arXiv:1605.01795v2 [math.GR] 15 Sep 2016

FROM LOCAL TO GLOBAL CONJUGACY OF SUBGROUPS
OF RELATIVELY HYPERBOLIC GROUPS
OLEG BOGOPOLSKI AND KAI-UWE BUX
Abstract. Suppose that a finitely generated group G is hyperbolic relative to
a collection of subgroups P = {P1 , . . . , Pm }. Let H1 , H2 be subgroups of G such
that H1 is relatively quasiconvex with respect to P and H2 is not parabolic.
Suppose that H2 is elementwise conjugate into H1 . Then there exists a finite
index subgroup of H2 which is conjugate into H1 . The minimal length of the
conjugator can be estimated.
In the case where G is a limit group, it is sufficient to assume only that H1 is
a finitely generated and H2 is an arbitrary subgroup of G.

1. Introduction
Serre [15, Corollary 3, page 65] famously observed that a finitely generated group
acting on a tree has a global fixed point provided each of its elements fixes a point.
If the tree corresponds to an HNN-extension G = hB, ti, it follows that a finitely
generated subgroup H of G conjugates into B if each of its elements conjugates into
B. If the tree corresponds to a free product G = A ∗ B, the situation is similar:
if each element of H conjugates into B, then the whole subgroup conjugates into
B. With amalgamation, however, the sutiation is not as clear cut: if each element
of a finitely generated subgroup H conjugates into B, the whole group conjugates
into B or into A. In some situations, one is able to use additional information to
conclude that H is conjugate into B. This happened to the authors in the proof
of [3, Theorem 7.4], which in turn is a central step in the argument of that paper
that surface groups are subgroup conjugacy seperable (SCS). Trying to generalize,
it is therefore natural to search for sufficient conditions that imply conjugacy of
a subgroup into a target given that all elements conjugate into the target. Serre’s
observation also hints at the importance of negative curvature for this phenomenon.
In [4], we made the first step in this direction. At the heart of the argument there
lies the following:
Theorem A of [4]. Let G be a hyperbolic group, let H1 be a quasiconvex subgroup
of G and let H2 be an arbitrary subgroup of G. Suppose that H2 is elementwise
1991 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 20F65, 20F67. Secondary 20E45.
† This research was partially supported by SFB 701, “Spectral Structures and Topological
Methods in Mathematics”, at Bielefeld University.
1

2

OLEG BOGOPOLSKI AND KAI-UWE BUX

conjugate into H1 . Then there exists a finite index subgroup of H2 which is conjugate
into H1 .
We recently learned that Theorem A was already contained in [11, Theorem 1].
We used Theorem A to extend subgroup conjugacy separability to a class of groups
including surface groups (see [4]). Meanwhile, Chagas and Zalesskii [6] had generalized our result about surface groups in a different direction showing that limit
groups are subgroup conjugacy separable. They use different methods.
Here, we extend Theorem A to relatively hyperbolic groups. From a geometric
point of view, a finitely generated group is hyperbolic if it acts properly discontinously and cocompactly by isometries on a hyperbolic space. In particular, point
stabilizers of the action are finite. If we have an action with infinite point stabilizers, non-negative curvature might be hidden there. We would like to regard a group
acting cocompactly on a hyperbolic space still as hyperbolic modulo the pieces of
the group acting trivially. The notion of a group hyperbolic relative to a collection
of subgroups (think of a set of representatives for point stabilizers) is one way to
make this intuition precise. We recall a definition suitable for out needs and some
further results in Section 2.
Our main result is:
Theorem 3.1. Suppose that a finitely generated group G is hyperbolic relative to
a collection of subgroups P = {P1 , . . . , Pm }. Let H1 , H2 be subgroups of G such
that H1 is relatively quasiconvex with respect to P and H2 is elementwise conjugate
into H1 . Then one of the following holds:
(1) The subgroup H2 is parabolic, i.e., conjugate into some element of P.
(2) Some finite index subgroup of H2 is conjugate into H1 .
If H2 is infinite and nonparabolic, then the length of the conjugator with respect to
a finite generating system X of G can be bounded in terms of |X|, the quasiconvexity
constant of H1 , and the minimal X-length of loxodromic elements of H2 .
If all peripheral subgroups are virtually abelian, then the second option always
occurs:
Corollary 4.5. Suppose that a finitely generated group G is hyperbolic relative to a
collection of virtually abelian subgroups P = {P1 , . . . , Pm }. Let H1 , H2 be subgroups
of G such that H1 is relatively quasiconvex with respect to P and H2 is elementwise
conjugate into H1 . Then some finite index subgroup of H2 is conjugate into H1 .
Moreover, the following holds:
(a) If H2 is infinite and nonparabolic, then the length of the conjugator with
respect to a finite generating system X of G can be bounded in terms of |X|,
the quasiconvexity constant of H1 , and the minimal X-length of loxodromic
elements of H2 .
(b) If H2 is infinite and parabolic, then a conjugator may be chosen whose Xlength is bounded a priory in terms of H1 and the minimal X-length of
elements of infinite order in H2 .

