COMPACT PRESENTABILITY OF TREE ALMOST
AUTOMORPHISM GROUPS

arXiv:1402.5652v3 [math.GR] 16 Jun 2016

ADRIEN LE BOUDEC

Abstract. We establish compact presentability, i.e. the locally compact
version of ﬁnite presentability, for an inﬁnite family of tree almost automorphism groups. Examples covered by our results include Neretin’s group
of spheromorphisms, as well as the topologically simple group containing
the proﬁnite completion of the Grigorchuk group constructed by Barnea,
Ershov and Weigel.
We additionally obtain an upper bound on the Dehn function of these
groups in terms of the Dehn function of an embedded Higman-Thompson
group. This, combined with a result of Guba, implies that the Dehn
function of the Neretin group of the regular trivalent tree is polynomially bounded.

Contents
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

Introduction
Tree almost automorphisms
Higman-Thompson groups
The almost automorphism groups AAutD (Td,k )
Presentation of AAutD (Td,k )
Compact presentability of Schlichting completions
Almost automorphism groups associated with regular branch
groups
References

1
6
7
10
13
18
22
28

1. Introduction
Almost automorphism groups. If T is a locally finite tree, then its automorphism group Aut(T ), endowed with its natural locally compact and totally
disconnected topology, acts continuously and properly on T .
Almost automorphisms of the tree T (sometimes called spheromorphisms)
do not act on T , but on its boundary ∂∞ T . Roughly speaking, an almost
automorphism of T is a transformation induced in the boundary by a piecewise
tree automorphism. Almost automorphisms form a topological group AAut(T )
containing the automorphism group Aut(T ) as an open subgroup.
In the case where T is a non-rooted regular tree of degree d+1 ≥ 3, the group
Nd of almost automorphisms of T was introduced by Neretin in connection
with his work in representation theory [Ner92]. Neretin proved that, from the
Date: June 16, 2016.
1

2

ADRIEN LE BOUDEC

point of view of representation theory, the group Nd can be seen as a p-adic
analogue of the diffeomorphism group of the circle. Inspired by a simplicity
result for the diffeomorphism group of the circle Diff + (S1 ) [Her71], Kapoudjian
later proved that the group Nd is abstractly simple [Kap99].
Recently, Bader, Caprace, Gelander and Mozes proved that Nd does not
have any lattice [BCGM12]. This result is remarkable for the reason that all
the familiar examples of simple locally compact groups (which are unimodular), e.g. real or p-adic Lie-groups, or the group of type preserving automorphisms of a locally finite regular tree, are known to have lattices. Actually Nd
turned out to be the first example of a locally compact simple group without
lattices.
In this paper we investigate a family of groups which appear as generalizations of Neretin’s group. Here we give an outline of their construction (see Section 4 for precise definitions). Every finite permutation subgroup D ≤ Sym(d)
is known to give rise to a closed subgroup of the automorphism group Aut(Td )
of the rooted d-regular tree Td , by considering the infinitely iterated permutational wreath product W (D) = (. . . ≀ D) ≀ D. Elements of W (D) are rooted
automorphisms whose local action is prescribed by D. We now consider the
quasi-regular rooted tree Td,k , in which the root has degree k and other vertices
have degree d + 1. Roughly, the almost automorphism groups AAutD (Td,k )
we are interested in, are homeomorphisms of ∂∞ Td,k that are piecewise tree
automorphisms whose local action is prescribed by D. This family of groups
generalizes Neretin’s groups because when D is the full permutation group
Sym(d), the group W (D) is the full automorphism group of Td and we can
check that AAutD (Td,2 ) ≃ Nd .
These groups appear in [CM11], where a careful study of the abstract commensurator group of self-replicating profinite wreath branch groups is carried out (we refer to [BEW11] for an introduction to abstract commensurators of profinite groups). Let Wk (D) be the closed subgroup of Aut(Td,k )
fixing pointwise the first level of Td,k and acting by an element of W (D)
in each subtree rooted at level one. Under the additional assumption that
D ≤ Sym(d) is transitive and is equal to its normaliser in Sym(d), the group
AAutD (Td,k ) turns out to be isomorphic to the abstract commensurator group
of Wk (D). In particular Neretin’s group Nd is the abstract commensurator
group of W2 (Sym(d)), or equivalently the group of germs of automorphisms
of Aut(T ) in the language of [CM11].
The result that the groups AAutD (Td,k ) are compactly presented is motivated by their connections with Thompson groups and their generalizations.
Recall that Higman [Hig74] constructed an infinite family of finitely presented
infinite simple groups Vd,k (sometimes denoted Gd,k ), generalizing the group
V introduced by R. Thompson. When D ≤ Sym(d) is the trivial group then
AAutD (Td,k ) is nothing else than Vd,k (see Section 3 for details). One of the
reasons why combinatorial group theorists became interested in Thompson
groups is because of the combination of simplicity and finiteness properties.
Indeed Thompson groups T and V turned out to be the first known examples
of finitely presented infinite simple groups (see [CFP96]). While simplicity
results for AAutD (Td,k ) have recently been obtained in [CM11], here we settle

COMPACT PRESENTABILITY OF TREE ALMOST AUTOMORPHISM GROUPS

3

in the positive the question whether these groups satisfy the locally compact
version of being finitely presented, i.e. being compactly presented.
Compact presentability. Recall that a locally compact group is said to
be compactly generated if there exists a compact subset S so that the group
generated by S is the whole group G. Less known than the notion of compact
generation is the notion of compact presentation. A locally compact group G is
said to be compactly presented if it admits a compact generating subset S such
that G has a presentation, as an abstract group, with S as set of generators
and relators of bounded length (but possibly infinitely many relators). When
the group G is discrete, this amounts to saying that G is finitely presented; and
as in the discrete case, for a locally compact group, being compactly presented
does not depend on the choice of the compact generating set S.
Compact presentability can be interpreted in terms of coarse simple connectedness of the Cayley graph of the group with respect to some compact
generating subset. In particular, among compactly generated locally compact
groups, being compactly presented is preserved by quasi-isometries. For a
proof of this result, see for instance [CH15, Chapter 8].
Our first result is the following:
Theorem 1.1. For any k ≥ 1, d ≥ 2, and any subgroup D ≤ Sym(d), the
group AAutD (Td,k ) is compactly presented.
The group AAutD (Td,k ) always contain a dense copy of the Higman-Thompson
finitely presented group Vd,k . Here we insist on the fact that for a locally compact group, although having a dense finitely generated subgroup is a sufficient
condition for being compactly generated, the analogue result does not hold for
compact presentation, i.e. having a dense finitely presented subgroup does not
imply compact presentation of the ambient group. For example, for any nonArchimedean local field K, the group K2 ⋊ SL2 (K) has a central extension with
non-compactly generated kernel, and is therefore not compactly presented (see
for instance [CH15, Proposition 8.A.26]). However the reader can check that
this group admits dense finitely generated free subgroups.
We also emphasize the fact that, for the case of Neretin’s group, Theorem
1.1 cannot be obtained by proving finite presentation of a discrete cocompact
subgroup because these do not exist [BCGM12]. However we note that it seems
to be unknown whether Neretin’s group Nd is quasi-isometric to a finitely
generated group.
As a by-product of Theorem 1.1 and the main result of [BCGM12], we also
obtain that locally compact simple groups without lattices also exist in the
realm of compactly presented groups.
Dehn function. Having obtained compact presentability of a locally compact group G naturally leads to the study of an invariant of G, having both
geometric and combinatorial flavors, called the Dehn function of G.
From the geometric point of view, the Dehn function δG (n) is the supremum
of areas of loops in G of length at most n. In other words, it is the best
isoperimetric function, where isoperimetric function can be understood as for
simply connected Riemannian manifolds.

4

ADRIEN LE BOUDEC

From the combinatorial perspective, the Dehn function is a quantified version of compact presentability: δG (n) is the supremum over all relations w of
length at most n in the group, of the minimal number of relators needed to
convert w to the trivial word.
First recall that for any two functions f, g : N → N, we say that f is
asymptotically bounded by g, denoted f 4 g, if for some constant c we have
f (n) ≤ cg(cn) + cn + c for every n ≥ 0; and f, g have the same ≈-asymptotic
behavior, denoted by f ≈ g, if f 4 g and g 4 f .
If G is compactly presented and if S is a compact generating set, then there
is k ≥ 1 such that the group G is presented by hS | Rk i, where Rk is set of
relations in G of length at most k. The area a(w) of a relation w, i.e. a word
in the letters of S which represents the identity in G, is the smallest integer
m so that w can be written in the free group FS as a product of m conjugates
of relators of Rk . Now define the Dehn function of G by
δG (n) = sup {a(w) : w relation of length at most n} .
This function depends on the choice of S and k, but its ≈-asymptotic behavior
does not, and is actually a quasi-isometry invariant of G.
Our second result is the following upper bound on the Dehn function of
almost automorphism groups:
Theorem 1.2. For any k ≥ 1, d ≥ 2, and any subgroup D ≤ Sym(d), the
Dehn function of AAutD (Td,k ) is asymptotically bounded by that of Vd,k .
On the other hand, the Dehn function of AAutD (Td,k ) is not linear because
having a linear Dehn function characterizes Gromov-hyperbolic groups among
compactly presented groups, and the group AAutD (Td,k ) is easily seen not to
be Gromov-hyperbolic. So by a general argument (see for example [Bow95]),
the Dehn function of AAutD (Td,k ) has a quadratic lower bound.
In the case d = 2, all the groups V2,k turn out to be isomorphic to Thompson
group V . While the Dehn function of Thompson group F has been proved
to be quadratic [Gub06], it is not known whether the Dehn function of V is
quadratic or not. However, using a result of Guba [Gub00] who showed the
upper bound δV 4 n11 , we obtain:
Corollary 1.3. Neretin’s group N2 has a polynomially bounded Dehn function
(4 n11 ).
We believe that the result of Guba can be extended to the family of groups
Vd,k , i.e. that every group Vd,k satisfies a polynomial isoperimetric inequality.
By Theorem 1.2 this would imply that the Dehn function of AAutD (Td,k ) is
polynomially bounded for arbitrary k ≥ 1, d ≥ 2 and D ≤ Sym(d).
Almost automorphism groups associated with closed regular branch
groups. The notions of self-similarity and branching appear naturally in the
theory of groups acting on rooted trees. Basic definitions are recalled at the
beginning of Section 7, and we refer the reader to the surveys [Nek05, BGŠ03]
for more on self-similar and branch groups.
To any self-similar group G ≤ Aut(Td ) we naturally associate a subgroup
AAutG (Td ) ≤ AAut(Td ), consisting of almost automorphisms acting locally

