arXiv:1603.05384v4 [math.GR] 12 Oct 2017

Maximal linear groups induced on the
Frattini quotient of a p-group
John Bamberg, S. P. Glasby, Luke Morgan and Alice C. Niemeyer
Dedicated to the memory of our distinguished colleague L.G. (Laci) Kovács
Abstract. Let p > 3 be a prime. For each maximal subgroup H 6 GL(d, p) with
|H| > p3d+1 , we construct a d-generator finite p-group G with the property that Aut(G)
d4

induces H on the Frattini quotient G/Φ(G) and |G| 6 p 2 . A significant feature of
this construction is that |G| is very small compared to |H|, shedding new light upon a
celebrated result of Bryant and Kovács. The groups G that we exhibit have exponent p,
and of all such groups G with the desired action of H on G/Φ(G), the construction yields
groups with smallest nilpotency class, and in most cases, the smallest order.

1. Introduction
The number of groups of prime power order is dauntingly large: Higman and Sims [15,
3
−1/3
25] showed that there are as many as p2m (1+O(m ))/27 groups of order pm . This suggests that properties of p-groups should be investigated statistically. Given a property of
p-groups, one may ask: What is the range of possibilities? What is the frequency distribution? What are the mean and variance?
Some questions concerning ‘ranges’ were considered in the 1970’s. For example, one
may ask which groups can arise as the group induced by the automorphism group Aut(G)
acting on G/Z(G), for a p-group G. Heineken and Liebeck [11] showed that the range is
as large as possible, namely for any finite group H and any prime p > 2, there exists a
p-group G of nilpotency class 2, and exponent p2 such that Aut(G) induces H on G/Z(G).
Later this result was generalised to p = 2, see [17, 28]. The group G constructed in [11] is
a d-generator p-group where d = |H| k+2
and H is k-generated. Soules and Woldar [26]
2
reduce the number of generators of G to d = |H| when H is a sporadic simple group. These
examples have |G| > p|H| so it is unclear whether one sees such wild behaviour in practical
examples, or whether |G| is always huge compared to |H|. Is wildness of theoretical interest
only?
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 20D45, 20D15, 20B25.
1

2

J. BAMBERG, S. P. GLASBY, L. MORGAN, A. C. NIEMEYER

A result addressing the frequency is due to Helleloid and Martin. They show in [13,
Theorem 3] that the group A(G) induced on G/Φ(G) by the automorphism group of some
d-generator p-group G, is ‘almost always’ the trivial subgroup of GL(d, p). In light of this
result, a natural question about ranges is: Which subgroups H 6 GL(d, p) are conjugate1
to A(G), for some d-generator p-group G? Thus groups for which A(G) is non-trivial are
rare. However, Bryant and Kovács [4] prove a striking result: given any H 6 GL(d, p)
where d > 1, there exists a d-generator p-group G such that Aut(G) induces on G/Φ(G) the
linear group H. An alternative proof of this celebrated result is given in [18, Chapter VIII,
§13]. Whilst the methods of the proof of [4, Theorem 1] are natural, utilising the Lie ring
associated to a p-group, the conclusion is not constructive: it is an existence result bounding
neither |G|, nor the nilpotency class of G, nor the exponent of G.
Inspired by the above results, given H 6 GL(d, p), we ask: Is it possible to find
relatively small groups G (compared to |H|) satisfying A(G) = H? For certain classes of
H, of order at least p3d+1 , we construct a d-generator finite p-group G with the property
d4
that A(G) = H and |G| 6 p 2 . Thus, our construction shows that ‘small’ p-groups G with
A(G) = H do in fact occur. Our methods for constructing G from H involve representation
theory; our constructions are geometric, and we believe, also very natural. We hope that
they contribute to a deeper understanding of automorphism groups of p-groups and their
construction, as even the very efficient algorithms [7] to compute Aut(G) struggle when
G is large, for example, when G is one of the groups we construct in Table 6.1. For more
information on automorphism groups of p-groups, we refer the reader to the survey of
Helleloid [12].
To state our main result we require the following definition. The lower exponent-p
p
central series 2 for a group X is defined inductively by X0 = X, Xk = [X, Xk−1 ]Xk−1
for
k > 1. The smallest integer n for which Xn = {1} (when it exists) is called the lower plength of X, and we write np (X) = n. If X is a group of exponent p, the lower p-length of
X is equal to the nilpotency class of X (or class for short). With our numbering convention
(X0 = X), we have [Xi , Xj ] 6 Xi+j+1 for all i, j > 0. We alert the reader that for some
authors Xi denotes the (i + 1)st term of the lower central series for X.
Theorem 1. Let p > 3 be a prime, and let d > 1 be an integer. Suppose that H
is a maximal subgroup of GL(d, p) with SL(d, p) 66 H and that |H| > p3d+1 . Then there
d4

exists a d-generator p-group G of exponent p, class at most 4, order at most p 2 and such
that Aut(G) induces H on the Frattini quotient G/Φ(G). The nilpotency class, order and
structure of G is given in Table 6.1.
1.1. Strategy and outline of the paper. We address the problem: given H 6
GL(d, p) find G such that A(G) = H. To ensure that G is interesting, we choose H to be a
1After

a basis has been chosen for G/Φ(G), we may regard A(G) as a subgroup of GL(d, p), we thus
speak of conjugacy to mean ‘up to change of basis’. We will write A(G) = H to mean a basis may be
chosen to effect this equality.
2Properties of this series are given in Huppert and Blackburn [19, 16, Chapter VIII]. However, their
definition differs from ours as it starts with X1 = X.

MAXIMALLY SYMMETRIC p-GROUPS

3

maximal subgroup of GL(d, p), and insist that |G| is minimal subject to having exponent p
(c.f. Remark 6.2). To avoid trivialities, we assume that p > 2 (as 2-groups of exponent 2
are elementary abelian). In Section 4 we summarise the maximal subgroups of GL(d, p)
that we consider and explain the notation in Columns 1-4 of Table 6.1.
Our strategy for constructing G is to examine the freest d-generator group B of exponent p. The quotient Γ(d, p, n) = B/Bn (the quotient of B by the nth term of its lower
central series) is the universal d-generator p-group of exponent p and class n. Our results
depend critically on a practical description of Γ(d, p, n). In §2 we describe Γ(d, p, n) using
a new data structure which we call Lie n-tuples. The problem of constructing our desired
group G is reduced in §2 to determining the H-submodule structure of a certain Lie power
Ln V of the natural H-module V , see Theorem 2.2. In §3 we consider the irreducible submodules of Lie powers, keeping the prerequisites to a minimum. Aschbacher’s classes Ci
of maximal subgroups H of GL(d, p) are listed in §4 before we determine class-by-class
the H-submodule structure of Ln V in §5. The proof of Theorem 1 appears in §6, and we
conclude in §7 with some open questions and directions for future research.
Notation. Throughout the paper, V will denote a vector space of dimension d over a
(possibly infinite) field F. The precedence of the operators3 An , S n , T n is greater than ⊗
which is greater than ⊕. For example, An U ⊗ V ⊕ W means ((An U) ⊗ V ) ⊕ W .
2. Universal groups of exponent p
We fix integers d and n and a prime p. In this section, we discuss the universal group
in the category of finite d-generator p-groups of class n and exponent p. First, we approach
this group from an abstract point of view, and later realise this group concretely. We set
the following notation:
• F (d), the free group of rank d,
• B(d, p) = F (d)/F (d)p, the relatively free group of rank d and exponent p,
• Γ(d, p, n) = B(d, p)/B(d, p)n, the relatively free group of rank d, exponent p and
class n.
Note that the group Γ(d, p, n) is finite, having bounded rank, exponent and class.
Moreover, Γ(d, p, n) is universal, in the sense that each finite p-group of rank d, exponent
p and class n is an image of Γ(d, p, n). An explicit formula for the order for Γ(d, p, n) was
given by Witt; to describe this formula we require some additional knowledge of Lie rings.
Higman describes in [14] how to associate a graded Lie ringTL(Ni ) to a normal series
G = N1 Q N2 Q · · · for a group G provided [Ni , Nj ] 6 Ni+j and ∞
i=1 Ni = {1} hold. The
Ni /Ni+1 are abelian as [Ni , Ni ] 6 N2i 6 L
Ni+1 . We view the Ni /Ni+1 as additive groups,
and then form the abelian group L(Ni ) = ∞
i=1 Ni /Ni+1 . The following multiplication rule
(gi Ni )(gj Nj ) = [gi , gj ]Ni+j turns L(Ni ) into a graded Lie ring. The Hall-Witt identity for
G (see [27]) gives rise to the Jacobi identity for L(Ni ) . The sections Ni /Ni+1 are called
homogeneous components of the Lie ring.
3The

nth alternating, symmetric and tensor powers of V are denoted An V , S n V and T n V , respectively.

4

J. BAMBERG, S. P. GLASBY, L. MORGAN, A. C. NIEMEYER

Returning now to F (d) and B(d, p), both the lower central series4 of F (d) (taking
Ni = γi (F (d))) and the lower exponent-p central
series of B(d, p) (taking Ni = B(d, p)i−1 )
T
N
satisfy the conditions [Ni , Nj ] 6 Ni+j and ∞
i=1 i = {1}. This gives two related Lie rings
which we denote simply by L and L:
∞
∞
M
M
i
(1)
L := L(γi (F )) =
L and L := L(Bi−1 ) =
Li ,
i=1

k

i=1

k

where L and L are the kth homogeneous components of L and L, respectively.
It turns out that Lk is a free abelian group, and Lk is a vector space over the prime
field Fp . Witt [31, Satz 3] gave formulas for the rank f (d, k) of Lk , and dimension fp (d, k)
of Lk . Indeed,
k
1X
(2)
Lk ∼
µ(i)d i ,
= Zf (d,k) where f (d, k) =
k
i|k

and µ is the number theoretic Möbius function. Also, by [32, p.209 (6p)], we have
k
1X
µ(i0 )ϕ(ph )d i (i = i0 ph , p ∤ i0 ),
(3)
Lk ∼
= (Fp )fp (d,k) where fp (d, k) =
k
i|k

and ϕ is Euler’s totient function. Note that f (d, k) = fp (d, k) if p > k, and Fk−1 /Fk =
Lk
i
i=1 L by [13, Theorem 16]. This is illustrated in Figure 1.
Figure 1. The lower central series of F := F (d) and the lower exponent-p
central series for F and B := B(d, p). The Lie algebras L and L have the
sections in the first and third chains.