FROM LOCAL TO GLOBAL CONJUGACY

3

(c) If H2 is finite then the finite index subgroup and the conjugator can be taken
to be trivial.
Remark 1.1. In Theorem 3.1, passage to a finite index subgroup of H2 cannot be
avoided even in case that G is a free group. Indeed, let A4 be the alternating group
of degree 4, K the Klein subgroup of A4 , and Z2 a subgroup of K of order 2. Let G
be the free group of rank 2 and ϕ : G → A4 an epimorphism. We set H1 = ϕ−1 (Z2 )
and H2 = ϕ−1 (K). Then H2 is locally, but not globally conjugate into H2 .
For a subset M of a relatively hyperbolic group G, let M 0 denote the subset of
all loxodromic elements of M .
Limit groups are hyperbolic relative to a collection of representatives of conjugacy classes of maximal noncyclic abelian subgroups [8, Theorem 4.5], see also [1,
Corollary 3.5]. This allows us to apply the main result in this case. In this situation,
we also prove that the index depends only on H1 :
Corollary 5.2. Let G be a limit group and let H1 and H2 be subgroups of G, where
H1 is finitely generated. Suppose that H2 is elementwise conjugate into H1 . Then
there exists a finite index subgroup of H2 which is conjugate into H1 .
The index depends only on H1 . The length of the conjugator with respect to a
fixed generating system X of G depends only on H1 and m, where


if H20 6= ∅.
 min0 distX (1, g)
g∈H2
m=

 min distX (1, g) otherwise.
g∈H2 \{1}

As already mentioned, our main result generalizes Theorem A of [4]. Analogously
to [4], our main result enables us to prove that a large class of relatively hyperbolic
groups are quasiconvex-SCS and quasiconvex-SICS. In particular, we obtain a new
proof that limit groups are SCS. We will explain this in a forthcoming paper.
2. Relatively hyperbolic groups
The following discussion is based on [13, Chapter 2]. We shall choose among the
many equivalent characterizations of relatively hyperbolic groups a definition that
is well suited to our needs. The first paragraphs are taken almost verbatim from
[13, Chapter 2], but notation is slightly changed to suit our current needs.
Let G be a group, {Pλ }λ∈Λ a collection of subgroups of G, X a subset of G.
We say that X is a relativegenerating set of G with respect to {Pλ }λ∈Λ if G is
generated by the set ∪ Pλ ∪ X. (We always assume that X is symmetrized, i.e.
λ∈Λ

X −1 = X.) In this situation the group G can be regarded as the quotient group of
the free product

(2.1)
F = ∗ Pλ ∗ F (X),
λ∈Λ

where F (X) is the free group with the basis X. If the kernel of the natural homomorphism F → G coincides with the normal closure of a subset R ⊆ F , we say that

4

OLEG BOGOPOLSKI AND KAI-UWE BUX

G has relative presentation
hX, {Pλ }λ∈Λ | R = 1 (R ∈ R)i.

(2.2)

If X and R are finite, this relative presentation is called finite and the group G is
called finitely presented with respect to {Pλ }λ∈Λ .
Theorem 2.1. ([13, Theorem 1.1]) Let G be a finitely generated group, P = {P }λ∈Λ
a collection of subgroups of G. Suppose that G is finitely presented with respect to P.
Then Λ is finite and each subgroup Pλ is finitely generated.
Suppose that (2.2) is a finite relative presentation. Let P = ⊔ (Pλ \ {1}).Given
λ∈Λ

a word W in the alphabet X ∪ P such that W represents 1 in G, there exists an
expression
k
Y
fi−1 Ri fi
(2.3)
W =
F

i=1

with the equality in the group F , where Ri ∈ R ∪ R−1 and fi ∈ F for any i. The
smallest possible number k in a representation of type (2.3) is denoted Arearel (W ).
A function f : N → N is called a relative isoperimetric function of (2.2) if for
any n ∈ N and for any word W over X ∪ P of length |W | 6 n representing the
trivial element of the group G, we have Arearel (W ) 6 f (n). The smallest relative
isoperimetric function of (2.2) is called the relative Dehn function of G with respect
rel
to {Pλ }λ∈Λ and is denoted by δG,{P
(or simply by δrel when the group G and
λ ,λ∈Λ}
the collection of subgroups are fixed).
There are simple examples showing that δrel is not always well-defined, i.e. it
can be infinite for certain values of the argument. However if δrel is well-defined, it
is independent of the choice of the finite relative presentation up to the following
equivalence relation. Two functions f, g : N → N are called equivalent if there are
positive constants A, B, C such that f (n) 6 Ag(Bn)+Cn and g(n) ≤ Af (Bn)+Cn.
Definition 2.2. [13, Definition 2.35 and Corollary 2.54] We call a group G hyperbolic relative to a collection of subgroups P = {Pλ }λ∈Λ if G is finitely presented with
respect to P, the corresponding Dehn function is well-defined, and the Cayley graph
Γ(G, X ∪ P) is a hyperbolic metric space. We call P a peripheral structure for G.
A subgroup H 6 G is called parabolic if it is conjugate into some Pλ ∈ P.
In particular, a group is hyperbolic (in the ordinary non-relative sense) if and
only if it is hyperbolic relative to the trivial subgroup.
Here we meet the main difficulty: The space Γ(G, X ∪ P) is hyperbolic, but is
not locally finite if P is infinite. Suppose that X generates G. Then there are two
distance functions on Γ(G, X ∪ P), namely distX∪P and distX . For brevity, we
denote |AB| := distX∪P (A, B). Clearly, |AB| 6 distX (A, B).
For reference, we collect a few statements from [2, 9, 13, 14] that will allow us
to deal with the relatively hyperbolic case. From now on and to the end of this
section, we will assume the following.

