arXiv:1609.03028v1 [math.GR] 10 Sep 2016

A CHARACTERIZATION OF A-SIMPLE GROUPS
PAUL FLAVELL
Abstract. Let A be an elementary abelian r-group with rank at least 3 that
acts faithfully on the finite r ′ -group G. Assume that G is A-simple, so that
G = K1 × · · · × Kn where K1 , . . . , Kn is a collection of simple subgroups
of G that is permuted transitively by A. The purpose of this paper is to
characterize G and the collection of fixed point subgroups {CG (a) | a ∈ A# }.
An application of this result will be a new proof of McBride’s Nonsolvable
Signalizer Functor Theorem.

1. Introduction
Throughout this paper, r is a prime and A is an elementary abelian r-group with
rank at least 3. Suppose that A acts faithfully on the finite r′ -group G and that G
is A-simple. Then G = K1 × · · · × Kn where K1 , . . . , Kn is a collection of simple
subgroups of G that is permuted transitively by A. The type of G is defined to be
the isomorphism class of K1 . Let a ∈ A# and suppose that K1 is one of the known
simple groups. Since A is elementary abelian, exactly one of the following holds:
(a) h a i acts semiregularly on h K1 , . . . , Kn i and CG (a) is A-simple with the
same type as G.
(b) a normalizes each Ki , E(CKi (a)) is simple, F (CKi (a)) = 1 and E(CG (a))
is A-simple.
(c) a normalizes each Ki and CG (a) is solvable.
Moreover in cases (a) and (b),
CA (E(CG (a))) = h a i.
These facts are established in [2]. For all a, b ∈ A# we have
E(E(CG (a)) ∩ CG (b)) ≤ E(CG (b))
since in (b), CG (a)/E(CG (a)) is solvable. In addition
G = h E(CG (a)) | a ∈ A# i.
The purpose of this paper is to prove that these conditions characterize G and the
collection of fixed point subgroups { CG (a) | a ∈ A# }. We shall prove:
Theorem A. Let r be a prime and A an elementary abelian r-group of rank at
least 3 that acts on the group G. Suppose that for each a ∈ A# that θ(a) is a finite
A-invariant r′ -subgroup of CG (a) and that the following hold:
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 20D45 20D05 20E34 .
A considerable portion of this research was done whilst the author was in receipt of a Leverhulme Research Project grant and during visits to the Mathematisches Seminar, ChristianAlbrechts-Universität, Kiel, Germany. The author expresses his thanks to the Leverhulme Trust
for their support and to the Mathematisches Seminar for its hospitality.
1

2

PAUL FLAVELL

(a) If a ∈ A# with E(θ(a)) 6= 1 then E(θ(a)) is an A-simple K-group, F (θ(a)) =
1 and CA (E(θ(a))) = h a i.
(b) For all a, b ∈ A# ,
θ(a) ∩ CG (b) ≤ θ(b)
and
E(E(θ(a)) ∩ CG (b)) ≤ E(θ(b)).
(c) G = h E(θ(a)) | a ∈ A# i.
Then G is a finite r′ -group, it is A-simple and a K-group. Moreover
CG (a) = θ(a)
#

for all a ∈ A .
A number of remarks are in order.
• The first condition on (b) asserts that θ is an A-signalizer functor on G.
The conclusion asserts that θ is complete. Theorem 1 is therefore a special
case of the Nonsolvable Signalizer Functor Theorem.
• The Nonsolvable Signalizer Functor Theorem was proved by McBride [6, 7]
and plays a fundamental role in the proof of the Classification of the Finite
Simple Groups, see [4] for example. This paper is one of a sequence of
papers on automorphisms of K-groups, one of whose aims is to give a new
proof of the Nonsolvable Signalizer Functor Theorem. In both his papers,
McBride proves results similar to Theorem 1. Hence this paper may be
regarded as a revision of part of McBride’s work.
• Theorem 1 is analogous to the standard form problems that arise in the
proof of the Classification of the Finite Simple Groups.
• Recall that a K-group is a finite group all of whose simple sections are
known simple groups. Since the main application of the Nonsolvable Signalizer Functor Theorem is to the Classification, the K-group assumption
in (a) causes no difficulty. A crucial consequence is that if a is an automorphism with order r of the simple r′ -group K then CK (a) has a unique
minimal normal subgroup. It would be interesting to see if it possible to
establish this without the K-group assumption.
2. Preliminaries
Lemma 2.1.
(a) Suppose that K is a simple K-group and an r′ -group. Then
the Sylow r-subgroups of Aut(K) are cyclic.
(b) Suppose that A is an elementary abelian r-group that acts coprimely on the
K-group G.
(i) If G is A-simple then F ∗ (CG (A)) is the unique minimal normal subgroup of CG (A).
(ii) If K ∈ compA (G) then CG (CK (A)) = CG (A).
(c) Suppose that B is an elementary abelian r-group and that K is a simple
K-group and an r′ -group. Then there exists a prime p such that whenever
J is B-simple of type K then
J = h CJ (B), Z(P ) i
for all P ∈ Sylp (J; B).