F = γ1 (F )
L1 = Zd
γ2 (F )
2
L2 = Z(d −d)/2
γ3 (F )
3
L3 = Z(d −d)/3
γ4 (F )

F = F0
F1
F2
F3

B = B0
B1
B2
B3

L1
L1 ⊕ L2
L1 ⊕ L2 ⊕ L3

L1
L2
L3

Below we summarise the above discussion.
Lemma 2.1. Suppose that p > n and 1 6 k 6 n. Then we have
|γk (Γ(d, p, n))/γk+1(Γ(d, p, n))| = pf (d,k)

where f (d, k) =

k
1X
µ(i)d i .
k

i|k

Next we turn to the automorphism group of Γ(d, p, n), and of certain quotients.
Theorem 2.2. Let B = B(d, p). If Bn 6 M < Bn−1 and G = B/M, then A(G) = K
where K = NGL(d,p) (M/Bn ), i.e., the group A(G) of automorphisms induced by Aut(G) on
G/Φ(G) is K. Furthermore, the nilpotency class of G is n.
4The

lower central series of a group X is defined by γ1 (X) := X and γi+1 (X) := [γi (X), X] for i > 1.

MAXIMALLY SYMMETRIC p-GROUPS

5

Proof. First, Bn 6 M < Bn−1 implies np (G) = n as Gn−1 = Bn−1 /M is non-trivial.
Second, the proof relies on the fact that A(B) ∼
= GL(d, p) induces a well-defined action
on the elementary abelian p-groups Bn−1 /Bn , see [18, Chapter VIII, Lemma 13.3 and
Theorem 13.4] and [13, §2.2]. For the remainder of the proof, see [13, Theorem 13].

In order to apply Theorem 2.2, it is useful to have a more explicit description of
Γ(d, p, n). Construction 2.3 below achieves this and it relates the action of automorphisms to linear actions in an explicit way. Let V = Fd be a d-dimensional module over
a field ofLcharacteristic p. View V as a GL(V )-module, and consider the tensor algebra
T (V ) = n>0 T n V where each T n V = V ⊗n is a GL(V )-module. For u, v ∈ T (V ) define

(4)

[u, v] := u ⊗ v − v ⊗ u,

L
and let L(V ) be the closure of V under this bracket operation. Then L(V ) = n>1 Ln V is
a free Lie F-algebra by Witt’s Theorem, where Ln V := T n V ∩ L(V ) is called the n-th Lie
power of V , see [4, 20]. Note that L1 V = V = T 1 V and [Li V, Lj V ] ⊆ Li+j V for i, j > 1.
Construction 2.3 (Lie n-tuples). Let V be a d-dimensional vector space over a field
F of characteristic p, and assume that p > n. We set
Γn (V ) :=

n
Y

Li V.

i=1

We write typical elements of Γn (V ) as gn = (v1 , . . . , vn ), gn′ = (v1′ , . . . , vn′ ) and gn′′ =
(v1′′ , . . . , vn′′ ) where vi , vi′ , vi′′ ∈ Li V . A binary operation gn gn′ = gn′′ on Γn (V ) is a rule for
writing the vk′′ in terms of the vj′ and vi .
The operation for Γ1 (V ) = V is addition. For n = 2, 3, 4 it is defined as follows:
(5)

g2 g2′ = (v1 + v1′ , v2 + v2′ + [v1 , v1′ ]),

(6)

g3 g3′ = (v1 + v1′ , v2 + v2′ + [v1 , v1′ ], v3 + v3′ + 3[v1 , v2′ ] + 3[v2 , v1′ ] + [v1 , v1′ , v1′ − v1 ]),

(7)

g4 g4′ = (v1 + v1′ , v2 + v2′ + [v1 , v1′ ], v3 + v3′ + 3[v1 , v2′ ] + 3[v2 , v1′ ] + [v1 , v1′ , v1′ − v1 ],
v4 + v4′ + [v1 , v3′ ] + 3[v2 , v2′ ] + [v3 , v1′ ]
+ [v2 , v1′ , v1′ − v1 ] + [v1 , v2′ , v1′ − v1 ] + [v1 , v1′ , v2′ − v2 ] − [v1 , v1′ , v1 , v1′ ]).

where for notational convenience, left-normed Lie brackets such as [[[v, v ′ ], v ′′ ], v ′′′ ] are abbreviated by [v, v ′ , v ′′ , v ′′′ ].
♦
Remark 2.4.
n < p, the Lazard correspondence applied to the finite nilpotent
L∞When
i
Lie ring L(V )/ i>n L V of class n gives a group of the same order and class which turns out
to be isomorphic to our p-group Γn (V ) when n 6 4. This observation allows us to deduce
a multiplication rule for Γn (V ) for n > 4 from the Baker-Campbell-Hausdorff formula
(see [5] for a nice overview). The rules (5)–(7) above allow us to do practical computations
with the automorphism group of Γn (V ), as will become apparent below. For example,
1
1
1
1
x3 + 24
x4 and y = y1 + 12 y2 + 12
y3 + 24
y4
we identify the Lie elements x = x1 + 21 x2 + 12
i
with the group elements (x1 , x2 , x3 , x4 ) and (y1 , y2 , y3, y4 ) where xi , yi ∈ L (V ) and then

6

J. BAMBERG, S. P. GLASBY, L. MORGAN, A. C. NIEMEYER

we substitute x, y into the left-normed BCH formula for z(x, y) where ex ey = ez(x,y) (c.f.
[5, p. 432]):
1
1
1
1
z(x, y) = x + y + [x, y] − [x, y, x] + [x, y, y] − [x, y, x, y] + · · · .
2
12
12
24
L
1
1
1
i
Expressing the answer in the form z = z1 + 2 z2 + 12 z3 + 24 z4 by expanding modulo ∞
i>4 L V
gives the rule (7).
Theorem 2.5. Let V = Fd be a d-dimensional space over F. Then
(i) Γ2 (V ) is a group of order |F|d(d+1)/2 , and class 2 when char(F) 6= 2.
(ii) Γ3 (V ) is a group of order |F|d(d+1)(2d+1)/6 , and class 3 when char(F) 6= 2, 3.
2
(iii) Γ4 (V ) is a group of order |F|d(d+1)(3d +d+2)/12 , and class 4 when char(F) 6= 2, 3.
(iv) If |F| = p, p > n and n 6 4, then
Γ(d, p, n) ∼
= Γn (Fdp ).
In particular, Γn (Fdp ) has exponent p and class n.
(v) For n 6 4 there is a monomorphism α : GL(V ) → Aut(Γn (V )) defined by α : g 7→ αg ,
where αg is as follows:
(v1 , . . . , vn )αg = (v1 g, . . . , vn g).
(vi) Suppose p > n, n 6 4, and V = Fdp , then
Aut(Γn (V )) = K ⋊ GL(V ),
where K is the kernel of the action of Aut(Γn (V )) on the quotient Γn (V )/Φ(Γn (V )).
Proof. (i)–(iii) The associative law (gn gn′ )gn′′ = gn (gn′ gn′′ ) follows from the Lazard correspondence when char(F) > n. It is noteworthy that associativity holds even when
char(F ) 6 n. It holds for n = 1 because (v1 + v1′ ) + v1′′ = v1 + (v1′ + v1′′ ), and it holds
for n = 2 because [ , ] is biadditive. Verifying associativity for n = 3, 4 involves complicated (though technically simple) calculations. For this reason we delegated the task to a
Magma [3] computer program whose source can be found at [10]. The identity element
is easily seen to be the all zeroes vector, written 1 = (0, . . . , 0), and the inverse of gn is
gn−1 = (−v1 , . . . , −vn ). This follows because [v, 0] = [0, v] = [v, −v] = 0. Hence Γn (V ) is a
group for n 6 4 and all vector spaces V = Fd .
Properties of these groups depend on the characteristic of the field F. For example,
it is easy to see by induction on k that gnk = (kv1 , . . . , kvn ) for k ∈ Z. Hence Γn (V ) has
exponent p if char(F) = p > 0, and is torsion-free otherwise. The following commutator
calculations are too long for most humans (when n = 3, 4) and were done by the Magma [3]
computer programs in [10]:
(8)
(9)
(10)

[g2 , g2′ ] = (0, 2[v1 , v1′ ]),
[g3 , g3′ , g3′′ ] = (0, 0, 12[v1, v1′ , v1′′ ]),
[g4 , g4′ , g4′′, g4′′′ ] = (0, 0, 0, 24[v1, v1′ , v1′′ , v1′′′ ]),

MAXIMALLY SYMMETRIC p-GROUPS

7

where for notational convenience, left-normed group commutators such as [[[g, g ′], g ′′], g ′′′ ]
are abbreviated by [g, g ′, g ′′Q
, g ′′′ ].
The order of Γn (V ) is ni=1 |Li V | and |Li V | = |F|f (d,i) by [32] where f (d, i) is given
by (2). Moreover, it follows from (8), (9), (10) that Γn (V ) has class n if char(F) 6∈
{2, . . . , n}. This proves parts (i)–(iii).
(iv) Suppose now that F = Fp , and considerQpart (iv) for n 6 4. As p > n, Lemma 2.1
shows that np (Γ(d, p, n)) = n and |Γ(d, p, n)| = ni=1 |Li V |. Thus it follows that Γ(d, p, n) ∼
=
Γn (Fdp ), as desired.
(v) Each g ∈ GL(V ) induces an action on Ln V . A significant advantage of the definitions (5), (6), (7) is that the map αg is easily verified to be an endomorphism of Γn (V ). In
fact, αg is an automorphism with inverse αg−1 . Thus the map α : GL(V ) → Aut(Γn (V ))
with α(g) = αg is a monomorphism.
(vi) The action of Aut(Γn (V )) on the Frattini quotient Γn (V )/Φ(Γn (V )) ∼
= V induces
a homomorphism Aut(Γn (V )) → GL(V ), which is surjective by part (v). We have now
shown that GL(V ) is a subgroup (and a quotient group) of Aut(Γn (V )). Hence Aut(Γn (V ))
splits as Aut(Γn (V )) = K ⋊ GL(d, p) for n 6 4, with K as in the statement above. In fact,
K is a normal p-subgroup of Aut(Γn ) by a theorem of Hall.