FROM LOCAL TO GLOBAL CONJUGACY

5

Assumption. The group G is generated by a finite set X and is hyperbolic relative
to a collection of subgroups P = {Pλ }λ∈Λ .
Theorem 2.3. ([13, Theorem 3.26]) There exists a constant ν > 0 having the
following property. Let ∆ = pqr be a triangle whose sides p, q, r are geodesics in
Γ(G, X ∪ P). Then for any vertex v on p, there exists a vertex u on the union q ∪ r
such that
distX (u, v) < ν.
Recall that an element g ∈ G is called parabolic if it is conjugate to an element of
one of the subgroups Pλ , λ ∈ Λ. An element is called hyperbolic if it is not parabolic.
An element is called loxodromic if it is hyperbolic and has infinite order.
Lemma 2.4. ([13, Corollary 4.20]) For any loxodromic element g ∈ G, there exist
λ > 0, σ > 0 such that
distX∪P (1, g n ) > λ|n| − σ
for any n ∈ Z.
Lemma 2.5. ([13, Corollary 4.21]) Let g be a loxodromic element in G. If x−1 gn x =
gm for some x ∈ G and n, m ∈ Z, then n = ±m.
Recall that a subgroup of a group is called elementary if it contains a cyclic
subgroup of finite index.
Theorem 2.6. ([14, Theorem 4.3]) Every loxodromic element g ∈ G is contained
in a unique maximal elementary subgroup, namely in
EG (g) = {f ∈ G | f −1 gn f = g±n for some n = 1, 2, 3, . . .}.
Lemma 2.7. ([2, Lemma 3.5]) Let G be a group hyperbolic relative to the collection
of subgroups {Pλ }λ∈Λ . For any λ ∈ Λ and a ∈ G \ Pλ , there exists a finite subset
F = Fλ (a) ⊆ Pλ such that if x ∈ Pλ \ F, then ax is loxodromic.
Lemma 2.8. ([9, Lemma 2.13]) Let H be a subgroup of a relatively hyperbolic group
G. If H is infinite and torsion, then H is parabolic.
Lemma 2.9. Let H be a subgroup of a relatively hyperbolic group G. Then H
contains a loxodromic element if and only if H is infinite and nonparabolic.
Proof. Suppose that H is infinite and nonparabolic. By Lemma 2.8, H contains
an element h of infinite order. Suppose that h is not loxodromic. Then g −1 hg ∈ Pλ
for some g ∈ G and λ ∈ Λ. Since H is not parabolic, there exists a ∈ H such that
g−1 ag ∈
/ Pλ . By Lemma 2.7, there exists a finite set F ⊂ Pλ such that (g−1 ag)x is
loxodromic for any x ∈ Pλ \ F. Since h has infinite order, some power x = g−1 hn g
lies outside of F; hence the element (g −1 ag)(g−1 hn g) is loxodromic. Thus, ahn is a
loxodromic element in H. The converse direction is obvious.
✷
Definition 2.10. ([13, Definitions 4.9, 4.11])
Let G be a group generated by a finite set X, P = {Pλ }λ∈Λ a collection of
subgroups of G.

