---
bibliography:
- 'references.bib'
title: Quotients and Extensions
---

Quotient Graphs
===============

In the first section of this Chapter, we determined, for any two transitive permutation groups $(G, \Omega_1)$ and $(G,\Omega_2)$, the conditions under which there exists a $G$-homomorphism from $(G,\Omega_1)$ to $(G,\Omega_2)$.

We saw that if $(G,\Omega_1)$ is permutation equivalent to $(G,\cos_G(H))$ for some $H < G$, and $(G,\Omega_2)$ is permutation equivalent to $(G,\cos_G(K))$ for some $K < G$, then there is a $G$-homomorphism from $(G,\Omega_1)$ to $(G,\Omega_2)$ if and only if $H < K < G$.

In this section we give analogous conditions under which there exists a $G$-homomorphism from a $G$-symmetric graph $\Gamma$ to a $G$-symmetric graph $\Sigma$.

\[Lorimer\] If $\Gamma$ is a $G$-symmetric graph isomorphic to $\operatorname{Sab}(G,H,HaH)$ and $\Sigma$ is a quotient of $\Gamma$, then $\Sigma$ is isomorphic to $\operatorname{Sab}(G,K,KaK)$ for some $H < K < G$ with $a \not\in K$.

Suppose that $\pi : \Gamma \to \Sigma$ is a $G$-graph homomorphism. Since $\Gamma$ is $G$-isomorphic to $\operatorname{Sab}(G,H,HaH)$, the action of $G$ on the vertices of $\Gamma$ is permutation equivalent to $(G,\cos_G(H))$. Since $\pi$ induces a homomorphism from $V \Gamma$ to $V \Sigma$, by \[where?\] $(G,V \Sigma)$ must be permutation equivalent to $(G,\cos_G(K))$ for some $K$ with $H < K < G$. What about the $a$?

Extension Problem
=================

For a given symmetric graph $\Gamma$, let $\operatorname{Grp}(\Gamma)$ denote the set of subgroups of $\operatorname{Aut}(\Gamma)$ which act symmetrically on $\Gamma$. For a given group $G$, let $\operatorname{Ext}(G)$ denote the set of groups $\widetilde{G}$ such that $\widetilde{G}/N \cong G$ for some $N$ normal in $\widetilde{G}$. Clearly $\Gamma$ is $\widetilde{G}$-symmetric if and only if $\widetilde{G} \in \operatorname{Ext}(G)$ for some $G \in \operatorname{Grp}(\Gamma)$.

The symmetric graph $(\widetilde{G},\widetilde{\Gamma})$ is said to be an <span>*extension*</span> of the symmetric graph $(G,\Gamma)$ if $\widetilde{G} \in \operatorname{Ext}(G)$ and there exists a $\widetilde{G}$-homomorphism from $\widetilde{\Gamma}$ to $\Gamma$.

The "extension problem" for symmetric graph is the problem of finding all the extensions of a given symmetric graph $(G,\Gamma)$.

On a group theoretic level, if we knew the subgroup structure of $G$ and we knew all the groups $\widetilde{G}$ which admit $G$ as a quotient then in a sense we would "know" all the possible extensions of $(G,\Gamma)$.

If $\Gamma$ is $G$-isomorphic to $\operatorname{Sab}(G,H,HaH)$ then the faithful extensions of $\Gamma$ are the graphs of the form $\operatorname{Sab}(G,K,KaK)$ where $K < H$ and $KaK \subset HaH$.

For any $\widetilde{G} \in \operatorname{Ext}(G)$, let $N \triangleleft G$ be such that $\widetilde{G}/N \cong G$ and let $\pi : \widetilde{G} \to G$ be the natural projection. The $\widetilde{G}$-symmetric extensions of $\Gamma$ are the graphs of the form $\operatorname{Sab}(\widetilde{G},R,R\widetilde{a}R))$ where $\pi(R) < H$ and $\pi(a) \in HaH$.