A CHARACTERIZATION OF A-SIMPLE GROUPS

3

Proof. (a) and (b) follows from [2, Theorem 4.1].
(c). TO DO. This reduces quickly to the case when J is simple and B has order
r.

Lemma 2.2. Suppose that A acts coprimely on the K-group X and that X is
A-simple. Suppose also that B ≤ A is noncyclic. Then
X = h CX (b) | b ∈ B # and CX (b) is A-simple with the same type as X i.
Proof. If CB (X) 6= 1 then X = CX (b) for any b ∈ B # and there is nothing to prove.
Hence we may assume that CB (X) = 1. Then we may replace A by A/CA (X) and
assume that CA (X) = 1. Set A∞ = ker(A −→ Sym(comp(X))). [2, Lemma 6.4]
implies A∞ is cyclic so B ∩ A∞ < B. Let
Y = h CX (b) | b ∈ B \ B ∩ A∞ i.
[2, Lemma 6.5] implies that CX (b) is A-simple with the same type as X for all
b ∈ B \ A∞ . Hence it suffices to show that Y = X. [2, Lemma 6.5(d)] implies
CA (CX (b)) = h b i for all b ∈ B \ B ∩ A∞ . Then CA (Y ) ≤ h b i so as B is
noncyclic and B ∩ A∞ is cyclic, it follows that CA (Y ) = 1. Note that CX (b) is
overdiagonal, which implies that CX (b) projects onto each component of X for
each b ∈ B \ B ∩ A∞ , so Y is overdiagonal. [2, Lemma 6.6] implies Y = CX (D) for
some D ≤ A. But CA (Y ) = 1 so D = 1 and Y = CX (1) = X.

Lemma 2.3. Let R be a group that acts coprimely on the group G. Assume that
G = G1 ∗ · · · ∗ Gn .
where { G1 , . . . , Gn } is a collection of perfect subgroups of G on which R acts
semiregularly. Then CG (R) is perfect.
Proof. Note that ∗ denotes a central product. Let G∗ = G1 × · · · × Gn and observe
that R acts on G∗ . The map G∗ −→ G defined by (g1 , . . . , gn ) 7→ g1 · · · gn is an Repimorphism. By Coprime Action, CG (R) is the image of CG∗ (R). Visibly CG∗ (R)
is perfect.

Lemma 2.4. Suppose G is a perfect group and G/Z(G) is a finite r′ -group. Then
G is a finite r′ -group.
Proof. [8, Theorem 9.8, p.250] implies that G is finite. Now Or (Z(G)) is a normal
Hall subgroup of G. Apply the Schur-Zassenhaus Theoren and the fact that G is
perfect.

3. Part 1
Henceforth we assume the hypotheses of Theorem 1. For each a ∈ A# set
Ea = E(θ(a)).
If Ea 6= 1 set
Aa = ker (A −→ Sym(comp(Ea )))
otherwise set Aa = A.
Consider the types of Ea as a ranges over A# and choose a type K of maximal
order. Note that K exists because G = h Ea | a ∈ A# i. Set
Amax = { a ∈ A# | Ea has type K }
Amin = A# \ Amax .

4

PAUL FLAVELL

Lemma 3.1. Let a, b ∈ A# . Then
E(CEa (b)) = E(CEb (a)).
Proof. By assumption, E(CEa (b)) ≤ Eb so
E(CEa (b)) ≤ CEb (a) ≤ θ(b) ∩ CG (a) ≤ θ(b) ∩ θ(a).
Now Ea E θ(a) so θ(a) ∩ θ(b) normalizes E(CEa (b)). Consequently E(CEa (b)) ≤
E(CEb (a)). The conclusion follows by symmetry.

Lemma 3.2. Let a ∈ Amax . Then | Aa | = r or r2 .
Proof. By hypothesis, Ea is the direct product of simple groups that are permuted
transitively by A. Since A is elementary abelian, it follows that Aa /CA (Ea ) is
isomorphic to a subgroup of the automorphism group of a component of Ea . Hence
Aa /CA (Ea ) has order at most r by Lemma 2.1. Also by hypothesis, CA (Ea ) = h a i,
hence the result.

