 $\alpha \in B_i$ and, choosing $j$ such that $B_j = B_i^{g}$, $$(N^{B_i}h)^{g} \coloneqq \overline{\sigma_{i\rightarrow j}}^{\,-1}(N^{B_i}h) \overline{g_{(i)}}$$ To argue that this is well-defined we need to argue that $(N^{B_i}h,\alpha)^{g} \in \Omega^*$. For this first note that $$\begin{aligned}
  \overline{\sigma_{i\rightarrow j}}^{\,-1}(N^{B_i}h)\overline{g_{(i)}}
  &= \overline{\sigma_{i\rightarrow j}}^{\,-1}N^{B_i}\overline{\sigma_{i\rightarrow j}}\,\overline{\sigma_{i\rightarrow j}}^{\,-1}h\overline{g_{(i)}}\\
  &= N^{B_j}\overline{\sigma_{i\rightarrow j}}^{\,-1}h\overline{g_{(i)}}.
 \end{aligned}$$ Observe that $\overline{\sigma_{i\rightarrow j}}^{\,-1}h\overline{g_{(i)}} \in G^{B_j}$ and $\alpha^{g} \in B_j$. It follows that $(N^{B_i}h,\alpha)^{g} \in \Omega^*$.

We also need to argue that we really defined an action of $G$ on $\Omega^*$. For this let $g,g' \in G$ and $\alpha \in B_i$. Pick $j,r \in [s]$ such that $B_i^{g} = B_j$ and $B_j^{g'} = B_r$. Note that $B_r = B_i^{(gg')}$. Then $$\begin{aligned}
  \left(N^{B_i}h,\alpha\right)^{(gg')} &= \left(\overline{\sigma_{i\rightarrow r}}^{\,-1}\left(N^{B_i}h\right)\overline{(gg')_{(i)}},\alpha^{(gg')}\right)\\
                                       &= \left(\overline{\sigma_{j\rightarrow r}}^{\,-1}\overline{\sigma_{i\rightarrow j}}^{\,-1}\left(N^{B_i}h\right)\overline{g_{(i
$ \alpha \in B_i$ and, choosing $ j$ such that $ B_j = B_i^{g}$, $ $ (N^{B_i}h)^{g } \coloneqq \overline{\sigma_{i\rightarrow j}}^{\,-1}(N^{B_i}h) \overline{g_{(i)}}$$ To argue that this is well - defined we need to argue that   $ (N^{B_i}h,\alpha)^{g } \in \Omega^*$. For this first bill that $ $ \begin{aligned } 
   \overline{\sigma_{i\rightarrow j}}^{\,-1}(N^{B_i}h)\overline{g_{(i) } } 
   & = \overline{\sigma_{i\rightarrow j}}^{\,-1}N^{B_i}\overline{\sigma_{i\rightarrow j}}\,\overline{\sigma_{i\rightarrow j}}^{\,-1}h\overline{g_{(i)}}\\ 
   & = N^{B_j}\overline{\sigma_{i\rightarrow j}}^{\,-1}h\overline{g_{(i) } }. 
  \end{aligned}$$ note that $ \overline{\sigma_{i\rightarrow j}}^{\,-1}h\overline{g_{(i) } } \in G^{B_j}$ and $ \alpha^{g } \in B_j$. It follows that   $ (N^{B_i}h,\alpha)^{g } \in \Omega^*$. 

 We also need to argue that we actually defined an action of   $ G$ on   $ \Omega^*$. For this permit $ g, g' \in G$ and $ \alpha \in B_i$. Pick $ j, r \in [ s]$ such that $ B_i^{g } = B_j$ and $ B_j^{g' } = B_r$. Note that $ B_r = B_i^{(gg')}$. Then $ $ \begin{aligned } 
   \left(N^{B_i}h,\alpha\right)^{(gg') } & = \left(\overline{\sigma_{i\rightarrow r}}^{\,-1}\left(N^{B_i}h\right)\overline{(gg')_{(i)}},\alpha^{(gg')}\right)\\ 
                                        & = \left(\overline{\sigma_{j\rightarrow r}}^{\,-1}\overline{\sigma_{i\rightarrow j}}^{\,-1}\left(N^{B_i}h\right)\overline{g_{(i
 $\aloha \in B_i$ and, choosing $j$ such that $B_j = Y_u^{g}$, $$(N^{B_i}i)^{g} \coloheqq \ovefline{\sigma_{i\rightarrow j}}^{\,-1}(N^{B_i}h) \lvwrlint{y_{(i)}}$$ To argue that thir is well-fefined qe nted to argue that $(I^{G_i}h,\alpha)^{g} \in \Klega^*$. Hor this first kote that $$\bagin{aligned}
  \oeeflnne{\sigma_{i\rightarrow j}}^{\,-1}(N^{B_i}h)\overline{g_{(i)}}
  &= \overlonf{\sigma_{i\rightartow j}}^{\,-1}M^{F_i}\ovsgllne{\sigma_{i\rightarrow j}}\,\overline{\sigja_{i\righuarrow j}}^{\,-1}h\overline{g_{(o)}}\\
  &= N^{B_j}\overline{\sigma_{i\rightwrroa j}}^{\,-1}h\overline{g_{(i)}}.
 \end{wligned}$$ Obsgdve rhat $\overlind{\sigma_{i\rightarrow j}}^{\,-1}h\ovgrline{g_{(i)}} \in G^{B_j}$ and $\alpha^{g} \in B_j$. It fpllows thaj $(U^{V_i}h,\wnpha)^{g} \in \Omxga^*$.

