arXiv:1612.06912v2 [math.GR] 29 Nov 2017

ON ANDREWS-CURTIS CONJECTURES FOR SOLUBLE
GROUPS
LUC GUYOT

Abstract. The Andrews-Curtis conjecture claims that every normally
generating n-tuple of a free group Fn of rank n ≥ 2 can be reduced to a basis
by means of Nielsen transformations and arbitrary conjugations. Replacing
Fn by an arbitrary finitely generated group yields natural generalizations
whose study may help disprove the original and unsettled conjecture. We
prove that every finitely generated soluble group satisfies the generalized
Andrews-Curtis conjecture in the sense of Borovik, Lubotzky and Myasnikov. In contrast, we show that some soluble Baumslag-Solitar groups do
not satisfy the generalized Andrews-Curtis conjecture in the sense of Burns
and Macedońska.

1. Introduction
The Andrews-Curtis conjecture (AC conjecture) is a long-standing open
problem in combinatorial group theory with a tight link to open problems in
low-dimensional topology [34, 1, 32]. The conjecture asserts that any n-tuple
whose components normally generate a free group of finite rank n ≥ 2 can
be transitioned to a basis by means of Nielsen transformations and arbitrary
conjugations. This article, which is only concerned with algebraic aspects,
addresses two generalizations of this conjecture to finitely generated soluble
groups. Our main results are Theorem 1.3, Theorem 1.9 and Corollary 1.10
below. Theorem 1.3 elaborates on results of [20, 8] to settle the generalized Andrews conjecture in the sense of [4] for soluble groups. Theorem 1.9
and Corollary 1.10 solve [8, Open Problem] and show in particular that the
metabelian Baumslag-Solitar group a, b aba−1 = b11 does not satisfy the
generalized Andrews conjecture in the sense of [7].
Before we can state the AC conjecture with precise terms, we need to introduce some definitions.
Date: December 1, 2017.
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 20F05, Secondary 20F16.
Key words and phrases. Andrews-Curtis conjecture; Nielsen equivalence; recalcitrance; coessential abelianization; metabelian groups; Baumslag-Solitar groups; N-Frattini
subgroup.
1

2

LUC GUYOT

Let G be a finitely generated group. We denote by rk(G) the rank of G, i.e.,
the minimal number of elements which generate G. For n ≥ rk(G), we define
a generating n-vector of G as an ordered n-tuple whose components generate
G. An elementary Nielsen transformation of Gk for k ≥ 1, is a transformation
which replaces for some i the component gi of g = (g1 , . . . , gk ) ∈ Gk by either
gj gi for some j 6= i or by gi−1 and leaves the other components unchanged. We
call Nielsen transformation the composition of any finite number of elementary
Nielsen transformations. The Nielsen transformations of Gn for n ≥ rk(G)
clearly preserve the set of generating n-vectors of G. Two such vectors are said
to be Nielsen equivalent if they can be related by a Nielsen transformation.
We say that a set {g1 , . . . , gn } of elements of a group G normally generates
G if the normal subgroup hg1 , . . . , gn iG generated by these elements is G. We
denote by w(G) the weight of G, i.e., the minimal number of elements which
normally generate G. For n ≥ w(G), we define a normally generating n-vector
of G as an ordered n-tuple whose components normally generate G.
The elementary transformations of Andrews and Curtis [2], are the elementary Nielsen transformations supplemented by the transformations replacing
a component gi by any of its conjugates gig + g −1gi g with g ∈ G, and leaving
the other components unchanged. We refer to these transformations as the elementary AC-transformations. We call AC-transformation the composition of
any finite number of elementary AC-transformations The AC-transformations
of Gn for n ≥ w(G) clearly preserve the set of normally generating n-vectors
of G. Two such vectors are said to be AC-equivalent if they can be related by
an AC-transformation. The AC conjecture claims that
Andrews-Curtis conjecture ([1], [2]). Every normally generating n-vector
of a free group Fn of rank n ≥ 2 is AC-equivalent to some basis of Fn .
Since any two bases of Fn are Nielsen equivalent [19, Proposition 4.1],
the conjecture can be rephrased saying that any two normally generating nvectors of Fn are AC-equivalent. We observe that, for every n ≥ 1, an ACtransformation of Gn induces an AC-transformation on Qn for any quotient Q
of G. Thus the existence of non-AC-equivalent vectors in some quotient of Fn
would disprove the AC conjecture, provided these vectors can be lifted to Fn .
This never holds for Abelian quotients:
Proposition 1.1. Let Fn be a free group of rank n ≥ 1 and π : Fn ։ G an
epimorphism onto an Abelian group G. Then the images under π of any two
normally generating n-vectors of Fn are AC-equivalent.
In a finitely generated Abelian group, AC-transformations and Nielsen transformations coincide and define hence the same equivalence relation. Therefore
the proposition holds if it is established for G = Zn , which is well-known [19,

