arXiv:1709.09441v1 [math.GR] 27 Sep 2017

Doubly Hurwitz Beauville groups
Gareth A. Jones and Emilio Pierro
September 28, 2017
Abstract
If S is a Beauville surface (C1 × C2 )/G, then the Hurwitz bound
implies that |G| ≤ 1764 χ(S), with equality if and only if the Beauville
group G acts as a Hurwitz group on both curves Ci . Equivalently, G
has two generating triples of type (2, 3, 7), such that no generator in
one triple is conjugate to a power of a generator in the other. We show
that this property is satisfied by alternating groups An , their double
covers 2.An , and special linear groups SLn (q) if n is sufficiently large,
but by no sporadic simple groups or simple groups Ln (q) (n ≤ 7),
2
G2 (3e ), 2 F4 (2e ), 2 F4 (2)′ , G2 (q) or 3 D4 (q) of small Lie rank.

MSC2010 Classifications: 14H37, 14J29, 20B25, 20D05, 20F05, 30F10.

1

Introduction

A Beauville surface is a complex algebraic surface of general type, of the
form
S = (C1 × C2 )/G
where C1 and C2 are the algebraic curves underlying regular dessins R1 and
R2 of genera g1 , g2 > 1, which have the same automorphism G which acts
freely on their product. (This construction was introduced by Beauville
in [2]; for further details see the surveys [17, 26] or [28, Chapter 11].) A
finite group G arises in this way (and is then called a Beauville group) if and
only if it has generating triples (xi , yi , zi ) of hyperbolic types for i = 1, 2,
such that no non-identity element of G has fixed points on both curves, or
equivalently no non-identity power of x1 , y1 or z1 is conjugate in G to a power
of x2 , y2 or z2 .
In this situation, S has Euler characteristic
χ(S) =

4(g1 − 1)(g2 − 1)
χ(C1 )χ(C2 )
=
.
|G|
|G|
1

Using the Hurwitz bound |G| ≤ 84(gi − 1) (see [25]) we therefore have
|G| ≤ 1764 χ(S),

(1)

with equality if and only if G acts on each curve Ci as a Hurwitz group, that
is, Ci is uniformised by a normal subgroup of the triangle group
∆ = ∆(2, 3, 7) = hX, Y, Z | X 2 = Y 3 = Z 7 = XY Z = 1i,
with quotient group G. Alexander Zvonkin [48] has raised the question
of whether there exist such groups G which act as Hurwitz groups in two
essentially different ways, that is, which have two generating triples (xi , yi , zi )
of type (2, 3, 7) such that no non-identity power of x1 , y1 or z1 is conjugate in
G to a power of x2 , y2 or z2 , so that the bound in (1) is attained. We will call
such a group a doubly Hurwitz Beauville group, or a dHB group for brevity.
(By contrast we note that the first examples of Beauville surfaces [2], where
each Ci is the Fermat curve of degree n coprime to 6 and G ∼
= Cn × Cn , so
that χ(S) = (n − 3)2 , come nowhere near attaining this bound.)
Each Hurwitz group is perfect, and is thus a cover of a non-abelian finite
simple group, which is also a Hurwitz group. It is therefore of interest
to consider various families of non-abelian finite simple groups, and more
generally quasisimple groups, to determine which of their members are dHB
groups. Here, being a Beauville group is no great restriction: it is easily
seen that A5 is not a Beauville group, and in 2005 Bauer, Catanese and
Grunewald [1] conjectured that every other non-abelian finite simple group
is a Beauville group. This was proved, first with finitely many possible
exceptions, by Garion, Larsen and Lubotsky [21], and then completely by
Guralnick and Malle [24], a result which Fairbairn, Magaard and Parker [18]
extended to all quasisimple groups except A5 and its double cover Ã5 ∼
=
SL2 (5). However, being a dHB group is a much stronger condition than
being both a Hurwitz group and a Beauville group.
As a perhaps surprising example, none of the 26 sporadic simple groups
is a dHB group (see Theorem 6.1), even though twelve of them are Hurwitz
groups: not even the Monster, shown by Wilson [46] to be a Hurwitz group
in many different ways, has a pair of generating triples of type (2, 3, 7) which
satisfy the Beauville condition.
As shown by Macbeath [33] the groups G = L2 (p) = P SL2 (p), for primes
p ≡ ±1 mod 7, are Hurwitz groups in three ways, since Aut G has three
orbits on generating triples of type (2, 3, 7). However, these groups have only
one conjugacy class of involutions, so the Beauville non-conjugacy condition
cannot be satisfied (a similar problem arises with their subgroups of orders
2

3 and 7). On the other hand, sufficiently large alternating groups An do not
suffer from these restrictions, and indeed they have been shown by Fuertes
and González-Diez [20] to be Beauville groups for all n ≥ 6, and by Conder [8]
to be Hurwitz groups for all n ≥ 168 (as well as for certain values n < 168).
We will adapt Conder’s proof of this to establish the following theorem:
Theorem 1.1 For each r = 0, 1, . . . 13 there exists an integer Nr , given in
Table 1, such that if n ≡ r mod (14) and n ≥ Nr then the alternating group
An is a doubly Hurwitz Beauville group. In particular, An is a doubly Hurwitz
Beauville group for all n ≥ 589.
r
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 11 12 13
Nr 294 589 394 367 396 439 510 329 540 457 430 459 432 447
Table 1: Values of Nr .
The proof, in Section 3, proceeds in two stages: first the construction
in An of pairs of triples of type (2, 3, 7) which satisfy the Beauville condition, and then the proof that they both generate the whole group. The first
stage is not so difficult, and can be performed within alternating groups of
considerably lower degrees. Heuristically, if n is sufficiently large one might
expect almost all such triples to generate An , by Dixon’s theorem [14] on
random generation of alternating and symmetric groups. However, proving
that a given triple generates An is more difficult, requiring the construction
of a permutation with a suitable cycle of prime length, so that a well-known
theorem of Jordan can be applied (see Section 2). Having to do this simultaneously for two essentially different triples makes the task even more
delicate, and explains the rather large lower bounds on n in Table 1. No
doubt a more careful construction of suitable triples, perhaps not so heavily
reliant on the hard work already done by Conder in [8], could achieve more
realistic lower bounds. Indeed, minor modifications to our proof yield a few
smaller examples, such as A246 , while Conder [10] has recently used Magma
to show that A168 is a dHB group. (This is, in fact, the smallest example of
a dHB group currently known to us.) However, one should not expect major
improvements, since An is never a dHB group if n < 168 (see Theorem 3.1).
In 2010, Pellegrini and Tamburini [37] showed that the double cover Ãn
of An is a Hurwitz group for all n ≥ 231; in Section 4, a small modification
of the proof of Theorem 1.1 gives the following, where Nr is as in Table 1:

3

Corollary 1.2 If n ≡ r mod (14) and n ≥ Nr + 112 then the double cover
Ãn of An is a doubly Hurwitz Beauville group. In particular, this applies for
all n ≥ 701.
In 2000, Lucchini, Tamburini and Wilson [32] showed that if n ≥ 287
then SLn (q) is a Hurwitz group for each prime power q, and it immediately
follows that the same applies to the simple group Ln (q) = P SLn (q). By
combining our method of proof with theirs (an adaptation of Conder’s in [8],
using permutation matrices in place of permutations), we will prove the
following in Section 5:
Corollary 1.3 If n ≡ r mod (14) and n ≥ Nr + 42 then the groups SLn (q)
and Ln (q) are doubly Hurwitz Beauville groups for all prime powers q. In
particular, this applies for all n ≥ 631.
In contrast with the above results, we will show in Section 6 that there
are no dHB groups among various other families of simple groups, either by
arguments similar to those which apply to Macbeath’s Hurwitz groups, or
by a more detailed analysis of their generating triples of type (2, 3, 7):
Theorem 1.4 If G is a simple group of one of the following types,
1. a sporadic simple group,
2. Ln (q) (n ≤ 7), 2 G2 (3e ), 2 F4 (2e ), 2 F4 (2)′ , G2 (q) or 3 D4 (q),
then G is not a doubly Hurwitz Beauville group:
The groups listed here include many of the families of simple Hurwitz
groups of small Lie rank. Of course, several families remain, and there is
a vast no-man’s-land between these groups and those in Corollary 1.3, in
which results about dHB groups will no doubt be harder to obtain.
Although the techniques we use are almost entirely group-theoretic, in
order to make this paper accessible to geometers and others we have given
rather more background detail than experts in group theory might require.
For a similar reason, in Section 9 we will discuss some connections between
the method of proof of Theorem 1.1, the algebraic theory of maps on surfaces
developed by Singerman and the first author in [27], and Grothendieck’s
theory of dessins d’enfants [23].
Acknowledgements The second author was supported by the grant SFB
701 at Universität Bielefeld and is grateful to Alastair Litterick for many
helpful conversations.
4

2

Techniques

2.1

Some classical results

In the proof of Theorem 1.1, we will follow Conder in applying the following
theorem of Jordan (see [45, Theorem 13.9]):
Theorem 2.1 (Jordan) If G is a primitive permutation group of degree
n, containing a cycle of prime length with at least three fixed points, then
G ≥ An .
The following corollary is a minor generalisation of a result of Everitt [16,
Lemma 2.3]:
Corollary 2.2 Let G be a permutation group of finite degree n, with a transitive subgroup H = hh1 , . . . , hr i. Suppose that G contains an element g with
a cycle c such that
1. c has prime length p ≤ n − 3 which is coprime to the lengths of all
other cycles of g;
2. for each i = 1, . . . , r, there is an element of c with its image under hi
also in c.
Then G ≥ An .
Proof. By (1), replacing c by a suitable power allows us to assume that
g = c, so g fixes all points outside c. It is now sufficient to show that G is
primitive, since then Jordan’s Theorem completes the proof.
Suppose that G is imprimitive. For each block of imprimitivity B meeting
c, |B ∩ c| must divide p. If |B ∩ c| = 1 for all such B, then since g permutes
these blocks transitively yet fixes all points outside c, it follows that |B| = 1,
contradicting imprimitivity. Hence |B ∩ c| = p, that is, c is contained in a
single block B. But now condition (2) implies that each generator hi of H
maps B to itself, and hence so does H, contradicting the transitivity of H.
Thus G is primitive, as required.