Remark 2.6. The constants appearing in the commutator relations given in (8), (9) and
(10) are denominators appearing in the Baker-Campell-Hausdorff formula. The connection
is related to the Lazard correspondence as explained in Remark 2.4.
Remark 2.7. One may guess that rules (5)–(7) for multiplying Lie n-tuples do no
more than encode a pc-presentation5 for Γn (V ). This turns out not to be the case. For
m
m
example, consider a special group Γ2 (V ) = G of order p( 1 )+( 2 ) and exponent p > 2 where
V = (Fp )m . Let G have generators gi , 1 6 i 6 m, and hk,j , 1 6 j < k 6 m, and define
a pc-presentation for G by gip = hpk,j = 1, and gjgk = gj hk,j for 1 6 j < k 6 m. This
pc-presentation gives rise to the symbolic multiplication rule
!
! m
m
m
Y
Y yk,j +y′ +xj x′
Y x′ Y y ′
Y
Y y
x +x′
xi
k
k,j
k,j
i
.
gi i i
hk,j k,j
hk,j =
gi
(11)
gi
hk,j
i=1

j<k

i=1

j<k

i=1

j<k

Indeed when m = 1, every pc-presentation for G (with different composition series or
transversals) has the same rule. It is much easier to prove that GL(V ) is a subgroup of
Aut(G) using the more geometric ‘Lie’ rule (5), than using (11). We return to this point
in Remark 5.7.
3. Some representation theory
Bryant and Kovács proved [4, Theorem 1] by considering regular submodules of a
certain sum of Lie powers [4, Theorem 2]. In this section, we consider the relevant Lie
representation theory for our results. A good introduction to this topic is [20]. As noted
5The

abbreviation ‘pc’ stands for ‘power-conjugate’, ‘power-commutator’ or ‘polycyclic’, see [16].

8

J. BAMBERG, S. P. GLASBY, L. MORGAN, A. C. NIEMEYER

in §2, the action of GL(V ) on V induces an action on the tensor algebra T (V ), and on
L(V ) (which is a subset of T n V containing V , closed under the Lie bracket [ , ]).
Our aim in this section is to describe the GL(V )-modules Li V for 1 6 i 6 4 and to
show that they are irreducible. We note that the representation theory of GL(V ) on T n V
is known when char(F) = 0 (see [8]) and the irreducible GL(V )-modules are described by
the representation theory of the symmetric group Sn of degree n. We require the analogous
results when F is a finite field and char(F) > n, which we have been unable to locate in
the literature.
The action of g ∈ GL(V ) on the nth tensor power T n V = V ⊗n is
(v1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ vn )g = (v1 g) ⊗ · · · ⊗ (vn g)

where v1 , . . . , vn ∈ V ,

and the following action of the symmetric group of degree n commutes with that of GL(V ):
(v1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ vn )σ = (v1σ−1 ) ⊗ · · · ⊗ (vnσ−1 )

where v1 , . . . , vn ∈ V , and σ ∈ Sn .

Suppose now that char(F) 6∈ {2, . . . , n} so that Sn acts completely reducibly on T n V .
There exist primitive central orthogonal idempotents6 e1 , . . . , er ∈ FSn which satisfy
r
M
n
(12)
T V =
(T n V )ei .
i=1

Since the actions of GL(V ) and Sn commute, this is a GL(V )-invariant decomposition
of T n V . The primitive idempotents
!
!
1 X
1 X
σ
and e2 =
sgn(σ)σ
e1 =
n! σ∈S
n! σ∈S
n

n

n

give rise to the symmetric and alternating powers S V and An V , respectively. For vectors
v1 , . . . , vn ∈ V we define
v1 ⊙ · · · ⊙ vn = n!(v1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ vn )e1

and v1 ∧ · · · ∧ vn = n!(v1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ vn )e2 .

The symmetric and alternating powers are spanned by vectors of the form v1 ⊙ · · · ⊙ vn
and v1 ∧ · · · ∧ vn respectively, and their dimensions are

 

d
d+n−1
n
n
.
and dim(A V ) =
(13)
dim(S V ) =
n
n
For the case n = 2, this gives

T 2 V = V ⊗ V = A2 V ⊕ S 2 V

(14)

if char(F) 6= 2.

We now relate Ln V for n 6 3, to more familiar modules. We have L1 V = V and
L2 V = A2 V because v1 ∧ v2 = [v1 , v2 ] (see (4)). We warn the reader that [v1 , v2 , v3 ] 6=
v1 ∧ v2 ∧ v3 ; the left hand side term has four summands while the right hand side term has
six summands.
Lemma 3.1. Suppose that char(F) 6= 2, 3. The following hold.
6This

means

Pr

i=1 ei

= 1, e2i = ei ∈ Z(FSn ) for 1 6 i 6 r, and ei ej = 0 for 1 6 i < j 6 r.

MAXIMALLY SYMMETRIC p-GROUPS

9

(i) If d > 3, then L3 V = X1 ⊕X2 is a sum of irreducible H-modules,
where H is the group


d
GL(1, F) ≀ Sd of all monomial matrices, and dim(X1 ) = 2 2 and dim(X2 ) = 2 d3 .
(ii) If d > 1, then L3 V is an irreducible GL(V )-module.
(iii) There are isomorphisms A2 V ⊗ V ∼
= S 3 V ⊕ L3 V of
= L3 V ⊕ A3 V , and S 2 V ⊗ V ∼
GL(V )-modules. Hence T 3 V ∼
= S 3 V ⊕ L3 V ⊕ L3 V ⊕ A3 V .
Proof. (i) Suppose that H preserves a decomposition V = V1 ⊕ · · · ⊕ Vd where the
1-dimensional subspaces Vi = hvi i are permuted transitively. Let K := G1 ×· · ·×Gr be the
base group of H = GL(V1 )≀Sd where Gi = GL(Vi ). For i, j, k there are three possibilities for
the dimension of Vi +Vj +Vk , depending on the cardinality of the set {i, j, k}. For A, B ⊆ V
let [A, B] := h[a, b] | a ∈ A, b ∈ Bi. Then A2 V ⊗ V has two obvious H-submodules:
X
X
[Vi , Vj ] ⊗ (Vi + Vj ),
and
W2 =
[Vi , Vj ] ⊗ Vk .
W1 =
i<j

k6∈{i,j}

It is clear that A2 V ⊗ V = W1 + W2 . Since

 

 
d
d−1
d
= dim(A2 V ⊗ V ),
=d
+d
dim(W1 ) + dim(W2 ) 6 2
2
2
2

the inequality above is an equality and A2 V ⊗V = W1 ⊕W2 is an H-module decomposition.
Now
(15)

v1 ∧ v2 ∧ v3 = [v1 , v2 ] ⊗ v3 + [v2 , v3 ] ⊗ v1 + [v3 , v1 ] ⊗ v2 ,



d
d
so W2 contains A3 V and dim(W2 /A3 V ) = d d−1
−
=
2
> 0 since d > 3. We claim
2
3
3
that W1 and W2 /A3 V are irreducible H-modules.
We may write each 2-dimensional subspace [Vi , Vj ] ⊗ (Vi + Vj ) of W1 as the sum of two
1-dimensional K-invariant subspaces, which are isomorphic to [Vi , Vj ] ⊗ Vi and [Vi , Vj ] ⊗ Vj
respectively. Hence W1 can be written as the sum of 2 d2 1-dimensional subspaces that
are pairwise non-isomorphic as K-modules. As these are permuted transitively by H, we
find that W1 is an irreducible H-module.
For W2 , let ∆ be the set of 3-subsets of {1, . . . , d}. For each δ = {i, j, k} in ∆ define
Uδ := [Vi , Vj ] ⊗ Vk + [Vj , Vk ] ⊗ Vi + [Vk , Vi ] ⊗ Vj .
L

Then W2 = δ∈∆ Uδ . The diagonal matrix t = (α1 , . . . , αd ) ∈ K acts on the 3-dimensional
space Uδ as the scalar matrix αi αj αk I. Hence, if δ 6= δ ′ , then Uδ and Uδ′ are non-isomorphic
K-modules. Let M ∼
= S3 be the setwise stabiliser of δ. As M 6 Sd 6 H, we may view Uδ as
an M-module. Since p > 3, Uδ is a sum of 1- and 2-dimensional irreducible M-submodules.
By (15) the 1-dimensional submodule is
A3 V ∩ Uδ = hvi ∧ vj ∧ vk i = h [vi , vj ] ⊗ vk + [vj , vk ] ⊗ vi + [vk , vi ] ⊗ vj i.

Now A3 V is the direct sum of d3 pairwise non-isomorphic 1-dimensional K-submodules,
one for each 3-set {i, j, k} ∈ ∆. These K-submodules are permuted transitively by Sd ,
and so A3 V is an irreducible H-module. Now suppose
Pthat N is an H-submodule where
3
3
A V < N 6 W2 . Choose x ∈ N \ A V and write x = δ∈∆ uδ where uδ ∈ Uδ . Then there

10

J. BAMBERG, S. P. GLASBY, L. MORGAN, A. C. NIEMEYER

exists δ ∈ ∆ for which uδ 6∈ A3 V . In order to prove that N = W2 it suffices to show that
Uδ 6 N, as Sd is transitive on ∆.
We claim that uδ ∈ N. Assuming the claim is true, then the M-submodule Uδ ∩ N
satisfies Uδ ∩ A3 V < Uδ ∩ N 6 Uδ and by the above remarks, the only M-submodule of
Uδ properly containing the 1-dimensional submodule Uδ ∩ A3 V is Uδ itself. Hence Uδ 6 N
and N = W2 .
We now prove the claim. Because Sd is transitive on ∆, we may assume that δ =
{1, 2, 3}. Let
a := (−1, 1, 1, . . . , 1),

b := (−1, −1, 1, . . . , 1),

c := (−1, −1, −1, 1, . . . , 1)

/ δ′,
be elements of K. For δ ′ ∈ ∆, observe that
if 1 ∈ δ ′ , then uδ′ a = −uδ′ and if 1 ∈
P
then uδ′ a = uδ′ . Thus y := 21 (x − xa) = δ′ ∈∆,1∈δ′ uδ′ , and y ∈ N. Now observe that
if 1 ∈ δ ′ and 2 ∈
/ δ ′ then uδ′ bP= −uδ′ , and if {1, 2} ⊂ δ ′ then uδ′ b = uδ′ . Setting
1
′
z := 2 (y + yb), we have z =
δ′ ∈∆,{1,2}⊂δ′ uδ′ and z ∈ N. Now for all δ such that
{1, 2} ⊂ δ ′ we have uδ′ c = uδ′ unless δ ′ = {1, 2, 3}. Hence we obtain u{1,2,3} = 21 (z − zc).
Thus u{1,2,3} ∈ N \A3 V , as desired. In summary, we have shown that the only H-submodule
of W2 properly containing A3 V is W2 itself. Hence W2 /A3 V is indeed irreducible as an
H-module. Thus L3 V = (A2 V ⊗ V )/A3V = X1 ⊕ X2 , where X1 ∼
= W2 /A3V
= W1 and X2 ∼
are irreducible.
(ii) When d = 2, part (i) shows that L3 V = X1 is an irreducible H-module, and hence
an irreducible GL(V )-module. When d > 3, there is a non-monomial matrix in GL(V )
which maps a non-zero element of X1 into X2 . This proves that L3 V is an irreducible
GL(V )-module.
(iii) The map φ : A2 V ⊗ V → L3 V given by φ([u, v] ⊗ w) = [[u, v], w] is a (well-defined)
GL(V )-module homomorphism. Furthermore, it follows from (15) and the Jacobi identity
in L3 V that A3 V 6 ker(φ). It is clear that φ is surjective. We observe that
 2

