A FINITE SIMPLE GROUP IS CCA IF AND ONLY IF IT HAS NO
ELEMENT OF ORDER FOUR

arXiv:1703.07905v1 [math.GR] 23 Mar 2017

LUKE MORGAN, JOY MORRIS, AND GABRIEL VERRET
Abstract. A Cayley graph for a group G is CCA if every automorphism of the graph
that preserves the edge-orbits under the regular representation of G is an element of the
normaliser of G. A group G is then said to be CCA if every connected Cayley graph on
G is CCA. We show that a finite simple group is CCA if and only if it has no element of
order 4. We also show that “many” 2-groups are non-CCA.

1. Introduction
All groups and all graphs in this paper are finite. Let G be a group and let S be an
inverse-closed subset of G. The Cayley graph Cay(G, S) of G with respect to S is the
graph with vertex-set G and, for every g ∈ G and s ∈ S, an edge {g, sg}. This graph
admits a natural edge-colouring in which an edge {g, sg} is coloured {s, s−1 }. The colourpreserving automorphism group is denoted Autc (Cay(G, S)) and we define Aut±1 (G, S) =
{α ∈ Aut(G) | sα ∈ {s, s−1 } for all s ∈ S}. It is easy to see that GR o Aut±1 (G, S) 6
Autc (Cay(G, S)), where GR is the right-regular representation of G and, in fact, the former
group is precisely the normaliser of GR in Autc (Cay(G, S)).
Definition 1.1 ([15]). The Cayley graph Cay(G, S) is CCA (Cayley colour automorphism)
if Autc (Cay(G, S)) = GR o Aut±1 (G, S). The group G is CCA if every connected Cayley
graph on G is CCA.
Thus, Cay(G, S) is CCA if and only if GR is normal in Autc (Cay(G, S)), c.f. [15, Remark
6.2]. Note that Cay(G, S) is connected if and only if S generates G.
Previous results on the CCA problem have focused on groups of odd order and, more
generally, on solvable groups (see [9] and [15] for example). In this paper, we will focus on
two ends of the spectrum of groups: non-abelian simple groups and 2-groups.
In Section 2, we introduce some basic terminology and previous results on the CCA
problem. In particular, Proposition 2.2 is a condition from [15] that is sufficient to guarantee that a group is non-CCA. This condition requires the group to contain elements of
order four. We also include various results that will allow us to apply this condition to
many of the groups we study in this paper.
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 05C25.
Key words and phrases. CCA problem, Cayley graphs, edge-colouring, 2-groups, finite simple groups.
This research was supported by the Australian Research Council grants DE130101001 and DE160100081,
by the Natural Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada, and by the Cheryl E. Praeger Visiting
Research Fellowship from The University of Western Australia.
1

In Section 3 we focus on 2-groups. We show that a lower bound on the number of groups
of order 2n that are non-CCA has the same leading term as the total number of groups of
order 2n . In Sections 4 and 5 we prove the following.
Theorem 1.2. A finite simple group is CCA if and only if it has no element of order four.
This theorem also holds for almost simple groups whose socle is either an alternating
group or a Suzuki group; the proof of this is also in Section 5.
The proof of Theorem 1.2 involves some case-by-case analysis of finite simple groups,
and relies on their classification.
2. Preliminaries
We begin by describing a sufficient criterion for a group to be non-CCA that appeared
in [15]. This criterion is surprisingly powerful, as will be made abundantly clear in Sections 3 and 5. We first need the following definition.
Definition 2.1. Let G be a group. A non-CCA triple of G is a triple (S, T, τ ) where S
and T are subsets of G and τ is an involution in G such that the following hold:
(Ai) G = hS ∪ T i;
(Aii) τ inverts or centralises every element of S;
(Aiii) t2 = τ for every t ∈ T ;
(Aiv) hS ∪ {τ }i =
6 G;
(Av) either τ is non-central in G or |G : hS ∪ {τ }i| > 2.
We may sometimes abuse notation and write (S, t, τ ) for the non-CCA triple (S, T, τ )
when T = {t}.
Proposition 2.2 ([15, Proposition 2.5]). If (S, T, τ ) is a non-CCA triple of G, then
Cay(G, S ∪ T ) is connected and non-CCA and thus G is non-CCA.
For G a group and τ an involution of G, we set
SG (τ ) = (CG (τ ) ∪ {yτ | y ∈ G and y 2 = 1}) − {1}.
Remark 2.3. The subgroup hSG (τ )i contains every involution of G, and thus contains the
normal subgroup of G generated by the set of involutions of G.
The following lemmas prove useful in allowing us to apply Proposition 2.2.
Lemma 2.4. If G is a group with an involution τ , then
SG (τ ) = {x ∈ G | xτ ∈ {x, x−1 }}.
Proof. By definition, xτ = x if and only if x ∈ CG (τ ). If u = yτ with y 2 = 1, then
uτ = τ yτ τ = τ y = τ −1 y −1 = (yτ )−1 = u−1 . In the other direction, if xτ = x−1 , then
(xτ )2 = 1 hence x = (xτ )τ ∈ SG (τ ), as required.

