arXiv:1405.6276v3 [math.GR] 29 Oct 2016

J. Group Theory ? (????), 1 – 28
DOI 10.1515 / jgt-????-???

© de Gruyter ????

Ultraproducts of Quasirandom Groups with Small
Cosocles
Yilong Yang
Communicated by ???

Abstract. A D-quasirandom group is a group without any non-trivial unitary representation of dimension less than D. Given a sequence of groups with increasing quasirandomness, then it is natural to ask if the ultraproduct will end up with no finite dimensional
unitary representation at all. This is not true in general, but we answer this question in the
affirmative when the groups in question have uniform small cosocles, i.e., their quotient
by small kernels are direct products of finite simple groups.
Two applications of our results are given, one in triangle patterns inside quasirandom
groups and one in self-Bohrifying groups. Our main tools are some variations of the covering number for groups, different kinds of length functions on groups, and the classification
of finite simple groups.
Keywords. Quasirandom Group, Finite Simple Group, Minimally Almost Periodic
Group, Self- Bohrifying Group, Ultraproduct.
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 20D06, Secondary 20D05, 03C20,
43A65.

1

Introduction

As an indirect consequence of Kassabov, Lubotzky and Nikolov’s paper [16], the
following theorem about non-abelian finite simple groups is true.
Theorem 1.1. An ultraproduct of non-abelian finite simple groups is either finite
simple, or has no finite dimensional unitary representation other than the trivial
one.
Definitions related to ultraproducts are presented in Section 2 for those unfamiliar with them.
In this paper, we shall show that non-abelian finite simple groups are not the
only kind of groups exhibiting such a behavior. It turns out that such a behavior
has a very close link to the notion of quasirandom groups, defined by Gowers [9],
and the notion of minimally almost periodic groups, defined by von Neumann and

2

Y. Yang

Wigner [17]. All representations considered in this paper are over C. We shall
informally say that a group is quasirandom when the group is D-quasirandom for
some large D.
Definition 1.2. For a positive integer D, a group G is D-quasirandom if it has no
non-trivial unitary representation of dimension less than D.
Definition 1.3. An infinite group is minimally almost periodic if it has no nontrivial finite dimensional unitary representation.
A group is minimally almost periodic iff it is D-quasirandom for all D. Then it
is natural to wonder whether some sort of limit of increasingly quasirandom groups
would give us a minimally almost periodic group. One such limit to consider is
the ultraproduct.
The author will prove the existence of classes of groups with similar results to
Theorem 1.1. The main theorem is the following Theorem 1.5.
Definition 1.4. For a group G, we define its cosocle Cos(G) to be the intersection
of all maximal normal subgroups of G.
Let n be any positive integer. Let Cn be the class of groups that are arbitrary direct products (not necessarily finite) of finite quasisimple groups and finite groups
G whose cosocles contain at most n conjugacy classes of G.
Theorem 1.5. For any sequence of groups in Cn with quasirandom degree going
to infinity, their non-principal ultraproducts will be minimally almost periodic.
Quasirandom groups are first introduced by Gowers to find groups with no large
product-free subset. They can be seen as stronger versions of perfect groups.
Example 1.6 (Gowers [9]).
(i) A group (not necessarily finite) is 2-quasirandom iff it is perfect. The reason
is that a non-perfect group has a non-trivial abelian quotient, which in turn
has a non-trivial homomorphism into U1 (C). A perfect group, on the other
hand, can only have the trivial homomorphism into the abelian group U1 (C).
(ii) A finite
√ perfect group with no normal subgroup of index less than n is at
least log n/2-quasirandom. In fact, using a form of Jordan’s theorem [8],
a finite perfect group with no normal subgroup of index less than n is at least
c log n-quasirandom for some constant c.

Ultraproducts of Quasirandom Groups

3

(iii) In particular, a non-abelian finite simple group G is at least c log n-quasirandom
if it has n elements.
(iv) Conversely, any D-quasirandom group must have more than (D − 1)2 elements.
(v) The alternating group An is (n − 1)-quasirandom for n > 5, and the special
linear group SL2 (Fp ) is p−1
2 -quasirandom for any prime p.
Morally, ultraproducts preserve all local properties at the scale of elements. In
particular, all element-wise identities are preserved. But global properties of a
group, like being finite or finitely generated, might be lost after taking ultraproducts. So one may wonder if a non-principal ultraproduct of increasingly quasirandom groups is always minimally almost periodic. In another words, we want to
investigate if quasirandomness can be captured by element-wise properties. This
turns out to be false. In particular, we have the following counterexample, pointed
out by László Pyber.
Example 1.7. We recall that a group G (not necessarily finite) is 2-quasirandom
iff G is perfect. We claim that there is a sequence of Di -quasirandom groups
(Gi )i∈Z+ with limi→∞ Di = ∞, whose ultraproduct by any non-principal ultrafilter is not even perfect.
Using the construction of Holt and Plesken [13, Lemma 2.1.10], one may construct a finite perfect group Gp,n for each prime p ≥ 5 and positive integer n, such
that an element of Gp,n cannot be written as a product of less than n commutators,
and that the only simple quotient of Gp,n is PSL2 (Fp ), the projective special linear
group of 2 × 2 matrices over the field of p elements. Then by Example 1.6 (ii), for
any D, Gp,n is D-quasirandom for large enough p.
Let Gi be Gpi ,i , where (pi )i∈Z+ is a strictly increasing sequence of primes.
Then Gi is Di -quasirandom for some Di with limi→∞ Di = ∞. Let gi ∈ Gi be
an element which cannot be written as a product of less than i commutators.
Then
Q
g = (gi )i∈N corresponds to an element of the ultraproduct G = i→ω Gi by any
ultrafilter ω. When ω is non-principal, clearly g cannot be written as a product of
finite number of commutators in G. So g is not in the commutator subgroup of G,
and thus G is not perfect.
However, a recent paper by Bergelson and Tao [5] showed the following theorem, which shed some new light on this inquiry:
Q
Theorem 1.8 (Bergelson and Tao [5, Theorem 49 (i)]). The ultraproduct i→ω SL2 (Fpi )
by a non-principal ultrafilter ω is minimally almost periodic.
Inspired by this, we can make the following definitions:

4

Y. Yang

Definition 1.9. A class F of groups is a q.u.p. (quasirandom ultraproduct property) class if for any sequence of groups in F with quasirandom degree going to
infinity, their non-principal ultraproducts will be minimally almost periodic.
Definition 1.10. A class F of groups is a Q.U.P. class if there is an unbounded
non-decreasing function f : Z+ → Z+ such that any ultraproduct of any sequence
of D-quasirandom groups in F is f(D)-quasirandom.
Remark 1.11. A Q.U.P class is automatically a q.u.p. class. It is like an effective
version of q.u.p. class, where we are able to keep track of the amount of quasirandomness passed down to the ultraproduct.
In this paper, the proof of Theorem 1.5 in fact shows that the class Cn is a Q.U.P.
class. And we immediately have the following corollary:
Corollary 1.12. The following classes are Q.U.P.
(i) The class CQS of finite quasisimple groups.
(ii) The class CSS of finite semisimple groups.
(iii) The class CCS(n) of finite groups with at most n conjugacy classes in their
cosocles.
All Q.U.P. classes must have a uniformly bounded commutator width, i.e., every
element can be written as a product of uniformly bounded number of commutators.
In view of this, the following conjecture was suggested by László Pyber.
Conjecture 1.13. For any integer n, the class of perfect groups with commutator
width ≤ n (i.e., every element of these groups can be written as a product of at
most n commutators) is Q.U.P.
So far, we do not know if there is a non-Q.U.P but q.u.p. class of groups.
Some applications of our results have already been found. In a paper in preparation by Bergelson, Robertson and Zorin-Kranich [4, Theorem 1.12], it is shown
that a sufficiently quasirandom group in a q.u.p. class will have many “triangles”.
As another application, one may also use our method to find many examples of
self-Bohrifying groups. Both applications will be explained in Section 8 of this
paper.
Here we shall briefly outline the sections of this article:
(i) A model case of the alternating groups to illustrate the general idea. (Section 3)

