TITS GEOMETRY AND POSITIVE CURVATURE

arXiv:1205.6222v3 [math.DG] 14 Jul 2016

FUQUAN FANG, KARSTEN GROVE, AND GUDLAUGUR THORBERGSSON
Abstract. There is a well known link between (maximal) polar representations and isotropy representations of symmetric spaces provided by Dadok. Moreover, the theory by Tits and BurnsSpatzier provides a link between irreducible symmetric spaces of noncompact type of rank at
least three and irreducible topological spherical buildings of rank at least three.
We discover and exploit a rich structure of a (connected) chamber system of finite (Coxeter)
type M associated with any polar action of cohomogeneity at least two on any simply connected
closed positively curved manifold. Although this chamber system is typically not a Tits geometry
of type M, its universal Tits cover indeed is a building in all but two exceptional cases. We
construct a topology on this universal cover making it into a compact spherical building in the
sense of Burns and Spatzier. Using this structure we classify up to equivariant diffeomorphism
all polar actions on (simply connected) positively curved manifolds of cohomogeneity at least
two.

The interest in positively curved manifolds goes back to the beginning of Riemannian geometry or even to spherical and projective geometry. Likewise, the program of Tits to provide
an axiomatic description of geometries whose automorphism group is a noncompact simple
algebraic or Lie group goes back to projective geometry.
The presence of symmetries has played a significant role in the study of positively curved
manifolds during the past two decades; see, e.g., the surveys [Gr, Wi1, Zi]. Not only has this
resulted in a number of classification type theorems, it has also lead to new insights about
structural properties, see, e.g., [VZ, Wi3], as well as to the discovery and construction of a new
example [De, GVZ].
Unlike [GWZ], our work here is not motivated by the quest for new examples. On the contrary, we wish to explore rigidity properties of special actions on positively curved manifolds
whose linear counterparts by work of Dadok [Da], Cartan (see [He]), Tits [Ti1], and Burns and
Spatzier [BSp] ultimately are described axiomatically via so-called compact spherical buildings.
The special actions we investigate are the so-called polar actions, i.e., isometric actions for
which there is an (immersed) submanifold, a so-called section, that meets all orbits orthogonally. Such actions form a particularly simple, yet very rich and interesting class of manifolds
and actions closely related to the transformation group itself. The concept goes back to isotropy
representations of symmetric spaces. Also, as a special case, the adjoint action of a compact
Lie group on itself is polar with section a maximal torus. Its extension to general manifolds was
pioneered by Szenthe in [Sz] and independently by Palais and Terng in [PTe], and has recently
Date: July 15, 2016.
The first author is supported in part by an NSFC grant and he is grateful to the University of Notre Dame for
its hospitality. The second author is supported in part by an NSF grant, a research chair at the Hausdorff Center at
the University of Bonn and by a Humboldt research award. The third author is grateful to the University of Notre
Dame and the Capital Normal University in Beijing for their hospitality.
1

2

FUQUAN FANG, KARSTEN GROVE, AND GUDLAUGUR THORBERGSSON

been further developed in [GZ]. Since the action by the identity component of a polar action is
itself polar, we assume throughout without further comments that our group is connected. An
exceptional but important special case is that of cohomogeneity one actions and manifolds, i.e.,
actions with 1-dimensional orbit space.
The exceptional case of positively curved cohomogeneity one manifolds was studied in
[GWZ] and [Ve]. Aside from the rank one symmetric spaces, this also includes infinite families
of other manifolds, most of which are not homogeneous even up to homotopy. In contrast, our
main result here is the following:
Theorem A. A polar action on a simply connected, compact, positively curved manifold of
cohomogeneity at least two is equivariantly diffeomorphic to a polar action on a compact rank
one symmetric space.
This is reminiscent of the situation for isoparametric submanifolds in euclidean spheres,
where many isoparametric hypersurfaces are not homogeneous (see [OT, FKM]), whereas in
higher codimensions by [Th] they are the orbits of linear polar actions if they are irreducible or
equivalently the orbits of isotropy representations of compact symmetric spaces by [Da].
All polar actions on the simply connected, compact rank one symmetric spaces, i.e., the
spheres and projective spaces, Sn , CPn , HPn and OP2 were classified in [Da] (see also [EH]) and
[PTh, GK]. In all cases but OP2 they are either linear polar actions on a sphere or they descend
from such actions to a projective space. By the work mentioned above by Dadok, Cartan, Tits,
and Burns-Spatzier, the (maximal) irreducible polar linear actions are in 1-1 correspondence
with irreducible compact spherical buildings. On OP2 any polar action has either cohomogeneity one or two, and in the second case all but two have a fixed point. The latter are actions by
SU(3) SU(3) [PTh] and SO(3) G2 [GK] both with orbit space a spherical triangle with angles
π/2, π/3 and π/4. We refer to these as the exceptional (irreducible) actions on OP2 .
We note that Theorem A is optimal: In fact, since the Berger-Cheeger deformation [Ch]
preserves polarity and lower curvature bonds there are even invariant positively curved polar
metrics on any rank one symmetric space arbitrarily Gromov - Hausdorff close to its orbit space.
There are different steps and strategies involved in the proof of Theorem A. To guide the
reader we provide a short discussion of the key results needed in the proof.
Our point of departure is the following description of sections and their (effective) stabilizer
groups referred to as polar groups in [GZ] and generalized Weyl groups in [Sz, PTe]:
Theorem B. The polar group of a simply connected positively curved polar manifold of
cohomogeneity at least two is a Coxeter group or a Z2 quotient thereof. Moreover, the section
with this action is equivariantly diffeomorphic to a sphere, respectively a real projective space
with a linear action.
If this linear action is irreducible we say that the polar G action is irreducible, and reducible
otherwise. The above result also allows us to associate a (connected) chamber system C (M; G)
(cf. [Ti2, Ro]) of type M (the Coxeter matrix of the associated Coxeter group), to any simply
connected positively curved polar G manifold M of cohomogeneity at least two. We point out
that in this generality, the geometric realization of C (M; G) is not always a simplicial complex,
so not a geometry of type M in the sense of Tits. For this we prove:

TITS GEOMETRY AND POSITIVE CURVATURE

3

Theorem C. Let M be a simply connected positively curved polar G manifold without fixed
points, and not (equivalent to) an exceptional action on OP2 . Then the universal cover C˜(M; G)
of C (M; G) is a spherical building.
Moreover, the Hausdorff topology on compact subsets of M induces in a natural way a topology on C˜(M; G) for which we prove:
Theorem D. Whenever the universal cover C˜(M; G) of C (M; G) is a building, it is a compact
spherical building.
When the Coxeter diagram for M is connected, or more generally has no isolated nodes,
the work of Burns and Spatzier [BSp] as extended by Grundhöfer, Kramer, Van Maldeghem
and Weiss [GKMW] applies, and hence C˜(M; G) is the building of the sphere at infinity of a
noncompact symmetric space U /K of nonpositive curvature, and the action of K on the sphere
at infinity is the linear polar action whose chamber system is the building. In our case, the
fundamental group π of the cover becomes a compact normal subgroup of G̃ ⊂ K acting freely
on the sphere with quotient our manifold with the action by G = G̃/π. Moreover, the actions by
G̃ and K on the sphere are orbit equivalent. This already proves our Theorem A up to equivariant
homeomorphism in this case (Theorem 4.10), and equivariant diffeomorphism follows, e.g.,
from the recognition theorem in [GZ]. In particular, we note that in this case M is either a
sphere or a quotient thereof by a Hopf action, i.e., not the Cayley plane.
In the remaining (reducible) cases (including the case of fixed points), where isolated nodes
of the Coxeter diagram are present, the above mentioned extended Burns-Spatzier-Tits theory
does not yield the desired result, and we also use more direct geometric arguments that hinges
on a characterization of Hopf fibrations in our context, Lemma 6.2.
We point out that the proof of Theorem C above has three distinct parts, a special one of
which is carried out in [FGT]. For all chamber systems of rank at least four, our constructions
combined with the work of Tits gives the result (cf. Theorem 3.13). In the reducible rank
three cases it follows from Theorem 7.1. In the irreducible rank three cases, i.e., of type A3
and C3 , corresponding to the orbit space being a spherical triangle with angles π/2, π/3 and
π/3, respectively π/2, π/3 and π/4, the general theory breaks down. The point of departure
here (Theorem 5.1), is that in this case C (M; G) is simplicial, thus an A3 , respectively a C3
geometry. Since all An geometries are buildings by work of Tits, this completes the case of A3 .
In the case of C3 one can use an axiomatic characterization of buildings of type C3 due to Tits.
This is carried out in [FGT] via reductions and the work in [GWZ]. Unlike the higher rank case,
the strategy here is to construct suitable covers and prove that they are buildings. Exactly two
cases emerge (from the exceptional actions on OP2 ) where this cannot be done due to theorem
D and the subsequent discussion above. In fact, we conclude:
Theorem E. The chamber system C (OP2 , G) for an irreducible polar G action on OP2 is a
C3 geometry whose universal cover is not a building.
The existence of C3 geometries whose universal covers are not buildings are well known in
the “real estate community” (see [Ne]), but the examples C (OP2 , G), with G = SU(3) · SU(3),
and G = SO(3) · G2 which arise naturally in our context are new.

4

FUQUAN FANG, KARSTEN GROVE, AND GUDLAUGUR THORBERGSSON

We conclude this outline by pointing out that positive curvature is used in the general theory for two purposes: (1) To prove Theorem B (cf. Section 2) , and (2) to establish that the
associated chamber system C (M; G) is connected, or equivalently the G action is primitive (cf.
Section 3). In fact, we prove the conclusion of Theorem A for any polar action with connected
chamber system and whose orbit space has positive curvature, unless it is of type C3 . In the
case of C3 (see [FGT]) we use positive curvature more extensively, in particularly relying on
the work in [GWZ] (alternatively, due to Theorem 5.1, this case is also covered by the classification of irreducible homogeneous geometries of finite Coxeter type M of rank at least two in
[KL]).
Unlike previous applications of buildings to geometry, what is essential for us is to use Tits’s
local approach to buildings, i.e., via chamber systems and their universal covers [Ti2, Ro]. We
like to mention that this is the case also in independent simultaneous work by Lytchak [Ly]
describing the structure of polar singular foliations of codimension at least three in compact
symmetric spaces. In particular, in his context results similar to Theorem D and its corollary,
Theorem E were obtained.
We point out that a corresponding theory for polar actions on nonnegatively curved manifolds
is significantly more involved. In particular, the concept of an “irreducible action” is not as
straightforward in this case, in part since the section is no longer just a sphere or a real projective
space with a reflection group (for a complete description see [FG]). For example the polar T2
action on CP2 with three fixed points induces a polar T2 action on CP2 # ± CP2 with a metric
of nonnegative curvature and flat Klein bottle as section (see [GZ]) that should be viewed as
reducible, as should actions that are not primitive.
With the appropriate notion of irreducibility we
Conjecture. An irreducible polar action on a simply connected nonnegatively curved compact manifold is equivariantly diffeomorphic to a quotient of a polar action on a symmetric
space.
Another interesting direction is based on part of our work here that generalizes to curvature
free settings. For example, the combinatorial content of our paper can be used in the study of
general polar actions on simply connected manifolds with finite polar group.
We have divided the paper into seven sections. Structurally it consists of three rather different
moderately intertwined parts, Sections 1-4 constituting Part I, Section 5 (together with [FGT])
Part II, and Sections 6-7 Part III. Here Part I deals with the overall general approach and theory
leading to a proof of Theorem A for all irreducible actions of cohomogeneity at least three.
Part II deals with the exceptional case of irreducibe actions of cohomogeneity two where the
key issue for the general theory breaks down. Finally Part III deals with all reducible cases
including cohomogeneity two. In particular, Parts I and III yield a proof of Theorem A in
cohomogeneity at least three. In cohomogeneity two only the irreducible actions of type C 3
are not covered in this paper and we refer to [FGT] (or [KL]).
The first two sections are devoted to preliminaries and an analysis of sections culminating in
Theorem B, which actually provides a complete classification of positively curved manifolds
with reflection groups. The chamber system associated with a polar action in positive curvature

TITS GEOMETRY AND POSITIVE CURVATURE

5

is investigated in Section 3. The point of departure here is that this chamber system is connected.
The proof of this is based on a result about dual foliations due to Wilking [Wi3]. We conclude
Section 3 by proving Theorem C in all (irreducible) cases but A3 and C3 .
In Section 4 we equip the ingredients of Theorem C with a natural topology based on the
classical Hausdorff topology on closed sets in a compact metric space. Our main result here
is that with this topology the universal covers of our chamber systems are compact spherical
buildings in the sense of Burns and Spatzier. This then in particular leads to a proof of Theorem
A for all irreducible actions but those of type A3 and C3 .
As mentioned above, the general theory for compact spherical buildings breaks down for
reducible actions in general (the ones for whom the Coxeter diagram has isolated nodes). The
proof of Theorem A for such actions is carried out in Sections 6 and 7. As a key input, we
provide in Section 6 a characterization of Hopf fibrations in our context which is of independent
interest. This immediately yields Theorem A for the special case where fixed points are present.
The reducible case where no fixed points are present is dealt with in Section 7.
For basic facts and tools involving critical point theory for nonsmooth distance functions and
convex sets in positive curvature that will be used freely we refer to [Pe] Chapter 11.
It is our pleasure to thank Linus Kramer, and Alexander Lytchak for constructive discussions
and comments. Likewise, we are grateful to an anonymous referee for constructive comments
and a suggestion that lead to a significant simplification of the proof of the Hopf Lemma 6.2,
and subsequent ramifications.
1. Preliminaries
We will begin by giving a brief description of known facts for general polar manifolds (cf.
e.g. [GZ] and [HPPT] for further information). We observe that under fairly mild restrictions,
there is a general so-called chamber system naturally associated with such actions. We will end
the section with a description of such systems, and the special case of Coxeter systems.
Throughout G will be a compact connected Lie group acting isometrically on a connected
compact Riemannian manifold M in a polar fashion. By definition there is a section Σ, i.e.,
an immersion σ : Σ → M of a connected manifold Σ, whose image intersects all G orbits
orthogonally. Moreover, we demand that σ is a section without a subcover section, i.e. σ
does not factor through a covering Σ → Σ′ → M. Obviously g σ is a section for any g ∈ G,
and G σ(Σ) = M. Clearly, Σ has the same dimension as the orbit space M ∗ := M/ G, i.e.,
the cohomogeneity of the action, or the codimension of principal orbits, G / H ⊂ M. If not
otherwise stated, it is understood that 0 < dim M ∗ < dim M. This eliminates general actions
by discrete groups, and general transitive actions. In addition, we also assume that M is not a
product where G acts trivially on one of the factors. In general, we will denote the image of a
subset X ⊂ M under the orbit map by X ∗ ⊂ M ∗ .
The following facts are simple and well known (cf. [Sz, PTe]):
• Any section is totally geodesic.
• The slice representation of any isotropy group K ⊂ G is a polar representation.
Recall here that if K fixes p ∈ M, then the slice representation of K is the action of K by
differentials on the normal space in T p M to the tangent space T p (G p) of its orbit G p. We often

6

FUQUAN FANG, KARSTEN GROVE, AND GUDLAUGUR THORBERGSSON

restrict this further to the subspace T p⊥ perpendicular also to the fixed point set T p M K . This is
also a polar representation.
Fix a section σ : Σ → M and a point p ∈ Σ corresponding to a principal G orbit, i.e., G σ(p)
is a principal orbit with isotropy group H = Gσ(p) . The stabilizer subgroup Gσ(Σ) ⊂ G of σ(Σ)
induces an action on Σ. Clearly, H is the kernel of that action, and we refer to Π := Gσ(Σ) / H as
the polar group associated to the section σ. Recall the following facts:
• For any q ∈ Σ, σ∗ (T q Σ) ⊂ T σ(q) M is a section of the polar representation, the slice
representation of Gσ(q) , and the associated polar group is the isotropy group Πq .
• Π is a discrete subgroup of N(H)/ H acting properly discontinuously on Σ with trivial
principal isotropy group.
• M ∗ = Σ∗ := Σ/Π is an orbifold.
In complete generality, the structure of M and its G action is encoded in the section Σ, the
polar group Π and its actions on Σ and G / H, and the G isotropy groups along Σ. Although in
general, Π can be any discrete subgroup of a Lie group, typically singular orbits are present, in
which case there is a nontrivial normal subgroup W ⊂ Π generated by reflections ri associated
with maximal singular isotropy groups Ki ⊂ G along Σ (cf. [GZ]). We refer to any group
generated by reflections as a reflection group. We stress that here r : Σ → Σ is called a reflection
if r has order two, and at least one component of the fixed point set has codimension 1. The
codimension 1 components Λr ⊂ Σ of the fixed point set Σr are referred to as the mirrors of r. A
connected component c of the complement of all mirrors is called an (open) chamber of Σ. We
denote the closure of an open chamber by C = c̄ and refer to it simply as a chamber. Again, we
stress that this kind of terminology is usually reserved to the situation where the complement
of a mirror has two connected components interchanged by the reflection. Note that the latter is
automatic for reflections on a simply connected manifold.
It is clear that W acts transitively on the set of open chambers of Σ, but the stabilizer group
Wc which we will call the chamber group may be nontrivial when the section is not simply
connected (cf. Example 1.1 and Theorem 1.2). Clearly Σ/W = C/Wc . Moreover, the boundary
∂C = C − c of a chamber C, is the union of its chamber faces, where a chamber face is a
nonempty intersection C ∩ Λ with a mirror.
The following examples illustrate these concepts and are relevant for our subsequent discussion about positive curvature:
Example 1.1. Consider the following groups W acting on S2 as well as on RP2 .
(1) W = A1 = hri, where r is the reflection in the equator:
On S2 there is one mirror and two open chambers, the open upper and lower hemispheres
interchanged by r. Their closure is the orbit space S2 /W. There is one face, its boundary circle
(and it coincides with the mirror of r).
On RP2 there is one mirror and one open chamber and it is preserved by r. Its closure is all of
RP2 and the orbit space RP2 /W is the cone on its boundary circle, the cone point corresponds
to the isolated fixed point of r on RP2 (in the chamber). There is one face, the whole boundary
(and it coincides with the mirror of r).
Note that the action of W on RP2 lifts to the action of W on S2 . If we extend this action by
−id, the extended group action induces the same action on the base, and now has the same orbit
space.