ON ANDREWS-CURTIS CONJECTURES FOR SOLUBLE GROUPS

3

Proposition 4.4]. As a by-product, we obtain that the minimal number of ACtransformations needed to turn one image vector into the other is bounded
above by a constant which depends only on n.
Because of Proposition 1.1, none of the potential counterexamples to the
Andrews-Curtis conjecture (see, e.g., [14]) can be verified using Abelian quotients, even though finitely generated Abelian groups do have in general Nielsen
non-equivalent generating vectors (consider Z/5Z and see Theorem 1.12 below
for a complete treatment). Borovik, Lubotzky and Myasnikov [4] formulated
a generalization of the AC conjecture which takes into account false positives
occuring in abelianization, i.e., pairs of normally generating vectors whose images under abelianization are not AC-equivalent. Let [G, G] be the commutator subgroup of G and let πab : G ։ Gab = G/[G, G] be the abelianization
homomorphism.
Generalized Andrews-Curtis conjecture 1 (GACC 1). A finitely generated group G is said to satisfy the generalized Andrews-Curtis conjecture in the
sense of [4] if the following holds for every n ≥ max(w(G), 2): any two normally generating n-vectors of G are AC-equivalent if and only if their images
under abelianization are AC-equivalent.
The question as to whether there is a finitely generated group which does
not satisfy GACC 1 remains open. The class of groups satisfying GACC 1
comprises finite groups [4, Theorem 1.1], finitely generated groups whose maximal subgroups are normal [22, Theorem 1.5] and finitely generated groups of
the form S1 × · · · × Sk where each factor is a non-Abelian simple group [4,
Inspection of Theorem 2.1’s proof]. It also comprises finitely generated free
soluble groups [20, Corollary 1], and more generally, finitely generated soluble
groups G whose abelianization homomorphism is coessential, i.e., such that
every generating n-vector of Gab lifts to an n-generating vector of G for every
n ≥ rk(G) [8, Theorem 3.1]. Any of the two latter results easily implies
Proposition 1.2. Let Fn be a free group of rank n ≥ 1 and π : Fn ։ G an
epimorphism onto a soluble group G. Then the images under π of any two
normally generating n-vectors of Fn are AC-equivalent.
We shall establish with Corollary 1.10 below that there exist finitely generated soluble groups with non-coessential abelianization homomorphisms. Therefore the aforementioned results do not fully settle GACC 1 in the variety of
soluble groups. Elaborating on the techniques of [8, Theorem 3.1], we are able
to settle this conjecture for all soluble groups:
Theorem 1.3. Every finitely generated soluble group G satisfies GACC 1: for
every n ≥ max(w(G), 2), any two normally generating n-vectors of G are ACequivalent if and only if their images under abelianization are AC-equivalent.

4

LUC GUYOT

If we restrict to the case n > w(G), then the conclusion of Theorem 1.3
is actually valid for a class of groups which is larger than the union of all
classes mentioned earlier. The definition of this class involves the N-Frattini
subgroup W (G) of a group G. The group W (G) is the intersection of all
maximal normal subgroups of G if such exist, the group G otherwise. This
is obviously a characteristic subgroup of G and it is straightforward to check
that W (G/W (G)) = 1. In addition, the group W (G) coincides with the set
of elements which can be omitted from every normal generating subset of G,
that is, if hX, giG = G for some subset X of G and an element g ∈ W (G),
then hXiG = G (see [3, Satz 3.1] or [4, Lemma 4.1.(1)]). As a result, we have
w(G) = w(G/W (G)) whenever G 6= W (G). If every simple quotient of G has
a maximal subgroup, then W (G) contains the Frattini subgroup Φ(G) of G,
that is the intersection of all maximal subgroups of G if such exist, the group G
otherwise [10, Lemma 4]. Thus the inclusion Φ(G) ⊂ W (G) holds in particular
if G is finitely generated or soluble. But if G is a simple group without maximal
subgroups, e.g., one of those constructed in [28] or [25, Theorem 35.3], then
Φ(G) = G whereas W (G) = 1, so that Φ(G) 6⊂ W (G). The quotient G/W (G)
is, by construction, a subdirect product of an unrestricted product of simple
groups. Since simple soluble groups are Abelian, the following is immediate:
Lemma 1.4. [3, Folgerung 2.10]. If G is a finitely generated soluble group
then G/W (G) is Abelian.
We say that G satisfies GACC 1n>w if for every n > w(G), any two normally
generating n-vectors of G are AC-equivalent. As finitely generated Abelian
groups satisfy GACC 1n>w by Theorem 1.12, the case n > w(G) of Theorem
1.3 is a direct consequence of the following more general result
Proposition 1.5. Let G be a finitely generated group such that G/W (G) satisfies GACC 1n>w , then so does G.
We have already observed, thanks to Theorem 1.12, that GACC 1 implies
GACC 1n>w , but the question as to whether the converse holds is open. Proposition 1.5 naturally leads to the following definition. Let W be the class of the
groups G such that G/W (G) is finite, or Abelian, or of the form S1 × · · · × Sk
where each factor is non-Abelian and simple. Then we have the following
Corollary 1.6. Let G be a finitely generated group in W. Then G satisfies
GACC 1n>w .
By construction, the class W contains all the groups which were shown to
satisfy GACC 1. Let MN be the class of groups whose maximal subgroups
are normal. The subclass of W which consists of the finitely generated groups

ON ANDREWS-CURTIS CONJECTURES FOR SOLUBLE GROUPS

5

G such that G/W (G) is Abelian naturally generalizes the class of finitely generated groups lying in MN . Indeed MN coincides with the class of groups
G such that G/Φ(G) is Abelian [21, Theorem A]. Furthermore, the class W
contains finitely generated group which don’t sit in MN since a finitely generated soluble group in MN must be nilpotent. The class W also contains
those Sunic groups of intermediate growth that don’t belong to MN [11].
In the formulation of GACC 1, the case n = w(G) = 1 is purposely ignored. Indeed, the original AC conjecture is only concerned with n ≥ 2 since
w(Fn ) = n and it is trivial to address the case of F1 . Moreover, no non-trivial
perfect group can satisfy the specialization to n = 1 of GACC 1 (see, e.g.,
[31, Lemma 4.2]) whereas all finite groups satisfy it when n ≥ 2. Still, understanding AC-equivalence in the class of finitely generated weight one groups,
which encompasses the long-studied class of n-knot groups, is a problem on
its own (see, e.g., [27, 29]). We call g ∈ G a weight element of G if g normally
generates G, i.e., G = hgiG . We say that G satisfies GACC 1n=1 if w(G) = 1
and if two weight elements of G are AC-equivalent whenever their images under abelianization are AC-equivalent. Note that GACC 1n=1 is, by definition,
independent of GACC 1. In the class of finitely generated soluble groups, the
following results can be established:
Proposition 1.7. The following hold:
(i) A finitely generated soluble group is normally generated by a single
element if and only if its abelianization is cyclic.
(ii) A finitely generated metabelian group with cyclic abelianization satisfies
GACC 1n=1 .
(iii) There exists a three-generated polycyclic group of solubility length 3 with
infinitely many non-AC-equivalent weight elements.
(iv) The wreath product of finitely many finite cyclic groups with pairwise
coprime orders satisfies GACC 1n=1.
The assertion (i) of Proposition 1.7 is a straightforward corollary of Lemma
1.4, while assertions (ii) and (iii) are respectively [15, Theorem 14.1.(4)]
and [16, Theorem 9.1]. Our contribution is assertion (iv) which shows that
GACC 1n=1 can be satisfied by groups with arbitrary solubility lengths.
Here are three examples of non-cyclic metabelian groups which satisfy GACC 1n=1 :
• the dihedral group of order 2p with p an odd integer;
• the group of the invertible affine transformations x 7→ ax + b of a finite
field;
• the metabelian Baumslag-Solitar group BS(1, 2) = ha, b | aba−1 = b2 i.
Because of statements like Proposition 1.2 and the analogous [4, Corollary 1.3] for finite groups, it is sometimes asserted that a computation in a