Lemma 3.3. Let a ∈ Amax and b ∈ A# with h a i 6= h b i. Exactly one of the
following holds:
(a) b 6∈ Aa and a 6∈ Ab . Moreover b ∈ Amax and | Aa | = | Ab |.
(b) b ∈ Aa and a 6∈ Ab . Moreover b ∈ Amin .
(c) b ∈ Aa and a ∈ Ab .
Proof. We have
Ea = K1 × · · · × Kα
where { K1 , . . . , Kα } are the components of K. Since A is elementary abelian
and transitive on { K1 , . . . , Kα } it follows that A/Aa is regular. In particular,
α = | A : Aα |.
Suppose b 6∈ Aa . Then b acts as the product of α/r cycles of length r. Visibly
∼ K α/r .
(1)
E(CE (b)) = CE (b) =
a

a

Suppose b ∈ Aa . Then CEa (b) = CK1 (b) × · · · × CKα (b) and A is transitive on
{ CK1 (b), . . . , CKα (b) }. Then there is an action of b on K such that
∼ E(CK (b))α
(2)
E(CE (b)) =
a

and CK (b) ∼
= CKi (b) for all i. As h b i 6= h a i = CA (Ea ) it follows that CK (b) < K.
Lemma 3.2 implies that
(3)

E(CEa (b)) = E(CEb (a)).

Suppose that Eb = 1. Then E(CEa (b)) = 1 so the previous paragraph implies
b ∈ Aa . By the definition of Ab we have A = Ab so a ∈ Ab and (c) holds. Hence
we may assume that Eb 6= 1.
We have
Eb = J1 × · · · × Jβ
where { J1 , . . . , Jβ } are the components of Eb and β = | A : Ab |. Let J be the type
of Eb . Then there are expressions for E(CEb (a)) analogous to (1) and (2).
Assume b 6∈ Aa and a 6∈ Ab . Then K α/r ∼
= J β/r whence K ∼
= J, so b ∈ Amax .
Also α = β so | Aa | = | Ab | and (a) holds.
Assume b ∈ Aa and a 6∈ Ab . Then E(CK (b))α ∼
= J β/r . Consequently | J | ≤
| E(CK (b)) | < | K | so b ∈ Amin and (b) holds. If b 6∈ Aa and a ∈ Ab , then
similarly | K | < | J |, contrary to the choice of K, hence this case does not arise.
The only remaining possibility is (c).


A CHARACTERIZATION OF A-SIMPLE GROUPS

5

Lemma 3.4. Let a ∈ Amax .
(a) If b ∈ Aa ∩ Amax then Aa = Ab .
(b) Amin ⊆ Aa .
(c) If b ∈ A \ Aa then b ∈ Amax ; a 6∈ Ab ; CEa (b) and CEb (a) are A-simple;
CEa (b) = CEb (a) and CEa (A) = CEb (A).
Proof. (a). We may suppose h a i 6= h b i. Lemma 3.2 implies Aa = h a, b i. Now
b ∈ Aa so only case (c) of Lemma 3.3 may hold. Thus a ∈ Ab and Ab = h a, b i = Aa .
(b). Let b ∈ Amin . Case (a) of Lemma 3.3 cannot hold so b ∈ Aa .
(c). Since b 6∈ Aa . Only Case (a) of Lemma 3.3 can hold so b ∈ Amax and
a 6∈ Ab . Since b 6∈ Aa = ker (A −→ Sym(comp(Ea ))) it follows that CEa (b) is Asimple. Similarly so is CEb (a). Lemma 3.1 implies CEa (b) = CEb (a). Now a, b ∈ A

whence CEa (A) = CEb (A).
Lemma 3.5. Let a ∈ Amax . Then
Aa = h Amin , a i.
Moreover, | h Amin i | = 1 or r.
Proof. Choose b ∈ A \ Aa . This is possible since | Aa | = r or r2 by Lemma 3.2 and
since rank(A) ≥ 3. Lemma 3.4(c) implies CEa (b) is A-simple and
CEa (b) = CEb (a).

(1)

The components of CEa (b) correspond to the orbits of h b i on comp(Ea ). Since Aa
acts trivially on comp(Ea ) it follows that Aa acts trivially on comp(CEa (b)). Then
(1) implies that Aa acts trivially on the set of orbits of h a i on comp(Eb ). Now
A/Ab is abelian and regular on comp(Eb ) so it follows that h a i and Aa induce the
same group on comp(Eb ). Consequently
(2)

Aa = h Aa ∩ Ab , a i.