From a combinatorial perspective, if $(\widetilde{G},\widetilde{\Gamma})$ is an extension of $(G,\Gamma)$ then we would like to understand how the structure of $\widetilde{\Gamma}$ is related to the structure of $\Gamma$. Ideally, we'd like to be able to describe the adjacency structure of $\widetilde{\Gamma}$ in terms of the adjacency structure of $\Gamma$.

Unfaithful Extensions
=====================

Recall from Chapter 1, that in our definition of a symmetric graph, we do not require the action of the group to be faithful on the vertices of the graph. Suppose that $\Gamma$ is a $G$-symmetric graph isomorphic to $\operatorname{Sab}(G,H,HaH)$. The vertices of $\Gamma$ are the cosets of $H$ in $G$ and the action of $G$ on the vertices of $\Gamma$ is the permutation group $(G,\cos_G(H))$. By proposition \[?\] the <span>*kernel*</span> of this action is: $$\operatorname{Core}_G(H) = \bigcap_{g \in G} g^{-1}Hg.$$ If this kernel is non-trivial then the action of $G$ on the vertices of $\Gamma$ is unfaithful.

For any pair of groups ${\widetilde{G}}$ and ${\widetilde{H}}$ with ${\widetilde{H}} < {\widetilde{G}}$, and any $a \in {\widetilde{G}}$ with ${\widetilde{a}}^2 = 1$ and ${\widetilde{a}} \not\in {\widetilde{H}}$, the graphs $\operatorname{Sab}({\widetilde{G}},{\widetilde{H}},{\widetilde{H}}a{\widetilde{H}})$ and $\operatorname{Sab}(G, H, HaH)$ are isomorphic where: $$\begin{aligned}
N  & = &\operatorname{Core}_{{\widetilde{G}}}({\widetilde{H}}) \\ 
G & = & {\widetilde{G}}/N \\
H & = & {\widetilde{H}}/N\end{aligned}$$ and $a = \pi({\widetilde{a}})$ where $\pi : {\widetilde{G}} \to G$ is the natural projection.

Let ${\widetilde{\Gamma}} = \operatorname{Sab}({\widetilde{G}},{\widetilde{H}},{\widetilde{H}}{\widetilde{a}}{\widetilde{H}})$ and let $\Gamma = \operatorname{Sab}(G,H,HaH)$. The vertices of ${\widetilde{\Gamma}}$ are the right cosets of $H$ in $G$. The vertices of $\Gamma$ are the right cosets of $H/N$ in $G/N$. Now, $$\begin{aligned}
[{\widetilde{G}}/N : {\widetilde{H}}/N] & = & (|{\widetilde{G}}|/|N|)/(|{\widetilde{H}}|/|N|) \\
            & = & |{\widetilde{G}}|/|{\widetilde{H}}| \\
        & = & [{\widetilde{G}}:{\widetilde{H}}]\end{aligned}$$ so both ${\widetilde{\Gamma}}$ and $\Gamma$ have the same number of vertices. Let $\pi : {\widetilde{G}} \to G$ be the natural projection. Since $N$ is normal in ${\widetilde{H}}$, we have $\pi({\widetilde{H}}) = H$. Now, $$\begin{aligned}
H\pi(x) = H\pi(y) & \Leftrightarrow & \pi(xy^{-1}) \in H \\
                    & \Leftrightarrow & xy^{-1} \in {\widetilde{H}} \\
            & \Leftrightarrow & {\widetilde{H}}x = {\widetilde{H}}y \\\end{aligned}$$ so $\pi$ actually induces a bijection between the cosets of $H$ in $G$ and the cosets of $H'$ in $G'$. To see that it preserves adjacency, suppose that $({\widetilde{H}}x,{\widetilde{H}}y)$ is any arc of ${\widetilde{\Gamma}}$, and so $xy^{-1} \in {\widetilde{H}}{\widetilde{a}}{\widetilde{H}}$. It follows that $\pi(xy^{-1}) \in HaH$ and so $(Hx,Hy)$ is an arc of $\Gamma$. The result follows.