6

OLEG BOGOPOLSKI AND KAI-UWE BUX

(a) A subgroup H of G is called relatively quasiconvex with respect to P (or
simply relatively quasiconvex when the collection P is fixed) if there exists ǫ > 0
such that the following condition holds. Let f1 , f2 be two elements of H and p an
arbitrary geodesic path from f1 to f2 in Γ(G, X ∪ P). Then for any vertex v ∈ p,
there exists a vertex u ∈ H such that
distX (v, u) 6 ǫ.
(b) A relatively quasiconvex subgroup H of G is called strongly relatively quasiconvex if the intersection H ∩ Pλg is finite for all g ∈ G, λ ∈ Λ.
In the case of a finitely generated relatively hyperbolic group these notions do
not depend on a choice of a finite generating set:
Proposition 2.11. ([13, Proposition 4.10]) Let G be a group hyperbolic relative
to a collection of subgroups P = {Pλ }λ∈Λ and let H be a subgroup of G. Suppose
that X1 , X2 are two finite generating sets of G. Then H is (strongly) relatively
quasiconvex with respect to X1 if and only if it is (strongly) relatively quasiconvex
with respect to X2 .
Theorem 2.12. ([13, Theorem 4.19]) Let G be a finitely generated group hyperbolic
relative to a collection of subgroups P = {Pλ }λ∈Λ and let g be a hyperbolic element of
G. Then the centralizer C(g) of g in G is a strongly relatively quasiconvex subgroup
in G.
Lemma 2.13. For every loxodromic element b ∈ G, there exists τ > 0 such that the
following holds. Let m be a natural number and p a geodesic segment in Γ(G, X ∪P)
connecting 1 and bm . Then the Hausdorff distance (induced by the distX -metric)
between the sets p and M = {bi | 0 6 i 6 m} is at most τ .
Proof. A path in Γ(G, X ∪ P) is called an X-path if its edges are labelled by
elements of X. Let [1, b]X be a path of minimal length among all X-paths from 1 to
b. We set qi = bi · [1, b]X for i ∈ Z and q = q0 q1 . . . qm−1 . The paths p and q have the
same endpoints; the path p is a geodesic and the path q is a quasi-geodesic (with
respect to distX∪P ) with uniform constants (i.e., independent of the exponent m)
by Lemma 2.4.
The paths p and q do not have backtracking [13, Definition 3.9] and every vertex
of p and q is a phase vertex [13, Definition 3.10]: in the case of q, this is because
the path has only labels from X; and for p this follows from the path being geodesic. Thus, the technical hypotheses of [13, Proposition 3.15] are satisfied. By
this proposition, there is a uniform constant ǫ > 0 such that the Hausdorff distance
between p and q (with respect to distX ) is at most ǫ. Then the Hausdorff distance
betweeen p and M is at most τ := ǫ + distX (1, b).
✷
We use the following result of B.H. Neumann.
Theorem 2.14. [12, Lemma 4.1] Suppose that (Hi )i∈I is a finite family of subgroups
of a group G and (xi )i∈I is a finite family of elements of G with the property G =
∪ Hi xi . Then there exists i ∈ I such that Hi has a finite index in G.

i∈I

FROM LOCAL TO GLOBAL CONJUGACY

7

3. The main theorem
For this section, we let G be a group generated by a finite set X that is hyperbolic
m
relative to a fixed peripheral structure P = {P1 , . . . , Pm }. We put P = ⊔ (Pλ \{1}).
i=1

In the following proof we will fix a loxodromic element b ∈ G. To not interrupt the
proof, we fix some notation and constants in advance.
• For an element g ∈ G, we denote |g| := distX∪P (1, g). Clearly, |g| 6
distX (1, g).
• Let ν be the constant defined in Theorem 2.3.
• Let λ, σ and τ be the constants defined in Lemma 2.4 and Lemma 2.13 for
the loxodromic element b.
Enlarging ν, σ, τ and 1/λ, we may assume that all of them are integers.
Theorem 3.1. Suppose that a finitely generated group G is hyperbolic relative to
a collection of subgroups P = {P1 , . . . , Pm }. Let H1 , H2 be subgroups of G such
that H1 is relatively quasiconvex with respect to P and H2 is elementwise conjugate
into H1 . Then one of the following holds:
(1) The subgroup H2 is parabolic, i.e., conjugate into some element of P.
(2) Some finite index subgroup of H2 is conjugate into H1 .
If H2 is infinite and nonparabolic, then the length of the conjugator with respect to
a finite generating system X of G can be bounded in terms of |X|, the quasiconvexity
constant of H1 , and the minimal X-length of loxodromic elements of H2 .
Proof. We may assume that H2 is infinite. Suppose that H2 is nonparabolic. By
Lemma 2.9, H2 contains a loxodromic element b.
Ultimately, we obtain the finite index subgroup of H2 by means of Theorem 2.14.
We shall cover H2 by finitely many cosets of subgroups. One of the subgroups is
the intersection H2 ∩ EG (b). In order to cover the other elements, let us consider
an arbitrary element a ∈ H2 \ EG (b). Then for every n ∈ N, there exists zn ∈ G
such that zn abn zn−1 ∈ H1 . Let xn ∈ G be the shortest element with respect to the
metric distX∪P among those elements which satisfy the following property: There
exist k, l > 0 such that k + l = n and

n −1
xn · bk abl · x−1
n = zn ab zn .

We consider the path γn starting at 1 with label xn bk abl x−1
n . The path γn ends at
a point hn ∈ H1 . We also consider the geodesic 6-gone KABCDN in Γ(G, X ∪ P),

8

OLEG BOGOPOLSKI AND KAI-UWE BUX

where K = 1, A = xn , B = xn bk , C = xn bk a, D = xn bk abl , and N = xn bk abl x−1
n
(see Fig. 1).

B

Vj
Vi
A

b

a

C

Vj′
b

Vi′

xn

D
xn

Vj′′

Vi′′
K=1

g
Vi′′′

N = hn

g
Vj′′′

H1

Figure 1.
Let ǫ1 be the quasiconvexity constant for H1 . Let S(r) be the number of words
of length up to r in the alphabet X. We choose
n := (A + 2) · (B1 + B2 + B3 + B4 + 2),
where A := S(τ + 4ν + ǫ1 ) and
B1 : = (σ + 2τ + 8ν)/λ,
B3 : = S(2τ + 4ν),

B2 : = (σ + τ + 4ν + |a|)/λ,
B4 : = (τ + 4ν + 1) · S(τ + 4ν).