The following result of Frobenius [19] allows one to count the triples of
a given type, such as (2, 3, 7), in a given finite group:
Theorem 2.3 (Frobenius) Let X , Y and Z be conjugacy classes in a finite
group G. Then the number n(X , Y, Z) = nG (X , Y, Z) of solutions in G of

5

the equation xyz = 1, where x ∈ X , y ∈ Y and z ∈ Z, is given by the
formula
|X | · |Y| · |Z| X χ(x)χ(y)χ(z)
,
|G|
χ(1)
χ
where the sum is over all irreducible complex characters χ of G.
Of course, if such triples exist one still has to determine whether any of
them generate the whole group. For this, knowledge of the subgroup lattice
of G, or at least a list of its maximal subgroups, is important.
The numbers nG (X , Y, Z) given by Theorem 2.3 are sometimes referred
to as ‘structure constants’, since they are closely related to the structure
constants for the centreP
of the group algebra CG. This has a basis consisting
of the class sums X = {x | x ∈ X } for the conjugacy classes X of G. The
coefficient of Z in X · Y is the number of pairs (x, y) ∈ X × Y such that
xy = z for some fixed z ∈ Z, and this is given by
|X | · |Y| X χ(x)χ(y)χ(z)
n(X , Y, Z −1 )
|X | · |Y| X χ(x)χ(y)χ(z −1 )
=
=
|G|
χ(1)
|G|
χ(1)
|Z|
χ
χ
where Z −1 denotes the conjugacy class {z −1 | z ∈ Z}.
The following is a special case of a more general theorem of Singerman [40]
about Fuchsian groups. If M is a subgroup of finite index n in ∆, then ∆
acts as a transitive group of degree n on the cosets of M . If α, β and γ
are the numbers of fixed points of X, Y and Z in this action, then M has
signature
(g; 2[α] , 3[β] , 7[γ] )
with g (the genus of H/M , where H is the hyperbolic plane) given by the
Riemann-Hurwitz formula
g =1+

1
(n − 21α − 28β − 36γ) .
84

(2)

Conversely, if ∆ has a transitive permutation representation of degree n,
then the stabilisers of points form a conjugacy class of subgroups of index n
with this signature.

2.2

Conder’s diagrams

In [8], Marston Conder constructed quotients of ∆ by applying Graham
Higman’s technique of ‘sewing coset diagrams together’. These diagrams
6

illustrate pairs of permutations x and y of order 2 and 3, with product of
order 7, which generate a transitive group. Each diagram is a coset diagram
for the stabiliser of a point, with respect to the generators x and y: small triangles, taken anticlockwise, represent 3-cycles of y, and heavy dots represent
its fixed points, while long edges represent 2-cycles of x. An equivalent but
more economical representation is to regard x and y as the canonical generators for a map on an oriented surface, as in [27], permuting arcs (directed
edges) by reversing them or rotating them around their incident vertices:
thus each of Conder’s small triangles is shrunk to a point, so that vertices of
valency 1 and 3 represent fixed points and 3-cycles of y, while edges and free
edges represent 2-cycles and fixed points of x. The faces of the map then
correspond to the cycles of z := (xy)−1 ; each face has seven sides or one,
with a free edge counting as one side. The group hx, yi, a quotient of ∆ since
x2 = y 3 = z 7 = xyz = 1, is the cartographic group of the map, or the monodromy group of the corresponding dessin d’enfant [28] in Grothendieck’s
terminology. (The connections with maps and dessins will be discussed in
more detail in Section 9.) For the rest of this paper, the terms ‘diagram’ and
‘map’, and the symbols x, y and z, will always have the above meaning.
For example, Figure 1 shows a typical permutation diagram (called A
in [8]), with the corresponding map A (of genus 0). The permutations x, y
and z are elements of the symmetric group S14 with cycle structures 12 26 ,
12 34 and 72 . The cartographic group hx, yi is the simple group L2 (13) in its
natural representation of degree 14 on the projective line P1 (F13 ).

A

A

Figure 1: Conder’s diagram A and the corresponding map A.
The diagrams Conder used, such as A in Figure 1, are all invariant under a reflection t which inverts x and y, so that hx, y, ti ie the extended
cartographic group of the map, a quotient of the extended triangle group
∆∗ = ∆[2, 3, 7] = hX, Y, T | X 2 = Y 3 = T 2 = (XY )7 = (XT )2 = (Y T )2 = 1i
7

which contains ∆ with index 2. Having odd order, x and z are always even
permutations, and hence so is y, whereas t could be even or odd.
Diagram
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N

Degree
14
15
21
22
28
30
42
42
57
72
72
102
108
108

Parity
+
+
−
−
+
+
+
−
−
−
+
−
+
+

Fixed points
2, 2, 0
3, 0, 1
5, 0, 0
2, 1, 1
4, 1, 0
2, 0, 2
6, 0, 0
6, 0, 0
5, 0, 1
4, 0, 2
4, 0, 2
2, 0, 4
4, 0, 3
4, 0, 3

Handles
1, 0, 0
0, 2, 1
1, 0, 1
0, 1, 0
1, 1, 0
0, 1, 0
3, 0, 0
1, 0, 1
0, 2, 0
2, 0, 0
1, 0, 0
0, 1, 0
1, 1, 0
1, 0, 1

Cycle-lengths of w
1, 13
3, 5, 7
1, 4, 8, 8
5, 6, 11
1, 93
152
13 , 133
1, 3, 10, 11, 17
4, 7, 8, 10, 13, 15
12 , 10, 112 , 16, 22
1, 5, 17, 49
21, 23, 58
1, 12, 14, 19, 26, 36
1, 9, 18, 20, 21, 39

Table 2: The 14 basic diagrams.
Conder constructed his diagrams from 14 basic diagrams A, . . . N , drawn
in [8]; the corresponding maps A, . . . , N are shown in the Appendix. Table 2
gives information about these diagrams which we will need later, namely the
degree of the permutation group, the parity of t, the numbers of fixed points
of x, y and z, the numbers of (k)-handles for k = 1, 2 and 3 (see §2.3), and
the cycle structure of the permutation w := xyt, with an entry lm indicating
m cycles of length l. (The significance of these cycle-lengths, together with
the reason for showing some of them in bold face, will be

2.3

Composing diagrams and maps

In [8], Conder described a method for joining pairs of diagrams together to
produce larger diagrams. Here we will reinterpret and illustrate this idea
in terms of the corresponding maps. A (k)-handle, for k = 1, 2 or 3, is a
pair a, b of fixed points of the involution x satisfying b = a(xy)k = at (see
Figure 2).
If maps D and D ′ of degrees n and n′ have (k)-handles a, b and a′ , b′ , for
the same value of k, then (a, a′ ) and (b, b′ ) are defined to be new 2-cycles
for x, while the remaining cycles of x on the two maps, together with those
8

b

a

b

a

b

a

Figure 2: (k)-handles for k = 1, 2, 3.
b′

a′

D′

D′

a

b

D

D

Figure 3: (1)-composition of dessins
of y and t, are unchanged. This process is called k-composition. Figure 3
illustrates (1)-composition of D and D ′ ; the process is similar for k = 2, 3.
It is straightforward to check that x and y again generate a transitive group
with x2 = y 3 = (xy)7 = 1, so this creates a new map of the required type
and of degree n+n′ . We will denote this new map by D +D ′ or, following [8],
9

by D(k)D ′ if we want to emphasise the type of handles used. If v(D) denotes
the vector (α, β, γ) giving the numbers of fixed points of x, y and z in D,
then v(D + D ′ ) = v(D) + v(D ′ ) − (4, 0, 0).
Topologically, this can be regarded as a connected sum operation on
maps, in which two free edges a, b of D are joined to two similar free edges
a′ , b′ of D ′ to form two new edges, and the underlying surfaces are joined
across cuts between the corresponding free ends. By drawing D and D ′ in
the plane (possibly with crossings), both on the same axis of symmetry and
with the relevant (k)-handles in the outer face, as on the left of Figure 3,
one can see that no new crossings are introduced, so D + D ′ has genus
g(D + D ′ ) = g(D) + g(D ′ ).
These composition operations can be iterated, provided suitable disjoint
pairs of handles are available, allowing maps of unbounded degrees to be constructed. (Note that the only Hurwitz map containing non-disjoint handles
is B, where any two of its three handles have a fixed point in common.) The
maps A, . . . , N corresponding to the basic diagrams in [8] all have genus 0, so
the same applies to any map constructed in this way by forming a chain (or
even a tree) of them. However, by using other patterns of composition, including joining a map to itself, one can construct maps of unbounded genus:
for instance the map G, which has three (1)-handles, can act as a ‘pair of
pants’ (a sphere minus three discs), 2(g − 1) of which can be composed with
each other, using all available handles, to form an orientable surface of any
genus g ≥ 2.