Suppose that ${\widetilde{\Gamma}}$ is a symmetric graph isomorphic to $\operatorname{Sab}({\widetilde{G}},{\widetilde{H}},{\widetilde{H}}{\widetilde{a}}{\widetilde{H}})$. Suppose further that ${\widetilde{G}}$ acts faithfully on the vertices of ${\widetilde{\Gamma}}$. Let $\Gamma$ be any quotient of ${\widetilde{\Gamma}}$, so that, by proposition \[?\], $\Gamma$ is isomorphic to $\operatorname{Sab}({\widetilde{G}},{\widetilde{K}},{\widetilde{K}}{\widetilde{a}}{\widetilde{K}})$ for some ${\widetilde{K}}$ such that ${\widetilde{H}} < {\widetilde{K}} < {\widetilde{G}}$ and ${\widetilde{a}} \not\in {\widetilde{K}}$. Although ${\widetilde{G}}$ acts faithfully on the vertices of ${\widetilde{\Gamma}}$ it does not follow that ${\widetilde{G}}$ acts faithfully on the vertices of the quotient $\Gamma$.

If $(G,\Gamma)$ is a symmetric graph with $G$ acting faithfully on the vertices of the $\Gamma$, then an <span>*unfaithful*</span> extension of $(G,\Gamma)$ is an extension of the form $(\widetilde{G},\widetilde{\Gamma})$ where $\widetilde{G} \neq G$.

Suppose that $(G,\Gamma)$ is a symmetric graph with $\Gamma \cong \operatorname{Sab}(G,H,HaH)$. and that $({\widetilde{G}},{\widetilde{\Gamma}})$ is an unfaithful extension of $(G,\Gamma)$ with ${\widetilde{\Gamma}} \cong 
\operatorname{Sab}({\widetilde{G}},{\widetilde{H}},{\widetilde{H}}{\widetilde{a}}{\widetilde{H}}))$ If $\pi : {\widetilde{G}} \to G$ is the natural projection, then $\pi({\widetilde{H}}) < H$ and $\pi({\widetilde{a}}) \in HaH$.

Let $N = \ker(\pi))$ Since $\Gamma$ is a quotient of ${\widetilde{Gamma}}$ we must have $\Gamma \cong \operatorname{Sab}({\widetilde{G}},{\widetilde{K}},{\widetilde{K}}{\widetilde{a}}{\widetilde{K}}))$ for some ${\widetilde{H}} < K < {\widetilde{G}}$. Since $\Gamma \cong \operatorname{Sab}(G,H,HaH)$ we must have $\operatorname{Core}_{{\widetilde{G}}}(K) = N$ and $\pi(K) = H$. Since ${\widetilde{H}} < K$ it follows that $\pi({\widetilde{H}}) < \pi(K) < H$. What about the $a$?

Covering Graphs
===============

The graph $\widetilde{\Gamma}$ is said to be a <span>*cover*</span> of the graph $\Gamma$ if there exists a graph homomorphism $\pi : \widetilde{\Gamma} \to \Gamma$ with the property that. For any arc $(B,C)$ of $\Gamma$, and any $v \in \pi^{-1}(B)$ there is a unique $w \in \pi^{-1}(C)$ such that $(v,w)$ is an arc of $\widetilde{\Gamma}$.

The graph $\widetilde{\Gamma}$ is said to be a <span>*cover*</span> of the graph $\Gamma$ if there exists a graph homomorphism $\pi : \widetilde{\Gamma} \to \Gamma$ with the property that. For any arc $(B,C)$ of $\Gamma$, and any $v \in \pi^{-1}(B)$ there exists some $w \in \pi^{-1}(C)$ (not necessarily unique) such that $(v,w)$

Clearly a multicover is a special case of a cover. We shall see that in this section that if $(\widetilde{G},\widetilde{\Gamma})$ is an unfaithful extension of $(G,\Gamma)$ then $\widetilde{\Gamma}$ is a multicover of of $\Gamma$.

Let $(\widetilde{G},\widetilde{\Gamma})$ be an unfaithful extension of $(G, \Gamma)$ and let $N$ be a normal subgroup of $\widetilde{G}$ such that $\widetilde{G}/N \cong G$. If $B$ is any vertex of $\Gamma$ then $N$ acts transitively on the fiber $\pi^{-1}(B)$.

