A structured description of the
genus spectrum of abelian p-groups

arXiv:1604.04065v2 [math.GR] 15 Feb 2017

Jürgen Müller and Siddhartha Sarkar
Abstract
The genus spectrum of a finite group G is the set of all g such that G acts faithfully on a
compact Riemann surface of genus g. It is an open problem to find a general description
of the genus spectrum of the groups in interesting classes, such as the abelian p-groups.
Motivated by the work of Talu [14] for odd primes p, we develop a general combinatorial
machinery, for arbitrary primes, to obtain a structured description of the so-called reduced
genus spectrum of abelian p-groups.
We have a particular view towards how to generally find the reduced minimum genus in
this class of groups, determine the complete genus spectrum for a large subclass of abelian
p-groups, consisting of those groups in a certain sense having ‘large’ defining invariants,
and use this to construct infinitely many counterexamples to Talu’s Conjecture [14], saying
that an abelian p-group is recoverable from its genus spectrum. Finally, we indicate the
effectiveness of our combinatorial approach by applying it to some explicit examples.
Mathematics Subject Classification (MSC2010): 20H10; 20K01, 30F35, 57S25.
Contents
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Groups acting on Riemann surfaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Mainline integers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Talu’s Theorem revisited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Transforming to mainline integers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The main result . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Talu’s Conjecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Examples: Small rank . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Examples: Small exponents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1
5
7
8
12
18
22
28
34

1. Introduction
1.1. Genus spectra. Given a compact Riemann surface X of genus g ≥ 0, a
finite group G is said to act on X, if G can be embedded into the group Aut(X)
of biholomorphic maps on X. While Aut(X) is infinite as long as g ≤ 1, by the
Hurwitz Theorem [5] we have |Aut(X)| ≤ 84 · (g − 1) as soon as g ≥ 2. Thus in the
latter case there are only finitely many groups G, up to isomorphism, acting on X.
But conversely, given a finite group G there always is an infinite set sp(G) of integers
g ≥ 0, called the (genus) spectrum of G, such that there is a Riemann surface
X of genus g being acted on by G; in this case, g is called a genus of G. Note that
we are in particular including the cases g ≤ 1. In [10], the problem of determining
sp(G) is called the Hurwitz problem associated with G, and the problem of
finding the minimum genus min sp(G) of G, also called its strong symmetric
genus, has arisen some particular interest. For more details we refer the reader to
[1, 13], and the references given there.

2
|G|
, where exp(G) denotes the
To attack the Hurwitz problem, let ∆(G) := exp(G)
exponent of G, that is the least common multiple of the orders of its elements.
Then let the reduced (genus) spectrum of G be defined by


g−1
sp0 (G) :=
∈ Z : g ∈ sp(G) ,
∆(G)
g−1
is called the reduced genus associated with g. It follows
where the number ∆(G)
from [6], together with a special consideration of the case g = 0, that
1
sp0 (G) ⊆ S :=
· ({−1} ∪ N0 )
ǫ(G)

is a co-finite subset, where ǫ(G) divides gcd(2, |G|) and can be determined from the
structure of G, as is recalled in (2.3). A word of caution is in order here: In [6] the
notion of reduced genus is defined differently, by taking ǫ(G) into account as well,
while our choice leads to fewer case distinctions.
The reduced minimum genus of G, that is the reduced genus associated with
the minimum genus of G, equals µ0 (G) := min sp0 (G). Moreover, following [7],
the reduced stable upper genus σ0 (G) of G is the smallest element of S such
that all elements of S \ sp0 (G) are less than σ0 (G); the genus σ(G) associated
with σ0 (G) is called the stable upper genus of G. The elements of S \ sp0 (G)
exceeding µ0 (G) are called the reduced spectral gap of G; the associated genera
form the spectral gap of G. Hence solving the Hurwitz problem for G amounts
to determining µ0 (G) and σ0 (G) and the reduced spectral gap of G.
1.2. Our approach to abelian p-groups. We now restrict ourselves to finite
p-groups G, where p is a prime. Not too much is known about the genus spectrum of groups within this class, not even if we only look at interesting subclasses,
for example those given by bounding a certain invariant such as rank, exponent,
nilpotency class, or co-class; see [13].
This still holds if we restrict further to the class of abelian p-groups, which are the
groups we are interested in from now on, their general shape being
G∼
= Zr1 ⊕ Zr22 ⊕ · · · ⊕ Zrpee ,
p

p

where e ≥ 1, and ri ≥ 0 for 1 ≤ i ≤ e − 1, and re ≥ 1. We point out that, in
particular contrary to [9, 14], we are allowing for arbitrary primes p ≥ 2 throughout.
We give an outline of the paper: In Section 2 we recall a few facts about Riemann
surfaces and their automorphism groups. In Section 3 we prepare the combinatorial tools needed later on; we comment on them in (1.3). Having these preliminaries
in place we turn out attention to abelian p-groups and their genus spectra:
Section 4: Our starting point is Talu’s approach [14] towards a general description
of the genus spectrum of abelian p-groups, in the case where p is odd. Building
on these ideas, we develop a conceptual approach to describe the smooth epimorphisms, in the sense of (2.2), onto a given abelian p-group, where p is arbitrary. The
resulting general necessary and sufficient arithmetic condition for their existence,
which we still refer to as Talu’s Theorem, is given in Theorems (4.4) and (4.5);
in proving the latter we in particular close a gap in the proof of [14, Thm.3.3].

3

Section 5: This is then translated into a combinatorial description of the domain
of the reduced genus map, yielding a structured description of the reduced spectrum
of G being presented in (5.2), and leading to a machinery to compute the reduced
minimum genus µ0 (G) of G culminating in Theorem (5.5), which says that µ0 (G)
is given as the minimum of at most e + 1 numbers, given explicitly in terms of the
defining invariants (r1 , . . . , re ). In particular, in (5.7) we obtain an independent
proof and an improved version of Maclachlan’s method [8, Thm.4] for the special
case of abelian p-groups. Our combinatorial approach should also be suitable to
get hands on the reduced stable upper genus σ0 (G) of G; we are planning to pursue
this further in a subsequent paper.
Section 6: Having this combinatorial machinery in place, we turn to abelian pgroups with ‘large’ invariants, by assuming that
ri ≥ p − 1

for 1 ≤ i ≤ e − 1,

and re ≥ max{p − 2, 1}.

In these cases we are able to determine both the reduced minimum genus µ0 (G)
as well as the reduced stable upper genus σ0 (G) in terms of the defining invariants
(r1 , . . . , re ) of G. More precisely, our main result says the following:
Main Theorem (6.2). Let G have ‘large’ invariants as specified above. Then the
reduced minimum and stable upper genera of G are given as


e
X
1
e
e−i
e
(p − p ) · ri .
µ0 (G) = σ0 (G) = · − 1 − p +
2
i=1
At this stage, a comparison with [14] is in order: The P
major aim there is to study
e
abelian p-groups having ‘small’ invariants, fulfilling 1+ j=i rj ≤ (e−i+1)·(p−1),
for 1 ≤ i ≤ e, with a particular view towards computing the reduced stable upper
genus σ0 (G) in these cases, the key result being a closed formula for σ0 (G) in terms
of the defining invariants (r1 , . . . , re ). Now one of the maximal admissible ‘small’
cases coincides with the smallest admissible case here, thus we recover [14, Cor.3.7],
where σ0 (G) is explicitly determined, but µ0 (G) is only claimed without proof.
Section 7: Next, we turn to an aspect of the general question of how much information about a group is encoded into its spectrum, at best whether its isomorphism
type can be recovered from it. Since in view of the examples in [9] this cannot possibly hold without restricting the class of groups considered, the class of abelian
p-group seems to be a good candidate to look at. More specifically, Talu’s Conjecture [14] says that, whenever p is odd, the spectrum of a non-trivial abelian
p-group already determines the group up to isomorphism. Moreover, although this
cannot possibly hold in full generality for p = 2, for example in view of the sets of
groups {Z2 , Z4 , Z22 , Z8 } and {Z2 ⊕ Z4 , Z32 , Z2 ⊕ Z8 } discussed below, we are tempted
to expect that it still holds true up to finitely many finite sets of exceptions.
But, as a consequence of (6.2), we are able to produce infinitely many counterexamples to Talu’s Conjecture (both for p odd and p = 2), that is pairs of nonisomorphic abelian p-groups having the same spectrum. We present two distinct
kinds of counterexamples, consisting of groups having the same order and exponent,
and of groups where these invariants are different, in (7.2) and (7.3), respectively.
This also shows that there cannot be an absolute bound on the cardinality of a
set of abelian p-groups sharing one and the same spectrum, not even if we restrict

4

ourselves to groups having the same order and exponent. Still, we will have to say
something positive on Talu’s Conjecture later on.
Section 8: In order to show the effectiveness of the combinatorial machinery
developed we work out various examples, where in particular we get new systematic
proof of a number of earlier results scattered throughout the literature: In (8.1) we
determine the groups of non-positive reduced minimum genus, where we recover
the abelian p-groups amongst the well-known finite groups acting on surfaces of
genus g ≤ 1, see [12, App.] or [2, Sect.6.7]. In particular, the non-cyclic abelian
groups of order at most 9, which have to be treated as exceptions in [8, Thm.4],
reappear here naturally.
In (8.2) we deal with the groups of rank at most 2, whose smallest positive reduced
genus we determine. In particular, for the cyclic groups we recover the results in [4]
and [6, Prop.3.3], for the groups of rank 2 we improve the bound in [6, Prop.3.4], and
for the cases of cyclic deficiency 1, where p is odd, we recover the relevant part of
[9, Thm.5.4] and [9, Cor.5.5]. Moreover, we show that a cyclic p-group is uniquely
determined by its smallest genus ≥ 2, with the single exception of the groups
{Z2 , Z4 , Z8 }, and that an abelian p-groups of rank 2 is uniquely determined by its
smallest genus ≥ 2, with the single exception of the groups {Z2 ⊕ Z4 , Z2 ⊕ Z8 , Z24 }.
Section 9: In (9.1) and (9.2) we determine the reduced minimum genus of the
elementary abelian p-groups, and of the abelian p-groups of exponent p2 , respectively. Using this, we show that within the class of elementary abelian p-groups a
group is uniquely determined by its minimum genus, with the single exception of
the groups {Z2 , Z22 }; for p odd this would also be a consequence of [9, Cor.7.3], but
[9, Sect.7, Rem.] preceding it contains an error. Similarly, we show that within
the class of abelian p-groups of exponent p2 a group is uniquely determined by its
Kulkarni invariant, see (2.3), and its minimum genus, with the single exception of
the groups {Z24 , Z2 ⊕ Z4 }; for p odd this is claimed without proof in [14, Thm.3.8].
To summarize our results in Sections 8 and 9, although Talu’s Conjecture is false
in general, it turns out to hold within the following subclasses of the class of nontrivial abelian p-groups (including the case p = 2): i) the class of cyclic p-groups,
ii) the class of p-groups of rank 2, iii) the class of elementary abelian p-groups, and
iv) the class of p-groups of exponent p2 .
1.3. Mainline integers. We comment on the combinatorial tool featuring prominently in our approach: Given a prime p, and a non-increasing sequence a :=
(a1 , . . . , ae ) of non-negative integers, the associatedP
p-mainline integer (as we
call it by lack of a better name) is defined as ℘(a) := ei=1 ai pe−i . Moreover, given
any non-increasing sequence s := (s1 . . . , se ) of non-negative integers, let P(s) be
the set of all p-mainline integers ℘(a) where a is bounded below component-wise by
s. The connection to abelian p-groups with defining invariants (r1 , . . . , re ) is given
by letting the sequence s be given by
e
X
rj for 1 ≤ i ≤ e.
si := 1 +
j=i

We are interested in the structure of P(s), whose minimum obviously equals ℘(s).
It can be shown that P(s) is a co-finite subset of the non-negative integers, and thus

5

the combinatorial problems arising are to determine the smallest m such that all
integers from m on actually are elements of P(s), and to describe the gap consisting
of the non-mainline integers between ℘(s) and m.
It might very well be possible that this general kind of problems is well-known
to combinatorialists, but we have not been able to find suitable references. In
consequence we develop a piece of theory, just as far as necessary for the present
paper; we are planning to elaborate on this, as we go along with pursuing further
questions concerning the genus spectrum of abelian p-groups.
2. Groups acting on Riemann surfaces
We assume the reader familiar with the basic theory of Riemann surfaces, as is
exhibited for example in [1, 2], so that here we are just content with recalling a few
facts. The connection between geometry and group theory is given by the following
well-known theorem. We point out that it is often only used for g ≥ 2, in which
case the ‘groups with signature’ occurring are the Fuchsian groups, but it actually
holds for all g ≥ 0; see for example [1, Sect.1] and [2, Ch.6] and [12]:
2.1. Theorem. A finite group G acts on a compact Riemann surface X, if and
only if there is Γ ≤ Aut(U ), where U is a simply-connected Riemann surface and Γ is
a group with signature in the sense of (2.2), and a smooth epimorphism φ : Γ −→ G,
such that X is isomorphic to the orbit space U/ker(φ).
✷
2.2. Smooth epimorphisms. We keep the notation of (2.1). A group Γ is said
to be a group with (finite) signature if it has a distinguished generating set
{ak , bk : 1 ≤ k ≤ h}

∪

{cj : 1 ≤ j ≤ s},

for some h, s ∈ N0 , subject to the order relations
n

cj j = 1,

nj ∈ N \ {1},

where

for 1 ≤ j ≤ s, and the ‘long’ relation
h
Y

k=1

[ak , bk ] ·

s
Y

cj = 1,

j=1

where [a, b] := a−1 b−1 ab denotes the commutator of a and b. More generally, there
might also be order relations of the form ‘c∞ = 1’, that is no order relation for the
generator c at all; but since we are requiring X to be compact, and hence the orbit
space X/G to be compact as well, these cases do not occur here; see [12, App.].
An epimorphism φ : Γ −→ G with torsion-free kernel is called smooth. This is
equivalent to the condition that
φ(cj ) ∈ G has order nj ,

for all 1 ≤ j ≤ s.