6

LUC GUYOT

group which satisfies GACC 1 cannot lead to a counterexample to the classical AC conjecture. This is only true if one disregards strategies based on
the complexity of the reduction. Indeed, if reducing the image of a potential
counterexample in a group G to the image of a fixed basis requires arbitrarily
many AC-moves when G varies is some suitable class, then the AC conjecture
is disproved. Complexity measures tightly related to the minimal number of
required AC-moves were studied in [5, 18]. A coarser complexity measure,
termed recalcitrance, was studied in [8, 6, 7] with a view to disprove the classical AC conjecture using reductions in free soluble groups with arbitrary soluble
lengths.
We shall define the recalcitrance of a finitely generated group in the sense
of [6] and present then a new generalized Andrews-Curtis conjecture based
on this definition. In [7, Proposition 1] it was shown that the result of any
finite sequence of successive AC-transformations can be achieved by means of
a sequence of transformations of the form
(s1 , . . . , sn ) → (s1 , . . . , si w, . . . , sn ), w ∈ hs1 , . . . , si−1 , si+1 , . . . , sn iG
perhaps followed by a permutation of the n-vector, and conversely. Such a
transformation is called an M-transformation (M for “modulo” since si is replaced by any element congruent to it modulo the other sj ). We take the
M-transformations as our “elementary moves” and define the recalcitrance of
a normally generating n-vector of a group G of rank n to be the least number
of M-transformations needed to transition from that n-vector into a generating
n-vector of G. If such a transition is impossible, the recalcitrance is infinite.
The recalcitrance rec(G) of the group G is defined as the supremum of the
recalcitrances of all of its normally generating n-vectors. The classical AC
conjecture can now be rephrased in asserting that every finitely generated free
group has finite recalcitrance. This leads to
Generalized Andrews-Curtis conjecture 2 (GACC 2). A finitely generated group of rank n is said to satisfy the generalized Andrews-Curtis conjecture
in the sense of [7] if every normally generating n-tuple of G has finite recalcitrance.
A group G of rank n has recalcitrance zero if every normally generating
n-vector of G is a generating n-vector. Finitely generated groups with recalcitrance zero have been characterized in the following ways
Theorem 1.8. [6, Theorem 1], [21, Theorem A]. Let G be a finitely generated
group. Then the following are equivalent:
(i) rec(G) = 0.
(ii) The Frattini subgroup of G contains the derived subgroup of G.

ON ANDREWS-CURTIS CONJECTURES FOR SOLUBLE GROUPS

7

(iii) Every maximal subgroup of G is normal.
In particular, finitely generated nilpotent groups have recalcitrance zero
while finitely generated soluble and linear groups with zero recalcitrance must
be nilpotent (see [6, 21]). As noted in [21], the first Grigorchuk group and
the Gupta-Sidki p-groups are examples of non-linear groups with recalcitrance
zero. The infinite dihedral group is an example of group with recalcitrance one
[6, Examples 3.1] . By [8, Theorem 2.1], the recalcitrance of a finite group of
rank n is bounded by 2n−1, provided that n is greater than the abelianization
rank. By [8, Theorem 3.1], the recalcitrance of a soluble group G of rank n
is bounded by 2n − 1 if its abelianization homomorphism is coessential. The
authors ask in [8, Open Problem] whether the latter condition is necessary. We
answer this question in the positive and exhibit subsequently a two-generated
metabelian group with infinite recalcitrance.
Theorem 1.9 (Lemma 3.1 and Theorem 3.1 of [8]). Let G be a finitely generated soluble group of rank n. Then G satisfies GACC 2 if and only if its
abelianization homomorphism is coessential. If G satisfies GACC 2 then we
have, furthermore, rec(G) ≤ 2n − 1.
Using results of [13], we are able to prove with Proposition 3.3 below that
the abelianization homomorphism of the Baumslag-Solitar group BS(1, 11) =
a, b aba−1 = b11 is not coessential.
Corollary 1.10 (Proposition 3.3 and Corollary 3.4). The metabelian BaumslagSolitar group BS(1, 11) has some normally generating pairs of infinite recalcitrance. In particular, this group does not satisfy GACC 2.
Eventually, we present a graph which encodes the complexity of the reduction of normally generating vectors via M-transformations. For n ≥ w(G),
we denote by M-graph Mn (G) of G, that is the graph whose vertices are the
normally generating n-vectors of G and such that two vertices are connected
by an edge if an M-transformation, or the inversion of one component, turns
one vertex into the other. Note that swapping two components of an n-vector
can be carried out using three elementary Nielsen transformations followed
by the inversion of a component. Therefore, replacing inversions by swaps in
the definition of Mn (G) would result in a quasi-isometric graph with the same
connected components. We denote by diam(Γ) the diameter, possibly infinite,
of a connected graph Γ. We set
dn (G) = sup diam(C)
C

where C ranges over the set of connected components of Mn (G).
Thanks to [8, Theorem 3.1] and to a careful inspection of the proofs of
Proposition 1.5 and Theorem 1.3, we obtain