Remark 2.5. Lemma 2.4 shows that (Aii) of Definition 2.1 holds whenever we use some
SG (τ ) as the first entry of a putative non-CCA triple, with τ as the final entry. This fact
will be used repeatedly throughout Section 5, usually without explicit reference.
2

We now state two results on colour-preserving automorphisms of Cayley graphs.
Lemma 2.6 ([15, Lemma 6.3]). The vertex-stabiliser in the colour-preserving group of
automorphisms of a connected Cayley graph is a 2-group.
Lemma 2.7 ([17, Lemma 2.4]). Let Γ = Cay(G, S), let A be a colour-preserving group
of automorphisms of Γ, let N be a normal 2-subgroup of A and let K be the kernel of the
action of A on the N -orbits. If Kv 6= 1 for some v ∈ Γ, then S contains an element of
order four.
3. Many 2-groups are not CCA
Abelian CCA groups were determined in [15, Proposition 4.1]. From this classification, it
follows that, while the number of abelian CCA groups of order 2n increases with n, almost
all abelian 2-groups are non-CCA. We are not able to prove a result quite this strong for
all 2-groups but, using a slightly modified version of an argument of Higman, we get the
following.
2

3 +O(n2 )

Theorem 3.1. There are at least 2 27 n
that are non-CCA.

pairwise non-isomorphic groups of order 2n

Proof. We assume that n > 3, and follow the account by Sims [20, pg.151–152] of a result
of Higman [14, Theorem 2.1]. Let r and s be positive integers such that r + s = n. For
1 6 i 6 r and 1 6 j 6 s, let b(i, j) ∈ {0, 1}. For 1 6 i < j 6 r and 1 6 k 6 s, let
c(i, j, k) ∈ {0, 1}. The relations
h2i
[hi , hj ]
[gi , hj ]
gi2
[gi , gj ]

=
=
=
=
=

1,
1 6 i 6 s,
1,
1 6 i 6 j 6 s,
1,
1 6 i 6 r, 1 6 j 6 s,
b(i,1)
b(i,s)
h1
· · · hs ,
1 6 i 6 r,
c(i,j,s)
c(i,j,1)
· · · hs
,
1 6 i < j 6 r,
h1

on {g1 , . . . , gr , h1 , . . . , hs } define a group of order 2n . The number of ways of choosing the
r
3
2
b(i, j)s and the c(i, j, k)s is 2(2)s+rs which, if we take r = b2n/3c, is 22n /27+O(n ) . Moreover,
Higman showed that the number of choices of the b(i, j)s and the c(i, j, k)s which determine
2
isomorphic groups is 2O(n ) .
2
We now add the extra requirement that gr2 = gr−1
= h1 . This completely determines
b(r, j) and b(r − 1, j) for every j ∈ {1, . . . , s}. The number of ways of choosing the
r
3
2
parameters is now 2(2)s+(r−2)s which is again 22n /27+O(n ) for r = b2n/3c and, by Higman’s
3
2
result, we still get 22n /27+O(n ) pairwise non-isomorphic groups.
Let G = hg1 , . . . , gr , h1 , . . . , hs i be such a group. Let S = {g1 , . . . , gr−2 , h1 , . . . , hs }, let
τ = h1 and let T = {gr−1 , gr }. We show that (S, T, τ ) is a non-CCA triple and thus G
is not CCA by Proposition 2.2. Clearly, G = hS ∪ T i. Moreover, τ is central in G and
2
gr−1
= gr2 = τ . Finally, let X = hS ∪ {τ }i and let H = hh1 , . . . , hs i. Note that H 6 X
3

and that G/H is an elementary abelian 2-group of order 2r with {Hg1 , . . . , Hgr } forming
a basis. This implies that |G : X| = 4 and thus (S, T, τ ) is a non-CCA triple.

2

3

8/3

Remark 3.2. Note that, by [20], the number of groups of order 2n is 2 27 n +O(n ) . Still,
Theorem 3.1 falls short of proving that almost all 2-groups are non-CCA, although this
seems likely to be the case.
4. Simple groups with no element of order four
In this section, we show that simple groups with no element of order four are CCA. It
is easy to see that cyclic groups of prime order are CCA. (See [15, Proposition 4.1] or [18].
This can also be seen as a consequence of Burnside’s Theorem [8, Theorem 3.5A].) We
therefore restrict our attention to non-abelian simple groups with no element of order four.
Such groups were classified by Walter.
Theorem 4.1 ([22]). A non-abelian simple group has no element of order four if and only
if it is isomorphic to one of the following:
• PSL(2, 2e ), e > 2,
• PSL(2, q), q ≡ ±3 (mod 8), q > 5,
• a Ree group 2 G2 (32n+1 ), n > 1,
• the Janko group J1 .
We will need the following result concerning the dimensions of irreducible F2 -modules
for PSL(2, 2e ).
Lemma 4.2. Let G = PSL(2, 2e ) and let W be a non-trivial irreducible F2 G-module. Then
dimF2 (W ) > 2e.
Proof. Let K = F2 and set L = F2f where f is minimal such that W L := L ⊗K W is a sum
of absolutely irreducible LG-modules. Note that f divides e since F2e is a splitting field
for G. Using [1, (26.2)] and the notation from loc. cit. we have
a
M
L
W =
Vi
i=1

where each Vi is a Galois twist of V := V1 and a = |Γ : NΓ (V )| with Γ = Gal(L, K). Since
V cannot be written over a subfield of L, [1, (26.5)] implies that NΓ (V ) = 1 and so a = f .
We now use the Brauer-Nesbitt Theorem as formulated in [4, Section 5.3] and borrow the
notation established there. Since V is irreducible, [4, Theorem 5.3.2] states that V = M (n)
e
for some integer n with 0 6 n 6 2P
− 1. Further, since V is written over L, there are
i
φ
0 6 a0 , . . . , ae−1 6 1 such that n = e−1
i=0 ai 2 and we have V = M (a0 ) ⊗ M (a1 ) ⊗ · · · ⊗
e−1
M (ae−1 )φ and dimL (V ) = (a0 + 1)(a1 + 1) · · · (ae−1 + 1). Since V is non-trivial we have
n > 1, so there is some i such that ai = 1. Now since V is written over L, [4, Corollary
e
5.3.3] gives that ai = aj if i ≡ j mod f . Hence dimL (V ) > 2 f and we obtain
e
e
dimK (W ) = dimL (W L ) = dimL (V )f > 2 f f > 2 f = 2e.