2.4

Cycles of w

It will be important for the proof of Theorem 1.1 to have information about
the cycles of the permutation w := xyt in various maps, so that Corollary 2.2
can be applied to the element g = w and the subgroup H := hx, yi of
G := hx, y, ti.
The cycles of w in the 14 basic diagrams are described in [8]; in addition
to this one needs to understand the effect of (k)-composition on its cycles.
For this it is sufficient to consider just those cycles containing a, b, a′ or b′ ,
since no others are changed.
In (1)-composition, the two fixed points a and a′ of x in D and D ′ , initially
fixed by w in its actions on D and D ′ , form a 2-cycle in its action on D(1)D ′ ,
′
while the cycles (b, bw, . . . , bwl−1 ) and (b′ , b′ w, . . . , b′ wl −1 ) of w containing
′
b and b′ merge to form a single cycle (b, b′ w, . . . , b′ wl −1 , b′ , bw, . . . , bwl−1 ) of
w. More conveniently, if we write the two cycles as cb and cb′ ending with b

10

and b′ , they are concatenated to form a single cycle
′

cb cb′ = (bw, . . . , bwl−1 , b, b′ w, . . . , b′ wl −1 , b′ ).
The situation is a little more complicated when k = 2 or 3, depending
on whether or not a and b are in the same cycle of w on D, and likewise for
a′ and b′ . If neither of these conditions is satisfied (as always happens when
k = 1), the cycles ca and ca′ ending with a and a′ are concatenated to form
a cycle ca ca′ , and similarly for the cycles cb and cb′ , as above. If a and b are
in the same cycle of w, which we can write as ca cb , but a′ and b′ are not,
then the cycles ca′ and cb′ are inserted, immediately after a and b, into ca cb
to form a single cycle ca ca′ cb cb′ of w. By symmetry between D and D ′ there
is a similar insertion of cycles if a′ and b′ are in the same cycle, but a and
b are not. However, if a and b are in the same cycle ca cb , and a′ and b′ are
in the same cycle ca′ cb′ , then we obtain two cycles ca cb′ and cb ca′ of w in
D(k)D ′ .
The following illustrative examples will be used later in the proof of
Theorem 1.1. First, for any map D, let Π(D) denote the set of primes
dividing the cycle-lengths of w on D.
Example 1. The map G has three (1)-handles, and the cycle structure of
w on G is 13 , 133 (see Table 2): the three fixed points are the elements a
in the three handles, and three cycles of length 13 each contain one of the
points b in the handles. Suppose that we compose two copies of G to form
the map G(1)G, using a single (1)-handle {a, b} and {a′ , b′ } in each copy. (It
does not matter which handles we choose, by the C3 symmetry of G.) Then
the two fixed points a, a′ form a 2-cycle of w, and two cycles of length 13
are concatenated to form a 26-cycle containing b and b′ . The cycle structure
of w on G(1)G is therefore 14 , 2, 134 , 26. This map now has four (1)-handles,
and again each consists of a fixed point of w and an element of a 13-cycle.
This means that if we iterate this process, adjoining further copies of G in
any way to form a compound map mG = G + · · · + G, the only cycle-lengths
we will obtain will be 1, 2, 13 and 26, so Π(mG) ⊆ {2, 13}.
Example 2. The maps L and M each have a single (2)-handle, {a, b} and
{a′ , b′ }. Suppose that we use these to form the map L(2)M. The cycle
structure of w on L is 21, 23, 58, with a and b (α and β in [8]) in the cycles of
lengths 21 and 23. The cycle structure of w on M is 1, 12, 14, 19, 26, 36, with
a′ and b′ in the cycles of lengths 36 and 19. Since a and b are in separate
cycles of w, as are a′ and b′ , the cycles containing a and a′ are concatenated
to form a cycle of length 21 + 36 = 57, while those containing b and b′ form
11

a cycle of length 23 + 19 = 42. Thus the cycle structure of w on L(2)M is
1, 12, 14, 26, 42, 57, 58, so Π(L(2)M) = {2, 3, 7, 13, 19, 29}.
In [8], Conder defined a cycle c of w to be a useful cycle if, for each of
the permutations h = x and y, there is a point in c with its image under
h also in c: this implies that c satisfies condition (2) of Corollary 2.2 with
H = hx, yi ≤ G = hx, y, ti. It is also required that in the case h = x, the
chosen point should not be a fixed point of x contained in a (k)-handle for
k = 1, 2 or 3: this implies that the property of being useful is invariant under
composition, even if this embeds the cycle in a longer cycle of w, since the
latter is then also a useful cycle. In Table 2, the lengths of useful cycles in
the 14 basic diagrams are indicated in bold face.

3

Proof of Theorem 1.1

The general strategy of the proof is, for each r = 0, 1, . . . , 13 and for each
sufficiently large integer m ≡ r mod (14), to construct a map W of degree
m, by following Conder’s method in [8], and then to compose each of two
copies of W with a map Xi (i = 1, 2), where X1 and X2 have the same degree
210 but have different numbers of fixed points for each of the canonical
generators x, y and z. This gives two maps Wi = W + Xi of the same degree
n = m+210 ≡ r mod (14), but with different numbers of fixed points for their
canonical generators xi , yi and zi . As in [8] we will use Jordan’s Theorem
(or, more precisely, its corollary) to prove that the cartographic group hxi , yi i
of each map Wi is the alternating group An . The condition on numbers of
fixed points then guarantees that the two generating triples (xi , yi , zi ) for
An satisfy the Beauville condition, with the Galois (minimal regular) covers
fi of Wi as the corresponding Hurwitz curves Ci in the construction of the
W
Beauville surface.
The first ingredient of W is a map Us , corresponding to Conder’s ‘stock’
diagram Us . Here we will make a slight modification of Conder’s construction
of Us , for a reason which will be explained later. For each s ≥ 3 we take
s′ = ⌊s/3⌋ copies of the basic map G, joined by (1)-handles to form a chain
s′ G = G(1)G(1) · · · (1)G, and then if s ≡ 1 or 2 mod (3) we add a copy of
the basic map A or E to this chain by (1)-composition. Since A, E and G
have degrees 14, 28 and 42, Us has degree 14s, and by inspection it has at
least two unused (1)-handles, which we will need later. (This is why we have
avoided the cases s ≤ 2 also considered by Conder, and why in the case s ≡ 2
mod 3 we have added a single copy of E rather than two copies of A as in [8],
thus ensuring that there are two unused (1)-handles when s = 5.) As shown
12

in Example 1, all cycles of w in s′ G have length 1, 2, 13 or 26, and in any
unused (1)-handle, the fixed points a and b of y are in cycles of w of length 1
and 13 respectively. Adjoining A extends a pair of cycles of length 1 and 13
into cycles of length 2 and 26, while adjoining E increases their lengths to 2
and 22 and adds two cycles of length 9, so in all cases Π(Us ) ⊆ {2, 3, 11, 13}.
The second ingredient of W is one of the maps corresponding to the
fourteen compound diagrams listed by Conder in [8, p. 84]; he did not name
these diagrams (they are denoted by Hd in [32], where d is their degree),
so we shall call each map Vr for r = 0, 1, . . . , 13 as it has degree dr ≡ r
mod (14). These maps are constructed as chains of basic maps, described
in the second column of Table 3. The cycle-lengths for w on each map Vr ,
calculated by Conder, are given in the final column, starting (before the
semicolon) with the two cycles of lengths 1 and lr containing the pair of
points a, b in an unused (1)-handle in Vr . By using this (1)-handle, we can
compose Vr with Us for any s ≥ 3 to form a map W = Us (1)Vr of degree
m = 14s + dr ≡ r mod (14). The only effect of this composition on the
cycle-lengths of w is that two points a in Us and a′ in Vr , originally fixed
by w, now form a 2-cycle, and two cycles of lengths 13 and lr in Us and Vr ,
containing b and b′ , are joined to form a cycle of length lr′ = 13 + lr , shown
in the final column of Table 3. The lengths of the cycles of w meeting Vr
can therefore be seen from this table by replacing the initial pair 1, lr with
2, lr′ . The remaining cycles, those contained in Us , all have length 1, 2, 13
or 26 (and their multiplicities are unimportant). As shown by Conder, each
map Vr provides a useful cycle of prime length pr (indicated in bold face in
Table 3); by inspection of Table 3, pr is coprime to all other cycle-lengths
for w in W.
We will now modify these maps W by adjoining a suitable map Xi
(i = 1, 2) to each of two copies of W. We define X1 to be a chain 4G =
G(1)G(1)G(1)G, with three copies of A attached by (1)-composition, so that
X1 = 4G + 3A has degree 4 · 42 + 3 · 14 = 210 ≡ 0 mod (14), and has three
unused (1)-handles. Since constructing X1 involves six joins, each eliminating four fixed points of x, the vector v(X1 ) giving the numbers of fixed
points of x, y and z on X1 is 4(6, 0, 0) + 3(2, 2, 0) − 6(4, 0, 0) = (6, 6, 0). Note
that, as in the case of Us , all cycles of w in X1 have length 1, 2, 13 or 26,
so Π(X1 ) = {2, 3, 13}, and that in any unused (1)-handle, the fixed points a
and b of y are in cycles of w of length 1 and 13 respectively. We define X2 to
be the compound map L(2)M of degree 102 + 108 = 210 constructed in Example 2, with Π(X2 ) = {2, 3, 7, 13, 19, 29}. This has one unused (1)-handle,
and its fixed point vector v(X2 ) is (2, 0, 4) + (4, 0, 3) − (4, 0, 0) = (2, 0, 7),
differing from v(X1 ) in all three coordinates. Since W has an unused (1)13

r
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

Vr
H
B(3)H
F(2)E(1)G(1)H
E(2)I(2)F
J (1)K
C(3)N (1)E(2)F
B(3)C(1)G(1)M(2)F
C(1)E(2)E
B(3)C
C(3)H(1)J
B(3)C(1)G(1)E(2)F
C(1)J (1)J
J (1)M
F(2)I(2)M