Lemma 3.4(b) implies Amin ⊆ Aa ∩ Ab . Now a ∈ Aa and a 6∈ Ab so Aa 6= Ab . If
there exists 1 6= b′ ∈ (Aa ∩ Ab ) \ Amin then b′ ∈ Aa ∩ Ab ∩ Amax so Lemma 3.4(a)
implies Aa = Ab′ = Ab , a contradiction. We deduce that
h Amin i = Aa ∩ Ab < Aa .
Again, strict containment holding because a ∈ Aa \ Ab . Then (2) implies Aa =
h Amin , a i. By Lemma 3.2, | Aa | ≤ r2 whence | h Amin i | ≤ r.

Henceforth we set
A∞ = h Amin i.
Then using Lemma 3.5, we have:
Theorem 3.6. Exactly one of the following holds:
(a) A∞ = 1. For each a ∈ A# ,
Ea ∼
= K | A |/r and Aa = h a i.
(b) | A∞ | = r. For each a ∈ A \ A∞ ,
2
Ea ∼
= K | A |/r and Aa = h A∞ , a i.

6

PAUL FLAVELL

Remark. We will eventually show that G is A-simple of type K. The two possibilities in Theorem 3.6 corresponds to whether A acts faithfully on comp(G) or not;
with A∞ being the kernel of this action. Moreover, we have established that the
subgroups E(θ(a)) have the same structure as the corresponding subgroups in the
target group.
4. Part 2
Lemma 4.1. Suppose B satisfies A∞ < B ≤ A. Then
G = h Eb | b ∈ B \ A∞ i.
Proof. Let H = h Eb | b ∈ B \ A∞ i. We claim that if a ∈ A \ A∞ then Ea ≤ H.
Indeed, Lemma 2.2 implies
Ea = h CEa (b) | b ∈ B # and CEa (b) is A-simple with the same type as Ea i.
Write Ea = K1 × · · · × Kn where K1 , . . . , Kn are the components of Ea . Suppose
e ∈ A#
∞ . Theorem 3.6 implies that e normalizes each Ki so CEa (e) = CK1 (e)× · · ·×
CKn (e). By assumption, CA (Ea ) = h a i so as a ∈ A \ A∞ we have CKi (e) 6= Ki . It
follows that CEa (e) is not A-simple with the same type as Ea . Suppose b ∈ B # and
CEa (b) is A-simple with the same type as Ea . Then b 6∈ A∞ . Lemma 3.1 implies
CEa (b) ≤ Eb ≤ H and the claim follows.
Suppose e ∈ A#
∞ . We claim that Ee ≤ H. Theorem 3.6 implies A∞ is cyclic
so as rank(A) ≥ 3 we may choose D ≤ A with D noncyclic and D ∩ A∞ = 1.
Lemma 2.2 implies
Ee = h CEe (d) | d ∈ D# and CEe (d) is A-simple. i
If d ∈ D# with CEe (d) being A-simple then as before CEe (d) ≤ Ed . Now d 6∈ A∞
so Ed ≤ H by the previous paragraph. We have shown that Ea ≤ H for all a ∈ A# .
By assumption, G = h Ea | a ∈ A# i, completing the proof.

Set
G = G/Z(G).
For each B ≤ A define
Ω(B) =

[

compB (Eb ).

b∈B\A∞

Recall that if B acts on the group X then the B-components of X are the groups
generated by the orbits of B on comp(X). The set of B-components of X is denoted
by compB (X).
Lemma 4.2. Suppose that B satisfies A∞ < B < A. Suppose also that “does not
commute” is an equivalence relation on Ω(B). Then:
(a) G is the direct product of | A : B | perfect subgroups. These subgroups are
permuted transitively by A and the A-stabilizer of any of them is B.
(b) G is a finite r′ -group.
(c) Let a ∈ A \ B then
CG (a) = θ(a) = Ea and CZ(G) (a) = 1.