   
A V ⊗V
d3 − d
d
d
dim
=
−
=
d
= dim(L3 V )
3
2
A3 V
3
using (2), and hence ker(φ) = A3 V .
The group algebra A := FS3 can be written as A = Ae1 ⊕ Ae2 ⊕ Ae3 where e1 , e2 , e3
are primitive central orthogonal idempotents where
1X
1X
σ, e2 =
sign(σ)σ, and e3 = 1 − e1 − e2 .
e1 =
6 σ∈S
6 σ∈S
3

3

Then T := T 3 V equals T A, and hence T = T1 ⊕ T2 ⊕ T3 , where Ti = T ei . However,
T1 = S 3 V and T2 = A3 V , and
T = T 2 V ⊗ V = (S 2 V ⊕ A2 V ) ⊗ V = (S 2 V ⊗ V ) ⊕ (A2 V ⊗ V ).
By the previous paragraph, A2 V ⊗V has two composition factors: A3 V and L3 V . It follows
from the equation T1 ⊕ T2 ⊕ T3 = (S 2 V ⊗ V ) ⊕ (A2 V ⊗ V ) that T3 ∩ (A2 V ⊗ V ) = L3 V . A
similar argument shows that (V ⊗ A2 V ) ∩ T3 = L3 V . However, A2 V ⊗ V ∼
= V ⊗ A2 V and

MAXIMALLY SYMMETRIC p-GROUPS

11

(A2 V ⊗ V ) ∩ (V ⊗ A2 V ) = A3 V . Thus T3 = L3 V ⊕ L3 V and so S 2 V ⊗ V = S 3 V ⊕ L3 V
holds, as desired.

Finally, we must understand the structure of L4 V when dim(V ) = 2.
Lemma 3.2. Suppose that d = 2 and char(F) 6= 2, 3. Then L4 V ∼
= A2 V ⊗ S 2 V is an
irreducible GL(V )-module.
Proof. Fix a basis {e1 , e2 } for V . It is well-known that the left-normed vectors
[v1 , v2 , v3 , v4 ] := [[[v1 , v2 ], v3 ], v4 ] span L4 V . Indeed, {s1 , s2 , s3 } is a basis for L4 V where
s1 = [e1 , e2 , e1 , e1 ],

s2 = [e1 , e2 , e1 , e2 ] and s3 = [e1 , e2 , e2 , e2 ].

Note that s2 = [e1 , e2 , e2 , e1 ]. Define the map φ : A2 V ⊗ S 2 V → L4 V by:
φ([e1 , e2 ] ⊗ (e1 ⊙ e1 )) = s1 ,

φ([e1 , e2 ] ⊗ (e1 ⊙ e2 )) = s2 ,

φ([e1 , e2 ] ⊗ (e2 ⊙ e2 )) = s3 .

Since s2 = [e1 , e2 , e2 , e1 ], φ is well-defined. It follows from the linearity of [, ] and the
universality property of the exterior square, symmetric square and the tensor product,
that φ is a linear map. Since φ is surjective, and the dimensions of the respective spaces
are equal, we see that φ is an isomorphism. Moreover, a direct calculation shows that
φ is a GL(V )-module isomorphism. Since S 2 V is irreducible as a GL(V )-module and
dim(A2 V ) = 1, it follows that L4 V is irreducible as a GL(V )-module.

4. Aschbacher’s Theorem
An idea pervading Felix Klein’s Erlanger Programm is that there is a correspondence
between geometry and group theory. A group gives rise to a geometry, and ‘interesting’
subgroups give rise (via stabilisers) to ‘interesting’ geometric substructures. Our group will
be GL(d, q), where q = pa , and its ‘interesting’ subgroups will be its maximal subgroups
H. A celebrated result of Aschbacher relates maximal subgroups of the classical groups
to geometry. For GL(V ) ∼
= GL(d, q), the geometric subgroups fall into eight classes of
subgroups which we now define:
C1 stabilisers of proper non-zero subspaces of V ;
C2 stabilisers of an equidimensional direct sum decomposition V = V1 ⊕ · · · ⊕ Vr ;
C3 stabilisers of an extension field structure Fqr where r is prime;
C4 stabilisers of an unequal dimensional tensor decomposition V = V1 ⊗ V2 ;
C5 subgroups conjugate (modulo scalars) to a linear group over Fq1/r where r is prime;
C6 normalisers of an r-subgroup of symplectic type where r 6= p is prime;
C7 stabilisers of an equidimensional tensor product decomposition V = V1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ Vr ;
C8 stabilisers of non-degenerate forms on V .
The following statement of Aschbacher’s Theorem follows [21, Theorem 1.2.1]. An
alternative form of the theorem is given in [29, §3.10.3].
Theorem 4.1 (Aschbacher, [1]). Let q be a power of p and suppose H 6 GL(d, q) and
SL(d, q) 66 H. Then
(i) H is contained in a member of (at least one) of the classes C1 – C8 , or

12

J. BAMBERG, S. P. GLASBY, L. MORGAN, A. C. NIEMEYER

(ii) H/Z(H) is almost simple and H acts absolutely irreducibly on the natural module for
GL(d, q).
The subgroups H in Theorem 4.1 satisfying H 6∈ C1 ∪ · · · ∪ C8 are said to be of type C9 .
The size of a maximal subgroup H varies by class: the classes C1 ∪ · · · ∪ C5 ∪ C8 all contain
a ‘large’ subgroup, that is, a subgroup H with |H| > q 3d+1 . On the other hand, for
H ∈ C6 ∪ C7 , we have |H| < q 3d+1 . To understand the order of groups in the class C9 , we
use the following theorem of Liebeck.
Theorem 4.2 (Liebeck [24]). Let G0 be a simple classical group with natural projective
module V of dimension d over Fq , and let G be a group such that G0 P G 6 Aut(G0 ). If
H is any maximal subgroup of G, then one of the following holds:
(i) H is a known group (and H ∩ G0 has a well-described (projective) action on V );
(ii) |H| < q 3d .
For G0 ∼
= PSL(d, q), the remarks in [24] show that the projective actions of the groups
in part (i) of the theorem above are those of groups from classes C1 ∪ · · · ∪ C5 ∪ C8 . Since
every maximal subgroup of GL(d, q) not containing SL(d, q) must contain Z(GL(d, q)), we
obtain:
Corollary 4.3. Let G = GL(d, q) and suppose that H is a maximal subgroup of G
not containing SL(d, q). Then H ∈ C1 ∪ · · · ∪ C5 ∪ C8 , or |H| < q 3d+1 .
5. Representation theory of maximal subgroups on Lie powers
We now now assume that char(F) = p is an odd prime and that F is finite. Recall
that V is a d-dimensional vector space over F. The aim of this section is to determine
the reducibility of L2 V , L3 V and L4 V (where necessary) as H-modules, for a maximal
subgroup H of GL(V ). In the cases where the modules are reducible, we also aim to
determine the smallest quotient modules.
5.1. The reducible C1 case.
Figure 2. The GL(V )U composition factors of A2 V and their respective dimensions.
A2 V
hu ∧ v | u ∈ U, v ∈ V i = U ∧ V
hu ∧ u′ | u, u′ ∈ Ui = A2 U
{0}

A2 (V /U)
U ⊗ (V /U)
A2 U

A2 V
U ∧V
A2 U
{0}


d1 = d−r
2
d2 = r(d − r)

d3 = 2r

Lemma 5.1. Suppose that H = GL(V )U ∈ C1 is the stabiliser of an r-dimensional
subspace U of V where 0 < r < d := dim(V ).
(i) If d > 2, then L2 V is a reducible H-module
and the dimension of the smallest quotient

d−r
module is r if d − r = 1, and 2 otherwise.

MAXIMALLY SYMMETRIC p-GROUPS

13

(ii) If p > 3 and d = 2, then L2 V is an irreducible H-module, and L3 V is a uniserial,
reducible 2-dimensional H-module.
Proof. (i) We first show that we have a composition series for the H-module A2 V as
in Figure 2. Define π1 : A2 V → A2 (V /U) by π1 (v ∧ w) = (v + U) ∧ (w + U). This map is
a surjective H-module homomorphism, with kernel
(16)

U ∧ V := hu ∧ v | u ∈ U, v ∈ V i.

Observe that A2 U is an H-invariant subspace of U ∧ V . We claim that {0} ⊆ A2 U ⊆
U ∧ V ⊆ A2 V is the desired composition series. Note that GL(V /U) and GL(U) act
irreducibly on A2 (V /U) and A2 U respectively. We construct an H-module isomorphism
U ⊗ (V /U) ∼
= (U ∧ V )/A2 U as follows. We define φ : U ⊗ (V /U) → (U ∧ V )/A2U to be the
linear extension of the following map:
u ⊗ (v + U) 7→ u ∧ v + A2 U.
It is straightforward to check that φ is well-defined, surjective and an H-module homomorphism. Comparing dimensions reveals that φ is an H-module isomorphism and therefore
shows that (U ∧V )/A2 U is also irreducible. Hence A2 V has a composition series as depicted
in Figure 2, where the factors are irreducible or zero.
To prove that A2 V is a uniserial H-module, we must show that {0}, A2 U, U ∧ V, A2 V
are the only H-submodules of A2 V (some may coincide). Using the fact that invertible
matrices of the form ( I∗ ∗0 ) lie in H, fix U elementwise and are transitive on V \ U, it follows
that there is no H-invariant complement to A2 U in U ∧ V . A similar argument shows that
there is no H-invariant complement to U ∧ V in A2 V . Thus A2 V is uniserial as claimed
and the dimensions of the composition factors are as shown in Figure 2. Note that, since
d > 2, there are at least two composition factors, so A2 V is reducible. If d1 = 0, then
r = d − 1 is the dimension of the smallest quotient module.
(ii) Suppose now that d = 2, r = 1 and p > 3. Then A2 V is an irreducible 1-dimensional
H-module and A3 V = {0}. Since V is a reducible H-module, L3 V ∼
= A2 V ⊗V is a uniserial
2-dimensional H-module with unique non-trivial submodule A2 V ⊗ U.

5.2. The imprimitive C2 case.
Lemma 5.2. Suppose that H = GL(V1 ) ≀ Sr ∈ C2 fixes an equidimensional decomposition
V = V1 ⊕ · · · ⊕ Vr

where 1 < r 6 d and char(F) = p > 2.