dr
42
57
142
115
144
187
216
77
36
135
136
165
180
195

Cycle-lengths for w
1, 10; 3, 11, 17
1, 10; 3, 5, 14, 24
1, 13; 22 , 3, 11, 17, 22, 23, 242
1, 9; 4, 10, 17, 222 , 30
1, 11; 2, 5, 10, 16, 17, 22, 60
1, 17; 2, 8, 18, 20, 242 , 30, 43
1, 13; 22 , 5, 8, 11, 12, 14, 24, 26, 34, 64
1, 9; 2, 4, 8, 17, 182
1, 11; 5, 8, 11
1, 11; 1, 2, 3, 8, 10, 16, 19, 212 , 22
1, 13; 22 , 5, 8, 11, 22, 243
1, 11; 22 , 4, 8, 102 , 162 , 19, 223
1, 11; 2, 10, 12, 14, 16, 19, 22, 26, 47
1, 51; 4, 10, 12, 14, 23, 262 , 28

lr′
23
23
26
22
24
30
26
22
24
24
26
24
24
64

Table 3: The maps Vr
handle (within Us ), we can form a pair of maps Wi = W(1)Xi (i = 1, 2) of
the same degree n = m + 210 = 14s + dr + 210 ≡ r mod (14), but with fixed
point vectors v(Wi ) differing in all three coordinates.
We now need to show that the cartographic group of Wi is the alternating
group An . In order to apply Corollary 2.2, we need the element w to contain
a useful cycle of prime length p ≤ n − 3, which is coprime to all other cyclelengths for w in Wi . The obvious candidate is the useful cycle of length
p = pr in Vr , since this is coprime to all other cycle-lengths of w in W.
We need to check that adjoining Xi does not introduce a new cycle which
prevents this property from extending to Wi .
Adjoining X1 to W creates new cycles of lengths 1, 2, 13 or 26, all of which
are coprime to pr for each r. However, in the case of X2 we meet a technical
problem: the cycle-lengths of w on X2 = L(2)M are 1, 12, 14, 26, 23 + 19 =
42, 21 + 36 = 57 and 58, with the merged cycle of length 57 containing the
fixed point b of x in the unique (1)-handle; when we compose W and X2 by
means of a (1)-handle in a copy of G in W2 , we obtain a merged cycle of
length 57+13 = 70, which is divisible by 5. We also introduce prime divisors
3, 7, 19 and 29 from cycles in X2 , which may or may not already be present
in Π(W) (the primes 2 and 13 certainly are, from cycles in Us ). The possibly
new primes 3, 7 and 29 cause no problem since pr never takes these values.
However, pr = 5 when r = 1, 6, 8 or 10, and pr = 19 when r = 9 or 11, so in
14

these six cases pr is not coprime to all other cycle-lengths of w on W2 .

3.1

The cases r = 0, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 12, 13.

There is no such difficulty with the other eight values of r, those for which
pr ∈ {17, 23, 43, 47}. In these cases Corollary 2.2, applied to the element
g = w and the transitive subgroup H = hx, yi of index 2 in G = hx, y, ti,
proves that G ≥ An , and hence H = An . For such values of r this deals with
all degrees n = 14s + dr + 210 where s ≥ 3. For r = 0, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 12 and 13
we have
dr = 42, 142, 115, 144, 187, 77, 180 and 195,
so in these congruence classes r mod (14) we have proved the result for all
n ≥ 252 + dr = 294, 394, 367, 396, 439, 329, 432 and 447.

3.2

The cases r = 6, 9, 10, 11.

When r = 6, 9, 10, or 11 the coprimality condition on pr fails for j = 2,
so the above argument does not apply. Let us therefore go back to the
construction of W in these four cases, and replace the map Vr with Vr∗
where r ∗ = 13, 2, 3, 4 ≡ r + 7 mod (14), giving a map Us (1)Vr∗ , constructed
as before, instead of Us (1)Vr . This adds 7 to the congruence class mod (14)
of the degree, so to restore the original class let us also adjoin a copy of C (of
degree 21) at an unused (1)-handle. If s 6= 4, 5 there are at least two such
handles in Us , which can be used to attach C and Xj , but if s = 4 or 5 there is
only one, so we will need to create another by first adjoining an extra copy of
G to Us . We therefore form W = C(1)Us∗ (1)Vr∗ and Wi = W(1)Xi for i = 1, 2
where s∗ := s + 3 or s as s = 4, 5 or otherwise. This restores the congruence
class of the degree n mod (14), and replaces the prime pr = 5 with pr∗ = 23
(when r = 6) or 17 (when r = 9, 10 or 11). There is a useful cycle of w
of length pr∗ in Wi ; adjoining C creates merged cycles of length 1 + 1 = 2
and 8 + 13 = 21, and introduces new cycles of lengths 4 and 8, so w has
no other cycles of length divisible by pr∗ , and the proof proceeds as before.
Since n = 21 + 14s∗ + dr∗ + 210, with s∗ ≥ 6 and dr∗ = 195, 142, 115, 144,
we obtain lower bounds n ≥ 510, 457, 430 and 459 for r = 6, 9, 10 and 11.

3.3

The cases r = 1, 8.

The trick we used for r = 6, 9, 10 and 11, of replacing Vr with Vr∗ where
r ∗ ≡ r + 7 mod (14), will not work in the remaining cases r = 1 and 8,
15

since it simply transposes these two problematic values, so here we must
try something else. When r = 1 let us instead replace V1 with V5 in the
construction of W, thus replacing p1 = 5 with p5 = 43. This adds 4 to the
congruence class of the degree, so to restore it let us adjoin a copy of M, of
degree 108 ≡ 10 mod (14); this can be done using the (1)-handles in M and
in a copy of G in Us∗ (where we define s∗ as before since we need an extra
copy of G if s = 4 or 5). Adjoining M to G creates cycles of w of length
1 + 1 = 2 and 36 + 13 = 49, and introduces new cycles of length 12, 14, 19
and 26, but no cycles of length divisible by 43 arise. The proof now proceeds
as before, giving a lower bound n ≥ 589.
Similarly when r = 8 we can replace V8 with V12 = J (1)M, and p8 = 5
with p12 = 47. As in the case r = 1, we can restore the congruence class of
the degree by adding a copy of M, only this time we can attach it, through
its (2)-handle, to the unused (2)-handle in the copy of M in V12 , so no extra
copy of G is required. The useful cycle of w of length 47 = 11 + 36 in V12 is
then merged with a cycle of length 36 in M to form a cycle (still useful) of
prime length 83. There are no other cycles of length divisible by 83, so we
can apply Corollary 2.2 as before. This gives a lower bound of n ≥ 540, and
completes the proof of Theorem 1.1.


3.4

Smaller values of n

Note that if s = 3 we do not need a (1)-handle to adjoin A or E when
constructing Us , so when r = 1, 6, 9, 10 or 11 we do not need to add an extra
copy of G at the last stage of the proof. In these cases we can therefore
take s∗ = s = 3, reducing the degree by 42, so that An is also a dHB group
for n = Nr − 42 = 547, 468, 415, 388 and 417. (Note that we have not
established the result for n = Nr − 14 or Nr − 28.)
For some values of r we can find smaller examples of dHB groups by taking s = 0 and using Conder’s stock diagram U0 , namely the empty diagram,
so that W = Vr . We then form Wi = W(1)Xi for i = 1, 2 by attaching Xi
directly to Vr , rather than to a copy of G in Us as in the preceding proof,
so that each Wi has degree n = dr + 210. (Here we use the (1)-handle in
Vr which was previously used to attach it to Us .) To complete the proof, it
is sufficient to check that the useful cycle of length pr in Vr remains useful
after this joining operation. Attaching X1 merges the cycle of length lr in
Vr containing a fixed point of x with one of length 13 in a copy of G in
X1 to form a cycle of length lr′ = lr + 13; this is coprime to pr for each
r, so no problem arises. However, attaching X2 creates a cycle of length
lr′′ = lr + 57, and now we have a problem when r = 4, 6 or 10, since then
16

lr′′ = 68, 70 or 70 is divisible by pr = 17, 5 or 5. In all other cases, namely
r = 0, 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12 or 13, the prime pr does not divide lr′′ , so An is
a dHB group for n = 252, 267, 352, 325, 397, 287, 246, 345, 375, 390 and 405.
In particular, A246 is a dHB group, and in fact it is the smallest example
of a dHB group which we can verify by hand. However, Marston Conder [10]
has recently used Magma to show that A168 is a dHB group. The following
result shows that it is the smallest alternating group with this property.
Indeed, it is currently the smallest example we know of any dHB group.
Theorem 3.1 If An is a dHB group then n ≥ 168.
Proof. If An is a dHB group, then the Riemann-Hurwitz formula shows
that the two quotient maps corresponding to its natural representation have
genus gi satisfying
n = 84(gi − 1) + 21αi + 28βi + 36γi

(i = 1, 2),

where αi , βi and γi are the numbers of fixed points of the two triples of
generators xi , yi and zi . It follows that
n ≡ 21αi + 28βi + 36γi mod (84)
for i = 1, 2, so
α1 ≡ α2 mod (4),

β1 ≡ β2 mod (3),

γ1 ≡ γ2 mod (7).