In this case, the (s+1)-tuple (n1 , . . . , ns ; h) is called a signature of G, with periods
n1 , . . . , ns ≥ 2 and orbit genus h ≥ 0. The orbit space X/G has genus h, and the
branched covering X −→ X/G gives rise to the Riemann-Hurwitz equation


s
1
1 X
(1 − ) .
g − 1 = |G| · h − 1 + ·
2 i=1
ni

6

2.3. Kulkarni’s Theorem. To describe the structure of the genus spectrum of
a finite group G, in [6] a group theoretic invariant N (G) ∈ N, now called the
Kulkarni invariant of G, is introduced, such that
sp(G) \ {0} ⊆ 1 + N (G) · N0 ,
and sp(G) \ {0} is a co-finite subset of 1 + N (G) · N0 . Moreover, we have
N (G) =

|G|
1
·
,
ǫ(G) exp(G)

where ǫ = ǫ(G) ∈ {1, 2} is determined by the structure of G as follows:
If |G| is odd, then ǫ := 1; if |G| is even, letting G̃ be a Sylow 2-subgroup of G, then
ǫ := 1 provided the subset {a ∈ G̃; |a| < exp(G̃)} ⊆ G forms a subgroup of G̃ of
index 2, otherwise ǫ := 2. In other words, using the notions developed in [11], we
have ǫ = 2 if and only if G̃ is a non-trivial 2-group not of ‘GK type’.
This yields the description of the non-negative part of the reduced spectrum sp0 (G)
as stated earlier. As for its negative part, the well-known description of finite group
actions on compact Riemann surfaces of genus g = 0, see [12, App.] or [2, Sect.6.7],
says that in this case G is cyclic, dihedral, alternating or symmetric of isomorphism
type in {Zn , Dih2n , Alt4 , Sym4 , Alt5 }, hence we indeed get ∆(G) = ǫ(G).
2.4. The case of p-groups. We turn to the case of interest for us: Let G be a
p-group of order pn and exponent pe , where e ≤ n ∈ N0 .
If φ : Γ −→ G is a smooth epimorphism, then all the periods are of the form pi ,
where 0 ≤ i ≤ e. Hence we may abbreviate any signature (n1 , . . . , ns ; h) of G by
the (e + 1)-tuple (x1 , . . . , xe ; h), being called the associated p-datum, where
xi := |{1 ≤ j ≤ s; nj = pi }| ∈ N0 .
The set D(G) of all p-data of G, being afforded by smooth epimorphisms, is called
the data spectrum of G. Then the Riemann-Hurwitz equation gives rise to the
genus map g : D(G) −→ sp(G) defined by


e
1 X
g(x1 , . . . , xe ; h) := 1 + pn−e · (h − 1) · pe + ·
xi (pe − pe−i ) .
2 i=1
Letting the cyclic deficiency of G be defined as
δ = δ(G) := logp (∆(G)) = n − e ∈ N0 ,
1
·pδ(G) . Then the reduced
in view of Kulkarni’s Theorem (2.3) we have N (G) = ǫ(G)
1
genus map g0 : D(G) −→ sp0 (G) ⊆ ǫ(G)
· ({−1} ∪ N0 ) ⊆ 21 · ({−1} ∪ N0 ), given by

associating the reduced genus

g−1
pδ

∈ sp0 (G) with any g ∈ sp(G), reads

g0 (x1 , . . . , xe ; h) = (h − 1) · pe +

e
1 X
xi (pe − pe−i ).
·
2 i=1

7

3. Mainline integers
In this section we consider sequences of non-negative integers from a certain purely
combinatorial viewpoint. We develop a little piece of general theory, as far as will
be needed in Sections 5 and 6.
3.1. Integer sequences. Given finite sequences a = (a1 , . . . , ae ) ∈ Ne0 and b =
(b1 , . . . , be ) ∈ Ne0 of non-negative integers, of length e ≥ 1, we write a ≤ b, and say
that b dominates a, if ai ≤ bi for all 1 ≤ i ≤ e. We will be mainly concerned with
the set of non-increasing sequences
N = N (e) := {a = (a1 , . . . , ae ) ∈ Ne0 : a1 ≥ · · · ≥ ae }.
We introduce a few combinatorial notions concerning integer sequences: To this
end, we fix p ∈ N; later on p will be a prime, but here is no need to assume this.
i) For an arbitrary sequence a = (a1 , . . . , ae ) ∈ Ne0 let
e
X
℘(a) = ℘(a1 , . . . , ae ) :=
ai pe−i ∈ N0 .
i=1

Then the (p-)mainline integers associated with a are defined as
P(a) = P(a1 , . . . , ae ) := {℘(b) ∈ N0 : b ∈ N , a ≤ b}.
Note that we allow for arbitrary a to start with, while the sequences b used in the
definition of P(a) are required to be non-increasing. It will turn out that there
always is a non-increasing sequence affording a given set of mainline integers.
The hull sequence ã = (ã1 , . . . , ãe ) ∈ N of a is defined recursively by letting
ãe := ae and
ãi := max{ãi+1 , ai } for e − 1 ≥ i ≥ 1;
note that this definition is actually independent of the chosen integer p. Hence we
have a ≤ ã, where a = ã if and only if a ∈ N .
ii) Given a non-increasing sequence a = (a1 , . . . , ae ) ∈ N , its p-enveloping sequence â = (â1 , . . . , âe ) ∈ N is defined recursively by âe := ae and
âi := max{âi+1 + (p − 1), ai }

for e − 1 ≥ i ≥ 1;

hence we have a = ã ≤ â, where a = â if p = 1.
Moreover, whenever e ≥ 2 let
||a|| = ||(a1 , . . . , ae )|| := min{ai − ai+1 : 1 ≤ i ≤ e − 1},
and let ||a|| := ∞ for e = 1; note that, despite notation, || · || is not a norm in sense
of metric spaces. In particular, we have a = â if and only if ||a|| ≥ p − 1.
3.2. Proposition. Given a ∈ Ne0 , then we have P(a) = P(ã).
Proof. Let b = (b1 , . . . , be ) ∈ N . If ã ≤ b, then from a ≤ ã we also get a ≤ b.
Conversely, if a ≤ b, then we have ãe = ae ≤ be , and recursively for e − 1 ≥ i ≥ 1
we get ãi+1 ≤ bi+1 ≤ bi and ai ≤ bi , hence ãi ≤ bi ; this implies that ã ≤ b.
✷
3.3. Proposition. Given a ∈ N , the set N0 \ P(a) is finite.

8

Proof. We consider the p-enveloping sequence â = (â1 , . . . , âe ) ∈ N of a, and we
show that any m ≥ ℘(â) is a mainline
P integer: To this end, write m−℘(â) in a partial
0 such that b2 , . . . , be ≤
p-adic expansion as m − ℘(â) = ei=1 bi pe−i , where bi ≥ P
e
p−1, but b1 might be arbitrarily large. Then we have m = i=1 (âi +bi )pe−i . Since
for 1 ≤ i ≤ e − 1 we have âi − âi+1 ≥ p − 1 ≥ bi+1 − bi , thus âi + bi ≥ âi+1 + bi+1 ,
this implies that m ∈ P(a).
✷
3.4. Combinatorial problems. The general aim now is to investigate into the
structure of P(a), for a given sequence a ∈ Ne0 : By (3.2) we have
µ(a) := min P(a) = min P(ã) = ℘(ã),
where ã ∈ N is the associated hull sequence. Moreover, by (3.3) the set P(a) = P(ã)
is a co-finite subset of N0 . In consequence, the problems associated with a are to
determine the smallest integer σ(a) ∈ N0 such that all m ≥ σ(a) are elements of
P(a), and to determine the gap {µ(a) + 1, . . . , σ(a) − 1} \ P(a).
Note that by the proof of (3.3) we have µ(a) ≤ σ(a) ≤ ℘(â), where â is the
associated p-enveloping sequence. Hence in particular we have shown the following:
3.5. Theorem. Given a ∈ N such that ||a|| ≥ p − 1, then we have µ(a) = σ(a) =
✷
℘(a), that is the associated mainline integers are given as P(a) = N0 + ℘(a).
4. Talu’s Theorem revisited
In this section we develop a conceptual approach to describe the smooth epimorphisms onto a given abelian p-group. We first prepare the setting:
4.1. Abelianisations. Let Γ be a group with signature, given by the p-datum
(x1 , . . . , xf ; h), where h ≥ 0, f ≥ 0 and xf > 0; note that we are allowing for the
case f = 0, where the p-datum becomes (−; h). Thus Γ is generated by the set
{ak , bk : 1 ≤ k ≤ h}

∪

{cij : 1 ≤ i ≤ f, 1 ≤ j ≤ xi },

subject to the order relations
i

cpij = 1,

for 1 ≤ i ≤ f

and 1 ≤ j ≤ xi ,

and the long relation
h
Y

[ak , bk ] ·

k=1

f Y
xi
Y

cij = 1.

i=1 j=1

Let 0 ≤ f ′ ≤ f be defined as follows:
(
Pf
0,
if
′
i=1 xi ≤ 1,
f :=
Pf
Pf
max{1 ≤ d ≤ f :
i=d xi ≥ 2}, if
i=1 xi ≥ 2.

In other words, we have f ′ = 0 if and only if the p-datum is (−; h) or (0, . . . , 0, 1; h),
while otherwise we have f ′ = f if and only if xf ≥ 2, and if xf = 1 then 1 ≤ f ′ < f
is largest such that xf ′ > 0.

9

It follows from the above presentation that the abelianisation H := Γ/[Γ, Γ] of Γ,
where [Γ, Γ] denotes the derived subgroup of Γ, can be written as


Z2h ,
if f ′ = 0,


x −1
Z2h ⊕ Zxp 1 ⊕ Zxp22 ⊕ · · · ⊕ Zpff , if f ′ = f,
H∼
=


 Z2h ⊕ Zx1 ⊕ Zx22 ⊕ · · · ⊕ Zxf′′ ,
if 1 ≤ f ′ < f.
p
p
pf

Indeed, identifying the elements of Γ with their images under the natural map
Γ −→ H, we conclude that H is generated by the set
C := C0 ∪ C1 ∪ · · · ∪ Cf −1 ∪ Cf ,
reflecting its decomposition as a direct sum of cyclic subgroups, where
C0

:=

{ak , bk ∈ H : 1 ≤ k ≤ h},

Ci

:=

{cij ∈ H : 1 ≤ j ≤ xi },

Cf

:=

{cf j ∈ H : 1 ≤ j ≤ xf − 1}.

for 1 ≤ i ≤ f − 1,

4.2. Abelian groups. Let G be a non-trivial abelian p-group given by
∼ Zr1 ⊕ Zr22 ⊕ · · · ⊕ Zree ,
G=
p
p
p
where e ≥ 1, and ri ≥ 0 for 1 ≤ i ≤ e − 1, and re ≥ 1. Moreover, let
{gij : 1 ≤ i ≤ e, 1 ≤ j ≤ ri }
be a generating set reflecting the decomposition as a direct sum of cyclic subgroups.
Proceeding similarly as above, let 0 ≤ e′ ≤ e be defined as follows:
(
Pe
0,
if
i=1 ri ≤ 1,
′
e :=
Pe
Pe
max{1 ≤ d ≤ e :
i=d ri ≥ 2}, if
i=1 ri ≥ 2.
′
∼
Thus, we have e = 0 if and only if G = Zpe is cyclic, while otherwise we have e′ = e
if and only if re ≥ 2, and if re = 1 then 1 ≤ e′ < e is largest such that re′ > 0.
i

Letting Ωi (G) = {g ∈ G : g p = 1} be the characteristic subgroup of G consisting
of all elements of order dividing pi , where 0 ≤ i ≤ e, we observe that Ωi−1 (G) is a
subgroup of index p in Ωi (G) if and only if e′ < i ≤ e. In other words, using the
notions developed in [11], we have e′ < e if and only if G is a group of ‘GK type’,
in which case e − e′ coincides with the length of its ‘GK series’, see [11, Ex.2.3].
In view of Kulkarni’s Theorem (2.3), and the comments in [11, Sect.1.1], it is not
surprising that this shows up here in disguised form as well.
For the remainder of this section we keep the notation fixed in (4.1) and (4.2).
Now, since any group homomorphism from Γ to an abelian group factors through
H, from (2.2) we get the following:
4.3. Proposition. There is a smooth epimorphism φ : Γ −→ G if and only if
there is an epimorphism ϕ : H := Γ/[Γ, Γ] −→ G such that ϕ(cij ) has order pi , for
Qxf −1
ϕ(cf j ) has order pf .
✷
1 ≤ i ≤ f and 1 ≤ j ≤ xi , and j=1

Such an epimorphism ϕ : H −→ G is also said to be smooth. Having this in place,
we are prepared to state a necessary and sufficient arithmetic condition when there
is a smooth epimorphism φ : Γ −→ G. By (4.3) this amounts to give such a

10

condition for a smooth epimorphism ϕ : H −→ G, which is done in (4.4) and (4.5)
for necessity and sufficiency, respectively. We call this collection of statements
Talu’s Theorem, for the following reasons:
We pursue a strategy similar to the one employed in [14, La.3.2] and [14, Thm.3.3],
where the statements of (4.4) and (4.5) are proven for the case p odd. Here, we are
developing a general approach, which covers the case p = 2 as well, and with which
we recover the results in [14] in a more conceptual manner. In particular, we close
a gap in the proof of [14, Thm.3.3], where the element there playing a role similar
to the element ‘g’ in our proof of (4.5) is incorrectly stated.
4.4. Theorem. If there exists a smooth epimorphism ϕ : H −→ G then we have
f ′ = f ≤ e, and the following inequalities are fulfilled:
2h +

f
X
j=i

xj ≥ 1 +

e
X

rj ,

for 1 ≤ i ≤ f,

and 2h ≥

e
X

rj .

j=f +1

j=i

Moreover, if p = 2 and e′ < f , then xf is even.
i

i

Proof. For 0 ≤ i ≤ e let Ωi (G) = {g ∈ G : g p = 1} and ✵i (G) = {g p ∈ G : g ∈
G} be the characteristic subgroups of G consisting of all elements of order dividing
pi , and of all pi -th powers, respectively. In particular Ω1 (G) is an Fp -vector space,
where Fp denotes the field with p elements.
Now, the existence of the smooth epimorphism ϕ : H −→ G implies f ′ = f ≤ e.
We have ✵e (H) ≤ ker(ϕ), thus letting
x −1
H̃ := H/✵e (H) ∼
= Zx1 ⊕ Zx22 ⊕ · · · ⊕ Z ff ⊕ Z2he
p

p

p

p

yields an epimorphism ϕ̃ : H̃ −→ G. Hence dualising we get a monomorphism
ϕ̃∗ : G∗ := Hom(G, C∗ ) −→ Hom(H̃, C∗ ) = H̃ ∗ , that is G ∼
= G∗ is isomorphic to a
∗ ∼
subgroup of H̃ = H̃. Thus Ωi (G) and ✵i (G) can be identified with subgroups of
Ωi (H̃) and ✵i (H̃), respectively, and hence we have
dimFp (Ω1 (✵i (G))) ≤ dimFp (Ω1 (✵i (H̃))).
Now, for 0 ≤ i ≤ e − 1 we have
Ω1 (✵i (G)) ∼
= Zpri+1 ⊕ Zpri+2 ⊕ · · · ⊕ Zrpe ,
which yields
dimFp (Ω1 (✵i (G))) =

e
X

rj .

j=i+1

Similarly, for 0 ≤ i ≤ f − 1 we have
x
x −1
Ω1 (✵i (H̃)) ∼
= Zpxi+1 ⊕ Zpxi+2 ⊕ · · · ⊕ Zp f −1 ⊕ Zp f ⊕ Z2h
p ,
yielding
dimFp (Ω1 (✵i (H̃))) = 2h − 1 +

f
X

j=i+1

while for f ≤ i ≤ e − 1 we get

dimFp (Ω1 (✵i (H̃))) = 2h.

xj ,

11

Finally, let p = 2 and e′ < f ≤ e. Then G has shape
r ′
G∼
= Zr1 ⊕ Zr2 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Z e′ ⊕ Z2e ,
2

4

2e

and thus

Ωf (G)/Ωf −1 (G) ∼
= Z2e−f /Z2e−f +1 ∼
= Z2 .
Now we observe that ϕ(cf j ) ∈ Ωf (G) \ Ωf −1 (G), for 1 ≤ j ≤ xf − 1, where
Qxf −1
✷
j=1 ϕ(cf j ) 6∈ Ωf −1 (G) as well, implying that xf − 1 is odd.