Ultraproducts of Quasirandom Groups

5

(ii) A group with a nice covering property is very quasirandom. (Section 4)
(iii) Covering properties can ignore small cosocles. (Section 5)
(iv) Quasirandom finite quasisimple groups have nice covering properties. (Section 6)
(v) Proof of Theorem 1.5. (Section 7)
(vi) Applications of our results. (Section 8)

2

Definitions relating to Ultraproducts

Definition 2.1. A filter on N is a collection ω of subsets of N such that:
(i) ∅ ∈
/ ω;
(ii) If X ∈ ω and X ⊆ Y , then Y ∈ ω;
(iii) If X, Y ∈ ω, then X ∩ Y ∈ ω.
An ultrafilter is a filter that is maximal with respect to the containment order. A
non-principal ultrafilter is an ultrafilter that contains no finite subset of N.
Definition 2.2. Given a sequence of groups (Gi )i∈N , let G be their direct product.
Given an ultrafilter ω on N, let N := {g = (gi )i∈N ∈ G : {i ∈ N : gi = e} ∈ ω},
which is clearly a normal subgroup ofQG. Then we call G/N the ultraproduct of
the groups (Gi )i∈N by ω, denoted by i→ω Gi .
Remark 2.1. An ultrafilter ω is principal (i.e., not non-principal) iff we can find
an element n ∈ N such that for all subsets A ⊆ N, we have A ∈ ω iff n ∈ A. In
this case, the corresponding ultraproduct of groups (Gi )i∈N is isomorphic to Gi .
Therefore, in practice, the useful ultrafilters are usually non-principal.
The particular choice of the ultrafilter is not that important. As long as we fix
a non-principal ultrafilter, then all the discussion for the rest of the paper will be
true for the ultraproduct of this ultrafilter.
Ultraproducts have
Q an interesting property, given by Łoś’ Theorem. Given an
ultraproduct G = i→ω Gi for an ultrafilter ω, any first-order statement φ in the
language of groups is true for G iff it is true for most of the Gi , i.e., {i ∈ N :
φ is true for Gi } ∈ ω. In particular, this implies that behaviors at the scale of
elements are preserved. We shall not need Łoś’ Theorem in this paper, but it could
be used as an alternative to Proposition 7.3.

6

Y. Yang

3

The Class of Alternating Groups

Let An denote the alternating group of rank n, and Sn denote the symmetry group
of rank n. We shall show that the class of alternating groups is a Q.U.P. class, as a
simple illustration of the general idea to attack Theorem 1.5.
3.1

Quasirandom Alternating Groups have nice Covering Properties

Definition 3.1.
(i) For any subsets A, B of a group G, we define the product set AB = {ab ∈
G : a ∈ A, b ∈ B}. And we define An := {a1 a2 . . . an : a1 , ..., an ∈ A}.
(ii) An element g of a group G is said to have covering number K if its conjugacy
class C(g) has C(g)K = G.
(iii) Let m be any positive integer or ∞. Then an element g ∈ G has the covering
property (K, m) if g i has covering number K for all 1 ≤ i ≤ m.
(iv) A group G has the covering property (K, m) if it has an element with the
covering property (K, m).
Remark 3.2. Note that we use An to denote the set of elements that can be expressed as products of EXACTLY n elements of A. For example, the cyclic group
of order 2 has no covering property at all. The identity is always an even power
of the generator, while the generator is always an odd power of itself. There is
no uniform choice of K where every element is a product of K conjugates of the
generator.
Definition 3.3. An even permutation σ ∈ An is exceptional if its cycles in the
cycle decomposition have distinct odd lengths, or equivalently, if its conjugacy
class in An is different from its conjugacy class in Sn .
Lemma 3.4 (Brenner [6, Lemma 3.05]). If an even permutation σ ∈ An is fixedpoint free and non-exceptional, then An = C(σ)4 .
Proposition 3.5. For any m ∈ Z+ , An has the covering property (4, m) for large
enough n.
Proof. Pick any odd prime p > m, and pick another prime q > p.
Since p, q are necessarily coprime, for any large enough integer n, we can find
positive integers a, b such that n = ap+bq. Let σ ∈ Sn be a permutation composed
of a p-cycles and b q-cycles, where all cycles are disjoint.

Ultraproducts of Quasirandom Groups

7

Since p, q are odd, σ is an even permutation in An . Furthermore, for large
enough n, a or b can be chosen to be larger than 1, so σ will be non-exceptional.
Since σ is also fixed-point free by construction, Lemma 3.4 implies that An =
C(σ)4 .
Now clearly σ i will also have a cycle decomposition of a p-cycles and b q-cycles
for all 1 ≤ i ≤ p − 1, and this implies that An = C(σ i )4 for all 1 ≤ i ≤ p − 1. So
An has the covering property (4, p − 1). Since p − 1 ≥ m, An has the covering
property (4, m).
Corollary 3.6. For any m ∈ Z+ , any D′ -quasirandom alternating group has the
covering property (4, m) for large enough D′ .
3.2

Covering Properties passes to Ultraproducts and implies
Quasirandomness

Lemma 3.7. Let Gi be a sequence of groups such that all but finitely many of
them have the covering property (K, m). Then any ultraproduct of them by a
non-principal ultrafilter will have the covering property (K, m).
Proof. Since non-principal ultraproducts ignore finitely many exceptions in the
sequence Gi , WLOG we may assume all Gi have the covering property (K, m).
For each Gi , let gi be the element of Gi with the covering property (K, m).
Then I claim that in any ultraproduct of Gi , the element represented by the sequence (gi ) would have the covering property (K, m).
Pick any 1 ≤ j ≤ m. Then any element of Gi is a product of conjugates of gij
by ai,1 , ..., ai,K ∈ Gi . As a result, any element of the ultraproduct is a product of
conjugates of (gi )j by (ai,1 ), ..., (ai,K ). Here we use a sequence of elements (ai )
to represent an element in the ultraproduct.
We now state a special case of Proposition 4.4, proven in Section 4.
Lemma 3.8. There is a function f : Z+ → Z+ such that for any m, K ∈ Z+ with
2
m > f(D)K D , any group G (not necessarily finite) with the covering property
(K, m) is D-quasirandom.
Proposition 3.9. The class of alternating groups is a Q.U.P. class.
2

Proof. For any D ∈ Z+ , find m > f(D)4D and find D′ ∈ Z such that any
D′ -quasirandom alternating group has the covering property (4, m). Let G be an
ultraproduct of D′ -quasirandom alternating groups. Then G will also have the
covering property (4, m). Then by Lemma 3.8, G is D-quasirandom.

8

4

Y. Yang

Covering Properties Imply Quasirandomness

This section is devoted to obtaining some element-scale properties that guarantee
the quasirandomness of a group.
Definition 4.1.
(i) An element g of a group G is said to have symmetric covering number K if
C(g)K C(g −1 )K = G.
(ii) Let m be a positive integer or ∞. Then an element g ∈ G has the symmetric
covering property (K, m) if g i has symmetric covering number K for all
1 ≤ i ≤ m.
(iii) A group G has the symmetric covering property (K, m) if it has an element
g ∈ G with the symmetric covering property (K, m).
(iv) A group G has the (symmetric) covering property (K, m) mod N for some
normal subgroup N if G/N has the (symmetric) covering property (K, m).
Definition 4.2.
(i) A pair of elements (g1 , g2 ) of a group G is said to have symmetric double covering number (K1 , K2 ) if we have C(g1 )K1 C(g1−1 )K1 C(g2 )K2 C(g2−1 )K2 =
G.
(ii) Let m1 , m2 be positive integers or ∞. A pair of elements (g1 , g2 ) in G has
the symmetric double covering property [(K1 , m1 ), (K2 , m2 )] if (g1i , g2j ) has
symmetric double covering number (K1 , K2 ) for all 1 ≤ i ≤ m1 , 1 ≤ j ≤
m2 .
(iii) A group G has the symmetric double covering property [(K1 , m1 ), (K2 , m2 )]
if it has a pair of elements (g1 , g2 ) in G with the symmetric double covering
property [(K1, m1 ), (K2 , m2 )].
(iv) A group G has the symmetric double covering property [(K1 , m1 ), (K2 , m2 )]
mod N for some normal subgroup N if G/N has the symmetric double covering property [(K1 , m1 ), (K2 , m2 )].
Remark 4.3.
(i) Suppose K < K ′ . Then an element with covering number K has covering
number K ′ . In general, the (symmetric) covering property (K, m) implies
the (symmetric) covering property (K ′ , m′ ) when K ′ ≥ K, m′ ≤ m. A
similar statement is also true for the symmetric double covering properties.