Let $\Delta = \pi^{-1}(B)$. By proposition \[?\], $\Delta$ is a block of imprimitivity of $V \widetilde{\Gamma}$. Suppose that $\Gamma \cong \operatorname{Sab}(G,H,HaH)$ and $\widetilde{\Gamma} \cong
\operatorname{Sab}(\widetilde{G},\widetilde{H},\widetilde{H}\widetilde{a}\widetilde{H}))$. Then the stabilizer of $\Delta$ is $HN$ and the action of $HN$ on the fiber is permutation equivalent to $(HN,\cos(H))$.

Combinatorial Perspective
=========================

In this chapter we look at a number of well-known "combinatorial" methods for constructing extensions of symmetric graphs. We first describe the constructions, and then analyze them group theoretically. In the next chapter we describe a "geometrical" approach to the extension problem for symmetric graphs which was proposed by Gardiner and Praeger.

Direct Sum and Lexicographic Product
====================================

There are a number of ways of forming "products" of graphs. See for example \[?\].

For any two graphs $\Gamma$ and $\Sigma$, then the direct sum of $\Gamma$ and $\Sigma$ is the graph with vertex set $V \Gamma \times V \Sigma$ where $(v,x)$ is adjacent to $(w,y)$ if and only if $v$ is adjacent to $w$ in $\Gamma$ and $x$ is adjacent to $y$ in $\Sigma$.

If $\Gamma$ and $\Sigma$ are both symmetric graphs then the direct product of $\Gamma$ and $\Sigma$ is symmetric.

For any two graphs $\Gamma$ and $\Sigma$, the lexicographic product of $\Gamma$ by $\Sigma$ is the graph with vertex set $V \Gamma \times V \Sigma$ where $(v,x)$ is adjacent to $(w,y)$ if and only if $v$ is adjacent to $w$ in $\Gamma$ or $v = w$ and $x$ is adjacent to $y$ in $\Sigma$

If $\Gamma$ is any symmetric graph and $\Sigma$ is the empty graph on $n$ vertices, then the lexicographic product of $\Gamma$ by $\Sigma$ is symmetric.

Bigg's Covering Graph Construction
==================================

The three-arc graph construction allows us, under certain conditions, to "unfold" a $G$-symmetric graph into a larger, <span>*imprimitive*</span> $G$-symmetric graph, admitting the original graph as a quotient. The <span>*covering graph*</span> construction @B1974 is simmilar in this respect. It also, under certain conditions, allows us to "unfold" a $G$-symmetric graph into a larger one. It differs from the three-arc graph construction, however, in that it requires a simultaneous "unfolding" of the group $G$.

Recall that given two groups $N$ and $G$ and a homomorphism $$\rho : G \to \operatorname{Aut}(N)$$ we may form the <span>*semidirect product*</span> of $N$ by $G$. This is the group $\widetilde{G} = N \rtimes_\rho G$, whose elements are the ordered pairs: $$\{ (n,g) : n \in N, g \in G \}$$ with multiplication given by: $$(n_1, g_1)(n_2,g_2) = (n_1^{\rho(g_1)}n_2, g_1g_2).$$ The functions $i_1 : N \to \widetilde{G}$ and $i_2 : G \to \widetilde{G}$ given by $ n \mapsto (n,1) $ and $ g \mapsto (1,g) $ respectively give natural embeddings of $N$ and $G$ into $\widetilde{G}$. Identifying $N$ with its image under $i_1$, the semidirect product has the property that $N$ is normal in $\widetilde{G}$ and $\widetilde{G}/N \cong G$.

\[$N$-chain\] Suppose that $\Gamma$ is a $G$-symmetric graph and $N$ is a group. An $N$-chain is a function $\phi : A \Gamma \to N$ satisfying $\phi((v,u)) = \phi((u,v))^{-1}$ for all $(u,v) \in A \Gamma$.

