Schmidt SubgroupLatticesOfGroups

DE GRUYTER Roland Schmidt
EXPOSITIONS
IN
MATHEMATICS
14
Subgroup
lattices
of
Groups
de Gruyter Expositions in Mathematics 14
Editors
0. H. Kegel, Albert-Ludwigs-Universitat, Freiburg

V. P. Maslov, Academy of Sciences, Moscow
W. D. Neumann, The University of Melbourne, Parkville
R. 0. Wells, Jr., Rice University, Houston
de Gruyter Expositions in Mathematics
I The Analytical and Topological Theory of Semigroups, K. H. Hofmann,

J. D. Lawson, J. S. Pym (Eds.)
2 Combinatorial Homotopy and 4-Dimensional Complexes, H. J. Baues
3 The Stefan Problem, A. M. Meirmanov
4 Finite Soluble Groups, K. Doerk, T. O. Hawkes
5 The Riemann Zeta-Function, A. A. Karatsuba, S. M. Voronin
6 Contact Geometry and Linear Differential Equations, V. R. Nazaikinskii,
V. E. Shatalov, B. Yu. Sternin
7 Infinite Dimensional Lie Superalgebras, Yu. A. Bahturin, A. A. Mikhalev,
V. M. Petrogradsky, M. V. Zaicev
8 Nilpotent Groups and their Automorphisms, E. I. Khukhro
9 Invariant Distances and Metrics in Complex Analysis, M. Jarnicki, P. Pflug
10 The Link Invariants of the Chern-Simons Field Theory, E. Guadagnini
1I Global Affine Differential Geometry of Hypersurfaces, A.-M. Li, U. Simon,
G. Zhao
12 Moduli Spaces of Abelian Surfaces: Compactification, Degeneration, and
Theta Functions, K. Hulek, C. Kahn, S. H. Weintraub
13 Elliptic Problems in Domains with Piecewise Smooth Boundaries, S. A. Na-
zarov, B. A. Plamenevsky
Subgroup Lattices of Groups
by
Roland Schmidt
W
DE
G
Walter de Gruyter Berlin New York 1994
Author
Roland Schmidt
Mathematisches Seminar
Universitat Kiel
Ludewig-Meyn-StraBe 4
D-24098 Kiel
Germany
1991 Mathematics Subject Classification: 20-01, 20-02

Keywords: Group, lattice, subgroup lattice, projectivity, duality
Printed on acid-free paper which falls within the guidelines of the ANSI to ensure permanence and durability.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Schmidt, Roland, 1944-

Subgroup lattices of groups / by Roland Schmidt.
p. cm. - (De Gruyter expositions in mathematics ; 14)
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 3-11-011213-2
1. Group theory. 2. Lattice theory. I. Title. II. Series.
QA174.2.S36 1994
512'.2 - dc20 94-20795
CIP
Die Deutsche Bibliothek - Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Schmidt, Roland:
Subgroup lattices of groups / by Roland Schmidt. - Berlin ; New
York : de Gruyter, 1994
(De Gruyter expositions in mathematics ; 14)
ISBN 3-11-011213-2
NE: GT
Copyright 1994 by Walter de Gruyter & Co., D-10785 Berlin.

All rights reserved, including those of translation into foreign languages. No part of this book
may be reproduced in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy,
recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from
the publisher.
Printed in Germany.
Typesetting: ASCO Trade Ltd. Hong Kong. Printing: Gerike GmbH, Berlin.
Binding: Liideritz & Bauer GmbH, Berlin. Cover design: Thomas Bonnie, Hamburg.
To Traute and
Alexander Katharina Viktoria Johannes Maria
Preface
The central theme of this book is the relation between the structure of a group and
the structure of its lattice of subgroups. The origin of the subject may be traced back
to Dedekind, who studied the lattice of ideals in a ring of algebraic integers; he
discovered and used the modular identity, which is also called the Dedekind law, in
his calculation of ideals. But the real history of the theory of subgroup lattices began
in 1928 with a paper of Ada Rottlander which was motivated by the Galois cor-
respondence between a field extension and its Galois group. Subsequently many
group theorists have worked in this field, most notably Baer, Sadovskii, Suzuki, and
Zacher. Since the only book on subgroup lattices is still Suzuki's Ergebnisbericht
of 1956, there is a clear need for a book on this subject to describe more recent
developments.
We denote the subgroup lattice of a group G by L(G). If G and Gare groups, an
isomorphism from L(G) onto L(G) is called a projectivity from G to G. Since isomor-
phic groups have isomorphic subgroup lattices, there is a correspondence between
the class of all groups and a certain class of (algebraic) lattices in which a group is
sent to its subgroup lattice. This raises the following questions:
(A) Given a class X of groups, what can we say about the subgroup lattices of
groups in X?
(B) Given a class IV of lattices, what can we say about the class of groups G such
that L(G) a J?
Since there are nonisomorphic groups having isomorphic subgroup lattices, we
may further ask:
(C) If X is a class of groups, what is the lattice-theoretic closure 1 of X? Here X is
the class of all groups G for which there exists G e X such that L(G) is isomorphic to
L(G).
(D) Which classes of groups X satisfy _ X, that is, are invariant under pro-
jectivities?
If X consists of just one group, Problem (D) becomes the following:
(E) Which groups G are determined by their subgroup lattice, that is are isomor-
phic to every group G with L(G) isomorphic to L(G)?
Every isomorphism between two groups induces a projectivity in a natural way;
our final question is:
(F) Which groups are not only determined by their subgroup lattice but even
have the property that all their projectivities are induced by group isomorphisms?
These are the main problems in the field and they are studied in the first seven
chapters of the book. In Chapter 8 we consider dualities between subgroup lattices
and in Chapter 9 we briefly handle other lattices associated with a group, namely
the lattices of normal subgroups, composition subgroups, centralizers, and
cosets.
viii Preface
Although the theory of subgroup lattices is just a small part of group theory, for
reasons of space I have been unable to include all the contributions to this theory. I
have tried to compensate for omissions by at least including statements and refer-
ences wherever possible; also many interesting results are cited in the exercises at the
end of each section. However, certain parts of the theory have not been covered at
all. In writing what is after all a book on group theory I decided to omit those topics
which would have led too far away from this subject. Therefore I do not cover
embeddings of lattices in subgroup lattices, lattices of subsemigroups, homotopy
properties of subgroup lattices, inductive groupoids, or anything about topological
groups, although there are also interesting results in these fields. Furthermore I do
not study homomorphisms between subgroup lattices. The reason is that when I
started to write this book there had been no activity in this area for more than 30
years, so that Suzuki's book remained an adequate reference. This situation changed
in 1985 and especially since 1990, but by then there was no room in the book for a
chapter on lattice homomorphisms.
Nevertheless I hope that this book will serve as a basic reference in the subject
area, as a text for postgraduate studies, and also as a source of research ideas. It is
intended for students who have some basic knowledge in group theory and wish to
delve a little deeper into one of its many special areas. It is assumed that the reader
is familiar with the basic concepts of group theory, but references are given for many
well-known group theoretical facts. For this purpose I mainly use the books by
Robinson [1982] and Huppert [1967]. I do not assume that the reader is familiar
with lattice theory, but the basic facts are developed in 1.1 and at the beginning of
some other sections. For a thorough introduction into lattice theory the reader is
referred to the books of Birkhoff, Crawley and Dilworth, or Gratzer. Since the book
is intended as a textbook for students, I have included a large number of exercises of
varying difficulty. While these exercises are not used in the main text they often give
alternate proofs or contain supplementary results for which there was no room in
the main text.
It is a pleasure to thank the many students and colleagues who have read parts of
the manuscript and made helpful suggestions. In particular, I mention O.H. Kegel
and G. Zacher who have followed the whole project with much interest. Thanks
are also due to Ms. J. Robinson for checking the English text and to Frau
G. Christiansen for typing parts of the manuscript. Finally, I thank Dr. M. Karbe
and the publisher for their courtesy and cooperation.
Contents
Preface ............................................................ vii
Notation .......................................................... xiii
Chapter 1
Fundamental concepts
....................................
1.1 Basic concepts of lattice theory 1
..............................
1.2 Distributive lattices and cyclic groups 11
1.3 Projectivities ................................................... 16
1.4 The group of autoprojectivities .................................... 23
1.5 Power automorphisms ........................................... 29
1.6 Direct products ................................................. 34
Chapter 2
Modular lattices and abelian groups .................................... 41
2.1 Modular lattices ................................................ 41
2.2 P-groups ....................................................... 49
2.3 Finite p-groups with modular subgroup lattices ..................... 54
2.4 Groups with modular subgroup lattices ............................ 69
2.5 Projectivities of M-groups ........................................ 88
2.6 Projectivities between abelian groups .............................. 101
Chapter 3
Complements and special elements in the subgroup lattice of a group ........ 114
3.1 Groups with complemented subgroup lattices (K-groups) ............. 115

3.2 Special complements ............................................ 121
3.3 Relative complements ............................................ 126
3.4 Neutral elements and related concepts ............................. 135
3.5 Finite groups with a partition ..................................... 145
Chapter 4
Projectivities and arithmetic structure of finite groups ..................... 157
4.1 Normal Hall subgroups .......................................... 158

4.2 Singular projectivities ............................................ 166
4.3 OO(G), O(G), Fitting subgroup and hypercentre ...................... 178
4.4 Abelian p-subgroups and projectivities ............................. 185
x Contents
Chapter 5
Projectivities and normal structure of finite groups....................... 199
5.1 Modular subgroups of finite groups ................................ 200

5.2 Permutable subgroups of finite groups ............................. 216
5.3 Lattice-theoretic characterizations of classes of finite groups ........... 228
5.4 Projective images of normal subgroups of finite groups ............... 235
5.5 Normal subgroups of p-groups with cyclic factor group ............... 243
5.6 Normalizers, centralizers and conjugacy classes ...................... 272
Chapter 6
......................
Projectivities and normal structure of infinite groups 281
6.1 Subgroups of finite index ......................................... 282

6.2 Permodular subgroups ........................................... 288
6.3 Permutable subgroups of infinite groups ............................ 303
6.4 Lattice-theoretic characterizations of classes of infinite groups ......... 311
6.5 Projective images of normal subgroups of infinite groups and index
preserving projectivities .......................................... 321
6.6 The structure of N/NU and N/Na and projective images of
soluble groups .................................................. 330
Chapter 7
Classes of groups and their projectivities ................................ 343
7.1 Free groups .................................................... 345
7.2 Torsion-free nilpotent groups ..................................... 360
7.3 Mixed nilpotent groups .......................................... 374
7.4 Periodic nilpotent groups ........................................ 385
7.5 Soluble groups .................................................. 395
7.6 Direct products of groups ........................................ 406
7.7 Groups generated by involutions .................................. 421
7.8 Finite simple and lattice-simple groups ............................. 439
Chapter 8
Dualities of subgroup lattices ......................................... 452
8.1 Abelian groups with duals ........................................ 452
8.2 The main theorem ............................................... 458
8.3 Soluble groups with duals ........................................ 462
8.4 Finite groups with duals ......................................... 468
8.5 Locally finite groups with duals ................................... 476
Chapter 9
Further lattices ..................................................... 485
9.1 Lattices of normal subgroups ..................................... 486
9.2 Lattices of subnormal subgroups .................................. 498
Contents xi
9.3 Centralizer lattices .............................................. 511

9.4 Coset lattices ................................................... 527
Bibliography ....................................................... 542

Index of Names .................................................... 561
Index of Subjects ................................................... 564
Notation
Throughout this list, G denotes a group, I a class of groups, L a lattice, p a prime, it

a set of primes, n a natural number, x and y elements of G, u and v elements of L, and
cp a projectivity from G to a group G.
IV, fro, 7L set of natural numbers, nonnegative integers, integers

0, IB, C field of rational numbers, real numbers, complex
numbers
P set of all primes
GF(p") field with p" elements
Up group of p-adic units
XS-= Y,X Y X is a subset, a proper subset of the set Y
X\Y set of all elements in X which are not contained in Y
IXI cardinality of the set X
a divides b, a does not divide b, (a, b e 7L)
(a, b) greatest common divisor of a and b, (a, b e 7L)
P nC P\(p), P\n
H=K H is isomorphic with K
DrX, direct product
AeA
Lattice theory notation
S,n,U partial order, intersection, union in L

ns,us greatest lower bound, least upper bound of the subset S
, least, greatest element of L
[u/v] interval of all w e L such that v< w 5 u
u mod L u is a modular element of L
C(L) set of all cyclic elements of L
M" lattice of length 2 with n atoms
Group theory notation
Y-'xY
x-'x' where s is an element or an automorphism of G
cyclic subgroup generated by x
order of x
(y)-'(x)-'(xy), amorphy of the map a
xiv Notation
HS G, H < G H is a subgroup, a proper subgroup of G

HgG H is a normal subgroup of G
HgaG H is a subnormal subgroup of G
H mod G H is a modular subgroup of G
H pmo G H is a permodular subgroup of G
H per G H is a permutable subgroup of G
IG:HI index of the subgroup H in G
<XAIA E A) subgroup generated by subsets Xx of G
HuK, U Ht subgroup generated by subgroups H, K, Hx of G
AEA
Hx <Hxlx a X) for subsets H and X of G
Ha, Ha normal closure, core of the subgroup H in G
H'0z'0 -' ((H0)z0-' for H S G and z e G
HG,HU ((H4' )Gyp ', ((HP)-)'P -'for H < G
CG(H), N6(H) centralizer, normalizer of H in G
CG(H/K) {xeGI [H,x]<K}
orbit of a E ) under the operation of G on the set )
stabilizer of the point a under the operation of G
I(x): <x) n HI, order of x modulo the subgroup H
set of all x e G such that o(x, H) is infinite or a prime
power
J(H) set of all x E G such that o(x, H) is a prime power
<XIR> group presented by generators X and relations R
H wr K (standard restricted) wreath product of H with K
Cr Gx cartesian product of groups Gx
.SEA
Aut G, Inn G automorphism group, inner automorphism group of G
Pot G group of power automorphisms of G
End G set of endomorphisms of G
Hom (A, B) set of homomorphisms from A to B
P(G) group of autoprojectivities of G
PA(G), PI(G) group of all autoprojectivities of G induced by auto-
morphisms, by inner automorphisms
G" (x"lx a G>
((G), ("(G) (xeGlxP= 1>,(xeGlx"= 1) if G is a p-group
U"(G) GP" if G is a p-group
Z(G) centre of G
N(G) norm of G
[X, S] ([x, s] I x e X, s E S> for subsets X of G and S of G or
Aut G
G'=[G,G] commutator subgroup of G
Com G set of commutators of elements of G
Z"(G), K"(G), Gc"' terms of the upper central series, the lower central
series, the derived series of G
Z.(G) hypercentre of G
F(G) Fitting subgroup of G
cD(G) Frattini subgroup of G
Notation xv
F"(G), 1V"(G) terms of the upper Fitting series, the lower Fitting series
of G
R(G) Hirsch-Plotkin radical of G
S(G) locally soluble radical of G
G.' I-radical of G
G, I-residual of G
Op(G), O"(G) maximal normal p-subgroup, 7r-subgroup of G
Op(G), O"(G) minimal normal subgroup of G with factor group a p-
group, a n-group
Gp p-component of the nilpotent torsion group G
T(G) torsion subgroup of G
Sylp(G) set of Sylow p-subgroups of G
Exp G exponent of G
7r(G) set of all primes dividing the order of an element of G
c(G) nilpotency class of G
d(G) derived length of G
1p(G) p-length of G
ro(G) torsion-free rank of the abelian group G
LX class of all locally 1-groups
W, 91, a classes of abelian, nilpotent, soluble groups
P(n, p) P-groups
Sym X, S. symmetric group on the set X, on (1,...,n}
Alt X, An alternating group on the set X, on (1, ... , n}
C", CW cyclic group of order n, of infinite order
Cp= Prefer group, quasicyclic group
D. dihedral group of order n
Q2 generalized quaternion group of order 2"
GL(V), GL(n, F), GL(n, q) general linear group
SL(V), SL (n, F), SL (n, q) special linear group
PGL(n, q), PSL(n, q) projective general linear and projective special linear
groups
PSU(V), PQ(V), PSU(V) projective symplectic, orthogonal, unitary groups
Sz(q) Suzuki groups
L(G) subgroup lattice of G
L"(G) set of all subgroups of G generated by n elements
92(G) lattice of normal subgroups of G
R(G) lattice of composition subgroups of G
(!(G) centralizer lattice of G
9R(G) coset lattice of G
[X/Y]N, [X/Y]K, [X/Y]c interval in 91(G), R(G), (1(G)
Chapter 1
Fundamental concepts
In this first chapter we briefly introduce the basic concepts of lattice theory and
develop the elementary properties of subgroup lattices and projectivities of groups
that will be needed later.
In 1.1, in addition to the purely lattice-theoretic concepts, we define the sub-
group lattice L(G) of a group G, projectivities between groups, and introduce certain
sublattices and meet-sublattices of L(G), namely the lattices of normal subgroups,
composition subgroups, centralizers, and cosets of G.
The main result of 1.2 is Ore's theorem of 1938 which characterizes the groups
with distributive subgroup lattices as the locally cyclic groups. It yields the basic fact
that every projectivity maps cyclic subgroups to cyclic subgroups. So it seems rea-
sonable to try to construct projectivities between two groups G and G using maps
between the sets of cyclic subgroups or even element maps between G and G. This
we study in 1.3, and then prove Sadovskii's approximation theorems which enable
us to extend isomorphisms inducing a given projectivity cp on certain sets of sub-
groups or factor groups of G to an isomorphism inducing cp on the whole group.
In 1.4 we study the group P(G) of all autoprojectivities of G and introduce the
subgroups PA(G) and PI(G) consisting of all autoprojectivities induced by automor-
phisms and inner automorphisms, respectively. The kernel of the natural map from
Aut G to PA(G) is the group Pot G of all power automorphisms of G. In 1.5 we
prove Cooper's theorem that every power automorphism is central and determine
the power automorphisms of abelian groups.
Finally, in 1.6 we investigate direct products of groups and prove Suzuki's theo-
rem that the subgroup lattice of a group G is a direct product if and only if G is a
direct product of coprime torsion groups. As a nice application we obtain that the
number of groups whose subgroup lattice is isomorphic to a given finite lattice L is
finite if and only if L has no chain as a direct factor.
1.1 Basic concepts of lattice theory

A partially ordered set or poset is a set P together with a binary relation < such that
the following conditions are satisfied for all x, y, z e P:
(1) x < X. (Reflexivity)
(2) If x < y and y < x, then x = y. (Anti symmetry)
(3) If x < y and y < z, then x < z. (Transitivity)
2 Fundamental concepts
An element x of a poset P is said to be a lower bound for the subset S of P if x < s

for every s e S. The element x is a greatest lower bound of S if x is a lower bound of
S and y < x for any lower bound y of S. By (2), such a greatest lower bound of S is
unique if it exists; we denote it by inf S or n S. Similar definitions and remarks apply
to upper bounds and the least upper bound; the latter is denoted by sup S or U S.
Lattices
A lattice is a partially ordered set in which every pair of elements has a least upper
bound and a greatest lower bound. A partially ordered set in which every subset has
a least upper bound and a greatest lower bound is called a complete lattice. We can
also view lattices as algebras with two binary operations.
1.1.1 Theorem. (a) Let (L, <) be a lattice and define the operations n and u on L
(called intersection and union, respectively) by
(4) x n y = inf {x, y} and x u y = sup {x, y}.
Then the following properties hold for all x, y, z e L:
(5) xny = y n x and x u y= y u x. (Commutativity)
(6) (x n y) n z= x n (y n z) and (x u y) u z= x u (y u z). (Associativity)
(7) x n (x u y) = x and x u (xny) = x. (Absorption identities)
Furthermore, we have x < y if and only if x = x n y (or y = y u x).
(b) Conversely, let L be a set with two binary operations n and u satisfying (5)-(7)
and define the relation S on L by
(8) x 5yif and only if x =xny.
Then (L, <) is a lattice with x n y = inf{x, y} and x u y = sup{x, y} for all x, y e L.
Proof. (a) Clearly, the operations defined in (4) are commutative. Also it is easy to
see that (x n y) n z and x n (y n z) both are the greatest lower bound of {x, y, z}.
Hence (x n y) n z = x n (y n z) and similarly (x u y) u z = x u (y u z). Furthermore
x < y if and only if x = inf{x, y} = xny (or y = sup{y, x} = y u x). Since x < x u y
and x n y < x, we therefore have x n (x u y) = x and x u (x n y) = x.
(b) Let x, y, z e L. We note first that the conditions x n y = x and y u x = y
are equivalent; for, if x n y = x holds, then y u x = y u (y n x) = y and conversely
y u x = y implies x n y = x n (y u x) = x. So by (8),
(9) x < y if and only if y = y u x.
We now show that (L, 5) is a poset. The absorption identities yield x n x =
xn(xu(xnx))=x;by (8),x<x.If x<yand y5x,then x=xny=ynx=y.
If x <y and y <z, then
xnz=(xny)nz=xn(ynz)=xny=x
and hence x < z. So (1)-(3) hold and (L, <) is a poset.
Since (xny)nx=xn(xny)=(xnx)ny=xny,xny<x. Similarly x r) y!5; y.

If z is any lower bound of {x, y}, then z n x = z and z n y = z. Hence z n (x n y) =
(z n x) n y = z n y = z and z < x n y. This shows that x n y = inf {x, y}. Replacing
n by u and using (9) instead of (8) we get x u y = sup {X, y}. In particular, (L, S) is
a lattice.
Lattices occur in abundance. For any set X, the set of all subsets of X partially
ordered by set inclusion is a complete lattice; the greatest lower bound of any collec-
tion of subsets is the set intersection, and the least upper bound is the set union. The
subject of this book is the following lattice.
Subgroup lattice
If G is any group, the set L(G) of all subgroups of G is partially ordered with respect
to set inclusion. Moreover any subset of L(G) has a greatest lower bound in L(G),
the intersection of all its elements, and a least upper bound in L(G), the join of all its
elements. Thus L(G) is a complete lattice, the subgroup lattice of G. We denote the
operations of this lattice by n and u. So we shall write X n Y for the intersection,
and X u Y but sometimes also <X, Y> for the join of the subgroups X and Y of G.
Also, for a set .9' of subgroups of G, U .9' and <SIS e .9') both denote the group
generated by the subgroups in Y.
Minimal and maximal elements, chains and antichains
For elements x, y of a poset P we write x < y if x 5 y and x 0 y. If x < y and there

is no element z e P such that x < z < y, then we say that x is covered by y or that y
covers x. Let S be a subset of P and x e S. Then x is a minimal element of S if there
is no s e S with s < x, and x is a least element of S if x 5 s for every s e S. Certainly
the least element of S is a minimal element of S and is unique if it exists; on the other
hand, it may happen that S contains many minimal elements but no least element.
Similar definitions and remarks apply to maximal elements and the greatest element
of S. We write 0 and I for the least and greatest elements of P, respectively (if they
exist). An element of P that covers 0 is called an atom, an element that is covered by
I is an antiatom of P. If L is a complete lattice, then inf L is the least and sup L the
greatest element of L. In the subgroup lattice of the group G the trivial subgroup 1
is the least element, G is the greatest element, the minimal subgroups are the atoms
and the maximal subgroups are the antiatoms of L(G).
Two elements x and y in a poset P are called comparable if x < y or y 5 x. A
subset S of P is a chain if any two elements in S are comparable, S is an antichain if
no two different elements of S are comparable. The length of a finite chain S is
ISI - 1. The poset P is said to be of length n, where n is a natural number, if there is
a chain in P of length n and all chains in P are of length at most n. A poset P is of
finite length if it is of length n for some n e N. Similarly P is said to be of width n if
there is an antichain with n elements in P and all antichains in P have at most n
elements.
A poset P with the property that each of its nonempty subsets contains a maximal
element is said to satisfy the maximal condition or the ascending chain condition. The
second name comes from the following alternative formulation: P satisfies the maxi-
mal condition if and only if it contains no infinite sequence of elements x1, x2, ...
such that x1 < x2 < x3 < - The minimal condition or descending chain condition is
defined correspondingly.
Isomorphisms and projectivities
Let L and L be lattices. A map a: L -. L is called a homomorphism if

(10) (xny) = xny and (xuy) = xuy
for all x, y c L. A homomorphism is an isomorphism if it is bijective, and an isomor-
phism of a lattice with itself is called an automorphism. We write L - L if L and L are
isomorphic. Finally, we introduce a shorter name for isomorphisms between sub-
group lattices. If G and G are groups, an isomorphism from L(G) to L(G) is called
a projectivity from G to G. We also say that G and G are lattice-isomorphic if there
exists a projectivity from G to G.
In order to show that a bijective map between two lattices is an isomorphism it
suffices to prove that it has one of the two properties in (10) or that it preserves the
order relations of the lattices. In addition, every isomorphism preserves union and
intersection of arbitrary subsets.
1.1.2 Theorem. Let a be a bijective map of a lattice L to a lattice L. Then the follow-
ing properties are equivalent.
(a) For all x,yEL,x <y if and only if x' <y'.
(b) (xny)=xnyfor all x,yEL.
(c) (xuy)=xuyforallx, yEL.
Furthermore, if a satisfies (a) and S is a subset of L such that n S exists, then also
n S' exists and (n s), = n Sc; similarly (U S) = U S if U S exists.
Proof. Let x, y c- L. By 1.1.1, x < y if and only if x n y = x (or x u y = y). It follows

that (b) (and also (c)) implies (a). Conversely, if a satisfies (a) and if S is a subset of L
such that z = n S exists, then z is a lower bound of S and every lower bound of S
is of the form w where w is a lower bound of S. Since z is the greatest lower bound
of S, w < z and hence w < z. This shows that z is a greatest lower bound of S and
that (n S) = n S. In particular (b) holds. The corresponding result for the least
upper bound follows similarly.
An easy, but useful, consequence of this result is that a projectivity of a group is

determined by its action on the cyclic subgroups.
1.13 Corollary. If q and 0 are projectivities of a group G such that X1 = X'' for
every cyclic subgroup X of G, then cp = 0.
Proof. Let H < G. Then by 1.1.2, HW _ (xU (x>)4= zU (x)- = xU <x> = H.
Hasse diagram
Every finite poset P, in particular every finite lattice, may be represented by a dia-
gram. Represent each element of P by a point in the plain in such a way that the
point py associated with an element y lies above the point associated with x when-
ever x < y. Then, whenever y covers x, connect the points px and p, by a line
segment. We call the resulting figure a Hasse diagram of P. It is easy to see that it is
possible to construct such a diagram. For the finite poset P has a maximal element
z, P\ {z} is a smaller poset, and therefore, by induction, has a diagram; now choose
a point p= above the points of this diagram and connect it with all the points px
associated to elements x covered by z. Figure 1 shows the Hasse diagrams of all
lattices with at most five elements.
A, A, A3 A, B, A5 B5 C5 D5 E5
Figure 1
Sublattices
A subset of a lattice is called a sublattice if it is closed with respect to the operations

n and u defined in I.I.I. It is evident that a sublattice is a lattice relative to the
induced operations. Examples of sublattices of a lattice L are, for x, y E L, the sets
S = {x, y, x n y, x u y} or, if x < y, the intervals
[y/x] = {z E Llx < z < y}.
We mention two sublattices of the subgroup lattice of a group G.
Lattice of normal subgroups
SJR(G) = {NON L:3 G}.

Lattice of composition subgroups
We say that the subgroup H of G is subnormal in G, and we write H g a G, if there

are a nonnegative integer n and a series
(11) H=H, =G
of subgroups of G. We say that H is a composition subgroup of G, if there exists a
series (11) for H in which all the factor groups H./H;+1 are simple; we then call n the
type of H and (11) a composition series from G to H of length n. Clearly a composi-
tion subgroup is always subnormal, but the converse is false.
1.1.4 Lemma. If H is a composition subgroup of type n in G, H < K < G and

K :9:9 G, then there exist composition series of lengths less than n from G to K and
from K to H.
Proof. Let K = K. a Krn_1 9 g KO = G and let (11) be a composition series

from G to H. Then
(12) =G
is a normal series from G to H. By the Schreier refinement theorem, the normal series
(11) and (12) have isomorphic refinements. There is no proper refinement of the
composition series (11). Hence the isomorphic refinement of (12) is a composition
series from G to H of length n. Since H < K < G, the two parts from G to K and
from K to H of this series are composition series of lengths less than n. El
1.15 Theorem (Wielandt [1939]). Let G be a group. The set $1(G) of all composition
subgroups of G is a sublattice of the subgroup lattice L(G).
Proof. Let A, B e R(G). Then there are composition series
and =G
from G to A and B, respectively. We use induction on min(m, n) to prove that
A n B e R(G), and we may assume that m 5 n. If m = 0, then A n B = B e R(G); so
let m >_ 1. Since
Al SA1uB=A1uB,9A1uBn_1 =G
and G/A1 is simple, we have either Al u B = Al or Al u B = G. In the first case,
Al n B = B; in the second, Al n B a B and B/A1 n B G/A1 is simple. In both
cases, Al n B e R(G) and 1.1.4 yields that Al n B e R(A1). By induction A n B =
A n (A1 n B) e R(A1), and so A n B e R(G) since G/A1 is simple.
We use induction on the ordered pair (max(m, n), min(m, n)) to prove that A U B e
R(G). Since this is clear if m = 0 or n = 0, we may assume that m, n >_ 1 and that the
join of two composition subgroups of types r and s in a group is again a composition
subgroup whenever r 5 s < max(m, n) or s = max(m, n) and r < min(m, n). Suppose
that A is not normal in A v B. Then there exists b e B such that A6 # A. Since

A1 :Q G, Ab < A, and there are composition series of lengths m - 1 < max(m, n)
from A, to A and to Ab. By induction A u Ab e $1(A,) and hence A u Ab 9 9 G.
By 1.1.4 there is a composition series of length less than m from G to A u A6.
By induction A u B = (A u Ab) u B E R(G), as desired. So we may assume that
A 9 A u B and, similarly, B 9 A u B. Again by induction A._, v B E R(G). If
Am_, u B # G, then by 1.1.4 there exist composition series of lengths less than m and
n from Am_, u B to A and B, respectively; by induction A u B E R(Am_, U B) and
therefore A u B E R(G). So we may finally assume that Am_, u B = G and, similarly,
Au G. Then A 9 G since A is normalized by Am_, and B. Similarly B:9 G
and so AuB9G.By 1. 1.4, A u B e R(G).
Lemma 1.1.4 shows that in a group G with a composition series (from G to 1)

every subnormal subgroup is a composition subgroup. Hence in these groups, in
particular in finite groups, subnormal and composition subgroups coincide. There-
fore, in this case, R(G) is also called the lattice of subnormal subgroups of G. For
subnormal subgroups A and B in an arbitrary group G, it is clear that A n B 9 9 G,
but A u B in general is not subnormal in G. The reader will find examples and a
thorough investigation into the join problem in the book by Lennox and Stonehewer
[1987].
Meet-sublattices
Let L be a lattice and M a subset of L which is a lattice relative to the induced partial
order. Clearly, M need not be a sublattice of L; the subgroup lattice of a group G as
a subset of the lattice of all subsets of G is an example. If n and n denote the
intersection in L and M, respectively, then for x, y e M, x A y is a lower bound of
{x, y} in L and so x A y S x n y. We call M a meet-sublattice of L if x A y= x n y
for all x, y E M, and M is a complete meet-sublattice of L if M and L are complete
lattices and for every subset S of M the greatest lower bounds of S in M and L
coincide. Actually, one need not require that M is a lattice here.
1.1.6 Lemma. If M is a subset of a complete lattice L such that for every subset S of
M the greatest lower bound n S of sin L is contained in M, then M is a complete
meet-sublattice of L.
Proof. For a subset S of M let S* be the set of upper bounds of S in M. By hypothe-

sis, inf S* E M. Every s E S is a lower bound of S*, hence s S inf S*. Thus inf S* is an
upper bound of S and then, certainly, the least upper bound of S in M. Clearly, inf S
is the greatest lower bound of S in M. Hence M is a complete lattice and the greatest
lower bounds of S in M and L coincide.
If G is a group, L(G) is an example of a complete meet-sublattice of the lattice of

all subsets of G. We introduce two further lattices of this kind.
Centralizer lattice
Let (1(G) be the set of all centralizers of subgroups of G. Since for Hi 5 G,
in C6(Hi) = Ca Hi I e I(G),
(4;(G) is a complete meet-sublattice of L(G); in general it is not a sublattice (see

Exercise 7). We call E(G) the centralizer lattice of G. The least element of (f(G) is the
centre Z(G), the greatest element is G.
Coset lattice
Let 91(G) be the set of all right cosets of subgroups of G together with the empty set
0. If 9 is a nonempty subset of 91(G), then either n .9' = 0 e 91(G) or there exists
an element x en .. In the latter case, 9 = {HixIi e I} for certain subgroups Hi
of G, and hence n.5" = (n Hi) x e 91(G). If .5" is the empty subset of 91(G), then
n .5" = G E 91(G). By 1.1.6, 91(G) is a complete meet-sublattice of the lattice of all
subsets of G. Since Hx = x(x-'Hx) for all H 5 G and x e G, every right coset is a left
coset, and conversely. So 91(G) is the set of all (right or left) cosets in G and we call
91(G) the coset lattice of G. The subgroups of G are precisely the cosets containing
the coset 1. Hence L(G) is the interval [G/1] in 91(G).
Direct products
Let (LA)A E A be a family of lattices. The direct product, L = Dr Lx, is the lattice whose
AEA
underlying set is the cartesian product of the sets Lx, that is the set of all functions f
defined on A such that f (A) e Lx for all ). a A, and whose partial order is defined by
the rule that f 5 g if and only if f(A) < g(A) for all A E A. Clearly, f n g and f u g are
the functions mapping each A to f(2) n g(A) and f(l) u g(.1), respectively, so that L is
a lattice in which intersection and union are performed componentwise. It follows
that L satisfies a given lattice identity if and only if each Lx satisfies this identity. If
A is finite, say A = { I_-, n} for some n e ICI, we also use the simpler n-tupel notation
for the elements of L. Thus, in this case,
L= L, x x L. =
and (x...... x.) 5 if and only if xi < yi for all i = 1, ..., n.

We shall need the following simple result which clarifies the structure of a direct
product of lattices with greatest and least elements.
1.1.7 Lemma. Let (LA)AEA be a family of lattices, and put L = Dr L.J. Suppose that L
leA
contains a least element 0 and a greatest element I. If A a A, then 0(2) is the least
and I(A) the greatest element of LA. Define fA e L by ft() = 0() for A # E A and
f(A) = 1(A1). Then
(a) U f,,=land U f, nf,=0,
veA vEA\{.Z}
(b) [ ft/0] z LA, and
(c) [x u y/O] [x/O] x [y/0] if x e [fx/O], y e [ f,/O] and A E A.
Proof. For z e LA, the axiom of choice implies that there is a function f E L with
f(A) = z. From 0S f 5 I it follows that 0(A) S z S 1(.1). This shows that 0(.1) is the
least and 1(2) the greatest element of LA. Since union and intersection in L are
performed componentwise, (a) is clear. The map a: Lx - [ fZ/0] defined by z(v) =
0(v) for A # v e A and z(.1) = z clearly is an isomorphism; thus (b) holds. Finally, the
map
T: [x/0] x [y/O] - [x v y/0]; (u, v) i-- w
where w(1) = u(.1), w() = v() and w(v) = 0(v) for v e A with A # v # z also is an
isomorphism, and this implies (c).
Embedding of lattices in subgroup lattices
We mention without proof three results on subgroup lattices that have little connec-
tion with the topics treated in this book. They show how complex subgroup lattices
can be.
1.1.8 Theorem (Whitman [1946]). Every lattice is isomorphic to a sublattice of the

subgroup lattice of some group.
The reader can find a proof of this result in Whitman's paper or in the book by
Gratzer [1978]. Whitman first shows that every lattice L is isomorphic to a sub-
lattice of a partition lattice of some set X; this lattice then is isomorphic to a sub-
lattice of the subgroup lattice of the symmetric group Sym X on X (see Exercise 9).
The set X constructed by Whitman in general is infinite even when L is finite.
However, with a different construction, it is possible to keep the set X finite in this
case.
1.1.9 Theorem (Pudlak and Tuma [1980]). Every finite lattice is isomorphic to a
sublattice of the subgroup lattice of some finite group.
The situation is more complex if one tries to replace "sublattice" by "interval" in

these statements. An element c in a complete lattice L is called compact if whenever
S c L and c <_ U S there exists a finite subset T S S with c :!g U T; and a lattice
is called algebraic if it is complete and each of its elements is a join of compact
elements. Now if H is a subgroup of a group G and g e G, then <H, g) clearly

is a compact element in [G/H]. Thus every interval [G/H] is an algebraic lattice,
and so the following converse improves Whitman's theorem in this direction as far
as possible.
1.1.10 Theorem (Tuma [1989]). Every algebraic lattice is isomorphic to an interval in

the subgroup lattice of some group.
The finite analogue, however, is an open problem even for the simplest lattices, for
example, for the lattice M of length 2 with n atoms. It is easy to construct finite
(soluble) groups with such an interval if n - 1 is a prime power (see Exercise 11) and
the lattices M7 and M11 occur in the alternating group A31 (see Feit [1983], Palfy
[1988]). However, if n > 13 and n - 1 is not a prime power, it is not known whether
M,. is an interval in the subgroup lattice of some finite group.
Exercises
1. LetLbealatticeandletx,y,zeL.
(a) If y<z,then xny<xnzand xuy5xuz.
(b) xu(ynz)S(xuy)n(xuz)and (xny)u(xnz)<xn(yuz).
(c) IfxSz,then xu(yr z)<(xuy)r z.
2. Which of the Hasse diagrams displayed in Figure 1 represent subgroup lattices?
3. Draw Hasse diagrams for the 15 lattices with 6 elements.
4. Let G be a group and let A, B g g G.
(a) Show that A n B 9 a G.
(b) If AB=BA,prove that AuBggG.
5. (Curzio [1953]) Show that the abelian group G = (a) x with o(a) = 8,
o(b) = 2 and the group <c,dlc8 = d2 = 1, dcd = cs) have isomorphic coset
lattices.
6. If G = H x K, then (1;(G) C(H) x E (K).
7. If G = <a, bIa15 = b2 = 1, bab = a-1) is the dihedral group of order 30, show
that E (G) is not a sublattice ofL(G). _
8. If G and G are groups with 91(G) a- 91(G), show that L(G) L(G) and 161 = I G I
9. Let X be a set and let 11(X) be the set of all equivalence relations (or parti-
tions) on X. For p, rr e 11(X) define p S T if and only if xpy implies xry for all x,
yeX.
(a) Show that II(X) is a lattice, the partition lattice of X.
(b) Prove that 11(X) is isomorphic to a sublattice of L(Sym X).
10. Show that the compact elements in the subgroup lattice of a group are precisely
the finitely generated subgroups.
11. Let F be the field with p' elements, V a vector space of dimension 2 over F and
G the group of all permutations x -o, ax + v over V where 0 # a e F and v e V. If
H = {x ax 10 # a e F}, show that [G/H] M,+1.
1.2 Distributive lattices and cyclic groups

In this section we are going to study subgroup lattices of cyclic groups. Since these
turn out to be distributive, we shall first determine all groups with distributive
subgroup lattices.
Distributive lattices
A lattice L is called distributive if for all x, y, z e L the distributive laws hold:

(1) xu(ynz)=(xuy)n(xuz),
(2) xn(yuz)=(xny)u(xnz).
1.2.1 Remark. Since distributivity is a property defined by identities, sublattices
and direct products of distributive lattices are distributive. Furthermore, a lattice L
is already distributive if it satisfies one of the two distributive laws. For example, if
(1) holds in L, then for x, y, z e L we have
(xny)u(xnz) _ ((xny)ux)n((xny)uz) = xn(zu(xny))

= xn((zvx)n(zuy)) = xn(yuz);
thus (2) holds. The other implication follows similarly.
It is easy to see that every chain is a distributive lattice. We shall also need the
following distributive lattices. For a, b c No, the set of nonnegative integers, write
a 5'b if b divides a. Clearly, < is a partial order on No for which sup{a,b} is the
greatest common divisor and inf{a, b} is the least common multiple of a and b. Thus
(NO, S') is a lattice with greatest element 1 and least element 0. We denote this lattice
by T., and for n e N, we write T, for the interval [1/n] in T.. Then T is the lattice of
all divisors of n. The reader may check that T. is distributive; this will, however, also
follow from 1.2.2 and 1.2.3. As sublattices of T., all the T,. are distributive as well.
72
Figure 2: T72
Cyclic groups
Let n be a natural number or the symbol oo. We write n e N u {oo} to express this
and we denote the cyclic group of order n by C. Let C = <g>. When n = oo, it is
well-known that for every r e N there is a subgroup of index r in <g>, namely <g'),
and every nontrivial subgroup of <g) is of this form. If n is finite, then for every
divisor r of n there is exactly one subgroup of index r in <g>, again <g'>. Hence, if
we define v: T,. - L(<g)) by r = <g'> for all r e T,,, then v is bijective. Furthermore,
for r, s e T., we have r <'s if and only if s divides r, and this holds if and only if
<g'> < <g'). By 1.1.2, a is an isomorphism. Thus we have shown the following.
1.2.2 Lemma. If n e N u {oo}, then L(C,,) ^- T,,.
Groups with distributive subgroup lattices
A group G is called locally cyclic if every finite subset of G generates a cyclic sub-
group. Equivalently we can say that <a, b) is cyclic for every pair a, b of elements of
G. In particular, every locally cyclic group is abelian. The additive group a of
rational numbers and the group Q/7L of rational numbers modulo 1 are locally cyclic
since finitely many rational numbers have a common denominator n and there-
fore are contained in the cyclic group generated by -,,. It is a familiar result that
a group is locally cyclic if and only if it is isomorphic to a subgroup of 0 or of Q/7L.
We come to our first major result.
1.2.3 Theorem (Ore [1938]). The subgroup lattice of a group G is distributive if and
only if G is locally cyclic.
Proof. Suppose first that L(G) is distributive and let a, b e G. We have to show that
<a,b) is cyclic. Since <a> n is centralized by a and b, <a> n S Z(<a,b)).
Also <ab) u <a> = <a,b) = <ab) u and so by (1),
<ab) u (<a> n ) = (<ab) u <a>) n (<ab) u ) = <a, b).
Thus <a, b)/<a) n <b) <ab)/<ab) n (<a> n <b)) is cyclic and therefore <a, b) is
abelian, as a cyclic extension of a central subgroup. By the structure of finitely
generated abelian groups (see Robinson [1982], p. 100) there exist c, d e G such
that <a, b) = <c) x <d ). By what we have shown, <c, d)/<c) n <d) is cyclic. Since
<c) n <d) = 1, <a, b) = <c, d) is cyclic.
Now suppose that G is locally cyclic and let A, B, C e L(G). By 1.2.1, we need only
show that the first distributive law holds, or, since G is abelian, that A(B n C) =
AB n AC. Clearly, A(B n Q< AB n AC. Let x e AB n AC, hence x = ab = a'c with
a, a' a A, b e B and c e C. Since G is locally cyclic, there exists g e G such that
<a,a',b,c) _ <g>. Then ab = a'c implies that <g) = (A n <g))(B n <g)) =
(A n <g))(C n <g>). If one of the three subgroups A n <g>, B n <g>, C n <g) is
trivial, then either x = b = c e B n C or x e A. In both cases, x e A(B n Q. So sup-
pose that all these subgroups are nontrivial and let n, r, s be the respective indices
of A n (g>, B n <g), C n <g) in <g)'. Then (n, r) = 1 = (n, s), hence (n, rs) = 1 and
therefore
<g) = <g") <grs) = (A n <g>)(B n C n <g)) < A(B n Q.
Again it follows that x e A(B n Q. Thus AB n AC :!5; A(B n C), as required.
1.2.4 Corollary. The subgroup lattice of a finite group G is distributive if and only if
G is cyclic.
Ore's theorem, and perhaps even more its corollary, is one of the most beautiful
results on two of the basic problems mentioned in the preface: Which class of groups
is the class of all groups with a given lattice property and, conversely, which lattice
property characterizes a given class of groups. Here an interesting class of lattices,
the finite distributive lattices, belongs to a simple class of groups, the finite cyclic
groups. This example is rather atypical. We shall see that nice classes of lattices
often lead to fairly complicated classes of groups and, similarly, it is usually very
difficult or even impossible to characterize a given interesting class of groups.
Lattice-theoretic characterizations of cyclic groups
Using Ore's theorem, however, it is not difficult to characterize the class of cyclic
groups.
1.2.5 Theorem. The group G is cyclic if and only if its subgroup lattice L(G) is distrib-
utive and satisfies the maximal condition.
Proof. It is well-known and easy to prove that a group whose subgroup lattice
satisfies the maximal condition is finitely generated. Thus if L(G) is distributive and
satisfies the maximal condition, then G is locally cyclic, by Ore's theorem, and
finitely generated; hence G is cyclic. Conversely, if G is cyclic, then L(G) is distribu-
tive, by Ore's theorem. Furthermore, if 1 < H < G, then [G/H] is finite. So, clearly,
L(G) satisfies the maximal condition.
1.2.6 Corollary (Baer [1939a]). Let G be a group. Then G C. if and only if

L(G) T..
Proof. If G C., then L(G) Tom, by Lemma 1.2.2. Conversely, let L(G) T.. By
1.2.2, L(G) L(C.). By 1.2.5, L(G) is distributive and satisfies the maximal condi-
tion and therefore G is cyclic. Clearly, I GI is infinite.
Thus the infinite cyclic group C. is determined by its subgroup lattice: it is the
only group G such that L(G) L(CD). For finite cyclic groups the situation is differ-
ent since for m, m' a N, the lattices T. and T", may be isomorphic although m 96 m'.
If m = p;' ... p;r is the prime power decomposition of m, then every divisor of m has
the form pi' ... p;" with 0 < ki < n; for i = 1, ..., r. The map o defined by
k, k,. a k.
'P1 Pr) =(P1 ,.
k,.
,Pr )
is an isomorphism from Tm to the direct product of the Tp.,,, and these TP., are chains
of lengths ni. Furthermore, Ti,, contains exactly r antiatoms, namely p,, ..., Pr, and
to each pi exactly one chain of maximal length through 1 and p,, namely El/p"'] of
length ni. So if m' e R such that Tm. T. and r, say, is an isomorphism from T. to
T,,.,, then the p; are distinct primes and m' = (pi)', ... (p; )"r.
1.2.7 Theorem (Baer [1939a]). Let n1, ..., nr E N. The group G is cyclic of order
pi' ... p;r with distinct primes pi if and only if L(G) is a direct product of chains of
lengths n l , ..., nr.
Proof. If G is cyclic of order m = p;' ... p,r, then L(G) T. is a direct product of
chains of lengths nl, ..., nr. Conversely, suppose that L(G) is such a direct product,
let q1, ..., qr be distinct primes and put m' = qi' ... q;r. Then L(G) Tm. is dis-
tributive and finite. By 1.2.5, G is cyclic. Thus Tm. L(G) = Tic,, and hence IGI =
pi' ... p" with distinct primes A.
1.2.8 Corollary. Let n1, ... , nr E F and let pl, ..., pr be distinct primes. If G is a cyclic
group of order p;' ... p;, and G is any group, then L(G) L(G) if and only if G is
cyclic of order qi' ... q;r with distinct primes q1, ..., qr.
Thus the finite cyclic groups are far away from being determined by their sub-
group lattices. Indeed, to every finite cyclic group C,, there exist infinitely many
nonisomorphic groups C with L(C) However, all these groups are cyclic.
And that is the important fact. If H is a subgroup of a group G, L(H) is the interval
[H/1] in L(G). Hence it is possible to decide in the lattice L(G) whether a given
subgroup H of G is cyclic or not.
Lattice-theoretic characterizations and invariance under projectivities
Let us pause for a general remark on the study of classes of groups and their lattices.
Ore's theorem, or rather Theorem 1.2.5, is our first example of a lattice-theoretic
characterization of a class I of groups. By this we mean the specification of a lattice-
theoretic property, that is a class 9) of lattices, such that for every group G,
(3) G E L if and only if L(G) E 9).
We call a class L of groups invariant under projectivities if for every projectivity
between two groups G and G,
(4) G E L implies 6 E X.
Suppose that a class I of groups has a lattice-theoretic characterization J. Then if

G E I and cp is a projectivity from G to G, L(G) L(G) c J and hence G E X, by (3).
So we have the following.
1.2.9 Lemma. Let X be a class of groups. If X has a lattice-theoretic characterization,

then I is invariant under projectivities.
The converse of this statement is also true. If X is invariant under projectivities,

then the class IV of all lattices isomorphic to some L(G) with G E satisfies (3).
However, we are looking for a lattice-theoretic description of this class J as, for
example, in Theorem 1.2.5. This result together with 1.2.9 yields the following.
1.2.10 Theorem. Every projectivity maps cyclic groups onto cyclic groups.
If H is a subgroup of G and cp is a projectivity from G to G, then the restriction cPH

of p to [H/1] = L(H) clearly is a projectivity from H to H`; we say that cp induces
the projectivity (PH in H. Theorem 1.2.10 shows that if H is cyclic, so is H` since it is
the image of H under the projectivity (PH.
Finite and locally finite groups
We conclude this section with a first application of our results on subgroup lattices
of cyclic groups. Let I be a class of groups. We say that G is locally an X-group, if
every finitely generated subgroup of G lies in X. We write LX for the class of all
locally X-groups.
1.2.11 Lemma. Let X be a class of groups. If X is invariant under projectivities, then

so is LX.
Proof. Let q be a projectivity from G to G and suppose that G E LX. Let H =

... ,
<x 1i be a finitely generated subgroup of G. By 1.2.10 there exist y1, ... , y E G
such that
H4'=(<x,>u...u <x.>)w=<xl>4U...u<x,. >4= <yj > u ... u <y.>-
Thus H4' is finitely generated and hence H`0 E X, since G E LX. Now cp-' induces a
projectivity from H4' to H, and since I is invariant under projectivities, H E 1. Thus
G E LX.
1.2.12 Theorem. A group is finite if and only if its subgroup lattice is finite. Hence
every projectivity maps finite groups onto finite groups and locally finite groups onto
locally finite groups.
Proof. If JGI is finite, then G has only finitely many subgroups. Conversely, suppose
that L(G) is finite. If C is a cyclic subgroup of G, then L(C) is an interval in L(G),
hence finite; by 1.2.2, ICI is finite. Since G possesses only finitely many such sub-
groups and every element of G is contained in one of them, I G I is finite. By 1.2.9, the
class of all finite groups is invariant under projectivities. Then 1.2.11 implies that the
class of locally finite groups has the same property.
Exercises
1. Let p be a prime and write C,, for the Priifer group of type p, that is CP. = A/7L
where A is the additive group of rational numbers whose denominator is a power
of p. Show that L(CP=) is a chain.
2. If L(G) is a chain, show that G - CP., where p e P and n e N u {oo}.
3. (Ore [1938]) The elements x, y of a lattice L are said to be a n-distributive ("meet-
distributive") pair in L if for all z e L the distributive law
zn(xuy)=(znx)u(zny)
holds. Show that the subgroups A, B form a n-distributive pair in L(G) if and
only if for every c e A u B, in neither A nor B, there-exist coprime natural num-
bers m and n such that cm e A and c" E B.
4. If A, B is a n-distributive pair in L(G) with A n B a A u B, show that A and B
are normal subgroups of A u B. (Hint: For a e A, B = (B n A) u (B n B) = B
since A, B and A, Ba are n-distributive pairs.)
5. Use Exercises 3 and 4 to give an alternate proof of Theorem 1.2.3.
6. A n-distributive pair x, y is said to be trivial if x < y or y < x. Show that L(G)
has only trivial n-distributive pairs if and only if every element of G has prime
power order.
7. (Bruno [1972]) If A, B is a n-distributive pair in L(G), show that A, B is a
u-distributive pair in L(A u B), that is satisfies
Cu(AnB)=(CuA)n(CuB)
for all C e L(A u B). Also show that the converse is false.
8. Let be a class of groups and suppose that'd is a class of lattices such that (3)
holds. Find a lattice-theoretic characterization of the class Ll of all locally X-
groups.
1.3 Projectivities
In this section we shall present some general methods to construct projectivities

between groups and to find isomorphisms that induce a given projectivity.
1.3 Projectivities 17
Construction of projectivities
It is often possible to work with element maps. For such a map a: G - G and a
subset X of G we define X = {xjx c X}. If a is bijective and satisfies
(1) X < G if and only if X < G
for all subsets X of G, then by 1.1.2, the map
(2) i7: L(G) - L(G); H - H

is a projectivity from G to G. We call it the projectivity induced by Q, and, more
generally, we say that a given projectivity cp is induced by an element map a between
the two groups if H10 = H for all H < G.
A useful concept in the study of element maps between groups is the amorphy of
a map. It measures the deviation from homomorphy. To be precise, if a is an element
map from G to G, then the map
(3) a: G x G _9 G; (x,Y)i--,(Y)-1(x)-'(xy)
is called the amorphy of Q. Clearly, (xy) = xya(x, y) and so a is a homomorphism
if and only if a(x, y) = 1 for all x, y c G. Furthermore, we have the associativity
identities
(4) a(x, y)='a(xy, z) = a(y, z)a(x, yz) for all x, y, z e G.
For, we can write
((xy)z) = (xy)za(xy, z) = xya(x,Y)za(xY, z)

and
(x(Yz)) = x(Yz)a(x,Yz) = xyza(Y,z)a(x,Yz),
and the associative law in G implies (4).

If a: G - G is bijective and induces a projectivity, then (xy) E <x,y> _
<x> u <y> = <x, y> and hence also a(x,y) E <x, y>. We show that, conversely,
this property and the corresponding one for o--' suffice to guarantee that a induces
a projectivity. This will be our most useful tool in constructing projectivities.
1.3.1 Theorem. Let a- be a bijective map from G to G such that

(5) (xy) c <x, y> for all x, y c G, and
(6) (uv)-' E <u-', v > for all u, v c- G.
Then the map Q: L(G) -- L(G) defined in (2) is a projectivity from G to G.
Proof. Let H < G and let x, y E H. By (6), (xy)-' e <x, y> < H and hence
xy E H. If we can show that also (x)-' E H, then H is a subgroup of G. By
symmetry then also K-' < G for every K S G. Thus a satisfies (1) and 6 is a projec-
tivity. So it remains to show that (x)-' a H.
To do this we study an arbitrary pair of elements a, b e G with (a)-' = b = u,
say. By an obvious induction we get from (5),
(7) (a") a <u) and (b") a 
for all n e NI, and from (6), (u")-' e and (u-") e <a>, that is .
(8) u" e and u-" e <a>.

Again by (5), (ab) is contained in <a,b> = and hence in or in <a>, by
(8). Thus ab lies in or in <a> and so we get the following.
(9) If a, b e G such that (a)-' = b, then a e or b e <a>.
We want to show that <a> = in (9). For this purpose we suppose that <a> 0
 and, without-loss of generality, we may assume that <a> < . Then (7) and (8)
show that s and that a, b and u all have infinite order. Write (b-') = v.
Then (9), applied to u, v e G and v-', yields that u e <v> or v e .
Suppose first that v e and let v = u' with r e Z. Since o is bijective, Irl > 2. By
(7), (b-") a <u'> for all n e N and so c . Thus = . Hence for every
i e RI there exist k, t e 7L such that u" = (bk) and (b -')a = u', and we can choose i so
that I k I > 2 and I t I > 2. Now (9), applied to u'", u' e G and a -', shows that u'" a <u'
or u' a <u">. In both cases, d = (r, t) # 1 and (bl'l) a <ud>. Since also (b-") e
<u'> < <u'> for every n e NI, we get by (5)
u = b = (bIkIb-(Ik1-1))
a <udx
a contradiction. The case that v 0 is similar. Here < <v>, let u = vS where
Isi > 2. Again by (7), c S <v>. Hence for i e N there exist k, t e 7L such that
(bk) = vs" and (b-k) = v', and we can choose i so that Ikl > 2 and Iti >_ 2. Now
replace u by v and r by s to get the same contradiction as before.
Thus we have shown that <a> = in (9) and hence that (a)-' e <a>'. Return-
ing to the element x e H we see that (x)-' e <x>" s H, as required.
For n e N let L1(G) be the set of all subgroups of the group G that can be gener-
ated by n elements. Since any group is the join of its cyclic subgroups, every projec-
tivity is determined by its action on the set L1(G). In general the most accessible
subgroups of a group are the cyclic ones. Therefore it is important to know under
which conditions one can extend a bijection between L1(G) and L1(G) to a projec-
tivity from G to G.
1.3.2 Theorem. Let G and G be groups and suppose that r is a bijective map from the
set L1(G) of all cyclic subgroups of G to L1(G) such that for all X, Y, Z e L1(G),
(10) X 5 <Y,Z> if and only if XT < <YT,ZT>.
For H < G let HO be the set union of all the XT where X e L1(H). Then 9 is a
projectivity from Gto G.
Proof. We first show that H9' is a subgroup of G. So let a, b e H9. Then there exist
Y, Z e L 1(H) such that a e Y` and b e Z'. Since T is surjective, there is an X E L, (G)
such that X` = <ab-' ). Then X'< <a, b) 5 <Y',Zi) and by (10), X 5 <Y, Z) 5 H.
Therefore X E L1(H) and ab-' a X-- s He'. Thus Hg' 5 G and cp is a map from L (G)
to L(G). Since T-' satisfies (10) with G and G interchanged, there is a map 0: L(G) -
L(G) defined to T-' in the same way as p to r. For x e H5 G, <x>' c- L1(H'') and
hence x e H`0*; thus H < H". Conversely, the definitions of f and p imply that
to every y e H1*0 there exist a L1(H9) and Z E L1(H) such that y e <u)`-' and
u c Zi. Hence < Zr and therefore y e '-' < Z, by (10). Thus y e H and so
H'P" = H. Similarly, Kd'' = K for all K S G. It follows that q' and i are bijective
maps and they certainly preserve inclusion. By 1.1.2, cp is a projectivity.
It does not suffice to assume in Theorem 1.3.2 that T is an isomorphism between

the partially ordered sets (by inclusion) L1(G) and L 1(G). This can be seen by taking
any two groups of the same order p" and exponent p, p a prime, that are not lattice
isomorphic. One needs the subgroups generated by two elements in (10). But for
n > 2, every isomorphism between L"(G) and L"(G) can be extended to a projec-
tivity. This result, of course, is most interesting for n = 2; however, it seems possible
that one knows L"(G) and L"(G) for some n > 2 without being able to decide which
subgroups are cyclic or lie in L2(G).
1.3.3 Theorem (Poland [1985]). Let G and G be groups and let n e N with n > 2. If
a is a bijective map from L"(G) to L"(G) such that for all X, Y e L"(G),
(11) X < Y if and only if X 5 Y,
then there exists a unique extension p of a to a projectivity from G to
Proof. We first show that a maps cyclic subgroups of G to cyclic subgroups of G. So

let H S G be cyclic. Then L"(H) L"(H) = L(H) and therefore L"(H) ^- T. where
m = I H I e N u {cc}, by 1.2.2. In particular, L"(H) satisfies the maximal condition
and hence there exists a maximal cyclic subgroup <x> of H. Suppose that H #
<x>, take y e H'\ <x> and put Z = <x,y). Since L"(Z) is the interval [Z/1] in
L"(H), we have L"(Z) a- T for some r e N u {co}, and if r = oo, then <x> n <y> # 1.
Thus in any case, the interval [Z/<x) n <y)] in L"(Z) is isomorphic to some T.
where s c N. Now y operates by conjugation on this interval in which <x> is the only
complement to <y>; it follows that <x)'' = <x>. Thus <x> 9 Z and Z/<x) is cyclic.
Therefore, if K is any subgroup of Z, K n <x> is a cyclic normal subgroup of K with
cyclic factor group and hence K e L2(Z) c L"(Z). This shows that L(Z) = L"(Z) -- T
and by 1.2.5, Z is cyclic, contrary to the maximality of <x>. We have shown that
H is cyclic.
Since a-' satisfies the assumptions of the theorem with G and G interchanged, a-'
maps cyclic subgroups of G to cyclic subgroups of G. The restriction r of a to L, (G),
therefore, is a bijective map from L1(G) to L1(G). For k < n and X1, ..., Xk E
L1(G), by (11) we have X, = X S <X...... Xk) for all i and so <X;,...,Xk) S
<X 1, ... , Xk). The corresponding result for a-' yields the reverse inclusion. Thus
(12) <XI,...,Xk) _ <X1,...,Xk)0.
Now for X, Y, Z E L,(G), (11) and (12) imply that X < <Y,Z> if and only if X' =
X S <Y,Z) = <Y`,Z`>. By 1.3.2 there is a projectivity cp from G to G whose
restriction to L,(G) is T. By (12), cp is an extension of a and it is unique since every
projectivity is determined by its action on L,(G).
We shall quite often use 1.3.1 or 1.3.2 to construct projectivities. Theorem 1.3.3,
however, is more of theoretical interest. Nevertheless it seems worthwhile to investi-
gate more closely these partially ordered sets L(G), in particular, L2(G).
Induced projectivities
An isomorphism a from G to G satisfies (1) and therefore induces a projectivity. It is

one of the main problems about subgroup lattices to decide under what conditions
a given projectivity cp is induced by a group isomorphism a. Clearly, it suffices to
know that cp and a operate in the same way on L, (G). We shall need the following
more general result.
1.3.4 Lemma. If cp is a projectivity from G to G and a: G -+ G is a homomorphism such

that X = X" for every cyclic subgroup X of G, then a is an isomorphism inducing cp.
Proof. If X is a cyclic subgroup of the kernel of o, then X`0 = X = 1 and so X = 1.

Thus u is injective. Let H S G. Since a is a homomorphism, He < G. Hence by 1.1.2,
(P
H`0 = U <x>J = U <x> = U <x> = H.

\ XE H XEH XEH
In particular, G = G. Thus a is surjective and induces cp.
The fact that a projectivity maps cyclic groups onto cyclic groups makes it possi-
ble to construct element maps. A general result in this direction is the following.
1.3.5 Theorem._A projectivity cp from a group G to a group G is induced by a bijective

map from G to G if and only if I <g>'* I = I <g> I for every g c- G.
Proof. The condition is clearly necessary. Conversely, let cp be a projectivity sat-

isfying I <g>" I = I <g> I for all g e G. For any cyclic group C let C* be the set of
generators of C. If C < G is cyclic, then so is C", by 1.2.10, and since ICI = ICI, we
have I(CP)*I = I C*I; let ac be a bijection from C* to (CP)*. Forge G define g = g
where C = <g>. Then, clearly, a is injective. If H < G and g e H, then <g> < H10
and hence g a H`0; conversely, for y e H0 the preimage <y>'P-' = D is cyclic and
therefore y = x = x for some x e D < H. Thus He = H`0. This shows that o is
bijective and that cp is induced by o. 11
The disadvantage of this theorem is that the map a constructed in its proof does
not have any nice properties. It is much more interesting to know, for example, that
a given projectivity is induced by an isomorphism. We present two general results

due to Sadovskii that reduce this problem to the corresponding problem for finitely
generated groups.
Sadovskii's approximation theorems
A family $ of subgroups of a group G is called a local system of subgroups of G if

(13) for any X, Y E . there exists Z E S/ such that X u Y < Z, and
(14) every element of G is contained in some X E Y.
1.3.6 Theorem (Sadovskii [1941]). Let cp be a projectivity from a group G to a group

G and let . be a local system of subgroups of G. For every X E. let cpx be the
projectivity induced by cp in X, and Ax be the set of all isomorphisms from X to X" that
induce qx. If Ax is nonempty and finite for all X E., then cp is induced by an
isomorphism from G to G.
Proof. Recall that a directed set is a partially ordered set in which every pair of
elements has an upper bound. By (13), . is a directed set and (Ax)x E , is a family of
sets indexed by 9. For each pair (X, Y) of elements of .' such that X < Y, we define
a mapping irxy: Al - Ax in the following way. Take a E Ay. Then o induces cpy, so
the restriction 6jx of a to X induces cpx, and a E Ax; now we can define 7rxy(a) _
aI x. Clearly, these mappings satisfy the following conditions:
(15) For every X E ., nxx is the identity mapping of Ax.
(16) If X < Y < Z, then rtxz = trxytryz
Since every Ax is nonempty and finite, the inverse limit A = lim Ax of the family
(Ax)x,.v with respect to the mappings ttxy is not empty (see Bourbaki [1968], Chap-
ter III, 7.4). An element of A is an element of the cartesian product of the sets Ax,
hence a function f defined on . such that f(X) E Ax for all X E 9, with the property
that
(17) f(X) = nxy(f(Y)) = f(Y)Ix
for X < Y. We take such an f and define a mapping p: G G in the following way.
For g e G there exists X E 9 such that g c- X, and we let gP = gf(x). If in addition
g c- Y E 9, then there exists Z E. such that X u Y < Z, and hence gf(X) = gf(Z) _
gf(I), by (17). Thus p is well defined. For x, y e G there are X, Y, Z E .' such that
x c X, y c Y and X u Y < Z. Since p1z = f(Z) is an isomorphism inducing the pro-
jectivity cpz, (xy)P = xPyP and <x>P = <x>". By 1.3.4, p is an isomorphism induc-
ing cp. O
If H = <x....., is a finitely generated group and ' is a projectivity from H to

some group H, then every isomorphism a: H - H that induces 0 has to map x;
to some generator of <x>', i = 1, ... , n. Since <x1> ' has only a finite number of
generators and since a is determined by the images of the xi, there are only finitely
many isomorphisms inducing 0. So we get the following corollary to Theorem 1.3.6
which usually suffices for the applications.
1.3.7 Corollary. Let cp be a projectivity from G to G and let . be a local system of

finitely generated subgroups of G. If cp is induced by an isomorphism on every X E .9',
then cp is induced by an isomorphism on G.
We now prove a result dual to Theorem 1.3.6. Clearly, if cp is a projectivity from

G to G and N a G such that N" a G, then the map
(P": L(G/N) --+ L(G/N"); H/N i--. H10/N11
is a projectivity from GIN to G/N'; we call gyp" the projectivity induced by q in G/N.
1.3.8 Theorem (Sadovskii [1965a]). Let p be a projectivity from a group G to a

group G and let 9 be a family of normal subgroups of G such that
(18) for any X, Y e. there exists Z e So with Z < X n Y, and
(19) for every g e G there exists X e .So such that <g> n X = 1.
For every X e., suppose that X`0 g G and let Ax be the set of all isomorphisms from
G/X to G/X0 that induce the projectivity tpx. If A. is nonempty and finite for all
X e .9', then cp is induced by an isomorphism from G to G.
Proof. Let X, Y e 5 and define X* = {g e GI<g> n X = 1). Every a e Ax induces

a map a* from X* to G. For, if g e X*, then (gX) e <g> X`/X9', and since
<g)" n X = 1, there is a unique g' E <g> such that (gX) = g'X. Now we set
g = g' and define Bx = {a*Ia e Ax}. If Y < X and /3 e A1, then the isomorphism
/3: G/Y 6/Y` induces in the natural way an isomorphism y : G/X --+ 6/X`. Since /3
induces qp on G/Y, it follows that y induces q on G/X and hence y e Ax. Now Y < X
implies X* < Y*, and for g e X*, gQ' is an element of <g> satisfying (gX)7 = gP*X''.
Thus gfl = gY' and hence y* = fl*Ix..
Let us write X <' Y if and only if Y < X. Then (Y, <') is a directed set, by (18),
and we have just shown that for X <' Y there exists a map 7[,y: By -+ Bx defined by
nxr(a) = aI x. for all o e By.. Clearly, these maps have the properties (15) and (16)
with respect to and since every B. is finite and nonempty, the inverse limit
B = lim B. with respect to the mappings nxy is not empty. An element f e B has the
property that f(X) e Bx and
(20) f(X) = nxr(f(Y)) = f(Y)lx.
if X <' Y, i.e. Y<_ X. We take such an f and define p: G - G in the obvious way:
if g e G, then by (19) there exists X e. such that g e X*, and we define g = gf(X).
If also g e Y*, then there exists Z e . such that Z < X n Y, and hence gf(x) =
gf(Z)= gf(I), by (20). Thus p is well defined. Let x, y e G and consider the amorphy
a(x,y) = (y)-`(x)-`(xy) e G. Since cp is a projectivity, there exists g e G such that
<g)`0 = <a(x,y)>, and our assumptions on . yield the existence of a subgroup
1.4 The group of autoprojectivities 23
Z E Y such that x, y, xy, g are all contained in Z*. Then f(Z) = a* for some a e AZ
and, using the definitions of p and a*, we get <x> = <x) = <x>" and
(xy)Z` = (xY)a*Z*
= (xYZ) = (xZ)(yZ) = x' yPZ'D.
Therefore a(x, y) c -Z". On the other hand a(x, y) E <g> and <g)` n Z( = 1. Thus
a(x,y) = I and so (xy)P = xy'. By 1.3.4, p is an isomorphism inducing cp.
Also in this theorem the assumption that Ax is nonempty and finite may be
replaced by the condition that G/X is finitely generated and cp is induced by some
isomorphism on G/X.
Exercises
1. Let a: G - G be a map, a the amorphy of a and write A = <a(x, y)Ix, y e G> and
B = <gJg a G>. Show that A a B and that the map a* defined by x = xA for
all x a G is an epimorphism from G to B/A.
2. (Gaschutz and Schmidt [1981]) Let G be a finite group, a a permutation of G and
a the amorphy of a. Show that the following are equivalent:
(a) (Hx) = Hx and (xH) = xH for all H < G and x e G,
(b) a(x,y) e <x) n <yc> for all x, y e G.
3. Let a be a bijective map from G to G such that
(a) (xy-' ) E <x, y> for all x, y c- G, and
(b) (uv-')-' E <u-', v-') for all u, v a G.
Show that the map d: L(G) -+ L(G) defined in (2) is a projectivity.
4. (a) If L2(G) is a sublattice of the finite group G, show that L2(G) = L(G).
(b) Find a group G such that L2(G) is a meet-sublattice but not a sublattice of
L(G).
(c) Find a group G for which L2(G) is not a lattice.
5. If L2(G) is a distributive lattice, show that G is locally cyclic.
6. If G and G are lattice isomorphic p-groups, p a prime, and (P is a projectivity from
G to G, show that there exists a bijective map a: G -+ G inducing cp such that
(xP)Q = (x)P for all x e G.
1.4 The group of autoprojectivities

Let G be a group. A projectivity from G to G is called an autoprojectivity of G; the
group of all autoprojectivities of G, that is of all automorphisms of L(G), is denoted
by P(G). Clearly, every automorphism of G induces an autoprojectivity, as does
every element g a G via the inner automorphism induced by g. We collect these
simple facts in the following theorem and introduce important subgroups of G,
Aut G and P(G).
1.4.1 Theorem. Let G be a group.

(a) The map p: Aut G -+ P(G) defined by H" = Ha for H < G, a e Aut G is a homo-
morphism. The kernel of p is the group
Pot G = {aeAutGJH2=H for all H <G}
of power automorphisms of G, the image of p is the group PA(G) of all autoprojec-

tivities of G that are induced by automorphisms. We have PA(G) Aut G/Pot G.
(b) The map n: G -+ P(G) defined by H9' = g-'Hg for H < G, g c- G is a homomor-
phism. The kernel of rl is the group
N(G) = n NG(H),
H<G
called the norm of G, the image of rl we denote by PI(G). We have PI(G) G/N(G).
(c) If 7t: G - Aut G is the homomorphism mapping g e G to the inner automorphism
induced by g, that is x9' = g-'xg for x e G, then rl = 7tp and N(G)" = G" n Pot G =
Inn G n Pot G.
0 P (G)
Aut G
PA(G)
PI (G)
n
G t
Pot G
N(G)
Z (G) -0 1
1 6
Figure 3
Proof. Let a, /3 E Aut G and H < G. Then t' is the projectivity induced by Of and
H1afi' = Hae = HaP. Hence p is a homomorphism. For g c G we have H9' = g -'Hg =
H9", and therefore rl = 7rp is the product of two homomorphisms. Thus rl is also a
homomorphism. The remaining assertions are trivial or follow from the isomor-
phism theorem for groups. El
If two isomorphisms a and z induce the same projectivity between two groups G
and G, then o r ' is a power automorphism of G, and conversely. Therefore,
1.4.2 Corollary. If a projectivity of a group G is induced by an isomorphism, it is

induced by exactly I Pot GI isomorphisms.
There is a large class of groups in which the homomorphisms p and ry described

in Theorem 1.4.1 are injective.
1.4.3 Theorem (Baer [1956], Suzuki [1951a]). If G is a group with Z(G) = 1, then
also N(G) = I and Pot G = 1, hence PI(G) G and PA(G) Aut G.
Proof. This is an immediate consequence of a more general result on power auto-

morphisms of groups, so we shall postpone the proof until 1.5.2 below. But there is
a short proof for finite groups which we want to present here. So let G be finite and
suppose first that N(G) : 1. Then there exists a nontrivial Sylow p-subgroup P of
N(G). Since N(G) normalizes every subgroup, P 9 N(G) and hence P a G. So if
Sc Sylo(G), then P a S and P n Z(S) 1; let 1 a E P n Z(S). Then S< CG(a) and
for primes q # p, P normalizes every Sylow q-subgroup Q of G and hence QP =
Q x P. Therefore also Q < CG(a) and CG(a) = G, contrary to Z(G) = 1. Thus
N(G) = 1 and PI(G) G, by 1.4.1.
The second assertion now follows from the fact that G(Inn G) = 1 if G is a
group with trivial centre. Indeed, Pot G n Inn G = N(G)" = 1, by 1.4.1, and since
Pot G and Inn G are normal subgroups of Aut G, they centralize each other. There-
fore, if aEPotGandx,geG,
(g-lxg)a = (ga)-'xaga
g lxag = xaa' = X9,a =
and so gag-l centralizes xa. Since x was arbitrary, gag-' E Z(G) = 1 and hence
ga = g. Thus Pot G = 1 and PA(G) Aut G.
In the remainder of this section, we shall study L(G) and P(G) for some well-
known groups G; in particular we want to determine the subgroups PA(G) and
P1(G) of P(G). Since every automorphism of a cyclic group is a power automor-
phism, 1 for all n c N u {cc}. The results of Section 1.2 yield the descrip-
tion of given in Exercises 1 and 2. The next example will explain those parts of
our terminology and notation that originated in projective geometry.
Elementary ahelian groups
Let p be a prime, n a natural number and let G be an elementary abelian group of

order p". Then it is well-known that we can regard G as a vector space of dimension
n over GF(p), the field with p elements, and that L(G) is the projective geometry of
this vector space. An automorphism of the group G is an invertible linear map of the
vector space G onto G, and an autoprojectivity of G is simply a projectivity of the
projective geometry L(G) onto itself in the sense of projective geometry. It follows
that PA(G) PGL(n,p). If n = 2, then every nontrivial, proper subgroup of G has
order p and hence L(G)\{G, 1 } is an antichain with p + I elements. Every permuta-
tion of these elements yields an autoprojectivity of G, and therefore P(G) is isomor-
phic to the symmetric group Sp+1 on p + 1 letters. If n >_ 3, the Fundamental Theo-
rem of Projective Geometry (see, for example, Baer [1952], p. 44) tells us that every
autoprojectivity of G is induced by a semi-linear mapping of the vector space G. But

since GF(p) has only the trivial automorphism, this mapping is linear, i.e. an auto-
morphism. Thus we have the following result.
1.4.4 Theorem. Let G be an elementary abelian group of order p", p a prime, n e N.

Then PA(G) PGL(n, p); and P(G) = PA(G) for n >- 3, but P(G) ^-- SP+i if n = 2.
In Section 2.6 we shall show, without using the Fundamental Theorem of Projec-
tive Geometry, that for a much larger class of abelian groups all autoprojectivities
are induced by automorphisms.
Groups of order pq
Let p and q be primes such that q I p - 1 and let H be a nonabelian group of order pq.
Then by Sylow's theorem there are p subgroups of order q and one subgroup of
order p in H and so L(H) consists of H, 1 and an antichain with p + 1 elements.
Therefore, again, P(H) Sp+1 whereas PA(H) Aut H and PI(H) H, by 1.4.3.
Thus PA(H) and PI(H) are subgroups of orders p(p - 1) and pq, respectively, in
Sp+1
This shows that in general PA(G) and PI (G) are not distinguished subgroups of
P(G); in fact they are not even normal in P(G). However, this is not very surprising
if, as is the case here, the subgroup lattice is structurally small, in particular if it does
not determine the group. The situation is different in our next example.
The alternating group A4
Let G be the alternating group of degree 4. Then G has 3 subgroups of order 2,

generating the Klein 4-group V, and 4 maximal subgroups of order 3. It is easy to
see that G is determined by its subgroup lattice. Indeed let G be a group with
isomorphic subgroup lattice; then G operates faithfully by conjugation on the set F
of those atoms of this lattice which are also antiatoms. Hence G is a subgroup of S4
and it follows that G G. Let A be the set of those atoms of L(G) that are not
antiatoms, and let S, T be the kernels of the actions of P(G) on T, A, respectively.
zx Figure 4: L(A4)
Clearly,
P(G)=SxT=S3xS4.
By 1.4.3, PA(G) Aut G. An automorphism a of G fixing all H E I operates on each
of these groups in the same way as on G/V. Hence a either centralizes or inverts all
H E r; and since one can easily check that the latter is impossible, a = 1. Thus
PA(G) n S = 1 and PA(G) is isomorphic to a subgroup of T ^- S4. On the other
hand, S4 operates faithfully by conjugation on its normal subgroup A4 and induces
an S3 on V. It follows that PA(G) S4 and PA(G)S = P(G) = PA(G)T. An element
of S normalizing PA(G) would centralize PA(G) and therefore also PA(G)T = P(G);
but Z(S) = 1. Thus N,,(G)(PA(G)) = PA(G) and PA(G) is one of 6 conjugate sub-
groups of P(G).
Dihedral 2-groups
The results obtained so far show an obvious general phenomenon. The more struc-
ture the subgroup lattice of a group has, the more likely it is that it determines
group-theoretic invariants. Compare, for example, the situation for A4 and S4 (see
Exercise 3) or the cases n = 2 and n > 3 in 1.4.4. The dihedral 2-groups are an
exception to this rule.
Let n>3 and let G = D2" _ <x,yIx2"-` = y2 = 1, yxy = x-`> be the dihedral
group of order 2". Since (x'y)2 = x'x -' = 1 for all i c N, every element in G \ <x> is
an involution; in particular, <x> is the only cyclic maximal subgroup of G. It follows
that <x> is invariant under P(G) and that P(G) operates faithfully on the set A of
subgroups of order 2 not contained in <x>. Every power automorphism has to
centralize all these involutions and therefore Pot G = 1 and PA(G) Aut G. If n =
3, it is easily seen that
P(D8) = PA(D8) Aut D8 nt D8.
Figure 5: L(D1e)
For n > 4 there are exactly three maximal subgroups in G, namely <x> and two
subgroups, M1 and M2, say, isomorphic to D2" Since M1 n M2 = <x2>, P(G)
contains a subgroup isomorphic to P(M1) X P(M2), and because there are even
automorphisms of G interchanging M, and M2, P(DAI = 21P(D2"-,)12. By an obvi-
ous induction we get I 22"-'-1 for all n > 4. Since this is the highest power
of 2 dividing (2"-')! and IAA = 2"-', P(D2.) is isomorphic to a Sylow 2-subgroup of
the symmetric group S2"-1. Every automorphism of G is determined by the images
of y and xy, and for these there are 2"-' and 2n-2 involutions respectively available.
Thus IAutGI = 22n-3 so that PA(D2") is properly contained in P(D2.,) for all n > 4.
Quaternion groups
Let n > 3 and let G = Q2" = <x, yIx2" = 1, y2 = x2"-2, y-'xy = x-' > be the gener-
alized quaternion group of order 2". Then Z(G) is the only minimal subgroup of
G and G/Z(G) ^ - D2" Thus P(Q2") ^- P(D2"-,), and since every automorphism of
G/Z(G) can be lifted to an automorphism of G.
PA(Q2") PA(D2"-,) ^, Aut D2.,-,.
Figure 6: L(Q16)
In particular, P(Q,) = PA(Q,) ^- S31 P(Q16) = PA(Q16) De and PA(Q2") <

P(Q2") for n > 5. For every homomorphism a: G -+ Z(G), the map a: G -i G defined
by g = gg for g e G is a power automorphism of G. It follows that I Pot G 1 > 4, and
since G is generated by two elements of order 4, 1 Pot G I = 4.
Finally, we mention that because the quaternion groups are the only noncyclic
finite groups with just one minimal subgroup, they are determined by their subgroup
lattices. We leave it as an exercise to show that this also holds for the dihedral
2-groups.
Exercises
1. Show that P(C.) ^ Sym P.
2. Let m e N and for i e t\J define n; to be the number of primes p such that p' is the
maximal power of p dividing m. Show that P(C,") Dr S. (where of course, So is
the trivial group). 'E"
1.5 Power automorphisms 29
3. Draw a Hasse diagram of L(S4) and show that P(S4) = PA(SO) ^ S4.
4. Give details for those parts in the discussion of the dihedral and quaternion
groups that have only been sketched in the text.
5. Show that D2., is determined by its subgroup lattice for n > 2.
6. Let p be an odd prime and let G be the nonabelian group of order p3 and
exponent p. Determine P(G), PA(G) and Pot G.
1.5 Power automorphisms

In this section we shall prove Cooper's theorem that every power automorphism of
a group is central. This will have a number of interesting consequences. First we give
an elementary result.
1.5.1 Theorem. Let G be a group. Then Pot G is abelian.
Proof. For g c G let F(g) = {a e Pot GIga = g}. Then F(g) a Pot G and Pot G/F(g),
being isomorphic to a subgroup of Aut(g)., is abelian. Since n F(g) = 1, Pot G is
aEc
abelian.
Commutators
For elements x, y e G and a E Aut G, [x,y] = x-'y-'xy = x-'xy is the commutator

of x and y and, similarly, [x, a] = x-'x is the commutator of x and a. Then if
X s G and S is a subset of G or Aut G, [X, S] = ([x, s] Ix e X, s e S). Finally, for
elements x e G and s...... s" of G or Aut G we define inductively
[x, s,,.-.,s"] = [[x,s"--.,s"-,],s"]

for n > 2;
for subsets X of G and S...... S. of G or Aut G we define [X, S,_., S"] similarly.
For the convenience of the reader we list the basic properties of commutators which
we shall require. So let x, y e G, s and t elements of G or Aut G, X, Y, Z subgroups
of G, S a subset of G or Aut G and let n e 101, m e Z. Then
(1) [x y, s] = [x, s]y,
[ y, s] and [x, st] = [x, t] [x, s]',
(2) [xm, s] = [x, s]m if [x, s] and x commute,
(3) [x, sm] = [x, s]m if [x, s]S = [x, s],
(4) (xy)" = x"y"[y, x]()) if [x, y] commutes with x and y,
(5) [x, y] = [x, y] for every homomorphism a of G,
(6) [X, S]'r = [X, S] and [X, Y] a X u Y,
(7) [X, Y, Z] = I = [Y, Z, X] implies [Z, X, Y] = 1.
The proofs of these results for s, t e G and S 9 G can be found in Robinson [1982],
Chapter 5; for s, t e Aut G and S c Aut G, they are similar.
Cooper's theorem
15.2 Theorem (Cooper [1968]). Let G be a group. Then [G, Pot G] 5 Z(G).
This result has a number of immediate consequences. First of all, we get the
Proof of Theorem 1.4.3. If G is a group with Z(G) = 1, then [G, Pot G] = 1 and thus
Pot G = 1. Hence also N(G) = 1, by 1.4.1, (c). Then 1.4.1, (a) and (b) show that
PA(G) Aut G and PI (G) G.
Furthermore, we can show that power automorphisms centralize not only G/Z(G)
but also the commutator subgroup G' of G. In addition they commute with the inner
automorphisms. Finally, we get a result of Schenkman's [1960] that the norm of a
group G is contained in the second centre Z2(G).
15.3 Corollary. If G is a group, then

(a) [G', Pot G] = 1,
(b) [Inn G, Pot G] = 1,
(c) N(G) < Z2(G).
Proof. Let g, x e G and a e Pot G. By 1.5.2 there exist elements z, w e Z(G) such that
g2 = gz and x2 = xw. Hence [g, x] = [ga, xa] = [gz, xw] = [g, x] and this implies
(a). As in 1.4.1 let 7C be the natural homomorphism from G to Aut G. Then
(g-1xg)Q (9a)-lxaga = z-1g-lxagz = xaa`
x = =
and (b) follows. Finally, if g e N(G), then g" e Pot G and hence [x, g] = [x, g'] e Z(G),
by 1.5.2. Thus g e ZZ(G) and (c) holds.
Proof of Theorem 1.5.2. Let x, y e G and a e Pot G. We have to show that [x, a, y] = 1.
Since xa e <x)', the elements xa and [x, a] commute with x. By (2),
(8) [x"', a] = [x, a]' for all m e Z.
If H< G, then H" = (Hx) = (H2)' = H' and hence [x, a] = x-1xa = xxx-1 e NG(H).
Thus
(9) [x, a] e N(G).
Since xaya = (xy) commutes with xy, we have [x, a, y] [y-1, a, x-1] _
x-axy-1x-1 xaYy2y-1xyy-ax-1 = xx-ay-1x-1(xy)
(x
ya)y-ax-1 = I. By (9),
[x, a, y] e <y) and [y-1, a, x -1 ] e <x> and hence
(10) [X, a, Y] e <x) n W.
In particular, [x, a, y] commutes with [x, a] and y. Therefore the commutator

formulas (8), (2) and (3) yield
(11) [xm, a, y"] = [[x, a]m, y"] = [x, a, y]""" for all m, n e Z.
This implies [y -1, a, x -1 ] = [y, a, x] and so we finally get
(12) [x, a, y] [y, a, x] = 1.
Letx=x',ya=ysand(yx)a=(y")` where r, s,te7L.Then (y`)"=(yx)`=(yx)
ys2
(ya)" = (ys)" and hence yS = (y`)x'-' and y' =
(ys)xr-'.
It follows that = (,S)2 =
.)2 ((Y`)""-.,.Y ,)2
((Y`)x,
= (Y`S)"" = =
((YS)',,
(YS2)x and this yields 1 =

[x"
2,YS2] = [[x,a]r-l,YS2]. Using (11), we get
Y](r-1)S2 = 1.
(13) [x, a,
Now suppose that the theorem is false. Then there exist elements x, y e G and
a e Pot G such that [x, a, y] # 1. If x or y had infinite order, then so would [x, a, y],
by (10), and (13) would imply that r = 1. But then [x, a] = xr-1 = 1 and [x, a, y] = 1,
a contradiction. So x and y have finite order and we can choose x, y e G with
[x, a, y] # 1 such that o(x) + o(y) is minimal. By (12), also [y, a, x] 1 and so
without loss of generality we may assume that o([x, a]) z off y, a]). If p is a prime
divisor of o(x) or o(y), then by our choice of x and y, [x, a, y] = 1 or [x, a, y] = 1;
in both cases [x, a, y]" = 1, by (11). Hence o(x) and o(y) are powers of the same
prime p and
(14) [x, a, y] = 1.
Again let r, s e Z such that xa = x' and ya = ys. Since a is an automorphism, s * 0
(mod p). So from (13) we get [x, a, y]'-1 = 1 and then (12) and (11) yield
1= [Y,a,x]'-1 = [Y,a,x'-1]
= [[Y,a],[x,a]].
Thus A = < [x, a], [y, a] > is an abelian p-group and [x, a] is an element of maximal
order in A. Such an element generates a direct factor (see, for example, the more
general Lemma 2.3.11), that is we have A = ([x, a] > x B where B:!5; A. Now [y, a] e A
and so there exist b e B and n e 7L such that [y, a] = [x, a] -"b. Thus
(15) <[x, a]> n <[x, a]"[Y, a] > = 1.
Since < [x, a, y] > is a minimal and < [x, a] > a nontrivial subgroup of the cyclic p-
group <x>, we have [x, a, y] e < [x, a] >. Hence there exists j e 7L such that [x, a, y] _
{x,a]J;letm=n(1 - j). Then by (1),
-"jx"y, a] = [x -"', a]x"y [x"Y, a]
rx mY, a] = [x
=([x,a]-"1)x"1[x",a]y[Y,a] (by(8)and(1))
_ [x, a, y] `[x", a] [x", a, y] [y, a] (since [x, a, y] e Z(<x, y>))
_ [x, a]"[y, a] (by (8) and (11)).

Now if [xmy, a] # 1, then <[x, a] > and <[xmy, a]> are nontrivial p-subgroups of <x>
and <xmy>, respectively, and they have trivial intersection by (15). Since <x> is a
cyclic p-group and therefore contains only one minimal subgroup, it follows that
<x) n <x'"y) = 1. By (10), [x, a, xmy] = 1 in this case; but if [xmy, a] = 1, then clear-
ly [x'"y, a, x] = 1 and so [x, a, xmy] = 1, by (12). Hence in any case [x, a, xmy] = 1,
and (1) implies that 1 = [x, a, xmy] = [x, a, y] [x, a, xm]y = [x, a, y], a contradiction.
Power automorphisms of abelian groups
Cooper's theorem does not say anything about abelian groups. However, it is not
difficult to determine all power automorphisms of these groups. We call a power
automorphism a of G universal if there exists an integer n such that x = x" for
all x e G. We first remark that every power automorphism of a finitely generated
abelian group is universal. More generally we show the following.
15.4 Lemma. Let A be a finitely generated abelian group with A = <a1 > x x <a,>.
If an automorphism a of A fixes <a1>, ..., <a,> and <a1...a,>, then there exists an
integer n such that a = a"for all a e A.
Proof. By hypothesis there exist integers n, n, such that a; = a;' and
an1' ... r-
anom = (a1 ... ar -a = (a1 ... ar-n- aln an
r
It follows that a;=a;' =a'fori= 1, ..., r and then a' = a" for allaeA.
An abelian torsion group A is the direct product of its primary components AP
and therefore Pot A is the cartesian product of the groups Pot AP where p runs
through P. So let A be an abelian p-group and let a e Pot A.
Consider first the case Exp A = pk, and take an x e A with o(x) = pk. Then a
induces an automorphism in <x> and so there is an integer n such that 0 < n < pk,
(n, p) = 1 and x = x". For every a e A, a induces a power automorphism in <x, a>
and by 1.5.4 there exists an integer m such that a = a' and xa = x'. It follows that
m = n (mod pk) and a2 = a". Hence a is universal and Pot A ^_- Aut <x>.
Now suppose that Exp A is infinite and consider KIk(A) = {a e Al a" = 11 for k c
N. Then at is universal on ( (A), so there exist integers nk such that 0 < nk < pk and
a = a"k for all a E i2k(A). Since i2k(A) 5 ilk+1(A), we have a"k = a = a""' and there-
fore nk = nk+1 (mod pk). Hence there exist unique integers r, such that 0 < ro < p,
k-1
0< r, < p for i E 101 and nk = rip ; thus a determines a p-adic unit r = rip'.
i=o i=o
Conversely, such a p-adic unit yields a power automorphism of A.
1.55 Lemma. Let A be an abelian p-group and let r be a p-adic unit, r = j rip', say,
i=o
where rie7L,0<ro<pand 05ri<pforie1J.For aeAwith o(a)=pk(keN)we
k-1
define a = an,, where nk = rip'. Then a is a power automorphism of A; we shall
i=o
write a' for a.
Proof. First of all, a is well-defined since the ri are uniquely determined by r.

Furthermore n; = nk (mod pJ) for j S k and therefore a = a"k for all a e S2k(A). Thus
or induces a power automorphism on every S2k(A). It follows that a is a power
automorphism of A.
Now if Exp A is infinite, the correspondence between power automorphisms and

p-adic units described above clearly is bijective and multiplicative. Thus we have the
following result.
15.6 Theorem (Robinson [1964]). Let A be an abelian torsion group and for p e P
let AP be its p-component.
(a) Pot A _- Cr Pot Ap.
pe P
(b) If Exp AP is infinite, then Pot AP ^-- Up, the multiplicative group of p-adic units;
in fact, the map sending r e Up to the power automorphism or defined in 1.5.5 is an
isomorphism.
(c) If Exp AP = pk is finite, then every power automorphism of AP is universal and
Pot AP ^-- Aut Cpk, the multiplicative group of units of the ring 7L/pk7L (or of p-adic units
modulo pk).
For nonperiodic abelian groups the situation is much simpler.
15.7 Theorem. If A is an abelian group with elements of infinite order, then

IPotAI=2anda=a-1for1 #aePotAandallaeA.
Proof. Suppose that a e Pot A and let x e A with o(x) = oc. Since a induces an
automorphism in <x>, we have x = x" where n e { + 1, - 1}. If a e A, then a induces
a power automorphism in <x, a> which is universal, by 1.5.4. Thus a" = a" for all
a e A. The result follows.
Power automorphisms of nonabelian groups
Here we only need the following result; it is an immediate consequence of Cooper's

theorem.
15.8 Theorem. if G is a nonabelian group generated by elements of infinite order, then

Pot G = 1.
Proof. Suppose that 1 # a e Pot G. Since G is generated by elements of infinite

order, there exists x e G such that o(x) = oo and x" # x, and hence x" = x-1. By 1.5.2,
x-2 = [x, a] e Z(G). Therefore, if g c G, <x2, g> is abelian and by 1.5.4, a induces a
universal power automorphism in this group. Thus g = g-' for all g e G. But this
implies that G is abelian, a contradiction. El
There are also nonabelian groups possessing nontrivial power automorphisms.

Universal power automorphisms exist in metacyclic groups (see Exercise 1) and,
more generally, in certain groups with modular subgroup lattices (see 2.3.10). Exam-
ples of nonuniversal power automorphisms can be found in the quaternion groups
and in the groups of Exercise 2.
Exercises
1. If G = <a,bjaP" = bP"-' = 1, b-lab = al+P) where p E P, p > 2 and n >_ 2, sho

that a: G -+ G defined by x2 = x'+P"-' for x e G is an automorphism of G.
2. Let G be a finite p-group and let 1 < K < H < G such that K S <x> for all
xEG\H.
(a) If a: G -+ K is a homomorphism with H < Ker a, show that a: G - G defined
by x = xx for x e G is a power automorphism of G.
(b) If all elements in G \ H have the same order and if I G : HI > p2, show that
there exist power automorphisms of G that are not universal. (Groups with
these properties can be found in Huppert [1967], p. 334.)
3. (Baer [1934]) If N(G) contains an element of infinite order, show that N(G) _
Z(G).
4. (Cooper [1968]) Let G be a nonabelian group with elements of infinite order and
define W(G) = <x e GIo(x) = oo>. Show that every power automorphism of G
centralizes W(G) and G/W(G).
5. (Huppert [1961]) If G is a nonabelian finite p-group, show that Pot G is a p-
group.
1.6 Direct products
In this section we shall study the subgroup lattice of a direct product of groups; we
also investigate the structure of a group whose subgroup lattice decomposes into a
direct product.
The subgroup lattice of the direct product of two groups
If G = H x K, then in general L(G) L(H) x L(K); see G = CP x CP for p e P.

However, it is possible to construct L(G) out of L(H), L(K) and all isomorphisms
between sections of H and K. This was discovered by Goursat as early as 1890.
1.6 Direct products 35
1.6.1 Theorem. Let H, K < G and G = H x K.