(i) If 1 < r < d, then L2 V = U1 ⊕ U2 where U1 and U2 are irreducible H-modules
satisfying 0 < d2 ( dr − 1) = dim(U1 ) < dim(U2 ).
(ii) If p > 3 and 2 < r = d, then H acts irreducibly
on
L2 V , and L3 V is a sum of two


irreducible H-modules of dimensions 2 d2 and 2 d3 .
(iii) If p > 3 and 2 = r = d, then H acts irreducibly on L2 V and L3 V , and L4 V ∼
=
A2 V ⊗ S 2 V ∼
= X1 ⊕ X2 where dim(X1 ) = 2 and dim(X2 ) = 1.
Proof. (i) Consider the base group K := G1 × · · · × Gr of H where Gi = GL(Vi ).
For each i we identify A2 Vi with the obvious subspace of A2 V . Furthermore, for i 6= j set

14

J. BAMBERG, S. P. GLASBY, L. MORGAN, A. C. NIEMEYER

Vi ∧ Vj := hu ∧ w | u ∈ Vi , w ∈ Vj i mimicking the notation in (16). Then Vi ∧ Vj = Vj ∧ Vi ,
and we note that Vi ∧ Vj is isomorphic as a K-module to Vi ⊗ Vj if i 6= j. Hence we have
the following K-module decomposition:
!
r
r
M
M
M
2
2
∼
A V =A
Vi = U1 ⊕ U2
where U1 =
A2 Vi and U2 ∼
Vi ⊗ Vj .
=
i=1

i=1

i<j

Observe that A2 Vi and Vi ⊗ Vj are irreducible K-modules. Thus A2 V1 , . . . , A2 Vr are
pairwise non-isomorphic K-submodules of U1 , and the Vi ⊗ Vj with i < j are pairwise
non-isomorphic K-submodules of U2 (witnessed by the differing kernels of the action of
K). However, Sr permutes these non-isomorphic K-modules transitively. It follows from
Clifford’s Theorem [6, pp. 343–344] that both U1 and U2 are irreducible H-modules. We
2
have dim(U1 ) = r d/r
, dim(U2 ) = 2r dr2 , and 0 < dim(U1 ) < dim(U2 ). Hence when r < d
2
we have that A2 V is a reducible H-module.
(ii) Suppose now that 2 < r = d. By part (i), U1 = {0} and A2 V = U2 is an irreducible
H-module. ByLemma 3.1(ii), L3 V = X1 ⊕ X2 is a sum of irreducible H-submodules of
dimensions 2 d2 and 2 d3 , respectively.
(iii) Finally, consider the case that 2 = r = d. Then L2 V = A2 V is 1-dimensional and
3
A V = {0}. Hence L3 V ∼
= A2 V ⊗ V is the tensor product of an irreducible H-module with
a 1-dimensional module, and is therefore irreducible.
Restricting the GL(V )-isomorphism L4 V ∼
= A2 V ⊗ S 2 V in Lemma
 3.2, gives an H0 x
isomorphism. Now H is generated by matrices of the form g = y 0 , where x and y are
non-zero, and the action of these matrices on L4 V is understood using the map φ defined
in the proof of Lemma 3.2. It follows that the following is an H-module decomposition:
A2 V ⊗ S 2 V ∼
= hv1 ∧ v2 ⊗ v1 ⊙ v1 , v1 ∧ v2 ⊗ v2 ⊙ v2 i ⊕ hv1 ∧ v2 ⊗ v1 ⊙ v2 i.
These 2- and 1-dimensional H-submodules are irreducible, as desired.



5.3. The extension field C3 case. We assume that F = Fq is finite, char(F) = p and
let E = Fqr with r a prime. In this case, ΓL(1, E/F) is a maximal subgroup of GL(r, p)
by [21, Theorem 1.2.1]. The rth cyclotomic polynomial Φr (t) factors over Fq as a product
of equal-degree irreducibles by [23, Theorem 2.47(ii), p. 61]. This common degree divides
r − 1.
Lemma 5.3. Let E = Fqr and F = Fq where r is a prime and q a power of the prime p.
Let V be an irreducible ΓL(1, E/F)-module over F. Then dim(V ) equals r, or divides r − 1.
In particular, the maximum dimension of an irreducible ΓL(1, E/F)-module over F is r.
Proof. Observe that ΓL(1, E/F) is isomorphic to the metacyclic group
H = hφ, µ | φr = µq

r −1

= 1, µφ = µq i.

Consider V E = V ⊗F E as an EM-module where M = hµi. As |M| = q r − 1 is coprime
to p, it follows that V E is a completely reducible M-module by Maschke’s Theorem. Let
W be an irreducible EM-submodule of V E . Thus dimE (W ) = 1, as E is a splitting field
for M. Hence µ acts as a non-zero scalar, λ(µ) ∈ E say on W .

MAXIMALLY SYMMETRIC p-GROUPS

15

Case: λ(µ) = λ(µq ). Since λ(µ) = λ(µ)q , we have λ(µ) ∈ F. Then hµi acts on V as
the matrix λ(µ)I. It follows that V is an irreducible FH-module if and only if V is an
irreducible hφi-module. Thus, by the remarks preceding this lemma, dim(V ) divides r − 1.
Lr−1 φi
φ
Case: λ(µ) 6= λ(µq ). Let U =
i=0 W . Note that W is not isomorphic to W
as an EM-module by assumption. Hence U is the sum of pairwise non-isomorphic EMsubmodules, which are permuted transitively by H. Thus U is an irreducible EH-module.
Note also that U is a summand of V E . By [2, 26.6(1)] we have that V is a summand of the
restriction UF , of U to F. By [18, VII Theorem 1.16(e)], UF is a direct sum of isomorphic
modules, each of dimension dimE (U) = r. Hence dimF (V ) = r.

The computational algebra systems [3] and [9] were used to investigate the submodule
structure of Lie powers for C3 groups H. The first n for which Ln V was H-reducible turned
out to be completely reducible. From the data we collected, we could guess, but not prove,
the dimension of the smallest quotient H-module of Ln V . Thus we suspect that the three
inequalities that appear in Table 6.1 (in the C3 rows) are in fact equalities.
Lemma 5.4. Suppose that H = GL(d/r, Fqr )⋊Gal(Fqr /Fq ) ∈ C3 is a subgroup of GL(V )
where V = (Fq )d , and r is a prime, and suppose char(Fq ) = p > 2.

(i) If 1 < r < d then H acts reducibly on L2 V , preserving a quotient of dimension d/r
r.
2
2
(ii) If 3 < r = d then H acts reducibly on L V , with a minimal quotient of dimension d.
(iii) If 3 = r = d and p > 3, then H acts irreducibly on L2 V , and reducibly on L3 V .
(iv) If 2 = r = d and p > 3, then H acts irreducibly on L2 V and L3 V , and reducibly
on L4 V .
Proof. (i) As above write E = Fqr and F = Fq . We think of H as acting semilinearly on
V = Ed/r , and view V as (V ′ )F , i.e., V ′ with scalars restricted to F. Thus dimE (V ′ ) = d/r
and dimF (V ) = d. Similarly, let T ′ = A2 V ′ , and let T = (T ′ )F . Since d/r > 1, we have
dimF (T ) = r dimE (T ′ ) = r d/r
> 0. We construct a surjective FH-module homomorphism
2
η : A2 V → T . Certainly ker(η) is a proper submodule of A2 V because dim(T ) > 0, and
ker(η) is non-zero because
 
 
d(d − d/r)
d/r
d
2
=
−r
dim(ker(η)) = dim(A V ) − dim(T ) =
> 0.
2
2
2
′

Fix a basis α1 , . . . , αr for E over F and a basis v1 , . . . , vd/r for V ′ . Then V has a basis
{αi vj | 1 6 i 6 r, 1 6 j 6 d/r}
and T has a basis
{αi vj ∧ vk | 1 6 i 6 r, 1 6 j < k 6 d/r}.

Furthermore, A2 V hasPa basis consisting of vectors of the form αi vk ∧ αj vℓ . As αi αj ∈ E,
we may write αi αj = rs=1 λs αs where λs ∈ F. Define η : A2 V → T by
!
r
r
X
X
λs (αs vk ∧ vℓ ).
η(αi vk ∧ αj vℓ ) = (αi αj )vk ∧ vℓ =
λs αs vk ∧ vℓ =
s=1

s=1

16

J. BAMBERG, S. P. GLASBY, L. MORGAN, A. C. NIEMEYER

Certainly η is a GL(V ′ )-homomorphism, and η(βvk ∧ γvℓ ) = βγvk ∧ vℓ for all β, γ ∈ E. As
θ ∈ Gal(E/F) maps αi vk to (αiθ )vk , we see that η((αi vk ∧ αj vℓ )θ ) equals
η(αiθ vk

∧

αjθ vℓ )

=

(αiθ αjθ )vk

∧ vℓ =

r
X

λs (αsθ vk ∧ vℓ ) = η(αi vk ∧ αj vℓ )θ .