TITS GEOMETRY AND POSITIVE CURVATURE

7

(2) W = A1 × A1 = hr0 , r2 i where r0 , r2 are reflection in two great circles making an angle π/2:
On S2 there are two mirrors and four open chambers. Their closure is the orbit space S2 /W,
a spherical right angled biangle. There are two faces each of which are also a chamber face.
Their intersection is the intersection of mirrors and coincides with the fixed point set Fix(W).
On RP2 there are three mirrors and four open chambers. In fact, the “rotation” r0 r2 on S2
induces a reflection on RP2 . The closure of an open chamber is the orbit space RP2 /W, a right
angled spherical triangle. There are three faces, each of which is also a chamber face. The
intersection of all mirrors is empty, but each vertex of the orbit space triangle correspond in this
case to a fixed point of W.
In this case, the lifted action of W on RP2 to S2 contains a rotation of angle π. Again the
extended action by −id defines the same action on RP2 , but on S2 the action has three reflections,
and of course the same orbit space. In other words, the reflection group on S2 generated by the
lift of all the reflections in RP2 contains the antipodal map in this case as opposed to the first
case.
(3) W = A2 = hr0 , r3 i where r0 , r3 are reflection in two great circles making an angle π/3:
On S2 there are three mirrors and six open chambers. Their closure is the orbit space S2 /W,
a spherical biangle with angle π/3. There are two faces each of which are also a chamber face.
Their intersection is the intersection of mirrors and coincides with the fixed point set Fix(W).
On RP2 there are three mirrors and three open chambers. The closure of an open chamber is
a spherical biangle with angle π/3 where the two vertices have been identified! The stabilizer
Wc of a chamber has order two, fixes the “mid point” of C and rotates C to itself, mapping one
chamber face to the other. The orbit space has one face with one singular point, the fixed point
of W and one interior singular point, the fixed point of Wc .
In this case, the reflection group obtained by lifting the reflections in RP2 to reflections in S2
does not contain the antipodal map. If we extend it by the antipodal map we get the same action
on RP2 and the orbit spaces are of course the same as well.
(4) Consider a linear cohomogeneity one action on a sphere with orbit space of length π/i,
i = 2, 3. The suspended action and its induced action on the real projective space have sections
and polar groups as presented in (2) and (3) above.
Note that if Π = W and the chamber group Wc is trivial, it follows that C is isometrically
identified with Σ/W = M/ G, and that W acts simply transitively on the set of closed chambers
of a fixed section Σ. Moreover, G acts transitively on the set of all chambers in all sections of M,
i.e. M = ∪g∈G gC, and this set of chambers is G / H as a set. The chamber faces F i , i = 1, . . . k,
of C correspond to a set of generators ri for W. This way all faces of chambers gC, g ∈ G of
M get labeled consistently, so that G is label preserving. Now define two chambers g1C and
g2C to be i-adjacent if they have a common i face g1 F i = g2 F i . This relation among the set
of chambers in M, respectively all chambers in a fixed section Σ make both of these sets into a
chamber system C (M, G), respectively C (Σ, W) according to the following definition (see, e.g.,
[Ti2, Ro]):
An (abstract) chamber system over I = {1, . . . , k} is a set C together with a partition of C
for every i ∈ I. Elements C, C ′ ∈ C in the same part of the i-partition, are said to be i-adjacent
which is written as C ∼i C ′ . The elements of C are called chambers.
We will use the following standard terminology in subsequent sections:

8

FUQUAN FANG, KARSTEN GROVE, AND GUDLAUGUR THORBERGSSON

A gallery in C is a sequence Γ = (C0 , . . . , Cm ) in C such that C j is i j -adjacent to C j+1 for
every 0 ≤ j ≤ m − 1. Here the word f = i0 i2 . . . im−1 in I is referred to as the type of the gallery.
If we want to indicate this type, we write Γ f rather than just Γ. If the i j ’s belong to a subset
J of I, we call Γ = (C0 , . . . , Cm ) a J-gallery. A subset B of a chamber system C is said to
be connected (or J-connected) if any two chambers in it can be connected by a gallery (or a
J-gallery). The J-connected components of C are called J-residues. The rank of a J-residue is
the cardinality of J and its corank is the cardinality of I \ J. Given residues R and S of types J
and K respectively, we say that S is a face of R, if R ⊂ S and J ⊂ K.
Note that for chamber systems C (M, G) as above, if two mirrors Λi and Λ j in Σ corresponding
to two reflections ri and r j on Σ intersect, then (ri r j )mi j = 1 for some finite integer mi j > 1. In
fact, ri , r j ∈ W p the reflection group of the polar representation of the isotropy group G p for
p ∈ Λi ∩ Λ j =: Λi j , so hri , r j i is a dihedral group, and the angle between Λi and Λ j is π/mi j .
In fact, in our case mi j is limited to 2, 3, 4, or 6 , since these are the possibilities for isotropy
representations of symmetric spaces, and moreover no exceptional orbits are present (Theorem
2.7).
Recall, that a symmetric k × k matrix M = (mi j ) with entries from N ∪ {∞}, with mii = 1 for
all i ∈ I, and mi j > 1 if i , j is called a Coxeter matrix.
Pictorially, M is given by its so-called diagram, which consists of one node for each i ∈ I and
mi j − 2 lines joining the i and j nodes.
The associated Coxeter group of type M is the group W(M) given by generators and relations
as
W(M) = h{r1 , . . . , rk } | (ri r j )mi j = 1 for all i, j ∈ I such that mi j is finitei.
The pair (W(M), S ), where S = {r1 , . . . , rk }, is called the Coxeter system of type M, and k is
referred to as its rank. The elements of W(M) that are conjugate to elements in S are called
reflections.
There is a natural chamber system, C (W) associated with a Coxeter system (W(M), S ), where
S = {r1, . . . , rk } and I = {1, . . . , k}: One defines i-adjacency for i ∈ I to be w ∼i wri , i.e.,
each part in the i-partition of W consists of two elements. Notice that W is connected since S
generates W. There is a partial order among residues defined by setting S ≤ R if S ⊃ R. The
residues T for which S ≤ T implies S = T are called the vertices of C (W). Denote the set of
vertices by V. One associates to a residue S the subset S ′ ⊂ V defined by S ′ = {v ∈ V|v ≤ S },
and call S ′ an i-simplex if its cardinality is i + 1. The set simplices in V is denoted by ∆(W).
The Coxeter complex, ∆(W) associated to a Coxeter system (W(M), S ) also provides an example of an (abstract) simplicial complex:
Recall that an (abstract) simplicial complex is a nonempty family S of finite subsets (called
simplices) of a set V so that {v} ∈ S for every v ∈ V and every subset of a simplex in S is a
simplex in S (called a face). (The simplices consisting of one element are called vertices.)
One has the following general facts (see e.g. [Dav] page 179, Theorem 10.1.5 and Lemma
10.1.6):
Theorem 1.2. For any reflection group W acting on a simply connected Riemannian manifold
Σ, (W, S ) is a Coxeter system, where S are reflections in W corresponding to the faces of

TITS GEOMETRY AND POSITIVE CURVATURE

9

a chamber C, and Wc is trivial. If Σ is compact, W is finite and isomorphic to a spherical
reflection group.
Remark 1.3. The Coxeter groups that we will deal with in this paper will all be finite. By
a theorem of Coxeter, Coxeter systems of rank k + 1 are in one to one correspondence with
finite subgroups of O(k + 1) that are generated by reflections in hyperplanes of Rk+1 and only
fix the origin. Such groups have been classified. Let (W, S ) be a Coxeter system of rank k
acting as a reflection group on Rk+1 , and consider its restriction to Sk . In this case mirrors are
of course great spheres Sk−1 , and the Coxeter group W acts simply transitively on the set of
chambers. Each chamber is a spherical k-simplex and the corresponding triangulation of Sk is
the geometric realization of the Coxeter complex ∆(W) associated to a Coxeter system (W, S ).
The geometry of this representation is also reflected in the Coxeter diagram of M. For example, this diagram is connected if and only if this action is irreducible. Each node corresponds
to a codimension one face simplex, i, and π/mi j is the angle between the corresponding i and
j faces of the k-simplex Sk /W. The Coxeter diagram for the isotropy group of W at the vertex
opposite of face i is obtained from the Coxeter diagram of W by removing the i-th node.
We note that the chambers for the Coxeter system (W, S ) in Theorem 1.2 when Σ is a compact
k manifold combinatorially are the same as the spherical k simplices of its representation above.
Geometrically, it follows in particular that all angles in a chamber of Σ are the same as the
corresponding angles in the spherical simplex.
Although A2 is an irreducible Coxeter group, we point out that all the linear 3-dimensional
representations presented in Example 1.1 above are reducible. We conclude this section with
important examples of irreducible Coxeter groups:
Example 1.4. Finite Coxeter groups that are isomorphic to finite and irreducible reflection
groups acting on R3 will play a special role in some of our proofs. There are three such groups
that in the classification of finite Coxeter (or reflection) groups are given the symbols A3 , C3 , H3 .
The group A3 is isomorphic to the symmetric group on four letters. It is the group of symmetries of a regular tetrahedron. Its order is 24. The 2-simplexes in the triangulation explained
above have angles π/2, π/3, and π/3 at the vertices.
The group C3 is the symmetry group of a regular cube (or dually of a regular octahedron). Its
order is 48. The 2-simplices in the triangulation have angles π/2, π/3, and π/4 at the vertices.
The group H3 is the symmetry group of a regular dodecahedron (or dually of a regular icosahedron). Its order is 120. The 2-simplices in the triangulation have angles π/2, π/3, and π/5
at the vertices. Note, that the occurrence of the angle π/5 excludes H3 as a Coxeter group of a
polar action.
2. Sections and Coxeter Groups
We assume from now on that M is a positively curved polar G-manifold of cohomogeneity
at least two. This will yield strong restrictions on all the basic items presented in Section 1. In
particular, we will prove that sections are either spheres or real projective spaces.
When M is simply connected, we show that the polar group is a Coxeter group when the
section is a sphere, and a Z2 quotient of such a group when the section is a real projective space;
in either case the action is linear as stated in Theorem B of the introduction.

10

FUQUAN FANG, KARSTEN GROVE, AND GUDLAUGUR THORBERGSSON

The starting point is the following
Lemma 2.1 (Singular Orbit). Any positively curved polar G-manifold has singular orbits.
Proof. If all orbits have maximal dimension, the normal distribution is globally defined and
integrable with leaves the sections of M. Since in particular the sectional curvature of M is
nonnegative, it now follows from Theorem 1.3 in [Wa] that the orbits of G are totally geodesic,
and that the metric on M locally is a product metric. This is a contradiction since the sectional
curvature of M is actually positive.

Remark 2.2. For a nonnegatively curved polar G-manifold the same conclusion holds unless
M = Σ ×Π G / H is locally metrically a product. If in addition M is simply connected, M =
Σ × G / H with a product metric.
From Section 1, we know in particular that the reflection group W ⊂ Π is nontrivial and that
∂M ∗ = ∂Σ∗ is nonempty. This already is sufficient to prove
Proposition 2.3 (Section). Let M be a compact positively curved polar manifold. Then any
section Σ is diffeomorphic to either a sphere Sk or a real projective space RPk . In particular,
the polar group Π is finite.
Proof. Let r be a reflection, with mirror Λ and E ⊂ Λ a component. Since the curvature is
positive the (local) distance function to E is strictly concave. In particular, the complement
Σ − Dǫ (E) of a small tubular neighborhood of E is a (locally) convex set with boundary ∂Dǫ (E).
This set either has one or two components corresponding to the boundary having one or two
components. In either case, each component is a disc by the standard “soul argument”, and in
fact E = Λ. The key fact here is that the distance function to the boundary is strictly concave
and hence has a unique point at maximal distance called the soul point. Moreover the distance
function to the soul point has no critical points. For the arguments and constructions below it is
also important that the distance function is r invariant.
In the case, where Σ − Dǫ (E) has two components, Λ = E separates Σ into two manifolds V+
and V− each with Λ as a totally geodesic boundary. In this case the isometry r interchanges V+
and V− . Moreover, the diffeomorphism φ say from the upper hemisphere Dk+ of Sk to V+ can be
chosen so that the north pole of Dk+ goes to the soul point of V+ , and the image of the gradient
lines to the north pole of Dk+ are “radial” near E and the soul point. The map Φ : Sk → Σ defined
by Φ = φ on Dk+ and Φ = r φρ on Dk− is a diffeomorphism which is equivariant relative to the
reflections ρ in the equator of Sk and r on Σ.
In the case where Σ−Dǫ (E) has one component, r fixes its soul point and acts freely elsewhere:
In fact r clearly acts freely in Dǫ (E) − E, so by convexity r can only have isolated fixed points
in Σ − Dǫ (E). Moreover, if there was an isolated fixed point in addition to the soul point a
minimal geodesic between them would be reflected to a closed geodesic which is impossible
by convexity. In particular, Λ = E = RPk−1 and Σ has fundamental group Z2 . In the two
fold universal cover Σ̃ of Σ, the lift Λ̃ splits Σ̃ into two convex components V+ and V− with
common totally geodesic boundary Λ̃, as in the first part. The reflection r lifts to a reflection r̃
interchanging V+ and V− , each being mapped isometrically by the projection map to Σ − Λ (see
also remark 2.4). Choosing a diffeomorphism φ say from the upper hemisphere Dk+ of Sk to V+

TITS GEOMETRY AND POSITIVE CURVATURE

11

as before, the map Φ̃ : Sk → Σ̃ defined by Φ̃ = φ on Dk+ and Φ̃ = r φρ̃ on Dk− is a diffeomorphism
which is equivariant relative to the reflection ρ̃ on Sk and r̃ on Σ̃, and in addition by construction
equivariant relative to the antipodal map −id on Sk and the deck transformation a of Σ̃. We
conclude that Φ̃ induces a diffeomorphism Φ : RPk → Σ which is equivariant relative to the
reflections ρ on RPk induced from ρ̃ and r on Σ.

Remark 2.4. During the proof of the result above we note in particular that if r ∈ W is a
reflection of the section Σ with mirror Λ, then:
• If Σ is a sphere, Fix(r) = Λ and Λ is a codimension one sphere.
• If Σ is a projective space, Fix(r) = Λ ∪ s, where s is the soul point at maximal distance
to Λ, and Λ is a real projective space of codimension one. - Note in addition that r also
lifts to a map preserving V± ⊂ M̃ and acting as a on Λ̃
In particular, mirrors are connected, and if Π = hri , the result above gives a complete equivariant description of (Σ, Π).
The proof above also allows us to derive further information about the reflection group W
and the corresponding open chambers and orbit space Σ/W:
Lemma 2.5 (Sphere Chamber). Assume Σ is a k-dimensional sphere, and c is an open chamber. Then
• Intersections of mirrors are spheres, and the closure C of c is a convex set in Σ.
• There are at most k + 1 chamber faces, and the intersection of all of them is Fix(W).
• If there are k + 1 chamber faces, then C is a k-simplex, and Fix(W) = ∅.
• If there are ℓ + 1 < k + 1 chamber faces, then C is the join of Fix(W) with an ℓ-simplex.
Moreover, C is a fundamental domain for W and Σ/W = C.
Proof. If there is only one mirror Λ corresponding to one reflection r, W = hri = Z2 and C is a
closed convex disc with boundary Λ = Fix(W) and indeed a join of Fix(W) with a 0-simplex,
the soul point s of C as we have seen.
Now consider any two reflections, ri , i = 1, 2 with corresponding mirrors Λi . If p ∈ Λ12 :=
Λ1 ∩ Λ2 = Fix(hr1 , r2 i), clearly ri ∈ W p the reflection group of the polar representation of the
isotropy group G p . In particular, hr1 , r2 i is a dihedral group, and the angle between Λ1 and Λ2 is
π/k for some integer k. In particular, the intersection Λ12 is a codimension one totally geodesic
submanifold of either mirror Λi , and hence again by convexity is a sphere (two points when the
mirrors are 1-dimensional).
In general, consider ℓ mirrors Λ1 , . . . , Λℓ such that the inclusions of iterated intersections
Λ12 ⊃ Λ123 ⊃ . . . ⊃ Λ123...ℓ are all strict. Then each intersection is a totally geodesic submanifolds of codimension one in the previous intersection, and hence Λ123...ℓ is a (k − ℓ) sphere. Also
Λ123...ℓ is the set fixed by all reflections ri with corresponding mirror Λi . This completes the
proof of the first two “bullets”, since mirrors corresponding to ℓ different chamber faces satisfy
the needed inclusion property.
Now suppose C has ℓ + 1 chamber faces, F 0 , . . . , F ℓ . Since the angle between any two faces
is at most π/2 it follows as in the original Cheeger-Gromoll case of the distance function to the
full boundary [Pe], that the distance function on C to one face, say F 0 is strictly concave (cf.
Theorem 7 in [Wi2], Theorem 1.3 in [GKi], and Corollary 3.2 in [Wö] for general Alexandrov

12

FUQUAN FANG, KARSTEN GROVE, AND GUDLAUGUR THORBERGSSON

spaces with boundary), and hence has a unique point at maximal distance, its “soul point”, s0 .
It follows that, s0 is in the intersection of the remaining chamber faces (Theorem 1.3 in [GKi]
and Lemma 3.4 in [Wö] for general Alexandrov spaces noting that intersections of faces are
extremal subsets). Moreover, by convexity of super level sets the distance function to s0 on C
has no critical points. Using this and the basic fact that convex combination of “gradient like
vector fields” is “gradient like” one constructs a gradient like vector field (the angle between it
and any minimal geodesic to s0 is larger than π/2) which is radial near s0 and gradient like also
when restricted to the remaining faces intrinsically. In particular, C is the cone on F 0 which
in turn is isotopic to a small metric ball in C of radius ǫ centered at s0 . This also identifies F 0
with the boundary of this ǫ ball, which via the exponential map is identified with the closure of
a chamber in the unit sphere at s0 corresponding to the reflections r1 , . . . , rℓ . The proof of the
remaining two bullets is now completed by induction on the number of chamber faces.