Writing
α1 − α2 = 4a,

β1 − β2 = 3b,

γ1 − γ2 = 7c,

we see that a, b and c are integers satisfying
a + b + 3c = g2 − g1 .
Moreover, they are each non-zero by the Beauville condition on the triples
(xi , yi , zi ). Since gi , αi , βi , γi ≥ 0 it is clear that the least value of n satisfying
these conditions is obtained by taking each gi = 0, with (a, b, c) = ±(1, 2, −1)
or ±(2, 1, −1), and taking the triples (αi , βi , γi ) to be (4, 6, 0) and (0, 0, 7),
or (8, 3, 0) and (0, 0, 7), so that n = 168 in all cases.


4

The double cover of An

For each n ≥ 4, the double cover Ãn = 2.An is the unique group G with
a central involution ι ∈ G′ such that G/hιi ∼
= An . For n = 4 or 5 it is
17

isomorphic to the binary tetrahedral or binary icosahedral group, and in the
latter case also to SL2 (5), while Ã6 ∼
= SL2 (9).
An element of An of odd order k lifts to a pair of elements of order
k and 2k in Ãn , while an involution g ∈ An lifts to a pair of elements of
order 2 or 4 as the number τ (g) := (n − |Fix(g)|)/2 of transpositions in
g (necessarily even) is or is not divisible by 4. It follows that a (2, 3, 7)triple (x, y, z) generating An lifts to one generating Ãn if and only if τ (x) is
divisible by 4, and that every such triple for Ãn arises in this way. Pellegrini
and Tamburini [37] used this to determine those n for which Ãn is a Hurwitz
group; these include all n ≥ 231, together with some smaller values.
It also follows from a result of Fairbairn, Magaard and Parker [18] on
quasisimple groups that Ãn is a Beauvillle group for all n ≥ 6. Here we will
show how to adapt the proof of Theorem 1.1 to prove Corollary 1.2, that Ãn
is a dHB group for all sufficiently large n.
It is sufficient to show that An has a pair of generating triples (xi , yi , zi )
of type (2, 3, 7) for i = 1, 2, which satisfy the Beauville property and have
τ (xi ) divisible by 4, since these then lift to a suitable pair for Ãn . We have
already done all of this in proving Theorem 1.1, apart from dealing with
τ (xi ), so it is sufficient to adapt the proof to make each τ (xi )/2 even.
By inspection of Table 2, we see that in all 14 of Conder’s basic diagrams,
apart from C, E, M and N , the involution x has τ (x)/2 odd. When forming
a (k)-join, for any k, one must add the values of τ /2 on the two components
and also add 1 for the two new transpositions created by the join. Thus
adjoining a copy of C, E, M or N to a map changes the parity of τ /2, while
adjoining any of the other ten basic maps preserves it.
Since Wi = W(1)Xi for i = 1, 2, with τ /2 equal to 51 and 52 on X1
and X2 , we see that τ (x1 )/2 and τ (x2 )/2 always have opposite parities. If
τ (x1 )/2 is odd and τ (x2 )/2 is even, let us add a copy of E to W1 , and two
copies of A to W2 , using (1)-joins with copies of G in Us ; if the latter has
insufficient unused (1)-handles we can add one or two copies of G to Us in
each Wi . This changes the parity of τ (x1 )/2 and preserves that of τ (x2 )/2,
so that both are now even, and it increases the degree n in each case by 28
(or by 70 or 112 if extra copies of G are needed). It is straightforward to
check that these adjunctions have no effect on the validity of the proof of
Theorem 1.1, other than possibly through changing the fixed point vectors
v(Wi ). Originally, we had v(W1 ) − v(W2 ) = (6, 6, 0) − (2, 0, 7) = (4, 6, −7),
and adding copies of G to each Wi preserves this difference; adjoining E
to W1 adds (4, 1, 0) − (4, 0, 0) = (0, 1, 0) to v(W1 ), and adjoining 2A to W2
adds 2(2, 2, 0)−2(4, 0, 0) = (−4, 4, 0) to v(W2 ), so after these adjunctions the
difference is (8, 3, −7). This has all three coordinates non-zero, as required.
18

If, on the other hand, τ (x1 )/2 is even and τ (x2 )/2 is odd, we cannot
simply transpose the roles of W1 and W2 since v(W1 ) − v(W2 ) then becomes
(0, 9, −7), so that x1 and x2 are conjugate in An . Instead, arranging as before
that there are two unused (1)-handles in Us , we can use them to form a (1)join in W2 , thus increasing τ (x2 )/2 by 1, while leaving them unused in W1 .
This ensures that τ (xi )/2 is now even for i = 1, 2. Again, the only significant
effect on the proof of Theorem 1.1 is to increase the lower bounds on n
(now by 84), and to change the fixed point vectors v(Wi ) of the two maps.
Originally, we had v(W1 ) − v(W2 ) = (6, 6, 0) − (2, 0, 7) = (4, 6, −7); adding
copies of G preserves this difference, and making an extra join in W2 subtracts
(4, 0, 0) from v(W2 ), so the difference becomes (8, 6, −7), which is still nonzero in all three coordinates. This completes the proof of Corollary 1.2.

5

The groups SLn (q) and Ln (q)

In 2000, Lucchini, Tamburini and Wilson [32] showed that if n ≥ 287 then
SLn (q) is a Hurwitz group for each prime power q; it immediately follows that
the same applies to the simple quotient group Ln (q). Here we will combine
their method of proof with ours for Theorem 1.1 to prove Corollary 1.3, that
these groups are all dHB groups if n is sufficiently large.
Following the notation of [32], let (ξ, y, (ξy)−1 ) be the (2, 3, 7)-triple generating An corresponding to the map Wi in the proof of Theorem 1.1, where
n ≥ Nr and i = 1 or 2. Adding an extra copy of G to Us if necessary (and
thus increasing the degree n by 42), we may assume that the first copy of
G in Us has two free (1)-handles a, b and a′ , b′ (these are v2 , v3 and v14 , v15
in [32]). For any prime power q we can represent ξ and y as permutation
matrices in SLn (q), acting naturally on the permutation module V = Fnq .
Let t1 be a generator of the field Fq , and let x′ (denoted by x1 in [32]) be
the matrix which acts on a and b by
a 7→ −a + t1 a′ ,

b 7→ −b + t1 b′ ,

while fixing the n − 2 remaining standard basis vectors; thus x′ is an involution commuting with ξ. The results in [32, §4], applied there to Conder’s
generators ξ, y for An , carry over to our situation without change, and show
that if x := x′ ξ and z := (xy)−1 , then (x, y, z) is a Hurwitz triple generating
SLn (q).
Taking i = 1 and 2 we obtain two such triples (xi , yi , zi ). Now the
subspace of V fixed by the matrix yi has dimension equal to the number of
cycles of the permutation yi ; this takes different values for i = 1 and 2, since
19

by our earlier construction the numbers of fixed points are different, so y1
and y2 cannot be conjugate in SLn (q) to powers of each other. A similar
argument applies to the involutions xi , since the relevant dimensions are the
numbers of cycles of ξ, minus 2. Finally, it is shown in [32, Lemma 4(a)]
that xy is conjugate to ξy, so this argument also applies to the elements zi .
Thus the triples (xi , yi , zi ) satisfy the Beauville condition, as required.

Lucchini and Tamburini [31] have used the methods developed in [32]
to prove Hurwitz generation for Sp2n (q), Ω+
2n (q) and SU2n (q) for all q, and
Ω2n+7 (q) and SU2n+7 (q) for all odd q, provided n ≥ 371 (and also for some
smaller values of n). Similar arguments to that given above, omitted for
brevity, show that these are also dHB groups for all sufficiently large n.

6

Other simple groups.

It is natural to consider which other finite groups, especially simple groups,
could be dHB groups. We will follow the ATLAS [11] for notation for groups;
in particular we will write nA, nB, . . . for the conjugacy classes of elements
of order n in a group, in decreasing order of their centralisers.
Theorem 6.1 No sporadic simple group is a doubly Hurwitz Beauville group.
Proof. Twelve of the 26 sporadic simple groups are Hurwitz groups, namely
J1 , J2 , J4 , F i22 , F i′24 , Co3 , He, Ru, HN, Ly, T h and M
(see Conder [9], for example); however, of these only Held’s group He, Fischer’s group F i′24 and the monster M have at least two conjugacy classes of
subgroups of each order 2, 3 and 7, a necessary condition for being a dHB
group.
Held’s group has two classes of involutions, two classes of elements of
order 3 and five classes of elements of order 7. Its outer automorphism group,
of order 2, transposes the mutually inverse classes 7A and 7B, and similarly
7D and 7E, whereas the classes 2A, 2B, 3A, 3B and 7C are invariant;
in looking for generating triples of type (2, 3, 7) it is therefore sufficient to
restrict attention to elements of order 7 in classes 7A, 7C or 7D. As shown
by Butler [5, §3.4], the only such types with non-zero structure constants
are (2B, 3A, 7A), (2A, 3B, 7C) and (2B, 3B, 7D). Note that the Hurwitz
triples for He exhibited by Woldar in [47] are of the last type. From Butler’s
analysis of the maximal subgroups of He (specifically, his Theorem 23(i)),
it follows by simple counting that triples of the first type all lie in maximal
20

subgroups isomorphic to S4 ×L3 (2). This shows that any Hurwitz generating
triple must have type (2, 3B, 7), so He cannot be a dHB group.
Linton and Wilson considered F i′24 in [30]; they showed that generating
(2, 3, 7) triples must have type (2A, 3C, 7A) or (2A, 3E, 7B), which eliminates
this group. Norton [36] showed that any generating (2, 3, 7) triples in M must
be of type (2B, 3B, 7B) or (2B, 3C, 7B) (see also [46]), so this group is also
eliminated.