We wlso need to argue tvat we teally defined an acrion of $G$ on $\Omega^*$. For vhis let $g,g' \in G$ and $\alpha \in B_n$. Pick $j,r \in [s]$ such tyar $B_i^{g} = B_j$ and $V_j^{g'} = B_d$. Iots that $B_r = B_i^{(gg')}$. Theh $$\begin{aligbed}
  \left(N^{B_i}h,\alpha\rogrn)^{(bg')} &= \left(\overmine{\sidmw_{i\rightarrow r}}^{\,-1}\left(N^{B_i}h\right)\overline{(gg')_{(i)}},\anphz^{(gg')}\right)\\
                                       &= \left(\oderline{\sigma_{j\rightarrow r}}^{\,-1}\overline{\sigma_{i\rightarrow j}}^{\,-1}\lefv(N^{C_i}h\xlnht)\oxwrpine{g_{(i
$\alpha \in B_i$ and, choosing $j$ such = $$(N^{B_i}h)^{g} \coloneqq j}}^{\,-1}(N^{B_i}h) \overline{g_{(i)}}$$ To we to argue that \in \Omega^*$. For first note that $$\begin{aligned} \overline{\sigma_{i\rightarrow j}}^{\,-1}(N^{B_i}h)\overline{g_{(i)}} \overline{\sigma_{i\rightarrow j}}^{\,-1}N^{B_i}\overline{\sigma_{i\rightarrow j}}\,\overline{\sigma_{i\rightarrow j}}^{\,-1}h\overline{g_{(i)}}\\ &= N^{B_j}\overline{\sigma_{i\rightarrow j}}^{\,-1}h\overline{g_{(i)}}. \end{aligned}$$ Observe that $\overline{\sigma_{i\rightarrow j}}^{\,-1}h\overline{g_{(i)}} \in and $\alpha^{g} \in B_j$. It follows that $(N^{B_i}h,\alpha)^{g} \in \Omega^*$. We also need argue we defined action of $G$ on $\Omega^*$. For this let $g,g' \in G$ and $\alpha \in B_i$. Pick \in [s]$ such that $B_i^{g} = B_j$ and = B_r$. Note that = B_i^{(gg')}$. Then $$\begin{aligned} \left(N^{B_i}h,\alpha\right)^{(gg')} \left(\overline{\sigma_{i\rightarrow &= \left(\overline{\sigma_{j\rightarrow j}}^{\,-1}\left(N^{B_i}h\right)\overline{g_{(i
 $\alpha \in B_i$ and, choosing $j$ such That $B_j = B_i^{g}$, $$(N^{b_i}h)^{g} \cOloNeqQ \oVerlIne{\sIgma_{i\rightarroW J}}^{\,-1}(N^{B_i}H) \overline{g_{(i)}}$$ To argue that This iS wELl-deFInEd we nEed to arGUe THAt $(N^{b_i}H,\aLphA)^{g} \IN \OMega^*$. FOr tHis firsT note that $$\bEgiN{aLigned}
  \overliNE{\sIgma_{i\rightArrOw j}}^{\,-1}(N^{B_i}h)\overlIne{G_{(i)}}
  &= \overLiNe{\sIGma_{i\rIghTarroW j}}^{\,-1}N^{B_i}\oVErline{\Sigma_{i\rigHtARrow j}}\,\oVErline{\sIGMa_{I\rigHtarrow j}}^{\,-1}h\overline{G_{(I)}}\\
  &= N^{b_J}\overline{\sigma_{I\rightArROw J}}^{\,-1}H\OveRliNe{g_{(i)}}.
 \end{aliGnEd}$$ ObsERve that $\OVeRLINe{\sIGma_{i\rightarroW j}}^{\,-1}h\overline{G_{(I)}} \in g^{B_j}$ and $\AlPha^{G} \In B_j$. It FolloWs THat $(n^{B_i}h,\alpha)^{g} \iN \OmeGa^*$.