A CHARACTERIZATION OF A-SIMPLE GROUPS

7

Proof. Let ∼ be the equivalence relation “does not commute” on Ω(B) and let
n = | A : B |. Let b ∈ B \ A∞ . Theorem 3.6 implies that comp(Eb ) consists
of | A |/r| A∞ | copies of K that are permuted regularly by A/h b, A∞ i. Now
h b, A∞ i ≤ B so B has n orbits on comp(Eb ) and we have
Eb = X1 × · · · × Xn
where X1 , . . . , Xn are the B-components of Eb . Note that A is transitive on
{ X1 , . . . , Xn } and for each i, B = NA (Xi ).
We claim that { X1 , . . . , Xn } is a set of representatives for the equivalence classes
of ∼. If i 6= j then [Xi , Xj ] = 1 so Xi and Xj lie in different classes. Let Y ∈ Ω(B).
Note that CY (b) 6= 1 since Y is not nilpotent. Then 1 6= CY (b) ≤ θ(b). Now Eb 6= 1
so by assumption F (θ(b)) = 1 and then Cθ(b) (Eb ) = 1. Hence there exists i with
[Xi , CY (b)] 6= 1. In particular, Xi ∼ Y . The claim is established.
For each i let Gi be the group generated by the equivalence equivalence class
of Xi . Since B-components are perfect, so is each Gi . The definition of ∼ implies
[Gi , Gj ] = 1 for all i 6= j. Lemma 4.1 implies G = G1 ∗ · · · ∗ Gn and so
G = G1 ∗ · · · ∗ Gn .
Then A is transitive on { G1 , . . . , Gn } and for each i, B = NA (Gi ). In particular,
(a) holds.
For each i let πi : G −→ Gi be the projection map. Let a ∈ A \ B. Without loss,
X1a = X2 , X2a = X3 , . . .. In particular, a is nontrivial on comp(Eb ) and so CEb (a) is
A-simple. Lemma 3.1 implies CEb (a) ≤ Ea . Let x1 ∈ X1 , put x2 = xa1 , x3 = xa2 , . . .
and x = x1 · · · xr ∈ CEb (a) ≤ Ea . Then x ∈ Ea and x1 = xπ1 ∈ Ea π1 . We deduce
that
X1 ≤ Ea π1 .
Now suppose Y1 ∈ Ω(B) and Y1 ∼ X1 . Then for some b′ ∈ B \ A∞ we have
Y1 ∈ compB (Eb′ ). We may write Eb′ = Y1 × · · · × Yn with Yi ∼ Xi for all i. Then
Gi is the group generated by the equivalence class of Yi . The previous paragraph,
with (b′ , Y1 ) in the role of (b, X1 ) implies Y1 ≤ Ea π1 . It follows that
G1 ≤ Ea π1 ≤ θ(a)π1 ≤ CG (a)π1 ≤ G1
and then we have equality.
Observe that G1 is a finite r′ -group since it is the image of the finite r′ -group
θ(a). Then G is a finite r′ -group. Now G is perfect since it is generated by the
perfect subgroups Gi . Lemma 2.4 implies that G is a finite r′ -group so (b) holds.
Since h a i is semiregular on { G1 , . . . , Gn } we have CG (a) ∩ ker π1 = 1 so the
previously proved equality forces
Ea = θ(a) = CG (a).
In particular, Ea (Z(G)∩CG (a)) = CG (a). Lemma 2.3 implies that CG (a) is perfect.
Consequently Ea = CG (a). Since Ea ≤ θ(a) we obtain Ea = θ(a) = CG (a). Also
as Ea 6= 1 we have F (θ(a)) = 1 so CZ(G) (a) = 1 and (c) holds.

Theorem 4.3. Suppose B1 , . . . , Bn satisfy:
• For each i, A∞ < Bi < A and “does not commute” is an equivalence
relation on Ω(Bi ).
• A∞ = B1 ∩ · · · ∩ Bm .

8

PAUL FLAVELL

Then G is an A-simple r′ -group. It is the direct product of | A : A∞ | copies of K,
A∞ = ker (A −→ Sym(comp(G))) and for all a ∈ A# ,
θ(a) = CG (a).
In particular, θ is complete.
Proof. Let a ∈ A \ A∞ . Then there exists i with a 6∈ Bi so Lemma 4.2 implies
θ(a) = CG (a) and CZ(G) (a) = 1.
Choose D < A with D ∩ A∞ = and rank(A) = 2. Suppose 1 6= e ∈ A∞ . Now G is
an r′ -group by Lemma 4.2 so by considering the action of D on CG (e) we have
CG (e) = h CG (e) ∩ CG (d) | d ∈ D# i
= h CG (e) ∩ θ(d) | d ∈ D# i ≤ θ(e).
Hence
θ(e) = CG (e).
Consequently θ is complete. Moreover CZ(G) (d) = 1 for all d ∈ D# so as D is
noncyclic, this forces Z(G) = 1.
Let
G = K1 × · · · × Kl
be a decomposition of G into a direct product of nontrivial indecomposable groups.
Since G is perfect, so is each Ki and this decomposition is unique by the KrullSchmidt Theorem. In particular, A permutes { K1 , . . . , Kl }.
Recall that a ∈ A \ A∞ . Choose i with a 6∈ Bi . Now Z(G) = 1 so Lemma 4.2
implies there exists a decomposition
G = G1 × · · · × G| A:Bi |
and that h a i acts semiregularly on the factors. Let 1 ≤ i ≤ l. Writing each Gj as a
direct product of indecomposable groups, we see that there exists k with Ki ≤ Gk .
Now a does not normalize Gk so it does not normalize Ki . Consequently h a i acts
semiregularly on { K1 , . . . , Kl }. In particular, CG (a) is a direct product of groups,
one for each orbit of h a i on { K1 , . . . , Kl }. Now CG (a) = θ(a) = Ea and Ea is
A-simple of type K. If 1 6= e ∈ A∞ then since Ee is not A-simple of type K, we
see that e normalizes each Ki . Consequently
A∞ = ker (A −→ Sym(comp(G))) ,
completing the proof.


