and so it could happen that ϕ = ρ1 (ρ2 ρ1 )d2 .
Suppose p is odd, p ≥ 9. Then
ρ0 ρ1 = (1, 3, 5, 7, 9, . . . , p, p − 1, p − 3, . . . , 6, 4, 2)
and
ρ2 ρ1 = (1, 4, 2, 7, 9, . . . , p, p − 1, p − 3, . . . , 6, 3, 5).
We note that these cycles act the same way on 3, on 4, and on 7 through p. Indeed,
7 is the start of a unique longest sequence of points on which ρ0 ρ1 and ρ2 ρ1 act, and
so we can apply Lemma 5.2 with i = 7 and k = p − 6. It follows that there is no
nontrivial equation of the form (ρ0 ρ1 )d1 = (ρ2 ρ1 )d2 .
Now, suppose p is even. Then
ρ0 ρ1 = (1, 3, 5, 7, 9, . . . , p − 1, p, p − 2, p − 4, . . . , 6, 4, 2)
and
ρ2 ρ1 = (1, 4, 2, 7, 9, . . . , p − 1, p, p − 2, p − 4, . . . , 6, 3, 5).
As in the odd case, (ρ0 ρ1 )d1 cannot equal (ρ2 ρ1 )d2 , by Lemma 5.2 with i = 7 and
k = p − 6. We still need to rule out the case (ρ0 ρ1 )p/2 = ρ1 (ρ2 ρ1 )d2 . Note that
(ρ0 ρ1 )p/2 always sends 1 to p. In order for ρ1 (ρ2 ρ1 )d2 to do the same thing, we would
19

need d2 = p/2 as well. But then (ρ0 ρ1 )p/2 sends 3 to p − 2, whereas ρ1 (ρ2 ρ1 )p/2 sends
3 to p − 3. So that rules out this case, proving that the intersection condition holds.
The remaining cases where p = 7, 8 can be verified using a computer algebra
system.
Using the polyhedra built in Theorem 5.3 as a base, we can construct an infinite
polyhedron that is internally self-dual.
Theorem 5.4. Consider a family of internally self-dual regular polyhedra {Pi }∞
i=1 .
(i) (i) (i)
Let Γ(Pi ) = hρ0 , ρ1 , ρ2 i. Suppose that there is a finite sequence j1 , . . . , jm such
(i)
(i)
that ρj1 · · · ρjm is dualizing in each Γ(Pi ). Then P = P1  P2  · · · is an infinite
internally self-dual regular polyhedron.
(1)

(2)

(1)

(2)

Proof. It is clear that P is infinite. Let ρ0 = (ρ0 , ρ0 , . . .), ρ1 = (ρ1 , ρ1 , . . .),
(1) (2)
ρ2 = (ρ2 , ρ2 , . . .). To show that P is a polyhedron, we need to show that hρ0 , ρ1 , ρ2 i
satisfies the intersection condition. In particular, by Proposition 2E16 of [9], the only
intersection that is nontrivial to check is hρ0 , ρ1 i ∩ hρ1 , ρ2 i. Suppose ϕ ∈ hρ0 , ρ1 i ∩
hρ1 , ρ2 i. For each i, let ϕi be the natural projection of ϕ in Γ(Pi ), where we send each
(i)
(i)
ρj to ρj . Since Pi is a polyhedron, each ϕi is either  or ρ1 . Now, since hρ0 , ρ1 i is
dihedral, the automorphism ϕ is either even or odd. Furthermore, its projection ϕi
(i) (i)
into the dihedral group hρ0 , ρ1 i must have the same parity as ϕ itself. Therefore,
(i)
every ϕi must have the same parity, and so either ϕi =  for every i, or ϕi = ρ1
for every i. In the first case, ϕ = , and in the second, ϕ = ρ1 . This proves the
intersection condition.
Finally, it is clear that ρj1 · · · ρjm is dualizing in Γ(P), and so P is internally
self-dual.
Corollary 5.5. There is an infinite internally self-dual regular polyhedron of type
{∞, ∞}, with dualizing automorphism (ρ0 ρ2 ρ1 )6 .
Proof. Apply the construction of Theorem 5.4 to the polyhedra in Theorem 5.3.
The infinite polyhedron of Corollary 5.5 is a little difficult to work with; we have
neither a permutation representation nor a presentation for the automorphism group.
With this example, however, we can now build a simpler example.
Corollary 5.6. Let Γ be the quotient of [∞, ∞] by the three relations
(ρ0 ρ2 ρ1 )6 ρi = ρ2−i (ρ0 ρ2 ρ1 )6 , where 0 ≤ i ≤ 2.
Then Γ is the automorphism group of an infinite internally self-dual regular polyhedron of type {∞, ∞}.
20