f
4

For a group A, the largest normal 2-subgroup of A is denoted O2 (A).
Proposition 4.3. Let A be a group containing a non-abelian simple subgroup G. If |A : G|
is a power of 2, then either
(1) A/O2 (A) is almost simple with socle isomorphic to G, or
(2) G ∼
= Alt(2n − 1) and A/O2 (A) is isomorphic to Alt(2n ) or Sym(2n ), where n > 3.
Proof. Note that A/O2 (A) also satisfies the hypothesis hence we may assume that O2 (A) =
1. Let N be a minimal normal subgroup of A and let p be an odd prime that divides |N |.
Since |A : G| is a power of 2, G ∩ N 6= 1 and, since G is simple, G 6 N . Since distinct
minimal normal subgroups intersect trivially, this shows that N is the unique minimal
normal subgroup of A. It also follows that N is non-abelian hence N = T1 × · · · × Tk where
Ti ∼
= T for some non-abelian simple group T . Since T1 is a minimal normal subgroup of
N , and has order divisible by p, the same argument as above gives G 6 T1 . Since |A : G|
is a power of 2, it follows that |N : T1 | = |T |k−1 is a power of 2 hence k = 1, N is simple
and A is almost simple. If N = G, then (1) holds. Otherwise, G < N and [13, Theorem 1]
implies that N ∼

= Alt(2n ) and G ∼
= Alt(2n − 1) with n > 3.
Theorem 4.4. Non-abelian simple groups with no element of order four are CCA.
Proof. Let G be a non-abelian simple group without elements of order four, let Γ be a
connected Cayley graph on G and let A be the colour-preserving group of automorphisms
of Γ. Let N = O2 (A) and let K be the kernel of the action of A on the set of N -orbits.
Since G has no element of order four, Lemma 2.7 implies that for all v ∈ Γ we have Kv = 1
and hence K = N . By Lemma 2.6, |A : G| is a power of 2. Since G has no element of
order four, Proposition 4.3 implies that N G is normal in A. We claim that G centralises
N.
Suppose otherwise, and note therefore that G acts faithfully on N , and therefore on
N/Φ(N ) (where Φ(N ) denotes the Frattini subgroup of N ), and we may identify G with
a subgroup of Aut(N/Φ(N )) ∼
= GL(d, 2) for some d ∈ N. Let P be a Sylow 2-subgroup of
G. Since Kv = 1 for all v ∈ Γ, |N | is the size of an N -orbit hence |N | divides |Γ| = |G|
and thus |N | divides |P |. Note that P must be elementary abelian since G has no element
of order four, and G must appear in Theorem 4.1. Suppose that G is not isomorphic to
PSL(2, 2n ). Then |N | 6 |P | 6 8 and so d 6 3. However G is not a subgroup of GL(3, 2),
a contradiction. We may thus assume that G ∼
= PSL(2, 2n ) and |N | 6 |P | = 2n so d 6 n.
By Lemma 4.2, the smallest faithful representation for PSL(2, 2n ) over F2 is of dimension
2n, so d > 2n, a contradiction.
We have shown that G centralises N , hence N G = N × G and G is characteristic in N G
which is normal in A. It follows that G is normal in A and hence Γ is CCA. This concludes
the proof.

5. Simple groups with elements of order four
In this section we complete the proof of Theorem 1.2 by showing that simple groups with
elements of order four are non-CCA. We use the Classification of Finite Simple Groups and
simply consider each family of groups in turn (ignoring those that appear in Theorem 4.1).
5

5.1. Alternating groups. The idea of the proof for the alternating groups is used for
each simple group considered in the rest of this section. Let G = Alt(n). Since Alt(5) does
not have an element of order four, we may assume that n > 6. Let t = (1 2)(3 4 5 6), τ = t2
and H = G1 ∼
= Alt(n − 1). We claim that (SH (τ ), t, τ ) is a non-CCA triple of G. Since
H is maximal in G and t ∈
/ H, we have G = hSH (τ ), ti, so (Ai) holds. By Lemma 2.4,
(Aii) holds. By definition of τ , (Aiii) holds (where we take T = {t}). By definition,
SH (τ ) ⊆ H and τ ∈ SH (τ ), so hSH (τ )i 6 H and (Aiv) holds (in fact, Remark 2.3 shows
that hSH (τ )i = H). Finally, (Av) is clear as G has trivial centre. Hence, Proposition 2.2
shows that G is non-CCA.
Remark 5.1. One can also prove that Sym(n) is non-CCA for n > 5. In fact, the same
proof as above works for n > 6. For n = 5 we take t = (1 4 2 5), and τ = t2 and
H = Sym(5){4,5} ∼
= Sym(3). Then (SH (τ ), t, τ ) is a non-CCA triple of G.
By Theorem 4.4, Alt(5) is CCA. Moreover, Alt(n) is CCA for n 6 4, whereas Sym(4)
is not CCA, but Sym(3) and Sym(2) are CCA (see for example [15]). One can also check
that almost simple groups with socle Alt(6) are not CCA (using Magma [3], for example).
These results include every almost simple group whose socle is alternating. In each case,
a group is CCA if and only if it does not contain an element of order four.
5.2. Chevalley groups. We now turn to the Chevalley groups (also called untwisted
groups of Lie type). Most of the families can be dealt with in a uniform manner, but
to do this we require some setup. Our approach is to use the Chevalley presentation.
We refer (and recommend) the reader to [5] or [12] for a more detailed exposition. In
particular, all details in the following paragraphs are found in [12, Section 2.4]. First, we
recall the notation. Let G = Xn (q) be a Chevalley group where q = pf for a prime p,
X ∈ {A, B, C, D, E, F, G} and n is a positive integer, with n > 1 if X = A, n > 2 if X = B,
n > 3 if X = C, n > 4 if X = D, n ∈ {6, 7, 8} if X = E, n = 4 if X = F and n = 2 if
X = G. Associated to G is a root system Φ (a set of vectors in a vector space associated
to G) with fundamental system Π so that Φ = Φ+ ∪ Φ− with respect to Π (that is, each
vector in Φ can be written as either a positive or a negative linear combination of elements
of Π). For explicit models of the root systems see [12, Remark 1.8.8]. For each α ∈ Φ we
have homomorphisms xα : (Fq , +) → G and hα : (Fq − {0}, ×) → G. The root subgroups
of G are Xα = hxα (η) | η ∈ Fq i. Finally, there are elements nα ∈ G for each α ∈ Φ+ .
With this notation in hand, we set
U = hxα (η) | α ∈ Φ+ , η ∈ Fq i,
H = hhα (λ) | α ∈ Φ+ , λ ∈ Fq − {0}i = hhα (λ) | α ∈ Π, λ ∈ Fq − {0}i
N = hH, nα | α ∈ Φ+ i.
Then U is a Sylow p-subgroup of G, H normalises U and B = U H is the normaliser in
G of U . Further, H = B ∩ N is abelian and H is normal in N . The Weyl group of G
is W := N/H, with generators sα := Hnα such that α ∈ Π. The Weyl group of G acts
faithfully on the root system Φ, and we write sα (β) for the image of β ∈ Φ under the
Weyl group element sα . The Chevalley Relations [12, Theorem 2.4.8] give a presentation
for the group Xn (q) in terms of the elements of U , H and N as follows. For α, β ∈ Φ with
6