4.5. Theorem. Let f ′ = f ≤ e, where in case p = 2 and e′ < f we additionally
assume that xf is even, such that
2h +

f
X

xj ≥ 1 +

e
X

rj ,

for 1 ≤ i ≤ f,

and 2h ≥

rj .

j=f +1

j=i

j=i

e
X

Then there exists a smooth epimorphism ϕ : H −→ G.
Proof. By the inequalities assumed we have
e
X
rj , for 1 ≤ i ≤ f,
|C0 ∪ Cf ∪ Cf −1 ∪ · · · ∪ Ci | ≥

and |C0 | ≥

e
X

rj ,

j=f +1

j=i

where the latter
Pesum is empty if e = f . Thus we may choose a subset Df +1 ⊆ C0
of cardinality j=f +1 rj . Subsequently, for f ≥ i ≥ 1 we may recursively choose,
disjointly from Df +1 , pairwise disjoint sets
Di = {di,1 , . . . , di,ri } ⊆ C0 ∪ Cf ∪ Cf −1 ∪ · · · ∪ Ci

of cardinality ri . Let

[
i
for 1 ≤ i ≤ f,
Dj
Ci′ := Ci \

and C0′ := C0 \

 f[
+1
j=1

j=1


Dj .

We are going define a homomorphism ϕ : H −→ G by specifying the image of C:
Pe
The direct summand hDf +1 i of H is a free abelian group of rank j=f +1 rj , hence
choosing ϕ(c) appropriately, for c ∈ Df +1 ⊆ C0 , the direct summand
rf +2
re
∼ Zrff+1
G′ := hgij : f + 1 ≤ i ≤ e, 1 ≤ j ≤ ri i =
+1 ⊕ Z f +2 ⊕ · · · ⊕ Zpe
p

p

of G becomes an epimorphic image of hDf +1 i. Thus letting ϕ(c) := 1 for c ∈ C0′ ,
we are done in the case f = 0. Hence we may assume that f ′ = f > 0, thus we
have xf ≥ 2 and Cf 6= ∅, where we may assume that Cf ∩ Df 6= ∅ whenever rf > 0.
Now, for dij ∈ C0 ∩ Di , where 1 ≤ i ≤ f , we let ϕ(dij ) := gij . Moreover, for
pe−k
, while for c ∈ Ck′
dij ∈ Ck ∩ Di , where 1 ≤ i ≤ k < f ≤ e, we let ϕ(dij ) := gij · ge,r
e
e−k
p
. To specify ϕ(c) for c ∈ Cf we need some flexibility:
we let ϕ(c) := ge,r
e
For dij ∈ Cf ∩ Di , where 1 ≤ i ≤ f , we let ϕ(dij ) = gij · c′ , for some c′ ∈ G, while
for c ∈ Cf′ we just write ϕ(c) = c′ . Then we have to show that the elements c′ can
be chosen suitably
Q to give rise to an epimorphism such that all ϕ(c), where c ∈ Cf ,
as well as g := c∈Cf ϕ(c) have order pf .

In particular, ϕ(c) will have order pf , if c ∈ Cf \ Df and c′ ∈ G is chosen to
have order pf , or if c ∈ Cf ∩ Df and c′ ∈ G′ is chosen to have order dividing pf .

12

Moreover, ϕ will be an epimorphism whenever f < e and we choose c′ ∈ G′ for
Sf
all c ∈ Cf ∩ ( i=1 Di ). The order condition on g will be checked by showing that
the image of g under a suitable projection of G onto one of its direct summands
already has order pf . We now distinguish various cases:
e′ −f

i) Let f < e′ ≤ e. Then pick c0 ∈ Cf , and let c′0 := gep′ ,1 , while for c0 6= c ∈ Cf
e−f

p
; note that for e′ = e we have re ≥ 2. Then projecting g onto hge′ ,1 i
let c′ := ge,r
e
yields c′0 , which has order pf .

ii) Let f = e′ ≤ e. Then, since rf = re′ > 0, we may assume that de′ ,1 ∈ Cf ∩ Df .
pe−f
, while for c ∈ Cf ∩ Df let c′ := 1; note that for
For c ∈ Cf \ Df let c′ := ge,r
e
′
f = e = e we have re ≥ 2, and de,re ∈ C0 ∪ Cf implies that ϕ is an epimorphism.
Projecting g onto hge′ ,1 i yields ge′ ,1 , which has order pf .
e−f

p
)ac , where ac is chosen coprime
iii) Let e′ < f < e. Then for c ∈ Cf let c′ := (ge,1
e−f
P
p
)a , where a := c∈Cf ac . The latter
to p. Projecting g onto hge,1 i yields (ge,1
element has order pf if and only if a is coprime to p. If p is odd, this can be
achieved by picking any c ∈ Cf and replacing ac by ac + 1 or ac − 1, if necessary. If
p = 2, then ac is odd for all c ∈ Cf , which, since |Cf | = xf − 1 is odd, implies that
a is odd.

iv) Let e′ < f = e. Then, since rf = re = 1, we may assume that Cf ∩ Df = {de,1 }.
ac
For c ∈ Cf let c′ := ge,1
, where ac is chosen coprime to p for c 6= de,1 , while for
c = de,1 we choose ac such that 1 + ac is coprime to p. This implies that ϕ(de,1 ) has
a
order pf and that ϕ is an epimorphism. Projecting g onto hge,1 i yields ge,1
, where
P
f
a := 1 + c∈Cf ac . The latter element has order p if and only if a is coprime to
p. If p is odd, this can be achieved by picking c ∈ Cf and replacing ac by ac + 1 or
ac − 1, if necessary. If p = 2, then ac is odd for all de,1 6= c ∈ Cf , and 1 + ac is odd
for c = de,1 , which, since |Cf | = xf − 1 is odd, implies that a is odd.
✷
5. Transforming to mainline integers
In this section we show how mainline integers, as introduced in Section 3, can be
reconciled with the problem of determining the (reduced) genus spectrum of abelian
p-groups and the results of Section 4.
5.1. Translating the reduced genus map. Let still G be a non-trivial abelian
p-group of exponent pe .
i) In order to reformulate the results of Section 4, we define α : Ne+1
−→ Ne+1
by
0
0

X
e
e
X
xi + 2x0 , . . . , xe + 2x0 , 2x0 ,
xi + 2x0 ,
α(x1 , . . . , xe ; x0 ) :=
i=1

i=2

which is injective and has image, using the notation from (3.1),

im(α) = N ′ (e + 1) := {(a1 , . . . , ae+1 ) ∈ N (e + 1) : ae+1 ∈ 2N0 }.
The inverse map α−1 : N ′ (e + 1) −→ Ne+1
is given by
0
α−1 (a1 , . . . , ae+1 ) := (a1 − a2 , . . . , ae − ae+1 ;

ae+1
).
2

13

Letting D(G) ⊂ Ne+1
be the data spectrum of G as introduced in (2.4), let
0
A(G) := α(D(G)) ⊂ Ne+1
0 .
Then the reduced genus map g0 : D(G) −→ 12 · ({−1} ∪ N0 ), given by


e
e
1 X
1 X
xi · pe − ·
xi pe−i ,
g0 (x1 , . . . , xe ; h) = −pe + h + ·
2 i=1
2 i=1
1
2

can be rephrased as γ = g0 ◦ α−1 : A(G) −→
γ(a1 , . . . , ae+1 ) = −pe +

· ({−1} ∪ N0 ), where explicitly

ae+1
p−1
+
· ℘(a1 , . . . , ae ).
2
2

ii) As will become clear below, elements of the form (x1 , . . . , xi , 0, . . . , 0; h) ∈ D(G),
for some 0 ≤ i ≤ e, are of particular importance. These translate into elements of
the form (a1 , . . . , ai , 2a, . . . , 2a) ∈ N ′ (e + 1). For the latter we have
p−1
γ(a1 , . . . , ai , 2a, . . . , 2a) = −pe + a +
· ℘(a1 , . . . , ai , 2a, . . . , 2a),
2
where the argument of ℘ is a sequence of length e, and yields
℘(a1 , . . . , ai , 2a, . . . , 2a) = pe−i ·

i
X

aj pi−j + 2a ·

j=1

From that we get
e

γ(a1 , . . . , ai , 2a, . . . , 2a) = −p + p

e−i

e−i−1
X

pj .

j=0



p−1
· ℘(a1 , . . . , ai ) .
· a+
2

In particular, for i = 0 we get γ(2a, . . . , 2a) = (a − 1) · pe , while for i = e
we recover γ(a1 , . . . , ae , 2a) = −pe + a + p−1
2 · ℘(a1 , . . . , ae ). Note that we have
γ(a1 , . . . , ai , 2a, . . . , 2a) ∈ Z, unless p = 2 and i = e and ae odd, in which case we
have γ(a1 , . . . , ae , 2a) ∈ 21 Z \ Z.
∼ Zr1 ⊕ Zr22 ⊕ · · · ⊕ Zrpee , where
5.2. Translating Talu’s Theorem. Let again G =
p
p
e ≥ 1, and ri ≥ 0 for 1 ≤ i ≤ e − 1, and re ≥ 1. Moreover, for 1 ≤ i ≤ e + 1 we fix
e
X
si := 1 +
rj ,
j=i

Hence we have s := (s1 , . . . , se+1 ) ∈ N (e + 1) such that se ≥ 2 and se+1 = 1.
Having this in place, (4.4) and (4.5) can be rephrased as follows:
i) For p odd we have
A(G) := A0 ∪ A1 ∪ · · · ∪ Ae ,
where for 0 ≤ i ≤ e we let, setting a0 := ∞,
Ai

:= {a ∈ N ′ (e + 1) : (a1 , . . . , ai ) ≥ (s1 , . . . , si ),
ai+1 = · · · = ae+1 ≥ si+1 − 1, ai − ai+1 ≥ 2}.

In particular, we have
A0 = {a ∈ N ′ (e + 1) : a1 = · · · = ae+1 ≥ s1 − 1}
and
Ae = {a ∈ N ′ (e + 1) : (a1 , . . . , ae ) ≥ (s1 , . . . , se ), ae − ae+1 ≥ 2}.

14

For 0 ≤ i < j ≤ e the sequences in Ai satisfy aj = aj+1 , while those in Aj satisfy
aj − aj+1 ≥ 2, hence Ai ∩ Aj = ∅, thus A(G) is disjointly covered by the Ai .
ii) For p = 2, letting 0 ≤ e′ ≤ e be as defined in (4.2), we get
A(G) := A0 ∪ A1 ∪ · · · ∪ Ae′ ∪ A′e′ +1 ∪ · · · ∪ A′e ,
where for 1 ≤ i ≤ e we let
A′i := {a ∈ Ai : ai − ai+1 ∈ 2N}.
In particular, for i = e we get
A′e := {a ∈ Ae : ae ∈ 2N}.
Note that we have γ(Ae ) ⊆ 21 Z and γ(A′e ) ⊆ Z, thus we recover Kulkarni’s Theorem
(2.3) in the case of abelian p-groups.
5.3. Towards the minimum genus. This now gives a handle to compute the
reduced minimum genus of G, which for p odd is given as
µ0 (G) = min{min γ(Ai ) : 0 ≤ i ≤ e},
while for p = 2 we get
µ0 (G) = min ({min γ(Ai ) : 0 ≤ i ≤ e′ } ∪ {min γ(A′i ) : e′ < i ≤ e}).
i) We proceed to derive formulae, in terms of the sequence s = (s1 , . . . , se+1 )
associated with G, to determine min γ(Ai ), for 0 ≤ i ≤ e: To this end, let
si+1
si+1
⌋, . . . , 2 · ⌊
⌋) ∈ N ′ (e + 1)
si := (s1 , . . . , si , 2 · ⌊
2
2
and
si+1
si+1
⌋, . . . , 2 · ⌊
⌋) ∈ N ′ (e + 1),
si+ := (s1 , . . . , si−1 , si + ǫi , 2 · ⌊
2
2
where ǫi ∈ {0, 1, 2} is chosen minimal such that si + ǫi − 2 · ⌊ si+1
2 ⌋ ≥ 2, that is

0, if si − si+1 ≥ 2,






 0, if si − si+1 = 1, si+1 odd,
ǫi :=

1, if si − si+1 = 1, si+1 even,



1, if si = si+1 , si+1 odd,




2, if si = si+1 , si+1 even.

Note that for i = e we have se+1 = 1 and se ≥ 2, and thus ǫe = 0; moreover, for
i = 0 we let ǫ0 = 0.
It now follows from the description of Ai , and (3.2), that min γ(Ai ) is attained
precisely for the hull sequence
si+1
si+1
s̃i+ = (s̃1 , . . . , s̃i , 2 · ⌊
⌋, . . . , 2 · ⌊
⌋) ∈ N ′ (e + 1),
2
2
of si+ , where the prefix (s̃1 , . . . , s̃i ) of length i is determined as follows:
For i ≥ 1 let 0 ≤ i′′ ≤ i′ < i be both maximal such that si′ −si ≥ 1 and si′′ −si ≥ 2;
hence, if i′′ < i′ then we have si′ − si′ +1 = 1, and i′ = 0 and i′′ = 0 refer to the

15

cases s1 = si and s1 − si ≤ 1, respectively. Then (s̃1 , . . . , s̃i ) is given as
(s1 , . . . , si ),

if ǫi = 0,

(s1 , . . . , si′ , si′ +1 + 1, . . . , si + 1),

if ǫi = 1,

(s1 , . . . , si′′ , si′′ +1 + 1, . . . , si′ + 1, si′ +1 + 2, . . . , si + 2), if ǫi = 2.
Thus letting

we get



si+1
p−1
µi := γ(si ) = −pe + pe−i · ⌊
⌋+
· ℘(s1 , . . . , si ) ,
2
2



 µi ,
i+
µi +
min γ(Ai ) = γ(s̃ ) =


µi +

if ǫi = 0,
1
2
1
2

· (p

e−i′

· (p

e−i′′

−p

e−i

+p

),

e−i′

if ǫi = 1,
− 2p

e−i

),

if ǫi = 2.

In particular, we have

p−1
· ℘(s1 , . . . , se ),
2
being attained precisely for (s1 , . . . , se , 0), and
s1
min γ(A0 ) = µ0 = (⌊ ⌋ − 1) · pe ,
2
being attained precisely for (2 · ⌊ s21 ⌋, . . . , 2 · ⌊ s21 ⌋).
min γ(Ae ) = µe = −pe +

ii) It remains to consider min γ(A′i ), for e′ < i ≤ e, in the case p = 2: For e′ < i < e
′
we have si = si+1 = 2, hence s̃i = 4 and 2 · ⌊ si+1
2 ⌋ = 2, while for e < i = e we have
se+1
se = 2 and se+1 = 1, hence s̃e = 2 and 2 · ⌊ 2 ⌋ = 0. Thus the above description
for e′ < i ≤ e yields
min γ(A′i ) = min γ(Ai ) = γ(s̃i+ ),
implying that the reduced minimum genus of G, just as for p odd, is given as
µ0 (G) = min{min γ(Ai ) : 0 ≤ i ≤ e}.
5.4. Further towards the minimum genus. We turn to the question whether
there are relations between the various γ(s̃i+ ) = min γ(Ai ), for 0 ≤ i ≤ e, which
would allow to take the minimum determining µ0 (G) over a smaller set. To this
end, we consider the cases where ǫi 6= 0; hence we have 1 ≤ i ≤ e − 1:
i) If si+1 is even and si = si+1 , then we have
si+

=

(s1 , . . . , si−1 , si + 2, si , . . . , si ),

s(i−1)+

=

(s1 , . . . , si−1 + ǫi−1 , si , si , . . . , si ),

where ǫi−1 = 0 whenever si−1 ≥ si + 2, and si−1 + ǫi−1 = si + 2 otherwise.
ii) If si+1 is even and si − si+1 = 1, then we have
si+
s

(i−1)+

= (s1 , . . . , si−1 , si + 1, si − 1, . . . , si − 1),
= (s1 , . . . , si−1 + ǫi−1 , si − 1, si − 1, . . . , si − 1),

where ǫi−1 = 0 whenever si−1 ≥ si + 1, and si−1 + ǫi−1 = si + 1 otherwise.