Without loss of generality, we may assume that k > l. Then k > n/2.
For each i ∈ [0, k], we consider the vertex Vi = A · bi . By Lemma 2.13, there
exists a vertex Vi′ ∈ [A, B] such that
distX (Vi , Vi′ ) 6 τ.
By Theorem 2.3, there exists a point Vi′′ ∈ [A, K]∪[K, N ]∪[N, D]∪[D, C]∪[C, B]
such that
distX (Vi′ , Vi′′ ) < 4ν.
In particular,
distX (Vi , Vi′′ ) < 4ν + τ.
We prove that if k is sufficiently large, then there are many consecutive values of
i ∈ [0, k] such that Vi′′ ∈ [K, N ]. We will consider four cases, where Vi′′ ∈
/ [K, N ]
and show that each case can occur only for a restricted number of values of i, which
we shall bound explicitly.
Case 1. Suppose that Vi′′ ∈ [A, K].

FROM LOCAL TO GLOBAL CONJUGACY

9

We set yn := xn bi . Then
yn · bk−i abl+i · yn−1 = xn · bk abl · x−1
n .
By minimality of |xn | and using Lemma 2.4, we get:
|xn | 6 |yn | = |KVi | 6 |KA| − |AVi′′ | + |Vi′′ Vi |
6 |xn | − |AVi | + 2|Vi′′ Vi |
6 |xn | − (iλ − σ) + 2(τ + 4ν).
Therefore 0 6 i 6 B1 . In particular, the number of such i is at most B1 + 1.
Case 2. Suppose that Vi′′ ∈ [B, C].
Then
|Vi B| 6 |Vi Vi′ | + |Vi′ Vi′′ | + |Vi′′ B| 6 τ + 4ν + |a|.
On the other side, since Vi = xn bi and B = xn bk , we get by Lemma 2.4 that
|Vi B| = |bk−i | > λ · (k − i) − σ.
Thus k − B2 6 i 6 k. In particular, the number of such i is at most B2 + 1.
Case 3. Suppose that Vi′′ ∈ [C, D].
Recall that D = C · bl . By Lemma 2.13, there exists a vertex Wi ∈ {Cbj | 0 6 j 6 l}
such that distX (Vi′′ , Wi ) 6 τ . Then distX (Vi , Wi ) 6 2τ + 4ν. We write Wi = C · bsi ,
where 0 6 si 6 l.
Since Vi = A · bi and Wi = A · bk absi , we have
distX (1, bk−i absi ) = distX (Vi , Wi ) 6 2τ + 4ν.
We claim that this case can occur for at most B3 = S(2τ + 4ν) values of i ∈ [0, k].
Indeed, otherwise there would exist different i and j such that bk−i absi = bk−j absj .
Then a−1 bj−i a = bsj −si . Lemma 2.5 implies that sj −si = ±(j −i). By Theorem 2.6,
we obtain a ∈ EG (b) that contradicts our assumption.
Case 4. Suppose that Vi′′ ∈ [N, D].
We set yn := xn b−l a−1 b−(k−i) . Then yn · bk−i abl+i · yn−1 = xn · bk abl · x−1
n . Hence,
by minimality of |xn |, we have |xn | 6 |yn |.
Note that yn is the label of a path from N to Vi . Therefore
|yn | = |N Vi | 6 |N Vi′′ | + |Vi′′ Vi |
= |N D| − |Vi′′ D| + |Vi′′ Vi |
6 |xn | − |Vi′′ D| + (τ + 4ν).
Then |DVi′′ | 6 τ + 4ν.
We claim that this case can occur for at most B4 = (τ + 4ν + 1)S(τ + 4ν) values
of i ∈ [0, k]. Indeed, since Vi′′ lies on the geodesic [D, N ] and |DVi′′ | 6 τ + 4ν, there
are at most τ + 4ν + 1 possibilities for Vi′′ . Since distX (Vi , Vi′′ ) 6 τ + 4ν, there are
at most (τ + 4ν + 1) · S(τ + 4ν) possibilities for Vi , and hence for i.

10

OLEG BOGOPOLSKI AND KAI-UWE BUX

By the choice of n, there exists a subset I ⊆ [0, k] consisting of A + 1 consecutive
integers such that Vi′′ ∈ [K, N ] for every i ∈ I. Since the subgroup H1 is ǫ1 -quasiconvex, there exists Vi′′′ ∈ H1 with distX (Vi′′ , Vi′′′ ) 6 ǫ1 . We choose an X-geodesic
[Vi , Vi′′′ ] for each i ∈ I. We have
distX (Vi , Vi′′′ ) 6 distX (Vi , Vi′′ ) + distX (Vi′′ , Vi′′′ ) 6 τ + 4ν + ǫ1 .
Since A = S(τ + 4ν + ǫ1 ) is the number of words of length up to τ + 4ν + ǫ1 in the
alphabet X, there exist different i, j ∈ I such that [Vi , Vi′′′ ] and [Vj , Vj′′′ ] have the
same labels. Let g be this label. Then the label of the path [Vi′′′ Vi ]∪[Vi , Vj ]∪[Vj , Vj′′′ ]
is g−1 bj−i g. We set s1 = j − i. Thus, there exist g ∈ G and s1 ∈ Z such that
g−1 bs1 g ∈ H1 ,