COMPACT PRESENTABILITY OF TREE ALMOST AUTOMORPHISM GROUPS

5

like an element of G. The group AAutG (Td ) always contains the HigmanThompson group Vd and is generated by Vd together with an embedded copy
of G. See Section 7 for more details. It is worth noting that the definition of
the group AAutG (Td ) makes sense when G ≤ Aut(Td ) is an abstract subgroup.
In particular we make a priori neither topological (e.g. closed) nor finiteness
(e.g. finitely generated) assumption on G.
The first example of such a group was studied by Röver in the case when G
is the first Grigorchuk group. He proved that AAutG (Td ) is finitely presented
and simple [Röv99]. The case of a general self-similar group was then studied
by Nekrashevych, who proved that these groups enjoy properties rather similar
to the properties of the Higman-Thompson groups (see [Nek04, Nek]).
Later Barnea, Ershov and Weigel [BEW11] made use of Röver’s simplicity
result to prove that the profinite completion of the Grigorchuk group, which
coincides with its topological closure in Aut(T2 ), embeds as an open subgroup
in a topologically simple group, namely the group of almost automorphisms
acting locally like an element of the closure of the Grigorchuk group.
Here we are interested in almost automorphism groups associated with
closed regular branch groups. These can also be seen as generalizations of
Neretin’s group. It turns out that in this setting, AAutG (Td ) is naturally a
totally disconnected locally compact (t.d.l.c. for short) group, admitting G as
a compact open subgroup. Under some more assumptions on G, we prove:
Theorem 1.4. Let G ≤ Aut(Td ) be the closure of some finitely generated,
contracting regular branch group, branching over a congruence subgroup. Then
AAutG (Td ) is a t.d.l.c. compactly presented group.
Examples of groups covered by Theorem 1.4 include the aforementioned
topologically simple group constructed in [BEW11], as well as other groups
described in Section 7. As an application, we obtain that the profinite completion of the Grigorchuk group embeds as an open subgroup in a topologically
simple compactly presented group.
Note that any group G appearing in Theorem 1.4 can be explicitly described
in terms of the notions of patterns and finitely constrained groups, an introduction of which can be found in [Šun07]: G is the finitely constrained group
defined by allowing all patterns of a fixed size appearing in the group of which
it is the closure. See also the end of Section 7.
The proof of Theorem 1.4 will consist in two steps, and we believe that
each one is of independent interest. The first will be to establish a general
result on compact presentability of the so-called Schlichting completions (see
Section 6), and the second will be to identify our group with the Schlichting
completion of one of its dense subgroup (see Theorem 7.10).
Organization. We start by providing a brief introduction to almost automorphisms of trees and Higman-Thompson groups in the next two sections.
In Section 4 we define the groups AAutD (Td,k ) and their topology, and establish some preliminary results. Section 5 contains the proofs of Theorem
1.1 and Theorem 1.2. In Section 6, we prove a general statement on compact
presentability of Schlichting completions, namely Theorem 6.1, and the proof
of Theorem 1.4 is given in Section 7.

6

ADRIEN LE BOUDEC

Acknowledgments. I thank Yves de Cornulier for stimulating interactions,
for his careful reading of the paper and his valuable comments. I am also very
grateful to Pierre-Emmanuel Caprace for helpful discussions which gave rise
to this work, to Laurent Bartholdi for useful discussions about branch groups,
and to Pierre de la Harpe for his remarks and corrections.

2. Tree almost automorphisms
2.1. The quasi-regular rooted tree Td,k and its boundary. Let A and
B be finite sets of cardinality respectively k ≥ 1 and d ≥ 2. Consider the set
of finite words {∅} ∪ {ab1 · · · bn : a ∈ A, bi ∈ B} over the alphabet X = A ∪ B
being either empty or beginning by an element of A. This set is naturally
the vertex set of a rooted tree, where the root is the empty word ∅ and two
vertices are adjacent if they are of the form v and vx, x ∈ X. We will denote
this tree by Td,k . In the case when k = d it will be denoted by Td . For any
v the subtree of T
vertex v, we will also denote by Td,k
d,k spanned by vertices
having v as a prefix. The distance between a vertex and the root will be
called its level, and the number of its neighbours will be called its degree. If
v is a vertex of level n ≥ 0, then its neighbours of level n + 1 are called the
descendants of v. By construction, the root of Td,k has degree k, and a vertex
of level n ≥ 1 has degree d + 1: it has one distinguished neighbour pointing
toward the root, and d descendants. See Figure 1 for the case k = 2, d = 3.
The boundary ∂∞ Td,k of the tree Td,k is defined as the set of infinite words
ab1 · · · bn · · · , i.e. infinite geodesic rays in Td,k started at the root. We define
′
the distance between two such words ξ, ξ ′ by d(ξ, ξ ′ ) = d−|ξ∧ξ | , where |ξ ∧ ξ ′ |
is the length of the longest common prefix of ξ and ξ ′ . Equipped with this
distance, the boundary at infinity ∂∞ Td,k turns out to be homeomorphic to
the Cantor set.
From now and for the rest of the paper, we fix an embedding of Td,k in the
oriented plane. This embedding induces a canonical way of ordering, say from
left to right, the descendants of any vertex. In particular we obtain a total
ordering on the boundary at infinity ∂∞ Td,k , defined by declaring that ξ ≤ ξ ′ if
the first letter of ξ following the longest common prefix of ξ and ξ ′ , is smaller
than the one of ξ ′ .
∅
a1

a1 b1

a1 b2

a2

a1 b3

a2 b1

a2 b2

Figure 1. A picture of the tree T3,2 .

a2 b3

COMPACT PRESENTABILITY OF TREE ALMOST AUTOMORPHISM GROUPS

7

2.2. The group AAut(Td,k ) of almost automorphisms of Td,k . Recall that
the group Aut(Td,k ) of automorphisms of the rooted tree Td,k is defined as the
group of bijections of the set of vertices fixing the root and preserving the
edges. In particular every automorphism of Td,k induces a homeomorphism of
∂∞ Td,k . We now introduce a larger subgroup of the homeomorphism group of
∂∞ Td,k , namely the group of homeomorphisms of ∂∞ Td,k which are piecewise
tree automorphisms.
Definition 2.1. A finite subtree T of Td,k is a rooted complete subtree if it
contains the root as a vertex of degree k and if any other vertex which is not
a leaf has degree d + 1.
If T is a finite rooted complete subtree of Td,k then its complement is a
forest composed of finitely many copies of the rooted d-regular tree Td . If
T, T ′ are subtrees of Td,k , a map ψ : Td,k \ T → Td,k \ T ′ will be called a
forest isomorphism if it maps each connected component of Td,k \ T onto a
connected component of Td,k \ T ′ , and induces a tree isomorphism on each of
these connected components. Note that such a forest isomorphism naturally
induces a homeomorphism of ∂∞ Td,k .
Definition 2.2. The group AAut(Td,k ) is defined as the set of equivalence
classes of triples (ψ, T, T ′ ), where T, T ′ are finite rooted complete subtrees such
that |∂T | = |∂T ′ | and ψ : Td,k \T → Td,k \T ′ is a forest isomorphism, where two
triples are said to be equivalent if they give rise to the same homeomorphism
of ∂∞ Td,k . The multiplication in AAut(Td,k ) is inherited from the composition
in Homeo(∂∞ Td,k ).
We mention the following result, whose proof is easy and left to the reader,
which gives an alternative definition of the group of almost automorphisms
AAut(Td,k ).
Lemma 2.3. Let T1 , T1′ , T2 , T2′ be finite complete rooted subtrees of Td,k . Then
two triples (ψ1 , T1 , T1′ ), (ψ2 , T2 , T2′ ) are equivalent if and only if there exist
finite rooted complete subtrees T, T ′ so that T (resp. T ′ ) contains both T1 and
T2 (resp. T1′ and T2′ ) and ψ1 , ψ2 : Td,k \ T → Td,k \ T ′ are equal.
Remark 2.4. By the previous lemma, when considering a triple (ψ, T, T ′ )
representing an element of AAut(Td,k ), we can always assume that T and T ′
both contain a given finite subtree of Td,k .
Note that since the only automorphism of Td,k inducing the trivial homeomorphism on ∂∞ Td,k is the identity, the group AAut(Td,k ) contains a copy of
the group Aut(Td,k ) of automorphisms of the tree Td,k .
3. Higman-Thompson groups
3.1. Introduction. R. Thompson introduced in 1965 three groups F ≤ T ≤
V , an introduction to which can be found in [CFP96], while constructing a
finitely generated group with unsolvable word problem. The groups T and V
turned out to be the first examples of finitely presented infinite simple groups.
Higman then generalized Thompson group V to an infinite family of groups
(which were originally denoted by Gd,k , but we will use the notation Vd,k to

8

ADRIEN LE BOUDEC

keep in mind the analogy with Thompson group V , which is nothing else than
V2,1 ). K. Brown later generalized Higman’s construction to an infinite family
of groups Fd,k ≤ Td,k ≤ Vd,k such that F2,1 ≃ F and T2,1 ≃ T .
These groups were originally defined as automorphism groups of certain free
algebras. We refer the reader to [Bro87] for an introduction from this point of
view.
The definition of the groups Vd,k we give below is in terms of homeomorphism groups of the boundary of the quasi-regular rooted tree Td,k . From this
point of view, elements of these groups can be represented either as homeomorphisms of ∂∞ Td,k or by combinatorial diagrams, and we will use the interplay
between these two representations.
3.2. Higman-Thompson groups Vd,k as subgroups of AAut(Td,k ). The
definition that we adopt here for Higman-Thompson groups Vd,k is borrowed
from [CM11]. Note that when k = d the group Vd,d will be denoted by Vd for
simplicity.
Definition 3.1. An element of AAut(Td,k ) is called locally order-preserving if
it can be represented by a triple (ψ, T, T ′ ) such that T, T ′ are complete rooted
subtrees of Td,k and ψ : Td,k \T → Td,k \T ′ preserves the order of the boundary
at infinity on each connected component.
It follows from the order-preserving condition that such a forest isomorphism ψ is uniquely determined by the induced bijection between the leaves
of T and the leaves of T ′ . Locally order-preserving almost automorphisms are
easily checked to form a subgroup of AAut(Td,k ).
Definition 3.2. The Higman-Thompson group Vd,k is defined as the subgroup
of AAut(Td,k ) of locally order-preserving elements.
Every locally order-preserving v ∈ Vd,k has a unique representative (ψ, T, T ′ )
so that T, T ′ are complete rooted subtrees of Td,k and T is minimal for the
inclusion. Then T ′ is also minimal and (ψ, T, T ′ ) will be called the canonical
representative of v. This notion coincides with the classical notion of reduced
tree pair diagrams commonly used to study Thompson groups. The tree T
will be called the domain tree of v and T ′ the range tree. When considering a
triple representing a locally order-preserving element, we will without further
mention assume that this is the canonical representative.
The following finiteness result is due to Higman [Hig74] (see also [Bro87]).
Theorem 3.3. Higman-Thompson groups Vd,k are finitely presented.
This result will be used in Section 5, where we will enlarge a finite presentation of Vd,k to obtain a compact presentation of the group AAutD (Td,k ).
3.3. Saturated subsets. We now introduce a notion of saturated subsets
inside the group Vd,k , needed in Section 5. We would like to point out that
this notion is not necessary if one just wants to prove Theorem 1.1. However
it will be used in the proof of Theorem 1.2 to perform the cost estimates
carefully.