We point out that this proof is a special case of a general result about orbit spaces of positively curved manifolds due to Wilking [Wi2] (Theorem 7), related more directly to Σ/W in our
context however. We have included it here not only to make the exposition more self contained,
but also because it illuminates the particular structure we have here.
We now turn to the case where the section Σ is a projective space. In this case, we will
analyze the situation in its universal cover Σ̃. Specifically, for each mirror Λ in Σ corresponding
to a reflection r, we consider its lift Λ̃ to Σ̃. As noted in the proof the section proposition 2.3
and remark 2.4, r has two canonical lifts. One of them is a reflection r̃ in Λ̃, the other has two
isolated fixed points and restricts to a on Λ̃. Here we define W̃ to be the reflection group on
Σ̃ generated by all r̃, where we use all r from W. Note, that by construction, any lifted mirror
is preserved by a, and that a commutes with any element from W̃. Combining this with the
previous lemma one derives, whether M is simply connected or not, the following:
Lemma 2.6 (Projective Chamber). Assume Σ is a k-dimensional projective space and Σ̃ the
universal cover with deck transformation a. Then
• Intersections of lifted mirrors are spheres invariant under a.
• The associated reflection group W̃ of W may or may not contain a, but in either case
W = hW̃, ai/hai.
• Open chambers c in Σ are isometric to open chambers c̃ for W̃,
• The closure C̃ of an open chamber for W̃ is a convex set in Σ̃ with boundary the union of
chamber faces. Moreover, C is obtained from C̃ by identifying a orbits in the boundary.
• C̃ has at most k + 1 chamber faces, and the intersection of them all is Fix(W̃).
• If C̃ has k + 1 chamber faces it is a k-simplex and Fix(W̃) = ∅.
• If C̃ has ℓ + 1 < k + 1 chamber faces it is a join of Fix(W̃) and an ℓ simplex.
Moreover, Σ/W = Σ̃/hW̃, ai = (Σ̃/hW̃i)/hai = C̃/hai.
We assume from now on that M is a positively curved simply connected polar G manifold,
with G connected.
The following is proved more generally for singular polar foliations in [AT], Theorem 1.5
and [Al], Theorem 1.1:

TITS GEOMETRY AND POSITIVE CURVATURE

13

Theorem 2.7 (Alexandrino and Töben). Any nontrivial polar action on a simply connected
manifold has no exceptional orbits and its reflection group W is the whole polar group Π.
In the case of polar actions it was also recently proved in [GZ] that in addition the chamber
group is trivial. For the sake of the reader we provide a simple direct proof in the case of positive
curvature. In fact, the following is pivotal for us:
Proposition 2.8 (Chamber Group). The chamber group Wc of a simply connected positively
curved polar G manifold M is trivial, and hence M ∗ = Σ∗ = C. Moreover,
• If Σ is a sphere, C is a simplex and the fixed point set ΣW = ∅, or C is a join of ΣW and
a simplex.
• If Σ is a projective space, C is a simplex, a ∈ W̃ and ΣW is a subset of the vertices
(possibly empty).
In either case, W acts simply transitive on the set of chambers.
Proof. Consider an open chamber c and Wc acting on it. Note that whether or not Σ is a sphere
or a projective space, c is the union of compact closed locally convex subsets C ǫ (distance ǫ or
more to C − c). By convexity it is clear that the soul point (the common soul point s for all C ǫ )
is fixed by Wc (one can also use the description of c from the lemmas above). Since there are no
exceptional orbits when M is simply connected (cf. 2.7) this already is impossible unless Wc is
trivial. From section one we then know that M ∗ = Σ∗ is the closure C of a chamber c. If Σ is a
sphere, Lemma 2.5 completes the proof.
Now suppose Σ is a projective space:
First note that a acts freely on the set of open chambers for W̃. This follows from the simple
fact that a interchanges the two connected components of the complement of any lifted mirror,
and commutes with W̃.
We now claim that ΣW̃ = ∅ and hence C̃ (defined in 2.6) is a simplex. Indeed, if ΣW̃ is nonempty
then clearly a < W̃. Moreover, the involution induced by a on Σ̃/W̃ = C̃ acts freely on ΣW̃
and preserves the boundary of C̃. In particular, C̃/hai will have interior metric singular points
contradicting that it is C by Lemma 2.6.
To complete the proof we now claim that a ∈ W̃, and in particular C = Σ/W = Σ̃/W̃ = C̃. If not,
then |W| = |W̃| and a induces a nontrivial involution on C̃ with C = C̃/hai. Such an involution
will preserve the boundary of the simplex C̃ taking faces to faces. As before this will produce
an interior metric singular point of C unless the induced map by a is a reflection of the simplex.
This, however, cannot happen since the fixed point set of this involution would correspond to a
chamber face of C and hence a reflection in W whose lift to Σ̃ had been omitted from W̃.

Remark 2.9. Note that it follows from this that if M G , ∅ and Σ is a sphere then M G = ΣW ,
since ΣW is the most singular stratum in the orbit space Σ/W = M/ G. In the next section we
will see that conversely, if ΣW , ∅ and Σ is a sphere then M G , ∅ as well and hence M G = ΣW
(cf. (3.6)).
The Coxeter group W, respectively W̃ corresponding to the section being a sphere, respectively a projective space admits a canonical representation, i.e., acts isometrically on the unit
k-sphere Sk with orbit space C ′ having the same infinitesimal singularities (i.e., tangent cones)
as C. As a consequence we have:

14

FUQUAN FANG, KARSTEN GROVE, AND GUDLAUGUR THORBERGSSON

Corollary 2.10. Let M be a simply connected positively curved polar G manifold. Then
M = Σ∗ = C admits a metric of constant curvature isometric to its linear model C ′ .
∗

Proof. From Proposition 2.8, we know that Σ∗ is the chamber C for a Coxeter group W (resp.
W̃) acting on the k-sphere Σ (resp. Σ̃, when Σ is a projective space). Moreover, as stated above
the same Coxeter group acts linearly on Sk , with chambers C ′ having labels as C and with the
same tangent cones, determined by the corresponding isotropy groups and actions.
We only consider the case that Σ is a sphere since the other case is analogous. Now fix a
chamber C with ℓ + 1 chamber faces, F 0 , . . . , F ℓ in Σ and the corresponding model chamber
C ′ ⊂ Sk . As in the proof of Lemma 2.5, let s0 be the point in C at maximal distance to the
face F 0 . Now apply the isotropy group Ws0 of the Coxeter group at so to C to obtain a Ws0
invariant convex subset Ws0 (C) of Σ with s0 in the interior, the point at maximal distance from
the boundary ∂(Ws0 (C)) = Ws0 (F 0 ) of Ws0 (C). As in the proof of Lemma 2.5 it follows that
there is a Ws0 invariant smooth vector field on an open neighborhood of Ws0 (C) in Σ, which is
radial near s0 and gradient like on ∂(Ws0 (C)).
The same construction based on C ′ in Sk yields a Ws0 invariant diffeomorphism of a neighborhood of Ws0 (C) in Σ to a neighborhood of Ws0 (C ′ ) in Sk . After a suitable reparametrization
of one of the vector fields using transversality if needed, the restriction yields the desired diffeomorphism from C to C ′ .

We are now ready to establish the main result of this section.
Theorem 2.11 (Coxeter Section). Let M be a simply connected positively curved polar manifold. Then the action of the polar group W of a section Σ is equivariantly diffeomorphic to a
linear action of W. In fact, Σ admits a W invariant metric of constant curvature.
Proof. Choose a constant curvature metric on Σ∗ as above. We now claim that this metric comes
from a W invariant metric on Σ with constant curvature. To see this, all we have to do is to lift
the metric locally near any point of the orbit space to any point mapping to it by the orbit map.
This however is clear. Since the lifted metrics obtained this way agree on overlaps we are
done.

Remark 2.12. We point out that our conclusions about the section in the theorem above carry
over to the general context of a positively curved manifold with a nontrivial isometric reflection
group action. The manifold together with the action of the reflection group is then equivariantly
diffeomorphic to a sphere or a real projective space with a linear action by a finite Coxeter group
(Z2 ineffective in the latter case).
The following is now natural
Definition 2.13. We say that a simply connected positively curved polar G manifold M is
reducible if the action by the Coxeter group W on Σ is reducible.
In particular it follows that W, or W̃ is an irreducible Coxeter system group when (M, G) is irreducible, but Example 1.1(3) implies that the converse is false. Also an action with a nontrivial
fixed point set is reducible. In the case of irreducible actions all the types An , Cn , Dn , E6 , E7 , E8

TITS GEOMETRY AND POSITIVE CURVATURE

15

and F4 are of course possible when the section is a sphere, but we note that due to the Chamber
Group Proposition above, not all of them are possible when the section is a projective space.
We remark that in the literature the notion hyperpolar is used for a polar manifold with flat
sections. Following [GZ], we say that a polar manifold is a polar space form if its sections have
constant curvature. According to the sign of the curvature of the sections one then says that the
polar space form has spherical, euclidean or hyperbolic type. Using this language, a partition
of unity argument as in [GZ] Thm. 3.3, or the main result of [Me] now yields the following in
our case
Corollary 2.14 (Polar Space Form). A simply connected positively curved polar G manifold
M admits the structure of a polar spherical space form with the same sections.
It should be noted that M with such a polar space form structure typically has curvatures of
both signs. In general, a highly nontrivial result of [Me] asserts that any metric on a section of
any polar G manifold invariant under the polar group extends to a G invariant metric on the
ambient manifold with the same section.

3. The Chamber System and Primitivity
Based on the Chamber Group Proposition 2.8, recall from Section 1 that there are two natural chamber systems C (Σ, W), respectively C (M, G) associated with any polar action of a connected compact Lie group G on a simply connected positively curved manifold M with section
Σ and polar group W. Throughout the rest of the paper (M, G) is such a polar pair.
Our primary purpose in this section is to analyze C (M, G) further and thereby derive essential
properties about such general actions. In particular, we will show that it is a connected chamber
system (the crucial starting point for our subsequent investigation of irreducible actions), and
use this to show that G is generated by the face isotropy groups of any fixed chamber C ⊂ Σ (an
essential ingredient in our investigation of reducible actions).
When the chambers are spherical simplices, we observe that all proper residues of the chamber system can be described via slice representations of corresponding isotropy groups. This
allows us to invoke a celebrated result of Tits [Ti2] implying that the so-called universal cover
of our chamber system is a building in most cases.
From the description C (M, G) = ∪g∈G gC of the chamber system we first note that all chambers are isometric when equipped with the induced length space metric from M. This induces
a natural length space metric on each path connected component of C (M, G). A fundamental
Theorem due to Wilking [Wi3] asserts in particular that the dual foliation associated to the orbits of an isometric group action on a positively curved manifold has only one leaf. It is an
immediate consequence of this result that
• C (M, G) has only one component.
There is an equivalent length metric on C (M, G) obtained by using a polar space form metric
on M (cf. 2.14) in the construction above. We will refer to the corresponding topology as the
thin topology on C (M, G). (Since M is the union of its chambers, we can also think of it as M
being equipped with this metric and topology.)

16

FUQUAN FANG, KARSTEN GROVE, AND GUDLAUGUR THORBERGSSON

From now on, we will always use the thin length metric on C (M, G) induced from a constant
curvature one metric on a section. In particular, note that then each chamber C is either a
(spherical) k - simplex ∆k , or else the spherical join Sk−ℓ−1 ∗ ∆ℓ of the (k − ℓ − 1)-sphere and a
spherical ℓ - simplex. In either case, the chambers in a fixed section Σ tile the section, which
is either RPk or Sk . Moreover, by construction, G preserves the labeling of all “vertices, edges,
. . . , faces”, i.e., of all 0-, 1-, . . . , (k − 1)-simplices, when C = ∆k is a simplex. In the special
case where the chamber is not a simplex, i.e., C = Sk−ℓ−1 ∗ ∆ℓ , by a “vertex”, or “0-simplex”
of the chamber C we mean a set of the type Sk−ℓ−1 ∗ {v}, where v is a vertex of the simplex
∆ℓ , and similarly for “edges”, . . . , “faces”. We label the set Sk−ℓ−1 ⊂ C as the −1-simplex of
the chamber C. In either case we note that the intersection of any two chambers in M is either
empty or else a common “subsimplex” in this sense, allowing in particular the intersection to
be a “−1-simplex”.
From the fact that C (M, G) with the thin topology is connected, we get the essential property:
Theorem 3.1 (Connectivity). Assume M is a simply connected positively curved polar G
manifold. Then the associated chamber system C (M; G) is connected, i.e., any two chambers
are connected by a gallery.
Proof. We will prove this by induction on dimM ∗ = k using that C (M; G) is path connected.
For simplicity we first present the proof in the typical case where the chamber C is a simplex
∆k . A simple modification yields the general statement.
Let C and C ′ be two chambers of C (M; G). Using [Wi3] join two interior points of C and
C ′ by a piecewise smooth horizontal curve, i.e., at any point both one sided derivatives of the
curve are perpendicular to the G orbit at the point. In our case, it is clear that we can choose
a horizontal curve γ : [0, 1] → M, and 0 = t0 < t1 < t2 . . . < tk+1 = 1 such that γ|(ti ,ti+1 ) is
a geodesic, or once broken geodesic in the interior of a chamber Ci relative to the thin metric
on C (M; G), where C0 = C, Ck = C ′ and all Ci are different. Moreover, γ can be chosen so
that each of the possibly nonsmooth points γ(ti ), i = 1, . . . k are all vertices. In addition, the
one-sided derivatives γ+′ (ti ), −γ−′ (ti ) of γ at the vertices γ(ti ) are interior points of two (k − 1)
chamber simplices for the chamber complex C (S⊥γ(ti ) ; Gγ(ti ) ) of the slice representation of the
isotropy group Gγ(ti ) . By induction these simplices can be joined by a gallery in C (S⊥γ(ti ) ; Gγ(ti ) ).
Filling in the corresponding gallery in C (M; G) at each γ(ti ) now yields a gallery from C to C ′ .
To complete the proof we need to establish the induction anchor in cohomogeneity two.
By the same reasoning as above, this follows from the claim that the chamber complex of a
linear spherical cohomogeneity one action is connected. Since any horizontal curve provided
by Wilkings theorem in this case is a piecewise horizontal geodesic up to parametrization, such
a curve already constitutes the desired gallery.
The modification needed to cover the case where the chambers are joins with a nonempty
sphere can be explained as follows: As in the simplex case one may choose a piecewise horizontal geodesic γ, so that each of the possibly nonsmooth points points γ(ti ), i = 1, . . . k are
most singular, i.e., in this case −1-simplex points. The remaining part of the proof follows the
same path.

The Coxeter Section Theorem 2.11 and the Connectivity Theorem above are the two crucial
properties derived using positive curvature. We note that there is no reason for the chamber
system of a simply connected polar space form of spherical type to be connected. However:

TITS GEOMETRY AND POSITIVE CURVATURE

17

The manifolds we actually classify in higher cohomogeneities in this paper are the
Chamber Connected Polar Spherical Space Form
i.e.
• Simply connected polar space forms (M, G) of spherical type
with
• Connected associated chamber system, C (M; G)
In addition, this generality is important for the proof, because G invariant polar submanifolds
of a positively curved polar manifold are typically not positively curved (cf. Section 6, proof of
Hopf Lemma).
The two assumptions above will be applied throughout the rest of the paper.
Using connectivity we derive the following simple but powerful tool:
Theorem 3.2 (Primitivity). The group G is generated by the (identity components of the),
face isotropy groups of any fixed chamber.
Proof. Fix a chamber C0 and consider any other chamber g C0 , g ∈ G. Using the above, let
Γ = (C0 , ...., Ck ) be a gallery, of type i1 i2 . . . ik , where Ck = g C0 . By definition, note that any Cn
is obtained from Cn−1 by applying an element gin of the isotropy group for the common face in of
Cn and Cn−1 to Cn−1 , i.e., Cn = gin Cn−1 . From this it follows that Ck = g C0 = gik gik−1 . . . gi1 C0 ,
and hence g = gik gik−1 . . . gi1 after modifying gi1 with an element of the stabilizer of the chamber
C0 if necessary.
Now each gin is a conjugate of an element of the isotropy group corresponding to the face in
by the previous element. So in other words gik = [gik−1 . . . gi1 ]hik [gik−1 . . . gi1 ]−1 , and hence
g = [gik−1 . . . gi1 ] hik [gik−1 . . . gi1 ]−1 gik−1 . . . gi1 = [gik−1 . . . gi1 ] hik , where hik is in the isotropy group
with face ik of C0
Proceeding in this way we see that g = hi1 hi2 ..... hik , where also hi1 = gi1 as claimed. The
claim about identity components of the face isotropy groups follows since these in fact act
transitively on the normal spheres of their orbit strata (these spheres are connected).