8

LUC GUYOT

Corollary 1.11. Let G be a finitely generated group in W, e.g., G is a finitely
generated soluble group. Then the following hold.
(1) If n > w(G), then Mn (G) is connected and we have:
diam(Mn (Gab )) ≤ diam(Mn (G)) ≤ diam(Mn (G/W (G))) + n + w(G).
(2) If n = w(G) > 1 and G is moreover soluble, then the following hold.
(i) The abelianization homomorphism G ։ Gab = G/[G, G] induces
bijection between the sets of connected components of Mn (G) and
Mn (Gab ).
(ii) We have dn (Gab ) ≤ dn (G) ≤ 2dn (Gab ) + 8(n − 1).
(iii) [8, Theorem 3.1] If the abelianization homomorphism of G is coessential, then a normally generating n-vector is a t distance at
most 2n − 1 from a generating n-vector.
If G is a finitely generated Abelian group, then Mn (G) is the Nielsen graph
Γn (G) depicted in [22], also known as the extended product replacement graph
Γ̃n (G) [26, Section 2.2]. In this case, the connected components of Mn (G) can
be described using the following
Theorem 1.12. [23, Theorem 1.1] Let G be a finitely generated Abelian group
whose invariant factor decomposition is
Zd1 × · · · × Zdk
with 1 6= d1 , di divides di+1 and where Zdi stands for Z/di Z with di ≥ 0 (in
particular Z0 = Z). Then every generating n-vector g with n ≥ k is Nielsen
equivalent to (δe1 , e2 , . . . , ek , 0, . . . , 0) for some δ ∈ (Zd1 )× and where ei ∈ G is
defined by (ei )i = 1 ∈ Zdi and (ei )j = 0 for j 6= i.
• If n > k, then we can take δ = 1.
• If n = k then δ must be ± det(g) where det(g) is the determinant of
the matrix whose rows are the images of the components of g under the
natural epimorphism G ։ (Zd1 )n .
In particular G has only one Nielsen equivalence class of generating n-vectors
for n > k while it has max(ϕ(d1 )/2, 1) Nielsen equivalence classes of generating
k-vectors where ϕ denotes the Euler totient function extended by ϕ(0) = 2.
Under the hypotheses of Theorem 1.12, the diagonal action of the automorphism group of G on Gn induces a transitive action on the set of connected
components of Mn (G), which are therefore isometric. Moreover, the diameter
dn (G) of any connected component of Mn (G) is finite if and only if G is finite.
The understanding of dn (G) for a finite Abelian group G seems to be rather
limited. As an example, d2 (Z/pZ) = diam(M2 (Z/pZ)) is of order log(p) [9,
Remark 3.3], a result which generalizes to all finite groups [26, Theorem 2.2.3].

ON ANDREWS-CURTIS CONJECTURES FOR SOLUBLE GROUPS

9

The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 is dedicated to the proofs
Theorem 1.3 and Proposition 1.7. Section 3 is dedicated to the proofs of
Theorem 1.9 and Corollary 1.10.
The following notation will be used throughout the article. Given a group
homomorphism π : G → Q and g ∈ Gk , we denote by π(g) ∈ Qk the k-vector
obtained by componentwise application of π to g. We will denote by πW the
natural epimorphism G ։ G/W (G). Recall that the following are equivalent:
• g normally generates G,
• πW (g) normally generates G/W (G).
2. The generalized Andrews-Curtis conjecture in the sense of
[4]
In this section we shall establish first Theorem 1.3, with its assumption
n ≥ max(w(G), 2). At the end of this section we shall consider the more
exotic case n = w(G) = 1. We start by handling the easiest range for n,
that is n > w(G). Our results for such values of n, i.e., Proposition 1.5 and
Corollary 1.6, apply to a class wider than the class of soluble groups, namely
the class W defined in the introduction.
Proof of Proposition 1.5. Let n > w(G) and let us fix a normally generating
n-vector g = (g1 , . . . , gn ) of G. Since G/W (G) satisfies GACC 1n>w by hypothesis, the vector πW (g) is AC-equivalent to a normally generating n-vector
whose index i component is trivial for all i > w(G). Replacing g by an ACequivalent vector if needed, we can hence assume that gi ∈ W (G) for every
i > w(G).
Consider now another normally generating n-vector h = (h1 , . . . , hn ) of G.
We shall show that h is AC-equivalent to g. By hypothesis, the vectors πW (g)
and πW (h) are AC-equivalent. Replacing h by an AC-equivalent vector if
needed, we can therefore assume that hi = gi wi with wi ∈ W (G) for every
i. Let i ∈ {1, . . . , w(G)}. As the vector (h1 , . . . , hw(G) ) normally generates G,
we can turn the component of h with index w(G) + 1 into wi by means of an
M-transformation. Subsequently we can turn the i-th component, namely hi ,
into gi , using an evident Nielsen transformation. Thus we obtain a normally
generating n-tuple h′ which is AC-equivalent to h and such that h′i = gi for
1 ≤ i ≤ w(G) and h′i ∈ W (G) for w(G) ≤ i ≤ n. Since (g1 , . . . , gw(G) )
normally generates G, we can replace h′i by gi for every w(G) < i ≤ n by
means of M-transformations, which yields g.

Proof of Corollary 1.6. Let G be a finitely generated group in W and let H =
G/W (G). By Proposition 1.5, it suffices to show that the conclusion holds for
H. If H is Abelian, the result follows from Theorem 1.12. If H is finite, it

10

LUC GUYOT

follows from [4, Theorem 1.1]. If H is a direct product of finitely many simple
non-Abelian groups, the result follows from [4, Proof of Theorem 2.1].