COMPACT PRESENTABILITY OF TREE ALMOST AUTOMORPHISM GROUPS

9

Definition 3.4. A subset Σ ≤ Vd,k is said to be saturated if for every σ =
(ψ, T, T ′ ) ∈ Σ and every u ∈ Aut(Td,k ), all the elements of Vd,k having a
canonical representative of the form (ψ ′ , u(T ), T ′ ) belong to Σ.
Lemma 3.5. Every finite subset Σ ≤ Vd,k is contained in a finite saturated
subset.
Proof. Let Ω be the subset of Vd,k consisting of elements of the form (ψ, u(T ), T ′ ),
where u ∈ Aut(Td,k ) and T is the domain tree of the canonical representative
of some element of Σ. Clearly Ω contains Σ and is saturated. Since Σ is finite,
the number of such trees T is finite, and so is the set of u(T ), u ∈ Aut(Td,k ).
The result then follows from the observation that, if T is a fixed finite complete rooted subtree of Td,k , then there are only finitely many elements of Vd,k
having a canonical representative of the form (ψ, T, T ′ ).

3.4. A lower bound for the word metric in Vd,k . Here we give a lower
bound for the word metric in the group Vd,k in terms of a combinatorial data
contained in the diagrams (ψ, T, T ′ ) representing elements of Vd,k .
Recall that a d-caret (or caret for short) in Td,k is a subtree spanned by a
vertex of level n ≥ 1 and its d neighbours of level n + 1. We insist on the
fact that we do not consider the subtree of Td,k spanned by the root and its k
neighbours as a caret. If T is a finite complete rooted subtree of Td,k with κ
carets, then the number of leaves of T is (d − 1)κ + k. In particular if v ∈ Vd,k
has canonical representative (ψ, T, T ′ ), then T, T ′ have the same number of
leaves, and consequently they also have the same number of carets. By abuse
we will call it the number of carets of v and denote it by κ(v).
Metric properties of Higman-Thompson groups of type F and T can be
essentially understood in terms of the number of carets of tree diagrams, the
latter being quasi-isometric to the word-length associated to some finite generating set. The use of this point of view shed light on some interesting large
scale geometric properties of these groups (see [Bur99, BCS01, BCST09]).
However metric properties of Higman-Thompson groups of type V are far less
well understood, as it follows from the work of Birget [Bir04] that the number
of carets is no longer quasi-isometric the the word-length in Thompson group
V.
Nevertheless, the following lemma gives a lower bound for the word metric
in Vd,k in terms of the number of carets. Note that the same result appears in
[Bir04] for the case of Thompson group V .
Proposition 3.6. For any finite generating set Σ of Vd,k , there exists a constant CΣ > 0 such that for any v ∈ Vd,k , we have κ(v) ≤ CΣ |v|Σ .
Proof. Define CΣ = maxσ∈Σ κ(σ). Now remark that when multiplying, say on
the right, an element v ∈ Vd,k by an element σ ∈ Σ, we obtain an element
vσ having a canonical representative with trees having at most κ(v) + CΣ
carets. This is because when expanding the domain tree of v to get a common
expansion with the range tree of σ, we have to add at most CΣ carets. So it
follows from a straightforward induction that every element of length at most n
with respect to the word metric associated to Σ has a canonical representative
with at most CΣ n carets, and the proof is complete.


10

ADRIEN LE BOUDEC

4. The almost automorphism groups AAutD (Td,k )
Almost automorphisms of Td,k are homeomorphisms of the boundary ∂∞ Td,k
which are piecewise tree automorphisms. In this section we introduce a family
of subgroups of AAut(Td,k ) consisting of almost automorphisms which are
piecewise tree automorphisms of a given type.
4.1. Almost automorphisms of type W (D). Let D ≤ Sym(d) be a subgroup of the symmetric group on d elements. Define recursively D1 = D, seen
as the subgroup of the automorphism group of the rooted d-regular tree Td
acting on level one; and Dn+1 = D ≀ Dn for every n ≥ 1, where the permutational wreath product is associated with the natural action of Dn on the
set of vertices of level n of Td . We now let W (D) be the closed subgroup
generated by the family (Dn ). For any k ≥ 1 we let Wk (D) be the subgroup
of Aut(Td,k ) fixing pointwise the first level and acting by an element of W (D)
in each subtree rooted at level one. The group Wk (D) is naturally isomorphic
to the product of k copies of the group W (D).
Definition 4.1. An almost automorphism of Td,k is said to be piecewise of
type W (D) if it can be represented by a triple (ψ, T, T ′ ) such that T, T ′ are
finite rooted complete subtrees of Td,k and ψ : Td,k \ T → Td,k \ T ′ belongs to
W (D) on each connected component, after the natural identification of each
connected component of Td,k \ T and Td,k \ T ′ with Td .
We observe that by construction of W (D), if a triple (ψ1 , T1 , T1′ ) is such
that ψ1 : Td,k \ T1 → Td,k \ T1′ belongs to W (D) on each connected component,
then for any equivalent triple (ψ2 , T2 , T2′ ) such that T2 (resp. T2′ ) contains T1
(resp. T1′ ), then ψ2 : Td,k \ T2 → Td,k \ T2′ belongs to W (D) on each connected
component.
Proposition 4.2. The set of almost automorphisms AAutD (Td,k ) which are
piecewise of type W (D) is a subgroup of AAut(Td,k ).
Proof. The only non-trivial fact that one needs to check is that AAutD (Td,k )
is closed under multiplication, but this follows from the previous observation
and from the fact that W (D) is a subgroup of Aut(Td ).

If D is the full permutation group Sym(d) then W (D) = Aut(Td ) and
AAutD (Td,k ) = AAut(Td,k ). At the opposite extreme, if D is the trivial
group then being piecewise trivial means being locally order-preserving and
AAutD (Td,k ) = Vd,k . It is straightforward from the definition that if D ′ contains D then AAutD′ (Td,k ) contains AAutD (Td,k ). In particular we note that
for every subgroup D ≤ Sym(d), the group AAutD (Td,k ) always contains Vd,k .
4.2. Topology on AAutD (Td,k ). By definition the group AAutD (Td,k ) also
contains a copy of the tree automorphism group Wk (D). The latter comes
equipped with a natural group topology, which is totally disconnected and
compact, defined by saying that the pointwise level stabilizers form a basis of
neighbourhoods of the identity. We would like to extend this topology to the
group AAutD (Td,k ), i.e. define a group topology on AAutD (Td,k ) for which the
subgroup Wk (D) is an open subgroup. For this, let us first recall the following
well-known lemma, a proof of which can be consulted in [Bou71, Chapter 3].

COMPACT PRESENTABILITY OF TREE ALMOST AUTOMORPHISM GROUPS

11

Lemma 4.3. Let G be a group and let F be a family of subgroups of G which
is filtering, i.e. so that the intersection of any two elements of F contains an
element of F. Assume moreover that for every g ∈ G and every U ∈ F, there
exists V ∈ F so that V ⊂ gU g−1 . Then there exists a (unique) group topology
on G for which F is a base of neighbourhoods of the identity.
Now let F be the family of open subgroups of Wk (D), which is a base
of neighbourhoods of the identity in Wk (D). By combining Lemma 4.6 together with Proposition 4.7 below, we see that the assumption of Lemma 4.3
is satisfied in G = AAutD (Td,k ), so we deduce:
Proposition 4.4. There exists a group topology on AAutD (Td,k ) making the
inclusion Wk (D) ֒→ AAutD (Td,k ) continuous and open. In particular AAutD (Td,k )
is a t.d.l.c. group (which is discrete if and only if Wk (D) is trivial, if and only
if D is trivial).
Remark 4.5.
1) It is interesting to point out that whereas the topology
on Aut(Td,k ) coincides with the compact-open topology induced from
Homeo(∂∞ Td,k ), this is no longer true for the group AAut(Td,k ). Indeed, the inclusion AAut(Td,k ) ֒→ Homeo(∂∞ Td,k ) is continuous but
has a non-closed image. In other words, the topology on AAut(Td,k )
is strictly finer than the compact-open topology. Actually the image
of AAut(Td,k ) ֒→ Homeo(∂∞ Td,k ) is even dense, because one can check
that the group Vd,k is a dense subgroup of the homeomorphism group
of ∂∞ Td,k with respect to the compact-open topology.
2) We also insist on the fact that for any permutation group D, the
inclusion AAutD (Td,k ) ֒→ AAut(Td,k ) is always continuous, but its image is never closed unless D is the full permutation group Sym(d).
Indeed, AAutD (Td,k ) contains the subgroup Vd,k which is dense in
AAut(Td,k ) by Remark 4.8, and therefore AAutD (Td,k ) is never closed
inside AAut(Td,k ) unless it is the whole group.
4.3. Preliminaries. In this section we establish preliminary results about the
groups AAutD (Td,k ). Recall that D ≤ Sym(d) is a finite permutation group,
and we define recursively a family of finite subgroups of Aut(Td ) by D1 = D
and Dn+1 = D ≀ Dn for every n ≥ 1, where the permutational wreath product
is associated with the natural action of Dn on the dn vertices of level n of
Td . We denote by D∞ the subgroup generated by the family (Dn ) (which
also coincides with the increasing union of the family (Dn )) and by W (D)
the closure of D∞ in Aut(Td ). For n ∈ {1, . . . , ∞} we will also denote by Dnk
the subgroup of Wk (D) fixing pointwise the first level of Td,k and acting by
an element of Dn on each subtree rooted at the first level. Note that these
(i)
(k)
(1)
groups have a natural decomposition Dnk = Dn × . . . × Dn , where Dn is
the subgroup of elements acting only on the ith subtree rooted at level one.
If σ = (ψ, T, T ′ ) ∈ Vd,k , we let Wk (D)σ be the subgroup of Wk (D) consisting
of automorphisms which are the identity on the subtree T . Note that Wk (D)σ
always contains some neighbourhood of the identity, and is consequently an
open subgroup of Wk (D).

12

ADRIEN LE BOUDEC

Lemma 4.6. For every σ ∈ Vd,k , we have the inclusion
σ Wk (D)σ σ −1 ⊂ Wk (D).
In particular Wk (D) is commensurated by Vd,k .
Proof. If σ = (ψ, T, T ′ ) and u ∈ Wk (D)σ , the reader will easily check that the
element σuσ −1 ∈ AAutD (Td,k ) is represented by a triple (ψ ′ , T ′ , T ′ ), where ψ ′
permutes trivially the connected components of Td,k \ T ′ . Now if we consider
the tree automorphism u′ ∈ Wk (D) being the identity on T ′ and acting on
Td,k \ T ′ like ψ ′ , it is clear that u′ is represented by the triple (ψ ′ , T ′ , T ′ ), and
therefore σuσ −1 = u′ ∈ Wk (D).

The next result yields a decomposition of the group AAutD (Td,k ) in terms
of the two subgroups Wk (D) and Vd,k . It will be essential for proving Theorem
1.1 and Theorem 1.2.
Proposition 4.7. For any g ∈ AAutD (Td,k ) there exists (u, v) ∈ Wk (D)×Vd,k
such that g = uv.
Proof. Let (ψ, T, T ′ ) be a triple representing g ∈ AAutD (Td,k ). Let us consider
the element v ∈ AAutD (Td,k ) represented by the triple (ξ, T, T ′ ) where ξ is
defined by declaring that each tree of the forest Td,k \ T is globally sent onto
its image by ψ, but so that ξ is order-preserving on each connected component
of Td,k \T . Clearly we have v ∈ Vd,k . Now the discrepancy between g and v can
be filled by performing the rooted tree automorphism induced by g on each
subtree rooted at a leaf of T ′ . But all of these can be achieved at the same
time by an element of Wk (D), namely the automorphism being the identity
on T ′ and acting as the desired rooted tree automorphism on each connected
component of Td,k \ T ′ .