\[Compatible $N$-chain\] Suppose that $\Gamma$ is a $G$-symmetric graph, $N$ is a group and $\rho : G \to \operatorname{Aut}(N)$ is a homomorphism. An $N$-chain $\phi$ is said to be <span>*compatible*</span> with $\rho$ if for every $g \in G$ the following diagram commutes:

\[Biggs Cover\] Suppose that $\Gamma$ is a $G$-symmetric graph, $N$ is a group, $\rho : G \to \operatorname{Aut}(N)$ is a homomorphism and $\phi$ is a compatible $N$-chain. The Biggs Cover $\widetilde{\Gamma}(N,\rho,\phi)$ of $\Gamma$ with respect to $\phi$ is the graph with vertex set: $\{ (g,v) : k \in G, v \in V \Gamma \}$ and arc set: $ \{ ((g_1,v_1),(g_2,v_2)) : (v_1,v_2) \in A \Gamma, g_2 = g_1 \phi((v_1,v_2)) \}$

Note that the condition $\phi((v,u)) = \phi((u,v))^{-1}$ ensures that the resulting graph is simple.

The covering graph $\widetilde{\Gamma}(N,\rho,\phi)$ is $(N \rtimes_\rho G)$-symmetric.

Define an action of $N \rtimes_\rho G$ on $\widetilde{\Gamma}$ by: $$(n,v)^{(\eta, g)} = (n^{\rho(g)} \eta,v^g).$$ This action is well-defined since: $$\begin{aligned}
(n,v)^{(\eta_1, g_1)(\eta_2, g_2)} 
& = & (n^{\rho(g_1)} \eta_1 ,v^{g_1})^{(\eta_2, g_2)} \\
& = & (n^{\rho(g_1) \rho(g_2)} \eta_1^{\rho(g_2)} \eta_2 , v^{g_1 g_2}) \\
& = & (n,v)^{(\eta_1^{\rho(g_2)} \eta_2, g_1 g_2)}\end{aligned}$$ We must check that it preserves the adjacency structure of $\widetilde{\Gamma}$. Observe that, by the compatibility of $\rho$ and $\phi$, if $n_2 = n_1 \phi(v_1,v_2)$ then: $$\begin{aligned}
{n_2}^{\rho(g)} \phi({v_1}^g, {v_2}^g)
& = & {n_2}^{\rho(g)} \phi(v_1, v_2)^{\phi(g)} \\
& = & (n_2 \phi(v_1, v_2))^{\phi(g)} \\
& = & {n_1}^{\phi(g)} \end{aligned}$$ for any $(\eta,g) \in N \rtimes_\rho G$. Also, since $G$ is a group of automorphisms of $\Gamma$, we know that $(v_1,v_2) \in A \Gamma$ if and only if $({v_1}^g,{v_2}^g) \in A \Gamma$. Thus the action defined above does indeed preserves adjacency.

For any $(n_1,v_1), (n_2,v_2) \in V \widetilde{\Gamma}$, by the $G$-symmetry of $\Gamma$ we can find a $g \in G$ such that ${v_1}^g = {v_2}$. Let $\eta = {n_1}^{\rho(g)^{-1}} n_2$. We have: $$\begin{aligned}
(n_1,v_1)^{(\eta,g)} & = & ({n_1}^{\rho(g)} \eta,{v_1}^g) \\
                    & = & ( {n_1}^{\rho(g)}, {n_1}^{\rho(g)^{-1}} n_2,v_2) \\
            & = & (n_2,v_2).\end{aligned}$$ Thus the action is vertex transitive.