(a) For U < G and x c- UK n H define xa = {y c- KIxy c- U}. Then a is an epimor-
phism from UK n H onto UH n K/U n K with kernel U n H.
(b) Conversely, if U1 < H, W:9 UZ < K and a is an epimorphism from U, onto
U,/W, then
U = D(U,,a) = {xyIx c- U,,y c- xa}
is a subgroup of G with U, = UK n H, UZ = UH n K, W= U n K and Ker a =

UnH.
(c) For U,, V, < H and epimorphisms a, fi as in (b), we have D(U,,a) < D(V,,fJ) if
and only if U, 5 V1 and xa9x0forall xeU,.
Proof. (a) Let U, = {x c- HIxy E U for some y c- K} be the set of H-components of

elements of U. If x c- U, and y c- K such that xy c- U, then x = (xy)y-' E UK n H;
conversely, if x c- UK n H, x = uk with u c- U and k c- K, say, then u = xk-' and
hence x c- U,. Thus U, = UK n H and, similarly, UH n K = U2 is the set of K-
components of elements of U. For x c- UK n H, therefore, xa is a nonempty subset
of UH n K. Furthermore, if y, z c xa, then xy and xz are elements of U and so
1z
= (xy)-'xz c- U n K. Hence y and z lie in the same coset of U n K, and if w is
Y-
another element of this coset y(U n K), then w = yu with u c- U n K implies xw =
xyu c- U, that is w c- xa. Thus we have shown that x E U2/U n K. For x,, x2 E U,
and y; E x; we have x1xzyly2 = x1y1xzy2 E U and hence yty2 E (xlx2) Therefore
(xt x2)a = y1 y2(U n K) = xi xz and a is an epimorphism. Finally, x c- Ker a if and
only if xa = U n K, i.e. 1 E x. It follows that Ker a = U n H.
(b) If x1, x2 E U1 and y; E x; , then y, y2-' E xi(xz)-' _ (x,xZ'r and hence
(xty1)(xzy2)-' = x,x2'y1y2' E U. Therefore U is a subgroup of G and U, is its set
of H-components. Thus U, = UK n H and a is the epimorphism defined in (a) for
the subgroup U of G. The other assertions in (b) now follow from (a).
(c) If U=D(U,,a)<D(V,,fl)=V, then U1= UKnH<VKnH=V1 and
xa 9 x0 for all x c- U1. The converse is obvious.
The isomorphism theorem yields U1/U n H U2/U n K in 1.6.1 (b). Therefore

we are interested in direct products of isomorphic groups. These are characterized
by the existence of diagonals. Here, a subgroup D of G = H x K such that DH =
G = DK and D n H = 1 = D n K is called a diagonal in G (with respect to H and K).
1.6.2 Theorem. Let H, K < G and G = H x K. If 6: H - K is an isomorphism, then
D(S) = D(H, S) = {xxalx c- H}
is a diagonal in G (with respect to H and K). Conversely, if D is a diagonal in G (with

respect to H and K), then there exists a unique isomorphism S: H --- K such that
D = D(S). Thus there is a bijection between diagonals (with respect to H and K) and
isomorphisms of H to K, and also, if H K, between diagonals and automorphisms
of H.
Proof. If 6: H - K is an isomorphism and U = D(H, 6), then it follows from 1.6.1 (b)
that UnH=1=UnK,H=U1<UKand K=U2<UH.Thus UK =G=UH
and U is a diagonal in G. Conversely, let D be a diagonal in G and consider
the epimorphism a defined for D in 1.6.1 (a). Then a maps DK n H = H onto
DH n K/D n K = K and Ker a = D n H = 1. Thus at is an isomorphism from H to
K and D = D(H, a) = D(a). Finally, 1.6.1 (c) implies that different isomorphisms 6, e
lead to different diagonals D(S) and D(e) so that the correspondence b -+ D(b) is
bijective. F-1
1.63 Remark. Every subgroup U of a direct product G = H x K is a diagonal

in a certain section of G. More precisely, if U = D(U1, a), U2 = UH n K and
Uo = (U n H) x (U n K), then Uo g Ul x U2, Ul Uo = Ul x (U n K) and U2 Uo =
(U n H) x U2. Thus
Ul X U2/Up = Ul U0/U0 X U2 U0/U0.
Figure 7
Furthermore, UUl >_ U2, UU2 >_ Ul and so UUl = Ul x U2 = UU2. Now
Dedekind's law yields that Ul U0 n U = (U1 n U)UO = (U n H) U0 = U0 and, simi-
larly, U2 U0 n U = U0. Hence U/Uo is a diagonal in Ul x U2/Uo with respect to
Ul Uo/U0 and U2 Uo/U0. It is easy to see that the corresponding isomorphism
b: Ul U0/U0 -+ U2 U0/U0 is the one induced by a, that is (xUo)" = x2U0 for x c U1.
Groups with decomposable subgroup lattices
Our description of the subgroup lattice of G = H x K shows that L(G) L(H) x L(K)
if every epimorphism a in 1.6.1 (a) is trivial. Clearly, this holds if (and only if) the
elements in H and K have finite, coprime orders. It is easy to see that this result
is also true for more than two factors. Let us say that the groups Gx (A E A) are
coprime if every G,A is a torsion group and (o(x), o(y)) = 1 for all x E G,l, y E G with
A :0 ; for finite groups this is equivalent to (IGAl, 1 for a. .
1.6.4 Lemma. If G = Dr Gx with coprime groups Gx (A e A), then L(G) = Dr L(GA);

AEA AEA
in fact, the map r: L(G) -+ Dr L(GA) defined by HT(A) = H n Gx for A e A and H < G
AEA
is an isomorphism.
Proof. Let L = Dr L(GA). Recall that L is the set of all functions f defined on A
f(A) AEA
such that e L(Gx) for all A e A; hence H' is a well -/defined element of L. Let
p: L - L(G) be defined by f = Dr f(.1). Then f T(A) = I Dr f() I n Gx = for
AEA \UEA /
all A e A and hence pr is the identity on L. On the other hand, if H < G and x e H,
then x is the product of certain xx e Gx and since the Gx are coprime, x = xxyx
where xxyx = yxxx, o(xA) = n, o(yx) = m and (n,m) = 1. There exist integers s, t
such that ns + mt=1; thus x""=xx`yx`=xx-'-=xx. Hence xxeH for all A and
H= Dr (H n Gx)= H`. Thus rp is the identity on L(G). It follows that T is bijective
AEA
and by 1.1.2, r is an isomorphism.
We come now to the main result of this section. We show that any group with
decomposable subgroup lattice is a direct product of coprime groups.
1.65 Theorem (Suzuki [1951a]). Let G be a group such that L(G) Dr Lx where
AEA
(Lx)x E A is a family of lattices, I A I > 2 and I L.I > 2 for all A e A; write L = Dr L. and
IEA
suppose that or: L(G) --+ L is an isomorphism. For A e A let Ox be the least and Ix the
greatest element of Lx, define ft e L by fx() = O for A # e A and fx(A) = Ix and,
finally, let Gx be the subgroup of G with G7 = fx. Then G = Dr Gx, the groups Gx
AEA
(A a A) are coprime and L(GA) ^- Lx for all A e A.
Proof. Clearly, G is the greatest and 1 the least element 0 of L, so that by 1.1.7,
every Lx has a least and a greatest element and L(GA) [fx/0] L. For A # e A,
1 x e Gx and l y e G, furthermore
L(<x> u ) = [<x>0 u <y>0/0] [<x>a/0] x [<y>0/0] L(<x>) x L(<y>).
By 1.2.3, L(<x>) and L(<y>) are distributive, as is their direct product. Therefore
<x) u <y> is locally cyclic, and hence cyclic. Since x and y generate this cyclic group
and x # 1 y, <x> and <y> have finite, coprime indices in it, and as <x> n <y> = 1,
o(x) and o(y) are finite and coprime. This shows that the groups Gx (A e A) are
coprime and that they centralize each other. By 1.1.7, G = M a A> and
A e A> n Gx = 1. It follows that Gx g G and G = Dr Gx.
AEA
Suzuki's theorem and Lemma 1.6.4 have a number of important consequences. In

conjunction with Lemma 1.2.9 they show that the class of nontrivial direct products
of coprime groups is invariant under projectivities. Moreover, the direct factors are
mapped onto direct factors.
1.6.6 Theorem. Let G = Dr G, with coprime subgroups Gk (A e A) and let cp be a

AEA
projectivity from G to a group G. Then G = Dr Gx and the subgroups Gf (A a A) are
AEA
coprime.
Proof. Let T: L(G) - Dr L(GA) be the isomorphism defined in 1.6.4. Then a = cp-1T
CA
is an isomorphism from
'I L(G) to Dr L(GA). In the notation of 1.6.5, fA(A) = GA _
AEA
G1(A) and f1() = 1 = for A e A. Hence fA = Gx and so (G9)' = ft. Now all
the assertions follow from 1.6.5.
We mention the following special case of 1.6.6 since we shall often use the result
in this form.
1.6.7 Corollary. Let H and K be coprime subgroups of a group G such that [H, K] = 1.
If cp is a projectivity from G to some group d, then (HK)' = H' x K' and H`0, K"
are coprime.
Proof. Apply 1.6.6 to the projectivity induced by cp in HK = H x K.
Note that neither of the properties [H, K] = 1 and H, K coprime in 1.6.7, is

preserved under projectivities. This, for example, is shown by the projectivities be-
tween the elementary abelian group of order 9 and the nonabelian group of order 6.
As a consequence of 1.6.7 we get a more general result in this direction.
1.6.8 Corollary. Let it be a set of primes and suppose that H and K are subgroups of
a group G such that H is generated by 7t-elements, K by n'-elements and [H, K] = 1.
If 9 is a projectivity from G to some group G, then [H', K'] = 1.
Proof. For every 7t-subgroup X of H and every n'-subgroup Y of K, [X`0, Y"] = 1,

by 1.6.7. Since H' is generated by these X', it follows that [H', Y'] = 1, and since
K' is generated by these Y', [H', K'] = 1.
We have shown that L(G) is decomposable if and only if G is a'nontrivial di-

rect product of coprime groups. For finite groups this property is inherited by the
Frattini factor group. We remind the reader that the Frattini subgroup fi(G) of an
arbitrary group G is defined to be the intersection of all the maximal subgroups of
G, with the stipulation that it shall equal G if G should have no maximal subgroups.
If G is finite, then D(G) is nilpotent and cD(G)H < G for every proper subgroup H
of G.
1.6.9 Theorem. Let G be a finite group. Then the following properties are equivalent.
(a) L(G) is directly decomposable.
(b) There exist nontrivial subgroups H and K of G such that G = H x K and
(IHI, IKI) = 1.
(c) L(G/b(G)) is directly decomposable.
Proof. That (a) implies (b) follows from 1.6.5. If (b) holds, then G/I(G) is the direct
product of HD(G)/1(G) and K b(G)/(D(G) and these groups are coprime. Since every
prime divisor of IGI also divides IG/O(G)I (see Robinson [1982], p. 263), both factors
are nontrivial. Now (c) follows from 1.6.4.
Finally, let L(G/b(G)) be decomposable, G/I(G) = H,/CD(G) x H2/I(G) where
lb(G) < Hi (i = 1, 2) and (IH,/cD(G)I, H2/D(G)I) = 1. If Di is the product of those
Sylow p-subgroups of (D (G) for which p divides IHi/D(G)I, then D; g G (i = 1, 2), as
characteristic subgroups of b(G). Furthermore, D(G) = D, x D2 since every prime
divisor of ID(G)I also divides IG/D(G)I. Thus D, is a normal Hall subgroup of H2. By
the Schur-Zassenhaus theorem there exists a complement G2 to D, in H2 and all
these complements are conjugate in H2. Since D, and H2 are normal subgroups, G
operates by conjugation on the set S2 of these complements and H2 is transitive
on Q. By the Frattini argument, G = NG(G2)H2. As H2 = G2D G = NG(G2)D, <
NG(G2)CD(G) and hence G = NG(G2) since 'D(G) is the set of nongenerators of G. Thus
G2 a G with IG21 = IH2: D11 = IH2/c(G)IID21 and similarly, we get a normal sub-
group G, of G such that IG11 = IHi/c(G)IID,1. Then (IG,1,1G21) = 1, 1G111G21 = IGI
and so G = G, x G2. Now (a) follows from 1.6.4.
The number of groups with a given subgroup lattice
We finish this chapter with an application of our results on direct products. In 1.2.8
we saw that for every finite cyclic group G there exist infinitely many nonisomorphic
groups that are lattice isomorphic to G. By 1.6.4 and 1.6.5, this still holds for finite
groups G whose subgroup lattice possesses a chain as direct factor; for then G =
Cp x K where p E P, n e R, (p, IKI) = 1, and every group G= Cq., x K with q e P
and (q, I K 1) = 1 is lattice isomorphic to G. However, we can show that these are the
only finite groups with this property.
1.6.10 Theorem (Suzuki [1951a]). Let L be a finite lattice that has no chain as a
direct factor. Then there are only finitely many nonisomorphic groups whose subgroup
lattices are isomorphic to L. More precisely: If 1 is the length and w the width of L (see
Section 1.1), then IGI < w'" for every group G with L(G) ^- L.
Proof. It is clear that the first assertion follows from the second since there are only
finitely many groups of order at most w''". To prove the second assertion, we shall
show that p :!g w for every prime divisor p of IGI. Since a maximal subgroup of a
p-group has index p, the subgroup lattice of a group of order p" contains a chain of
length n. Therefore it will follow that I P 1 < p' < w' for every Sylow p-subgroup P of
G, and since there are at most w primes p < w, we get IGI < (w')w = w''".
So let p be a prime divisor of I G I and let P be a Sylow p-subgroup of G. If P is not
cyclic, then P contains at least p + 1 maximal subgroups and these form an an-
tichain in L(G). If P is not normal in G, then, by Sylow's theorem, the conjugates of
P form an antichain containing at least p + 1 elements. In both cases p < w. So we
may suppose that P is a cyclic normal subgroup of G. By the Schur-Zassenhaus
theorem, P has a complement K in G. If K were normal in G, then 1.6.4 would imply
that L(G) -- L(P) x L(K), which is impossible since L(P) is a chain. Thus K is not
normal in G and the conjugates of K form an antichain with p" (n c N) elements. But
then p < w, as asserted.
Clearly, our bound on IGI is not best possible. It seems worthwhile to look for
better bounds and also to ask how many groups G satisfy L(G) - L for a given
lattice L. Some remarks on the first problem and a characterization of infinite
groups with subgroup lattice of finite width can be found in Brand] [1988].
Exercises
1. Let G = H x K and let U be a subgroup of G. Show that the following properties
are equivalent (the U, are defined as in 1.6.3).
(a) U a G.
(b) [U H] < U n H and [U2, K] < U n K.
(c) Uo a G and U/Uo 5 Z(G/U0).
2. (Rose [1965]) Let G = H x K, H ne K and let D be a diagonal in G with respect
to H and K. Show that [G/D] is isomorphic to the lattice of normal subgroups of
H.
3. Show that for A, E A with A , the groups G,, and G defined in 1.6.5 form a
n-distributive pair in L(G) and use Exercises 1.2.3 and 1.2.4 to give an alternate
proof of Theorem 1.6.5.
4. Let G, be a group having only finitely many nonisomorphic projective images-
call them G1, ..., G,-and suppose that cp is a projectivity from G = G, x x G,
to some group G. If Gr 9 G for all i = 1, ..., r, show that G f-- G.
5. (Brandl [1988]) Let p be a prime, n c N. Show that there are only finitely many
noncyclic finite p-groups whose subgroup lattices have width n.
Chapter 2
Modular lattices and abelian groups
In this chapter we are going to study subgroup lattices of abelian groups. Since these
are modular, we shall more generally investigate groups with modular subgroup
lattices, called M-groups for short. Unlike the groups with distributive subgroup
lattices, these do not form a nice class of groups. However, there are close connec-
tions between M-groups and abelian groups.
In 2.1 we give the basic properties of modular lattices and introduce one of the
most important concepts of this book, the modular elements of a lattice. These will
be used later to study projective images of normal subgroups of groups.
In 1939 Baer determined the projective images of an elementary abelian p-group.
These were called P-groups by Suzuki [1951a], who proved that every projective
image of an arbitrary noncyclic finite p-group either is a p-group or a P-group.
These results are fundamental for the study of projectivities between finite groups;
they are proved in 2.2.
In 1941 and 1943 Iwasawa investigated the locally finite M-groups and those with
elements of infinite order; he showed that they are metabelian and determined their
exact structure. His results are presented in 2.3 and 2.4, together with the theorem
of Schmidt [1986] which characterizes the periodic M-groups and thus completes
the characterization of groups with modular subgroup lattices.
The main results of 2.5 are two theorems of Baer [1944] and Sato [1951]. These
assert, respectively, that every nonhamiltonian locally finite p-group with modular sub-
group lattice, and every M-group with elements of infinite order admit a projectivity
onto a suitable abelian group. In the p-group case, there exists a crossed isomorphism
which even induces an isomorphism between the coset lattices of the two groups.
In 2.6 we prove two important theorems of Baer [1939a] on projectivities be-
tween abelian groups. He showed that every projectivity between two abelian p-
groups is induced by an isomorphism if these groups contain with every element of
order p" at least three independent elements of this order. Also, if G is an abelian
group with two independent elements of infinite order, then every projectivity of G
to an arbitrary group is induced by an isomorphism. Finally, we study projectivities
between abelian groups of torsion-free rank 1.
2.1 Modular lattices

A lattice L is called modular if for all x, y, z e L the modular law holds:
(1) Ifx <z, then xu(ynz) =(xuy)nz.
42 Modular lattices and abelian groups
2.1.1 Remarks. Let L be a lattice and let x, y, z c L.

(a) If x <z, then x <(xuy)nz and ynz <(xuy)nz, so that xu(ynz) <
(x u y) n z holds in any lattice. Thus only the reverse inclusion is required for the
modular law.
(b) Every distributive lattice is modular. For, if L is distributive and x < z, then
xuz = z and hence xu(ynz) = (xuy)n(xuz) = (xuy)nz.
(c) If L is modular, then x u (y n (x u z)) = (x u y) n (x u z) since x < x u z. Con-
versely, if this equation holds in L, then x < z implies x u z = z and hence
x u (y n z) = (x u y) n z. This shows that modularity can be defined by an identity.
Thus sublattices and direct products of modular lattices are modular.
It is easy to see that the only nonmodular lattice with 5 or less elements is the one
called E5 in Section 1.1. This lattice can be used to characterize modularity.
2.1.2 Theorem. The lattice L is modular if and only if it does not contain a sublattice
isomorphic to E5.
Proof. If L is modular, then every sublattice of L is modular and therefore cannot

be isomorphic to E5. Conversely, we have to show that every nonmodular lattice L
contains a sublattice isomorphic to E5. Since L is not modular, there exist x, y, z c L
with x<zand xu(ynz)<(xuy)nz.Let a=ynz,b=xu(ynz),c=(xuy)nz,
d = y, e = x u y and S = {a, b, c, d, a}. Then, clearly, a < b < c < e and a < d < e.
Furthermore
cnd=(xuy)nzny=zny=a
and
bud=xu(ynz)uy=xuy=e;
Figure 8: E5
it follows that b n d = a and c u d = e. Thus S is a sublattice of L and as b < c and

b u (d n c) = b c = (b u d) n c, S is not modular. Since all the other lattices with
at most 5 elements are modular, S E5.
We shall also consider the modular law for single elements of a lattice. Thus we
come to one of the fundamental concepts of this book.
2.1 Modular lattices 43
Modular and permutable subgroups
We say that the element m of the lattice L is modular in L, and write m mod L, if
(2) xu(mnz)=(xum)r zforallx,zELwithx z, and
(3) mu(ynz)=(muy)nzfor ally,zeLwithm<z;
a subgroup M of a group G is called modular in G if M is modular in L(G), we write
M mod G in this case.
Modular elements were introduced by Kurosh in 1940; see also Zassenhaus
[1958], p. 74 where they are called "Dedekind elements". Clearly, a lattice L is
modular if and only if every element of L is modular in L. The following theorem
shows why we use just (2) and (3), two of the three possible variants of the modular
law, for the definition of a modular element.
2.1.3 Theorem (Ore [1937]). Let G be a group.

(a) If NaG,then NH=HN for all H<G.
(b) If M < G such that MH = HM for all H < G, then M mod G.
Proof. If N g G, then Nx = xN for all x E G and (a) holds. To prove (b), first
let X< Z< G. Then, clearly, X u (M n Z) < (X u M) n Z. Furthermore, if
g c- (X u M) n Z, then, since X u M= XM, there exist x e X and m c- M such that
g = xm. Since X < Z, we have m = x-' g E Z and hence g = xm c X u (M n Z).
Thus X u (M n Z) _ (X u M) n Z and (2) holds. Now let Y, Z < G with M < Z.
Then Mu(YnZ)<(MAY)nZandfrom g=mye(MuY)nZand mEM<Z
it follows as above that y c- Z. Therefore g E M u (Y n Z) and (3) holds. Thus M is
modular in G.
Following Stonehewer [1972] we call a subgroup M of G permutable in G, and

write M per G, if MH = HM for all subgroups H of G. These permutable subgroups
had been introduced by Ore [1937] who had called them "quasinormal". Theorem
2.1.3 shows that a normal subgroup is permutable and a permutable subgroup is
modular in G. Thus a normal subgroup is modular in G and the modular laws (2)
and (3) are the main properties of a normal subgroup that are visible in the subgroup
lattice. We shall use this fact later in our study of images of normal subgroups under
projectivities. In this chapter we investigate the connections between commutativity
of the group and modularity of its subgroup lattice. Here Theorem 2.1.3 yields the
following.
2.1.4 Theorem. The lattice of normal subgroups of an arbitrary group and the sub-
group lattice of an abelian group are modular.
Proof. By 2.1.3, every normal subgroup of a group G is modular in L(G) and hence
also in 91(G) since this is a sublattice of L(G). Thus 91(G) is modular. If G is abelian,
then L(G) = 91(G).
Properties of modular elements
We give a useful characterization of modular elements in arbitrary lattices, which

leads to an important property of elements in modular lattices.
2.1.5 Theorem. The following properties of the element m of a lattice L are

equivalent.
(a) m is modular in L.
(b) For every a c- L, the map pa,m: [a/a n m] --+ [a u m/m]; x " x u m is an
isomorphism.
(c) For every ac-L, the map Y'a.m: [a u m/m] -+ [a/a n m]; z H z n a is an
isomorphism.
(d) For every a E L, coa.mll/a m = idiaianmj and Y'a.mcoa.m =
Proof. (a) (d). Let a E L. If x c- [a/a n m], then by (2),
xvm'k^" = (x u m) n a= x u (m n a) = x
and if z E [a u m/m], then by (3),
z0-9- _ (z n a) u m = (m u a) n z = z.
Thus cpa.mqia.m = idlaiatm) and Y'a.m(pa.m = idiajmim].

(d) = (a). Let x, z c- L such that x < z. Then x u (m n z) E [z/z n m] and hence
xu(mnz) = (m n z)) u n z = (xum)nz,

that is, (2) holds. If y, z c- L such that m z, then (m u y) n z E [y u m/m] and hence
(muy)nz = ((muy)nz)'Oy.-wy.- _ (((muy)nz)ny)um = (ynz)um.

Hence (3) also holds and m is modular in L.
To prove the equivalence of (b), (c) and (d), let a e L and write (p, = (P and
4/a.m= 0.
(b) . (d). Let x c- [a/a n m]. Then x < (x u m) n a and hence x u m <
((x u m) n a) u m. The other inclusion is trivial since m and (x u m) n a are contained
in x u m. So we get
x=xuIn =((xum)na)um=((xum)na)".
Since cp is injective, it follows that x = (x u m) n a = x'". Now let z e [a u m/m].
Then (z n a) u m < z and since cp is surjective, there exists b e [a/a n m] such that
z=b"=bum. Thenb<znaandz=bum <(zna)um.Thusz=(zna)um=
zO" and (d) holds.
It is clear that (d) implies both (b) and (c). For, if (d) holds, then cp and I are
bijective and satisfy (c) and (b) of 1.1.2, respectively. So it remains to show that
(c) (d). For x E [a/a n m], again, x < (x u m) n a. Since qi is surjective, there
exists c E [a u m/m] such that x= c o= c n a. Then x u m< c and (x u m) n a<
c n a = x. Thus x = (x um)na = xl*O. Now let zn [a um/m]. Then (z a) urn <z
and hence ((z n a) u m) n a < z n a. The other inclusion is trivial and so we get
that
z0 =zna=((zna)um)na=((zna)um)''.
Since 0 is injective, it follows that z = (z n a) u m = z 0". Thus (d) holds.
Theorem 2.1.5 shows that if m is a modular element of a lattice L, then

(4) [a u m/m] [a/a n m] for every a E L.
But this condition alone does not imply that m is modular in L. This is shown by the
following example. Take a circle K in the euclidean plane, choose two points I and
0 on K dividing the circle into two arcs and for x, y E K, define x < y if and only if
x and y are on the same arc and x is nearer to 0 than y or x = y. Let a, m E K;
then both [a u m/m] and [a/a n m] consist of a single element if a < m, and are
I=aum
0=anm
Figure 9
isomorphic to the real unit interval if a m. So m satisfies (4), but, clearly, m is not
modular in K if 0 V: m v: 1. If L is a finite lattice, it is easy to see that m is modular
in L if it satisfies (4) (see Exercise 2). However, we shall not need this fact since we
shall always use the mappings cpa., and t/ia,, to prove (4).
We collect the main inheritance properties of modular elements.
2.1.6 Theorem. Let L be a lattice, m, n, a c L and suppose that m is modular in L.

(a) m n a is modular in [a/0] = {x E Lix < a}.
(b) m u a is modular in [I/a] = {y E LIa < y}.
(c) If m < n and n is modular in [I/m], then n is modular in L.
(d) If n and m are modular in L, then so is m vn. _
(e) If u is an isomorphism from L to a lattice L, then m is modular in L.
Proof. (a) Let b e [a/0]. If X E [b/b n (m n a)] = [b/b n m], then by (2),
x`b.- = x v (m n a) = (x u m) n a = xa1b.-O..M.
Hence cpb,m,., is the product of (pb,m and the restriction of 'n,m to [b u m/m]. Since
these two maps are isomorphisms, (p6,mnn is also an isomorphism and by 2.1.5, m n a
is modular in [a/0].
(b) Let c e [I/a]. If z c- [c u (m u a)/m u a] = [c u m/m u a], then z
znc= Thus oc,m is the restriction of 'tl m to [cum/m u a] and hence an
isomorphism. By 2.1.5, m u a is modular in [I/a].
(c) Let d e L. Then for z e [d u n/n], we have z k&n= z n d = z n (d u m) n d
z note that the right-hand side is well-defined because m S z n (d u m) <
d u m. Since Iidum,n and the restriction of Od,m to [d u m/(d u m) n n] are isomor-
phisms, Iid,n is also an isomorphism. By 2.1.5, n is modular in L.
(d) By (b), m u n is modular in [I/n] and therefore by (c), m u n is modular in L.
(e) is trivial.
Note that m n n in general is not modular in L if m and n are modular elements in

L. This, for example, is shown by the lattice represented by the Hasse diagram of
Figure 10. But there are also simple examples in subgroup lattices (see Exercise 3).
Figure 10
It is well-known (see Robinson [1982], p. 66) that the class of groups satisfying the
maximal condition (or other chain conditions) is closed with respect to forming
extensions. This is a more general property of intervals in lattices.
2.1.7 Lemma. Let a, b, m be elements of a lattice L such that b < m S a and suppose
that m is modular in L. If [a/m] and [m/b] satisfy the maximal condition, then so does
[alb].
Proof. Let (c;)j, N be an ascending chain in [a/b]. Then (c; u m);,-: N and (c; n m),E N
are ascending chains in [a/m] and [m/b], respectively. Since these two intervals
satisfy the maximal condition, there exists a natural number r such that c, u m =
csumand c,nm=cSnmfor all s _! r. Then c, :!9 c, and by (2),
c,=c,u(mnc,)=c,u(mnc5)=(c,um)nc5=(c,um)nc,=c5
for all s > r. Thus the chain (c1)1 N is also finite.
Semimodular lattices
A lattice L is called upper semimodular if for all x, y e L,

(5) x u y covers x whenever y covers x n y;
and L is called lower semimodular if for all x, y a L,

(6) y covers x n y whenever x u y covers x.
By 2.1.5, a modular lattice satisfies (5) and (6) and is therefore upper and lower
semimodular. The following theorem shows that for subgroup lattices, property (6)
is more important.
2.1.8 Theorem. The lattice of composition subgroups of an arbitrary group and the
subgroup lattice of a finite nilpotent group are lower semimodular.
Proof. Let G be a group and let X, Y be composition subgroups of G such that

X u Y covers X in the lattice R(G) of composition subgroups of G. By 1.1.4, there
exists a composition series from X u Y to X. Clearly, all members of this series
belong to R(G) and since X u Y covers X in R(G), the series must have length 1. So
X a X u Y and X u Y/X is simple. Hence also X n Y g Y and Y/X n Y is simple.
Again by 1.1.4, if H e R(G) such that X n Y< H < Y, then there exists a composi-
tion series from Y to H and it follows that H = X n Y. So Y covers X n Y in R(G)
and R(G) is lower semimodular. In a finite nilpotent group G, every subgroup is
subnormal and hence L(G) = R(G).
The Jordan-Dedekind chain condition
We say that a lattice L satisfies the Jordan-Dedekind chain condition if for every
x, y e L with x < y there exists a finite maximal chain x = xo < < xr = y from x
to y and all maximal chains from x to y have the same length l(x, y).
2.1.9 Theorem. Every upper or lower semimodular lattice L of finite length satisfies
the Jordan-Dedekind chain condition.
Proof. We give a proof in the case that L is lower semimodular; the proof for upper
semimodular lattices is similar. If x, y e L with x < y, then there exists a finite
maximal chain from x to y since L has finite length. We prove by induction on n the
following assertion which then, clearly, will imply the Jordan-Dedekind chain condi-
tion for L.
(*) If x, y a L with x < y and if there exists a maximal chain from x to y of length
n, then every maximal chain from x to y has length n.
This is clear if n = 1, that is if y covers x. So assume that (*) is true for n - 1,
let x = xo < < x = y be a maximal chain of length n and suppose that x =
yo < . . < y, = y is another maximal chain. If yrn_1, then by induction,
n - 1 = m - 1. So assume that yrn_1 and let z = n yrn_1. Then y =
u and z is covered by x,,_1 and yrn_1 since L is lower semimodular. There-
chain, then
x = xo < < xi_1 are maximal chains from x to xn_1. By the induction assump-
tion, n - 1 = k + 1. Thus also x = zo < < zk < y._, is a maximal chain of length
n - 1 and the induction assumption applied to this chain and to x = yo < < yin_1
yields n - 1 = m - 1. Thus n = m and (*) holds.
2.1.10 Theorem. The following properties of a lattice L of finite length are equiva-
lent.
(a) L is modular.
(b) L is upper and lower semimodular.
(c) L satisfies the Jordan-Dedekind chain condition and 1(x, x u y) = !(x n y, y) for
all x, y e L.
Proof. That (a) implies (b) is clear. If (b) holds, then L satisfies the Jordan-Dedekind
chain condition as we have just shown. Let x = xo < < x, = x u y be a maximal
chain. Then
(7)
For every i e {0, ... , n - 11, since xi+1 covers xi, either xi n y = xi+1 n y or
xi u (xi+1 n y) = xi+1 and then xi n y = xi n (xi+1 n y) is covered by xi+1 n y since L
is lower semimodular. Therefore (7) yields a maximal chain from x n y to y of
length at most n; that is, we have 1(x, x u y) > 1(x n y, y). The other inequality fol-
lows similarly from the upper semimodularity of L. Thus (c) holds. Finally, suppose
that L satisfies (c) but is not modular. Then by 2.1.2, there exists a sublattice
{a, b, c, d, e} of L isomorphic to Es. If a < b < c < e and a < d < e, then
l(a, b) = l(d n b, b) = l(d, d u b) = l(d, e);
similarly, l(a, c) = l(d, e). Thus l(a, b) = l(a, c), but this is impossible since b < c. This
contradiction shows that (c) implies (a).
Exercises
1. Show that a modular subgroup of a group G is in general not permutable, and a

permutable subgroup is in general not normal in G.
2. (Schenke [ 1986]) Let L be a lattice and let m e L such that [a u m/m]
[a/a n m] for every a e L. If [I/m] is finite, show that m is modular in L.
3. Let p be an odd prime, H = <a,bIa"2 = b = l,ab = a1+p> the nonabelian group
of order p3 and exponent p2, K = <c> cyclic of order p2 and let G = H x K.
Find two modular subgroups of G whose intersection is not modular in G.
4. Show that a lattice all of whose sublattices are lower semimodular is modular.
Deduce that sublattices of lower semimodular lattices are in general not lower
semimodular.
5. Let L be the direct product of lattices Lx. Show that L is lower semimodular if
and only if every Lx is lower semimodular.
6. Show that for an arbitrary lattice L, no two of the conditions (a)-(c) in Theorem
2.1.10 are equivalent.
2.2 P-groups 49
7. The element m of the lattice L is called semimodular in L if it satisfies (2). Show

that
(a) m is semimodular in L if and only if (p",ml//a,m = id["i"nm, for all a e L;
(b) if m is semimodular in L, then 0m,"(pm," = id[.,,.,.] for all a e L;
(c) if m and n are semimodular in L, then [m u n/n] [n/m n n];
(d) an antiatom of L is semimodular in L if and only if it is modular in L.
8. Let L be a lattice, m, n, a e L, and suppose that m is semimodular in L. Show that
(a) m n a is semimodular in [a/0];
(b) if m is modular in L, m < n and n is semimodular in [I/m], then n is semi-
modular in L;
(c) if m 5 n and n is modular in [I/m], then n in general is not semimodular in L;
(d) if [I/m] is a chain and m < n, then n is semimodular in L.
2.2 P-groups
By 1.6.6, every projective image of a periodic abelian group G is the direct product
of the images of the primary components of G. However, in general these images are
neither abelian nor primary: the nonabelian group of order pq, p and q primes with
q dividing p - 1, and the elementary abelian group of order p2 have isomorphic
subgroup lattices. This is the first of a series of examples that we shall now investi-
gate more closely.
The classes P(n,p)
Let p be a prime and n >- 2 be a cardinal number. We say that a group G belongs to
the class P(n, p) if G is either elementary abelian of order p", or a semidirect product
of an elementary abelian normal subgroup A of order p"-1 by a group of prime order
q # p which induces a nontrivial power automorphism on A. Here, if n is infinite, by
an elementary abelian group of order p" or p"-1 we shall mean a direct product of n
cyclic groups of order p. We call G a P-group if G e P(n, p) for some prime p and
some cardinal number n >- 2.
2.2.1 Remarks. Let G be a nonabelian P-group, so G = A<t> with an elementary

abelian p-group A and an element t of order q that induces a nontrivial power
automorphism on A. By 1.5.6, t is universal on A, that is, there exists an integer r
such that
(1) t-tat=a'for all aeA.
Since t 0 CG(A) and t9 = 1,
(2) r # 1 (mod p) and r9 = 1 (mod p).
Hence q divides p - 1. In particular, the classes P(n, 2) only contain the elementary
abelian groups of order 2". For p > 2, however, to every prime divisor q of p - 1,
there exists an integer r satisfying (2); then the semidirect product G = A<t) of a
nontrivial elementary abelian p-group A by a cyclic group <t> of order q where
t-1 at = a' for all a e A is a nonabelian P-group. Any two such groups with the same
A and q (for different r) are isomorphic, as the reader can easily verify. Thus for
p > 2, the classes P(n, p) contain the elementary abelian group of order p", and, for
every prime divisor q of p - 1, exactly one nonabelian P-group with elements of
order q; if n is finite, the order of this group is p"-' q.
We want to show that these P(n, p) are complete classes of lattice-isomorphic

groups. For this purpose and for later use, we collect some simple properties of
P-groups.
2.2.2 Lemma. Let G be a nonabelian P-group and suppose that p, q and A are as in
2.2.1.
(a) G' = A = CG(a) for all 1 0 a e A.
(b) Z(G) = 1.
(c) The normal subgroups of G are G and the subgroups of A.
(d) Every element x e G\A has order q. Hence the subgroups of order q generate G.
Proof. (a) Since G/A is cyclic, G' < A. If 1 a e A, in the notation of 2.2.1, then
[a, t] = a'-' and <a'-') = <a> since r # 1 (mod p). Hence <a> < G' and a 0 Z(G).
Thus G' = A and C6(a) = A since A is an abelian maximal subgroup of G.
(b) By (a), Z(G) < CG(A) = A and a 0 Z(G) for all 1 rA a E A. Thus Z(G) = 1.
(c) Since A is abelian and t induces a power automorphism on A, every subgroup
of A is normal in G. If N:9 G and N A, then AN = G and GIN A/A n N is
abelian. It follows that A = G' < N and hence N = G.
(d) If x e G\A, then G = A<x) and x e CG(A n <x>). By (a), A n <x> = 1. Hence
<x) - G/A is of order q. Since a group cannot be the set-theoretic union of two
proper subgroups, G is generated by the elements in G\A.
2.2.3 Theorem (Baer [1939a]). For every prime p and every cardinal number n > 2,
all groups in P(n, p) are lattice-isomorphic.
Proof. We show that every nonabelian group G E P(n, p) is lattice-isomorphic to the

elementary abelian group in P(n,p). So let q, r and G = A<t) be as in 2.2.1. Then
G = A x <t), where o(t) = p, is the elementary abelian group in P(n, p). We want to
construct a bijective map from the set L1(G) of cyclic subgroups of G to L1(G) that
induces a projectivity from G to G. If x e G\A, then by 2.2.2, <x> has order q and
therefore contains exactly one element out of each coset of A, in particular out of At.
Hence there exists exactly one element a e A such that <x> = <at>. We define the
map r: L1(G) - L1(G) by <x>' = <x> if x e A, and <x> = <at> if <x> = <at> A.
Since every cyclic subgroup of the elementary abelian group G = A x <1) which is
not contained in A also contains exactly one element of the form at with a E A, we
see that r is bijective. By 1.3.2, we have to show that for all X, Y, Z E L1(G),
(3) X < <Y,Z) if and only if X' S <Y`,Z`).
2.2 P-groups 51
This is clear if Y and Z are contained in A since T is the identity on L,(A). If Y < A
and Z $ A, that is, Y = and Z = <ct> with b, c e A, then <Y, Z> n A = Y since
every subgroup of A is normal in G. Similarly, <Y`, Z=> n A = Y`. Thus, if X < A,
then X < <Y,Z> if and only if X < Y, and this is the case if and only if X'<
Y`, Z`>. For X $ A, that is, X = <at> with a e A, we have X < <Y, Z> if and only
if at e <b, ct> n At = (<b, ct> n A)ct = ct, i.e. a e c; moreover, this is the case
if and only if U` = <al> < x <ci-> = < YT, Z`>. Finally, if neither Y = <bt> nor
Z = <ct> is contained in A, then with W = <bc-' > < A we have <Y, Z> = (W, Z>
and <Y`,Z`> = <bc-',cf> = <W`,Z`>. Thus (3) also holds in this case as we have
just shown.
We now want to show that the classes P(n, p) are closed under projectivities. For
the case n = 2 of this assertion we prove a more general result that will also be used
in the next section.
2.2.4 Lemma. Let G be a finite group and suppose that M and N are two different
minimal subgroups of G which are modular in G. Then I M u NI = pq where p and q are
primes.
Proof. We may assume that G = M u N. If H is a maximal subgroup of G, then H

cannot contain both M and N. So if M H, say, then H n M = 1, H u M = G and,
by 2.1.5,
[H/1] = [H/H n M] [H u M/M] = [N u M/M] [N/N n M] = [N/1].
Hence H is a minimal subgroup of G. If H a G, then I HI = p and I G/HI = q are

primes and I GI = pq. So assume that H is not normal in G. Then H = NG(H) and the
conjugates of H in G together contain I G : HI (I HI - 1) = IGI - I G : HI nontrivial
elements, that is, at least i IGI but less than IGI - 1. Since H is not normal, G is not
cyclic and therefore every element of G is contained in a maximal subgroup of G.
Hence there exists a maximal subgroup K of G that is not conjugate to H. But then
K a G and IGI = pq since otherwise the conjugates of K would contain at least i I GI
further nontrivial elements of G.
2.2.5 Theorem (Baer [1939a]). For every prime p and every cardinal number n - 2,
the class P(n, p) is invariant under projectivities.
Proof. Let cp be a projectivity from G to G and suppose that G E P(n, p). If n = 2,

then the nontrivial proper subgroups of G form an antichain with p + 1 elements. By
2.2.4, 1 GI = qr where q and r are primes with q > r, say. Since the antichain contains
more than 2 elements, G is not cyclic and hence elementary abelian of order q2 (if
q = r) or nonabelian of order qr (if q r). In both cases, G has exactly q + 1 minimal
subgroups. It follows that q = p and G E P(2, p).
Now let n > 3. By 2.2.3, we may assume that G is elementary abelian. So if x and
y are nontrivial elements of G such that <x> <y>, then <x>' and <y>' are cyclic of
order p, and <x, y)`0 = <x)`0 u <y> is elementary abelian of order p2. By the case
n = 2, already settled,
(4) <x, y> E P(2, p).
In particular, if P is the set of p-elements in G, then P 1 and we show that P is an
elementary abelian normal subgroup of G. For 1 x c- P, <x> is cyclic of order p
and hence also o(x) = p. If x, y E P with o(x) = p = o(y) and <x> : <y>, then by (4),
<x, y> E P(2, p). And since a nonabelian group in P(2, p) has only one subgroup of
order p, I <x, y> = p2. Thus xy-' E P and xy = yx. This also holds if <x> = <y> and
hence P is an abelian subgroup of G. Since it is the set of all elements of order p or
1 in G, it is clearly normal and elementary abelian.
Now P and P are lattice-isomorphic elementary abelian p-groups. If P = Dr Px
.ZEA
where I P I = p for all A, then P' = U Px and Px n U P", = (Px n U P ) = l for

AEA
all A. Hence P` = Dr Px and PO P. Therefore if P = G, we are finished. So assume

AEA
that P G. Since G/P does not contain elements of order p, 16/P01 = p by the case
n = 2, which is already settled. Thus P`0 and P are elementary abelian of order p"-'
and I G : PI = q for some prime q. Let t E G with o(t) = q. Then G = P<t>. For
1 x E P, <x, t> E P(2, p) by (4) and therefore <x> g <x, t>. Thus t induces a non-
trivial power automorphism on P and G E P(n, p).
Projective images of locally finite p-groups
By 2.2.3 and 2.2.5, the class P(n, p) is precisely the class of projective images of the
elementary abelian group of order p". So for p > 2, this group has projective images
that are not even primary groups. We show that the elementary abelian groups are
the only finite p-groups with this property.
2.2.6 Theorem (Suzuki [1951a]). Let p be a prime, n a natural number, G a group of
order p", and suppose that cp is a projectivity from G to some group G. If 161 IGI,
then either
(a) G is cyclic and G is cyclic of order q" where q is a prime different from p, or
(b) G is elementary abelian, n >_ 2 and G is a nonabelian P-group of order p"-'q
where q is a prime dividing p - 1.
Proof. We use induction on n. Since IGI IGI, G is not a p-group. If G is cyclic, then
by 1.2.8, (a) holds. In particular our assertion is correct for n = 1 and we may assume
that n > 2 and that G is not cyclic. Then by the Burnside Basis Theorem, G/cD(G)
is elementary abelian of order p' where m >_ 2. Since cb(G)`' = cb(G), cp induces a
projectivity from G/cD(G) to 61(l)(6) and by 2.2.5, G/cb(G) E P(m, p). Hence there
exists a subgroup P of G such that cD(G) < P and I P'/D(G)J = p'-' By the induction
assumption, P'0 is a p-group or lies in P(k, p) for some k; in the latter case by 2.2.2,
D(G) is a p-group as a normal subgroup of P. Hence in both cases P" is a p-group.
Since G is not a p-group, OD(G) is nonabelian of order p"'-' q where q is a prime
dividing p - 1 and P'0 is the Sylow p-subgroup of G.
2.2 P-groups 53
Figure 11
If (D(G) = 1, then (b) holds and we are finished. So suppose for a contradiction that
D6(G) # 1. Let Q < G such that IQ"I = q, take a maximal subgroup R of G containing
Q and put D = P n R. Since P`Q = G, R 0 P and so G/D is elementary abelian of
order p2. Hence there exists a maximal subgroup_S of G such that D < S and R
S : P. Since P4' is the only Sylow p-subgroup of G, R0 and SP are not p-groups; on
the other hand, p divides the order of cD(G) < R'O n S". By induction, R and S are
elementary abelian. This implies that D 5 Z(G) and that P is abelian as a cyclic
extension of the central subgroup D. So for x, y E G, we have [y, x] e G' S D 5 Z(G)
and by (4) of 1.5,
(xy)" = x"y"[y,x](z) = xryr

since D is elementary abelian and p > 2. Therefore the set of elements of order
dividing p is a subgroup of G containing R and S, hence is G. It follows that P is
elementary abelian. Since P' is a p-group, it is also elementary abelian, and, by
Maschke's Theorem, P" is completely reducible under the action of Q'P. Hence there
exists a Q'-invariant subgroup KP of G such that P' = K0 x cD(G). Then K0Q' is a
proper subgroup of G, but every maximal subgroup of G containing KQ0 also
contains KocF(G)Qq' = P'Q' = G. This contradiction shows that D(G) = 1 and (b)
holds.
The corresponding result for locally finite groups is an easy consequence.
2.2.7 Corollary. Let p be a prime and let G be a locally finite p-group. If there exists
a projective image of G that is not a p-group, then G is locally cyclic (that is G - Cp
for some n e f\l u { oo }) or elementary abelian.
Proof. Let cp be a projectivity from G to G where G is not a p-group and suppose

that G is not elementary abelian. Then there exist elements x, y, z c- G such that <x>w
is not a p-group and <y,z> is not elementary abelian. Now if g1, ..., g E G, then
H = <g1,.. . , g,,, x, y, z> is a finite p-group, and since x, y, z e H, we see that I H' :
IHI and H is not elementary abelian. By 2.2.6, H is cyclic and thus G is locally cyclic.
As another consequence of Suzuki's theorem it is possible to describe the projec-

tive closure of the class of finite nilpotent groups, that is, the smallest class of groups
which is invariant under projectivities and contains all finite nilpotent groups (see
Exercise 7). Nilpotent torsion groups will be handled in Section 7.4.
Exercises
1. Show that there is at most one P-group of a given finite order (see Remark 2.2.1).
2. Give an alternate proof of Theorem 2.2.3. With the notation used there show the
following.
(a) Every subgroup H of G that is not contained in A has the form H = A, <at>
where A, = Hr'A <A and ac A.
(b) For A, < A and a; E A, A, <a, t> < A2 <a2 t> if and only if A, < A2 and
a, a2 E A2'
(c) The map cp: L(G) - L(G) defined by H0 = H for H < A and (A, <at>)" _
A, <at > for A, < A and a E A is a projectivity from G to G.
3. Let p be a prime and 2 < n c N. If H and K are nonabelian groups in P(n, p) and
P is a p-group, show that P x H and P x K are lattice-isomorphic.
4. Let G be a finite group such that any two different maximal subgroups of G
intersect trivially. Show that G is cyclic of prime power order or a semidirect
product of an elementary abelian normal subgroup A by a group of prime order
operating irreducibly on A.
5. Give an alternate proof of Theorem 2.2.6 (avoiding Maschke's Theorem). Show
by induction that IG : D(G)l = p2 and JD(G)J = p if D(G) # 1. Then study the
conjugacy classes of subgroups of order p of P`0.
6. Illustrate Theorem 2.2.6 by the following examples. That is, without using 2.2.6,
show that for primes p and q with qlp - 1, the groups G and G are not lattice-
isomorphic if _
(a) G = Cpl x CP and G is the semidirect product of C,,2 by Cq to an automor-
phism of order q of CPz, _
(b) G is nonabelian of order p3 and exponent p, and G = CP x H where H is
nonabelian of order pq, and
(c) G is as in (b), G = <a, b, cI aP = bP = c9 = 1, ab = ba, c-' ac = a', c-' be = b'2
where r is an integer such that r 0- 1 (mod p) and r9 - 1 (mod p).
7. Show that a finite group is lattice-isomorphic to a nilpotent group if and only if
it is a direct product of p-groups and P-groups with relatively prime orders.
2.3 Finite p-groups with modular subgroup lattices

In this section and the one following we wish to determine all groups with modular
subgroup lattices, called M-groups for short. We start with the most difficult part of
this program and describe first the finite p-groups with this property. So, in this
2.3 Finite p-groups with modular subgroup lattices 55
section, p is a prime and every p-group considered is finite. Our aim is to prove the
following result.
2.3.1 Theorem (Iwasawa [1941]). A finite p-group G has modular subgroup lattice if
and only if
(a) G is a direct product of a quaternion group Q8 of order 8 with an elementary
abelian 2-group, or
(b) G contains an abelian normal subgroup A with cyclic factor group G/A; further
there exists an element b c G with G = A and a positive integer s such that
b-'ab=a1+F` for all aEA,with s>_2incase p=2.
The proof of Iwasawa's theorem will occupy nearly the whole section. In 2.3.3 we
shall present a useful criterion for a p-group to have modular subgroup lattice. From
this it will easily follow that the groups in 2.3.1 are M-groups. The converse, how-
ever, is much deeper. We first study p-groups with modular subgroup lattices in
which the quaternion group Q8 is involved, and show in 2.3.8 that they are the
groups in (a) of Theorem 2.3.1. Recall that a group is called hamiltonian if it is
nonabelian and all of its subgroups are normal. By 2.1.4, these groups have modular
subgroup lattices, so the hamiltonian p-groups have to show up in Iwasawa's theo-
rem. We shall see in 2.3.12 that they are also exactly the groups in (a) of Theorem
2.3.1. Therefore it remains to consider p-groups with modular subgroup lattices in
which Q8 is not involved, or which are not hamiltonian. We call these M*-groups
and establish a number of important properties that will also be used in later
sections, the most noteworthy being 2.3.10, 2.3.11, 2.3.14 and 2.3.16. These proper-
ties, of course, can also be proved as soon as one knows that the groups satisfy (b)
of Theorem 2.3.1; however, they are not obvious consequences of Iwasawa's theorem
and we need them in the proof of it. This proof will finally distinguish the two cases
that there exists a cyclic normal subgroup X in the M*-group G such that X J =
Exp G, in which case we get the desired structure for G quite easily (2.3.15), and that
there is no such X, where the computations become a little more involved (2.3.18).
In both cases additional information will be obtained on how to choose the sub-
group A, the element b and the integer s in Iwasawa's theorem. That these are not
uniquely determined by G is shown by the abelian groups, for example. There any
integer s > 2 with ps > Exp G and every subgroup A and element b with G = A 
will satisfy (b) of 2.3.1.
We start with an elementary remark. If H and K are subgroups of a p-group G
such that [H u K/K] [K/H n K], then I H u K: K I= p" = I K: H n K I, where n
is the length of any of the two isomorphic intervals, and hence HK = H U K = KH.
So 2.1.5 and 2.1.3 yield the following result.
2.3.2 Lemma. A finite p-group has modular subgroup lattice if and only if any two of
its subgroups permute.
The groups of order p3 are well-known. The dihedral group and the nonabelian
group of exponent p for p > 2 are generated by two elements of order p and there-
fore, by 2.2.4, cannot be M-groups. In the other groups of order p3 any two elements
of order p commute and every subgroup of order p2 is normal. By 2.3.2, these groups
are M-groups. For an arbitrary p-group, the sections of order p' decide whether it
has modular subgroup lattice or not.
2.3.3 Lemma. Let G be a finite p-group. Then G has modular subgroup lattice if and
only if each of its sections of order p' does. Therefore if G is not an M-group, then
there exist subgroups H, K of G with K g H such that H/K is dihedral of order 8 or
nonabelian of order p' and exponent p for p > 2.
Proof. The second assertion follows from the first as our remarks on groups of order
p3 show. And since sublattices of modular lattices are modular, one part of the first
assertion is trivial. So we have to show that G has modular subgroup lattice if every
section of order p3 does. We choose a minimal counterexample G to this statement.
Then every proper section of G is an M-group. Since G is not an M-group, there
exist subgroups H and K of G with HK KH; choose H and K so that IHI IKI
is minimal. If H, and K1 are maximal subgroups of H and K, respectively, then
H1K1 = K1H1, H1K = KH1 and HK1 = K1H. For X = HK1 and Y = H1K, it
follows that HK = HH1 K 1 K = HK 1 H1 K = X Y and KH = KH1 K 1 H = YX. Thus
X Y 0 YX, and furthermore
IX:X r Yl <_ IHK,:H1K11 = IH:HnH1K1I <IH:H1I = p.
Similarly I Y: X n YI S p and hence X n Y:9 X v Y. Since all proper sections of G

are M-groups, X u Y = G and X n Y = 1. In particular, IXI = I YI = p. If N is a
minimal normal subgroup of G, then, since INI = p and XY YX, we see that
XN/N and YN/N are different subgroups of order p generating the M-group GIN.
By 2.2.4, IG/NI = p2 and hence IGI = p'. But then by assumption, G is an M-group,
a contradiction.
As an easy application of 2.3.3 we get the following criterion.
2.3.4 Lemma. Let G be a finite p-group and let A be an abelian subgroup of G such
that every subgroup of A is normal in G and G/A is cyclic. If p = 2 and Exp A > 4,
assume further that there exist subgroups A2 < A, of A with A, /A2 ^- C4 and
[A,,G] < A2. Then G is an M-group.
Proof. We use induction on IGI. Since G/A is cyclic, there exists b E G with G =
A (b). By 1.5.4, b induces a universal power automorphism on A; that is, there exists
an integer k such that b-1 ab = a' for all a e A. If p = 2 and Exp A > 4, our assump-
tion implies that k =_ 1 (mod 4) and so every element of A with order at most 4 lies
in the centre of G. Thus if H is a proper subgroup of G, every subgroup of A n H is
normal in H, and H/A n H AH/A is cyclic; also, if p = 2 and Exp A n H > 4, there
exist 1 = A2 < Al < A n H such that A 1 C4 and [A1, H] 5 [A G] = 1, By in-
duction, L(H) is modular. So if G were not an M-group, then by 2.3.3 there would
exist a normal subgroup N of G with GIN D8 or GIN nonabelian of order p' and
exponent p for p > 2. Since G/AN is cyclic, we have I G : AN I < p in both cases. But
every subgroup of AN/N is normal in GIN, and this implies that p = 2 and AN/N is
the cyclic subgroup of order 4 in the dihedral group GIN. Hence A/A n N C4 and
by assumption, [A, G] < A n N. It follows that [AN, G] 5 N, a contradiction. Thus
G is an M-group.
It will follow immediately from Lemma 2.3.4 that the groups in Theorem 2.3.1 are
M-groups. We turn to the proof of the more difficult part of this theorem. Recall the
definition, for an arbitrary p-group G and i e N, of the characteristic subgroups
O,(G)=<xEGixP'= 1> and J(G)=<xP'IxEG>;
we put f2(G) = Q1(G). By 1.2.7, Q,(G)0 = fl,(G) and Ui(G)'P = Ji(G) for every
projectivity cp from G to a p-group G.
23.5 Lemma. If G is a finite p-group with modular subgroup lattice, then (1(G) is
elementary abelian and Q,(G) = {x E GIxP' = 1} for all i E N.
Proof. Let P = {x E G i xP = 11. If x and y are nontrivial elements of P with <x>

xy_'
<y>, then by 2.3.2, <x, y> is elementary abelian of order p2 and hence E P and
xy = yx. This clearly also holds if <x> = <y>. Thus P is an abelian subgroup of G,
and therefore ((G) = P is elementary abelian. This is the first assertion of the lemma
and also the case i = 1 of the second. So assume that this second statement is true
for i - 1. Then for x, y e G with xP' = 1 = yP', we have x"'-', y"'-' E ((G), and by
induction applied to G/11(G), we get (xy)P'-' E ((G). It follows that (xy)P' = 1 and
that fQi(G) only contains elements of order at most p'.
We first determine the 2-groups with modular subgroup lattices in which the
quaternion group Q8 is involved. We start with a property of modular 2-groups that
will be needed later.
23.6 Lemma. If G is a finite 2-group with modular subgroup lattice, then (2(G)
normalizes every subgroup of G, that is f22(G) < N(G), the norm of G.
Proof. We use induction on IGI. Let H be a nontrivial subgroup of G and let

Z = <z> be a normal subgroup of order 2 of H. By 2.3.2, if x E f22(G), then
I <x, z> : <x> I S 2 and hence <x>' = <x>. If z did not centralize x, then xZ = x-' and
<x, z> would be a dihedral group of order 8; but this is not an M-group. Therefore
<x,z> is abelian and it follows that Z a Hc22(G). The group H02(G)/Z has smaller
order than G, hence by induction, H/Z is normalized by f22(Hf22(G)/Z) and this
group contains (2(G)Z/Z. Thus (12(G) normalizes H.
23.7 Lemma. If G is a finite M-group of exponent 4, then G is abelian or G = Q x A

where Q - Q8 and A is elementary abelian.
Proof. Suppose that G is not abelian, let x, y e G with xy yx and put Q = <x, y>.
By 2.3.6, every subgroup of G is normal in G. Hence 1 # [x, y] E <x> n <y> and so
I <x, y> I < 8. Since the dihedral group D. is not an M-group, Q - Q8. As a subgroup
of Pot Q, G/CG(Q) has order at most 4. On the other hand QCG(Q)/CG(Q) = Q/Z(Q)
is of order 4. Thus G = QCG(Q). Force CG(Q), we have (xc) = x-'c : xc and since
o(xc) < 4, it follows that x-'c = (xcv = (xc)-' = x-'c-'. Thus c2 = 1 and CG(Q)
is elementary abelian. Then G = Q x A where A is a complement to Z(Q) in
CG(Q)
2.3.8 Theorem. Let G be a finite 2-group with modular subgroup lattice. If the
quaternion group Q8 is involved in G, that is, if there exist K a H < G with
H/K Q8, then G = Q x A where Q ^-' Q8 and A is elementary abelian.
Proof. We use induction on I GI to show that Exp G = 4. Then the theorem will
follow from 2.3.7. So suppose that Exp G > 4 and take u e G with o(u) = 8. Assume
first that there exists a proper subgroup of G in which Q8 is involved. Then by
induction, Q8 is also a subgroup of G and hence of i22(G). By 2.3.7, S22(G) = Q x A
where Q Q8 and A is elementary abelian. Since u2 E S22(G), there exist x e Q
and a c A with o(x) = 4 and u2 = xa. Let Q = <x, y>. Then u4 = x2 = y2, hence
<u4> a <Q, u> and, by 2.3.6 applied to <Q, u>/<u4>, it follows that <y>u = <y>.
Since o(y) = 4, y"2 = y; on the other hand, y" = y" = y-', a contradiction.
We are left with the case that Q8 is not involved in any proper subgroup of G.
Since Q8 is involved in G, there exists N a G with GIN Q8. As Exp G > 4, N :A 1
and we take a minimal normal subgroup Z of G contained in N. By induction, Q8 is
a subgroup of G/Z and, since it cannot be a proper subgroup, G/Z ^- Q8. Thus
Z = N and IGI = 16. Since L(D8) is not modular and Q8 is not a subgroup of G,
every subgroup of order 8 of G is abelian. Since GIN Q8, we see that N < and
<u2> is the intersection of abelian maximal subgroups of G; thus <u2> :!5; Z(G). On
the other hand there exists v e G with GIN = <uN, vN> and u = u-'z for some
z e N, and it follows that (u2)" = u-2. This contradiction shows that Exp G = 4.
M*-groups
We say that a finite p-group G is an M*-group if L(G) is modular and the quaternion
group Q8 is not involved in G. Thus for p > 2, every p-group with modular subgroup
lattice is an M*-group. Furthermore, every subgroup and every factor group of an
M*-group is an M*-group. We want to show that every M*-group satisfies (b) of
Theorem 2.3.1; in view of 2.3.8 this will finish the proof of that theorem. We start
with a useful remark on cyclic permutable subgroups of maximal order in arbitrary
p-groups.
2.3.9 Lemma. If X is a cyclic permutable subgroup of the p-group G such that I X I =

Exp G, then f2(X) < Z(G).
Proof. Let y c- G and Y = <y>. If y E X, then y clearly centralizes f2(X). So assume

that y X and let N be a maximal subgroup of X Y containing X. Then N a X Y,
hence Xy < N and therefore
JX:XnX =IXX':Xyl <jXY:Xyl =JXY:XI=I Y:XnYj.

Since I XI = ExpG, we have I Y: X n YI < I X I and it follows that X n Xy 1. But
then the minimal subgroup of X n X' is S2(X) and also Q(Xy), and we get that
0(X) = Q(Xy) = S2(X)y. Since Q(X) is of order p, it is centralized by y. Thus
S2(X) < Z(G).
2.3.10 Lemma. Let G be an M*-group of exponent p". Then the map u defined by
x = x"-' for x e G is a homomorphism from G to i2(Z(G)).
Proof. That x e S2(Z(G)) for all x e G follows from 2.3.9. So we have to show that
(xy)""-' = x"-'y"-' for all x, y e G, and we do this by induction on n.
The case n = 1 being trivial, assume first that n = 2. Then if p = 2, G is abelian by
2.3.7. For p > 2, we let H = <x, y> and show that H' < Q(H) n Z(H). This is clear if
IHI < p3. And if JHI > p3, then o(x) = o(y) = p2 and thus S2(<x>)Q(<y>) < Z(H) by
2.3.9. Furthermore H/S2(<x>)i2(<y>) is generated by two elements of order p and
hence is abelian. Therefore once again H' < f2(H) n Z(H) and by (4) of 1.5,
(xy)" = x"y"[y, x](2) = x"y".
Finally, let n >_ 3 and assume that the formula is correct for n - 1. By 2.3.5, G/f2(G)
(xy)p-2
is an M*-group of exponent p"-' and it follows that = xp-2ypi-'z where

z e Q(G). Since x""-', yp"-' and z are contained in the M*-group Q2(G) of exponent
p2, the first part of our proof yields that
(xy)p" l (x"" 2y". xp^-'yp-'Zp = xp- 'yp-'.
= 2Z)" =
The last two results suggest studying elements of maximal order in M*-groups. In
abelian p-groups, a fundamental property of such elements is that they generate
direct factors. A similar result holds in M*-groups.
2.3.11 Lemma. Let X be a cyclic subgroup of the M*-group G such that I X j =

Exp G. If H < G with H n X = 1, then there exists a complement C of X in G
containing H, that is, a subgroup C of G such that G = XC, X n C = 1 and H < C.
Proof. We use induction on I G1. If H contains a nontrivial normal subgroup N of G,

then X N/N is cyclic of maximal order in GIN and X N n H = N(X n H) = N. By
induction there exists a subgroup C of G containing N and H such that G = XNC
and XNnC= N.HenceG = XCand XnC <XnXNnC=XnN= l,thatis,
C has the desired properties.
Now let Ho = 1 and suppose first that there exists a normal subgroup Z of G such
that IZI = p and Z n X = 1; let K = HZ. If K n X # 1, then Q(X) < K and hence
Q(X)Z is an elementary abelian subgroup of K of order p2, which, by 2.3.9, is
contained in Z(G). Since I K: HI < p, it would follow that 1 j4 H n O(X)Z < Z(G),
contradicting HG = 1. Thus K n X = 1, and the first part of our proof shows that
there exists a complement to X in G containing K and hence also H.
Finally assume that Q(Z(G)) < X, let p" = ExpG and put L = S2"_1(G). Then
IS2(Z(G)l = p and hence I G: LI = p since L is the kernel of the homomorphism
(g a G) defined in 2.3.10. It follows that G = XL. For h e H, we have
h" e H n Q(Z(G)) = 1 and hence H < L. Since X n L is cyclic of maximal order
pn-1 in L, by induction there exists a subgroup C of L such that L = (X n L)C,
XnLnC= 1 and HSC.Then G=XL=XCand XnC= 1, thatis,Chasthe
desired properties.
Hamiltonian p-groups
2.3.12 Theorem. All the subgroups of a finite p-group G are normal if and only if G
is abelian or G = Q x A where Q ^- Q8 and A is an elementary abelian 2-group.
Proof. If G is such a direct product, then the elements of order 2 in G are contained
in Z(G) and subgroups of exponent 4 contain Z(Q) = G'. Hence every subgroup of
G is normal. Conversely, suppose that G is a hamiltonian p-group. We show by
induction that G has the desired structure. By 2.1.4, G is an M-group. If G were an
M*-group, then for a cyclic subgroup X of maximal order in G, by 2.3.11 there
would exist a subgroup C of G such that G = X x C. Since G is not abelian, C would
be hamiltonian and, by induction, Q8 would be involved in C, a contradiction. Thus
G is not an M*-group and by 2.3.8, G has the desired structure.
The structure of arbitrary hamiltonian groups is well-known (see Robinson

[1982], p. 139), and is described in Exercise 1. Theorems 2.3.8 and 2.3.12 show that
a p-group is an M*-group if and only if it is a nonhamiltonian M-group. So these
two notions are the same and we introduce a third, related one.
Iwasawa triples
The triple (A, b, s) is called an Iwasawa triple for the p-group G if A is an abelian
normal subgroup of G, b e G and s is a positive integer which is at least 2 in case
p = 2 such that G = A and b-lab = a1+p for all a c A. To finish the proof of
Iwasawa's theorem, we have to show that every M*-group possesses an Iwasawa
triple. We start with a sufficient condition for the existence of such a triple.
2.3.13 Lemma. Let A be a subgroup of the M*-group G such that every subgroup of
A is normal in G.
(a) Then A is abelian and G/CG(A) is cyclic.
(b) If Exp A # 4 and B is a cyclic subgroup of G, then there exist a generator b of
B and an integer s such that (A, b, s) is an Iwasawa triple for AB.
Proof. By 2.3.12, A is abelian since QS is not involved in G. Furthermore, the

elements of G induce power automorphisms on A which are universal by 1.5.4. So if
x e A with o(x) = Exp A = p", then CG(A) = CG(<x>) and hence G/CG(A) is isomor-
phic to a subgroup of Aut(x).
If p > 2, Aut (x) is cyclic of order pn-1(p - 1) and for s = 1,... , n, the sub-
group of order p"-' of Aut(x) is generated by the automorphism a with x = xl+'
(see Huppert [1967], p. 84). In particular, (a) holds in this case. Furthermore,
IB/CB((x))l = p"-' for some s e {1,...,n}, and hence there exists b e B such that
B = and xb = xl+P. Since b operates as a universal power automorphism on A
and o(x) = Exp A, it follows that ab = a1+p' for all a e A. Thus (A, b, s) is an Iwasawa
triple for AB.
Now assume that p = 2 and n >_ 3. Then Aut<x) _ (fi) x (y) where xP = x 1
and x1 = x5. Suppose that some element g e G induces an automorphism in (x)
that does not lie in (y). Then every section of order 4 of <x) is inverted by g.
It follows that I(x) n (g)l < 2 and hence <x> n (g) S (x4). By 2.3.6 applied to
G/<x4), <g, x4) is normalized by x and therefore [x,g] a (x) n <x4) (g) = (x4).
Thus (x)/<x4) is centralized by g, a contradiction. This shows that G/CG(A) is
isomorphic to a subgroup of (y), that is, (a) holds. And since the subgroups of (y)
are generated by the automorphisms b such that x" = x1 "' for 2 S s < n, statement
(b) also follows as in the case p > 2.
Finally, if p = 2 and n 5 2, then lAut<x>l < 2. In particular, G/CG(A) is cyclic. If
Exp A # 4, it follows that A < Z(G) and then for every generator b of B, (A, b, 2) is
an Iwasawa triple for AB.
If Exp A = 4 in 2.3.13, A need not be a member of an Iwasawa triple for AB (see

Exercise 4). It is not difficult to determine the structure of AB in this case (see
Exercise 5). However, we shall not need this in our proof of Iwasawa's theorem since
we can use 2.3.6 if Exp A = 4.
2.3.14 Lemma. Let G be an M*-group, X a cyclic subgroup of G with I X I = Exp G

and suppose that H < G such that H n X = 1.
(a) If Hx = H, then every subgroup of H is normal in G.
(b) H/HG is cyclic.
Proof. (a) Let X = <x> and p" = o(x) = Exp G. By 2.3.11 there exists a complement
C to X in G with H S C. Every g e G therefore has the form g = x'y where i e N,
y e C, and it follows that Ha = H'' S C. Thus the normal closure HG of H is con-
tained in C. Therefore, if K 5 H and g e G with <g> n C = 1, then
K = K((g) n HG) = K<g) n HG 9 K<g),
that is, g c NG(K). In particular, x c NG(K). And for y c C, by 2.3.10, (xy)P"-' _

XP"-' yP"-' 0 C. Thus (xy) n C = 1, hence xy a NG(K) and therefore y e NG(K). It
follows that NG(K) >_ XC = G.
(b) Since our assumptions are inherited by G/HG, we may assume that HG = 1.
Then by (a), CH(X) = 1 and hence NH(X) is cyclic by 2.3.13, (a). On the other hand,
every minimal subgroup K of H normalizes X since I X K: X I= I K I= p. Thus H has

only one minimal subgroup and therefore is cyclic since QB is not involved in G..
2.3.15 Theorem. Let G be an M*-group and suppose that X is a cyclic normal sub-
group of G with I X I = Exp G. Then every subgroup of C6(X) is normal in G and
G/CG(X) is cyclic. If G = CG(X)B where B is cyclic, then there exists a generator b of
B and an integer s such that (CG(X), b, s) is an Iwasawa triple for G.
Proof. By 2.3.13, G/CG(X) is cyclic. If C is a complement to X in G, then CG(X) =

XC n CG(X) = X x Co where Co = C n CG(X). Let g e G and X = <x>. Since X 9 G,
there exists an integer r such that xa = x'. For c e Co take y E X with o(y) = o(c).
Then <y, c> = <y> x <c> is abelian and < yc> n X = 1 = <c> n X. By 2.3.14, <yc>
and <c> are normal subgroups of G. Since y c- X a G, also <y> 9 G and by 1.5.4, g
induces a universal power automorphism in <y, c>. Hence ca = c' and it follows that
as = a' for all a e CG(X) = X x Co. Thus every subgroup of CG(X) is normal in G.
By 2.3.13, G has the desired structure except, possibly, when Exp CG(X) = 4. But
then Exp G = o(x) = 4, G is abelian by 2.3.7 and the assertion holds trivially.
Of course, CG(X) is abelian in 2.3.15. In particular, as a useful consequence, we

note the following.
2.3.16 Corollary. If G is an M*-group containing an element z e Z(G) with o(z) _

Exp G, then G is abelian.
Theorem 2.3.15 shows how to find an Iwasawa triple in the M*-group G if there
exists a cyclic subgroup X of maximal order that is normal in G: one can take CG(X)
as the abelian normal subgroup A. If there is no such X, we cannot describe A so
easily. Furthermore, we have to do some unpleasant calculations.
2.3.17 Lemma. Let L = <x, a> be an M*-group, X = <x>, o(a) < o(x) = Exp L and
suppose that ax = a'+psxo where x0 e S2(X) and s is an integer which is at least 2 in
case p = 2.
(a) If X is not normal in L, then R+1(X) 5 Z(L) and there exists x1 E Sts+1(X) such
that d" = d'+e` and L = <x,d> where d = ax1.
(b) Suppose that there exists u e L such that L = X , X n = 1 and
 9 L. Then Sts+,(X) 5 Z(L), u e <a>Q5+1(X) and ux = u'+e.
Proof. (a) First note that by 2.3.9, xo E Z(L) and therefore ax' = for all
i e N. Indeed, this is clear by assumption if i = 1; and if it is true for some i e N, then
axi+i = (ax)cl+papx0 = all+p"1,+ix0i+1
Let o(x) = p". Since X is not normal in L, ae' o X and hence ps < o(a) < p", that
' =
is, s < n - 1. It follows that (1 + p'')e"-'-' 1 (modp"-') and therefore ax" '
,-lxo"
a('+e`) ' ' = a. Thus Sts+1(X) = <xe"-'_'> 5 Z(L). Finally, x0 = xè"-' for
some i e NJ and we put x, = x'P"-'-'. Then for d = ax,, we clearly have L = (x, a> _
(x, d > and
d' = (ax'D^
')x = al+P.xfP. x"'"-.-'
= (axl)l+t
= dl+p
(b) By (a), I,+1(X) < Z(L) if X is not normal in L; and if X a L, then L =

X x is even abelian. Since L/(u) X is cyclic, [a,x] = aP'xo e and hence
aP'+` _ (aP'xo )P a <a> n . Therefore I <a, u> : I = I <a>: (a> n I << ps+l and
so <a, u> < C,+, (X). Let u, a (u> and x, a 52,+, (X) such that a = ul x- j'. Then
L = X<ul> and therefore = <u1> < <a>i2,+,(X). Finally,
u; = (axl)x - al+P'xl - al+P'xl+P' = (axl)1+p' = ui+P' (modi)(X))
and hence ui+P'(ui)-1 a Q(X)r (u> = 1. It follows that ui = u;+P' and then also
ux = u1+P=
2.3.18 Theorem. Let G be an M*-group in which no cyclic subgroup of maximal order

is normal. Then there exist a subgroup A of G and an integer s with the property that
for every cyclic subgroup B of maximal order in G,
(a) there is a generator b of B such that (A, b, s) is an Iwasawa triple for G, and
(b) A contains every subgroup H of G that is normalized by B and intersects B
trivially.
Proof. We proceed by induction on IGL. Let X be a cyclic subgroup of maximal

order in G and let I X I = Exp G = p". By 2.3.9, Q(X) a G and hence by induction or
2.3.15 (in the case where there exists a cyclic subgroup of maximal order in G10 (X)
that is normal), there exists a subgroup S/i2(X) of G/i2(X) that is a member of an
Iwasawa triple for G/S2(X). In particular,
(1) S/i2(X) is abelian
and G/S is cyclic; let t e G with G = S(t>. If G : SX, then SX = S(SX n <t>) <
S<t"> and hence at'P generates X for some a e S and i e N. By 2.3.10, (at'P)P"-` _
aP"-`t'P" = aP"-' and hence CI(X) < (a> < S and o(a) = p". But then (a> would be a
cyclic subgroup of maximal order, normal in G, a contradiction. Thus
(2) G = SX.
Since X is not normal in G, 2.3.6 shows that Exp(S/S2(X)) 4. By 2.3.13 there exist
a generator x of X and an integer s which is at least 2 in case p = 2 such that for all
a e S,
(3) ax = al+P'xa where xa e S2(X).
We want to show next that
(4) Exp S < p" = o(x).
In order to obtain a contradiction suppose that there exists an element a e S with
o(a) = p". Since subgroups Y satisfying fl(X) < Y< S are normal in G, we see that
52(X) $ <a> and hence X n <a> = 1. Let H = <X, a>. Then
(a'x") = (a )Px = "

xa)"j'
a centralizes aP'xa, it follows that <aP'xa) 9 H. Now arxa = [a,x] implies

that H/<aPxa) is abelian and H' = <a"'xa) is cyclic. It follows that H' o X = 1 or
H' r) <a> = 1. By 2.3.11 there exists a complement C to X or <a) in H containing
H'. By 2.3.14, this complement is normal in G and, by 2.1.5, its subgroup lattice is
isomorphic to [H/X] L(<a)) or to [H/<a)] L(X). Hence C is a cyclic normal
subgroup of order p" and this contradicts our assumption. Thus (4) holds.
We are now going to construct a subgroup A of G that together with the integer
s in (3) satisfies (a) and (b) for B = X; it will then be easy to show that A and s also
have these properties for arbitrary B. Let M be a complement to X in G. If g e G,
then, by (2), there exist a E S and i E N such that g = ax'. Then (3) and (4) show that
L = <x, g) = <x, a) satisfies the assumptions of 2.3.17. Since X is not normal in G,
M is generated by the elements outside NM(X). By 2.3.14, M/Mc is cyclic and hence
there exists an element c E M\NM(X) with M = MG <c). By 2.3.17, c e Cc(523+1 (X))
and there exist x, a 0,+, (X) and a, e S such that for d = a, x, , d" = d' +P' and
<x, c) = <x, d ). Let
(5) A=<d,HI HSG,HnX=1,H"=H).
Then AX Mc <d) X = Mc <c) X = MX and hence
(6) AX = G.
We show that any two of the generators of A given in (5) commute and that they are
all mapped by x to their (1 + ps}th power. Then it will be clear that A is abelian and
(7) (A, x, s) is an Iwasawa triple for G.
So let u e H < G where H n X = 1 and H" = H. By 2.3.14, 9 G and by 2.3.17,
u e Cc(525+1(X)), u = a2 x2 for some a2 e S and x2 e 52,+, (X) and ux = u'+". In par-
ticular, f +, (X) is centralized by MG, c and X and hence lies in the centre of G. Since
S/52(X) is abelian, it follows that
[d, u] = [a,xi, a2x2] = [a,, a2] a Q(X) n <u) = 1.
If v e K 5 G where K n X = 1 and K" = K, then similarly v = a3x3 with a3 a S,

x3 a 525+, (X) and [u, v] = [a2i a3] E 52(X) n <u) = 1. Thus A is abelian and (7)
holds.
Finally, suppose that B is an arbitrary cyclic subgroup of maximal order in G. By
(7), B = <az) where a E A and z E X, and, since there are no cyclic normal subgroups
of order p" in G, o(a) < p". By 2.3.10, (az)P"-' = aP"-'zP"-' = zP"-' and this implies
that o(z) = p" and 52(B) = 52(X). Thus <x) = <z> < AB and G = AB. Similarly, if
a E A and b E B such that x = ab, then b is a generator of B and since it induces the
same automorphism on A as x does, (A, b, s) is an Iwasawa triple for G. Thus (a) holds.
And if H is a subgroup of G with H n B = 1 and B 5 NG(H), then H a G by 2.3.14
and H n X = 1 since 52(X) = 52(B). By (5), H < A and hence (b) too is satisfied.
Iwasawa's theorem can now be proved; in fact, we only have to quote the results
of this section.
Proof of Theorem 2.3.1. If G satisfies (a) of 2.3.1, then G is hamiltonian by 2.3.12, and
if (b) holds, then 2.3.4 shows that G is an M-group. Conversely, let G be a p-group
with modular subgroup lattice. If the quaternion group Qs is involved in G, then
2.3.8 yields that G satisfies (a) of 2.3.1. And if G is an M*-group, then by 2.3.15 and
2.3.18 there exists an Iwasawa triple for G, that is, (b) holds.
A word of warning
There are a number of mistakes in the literature on Iwasawa's theorem. It starts with
Iwasawa [1941], p. 197 where in the proof of his theorem he chooses a certain basis
of an abelian group which, in general, does not exist. This gap in the argument is
reproduced in Suzuki [1956], p. 16; it was closed in a paper by Napolitani [1967a].
Our method of proof is different. Another mistake that is found, for example, in the
papers by Jones [1945], p. 549 and Sato [1951], p. 220 is the claim that an M*-
group always has an Iwasawa triple (A, b, s) with A n = 1. However, simple
examples show that this is not so.
23.19 Example. Let p > 2 and G = <a,xIaP' = 1,X"' = a"2,ax = a"">. Since a"2
is centralized by the automorphism u of <a> with a = al+", G is an extension of <a>
by a cyclic group of order p3. By Iwasawa's theorem, G is an M*-group of order p6
and has exponent p4 by 2.3.5. Let <x> = X and suppose that Y is a cyclic subgroup
of order p4 of G. Then I X: X n Yj _ I X Y : YI < p2 and hence X n <a> = i2(X) <
X n Y. This implies that G' = <a"> Y and since IG: Yl = p2, Y cannot be normal
in G. Now suppose that G = AB where B is cyclic and every subgroup of A is normal
in G. Then Exp A < p4 and hence I BI = p4. It follows that Q (X) < B; but as G/A is
cyclic also i2(X) < G' < A. Thus A n B :A 1.
Finally, we mention that in general there are many different Iwasawa triples in
a given M*-group. Some examples and results in this direction can be found in
Exercises 7-9.
Characteristic subgroups in M*-groups
There are a number of interesting results on the existence of certain characteristic

subgroups in M*-groups. The following is due to Menegazzo.
23.20 Theorem (Busetto and Menegazzo [1985]). Let G be an M*-group of expo-

nent p". If G/S2n_1(G) is not cyclic, then there exists an abelian characteristic subgroup
A of G such that G/A is cyclic and [G, Aut G] < A.
Proof. We choose an Iwasawa triple (A, b, s) for G such that A has maximal order.
Since G/A is cyclic and G/i2"_1(G) is not, A 4 i2"_,(G) and hence there exists an
element a e A of order p". For every such a, <a> 9 G and A < CG(a). By 2.3.15, CG(a)
belongs to an Iwasawa triple for G and our choice of A implies that
(8) A = CG(a) for all a e A with o(a) = p".
We want to show that
(9) A = <X I X < G, X cyclic, X J = p" ).
Since A is generated by its elements of order p", it is certainly contained in the join of
all cyclic normal subgroups of order p" of G. Conversely, suppose that X is a cyclic
normal subgroup of order p" of G. If there exists an element a c- A of order p" with
<a> n X = 1, then X < CG(a) = A and we are done. So assume that there is no such
a. Then t5"_,(A) < X is cyclic and hence t5"_,(A) = Q(X). By 2.3.10, t5"_,(G) =
t5"_,(A)<bP"-') is isomorphic to G/S2n_1(G) and therefore is not cyclic. It follows
that o(b) = p" and n U,,-, (A) = 1. Let X = (x> and take c e A, i e 101 with x =
b'c. Since
1 -A xP"-' = b'P"'cP"' EQ(X) = t5n_1(A),
b'P"-' = 1 and cP"-' 1. Thus o(c) = p" and S2(<c>) = t5"_,(A). Since X a G,
[x, b] = [b'c, b] = [c, b] = cP' E X
and since x and c have the same order, <cP'> = <x"> = <b'P'c'> for some k e N.
Hence b'P' E n <c> = n U ,,-,(A) = 1 and so b' c- f2S(). Since ab = a' 'P'
for all a e A and ExpA = p" = o(b), it follows that f2S() < CG(A) = A. Thus x =
b'c e A and (9) holds.
In particular, A is a characteristic subgroup of G. Hence for a E Aut G and a E A
with o(a) = p", aTM e A and
(aTM)b' = (ab)a = (a'+P`)a = (aTM)'+p = (aa)b
Thus b-1bTM E CG(aTM) = A by (8). It follows that G/A is centralized by a and hence
that [G, Aut G] < A.
We mention an obvious consequence of Menegazzo's theorem that will be used

later.
2.3.21 Corollary. Let N be an M*-group of exponent p" such that N/i2"_1(N) is not
cyclic. If N is contained as a normal subgroup with cyclic factor group in a group G,
then G is metabelian.
Proof. By 2.3.20 there exists an abelian characteristic subgroup A of N such that

N/A is cyclic and [N, Aut N] < A. Then A a G and N/A is a central subgroup of
G/A with cyclic factor group. It follows that G/A is abelian.
Another immediate application of Menegazzo's theorem is an older result of v.d.

Waall's.
2.3.22 Theorem (v.d. Waall [1973]). Every nonabelian M*-group has a characteristic
maximal subgroup.
Proof. Let G be a nonabelian M*-group of exponent p". If G/Qn_1(G) is cyclic, then

fen_1(G) is a characteristic maximal subgroup of G. If G/fQn-1 (G) is not cyclic, then by
2.3.20 there exists an abelian characteristic subgroup A of G with cyclic factor group.
Since G is not abelian, A G and the maximal subgroup of G containing A is
characteristic in G.
2.3.23 Theorem (Seitz and Wright [1969]). Let G be a nonabelian M*-group. Then
there exist (characteristic) subgroups R and S of G such that c(G) < S < R and
[R, Aut G] < S.
Proof. We proceed by induction on I G 1. Suppose first that there exists a nontrivial
characteristic subgroup K of G such that G' K. Then G/K is a nonabelian
M*-group and by induction there are subgroups R/K and S/K of G/K such that
(D(G/K) < S/K < R/K and [R/K, Aut(G/K)] < S/K. Hence '(G) 5 S < R and since
every automorphism of G induces an automorphism in G/K, it follows that
[R, Aut G] < S. So we are done in this case and therefore may assume that
(10) G' is the only minimal characteristic subgroup of G.
Let ExpG = p". If G/Q _1(G) is not cyclic, then by 2.3.20 there exists an abelian
characteristic subgroup of G such that [G, Aut G] < A. Then R = G and a maximal
subgroup S of G containing A have all the desired properties. So let G/f2n_1(G) be
cyclic, that is, IG : fl _1(G)I = p. By 2.3.10, Jun-,(G)I = p and since G' is the only
minimal characteristic subgroup of G, it follows that
(11) G' = Y,,_1(G) is of order p.
Let a e G with o(a) = p". Then G' = J _1(G) = <aP"-'> < <a> and hence <a> a G.
By 2.3.15 there is an Iwasawa triple (A, b, s) for G in which A = CG(a). Since I G' j = p,
[a, bP] = [a, b]P = 1 and hence bP e CG(a) = A. This implies that IG : A = p and
s = n - 1. It follows that Qn_1(A) < Z(G). Since IA : Q.-1(A)I = jZ5 _1(A)I = P,
(12) IG:f2n-1(A)I = p2 and Q .-,(A) = Z(G)
So if we choose R = Qn_1(G) and S = Q.-, (A) = Z(G), then R and S are characteris-
tic subgroups of G such that 1(G) < S < R. Since G = AR, there exist c e A and
d e R such that b = cd. Then (A, d, s) is an Iwasawa triple for G. It follows that
d Z(G) = S and hence R = S<d>. For g e G, there exist a1 e A, i e IOI such that
g = dà1 and since d e Q. -I (G),
= d`P"-'al"-I = g13"
[g,d] = [d'al,d] _ [a1,d] = af"
Hence if a e Aut G, then [a, da] _ [aa-', d]a = ((a')"') a = aP"-' _ [a, d] and there-
fore dad-1 e CG(a) = A. Since d e R = Ra, we have dad-1 e A n R = S, that is, Aut G
centralizes R/S.
Power automorphisms of M*-groups
By 1.5.4, every power automorphism of a finite abelian group is universal. On the

other hand, the quaternion group of order 8 has nonuniversal power automor-
phisms of order 2. So it is interesting to note that M*-groups may also possess
nonuniversal power automorphisms of order p (see Exercise 11), but only if p = 2.
2.3.24 Theorem (Napolitani [1971]). Let a be a power automorphism of order p

of the M*-group G and assume that or fixes an element of order 4 in G if p = 2 and
Exp G >_ 4. Then a is universal.
Proof. We use induction on I GI. Let Exp G = p" and put H = L2.-, (G). If p = 2 and
Exp H > 4, then H contains every element of order 4 of G. Thus either aIH is the
identity or it satisfies the assumptions of the theorem. By induction, of is universal on
H. Let x e G with o(x) = p". Then a induces an automorphism of order 1 or p in
<x> and therefore x' = x1+rp"-' where 1 < r < p. We have to show that a induces
the same power in every cyclic subgroup Y = (y> of G. If I Yl < p", then xp and y
are contained in S2n_1(G) and, since a is universal on S2"_1(G), y" = y1+'p"-' = y
So let I Yl = p". If (x> n Y:11- 1, we may choose the generator y of Y such that
yp"-' = (xP"-')-1. By 2.3.10, (xy)p"-' = xp"-'yp"-' = 1 and therefore, as we have just
shown, xy = (xy)' = x'y" = xl+rp"-'ya Thus y' = (xp"-')-'y = y1+rp"-' Finally, if
<x> n Y = 1, then (xy)p"-' 1 and therefore (xy)2 = (xy)1+t1 ' and y = y1+,p"-'
where 1 < s, t < p. Using 2.3.10 and (1) of 1.5, we get

,= , ,
xrp"-' ysp" ' = [x, a] [y, a] = [xy, a] = (xy)tp" xtp" ytp"
and hence r = t = s. Thus y- = y' +'P'- 1.
Exercises
1. Show that a group is hamiltonian if and only if it is the direct product of a

quaternion group of order 8, an elementary abelian 2-group and an abelian
group with all its elements of odd order.
2. If G is an M*-group, show that U.(G) = {xp'"Ix e G} for every m e N.
3. Let G be an M*-group with I G' J = p. Show that there exist elements a, b e G, an
integer m and an abelian subgroup H of G such that G = (a, b> x H, o(a) _
p'"> ExpHanda'=a'+p'"-'.
4. Let G = (u,vlu8 = v2 = 1, u" = u5> and A = (uzv>. Show that A 9 G, G/A is
cyclic, but A is not a member of an Iwasawa triple for G.
5. Let A be a subgroup of the M*-group G such that every subgroup of A is
normal in G and suppose that B is a cyclic subgroup of G. If the assertion of
2.3.13 (b) does not hold in AB, show that there exist an element x of order 4, an
elementary abelian 2-group E, and an integer t such that A = <x> x E and
(EB, x, t) is an Iwasawa triple for AB.
2.4 Groups with modular subgroup lattices 69
1, UV = Vu, Xp2 = V-P, ux = ul+P'^-1, v" = V1+P--1 >

<u,v,xluP'" = vP"' =
6. Let G =
where m > 4. Determine a complement to <x> in G.
7. Let G be an M*-group with nilpotency class c(G) > 3 and suppose that (A, b, s)
and (A 1, 61, s1) are Iwasawa triples for G.
(a) Show that Exp A = Exp A 1 and hence s = s1.
(b) Show that I A I = I A, I if A and A 1 are maximal among the subgroups that
belong to Iwasawa triples for G.
8. Let n >- 5 and G = <u, vl up" = vP" = 1, u' = u1+p2>. Show that there are
Iwasawa triples (A, b, s) and (A 1, 61, s1) for G with A 1 < A; note that c(G) _
n-2>3.
9. Let G = <u, vlup` = vp = 1, u" = u1+P'>. Show that (, v, 3) and (<upv>, u-1, 2)
are Iwasawa triples for G. Deduce that in general (a) and (b) of Exercise 7 do not
hold if c(G) = 2.
10. Construct a nonabelian M*-group G with [G, Aut G] = G. (Hence, in general,
one cannot have R = G in Theorem 2.3.23.)
11. Let n > 3 and G = <a,bla2" = b2" = 1, ab = al+zn-1>. Show that there exists a
power automorphism of order 2 of G that is not universal.
2.4 Groups with modular subgroup lattices

We continue our study of groups with modular subgroup lattices. We shall describe
these groups completely modulo the so-called Tarski groups. First we introduce a
class of groups similar to the P-groups studied in Section 2.2.
P*-groups
We say that G is a P*-group if G is the semidirect product of an elementary abelian

normal subgroup A by a cyclic group <t> of prime power order such that t induces
a power automorphism of prime order on A. As for nonabelian P-groups, this power
automorphism is universal so that there exist primes p, q and integers m, r such that
A is a p-group, o(t) = q' and t-1 at = a' for all a e A. Since t induces an automor-
phism of order q in A, r it 1 (mod p) and r9 - 1 (mod p) so that q I p - 1.
2.4.1 Lemma. Let G = A<t> be a P*-group and let o(t) = q'". Then Z(G) = <t9> _
D(G), G/Z(G) is a nonabelian P-group and L(G) is modular.
Proof. It is clear that t9 e Z(G) and G/< t9> is a nonabelian P-group. Thus D(G) <
<ta> < Z(G). By 2.2.2, Z(G/<t9>) = 1 and hence <t9> = Z(G). Furthermore, for
x e G\(A x <ta>), x<t9> is of order q in G/<t9> and hence <x, t9) G/A <t>. It
follows that o(x) = q' and t9 E,<x>. Therefore, if H is a subgroup of G, then either
H :!g A x <t"> or <t9> < H. In the first case, H a G. In the second, H is modular in
[G/< t9>] since this lattice is isomorphic to the subgroup lattice of an abelian group.
It follows from 2.1.6(c) that H is modular in G. Thus every subgroup of G is modular
in G, that is L(G) is modular. Finally, if M is a maximal subgroup of G, then

<to><Mn<t>by 2.1.5and so <t">=D(G).
Conversely, for finite groups, we have the following result.
2.4.2 Lemma. If G is a finite M-group such that G/D(G) is a nonabelian P-group,

then G is a P*-group.
Proof. Suppose that I G/'D(G)I = p"q where p and q are primes with p > q, let A/D(G)
be the Sylow p-subgroup of G/D(G) and P a Sylow p-subgroup of G. Since A 9 G
and I G : Al = q, we have P< A and hence A = PD(G). By the Frattini argument,
G = NG(P)A = NG(P)PD(G) = NG(P)CD(G)
Since 'D(G) is the set of nongenerators of G, it follows that G = NG(P), that is, P 9 G.
If Q is a Sylow q-subgroup of G, then G = AQ = cD(G)PQ and hence G = PQ as
before. Since G/(D(G), and therefore also G, has only one subgroup of index q, Q is
cyclic; let Q = <t). As G/D(G) is not nilpotent, t operates nontrivially on P. But
I G/D(G)I = p"q implies that Q n D(G) = <t"> is the Sylow q-subgroup of D(G).
Hence <t9) 9 G and P is centralized by t". Finally, for H < P,
H=Hu(QnP)=(HuQ)nPaHuQ
since P 9 G. It follows that t induces a power automorphism of order q on P.
It remains to be shown that P is elementary abelian. Since <t9> a G, it fol-
lows that <t9) = Q n Q, for every Sylow q-subgroup Q, Q of G. By 2.2.4,
I Q/<t 9) u Q, /<t9) I = pq and therefore IQ u Q, I = p I Q I. This implies that
Q u Q, < O.(P)Q. By 2.2.2, G is generated by its Sylow q-subgroups and hence
G = f)(P)Q. It follows that P = 0(P) and by 2.3.5, P is elementary abelian.
Finite M-groups
2.4.3 Lemma. If G is a finite M-group with D(G) = 1, then G is a direct product of

P-groups with relatively prime orders.
Proof. We use induction on IGI. If H :!g G and M is a maximal subgroup of G, then

by 2.1.5, [H u M/M] [H/H n M] and hence H n M is H or a maximal subgroup
of H. In both cases, b(H) < M. It follows that cb(H) < D(G) = 1. In particular,
(1) every Sylow subgroup of G is elementary abelian
and every subgroup of G satisfies the assumptions of the lemma.
Let R and T be subgroups of prime order in G. Then by 2.2.4, IR U TI is the
product of two primes. Therefore if I R I > I TI, then I R u TI = I R I I TI and R a R u T.
So we have that
(2) T < NG(R) if I R I > I TI are primes.
Denote by p the maximal prime dividing IGI and let S be a Sylow p-subgroup of G.
By (1) and (2), every subgroup of S is normal in G. If S < Z(G), then the Schur-
Zassenhaus theorem yields that G = S x C where C is a complement to S in G. By
induction, C is a direct product of P-groups with relatively prime orders; hence
G = S x C also has this structure. So we may assume that S is not central in G.
Then by (1) there exists a subgroup Q of prime order q in G that does not centralize
S. Thus
(3) SQ is a nonabelian P-group
and we want to show that Q is a Sylow q-subgroup of G. Suppose that this is not the
case and let T be a subgroup of order q2 of G containing Q. Let P < S with I P I = p
and put H = P u T. By (2), P:9 H and hence IHI = pq2 and H/P T. Since P is not
central in H, at most one of the q + 1 subgroups of order pq containing P may be
cyclic. Hence H contains two different nonabelian subgroups U and V of order
pq. Let Q1, Q2 < U and Q3 < V be subgroups of order q such that Q, : Q2. If
I Q 1 U Q3I = pq, then U = PQ1 = Q, U Q3 = PQ3 = V, a contradiction. By 2.2.4,
IQ1 U Q3I = q2 and similarly IQ2 U Q3I = q2. It follows that Q3 is centralized by
Q1 U Q2 U Q3 = U U Q3 = H; but V = PQ3 is not abelian. This contradiction shows
that Q is a Sylow q-subgroup of G and that
(4) SQ is a Hall subgroup of G.
It remains to be shown that if r is a prime such that p # r q, then
(5) SQ is centralized by every subgroup R of G with I R I = r.
Indeed (1) implies that SQ g G, and the Schur-Zassenhaus theorem yields the exis-
tence of a complement K to SQ in G and again by (5) and (1), G = SQ x K. By
induction, K has the desired structure and therefore so does G.
If r < q in (5), then by (2), R normalizes every subgroup of SQ. Since Z(SQ) = 1,
Cooper's theorem (or 1.4.3) shows that R centralizes SQ. If p > r > q and again
P < S is of order p, then R is normalized by every subgroup of order q of PQ. Hence
PQ < NG(R) and so P and R are normal subgroups of L = PQR. Thus ILI = pqr and
PR = P x R. Suppose that Q does not centralize R. Then NL(Q) = Q and L contains
IL : QI = pr Sylow q-subgroups. For every Sylow q-subgroup Q1 : Q of L, by 2.2.4,
Q u Q1 is a subgroup of order pq or rq of L and hence is PQ or RQ. But these two
groups contain only p + r - 1 Sylow q-subgroups. This contradiction shows that
L = PQ x R and that (5) also holds in this case.
2.4.4 Theorem (Iwasawa [1941]). A finite group has modular subgroup lattice if and
only if it is a direct product of P*-groups and modular p-groups with relatively prime
orders.
Proof. Since a direct product of modular lattices is modular, 1.6.4 and 2.4.1 yield
that L(G) is modular if G is a direct product of P*-groups and modular p-groups
with relatively prime orders. Conversely, we show by induction on I G I that every
finite M-group G is such a direct product. If L(G) is directly decomposable, then by
1.6.5 there exist nontrivial subgroups H and K of G such that G = H x K and
(I H I, I
K I) = 1. By induction, H and K have the desired structure and then so does G.
So suppose that L(G) is directly indecomposable. Then by 1.6.9, L(G/(D(G)) is also
directly indecomposable and 1.6.4 and 2.4.3 yield that G/(D(G) is a P-group. If this
P-group is nonabelian, then G is a P*-group by 2.4.2. And if G/cb(G) is an elementary
abelian p-group, then G is a p-group since every prime divisor of IGI also divides
IG/c1(G)I. In any case, G has the desired structure.
Theorems 2.4.4 and 2.3.1 give the precise structure of finite M-groups. As an
immediate consequence we note the following.
2.4.5 Theorem. Every finite group with modular subgroup lattice is metabelian.
We shall need some simple properties of elements of prime power order in finite
M-groups. They can easily be proved directly but also follow immediately from
Iwasawa's theorem.
2.4.6 Lemma. Let G be a finite M-group and x, y e G. If x is a p-element and y a

q-element where p and q are primes with p > q, then <x> = (x).
Proof. By 2.4.4, G is a direct product of groups G1, ..., G, with relatively prime
orders such that every G. is either a P*-group or an M-group of prime power order.
If x and y are contained in different components of this decomposition, then xy = yx
and hence <x> = <x>. So suppose that x, y e G; for some i. Then G. is a P*-group
and hence <x> G; since p is the larger prime dividing IG,I.
2.4.7 Lemma. Let p be a prime, G a finite M-group and suppose that x, y e G are
p-elements.
(a) If o(x) # o(y), then <x, y> is a p-group.
(b) If o(x) > o(y) and o(x) > p2, then i2(<x>) g (x,y>.
Proof. Let G = Gl x x G, as in the proof of 2.4.6. Since the orders of the G. are
relatively prime, x and y have to lie in the same component G.
(a) If G, is a p-group or a P*-group and p the larger prime dividing I G; I, then
<x, y> is clearly a p-group. So suppose that G, is a P*-group and p the smaller prime
dividing IG,I. Then by 2.4.1, the maximal subgroups of the Sylow p-subgroups are
central in G,. Since o(x) o(y), therefore x or y is contained in Z(G,). It follows that
<x, y> is a p-group.
(b) If G, is a P*-group, then p is the smaller prime dividing 1G,1 since o(x) > p2.
Again <xv> 5 Z(G,) and hence fZ(<x>) 9 <x,y>. And if G, is a p-group, then 2.3.5
implies that Exp<x,y> = o(x) and 2.3.9 yields that f1(<x>) a <x, y>.
M-groups with elements of infinite order
The structure of M-groups with elements of infinite order is well-known. We first

show that the torsion subgroup of such a group and its factor group are abelian.
2.4.8 Lemma. Let G be an M-group. Then the set T(G) of all elements of finite order
in G is a characteristic subgroup of G. If G contains an element of infinite order, then
T(G) is abelian and every subgroup of T(G) is normal in G.
Proof. For a, b e T(G), 2.1.5 yields that
[<ab>/<ab> n <a>] ^' [<ab> u <a>/<a>] = [<a,b>/<a>] [/<a> n ]
is a finite lattice. Since also <ab> n <a> is finite, ab has finite order. Thus T(G) is a
subgroup and then of course a characteristic subgroup of G.
Let x e G be an element of infinite order. Then <x> n T(G) = 1 and if H :!S;
T(G), then we see that H = H u (<x> n T(G)) = (H u <x>) n T(G) H u <x> since
T(G) g G. Thus x e NG(H) and since G is generated by the elements outside T(G), it
follows that H a G. In particular, T(G) is abelian or hamiltonian. In the latter case
T(G) would contain a finite nonabelian p-subgroup since a hamiltonian torsion
group is clearly the direct product of its primary components. By 2.3.12, G would
contain a subgroup Q isomorphic to the quaternion group Q8 (see also Exercise
2.3.1). Since Q a G, the element x e G of infinite order would operate on Q and
hence a nontrivial power y of x would centralize Q. Then <y> x Q/<y4> ^_ C4 X Q8
would be an M-group, contradicting 2.3.8. Thus T(G) is abelian.
2.4.9 Lemma. If G is an M-group, then G/T(G) is abelian.
Proof. Since G/T(G) does not contain elements of finite order, we may assume that
T(G) = 1, that is, G is torsion-free. Let a, b c- G. We shall show in several steps that
ab = ba.
(6) If b-t amb = an with integers n and m, then n = m.
Indeed, if <a> n = <ak> 4 1, then the assumption in (6) implies that akm =
b-1 akmb = ak"; therefore n = m since G is torsion-free. In addition, if <a> n = 1,
the modular law and the assumption in (6) yield that
<an> = (<an> u ) n <a> = (<am> u ) n <a> = <am>,
that is, n = m or n = -m. If n = -m, then <a"> is inverted by b and hence

<a", b>/<a4n, b2 > is a dihedral group of order 8. But this group is not an M-group.
Thus n = m and (6) holds.
(7) If <a> n <ab> 1, then ab = ba.
Suppose that this is false. Thus a # ab, let I <a>: <a> n <ab> I = n. Then an = (ab)m for
some integer m and by (6), n = m. So if we put c = ab and d = an, we have found
elements a 0 c and d 1 in G satisfying <a> n <c> = <d> and d = a" = c". Since
<a, c>/<d> is generated by elements of finite order, it is a torsion group by 2.4.8.
Hence there exists an integer r such that (ac-1r e <d> and we can choose k in
{ + 1, -1 } such that (ac-')" = d' where s Z 0. Since a c and G is torsion-free,
s > 0. Consider the subgroups U = <ad'> = <aru+1>, V = <cds> = <cns+l> and
W = <a>. Clearly, U S W and U u V contains ad'(cd')-l = ac-l; hence U U V also

contains (ac-1)" = ds and so a and c. Thus U u V = <a,c> >_ W. Furthermore
V n W = <cn9+1> n <a> = <cns+l> n <c> n <a> = <cn,+1> n <c">
= <cn(ns+l)> = <an(ns+l)> S U.
The modular law yields <a> = W = (U u V) n W = U u (V n W) = U = <a"s+l >, a

contradiction since ns > 0. Thus (7) holds.
Since <a> n = (<a> n )b < <a> n <ab>, an immediate consequence of (7)
is the following.
(8) If <a> n 1, then ab = ba.
To deal with the case <a> n = 1, we strengthen property (7). Assume that
b-"amb" = a' for integers n and m with n # 0 m. Then a' e e <a> n <ab"> and by
(7), ab" = b"a. This implies that b" e n <b"> and (7) yields that ba = ab. So we
have shown:
(9) If amb" = b"a' for integers n and m with n 0 0 m, then ab = ba.
The second main step in the proof of the lemma is the following.
(10) If ab # ba, then <a, b>/<a, b )' is a nontrivial finite group and <a, b)' = <c, d>
with cd 0 dc.
To show this let H = <a, b>, K = <a, ab> and N = <a2, (a2)b>. Since H = <a> u _
<ab> u <b),
K=<a>u(Kn)=<ab>u(Kn)=Kb
and hence K a H. Similarly, N g <a2, b> and N = <a2, (a2yb> g <a2, ab>. Thus
N g <b, ab> = H. Now K/N is generated by the involutions aN and abN. Therefore
it is a dihedral group and hence finite since the infinite dihedral group is not
an M-group. Furthermore, K n 1 since otherwise ab a <a> and (7) would
imply that ab = ba. So K n = <b'> for some positive integer r and H/K
/K n is cyclic of order r. It follows that H/N is finite. From (8) we have
 n <a> = 1 and hence <a2, b> n <a> = <a2 ). Thus N < <a2, b> < H and so we
have shown that H/N is a nontrivial finite M-group. By 2.4.5, H' H. Since H/K is
cyclic, H' < K; on the other hand, if we put c = [a, b] = a-lab, then K = <a, ab> =
<a, c). It follows that K = <a> u H' and H' = <c> u (<a> n H') = <c, a'> with
<a') = <a> n H'. Suppose that <a> n H' = 1. Then H' = <c> is centralized by a2
since I Aut <c> I = 2. Hence a2 e Z(K), a2 b' = b'a2 and (9) implies that ab = ba,
a contradiction. Thus <a> n H' 1. Similarly, n H' = <b") 1. Then
<a'",b"> 5 H'. It follows that H/H' = <aH',bH'> is finite and (9) implies that H' is
nonabelian. So if we put d = a', then H' = <c,d> and cd 0 dc. Thus (10) holds.
To finish the proof of the lemma we suppose that ab # ba and put H = <a, b>.
Then H' = <c, d > with cd # dc. Applying (10) two further times we get that H" _
<c, d >' = <e, f > with of fe and H"' = <e, f >' = <g, h> where gh 0 hg. Further-
more all the commutator factor groups H/H', H'/H" and H"/Hare nontrivial finite
groups. But then H/H" is a finite M-group that is not metabelian, contradicting
2.4.5. It follows that ab = ba.
We show next that for a nonabelian M-group G with elements of infinite order,
the torsion-free abelian group G/T(G) has rank one.
2.4.10 Lemma. Let G be an M-group. If G contains two elements a and b of infinite

order such that <a> n = 1, then G is abelian.
Proof. Let S be the set of elements of infinite order in G. For u, v e S, define u ' v
if and only if n <v> # 1. If u - v and v - w, then n <v> = <vt> 1 and
<v> n <w> = <v") # 1; thus 1 vn' e n <w> and hence u - w. This shows that
- is an equivalence relation on S. Let x, y e S. If x f y, that is if <x> n <y> = 1,
then every element g of finite order in <x, y> satisfies
L(<g>) [<g> u <x>/<x>] = [<y"> u <x>/<x>] ^' L(<y"))

for some integer n and hence g = 1. Thus <x, y> is torsion-free and by 2.4.9, xy = yx.
And if x - y, that is, if <x> n <y> # 1, then by assumption there exists an element
z e S that is not equivalent to x and y. Hence, as we have seen, xz = zx and yz = zy.
It follows that <y,z> = <y> x <z> and <yz> n <y> = 1. So yz e S and yz f y,
whence also yz f x. Thus x(yz) = (yz)x = yxz and hence in this case also xy = yx.
We have shown that all elements of infinite order in G commute. By 2.4.8, G is
generated by these elements and hence is abelian.
So far we have obtained a number of restrictions on the structure of a nonabelian