9

Ultraproducts of Quasirandom Groups

(ii) Any symmetric covering property is always weaker than the corresponding
non-symmetric covering property.
(iii) Any group with the symmetric covering property (K, m) has the symmetric
double covering property [(1, ∞), (K, m)]. This is easily seen by taking g1 to
be the identity, and taking g2 to be the element with the symmetric covering
property (K, m).
(iv) In our definition of the symmetric double covering properties, since C(g1 )
and C(g2 ) are conjugate invariant subsets of G, they necessarily commute,
i.e., C(g1 )C(g2 ) = C(g2 )C(g1 ). So the order of (K1 , m1 ) and (K2 , m2 )
does not matter.
(v) By imitating the definition of the symmetric double covering properties, one
can in fact define the symmetric n-tuple covering properties for groups. As n
grows larger and larger, the corresponding covering properties will become
weaker and weaker. Note that most results throughout this paper would still
hold by replacing the symmetric double covering properties by the symmetric n-tuple covering properties, though for our purpose here, the symmetric
double covering properties are enough.
The proof of Proposition 4.4 will be the main part of this section. Let us first
state the proposition and some corollaries.
Proposition 4.4 (Local criterion for quasirandomness). There is a function f :
2
Z+ → Z+ such that, for any K1 , m1 , K2 , m2 ∈ Z+ with mi > f(D)KiD for
i = 1, 2, any group G (not necessarily finite) with the symmetric double covering
property [(K1 , m1 ), (K2 , m2 )] is D-quasirandom.
We shall fix this function f from now on.
2

Corollary 4.5. For any K, m ∈ Z+ with m > f(D)K D , any group G (not
necessarily finite) with the symmetric double covering property (K, m) is Dquasirandom.
2

Corollary 4.6. For any K, m ∈ Z+ with m > f(D)K D , any group G (not
necessarily finite) with the covering property (K, m) is D-quasirandom.
Remark 4.7. We note here that a partial converse, Corollary 7.5, of the above
result is true. I.e., quasirandomness implies a nice covering property mod cosocle.
The proof of this converse will be presented in Section 7.
We shall first explore some geometric structures of UD (C).

10

Y. Yang

Definition
p 4.8. The Hilbert-Schmidt norm of an n-by-n complex matrix A is
||A|| = Tr(A∗ A).
Lemma 4.9.
(i) The Lie group UD (C) has a Riemannian metric d : UD (C) × UD (C) → R
such that d(A, B) = ||B − A|| for all A, B ∈ UD (C). The norm here is the
Hilbert-Schmidt norm.
(ii) This metric is bi-invariant in the sense that d(AB, AC) = d(BA, CA) =
d(B, C) for all A, B, C ∈ UD (C).
(iii) This metric induces a Haar measure, and the volume of UD (C) under this
Haar measure is finite, and vol(UD (C)) =
constant by vD from now on.

(2π)D(D+1)/2
1!2!...(D−1)! .

We shall denote this

(iv) Under the metric d, UD (C) has non-negative Ricci curvature everywhere.
(v) There is a function c : Z+ → R+ , such that a geodesic ball of radius r in
2
UD (C) will have volume bounded by c(D)rD . We shall fix this function c
from now on.
Proof. These are very standard facts. See, e.g., [19] and [7].
Definition 4.10. Let G be any group. A non-negative function ℓ : G → R is called
a length function if it has the following properties.
(i) ℓ(g) = 0 iff g is the identity element.
(ii) ℓ is symmetric, i.e., ℓ(g) = ℓ(g −1 ) for all g ∈ G.
(iii) ℓ is conjugate invariant, i.e., ℓ(ghg −1 ) = ℓ(h) for all g, h ∈ G.
(iv) ℓ satisfies the triangle inequality, i.e., ℓ(gh) ≤ ℓ(g) + ℓ(h) for all g, h ∈ G.
A pseudo length function is a non-negative function ℓ : G → R satisfying (ii),
(iii) and (iv) above.
Lemma 4.11. Let G be a group, and suppose g1 , g2 ∈ G have symmetric double
covering number (K1 , K2 ). Let φ : G → H be any homomorphism and let ℓ be
a length function of H. Then for all g ∈ G, we have ℓ(φ(g)) ≤ 2K1 ℓ(φ(g1 )) +
2K2 ℓ(φ(g2 )).

11

Ultraproducts of Quasirandom Groups

Proof. For any g ∈ G, g can be written as the product of K1 conjugates of g1 , K1
conjugates of g1−1 , K2 conjugates of g2 and K2 conjugates of g2−1 . So by triangle
inequality and the conjugate invariance of ℓ, we have
ℓ(φ(g)) ≤K1 ℓ(φ(g1 )) + K1 ℓ(φ(g1−1 )) + K2 ℓ(φ(g2 )) + K2 ℓ(φ(g2−1 ))
≤2K1 ℓ(φ(g1 )) + 2K2 ℓ(φ(g2 )).

Proposition 4.12. The function ℓ : UD (C) → R defined by ℓ(A) = d(A, I) is a
length function.
Proof. Let A, B be any unitary matrices.
Positivity: Clearly ℓ(A) = d(A, I) ≥ 0. And we have
ℓ(A) = 0 ⇐⇒ d(A, I) = 0 ⇐⇒ A = I.
Symmetry:
ℓ(A) = d(A, I) = d(AA−1 , IA−1 ) = d(I, A−1 ) = ℓ(A−1 ).
Conjugate Invariance:
ℓ(BAB −1 ) = d(BAB −1 , I) = d(BA, B) = d(A, I) = ℓ(A).
Triangle Inequality:
ℓ(AB) = d(AB, I) ≤ d(AB, B) + d(B, I) = d(A, I) + d(B, I) = ℓ(A) + ℓ(B).

We shall use ℓ to denote this length function from now on.
Lemma 4.13. For any ǫ > 0 and any integer m >

vD
2,
c(D)ǫD

any m points in

UD (C) will have two points with distance smaller than ǫ. Here vD and c(D) are
as in Lemma 4.9.
Proof. This follows from a volume packing argument.
Since our metric is bi-invariant, each ball of radius 2ǫ in UD (C) has the same
volume vol(Bǫ/2 ). So by our assumption on m, we have
m>

vol(UD (C))
vD
.
2 ≥
D
vol(Bǫ/2 )
c(D)ǫ

12

Y. Yang

Now for any m points in UD (C), suppose any two of them have distance larger
than ǫ. Then the balls of radius 2ǫ centered at these m points will be disjoint and
contained in UD (C), which is impossible. So two of the points have distance
smaller than ǫ.
Lemma 4.14. Any √
non-trivial cyclic subgroup of UD (C) contains an element of
length larger than 2.
Proof. Let A be any nontrivial element of UD (C) of finite order. Let λ1 , ..., λD be
its eigenvalues, and WLOG say λ1 6= 1. Then λ1 is a primitive n-th root of unity
for some n. Replacing A by a proper power of itself, we may assume
that λ1 is an
√
n-th root of unity closest to −1. Then in particular, |λ1 − 1| > 2.
Then we know
ℓ(A)2 = Tr(A − I)∗ (A − I) =

D
X
i=1

|λi − 1|2 ≥ |λ1 − 1|2 > 2.