Remark 3.3. The description of galleries used in the proof above is very useful. In fact, a
gallery starting at C of type i1 i2 . . . ik is given by a word hi1 hi2 . . . hik in elements of the isotropy
groups Gi j corresponding to the i j -faces of C. Note that each Gi j acts transitively on the normal
sphere to the corresponding orbit stratum, i.e., the i j residue of C is in one to one correspondence
with this normal sphere. For this reason we say that a gallery Γ f = (C0 , ...., Ck ) of type f =
i1 i2 . . . ik is obtained from C0 by folding it repeatedly along faces using the face isotropy groups
Gi1 , Gi2 , . . . , Gik .
Remark 3.4. Note that this also immediately implies that G is generated by any two vertex
isotropy groups.
Remark 3.5. We also observe that in complete generality, our chamber system C (M; G)
associated to a polar G action on a simply connected manifold M is a homogeneous chamber
system of a type described in Ronan’s book [Ro]. Specifically:

18

FUQUAN FANG, KARSTEN GROVE, AND GUDLAUGUR THORBERGSSON

The chamber system C (M; G) is the left coset G / H (the principal orbit) with the following
adjacency relation: two chambers g H and g′ H are i-adjacent if and only if g Gi = g′ Gi , where
H is the principal isotropy group, and the Gi for i ∈ I are the face isotropy groups of a fixed
chamber.
Note that C (M; G) is connected if and only if the polar G action is primitive, i.e., by definition: G is generated by the face isotropy groups.
As promised we can use the above connectedness to prove the fixed point claim from the
previous section:
Proposition 3.6. Suppose M is a simply connected positively curved polar G manifold with
spherical section Σ and polar group W. Then M G = ΣW , and in particular rk(W) = dim Σ∗ +
1 − dim M G .
Proof. Since obviously M G ⊂ ΣW and equality has been proved in the previous section if MG is
nonempty, it remains to prove that M G , ∅ as long as ΣW is nonempty (cf. 2.9).
By assumption M ∗ = Σ∗ = C = ΣW ∗ ∆ℓ = Sk−ℓ−1 ∗ ∆ℓ . Since all G orbits corresponding
to ΣW = Sk−ℓ−1 , are of the same type (corresponding to the most singular stratum of the orbit
space) and are perpendicular to the section Σ it suffices to see that ΣW is preserved by G.
Pick any g ∈ G and join the chamber g C to C with a gallery. Since any two consecutive
chambers in a gallery have a common “face” and thereby the same “−1-simplex”, i.e., the
same fixed point set for the respective Weyl groups, it follows that also g C has the same “−1simplex”, which however is g ΣW .

Example 3.7. Here are examples showing that the conclusion above may fail in cohomogeneity one as well as when the section is a projective space.
(1) Let M = CPn = SU(n + 1)/ U(n). Then G = U(n) acts by cohomogeneity one with one
fixed point. However, its polar group is Z2 acting on a section S1 with two fixed points.
(2) The obvious polar G = U(1) × U(1) × U(n) representation on Cn+2 = C + C + Cn descends
to a polar action on CPn+1 with two fixed points (corresponding to the two C summands). Its
section is RP2 with RP2 /W = CPn+1 / G a right angled spherical triangle. In particular, its Weyl
group must necessarily have three fixed points.
The case where the orbit space M ∗ = Σ∗ = C is not a simplex, i.e., by 2.8 it is a join of a
sphere with a simplex (in particular M G , ∅) will be dealt with in Section 6.
We now point out some simple but crucial strong local properties of the chamber system
C (M, G) of a positively curved simply connected polar manifold in all remaining cases, i.e.,
when the orbit space is a simplex.
Say M = (mi j ), i, j ∈ I is the Coxeter matrix for the reflection group W of the section Σ if it
is a sphere, or else of W̃. In the latter case any word in the generators ri of W whose lift is the
antipodal map in W̃ is a non-Coxeter relation in W, and must necessarily involve all generators
of W. For any fixed proper subset J ⊂ I let M J denote the submatrix of M with entries mi j ,
i, j ∈ J. Correspondingly, we let WJ denote the subgroup of W generated by ri , i ∈ J. It is well
known that the subgroup WJ of W as well as of W̃, is a Coxeter group of type MJ .

TITS GEOMETRY AND POSITIVE CURVATURE

19

Recall, that a chamber system C over I, by definition has type M if all {i, j} residues, i, j ∈ I
are so-called generalized mi j -gons (cf. [Ro]).
For any chamber C, consider C J := ∩i∈J Ci , where Ci is the i-face of C. For an interior point
p ∈ C J , let S⊥p,J denote the unit sphere normal to the orbit stratum of G p at p, i.e., S⊥p,J is the
sphere in the normal space to the orbit perpendicular to the fixed point subspace of G p . It is
now apparent (see, e.g., 3.3) that
Lemma 3.8 (Residue). The J-residue of C and C (S⊥p,J , G p ), for any p ∈ C J are isomorphic
as chamber systems of type MJ .
Recall that a chamber system B over I is called a building of type M = (mi j ), i, j ∈ I, if
each chamber is i-adjacent to at least one other chamber, and there is a W(M) valued “distance
function”
δ:B×B →W
with the property δ(x, y) = w ∈ W if and only if the types of minimal galleries between x and y
coincide with the types of minimal galleries in the Coxeter complex C (Σ, W) =: W from 1 to
w.
The Coxeter complex W is itself a building with δ(u, v) = u−1 v. We call “isometric” images
of W in B apartments in B. Another example of central importance to us is the following
Example 3.9 (Polar Representations). The chamber system, B = C (S, K) associated to the
restriction of a polar representation of a compact Lie group K to the unit sphere S (without fixed
points) is a fundamental example of a (spherical) Tits building (see [Ti1] and [Da]).
Remark 3.10 (Basic Building Properties). In a building B, the following properties are basic
and used repeatedly in the next sections.
• (Connectedness) Any two chambers x, y are joined by a minimal gallery Γ f , which in turn
is contained in an apartment A.
• (Uniqueness) A minimal gallery from x to y is uniquely determined by its type.
• (Convexity) If x, y are chambers in an apartment A, every minimal gallery from x to y is
contained in A.
• (Homotopy) If Γ is a gallery from x to y of type f (not necessarily minimal), and f ≃ g (see
below), then there is a gallery of type g from x to y.
• A gallery of type f is minimal if and only if f = i1 · · · im is a so-called reduced word, or
equivalently w = r f := ri1 · · · rim cannot be expressed as rg for g a shorter word.
Since the slice representation of each isotropy group G p is polar, it follows from 3.9 and the
residue lemma 3.8 that
Proposition 3.11. For any proper J ⊂ I, any J residue in the chamber system C (M, G) is a
spherical building of type MJ .
By invoking the following corollary of a profound result of Tits [Ti2], Corollary 3 in Section
5.3 (cf. also [Ro], Theorem 4.9), we get

20

FUQUAN FANG, KARSTEN GROVE, AND GUDLAUGUR THORBERGSSON

Theorem 3.12 (Tits). The universal Tits cover C˜ of a (gallery-) connected chamber system
C of (finite) type M over I is a building if and only if all residues of rank three are covered by
buildings.
We conclude
Theorem 3.13 (Building Cover). Suppose M is a positively curved simply connected polar
G manifold with orbit space a simplex of dimension at least 3. Then the universal Tits cover
C˜(M; G) of the associated chamber system C (M; G) is a spherical building.
Remark 3.14. The fact that all residues of rank at least 3 of the chamber system C (M; G) are
buildings implies that universal Tits cover C˜(M; G) can be viewed also as the usual topological
universal cover of C (M; G) equipped with the thin topology. For this reason we frequently
simply refer to C˜(M; G) as the universal cover of C (M; G). - In particular, the fundamental
group π of C (M; G) acts freely by deck transformations on C˜(M; G) equipped with the thin
topology. It is a startling consequence of our main result Theorem 4.10 in Section 4 that π
in fact is either S1 or S3 with discrete topology when M has no isolated nodes and C˜(M; G)
is a building. Note also that π acting freely on the set C˜(M; G) of course is independent on
topology.
Recall that the universal Tits cover is obtained via a notion of homotopies of galleries in
analogy with the usual construction of a topological universal cover.
Here two galleries Γ1 Γ0 Γ2 and Γ1 Γ′0 Γ2 in a chamber system, C of type M over I are said to be
elementary homotopic if Γ0 and Γ′0 are galleries in a rank 2 residue with the same extremities.
A homotopy from a gallery Γ to another one Γ′ (with fixed extremities) is a finite sequence
of elementary homotopies which transforms Γ to Γ′ . When such a homotopy exists we write
Γ ≃ Γ′ .
By construction, C˜ as a set is a union of chambers, each chamber, C̃ ∈ C˜ being a homotopy
class, [Γ] = [C0 , . . . , Cm ] of galleries Γ = (C0 , . . . , Cm ) from C starting at a fixed chamber C0 ∈
C and ending at Cm = C ∈ C , and where the covering map p : C˜ → C takes C̃ to Cm . Also,
the adjacency relation among chambers is defined as follows: C̃ = [C0 , . . . , Cm ] is “i-adjacent”
to C̃ ′ = [C0 , . . . , Cm−1 , Cm′ ] when Cm and Cm′ are “i-adjacent”, and to C̃ ′′ = [C0 , . . . , Cm , C ′′ ] for
other i’s when Cm and C ′′ are “i-adjacent”. All other incidence relations follow from this, and
the covering map p preserves incidence relations. In this fashion the covering map p preserves
faces, and hence all other types.
Note that in a Coxeter complex, W galleries starting at 1 are in one-to-one correspondence
with their types. Here one also uses the notion of strict homotopy, denoted f ≃ g, where
the notion of an elementary homotopy above is replaced by the stronger notion of an strict
elementary homotopy. Here a strict elementary homotopy is an alteration of a word of the form
f1 p(i, j) f2 to a word f1 p( j, i) f2, where p(i, j) is a word of the form · · · i ji j (with mi j letters and
ending in j); e.g., if mi j = 3, p(i, j) = ji j; and p( j, i) = i ji. In particular, f and g have the
same length if they are strictly homotopic (but not necessarily if they are just homotopic). Also
r f = rg if f and g are strictly homotopic, but the converse is false, since one may have redundant
letters; e.g, the words f = f1 ii f2 and g = f1 f2 are not strictly homotopic but r f = rg . A word f
is called reduced if it is not strictly homotopic to a word of the form f1 ii f2.

TITS GEOMETRY AND POSITIVE CURVATURE

21

Remark 3.15. Buildings are simplicial complexes, but our chambers systems C (M; G) are
frequently not. This is illustrated for example with the standard T2 action on CP2 . Here all
chambers are spherical right angled 2-simplices, and they all have the same three vertices, the
fixed points of T2 . As the Building Cover Theorem above shows, we do not need to assume
C (M; G) to be simplicial when the rank of M is at least 4. However, in the rank 3 case where
the Building Cover Theorem says nothing, we do indeed need C (M; G) to be simplicial in the
irreducible cases, i.e., the cases of types A3 and C3 . This will be proved in Theorem 5.1 and will
allow us to use work of Tits on so-called geometries, i.e., chamber systems of type M whose
underlying geometric realization is simplicial.
Remark 3.16. Equipped with the thin metric, our chamber system C (M, G) has the local
structure of a CAT(1) space. This is of course true for its universal cover C˜(M, G) as well. In
fact, when its dimension is at least three (corresponding to rank at least four), it follows by work
of Charney and Lytchak [CL], that in fact C˜(M, G) is a CAT(1) space and in fact a spherical
building by their geometric characterization of buildings.

4. Compact spherical Buildings
Throughout this section, we assume that the orbit space M ∗ = C is a simplex, and that
the universal cover C˜ := C˜(M, G) of our base chamber system C := C (M, G) is a spherical
building of rank at least 3. In particular, C˜ is also a simplicial complex and we use p : C˜ → C
to denote the covering map.
Our primary objective is to endow C˜ with a natural topology inherited from the topology of
M, in such a way that it becomes a compact spherical building in the sense of Burns and Spatzier
[BSp], where the extension by Grundhöfer, Kramer, Van Maldeghem, and Weiss in [GKMW]
is crucial for us. Our second objective is to analyze the fundamental group π of C (M, G) and
its action on the cover when C˜(M, G) is a compact spherical building. This in fact will imply
Theorem A in the introduction in all cases except where G has fixed points or where the Coxeter
diagram for M either has isolated nodes or is of type A3 or C3 .
Section 5 and [FGT] are devoted to the case where the Coxeter diagram of M is of type A3 or
C3 . In the special reducible cases where isolated nodes are present in the Coxeter diagram of M
or M G , ∅, rather different arguments will be employed in Sections 6 and 7.
We will write the set of vertices Vert(C˜) of a Tits building C˜ as a disjoint union Vert(C˜) =
Ṽ1 ∪ · · · ∪ Ṽk+1 over the vertices of the same cotype where k + 1 is the rank of M. The set of
r-simplices of type (i1 , . . . , ir+1) for r ≤ k will be denoted by C˜i1 ,...,ir+1 .
Recall, that a compact (spherical) building according to [BSp] is a Tits building C˜ with a
Hausdorff topology on the set Vert(C˜) = Ṽ1 ∪ · · · ∪ Ṽk+1 of all vertices such that the set C˜i1 ,...,ir+1
of all simplices of type (i1 , . . . , ir+1) is closed in the product Ṽi1 × · · · × Ṽir+1 . With the induced
topology on the k simplices C˜1,...,k+1 , C˜ is called compact, locally connected, infinite, metric if
C˜1,...,k+1 has the appropriate property.
It is the main result of [BSp] that an infinite, irreducible, locally connected, compact, metric,
topologically Moufang building of rank at least 2 is classical. Namely, it is a Tits building
associated to a noncompact real semisimple Lie group via the following description (cf. also
proof of Theorem 4.10):

22

FUQUAN FANG, KARSTEN GROVE, AND GUDLAUGUR THORBERGSSON

Example 4.1 (Symmetric Spaces and Buildings). Let U be a connected noncompact real
semisimple Lie group without center and K ⊂ U a maximal compact subgroup (which is unique
up to conjugation). The isometric action of U on the symmetric space N = U /K of nonpositive
curvature induces a continuous action on the boundary at infinity, S∞ , with the same orbits as
those of the subaction by K. Here the action by K is topologically equivalent to the isotropy
representation of K on the unit sphere S p at p ∈ N with U p = K.
The isotropy representation of K = U p is polar with sections the tangent spaces of flats
through p ∈ N = U /K. These flats at infinity are apartments of a (topological) building,
C (U) equivalent to C (S p , U p ). One gets all apartments in the building in this fashion by letting
p go through all points of N. The group U is the identity component of the (topologiocal)
automorphism group Auttop (C (U)) of the building.
An algebraic description of C (U) can be given via the set of all parabolic subgroups of U.
We think of C (U) as the set of parabolic subgroups of U with the following partial order: If
C1 , C2 ∈ C (U), we call C1 a face of C2 and write C1 < C2 if C2 ⊂ C1 . The chambers are
the minimal parabolic subgroups. Let W denote the Weyl group of the symmetric space U /K.
We fix a minimal parabolic subgroup B. The W valued metric δ in the definition of a building
is then defined as follows: Given chambers C = g B and C ′ = g′ B, there is by the Bruhat
decomposition a unique w ∈ W such that B g−1 g′ B = B w B. We set δ(C, C ′ ) = w .
The correspondence between the geometric and algebraic description is that the isotropy
groups under U of the chambers and their subsimplices at infinity are exactly the parabolic
subgroups of U.
The topology on C˜(M, G)
When considering C (M, G) as a set of chambers, each being a compact subset of the metric
space M, C (M, G) is a compact metric space with the classical Hausdorff metric. Moreover, the
same holds for the set of all galleries with any upper bound on the number of chambers. Since
C˜(M, G) is a building of type M any two chambers can be connected by a gallery of length at
most 1/2|W(M)|.
Let us fix a chamber C̃0 ∈ C˜. For any fixed large positive integer k ≥ 12 |W(M)|, ǫ > 0 and any
chamber C̃ ∈ C˜, we let
Bǫ,k (C̃) be the union of those chambers C̃ ′ ∈ C˜
for which there are (stuttering) galleries Γ and Γ′ of length at most k starting at C̃0 and ending
at C̃, respectively C̃ ′ so that the (stuttering) galleries p(Γ) and p(Γ′ ) in C are within Hausdorff
distance ǫ from one another in M. We will refer to the topology generated by these sets as the
chamber topology on the building C˜.
The geometric realization of the building C˜(M, G) is a simplicial complex S˜(M, G). We
will show that this topology induces a topology on S˜(M, G) making it into a compact spherical
building in the sense of Burns and Spatzier [BSp].
The following will be used repeatedly
Lemma 4.2 (Homotopy Control). Let ∆ be a building of rank at least 3. Then for any k there
is a C(k) with the following property: Any galleries Γ and Γ′ of lengths at most k with the same
extremities are homotopic by a homotopy consisting of at most C(k) chambers.

TITS GEOMETRY AND POSITIVE CURVATURE

23

Proof. Since any building of rank at least three is simply connected, Γ and Γ′ are homotopic.
The remaining part of our claim is proved by induction on k, being trivially true for k = 1.
If Γ and Γ′ are both minimal, the claim is a direct consequence of the Convexity Property
in 3.10. Similarly, if Γ = Γ1 Γ0 Γ2 and Γ′ = Γ1 Γ′0 Γ2 , where Γ0 and Γ′0 are minimal (e.g., when
there is a strict elementary homotopy from Γ to Γ′ ). In particular, by induction it suffices to
prove that a nonminimal Γ is strictly homotopic to a Γ′ via an a priory bounded number of strict
elementary homotopies and Γ′ is homotopic to a shorter gallery within a uniformly bounded
number of chambers.
Suppose Γ is not minimal of type f . We claim that Γ is strictly homotopic to a gallery Γ′ of
type f1 ii f2 through at most ℓℓ strictly elementary homotopies, where ℓ = |I|k . Indeed, the number
of words of length at most k is bounded above by |I|k . Therefore, the noncircuit operations from
a word of length at most k to another one of length at most k is bounded above by ℓℓ .
Now, a gallery Γ′ of type f1 ii f2 from x to y is obviously homotopic to a shorter gallery of
type either f1 i f2 or type f1 f2 , according to the chambers being Γ1C1C2C3 Γ2 (where C1 ∼i C2 ,
and C2 ∼i C3 ) or Γ1C1C2C1 Γ2 (where C1 ∼i C2 ). Moreover, the homotopy can be realized in the
longer gallery and so the number of chambers is bounded by the length k.