β 6= ±α, if α + β ∈
/ Φ, then [Xα , Xβ ] = 1 and if α + β ∈ Φ, then the Chevalley Commutator
Formula [12, Theorem 2.4.5] allows us to calculate [Xα , Xβ ]. The action of N on the root
subgroups is given by
xβ (η)nα = xsα (β) (±η) and xβ (η)hα (λ) = xβ (ηλAβα )
where the constants Aβα are found in the Cartan matrix of Φ, which we again do not dwell
upon. Finally, the action of N on H is given by hβ (λ)nα = hsα (β) (λ) and we mention that
(nα )2 = hα (−1) for all α ∈ Φ+ .
5.2.1. Xn ∈
/ {A1 , G2 }. We are now ready to deal with most Chevalley groups, except for
two families of low rank.
Since the rank of G (= |Π|) is at least two and since G is not of type G2 , we may pick
simple roots α, β ∈ Π such that with γ := sα (β) we have β + γ ∈
/ Φ. More precisely, if G
is not of type B2 , the simple roots corresponding to nodes 1 and 2 of the Dynkin diagram
of G (as labelled in [12, pg.12]) have this property. If G is of type B2 we set α to be the
short root, so that sα (β) = 2α + β. Set J = Π − {α} and let PJ = hB, nγ | γ ∈ Ji be
the maximal parabolic subgroup corresponding to J (PJ is a maximal subgroup of G by
[1, (43.7)]).
Suppose first that q is even. In this case, we have that {nγ | γ ∈ Π} is a set of involutions
in G and we let t = xβ (1)nα . Then
τ := t2 = xβ (1)xβ (1)nα = xβ (1)xsα (β) (1) = xβ (1)xγ (1).
Since β + γ ∈
/ Φ, xβ (1) and xγ (1) commute, and since q is even, we have τ 2 = 1. Note
that τ ∈ PJ since τ ∈ U , but t ∈
/ PJ since nα ∈
/ PJ . Let S := hSPJ (τ )i. We claim that PJ
is the unique maximal subgroup of G containing S. Indeed, suppose that M is a maximal
subgroup of G containing S. First note that since q is even the elements xδ (η) for η ∈ Fq
and δ ∈ Φ are involutions, thus since S contains each involution in PJ , S contains U . Hence
by [12, Theorem 2.6.7], M must be a parabolic subgroup containing B. Since S contains
all of the involutions nδ for δ ∈ J, we have Bnδ ⊂ M . Hence PJ = hB, nγ | γ ∈ Ji 6 M
which forces PJ = M since PJ is maximal. This proves the claim. Now it is easy to verify
that (SPJ (τ ), t, τ ) is a non-CCA triple of G.
Suppose now that q is odd. Set t = nα , so that (by [12, Remark 2.4.0(c)] and [12,
Theorem 1.12.1k]) we have τ := t2 = hα (−1) 6= 1 (note that when G is of type B2 , this is
due to our choice of α). Let S = hSPJ (τ )i. Let γ ∈ Π be arbitrary and let η ∈ Fq . We
have
(xγ (η))τ = xγ ((−1)Aγα η) = xγ (±η) = (xγ (η))±1 .
In particular, τ inverts or centralises each generator of U and so U 6 S. If nβ is an
involution in G (when G is of type B2 for example) then nβ ∈ S. If nβ has order four, then
7