Suppose that $(n_1,v_1)$ and $(n_2,v_2)$ are both adjacent to $(n,g)$, so $n_1 = n \phi(v,v_1)$ and $n_2 = n \phi(v,v_2)$. By the $G$-symmetry of $\Gamma$ we can find a $g \in G_v$ such that $v_1^g = v_2$. Let $\eta = (n^{-1})^{\rho(g)}n$. We have: $$\begin{aligned}
(n,v)^{(\eta,g)} & = & (n^{\rho(g)} \eta, v^g) \\
                 & = & (n^{\rho(g)} (n^{-1})^{\rho(g)}n, v) \\
         & = & (n,v)\end{aligned}$$ and: $$\begin{aligned}
(n_1,v_1)^{(\eta,g)} & = & ({n_1}^{\rho(g)} \eta, {v_1}^g) \\
                 & = & ({n_1}^{\rho(g)} (n^{-1})^{\rho(g)}n, v_2) \\
                 & = & ({(n_1 n^{-1})}^{\rho(g)} n, v_2) \\
                 & = & (\phi(v,v_1)^{\rho(g)} n, v_2) \\
                 & = & (\phi(v,v_2) n, v_2) \\
                 & = & (n_2 n^{-1} n, v_2) \\
                 & = & (n_2, v_2) \\\end{aligned}$$ Thus the action is locally transitive. The result follows.

In fact, a stronger result than this holds. If $\Gamma$ is $(G,s)$-arc transitive then $\widetilde{\Gamma}$ is $(\widetilde{G},s)$-arc transitive, where $\widetilde{G} = N \rtimes_\rho G$. The proof is by induction and may be found in @B1974. This construction was originally used by Conway to produce an infinitely family of $5$-arc transitive graphs.

For each $v \in V \Gamma$, let $B(v) = \{ (n,v) : n \in N \}$. For any $(\eta, g) \in \widetilde{G}$ we have: $$\begin{aligned}
B(v)^{(\eta,g)} & = & \{ (n,v)^{(\eta,g)} : n \in N \} \\
                & = & \{ (\eta n^{\rho(g)},v^g) : n \in N \} \\
        & = & \{ (n, v^g) : n \in N \} \\
        & = & B(v^g).\end{aligned}$$ Thus the partition: ${\mathcal{B}}= \{ B(v) : v \in V \Gamma \}$ is $\widetilde{G}$-invariant.

The quotient of the Biggs cover $\widetilde{\Gamma}$ with respect to the partition ${\mathcal{B}}$ is isomorphic to the original graph $\Gamma$

The map $\eta : V \Gamma \to V \widetilde{\Gamma}_{\mathcal{B}}$ given by $v \mapsto B(v)$ establishes a bijection between the vertices of $\Gamma$ and the vertices of $\widetilde{\Gamma}_{\mathcal{B}}$. If $(u,v)$ is an arc of $\Gamma$, then $((1,u),(\phi((u,v)),v))$ is an arc of $\widetilde{\Gamma}$, and so $(B(u), B(v))$ is an arc of $\widetilde{\Gamma}_{\mathcal{B}}$. If $(u,v)$ is not an arc of $\Gamma$, then for all $n_1, n_2 \in N$ $((n_1, u),(n_2, v))$ is not an arc of $\widetilde{\Gamma}$ and so $(B(u), B(v))$ is not an arc of $\widetilde{\Gamma}_{\mathcal{B}}$. Thus $\eta$ establishes an isomorphism between $\Gamma$ and $\widetilde{\Gamma}_{\mathcal{B}}$.

Let $(B,C)$ be any arc of $\widetilde{\Gamma}$. By the above $B = B(u)$ and $C = B(v)$ for some $(u,v) \in A \Gamma$. Its not too hard to see that each $(n,u) \in B$ has a unique neighbour in $C$, namely $(n \phi(u,v),v)$. Thus the induced bipartite graph $\Gamma[B,C]$ is a matching. It follows immediately that the valency of $\widetilde{\Gamma}$ is the same as the valency of $\Gamma$.

Group Theoretic Analyais of Bigg's Covering Graph Construction
==============================================================

The group $\widetilde{G}$ acts unfaithfully on ${\mathcal{B}}$ with kernel $$\widetilde{N} = \{ (n,1) : n \in N \} \cong N.$$ If $|N| = n$ then $|\widetilde{G}| = n |G|$, and since $\widetilde{\Gamma}$ has exactly $n$ times as many vertices as $\Gamma$, we have $[\widetilde{G} : \widetilde{G}_{B(\alpha)}] = n [G : G_\alpha]$. It follows that $ |\widetilde{G}_{B(\alpha)}| = |G_\alpha|$.