Because the proof Theorem 1.3 is essentially the same when G is twogenerated, we shall address this case first and indicate later on how to generalize to arbitrary finite ranks. In the two-generated case, the theorem can be
rephrased as follows.
Proposition 2.1. Let G be a soluble group of rank 2 and let (a, b) be a normally
generating pair of G. Then (ac, bd) is AC-equivalent to (a, b) for every c, d ∈
[G, G].
Proposition 2.1 can in turn be reduced to the following
Proposition 2.2. Let G be a soluble group of rank 2. Let (a, b) be a generating
pair of G and let k ∈ Z be such that (a, bk ) normally generates G. Then
(ac, bk d) is AC-equivalent to (a, bk ) for every c, d ∈ [G, G].
Let us postpone the proof of Proposition 2.2 to the end of this section.
Taking this proposition for granted, we can now prove Theorem 1.3 provided
n = 2.
Proof of Theorem 1.3: the case n = 2. Consider two normally generating pairs
g and h. Since each AC-move on G2 induces a Nielsen transformation on
G2ab , the generating pairs πab (g) and πab (h) are Nielsen equivalent if g and
h are AC-equivalent. Let us show that Proposition 2.1 implies the converse.
To this end, assume that πab (g) and πab (h) are Nielsen equivalent and write
g = (a, b). Applying to h a Nielsen transformation taking πab (h) to πab (g),
we obtain a normally generating pair h′ of the form (ac, bd) with c, d ∈ [G, G].
By Proposition 2.1, the pair h′ , and hence h, is AC-equivalent to g.
Let us now prove that Proposition 2.1 follows from Proposition 2.2. To do
so, consider two normally generating pairs h = (x, y), h′ = (xc, yd) of G with
c, d ∈ [G, G]. By Theorem 1.12, there is a generating pair g = (a, b) of G and
k ∈ Z such that πab (h) is Nielsen equivalent to πab (a, bk ). Applying a suitable
Nielsen transformation to h, we obtain an AC-equivalent pair of the form
(ac1 , bk d1 ) with c1 , d1 ∈ [G, G]. Applying the same Nielsen transformation to
h′ , we obtain an AC-equivalent pair of the form (ac2 , bk d2 ) with c2 , d2 ∈ [G, G].
By Proposition 2.2, the latter two pairs are both Nielsen equivalent to (a, bk ).
As a result, the pairs h and h′ are AC-equivalent.

The next definitions and preliminary results will enable us to present the
proof of Proposition 2.2 and the general case of Theorem 1.3. Our proofs will
follow closely the lines of [8, Theorem 3.2]’s proof. First we need to generalize
the concept of weighted commutators used by the latter. Recall that [G, G]

ON ANDREWS-CURTIS CONJECTURES FOR SOLUBLE GROUPS

11

denotes the commutator subgroup of G, that is the subgroup generated by the
commutators [x, y] + x−1 y −1xy for x, y ∈ G. Let a and b be arbitrary elements
of a group G. Commutators of weight w in a and b are defined inductively
as follows. For w = 1, these are taken to be a±1 and b±1 . A commutator of
weight w > 1 in a and b is then defined to be an element of G expressible as
[c1 , c2 ] where c1 and c2 are respectively commutators of weights w1 , w2 < w in
a and b, such that w1 + w2 = w. We define similarly commutators of weight
w in conjugates of a and b, these being just the conjugates of a±1 and b±1 if
w = 1. It is easy to prove, using the standard group identities
[xy, z] = [x, z][[x, z], y][y, z]
[x, yz] = [x, z][x, y][[x, y], z]
that every element of the commutator subgroup of ha, bi (resp. of the commutator subgroup of ha, biG ) can be expressed as a product of finitely many
commutators of weights ≥ 2 in a and b (resp. commutators in conjugates of a
and b). The proofs of [8, Lemmas 3.1 and 3.2] can be used almost verbatim to
demonstrate the following
Lemma 2.3. Let G be a soluble group such that w(G) = 2 and let a, b, c ∈ G.
Then the following assertions hold.
(i) [8, Lemma 3.1] If c is expressible as a weighted commutator in conjugates of a and b involving a±1 , and g is any element of G(i) , the i-th
term of the derived series of G, then the result ĉ of replacing every
occurrences of a in c by g, is also in G(i) .
(ii) [8, Lemma 3.2] If G = ha, bi (resp. G = ha, biG ) and if c is expressible
as a product c1 · · · cn of weighted commutators ci in a and b (resp. in
conjugates of a and b), of arbitrary weights ≥ 2, each involving a±1 at
least twice, then haciG contains a.
We are now in position to prove Proposition 2.2.
Proof of Proposition 2.2. Let (a, b) be a generating pair of G and let k ∈ Z
such that ha, bk iG = G. Let g = (ac, bk d) with c, d ∈ [G, G]. We can assume
that d is a product of non-trivial weighted commutators of a and b, so that
each of these commutators involves a±1 at least once.
We shall assume first that c is expressible as a product of weighted commutators in conjugates of a and bk , each involving a±1 at least twice. By Lemma
2.3.2, we have a ∈ haciG . Since G = ha, bi, we deduce that [G, G] ⊂ haiG .
Therefore we can turn g into (ac, bk c) by means of a single M-transformation.
Using a subsequent Nielsen move, we get (ab−k , bk c). As [G, G] ⊂ hab−k iG ,
we obtain (ab−k , bk ) by applying another M-transformation. Applying a last
Nielsen transformation yields (a, bk ), which proves the result in this case.

12

LUC GUYOT

If not all of the commutator factors cj of c involve a±1 at least twice, we
replace every occurrence of b±k in all of them by d∓1 and expand the result
as a product cj1 cj2 · · · cjk of commutators in a and b using the above group
identities. Since d is a product of commutators in a and b involving each at least
one occurrence of a±1 , this procedure must produce additional occurrences of
a±1 , that is, all commutators cjr will have at least two occurrences of a±1 .
We thus obtain, via a single M-transformation, a pair (ac′ , bk d) where c′ is a
product of commutators in a and b all of which involve a±1 at least twice.
Lemma 2.3.1.ii applies and proceeding now as in the earlier case, we have that
at most two more M-transformations to get to (a, bk ).