Remark 4.3. The proof of the above lemma gives an algorithm to construct a controlled
homotopy between galleries with the same extremities in a building.
Proposition 4.4. With the chamber topology, C˜ is a compact, separable and metrizable
space.
Proof. By the Uryson Characterization Theorem for metrizable spaces, all we need to prove is
that C˜ is sequentially compact, separable, and regular.
• (Sequential Compactness) Any sequence {C̃n } of chambers in C˜ has a convergent subsequence.
For each n, let Γn be a gallery of length at most k joining C̃0 and C̃n . By compactness of M
the sequence p(Γn ) has a convergent subsequence in the Hausdorff metric topology with limit a
gallery Γ̄∞ starting at p(C̃0 ). By the unique homotopy lifting property (see [Ro], Lemma 4.4),
Γ̄∞ can be uniquely lifted to a gallery, say Γ∞ , starting at C̃0 . By the definition of the chamber
topology we know that the corresponding subsequence of {C̃n } converges to the end chamber of
Γ∞ .
• (Separability) We may choose a countable dense subset Qi of each face isotropy group
Gi , e.g. the rational points. The set of galleries starting at C̃0 of length at most k obtained by
the folding process described in 3.3 using only elements from Qi is clearly dense in the set of
all galleries starting at C̃0 of length at most k. By definition, the last chamber of these lifted
galleries in C˜ starting at C̃0 form a countable dense set in the chamber topology.
• (Regularity) We need to prove that, for a chamber C̃1 and a closed subset B ⊂ C˜ in the
complement of C̃1 , there are two disjoint open sets U and V containing C̃1 and B respectively.
If this is not the case, we find for arbitrary large integers n, a chamber C̃n′ ∈ B n1 ,k (C̃1 ) ∩
B 1n ,k (B). By the above we know that the closed subset B is sequentially compact. Therefore,
a subsequence of C̃n′ converges to some chamber C̃2 ∈ B. Therefore, there are two pairs of
sequences of galleries Γi,n , Γ′i,n , i = 1, 2, starting at C̃0 and ending at the chambers C̃1 , C̃2 ,
respectively C̃n′ , with dH (p(Γi,n ), p(Γ′i,n )) < n1 . For each n, Γ′1,n and Γ′2,n have the same extremities

24

FUQUAN FANG, KARSTEN GROVE, AND GUDLAUGUR THORBERGSSON

in the building C˜, and hence Γ′1,n ≃ Γ′2,n and p(Γ′1,n ) ≃ p(Γ′2,n ), by a homotopy Hn′ . By Lemma 4.2
we can assume that Hn′ is composed of an a priory bounded number of chambers independent
of n. Taking convergent subsequences, we can assume that p(Γi,n ) as well as p(Γ′i,n ) converge to
′
the same galleries Γ̄i,∞ , and that these are homotopic by a homotopy H∞
. So on the one hand, by
the unique homotopy lifting property, Γ̄i,∞ , i = 1, 2 lift to galleries with the same end chamber
in C˜. On the other hand they lift to galleries with end chamber C̃i , i = 1, 2 respectively. A
contradiction.

Lemma 4.5 (Independence). The chamber topology is independent of the choices of C̃0 and
the parameter k.
Proof. Let us first prove the independence of k. If k′ > k clearly Bǫ,k (C̃) ⊂ Bǫ,k′ (C̃). Consequently it suffices to show that a k′ -convergent sequence of chambers {C̃n } is also k-convergent.
By assumption there are galleries Γn and Γn in C˜ of length at most k′ starting at C̃0 and ending at C̃n respectively C̃ such that the projected galleries p(Γn ) and p(Γn ) Hausdorff converge
to a gallery Γ̄∞ (possibly stuttering) in C . Again using Lemma 4.2 we see that the gallery Γn
is homotopic to a gallery Γ′n of length at most k by a homotopy Hn with an a priory bounded
number of chambers. Note that p(Γ′n ) subsequentially converges to a gallery Γ̄′∞ = p(Γ′∞ ), where
Γ′∞ is the subsequence limit of Γ′n . We may assume the homotopies p(Hn ) also converge, and
therefore we get a limit homotopy between the two limit galleries Γ̄∞ and Γ̄′∞ . By the homotopy
uniqueness lifting property once again we get that Γ∞ and Γ′∞ have the same ending chambers
C̃. Therefore, {C̃n } also k-converges to C̃.
To see the independence of the choice of C̃0 join another chamber C̃0′ to C̃0 with a fixed
gallery Γ0 , and the claim follows from independence of k via concatenation with Γ0 and its
opposite.

We will now investigate the topology induced on the set of vertices from the chamber topology. That topology in turn will induce a topology on the geometric realization |S˜(M, G)|, of the
simplicial complex S˜(M, G) associated to the building referred to as the thick topology on C˜
from now on. Assuming our chamber system C˜ has rank k + 1 corresponding to cohomogeneity
k, for any i ∈ I = {0, . . . , k}, consider the set Ṽi of cotype i vertices in C˜. Let πi : C˜ → Ṽi denote
the obvious projection map. For each i, we equip Ṽi with the quotient topology.
Lemma 4.6 (Vertex Space). For any i ∈ I, the projection πi : C˜ → Ṽi is an open map, and Ṽi
˜
is compact and Hausdorff. Moreover, for any x ∈ Ṽi , the fiber π−1
i (x) ⊂ C is the residue Res(x)
˜
˜
in C , which is compact, and the restriction of the covering map p : C → C to this residue is a
homeomorphism to the residue Res(p(x)) in C .
Proof. We begin with a proof of the last claim. By construction of C˜, p provides an isomorphism between the residues as subbuildings. We need to show that the chamber topology
restricted to the residue Res(x) coincides with the Hausdorff topology of Res(p(x)) in the manifold M.
Since C˜ and C are both compact and Hausdorff, and p : C˜ → C obviously is continuous, it
remains to check that Res(x) is closed in C˜. Let {C̃n }, n = 1, 2, . . . be a sequence of chambers
in Res(x) which converges in C˜. Join a fixed chamber C̃0 to C̃1 by a gallery Γ. Using that the

TITS GEOMETRY AND POSITIVE CURVATURE

25

residues are buildings, join each C̃1 to C̃n by a minimal gallery Γn within the residue. A subsequence of the projections to C of the concatenated galleries clearly converges in the Hausdorff
topology, and the end chamber of the lift of the limiting gallery is the limit of {C̃n }, which as a
consequence is in the residue.
To show that Ṽi is Hausdorff it suffices to show that πi : C˜ → Ṽi is an open map and the
cotype i-adjacency is a closed relation, i.e. the subset
{(C̃, C̃ ′ ) ∈ C˜ × C˜ : C̃ and C̃ ′ have common cotype i vertices}
is closed in the product topology. To show the latter, let (C̃n , C̃n′ ) be a sequence converging to
(C̃, C̃ ′ ), where πi (C̃n ) = πi (C̃n′ ). In particular Cn and Cn′ share an i-vertex, and (Cn , Cn′ ) converges
to (C, C ′ ) in the Hausdorff topology of M. Join C̃n to C̃n′ by a minimal gallery Γin in the iresidue and pick a subsequence if necessary so that the image galleries p(Γin ) in the residues in
M converge. Obviously the limit gallery joins C to C ′ , and, in particular, they share an i vertex.
It follows that C̃ and C̃ ′ share the type i vertex.
˜
Let us prove that πi is open. For this we need to see that π−1
i (πi (U)) is open in C , where U is
′
−1
′
a finite intersection of Bǫi ,k (C̃i )’s. Pick a chamber D̃ ∈ πi (πi (U)), i.e. πi (D̃ ) = πi (C̃ ′ ) for some
C̃ ′ ∈ U. We need to find a neighborhood U ′ of D̃′ so that for any D̃′′ ∈ U ′ there is a C̃ ′′ ∈ U
with πi (D′′ ) = πi (C ′′ ).
Let V be a finite intersection of Bǫ j ,k (C̃ j )’s so that C̃ ′ ∈ V ⊂ U. Since C̃ ′ and D̃′ are cotype i
adjacent, they are in the same cotype i residue (of some vertex), and they can be joined within
this residue by a gallery Γ explicitly obtained by folding (see 3.3) C̃ ′ repeatedly along faces
using face isotropy groups (fixing the cotype i vertex) in M via p : C˜ → C . To complete the
proof the following observation suffices: Consider the chamber C ′ = p(C̃ ′ ) in C . Any chamber
Hausdorff close to C ′ is g C ′ for some g ∈ G close to 1 ∈ G, and g Γ is thus close to Γ. Thus
this process and its inverse takes a neighborhood of C̃ ′ to a neighborhood D̃′ and conversely,
and the claim follows.

Now we are ready to prove the first of our main results in this section.
Theorem 4.7 (Compact Spherical Building). The spherical building C˜(M, G) with the topology on the set of vertices induced by the thick topology on the chambers is a compact spherical
building if its rank is at least 3.
Proof. We have seen in Lemma 4.6 that the space V1 ∪ · · · ∪ Vk+1 of vertices is Hausdorff. It is
therefore left to show that the set C˜i1 ,...,ir+1 of all simplices of type (i1 , . . . , ir+1 ) is closed in the
product Ṽi1 × · · · × Ṽir+1 . It follows from Proposition 4.4 and Lemma 4.6 that the product map
Q
πi j : C˜i1 ,...,ir+1 → Ṽi1 × · · · × Ṽir+1 is continuous for any multi-index i1 , . . . , ir+1 and its image is
a closed subset, which finishes the proof.

It is clear from what we have proved so far that the compact spherical building in Theorem
4.7 is an infinite compact metrizable building. We can now apply the main results of [BSp]
or rather its generalization in [GKMW] to compact spherical buildings that need not be locally
connected.
Theorem 4.8 (Classical Building). Assume the compact spherical building C˜(M, G) has rank
at least 3 and its associated Coxeter diagram has no isolated nodes. Then it is the building at
infinity of a product N of irreducible symmetric spaces of noncompact type of rank at least 2.

26

FUQUAN FANG, KARSTEN GROVE, AND GUDLAUGUR THORBERGSSON

The topological automorphism group Auttop (C˜) of the building C˜(M, G) is a real noncompact
semisimple Lie group with finitely many connected components and its identity component is
isomorphic to the identity component of the isometry group of the symmetric space N.
Proof. It follows from Theorem 1.2 in [GKMW] that C˜(M, G) is the building at infinity of
a product of irreducible symmetric spaces of rank at least 2 and a locally finite Bruhat-Tits
building of dimension at least two. The building at infinity of the Bruhat-Tits building is totally
disconnected and can therefore be excluded since by Lemma 4.6 the vertex residues are locally
connected compact spherical buildings. The claims about Auttop (C˜) follow from [BSp].

We now prove a general theorem about the lifted G̃ action and the free subaction of π (cf.
remark 3.14) on the simplicial complex C˜(M, G) when equipped with the thick topology
Theorem 4.9 (Compact Transformation Group). Assume the spherical building C˜(M, G) has
rank at least 3 and is equipped with the thick topology. Then the deck transformation group π
with the compact open topology is a compact subgroup of the topological automorphism group
Auttop (C˜). Moreover, there is a compact subgroup G̃ of Auttop (C˜), such that π ⊂ G̃ is a normal
subgroup with quotient G̃/π = G, whose action covers the G-action on C .
Proof. It is a simple consequence of the Independence Lemma 4.5 that every element of π is a
homeomorphism with respect to the chamber and thick topologies. In particular, π is a subgroup
of the topological automorphism group Auttop (C˜). We now prove that π is a closed subgroup
of Auttop (C˜). Let fn be a sequence in π that converges to f in Auttop (C˜) in the compact open
topology. In particular, fn (C̃) converges to f (C̃) in the chamber topology for every chamber
C̃ ∈ C˜. Notice that p( fn (C̃)) = p(C̃). Therefore, p( f (C̃)) = p(C̃), and it follows that f is in π.
The compactness of π follows since the orbit of π is compact and the action of π is free.
It is well-known that the G-action on C lifts to a covering group G̃-action on C˜, where G̃ fits
in an extension (see [Ro], Exercise 8 in Chapter 4)
1 → π → G̃ → G → 1.
Once again, by the Independence Lemma 4.5, we see that G̃ is a subgroup of Auttop (C˜) and
as above one can check that it is closed, hence also compact, since both π and G are.

Combining these results we have the following main result about polar manifolds of positive
curvature:
Theorem 4.10. Any polar action of a compact connected Lie group G on a simply connected
positively curved manifold M whose associated chamber system is covered by a spherical building C˜ of rank at least three and whose diagram M contains no isolated nodes is equivariantly
diffeomorphic to a polar action on a compact rank one symmetric space, other than the Cayley
plane.
Proof. It follows from Theorem 4.8 that the simplicial complex S˜ as a set with the thick topology is a sphere that we will denote by S. The compact subgroup π of Auttop (C˜) is a Lie group
since Auttop (C˜) is a Lie group by Theorem 4.8.

TITS GEOMETRY AND POSITIVE CURVATURE

27

We would like to show that π is connected. We denote the identity component of π by π0 .
Clearly, π0 acts freely on the sphere S, and there is a covering S/π0 → S/π = M whose fiber
has the same number of points as π/π0 . This is a contradiction since M is simply connected.
It follows that π = π0 and that π and G̃ are both compact and connected subgroups, i.e., Lie
subgroups of the identity component U of Auttop (C˜). As a consequence, G̃ has a fixed point in
the symmetric space U /K, where K is a maximal compact subgroup of the semisimple Lie group
U. Therefore, up to conjugation we can assume that G̃ ⊂ K and it follows that the action by G̃ is
topologically equivalent to a linear polar action orbit equivalent to the isotropy representation of
K on S. Since the action of π on S is both linear and free, π is either {1}, S1 or S3 (cf. e.g. [Br])
and by representation theory the action is the Hopf action. It follows that M is G-equivariantly
homeomorphic to the rank one symmetric space S/π with the linear polar action by G = G̃/π.
To complete the proof, we note that the induced linear polar action on S/π by G = G̃/π
has the same data, i.e., section, polar group, isotropy groups and their slice representations as
the polar G action on M. From the reconstruction theorem of [GZ] it follows that (M, G) is
smoothly equivalent to (S/π, G).

In view of the Building Cover Theorem 3.13, this takes care of all cases where G has no fixed
points and M has no isolated nodes and rank at least 4.
We conclude this section by another application of Theorem 4.10. As mentioned in the
introduction there are polar G actions by SU(3) SU(3) and SO(3) G2 on OP2 (see [PTh, GK])
whose associated chamber systems C (OP2 , G) are of type C3 . In particular we conclude from
Theorem 4.10 that
Corollary 4.11 (Not a Building). The universal covers of the chamber systems C (OP2 , G)
associated to the polar actions on OP2 by G = SU(3) · SU(3), SO(3) · G2 are simply connected
chamber systems of type C3 that are not buildings.
Examples of simply connected chamber systems of type C3 that are not buildings were discovered by Neumaier and later but independently by Aschbacher. The examples of the chamber
systems in 4.11 are new and follow also from [Ly] and [KL] as noted by them. These intriguing
examples motivate the following interesting problems.
Problem 4.12 (Cayley plane chamber system). Let C˜ denote the universal cover of the chamber system C := C (OP2 ; G), where G is one of SU(3) · SU(3), SO(3) · G2 .
(1) Is C itself simply connected?
(2) If C is not simply connected, does the section RP2 lift to S2 in C˜? What is its fundamental group, and what is C˜?

5. Irreducible Chamber systems and Tits geometries of rank 3
The purpose of this section is to develop and describe an alternative to the Building Cover
Theorem 3.13 for irreducible polar actions of cohomogeneity two, i.e., for rank 3 chamber
systems C = C (M, G), where M has no isolated nodes, or equivalently M has type A3 or C3 . In
this case, any closed chamber C of C , or equivalently the G orbit space of M is the spherical
triangle with angles { π3 , π2 , π3 }, or { π4 , π2 , π3 } respectively.

28

FUQUAN FANG, KARSTEN GROVE, AND GUDLAUGUR THORBERGSSON

Our method is based on a construction of chamber system covers (corresponding to the principal bundle construction for polar manifolds in [GZ]), and on an axiomatic characterization due
to Tits of buildings of irreducible type M, when the geometric realization |C | (C with the thin
topology) of the associated chamber system C , is a simplicial complex. This characterization is
given in terms of the incidence geometry associated with C . Here, by definition
• Vertices x, y ∈ |C | are incident, denoted x ∗ y, if and only if x and y are contained in a
closed chamber of |C |.
Clearly, the incidence relation (not an equivalence relation) is preserved by the action of G in
our case.
To describe the needed characterization, and to prove that our chamber systems C (M, G) of
types A3 and C3 are simplicial, we will use the following standard terminology:
• The shadow of a vertex x on the set of vertices of type i ∈ I, denoted Shi (x), is the union
of all vertices of type i incident to x.
When M = C3 , we will use q, r, and t respectively, to denote the vertices of a chamber C
at angles π4 -, π2 -, and π3 respectively, corresponding to the three nodes from left to right of the
C3 -diagram
❜

❜

❜

The faces in C opposite q, r and t respectively, will be denoted by ℓq, ℓr and ℓt respectively.
Following Tits [Ti2], we call the vertices of type q, r and t, points, lines, and planes respectively. We denote by Q, R and T the set of points, lines, and planes in C (M; G). Notice that G
acts transitively on Q, R and T .
Using this terminology we prove the following key
Theorem 5.1 (Simplicial). The geometric realization |C (M, G)| of a chamber system C (M, G)
of type A3 or C3 associated with a simply connected polar G-manifold M is simplicial.
Proof. Since the case of A3 follows directly from a part of the proof of the C3 case (cf. Case (i)
below), we only discuss the latter.
We claim that all we need to show is that vertices of different types are joined by at most
one minimal geodesic. In particular, an edge is determined by its vertices. In fact, given this
we only need to prove that any chamber C of |C (M, G)| is uniquely determined by its vertices.
So suppose C and C ′ are chambers with the same vertices. From the claim they have the same
edges as well. Now by transitivity there is a g ∈ G with g C = C ′ . Since g fixes all vertices and
edges of C it is in the principal isotropy group of C and hence g C = C.
Case (i). One of the vertices is a plane.
For a plane t ∈ T , note that the shadow ShQ (t) (resp. ShR (t)) of t in Q (resp. R) is the
homogeneous space Gt q = Gt / Gt ∩ Gq , where q ∈ ShQ (t) (resp. q ∈ ShR (t)) . Moreover, the
set of all edges containing t and q is the homogeneous space Gt ∩ Gq ℓr = Gt ∩ Gq / Gℓr , where
ℓr is a minimal reference geodesic connecting t and q. It suffices to prove that Gℓr = Gt ∩ Gq :
Consider the fibration
Gt ∩ Gq
Gt
Gt
→
→
Gℓr
Gℓr
Gt ∩ Gq
Note that the base cannot be a point, since otherwise, Gt ⊂ Gq , and so by the primitivity
G = hGt , Gq i = Gq , and hence G would have fixed points. On the other hand, Gt / Gℓr is the set

TITS GEOMETRY AND POSITIVE CURVATURE

29

of points (resp. planes) in a type A2 geometry, associated with the slice representation at t, i.e.,
Gt / Gℓr = P2 (k), where k = R, C, H or O. In particular, Gℓr is a maximal subgroup of Gt , and
thus Gℓr = Gt ∩ Gq .
Case (ii). One of the vertices is a line.
Consider a chamber C with sides ℓt , ℓr , and ℓq , and suppose ℓt′ is another minimal geodesic
joining the vertices r and q of C. Since each singular isotropy group of the reducible slice
representation of Gr acts transitively on the other singular orbit, there is a g ∈ Gℓq ⊂ Gr with
g ℓt = ℓt′ . By (i) g C is a chamber with sides ℓt′ , ℓr , and ℓq . But since g fixes ℓr and ℓq it is in the
principal isotropy group of the slice representation of Gt and hence g C = C. Thus ℓt′ = ℓt . 
Since by work of Tits [Ti2] (cf. Proposition 6), any An -geometry is a building, we conclude
as in Theorem 4.10 (with π trivial) that
Corollary 5.2. A simply connected positively curved polar G-manifold of type A3 is equivariantly diffeomorphic to a polar G representation on a sphere.
In the much more complicated and rich case, where the chamber system C (M, G) is of type
C3 our classification carried out in [FGT] hinges on an axiomatic characterization for a connected Tits geometry of type C3 to be a building [Ti2].
For all but two such chamber systems, this Tits axiom is verified for a suitable cover of
C (M, G), and the two exceptional cases are identified with the chamber systems for the two
exceptional polar actions of type C3 on the Cayley plane. - Since by Theorem 5.1 C (M, G) is
simplicial an alternative proof is offered in [KL].