5. Part 3

In order to complete the proof of Theorem 1, by the previous theorem it suffices
to show that if A∞ < B < A with | A : B | = r then “does not commute” is an
equivalence relation on Ω(B). If rank(A) ≥ 4, then rank(B) ≥ 3 so as θ is also
a B-signalizer functor, this follows from [2, The Global Theorem, Theorem 10.2].
However, more work is needed to establish this fact if rank(A) = 3.
Hypothesis 5.1.
• A∞ < B < A with rank(B) = 2.
• a, b ∈ B \ A∞ with B = h a, b i.
• Ea = K1 ×· · ·×Kα and Eb = J1 ×· · ·×Jα where α = | A |/r2 and K1 , . . . , Kα
and J1 , . . . , Jα are the B-components of Ea and Eb respectively.

A CHARACTERIZATION OF A-SIMPLE GROUPS

9

To justify the assertion made in the third part consider first the case that A∞ =
1. Theorem 3.6 implies that Ea is the direct product of | A |/r copies of K and
Aa = h a i. Since a ∈ B and | B | = r2 it follows that B has α orbits on comp(Ea ).
Consider the case | A∞ | = r. Theorem 3.6 implies that Ea is the direct product of
| A |/r2 copies of K and Aa = h A∞ , a i. Then B = Aa so B is trivial on comp(Ea ).
Again, B has α orbits on comp(Ea ).
Lemma 5.2. Assume Hypothesis 5.1. After a suitable renumbering, the following
hold:
(a) F ∗ (CKi (B)) = F ∗ (CJi (B)) for all i.
(b) [CKi (B), Jj ] = 1 = [Ki , CJj (B)] for all i 6= j.
Proof. Let N = θ(B), so that N = ∩c∈B # θ(c). For any c ∈ B # we have CEa (B) ≤
θ(a) ∩ CG (c) ≤ θ(c) whence CEa (B) ≤ N . As a ∈ B # and Ea = E(θ(a)) it follows
that AN normalizes Ea . In fact, as AN centralizes B, it follows that AN permutes
the B-components of Ea . Now Ea is A-simple so A acts transitively. Moreover,
N E AN and N is an r′ -group. This implies that N acts trivially. Consequently
CEa (B) = CK1 (B) × · · · × CKα (B) and CKi (B) E N.
Similarly
CEb (B) = CJ1 (B) × · · · × CJα (B)

and CJi (B) E N.

We have also shown that CKi (B) normalizes Jj and CJj (B) normalizes Ki for all
i, j.
Using Lemma 2.1(b)(ii) we have CN (CEb (B)) ≤ Cθ(b) (CEb (B)) ≤ Cθ(b) (Eb ).
Now Eb = E(θ(b)) so by assumption, F (θ(b)) = 1 and hence Cθ(b) (Eb ) = 1. Consequently
CN (CEb (B)) = 1.
Let 1 ≤ i ≤ α. By the above, there exists j such that [CKi (B), CJj (B)] 6= 1. Then
1 6= [CKi (B), CJj (B)] ≤ CKi (B) ∩ CJj (B) E h CKi (B), CJj (B) i.
Lemma 2.1(b)(i) implies that F ∗ (CKi (B)) is the unique minimal normal subgroup
of CKi (B). Then F ∗ (CKi (B)) ≤ F ∗ (CKi (B) ∩ CJj (B)) ≤ F ∗ (CJj (B)). By symmetry we have
F ∗ (CKi (B)) = F ∗ (CJj (B)).
If k 6= j then F ∗ (CJj (B)) 6= F ∗ (CJk (B)) because Jj ∩ Jk = 1. It follows that
F ∗ (CJk (B)) 6= F ∗ (CKi (B)), so j is uniquely determined. Hence [CKi (B), CJk (B)] =
1 for all k 6= j.
After a suitable renumbering, we have
F ∗ (CKi (B)) = F ∗ (CJi (B))
for all i and
[CKi (B), CJj (B)] = 1
for all i 6= j. To prove (b) suppose that i 6= j. At the beginning of the proof, we
observed that CKi (B) normalizes Jj . Then (b) follows from Lemma 2.1(b)(ii). 
Henceforth, whenever we assume Hypothesis 5.1, we assume the ordering has
been chosen on accordance with Lemma 5.2.