Remark 4.8. Actually in Proposition 4.7, Wk (D) can be replaced by the
pointwise stabilizer of the nth level of Td,k in Wk (D), for every n ≥ 1, the
proof being the same. It yields in particular that Vd,k is a dense subgroup of
AAutD (Td,k ).
Now given g ∈ AAutD (Td,k ), there is not a unique (u, v) ∈ Wk (D) × Vd,k
such that g = uv because the two subgroups Wk (D) and Vd,k have a nontrivial intersection (as soon as D is non-trivial). The measure of how this
decomposition fails to be unique naturally leads to the study of the intersection
of these two subgroups.
Lemma 4.9. The intersection between Vd,k and Wk (D) in AAutD (Td,k ) is
k .
D∞
k ⊂
Proof. Dnk lies inside Vd,k and Wk (D) for any n ≥ 1, so the inclusion D∞
Vd,k ∩ Wk (D) is clear. To prove the reverse inclusion, let g be an element of
Vd,k ∩ Wk (D). Such an element g is an automorphism of Td,k and therefore
does act on the tree fixing setwise each level, so it is enough to prove that
k acting like g on T . Since g ∈ W (D), for
there exists an element of D∞
d,k
k
every n ≥ 1 there exists gn ∈ Dnk acting like g on the first n levels of Td,k . But
now since g ∈ Vd,k , it is eventually order-preserving and therefore g = gn for
n large enough, which completes the proof.


COMPACT PRESENTABILITY OF TREE ALMOST AUTOMORPHISM GROUPS

b

d+1
b

1

······
b

b

j

d

ψ

13

b

j
b

······
b

b

1 d+1 d

Figure 2. The diagram of δ1,j when k = 2.
The end of this section is devoted to establishing Lemma 4.10, which will
be applied in the proof of Lemma 5.3 in Section 5.
Recall that (a1 , . . . ak ) are the ordered vertices of level one of Td,k , and
(i)
ai
that Td,k
is the full subtree of Td,k rooted at ai . Recall also that D∞ are
ai
the automorphisms of Td,k acting by an element of D∞ on Td,k , and acting
ai
. Finally recall that we denote by (ai b1 , . . . , ai bd ) the
trivially outside Td,k
ai
ordered neighbours of ai in Td,k
. In what follows, by convention indexes will
be taken modulo k (for example ak+1 will denote the vertex a1 ).
For every i = 1 . . . k and j = 1 . . . d, we define an element δi,j = (ψ, T, T ′ ) ∈
Vd,k by the following manner:
• T is the smallest finite complete rooted subtree containing the d descendants of ai ;
• T ′ is the smallest finite complete rooted subtree containing the d descendants of ai+1 ;
• ψ is defined by the formulas
– ψ(aℓ ) = aℓ for every ℓ ∈
/ {i, i + 1};
– ψ(ai+1 ) = ai+1 bj ;
– ψ(ai bℓ ) = ai+1 bℓ for every ℓ 6= j;
– ψ(ai bj) = ai .
For example the diagram of δ1,j is represented in Figure 2 in the case k = 2.
We denote by ∆ the set of δi,j , for i = 1 . . . k, j = 1 . . . d.
(i)

Lemma 4.10. Let i = 1 . . . k, j = 1 . . . d, and let n ≥ 1. Assume that u ∈ D∞
ab
acts trivially outside Td,ki j , and u has at most n + 1 carets. Then the element
(i)

−1
δi,j uδi,j
belongs to D∞ and has at most n carets.
ab

Proof. This is a direct consequence of the fact that δi,j maps the subtree Td,ki j
ab

ai
onto the the subtree Td,k
, and is order-preserving on Td,ki j .



5. Presentation of AAutD (Td,k )
In this section we write down an explicit presentation of the group AAutD (Td,k )
for any k ≥ 1, d ≥ 2 and D ≤ Sym(d), and prove Theorem 1.1 and Theorem
1.2.
Let Σ denote a finite generating set of the group Vd,k , which is supposed to
contain ∆ (recall that ∆ has been defined at the end of Section 4). Enlarging

14

ADRIEN LE BOUDEC

Σ if necessary, we can also assume that Σ is saturated by Lemma 3.5. This
implies the following:
Lemma 5.1. We have the inclusion Σ Wk (D) ⊂ Wk (D) Σ.
Proof. It follows from the proof of Proposition 4.7 that any σ1 u1 ∈ Σ Wk (D)
can be written u2 σ2 with u2 ∈ Wk (D) and σ2 ∈ Vd,k being of the form
(ψ, u−1 (T ), T ′ ), where T is the domain tree of σ. Since Σ is saturated, σ2
belongs to Σ and therefore σ1 u1 ∈ Wk (D) Σ.

According to Proposition 4.7, the set S = Σ ∪ Wk (D) is a generating set of
AAutD (Td,k ). The strategy to prove Theorem 1.1 will be to list some particular
relations between the elements of S satisfied in the group AAutD (Td,k ), and
then to prove that they generate all the relations in AAutD (Td,k ).
(RΣ ) According to Theorem 3.3 there exists a finite set of words RΣ ≤ Σ∗
so that hΣ | RΣ i is a presentation of Vd,k .
(RD ) We let RD be the set of words of the form u1 u2 u−1
3 , ui ∈ Wk (D),
whenever the relation u1 u2 = u3 is satisfied in the group Wk (D).
(R1 ) The set of relations R1 will correspond to commensurating relations in
AAutD (Td,k ). Recall that if σ ∈ Vd,k and u ∈ Wk (D)σ then σuσ −1 ∈
Wk (D) by Lemma 4.6. We let R1 be the set of words of the form
σu1 σ −1 u−1
2 , where σ ∈ Σ, u1 ∈ Wk (D)σ , u2 ∈ Wk (D), whenever the
relation σu1 σ −1 = u2 holds in AAutD (Td,k ).
(R2 ) We add relations corresponding to the fact that the subgroup D1k of
AAutD (Td,k ) lies in the intersection of Vd,k and Wk (D). More precisely,
(i)
for every i ∈ {1, . . . , k} and every u ∈ D1 , we choose a word wu ∈ Σ∗
so that u = wu in AAutD (Td,k ). We denote by R2 the set of words
uwu−1 , and by ri the maximum word length of the words wu when u
(i)
ranges over D1 .
(R3 ) By Lemma 5.1, for every σ1 ∈ Σ and u1 ∈ Wk (D) we can pick some
u2 ∈ Wk (D) and σ2 ∈ Σ so that σ1 u1 = u2 σ2 in AAutD (Td,k ). We
denote by R3 the set of words σ1 u1 σ2−1 u−1
2 .
Denote by R = RΣ ∪ RD ∪i Ri the union of all these relations. Note that
elements of R have bounded length with respect to the compact generating
set S = Σ ∪ Wk (D) of AAutD (Td,k ).
We let G be the group defined by the presentation hS | Ri, that is we have
a short exact sequence
1 → R = hhRii → FS → G → 1,
where FS is the free group over the set S and hhRii is the normal subgroup
generated by R. Denote by a : FS → [0, +∞] the corresponding area function,
which by definition associates to w ∈ R the least integer n so that w is
a product of at most n conjugates of elements of R, and a(w) = +∞ if
w ∈
/ R. We also define the associated cost function c : FS × FS → [0, +∞]
by c(w1 , w2 ) = a(w1−1 w2 ). This function estimates the cost of converting w1
to w2 , or the cost of going from w1 to w2 , in the sense that c(w1 , w2 ) is the
distance in FS between w1 and w2 with respect to the word metric associated

COMPACT PRESENTABILITY OF TREE ALMOST AUTOMORPHISM GROUPS

15

to the union of conjugates of R. In particular the cost function is symmetric
and satisfies the triangular inequality c(w1 , w3 ) ≤ c(w1 , w2 ) + c(w2 , w3 ) for
every w1 , w2 , w3 ∈ FS . This, combined with the bi-invariance of the cost
function, yields the following inequality, which will be used repeatedly: for
every ℓ ≥ 1 and every w1 , . . . , wℓ , w1′ , . . . , wℓ′ ∈ FS , we have:
c(w1 . . . wℓ , w1′ . . . wℓ′ ) ≤

ℓ
X

c(wi , wi′ ).

i=1

Two words w1 , w2 ∈ FS are said to be homotopic if they represent the same
element of G, i.e. if c(w1 , w2 ) < +∞.
We are now able to state the main theorem of this section, which implies
both Theorem 1.1 and Theorem 1.2.
Theorem 5.2. The natural map G → AAutD (Td,k ) is an isomorphism. Furthermore, the Dehn function of the presentation hS | Ri is asymptotically
bounded by that of Vd,k .
It is clear that the map from G to AAutD (Td,k ) is a well defined morphism
because relations RΣ , RD , (Ri ) are satisfied in AAutD (Td,k ), and it is onto because S generates the group AAutD (Td,k ). So proving the first claim comes
down to proving that this morphism is injective, i.e. any word in FS representing the identity in the group AAutD (Td,k ) already represents the trivial
element in the group G. This will be achieved, as well as the proof of the
upper bound on the Dehn function, in Proposition 5.6, using both geometric
and combinatorial arguments.
The goal of Proposition 5.4 is to prove that relations in the group AAutD (Td,k )
coming from the fact that the subgroups Wk (D) and Vd,k intersect non-trivially,
are already satisfied in the group G, and to obtain a precise estimate of their
cost.
The following is the main technical lemma towards Proposition 5.4.
Lemma 5.3. Fix i ∈ {1, . . . , k}, and let Ci = 2d + max(2, ri ) (recall that ri
has been defined with the set of relators R2 ). Then for every n ≥ 0 and every
(i)
u ∈ D∞ having at most n carets, there exists a word w ∈ Σ∗ of length at most
Ci n so that the relation u = w holds in G and has cost at most Ci n.
Proof. We use induction on n. The result is trivially true for n = 0 because
(i)
the only element of D∞ with zero carets is the identity, and is true for n = 1
thanks to the set of relators R2 .
(i)
The idea of the proof of the induction step is the following. Given u ∈ D∞
(i)
with at most n + 1 carets, we begin by multiplying it by an element of D1
ai
in order to ensure that it acts trivially on the first level of Td,k . The resulting
automorphism has a natural decomposition into a product of d elements of
(i)
ai bd
ai b1
, with a nice con, . . . , Td,k
D∞ , coming from its action on the subtrees Td,k
trol on the number of carets of each element of this product. We then apply
the induction hypothesis to each of these elements, after having reduced their
number of carets by conjugating by an element of ∆, which has the effect of
increasing by 1 the level of the subtree on which they act.