This leaves the simple groups of Lie type. Our aim now is to complete the proof of Theorem 1.4 by eliminating various families of low rank.
In [38, Prop. 3.1], Pellegrini and Tamburini have classified the simple Hurwitz groups with an absolutely irreducible projective representation of degree
n ≤ 7. They are the following:
• L2 (p) for primes p ≡ 0, ±1 mod (7) and L2 (p3 ) for p ≡ ±2, ±3 mod (7);
• G2 (q) for prime powers q ≥ 5;
• ‘small’ Ree groups 2 G2 (3e ) for odd e > 1;
• Janko’s sporadic groups J1 and J2 ;
• symplectic groups S6 (q) = P Sp6 (q) for odd q ≥ 5;
• various groups Ln (q) and unitary groups P SUn (q) for n = 5, 6 and 7.
We have already shown that J1 and J2 are not dHB groups; in the following
results we will also eliminate the first three of the above families, together
with the ‘large’ Ree groups 2 F4 (2e )′ for odd e and the Steinberg groups
3 D (q) for odd q.
4
Many of these groups can immediately be eliminated because they do
not have enough conjugacy classes of subgroups of order 2, 3 or 7:
Lemma 6.2 Let G be a Hurwitz group belonging to one of the following
families of finite simple groups:
1. the projective special linear groups Ln (q) where n ≤ 7,
2. the small Ree groups 2 G2 (3e ) for odd e > 1,
3. the large Ree groups 2 F4 (2e )′ for odd e ≥ 1,
4. the exceptional groups G2 (q) for odd q ≥ 5, or
5. the exceptional groups 3 D4 (q) for odd q ≥ 3.
21

Then G is not a dHB group.
Proof. Many of these groups can be eliminated because they have a unique
conjugacy class of involutions: this is clear for the groups L2 (q), and has
been proved by Ward [44] for the small Ree groups. For the groups G2 (q) it
has been proved by Chang [6, Theorem 4.4] in characteristic p 6= 2, 3, and
by Enomoto [15] for p = 3, while for 3 D4 (q) with q odd the result is due to
Deriziotis and Michler [13]. The only Hurwitz group Ln (q) with n = 3 or
4 is L3 (2) ∼
= L2 (7), while Tamburini and Vsemirnov [43] have shown that
when n = 5, 6 or 7 the involutions in Hurwitz generating triples for Ln (q)
all lie in a single conjugacy class. Finally, Shinoda [39] has shown that the
large Ree groups have a unique conjugacy class of elements of order 3. 

7

The groups G2 (2e)

In [34], Malle showed that the group G2 (q) is a Hurwitz group if and only
if q ≥ 5. We dealt with odd values of q in Lemma 6.2, so in this section we
treat the remaining cases, where q is even. Our aim is to prove the following:
Theorem 7.1 If G is the exceptional group G2 (2e ) where e ≥ 3, then G is
not a dHB group.
In order to prove the above theorem, it will be necessary to analyse the
7-structure of G2 (2e ), since the members of this family have two conjugacy
classes each of elements of order 2 and 3. This result is due to Enomoto [15],
who also determined the structure of the centralisers of these elements, which
we reproduce here.
Let q = 2e . Involutions in G2 (q) belong to the conjugacy classes 2A or
2B, with centralisers of order q 6 (q 2 −1) or q 4 (q 2 −1) respectively. The orders
of the centralisers of elements of order 3 depend on the congruence class
ǫ = ±1 of q modulo 3. We denote by 3A the class whose centralisers have
order q 3 (q 2 − 1)(q 3 − ǫ) and are isomorphic to SL3 (q) or SU3 (q) respectively.
We denote by 3B the class whose centralisers have order q(q 2 − 1)(q − ǫ) and
are isomorphic to L2 (q) × (q − ǫ). (Here (q − ǫ) is ATLAS notation for a
cyclic group of order q − ǫ.)
The next lemma treats the conjugacy classes of cyclic subgroups of order 7
in G2 (2e ).
Lemma 7.2 Let G = G2 (q) where q = 2e and e ≥ 1.

22

1. If q ≡ 2 or 4 mod 7, or equivalently if e is not divisible by 3, then the
Sylow 7-subgroups of G are cyclic.
2. If q ≡ 1 mod 7, or equivalently if e is divisible by 3, then G contains
three conjugacy classes of cyclic subgroups of order 7.
Proof. The first part follows from the list of conjugacy classes of G in [15].
The second follows again from [15] and from Malle’s analysis of the Sylow
7-subgroups of G in [34].

As an immediate corollary we have the following.
Corollary 7.3 If 2e ≡ 2 or 4 mod 7, then G2 (2e ) is not a dHB group.
We may therefore assume from now on that e is divisible by 3, so we will
change notation and write q = 8e . Note that ǫ = 1 or −1 as e is even or odd.
Following Malle’s analysis [34] we see that one class of cyclic subgroups
of order 7 in G are generated by elements from a unique conjugacy class
of regular elements which we denote by 7C. The remaining two classes
of cyclic subgroups of order 7 are generated by elements from one of two
conjugacy classes which we denote by 7A and 7B. Elements from these
two classes are distinguished by the fact that if s ∈ 7A or 7B and t is an
involution in CG (s), then t ∈ 2A or 2B respectively [15]. If s ∈ 7A ∪ 7B
then CG (s) ∼
= SL2 (q) × (q − 1), whereas CG (s) ∼
= (q − 1) × (q − 1) if s ∈ 7C.
Remark 7.4 The Hurwitz triples given by Malle [34] are of type (2B, 3B, 7C)
in our notation.
Our strategy is to show that there do not exist Hurwitz generating triples
for G2 (8e ) of type (2A, 3, 7) by using the structure constants for G, as described in Theorem 2.3. We begin by determining the non-zero (2A, 3, 7)
structure constants in CHEVIE [7], which are as follows:
n(2A, 3B, 7B) = q 7 (q 6 − 1),

n(2A, 3B, 7C) = |G|

We immediately have the following:
Lemma 7.5 Let G = G2 (q) where q = 8e and let H be a Hurwitz subgroup
of G of type (2A, 3B, 7B). Then H is a proper subgroup of G.
Proof. Define the following set
H = {(x, y, z) ∈ G × G × G | x ∈ 2A, y ∈ 3B, z ∈ 7B, xyz = 1}
23

and note that |H| = n(2A, 3B, 7B) = q 7 (q 6 − 1). The Hurwitz subgroup
H is generated by a triple (x, y, z) ∈ H. We now let each g ∈ G act on H
by sending (x, y, z) to (xg , y g , z g ). Since |G| = q 6 (q 6 − 1)(q 2 − 1) > |H|,
any orbit of G on H has non-trivial stabilisers, that is, H has a non-trivial
centraliser. It follows, since G is non-abelian and simple, that H is a proper
subgroup of G.

For the Hurwitz subgroups of type (2A, 3B, 7C), we must be a little more
delicate.
Lemma 7.6 Let G = G2 (q) where q = 8e , and let H be a Hurwitz subgroup
of G of type (2A, 3B, 7C).
1. If ǫ = −1 then H lies in a unique conjugacy class of subgroups H ∼
=
∼
L3 (2), with NG (H) = L3 (2).2.
2. If ǫ = 1 then H lies in one of two conjugacy classes of subgroups
isomorphic to L3 (2), with representatives H1 and H2 where NG (H1 ) ∼
=
3 × L3 (2) and NG (H2 ) ∼
= (3 × L3 (2)).2.
Proof.
First we show that such subgroups H exist. From the work of
Cooperstein [12] we see that there exists a unique conjugacy class of maximal
subgroups of G isomorphic to SL3 (q).2. The commutator subgroup SL3 (q)
of such a maximal subgroup contains a unique conjugacy class of involutions
whose elements belong to the G-class 2A. The classification of maximal
subgroups of SL3 (q) can be found in [4], from which we see that such groups
contain subgroups isomorphic to L3 (2). It is clear that elements of order 7
in such subgroups belong to the G-class 7C, and from the non-zero structure
constants of G, elements of order 3 must then belong to the G-class 3B.
From the list of maximal subgroups of SL3 (q) again we see that there are
d = gcd(q −1, 3) conjugacy classes of subgroups of shape d×L3 (2) in SL3 (q).
Suppose that d = 1, in which case ǫ = −1, and let H ∼
= L3 (2) be a representative of such a conjugacy class. The number of (2, 3, 7) triples in H can be
counted by using Theorem 2.3; there are 2|H| of them, since we must count
across both conjugacy classes of elements of order 7 in H. The normaliser in
G of H is NG (H) ∼
= L3 (2).2, so H has |G : NG (H)| = |G|/2|H| conjugates,
giving |G| triples. this accounts for the full number nG (2A, 3B, 7C) of triples.
Now suppose that d = 3, in which case ǫ = 1. There are three conjugacy
classes of subgroups isomorphic to L3 (2) in SL3 (q), two of which are fused
under the action of the outer graph automorphism. Denote by H1 and H2
conjugacy representatives of these classes such that NG (H1 ) ∼
= L3 (2) × 3 and

24

NG (H2 ) ∼
= (3 × L3 (2)).2. A similar calculation shows that the contribution
from these classes is equal to |G|. This completes the proof.

We have shown that any Hurwitz generating triple for G is of type
(2B, 3, 7), completing the proof of Theorem 7.1.