Let $\pi : \widetilde{G} \to G$ be the natural projection. Clearly $|\pi(\widetilde{G}_{B(\alpha)})| \leq |\widetilde{G}_{B(\alpha)}|$. Since $G_\alpha \leq \pi(\widetilde{G}_{B(\alpha)})$, we must have $G_\alpha = \pi(\widetilde{G}_{B(\alpha)})$ and $|\pi(\widetilde{G}_{B(\alpha)})| = |\widetilde{G}_{B(\alpha)}|$, so $\widetilde{G}_{B(\alpha)} \cong \pi(\widetilde{G}_{B(\alpha)}) \cong G_\alpha$. In fact, the permutation groups $(G_\alpha, \Gamma(\alpha))$ and $(\widetilde{G}_{B(\alpha)}, \widetilde{\Gamma}(B(\alpha)))$ are equivalent via the bijection $\eta : \Gamma(\alpha) \to \widetilde{\Gamma}(B(\alpha))$ which sends $\beta$ to $B(\beta)$. Probably a much easier way to say this.

If $\Gamma$ is isomorphic to the coset graph $\Gamma(G, H, a)$ then since the local actions of $\Gamma$ and $\widetilde{\Gamma}$ are the same, $\widetilde{\Gamma}$ must be isomorphic to the coset graph $\Gamma(\widetilde{G}, H, \widetilde{a})$ where $\widetilde{a}$ is such that $\pi(\widetilde{a}) = a$. That is $\widetilde{a} \in \{ (n,a) : n \in N \}$. Thus for any $N$ there are exactly $n$ possible Biggs covers of $\Gamma$.

Looking closely at the compatibility condition between $\rho$ and $\phi$ we see that, since $G$ acts transitively on the arcs of $\Gamma$, the map $\phi$ is completely determined by where it sends the arc $(v_{H}, v_{Ha})$. Choosing where to send this arcs is essentially equivalent to choosing which preimage of $a$ we want. Requiring that $\phi((v_{H}, v_{Ha})) = n$ is essentially the same as determining that $\widetilde{a} = (n,a)$.

I think that Bigg's covering graph construction encompasses all pairs of graphs $\Gamma(G, H, a)$ and $\Gamma(\widetilde{G}, H, \widetilde{a})$ where $\widetilde{G}$ is a semidirect product of $N$ by $G$ for some $N$. In the more general case where $\widetilde{G}$ is an extention of $N$ by $G$ but not a split extension $\Gamma(\widetilde{G}, H, \widetilde{a})$ should be a cover of $\Gamma(G, H, a)$ in the sense that the induced bipartite graph is a matching, but Bigg's covering graph construction cannot be used to construct $\Gamma(\widetilde{G}, H, \widetilde{a})$ from $\Gamma(G, H, a)$.

Generalization of Bigg's Covering Graph Construction
====================================================

The Bigg's covering graph construction applies to the case where $\widetilde{G}$ is a semidirect product of $N$ by $G$ and $H < \widetilde{G}$ is such that $H \cap N = \{1\}$. The graph $\widetilde{\Gamma}$ is isomorphic to $\operatorname{Sab}(\widetilde{G},H,HaH)$ and the graph $\Gamma$ is isomorphic to $\operatorname{Sab}(\widetilde{G},\widetilde{H},\widetilde{H}a\widetilde{H})$ where $\widetilde{H} = HN$.

In this section we consider a generalization of the Bigg's covering graph construction in which the condition that $H \cap N = \{1\}$ is relaxed. We find that in this case $\widetilde{\Gamma}$ is a <span>*multicover*</span> of $\Gamma$.

If $H$ is a subgroup of $G$ and $N$ is a normal subgroup of $G$ then $H \cap N$ is a normal subgroup of $H$.

Let $M = N / H \cap N$ and let $\lambda : N \to M$ be the natural projection.

{'source': 'arXiv_out/1306'}