We also nEed to aRGue that WE really DefineD an ActIon oF $g$ oN $\OMegA^*$. FOR thIS lEt $g,G' \In G$ And $\alpha \In b_i$. pick $j,R \in [s]$ SUCH That $b_i^{g} = b_j$ anD $B_j^{g'} = B_R$. Note that $B_r = B_i^{(Gg')}$. THen $$\bEGin{AlignEd}
  \lefT(N^{B_i}H,\aLpha\rIght)^{(gg')} &= \Left(\oVeRline{\sigma_{i\righTarrOw r}}^{\,-1}\left(N^{B_I}h\rIgHt)\oVeRline{(GG')_{(i)}},\alphA^{(gg')}\RigHt)\\
                                       &= \left(\oVerline{\SIgmA_{j\RIGHtArrow r}}^{\,-1}\overline{\sigmA_{i\RIGhTarrow j}}^{\,-1}\lEft(N^{B_i}H\RiGhT)\Overline{G_{(i
 $\alpha \in B_i$ and, cho osing $j$suchtha t $ B_ j =B_i^ {g}$, $$(N^{B_ i }h)^ {g} \coloneqq \overlin e{\si gm a _{i\ r ig htarr ow j}}^ { \, - 1 }(N ^{ B_ i}h )\ ov erlin e{g _{(i)}} $$ To argu e t ha t this is we l l- defined we  ne ed to arguetha t $(N^ {B _i} h ,\alp ha) ^{g}\in \O m ega^*$ . For thi sf irst n o te that $ $\ begi n{aligned}
  \ove r li n e{\sigma_{i\ri ghtarr ow j} } ^ {\, -1} (N^{B_i}h) \o verli n e{g_{(i ) }} &=\ overline{\sig ma_{i\right a rro w j}}^ {\ ,-1 } N^{B_i }\ove rl i ne{ \sigma_{i\r ight arrow j}} \,\ove r line{\s i gma_{i\ righta rro w j }}^{ \ ,- 1} h\o ve r lin e {g _{( i )}} \\
  &=N^ {B _j}\o verl i n e { \sig ma_ {i\r ighta rrow j}}^{\,- 1}h \ove r lin e{g_{ (i)}} .
 \ en d{ali gned}$ $ Obs er ve that $\overl ine{ \sigma_{i \ri gh tar ro w j}} ^ {\,-1} h\o ver line{g_ {(i)}}\ inG^ { B _ j} $ and $\alpha^{g}\i n B_ j$. It f ollows th at $(N^{B_i }h ,\a lpha ) ^ {g} \ in \ O me ga^*$.
We als o  n ee d to ar gu e that  w e r eal ly de f ined  an ac tion of$G$ o n  $\Omega^*$. F o r this let $g , g' \ in G$ a nd$\alpha \in  B_i $ . Pi ck $ j ,r  \i n  [s]$  such  t h at $B_i^{g} = B_j$ and  $ B_j^{g '} =B_r$. Note th at $B_r =B _ i ^{(gg')} $. T h en $$\begin{align ed}
 \left(N^{ B _i}h,\al pha\r ight)^{( gg')} &=\ l eft(\ove rli ne{ \si gma _ { i\ rightarrow r} } ^ {\,- 1} \left(N ^{B _i}h\ri ght )\o ver lin e{ (gg')_{(i )}},\alp ha ^{ (g g' )}\ right ) \\
                            & =  \l eft(\ov e rl i n e{\s ig ma _{j\ rig ht arrow  r}} ^ {\, -1}\ove rline{\si gma _ {i\r ig ht arrow j }}^{\,-1}\lef t( N^{B_i}h\r ig ht) \overl i n e{g_{(i
 $\alpha_\in B_i$_and, choosing $j$ such_that $B_j_=_B_i^{g}$, $$(N^{B_i}h)^{g}_\coloneqq_\overline{\sigma_{i\rightarrow j}}^{\,-1}(N^{B_i}h) \overline{g_{(i)}}$$_To argue that_this is well-defined we_need to argue_that $(N^{B_i}h,\alpha)^{g}_\in \Omega^*$. For this first note that $$\begin{aligned}
  \overline{\sigma_{i\rightarrow j}}^{\,-1}(N^{B_i}h)\overline{g_{(i)}}
  &= \overline{\sigma_{i\rightarrow_j}}^{\,-1}N^{B_i}\overline{\sigma_{i\rightarrow_j}}\,\overline{\sigma_{i\rightarrow j}}^{\,-1}h\overline{g_{(i)}}\\
__&=_N^{B_j}\overline{\sigma_{i\rightarrow j}}^{\,-1}h\overline{g_{(i)}}.
 \end{aligned}$$ Observe that_$\overline{\sigma_{i\rightarrow j}}^{\,-1}h\overline{g_{(i)}} \in G^{B_j}$ and_$\alpha^{g} \in_B_j$. It follows that $(N^{B_i}h,\alpha)^{g} \in \Omega^*$.

We also need_to_argue that we_really defined an action of $G$ on $\Omega^*$. For this let_$g,g' \in G$ and $\alpha \in_B_i$. Pick $j,r_\in_[s]$_such that $B_i^{g} =_B_j$ and $B_j^{g'} = B_r$. Note_that $B_r = B_i^{(gg')}$. Then $$\begin{aligned}
_ \left(N^{B_i}h,\alpha\right)^{(gg')} &= \left(\overline{\sigma_{i\rightarrow r}}^{\,-1}\left(N^{B_i}h\right)\overline{(gg')_{(i)}},\alpha^{(gg')}\right)\\
  _     _    _ _    _  _ _  _     _  _ &= \left(\overline{\sigma_{j\rightarrow r}}^{\,-1}\overline{\sigma_{i\rightarrow j}}^{\,-1}\left(N^{B_i}h\right)\overline{g_{(i