16

ADRIEN LE BOUDEC
(i)

Henceforth we assume that u ∈ D∞ is an element having at most n + 1
(i)
carets, with n ≥ 1. If we let ū denote the element of D1 acting like u on the
ai
first level of Td,k
, it is clear that u′ = uū−1 stabilizes pointwise the first level
ai
of Td,k . Using relators from R2 , we pick a word wū ∈ Σ∗ so that the relation
ū = wū holds in G and has cost at most one.
Now in the group AAutD (Td,k ), since u′ acts trivially on the first level of
(i)
ai
Td,k
, it has a natural decomposition u′ = u1 . . . ud , where each uℓ ∈ D∞
ai bℓ
. In the rest of the proof, we implicitly
acts trivially outside the subtree Td,k
assume that we only consider integers ℓ ∈ {1, . . . , d} such that uℓ is non-trivial.
Note that each uℓ has at most n + 1 carets and that

X

κ(uℓ ) ≤ κ(u) + d − 1 ≤ n + d,

ℓ

ai
because the caret corresponding to the root of Td,k
can appear d times in this
sum, whereas it is counted only once in κ(u). Note also that thanks to the set
of relators RD , the relation u′ = u1 . . . ud also holds in the group G and has
cost at most d.
Remark that by construction of the set ∆, every element of Wk (D) acting
trivially on the second level of Td,k lies inside Wk (D)δ for every δ ∈ ∆ (see
Subsection 4.3 for the definition of Wk (D)δ ). In particular if ℓ ∈ {1, . . . , d}
and if δℓ = δi,ℓ , we have uℓ ∈ Wk (D)δℓ and thanks to R1 , the word δℓ uℓ δℓ−1
(i)
represents in the group G an element u˜ℓ ∈ D∞ with at most κ(uℓ ) − 1 carets
according to Lemma 4.10. Note in particular that

X

(1)

κ(u˜ℓ ) ≤

X

(κ(uℓ ) − 1) ≤

ℓ

ℓ

X

κ(uℓ ) − d ≤ n.

ℓ

Now since κ(u˜ℓ ) ≤ κ(uℓ ) − 1 ≤ n for every ℓ ∈ {1, . . . , d}, we may apply the
induction hypotheses to u˜ℓ , and we obtain a word w̃ℓ of length at most Ci κ(u˜ℓ )
so that u˜ℓ = w̃ℓ in G and c(u˜ℓ , w̃ℓ ) ≤ Ci κ(u˜ℓ ). If we denote by wℓ = δℓ−1 w̃ℓ δℓ ,
then the relation uℓ = wℓ holds in the group G and has cost
c(uℓ , wℓ ) ≤ c(uℓ , δℓ−1 u˜ℓ δℓ ) + c(δℓ−1 u˜ℓ δℓ , wℓ ) ≤ 1 + Ci κ(u˜ℓ ).
We now want to put all these pieces together and conclude the proof of the
induction step. Consider the word w = w1 . . . wd wū ∈ Σ∗ . Its length is easily
seen to satisfy
|w|Σ ≤

d
X

|wℓ |Σ +|wū |Σ ≤

ℓ=1

d
X

(2+|w̃ℓ |Σ )+ri ≤ Ci

ℓ=1

d
X

κ(u˜ℓ )+2d+ri ≤ Ci (n+1),

ℓ=1

because ℓ κ(u˜ℓ ) ≤ n according to (1), and Ci ≥ 2d + ri . Furthermore, we
claim that the relation u = w is satisfied in G and has cost at most Ci (n + 1).
Indeed, by triangular inequality we have
P

c(u, w) ≤ c(u, u′ ū) + c(u′ ū, w1 . . . wd wū )
≤ c(u, u′ ū) + c(u′ , w1 . . . wd ) + c(ū, wū ).

COMPACT PRESENTABILITY OF TREE ALMOST AUTOMORPHISM GROUPS

17

Now c(u, u′ ū) and c(ū, wū ) are at most 1, and by using triangular inequality
again we obtain
c(u, w) ≤ 2 + c(u′ , u1 . . . ud ) + c(u1 . . . ud , w1 . . . wd )
≤2+d+

X

c(uℓ , wℓ )

≤2+d+

X

(1 + Ci κ(u˜ℓ ))

≤ 2 + 2d + Ci

X

κ(u˜ℓ )

≤ 2 + 2d + Ci n
≤ Ci (n + 1),

so the proof of the induction step is complete.



k ,
Proposition 5.4. There exists a constant C > 0 such that for every u ∈ D∞
∗
there exists a word w ∈ Σ of length at most Cκ(u) so that the relation u = w
holds in G and has cost at most k + κ(u).

Proof. Let C = maxi Ci , where the constant Ci is defined in Lemma 5.3. Any
k can be written u = u . . . u in AAut (T ), with u ∈ D (i) and
u ∈ D∞
∞
1
D d,k
i
k
κ(u) = κ(u1 ) + · · · + κ(uk ). Applying Lemma 5.3 to ui , we get a word wi of
length at most Ci κ(ui ) so that the relation ui = wi holds in G and has cost at
most κ(ui ). Let w = w1 . . . wk . Then
|w|Σ ≤

k
X
i=1

|wi |Σ ≤

k
X

Ci κ(ui ) ≤ C

i=1

k
X

κ(ui ) = Cκ(u).

i=1

Moreover the relation u = u1 . . . uk holds in G thanks to the set of relators
RD . Consequently in G we have u = w at a total cost of at most
c(u, u1 . . . uk ) + c(u1 . . . uk , w) ≤ k +
≤k+

k
X

i=1
k
X

c(ui , wi )
κ(ui ) = k + κ(u).

i=1


The next lemma will reduce the estimate of the area function to its estimate
for words of the special form Wk (D)Σ∗ .
Lemma 5.5. There exists a constant c1 > 0 such that for any n and any word
w ∈ S ∗ of length at most n, there exists a word w′ = uσ1 . . . σj of length at
most n, where u ∈ Wk (D), σ1 , . . . , σj ∈ Σ, so that w′ is homotopic to w and
c(w, w′ ) ≤ c1 n log(n).
Proof. For any word w ∈ S ∗ , define
τ (w) = inf c(w, w′ ) : w′ ∈ Wk (D)Σ∗ and w′ is homotopic to w ,
and



f (n) = sup {τ (w) : w ∈ S ∗ has length at most n} .
Note that both τ and f take finite values thanks to relators from R3 and RD .
We want to prove that f (n) ≤ c1 n log(n) for some constant c1 .

18

ADRIEN LE BOUDEC

We use an algorithmic strategy. Given a word w, we first divide it into
two subwords, then apply the algorithm to each of them and finally merge the
results. More precisely, let us consider a word w of length 2n+1 , and divide
it into two subwords w1 , w2 of length 2n . By definition of the function f ,
there exists words w1′ , w2′ ∈ Wk (D)Σ∗ such that c(w1 , w1′ ), c(w2 , w2′ ) ≤ f (2n ).
Now in the word w̄ = w1′ w2′ ∈ Wk (D)Σ∗ Wk (D)Σ∗ we can move the Wk (D)
part of w2′ to the left by applying at most 2n − 1 relators of R3 , and merge it
with the Wk (D) part of w1′ with cost 1 thanks to the set of relators RD . We
therefore get a word w′ ∈ Wk (D)Σ∗ homotopic to w and so that c(w, w′ ) ≤
2f (2n ) + (2n − 1) + 1, which implies that τ (w) ≤ 2f (2n ) + 2n . By definition of
f , we obtain f (2n+1 ) ≤ 2f (2n ) + 2n , from which we easily get the inequality
f (2n ) ≤ n2n−1 . The result then follows from this inequality together with the
fact that f is non-decreasing.

Proposition 5.6. There exists a constant c > 0 such that if w ∈ FS has
length at most n and represents the identity in AAutD (Td,k ), then w already
represents the identity in G and has area
a(w) ≤ cn log(n) + δ(cn),
where δ is the Dehn function of the presentation hΣ, RΣ i of Vd,k .
Proof. We first apply Lemma 5.5 to the word w, and obtain a word w′ =
uσ1 . . . σj of length at most n so that c(w, w′ ) ≤ c1 n log(n). Since w is trivial in
AAutD (Td,k ), so is w′ , and therefore the element u−1 belongs to Wk (D)∩Vd,k =
k . Moreover this element has length at most n in the group V
D∞
d,k because
′
the word w has length at most n. According to Proposition 3.6, we have
κ(u−1 ) ≤ CΣ n. Applying Proposition 5.4 to u−1 yields a word w′′ ∈ Σ∗ of
length at most Cκ(u−1 ) ≤ CCΣ n so that the relation u−1 = w′′ holds in G
and has cost at most k + CΣ n. Therefore we obtain that
a(w) ≤c(w, w′ ) + c(u−1 , w′′ ) + c(w′′ , σ1 . . . σj )
≤c1 n log(n) + (k + CΣ n) + δ (CCΣ n + n) ,
because w′′ and σ1 . . . σj represent the same element in Vd,k and w′′ (σ1 . . . σj )−1
has length at most CCΣ n + n, so c(w′′ , σ1 . . . σj ) is at most δ(CCΣ n + n) by
definition of the Dehn function. Therefore a(w) ≤ cn log(n) + δ(cn) for some
constant c depending only on Σ, and the proof is complete.

In particular we deduce from Proposition 5.6 that the Dehn function of
AAutD (Td,k ) is 4 n log n + δVd,k . But now the group Vd,k is not Gromovhyperbolic since it has a Z2 subgroup, so its Dehn function is not linear and
consequently at least quadratic [Bow95]. Therefore n log n 4 δVd,k , and the
Dehn function of AAutD (Td,k ) is thus asymptotically bounded by δVd,k .
6. Compact presentability of Schlichting completions
If Γ is a group with a commensurated subgroup Λ, the Schlichting completion process builds a t.d.l.c. group Γ//Λ and a morphism Γ → Γ//Λ, so that
the image of Γ is dense and the closure of the image of Λ is compact open. It
was formally introduced in [Tza03], following an idea appearing in [Sch80].

COMPACT PRESENTABILITY OF TREE ALMOST AUTOMORPHISM GROUPS

19

We would like to point out that Schlichting completions are sometimes called
relative profinite completions [SW13, EW13], but we choose not to use this
terminology in order to avoid confusion with the notion of localised profinite
completion appearing in [Rei]. Although we will not use this terminology, we
also note that a group together with a commensurated subgroup is sometimes
called a Hecke pair.
The main theorem of this section is a general result about compact presentability of Schlichting completions:
Theorem 6.1. Let Γ be a finitely presented group and let Λ be a finitely
generated commensurated subgroup. Then the t.d.l.c. group Γ//Λ is compactly
presented.
Before going into the proof, let us mention the following result which can
derived from Theorem 6.1. As mentioned above, the notion of Schlichting
completion is different but closely related to the notion of profinite completion
of a group localised at a subgroup [Rei]. More precisely, it is proved in [Rei,
Corollary 3, (vii)] that the Schlichting completion Γ//Λ is the quotient of the
profinite completion of Γ localised at Λ by a compact normal subgroup. Now
since a locally compact group is compactly presented if and only if one of its
quotients by a compact normal subgroup is, we obtain:
Corollary 6.2. If Γ is a finitely presented group with a finitely generated
commensurated subgroup Λ, then the profinite completion of Γ localised at Λ
is compactly presented.
6.1. From commensurated subgroups to t.d.l.c. groups. We start by
recalling the definition of the process of Schlichting completion.
Let Γ be a group and let Λ be a subgroup of Γ. The left action of Γ on
the coset space Γ/Λ yields a homomorphism Γ → Sym(Γ/Λ), whose kernel
is the normal core of Λ, i.e. the largest normal subgroup of Γ contained in
Λ (or equivalently, the intersection of all conjugates of Λ). The Schlichting
completion of Γ with respect to Λ, denoted Γ//Λ, is by definition the closure
of the image of Γ in Sym(Γ/Λ), the latter group being equipped with the
topology of pointwise convergence.
Recall that Λ is said to be commensurated by a subset K of Γ if for every
k ∈ K, the subgroup kΛk−1 ∩ Λ has finite index in both Λ and kΛk−1 . We
say that Λ is a commensurated subgroup if it is commensurated by the entire
group Γ. It can be checked that if this holds, then the closure of the image of
Λ in Γ//Λ is a compact open subgroup. In particular Γ//Λ is a t.d.l.c. group.
Note that by construction the image of Γ in Γ//Λ is a dense subgroup.
From now Λ will be a commensurated subgroup of a group Γ. We point
out that although the map Γ → Γ//Λ is generally not injective, for the sake
of simplicity we still use the notation Λ and Γ for their images in the group
Γ//Λ.
The next two lemmas are straightforward, we provide proofs for completeness.
Lemma 6.3. We have Γ//Λ = Λ · Γ.