Proof. First, note that Γ covers the automorphism group of any polyhedron with
dualizing automorphism (ρ0 ρ2 ρ1 )6 . Therefore, Γ covers the automorphism group of
the polyhedron in Corollary 5.5. Then the quotient criterion (see [9, Thm. 2E17])
shows that this is a polyhedron, since it covers the polyhedron in Corollary 5.5
without any collapse of the facet subgroup hρ0 , ρ1 i.
Now let us prove that there are infinitely many internally self-dual polyhedra of
type {p, p} when p ≥ 4 and p is even. We first cover the case p = 4.
Proposition 5.7. The polyhedron {4, 4}(s,0) is internally self-dual if and only if s is
odd.
Proof. Let P = {4, 4}(s,0) , and let us identify the vertices of P with (Z/sZ)2 . Let us
choose the base flag to consist of the origin, the edge from the origin to (1, 0), and
the square [0, 1] × [0, 1]. Then ρ0 sends each vertex (x, y) to (1 − x, y), ρ1 sends (x, y)
to (y, x), and ρ2 sends (x, y) to (x, −y). If s is even, then ρ0 does not fix any vertex,
and so by Corollary 3.8, P is externally self-dual. If s is odd, say s = 2k − 1, then
the unique vertex fixed by hρ0 , ρ1 i is (k, k). Continuing with Algorithm 3.6, we want
an edge that contains (k, k) and (k, k)ρ2 = (k, −k) = (k, k + 1). Finally, we want a
square that contains that edge and its images under hρ1 , ρ2 i, which consists of the 4
edges bounding the square with corners (k, k) and (k + 1, k + 1). Thus, the flag that
is dual to the base flag consists of the vertex (k, k), the edge to (k, k + 1), and the
square that also includes (k + 1, k + 1). See Figure 4.
We now construct a family of examples to cover the remaining cases.
Theorem 5.8. For each even p ≥ 6, there are infinitely many internally self-dual
polyhedra of type {p, p}.
Proof. For each even p ≥ 6, we will construct a family of permutation representation
graphs, and show that each one is the CPR graph of a distinct internally self-dual
polyhedron of type {p, p}. First, consider the following permutation representation
graph G:
.