16

iii) If si+1 is odd and si = si+1 , then we have
si+
s

(i−1)+

= (s1 , . . . , si−1 , si + 1, si − 1, . . . , si − 1),
= (s1 , . . . , si−1 + ǫi−1 , si − 1, si − 1, . . . , si − 1),

where ǫi−1 = 0 whenever si−1 ≥ si + 1, and si−1 + ǫi−1 = si + 1 otherwise.

✷

Hence, in either of these cases, going over to hull sequences yields s̃i+ ≥ s̃(i−1)+ ,
implying min γ(Ai ) = γ(s̃i+ ) ≥ γ(s̃(i−1)+ ) = min γ(Ai−1 ). Thus min γ(Ai ) need
not be considered in finding µ0 (G). Hence we are left with the cases 0 ≤ i ≤ e such
that ǫi = 0, that is min γ(Ai ) = µi .
Moreover, if s1 is even, then since s1 ≥ · · · ≥ se ≥ 2 we have
p−1
s1
s1
µe = −pe +
· ℘(s1 , . . . , se ) ≤ −pe +
· (pe − 1) < ( − 1) · pe = µ0 ,
2
2
2
hence in this case min γ(A0 ) need not be considered in finding µ0 (G). Thus, in
conclusion, we have proved the following:
5.5. Theorem. Keeping the above notation, we have
µ0 (G) = min{min γ(Ai ) : i ∈ I(G)} = min{µi : i ∈ I(G)},
where, letting s0 := ∞, we have
I(G) := {0 ≤ i ≤ e : si − si+1 ≥ 2}

∪

{0 ≤ i ≤ e : si − si+1 = 1, si+1 odd}.

In particular, we always have {0, e} ⊆ I(G), but if s1 is even then to find µ0 (G) it
suffices to consider i ∈ I(G) \ {0} only
✷
In other words, finding µ0 (G) is reduced to computing the minimum of |I(G)| ≤
e + 1 numbers, which are given explicitly in terms of known invariants of G. In
particular, this machinery to determine µ0 (G) will feature prominently in the proof
of our main result (6.2). Moreover, to underline the effectiveness of these techniques,
in Sections 8 and 9 we give detailed example treatments of the groups of rank at
most 2, and of the groups of exponent at most p2 , respectively.
5.6. Translating back. We translate the results back, to express µi = min γ(Ai ),
for i ∈ I(G), in terms of the p-datum giving rise to µi , which by (5.1) is given as
si+1
si+1
xi = (x1 , . . . , xe ; h) := α−1 (s1 , . . . , si , 2 · ⌊
⌋, . . . , 2 · ⌊
⌋).
2
2
i) If ri = si − si+1 ≥ 2 and si+1 is even, then we have
si+1
xi = (r1 , . . . , ri , 0, . . . , 0;
),
2
yielding


i
1
1 X
si+1
e
rj (1 − j ) .
−1+ ·
µi = p ·
2
2 j=1
p
ii) If ri = si − si+1 ≥ 1 and si+1 is odd, then we have
si+1 − 1
xi = (r1 , . . . , ri−1 , ri + 1, 0, . . . , 0;
),
2

17

yielding
µi = p e ·




i
1
si+1 − 1
1
1 X
1
rj (1 − j ) + · (1 − i ) .
−1+ ·
2
2 j=1
p
2
p

In particular, the case i = 0 is encompassed by the above cases, depending on
whether s1 is even or odd, respectively, by x0 = (0, . . . , 0; ⌊ s21 ⌋), where this case
need not be considered if s1 is even. Moreover, the case i = e, since se+1 = 1, is
subsumed in the second of the above cases, by xe = (r1 , . . . , re−1 , re + 1; 0).
Finally, the various µi = min γ(Ai ) to be considered belong to pairwise distinct
orbit genera, inasmuch the map
si+1
I(G) −→ Z : i 7→ ⌊
⌋
2
is strictly decreasing, hence in particular is injective: Indeed, if i − 1, i ∈ I(G),
then we have si − si+1 ≥ 1 anyway; and if si is odd and si+1 is even, then from
si+1
si − si+1 ≥ 2 we still get ⌊ s2i ⌋ = si2−1 > si+1
2 = ⌊ 2 ⌋.
5.7. Maclachlan’s method. We compare our approach with the method to compute the minimum genus for arbitrary non-cyclic abelian groups given in [8]:
Let G be a non-cyclic abelian group, with sequence (n1 , . . . , ns ) of invariants giving
rise to the Smith normal form abelian group presentation of G; hence we have
s ≥ 2, and the exponent of G equals ns . Let νh ∈ N0 be the reduced minimum
genus afforded by all signatures of G with fixed orbit genus h ≥ 0. Then, by [8,
Thm.4], the reduced minimum genus of G equals
s
µ0 (G) = min{νh : 0 ≤ h ≤ ⌊ ⌋},
2
where the numbers νh can be computed explicitly as


s−2h
1
1
1
1 X
(1 −
) + · (1 −
) .
νh = n s · h − 1 + ·
2
nk
2
ns−2h
k=1

In our case of abelian p-groups this reads as follows: We have
(n1 , . . . , ns ) = (p, . . . , p, p2 , . . . , p2 , . . . , pe , . . . , pe ),
P
where the entry pi occurs ri times, for 1 ≤ i ≤ e; hence we have s = ei=1 ri = s1 −1.
Thus we are able to improve [8, Thm.4], for non-cyclic abelian p-groups, as follows:
By the injectivity of the map I(G) −→ Z : i 7→ ⌊ si+1
2 ⌋, for i ∈ I(G) we have
ν⌊ si+1 ⌋ = µi ,
2

and thus by (5.5) we may compute µ0 (G) as a minimum over a set of cardinality
|I(G)| ≤ e + 1 instead of one of cardinality ⌊ s12−1 ⌋ + 1, as
µ0 (G) = min{ν⌊ si+1 ⌋ : i ∈ I(G)}.
2

Recall that whenever s1 is even the case i = 0 need not be considered, so that we
always get a subset of the indices used in [8]. From the formulae in (5.6) to compute
µi in terms of p-data, we recover the formulae for ν⌊ si+1 ⌋ given in [8]. Finally, we
2
point out that our approach is also valid for cyclic p-groups, while cyclic groups
are excluded in [8]. Moreover, since in [8] only genera g ≥ 2 are considered, the

18

case s = 2 and some small abelian groups have to be treated as exceptions; these
reappear in (8.1), where we consider p-groups of non-positive minimum genus.
6. The main result
In view of the examples worked out in Sections 8 and 9, if G runs through all abelian
p-groups, there seems to be a tendency that there are phenomena of ‘exceptional’
and ‘generic’ cases, where in the ‘generic’ region we have µ0 (G) = µe ; for an example
illustration how this is to be understood see Table 5 (page 37). Our main result, to
which we proceed in this section, can be seen as a verification of this observation
for a large part of the ‘generic’ region.
We keep the notation introduced in Section 5, in particular let
∼ Zr1 ⊕ Zr22 ⊕ · · · ⊕ Zrpee ,
G=
p

p

where e ≥ 1, and ri ≥ 0 for 1 ≤ i ≤ e − 1, and re ≥ 1.
6.1. Proposition. Suppose that
℘(ri+1 , . . . , re ) ≥ pe−i − 1,
for all 0 ≤ i ≤ e − 1 such that si+1 is odd. Then we have µ0 (G) = µe .
If si > si+1 for all 1 ≤ i ≤ e − 1 such that si+1 is odd, then the converse also holds.
Proof. By (5.3), we have min γ(Ae ) = µe and min γ(A0 ) = µ0 , while for 1 ≤
i ≤ e − 1 we have min γ(Ai ) ≥ µi . Moreover, for p = 2 and e′ < i ≤ e we have
min γ(A′i ) = min γ(Ai ). Thus it is sufficient to show that under the assumptions
made we have µi ≥ µe , for 0 ≤ i ≤ e − 1:
Now µi ≥ µe is equivalent to saying
si+1
2·⌊
⌋ · pe−i ≥ (p − 1) · ℘(si+1 , . . . , se ).
2
The right hand side of this inequality being equal to
si+1 pe−i − se +

e−1
X

(sj+1 − sj )pe−j = si+1 pe−i − 1 − ℘(ri+1 , . . . , re ),

j=i+1

we thus have µi ≥ µe if and only if
si+1
(si+1 − 2 · ⌊
⌋) · pe−i ≤ 1 + ℘(ri+1 , . . . , re ).
2
The latter inequality clearly holds if si+1 is even, while if si+1 is odd then it holds
if and only if ℘(ri+1 , . . . , re ) ≥ pe−i − 1. This proves the first assertion.
For the second assertion, let 0 ≤ i ≤ e − 1 such that si+1 is odd. Then for i 6= 0 the
assumption si − si+1 ≥ 1 implies ǫi = 0, using the notation of (5.3), while we have
ǫ0 = 0 anyway. Thus we get µi = min γ(Ai ) ≥ µ0 (G) = µe , which by the above
observation implies the second assertion.
✷
We are now in a position to prove our main result:

19

6.2. Main Theorem. Let G be a non-trivial abelian p-group of shape
G∼
= Zr1 ⊕ Zr22 ⊕ · · · ⊕ Zree ,
p

p

p

such that
ri ≥ p − 1

for 1 ≤ i ≤ e − 1,

and re ≥ max{p − 2, 1}.

a) Then the reduced minimum and stable upper genera of G are given as
!
e
X
1
e
e−i
e
(p − p ) · ri .
µ0 (G) = σ0 (G) = · −1 − p +
2
i=1
b) Letting 0 ≤ j ≤ e be chosen smallest such that (rj+1 , . . . , re ) = (p− 1, . . . , p− 1),
where j = e refers to the case re 6= p − 1, the reduced minimum genus µ0 (G) is
afforded precisely by the p-data


1
r1 , . . . , ri−1 , ri + 1, 0, . . . , 0; (e − i)(p − 1) ,
2
where j ≤ i ≤ e is arbitrary for p odd, but restricted to the cases where e − i is
even for p = 2. In particular, µ0 (G) is always afforded by
(r1 , . . . , re−1 , re + 1; 0).
Proof. a) By (5.3) and (5.6) we have
1
·
2

e

−1 − p +

e
X
i=1

1
2 Z,

e

(p − p

e−i

) · ri

!

= −pe +

p−1
· ℘(s1 , . . . , se ) = µe .
2

Note that µe ∈
where µe ∈ 21 Z \ Z if and only if p = 2 and se is odd. Since
µ0 (G) ≤ σ0 (G) anyway, it suffices to prove σ0 (G) ≤ µe and µe ≤ µ0 (G):
i) We first show σ0 (G) ≤ µe : By assumption, we have si − si+1 = ri ≥ p − 1 for
1 ≤ i ≤ e − 1, that is ||(s1 , . . . , se )|| ≥ p − 1. Hence for any m ∈ N0 , by (3.5),
there is a sequence (a1 , . . . , ae ) ∈ N (e) such that (a1 , . . . , ae ) ≥ (s1 , . . . , se ) and
℘(a1 , . . . , ae ) = ℘(s1 , . . . , se ) + m.
Let first p be odd, and σ ∈ Z such that σ ≥ µe . Then there are m ∈ N0 and r ∈ N0
such that r < p−1
2 and
p−1
p−1
+ r = −pe +
· (℘(s1 , . . . , se ) + m) + r.
2
2
Let (a1 , . . . , ae ) as above such that ℘(a1 , . . . , ae ) = ℘(s1 , . . . , se ) + m, and ae+1 :=
2r, then ae − ae+1 ≥ (re + 1) − 2 · p−3
≥ 2 implies (a1 , . . . , ae+1 ) ∈ Ae . Since
2
γ(a1 , . . . , ae+1 ) = −pe + r + p−1
·
℘(a
,
.
.
.
, ae ) = σ, from (5.2) we get σ ∈ sp0 (G).
1
2
σ = µe + m ·

Let now p = 2, and σ ∈ 21 Z such that σ ≥ µe . Let m := 2(σ − µe ) ∈ N0 . Let
(a1 , . . . , ae ) be as above such that ℘(a1 , . . . , ae ) = ℘(s1 , . . . , se ) + m, and ae+1 := 0,
then ae − ae+1 ≥ re + 1 ≥ 2 implies (a1 , . . . , ae+1 ) ∈ Ae . Since γ(a1 , . . . , ae+1 ) =
−2e + 21 · ℘(a1 , . . . , ae ) = σ. Thus, if e′ = e from (5.2) we get σ ∈ sp0 (G).
If e′ < e, then we have e′ = e − 1 and se = 2, and hence γ(A(G)) = γ(A0 ) ∪ γ(A1 ) ∪
· · · ∪ γ(Ae−1 ) ∪ γ(A′e ) ⊆ Z. Since µe = min γ(A′e ) we may assume that σ ∈ Z, thus
m := 2(σ − µe ) ∈ N0 is even. Hence we get
ae ≡ ℘(a1 , . . . , ae ) = ℘(s1 , . . . , se ) + m ≡ se + m ≡ 0

(mod 2),

20

implying that (a1 , . . . , ae+1 ) ∈ A′e , and from (5.2) we get σ ∈ sp0 (G).
ii) We show µe ≤ µ0 (G): Since si − si+1 = ri ≥ 1 for all 1 ≤ i ≤ e − 1, by (6.1) we
have to show ℘(ri+1 , . . . , re ) ≥ pe−i − 1, for all 0 ≤ i ≤ e − 1 such that si+1 is odd.
Pe
For p odd we have rj ≥ p − 1 for 1 ≤ j ≤ e − 1, and re ≥ p − 2, where j=i+1 rj =
si+1 − 1 being even implies that (ri+1 , . . . , re−1, re ) 6= (p − 1, . . . , p − 1, p − 2). Thus
℘(ri+1 , . . . , re ) > −1 + (p − 1) ·

e
X

pe−j = pe−i − 2.

j=i+1

For p = 2 we have rj ≥ 1 for 1 ≤ j ≤ e, directly yielding
℘(ri+1 , . . . , re ) =

e
X

j=i+1

rj · 2e−j ≥

e
X

2e−j = 2e−i − 1.

j=i+1

b) We determine when µ0 (G) is attained: By (5.3), min γ(Ae ) = µe is attained
precisely for (s1 , . . . , se , 0), corresponding to the p-datum (r1 , . . . , re−1 , re + 1; 0).
Now, for 0 ≤ i ≤ e − 1, by the proof of (6.1) we have µi ≥ µe . Moreover, replacing
inequalities by equalities in the proof of (6.1) shows that µi = µe is equivalent
to si+1 being odd and ℘(ri+1 , . . . , re ) = pe−i − 1. Since (ri+1 , . . . , re−1 , re ) ≥
(p−1, . . . , p−1, max{p−2, 1}), the latter equalityPholds if and only if (ri+1 , . . . , re ) =
e
(p − 1, . . . , p − 1). Since in this case si+1 − 1 = j=i+1 rj = (e − i)(p − 1), we have
si+1 odd if and only if p is odd or e − i is even. Hence we conclude, by (5.3) again,
that in these cases min γ(Ai ) = µi is attained precisely for
si+1
si+1
(s1 , . . . , si , 2 · ⌊
⌋, . . . , 2 · ⌊
⌋) = (s1 , . . . , si , si+1 − 1, . . . , si+1 − 1),
2
2
corresponding to the p-datum, using the notation of (5.6),
1
xi = (r1 , . . . , ri−1 , ri + 1, 0, . . . , 0; (e − i)(p − 1)).
2
Note that we have I(G) = {0, . . . , e} for p odd, while for p = 2 we at least get
{0} ∪ {e − 2 · ⌊ e−j
2 ⌋, . . . , e − 2, e} ⊆ I(G), hence the indices 0 ≤ i ≤ e affording
µ0 (G) are indeed elements of the index set I(G), in accordance with (5.5).
✷
6.3. Example. i) For p odd and (r1 , . . . , re−1 , re ) = (p − 1, . . . , p − 1, p − 2), that
is the extremal case, we get, recovering [14, Cor.3.7],
1
µ0 (G) = σ0 (G) = · (((e(p − 1) − 3) · pe + 1).
2
ii) For p arbitrary and (r1 , . . . , re−1 , re ) = (p − 1, . . . , p − 1, p − 1) we get
1
µ0 (G) = σ0 (G) = · (e(p − 1) − 1) · pe ,
2
e
which for p = 2 specializes to µ0 (G) = e−2
2 ·2 .
As an immediate consequence of (6.2), invoking Kulkarni’s Theorem (2.3), we are
able to describe the complete (reduced) spectrum of the groups in question:

21

6.4. Corollary. a) The reduced spectrum of G is given as

µ0 (G) + N0 ,
if p odd or re = 1,
sp0 (G) =
µ0 (G) + 21 N0 , if p = 2 and re ≥ 2.
Pe
b) Letting δ = δ(G) :=
i=1 (iri − 1) be the cyclic deficiency of G, then the
minimum genus and the spectrum of G are given as µ(G) = 1 + pδ · µ0 (G) and

1 + pδ · µ0 (G) + pδ · N0 ,
if p odd or re = 1,
sp(G) =
1 + 2δ · µ0 (G) + 2δ−1 · N0 , if p = 2 and re ≥ 2.
Moreover, for certain suitable co-finite sets of positive integers we are conversely
able to provide abelian p-groups having the specified set as their reduced spectrum:
6.5. Theorem. Let p be a prime, let e ≥ 1, and let m ∈ N such that
(
e
−1
+ 1, if p odd,
(2e − 1)pe − 2 · pp−1
m≥
e+1
(e − 1) · 2
+ 2,
if p = 2.
Then there is a group G of exponent pe such that µ0 (G) = −pe +

µ0 (G) + N0 ,
if p odd or m even,
sp0 (G) =
µ0 (G) + 12 N0 , if p = 2 and m odd.

p−1
2

· m and

Proof. We consider the sequence (a1 , . . . , ae ) ∈ N given by ae := max{p − 1, 2},
and ae−i := ae + i · 2(p − 1) for 1 ≤ i ≤ e − 1.
i) We first show that the lower bound for m given above coincides with ℘(a1 , . . . , ae ):
Pe−1 i
Pe
p
e
i
To this end, we first observe that se (p) :=
i=0 p ),
i=1 ip = p−1 · (ep −
which in turn is seen by induction: This 
formula being correct for e = 1, we
Pe−1
p
get se+1 (p) = (e + 1)pe+1 + se (p) = p−1
· (e + 1)(p − 1)pe + epe − i=0 pi =

Pe
p
e+1
− i=0 pi . In particular, for p = 2 we get se (2) = (e−1)·2e+1 +2.
p−1 · (e + 1)p
Now, for p odd we have

℘(a1 , . . . , ae ) = (p − 1) ·

e
X

(2(e − i) + 1)p

e−i

i=1

e−1
e
X
2(p − 1) X i
=
pi ,
ip − (p − 1) ·
·
p
i=0
i=1

which using the above expression for se (p) can be rewritten as
!
e−1
e−1
X
X
i
e
pi .
p − pe + 1 = (2e − 1)pe + 1 − 2 ·
℘(a1 , . . . , ae ) = 2 · ep −
i=0

i=0

For p = 2 we get ℘(a1 , . . . , ae ) = 2 ·

Pe

i=1 (e

− i + 1) · 2

e−i

=

Pe

i=1

i

i · 2 = se (2).

ii) The strategy of proof now is reminiscent of the proof of (3.5): Given m ≥
℘(a1 , . . . , ae ), then wePwrite m − ℘(a1 , . . . , ae ) in a partial p-adic expansion as
e
m − ℘(a1 , . . . , ae ) = i=1 bi pe−i , where bi ≥ 0 such that b2 , . . . , be < p, but b1
mightPbe arbitrarily large. Hence letting si := ai + bi for 1 ≤ i ≤ e, we have
e
m = i=1 si pe−i . Thus for 1 ≤ i ≤ e − 1 we get
ri := si − si+1 = 2(p − 1) + (bi − bi+1 ) ≥ p − 1,

22

and re := se − 1 ≥ ae − 1 = max{p − 2, 1}. Hence, by (6.2), for the abelian group
of shape G ∼
= Zrp1 ⊕ Zrp22 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Zrpee we have
p−1
p−1
· ℘(s1 , . . . , se ) = −pe +
· m.
2
2
Moreover, for p = 2 we have ae = 2, and thus if m is even we get be = 0 and hence
re = 1, while if m is odd we get be = 1 and hence re = 2. Thus the statement on
sp0 (G) follows from (6.4).
✷
σ0 (G) = µ0 (G) = µe = −pe +

7. Talu’s Conjecture
In general, we might wonder which invariants of a non-trivial abelian p-group G
are determined by its spectrum. Given the latter, this determines the Kulkarni
invariant N = N (G), and hence the cyclic deficiency δ = δ(G) = logp (N ) is known
as well whenever p is odd, while δ ∈ {logp (N ), 1 + logp (N )} for p = 2. Thus the
spectrum also determines the reduced minimum and stable upper genera whenever
p is odd, while the latter are known up to a factor of 2 for p = 2.
In this spirit, Talu’s Conjecture says that, if p is odd, then even the isomorphism
type of G is determined by its spectrum. We are tempted to include the case
p = 2 as well by expecting this to hold true up to finitely many finite sets of
exceptions; we cannot possibly expect more, for example in view of the sets of
groups {Z2 , Z4 , Z22 , Z8 } and {Z2 ⊕ Z4 , Z32 , Z2 ⊕ Z8 } discussed in (8.5).
As for evidence, restricting to certain classes of abelian p-group, Talu’s Conjecture
(including the case p = 2) holds within the class of cyclic p-groups with the only
exception of {Z2 , Z4 , Z8 }, see (8.3); within the class of elementary abelian p-groups
with the only exception of {Z2 , Z22 }, see (9.1); and within the class of p-groups of
exponent p2 , see (9.3). We proceed to prove a further positive result:
7.1. A finiteness result. We show that, as long as we stick to groups fulfilling
the assumptions of (6.2), given the spectrum of G there are only finitely many
groups having the same spectrum, up to isomorphism. Actually, just keeping the
reduced minimum genus fixed leaves only finitely possibilities:
Note first that the only admissible cyclic groups are Z2 and Z3 , hence we may
assume that the groups we are looking for are non-cyclic, that is have an associated
sequence (s1 , . . . , se ) 6= (2, . . . , 2). We now show that, given any m ≥ 0, there are
only finitely many e ≥ 1 and sequences s1 ≥ · · · ≥ se ≥ 2, where s1 ≥ 3, such that
p−1
µe = −pe +
· ℘(s1 , . . . , se ) ≤ m.
2
This is seen as follows: The above inequality is equivalent to
2(m + 1)
pe − 1
≤
.
℘(s1 − 2, . . . , se − 2) = ℘(s1 , . . . , se ) − 2 ·
p−1
p−1
2(m+1)
p−1 , hence since s1
e−i
p
≤ 2(m+1)
p−1 , bounding

This implies (s1 − 2) · pe−1 ≤

≥ 3 we infer that e is bounded.

Fixing e, we get (si − 2) ·

si as well, for 1 ≤ i ≤ e.

✷

23

In view of this, there necessarily are groups fulfilling the assumptions of (6.2) whose
reduced minimum genus exceeds any given bound. Hence the point of (6.5) is to
add some precision to this observation. But here positive results come to an end:
In (7.2) and (7.3), we are going to construct counterexamples to Talu’s Conjecture
(both for p odd and p = 2), consisting of pairs of groups having the same order
exponent, and pairs where these invariants are different, respectively. Even worse,
by the results in (7.2), there cannot be an absolute bound on the cardinality of a
set of abelian p-groups having the same spectrum, not even if we restrict to groups
having the same order and exponent.
7.2. Counterexamples with fixed exponent. We construct non-isomorphic
abelian groups G and G̃ having the same order, exponent, and spectrum, thus
in particular having the same Kulkarni invariant, cyclic deficiency, minimum genus
and reduced minimum genus.
In view of the results in (9.1) and (9.3), we let e := 3, and look at groups G ∼
=
∼ Zr̃1 ⊕ Zr̃22 ⊕ Zr̃33 of exponent p3 fulfilling the assumptions
Zr1 ⊕ Zr22 ⊕ Zr33 and G̃ =
p

p

p

p

p

p

of (6.2), that is coming from sequences r = (r1 , r2 , r3 ) and r̃ = (r̃1 , r̃2 , r̃3 ) such that
r1 , r2 , r̃1 , r̃2 ≥ p − 1 and r3 , r̃3 ≥ max{p − 2, 1}. Then, by (6.4), the groups G and
G̃ are as desired if and only if they are non-isomorphic such that |G| = |G̃| and
µ0 (G) = µ0 (G̃), and in case p = 2 we have r3 = 1 if and only if r̃3 = 1.
Now |G| = |G̃| translates into
r1 + 2r2 + 3r3 = logp (|G|) = logp (|G̃|) = r̃1 + 2r̃2 + 3r̃3 ,
and µ0 (G) = µ0 (G̃) translates into
3
X
i=1

(p3 − p3−i ) · ri =

3
X

(p3 − p3−i ) · r̃i .

i=1

Hence we conclude that we have |G| = |G̃| and µ0 (G) = µ0 (G̃) if and only if
r̃ − r ∈ Z3 is an element of the row kernel of the matrix


1 p3 − p2
P := 2 p3 − p  ∈ Z3×2 ⊆ Q3×2 .
3 p3 − 1

Now P has Q-rank 2, and its row kernel is given as ker(P ) = hρiQ , where
ρ := (p + 2, −2p − 1, p) ∈ Z3 .
Since gcd(p + 2, −2p − 1, p) = 1 we conclude that ker(P ) ∩ Z3 = hρiZ .

In conclusion, we have |G| = |G̃| and µ0 (G) = µ0 (G̃) if and only if r̃ = r + k · ρ
for some k ∈ Z, where G and G̃ are non-isomorphic if and only if k 6= 0. Thus
this provides a complete picture of the counterexamples to Talu’s Conjecture in
the realm of abelian groups of exponent p3 fulfilling the assumptions of (6.2). In
particular, for any l ∈ N there is a set of isomorphism types of cardinality at least
l + 1 consisting of groups having the same order and reduced minimum genus:
Given r1 ≥ p − 1 and r3 ≥ p − 2, such that r3 ≥ 2 for p = 2, and letting r2 :=
(p − 1) + l · (2p + 1), all the sequences r + k · ρ, where 0 ≤ k ≤ l, give rise to groups

24

as desired. The smallest counterexamples, in terms of group order, are given by
choosing r as small as possible for the case l = 1:
i) For p odd this yields
r = (p − 1, 3p, p − 2) and r̃ := r + ρ = (2p + 1, p − 1, 2p − 2),
giving rise to groups such that
1
· (5p4 − 5p3 − 2p2 − p + 1).
2
Hence in particular for p = 3 we get r = (2, 9, 1) and r̃ = (7, 2, 4), giving rise to
groups such that |G| = |G̃| = 323 and µ0 (G) = µ0 (G̃) = 125.
|G| = |G̃| = p10p−7

and µ0 (G) = µ0 (G̃) =

ii) In order to cover the case p = 2 as well, for p arbitrary we may let
r = (p − 1, 3p, p) and r̃ = (2p + 1, p − 1, 2p),
giving rise to groups such that
1
· (5p4 − 3p3 − 2p2 − p − 1).
2
Hence in particular for p = 2 we get r = (1, 6, 2) and r̃ = (5, 1, 4), giving rise to
groups such that |G| = |G̃| = 219 and µ0 (G) = µ0 (G̃) = 45
2 .
|G| = |G̃| = p10p−1

and µ0 (G) = µ0 (G̃) =

7.3. Counterexamples with varying exponent. We construct non-isomorphic
abelian groups G and G̃ just having the same spectrum, thus in particular having
the same Kulkarni invariant and minimum genus; hence for p odd also having the
same cyclic deficiency and reduced minimum genus. We might wonder whether in
this situation, possibly further assuming that G and G̃ belong to the class of groups
described in (6.2), the groups necessarily have the same exponent, or equivalently
the same order whenever p odd; if this was the case then the examples in (7.2)
would be the typical or even the only ones.
We look at groups afforded by sequences r = (r1 , . . . , re ) and r̃ = (r̃1 , . . . , r̃ẽ ), where
e, ẽ ≥ 1, fulfilling the assumptions of (6.2), that is ri ≥ p − 1 for 1 ≤ i ≤ e − 1, and
r̃i ≥ p − 1 for 1 ≤ i ≤ ẽ − 1, as well as re , r̃ẽ ≥ max{p − 2, 1}. We are going to
present a series of counterexamples to Talu’s Conjecture fulfilling e 6= ẽ, where this
subsection deals with the case p odd, while the case p = 2 is treated in (7.4). But
before doing so, we would like to indicate the heuristics we have used to find them:
Let δ ≥ −2e + e(e+1)
· (p − 1) whenever p is odd, and δ ≥ e(e−1)
for p = 2, in
2
2
each case the lower bound being the cyclic deficiency associated with the smallest
admissible sequence (p − 1, . . . , p − 1, max{p − 2, 1}); note that smaller values of
δ are not achieved at all. We now aim at
Pevarying r within the set of admissible
sequences, such that logp (|G|) = δ + e = i=1 iri is kept fixed, but
e

2µe + 1 = −p +

e
X

e

(p − p

e−i

e

) · ri = −p +

e
X
pe − pe−i
i=1

i=1

is maximized and minimized, respectively.

i

· iri

To this end, we observe that the arithmetic mean of the first i entries of the sequence
Pe−1
e
−pe−i
pj = 1i · p p−1
, for 1 ≤ i ≤ e, hence the
(pe−1 , . . . , p, 1) is given as 1i · j=e−i
e

sequence ( p

e
−pe−1 pe −pe−2
,
, . . . , p e−1 )
1
2

is strictly decreasing. Thus 2µe + 1 becomes

25

largest (respectively smallest) by choosing the last (respectively first) e − 1 entries
of r as small as possible, and adjusting the first (respectively last) entry such that
r has cyclic deficiency δ associated with it.
For the remainder of this subsection let p be odd. Then maximizing yields 2µe +1 ≤
2µe (a, p − 1, . . . , p − 1, p − 2) + 1, where
(e + 2)(e − 1)
· (p − 1).
2
Note that by the choice of δ we conclude that a ≥ p − 1, hence the right hand side
of the above inequality is achieved. By a straightforward computation we get


e(e−1)(p−1)
2µe + 1 ≤
δ + (e−1)(e+6)
· pe
−
2
2


− δ + e(e+5)
· pe−1 + 2
2
a := δ + 2e −

Similarly, minimizing yields 2µe + 1 ≥ 2µe (p − 1, p − 1, . . . , p − 1, b) + 1, where
e−1
δ
· (p − 1) + 1.
b := −
e
2
Note that here b in general is not integral, so that the right hand side of the above
inequality might not be achieved; it is possible to determine explicitly the sequence
giving rise to the actual minimum of 2µe + 1, but this will not be needed. By a
straightforward computation we get