M-group with elements of infinite order. We now give the precise structure of these
groups.
2.4.11 Theorem (Iwasawa [1943]). Let G be a nonabelian M-group with elements of

infinite order. Then T(G) is abelian and G/T(G) is a torsion free abelian group of rank
one.
(a) If G/T(G) is cyclic, then G is the semidirect product of T(G) by an infinite cyclic
group <z>, and for every prime p there exists a p-adic unit r(p) with r(p) __ 1 (mod p)
and r(2) = 1 (mod 4) such that a' = a'(P) for all a e T(G)P, the p-component of T(G).
(See 1.5.5 for the definition of a'(P).)
Conversely, for every prime p, let r(p) be a p-adic unit with r(p) = 1 (mod p) and
r(2) = 1 (mod 4). If G is the semidirect product of an abelian torsion group T by an
infinite cyclic group <z> to the automorphism given by a' = a'(P) for all a e TP, then
HK = KH for all H, K S G and G is an M-group with G/T(G) infinite cyclic.
(b) Suppose that G/T(G) is not cyclic and let Exp T(G)P = p" where n e fN v {O, ao}.
Then there exist elements z, e G, a, e T(G), primes pi and p-adic units r;(p) such that
G = <T(G), z 1, z2, ...) and for all primes p and all i n IN,
(11) r.(p) = 1 (mod p) and r,(2) - 1 (mod 4),
(12) r.+1(p)P' = r,(p) (mod p") (that is r;+1(p)P' = r1(p) if n = oo),
(13) o(zi) is infinite,

(14) a=' = a''(P' for all a e T(G)p,
(15) z,+, = ziai, and
(16) (z1a,)z1 = ziai
Conversely, let T be an abelian torsion group with Exp Tp = p", let ai E T and ri(p) be
p-adic units satisfying (11) and (12) for all primes p and all i e N. If we extend T
successively by cyclic groups <z,> according to the relations (13)-(16), we get an
M-group G = <T, z,,z2, ... > in which any two subgroups permute.
Proof. By 2.4.8 and 2.4.9, T(G) and G/T(G) are abelian and G/T(G) is torsion-free.
The rank of this group is one since otherwise there would exist two infinite cyclic
subgroups with trivial intersection in G/T(G), hence also in G; so G would be abelian
by 2.4.10.
(a) Suppose that G/T(G) is cyclic and let z e G with G/T(G) = <zT(G)>. Then z
has infinite order and hence T(G) n <z> = 1. Thus G is the semidirect product of
T(G) by <z> and 2.4.8 shows that z induces a power automorphism in T(G). So for
every prime p, by 1.5.6 there exists a p-adic unit r(p) such that a2 = a'(P) for all
a c- T(G)p. If T(G)p = 1 or Exp T(G)2 < 2, we may choose r(p) = 1 or r(2) = 1, re-
spectively. So suppose that T(G)p 1 and Exp T(G)2 > 4 and take a e T(G) with
o(a) = p. If r(p) # I (mod p), then a suitable power b of z would induce an automor-
phism of prime order q pin <a>; but then <a, b>/<bP9> would be a group of order
p2q which, by 2.4.4, would not be an M-group. Similarly, if r(2) # 1 (mod 4), every
element a of order 4 in T(G) would be inverted by z and hence <a, z>/<z2> would be
a dihedral group of order 8 and not an M-group. Thus r(p) = 1 (mod p) and r(2) = 1
(mod 4).
Conversely, suppose that G = T<z> as described in the theorem, let H, K
and take x e H, y e K. If o(x) is finite, then x c- T since G/T is infinite cyclic. It
follows that <x> a G and xy = yx' a KH. So suppose that o(x) is infinite and write
x = az' and y = bzj with a, b c- T and integers i, j. Then x and y are contained in
L = <a, b, z> = A <z> with A = <a, b> < T Since A is finite, L/C<2>(A) too is finite,
and therefore x' - C<2>(A) for some positive integer k. Thus if N = <x> n C(2)(A),
then 1 N g L and L/N is finite. For every prime p, r(p) = 1 (mod p) implies that z
induces a power automorphism of order some power of p in the Sylow p-subgroup
of A. It follows that L/N is a direct product of finite p-groups and since r(2) __ 1
(mod 4), 2.3.1 shows that these p-groups have modular subgroup lattices. By 2.3.2,
any two subgroups of these p-groups, and hence also of L/N, permute. In particular,
there exist integers n, m and an element u_E N < <x> such that xy = y"xmu e KH.
This shows that HK = KH and by 2.1.3, G is an M-group.
(b) Now suppose that G/T(G) is not cyclic. As a torsion-free abelian group of rank
one, G/T(G) is isomorphic to a subgroup of the rationals (see Robinson [1982],
p. 112); hence it is countable and locally cyclic. It follows easily that there exist
subgroups Gi of G and primes pi such that T(G) < G, < G2 < ... < G, U G. = G,
LE N
Gi/T(G) is infinite cyclic and I Gi,, : Gi I = p, for all i e N. By (a) there exist z, e G with
G1 = T(G)<z1) and p-adic units r1(p) satisfying (11) and (14) for i = 1 and all primes
p. We show that if for some integer i, there exist an element z; e G with G, =
T(G) <zi> and p-adic units r;(p) satisfying (11) and (14) for i, then there are elements
zi+1 e G, ai E T(G) and p-adic units r;+1(p) such that Gi+1 = T(G)<zi+1>, (11) and (14)
hold for i + 1, and (12), (15), (16) are satisfied for i. This will prove the first assertion
of (b). So suppose that G; = T(G) <zi> as described and let w c Git1 such that G;+1 =
T(G) <w>. Since G; = T(G)(G; n <w>) has index pi in Gi+1, G; n <w> = <wP'> and wi
is congruent to z; or z,-' modulo T(G). Let z,+1 be the generator of <w> satisfying
z+1 =_ zi (mod T(G)), that is z,+1 = z;a; for some a; E T(G). By (a) there exist p-adic
units r;+1(p) satisfying (11) and (14) for i + 1 and all primes p. Since z 1 and zi induce
the same automorphism in T(G), (12) holds; finally (16) follows from z;a; E <zi+1>.
Conversely, let G1 be the semidirect product of T by an infinite cyclic group <zl >
to the automorphism given by a=' = a''(P) for all a e TP. If G; = <T,z1,...,z,> =
<T,zi> is already constructed, then (14) and (16) define an automorphism of G; =
<T,z;a;) that fixes zia, and whose p; th power, as (12) shows, is the inner automor-
phism induced by zia,. Thus there exists the extension Gi+1 of Gi by a cyclic group
<zi+1> with respect to this automorphism and the relation z?+1 ziai. Hence G
exists and is the set-theoretic union of the groups G;. So if x, y e G, there exists an
integer i such that x, y e G; = T<z,>. By (a), <x> <y> = <y> <x>. It follows that any
two subgroups of G permute and by 2.1.3, G is an M-group.
It is possible to choose the p-adic units ri(p) in Theorem 2.4.11(b) in such a way
that
(12') r;+1(p)" = ri(p) for all i e N.
This has as a consequence the following result.
2.4.12 Theorem (Mainardis [1991]). Every M-group with elements of infinite order
can be embedded in an M-group with divisible (abelian) torsion subgroup.
Proof. First let us prove that we may choose the r;(p) such that (12') holds. So
suppose that G is an M-group, G/T(G) is not cyclic and let z;, pi, ri(p) be as in
Theorem 2.4.11(b). If Exp T(G), = oo, then clearly (12') holds. And if Exp T(G), is
finite, then also Pot T(G), is finite. Let a; be the power automorphism induced by z;
in T(G)P; so t = t''(p) for all t e T(G)p. If all the ai are trivial, we may choose
r,(p) = 1 for all i and (12') holds. So suppose that aj # 1 for some j. Since r3(p) = 1
k-1
(mod p), o(a;) = p" for some u e N. For every k > j, zj = zk where d = p, and if v
i=;
of these pi are equal to p, then o(ak) = p"+ Since Pot T(G)p is finite, it follows that
there exists k E N such that p, p for all i >_ k.
For every prime q p and every p-adic integer y = 1 (mod p), the equation 13Q = y
has a unique solution 13 E RP with 1 = 1 (mod p). For, let y = Y_ cipi where co = 1
M-1 i=o
and 0 < ci < p for all i and put y, = E c,p'. Let bo = 1 and assume that bo,..., brn-1
i=o / m-1
are integers such that 0 S bi < p for all i and P. = bipi is the unique integer
i=o
satisfying 1 < I'm < pm, I'm = 1 (mod p) and /3m = ym (mod pm). Since y = 1 (mod p),
ym+1 lies in the Sylow p-subgroup of the multiplicative group of integers modulo
pm+1 In this abelian p-group, the map x - x9 is an automorphism and hence there
exists a unique integer I'm+1 such that 1 < Nm+1 < pm+1 N.+1 = 1 (mod p) and
(M-
Qm+1 = ym+1 (mod pm+1) If /3m+1 = > dip' where 0 < d; < p, then Y1 d; p')Q ym
(mod pm) and the uniqueness of /3m implies that d; = b; for i = 0, ..., m - 1. So if we
/ m
define bm = dm, then I'm+1 = Y b;p'. Thus, inductively, we obtain that there exists a
i=o
oo
unique p-adic integer /3 = Y b;p' such that / __ 1 (mod p) and Q9 = y (mod pm) for
i=o
allmaFk,that is/3"=y.
Now we define p-adic integers s;(p) satisfying (12') in place of the r;(p). We put
sk(p) = rk(p) and, inductively, s;(p) = s;+,(p)PI for i < k; and if i >_ k, then p,: p and
we let s;+1(p) be the unique solution of the equation xP, = s;(p) in RP satisfying
s;+I(p) = 1 (modp). Then, clearly, (12') holds for the s;(p) and we have to show that
(14') a'- = as") for all a e T(G)P;
then we can replace the r;(p) by the s;(p) in Theorem 2.4.11(b). So let a; be the power
automorphism of T(G)P defined by a = as" for a e T(G)P. Clearly, ak = ak. If i < k
k-1 i-I
andu= Hp1,then a ak=ak=
J=i J=k
a;; since (v, p) = 1 and a;, a, are p-elements of Pot T(G)P, it follows that a; = a;. Thus
(14') holds.
Finally, we prove the assertion of the theorem. Let G be an M-group with
elements of infinite order. If G is abelian, the theorem is well-known (see Robinson
[1982], p. 95). So we may assume that G is nonabelian and therefore has the struc-
ture given in 2.4.11. In particular, T(G) is abelian and by the result just cited there
exists a divisible abelian torsion group T containing T(G) as a subgroup. If (a) of
2.4.11 holds, the semidirect product of T and <z> with respect to the automorphism
given by a' = a'1P1, a e T(G)P, p e P, is an M-group containing G = T(G) (z) as a
subgroup. Similarly, if (b) of 2.4.11 holds and the r;(p) satisfy (12'), then by 2.4.11,
the relations (13)-(16) define an M-group T<z1,z2,...> containing G as a
subgroup.
We finally mention that the structure of G in Theorem 2.4.11(b) becomes simpler
if T(G) is a p-group and also if T(G) is divisible. For, in the first case, we may choose
pi j4 p for all i e N. And then, in either case, we may take a; = I for all i e J so that
G is the semidirect product of T(G) and Z where Z = <z1,z2,...> is a torsion-free,
locally cyclic group and the z;, r;(p) satisfy (11)-(14) and zp I = z;. We leave the proof
of the first assertion as an exercise and shall prove the second one in 2.5.13.
Locally finite M-groups
An abelian torsion group clearly is locally finite. Hence a projective image of such a
group is a locally finite M-group. Therefore the structure of these groups is of
particular interest and it will be described in the next two theorems; these may be
regarded as extensions of Theorems 2.4.4 and 2.3.1.
2.4.13 Theorem (Iwasawa [1943]). The group G is a locally finite M-group if and
only if it is a direct product of P*-groups and locally finite p-groups with modular
subgroup lattices such that elements of different direct factors have relatively prime
orders.
Proof. That such a direct product is an M-group follows from 1.6.4 and 2.4.1 as in
the finite case. Furthermore, it is obvious that every P*-group, and therefore a direct
product of such groups, is locally finite. Conversely, suppose that G is a locally finite
M-group. For every prime q, let Gq be the subgroup generated by all the q-elements
of G. Clearly, Gq is a characteristic subgroup of G. If any two q-elements generate a
q-group, then Gq is the set of all q-elements in G and hence a locally finite q-group
with modular subgroup lattice. Now suppose that there are q-elements u, v such that
<u, v> is not a q-group. Then by 2.4.4, the finite M-group <u, v> must be a P*-group
of order p`q' where p is a prime with p > q. Since u 0 Z(<u,v>), there exists an
integer r with r * 1 (mod p) and rq = 1 (mod p) such that a" = a' for every p-element
a of <u, v>. Let x, y be arbitrary p-elements and z an arbitrary q-element of G. Then
H = <u, v, x, y, z> is a finite M-group and since <u, v> < H, it follows from 2.4.4 that
H is a P*-group of order p"q"' with n, m e N. The p-elements x and y are contained
in the Sylow p-subgroup of H, hence they have order p and commute; furthermore
x" = x' since u induces a universal power automorphism in this Sylow p-subgroup.
Since x and y were arbitrary, it follows that GP is an elementary abelian p-group and
that Gp is a P*-group. By 2.4.1 and 2.2.2, this P*-group is generated by q-
elements; on the other hand, z e H < Gp. Since z was an arbitrary q-element,
Gq = Gp is a P*-group. If g e G with (o(g), pq) = 1, then <H, g> is a finite M-
group and by 2.4.4, g centralizes x and z. This shows that GP cannot be contained in
a second P*-subgroup GS of G. Clearly G is the product of the P*-groups Gq obtained
in this way and the t-groups G, that are not contained in these P*-groups. Since the
orders of the elements in different factors of this type are relatively prime, the prod-
uct is direct.
2.4.14 Theorem (Iwasawa [1943]). Let p be a prime. The group G is a nonabelian

locally finite p-group with modular subgroup lattice if and only if
(a) G is a direct product of a quaternion group Q8 of order 8 with an elementary
abelian 2-group, or
(b) G contains an abelian normal subgroup A of exponent p' with cyclic factor
group G/A of order p' (k, m e N) and there exist an element b e G with G = A and
an integer s which is at least 2 in case p = 2 such that s < k < s + m and b-' ab =
a'+P`forall aeA.
Proof. If G satisfies (a), then the elements of order 2 of G are contained in Z(G) and
subgroups of exponent 4 contain G'. Thus G is hamiltonian and hence L(G) is
modular. Clearly, G is locally finite. Now suppose that (b) holds. For x 1, ..., x" e G
there exist a, e A and b, e such that x, = a,b;. Then every x; is contained in
<a1...., a.> (b> and this group is a finite M-group by 2.3.1. Thus G is locally finite
and by 2.3.2, (x1> (xi> = (x,) (x1> for all i,j. It follows that any two subgroups of
G permute. Hence L(G) is modular and since s < k, G is not abelian.
Conversely, let G be a nonabelian locally finite p-group with modular subgroup
lattice. If G contains a subgroup Q Q8, then for x e G and y e CG(Q), H =
(Q, x, y> is a finite 2-group. By 2.3.8, H = QCH(Q) and CH(Q) is elementary abelian.
It follows that x e QCG(Q) and o(y) = 2, that is, G = QCG(Q) and CG(Q) is elemen-
tary abelian. Thus G = Q x A where A is a complement to Z(Q) in CG(Q) and (a)
holds.
So suppose that G does not contain a subgroup isomorphic to Q8. Again by 2.3.8,
every finite subgroup of G is an M*-group. Since G is not abelian, there exist x, y e G
with xy yx. Then (x, y> is finite of exponent p", say. We claim that
(17) Exp G < pzn.
For, suppose that there exists an element z c- G of order pen. Then H = (x, y, z>
is still finite and of exponent pen by 2.3.5. For w c H with o(w) = p2" there are
a e S2"(H) > (x,y> and zl e (z> such that w = azl. It follows that
I <w>: (z> n (w> I = I (w, z> : (z> I = I (a, z> : <z> I = I <a>: <a> n (z> I s p"
and hence I<z> n (w>I > p". Thus S2"((z>) < (w>. Since H is generated by its
elements of maximal order, S2"((z)) < Z(H). In particular, f2"((z)) < Z(92"(H)) and
by 2.3.16, applied to S2"(H), this group is abelian. But this is impossible since
x, y c S2"(H). Thus (17) holds.
Let So be the set of all finite subgroups of G containing x and y. Any H e .9' is a
nonabelian M*-group and hence every Iwasawa triple (A, b, s) for H satisfies p' <
Exp G; we denote the maximal integer s occurring in an Iwasawa triple for H by
s(H). We choose a subgroup M E .So with minimal s(M) and among these with
maximal Exp M', that is, satisfying
(18) s(M) < s(H) for all H e .9', let s(M) = s, and
(19) Exp M' > Exp H' for all H e . with s(H) = s(M).
We shall construct a special Iwasawa triple for M and from this an Iwasawa triple
for G. First we note the following.
(20) If M < H e 9' and (C, d, t) is an Iwasawa triple for H with t = s(H), then t = s
and there is an element u e M such that (C, u, s) is an Iwasawa triple for H.
To show this let CM = K and IH: KI = p'. Since H = C(d>, K = C(K n (d>) _
C(d'>. If Exp C = p", then d induces an automorphism of order pk-` in C. Since K
is not abelian, d' induces a nontrivial automorphism of order pk-`-' on C and there
exists a generator dl of (d') such that (C, dl, t + j) is an Iwasawa triple for K. As
CM = K, there exist c e C and u e M such that dl = cu; hence (C, u, t + j) is an
Iwasawa triple for K. Now M = (C n M) (u) and so (C n M, u, t + j) is an Iwasawa
triple for M. Hence t +j < s(M) = s, on the other hand s < s(H) = t by (18). It
follows that t = s and j = 0. Thus (C, u, s) is an Iwasawa triple for K = H.
(21) There exists an Iwasawa triple (A*, b, s) for M with the property that for every
M < H E 9 there is an Iwasawa triple (C, b, s) for H with A* < C.
Suppose that this is false. If (A,, b,, s), ..., (A b s) are all the Iwasawa triples for
M with third component s, then for every i e { 1, ... , r} there exists a subgroup Hi in
S such that M < Hi and Hi does not contain an Iwasawa triple of the form (Ci, bi, s)
with A. < Ci. Since G is locally finite, H = H, u u H, is finite; choose an Iwasawa
triple (C, d, t) for H with t = s(H). By (20), t = s and there is an element u E M such
that (C, u, s) is an Iwasawa triple for H. It follows that (C n M, u, s) is an Iwasawa
triple for M, that is C n M = A, and u = bi for some i. But then (C n Hi, bi, s) is an
Iwasawa triple for Hi with A. < C n Hi. This contradiction yields (21).
(22) Let Hi E .9" and suppose that (Ai, b, s) are Iwasawa triples for Hi such that
A* < Ai for i = 1, 2. Then A, u A2 is abelian.
For, the definition of an Iwasawa triple implies that U,(A*) = M' and t5,(Ai)
H. Furthermore by (20), s(Hi) = s and thus (19) shows that ExpA* > ExpAi for
i = 1, 2. On the other hand, A* 5 A, n A2 and hence Exp Ai = Exp A* for i = 1, 2.
By 2.3.5, A, u A2 has the same exponent as A* and therefore contains an element
a e A* of maximal order in its centre. By 2.3.16, A, u A2 is abelian.
Now let A be the join of all finite abelian subgroups C of G such that A* < C
and cb = c'+P for all c c- C. For any such C, (C, b, s) is an Iwasawa triple for H =
C<b) > A*<b) = M. So (22) shows that any two such C's centralize each other, that
is, A is abelian. It follows that ab = a'+P for all a e A. If g c- G, then H = <M, g) e S
and by (21), g e C<b) < A<b) for some Iwasawa triple (C,b,s) of H with A* < C.
Thus G= A<b) and A a G. If Exp A = pk and I G : A l =p', then s < k since G is
not abelian. Furthermore b induces a power automorphism of order pk_, in A and
since bP'" E A operates trivially on A, k - s < m. Finally, s > 2 in case p = 2 since
(A*, b, s) was an Iwasawa triple for M. Thus G satisfies (b).
Clearly, the groups in (a) of Theorem 2.4.14 are the hamiltonian locally finite
p-groups. We shall need an additional property of the other locally finite M-groups.
2.4.15 Corollary. Let G be a nonabelian locally finite p-group with modular subgroup
lattice. Then Exp G = p" is finite. If G is not hamiltonian, then there exists a triple
(A, b, s) with the properties given in 2.4.14(b) and, in addition, o(b) = p" and s + m = n.
Proof. That G has finite exponent follows immediately from 2.4.14. Suppose that G
is not hamiltonian and let (A, b, s) be as in 2.4.14(b). Since G/A is finite, we may
choose A in such a way that no subgroup of G containing A properly occurs in a
triple with these properties. Two elements of order at most pn-1 generate a finite
subgroup of G and by 2.3.5, their product has order at most pn-1. Thus fl,-,(G) is
the set of elements of order at most pn-1, also in the locally finite M-group G.
Therefore G is generated by its elements of order p" and since G/A is cyclic, there
exists a cyclic subgroup C of order p" such that G = AC. Let ao e A and c c- C such
that b = aoc. Then G = A<c) and C = <c>; hence o(c) = p" and ac = a'+P for all
a e A. Since ca'" e A, cr'" = (cP"')` = cP'"i'+' 1, that is p"+s = 0 (mod p") and hence
m + s >_ n. Suppose that m + s > n. Then c'"-' e CG(A) since the automorphism
induced by c in A has order at most p"-s < p'. Thus A* = <A,c""-') would be
abelian and (c"'-' )` = cP--' = (c""')1 +p', that is, (A*, c, s) would have all the proper-
ties given in 2.4.14(b). This would contradict the choice of A. Hence m + s = n and
the triple (A, c, s) has the desired properties.
Torsion groups with modular subgroup lattices

We say that a group G is a Tarski group if it is infinite but every proper, nontrivial
subgroup of G has prime order. For a long time it was not known whether Tarski
groups exist until Olshanskii [1979], using an extremely complicated inductive con-
struction, produced the first examples of such groups. Clearly, the set of proper,
nontrivial subgroups of a Tarski group G is an infinite antichain and hence L(G) is
modular. If one adds a chain to the zero element of this lattice, one clearly also gets
a modular lattice. Therefore we call a group G an extended Tarski group if it contains
a normal subgroup N such that
(23) GIN is a Tarski group,
(24) N is cyclic of prime power order p' 1, and
(25) for every subgroup H of G, H 5 N or N 5 H.
I
Extended Tarski Group
Figure 12
It follows from (25) that for every minimal subgroup H/N of GIN, L(H) is a chain
and hence H is cyclic of order p`+1 Thus N = Z(G) and G is a p-group with modular
subgroup lattice. Groups of this type do also exist (see Olshanskii [1991], p. 344).
However, a complete description of all Tarski and extended Tarski groups is not
known and seems difficult to establish. So we have to take the following result as our
final description of periodic M-groups.
2.4.16 Theorem (Schmidt [1986]). Let G be a torsion group. Then G has modular
subgroup lattice if and only if G is a direct product of Tarski groups, extended Tarski
groups and a locally, finite M-group such that elements of different direct factors have
relatively prime orders.
In order to prove this theorem we need four lemmas. The first shows how the
Tarski groups get involved.
2.4.17 Lemma. Let x and y be elements of prime power order of an M-group G and
suppose that H = <x,y> is infinite.
(a) (Rudolph [1982]) If <x> n <y> = 1, then H is a Tarski group.
(b) If <x> n <y> 0 1, then H is an extended Tarski group.
Proof. (a) Assume that the assertion is wrong and choose a counterexample in
which o(x) + o(y) is minimal. Let X = <x> and Y = <y>. Suppose first that o(x) and
o(y) are primes. A proper, nontrivial subgroup K of H cannot contain both X and
Y. And if X :C K, say, then X n K = 1 and by 2.1.5, [K/1] [X u K/X] is an inter-
val in [H/X] [Y/1], that is, IKI is a prime. Thus H is a Tarski group, contradicting
the choice of G.
It follows that o(x), say, is not a prime; let A = f2(X) and B = f2(Y). Again by
2.1.5, [X u B/B] is a chain and every minimal subgroup of X u B is contained in
the atom A u B of this chain. Thus A u B= .Q(X u B) 9 X u B. Similarly, A u B =
(I(A u Y):9 A u Y and hence A u B:9 X u Y = H. Also by 2.1.5, X is a maximal
subgroup of X u B and therefore A <'D(X) < X n X6 for every b e B. It follows
that A a X u B; in particular, A u B is a finite group. Let Y, = Y n NH(A). The
modular law yields that NH(A) = (X u Y) n NH(A) = X u Y, and (A u Y,) n X =
A u (Y, n X) = A. Thus NH(A)/A is generated by the cyclic subgroups X/A and
AY,/A of prime power order intersecting trivially. Since NH(A)/A contains the nor-
mal subgroup A u B/A of prime order, it is not a Tarski group. The minimality of
o(x) + o(y) implies that NH(A)/A is finite. Every conjugate of A in H is contained in
the finite normal subgroup A u B of H and hence also the number I H : NH(A) I of
these conjugates is finite. So, finally, H is finite, a contradiction. Thus (a) holds.
(b) Let N = <x> n <y>. Then N is cyclic of prime power order and lies in the
centre of H. Therefore H/N is infinite and hence is a Tarski group by (a). Thus (23)
and (24) hold for H. To show (25), suppose that there exists a subgroup K of H such
that K -t N and N K; let X = <x>. Since L(X) is a chain and N:!5: X, it follows
that K X and D = K n X < N. As H/N is a Tarski group, X is a maximal sub-
group of H. So X u K = H and [KID] [H/X], that is, KID is cyclic of prime
order. Therefore HID is generated by the cyclic subgroups X/D and KID of prime
power order intersecting trivially, but is neither finite nor a Tarski group. This
contradicts (a). Thus (25) holds and H is an extended Tarski group.
The following lemma is the main step in the proof of Theorem 2.4.16. It shows in
particular that there are no "Tarski groups of higher dimension", that is torsion
groups G with L(G) modular of length at least 3 in which any two different minimal
subgroups generate a Tarski group. For any group T, we denote by n(T) the set of
all primes dividing the order of an element of T
2.4.18 Lemma. Let G be a torsion group with modular subgroup lattice and suppose
that the subgroup T of G is a Tarski group.
(a) If x e G of prime power order q" (q a prime, n E N), then x e T for q e 7r(T) and
x e CG(T) in case q 0 ir(T).
(b) T is the set of all rr(T)-elements in G and G = T x CG(T).
Proof. (b) is an immediate consequence of (a). For, every g E G is the product of its
primary components. Therefore by (a), every n(T)-element of G lies in T and every
element of G is contained in <T, CG(T)). Since T n CG(T) = Z(T) = 1, it follows that
G = T x CG(T).
To prove (a) we use induction on n and first consider the case n = 1. So let x E G
with o(x) = q and suppose that x T; we have to show that x e CG(T) and q 0 ir(T).
To do thisletX = <x>,H = TuXand 1 #aeTTakebeTwith T= <a,b>and
put S = <b,x). Since and <x> are different minimal subgroups of H and L(H) is
modular of length 3, S is a maximal subgroup of H. If S = S, then S n T = <b)
would be invariant under a which is clearly not the case. Thus S # S and S n S is
a minimal subgroup of H different from <a>. So, finally, K = <a> u (S n S) is a
maximal subgroup of H. Since a 0 S and a 0 S, K n S = S n S = K n S and hence
(SnS)=(KnS)=KnS=SnS,
that is, S n S is normalized by a. Thus S n S 9 K and K is finite. As x E S,
XnK = XnSnK = Xn(SnS). So if X -A SnS, then XnK = I and hence
X u K = H. By 2.1.5, L(K) ^- [H/X] ^ L(T), a contradiction, since K is a finite and
T an infinite group. Therefore X = S n S. So X is normalized by a and as a was an
arbitrary nontrivial element of T, X is normalized by T Since the simple group T
can only operate trivially on the cyclic group X, it follows that x e CG(T). Finally, if
q e ir(T), then there would exist an a e T with o(a) = q. Then <a, x) would be ele-
mentary abelian of order q2 and ax would be an element of order q in G not
contained in T But then ax e CG(T), as we have just shown, and hence also
a e CG(T), a contradiction. Consequently, q ir(T) and this finishes the case n = 1.
Now let n > 2 and suppose that the assertion of the lemma is correct for n - 1;
again let X = <x) and H = T u X, and put Z = f)(X). If T n X # 1, then T n X =
Z and H = T u X= Y u X for some cyclic subgroup Y of T with T= Y u Z. As H
is neither finite nor a Tarski group, this would contradict 2.4.17. Hence T n X = 1
and the case n = 1 already settled shows that Z 5 CG(T) and q 0 ir(T). Thus Z <
Z(H) and, by induction, TZ/Z is centralized by X/Z. In particular, X a H and, as
before, it follows that x e CG(T) since T cannot operate on X.
We prove the corresponding result for the extended Tarski groups.
2.4.19 Lemma. Let G be a torsion group with modular subgroup lattice and suppose
that the subgroup T of G is an extended Tarski group; let rr(T) = {p}.
(a) If x e G of prime power order q" (q a prime, n e N), then x e T for q = p and
x E CG(T) in case q A p.
(b) T is the set of all p-elements in G.
Proof. Since T is a p-group, (b) clearly follows from (a). To prove (a), we first show
that Z(T) a G. So suppose that Z(T) is not normal in G. Then there exists g E G
such that Z(T)' # Z(T). Take c e Z(T)a with <c"> = Z(T) n Z(T)a, let H = T v <c>
and consider a maximal subgroup <a> of T Since a and c are p-elements of different
orders, <a, c) is neither a Tarski nor an extended Tarski group. By 2.4.17, <a, c) is a
finite subgroup of G and then a p-group as 2.4.7(a) shows. Since cP E <a>, <a> is a
maximal subgroup of <a, c> and hence normal in this finite p-group. It follows that
Z(T) g H. But then cZ(T) is an element of order p in HIT that does not lie in the
Tarski p-subgroup T/Z(T); this contradicts 2.4.18.
Thus Z(T) a G. By 2.4.18, xZ(T) E T/Z(T) for q = p, that is, x E Tin this case. So
let q # p. Then T/Z(T) is centralized by xZ(T). Therefore if <a> is a maximal sub-
group of T, it follows that [x, a] e Z(T) = <aP). So x induces an automorphism in
<a> centralizing <a)/I(<a)) and as o(x) is prime to p, x centralizes <a). Since <a>
was an arbitrary maximal subgroup of T, we conclude that x c CG(T).
The last of our four lemmas will be used to show that the product of all Tarski and
extended Tarski groups in G has a locally finite complement.
2.4.20 Lemma. Let G be an M-group and let x,, ..., x, c- G. If <x,, xj ) is finite for
all i and j, then also <x,,..., x,) is finite.
Proof. We may assume that the x, are elements of prime power order; for, the
primary components of the xi satisfy the same assumptions as the x, and also gener-
ate <x,,...,x,>. So we prove the lemma under this additional assumption and use
induction on o(x,) + + o(x,). Let H = <x1,...,x,> and let p be the largest prime
dividing the order of one of the x,.
Suppose first that there exists another prime dividing one of these orders. Without
loss of generality, let x,, ..., x, be the p-elements among the x,. Then for i < s and
j > s, the subgroup <xi, x3) is a finite M-group and by 2.4.6, <x, >'j = <x,). Thus
<x,,...,x,) 9 H and H = <x,,...,x,)<x,+,,...,x,) is finite since, by induction,
<x,,...,x,) and <x,+,,...,x,) are finite.
Now suppose that all the xi are p-elements and let x, be an element of maximal
order among the xi. If o(x,) > p2, then 2.4.7(b) shows that fl(<xl )) is normalized by
every xi and hence is normal in H. By induction H/S2(<x,) ), and hence H, is finite.
We are left with the case that o(xi) = p for all i. If all the <xi,xx) are p-groups, any
two of the xi commute; it follows that H is abelian and hence finite. Finally, suppose
that <x1, x2 ), say, is not a p-group. Then by 2.2.4, 1 <x,, x2 ) I = pq where q is a prime
with q > p. Let Q be the subgroup of order q in <x,, x2 ). We claim that <Q, x,) is
finite for all i >_ 3. For otherwise <Q, xi) would be a Tarski subgroup of the torsion
group <xi, X2, xi), by 2.4.17. By 2.4.18, <Q, xi) would have to contain the p-elements
x, and x2i but a Tarski group cannot have a subgroup <x,, x2) of order pq. So
<Q, xi) is finite and by 2.4.6, Q a_ <Q, x, ). Thus Q a H and by induction, H/Q =
<x2Q,...,x,Q) is finite. Therefore H too is finite.
Proof of Theorem 2.4.16. If G has the structure given in this theorem, then by 1.6.4,
L(G) is isomorphic to a direct product of modular lattices and hence is modular.
Conversely, suppose that G is a torsion group with modular subgroup lattice, let .l
be the set of all Tarski subgroups and extended Tarski subgroups of G and let it be
the union of all the n(T) with T e By 2.4.18 and 2.4.19, every T e
. is the set of
all n(T)-elements of G and hence is a normal subgroup of G. Since the Tarski groups
are simple and every extended Tarski group has only one minimal subgroup, any
two such groups intersect trivially and the tr(T) with T E J form a partition of it.
Let K be the set of all n -elements in G. We shall show that K is a locally finite
subgroup of G. Then, clearly, K is a normal subgroup of G and since K and the
TE are coprime subgroups, G is the direct product of K and all the T e . This
will prove the theorem. First we show that
(26) <x, y) is finite for all x, y e K.
For, if x = x, ... x, and y = yi ... y, are written as products of their primary compo-
nents, then all the xi, yk are n'-elements and, clearly, <x;,x3) < <x> and <y;,yy) <
<y) are finite for all i and j. If <xi, yy) were infinite, then <x;, y3) E by 2.4.17 and
then x; would be a n-element, a contradiction. Thus all the <x;, yy) are finite. By
2.4.20, <x,,._ x y, , ... , y5) = <x, y) is finite and (26) holds.
We show now that K is a subgroup of G. For this let x, y e K and suppose that
xy-' 0 K. Then there exists a prime p e n dividing o(xy-' ); let T e .l with p e n(T).
By (26), <x, y) is finite and by 2.4.18 or 2.4.19, T n <x, y) is the set of n(T)-elements
in <x, y). Hence T n <x, y) is a normal Hall subgroup of <x, y) and the Schur-
Zassenhaus theorem yields that there exists a complement S to T n <x, y) in <x, y).
This centralizes T n <x, y), again by 2.4.18 or 2.4.19. Thus S is a normal subgroup
of <x, y) and therefore contains the n(T)'-elements x and y. Hence also xy-' E S, but
p divides o(xy-' ). This contradiction shows that xy-' E K and that K is a subgroup
of G. By (26) and 2.4.20, K is locally finite.
Further topics
Theorems 2.4.11, 2.4.13 and 2.4.14 (or 2.4.4 and 2.3.1 in the finite case), and finally
2.4.16 give the structure of nonabelian M-groups. These results are basic and will
often be used. In the remainder of this section we point out some immediate conse-
quences and report on related results.
In 2.4.5 we noted that every finite M-group is metabelian. The results mentioned
above show that this is also true for locally finite M-groups and M-groups with
elements of infinite order. Considering 2.4.16, we get the following result.
2.4.21 Theorem. Let G be an M-group. If G contains elements of infinite order or if

no Tarski group is involved in G, then G is metabelian. In particular, every projective
image of an abelian group is metabelian.
If any two subgroups of the group G permute, then G is an M-group by 2.1.3. And,
clearly, G is locally finite if it is a torsion group. So 2.4.11 and the results on locally
finite M-groups give the structure of these groups (see Exercise 3). In particular, we
note the following.
2.4.22 Theorem (Iwasawa [1943]). If any two subgroups of the group G permute,
then G is metabelian.
In the theory of finite groups, for inductive proofs, it is often useful to know for a
certain class X of groups the class of all groups in which every proper subgroup (or
proper factor group) is an .1-group. For the class I of M-groups, these classes have
been studied extensively. First Napolitani [1971] determined the finite groups all of
whose proper subgroups are M-groups. Since every finite M-group is supersoluble,
these groups are soluble and Napolitani gave a complete list of them. Then Fort
[1975] investigated finite groups G in which
(27) [G/H] is modular
for every nontrivial subgroup H of G, that is, with weakly modular subgroup lattices.
Also these groups are soluble, since the minimal simple groups do not have this
property and Fort was able to determine them completely. Finally, Longobardi
[1982] studied finite groups G satisfying (27) for every nontrivial normal subgroup
H of G, that is, in which all proper factor groups are M-groups. Since every finite
simple group has this property, Longobardi restricted herself to supersoluble groups
of this type and produced a complete list of them. Slightly smaller than the class
studied by Longobardi is the class of all finite groups in which (27) holds for every
nontrivial modular subgroup H of G. This class is interesting since it is clearly
invariant under projectivities. Longobardi and Maj [1985] showed that the nonnil-
potent groups in both classes coincide and, using Longobardi's list, determined the
nilpotent groups in the smaller class. All these results are much too technical to be
presented here.
Finally we mention a theorem of a quite different character. Fort [1983] proved
that a finite group G has modular subgroup lattice if and only if every maximal
subgroup of G is dually modular in L(G); here an element d of a lattice L is called
dually modular in L if it satisfies
(28) xn(duz)=(xnd)uzfor all x,zeLwith x>z,and
(29) dn(yuz)=(dny)uzfor ally, zELwithd>z.
Note that these conditions are dual to (2) and (3) of 2.1 in the definition of modular
elements of a lattice.
Exercises
1. (Jones [1945]) Let G be a P*-group of order p"q' with n, m e N and primes p > q
and suppose that m >_ 2 (that is, G is not a P-group). Show that the group G is
lattice-isomorphic to G if and only if G is a P*-group of order p"r' where r is a
prime dividing p - 1.
2. Let G be a nonabelian finite P-group. Determine Aut G and eliminate Cooper's
theorem (or 1.4.3) from the proof of Lemma 2.4.3.
3. Show that the following properties of a torsion group G are equivalent.
(a) Any two subgroups of G permute.
(b) G is the direct product of its p-components and these are locally finite p-
groups with modular subgroup lattices.
(c) G is a locally nilpotent M-group.
4. Let G be an M-group with elements of infinite order. Show that G is locally

nilpotent but in general not nilpotent.
5. Let G be a nonabelian M-group such that T(G) is a p-group and G/T(G) is not
cyclic.
(a) Show that in Theorem 2.4.11(b) we may choose p; # p for all i e N. (Hint: If
a e T(G) and k e N such that azk # a, show that there are only finitely many
j>kwith p;=p.)
(b) If p; # p for all i, show that there exist b, e T(G) such that the elements x, _
z;6; satisfy xP+l = xt for all i e N. Conclude that G is the semidirect product of
T(G) and the torsion-free, locally cyclic group Z = <x1, x2, ... ).
6. (Napolitani [1971]) Let G be a finite group in which every proper subgroup is an
M-group.
(a) Show that G is soluble.
(b) If I G I is divisible by 3 different primes, show that G is supersoluble.
(c) If I G I is divisible by 4 different primes, show that G is an M-group.
7. Let G = H x K be an M-group. Show that G is abelian if to every x e H there
exists y e K and to every y e K there exists x e H such that o(x) = o(y). (In partic-
ular, G is abelian if H K; for a short direct proof of this result see Lukacs and
Palfy [1986].)
2.5 Projectivities of M-groups
It is a remarkable fact that large classes of nonabelian M-groups admit projectivities

onto abelian groups. In particular, all M-groups with elements of infinite order and
all nonhamiltonian locally finite p-groups with modular subgroup lattices have this
property. We shall construct these projectivities using special element maps, so-
called crossed isomorphisms, in the locally finite case. More generally, we want
to determine all projectivities of an arbitrary M-group. We start with the torsion
groups and, in the light of 1.6.6, we may restrict our attention to the direct factors
that appear in Theorems 2.4.16 and 2.4.13.
Tarski groups and extended Tarski groups
Clearly, every projective image of a Tarski group or an extended Tarski group

is a Tarski group or extended Tarski group, respectively. Since a Tarski group
is generated by two elements, it is countable. Therefore any two Tarski groups
have the same number of minimal subgroups and are lattice-isomorphic. And two
extended Tarski groups are lattice-isomorphic if and only if their subgroup lattices
have the same lengths. Finally, the group of autoprojectivities of a Tarski or
extended Tarski group is isomorphic to Sym f\l, the symmetric group on a countable
set.
2.5 Projectivities of M-groups 89
P*-groups
We saw in Section 2.2 that every P-group is lattice-isomorphic to an elementary

abelian group. It is not difficult to describe the projectivities of those P*-groups that
are not P-groups (see Exercise 2.4.1). Even without such a description, the results of
2.2 show that a P*-group is lattice-isomorphic to an abelian group if and only if it
is a P-group. For, if G is a P*-group with nonnormal Sylow subgroup of order q"
and qp is a projectivity from G to an abelian group G, then a subgroup H of order
pq' of G has indecomposable subgroup lattice. Its abelian projective image H0
therefore must be a primary group and by 2.2.6, H' is elementary abelian. Thus
m = 1 and G is a P-group.
Autoprojectivities of elementary abelian groups, and hence also P-groups, were
described in 1.4.4; see also 2.6.7. If G is a P*-group and not a P-group, every
autoprojectivity of G fixes D(G) and the p-component A of G where p is the larger
prime involved in G. It follows that P(G) is isomorphic to the subgroup of elements
of P(G/(D(G)) fixing AD(G), that is, to the group of autoprojectivities of an elemen-
tary abelian group fixing a maximal subgroup.
Hamiltonian 2-groups
These groups clearly cannot be lattice-isomorphic to an abelian group since the

quaternion group Q8 is determined by its subgroup lattice. In fact, this holds for an
arbitrary hamiltonian 2-group and we prove an even stronger result.
25.1 Theorem (Baer [1939a]). Every projectivity of a hamiltonian 2-group is induced

by exactly four isomorphisms.
Proof. Let G be a hamiltonian 2-group, that is, G = Q x A where Q - Q8 and A is

elementary abelian, and let q be a projectivity from G to some group G. Since Q0
contains only one minimal subgroup, Q' Q$ ^- Q. If x e Q has order 4 and 1 0
a e A, then <x2, a)9' is a four-group. Hence I <a>"I = 2 and A0 is an elementary
abelian 2-group (see also 2.2.5). Furthermore, <x, a>0 is a group of order 8 with 3
minimal subgroups and therefore is abelian since Q8 has 1 and D. has 5 minimal
subgroups. It follows that Q' < CU(A'') and hence G = Q4' x A".
Let H = Z(Q) x A and define r: H - H0 by <at> = <a>0' for a e A. Then, clearly,
r is the only element map inducing (p on H. If a, b E H, and <a, b> is a four-group,
then (ab>0 = <a`bt> is the minimal subgroup different from <a>0 and 0 in
<a, b)0. Thus (ab)` = a`b` and this, of course, also holds if I <a, b> I S 2. Now let Q =
<x, y>, <x>0 = , <y>0 = <v> and let a: G -- G be the isomorphism satisfying
x = u, y = v and a = at for all a E A. This isomorphism clearly induces q on Q
and on H. And if g e G with g 0 Q and g 0 H, then there exist z e Q and a e A with
o(z) = 4 and g = za. As <z>0 = <z> and <a>0 = <a>, also <z, a>" = <z, a) and
since <g> is the only cyclic maximal subgroup different from <z> in <z, a>, it follows
that <g>0 = <g). Thus a induces 'p. We had a choice of two elements each for u
and v. So we have shown that there are 4 different isomorphisms inducing cp. On the
other hand, every isomorphism inducing rp has to map x and y onto a generator of
(x> and (y> , respectively. Hence there are exactly 4 such isomorphisms.
Crossed isomorphisms
Let G be a group and let f be a map from G into the set End G of all endomorphisms
of G. A bijective map from G to a group G is called an f-isomorphism if it satisfies
(1) xy = (xf(Y)y) for all x, y e G.
A crossed isomorphism is an f-isomorphism for some map f : G - End G. Examples
of crossed isomorphisms are isomorphisms-here f(x) is the identity for all x E G-
and antiisomorphisms. For, if f(x) is the inner automorphisminduced by x-', that
is, gf(x) = xgx-' for all g, x e G, then a bijective map a: G -+ G is an f-isomorphism
if and only if xy = (yxy-' y) = (yx) for all x, y E G.
We want to use crossed isomorphisms to construct projectivities between locally
finite, nonhamiltonian p-groups and abelian groups. So we have to find out for
which maps f there exist f-isomorphisms and when they induce projectivities. The
first question is easy to answer.
2.5.2 Theorem. Let G be a group and f : G -+ End G. If there exists an f-isomorphism

from G to some group G, then
(2) f (l) is the identity,
(3) f(x) E Aut G for all x E G, and
(4) f(x)f(y) = f(xf(Y)y) for all x, y E G.
Conversely, suppose that (2)-(4) hold and define a new operation o on G by
(5) x o y = xf(Y) y
for x, y c- G. Then G* = (G, o) is a group and the identity on G is an f-isomorphism
from G to G*.
Proof. Let x, y, z e G. If a is an f-isomorphism from G to G, then 1y = (IJ(Y)y) _

y and hence
(6) 1 = 1.
Therefore x = x1 = (xf(')) and since a is injective, x = xf('). Thus (2) holds. To
prove (3), suppose that xf(Y) = zf(Y). Then xy = (xf(Y)y) = (zf(Y)y) = zy. As a is
injective, x = z and hence f(y) is injective. Since a is surjective, there exists g E G
with g = (xy)(y)-' and hence (xy) = gy = (gf(Y)y) Again the injectivity of a
implies that x = gf(Y). Thus f(y) is also surjective. It follows that f(y) e Aut G and (3)
holds. Finally,
(zf(xfly)y)xf(Y)y) = Z(xf(Y)y) = Zxy = (zl(x)x)y = (zf(x)f(Y)Xf(Y)y)
and since a is injective, it follows that z1(x)f(Y) = zf(xf")Y). Thus also (4) holds.
Conversely, suppose that (2)-(4) are satisfied. Then
(x o y) o z = (xf(y)y)f(z)z = xf(y)f(z)yflz)z = x-(yflllz)(Yf(=)Z) = X

o (y o Z),
that is, the operation o is associative. Furthermore, 1 o y = if(y)y = y. Since f(y) is

surjective, there exists g e G such that gf(y) = y-' and hence g o y = gf(Y)y = 1. Thus
G* = (G, o) is a group and (5) implies that the identity is an f-isomorphism from G
to G*.
2.5.3 Corollary. If a: G -p G is an f-isomorphism, then the map v: G - Aut G given by

u" = f(u ') for u e G is a homomorphism.
Proof. Let u, v c- G and take x, y c- G with x = u, y = v. By (3), u" E Aut G and (1)
and (4) imply that
(uv)" = WY), = ((xf(y)y))V
= f(xf(y)Y) = f(x)f(y) = u"v".
Thus v is a homomorphism from G to Aut G.
2.5.4 Lemma. Let G be a group, f : G -i End G and suppose that u: G -i G is an

f-isomorphism. For H < G and x c- G,
(7) (Hx) = Hx if and only if Hf(x) = H, and
(8) H is a subgroup of G if and only if Hf(=) = H for all z e H.
Proof. By (3), f(x) -' exists and (1) implies that for all z e H, zx = (zf (')x)' and
(zx) = (z1(x)-')x. Since Q is injective, it follows that (Hx) = Hx if and only if for
all z c- H, zf(x) and Zf(x) are contained in H, that is, Hf(x) = H. Thus (7) holds. To
prove (8), suppose first that H < G. Then for all z e H, (Hz)' = H = Hz and
hence Hf(=) = H by (7). Conversely, let Hf(') = H for all z c- H. If y, z c- H, then (7)
shows that yz E (Hz)" = H. Furthermore there exists w c- H such that wf(z) = z-1.
By (6) and (1), 1 = 1 _ (wf(z)z) = wz so that (z)-' = w e H. Thus H is a
subgroup of G.
The lemma shows that if an f-isomorphism a is to induce a projectivity, every

endomorphism f(x) has to fix all subgroups containing x. However, this condition
is not sufficient. Even if all the f(x) are power automorphisms, a need not induce a
projectivity.
2.55 Example. Let G be an abelian group and suppose that N is a nontrivial sub-
group of index 2 in G. For a E N, let f(a) = id, the identity map on G; if x E G\N, let
f(x) = - id, that is, gf(x) = g-' for g e G. Then (2) and (3) are satisfied and since
I G: NI = 2, it is easy to see that also (4) holds. So if we define the operation o on G
by (5), then H = (G, o) is a group and u = id is an f-isomorphism from G to H.
If xeH\N and aeN, then xox=xf(x)x=X-'x= 1 and xoaox=(xa)ox=
a-' x-i x = a-'. Since the multiplication in N has not changed, a-' is also the inverse
to a in H and it follows that H is a generalized dihedral group. In particular, if G is

cyclic, then H is a dihedral group and clearly not lattice-isomorphic to G. Note that
by (8), every subgroup of G is also a subgroup of H, but H may contain additional
subgroups.
In our computations with crossed isomorphisms we shall need some simple

number-theoretic facts.
2.5.6 Lemma. Let p be a prime and suppose that 1, k, n are natural numbers such that
(n)
2 < k < n. If p ' divides n, then p i+1 divides m = p k-1, except in the case p = 2,
k
k = 2 in which m is divisible just by p'.
Proof. The assertion certainly is correct if k >- i + 2; assume therefore that k <
is
i + 1. Now n = p'a where a e N and m = Cpk pk-1 = p
k-1 is k-1 'a
[p Since
- .
f/ kp i=1 j
j < i, the powers of p in the factor j of the denominator cancel with those in p'a - j.
Therefore, if k = p's with (s, p) = 1 and r > 0, then m is divisible by p` where
t = p's - 1 +i-r. Clearly t> i+ 1, except in the case r = s = 1, p = 2 in which
t=i.
2.5.7 The Functions r. For every integer r, define u,: N - Z by
n-1
(9) u,(n) = I r'.
i=o
Then for all n, m e N,
n-1 m-1
(10) r(n)r' + r(m) =
I ri+m + Y r' = Ur(n + m).
i=o j=0
We shall use the functions , to compute powers of elements. In fact, if v is an
f-isomorphism from G to G and xflx) = Xr where r e Z, then
(11) (x ")n = (xp,(n))a
For, if n = 1, then u,(n) = 1. And if (11) holds for n - 1, then (1) and (10) imply that
(x")n = (xp,(n-1))ax" = (xp,(n-1)r+1)" = (x,(n))ff
Let r = 1 + psa where p is a prime and a, s e N with (p, a) = 1 and s > 2 in case
p = 2. Then r" _ (n) pksak and hence
k=o k
r" - 1 (n)
p (k-1)sak-1
(12) .(n) = =n+n
r-1 k=2 k
Let i e N. If p']n, then by 2.5.6, every summand on the right hand side of (12) is
divisible by p' and hence p'Ir(n). Conversely, suppose that p1 ,(n) and let n = p'b
with (p, b) = 1. By (12), ,(n) - n ((mod p) and hence j > 1. Since s >_ 2 in case p = 2,
2.5.6 shows that every summand ()p_1ak_1 in (12) is divisible by p'+'. Then (12)
yields that i < j + 1. Thus pÌ n. We have shown that for all i, n e N,
(13) p`ln if and only if p`lu,(n).
It follows that for all x, y, m e N,
(14) x = y (mod p') if and only if r(X) - r(y) (mod pm).
This is clear if x = y. If, say, x = n + y with n e N, then u,(x) = r(n)r'' + ,(y) by
(10). Since r = 1 (mod p), therefore u,(x) = ,(y) (mod p') if and only if u,(n) __ 0
(mod pm) and by (13), this is the case if and only if n = 0 (mod pm). This proves
(14). Now (14) shows that the map ar,m: 7L/p'"7L - 7L/pm7L given by r,m(X + pm7L) =
,(x) + pm7L is well-defined and injective. Since 7L/pm7L is finite, this map is also
surjective and it follows that
(15) to every i e N there exists j e N such that r(j) = i (modpm).
We leave open the question exactly when a crossed isomorphism induces a

projectivity, and content ourselves with the following result. Note that property (d)
of the theorem only contains conditions on f that are easy to control in G.
2.5.8 Theorem (Baer [1944]). Let G be a group, f: G -+ End G and suppose that
a: G - G is an f-isomorphism. Then the following properties (a)-(d) are equivalent.
(a) a induces a projectivity from G to G and satisfies (Hx) = Hx for all H < G
and x e G.
(b) For every x e G, f(x) is a power automorphism and <x) _ <x>.
(c) For every x e G, f(x) is a power automorphism and o(x) = o(x).
(d) For all x, y e G, the following conditions are satisfied.
(i) f(x) is a power automorphism.
(ii) If o(x) is infinite, then xf(x) = X.
(iii) If o(x) = 2m with m > 1, then xf(x) = x1+4' with i e N.
(iv) If xy = yx and o(x) and o(y) are finite and relatively prime, then xf(v) = X.
Proof. (a) (b). By (7), every f(x) is a power automorphism. Since a induces a
projectivity, <x> = <x).
(b) = (c). Since a is bijective, o(x) = I <x> I = I <x)I = o(x).
(c) (d). Clearly (i) holds. If o(x) is infinite and xf(x) 0 x, then xf(x) = x-1 and
XX _ (Xf(x)X) = 1 = 1 by (6). This would contradict the assumption o(x) =
o(x). Hence (ii) holds and (iii) follows similarly. For, if o(x) = 2m with m > 1 and
XPX) = X-1+4; with j e N, then (x)Z = (x4') by assumption would have order 2m-1,
on the other hand its order would divide 2m-2. Finally, if x, y e G with xy = yx and
(o(x), o(y)) = 1, then <xy> = <x> x <y>. By (8), <xy> is a subgroup of order I <xy>
containing the element (xy) of this order. Thus <xy) is cyclic and since x, y e
<xy), we have (xf('')y) = xy = yx _ (yf(x)x). Hence xf(Y)y = yf(x)x and since
xf(r) E <x> and yf(x) a <y>, it follows that xf(Y) = X.
(d) - (b). By (8), <x> is a subgroup of G; we have to show that it is generated

by x. First let o(x) be infinite and write H = <x>. For 1 : y e H, xf(r) = x or
xfly) = x-'. In the latter case, it would follow that yf(r) = y-', contradicting (ii).
Thus f(y) is the identity on H. By (2), this also holds for y = 1 and therefore yz =
(yf(z)z) = (yz) for all y, z e H. Thus a induces an isomorphism on H and it follows
that <x) = <x). Now let o(x) be finite and suppose first that o(x) = p" for some
prime p and m e N. If m = 1, then by (6), x is a nontrivial element in the group <x)
of order p and hence <x> = <x). So suppose that m > 2. Then I<x>'I = p" and by
2.5.3, f(x) is the image of the p-element x under a homomorphism. Thus f(x) is
a p-element in Pot G and therefore xf(x) = x' with r - 1 (mod p); let r = 1 + p'a
where (p, a) = I and s >_ 1. The assumption (iii) implies that s >_ 2 in case p = 2.
By (13), p' does not divide u,(p'') and then (11) and (6) yield that (x)P'' =
0 1. It follows that x generates <x). Finally suppose that x is of com-
posite order, that is, x = yz with y : 1 : z, yz = zy and (o(y), o(z)) = 1, and assume
that the assertion is true for elements of smaller order. Then o(y) = o(y), o(z) _
o(z) and by (iv),
yz = (yf( )Z) = (yz) = x = (zy) = (zf(v)y) = zy.
It follows that o(x) = o(y)o(z) = o(x) and this implies that <x> = <x>.
(b) (a). By 2.5.4, H < G and (Hx) = H x for all H < G and x e G. We have
to show that preimages of subgroups of G are subgroups in G. Let S c G satisfy
S < G and take x, y e S. Then x(y)-' a S. Hence there exists z e S such that
x(y)-' = z, that is, x = zy = (zf(Y)y). It follows that x = zf('')y and hence
xy ' = zf(r) e <z> since f(y) is a power automorphism. Thus (xy-') c- <z) =
<z) < S, that is, xy-' e S. Therefore S is a subgroup of G and a induces a
projectivity.
We remark that element maps satisfying condition (a) of Theorem 2.5.8 can be
regarded as special types of isomorphism between the coset lattices of G and G, the
so-called right affinities.
Nonhamiltonian locally finite M-groups
We use Theorem 2.5.8 to construct projectivities between abelian and nonabelian

p-groups.
2.5.9 Theorem (Baer [1944]). Let G be a locally finite p-group with modular sub-
group lattice. If G is not hamiltonian, then there exist an abelian p-group G and
a crossed isomorphism a: G - G that induces a projectivity between G and G and
satisfies (Hx) = Hx for all H < G and x e G.
Proof. If G is abelian, then G = G and the identity a on G has the desired properties.
So suppose that G is not abelian and take an Iwasawa triple (A, b, s) for G as de-
scribed in 2.4.15. Then A is an abelian normal subgroup of 6 with IG : Al = p'", b is
an element of G with o(b) = p" = Exp G and s is an integer with s > 2 in case p = 2
such that G = A , b-' ab = a' +p' for all a e A and
(16) m + s = n.
Let r = 1 + p5 and = , the function defined in 2.5.7. By (13), p-',U(p') is an
integer prime to p; let t e 101 such that 0 < t < p" and
(17) t = p-'"(p") (mod p").
Then t # 0 (mod p) and therefore the map a - at is an automorphism of A. Now
bp"' E A since I G : A I = p'", and hence there exists a unique element ao e A such that
(18) bp' = a'..
Let G be the abelian group obtained by adjoining to A an element c, subject to the
relation
(19) cp"' = ao.
Then o(c) = o(b) = p" = Exp G. We want to construct a map f : G - End G sat-
isfying (2)-(4) and property (d) of Theorem 2.5.8.
For this let a be the power automorphism of G defined by g = g' = g'+p for all
g e G. By (16), o(a) = p'". Since IG: Al = p', every element x e G can be written
uniquely in the form x = ac'(x) with a c A and I < i(x) < p'", By (15) there exist
integers j such that (j) i(x) (modpt) and (14) shows that any two such integers
are congruent modulo p'. Therefore, since o(a) = p',
(20) f(x) = a'
is independent from the choice of the integer j satisfying (j) = i(x) (mod p') and
hence is a well-defined power automorphism of G. Now f (x) is the identity if and
only if p'"l j and by (13), this holds if and only if p' =_ (j) = i(x) (mod p'), that is, if
and only if x e A. Thus
(21) A={xeGlf(x)=id}.
In particular, (2) holds and (3) is trivial. To prove (4), consider elements x = a, OX)
and y = a2C'(i) of G, and let j, k e 101 satisfy (j) = i(x) (modpm) and (k) = i(y)
(modpm). Then ce'" a A, and the definition of f(y) and (10) yield that modulo A,
xf(Y)y = (c i(x))Py)C i(Y) = CM(!)rk+(k) = C(j+k).
Thus i(xf('')y) = (j + k) (mod p"') and hence f(xf(Y)y) = a'+k = a'ak = f(x)f(y).
So if we write x o y = xf('')y for x, y e G, then by 2.5.2, G* _ (G, o) is a group and
the identity a is an f-isomorphism from G to G*. Since s >_ 2 in case p = 2, f has all
the properties in (d) of 2.5.8 and therefore a induces a projectivity from G to G* and
satisfies (Hx) = Hx for all H < G and x e G. If we can show that G* and G are
isomorphic, then the theorem will be proved.
By (21), f(x) is the identity for all x e A and hence elements of A have the same
product in G and G*. Furthermore i(c) = 1 and (l) = 1 so that
(22) f(c) = a.
Since f (x o y) = f (xf ('') y) = f(x)f(y) for x, y E G*, the map f can be regarded as an
epimorphism from G* to <a> < Aut G with kernel A. It follows from (22) that G* is
generated by A and c. If d is the inverse to c in G*, then df(')c = d o c = 1. So (21)
and (22) imply that for a e A,
doaoc=(df(a)a)oc=(da)f(c)c=df)caf(c)=a'.
And if e is the pm-th power of c in G*, then (11), (17), (19) and (18) yield that
e=cv(p"')=cp'"'=ao' = bp"'.
Thus G and G* are extensions of A by elements b and c, respectively, inducing the

same automorphism on A and subject to the same relation zr'" = ao. Hence these
groups are isomorphic and the proof of the theorem is complete.
By 1.6.4 and 1.6.5, the results of Section 2.2 and Theorem 2.5.9 give the structure
of projective images of abelian torsion groups.
2.5.10 Theorem. The group G is lattice-isomorphic to an abelian torsion group if and

only if G is a direct product of coprime P-groups and nonhamiltonian locally finite
p-groups with modular subgroup lattices.
M-groups with elements of infinite order
Every nonabelian M-group with elements of infinite order admits a projectivity onto
an abelian group. We shall prove this beautiful theorem of Sato [1951] in the
remainder of this section. Our proof follows Mainardis [1991], [1992]; its main idea
is to embed the given M-group into an M-group with divisible torsion subgroup.
For such a group G, the infinite cyclic subgroups can be described quite easily and
Sato's construction of the projectivity between G and an abelian group becomes
much simpler. To describe these cyclic subgroups, we have to compute powers of
elements in G and for this we need the following functions.
2.5.11 The Functions ,a, and v,. Let p be a prime and let U,, be the set of (p-adic)
units in the ring RP of p-adic integers. For r e Up, the formula
"-1
(9) ,(n) _ Y- r'
1=0
again defines a function u,; this time, p,: FJ -+ R.

Let s e R with s > 2 in case p = 2 and assume that r = 1 + p'a where 0 a E R.
Write n = p'b where t > 0 and (b, p) = 1; then b c- Up and hence there exists d e Up
such that bd = 1. As in (12),
r" - 1
.(n) = =n+n (fl)p(k_1)sak_1
r-1 k=z \k
Again by 2.5.6, pt+1 divides (n)_1 )S for 2 < k 5 n and hence there exists f e Rp
such that
p'+1 f = n
p,(n) = n + + bdp'+1 f = n(1 + pdf).
Thus there exists one and, since Rp is an integral domain, only one element g e Rp
such that ,(n) = ng. That is, we have a second function v,: N - RP given by
(23) ,(n) = nv,(n)
and satisfying
(24) v,(n) - 1 (mod p) for all n e N.
As mentioned above, we can use the functions , and v, to compute powers of

elements.
2.5.12 Remark. Let G be a nonabelian M-group and let z e G be an element of

infinite order. Then by 2.4.11 there exist p-adic units r(p) with r(p) - 1 (mod p) and
r(2) - 1 (mod 4) such that c' = c(P) for all c c T(G)P, the p-component of T(G). And
an obvious induction then shows that for every finite subset it of P, for all n e N and
aP a T(G)P,
(25) z Li ap = z" fl ap'-,(n) = zn r7 apv-)(n)

PER PER PER
For, since ,(P)(1) = 1, the first equation is clear if n = 1. And if it holds for n, then
n+l
z jj ap) =( 11 ap)(zn zn+1 TT a;(P)"+I"jP)(")
jj P
PER PER PER PER
= Zn+1 T7
P
PEN
The second equation now follows from (23).

To simplify the notation, we define maps v(z, n): T(G) -, T(G) by
(26) (n Li av-(") for aP e T(G)P, zC c P, it finite.

PER PER
By (24) and 1.5.5, the map c - 0-0) is a power automorphism of T(G)p and hence
(27) v(z, n) e Pot T(G) for all z e G\T(G), n e N.
And if we use these maps, we can rewrite (25) in the form
(28) (za)" = z"a""(-,n) for all z e G\T(G), a e T(G), n e N.
We need a result on the structure of M-groups with divisible torsion subgroup,

due to Mainardis [1991], which is of independent interest.
2.5.13 Lemma. Let G be a nonabelian M-group with divisible torsion subgroup

T(G) = T
(a) For every z E G\T, a E T and n c- N, there exists b e T such that z"a = (zb)".
(b) There exists a torsion free, locally cyclic subgroup Z of G such that G = TZ.
Proof. (a) Since T is divisible and v(z, n) E Pot T, there exists b e T such that
b""(=,n) = a. By (28), (zb)" = z"b"(Z") = z"a.
(b) The assertion is clear if G/T is cyclic. So suppose that G/T is not cyclic. Then
G has the structure given in 2.4.11(b). In particular, G = T<z1,z2,...> and z'41 =
ziai with a, E T, pi e P. We show that there exist bi e T such that the elements xi =
zibi satisfy x?+1 = xi for all i e N. For this we may take b1 = 1. And if bi exists, then
ai ' bi e T and hence by (a) there exists bi+1 E T such that
x +1 = (zi+1bi+1)1" = z la;'bi = zibi = xi.
Thus the xi exist and <x1, ... , xi) = (x1> is infinite cyclic for all i. So Z =
<x1, x2, ... > is a torsion-free, locally cyclic subgroup of G satisfying TZ >_
T<z1,z2,...> = G.
The main step in the proof of Sato's theorem is the following lemma.
2.5.14 Lemma (Mainardis [1992]). Let G = T<z> be a nonabelian M-group with

divisible torsion subgroup T(G) = T and o(z) infinite; let G =_T x <w> where o(w) is
infinite. For every fl E Pot T, we define a map T: L1(G) - L1(G) in the following way.
If X E L1(T), let XT = X; and if X E L1(G) such that X T, that is, X = <(wa)">
where n e N and a E T, define XT = <(zag)">. Then T = T(W,Z; fl) is a bijective map
from L1(G) onto L1(G) satisfying for all X, Y, Z E L1(G),
(29) X < <Y,Z> if and only if XT < <YT,ZT).
Thus, by 1.3.2, T induces a projectivity from G onto G.
Proof. First of all, note that T is well-defined. For, if X is an infinite cyclic subgroup
of G, then just one of its two generators is of the form w"b with n > 0 and b e T
Since T is divisible, there exists a c- T such that b = a"; thus X = <(wa)">. And if
X = <(wa)"> = <(wc)m> where n, m c- N and a, c E T, then n = m and a" = cm. So if
v(n) = v(z, n) is as in 2.5.12, then by (28),
(zag)" = z"aPnv(n) = z"anp"(n) = z"cnp"(n) = (zcP)".
This shows that T is a well-defined map from L1(G) to L1(G). If X is a cyclic sub-
group of infinite order in G, again one of the two generators of X has the form z"b
where n e N and b e T. By (a) of 2.5.13 and since j E Pot T, there exists a e T such
that z"b = (zag)" and hence X = <(wa)" )T. Thus T is surjective. And if <(wa)" )T =
<(wc)m)T, then <z"ap""(")) = <zm'cflm"(m)> and since n, m c- N, this implies that n = m
and (a")fl"(") = (c")fl"("). Since the map t -- to"(") is an automorphism of T, it follows
that a" = c". Thus T is bijective.
It remains to be shown that r satisfies (29). So let X, Y, Z e L1(G). Note that by

2.4.11, any two subgroups of G permute so that < Y`, ZT> = YZZ` and also, of course,
<Y, Z> = YZ. If Y and Z are finite, then Y, Z < T and since r is the identity on
L1(T), (29) clearly holds for X, Y, Z. Suppose next that Y is infinite and Z is finite.
Then Y = <(wa)"> and Z = where n e t\! and a, b e T. Let X < YZ. If X is finite,
X < Z and (29) holds. So let X be infinite, that is X = <(wa)"`b'> where i, j e N.
Since T is divisible, there exists c e T such that c"` = b'. Thus Y` = <(zap)"> and
Zr = >_ <c`>; since fi and v(za', ni) are power automorphisms of T, using (28),
we obtain
<(za,')n(cneev(--',")>
Xi = <(wac)"`>t = <(z(ac)')"`> = < YTZ`.
Conversely, assume that XT < YTZT and X` ZT. Then XT = <(zafl)"kbm> where
k, m c N. Since T is divisible and # and v(nk) are power automorphisms of T, there
exists d e T such that bm = dP"k"("k). By (28),
XT = <(ZaP)nkbm> = <ZnkaPnkv(nk)dOnkv(nk)\ = <(z(ad)P)nk\
and since d"k = bm"(nk) '# ` e Z, it follows that X = <(wad)`> = <(wa)nkdnk> < YZ
Thus (29) holds for X, Y, Z.
Finally suppose that Y and Z are infinite. We shall reduce this case to the one
just dealt with. Now YZ, being a subgroup of G = T x <w>, has the form H x U
where H = YZ r T is the torsion subgroup of YZ and U is infinite cyclic. Clearly,
H HY/Y is cyclic. By the case already settled, Y` < HT UT and Z` < HT UT, so that
YTZ` = KT V` where K'< HT and VT < HT UT is infinite cyclic. Applying this case
once again, we get that Y < K V and Z < K V. Thus H U = YZ < K V and therefore
again H` < KT VT and U` < KT VT. So we finally get that YTZT = KT VT = HT UT. Since
(29) holds in this case, X < YZ = HU if and only if XT < HT UT = YTZT. This finishes
the proof of (29) and of the lemma.
2.5.15 Theorem (Sato [1951]). Let G be an M-group with elements of infinite order.
Then there exists an abelian group G lattice-isomorphic to G.
Proof. The assertion is clear if G is abelian; so let G be nonabelian. By 2.4.12, we

may assume that T(G) = T is divisible. By 2.5.13, G = TZ where Z is a torsion-free,
locally cyclic subgroup of G. Finally, by 2.5.14, we may assume that Z is not cyclic.
Thus there exist z, e Z and primes pi such that Z = <z1, z2, ... > and z+1 = z, for all
i e N. Take a group W = <w1, w2, ... > isomorphic to Z via the natural isomorphism
mapping z; to w1, let G=Tx W,Gi=T<z1>SGand G1=Tx <we>foralliet N.
Then the (G,)iE N form an ascending chain of subgroups of G whose set-theoretic
union is G; similarly for G. Inductively we define power automorphisms F'1 = 1 and
A+1 = Av(zi+1, p,)-1 of T where v is as in (27). Then by 2.5.14, for every i e t\!, the
map r, = r(wi, zi; $i): L1(Gi) - L1(G,) is bijective and induces a projectivity from G,
onto Gi. All the Ti clearly coincide on L1(T). If X is an infinite cyclic subgroup of Gi,
then X = <(wia)"> for some n e t\!, a e T and since T is divisible, there exists b e T
such that bP, = a; using (28), we obtain that
X"', = <(w1a)">' = <(w,+1b)P1")T"' = <(z1+1bv'.,)P;")
<(z1aP')n)
= <(zP+1 bP"Q'+'
v(z-.P'))n> = = X.
Thus Ti is the restriction of Ti+1 to L1(G1). If X is a cyclic subgroup of G, there exists
i e N such that X 5 G; and we define X` = X". Then T is a well-defined bijective
map from L1(G) onto L 1(G). And if X, Y, Z e L, (G), there exists Gk such that
X, Y, Z S Gk and it follows that (29) holds for X, Y, Z and t. By 1.3.2, T induces a
projectivity from G onto G.
Finally we mention that Sato's theorem also implies that every locally finite
nonhamiltonian p-group with modular subgroup lattice is lattice-isomorphic to an
abelian group (see Exercise 7). However, we chose to present Baer's proof since it is
independent of Iwasawa's theorem on M-groups with elements of infinite order;
what is more, it even yields an isomorphism between the coset lattices of the two
groups. Unfortunately, as Exercise 6 shows, Baer's method cannot be used to prove
Sato's theorem.
Exercises
1. Let G be a group, f : G - End G, a an f-isomorphism from G to a group G and
E= {xeGIf(x)=id}. Show that for all x, yeG and ac E,
(a) E and E are subgroups of G and G, respectively,
(b) f(x) = f(y) if and only if x-1 y e E,
(x)-1ax = (x-1at(:)x).
(c)
2. Let A be an abelian group, f : A - Pot A, a an f-isomorphism from A to a group
B and E = {a e A If(a) = id}. Show that every subgroup of E is normal in B and
that E and B/E' are abelian.
3. Prove Theorem 2.5.10.
4. Show that an abelian p-group possesses a projectivity onto a nonabelian group if
and only if it is not cyclic and has finite exponent which is at least 8 in case p = 2.
5. Let G = T x Z where T is an abelian torsion group and Z is infinite cyclic. Show
that G is lattice-isomorphic to a nonabelian group if and only if T contains an
element of order 8 or there is a prime p > 2 such that T contains an element of
order p2.
6. Let G = T x <w> where T = <a) x with o(a) = o(b) = p" for some prime p,
n e t and o(w) is infinite. Show that if a is a crossed isomorphism from G to some
group G inducing a projectivity from G to G, then G is abelian.
7. (Mainardis [1992]) Let G be a locally finite nonhamiltonian p-group with modu-
lar subgroup lattice. Show that there exists an M-group G* with elements of
infinite order such that G is isomorphic to a factor group of G*. (Hint: Show that,
for arbitrary groups, if G = TZ, T:9 G and : X - Z is an epimorphism, then G
is isomorphic to a factor group of a semidirect product of T by X.)
2.6 Projectivities between abelian groups 101
2.6 Projectivities between abelian groups

We have seen that many abelian groups admit projectivities onto nonabelian groups
(Exercises 2.5.4 and 2.5.5). In this section we shall show that, on the other hand,
lattice-isomorphic abelian groups are nearly always isomorphic, and that frequently
every projectivity between them is induced by a group-isomorphism. Exceptions to
these classical results of Baer [1939a] are the groups of torsion-free rank 1. Their
projectivities will be studied at the end of this section.
Element maps derived from projectivities
We want to construct group-isomorphisms from projectivities between abelian

groups. In the definition of the element maps, we do not require the image group to
be abelian. In general it will be an M-group and we shall use the following.
2.6.1 Lemma. Let H be an M-group, H = X u Y with X, Y cyclic and X n Y = I

and suppose that Z is a cyclic subgroup of H such that X u Z = H = Y u Z.
(a) If Z = <xy) where x e X and y e Y, then <x) = X and <y) = Y.
(b) If either X is infinite or H is a finite p-group and IXI > I YI, then to every
generator x of X there exists exactly one generator y of Y such that Z = <xy).
Proof. (a) Since <x) u Y >_ Z u Y = H and H is an M-group, X = (<x) u Y) n X =

<x) v (Y n X) = <x>. Similarly, Y = < y).
(b) Suppose first that X is infinite. If Y is finite, then Y H and Z is infinite by
2.4.8. If Y is infinite, then H is abelian by 2.4.10 and Z clearly is infinite. In both
cases, H = X Y and hence Z = <xy) where x e X, y e Y. Since Z is infinite, xy and
(xy)-' = y-'x-' = x-'yk, for some integer k, are the generators of Z. By (a), x
or z = x-' and the assertion is clear.
Now suppose that H is a finite p-group and IXI >_ I YI. By 2.3.2, H = XY; let
Z = <xy) where x e X, y e Y. By 2.3.5, Exp H = I X I = p", say, and 2.3.8 shows that
Q8 is not involved in H, that is, H is an M*-group. Since x and y are generators of
X and Y, respectively, o(y)5 o(x) = p". By 2.3.10, (xy)""-' = x" 'y""-' it Y and, simi-
larly, (yx)""-' 0 Y. It follows that IZI = p" = IXI and <yx) n Y = 1. Suppose that
there is another element yo e Y such that <xyo) = Z = <xy). Then there exists
k e t\l such that xyo = (xy)'` = x(yx)k-' y and hence y0y' _ (yx)k-' e <yx) n Y = 1,
that is, yo = y. This shows that to every x e X there is at most one element y e Y
with Z = <xy). Since Z and X have the same number of generators, it follows from
(a) that to every generator x of X there is exactly one y E Y such that Z = <xy).
2.6.2 Lemma. Let q be a projectivity from the group G to the group G and let a, b e G
such that <a, b) = <a> x . Assume that either o(a) is infinite or G and G are finite
p-groups and o(a) >_ o(b). Then if <a>" = <a>, there exists a unique element b e G
such that
(1) " = and <ab>" = <ab>.
We write b = f(b;a,a,cp) or, briefly, b = f(b;a,a) since we are never going to change
the projectivity.
Proof. Since <a, b> is abelian, H = <a, b)` is an M-group and X = <a>9, Y= ",
and Z = <ab> satisfy the assumptions of 2.6.1(b). It follows that to the given
generator a of X there corresponds exactly one generator 6 of Y = " such that
<ab) = Z = <ab>0.
2.6.3 Lemma. Let G = <a> x B and let cp be a projectivity from G to some group G.
Assume that either o(a) is infinite or G and G are finite p-groups and o(a) > Exp B. Let
<a>0 = <a> and define u: B -- B9' by b = f(b; a, a) for b e B. Then a is bijective and
induces cp on B.
Proof. For every b E B, <a, b> satisfies the assumptions of 2.6.2. Hence f (b; a, a) is a
uniquely determined element of " < B' and thus a is a well-defined map from
B to B`0. If b,, b2 E B such that bi = bz, then <ab, )` = <ab; > = <abZ> = <ab2>0.
Since cp is bijective, <ab,> = <ab2> and there exists an integer k such that ab, _
(abZ)" = a"bk. It follows that a = a'` and hence k = 1 if o(a) is infinite and k =_ 1
(mod o(a)) if o(a) is finite. In both cases, b, = bZ = b2. Thus a is injective. To show
that u is also surjective take c c B` and let Y, Z < G such that Yq' = <c> and
Z0 _ <ac>. If X = <a>, then X` u Y` = <a, c> = X` u Z` = Y` u Z` and hence
H = X u Y = X x Y satisfies the assumptions of 2.6.1(b). It follows that to the
generator a of X there is a generator b of Y such that (ab> = Z. So (b)` = Yq, =
<c> and <ab> = Z` _ <ac>, that is, c = f(b; a, a) = V. Thus a is surjective. Finally,
(1) shows that _ <f(b;a,a)> = 0 for all b e B and it follows that H`0 = H
for all H < B. Thus a induces q on B.
2.6.4 Lemma. Under the hypotheses of 2.6.3, assume moreover that G and G are
abelian and let b, c E B.
(a) If n <c> = 1, then (be)' = bc.
(b) If n <c> = <bc> n <c> = 1, then (c") = (c)" for all n c- Z.
Proof. (a) Since G and G are abelian, <a, b, c> = <a> x x <c> and <a, b, c)4' =
<a>` x " x <c> . Furthermore b = f(b; a, a), c = f(c; a, a) and (bc) =
f(bc; a, a) are by definition generators of 4', <c> and <bc)`, respectively, such
that <ab> = (ab>, <ac>0 = <ac) and <abc>0 = <a(bc)). If o(a) is infinite, then
also o(ac) is infinite and if o(a) is finite, then o(ac) = o(a) > o(b). In both cases,
(ac, b> = <ac> x so that by 2.6.2 there exists b = f (b; ac, ac) E q, with
<acb>0 = <acb). Similarly, we have c = f(c;ab,ab) E <c>0 with <abc>0 = <abc).
Hence
(2) <abc> = <a(bc)a> = <a6c> = <abc>
and there exist integers r, s such that a(bc) = (abccy = (abc)s. Since a e <a>,
b, b E 0, c, c E <c> P and the product of these three groups is direct, it follows
that a = a' = as, 6' = (b)s and (bc) = (6c)'. If o(a) is finite, this implies that
r - s = 1 (mod o(a)) and, since o(a) = Exp G, that x' = x = xs for all x c- G. If o(a) is
infinite, r = s = 1. In both cases, it follows that b = b and (bc) = 6c = bc.
(b) Clearly, (c") = (c)" holds for n = 0 and n = 1. Suppose it is true for
n - 1 E N. Then by (a),
b(c")" = (bc")" = (bcc"-')o = (bc)o(c"-1)" = baca(co)"-i = bo(co)n
and hence (c") = (c)". This proves the assertion for n > 0. Again by (a),
b = (bc)"(c-') = bc"(c-')" and hence (c-') = (c)-' Since b-' and c-' satisfy
the same assumptions as b and c, it follows that for n > 0, (c-") =
((C-1)")" = (Co)-n
2.6.5 Lemma. Let B and b be abelian groups and suppose that a: B -+ B is a bijective
map satisfying (c") = (c)" for all c e B, n e 7L and (bc) = bc" for all b, c e B with
 n <c> = 1. Then a is an isomorphism.
Proof. If x, y e B, then by the structure of finitely generated abelian groups there are
b, c c- B such that <x, y) = <b) x <c>. Hence x = b'c', y = bres where i, j, r, s are
integers and our assumptions yield that (xy) = (b'+rC;+s)o = (bo)i+r(coy+s = xoyo
We summarize the results obtained so far.
2.6.6 Lemma. Let the hypotheses of 2.6.3 hold. Assume in addition that G and G
are abelian and that to every c e B there exists b e B such that n <c) _
<bc) n <c) = 1. Then a is an isomorphism inducing cp on B.
Proof. By 2.6.3, a is bijective and induces cp on B. Then 2.6.4 yields that a satisfies
the assumptions of 2.6.5 and therefore is an isomorphism.
Torsion groups
We can now prove our first main result on projectivities between abelian groups.
2.6.7 Theorem (Baer [1939a]). Let G be an abelian p-group with the following
property:
(3) If G contains an element of order p", then G contains at least three independent
elements of this order.
Then any projectivity cp of G onto an abelian group G is induced by an isomorphism.
Proof. Let 9 be the family of all finitely generated subgroups of G that satisfy (3).
Clearly, 9 is a local system of subgroups of G and by 1.3.7, it suffices to prove that
q is induced by an isomorphism on every X E 9. Thus we may assume that G itself
is finitely generated and hence a finite group.
Our assumptions then imply that G = <a> x B where o(a) = p" = Exp G and B
contains two independent elements of order p". Hence if c E B, there exists b E B such
that o(b)_= p" and n <c> = 1, and therefore also <bc> n <c> = 1. Since G is
abelian, G = <a>0 x B and by 2.2.6, G is a p-group. So all the assumptions of 2.6.6
are satisfied and if we choose a e G with <a> = <a>", then a: B - B0 given by
b = f(b; a, a) for b e B is an isomorphism inducing qp on B. We define r: G -, G by
(a'.b)' = a'b for b E B and i e N. Then r is clearly an isomorphism as well and we
want to show that it induces q,. Since every group is the join of its cyclic subgroups,
it suffices to prove that
(4) <a'b>0=<(a`b)T>forallbEB,ieNl.
So let b e B and take c e B with o(c) = p" and <c)' n = 1. By 2.3.11 there exists
a complement D of <c> in G containing <a, b>. Hence G = <c> x D and by 2.6.6,
the map v: D -' D0 defined by d" = f(d; c, c") is an isomorphism inducing cp on D.
Since a induces (p on B, <cb>0 = <(cb)> = <cb> and the definition of f in 2.6.2
shows that b = f(b;c,c) = by. Similarly,
<ca>0 = <ac>0 = <af(c; a, a)> = <ac) = <ca)
implies that a = f(a; c, c") = a". Since v induces cp on D, we finally get that
<a'b>0 = <(a`b)"> = <(a")'b"> = <a'b"> = <(a'b)`>.
Thus (4) holds and r induces q,.
Baer's theorem shows in particular that every autoprojectivity of an abelian p-

group having property (3) is induced by an automorphism, that is, P(G) = PA(G) for
such a group G. An elementary abelian group of order p" clearly satisfies (3) if n > 3.
Thus Baer's theorem yields a proof of Theorem 1.4.4 that is independent of the
Fundamental Theorem of Projective Geometry; in fact, it is a wide generalization of
this result.
For finite abelian p-groups, condition (3) means that the type of G is of the form
(p",_., with r > 3, n1 = n2 = n3 = n and p" = ExpG. It is easy to see that
this condition is almost necessary if G is to have every projectivity induced by an
isomorphism. We illustrate this in Exercises 3-5 and mention that Holmes [1988]
determines P(G) for a group G of type (p", p') completely. It is also clear that two
lattice-isomorphic finite abelian p-groups are isomorphic, as one can tell from the
subgroup lattice the type of the group. In fact, it is a consequence of Theorem 2.6.7
that any two lattice-isomorphic abelian p-groups for a fixed prime p are isomorphic.
2.6.8 Theorem (Baer [1939a]). Let G and G beabelian p-groups for some prime p
and suppose that qp is a projectivity from G to G. Then there exists an isomorphism
a: G G inducing cp on H = <S2m(G)I SZm(G)/0rn-1(G)I > p3).
Proof. If x e H is of order p", then 1,,(H) = S2"(G) is a direct product of cyclic groups
(see Robinson [1982], p. 105) and since IS2"(G)/S2n_1(G)I > p3, at least three of the
direct factors are of order p". By 2.6.7 there exists an isomorphism r: H -+ H10
inducing cp on H. If H = G, we are done. So suppose that H < G and take a basic
subgroup B of G. Then B is a direct product of cyclic groups and G/B is a direct

product of quasicyclic groups. Since H < G, B has finite exponent and therefore is a
direct factor of G (see Robinson [1982], p. 106). Thus G is a direct product of cyclic
and quasicyclic groups and it follows that G = X1 xX2 x Y where the Xi are cyclic
(possibly trivial) or quasicyclic and Y< H. Then G = X' x Xz x Y' and clearly
there are isomorphisms a;: X; - Xr extending the restrictions of T to Xi n H. Thus
there is an isomorphism a: G - G extending T.
Using 1.6.6, it is not difficult to extend our results from p-groups to arbitrary
torsion groups (see Exercise 1).
Groups with elements of infinite order
We want to show that if G is an abelian group of torsion-free rank ro(G) >_ 2, then
every projectivity of G is induced by an isomorphism. To prove this we must first
handle the following special case.
2.6.9 Lemma. If G = <a> x where o(a) and o(b) are infinite, then every projec-
tivity (p from G to some group G is induced by an isomorphism.
Proof. By 2.4.10, G is abelian and hence G = <a>" x ' -_ G. Let <a> = <d> and
put b = fl b; a, a) where f is the function defined in 2.6.2. Then v = , G =
<a> x and we want to show that the isomorphism T: G -+ G mapping a to a and
b to & induces cp.
For k E N, q induces a projectivity from G/<b'"> = <a, b')/<bk> x /<b"> to
G/<bk )` and since <a, bk)/<bk) is infinite cyclic, I /<bk> I = I '/<bk> 0I by 2.6.3.
It follows that <bk>w = <bk> and, similarly, <ak>,, = <ak>
Let n, m e 7L\{0}. Then by (1), x = f(bm; a", a") is a generator of <bm> satisfying
<a"bm)'0 = <a"x>. Since bm and b-m are the only generators of <bm)`0, it follows that
there exists a sign E(n, m) e { + 1, -1 } such that
<anbe(n,m)m\
(5) <anbm> =
We have to show that E(n, m)) = 1 for all n, m since this will imply that X' = XT for
all cyclic subgroups X of G and hence that cp is induced by T. First of all,
(6) E(n, m) = E(- n, - m) = E(n, - m).
For, <a-"b-m\N = <anbm> = <anbs(n.m)m> = <a-nbe(n.m)(-M)> yields E(n,m) =
E(-n, -m), and 9(n, m) = - E(n, -m) would imply that <a"b-m >11 = <a"be(" m)m \ _
<a"bm)m, a contradiction. We show next that
(7) E(n, m) = E(n - 1, m) for n > 2.
For, since <a> n <a"-lbm> = 1, there exists y = f(a"-lbm;a,a) satisfying <y> =
<an-lbm// \M = <an-1be(n-l,m)m> and <ay> = <a(an-lbm)>dl = <anbe(n.m)m\. Hence
there exist u, v e { + 1, -1} /such that al+"(n-1)b 1e(n-1,m)m = avnbve(n,m)m /It follows
that 1 - it = (v - u)n and ys(n - 1, m) = ve(n, m). Since n > 2, the first equation
implies that v = e and the second then yields (7). Finally we claim that
(8) e(n, m) = e(n, m - 1) form >- 2.
<a"b'n-1)`0
Indeed z = f(a"b'"-l;b,b) satisfies <z> = = <a"be(R,m-')('"-')) and
<bz) = <ba"b'-' >0 = <a"be(" so that there exist u, v e (+ 1, - 1} such that
anbe(n,m-1)(m-1)+1 = avnbve(n.m)m This implies that = v and e(n,m - 1) - I =
m(e(n, m - 1) - E(n, m)); since m > 2 it follows that e(n, m - 1) = e(n, m).
By induction, (7) and (8) yield that e(n,m) = E(1, 1) for all n, m e N. Since
b = f(b; a, a), <ab>0 = <ab> and hence E(l,1) = 1. By (6), e(n, m) = 1 for all
n,me7L\{0}.
2.6.10 Theorem (Baer [1939a]). Let G be an abelian group which contains two
elements a and b of infinite order such that <a> n = 1. Then any projectivity of G
is induced by exactly two isomorphisms.
Proof. Let p be a projectivity from G to some group G. We have to show that (P is

induced by an isomorphism; by 1.5.7, 1 Pot G I = 2, so that p will then be induced by
exactly two isomorphisms. By 2.4.10, G is abelian.
We note first that 2.6.9 has a number of immediate consequences for the
functions f( ; a, a) defined in 2.6.2. Let a, b e G be elements of infinite order such that
<a> n = 1; let <a>0 = <a> and put b = fl b; a, a). If r is an isomorphism from
<a, b> to <a, b>0 inducing q there and if x, y e <a, b> such that <x> n <y> = 1, then
<y>'P = <y`> and <xy>0 = <(xy)`> = <x`y`> so that
(9) fly; x,xI) = y`.
Exactly one of the two isomorphisms inducing (p on <a, b> satisfies at = a. It follows
from (9) that for this T, b` = fl b; a, a) = b and hence that
(10) a = fl a; b, b) and ab = flab; a,a).
Again by (9), since (x")` = (x`)" for every integer n,

(11) f (x'; a, a) = f (x; a, a)" for all x e <a, b> with <x> n <a> = 1.
Finally we claim that
(12) f(x; a, a) = f(x; b, b) for all x c- G with <x> n <a> = I = <x> n .
For, if 1 x" e <a, b> for some n E t%J, it follows from (9) that f (x'; a, a) = (x")` _
f (x"; b, b) and then (11) applied to <a, x> and <b, x> yields that
f (x; a, a)" = fl x"; a, a) = fl x"; b, b) = f (x; b, b)".
This implies f (x; a,a) = f (x; b, b) since both elements generate the same infinite cyclic
group <x>0. And if <x> n <a, b> = 1, then 2.6.4(a) and (10) yield that
f(xab;a,a) = f(x;a,a)f(ab;a,a) = f(x;a,a)ab.

By (1), this implies that <abx>0 = <abf(x; a, a)> and hence f(x; a, a) = f(x; ab, ab).
Similarly, f (x; b,b) = f (x; ab, ab) and this yields (f2).
Now we define a map a: G -+ G that will turn out to be an isomorphism inducing

cp. We choose a fixed pair u, v of elements of infinite order in G such that
 n <v> = 1, take u e G with ' = and put u = f(v; u, u). Let x e G. If
<x> n = 1, we define x = f(x; u, u); and if <x> n : 1, then <x> n <v> = 1
and we define x = f(x; v, v). By 2.6.3, a1, is a bijective map from X to X' for every
cyclic subgroup X of G and since q is a projectivity, this implies that a is bijective
and induces cp. We claim that for every w e G of infinite order with n <w> = 1,
(13) x = f(x; w, w) for all x e G with <x> n <w> = 1.
For, w = f(w; u, u). So if <x> n = 1, then x = f(x; u, u) = f(x; w, w) by (12).
And if <x> n # 1, there exist n, m e 7L such that x" = um and (11) and (10) yield
that
R X; w, w)" = fix"; w, w) = ./ (um; W, W) = f (u; W, W)m = u'.
Thus f(x; w, w) is the unique generator of <x>" whose n-th power is um, and since
this description is also true of f(x; v, v) = x, we obtain x = f(x; w, w').
Now we are able to prove that a is an isomorphism. Let x, y e G and suppose first
that <x, y> Cm x C. Since in such a group there exist infinitely many infinite
cyclic groups, every pair intersecting trivially, there is 1 # w e <x, y> such that
<w> n <x> = <w> n <y> = <w> n <xy> = <w> n = 1. If r: <x, y> - <x, y> is
the isomorphism inducing cp on <x, y> and satisfying wt = w, then by (13) and
(9), z = f (z; w, w) = f (z; w, w`) = zt for every z e {x, y, xy}. Thus (xy) = (xy)T =
x`y` = xy. Now suppose that <x, y> * C,,,, x C. Then by the structure of finitely
generated abelian groups, there exists a subgroup B of G of torsion-free rank 1 such
that <x, y> < B. If n B = 1, take w = u; if n B ; 1, take any w e G of infi-
nite order satisfying <w> n B = 1. In both cases, c = f(c; w, w) for all c e B. It
follows from 2.6.4 that (bc) = b'c' for all b, c e B with n <c> = 1 and that
(c") = (c)" for all c e B of finite order; if o(c) is infinite, then (c") = f(c"; w, w) _
f(c; w, w)" = (c)" by (11). Thus 2.6.5 shows that ajB is an isomorphism and hence
that (xy) = xy.
In view of Baer's theorem it remains to study projectivities between abelian

groups of torsion-free rank 1; we start with the torsion-free groups of this type.
Torsion-free groups of rank one
The structure of these groups is well-known (see Robinson [1982], p. 112); we review
the basic facts. In general, if G is an abelian group, written additively, an element
g e G is said to be divisible in G by a positive integer m if g = mg, for some gl a G. If
p' is the largest power of the prime p dividing g, then h is called the p-height of g in
G; should g be divisible by every power of p, we say that g has infinite p-height in G.
Let pl, P2, ... be the sequence of primes written in their natural order. Then the
height of g in G is the vector l)(g) = (hl,h2,...) where h; is the p; height of g in
G. Two such vectors b and f are called equivalent if hi = k, for almost all i and h, = ki
whenever hi or k, is infinite. This is an equivalence relation on the set -5 of all such

vectors, and the equivalence classes are termed types. The type of a group element g
is defined to be the type of its height vector. If G is a torsion-free abelian group of
rank 1, then all nonzero elements of G have the same type, which is referred to as the
type of G, in symbols t(G). The structure theorem now states that two torsion-free
abelian groups of rank 1 are isomorphic if and only if they have the same type.
Furthermore, every such group is isomorphic to a subgroup of the additive group 0
of rationals containing the integers. So we only have to study projectivities of these
subgroups of 0 and the basic tool here is the following.
2.6.11 Lemma. Let 71 < G < 0 and suppose that cp is a projectivity from G to some
subgroup G of 0. If = <p) for all p e P, then G = G and co is the trivial auto-
projectivity of G.
Proof. We want to show that cp fixes every cyclic subgroup of G. First of all, Z10 = 71
since 71 = <2> u <3>; in particular, 71 5 G. If p is a prime, r e IN and s a nonnegative
integer such that p_5 a G, then <p') < 71 5 <p-') S G and <p-')/<p') is cyclic of
order p'+'. By 1.2.8, <p-')'/<p')' is cyclic of order q'+, for some prime q and as
I DOI <p)" I = I71/<p) I = p divides the order of this group, q = p. Since 71' = 71, it
follows that <p' ),, = <pr > and <p-' )' = <p-' ). Next, suppose that m = pr,1 ... pkk is
the primary decomposition of the positive integer m. Then <m> = <pil) n ... n <pkk )
and hence <m)" = <m>. If m-1 e G, then also pi e G for all i, and <m-1) _
<p'') u u <pk'k) implies that <m-1 )' = <m-1 ). Finally, if m, n e71 are coprime
and e G, then <m> and are subgroups of G and the group (!) is the unique
subgroup H of (!)
n
satisfying (1) = H u 71 and H n 71 = <m>. Since (_), 71 and
n n
(/m m m
<m> are invariant under cp, it follows that (). Thus every cyclic sub-
\n = n
group of G is fixed by cp and hence G 5 G. If we apply this result to c0-1, we get that
G = G and then cp clearly is the trivial autoprojectivity of G.
2.6.12 Corollary. If 71 < G < Q and cp and ,1i are projectivities from G to some group
G such that <p)IP = " for all p e P, then cp = 0.
Proof. Apply 2.6.11 to the autoprojectivity c*_' of G.
We are now able to determine the autoprojectivities of 0; the structure of P(G) for
an arbitrary torsion-free abelian group G of rank 1 is given in Exercise 7. All these
groups possess autoprojectivities that are not induced by group automorphisms.
2.6.13 Theorem (Gasparini and Metelli [1984]). The group P(Q) of autoprojectivi-
ties of 0 is the semidirect product of PA(G) by S = (co e P(Q)I 1W = 71). Furthermore,
PA(0) is isomorphic to the multiplicative group of positive rational numbers and
S - Sym N.
Proof. It is well-known and easy to prove that Aut 0 is isomorphic to the multi-
plicative group of rational numbers: for q e 0\{0}, the multiplication q: x - qx is an
automorphism of 0 and every automorphism is of this form. If we write pq for the
autoprojectivity induced by q, then
(14) <x>Pa = <qx> for all x e 0
and by 1.4.1, the map p: q pq is an epimorphism from Aut 0 to PA(0). Since
kerp = (1, -1 }, it follows that PA(Q) is isomorphic to the multiplicative group of
positive rational numbers.
Let cp e P(Q). Since 7L is cyclic, 7L'' = <q> = 7LP9 for some q e 0. Hence p, ,-'(p e S
and cp e PA(QQ)S. If cp e PA(Q) n S, then cp = p, for some r e QQ and 7L = ZPr = <r>.
It follows that r e 1+ 1, -11 and cp is the trivial autoprojectivity. Thus P(Q) _
PA(QQ)S and PA(Q) n S = 1.
We show next that S Sym N. For this recall that pl, pZ, ... is the sequence of
primes written in their natural order. If a E Sym 101, we define a map 6: 0 - 0 by
(15) 0=0,(ii = [1 P i)fork,aZ,naNand(-x)'= -x' for x > 0.

t=1 / i=1
Clearly, Q is bijective and satisfies (xy) = xy" for all x, y c- Q. Furthermore 7L = 7L

and therefore <x> = (x7L)6 = x7L = <x> for all x e Q. Since every finitely gener-
ated subgroup of 0 is cyclic, Theorem 1.3.3 shows that Q induces an autoprojectivity
0 of 0 and as 7L = 7L, 0 E S. We claim that the map 0: Sym N - S; a ' is an
isomorphism. Clearly,
(16) <x>O = <x> for all x e 0;
in particular, <pi>"e = <p6> = <Pa(j)> for all i and this shows that 0 is injective.
Every cp e S permutes the maximal subgroups of Z. So if we define T E Sym N by
<Pt>' = <PT(i)>, then <pi>" = for all i and by 2.6.12, (p Thus 0 is
surjective. And if a, r E Sym N, then
<A>11111 = <P.(i)> "= <P,(a(i)) ) = <Pt>0-
for all i and again by 2.6.12, '7L Thus 0 is an isomorphism. Finally, for
ge0,aaSym101andpEP,
=P
'-"- = <qP> "= <(qp)> = <qP> = 1'.Pv,
and hence, again by 2.6.12, t/rs 1 pqO = pq, e PA(QQ). Since P(O) = PA(U)S, it
follows that PA(Q) a P(0) and P(0) is the semidirect product of PA(O) by S.
We finish our study of torsion-free abelian groups of rank 1 by showing that two
such groups are lattice-isomorphic if and only if their types can be obtained from
each other by a suitable permutation of the primes. Note that Sym N operates on
the set , of height vectors by h = (h-,(1),h-l(2),...) for 1) = (hl,h2i...) E.5 and
a e Sym N. If h and t are equivalent, then so are If and t and it follows that for any
type t, t = {E)14 E t} is again a type. Thus Sym N also operates on the set of types.
For example, if 7 < G 5 Q and t is an integer, then p; E G if and only if p"'m = (p; ) C
G = GO-. This shows that h; = k(i) if 1) = (hl,h2.... ) and t = (k, k,,...) are the
height vectors of 1 in G and GO respectively. Hence k. = h-,(i) for all i, that is t = 1)
and it follows that
(17) t(GO) = t(G) for all 7L < G < 0 and a e Sym 101.
2.6.14 Theorem (Fuchs [1960]). Two torsion free abelian groups G and G of rank 1
are lattice-isomorphic if and only if there exists a permutation a e Sym t\J such that
t(G) = t(G).
Proof. Let G and G be torsion-free abelian groups of rank 1; we may assume that G
and G are subgroups of 0 containing Z. First suppose that G and G are lattice-
isomorphic and consider a projectivity (p from G to G. Then r is a cyclic subgroup
of G and hence l` = (q> for some q e Q. Since (p maps every maximal subgroup of
7L to a maximal subgroup of (q>, there exists a permutation a e Sym 101 such that
(pi )' = (p(,)q> for all i e N. Let be the projectivity induced by (Ii pq)-' in G.
Then cpc is a projectivity from G to some subgroup G'14 of 0 satisfying
(pi>"' = (p(1)q)'11e`
_ (p(i))'4' = (pi)
for all i. By 2.6.11, G` = G and hence G = G = GO-Q. Since pq is induced by an
isomorphism, G GO- and therefore by (17), t(G) = t(G'") = t(G). For later use, we
record what has been proved so far:
(18) If Gand G are torsion-free abelian groups of rank 1 and cp is a projectivity
from G to G, then t(G) = t(G) where a e Sym N satisfies <x>11 = (y> and (pix>c _
(p)i)y> for a suitable nonzero element x e G and all i e N.
To complete the proof of Theorem 2.6.14, we suppose conversely that there exists
a e Sym 101 such that t(G) = t(G). Then t(GO) = t(G) = t(G). It follows that GO- is
isomorphic to G and hence that G and G are lattice-isomorphic.
Theorem 2.6.14 shows that 0 is determined by its subgroup lattice, whereas, for
example, all the groups UP of rational numbers with denominator a power of the
prime p are lattice-isomorphic but pairwise nonisomorphic.
Mixed groups of torsion-free rank one
It is an open problem to determine the projective closure of an arbitrary abelian

group G of torsion-free rank 1. Using the methods developed in this section, we give
some necessary conditions for an abelian group to be lattice-isomorphic to G. We
resume the multiplicative notation and write Go for the p-component of the torsion
subgroup T(G) of G. Define
MP(G) = (S2i(Go)IS2i(Go)1S2i-1(Go) is not cyclic>
and put M(G) = (MP(G)l p E P>.