p−3
2

1

1

2

0

3

1

4

0

p−4

p−1
0

2
p−2

21

1

p

2p−8

2

2p−7

1

2p−6

Figure 4: Base and dual flags in the regular polyhedron {4, 4}(5,0)
Let ρ0 , ρ1 , ρ2 be the permutations induced by edges of the appropriate label. We
have
ρ0 = (2, 3)(4, 5) · · · (p − 6, p − 5)(p − 4, p − 2)(p − 3, p − 1),
ρ1 = (1, 2)(3, 4) · · · (p − 5, p − 4)(p − 1, p)(p + 1, p + 2) · · · (2p − 7, 2p − 6),
ρ2 = (p − 4, p − 3)(p − 2, p − 1)(p, p + 1)(p + 2, p + 3) · · · (2p − 8, 2p − 7).
It is again clear that hρ0 , ρ1 , ρ2 i is a string group generated by involutions. Next, note
that ρ0 ρ2 ρ1 interchanges p − 2 with p − 3, while cyclically permuting the remaining
2p−8 points. Now consider σ = (ρ0 ρ2 ρ1 )p−4 . This interchanges 1 with 2p−6 and thus
1(ρ0 ρ2 ρ1 )j with (2p − 6)(ρ0 ρ2 ρ1 )j , for each j. Since the action of (ρ0 ρ2 ρ1 ) on vertices
on the left is the mirror of the action on the right, it follows that σ interchanges i
with 2p − 5 − i for 1 ≤ i ≤ p − 4, while fixing p − 2 and p − 3.
We will now build a larger graph X using the one above as a building block. Let
k be an odd positive integer, and take N := k(p − 4) copies of the above graph,
labeled G1 , G2 , . . . , GN , and arrange them cyclically. Let us use (i, j) to mean vertex
i in Gj (and where j is considered modulo N if necessary). We connect the graphs
Gj by adding edges labeled 1 from (p − 2, j) to (p − 3, j + 1) By Theorem 4.5 in [11],
this is the CPR graph of a polyhedron,. Furthermore, if we erase the edges labeled
2, then the connected components either have 2 vertices or p vertices. The latter
consists of the first p − 4 vertices, then the bottom of a diamond, then the top of the
next diamond, the right of that diamond, and one more vertex. The same happens
if we erase the edges labeled 0, and so we get a polyhedron of type {p, p}.
22

Let us now redefine ρ0 , ρ1 , and ρ2 as the permutations induced by edges of X ,
and let σ = (ρ0 ρ2 ρ1 )p−4 as before. The new σ acts in exactly the same way on every
vertex in every copy of the original CPR graph except for the top and bottom of the
diamonds. Indeed, σ takes (p − 3, j) to (p − 3, j − p + 4) and it takes (p − 2, j) to
(p − 2, j + p − 4). Then the order of σ is 2k, since σ to any odd power interchanges
every (1, j) with (2p−6, j), and σ k is the smallest power of σ that fixes every (p−3, j)
and (p − 2, j).
We claim that σ k is dualizing. To prove that, we need to show that ρi σ k = σ k ρ2−i
for i = 0, 1, 2. That is clearly true for all vertices other than the tops and bottoms
of diamonds, because σ k acts as a reflection through the middle of the diagram, and
this reflection also dualizes every label. Checking that ρi σk and σ k ρ2−i act the same
on the top and bottom of every diamond is then easy.
Finally, we claim that the constructed polyhedra are distinct for each k. For
this, it suffices to show that in each polyhedron, k is the smallest positive integer
such that σ k is dualizing. (In principle, if σ k is dualizing, it might also be true that
σ m is dualizing for some m dividing k.) In order for a power of σ to dualize most
vertices, it must be odd, since σ 2 fixes every vertex other than the tops and bottoms
of diamonds. So consider σ m for some odd m < k. The permutation σ m ρ1 sends
(p − 3, 1) to (p − 2, m(p − 4)), whereas ρ1 σ m sends (p − 3, 1) to (p − 2, N − m(p − 4)) =
(p − 2, (k − m)(p − 4)). In order for these two points to be the same, we need
k − m = m, so that k = 2m. But k is odd, so this is impossible. So we get infinitely
many internally self-dual polyhedra of type {p, p}.
We can now prove our main result.
Proof of Theorem 5.1. The data from [2], combined with Theorem 5.3 and Corollary 5.5, show that there are internally self-dual polyhedra of type {p, p} for all
3 ≤ p ≤ ∞. Theorem 4.12 then shows that there are externally self-dual polyhedra
of type {p, p} for 4 ≤ p ≤ ∞. Proposition 5.7 and Theorem 5.8 show that there are
infinitely many internally self-dual polyhedra of type {p, p} for p even, and combining with Corollary 4.8, we get infinitely many externally self-dual polyhedra of type
{p, p} for p even as well.