10

PAUL FLAVELL

Lemma 5.3. Assume Hypothesis 5.1. Then
CKi (B) = CJi (B)
for all i.
Proof. Without loss i = 1. Choose c ∈ A \ B. Now A/A∞ is regular on comp(Eb )
and J1 , . . . , Jα are the subgroups generated by the orbits of B on comp(Eb ). It
follows that h c i is semiregular on { J1 , . . . , Jα }. Then visibly CEb (B) ∩ CG (c)
induces the same group on CJ1 (B) as does CJ1 (B). Also, h c i is semiregular on
{ K1 , . . . , Kα } so using Lemma 5.2 we see that CEa (B) ∩ CG (c) induces the same
group on CJ1 (B) as does CK1 (B). Using Lemma 3.4(c), with (b, c) in the role of
(a, b), we have
CEb (B) ∩ CG (c) = CG (B) ∩ CEb (c) = CG (B) ∩ CEc (b) = CEc (B).
Similarly, CEa (B) ∩ CG (c) = CEc (B). We deduce that CK1 (B) and CJ1 (B) induce
the same group on CJ1 (B).
Let X = Cθ(B) (CJ2 (B) × · · · × CJα (B)). Lemma 2.1(b)(ii) implies that [X, J2 ×
· · · × Jα ] = 1. Moreover, F (θ(b)) = 1 so F ∗ (θ(b)) = J1 × · · · × Jα and it follows that
X is faithful on CJ1 (B). Clearly CJ1 (B) ≤ X. By Lemma 5.2, CK1 (B) ≤ X. Since
CJ1 (B) and CK1 (B) induce the same group on CJ1 (B), we deduce that CJ1 (B) =

CK1 (B).
Corollary 5.4. Let a, b ∈ A \ A∞ . Then
CEa (b) = CEb (a).
Proof. Suppose h a i = h b i. Then θ(a) = θ(a) ∩ CG (b) ≤ θ(b). By symmetry,
θ(a) = θ(b) whence Ea = Eb and the conclusion follows. If b 6∈ Aa then the
conclusion follows from Lemma 3.4(c). Hence we may suppose that b ∈ Aa . Set
B = Aa . Lemma 3.5 implies B = h a, b i. Also, A∞ < Aa . Using Lemma 5.3 we

have CEa (b) = CEa (B) = CEb (B) = CEb (a).
Recall that by hypothesis, θ is an A-signalizer functor on G. Also if p is a prime
then a (p, θ)-subgroup of G is an A-invariant p-subgroup P with the property
CP (a) ≤ θ(a)
for all a ∈ A# . The set of maximal (p, θ)-subgroups is denoted by Sylp (G; θ). The
Transitivity Theorem, [5, p. 309] asserts that θ(A) acts transitively by conjugation
on Sylp (G; A). Consequently CP (a) ∈ Sylp (θ(a)) for all P ∈ Sylp (G; θ) and a ∈ A# .
Lemma 5.5. Assume Hypothesis 5.1. Let p be a prime and P ∈ Sylp (G; θ). Then
[Z(P ∩ Ea ), Z(P ∩ Eb )] = 1.
Proof. For each c ∈ A \ A∞ set Pc = P ∩ Ec . Now Ec E θ(c) so the preceding
discussions imply Pc ∈ Sylp (Ec ; A).
Let c ∈ A \ B. We claim that
CZ(Pa ) (c) = CZ(Pc ) (a).
Note that Pa is the direct product of its intersections with the components of Ea .
Since c ∈ A \ B and Aa = h A∞ , a i ≤ B we have c 6∈ Aa so h c i is semiregular
on comp(Ea ) and hence on the factors of Pa . It follows that Z(CPa (c)) ≤ Z(Pa ).
Consequently
Z(CPa (c)) = CZ(Pa ) (c).