8

The groups 3 D4 (2e)

The groups 3 D4 (q) contain natural copies of G2 (q) as subgroups, so many
of the results we need for them, together with the techniques we use, are
similar to those for G2 (q). Malle [35] has shown that 3 D4 (pe ) (p prime) is
a Hurwitz group if and only if p 6= 3 and pe 6= 4. The case where p ≥ 5
has already been dealt with in Theorem 6.2, so our aim in this section is to
prove the following:
Theorem 8.1 If G is the Steinberg triality group 3 D4 (2e ) where e ≥ 1, then
G is not a dHB gorup.
As in the case of the groups of type G2 (2e ), the groups of type 3 D4 (2e )
have two conjugacy classes each of elements of order 2 and 3, as determined
by Deriziotis and Michler [13]. Here we reproduce their results on the centralisers of these elements.
Let q = 2e . Involutions in 3 D4 (q) belong to the conjugacy classes 2A or
2B, with centralisers of order q 12 (q 6 − 1) or q 10 (q 2 − 1) respectively. The centralisers of elements of order 3 again depend on the congruence class ǫ = ±1
of q modulo 3. We denote by 3A the class whose elements have centralisers
isomorphic to SL2 (q 3 ) × (q − ǫ), where (q − ǫ) denotes the cyclic group of
that order, as before. We denote by 3B the class for which the centralisers
are isomorphic to GL3 (q) or GU3 (q) when ǫ = 1 or −1 respectively.
We now turn to the 7-structure of the groups 3 D4 (2e ).
Lemma 8.2 Let G = 3 D4 (q) where q = 2e and e ≥ 1.
1. If q ≡ 2 or 4 mod 7, or equivalently if e is not divisible by 3, then G
has two conjugacy classes of cyclic subgroups of order 7.
2. If q ≡ 1 mod 7, or equivalently if e is divisible by 3, then G has three
conjugacy classes of cyclic subgroups of order 7.
Proof. These results follow from the analysis due to Malle [35] and the
determination of the conjugacy classes of 3 D4 (q) in [13].

We are now in a position to prove the following.
25

Lemma 8.3 If 2e ≡ 2 or 4 mod 7, then 3 D4 (2e ) is not a dHB group.
Proof. The structure constants for 3 D4 (2e ) in these cases can be determined
by using CHEVIE. We see that all of the n(2A, 3, 7) structure constants are
zero, hence there cannot exist a compatible dHB structure for G.

It now suffices to consider the case where e is divisible by 3, so we change
notation and write q = 8e . Note that ǫ = 1 or −1 as ǫ is even or odd.
We now provide a more detailed description of the 7-structure of 3 D4 (8e )
following [13] and Malle’s analysis [35].
There exists a unique conjugacy class of regular elements of order 7 in
3 D (q), which we denote by 7C. If s ∈ 7C, then C (s) ∼ (q 3 − 1) × (q − 1).
=
4
G
The remaining two classes of cyclic subgroups of order 7 are generated by
elements from one of two conjugacy classes, which we denote by 7A and 7B.
If s ∈ 7A then CG (s) ∼
= SL2 (q 3 ) × (q − 1), while if s ∈ 7B then CG (s) ∼
=
3
SL2 (q) × (q − 1).
Remark 8.4 In our notation, the Hurwitz triples shown to exist by Malle [35]
are of type (2B, 3B, 7C).
We are now in a position to prove the following lemma, which will complete the proof of Theorem 8.1.
Lemma 8.5 Let G = 3 D4 (q) where q = 8e , and let H be a Hurwitz subgroup
of G of type (2A, 3, 7). Then H is a proper subgroup of G.
Proof. We must first determine the non-zero values of n(2A, 3, 7) for G;
there are two such candidates: nG (2A, 3A, 7A) and nG (2A, 3A, 7C).
Using CHEVIE we calculate
nG (2A, 3A, 7A) =

q3 − q2 + 1
|G|.
q 2 (q 6 − 1)

By an argument similar to that used in the proof of Lemma 7.5, it follows
that Hurwitz subgroups of G of type (2A, 3A, 7A) are always proper.
The value n(2A, 3A, 7C) is a so-called ‘exceptional value’ in CHEVIE,
and so it (incorrectly) evaluates to 0 despite contributions from subgroups
isomorphic to G2 (q). Hence we must determine the value by hand. For
this we use the character table of G to determine a bound on the order of n(2A, 3A, 7C). The unipotent characters were determined by Spaltenstein [41] and the remaining characters were determined by Deriziotis and
Michler [13]. For simplicity, we assume that ǫ = −1; the proof in the case
26

ǫ = 1 is identical, apart from appropriate sign changes in the character values. Apart from the trivial character, the characters which do not take the
value 0 on all three conjugacy classes are those denoted as follows: [ε1 ], [ε2 ]
and the four families of characters χ4,1 , χ4,St , χ5,1 and χ5,St . Crucially, since
any element g ∈ 2A ∪ 3A ∪ 7C is conjugate to all of its non-trivial powers,
the character values of g are all rational – in particular they are all integers
– which allows us to compute the following bound relatively easily:
nG (2A, 3A, 7C) ≤

q2

|G|
.
+q+1

From this we see that any (2A, 3A, 7C)-subgroup has a non-trivial centraliser
in G, completing the proof.


9

Connections with maps and dessins d’enfants

In this section we will put the specific arguments and constructions used
in Section 3, and those in [8] on which they are based, in the more general
context of the algebraic theory of maps on surfaces [27] and of Grothendieck’s
theory of dessins d’enfants [23]. For further background, see [28].
Let G be a Hurwitz group, generated by a Hurwitz triple (x, y, z), and
let K = ker θ where θ is the epimorphism ∆ → G given by X 7→ x, Y 7→ y
and Z 7→ z. There is a natural action of ∆ as a group of orientationpreserving isometries of the hyperbolic plane H, or equivalently as a group of
automorphisms of the Riemann surface H; this action preserves the universal
map U of type {7, 3}, a trivalent tessellation of H by hyperbolic heptagons.
This induces an action of ∆/K, and hence of G, as the automorphism group
of the compact Riemann surface R = H/K of genus ge = 1 + |G|/84, and also
as the orientation-preserving automorphism group of U /K, an orientably
regular map of type {7, 3} on R.
If G has a faithful, transitive permutation representation of degree n,
with H the stabiliser of a point, let M = θ −1 (H), a subgroup of index n
in ∆ with core K. Then the Riemann surface S = H/M = R/H has a
tessellation T = U /M , a map with U /K as its Galois (minimal regular)
cover Te and G as its monodromy group, that is, the monodromy group of
the branched covering R → S.
Having finite index in ∆, both K and M are finitely generated Fuchsian
groups, with K isomorphic to the fundamental group of R, a surface group
of genus e
g. By a theorem of Singerman [40] (see also §2.1), M has signature
(g; 2[α] , 3[β] , 7[γ] )
27

where there are α = |Fix(x)| elliptic periods equal to 2, β = |Fix(y)| equal
to 3, and γ = |Fix(z)| equal to 7, and where the genus g (of M , S and T ) is
given by applying the Riemann-Hurwitz formula (2) to the inclusion M ≤ ∆.
Being compact, the Riemann surfaces R, S and H/∆ can be regarded
as complex algebraic curves. The latter, having genus 0, can be identified
with the Riemann sphere, or complex projective line, Ĉ = P1 (C) = C ∪ {∞}.
The inclusions of M and K in ∆ induce meromorphic functions β : S → Ĉ
and βe : R → Ĉ which are branched over three points (the images of the
fixed points of X, Y and Z, which can be identified with 0, 1 and ∞), so by
e are defined over the field Q
Belyı̆’s Theorem [3] the pairs (S, β) and (R, β)
of algebraic numbers. Indeed, it follows from recent work of González-Diez
and Jaikin-Zapirain [22] (see also Kucharczyk [29]) that these regular Belyı̆
e associated with Hurwitz groups provide a faithful representation
pairs (R, β)
of the absolute Galois group Gal Q/Q.
The maps T and Te are the dessins d’enfants associated with the Belyı̆
e that is, they are the inverse images under β and βe of
pairs (S, β) and (R, β),
the unit interval [0, 1] ⊂ Ĉ, with the vertices forming the fibre over 0. If T
is one of the basic maps A, . . . , N , or one of those constructed from them in
Section 3 or (implicitly) in [8], then S has genus 0, so β is a rational function
Ĉ → Ĉ of degree n. However, explicitly determining β, even in a simple case
such as S = A, where n = 14 and G ∼
= L2 (13), is a difficult problem.
Example Macbeath [33] showed that for each prime p ≡ ±1 mod (7) there
are three normal subgroups Ki (i = 1, 2, 3) of ∆ with ∆/Ki ∼
= L2 (p), corresponding to three Riemann surfaces Ri of genus ge = 1 + p(p2 − 1)/168.
In the corresponding Hurwitz triples generating G, the elements x and y lie
in the unique conjugacy classes of elements of order 2 and 3, while the elements z lie in the three different conjugacy classes of elements of order 7. As
e are defined over
shown by Streit [42], the corresponding Belyı̆ pairs (Ri , β)
the real cyclotomic field Q(cos(2π/7)), and are conjugate under its Galois
group C3 . If we take the natural representation of G of degree n = p+1, with
H ∼
= Cp ⋊ C(p−1)/2 a Sylow p-normaliser, we obtain three quotient surfaces
Si = Ri /H. Their common genus g can be found by using the fact that the
numbers α, β and γ of fixed points of x, y and z are 0 or 2 as their orders
2, 3 and 7 divide (p ± 1)/2 respectively. For instance, if p = 13 we have
α = β = 2 and γ = 0, so g = 0; one of the three planar maps Si is the map
A shown in Figure 1. For p = 29, 41, 43, . . . we have g = 0, 1, 0, . . . ∼ p/84.
The realisations of various groups G = An as Hurwitz groups in Section 3
(and also, implicitly, in [8]) are all constructed in the above way, using the
natural representation of G of degree n, with permutations x, y and z defining
28

maps Wi which play the role of T and are designed to have monodromy
group hx, y, zi ∼
= An . In each of these examples, T has genus 0 (although
not strictly necessary, this simplifies exposition and illustration), so that
n = 21α + 28β + 36γ − 84. By contrast, in the last paragraph of Section 4,
the extra (1)-join created in W2 increases its genus from 0 to 1 while reducing
α by 4, so that n = 21α + 28β + 36γ.
Similarly, for the construction of Hurwitz groups it is convenient though
not really necessary that the maps T and therefore also Te , both here and
in [8], are invariant under a reflection t. (Conder’s motivation for this was
also to realise various symmetric and alternating groups as quotients of the
extended triangle group ∆∗ = ∆[2, 3, 7].) It follows that in such cases K
is normal in ∆∗ , and the full automorphism group of the map Te , including
orientation-reversing elements, is ∆∗ /K. When G = An this is isomorphic
to either An × C2 or Sn as the permutation t is even or odd; in the examples
in [8] and Section 3, the parity of t can be determined from the information
in the third column of Table 2.