(nβ )2 = hβ (−1) and (recalling that H is abelian)
(τ nβ )2 = hα (−1)n2β hα (−1)nβ
=
=
=
=

hα (−1)hβ (−1)hsβ (α) (−1)
hα (−1)hβ (−1)hα+β (−1)
(hα (−1)hβ (−1))2
1

where the second to last equality holds by [12, Theorem 2.4.7]. Hence τ nβ is an involution
in PJ , and so nβ ∈ S since τ ∈ S. Next, if γ ∈ Π with α 6= γ 6= β, then nγ commutes
with hα (−1) = τ , so that nγ ∈ S. Hence, arguing as above, if M is a maximal subgroup
of G containing S, then M = PJ . In particular, (SPJ (τ ), t, τ ) is a non-CCA triple of G, so
Proposition 2.2 completes the proof in this case.
We now turn to the excluded families.
5.2.2. Xn = A1 . We now assume that G = A1 (q) ∼
= PSL(2, q). In view of Theorem 4.1,
we can assume that q ≡ 1, 7 (mod 8) and, taking into account exceptional isomorphisms,
that q ∈
/ {7, 9}. In this case, G has one conjugacy classes of involutions, so each involution
in G is a square. Further, G has maximal subgroups M1 and M2 isomorphic to Dq+1 and
Dq−1 . Depending on q, we may pick i ∈ {1, 2} and an involution τ in Mi such that τ is
a non-square in Mi and Mi = hSMi (τ )i. Since τ is a square in G, but not in Mi , there is
t ∈ G such that t2 = τ and t ∈
/ Mi . Hence (SMi (τ ), t, τ ) is a non-CCA triple of G, and
Proposition 2.2 completes the proof in this case.
5.2.3. Xn = G2 . Finally, we assume that G = G2 (q). We may assume that q > 3. If
q is odd, then G has a unique conjugacy class of involutions [6, Theorem (4.4)], so each
involution in G is a square. If q is even, then G has two conjugacy classes of involutions [10,
Proposition 2.6] and one of the classes consists of squares – using notation of loc. cit. the
involution x3 is the square of x5 , for example. We consult [23, Table 4.1] for the maximal
subgroups of G. If q is odd, let M be a maximal subgroup with M ∼
= SL(3, q) : 2 and let τ
be an involution in M that does not lie in the SL(3, q) subgroup. If q is even, let M be a
maximal subgroup with M ∼
= PSL(2, q) × PSL(2, q) and let τ be an involution in M which
is a conjugate of x3 (the first paragraph of [23, Section 4.3.6] shows that M contains such
an involution). If q is even, the structure of M shows that τ is not a square in M and, if
q is even, then the Sylow 2-subgroups of M are elementary abelian, so τ is not a square
in M . Thus, in either case, there is t ∈ G such that t2 = τ . Now t ∈
/ M so hM, ti = G.
In both cases, we have hSM (τ )i = M . Thus (SM (τ ), t, τ ) is a non-CCA triple of G, so
Proposition 2.2 completes the proof in this case.
5.3. Twisted groups of Lie type. Next, we deal with the so-called twisted (or “Steinberg”) groups. These groups arise as fixed points of the so-called graph-field automorphisms
of the Chevalley groups, which exist whenever the associated Dynkin diagrams admit a
graph automorphism (of order d if the group is d Xn (q)).
8

We start with the case d = 2 that is, groups of the form 2 An (q) ∼
= PSU(n + 1, q),
2
−
2
∼
Dn (q) = PΩ (2n, q) (n > 4) and E6 (q). Below we have shown the Dynkin diagrams in
such a way that the orbits of the graph automorphism are clear.
1

m−1

m

2

1

2m
1

m−2

2

Dm

A2m

2m − 1
2

m+1

A2m+1

2m + 1 2m

m

m

1

m+1

m+2

2

E6

3

5

6

4

A twisted group 2 Xn (q) admits a twisted root system. These root systems are in fact
equivalence classes of the images of roots from the corresponding untwisted group Xn (q),
see [12, Definition 2.3.1]. The graph automorphism of the Dynkin diagram extends to an
isometry ρ of the vector space associated to the untwisted group Xn (q), and thus acts on
the root system Φ. The average of the roots in the orbit of α ∈ Φ is denoted α̃, and the
set of these averages is denoted Φ̃. We say two vectors of Φ̃ are equivalent if one is a
positive multiple of the other. The equivalence class of α̃ is denoted by α̂. Thus there are
maps Φ → Φ̃ → Φ̂, and the set Φ̃ is the twisted root system of the twisted group 2 Xn (q)
(it may not be an actual root system). In the cases under consideration, Σ̃ = Σ̂, except
for 2 A2m (q). The twisted group is generated by the root subgroups hxα̂ (η) | η ∈ Fq i for
α̂ ∈ Φ̂. The definition of xα̂ depends upon the orbit of α under ρ, and is found in [12, Table
2.4]. Three possibilities arise for us, the orbit is a single vertex, two disconnected vertices
or two vertices joined by an edge. The definition of xα̂ is then found in Row I, II or IV
respectively of [12, Table 2.4]. (For example, in the case of 2 D4 (q), we have α3 and α4 are
in the same orbit, and xαˆ3 (η) = xα3 (η)xα4 (η q ), see Row II of [12, Table 2.4].) There is an
analogous definition of hα̂ for α̂ ∈ Φ̂, found in [12, Table 2.4.7]. For the precise definition of
nα̂ we actually consult the proof of [12, Theorem 2.4.8] (see also [12, Remark 2.4.9(b)]) and
conclude that either α is fixed by the isometry ρ and we can take nα̂ = nα or the orbit of α
has length two. In even characteristic, nα̂ always has order two and in odd characteristic
nα̂ has order four if α̂ is of type II, and has order two if α̂ is of type IV. More specifically,
when α̂ is of type II, we have nα̂ = hnα nαρ for some h ∈ T1 (see loc. cit.), where h = 1
in even characteristic. If α̂ is of type IV, we have nα̂ = hnα nαρ nα = hnαρ nα nαρ for some
h ∈ T1 (see loc. cit.), where again h = 1 if the characteristic is even. We calculate that, if
nα̂ has order four, then (in all cases) n2α̂ = hα̂ (−1).
5.3.1. 2 Dn (q) for n > 4 and 2 E6 (q). Let G = 2 Xn (q), where X ∈ {D, E}. The idea
of the proof is analogous to the untwisted case, but the setup requires a little more care
because of the twist. First, we select two simple roots α, β ∈ Π that are fixed by the
isometry ρ. In detail: if X = D pick α = α1 , β = α2 and if X = E pick α = α4 and
9