Now suppose A has infinite order. Let λ1 , ..., λD be its eigenvalues, and WLOG
say λ1 6= 1. Then λ1 is an element of infinite order on the unit circle. Replacing A
by a proper power of itself,
√ we may assume that λ1 is arbitrarily close to −1. Then
in particular, |λ1 − 1| > 2. Then we are done by the same computation.
Proof of Proposition 4.4. For any ǫ1 , ǫ2 > 0, pick m1 >
vD
2.
c(D)ǫD
2

vD
2
c(D)ǫD
1

and m2 >

For any unitary representation φ : G → UD (C) of a group G with the

symmetric double covering property [(K1 , m1 ), (K2 , m2 )], we may find elements
g1 , g2 ∈ G for this symmetric double covering property.
Now consider the points I, φ(g1 ), φ(g12 ), ..., φ(g1m1 ). By Lemma 4.13, since
m1 > vD D2 , we can find two points with distance less than ǫ1 . Say d(φ(g1s ), φ(g1t )) <
c(D)ǫ1

ǫ1 for some 1 ≤ s < t ≤ m1 . Then
ℓ(φ(g1t−s )) = d(φ(g1t−s ), I) = d(φ(g1t ), φ(g1s )) < ǫ1 .
So we have ℓ(φ(g1i )) < ǫ1 for some 1 ≤ i ≤ m1 . Similarly we have ℓ(φ(g2j )) < ǫ2
for some 1 ≤ j ≤ m2 .
To sum up, there are elements g1i , g2j ∈ G with symmetric double covering
number (K1 , K2 ), and ℓ(φ(g1i )) < ǫ1 , ℓ(φ(g2j )) < ǫ2 . So by Lemma 4.11, all
elements of φ(G) would have length smaller than 2K1 ǫ1 + 2K2 ǫ2 .
√
√
Now pick ǫ1 , ǫ2 small enough so that 2K1 ǫ1 + 2K2 ǫ2 ≤ 2. (Say ǫ1 ≤ 4K21
√
√
and ǫ2 ≤ 4K22 .) Then all elements of φ(G) would have length at most 2. But by
Lemma 4.14, this means φ(G) is trivial.

Ultraproducts of Quasirandom Groups

13

Therefore, a group with the symmetric double covering property [(K1 , m1 ), (K2 , m2 )]
2
2
will be D-quasirandom if m1 ≥ f(D)K1D and m2 ≥ f(D)K2D , where f(D) =
√
2
vD
D
c(D) (2 2) .
Remark 4.15. Note that the above argument proves Proposition 4.4 for all groups,
not necessarily finite. However, if one only needs to prove Proposition 4.4 for finite
groups, and only for the covering property (K, m), then a group is D-quasirandom
m
≫ the length ratio of the longest and the shortest closed geodesics of Un (C).
if K
m
So one can interpret the optimal value of K
as a measure of the “shape” of the
finite group. The smaller this optimal value is, the “more rounded” the finite group
looks like.

5

Covering Properties and the Cosocle

In this section, we will show that a certain nice covering property mod cosocle is
equivalent to a weaker covering property of the whole group.
Lemma 5.1. Let G be a group, and let N be a normal subgroup of G contained
in its cosocle. Let C be a conjugate invariant symmetric subset of G, such that
CN = G. Then for any non-empty conjugate invariant subset S ⊆ G, SC = S
iff S = G.
Proof. Suppose SC = S and S 6= G. Then we have SC i = S for any positive
integer i. So S must contain the subgroup generated by C. Since C is conjugate
invariant, the subgroup generated by C is a normal subgroup, and it is a proper
normal subgroup since it is contained in S 6= G. In particular, C is contained in a
maximal normal subgroup M of G.
But since N is in the cosocle, it is contained in M . So
CN ⊆ M N = M ( G.
This is a contradiction.
Proposition 5.2. Let G be a group with the symmetric double covering property
[(K1 , m1 ), (K2 , m2 )] mod N for a normal subgroup N contained in the cosocle,
and suppose that N contains exactly n conjugacy classes of G. Then G has the
symmetric double covering property [((3n − 2)K1 , m1 ), ((3n − 2)K2 , m2 )].
Proof. Find g1 , g2 ∈ G such that (g1 N, g2 N ) has symmetric double covering
number (K1 , K2 ) in G/N . Let C := C(g1 )K1 C(g1−1 )K1 C(g2 )K2 C(g2−1 )K2 . Then

14

Y. Yang

by assumption, C is mapped surjectively onto G/N through the quotient map. So
CN = G.
Now N contains exactly n conjugacy classes of G. I claim that C 3t contains
at least t + 1 conjugacy classes of G in N , which would imply that C 3n−3 ⊇ N .
Then C 3n−2 ⊇ CN = G, finishing our proof.
We proceed by induction. As a convention we define C 0 to be {e}. Then the
claim is true when t = 0.
Now assume the statement is true for some t < n. Then C 3t contains t + 1
3t+1
conjugacy
1 , ..., Ct+1 . Then we have C
St+1 classes of G in N . Let them be C3t+2
St+1 ⊇
C( i=1 Ci ). Suppose for contradiction that C
is disjoint from C(N − i=1 Ci ).
Then we observe that
C(N −

t+1
[
i=1

Ci ) ⊇ CN − C(

t+1
[
i=1

Ci ) = G − C(

t+1
[
i=1

Ci ) ⊇ G − C 3t+1 .

So C 3t+2 ⊆ C 3t+1 . Then Lemma 5.1 implies that C 3t+2 = S
C 3t+1 = G. This
3t+2
contradicts the assumption that C
is disjoint from C(N − t+1
i=1 Ci ).
St+1
3t+2
So, C
intersects with C(N − i=1 Ci ). Let g be an element in this intersection. Then g ∈ CCt+2 for some conjugacy class Ct+2 of G in N disjoint from
C1 , ..., Ct+1 . Find h ∈ Ct+2 such that g ∈ Ch. Then since C is symmetric, we
have h ∈ Cg ⊆ C 3t+3 . So C 3t+3 intersects with Ct+2 . Since C 3t+3 is conjugate
invariant, we conclude that C 3t+3 contains Ct+2 .
Finally, since e ∈ C, we see that C 3t+3 also contains C1 , C2 , ..., Ct+1 . So C 3t+3
contains t + 2 conjugacy classes of G in N .
Proposition 5.3. Let G be a group with the symmetric covering property (K, m)
mod N for a normal subgroup N contained in the cosocle, and suppose that N
contains exactly n conjugacy classes of G. Then G has the symmetric covering
property ((3n − 2)K, m).
Proof. Same strategy as Proposition 5.2.

6

Quasirandom Finite Simple Groups have Nice Covering
Properties

In this section we shall show that, for finite quasisimple groups, large quasirandomness will imply a nice covering property. We shall first deal with finite simple
groups of bounded ranks in Subsection 6.1. Then we shall deal with the case of alternating groups in Subsection 6.2. Finally, we shall deal with finite simple groups
of large ranks by embedding alternating groups into them in Subsection 6.3. The
classification of finite simple groups is used in this section.