2.6.15 Theorem. Let G be an abelian group of torsion free rank 1 and let cp be a
projectivity from G to an abelian group G. Then
(a) T(G) T(G),
(b) cp is induced by an isomorphism on M(G),
(c) G/T(G) is of rank 1 and there exists u c Sym N fixing every i c N for which
Gp, 1 such that t(G/T(G)) = t(G/T(G)).
Proof. Since cyclic groups are preserved under projectivities, T(G)` = T(G) and
ro(G) = ro(G) = 1. Let a E G be of infinite order, take a c G such that <a>" = <a>
and consider the map v: T(G) - T(G) given by b" = f(b; a, a) where f is the function
defined in 2.6.2. By 2.6.3, v is bijective and induces cp on T(G). In particular, I (b) I =
I(b)'I for all b c T(G) and hence Gp is the p-component of T(G). By 2.6.8, Gp Gp
and therefore T(G) = Dr G` T(G).
pe P
If c c MP(G) and o() = p", say, then S2"(Gp) < MP(G) and S2"(GP)/S2"_,(GP) is not
cyclic. Now S2"(GP) is a direct product of cyclic groups and it follows that there
are at least two direct factors of order p". Hence there exists b c S2"(GP) such that
(b) n <c) = 1 = <bc) n <c). By 2.6.6, the restriction of v to MP(G) is an isomor-
phism inducing cp on MP(G). It follows that VIM(G) is an isomorphism inducing cp on
M(G) = Dr MP(G).
pE P
_ Finally, cp induces a projectivity i-p between the torsion-free groups G/T(G) and
G/T(G) of rank 1. By (18), t(G/T(G)) = t(G/T(G)) where u c Sym N satisfies <x)` _
(y) and <x"> _ (yP-(-)> for a suitable nontrivial element x E G/T(G). Take u c G
with (x) = <uT(G)>. Then o(u) is infinite and <y) = <uT(G)) where (u) = (u)`. If
G contains an element b of order p, then <u,b)/<uP) is elementary abelian of order
p2 and by 2.2.5, <u,b)m/<uP)`j = p2 as well. Hence <uP)` = <u"> and it follows
that (xP)' = (y">. This shows that po(i) = p; for those i for which GP, 1.
If G does not split over T(G), then G and G = T(G) x (G/T(G)) satisfy (a) and (c)
of Theorem 2.6.15; but clearly these are not lattice-isomorphic. For groups that split
over their torsion subgroups, however, our conditions are necessary and sufficient.
2.6.16 Theorem (Ostendorf [1991]). Let G be an abelian group of torsion free rank 1
that splits over its torsion subgroup. Then the abelian group G is lattice-isomorphic to
G if and only if G splits over its torsion subgroup and satisfies
(a) T(G) T(G),
(b) G/T(G) is of rank 1 and there exists a E Sym 101 fixing every i c 101 for which
Gp, 1 such that t(G/T(G))" = t(G/T(G)).
Proof. If cp is a projectivity from G to Gand G = T(G) x_H, then G = T(G)` X H` _

T(G) x H since G is abelian. Thus G splits over T(G) and the other assertions
follow from 2.6.15. Conversely, suppose that G and G satisfy the conditions of the
theorem. Then G = T x R and G= T x R where T, T are isomorphic torsion
groups, R, R are torsion-free of rank 1 and there exists u E Sym 10J fixing every i E 10J
for which TP, 1 such that t(R) = t(R). Then R is isomorphic to a subgroup H of
0 containing 7L and by (17), t(HO") = t(H) = t(R) = t(R) where Wn is the auto-
projectivity of 0 defined in (15) and (16). Hence H10 R and, since we only want to
show that G and G are lattice-isomorphic, we may assume, using additive notation
again, that G = T e H and G= T e K where T is a torsion group, 7L < H< 0 and
K = HO'- = W. We want to construct a bijective map r from the set L1(G) of cyclic
subgroups of G to L1 (G) such that for all X, Y, Z E L1(G),
(19) X < Y + Z if and only if X` < Y` + Z`.
Then by Theorem 1.3.2,,r will induce a projectivity from G to G. For this let X be a
cyclic subgroup of G. If X < T, we define X` = X, that is, r is the identity on L1(T).
Let X 4 T. Then X can be written uniquely in the form X = <a + h> where a E T
and 0 < h E H. Since a fixes the primes involved in T, the definition of it in (15) shows
ha
that = g;' ... q" where n; E 7L and the g; are primes not dividing o(a). It follows
that hQa = gi' ... g; "a is a well-defined element of <a>; here g"a, for n < 0, is the
h
unique element b E <a> satisfying g-"b = a. We put X` _ ( h a + h . This defines
a map from L1(G) to L1(G) which is bijective since there is an obvious inverse map
defined in the same way to Q-' = Q-', that is, sending (a + k> to (-j-a + k-`) for
L1(/G).
a E T and 0 < k E K. We want to show that r satisfies (19). So let X, Y, Z E If

Y and Z are finite, then Y, Z < T and since r is the identity on L1(T), (19) clearly
holds for X, Y, Z. Suppose next that Y = (b> is finite and Z = <a + h> is infinite.
Then X = <ib + j(a + h) > where i, j c- Z. If j = 0, then X` = X < Y = Y`; and if
j 0, since Q(2-_(ib
is multiplicative,
X` = + ja) + (jh), _ (--b + jI/ Qa

\\
+ h I) < Y` + Z`.
Similarly, X` < Y` + Z` implies that X < Y + Z and hence (19) /holds. Finally sup-
pose that Y and Z are infinite. Since ro(G) = 1, Y + Z = U e R where U and R are
cyclic and U is finite. As in the proof of Lemma 2.5.12, the result just proved shows
that Y` + Zr S U` + R`. Hence Y` + Z` = V` e S` where V` < U` and S` 5 U` + R`
is infinite cyclic. It follows that U + R = Y + Z < V + S and hence U` + R` S
V` + S`. Thus Y` + Zr = U` + R` so that this case is reduced to the one just settled.
This finishes the proof of (19) and of the theorem.
The above theorem has been proved independently and generalized to larger
classes of mixed abelian groups of torsion-free rank 1 by Mahdavi and Poland
[1992], [ 1993].
Exercises
1. Let G be an abelian torsion group with the property that if G contains an element
of order n, then G contains at least three independent elements of this order.
Show that every projectivity from G to an abelian group G is induced by an

isomorphism.
2. Let p > 2, n > 2 and let G be the abelian group of type (p", p). Determine P(G)
and PA(G).
3. Let G be an abelian group of type (2", 2, ... , 2). Show that every projectivity from
G to an abelian group G is induced by an isomorphism.
4. Suppose that G = <a> x B is an abelian group, o(a) = p" > p' = Exp B and that
m > 2 if p = 2. Let N = <a""'> and let a be the automorphism of G/N satisfying
(bN) = bN for all b c- B and (aN) = (aN)1+p'"-' if m > 2 and (aN) = a2N if
m = 1.
(a) Show that there is a unique autoprojectivity cp of G that fixes every subgroup
of L2,-, (G) and is induced by a on G/N.
(b) This projectivity is not induced by an automorphism of G.
5. Let p > 2 and G = A x B be an abelian group with A of type (p", p") and
Exp B = p' < p". For every subgroup N of order p of A let aN be an automor-
phism of GIN fixing every subgroup U/N of G/N for which fl(A)5 U or U<
n"1(G).
(a) Show that there is a unique autoprojectivity cp of G that fixes every subgroup
of L2,-, (G) and is induced by QN on G/N for every N.
(b) Find automorphisms aN such that cp is not induced by an automorphism of G.
6. Let Z < G S Q. Show that every projectivity cp from G to some subgroup of 0 is
induced by a unique autoprojectivity of 0.
7. (Gasparini and Metelli [1984]) Let Z < G 5 G. Show that P(G) is the semi-
direct product of PA(G) and a group isomorphic to the subgroup
{Q E Sym 101It(G)' = t(G)} of Sym N.
Chapter 3
Complements and special elements

in the subgroup lattice of a group
The main subject of this chapter is groups with complemented subgroup lattices.
Since not much is known about these groups in general, various stronger comple-
mentary conditions and related lattice-properties are also considered. All these are
far less important than distributivity or modularity since there are no natural classes
of groups connected with them.
The group G is called a K-group if its subgroup lattice is complemented, that is, if
to every H < G there exists K < G such that G = (H, K> and H n K = 1. We show
in 3.1 that G is a K-group if and only if its Fitting subgroup F(G) is a direct product
of abelian minimal normal subgroups of G and has a complement that is a K-group;
from this we derive a characterization of soluble K-groups. In particular, we get that
a finite soluble group G is a K-group if and only if 1(G/Fi(G)) = I for all i >_ 0; this
was proved by Zacher in 1953. However, the structure of finite K-groups in general
is not known. Therefore, in 3.2, we study groups G in which every subgroup H has
a complement K satisfying G = HK; groups with this stronger property are called
C-groups. As early as 1937 P. Hall proved that the finite C-groups are precisely the
finite supersoluble K-groups and determined the structure of these groups. We gen-
eralize his result to infinite groups and also consider groups with the weaker prop-
erty that every subgroup H has a sectional complement, that is a subgroup K such
that X n K is a complement to H in X for every subgroup X of G containing H.
In 3.3 we mainly investigate groups with relatively complemented subgroup
lattices and IM-groups. A group G is called an RK-group (or RC-group) if for all
L, H, M < G such that L < H < M there exists K < G such that H n K = L and
(H, K> = M (or HK = M, respectively). In 1952 Zacher proved that a finite group
is an RK-group if and only if it has elementary abelian Sylow subgroups and nor-
mality is a transitive relation in every subgroup; in particular, such a group is
supersoluble. We further show that the RC-groups are precisely the soluble (or
locally finite) RK-groups and have a similar structure to finite RK-groups. An IM-
group is a group in which every proper subgroup is the intersection of maximal
subgroups. Clearly, every RK-group is an IM-group. The classification of finite
simple groups yields that every finite IM-group is soluble. The structure of arbitrary
soluble IM-groups was determined by Menegazzo in 1970. It follows from his result
that a finite group is a (soluble) IM-group if and only if it is an RK-group.
The last two sections of this chapter are concerned with some isolated topics. An
element a of a lattice L is called neutral if every triple a, x, y of elements in L
generates a distributive sublattice; equivalently a is join-distributive (that is, satisfies
3.1 Groups with complemented subgroup lattices (K-groups) 115
a u (x n y) = (a u x) n (a u y) for all x, y c L), meet-distributive (defined dually) and

uniquely complemented (that is, a u x = a u y and a n x = a n y implies x = y for all
x, y c L). We investigate these and similar properties in subgroup lattices of groups
and, as our final result in 3.4, present the characterization of neutral elements in the
subgroup lattice of a finite group that was given by Suzuki and Zappa, indepen-
dently, in 1951.
A partition of a group G is a set E of nontrivial subgroups of G such that every
nonidentity element of G is contained in a unique subgroup X E E; it is called non-
trivial if X G for all X E L. Possession of a nontrivial partition is a lattice-property
of a group. In 1961 Baer and Suzuki determined all finite groups having a nontrivial
partition; their results are presented in 3.5. It is shown, among other things, that the
projective special linear groups PSL(2, p") and the Suzuki groups Sz(2") are the only
finite simple groups with this property.
3.1 Groups with complemented subgroup lattices (K-groups)

Let L be a lattice with least element 0 and greatest element I. For a E L, an element
c e L is called a complement to a in L if a n c = 0 and a u c= I; for a group G, we
say that K is a complement to H in G if it is a complement to H in L(G). The lattice
L is said to be complemented if every element of L has a complement in L. In this
section we want to study groups with complemented subgroup lattices, K-groups for
short. First of all we note an obvious necessary condition for a group to have this
property.
3.1.1 Lemma. The Frattini subgroup of a K-group is trivial.
Proof. Let 1 x c- G and take a complement K to <x> in G. Consider the set 9 of

all subgroups of G containing K but not x. Then 9' is not empty since K is a
member. Clearly .' is partially ordered by inclusion; moreover the union of any
chain in . is likewise in Y. By Zorn's Lemma . has a maximal element M. If
M < H < G, then K < H and as H Y, x e H; it follows that H > <x> u K = G.
Hence M is a maximal subgroup of G and therefore contains the Frattini subgroup
O(G). Since M e S x M and so, finally, x 0 (D(G). Thus D(G) = 1.
It follows from 3.1.1, for example, that a finite p-group has complemented sub-
group lattice if and only if it is elementary abelian. There are also large classes of
nonsoluble K-groups.
3.1.2 Theorem. If G is a primitive permutation group and the stabilizer of a point is a

K-group, then G is a K-group. In particular, every finite symmetric or alternating
group has complemented subgroup lattice.
Proof. Let G be primitive on the set f) and suppose that 1 H < G. Since G is
G.. The stabilizer of a point in a
faithful on Q, there exists an a c- S2 such that H
116 Complements and special elements in the subgroup lattice of a group
primitive permutation group is a maximal subgroup and therefore H U G, = G.

Since G. is a K-group, there exists a complement K to H n G. in G,. It follows that
HnK=HnG2nK= 1 and HuK=Hu(HnG,)uK=HuG,=G. Thus K
is a complement to H in G and G is a K-group. For n > 3, the symmetric group S
and the alternating group A. are primitive permutation groups and the stabilizer of
a point is Si_1 and Ai_1, respectively. Since S3 and A3 are K-groups, it follows by
induction that all finite symmetric and alternating groups are K-groups.
In general the structure of finite K-groups is not known. In particular, it is un-

known whether every finite simple group is a K-group. Previato [1982] proved this
conjecture for the alternating groups, the projective special linear groups PSL(n, p")
and the Suzuki groups Sz(q).
Theorem 3.1.2 shows that subgroups of K-groups need not be K-groups. For
factor groups and direct products of K-groups, the situation is different.
3.1.3 Lemma. If N < G, N < H < G and K is a complement to H in G, then NK/N

is a complement to H/N in G/N. In particular, every epimorphic image of a K-group is
a K-group.
Proof. Clearly, H u NK > H u K = G and by Dedekind's law, H n NK =

N(H n K) = N. Thus NK/N is a complement to H/N in GIN.
3.1.4 Lemma. Let H < G = AB and assume that C and D are complements to H n A
in A and (H u A) n B in B, respectively. If CD = DC, then CD is a complement to H
in G.
Proof. Suppose that x = cd e H where c e C and d c- D. Then
d=c-'xE(HuC)nD<(HuA)nBnD= 1
and hence x=cc-HnC=HnAnC=1. Thus HnCD=1. Now HuCD>_
(HnA)uC=A and therefore HuCD>HuAuD>B. Hence G=AB<
H u CD and CD is a complement to H in G.
3.1.5 Corollary. The direct product of two K-groups is a K-group.
Proof. If H < G = A x B with K-groups A and B, then the complements C and D

in 3.1.4 exist and they certainly satisfy CD = DC. Thus H has a complement in G.
The Fitting subgroup of a K-group
The Fitting subgroup F(G) of a group G is the subgroup generated by all the normal
nilpotent subgroups of G. Since the product of two normal nilpotent subgroups is
nilpotent, F(G) is the unique largest normal nilpotent subgroup of G if G is finite. In
general, F(G) need not be nilpotent.
3.1.6 Lemma. The Fitting subgroup of a K-group is abelian.
Proof. Let G be a K-group. We first show by induction on the nilpotency class c(N)
that every normal nilpotent subgroup N of G is abelian. This is clear if c(N) = 1.
Thus we can suppose that c(N) > 2 and consider a complement K to Z(N) in G. As
a characteristic subgroup of N, Z(N) is normal in G. Hence G = Z(N)K and
N = Z(N)(N n K) = Z(N) x (N n K). Furthermore N n K is normal in K and cen-
tralized by Z(N). Thus N n K is a normal subgroup of Z(N)K = G and its nil-
potency class is c(N) - 1 since N n K ^- N/Z(N). By induction, N n K is abelian
and then N = Z(N) x (N n K) is abelian as well. Now F(G) is generated by abelian
normal subgroups of G. By Fitting's theorem, any two of these generate a nilpotent,
hence abelian normal subgroup of G; thus they centralize each other. It follows that
F(G) is abelian.
We want to show next that the Fitting subgroup of a K-group is a direct product
of minimal normal subgroups. We prove a more general result.
3.1.7 Lemma. Let A be an abelian normal subgroup of the group G. If every normal
subgroup of G that is contained in A has a complement in G, then A is a direct product
of minimal normal subgroups of G.
Proof. We may assume that A 54 1. Clearly, every normal subgroup B of G con-

tained in A satisfies the assumptions of the lemma. Furthermore, if K is a comple-
ment to B in G, then A = A n BK = B(A n K) so that A n K is a complement to B
in A. Since Ais abelian,AnK aAandasAaG,AnK aK.Thus AnK aAK
G and it follows that A = B x (A n K) is a completely reducible G-module.
We want to show that A contains a minimal normal subgroup of G. Take 1
a e A and consider .9" = {N a G I a 0 N < A}. Clearly .91 is not empty and it contains
the join of any chain in Y. By Zorn's Lemma there exists a maximal element M in
Y. Since A is completely reducible, A = M x C for some normal subgroup C of G.
And if C were not a minimal normal subgroup of G, then C = Cl x C2 with 1 54
C, a G. The maximality of M would imply that M x Ci 0 St for i = 1, 2; hence
a E (M x C,) n (M x C Z) = M, a contradiction. Thus C is a minimal normal sub-
group of G contained in A.
Now if A* is the subgroup generated by all the minimal normal subgroups of
G contained in A, then again A = A* x D where D a G. If D 54 1, then D would
contain a minimal normal subgroup N of G, as we have just shown; but then N <
A* n D = 1, a contradiction. Thus D = 1 and A is generated by minimal normal
subgroups of G. By another straightforward application of Zorn's Lemma A is a
direct product of minimal normal subgroups of G (see Robinson [1982], p. 83).
Conversely, we have the following results.
3.1.8 Lemma. Let A be an abelian subgroup of G generated by minimal normal sub-

groups Ai (i e 1) of G and let B < A. If either B a G or all the Ai are cyclic, then there
exists a complement C to B in A that is normal in G.
Proof. Consider Y = IN a GIN < A and N n B = 1}. Again Y is not empty and
contains the join of any chain in .9' so that by Zorn's Lemma there is a maximal
element C in Y. Suppose that A 0 BC. Then since A is generated by the A,, there is
an i c- I such that A. 4 BC. If B < G, then BC a G and BC n A. = 1 since A; is a
minimal normal subgroup of G; if B is not normal in G, then A. is cyclic of prime
order and again BC n A. = 1. In both cases, BCAi = B x C x A; and therefore
C x A. e.91, contradicting the maximality of C. Thus A = BC and C is a comple-
ment to B in A that is normal in G.
3.1.9 Lemma. If G contains an abelian subgroup A generated by minimal normal

subgroups of G and a complement K to A that is a K-group, then G is a K-group.
Proof. Let H < G. Since K is a K-group, there is a complement C to H n K in K.

Since A is abelian, B = (H u K) n A < A and as A a G, B < H u K. Hence
B g AK = G and by 3.1.8 there is a complement D to B = (H u K) n A in A that is
normal in G. By 3.1.4, CD = DC is a complement to H in G.
We summarise the results proved so far in the following.
3.1.10 Theorem (Zacher [1953], Emaldi [1969]). The group G is a K-group if and
only if its Fitting subgroup F(G) is a direct product of abelian minimal normal sub-
groups of G and has a complement K that is a K-group.
Proof. If G is a K-group, then F(G) by 3.1.6 is abelian and by 3.1.7 is a direct product
of minimal normal subgroups of G. Clearly, F(G) has a complement K in G and by
3.1.3, K G/F(G) is a K-group. Conversely, if G satisfies the conditions of the
theorem, it is a K-group by 3.1.9.
Soluble K-groups
It is clear that Theorem 3.1.10 tells us nothing about the structure of semi-simple
K-groups. In soluble groups, however, F(G) : I and the Fitting series, defined in-
ductively by F0(G) = I and Fi+, (G)/Fi(G) = F(G/Fi(G)) for i > 0, reaches G. There-
fore we get the following characterization of soluble K-groups.
3.1.11 Theorem (Zacher [1953], Emaldi [1969]). The soluble group G is a K-group
if and only if for all i > 0, F;+, (G)/Fi(G) is a direct product of minimal normal sub-
groups of G/Fi(G) and has a complement in G/Fi(G).
Proof. If G is a K-group, then 3.1.3 shows that also G/Fi(G) is a K-group. Therefore
by 3.1.10, its Fitting subgroup Fi+,(G)/Fi(G) has the stated properties. Conversely, if
G satisfies the conditions of the theorem, we prove by induction on the Fitting length
n that G = is a K-group. For n = 0, there is nothing to prove. And if the
assertion is true for n - 1, then G/Fl (G) is a K-group. Since the complement to F, (G)
in G is isomorphic to this group, G is a K-group by 3.1.10.
It is a well-known theorem of Gaschiitz (see Robinson [1982], p. 131) that for a

finite group G, the factor group F(G)/cF(G) of the Fitting subgroup modulo the
Frattini subgroup is the product of all the abelian minimal normal subgroups of
G/D(G). We use this to give the following more elegant characterization of finite
soluble K-groups.
3.1.12 Theorem (Zacher [1953]). The finite soluble group G is a K-group if and only
if (D(G/ F1(G)) = 1 for all i > 0.
Proof. If G is a K-group, then 3.1.3 shows that G/Fi(G) is a K-group and by 3.1.1,
(D(G/Fi(G)) = 1. Conversely, suppose that (D(G/F1(G)) = I for all i >_ 0. Then again by
induction, G/F(G) is a K-group and by Gaschutz's theorem, F(G)/N(G) = F(G) is a
direct product of abelian minimal normal subgroups of G. It remains to be shown
that F(G) has a complement in G: this will be isomorphic to G/F(G) and Theorem
3.1.10 will yield that G is a K-group. For this purpose we take a subgroup L of G
which is maximal with the properties that it is contained in F(G) and possesses a
complement H in G. We want to show that L = F(G), so suppose that L = F(G).
Then F(G) n H # 1 and F(G) n H a F(G)H = G since F(G) is an abelian normal
subgroup of G. Let N be a minimal normal subgroup of G contained in F(G) n H.
Since V(G) = 1, there is a maximal subgroup M of G with N $ M and as N is
abelian, it follows that N n M = I and NM = G. Now N is a modular subgroup of
G and hence
(NuL)n(MnH) =((NuL)nH)nM =(Nu(LnH))nM = N n M = 1,

(N u L) u (M n H) = L u (N u (M n H)) = L u ((N u M) n H) = L u H = G.
Thus M n H is a complement to NL in G. This contradicts the maximality of L.

Hence L = F(G) and F(G) has a complement in G.
Zacher's theorem has some rather surprising consequences.
3.1.13 Corollary. Every normal subgroup of a finite soluble K-group is a K-group.
Proof. Let G be a finite soluble K-group and suppose that N a G. Then it is well-
known that F;(N) = Fi(G) n N and hence N/F;(N) NF1(G)/F1(G) a G/F1(G). Since
(D(G/Fi(G)) = I and the Frattini subgroup of a normal subgroup is contained in
the Frattini subgroup of the whole group, '(NFL(G)/FL(G)) = 1. It follows that
D(N/F1(N)) = 1 and by 3.1.12, N is a K-group.
It is not known whether the assertion of the corollary is also true for infinite
soluble groups or arbitrary finite groups; nor is it known if it is true for an arbitrary
K-group. Another easy consequence of Zacher's theorem is that in order to find out
if a finite soluble group G is a K-group, it suffices to know that every normal
subgroup of G has a complement, or even that every characteristic subgroup of G
has a complement in G. Here is a more general statement.
3.1.14 Theorem (Napolitani [1967b], Emaldi [1970]). The following properties of a

soluble group G are equivalent.
(a) Every subgroup of G has a complement in G, that is, G is a K-group.
(b) Every normal subgroup of G has a complement in G.
(c) Every characteristic subgroup of G has a complement in G and for every pair of
normal subgroups N, M of G with N < M there exists a minimal normal subgroup of
G/N contained in M/N.
Proof. That (a) implies (b) and (b) implies the first part of (c) is trivial. To show that
(c) follows from (b), we therefore have to consider a pair of normal subgroups N, M
of G with N < M. Since G is soluble, there exists a nontrivial abelian normal sub-
group A/N of GIN contained in M/N. By 3.1.3, every normal subgroup of G/N has
a complement in GIN and hence Lemma 3.1.7 yields that A/N contains a minimal
normal subgroup of GIN. Thus (c) holds.
It remains to show that (c) implies (a), which will be proved by induction on the
derived length k of the soluble group G. If k = 0, then G = I and (a) holds. So we
may assume k > I and take A = G"", the penultimate term of the derived series of
G. Then A is a nontrivial abelian characteristic subgroup of G and, by assumption,
A has a complement K in G. Since both conditions in (c) are preserved by factor
groups with respect to characteristic subgroups, by induction, K -_ G/A is a K-
group. Finally, if B is the subgroup generated by all the minimal normal subgroups
of G contained in A, then B is characteristic in G and therefore has a complement
C in G. Since A is an abelian normal subgroup of G, A n C < AC = G. Thus if
A n C 0 1. there would exist a minimal normal subgroup N of G contained in A n C
and it would follow that N < B n C = 1. This is impossible. Thus A n C = I and
A = B(A n C) = B, that is, A is generated by minimal normal subgroups of G. By
3.1.9, G is a K-group and (a) holds.
The second assumption in (c) clearly holds if G satisfies the minimal condition on
normal subgroups. That the condition cannot be omitted from the theorem is shown
by the additive group CD of rational numbers. This has only trivial characteristic
subgroups since multiplication by an arbitrary nonzero rational number is an auto-
morphism; hence every characteristic subgroup has a complement. On the other
hand, 0 is not a K-group since any two nontrivial subgroups of 0 have nontrivial
intersection.
Exercises
1. (Previato [1982]) (a) Let G be a finite group and suppose that H < G is a K-
group. If H is contained in exactly one maximal subgroup M of G and if MG =
n M' = 1, show that G is a K-group.
xEG
(b) Taking for H a Sylow p-subgroup, deduce that PSL(2, p") is a K-group for all
pEP.nEN.
3.2 Special complements 121
2. (Emaldi [1969]) Show that every soluble K-group is periodic. (Hint: use the fact
that an abelian group A with a locally finite subgroup of Aut A operating irre-
ducibly on A is periodic (see Baer [1964]).)
3. (Curzio [1960]) If G is a soluble group such that L(G) is complemented and
satisfies the maximal condition, show that G is finite.
4. (Christensen [1964]) Show that G is a finite metabelian K-group if and only if G
is the semidirect product of two abelian groups and has elementary abelian Sylow
subgroups.
5. (Dinerstein [1968]) Let G he a finite group (it suffices to assume that L(G) satisfies
the minimal condition) in which every characteristic subgroup has a complement.
Show that every normal subgroup of G has a complement in G.
3.2 Special complements
Much more can be said about K-groups in which the complements have additional
properties. The most natural of these is that they permute with the given subgroups.
We call G a C-group if to every subgroup H of G there is a subgroup K of G such that
(1) G=HK and HnK= 1;
we also say that H is permutably complemented by K in G if (1) holds. The structure
of C-groups is well-known, and will be presented in this section. First of all we have
the following simple inheritance properties.
3.2.1 Lemma. (a) Subgroups and epimorphic images of 'C-groups are C-groups.
(b) The direct product of two C-groups is a C-group.
Proof (a) Let H < X < G. If K satisfies (1), then X = X n HK = H(X n K) and
H n (X n K) = 1. Thus X n K is a complement to H in X that permutes with H. If
N < G, N < H < G and K again satisfies (1), then by 3.1.3, NK/N is a complement
to H/N in GIN and clearly (H/N)(NK/N) = HK/N = G/N.
(b) Let H < G = A x B with C-groups A and B. Then there exists a subgroup C
of A such that A = (H n A)C and (H n A) n C = 1 and a subgroup D of B with the
property that B = (HA n B)D and (HA n B) n D = 1. By 3.1.4, CD is a complement
to H in G and
HCD = H(H n A)CD = HAD = HA(HA n B)D = HAB = G.
Thus G is a C-group.
Another natural property a complement K to a subgroup H of G might have is

the following.
(2) If H < X < G, then X n K is a complement to H in X.
We call a subgroup K of G with this property a sectional complement, or S-comple-

ment for short, to H in G. And a group in which every subgroup has an S-comple-
ment is called an SC-group. The proof of Lemma 3.2.1 (a) shows that if G = HK and
H n K = 1, then K is an S-complement to H in G. Hence
(3) every C-group is an SC-group.
The structure of SC-groups is not known. We shall, however, show that the classes
of C-groups and of locally finite SC-groups coincide.
3.2.2 Lemma. Subgroups and epimorphic images of SC-groups are SC-groups.
Proof. Let G be an SC-group, H < X < G and suppose that K is an S-complement

to H in G. Then clearly X n K is an S-complement to H in X. And if N < G such
that N < H, then by 3.1.3, N(X n K)/N is a complement to H/N in X/N. Since
N(X n K) = X n NK, it follows that NK/N is an S-complement to H/N in GIN.
The main property of SC-groups which we shall require is the following.
3.2.3 Lemma. If N is an abelian minimal normal subgroup of an SC-group G, then N

is cyclic of prime order.
Proof. Suppose that M is a proper subgroup of N and take an S-complement K to

M in G. Then N n K is a complement to M in N and hence 1 < N n K < N. Since
N is an abelian normal subgroup of G, N n K a NK = G and the minimality of N
implies that N n K = N. Thus M = I and N is cyclic of prime order.
As early as 1937 P. Hall proved that the finite C-groups and the finite super-
soluble K-groups coincide and determined their structure. He did not consider S-
complements but his proof also works for SC-groups.
3.2.4 Theorem (P. Hall [1937]). The following properties of the finite group G are
equivalent:
(a) G is a C-group,
(b) G is an SC-group,
(c) G is a supersoluble K-group,
(d) G is isomorphic with a subgroup of a direct product of groups of squarefree
order.
Proof. That (a) implies (b) follows from (3). If G is an SC-group, then it clearly is a
K-group and we use induction on I GI to prove that G is supersoluble. By 3.2.2, every
proper subgroup of G is supersoluble and a well-known result of Huppert's (see
Robinson [1982], p. 287) shows that G is soluble. So if N is a minimal normal
subgroup of G, then by 3.2.3, N is cyclic and 3.2.2 yields that G/N is an SC-group.
By induction GIN and hence also G is supersoluble. Thus (b) implies (c).
Now let G be a supersoluble K-group and for every maximal subgroup M of G,

let MG = n MX be the core of M in G. By 3.1.1, the intersection of all these MG is
xcG
trivial so that G is isomorphic with a subgroup of the direct product of the groups
G/MG. To prove that (c) implies (d), we therefore show that every such group G,/MG
has squarefree order. By 3.1.3, G/MG is a supersoluble K-group and hence we may
assume that MG = 1 and M 0 1. Then a minimal normal subgroup N of G is cyclic
of prime order p, furthermore G = NM and C,(N) = 1 since M, = 1. So M is
isomorphic to a subgroup of Aut N and hence cyclic of order dividing p - 1. There-
fore every Sylow subgroup of M ^- GIN is an epimorphic image of G; hence it is a
K-group and so has prime order. It follows that I G I = pIMI is squarefree.
Finally suppose that (d) holds. We want to show that G is a C-group, and since
direct products and subgroups of C-groups are C-groups, we may assume that G has
squarefree order. It is well-known that groups of squarefree order are soluble (see
Robinson [1982], p. 281). Every subgroup H of G is a Hall n-subgroup for some set
it of primes and if n' = P\n, any Hall n'-subgroup K of G satisfies H n K = 1 and
HK = G. Thus G is a C-group.
It is now not difficult to give the exact structure of a finite C-group G. By (c) or (d)
of Hall's theorem, G is metabelian and 3.1.7 then shows that G' = A 1 x . . x A, with
.
minimal normal subgroups A; of G. Since G is supersoluble, these A. have prime

order. Clearly G' has a complement B in G. And since B GIG' is an abelian K-
group, again 3.1.7 yields that B = B, x x B., where the B. also have prime order.
It was proved by Cernikova in 1953 that infinite C-groups have exactly the same
structure; the other two properties in Theorem 3.2.4 were later generalized to infinite
groups by Emaldi. We remind the reader that a group G is called hypercyclic if every
nontrivial epimorphic image possesses a nontrivial cyclic normal subgroup. Equiva-
lent is that G has an ascending normal series with cyclic factors (see Robinson
[1972a], p. 14); thus hypercyclic groups are a natural generalization of supersoluble
groups. If N and M are normal subgroups of G such that N < M, it follows from
Zorn's Lemma that there exists a normal subgroup K of G maximal with the prop-
erty that M n K = N. Then K 0 G and if G is hypercyclic, there exists a non-
trivial cyclic normal subgroup Z/K of G/K. The maximality of K implies that H =
M n Z > N and clearly H/N is cyclic. Thus:
(4) If G is hypercyclic and N < M are normal subgroups of G, then there exists
H a G such that N < H < M and H/N is cyclic. In particular, chief factors of hyper-
cyclic groups are cyclic.
3.2.5 Theorem (Cernikova [1956], Emaldi [1969], [1978]). The following properties
of a group G are equivalent:
(a) G is a C-group,
(b) G is a locally finite SC-group,
(c) G is a hypercyclic K-group,
(d) G is the semidirect product of A = Dr A; by B = Dr BB where all the A. and BB
È1 JEJ
have prime order and A . a G for all i e I.
Proof. Suppose first that G is a C-group. Then G is an SC-group by (3) and we want
to show that G is locally finite. Every subgroup of G is a C-group and, since the
subgroup lattice of an infinite cyclic group is not complemented, G is a torsion
group. Let 1 0 x e G and take C < G such that <x> n C = 1 and G = <x>C. Then
I G : Cl = I<x>l is finite. Therefore by 3.2.1, G/CG is a finite C-group and Hall's theo-
rem shows that G/Cc is metabelian. It follows that G" < C and hence x G". Since
x was arbitrary, G" = 1. So G is a soluble torsion group and therefore locally finite
(see Robinson [1982], p. 147). Thus (b) holds.
Now suppose that G is a locally finite SC-group. Then G is a K-group and we
want to show that G is hypercyclic. If a, b, c, d c- G, then by 3.2.2, H = <a, b, c, d > is
a finite SC-group and Hall's theorem shows that H is metabelian. It follows that
[ [a, b], [c, d]] = 1 and hence G" = 1. So if N g G with GIN o 1, then there exists a
nontrivial abelian normal subgroup A/N of G/N. By 3.2.2, GIN is an SC-group.
Therefore 3.1.7 implies that A/N contains a minimal normal subgroup of G/N which
is cyclic by 3.2.3. Thus G is hypercyclic and (c) holds.
Next suppose that G is a hypercyclic K-group. We want to show that (d) holds,
and again we first claim that G is metabelian. To prove this, we show that G" is
contained in every maximal subgroup of G; then 3.1.1 will imply that G" = 1. So let
M be a maximal subgroup of G and suppose that G' M. Then G = G'M and
G' r) M g M. Consider N = (G' r) M)u. By (4) there exists a nontrivial cyclic normal
subgroup H/N of G/N contained in G'/N. If WIN = CG/N,(H/N), then G/W is isomor-
phic to a subgroup of AutH/N and therefore abelian. Hence G' < W and H/N
centralizes G' n M/N. Thus H normalizes G' r) M and since H M and M is maxi-
mal in G, it follows that G' r) M a G and G'/G' n M is a chief factor of G. By (4),
G'/G' n M is cyclic and hence G" < G' r) M < M. Thus G" < D(G) = 1. Now A = G'
is an abelian normal subgroup of G and by 3.1.7, A = Dr A; with minimal normal
IEI
subgroups A, of G. By (4), every A, is cyclic of prime order. Clearly A has a comple-
ment B in G. And since B G/G' is an abelian K-group, again 3.1.7 yields that
B = Dr Bj where the Bj also have prime order. Thus (d) holds.
jEJ
Finally suppose that (d) is satisfied and let H < G = AB. By 3.1.8 there exist a
complement C to H n A in A that is normal in G, and a complement D to HA n B
in B. By 3.1.4, CD is a complement to H in G and, as in the proof to (b) of 3.2.1,
HCD = G. Thus (a) holds.
Note that by Exercise 1.2.8, property (b) of Theorem 3.2.5 is a lattice-property so

that the class of C-groups is invariant under projectivities, a result not obvious from
the definition.
Property (d) of Hall's theorem can also be generalized to infinite groups: every
C-group is isomorphic with a subgroup of a cartesian product of finite groups of
squarefree order. However, it is not possible to replace "cartesian" by "direct" in this
statement and it is also not true that every periodic subgroup of such a cartesian
product is a C-group. For details see Exercises 3 and 4 or Cernikova [1956].
As for K-groups, to prove that a soluble group G is a C-group it is not necessary
to show that every subgroup of G is permutably complemented; it suffices to look at
the subnormal subgroups. In fact one need only consider the subnormal subgroups
of defect at most 2, that is subgroups H of G such that H o N a G for some N. This

was shown for finite groups, using Hall's theorem, by Bechtell [1969] and for arbi-
trary groups, using Cernikova's theorem, by Kochendorfer [1969]. However, there
is a simple direct proof by induction on the derived length of G.
3.2.6 Theorem (Kochendorfer [1969]). The group G is a C-group if and only if G is

soluble and every subnormal subgroup ofdefect at most 2 is permutably complemented
in G.
Proof: If G is a C-group, then by 3.2.5, G is soluble and, clearly, every subnormal

subgroup of defect at most 2 is permutably complemented in G. Assume conversely
that G has these properties. If G is abelian, then every subgroup is complemented
and G is a C-group. So suppose that the derived length of G is n > 2 and that the
assertion is true for soluble groups of smaller derived length. Then A = 0"-1) is an
abelian normal subgroup of G. And if S/A is subnormal of defect at most 2 in G,/A,
then there exists a subgroup T of G such that S n T = 1 and ST = G and S/ A is
permutably complemented by AT/A in G/A; the induction assumption yields that
G/A is a C-group. Let H < G. Then there exists a subgroup C/A of G/A such that
HA n C = A and HAC = G. Hence H n C< A and since A is abelian, H n C a
A o G. By assumption there exists a subgroup D of G such that (H n C) n D = 1 and
(H n C)D = G; it follows that C = (H n C)(C n D). So if we put K = C n D, then
HnK=HnCnD=1
and
HK = H(C n D) = H(H n QC n D) =HC = HAC = G.
Thus G is a C-group.
Further topics
Since C-groups have such a restricted structure, it seems reasonable to weaken the
condition of complementability. This has mainly been done in two directions and
there is a vast literature on this subject. But all these results are far too special to be
presented here; we shall only give some hints for further reading. First of all, one
studies groups G such that for a certain class X of groups, every X-subgroup of G is
permutably complemented in G and tries to prove that G then (nearly) is a C-group.
This was initiated by Cernikov [1954] who took for X the class of abelian groups.
In the meantime many other classes have been considered, among them the classes
of primary groups (Gorcakov [1960]), elementary abelian groups (Sysak [1977]),
infinite abelian groups (Cernikov [1980]), nonabelian groups (Barysovec [1977],
[1981 a], [1981 b]), infinite groups (Cernikov [1967]), and finite groups (de Giovanni
and Franciosi [1987]). The second possibility is to assume that, again for a certain
class X of groups, to every subgroup H of G there exists a subgroup K such that
G = HK and H n K e X. This has been done in particular where X is the class

of finite groups (Sergeev [1964]; Tsybanev [1973], [1980]) and of cyclic groups
(Mozarovskaja [1978]).
Exercises
1. (Hall [1937]) Show that a finite group is a C-group if and only if it is supersoluble
and its Sylow subgroups are all elementary abelian.
2. (Cernikova [1956]) Show that every group having an ascending normal series
with cyclic factors of nonrepeating prime orders is a C-group.
3. Let G be an infinite nonabelian P-group. Show that G is a C-group which is not
isomorphic with a subgroup of a direct product of finite groups of squarefree
order.
4. Let I be an infinite set, Gi a nonabelian group of order 6 for every i e I and let
G = Cr Gi. Show that G is periodic but not a C-group. (Hint: determine the
iEI
normal subgroups of order 3 in G and use 3.1.7.)
5. (Emaldi [1970]) Show that G is a C-group if and only if G is a hypercyclic torsion
group in which every characteristic subgroup has a complement. (Hint: first show
that G' is abelian.)
6. (Emaldi [1985a]) Show that a finite group is a C-group if and only if every
subgroup of prime order has an S-complement.
7. (Emaldi [1985a]) Show that G is a C-group if and only if every subgroup H of G
has an S-complement K such that K has finite index in G if H is finite.
3.3 Relative complements

In this section we shall study groups that satisfy various stronger complementary
conditions.
SK-groups
A group G is called an SK-group if every subgroup of G is a K-group, that is if L(G)

is sectionally complemented. By 3.2.2, every SC-group is an SK-group but the con-
verse does not hold, the alternating group A4, or even A5, is an example. Clearly,
every SK-group is periodic and has all its elements of squarefree order; however the
structure of SK-groups is not known. For finite groups, at least, we have the follow-
ing characterization.
3.3.1 Theorem (Bechtell [1965]). The following properties of the finite group G are
equivalent.
3.3 Relative complements 127
(a) G is an SK-group.
(b) 1(H) = 1 for every subgroup H of G.
(c) Every Sylow subgroup of G is elementary abelian.
Proof. That (a) implies (b) follows from 3.1.1. And since a finite p-group with trivial
Frattini subgroup is elementary abelian, (b) implies (c). So we finally have to show
that a finite group G with elementary abelian Sylow subgroups is an SK-group. By
induction, every proper subgroup of G is a K-group and it remains to be shown that
G is a K-group. For this we first note that b(G) = 1. For, if 1(G) # 1, there would
exist a minimal normal subgroup N of G contained in F(G). As b(G) is nilpotent, N
would be a p-group and since the Sylow p-subgroups of G are elementary abelian, a
well-known theorem of Gaschiitz (see Huppert [1967], p. 121) would yield a comple-
ment C to N in G. But then (D(G)C = G would imply C = G and N = 1, a contradic-
tion. Thus 1(G) = 1. So if 1 H < G, there exists a maximal subgroup M of G such
that H M. Since M is a K-group, there is a complement K to H n M in M.
Clearly, HnK=HnMnK=1 and HuK=Hu(HnM)uK=HuM=G.
Thus K is a complement to H in G and G is an SK-group.
RK-groups
The group G is called an RK-group if its subgroup lattice is relatively complemented,

that is if for all L, H, M c L(G),
(1) L < H < M implies the existence of K < G such that H n K = L and
HuK=M.
It is easy to see that this property implies that normality is transitive in G. Recall
that G is called a T-group if L a H g G implies L a G, and that G is a T*-group if
(2) L< H g M< G implies L< M,
that is every subgroup of G is a T-group.
3.3.2 Lemma. Every RK-group is a T*-group.
Proof. If L a H a M< G and K is as in (1), then L = H n K a K since H< M and

K < M. It follows that L g H u K = M.
Every simple group is a T-group and every Tarski group is a T*-group, so the
structure of these groups is not known. But clearly, every subgroup of a T*-group is
a T*-group. So to prove that
(3) every finite T*-group G is supersoluble,
we may use induction on IGI and get that every proper subgroup of G is super-
soluble. By Huppert's theorem (see Robinson [1982], p. 287), G is soluble. If H/N is
a chief factor of G and N < L < H, then L < H < G and hence L < G. Thus H/N is
of prime order and G is supersoluble. Now we can prove the following characteriza-
tion of finite RK-groups.
3.3.3 Theorem (Zacher [1952]). A finite group is an RK-group if and only if it is a

T*-group with elementary abelian Sylow subgroups.
Proof. That these conditions are necessary follows from 3.3.2 and 3.3.1. Conversely
suppose that G is a T*-group with elementary abelian Sylow subgroups. We use
induction on I GI to show that G is an RK-group. First of all, since the assumptions
are inherited by subgroups and epimorphic images, every proper subgroup and
every proper factor group of G is an RK-group. Therefore (1) holds for subgroups L,
H, M of G such that M -A G or LG 0 1, and it remains to show (1) in the case that
(4) M=GandLG= 1.
Let p be the largest prime dividing IGI. Since G is supersoluble, there exists a normal
subgroup N of order p in G (see Robinson [1982], p. 145) and N $ L as LG = 1.
Since G/N is an RK-group, there exists K < G such that
(5) HNnK=LNandHNuK=G.
IfN H,then HuK=HuNuK=GandL<HnK<HNnK=LN. Since
N H and ILN : LI = p, it follows that H n K = L and K is the desired relative
complement. So suppose that N < H. Then (5) yields that H nK = LN and
H u K = G. If K < G, then K is an RK-group and there exists R < K such that
LNnR=LandLNuR=K.Itfollows thatHnR=HnKnR=LNnR=L
and H u R = H u N u L u R= H u K = G, thus R has the desired properties. It
remains to consider the case where N < H and K = G. Here (5) yields that H = LN.
Case 1:N H Case 2:N<H,K9 G Case 3: N <H, K = G

Figure 13
Every Sylow subgroup of G is elementary abelian and hence by 3.3.1 (or Gaschiitz's
theorem) there exists a complement S to N in G. It follows that H = (S n H)N, that
is L and S n H are complements to N in H. Now G is supersoluble and p is the
largest prime dividing IGI. Therefore the Sylow p-subgroup P of G is normal in G.
And if Q is any p-subgroup of G, then Q a P a G and hence Q a G as G is a
T-group. Since LG = 1, it follows that ILI is prime to p and N is a normal Hall
subgroup of H. By the Schur-Zassenhaus Theorem, L and S n H are conjugate in H,
that is there exists an x e H such that L = (S n H)X = SX n H. Clearly SX u H =
SX u N u H = G and hence SX is a complement to H in [G/L].
The structure of infinite RK-groups is not known. However, it is possible to
extend Zacher's theorem to infinite soluble groups. Using Zacher's theorem, it is not
difficult to show that finite RK-groups have the following property:

(6) if L, H, M E L(G) and L < H < M, then there exists K < G such that
HnK=LandHK=M.
This property is slightly stronger than (1). We call groups of this type RC-groups and
we shall show that the RC-groups are precisely the soluble or locally finite RK-
groups, and these have a similar structure to the finite RK-groups. It is difficult
to attribute this result correctly. There are two slightly erroneous versions of it
in Emaldi and Zacher [1965] and Abramovskii [1967]; they were corrected by
Menegazzo [1970a]. Emaldi [1971] added the characterization of RC-groups. For
the proof we shall need the following technical results.
3.3.4 Lemma. If G is a metabelian periodic T-group with all Sylow subgroups elemen-
tary abelian, then G' is a Hall subgroup of G (that is n(G') n n(G/G') = 0).
Proof. Suppose that p e n(G') n n(G/G'). If N is the p-complement in G', then GIN
satisfies the assumptions of the lemma. Therefore we may assume that N = 1. Let P
be a Sylow p-subgroup of G. Then G' < P and hence P a G. Since G is a T-group
and P is elementary abelian, every subgroup of P is normal in G and P = G' x K
where 1 < K < P. By 1.5.6, every g e G induces a universal power automorphism in
P and if x9 = x' for x e P, then xr"1 = [x, g] e G' r) K = I for every x E K. It follows
that r = I (mod p) and hence P < Z(G). There exist u, v e G of prime power order
such that [u, v] 0 1. Then l = [u, v]P = [uP, v] by (2) of 1.5. Since P < Z(G), u 0 P
and hence u e <uP> < CG(v), a contradiction. Thus G' is a Hall subgroup of G.
3.3.5 Lemma. Let G be a locally finite T*-group with all Sylow subgroups elemen-
tary abelian. Then G' is an abelian K-group and every subgroup of G' is normal in G.
Let it = n(G/G') and suppose that every maximal n-subgroup of G is a complement to
G' in G.
(a) If N < G', then every maximal n-subgroup of GIN is a complement to G'/N in
GIN.
(b) If H < G, then every maximal n-subgroup of H is a complement to G' n H in H.
Proof. Since finite supersoluble groups with elementary abelian Sylow subgroups
are metabelian, also G is metabelian. Hence G' is a direct product of its elementary
abelian p-components and therefore an abelian K-group. Since G is a T-group, every
subgroup of G' is normal in G.
(a) Let S/N be a maximal n-subgroup of GIN, choose a maximal n-subgroup S,
of S and a maximal n-subgroup T of G containing S,. By assumption, T is a comple-
ment to G' in G and since G' is an abelian K-group, G' = M x N for some M < G'.
Then MT nSnG'=MnS= 1and MTnSis an-group. From S, <MTnS<S
and the maximality of S, it follows that MT n S = S, and NS1 = N(MT n S) =
NMT n S = S. Thus S/N is contained in the 7t-group NT/N. The maximality of S/N
yields that S/N = NT/N and so by 3.1.3, S/N is a complement to G'/N in G/N.
(b) Let S be a maximal n-subgroup of H and choose a maximal n-subgroup
T of G containing S. Then once again T is a complement to G' in G, and hence
(G' n H) n S = 1. From S < T n H and the maximality of S it follows that S = T n H.

Hence if G' < H, then H = G'T n H = G'(T n H) = G'S and S is a complement to G'
in H. Now suppose that G' H and let N < G' such that G' = N x (G' n H). Then
by (a), GIN satisfies the assumptions of the lemma and NH/N = G'H/N is a sub-
group of GIN containing G'/N = (G/N)'. Since N n H = 1, NS/N is a maximal n-
subgroup of NH/N; therefore, as we have just shown, it is a complement to G'/N in
G'H/N. In particular, G'H = G'NS = G'S and then H = (G' r) H)S. Thus S is a com-
plement to G' r) H in H.
3.3.6 Theorem (Menegazzo [1970a], Emaldi [1971]). The following properties of a
group G are equivalent:
(a) G is an RC-group,
(b) G is a soluble RK-group,
(c) G is a locally finite RK-group,
(d) G is a locally finite T*-group with all Sylow subgroups elementary abelian such
that.for it = n(G/G'), the set of primes dividing the order of an element of G/G', every
maximal n-subgroup of G is a complement to G' in G.
Proof. Every RC-group is a C-group and hence soluble by 3.2.5. Thus (a) implies (b).
Since every RK-group is periodic and a soluble periodic group is locally finite, (c)
follows from (b). Now suppose that (c) holds. Then by 3.3.2, G is a T*-group. By
3.3.3, every finite subgroup of G is supersoluble with elementary abelian Sylow
subgroups and hence metabelian. Since G is locally finite, G is metabelian and has
elementary abelian Sylow subgroups. By 3.3.4, G' is a Hall subgroup of G. So if S
is a maximal n-subgroup of G, then S n G' = 1. Since G is an RK-group, there exists
a subgroup T of G such that G'S n T = S and G = G'S u T = G'T. Hence T n G' =
T n G'S n G' = S n G' = I and therefore T TG'/G' is a n-group. The maximality
of S implies that S = T is a complement to G' in G.
Finally suppose that (d) holds. We want to show (6) and take L, H, M E L(G) such
that L < H < M. By 3.3.5, L n G' a G and G,IL n G' satisfies (d). Therefore we may
assume that L n G' = I so that L is a n-group. Let S be a maximal n-subgroup of H
containing L and let T be a maximal n-subgroup of M containing S. Then Lemma
3.3.5 (b) shows that H = (G' r) H)S and M = (G' n M)T. Furthermore, since T
G'T/G' and G' n M are abelian K-groups, there exist subgroups N, Q, R of G such
that G' n M= (G' n H) x N, S = L x Q and T= S x R= L x Q x R. We claim
that K = N(L x R) is the relative complement we are looking for. Since N a G,
HK =(G'nH)SN(L x R)=(G'nH)NS(L x R)=(G'nM)T=M
and if x e H n K = (G' r) H)S n N(L x R), that is x = as = bt where a e G' r-) H,
snS, bnN, tnL x R, then b-'a =ts-'E(G'nM)nT=1. Hence a = b e
(G'nH)nN= 1 and x=s=tESn(L x R) = L. Thus HnK=Las desired.
IM-groups
A group G is called an IM-group if every proper subgroup of G is the intersection of

maximal subgroups of G. Clearly, every RK-group is an IM-group (see also 3.3.12),
but one can show (see Exercise 6) that the converse is wrong. A basic property of
IM-groups is the following.
3.3.7 Lemma. If N is a normal subgroup of the IM-group G, then N and GIN are
IM-groups.
Proof. That GIN is an IM-group is trivial. Suppose that H is a proper subgroup of

N and take x e N\H. Then by Zorn's Lemma, the set of all subgroups R of G such
that H < R < N and x 0 R has a maximal element S. Since x 0 S, we have
T = <S, x> > S, and for every subgroup X of N containing S properly, the
maximality of S implies that x e X and hence T< X. Thus
(7) T=n{XiS<X<N}
and S is a maximal subgroup of T. Since G is an IM-group, there exists a maximal
subgroup M of G such that S < M but T M. Then (7) implies that M n N = S.
Thus N and S, and therefore also T, are normalized by M. It follows that G = TM
and hence N = TM n N = T(M n N) = T, that is, S is maximal in N. We have
shown that to every x e N\H there exists a maximal subgroup S of N containing H
such that x 0 S. In particular, x is not contained in the intersection K of all the
maximal subgroups of N containing H. It follows that K = H and N is an
IM-group.
By the lemma the existence of a finite nonsoluble IM-group implies that of a finite
nonabelian simple IM-group. But Bianchi and Tamburini Bellani [1977] and Di
Martino and Tamburini Bellani [1980], [1981] checked the list of finite nonabelian
simple groups and proved that none of them is an IM-group. Thus, modulo the
classification of finite simple groups (see Gorenstein [1982]), we have the following
result.
3.3.8 Theorem. Every finite IM-group is soluble.
The structure of soluble IM-groups was determined by Menegazzo [1970b]. First

of all we have the following general result.
3.3.9 Lemma. Every IM-group is a T-group.
Proof: Suppose that G is an IM-group and let L g H < G. If .9' is the set of all
maximal subgroups of G containing L but not H, then L = H n ( n M I =
ME Y
n (H n M). Every M e Y satisfies G = MH and H n M < M. So for every x e G,
ME .!
if we write x = mh with m e M and h e H, it follows that (H n M)" = (H n M)" >-
L" = L and hence Lx = n (H n M)' > L. Thus L < G.
MES
Let us call a group elementary abelian if it is an abelian torsion group with all
p-components elementary abelian. Then we can state Menegazzo's theorem in the
following form.
3.3.10 Theorem (Menegazzo [1970b]). The following properties of a group G are

equivalent:
(a) G is a soluble IM-group,
(b) G is a metabelian periodic T-group with all Sylow subgroups elementary abelian,
(c) G contains a normal elementary abelian Hall subgroup N with elementary
abelian factor group such that every subgroup of N is normal in G.
Proof. Suppose first that G is a soluble IM-group. Then by 3.3.9, G is a T-group

and a well-known theorem of Robinson's (see Robinson [1982], p. 389) yields that
G is metabelian. So by 3.3.7, G' and GIG' are abelian IM-groups. Since every sub-
group of an abelian IM-group is an IM-group and the infinite cyclic group clearly
is not an IM-group, G' and G/G' and hence also G are periodic. If P is a Sylow
p-subgroup of G, then P PKIK where K is the p-complement in G'. Then
PK/K a G/K, and again by 3.3.7, PK/K is an IM-group. In particular, 4)(P) = 1.
But a metabelian p-group is locally nilpotent and therefore has all its maximal
subgroups normal (see Robinson [1982], p. 345). Hence P is elementary abelian and
(b) holds.
If G satisfies (b), then 3.3.4 shows that N = G' is a Hall subgroup of G; clearly it
also has the other properties in (c). Finally, suppose that (c) holds. Then G certainly
is soluble. Let H be a proper subgroup of G. We have to show that H is the intersec-
tion of maximal subgroups of G. Since H n N _ G and G/H n N also satisfies (c), we
may assume that H n N = 1. We shall prove that for every x E G\H of prime order
p there exists a maximal subgroup M of G that contains H but not x; since all the
Sylow subgroups of G are elementary abelian, the assertion will then follow. Sup-
pose first that x e N and let P be a Sylow p-subgroup of G. Since G is locally finite,
every pair x, y of p'-elements of CG(P) generates a finite subgroup of CG(P) in which
P n <x, y> is a direct factor; thus xy-' is a p'-element. Therefore the set L of p'-
elements in CG(P) is a subgroup and CG(P) = P x L. Since G induces power auto-
morphisms in P, IG/CG(P)I is finite and clearly prime to p. So Gaschiitz's theorem
(see Huppert [1967], p. 121) shows that P has a complement K in G and all the
complements to P in G are conjugate. Then H and PH n K are complements to P in
PH and hence there exists g e G such that H < K9. So if P = (x> x Q, then M =
QK9 is a maximal subgroup of G that contains H but not x. Now suppose that x 0 N
but xN E HN; let x = by where h E H and 1 0 y E N. As we have just shown, there
is a maximal subgroup M of G containing H but not y; then x = by 0 M. Finally, if
xN 0 HN, then since GIN is elementary abelian, GIN = <xN> x M/N for some
subgroup M of G containing HN. Again M is a maximal subgroup of G containing
H but not x. Thus G is an IM-group.
3.3.11 Corollary. A finite group is a (soluble) IM-group if and only if it is an

RK-group.
Proof. By a theorem of Gaschiitz (see Robinson [1982], p. 392), every finite soluble
T-group is a T*-group. Therefore the conditions in Theorem 3.3.3 and (b) in Theo-
rem 3.3.10 are equivalent for finite groups.
Further topics
A lattice L is called weakly join-complemented if it contains a greatest element I

and for every pair x, y of elements of L such that x < y there exists an element z a L
such that x u z 0 1 and y u z = I. A complement z to y in the interval [I/x]
would clearly satisfy this, so that every relatively complemented lattice is weakly
join-complemented.
3.3.12 Theorem (de Giovanni and Franciosi [1981]). The subgroup lattice of a group
G is weakly join-complemented if and only if G is an IM-group.
Proof. If G is an IM-group and H < K < G, then there exists a maximal subgroup
M of G such that H< M but K M. It follows that K u M = G and H u M =
M < G. Thus L(G) is weakly join-complemented. Conversely, assume that L(G) is
weakly join-complemented and let H be a proper subgroup of G. Let K be the
intersection of all the maximal subgroups of G containing H and suppose for a
contradiction that H < K. Then there exists a subgroup L of G such that K U L = G
and H u L G; take x a G\(H u L). By Zorn's Lemma there exists a subgroup M
maximal with the properties H u L < M and x 0 M. Every subgroup of G contain-
ing M properly contains x and so M is a maximal subgroup of <M, x>. Again
since L(G) is weakly join-complemented, there exists a subgroup N of G such that
M u N 0 G and (M, x> u N = G. If N M, then M < M u N and the maximality
of M would imply that x a M u N and M u N = <M, x> u N = G, a contradiction.
Hence N < M and <M, x> = G. Thus M is a maximal subgroup of G containing H.
The definition of K implies that K < M; since also L< M, it follows that M con-
tains K u L = G. This contradiction shows that K = H and G is an IM-group.
A subgroup H of a group G is called maximal sensitive in G if every maximal

subgroup of G that does not contain H intersects H in a maximal subgroup of H
and, conversely, every maximal subgroup of H is the intersection of H with a suit-
able maximal subgroup of G.
3.3.13 Theorem (Venzke [1972]). Let G be a finite soluble group. Then every normal
subgroup of G is maximal sensitive in G if and only if G is an IM-group.
Proof. First assume that every normal subgroup of G is maximal sensitive. We want
to show that G is a T-group. So let L a H a G and suppose for a contradiction that
L is not normal in G. Then L:9 La, the normal closure of L in G, and LG/L is a
nontrivial finite soluble group. Hence there exists a normal subgroup N/Lof prime
index in LG/L. Since LG is maximal sensitive in G, there is a maximal subgroup M of
G such that N = LG n M. It follows that N a LG u M = G, a contradiction since LG
is the smallest normal subgroup of G containing L. Thus G is a soluble T-group and
hence metabelian (see Robinson [1982], p. 389). Let P be a Sylow p-subgroup of G
and let N be the p-complement of G'. Then P PN/N and PN a G; let Q/N =
fi(PN/N). If Q > N, then since Q is maximal sensitive in G, there exists a maximal
subgroup M of G such that Q n M is a maximal subgroup of Q containing N. Since
PN is maximal sensitive in G, PN n M is maximal in PN and it follows that Q <

PN n M < M, a contradiction. Thus Q = N and P PN/ N is elementary abelian.
By 3.3.10, G is an IM-group.
Conversely assume that G is an IM-group and take a normal subgroup H of G.
If M is a maximal subgroup of G that does not contain H, then G = HM and
I H: H n MI = I G: MI is a prime since G is supersoluble. Thus H n M is a maximal
subgroup of H. On the other hand, every maximal subgroup K of H is the intersec-
tion of maximal subgroups of G and hence there exists a maximal subgroup M of G
such that K < M but H M. It follows that K = H n M and H is maximal sensitive
in G.
Emaldi [1985b] generalized Venzke's theorem to infinite groups. A number of

interesting results on chief factors and the socle of an IM-group are contained in
Curzio and Rao [1981].
Exercises
1. (Bechtell [1965]) Show that a finite group G satisfies b(H) < D(G) for every
subgroup H of G if and only if GIN(G) is an SK-group.
2. Find a supersoluble K-group that is not an RK-group.
3. (Di Martino and Tamburini Bellani [1980]) Let n > 7 and G = A. be the alter-
nating group of degree n. Show that if H = <(123)>, then [G/CG(H)] is a chain of
length 2; thus G is not an IM-group. (Hint: show that a transitive subgroup of G
containing CG(H) is primitive and use the fact that a primitive permutation group
of degree n containing a 3-cycle contains A..)
4. (Di Martino and Tamburini Bellani [1980]) Suppose that G contains proper
subgroups B and N such that G = BNB, H = B n N a N and B = UH where
H < NG(U). If G is simple, show that every maximal subgroup of G containing U
also contains H; thus if H 1, G is not an IM-group. (Note that all simple
Chevalley groups and all twisted groups over a field K have subgroups B, N with
the given property and that H = I only if K is the field with 2 elements or
G = PSU(3.4).)
5. (Menegazzo [1970a]) Let G be a periodic group and w a set of primes. A Sylow
w-basis of G is a collection . " of subgroups of G consisting of a maximal w-
subgroup and some Sylow p-subgroups of G for primes p 0 w such that ST = TS
for all S, T e Y and U S = G. Show that G is a soluble RK-group if and only if
sE
G is a locally finite T*-group with all Sylow subgroups elementary abelian such
that for every set w of primes, every maximal w-subgroup of G is a member of a
suitable w-basis of G.
6. (Menegazzo [I970a]) For every i e N let pi, qi be odd primes such that g1Jpi -
and i pi, qi } n { pj, qj } = 0 if i 0 j; let Hi = <ai, bi) be a nonabelian group of
order pigi where o(ai) = pi and o(bi) = q,. Let H = Dr H; and G = H(z> where
o(z) = 2 and zaiz = a;', zbiz = b; for all i c N. Showi6that
Z
3.4 Neutral elements and related concepts 135
(a) G is a locally finite T*-group such that every Sylow p-subgroup of G is

elementary abelian and is a member of a suitable Sylow {p}-basis of G, in
particular,
(b) G is an IM-group, but
(c) G is not an RK-group.
7. (de Giovanni and Franciosi [1981]) Show that the subgroup lattice of a group G
is weakly meet-complemented (that is, for every pair H, K of subgroups of G such
that H < K there exists a subgroup L of G such that H n L= 1 and K n L 0 1)
if and only if G is periodic and every element of G has squarefree order.
8. Show that every subgroup of a group G is maximal sensitive if and only if G is an
IM-group and every maximal subgroup of G is modular in G.
3.4 Neutral elements and related concepts

Distributive, standard and neutral elements were introduced into lattice theory by
Ore, Gratzer and Birkhoff. We shall study these and some further related concepts
in subgroup lattices of groups.
An element a of a lattice L is called neutral if every triple a, x, y of elements in L
generates a distributive sublattice. The reader can easily verify that greatest and least
elements of L are neutral and that if L is a direct product of lattices L, and L2, then
an element a = (a, a,) of L is neutral if and only if both a; are neutral in L.
3.4.1 Theorem. The element a of the lattice L is neutral if and only if for all x, y a L,
(1) au(xny) = (aux)n(auy),
that is the map cpo: L -+ [I/a]; x - a u x is an epimorphism,
(2) an(xuy) _ (anx)u(any),
that is the map via: L -, [a/0]; x -- a n x is an epimorphism, and
(3) aux=auyandar x = anyimplies that x= y.
Proof. Since (1) and (2) are just distributive laws involving only a, x and y, they
clearly are satisfied if a is neutral; in addition, a u x = a u y and a n x = a n y to-
gether with the distributive laws imply that
x = xn(aux) = xn(auy) _ (xna)u(xny)

_ (any)u(xny) _ (aux)ny = (auy)ny = y.
Conversely, suppose that (1)-(3) hold. Then the map a: L [I/a] x [a/0] defined
by x = (a u x, a n x) for x a L is a monomorphism. For, (1) implies that
(xny) _ (au(xny),an(xny)) _ ((aux)n(auy),(anx)n(any))

_ (a u x, a n x) n (a u y, a n y) = xny,
similarly (2) yields (x u y) = x u y, and r is injective by (3). Now a is neutral in

[I/a] and in [a/0]. Therefore a = (a, a) is neutral in [I/a] x [a/0] and hence also in
the sublattice L of this direct product. It follows that a is neutral in L.
All the properties (1)-(3) in Theorem 3.4.1 have been studied separately. An ele-
ment a of the lattice L is called join-distributive if it satisfies (1), meet-distributive if (2)
holds, and uniquely complemented if (3) is satisfied for all x, y e L. Furthermore, a is
called join-quasi-distributive if (1) holds for all x, y e L such that a u x = a u y;
dually, a is meet-quasi-distributive if (2) is satisfied whenever a n x = a n y. Finally, a
is a standard element if it is join-distributive and uniquely complemented, that is, it
satisfies (1) and (3).
General properties of distributive elements
In arbitrary lattices there are only the obvious interrelations between the concepts
introduced above. For subgroup lattices, however, we have some unexpected results.
3.4.2 Theorem (Ivanov [1969]). Every join- or meet-distributive element in the sub-
group lattice of a group G is normal in G and uniquely complemented in L(G).
Proof. Let N< G, z e G and Z = <z>. Then N' u Z = N u Z and NZ n Z

z-' (N n Z)z = N n Z. Therefore if N is join-distributive, then
N = Nu(NZnZ)=(NuNZ)n(NuZ)= NuNZ
and hence N= < N. Similarly, if N is meet-distributive, then
N=Nn(NZuZ)=(NnNZ)u(NnZ)=NnNZ
and hence N < NZ. Since z is arbitrary, it follows in both cases that N a G.
Now let X, Y< G such that N u X= N u Y and N n X= N n Y. If N is join-
distributive, then since N a G, NX = NY= N(X n Y) and therefore
X = NX n X = N(X n Y) n X =(NnX)(XnY)=(NnY)(X r) Y)
=N(XnY)nY=NY nY=Y.
If N is meet-distributive, then N n (X u Y) = N n X = N n Y< X n Y and there-
fore since N a G,
X =(Nn(XuY))X =NXn(XuY)=NY n(XuY)=(Nn(XuY))Y= Y.

In both cases, N is uniquely complemented in L(G).
3.4.3 Theorem (Curzio [1964a], Napolitani [1965]). Let N be a subgroup of the

group G. Then N is join-quasi-distributive in L(G) if and only if N is join-distributive
in L(G).
Proof. Clearly every join-distributive element is join-quasi-distributive. So suppose

that N is join-quasi-distributive in L(G). We want to show first that N a G. If x e N
and g e G\N, then N u <g> = N u <xg) = N u (<g) n <xg)) as N is join-quasi-
distributive. Hence there exists an integer r such that
(4) <g) n <xg) = <g') N and N u <g> = N u <g'); furthermore g' E CG(x)
since <g) n <xg) is centralized by g and xg and hence also by x. We use the first
assertion in (4) to show that if N contains an element of finite order n, then every
element of G of this order is contained in N. For, if this were false this statement
would fail for a smallest integer n; choose x e N and g c G\N such that o(x) = n =
o(g). Then every proper subgroup of <g) would be contained in N and therefore by
(4), <g) n <xg) = <g>. It would follow that g c <xg), hence also x e <xg) and since
the cyclic group <xg) contains only one subgroup of order n, <g) = <x> < N, a
contradiction.
The result just proved implies that N is normal in G if it is periodic. So suppose
now that N contains an element x of infinite order and take g e G\N. Then by (4),
N u <g) = N u <g') and g'x = xg' for some integer r. Again by (4), <g') n <xg') N
and hence there exist nonzero integers s, t such that g'S = (xg')' = x'g't. Since x
has infinite order, I : x' = g'(S-') and therefore I<g>: N n <g)I is finite. Now choose
g, e <g) satisfying N u <g,) = N u <g> for which I<g, ): N n <g, )I is minimal. If
y e N, then again by (4) there exists 92 e <g,) such that N u <g2) = N u <g,) _
N u <g) and y92 = g2y. The choice of g, implies that
<9i): N n <91>I < I<92): N n <92)I = I<92)(N n <gI>): N n <g,>I
S I<gl>: N n <9,>1
and it follows that <g,) = <92)(N n <g,)). Thus g, = g3z with g3 E <9z>, z e N
and hence y9i = y93= = y' E N. Since y was arbitrary, N9' < N. Similarly N91' < N
so that g, e NO(N). Therefore g e N u <g,) < NG(N) and since g was arbitrary,
NaG.
Thus N < G in all cases. For arbitrary subgroups X and Y of G therefore, by
Dedekind's law, NX n NY= N(NX n Y) < NX and hence
N(NX n Y) = N(X n N(NX n Y)) = N(NX n Y n X n N(NX n Y)) = N(X n Y)
since N is join-quasi-distributive. Thus NX n NY = N(X n Y) and N is join-

distributive.
3.4.4 Corollary. In the subgroup lattice of a group, the join-quasi-distributive ele-

ments, the join-distributive elements and the standard elements coincide.
Note that the nonmodular lattice with 5 elements contains an element that is
join- and meet-distributive but not uniquely complemented, another one that is
join-quasi-distributive but not join-distributive, and a third one that is meet-quasi-
distributive but not meet-distributive. This last situation also occurs in subgroup
lattices so that the dual to Theorem 3.4.3 does not hold.
3.4.5 Example. Let G = <a,b,cla' = h' = c4 = 1, ab = ba, c-'ac = b, c-'bc = a-'>.

Then c operates fixed-point-freely on P = <a, b> and hence G is a Frobenius
group of order 72 - 4. We claim that N = P<c2> is meet-quasi-distributive in L(G).
To show this let X, Y< G such that N n X = N n Y. If X u Y < N, then
N n (X u Y) = X u Y = (N n X) u (N n Y). And if X, say, is not contained in N,
then X contains a Sylow 2-subgroup <c>9 of G. Since c operates irreducibly on P,
<c >9 is a maximal subgroup of G and hence X = G or X = <c>9. In the first case,
clearly X u Y = X; in the second, N n Y = N n X = <C2> /N implies that <C2>
/X <
Y < <c>9 = X and therefore also X u Y = X. In both cases n (X u Y) = N n =
N n Y and N is meet-quasi-distributive. Since <a> u <c> = G and a`2 = a-'
N n (<a> u <c>) = N 0- <a> u <C2> = (N n <a>) u (N n <c>)
and hence N is not meet-distributive in L(G).
Uniquely complemented elements
We want to determine these elements in the subgroup lattice of a finite group. So in

the sequel, let G be a finite group and N < G a uniquely complemented element in
L(G). In the first place the following is evident:
(5) if M < N and M a G, then N/M is uniquely complemented in L(G/M).
Furthermore, if H < G and X, Y e L(H) such that (N n H) u X = (N n H) u Y and
(NnH)nX = (NnH)nY, then NuX =Nu(NnH)uX = Nu(NnH)uY=
NuYandNnX=NnHnX=NnHnY=NnY;since Nis uniquely com-
plemented in L(G), it follows that X = Y. We have now shown the following which,
of course, also holds more generally in arbitrary lattices.
(6) If H < G, then N n H is uniquely complemented in L(H).
If X <G and zEN,N(NnX), then NnX =(NnX)Z=NnX2 and NuX =
(N u X)= = N u XZ. Since N is uniquely complemented, X = XZ and we have shown
that
(7) N,,(N n X) < NG(X) for all X < G.
In particular, if p is a prime dividing IN) and X is a subgroup of order pin G that is
not contained in N, then N n X = 1; hence P < N0(X) for every subgroup P of order
p of N. It follows that PX is elementary abelian of order p2 and PX n N = P.
Therefore every minimal subgroup Y of PX different from P and X satisfies N n Y =
1 = N n X and N u Y = N u X. This contradiction shows that there is no such X,

another important property of N.
(8) If X < G such that IX I = p is a prime dividing I NI, then X < N.
It follows easily that
(9) N is a characteristic subgroup of G.
For, if we choose a prime p dividing INI and let M = (P < GIIPI = p), then M is a
characteristic subgroup of G contained in N and by (5) and induction, N/M is char-
acteristic in G/M. Thus N is characteristic in G. Finally (7) and (9) yield that
(10) N<CG (X)for all X<Gsuch that NnX= 1;
for, N normalizes X and X normalizes N and therefore [N, X] < N n X = 1.
Note that if N is a Hall subgroup of G, then (9), (10) and the Schur-Zassenhaus
Theorem imply that G = N x K where K is a complement to N in G; therefore N is
neutral in L(G) since it is the greatest element of a direct factor of L(G). On the other
hand, the following lemma will show that if G is a p-group and I < N < G, then G
is cyclic or generalized quaternion and again N is neutral in L(G).
3.4.6 Lemma. Let N be a uniquely complemented element in the subgroup lattice of a
finite group G and suppose that p is a prime dividing INI and IG/NI. Then every Syloiv
p-subgroup S of G is cyclic or a generalized quaternion group, and in the latter case
I NI - 2 (mod 4). Furthermore, NN(N n S) < CG(S) and N has a normal p-complement.
Proof. By (6), R = N n S is uniquely complemented in L(S). Since N < G, R is a

Sylow p-subgroup of N and therefore 1 < R < S. Hence there exists H < S such that
R is a maximal subgroup of H, and as R is uniquely complemented in L(S) it is the
only maximal subgroup of H. Thus H is cyclic, but by (8), its subgroup R contains
every minimal subgroup of S. It follows that S has only one minimal subgroup and
therefore is cyclic or a generalized quaternion group (see Robinson [1982], p. 138).
In the latter case, (5) shows that R/Z(S) is uniquely complemented in L(S/Z(S)) and
therefore is trivial since S/Z(S) is a dihedral group; thus R = Z(S) and INI = 2
(mod 4).
To prove that NN(R) < CG(S) take z E NN(R). If z is a p-element, then z is contained
in R, the only Sylow p-subgroup of NN(R). Since R = Z(S) if S is generalized qua-
ternion, it follows that z E CG(S). Now suppose that z is a p'-element. By (7), z
normalizes S and as N < G, [z, S] < N n S = R. Since R < (D(S), it follows that
z centralizes S/ED(S) and hence also S. Thus z E CG(S) in this case also and so, final-
ly, NN(R) < CG(S). In particular, NN(R) = CN(R) and by Burnside's theorem (see
Robinson [ 1982], p. 280) there exists a normal p-complement in N.
Now we can give the desired characterization of uniquely complemented elements

in the subgroup lattice of a finite group.
3.4.7 Theorem (Napolitani [1968]). Let N be a subgroup of a finite group G. Then
N is a uniquely complemented element in L(G) if and only if there exist subgroups L
and K of G with the following properties.
(a) G = LK, L a G, (I LI, I K I) = 1, that is, L is a normal Hall subgroup of G with

complement K.
(b) N = L(N n K) and N n K < Z(K).
(c) For every prime p dividing IN n KI, the Sylow p-subgroups of G are cyclic or
generalized quaternion groups.
(d) For every Sylow subgroup S of K, CL(N n S) = CL(S).
Proof. Suppose first that N is uniquely complemented in L(G). Then by (9), N a G

and Lemma 3.4.6 shows that N has a normal p-complement for every prime p
dividing I N I and I G/N I. Let L be the intersection of these normal p-complements of
N or L = N if there is no such prime p. Then L is a characteristic subgroup of N and
hence normal in G. Furthermore the construction of L shows that a prime q dividing
ILI cannot divide I G/N I. It follows that Lisa normal Hall subgroup of G and by the
Schur-Zassenhaus Theorem there exists a complement K to L in G. We claim that
L and K satisfy (a)-(d). Clearly (a) holds and N = L(N n K). Furthermore N/L is
nilpotent and has cyclic Sylow subgroups by 3.4.6. Thus N/L N n K is cyclic. Let
S be a Sylow subgroup of K. If N n S -A 1, then N n K < NN(N n S) < CG(S) by 3.4.6,
since every prime dividing I N n K I = I N/LI also divides I G/N I. And if N n S = 1,
(10) shows that N n K < CG(S). Thus N n K centralizes every Sylow subgroup of K
and hence K. Therefore (b) holds and (c) follows again from 3.4.6. Finally, for every
subgroup X of K, CL(N n X) < NG(X) by (7). Hence [CL(N n X), X] < L n X = I
and CL(N n X) = CL(X). In particular, (d) holds.
Suppose conversely that G contains subgroups L and K satisfying (a)-(d). By (b),
N a G and we claim that
(11) K is the only complement of L in G intersecting N in N n K.
To show this, suppose that H is such a complement. Let p be a prime dividing
K I = I H I and take Sylow p-subgroups So and T of K and H, respectively. By (a),
So and T are Sylow p-subgroups of G and there exist x e L, y e K such that T =
Sox = SX for S = So, a Sylow p-subgroup of K. Now N n S and N n T are Sylow
p-subgroups of the abelian group N n K = N n H. It follows that N n S =
NnT=NnSX=(NnS)Xand therefore [x,NnS] <LnS= 1. By(d),S=SX= T
and so T < K. Since p was arbitrary, H < K and hence H = K. This proves (11).
Now consider subgroups X and Y of G such that N n X = N n Y and NX = N Y.
We have to show that X = Y and may assume that
(12) NX =G=NY
since L and Ko = K n NX satisfy (a)-(d) in Go = NX. If p is a prime dividing
I N n K I but not I G/N I and P is a Sylow p-subgroup of N n K, then by (b), P is a
central Sylow subgroup of K and hence K = P x K* where K* is a p'-group. It
follows that L* = LP is a normal Hall subgroup of G with complement K* sat-
isfying (a)-(d). We may therefore also assume that
(13) every prime dividing IN n KI also divides I GIN 1.
Since L n X is a normal Hall subgroup of X, we can write X = (L n X)X1 where X1
is a complement to L n X in X; similarly, Y = (L n Y)Y1 with a complement Yl to
LnYin Y.ThenLnX =LnNnX =LnNnY=LnYandhence

(14) X=MX1andY=MY1
where M=LnX=LnY.Since NnX=NnMX1=M(NnX1)and Nn Y=
M(N n Y1), N n X 1 and N n Y1 are complements to the normal Hall subgroup M
in N n X = N n Y. By (b), N/L and hence also N n X/M is abelian. Therefore by
the Schur-Zassenhaus Theorem there exists z e M such that N n X 1 = (N n Y1 )Z =
N n Y,. Since also NX 1 = G = N Y, , and, in view of (14), it is sufficient to show that
X1 = Y1=, we may finally assume that
(15) LnX=1=LnY.
We claim that X and Y then are complements to L in G. For, since G/N X/N n X,
it follows from (13) that there exists a p-element x e X \N for every prime p dividing
N n K 1. By (c), a Sylow p-subgroup S of G containing x is cyclic or generalized
quaternion, and in the latter case, IN n SI = 2 since N n S < Z(S). Hence N n S <
<x> < X and therefore the normal subgroup LX of N contains every Sylow p-
subgroup of N. It follows that N n K < LX and G = NX = L(N n K)X < LX. To-
gether with (15) this shows that X is a complement to L in G; similarly for Y. It
follows that N n K and N n X = N n Y are complements to L in N and the Schur-
Zassenhaus Theorem implies that there exists z e L such that N n K = (N n X)2 =
N n X` = NnY=. By (11), X2 = K = Y= and hence X = Y as desired.
No characterization of uniquely complemented elements in the subgroup lattice

of an arbitrary group is known.
Join-distributive elements
3.4.8 Theorem (Zappa [1949]). Let N be a subgroup of a finite group G. Then N is

a join-distributive (or standard) element in L(G) if and only if there exist subgroups L
and K of G with the following properties.
(a) G = L x K and (ILI, IKI) = 1.
(b) N = L x (N n K) and N n K< Z(G).
(c) For every prime p dividing IN n K1, the Sylow p-subgroups of G are cyclic or
generalized quaternion groups.
Proof. First suppose that N is join-distributive in L(G). Then by 3.4.2, N is uniquely

complemented in L(G) and hence there exist subgroups L and K with properties
(a)-(d) of Theorem 3.4.7. As in the proof of this theorem, if p is a prime dividing
IN n KI but not IG/NI and P is a Sylow p-subgroup of N n K, then K = P x K* for
some p'-subgroup K* and L* = LP is a normal Hall subgroup of G with comple-
ment K* satisfying (a)-(d) of 3.4.7. So we may assume that every prime dividing
I N n KI also divides IG/NI; in addition we want to show that under this assumption
K a G. Then it will follow that G = L x K, N = L x (N n K) and L < CG(N n K)
so that N n K < Z(G); thus (a)-(c) will be satisfied.
Let p be a prime and S a Sylow p-subgroup of K. If N n S = 1, then (d) of 3.4.7

shows that S is centralized by L. So suppose that N n S : 1. Then p divides I G/ N
and therefore S $ N. For x e L, NS = (NS)' = NSX and since N is join-distributive,
N(S n SX) = NS n NSX = NS. In particular, S n S' $ N. By (c) of 3.4.7, S is cyclic or
generalized quaternion and in the latter case, IN n S1 = 2 since N n S <Z(S). It
follows that N n S < S n SX < S. But then N(S n SX) = NS implies that S n SX = S
and hence S = SX. This shows that L normalizes every Sylow subgroup of K. Thus
K<LK=G.
Suppose conversely that G contains subgroups L and K satisfying (a)-(c) and let
X < G.
(16) If g e NX is an element of prime power order, then g c N or g e X.
To prove this, suppose that o(g) = p" and let g 0 N. Let a E N, x e X such that
g = ax and write a = be with commuting p-element b and p'-element c. Since g 0 N,
p divides S K I and hence g e K and h e N n K< Z(G). Hence <b, g> is a p-group and
(c) shows that <h> < <g>. It follows that <g> = <b-'g>. Now x = a-'g = c-'b-'g
where c-' E N is a p'-element and b-' g e K is a p-element. Since [N, K] = 1, b-' y
therefore is a power of x. Thus <g> = <h-'g> < X and (16) holds.
Now we prove that N is a join-distributive element in L(G). Since N < G, we have
to show that N(X n Y) = NX n NY for all X, Y!59 G. Let g e NX n NY be an
element of prime power order. If g e N, then g e N(X n Y); on the other hand,
if g 0 N, then by (16), g e X and y e Y, so that again g e N(X n Y). It follows
that NX r) NY < N(X n Y). The other inequality is obvious. Hence N(X n Y) =
NX n NY, as desired.
The join-distributive elements in the subgroup lattice of an infinite group were

characterized by D.G. Higman [1951] in the case of a torsion group and by Sato
[ 1952] for groups with elements of infinite order. We also refer the reader to Suzuki
[1956], Chapter IV for a systematic treatment of lattice-homomorphisms of groups.
Since any join-distributive element N in L(G) is normal in G, the map sending every
subgroup X of G to NX/N is a homomorphism from L(G) to L(G/N) induced by the
natural group-homomorphism from G to GIN. So Suzuki is able to use his general
theory of lattice-homomorphisms to give shorter proofs of Zappa's, Higman's and
Sato's results.
Neutral elements
3.4.9 Theorem (Suzuki [1951b], Zappa [1951c]). Let N he a subgroup of a finite

group G. Then N is a neutral element in L(G) if and only if there exist subgroups L, H
and M of G with the .following properties.
(a) G = L x HM,M<Gand (ILI,IHI)=(I LI,IMI)=(IH1,IM1)= 1 (so that L, H
and M are Hall subgroups of G).
(b) N = L x (N n H) and N n H< Z(G).
(c) H is nilpotent with Sylow subgroups cyclic or generalized quaternion groups.
Proof. First suppose that N is neutral in L(G). Then by 3.4.1, N is join-distributive

in L(G) and hence there exist subgroups L and K with properties (a)-(c) of Theorem
3.4.8. Let M = {x E GI(o(x), INI) = 11. If x, y c- M, then N n <x> = I = N n <y>
and, since N is meet-distributive, also N n(<x> u <y)) = 1. It follows from (8) that
(INI,I<x,y>I) = 1. In particular, (o(xy-'),INI) = 1 and hence xy-' E M. This shows
that M is a subgroup, and it is clearly a normal Hall subgroup of G. Now M < K
and by the Schur-Zassenhaus Theorem there is a complement H to M in K. Since
N a G and LH is a Hall subgroup of G, N < LH and N n H = N n K. Thus (a) and
(b) are satisfied and since every prime dividing IHI also divides I N n HI, it remains
to be shown that H is nilpotent. So let p be a prime and suppose for a contradic-
tion that S and T are different Sylow p-subgroups of H. Since N a G, N n S and
N n T are Sylow p-subgroups of N n H. An abelian group has only one Sylow
p-subgroup, hence N n S = N n T. Since N is meet-distributive, N n (S u T) =
(N n S) u (N n T) = N n S is a p-group. But as S T, there exists a subgroup Q of
prime order q 0 p in S u T< H. The definition of M implies that q divides I N I and
therefore Q < N by (8). Thus Q < N n (S u T), a contradiction. It follows that H
contains only one Sylow p-subgroup for every prime p and hence is nilpotent.
Suppose conversely that G contains subgroups L, H, M satisfying (a)--(c) and let
X, Y < G. We have to show that
(17) Nn(XuY)=(NnX)u(NnY).
Then N will be meet-distributive in L(G); by 3.4.8, N is join-distributive, and 3.4.2
and 3.4.1 will imply that N is a neutral element of L(G). If L(G) is a direct product
and (17) is true for the components of N, X and Y, then it certainly also holds for the
subgroups themselves. By 1.6.4, L(G) ^-, L(L) x L(HM) and since L < N, we may
therefore assume that L = 1. Then N < Z(H) and (17) holds for X, Y < H since
H is nilpotent and (17) is satisfied for the Sylow subgroups of N, X and Y. Now
G%M H and it follows that MN is meet-distributive in [G/M]. Furthermore
(I M I,1 N I) = I and therefore for every subgroup Z of G,
M(N n Z) = M((M n Z) x (N n Z)) = M(MN n Z) = MN n MZ.
Hence for arbitrary X, Y < G,
M(N n (X u Y)) = MN n M(X u Y) = MN n (MX u MY)
= (MN n MX) u (MN n M Y) = M(N n X) u M(N n Y)
= M((N n X) u (N n Y)).
It follows that N n (X u Y) = (N n X) u (N n Y) as required.
No characterization of neutral elements in the subgroup lattice of an arbitrary

group is known, for torsion groups they were determined by Martino [1973]. The
meet-distributive and meet-quasi-distributive elements in subgroup lattices of finite
groups were characterized by Zappa [1951a] and Napolitani [1968], respectively
(see Exercises 2 and 4 or Suzuki [1956], Chapter IV). Ivanov [1969] showed that
meet-distributivity is a local property and thus extended Zappa's result to locally
finite groups. Meet-distributive elements in subgroup lattices of non-periodic locally
soluble groups have been considered by Ivanov [1985], Stonehewer and Zacher
[1990a], [1990b], [1991b]. A characterization of meet-distributive or meet-quasi-
distributive elements in subgroup lattices of arbitrary groups is not known.
Modular elements
It is natural to look for elements m of a lattice L that stand in the same relation to
modularity as neutral elements do to distributivity; thus we introduce:
(18) every triple m, x, y of elements in L generates a modular sublattice.
This was done by Zacher [1955a], [1955b], [1956] who used the slightly stronger
condition that m generates a modular sublattice with every modular sublattice of L.
Clearly, if m satisfies (18), then
xu(mny)=(xum)ny forallx,yELwith x<y,and

mu(xny)=(mux)ny forallx,yELwithm<y,
that is, m is a modular element of L in the sense of Section 2.1. The converse is not
true; in fact, if G is the nonabelian group of order p3 and exponent p and X and Y
are subgroups of order p of G with G = <X, Y>, then the sublattice of L(G) generated
by Z(G), X and Y is not modular. We shall study modular elements in the subgroup
lattice of a finite group Gin Section 5.1 and will get a fairly good description of these
modular subgroups. While characterizations of subgroups of G satisfying either (18)
or Zacher's stronger condition in L(G) are not known, Zacher [1956] determined the
Hall subgroups of finite groups with the second property.
Exercises
1. Let L be a lattice.
(a) Show that greatest and least elements of L are neutral.
(b) Show that if L is a direct product of lattices L, and L2, then an element
a = (aI,a2) of L is neutral if and only if both a; are neutral in L.
2. (Zappa [1951 a]) Show that a subgroup N of a finite group G is meet-distributive
in L(G) if and only if there exist subgroups L, H and M of G with the following
properties.
(a) G = LHM, L a G, M a G and (ILI, IHI) = (ILI, IMI) = (IHI, IMI) = 1.
(b) N = L(N n H) and N n H< Z(HM).
(c) H is nilpotent with Sylow subgroups cyclic or generalized quaternion.
3.5 Finite groups with a partition 145
(d) For every Sylow subgroup S of H, CL(N n S) = CL(S).

(e) For every Sylow subgroup S of H, every subgroup of L that is normalized by
N n S is normalized by S.
Using the classification of finite simple groups, Stonehewer and Zacher [1991a]
showed that the group [L, H] in Exercise 2 is nilpotent.
3. (Stonehewer and Zacher [1991a]) If M = 1 in Exercise 2 and the Sylow 2-
subgroup Q of H is a generalized quaternion group, show that Q is a direct
factor of G.
4. (Napolitani [1968]) Show that a subgroup N of a finite group G is meet-quasi-
distributive in L(G) if and only if it satisfies properties (a)-(d) of Exercise 2.
5. Show that a subgroup N of a finite group G is neutral in L(G) if and only if it is
both join- and meet-quasi-distributive.
3.5 Finite groups with a partition

A partition of a group G is a set E of nontrivial subgroups of G such that every
nonidentity element of G is contained in a unique subgroup X E E. Equivalent to
this condition clearly is that
(1) X n Y = 1 for all X, Y E E such that X -A Y, and
(2) for every cyclic subgroup C of G there exists Z E E such that C < Z.
The elements of E are termed components of the partition; E is called nontrivial if
X G for all X E E. By 1.2.5, a subgroup C of G is cyclic if and only if [C/1] is
distributive and satisfies the maximal condition. Therefore (1) and (2) show that for
a group G to possess a nontrivial partition is a lattice-theoretic property. We give
examples for partitions of finite groups.
3.5.1 Examples. Let G be a finite group, p a prime, n e N.

(a) If 1 < N < G such that every element in G\N has order p, then any partition
of N together with the set of cyclic subgroups of G not contained in N is a nontrivial
partition of G.
(b) In particular, if N is a nontrivial normal subgroup of index p in G such that
every element in G\N has order p, then N together with the set of cyclic subgroups
of G not contained in N is a partition of G.
(c) A Frobenius group is a group G containing a proper nontrivial subgroup H
such that H n Hz = I for all x e G\H. It is well-known (see Robinson [1982], pp.
243 and 299) that the set N of all elements of G not contained in the conjugates of H
together with I is a nilpotent normal subgroup of G. This is called the Frobenius
kernel and H a Frobenius complement. Clearly, N together with the set of conjugates
of H is a nontrivial partition of G.
(d) If G is the symmetric group on 4 letters, then the set E of maximal cyclic
subgroups of G is a partition; for in any finite group this set satisfies (2). And if
X, Y E E such that X j4 Y and X n Y 1, then, since every element in S4 has order
at most 4, it would follow that JXI = I Yl = 4 and IX n YJ = 2. But S4 has only 3

cyclic subgroups of order 4 and any two of them intersect trivially. Thus (1) also
holds and E is a partition of G.
(e) Also for G = PGL(2, p"), the projective general linear group of dimension 2
over the field with p" elements, p" > 3, the set of maximal cyclic subgroups is a
partition. It consists of groups of order p, p" + 1 and p" - 1. The Sylow p-subgroups
(of order p"), together with these maximal cyclic subgroups of order p" + 1 and
p" - 1, form another partition E of G, and E' _ {X n HEX e E} is a partition for the
subgroup H = PSL(2, p") of G (see Huppert [1967], p. 193).
(f) There is another class of finite simple groups with a nontrivial partition, the
Suzuki groups Sz(q), q = 22n+1. This consists of the Sylow 2-subgroups and cyclic
subgroups of order q - 1, q + 2n+1 + 1 and q - 2n+1 + 1 (see Huppert and
Blackburn [1982b], p. 190).
Our aim in this section is to show that every finite group with a nontrivial parti-
tion is one of the examples given in 3.5.1. This was proved in 1961 for soluble groups
by Baer and in the general case by Suzuki. The main problem in Suzuki's proof was
to show that a finite nonsoluble group with a nontrivial partition has even order. We
shall use the Feit-Thompson Theorem to achieve this, and then the classification of
Zassenhaus groups to identify the group. In this section, all groups considered are
finite.
Elementary results
A partition E of G is called normal if X9 E E for every X E E and g E G. If E and A

are partitions of G, 1 H < G and g e G, then clearly
(3) H n E :_ J H n X (X E E, H n X 1} is a partition of H,
and E n A:= {X n YIX E E, Y E A, X n Y 0 1} and I-:_ {X91X E E} are parti-
tions of G. Thus if E is a nontrivial partition of G, then
(4) EG := n Y-' is a nontrivial normal partition of G.
xEG
Therefore we may usually assume that the partitions we consider are normal. The
following simple results will be used over and over again.
3.5.2 Lemma. Let Y. be a partition of G and let a, b e G such that ab = ba and either
(i) o(a) o(b) or
(ii) o(a) = o(b) is not a prime.
Then there exists a component X of E containing a and b.
Proof. We may assume that a 0 1: b and take X, Y e Y. such that a e X and b E Y;

we have to show that X = Y. Suppose first that (i) holds and take Z E I such that
ab e Z. Then o(a) > o(b), say, and since ab = ba, 1 a(bl = (ab)(b) E X n Z. By (1),
X = Z. So Z contains a and ab and therefore also b; thus X = Z = Y as desired.
Now suppose that (ii) holds and take a prime p dividing o(a). Then p 0 o(a) and
hence aP 0 1, aPb = baP and o(aP) 0 o(b). Thus (i) holds for aP and b and, as we have
just shown, this implies that aP and b lie in the same component of E. Since aP e X,
it follows from (1) that X = Y.
The lemma shows that a finite abelian group has a nontrivial partition only if it is
an elementary abelian p-group. More generally, if E is a partition of G and 1 : a e
X E E such that o(a) is not a prime, then every element b c- CG(a) satisfies (i) or (ii) of
3.5.2 and hence CG(a) < X. In particular, we have the following.
3.5.3 Corollary. If E is a partition of G and H is a nilpotent subgroup of G that is not

contained in a component of E, then H is a p-group for some prime p.
3.5.4 Lemma. Let E be a normal partition of G and let X E E. If 1 H < X, then

NG(H) < NG(X). In particular, CG(x) < NG(X) for every I x e X.
Proof. Let g c- NG(H). Then 1 0 H = H9 < X n X9 and X9 E E since E is normal.

By (1), X = X9 and hence g e NG(X). In particular, CG(x) < NG((x>) < NG(X) for
1:xeX.
Admissible subgroups
Let E be a partition of G. A subgroup H of G is called E-admissible if for every X E E,

either X < H or X n H = 1. Clearly, every component of E is E-admissible. We
want to show that every E-admissible subgroup of a finite group G is either self-
normalizing or nilpotent. For this we consider the Hughes subgroup HP(G) of G
defined by
(5) HP(G) = (x e GIo(x) # p>.
Suppose that HP(G) < G. Then every element in G\HP(G) has order p. So if
a c- G\HP(G) and x e HP(G), then
1 = (xa-1)P = xx... x"a-P
By a well-known theorem of Hughes, Kegel and Thompson (see Huppert [1967], p.

502), a finite group with such an automorphism is nilpotent. Thus
(6) HP(G) is nilpotent if H,(G) < G.
We shall also need the following result due to Hughes and Thompson [1959].
3.5.5 Lemma. If HP(G) < G and G is not a p-group, then I G: HP(G)I = p.
Proof. We use induction on I G I. Let H = HP(G) and P be a Sylow p-subgroup of G.