β = α3 . The proof can now proceed exactly as for the untwisted groups. We provide some
details to show how the various steps may be adjusted. Let δ ∈ {α, β}. Since δ is fixed
by the isometry ρ, any calculations involving nδ̂ = nδ and hδ̂ (η) = hδ (η) are the same as
for the untwisted groups. Further, the calculations regarding sα (β) and β are the same as
for the untwisted group. Finally, since all of the root subgroups are either of type I or II,
the assertions concerning the structure of the Sylow p-subgroups (that it is generated by
involutions when q is even and that the generators are either inverted or centralised when
q is odd) are the same as for the untwisted groups.
5.3.2. 2 An (q) for n > 3. Let n > 3 and let G = 2 An (q) ∼
= PSU(n + 1, q). For the
unitary groups in odd dimension, the root subgroups can be of type IV and so, in even
characteristic, are not necessarily generated by involutions. For this reason, we use a
different approach. We first claim that there is a maximal parabolic subgroup P stabilising
a totally isotropic 1-space or 2-space and an element t ∈ G − P of order four such that
τ := t2 ∈ P .
Suppose first that q is odd. Since n > 3, the claim holds with t = nα̂1 , τ = t2 = hα̂1 (−1)
and P the stabiliser of a totally isotropic 1-space corresponding to the first node of the
Dynkin diagram for An (q).
Suppose now that q is even and assume first that n > 4. Set w = nα̂2 , x = xα̂1 (1) and
put t = xw. Since q is even, nα̂2 is an involution and, since n > 3, the twisted root α̂1 is of
type II, so that both x and w are involutions. We set τ := t2 = xxw . To calculate τ , there
are three cases depending on the type of αˆ2 . Since we assume n > 4, αˆ2 is of type II or IV.
If αˆ2 is of type II then necessarily n > 5 and w = nα2 nαn−1 . Then
xxw = xα1 (1)xαn (1)(xα1 (1))nα2 (xαn (1))nαn−1
= xα1 +α2 (1)xα2 (1)xαn (1)xαn +αn−1 (1).
Note that since n > 5, each of the elements in the expression for xxw above commute, and
so τ 2 = 1 since q is even. Hence the claim holds with P the stabiliser of a totally isotropic
2-space.
Suppose that αˆ2 is of type IV, so that n = 4, x = x1 (1)x4 (1) and nαˆ2 = nα2 nα3 nα2 =
nα3 nα2 nα3 . Then
xxw = xα1 (1)xα4 (1)(xα1 (1))nα2 nα3 (xα4 (1))nα2 nα3
= xα1 (1)xα4 (1)xα1 +α2 +α3 (1)xα2 +α3 +α4 (1).
Using the Chevalley Commutator Formula, we calculate that τ 2 = 1. (Note that there are
exactly two pairs of non-commuting elements in the expression for τ , so when calculating
the square, we introduce twice the element xα1 +α2 +α3 +α4 (1) which is the commutator of
both xα1 (1) and xα2 +α3 +α4 (1) and of xα4 (1) and xα1 +α2 +α3 (1).) Hence the claim holds with
P the stabiliser of a totally isotropic 2-space in the 5-dimensional vector space on which
SU(5, q) acts.
Now assume that n = 3 and set w = nαˆ1 , x = xαˆ2 (1) = xα2 (1) and t = xw. Since
q is even, w is an involution, so τ := t2 = xxw . Since w = nα1 nα3 , we calculate that
10