δ (e − 1)(p − 1)
(e + 1)(p − 1) δ
2µe + 1 ≥
+
− 1 · pe +
− .
e
2
2
e
Hence we have to ensure that the above upper bound for 2µẽ + 1, applied to some
1 ≤ ẽ < e, is at least as large as the lower bound for 2µe + 1. Viewing the upper
and lower bounds as linear functions in δ, in order to have an unbounded range
of candidates δ to check, the slope of the upper bound function should exceed the
slope of the lower bound function. This yields
pe − 1
(p − 1)pẽ−1 ≥
,
e
in other words
ẽ−1
ẽ−1
e−ẽ
e
X
X
X
pe−ẽ+1 − 1 X −i
−i
i
(e−i)−(ẽ−1)
p ,
p =
+
p +
p
=
e≥
p−1
i=1
i=1
i=0
i=1
implying

e≥

pe−ẽ+1 − 1
+ 1.
p−1

Thus we are led to consider the case ẽ = e − 1, where the smallest possible choices
are e := p + 2 and ẽ := p + 1. This yields the following specific examples: Let
r := (p − 1, . . . , p − 1, p, p3 + p2 − 2),
thus having p consecutive entries p − 1, and for p ≥ 5 let
r̃ := (p4 + 3p3 + 2p2 − p − 1, p − 1, . . . , p − 1, p, p, p − 1, p − 2),
thus having p − 4 consecutive entries p − 1, while for p = 3 let
r̃ := (p4 + 3p3 + 2p2 − p, p, p − 1, p − 2)|p=3 = (177, 3, 2, 1);

26

Table 1. Counterexamples with varying exponent.
p
r
r̃
3
(2, 2, 2, 3, 34)
(177, 3, 2, 1)
5
(4, . . . , 4, 5, 148)
(1044, 4, 5, 5, 4, 3)
7
(6, . . . , 6, 7, 390)
(3520, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 6, 5)
11 (10, . . . , 10, 11, 1450) (18864, 10, . . . , 10, 11, 11, 10, 9)
13 (12, . . . , 12, 13, 2364) (35476, 12, . . . , 12, 13, 13, 12, 11)
17 (16, . . . , 16, 17, 5200) (98820, 16, . . . , 16, 17, 17, 16, 15)
p
e
δ
µe
3 5
189
4964
5 7
1119
6679613
7 9
3725
8817262934
11 13 19629
27083067676913144
13 15 36719
64775747609331851801
17 19 101535 655895227302212659718161655

a few explicit cases are given in Table 1. Then, by a straightforward computation,
we indeed have
5
7
δ = δ̃ = p4 + p3 + 3p2 − p − 6,
2
2
and

1
µe (r) = µẽ (r̃) = · (p3 + 2p2 − 4) · pp+2 − p3 − p2 + 1 .
2
We remark that, had we carried out the analysis on minimizing 2µe + 1, we would
have found r as the minimizing sequence associated with δ. Thus r and r̃ give rise
to groups G and G̃, respectively, by (6.4) having the same spectrum, but having
distinct exponents pp+2 and pp+1 , respectively.
Actually, the above series has been found by running an explicit search for odd p ≤
11, using the computer algebra system GAP [3], and observing the pattern arising.
We suspect that these in general are the counterexamples to Talu’s Conjecture
with smallest possible cyclic deficiency δ for groups of exponents pp+2 and pp+1 ,
respectively; but we have not attempted to prove this in general, and only checked
it explicitly for 3 ≤ p ≤ 23 using GAP.
The above analysis also implies that counterexamples consisting of groups of exponent pe and pẽ , respectively, such that ẽ < e ≤ p + 1 can possibly exist only
for finitely many values of δ. Actually, we suspect that counterexamples such that
ẽ ≤ p do not exist at all; but we have not thoroughly investigated into this, and
only made a few unsuccessful explicit searches for 3 ≤ p ≤ 23 using GAP.
7.4. Counterexamples with varying exponent for p = 2. We keep the setting
of (7.3), but let now p = 2. Since our approach involves sequences r such that
re ≥ 2, for r̃ we distinguish the cases r̃ẽ ≥ 2 and r̃ẽ = 1:
i) Let first r̃ẽ ≥ 2. Then, by (6.4), the groups G and G̃ associated with these
sequences have the same spectrum if and only if they have the same cyclic deficiency

27

and reduced minimum genus. Thus a similar analysis as the one in the odd prime
case yields 2µe + 1 ≤ 2µe (a, 1, . . . , 1) + 1, where a := δ − (e−2)(e+1)
, hence we get
2


(e − 2)(e − 3)
− 1 · 2e−1 + 1.
2µe + 1 ≤ δ −
2

Similarly, we get 2µe + 1 ≥ 2µe (1, . . . , 1, b) + 1, where b := δe − e−3
2 , yielding


δ e−3
e+1 δ
2µe + 1 ≥
· 2e +
+
− .
e
2
2
e
Again comparing slopes with respect to δ of the upper and lower bound functions
e
yields 2ẽ−1 ≥ 2 e−1 , which is the same formula as in the odd prime case, specialized
to p = 2. Hence here we obtain the condition e ≥ 2e−ẽ+1 . Moreover, it turns out
that for 1 ≤ ẽ < e ≤ 3 and any δ ≥ 0 the upper bound for 2µẽ + 1 is smaller than
the lower bound for 2µe + 1, excluding these choices of ẽ < e. Hence we are led to
consider the case ẽ = e − 1, with smallest possible choices e := 4 and ẽ = 3:
An explicit search using GAP yields the smallest counterexamples, with respect to
cyclic deficiency δ, as
r := (1, 1, 1, 18) and r̃ := (69, 1, 2).
Then we get δ = δ̃ = 74 and µe (r) = µẽ (r̃) = 287
2 , where again we remark that r is
the minimizing sequence associated with δ. Thus r and r̃ give rise to groups G and
G̃, respectively, by (6.4) having the same spectrum, and both fulfilling the ‘e′ = e’
property, but having distinct exponents 16 and 8, respectively.
ii) Let now r̃ẽ = 1. Then, by (6.4) the groups G and G̃ associated with the
sequences r and r̃ have the same spectrum if and only if for the associated cyclic
deficiency and reduced minimum genus we have
δ̃ = δ − 1 and µẽ (r̃) = 2µe (r).
Considering again the slopes with respect to δ of the upper and lower bound
functions, from 2µẽ (r̃) + 1 = 4µe (r) + 1 = 2 · (2µe (r) + 1) − 1 we this time get
e
2ẽ−1 ≥ 2 · 2 e−1 , implying e ≥ 2e−ẽ+2 , thus leading us to consider the case ẽ = e − 1
with smallest possible choices e := 8 and ẽ = 7:
An explicit search using GAP yields the smallest counterexamples, with respect to
cyclic deficiency δ, as
r := (1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1025) and r̃ := (8199, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1).
Then we get δ = 8220 = δ̃ + 1 and µe (r) = 131328 = 21 · µẽ (r̃), where again we
remark that r is the minimizing sequence associated with δ, and r̃ is the maximizing
sequence associated with δ̃. Thus r and r̃ give rise to groups G and G̃, respectively,
by (6.4) having the same spectrum, precisely one of them fulfilling the ‘e′ = e’ property, and having distinct exponents 256 and 128, respectively. Moreover, although
we have not thoroughly investigated into this, unsuccessful explicit searches using
GAP lead us to suspect that such counterexamples with ẽ ≤ 6 do not exist.
✷
Finally, we remark that the above approach can also be used to find counterexamples fulfilling ẽ = e: Actually, by (9.1) and (9.3), there cannot be counterexamples
for 1 ≤ ẽ = e ≤ 2, except the groups {Z2 , Z22 }; note that the latter indeed is a single
counterexample, for δ = 1, while our approach is aiming at finding ẽ ≤ e allowing

28

for an infinite range of candidates δ. Moreover, it turns out that for ẽ = e = 3
and any δ ≥ 0 the upper bound for 2µe + 1 is smaller than the lower bound for
2 · (2µe + 1) − 1, excluding this case. Hence we are led to consider the case e := 4:
An explicit search using GAP yields the smallest examples, with respect to cyclic
deficiency δ, as
r := (1, 1, 1, 21) and r̃ := (80, 1, 1, 1).
Then we get δ = 86 = δ̃ +1 and µe (r) = 166 = 21 ·µẽ (r̃), where again we remark that
r is the minimizing sequence associated with δ, and r̃ is the maximizing sequence
associated with δ̃. Thus r and r̃ give rise to groups G and G̃, respectively, by (6.4)
having the same spectrum, precisely one of them fulfilling the ‘e′ = e’ property,
and having the same exponent 16.
8. Examples: Small rank
In the remaining two sections, in order to show that the combinatorial machinery
developed in Section 5 actually is an efficient technique to find µ0 (G), and in suitable
cases even all of sp0 (G), we explicitly work out some ‘small’ examples. Moreover,
we show that Talu’s Conjecture (including the case p = 2) holds within the various
classes of p-groups considered. In this section, now, we deal with the abelian pgroups of minimum genus at most 1, and those of rank at most 2, where in particular
we are interested in finding the smallest positive reduced genus of these groups.
8.1. Non-positive reduced minimum genus. We determine the non-trivial
abelian p-groups G such that µ(G) ∈ {0, 1}, that is µ0 (G) ∈ {−1, − 21 , 0}.
We have µi ≤ 0, for i ∈ I(G), if and only if
p−1
si+1
· ℘(s1 , . . . , si ) ≤ pi − ⌊
⌋.
2
2
From s1 ≥ · · · ≥ si ≥ 2 · ⌊ si+1
2 ⌋ + 2 we get
si+1
p−1
⌋ + 1) · (pi − 1) ≤
· ℘(s1 , . . . , si ),
2
2
hence assuming µi ≤ 0 yields
si+1
si+1
(⌊
⌋ + 1) · (pi − 1) ≤ pi − ⌊
⌋,
2
2
i
that is ⌊ si+1
2 ⌋ · p ≤ 1, a contradiction for 1 ≤ i ≤ e − 1. We consider the remaining
cases: For i = 0 we get µ0 ≤ 0 if and only if ⌊ s21 ⌋ ≤ 1, or equivalently 2 ≤ s1 ≤ 3,
yielding the cases as indicated in the first table in Table 2, where 1 ≤ e′ < e.
e
For i = e we get µe ≤ 0 if and only if p−1
2 · ℘(s1 , . . . , se ) ≤ p , hence, since
p−1
p−1
e
s1 ≥ · · · ≥ se ≥ 2 implies p − 1 = 2 · ℘(2, . . . , 2) ≤ 2 · ℘(s1 , . . . , se ), we get
the cases indicated in the second table in Table 2.
(⌊

In conclusion, we have µ0 (G) < 0, that is µ(G) = 0, if and only if
G∼
= Z22 ,
= Zpe or G ∼
and µ0 (G) = 0, that is µ(G) = 1, if and only if
G∼
= Zpe′ ⊕ Zpe for e′ < e, or G ∼
= Z2pe for pe 6= 2,

or G ∼
= Z32 .

29

Table 2. Non-positive reduced minimum genus.
G

µ0

p-datum

s1 = se = 2 Zpe

0 (0, . . . , 0; 1)

Z2pe

0 (0, . . . , 0; 1)

s1 = se = 3

s1 = 3 > se = 2 Zpe′ ⊕ Zpe

0 (0, . . . , 0; 1)

G
s1 = se = 2 Zpe
p = 3, e = 1,

s1 = 3

p = 2, e = 1,

s1 = 3

p = 2, e = 1,

s1 = 4

Z23
Z22
Z32

p = 2, e = 2, s1 = 3 > s2 = 2 Z2 ⊕ Z4

µe

p-datum

−1 (0, . . . , 0, 2; 0)
0

(3; 0)

− 12

(3; 0)

0

(4; 0)

0

(1, 2; 0)

This also yields all abelian p-groups having a genus g ≤ 1. Note that the explicit
cases for p = 2 and p = 3 are precisely the non-cyclic abelian groups of order at
most 9, which are treated as exceptional cases in [8, Thm.4].
These results compare to the well-known description of finite group actions on
compact Riemann surfaces of genus g ≤ 1, see [12, App.] or [2, Sect.6.7], as
follows: The cases of µe < 0 are precisely the abelian p-groups amongst the groups
with signature of positive curvature, and belong to branched self-coverings of the
Riemann sphere. The cases of µ0 = 0 and µe = 0 are precisely the abelian pgroups being smooth epimorphic images of the groups with finite signature of zero
curvature, the former belong to unramified coverings of surfaces of genus 1, the
latter belong to branched coverings of the Riemann sphere by surfaces of genus 1.
8.2. Groups of rank at most 2. The cases occurring in (8.1) consist of all
the non-trivial abelian p-groups of rank at most 2, and the group G ∼
= Z32 . The
latter being covered by (6.4), we proceed to consider the former in more detail,
and determine their smallest positive reduced genus µ+
0 (G), and thus their smallest
genus µ+ (G) ≥ 2. The results are collected in Table 3, grouped into three infinite
series, where 1 ≤ e′ < e, and finitely many exceptional cases for p = 2 and p = 3.
The proofs for the cyclic cases and the cases of rank 2 are given in (8.3) and (8.4),
respectively; the cases with e ≤ 2 will reappear in Section 9.
For the cyclic cases we recover the results in [4] and [6, Prop.3.3]. Moreover,
we conclude that a cyclic p-group is uniquely determined by its smallest genus
µ+ (G) ≥ 2, with the single exception of the groups {Z2 , Z4 , Z8 }, which indeed have
the same spectrum N0 . In particular, Talu’s Conjecture (including the case p = 2)
holds within the class of cyclic p-groups.
For the cases of rank 2 the sharp bound derived here improves the general bound
given in [6, Prop.3.4]; and for the cases of cyclic deficiency δ = 1, where p is odd, we
recover the relevant part of [9, Thm.5.4] and [9, Cor.5.5]. Moreover, we conclude
that an abelian p-groups of rank 2 is uniquely determined by its smallest genus

30

Table 3. Groups of rank at most 2.
µ+
0 (G)

G

condition

Zpe

pe 6= 2, 3, 4

Zpe′ ⊕ Zpe
Z2pe

e′

e

(p , p ) 6= (2, 4)
pe 6= 2, 3

1
e
e−1
)−1
2 · (p − p
1
e
e−e′
·
(p
−
p
)−1
2
1
e
2 · (p − 3)

µ+ (G)
1
2
1
2

e′

e

· (pe − pe−1 )

· p · (p − p
1
2

e−e′

e

− 2) + 1

e

· p · (p − 3) + 1

G

µ+
0 (G)

µ+ (G)

Z2

1

2

G

µ+
0 (G)

µ+ (G)

Z4

1

2

Z3

1

2

Z22

1
2

2

Z23

1

4

Z2 ⊕ Z4

1

3

µ+ (G) ≥ 2, with the single exception of the groups {Z2 ⊕ Z4 , Z2 ⊕ Z8 , Z24 }; it will
be shown in (8.5) that Z2 ⊕ Z4 and Z2 ⊕ Z8 indeed have the same spectrum 1 + 2N0 ,
which differs from the one of Z24 . In particular, Talu’s Conjecture (including the
case p = 2) holds within the class of abelian p-groups of rank 2.
8.3. Cyclic groups. Let G ∼
= Zpe , that is (s1 , . . . , se ) = (2, . . . , 2); hence we have
I(G) = {0, e}. By (8.1), we have min γ(A0 ) = µ0 = 0 and min γ(Ae ) = µe = −1,
hence both g = 0 are g = 1 are genera of G.
We proceed to determine µ+
0 (G): We have
A0 = {(2a, . . . , 2a) : a ≥ 1},
and hence γ(2a, . . . , 2a) = (a − 1) · pe yields
min (γ(A0 ) \ {0}) = pe .
For 1 ≤ i ≤ e − 1, using the notation of (5.3), we have i′ = i′′ = 0 and ǫi = 2, thus
we have µi = 0 and
min γ(Ai ) = pe − pe−i ≥ pe − pe−1 = min γ(A1 ).
Moreover, for p = 2 we have e′ = 0 and min γ(A′i ) = min γ(Ai ). Now let i = e:
i) Let first p be odd. Then we have
Ae = {(a1 , . . . , ae , 2a) : a1 ≥ · · · ≥ ae ≥ 2(a + 1)},
hence comparing γ(a1 , . . . , ae , 2a) = −pe +a+ p−1
2 ·℘(a1 , . . . , ae ) with γ(2, . . . , 2, 0) =
µe = −1 yields
1
min (γ(Ae ) \ {−1}) = · pe−1 · (p − 1) − 1 ≥ 0,
2
being attained precisely for (3, 2, . . . , 2, 0). We have pe−1 · (p − 1) = 2 if and only
1
e−1
· (p − 1) − 1.
if p = 3 and e = 1. Thus, if G ∼
6 Z3 , then we have µ+
=
0 (G) = 2 · p
∼
The case G = Z3 is covered by (6.4).
ii) Let now p = 2. We have
A′e = {(a1 , . . . , ae , 2a) : a1 ≥ · · · ≥ ae ≥ 2(a + 1), ae even}.