References
[1] I. Bauer, F. Catanese and F. Grunewald, Beauville surfaces without
real structures, in Geometric Methods in Algebra and Number Theory,
1–42, Progr. Math. 235, Birkhäuser, Boston MA, 2005.
[2] A. Beauville, Surfaces algébriques complexes, Astérisque 54, Soc. Math.
France, Paris, 1978. English transl.: Complex Algebraic Surfaces, London Math. Soc. Student Texts 34, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1996.
[3] G. V. Belyı̆, On Galois extensions of a maximal cyclotomic field, (Russian) Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR Ser. Mat. 43 (1979), 267–276, 479. English
transl.: Math. USSR Izvestija 14 (1980), 247–256.
[4] J. N. Bray, D. F. Holt and C. M. Roney-Dougal, The Maximal
Subgroups of the Low-Dimensional Finite Classical Groups, London
Math. Soc. Lecture Note Ser. 407, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2013.
[5] G. Butler, The maximal subgroups of the sporadic simple group of Held,
J. Algebra 69 (1981), 67–81.
[6] B. Chang, The conjugate classes of the Chevalley groups of type (G2 ),
J. Algebra 9 (1968), 190–211.
29

[7] CHEVIE, http://www.math.rwth-aachen.de/homes/CHEVIE/.
[8] M. Conder, Generators for alternating and symmetric groups, J. London
Math. Soc. 22 (1980), 75–86.
[9] M. Conder, An update on Hurwitz groups, Groups, Complex. Cryptol.
2 (2010), 35–49.
[10] M. Conder, private communication, 5th August 2017.
[11] J. H. Conway, R. T. Curtis, S. P. Norton, R. A. Parker, R. A. Wilson, with
computational assistance from J. G. Thackray, ATLAS of Finite Groups.
Maximal Subgroups and Ordinary Characters for Simple Groups,
Clarendon Press, Oxford, 2005 (first edition 1985).
[12] B. N. Cooperstein, Maximal subgroups of G2 (2n ), J. Algebra 70 (1981),
23–36.
[13] D. I. Deriziotis and G. O. Michler, Character table and blocks of finite
simple triality groups 3 D4 (q), Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 303 (1987), 39–
70.
[14] J. D. Dixon, The probability of generating the symmetric group,
Math. Z. 110 (1969), 199-205.
[15] H. Enomoto, The conjugacy classes of Chevalley groups of type (G2 )
over finite fields of characteristic 2 or 3, J. Fac. Sci. Univ. Tokyo Sect. I,
16 (1969), 497–512.
[16] B. Everitt, Alternating quotients of Fuchsian groups, J. Algebra 223
(1969), 457–476.
[17] B. Fairbairn, Recent work on Beauville surfaces, structures and groups,
Groups St Andrews 2013, 225–241, London Math. Soc. Lecture Note
Ser. 422, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2015.
[18] B. Fairbairn, K. Magaard and C. Parker, Generation of quasisimple
groups with an application to groups acting on Beauville surfaces,
J. London Math. Soc. (3) 107 (2013), 744–798.
[19] F. G. Frobenius, Über Gruppencharaktere, Sitzber. Königlich Preuss.
Akad. Wiss. Berlin (1896), 985–1021.
[20] Y. Fuertes and G. González-Diez, On Beauville structures on the groups
Sn and An , Math. Z. 264 (2010), 959–968.
30

[21] S. Garion, M. Larsen and A. Lubotsky, Beauville surfaces and finite
simple groups, J. Reine Angew. Math. 666 (2012), 225–243.
[22] G. González-Diez and A. Jaikin-Zapirain, The absolute Galois group
acts faithfully on regular dessins and on Beauville surfaces, Proc. London Math. Soc. (3) 111 (2015), 775–796.
[23] A. Grothendieck, Esquisse d’un Programme, in Geometric Galois Actions I, Around Grothendieck’s Esquisse d’un Programme (ed. P. Lochak
and L. Schneps) London Math. Soc. Lecture Note Ser. 242 (Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, 1997), 5–48.
[24] R. Guralnick and G. Malle, Simple groups admit Beauville structures,
J. London Math. Soc. (2) 85 (2012), 694–721.
[25] A. Hurwitz, Über algebraische Gebilde mit Eindeutigen Transformationen in sich, Math. Ann. 41:3, 403–442.
[26] G. A. Jones, Beauville surfaces and groups: a survey, Rigidity and Symmetry, 205–225, Fields Inst. Commun. 70, Springer, New York, 2014.
[27] G. A. Jones and D. Singerman, Theory of maps on orientable surfaces,
Proc. London Math. Soc. (3) 37 (1978), 273–307.
[28] G. A. Jones and J. Wolfart, Dessins d’enfants on Riemann Surfaces,
Springer Monographs in Mathematics, Springer, Cham, 2016.
[29] R. A. Kucharczyk,
arXix:1408.3024.

The

Galois

action

on

Hurwitz

curves,

[30] S. A. Linton and R. A. Wilson, The maximal subgroups of the Fischer
groups F i24 and F i′24 , Proc. London Math. Soc. (3) (1991), 113–164.
[31] A. Lucchini and M. C. Tamburini, Classical groups of large rank as
Hurwitz groups, J. Algebra 219 (1999), 531–546.
[32] A. Lucchini, M. C. Tamburini and J. S. Wilson, Hurwitz groups of large
rank, J. London Math. Soc. (2) 61 (2000), 81–92.
[33] A. M. Macbeath, Generators of the linear fractional groups, Number
Theory, Proc. Sympos. Pure Math. XII, 1967 (Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 1969), 14–32.
[34] G. Malle, Hurwitz groups and G2 (q), Canad. Math. Bull. 33 (1990),
349–357.
31

[35] G. Malle, Small rank exceptional Hurwitz groups, in Groups of Lie Type
and their Geometries (Como, 1993), 173–183, London Math. Soc. Lecture Note Ser. 207, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1995.
[36] S. P. Norton, The anatomy of the Monster, I, The atlas of finite groups
ten years on (ed. R. T. Curtis and R. A. Wilson), Cambridge University
Press, 1998, 198–214.
[37] M. A. Pellegrini and M. C. Tamburini, Hurwitz generation of the universal covering of Alt(n), J. Group Theory 13 (2010), 649–657.
[38] M. A. Pellegrini and M. C. Tamburini, Finite simple groups of low
rank: Hurwitz generation and (2, 3)-generation, Int. J. Group Theory
4 (2015), 13–19.
[39] K. Shinoda, The conjugacy classes of the finite Ree groups of type (F4 ),
J. Fac. Sci. Univ. Tokyo Sect. I A Math. 22 (1975), 1–15.
[40] D. Singerman, Subgroups of Fuchsian groups and finite permutation
groups, Bull. London Math. Soc. 2 (1970), 319–323.
[41] N. Spaltenstein, Caractères unipotents de 3 D4 (Fq ), Comm. Math. Helvetici 57 (1982), 676–691.
[42] M. Streit, Field of definition and Galois orbits for the Macbeath–
Hurwitz curves, Arch. Math. 74 (2000), 342–349.
[43] M. C. Tamburini and M. A. Vsemirnov, Irreducible (2, 3, 7)-subgroups
of P GLn (F ), n ≤ 7, J. Algebra 300 (2006), 339–362. Corrigendum,
ibid. 322 (2009), 4161–4162.
[44] H. N. Ward, On Ree’s series of simple groups, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.,
121 (1966) 62–89.
[45] H. Wielandt, Finite Permutation Groups, Academic Press, New York.
1964.
[46] R. A. Wilson, The Monster is a Hurwitz group, J. Group Theory 4
(2001), 367–374.
[47] A. J. Woldar, On Hurwitz generation and genus actions of sporadic
groups, Illinois J. Math. 33 (1989), 416–437.
[48] A. Zvonkin, private communication, December 2016.

32

10

Appendix: The 14 basic maps

Here we show the maps A, . . . , N corresponding to Conder’s basic diagrams
A . . . , N.

A

B

Figure 4: The maps A and B.

C

D

Figure 5: The maps C and D.

33

E

F
Figure 6: The maps E and F.

G

H

Figure 7: The maps G and H.

34

J

I

Figure 8: The maps I and J .

Figure 9: The map K.

35

Figure 10: The map L.

Figure 11: The map M.

36

Figure 12: The map N .
G. A. Jones:
School of Mathematics,
University of Southampton,
Southampton SO17 1BJ,
U.K.
email: G.A.Jones@maths.soton.ac.uk
E. Pierro:
Department of Economics, Mathematics and Statistics,
Birkbeck, University of London,
Malet Street,
London WC1E 7HX,
U.K.
email: e.pierro@mail.bbk.ac.uk

37