τ = xα2 (1)xα1 +α2 +α3 (1). Hence τ 2 = 1 and the claim holds with P the stabiliser of a
totally isotropic 1-space in the 4-dimensional vector space on which SU(4, q) acts.
Set S = hSP (τ )i and let X be the normal subgroup of P generated by the involutions in
P , so that X 6 S. We claim that P is the unique maximal subgroup of G containing P .
The proof of this claim depends on the structure of P , for which we refer to [23, Theorem
3.9(ii)] (noting that n − k should read n − 2k). Let P = QL be the Levi decomposition of
P.
Let M be a normal quasisimple subgroup of L, so that M/Z(M ) is non-abelian simple.
We claim that M 6 S. Since M is quasisimple, either X ∩M 6 Z(M ) or X ∩M = M 6 S.
If the former holds, then [X, M, M ] = 1 = [M, X, M ] and so the Three Subgroups Lemma
gives 1 = [M, M, X] = [M, X], where the last equality holds since M is perfect. Since
τ ∈ X, this yields M 6 CP (τ ) and so M 6 S. Let E be the product of the normal
quasisimple subgroups of L, so that E 6 S.
Assume that (n, q) ∈
/ {(3, 2), (3, 3), (5, 2), (6, 2)}. Then QE contains a Sylow p-subgroup
of G. Note that Q = [Q, E] 6 [Q, X] 6 X. Hence QE 6 S and so S contains a
Sylow p-subgroup of G. By [12, Theorem 2.6.7] the only maximal subgroup containing
S must therefore be a parabolic subgroup, that is, a stabiliser of some totally isotropic
subspace. Since QE fixes a unique totally isotropic subspace, the only maximal subgroup
of G containing S is P , as claimed.
For (n, q) ∈ {(3, 2), (3, 3), (5, 2), (6, 2)}, one can verify the claim directly (say, with
Magma [3]).
From the claim, it follows (SP (τ ), t, τ ) is a non-CCA triple of G, and so G is non-CCA
by Proposition 2.2.
5.3.3. 2 A2 (q). Let G = 2 A2 (q) ∼
= PSU(3, q) for q a prime power. Let M 6 SU(3, q) be the
stabiliser of a non-degenerate direct sum decomposition of the natural vector space that
SU(3, q) acts on. Then M ∼
= (Cq+1 )2 o Sym(3) and M is maximal in SU(3, q) by [4]. Since
Z(SU(3, q)) ∼
= C(3,q+1) is contained in M , we have H := M/Z(SU(3, q)) is maximal in G.
Pick τ to be an involution in a subgroup of H conjugate to Sym(3). Then τ is a non-square
in H. Since G has elements of order four, and one conjugacy class of involutions (see [12,
Table 4.5.1] for q odd and [2, (6.1)] for q even) there is t ∈ G − H such that t2 = τ .
Let X := hSH (τ )i. We claim that H = X. Note that X is a normal subgroup of H
containing our chosen Sym(3) subgroup. Write q + 1 = pa11 . . . par r . Then, for pi 6= 3, we
have Ti = Opi (H) and Sym(3) acts irreducibly on Ti ∼
= (Cpai i )2 . This forces Ti 6 X. For
pi = 3, Ti ∼
= C3ai ◦3 C3ai (where the symbol ◦3 means that a subgroup of order three has
been identified). It follows that there are generators x and y for Ti such that xτ = x and
y τ = y −1 . Thus y = zτ for some involution z and so Ti 6 X.
The previous two paragraphs show that (SM (τ ), t, τ ) is a non-CCA triple of G hence, by
Proposition 2.2, G is non-CCA.
5.3.4. 3 D4 (q). Let G = 3 D4 (q) for q a prime power. When q is odd, G has a unique
conjugacy class of involutions by [16, Lemma 2.3(i)], so each involution is a square in G.
When q is even, G has two conjugacy classes of involutions [21, (8.1)]. Representatives are
11

x6 (1) and x4 (1) (using the notation of [21]). Using [21, (2.1)], we calculate that x6 (1) =
(x2 (1)x5 (1))2 . For α ∈ Fq3 − Fq , we find that the square of x1 (α)x3 (1) is conjugate to x4 (1)
by [21, (3.1)]. Hence, for all q, every involution in G is a square. Now, by [23, Theorem
4.3], there is a maximal subgroup M of the form 2 · (PSL(2, q 3 ) × PSL(2, q)) : 2 for q odd
and, for q even, there is a maximal subgroup M of the form PSL2 (q 3 ) × PSL2 (q). For q
odd, we let τ be an involution in M outside the derived subgroup and, for q even, we let
τ be an involution in M . In both cases, we have that τ is a square in G, but not in M ,
so there is t ∈ G such that t2 = τ . This case can now be finished by arguing as in the
previous one.

5.4. Suzuki-Ree groups.

5.4.1. 2 F4 (q). Let G be either a large Ree group 2 F4 (q), where q = 2e > 4 with e odd,
or the Tits group 2 F4 (2)0 . We note that G has two conjugacy classes of involutions by [2,
(18.2)]. Consulting [19] and using notation of loc. cit., we find representatives x12 (1) and
x10 (1). We find x12 (1) = x5 (1)2 and (x4 (1)x2 (1))2 = x7 (1)x8 (1)x11 (1)x12 (1). The latter
element is conjugate to x7 (1) by [19, Section 2] and x7 (1) is conjugate to x10 (1) by [19,
Lemma 10]. Thus all involutions in G are squares. By [23, Theorem 4.5] there is a maximal
subgroup M ∼
= Sp(4, q) : 2. Let τ be an involution in M that does not lie in the Sp(4, q)
subgroup. Then M = hSM (τ )i since M is almost simple (even for q = 2). There is t ∈ G
such that t2 = τ and t ∈
/ M since the structure of M shows that τ is not a square in M .
Then (SM (τ ), t, τ ) is a non-CCA triple of G, and Proposition 2.2 completes the proof.

5.4.2. 2 B2 (q). Let q = 2e > 8 with e odd. We will prove something slightly stronger
than required, namely that, if G is an almost simple group with socle 2 B2 (q), then G is
non-CCA. By [4, Theorem 7.3.5] and [4, Table 8.16], the normaliser in G of a maximal
subgroup M ∼
= Dq−1 of soc(G) is maximal in G. Now NG (M ) ∼
= Cq−1 o (C2 × Cf ) for some
divisor f of e. Since q is even, we may pick involutions x and τ and an element c ∈ G of
order f that commutes with τ such that NG (M ) = hτ x, τ, ci. Since all involutions in G are
squares (see the description of a Sylow 2-subgroup of G in [4, Table 8.16]), there is t ∈ G
such that t2 = τ . Now ({τ x, τ, c}, {t}, τ ) is a non-CCA triple, so Proposition 2.2 completes
the proof.