We will prove now Theorem 1.3 in full generality. The definition of commutators of weight k in (conjugates of ) x1 , . . . , xn is a straightforward generalization
of the definition in the case n = 2 given above. The following generalization
of Lemma 2.3 is immediate.
Lemma 2.4. Let G be a soluble group such that w(G) = n and let x1 , . . . , xn , c
be elements of G. Then the following assertions hold.
(i) [8, Lemma 3.1′ ] If c is expressible as a weighted commutator in conju(i)
gates of x1 , . . . , xn , each involving x±1
1 , and g is any element of G ,
the i-th term of the derived series of G, then the result ĉ of replacing
every occurrences of x1 in c by g, is also in G(i) .
(ii) [8, Lemma 3.2′ ] If G = hx1 , . . . , xn i (resp. G = hx1 , . . . , xn iG ) and if c is
expressible as a product c1 · · · cn of commutators ci in x1 , . . . , xn (resp.
in conjugates of x1 , . . . , xn ), of arbitrary weights ≥ 2, each involving
G
x±1
1 at least twice, then hx1 ci contains x1 .
Proof of Theorem 1.3: the general case. By Corollary 1.6, we can assume that
n = w(G) ≥ 2. Let g and h be two normally generating n-vectors. Since each
AC-move on Gn induces a Nielsen transformation on Gnab , the generating pairs
πab (g) and πab (h) are Nielsen equivalent if g and h are AC-equivalent.
We shall prove now the converse. To this end, assume that πab (g) and
πab (h) are Nielsen equivalent. Reasoning as in the case n = 2, we can find
a generating n-vector (a1 , . . . , an−1 , b) of G and k ∈ Z such that πab (g) and
πab (h) are both Nielsen equivalent to πab (a1 , . . . , an−1 , bk ). Therefore it suffices
to show that (a1 c1 , . . . , an−1 cn−1 , bk d) is AC-equivalent to (a1 , . . . , an−1 , bk ) for
every c1 , . . . , cn−1 , d ∈ [G, G].
If in the expression of ci as a product of weighted commutators in conjugates of a1 , . . . , an−1 , bk , some of the factors do not involve a±1
at least twice,
i
then we replace the occurrences of bk and aj (j 6= i) appearing in those factors with d∓1 (since bk ≡ d−1 mod hbk diG ) and the corresponding c∓1
(since
j
−1
G
aj ≡ cj mod haj cj i ), and repeat this until the factors contain at least two

ON ANDREWS-CURTIS CONJECTURES FOR SOLUBLE GROUPS

13

occurrences of ai , or they become trivial (as elements of G(k) , where k is the
solubility length of G), which will occur if a±1
fails to appear, or appears just
i
once, in the course of this iteration. Thus, performing at most n − 1 Mtransformations if needed, we can assume that ci is expressible as a product
of commutators in a1 , . . . , an−1 , bk , of arbitrary weights ≥ 2, each involving
a±1
at least twice. Since ha1 c1 , . . . , an−1 cn−1 iG coincides with ha1 , . . . , an−1 iG
i
by Lemma 2.4.ii, it contains [G, G]. Hence a subsequent M-transformation
can be used to obtain the vector (a1 c1 , . . . , an−1 cn−1 , bk c1 ). By means of a single Nielsen move, we get (a1 b−k , . . . , an−1 cn−1 , bk c1 ). As ha1 b−k , . . . , an−1 cn−1 iG
still contains [G, G], we can iterate this procedure until we obtain a vector of
the form (a1 b−k , . . . , an−1 b−k , bk ). Eventually, n − 1 additional Nielsen transformations yield (a1 , . . . , an−1 , bk ).

We conclude this section with the proof of Proposition 1.7 which deals with
finitely generated groups of weight one. Finitely generated groups of weight at
most one have been characterized as the homomorphic images of knot groups,
while groups of weight at most k are the homomorphic images of k-complement
link groups [12]. A knot group can have infinitely many non-AC equivalent
elements, each of which normally generates the whole group [27, 29]. By
contrast, Proposition 1.7 shows that the study of AC-equivalence is trivial for
all weight one metabelian groups and also some groups with arbitrary solubility
lengths.
Proof of Proposition 1.7. (i). Let G be a finitely generated soluble group. By
Lemma 1.4, we have w(G) = w(Gab ) = w(G/W (G)), a result originally proved
by Baer [3, Folgerung 2.10 and Satz 6.4]. Therefore w(G) = 1 if and only if
Gab is cyclic.
(ii). Let G be a finitely generated metabelian group with cyclic abelianization C = hci. Let a be a lift of c in G. Every weight element of G which is also
a lift of c must be of the form ad for some d ∈ [G, G]. Therefore, it suffices to
show that every d ∈ [G, G] is of the form [a, e(d)] for some e(d) ∈ [G, G]. By
k
k
setting g c + g a for g ∈ [G, G] and k ∈ Z, we define an action of C on [G, G].
Extending linearly this action to Z[C], the integral group ring of C, we turn
[G, G] into a module over Z[C]. For every k, l ∈ Z and every d, e ∈ [G, G],
k
l
the following identity holds: [ak d, al e] = e1−c d−(1−c ) . Since 1 − c divides both
1 − ck and 1 − cl in Z[C], we have [ak d, al e] ∈ [G, G]1−c . As G = hai[G, G], we
deduce that [G, G] = [G, G]1−c , which proves the result.
(iii). See [16, Theorem 9.1].
(iv). Let us consider finite cyclic groups C1 , . . . , Ck . We set G1 = C1 and
Gi = C1 ≀ · · · ≀ Ci for every 1 < i ≤ k, so that Gi = Gi−1 ≀ Ci if i > 1. It is easily
checked that (Gi )ab = C1 × · · · × Ci , and the latter group is cyclic for every

14

LUC GUYOT

i since the orders |Ci | of the cyclic groups Ci are pairwise coprime integers.
By the above assertion (1), we have w(Gi ) = 1 and every weight element of
Gi is a lift of a generator of (Gi )ab . For every i, we pick a generator ci of Ci
and define a lift xi of (c1 , . . . , ci ) ∈ (Gi )ab in Gi in the following way. We set
i
x1 = c1 and xi = fi ci where fi ∈ GC
i−1 is defined by fi (1) = xi−1 and for i > 1
we set fi (c) = 1 for c 6= 1. We shall prove by induction on k that the order
of xk coincides with the order of (Gk )ab and that xk is self-centralizing in Gk ,
i.e., the centralizer of xk in Gk is the cyclic subgroup hxk i generated by xk .
|C |
k
If k = 1, this is obvious. If k > 1, then gk−1 + xk k belongs to GC
k−1 and
is defined by gk−1 (c) = xk−1 for every c ∈ Ck . Since the order of xk−1 is the
order (Gk−1 )ab by induction hypothesis, we infer that the order of xk is the
order of (Gk )ab . As xk−1 is self-centralizing in Gk−1 by induction hypothesis
and ck is self-centralizing in Ck , we deduce from [17, Theorem 1.(5)] that xk
is self-centralizing in Gk , which proves the claim. Eventually, we shall prove
that every lift of (c1 , . . . , ck ) in Gk is a conjugate of xk , hence the result. Every
such lift is of the form xk d for some d ∈ [Gk , Gk ]. Therefore the result is
established if the conjugacy class of xk has as many elements as [Gk , Gk ], that
is |Gk |/|(Gk )ab | elements. This is indeed verified since the centralizer of xk is
hxk i and has |(Gk )ab | elements.