Ultraproducts of Quasirandom Groups

15

Definition 6.1. For a finite quasisimple group G, we define its rank r(G) as the
following:
(i) When the only simple quotient of G is abelian or sporadic, then r(G) = 1.
(ii) When the only simple quotient of G is the alternating group An , then r(G) =
n.
(iii) When the only simple quotient of G is a group of Lie type, then r(G) is the
(twisted) rank of that finite simple group as an algebraic group.
6.1

Finite simple groups of bounded ranks

Lemma 6.2 (Stolz and Thom [20, Proposition 3.8]). There is a function K : Z+ →
Z+ such that, in any finite simple group of Lie type of rank ≤ r, any non-identity
element will have covering number K(r).
We shall fix this function K(r) from now on.
Lemma 6.3 (Babai, Goodman and Pyber [1, Proposition 5.4]). Let k be any posi2
tive integer. Then for any finite simple group G, if |G| ≥ k k , then |G| has a prime
divisor greater than k.
Proposition 6.4. Let G be a finite simple group of rank ≤ r. For any m < ∞, G
has the covering property (K(r), m) if G is D-quasirandom for large enough D.
Proof. By choosing D to be larger than some absolute constant, a D-quasirandom
group G cannot be an abelian group, a sporadic group, or an alternating group of
rank ≤ r. So we only need to consider finite simple groups of Lie type.
Recall that any D-quasirandom group must have
than (D − 1)2 elements.
√ more
2
For any m ∈ Z+ , let D be an integer > 1 + mm . Then all D-quasirandom
2
finite simple groups will have order > mm , and thus have an element g of prime
order p > m. Then g i are non-identity for all 1 ≤ i ≤ p − 1. Then Lemma 6.2
states that all these elements have covering number K(r). So G has the covering
property (K(r), m).
Corollary 6.5. Let G be a finite quasisimple group of rank ≤ r. For any m < ∞,
G has the symmetric covering property (K(r) max(3r + 1, 34), m) if G is Dquasirandom for large enough D.
Proof. If a quasisimple group is D-quasirandom, then the simple group it covers
is D-quasirandom. Therefore, it is enough to show that, if a finite simple group G

16

Y. Yang

has the covering property (K, m), then any perfect central extension G′ of it will
have the covering property (K max(3r + 1, 34), m).
Let Z be the center of G′ . Then Z will be the cosocle of G′ , and the Schur
multiplier of the simple group G would provide an upper bound for |Z|. Since G
has a rank at most r, by going through the list of finite simple groups, its Schur
multiplier has a size at most max(3r + 1, 34). So if G has the covering property (K, m), Proposition 5.3 implies that G′ has the symmetric covering property
(K max(3r + 1, 34), m).
6.2

Alternating groups

Proposition 6.6. Let G be a quasisimple group over an alternating group. Then
for any m < ∞, G has the symmetric covering property (20, m) if G is Dquasirandom for large enough D.
Proof. If G is D-quasirandom for some large D, then the alternating group it
covers must be An for some large n. Then Proposition 3.5 implies that An has the
covering property (4, m). Now when n > 7, An will have a Schur multiplier of 2.
So G has the covering property (20, m).
6.3

Finite simple groups of large ranks

The goal of this section is to prove the following proposition.
Proposition 6.7. There is an absolute constant K0 , such that for any m < ∞, all
finite quasisimple groups of ranks ≥ r will have the symmetric covering property
(K0 , m) for large enough r.
By the classification of finite simple groups, a finite simple group of rank larger
than some absolute constant will have to be a classical finite simple group of Lie
type or an alternating group. Any classical finite simple group of Lie type is in one
of the following four classes:
(i) The projective special linear groups PSLn (Fq ). For large enough n, SLn (Fq )
are their universal perfect central extensions.
(ii) The projective symplectic groups PSpn (Fq ). For large enough n, Spn (Fq )
are their universal perfect central extensions.
(iii) The projective special unitary groups PSUn (Fq ). For large enough n, SUn (Fq )
are their universal perfect central extensions.

Ultraproducts of Quasirandom Groups

17

−
(iv) The projective Omega groups PΩ+
2n (Fq ), PΩ2n (Fq ), or PΩ2n+1 (Fq ). Here
Ωn (Fq ) are the commutator subgroups of the special orthogonal groups SOn (Fq ),
and PΩn (Fq ) = Ωn (Fq )/Z(Ωn (Fq )). The plus or minus signs indicate different quadratic forms used to obtain the groups in even dimensions. For
large enough n, Ωn (Fq ) are the universal perfect central extensions of PΩn (Fq ).

The above statements can be found in any standard textbook in classical groups
(e.g., See [10]). It is enough to show Proposition 6.7 for SLn (Fq ), Spn (Fq ),
SUn (Fq ), and Ωn (Fq ), since they are the universal perfect central extensions of
the simple groups they cover, and since the order of the Schur multipliers of these
groups are bounded above by a function of r.
We start by analyzing a length function for groups of Lie type over finite fields.
Definition 6.8. Let g be an n×n matrix over a finite field F . Let mg := supa∈F × dim(ker(a−
n−m
g)). Then the Jordan length of g is ℓJ (g) := n g
Proposition 6.9. Let G be any subgroup of GLn (F ) for some finite field F . The
function ℓJ on G is a pseudo length function.
Proof. Non-negativity: For any g ∈ G,
mg = sup dim(ker(a − g)) ≤ n.
a∈F ×

So ℓJ (g) =

n−mg
n

≥ 0.

Symmetry: For any g ∈ G, any a ∈ F × , and any vector v ∈ F n , we have
v ∈ ker(a − g) ⇐⇒ av = gv ⇐⇒ g −1 v = a−1 v ⇐⇒ v ∈ ker(a−1 − g −1 ).
As a result,
mg = sup dim(ker(a − g)) = sup dim(ker(a−1 − g −1 )) = mg−1 .
a∈F ×

a∈F ×

So ℓJ (g) = ℓJ (g −1 ).
Conjugate-invariance: For any g, h ∈ G, any a ∈ F × , and any vector v ∈ F n ,
we have
v ∈ ker(a−g) ⇐⇒ av = gv ⇐⇒ ahv = (hgh−1 )hv ⇐⇒ hv ∈ ker(a−hgh−1 ).
As a result,
mg = sup dim(ker(a − g)) = sup dim(ker(a − hgh−1 )) = mhgh−1 .
a∈F ×

a∈F ×

18

Y. Yang

So ℓJ (g) = ℓJ (hgh−1 ).
Triangle inequality: For any g, h ∈ G, any a, b ∈ F × , and any vector v ∈ F n ,
we have
v ∈ ker(a−g)∩ker(a−abh−1 ) =⇒ gv = av = abh−1 v =⇒ v ∈ ker(abh−1 −g).
So we know ker(a − g) ∩ ker(a − abh−1 ) ⊆ ker(abh−1 − g). As a result, we
have
mgh ≥ dim ker(ab − gh)

≥ dim ker(abh−1 − g)

≥ dim(ker(a − g) ∩ ker(a − abh−1 ))

≥ dim(ker(a − g)) + dim(ker(a − abh−1 )) − n

≥ dim(ker(a − g)) + dim(ker(b − h)) − n.

Since this is true for all a, b ∈ F × , therefore mg + mh − n ≤ mgh . So ℓJ (gh) ≤
ℓJ (g) + ℓJ (h).
Lemma 6.10. Given an n1 × n1 matrix A over a finite field F , and an n2 × n2
1
2
matrix B over the same finite field, then ℓJ (A ⊕ B) ≥ n1n+n
ℓJ (A) + n1n+n
ℓJ (B).
2
2
Proof. For any a ∈ F × , we have the following
ker(a − A ⊕ B) = ker((a − A) ⊕ (a − B)) = ker(a − A) ⊕ ker(a − B).
So dim ker(a − A ⊕ B) ≤ mA + mB . Since this is true for all a ∈ F × , therefore
mA⊕B ≤ mA + mB . So we have
n1 + n2 − mA⊕B
n1 + n2
n1 + n2 − mA − mB
≥
n1 + n2
n1 − mA n2 − mB
+
≥
n1 + n2
n1 + n2
n1
n2
≥
ℓJ (A) +
ℓJ (B).
n1 + n2
n1 + n2