Then G = HP and by (6), H = Q x (H n P) where Q is a p-complement in G. If
1
x e P and 1 0 y c- CQ(x), then o(xy) : p and hence xy e H; since also y e H, it fol-

lows that x e H n P. Thus if H n P = 1, then P operates fixed-point-freely on H and

by a well-known theorem of Burnside (see Robinson [1982], p. 298), P is cyclic or
generalized quaternion. Since every element in G\H has order p, it follows that
IPI = p and I G : HI = p. If H n P 0 1, there exists a subgroup N of order p in
H n Z(P). Clearly N G and every element in GIN that is not contained in H/N has
order p. Thus HP(G/N) < H/N and by induction, I GIN : HP(G/N)I = p. It follows
that HP(G/N) = H/N and IG: HI = p.
It was conjectured, and then proved for p = 2 and 3, that IG : HP(G)I < p if G is a
p-group; however Wall [1965] gave a counterexample for p = 5. The reader can find
further results on the Hughes subgroup and on partitions of p-groups in the book
by Khukhro [1993]. In any case, Lemma 3.5.5 suffices to prove the result on admis-
sible subgroups announced earlier.
3.5.6 Lemma (Kegel [1961]). If E is a partition and H a E-admissible subgroup of G,

then H = NG(H) or H is nilpotent.
Proof. Suppose that H < NG(H). Then there exists a subgroup M of NG(H) such that
IM: HI = p for some prime p. Let x e M\H and take X e E such that x e X. Since
H is E-admissible, X n H = 1. As M = H<x>, it follows that <x> M/H and hence
o(x) = p. Thus HP(M) < H. If H is a p-group, it is nilpotent. And if H is not a
p-group, then by 3.5.5, IM : HP(M) I < p. Thus HP(M) = H and by (6), H is nilpotent.
In our first main result on a finite group with a partition we deal with the situation
that G has a nontrivial admissible normal subgroup. This clearly holds in Examples
3.5.1, (b) and (c). The following theorem shows the converse.
3.5.7 Theorem (Baer [1961a]). Let G be a finite group with a normal partition E and
suppose that N is a nontrivial proper E-admissible normal subgroup of G. Then one of
the following holds.
(a) G is a Frobenius group, the Frobenius complements are components of E and N
is contained in the Frobenius kernel of G.
(b) There exists a prime p such that all elements in G,,N have order p, and if G is
not a p-group, then N = HP(G), I G : NI = p and N is a component of E.
Proof. Suppose first that there exists X E E such that X N and CN(X) = 1. Then
as N is E-admissible, N n X = 1 so that N n NG(X) and X are normal subgroups of
NG(X) intersecting trivially. Therefore N n NG(X) < CN(X) = 1 and by Dedekind,
(7) NNX(X) = NX n NG(X) = (N n NG(X))X = X.
Thus NX is a Frobenius group with complement X and kernel N. It follows that
NX is the set-theoretic union of N and all the X9 where g e NX, and hence is
E-admissible since all these X9 are components of E. Furthermore NX is not nil-
potent and by 3.5.6, NG(NX) = NX. But as N :!g G, NG(X) < NG(NX) and then (7)
shows that NG(X) = X. Thus G is a Frobenius group with complement X, N is
contained in the Frobenius kernel and (a) holds. So we may assume that
(8) CN(X) -A 1 for every X e E such that X .4 N
and want to show that then (b) is satisfied. If 1 a E C,N(X) and 1 b e X, then a
and b lie in different components of E. By 3.5.2, o(a) = o(b) is a prime p and every
nontrivial element in CN(X) and in X has order p. In particular,
(9) p divides I NI and ExpX = p.
It follows that every element in G\N has prime order. Therefore (b) holds if G is a
p-group and we may assume that G is not of prime power order. Then (9) shows that
N too is not of prime power order. If p is a prime dividing I G : N I and P is a
Sylow p-subgroup of G, then INP: NI is a power of p and hence every element in
NP\N has order p. Thus HP(NP) < N < NP. By 3.5.5, I NP : HP(NP) I = p and hence
HP(NP) = N and INP: NI = p. It follows that all Sylow subgroups of GIN are cyclic
of prime order and by a well-known theorem of Zassenhaus (see Robinson [1982],
p. 281), GIN is soluble. Hence there exists a normal subgroup M/N of GIN of
prime index p. Again every element of G\M has order p and hence HP(G) = M by
3.5.5. By (6), M is nilpotent and not of prime power order since N < M. But then
3.5.3 shows that M is a component of E and the E-admissibility of N implies that
M = N. Thus (b) holds.
3.5.8 Remark. If p = 2 in (b) of Theorem 3.5.7, then G is either an elementary

abelian 2-group or a generalized dihedral group, that is, N is abelian, G = N<t>
where o(t) = 2 and tat = a-' for all a e N. For, if we take t E G\N and a e N, then
at N and hence t2 = 1 and atat = 1; it follows that tat = a-' for all a E N and this
implies that N is abelian. If Exp N = 2, then every element in G has order at most 2
and G is elementary abelian. And if Exp N 2, then t 0 CG(N). Since t was arbitrary,
it follows that CG(N) = N and that the automorphism group induced by G in N has
order 2. Thus I G : NI = 2 and G = N<t> as desired.
A characterization of S4
In view of Theorem 3.5.7 we may assume in the remainder of this section that our
groups do not possess admissible normal subgroups. We first establish the following
nice characterization of the symmetric group on four letters.
3.5.9 Theorem (Baer [1961b]). Let E be a nontrivial normal partition of the finite
group G and suppose that there is no nontrivial proper E-admissible normal subgroup
of G. If the Fitting subgroup F(G) : 1, then G S4 and E consists of the maximal
cyclic subgroups of G.
Proof. Since F(G) 1, there exists a prime p such that G contains a nontrivial
normal elementary abelian p-subgroup P. We shall show in a number of steps that
p = 2 and IPI = 4 for any such P; it will follow easily that G S4. First of all,
(10) Z(G) = 1.
For, if 1 0 z c Z(G) and Z e E such that z e Z, then Z:9 G by 3.5.4. Since E is

nontrivial, Z would be a proper nontrivial E-admissible normal subgroup of G, a
contradiction. Similarly, if P < X e E, then X g G by 3.5.4, the same contradiction.
Thus
(11) P is not contained in a component of E.
But if 1 c e CG(P) and o(c) 0 p, then by 3.5.2, P< X where X is the component of
E containing c. Thus (11) implies that
(12) Exp CG(P) = p.
Let X be a component of E. Suppose first that P n X 1. Then by 3.5.4, P <_
No(P n X) < NN(X) so that X a H = PX. By (11), X < H and hence 3.5.6 implies
that X is nilpotent. Thus H = PX is the product of nilpotent normal subgroups and
therefore, by Fitting's theorem, is nilpotent. Hence every p'-element of H centralizes
P and (12) implies that H is a p-group. Furthermore X is a component of the normal
partition H n E of H and Theorem 3.5.7 and Remark 3.5.8 yield the remainder of the
following assertion.
(13) If X E E such that P n X 1, then PX is a p-group, X < PX and every ele-
ment in PX \X has order p; if p = 2, then PX is elementary abelian or I PX : X I = 2.
Now suppose that P n X = I and that p divides I X 1. Let S be a Sylow p-subgroup
of X. Then S 0 1 and since P is a nontrivial normal subgroup of the p-group PS,
there exists t c- P n Z(PS) such that o(t) = p. By 3.5.4, t c CG(S) < NG(X) and hence
[t, X] < P n X = 1. Since t 0 X, 3.5.2 shows that every nontrivial element in X has
order p. We have thus proved:
(14) If X e E such that P n X = 1 and p divides JXI, then Exp X = p.
In particular, X is a p-group, and (13) and (14) show that
(15) every component of E is either a p-group or a p'-group.
We want to show next that G contains elements of order p2. So suppose that this is
false. Then every nontrivial p-element of G has order p and by (15), the set A of
subgroups of order p of G and of components of order prime top of E is a nontrivial
normal partition of G. Clearly, P is a A-admissible normal subgroup of G and by
(10), G is not a p-group. It follows from 3.5.7, that either G is a Frobenius group with
complement X E A and kernel K containing P, or P is a component of A. In the first
case, since K as a Frobenius kernel is a normal Hall subgroup of G, X is a p'-group
and hence X c E; this implies that K is E-admissible, contradicting our assumption.
In the second case, IPI = p and hence P is contained in a component of E, contra-
dicting (11). This contradiction shows that
(16) G contains elements of order p2.
In the remainder of the proof let x e G be an element of order p2, X E E such that
x E X and H = PX. We want to study the automorphism 6 induced by x in P which
is given by a = x-lax for a e P. By (14), P n X 0 1 and (13) then yields that X a H.
It follows that [P, X] < P n X. If a, b e P, then since P is abelian, by (1) of 1.5,
[ab, x] = [a, x]b[b, x] = [a, x] [b, x]
so that the map a: P -+ P n X defined by as = [a, x] = a-' for a e P is a homomor-

phism. If a e Kera, then ax = xa and by 3.5.2, a e X. Thus Kera < P n X and the
homomorphism theorem yields that
(17) IP1= IPIjKeral < IPnXI2.
If P n X a G, then by 3.5.4, X a G, a contradiction. So there exists g e G such
that P n X (P n X)9 = P n Xg and since X and X9 are components of E,
(Pr'X)n(Pr X)9= 1. But as Pa G, (Pr X)(PnX)9<Pand hence lP1> IPnXI2.
Thus
(18) [pi = IPnXI2
and since P" and Kera are contained in P n X, it also follows from (17) that
P = P n X = Kera. Hence a82 = 1 for all a e P, that is (a - 1)2 = 0 in the endo-
morphism ring of P. On the other hand, by (11) there exists a e P such that a 0 X.
Then ax-1 E H\X so that o(ax-1) = p by (13). It follows that
aax...axp-'x-p = a1+o+..+"x-p
I = (ax-1)p =
p-1
Since x-p 1, we have al""" # I and hence y a' 0. In the polynomial
=o
ring GF(p)[z], the identity (z - 1)p = zp - I =(z - 1) P-'
E z' implies that (z - 1)p-1 =
=o
P-1
Y- Z'. Now there is an obvious ring epimorphism from GF(p)[z] to the commuta-
i
tive subring of End P generated by I and a in which z maps to a; hence (a - 1)p-1 =
P-1
Y, a'. Thus (a - 1)p-' 0 and, because (a - 1)2 = 0, it follows that p = 2. Since
=o
o(x) = 4, X is not elementary abelian and by (13), 1 P: P n X I = I PX : X 1 = 2. On the
other hand, (18) shows that I P: P n X I= P n X 1. It follows that I P n X I= 2 and
(19) 1P1 = 4.
By (12), CG(P) has exponent 2 and therefore is an elementary abelian normal 2-
subgroup of G. So we may apply our result (19) to CG(P) instead of P, obtaining
ICG(P)l = 4. Hence
(20) P = CG(P)
and G/P is isomorphic to a subgroup of Aut P S3. Since G has elements of order
4, 1 G/PI is even and since Z(G) = 1, G is not a 2-group. Thus G/P S3 and I GI =
24. Let Y be a component of E containing an element of order 3; by (15), 1 Y1 = 3.
Hence G does not contain elements of order 6 and it follows that Y = CG(Y). If
Y = NG(Y), then G is a Frobenius group and its Frobenius kernel is a E-admissible
normal subgroup of G, a contradiction. Thus I NG(Y)l = 6 and since G operates
faithfully on the set of its Sylow 3-subgroups, G 2 S4. By (15) and (11), all cyclic
subgroups of order 3 and 4 of G belong to E and a noncyclic component W of E has
to be elementary abelian of order 4. But since the Sylow 2-subgroups of G are

dihedral, there would exist a cyclic subgroup of order 4 intersecting W nontrivially,
a contradiction. Thus E consists of the maximal cyclic subgroups of G.
The main theorem
We collect the results proved so far to give the structure of a finite soluble group
with a partition.
3.5.10 Theorem (Baer). Let E be a nontrivial partition of the finite soluble group G.
Then one of the following holds.
(a) G is a p-group for some prime p and E contains a component X such that every
element in G\X has order p; furthermore IEI = 1 (modp).
(b) G possesses a nilpotent normal subgroup N such that N e E, IG : NI is a prime p
and every element in G\N has order p.
(c) G is a Frobenius group.
(d) G^- S4.
Proof. First suppose that G is a p-group. If 1 A x e Z(G) and X E E such that x e X,

then by 3.5.2, X contains every element of order different from p in G; thus o(g) = p
for all g e G\X. Every subgroup of order p of G is contained in a unique component
of E. Since k(G) = I (mod p) if k(G) is the number of subgroups of order p in G (see
Huppert [1967], p. 33), it follows that 1 = k(G) _ k(X) - 111 (modp).
Now suppose that G is not a p-group. By (4), EG x6yis a nontrivial normal partition
of G. Therefore 3.5.7 and 3.5.9 show that (c) or (d) is satisfied or there is a prime p
such that N = HP(G) E EG and I G : NI = p. Since every component of E, is con-
tained in a component of E, N E E in this case. By (6), N is nilpotent and (b) holds.
Note that there are nonnormal partitions of S4 and of many Frobenius groups.
Finally we determine the nonsoluble groups with a partition.
3.5.11 Theorem (Suzuki [1961]). Let G be a nonsoluble finite group with a nontrivial
partition. Then one of the following holds.
(a) G is a Frobenius group.
(b) G PGL(2, q), q a prime power, q > 4.
(c) G PSL(2, q), q a prime power, q > 4.
(d) G Sz(q), q = 2"', n e N.
Proof. We cannot give a complete proof of this beautiful theorem here since some
classification theorems are required to identify the groups. As a matter of fact,
Suzuki's theorem is a consequence of the classification of finite simple groups; how-
ever, a proof using this result might not be appropriate. We decided to use the
Feit-Thompson Theorem on the solubility of groups of odd order, the classification
of Zassenhaus groups (a complete proof of which can be found in Huppert and

Blackburn [1982b], pp. 160-286) and elementary parts of Bender's classification of
groups with a strongly embedded subgroup and of the Brauer-Suzuki-Wall Theo-
rem (both to be found in Suzuki [1986], pp. 391-404 and 494-504, respectively).
Thus by consulting these books, the reader can find a complete proof of Theorem
3.5.11 modulo the Feit-Thompson Theorem; this is avoided in the original paper of
Suzuki by the use of the theory of exceptional characters to prove that the order of
the group is even.
So let G be a finite nonsoluble group with a nontrivial partition E. By (4), we may
assume that E is normal and we may clearly also assume that G is not a Frobenius
group. It follows that for every X e E,
(21) X < NG(X) and X is nilpotent
by 3.5.6. Furthermore, 3.5.7 and the nilpotency of HP(G) imply that there is no
nontrivial proper 1-admissible normal subgroup of G. By 3.5.9,
(22) F(G) = 1.
Let S be a Sylow 2-subgroup of G; the Feit-Thompson Theorem implies that S 0 1.
We divide the remainder of the proof into four parts.
(1) If there exists a component X e E such that S < X, then G is isomorphic to

PSL(2, 2") or Sz(2") for some n e N.
Proof. Recall that a subgroup H of G is called strongly embedded in G if H < G, I H I

is even and 1H n H91 is odd for every g e G\H. Now if H = NG(S), then H < G
by (22), and clearly IHI is even. By 3.5.4, NG(S) < NG(X) and since X is nilpotent,
NG(X) < NG(S). So if g e G\H, then X9 # X so that S n S9 < X n X9 = 1. But the
Sylow 2-subgroup of H n H9 is contained in S n S9 and hence is trivial. Thus
IH n H91 is odd and
(23) H = NG(S) = NG(X) is strongly embedded in G.
If S were cyclic or generalized quaternion, then H would centralize the involution in
S and since S < X < H, 3.5.2 would imply that every element in H\X would be
contained in X; this is impossible. Thus S is not cyclic or generalized quaternion and
it follows (see Suzuki [1986], p. 396) that the action of G on the cosets of H is doubly
transitive and that a maximal p-subgroup P of H, p an odd prime, stabilizing three
points is contained in a conjugate L of H for which INL(P)I is even. We want to show
that P = 1; then the stabilizer of three points will be trivial and since, by (22), G has
no regular normal subgroup, G will be a Zassenhaus group.
So suppose that P : I and that T is a nontrivial 2-subgroup of NL(P); let L = H"
where u c G. Since P is contained in three different conjugates of H, we may assume
that H" 0 H; let D = H n H". Then T < S" < H" and hence [T, P] < S" n P = 1.
Since T< S" < X", it follows from 3.5.2 that P < X". By (23), X : X" and therefore
P n X = 1. Thus p divides I X I and I H: X 1. Clearly, X is an (H n E)-admissible prop-
er normal subgroup of H. If H were a Frobenius group containing X in its kernel K,
then 2p would divide IKI and since K is nilpotent, K < X by 3.5.3. Thus K = X and
this would contradict the fact that a Frobenius kernel is a normal Hall subgroup.
Therefore 3.5.7 shows that I H : X I = p. Since P n X = 1, 1 PI = p and H = PX. It
follows that D = H n H" = P(X n H") and I X n H"I divides I H": X"J = p. We may
assume that u is an involution (see Suzuki [1986], p. 395). Then P" < (H n H")" _
H n H" and P 0 P" since otherwise P :!g X n X" = 1. Thus
(24) D = H n H" = PP" is elementary abelian of order p2
and the involution u interchanges the subgroups P and P". It follows that D =
A x B where IAI = IBI = p, A is centralized and B is inverted by u. Let Y be
the component of E containing B. Then D<u) < NG(B) < NG(Y) by 3.5.4. By (21),
NG(Y) > Y and so 3.5.7 shows that either NG(Y) is a Frobenius group containing Y
in its kernel or there exists a prime q such that JNG(Y) : Yl = q. In the first case, the
Frobenius kernel is a nilpotent normal Hall subgroup of NG(Y) and therefore con-
tains D and does not contain u; this contradicts the fact that A is centralized by u. In
the second case, again u 0 Y since Y is nilpotent and contains B. Hence q = 2 and
D = PP" < Y. Since P < X" and P" < X, it follows that X n Y 1 0 X" n Y and
hence X = Y = X". This contradiction shows that P = 1 and that G is a Zassenhaus
group of degree IG: HI = 1 (mod 2). It follows (see Huppert and Blackburn [1982b],
p. 286) that G PSL(2, 2") or G ^- Sz(2") for some n e N.
(II) If CG(x) is nilpotent for every involution x e Z(S), then either
(a) G is isomorphic to PSL(2, 2") or Sz(2") for some n e N, or
(b) S is dihedral of order at least 8 and if Z(S) = <x) and X E E is the com-
ponent containing x, then S = CG(x) = NG(X) = X<t) where o(t) = 2 and
tat = a-' for all a e X.
Proof. Let x e Z(S) be an involution and let X E E such that x e X. If CG(x) is not a
2-group, then by 3.5.3, CG(x) < X; it follows that S < X and by (I), (a) holds. So we
may assume that
(25) CG(x) = S for every involution x e Z(S).
Since X is nilpotent, its 2'-component centralizes x and hence is trivial; thus X is a
2-group. By 3.5.4, S = CG(x) < NG(X) and hence XS is a 2-group. It follows that
XS < S and therefore
(26) X a S.
If X = S, we are done by (I); so we may assume that X < S. Then X is a proper
(S n E)-admissible normal subgroup of S and by 3.5.7 and 3.5.8, either S is elemen-
tary abelian or
(27) S = X <t> where X is abelian, Exp X > 4, o(t) = 2 and tat = a-' for every
aEX.
If S is elementary abelian, (25) and (26) show that X < S = CG(x) for every 1 0 x e S
and this implies that S n S9 = 1 for all g e G\NG(S). Therefore the conjugates of S
together with the 2'-subgroups in E form a nontrivial normal partition of G which
satisfies the assumptions of (I), and again (a) is satisfied. So we may assume that (27)
holds.
Then Z(S) = CI(X) and every element of S\X is an involution. If none of these is
conjugate to an element of X, then they all operate as odd permutations on the set
of cosets of X in G (see Suzuki [1986], p. 128). It follows that G has a normal
subgroup N of index 2 such that N n S = X. Then N n E is a normal partition of N
having a Sylow 2-subgroup X of N as a component. By (I), N PSL(2, 2") or
N Sz(2") for some n E N. Since X is abelian, N 2w PSL(2, 2") and then X is elemen-
tary abelian, contradicting (27).
Thus there exist s E S\X and g e G such that s9 E X. Then s e S2(X9) = Z(S9)
and therefore S2(X) = Z(S) < CG(s) = S9 by (25). Since IS9 : X9I = 2 and
S2(X) n X9 = 1, IS2(X)I = 2. Hence X is cyclic, S is dihedral and NG(X) < CG(x) = S;
thus (b) holds.
(III) If there exists an involution x e Z(S) such that H = CG(x) is not nilpotent, then
S is a dihedral group and if X E E is the component containing x, then H = CG(x) _
NG(X) = X<t) where X is abelian, o(t) = 2 and tat = a-' for all a E X.
Proof. First let x be any involution in S such that CG(x) is not nilpotent, let X E E
be the component containing x and put H = NG(X); by 3.5.4, CG(x) < H. Again (21)
shows that X is a proper (H n E)-admissible normal subgroup of H and by 3.5.7,
either H is a Frobenius group containing X in its kernel K or there exists a prime p
such that all elements in H\X have order p. In the first case, x e K and therefore also
CG(x) < K, a contradiction since K is nilpotent. Thus the second alternative holds.
Since X is nilpotent, CG(x) 4 X and for z E CG(x)\X, also xz 0 X so that 1 = (xz)P =
xzP = XP. Thus p = 2 and 3.5.8 shows that
(28) H = X<t) where X is abelian, o(t) = 2 and tat = a-' for all a e X;
in particular, H = CG(x). We now choose an involution x E Z(S) such that CG(x) is
not nilpotent. Then S < H = X<t) and we have to show that X n S is cyclic; then
S = (X n S)<t), say, will be a dihedral group.
Since H is not nilpotent, X is not a 2-group and Z(H) = O(X n S). Let Z = Z(H)
and suppose for a contradiction that IZI >_ 4; let y E Z such that 1 # y # x and take
g E G\H. If x" E Z for some u E G, then x" E X n X" and hence X = X"; it follows
that u E NG(X) = CG(x) and x" = x. This shows that x is not conjugate to y and
to y9. Therefore <x, y9) is a dihedral group of order divisible by 4 and there
exists an involution z E <x, y9) that centralizes x and y9. Thus Z E CG(x) = H and
z e CG(y9) = H9 and hence <Z, Z9> < CG(z). If CG(z) is nilpotent, then Z and Z9 are
contained in the Sylow 2-subgroup of CG(z) and hence in a Sylow 2-subgroup S of
G. Since (X n S)" is a normal subgroup of index 2 in S" and IZI > 4, Z n X 1r
Z9 n X. It follows that X = X = X9, a contradiction since g H. If CG(z) is not

nilpotent and W E E such that z E W, then by (28), W :!g CG(z) of index 2. It follows
that W n Z 1 W n Z9 and X = W = X9, the same contradiction as before.
Thus IZI = 2, X n S is cyclic and S is a dihedral group.
(IV) G is isomorphic to PGL(2, q), PSL(2, q) or Sz(q) for some prime power q.
Proof. Suppose first that G has no normal subgroup of index 2. Then by (II) and
(III), either G is isomorphic to PSL(2, 2") or Sz(2") for some n e N, or an involu-
tion x c- Z(S) and its centralizer satisfy the assumptions of the essential part of the
Brauer-Suzuki-Wall Theorem (see Suzuki [1986], p. 497). It follows that G is a
Zassenhaus group of degree q + 1 and order (q + 1)q(q - 1)/2 for some prime
power q. This implies (see Huppert and Blackburn [1982b], p. 286) that G PSL(2, q).
In general, let N denote the smallest normal subgroup of G such that IG: NI is a
power of 2 and suppose that N G. Then N is a nonsoluble group with a nontrivial
normal partition N n E. Clearly, N has no normal subgroup of index 2 and F(N) =
I so that N is not a Frobenius group. Thus N PSL(2,q) or N Sz(q) for some
prime power q, as we have just shown. By (II) and (III), the Sylow 2-subgroup S of
G is dihedral and N n S is a proper noncyclic normal subgroup of S. Therefore
N n S is a dihedral group and IS: N n S I = 2. Thus I G : NJ = 2, N PSL(2, q) and G
is isomorphic to a subgroup of Aut N PFL(2, q). Since G has dihedral Sylow
2-subgroups, it follows that G PGL(2,q) (see Suzuki [1986], pp. 507-510). This
completes the proof of Theorem 3.5.11.
3.5.12 Corollary. The only finite simple groups with a nontrivial partition are the
groups PSL(2, p"), p" > 3, and Sz(2z"+i) n e N.
Exercises
1. (Baer [1961a]) Show that a partition is trivial if it consists of the conjugates of
one subgroup.
2. Show that a p-group has a nontrivial partition if and only if it has order at least
p2 and is not generated by its elements of order different from p.
3. Show that a 2-group has a nontrivial partition if and only if it is a generalized
dihedral group of order at least 4.
4. Determine all partitions of S4.
5. Let G be a P-group of order pzq, with p and q primes, p > q. Find a nonnormal
partition of G. (Note that G is a Frobenius group.)
6. Show that any of the groups PGL(2, p"), PSL(2, p") and Sz(2"), where p" > 3 for
the linear groups, is determined by its subgroup lattice.
Chapter 4
Projectivities and arithmetic structure of finite groups
In this chapter we investigate the influence of the subgroup lattice on the arithmetic
structure of a finite group G. By this we understand first of all the order of G, the
number, structure and embedding of Sylow subgroups, and the number of Hall
subgroups or, more generally, of subgroups of any given order in G.
Finite groups with proper normal Hall subgroups occur in abundance. For exam-
ple, every Sylow subgroup that is not self-normalizing is a proper normal Hall
subgroup in its normalizer. Therefore in 4.1 we describe the subgroup lattice of a
finite group G with a normal Hall subgroup N in terms of L(N), L(G/N) and conju-
gation by elements of N. This description is used to construct projectivities between
finite groups with isomorphic normal Hall subgroups that will be used quite often.
A projectivity cp from G to G is called index preserving if it satisfies I H` : K1* 1 =
IH:KI for all subgroups K < H of G. It is easy to see that if cp is not index
preserving, then there exist a prime p and a Sylow p-subgroup P of G such that
PÌ J P 1. By 2.2.6, P then is cyclic or elementary abelian and we show in 4.2
that G either is a direct product of a P-group with a group of coprime order
(P-decomposable) such that P is contained in the P-group, or has a normal p-
complement N such that N is a normal and, most often, a Hall subgroup of G. This
result was proved by Suzuki in 1951 and is one of the fundamental theorems on
subgroup lattices of groups. First of all, it shows that many groups only possess
index preserving projectivities. And secondly, it reduces most problems on projec-
tivities of finite groups to index preserving ones since, using the results of 4.1, it is
usually not difficult to handle the exceptional situations described above.
Many characteristic subgroups of finite groups can be defined by arithmetic
conditions. We show in 4.3 that a projectivity between P-indecomposable groups
G and G maps the maximal normal p-subgroup OP(G) to Oq(G) for some prime q and
hence the Fitting subgroup F(G)to F(G). This, of course, is not true for P-groups;
however, for k>_ 2, F,(G) = Fk(G) for every projectivity cp between arbitrary finite
groups G and G. The corresponding result for the iterated nilpotent residuals is also
true, but we will not be able to prove this until 5.4. The theorem on the Fitting
groups is due to Schmidt [ 1972b]; as a consequence we get the fact, proved indepen-
dently in 1951 by Suzuki and Zappa, that projective images of finite soluble groups
are soluble. We shall give other proofs of this theorem in Chapter 5. Finally we show
that index preserving projectivities map the hypercentre of G to that of G.
In 4.4 we study images of abelian Sylow p-subgroups under projectivities and
prove two theorems due to Menegazzo [1974] on the image of the centre of a Sylow
p-subgroup P under an index preserving projectivity cp of a finite group G generated
158 Projectivities and arithmetic structure of finite groups
by p'-elements where p > 2: If G is p-normal, then Z(P)" < Z(P'0); if G is p-soluble,

then Z(P)'0 = Z(P). These are the only general results that are known about the
projectivities induced in the Sylow subgroups of a finite group.
4.1 Normal Hall subgroups

In this section we study the subgroup lattice of a finite group G with a normal Hall
subgroup N. Basic for this is the Schur-Zassenhaus Theorem which asserts that N
has a complement H in G and that all the complements of N in G are conjugate
under N. To prove this last assertion the Feit-Thompson Theorem on the solubility
of groups of odd order is necessary. This can be avoided if one assumes that N or
G/N is soluble. This will always be the case in our applications of the results of
this section. Therefore, for these applications, the Feit-Thompson Theorem is not
needed. However, we state our results without the assumption that N or G/N is
soluble, that is we freely use the Feit-Thompson Theorem in this section.
Normalizers, centralizers and commutator subgroups
We want to describe group-theoretic concepts in the subgroup lattice of G and we

start with the core HG = n HX and the normal closure H' = U HX of a comple-
x" XEG
ment H to N in G. For this we do not need that (I NJ, CHI) = 1.
4.1.1 Lemma. Let N g G and H < G such that G = NH and N n H = 1.

(a) If H,, H2 < H and x e N such that Hi < H2, then H, < H2 and x e CN(H, ).
(b) For x e N, H n HX = CH(x) and H u HX = [x, H] H.
(c) HG = CH(N), HG = [N, H] H, HG n N = [N, H].
Proof. (a) Let a E H,. Then aX E H2 and hence [a,x] = a-'a' E H n N = 1 since
x e N a G. It follows that x E CN(H,) and H, = Hi < H2.
Hx)x
(b) Clearly, CH(x) = CH(x)x < H n Hx. Conversely, (H n H and hence (a)
yields that x e CN(H n Hx), that is, H n HX < CH(x). This proves the first assertion.
By (6) of 1.5, H normalizes [x, H] so that [x, H] H is a subgroup of G containing H.
The trivial identities [x, a-'] a = ax and [x, a] = (a-' )Xa show that [x, H] H also
contains HX and that [x, H] < H u Hx. Thus [x, H] H = H u HX and (b) holds.
(c) Now (b) and G = HN yield that HG = n Hx = n Hx = n CH(x) _
XEG xEN xEN
CH(N) and, similarly, HG = U [x, H]H = [N, H]H. By Dedekind, HG n N =
xEN
[N, H] (H n N) = [N, H].
4.1.2 Theorem. Let G be a finite group, N a normal Hall subgroup and H a comple-
ment to N in G. Suppose that cp is a projectivity from G to a group G such that N' is
a normal Hall subgroup of G. Then for all N, < N and H1 < H,
4.1 Normal Hall subgroups 159
(a) H1 < NG(N,) if and only if HI < Ni(N;),

(b) CN(H1)' = CN,(HI) and CH(N1)" = CH..(Nr),
(c) IN:CN(H1)I =IMP: CN-(Hf)I,
(d) [N1, H1 ]10 = [Ni, Hi] if H1 <_ Nc(N1)
Proof. (a) If H1 < NG(N1), then N1 H1 is a subgroup of G and N1 H1 n N = N1;

conversely, if N1 = (N1 u H1) n N then N1 a N1 u H1 since N a G. Thus
H1 < NG(N1) if and only if N1 = (N1 u H1) n N. This is equivalent to N; _
(Nw u H;) n N and hence to HI <
(b) By 1.6.7, H; is centralized by CN(H1)`0, that is, CN(H1)` < The corre-
sponding assertion for (p-1 yields the other inclusion. Similarly, CH(N1)` = CHm(N;).
(c) By the Schur-Zassenhaus Theorem, IN: CN(H1)I = IN: NN(H1)I is the num-
ber of complements to N in NH1. This implies (c).
(d) Since H1 < NG(N1), N1 is a normal Hall subgroup of N1 H1 and by (a), N; is a
normal Hall subgroup of NPHI*. By (c) of 4.1.1 and the Schur-Zassenhaus Theorem,
[N1,H1] is the intersection of N1 with the join of the complements to N1 in N1 H1,
and is therefore mapped by (p to the intersection of Nl with the join of the comple-
ments to N" in N;HI, that is, to [N;, HI]. El
The subgroup lattice of a finite group with a normal Hall subgroup
To construct the subgroup lattice, we need some further properties of a group with
a normal Hall subgroup.
4.1.3 Lemma. Let N be a normal Hall subgroup and H a complement to N in G.

(a) For every U < G satisfying (I U 1, I N 1) = 1, there exists x e N such that Ux < H.
(b) N = [N, H] CN(H) and [N, H, H] = [N, H].
(c) If N is abelian, then N = [N, H] x CN(H).
(d) For every prime p, there exists an H-invariant Sylow p-subgroup of N.
Proof. (a) Since NU = N(NU n H), U and NU n H are complements to N in NU.

By the Schur-Zassenhaus Theorem there exists x e N such that Ux = NU n H < H.
(b) By 4.1.1, [N, H] is a normal Hall subgroup in H' = [N, H] H. For x E N, H
and Hx are complements to [N, H] in HG and hence there exists y c [N, H] such
that Hx = Hy. Then x = (xy-1)y e NN(H) [N, H] and, since x was arbitrary, N =
[N, H] NN(H) = [N, H] CN(H). Furthermore, again by 4.1.1,
[N, H, H] H = U Hx = U Hx = [N, H] H
xe[N,H] xeN
and hence [N, H, H] = [N, H].

(c) By (b), we only have to show that [N, H] n CN(H) = 1. For this we study the
endomorphism r of N defined by x` = fl xh for x e N. If a E H and x e N, then
heH
(Xa)t = l Xah = fl xh = xT and hence [x, a]' = (X-1)t(Xa)t = (xr)-1xt = 1. Since
heH bEH l
[N, H] is generated by these [x, a] and r is a homomorphism, yT = 1 for all
y c [N, H]. So if x e [N, H] n CN(H), then 1 = x` = xini and x = I since (o(x), I H 1) = 1.

Thus [N, H] n CN(H) = I and (c) holds.
(d) Let P E Sylp(N). By the Frattini argument, G = NG(P)N and hence N n NG(P)
is a normal Hall subgroup of NG(P) having a complement K isomorphic to H. By (a)
there exists x e N such that KX < H and it follows that H = KX < NG(P)X = NG(Px).
Thus PX is an H-invariant Sylow p-subgroup of N.
4.1.4 Theorem (Paulsen [1975]). Let G be a finite group, N a normal Hall subgroup
and H a complement to N in G. Then L(G) = {Nx H; Jx E N, N, < N, H, < NH(N, )}
and N; Hi < NzHz (for x, y e N, N,, N2 < N, H. < NH(N;)) ifand only if H, <_ H2,
N; `' N2 and xy ' E CN(H, )N2. (Note that, in general, CN(H, )N2 is not a subgroup
oJ' N.)
Proof'. If H, < N,,(N, ), then N; Hi = (N, H, )X is a subgroup of G. Conversely,

suppose that U < G. Then U n N is a normal Hall subgroup of U and therefore
possesses a complement K in U. Since JKj = I U: U n NI = I UN: NI is prime to INI,
it follows from 4.1.3(a) that there exists v c N such that K` < H. So if we put N, _
(U n N)`, H, = K" and x = v-', then U = (U n N)K = N; H; as desired.
To prove the second assertion of the theorem, assume first that N; H; < N2Hz,
that is, N;' 'H;'' N2H2. Then clearly N;'' N2H2 n N = N2. Furthermore,
applying 4.1.3(a) to the subgroup H;y ' of N2H2, we see that there is z e N2 such
that H;'' < H2. Then 4.1.1(a) shows that H, < H2 and xy-' z E CN(H, ), that
is, xy-' E C,, (H,)N2. Conversely, suppose that H, < H2, Nil' ' < N2 and xy-' E
C^,(H, )N2. Then there are s e CN(H1) and t e N2 such that xy-' = st. It follows that
Nx,. Hi,., =Nii. 1
H'1 SN2Hi=N2H2
and hence N; H; <NZ Hz.
4.1.5 Remark. In certain situations our description of L(G) in 4.1.4 becomes

simpler. For example, if N is abelian or hamiltonian, then N; = N, for all x E N.
Therefore in this case, L(G) = IN, H; l x E N, N, < N, H, < NH(N,) } and N, H; <_
N2Hz if and only if H, < H2, N, < N2 and xy ' e CN(H, )N2i here CN(H, )N2 is a
subgroup of N.
Projectivities of finite groups with normal Hall subgroups
We use Theorem 4.1.4 to construct projectivities between groups with isomorphic

normal Hall subgroups.
4.1.6 Theorem. Let G = NH and G = MK he finite groups with normal Hall sub-
groups N and M and complements H and K, respectively. Suppose that 6: N -a M is
an isomorphism and r: L(H) -+ L(K) is a projectivity such that for every N, < N and
for every cyclic subgroup H, of prime power order of H,
(1) C,v(H, ) = CM(H,) and

(2) H, <_ NH(N1) if and only if Hi < NK(Ni ).
Then the map cp: L(G) -. L(G) defined by (N, Hi )v = (N;)X(H'j)Xfor x e N, N, < N,
H, < NH(N1) is a projectivity from G to G.
Proof: Since rr is a projectivity, it is clear that if (1) and (2) hold for two subgroups
H, and H2 of H, then they also hold for H, u H2. Therefore our assumptions imply
that (1) and (2) are satisfied for every subgroup H, of H. Now suppose that x, y c N,
)X(H,)X
N1, N2 < N and Hi < NH(N;). Then by (2), H, < NK(N') so that (Nl =
(Ni H; )X is a subgroup of G. And by 4.1.4, NxHi < NZHZ if and only if H, < H2,
N;'' ' < N2 and xy-' E C,,,(H1)N2. Since a is an isomorphism and r a projectivity
satisfying (1), this is the case if and only if H; < Hz, (N' )X(') I = (Ni' ) < NZ and
xY) ' = (xY E CN(H, ) Nz = CM(H; )Nz, that is if and only if (Nl )X(H' )X <
(N2)1(HZ)'. This shows that cp is well-defined and preserves inclusion. The same
holds for the map : L(G) - L(G) defined with respect to a-' and r-' in the same
way as cp with respect to o and T. Of course, U"y = U for all U < G and V101* = V
for all V < G. Thus cp is bijective and, by 1.1.2, it is a projectivity from G to G.
To illustrate Theorems 4.1.4 and 4.1.6, we study the simple but interesting situa-
tion where N is elementary abelian and H is cyclic of prime order.
4.1.7 Example. Let p and q be different primes, F = GF(p) and suppose that I H I = q.
(a) Let G = NH where N is an elementary abelian normal p-subgroup of G. Then
it is well-known that we can regard N as an FH-module and by Maschke's Theorem
(see Robinson [1982], p. 209), this FH-module is completely reducible. Thus
(3) N = CN(H) x N, x x N,
where the Ni are nontrivial irreducible FH-modules.
(b) It is also well-known (see Huppert [1967], p. 166) that all nontrivial irreduc-
ible FH-modules N have the same order p'", where m is the smallest natural number
such that glpm - 1, and all these modules lead to isomorphic semidirect products
G = NH. By 4.1.5, the subgroups of G are of the form N, H; where x e N, N, < N
and H, < NH(N,). Since I H I = q, only H, = 1 or H, = H is possible. If H, = 1, then
L(G) for p = 5, q = 3, m = 2
Figure 14
N, Hi = N, < N; for H1 = H, since N is FH-irreducible, either N, = N or N1 = 1,

and then N1 H; = NH" = G or N, Hi = Hx. Therefore L(G) consists of G, the sub-
groups of N and the INI conjugates of H. In particular, this lattice does not depend
on the prime q. Therefore, if we take another prime r such that rl p' - 1 and r,( p' - 1
for j < in, a group Kof order r and a nontrivial irreducible FK-module M, then the
semidirect product G = MK is lattice-isomorphic to G. For m = 1, G and G are
nonabelian groups in P(2, p). But for m > 2 we get, in addition to the cyclic groups
and the P-groups, another class of examples of lattice-isomorphic groups with differ-
ent orders. The smallest primes are p = 29, q = 3, r = 5 for m = 2 and p = 11, q = 7,
r = 19 form=3.
(c) In the case m = 1, that is, q1 p - 1, a fixed generator a of H induces power
automorphisms x -+ x` in the irreducible FH-modules Ni. Since Exp N = p, we may
regard these:: as (nonzero) elements of the field F = l/(p) and by (3), N is the direct
product of the eigenspaces
E(i.)=E(...,a,N)= {xENIx=x'-}
of a. In general, for an automorphism x of N of order dividing p - 1, we define the

type of x to be (do;d...... dk) if pdo = IE(1,x,N)I = IC,v(x)I and d1 > - - > dk are the
-
dimensions of the eigenspaces of x to eigenvalues ., 1. We shall show in 4.1.8 that

two groups N<a) and N<b) of the form considered are lattice-isomorphic if the
automorphisms induced by a and b in N have the same type. It is not so easy to
decide whether they are isomorphic; this is the case if and only if <a) and <b) induce
automorphism groups in N that are conjugate in Aut N (see Exercise 3).
(d) If there are two different primes q and r dividing p - 1, then we can construct
groups N <a> and N <b) with o(a) = q and o(b) = r such that a and h induce
automorphisms of the same type in N. So we get many further examples of lattice-
isomorphic groups having different orders of the form p"q and p"r. The following
table shows all types for n < 2 and the resulting groups of order p"q; in these small
cases it is also often clear from earlier results, for example 1.2.8, 1.6.4 or 2.2.3, that
all groups of the given type are lattice-isomorphic.
type group
CP X Cq
nonabelian group of order pq
CPxC,,xCq
CP x F where F is nonabelian of order pq
nonabelian P-group of order p2q
<x,y,alxP=yP=a"=[X,y]= 1,xa=XS,y=}`)where 1 <s<t
p - 1 and s`' = I = tQ (mod p)
The last groups in the table are the Rottlander groups which we shall study more
closely in 5.6.8. There are (q - 1)/2 nonisomorphic groups of this type and order
p2q
4.1.8 Theorem. Let q and r be (not necessarily distinct) primes dividing p - 1 and
suppose that G = N<a> and G = M with normal elementary abelian p-subgroups
N, M and o(a) = q. o(h) = r. Then there exists a projectivity cp from G to G satisfying
N` = M and <a>" = if and only if the automorphisms induced by a on N and by
h on M have the same type.
Proof. Let of and /3 be the automorphisms induced by a and b in N and M, respec-

tively. Suppose that the type of x is (do; d1 . ... . dk), that of /3 is (eo; e1.... . e,), and let
N = Do x x Dk and M = Eo x x E, be the decompositions of N and M into
eigenspaces of x and /3, respectively, such that Do = CN(a), Eo = CM(b), I D; I = pe, and
I E; I = pe- for all i. _

Suppose first that cp is a projectivity from G to G satisfying N" = M and <a>" _
. Then C,N,(a)' = CM(b) by 4.1.2(b). If D is an eigenspace of x, then a normalizes
every subgroup of D. Conversely, if F is a subgroup of N such that a normalizes
every subgroup of F, then by 1.5.4, a induces a universal power automorphism on F,
that is, F is contained in an eigenspace of x. Thus the eigenspaces of a are precisely
the subgroups of N maximal with the property that all their subgroups are normal-
ized by a. By 4.1.2, these subgroups are mapped by (p to the corresponding sub-
groups of M with respect to b, that is, to the eigenspaces of /3. It follows that d; = e;
for all i and of and /3 have the same type.
Conversely, if x and /3 have the same type, then k = l and J DJ = I E; I for all i. Hence
there exists an isomorphism a: N - M such that D; = E. for all i. This isomorphism
a and the trivial autoprojectivity t from <a> to satisfy (1) and (2). For, CN(a) _
Do = Eo = CM(b) and, as we have seen in 4.1.7, a subgroup F of N is normalized by
a if and only if F is a direct product of subgroups of the eigenspaces of a, that is, of
the Di. These subgroups are mapped by a onto the direct products of subgroups of
the E,, that is, onto the b-invariant subgroups of M. By 4.1.6 there is a projectivity
cp from G to G satisfying N' = M and <a>'* = <h>.
As another application of Theorem 4.1.4, we show how a projectivity of

G/ CH(N) = G/ HG can be lifted to a projectivity of G.
4.1.9 Theorem. Let G = NH and G = MK be finite groups with normal Hall sub-
groups N and M and complements H and K, respectively. Let u he a projectivity from
G/CH(N) to G/CK(M) satisfying (NCH(N),/CH(N)) = MCK(M)/CK(M), let r be a
projectivity from H to K such that CH(N)` = CK(M) and suppose that p and t induce
the same projectivity in H/CH(N). Then there exists a projectivity cp from G to G
inducing p in G/CH(N) and t in H.
Proof. For X < G let X = XCH(N) and let j be the map induced by p in the interval
[G/CH(N)], that is, (X/CH(N))" = X"/CK(M) for CH(N) < X < G.
Let U < G. Then by 4.1.4 there exist x c N, N1 < N, H1 < NH(N,) and x c M,
M1 < M, K 1 < NK(M,) such that
(4) U = N' H', U = Ni (Hl CH(N))X = Nl Hi and U" = M' K'*
We want to define U1* as (M, H',)'. In the first place this is a subgroup of G; indeed
CK(M) < K, since CK(M) < U"; therefore
Hi = Hi = (NH1 n H)" = (NU n H)" = N U n H" = MCK(M)Mf K' n K

=MKinK=K1,
that is,
(5) Hi < Hi = K1 < NK(M1)
Furthermore, N; Hi = U < V = NzHz (y E N, N2 < N, H2 < NH(N2)) implies that
(M, K1)x = U" < V" _ (M2K2)y and, by 4.1.4, H, < H2, K, < K2, MV-' < M2 and
xy 1 E CM(K1)M2. It follows that H; < HZ and xy ' e CM(H;)M2 since H, < K1.
Again by 4.1.4, (M1 HT)' < (M2 H2T)Y. So if we put U" = (M1 H')', then cp is well-
defined and preserves inclusion. The same holds for the map 0: L(G) L(G) defined
with respect to p-1 and T-1 in the same way as cp with respect to p and T. Now
CH(M)T = CK(M) and (5) imply that
(6) U`CK(M) = Mi (Hi CK(M))x = Mi (Hi )x = M1 K 1 = U",
hence (UCK(M))" ' = U = N1 Hi and therefore, finally, (Ul')O = (N1(H;)T-')x = U.
Since the situation is symmetric in cp and 0, it follows that also (W'') = W for all
W< G. Thus cp is bijective and, by 1.1.2, it is a projectivity from G to G. If CH(N) < U,
then U = U and, by (6), UP = U". Hence cp induces p in G/CH(N) and it trivially
induces r in H. F1
Autoprojectivities
The group P(G) of autoprojectivities of a group G with normal Hall subgroup N and
complement H was studied by Paulsen [1975]. His results are rather technical. Since
N is the only subgroup of its order, every autoprojectivity t/i of G that does not fix
N satisfies IN''I 0 INS; in the next section we shall study this rare situation to obtain
complete information about autoprojectivities of this type. If NO = N, then 0
induces autoprojectivities in N and in G/N and operates on the set _t- of com-
plements to N in G. And i/i is determined by its action on these three subsets of L(G),
that is on L(N), [G/N] and '; for, if x e N and H1 < H, then H; = NH1 n Hx.
There is not much more that can be said in general. If CN(H) = 1, the operation of cli
on . '' yields via the Schur-Zassenhaus Theorem a permutation of N which we study
for two special cases in the last theorem of this section and in Exercise 5.
4.1.10 Theorem. Let G be a finite group, N a normal Hall subgroup and H a comple-
ment to N in G such that CN(H) = 1. Suppose that 0 is an autoprojectivity of G which
satisfies NO = N and induces the trivial autoprojectivity in H; define p: N -+ N by
(H')0 = Hx" for x e N.
(a) Then p is a permutation of N and 1 = 1.
(b) For every H1 H and x e N, (Hi)p' = Hi; thus li is determined by p and its
action on L(N).
(c) If H1 < H and L is an H1-invariant normal subgroup of N such that CN(H,) < L
and L' = L, then (xL)P = xPL for all x e N; in particular, L = L.
Proof. (a) For x, y e N, H" = H'' if and only if xy-' E NN(H) = CN(H) = 1, that is,
x = y. Since 0 maps complements of N onto complements of N, the Schur-
Zassenhaus Theorem shows that p is well-defined and bijective. As H" = H, 1P = 1.
(b) Since N" = N and Hi = H1 we have (Hi)V' = (NH1 n Hx)4' = NH1 n Hx
H;; by 4.1.4, 0 is determined by p and its action on L(N).
(c) For x e N, let S(x) y e NILHi n H'' = H; }. Then y e S(x) if and only if
(LHi n H'')'' = (Hi )'' and (b) shows that this is the case if and only if LHi n Hy' _
Hi', that is, yP E S(xP). Hence S(x)P = S(xP), and it suffices to show that S(x) = xL.
If y e S(x), then H; < LHi and hence LHi = LHi; by the Schur-Zassenhaus Theo-
rem there exists z e L such that Hi= = H; . It follows that xzy-' E CN(H,) < L and
therefore y e xL since L a N. Conversely, if y = xz where z e L, then LHi n H' =
(LHi )z n H'' = LHi n H'' = Hi and hence y e S(x). Thus S(x) = xL and (c) holds.
1-1
Exercises
1. Let G be a finite group, N a normal Hall subgroup and H a complement to

N in G. Show that L(G) = {N, Hi I x e N, N, < N, H, < H, Hi < NG(N,) } and
N, Hi < N2 H2 (for x, y e N, N1, N2 < N, Hl, H2 < H, Hi < NG (N,) and HZ <
NG(N2)) if and only if H1 < H2, N1 < N2 and x e CN(H,)yN2.
2. For p > 2, let N= (x, y I xp2 = yP = [x, y] = 1 > be the abelian group of type
(p2, p) and M = (u, vluP2 = vP = 1, u" = u' {'P>
G/= the nonabelian group of order p3
lattice-isomorphic to N. Let G = N<a> and M be semidirect products of
N and M by cyclic groups of order 2 with respect to the automorphisms given by
x'=x- ''y = y andb uu = 'V '1' = v. Show that there are projectivites a from N
to M and r from H = <a> to K = satisfying (1) and (2), but that G and G are
not lattice-isomorphic. (This shows that we cannot replace the isomorphism a in
Theorem 4.1.6 by a projectivity.)
3. Let N be a group, H and K subgroups of Aut N and G = NH and G = NK
the corresponding semidirect products. Show that there exists an isomorphism
a: G -+ G satisfying N = N and H = K if and only if H and K are conjugate in
Aut N.
4. Let G = NH and G = MK be finite groups with normal Hall subgroups N and
M and complements H and K, respectively, and suppose that CN(H) = I =
CM(K). Show that there exists a projectivity cp from G to G satisfying N`0 = M if
and only if there are projectivities a from N to M and r from H to K and a
bijective map 7t: N -. M such that for all x, y e N, N, < N and H, <_ H,
(a) H, < NH(N,) if and only if Hi < NK(Nl ), and
(b) if H, < NH(N,), then xy-' e CN(H,)N, if and only if x"(y")-' e CM(Hi)N'
5. Let G be a finite group, N an abelian normal Hall subgroup, H a complement to
N in G and suppose that CN(H) = 1.
(a) Let it be a permutation of N such that if N, < N and H, < NH(N,) then
xy-' c CN(H, )N, if and only if x" (y")-' e CN(H, )N,. Show that q : L(G) -
L(G) defined by (N, Hi )`0 = N, Hf is an autoprojectivity of G. Denote the
group of all these autoprojectivities by F.
(b) Let r be an autoprojectivity of H such that for all H, < H, CN(Hi) = CN(H, )
and Hi and H, normalize the same subgroups of N. Show that ,: L(G) --9
L(G) defined by (N, H' )O, = N, (H')' is an autoprojectivity of G. Denote the
group of all these autoprojectivities by A.
(c) Let A = {0 c- P(G) I U0 = U for all U < N}. Show that A = I x A.
4.2 Singular projectivities
We already know many projectivities that map a group G onto a group of different
order; this may happen, for example, if G is cyclic (see 1.2.8), a P-group (see 2.2.3),
or for the groups in 4.1.7. On the other hand, Theorem 2.2.6 states that for a
projectivity 9 of a nonabelian p-group G, I G" I= I G I and then also I H4'I= I H I for
every subgroup H of G. In this section we want to show that this last property holds
for projectivities of many more groups and, in fact, reflects the normal behaviour of
a projectivity. We first of all give it a name.
Index preserving and singular projectivities
A projectivity cp of a group G is called index preserving if it satisfies IHI: KÌ =

I H : K I for every pair H, K of subgroups of G such that K < H; cp is called singular
if it is not index preserving. An index preserving projectivity in particular satisfies
H"=IHI for every subgroup H of G, and from Lagrange's Theorem it is clear that
for a finite group G the converse holds: cp is index preserving if IHII = IHI for all
H < G. But we can say a little more.
4.2.1 Lemma. If cp is a projectivity of a finite group G satisfying ISÌ = I S I for every

Sylow subgroup S of G, then cp is index preserving.
Proof. Assume that K < H < G, let p be a prime and let P e Sylp(H); take
S E Syl, (G) such that P < S. Since SP is a p-group, I P` I = I P I. If P would be
properly contained in a p-subgroup T10 of Hw, then P < T < H and T would contain
an element x of prime order q p. For a Sylow q-subgroup Q of G containing x,
p = I <x> I would divide IQ PI = I Q I, a contradiction. Thus P is a Sylow p-subgroup
of HP and hence the p-part of I HP I is the same as that of IHI. Since this holds for
all primes p, it follows that IHÌ = IHI. Similarly, IK'I = IKI and by Lagrange's
Theorem, IHI*: K10I = IHÌ/IK`'I = IHI/IKI = IH: KI.
The above lemma suggests the introduction of the following concepts.

4.2 Singular projectivities 167
p-singular projectivities
Let p be a prime and G a finite group. A projectivity cp from G to a group G is called

p-singular or singular at p if there exists a p-subgroup (or, equivalently, a Sylow
p-subgroup) P of G such that IP'I IPI; cp is called p-regular or regular at p if it is
not p-singular. Lemma 4.2.1 shows that if cp is not index preserving, then there exists
a prime p such that cp is singular at p. By 2.2.6 the Sylow p-subgroups of G are then
cyclic or elementary abelian and we are looking for further restrictions on the struc-
ture of G and G if G has composite order. However, if T is any group of order prime
to I G I and 161, then by 1.6.4 there exists a projectivity from G x T to G x T which
induces cp in G and therefore is singular at p. Hence there is no global restriction on
the structure of a group with a p-singular projectivity. We can only hope for restric-
tions on its p-structure, for example on the embedding of its Sylow subgroups. We
distinguish two kinds of singularities at p.
4.2.2 Lemma. Let q be a projectivity from G to G and suppose that P is a Sylow

p-subgroup of G such that I PI 0 P1. Assume further that there is no P-group S < G
containing P as a proper normal subgroup (we call cp singular of the first kind at p in
this case). Then P < Z(NG(P)) and hence G has a normal p-complement.
Proof. We have to show that P< Z(NG(P)); then Burnside's theorem (see Robinson
[1982], p. 280) yields that G has a normal p-complement. So we suppose that this
assertion is wrong and take a counterexample G of minimal order. If P < H < G,
then H and the projectivity induced by cp in H satisfy the assumptions of the lemma;
the minimality of G implies that P < Z(Nf(P)). In particular, if NG(P) < G, then
P< Z(NNG(p)(P)) = Z(NG(P)), contradicting the choice of G. Thus
(1) P a G,
(2) P <_ Z(H) for all P < H < G, and
(3) P Z(G)
since G is a counterexample. It follows that there exists a cyclic subgroup Q of prime
power order in G such that Q CG(P). By (1) and (2) G = PQ, and, by 2.2.6, P is
cyclic or elementary abelian. Thus P G and hence Q is a q-group for some prime
q 96 p. We want to show that I Q I = q and assume, for a contradiction, that IQI > q2.
If D is the maximal subgroup of Q, PD < G and, again by (2), D is centralized by P.
By 1.6.7, [D", P"] = 1 and since Q and QO are cyclic, it follows that D < Z(G) and
D" < Z(G). Thus q induces a projectivity 0 from G/D to 6/D" that maps the Sylow
p-subgroup PD/D of G/D onto the subgroup P`0D/D`0 of order I PI 0 JPD/DJ of
G/D`0. If G/D were a P-group and G/D e P(m, p), then also G/D e P(m, p) by 2.2.5.
Since iP is singular at p, G/D` would be nonabelian and since the Sylow p-subgroup
of G/D is not mapped onto the Sylow p-subgroup of G/D', there would exist a
subgroup Q 1 /D of order q in G/D such that I QI*/D" I = p. Since G/D is generated by
its subgroups of order q, there would also exist Q2/D < G/D of order q such that
Qz/D101 96 p. Then Q1 and Q2 would be Sylow q-subgroups of G and hence Q`1 and
Qz would be cyclic of prime power order. Since 1 D" < Q1' n QZ, the primes have
to be the same; but IQ;/DÌ = p 0 IQZ/D`1. This contradiction shows that G/D is not
a P-group and the minimality of G implies that PD/D < Z(G/D). It follows that
Q < G and hence G = P x Q is abelian, contradicting (3). We have shown that
(4) G = PQ andJQI=gwhere p0gEP.
We want to show next that P is not cyclic. So suppose, for a contradiction, that P is
cyclic. If JP1 = p, then P would be a proper normal subgroup of the P-group G,
contradicting our assumption. Thus IPI = p" where n > 2. If x e G then ((P")')"-' is
a cyclic subgroup of G of order t" for some prime t. Since I G I = p"q and n > 2, t = p
and hence ((P)X)`0-' = P, the only Sylow p-subgroup of G. Thus P' < G and cp
induces a projectivity from G/D(P) to G/D(P4'). Since Q operates nontrivially
on P, the group G/D(P) is not cyclic; hence G/(D(P) E P(2, p) and therefore also
G/ b(P`0) E P(2, p). Now P" < G implies that I P"/'(P`)I = p and since P is also
cyclic of prime power order, it follows that IP`PI = p" = JPJ, a contradiction. Thus P
is not cyclic and by 2.2.6,
(5) P is elementary abelian of order p" and P is a nonabelian P-group of order
p"-'r where n>2andp>rcP.
Let Po be the Sylow p-subgroup of P". If P" < G, then Po g G since it is characteris-
tic in Pq'. It follows that Po = Po Q" n P; hence PO = (P0 U Q) nP a PO U Q and
therefore Po < G. If P is not normal in G, then there exists x e G such that P' 0
P'. By 2.2.5, Pl"'*-' lies in P(n,p) and since it is different from P, !P`,`' ' I = p"-' q
Then I P n P' I = p"-' and P n P`""-' < P u PX`-' = G. Therefore, in both
cases, there is a maximal subgroup M of P such that M < G. By Maschke's theorem
(see Robinson [1982], p. 209) there exists a Q-invariant subgroup T of P such that
P = M x T; clearly, also T:9 G. Suppose first that I T'1 = p. Then T< P0; hence
M Po and therefore M10 is not a p-group. Thus cp induces a p-singular projectivity
from MQ < G to (MQ)" and the minimality of G implies that MQ is a P-group or
M < Z(MQ). In both cases, every subgroup of M is normalized by Q and hence is a
normal subgroup of G. Since r divides IM101,
(6) there exists a normal subgroup R of G contained in P such that JR101 = r.
This is trivial if I P : p, since we can take R = T in that case; thus (6) holds in
general. Now if X is any subgroup of P such that IXP I = r, then by Sylow's Theorem
there exists z e PP such that R"' = X". Since R a G, either RQ E P(2, p) or RQ is
cyclic; hence also (RQ)`ZP = X u QQZ'P ' E P(2, p) or this is cyclic. Since I X I = p, it
follows that X < X u QWZ`-'. As z e P, P and hence X < G. If Y < P such
Q`"`-'
that I YÌ = p, then (R Y)`0 E P(2, p) has order pr and every minimal subgroup of R Y
different from Y is mapped by q to a subgroup of order r in G. These groups are
normalized by Q, as we have just shown, and hence also R Y and Y are normalized
by Q. Thus Q induces a power automorphism in P and, since P Z(G), it follows
that G is a P-group. This contradicts our assumption on G.
4.2.3 Lemma. Let cp be a projectivity from G to G and suppose that P is a Sylow

p-subgroup of G such that IPÌ:IPI. Assume further that there exists a P-group
S < G containing P as a proper normal subgroup (we call cp singular of the second kind
at p in this case). Then there exists a subgroup K of G such that G = S x K and

(ISI>IKI)= 1.
Proof. Again we suppose that the assertion is wrong and consider a counterexample
G of minimal order. By 2.2.1, ISI = p"-'q where n > 2 and p > q E P. Then
S` E P(n, p) and, since IP"I IPI, we see that S is not abelian and (p does not map
the Sylow p-subgroup of S to that of S. It follows that there exists a subgroup Q of
order q in S such that IQ"I = p. Thus cp is singular at q and (p -' is singular at p, hence
the Sylow q-subgroups of G and the Sylow p-subgroups of G are cyclic or elementary
abelian. If Q were contained in a P-group H as a normal subgroup, then H E P(m, q)
for some m E N. Hence also H E P(m, q) and q would be the largest prime dividing
IHI1; but IQcI = p > q divides IHOI, a contradiction. Thus:
(7) There is no P-group H < G containing Q as a normal subgroup.
We want to show next that Q is a Sylow q-subgroup of G. Suppose that this is wrong
and take T E Sylq (G) such that Q < T. By (7), T is not elementary abelian and hence
cyclic. Since IQc1 = p, T is a cyclic p-group of order at least pz and therefore the
Sylow p-subgroups of G are not elementary abelian. It follows that cp-' is singular
of the first kind at p; by 4.2.2 the group G, and hence also every subgroup of G, has
a normal p-complement. But Sc has none, a contradiction. Thus
(8) Q E Sylq (G).
By (7), qp is singular of the first kind at q and by 4.2.2 there exists a normal q-
complement N in G, that is
(9) NaGsuch that G=NQ and NnQ= 1.
Certainly P < N and hence cp induces a p-singular projectivity from N to N`.
We want to show that this singularity is of the first kind. So suppose, for a contra-
diction, that T< N is a P-group containing P as a proper normal subgroup.
Then T E P(n, p) and T and S are contained in NG(P). Therefore, if x E S` then
T"""' ' < NG(P) and T""I" e P(n,p). Since P is the only Sylow p-subgroup of NG(P),
it follows that P < T"` '. Furthermore S`"`' ' = S and since S N, S n T = P.
Therefore Pwxc-' = S`0x`0-' n Tcxc-' > P, that is, (P`)x = P. Thus P" :9 S4' and by
2.2.2, 1PcI = p"-' = IP1, contradicting the assumption of the lemma. Hence the pro-
jectivity induced by cp in N is singular of the first kind at p and by 4.2.2 there exists
a normal p-complement K in N. Thus N = KP and K n P = 1, and since K is
characteristic in N g G, it follows that
(10) K aGsuch that G=KS and KnS= 1.
If S a G, then G = S x K is not a counterexample since (ISI, IKI) = 1. Thus
(11) S is not normal in G.
Suppose that K is not a primary group, and let r be a prime dividing I K I. By 4.1.3(d)
there exists an S-invariant Sylow r-subgroup R of K and cp induces a projectivity
from RS to (RS) that is singular of the second kind at p. Since K is not an r-group,
RS < G and the minimality of G implies that S :!g RS. Now K is generated by its
Sylow subgroups and it follows that K < NG(S). Hence S a G, contradicting (11).
Thus
(12) K is an r-group for some prime r.
Let M be a maximal subgroup of G containing S. By (10), M = LS where L =
M n K and the minimality of G implies that M = L x S. Since K is an r-group and
L < K, there exists g e NK(L)\L. Now M9 = M would imply that M g <M, g> = G
and hence that S < G as a characteristic subgroup of M; this would contradict (11).
Thus M90- M and M9 = Lq x S9 = L x S9 implies that L a M u M9 = G. By 1.6.7,
M" = L" x S" and (M9)" = L" x (S9)"; hence also L" g M" u (M9)" = G. It follows
that cp induces a projectivity from GIL to G/L" that maps PL/L to P"L"/L" P"
and SL/L is a P-group containing PL/L as a proper normal subgroup. Therefore if
L 1, the induction assumption would imply that SL/L o GIL and hence that
M = SL a G, contradicting M9 0 M. Thus L = 1, that is,
(13) S is a maximal subgroup of G.
Let Po be the Sylow p-subgroup of S". Then P n Po is a maximal subgroup of
P. We want to show that I P I = p and suppose, for a contradiction, that I P I > p2.
Then there exists a maximal subgroup D of P different from P n P0. And since
SID e P(2, p), there are two different maximal subgroups Sl and S2 of S such that
S1 # P : S2 and S1 n S2 = D. Then D = Si n P is a Sylow p-subgroup in G. = KS;
for i = 1, 2. Since D PO, we see that D" is not a p-group and S. < G; is a P-group
containing D as a proper normal subgroup. Thus cp induces projectivities in the G.
which are singular of the second kind at p and the minimality of G implies that
Si a G. for i = 1, 2. Hence St, S2 and therefore also S = S1 U S2 are normalized by K.
It follows that S a G, a contradiction. Thus I P I= p and
(14) ISI = pq.
Let x e S" such that (P")" # P". Then z: L(G) - L(G) defined by X` = X"""' ' for
X < G is an autoprojectivity of G satisfying P 0 PT < S` = S. By (14), P` is a Sylow
q-subgroup of S and S = P u PT. Since S cannot operate fixed-point-freely on K (see
Robinson [1982], p. 298), there exist nontrivial subgroups H of K and U of S such
that [H, U]= 1, that is,HU=H x U.IfP<U,thenPgHuS=Gby(13).And
if P U, then U is a Sylow q-subgroup of S and there exists y e S such that Uy = PT.
Then (HU)y = Hy x PT and, by 1.6.7, (HU)yT-' = Hyt ' x P. Since CS(P) = P, we
have Hy' ' S and hence P a HyT-' u S = G. Thus in both cases P 9 G, hence
PK = P x K and (PK)T = PT x KT. Consequently KT normalizes P and PT and there-
fore also P u PT = S. Since K' u S = (K u S)T = G, it follows that S g G, a final
contradiction.
The following terminology will simplify our discussion.
P-decompositions
A P-decomposition of a finite group G is a pair (S, T) of subgroups of G such that

G = S x T, (BSI, 1 TS) = 1 and S is a P-group. We call G P-decomposable if there
exists a P-decomposition of G; otherwise G is called P-indecomposable. Note that

T is allowed to be trivial so that a P-group is P-decomposable. Note further
that P-decompositions are preserved by projectivities; they are even fixed by
autoprojectivities.
4.2.4 Lemma. Let (S, T) be a P-decomposition of G. _

(a) If cp is a projectivity from G to G, then (S`, T`) is a P-decomposition of G.
(b) If a is an autoprojectivity of G, then S = S and T = T.
Proof. (a) By 1.6.6, G = S x T` where (IS" I, I T" I) = 1 and, by 2.2.5, S" is a P-group.
Thus (S`, T") is a P-decomposition of G.
(b) Suppose that S e P(n, p) and let P be the Sylow p-subgroup of S. By (a), G =
S x T" where (I S% I TI) = I and S e P(n, p). Therefore p divides I S' I and hence T"
is a p'-group and P < S". It follows that T < C0(P) = P x T and, as a p'-group,
T < T. Since a finite group has no projectivity onto a proper subgroup, T = T. By
1.6.4, T has only one complement in G and this implies that S = S.
We show next that autoprojectivities of P-indecomposable groups map Sylow

subgroups onto Sylow subgroups.
4.2.5 Theorem. Let p be a prime, G a finite group, P a Sylow p-subgroup of G,

I P I = p" where n e f\i and suppose that there is no P-decomposition (S, T) of G such
that P < S.
(a) Then P is a Sylow subgroup of G for every a a P(G).
(b) Let it be the set of primes dividing I P"I for some a e P(G). If it {p}, then P is
cyclic and there exists a normal n-complement D in G with cyclic factor group G/ D
of order n q"). Furthermore D = D` for all r e P(G) and P(G) operates transitively
qE"
on the set of normal q-complements (q e it) of G.
Proof. We first prove the following assertion.

(15) Let q be a prime, Q a Sylq(G) and r a P(G) such that P = Q or P < Q`. If
I QÌ - IQ I, then Q is cyclic and has a normal complement in G.
For, if r were singular of the second kind at q, then by 4.2.3 there would exist a
P-decomposition (S, T) of G such that Q < S. Then also Q' < S` = S by 4.2.4. Since
P = Q or P < Qt, it would follow that P < S, contradicting our assumption. Thus r
is singular of the first kind at q and by 4.2.2 there exists a normal q-complement in
G. It follows that Q` also has a normal q-complement and therefore cannot be a
P-group of order qm'r where q > r e P; by 2.2.6, Q is cyclic. This proves (15).
(a) Suppose, for a contradiction, that P is not a Sylow subgroup of G. Then, in
particular, IP"I # IPI and, by (15), P is cyclic. Hence P is a q-group for some prime
q and there exists a Sylow q-subgroup Q of G such that P < Q. Since P a Syl(G),
the subgroup Q" ' is not of prime power order. In particular, IQ' ' I
IQI and there-
fore r = a-' and Q satisfy the assumptions of (15); it follows that Q is cyclic. But then
Q" ' has prime order, a contradiction.
(b) Let p : q e it and let a- e P(G) such that q divides I PI. By (15), P is cyclic and
has a normal complement NP in G. By (a), P = Q is a Sylow q-subgroup of G and
again (15), applied to Q and r = a ', shows that Q is cyclic and has a normal
complement Nq in G. The intersection D of all these normal q-complements N. where
q E it is a normal rr-complement of G with cyclic factor group G/D of order fl q".
gER
Suppose, for a contradiction, that D` D for some r e P(G). Then D`D/D 0 1 and
hence there exists r E it dividing ID'I; let R < D` such that I R I = r. By (a) and the
definition of it there exists v e P(G) such that P" E Syl,(G) and hence R < (P')' for
some x E G. By (a), ((P")x)` is a Sylow s-subgroup of G for some s e it and since
1 0 R` ' < D n ((P")x)' it follows that s divides IDI. This is a contradiction since
D < N,, a normal s-complement in G. Thus D` = D for all r e P(G).
Therefore every r e P(G) induces an autoprojectivity i in the cyclic group G/D. If
q e it and u e P(G) such that P E Sylq (G), then 6: maps the Sylow p-subgroup PD/D
of G/D onto the Sylow q-subgroup PD/D and hence maps the unique complement
NP/D of PD/D in G/D to the unique complement Nq/D of PD/D. It follows that
NP' = N. and P(G) operates transitively on the set of normal q-complements (q e ir)
of G.
Simple examples for the situation described above can be found in cyclic groups.
It is easy to see that if in, n e f\J, G = C. and {p1,...,p,} is the set of primes p for
which p" is the largest power of p dividing in, then P(G) induces the full symmetric
group S, on the set of p;-complements of G (cf. Exercise 1.4.2). Further examples are
given in Exercises 2 and 3.
Suzuki's theorem
We collect the results proved so far in what is our main theorem on finite groups
with singular projectivities.
4.2.6 Theorem (Suzuki [1951a]). Let cp be a projectivity from the finite group G to
the group G and suppose that P is a Sylow p-subgroup of G such that IP1*I IPI; let
I P I = p". Then (a) or (b) holds.
(a) There exists a P-decomposition (S, T) of G such that P < S; that is, G = S x T
where S is a P-group properly containing P and (ISI,ITI) = 1.
(b) There exists a subgroup N of G with the following properties.
(b I) N 9 G, G = NP and N n P = 1; that is, N is a normal p-complement in G.
(b2) Let K= n N". If P is cyclic and it is the set of primes dividing IP"I for
ac P(G)
some a e P(G), then K < G and G/K is cyclic of order fl q". If P is not cyclic, then
gErz
P is elementary ahelian, P' is a nonabelian P-group of order p"- lq where p > q e P

and K = N.
(b3) N`P < G.
(b4) If (I G/NPI, I Nwl) : 1, then there exist a P-group S > P and a subgroup M < N
satisfying MS = G and M n S = 1 such that M and M`0 are normal Hall subgroups of
G and G, respectively, and ISI = rm-lp, ISÌ = rm where p < r e P and 2 < in E
(b5) If I PI > p or I P I = p > I P" 1, then NP is a normal Hall subgroup of G.
Proof. Suppose that (a) does not hold. Then by 4.2.3 and 4.2.2, (p is singular of the
first kind at p and there exists a normal p-complement N in G. Thus N satisfies (bl)
and we want to show that it also has the other properties in (b).
By 2.2.6, P is cyclic or elementary abelian and, in the latter case, P` is a non-
abelian P-group; hence in (b2) we only have to prove the statements on K. These are
clearly satisfied if N is invariant under P(G); for, in that case, IPI = IG : NI = I P I for
all v E P(G) and hence it = { p}. So suppose that there exists r c- P(G) such that
N' # N. Then p divides I NT N/NI = IN': N n N T I and there exists a Sylow p-
subgroup P" of G such that P" n NT 1. Therefore (P")T-' n N # 1, hence (P')' ' is
not a p-group and it 0- { p}. Since (a) does not hold, the assumptions of 4.2.5 are
satisfied. It follows that P is cyclic and G has a normal n-complement D with cyclic
factor group G/D satisfying D = D for all a c- P(G). Since D < N, this implies that
D < K. But P(G) operates transitively on the set of normal q-complements (q E n),
hence every such complement is of the form N where a- E P(G) and it follows that
D = K. Thus (b2) holds.
If r c- P(G), then tprg-' E P(G). Since K is invariant under P(G), it follows that
K' = K P; in particular, K`' a G. Thus N" -< 6 if K = N; and if K < N, we have just
shown that G/K is cyclic. Then 6/K' is cyclic and hence N10 a G in this case also.
Thus (b3) holds.
Now let r be a prime dividing (IG/N'I, I NII), let R` E Sylr(G) and RÌ = r'.
Then R n N` is a Sylow r-subgroup of NP and hence 1 < R n N`0 < RP; thus
I < R n N < R. Since R n N is a normal p'-subgroup of R and R/R n N RN/N
is a p-group, it follows from 2.2.6 that R is elementary abelian and R E P(m, r). By
2.2.2, R n N is an r-group and I R I = r'-' p where r > p. If P, E Sylp(G) such that
R n P, # 1, then r divides IPfl. Since r > p, we have P; 0 P(n,p) and hence P; is a
cyclic r-group. But the Sylow r-subgroups of G are elementary abelian; hence IP;I = r
and I P, I = p. We have shown:
(16) If N` is not a Hall subgroup of G, then IPI = p.
We now apply the results proved so far to R" and cp-'. Clearly, q is singular at r.
If (S, T`) were a P-decomposition of G such that R`' < S`, then by 4.2.4, (S, T)
would be a P-decomposition of G satisfying R < S. Therefore p would divide ISI and
it would follow that P < S, a contradiction since we assume that (a) is not true for
P. Thus (a) does not hold for RP and hence R4' satisfies the parts of (b) we have
already proved. In particular, G has a normal r-complement M` such that M o G
and since r2 divides IRÌ, (16) shows that M is a Hall subgroup of G. Now p divides
I R I and R is a complement to M in G. Therefore (p, I M I) = 1 and hence M < N and
P n M = 1. Thus P n M = I and 1P10I = r; let Sg0 E Sylr(G) such that P` < S`.
Then R" and S` are complements to M` in G, hence R and S are complements to M
in G and it follows that S -- G/M R is a P-group of order r'-'p and ISÌ = r'".
Thus (b4) holds and (b5) follows from the fact that I P"I = r > p =IPI in (b4).
We emphasize the following consequences of Suzuki's theorem since they are
often sufficient to obtain the applications.
4.2.7 Theorem. If cp is a projectivity from the finite group G to the group G, then
there exists a normal Hall subgroup N of G such that
(i) N" a G,
(ii) GIN is a direct product of coprime groups which are P-groups or cyclic p-
groups, and
(iii) for every prime p dividing IN 1, (p is regular at p; in particular, cp induces an
index preserving projectivity in N.
Proof. For every prime p for which (p is p-singular, we define a subgroup NP of G: If

(a) of 4.2.6 holds and (S, T) is the P-decomposition appearing there, we put NP = T;
if (a) does not hold, then (b) is satisfied and we let NP be the normal p-complement
in G. By 4.2.4 and 4.2.6, every NP is a normal Hall subgroup of G such that Np 9 G
and G/NP is a P-group of order divisible by p or a cyclic p-group. Therefore the
intersection N of all these NP is a normal Hall subgroup of G satisfying N'' a G, that
is, (i) holds. If G/NP is a nonabelian P-group and q the second prime dividing IG/NPI,
then G = S x T where S is a P-group of order p"q and (IS1,1 TI) = 1. Thus cp is also
singular at q but Nq = T = NP. Therefore the factor groups of G with respect to
different NP are coprime and it follows that GIN is isomorphic to the direct product
of the different G/NP, that is, (ii) holds. Finally, by definition, cp is regular at p
for every prime p dividing INI and hence satisfies IS"I = BSI for all Sylow sub-
groups S of N. By 4.2.1, (p induces an index preserving projectivity in N and (iii)
holds.
If cp is not index preserving, then the normal Hall subgroup N constructed in 4.2.7
is different from G and (ii) shows that there exists a normal Sylow complement in G
with cyclic or elementary abelian factor group. Also by (ii), G" < N. Thus we get the
following two corollaries.
4.2.8 Corollary. If G has no normal Sylow complement with cyclic or elementary

abelian factor group, then every projectivity of G is index preserving.
4.2.9 Corollary. Every projectivity of a finite group G induces an index preserving

projectivity in the second commutator subgroup G".
We remark that the results of this section can be generalized to locally finite
groups. This is fairly straightforward for the assertions on p-singular projectivities,
but the argument requires the Zacher-Rips Theorem 6.1.7 for the other results. We
shall carry this out for Corollary 4.2.9 in 6.5.9.
The structure of a finite group with a p-singular projectivity
Suzuki's theorem and its consequences are the main tools for handling singular
projectivities. In the remainder of this section we are looking for restrictions on the
structure of the normal p-complement N in (b) of 4.2.6 and the operation of the
Sylow p-subgroup P on N. The basic result here is that the operating group has to
be cyclic.
4.2.10 Theorem (Schmidt [1972b]). Let (p be a projectivity from the finite group G to
the group G, let P be a Sylow p-subgroup and N a normal p-complement in G. Suppose
that P is a nonabelian P-group, let Po be the Sylow p-subgroup of P and Q be a
subgroup of P such that IQI = p :A IQ4I, that is, P = PO x Q. Then PO < Z(G) and
every subgroup of RP is normal in G; furthermore, G = NQ x P. and G =
(Nw
x Po )Q` .
Proof. Since P is a nonabelian P-group, P is elementary abelian of order at least

p2. It follows that there is no P-group S such that P < S < G; for, since G has a
normal p-complement, p must be the smallest prime dividing ISI and hence IPI = p,
a contradiction. We conclude that (b) of 4.2.6 holds for P; in particular, N4' is a
normal Hall subgroup of G. By 4.1.2, CN(A)4' = CN,(A4') for all A < P.
Let A be a maximal subgroup of P different from PO and take B< P such that
P = A x B. If b c B, then CN(A) = CN(Ab) = CN(A), that is B normalizes CN(A). By
4.1.2, CN(A)4' = CN,(A4') is normalized by B`. Since A" is not a p-subgroup of the
P-group P = A" u B4', it is not normalized by P4' and there exists x E B`0 such that
(A`')' # A". Hence P4' = A4' u (A")' and
CN(P4') = CNm(A4) n CNm((A4')x) = CN,(A4') n CN,(A`)x = CNm(A4'),
it follows that CN(P) = CN(A). It is well-known (see Suzuki [1986], p. 216) that
N=<CN(A)IA<P,IP:AI =p>
and we have just shown that CN(A) = CN(P) is contained in CN(PO) if A P0. Hence
N = CN(Po) and since P is abelian, it follows that PO is centralized by NP = G. By
1.6.7, (NPO)4 = NIP x P04' and, as every subgroup of Po is normal in the P-group P,
every such subgroup is normalized by N4P4' = G. Finally, since P = Q x PO, we
conclude that G = NP = NQ x Po and G = N4P = (N4' x Po )Q`.
The above theorem reduces the problem of determining the structure of a group
with a p-singular projectivity to the study of groups with cyclic Sylow p-subgroups.
4.2.11 Theorem. Let G be a finite group with elementary abelian Sylow p-subgroups
of order p", n > 2. Then G has a p-singular projectivity if and only if either (a) or (b)
holds.
(a) G= S x T where S is a P-group of order p"q, p> q e P and (ISI1I TI) = 1.
(b) There exist subgroups Go and PO of G satisfying G = Go x P. and IPO I = p"-1
and then a projectivity tli from GO to a group G, and a Sylow p-subgroup Q of GO such
that (p, IG, I) = 1 and I Q" I divides p - 1.
Proof. Let qp be a p-singular projectivity from G to a group G and let P E Syl, (G)
such that IP4I 0 IPI. If there exists a P-decomposition (S, T) of G such that P < S,
then, since I P I > p2, p is the larger prime dividing I S I and (a) holds. If there is no such
P-decomposition, then by 4.2.6 there exists a normal p-complement N in G such that
N4' is a normal Hall subgroup of G. Let Po be the Sylow p-subgroup of P4', and let
Q < P satisfy IQI = p 0 IQ9I and Go = NQ; let G1 = Gg and c be the projectivity
induced by 'p in Go. By 4.2.10, G = Go x P0 and, since PP is a nonabelian P-group,
I Po I = p"-' and Q111 divides p - 1. Finally, since N" is a normal Hall subgroup of G
and p divides IG/N4I, p does not divide IN4I IQ4I = IG11. Thus (b) is satisfied.
Conversely, if (a) holds, then there exist p-singular autoprojectivities of G; for,
L(G) L(S) x L(T) and hence every autoprojectivity of S can be extended to an
autoprojectivity of G. So, finally, suppose that G = Go x Po and iti is a projectivity
from Go to a group G1 with the properties given in (b). Then cli is singular at p and
we show first that we may assume,
(17) there is a normal p-complement N in Go such that NO is a normal Hall
subgroup in G1.
This is clear if (b) of 4.2.6 holds for ; for, since I Q O I divides p - 1 , Q j = p > I Q O
and the assertion follows from (b5). If (a) if 4.2.6 holds, then Go = S x T and G1 =
SO x TO where S is a P-group containing Q and (ISI, I TI) = I = (ISOI, I TOI). Since p
does not divide G1 , p is the smallest prime dividing ISI and hence ISI = r'p where
p < r c P; also SO = r'"q since I QOI = q < p < r. Because L(G) L(S) x L(T),
there exists a projectivity from Go to G1 mapping Q to Q'', the Sylow r-subgroup R
of S to the Sylow r-subgroup of S'' and inducing t' in T. We may assume that c is
this projectivity and then N = R x T is a normal p-complement in Go and NO _
RO x TO is a normal Hall subgroup of G1. Thus (17) holds.
Now, clearly, N is also a normal p-complement in G and H = Q x Po is a Sylow
p-subgroup and hence a complement to N in G. Let G be the semidirect product of
an elementary abelian p-group P1 of order p"' by G1 such that P1 is centralized by
Na', and Q'" induces a nontrivial power automorphism in P1. Then K = P1Q'" is a
P-group of order p"-' IQ0I and is a complement to the normal Hall subgroup N0 of
6. If N is centralized by Q, then by 1.6.7, [NO, Q 0] = 1 and there exists a projectivity
from G = N x H to G = NO x K which satisfies H` = K and therefore is singular
at p. So suppose that [N, Q] : I and hence also [NO, Q''] : 1. Then CH(N) = P0,
CK(NO) = P1 and G/Po Go, G/P1 G1. Thus c induces a projectivity from
G/CH(N) to G/CK(N'') mapping NCH(N)/CH(N) to N''CK(N'")/CK(N'G) and H/CH(N)
to K/CK(N'"). Of course there is a projectivity t from H to K mapping P0 to P1 and
Q to Q''. By 4.1.9 there exists a projectivity tp from G to G which satisfies Hg, = K,
and therefore is singular at p.
If p and q are different primes and (IN I, pq) = 1, then by 1.6.4 there exists a p-
singular projectivity from G = N x CP to G = N x CQ. So it only makes sense to
look for restrictions on the structure of the normal p-complement N in 4.2.6(b) if G
is not the direct product of N and P. By 4.1.3, N = [N, P]CN(P) and the examples in
4.1.7(d) show that [N, P] and CN(P) can be elementary abelian groups of arbitrary
order. We give examples of directly indecomposable groups in which CN(P) is not
soluble.
4.2.12 Example (Paulsen [1975]). (a) Let A, F be finite groups and N = AF be a

semidirect product of A by F such that F induces power automorphisms on A. Let
p and q be primes satisfying (pq, I NI) = 1, let P CP and Q ^- Cq, and suppose that
G = NP and G = NQ are semidirect products of N by P and Q, respectively, such

that CN(P) = F = CN(Q) and P and Q also induce power automorphisms on A. Then
there exists a projectivity p from G to G satisfying N = N and P`0 = Q.
(b) It is possible to fulfil the assumptions of (a) for the following groups.
(i) F = S,,, n < p, n < q, A is a nontrivial abelian r-group for some prime r such
that pgIr - 1 (for example n = 5, p = 7, q = 11, r = 463), and CF(A) = A,,.
(ii) F = PGL(2,t) where (pq,(t - 1)t(t + 1)) = 1, A is a nontrivial abelian r-group
for some prime r satisfying pgIr - 1 (for example t = 7, p = 5, q = 13, r = 131), and
CF(A) = PSL(2, t).
Proof. If (i) or (ii) is satisfied, then p 0 2 0 q and hence A has fixed-point-free power
automorphisms of order 2p and 2q. Therefore S x P and S. x Q operate on A
with kernel A. inducing theseautomorphisms, and the corresponding semidirect
products G = A(S. x P) and G = A(S. x Q) have the structure described in (a)
where N = AS.; similarly for PGL(2, t). It remains to prove (a). For this we apply
4.1.6 to the normal Hall subgroups N = M of G and G, the identity a: N -+ M and
the trivial autoprojectivity r from P to Q. By assumption, CN(P) = F = CM(Q) and
hence (1) of 4.1 holds. Moreover, CA(P) 5 CN(P) = F and CA(P) = 1 since F n A = 1.
By 4.1.3, A = [A, P] CA(P) = [A, P] and hence [N, P] = [AF, P] = [A, P] = A.
(Note that since P induces power automorphisms on A = [A, P], Cooper's theorem
implies that A is abelian.) Therefore if U < N is normalized by P, then U =
[U, P] CU(P) where [U, P] < [N, P] = A and Cu(P) < CN(P) = F. Conversely, if
Vl < A and V2 < F, then V = Vl V2 is a subgroup normalized by P since F and P
normalize every subgroup of A and P centralizes F. Thus the groups Vl V2 where
Vl < A and V2 < F are precisely the P-invariant subgroups of N. The same holds for
Q and hence also (2) of 4.1 is satisfied. It follows that there is a projectivity from G
to G mapping N to N and P to Q.
Note that in the above examples, [N, P] is abelian. We can show (see Exercise 6)
that in general [N, P] need not be abelian but leave the question open whether there
are any restrictions on the structure of [N, P].
Exercises
1. Let G be a finite group and qp be a projectivity from G to a group G. Show that (p

is index preserving if
(a) CHI l = JHJ for every minimal subgroup H of G, or
(b) IG : MÌ = IG: MI for every maximal subgroup M of G.
2. Let p .... p, be different primes, n E N, m = (p, ... P,)", t a prime such that m
divides t - 1 and suppose that G is the semidirect product of a cyclic group of
order t by the subgroup of order m of its automorphism group. Show that P(G)
induces the full symmetric group S, on the set of p,-complements of G.
3. Let t be a prime and p1, ..., p4 be different primes dividing t - 1. Let N =

N, x . x N4 where I Ni I = t for all i, suppose that H = <a 1 > x x <a4 > where
o(a;) = pi and let G be the semidirect product of N by H in such a way that for all
i e { 1, ... , 4}, CN(a;) = 1 and the eigenspaces of the automorphism induced by a;
in N are N; x Ni,,, N1 2, N+3 (the indices taken modulo 4). Show that P(G)
operates transitively on the set of pi-complements of G but does not induce the
full symmetric group S4. _
4. Let cp be a projectivity from the finite group G to the group G and write
G = S, x x S, x T where the S. are P-groups (i = 1, ... , r; r >- 0), T is P-
indecomposable and (1S11, I S.11) = I = (1S11, I TI) for all i, j E { 1, ... , r} such that i j.
Show that there exists a normal subgroup N of T such that T/N is cyclic,
N" :!9 6 and cp induces an index preserving projectivity in N. _
5. Let rp be a projectivity from the finite group G to the group G and suppose
that P1, PZ E SyIP (G) such that P1" I 0 PZ I. Show that there exist a P-group S
(containing P1 and P2) of order r'p where r > p and a subgroup T of G such that
G=S x T and (ISI, I TI) = 1.
6. Let r > 3 be a prime, N the nonabelian group of order r3 and exponent r and let
p, q be different odd primes dividing r + 1.
(a) Show that there exist automorphisms u and v of N such that o(u) = p, o(v) = q
and [N, u] = N = [N, v].
(b) Show that the semidirect products N and N<v> are lattice-isomorphic.
7. Let G and G be groups such that L(G) ^t L(G) and recall that for any group X, we
denote by 7r(X) the set of all primes dividing the order of an element of X.
(a) If G is finite, show that I7r(G)l < 21 ir(G)1.
(b) If G is locally finite and of finite exponent, show that Exp G is finite. _
(Note that there are Tarski groups G and G such that Exp G is finite and Exp G
is infinite.)
8. Generalize 4.2.2, 4.2.3, and 4.2.6 to locally finite groups.
4.3 Op(G), OJI(G), Fitting subgroup and hypercentre

In this section we study projective images of characteristic subgroups of a finite
group G that are defined, or at least definable, by arithmetic conditions.
O,,(G) and the Fitting subgroup
We begin with OP(G), the largest normal p-subgroup, and F(G) = Dr OP(G), the
PC P
Fitting subgroup of G. Clearly, OP(G) is the intersection of all the Sylow p-subgroups
of G since this intersection is a normal p-subgroup of G and any normal p-subgroup
of G is contained in every Sylow p-subgroup.
Now let rp be a projectivity from G to G. If cp and cp-1 are regular at p, then the
Sylow p-subgroups of G and G are mapped onto each other by cp and cp-1 and hence
also every characteristic subgroup of G that is defined lattice-theoretically by the
4.3 OP(G), O(G), Fitting subgroup and hypercentre 179
Sylow p-subgroups is mapped to the corresponding subgroup of G. In particular,

OP(G)`0 = OP(G). If (p is singular at p, we can use the results of 4.2 to see what
happens to OP(G). It remains to consider the case that (p is regular and (p-' singular
at p.
4.3.1 Lemma. Let p be a prime dividing I GI and (p a projectivity from G to a group G

such that (p is regular at cp-' singular at p. Then there exist a normal Hall subgroup N
and a complement S to N in G such that S is a nonabelian P-group of order p"q for
some prime q < p, N is a normal p-complement and S`0 an elementary abelian Sylow
p-subgroup of G. Moreover, the Sylow p-subgroup P of G is an elementary abelian
normal subgroup of G, P" E Z(G) and, if Q < S satisfies IQI = q, then G = (N x P)Q
and G = N`Q" x P`.
Proof. Since cp-' is singular at p, there exists a Sylow p-subgroup T` of G such that
I TI # I T`0I. Suppose, for a contradiction, that there is a P-decomposition (U`, V) of
G such that T`0 < U`0. By 4.2.4, (U, V) is a P-decomposition of G. Since cp is regular
at p and (p, I V"I) = 1, p does not divide I VI and hence p divides I UI. Suppose first
that U and U`0 lie in P(n, p) for some n E N. Then I U` I = p"-' q for some prime q < p
since T is a proper subgroup of U". Now cp is regular at p and this implies that
I UI = p"-'r for some primer < p and that the Sylow p-subgroup of U is mapped to
the Sylow p-subgroup T of U. Hence I TI = I TÌ, a contradiction. It follows that p
is the smaller prime dividing I UI and I U" 1; hence I U I = s'p = I UÌ for some prime
s > p. Since (p is regular at p, again the Sylow p-subgroups of U have to be mapped
onto those of U` and we get the same contradiction I TI = I TÌ as before. Therefore
there is no P-decomposition (U", V`) of G satisfying T`0 < U`0 and by 4.2.6 there
exists a normal p-complement N" in G such that N a G.
Let P E Sylp(G). Then IPÌ = IPI since cp is regular at p; let S" be a Sylow p-
subgroup of G containing P. Then S` and T' are complements to N", hence S and
T are complements to N and therefore I S I = I G : N I = I TI # I TP I = I S" I. It follows
that P < S so that S is not a primary group. By 4.2.6, S`0 is elementary abelian, S is
a nonabelian P-group of order p"q for some prime q p, N is a
Hall subgroup of G. The remaining assertions of the lemma follow from 4.2.10
applied to (p-' and the Sylow p-subgroup S` of G.
It is clear that if G = S x T and G = S x T where S and S lie in P(n, p), S is

nonabelian and (ISI, I TI) = (ISI, I TI) = 1, then there exists a projectivity (p from G to
G mapping OP(G) to a subgroup of G which is not nilpotent. In particular, F(G) j4
F(G). If G is P-indecomposable, the situation is better.
4.3.2 Lemma. Let G be a P-indecomposable finite group and let cp be a projectivity
from G to a group G.
(a) For every prime p there exists a prime q such that OP(G) = O9(G).
(b) F(G)` = F(G).
9
Proof. Clearly, (a) implies that F(G)" = (PC U OP(G) U O9(G) = F(G). By
P / qc P
4.2.4, 6 too is P-indecomposable and hence we similarly get that F(G)A-' < F(G).
Thus F(G) = F(G) and (b) holds. For the proof of (a), we may assume that
OP(G) 1; otherwise every prime q not dividing 161 satisfies Oq(G) = 1 = OP(G).
Furthermore, if (p and cp-' are regular at p, then the Sylow p-subgroups of G are
mapped by cp onto those of G and hence their intersection OP(G) is mapped to the
intersection OP(G) of the Sylow p-subgroups of G.
Now let cp be singular at p and P E Sy1P (G) such that I P`01 I P1. Since G is not
p-decomposable, (b) of 4.2.6 is satisfied. In particular, G has a normal p-complement
N and by 4.1.1, Cp(N) = PG = OP(G). If IPI = p, then, since 1 < 0,(G)< P,
P = OP(G) and hence G _= N x P. By 1.6.7, G = N x P`0 where (IN''I, IP`0I) = 1 and
thus Op(G) = PO = Oq(G) for some prime q. So let IPI > p2. Then N0 is a normal
Hall subgroup of G and therefore by 4.1.2 and 4.1.1, OP(G)`0 = Cp(N)0 = Cp.(N'') _
(P)G. If P is cyclic, then P is a cyclic q-group for some prime q and hence
(P'P)G = Oq(G). If P is elementary abelian, then P" is a nonabelian P-group and since
G is P-indecomposable, P`0 is not normal in G. Therefore (P0)d is contained in the
Sylow p-subgroup of P" and hence (P0)G- = OP(G). (In fact, by 4.2.10, (P0)G- is the full
Sylow p-subgroup of G.) In both cases, (a) holds.
Finally, let cp be regular and cp-' singular at p. Then, in the notation of 4.3.1, the
Sylow p-subgroup P of G is normal in G, that is, P = 0,(G), and the Sylow
p-subgroup Sc of G is not normal in G since G is P-indecomposable. But P < Z(G)
and hence OP(G) = P" = OP(G)`0.
The Fitting series and soluble groups
Recall that the Fitting series of a finite group G is defined inductively by F0(G) = 1
and Fk(G)/Fk_I(G) = F(G/Fk_,(G)) for k e N.
4.3.3 Theorem (Schmidt [1972b]). If (p is a projectivity from the finite group G to the
group G, then Fk(G)`0 = Fk(G) for all k > 2.
Proof. Suppose that the theorem is false, let G be a minimal counterexample and
take k > 2 such that Fk(G)`0 FF(G). If G = S x T where S is a P-group and
(IS1,1TI) = 1, then G = S1* x T`0 and the minimality of G would imply that
Fk(G)0 = (S x Fk(T))` = S` x Fk(T0) = Fk(G),
a contradiction. Thus Gis P-indecomposable. _

By 4.3.2, F(G)0 = F(G). Hence if F(G) = 1, then F(G) = 1 and Fk(G) = I = Fk(G)0,
a contradiction. Thus F(G) 1; put F(G) = N and write i-p for the projectivity in-
duced by cp in G/N. Then
Fk-,(G/N)l = (Fk(G)/N)' = Fk(G)0/N0 # Fk(G)/N` = Fk-,(G/N0)
and since the assertion of the theorem is true in G/N, it follows that k = 2 and
F(G/N)" F(6/N`). By 4.3.2 there exists a P-decomposition (S/N, T/N) of G/N.
Since F(S) and F(T) are nilpotent normal subgroups of G, F(S) = N = F(T) and
4.3 OP(G), OP(G), Fitting subgroup and hypercentre 181
hence
F2(G)/N = F(G/N) = F(S/N) x F(T/N) = F2(S)/N x F2(T)/N,
that is, F2(G) = F2(S)F2(T). By 4.2.4, (SW/N",TW/NW) is a P-decomposition of GIN"

and hence also F2(G) = F2(SW)F2(TW). Therefore if S < G, the minimality of G would
imply that F2(S)W = F2(SW) and F2(T)W = F2(TW), and hence F2(G)W = F2(G), a con-
tradiction. Thus S = G, that is, G/N is a P-group in P(n, p), say.
Then the Fitting subgroups of G/N and of G/NW are their Sylow p-subgroups and,
since F(G/N)4' 0 F(G/NW), 9 or qp-' is singular at p. If cp were regular and qp-'
singular at p, then by 4.3.1, the Sylow p-subgroup of G would be normal in G and
hence would lie in F(G); this is impossible since p divides IG/NI. Thus (p is singular
at p and since G is not P-decomposable, (b) of 4.2.6 holds. In particular, G has a
normal p-complement. Then G/N also has a normal p-complement and it follows
that G/N is elementary abelian of order p" where n > 2. On the other hand, this
implies that the Sylow p-subgroups of G are not cyclic and then 4.2.10 shows that p2
does not divide IG/F(G)I. This is a contradiction.
As a consequence of the above theorem we get a classical result that was proved
independently by Suzuki and Zappa.
4.3.4 Theorem (Suzuki [1951 a], Zappa [1951b]). If G is a finite soluble group and
q a projectivity from G to a group G, then G is soluble.
Proof. Since G is soluble, there exists k >_ 2 such that Fk(G) = G. By 4.3.3, Fk(G) _
Fk(G)' = G and hence G is soluble.
We shall give a simpler proof of this theorem in 5.3, together with a lattice-
theoretic characterization of the class of finite soluble groups. Suzuki's proof was
also shorter. He only needed 4.2.6 and the following lemma that is often useful; we
leave it to the reader to construct a proof of Theorem 4.3.4 from 4.2.6 and 4.3.5.
4.3.5 Lemma. If M is a normal subgroup of index p in G and q a p-regular projecti-

vity from G to G, then M4 a G.
Proof. Let XW be a p'-subgroup of G. Then X" < MW since otherwise p =

I X M: M I = I X: X n M I would divide I X I and cp would be singular at p. Therefore
the subgroup T generated by all the p'-subgroups of G is contained in M`0 and hence
M a G since M4/T is a maximal subgroup of the finite p-group G/T
OP(G) and the nilpotent residual
Recall that OP(G) is the intersection of all normal subgroups N such that G/N is a
p-group and G.t = n OP(G) is the nilpotent residual, the smallest normal subgroup
PCP
with nilpotent factor group of G. Clearly OP(G) is the join of all the p'-subgroups of
G; indeed this join is a normal subgroup whose factor group is a p-group and it is
contained in any such normal subgroup of G.
4.3.6 Lemma. Let q be a projectivity from G to G. If G/OP(G) is not elementary

abelian, then there exists a prime q such that OP(G) = OQ(G).
Proof. If cp is regular at p, then (p -' also is regular at p since otherwise, by 4.3.1, the
Sylow p-subgroup of G and hence also G/OP(G) would be elementary abelian. Since
OP(G) is the join of all the p'-subgroups of G, it follows that OP(G)" = OP(G) in this
case. So suppose that q is singular at p and let P E Sylp(G) such that IP"I 0 IPI.
Again P cannot be elementary abelian and hence P is cyclic of order p" where n > 2.
Therefore (b) of 4.2.6 holds; in particular, there exists a normal p-complement N in
G such that N is a normal Hall subgroup of G. Then IPI = q" for some prime q and
O' (G) = N' = OP(G)''.
4.3.7 Remark. The assumptions in 4.3.6 are stronger than those in 4.3.2, the
corresponding result for OP(G), but they are necessary. It is clear that in certain
P-decomposable groups, for example G = S x T where S is a nonabelian P-group
and p the smaller prime dividing IS 1, there are even autoprojectivities mapping OP(G)
to a nonnormal subgroup of G. But with the hypothesis of Theorem 4.2.10, OP(G) =
N and GIN" is a nonabelian P-group; hence OP(G) O'(G) for every prime r. And
O9 (G) = (NP0) if q is the smaller prime dividing IPÌ; however NPo is not an O'(G).
That this situation actually occurs is easy to see. If we take primes p, q, r such that
qlp - I and pglr - 1, then, by 4.2.11 or 4.1.6, the semidirect product G = NP of a
cyclic group N of order r by an elementary abelian group P of order p2 inducing an
automorphism of order p in N has a projectivity (p onto the semidirect product G of
N by a nonabelian group P of order pq inducing an automorphism of order q in N.
Here G is P-indecomposable, but OP(G) = N = Gn is mapped by (p to the normal
subgroup N of G with nonnilpotent factor group G/N P, that is, neither to G,i nor
to any 0`(G) for t e P.
This example shows that we cannot prove the analogue of 4.3.2 for OP(G) or the
nilpotent residual G %. However, we shall show in 5.4 that nevertheless the iterated
nilpotent residuals behave under projectivities like the iterated Fitting subgroups,
that is, they are mapped to the corresponding subgroups in the image group.
Op, (G), OP '(G) and p-soluble groups
If we replace the prime p in the definition of OP(G) and OP(G) by a set it of primes,
we obtain the largest normal n-subgroup and the smallest normal subgroup
0"(G) with factor group a n-group. Also these are, respectively, the intersection of all
the maximal n-subgroups and the join of all the rt'-subgroups of G; thus they are
mapped by index preserving projectivities to the corresponding subgroups in the
image group. We are mainly interested in the largest normal p'-subgroup and
4.3 OP(G), OP(G), Fitting subgroup and hypercentre 183
the smallest normal subgroup OP'(G) with factor group a p'-group. They are mapped
to and OP'(G), respectively, by projectivities cp from G to G such that cp and
cp-1 are regular at p. Recall that G is p-soluble if its upper p-series
1 =PO <No aP1 :g a N, PmaNm...
defined by N,/Pi = and Pi+1/N; = OP(G/N;) reaches G; the length of this

series, the number of p-quotients in it, is called the p-length of G and denoted by
1,(G)-
4.3.8 Theorem. If G is a finite p-soluble group and cp a projectivity from G to a group

G, then G is p-soluble and IP(G) = lP(G) if l,(G) > 2.
Proof. Suppose first that 1,(G) 2. Then, by 4.2.6, (p is regular at p and, by 4.3.1, cp 1
is also regular at p. Therefore every term of the upper p-series of G is mapped onto
the corresponding term in G. In particular, G is p-soluble and 1,(G) = 1,(G).
Now suppose that lP(G) 5 1. Again if cp and cp-1 are regular at p, then G is p-
soluble and lP(G) = 1,(G). If (p-1 is singular at p, then, by 4.2.6, G is p-soluble and
!P(G) = 1. Finally, if q-1 is regular and (p singular at p, then either G is a p'-group or
we may apply 4.3.1 to cp-1 and conclude that G has a normal Sylow p-subgroup. In
both cases, G is p-soluble of p-length at most 1.
We shall need the following result that is similar to 4.1.2(a).
4.3.9 Lemma. Let A and B be subgroups of G and suppose that A is generated by

p-elements and B by p'-elements. If (p is a projectivity from G to a group G such that
cp-1
pp and are regular at p, then B < NG(A) (or A < NG(B)) if and only if B < N-(A`)
(resp. A" < N-(B)).
Proof. Suppose that B < NG(A), take a p'-element b e B and let H = <A, b>. Then A
is a normal subgroup of H generated by p-elements and H/A is a p'-group; thus
A = OP'(H) and hence A" = OP'(H) since cp and cp-1 are regular at p. Therefore A`
is normalized by < H` and, since Bc is generated by these subgroups (b> 'P,
it follows that B < Ne;(A`). Now Ac" is generated by p-elements and B by p'-
elements. Thus if we apply the result just proved to cp-1, we obtain the opposite
implication. The equivalence of A < NG(B) and A" < Nd(B'') is proved in an entirely
analogous way.
The hypercentre
Finally we discuss a characteristic subgroup that has not so much to do with the
arithmetic structure of a group. It is the hypercentre Z.(G), the final term of the
ascending central series of G. Unlike the iterated Fitting subgroups F,k(G), the n-th
centre Z,,(G) in general is not mapped to Z (G) by a projectivity cp from G to G. For
example, if G is an abelian P-group, then G for all n, but 1 in a
lattice-isomorphic nonabelian P-group G. Even if G is P-indecomposable and cp

index preserving, the situation is not much better, as is shown by the abelian group
G of type (p",p"-1) and the lattice-isomorphic M-group G = <a,bla" = bP" ' = 1,
an = a"P>; here again Zk(G) = G for all k, but Zk(G) A G for k = 1, ..., n - 1. So
only under rather restrictive assumptions can we expect to be able to prove that
Zk(G)` = Zk(G); an example of such a result is contained in Theorem 5.3.4. But the
hypercentre behaves better.
4.3.10 Theorem (Schmidt [1975a]). If (p is an index preserving projectivity from the

finite group G to the group G, then Zx(G)4' = Z, (G).
Proof. Let p be a prime and T= OP(OP'(CG(O(G)))). We want to show that T<

ZX (G) and T' = OP(OP'(CG(OP(G)))) < Z, (G). First of all, T is a p-group and there-
fore contained in a Sylow p-subgroup P of G. Hence there exists n e f\J such that
T < Z"(P) and, since T< CG(OP(G)) is centralized by every p'-element of G, it
follows that T< Z"(G) < Zj(G). Now H = O'(CG(O(G))) and K = OP(G) satisfy
the assumptions of 1.6.8 for it = {p}, and hence K = OP(G) is centralized by
H". Since H' is generated by p-elements, OP'(CG(OP(G))) = HIP < O'(CG(O(G))).
This statement for cp-'
yields the other-inclusion and it follows that T _
OP(OP'(CG(OP(G)))); in particular, T` < 4(G).
To prove the theorem, we use induction on G1 + G1 and we may assume that
Z(G) A 1, since otherwise we could consider q 1. Let p be a prime dividing JZ(G)J.
Then the Sylow p-subgroup of Z(G) is contained in T = OP(OP'(CG(OP(G)))) and
hence T A 1. Since T" = OP(OP'(CG(OP(G)))) a G, cp induces a projectivity from
G/T to G,IT` and, by induction, this projectivity maps Zx(G/T) = Z,(G)/T onto
Z,(G/T`) = Z,(G)/T`. It follows that Z,,(G)` = Z,,(G), as required.
The example constructed in 4.3.7 shows that even projectivities between P-

indecomposable groups in general do not map the hypercentres onto each other; in
this example, IZ,(G)I = p whereas Z,, (G) = 1. Therefore the assumption that cp is
index preserving cannot be replaced, as in 4.3.2 for the Fitting subgroup, by the
P-indecomposability of the groups involved.
Exercises
1. If cp is an index preserving projectivity from G to G, show that F(G) = F(G) and
G;;, = G.
2. Let cp be a projectivity from G to G.
(a) If IG : OP.(G)l : p, show that there exists a prime q such that Oq,(G).
(b) Show that the assertion in (a) need not hold if IG: 0 p is replaced by
the assumption that G is P-indecomposable.
3. If G is P-indecomposable and cp a projectivity from G to G, show that O(G)IO a G
for all p e P.
4. Prove Theorem 4.3.4 using only 4.2.6 and 4.3.5.
4.4 Abelian p-subgroups and projectivities 185
5. (Suzuki [1951a]) Let (p be a projectivity from G to G.