5.5. Sporadic groups. To finish the proof of Theorem 1.2, only the sporadic groups
remain to be addressed. In view of Theorem 4.1, we can ignore the Janko group J1 . Let
(G, H) be one of the pairs from the table below. That H is a maximal subgroup of G and
other facts regarding properties of G used below can be found in [7] or [24].
12

G
H
G
H
M11
PSL(2, 11)
Co1
Co2
M22
PSL(2, 11)
HN
Alt(12)
M23
M11
ON
Alt(7)
M24
PSL(2, 7)
J4
PSU(3, 3)
J3
PSL(2, 19)
Ly
37 : 18
McL
M11
Th PSL(3, 3)
He 71+2 : (3 × Sym(3))
Fi024
29 : 14
Suz
Alt(7)
M PSL(2, 59)
Co2
M23
For X = H or X = G and τ an involution of X we define
√
2
X τ = {t ∈ X | t = τ }
and we have that

√
|X τ | =

X

G
M12
J2
HS
Ru
Co3
Fi22
Fi23
B

H
M11
PSU(3, 3)
M11
Alt(8)
M23
M12
PSL(2, 23)
M11

s(χ)χ(τ )

χ∈Irr(X)

where s(χ) is the Frobenius-Schur indicator of χ. For both G and H, the character tables
are either stored
in Gap [11] or can be computed easily. We used Gap to compute the
√
values of |X τ | for each conjugacy class of involutions in both G and H. For G in the
left or middle table above we let
√ τ be an involution of H. For G in the right
√ table,√let
τ ∈ H be an involution with |H τ | =
6 0. Our calculations then show that |G τ | =
6 |H τ |
2
for the pair (G, H). Hence there is t ∈ G − H such that t = τ . Since hSH (τ )i contains
both CH (τ ) and the normal subgroup of H generated by the involutions of H, we have
hSH (τ )i = H. Then it is easy to check that (SH (τ ), {t}, τ ) is a non-CCA triple of G, and
Proposition 2.2 completes the proof.
Acknowledgements. We would like to thank Michael Giudici for his helpful comments
on an early version of this manuscript.
References
[1] M. Aschbacher, Finite group theory, Second edition in Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics
10 Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2000.
[2] M. Aschbacher and G. M. Seitz, Involutions in Chevalley Groups Over Fields of Even Order, Nagoya
Math. J. 63 (1976), 1–91.
[3] W. Bosma, J. Cannon and C. Playoust, The Magma algebra system. I: The user language, J. Symbolic
Comput. 24 (1997), 235–265.
[4] J. N. Bray, D. F. Holt and C. M. Roney-Dougal, The Maximal Subgroups of the Low-Dimensional
Finite Classical Groups, London Math. Soc. Lecture Note Ser. 407, Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, 2013.
[5] R. W. Carter, Simple groups of Lie type, Pure and Applied Mathematics, Vol. 28. John Wiley & Sons,
London-New York-Sydney, 1972.
[6] B. Chang, The conjugate classes of Chevalley groups of type (G2), J. Algebra 9 (1968), 190–211.
[7] J. Conway, R. T. Curtis, S. Norton, R. Parker, and R. Wilson, Atlas of finite groups, Clarendon Press,
Oxford, 1985.
13

[8] J. D. Dixon and B. Mortimer, Permutation groups, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol. 163, SpringerVerlag, New York, 1996.
[9] E. Dobson, A. Hujdurović, K. Kutnar and J. Morris, On color-preserving automorphisms of Cayley
graphs of odd square-free order, J. Algebraic. Combin. 44 (2016), 407–422.
[10] H. Enomoto, The conjugacy classes of Chevalley groups of type (G2) over finite fields of characteristic
2 or 3, J. Fac. Sci. Univ. Tokyo Sect. I 16 1969 497–512 (1970).
[11] The Gap Group, Gap–Groups, Algorithms, and Programming, 2015, http://www.gap-system.org.
[12] D. Gorenstein, R. Lyons and R. Solomon, The classification of the finite simple groups. Number 3.
Part I. Chapter A. Almost simple K-groups. Mathematical Surveys and Monographs, 40.3. American
Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1998.
[13] R. M. Guralnick, Subgroups of prime power index in a simple group, J. Algebra 81 (1983), 304–311.
[14] G. Higman, Enumerating p-groups. I: Inequalities, Proc. London Math. Soc. 10 (1960), 24–30.
[15] A. Hujdurović, K. Kutnar, D. W. Morris, J. Morris, On colour-preserving automorphisms of Cayley
graphs, Ars Math. Contemporanea 11 (2016), 189–213.
[16] P. B. Kleidman, The maximal subgroups of the Steinberg Triality groups 3 D4 (q) and of their automorphism groups, J. Algebra 115 (1988), 182–199.
[17] L. Morgan, J. Morris and G. Verret, Characterising CCA Sylow cyclic groups whose order is not
divisible by four, arXiv:1702.06651.
[18] J. Morris, Automorphisms of circulants that respect partitions, Contributions to Discrete Mathematics, 11 (2016), 1–6.
[19] D. Parrott, A Characterization of the Ree Groups 2 F4 (q), J. Algebra 27 (1973), 341–357.
[20] C. Sims, Enumerating p-groups, Proc. London Math. Soc. 15 (1965), 151–166.
[21] G. Thomas, A characterization of the Steinberg groups D42 (q 3 ), q = 2n , J. Algebra 14 (1970), 373–385.
[22] J. H. Walter, The characterization of finite groups with abelian Sylow 2-subgroups, Ann. of Math. 89
(1969), 405–514.
[23] R. A. Wilson, The finite simple groups, Graduate Texts in Mathematics volume 251, Springer-Verlag,
London, 2009.
[24] R. A. Wilson, ATLAS of Finite Group Representations, http://brauer.maths.qmul.ac.uk/Atlas/v3/
Luke Morgan and Gabriel Verret∗ , Centre for the Mathematics of Symmetry and Computation, School of Mathematics and Statistics (M019), The University of Western Australia, Crawley, 6009, Australia
E-mail address: luke.morgan@uwa.edu.au
Joy Morris, Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Lethbridge, Lethbridge, AB T1K 3M4, Canada
E-mail address: joy.morris@uleth.ca
∗ Current address: Department of Mathematics, The University of Auckland, Private
Bag 92019, Auckland 1142, New Zealand.
E-mail address: g.verret@auckland.ac.nz

14