s=1

Hence η is an H-homomorphism as desired. Since η is a surjective FH-homomorphism,
and 0 < dim(ker(η)) < dim(A2 V ), H acts reducibly on A2 V . As GL(V ′ ) acts irreducibly
on A2 V ′ , it follows that H acts irreducibly on T .
(ii) Suppose that d = r is prime and r > 3. Then H ∼
= Cqd −1 ⋊ Cd . We adopt the
d
notation in the proof of Lemma 5.3 and write H = hφ, µ | φd = µq −1 = 1, µφ = µq i. Let
e0 , e1 , . . . , ed−1 be a basis for V over F = Fq . Let A and C be the d × d matrices over F
corresponding to the action of φ and µ on V . Now let E = Fqd and set V E = V ⊗F E. Since C
d−1
is irreducible over F, its characteristic polynomial has distinct roots ζ, ζ q , . . . , ζ q
in E.
d−1
E
q
q
Thus C is conjugate in GL(d, E) to the diagonal matrix C := diag(ζ, ζ , . . . , ζ
). Let AE
be the matrix with ei AE = ei+1 where the subscripts are read modulo d. Then AE satisfies
E
(C E )A = (C E )q , and it follows that there exists a matrix in GL(d, E) that conjugates A
to AE and C to C E . The matrices A, C in GL(V ) induce matrices a, c in GL(A2 V ) and AE ,
C E in GL(V E ) induce matrices aE , cE in GL(A2 V E ). The induced matrices a, c ∈ GL(A2 V )
and aE , cE ∈ GL(A2 (V E )) are (simultaneously) conjugate in GL(A2 (V E )).
The action of aE and cE relative to the basis ei ∧ ej , 0 6 i < j < d, for A2 V E is given
i
j
by ei ∧ ej aE = ei+1 ∧ ej+1 and ei ∧ ej cE = ζ q +q ei ∧ ej . We show that a typical eigenvalue
i
j
q j−i
= ξi,j
ξi,j = ζ q +q of cE does not lie in F. Indeed, suppose that ξi,j ∈ F, then ξi,j
i
j
2(j−i)
d
j
2j−i
= 1 = ζ q −1 , and q d − 1 is coprime to q 2(j−i) , it
and ζ q +q
= ζ q +q . Since ζ q
follows that ζ has order 1, a contradiction. As ξi,j is an eigenvalue of c, it follows that
c does not fix an F-subspace of dimension less than d. The d-dimensional E-subspace
U = hei ∧ ei+1 | 0 6 i < di, is invariant under aE and cE . The restrictions of aE and cE
q
q d−1
to U have matrices aEU = A and cEU = diag(ξ0,1, ξ0,1
, . . . , ξ0,1
), respectively. The subgroup
E
E
haU , cU i is irreducible by Clifford’s Theorem [6, pp. 343–344]. A simple calculation shows
that the character values of the monomial group haEU , cEU i lie in F, so by a theorem of
Brauer [18, VII Theorem 1.16(e)], the subgroup haEU , cEU i of GL(d, E) is conjugate to an
irreducible subgroup of GL(d, F). In summary, we have proved that every non-zero Hsubmodule of A2 V has F-dimension at least d, and one has dimension precisely d. As H
can be shown to act completely reducibly on A2 V , it follows that the smallest dimensional
proper quotient module of A2 V has dimension d.
(iii) Suppose that d = r = 3. The argument in part (ii) shows that H preserves
an irreducible 3-dimensional subspace of A2 V = L2 V . Thus H acts irreducibly on L2 V .
By (2), dim(L3 V ) = (33 − 3)/3 = 8 so by Lemma 5.3, H acts reducibly on L3 V preserving
a submodule of codimension at most 3.
(iv) Suppose that d = r = 2. Then H acts irreducibly on the 1-dimensional space L2 V ,
and on the 2-dimensional space L3 V ∼
= A2 V ⊗ V . Finally, H acts reducibly on L4 V by

MAXIMALLY SYMMETRIC p-GROUPS

17

Lemma 5.3 as dim(L4 V ) = (24 − 22 )/4 = 3, and H preserves a submodule of codimension
at most 2.

5.4. The tensor reducible C4 case.
Lemma 5.5. Suppose that H = GL(V1 )◦GL(V2 ) ∈ C4 where 2 6 dim(V1 ) < dim(V2 ) and
char(F) 6= 2. Then L2 (V1 ⊗ V2 ) = U1 ⊕ U2 where U1 ∼
= A2 V1 ⊗ S 2 V2 and U2 ∼
= S 2 V1 ⊗ A2 V2
are irreducible H-modules satisfying 0 < dim(U1 ) < dim(U2 ) < dim(L2 (V1 ⊗ V2 )).
Proof. Let H = GL(V1 ) ◦ GL(V2 ) preserve the decomposition V = V1 ⊗ V2 where
2 6 dim(V1 ) < dim(V2 ). By (14), we have the following H-module isomorphisms
T 2 V = (V1 ⊗ V2 ) ⊗ (V1 ⊗ V2 )
∼
= (V1 ⊗ V1 ) ⊗ (V2 ⊗ V2 )


∼
= S 2 V1 ⊕ A2 V1 ⊗ S 2 V2 ⊕ A2 V2


∼
= S 2 V1 ⊗ S 2 V2 ⊕ A2 V1 ⊗ A2 V2 ⊕ S 2 V1 ⊗ A2 V2 ⊕ A2 V1 ⊗ S 2 V2
∼
= S 2 V ⊕ A2 V.
Equating symmetric and anti-symmetric parts gives the following H-module isomorphisms:
S 2V ∼
= S 2 V1 ⊗ S 2 V2 ⊕ A2 V1 ⊗ A2 V2 , and
A2 V ∼
= S 2 V1 ⊗ A2 V2 ⊕ A2 V1 ⊗ S 2 V2 .
In particular, we see that A2 V ∼
= L2 V is reducible as an H-module. Since S 2 Vi and A2 Vi are
irreducible GL(Vi )-submodules (for i = 1, 2), it follows that S 2 V1 ⊗ A2 V2 and A2 V1 ⊗ S 2 V2
are irreducible modules for GL(V1 ) × GL(V2 ) and hence for H = GL(V1 ) ◦ GL(V2 ). Since

2 6 d1 < d2 where d1 = dim(V1 ) and d2 = dim(V2 ), it is easy to see that 0 < d21 d22+1 <
 

d1 +1 d2
d1 d2
<
, and hence 0 < dim(U1 ) < dim(U2 ) < dim(L2 (V1 ⊗ V2 )).

2
2
2

5.5. The tensor induced case C7 . The classes Ci considered so far all contain ‘large’
maximal subgroups of GL(d, p), i.e., ones with |H| > p3d+1 . By contrast, none of the
C7 subgroups H are large in this sense; indeed Corollary 4.3 shows that |H| < p3d+1 .
Intuitively, the smaller |H| is compared to |GL(d, p)| the less likely it is that modules with
dimensions much larger than d remain irreducible, when restricted to H. Thus one might
expect that our desired p-group G (with A(G) = H) has small nilpotency class, and that
it is not too hard to construct. The first expectation is true, but not the second, as the
small dimensional modules such as L2 V and L3 V turn out to be hard to handle.

Theorem 5.6. Let H = GL(V1 ) ≀ Sr 6 GL(V ) preserve the tensor decomposition V =
V1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ Vr , so H ∈ C7 . Suppose that p := char(F) > 2, r > 2, and t := dim(V1 ) = · · · =
dim(Vr ) > 2.
(i) If p > 2 and r > 2, then L2 V is reducible and the smallest quotient module of L2 V
r
r−1 t+1
has dimension 2t if r is odd, and r 2t
if r is even.
2
2
(ii) If p > 3 and r = 2, then L V is an irreducible H-module, and L3 V is a reducible
H-module. The smallest dimension of a quotient module of L3 V is 4 if t = 2, and
(t + 1)t2 (t − 1)2 (t − 2)/9 if t > 2.

18

J. BAMBERG, S. P. GLASBY, L. MORGAN, A. C. NIEMEYER

Proof. As H ∈ C7 , we have H = GL(V1 ) ≀ Sr 6 GL(V1⊗r ) where t > 2 and r > 2.
(i) Suppose now that V = V1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ Vr where r > 2 and p > 2. Rearranging tensor
factors, and using (14) shows that
T 2 V = T 2 V1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ T 2 Vr = (A2 V1 ⊕ S 2 V1 ) ⊗ · · · ⊗ (A2 Vr ⊕ S 2 Vr ).
r
Expanding gives
Lr 2 summands. We show that collecting these summands into Sr -orbits
2
gives T V = k=0 Uk where the Uk are pairwise non-isomorphic irreducible H-submodules
satisfying
r−k
  k 
M
M
t+1
t
r
2
2
.
Uk , and dim(Uk ) =
Uk , S V =
AV =
2
k 2
k even
k odd

We identify the 2r summands with the elements of the vector space C = (F2 )r . The orbits
of Sr on the vectors of C are C0 , . . . , Cr where Ck comprises the kr vectors with precisely
k ones. Define
(
M
A2 Vj if εi = 1,
X ε1 (V1 ) ⊗ · · · ⊗ X εr (Vr ) where X εi (Vj ) =
Uk =
S 2 Vj if εi = 0.
(ε ,...,ε )∈C
1

r

k

The summands of Uk are pairwise non-isomorphic irreducible modules for the base group
GL(V1 ) × · · · × GL(Vr ) of H, so by Clifford’s Theorem [6, pp. 343–344], U
 k is an irreducible
t
2
H-submodule.
The
formula
for
dim(U
)
is
now
clear
as
dim(A
V
)
=
and dim(S 2 Vj ) =
k
i
2

t+1
by (13).
2
The number of irreducible H-submodules Uk of A2 V is the number of odd k satisfying
0 6 k 6 r, namely ⌈r/2⌉. Hence A2 V is reducible precisely when r > 2. Suppose that
k0 is odd and dim(Uk0 ) 6 dim(Uk ) for all odd k satisfying 0 6 k 6 r. Observe first that
r − k < k implies that dim(Ur−k ) > dim(Uk ) so we may assume r/2 6 k0 6 r. Second,
note
 that
 if k, ℓ are odd and r/2 6 ℓ < k, then it follows that dim(Uℓ ) > dim(Uk ) because
r
r
>
. Hence k0 = r when r is odd, and k0 = r − 1 when r is even. This proves part (i).
ℓ
k
(ii) Suppose now that p > 3, r = 2, and V = V1 ⊗ V2 . By part (i), L2 V is irreducible.
We use Lemma 3.1 to investigate the K-module structure of A2 V ⊗V where K = GL(V1 )×
GL(V2 ) is normal in H of index 2. It follows from part (i) that we have the following Kmodule decomposition: A2 V = (A2 V1 ⊠ S 2 V2 ) ⊕ (S 2 V1 ⊠ A2 V2 ) where ⊠ denotes ‘outer
tensor product’ for K. Consider the following K-module decomposition:

A2 V ⊗ V ∼
= (A2 V1 ⊠ S 2 V2 ) ⊕ (S 2 V1 ⊠ A2 V2 ) ⊗ (V1 ⊠ V2 )

∼
= (A2 V1 ⊗ V1 ) ⊠ (S 2 V2 ⊗ V2 ) ⊕ (S 2 V1 ⊗ V1 ) ⊠ (A2 V2 ⊗ V2 ).
Lemma 3.1(ii) gives A2 Vi ⊗ Vi ∼
= S 3 Vi ⊕ L3 Vi , so
= L3 Vi ⊕ A3 Vi and S 2 Vi ⊗ Vi ∼
A2 V ⊗ V ∼
= (L3 V1 ⊕ A3 V1 ) ⊠ (S 3 V2 ⊕ L3 V2 ) ⊕ (S 3 V1 ⊕ L3 V1 ) ⊠ (L3 V2 ⊕ A3 V2 )
∼
= (B1 ⊕ C1 ) ⊠ (A2 ⊕ B2 ) ⊕ (A1 ⊕ B1 ) ⊠ (B2 ⊕ C2 )

where Ai = S 3 Vi , Bi = L3 Vi , and Ci = A3 Vi . Expanding shows that A2 V ⊗ V is a sum of
8 irreducible K-modules as follows:
(17)
A2 V ⊗ V ∼
= P ⊕Q⊕R⊕S

MAXIMALLY SYMMETRIC p-GROUPS

19

where
P = A1 ⊠ B2 ⊕ B1 ⊠ A2 ,
R = B1 ⊠ C2 ⊕ C1 ⊠ B2 ,

Q = A1 ⊠ C2 ⊕ C1 ⊠ A2 ,
S = B1 ⊠ B2 ⊕ B1 ⊠ B2 .