5.2

Higher ranks

Now that the rank three case is well established, let us consider internally self-dual
regular polytopes of higher ranks. We will start by showing that there are infinitely
many internally self-dual polytopes in every rank. By Theorem 4.12, we already

23

know that the n-simplex is internally self-dual. It is instructive to actually show this
constructively, using Algorithm 3.6.
Consider the representation of the regular n-simplex P as the convex hull of
the points e1 , e2 , . . . , en+1 in Rn+1 . Each i-face of P is the convex hull of i + 1 of
the vertices, and each flag of P can be associated to an ordering of the vertices
(ei1 , ei2 , . . . , ein+1 ), where the i-face of the flag is the convex hull of the first i + 1
vertices.
Let us set the base flag Φ to be the flag corresponding to the ordering (e1 , e2 , . . . , en+1 ).
Then each automorphism ρi acts by switching coordinates i+1 and i+2, corresponding to a reflection in the plane xi+1 = xi+2 . In order to find a flag dual to Φ, we need
to first find a vertex that is fixed by hρ0 , . . . , ρn−2 i. The only such vertex is en+1 .
Next, we need an edge that is incident to en+1 and fixed by hρ0 , . . . , ρn−3 i × hρn−1 i.
Since ρn−1 interchanges en and en+1 and it must fix the edge, it follows that the edge
must be incident on en . Continuing in this manner, it is easy to see that the dual
flag must be (en+1 , en , . . . , e1 ).
Now let us find the dualizing automorphism of Γ(P). We can identify Γ(P) with
the symmetric group on n + 1 points, where ρi is the transposition (i + 1, i + 2). We
noted above that the dual of the base flag simply reversed the order of the vertices.
So the dualizing automorphism of Γ(P) can be written as
(ρ0 ρ1 · · · ρn−1 )(ρ0 ρ1 · · · ρn−2 ) · · · (ρ0 ρ1 )(ρ0 ),
as this “bubble-sorts” the list (1, 2, . . . , n + 1) into its reverse.
Here is another example of high-rank internally self-dual polytopes. That they
are internally self-dual follows from Proposition 3.2.
Proposition 5.9. For each n ≥ 5 the regular n-polytope with group Sn+3 described
in [5, Proposition 4.10], is internally self dual.
1

0

1

2

3

n−4 n−3 n−2 n−1 n−2

4

The CPR graph of these polytopes is shown above. Each of this polytopes is obtained from a simplex, by first taking the Petrie contraction and then dualizing and
taking another Petrie contraction. (The Petrie contraction of a string group generated by involutions hρ0 , ρ1 , ρ2 , . . . , ρn−1 i is the group generated by hρ1 , ρ0 ρ2 , ρ3 , . . . , ρn−1 i.)
The cubic toroids (described in [9, Section 6D]) provide an infinite family of
internally self-dual polytopes with automorphism groups other than the symmetric
group.

24

Theorem 5.10. The regular n + 1-polytope {4, 3n−2 , 4}(s,0n−1 ) is internally self-dual
if and only if s is odd.
Proof. Let us take the vertex set of P to be (Z/sZ)n . For 0 ≤ i ≤ n, let Gi be the
i-face of P containing vertices 0, e1 , e1 + e2 , . . . , e1 + e2 + · · · + ei , where {ei }ni=1 is
the standard basis. Let Φ = (G0 , . . . , Gn ) be our base flag. Then the generators of
Γ(P) can be described geometrically as follows (taken from [9, Eq. 6D2]). ρ0 sends
(x1 , . . . , xn ) to (1 − x1 , x2 , . . . , xn ), ρn sends (x1 , . . . , xn ) to (x1 , . . . , xn−1 , −xn ), and
for 1 ≤ i ≤ n − 1, ρi interchanges xi and xi+1 .
We now try to build a flag that is dual to Φ, using Algorithm 3.6. First, we need
to find a vertex that is fixed by hρ0 , . . . , ρn−1 i. In order for (x1 , . . . , xn ) to be fixed
by ρ0 , we need for x1 ≡ 1 − x1 (mod s); in other words, 2x1 ≡ 1 (mod s). That has
a solution if and only if s is odd, so that already establishes that when s is even, the
polytope P is not internally self-dual. On the other hand, if s is odd, then we can take
x1 = (s + 1)/2 as a solution. Now, in order for ρ1 , . . . , ρn−1 to also fix this vertex, we
need all of the coordinates to be the same. So we pick F0 = ((s + 1)/2, . . . , (s + 1)/2).
Next we need an edge incident on F0 and F0 ρn . The latter is simply ((s +
1)/2, . . . , (s + 1)/2, (s − 1)/2), which is indeed adjacent to F0 , and that gives us our
edge F1 . To pick F2 , we look at the orbit G1 hρn−1 , ρn i; this gives us the square
whose 4 vertices are ((s + 1)/2, . . . , (s + 1)/2, ±(s + 1)/2, ±(s + 1)/2). In general,
we take Fi to be the i-face such that its vertices are obtained from F0 by any combination of sign changes in the last i coordinates. Then it is clear that Fi is fixed by
hρ0 , . . . , ρn−i−1 , ρn−i+1 , . . . , ρn i, and thus we have a dual flag to Φ.
To show that there are examples of internally self-dual polytopes other than the
toroids and simplices (and self-dual petrie contracted relatives) in each rank r ≥ 5,
we give the following family of examples and prove that they yield string C-groups
which are internally self-dual. (There are other examples in rank 4 as well, such as
the polytope of type {5, 6, 5} that was mentioned at the end of Section 4.3.)
Lemma 5.11. For each n ≥ 4, the following permutation representation graph is
the CPR graph of a regular n-polytope with automorphism group Γ isomorphic to the
symmetric group on n + 3 points.
2
0