20

ADRIEN LE BOUDEC

Proof. Since Λ is an open subgroup of Γ//Λ, Λg is an open neighbourhood of
g for any g ∈ Γ//Λ. Therefore the dense subgroup Γ intersects Λg, meaning

that there exist γ ∈ Γ and λ ∈ Λ so that λg = γ, i.e. g = λ−1 γ.
Lemma 6.4. The subgroups Λ and Γ intersect along Λ.
Proof. The subgroup Λ stabilizes the coset Λ in Sym(Γ/Λ), so every element
of Λ must stabilizes this coset as well by definition of the topology. Therefore
Λ ∩ Γ ⊂ Λ. The reverse inclusion is clear.

The following result is a useful tool to identify some t.d.l.c. group G with
the Schlichting completion of one of its dense subgroups. It is due to Shalom
and Willis [SW13, Lemmas 3.5-3.6].
Proposition 6.5. Let G be a topological group with a compact open subgroup
U . If Γ is a dense subgroup of G, then Γ ∩ U is commensurated in Γ and
the embedding of Γ in G induces an isomorphism of topological groups ϕ :
Γ//(Γ ∩ U ) → G/KU , where KU is the normal core of U . In particular if
U contains no non-trivial normal subgroup of G, then ϕ is an isomorphism
between Γ//(Γ ∩ U ) and G.
Example 6.6. Elder and Willis [EW13] considered the Schlichting completion Gm,n of the Baumslag-Solitar group BS(m, n) = t, x | txm t−1 = xn with
respect to the commensurated subgroup hxi. Theorem 6.1 can be applied and
yields that Gm,n is compactly presented. However in this case this can be
seen more directly because Gm,n coincides with the closure of BS(m, n) in
the automorphism group of its Bass-Serre tree, and therefore Gm,n acts on
a locally finite tree with compact vertex stabilizers. It follows that Gm,n is
Gromov-hyperbolic, and consequently automatically compactly presented.
The next example shows that the almost automorphism group AAutD (Td,k )
is a Schlichting completion of the Higman-Thompson group Vd,k . In particular
Neretin’s group is the Schlichting completion of Vd,2 with respect to an infinite
locally finite subgroup, a point of view which does not seem to appear in the
literature. This will be generalized in Theorem 7.10.
Example 6.7. We use the notation introduced at the beginning of Section 4.3.
Let us consider the t.d.l.c. group AAutD (Td,k ) and its compact open subgroup
Wk (D), which is easily seen not to contain any non-trivial normal subgroup
of AAutD (Td,k ). The Higman-Thompson group Vd,k is a dense subgroup ink by Lemma 4.9. So it follows from Proposition
tersecting Wk (D) along D∞
6.5 that the group AAutD (Td,k ) is isomorphic to the Schlichting completion
k .
Vd,k //D∞
However, note that compact presentability of AAutD (Td,k ) cannot be obk is not finitely generated.
tained by applying Theorem 6.1 because D∞
6.2. Presentation of Γ//Λ. We will now prove the main result of this section,
namely Theorem 6.1, which will follow from Proposition 6.9.
From now Γ is a finitely presented group and Λ a finitely generated commensurated subgroup. Recall that by abuse of notation, we still denote by
Γ and Λ their images in the group Γ//Λ. We let S = {s1 , . . . , sn , . . . , sm }

COMPACT PRESENTABILITY OF TREE ALMOST AUTOMORPHISM GROUPS

21

be a finite generating set of Γ such that the elements s1 , . . . , sn generate Λ.
It follows from Lemma 6.3 that S ∪ Λ is a compact generating set of Γ//Λ.
To prove that the group Γ//Λ is compactly presented, we will consider a set
R = R1 ∪ R2 ∪ R3 ∪ R4 of relations of bounded length in Γ//Λ, and prove that
it is a set of defining relations, i.e. that relations of R generate all the relations
in Γ//Λ.
We let R1 be a set of words so that hS | R1 i is a finite presentation of Γ.
Let us also consider relations corresponding to the inclusion Λ ≤ Λ in the
group Γ//Λ. That is, for every i ∈ {1, . . . , n}, we let s¯i ∈ Λ be such that si = s¯i
in Γ//Λ, and denote by R2 the set of words si s¯i −1 .
We denote by R3 the set of relations of theDform u1 u2 = u3 , uiE∈ Λ.
Now let us define the abstract group G1 = S ∪ Λ | R1 , R2 , R3 . Note that
by construction there is a homomorphism G1 → Γ//Λ.
Proposition 6.8. Let w be a word in the elements of S and u ∈ Λ. If the word
u−1 w represents the identity in Γ//Λ, then it already represents the identity in
G1 .
Proof. The fact that u−1 w represents the identity in Γ//Λ means that the
element represented by w lies in Γ ∩ Λ, which is reduced to Λ according to
Lemma 6.4. Therefore there exists a word wΛ in the letters s1 , . . . , sn , so that
w = wΛ in Γ//Λ. But thanks to R1 , the relation w = wΛ is also satisfied in
G1 . Now for each letter of wΛ we can apply a relation from R2 to obtain a
word wΛ in the letters s¯1 , . . . , s¯n , so that w = wΛ in G1 . Consequently the
relation wΛ = u holds in Γ//Λ, and thanks to R3 this relation also holds in
G1 , meaning that w = u in G1 .

We finally consider a last family of relations in Γ//Λ. According to Lemma
6.3, for every i ∈ {1, . . . , m} and u ∈ Λ, we can pick some u′ ∈ Λ and
some word w ∈ S ∗ so that si u = u′ w in Γ//Λ. We denote by R4 the set of
corresponding relations.
E
D
Now let us define the abstract group G2 = S ∪ Λ | R1 , R2 , R3 , R4 . Note
that the group G2 is a quotient of G1 .
Proposition 6.9. The natural homomorphism G2 → Γ//Λ is an isomorphism.
Proof. It is clear that this morphism is onto because S ∪ Λ is a generating set
of Γ//Λ. So we only have to prove that it is injective. For this, let us consider
a word w in the elements of S ∪ Λ representing the identity in Γ//Λ. We want
to prove that w represents the identity in G2 . Applying successively relators
from R4 , we can move each occurrence of an element of Λ in w to the left, and
obtain a word w′ of the form w′ = u1 · · · uk si1 · · · siℓ , with ui ∈ Λ, sj ∈ S, so
that w = w′ in G2 . Now thanks to R3 , the word w′ can be transformed into
a word w′′ of the form w′′ = usi1 · · · siℓ , u ∈ Λ. But now since w represents
the identity in Γ//Λ, the same holds for w′′ . Therefore by Proposition 6.8,
the word w′′ represents the identity in G1 , and a fortiori it also represents the
identity in G2 , the latter being a quotient of G1 . It follows that the word w
represents the identity in G2 , and the proof is complete.


22

ADRIEN LE BOUDEC

Remark 6.10. Here we do not try to get an estimate on the Dehn function
of Γ//Λ, because a careful reading of the proof reveals that the best we could
hope in this level of generality is to obtain that the Dehn function of Γ//Λ is
bounded by the Dehn function of Γ. However this would be far from being
sharp, as for example the Baumslag-Solitar group BS(1, n) has an exponential
Dehn function for n ≥ 2 (see for instance [GH01]), whereas its Schlichting
completion Qn ⋊n Z is Gromov-hyperbolic, and therefore has a linear Dehn
function.
7. Almost automorphism groups associated with regular branch
groups
Almost automorphisms of Td are homeomorphisms of the boundary ∂∞ Td
which locally coincide with a tree automorphism. It seems natural to extend
this definition by considering a subgroup G ≤ Aut(Td ), and homeomorphisms
of ∂∞ Td which locally coincide with an element of G. In other words, we want
to define homeomorphisms of ∂∞ Td which are piecewise in G. It turns out
that the notion naturally appearing for G is self-similarity, whose definition is
recalled below.
Note that we restrict ourselves to the case k = d for simplicity, but the
results could naturally be extended to almost automorphism subgroups of
AAut(Td,k ).
7.1. Preliminary material. This section is devoted to reviewing basic definitions and facts about self-similar and branch groups, and establishing some
preliminary results. We refer the reader to [Nek05, BGŠ03] for more on selfsimilar and branch groups.
Recall that vertices of Td are labeled by words over a finite alphabet X of
cardinality d, and we freely identify a vertex with the word associated to it.
If G is a subgroup of the automorphism group Aut(Td ) and if n ≥ 0, we will
denote by Gn the nth level stabilizer of G, that is the subgroup of G fixing
pointwise the nth level of Td . Note that Gn is always a finite index subgroup
of G, but the converse is far from true because there may exist some finite
index subgroup of G not containing any level stabilizer. This motivates the
following definition.
Definition 7.1. A finite index subgroup of G is a congruence subgroup if it
contains some level stabilizer.
If g ∈ Aut(Td ) is an automorphism and v ∈ X ∗ is a vertex of Td , the section
of g at v is the unique automorphism gv of Td defined by the formula
g(vw) = g(v)gv (w)
for every w ∈ X ∗ .
Definition 7.2. A subgroup G ≤ Aut(Td ) is self-similar if every section of
every element of G is an element of G.
Self-similar groups appear naturally when studying holomorphic dynamics
and fractal geometry. The study of self-similar groups is also motivated by the