(3.1)

0 < |s1 | 6 A, and distX (1, g) 6 τ + 4ν + ǫ1 .
Moreover, the label of the path [K, A] ∪ [A, Vi ] ∪ [Vi , Vi′′′ ] is xn bs0 g for some s0 ,
and we have
xn bs0 g ∈ H1 .
(3.2)
Recall that
(3.3)
xn bk abl x−1
n ∈ H1 .
−1
p
From (3.2) and (3.3), it follows that there are exponents p, q ∈ Z with g b abq g ∈
H1 , and using (3.1), we can in addition arrange for 0 6 p, q 6 |s1 | 6 A. Thus,
a ∈ b−p gH1 g −1 bp · b−(q+p) .
Since a is an arbitrary element in H2 \ EG (b) and distX (1, g) 6 τ + 4ν + ǫ1 , we have
[
H2 ⊆
(z −1 H1 z · b−t ) ∪ EG (b),
(t,z)∈M

where M = {(t, z) ∈ Z × G | 0 6 t 6 2A, distX (1, z) 6 A · distX (1, b) + τ + 4ν + ǫ1 }.
Since b ∈ H2 , we have
[
H2 =
((z −1 H1 z ∩ H2 ) · b−t ) ∪ (EG (b) ∩ H2 ).
(t,z)∈M

Since the set M is finite, we deduce from Theorem 2.14 that either EG (b) ∩ H2 is
of finite index in H2 , or there exists (t, z) ∈ M such that z −1 H1 z ∩ H2 is of finite
index in H2 . In the first case, hbi has finite index in H2 and we are done. In the
second case, a finite index subgroup of H2 is conjugate into H1 .
✷
4. Toral relatively hyperbolic groups
In this section we specialize Theorem 3.1 for the case, where the peripheral subgroups of the relatively hyperbolic group G are virtually abelian.
Theorem 4.1. ([13, Theorem 1.4]) Let G be a group, P = {Pλ }λ∈ Λ a collection
of subgroups of G. Suppose that G is finitely presented with respect to P and the
relative Dehn function of G with respect to P is well-defined, i.e., it takes finite
values for each n ∈ N. Then the following conditions hold.

FROM LOCAL TO GLOBAL CONJUGACY

11

(1) For any g1 , g2 ∈ G the intersection Pλg1 ∩ Pµg2 is finite whenever λ 6= µ.
(2) The intersection Pλg ∩ Pλ is finite for any g ∈
/ Pλ .
A quasiconvex subgroup of a relatively hyperbolic group is hyperbolic relative to
an induced peripheral structure:
Theorem 4.2. ([10, Theorem 9.1]) Let G be a finitely generated group hyperbolic
relative to a collection of subgroups P = (Pλ )λ∈Λ and let H 6 G be a relatively
quasiconvex subgroup. Consider the following collection of subgroups of H:
O := {H ∩ gP g −1 | g ∈ G, P ∈ P, and H ∩ gP g −1 is infinite}.
Then the elements of O lie in only finitely many conjugacy classes of H. Furthemore, if O is a set of representatives of these classes, then H is hyperbolic relative
to O. We call O the induced peripheral structure of H.
Lemma 4.3. Let G be a finitely generated group hyperbolic relative to a collection
of subgroups P = (Pλ )λ∈Λ . Let H1 , H2 be subgroups of G such that H1 is relatively
quasiconvex with respect to P and H2 is a subgroup of a peripheral subgroup Pλ ∈ P.
Suppose that H2 is elementwise conjugate into H1 . Then there exists a finite collection of elements g1 , . . . , gn ∈ G such that each element of infinite order of H2 is
conjugate (in Pλ ) into the union of Pλ ∩ gi−1 H1 gi . The elements g1 , . . . , gn ∈ G can
be chosen so that they depend only on H1 , but not on H2 .
Proof. We will use notation of Theorem 4.2 applied to H = H1 . First, we fix
a peripheral structure of H1 induced by the peripheral structure of G: Then there
exists a finite collection of elements (gi )i∈I of G and finite subsets Λi ⊂ Λ for each
i ∈ I such that
• O = (H1 ∩ gi Pµ gi−1 )i∈I,µ∈Λi consists of representatives of conjugacy classes
in H1 of subgroups from O and
• H1 is hyperbolic relative to O.
Recall that H2 6 Pλ for some λ ∈ Λ. Let h ∈ H2 be an element of infinite
order. We show that h is conjugate (in Pλ ) into Pλ ∩ gi−1 H1 gi for some i ∈ I. By
assumption, there exists g ∈ G such that ghg −1 ∈ H1 . Thus,
ghg −1 ∈ H1 ∩ gPλ g−1 .
In particular, H1 ∩ gPλ
z ∈ H1 such that