By Clifford’s Theorem [6, pp. 343–344], P , Q and R are pairwise non-isomorphic
irreducible H-modules, whilst S is the sum of two irreducible H-modules, S1 and S2 say,
each isomorphic to B1 ⊗ B2 . Using Lemma 3.1(iii), we reconcile the H-decompositions
A2 V ⊗ V = L3 V ⊕ A3 V

and A2 V ⊗ V = P ⊕ Q ⊕ R ⊕ S1 ⊕ S2 .

Table 5.1. Dimensions of irreducible H-submodules of A2 V ⊗ V .
U
dim(U)

P

Q

R

S1 S2

2ab 2ac 2bc b2

b2

a = dim(Ai ) b = dim(Bi ) c = dim(Ci ) d
(t+2)(t+1)t
6

(t+1)t(t−1)
3

t(t−1)(t−2)
6

t2

The dimensions of the modules P , Q, R, S1 and S2 are displayed in Table 5.1. Since
L3 V is a completely reducible H-module, there exist p, q, r, s1 , s2 ∈ {0, 1} such that
t6 − t2
= p dim P + q dim Q + r dim R + s1 dim S1 + s2 dim S2 .
3
The above gives rise to 32 polynomial equations in t. If t 6= 4, then the only solutions are
(p, q, r, s1, s2 ) = (1, 0, 1, 1, 0) or (p, q, r, s1 , s2 ) = (1, 0, 1, 0, 1). If t = 4, then there are two
additional possibilities since dim R = dim Q, namely that (p, q, r, s1 , s2 ) = (1, 1, 0, 0, 1) or
(p, q, r, s1, s2 ) = (1, 1, 0, 1, 0). Renumbering if necessary, assume that S1 6 L3 V and thus
S2 6 A3 V . Hence, if t 6= 4 we obtain L3 V ∼
= P ⊕ R ⊕ S1 . When t = 4 the additional
3
∼
possibility that L V = P ⊕ Q ⊕ S1 arises. As L3 V is completely reducible, the smallest
non-zero quotient H-module is isomorphic to the smallest irreducible H-submodule of L3 V .
If t = 2 then c = 0 and L3 V ∼
= P ⊕ S1 and the minimal dimension of an H-submodule of
L3 V is 4. If t > 2 then c > 0 and the dimensions of the minimal H-submodules of L3 V are
2ab, 2bc and b2 . Since a > c and b > 2c, the smallest dimension of a minimal submodule
of L3 V in this case is 2bc = (t + 1)t2 (t − 1)2 (t − 2)/9.

dim L3 V =

5.6. The C8 case, classical groups in natural action. As our primary interest is in
the field Fp , we do not consider the unitary groups here. The following remark elucidates
the symplectic case in Lemma 5.8(i).
Remark 5.7. The extraspecial group G of order p1+2m with exponent p > 2 has a
pc-presentation
(18)

g

p
= 1, g2k2k−1 = g2k g2m+1 , 1 6 k 6 m
G = g1 , . . . , g2m+1 | g1p = · · · = g2m+1

20

J. BAMBERG, S. P. GLASBY, L. MORGAN, A. C. NIEMEYER

where gjgi = gj for 1 6 i < j 6 2m + 1 and (i, j) 6∈ {(2k − 1, 2k) | 1 6 k 6 m}. Using
collection, we can symbolically multiply
 x′ y ′

′
x′m
ym
ym z
xm
z′
g2m+1 g1 1 g2 1 · · · g2m−1
g2m
g2m+1
g2m
g1x1 g2y1 · · · g2m−1
x +x′1 y1 +y1′
g2

= g1 1

x +x′

′
z+z ′ +
y +ym
g2m+1

m
m
m
· · · g2m−1
g2m

Pm

k=1

xk yk′

.

′
), we have a more
However, writing v1 = (x1 , y1 , . . . , xm , ym ) and v1′ = (x′1 , y1′ , . . . , x′m , ym
2m
symmetric multiplication rule on pairs in Fp × Fp :

(v1 , v2 )(v1′ , v2′ ) = (v1 + v1′ , v2 + v2′ + β(v1 , v1′ ))
P
′
′
where β(v1 , v1′ ) = m
k=1 (xk yk − xk yk ) (mod p). This rule is a ‘quotient’ of the Lie 2-tuple
rule in Example 2.7, and it helps to show that the conformal symplectic group CSp(β) is a
subgroup of Aut(G). If g ∈ CSp(β) satisfies β(v1 g, v1′ g) = β(v1 , v1′ )δg where δg ∈ F is nonzero, then the map (v1 , v2 )αg = (v1 g, v2 δg ) lies in Aut(G), and g 7→ αg is a monomorphism
CSp(β) → Aut(G). This proves that Aut(G) splits over Inn(G), c.f. [30, Theorem 1(a)].
Lemma 5.8. Suppose that H ∈ C8 is the stabiliser of a non-degenerate form on V =
(Fq )d , where q is an odd prime power and d > 2.
(i) If H preserves an alternating form, then H acts reducibly on L2 V , and the smallest
dimension of a quotient module is 1.
(ii) If H preserves a quadratic form, then H acts irreducibly on L2 V , and reducibly on
L3 V . Moreover, the smallest dimension of a quotient module of L3 V is d or 1.
Proof. (i) Suppose that H = CSp(β) is the conformal symplectic group preserving
the alternating form β : V × V → Fq up to scalar multiples. Recall that CSp(β)/Sp(β) ∼
=
2
∼
F×
C
.
The
linear
map
π
:
L
V
→
F
satisfying
π([v,
w])
=
β(v,
w)
is
well-defined
q−1
q
q =
precisely because β is alternating. Moreover, since β is an H-invariant form we have that
π is an H-module homomorphism, and CSp(β) acts non-trivially on Fq with kernel Sp(β).
Clearly π is onto, therefore dim(L2 V / ker(π)) = 1. As dim(L2 V ) = d2 > 1 for d > 2, we
see that L2 V is reducible as claimed.
(ii) Suppose that H preserves the symmetric form β : V × V → Fq up to non-zero
scalar multiples. Since p is odd, H acts irreducibly on A2 V , see [24, Table 1]. Define
π : T 3 V → V ⊗ Fq by π(u ⊗ v ⊗ w) = u ⊗ β(v, w). Since H preserves β up to scalars, we
see that π is an H-module homomorphism. Moreover, since
u∧v∧w = u⊗v⊗w−u⊗w⊗v+v⊗w⊗u−v⊗u⊗w+w⊗u⊗v−w⊗v⊗u
we have
π(u ∧ v ∧ w) = u ⊗ (β(v, w) − β(w, v)) + v ⊗ (β(w, u) − β(u, w)) + w ⊗ (β(u, v) − β(v, u)).
Thus π(A3 V ) = {0} since β is symmetric. Now choose vectors u, v and w of V so that
u ⊗ v ⊗ w is a fundamental tensor and such that f (u, w) = 0 and β(v, w) 6= 0 (such a choice
is always possible since β is non-degenerate). Then x := u ⊗ v ⊗ w − v ⊗ u ⊗ w ∈ A2 V ⊗ V
and π(x) = u ⊗ β(v, w) 6= 0. Hence
A3 V 6 ker(π) ∩ (A2 V ⊗ V ) < A2 V ⊗ V

MAXIMALLY SYMMETRIC p-GROUPS

21

and the quotient (A2 V ⊗ V )/(ker(π) ∩ (A2 V ⊗ V )) is isomorphic to a submodule of V ⊗ Fq .
Since the latter is an irreducible H-module, we have that the smallest quotient module of
L3 V has dimension d or 1.

Remark 5.9. We do not consider the case when H is a maximal subgroup of GL(d, p)
containing SL(d, p). In this case the irreducible GL(V )-submodules of Ln V with p > n, are
likely to restrict to irreducible SL(V )-modules. In the case d = 2 excluded in Lemma 5.8,
H contains Sp(2, p) = SL(2, p).
6. Proof of the main theorem
In this section we complete the proof of Theorem 1. In fact, we prove a stronger theorem
from which Theorem 1 follows, after an application of Corollary 4.3.
Theorem 6.1. Let p > 5 be a prime, and let d > 2 be an integer. Suppose that H is a
maximal subgroup of GL(d, p) with SL(d, p) 66 H and that H lies in one of the Aschbacher
classes C1 ∪· · ·∪C5 ∪C7 ∪C8 . Then there exists a d-generator p-group G of exponent p, class
d4
at most 4, order at most p 2 and A(G) = H. The nilpotency class, order and structure
of G is given in Table 6.1.
Proof. Let H be as in the statement of the theorem and let V = Fdp . Note that H
cannot be in class C5 and cannot be in class C8 preserving a unitary form. We seek a
d-generator p-group G of exponent p and minimal class such that A(G) = H. Now GL(V )
(and hence H) acts on the sections of the lower exponent-p central series of the d-generator
Burnside group B = B(d, p). By Lemmas 5.1, 5.2, 5.4, 5.5, 5.8 and Theorem 5.6 there
exists an n 6 4 such that H acts irreducibly on L1 V, . . . , Ln−1 V (with the exception that
if H is of class C1 then H is reducible on L1 V ), and there is a maximal H-submodule, say
M/Bn , of Bn−1 /Bn ∼
= Ln V which is not GL(V )-invariant. Set G := B/M. We claim that
G is the desired p-group.
Since Bn < M < Bn−1 is H-invariant, G is a proper quotient of the finite group
Γn (V ) = Γ(d, p, n). In particular, G has class n. Now H 6 NGL(V ) (M/Bn ) 6 GL(V )
and since H is maximal in GL(V ), our choice of M gives NGL(V ) (M/Bn ) = H. Hence
Theorem 2.2 gives A(G) = NGL(V ) (M/Bn ) = H.
It remains to bound |G|. By construction, G is a quotient of Γ(d, p, n), and the order
d4

of the latter group is given in Theorem 2.5. From this it easily follows that |G| 6 p 2 as
claimed.

Remark 6.2. For a given H 6 GL(d, p), we let G(H) be the category of all finite
d-generator p-groups P with A(P ) = H. Then the group G appearing in Theorem 6.1
is the minimal element of G(H) with respect to order and nilpotency class. In fact, if
H ∈ C1 ∪ C2 ∪ C4 ∪ C7 or H is a C8 subgroup preserving a symplectic form, we have also
found the groups in G(H) of minimal order.
Remark 6.3. Let H be the C1 maximal subgroup GL(V )U which fixes a proper nonzero subspace U of V . Let r = dim(U) and let P = (Cp )r × (Cp2 )d−r . Then P is abelian

22

J. BAMBERG, S. P. GLASBY, L. MORGAN, A. C. NIEMEYER

Table 6.1. The exponent-p groups G of class nPin Theorem 1 for different
n−1
Aschbacher classes Ci where |G| = pm and m = i=1
f (d, i) + dim(Gn−1 ).