(a) If cp is index preserving and N a maximal normal subgroup of G, prove that
NcaG. _
(b) Show that if G is perfect (that is G' = G), then G is also perfect.
6. Let it be a set of primes and let A and B be subgroups of G such that A is
generated by n-elements and B by n'-elements. If (p is an index preserving projec-
tivity from G to G, show that B < NG(A) if and only if Bc < NU(A`).
7. Show that the assertions of 4.3.9 do not hold without the assumption that cp and
cp-' are p-regular.
4.4 Abelian p-subgroups and projectivities

In the last section of this chapter we investigate the projectivity induced in a Sylow
p-subgroup P by an index preserving projectivity q of G. If G = P x Q, then L(G)
L(P) x L(Q) and every projectivity from P to a p-group P can be extended to a
projectivity of G (to G = P x Q). This will no longer be true if P is not a direct factor
of G or even if G is generated by its p'-elements; but very little is known about this
problem. We shall study it first for abelian Sylow p-subgroups and then go on to
show that for arbitrary P, under suitable assumptions on p and the p-structure of G,
Z(P)` = Z(P`).
Abelian Sylow p-subgroups
4.4.1 Lemma. Let A be an abelian p-subgroup of G, B a p'-subgroup of N6(A) and

suppose that (p is a projectivity from G to G such that A` is a normal Sylow p-subgroup
of (AB)". Then
(a) A`' = [A'*, Bc] x C,,.(B'*),
(b) C,(B)c,
(c) [A`0, Bc] _ [A, B]`0 is abelian and hence isomorphic to [A, B].
Proof. By 4.1.3, A = [A, B] x CA(B) and 4.1.2 applied to the projectivity 0 induced
by cp in AB shows that [A, B]` = [A`, B4'] and CA(B)" = CA.(B`). Thus A" =
[A`, B4'] u CA.,(B`) and [A`, B`] n 1. By (6) of 1.5, [A`, B`] a A`D u B`,
and we want to show that CAm(B`) a A`; then (a) and (b) will hold. Since CA(B) <
Z(AB) we have [CA(B), OP(AB)] = 1 and, by 1.6.8, [CA(B)c, OP(AB)c] = 1. Our as-
sumption on Ac' implies that >li and 0' are regular at p and hence OP(AB)c =
OP((AB)`). It follows that CA.(B`) = C4(B)c < CA.(OP((AB)`)) < CA(Bc) and there-
fore CA.(B`) = C4.(OP((AB)c)) g A'*. Thus A'* = [A'*, B`] x CA.(B`).
It remains to be shown that [Ac', Bc] is abelian. As a projective image of an
abelian group, [Ac', B`] is a p-group with modular subgroup lattice in which the
quaternion group is not involved, that is, an M*-group according to our definition
in 2.3. If [A`, B`] were not abelian, then, by 2.3.23, there would exist characteristic
subgroups R > S of [AP, BP] such that [R, Aut[A`, Bc]] < S. It would follow
that R a AcBQ and hence [R, B`0] < S; on the other hand, by 4.1.3, R =
[R, B`']CR(B) = [R, Be'] since CR(B`0) = R n CAO(B) = 1. This contradiction shows
that [A`0, Bc] = [A, B]" is abelian and therefore isomorphic to [A, B] since the type
of a finite abelian p-group is determined by its subgroup lattice.
4.4.2 Theorem (Paulsen [1975]). Let G be a finite group with an abelian Sylow p-
subgroup P and let cp be a p-regular projectivity from G to a group G. Then P =
P, x P2 where P, = P n OP(G) and P2 = P n Z(NN(P)), P = Pl x PZ and P? P, is
abelian. If P` is not abelian, then Exp P, < Exp P2.
Proof. Since P is a normal Hall subgroup of L = NG(P), there exists a complement

B to P in L. By 4.1.3, P = [P, B] x Cp(B); let P, = [P, B] and PZ = Cp(B). Since P is
abelian, Pz = P n Z(NG(P)). Furthermore, clearly, P, < P n L'; on the other hand,
L,/'B` P/P n BL is abelian, hence L' < B' and therefore P n L' < P n Bt' = [P, B]
by 4.1.1. Thus P, = P n L'. Since P is abelian, G' < OP(G) and OP(G)/G' is a p'-group;
therefore P n OP(G) = P n G'. By Grun's First Theorem (see Robinson [1982],
p. 283), P n G' = P n L'. It follows that P, = P n G' = P n OP(G), as desired. Now,
by assumption, cp is regular at p and hence P is a p-group. If cp-' is singular at p,
then the Sylow p-subgroups of G are abelian and the remaining assertions of the
theorem hold trivially. So suppose that cp-' is regular at p. Then P is a normal
Sylow p-subgroup of (RB)A and 4.4.1 implies that P = Pf x P210, P, is abelian and
P; P,. Finally, as a projective image of an abelian group, P10 again is an M*-
group. Therefore if Exp P, > Exp P2, then Exp Pr = Exp P4' and, by 2.3.16, P is
abelian.
We note some immediate consequences of Paulsen's theorem.
4.4.3 Corollary. If G is a perfect finite group with an abelian Sylow p-subgroup P,

then P P for every projectivity cp of G.
Proof. Recall that G is perfect if and only if G = G'. Thus G = OP(G), hence P, = P
and, by 4.2.9, cp is index preserving. Now 4.4.2 yields that P' = Pt is isomorphic
to P.
4.4.4 Corollary. Let G he a P-indecomposable finite group with an abelian Sylow

p-subgroup P and let cp be a projectivity from G to G such that P is not isomorphic to
P. If P is homocyclic or generated by two elements, then G has a normal p-complement.
Proof: If cp is singular at p, then, by 4.2.6, G has a normal p-complement; so suppose

that cp is regular at p. By 4.4.2, P = P, x P2 where P, = P n OP(G), P = P; x P21',
Pr is abelian and Exp P, < Exp P2. We have to show that P, = 1; then it will follow
that G/OP(G) P/P n OP(G) = P and OP(G) is a normal p-complement in G. If P is
homocyclic of type (p", ... , p"), say, then every nontrivial direct factor of P contains
an element of order p"; since Exp P, < Exp P, it follows that P, = 1. If P is generated
by two elements and P, 0 1, then P2 and hence also Pz would be cyclic; therefore
P10 = P; x Pz would be abelian and so P`0 P, a contradiction. Thus in this case
also, P, = 1.
In general, a finite group G with abelian Sylow p-subgroup P need not possess a
normal p-complement if P is mapped to a nonabelian group by an index preserving
projectivity of G. This is shown by the following example, that, as Lemma 4.4.1, can
be found both in Menegazzo [1974] and in Paulsen [1975].
4.4.5 Example. Let p and q be primes such that qtp - 1, R = <a> x where
o(a) = p2, o(b) = p the abelian group of type (p2, p), S = <c, d1 c" = d = 1, c' = c'+)
the nonabelian group lattice isomorphic to R and T a nonabelian group of order
pq. Then there exists a projectivity from G = R x T to G = S x T mapping the
abelian Sylow p-subgroup of G to the nonabelian Sylow p-subgroup of G; clearly, G
has no normal p-complement.
Proof. The map a: G G defined by (a`b't) = c'd't for i,j e 7L and t e T is certainly
bijective. If x = a'b't and y = a'b't' where i, j, k, I E 7L and t, t' E T, then
c'+kdj+ttt'[dI ck] =
ry" = (c`d't)(ckdtt') = (xy)[d' ck]
Therefore to see that (xy) e <x, y), we only have to show that [d', ck] E <x, y" )
If k - 0 (mod p), then [d', ck] = 1 and, if k * 0 (mod p), then [d', ck] E <c) _
<(ckdtt')P9) < <x",y). Similarly, (uv)' ' E for u, r e G and, by 1.3.1, Q
induces a projectivity from G to G with the desired properties. Since T has no
normal p-complement, neither does G.
Further results on projective images of groups with abelian Sylow p-subgroups

are contained in Huppert [1960] and Seitz and Wright [1969]. Both papers are
concerned with groups G having a Sylow p-subgroup P such that L(P) is modular.
Corollary 4.4.3, for example, also follows from a theorem of Seitz and Wright which
asserts that O(G) i4 G if P is a nonabelian M*-group (see Exercise 1).
Normal abelian p-subgroups
The crucial step in the proof of the main results of this section is to show that if
p > 2, G = O(G) and Z is a normal subgroup of G contained in the centre of a
Sylow p-subgroup P of G, then Z' < Z(P) for every index preserving projectivity of
G. This will then be applied to NG(Z(P)) in place of G. The proof of this result is quite
long and will be given in the next three lemmas. The first two deal with the structure
of P and its normalizer in a minimal situation which will emerge in the course of
this proof.
4.4.6 Lemma. Let H be a p-group with modular subgroup lattice, Z a homocyclic

normal subgroup of H of exponent p", and Y a cyclic subgroup of H that centralizes
Z/S2(Z) and S2(Z) but does not normalize every subgroup of Z. For y C- Y, write
DZ(y) = {z e Ztz'' = z'+"-'}; note that Dz(y) is a subgroup of Z.
(a) If Y n Z < W < Z, then Y < NH(W).
(b) Either
(1) Z:C7(Y)I =P
or there exist a generator y of Y and an element v e Z of order p" such that
(2) Z : DZ(y)I = p and v'' = vl+z" , where ). * I (mod p), or
(3) Z : Dz(y)I = p and v'' = v'+0" `w1 ' where w e Dz(y) and o(w) = p".
Proof. We may assume that H = ZY. If Y n Z< W< Z, then W = W u (Y n Z) =

(W u Y) n Z < W u Y, that is, Y < NH(W), since L(H) is modular and Z < H. Thus
(a) holds.
To prove (b), first note that since Y does not normalize every subgroup of Z but
centralizes Q(Z), Z is neither cyclic nor elementary abelian. In a direct product of Q8
by an elementary abelian 2-group, however, every homocyclic subgroup is cyclic or
elementary abelian. Therefore, by 2.3.8, Qg is not involved in H, that is,
(4) H is an M*-group.
Since Z/ f2(Z) is centralized by Y, H/S2(Z) is abelian and since Q(Z) is centralized by
Z and Y,
(5) H' < Q(Z) < Z(H).
Therefore (1) of 1.5 implies that
(6) [z, z2, y] = [z1, y] [z2, y] for all z; E Z, y c- Y
and hence [z', y] = [z, y] = 1, that is, (z)'' = z = (z)1+ ' for all z e Z. Thus
(7) (D(Z) <Cz(y)nDz(y)for all ye Y.
Suppose, for a contradiction, that I YI < p" = Exp Z. Then Exp H = p" and, by an
obvious extension of 2.3.11, there exists a complement C to Z in H. For, given z E Z
with o(z) = p", by 2.3.11 there exists a complement K to <z> in H; hence Z =
<z) (K n Z), K n Z is a homocyclic normal subgroup of K and, by induction, it has
a complement C in K such that H = <z>K = <z>(K n Z)C = ZC and Z n C =
Z n K n C = 1. Now C in place of Y satisfies the assumptions of the lemma and, by
(a), every subgroup of Z is normal in H, a contradiction. It follows that
(8) Exp Z = p" < p' = I YI = Exp H.
Now suppose first that there exists h e H such that o(h) = p' and <h> < H. Then
h = vy where v c Z, y c Y and o(y) = p', that is, Y = <y). Thus Z<h) = H and
HI<h) - Z/ Z n <h> is abelian. Therefore H' < <h> n Q(Z) and hence I H'I = p. By
(6), the map z -+ [z, y] is a homomorphism from Z to [Z, y] < H' with kernel CZ(Y).
It follows that IZ : Cz(Y)I = p and (1) holds.
It remains to consider the case that no cyclic subgroup of maximal order is nor-
mal in H. Then by 2.3.18 there exists an abelian normal subgroup A of H, a genera-
tor v of Y and an integer s which is at least 2 in case p = 2 such that H = A<y) and
a'' = a' +' for all a e A. Then US(A) = a $a E H} = H' < Q(Z) and hence Exp A =
ps 1. Therefore, if s < n - 1, then A < S2n_1(H) and Z/S2"_,(Z) ZS2"_,(H)/S2"_,(H)
would be cyclic; but Z has two independent elements of order p", a contradiction.
Thus s > n - I. If s > n - 1, then ExpZ = p" implies that a'' = a'+P, = a for
all a E Z n A. Hence Z n A < Cz(Y) and Z/Z n A ZA/A is cyclic. Since
i(Z) < CZ(Y), it follows that I Z : CZ(Y)l = p and again (1) holds. So, finally, let
s = n - 1, that is,
(9) a'' = a'+P"-' for all a e A.
Now Z n A < DZ(y), Z/Z n A is cyclic and (D (Z) < DZ(y). It follows that
JZ : D7(y)I = p, and we have to find an element v e Z of order p" for which the
remaining assertions of (2) or (3) hold. If Z5"-,(D,(y)) n Y = 1, we choose v c- Z such
that o(v) = p" and Y n Z < <v>. By (a) and (5), [v, y] E <v> n Q(Z) = <vP" ' > and
hence v'' = v'+"P"-' where i. E Z. Since y does not normalize every subgroup of Z,
Y n Z j4 1, and it follows that v 0 DZ(y). Thus ; -* I (mod p) and (2) holds. If
Z5"-I(D7(y)) n Y 1, we take v E Z\Dz(y). Then o(v) = p", v = ab where a c- A, b c- Y
and o(b) < p" since Exp A = p". By (9) and 2.3.10 applied to S2"(H),
aP" ,= vP"
b-P"
[v, y] = [a, y] = '
and since v D7(y), h-P" 1. Now b-P"-' E Q(Y) < Z5"_,(DZ(y)) and hence there
exists w e DZ(y) such that w"'-' = b-P" '. It follows that o(w) = p" and vy _
v`+P" ' w"" ', that is, (3) holds.
4.4.7 Lemma. Let p > 2 and Z be a homocyclic group of exponent p" and order p'"
where n > 2, r > 2. Let A = BC < Aut Z, B a nontrivial elementary abelian normal
p-subgroup of A and C = <> a cyclic q-group where q : p is a prime and suppose that
(10) y operates irreducibly on B, [B,,,,] = B, [B, y4] = 1,
(11) y operates irreducibly on S2(Z),
(12) [Z, B] < S2(Z), and
(13) every cyclic subgroup Y -A 1 of B satisfies (b) of 4.4.6.
Then r = 2, IBS = p, q = 2 and there exist a generator a of B and a basis {u, v} of Z
such that u' = uP" ', v' = v' - P" ' and a'' = a-1.
Proof. To simplify notation, we write Cz(a) = C. and D7(x) = D. for x c- B. If

IZ : C,I < p, then clearly iV(Z) < Ca. And if IZ : C,I > p, then, by (13) there exists
i E < > such that IZ: Dpi = p; hence zfl = z1+P"-' = z for all z E N(Z) and again
N(Z) <_ C, = C. It follows that
(14) .D(Z) < CZ(B).
Since n > 2, (12) implies that [Z, B] is contained in 4>(Z) and hence is centralized by
B and, of course, also by Z. Therefore (1) of 1.5 yields that
(15) [uv, x] = [u, a] [v, x] and [z, a/3] = [z, a] [z, /3] for all u, v, z E Z and x, J3 E B.
In particular, the map z --+ [z, x] is an epimorphism from Z to [Z, x] with kernel C,
and hence
(16) I[Z,x]I = IZ:C,I for xeB;

similarly,
(17) 1 [z, B] I = I B : CB(z)I for z e Z.
If a e B such that IZ : C,I = p, then 1 U , , < S2(Z); furthermore I [Z, a] I = p

and hence also I < [Z, x] < S2(Z). Since y operates irreducibly on S2(Z), we have
[Z, x] [Z, a]Y = [Z, 2Y] and C. 0 (C,)' = C,,. For z e Z and i = 1, ..., p - 1,
[z,a'aY] = [z,a]'[z,aY] e [Z, x] x [Z,a'']. If z e C,\C,,, then [z,a'a"] = [z,aY] is a
nontrivial element in [Z, al] and for z e C2,\C [z, a'ff] = [z, a]' is a nontrivial
element in [Z, x]. It follows that [Z, a'a'] = [Z, a] x [Z, a Y]. In view of (16), we
have shown:
(18) IfaEBsuch that IZ:C,,1=p, then IZ:CZ(a'aY)I=p2for i=l,...,p-1.
If a E B such that IZ : D,I = p, then every z e D. n (D,)' satisfies z'' = zY-'a' _
z'+P" ' = z', and it follows that D, n (D,)" < CZ(aYa-'). Thus we have:
(19) If a e B such that IZ : D,I = p, then IZ : CZ(a1a-1)I <- p2.
From (18) and (19) we conclude that there exists /3 e B such that
(20) IZ:DOI = p and IZ:Cp1 =p2.
For, if there exists a e B with IZ : Cj = p, then IZ: CZ(aaY)I = p2, and if there is no
such x, then by (13) there exists S E B with IZ: Dbl = p and hence
IZ : C,(SYS4') = p2. Again (13) implies that a suitable generator i of (aa') or
<6`6`> satisfies IZ : DPI = p and, of course, I Z : Cal = p2.
By (14) and (20), Qt(Z) < Cp n D. On the other hand, z e Cp n Dp implies that
z = zp = z'+P"-' and hence z e V(Z). Thus I(Z) = Cp n Dp and, by (20),
pr = IZ : (D(Z)l < p3, that is, r < 3. Suppose, for a contradiction, that r = 3. Then
Z/.D(Z) = C,,/V(Z) x D,/I(Z) and hence there exists a basis {u, v, w} of Z such that
up = u, VP = v1+P"-', and wp = W"P"-'. Now Z is a free 7L/(p")-module and we may
consider A as a subgroup of GL(Z) GL(3,7L/(p")). The determinant defined there
induces a homomorphism from A to the group of units of 7L/(p"). By (10), A has no
normal subgroup of index p and this implies that the determinant is trivial on the
p-elements of A. But det/3 = I + 2p"-' + (p") 1 + (p") since p > 2. This contra-
diction shows that
(21) r = 2.
By assumption, y is irreducible on Q(Z). Therefore the order of the operating group
divides p2 - 1; in particular, qI p2 - 1. This implies that every irreducible GF(p)-
module of the cyclic group of order q has order at most p2 (see Huppert [1967],
p. 166). Since (y)/(y9) operates irreducibly on B, it follows that
(22) IBI < p2.
Suppose, for a contradiction, that there exists a e B such that IZ : C,I = p. Then for
every 6 E (y), (C,) = C,8 and hence IZ: CZ(a6)1 = p. By (18), IZ: CZ((X'a)I = p2 for
i = 1, ..., p - 1. Therefore B = (a) x (al) has order p2 and among the p + 1
minimal subgroups of B, only <a> and (a') have their centralizers of index p in Z.
Hence <y> operates on { <a), <a Y> } and it follows that q = 2; but this contradicts
(10) because a group of order 2 cannot operate irreducibly on an elementary abelian
group B of order p2. Thus there does not exist a e B with I Z : C2 = p; since (D(Z) is
centralized by B and has index p2 in Z, it follows that
(23) C2 = (D(Z) for all 1 a e B.
Let Bo be a subgroup of order p of B. By (13) there exist a e Bo and v e Z
such that o(v) = p", IZ : Dj = p and, either v = v'+"P"-' with 2 * 1 (mod p) or
v'+P"-,
v = WP"-' with w e D2, o(w) = p". In the latter case, {v, w} would be a basis
of Z and since w" = w`+P"-`, deta = 1 + 2p`1 + (p") 1 + (p"), a contradiction.
Thus v2 = v'+"P"-' where 2 0 1 (modp). If u e D. with o(u) = p", then ua = u'+P"-'
and {u, v} is a basis of Z. Then 1 + (p") = det a = 1 + (2 + 1)p"-' + (p") implies
- I (mod p) and hence our basis {u, v} of Z satisfies
(24) u = v" = v'
u'+P"
Now suppose, for a contradiction, that I BI = p2. Then by (24), any of the p + 1
minimal subgroups of B fixes at least 2 cyclic subgroups of order p' of Z. Since Z has
only p + 1 maximal subgroups, there must exist subgroups <a> <x > of order p of
B, and elements x, y e Z of order p" satisfying [x, a] e <x> and [y, x'] e (y> such
that x and y lie in the same maximal subgroup <x).D(Z) = <y)D(Z) of Z. By (12),
[x, a] and [y, a'] are contained in n(<x>) = n(<y>). Furthermore x = y`z for some
i e Z, z e (D(Z) and hence (15) and (14) show that [x,a] = [y,a']' e Q((x>) also.
It follows that [x, B] < SZ((x>) and hence p >- I [x, B] I = JB : CB(x)l by (17). This
implies that I CB(x)l > p and x e C. if 1 S e CB(x), contradicting (23). Thus
(25) IBI = p.
Since y does not centralize B, qlp - 1. And since y operates irreducibly on Q (Z), o(y)
divides p2 - 1 but not p - 1. Therefore q also divides p + 1 and it follows that q = 2.
By (24), there exist a generator or of B and a basis {u, v} of Z such that u' = u'+P"-'
and v" = v'-P"-'. Finally, y induces an automorphism of order 2 in B and hence
a''=a-'.
4.4.8 Lemma. Suppose that p > 2, G is a finite group with OP(G) = G, P e Sylp(G),
Z is a normal subgroup of G contained in Z(P) and cp is an index preserving projectivity
from G to a group G. Then Z" < Z(P').
Proof. Suppose that the lemma is false and consider a counterexample G of minimal
order. By 4.3.9,
(26) Zq' a G.
Furthermore, if A and B are nontrivial normal subgroups of G contained in Z such
that A n B = 1, then A'* a G and B" a G, co induces projectivities in G/A and G/B,
and the minimality of G implies that [P'*, Z1*] < A'* n B1* = 1. Hence Z` 5 Z(P'*),
contradicting the choice of G. We have shown:
(27) If A,B<Zsuch that AaG,BaGand AnB=1,then A=lor B=1.

Since P < CG(Z), the group of automorphisms induced by G in Z is a p'-group.
Therefore Z = [Z, G] x CZ(G) (apply 4.1.3 to the semidirect product of Z by this
group of automorphisms) and, by (27), [Z, G] = I or CZ(G) = 1. In the first case,
1.6.8 would imply that [Z`, G] = 1 and hence Z`0 < Z(P), contradicting the choice
of G. Therefore
(28) C,(G) = Z n Z(G) = 1 and [Z, G] = Z.
Furthermore, Maschke's Theorem (see Robinson [1982], p. 209) shows that to every
G-invariant subgroup A of Q(Z), there exists B a G such that )(Z) = A x B; then
(27) implies that A = 1 or A = S2(Z). Thus
(29) G operates irreducibly on S2(Z).
In particular, Z5"_, (Z) = Q(Z) if Exp Z = p" and hence
(30) Z is homocyclic.
Take any p'-subgroup B of G. By 4.4.1, Z = [Z`P, B"] x CZ(B)` and [Z`0, B"] is
abelian. Therefore (Z`)' < C7(B)" and hence ((Z`)')"-` < CZ(B). Since G = OP(G) is
generated by these p'-subgroups B, it follows that ((Z")')` C7(G) = 1. Thus
(Z'*)' = I and
(31) Z`0 is abelian.
Put L = OP'(G) and M = OP(L). Then P< L and MP = L. Since cp is index

preserving,
(32) L' = OP'(G) and M* = OP(L`).
Since GjCG(Z) is a p'-group, L < CG(Z). In particular, [Z, M] = 1 and, by 1.6.8,

(33) [Z`0, M] = 1.
IZ
PI M
Figure 15
Hence L10/C,m(Z10) is a p-group operating on the p-group Z`0 and therefore it central-
izes a nontrivial element in this group. Thus fl(Z`0) n Z(LP) 0 1 and, of course, is
normal in G. By 4.3.9, (fl(Z`0) n Z(L`0))'0-' < G and since G operates irreducibly on
S2(Z), it follows that
(34) S2(Z`0) < Z(L"); in particular, fl(Z") < Z(P10).
Since G is a counterexample to the lemma, S)(Z) < Z and the minimality of G yields
that Z`0/S2(Z) is contained in the centre of P"/Q(Z`0). Thus
(35) Exp Z = p" > p and [P`0, Z10] < fl(Z`0).
Now (35), (34) and (31) show that for x c P and z c Z`0, [x, z] has order p and
commutes with x and z. Therefore 1 = [x, z] = [x, z] = [x, z], that is, P is cen-
tralized by Z5'(Z") = 4t(Z`0) and Z`0 is centralized by ZS(P). Since [P, Z`, P10] = 1 =
[Z`0, P, P], we have [(P")', Z] = [P`0, P10, Z10] = 1 also (see (7) in 1.5); hence Z is
centralized by Z3'(P10)(P(0)' = cb(P`0). Thus
(36) [P`0, 1(Z")] = 1 = [(D(PP), ZP].
Put G* = G/M10 and G = G/Cj;(Z0). For x e G and H < G, write x* = xM, . =
xCi;(Z`0), H* = H`0M`0/M` and H = H10Ci;(Z)/CG(Z10) to denote the images of x
and H`0 under the natural epimorphisms from G to G* and G. By (33), M` < CZ;(Z`0)
so that G is an epimorphic image of G*. Since L` = O'(6) = PWMQ, we have
P* = L10/M10 < G*. Hence the Sylow p-subgroup P of the epimorphic image G of G*
is normal in G and P 1 because G is a counterexample. Since Z` is centralized by
(D(P`0), finally,
(37) P is a nontrivial elementary abelian normal subgroup of G.
The Frattini argument shows that G = LNN(P) = M0NU(P), and by the Schur-
Zassenhaus Theorem there exists a complement QO to P in Nd(P`0). Since P10 and
Q`0 have relatively prime order, Q* and Q are also complements to P* and P,
respectively, in the epimorphic images G* and G of Nj (P`0). Then G = O(G) implies
that G* = OP(G*) = (Q*)G' and, by 4.1.1, p* = P* n (Q*)G; = [P*, Q*]. The same
applies for G; since P is abelian, 4.1.3 implies that C?(Q) = 1. Thus
(38) [P*, Q*] = P*, [P, Q] = P and CP(Q) = 1.
Our aim is to show that the assumptions of Lemma 4.4.7 are satisfied for Z` in place
of Z, G = A, P = B and Q = C. By (30), (31) and (35), Z" is homocyclic of exponent
p" where n > 2, and we may regard G = G/C6(Z") as a subgroup of Aut Z in which
P, by (37), is a nontrivial elementary abelian normal p-subgroup. If Y # I is a cyclic
subgroup of P, then Y = <y> for some y e P; let H = <y>Z`0. Since Z < Z(P), the
subgroup H`-' = <y>w 'Z is abelian and hence L(H) is modular. By (35) and (36),
Z`0/Q(Z") and S)(Z) are centralized by <y>. If y normalized every subgroup of Z`0,
then, by 1.5.4, y would induce a universal power automorphism in Z`, which, of
course, would centralize every automorphism of Z`0; it would follow that y c- CP(Q),
contradicting (38). Thus Y does not normalize every subgroup of Z'; in particular,
Z1* is not cyclic, that is, jZPj = p'" where r > 2, and since we shall need it later, we
note that we have shown:
(39) If y c P such that y 0 1, then H = (y>Z`0, Z` and (y> satisfy the assump-
tions of 4.4.6.
Therefore, by 4.4.6, Y satifies (b) of this lemma, that is, (13) holds for P = B and (12)
follows from (35). It remains to be shown that Q is a cyclic q-group for some prime
q satisfying (10) and (11). For this we need:
(40) If S < G such that S` < Qc and S* < Q*, then ELI, Sc'] < CG-(Z`).
To prove (40), first note that (IS`j, p) = 1 and hence Z`' = [Z"', Sc] Cz.(S"'); we show
that [L`, S'] centralizes the two factors in this product. Now LS = G would
imply that G* = L*S* = P*S*, contradicting S* < Q*. Thus LS < G, hence Go =
OP(LS) < G and OP(G0) = Go. Since P c Sylp(LS), P n Go is a Sylow p-subgroup of
Go containing the normal subgroup Z n Go of Go in its centre. The minimality of G
implies that (Z n G0)` is centralized by (P n G0)`' and, by (33), it is also centralized
by MI. Since q is index preserving, Go = OP(LISI) and so,
(41) DO n OP(L'S`) is centralized by M(P`0 n OP(L`S`)).
Now Z`0 a LcSc and the p'-group S"' <OP(L`0S"); hence [Z`0, S`] < Z` n OP(LcS`).
Furthermore S" < OP(LcS') implies that [L`, S`] < OP(LISI) and so from
ELI, S`] < L` = McP"' it follows that Mc'[L"', S`0] = Mc(P` n M`'[L`, S]) <
M`0(Pc n OP(L`0S`0)) since M`0 = OP(L`) < OP(LISI) also. Thus (41) shows that
[Z`, S`] is centralized by [L"', S`].
The other factor of Z` is easier to handle. Since L < CG(Z), [CZ(S), LS] = I and
hence, in particular, [CZ(S), OP(LS)] = 1. By 1.6.8, [CZ(S)`, OP(LS)m] = 1 and, by
4.1.2, CZ(S)` = CZ,(S`). Since [L`, S`] < OP(LISI) = OP(LS)10, it follows that
[L"', Sc'] centralizes CZm(S`0) and hence also [Z`, S`0]CZv(S`) = Z. This proves (40).
We show next that Q* is cyclic of prime power order. If this were not the case,
there would exist elements s; e Qc such that <s'> < Q* for all i and Q* is generated
by the' s*. Applying (40) to SIP = <si >, we obtain ELI, s1] < CU(Z`) and hence
[P*, s*] = [L /M, s*] < Cd(Z`)/M"'. By (38), P* _ [P*, Q*] < CU(Z"')/M` and this
would contradict (37). Thus Q* is cyclic of prime power order and therefore also its
epimorphic image
(42) Q is a cyclic q-group for some prime q.
Lets e Q10 such that Q = (. >. We want to show that 9 = satisfies (10) and (11). By
(34), S2(Zc) is centralized by P; but, by (29) and 4.3.9, S2(Z`') is irreducible under
G = P<>. It follows that
(43) s operates irreducibly on S2(Z`),
that is, (11) holds. By (38), [P,9] = P and, applying (40) to S10 = <s'>, we obtain
[P`0, s9] < ELI, S1] < CU(Zc). It follows that [P, s9] = 1 and it remains to be shown
that s operates irreducibly on P. So suppose that Pl is a 0-invariant subgroup of P
such that Pl < P. Let T < G such that T'/Cd(Zc) = Pl Q. Then T < G, hence R =
OP(T) < G and OP(R) = R. By 4.1.3, Z` = [Z", Q`] x CZm(Q`); since IS2(Zc)l > p2
and Q`0 operates irreducibly on S2(Z'*), it follows that Z` = [Zc', Q`0]. Since Q` <
OP(TI) = R` and Z' < Tc, we have Z`0 = [Zc,Q`0] < R`'. Now I G: RI is a power of
p, hence G = PR and therefore Z is a normal subgroup of R contained in the Sylow

p-subgroup P n R of R. The minimality of G implies that Z" is contained in the
centre of the Sylow p-subgroup (P n R)` of RO. Hence R"/R` n Q(Z') is a p'-group.
It follows that R = RCG(Z4')1Cd(Z4) is a p'-group and since
T`/0"(Tc)CU(Z`') is a p-group, R is a normal p-complement in T = P1Q. Therefore
T = P1 x Q and, by (38), P1 = 1. Thus s operates irreducibly on P and all the as-
sumptions of 4.4.7 have been verified. By 4.4.7,
(44) r = 2, IPI = p, q = 2 and there exist y e P satisfying <y) = P and a basis
{v1,v2} of Z` such that <v1> = <v1>, <V2> = <v2> and
Let W = n(<vi>) for i = 1, 2. If x e P\Cpm(Z), then <z> = P zA 1 and therefore,
by (39), H = <x>Z' satisfies the assumptions of 4.4.6. If W1 S2(<x>) W2, then
the cyclic subgroup <x> n Z" of the homocyclic group Z would be contained in
a maximal cyclic subgroup <v> of Z" such that <v1 > n <v> = 1 = <v2 > n <v>. By (a)
of 4.4.6, <v>' = <v> and since also <vi>' = <vi> for i = 1, 2, it would follow from
1.5.4 that x induces a power automorphism in Z". This is not the case; thus
(45) i2(<x>) e { W1, W2} for every x e P`\Cpm(Z).
By (44), (yCG-(Z))S = y-'Cj;(Z1') and, since s normalizes P, it follows that
y-'Cpm(Z). By (45), s operates on {W1, W2} and, since s is irreducible
on Q(Z''), Wl = W2 and Wz = W1. For i = 1, 2 define
S i = {x e yCp.(Z1')IS2(<x)) = W} and T = {x e y-' Cpm(Z`)Ii2(<x>) =
Then S._' = {x-'Ixe S1} = Ti and hence SiI = ITI for i = 1,2. If xeS1, then
W2 = Wl = n(<x>)S = n(<xs)) and so xs e T2; similarly, xs e T1 for x e S2. By (45),
yCp-(Z) = S1 U S2 (disjoint set-theoretic union) and y-' Cpm(Z") = T1 Q) T2; it fol-
lows that S; = T2. Therefore IS1I = I T21 = IS2I and hence I Cpo(Z')I = IyCp(Z")I =
2IS1I. But this contradicts the assumption that p > 2.
The centre of a Sylow p-subgroup
We remind the reader that a finite group G is called p-normal if Z(P)9 < P implies
that Z(P)9 = Z(P) whenever P e Syl"(G) and g e G. In particular, every finite group
with abelian Sylow p-subgroups is p-normal. Therefore the following result is a
generalization of Theorem 4.4.2 in the case p > 2 and OP(G) = G.
4.4.9 Theorem (Menegazzo [1974]). Let p > 2 and suppose that the finite group G is
p-normal and satisfies 0"(G) = G. If cp is an index preserving projectivity from G to a
group G, then Z(P)` < Z(P) for every Sylow p-subgroup P of G.
Proof. By Griin's Second Theorem (see Robinson [1982], p. 285), the largest abelian
p-quotient of G is isomorphic to that of N = NG(Z(P)); hence O"(G) = G implies that
OP(N) = N. Now 4.4.8 applied to Z = Z(P) a N and the projectivity induced by qP
in N yields that Z(P)" < Z(P4).
4.4.10 Theorem (Menegazzo [1974]). Let p > 2 and suppose that the finite group G
is p-soluble and satisfies OP(G) = G. If cp is an index preserving projectivity from G to
a group G, then Z(P)4' = Z(P`0) for every Sylow p-subgroup P of G.
Proof. Since cp is index preserving, G is p-soluble (see also 4.3.8) and OP(G) = G.
Therefore we only have to show that Z(P)" < Z(P`0); this result for gyp-' will yield the
other inclusion. So suppose that G is a minimal counterexample to the assertion
Z(P)'P < Z(P`0) and put Z = Z(P). For every nontrivial normal subgroup N of G
such that N < G, qp induces a projectivity from GIN to G/N`0, and ZN/N is con-
tained in the centre of the Sylow p-subgroup PN/N of G/N. The minimality of G
therefore implies that
(46) [PQ, Z`'] < NP.
Hence if Op (G) : 1, it would follow that [P, Z] < OP.(G) n P` = 1, contradicting
the choice of G. Thus
(47) 1.
Let Q be a complement to P in N(P). By 4.1.1, T = [P, Q]Q is the normal closure

of Q in NG(P); in particular, OP(T) = T. Furthermore, Q normalizes [Z, Q] and
[Z, Q] < Z since Z a N(P). Therefore [Z, Q] is a normal subgroup of T contained
in the centre of the Sylow p-subgroup [P, Q] of T. By 4.4.8, [Z, Q]" < Z([P, Q]").
Clearly, CZ(Q) is centralized by [P, Q] Q = T and, by 1.6.8, [CZ(Q)`P, T`0] = 1; in
particular, [Cz(Q)`0, [P, Q]`] = 1. Since Z = [Z, Q] CZ(Q), it follows that
(48) Z10 is centralized by [P, Q]'*.
Let M be a maximal normal subgroup of G. Since OP(G) = G, G/M is a p'-group; let

H = OP(M). Then M = PH and the Frattini argument yields that G = NG(P)M =
NG(P)H. Now T = [P, Q]Q a NG(P) and hence [P,Q]QH is normalized by
NG(P)H = G. Since QH/H contains a p-complement of G/H, G/[P,Q]QH is a
p-group. But OP(G)=G then implies that G = [P,Q]QH. By Dedekind's law,
P = P n [P, Q] QH = [P, Q] (P n QH) and, since (IQH : HI, p) = 1, P n H is a Sylow
p-subgroup of H and of QH. Therefore P n QH = P n H and
(49) P = [P, Q] (P n H).
If Z < H, then Z would be contained in the centre of the Sylow p-subgroup P n H
of H and, since OP(H) = H, the minimality of G would imply that
[Z`*, (P n H)`] = 1. But then (48) and (49) would show that [Z", P] = 1,
contradicting the choice of G. Thus
(50) Z H.
Since G is p-soluble and OP.(G) = 1, we may conclude that CG(OP(G)) < OP(G) (see
Robinson [1982], p. 261). Of course, Z centralizes OP(G) < P and hence
Z < CG(OP(G)) = Z(OP(G)). It follows that
(51) Z is an abelian normal p-subgroup of G.
Let 1 = Ho < H1 < - - < H. = H be part of a chief series of G. Then every H;/H;_,
-
is a p-group or a p'-group, and we want to show by induction that

(52) [Z',H;] = l fori =0,...,n.
This is certainly true for i = 0. So let [ZG, Hi_,] = 1 and suppose first that H;/Hi_1
is a p-group. Since H; a G, P n H; is a Sylow p-subgroup of H; and therefore
H. = H;_, (P n H;). Hence for every x e G, there exists y e Hi_, such that
(P n Hi)'-' = (P n H;)Y and ZY_' = Z since [ZG, Hi_1] = 1. Therefore
[Z', P n H;] = [ZX, (P n H;)YX] = [ZY-', P n H_]YX = [Z, P n H1]YX = 1
since Z = Z(P). It follows that [Zc, P n H;] = I and then also [ZG, H;] =
[ZG, H;_, (P n H;)] = 1. Now suppose that H;/Hi-1 is a p'-group. Then, since
[Zc, Hi-,] = 1, this p'-group operates on the abelian p-group Zc, and 4.1.3
applied to the semidirect product of ZG by the operating group, shows that ZG =
[Zc, H;] x Cz.(H;). Both factors are normal p-subgroups of G = O"(G). By 4.3.9,
their images are normal in G and one of them has to be trivial since otherwise (46)
would yield that [P', Z] < [Zc, H;]` n Cz.(H;)' = 1, contradicting the choice of
G. But Cz6(H;) = 1 would imply that ZG = [ZG , H;] < H; < H, contradicting (50).
Hence [ZG , H;] = 1, as desired. This proves (52).
Now (52) shows that [Zc, H] = [Zc, H = O(H), 1.6.8 yields
that [(ZG), H ] = 1; in particular, [Z`, (P n H)] = 1. But then (48) and (49) imply
that [Z", P`] = 1, contradicting the choice of G.
We finally remark that Menegazzo states Theorems 4.4.9 and 4.4.10 without the
additional assumption that p > 2. Unfortunately his proof is incomplete. In the
proof of his main lemma he verifies the assumptions of 4.4.6 and then claims that a
suitable generator y of Y has to operate on Z in one of four explicitely given ways
that correspond to the assertions (1) and (2) in (b) of 4.4.6. The possibility (3), how-
ever, is overlooked. Exercise 4 gives an example for an operation of this type for
which (1) and (2) do not hold. Exercise 5 describes the situation that occurs in 4.4.7
for p = 2. If one tries to prove Lemma 4.4.8 (and hence Menegazzo's theorems) for
p = 2, this situation will occur in (44) in addition to the one considered there. One
has to decide if it leads to a contradiction or to a counterexample to 4.4.8, and
possibly also to Theorems 4.4.9 and 4.4.10 for p = 2.
Exercises
1. (Seitz and Wright [1969]) If a Sylow p-subgroup of G is a nonabelian M*-group,

show that O (G) : G. (Hint: Use 2.3.23.)
2. (Paulsen [1975]) Let G = NP where P is an abelian Sylow p-subgroup and N a
normal p-complement of G. If cp is a projectivity from G to G, show that
((P'*)')' < Z(G) and (P`)' centralizes N`.
3. (Paulsen [1975]) Let G = NP where P e Syl(G) is an M*-group and N is a

normal p-complement in G. Show that there exists a projectivity from G to a
group with abelian Sylow p-subgroups if and only if P' < CP(N).
4. Let N = (a,) x x (a,> x (b> x (c> where o(a;) = o(b) = p", o(c) = p, n > 2,
and n > 3 in case p = 2. Let x e Aut N be such that a; = a1 +P"-' (i = 1,... , r),
b = b'+" 'aand ca = ca1-'"-'.
1
(a) Show that a is an automorphism of order p of N and there exists an extension

H of N by (y> such that yP = a, c and xy = x for all x e N.
(b) H is an M*-group and Z = (a...... a b> is a homocyclic normal subgroup
of H.
(c) Show that I Z : CZ(y)l = p", JZ : DZ(y)l = p and there is no v e Z of order p"
and 1 (mod p) such that vy = v'+ "
5. Show that if p = 2 instead of p > 2 in the assumptions of 4.4.7, then r = 2, q = 3,
A A4, and there exist a basis {u, v} and generators x, fi of B and y of C whose
matrices with respect to the basis {u, v} are
1 + 2n-1 2n-' 1+ 2n-1

0 _ 0 1
0 1+2n 1' 2"-' 1+2n' '' -1 -1

Chapter 5
Projectivities and normal structure of finite groups
Many classes of groups are defined via properties of normal subgroups. To decide
whether such a class is invariant under projectivities, we have to know something
about projective images of normal subgroups; and in order to get lattice-theoretic
characterizations of these classes, we have to be able to describe normal subgroups
in the subgroup lattice of a group. The basic tools to accomplish this, at least in finite
groups, are the modular subgroups introduced in 2.1. Every normal subgroup N of
G is modular in L(G) and for every projectivity cp of G, NP is a modular subgroup of
G. Therefore we want to find out how far these modular subgroups can deviate
from normality. How to measure this? We know that to every subgroup H of G there
exist two normal subgroups of G enclosing H,
the core HG = n Hx and the normal closure HG = U Hx

xEG xEG
of H in G. Obviously, HG is the largest normal subgroup of G contained in H, HG is

the smallest normal subgroup of G containing H and the structure of HG/HG and the
embedding of this factor in G describe the deviation of H from normality.
For this reason we investigate the structure of MG/MG and G/MG for a modular
subgroup M of G, and in 5.1 reduce this problem for finite groups to the case where
M is permutable in G. In 5.2 we show that then MG/MG is hypercentrally embedded
in G and hence is nilpotent. Together with the results of 5.1 this yields a structure
theorem for G/MG for modular subgroups of finite groups which, in particular,
implies that MG/MG is hypercyclically embedded in G.
Our first nontrivial result on modular subgroups, Lemma 5.1.2, already leads to
lattice-theoretic characterizations of the classes of simple, perfect and soluble finite
groups. These we present in 5.3 together with two characterizations of the class of
supersoluble groups. The first of these depends on the main result of 5.2, the second
asserts that a finite group is supersoluble if and only if its subgroup lattice satisfies
the Jordan-Dedekind chain condition. This characterization, given by Iwasawa in
1941, and Ore's theorem on cyclic groups are the only results known in which an
interesting class of groups is characterized by a property that is important in lattice
theory. We finish this section using our results on modular subgroups to determine
the finite groups with lower semimodular subgroup lattice.
In 5.4 we come to the main topic of this chapter. Let N be a normal subgroup of
the finite group G, cp a projectivity from G to a group G, H` the normal closure and
K4' the core of N" in G. We first show that H and K are normal subgroups of G, and
then use the results of 5.1 and 5.2 to prove a structure theorem due to Schmidt
200 Projectivities and normal structure of finite groups
[1975a] for G/K and G/KcO. This theorem, in particular, implies that H/K and
H/K' are hypercyclically embedded in G and G, respectively, and this yields useful
criteria for projective images of normal subgroups to be normal in the image group.
We mention theorems of Suzuki [1951a] and Schmidt [1972b] which assert that
normal subgroups with perfect factor groups or without adjacent cyclic chief factors
have this property. Using results in Chapter 4 on singular projectivities, we show
that subnormal subgroups of finite groups are mapped by projectivities to subnor-
mal subgroups, modulo the obvious exception of P-groups.
The results of 5.2 and 5.4 reduce most problems on projective images of normal
subgroups to the study of projectivities between p-groups. This, in particular, is the
case for the investigation of the finer structure of H/K, not only for finite but also for
infinite groups, as we shall see in Chapter 6. Therefore in 5.5 we study this situa-
tion; more precisely, we handle the crucial case that G is a finite p-group, GIN is
cyclic and K = 1. In this case we show that IN'J < 2, G is metabelian and G is soluble
of derived length at most 3. In 6.6 we shall use this together with some rather
special properties of permutable subgroups, proved in 6.3, to show that for
arbitrary groups, H/K and H`/K` are soluble of derived length 4 and 5, respectively.
This whole theory was developed in the 1980's by Busetto, Menegazzo, Napolitani
and Zacher.
In 5.6 we show that normalizer preserving projectivities are also centralizer
preserving, and present the classic examples, due to Rottlander, Honda, Yff, and
Holmes, of projectivities between nonisomorphic groups that preserve indices, con-
jugacy classes and the isomorphism types of proper subgroups. Finally, we begin to
study an important problem that can be regarded as a generalization of the main
theme of this chapter: When can we say that a projectivity maps a conjugacy class
A of subgroups of G to a conjugacy class of G? This is interesting because in this case
not only G but also G operates on A. We show that, modulo the obvious exception
of P-groups, conjugacy classes of maximal subgroups of finite soluble groups are
mapped to conjugacy classes by any projectivity.
All groups considered in this chapter are finite except for a few general remarks
on modular and permutable subgroups in 5.1 and 5.2, and on normalizer pre-
serving projectivities in 5.6.
5.1 Modular subgroups of finite groups

As already indicated, we shall investigate the structure of MG/MG and G/MG for a
modular subgroup M of a finite group G. In this section we reduce this problem to
the case that M is permutable in G. More precisely, we show that if M is not
permutable in G, then G/MG is P-decomposable.
Modularity and permutability
First of all we give a useful criterion for a modular subgroup of a finite group to be
permutable; it will be generalized to arbitrary groups in 6.2.10.
5.1 Modular subgroups of finite groups 201
5.1.1 Theorem. The subgroup M of the finite group G is permutable in G if and only
if M is modular and subnormal in G.
Proof. First suppose that M is permutable in G. Then by 2.1.3, M is modular in G.

We want to show that M is subnormal in G and use induction on JGJ. Let N be a
maximal permutable subgroup of G containing M. We show that N < G; by induc-
tion, M !9!9 N, and it will follow that M < < G. So suppose, for a contradiction,
that N is not normal in G. Then there exists x e G such that N" N. For H < G,
HNN" = NHN" = Nx-'H"-'Nx = Nx-'NH"x = NN"H;
hence NN" is permutable in G. Since N is a maximal permutable subgroup of G, it

follows that NN" = G. But then there exist a e N, b E N" such that x = ab and we
get the contradiction N = N" = Nsb-' = N". Thus N < G and M !!9:!9 G.
Conversely suppose that M is modular and subnormal in G. We show that M is
permutable in G, again using induction on I G I. Clearly M is modular and subnormal
in every subgroup which contains M. Let H < G. If H < M, then HM = M = MH.
If H M, then M < H u M and there exists a proper normal subgroup N of H U M
such that M < N. It follows that N < G and, by induction, M(H n N) = (H n N) M.
The modularity of M implies that N = (H u M) n N = M u (H n N) and, since
N < H u M, we finally get that
HM = H(H n N)M = HN = NH = M(H n N)H = MH.
Thus M is permutable in G.
Since we shall use them constantly, we collect for reference the basic properties of
modular subgroups; these were proved more generally for modular elements of
lattices in 2.1.5 and 2.1.6. So let M be modular in the (not necessarily finite) group G.
Then
(1) [H u M/M] ^ [H/H n M] for all H < G,
(2) H n M mod H for all H< G.
(3) If N 9 G, then MN/N is modular in GIN.
(4) If M < M1 < G and M, mod [G/M], then M1 mod G. In particular, if N < G
and M1/N mod GIN, then M1 mod G.
(5) If M1 and M2 are modular in G, then so is M1 U M2.
(6) If cp is a projectivity from G to a group G, then M4' mod G.
Permutable subgroups have similar properties. We prove these and also some
general results on permutability of subgroups, again for arbitrary groups. So let
H.(i c- I), H and K be subgroups of G.
(7) If G is finite, then HK = KH if and only if IH u K: KI _ IH: H n KI.
Indeed this equation is equivalent to I HK I = I H u K I = I KH I.

(8) If HiK=KH;for all H=<HiliEl>,then HK =KH.
For, every x E H has the form x = x,... x where xi E HH for some j E I; by induction
on n, we see that to every y c- K and x = x, ... x E H there exist y' E K and x' E H
such that xy = y'x'. This is clear by assumption if n = 1. And if it is true for n - 1,
then there exist y, y' E K and x;,, z E H such that
where x' = zx,, e H. Thus HK c KH and the other inclusion is proved in an entirely
analogous way. Since every subgroup of G is generated by its cyclic subgroups, an
immediate consequence of (8) is the following.
(9) If XK = KX for all cyclic subgroups X of prime power or infinite order of G,
then K is permutable in G.
We come to the basic inheritance properties of permutable subgroups.
(10) If Hi per G for all i El, then <H1i El> per G.
(11) If H per G and K < G, then H n K per K.
(12) If N a G and H per G, then HN/N per GIN.
(13) If N a G and N < H < G such that H/N per G/N, then H per G.
Clearly (10) immediately follows from (8). To prove (11), note that for every X < K,
by Dedekind's law, (H n K)X = HX n K = XH n K = X(H n K). Finally, (12) and
(13) are trivial. We remark that for finite groups (10)-(13) also follow from 5.1.1 and
the corresponding properties of modular or subnormal subgroups. Note further that
5.1.1 and Exercise 2.1.3 show that the intersection of two permutable subgroups in
general is not permutable.
Maximal modular subgroups
By (5), the join of two modular subgroups of a group is again modular. Therefore, in
finite groups, it seems reasonable to study maximal modular subgroups, that is,
modular subgroups which are not contained in any larger proper modular subgroup
of the group. We are able to show that such a subgroup is nearly normal. This result
is basic for everything that follows; for example, it immediately yields the lattice-
theoretic characterizations of the classes of simple, perfect and soluble finite groups
which will be presented in 5.3.
5.1.2 Lemma (Schmidt [1969]). If M is a maximal modular subgroup of the finite

group G, then either M g G or G/MG is nonabelian of order pq for primes p and q.
Proof. Let G be a minimal counterexample to the lemma, and take a maximal

modular subgroup M of G for which the assertion of the lemma does not hold. By
(3) and (4), M/Mc is a maximal modular subgroup of G/Mc. Hence G/MG is also a
counterexample to the lemma, and the minimality of G implies that
(14) M6 = 1.
Let S be a maximal subgroup of G containing M. For x e S, M < M u Mx < S and,
by (5) and (6), M u Mx mod G. The maximality of M implies that M = M" and hence
M a S. Since M is not normal in G, S is the only maximal subgroup of G containing
M. But then 2.1.5 shows that S mod[G/M] and, by (4), S mod G. The maximality of
M yields S = M, that is,
(15) M is a maximal subgroup of G.
Let N : M be a conjugate to M and put D = N n M. By (1), [G/M] L-t [N/D] and
hence D is a maximal subgroup of N, and, similarly, of M. If H M is a maximal
subgroup of G containing D, then H u M = G and H n M = D; by (1), D is a maxi-
mal subgroup of H. Thus
(16) [G/D]\{G, D} is an antichain.
We want to show next that D is normal in neither M nor N. So suppose, for a
contradiction, that D 9 M, say. Then IM: DI = p is a prime and every p'-element of
M is contained in N. Since M and N are isomorphic, N cannot contain more
p'-elements than M. It follows that
O"(M)_ <xEMJ(o(x),p)= 1>=O"(N)aMuN=G.

By (14), O (N) = 1. So D is a maximal subgroup of the p-group N and hence D :!g N.
Therefore D a G and, by 2.2.4, IG/DI = pq where q is a prime. This contradicts the
choice of G. Thus
(17) D is neither normal in M nor in N.
By (2) and (6), D is modular in M and in N; the minimality of G implies that M/D,M
is nonabelian of order pq where p, q are primes and p > q, say. Since D is not normal
in M, IM : DI = p, hence I N : DI = p and therefore N/DN is nonabelian of order pr
Figure 16
where r < p is a prime. Let it = {q, r}. Then
O"(D)=O"(DM)=O"(DN,)<MuN=G
and, by (14), 0"(D) = 1. This shows that I M: M n NI = p is the largest prime divid-
ing I M I and M n N is a Hall p'-subgroup of M. This holds for every conjugate
N # M of M. The normal p'-subgroup DM of M is contained in every Hall p'-
subgroup of M, hence in every conjugate of M, and therefore in MG = 1. Thus
DM = 1, that is,
(18) IMO=pgandIDI=q<p.
Let x c G such that N = Mx. Then D and D" are Sylow q-subgroups of MX and
hence there exists y E Mx such that D = DXY. Since M 0 Mx, we have x 0 MX and
therefore xy 0 D. Thus T = NG(D) > D. By (14), T < G and then (16) implies that D
is maximal in T, that is,
(19) IT: DI = t is a prime.
Since MG = 1, there exists a conjugate L # M of M such that D T n L. By (1),
T n L is maximal in T and hence of prime order. Since D < T of order q < p,
I T n LI = p would imply that T were cyclic of order pq and hence T n L < T U L = G,
contradicting (14). Thus I T n LI # p and, since I LI = pq, it follows that I T n LI = q
and I TI = q2. By (1), M intersects every conjugate of Tin a subgroup of order q. If
T1, T2 are different conjugates of T, then T, n M # TZ n M; for, otherwise T, n M =
T2 n M < T, u T2 = G, contradicting (14). Therefore, since M has only p subgroups
of order q, T has at most p conjugates; on the other hand, T is a maximal subgroup
of G and p divides I G : TI. It follows that I G : TI = p and hence G I = pq2. But then
the subgroup of order p of M is a Sylow p-subgroup of G, its normalizer is M, and
Sylow's theorem implies that q = I G : M I - I (mod p). This contradicts (18).
The groups <M, x>
In addition to the structure theorem for G/MG we want to prove a characterization

of modular subgroups in finite groups, due to Previato [1975], that is similar to the
useful criterion (9) for permutability. It asserts that M is modular in the finite group
G if and only if M is modular in every subgroup <M,x> where x runs through the
elements of prime power order in G. Of course, every modular subgroup has this
property, and indeed it is equivalent to modularity. Both results will follow from the
fact that a subgroup M with this property has the desired structure. This we shall
prove in a number of steps in the remainder of this section. It should be clear to the
reader that all the results we derive in the course of this proof for subgroups having
Previato's property, for example (b) of 5.1.5, 5.1.6 and 5.1.12, in particular hold for
modular subgroups in finite groups and are useful properties of these.
First of all we have to handle the groups <M,x>. By (1) and 1.2.7, the interval
[M u <x> M] [<x>/<x> n M] is a chain if M mod G and o(x) is a prime power.
Therefore we shall study this situation.
5.1.3 Lemma. IJ' M is modular in the finite group G and [G/M] is a chain, then either
G/MG is a p-group or M is a maximal subgroup of G and G/MG is nonabelian of order
pq for primes p and q.
Proof. Again let G be a minimal counterexample to the lemma and take a modular
subgroup M of G for which the assertion of the lemma does not hold. Then G/MG is
also a counterexample and the minimality of G implies that
(20) MG = 1.
By 5.1.2, [G/M] is a chain of length n >_ 2; let H be the maximal subgroup of G
containing M. Then H mod[G/M], therefore H mod G, by (4), and again 5.1.2 yields
that IG : HI = p is a prime. The minimality of G, furthermore, implies that either
H/MH is a q-group or M is a maximal subgroup of H and IH: MI = q for some
prime q; in both cases, JH : MI = q"-'. Let P, E Sylp(M) and take P E Sylp(G) such
that P, < P. Since I G : H I = p, we have P $ H, and, since H is the only maximal
subgroup of G containing M, it follows that P u M = G = P u H. If q 0 p, then P,
would be a Sylow p-subgroup of H contained in the p-subgroup P n H. It would
follow that P n H = P, = P n M and then by (1),
[G/ M] = [P u M/M] [P/P n M] = [P/P n H] [P u H/H] = [G/H],
contradicting n > 2. Thus p = q and

(21) IG:MI =p"wheren> 2.
Suppose, for a contradiction, that H is not normal in G. Then, by 5.1.2, G/HG is
nonabelian of order pr for some prime r < p. If N/HG is the normal subgroup of
index r in G/HG, then MN = G and hence [N/N n M] [G/M] is a chain of length
n. Since IN: N n MI = I G: MI = p", the minimality of G implies that N/(N n M)N, is
a p-group. It follows that OP(N) < M and, by (20), O(N) = 1, that is, N is a p-group.
If xEG'\H,then MnMX<HnHX=HG <Nis ap-group andMuMX=Gsince
M HX and H' is the only maximal subgroup of G containing MX. As MX is modu-
lar in G, M n MX mod M and [M/M n MX] [G/MX] is a chain of length n. Again
the minimality of G implies that M/(M n MX)M is a p-group since r2 does not divide
the order of G. But then I G : M 1, 1 M: M n MX I and I M n MX I are powers of p and
hence G is a p-group. This contradicts the choice of G. Thus we have shown that
(22) H a G.
Since G is not a p-group, there exists a prime s p dividing I G 1; let S E Syls(G) and
T= NG(S). If S a G, then (21) would imply that S < M, contradicting (20). Thus S is
not normal in G, that is, T 0 G. Since H is a normal subgroup of index pin G, S < H
and the Frattini argument yields that G = HNG(S) = HT. It follows that T H and
hence T u M' = G for all x e G since H is the only maximal subgroup of G contain-
ing M. Again M' mod G implies that T n M' mod T and [T/T n M'] [G/MX]
is a chain of length n; furthermore I T : Tn H I = p divides I T : T n M' J. Therefore
the minimality of G implies that T/(T n M')T is a p-group and it follows that
S < (T r) MX)T < M' for all x c- G. But then S < MG = 1, a final contradiction.
We come back to the groups <M, x> for x of prime power order or, more gener-
ally, such that
o(x, M) = I<x>: <x> n MI
is a power of a prime. In particular, we are interested to know when M and <x>

permute.
5.1.4 Corollary. Let M be modular in the finite group T and suppose that T =
<M, x> where o(x, M) = p", with p a prime, and n e N. Then one of the following holds.
(23) TIMT is a p-group and M is permutable in T; in particular, M<x> = <x>M.
(24) T/MT is nonabelian of order pq for some prime q and I M : MTI = q < p; here
M<x> = <x>M.
(25) T/MT is nonabelian of order pq for some prime q and IM: MTI = p < q; here
M<x> : <x>M.
Proof. If x e M, (23) holds. So suppose that x 0 M. By (1) and 1.2.7, [T/M] -

[<x>/'<x> n M] is a chain and, since x 0 MT, p divides I T/MTI. Therefore 5.1.3 shows
that T/MT is a p-group or nonabelian of order pq where q is a prime. In the first case,
M a a T; therefore, by 5.1.1, M is permutable in T and (23) holds. In the second
case, M is not normal in T and hence I M : MTI is the smaller of the primes p and q.
So if p > q, IM: MTI = q and hence I<x> u M: MI = p = I<x>: <x> n MI; by (7),
M<x> = <x>M and (24) is satisfied. Finally, if p < q, then IM: MTI = p and
J <x) u M : MI = q : p = I <x> : <x> n MI; again by (7), M <x> : <x> M and (25)
holds.
An immediate consequence of 5.1.4 is the second part of the following useful result.
5.1.5 Lemma. Let G be a finite group and suppose that M, H < G such that
(IMI,IHI) = 1.
(a) If M is permutable in G, then H < NG(M).
(b) If M is modular in <M, x> for all x e H of' prime power order, then MH = HM.
Proof (a) Clearly, I MH : M I = I H: H n M I is prime to I M I; on the other hand, for

x c H, I MMX : M I = I MX: M n MX I divides I M O. Since M < MMX < MH, it follows
that M = MMX and hence M = MX.
(b) If x e H has prime power order, then M mod<M,x> and, since (IMI, IHI) = 1,
(25) cannot hold for T = <M, x>. Therefore 5.1.4 implies that M<x> = <x>M and,
by (8), MH = HM.
The structure of M/MG
To determine the structure of M/MG we need a description of MG in terms of the

groups M,,M.X, for x c G of prime power order. To obtain this we define for any
subgroup H and subset X of a (not necessarily finite) group G,

(26) Hx = <HXIx e X).
If Y G, then (Hx)Y = <HXlx e X)Y = <HX''Ix e X, y e Y) and hence
(27) (Hx)r = Hxr for H < G and arbitrary subsets X, Y of G.
If X is a subgroup of G, then clearly X < NG(Hx); furthermore, (27) implies that
(28) (Hx)Y = (HY)x for X, Y < G such that XY = YX.
5.1.6 Lemma. Let Go he the set of elements of prime power order in the finite group
G. /f M is modular in <M,x) for all x E Go, then MG =n e Go}.
Proof. Since L = n {M<M.X>Ix e Go} is an intersection of conjugates of M, it clearly

contains the intersection MG of all these conjugates. We have to prove the other
inclusion L < MG, that is, L < M9 for all g e G. We use induction on the number r of
primes dividing o(g) to show that if 1 0 xi E Go such that <y) = (xl) x x <xr),
then
(29) MCM.9) =n M<M,x,>-
Since the left hand side of this equation is contained in M9 and the right hand side
containes L, it will follow that L < M9.
For r = 1, (29) is trivial. So let r > 2 and assume that the assertion is true for r - 1.
For every i = 1, ..., r, M is modular in <M, xi) and hence, by 5.1.4, any of these
groups must have one of the properties (23)-(25). Without loss of generality we may
choose the notation in such a way that <M, xr) = T satisfies (24) or, if there is
no such xi, it satisfies (25) if there is an xi with this property. Furthermore write
<M,9) = H, <M,x1,...,xr-1) = S, xi ...xr-i = X, Xr = Y, X = <x> and Y = <y>.
Then <x> = <x l) x . . X <xr_ 1 ), hence by our induction assumption,
r-1
(30) Ms =ni=1
M<M,X,)
and we have to show that
(31) MH = Ms n MT.
This is clear if T < S; for, then S = H and hence MH = Ms = Ms n MT. Therefore
suppose that T S and let D = Ms n MT. Since MH is normal in S and T, MH < Ms
and M. < MT and hence
(32) MH < D.
If M permutes with all the <xi>, then, by (8), M also permutes with <x 1) ... <xr_ 1) _
X and Y. It follows that I S: M I= I MX : M I= I X: X n M I is coprime to
I Y: Y n M I _ I T : M I and hence S n T = M. If M does not permute with <xj ), say,
then, by 5.1.4, <M, xj> satisfies (25) and our choice of Xr implies that M is a maximal
subgroup of T Since T S, again it follows that S n T = M. Thus in any event
<M,x>=S
Ms
Figure 17
(33) S n T = M.
Since D < Ms < S, we see that (Dx)Y < (Ms)' < T and, similarly, (DY)x < S. As X
and Y are contained in (g>, they permute and, by (27) and (28), DXY = (Dx)Y =
(DY)x < S n T, that is,
(34) DxY < M.
Now suppose first that MY = YM. Then (DXY)M = (DX)YM is invariant under
YM = T and contained in M. Thus (Dx)YM < MT; in particular, Dx < MT. Since
D < Ms < S, it follows that Dx < Ms and hence Dx < Ms n MT = D. Thus
Dx = D and (DY)x = (Dx)Y = D. Since also (DY)M = (DM)Y = DY, it follows that
DY (M, X, Y> = H. This implies that D < DY < M. and, by (32), D = MH, as
desired.
So, finally, suppose that MY 0 YM. Then (25) holds for T and our choice of x,
implies that none of the <M, x1> satisfies (24). Therefore, by 5.1.4, for every
i E { I__ r}, the group M/M<M,X, is a p-group if x; is a p-element. Since the orders of
>
the x; are pairwise coprime, it follows from (30) that (M/M1 is prime to IM/MTI
and hence Ms u MT = M. If Dx A D, then D < Dx < Ms and hence Dx = Ms since
Ms : D I = IM: MTI is a prime. By (34), Ms < DXY < M and so M = DxY U MT
would be invariant under Y; but M does not even permute with Y. Thus Dx = D.
Again (DY)x = (Dx)Y = DY and, clearly, (DY)MT = (DMT)Y = D1. Since D < DY < MT
and M/D = MS/D X MT/D, we obtain DY < M and hence DY < M u X = S. As
DY < M, it follows that DY < M. and then DY < Ms n MT = D. Thus DY = D and
so, finally, D < <M, X, Y> = H. This implies that D < MH and (32) shows that D =
MH, as desired. El
It is clear that MG < n {M<M.X>Ix c- Go} < n {MXIx c Go} holds for arbitrary
M < G. We remark that for a modular subgroup M of a finite (or periodic) group G,
the proof of even the assertion MG = n {MXIx e Go} is much easier than that of
5.1.6; one can assume that G = <M, x> for some x e G and then use induction on
o(x, M) (see Stonehewer [1976b]). We shall see in 6.2.3 that this result generalizes to
modular subgroups of arbitrary groups; also this proof is easier than that of 5.1.6.
If M mod<M, x> and x E G is of prime power order, then, by 5.1.4, M/M<M,X> is
nilpotent. It follows that M/n {M<M,X> Ix e Go} and therefore, by 5.1.6, that
(35) M/MG is nilpotent if M mod<M, x> for every x e Go.
In particular, we have our first general result on the structure of MG/MG for a
modular subgroup M of G.
5.1.7 Theorem (Schmidt [1969]). If M is modular in the finite group G, then M/MG
is nilpotent.
By 5.1.7, the proof of our main theorem divides into two parts. We first prove the
result for modular subgroups of prime power order, and then show that for an
arbitrary modular subgroup M of G, the Sylow subgroups of M/MG are modular in
G/MG. The first part, the proof of Lemma 5.1.9, is a combination of ideas of Previato
[1975] and Schmidt [1970a]; in the second part we shall mainly follow Previato's
paper.
Modular subgroups of prime power order
We shall need the following simple lemma to establish the modularity in G of a

subgroup M for which G/MG has the correct structure.
5.1.8 Lemma. Let G = G1 x G2 and (I G11,1 G21) = 1. If Mi mod Gi for i = 1, 2, then

M1 X M2 mod G.
Proof. By 1.6.4, L(G) L(G1) x L(G2). Since the modular laws (2) and (3) of 2.1
hold for Mi in L(G;), they also hold for (M1,M2) in L(G1) x L(G2) and hence for
M1 X M2 in L(G).
We come to the first part of the program described above.
5.1.9 Lemma. If M is a subgroup of prime power order of the finite group G, then the
following properties are equivalent.
(a) M is modular in G.
(b) M is modular in <M, x> for all x e G of prime power order.
(c) M is permutable in G or G/MG = MG/MG x K/MG where MG/MG is a non-
abelian P-group of order prime to IK/MG I.
Proof. If the first alternative in (c) holds, then, by 2.1.3, M is modular in G; if the
second one is satisfied, then 5.1.8 shows that M/MG is modular in G/MG and, by (4),
M is modular in G. Thus (a) follows from (c) and, clearly, (b) follows from (a). It
remains to be shown that (b) implies (c).
Let G be a minimal counterexample to this assertion and take a q-subgroup M of

G, q a prime, satisfying (b) but not (c). If N is a normal subgroup of G contained in M
and gN e GIN of prime power order, then there exists g' e G of prime power order
such that gN = g'N. Because M mod<M, g'>, we obtain M/N mod<M, g' )/N =
<M/N, gN>; hence M/N satisfies (b) in GIN. The minimality of G implies that
(36) MG = 1.
There exists x E G of prime power order such that M is not permutable in <M, x>;
otherwise, by (9), M would be permutable in G. Put S = <M, x>. Since M is a
q-group, 5.1.4 shows that S/Ms is nonabelian of order pq where q = <x>M so that
(37) S = MX where I X I = p > q and S/Ms is nonabelian of order pq.
It follows that S < MG and hence M is not permutable in MG. Therefore if M' <
H < G, then (37) implies that p and q divide I M"/MHI and the minimality of G yields
that H/MH = M"/MH x L where M"/MH is a P-group of order p"q (n E N) and
(I LI, pq) = 1. Then M is a Sylow q-subgroup of H, hence of M', and it follows that
the core and the normal closure of M in MG are characteristic subgroups of M' and
hence normal subgroups of G. Now MG < H < G trivially implies that
MG <MH <MMG <M <MMG <M" <MG

MMG
and the normality of MM,; and Mm(' yields that MMG = MH = MG = 1 and =
M" = M'. Thus we have shown:
(38) If MG < H < G, then MG is a P-group of order p"q (n a N) and H = MG x L
where (IMGI,ILI)= 1.
Now we distinguish two cases.
Case]: I MI > q2.

Then Ms 0 1 and hence NG(Ms) G. If O9 (G) < NG(Ms), there would exist a proper
normal subgroup N of G such that M < NG(MS) < N. It would follow that MG < G
and (38) would show that I MI = q, a contradiction. Therefore O9 (G) is not contained
in NG(Ms), that is, there exist q'-elements in G\NG(Ms) and then also such elements
of prime power order.
So let y E G\NG(Ms) such that o(y) = r' where r q is a prime. Since x e NG(Ms),
also yX e G\NG(Ms) of order r'". And if y E NG(M), then yX 0 NG(M) since otherwise
yX would normalize M and MX and hence M n MX = Ms. Therefore we may assume
without loss of generality that y 0 NG(M). Then H = <M, x, y> is a counterexample
to our assertion; for, M is not permutable in S < H and, since MH < Ms, we con-
clude that IM: MHI > q2 so that H/MH cannot have the structure given in (c). The
minimality of G yields that G = H = <M, x, y). Now 5.1.5 first of all shows that (y)
permutes with M and MX and hence also with M u MX = S; thus G = S<y>. Sec-
ondly it yields that M is not permutable in T = (M, y> since otherwise y would
normalize M. By 5.1.4, T/MT is nonabelian of order rq, hence o(y) = r and so, finally,
(39) IGI = ISI I<y>I = I MI pr.
Since MS is not normalized by y, MS 0 MT and hence M = MS U M. It follows that
T = MUM''= MU(MT)''U(MS)''= MU(MS)' = MU(MS)XY <MUMXY

and MX T since Sr T = M; therefore also MXy T. Thus T < M U MXY and
since I G : T J = p, it follows that
(40) MUM'Y = G.
If r = p, we could choose y from a Sylow p-subgroup of G containing x. Then
o(.xy) = p and our assumption (b) together with (40) would imply that M is modular
in (M, xy> = G. It would follow that [G/M] z [(xy>/ 1] and hence M would be a
maximal subgroup of G, a contradiction. Thus r -,P-4 p. Now 5.1.5 shows that every
subgroup of order p permutes with M and MX, and hence with M U MX = S; there-
fore it is contained in S since I G : SI = r. Similarly, every element of order r of G is
contained in T and it follows that S and T are the only maximal subgroups of G
containing M. By (40), MXY n S and MXY n T are proper subgroups of MXy and hence
there exists z e MXy such that z 0 S and z 0 T. Since o(z) is a power of q, again (b)
implies that M mod(M, z> = G, but L((z>) z [G/M] is not a chain. This contradic-
tion shows that Case I cannot occur.
Case 2: IMI = q.
By (37), I MX I = pq and we first want to show that M is a P-group of order p"q for
some n c N. For this let M = M0, M....., Mk be the conjugates of M in G. If R < G
of prime order r > q, then by 5.1.5, R permutes with every Mi; hence I Mi U R I = rq
and R a Mi u R. Thus
(41) MG < NG(R) for every R < G of prime order r > q.
For i = 1, ... , k, furthermore, M is modular in M u M, and hence, by 5.1.4,
1 M u Miff = qri for r; E P. Since MUM. contains two different subgroups of order q,
ri >- q. Suppose, for a contradiction, that ri = q for some i. Then, by (41), H =
X (M U Mi) has order pq2 and X M is the only subgroup of order pq of H containing
M. Since M is not normal in XM, there exists a Sylow q-subgroup Q 0 M U Mi of
H and in Q an element z not contained in any of the two proper subgroups Q n X M
and Q n (M u Mi) of Q. Then M is modular in (M, z> XM, hence I(M, z>I = q2
and M a <M,z> u Mi = H, a contradiction. Thus ri > q for all i. Now suppose, for
a contradiction, that ri 0 p for some i; let ri = r. If R is the subgroup of order r in
M u Mi and again H = X(M u Mi), then H = XRM has order prq and, by (41), X
and R are normal in H. Therefore XM and RM are the only maximal subgroups of
H containing M and it follows that M = NN(M). Thus H contains IH : MI = pr
conjugates of M and all of these have to lie in one of the two maximal subgroups of
H containing M. But these two groups only contain p + r - 1 subgroups of order q,
a contradiction. So we have shown that I M u Mi l = pq for all i = 1, ... , k. If Pi is the
subgroup of order p in M u Mi, then, by (41), Pi a M and hence P = Pt u u Pk,
as a product of normal subgroups of order p of M, is an elementary abelian normal
p-subgroup of M. Furthermore
M=MUMIU.UMk=M(P1u...uPk)=MP
and, again by (41), every subgroup of P is normal in MG. It follows that

(42) MG is a P-group of order p"q for some n c N.
We want to show next that MG is a Hall subgroup of G. For this let t be a prime and
g c G\MG be a t-element. Every conjugate M; of M is modular in <M;,g> = W. If
W/(M;), were a P-group, we would have g c- W = Mi U Mg < MG, a contradiction.
Therefore, by 5.1.4, M. is permutable in W. Now suppose that t 0 q. Then 5.1.5
implies that M; a W so that in this case, g normalizes every subgroup of order q of
MG. If Y is a p-subgroup of MG, then YM is a P-group; hence it is normalized by g
and it follows that Y9 = Y. Thus g induces a power automorphism in MG which, by
1.4.3, has to be trivial since Z(MG) = 1. We have shown:
(43) If g e G\MG is of prime power order t'", then M<g> = (g>M and, fort q,
g E CG(MG).
Now suppose, for a contradiction, that MG is not a Hall subgroup of G. Then there
exists a subgroup H of G such that MG < H and IH : MGI = t where t = p or t = q.
By (38), H = G and hence I G : MGI = t. Let T be a Sylow t-subgroup of G and
g E T\MG. Then (43) shows that g E CG(MG) for t = p, and that <M,g> = M<g>
is abelian for t = q since it is a q-group and IGI = p"qz in that case. Thus in both
cases, g e CG(M) and, since T is generated by the elements in T \M', it follows that
T < CG(M). Since T was an arbitrary Sylow t-subgroup, this implies that M < Z(MG)
if t = p, and that M < 0Q(G) if t = q; both assertions contradict (42).
Thus MG is a normal Hall subgroup of G. By the Schur-Zassenhaus Theorem
there exists a complement K to MG in G and, by (43), K < CG(MG). But then
G = MG x K satisfies (c), a final contradiction.
The Sylow subgroups of M/MG
We want to show next that for a modular subgroup M of a finite group G, the Sylow
subgroups of M/MG are modular in GIMG. This is quite simple for permutable
subgroups; in fact, we prove a more general result for these, which we shall extend
in 6.2.16.
5.1.10 Lemma. If M is a nilpotent permutable subgroup of the finite group G, then

every Sylow subgroup of M is permutable in G.
Proof. Let q be a prime and Q E Sylq(M). By (9), we have to show that Q permutes
with every (cyclic) subgroup X of G of prime power order p". Let H = MX. If p = q,
we consider a Sylow p-subgroup P of H containing X. Since I M: M n PI = IMP: PI
is prime to p, M n P is a Sylow p-subgroup of M, that is, M n P = Q. By (11), Q
is permutable in P and therefore QX = XQ. Now let p:1-1 q. Then IH: MI =
J X: X n MI = p' for some m e N and hence IM: M n WI _ I MME : MI is a power
of p for every y e H. It follows that Q < MH; since it is a Sylow subgroup of the
nilpotent normal subgroup MH of H, we conclude Q a H. Thus QX = XQ in this
case too.
The corresponding statement for modular subgroups is not true in general (see
Exercise 3); however it holds if M is a Hall subgroup of G.
5.1.11 Lemma. If M is a nilpotent modular subgroup of the finite group G and

(I G : MI,1 MI) = 1, then every Sylow subgroup of M is modular in G.
Proof. Let G be a minimal counterexample to the lemma, let M be a nilpotent

modular subgroup of G such that (I G : MI, I MI) = 1, and suppose that Q is a Sylow
q-subgroup of M which is not modular in G. By 5.1.9 there exists x E G of prime
power order such that Q is not modular in <Q, x> and the minimality of G implies
that (M,x> = G. By 5.1.10, M is not permutable in G and then 5.1.4 shows that M
is a maximal subgroup of G and G/MG is nonabelian of order pt where p and t are
primes such that p > t, say. It follows that I G : MI = p is prime to I MI and there
exists Y < G such that I YI = p and G = MY.
Since Q is not modular in G but L(G/MG) is modular, MG 1; let N be a minimal
normal subgroup of G contained in MG. Then M/N is a nilpotent modular Hall
subgroup of G/N and the minimality of G implies that QN/N mod GIN. By (4),
QN mod G. As a Sylow subgroup of the nilpotent normal subgroup MG of G,
Q n MG 9 G. So if Q n MG 1, we could choose N < Q n MG and would get the
contradiction Q = QN mod G. Therefore Q n MG = 1 and hence t = q and I QI = q.
We want to show next that there exists a subgroup P of order p in G such that Q
is not modular in Q u P. Since x 0 MG and I G : MGI = pq, x is either a p-element or a
q-element. As p2 X IGI, we may take P = <x> if x is a p-element. And if x is a q-
element, there exists a Sylow q-subgroup of G containing x. Since Q E Sylq(G)
and G = MY, we can find a e M, y e Y such that x e Qy = Qy, and then
<Q, x> < <Q, Qy> < <Q, y). Thus Q is not modular in <Q, y> and we may take
P = <y> in this case.
Now QN mod G and (I QNI, J PI) = 1. By 5.1.5, QN permutes with P and hence
IQNP: QNI = p is prime to IQNI. So if QNP < G, the minimality of G would
imply that Q mod QNP, a contradiction. Thus QNP = G and therefore N = MG and
M = Q x N < CG(N) a G. It follows that CG(N) = G and, since N is a minimal
normal subgroup of G, I N I = r is a prime and I G I = pqr. The subgroup NP of index
q in G is normal in G and cyclic since N < Z(G). It follows that P a G and hence
IQ u P I = pq. But then, of course, Q mod Q u P, a final contradiction.
5.1.12 Lemma. Let G be a finite group and M < G such that M is modular in <M, x>
for every x c- G of prime power order. If Q/MG is a Sylow subgroup of M/MG, then Q
is modular in G.
Proof. Let G be a minimal counterexample to the lemma, let M be modular in

<M, x> for every x E G of prime power order, and suppose that Q/MG is a Sylow
q-subgroup of M/MG such that Q is not modular in G. Then G/MG too is a counter-
example since the assumptions on M are also satisfied by M/MG in G/MG, as we
have shown at the beginning of the proof of 5.1.9, and since, by (4), Q/MG is not
modular in G/MG. The minimality of G implies that
(44) MG = 1.
Then by (35),
(45) M is nilpotent
and, by 5.1.9, there exists x e G of prime power order such that Q is not modular in
<Q, x). Again 5.1.10 shows that M is not permutable in <M, x> = S and, by 5.1.4,
S/MS is nonabelian of order pI M : MSI where p > IM: M51 are primes. Since every
Sylow subgroup of the nilpotent normal subgroup MS is normal in S, Q $ MS and
hence IM : MSS = q. Furthermore we claim that we may assume that o(x) is a power
of p and M permutes with <x>, that is, we have the following situation:
(46) There exists x e G such that o(x) = p", S = <M,x> = M<x>, S/MS is non-
abelian of order pq, p > q and Q is not modular in <Q, x>.
Indeed, since IS: MI = p and IM : MSS = q p, there exist cyclic p-subgroups Z of S
such that S = M u Z, and 5.1.4 shows that any such Z permutes with M. So if x is a
p-element, then S = M<x> and (46) holds. If x is not a p-element, then x is a q-
element, since IS/MS1 = pq, and therefore x is contained in a Sylow q-subgroup
of S. As S = MZ, there are a e M, z e Z such that x e QZ = QZ and hence
<Q, x> < <Q, QZ> < <Q, z). Then Q is not modular in <Q, z> and (46) holds with x
replaced by z.
Now if (p, I M 1) = 1, then the assumption of 5.1.11 would be satisfied in S and
hence Q mod S, contradicting (46). Thus p divides IMl; let P be the Sylow p-subgroup
of M. Now NG(P) # G since MG = 1; let y e G\NG(P) of prime power order and put
T = <M, y). If P < MT, then as a Sylow subgroup of the nilpotent normal subgroup
MT of T, P a T, contradicting the choice of y. Thus p divides I M : MTI and, by 5.1.4,
(47) M/MT is a p-group.
Suppose, for a contradiction, that H = <M, x, y> < G and let N = MH. Then the
minimality of G yields that QN/N is modular in H/N and hence QN mod H, by (4).
If QN per H, then Q per H, by 5.1.10; but Q is not even modular in H. There-
fore QN/N is not permutable in H/N and, by 5.1.9, H/N = A/N x B/N where
(IA/NI, IB/NI) = 1 and A/N = (QN/N)HI" is a nonabelian P-group. By (47), p divides
IM/NI. Since M is nilpotent, QN/N is centralized by PN/N and so 2.2.2 implies that
PN/N < B/N. It follows that IH : BI is prime to p, hence x e B and then (QN)" =
QN. Since QN is nilpotent, this implies that Qx = Q, contradicting (46). Thus H = G,
that is,
(48) G = <M, x, y> = S u T
Let L be the {p, q}-complement of M, that is, M = P x Q x L. Then L:' MS n MT
and, as a characteristic subgroup of Ms :!g S, L a S; similarly, L o T and so
L o S u T = G. Since MG = 1, it follows that L = 1, that is,
(49) M = P x Q.
Now let R be any Sylow subgroup of G and z e R. Then by assumption, M is
modular in <M, z> = U and, by 5.1.4, M/MU is a group of prime power order.
Therefore either P< MU or Q < MU and, since MU is nilpotent, this again implies
that P o U or Q a U, that is, z e NR(P) or z e NR(Q). Since R cannot be the set-
theoretic union of two proper subgroups, it follows that R = NR(Q) or R = NR(P).

Thus:
(50) If R is a Sylow subgroup of G, then R < NG(P) or R < NG(Q).
By (46), Q and Q' are different Sylow q-subgroups of S. Therefore a Sylow q-sub-
group of G containing Qx cannot normalize Q, nor can a Sylow p-subgroup of G
containing x. Thus (50) shows that NG(P) must contain these two Sylow subgroups
of G and, since MG = 1, NG(P) G. Hence there must exist a prime r dividing IGI
such that p r q and a Sylow r-subgroup R of G that is not contained in NG(P).
Then we may choose y e R\NG(P). For this y, M is not permutable in T = <M, y)
since 5.1.5 (a) would imply that My = M and hence Py = P if M per T. By 5.1.4,
T/MT is a P-group and so o(y) = I T : M I = r. Again by 5.1.5, < y> permutes with M
and Ms, hence with S, and (48) yields that IGI = I S I I<y>I = I MI pr. It follows that S
and T are maximal subgroups of G and hence S = NG(P) and T = NG(Q). Since
I G : T j = p, T cannot contain any Sylow p-subgroup of G; by (50), all these Sylow
p-subgroups have to lie in S. Since P g S, it follows that P is contained in the inter-
section OP(G) of all the Sylow p-subgroups of G, and, since P is a Sylow p-subgroup
of T, we have P = OP(G) n T a T. This contradicts the choice of y e G\NG(P).
The main theorems
5.1.13 Theorem (Previato [1975]). The subgroup M of the finite group G is modular
in G if and only if M is modular in <M, x> for every x e G of prime power order.
Proof. If M is modular in G, then it is also modular in every group <M, x>. Con-
versely, if M is modular in <M, x> for every x E G of prime power order and Q/MG
is a Sylow subgroup of M/MG, then, by 5.1.12, Q is modular in G. Since M is
generated by these subgroups Q, it follows from (5) that M is modular in G.
5.1.14 Theorem (Schmidt [1970a]). The subgroup M of the finite group G is modular
in G if and only if
G/MG = Sl/MG x ... X S,/MG x T/MG
where 0 < r e 7L and for all i, j e { 1, ... , r},

(a) S;/MG is a nonabelian P-group,
(b) (ISI/MGI,IS,/MGI)= 1 =(ISI/MGI,IT/MGI)fori 0j,
(c) M/MG = QI/MG x x Q,/MG x (M n T)/MG and Q./MG is a nonnormal
Sylow subgroup of S;/MG, and
(d) M n T is permutable in G.
Proof. If G/MG has the given structure, then L(S;/MG) is modular and hence
Q./MG mod S;/MG for all i. Furthermore (M n T)/MG mod T/MG so that, by 5.1.8,
M/MG mod G/MG; by (4), M is modular in G.
Conversely, we use induction on IGI to show that for a modular subgroup M of

G, G/MG has the structure given in the theorem. Of course, we may assume that
MG = I since otherwise G/MG by induction has the right structure. Then, by 5.1.7,
M is nilpotent. If all the Sylow subgroups of M are permutable in G, then by (10), M
is permutable in G and the assertion holds with r = 0 and T = G. If Q is a Sylow
subgroup of M that is not permutable in G, then, by 5.1.12, Q is modular in G and
5.1.9 yields that G = QG x L where QG is a nonabelian P-group of order prime to
ILI. By (2), M n L is modular in L and, clearly, (M n L)L = 1. Hence, by induction,
L has the right structure. Since M n QG is nilpotent, 2.2.2 shows that Q = M n QG is
a nonnormal Sylow subgroup of QG. Thus G has the right structure.
Exercises
1. Show that the subgroup M of the finite group G is a maximal modular subgroup
of G if and only if either M is a maximal normal subgroup of G or M is a maximal
subgroup of G and G/MG is nonabelian of order pq where p and q are primes.
2. (Schmidt [1969]) Let M be modular in the finite group G and suppose that
I G: MI = p" where p e P and n e N. Show that G/MG is either a p-group or a
P-group of order p"q where p > q e P.
3. Let G = PQ x R where I PI = I R I = p e P and PQ is nonabelian of order pq,
p > q e P. Show that M = QR is a nilpotent modular subgroup of G whose
Sylow q-subgroup is not modular in G.
4. (Schmidt [1970a]) Show that if M is a nilpotent modular subgroup of the finite
group G, q the largest prime dividing I M I and Q the Sylow q-subgroup of M, then
Q is modular in G.
5. (Whitson [1977]) Let G be a finite group and let M < G be such that (X U M) n Z =
X u (M n Z) for all subgroups X and Z of G satisfying X < Z, that is, M is semi-
modular in L(G) as defined in Exercise 2.1.7. Show that if [G/M] is a chain of
length 2 and I G : MI = p2 for some prime p, then G/MG is a p-group.
5.2 Permutable subgroups of finite groups

Since we know the structure of P-groups very well, Theorem 5.1.14 reduces our
problem of determining the structure of G/MG for a modular subgroup M of a finite
group G to the study of the factor T/MG in this theorem, that is, to the case that M
is permutable in G. Our main result in this section is that MG/MG is then hyper-
centrally embedded in G, in particular is nilpotent. In the remainder of this section
we shall study some special problems on permutable subgroups in order to prepare
our investigations on projective images of normal subgroups. We shall not always
insist on the finiteness of the groups considered since we shall be able to apply
the more general results also in the study of images of normal subgroups under
projectivities of infinite groups in Chapter 6. For the same reason we introduce the
5.2 Permutable subgroups of finite groups 217
concepts of hypercentral and hypercyclic embedding in the most general form,

although, at the moment, we are only interested in projectivities between finite
groups.
Hypercentral and hypercyclic embedding
Let K < H be normal subgroups of the group G. We say that H/K is hypercentrally
(respectively hypercyclically) embedded in G if to every normal subgroup N of G such
that K < N < H there exists a subgroup M of G satisfying N < M < H such that
[M, G] < N (respectively such that M 9 G and M/N is cyclic). For groups satisfying
the maximal condition for normal subgroups, in particular for finite groups, this is
equivalent to the existence of a chain of subgroups N of G such that
K=Na<N,
and [Ni, G] < Ni-, (respectively Ni a G and N/N_1 is cyclic) for i = 1, ..., r. In
particular, every hypercentrally (respectively hypercyclically) embedded factor of a
finite group is nilpotent (respectively supersoluble). Since for N < M < G the inclu-
sion [M, G] < N is equivalent to N a_ G and M/N < Z(G/N), it is clear that every
hypercentrally embedded factor of an arbitrary group is hypercyclically embedded.
We shall need the following simple inheritance properties of the concepts introduced
above.
5.2.1 Lemma. Let F, H, K, L, M, N be normal subgroups of G such that K < M < H,

L<HandK<F.
(a) If H/K is hypercentrally (hypercyclically) embedded in G, then so are HN/KN
and H n N/K n N.
(b) H/K is hypercentrally (hypercyclically) embedded in G if and only if H/M and
M/K are hypercentrally (hypercyclically) embedded in G.
(c) If F/K and H/K are hypercentrally (hypercyclically) embedded in G, then so is
FH/K.
(d) If H/K and H/L are hypercentrally (hypercyclically) embedded in G, then so is
H/K n L.
Proof. We sketch the proofs of these properties for hypercentral embedding; the
proofs for hypercyclic embedding are similar. First of all, (a) follows from the fact
that for normal subgroups S, T of G such that [T, G] < S, (1) of 1.5 yields
[TN, G] < [T, G]G[N, G] < SN; furthermore, of course, [T n N, G] < S n N. To
prove (b), observe first that if H/K is hypercentrally embedded in G, then from (a) it
follows that HM/KM = H/M and H n M/K n M = M/K are hypercentrally em-
bedded. Conversely, if these two factors are hypercentrally embedded and S a G
such that K < S < H, then H/MS and M/M n S are hypercentrally embedded and
therefore, by (a), MS/S is also. Hence there exists T < G satisfying [T, G] < S such
that S < T < MS < H if S < MS and such that S = MS < T < H in the other case.
Thus (b) holds. In (c), F/K and FH/FK = FH/F are hypercentrally embedded; in (d),
H/K and H n K/ L n K = K/L n K are hypercentrally embedded. In both cases, (b)
yields the desired result.
We need a criterion for a normal subgroup of prime power order to be hyper-

centrally embedded in a finite group.
5.2.2 Lemma. If p is a prime and N a normal p-subgroup of a finite group G, then N

is hypercentrally embedded in G if and only if G/C(N) is a p-group.
Proof'. First assume that N is hypercentrally embedded in G and let Q be a q-

subgroup of G for some prime q p. Then N and the q-group QN/N are hyper-
centrally embedded in QN. Thus QN is hypercentrally embedded in QN, that is QN
is nilpotent. It follows that Q < C(N) and, since q was arbitrary, GIG(N) is a
p-group.
Conversely, suppose that G/C(N) is a p-group and take S g G such that S < N.
Then G operates as a p-group on the p-group N/S and therefore has a nontrivial
centralizer T/S in this group. It follows that S < T and [T, G] < S. Thus N is hyper-
centrally embedded in G.
The structure and embedding of M/MG
5.2.3 Theorem (Maier and Schmid [1973]). If M is permutahle in the finite group G,
then M'/M is hypercentrally embedded in G.
Proo/. Let G be a minimal counterexample to the theorem and let M be minimal

among the permutable subgroups of G for which M/M is not hypercentrally
embedded in G. Then G/M is a counterexample and the minimality of G implies
that
(1) M = 1.
By 5.1.7 and 5.1.10, M is nilpotent and its Sylow subgroups are permutable in G.
Hence if M had composite order, the minimality of M would imply that pG would
be hypercentrally embedded in G for every Sylow subgroup P of M. By (c) of 5.2.1,
the product of these normal closures, that is M, would also be hypercentrally
embedded in G, a contradiction. Thus M is a p-group for some prime p and therefore
also
(2) M is a p-group
since the product of p-groups is a p-group. Now M is not hypercentrally em-
bedded in G and therefore, by 5.2.2, there exists a prime q # p dividing I G/C(M)I.
Let Q E Sylq(G) and put H = N(Q)M. The Frattini argument shows that the Sylow
normalizer N(Q) cannot be contained in a proper normal subgroup of G. Thus
O"(G)H = G and every x e G can be written in the form x = yh where y E O(G).
h E H. Since O(G) is generated by p'-elements, 5.1.5 shows that M is normalized by
0(G). Therefore MX = Mh and hence M" = MG and MH = MG = 1. So if H were a

proper subgroup of G, the minimality of G would imply that .MG = M"/MH would
be hypercentrally embedded in H. But then 5.2.2 would imply that Q < CH(MG) and
this would contradict the fact that q divides 1G/CG(MG)I. Thus H = G, that is,
(3) G = NG(Q)M.
This yields QG = Q'N < QM and hence QG n MG < QM n MG = (Q n MG)M = M
since Q is a q-group and MG a p-group. Since MG = 1, it follows that QG n MG = 1
and we get that Q < CG(MG), the same contradiction as before.
Recall that if K < H are normal subgroups of a group G, then G operates by

conjugation on H/K and the kernel of this operation is
CG(H/K) = {x e GI[H,x] < K}.
Thus G/CG(H,'K) is isomorphic to the automorphism group induced by G in H; K;

furthermore, CG(H/K)/K = CG/K(H/K).
5.2.4 Corollary. If M is permutable in the finite group G, then G/CG(MG/MG) is

nilpotent and the princes dividing the order of this group are precisely those dividing
IM/MGI.
Proof. We may assume that MG = 1 so that MG is hypercentrally embedded in G.

Then MG is nilpotent and a prime divides IMGI if and only if it divides IMI. If p is
such a prime and P the Sylow p-subgroup of MG, then P < G and (b) of 5.2.1 shows
that P is hypercentrally embedded in G. By 5.2.2, G/CG(P) is a p-group which is not
trivial since otherwise P n M would be a nontrivial normal subgroup of G contained
in M. Since CG(MG) is the intersection of all the CG(P), the assertion follows.
Our main results, Theorems 5.1.14 and 5.2.3, yield a rather good but somewhat
complicated description of the structure and embedding of MG/MG for a modular
subgroup M of a finite group G. Therefore we prove a handier result that follows
immediately from these theorems and that will often suffice for the applications.
5.2.5 Theorem (Schmidt [1975a]). If M is modular in the finite group G, then

MG/MG is hypercyclically embedded in G and G/CG(MG/M(;) is supersoluble.
Proof. Again we may assume that MG = 1. Then, by 5.1.14, G = Sc x x S, x T

where the S; are nonabelian P-groups, M n T is permutable in G, and MG =
Sc x . x S, x (M n T)G. Clearly, all the Si are hypercyclically embedded in G and
so is (M n T)G, by 5.2.3; thus (c) of 5.2.1 shows that M' is hypercyclically embedded
in G. Furthermore G/CG((M n T)G) is nilpotent and G/CG(S;) S. is supersoluble
for every i = 1, ..., r. Since CG(MG) is the intersection of all these centralizers, it
follows that G/CG(MG) is supersoluble.
5.2.6 Corollary. if M is modular in the finite group G and G or M is perfect, then

M a G.
Proof. Recall that a group is perfect if it has no proper normal subgroup with
soluble factor group. Therefore, if G is perfect, Theorem 5.2.5 implies that G =
CG(Mo/MG); and if M is perfect, it follows that M = MG. In both cases, M:9 G.
The results established so far will suffice to prove a number of important criteria
for projectivities of finite groups to map normal subgroups onto normal subgroups;
Corollary 5.2.6 is a first example. But they say nothing if the groups considered are
nilpotent groups or p-groups; rather they reduce the problems to the investigation
of p-groups. As mentioned before, we shall be able to prove similar reduction theo-
rems also for infinite groups. Therefore, in the remainder of this section, we shall
study permutable subgroups of p-groups and cyclic permutable subgroups of arbi-
trary groups as far as necessary for the applications to projective images of normal
subgroups.
Elements of infinite order
First of all we show that elements of infinite order cause little trouble in the prob-
lems we consider. The reason for this is the following basic result which we shall
generalize in 6.2.2.
5.2.7 Lemma. If M per G and g e G such that o(g, M) is infinite, then g e NG(M).
Proof. We may assume that M<g> = G. Since o(g, M) = I<g>: <g> n MI, it follows
that o(g) is infinite and M n <g> = 1. If p is a prime, S = M<g"> is a subgroup of
index p in G; let N = SG. Then IG/NI divides p! and hence MN/N:5 S/N is a p'-
subgroup of GIN. Since MN/N is permutable in GIN, we see that (MN/N)GI" =
MGN/N is a p'-group and hence MGN/N < S/N. Thus MG < S. This shows that MG
is contained in M<g"> for every prime p and, since, by 2.1.5, the intersection of these
subgroups is M, it follows that M = MG a G.
Permutable subgroups of finite p-groups
The structure of M/MG may be rather complicated even if M is a permutable sub-

group of a finite p-group. That M/MG need not be abelian is shown by Exercise 1.
Papers by Bradway, Gross and Scott [1971], Gross [1971], [1975b], Stonehewer
[1973], [1974], and Berger and Gross [1982] contain examples in which the nil-
potency class, derived length and Frattini length of M/MG are arbitrarily large.
Although all these structural complications, by 5.1.6, have to occur in groups of the
form G = M<x>, these groups at least have a decent power structure.
5.2.8 Theorem (Gross [1971]). Let M be a core free permutable subgroup of the
finite p-group G = MX and suppose that X is cyclic of order p". Then the following
properties hold.
(a) Every X-invariant subgroup of M is trivial.