ℓJ (A ⊕ B) =

Ultraproducts of Quasirandom Groups

19

Lemma 6.11 (Stolz and Thom [20, Lemma 3.11]). There is an absolute constant
c0 , such that for any finite classical quasisimple group of Lie type G, and for any
g ∈ G\Z(G), where Z(G) is the center of G, then C(g)K = G for all K ≥ ℓJc(g) .
In short, elements of large Jordan length will automatically have small covering
number.
The next step is to identify subgroups of these quasisimple groups of Lie type
isomorphic to the alternating groups. A key step is to treat elements in alternating
groups as matrices, namely the permutation matrices. These are the matrices with
exactly one entry of value 1 in each column and in each row, and 0 in all other
entries. Such an n × n matrix will act on the standard orthonormal basis of an
n-dimensional vector space by permutation, and thus will provide an embedding
of Sn into GLn (F ) for any field F . Any such matrix is in An iff it has determinant
1.
Lemma 6.12. If P is an n × n permutation matrix where its cycle decomposition
has k cycles, then we have ℓJ (P ) ≥ n−k
n .
Proof. By cycle decomposition, after a change of basis in the vector space, P will
be a direct sum of many cyclic permutation matrices. By Lemma 6.10, it’s enough
to prove the case when P is a single cycle of length n, and show that ℓJ (P ) ≥ n−1
n .
Since P is a single cycle of length n, its eigenvalues in the algebraic closure
of F are precisely all the n-th roots of unity, with multiplicity 1 for each root of
unity. So dim ker(a − P ) ≤ 1 for all a ∈ F × . So ℓJ (P ) ≥ n−1
n .
Proposition 6.13. There is an absolute constant K0 such that, for any m < ∞,
for any finite quasisimple group of Lie type of n × n matrices, if it contains An
as permutation matrices, then it will have the covering property (K0, m) for large
enough n.
Proof. Let K0 > 3c0 for the absolute constant c0 in Lemma 6.11. Then any
element A of Jordan length ≥ 31 will have covering number K0 in any finite quasisimple group of Lie type.
Pick any odd prime p > m, and pick another prime q > p. For any large
enough n, we have n = ap + bq for some integers a > 1, 0 < b < p + 1. Then
find σ ∈ An made up of exactly a p-cycles and b q-cycles, where all cycles are
disjoint. This element will be fixed-point free and non-exceptional, and it will have
at most a + b ≤ np + p cycles.
For any finite quasisimple group of Lie type of n × n matrices, suppose it
contains An as permutation matrices. Let P be the matrix corresponding to σ.

20

Y. Yang

Then we have
ℓJ (P ) ≥

n−

n
p

n

−p

=1−

1 p
1
− > .
p n
3

The last inequality follows because p ≥ 3 and n ≥ 2p + q > 3p.
So this element will have covering number K0 in G. It clearly has order pq, and
all of its powers coprime to pq will also have the same covering number. So G has
the covering property (K0 , p − 1).
Corollary 6.14. For any m < ∞, all finite special linear groups of rank r for
large enough r will have the covering property (K0 , m). Here K0 is the absolute
constant in Proposition 6.13.
Proposition 6.15. There is an absolute constant K0 , such that for any m < ∞, we
have the following:
(i) For any finite quasisimple group of Lie type of 2n×2n matrices, if it contains
An as {P ⊕ P : P ∈ An is a permutation n × n matrix}, then it will have
the covering property (K0 , m) for large enough n.
(ii) Let I1 be the 1 by 1 identity matrix. Then for any finite quasisimple group of
Lie type of (2n+1)×(2n+1) matrices, if it contains An as {P ⊕P ⊕I1 : P ∈
An is a permutation n × n matrix}, then it will have the covering property
(K0 , m) for large enough n.
(iii) Let I2 be the 2 by 2 identity matrix. Then for any finite quasisimple group of
Lie type of (2n+2)×(2n+2) matrices, if it contains An as {P ⊕P ⊕I2 : P ∈
An is a permutation n × n matrix}, then it will have the covering property
(K0 , m) for large enough n.
Proof. The strategy is identical to Proposition 6.13. Just take σ ⊕ σ, σ ⊕ σ ⊕ I1
or σ ⊕ σ ⊕ I2 instead of σ, and use Lemma 6.10.
Definition 6.16. A vector space V is a non-degenerate formed space if it has
a non-degenerate quadratic form Q (the orthogonal case), or a non-degenerate
alternating bilinear form B (the symplectic case), or a non-degenerate Hermitian
form B (the unitary case).
Lemma 6.17 (Witt’s Decomposition Theorem). Let V be any non-degenerate formed
space over
L a finite field F . Then we have an orthogonal decomposition V =
W ⊕ ( ni=1 Hi ) where W is anisotropic of dimension at most 2, and Hi are hyperbolic planes.

Ultraproducts of Quasirandom Groups

21

Proof. These are standard facts in the geometry of classical groups (e.g., See [10]).

Proposition 6.18. For a non-degenerate formed space, the special isometry group,
i.e., the group of isometries of determinant 1, contains an alternating group in one
of the ways described by Proposition 6.15.
Proof. Let V be any finite dimensional non-degenerate formed space over any
finite field F . Then we have an orthogonal decomposition V = W ⊕ H with an
anisotropic space
L W of dimension at most 2, and an orthogonal sum of hyperbolic
planes H = ni=1 Hi .
Then let (vi , wi ) be a hyperbolic pair generating Hi for each i. For any σ ∈
An , we can let σ act by permutation on the set {v1 , .., vn , w1 , ..., wn }, such that
σ(vi ) = vσ(i) and σ(wi ) = wσ(i) .
Now clearly {v1 , ..., vn , w1 , .., wn } is a basis of H. So the above action of σ
induces a linear transformation P ⊕ P on H, where P is the n × n permutation
matrix for σ. And this P ⊕ P is clearly an isometry on H by construction. Now
taking the direct sum of P ⊕P on H and the identity matrix on W , we shall obtain
our desired embedding of An into the full isometry group.
Finally, since P is a permutation matrix for an even permutation, it has determinant 1. Therefore the above embedding of An is in the special isometry group.
Corollary 6.19. For any m < ∞, any finite symplectic or special unitary group of
rank r has the covering property (K0 , m) for large enough r. K0 is the absolute
constant in Proposition 6.15.
−
Corollary 6.20. For any m < ∞, any Ω+
2n (Fq ), Ω2n+1 (Fq ) or Ω2n (Fq ) has the
covering property (K0 , m) for large enough n. K0 is the absolute constant in
Proposition 6.15.
−
Proof. Embed An in SO+
2n (q), SO2n (q) and SO2n+1 (q) in the ways described
by Proposition 6.15. After taking the commutator subgroup, the groups Ω+
2n (q),
Ω−
(q)
and
Ω
(q)
will
still
contain
A
through
this
embedding,
because
An
2n+1
n
2n
is its own commutator subgroup. So we may apply Proposition 6.15 to Ω+
(q),
2n
Ω−
2n (q) and Ω2n+1 (q) and obtain the desired result.

Proposition 6.7 is proven by putting Corollary 6.14, Corollary 6.19 and Corollary 6.20 together.