3. The Andrews-Curtis conjecture in the sense of [8]
This section is dedicated to the proofs of Theorem 1.9 and Corollary 1.10.
We shall use the following definition in a preliminary result. An homomorphism π : G → Q is termed normally coessential if every normally generating
vector of Q lifts to a normally generating vector of G. Theorem 1.9 is a
straightforward consequence of [8, Theorem 3.1] and the following
Lemma 3.1. Let G be a finitely generated group of rank n and let πab : G ։
Gab be its abelianization homomorphism.
(i) Assume that G is soluble. Let g ∈ Gk with k ≥ n. Then g normally
generates G if and only if πab (g) generates Gab . In particular πab is
normally coessential.
(ii) If every normally generating n-vector of G has finite recalcitrance and
πab is normally coessential then πab is coessential.
Proof. (i). Apply Lemma 1.4. (ii). Let g be a generating k-vector of Gab with
k ≥ n. By hypothesis there is a lift g of g in Gk which normally generates
G. Since g can be transitioned to a generating k-vector h of G by means of
finitely many M-transformations, there is a Nielsen transformation which takes

ON ANDREWS-CURTIS CONJECTURES FOR SOLUBLE GROUPS

15

g to πab (h). The inverse transformation takes h to a generating k-vector of G

which is also a lift of g in Gk . Therefore πab is coessential.
We define now a class of metabelian groups whose abelianization homomorphisms can be studied by elementary ring-theoretic means. Let C = hai be a
cyclic group, finite or infinite, given with a generator a. Let R be a quotient
ring of Z[C], the integral group ring of C. We denote by α the image of a in R
via the quotient map; thus α ∈ R× . Let G = R ⋊α C be the semi-direct product of the additive group of R with C, where a acts on R via multiplication by
α. We identify R and C with their natural images in G, i.e., we have G = RC
and R ∩ C = 1. The commutator subgroup of G is easily seen to be (1 − α)R.
Then we have Gab = RC × C where RC + R/(1 − α)R is a homomorphic
image of Z. Moreover the abelianization homomorphism πab : G ։ Gab splits
as πab = πC × IdC where πC : R ։ RC is the natural map and IdC denotes
the identity endomorphism of C.
Proposition 3.2. Let G = R ⋊α C be as above. Then the following are
equivalent:
(i) The abelianization homomorphism G ։ Gab is coessential.
(ii) The natural group homomorphism R× → RC× is surjective.
Proof. Since G is two-generated, the introductory remark of [24] implies that
πab is coessential if and only if every generating pair of Gab lifts to a generating
pair of G. Let g be a generating pair of Gab . By [13, Corollary 1], there is
a generating pair h which is Nielsen equivalent to g and of the form (u, ak )
for some u ∈ RC× and some k ∈ Z such that C = hak i. Clearly g lifts to a
generating pair of G if and only if h does. By [13, Lemma 7], the pair h lifts
to a generating pair of G if and only if u lifts to a unit of R.

Thus the abelianization homomorphism of R ⋊α C is certainly coessential
if RC ≃ Z/nZ with n ∈ {0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6}. This also clearly holds if 1 − α is
a nilpotent element of R, i.e., (1 − α)n = 0 for some n > 0, which means
that G is nilpotent. If G is nilpotent then the result is actually well-known
and generalizes as follows: a group G with zero recalcitrance has a coessential
abelianization homomorphism [22, Proposition 2.2].
Proposition 3.3. Let R and RC be as above. Then the natural group homomorphism R× → RC× is surjective in the following cases:
(i) R is finite.
(ii) R = Zm [X ±1 ], the ring of Laurent polynomials over Zm + Z/mZ and
α = X.
2iπ
(iii) R = Z[ζn ] where α = ζn = e n and n > 0.

16

LUC GUYOT

Proof. (i). Apply Justin Chen’s lemma, see [13, Lemma 16] or [33].
(ii). Any u ∈ (Zm )× is the image of the corresponding constant Laurent
polynomial which is clearly invertible in Zm [X ±1 ].
(iii). If n has more than one prime divisor, then 1 − ζn is a unit of Z[ζn ] by
[30, Proposition 7.6.2.ii] and hence RC is trivial. So we can assume that n is
a
n
a power of a prime. In this case ξa = 1−ζ
is a unit for every a ∈ Z coprime
1−ζn
with n by [30, Proposition 7.6.2.ii]. We have RC = Z/Φn (1)Z where Φn is
the n-th cyclotomic polynomial and we know that Φn (1) divides n. As ξa ≡ a
mod (1 − ζn )Z[ζn ], the result follows.