(b) M n X = 1, S1(X) < Z(G) < X.
(c) S2(G) is elementary abelian.
(d) For r = 1, ..., n, S2,(G) = 0,(M)S2r(X) has exponent p' and is soluble of derived
length at most r; furthermore, the core of MS2,(G)/0,(G) in G/S2r(G) is trivial.
(e) ExpG=p">ExpM.
(f) For p = 2, SI2(G) is abelian and hence S1r(G)/S1r_2(G) is abelian for r >_ 2.
(g) If p = 2 and M 1, then M < S2n_2(G).
Proof. If n = 1, M a G and hence M = 1. Thus G = X is of order p and all the

assertions hold trivially. So assume that n > 2. If H is an X-invariant subgroup of
M, then H G = HXM = HM < M and, since MG = 1, it follows that H = 1. In particu-
lar, M n X = 1 and CG(X) = X(CG(X) n M) = X implies that Z(G) < X. Therefore
CI(X) < Z(G) since Z(G) 1. Thus (a) and (b) hold.
For g e G with o(g) = p, I M< g> : MI is contained in the
atom MSI(X) of the chain [G/M] L(X). It follows that KI(G):!5; M11(X) and so
S2(G) = (M n S)(G))S1(X). Therefore M n 1(G) is of index p in S1(G) and contains
(D(S)(G)), a normal subgroup of G. Since MG = 1, it follows that D(Q(G)) = 1. Thus
S1(G) is elementary abelian and (c) holds. This implies that S1(M) = M n O(G) and
hence 1(G) = S1(M)SI(X). If K/1(G) is the core of M1(G)/S1(G) in G/S1(G), then
IK: M n KI = p since M is a maximal subgroup of MS2(G) = MS1(X). So this time
c(K) is a normal subgroup of G contained in M and is therefore trivial. Thus K
is elementary abelian and hence K = 1(G). This shows that (d) holds for r = 1
Figure 18
and the general assertion follows by induction on r. For, if N = S2(G), then MN/N
is a core-free permutable subgroup of GIN, as we have just shown, and G/N =
(MN/N)(XN/N); since S2(G) is elementary abelian, 1,_,(G/N)=52,(G)1N,
S2,-,(MN/N) = S2,(M)N/N and S2,_,(XN/N) = Sl,(X)N/N. Therefore by induction,
Q, -I (G/N) = S2,(G)/N is of exponent p'-' and soluble of derived length at most r -1,
and hence S2r(G) is of exponent p' and soluble of derived length at most r. Further-
more Q,(G) = 1r(M)N1,(X) = f1,(M)S2r(X) and the core of (MN/N)f2,_,(G/N)/
S2,_, (G/N) in (G/N)/S2,_1 (G/N) is trivial. Thus the core of M1,(G)/f2r(G) in G/S2r(G)
is also trivial and (d) holds.
Since MS2"_, (X) < M1"_, (G) is a maximal subgroup of G, we have MS2"_, (G) 9 G;
on the other hand, by (d), is core-free. It follows that
M12,_1(G)/S2"_1(G) = I and hence M < S2"_,(G). Again by (d), ExpM < pn-' and
G = MX = c2 (M)1"(X) = Q,(G) has exponent p". Thus (e) holds.
To prove (f) and (g), suppose that p = 2 and first note that I12(G) :12(M)I _
A(X)I = 4; let 12(M) < T < 112(G). Then 112(M) g T !!g 12(G) and S22(M) has at
most two conjugates in 12(G), both contained in T. So if 12(M) were not normal in
12(G) and L is the core of S22(M) in S22(G), it would follow that 112(G)/LI = 8 and,
by (11) of 5.1, S22(M)/L = (M n S22(G))/L would be a nonnormal permutable sub-
group of order 2 in f'2(G)/L. But such a group of order 8 does not exist. This shows
that S22(M) a S22(G) and f12(G)/S22(M) is abelian. Therefore S22(G)' is a normal sub-
group of G contained in M and hence is trivial. Thus 112(G) is abelian. By (d),
G/1,_2(G) satisfies the assumptions of the theorem and hence 12(G/f1,-2(G)) =
1.(G)/S2,_2(G) is also abelian. In particular, G/S2n_2(G) is abelian and, by (d),
M1,_2(G)/S2"_2(G) is core-free in this group. It follows that M < S2"_2(G). Thus (f)
and (g) are satisfied.
There is a vast literature on permutable subgroups of finite groups, especially

finite p-groups. We refer the reader to the papers mentioned above and in addition
to Ore [1937], Ito and Szep [1962], Deskins [1963], and Nakamura [1966], [1970],
[1979]. However, most of the results in these papers are not relevant to our pur-
poses. For example, Gross [1971], [1975b] exhibits bounds for the nilpotency class
and derived length of M/MG for a permutable subgroup M of a finite p-group G. But
all these bounds depend on the exponent of G, tend to infinity with Exp G, and are
best possible as is shown by the examples mentioned above. In contrast to this we
shall prove in 6.6.1 that M/MG is metabelian if M is a projective image of a normal
subgroup. For this, the bounds of Gross are clearly not usable. In addition, this
different behaviour of permutable subgroups and of projective images of normal
subgroups shows that the former do not sufficiently approximate the latter. It is
clear that images of normal subgroups under projectivities between p-groups (called
"images" for short) have a number of additional properties, for example:
(4) If M is an image, there exist images M; such that 1 = Mo < . . < Mk = .
and IMi: Mi_,J = pfor i = 1, ..., r.

(5) If M is an image and T is a maximal subgroup of G, then M n T is an image.
(6) If M is an image and A < M is invariant under P(M), for example A = (D(M)
or 1(M), then A is an image.
It would be desirable to use these or similar simple properties to define a class of

subgroups in finite p-groups that lies between the projective images of normal sub-
groups and the permutable subgroups, and to prove that M/MG is metabelian for
any member M of this class. This would suffice to prove the same result for images
of normal subgroups under projectivities between arbitrary groups as we shall see in
Chapter 6. However, such a theory does not exist.
Cyclic permutable subgroups
We want to show that MG/MG is hypercentrally embedded in G if M is a finite cyclic

permutable subgroup of an arbitrary group G. If I M I is a prime, we can say a little
more.
5.2.9 Theorem. Let M be a permutable subgroup of prime order p in the group G and
suppose that M is not normal in G.
(a) Then MG is an elementary abelian p-group.
(b) If x c G has infinite order or finite order prime to p, then x c CG(MG).
(c) MG < N(G) < Z2(G).
(d) MG = M X (MG n Z(G)).
(e) MG n Z(G) n <x> : 1 for every x e G\CG(M).
Proof. (a) Since every conjugate of M is permutable in G, the subgroup <Mx, M''>
has order p or p' and is therefore abelian for all x, y c G. It follows that MG =
<Mxix E G> is abelian and hence elementary abelian as IMI = p.
(b) By 5.1.5 or 5.2.7, x normalizes every conjugate of M. Since M is not normal in
G, there exists y e G\NG(M) such that o(y) = p' for some m e N. Put H = <M, x, y>
and T = M(y). Since MT is normalized by x, we have MT = MH. Furthermore
M < Q (T) a T and IS2(T)J = p2. Since M is not normal in T, it follows that MH =
MT = Q (T) is elementary abelian of order p2 and I MH n <y>l= p. Let N=
MH n <y>. Then y e CH(N) and, since M" has only p + I subgroups of order p, N is
the only subgroup of order p of MH that is normalized by y. The other subgroups of
order p of MH are conjugates of M, and are therefore normalized by x; it follows that
NF = N. Since x e NG(M) and y NG(M), clearly xy 0 NG(M) and hence o(xy) is finite.
Let <z> be the Sylow p-subgroup of (xy>. Then MZ M and hence MH = Mlm,z>
and I MH n <z>I = p as for y. Therefore if L = MH n <z> = MH n <xy>, then
<xy> < CH(L) and so y e NH(L). Since N is the only subgroup of order p of M"
normalized by y, L = N. Thus N is centralized by y and xy and hence also by x. But
x normalizes every subgroup of M" and, by 1.5.4, induces a universal power auto-
morphism in this group. It follows that x e CG(MH) < CG(M). Now x was arbitrary
and hence also x9-' E CG(M), that is, x e CG(Mg) for all g c G. Thus x e CG(MG), as
desired.
(c) If X is a cyclic p-subgroup of G and g c G such that M9 $ X, then I M9X I _
p 1 X I and hence Mg < NG(X). Thus M and its conjugates normalize every cyclic
p-subgroup and centralize every element of infinite order and of finite order prime to
p. It follows that MG is contained in the norm N(G) of G and, by 1.5.3, N(G) < Z2(G).
(d) By (c), Z(G) < MZ(G) < Z2(G) and hence MZ(G) a G; it follows that
MG < MZ(G). Then Dedekind's law shows that MG = M(MG n Z(G)) and, since
M Z(G), the product is direct.
(e) Let X = <x>. Since MG normalizes every subgroup of G, 10 [M, X] < MG n X.
Therefore if MG n Z(G) n X = 1, it would follow that
M< MG = (MG n Z(G))(MG n X) < CG(X),
a contradiction. Thus MG n Z(G) n X 0 1, as desired.
To prove the result announced above we have to show first that every subgroup
of a cyclic permutable subgroup is permutable in G. For this we need the following.
5.2.10 Lemma. Let K < H be permutable subgroups of the p-group G. If [H/K] is a

finite chain and K < M < H, then M is permutable in G.
Proof. We use induction on the length of the chain [H/K] and have to show that
X M = MX for every cyclic subgroup X of G. This is clear if M = H, so assume that
M < H. If M< KX, then XM = XKM = KXM = KX = MKX = MX. So sup-
pose that M KX and hence KX < HX. Since [H/K] is a finite chain, there exists
g E G such that H = K(g>, and it follows that IH : KI = I(g>: (g) n KI and
I HX : HI = J X: X n HI are finite. Then I HX : KI is also finite, thus HX/KHX is a
finite p-group and hence there exists a normal subgroup T of index p in HX contain-
ing KX. Then KS H n T< H and J H: H rn TI = I HT : TI = I HX : TI = p. Since
[H/K] is a chain, it follows that M < H n T and (11) of 5.1 yields that H n T and
K are permutable subgroups of T By induction, M is permutable in T and hence
XM=MX.
It is not difficult to show that the above lemma holds for arbitrary groups G; for
a still more general result see Exercise 6.
5.2.11 Lemma. If M is a cyclic permutable subgroup of the group G, then every

subgroup of M is permutable in G.
Proof. Let 1 H S M and assume first that G is finite. Let p be a prime dividing
I HI, P E Sylp(H) and Sc Sylp(M). Then P < S and S is permutable in G by 5.1.10.
Therefore, if X is a subgroup of prime power order q" of G and p q, then, by 5.1.5,
S a SX and hence P a SX; also if p = q, then SX is a p-group and P per SX by
5.2.10. In both cases, PX = XP. Thus P is permutable in G and, since this holds for
every prime dividing IHI, it follows that H is permutable in G.
Now let G be arbitrary and take x e G. We have to show that (x>H = H(x>. If
x e NG(M), then also x c NG(H) and we are done; so let x 0 NG(M) and consider
L = M(x). By 5.2.7, I L : MI = o(x, M) is finite, hence IL: HI is also finite and so,
finally, L/HL is a finite group. Then H/HL permutes with (x>HL/HL, as we have just
shown, and it follows that (x>H = <x>HLH = H(x>HL = HHL(x> = H(x>.
5.2.12 Theorem (Busetto [1980b]). Let M be a finite cyclic permutable subgroup of

the group G and suppose that MG = 1; let I M I = pi' ... p; be the prime factor decom-
position of I M I and put n = max{ri;Ii = 1,...,r}. Then MG < Zzn(G).
Proof. By 5.2.11, the Sylow subgroups of M are permutable in G and, clearly, MG is

the product of their normal closures. Therefore we may assume that M is a p-group.
Then I M I = p" and we show by induction on n that MG is a p-group of exponent p"
and is contained in Zzn(G). If n = 1, this is true by 5.2.9. So assume that n > 2 and
the assertion holds for n - l; let N = S2n_1(M)G . Again by 5.2.11, S2"_1(M) is per-
mutable in G and the induction assumption yields that N < Z2n_2(G) and Exp N =
p"-'. Since M, = 1 and [M/1] is a chain, there exists x e G such that M n M" = 1.
By 5.2.7 and 5.1.5, M is normalized by elements of infinite order or finite order prime
to p; therefore we may choose x as a p-element. Then H = M<x> is a finite p-group
and M. = 1. By 5.2.8, On_1(H) = Qn_1(M)S2n_1(<x>) has order at most p2n-z; on the
other hand, S2n_1(M)S2n_1(Mx) is contained in f2,-,(H) and has this order since
M n Mx = 1. Thus n,,-,(H) = Qn_1(M)(2n_1(Mx) < N n H and, since Exp N = pn '
we obtain S2n_1(H) = N n H. Now (d) of 5.2.8 shows that MN n H = M(N n H) =
MS2n_1(H) is not normal in H and hence MN/N is a nonnormal permutable sub-
group of order p in GIN. By 5.2.9, (MN/N)GI" = MG IN is elementary abelian
and MG IN < Z2(G/N). It follows that Exp G = p" and, as N < Z2 _2(G), that
MG < Zzn(G)
Metacyclic p-groups
A group G is called metacyclic if it has a normal subgroup N such that N and G/N
are cyclic. For p-groups a seemingly weaker condition suffices.
5.2.13 Theorem. The p-group G is metacyclic if and only if it is the product of two
cyclic subgroups one of which is permutable in G.
Proof. If G is metacyclic, it is the product of a cyclic normal subgroup and a cyclic

supplement. So assume that, conversely, G satisfies the condition of the theorem.
Then, as a product of two cyclic p-groups, G is finite and we use induction on I G I to
show that G is metacyclic. First of all we note that the assumption on G is equivalent
to the following condition.
(7) There exists a modular subgroup M of G such that [G/M] and [M/1] are
chains.
For, since G is a p-group, a cyclic permutable subgroup M with cyclic supplement
clearly satisfies (7); and if (7) holds and g e G is not contained in the maximal sub-
group of G containing M, then G = M<g>, M is permutable in G and M is cyclic.
Now (1), (2) and (3) of 5.1 immediately show that property (7) is inherited by
subgroups and factor groups; for, if (7) holds and H < G or N 9 G, then M n H and
MN/N satisfy (7) in H and GIN, respectively. Therefore, by induction,
(8) proper subgroups and factor groups of G are metacyclic.
We show next that we may assume that IG'I = p. If G' = 1, then G is clearly meta-
cyclic. So assume that G' 1 and let N be a normal subgroup of order p contained
in G'. By (8), GIN is metacyclic; let K/N a GIN such that KIN and G/K are cyclic
and let t e K such that K = N<t). If K is cyclic, we are done; so assume that K is
not cyclic. Then N (t) and hence K = N x <t> since N < Z(G). If L = N(tP) =
NO(K) is the maximal subgroup of K containing N, then K/L < Z(G/L) and G/K is
cyclic. It follows that GIL is abelian and hence N < G' < L = N t (K). Thus
(9) G' = N x (G' n (D(K)).
Suppose, for a contradiction, that G' n s(K) : 1. Then the minimal subgroup N, of
this cyclic normal subgroup is normal in G and G'/N, is cyclic as in the case of N. It
follows that IG' n b(K)I = p and hence G' < Z(G). It is well-known (see Huppert
[1967], p. 258) that for a group G generated by two elements, G'/[G', G] is cyclic;
in our case, [G', G] = I and G' = N x Ni is not cyclic, a contradiction. Thus
G' n D(K) = I and by (9),
(10) IG'I = p.
Since G is generated by two elements, GIG' = (aG') x <bG') for suitable a, b e G.
Let o(aG') = p" and o(bG') = p'. If aP" : 1, it generates G' and <a> > G' is a cyclic
normal subgroup of G with cyclic factor group. Thus G is metacyclic and we are
done. So assume that aP" = 1 and, similarly, b"" = 1. We want to show that then
n = 1 = m. Suppose that in fact n > 1. Of course, [a, b] = c is a generator of G'
and, since G' < Z(G), we have [aP, b] = [a, b]P = 1 = [a, bP]. Thus H = (aP, b, c) is
abelian and metacyclic by (8). Hence If)(H)I < p2 and since <aP"-'> and (c) are
different minimal subgroups of H, it follows that b""' ' e SI(H) = <aP"-', c). In partic-
ular, b""' ' e <a>G'; but b has order p' modulo <a)G'. This contradiction shows that
n = 1. In exactly the same way we get that m = 1 and hence I G I = p'. Since G is the
product of two cyclic groups, one of these must have order at least p2 and is then a
cyclic normal subgroup with cyclic factor group. Thus G is metacyclic.
5.2.14 Corollary (Napolitani and Zacher [1983]). The p-group G is a metacyclic

M-group if and only if it is the product of two cyclic subgroups which are both
permutable subgroups of G.
Proof. If G is a metacyclic M-group, every subgroup is permutable in G and hence

G is a product of two cyclic permutable subgroups. Conversely, let G = AB where A
and B are cyclic permutable subgroups of G. By 5.2.13, G is metacyclic; let N g G
such that N = (x) and GIN are cyclic. Since G = AB and GIN is cyclic, G = NA or
G = NB; say that G = NB and let B = . Then, by 2.3.4, G is an M-group except
when p = 2, INS > 4 and N/<x4) is not centralized by b. In this case, T = <x4, b2) g G,
G/T would be dihedral of order 8 and BT/T would be a nonnormal permutable
subgroup of order 2 in G/T. But such a subgroup does not exist in a dihedral group.
Thus G is an M-group.
We can regard Theorem 5.2.13 as a lattice-theoretic characterization of the class

of metacyclic p-groups within the class of all finite p-groups; this restriction, of
course, is needed since the metacyclic, noncyclic group of order p2 is lattice-

isomorphic to the nonabelian group of order pq for any prime q dividing p - 1. The
lattice-theoretic property (7) appearing in the proof of Theorem 5.2.13, that there
exists a modular subgroup M of G such that [G/M] and [M/1] are chains, charac-
terizes in the class of finite groups those groups G which possess a normal subgroup
N such that N and GIN are cyclic of prime power order (see Exercise 7). Finally, we
remark that the class of finite metacyclic groups is not invariant under projectivities
(see Exercise 8).
Exercises
1. (Thompson [1967], Nakamura [1968]) Let p > 2 and A = <a0,...,aP> be an

elementary abelian group of order pP+l
(a) Show that there exists an extension H = A<x> of A by a cyclic group (x>
satisfying x"2 = ao, x-'aox = ao and x-la;x = a;a;_, for i = 1, ..., p.
(b) Show that there exists an extension G = H(y> of H by a cyclic group <y>
satisfying yP = al', y-'apy = a,ai 1, y-'a;y = ai for i = 0, ..., p - 1 and
y-1xy = x1+p.
(c) Show that M = <y, a2, ..., ap> is a core-free nonabelian permutable subgroup
of G.
2. (Nakamura [1979]) If G = MX is a finite p-group, M permutable in G and X
cyclic, show that there exists a permutable subgroup H of order p of G such that
H < Z(M).
3. (Gross [1971]) If G = MX is a finite p-group, M a core-free permutable subgroup
of G and X cyclic, show that the nilpotency class of 02(G) is at most p - 1
(compare with 5.2.8 (f)).
4. (Gross [1971]) Suppose that G = MX is a finite p-group, M a core-free per-
mutable subgroup of G and X cyclic of order p", n > 2.
(a) Show that IS2(G)l < p' where m = pn-2(p - 1).
(b) Show that the nilpotency class of G is at most pn-1 - 1.
5. Prove properties (4)-(6).
6. (Busetto [1980b]) Let H and K be permutable subgroups of the group G and
suppose that there exists g c G such that H = K(g). Show that every subgroup
M of G such that K < M < H is permutable in G.
7. Show that a finite group G contains a normal subgroup N such that N and GIN
are cyclic of prime power order if and only if L(G) contains a modular element M
such that [G/M] and [M/1] are chains.
8. Let p and q be primes such that 2 < q I p - 1, and let G = NH and G = NK where
INS = p, H is the abelian and K the nonabelian group of order q3 and exponent
q2, CH(N) = S2(H) and CK(N) = S2(K). Show that
(a) G and G are lattice-isomorphic,
(b) G is metacyclic, but 6 is not.
5.3 Lattice-theoretic characterizations of classes of finite groups

A rather natural way of obtaining a lattice-theoretic characterization of a class of
groups is to replace concepts appearing in the definition by lattice-theoretic con-
cepts that are equivalent to them or nearly so. For example, we should try to replace
"normal subgroup" by "modular subgroup", "cyclic factor group" by "distributive
interval in the subgroup lattice", "abelian factor group" by "modular interval in the
subgroup lattice", and so on.
We shall show that this method indeed yields lattice-theoretic characterizations
for the classes of simple, perfect, soluble and supersoluble finite groups; and we shall
use this idea for many other lattice-theoretic characterizations. For the first three
classes we only need Lemma 5.1.2 on maximal modular subgroups; in the case of
supersoluble groups we shall use 5.2.5, but we remark that it is possible to give a
more elementary proof using 5.1.4 and 5.2.3 instead (see Exercise 1). We remark
further that in 6.4 we shall extend nearly all these results to infinite groups. Finally,
we shall present Iwasawa's characterization of finite supersoluble groups and discuss
certain classes of groups that are related to nilpotent groups, the most interesting
being the class of groups with lower semimodular subgroup lattice.
Simple groups
5.3.1 Theorem. The finite group G is simple if and only if I and G are the only
modular elements in L(G).
Proof. If 1 and G are the only modular elements in L(G), then G in particular has no
proper nontrivial normal subgroup, that is, G is simple. Conversely, let G be simple
and suppose, for a contradiction, that there exists a modular element in L(G) differ-
ent from I and G. Then there also exists a nontrivial maximal modular subgroup M
in G and, by 5.1.2, M a G or G/Mc is nonabelian of order pq with primes p and q. In
both cases, G is not simple, a contradiction.
Since projectivities map modular subgroups onto modular subgroups, Theorem

5.3.1 has the following immediate consequence.
5.3.2 Corollary (Suzuki [1951a]). If G is a finite simple group and cp is a projectivity

from G to a group G, then G is simple.
Perfect groups
Recall that a group is perfect if it coincides with its commutator subgroup. For
finite groups, an equivalent condition is that no maximal subgroup is normal.
To this definition we can apply the method described at the beginning of this
section.
5.3 Lattice-theoretic characterizations of classes of finite groups 229
5.3.3 Theorem. The finite group G is perfect if and only if no maximal subgroup of G
is modular in G.
Proof. If no maximal subgroup of G is modular in G, then, clearly, no maximal

subgroup of G is normal, that is, G is perfect. Conversely, let G be perfect and
suppose, for a contradiction, that there exists a maximal subgroup M of G that is
modular in G. Then again by 5.1.2, M a G or G/Mc is nonabelian of order pq with
primes p and q. In both cases there exists a normal subgroup of prime index in G,
and this contradicts the assumption that G is perfect.
Using 5.2.6, we again obtain as a corollary an older result of Suzuki's.
5.3.4 Theorem (Suzuki [1951a]). If G is a finite perfect group and pp a projectivity

from G to a group G, then G is perfect, cp induces an isomorphism from the lattice of
normal subgroups of G to that of G, and Z (G)" = Z.(6) for all n e N.
Proof. By 5.3.3, G is perfect. If N a G, then N'' is a modular subgroup of G and

hence N" a G by 5.2.6. Similarly, preimages of normal subgroups of G are normal
in G so that qp induces an isomorphism from 9t(G) to 9t(G). Finally, let P e Syl,,(Z(G))
for some prime p. Then [P, G] = 1 and, since O"(G) = G, 1.6.8 yields [Pp, G] = 1,
that is, P" < Z(G). It follows that Z(G)4' < Z(G) and this statement for cp-1 yields the
other inclusion. Thus Z(G)" = Z(G) and, since G/Z(G) is perfect, a trivial induction
yields that ZZ(G)4' = Z,(6) for all n e N.
Soluble groups
There are many ways of defining solubility and some of them are suitable for appli-
cation of the method described at the beginning of this section. We present three
lattice-theoretic characterizations of the class of finite soluble groups obtained this
way.
5.3.5 Theorem (Schmidt [1968]). The following properties of the finite group G are
equivalent.
(a) G is soluble.
(b) There are subgroups G; of G such that I = Go < < Gr = G, G. is modular in
G and [G;+1 /G] is modular (i = 0, ... , r - 1).
(c) There are subgroups G. of G such that 1 = Go < < GS = G, G is modular in
Gi+1 and [Gi+1 /G] is modular (i = 0, ... , s - 1).
(d) There are subgroups G of G such that 1 = Go < ... < G, = G, G. is maximal
and modular in G1+1 (i = 0,..., t - 1).
Proof. That (a) implies (b) is clear since, by 2.1.3 and 2.1.4, the members G; of a chief
series of the soluble group G have the desired properties. Trivially, (b) implies (c) and
(4) of 5.1 shows that if (c) holds, then every subgroup between G and Gi+1 is
modular in Gi+1, so that every maximal chain in L(G) containing all the G. has the
properties required in (d). Finally, we prove by induction on I G I that (d) implies (a).
The induction assumption yields that M = Gt_1 is soluble and, by 5.1.2, either M a G
and G/M is cyclic of prime order or IG/MGI = pq with primes p and q. In both
cases, MG and G/MG are soluble and hence G is soluble.
The above theorem yields a second proof of the fact that the class of finite soluble
groups is invariant under projectivities; in 4.3.4 we used Suzuki's results on singular
projectivities to prove this. Another lattice-theoretic characterization of the class of
finite soluble groups was given by Suzuki [1956]. He proved that the finite group G
is soluble if and only if there exists a maximal chain 1 = Go 5 < G, = G of
subgroups Gi invariant under P(G) such that [Gi+1/Gi] is modular for all i =
0, ,r- 1.
Recall that in every finite group G there exist the soluble residual Ga and the
soluble radical G a. The residual is defined as the intersection of all the normal
subgroups with soluble factor group and is therefore the smallest normal subgroup
of G with soluble factor group; the radical is the product of all the soluble normal
subgroups and hence is the largest soluble normal subgroup of G. Let R = Ga. Then
R' is a normal subgroup of G with soluble factor group and hence R = R', that is, R
is perfect. On the other hand, if H is any subgroup of G, then R n H a H and
H/R n H HR/R is soluble. It follows that every perfect subgroup of G is contained
in R. Thus
(1) Ga is the largest perfect subgroup of G.
Now let T = G `. Then if M is a maximal soluble subgroup of G, TM/T ^ M/M n T
is soluble, hence TM is soluble and the maximality of M implies that TM = M.
Thus T is contained in every maximal soluble subgroup of G and, since the intersec-
tion of all these clearly is a soluble normal subgroup of G,
(2) G a is the intersection of all the maximal soluble subgroups of G.
By 5.3.3 and 5.3.5, we can detect perfect and soluble subgroups in the subgroup
lattice of G. Thus (1) and (2) yield lattice-theoretic characterizations of the soluble
residual and the soluble radical in finite groups. We only note the usual corollary.
5.3.6 Theorem (Suzuki [1951a]). If q is a projectivity from the finite group G to a

group G, then (Ga)4' = G: and (G)` = G`.
Supersoluble groups
The finite supersoluble groups can be characterized like the soluble groups.
5.3.7 Theorem (Schmidt [1968]). The following properties of the finite group G are
equivalent.
(a) G is supersoluble.
(b) There are subgroups Gi of G such that 1 = Go < < G, = G, G. is modular in
G and [Gi+1 /G] is distributive (i = 0, ... , r - 1).
(c) There are subgroups G. of G such that 1 = Go < < G., = G, G; is modular in
G and maximal in Gi+1 (i = 0, ... , s - 1).
Proof. That (a) implies (c) is clear since the members Gi of a chief series of the
supersoluble group G have the desired properties. And (c) implies (b) since every
interval [Gi+1/G;] in (c) is a chain and hence is distributive. We prove by induction
on I G I that (b) implies (a). The property (b) is inherited by factor groups GIN; for
NG;/N is modular in GIN and (1) of 5.1 shows that
[(NGi+i/N)/(NG1/N)] ^' [NG,G1+i/NGi] ^-' [Gi+i/G;+i n NGi]
is an interval in [G;+,/Gi] and is therefore distributive. We may assume that

1 = Go < G, = M. Then M is modular in G and L(M) ^- [Gl/Go] is distributive. By
1.2.4, M is cyclic; in particular, MG is cyclic. By 5.2.5, MG/MG is hypercyclically
embedded in G and, since MG 1, the induction assumption yields that G/MG is
supersoluble. Thus MG, MG/MG and G/MG all are hypercyclically embedded in G,
and (b) of 5.2.1 shows that G is supersoluble.
5.3.8 Corollary. If G is a finite supersoluble group and cp is a projectivity from G to

a group G, then G is supersoluble.
The first lattice-theoretic characterization of the class of finite supersoluble groups

was given by Iwasawa. If G is supersoluble, it is easy to prove by induction on I GI
that every maximal subgroup M of G has prime index in G. This is clear if MG 0 1;
for then M/MG is a maximal subgroup of the supersoluble group G/MG of smaller
order than IGI. And if MG = I and N is a minimal normal subgroup of G, then
MN = G and IG: MI = INS is a prime. Since every subgroup of G is supersoluble it
follows that for every pair of subgroups K < H of G, the length of a maximal chain
in L(G) from K to H is the number of prime divisors of I H : K 1, including multiplici-
ties. Thus L(G) satisfies the Jordan-Dedekind chain condition and this is Iwasawa's
characterization.
5.3.9 Theorem (Iwasawa [1941]). A finite group is supersoluble if and only if its
subgroup lattice satisfies the Jordan-Dedekind chain condition.
Proof. It remains to be shown that a finite group G satisfying the Jordan-Dedekind

chain condition is supersoluble. We use induction on IGI. Then every proper sub-
group of G is supersoluble and, by a theorem of Huppert's (see Robinson [1982], p.
287), G is soluble. Therefore a composition series of G is a maximal chain in L(G) and
its length is the number d of prime divisors of I G1. If M is a maximal subgroup of G,
the Jordan-Dedekind chain condition implies that L(M) has length d - 1 and, since
M is supersoluble, M I has d - I prime divisors. It follows that I G: MI is a prime
and, by another well-known theorem of Huppert's (see Robinson [1982], p. 268), G
is supersoluble.
We remark that Iwasawa's theorem (and the above proof) by now can be found
in many textbooks on group theory; see, for example, Robinson [1982], p. 288 or
Huppert [1967], p. 719. Huppert's theorem, used to show that G is soluble, depends
on Gran's Second Theorem or a similar transfer argument. The reader can find a
direct proof of Iwasawa's theorem, using only Gran's Second Theorem, in Suzuki
[ 1956], p. 9.
Finally we mention that Berkovic [1966] and Fort [1978] study finite groups in
which for every 1 : H < G the interval [G/H] satisfies the Jordan-Dedekind chain
condition. Both authors determine the structure of soluble groups with this property
(see Exercise 4); using the classification of minimal simple groups, Fort, in addition,
shows that any group with this property is soluble.
Groups with semimodular subgroup lattice
For the class of finite nilpotent groups, our method of obtaining lattice-theoretic
characterizations does not work: the P-groups show that this class is not invariant
under projectivities. Nevertheless it is interesting to examine the properties that
emerge if we apply the usual process to a given characterization of nilpotency. The
most suitable one for our purpose is Wielandt's well-known theorem which asserts
that a finite group is nilpotent if and only if every maximal subgroup is normal.
Using this, we get the following class of groups.
5.3.10 Theorem (Schmidt [1970b]). Every maximal subgroup of the finite group G is
modular in G if and only if G is supersoluble and induces an automorphism group of at
most prime order in every complemented chief factor of G.
Proof. Suppose first that every maximal subgroup M of G is modular in G. Then it

follows from 5.1.2 that IG : MI is a prime and, by Huppert's theorem (see Robinson
[1982], p. 268), G is supersoluble. Let H/K be a complemented chief factor of G; we
have to show that IG: C,(H/K)I is a prime or 1. Since H/K is complemented, there
exists M<Gsuch that G=HM and HnM=K.Then JG:MI =JH:KI=pisa
prime and hence M is a maximal subgroup of G. By 5.1.2, M:9 G or I G : MGI = pq
for some prime q p. In both cases, HMG < CG(H/K) and thus IG : Cc(H/K)I is q
or 1.
Conversely, suppose that G satisfies the conditions of the theorem and take a
maximal subgroup M of G; we have to show that M mod G. If M a G, we are done;
so assume that M is not normal in G. Then G/MG is a primitive soluble group and
therefore (see Robinson [1982], p. 192) contains a minimal normal subgroup N/MG
such that N = CG(N/MG). Since G is supersoluble, I N/MGI = p is a prime and, since
N $ M, M/Mo is a complement to N/MG in G/MG. Thus N/Mo is a complemented
chief factor of G and our assumption yields that I G: NJ = I G : CG(N/MG)I = q is a
prime. Thus IG/MGI = pq and hence G/MG has modular subgroup lattice. By (4) of
5.1, M is modular in G.
A condition that appears to be slightly stronger than Wielandt's is that every

maximal subgroup of every subgroup H of G is normal in H. This clearly is also
equivalent to nilpotency and, if we translate this, we get the condition that every
maximal subgroup of every subgroup H of G is modular in H. By 2.1.5, a maximal
subgroup M of H is modular in H if and only if for every K:< H such that M u K = H,
M n K is maximal in K. This shows that our condition is equivalent to the follow-
ing: if K, M < G and M is maximal in M u K, then M n K is maximal in K. This is
equivalent to L(G) being lower semimodular as defined in 2.1. These groups were
characterized by Ito; they are still closer to nilpotent groups than those in Theorem
5.3.10.
5.3.11 Theorem (Ito [1951]). The subgroup lattice of the finite group G is lower
semimodular if and only if G is supersoluble and induces an automorphism group of at
most prime order in every chief factor of G.
Proof. Suppose first that L(G) is lower semimodular. Then by 5.3.10 or Iwasawa's
theorem, G is supersoluble. Let H/K be a chief factor of G; we have to show that
IG : CG(H/K)l is a prime or 1 and may assume that K = 1. Then JHI = p is a prime.
Since G is soluble, there exists a Hall p'-subgroup Q in G. Then every maximal
subgroup of HQ is modular in HQ and H is a complemented chief factor in HQ. By
5.3.10, GHQ: CQ(H)I q or divides
G is a of P.
It follows that IG : CG(H)I divides q, as desired.
Conversely, suppose that G is supersoluble and IG : CG(H/K)I is a prime or I for
every chief factor H/K of G. Let S < G and take a chief series 1 = Go < < G, = G
of G. Then for every i, S n Gi a S and IS n G; : S n G;_, I divides I G; : G;_, I e P. By
the Jordan-Holder Theorem, every chief factor of S is isomorphic to one of the
S n G;/S n G;_, Now CG(GI/Gi_1) n S centralizes S n G;/S n Gi_1 and has index in S
.
equal to 1 or a prime. Thus S satisfies the conditions of the theorem, in particular

those of Theorem 5.3.10. It follows that every maximal subgroup of S is modular in
S and L(G) is lower semimodular.
It is easy to see that the two classes of groups in Theorems 5.3.10 and 5.3.11 are
different (see Exercise 5). An immediate consequence of 5.3.11 is the following result
which is a little surprising.
5.3.12 Corollary. If H and K are finite groups with lower semimodular subgroup
lattice, then so is their direct product H x K.
Finite groups with upper semimodular subgroup lattice are less important since
there is no related class of groups which is significant from the group-theoretic point
of view. The structure of these groups was determined by Sato, who also studied
infinite groups with this property; see Suzuki [1956], pp. 24-26.
We shall give lattice-theoretic characterizations of certain classes of infinite nil-
potent groups in 7.2-7.4. However, not much is known about infinite groups
which satisfy the Jordan-Dedekind chain condition or have lower semimodular
subgroup lattice.
Exercises
1. Use 5.1.4 and 5.2.3 instead of 5.2.5 to prove Theorem 5.3.7. (Hint: In a minimal
counterexample to the implication (b) (a) there is exactly one minimal normal
subgroup N, and GIN is supersoluble; furthermore, (G1)G = 1 for G1 > Go. If M
is maximal with respect to the properties G1 < M mod G and MG = 1, show the
following:
(a) M < NM < D(M) = n {M u M"jx E G\NG(M)} and [D(M)/M] is a chain;
let F be the atom of this chain.
(b) If M a F, then M per G; by 5.2.3, INI is a prime.
(c) If M is not normal in F, then NM = D(M) = MG is a nonabelian group of
order pq (p, q c P) and hence again IN I is a prime.)
2. Let us call a lattice L polymodular if it contains a least element 0, a greatest
element I and elements a, such that 0 = ao < < a, = I, ai is modular in L and
[ai/ai_1 ] is modular (i = 1, ... , r). If G is a finite group, show that
(a) G` is the largest modular subgroup of G with polymodular subgroup lattice
and
(b) Gs is the smallest modular subgroup M of G with polymodular factor inter-
val [G/M].
3. Let us say that the element a of the lattice L with least element 0 is polymodular
in L if there exist a1 E L such that 0 = ao < < a, = a, ai is modular in L and
ai_ 1 is maximal in ai (i = 1, ... , r). For a finite group G, let T(G) be the largest
hypercyclically embedded normal subgroup of G, and G= the supersoluble resid-
ual, the smallest normal subgroup of G with supersoluble factor group; by 5.2.1,
these subgroups exist. Show that
(a) T(G) is the largest polymodular element of L(G) and
(b) GI is the smallest modular subgroup M of G for which G is polymodular in
[G/M].
It follows that T(G)" = T(G) and (GI)` = GI for any projectivity q from G to a
group G.
4. (Berkovic [1966], Fort [1978]) Let G be a finite soluble group. Show that [G/H]
satisfies the Jordan-Dedekind chain condition for every nontrivial subgroup H of
G if and only if G is either supersoluble or is a semidirect product of an elemen-
tary abelian group N by a cyclic group K of odd order such that every nontrivial
subgroup of K operates irreducibly on N.
5. Let p, q, r be primes such that q r and qr1 p - I and let 0 < s, t be the nonabelian group of order p3 and exponent p and define a E Aut P by
(cib.akk) = cisbitakst (0 < i, j, k < p). Show that every maximal subgroup of the
semidirect product G of P and <a> is modular in G, but that L(G) is not lower
semimodular.
6. (Venzke [1972]) Show that every subgroup of a finite group G is maximal sensi-
tive in G (for the definition see 3.3, Further Topics) if and only if G is isomorphic
to a subgroup of a direct product S1 x x S, of P-groups Si E P(ni, pi) such that
pi0p;fori0j.
5.4 Projective images of normal subgroups of finite groups 235
7. (Venzke [1975]) If M r N is maximal in M (and in N) for any two different

maximal subgroups M and N of the finite group G, show that every maximal
subgroup of G is modular in G. (Hint: In a minimal counterexample G choose a
maximal subgroup M of minimal order which is not modular in G. If G is not
soluble, use the Feit-Thompson Theorem to get an involution t e G such that
G = <M, t>; show that (M r M`)<t> is a maximal subgroup of G and hence is
modular in G.)
5.4 Projective images of normal subgroups of finite groups

In the next two sections and in 6.5 and 6.6 we shall study images of normal
subgroups N of a group G under projectivities cp from G to groups G. We want to
show that N is near to being normal in G. The main result of this section, Theorem
5.4.7, will reduce this problem for finite groups to the case that N is permutable in
G. Together with the results of 5.2 this will yield a number of useful criteria for N
to be normal in G. In the course of our analysis we shall very often have to consider
the core or the normal closure of N` and the preimages of these subgroups. There-
fore it is worthwhile introducing the following general notation for arbitrary groups.
5.4.1 Notation. If p is a projectivity from G to G, H < G and x E G, we put H = H"

and denote the preimages of the core and the normal closure of H` in G by Hz; and
HG, respectively, that is,
Hz; = ((HI)G-)'-' = (Hz;)'P-` and Ho = ((Hc)G)p 1 _ (HG)p
furthermore, as in Chapter 4, we shall write H'"`-' = ((HP)")v
Minimal normal subgroups
It seems reasonable to start our investigations with minimal normal subgroups. We

shall show that these are mapped to minimal normal subgroups if they are not cyclic
and we begin with the cyclic case.
5.4.2 Lemma. Let p be a prime, G a finite p-group and cp a projectivity from G to a

group G. _
(a) Then there exists a normal subgroup Z of order p in G such that Z`1 a G.
(b) If N is a minimal normal subgroup of G, then NG < Q(Z(G)).
Proof. If G is not a p-group, then, by 2.2.6, G and G are cyclic or P-groups and both
assertions of the lemma hold trivially. So we may assume that G is a p-group.
(a) Suppose, for a contradiction, that there is no minimal normal subgroup Z of
G_such that 2:9 G. Let N be a minimal normal subgroup of G and M < G such that
M is a minimal normal subgroup of G. Then N and M are nonnormal permutable
subgroups of order p in Gand G, respectively. Let x c G\CG(M). By (e) of 5.2.9,

Z(G) n <x) 0 1. If also Z(G) n <x)" 1, then Z = S2(<x)) < Z(G) and 2< Z(G);
butt we assume that such a normal subgroup does not exist. Therefore
Z(G) n <x)4' = 1, and (e) of 5.2.9 now shows that <x)` < CU(N). Since G is generated
by the elements x E G\CG(M), G is generated by these <x)4' and it follows that
N < Z(G). This contradiction proves (a).
(b) Let G be a minimal counterexample and N a minimal normal subgroup of G
such that H = NG is not contained in S (Z(G)). Then H N and hence again Nis a
nonnormal permutable subgroup of order p in G. By 5.2.9, H = N x (H n Z(G)) is
elementary abelian. Since N < Z(G) and H Z(G), there exists a subgroup M of
order p in (H n Z(G))"-' that is not contained in Z(G). Therefore M is a nonnormal
permutable subgroup of order p in G. Finally, by (a) there exists a normal subgroup
Z of order p in G such that Z:9 G. Then M Z N and the minimality of G
implies that the preimage LIZ of the normal closure of (NZ)"/Z in G/Z with respect
to the projectivity induced by qp in G/Z lies in the centre of G/Z. Since N < L 9 G,
we have H <_ L and hence Z < MZ < L. Thus MZ a G and, since M is not normal
in G, it follows that MZ = MG and MG n Z(G) = Z. For x e G\CG(M), again by (e)
of 5.2.9, 1 0 MG n Z(G) n <x) = Z n <x> and hence Z < <x>. Then Z 0 N < Z(G)
implies that N<x) = N x <x> and f (N<x)) = NZ. Since cp is a projectivity,
(NZ) = (f)(N<x>)) = c2((N<x>)') 9 (N<x))',
that is, <x)` normalizes (NZ)P. Now G is generated by these x e G\CG(M) and it
follows that (NZ)O a G. But then H = NZ < S2(Z(G)), a contradiction.
We need the following simple result on projective images of hypercentrally em-

bedded normal p-subgroups.
5.4.3 Lemma. Let cp be a projectivity from the finite group G to a group G and
suppose that H < G such that H is a normal p-subgroup of G which is hypercentrally
embedded in G but not contained in the centre of G.
(a) If P` e Sylp(G), then P is a p-subgroup of G containing H and G = P U CG(H).
(b) If H 9 G, then H is hypercentrally embedded in G.
Proof. Clearly, G = POP(G) and H< P since H is a normal p-subgroup of G. By

5.2.2, [H, OP(G)] = 1. Since H $ Z(G), P is not abelian and hence P is a p-group
by 2.2.6. Furthermore, 1.6.8 yields that [H,OP(G)'P-'] = I and it follows that G =
P U CG(H). Finally, if H 9 G, then H < P is a normal p-subgroup of G and
G/CG(H) ^- P/P n CG(H) is a p-group. By 5.2.2, H is hypercentrally embedded
in G.
5.4.4 Theorem (Schmidt [1975a]). Let N be a minimal normal subgroup of the finite
group G and suppose that cp is aprojectivity from G to a group G such that N' is not
a minimal normal subgroup of G. Then N is cyclic of prime order p and for S = NG,
one of the following two assertions holds:
(a) S and S` are P-groups in P(n, p) for some n c- N and there exists T < G such that
G = S x T,G=S` x Tànd(ISI,ITI)= I =(IS"I,ITÌ);
(b) S and S' are elementary abelian p-groups, furthermore S < Z(G) and
S` = N' x (S` n Z(G)) < Z2(G).
Proof. Suppose, for a contradiction, that there exists a subgroup M of G such that
I < M < N and M :!g G. Then M is modular in G and, since N is a minimal normal
subgroup, MG = N and MG = 1. By 5.2.5, N is hypercyclically embedded in G and
hence INI is a prime, contradicting 1 < M < N. Thus there is no normal subgroup
of G lying properly between l and N. In particular, if N:9 G, then N would be a
minimal normal subgroup of G, contradicting our assumption. It follows that N is
not normal in G and NG = 1.
By 5.1.7, N is nilpotent and hence N is a soluble minimal normal subgroup of G.
Thus N is an elementary abelian p-group and, by 2.2.6, its nilpotent projective image
N is a q-group for primes p and q. By 5.1.9 (or 5.1.14), either N is permutable in G or
S is a P-group and G = S x T where (ISI, I TI) = 1. In the latter case, I NI = q, hence
N is cyclic of prime order p and, by 1.6.6, G = S x T where (I S I, I TI) = 1. By 2.2.5, S
and S lie in the same class P(n, r) and, since N is a normal subgroup of order p in S,
r = p. Thus (a) holds. _
Now suppose that N is permutable in G. As a product of q-groups, S is a normal
q-subgroup of G and is hypercentrally embedded in G by 5.2.3. Then 5.2.2 shows that
G/CA(S) is a q-group and hence G= PCG(S) for some P E Sylq(G). Furthermore
S Z(G) since N is not normal in G. By 5.4.3, P is a q-subgroup of G containing S,
hence p = q as N < S, and G = P u CG(S). Therefore 1 : Z(P) n N < Z(G) and,
since N is a minimal normal subgroup of_G, it follows that N is cyclic of order p.
Now G = CU(S)P implies that S = NG = N" and 5.4.2, applied to the projectivity
induced in P, yields that S < S2(Z(P)). Since G = P U CG(S), it follows that S is an
elementary abelian p-subgroup of Z(G). Finally, N is a nonnormal permutable sub-
group of order p in G_and, by 5.2.9, S is an elementary abelian p-group and S =
N X (S n Z(6))< Z2(G). Thus (b) holds.
Our theorem in particular asserts that every projectivity between finite groups
maps noncyclic minimal normal subgroups onto minimal normal subgroups. We
show that the centralizers of these minimal normal subgroups are also mapped onto
each other.
5.4.5 Theorem. Let N be a minimal normal subgroup of the finite group G and let pp
be a projectivity from G to a group G. If N is cyclic, of order p, say, assume further
that N4 a G and that p and qp` are regular at p. Then CG(N)4' = CG(N4').
Proof. By 5.4.4, N is a minimal normal subgroup of G if N is not cyclic. Therefore it

suffices to show that CG(N)' < ;(N); application of this result to cp-' and N will
yield the other inclusion.
First assume that N is not abelian, let q be a prime and X a q-subgroup of CG(N).
Since N is a nonabelian minimal normal subgroup, N = OQ(N) and 1.6.8 shows that
X < CU(N). Since CG(N) is generated by its subgroups of prime power order, it
follows that CG(N)4' < CG(N).
Now suppose that N is abelian, hence INS = p" for some prime p. Again by 1.6.8,
[N, O(CG(N))'] = 1 and we have to show that P < CiT(N) for some P E Sy1P(CG(N)).
By the Frattini argument, G = CG(N)NG(P). This shows that N is a minimal normal
subgroup of H = NG(P) and, by 5.4.4 or assumption, N is a minimal normal sub-
group of H. We claim that cp and q p` are regular at p. This is clear by assumption if
N is cyclic; and if N is not cyclic, it follows from the fact, see 4.2.6, that a group with
a p-singular projectivity has only cyclic p-chief factors. Therefore P" < OP(H) =
OP(H`) and hence k a OP(H). Then N n Z(OP(H)) is a nontrivial normal subgroup
of H and, since N is a minimal normal subgroup of H, it follows that N < Z(OP(H)).
In particular, P < OP(H) centralizes N, as desired.
The structure of G/Ne; and 6/N6
We come to our main theorem on images of normal subgroups under projectivities

of finite groups. Our results on modular and permutable subgroups yield the struc-
ture of G/&. To use this efficiently in the study of G, we need to know that the
preimage Nj of Rd is a normal subgroup of G so that cp induces a projectivity from
G/Nj; to G/NZ;. In fact we prove a little more than this.
5.4.6 Lemma. Let N be a normal subgroup of the finite group G, cp a projectivity

from G to a group G, H = NG and K = that is, H` the normal closure and K' the
core of N4' in G.
(a) Then H and K are normal subgroups of G.
(b) If N` is permutable in G, then H/K and H4'/K4' are hypercentrally embedded in
G and G, respectively.
Proof. (a) We use induction on I G I and show first that H a G. For this let
M be a minimal normal subgroup of G contained in N and put S = MG. Then
S < H and, by 5.4.4, S 1 G. Therefore (p induces a projectivity i-p from G/S to
G/S and, for NS/S a G/S, H/S is the normal closure of (NS/S)4' in G/S. By induction,
H_aG.
Now we show that K a G. This is clear if K = 1. So let K 0 1 and take M < G
such that M is a minimal normal subgroup of contained in K. Then if S is the
normal closure of M in G, S < N since M < N a G. By 5.4.4, 9:9 G and, as k is the
core of N in G, it follows that S < K. Again cp induces a projectivity from G/S to G/S
and by induction, K a G.
(b) By (a), cp induces a projectivity from G/K to G/K and therefore we may as-
sume that K = 1. Then by 5.2.3, H is hypercentrally embedded in G. In particular,
H is nilpotent and hence H H' x x H4 with Sylow pi-subgroups HT of H.
Every H4' is characteristic in H and hence normal in G; thus H? is a hypercentrally
embedded normal pi-subgroup of G that is not contained in Z(G) since Hi" n N : 1.
By 1.6.6, H = H1 x x H, where (IH,I, IH,I) = 1 for i zA j; hence Hi is characteristic
in H a G and thus Hi a G. By (b) of 5.4.3, every Hi is hypercentrally embedded in G,
and then (c) of 5.2.1 shows that H = H1 ... H, is hypercentrally embedded in G.
5.4.7 Theorem (Schmidt [1975a]). Let N be a normal subgroup of the finite group G,
(p a projectivity from G to a group G, H = Nc and K = Ni;, that is, H the normal
closure and K the core of N0 in G. Then H and K are normal subgroups of G and
there are primes p;, q; and ni c- N such that
G/K = Sl/K x x S,/K x T/K and G/K'' = ST/K" x x S/K0 x TO/K0
where 0 < r e Z and for all i, j e { 1, ... , r},

(a) S?/K is a P-group of order p"iqi, pi > qi and (IS;r/K0I, IS7/K0I) = 1 =
(ISr/K0I, I Tw/KIOI) for i j,
(b) Si/K E P(n, + 1, pi) and (ISi/KI, IS;/KI) = 1 = (IS/K I, I T/KI ).for i 0 j,
(c) N/K = (N n S, )/K x - x (N n S,)/K x (N n T)/K, I (N n Si)/K I = pi,
I(N n Si)'Q/K0I = qi and (N n T)0 is permutable in G,
(d) H/K = Sl/K x . . . x S,/K x (H n T)/K, (H n T)/K and (H n T)0/K are hyper-
centrally embedded in G and G, respectively.
Proof. We have just shown that H and K are normal subgroups of G. Therefore to
prove that G/K and G/K have the required structure, we may assume that K = 1. If
N a G, then all assertions hold trivially for H = N = K and r = 0. So assume that
N is not normal in G. Then by 5.1.14, G = S1* x . . x S' x T where (a) is satisfied,
IN n SI = qi and N n T is permutable in G. By 1.6.6 and 2.2.5, G = S1 x x S, x T
and (b) holds. Furthermore IN n SiI = p; since N n S; g Si; thus (c) is also satisfied.
Since H = S1* x x S' x (H n T), H has the structure required in (d). Finally,
N n T g G and (N n T)I* is permutable in G; therefore (b) of 5.4.6 yields that H n T
and (H n T)0 are hypercentrally embedded in G and G, respectively.
Since all the Si/K, Sr/K0, (H n T)/K and (H n T)0/K0 in Theorem 5.4.7 are hyper-
cyclically embedded in G or G, (c) of 5.2.1 shows that the same is true for H/K and
H",/K0. Thus we get the following result.
5.4.8 Corollary. Under the assumptions of Theorem 5.4.7, H/K and H0/K0 are hyper-
cyclically embedded in G and G, respectively.
Furthermore, 5.4.7 and 5.4.8 yield some useful criteria for a projective image of a
normal subgroup to be normal in the image group. We collect these in the following
theorem. Parts (a) and (b) of it are due to Schmidt who improved similar criteria
with "cyclic" replaced by "abelian"; these, as part (c) of the theorem, had been
proved by Suzuki using his results on singular projectivities.
5.4.9 Theorem (Suzuki [1951a], Schmidt [1972b]). Let N be a normal subgroup of

the finite group G and suppose that one of the following is satisfied:
(a) G/N has no nontrivial cyclic normal subgroup.
(b) There is no normal subgroup M of G such that M < N and N/M is cyclic.
(c) GIN is perfect.
Then N0 i 6 for every projectivity cp from G to a group G.
Proof. By 5.4.8, N' /NG- and hence also N/N and N/NG- are hypercyclically em-
bedded in G. Therefore (a) implies that N' = N and (b) yields NZ; = N; in both cases,
N a G. Finally, if (c) is satisfied and R = G = is the soluble residual of G, then
G = NR since GIN is perfect. Furthermore, by 5.3.6, R is the soluble residual of G.
By 5.2.5, G/C;(NG/Nj;) is supersoluble and henceis contained in this centralizer.
In particular, N is normalized by R and, since G = N u k, it follows that N a G.
Iterated nilpotent residuals
As a first application of our results we prove the theorem on the iterated nilpotent
residuals announced in 4.3. Let us write G for the smallest normal subgroup with
nilpotent factor group in the finite group G and define inductively
No(G) = G and Nk(G) = Nk_t(G) n for k c N.
Then Nk(G) is the smallest normal subgroup of G with factor group soluble of
nilpotent length at most k.
5.4.10 Theorem. If (p is a projectivity from the finite group G to the group G, then
Nk(G)4' = Nk(G) for all k > 2.
Proof. Let N = Nk(G) and K = N. By 5.4.7, G/K = S1/K x . . x S,/K x T/K .
where the S;/K are P-groups and N n T/K is hypercentrally embedded in G. Now
T/N n T NT/N is soluble of nilpotent length at most k. If FIN n T is the Fitting
subgroup of T/N n T, then FIN n T is nilpotent and N n T/K is hypercentrally
embedded in F; by 5.2.1, F/K is nilpotent. It follows that T/K is soluble of nilpotent
length at most k. Since k > 2, the same holds for all the S;/K and hence also for G/K.
The definition of N = Nk(G) implies that N < K and therefore N = K. This shows
that N a G and cp induces a projectivity from GIN to_G/N. By 4.3.3, GIN is soluble
of nilpotent length at most k. It follows that Nk(G) < N = Nk(G)", and this result for
cp - ' yields the other inclusion.
Projective images of subnormal subgroups
In the remainder of this section we show that subnormal subgroups of finite groups
are mapped by projectivities onto subnormal subgroups, with the obvious exception
of P-groups. Since it is immediate that index preserving projectivities behave well
with respect to subnormal subgroups, we use the results of Chapter 4 on singular
projectivities and not the methods developed in this section. In this way we also
obtain another approach to our results on projective images of normal subgroups.
5.4.11 Lemma. Let cp be an index preserving projectivity from the finite group G to
the group G.
(a) 1J 'N a G, then N4' is permutable in G.

(b) If N < < G, then N4 !9!9 G.
Proof. (a) For every H < G, I HuN : N I = H: H n N I. Since cp is index preserving,

it follows that I H u N : NI = I H: H n NI and, by (7) of 5. 1, HN = NH. Thus N is
permutable in G. (Of course, the assertion also follows from Theorem 5.4.7.)
(b) We use induction on IG : NI. For N = G there is nothing to prove, so suppose
that N i4 G. Then there exists a normal subgroup M of G such that N < M < G. By
(a), M is permutable in G and hence, by 5.1.1, M << G. (In fact, Exercise 4.3.5 shows
that M < G if M is a maximal normal subgroup of G.) Since N < < M, the induction
assumption yields that N < < M and it follows that N < < G.
5.4.12 Theorem (Schmidt [1975a]). Let N be a subnormal subgroup of the finite

group G, cp a projectivity from G to a group G and K the largest normal subgroup of
G contained in N such that KIP < G. Then there exist primes pi, qi and ni e 1 such that
G/K = S, /K x x S,/K x T/K and G/KIO = S; /K4' x . x Sr/K4' x T4'/K4'
where 0 < r e Z and f o r all i, j e { 1, ... , r},

(a) S;/K` is a P-group of order p"-qi, pi > qi and (ISr/K4I,IS`/K4I) = 1 =
j,
(ISi/K4' I, I T4'/K4' I) for i
(b) Si/K e P(ni + 1,p,) and (ISi/KI,IS1/KI) = I = (ISi/KI, IT/KI)for i 0 j,
(c) N/K = (N n S1)/K x x (N n S,)/K x (N n T)/K, I(N n Si)/KI = pi,
I(N n Si)`/K4I = qi, and
(d) (NnT)4g_<G.
Proof. Let G be a minimal counterexample to the theorem. Then G/K is also a

counterexample and hence
(1) K = 1.
If k < < G, then all assertions would hold trivially for r = 0 and T = G. Thus
(2) N is not subnormal in G.
If G=A x B where (IA I, IBI) = 1 and A0 1 B, then N = (N n A) x (N n B),
N n A a< A and N n B< a B. The minimality of G would imply that A and B
would have the right structure and so would G, a contradiction. Hence if (A, B) were
a P-decomposition of G, then B = 1 and G would be a P-group in P(n, p), say. As a
subnormal subgroup of this P-group, N would have order pk for some k e N and,
since N is not subnormal in G, I NI = pk-'q for p > q e P. But K = 1 would imply
k = 1, that is, I N I = p and I N I = q, and the assertions of the theorem would hold for
Sl = G and T = 1. This would contradict the choice of G. Thus
(3) G is not P-decomposable.
Since N is not subnormal in G, 5.4.11 shows that cp is not index preserving. Let rt be
the set of primes p for which cp is singular at p. Since G is not P-decomposable, (b)
of Theorem 4.2.6 holds for all these primes. In particular, for every p e 7C,
(4) G has a normal p-complement Cp such that Cp a G.

Let D = n Cp. By 4.2.1, cp induces an index preserving projectivity from D to D.
Hence if N < D, then by 5.4.11, N !9:9 D; therefore N a a G since b a G. This
would contradict (2); thus N D and
(5) there exists a prime p e it dividing IN I.
Let C Cp. Then the Sylow p-subgroups of G are just the complements to C in G.
Since C a G, the inner automorphisms of G permute the images of the Sylow p-
subgroups of G. Therefore if V = <PIP E Sylp(G)> and W = <S2(P)IP E Sylp(G)>,
then
(6) V-gG,W<G,V< and WgG.
If P E Sylp(G), then N n P E Sylp(N) since N a a G. By (5), N n P 96 1. Therefore if
the Sylow p-subgroups of G were cyclic, it would follow that n(P) < N for every
P E Sylp(G) and hence W< N. But then (6) would contradict (1). Thus the Sylow
p-subgroups of G are not cyclic and therefore are elementary abelian since cp is
singular at p. Let P, E Sylp(G) such that IPri : IP1 I and let Po be the Sylow p-
subgroup of the P-group Pr. By 4.2.10, Po Z(G) and every subgroup of P, is
normal in G; again (1) implies that N n PO = 1. But if P is an arbitrary Sylow
p-subgroup of G, Po < P of index p and N n P : 1. It follows that P = Po(N n P)
PoN and this shows that
(7) V < Po N.
Now PoN n C is the normal p-complement in PoN. Since Po < Z(G), N is a normal
subgroup of PoN and therefore contains this normal p-complement; in particular,
V n C < N. By (4) and (6), V n C a G and (V n C)`0 = V10 n C a G. Thus by (1),
V n C = 1 and VC = G since P, < V and P1C = G. It follows that G = V x C and
V = P, is a P-group, contradicting (3).
5.4.13 Remark. In 5.4.12, if N is not only subnormal but normal in G, then
N n T a G; hence (N n T)`0 is subnormal and modular in G, that is, by 5.1.1,
(N n T)" per G. Thus Theorem 5.4.12, like 5.1.14 for modular subgroups, reduces the
study of projective images of normal subgroups of finite groups to the case of per-
mutable subgroups. In particular, via 5.4.12 we can obtain a second proof of the
main theorem of this section which does not use Theorem 5.1.14 on modular sub-
groups. For the first basic step in our discussion was Theorem 5.4.4 on minimal
normal subgroups. In the proof of this we need, apart from 5.4.12, just 5.1.1, 5.2.9
and the Maier-Schmid Theorem 5.2.3. The proof of the latter theorem uses 5.1.5(a)
and 5.1.10, which are independent of the results on modular subgroups, and 5.1.7.
However, it is easy to show directly that M/MG is nilpotent whenever M is a per-
mutable subgroup of G. The proof of 5.4.6 remains unchanged (it uses 5.4.4, 5.4.3 and
5.2.3) and 5.4.6 (a) yields that for N a G, the subgroup K defined in 5.4.12 is just N.
Then 5.4.7 follows from 5.4.12 and 5.4.6 (b).
If r > 0 in 5.4.12, that is, if there is a P-group S, /K, then neither G nor N is perfect;
therefore we get the following corollary.
5.5 Normal subgroups of p-groups with cyclic factor group 243
5.4.14 Corollary. Let (p be a projectivity from the finite group G to the group G and
let N :!9:9 G. If G or N is perfect, then Nm :!9:!9 G.
Incidentally the first assertion in 5.4.14 also follows immediately from 5.4.11 and
the fact that projectivities of perfect groups are index preserving; the second asser-
tion follows by induction from 5.4.9(b) (observe that if N is a perfect subgroup of G,
then NG is perfect).
Exercises
In Exercises 1, 3-5, and 8, cp is a projectivity from the finite group G to a group G.
1. (Schmidt [1975a]) If G is a p-group, show that S2(Z(G))m a G. (The assertion
holds more generally; see Zacher [1982a].)
2. (Schmidt [1975a]) Let G=(x,y,zlxP'=yP'=zP'=1, [x,y] =zP, [x,z]=[y,z]=1)
2P'
and G = <x,y,2I 2 = yP' = = 1, [X,. ] = 2P, [x,2] = xP, [y,z] =y'> where
p > 5 is a prime. Show that there exists a projectivity cp from G to G such that
Z(G)4' = (z)P = (z) is not normal in G.
3. Show that Zx,(G)" g G. (Hint: Z,,(G) is the largest hypercentrally embedded nor-
mal subgroup of G.)
4. If there exists no minimal normal subgroup N of G such that N" is a minimal
normal subgroup of G, show that G = S, x x Sr with nonabelian coprime
P-groups S; of order IS;I = p;q; where p;, q; e P. Conversely, if G is such a direct
product, show that there exists an autoprojectivity of G mapping every minimal
normal subgroup of G to a nonnormal subgroup.
5. For N a G, let SG(N) be the largest and TG(N) the smallest normal subgroup of G
such that SG(N)/N and N/TG(N) are hypercyclically embedded in G. Show that
SG(N)" and TG(N)`0 are normal subgroups of G and that SG(N)"/TG(N)`' is hyper-
cyclically embedded in G.
6. (Ito and Szep [1962]) If M is a permutable subgroup of the finite group G, show
directly (not using the results of 5.1) that M/MG is nilpotent.
7. Use 5.4.12, 5.1.1, 5.2.3 and 5.2.9 to prove Theorem 5.4.4.
8. Show that the following properties of (p are equivalent.
(a) NP a G for every normal subgroup N of prime index in G.
(b) N4 a a G for every normal subgroup N of G.
(c) N' :9:9 G for every subnormal subgroup N of G.
5.5 Normal subgroups of p-groups with cyclic factor group

We continue with the study of the structure of NG/NG and NG/NG- for a normal sub-
group N of a finite group G. The main result of the last section, Theorem 5.4.7,
reduces this to the case where N is permutable in G and Ni; = 1. Then 5.1.6 and 5.1.3,
or the corresponding results for permutable subgroups (which are much easier to
prove), reduce the investigation of N/NG- and N/NG- further to the situation where G
is a p-group, GIN is cyclic and NG- = 1. Moreover the results of 6.5 will do the same
for normal subgroups in arbitrary groups. Therefore we shall now study this situa-
tion aiming to show that N is abelian and G and G are metabelian if p > 2; if p = 2,
we shall show that N has modular subgroup lattice, I N' J < 2, G ismetabelian and G
is soluble of derived length at most 3. The results on N/NG- and N/NG- will be general-
ized to arbitrary groups in 6.6.1.
Basic properties of G and G
We continue to use the notation introduced in 5.4.1, and throughout this section we
assume the following.
5.5.1 Hypothesis. Let p be a prime, G a finite p-group, cp a projectivity from G to the

p-group G, and N a normal subgroup of G such that GIN is cyclic and NG- = 1; write
ExpN = p` and IS2(N)I = p'.
Let a E G be such that G = N<a>. Then <a> is cyclic, <a> = , say, N is a
core-free permutable subgroup of G and G = N. Therefore the assumptions of
Theorem 5.2.8 are satisfied by N and we first of all note the consequences of this
theorem for our situation. By (a) and (b) of 5.2.8, we have:
(1) Every b-invariant subgroup of N is trivial; in particular N n (b> = 1 and
hence also N n <a> = 1.
This immediately implies:
(2) If H is an a-invariant subgroup of N, then G* = H<a>, N* = H, and the
projectivity induced by cp in G* satisfy Hypothesis 5.5.1.
By (d) of 5.2.8,
(3) Nf k(G)/i2k(G) is core-free in G/Qk(G) for every k _> 0. Therefore cp induces
projectivities (pk from G/S2k(G) to G42k(G) for which the images of NS2k(G)/f2k(G) are
core-free; thus G/S2k(G), NS2k(G)/S2k(G) and (Pk satisfy Hypothesis 5.5.1.
(4) S2(G) and S2(G) are elementary abelian. For k = 1_.., r, 92k(G) = S2k(N)S2k(<a))
and S2k(G) = S1k(N)S2k() have exponent pk; furthermore, S2k(N) = S2k(G) n N.
Proof. The statements about G follow directly from 5.2.8(c) and (d). Thus fl(G) is
elementary abelian and, since the exponent of a subgroup is invariant under cp
and i2k(N) a G, we observe that S2k(G) = Qk(N)f2k(<a>) has exponent pk. Finally, by
Dedekind's law, f1k(G) n N = S2k(N)(S2k(<a>) n N) = 0,(N). El
(5) If p = 2, then Hk(G)/Qk-2(G), Qk(G)/Qk-z(G), Hk(N)/Qk-2(N) and

Qk(N)/S2k_2(N) are abelian for k > 2; furthermore, IG :1,(G)I > 4 if N 1.
Proof. By (f) of 5.2.8, f1k(G)/Qk_2(G) is abelian. As a projective image of this group,

S2k(G)/S1k_2(G) is an M-group of exponent at most 4 in which the quaternion
group Q$ is not involved; by 2.3.7, S2k(G)/S2k_2(G) is abelian. By (4), 0k_2(N) =

ilk-2(G) n N = S2k_2(G) n %(N) and hence S2k(N)/Qk_2(N) is isomorphic to the
subgroup Qk(N)Ok_2(G)/S2k_2(G) of the abelian group S2k(G)/S2,_2(G). Thus
S2k(N)/S2k_2(N) is abelian, and in the same way one shows that Qk(N)/0k_2(N) is
abelian. Finally, by (g) of 5.2.8, N< fl.-2(G) if 2" = Exp G and N 0 1. It follows that
r<n-2andhence IG:S2,(G)I>4.
In particular, f12(G) and S22(G) are abelian for p = 2 and hence the quaternion
group QB is not a subgroup of G or G. Therefore if H is a subgroup of G or G with
modular subgroup lattice, then by 2.3.8, Qg is not involved in H and so H is an
M*-group. Thus we have shown:
(6) Every subgroup of G or G having modular subgroup lattice is an M*-group.
As for M*-groups, the commutativity of S22(G) and 122(G) for p = 2 implies:
(7) If p = 2 and k e N, the maps x - x2k are endomorphisms of S2k+1(G) and
Qk+1 (G). Hence if x, y c G such that I : x2k = y2k c Q(G), then x = y (mod S2k(G)); if
in addition x, y c N, then x = y (mod b2k(N)). If X, Y < G such that X n Y = 1 and
X Y = YX, then S2k(X Y) = S2k(X)S2k(Y).
Proof. We use induction on IGI to prove the first assertion. For k = 1, it is trivial
since C12(G) and S22(G) are abelian; so suppose that k > 2. Since G/52(G) satisfies
Hypothesis 5.5.1, we may apply the induction assumption to b2k(G/Q(G)) =
S2k+i(G)/S2(G) and deduce that for x, y E Ilk+,(G) there exists z c 92(G) such that
= x 2k-1 y2k-1 z. Now x , y21- and z are contained in the abelian group
Zk-1 2k-1 1
(xy)
S22(G) and hence
= (x2k 'y2k 'z)2 = x2ky2k,

(xy)21
as desired. The proof for S2k+, (G) is similar. Now if x, y c G such that 1 : x2k =
y2k c 52(G), then x, y c S2k+, (G) and have the same image under the endomorphism
v: g - g2k of S2k+i(G). Therefore x-'y c Ker v = S2k(G). If in addition x, y c N, then
x-'y E S2k(G) n N = Qk(N), by (4). Finally, for g e X Y there exist x c X and y c Y
such that g = xy. If o(x) = 2', o(y) = 2', o(g) = 2k and h = max {i, j, k}, then
g 2h-. = x y2
# 1 since <x> n (y) = 1. This shows that h = k and that b2k(X Y) _
{z E XYIz2k = 1} g S2k(X)S2k(Y). The other inclusion is trivial.
We return to the general situation with arbitrary prime p and assume in addition
that N o 1; for, if N = 1, then G and G are cyclic p-groups and all the assertions we
want to prove hold trivially.
(8) Let T be an autoprojectivity of G and T = N n N'. Then T a N' with cyclic
factor group N'/T and T is permutable in N with [NIT] a chain.
Proof. Clearly, N:9 G and GIN cyclic imply that T = N n N':9 NT with cyclic fac-
tor group NT/T. Since NT is a projective image of N, it is permutable in G and [GIN']
is a chain. It follows from (11) and (1) of 5.1 that T = N n N' is permutable in N
and [NIT] [NNT/NT] is a chain.
Since we shall study numerous autoprojectivities r of G, we shall frequently use

the following argument.
(9) Let H be a p-group of exponent p" and M a permutable subgroup of H such
that [H/M] is a chain. Then H = M<x> for any element x e H that does not lie in the
maximal subgroup of H containing M and hence JH : MI = I<x> : <x> n MI < p".
If z e H such that o(z) = p" and M n <z> = 1, then I M<z> : MI = I<z>I = p" and
hence H = M<z).
(10) ICO(N)(a)I = p; thus CN(a) is cyclic.
Proof. Let H = Cn(N)(a). Since S2(N) is elementary abelian, H<a> is abelian. By (6),
(H<a>)O = H u is an M*-group and hence, by Iwasawa's theorem, contains an
abelian normal subgroup A with cyclic factor group inducing power automorphisms
in A. Then H n A is a b-invariant subgroup of N, hence is trivial by (1) and therefore
H HA/A is cyclic. It follows that H is cyclic and elementary abelian, hence I H I < p;
on the other hand, N a G implies that S2(N) n Z(G) 0 1 and hence I H I = p. Thus
CN(a) is a p-group with only one minimal subgroup and therefore is cyclic since, by
(6), Q8 is not a subgroup of G.
(11) There exist bases of SI(G) and { fo, f1,.... fm} of S2(G) with the
following properties:
(1 la) <eo> = SI(<a>) <- Z(G), (fo> = S2() <- Z(G);
(l l b) SI(N) = <e,) x x ;
(11 c) <e1, ... , ei> is the unique a-invariant subgroup of order p' of n(N)
(i = 1, ... , m); in particular,
(lid) e1 e H for every a-invariant subgroup H of G such that H n N 0 1;
(11 e) <e,> = Z(G) n SI(N) and e = e;e;_, for i = 2, ... , m;
(llf) <f>=<ei>fori=0,...,m;
(1lg) .Ti =.f1fo and <f1fo> = <e1eo>';
(llh) is the unique b-invariant subgroup of order p1+1 of n(6)
(i = 0'...'M).
Proof. For every a-invariant subgroup L of S2(N), the map rL: x - [x, a] (x e L) is
an endomorphism of L with kernel CL(a) and image [L, a]; for (1) of 1.5 shows that
for x, y e L, [xy, a] = [x, a]'' [ y, a] = [x, a] [y, a] since L is abelian. Now let 1 = Lo <
L1 < < Lm = O(N) be part of a chief series of the group fl(N)<a> and let rL, = Ti
for i = 1, ..., m. Then L;/L1_1 is centralized by a and hence L;' = [L,,a] < Li_1; on
the other hand, by (10), I Ker Ti I < p and the homomorphism theorem yields that
Li_1 = L;i = [L1,a]. In particular, Lm_1 = [S2(N),a] is uniquely determined by a
and, similarly, Li = [S2(N), a,.. , a] where a is written m - i times. Since the chief
.
series was chosen arbitrarily, it follows that Li is the unique a-invariant subgroup of
order p' of S2(N). In particular, L1 = Cn(N)(a) = Z(G) n S2(N); let L1 = <e1>. For
i = 2, ... , m, we define inductively elements ej e SI(N) such that e = e;e;_ 1 and

<e1,...,e;) = L;: If e1, ..., e;_1 are defined, then since Li_1 = L;! there exists e, a Li
such that ei_1 = e,i = [e;,a] and hence e = e;ei_1; as [L;_1,a] = L1_2, e; L;_1 and
hence Li = <e,,..., e.>. For i = m, we get SI(N) = <e 1, ... , em> = <e,> x x 
and hence (l Ib), (l lc) and (l Ie) are satisfied. Furthermore, if H < G is such that
H = H and H n N : 1, then H n Q(N) is a nontrivial a-invariant subgroup of SI(N),
and so, by (l lc), it contains e1; thus (1 Id) holds. Now let f be any generator of <e1>
for i = 15 ..., m. Since e1 e Z(G), it is clear that <el,a> = <e1> x <a) and hence
<e1,S2(<a))) = SI(<e1,a)). Thus <e1,S1((a)))1' = <f1,S1(<b))) is invariant under b.
Furthermore, is invariant under f1 and <fl)b 0 <f1> by (1). It follows that
1 : [f1,b] e <f1,SI((b))) n = S)((b>). So if we choose fo = [f1,b], then f; _
f1 fo and < fo) = S1() < Z(G); and for a suitable generator eo of S2(<a)), we can
write <f1 fo)`0 ' _ <eleo). Thus (1lf) and (I 1g) are satisfied. By (1), <f0> is the only
minimal normal subgroup of 6 and hence 5.4.2 shows that <eo) = <f,>"-' is a normal
subgroup of G. Therefore (I la) also holds and, by (4), {eo,...,em} and {fo,...,fm}
are bases of !Q(G) and SI(G), respectively. Finally, by (11c), <e0..... e;) =
Q(<a, e1, ... , e; )) and hence < fo, ... , f) is invariant under b for i = 0, ..., m. Since
S2(G) is abelian, for every b-invariant subgroup L of S1(G) containing fo, the map
r: x --+ [x, b] (x a L) is an endomorphism with kernel CL(b) = < fo ), by (1). Therefore
IL: [L, b] I = IL: L' I = I Ker i I = p and hence [L, b] is the only b-invariant maximal
subgroup of L. Now starting with L = SI(G), a trivial induction yields (I Ih).
(12) If p > 2 and N' < <e1>, then (xy)pk = for all x, y e N and k e N.
Xpkypk
Proof. By (1 Ie), <e1> < Z(G) and hence (4) of 1.5 shows that (xy)pk = xpkypk[y, x]`
k
where t = (') 0 (mod p). Since I N' l < p, it follows that [y, x]1 = 1.
(13) If p = 2 and m > 2, the bases {e0,. .. , em } and { fo, ... , fm } can be chosen with
the additional property that f2 = f2f1.
Proof. By (llh), <fo,f1) and [<fo,f1),b] = <fo) so that

[f2,b] e <fo, f1)\(f0 ). Thus [ f2i b] =f&2 where a e {0,1 }. If a = 0, we are done;
so suppose that a = 1. If we then put e* = e1 for i e {0, 1}, e* = e;ei_1 for i > 2 and
<f *) = <e'> for i e {0,...,m}, it is clear that all the assertions of (11) will hold for
the a*, f * in place of e;, f except, possibly, (l le). But for i > 3,
(e*) = (eie,-1) = eiei-1ei-let-2 = e*e* 1,
furthermore (e2) = e2e1e1 = e*e* and therefore (l le) holds. Since <e1, e2> is a four-
group, <e*)" = <e2e1)4' = <f2f1>. Hence f2 = f2f, and so, finally,
(f2* )b = (f2 f1 )b = f2 fl f0f1 f0 = f2 fl fl = f2f1*,
as desired.
In the remainder of this section we fix bases {e ...... em } and If ..... , f. J with the
properties given in (11) and (13) and study the autoprojectivity a induced by b in G,
that is, the map a: L(G) -- L(G) defined by
(14) H=H"' for allH<G.
We first note that
(15) H=Hif acH<G;
for, then b e H4' and H = HI""-' = H. In particular, <a> = <a> and so G = N<a>
implies
(16) G = N(a>.
By (11), fo = f0 and f,' = f fo so that
(17) <eo>Q = <eo> and <el> = <eieo>.
Since <e1> < N, therefore <eleo> < N; on the other hand, <eo> N implies that
<eo> = <eo> $ N. It follows that
(18) N n <eo,el> = <e1eo>; in particular, e1 0 N.
We study the core K of N in G and the intersection Q of N and N.
(19) Let K < G such that K = (N)c. Then N n K = 1, K and K are cyclic
normal subgroups of G, fl(K) = <e1> and Q(K) = <el eo>.
Proof. Since e1 0 N, e1 0 K a G and hence N n K = 1 by (1 ld). Therefore K a-

KNIN is cyclic, hence also K is cyclic and, by 5.4.6 applied to the projectivity a,
K a G. By (11) and (18), <eIeo> < Z(G) n N It follows that <eteo> = S2(K) and
then (17) implies that f)(K) = <el>.
(20) K = CN(a) and K <_ Z(G); if p = 2, then Q2(K) <_ Z(G).
Proof. By (15), K<a> = (K<a>) = K(a> = KG<a> so that both K and K are
normal subgroups of K<a> with cyclic factor groups. Thus (K<a>)' < K n K = 1,
by (19). This shows that K<a> = KG<a> is abelian so that K and K are centralized
by a. On the other hand, by (10), CN(a) is cyclic and hence CN(a)<a> is abelian
and invariant under Q. Therefore CN(a)' < CN(a)<a> is centralized by a. Since G =
N(a>, every g c- G can be written in the form g = a'z where z e N and (CN(a))g =
(CN(a))Z < N. It follows that (CN(a))G < (N)G = K and hence CN(a) < K. Thus
CN(a) = K, as desired.
If x e N, then G = N(xa>, and we may apply our results with xa in place of a.
Since G = N<xa>4', there exists y E N and b' e <xa>" such that b = y-'b'; it follows
that G = N<b'> and hence b' = yb generates <xa>4'. So if we let d = (pb'cp-', then
N' = Nwrbw-' = N and (N')o = K is centralized by xa, as we have just shown.
Thus K is centralized by a and every x E N so that K <_ Z(G). In particular,
<xa, K> is abelian and hence <xa, K>-' = <xa>-'K is an M-group. If p = 2, then
by (5) and (7), o(x) < o(a) = 2" and (xa)2"-' = a2"-' = eo; thus <xa> n K = 1. By
2.3.6, S22(K) normalizes <xa)-' and hence [(xa) ',I 2(K)] < (xa)-' n K = 1.
Since G is generated by the <xa> (x e N), it follows that 122(K) < Z(G).
(21) Let Q = N n N. Then QG = QQ.
Proof. Since Q < N a G, we have Q < QG < N and hence [QG/Q] is a chain by (8).
Since Q is permutable in N, Q u Q = QQ; let IQG : QQai = p`. Then QQ is the
unique subgroup of index p` in QG between Q and QG and also between Q and QG.
It follows that (QQ)" = QQ. By (16) and (8), G = N(a) and Q a Na. Thus QG =
Q<> << (QQ)<> = QQ and hence QG = QQ.
(22) If p = 2 or N' < (e, ), then QG = S25(N) where p5 = Exp Q and s is the
smallest integer such that N/S25(N) is cyclic.
Proof. Let p5 = Exp Q. Then Q < Q5(N) g G so that QG < f25(N). By (7) or (12),
ZSS_,(QG) = {xP9-'Ix e QG} is a nontrivial normal subgroup of G and therefore, by
xP,-'
(l ld), contains e,. Thus there exists x e QG such that = e,. Let y e S25(N). Since
Q is permutable in N, we deduce that I Q<Y> : QI = I <y>: <y> n QI < p5; by (18),
e, 0 Q and hence <x> n Q = I so that IQ<x) : QI = p5. Now [N/Q] is a chain and it
follows that Q<y) < Q<x) < QG. Thus QG = S25(N) and N/S25(N) is cyclic. Suppose,
N//
in order to obtain a contradiction, that SL5_, (N) is cyclic. Then If25(N) : Q 5_, (N) I =
p and therefore S25(N) = QS25_,(N). Hence there exist z e Q, w e S25_1(N) such that
zPs-'wPs-'
x = zw; by (7) or (12), e, = = = zP'-' E Q, a contradiction. Thus s is
xP'-'
the smallest integer such that N/Q5(N) is cyclic.
(23) If p = 2 or N' < <e,), there exists u e N such that u" e,; let U = (u)
and V = U. For any such pair U and V, we have:
(23a) N=QUand Nn U= 1, hence also QnU= 1;
(23b) N = QV and N n V = 1, hence also Q n V = 1;
(23c) NV = S2r(G) = NU; furthermore
(23d) NS2r(<a)) = S2r(G) = NS2r(<a)).
Proof. By (7) or (12), this time Z5r_,(N) = {xPr-'Ix E N} is a nontrivial normal sub-
group of G and therefore, by (lid), contains e,; thus there exists u E N such that
uP'-' = e,. By (18), Q(U) = <e,).4 N and hence N' r) U = 1; in particular,
Q n U = 1 By (17) and ( 1 1 ), 1(V) = f2(U) = <e,eo) N and hence N n V = 1;
.
in particular, Q n V = 1. By (9), N = QU and N = QV so that (23a) and (23b)

are satisfied. By (4), Qr(G) = NS2r(<a)) and hence S2r(G) = I r(G) = NS2r(<a)) =
NS2r(<a)) since b normalizes (S2r(<a)))11. Thus (23d) holds and again by (9), S2r(G) =
NV = NU.
(24) If S2r(<a)) < NG(Q), then N is abelian.

Proof. By (23d), S2,(G) = NS2,(<a>). Since Q = N n N< N and 0,(<a>) normal-

izes Q, it follows that Q < Q,.(G); in particular, Q < N. Then N/Q is cyclic and hence
N' < Q < Na. Since N' < G, we get that N' < (N)c = K. But by (19), N n K = 1
and thus N' = 1.
(25) If N' < <e,>, then Q is abelian and every subgroup of Q is normal in N';
furthermore, N and N are M-groups.
Proof. Let U and V be as in (23). Since N' < (el> < U, we see that U < N and
Q N/U is abelian. Furthermore, U = V is permutable in Na. For every X < Q,
therefore
X =X(VnQ)=XVnQ<XV
since Q < N; thus X < QV = Na. Finally, as a projective image of the abelian
group N/(e,>, the group N/<e1eo> is an M-group, and, since <e1e0> < C1,(X),
we see that XV/Cv(X) is an M-group. Thus if p = 2, ExpQ > 4 and X is cyclic of
order 4, then X < Z(N) since otherwise x = x-' for X = <x>, V = <v> and hence
X V/CV(X) would be dihedral of order 8 and not an M-group. By 2.3.4, N is an
M-group and then so is N.
The case p > 2
We come to our first main result.
5.5.2 Theorem (Menegazzo [1978]). Suppose that Hypothesis 5.5.1 is satisfied and
p > 2. Then N is abelian.
Proof. We proceed by induction on INI and keep the notation introduced above.
If m = 1, N is cyclic; if r = 1, N is elementary abelian, by (4). Thus we may assume
that in, r > 2. We now apply the induction assumption to three different projectiv-
ities. First of all, by (2), cp induces a projectivity in Qr_,(N)<a> satisfying Hypothesis
5.5.1; by induction,
(26) Q_, (N) is abelian.
By (3), the projectivity induced by cp in G/S2(G) satisfies Hypothesis 5.5.1; thus
NO(G)/S2(G) is abelian. Finally, a induces a projectivity from G/K to G/K and,
by (19), f2(K) _ <e1> so that K 1. Thus N/K is abelian and it follows that
N' < O(G) n K = S2(K) since K is cyclic and S2(G) is elementary abelian. So
(27) N' < (e,
and all the assertions in (22)-(25) hold for N; let ps = Exp Q, u e N such that uPr ' = e
U = and V = U. If s < r, then Q < 0,_,(N) and, since UQ = N, we have
US2r_,(N) = N < G. If s = r, then by (12), the map v: N -+ N defined by x" = xP'-'
(x c N) is an endomorphism of N with Kerv = Q_, (N) and, since uP'-' = e1, the
subgroup US2,_,(N) = {x e NIx'-` e <e,>} is the preimage of <e,> with respect to

this homomorphism. Since N and <e,> are normal subgroups of G, it follows that
US2,_,(N) g G. Thus in any case
(28) US2,_,(N) a G.
To simplify notation, put T = S2r_,(G). Then UT = Uf2,_,(N)T g G and hence UT
is permutable in G. Since o(u) = p', UT/T is a permutable subgroup of order p in
G_/T and hence normalizes the cyclic group T/T By (3) and (1) applied to G/T,
NT/T only contains trivial b-invariant subgroups and hence (UT)b 96 UT; by (14),
Ub = U`b 1` = U = V so that (UT)b = VT Therefore if SIT = S2(UT(b)1T),
then
(29) S/T has order p2 and contains UT/T, (UT)b/T = VT/T and TQ,(<a>)`/T =
S2(T/T) as three different minimal subgroups.
Figure 19
We want to show that VT normalizes every subgroup of Q5(N). By (4),

VT: f2r-,(N)I = I VT : TI I T : S2,-,(N)I = PI(2r-L(<a>)I = pr and, by (23),
VQ,_, (N) : Q,_, (N)I = I V: V n S2r-, (N)I = I VI = p'. Since S2r_, (N) < T, it follows
that
(30) VT = VQ,_,(N).
We show first that Q5(N) is centralized by f2,_1(N). This is clear ifs < r since then
S25(N) < S2,_, (N) and this group is abelian. So suppose that s = r. Then by (25),
N = QU is an M-group and since Q n U = 1, IN: "r-l (N)I >_ p2. On the other
hand, N'< Q(U) implies that <u">CQ(U) < Z(N) and hence IN : Z(N)I <
IN: <uo>CQ(U)I < p2. By 2.3.16, N is abelian or Z(N) < (2r-1 (N) and, in the latter
case, it follows from the above inequalities that Z(N) = f2,_,(N). Thus in any event
(31) f2,-,(N) < CG (c2S(N)).
Since VT = VS2r_1(N), it remains to be shown that V normalizes every subgroup of
f2s(N). By (25), every subgroup of Q is normal in the M*-group N = Q V and hence
by 2.3.13 there exists a generator v c V and k c N such that (Q, v, k) is an Iwasawa
triple for N, that is, x = x'+pk for all x E Q. By (29) and (4), v e Qr(<a>)TU =
Qr(<a>)Qr_, (N) U and hence there exist a, c f2r((a>) and x, E f)r_, (N) U such that
v = a , x, . Then [v, a] = [x,, a] E fQr_l (N) since, by (28), U0, _I (N)/0,_, (N) is a nor-
mal subgroup of order pin G/c2r_, (N). By (31), v-'v = [v, a] e C6(f2 (N)) and there-
fore v and v induce the same automorphism in Qs(N). By (21) and (22), fzs(N) =
QQ". Hence for z E f2s(N) there exist x, y e Q such that z = xy and, since
(}t:) (xy)V = x1+Ck(,) J)l+pk
()') . (y)`l = (J l+pk) = (J)'+pk, it follows that z =
/l + p
Since p > 2, 2
I I 0 (mod p) so that I N'I < p and (4) of 1.5 imply that
Z'+pk = xl+pk(y,)l+pk
/Thus z' = z'+pk, that is, v induces a power automorphism in
R(N). Now (30) and (31) yield that
(32) VT normalizes every subgroup of fl,(N).
All assertions proved so far also hold with b replaced by b-'. Thus if r is the
autoprojectivity of G induced by b-', that is, H` = H106- " ' for all H < G, and W =
U`, then by (29), WT/T is a minimal subgroup of S/T and, by (32), every subgroup
of 0,(N) is normalized by WT where, by (22), s is still the smallest integer such
that N/05(N) is cyclic. If VT = WT, then (UT)" = VT = WT = (UT)" ' and hence
(UT)" = UT; since p > 2, it would follow that h c N (UT), contradicting (29). Thus
VT/ T and WT/T are different minimal subgroups of S/T and hence generate SIT.
Therefore U < VTW normalizes every subgroup of f2s(N). In particular, Qv = Q
and so QaQU=N.Since N'<<e1><U,also UaNand, by(23),N=Q x U.
By (25), Q is abelian and so, finally, N is abelian.
Since N is abelian and G/N is cyclic, G is clearly metabelian if p > 2. An example

in which N is not abelian is given in Exercise 2. Nevertheless, G is also metabelian
as we are now going to show. In fact, we prove a more general result that will also
be used in the case p = 2.
5.5.3 Lemma. Suppose that Hypothesis 5.5.1 is satisfied and N is abelian. Then f2r(G)
is an .M*-group and G is metabelian; for every c E f2r(G) there exists k c- IN such that
k- 1(mod 4)if p=2and x`=x'"forall
Proof. We keep the notation introduced above and let f2r(<a>) = <c>. Since N' <
<e,>, all the assertions in (22)-(25) hold and we use induction on INI to prove first
that c induces a universal power automorphism v -+ v' in N. By (23) and (25), every
subgroup X of Q is normal in N = QV. Since N is abelian, X a NV = f2,(G). By
1.5.4, c induces a universal power automorphism in the abelian group Q, that is,
there exists h e 7L such that x` = x' for all x c- Q. Since c e <a>, we obtain (x)` =
(x`) = (x'')' = (x)", so that c induces the automorphism x -+ x' in QQ. By (21) and
(22), QQ = f2,(N) for some s e N. If s = r, then f2,(N) = N and we are done; thus we
may assume that s < r. By (23), N = Q x (u) where uPr-' = e,. The induction as-
sumption applied to G/S2(G) yields j c 77 such that ccl(G) induces the automorphism
e - o' in NS2(G)/S2(G); thus u` = u'z where z e fl(G) n N = f2(N). It follows that
(ups-')` = (u` )P' ujP'-5; on the other hand, (uP" ')` = u''p'-' since u'-' e I(N). Thus
h - j (mod ps) and hence x` = x' for all x e Q. Since u e N = (u) x Q, there exist
i e N and y e Q such that u = u'y. It follows that (u)` _ (u'y)` = (u`)'y` = (u'z)'y' _
(u'y)'z' = (u')-1z'; on the other hand, (u)` = (u`) = (u'z) = (u)'z since c c (a).
Thus z = z' E (z), hence (z) = (z) and (l Id) implies that (z) < (e,). Since
uP' ' = e,, there exists t e N such that z = u'P' '. It follows that u` = u'+'P'-' and
x'+`P.-'
XC = x' = for all x c Q so that c induces the power automorphism v -, v' in
N where k = j + tpr-1
By (5), f2r(G)/f2r_2(G) is abelian if p = 2 and so [N, c] < f2,-2(G) n N = f2,_2(N),

by (4); it follows that k = I (mod 4) in this case. By 2.3.4, f2r(G) = N(c) is an M-
group and, by (6), f2r(G) and S2r(G) are M*-groups. Of course, every element of Q,(G)
operates on N as a power of c and hence induces an automorphism v v' where
1 - I (mod4) if p = 2. Finally, S2r_,(G) < NS2r_,(G) < S2r(G) and NS2r_,(G)/S2r_,(G)
is core-free in It follows that f2r(G)/S2r_, (G) = S2r(G)/S2r_, (S2r(G)) is not
cyclic. Since G/f2r(G) is cyclic, 2.3.21 yields that G is metabelian.
Now 5.5.2 and 5.5.3 immediately imply:
5.5.4 Theorem (Busetto and Menegazzo [1985]). Suppose that Hypothesis 5.5.1 is
satisfied and p > 2. Then G is metabelian.
The case p = 2
In the proof of Theorem 5.5.2, the assumption p > 2 is used only in the last few lines.
All the assertions up to (32) could be proved similarly for p = 2 with simple alter-
ations; but for p = 2, of course, VT = WT so that we would not get U < VTW.
Indeed, there is an example of a 2-group satisfying Hypothesis 5.5.1 in which N is
nonabelian. We shall describe it briefly since the details are rather complicated and
tedious.
5.5.5 Example (Busetto and Stonehewer [1985]). It is easy to see that the group
G = (a u w1a64 = U16 = w8 = 1, uw = U9, ua = u-Iw4 Wa = u2w-1\
is the semidirect product of the normal subgroup N = (u, wIu16 = w8 = 1, u' = u9)
of order 2' by the cyclic group (a) of order 26. Clearly, N is metacyclic and N' =
(u8) has order 2.
The group G is best defined in three steps. First take H = (c) x (u) where o(c) =
o(u) = 16 (note that H <a 4> x (u) < G). The group H has an automorphism f3 of
order 4 satisfying cp = c13u8 and uft = u5; hence we may form the semidirect prod-
uct M of H by a cyclic group (w) of order 8 inducing the automorphism /3 in H; thus
IMI = 2''. Finally, there is an automorphism x of M satisfying c" = c, V =

and w' = u14w-'; also it is not difficult to show that x4 is conjugation by c. There-
fore there exists the extension G = M(a> where M a G, G/M is cyclic of order 4, a
operates as x on M, and a4 = c.
Every element of G can be written uniquely in the form akujw' where 0 < k < 63,
0 < j < 15, 0 is generated by an
element of the form aujwi. Similarly for G, and we define v: G -+ G by
(akuiwi)v = ak(1+4i)uj(1+4i)Wi+e
where c = 2 if i is odd and e = 4jk if i is even. It is easy to check that v is bijec-

tive; but it is less obvious-and we refer the reader to the paper of Busetto and
Stonehewer-that the map r defined by X` = X" for X < N(a2> and X' _
((aujwi)"> with cyclic X = (aujwi> 4 N(az> can be extended to a projectivity
cp from G to G. It is clear that N` = N = (u, w> is core-free in G since
S2(N) n Q(N)a n Q(N)a2 = 1. Therefore Hypothesis 5.5.1 is satisfied. Since [u, a]
C ' and [w, a] = u6w6 do not commute, G" 1; on the other hand, M = H<iv>
is metabelian so that G is soluble of derived length 3. Finally, N' = (u4> is cyclic of
order 4.
Busetto and Stonehewer also proved that the above example is the smallest possi-
ble one for which Hypothesis 5.5.1 is satisfied and N is nonabelian. But N is still an
M-group and JN'J < 2. It was shown by Busetto and Napolitani [1991] that this
is true in general. The basic breakthrough, however, had been accomplished by
Busetto [1984] who had almost determined generators and relations for G to show
that N and N have derived length at most 3 and 4, respectively. Busetto and
Napolitani improved this argument to obtain the results we shall present here. We
start with a preliminary result due to Menegazzo.
5.5.6 Lemma. Suppose that Hypothesis 5.5.1 is satisfied and p = 2. Then

S2(G) < Z(f),(G)).
Proof. We use induction on INI and may assume that r > 3 since f'2(G) is abelian.
By (19), 6 induces a projectivity from G/K to G/K and the induction assumption
yields that S2(G/K) < Z(S2,(G/K)) if 2` = Exp(N/K). Since S2(G)K/K < S2(G/K) and
N1 K < S2,(G/K), it follows that [S2(G), N] < K and hence
(33) [S2(G), N] < S2(G) n K = i2(K) = (e1>.
Let U, V be as defined in (23). Then U < N implies that [S2(G), U] 5 <e1> < U and
hence U is normalized by S2(G). It follows that I UX : UI < 2 for every minimal
subgroup X of G; hence I U u X: Ul < 2 and therefore V = U is normalized by
S2(G). The same holds for the projective image N of the normal subgroup N. Thus
[9)(G), Q] = [S2(G), N n N] < <e1> n N = 1, by (18), and [S2(G), V] < G' n V <
N n V = 1, by (23b), so that
(34) [i2(G), N] = [92(G), QV] = 1.
Since S2,(G) = NV = NN, it follows from (33) and (34) that

(35) [n(G), n,(G)] < <el ).
To prove the lemma we therefore suppose, for a contradiction, that [S2(G), f2,(G)] _
<e 1 >. By (18), eo N. So if W is a cyclic subgroup of order 2' in G such that eo e W,
then W n N = 1 and S2,(G) = NW since Is2,(G) : NI = 2'. If W were normalized
by f2(G), then (35) and (34) would imply that [S2(G), W] < W n <e1> = I and
[f2(G), S2,(G)] = [S2(G), NW] = 1; this would contradict our assumption. Thus
(36) S2(G) NG(W) for every cyclic subgroup W of order 2' of G containing eo.
In particular, S2,(<a>) is not normalized by Q(G) so that, by (35),
(37) [Q(G), Q,(<a>)] = <el ).
By induction on j e N we obtain that
a2J
(38) = e; for 2 < i < 2' and e2' = e;ei_2 for 2' < i < in.
For, if j = 0, this holds by (l Ie); and if (38) holds for j, then
Q2'- Q2' Q2l )Q 2'
e = (e ) = (eiei-2J = eiei-2jei-2jei-2i" = eiei-2r"
j+1 Q2J-' Q2l-' Q2,
where 2j" ) = <a2k>. By (38), [ei,a2k] = I for i < 2k, and [ei,a2k] = e1_2k for
2k < i. But by (37), [f2(G), <a2k>] = <e1> and it follows that
(39) m = 2k + 1.
Then <e0,..., em_, > is centralized by <a2k) = S2,(<a>) and by N, as (34) states, and
hence by S2,(<a>)N = S2,(G). Thus
(40) <eo,...,em_i> = Z(Ir(G))nS2(G).
We want to show that, on the other hand, U is not centralized by <fo,..., fm_,). For
this let U = <a) and W = <aab> '. By (7), (23), (1 If) and (1 Ig),
(iiiih)2 = U2' '(U2' ' )b =

J 1 J lb = J 1J 1J0 = f
and hence W is a cyclic subgroup of order 2' of G containing eo. Since.fo E Z(G),
(41)
t(ab)1+2'' = i (ilUb)2r tub = (aab)1+2 t
U1+2'
By (33), U is normalized by S2(G). Thus if x E f2(G) and <y> = <x>11, then UY = U

and, since f22(G) is abelian, the automorphism induced by y in U has the form
(42) aY = u1 where I = I or I = 1 + 2-1
By (11 h), <f0. .. , fm_i > is b-invariant and of index p in Q (G); thus y' = yz where
z E < fo, . , fm _, >. Therefore if U were centralized by <J0,. - -, fm _, >, it would follow
that u'' = aY2 = al; since (ab)Y" = (aY)b = (a)b = (ub)l we would get that (aab)Y6
al(i b)l = (aab)1 where the last equation is trivial if 1 = I and is (41) for 1 = I + 2-1 r .
Thus W = <uub> would be normalized by < yb> = <x> and so W by <x>" =

<x). Since x e S2(G) was arbitrary, it would follow that W would be normalized by
S2(G) = S2(G), contradicting (36). Thus, as fo e Z(G),
(43) <f1,...,.f._1> CU(U)
Since <e1,. .. , em _ 1) is generated by the elements outside <e 1, ... , em _ 2 ), there exists
x e <e1,...,em_1>\<e1,...,em_2> such that <y> = <x> Cd(U). Then 10 1 in (42)
and hence
u211
(44) [u, y] = = .fl
By (40), <a 2k> = 0,(<a>) centralizes <e1,...,em_1>. Thus <x'!0 is an
a-invariant subgroup of <e1,...,em_1> and hence, by (I lc), is equal to <e...... em_1
since x 0 <e1,...,em_2>. It follows that the 2' = m - I elements x' (0 ,
then L = <x'I0 < j < 2k - 1, j odd> and L n L = 1. In particular,
(45) CL(a) = 1 and L < CG(N),
by (40). Since L is generated by the conjugates of x under <a2>, we see that L is
normalized by this group. Thus if h e N and i e t\4 is odd, then L a <x, ha21> =
L<ha2L>. By (5) and (7), o(a2`) > o(h) and S2((ha21>) = S2(<a2'>) = <e0>. Thus
L n <ha2'> = I and hence
(46) S2(<x, ha21>) = L x <e0> for all h c N and i * 0 (mod 2).
Since ub2 e N<b2> = (N<a2>)`,, there exist h e N and i e N such that <ubZ) _
<ha2i>". Again by (5) and (7), o(u) < o(b2) = o(ub2) and hence i is odd. By (46),
Q(<y, ub2>) = S2(<x, hat'))"' = (L x <eo>)" and S2(<y, b2)) = S2(<x, a2))"' =
(L x (eo>)". Since o(y) = 2, it follows that [5b 2, y] e Q(< y, ub2>) = (L x <e0>)"and
[b2,y] e (L x <eo>)"'. By (1) of 1.5, (44) and (11g),
[ub2, y] _ [u, y]b2 [b2, y] = fl" [b2, y] = f, [b2, y]
and hence fl = [ub2, y] [b2,y]-1 e (L x <eo>)"'. Thus e1 e (L x <e0>) n N = L; but

by (45), CL(a) = 1. This is the desired contradiction.
Modularity in 2-groups
We interrupt our investigation of the case p = 2 to prove some lemmas on 2-groups

with modular subgroup lattices and permutable subgroups in 2-groups; these will be
used in the sequel. We start with two rather trivial properties which hold for arbi-
trary primes p.
(47) If H is a p-group of exponent p, 1 < k< n, S2rt_1(H) and H/Z5k(H) are M-
groups and TSk(H) is cyclic, then H is an M-group.
Proof. By 2.3.2, we have to show that X Y = YX for any two subgroups X, Y of H.