g−1

(4.1)

is infinite. By choice of O, there exist i ∈ I, µ ∈ Λi and

z −1 (H1 ∩ gPλ g−1 )z = H1 ∩ gi Pµ gi−1 .
(4.2)
−1
−1
−1
It follows that z gPλ g z ∩ gi Pµ gi is infinite, whence by Theorem 4.1, we have
λ = µ and x := g −1 zgi ∈ Pλ . Now (4.1) and (4.2) imply x−1 hx ∈ Pλ ∩ gi−1 H1 gi ,
and we are done.
✷
Lemma 4.4. ([13, Lemma 5.8]) Let G be a group generated by a finite set X.
Suppose that G is hyperbolic relative to a collection of recursively presented subgroups
P = {P1 , . . . , Pm }, each with solvable conjugacy problem. There exists a computable
function f : N → N with the following property: if g ∈ G is conjugate into Pλ , then
z −1 gz ∈ Pλ for some z ∈ G with distX (1, z) 6 f (distX (1, g)).

12

OLEG BOGOPOLSKI AND KAI-UWE BUX

Since finitely generated virtually abelian groups are finitely presented and have
solvable conjugacy problem, we obtain the following:
Corollary 4.5. Suppose that a finitely generated group G is hyperbolic relative to a
collection of virtually abelian subgroups P = {P1 , . . . , Pm }. Let H1 , H2 be subgroups
of G such that H1 is relatively quasiconvex with respect to P and H2 is elementwise
conjugate into H1 . Then some finite index subgroup of H2 is conjugate into H1 .
Moreover, the following holds:
(a) If H2 is infinite and nonparabolic, then the length of the conjugator with
respect to a finite generating system X of G can be bounded in terms of |X|,
the quasiconvexity constant of H1 , and the minimal X-length of loxodromic
elements of H2 .
(b) If H2 is infinite and parabolic, then a conjugator may be chosen whose Xlength is bounded a priory in terms of H1 and the minimal X-length of
elements of infinite order in H2 .
(c) If H2 is finite then the finite index subgroup and the conjugator can be taken
to be trivial.
Proof. We assume that H2 is infinite, otherwise the statement is trivial. If H2
is nonparabolic, then the statement follows from Theorem 3.1. Thus, we assume
that H2 is infinite and parabolic. Then there exist x ∈ G and P ∈ P such that
x−1 H2 x 6 P .
Let g ∈ H2 be the element of infinite order with the minimal X-length. Since
x−1 gx ∈ P , we have z −1 gz ∈ P for some z ∈ G with distX (1, z) 6 f (distX (1, g))
−1
(see Lemma 4.4). Then P z x ∩ P is infinite. By Lemma 4.1 we have x ∈ zP .
Hence, z −1 H2 z 6 P , where the X-length of z is bounded as above. Thus, we may
assume that H2 lies in P .
Let P ′ be a maximal torsion free abelean subgroup of P . Clearly, k := |P : P ′ |
is finite. Let z1 , . . . , zk be a set of representatives of left cosets of P ′ in P . We set
H2′ := H2 ∩ P ′ .
By Lemma 4.3, there exists a finite collection of elements g1 , . . . , gn ∈ G such
that H2′ is elementwise conjugate (in P ) into the union of P ∩ H1gi . Then H2′ lies in
gz
the union of P ∩ H1 i j , and we have
n

k

gz

H2′ = ∪ ∪ (H2′ ∩ H1 i j ).
i=1 j=1

gz

By Theorem 2.14, one of the subgroups H2′ ∩ H1 i j has finite index in H2′ and hence
in H2 . Recall that by Lemma 4.3, the elements g1 , . . . , gn depend only on H1 , and
the elements z1 , . . . , zk depend only on P .
✷
5. An application to limit groups
Recall that a subgroup H of a group G is called a retract of G if there exists an
epimorphism f : G → H with f|H = id. The epimorphism f is called a retraction.
Equivalently, H is retract of G if G = K ⋊H for some subgroup K of G. A subgroup
H of G is called a virtual retract of G if H is a retract of a finite index subgroup

FROM LOCAL TO GLOBAL CONJUGACY

13

of G. In the following proposition we list some properties of limit groups that we
use later.
Proposition 5.1.
(1) Limit groups have the unique root property, i.e., xn = y n
with n 6= 0 implies x = y. In particular, limit groups are torsion free.
(2) Retracts of limit groups are closed under taking of roots.
(3) If H is a finitely generated subgroup of a limit group G, then H is a virtual
retract of G [17, Theorem B], and hence is quasi-isometrically embedded [17,
Corollary 3.12]. In particular, H is quasiconvex in G.
Proof. (1) It suffices to argue the unique root property for subgroups of limit
groups generated by two elements. By [7, Proposition 3.1 (4)], those subgroups are
free or free abelian; and those have the unique root property.
(2) Let G be a limit group and f : G → H a retraction. Suppose that g ∈ G
is such that gn ∈ H for some n ∈ N. Then f (g)n = f (gn ) = g n . Since G has the
unique root property, we have g = f (g) ∈ H.
✷
Corollary 5.2. Let G be a limit group and let H1 and H2 be subgroups of G, where
H1 is finitely generated. Suppose that H2 is elementwise conjugate into H1 . Then
there exists a finite index subgroup of H2 which is conjugate into H1 .
The index depends only on H1 . The length of the conjugator with respect to a
fixed generating system X of G depends only on H1 and m, where