1

2

3

4

n−1

0
2

Proof. For n ≥ 6 this is shown in [5, Proposition 4.8]. The remaining cases can either
be checked by hand or using a computer algebra system.
25

Lemma 5.12. For each n ≥ 6, the following permutation representation graph is
the CPR graph of a regular n-polytope with automorphism group Γ isomorphic to the
symmetric group on n + 4 points. Furthermore, the element (ρn−2 ρn−1 ρn−2 ρn−3 ρn−2 )
is a five cycle with the last five points in its support.
2

1

0

2

3

4

n−3 n−2 n−1 n−2

0
2

Proof. For n ≥ 7 the fact that this is a CPR graph is shown in [5, Proposition
4.14]. The remaining case can either be checked by hand or using a computer algebra
system. The structure of (ρn−2 ρn−1 ρn−2 ρn−3 ρn−2 ) can easily be checked by hand.
Theorem 5.13. For each n ≥ 5, the following permutation representation graph is
the CPR graph of an internally self-dual regular n-polytope with automorphism group
Γ acting on n + 5 points.
3

2

1

4

0

5

2

6

3

7

n−4
n−1

n

n−2
n−3
n−3
n+1
n+2
n+3
n−1

0

2

2

1

n−1

n+5

n−3

n+4

Proof. First we notice that these graphs have slightly different structure depending
on whether n is odd or even. The two smallest cases seen below, of ranks 5 and 6,
are verified to yield string C-groups using a computer algebra system. In the rest of
the proof we will assume that n ≥ 7.
3

2

1

4

0

0

2

2

1

5

2

6

3

7

2

8
4

4

10

3

2

2

0

9

1

4
0

2

2

1

5

2

6

3

7

4

8

3

11

9
5

5
3

10

By design, Γ is self-dual, since interchanging every label i with n − 1 − i is
a symmetry of the graph, corresponding to a reflection through a line that goes
through the middle edge (if n is odd) or through the middle node (if n is even). Let
us show that Γ is internally self-dual.
First, when n is odd and n = 2k + 1, the permutation π1 = ρk interchanges
the two nodes that are incident on the middle edge, while fixing everything else.
Then, setting π2 = (ρk−1 ρk+1 )π1 (ρk+1 ρk−1 ), we get that π2 interchanges the next two
nodes from the center, while fixing everything else. Continuing this way, we can find
permutations π1 , . . . , πk+3 that each interchange a node with its dual while fixing
everything else. The product of all of these will be a dualizing automorphism in Γ.
26