31

We first assume that e ≥ 3. Comparing γ(a1 , . . . , ae , 2a) = −2e +a+ 21 ·℘(a1 , . . . , ae )
with γ(2, . . . , 2, 0) = µe = −1 we get
min (γ(A′e ) \ {−1}) = 2e−2 − 1 > 0,
e−2
being attained precisely for (3, 2, . . . , 2, 0). Hence we conclude µ+
− 1.
0 (G) = 2
∼ Z8 , we have γ(a1 , 2, 2, 0) = 2a1 − 5 for a1 ≥ 2,
In particular, for e = 3, that is G =
and γ(a1 , 3, 2, 0) = 2a1 − 4 for a1 ≥ 3, implying that γ(A′3 ) = {−1} ∪ N. Hence the
reduced spectrum equals sp0 (Z8 ) = {−1} ∪ N0 , yielding the spectrum sp(Z8 ) = N0 ;
hence in particular we recover a special case of [7, Cor.6.3].
The case G ∼
= Z2 being covered by (6.4), it remains to consider G ∼
= Z4 : We have

A′2 = {(a1 , a2 , 2a) : a1 ≥ a2 ≥ 2(a + 1), a2 even}
and γ(a1 , a2 , 2a) = −4 + a + a1 + a22 . This yields min (γ(A′2 ) \ {−1}) = 0, being attained precisely for (3, 2, 0), and min (γ(A′2 ) \ {−1, 0}) = 1, being attained precisely
for (4, 2, 0). Thus we have µ+
0 (Z4 ) = 1. From γ(a1 , 2, 0) = a1 −3, for a1 ≥ 2, we conclude that γ(A′2 ) = {−1} ∪ N0 , thus the reduced spectrum is sp0 (Z4 ) = {−1} ∪ N0 ,
yielding the spectrum sp(Z4 ) = N0 .
8.4. Groups of rank 2. Let G ∼
= Zpe′ ⊕ Zpe for some 1 ≤ e′ ≤ e, where for
e′ = e we get G ∼
= Z2pe ; hence (s1 , . . . , se′ , se′ +1 , . . . , se ) = (3, . . . , 3, 2, . . . , 2) and
I(G) = {0, e}. By (8.1), we have min γ(A0 ) = µ0 = 0, while min γ(Ae ) = µe < 0
only for G ∼
= Z22 . Hence g = 1 is a genus, while g = 0 is so if and only if G ∼
= Z22 .
We proceed to determine µ+
0 (G): We have
A0 = {(2a, . . . , 2a) : a ≥ 1},
and hence γ(2a, . . . , 2a) = (a − 1) · pe yields
min (γ(A0 ) \ {0}) = pe .
Let 1 ≤ i ≤ e − 1. Using the notation of (5.3), for 1 ≤ i ≤ e′ we have
1
3
µi = −pe + pe−i · (1 + · (pi − 1)) = · pe−i · (pi − 1),
2
2
hence from i′ = 0 and ǫi = 1 we get
1
min γ(Ai ) = µi + · pe−i · (pi − 1) = pe−i · (pi − 1).
2
For e′ < i ≤ e − 1 we have
′
′
′
′
1
1
µi = −pe + pe−i · (pi + · pi−e · (pe − 1)) = · pe−e · (pe − 1),
2
2
hence from i′ = e′ and i′′ = 0, as well as ǫi = 2, we get
′
′
1
min γ(Ai ) = µi + · pe−e · (pe + 1) − pe−i = pe−i · (pi − 1).
2
Thus for all 1 ≤ i ≤ e − 1 we have
min γ(Ai ) = pe − pe−i ≥ pe − pe−1 = min γ(A1 ).
Moreover, for p = 2 and e′ < i ≤ e − 1 we have min γ(A′i ) = min γ(Ai ).
Hence let i = e. We have
min γ(Ae ) = µe = −1 +

′
1 e−e′
·p
· (pe − 1),
2

32
′

′

where µe ≤ 0 if and only if pe−e · (pe − 1) ≤ 2, which holds if and only if e′ = 1
and pe ∈ {2, 3, 4}. Hence for pe > 4, or pe = 4 and e′ = e, we have µe > 0.
′

Assume that pe −pe−1 < µe = −1+ 21 ·(pe −pe−e ), then we have pe ·(1− p2 + p1e′ ) < −2,
implying that 1 −

2
p

+

1
pe′

< 0, or equivalently

2
p

−

1
pe′

> 1, a contradiction.

′

Thus for 1 ≤ e′ < e and (pe , pe ) 6= (2, 4) we conclude that
′
1 e−e′
·p
· (pe − 1),
µ+
0 (Zpe′ ⊕ Zpe ) = −1 +
2
and for pe ≥ 4 we have
1
2
µ+
· (pe − 3).
0 (Zpe ) =
2
∼ Z2 ⊕ Z4 and G =
∼ Z2 and G =
∼ Z2 are covered by (6.4).
The exceptional cases G =
2
3
8.5. Small 2-groups. As it turns out, the above results already cover all nontrivial abelian 2-groups of order at most 8. We observe that in all of these cases
there is no spectral gap. But this is different for the groups of order 16, where we
have the following cases not covered by (6.4):
i) Let G ∼
= Z24 , hence e′ = e = 2, that is (s1 , s2 ) = (3, 3). We have seen in (8.4)
that γ(A0 ) = 4N0 and min γ(A1 ) = 2. Moreover, we have min γ(A2 ) = 21 , where
A2 = {(a1 , a2 , 2a) : a1 ≥ a2 ≥ max{3, 2(a + 1)}}
and γ(a1 , a2 , 2a) =

1
2

· (−8 + 2a + 2a1 + a2 ). Writing m ∈ N as
(
−8 + 2 · m+5
2 + 3, if m odd,
m=
m+4
−8 + 2 · 2 + 4, if m even,

shows that any m ∈ N \ {2} is of the form m = −8 + 2a1 + a2 for some a1 ≥ a2 ≥ 3,
while 2 is not of the form −8 + 2a + 2a1 + a2 for any (a1 , a2 , 2a) ∈ A2 . Thus we
have γ(A2 ) = ( 12 N) \ {1}, hence we conclude that
1
sp0 (Z24 ) = ( N0 ) \ {1} and sp(Z24 ) = (1 + 2N0 ) \ {5}.
2
ii) Let G ∼
= Z2 ⊕ Z8 , hence we have e′ = 1 and e = 3, that is (s1 , s2 , s3 ) = (3, 2, 2).
We have seen in (8.4) that −1 is not a reduced genus, and that γ(A0 ) = 8N0 .
Moreover, we have min γ(A′3 ) = 1, where
A′3 = {(a1 , a2 , a3 , 2a) : a1 ≥ max{3, a2 }, a2 ≥ a3 ≥ 2(a + 1), a3 even},
and γ(a1 , a2 , a3 , 2a) = −8 + a + 2a1 + a2 + a23 . Writing m ∈ N as
(
−7 + 2 · m+5
2 + 2, if m odd,
m=
m+4
−7 + 2 · 2 + 3, if m even,
shows that m = −8 + 2a1 + a2 + 22 for some a1 ≥ a2 ≥ 2 such that a1 ≥ 3. Thus
we have γ(A′3 ) = N, hence we conclude that
sp0 (Z2 ⊕ Z8 ) = N0

and sp(Z2 ⊕ Z8 ) = 1 + 2N0 .

33

iii) Let G ∼
= Z16 , hence we have e′ = 0 and e = 4, that is (s1 , s2 , s3 , s4 ) = (2, 2, 2, 2).
We have seen in (8.3) that γ(A0 ) = 16N0 , and min γ(A′i ) = min γ(Ai ) = 16 − 24−i
for 1 ≤ i ≤ 3. Moreover, we have min γ(A′4 ) = −1, where
A′4 = {(a1 , a2 , a3 , a4 , 2a) : a1 ≥ a2 ≥ a3 ≥ a4 ≥ 2(a + 1), a4 even},
and γ(a1 , a2 , a3 , a4 , 2a) = −16 + a + 4a1 + 2a2 + a3 + a24 . Writing m ∈ {−1} ∪ N0 as

−15 + 4 · m+9

4 + 2 · 2 + 2, if m ≡ 3 (mod 4),


 −15 + 4 · m+7 + 2 · 3 + 2, if m ≡ 1 (mod 4),
4
m=
m+6

−15
+
4
·

4 + 2 · 3 + 3, if m ≡ 2 (mod 4),


m+4
−15 + 4 · 4 + 2 · 4 + 3, if m ≡ 0 (mod 4),

shows that any m ∈ ({−1} ∪ N0 ) \ {0, 1, 2, 4, 8} is of the form m = −16 + 4a1 +
2a2 + a3 + 22 for some a1 ≥ a2 ≥ a3 ≥ 2, while none of {0, 1, 2, 4, 8} is of the
form −16 + a + 4a1 + 2a2 + a3 + a24 for any (a1 , a2 , a3 , a4 , 2a) ∈ A′4 . Thus we have
γ(A′4 ) = ({−1} ∪ N0 ) \ {0, 1, 2, 4, 8}, hence we conclude that
sp0 (Z16 ) = ({−1} ∪ N0 ) \ {1, 2, 4} and sp(Z16 ) = N0 \ {2, 3, 5};
hence in particular we recover a special case of [7, Cor.6.3].

✷

For completeness, the remaining cases are dealt with using (6.4), and we get
1
sp0 (Z42 ) = N and sp0 (Z22 ⊕ Z4 ) = N, hence sp(Z42 ) = sp(Z22 ⊕ Z4 ) = 5 + 4N0.
2
Collecting the results for all non-trivial abelian 2-groups of order at most 16 yields
sp(Z2 ) = sp(Z4 ) = sp(Z22 ) = sp(Z8 ) = N0
and
sp(Z2 ⊕ Z4 ) = sp(Z32 ) = sp(Z2 ⊕ Z8 ) = 1 + 2N0 .
Thus these provide examples of 2-groups having the same spectrum, where neither
the order, the exponent, the cyclic deficiency nor the ‘e′ < e’ property coincide.
8.6. Small 3-groups. By the results above, and (6.4), we have
sp(Z3 ) = N0

and sp(Z23 ) = 1 + 3N0

and sp(Z33 ) = 10 + 9N0 .

We again observe that in all of these cases there is no spectral gap, but this picture
already changes for the next 3-groups springing to mind, as soon as we avoid the
realm of (6.4). We present a couple of examples, showing that going over to reduced
spectra tends to unify and straighten out the computations necessary:
i) Let G ∼
= Z9 , that is we have e = 2 and (s1 , s2 ) = (2, 2). We have seen in (8.3)
that γ(A0 ) = 9N0 and min γ(A1 ) = 6. Moreover, we have min γ(A2 ) = −1, where
A2 = {(a1 , a2 , 2a) : a1 ≥ a2 ≥ 2(a + 1)}
and γ(a1 , a2 , 2a) = −9 + a + 3a1 + a2 . Writing m ∈ N0 as

m+7

 −9 + 3 · 3 + 2, if m ≡ 2 (mod 3),
m+6
−9 + 3 · 3 + 3, if m ≡ 0 (mod 3),
m=


−9 + 3 · m+5
3 + 4, if m ≡ 1 (mod 3),

34

shows that any m ∈ N \ {1, 4} can be written as m = −9 + 3a1 + a2 for some
a1 ≥ a2 ≥ 2, while none of {0, 1, 4} is of the form −9 + a + 3a1 + a2 for any
(a1 , a2 , 2a) ∈ A2 . Thus we have γ(A2 ) = {−1} ∪ (N \ {1, 4}), hence we conclude
sp0 (Z9 ) = ({−1} ∪ N0 ) \ {1, 4} and sp(Z9 ) = N0 \ {2, 5};
hence in particular we recover a special case of [7, Cor.5.3].
∼ Z3 ⊕ Z9 , thus recovering [9, Cor.5.5]: We
ii) We determine the spectrum of G =
have e′ = 1 and e = 2, that is (s1 , s2 ) = (3, 2), and thus we have seen in (8.4) that
γ(A0 ) = 9N0 and min γ(A1 ) = 6. Moreover, we have min γ(A2 ) = 2, where
A2 = {(a1 , a2 , 2a) : a1 ≥ max{3, a2 }, a2 ≥ 2(a + 1)}
and γ(a1 , a2 , 2a) = −9 + a + 3a1 + a2 . As above, writing m ∈ N as

m+7

 −9 + 3 · 3 + 2, if m ≡ 2 (mod 3),
−9 + 3 · m+6
m=
3 + 3, if m ≡ 0 (mod 3),


m+5
−9 + 3 · 3 + 4, if m ≡ 1 (mod 3),

shows that any m ∈ N \ {1, 4} can be written as m = −9 + 3a1 + a2 for some
a1 ≥ max{3, a2 } and a2 ≥ 2, while none of {1, 4} is of the form −9 + a + 3a1 + a2
for any (a1 , a2 , 2a) ∈ A2 . Thus we have γ(A2 ) = N \ {1, 4}. Hence we conclude that
sp0 (Z3 ⊕ Z9 ) = N0 \ {1, 4} and sp(Z3 ⊕ Z9 ) = (1 + 3N0 ) \ {4, 13}.
9. Examples: Small exponents
In this section we consider abelian p-groups of exponent at most p2 . In particular,
we ask ourselves whether the description of the reduced minimum genus in terms of
the defining invariants of the group in question lends itself to a ‘generic’ description.
9.1. Elementary abelian groups. Let G ∼
= Zrp be an elementary abelian pgroup, that is e = 1, and let s := r + 1 ≥ 2. We have and I(G) = {0, 1}, where
(5.5) says that 0 ∈ I(G) can be ignored whenever s is even. Still, we have
( ps
if s even,
2 − p,
min γ(A0 ) = µ0 =
ps
3p
2 − 2 , if s odd,
and

ps s
− − p.
2
2
Thus we have µ0 < µ1 if and only if s is odd and s < p, with equality if and only
if s = p is odd. Hence we get µ0 (G) = µ0 if s is odd and s < p, otherwise we have
µ0 (G) = µ1 . In particular, for p odd we thus recover, and at the same time correct
[9, Sect.7, Rem.], where µ0 (G) is erroneously stated for s < p.
min γ(A1 ) = µ1 =