if H20 6= ∅.
 min0 distX (1, g)
g∈H2
m=

 min distX (1, g) otherwise.
g∈H2 \{1}

Proof. Let P be a set of representatives for the conjugacy classes of maximal
non-cyclic abelian subgroups of G. As a limit group, G is hyperbolic relative to the
finite family P ([8, Theorem 4.5], another proof is given in [1, Corollary 3.5]).
By statement (3) of Proposition 5.1, H1 is quasiconvex. By Corollary 4.5, there
f2 of H2 and an element g ∈ G such that g −1 H
f2 g 6
exists a finite index subgroup H
H1 and the X-length of g is bounded as above. It remains to prove that the index
e 2 | only depends on H1 .
|H2 : H
e of G
By statement (3) of Proposition 5.1, there exists a finite index subgroup G
e
e
such that H1 is a retract of G. Let N be a finite index subgroup in G which is
normal in G.
f2 g 6 H1 we deduce (g−1 H2 g)n! 6 H1 , where n = |H2 : H
f2 |. In
From g−1 H
particular,
n!
g−1 (H2 ∩ N )g
6 H1 .

e and g −1 (H2 ∩ N )g 6 N 6 G,
e we deduce from the
Since H1 is a retract of G
statement (2) of Proposition 5.1 that
g−1 (H2 ∩ N )g 6 H1 .
The estimate |H2 : H2 ∩ N | 6 |G : N | completes the proof.

✷

14

OLEG BOGOPOLSKI AND KAI-UWE BUX

References
[1] E. Alibegović, A combination theorem for relatively hyperbolic groups, Bull. London Math.
Soc., 3 (2005), 459-466.
[2] G.N. Arzhantseva, A. Minasyan and D. Osin, The SQ-universality and residual properties of
relatively hyperbolic groups, Journal of Algebra, 315 (1) (2007), 165-177.
[3] O. Bogopolski, K.-U. Bux, Subgroup conjugacy separability for surface groups. Preprint
(2014), 22 pages. Available at http://arxiv.org/pdf/1401.6203.pdf
[4] O. Bogopolski, K.-U. Bux, Subgroup conjugacy separabiliy of hyperbolic QVH-groups. Preprint
(2016), 22 pages. Available at http://arxiv.org/pdf/1602.03229v2.pdf
[5] O. Bogopolski, E. Ventura, On endomorphisms of torsion-free hyperbolic groups, International
Journal of Algebra and Computations, 21 (2011), no. 8, 1415-1446.
[6] S.C. Chagas, P.A. Zalesskii, Limit groups are subgroup conjugacy separable, Preprint, 2015.
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1511.04607.pdf
[7] C. Champetier, V. Guiradel, Limit Groups as Limits of Free Groups, Israel Journal of Mathematics, 146 Issue 1 (2005), 1-75.
[8] F. Dahmani, Combination of convergence groups, Geom. Topol., 7 (2003), 933-963.
[9] D. Groves, J.F. Manning, Dehn fillings and elementary splittings, Preprint, 2016. Available
at https://arxiv.org/pdf/1506.03831v2.pdf
[10] C.C. Hruska, Relative hyperbolicity and relative quasiconvexity for countable groups, Algebr.
Geom. Topol., 10 (2010), no. 3, 1807-1856.
[11] A. Minasyan, Some properties of subsets of hyperbolic groups, Comm. in Algebra 33 (2005),
no. 3, 909-935
[12] B.H. Neumann, Groups covered by permutable subsets. J. London Math Soc., 29 (1954),
236-248.
[13] D.V. Osin, Relatively hyperbolic groups: Intrinsic geometry, algebraic property, and algorithmic problems, Memoirs Amer. Math. Soc. 179 (2006), no. 843.
See also: arXiv.org/pdf/math/0404040v2.pdf.
[14] D.V. Osin, Elementary subgroups of relatively hyperbolic groups and bounded generation, Intern J. Algebra and Computation, 16 (2006), no. 1, 99-118.
[15] J.-P. Serre, Trees, Springer, 1980
[16] P. Tukia, Convergence groups and Gromov’s metric hyperbolic spaces, New Zealand J. Math.,
23 (2) (1994), 157–187.
[17] H. Wilton, Hall’s theorem for limit groups, GAFA, 18 (2008), 271-303.
Sobolev Institute of Mathematics of Siberian Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, Novosibirsk, Russia
and Düsseldorf University, Germany
E-mail address: Oleg Bogopolski@yahoo.com
Bielefeld University, Germany
E-mail address: bux 2009@kubux.net