Ci V = G0 /G1

H

conditions

C1 0 < U < V

GL(V )U

1<r<d − 1

r := dim(U)

1<r=d − 1

C2

C3

C4

C7

C8

Lr

i=1 Vi

(Fpr )d/r

V1 ⊗ V2

Nr

i=1

V1

n p> dim(Gn−1 )

d−r
2 3
2

Gn−1

A2 (V /U)

2

3

r

U ⊗ (V /U)

(d, r) = (2, 1) 3

5

1

A2 V ⊗ (V /U)

d/r
2


r

GL(V1 ) ≀ Sr

1<r<d

2

3

d = r dim(V1 )

4<r=d

3

5

3, 4 = r = d

3

5

2=r=d

4

5

d(d − 1)

2 d3

1<r<d

2

3

6

3<r=d

2

3

d

3=r=d

3

5

63

Lemma 5.4(iii)

2=r=d

4

5

Lemma 5.4(iv)

GL(V1 ) ◦ GL(V2 )

1 < d1 < d2

2

3

di := dim(Vi )

d = d1 d2

62


d1 d2 +1

GL(V1 ) ≀ Sr

2<r

2

3

5.6(i)

U2⌊(r−1)/2⌋

d = dim(V1 )r

2=r

3

5

5.6(ii)

R if t > 2

CSp(β)

2<d

2

3

1

det

GO(β)

2<d

3

5

1, d

Lemma 5.8

ΓL(d/r, Fpr )

U1

1

d/r
2

2



2

r

W1
W2 /A3 V
Lemma 5.2
Lemma 5.4(i)
Lemma 5.4(ii)

A2 V1 ⊗ S 2 V2
Lemma 5.5

and of exponent p2 , and it is easy to check that A(P ) = H. The group P has smaller order
than the corresponding group listed in Table 6.1, but the exponent is p2 rather than p.
7. Some open questions
Aschbacher’s Theorem [21, Theorem 1.2.1] and the results of Sections 3, 4, 5 work over
an arbitrary finite field Fq . There is no definition of ‘q-groups’ where q = pf and f > 1.

MAXIMALLY SYMMETRIC p-GROUPS

23

However, taking a group Γn (Fdq ) defined in Construction 2.3 results in a group that has
a Frattini quotient isomorphic to Fdq . Unfortunately, these groups are not relatively free
since they are df -generator groups and the lower central series of Γn (Fdq ) is not the same
as that of Γn (Fdf
p ).
How must our results be modified when p = 2? How large must the nilpotency class
of G be in the cases C6 and C9 which contain no ‘large’ subgroups? How do the multiplication rules (5)–(7) for the universal groups Γn (Fd ) generalise for n > 4? To what
extent can collection in groups of exponent p given by pc-presentations be replaced by
symbolic computations in Lie n-tuple groups? (This type of question is explored in [22],
for example.)
Suppose that H is a maximal subgroup of GL(V ) and the irreducible GL(V )-submodules
of L1 V, . . . , Ln−1 V restrict to irreducible H-submodules, and n is maximal with this property. Our examples lead us to ask: Is Ln V , viewed as an H-module, always either completely reducible or uniserial?
Acknowledgements. The first author acknowledges the support of the Australian Research Council Future Fellowship FT120100036, the second and fourth authors acknowledge
the support of the Australian Research Council Discovery Grant DP140100416 and the
third author acknowledges the ARC grants DP120100446 and DE160100081. We would
like to thank Kay Magaard, Csaba Schneider and Oihana Garaialde Ocanã for helpful
comments, and Saul Freedman for carefully reading the manuscript.
References
[1] M. Aschbacher, On the maximal subgroups of the finite classical groups, Invent. Math. 76 (1984),
no. 3, 469–514, DOI 10.1007/BF01388470. ↑11
[2]
, Finite group theory, 2nd ed., Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics, vol. 10, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2000. ↑15
[3] Wieb Bosma, John Cannon, and Catherine Playoust, The Magma algebra system. I. The user language,
J. Symbolic Comput. 24 (1997), 235–265. ↑6, 15
[4] R. M. Bryant and L. G. Kovács, Lie representations and groups of prime power order, J. London
Math. Soc. (2) 17 (1978), no. 415–421. ↑2, 5, 7
[5] Serena Cicaló, Willem A. de Graaf, and Michael Vaughan-Lee, An effective version of the Lazard
correspondence, J. Algebra 352 (2012), 430–450. ↑5, 6
[6] Charles W. Curtis and Irving Reiner, Representation theory of finite groups and associative algebras,
AMS Chelsea Publishing, Providence, RI, 2006. Reprint of the 1962 original. ↑14, 16, 18, 19
[7] Bettina Eick, C. R. Leedham-Green, and E. A. O’Brien, Constructing automorphism groups of pgroups, Comm. Algebra 30 (2002), no. 5, 2271–2295, DOI 10.1081/AGB-120003468. ↑2
[8] William Fulton and Joe Harris, Representation theory, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol. 129,
Springer-Verlag, New York, 1991. A first course; Readings in Mathematics. ↑8
[9] The GAP Group, GAP–Groups, Algorithms, and Programming, Version 4.8.7 (2017).
http://www.gap-system.org. ↑15
[10] S. P. Glasby, Supporting Magma code for symbolically computing in Γn (Fd ).
http://www.maths.uwa.edu.au/∼glasby/research.html. ↑6
[11] Hermann Heineken and Hans Liebeck, The occurrence of finite groups in the automorphism group of
nilpotent groups of class 2, Arch. Math. (Basel) 25 (1974), 8–16. ↑1
[12] Geir T. Helleloid, A survey on automorphism groups of finite p-groups, arXiv:math/0610294. ↑2

24

J. BAMBERG, S. P. GLASBY, L. MORGAN, A. C. NIEMEYER

[13] Geir T. Helleloid and Ursula Martin, The automorphism group of a finite p-group is almost always a
p-group, J. Algebra 312 (2007), no. 1, 294–329, DOI 10.1016/j.jalgebra.2007.01.008. ↑2, 4, 5
[14] Graham Higman, Lie ring methods in the theory of finite nilpotent groups, Proc. Internat. Congress
Math. 1958, Cambridge Univ. Press, New York, 1960, pp. 307–312. ↑3
[15]
, Enumerating p-groups. I. Inequalities, Proc. London Math. Soc. (3) 10 (1960), 24–30. ↑1
[16] Derek F. Holt, Bettina Eick, and Eamonn A. O’Brien, Handbook of computational group theory,
Discrete Mathematics and its Applications (Boca Raton), Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, FL,
2005. ↑7
[17] Anthony Hughes, Automorphisms of nilpotent groups and supersolvable orders, The Santa Cruz Conference on Finite Groups (Univ. California, Santa Cruz, Calif., 1979), Proc. Sympos. Pure Math.,
vol. 37, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, R.I., 1980, pp. 205–207. ↑1
[18] Bertram Huppert and Norman Blackburn, Finite groups. II, Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften [Fundamental Principles of Mathematical Sciences], vol. 242, Springer-Verlag, Berlin-New
York, 1982. AMD, 44. ↑2, 5, 15, 16
[19]
, Finite groups. III, Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften [Fundamental Principles
of Mathematical Sciences], vol. 243, Springer-Verlag, Berlin-New York, 1982. ↑2
[20] Marianne Johnson, L. G. Kovács work on Lie powers, J. Austral. Math. Soc. 102 (2017), 9–19. ↑5, 7
[21] Peter Kleidman and Martin Liebeck, The subgroup structure of the finite classical groups, London
Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series, vol. 129, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1990.
↑11, 14, 22
[22] C. R. Leedham-Green and Leonard H. Soicher, Symbolic collection using Deep Thought, LMS J.
Comput. Math. 1 (1998), 9–24 (electronic), DOI 10.1112/S1461157000000127. ↑23
[23] Rudolf Lidl and Harald Niederreiter, Finite fields, 2nd ed., Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its
Applications, vol. 20, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1997. With a foreword by P. M. Cohn.
↑14
[24] Martin W. Liebeck, On the orders of maximal subgroups of the finite classical groups, Proc. London
Math. Soc. (3) 50 (1985), no. 3, 426–446, DOI 10.1112/plms/s3-50.3.426. ↑12, 20
[25] Charles C. Sims, Enumerating p-groups, Proc. London Math. Soc. (3) 15 (1965), 151–166. ↑1
[26] Panagiotis C. Soules and Andrew J. Woldar, Representing the sporadic groups as noncentral automorphisms of p-groups, J. Algebra 185 (1996), no. 1, 258–265, DOI 10.1006/jabr.1996.0324. ↑1
[27] Terrence Tao. https://terrytao.wordpress.com/tag/hall-witt-identity/. ↑3
[28] U. H. M. Webb, The occurrence of groups as automorphisms of nilpotent p-groups, Arch. Math. (Basel)
37 (1981), no. 6, 481–498, DOI 10.1007/BF01234386. ↑1
[29] Robert A. Wilson, The finite simple groups, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol. 251, Springer-Verlag
London, Ltd., London, 2009. ↑11
[30] David L. Winter, The automorphism group of an extraspecial p-group, Rocky Mountain J. Math. 2
(1972), no. 2, 159–168. ↑20
[31] Ernst Witt, Treue Darstellung Liescher Ringe, J. Reine Angew. Math. 177 (1937), 152–160. ↑4
[32]
, Die Unterringe der freien Lieschen Ringe, Math. Z. 64 (1956), 195–216. ↑4, 7

(Bamberg, Glasby7, Morgan) Centre for Mathematics of Symmetry and Computation, University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley 6009, Australia.
Email: John.Bamberg@uwa.edu.au; WWW: http://www.maths.uwa.edu.au/∼bamberg/
Email: Stephen.Glasby@uwa.edu.au; WWW: http://www.maths.uwa.edu.au/∼glasby/
Email: Luke.Morgan@uwa.edu.au; WWW: http://www.maths.uwa.edu.au/contact/staff

7

Also affiliated with The Department of Mathematics, University of Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia.

MAXIMALLY SYMMETRIC p-GROUPS

25

(Niemeyer) Lehrstuhl B für Mathematik, Lehr- und Forschungsgebiet Algebra, RWTH
Aachen University, Templergraben 64, 52062 Aachen, Germany.
Email: Alice.Niemeyer@MathB.RWTH-Aachen.De;
WWW: https://www.mathb.rwth-aachen.de/Mitarbeiter/niemeyer.php