When n is even and n = 2k, the middle node is incident to edges labeled k − 1
and k. The permutation π1 = ρk−1 ρk ρk−1 is easily seen to interchange the two
nodes that are incident on the middle node, while fixing everything else. Then,
setting π2 = (ρk−2 ρk+1 )π1 (ρk+1 ρk−2 ), we get that π2 interchanges the two nodes at a
distance of 2 from the middle node, while fixing everything else. As in the odd case,
we can continue to define permutations π1 , . . . , πk+2 that each interchange a node
with its dual, and the product of all of these will be a dualizing automorphism in Γ.
Now we need to show that each Γ is a string C-group. It is clear that it is a
string group generated by involutions, so we only need to show that it satisfies the
intersection condition. We will do this utilizing [9, Proposition 2E16] by showing
that its facet group and vertex figure group are string C-groups, and that their
intersection is what is needed.
We will take advantage of the fact that Γ is self-dual by design, so the structure
of each of its parabolic subgroups is the same as the “dual” subgroup. For any
subset S of {0, 1, . . . , n − 1}, we define ΓS = hρi | i 6∈ Si. The structure of ΓS
is determined by the structure of the given permutation representation graph after
we delete all edges with labels in S. For example, the group Γ0,1,n−2,n−1 yields a
permutation representation graph with a chain with labels 2 through n − 3, along
with four isolated components; two labeled 2 and two labeled n − 3. It follows that
this is the group obtained from a simplex by mixing with an edge, dualizing, and
mixing with another edge. It is a string C-group which is isomorphic to 2 × 2 × Sn−3 .
The groups Γ0,1,n−1 and Γ0,n−2,n−1 are maximal parabolic subgroups of the group
obtained by mixing a string C-group from Lemma 5.11 with an edge. Both of these
groups are thus string C-groups, and can be shown to be isomorphic to 2 × 2 × Sn−1 .
Similarly, the groups Γ0,1,2 and Γn−3,n−2,n−1 are both described by Lemma 5.11. They
each are string C-groups isomorphic to Sn . Each group Γ0,1 and Γn−2,n−1 is the mix
of a group from Lemma 5.11 with an edge, and can be shown to be isomorphic to
2 × Sn+1 .
Now, to show that Γ0,n−1 is a string C-group, we use the fact that both Γ0,1,n−1
and Γ0,n−2,n−1 are string C-groups acting on three orbits, and as a symmetric group
on the largest orbit. The intersection of these two groups cannot be any larger than
the direct product of two groups of order two with the symmetric group acting on
the points shared by the large orbits of both groups. This is exactly the structure of
Γ0,1,n−2,n−1 , so Γ0,n−1 is a string C-group.
Similarly, we show that Γ0 is a string C-group (the result then follows for Γn−1 ,
by self-duality). Since both Γ0,1 and Γ0,n−1 are string C-groups, we just need to show
that their intersection is Γ0,1,n−1 . This is true following the same logic as above,
analyzing the orbits of each subgroup.
27

Also, following Lemma 5.12, Γ0 is a symmetric group extended by a single transposition. Furthermore, since element (ρ2 ρ1 ρ2 ρ3 ρ2 )5 fixes all the nodes of the connected component of the graph of Γ0 , and interchanges the nodes of the isolated
edge labeled 2, it follows that this single transposition is in the group Γ0 . Thus
Γ0 ∼
= 2 × Sn+3 .
Finally, Γ is a string C-group since both Γ0 and Γn−1 are string C-groups, and
Γ0,1 ∼
= 2 × 2 × Sn+1 is maximal in Γ0 ∼
= 2 × Sn+3 .