6. Reduction Input and Fixed Point Case
In the last two sections we will deal with reducible polar actions in positive curvature.
The key result in this section is a characterization of Hopf fibrations in our context, that also
will play an essential role in the next section. As a corollary we obtain a classification when
fixed points are present. We need the following
Lemma 6.1 (Extension). Let (Sn , G) be a fixed point free effective polar representation with
associated chamber system (building) C (Sn ; G). If G̃ ⊃ G is a compact connected subgroup of
Auttop (C (Sn , G)), then G̃ is a Lie group acting linearly on Sn .
Proof. First note that the induced action by G̃ on Sn is continuous and orbit equivalent to the G
action.
We begin by considering irreducible G representations. In the special case where G acts
transitively on Sn , a chamber of C (M; G) is just a point in Sn and Auttop (C (Sn , G)) is the homeomorphism group of Sn with the compact open topology. Since all G̃ orbits (there is only one)
are locally connected and Sn a manifold, Theorem 1 (page 244) of [MZ] states that G̃ is a Lie
group. In fact by [Po], G̃ is a subgroup of SO(n + 1).

30

FUQUAN FANG, KARSTEN GROVE, AND GUDLAUGUR THORBERGSSON

In the case where G acts by cohomogeneity one or higher on Sn , it follows from [Da] that the
action is orbit equivalent to the isotropy representation of a symmetric space U /K of noncompact type. Moreover, C (Sn ; G) is the building at infinity of U /K whose (topological) automorphism group is U, a Lie group. Thus, G̃ is a compact subgroup acting isometrically on U /K,
and hence with a fixed point, where the action is linear and orbit equivalent to the G action.
In general, the G action splits into a sum of irreducible subactions. From the above we
conclude that the restriction of G̃ to each subspace sphere is linear. Moreover, since G̃ ⊂
Auttop (C (Sn , G)), it takes chambers to chambers, and hence maps any minimal geodesic between G invariant subspace spheres to a minimal geodesic between the same invariant spheres.
Thus, G̃ acts linearly in fact isometrically on Sn .


We are now ready to prove
Lemma 6.2 (Hopf fibration). Let (Sn , G) be a fixed point free linear polar action, and (B, G)
a simply connected closed polar manifold. Suppose p : Sn → B is a smooth, G-equivariant,
chamber preserving map with the following property: For each v ∈ Sn , the differential p∗ on the
normal slice at v is a Gv -equivariant isomorphism onto the normal slice at p(v), orbit equivalent
to the slice representation of G p(v) ⊃ Gv . Then p is either a diffeomorphism, or a Hopf fibration
up to equivariant diffeomorphism of B (in particular the fibers are great spheres). Moreover, if
dim B < n and B is a sphere the cohomogeneity is at most 1.
Proof. Note that by assumption the chambers C in Sn and B are spherical k-simplices, where
k ≥ 0 is the cohomogeneity of the actions, and p is surjective. Moreover, p is a submersion,
since the differential p∗ on the tangent space to an orbit is surjective, and by the assumption
about slice representations p∗ is an isomorphism on the normal space to the orbit. Furthermore,
p when restricted to a section Σ in Sn is a cover of a section in B. This in particular proves our
claim when dim B = n.
When dim B < n we know from [Br] that the fiber of the submersion p is homeomorphic
to Si , i = 1, 3 or 7, where i = 7 can only happen when n = 15. Moreover, from the Gysin
exact sequence applied to the fibration p : Si → Sn → B, it follows that, B has the integral
cohomology ring of a projective space FPm , m ≥ 1 with F = C or H when i ∈ {1, 3} and B is a
homotopy 8-sphere if i = 7.
Our proof for the case dim B < n is anchored at irreducible polar G representations and polar
representations of cohomogeneity at most one (on Sn ) in conjunction with the above Lemma
6.1 and the Compact Transformation Group Theorem 4.9.
• Cohomogeneity k = 0.
From the list of G acting transitively and isometrically on Sn = G / H it follows directly (and
is well known), that Sn = G / H → G /K with fiber K/ H = Si , i ∈ {1, 3, 7} and G /K simply
connected, is a Hopf fibration (cf., e.g., Table C of [GWZ]).
• Cohomogeneity k = 1.
Recall that a cohomogeneity one action and manifold (M, G) is completely determined by its
data, i.e., G and its isotropy groups along a chamber C in M. Indeed, if K± are the isotropy
groups at the end points, u± of C and H the principal isotropy group along the interior of C, then

TITS GEOMETRY AND POSITIVE CURVATURE

31

K± / H = Sℓ± are canonically identified with the normal spheres to the orbits at the end points of

C, and via the slice theorem and canonical gluing
M = G ×K− Dℓ− ∪G / H G ×K+ Dℓ+ .
In our case, let M = Sn with data denoted as above. If K′± and H′ are the (local) data for B
along the chamber C ′ = p(C) in B with endpoints u′± , then
B = G ×K′− Dℓ− ∪G / H′ G ×K′+ Dℓ+
where we have used our assumption K′± / H′ = Sℓ± , and moreover, K′± /K± = H′ / H = Si are the
fibers of p along C ′ . It is important, that p is determined by these data as well. We will refer to
the dimensions, (ℓ− , ℓ+) of the normal spheres of the singular orbits as the multiplicities of the
action.
• Fiber dimensions i = 1, 3:
We point out that B is already known up to equivariant diffeomorphism: Indeed, note that
in the classification of cohomogeneity one actions on manifolds with the rational cohomology
ring of FPm due to [Uc] and [Iw], the quadric SO(2m + 1)/ SO(2) × SO(2m − 1) and G2 / SO(4)
are excluded in our case since they do not have the correct integral cohomology ring. Thus,
from [Uc] and [Iw] we conclude that the G action on B modulo K0 , the identity component of
its kernel, is equivariantly diffeomorphic to a linear action on FPm , i.e., there is an equivariant
diffeomorphism f : (B; Ḡ) → (FPm ; Ḡ), where the latter action is F-linear, Ḡ is the connected
normal subgroup of G such that G = K0 · Ḡ, a product up to finite central quotient.
Consider first the case where the G-representation is irreducible. A classification of these (including their data (corrected in [FGT])) is contained in Table E from [GWZ]. A corresponding
classification of those induced on FPm is contained in Table F in [GWZ].
When i = 3, i.e., B  HPm , such actions have multiplicity pairs (1, 1) and (2, 2l + 1), where
m = 1 and m = l + 1, l ≥ 1, respectively. In the first case there is only one such action,
while in the second there are two orbit equivalent actions. From the list of possible G actions
on Sn with these multiplicity pairs, it necessary follows that K0 = S3 acting freely in a linear
fashion along the fibers of f ◦ p as a subaction of G, and we are done. The same argument
works when i = 1 and the multiplicity pair is (1, l), including an “exceptional case” for each
of (1, 5) and (1, 6). In the remaining cases corresponding to the multiplicity pairs (2, 2l + 1),
(4, 5) and (9, 6), either K0 = S1 and we are done, or K0 is trivial. In the latter case it follows that
G acts almost effectively on B  CPm . This on the other hand determines all data, and hence
f ◦ p : S2m+1 → CPm is the Hopf map as claimed.
Now assume the G representation is reducible with singular orbits S± and Sn = S− ∗ S+ . From
the homogeneous case it follows that the fibers of p restricted to S± are the fibers of a Hopf
fibration. We will show that any fiber of p is a fiber of the uniquely determined Hopf fibration
of S− ∗ S+ restricting to the given ones on S± . For any regular point u′ ∈ B let C ′ be the unique
chamber containing u′ , and let K′± be the isotropy groups at the end points u′± of C ′ . Also let C
be a chamber in Sn with p(C) = C ′ having isotropy groups K± at its end points u± ∈ S± , and set
K′ := K′− ∩ K′+ . From our assumption about slice representations and the natural identifications
of the normal spheres to the singular orbits at say u′+ and u+ with S− (and vice verse with +−
swapped) it follows that the exponential map from S⊥u′ → p(S− ) = B− is a submersion with
+
fibers identified with the fibers of p|S− . Since the same is true with the roles of +− switched, it is

32

FUQUAN FANG, KARSTEN GROVE, AND GUDLAUGUR THORBERGSSON

not hard to see that K′ (C ′ )  Si+1 is a cohomogeneity 1, K′ -submanifold of B with a suspension
action, and p−1 (K′ (C ′ )) = K′ (C)  Si ∗ Si is a cohomogeneity 1, K′ -submanifold of Sn , where
the two Si in the join decomposition are the two Hopf fibers p−1 (u′± ). Therefore, it suffices to
establish our claim when p : S2i+1 = Si ∗ Si → B  Si+1 and the action on B is a suspension
action.
When i = 1, modulo kernel, the K′ action reduces to the reducible T2 action on S3 , and the
suspension action on the base S2 . Therefore, the kernel of T2 on the base is S1 ⊂ T2 , acting
freely and linearly along the fibers of p, and we are done.
When i = 3, and if the kernel of the action on the base S4 act transitively on the fibers of p,
the desired result follows as in the previous case. If not, one checks easily that, modulo kernel,
the K′ action contains the sum action of S3 × S3 on S7 as a subaction commuting with a Hopf
action given by an H-structure. This determines all data and p is a Hopf map, with fibers the
orbits the diagonal subgroup ∆(S3 ) ⊂ S3 × S3 , the principal isotropy group of the suspension
action on the base S4 .
• Fiber dimension i = 7:
In analogy with our applications of [Uc] and [Iw], we begin by analyzing the action on B,
where p : S15 → B is an equivariant fibration with fiber diffeomorphic to S7 :
We claim that the G action (modulo kernel) on the homotopy 8-sphere B is equivariantly
diffeomorphic to the spherical join action by SO(2) SO(7), or by SO(3) SO(6), or to the suspension action by SO(8) on S8 . Note that almost effectively, these are also actions by Spin(2) Spin(7),
Spin(3) Spin(6) = SU(2) SU(4) and Spin(8), all subgroups of Spin(9).
To see this, note that from Table E in [GWZ], the multiplicity pair in B, coinciding with
those in S15 are (4, 3) (typo in [GWZ]), (2, 5), (1, 6), and (1, 7), for the potential irreducible
representations by Sp(2) Sp(2), SU(2) SU(4) (or U(2) SU(4)), SO(2) SO(8) and SO(2) Spin(7)
respectively. In addition, if the G representation is reducible the action on B is necessarily a
suspension action, and so the multiplicity pair is (7, 7). It follows that the most singular orbit in
B has dimension 0, 1, 2, or 3. Thus it is either a point, a circle or a sphere (in the latter cases since
by transversality it is simply connected). Therefore, the dual singular orbit is also a homotopy
sphere (or a point) since it has the homotopy type of the complement of the orbit of codimension
at least 3, again, e.g., using transversality. Because the singular orbits in B are G-homogeneous
spaces, for dimension reasons it follows that, G can neither be Sp(2) Sp(2) nor SO(2) SO(8)
(the former can not act nontrivially on S3 , the latter can not act transitively on S6 ). Therefore,
the singular orbits of the G actions on B are respectively (S2 , S5 ), (S1 , S6 ) or two points (p− , p+ )
corresponding to a representation of SU(2) SU(4) (or its extension), SO(2) Spin(7) or Spin(8)
on S15 . From isotropy groups data it follows that the only possible way in which these groups
can act by cohomogeneity one on B and in particular transitively on the respective pair of
singular orbits is by the sum action of SO(3) SO(6) and SO(2) SO(7), and the suspension action
by SO(8) respectively.
Next we want to prove that, the G-representation on S15 must be one of the tensor representations of SO(2) Spin(7), SU(2) SU(4) or the reducible Spin(8) representation on S15 . It remains
to exclude the tensor representation of U(2) SU(4). To do this note that if the U(2) SU(4) representation descends via p to B, then its center S1 must be in the kernel K0 of the G-action on
B acting freely along the fibers of p. It follows that p induces a fibration CP7 → B = S8 with
fiber S7 / S1  CP3 . But such a fibration does not exist according to [Ui].

TITS GEOMETRY AND POSITIVE CURVATURE

33

A set of compatible homomorphisms from the diagrams for the isotropy groups of the tensor
representations SO(2) Spin(7), SU(2) SU(4) and Spin(8) on S15 to the reducible polar actions
on B is exhibited in Table 6.3 below (cf. [FGT] for a correction for the isotropy groups data for
SO(2) Spin(7) case in [GWZ]).

G

Representation

K−

K+

H

(ℓ− , ℓ+ )

SO(2) Spin(7)

R2 ⊗ R8

∆(SO(2)) SU(3)

G2

SU(3)

(1, 6)

SO(2) Spin(7)

R2 ⊕ R7

SO(2) SU(4)

Spin(7)

SU(4) = Spin(6)

(1, 6)

SU(2) SU(4)

C2 ⊗ C4

∆(SU(2)) SU(2)

S1 · SU(3)

S1 · SU(2)

(2, 5)

SU(2) SU(4)

R3 ⊕ R6

Sp(1) Sp(2)

Spin(8)

R8 ⊕ R8

Spin(7)

Spin(7)

G2

(7, 7)

Spin(8)

R8 ⊕ R1

Spin(8)

Spin(8)

Spin(7)

(7, 7)

S1 SU(4) = S1 Spin(6) S1 · Sp(2) = S1 Spin(5) (2, 5)

Table 6.3. Fixed point isotropy representations of polar actions on CaP2

On the other hand, since Spin(3) Spin(6), SO(2) Spin(7) and Spin(8) are subgroups of Spin(9),
it follows that they do act on the Cayley plane F4 / Spin(9) in a polar fashion with isolated fixed
points (cf. [PTh]), hence act by isometries on the Hopf fibration S15 → S8 . It is straigtforward
to see that, for each of the G-representations, the set of compatible homomorphisms is unique
up to conjugation. This proves the desired result.
• Cohomogeneity k ≥ 2.
Whether or not the G action is irreducible, note that p induces a G equivariant surjective map
between the chamber systems C (Sn , G) → C (B, G) of the same type M. Since C (Sn , G) is a
building it is both connected and simply connected. In particular, C (B, G) is connected.
By our assumption on the slice representations it follows that p yields an isomorphism between all proper residues of C (Sn , G) and C (B, G). In particular, p : C (Sn , G) → C (B, G) is a
covering map between chamber systems of type M, and hence C (Sn , G) is the universal cover
of C (B, G).
By construction of the chamber topology of the universal cover C˜(B, G) = C (Sn , G) in the
previous section, it is apparent that it coincides with the topology on C (Sn , G) defined using
the Hausdorff metric on all compact subsets of Sn . The corresponding thick topologies on
C (B, G) and C (Sn , G) yield the original topologies on B and Sn respectively. Moreover, with
this topology C˜(B, G) = C (Sn , G) is a compact spherical building.
From Theorem 4.9 we also know that the fundamental group π of the cover C (Sn , G) →
C (B, G) is a compact subgroup of the topological automorphism group Auttop (C (Sn , G)), and
that there is an action by G̃ ⊂ Auttop (C (Sn , G)) covering the Ḡ-action on C , where Ḡ is G mod
its kernel on B, and G̃ is an extension of Ḡ by π. Moreover, the actions by G ⊂ G̃ on Sn are
orbit equivalent, and B is homeomorphic to Sn /π.

34

FUQUAN FANG, KARSTEN GROVE, AND GUDLAUGUR THORBERGSSON

Although in complete generality, we do not know much about the group Auttop (C (Sn , G)),
we claim that in our case, π ⊂ G̃ is either S1 or S3 acting freely on Sn by the Hopf action.
Indeed, when the Coxeter diagram for M has no isolated nodes, Auttop (C (Sn , G)) is a Lie
group by [GKMW] (the rank is at least 3). Moreover, since its maximal compact subgroup acts
linearly on Sn , the compact group π acts linearly and freely on Sn , hence π is either trivial, S1
or S3 acting on Sn by the Hopf action. Notice that G is either Ḡ or G̃ up to finite kernel.
In general, note that each connected component of the diagram for M correspond to a G
invariant linear subsphere, Si of Sn on which G (mod its kernel) acts irreducibly in a polar fashion. Moreover, for each i, C (Si , G) is a compact topological subbuilding of C (Sn , G) invariant
under G̃ covering the chamber subsystem C (p(Si ), G). Applying Lemma 6.1 we conclude that
the compact group G̃ is a Lie group that acts isometrically and is orbit equivalent to the action
by G on Sn . Thus also, π is a compact Lie Group acting isometrically on Sn and the fibration
p : Sn → B is the orbit map by the free action of π.