COMPACT PRESENTABILITY OF TREE ALMOST AUTOMORPHISM GROUPS

23

fact that this class contains examples of groups exhibiting some exotic behavior. Among self-similar groups is a class of groups which is better understood,
namely contracting self-similar groups.
Definition 7.3. A self-similar group G is said to be contracting if there exists
a finite subset N ≤ G such that for every g ∈ G, there exists k ≥ 1 so that all
the sections of g of level at least k belong to N .
Here we are interested in a particular class of self-similar groups, namely
regular branch groups, whose definition is recalled below.
Definition 7.4. Let G ≤ Aut(Td ) be a self-similar group. By definition,
G comes equipped with an injective homomorphism ψ : G → G ≀ Sym(d)
(sometimes called the wreath recursion). We say that G is regular branch
over its finite index subgroup K if ψ(K) contains K × . . . × K as a subgroup
of finite index.
Remark 7.5. We note that being regular branch is stable by taking the
topological closure in Aut(Td ). More precisely, if G is regular branch over K
then the closure of G is regular branch over the closure of K. Note also that if
K contains some level stabilizer of G then its closure contains the stabilizer of
the same level in the closure of G, so being regular branch over a congruence
subgroup is also stable by taking the topological closure.
The most popular example of a self-similar group is the Grigorchuk group
of intermediate growth introduced in [Gri80]. It is a regular branch group,
branching over a subgroup containing its stabilizer of level 3. Other examples
are the Gupta-Sidki group as well as the Fabrykowski-Gupta group, which are
regular branch over their commutator subgroup, the latter containing their
level 2 stabilizer. For the definitions and properties of these groups we refer
the reader to Sections 6 and 8 of [BG02]. In view of Theorem 1.4, we note
that all these examples are contracting.
In the following standard lemma, a proof of which can be consulted in
[Šun07, Lemma 10], the isomorphism is obtained via the wreath recursion,
which is usually omitted.
Lemma 7.6. Let H ≤ Aut(Td ) be a regular branch group, branching over a
subgroup containing the level stabilizer Hs . Then for every n ≥ s, the level
stabilizer Hn+1 is isomorphic to Hn × . . . × Hn .
If H is a subgroup of the automorphism group Aut(Td ), it is in general
very hard to describe its topological closure in Aut(Td ). In the case of the
Grigorchuk group, the closure has been described by Grigorchuk in [Gri05].
We will use a generalization of this result due to Sunic, which is the following:
Proposition 7.7. Let H ≤ Aut(Td ) be a regular branch group, branching
over a subgroup containing the level stabilizer Hs , and let G be the topological
closure of H in Aut(Td ). Then an element γ ∈ Aut(Td ) belongs to G if and
only if for every section γv of γ, there exists an element of H ≤ Aut(Td ) acting
like γv up to and including level s + 1.
Proof. The statement is a reformulation of the implication (ii) ⇒ (i) of Theorem 3 of [Šun07]. Note that the author requires level transitivity in the

24

ADRIEN LE BOUDEC

definition of a regular branch group, but the proof given there does not use
this assumption.

This description of the closure of a regular branch group allows us to deduce
the following result, which does not seem to appear in the literature, and which
may be of independent interest.
Proposition 7.8. Let H ≤ Aut(Td ) be a regular branch group, branching over
a congruence subgroup, and let G be the topological closure of H in Aut(Td ).
Then the intersection in Aut(Td ) between G and H ≀ Sym(d) is equal to H.
Proof. The inclusion H ⊂ G ∩ (H ≀ Sym(d)) is clear because H ⊂ G is always
true and H ⊂ H ≀ Sym(d) is satisfied by self-similarity. To prove that equality
holds, we prove that H and G ∩ (H ≀ Sym(d)) have the same index in the group
H ≀ Sym(d).
Assume that H is branching over a subgroup containing Hs . By multiplicativity of the index, we have
[H ≀ Sym(d) : Hs+1 ] = [H ≀ Sym(d) : H] × [H : Hs+1 ] ,
that is

[H ≀ Sym(d) : Hs+1 ]
.
[H : Hs+1 ]
Now the number of possibilities for the action of an element of H ≀ Sym(d) on
the first level is |Sym(d)| = d!. Moreover the first level stabilizer of H ≀ Sym(d)
is H × . . . × H, so
[H ≀ Sym(d) : H] =

(2)

[H ≀ Sym(d) : Hs+1 ] = d! [H × . . . × H : Hs+1 ] .

Furthermore we can apply Lemma 7.6 to obtain that Hs+1 is equal to Hs ×
. . . × Hs , which yields
[H × . . . × H : Hs+1 ] = [H × . . . × H : Hs × . . . × Hs ] = [H : Hs ]d .
Going back to (2), we obtain
[H ≀ Sym(d) : H] =

d! [H : Hs ]d
.
[H : Hs+1 ]

Let us now compute the index of G ∩ (H ≀ Sym(d)) in H ≀ Sym(d). According
to Proposition 7.7, an element γ ∈ Aut(Td ) belongs to G if and only if for
every section γv of γ, there exists an element of H acting like γv up to level
s + 1. Since elements of H ≀ Sym(d) have all their sections of level at least 1
in H, it follows that an element γ ∈ H ≀ Sym(d) belongs to G if and only if
there exists an element of H acting like γ up to level s + 1. It follows that the
index of G ∩ (H ≀ Sym(d)) in H ≀ Sym(d) is the number of possibilities for the
action on level s + 1 for H ≀ Sym(d), divided by the number of possibilities for
the action on level s + 1 for H. The latter being [H : Hs+1 ] and the former
being d! [H : Hs ]d , we have
d! [H : Hs ]d
.
[H ≀ Sym(d) : G ∩ (H ≀ Sym(d))] =
[H : Hs+1 ]


COMPACT PRESENTABILITY OF TREE ALMOST AUTOMORPHISM GROUPS

25

7.2. Definition of the groups. Let G ≤ Aut(Td ) be a self-similar group.
We will say that an almost automorphism of Td is piecewise of type G if it can
be represented by a triple (ψ, T, T ′ ) such that T, T ′ are finite rooted complete
subtrees of Td and ψ : Td \ T → Td \ T ′ belongs to G on each connected
component, after the natural identification of each connected component of
Td \ T and Td \ T ′ with Td . We observe that by self-similarity, if a triple
(ψ1 , T1 , T1′ ) is such that ψ1 : Td \ T1 → Td \ T1′ belongs to G on each connected
component, then for any equivalent triple (ψ2 , T2 , T2′ ) such that T2 (resp. T2′ )
contains T1 (resp. T1′ ), then ψ2 : Td \ T2 → Td \ T2′ belongs to G on each
connected component. It follows from this observation that the set of almost
automorphisms which are piecewise of type G is a subgroup of AAut(Td ), which
will be denoted by AAutG (Td ). Note that AAutG (Td ) obviously contains the
group G.
It is worth pointing out that the definition of the group requires neither
topological (e.g. closed) nor finiteness (e.g. finitely generated) assumption on
G.
Following [Nek], we let L(G) ≤ Aut(Td ) be the embedded copy of G acting
on the subtree hanging below the first vertex of level 1, and being the identity
elsewhere. Since the Higman-Thompson group Vd acts transitively on the set
of proper balls of ∂∞ Td , it is not hard to see that the group AAutG (Td ) is
generated by Vd together with L(G). See Lemma 5.12 in [Nek] for details. In
particular if G is a finitely generated self-similar group, then AAutG (Td ) is
finitely generated as well.
The first example of such a group was considered by Röver when G is the
first Grigorchuk group. He proved that AAutG (Td ) is finitely presented and
simple [Röv99]. Then Nekrashevych [Nek04] introduced the group AAutG (Td )
for an arbitrary self-similar group G and generalized both simplicity and finiteness results (see Theorem 4.7 in [Nek] and Theorem 7.15 cited below).
Remark 7.9. It is worth noting that AAutG (Td ) is always a dense subgroup
of AAut(Td ), since it contains the subgroup Vd which is already dense. In
particular if N is a non-trivial normal subgroup of AAutG (Td ), then the closure of N in AAut(Td ) is normalized by the closure of AAutG (Td ), which is
AAut(Td ). By simplicity of the latter, the closure of N has to be equal to
AAut(Td ). This proves that any non-trivial normal subgroup of AAutG (Td )
is dense in AAut(Td ). In particular G can not contain any non-trivial normal
subgroup of AAutG (Td ).
7.3. Almost automorphism groups arising as Schlichting completions.
The main result of this section is the following.
Theorem 7.10. Let H ≤ Aut(Td ) be a regular branch group, branching over
a congruence subgroup, and let G be the topological closure of H in Aut(Td ).
Then the inclusion of AAutH (Td ) in AAutG (Td ) induces an isomorphism of
topological groups between AAutH (Td )//H and AAutG (Td ).
For example this brings a new perspective to the topologically simple group
constructed in [BEW11]: this is the Schlichting completion of Röver’s group
[Röv99] with respect to the Grigorchuk group.

26

ADRIEN LE BOUDEC

Theorem 7.10 will be proved at the end of this section. We begin by showing
how to endow the group AAutG (Td ) with a natural topology when G is a closed
regular branch group. We will need the following:
Proposition 7.11. Any regular branch group G ≤ Aut(Td ) is commensurated
in AAutG (Td ).
Proof. Since AAutG (Td ) is generated by Vd and L(G), it is enough to prove
that these two subgroups commensurate G.
Let us first prove that Vd commensurates G. Henceforth we assume that
K is a subgroup of G over which G is branching. For every finite rooted
complete subtree T of Td , we denote by KT the subgroup of Aut(Td ) fixing
pointwise T and acting by an element of K on each subtree hanging below a
leaf of T . Since G is regular branch over K, KT is a finite index subgroup of
G for every finite rooted complete subtree T . Now if σ ∈ Vd and if T, T ′ are
respectively the domain and range tree of the canonical representative triple
of σ, we easily check that σKT σ −1 = KT ′ . So conjugation by σ sends a finite
index subgroup of G to another finite index subgroup of G, which exactly
means that σ commensurates G.
Now let us prove that L(G) commensurates G. It is classic that since K is a
finite index subgroup of G, there exists a finite index subgroup N of K that is
normal in G. Therefore ψ(G) contains N × . . . × N as a finite index subgroup,
and the latter is normalized by L(G) because N is normal in G. This proves
an even stronger result than commensuration, namely the existence of a finite
index subgroup of G which is normalized by L(G).