Corollary 3.4. The Baumslag-Solitar group BS(1, n) = a, b aba−1 = bn
has infinite recalcitrance if n = pd with p prime, d ≥ 1 and n ≥ 11.
Proof. It is well-known that BS(1, n) ≃ R ⋊α C with R = Z[1/n], C = Z and
α = n. We have RC = R/(n − 1)R ≃ Z/(n − 1)Z. The unit group of R is
the multiplicative subgroup of Q∗ generated by −1 and the prime divisors of
n. If n = pd then this group maps onto a cyclic subgroup of RC× of order at
most 2d. For n ≥ 11, the group RC× has strictly more than 2d elements, so
that R× → RC× is not surjective. The result now follows from Theorem 3.2 
Acknowledgements. The author is grateful to Tatiana Smirnova-Nagnibeda
for pointing out that some Sunic groups of intermediate growth sit in the
class W defined in the introduction. The author is also thankful to Wolfgang
Pitsch, Pierre de la Harpe, Yves de Cornulier, Daniel Oancea and Robert
Geoffrey Burns for their helpful comments and their encouragements.
References
1. J. J. Andrews and M. L. Curtis. Free groups and handlebodies. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc.,
16:192–195, 1965.
2. J. J. Andrews and M. L. Curtis. Extended Nielsen operations in free groups. Amer.
Math. Monthly, 73:21–28, 1966.
3. R. Baer. Der reduzierte Rang einer Gruppe. J. Reine Angew. Math., 214/215:146–173,
1964.
4. A. V. Borovik, A. Lubotzky, and A. G. Myasnikov. The finitary Andrews-Curtis conjecture. In Infinite groups: geometric, combinatorial and dynamical aspects, volume 248
of Progr. Math., pages 15–30. Birkhäuser, Basel, 2005.
5. M. Bridson. The complexity of balanced presentations and the Andrews-Curtis conjecture. arXiv:1504.04187 [math.GR], April 2015.
6. R. G. Burns, W. N. Herfort, S.-M. Kam, O. Macedońska, and P. A. Zalesskii. Recalcitrance in groups. Bull. Austral. Math. Soc., 60(2):245–251, 1999.
7. R. G. Burns and O. Macedońska. Balanced presentations of the trivial group. Bull.
London Math. Soc., 25(6):513–526, 1993.
8. R. G. Burns and D. Oancea. Recalcitrance in groups II. J. Group Theory, 15(1):101–117,
2012.

ON ANDREWS-CURTIS CONJECTURES FOR SOLUBLE GROUPS

17

9. P. Diaconis and R. Graham. The graph of generating sets of an abelian group. Colloq.
Math., 80(1):31–38, 1999.
10. V. Dlab and V. Kořı́nek. The Frattini subgroup of a direct product of groups. Czechoslovak Math. J., 10 (85):350–358, 1960.
11. D. Francoeur and A. Garrido. Maximal subgroups of groups of intermediate growth.
arXiv:1611.01216 [math.GR], November 2016.
12. F. González-Acuna. Homomorphs of knot groups. Ann. of Math. (2), 102(2):373–377,
1975.
13. L. Guyot. Generators of split extensions of Abelian groups by cyclic groups. Preprint,
arXiv: [math.GR], April 2016.
14. G. Havas and C. Ramsay. Breadth-first search and the Andrews-Curtis conjecture. Internat. J. Algebra Comput., 13(1):61–68, 2003.
15. J. A. Hillman. Four-manifolds, geometries and knots, volume 5 of Geometry & Topology
Monographs. Geometry & Topology Publications, Coventry, 2002.
16. J. A. Hillman. 2-knots with solvable groups. J. Knot Theory Ramifications, 20(7):977–
994, 2011.
17. W. P. Kappe and D. B. Parker. Elements with trivial centralizer in wreath products.
Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 150:201–212, 1970.
18. B. Lishak. Balanced finite presentations of the trivial group. arXiv:1504.00418
[math.GR], April 2015.
19. R. Lyndon and P. Schupp. Combinatorial group theory. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1977.
Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete, Band 89.
20. A. G. Myasnikov. Extended Nielsen transformations and the trivial group. Mat. Zametki,
35(4):491–495, 1984.
21. A. Myropolska. The class MN of groups in which all maximal subgroups are normal.
arXiv:1509.08090 [math.GR], 2015.
22. A. Myropolska. Andrews-Curtis and Nielsen equivalence relations on some infinite
groups. J. Group Theory, 19(1):161–178, 2016.
23. D. Oancea. A note on Nielsen equivalence in finitely generated abelian groups. Bull.
Aust. Math. Soc., 84(1):127–136, 2011.
24. D. Oancea. Coessential abelianization morphisms in the category of groups. Canad.
Math. Bull., 56(2):395–399, 2013.
25. A. Y. Ol′ shanskiı̆. Geometry of defining relations in groups, volume 70 of Mathematics
and its Applications (Soviet Series). Kluwer Academic Publishers Group, Dordrecht,
1991. Translated from the 1989 Russian original by Yu. A. Bakhturin.
26. I. Pak. What do we know about the product replacement algorithm? In Groups and
computation, III (Columbus, OH, 1999), volume 8 of Ohio State Univ. Math. Res. Inst.
Publ., pages 301–347. de Gruyter, Berlin, 2001.
27. S. P. Plotnick. Infinitely many disk knots with the same exterior. Math. Proc. Cambridge
Philos. Soc., 93(1):67–72, 1983.
28. S. Shelah. On a problem of Kurosh, Jónsson groups, and applications. In Word problems,
II (Conf. on Decision Problems in Algebra, Oxford, 1976), volume 95 of Stud. Logic
Foundations Math., pages 373–394. North-Holland, Amsterdam-New York, 1980.
29. D. S. Silver, W. Whitten, and S. G. Williams. Knot groups with many killers. Bull.
Aust. Math. Soc., 81(3):507–513, 2010.
30. E. Weiss. Algebraic number theory. Dover Publications, Inc., Mineola, NY, 1998. Reprint
of the 1963 original.

18

LUC GUYOT

31. J. Wiegold and J. S. Wilson. Growth sequences of finitely generated groups. Arch. Math.
(Basel), 30(4):337–343, 1978.
32. P. Wright. Group presentations and formal deformations. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.,
208:161–169, 1975.
33. zcn (http://mathoverflow.net/users/44201/zcn). When does a ring surjection imply a surjection of the group of units?
MathOverflow.
URL:http://mathoverflow.net/q/153526 (version: 2014-01-03).
34. E. C. Zeeman. On the dunce hat. Topology, 2:341–358, 1964.
EPFL ENT CBS BBP/HBP. Campus Biotech. B1 Building, Chemin des mines,
9, Geneva 1202, Switzerland
E-mail address: luc.guyot@epfl.ch