We are now ready to prove the following
Theorem 6.4. Let M be a simply connected compact positively curved polar G manifold. If
M , ∅ then (M, G) is equivariantly diffeomorphic to an isometric, polar action of G on a
compact rank one symmetric space.
G

Proof. We will see in particular that M is a sphere if and only if the section Σ is a sphere.
Let us first deal with the case where
• Σ is a k-sphere, k ≥ 2:
Recall by Proposition 3.6 that in this case M G = ΣW =: S ⊂ Σ = S ∗ Sℓ , and C = M/ G =
Σ/W = S ∗ ∆, where ∆ = Sℓ /W and dim ∆ = ℓ ≥ 1.
The smooth spherical join description Σ = S ∗ Sℓ yields a decomposition of Σ as a union of
tubular neighborhoods of S and of Sℓ . Applying G gives a smooth decomposition of M into
a union of tubular neighborhoods of S = M G and the G invariant manifold G Sℓ =: S′ ⊂ M.
(In the metric chosen note that the cut locus of S in M is S′ and vice versa, at distance π/2
from one another). Note that S′ is a polar G manifold with section Sℓ , polar group W and
S′ / G = Sℓ /W = ∆. Moreover, if S0 = {p− ∪ p+ } ⊂ S is a pair of antipodal points in S, we see
that G Sℓ+1 = G({p− ∪ p+ } ∗ Sℓ ) is a G invariant polar submanifold N ⊂ M with two isolated
fixed points p± , section Σ0 := {p− ∪ p+ } ∗ Sℓ ⊂ Σ and polar group W. From this it in particular
follows that S′ is equivariantly diffeomorphic to the unit sphere S⊥ at a fixed point, say p− of
G in N, and that N is equivariantly diffeomorphic to the suspension of this. Of course S⊥ is the
normal sphere of S = M G in M at p− , and a similar argument now shows that M is equivariantly
diffeomorphic to S ∗ S⊥ where G acts trivially on S and by the isotropy representation of G on
the normal sphere S⊥ .
We now turn to the case where
• Σ is a projective k-space, k ≥ 2:
Since Σ∗ = Σ/W is a spherical k-simplex ∆ and M G ⊂ ΣW , we know that M G is contained in
the vertices of any chamber C = ∆ = M/ G = Σ/W by Proposition 2.8.
Let p0 ∈ M G be such an isolated fixed point, and ∆0 the chamber face opposite p0 in a fixed
chamber C = ∆, i.e., C = ∆ = p0 ∗ ∆0 . It follows that B := G ∆0 ⊂ M is a polar space form G
submanifold of M with section RPk−1 ⊂ Σ = RPk and polar group induced from W. Arguing

TITS GEOMETRY AND POSITIVE CURVATURE

35

as above, M is the union of a ball centered at p0 and a tubular neighborhood of B. (In the
chosen metric B is the cut locus of p0 and vice versa at distance π2 ). In particular, we have an
equivariant sphere fiber bundle p : S → B (with nontrivial fiber) between polar G manifolds
with the same orbit space ∆0 , where S is the unit sphere at p0 . Note also, that for any 0 < r < π2
the metric r-sphere S(p0 , r) centered at p0 is a polar G manifold equivariantly diffeomorphic
to S via scaling and exp p0 . Moreover, S(p0 , r) coincides with the boundary S(B; π2 − r) of the
π
− r tube D(B; π2 − r) of B, and in this way p can also be viewed as the projection from the unit
2
normal sphere bundle, S⊥ (B) of B to B. By transversality we see that B is simply connected.
From this description it follows that M is equivariantly diffeomorphic to a projective space once
it is established that p is a Hopf fibration. To see this it remains to check the assumption on the
slice representations in Lemma 6.2.
Let γ be a geodesic in C from p0 to q ∈ ∆0 perpendicular to ∆0 . By the slice theorem,
G ×Gq V̂q , is a G-equivariant tubular neighborhood of the orbit G(q), where V̂q is the slice in
M. Since B is G-invariant, we get a Gq -invariant decomposition V̂q = Vq ⊕ Vq⊥ where Vq is
the slice in B, and Vq⊥ is the normal space to B at q. Note that, from the slice representation
of Gq on Vq ⊕ Vq⊥ , the slice V̂ x for G x at x ∈ γ different from q is naturally identified with
Vq ⊕ T x γ. Therefore, the slice of the orbit at x inside S(B; π2 − r) is canonically identified with
Vq . Moreover, the orbit space Vq / G x = Vq / Gq , a cone over the space of directions at q ∈ ∆0 .
The desired result follows.

7. Fixed point Free Reducible Actions
In all remaining cases, the orbit space M ∗ = Σ∗ is a simplex ∆ isometric to all chambers in
M. Moreover, ∆ is a spherical join ∆ = ∆− ∗ ∆+ = ∆m− ∗ ∆m+ , corresponding to two dual W
invariant subsections Σ− and Σ+ , where Σ± = Sm± or the projective spaces RPm± .
Viewing ∆ also as a subset of a fixed section Σ, clearly B− = G ∆m− and B+ = G ∆m+ are
two polar G submanifolds in M with sections Σ− , Σ+ ⊂ Σ and Weyl groups W (mod kernel). In
particular, B± are polar space forms of spherical type. Moreover, just like ∆ can be viewed as
the union of two tubular neighborhoods of the ∆m± , M is the union of tubular neighborhoods of
the G submanifolds B± .
In the remaining cases where no fixed points are present our first goal is to exhibit a geometric
description of M as a projective space in which B± is a dual pair of projective subspaces. The
pivotal steps are to show that these pairs are the cut loci of one another, and that for each point
p± ∈ B± , the exponential map (up to scaling) from the unit normal sphere at p± to B± defines a
map to B∓ which in turn is a Hopf fibration. This is in spirit achieved by reducing it to the fixed
point case where the groups in question are the isotropy groups at p± . Analyzing and making
full use of equivariant restrictions forced by this description will then yield a proof of our main
result in this section:
Theorem 7.1 (Non-fixed point). A reducible fixed point free polar action on a simply connected positively curved manifold is equivariantly diffeomorphic to an isometric polar action
on a rank one symmetric space, excluding the Cayley plane.
Note, that when say m+ ≥ 1, the slice representation at each vertex of ∆+ ⊂ ∆ is reducible. In
particular, all vertex representations are reducible except possibly the one corresponding to say
∆− when it is a point.

36

FUQUAN FANG, KARSTEN GROVE, AND GUDLAUGUR THORBERGSSON

The following is a key step based on the primitivity lemma 3.2
Lemma 7.2 (Dual Generation). For any regular pair p± ∈ B±, the action of the isotropy
groups G p± restricted to B∓ is orbit equivalent to the action of G restricted to B∓ .
Proof. By the primitivity theorem, G p− is generated by the face isotropy groups, Gv1 , . . . , Gvm+ +1
of the faces, ∆− ∗ ∆mvi + −1 containing ∆− , and similarly G p+ is generated by the remaining face
isotropy groups, Gu1 , . . . , Gum− +1 , namely of the faces, ∆mu j− −1 ∗ ∆+ containing ∆+ . Note that
any face containing ∆− is perpendicular to any face containing ∆+ . In particular, if Gv,u is the
isotropy group at an intersection point of two such faces with isotropy groups Gv and Gu , the
slice representation of Gv,u restricted to the normal sphere of its fixed point set is a reducible
cohomogeneity one action with singular isotropy groups Gv and Gu . As a special case of the
primitivity theorem we already know that Gv and Gu generate Gv,u . However, since the action
is reducible we have that actually Gv Gu = Gu Gv = Gv,u as sets. Notice that this is equivalent to
the fact that in the slice representation of Gv,u , the isotropy group Gv is transitive on the opposite
singular orbit and vice versa.
We now claim that G = G p− G p+ . From the primitivity lemma we know that any g ∈ G can be
written as a word of elements from Gv1 , . . . , Gvm+ +1 , Gu1 , . . . , Gum− +1 . Using that Gvi Gu j = Gu j Gvi
for all i = 1, . . . , m+ +1 and j = 1, . . . , m− +1 we can rewrite any such word also as a word in the
Gv ’s times a word in the Gu ’s, i.e., G = G p− G p+ . The same reasoning shows that G = G p+ G p− ,
and hence completes the proof of the lemma.

The above lemma will allow us to use the input from the previous section. For this we let
Γ(p± ) be the set consisting of all minimal geodesics from regular points p± to B∓ . In addition
to viewing this as a set of geodesics, we will also view it as a subset of M whose points are the
points of all those geodesics. As such it can also be described as Γ(p± ) = G p± (p± ∗ ∆∓ ) ⊂ M.
Note that Γ(p− ) ∩ Γ(p+ ) is the set of all minimal geodesics joining p− and p+ . Since G p± is
independent of p± , we will use the notation G± instead.
It will also be useful to let Γ(p± )(r) denote the subset of Γ(p± ) at distance r from p± , and to
let Γ̂(p± ) denote the negative of the terminal directions of the geodesics in Γ(p± ).
Remark 7.3. The following are immediate consequences of the Dual Generation lemma 7.2,
and the decomposition of a section Σ ⊃ Σ± corresponding to ∆ = ∆− ∗ ∆+ .
• The cut locus C(B± ) = B∓ , and B± are at distance π/2 from one another.
• Γ(p± ) − B∓ is a smooth submanifold of M diffeomorphic to the open π/2 ball in the
normal space, T ±⊥ to B± at p± via the exponential map.
• The map γ p± : S⊥p± → B∓ taking a unit vector to the corresponding geodesic at time π/2
is smooth, G± equivariant and takes chambers to chambers.
Moreover, we have
Lemma 7.4. The map γ p± is a G± equivariant Hopf fibration.
Proof. For the sake of simplicity we will use x̄ to denote the image γ p± (x) of x ∈ S⊥p± . Since
γ p± is a smooth G± equivariant map that takes chambers to chambers and with the same orbit
space, by the Hopf lemma 6.2 it remains to verify that the slice representations of G±,v and

TITS GEOMETRY AND POSITIVE CURVATURE

37

G±,v̄ are orbit equivalent. For this it suffices to show that the dimensions of the corresponding

slices agree, or equivalently that corresponding principal orbits of isotropy groups have the
same dimension. So let x be a point of principal orbit type of the slice representation of G±,v .
We claim that dim(G±,v (x)) = dim(G±,v̄ ( x̄)). Note that G±,v̄ = G±, x̄ G±,v = G±,v G±, x̄ where the
latter follows from the Dual Generation lemma 7.2. Therefore, the orbit G±,v̄ ( x̄) = G±,v̄ / G±, x̄ =
G±,v G±, x̄ / G±, x̄ . In particular, G±,v acts transitively on this orbit with isotropy group G±,v ∩ G±, x̄ .
However, since clearly G±,v ∩ G±, x̄ = G±,x , this completes the proof.

The following plays a pivitol role in the geometric and equivariant description of M:
Lemma 7.5 (Reduction). For all regular p± ∈ B± , Γ(p± ) are G± invariant submanifolds of M.
Moreover,
• Γ(p± ) is G± equivariantly diffeomorphic to D⊥p±
if the section is a sphere, and
• Γ(p± ) is G± equivariantly diffeomorphic to a complex or quaternionic projective space
if the section is a projective space.
Proof. The key issue is to see that Γ(p± ) are submanifolds as claimed. From the remark above
this is clear except along B∓ ⊂ Γ(p± ).
From the Hopf Lemma 6.2 and Lemma 7.4 above we know that γ p± : S⊥p± → B∓ is either a
diffeomorphism or a Hopf map. Clearly, Γ(p− ) ∩ Γ(p+ ) is in bijective correspondence with the
fiber of γ p− over p+ and the fiber of γ p+ over p− , when viewing it as the set of minimal geodesics
between p− and p+ . In particular, both maps are of the same type, corresponding to Γ(p− )∩Γ(p+ )
being either one geodesic, an S1 , an S3 or an S7 family of geodesics. Moreover, this description
also shows that the linear span of the initial vectors of the geodesics in Γ(p− ) ∩ Γ(p+ ) at both p−
and p+ are linear subspaces of the corresponding normal spaces to B∓ .
Now consider the initial vectors of the geodesics in Γ(p− ) starting at B+ . This subset Γ̂(p− ) of
the unit normal bundle T 1⊥ B+ of B+ is canonically a smooth submanifold diffeomorphic to S⊥p−
via say Γ(p− )( π2 − 1). In particular, it is a smooth section of the unit normal bundle to B+ when
each Γ(p− ) ∩ Γ(p+ ) is just one geodesic, or equivalently γ p− : S⊥p− → B+ is a diffeomorphism.
In the other cases it is the unit sphere bundle of a smooth linear subbundle of the normal bundle
to B+ and γ p− : S⊥p− → B+ is a Hopf fibration. By equivariance then clearly each Γ(p∓ ) is
G∓ equivariantly diffeomorphic to a complex or quaternionic space, or to the Cayley plane if
Γ(p− ) ∩ Γ(p+ ) is an S7 family of geodesics. Since by assumption neither B± is a point the latter
case does not appear. Indeed, if so both B± would be homotopy 8-spheres. Moreover, from
the geometric decomposition and Poincaré duality it follows that M would be a 24-dimensional
manifold with integral cohomology algebra a truncated polynomial algebra with generator in
degree 8. This contradicts a well-known topological theorem (cf. [Ha] page 498, Corollary 4).

Having dealt with all cases where the Diagram for the Coxeter matrix has no isolated nodes,
and where the action has fixed points, we assume from now on that B− is an orbit corresponding
to an isolated node of the diagram. Thus, we will use a decomposition
∆ = ∆− ∗ ∆+ , where ∆− = ∆0 = p− is a vertex,
corresponding to an isolated node, and ∆+ corresponds to the rest of the diagram. In particular,

38

FUQUAN FANG, KARSTEN GROVE, AND GUDLAUGUR THORBERGSSON

G+ acts transitively on B− , as well as on each normal sphere S⊥+ to B+ along ∆+ .

We are now ready to complete the proof of Theorem 7.1:
Proof of Theorem 7.1. We first consider the case where the section Σ = Σ− ∗ Σ+ is a sphere:
By Lemma 7.5 the G∓ action on B± is equivariantly equivalent to the slice representation on
the normal sphere S⊥p∓ which we will denote by S(V± ) = S± . Note that G as well as G+ acts
transitively on B− since ∆− is a point. In particular G acts linearly on S− identified with B− .
If also the G action on B+ when identified with S+ is linear, we claim that the induced sum
action on S(V− ⊕ V+ ) is equivalently diffeomorphic to the G action on M. To see this, choose
p∗− ∈ S− with G p∗− = G p− = G− and a G− equivariant diffeomorphism from Γ(p− ) to the join
p∗− ∗ S+ ⊂ S− ∗ S+ . This extends to a well defined G equivariant diffeomorphism from M to
S− ∗ S+ by invariance. The proof is completed now by Lemma 6.1, since the polar G-action on
B+ is linear orbit equivalent to the G− action.
Now suppose Σ is a projective space:
By Lemma 7.5 the Cayley plane cannot appear, and moreover B± are both projective spaces
over F, with F = C or H. In fact, for each regular p± ∈ B±, the slice representation of G±
restricted to the normal space V± at p± to B± preserve an F structure and descends to a polar
action on B∓ orbit equivalent to the restriction of G to B∓ . This will guide us to the construction
of a representation of G (or frequently an extension of it) on V+ ⊕ V− preserving an F structure,
which together with the scalar multiplication of F∗ is polar, such that the induced G action on
the projective space FP(V+ ⊕ V− ) is equivariantly equivalent to that of G on M.
We divide the proof into two cases corresponding to (a) dim B− > 2 and (b) dim B− = 2
(noting that dim B− < 2 is covered by the fixed point case).
Throughout K± ⊳ G will denote the identity component of the kernel of the G-action restricted
to B± .
In case (a), we make the following claim: There is a normal subgroup H ⊳K+ acting transitively on the normal spheres to B+ such that K+ = H ·K0 , where K0 = 1, S1 or S3 , is the identity
component of the kernel of the action by K+ on B−. We will see later on that K0 = 1 when
F = H, and K0 = 1 or S1 when F = C.
To prove the claim note that dim ∆+ ≥ 1. Choose a pair of vertices v1 , v2 ∈ ∆+ and consider
the slice representations at the vertices. By Lemma 7.7 below it follows, by assumption on
dim B− , that up to a finite cover, there is a normal subgroup of rank at least 2 (of simple type),
say Hvi ⊳ Gvi for i = 1, 2, acting transitively on the normal sphere to B+ at vi but trivially on the
slice tangent to B+. Clearly each Hvi is also a normal (simple) subgroup in the principal isotropy
group G+ of the G action on B+ . Since G+ (modulo kernel) has a unique normal simple subgroup
(of rank at least 2) acting transitively on the normal sphere, it follows that Hv1 = Hv2 ⊳ G+ , and
will be denoted by H. By primitivity G = hGv1 , Gv2 i, and thus H is a normal subgroup in G.
Therefore B+ is fixed pointwise by H. In particular, H ⊳K+ acts transitively on B− with kernel
K0 , and thus K+ = H ·K0 .
Since K+ ⊳ G, we can write G = K+ · L = H ·K0 · L where L ⊳ G is a connected normal subgroup
which clearly acts almost effectively on B+ in a polar fashion. Since B− is a projective space
over C or H of dimension at least 4, and therefor any almost effective transitive action on it is
the linear action by SU(k + 1) or Sp(k) for some k ≥ 2 (cf. [On], pp. 264-5), we conclude that
H = SU(k+1) or Sp(k). Thus for the kernel of the G = H ·K0 · L action on B− , we get K− = K0 · L.