We are tempted to call the cases where s is odd such that s < p the ‘exceptional’
ones, and the remaining the ‘generic’ ones; then there are only finitely many ‘exceptional’ cases, which do not occur at all for p = 2. In particular, as part of the
‘generic’ region we have µ0 (G) = µ1 for s ≥ max{p−1, 2}, in accordance with (6.2).
i) For p odd, viewing µ0 and µ1 as linear functions in s, with positive slope p2 and
p−1
s
2 , respectively, and since µ0 (s + 1) − µ1 (s) = 2 > 0, for 2 ≤ s < p even, we

35

Table 4. Elementary abelian groups
s
µ0 (G)

2
−1

3

4

0 p−2

5 ...

p−3

p−2

p−1

p

p+1

p ...

p(p−6)+3
2

p(p−5)
2

p(p−4)+1
2

p(p−3)
2

p(p−2)−1
2

s

2

3

4

5

µ0 (G)

−1

− 21

0

1
2

6

7

8

1

3
2

2

µ(G)

0

0

1

5 17 49 129

conclude that the reduced minimum genus µ0 (G) is strictly increasing with s, and
thus the minimum genus µ(G) = 1 + ps−2 · µ0 (G) is as well.
ii) For p = 2 we have µ0 (G) = µ1 = s2 − 2 for all s ≥ 2, thus the reduced
minimum genus µ0 (G) is strictly increasing with s, and hence the minimum genus
µ(G) = 1 + 2s−2 · µ0 (G), for s ≥ 3, is as well.
A few values are given in the first and second table in Table 4, respectively. We
conclude that G is uniquely determined by its minimum genus µ(G), with the single
exception of {Z2 , Z22 }; indeed, as we have already noted in (8.5), the latter have the
same spectrum. Hence in particular Talu’s Conjecture (including the case p = 2)
holds within the class of elementary abelian p-groups.
Note that for p odd this would also be a consequence of [9, Cor.7.3], but due to the
erroneous [9, Sect.7, Rem.] the results [9, Thm.7.2, Cor.7.3] are at stake; only [9,
Cor.7.3(1)] can be verified independently by (6.2).
9.2. Groups of exponent p2 . Let G ∼
= Zrp1 ⊕ Zrp22 , that is we have e = 2. Let
s := s1 = r1 + r2 + 1 and t := s2 = r2 + 1, hence s ≥ t ≥ 2. Moreover, we have
{0, 2} ⊆ I(G) ⊆ {0, 1, 2}, where 1 ∈ I(G) if and only if s − t ≥ 2, or s − t = 1 and
t is odd; additionally, (5.5) says that 0 ∈ I(G) can be ignored whenever s is even.
Still, in order to obtain a complete overview, we explicitly have
( 2
p s
2
if s even,
2 −p ,
min γ(A0 ) = µ0 =
p2 s
3p2
2 − 2 , if s odd,
and

min γ(A1 ) =

and























p2 s
2
p2 s
2
p2 s
2
p2 s
2
p2 s
2
p2 s
2

−
−
−

p(s−t)
− p2 ,
2
p(s−t)
− p2 −
2
2
p − p2 ,
2

if t even, s − t ≥ 2,
2

p , if t odd, s − t ≥ 2,
if t even, s − t = 1,

−p−p ,

if t odd, s − t = 1,

− p,

if t even, s = t,

−p−

p2
2 ,

min γ(A2 ) = µ2 =

if t odd, s = t,

t
p2 s p(s − t)
−
− − p2 .
2
2
2

Thus we have µ0 < µ2 if and only if s is odd and p(s − t) + t < p2 , with equality
if and only if s is odd and p(s − t) + t = p2 ; and (min γ(A1 )) < µ2 if and only if t

36

is odd and t < min{p, s}, with equality if and only if t = p is odd and t < s; and
µ0 < (min γ(A1 )) if and only if


 s = t even,
s odd, t even, s − t < p,


s odd, t odd, s − t < p − 1,
with equality if and only if s is odd, and s − t = p odd or s − t = p − 1 even.

In particular, we have equality µ0 = (min γ(A1 )) = µ2 throughout if and only if
t = p odd and s = 2p − 1. Anyway, there are three cases in which µ0 (G) coincides
with either of µ0 , µ1 and µ2 in turn, where the mutual intersection of these cases
is described by equating the associated µi :
i) Let s be odd such that p(s − t) + t ≤ p2 , thus µ0 ≤ µ2 . Moreover, we have
s − t < p, implying µ0 ≤ (min γ(A1 )), hence we get
µ0 (G) = µ0 =

p2
· (s − 3).
2

ii) Let t be odd such that t ≤ p, and let s be even or s − t ≥ p − 1. Then we have
(min γ(A1 )) ≤ µ2 and (min γ(A1 )) ≤ µ0 , hence we get
µ0 (G) = µ1 =

p2
p
· (s − 2) − · (s − t + 1).
2
2

iii) Let s be even or p(s − t) + t ≥ p2 , and let t be even or t = s or t ≥ p. Then we
have µ2 ≤ µ0 and µ2 ≤ (min γ(A1 )), hence we get
µ0 (G) = µ2 =

p2
p
t
· (s − 2) − · (s − t) − .
2
2
2

Note that case i) consists of finitely many pairs (s, t), while in case ii) s is unbounded
but t is still bounded. Hence we are again tempted to call these the ‘exceptional’
cases, as opposed to the ‘generic’ case iii), where both s and t are unbounded. In
particular, as part of the ‘generic’ region we have µ0 (G) = µ2 for t ≥ max{p − 1, 2}
and s − t ≥ p − 1, which we will recover as a special case of (6.2). In particular, for
p = 2 case i) consists of the pairs (s, t) = (3, 3) and (s, t) = (3, 2), that is G ∼
= Z24
and G ∼
Z
⊕
Z
,
respectively,
case
ii)
does
not
occur
at
all,
and
all
pairs
except
= 2
4
(s, t) = (3, 3) belong to case iii).
To further illustrate the idea of distinguishing between ‘generic’ and ‘exceptional’
pairs, the various cases for p = 5 and 2 ≤ t ≤ s ≤ 27 are visualized in Table 5: The
cases i), ii) and iii) are depicted by ‘∗’, ‘•’ and ‘·’, respectively, the intersections
‘i)∩iii)’ and ‘ii)∩iii)’ are indicated by ‘×’ and ‘◦’, respectively, and ‘i)∩ii)’, consisting
of (s, t) ∈ {(7, 3), (9, 5)}, is indicated by ‘⊛’ and ‘⊗’, where the latter icon refers to
‘i)∩ii)∩iii)’, which is (s, t) = (9, 5).
The closed interior of the cone emanating from (s, t) = (8, 4) indicates the realm of
applicability of (6.2); actually, this turns out to be the largest cone being contained
in the ‘generic’ region, saying that in a certain sense this result is best possible, at
least for the cases considered here. Moreover, within this cone, the ‘generic’ case iii)
refers to the case j = 2 in the notation of (6.2), while the ‘exceptional’ intersection
‘ii)∩iii)’ refers to j ≤ 1, that is the pairs (s, 5) such that s ≥ 9, and finally the
intersection ‘i)∩ii)∩iii)’ refers to j = 0, that is (s, t) = (9, 5).

37

Table 5. ‘Generic’ and ‘exceptional’ cases for p = 5.
t

s
1

5

10

15

20

25

9.3. Recovering groups of exponent p2 . Keeping the notation of (9.2), we
show that G is uniquely determined by its Kulkarni invariant N = N (G) and its
minimum genus µ(G), with the single exception of the groups {Z24 , Z2 ⊕ Z4 }; the
latter groups can be distinguished by their spectrum, see (8.5). In particular we
conclude that Talu’s Conjecture (including the case p = 2) holds within the class
of abelian p-groups of exponent p2 ; thus for p odd we recover [14, Thm.3.8]:
Let first p be odd. The cyclic deficiency δ = δ(G) and the reduced minimum
genus µ0 (G) of G are known from δ = logp (N ) and µ0 (G) = µ(G)−1
. We have
pδ
δ = r1 + 2r2 − 2 = s + t − 4, thus we may view µ0 in case (9.2.i), µ1 in case (9.2.ii),
and µ2 in case (9.2.iii) as linear functions in s, depending on the parameter δ:
µ0

=

µ1

=

µ2

=

p2
3p2
2 ·s− 2 ,
2
− p2 ,
( p2 − p) · s + p(δ+3)
2
2
(p−1)
· s + (p−1)(δ+4)
− p2 .
2
2

38

As these functions have positive slope, they are strictly increasing, hence we look
for coincidences across cases:
i) Let first µ1 (s, t) = µ0 (s̃, t̃), where (s, t) belongs to case (9.2.ii), and (s̃, t̃) belongs
+1, hence we have s−t = kp−1
to case (9.2.i). Then we conclude that s̃ = s− s−t+1
p
1
for some k ≥ 1. From this get s = 2 · (δ + 3 + kp) and t = 12 · (δ + 5 − kp), implying
s̃ = s − k + 1 = 12 · (δ + 5 − 2k + kp) and t̃ = δ + 4 − s̃ = 21 · (δ + 3 + 2k − kp). Thus
we get s̃ − t̃ = 1 + k(p − 2). Hence s̃ − t̃ ≤ p − 1 yields k = 1, and thus s̃ = s and
t̃ = t. Note that in this case both s and t are odd such that t ≤ p and s − t = p − 1,
indeed yielding µ1 (s, t) = µ0 (s, t).
ii) Let next µ2 (s, t) = µ0 (s̃, t̃), where (s, t) belongs to case (9.2.iii), and (s̃, t̃)
belongs to case (9.2.i). Then we conclude that s̃ = s + (p−1)t−ps
+ 1, hence we
p2
have t = kp for some k ≥ 1. Thus we infer that p divides k(p − 1) − s, hence
we get s = k(p − 1) + lp for some l ≥ 1. This yields s̃ = (k + l)(p − 1) + 1 and
t̃ = s − s̃ + t = kp + l − 1. Hence we have p(s̃ − t̃) + t̃ = l(p − 1)2 + 2p − 1 ≤ p2 ,
implying l = 1, thus s̃ = s = (k + 1)p − k and hence t̃ = t. Note that in this case s
is odd, where s − t = p − k and t = kp ≥ p, hence p(s − t) + t = p2 , indeed yielding
µ2 (s, t) = µ0 (s, t).
iii) Let finally µ2 (s, t) = µ1 (s̃, t̃), where (s, t) belongs to case (9.2.iii), and (s̃, t̃)
belongs to case (9.2.ii). Then we conclude that (p − 1)s̃ + t̃ − 1 = (p − 1)s + p−1
p · t,
hence we have t = kp for some k ≥ 1, and thus t̃−1 = (p−1)(s+k − s̃) ≥ p−1. This
yields s̃ = s+k−1 and t̃ = p. Hence we get s+kp = s+t = δ+4 = s̃+ t̃ = s+k−1+p,
implying (k − 1)p = k − 1, thus k = 1, and hence s̃ = s and t̃ = t. Note that in this
case t = p is odd, and s is even or s ≥ 2p−1, in particular yielding µ2 (s, t) = µ1 (s, t).
This concludes our treatment of the case p odd, hence let now p = 2.
i) We first consider case (9.2.iii), where, using s + t = δ − 4 again, we have
t
s δ
µ2 = s + − 4 = + − 2.
2
2 2
We distinguish the cases t = 2 and t > 2: If t = 2, then we have log2 (N ) = δ =
s − 2 = µ2 + 1, thus
µ(G) = µ2 · 2δ + 1 = (log2 (N ) − 1) · N + 1,
while if t > 2, then we have log2 (N ) = δ − 1, thus
µ(G) = µ2 · 2δ + 1 = (log2 (N ) + s − 3) · N + 1.
Hence we are able to decide in which of these cases we are, and to determine δ and
subsequently s, in the former case from N , in the latter case from N and µ(G).
ii) Finally, we consider the pair (3, 3), that is G ∼
= Z24 , which is the only pair not
belonging to case (9.2.iii), but just to case (9.2.i): We have µ0 (Z24 ) = µ0 (3, 3) = 0,
hence its minimum genus equals µ(Z24 ) = 1. For pairs (s, t) belonging to case
(9.2.iii), the statement µ(G) = 1 translates into µ2 (s, t) = 0, that is s + 2t = 4,
being equivalent to (s, t) = (3, 2), that is G ∼
= Z2 ⊕ Z4 ; note that (3, 2) is the other
pair belonging to case (9.2.i). Moreover, for G ∼
= Z24 we have log2 (N ) = δ − 1 = 1,
∼
and for G = Z2 ⊕ Z4 we also have log2 (N ) = δ = 1. Thus {Z24 , Z2 ⊕ Z4 } are the
only groups under consideration which cannot be distinguished by N and µ(G).

39

References
[1] T. Breuer: Characters and automorphism groups of compact Riemann surfaces, London
Math. Soc. Lecture Note Series 280 (2000), Cambridge Univ. Press.
[2] A. Douady, R. Douady: Algèbre et théories galoisiennes, vol. 2: Théories galoisiennes (1979),
CEDIC, Paris.
[3] The GAP Group: GAP — Groups, Algorithms, Programming — A System for Computational
Discrete Algebra, Version 4.8.6 (2016), http://www.gap-system.org.
[4] W.J. Harvey: Cyclic groups of automorphisms of a compact Riemann surface, Quart. J.
Math. Oxford Ser. (2) 17 (1966), 86–97.
[5] A. Hurwitz: Über algebraische Gebilde mit eindeutigen Transformationen in sich, Math. Ann.
41 (1893), 403–442.
[6] R. Kulkarni: Symmetries of surfaces, Topology 26 (1987), 195–203.
[7] R. Kulkarni, C. Maclachlan: Cyclic p-groups of symmetries of surfaces, Glasgow Math. J. 33
(1991), 213–221.
[8] C. Maclachlan: Abelian groups of automorphisms of compact Riemann surfaces, Proc. London Math. Soc. (3) 15 (1965), 699–712.
[9] C. Maclachlan, Y. Talu: p-Groups of symmetries of surfaces, Michigan Math. J. 45 (1998),
315–332.
[10] D. McCullough, A. Miller: A stable genus increment for group actions on closed 2-manifolds,
Topology 31 (1992), 367–397.
[11] J. Müller, S. Sarkar: On p-groups of Gorenstein-Kulkarni type, Preprint (2012), arXiv:
1208.3566v1 [math.GR].
[12] C. Sah: Groups related to compact Riemann surfaces, Acta Math. 123 (1969), 13–42.
[13] S. Sarkar: On the genus spectrum for p-groups of exponent p and p-groups of maximal class,
J. Group Theory 12 (2009), 39–54.
[14] Y. Talu: Abelian p-groups of symmetries of surfaces, Taiwanese J. Math. 15 no. 3 (2011),
1129–1140.

J.M.: Arbeitsgruppe Algebra und Zahlentheorie
Bergische Universität Wuppertal
Gauß-Straße 20
D-42119 Wuppertal, Germany
juergen.mueller@math.uni-wuppertal.de
S.S.: Department of Mathematics
Indian Institute of Science Education and Research Bhopal
Indore-Bypass Road, Bhauri
Bhopal 462066, India
sidhu@iiserb.ac.in