22

7

Y. Yang

Proof of Theorem 1.5

The results of Section 6 can be summarized into the following useful lemma.
Lemma 7.1. For any integer D and any constant c, we can find integers D′ , K1 , K2 , m1 , m2
such that all D′ -quasirandom finite quasisimple groups have the symmetric double
2
2
covering property [(K1 , m1 ), (K2 , m2 )] such that m1 > cK1D , m2 > cK D .
Proof. Let K1 be max(20, K0 ) where the absolute constant K0 is as in Propo2
sition 6.7. Pick some m1 > cK1D . Find large enough r such that, according to
Proposition 6.7 and Proposition 6.6, all finite quasisimple groups (including the alternating case) of ranks ≥ r will have the symmetric covering property (K1 , m1 ).
Set K2 := K(r) max(3r + 1, 34) as in Corollary 6.5, and pick some m2 >
2
cK2D . Then for large enough D′ , all D′ -quasirandom finite quasisimple groups
will have the symmetric covering property (K2 , m2 ).
In all cases, a D′ -quasirandom finite quasisimple group will have the symmetric
double covering property [(K1 , m1 ), (K2 , m2 )].
Remark 7.2. In the above proof, one cannot substitute the double covering properties with the covering properties. To have a covering property (K, m), a finite
simple group must either have a large enough rank to accommodate the large m,
according to Proposition 6.7, or it must have a small enough rank to accomodate
the small K, according to Proposition 6.5. So there might be a gap between the
“large enough rank” and the “small enough rank”, where the finite simple subgroups in the gap would fail to have the covering property (K, m), no matter how
quasirandom they are.
In short, the covering properties of finite quasisimple groups are not necessarily
uniform. It is uniform when obtained through increasing ranks, and it is uniform
when obtained through base fields of increasing sizes. At least with the techniques
in this paper, we cannot combine the two uniformity into one. So we must use the
double covering properties.
Proposition 7.3. Let G be a group with the symmetric double covering property
for some parameters, and let (Gi )i∈I be an arbitrary family of groups with the
symmetric double covering property for some uniform parameters. Then the following are true:
(i) For any normal subgroup N , G has the symmetric double covering property
for the same parameters mod N .
(ii) Any quotient group of G has the symmetric double covering property for the
same parameters.

Ultraproducts of Quasirandom Groups

23

Q
(iii) The group i∈I Gi has the symmetric double covering property for the same
parameters.
Q
(iv) As a result of the (ii) and (iii), any ultraproduct i→ω Gi has the symmetric
double covering property for the same parameters.
Proof. (i), (ii) and (iv) are straightforward.
To see (iii), let gi,1 , gi,2 ∈ Gi be the pairs giving Gi theQsymmetric double
covering property. Then I claim that (gi,1 )i∈I , (gi,2 )i∈I ∈ i∈I Gi is the pair
giving the desired symmetric double covering property.
Q
For any element (gi )i∈I ∈ i∈I Gi , then each gi is in Gi . And by its symmetric
double covering property, we know
−1 K1
−1 K2
Gi = C(gi,1 )K1 C(gi,1
) C(gi,2 )K2 C(gi,2
) .

So we can find ai,j , bi,j ∈ Gi for i ∈ I and 1 ≤ j ≤ K1 , and ci,j , di,j ∈ Gi for
i ∈ I and 1 ≤ j ≤ K2 , such that
gi = (

Y

−1 −1
(ai,j gi,1 a−1
i,j )(bi,j gi,1 bi,j ))(

1≤j≤K1

Y

−1 −1
(ci,j gi,2 c−1
i,j )(di,j (gi,2 ) di,j )).

1≤j≤K2

Since the above identity is true for all i ∈ I, we have
(gi )i∈I =(

Y

−1
−1
((ai,j )i∈I (gi,1 )i∈I (ai,j )i∈I
)((bi,j )i∈I (gi,1 )−1
i∈I (bi,j )i∈I ))

1≤j≤K1

(

Y

−1
−1
((ci,j )i∈I (gi,2 )i∈I (ci,j )−1
i∈I )((di,j )i∈I (gi,2 )i∈I (di,j )i∈I )).

1≤j≤K2

So we have proven (iii).
Corollary 7.4. Let CQS be the class of finite quasisimple groups. Then CQS is a
Q.U.P. class.
Proof. For any integer D, and for the constant c = f(D) as in Proposition 4.4, we
can find D′ , K1 , K2 , m1 , m2 as in Lemma 7.1.
Let Gi be a sequence of D′ -quasirandom groups in CQS . Then Gi all have the
symmetric
Q double covering property [(K1 , m1 ), (K2 , m2 )]. Then any ultraproduct
G = i→ω Gi will have the symmetric double covering property [(K1 , m1 ), (K2 , m2 )]
2
2
by Proposition 7.3. Since m1 > f(D)K1D , m2 > f(D)K D , G is D-quasirandom
by Proposition 4.4.

24

Y. Yang

Corollary 7.5 (Quasirandomness implies a Nice Covering Property mod Cosocle).
For any integer D, and any constant c, we can find integers D′ , K1 , K2 , m1 , m2
such that all finite D′ -quasirandom groups have the symmetric double covering
2
2
property [(K1 , m1 ), (K2 , m2 )] mod cosocle, with m1 > cK1D , m2 > cK2D .
Proof. Let D′ , K1 , K2 , m1 , m2 be exactly as in Lemma 7.1. Let G be any finite
D′ -quasirandom group.
Let N be the cosocle of G. Then G/N is a direct product of D′ -quasirandom
finite simple groups. These simple groups all have the symmetric double covering
property [(K1 , m1 ), (K2 , m2 )]. So by Proposition 7.3, their product G/N will
have this same symmetric double covering property.
Corollary 7.6. Let CCS(n) be the class of finite groups with at most n conjugacy
classes in their cosocles. Then CCS(n) is a Q.U.P. class.
2

Proof. Let c = f(D)(3n − 2)D .
For any integer D, and for the constant c, we can find D′ , K1 , K2 , m1 , m2 as in
Corollary 7.5.
Let Gi be a sequence of D′ -quasirandom groups in CCS(n) . Then Gi all have the
symmetric double covering property [(K1 , m1 ), (K2 , m2 )] mod cosocles. Since
the cosocles contain at most n conjugacy classes, by Proposition 5.2, Gi all have
the symmetric double covering
Q property [((3n − 2)K1 , m1 ), ((3n − 2)K2 , m2 )].
Then any ultraproduct G = i→ω Gi will have the symmetric double covering
property [((3n − 2)K1 , m1 ), ((3n − 2)K2 , m2 )] by Proposition 7.3.
2
2
Since m1 > f(D)[(3n − 2)K1 ]D , m2 > f(D)[(3n − 2)K]D , G is Dquasirandom by Proposition 4.4.
2

Proof of Theorem 1.5. For any integer D, let c = f(D)(3n − 2)D . We can find
D′ , K1 , K2 , m1 , m2 as in Corollary 7.5 and Lemma 7.1.
Let Gi be a sequence of D′ -quasirandom groups in Cn . Then each Gi is a
direct product of D′ -quasirandom groups in CQS ∪ CCS(n) . These factor groups
must then have the symmetric double covering property [((3n−2)K1 , m1 ), ((3n−
2)K2 , m2 )]. By Proposition 7.3, Gi must also have this symmetric double covering
Q property [((3n − 2)K1 , m1 ), ((3n − 2)K2 , m2 )]. Then any ultraproduct G =
i→ω Gi will have the symmetric double covering property [((3n−2)K1 , m1 ), ((3n−
2)K2 , m2 )] by Proposition 7.3.
2
2
Since m1 > f(D)[(3n − 2)K1 ]D , m2 > f(D)[(3n − 2)K]D , Proposition 4.4
implies that G is D-quasirandom.