A CHARACTERIZATION OF A-SIMPLE GROUPS

11

Since c 6∈ Aa , Lemma 3.4(c) implies a 6∈ Ac and CPa (c) = CPc (a). Then Z(CPa (c)) =
Z(CPc (a)). Repeating the above argument, we have Z(CPc (a)) = CZ(Pc ) (a) and
the claim follows. For any such c we also have CZ(Pb ) (c) = CZ(Pc ) (b). We deduce
that
[CZ(Pa ) (c), CZ(Pb ) (c)] = 1
for all c ∈ A \ B.
Assume now the lemma to be false. Then [Z(Pa ), Z(Pb )] 6= 1. By Coprime
Action, there exists C < A with | A : C | = r and [CZ(Pa ) (C), Z(Pb )] 6= 1. Now
rank(A) ≥ 3 so C is noncyclic. Again by Coprime Action, there exists c ∈ C # with
[CZ(Pa ) (C), CZ(Pb ) (c)] 6= 1. In particular
(∗)

[CZ(Pa ) (c), CZ(Pb ) (c)] 6= 1.

The previous paragraph implies c ∈ B. If B = h a, c i then as b ∈ B and using
Corollary 5.4 we have
CZ(Pa ) (c) ≤ P ∩ CEa (b) = P ∩ CEb (a) ≤ Pb ,
contrary to (∗). Thus c ∈ h a i. Similarly c ∈ h b i. But by Hypothesis 5.1,
h a i 6= h b i, a contradiction.

Lemma 5.6. Assume Hypothesis 5.1 Then
[Ki , Jj ] = 1
for all i 6= j.
Proof. By Theorem 3.6, each member of Ω(B) is B-simple of type K so Lemma 2.1(c)
implies there exists a prime p such that
J = h CJ (B), Z(P0 ) i
whenever J ∈ Ω(B) and P0 ∈ Sylp (J; B). Choose P ∈ Sylp (G; θ). By the Transitivity Theorem, Cp (a) ∈ Sylp (θ(a); A) so as Ki EE θ(a) we have P ∩Ki ∈ Sylp (Ki ; B).
Similarly, P ∩ Jj ∈ Sylp (Jj ; B). Consequently
Ki = h CKi (B), Z(P ∩ Ki ) i and Jj = h CJj (B), Z(P ∩ Jj ) i.
Lemma 5.2(b) implies [CKi (B), Jj ] = 1 = [Ki , CJj (B)]. As Ea = K1 × · · · × Kα
we have Z(P ∩ Ki ) ≤ Z(P ∩ Ea ). Similarly Z(P ∩ Jj ) ≤ Z(P ∩ Eb ). Lemma 5.5
implies that [Z(P ∩ Ki ), Z(P ∩ Jj )] = 1. It follows that [Ki , Jj ] = 1.

Proof of Theorem 1. By Theorem 4.3 it suffices to choose B ∼
= Zr × Zr with A∞ <
B < A and prove that “does not commute” is an equivalence relation on Ω(B).
This will follow if we can show that
[X, Y ] 6= 1

if and only if

CX (B) = CY (B)

whenever X, Y ∈ Ω(B).
Choose X, Y ∈ Ω(B). By the definition of Ω(B), there exists a, b ∈ B \ A∞ such
that X ∈ compB (Ea ) and Y ∈ compB (Eb ). The “if” direction is clear since as X
is B-simple, CX (B) 6= 1. Thus to complete the proof, we assume [X, Y ] 6= 1 and
aim to show CX (B) = CY (B).
If h a i = h b i then since θ is an A-signalizer functor we have θ(a) = θ(b),
whence Ea = Eb . As distinct B-components of Ea commute, the conclusion is
clear. Hence we assume that h a i =
6 h b i. Then B = h a, b i and Hypothesis 5.1

12

PAUL FLAVELL

is satisfied. In particular X = Ki and Y = Jj for some i, j. Lemmas 5.6 and 5.3
imply CX (B) = CY (B). The proof is complete.

References
1. P. Flavell, A new proof of the Solvable Signalizer Functor Theorem, J. Algebra 398 (2014)
350-363
2. P. Flavell, Automorphisms of K-groups I, Preprint http://arxiv.org/abs/1609.01969
3. P. Flavell, Automorphisms of K-groups II, Preprint http://arxiv.org/abs/1609.02380
4. D. Gorenstein, R. Lyons, R.M. Solomon, The classification of the finite simple groups, (Mathematical Surverys and Monographs, 40, American Math. Soc., Providence Rhode Island )
5. H. Kurzweil and B. Stellmacher, The theory of finite groups. An introduction. Universitext,
Springer-Verlag, New York 2004.
6. P.P. McBride, Near solvable signalizer functors on finite groups, J. Algebra 78(1) (1982) 181214
7. P.P. McBride, Nonsolvable signalizer functors on finite groups, J. Algebra 78(1) (1982) 215-238
8. M. Suzuki, Group Theory I. Springer-Verlag, Berlin 1986
The School of Mathematics, University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT, Great
Britain
E-mail address: P.J.Flavell@bham.ac.uk