Now assume that G ≤ Aut(Td ) is a closed regular branch group. Examples
of such groups include the topological closure of any of the finitely generated regular branch groups mentioned earlier. In this context, the group G
comes equipped with a profinite topology, inherited from the profinite topology of Aut(Td ). The fact that G is commensurated in AAutG (Td ) together
with Lemma 4.3 allows us to extend the topology of G to the larger group
AAutG (Td ):
Proposition 7.12. Assume that G ≤ Aut(Td ) is a closed regular branch group.
Then there exists a (unique) group topology on AAutG (Td ) turning G into
a compact open subgroup. In particular AAutG (Td ) is a t.d.l.c. compactly
generated group.
We now prove some preliminary results which will be used in the proof of
Theorem 7.10.
Until the end of this section, H ≤ Aut(Td ) is a regular branch group, branching over a congruence subgroup, and G is the topological closure of H in
Aut(Td ).
Proposition 7.13. AAutH (Td ) is a dense subgroup of AAutG (Td ).
Proof. We let L be a congruence subgroup of G over which G is branching, and
we denote by K the closure of L in Aut(Td ). For every finite rooted complete
subtree T of Td , we still denote by KT the subgroup of Aut(Td ) fixing pointwise

COMPACT PRESENTABILITY OF TREE ALMOST AUTOMORPHISM GROUPS

27

T and acting by an element of K on each subtree hanging below a leaf of T .
Note that since L contains some level stabilizer of H, the subgroup K contains
some level stabilizer of G and is therefore an open subgroup of G. It follows
that (KT ) forms a basis of neighbourhoods of the identity in G, when T ranges
over all finite rooted complete subtrees. By definition of the topology, it is
also a basis of neighbourhoods of the identity in AAutG (Td ).
Let g be an element of G. By definition there exists a sequence (hn ) of
elements of H converging to g. Since L has finite index in H, we may assume
that all the elements hn lie in the same left coset of L, that is, that there exists
h ∈ H such that hn ∈ hL for every n. From this we deduce that g ∈ hK.
Now let γ be an element of AAutG (Td ). We will prove that AAutH (Td )
intersects every neighbourhood of γ. Let (ψ, T, T ′ ) be a triple representing γ
such that ψ : Td \ T → Td \ T ′ belongs to G on each connected component of
Td \ T . This means that for every leaf v of T , there exists an element gv ∈ G
so that ψ sends the subtree hanging below the leaf v to a subtree hanging
below a leaf of T ′ via the element gv . According to the above remark, there
exists some element hv ∈ H such that h−1
v gv ∈ K. Now let us consider the
almost automorphism γ̂ represented by the triple (ψ̂, T, T ′ ), where ψ̂ induces
the same bijection between the leaves of T and the leaves of T ′ , but does not
act on the subtree hanging below the leaf v by gv but by the element hv . By
construction, we have γ̂ ∈ AAutH (Td ) and γ̂ −1 γ ∈ KT . Since on the one hand
we can choose T to be as large as we want, and on the other hand (KT ) is a
basis of neighbourhoods of the identity, we obtain that AAutH (Td ) intersects
every neighbourhood of γ.

Proposition 7.14. The intersection in AAutG (Td ) between G and AAutH (Td )
is equal to H.
Proof. The inclusion H ⊂ G ∩ AAutH (Td ) being clear, we only have to prove
the reverse inclusion. First note that the intersection between Aut(Td ) and
AAutH (Td ) is the increasing union for n ≥ 0 of the subgroups H ≀ Autn , where
Autn is the subgroup of Aut(Td ) consisting of elements whose sections of level
n are trivial; and the permutational wreath product is associated to the action
of Autn on the vertices of level n. In particular
G ∩ AAutH (Td ) =

[

G ∩ (H ≀ Autn ).

n≥0

Let us prove by induction on n ≥ 0 that G ∩ (H ≀ Autn ) is reduced to H. This
is true for n = 0 by definition, and true for n = 1 according to Proposition
7.8. Assume that this is true for some n ≥ 1, and let γ ∈ G ∩ (H ≀ Autn+1 ).
Then every section of level 1 of γ lies in H ∩ (H ≀ Autn ), which is reduced to
H by induction hypotheses. Therefore γ ∈ G ∩ (H ≀ Sym(d)), which is also
equal to H by Proposition 7.8. So we have proved the induction step, namely
G ∩ (H ≀ Autn+1 ) = G, and consequently G ∩ AAutH (Td ) = H.

We are now ready to prove the main result of this section.
Proof of Theorem 7.10. The group AAutG (Td ) admits AAutH (Td ) as a dense
subgroup by Proposition 7.13, and the latter intersects the compact open
subgroup G along H according to Proposition 7.14. Moreover Remark 7.9

28

ADRIEN LE BOUDEC

prevents G from containing any non-trivial normal subgroup of AAutG (Td ),
so the conclusion follows from Proposition 6.5.

7.4. Proof of Theorem 1.4. We conclude by proving Theorem 1.4. The
only missing argument is a recent result of Nekrashevych, generalizing the
previous example of Röver [Röv99].
Theorem 7.15 ([Nek], Theorem 5.9).
If H ≤ Aut(Td ) is a finitely generated, contracting self-similar group, then
AAutH (Td ) is finitely presented.
Proof of Theorem 1.4. Let H be a finitely generated, contracting regular branch
group, branching over a congruence subgroup, having G for topological closure
in Aut(Td ). Then by Theorem 7.10 AAutG (Td ) is isomorphic to the Schlichting completion AAutH (Td )//H. Now according to Theorem 7.15 the group
AAutH (Td ) is finitely presented, and H is finitely generated by assumption,
so the conclusion follows from Theorem 6.1.

We make a brief comment on the fact that any group G appearing in Theorem 1.4 can be explicitly described in terms of the group of which it is the
topological closure. Indeed, if H is a finitely generated, contracting regular
branch group, branching over a subgroup containing Hs , having G for topological closure in Aut(Td ); then Proposition 7.7 yields that elements of G are
exactly the automorphisms having all their sections acting like an element of
H up to level s + 1. One can rephrase this in terms of patterns and finitely
constrained groups (see [Šun07]), by saying that G is the finitely constrained
group defined by allowing all the patterns of size s + 1 appearing in H.
References
[BCGM12] U. Bader, P.E. Caprace, T. Gelander, and S. Mozes, Simple groups without
lattices, Bull. Lond. Math. Soc. 44 (2012), no. 1, 55–67.
[BCS01]
J. Burillo, S. Cleary, and M. Stein, Metrics and embeddings of generalizations of
Thompson’s group F , Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 353 (2001), no. 4, 1677–1689.
[BCST09] J. Burillo, S. Cleary, M. Stein, and J. Taback, Combinatorial and metric properties of Thompson’s group T , Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 361 (2009), no. 2, 631–652.
[BEW11] Y. Barnea, M.l Ershov, and T. Weigel, Abstract commensurators of profinite
groups, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 363 (2011), no. 10, 5381–5417.
[BG02]
L. Bartholdi and R. Grigorchuk, On parabolic subgroups and Hecke algebras of
some fractal groups, Serdica Math. J. 28 (2002), no. 1, 47–90.
[BGŠ03]
L. Bartholdi, R. Grigorchuk, and Z. Šuniḱ, Branch groups, Handbook of algebra,
Vol. 3, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 2003, pp. 989–1112.
[Bir04]
J.C. Birget, The groups of Richard Thompson and complexity, Internat. J. Algebra Comput. 14 (2004), no. 5-6, 569–626, International Conference on Semigroups and Groups in honor of the 65th birthday of Prof. John Rhodes.
[Bou71]
N. Bourbaki, Éléments de mathématique. Topologie générale. Chapitres 1 à 4,
Hermann, Paris, 1971.
[Bow95]
B. Bowditch, A short proof that a subquadratic isoperimetric inequality implies
a linear one, Michigan Math. J. 42 (1995), no. 1, 103–107.
[Bro87]
K. Brown, Finiteness properties of groups, Proceedings of the Northwestern conference on cohomology of groups (Evanston, Ill., 1985), vol. 44, 1987, pp. 45–75.
[Bur99]
J. Burillo, Quasi-isometrically embedded subgroups of Thompson’s group F , J.
Algebra 212 (1999), no. 1, 65–78.

COMPACT PRESENTABILITY OF TREE ALMOST AUTOMORPHISM GROUPS

[CFP96]
[CH15]
[CM11]
[EW13]
[GH01]
[Gri80]
[Gri05]

[Gub00]

[Gub06]
[Her71]

[Hig74]

[Kap99]
[Nek]
[Nek04]
[Nek05]
[Ner92]
[Rei]
[Röv99]
[Röv02]

[Sch80]
[Šun07]
[SW13]

[Tza03]

29

J. W. Cannon, W. J. Floyd, and W. R. Parry, Introductory notes on Richard
Thompson’s groups, Enseign. Math. (2) 42 (1996), no. 3-4, 215–256.
Y. Cornulier and P. de la Harpe, Metric geometry of locally compact groups,
Book in preparation, arXiv:1403.3796v3, 2015.
P.E. Caprace and T. de Medts, Simple locally compact groups acting on trees and
their germs of automorphisms, Transform. Groups 16 (2011), no. 2, 375–411.
M. Elder and G. Willis, Totally disconnected groups from Baumslag-Solitar
groups, arXiv:1301.4775v3 (2013).
J. Groves and S. Hermiller, Isoperimetric inequalities for soluble groups, Geom.
Dedicata 88 (2001), no. 1-3, 239–254.
R. Grigorchuk, On Burnside’s problem on periodic groups, Funktsional. Anal. i
Prilozhen. 14 (1980), no. 1, 53–54.
, Solved and unsolved problems around one group, Inﬁnite groups: geometric, combinatorial and dynamical aspects, Progr. Math., vol. 248, Birkhäuser,
Basel, 2005, pp. 117–218.
V. S. Guba, Polynomial isoperimetric inequalities for Richard Thompson’s groups
F , T , and V , Algorithmic problems in groups and semigroups (Lincoln, NE,
1998), Trends Math., Birkhäuser Boston, Boston, MA, 2000, pp. 91–120.
, The Dehn function of Richard Thompson’s group F is quadratic, Invent.
Math. 163 (2006), no. 2, 313–342.
M. Herman, Simplicité du groupe des difféomorphismes de classe C ∞ , isotopes à
l’identité, du tore de dimension n, C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris Sér. A-B 273 (1971),
A232–A234.
G. Higman, Finitely presented infinite simple groups, Department of Pure Mathematics, Department of Mathematics, I.A.S. Australian National University, Canberra, 1974, Notes on Pure Mathematics, No. 8 (1974).
C. Kapoudjian, Simplicity of Neretin’s group of spheromorphisms, Ann. Inst.
Fourier (Grenoble) 49 (1999), no. 4, 1225–1240.
V. Nekrashevych, Finitely presented groups associated with expanding maps,
arXiv:1312.5654v1.
, Cuntz-Pimsner algebras of group actions, J. Operator Theory 52 (2004),
no. 2, 223–249.
, Self-similar groups, Mathematical Surveys and Monographs, vol. 117,
American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2005.
Yu. A. Neretin, Combinatorial analogues of the group of diffeomorphisms of the
circle, Izv. Ross. Akad. Nauk Ser. Mat. 56 (1992), no. 5, 1072–1085.
C. Reid, The profinite completion of a group localised at a subgroup,
arXiv:1208.3554v2.
C. Röver, Constructing finitely presented simple groups that contain Grigorchuk
groups, J. Algebra 220 (1999), no. 1, 284–313.
, Abstract commensurators of groups acting on rooted trees, Proceedings
of the Conference on Geometric and Combinatorial Group Theory, Part I (Haifa,
2000), vol. 94, 2002, pp. 45–61.
G. Schlichting, Operationen mit periodischen Stabilisatoren, Arch. Math. (Basel)
34 (1980), no. 2, 97–99.
Z. Šunić, Hausdorff dimension in a family of self-similar groups, Geom. Dedicata
124 (2007), 213–236.
Y. Shalom and G. Willis, Commensurated subgroups of arithmetic groups, totally
disconnected groups and adelic rigidity, Geom. Funct. Anal. 23 (2013), no. 5,
1631–1683.
K. Tzanev, Hecke C ∗ -algebras and amenability, J. Operator Theory 50 (2003),
no. 1, 169–178.

Laboratoire de Mathématiques, bâtiment 425, Université Paris-Sud 11, 91405
Orsay, France
E-mail address: adrien.le-boudec@math.u-psud.fr