TITS GEOMETRY AND POSITIVE CURVATURE

39

In particular, K0 = K− ∩ K+ fixes both B± pointwise, and acts almost effectively on the normal
spheres to B± (when non trivial), preserving all Γ(p− ) ∩ Γ(p+ ).
In summary the “face” isotropy groups G± and their kernels K± can be read off from the
following group diagrams, where the vertical inclusions are left out:
G = H ·K0 · ❚jL

❥4
❥❥❥❥
❥
❥
❥
❥❥❥
❥❥❥❥

G = H ·K0 · L+

G− = H− ·K0 ❚j· L

❚❚❚❚
❚❚❚❚
❚❚❚❚
❚❚

(7.6)

❚❚❚❚
❚❚❚❚
❚❚❚❚
❚❚

+
❥❥4
❥
❥
❥
❥❥
❥❥❥❥
❥❥❥❥

G− ∩ G+ = H− ·K0 · L+
K− = K0 · Lj❚

K+ = H ·K0

❚❚❚❚
❚❚❚❚
❚❚❚❚
❚❚❚

❥❥4
❥❥❥❥
❥
❥
❥
❥❥❥
❥❥❥❥

K− ∩ K+ = K0

Here H− , respectively L+ , is the principal isotropy group of H on B− and of L on B+ respectively.
Thus corresponding to the possible H above, we have H− = U(k), Sp(k−1) S1 or Sp(k−1) Sp(1).
Let H0 ⊳ H− denote the normal factor S1 or Sp(1) of H− . Thus, H0 = S1 corresponds to F = C
and H0 = Sp(1) to F = H. For this we have:
• H0 acts freely on S(V− ) along the Hopf fibers.
To see this, consider for any fixed p+ ∈ B+, the Hopf map γ p+ : S⊥p+ → B− . From the
transitive actions by H on S⊥p+ descending to B− we know that H0 acts freely along the fibers of
γ p+ . These fibers for p− ∈ B− are in one to one correspondence with Γ(p− ) ∩ Γ(p+ ), p− ∈ B− .
Turning things around, these are also in one to one correspondence with the fibers of the Hopf
map γ p− : S⊥p− → B+ where now p− is fixed. This proves the assertion and has the following
consequence:
• K0 is trivial when F = H .
Indeed, since both K0 and H0 = Sp(1) act (almost) effectively on S(V− ) this follows from
Lemma 7.9 below, because the slice representation of G− on V− descends to a fixed point free
action on B+ with H0 ·K0 ⊳ H− ·K0 in its kernel.
We now proceed to set up a projective model, FP(V+ ⊕ V− ) with a linear polar G-action with
the field F = C, H as indicated in our strategy above:
Consider the product representation on V+ ⊕ V− by K+ × K− = H ·K0 × K0 · L which on
each summand preserves an F structure, i.e., descends to a polar action on FP(V+ ), respectively
on FP(V− ). When K0 is trivial, obviously the sum F structure is preserved as well, and the
K+ × K− = H ×L action descends to a polar action on FP(V+ ⊕ V− ). When K0 = S1 and hence
F = C, the action by the diagonal S1 = ∆(K0 ) ⊳ K0 × K0 defines a C structure on the sum
preserved by K+ × K− descending to a polar action by G = H ·K0 · L on FP(V+ ⊕ V− ). These are
the models.
Given such a model, fix a point p− ∈ B− , and choose a point p∗− ∈ FP(V+ ) so that G p∗− = G p− .
By Lemma 7.5 Γ(p− ) is G p− -equivariantly diffeomorphic to the linear projective subspace of

40

FUQUAN FANG, KARSTEN GROVE, AND GUDLAUGUR THORBERGSSON

FP(V+ ⊕ V− ) containing p∗− and FP(V− ). As in the spherical section case this extends to a well
defined G equivariant diffeomorphism from M to FP(V+ ⊕ V− ) by invariance, and we are done.
Finally, let us consider the only remaining case (b) where B− = CP1 and B+ is a complex
projective space of real dimension at least 4, since the cases of dim B+ ≤ 2 reduce to the fixed
point case, because dim ∆+ ≥ 1.
Since G acts transitively on B− = CP1 = S2 we can write, G = K− · S3 , with K− the kernel
of the action on B− . Hence, G− = K− · S1 , where S1 ⊂ S3 . By Lemma 7.2 the subaction of
G− is orbit equivalent to the G-action on B+ . It follows from Lemma 7.8 below that the factor
S3 acts trivially on B+, that is S3 ⊳K+ , the kernel of the G action on B+ . Therefore, the slice
subrepresentation of K+ ⊲ S3 on V+  C2 descends to the transitive action on B−. This implies
that K+ = S3 or U(2), and accordingly K0 = K+ ∩ K− = 1 or S1 . We are now in a situation
similar to case (a) with F = C, and hence M is G-equivariantly diffeomorphic to the complex
projective space P(V+ ⊕ V− ). This completes the proof.

In conclusion, here are the facts we used about representations in the proof of Theorem 7.1:
Lemma 7.7. Let ρ : G → SO(V0 ⊕ · · · ⊕ Vk ), be a reducible polar representation, where the
Vi are irreducible G-modules (k ≥ 1) . Suppose the G-action on the unit sphere S(V0 ⊕ · · · ⊕ Vk )
descends to a polar action on the projective space FP(V0 ⊕ · · · ⊕ Vk ) where F = C or H. If
dim V0 ≥ 5 and dim V0 / G = 1, then there is a normal simple subgroup H ⊳ G of rank at least 2
acting transitively on the unit sphere S(V0 ) but trivially on V1 ⊕ · · · ⊕ Vk .
Proof. Since G is transitive on S(V0 ), by the list of transitive actions on the spheres it follows
that, G = H · G′ , where H is a simple normal subgroup of G acting transitively on S(V0 ), with
principal isotropy group H0 . For dimension reason, rank H ≥ 2. Moreover, H is a special
unitary group or a sympletic group, since it acts transitively on the projective space FP(V0 ).
We argue by contradiction. Assume H acts nontrivially on Vi for some i ≥ 1. For the restricted
reducible polar representation of G on V0 ⊕ Vi , since the principal isotropy group of G on V0
is H0 · G′ , by [Be] Theorem 2 it follows that G is orbit equivalent to H0 · G′ on Vi , hence, by
[Da], orbit equivalent to the isotropy representation of an irreducible symmetric space. Note
that H0 H is not a normal subgroup, and by assumption H is nontrivial on Vi . By the list in
[EH] it follows that, if dim Vi / G ≥ 2, then H is Spin(8) or Spin(7) which is neither a unitary
nor a symplectic group, contradiction.
It remains to consider the case of dim Vi / G = 1, i.e., G acts transitively on S(Vi ). By the
assumption that H acts non-trivially on Vi , from the list of transitive actions on spheres it follows
that:
• The rank at least 2 simple group H acts transitively on S(Vi ). Furthermore, by dividing the
kernel of the G′ -action, the transitive action of H · G′ on S(Vi ) reduces to an almost effective
action of H ·K0 where rank K0 ≤ 1.
Note that dim S(Vi ) ≥ 4, since a rank at least 2 simple group can not act nontrivially on a
lower dimensional spheres. Recall that H0 · G′ is orbit equivalent to the H · G′ -action on Vi , i.e.,
transitive on S(Vi ). For dimension reasons it follows that the H0 action is also transitive on S(Vi )
since the G′ -action modulo kernel reduces to the K0 -action where rank K0 ≤ 1.
In summery, H acts transitively on S(Vi ) orbit equivalent to the subaction of H0 H on S(Vi )
where H / H0  S(V0 ). Recall that H is a special unitary group or a symplectic group. From

TITS GEOMETRY AND POSITIVE CURVATURE

41

the list of transitive actions on spheres it follows that H = SU(4) acting on V0 ⊕ Vi = R8 ⊕ R6 ,
via the standard complex representation and the real representation of SU(4) = Spin(6) on the
summands (cf. [Be]). Since the Spin(6) action on R6 does not descend to the complex projective
plane, a contradiction is reached.

In the proof of the following result we will freely use the language and results about chamber
systems and their universal covers developed in section 4, translated to the current setting.
Lemma 7.8. Let ρ : G → SO(V) be an almost effective C-linear polar representation, descending to a polar action on the projective space CP(V).
Suppose G = K · S1 ⊂ G′ = K · S3 , and assume moreover that G′ acts on the projective space
extending the G-action with the same orbits. Then the factor S3 of G′ is in the kernel of the
action on CP(V).
Proof. We first prove that the factor S3 action is trivial on CP(Vi ) for each irreducible summand
Vi ⊂ V. This is clear for any rank 1 summand (summand Vi with dim Vi / G = 1), since G′ ⊃ G
acts transitively on CP(Vi ), hence modulo kernel it is either a unitary group or a symplectic
group. If the rank of a summand is 2, it follows immediately from [Uc]. If the rank of a
summand is at least 3, by section 4, the action of G′ ⊃ G lifts to a polar representation by an
extension by the deck transformation group S1 , i.e., S1 · G′ , acting on the universal cover, i.e.,
S(Vi ), orbit equivalent to the S1 · G-representation. By the classification of [EH] it follows that,
the S3 factor as well as the factor S1 ⊂ S3 must act trivially on S(Vi ). In general, suppose S3
acts trivially on both F
CP(Vi ) and CP(V j ), then S3 acts on CP(Vi ⊕ V j ) with fixed point set the
disjoint union CP(Vi ) CP(V j ). Since the space of geodesics Γ(pi ) ∩ Γ(p j ) joining pi ∈ CP(Vi )
and p j ∈ CP(V j ) is an S1 family of geodesics, S3 must act trivially on that as well for all pi , p j .
Thus, S3 acts trivially on CP(Vi ⊕ V j ). By induction it follows that the S3 action is trivial on
CP(V).

The following is probably well known
Lemma 7.9. Let ρ : G → SO(V) be an almost effective representation descending to HP(V) =
HPn . Then the kernel of the action on HP(V) is contained in Sp(1).
Proof. Identify V with the tangent space at a point p ∈ HPn+1 . The representation gives rise to
an isometric action on HPn+1 fixing p and with the induced action on HPn identified as the cut
locus of p in HPn+1 . Since the subgroup of the isometry group of HPn+1 that fixes HPn is Sp(1),
the claim follows.

References
[Al]
[AT]
[Be]
[Br]
[BSp]
[CL]

M. Alexandrino, On polar foliations and fundamental group. Results Math. 60 (2011), no. 1-4, 213-223.
M. Alexandrino and D. Töben, Singular Riemannian foliations on simply connected spaces. Differential
Geom. Appl. 24 (2006), 383–397.
I. Bergmann, Reducible polar representations. Manuscripta Math. 104 (2001), 309–324.
W. Browder, Higher Torsion in H-Spaces, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 108 (1963), 353–375.
K. Burns and R. Spatzier, On topological Tits buildings and their classification, Inst. Hautes etudes Sci.
Publ. Math. 65 (1987), 5-34.
R. Charney and A. Lytchak, Metric characterizations of spherical and Euclidean buildings, Geom. Topol.
5 (2001), 521-550.

42

[Ch]

FUQUAN FANG, KARSTEN GROVE, AND GUDLAUGUR THORBERGSSON

J. Cheeger, Some examples of manifolds of nonnegative curvature, J. Differential Geometry 8 (1973),
623-628.
[Da]
J. Dadok, Polar coordinates induced by actions of compact Lie groups, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 288
(1985), 125–137.
[Dav] M.W. Davis, The geometry and topology of Coxeter groups, London Mathematical Society Monographs
Series 32. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 2008.
[De]
O. Dearricott, A 7-manifold with positive curvature, Duke Math. J. 158 (2011), 307-346.
[EH]
J.-H. Eschenburg and E. Heintze, On the classification of polar representations, Math. Z. 232 (1999),
391–398.
[FG]
F. Fang and K. Grove, Reflection groups in non-negative curvature, J. Differential Geometry 102 (2016),
179–205.
[FGT] F. Fang, K. Grove and G. Thorbergsson, Rank Three Geometry and Positive Curvature, Comm. Anal.
Geom, 24 (2016), 487–520.
[FKM] D. Ferus, H. Karcher, and H.F Müzner, Cliffordalgebren und neue isoparametrische Hyperflächen, Math.
Z. 177 (1981), 479–502.
[GK]
C. Gorodski and A. Kollross, Some remarks on polar actions, Ann. Global Anal. Geom. 49 (2016), 43–58.
[Gr]
K. Grove, Developments around positive sectional curvature, Surveys in differential geometry. Vol. XIII.
Geometry, analysis, and algebraic geometry: forty years of the Journal of Differential Geometry, 117–
133, Surv. Differ. Geom. 13, Int. Press, Somerville, MA, 2009.
[GKi] K. Grove and C.-W. Kim, Positively curved manifolds with low fixed point cohomogeneity, J. Differential
Geom. 67 (2004), 1–33.
[GVZ] K. Grove, L. Verdiani and W. Ziller, An exotic T 1 S4 with positive curvature, Geom. Funct. Anal. 21
(2011), 499–524.
[GWZ] K. Grove, B. Wilking and W. Ziller, Positively curved cohomogeneity one manifolds and 3-Sasakian
geometry, J. Differential Geom. 78 (2008), 33–111.
[GZ]
K. Grove and W. Ziller, Polar Actions and Manifolds, The Journal of Fixed Point Theory and Applications
11 (2012), 279–313
[GKMW] T. Grundhöfer, L. Kramer, H. Van Maldeghem, and R.M. Weiss, Compact totally disconnected Moufang
buildings, Tohoku Math. J. (2) 64 (2012), 333-360.
[HPPT] E. Heintze, R.S. Palais, C.-L. Terng, and G. Thorbergsson, Hyperpolar actions on symmetric spaces.
Geometry, topology, & physics, 214–245, Conf. Proc. Lecture Notes Geom. Topology, IV, Int. Press,
Cambridge, MA, 1995.
[He]
S. Helgason, Differential geometry, Lie groups, and symmetric spaces, Graduate Studies in Mathematics
34. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2001.
[Iw]
K. Iwata, Classification of compact transformation groups on cohomology quaternion projective spaces
with codimension one orbits, Osaka J. Math. 15 (1978), 475–508.
[KL]
L. Kramer and A. Lytchak, Homogeneous compact geometries, Transform. Groups 19 (2014), 793-852.
[Ly]
A. Lytchak, Polar foliations of symmetric spaces, Geom. Funct. Anal. 24 (2014),1298-1315.
[Me]
R. Mendes, Extending tensors on polar manifolds, Math. Annalen, 365 (2016), 1409–1424.
[MZ] D. Montgommery and L. Zippin, Topological transformation groups, Interscience Publishers, New YorkLondon, 1955.
[Ne]
A. Neumaier, Some sporadic geometries related to PGL(3, 2) Arch. Math. 42 (1984), 89–96.
[On]
A. Onishchik, Topology of transitive transformation groups. Johann Ambrosius Barth Verlag GmbH,
Leipzig, 1994.
[OT]
H. Ozeki and M. Takeuchi, On some types of isoparametric hypersurfaces in spheres. I, II. Tôhoku Math.
J. 27 (1975), 515–559; 28 (1976), 7–55.
[PTe] R. S. Palais and C.-L. Terng, A general theory of canonical forms, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 300, (1987),
771–789.
[Pe]
P. Petersen, Riemannian Geometry, Second edition. Graduate Texts in Mathematics 171. Springer, New
York (2006).
[PTh] F. Podestà and G. Thorbergsson, Polar actions on rank-one symmetric spaces. J. Differential Geom. 53,
(1999), 131–175.

TITS GEOMETRY AND POSITIVE CURVATURE

[Po]
[Ro]
[Sz]
[Th]
[Ti1]
[Ti2]
[Uc]
[Ui]
[VZ]
[Ve]
[Wa]
[Wi1]
[Wi2]
[Wi3]
[Wö]
[Zi]

43

J. Poncet, Groupes de Lie compacts de transformations de l’espace euclidien et les sphères comme espaces homogènes, Comment. Math. Helv. 33, (1959), 109–120.
M. Ronan, Lectures on buildings. Perspectives in Mathematics 7. Academic Press, Inc., Boston, MA,
1989.
J. Szenthe, Orthogonally transversal submanifolds and the generalizations of the Weyl group, Period.
Math. Hungar. 15 (1984), 281–299.
G. Thorbergsson, Isoparametric foliations and their buildings, Ann. of Math. 133 (1991), 429–446.
J. Tits, Buildings of spherical type and finite BN-pairs. Lecture Notes in Mathematics 386. SpringerVerlag, Berlin-New York, 1974.
J. Tits, A local approach to buildings. The geometric vein. The Coxeter Festschrift. Edited by C. Davis,
B. Grünbaum, and F. A. Sherk, 519–547, Springer, New York-Berlin, 1981.
F. Uchida, Classification of compact transformation groups on cohomology complex projective spaces
with codimension one orbits, Japan J. Math. 3 (1977), 141-189.
J. Ucci, On the nonexistence of Riemannian submersions from CP7 and QP3 , Proc. Amer. Math.Soc. 88
(1983), 698–700.
L. Verdiani and W. Ziller, Concavity and rigidity in non-negative curvature, J. Differential Geom. 97
(2014), 349-375.
L. Verdiani, Cohomogeneity one manifolds of even dimension with strictly positive sectional curvature,
J. Differential Geom., 68 (2004), 31–72.
G. Walschap, Metric foliations and curvature. J. Geom. Anal. 2 (1992), 373–381.
B. Wilking, Nonnegatively and positively curved manifolds, Surveys in differential geometry. Vol. XI,
25–62, Surv. Differ. Geom. 11, Int. Press, Somerville, MA, 2007.
B. Wilking, Positively curved manifolds with symmetry. Ann. of Math. 163 (2006), 607–668.
B. Wilking, A duality theorem for Riemannian foliations in nonnegative sectional curvature. Geom. Funct.
Anal. 17 (2007), 1297–1320.
A. Wörner, A splitting theorem for nonnegatively curved Alexandrov spaces, Geom. Topol. 16 (2012),
2391–2426.
W. Ziller, Examples of Riemannian manifolds with non-negative sectional curvature, Surveys in differential geometry. Vol. XI, 63–102, Surv. Differ. Geom. 11, Int. Press, Somerville, MA, 2007.

Department of Mathematics, Capital Normal University, Beijing 100048, China
E-mail address: fuquan fang@yahoo.com
Department of Mathematics, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN 46556, USA
E-mail address: kgrove2@nd.edu
Mathematisches Institut, Universität zu Köln, Weyertal 86-90, 50931 Köln, Germany
E-mail address: gthorber@mi.uni-koeln.de