Ultraproducts of Quasirandom Groups

8
8.1

25

Applications
Triangles in a quasirandom group

A quasirandom group usually contains many patterns. For example, Gowers has
shown the following result:
Theorem 8.1 (Gowers [9, Theorem 5.1]). Pick any ǫ1 , ǫ2 > 0, 0 < α < 1. If G
is a D-quasirandom group for some large enough D, then for any subset A of G
such that |A| ≥ α|G|, there are more than (1 − ǫ1 )α2 |G| elements x ∈ G such
that |A ∩ xA| ≥ (1 − ǫ2 )α2 |G|.
Morally, if we define an x-pair to be a set {y, xy} for some y ∈ G, then this theorem means that any large enough subset of a quasirandom group G will contain
many x-pairs for many x.
Now given a q.u.p. class, we can obtain minimally almost periodic groups via
ultraproducts of sequences of increasingly quasirandom groups. Then by applying
ergodic theory on the ultraproduct, more patterns similar to that of Theorem 8.1
might emerge. It is proven by Bergelson, Robertson and Zorin-Kranich [4] that,
for a quasirandom group G in a q.u.p class, any large enough subset of G × G will
contain many x-triangle for many x.
Definition 8.2. Let g be an element of a group G. Then a g-triangle is the set
{(x, y), (gx, y), (gx, gy)} ⊆ G × G for some x, y ∈ G.
Theorem 8.3 (Bergelson, Robertson and Zorin-Kranich [4, Theorem 1.12]). Let
G be contained in a q.u.p. class. For any ǫ > 0, 0 < α < 1, there are integers
D, K such that, if G is D-quasirandom, then for any subset A of G × G with
|A| ≥ α|G|2 , the set TA = {g ∈ G : A contains more than (α4 −ǫ)|G|2 triangles}
can cover G with at most K left translates of itself.
8.2

Self-Bohrifying groups

The application in this section is related to topological groups. We shall treat all
groups in previous sections as discrete groups.
Definition 8.4. A Bohr compactification of a topological group G is a continuous
homomorphism b : G → bG such that any continuous homomorphism from G to
a compact group factors uniquely through b.
Remark 8.5.

26

Y. Yang

(i) The Bohr compactification exists for any group by the work of Holm [12]. It
is obviously unique up to a unique isomorphism.
(ii) Clearly, a discrete group is minimally almost periodic iff it has trivial Bohr
compactification. Note that for a discrete group, any abstract homomorphism
from it to another topological group is automatically continuous.
Definition 8.6. A topological group G is said to be self-Bohrifying if its Bohr
compactification bG is the same abstract group as G, but with a compact topology.
By the results and techniques of this paper, one can find many examples of
self-Bohrifying groups. In particular, we have the following theorem.
Theorem 8.7. Let n be a positive integer. Let Gi be a sequence of increasingly
Q
quasirandom groups in Cn , the class defined as in Theorem 1.5. Then i∈N Gi is
self-Bohrifying as a discrete group.
Corollary 8.8. Let GQ
i be a sequence of non-abelian finite simple groups of increasing order. Then i∈N Gi is self-Bohrifying as a discrete group.
`
Q
We will prove Theorem 8.7 by first showing that i∈N Gi / i∈N Gi is minimally almost periodic, and then using a lemma by Hart and Kunen [11].
Definition 8.9. Let Gi be a sequence of groups.
Q
`
(i) Their sum is the group i∈N Gi = {g ∈ i∈N Gi : only finitely many
coordinates of g is nontrivial}.
Q
`
(ii) Their reduced product is the group i∈N Gi / i∈N Gi .
Lemma 8.10 (Hart and
Q Kunen [11, Lemma 3.8]). Let {Gi }i∈N be a sequence of
finite groups. Then Q i∈N Gi is`self-Bohrifying if all but finitely many Gi are
perfect groups,
` and i∈N Gi / i∈N Gi has trivial Bohr compactification, i.e.,
Q
G
/
i∈N Gi is minimally almost periodic.
i∈N i
Proof of Theorem 8.7. All 2-quasirandom groups are perfect. So it is enough to
show that the reduced product of Gi is minimally almost periodic, i.e., it is Dquasirandom for all D.
2
For any integer D, let c = f(D)(3n − 2)D . We can find D′ , K1 , K2 , m1 , m2
as in Corollary 7.5 and Lemma 7.1.
Let Gi be a sequence of increasingly quasirandom groups in Cn . Then all but
finitely many Gi will be D′ -quasirandom. Since we are interested in the reduced

Ultraproducts of Quasirandom Groups

27

product, which is invariant under the change of finitely many coordinates, we may
WLOG assume that all Gi are D′ -quasirandom.
Since Gi ∈ Cn , each Gi is a direct product of D′ -quasirandom groups in CQS ∪
CCS(n) . These factor groups must then have the symmetric double covering property [((3n −2)K1 , m1 ), ((3n −2)K2 , m2 )]. By Proposition 7.3, Gi must also have
this symmetric double covering property [((3n − 2)K1 , m1 ), ((3n − 2)K2 , m2 )].
Now by PropositionQ
7.3, covering properties are preserved by arbitrary products andQ
quotients.`
So i∈N Gi will have this covering property, and the reduced
product i∈N Gi / i∈N Gi will also have this covering property.
2
2
Since m1 > c[(3n − 2)K1 ]D , m2 > c[(3n − 2)K]D , the reduced product is
D-quasirandom by Proposition 4.4. So we are done by Lemma 8.10.

Acknowledgments. I would like to thank Professor Terence Tao for introducing
me to this area and for his patient guidance. I would also like to thank Professor Richard Schwartz, Professor Vitaly Bergelson, Professor Emmanuel Breuillard and Professor Nikolay Nikolov for their helpful inputs, and thank Professor
László Pyber for his helpful inputs and for pointing me to a number of very useful
references.

Bibliography
[1] L. Babai, A. J. Goodman and L. Pyber, Groups without Faithful Transitive Permutation: Representations of Small Degree, J. Algebra, 195 (1997), 1–29.
[2] A. Ballester-Bolinches and L. M. Ezquerro, Classes of Finite Groups, Springer, Vol.
584, 2006.
[3] V. Bergelson and H. Furstenberg, WM Groups and Ramsey Theory, Topology Appl.,
156(16) (2009), 2572–2580.
[4] V. Bergelson, D. Robertson and P. Zorin-Kranich, Triangles in Cartesian Squares of
Quasirandom Groups, preprint, (2014), http://arxiv.org/abs/1410.5385.
[5] V. Bergelson and T. Tao, Multiple Recurrence in Quasirandom Groups, Geom. Funct.
Anal., 24(1) (2014), 1-48.
[6] J. L. Brenner, Covering Theorems for FINASIGs. VlII. Almost All Conjugacy Classes
in An Have Exponent ≤ 4, J. Aust. Math. Soc. Ser. A, 25(02) (1978), 210–214.
[7] J. Cheeger and D. G. Ebin, Comparison Theorems in Riemannian Geometry, American Mathematical Society, 1975.
[8] M. Collins, On Jordan’s Theorem for Complex Linear Groups, J. Group Theory,
10(4) (2007), 411–423.

28

Y. Yang

[9] W. T. Gowers, Quasirandom Groups, Combin. Probab. Comput., 17(3) (2008), 363–
387.
[10] L. C. Grove, Classical Groups and Geometric Algebra, American Mathematical
Society, 2002.
[11] J. E. Hart and K. Kunen, Bohr Compactifications of Non-Abelian Groups, Topology
Proc., 26(2) (2002), 593–626.
[12] P. Holm, On the Bohr Compactification, Math. Ann., 156 (1964), 34–46.
[13] D. Holt and W. Plesken, Perfect Groups, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989.
[14] A. E. Hurd and P. A. Loeb, An Introduction to Nonstandard Real Analysis, Academic Press, Vol. 118, 1985.
[15] T. Jech, Set Theory, Springer, 2002.
[16] M. Kassabov, A. Lubotzky and N. Nikolov, Finite Simple Groups as Expanders,
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 103(16) (2006), 6116–6119.
[17] J. von Neumann and E. P. Wigner, Minimally Almost Periodic Groups, Ann. of
Math., 41(2) (1940), 746–750.
[18] J. Nienhuys, A Solenoidal and Monothetic Minimally Almost Periodic Group, Fund.
Math., 73(2) (1971), 167–169.
[19] M. R. Sepanski, Compact Lie Group, Springer Science and Business Media, Vol.
235, 2007.
[20] Abel Stolz and Andreas Thom, On the Lattice of Normal Subgroups in Ultraproducts
of Compact Simple Groups, Proc. Lond. Math. Soc., 108(1) (2013), 73–102.

Received ???.
Author information
Yilong Yang, 3170 Sawtelle Blvd Apt 203, Los Angeles, CA 90066, USA.
E-mail: yy26@math.ucla.edu