6

Related problems and open questions

Some problems on the existence of internally self-dual polytopes remain open. Here
are perhaps the most fundamental.
Problem 1. For each odd p ≥ 5, describe an infinite family of internally self-dual
regular polyhedra of type {p, p}, or prove that there are only finitely many internally
self-dual regular polyhedra of that type.
Problem 2. Determine the values of p and q such that there is an internally self-dual
regular 4-polytope of type {p, q, p}.
Problem 3. Determine whether each self-dual (n − 2)-polytope occurs as the medial
section of an internally self-dual regular n-polytope.
To our knowledge, these problems are open even if we consider all self-dual regular
polytopes, rather than just the internally self-dual ones.
To what extent does the theory we have developed apply to transformations
other than duality? For example, the Petrie dual of a polyhedron P, denoted P π ,
is obtained from P by interchanging the roles of its facets and its Petrie polygons
(see [9, Sec. 7B]). If P π ∼
= P, then we say that P is self-Petrie. If P is regular, with
Γ(P) = hρ0 , ρ1 , ρ2 i, then P is self-Petrie if and only if there is a group automorphism
of Γ(P) that sends ρ0 to ρ0 ρ2 , while fixing ρ1 and ρ2 . We can then say that P is
internally self-Petrie if this automorphism is inner.
Working with internally self-Petrie polyhedra is not substantially different from
working with internally self-dual polyhedra, due to the following result.
Proposition 6.1. A regular polyhedron P is internally self-Petrie if and only if
(P ∗ )π is internally self-dual.

28

Proof. Suppose that P is (internally or externally) self-Petrie, and let Γ(P) =
hρ0 , ρ1 , ρ2 i. Then there is some π ∈ Aut(Γ(P)) such that ρ0 π = ρ0 ρ2 , ρ1 π = ρ1 ,
and ρ2 π = ρ2 . Now, Γ(P ∗ ) = hρ2 , ρ1 , ρ0 i, and then Γ((P ∗ )π ) = hρ0 ρ2 , ρ1 , ρ0 i =:
hλ0 , λ1 , λ2 i. Then it is easy to show that λi π = λ2−i for i = 0, 1, 2. It follows that
(P ∗ )π is self-dual. Furthermore, since Γ(P) ∼
= Γ((P ∗ )π ) as abstract groups and π
induces the self-Petriality of the former and the self-duality of the latter, it follows
that π is either inner for both groups or outer for both. The result then follows.
Perhaps there are other transformations of polytopes where it would make sense
to discuss internal versus external invariance under that transformation.

7

Acknowledgements

The computations done in this paper were verified independently using GAP [7] and
Magma [1].

References
[1] Wieb Bosma, John Cannon, and Catherine Playoust, The Magma algebra system. I. The user language, J. Symbolic Comput. 24 (1997), no. 3-4, 235–265,
Computational algebra and number theory (London, 1993). MR MR1484478
[2] Marston Conder, Lists of all regular polytopes with up to 2000 flags,
http://www.math.auckland.ac.nz/∼conder.
[3] Gabe Cunningham, Variance groups and the structure of mixed polytopes, Rigidity and Symmetry (Robert Connelly, Asia Ivic Weiss, and Walter Whiteley,
eds.), Fields Institute Communications, vol. 70, Springer New York, 2014,
pp. 97–116 (English).
[4] Maria Elisa Fernandes, Dimitri Leemans, and Mark Mixer, Polytopes of high
rank for the alternating groups, J. Combin. Theory Ser. A 119 (2012), no. 1,
42–56. MR 2844081
[5]

, An extension of the classification of high rank regular polytopes, (2015).

[6] William N Franzsen, Automorphisms of coxeter groups, Ph.D. thesis, University
of Sydney, 2001.

29

[7] The GAP Group, GAP – Groups, Algorithms, and Programming, Version
4.4.12, 2008.
[8] Michael I. Hartley, An atlas of small regular abstract polytopes, Periodica Mathematica Hungarica 53 (2006), 149–156, 10.1007/s10998-006-0028-x.
[9] Peter McMullen and Egon Schulte, Abstract regular polytopes, Encyclopedia of
Mathematics and its Applications, vol. 92, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2002. MR 1965665 (2004a:52020)
[10] Barry Monson, Daniel Pellicer, and Gordon Williams, Mixing and monodromy
of abstract polytopes, Transactions of the American Mathematical Society 366
(2014), no. 5, 2651–2681.
[11] Daniel Pellicer, CPR graphs and regular polytopes, European Journal of Combinatorics 29 (2008), no. 1, 59–71.

30