This is clear if X, Y < S2n_1(H); and if X $ S2"_1(H), say, then X contains an element
x of order p" and K = 75k(H) = <X"3 < X. It follows that XY = XKY = KYX =
YKX=YX.
(48) If H = M<z> is a p-group with modular subgroup lattice, M abelian, M a H

and M n <z> = 1, then there exists k e N, k = 1 (mod 4) in case p = 2, such that
x`'=x"for all xeM.
Proof. IfX <M,then X=Xu(<z>nM)=(Xu<z>)nM aXu<z>.By 1.5.4,z

induces a universal power automorphism x -+ xk in M. If Exp M < 2, k = 1; and if
x e M such that o(x) = 4, then by 2.3.6, xk-1 = [x, z] E <x> n <z> = 1 so that k - 1
(mod 4).
In the following four assertions let M be a subgroup and z an element of the group
H and let k E J. For short, let us say that z induces the power k in M if x` = xk for
all xeM.
(49) If z induces the power kin M and a E H such that [a-1, z-1] e CH(M), then z
also induces the power k in M.
Proof. By assumption there exists c e CH(M) such that az = cza. Hence (x)z =
xCZ" = (xk)" = (x")k for every x e M.
(50) Let H be a 2-group and k = 1 (mod 4). If I M' j < 2, then (xy)k = xkyk for all
x, y c M. So if z induces the power k in subgroups A, B of M and AB < M, then z
also induces the power k in AB.
Proof. By (4) of 1.5, (xy)k = xkyk [y, x]` where t = 12 I is even, since k =- 1 (mod 4);
thus [y, x]` = 1. For a E A, b e B, therefore (ab)z = azbz = akbk = (ab)k.
(51) Let H = M<a>, M a H, z e <a> and L < M where L g M<z>. If z induces

the power k in M/L, then it does likewise in M/LH.
Proof. By assumption, x-kxz E L for every x e M. For c e <a>, therefore L` contains

(x-kx2)C = (x`)-k(x`)z and, since M a H, it follows that x` is an arbitrary element of
M. Thus y-ky2 e n Lc= n Lk = LH for every y e M.
ce<a> hell
(52) Let H be a 2-group, l2(M) <_ Z(<M, z>) and suppose that z induces the power
xz: xkx
k in M/Q(M). Then (x2)2 = (x2)k and = for all x e M; in particular, z2 induces
the power k2 in M.
Proof. Let x2 = x k y where y e S2(M). Then (x2)2 = (xz)2 = (xky)2 = (xk)2y2 = (x2)k
xzz = (xky)2 = (xky)kyz = xkzy2 = xk2
and, since yk = y = y2, we conclude that
We have seen in 2.3 that elements of order 4 play a special role in 2-groups with
modular subgroup lattices. One reason for this is the following more general result.
(53) If M is a permutable subgroup of the 2-group H and M < X < H such that
JX : MI < 4, then M -A X; in particular, M:9 MS22(H).
Proof. If M were not normal in X, then IX : MI = 4 and X/MX would be isomorphic

to a 2-subgroup of order at least 8 of the symmetric group S4. But D8 E Sy12(S4) does
not possess a nonnormal permutable subgroup of order 2. Thus M g X; in particu-
lar, every element of order at most 4 of H normalizes M.
(54) Let H = <x, y) be a 2-group with modular subgroup lattice and suppose that
o(x) = 4 and <x> is core-free in H. Then <[x, y]) = S22(<y)), <[x, y2]) = S2(<y))
and <x)'' <x)y'-'.
Proof. By 2.3.6 or (53), x normalizes <y> and hence [x, y] E <y> n S22(H) =
Q2(<)')). If [x, y] E S2(<y)), then [x2, y] = [x, y]2 = 1 since S2(<y)) < Z(H) and
hence x2 e Z(H), contradicting <x)H = 1. Thus <[x, y]) = f22(W) and hence
[x, y2] = [x, y]2 generates S2(<y)). Since <x> n <y) = 1, therefore <x)y2 # <x) and
hence <x)y <x)y '.
(55) If H is a 2-group such that H' is cyclic of order at most 4, then

[x2, H] < V(H') and x4 E Z(H) for every x E H.
Proof. Since H' is cyclic and I H' I < 4, we have [x, y]x = [x, y]-' or [x, y]x = [x, y]
where y e H. Then (1) of 1.5 shows that in the first case [x2, y] = [x, y]x [x, y] = 1
and hence also [x4, y] = 1; in the second case, [x2, y] = [x, y]2 E D(H') and [x4, y] _
[x,1']4 = I-
In the last two lemmas of this subsection, H again is a p-group with modular
subgroup lattice for an arbitrary prime p. And since both assertions trivially hold in
a hamiltonian 2-group, that is, in a direct product of Q8 with an elementary abelian
2-group, we may assume that H is an M*-group. Then by Iwasawa's Theorem 2.3.1
there exist A a H, b e H and an integer s which is at least 2 in case p = 2 such that
H = A<b), A is abelian, and b-'ab = a'+"5 for all a c A. Clearly, H' = Z55(A).
(56) If the M*-group H contains a maximal subgroup M that is abelian, then H'
is elementary abelian.
Proof. We keep the notation introduced above and assume first that A < M. Then
b" be M < CH(A) so that (I + p')" - I (mod Exp A). But since s > 2 in case p = 2,
(1 + ps)" = 1 + p'+' (mod ps+2) and hence ps+' > Exp A. It follows that H' = Z55(A)
is elementary abelian. If A M, then H' < A n M < Z(AM) = Z(H) and
H = M<z) for some z c H. Since z" E M, we have [x, z]" = [x, z"] = 1 for every
x e M and therefore again H' is elementary abelian.
(57) If His an M*-group of exponent p' such that H' is cyclic and I H'11,_, (H)I > p3,
then H is abelian.
Proof. Suppose, for a contradiction, that H' = UJA) o 1. Then A = <a> x B where
o(a) > Exp B. It follows that JA : f2r_, (A) I < p and hence also I AS2,_, (H) : S2,_, (H)l _
I A: A n'2r_,(H)I < p. Since H/AS2r_,(H) is both cyclic and elementary abelian,
I H : Af2r_, (H)I = p. Thus JH : Qr_, (H)I < p2, a contradiction.
Finally, we mention that we sometimes use Baer's Theorem 2.5.9 saying that an
M*-group H of order p" is lattice-isomorphic to an abelian group H of the same
order and therefore of type (pa',..., pa') for integers x, >_ xz ;; we also call
this the type of H.
The case p = 2, continued
We want to show that under Hypothesis 5.5.1, N is an M-group, IN'I < 2, G is

metabelian and G has derived length at most 3. Recall that IS2(N)I = 2'. So if m = 1,
N is cyclic since G, by (6), does not contain subgroups isomorphic to Q8; then G is
metacyclic and 5.2.13 shows that G is metacyclic. Thus all the assertions we want to
prove hold in this case and hence we shall assume in the sequel that
(58) m > 2.
For the proof of our result we have to study three autoprojectivities of G in some
detail: first of all a = cpbtp-', as before, but also a2 = (pb2cp-1 and Qaa-1. For the
convenience of the reader we recall from (11) and (13) the operation of a and bon the
bases {e0,. .. , e,,, } and { f0, ... , fm } of fl(G) and S2(G), respectively. In addition we
note that, by Theorem 2.6.7, cp is induced on S2(G) by an isomorphism 1. Thus
(59) e' = f for i = 0, ..., m; eo, e, e Z(G); e = e;e;_, for I = 2, ..., m; fo = fo,
f 1b = .fl .fo and fi = fzfl
We shall need the following formulae (see also (17)).
(60) <eo)" _ <eo>, <er>" = <e1eo>, (e2>" = <eze1>, <eze,>" _ <ezeo>.
<eze,>"2
(61) <e1>"2 = <e1>, <e2>"2 = <ezeo>, = <eze,eo>, <ezeo>"2 = <e2>.

(62) <e1>""" '
= <e1>,
<eze,>oa"
= <ezeo>,
<e2eie0>"a"
= <ez>
Proof. By (59), a = cphcp-' is induced on S2(G) by the isomorphism 1bi-1, which we

1 1
shall also call a. Then we can compute as follows: eo = fob, 1 = fo = eo, ei = fob" =
(.fifo)' = e1eo, ei =fir = (f2fI)' 1 = eze,, (eze,)" = eiei = ezeo. This proves (60);
1 1
2 2
using (60), we obtain: e; = (e,eo)" = e,, e2 = (eze,)" = ezeo, (eze,) = e2 ei = 2 2 2
ez ei e o, (ez e)"2
o = z o = ez and a"a = (e,eo)a" ' = (eieo)"-' = ei, (ezei )"a =
ea2e"2
1
1 1
(ezeo)" = (e2 e1eo)" = ezeo, (ezeIeo)ff"-' = (ezeoeo)"" 1 = (e2 e1)" = e2.
(63) Again let Q = N n N" and define R = N n N"2 and S = N n N"a"-'. Then
Q n <eo,el,e2> = <eze1> and R n <eo,e1,e2> = <e1> = S n <eo,e,,ez>.
Proof. Let E _ <eo, e, , ez >. By (18), N" n <eo, e, > = <e, eo > and since e, eo 0 N,
Q n <eo,e,) = 1; it follows that IQ n El < 2. On the other hand, <e2>" = <eze,
and hence <e2e1) < N n N = Q. Thus Q n E = <e2e1). Similarly, since

Nn <e2, eo) = <e2 > but (e2) = (e2 eo)2 4 N2 and <e2> = <e2 e eo )-1 1
N 1, it follows that R n (eo, e2) = 1 = S r) <eo, e2 ). Thus R n Ej < 2 and

jS n Ej < 2; on the other hand, <e1)2 = <e1> = implies that <e1> <
<e1)-1
NnN2nN-1 =RnSandRnE= <el)=SnE.
(64) K< S and R n K = (e1).
Proof. Recall that K = (N)G. Thus S = (N n N"'-')' = N n (N) >- K and

hence S > K. Suppose, for a contradiction, that R n K > <e1>. Then R n K >
(22(K) _ <g) since K is cyclic; let <g)'* = <h). By (20), <g,a) is abelian and hence
<g, a)" _ <h, b) is a 2-group with modular subgroup lattice and o(h) = 4. Moreover,
by (1), <h> is core-free in <h,b) and so (54) yields that <[h,b2]) = S2(<b)) = <fo).
Now g E R= N n N2 implies that h e (N n
N2),
= N n N*b2 and hence fo =

h_1hb2
E (N`)b2. Since fo E Z(G), it follows that fQ E N41, a contradiction.
u2r-1
Recall that by (23) there exists u e N such that = e1. For any such u,
u2r-1 =
(65) N = Q<u), Q n <u) = 1, e1, u = u (mod fl,-, (N)) and, more generally,
(u2k) = u2k (mod S2r_k_1 (N)) for k = 0, ... , r - 1.
Proof. The first three assertions have been proved in (23). For k = 0, ..., r - 1,
((u2k))2r-k-1 = (u2r-1) = e = e1 = (u2k)2r-k-1

1
and hence by (7), (u2k) = u2k (mod S2r_k_1(N)).
(66) Let 25 = ExpQ. Then there exists w e Q such that w2s-1 = e2e1. For any
such w, Q = (Q n R)<w) = (Q n S)<w), (Q n R) n <w) = 1 = (Q n S) n <w) and
N = (Q n R)(w)<u); furthermore w = wu2r-` (mod (2s_1(N)).
Proof. To simplify notation, let r be one of the two autoprojectivities a2 or Qau-1

of G and let T = N n NL; thus T = R or T = S and therefore T n (eo, e1, e2) _
<e1), by (63). Now (65) and (7) imply that S25(N) = QK2,() and U,-, ((2,(N))
Z5s_1(Q)(e1). Since e1 0 Q and ts_1(Q) 0 1, it follows from (l lc) that (e1,e2) <
Vs_1(SL5(N)) and hence (e1,e2) n?55_1(Q) 1. Since Qn <e1,e2) = <e2e1) and
ZSS_1(Q) = {x21 Ix E Q}, there exists w e Q such that = e2e1. By (8), T is w2a-1
permutable in N and [N/T] is a chain. Thus T n Q is also permutable in Q and

[Q/Tn Q] is a chain. Since T r) <eo, e1, e2 > = <e1>, we deduce that (Q n T) n <w> = 1
and, by (9), Q = (Q n T)<w). It follows that N = Q(u) = (Q n T)<w)(u). For the
last assertion in (66), note that
1
1) W21-1U21-1 = (wu2r ')2' 1
(w)25 = (w25 = (e2e1) = e2e1e1 =
so that w - wu2r-' (mod S2s_1(N)), by (7).

(67) If N/Qr_2(N) is not cyclic, we may choose the element u in (65) from R;
similarly, there exists u' e S satisfying (65) and (66) in place of u. For these elements,
(67a) R = (Q n R) and S = (Q n S)<u'>,
(67b) N = R<w> = S<w> and R n <w> = S n <w> = 1,
R<w>a2 = R<wU2. s>al, R n <w>a2
(67c) N`2 = = 1= R n <wU2-=>2f
(67d) N ' = S(w>-'
Proof. Again let r be a2 or uacr' and T = N n N` so that T = R or T = S. For the

present, choose u as in (65). Then N = Q = T<z> for some z e N, by (8) and (9),
and hence by (7), t5r_,(N) = t5r_1(Q)t5r_1() = t3r_,(T)t5r_,(<z>). We are looking
for t e T such that t2'-' = e,. By (11c), U,-,(N) = <e,,...,e1> for some i. If i > 2,
then I?Sr_,(<z>)I < 2 implies that J,_,(T) n <e e2> 1. By (63), T r) <eo, e,, e2>
<e,>, therefore U,-, (T) n <e,, e2> = <e,>, and hence there exists t E T such that t21-' _
e,. This, of course, is also the case if i = 1 and Jr_,(T) 1. So suppose, for a
contradiction, that i = 1 and Jr_, (T) = 1. Then Exp T < 2r-' and t5r_, (N) =
<e,> = Q(<z>) = Q((u>). Since Q n = 1, it follows that also ExpQ < 2'-'. If
Q < Qr_2(N), then N/Qr_2(N) would be cyclic, contradicting our assumption; thus
ExpQ = 2r-'. Now IN: TI = I<z>: <z> n TI < 2r-' since Q(<z>) _ <e,> < T; on
the other hand, I T<w>: TI = I(w>I = 2r-' since Q((w>) = <e2e,> T. Thus N =
T <w> < Q,_, (N), which is a contradiction. Thus in any event there exists t e T such
that t2"-' = e,. By (65), for any such t, N = Q(t> and Dedekind's law yields that
T = (Q n T)(t>. By (66), N = <t>Q = (t>(Q n T)<w> = T<w> and T n <w> _
T n Q n <w> = 1; so (67a) and (67b) are satisfied.
2
For the proof of (67c), note that I N' : R I = IN: R I = I(w>I and that
Q(<w>) = <e2e,> and Q(<wu21->) = (e2>, by (7). Hence by (61) and (63),
n R = <e2e,eo> n R = 1 and
(w>Q2
n R = <e2eo> n R = 1. It follows
<wu2"-=>Q2
N.2
that = = R<wu2r-,>a2. Similarly, I N"' : SI = IN: SI _ I(w>I and, by
R<w>a2
(62) and (63), <w)-' n S = <e2e0> n S = 1; thus N"'-' = S<w)-' and (67d)
holds.
(68) If x e N such that [Q2(<x>), a] = 1, then [Qi+2(<x>), a] < n;(N) for all i > 0.
Proof. We use induction on o(x). If o(x) > 24, then the induction assumption ap-
plied to x2 yields that [Q3(<x>), a] < O(N). Therefore, by (3) and (4), xQ(G) satis-
fies the assumptions of (68) in G/Q(G) and the induction assumption implies that
[QI+2(<x>), a] < QI(G) n N = Q1(N) for all i > 1. Thus we may assume that o(x) = 8
and have to show that [x, a] E Q(N). Let H = <x, Q2(N)>. By (5), Q3(N)/Q(N) is
abelian and hence H' < U(N). Let K be as defined in (19). Since Q(<x>) = <x4> is
centralized by a, we obtain x4 = e, e K, by (l ic). Thus HK/K < Q2(G/K) is abelian,
by (5) applied to G/K. So H' < Q(N) n K = <e,>. Since (x)4 = (x4) = ei = e, = x4,
(7) implies that xa = xz for some z E Q2(N). By assumption, x2 = (x2) _ (Xa)2 =
(xz)2 = x2z[z,x]z and hence z2 = [x,z] E H' < <e,> = <x4>. Thus z2 = x4k for some
k, hence (zx-21)2 = I since Q2(N) is abelian and therefore zx-2' E Q(N) <_ Z(N),
by Lemma 5.5.6. It follows that z centralizes x and hence z2 = [x, z] = 1. So
[x, a] = z e U(N), as desired.
We now reduce the proof of our main theorem to a special case which is applica-
ble to the different situations we have to consider.
5.5.7 Lemma. Suppose that Hypothesis 5.5.1 is satisfied and that in addition p = 2, N
is an M-group with cyclic commutator subgroup N' and one of the following holds:
(a) N/S2,_2(N) is not cyclic, or
(b) Z5r_2(N) < Z(G)-
Then I N'I < 2.
Proof: We argue by induction on G I and first note that the assumptions of the
lemma are inherited by G/S2(G). Indeed N1(G)/1(G) N/S2(N) is clearly an M-
group of exponent 2'-' with cyclic commutator subgroup. If (a) holds for N, then it
also holds for N/Q(N) except possibly when r < 2; but in this case, by (5), N is
abelian and we are done. And if (b) holds, then Z5r_2(N) < CN,(a) is cyclic by (10). This
is equivalent to the type of N being of the form (2', 2k, ...) where k < r - 2 and this
is preserved in N/S2(N); hence Z5,_3(N/S2(N)) is cyclic. Thus Z5,_2(N) = <U2'-'> for
it e N with o(u) = 2' and Z5r_3(NS2(G)/S2(G)) = <u2r-'S2(G)>. Applying (68) with x, a
replaced by u, ya (y c- N), we obtain [u2r-', ya] E Q(G) for all y E N and hence, finally,
that <u2' 'f2(G)> < Z(G/S2(G)). Thus (b) holds in G/S2(G). The induction assumption
implies that N'f2(G)/S2(G)I < 2 and, since N' is cyclic, it follows that IN' l < 4. We
want to show that I N' l < 2; so we suppose, for a contradiction, that IN' I = 4. By
(l Id), e, e N'; so
(69) N' is a cyclic subgroup of order 4 of N containing e,.
Define Q as in (21) and choose u and w as in (65) and (66); then N = Q(u> and
u2' ' = e, Since e, Q and N' is cyclic, Q n N' = I and hence Q QN'/N' is
.
abelian. Then (55) implies that S2r_2(N) < Q<u'> centralizes Q. Thus
(70) Q is abelian and S2r_2(N) < CN,(Q).
We show next that we may choose u with the additional property that
(71) [u, a] E 52,-2(N).
This is clear if (b) holds; since then S22() < Z5r_2(N) < Z(G) and (68) implies (71).
So suppose that (a) is satisfied. Then N/S2r_2(N) is not cyclic and Q S2,_2(N)
since N = Q(u>. Thus 2'-' < o(w) = Exp Q. If o([u, w]) < 2, then [u, w] E Z(N)
and hence [u2, w] _ [u, w]2 = I. It would follow that W E Z(<Q, u2>) and o(w) =
Exp(Q, u2>. By 2.3.16, <Q, u2> would be abelian and (56) would imply that N' is
elementary abelian, contradicting (69). Thus o([u, w]) = 4 and hence N' = <z>
where z = [u, w]. Since N' a G, either z' = z or z = z-' = ze,; in the latter case,
(ze2) = ze,e2e, = zee. Since e, e and <e2e,> E <w>, we obtain e2 E <u, w>, and
hence H = <u, w> contains an element x, namely x = z or x = zee, such that x' = x
and x2 = e,; the latter follows from (ze2)2 = z2ez = z2 = e, where we use 5.5.6 to get
e2 E Z(N). Since n <w> = 1, the subgroup H is of type (2', 2') or (2', 2'-') and we
v2i-2
claim that there exists v e H such that = x. This is clear if the type of H is (2', 2')
since then ir_2(H) = 02(H). And if s = r - 1, then H/L is of type (2'-', 2'-') where
L = Vr_, (H) = <x2>; thus xL E S2(H/L) = Z5,-,(H/L) so that there exists g e H such
g2"-'
2 2
that g2 = x (mod L). It follows that g2 = x or = x-', and in both cases
there exists v e H such that v2" ' = x. Then = e1 and, by (68), [v, all E S2r_2(N);
v21_1
so if we replace u by v, (71) is satisfied and we may assume that (71) holds for u.
Now (71) implies_ that the group <u,a>S2r_2(G)/S2,_2(G) is abelian; hence
<u,a>'S2r_2(G)/S2r_2(G) is an M*-group containing "S2,_2(G)/S2r_2(G), which is
a core-free cyclic subgroup of order 4, by (1) applied to G/f2r_2(G). By (54),
"'12,-2(G): "b Hence if <u1> = = "b" ' and <u2> =
 ' = "b-',p1' then <u1>K2,-2(G)/K2,-2(G) and <U2>K2,-2(G)/J2, -2(G) are two
different subgroups of order 4 in the abelian group <u,a>S2r_2(G)/f2,_2(G), and
therefore their join contains the socle of this group. Let <c> = S2,(<a>). Then u2 and
c2 have order 2 modulo fl,-2(G) and it follows that
(72) <u2,c2> < <ui,u2>Qr-2(G)
By (23), N = Q = Q<u1>, Q n <ul> = 1 and Q= N r) Na N. As a projective
image of N, the subgroup N is an M-group. By (48) there exists k E N such that
k = I (mod 4) and x = xk for all x c- Q. Since u1 E <u, a>S2r_2(G) _ <u, a>S2r_2(N)
and, by (71), this group is abelian modulo Qr_2(N), we obtain [a-', u, '] E Qr_2(N) <
CG(Q), by (70). Thus (49) implies that conjugation by u1 also raises elements to the
power k in Q. Since [N/Q] is a chain of length r, Qf2r_1(Q) lies in the maximal
subgroup Q<u2> of N containing Q and, since [u2, x] = [u, x][u, x] = [u, x]2 or 1
for x e Q, it follows that (Q<u2>)' has order at most 2. By (50), x = uk for all
x c- QS2r_1(Q). Similarly, if we apply our results to a-' in place of a, we get that u2
induces a power automorphism x -+ x' in Q' = N n N ' and Q' and therefore also in
QS2r_1(Q). We claim that
(73) QQ,-1(Q) = Qn,-JQ);

then it will follow that, in particular,
(74) <u1,u2> induces a group of power automorphisms in Q.
To prove (73), first note that by (21) and (22), Q' = QQ = Q,(N) where p'=
Exp Q and s is the smallest integer such that N/Q,(N) is cyclic. If s < r - 1, then
QS2r_1(Q) = QQ = S2,(N) and, similarly, QS2r_1(Q) = Q'Q = S25(N). So suppose
that s = r, that is ExpQ = 2'. Since N' is cyclic, IN/S2r_1(N)J < 4, by (57); on the
other hand, u and w are independent elements of order 2' and hence IN/Qr_1(N)I = 4
and Q = Q1 x <w> where Exp Q1 < 2'. So if v: N - N is the homomorphism
defined by x" = x2" ' for x e N, then by (l lc), N' = <e1,e2>. Since QQ = N
and [N/Q] is a chain of length r, there exists x c- Q such that Q<x> = N and
Qn <x> = 1. As (Qf2,-1(Q))=Q <w>"=<e2e1>, we have Q<x2><QS2,-1(Q)<-
v-'(<e2e1>)< N. But Q<x2> is a maximal subgroup of N and it follows that
Q"r_1(Q) = v-'(<e2e1>). The same argument with Q, Q replaced by Q, Q
shows that QS2r_1(Q) = v '((Q')"). Now Q n <e1,e2> = <e2> since, by (60),
<e2e1> = <e2> < Na n N = Q and <eleo> = (e1> N '. Therefore V<
N'n Q = <e2> and, since Exp Q' = 2', we obtain 0'= <e2>. Thus (0)" = <e2> _
(e2e1> and so QS2r_1(Q) = v-'(<e2e1>) = QK2,-i(Q) This proves (73) and (74).
By (74) and (70), every subgroup of Q is normalized by <u1, u2 >f2,_ 2(N). Now
f)r-2(<a>) = <c4> and, by (72), <u1, u2>Q,-2(G) = <ui, u2>Q,-2(N)<c4> contains c2;
therefore c4 E'b(<c2)) lies in the Frattini subgroup of this group. Thus

<u1,u2)S2r_2(G) = <u1 ,u2)Qr_2(N) and now (72) implies that u2 normalizes every
subgroup of Q. Thus u2 induces a universal power automorphism in the abelian
group Q; since [u2, w] e N' n <w> = I and o(w) = Exp Q, u2 centralizes Q and
Q<u2) is abelian. Again by (56), N' is elementary abelian, a final contradiction.
We come now to the main result of this section.
5.5.8 Theorem (Busetto and Napolitani [1991]). Suppose that Hypothesis 5.5.1 is
satisfied and p = 2. Then N is an M-group and I N' < 2.
Proof. We use induction on N and keep the notation introduced above. By (5) and
(6), N is abelian if Exp N = 2' < 4 and cyclic if m < 1. Thus we may assume that
r > 3 and m > 2. As in the proof of Menegazzo's theorem we apply the induction
assumption to various projectivities. First of all, by (3), cP induces a projectivity in
G/S2(G) satisfying Hypothesis 5.5.1 and hence N'f2(G)/f2(G)J < 2; it follows that
N' < f22(G). Now we apply the induction assumption to the projectivity induced by
a in G/K and obtain that I N'K/K I < 2. By (1 I c) applied to G/K, N/K contains only
one a-invariant subgroup of order 2 and since, by (19), K is cyclic and contains e, ,
this subgroup is <e2)K/K. Thus N' < <e2)K n 02(G) = <e2)S22(K). By 5.5.6 and
(20), both factors are central in N and hence
(75) N' < (e2> x S22(K) < Z(N).
Again let S2,(<a>) = <c>. Since N' < Q2(N), it follows that NS22(G)/02(G) is abelian;
therefore by (3) and 5.5.3 there exists k e N such that c induces the power k in
NS22(G)/S22(G). By 5.5.6, S2(G) < Z(S2,(G)) and S22(G)/f2(G) < Z(Q,(G)/52(G)) and
hence (52) implies that c4 induces the power k4 in NS22(G). In particular,
(76) c4 acts as a power automorphism on N.
We make another remark that will be used later. Suppose that z e N such that
o(z) = 4 and z = z-'. Then (az)2 = a2 so that <az) and <a> are cyclic subgroups
of <a, z> generating this group and intersecting in <a2>. Their images under tp
are cyclic groups generating <a, z)` and intersecting in <b2 > and it follows that
<b2) < Z(<a, z)'). In particular, b2 centralizes <z)11 and therefore every conjugate of
<z)` in N<b2) is contained in N. This shows that the normal closure of <z> in
N<b2) is contained in N and hence <z>4' < L` if L" = Nn.<n:,; thus z E L. Since
L < N n N`''" R, (63) shows that e2e, L. Finally note that if N' is cyclic and
N' K, then by (1 ld), e, e N' and hence N' = <z> has order 4; furthermore, by (20),
C,(a) = K and therefore z" = z-'. Thus we have shown:
(77) Let M = N<a2> and L = NM. If z e N such that o(z) = 4 and z = Z_', then
z e L; in particular, N' < L if N' is cyclic and not contained in K. Furthermore
e2e, 0 L.
Now let Q, R, u, w be as in (65) and (66). Then Q' < N' r) Q < (<e2> x S22(K)) n Q =
<e2e,), by (63). Since w2' 1 = e2e,, we see that Q' < <w> and hence <w) a Q and
Q n R 2t Q/<w> is abelian. Thus
(78) Q' < <e2e1>, Q = <w>(Q n R), <w> n (Q n R) = 1, <w> a Q and Q n R is

abelian.
Since Q = N n N and R = N n N2, it follows that Q n R = N n N' n N2 <
N n N2 = Q and IQ: Q n RI = IQ: Q n RI = I<w)I = 25. Now <w> Q, so <w>
is permutable in Q and since, by (60), <e2e1) = <e2eo), we have 52((w)) N.
Thus (Q n R) n (w> = I and so Q' _ (Q n R)<w> It follows that N n Q =
(Q n R)(N n (w)) = Q n R < Q and hence for every X < Q n R, there results
X<w) n (Q n R) = X(<w> n (Q n R)) = X < X<w>. So we have shown:
(79) Let <w> _ <w1>. Then Q = (Q n R)(w1>, (Q n R) n <w1> = 1, Q n R a Q
<w1> is permutable in Q and induces a group of power automorphisms in Q n R.
(tiawu2...1,2' )21 I = w2a 1 u2r 1`2. I = e2e1e1eo = = wia ' and
By (7), e2eo
wu2.,c2'
(80) w1 = (mod 525-1(G))
Now we distinguish the cases s = r, s = r - 1, s < r - 2 and split the first of these
into two.
Case 1: s = r, Exp(Q n R) = 2'.
In this case we show that N is even abelian. Let x a Q n R of order 2'. Then by (65)
and (66), Ur_1(N) > S2(<x>) x S2(<w>) x S2() and hence by (7), IN/52,_1(N)I > 8.
By induction, however, N/52(N) N52(G)/52(G) is an M-group with cyclic commuta-
tor subgroup; it follows from (57) that N/S2(N) is abelian. Thus N' < 52(N) and (75)
yields that
(81) N' S <e1,e2>.
If IN/f2r_1(N)I > 16, then IN/KS2r_1(N)I > 8; again by induction, H/K is an
M-group with cyclic commutator subgroup and hence is abelian. Then
N' < <e1,e2> n K = <e1> and, by (25), N is an M-group. But then again (57) yields
that N is abelian. Thus we are left with the case that IN;S2r_1(N) = 8 in which
(82) N = <x, w, u>Q,-1(N).
Now (65) and (66) show that a normalizes <u)52r_1(N) and <w,u)52r_,(N).
Thus, applying (11c) to G/S2r_,(G), we see that <u)Or_1(G)/S2,_1(G) and
u)S2r_1(G),%S2r_1(G) are the only normal subgroups of order 2 and 4, respectively,
of G/52,_1(G) contained in the elementary abelian group NS2r_1(G),/f2,_1(G) of order
8; in particular, ((x)52r_1(G)) = NS2r_1(G). Since N = (Q n R)<w>, (7) shows
that <x>92,-, (N) < (Q n R)<w2><u2> so that ((Q n R)<w2><u2>) = N. Now N' <
Z(N) n 52(N) implies that u2, w2 a Z(N). Therefore (Q n R)<w2>(u2> is abelian and
every conjugate of it contains and hence centralizes the normal subgroup S2r_,(N).
It follows that
(83) fl,-,(N) < Z(N).
By (65) and (66), u - u and YCa - wu (mod flr_1(N)) and by (I le) applied to
G;52(G) there exists z a N such that z = zw (mod Q,-, (N)). Then z2 - (zw) = zu
and w2 _ (wu) - w (mod fl,-, (N)); since N's <e1, e2> < CN(a2) and N' < S2,_, (N) <
Z(N), it follows that [z, w] = [z, w]Z = [zZ, w'2] = [zu, w] = [z, w] [u, w]. Thus
[u, w] = I and <w> g N since <w> a Q and N = Q. Therefore [w, z] lies in
<w> n <e,, e2) = <w2' '> and hence wZ = where a E {0, 11. Since w _ wu
w'+e2'
(mod f2r_1(N)), we see that H = <w, u)S2r_1(N) <w, w)S2,_, (N) is an abelian
normal subgroup of G and has index 2 in N; therefore it contains [a-', z-']. By (49),
(w)` = '; by (83), h= = h = h1 '2r ' for all h E Sr_1(N) and then also for all
(w)1+f2r
h e H. But H<z> = N and Iwasawa's theorem implies that N is an M-group. By (6),

N and its projective image N are M*-groups. By (23), N = Q<u) and
Q n (u) = l; furthermore Q = N n N a N. So 2.3.14 shows that every subgroup
of Q is normal in N; in particular, Q n R 9 Q and by (78), Q = (Q n R) x <w> is
abelian. By (21) and (22), QQ = N and hence Q n Q < Z(N). Since [N/Q] is a chain
and IN/s2r_1(N)I = 23, there exists an element of order 2' in Q n Q and, by 2.3.16, N
is abelian. This finishes Case 1.
Case 2: s = r, Exp(Q n R) < 2'.

By (65), N1 = Sr_1(N) is an a-invariant subgroup of G so that, by (2),
G1 = N,<a>, N1 and the projectivity induced by cp in G1 satisfy Hypothesis 5.5.1. By
induction, Ni is an M-group and IN1 'I < 2. Since N, is a-invariant, (I lc) yields that
N1' < <e1> < . By (23) applied to N1 and Q1 = N1 n N', we get that N1 = Q1,
Q, n = I and N; = Q1<u), Q1 n = 1. Since IN1 : S2,_1(N1)I = 2, it follows
that S2r_,(N) = S2,_,(N,) = Q1<u2>. Furthermore Q1 n N,' = I implies that
Q1 _- Q1 N1'/N1 is abelian, and IN; I < 2 yields that u2 E Z(N,). Thus
(84) S2r_1(N) = Q1<u2> is abelian.
Let = (u1). Then by (48), u1 induces a power automorphism in Q1 a Ni.
From <e1> = <e1eo>, there follows u;' (uc)2' ', and hence by (7), uc = u,y for
some y e Q ,_,(G). By 5.5.3 applied to G* = S2r_,(N)<a> = S2r_1(G)<a>, elements of
S2,_1(G) induce power automorphisms in S2,_1(N), and it follows that uc = my in-
duces a power automorphism in Q1. By (65), [u,a] E S2r_,(N) and [c,a] = 1. Thus
[a-', (uc)-' ] E Sr_, (N) < CG(Q,) and hence by (49), uc induces in Q the same power
as in Q1. Since s = r, we see that Ni/flr_2(Nl) is not cyclic; hence (21) and (22)
applied to G1 yield that Q1Qi = nr-i(Ni) = or-1(N) and this group is abelian. So uc
induces a power automorphism in or-I(N). By (79), w1 induces a power automor-
phism in Q n R and, by (80), w1 = wucz for some z E or-1(G). Then Q n R < Qr_1(N)
since Exp(Q n R) < 2'. Thus w1, uc, z induce power automorphisms in Q n R and
hence so does w. In particular, (Q n R)' = Q n R and (78) shows that
(85) Q is abelian.
Since S2(<w' >) = <e2e1> = <e2> and Q n (e2> = 1, it follows that N = Q _
Q<w>, by (23). Similarly, by (63), (Q n Q) n <eo, e,, e2> = 1 and sine Q n Q is
permutable in Q with [Q/Q n Q] a chain, (9) shows that Q = (Q n Q)<w>; thus
N = (Q n Q)<w> <w). Now Q and Q are abelian and QQ > Q<w> = N so that
Q n Q < Z(N). By (75), N' < Z(N) and it follows that
(86) N' = ([w, w]> is cyclic of order at most 4.
Since r = s, the group N/Qr_2(N) is not cyclic, and therefore it remains to be shown
that N is an M-group; then the assumptions of 5.5.7(a) will be satisfied and it will
follow that I N'I < 2.
For this, suppose first that N' < K. Since Q n K = 1, we see that N/K is abelian
of exponent 2r, and by 5.5.3 there exists k c N such that k - I (mod 4) and x" = xk
(mod K) for all x e N. Now Q:9 N = Q(u1> implies that x-'x" E Q n K = I for
x e Q. Thus x = xk for all x e Q and, by 2.3.4, N is an M-group. Thus N is an
M-group, as desired.
Now suppose that N' K. Let M = N(a2> and L = N. By 5.4.6, cp induces a
projectivity from M/L to M/L for which Hypothesis 5.5.1 is satisfied. By (77), N' < L
and e2e1 0 L. Thus <w> n L = I and hence NIL is abelian of exponent 2r. By 5.5.3
applied to M/L, the element c induces a power h - 1 (mod 4) in NIL and hence, by
(51), also in N/LG. Since u1 E S2r(G) = N(c> and N/LG is abelian, u1 induces a power
k - 1 (mod4) in N/LG. Now e2e1 0 L together with (1 lc) implies that f2(LG) < (el)
so that Q n LG = 1. Then again Q a N = Q(u1> implies that x-kx E Q n LG = 1
for all x e Q and that NQ is an M-group. Thus also N is an M-group and this finishes
Case 2.
Case 3: s = r - 1.
We observe that N/S2r_2(N) is not cyclic and, by (67), we may assume that
(87) u e R so that R = (Q n R)(u> and N = R(w> = (Q n R)(u>(w>.
Since N = Q(u>, we have S2r_1(N) = Q(u2> and the induction assumption yields
that
(88) K2,-,(N) is an M-group and f2r_1(N)' < <e1>,
by (1lc). Since Q n (e1> = 1, it follows that
(89) Q is abelian.
We want to show next that R' < (e1>. If Exp(Q n R) = 2r-1, then K2,-, (N) has three
2r_'
independent elements of order and cyclic commutator subgroup and therefore,
by (57), it is abelian. Then N = f2,_1(N) and (75) imply that N' is elementary
abelian and N' < (e1,e2>. Thus R' < (e1,e2> n R = <e1>, by (63). Now suppose
that Exp(Q n R) < 2r_' and consider S as defined in (63). Then (66) implies that
Q n R < S2r_2(Q) = (Q n S)(w2> and by (67) there exists u' E S such that
S = (Q n S)(u'> and Q(u'> = N. Now R = (Q n R)(u>, the commutativity of Q and
N' < Z(N) imply that
R' _ [Q n R, (u>] < [(Q n S)(w2>, Q(u'>]
<- [Q n S, <u'>] [(w2>, (u'>] <- S'(ei>,
since [w2, u'] = [w, u']2 E 5(N') = <e, >, by (75). By (63) and (64), S' < (e2) K n S = K
and so R' < R n K = (e1>. Thus in any case,
(90) R' < (e1>.
We wish to apply Lemma 5.5.7(a) and therefore have to show that N' is cyclic and
N is an M-group. Now N = (Q n R)<w>, u e R, Q abelian and N'< Z(N) imply
that
N' = [Q n R, <w>] [Q n R, ] [<w>, ] < Q'R'<[w, u]) < <e1 ><[w, u]>.
Suppose, for a contradiction, that N' is not cyclic. Then e1 0 <[w, u]> and it follows
from (75) that o([w, u]) = 2 and [w, u] = e2e1 or [w, u] = e2; in any case, N' < f2(N).
Thus Nn(G)/fl(G) is abelian and, by 5.5.3, c acts as a power automorphism on
NO(G)/fl(G) and hence also on N/S2(N). By (52) and 5.5.6, c2 acts as a power auto-
morphism on N. Since N = R<w> and R n <w> = 1, it follows that 0r_2(N) < R(w2>.
Clearly [w2, u] = [w, u]2 = 1 and R'< <e1) < implies !g R; thus is nor-
malized by 0r-2(N)<c'> = flr-2(G)
Now assume first that [w,u] = e2e1; the other case will be similar. Then
[w, u] a <w> and hence <w> g Q<u) = N since Q is abelian. By (67c), R =
<w>2
N n N' 2 g N2 = R<w>2 and R n <w>2 = 1; let = <w2>. Since <w> a N, we
obtain that <w2> is permutable in N2, and hence (u><w2) n R = (<w2> n R) _
= e2eleo =
w2r-2
 g (u)<w2>. Because of

(wc2)2r-2,
we have w2 = wc2x for some

x E S2r-2(G), by (7). Now w2, c2 and x normalize , as we have seen, and hence so
does w. But this yields e2e1 = [w, u] E <u), a contradiction.
Now assume that [w, u] = e2. Then we use wu2 instead of w for our argument. As
[wu2,u] = [w,u] = e2 = (wu2)2r-2, the subgroup <wu2> is normalized by u; further-
more it is centralized by Q since Q is abelian and u2 a Z(N). Thus (wu2 > g N. By
N2 >Q2 2=
(67c), = R<wu2 >2 and hence <v> = <wu2 normalizes . Finally, v2'
e2eo = (wu2c2)2r-2 implies that v = wu2c2y for some y E fl,-2(G). Now v, c2, y nor-
malize and hence so does wu2. But [wu2, u] = e2 0 (u>, a contradiction. Thus
(91) N' is cyclic
and it remains to be shown that N is an M-group. To prove this, by (47), it will
suffice to show that
(92) N/<e1> is an M-group;
note that, by (88), 0,-, (N) is an M-group and U,-, (N) = <e1> is cyclic.
To prove (92), suppose first that N' < K and again let <w>2 = <w2>. Since
Q n K = 1 and s = r - 1, Exp(N/K) >- 2r-'; on the other hand, U,-, (N) _ <e1> < K.
Thus N/K is an abelian group of exponent 2r-1 and, by 5.5.3, w2 e 0r_1(G) induces
Nat
a power automorphism x --+ xk, k = I (mod 4), in N/K. By (67c), R = N n
NQ2
g
= R<w2> and hence x-'x'2 e R n K = (e1>, by (64), for every x e R. Since
R/R n K RK/K is abelian, it follows from 2.3.4 that R<w2>/<e,> = N62/(e,> is an
M-group. By (61), (e1>2 = <e1> so that N/<e,>, as a projective image of N2/(e1>,
is also an M-group.
Now suppose that N' K. Here, as in Case 2, we first study the projectivity
induced by T in M = N<a2> and then use aaa-' instead of a2; let (w3> = <w>-`.
By (77), N' < L and e2e, L for L = NM. Since U,-,(N) = (e1> < N' < L, we have
Exp(N/L) < 2'-'; on the other hand, <w> n L = I and hence NIL is abelian of
exponent 2r-1. By 5.5.3 applied to M/L, the element c2 induces a power h = 1
(mod 4) in NIL and hence, by (51), also in N/LG. Since w3 E Q,-, (G) = N<c2) and
N/LG is abelian, w3 also induces a power k = 1 (mod 4) in N/LG.
Consider S = N n N '. By (63), e2 S and e2 L since e, e L and e2e, L.
Therefore by (l lc), 1(SG) = <e,) = S2(LG) so that S. and LG are cyclic. Since N' < L
and, by (64), K< S, we see that C 2(LG) = N' and S22(SG) = Q2(K). So N' K implies
that N' S and hence S n LG = S n N' = <e,). By (67d), S = N n N-' g N '
S<w3) and hence x-'x W3 E S n L. = <e,) for every x c- S. Since S' < S n N' = <e, ),
it follows that S/<e,) is abelian and, by 2.3.4, S<w3)/<e,) = N' aa- '/<e,) is an M-
group. By (62), <e, >,a,-' = <e, ), so that N/<e, ), as a projective image of N-'/<e, ),
is also an M-group. This finishes the proof of (92) and Case 3.
Case 4: s<r-2.
Then N = Q<u) where Q:5; Qr_2(N) and hence U,-2(N) _ <u2"_2) is cyclic. Let
ur-2(N) = <z) and suppose first that za = z. Then z e CN(a) = K, by (20), and hence
U,-2(N) = S22(K); thus Exp(N/K) < 2r-2. By (76), c4 induces a power automorphism
in N and hence also in N/K. Therefore (24) applied to G/K yields that N/K is abelian
and (75) implies that N' < Q2(K) = Jr_2(N). By induction, (I,-,(N) is an M-group
and so (47) shows that N is also an M-group. Since N' < K is cyclic and, by (20),
ur-2(N) < Z(G), all the assumptions of Lemma 5.5.7(b) are satisfied and it follows
that J N' I < 2, as desired.
Now suppose that z" = z-1. Then by (77), <z) < L and e2e, 0 L if M = N<a2)
and L = NM. Thus 'Z5'r_2(N) < L and hence Exp(N/L) < 2r-2. Again c4 induces a
power automorphism in N and hence also in NIL; therefore (24) applied to the
projectivity induced by q in M/L yields that NIL is abelian. Now z2 = e, and hence
(ze2) = ze,e2e, = zee. As CN(a) = K, it follows that <ze2) = Q2(K) and so N' <
(<e2) x <ze2>) n L = <z), since e2e, 0 L. Thus
(93) N' < <u2r-2) _ 't5r_2(N); furthermore e2 E K and n K = <e,)
since <z) = Q2(<u)) and <ze2) = (12(K). Again by induction, 0,_1(N) is an M-
group and since N/t r_2(N) is abelian and U,_2(N) is cyclic, N is an M-group.
It remains to be shown that IN'! < 2. Unfortunately, since U,-2(N) $ Z(G), we
cannot apply Lemma 5.5.7 in this case. However, we can proceed as follows. Since
<u2'-,
N' < Z(N) n ) and Q n <u) = 1, the group Q is abelian, and [u2, x] _
[u, x]2 E S2(<u)) for all x E N. Therefore u4 E Z(N) and
(94) S2r_2(N) = Q<u4) and Q<u2)/<e,) are abelian.
Since G/S2r_2(N) = N<a)/S2,_2(N) and N/Q,_2(N) is cyclic of order 4, (55) shows
that a4 centralizes N/S2r_2(N). By (5), S2r(<a)) < <a4) and it follows that
S2r(G)/S2r_2(N) is abelian. By (23),
-0r(G) = <u)<u)QQr-2(N) = <u)Qr(<a))Qr-2(N) = <u)QQr(<a))Qr-2(N)

and hence there exist v c <u) and c e 0,(<a)) such that u = vc-1 (mod Q,-2(N)).
Since S2r(G)/S2,((a))Qr_2(N) is cyclic, <v) = <u) and, similarly, <c) = S2,(<a)).
Finally, since Q,(G)/Qr_2(N) is abelian, we have
(95) v - uc and v2 = u2c2 (mod S2,-2(N)).
Now N/S22(N) is abelian and hence by 5.5.3 there exists 2 E N such that 2 = 1
(mod 4) and c induces the power automorphism x -> x` in N/922(N). Since N central-
izes N/Q,(N), this automorphism is also induced by v in N,/S22(N). By (52),
(96) v2 and c2 induce the power 22 in N/S2(N).
Since Q a N = Q<v) and N is an M-group, v induces a power u in Q, by (48). Then
v2 induces p2 in Q and, by (94) and (95), u2c2 induces the same power in Q. Since
Qr-1(N)1fI.-2(N)I = 2, we have [u2, a] E fl,-,(N) and so [a-1 (u2c2)-1] E S2r-2(N) <
CO(Q); by (49), u2c2 induces the power p2 in Q and then also in the abelian group
QQ = QJN), by (21) and (22). By (96), c2 induces the power 22 in N,12(N) and then,
by (52), also in <u2 ). Therefore u2c2 induces in S2,(<u)) = <u2) n U(IV) the powers
22 and p2 and it follows that 22 = p2 (mod 25). So u2c2 induces the power 22 in Q
and, since Q<u2 )/ <e,) is abelian, u2c2 and c2 induce the same automorphism in
Q<e 1)/<e, ); thus
(97) c2 induces the power 22 in Q<e,)/<e,).
We want to show, finally, that c2 induces a power automorphism in N/K. By (96),
U' = for some e c- 92(N). Since the commutator subgroup of N/<e,, e> has order
at most 2, c2 induces the power 22 in Q<u)/<e,,e) = by (50). And by (51),
c2 induces this power in N/<el,e)G. So if <e1,e)0 = <e1>, we are done. And if
<el,e>G 0 <e1>, then <e1,e) = <e1,e2), by (l lc), and (93) shows that K >
2
<e1, e) and o(uK) = 2r-1. Therefore e = up2r (mod K) for some p e 71 and, since
ExpQ < 2r-2, c2 induces the power 22 + p2r-2 in QK/K and in <u)K/K. Now
o(z) = 4 implies that r > 4; hence 22 + p2r-2 = I (mod4) and, since I(N/K)'I < 2,
(50) implies that c2 also induces the power 22 + p2r-2 in Q<u)/K = N/K. Thus in
any case, c2 induces a power automorphism in N/K. Applying (24) to the projectivity
o from G/K to G,/K, we conclude that N/K is abelian; finally, (93) shows that
N' < n K = <e1>. Thus IN') < 2, as desired. This finishes Case 4 and the proof
of Theorem 5.5.8.
By 5.5.2 and 5.5.8, the nilpotency class c(N) < 2 under Hypothesis 5.5.1. A bound
for c(N) is not known; in Example 5.5.5 and in the known examples for p odd,
c(N) < 2. The projectivities between metacyclic groups show that neither c(G) nor
c(G) is bounded. Since N is an M-group, N and N are metabelian. For the derived
lengths of G and G, we obtain the following final result; note that d(G) = 3 in Exam-
ple 5.5.5.
5.5.9 Theorem (Busetto and Napolitani [1991]). Suppose that Hypothesis 5.5.1 is
satisfied and let M be the maximal subgroup of G containing N. Then G is metabelian
and G has derived length at most 3; more precisely, M` is metahelian and G" is elemen-
tary ahelian.
Proof: We first show that G is metabelian. This is clear if N is abelian, so assume

that N' A 1. Then by 5.5.2, p = 2; 5.5.8 and (l lc) yield that N is an M-group
and N' = <e1). Thus I.N/S2r_1(N)t < 4, by (57). Again let N = Q(u) as in (23).
Since N' < S2(Z(N)) n and Q n = 1, the group Q is abelian and u2 E Z(N);
thus Q<u2> is abelian. From G = N<a> follows G' = [N, <a>] N'; and [e2, a] = e1
shows that N' < [N, <a>]. So if IN/f2r_,(N)I = 2, then G' = [N, <a>] < S2,_1(N) and
S2,_1(N) = Q<u2> is abelian; thus G is metabelian. It remains to consider the case
that IN/f2r_,(N)j = 4. Then by (65), f2,_1(N) a G of index 2 in N so that G' =
[N, <a>] < f2r_1(N). By (66), Q<u2> = Q,_,(N)<w> is not normal in G; note
that ExpQ = 2' since N/1 r_, (N)j = 4. Since Q<u2> is abelian, it follows that
Q.-1(N) = (Q<u2>)G < Z((Q<u2>)G) = Z(N). Therefore S2r_,(N) is abelian and G
is metabelian.
The assertions on G both follow from 5.5.3. For, by 5.5.2 and 5.5.8, N' S <e1>.
Thus NQ(G)/Q(G) is abelian and 5.5.3 applied to G/Q(G) yields that G;f2(G) is meta-
belian. So G" < f2(G), and this group is elementary abelian. By (11), f b2 = f1 and
since M = N<b2>, it follows that <f1>M < N and so f, e NM. This shows that
<e1> < NM and hence N/NM is abelian. Therefore 5.5.3 applied to the projectivity
induced by p in M/NM yields that M/NM is metabelian. Thus M" < N and M" a G
since k is a maximal subgroup of G. So M" < N- = I and M is metabelian.
Using 5.4.6 and 5.1.6, it is not difficult to extend the results on N/NG- and N/Ne
proved in this section to projectivities between arbitrary finite groups. However, we
leave this and an application to projectivities between finite soluble groups as an
exercise for the reader (Exercises 4-6) since we shall extend these results to arbitrary
groups in 6.6.
Exercises
I . Let E = <eo, ... , em> and F = <f .... , f,,,> be elementary abelian p-groups of
order p'";1 and let n e N such that pn-2 > m and 2n-2 > m if p = 2. Define G =
E<a> and G = F by aP"-' = eo, a-leoa = eo, a-'e1a = e1, a-1e;a = ejej_, for
i = 2, ... , m and bP"-' = fo, b-'fob = fo, b-'f b = f f _1 for i = 1, ... , m. Construct
a projectivity from G to G mapping the normal subgroup N = <e,,..., e,n) of G
to M = <f 1 . ... . J,> and show that ME; = 1.
2. (Menegazzo [1978]) Let p > 2 and E = <e0,...,ep> be an elementary abelian
p-group of order pp+'
(a) Construct extensions H* = E<a> satisfying a"2 = eo, a-'eoa = eo, a-'ela =
e1, a-'e,a = e;ei_1 for i = 2, ..., p and G* = H* where [H*,u] = I and
1
uP = e-'
(b) Show that there exists a projectivity from G* to the group G of Exercise 5.2.1
mapping the abelian normal subgroup N = <u, e2, ... , eP> of G* onto the
nonabelian, core-free subgroup M = (y, a2, ..., a p> constructed there.
3. (Busetto and Menegazzo [1985]) If Hypothesis 5.5.1 is satisfied and p = 2, show
that f2(G) < Z(S2r(G)).
4. Let N be a normal subgroup of an arbitrary finite group G and cp a projectivity
from G to a group G. Show that
(a) N/ Nc and N/Nd are metabelian, and
(b) N/Nd is nilpotent of class at most 2 with commutator subgroup of exponent
at most 2; in particular, N/NG is abelian if 1 GI is odd.
5. Let N be a normal subgroup of the finite group G such that G/N is soluble of
derived length n c- N. If cp is a projectivity from G to a group G, show that
6(3n) < N.
6. If G is a finite soluble group of derived length d(G) = n and cp is a projectivity
from G to a group G, show that d(G) < 3n - 1.
5.6 Normalizers, centralizers and conjugacy classes

Apart from the index, studied in 4.2, there are other important interrelations be-
tween subgroups that may be preserved by a projectivity. We briefly treat three of
them and present the classical examples of particularly decent projectivities between
nonisomorphic groups.
A projectivity cp from a group G to a group G is called centralizer preserving if
CG(H)` = C6(H`) for all H < G, normalizer preserving if NG(H)` = NZ(H`) for all
H < G, and conjugacy preserving if for all X, Y < W < G, X is conjugate to Y in W
if and only if X` is conjugate to Y' in We'. These properties are not independent. For
example, if cp is conjugacy preserving and X < G, then X is the only subgroup of
W = NG(X) conjugate to X in W; therefore the same holds for X10 in W10 and hence
V' W. Thus NG(X) < NZ;(X`0) and, since cp-' like cp is conjugacy preserving, we
obtain the other inclusion. We have shown:
5.6.1 Theorem. Every conjugacy preserving projectivity is normalizer preserving.
Normalizer preserving projectivities
It is less obvious that every normalizer preserving projectivity is centralizer pre-

serving, as we shall see for arbitrary (possibly infinite) groups. For this we give
characterizations of both properties via images of commutator subgroups.
5.6.2 Theorem (Barnes and Wall [1964]). The following properties of the projec-
tiuity (p from the group G to the group G are equivalent:
(a) cp is normalizer preserving,
(b) (H')` - (H)' for every subgroup H of G,
(c) [H, K]`0 = [H`0, K`0] for all H, K < G.
Proof. Suppose first that (a) holds and let H< G. If H' < M < H, then N0(M) > H
and therefore NZ;(M') = N0(M)` > H. Thus (H') a H and H`/(H')' is abelian or
hamiltonian. Since every hamiltonian group contains a subgroup isomorphic to Q8
and cp induces a projectivity from the abelian group H/H' to H'/(H')', it follows that
H`,,'(H') is abelian. Thus (H`)' < (H'), and this result applied to H and the nor-
malizer preserving projectivity cp-' yields the other inclusion; so (b) holds.
Now suppose that (b) is satisfied. If X = <x> and Y = (y) are cyclic subgroups
of a group, then [X, Y] a <X, Y> and the factor group <X, Y>/[X, Y] is generated
5.6 Normalizers, centralizers and conjugacy classes 273
by x[X, Y] and y[X, Y]. These elements commute modulo [X, Y] and hence
<X, Y>/[X, Y] is abelian. Thus <X, Y>' < [X, Y] and, since the other inclusion is
trivial, <X, Y>' = [X, Y]. Therefore if H and K are cyclic subgroups of G, then
H`, and K` also are cyclic and
[H, K]' = ((H u K)')4' = ((H u K)")'= (H4' u K4')' = [HP, K`].
For arbitrary subgroups H, K of G, [H, K] = U { [<x>, <y>] I <x> < H, <y> < K}
and this is mapped by cp to U { [<x>`, <y>4'] I <x>`' < H`, < y>4' < K4'} = [H`, K`].
Thus (c) holds.
Finally, if (c) is satisfied and H < G, then [H`, NC(H)"] = [H, NG(H)]` < H" and
hence No(H)4' < Nd(H`). This result applied to H` and q' yields the other inclu-
sion. Thus (a) holds.
5.6.3 Theorem. The following properties of the projectivity tp from the group G to the
group G are equivalent:
(a) cp is centralizer preserving,
(b) Z(H)` = Z(H4') for every subgroup H of G,
(c) for all H < G, H' = 1 if and only if (H4')' = 1.
Proof. First of all, (a) implies that Z(H)` = (H n Cc(H))4' = H n CG(HP) = Z(H4')
for all H < G. Thus (b) follows from (a) and, since H' = 1 if and only if H = Z(H), (b)
clearly implies (c). Finally, if (c) holds, then for x e H and Y E CG(H), the subgroup
<x, y> is abelian, as is <x, y>" = <x>4' u <y>4'. It follows that <y>" < Cd(H') and
Cc(H)4' < CZ;(H4'). This result applied to H` and cp-' yields the other inclusion; thus
(a) holds.
Now 5.6.3(c) follows from 5.6.2(b) and therefore we obtain the result announced
above.
5.6.4 Corollary. Every normalizer preserving projectivity is centralizer preserving.
Of course, our theorems can also be used to prove that a given projectivity is
normalizer or centralizer preserving. The commutator subgroup of a group is the
join of the commutator subgroups of all its 2-generator subgroups, and a projec-
tivity maps 2-generator groups to 2-generator groups. Therefore 5.6.2(b) yields the
following useful criterion.
5.6.5 Remark. A projectivity cp from G to G is normalizer preserving if (H')4' = (H4')'

for every 2-generator subgroup H of G.
We use this to generalize a result of Spring [1963] to locally finite groups.
5.6.6 Theorem. If G is a nonabelian locally finite p-group of exponent p, then every

projectiuity of G is normalizer preserving.
Proof. Let (p be a projectivity from G to a group G. Since G is nonabelian, 2.2.7

yields that G is a p-group. Thus if H is a 2-generator subgroup of G, then H and H4'
are finite p-groups of exponent p. It follows that (H')4' = (H)4' = ?(H4') = (H4')'. By
5.6.5, q is normalizer preserving.
We give examples of normalizer preserving projectivities between nonisomorphic

finite p-groups.
5.6.7 Example (Barnes and Wall [1964]). Let p be a prime, 4 < n where o(s,) = p2 and o(si) = p for i > 2; thus N is an abelian
p-group of type (p2, p, ... , p) and order pn-1. For y E A = { 1, ... , p - 1 }, let s = s(y) be
the automorphism of N satisfying
(1) s; = sisi+, (1 5 i 5 n - 3), sn_2 = n-2SIP
and let G = N(s> be the semidirect product of N and the subgroup of Aut N
generated by s = s(y). By (2) of 1.5, [s,, s] = [s, , s] = sZ = I so that if we define
k (k)
=sip and s, = I for m > n, an obvious induction yields that s; = fl s;+; for k
j=0
all i, k > 1. Since n < p, it follows that sP = 1. Thus I<s> = p and I G I = p". Since
(s,, s2, ... , sn-2 > < G' has index p2 in G,
(2) G' = <s,,s2,...,Sn .2> _ ID(G).
Then K.(G) = [Ki_, (G), G] _ (Si, ... , Sn_2, s;) for i = 2, ..., n - 2 and (G) _
(sc>. so that G is a p-group of maximal class. As n < p, the group G is regular (see
Huppert [1967], p. 322) and, since G' is elementary abelian, (xy)P = xPyP for all
x, v c G. In particular, (ssl )P = s; P for all i e 7L and since G = (s, s, >, the maximal
subgroups of G are N and the groups
(3) M; = <Ss;,s2,...,sn_2> where 0 < i < p.
We show that all the groups (y e A) are lattice-isomorphic but, in general, not
isomorphic. More precisely, we claim that for G = G=
G G if and only if there exists E 7L such that d - Sn-2y (mod p), and
(b) there exists a bijective map a: G -* G inducing a normalizer preserving projec-
tivity from G to G such that a1H is an isomorphism for every proper subgroup H of G.
Proof. Let G = N<t> satisfy (1) with s and y replaced by t and S, respectively.
(a) Suppose first that r: G -b G is an isomorphism. Since N is the only abelian
maximal subgroup of G and G, we have N` = N and hence si = s;' ... s,", where
rl, * 0 (mod p); let t` = s s; E K,(G), a trivial induction yields
that fort<i<n-2,
S" 11, (mod Ki+1(G))
Si = [si-1 , t]t = [si-1 , tt] = ES; 1 1 , s5] =
Thus s_2 = sn 2 (mod Kn_1(G)) and since s] E K.-1(G) < Z(G), we get
s7" = (Sl )ap = (SbP)t

= [Sn-2, t] = [Sn-2, tt] _ 2R' SS] = (sl')5" zRt
Since o(s,) = p2 and q, * 0 (mod p), it follows that b -n zy (mod p), as desired.
Conversely, suppose that there exists S E 7L such that S - c" zy (mod p). Then if we
define s* = s5, s* = .s, and s* _ [.s* ,,s*] for 2 - Gn(b) = G.
(b) Since y, d E A = { 1,... , p - 11, there exists k c 1L such that b - ky (mod p). For
0<i.<p,letM;_=<tS',82,.... Sn_2>anddefineM,=N= MP. By (3), the M,' and
M; (0 x ... X <Sn-2> x <x >)<x> and MkA =
(<s2> x ... X <Sn-2> X <YP>)<Y>- Since [si,.x] = si+, _ [si,y] for 2 < i < n - 3,
[sn_z, x] = sj" = (xP)"' and also [sn_2,y] = SIP = s; ''P = (yP)PY there exists an iso-
morphism vA: MA - MkA fixing all the si (2 . Clearly, we may extend v to an isomorphism vP: N - N
defining s`r" = s; and, since [sn_2,t] = SIP = SI''P = IS,-2,S] there is an extension of
v to an isomorphism vo: Mo - Mo satisfying s = t. Now all the vA agree on 4)(G)
and therefore the map a: G - G defined by g = g if g c MA (0 < A < p) is well-
defined, induces an isomorphism in every maximal subgroup of G and hence satisfies
(5) and (6) of 1.3. By Theorem 1.3.1, o- induces a projectivity cp from G to G. Since
(G')'P = G' and a induces an isomorphism in every maximal subgroup of G, 5.6.2
implies that cp is normalizer preserving.
The simplest examples of nonisomorphic groups obtained in this way are G4(1)
and G,(;) of order p (p > 5), where y is a nonquadratic residue (mod p). Barnes and
Wall give similar examples with 3 < p < n, and also of groups of exponent p (see
Exercise 3).
Finally, we remark that the converses of 5.6.1 and 5.6.4 do not hold. For example,
the nonabelian group of order pq with p and q primes has only centralizer preserving
autoprojectivities and its singular autoprojectivities are not normalizer preserving.
Examples of index and centralizer preserving projectivities that are not normali-
zer preserving are given in Exercise 1. The Rottlander groups, which we shall shortly
study, possess normalizer preserving projectivities that are not conjugacy preserving.
Groups with identical subgroup structures
There is no general theory of conjugacy preserving projectivities giving results that

go beyond those known for arbitrary projectivities. One reason for this is probably
the many examples of projectivities between nonisomorphic groups which preserve
almost every structural property. We say that two groups G and G have identical
subgroup structures if there exists an index and conjugacy preserving projectivity (p
from G to G such that H` H for every proper subgroup H of G. The first example
of nonisomorphic groups with identical subgroup structures was published by Ada
Rottlander in the earliest study of subgroup lattices of groups.
5.6.8 Example (Rottlander [1928]). Let q > 5 and p be primes such that ql p - 1
and let r E N such that r * 1 (mod p) and r9 - I (mod p). For every A E A =
{2,..., q - 1 }, we define the Rottlander group
GA = <x,y,alxv = y" = aQ = [x,y] = 1, a-'xa = xr a-iya = yr">
and claim that for A, It e A,

(a) GA and G have identical subgroup structures, and
(b) GA G if and only if A = It or AM = 1 (mod q).
Thus we obtain (q - 1)/2 pairwise nonisomorphic groups with identical subgroup
structures. The smallest primes occuring are p = 11, q = 5 with I GAl = 605.
Proof. (a) Let N = <x, y> so that GA = N<a> and let G = N where xb = xr
and yb = yr". Since A # 0, 1 (mod q), the element a induces different nontrivial power
automorphisms in <x> and <y>. Thus <x> and <y> are the eigenspaces of the
automorphism induced by a in N and hence the type of this automorphism is (0; 1, 1).
By 4.1.8 there exists a projectivity (p from G. to G satisfying N = N and <a>' =
. Clearly, cp is index preserving and, since the maximal subgroups of GA different
from N are all nonabelian of order pq, &' ^" H for every proper subgroup H of GA.
The set f) of subgroups of order p of N different from <x> and <y> falls into (p - 1)/q
conjugacy classes of length q. For every X c -Q, the subgroup N is the only maximal
subgroup of G. containing X. Hence there exists an autoprojectivity p of G fixing
all the Y E and permuting the subgroups in S2 in such a way that ji = cpp
maps conjugacy classes of subgroups of order p to conjugacy classes. Since any two
Sylow q-subgroups are conjugate in every subgroup containing them, and since two
subgroups of order pq of GA are conjugate if and only if they intersect in a subgroup
of order p, it follows that 0 is conjugacy preserving. Thus G. and G, have identical
subgroup structures.
(b) Let a: GA -+ G," be an isomorphism and a = x'y'bk where i, j, k e N. Then a
has to map the normal subgroups <x>, <y> of order p of GA to the normal subgroups
<x>, <y> of order p of G.. If <z> is one of these normal subgroups, z = zs and
(z)6 = (z)` (s, t e N), then (z)s = (z')" = (z) = (z) = = (zQ),k and hence
(z)bk
s - tk (mod p). Therefore if <x>" _ <x> and <y>" = <y>, then r = r' (mod p) and
rA = rNk (mod p); thus k - 1 (mod q) and k - (mod q). Since i.,,u e {2, ... , q -1 },
it follows that d = M. If <x>" = <y> and <y>" = <x>, then r - rk (mod p) and
rA = rk (mod p); hence k - 1 (mod q) and ; - k (mod q) so that i! - 1 (mod q).
Conversely, if :: - 1 (mod q), then y" = yr"" = yr and xb" = xr" so that y, x, bA
satisfy the defining relations of GA. It follows that G. ^- GA and (b) holds.
For any A e A, there exists a unique e A such that A - 1 (mod q). If A # q - 1,
then A2 # 1 (mod q); thus A and hence these i in pairs yield (q - 3)/2 non-
isomorphic groups. Together with Gq_, we obtain (q - 1)/2 pairwise nonisomorphic
Rottlander groups of order p2q.
Other examples of nonisomorphic groups with identical subgroup structures were

given by Yff and Holmes; those of Yff can also be found in an earlier paper by
Honda on subgroup lattices of metacyclic groups.
5.6.9 Example. Let p and q be primes such that qI p - 1 and let

(a) (Honda [ 1952], Yff [ 1967]) t e P such that t 0 p and q I t - 1, or
(b) (Holmes [1976]) t = q2.
Let N = P x T with I P1 = p and I TI = t be the cyclic group of order pt. Then
Aut N = A, x A2 where A, = N(T) ^- AutP and A2 = N(P) Aut T, and
therefore Aut N contains an elementary abelian subgroup Q = Q, X Q2 of order q2
with Q; < A. and I Q;1 = q. For every subgroup R of order q of Q different from Q,
and Q2, let GR = NR be the semidirect product of N and R; thus
GR = <x alxp' = aQ = 1, a-'xa = x')
for some r e 1l satisfying rQ - 1 (mod pt), r # I (mod p) and r # I (mod t). Then all
the GR have identical subgroup structures. For, if S is another subgroup of order q
of Q different from Q, and Q2, then by 4.1.6 there exists a projectivity cp from GR to
GS. This is clear if (a) holds; in case (b), we take P to be a normal Hall subgroup, the
nonabelian groups TR and TS of order q3 and exponent q2 as complements and
r the projectivity induced by an isomorphism a: TR -* TS satisfying Ta = T and
R' = S. It is rather obvious that cp preserves indices, conjugacy and satisfies HO -_ H
for every proper subgroup H of G.
An isomorphism v: GR -+ Gs maps the cyclic normal subgroup N of order pt of GR
to the cyclic normal subgroup N of order pt of Gs and satisfies
(Xa)v = (Xr)v = (Xv)r

(Xv)al =
so that a' induces the same power as a on N; it follows that S = R. Thus we obtain
q - 1 pairwise nonisomorphic groups with identical subgroup structures. The
smallest primes occurring are q = 3, p = 7, t = 13 with I GR I = 273 in case (a), and
q = 3, p = 7 with I GR I = 189 in case (b).
The examples constructed in 5.6.8 and 5.6.9 can be generalized to the situation
where q does not divide p - 1, while those of Rottlander and Honda-Yff extend
also to the case where q is not a prime. For this the nonabelian groups of order
pq must be replaced by groups of order p'q in which the cyclic group of order
q operates irreducibly on an elementary abelian group of order p'"; for q E P,
these groups have been described in 4.1.7(b). In general, however, the projectivities
between these groups are not conjugacy preserving (Holmes [1984], Schmidt
[1982]).
There are many other examples of nonisomorphic but lattice-isomorphic groups.
We mention those due to Niegel [1973a], [1973b] of groups whose orders contain
at most three prime divisors or are square-free, Daues and Heineken [1975] of
groups of order p6, Caranti [1979] of p-groups of maximal class, Holmes [1971] of
direct products of Rottlander groups with certain other groups, Schmidt [1981] of
direct products of two isomorphic Rottlander groups, and Schmidt [1982] of groups
with elementary abelian normal Hall subgroups.
Projective images of conjugacy classes
More important than the investigation of conjugacy preserving projectivities, which

are relatively rare, is the question when a single conjugacy class A of G is mapped to
a conjugacy class of G by a projectivity (p from G to G. For then, not only G but also
G operates on A via the map ro: G Sym A defined by
(4) H"iX) = HP" ' for H e A;
we shall use this fact quite systematically in 7.7. Of course, we may assume that
JAI > 2 since the operation described above becomes trivial if JAI = 1. The first
observation one makes is that in many groups there are conjugacy classes of rela-
tively small subgroups which are not mapped to a conjugacy class by some projec-
tivity. For example, the conjugacy classes of subgroups of order p in the Rottlander
groups, in the groups of Example 4.1.7(b), or in Exercise 5 have this property.
Furthermore, as in the case of projective images of normal subgroups, P-groups will
cause difficulties. If we exclude these and restrict our attention to maximal sub-
groups, the situation is better. To show this, we first prove a useful general property
of the autoprojectivities induced in G by the elements of G.
5.6.10 Lemma. Let cp he a projectivity from the finite group G to the group G, let
x c G and r(x) he the autoprojectivity of G defined by HT(XJ = Hl"" ' for all H< G. If
G is P-indecomposable, then r(x) is index preserving.
Proof. Suppose, for a contradiction, that r(x) is not index preserving. By 4.2.5, r(x)
maps Sylow subgroups to Sylow subgroups since G is P-indecomposable. Therefore
4.2.1 implies that there exist primes p q, P E Sylp(G) and Q E SyIQ(G) such that
PT'x)
= Q. Thus P"X = Q" and since IP"I = IP"I = IQ"I, it follows that cp is singular
at p or at q. If p is singular at p, then by 4.2.6 there exists a normal p-complement N
of G such that N" a G. But then N"""-' = N, hence (PN)T'X' = G
and P"X' n N = (P n N)T'") = I so that IPT(x) I = IG : NI = IPI, a contradiction. If cp is
singular at q, we argue in exactly the same way using Q and x"' instead of P and x.
If G is P-decomposable, r(x) in general is not index preserving: consider G = S3 =

G, an autoprojectivity cp of G satisfying A3 A3 and x = (123). It is also clear that
for P-decomposable groups, conjugacy classes A of maximal subgroups in general
are not mapped to conjugacy classes by projectivities cp. However, we show that for
finite soluble groups, this is the only situation in which All is not a conjugacy class.
5.6.11 Theorem (Schmidt [1977b]). Let G be a finite soluble group, A a conjugacy

class of maximal subgroups of G such that Al I> 2, and cp a projectivity from G to a
group G. If there is an element g e G such that (011)9 A", then there are subgroups S
and T o f G such that G = S x T, (ISI, ITI) = 1, S is a P-group and T< n H.
Proof. We use induction on IGI and first note that it suffices to show that G is P-
decomposable. For then G = S x T where (ISI, ITI) = I and S is a P-group, so that
L(G) 2t L(S) x L(T) by 1.6.4. Every X E A is a maximal subgroup of G and hence

it follows that either S < X or T< X. If T< X, then T < Xo = n H and we
HED
are done; so suppose that S < X. Then X = S x (X n T) and A* = {H n TIH e Al
is a conjugacy class of maximal subgroups of T satisfying the assumptions of the
theorem. By induction, T = A x B where (IAI,IBI) = 1, A is a P-group and
B < n (H n T). Then S* = A and T* = S x B satisfy the assertions of the theorem.
HEe
Thus suppose, for a contradiction, that G is P-indecomposable. Since JAI > 2, we
have G = <KÌK e A>, and therefore the assumption (A4')9 A`0 implies that there
exist H, K e A and x e K`0 such that (H4')" 0 A`. If p = r(x) is defined as in 5.6.10,
then H = H`0"I ' 0 A and K = K e A. Thus H and K are maximal subgroups of
the soluble group G which are not conjugate in G. By a theorem of Ore (see Huppert
[1967], p. 165), H and K permute so that IG: HI = IK: H n KI. Since p is index
preserving, it follows that I G : HI = I K: H n K I and hence G = HK. This is impossi-
ble since H and K are conjugate. Thus G is P-decomposable.
5.6.12 Corollary. Let A be a conjugacy class of maximal subgroups of the finite

soluble group G. If cp is an index preserving projectivity from G to a group G, then All
is a conjugacy class in G.
Proof. For J A I = 1 , this follows from 4.3.5; and since an index preserving projec-
tivity of a P-group is conjugacy preserving, 5.6.11 yields the result if I > 2.
It is an interesting open problem whether Theorem 5.6.11 and its corollary also
hold without the assumption that G is soluble.
Exercises
1. Let G = <a, h az = h 2 = 1, b-'ab = a'+) Show that every autoprojectivity of

G is centralizer preserving and find an autoprojectivity which is not normalizer
preserving.
2. Find a group G and a projectivity (p of G which
(a) is conjugacy preserving but does not satisfy H' H for every H < G,
(b) satisfies H" z- H for every H < G but is not centralizer preserving.
3. (Barnes and Wall [1964]) Let 8 < n x ... x <s"_,> where
o(s;) = p be an elementary abelian group of order pn-2. For c c- { + 1, - 11, lets, be
the automorphism of N satisfying s" = s;si+2 (i > 2), where we put S. = s"+, = 1,
and let ME = N<s,> be the semidirect product of N and <s,>. Finally, let
GE = ME<s> be the semidirect product of M, and <s> where s, = sis;+, (i >- 1).
Show that G, and G_, are lattice-isomorphic but nonisomorphic groups of order
p", class n - I and exponent p.
4. Draw a Hasse diagram of the subgroup lattice of a Rottlander group of order
605.
5. Let p > 2 and G = C,wrC, be the wreath product of two cyclic groups of order p
-thus G = A where A = <a,> x ... x <a,>, o(a;) = o(b) = p, b-la;b = a;+t
(1 ,..., <ap>} be the conjugacy
class of <a,> in G. Let a be the automorphism of A satisfying ai = az and a = a
for all a E G' and define cp: L(G) L(G) by H` = H for H < A and H` = H for
H 4 A. Show that qp is an autoprojectivity of G such that all the groups in All are
pairwise nonconjugate.
Chapter 6
Projectivities and normal structure of infinite groups
We have already mentioned that it is possible to generalize most of the results of

Chapter 5 to infinite groups. Basic for this is a theorem that was proved indepen-
dently by Zacher and Rips in 1980. It states that a subgroup of finite index of a
group G is mapped to a subgroup of finite index in G by any projectivity from G to
6. This will be proved in 6.1; in fact, we shall even give a lattice-theoretic character-
ization of the finiteness of the index of a subgroup in a group. This theorem reduces
nearly every lattice-theoretic question on subgroups of finite index to the corre-
sponding question for finite groups.
In the subgroup lattice of a finite group we used modular elements to approxi-
mate normal subgroups. The Tarski groups show that this is not reasonable in
infinite groups, so we use here the so-called permodular subgroups, introduced by
Zacher [1982b]. These are modular subgroups with an additional lattice-theoretic
property possessed by projective images of normal subgroups and also by permu-
table subgroups. So in 6.2 and 6.3 we study permodular and permutable sub-
groups of groups as far as necessary for our applications. In contrast to the situation
for finite groups, M/MG in general is not hypercentrally embedded in G if M is
permutable in G. There is no general structure theorem for permodular subgroups,
like the one for modular subgroups of finite groups, which reduces all our problems
to the investigation of permutable subgroups. In our applications, however, we may
usually assume that G is finitely generated modulo M. In this situation, it is possible
to prove that 1 M : MI is finite and that the structure theorem holds if M is per-
modular in G; and if M is even permutable in G, then MG/MG is nilpotent of finite
exponent.
In 6.4 we use our results on permodular subgroups to generalize the lattice-
theoretic characterizations of 5.3 to infinite groups. In particular, we get character-
izations for the classes of simple, perfect, hyperabelian, polycyclic, finitely generated
soluble, hypercyclic, and supersoluble groups. However, we do not obtain a charac-
terization of soluble groups; in fact, it is one of the most interesting open problems
to find a lattice-theoretic characterization for this class of groups.
In 6.5 we again turn to our main problem. First of all we generalize some of the
criteria of 5.4 to infinite groups. In particular, we prove that, as in the finite case: if
N a G, cp is a projectivity from G to G, H is the normal closure and K is the core
of N4' in G, then H and K are normal subgroups of G. In 6.6 we obtain a structure
theorem for G/K and G/K4', mostly due to Zacher [1982a], that is similar to the
corresponding result for finite groups. Finally, we prove a number of properties of
H/K and H`/K`0, the most important being that H/K and H4'/K4 are soluble of
282 Projectivities and normal structure of infinite groups
derived length at most 4 and 5, respectively. These results emerged from joint efforts
of Busetto, Menegazzo, Napolitani and Zacher in the 1980's. As an important appli-
cation we prove that the projective image of a soluble group (of derived length n) is
soluble (of derived length at most 3n - 1), another result of Busetto, Menegazzo and
Napolitani that improves older bounds of Yakovlev [1970] who was the first to
prove that projective images of soluble groups are soluble.
6.1 Subgroups of finite index

It is easy to prove (see Theorem 1.2.12) that a group is finite if and only if its
subgroup lattice is finite. We wish to show that the finiteness of the index of a
subgroup in a group is also a projective invariant and can be recognized in the
subgroup lattice. For K < H < G, of course, IH : KI is finite if and only if there exists
a finite chain of subgroups K = Ho < H1 < < H = H such that Hi is a maximal
subgroup of Hi,, and jHi+1 : Hit is finite for all i = 0, ..., n - 1. Therefore we only
have to consider maximal subgroups.
Groups covered by cosets
The main tool in the proofs of our results will be a quite elementary lemma of B. H.
Neumann's on set-theoretic unions of subgroups of a group. To prove this, we have
to study groups that are covered by a set of cosets of subgroups. To simplify nota-
tion, in this section, we shall write A 1 u u An for the set-theoretic union of the
cosets A 1, ..., A. of G.
6.1.1 Lemma. Let G be a group n, m e N, and suppose that H; (i = 1,..., n) and D are
subgroups of G such that D 0 Hi for i = 1, ..., n. If there exist elements xi, yy e G such
that
(1) G
(2) G Dyl u u Dym,
then G is the union of finitely many right cosets of the subgroups H1...., Hn.
Proof. By (2) there exists g e G such that g 0 Dy1 u u Dyn. It follows that
Dg n (Dy, 1 u . u Dy,n) = 0 and then (1) shows that Dg S H1 x 1 u u Hn xn.
Hence
Dyi c (H1x1 u ... u Hnxn)g-ly; = H1(xlg-%) u ... u Hn(xng-ly;)
for j = 1, ..., m. By (1), G is the union of finitely many right cosets of the Hi.
6.1.2 Lemma. If the group G is covered by finitely many right cosets of subgroups, at
least one of these subgroups has finite index in G.
6.1 Subgroups of finite index 283
Proof. Let Hi < G and xi e G (i = I__, k) such that G = H, x 1 u u Hkxk; we

have to show that IG : Hit is finite for some i. We prove this by induction on the
number r of different subgroups among the Hi. If r = 1, then G is the union of k right
cosets of one and the same subgroup which then clearly has index at most k. So
suppose that I {H1..... Hk } I = r > 1, and assume that the assertion is true for r - 1.
Without loss of generality we may further assume that the cosets are arranged in
such a way that Hi 0Hkfori= 1,...,nandHi=Hkfori> n. Then H,,..., H. and
D = Hk satisfy (1). Now if IG : DI is Finite, we are done. On the other hand, if IG : DI
is infinite, then (2) holds and by 6.1.1, G is the union of finitely many cosets of the
r - I subgroups H1, ..., H. By induction, one of these has finite index in G.
6.1.3 Lemma (Neumann [1954]). Let Hi be subgroups and xi elements of the group
G (i = I__ , n) such that G = H1 x, u u If H. has infinite index in G, then
G = H1 x1 u ... u Hn-, xn-,
Proof. By 6.1.2, at least one of the Hi has finite index in G. So suppose without loss
of generality that IG:H;1 is Finite for i = 1, ..., k and infinite for i = k + 1, ..., n; let
D = H1 n n Hk. Since every subgroup of finite index contains a normal subgroup
of finite index, the intersection of a finite number of subgroups of finite index again
has finite index. Therefore I G : D I is finite and every Hi (i = I__ , k) is the union of
finitely many cosets of D. It follows that H1 x1 u . . u Hkxk = Dy1 u . u Dym for
certain yJ e G. If G 0 Dy, u . . u Dym, then by 6.1.1, G would be the union of finitely
.
many right cosets of the subgroups Hk+1, ... , however, by 6.1.2, this is impossible
since all these Hi have infinite index in G. Therefore
G=Dy1u...uDym=H1x,u...uHkxk9H1x1u...uHn-,xn-,
We are interested in the special case of Neumann's lemma in which all the x; = 1,
so that the cosets are subgroups of G. The lemma states that all the subgroups of
infinite index can be omitted from the covering of G. We say that, conversely, G is
covered irreducibly by subgroups Hi (i e I) if G is the set-theoretic union of the H; and
none of these subgroups can be omitted from the covering.
Maximal subgroups
An immediate consequence of Neumann's lemma is the following lattice-theoretic

characterization of the finiteness of the index of a nonnormal maximal subgroup.
6.1.4 Lemma. A nonnormal maximal subgroup M of the group G has finite index in G
if and only if there are finitely many subgroups H. (i = 1, ... , n) of G such that G is
n
covered irreducibly by the Hi and n H; < M.
it
Proof. If the Hi exist, then by 6.1.3, IG : Hit is finite for all i. Hence the intersection of
all the Hi has finite index in G and it follows that I G : M I is finite. Conversely,
suppose that M has finite index in G. Then GIN is a finite group if N = M0 is the
core of M in G. Let H;/N (i = 1, ... , n) be the maximal cyclic subgroups of GIN. If
x e G, then <x>N/N is cyclic and therefore is contained in one of the H;/N; thus
x e H. and G is covered by the Hi. And if g c- G such that H;/N = <g>N/N, the
maximality of Hi/N implies that g 0 H; for all j i. Thus Hi cannot be omitted from
the above covering of G. It remains to be shown that the intersection D of all the Hi
is contained in M. If this is false, then G = <M, D> since M is a maximal subgroup
of G. Since D/N is centralized by all the Hi/N, it follows that DIN < Z(GIN) and
hence that M a G, a contradiction. Thus D < M, as required.
6.1.5 Remark. (a) Note that the property in Lemma 6.1.4 can be recognized in the
subgroup lattice. For, since a subgroup H of G is cyclic if and only if L(H) is
distributive and satisfies the maximal condition, G is covered irreducibly by sub-
groups Hi if and only if
(3) for every H E L(G) for which [H/1] is distributive and satisfies the maximal
condition, there exists Hi such that H < Hi, and
(4) for every H, there exists H e L(G) for which [H/1] is distributive and satisfies
the maximal condition such that H < Hi and H HH for all j : i.
In particular, this property is preserved by projectivities.
(b) Therefore if M is a nonnormal maximal subgroup of G of finite index and cp a
projectivity from G to a group G, then IG : M1*I is finite. For, M'D inherits the lattice-
theoretic property of Lemma 6.1.4 from M. Thus if M` is not normal in G, then
I G : M"I is finite by 6.1.4; and if M10 a G, then 16: M10I is a prime.
We now handle the case of a normal maximal subgroup and first consider projec-
tive images.
6.1.6 Lemma. Let N be a normal subgroup of prime index in the group G. If cv is a

projectivity from G to a group G, then 16: N"I is finite (and hence a prime).
Proof. The assertion of the lemma clearly holds if N1* < G; so suppose that N4' is not
normal in G. Let a E G \N and = <a>4. Then <a> : N n (a> J = I G : NJ = p and
hence I : M n l = q for some prime q. Consider the autoprojectivity a of G
defined by X = ((X4')6)`0 -I for X < G. Since bQ e N`1, we have N" = ((N4)b"p = N
and hence
(5) T = N n N n . . . n N"-' is invariant under a.
To simplify notation, we put N' = Ni (i = 0, ... , q) and define for i = 0, ..., q - 1,
(6) and Si=R,,
Finally, let m be the smallest integer such that Rm = T. By (5), m < q - I and
(7) Sm=Rm=T.
Since N" = N, we have Nj" = N, for all j, and it follows that
(8) R"=RiandS"=Sifori=0,...,m.
We show next that for i = 0,..., m - 1,

(9) R. Si, Ri+1 = N n Si is a normal subgroup of index p in Si and S,+1 =
Si n N;+2 is a maximal subgroup of Si; thus
(10) Si = R;+1 Si+1 for i = 0, ... , m - 2
and the following section of the Hasse diagram of L(G) illustrates the situation.
G
Rm=T=Sm
Figure 20
To prove these assertions, suppose first, for a contradiction, that Ri = Si, that is
Ri = R', for some i < m - 1. Then Ri = R' < NN for all j = 0, ..., q and hence
Ri < T, contradicting the choice of m. Thus R. 0 Si for i = 0, ... , m - 1 and, by (6),
Ri+1 = N n Si a Si and Si+1 = Si n Ni+2. To complete the proof of (9), it remains to
be shown that Ri+1 Si and Si,, Si. Then ISi : Ri+1 I = IG : NI = p and Sin Ni+2
is maximal in Si since Ni+2, as a projective image of N, is modular in G so that
[Si/S n Ni+2] = [<Si, Ni+2>/Ni+2] = [G/N1+2]. So suppose, for a contradiction,
that Ri+1 = Si or Si+1 = Si. The first assumption yields that Ri > Ri+1 = Si = R,
and the second that R1+1 = R, and hence R = Si >- Ri+1 = Ri. By (8), RQ = Ri and
so in both cases it would follow that R = Ri, a contradiction, as we have just
shown. Thus (9) holds and, since for i = 0, ..., m - 2, Ri+1 and Si,, are different
maximal subgroups of Si, we clearly get (10).
Our aim is to show that T is a normal subgroup of finite index in G. For this we
first prove by induction that for i = 0, ..., m - 1,
(11) <S'Ij=0,...,q- 1>=G.
This is clear if i = 0 since So = N 0 N is a maximal subgroup of G. So suppose that
( 1 1 ) holds for some i < m - 2 and let H = <5,+1 I j = 0,..., q - 1 >. Then (8) and (10)
show that Ri+1 = R+1 = S +1' S H and hence Si = Ri+i Si,, < H. Again by (8), H is
invariant under a. Therefore all the S' (j = 0,..., q - 1) are contained in H and, by
induction, their join is G. Thus H = G and (11) holds.
By definition, for any subgroup X of G, (X')`0 = (X`0)6' < <X,b). Thus (11) im-
plies in particular that
(12) <Sm-,,b) = G.
Again by definition, N+, = N' " = N j " and hence (N`0)6 = N`', for all j =...0,, q - 1.
Since bQ e N`0 = N,", it follows that bQ e Ni!" P for all j. Thus
(13) b9 e T.
By (5), T' is normalized by b and hence I (b>T 0: T"I = I : (b> n T"I = q. It
follows that T`0 = N`0 n T" and T = N n (a, T> a <a, T>. Now (9) implies that
T=Nn g and hence NG(T)" contains <Sm_,, b> = G. Thus
(14) T < G.
Again by (9), IS.-, /TI = p. If S.-;/T is finite for some i e { I__, m - 11, then also its
projective image R.-;/T is finite and by (10), Sm_;_,/T is finite. It follows that So/T
is finite, as must be Ro/T = NIT; finally,
(15) G/T is finite.
Let H;/T (i = I__, n) be the maximal cyclic subgroups of G/T. Then G is covered
irreducibly by the Hi and hence, by 6.1.5, G is covered irreducibly by the Hr". Sup-
pose, for a contradiction, that the intersection D of the Hi is not contained in N.
Then ID: D n NJ = I G: NJ = p and hence D/T would contain a subgroup E/T of
order p. From bQ e T` and <a"> = (N n <a>)* = Nc" n (b> = <ba>, it follows that
a e T Therefore <a> TIT and Sm_,/T are two different subgroups of order p in G/T.
One of them is different from E/T and lies in a maximal cyclic subgroup Hj/T of G/T.
Since D < N, the cyclic group HJ/T would contain two different subgroups of order
p, a contradiction. Thus D < N and it follows that the intersection of the H' is
contained in N". By 6.1.4, 16: N"'I is finite. Then G/(Nl)d is a finite group and, by
5.1.2, 1G:N4'Iisaprime.
The Zacher-Rips theorem
We come to the main result of this section.
6.1.7 Theorem (Zacher [1980], Rips). Let (p be a projectivity from the group G to the
group G and suppose that H and K are subgroups of G such that K < H. Then K has
finite index in H if and only if K` has finite index in H.
Proof. Suppose that I H: KI is finite and let K = Ho < < H = H such that Hi
is a maximal subgroup of H;+, for i = 0, ..., n - 1. Then IH;+1 : H;I is finite and,
by 6.1.5 and 6.1.6, also IH , : Hr! is finite for all i. It follows that IH4: K" is finite.
Recall that a group is residually finite if it contains subgroups of finite index

intersecting trivially. The above theorem clearly shows that this property is pre-
served by projectivities.
6.1.8 Corollary. Let cp be a projectivity from the group G to the group G. If G is

residually finite, then so is G.
Lattice-theoretic characterizations
The Zacher-Rips Theorem also yields lattice-theoretic characterizations of the fi-

niteness of the index of a subgroup in a group. A first such characterization was
given by Zacher [1980]; we present a simpler one and for this we need another
consequence of Neumann's lemma.
6.1.9 Lemma. Suppose that M is a maximal subgroup of the group G such that for
every g e G, M n Mg is modular in G and [G/M n M9] is a finite lattice. Then M has
finite index in G.
Proof. This is clear if M a G; so suppose that M is not normal in G and take x e G

such that M : Mx. By assumption, D = M n Ms and M are modular subgroups
of G; furthermore [G/D] is finite. By 2.1.6, M" is modular in G and by 2.1.5,
[ <M, Ms)/Ms] 2 [M/M n M']. Since M" is a maximal subgroup of G, it follows
that D is a maximal subgroup of M. If H j4 M is another maximal subgroup of G
containing D, then M n H is maximal in H and D< M n H < M. Thus D = M n H
and [G/D] is a lattice of length 2. Clearly, x M and x Ms. Therefore M n <x> is
a maximal subgroup of <x> and is contained in M n Mx = D. Since D mod G, and
hence [<g>/D n <g>] ^_ [<D,g>/D] for all g e G, we see that D is also maximal in
<D, x> and therefore <D, x> is a maximal subgroup of G different from M and M".
This shows that [G/D] has at least 3 atoms and so is not isomorphic to the subgroup
lattice of a cyclic group. But [<D,g>/D] is isomorphic to the subgroup lattice of
<g)/D n <g> and it follows that <D, g> < G for all g c G. Thus G is covered by the
atoms of [G/D] none of which can be omitted from the covering. By 6.1.4, 1G : MI is
finite.
6.1.10 Theorem (Schmidt [1984b]). It H and K be subgroups of the group G such

that K < H. Then K has finite index in H if and only if there exists a finite chain
K = Ha < < H = H of subgroups H. such that for every i e 10,..., n - 11, Hi is a
maximal subgroup of Hi,, and satisfies one of the following two conditions:
(a) Hi+1 is covered irreducibly by finitely many subgroups whose intersection is
contained in H.; or
(b) for every automorphism a of the lattice [Hi,, /I], the subgroup H. n H' is modu-
lar in [H,..1/1] and [Hi+1/Hj n H] is finite.
Proof. If there exists such a chain, then by 6.1.4 and 6.1.9, 1H;,1 : H;I is finite for
every i and hence J H : K I is finite. Conversely, suppose that K has finite index in H
and let K = Ho < < H. = K be a maximal chain of subgroups connecting K and

H. If i E {0, ... , n - 11, then H. is clearly a maximal subgroup of Hi+1. If there exists
an autoprojectivity a of Hi+1 such that H is not normal in Hi,,, then by the
Zacher-Rips Theorem, H has finite index in Hi,,. By 6.1.4, Hi+1 is covered irre-
ducibly by finitely many subgroups whose intersection is contained in H. Then H;+1
is also covered irreducibly by the images of these subgroups under a-1 and the
intersection of these is contained in H,; thus (a) holds. If there is no such autoprojec-
tivity, then H is a normal subgroup of prime index in Hi,, for every automorphism
a of [Hi+1/1]. It follows that H, n H < H;+1, and H;+1 /Hl n H' is finite for every
such a. Thus (b) is satisfied.
As observed in 6.1.5, property (a) can be described in L(G), so that the above
theorem is indeed a lattice-theoretic characterization of the finiteness of JH : K1.
Another such characterization is given in Exercise 2.
Exercises
1. If a group G is covered by n cosets of subgroups H., show that I G : H,I < n for
some i.
2. (Schmidt [1984b]) Show that a maximal subgroup M of a group G has finite
index in G if and only if it has one of the following properties:
(i) M is not modular in G, but there exists a modular subgroup S of G such that
S < M and [G/S] is finite.
(ii) There exists r c- P(G) such that M n M' mod G and [G/M n M'] is a lattice
of length 2 with at least 3 atoms.
(iii) If o f P(G), then M n M mod G and [G/M n M] _ {G, M, M, M n M}.
6.2 Permodular subgroups

We call a subgroup M of the group G permodular in G and write M pmo G if
(1) M is modular in G, and
(2) for every g c- G and Y:!5; G such that M < Y< <M, g> and [ <M, g>/Y] is a
finite lattice, the index I <M, g> : YI if finite.
6.2.1 Remark. Since the finiteness of the index of a subgroup can be recognized in
the subgroup lattice, and a subgroup X of G containing M has the form X = <M,g)
for some g E G if and only if there exists H < G such that [H/1] is a distributive
lattice satisfying the maximal condition and X = M u H, condition (2) is a lattice-
theoretic property. Thus the permodular subgroups can be recognized in the sub-
group lattice, and if cp is a projectivity from G to a group G and M is permodular in
G, then M is permodular in G.
6.2 Permodular subgroups 289
Permodular subgroups were introduced by Zacher [1982b] who called them "D-
embedded" since he used the term "Dedekind subgroup" for a modular subgroup.
Our name is intended to express the close connection to modular and permutable
subgroups.
6.2.2 Lemma. Every permutable subgroup is permodular.
Proof. Let M be permutable in G. Then by 2.1.3, M is modular in G. If g e G and

Y< G such that M< Y!5; <M,g> = X and [X/Y] is finite, then X = M<g> and it
follows that Y = M(<g> n Y). By 2.1.5, [<g>/<g> n Y] [X/Y] is a finite lattice
and hence I <g>: <g> n YI is finite. But then IX: YI = I Y<g>: YI = I <g>: <g> n YI
is finite and M is permodular in G.
Since permodularity is a lattice-theoretic property, the lemma implies that projec-

tive images of permutable subgroups, in particular of normal subgroups, are per-
modular. We want to use these permodular subgroups to approximate normal
subgroups in the subgroup lattice. Therefore we have to investigate the structure of
MG/MG and G/MG for such a subgroup M of G and, as in the finite case, we want to
reduce this problem to the case that M is permutable in G. In fact, we shall be able
to do this in the two situations which are important for us, namely when M/MG is
periodic and when G is finitely generated modulo M.
Basic properties of permodular subgroups
First of all we generalize Lemma 5.2.7 to permodular subgroups.
6.2.3 Lemma. If M pmo G and g e G such that o(g, M) is infinite, then g e NG(M).
Proof. Let X = <M, g> and T be a maximal subgroup of X containing M. Since

[X/M] ^- L(<g>), there exists Y < X such that M < Y<_ T and [X/Y] is a chain of
length 2. By (2), IX : YI is finite and hence X/YX is a finite group. Since M is modular
in X and [X/M] is a modular lattice, it follows from (c) of 2.1.6 that Y is modular in
X. By 5.1.3, X/YX is a p-group for some prime p and hence T:9 X. Now M is the
intersection of all the maximal subgroups of X containing M. Thus M a X, as
desired.
Our next aim is to replace condition (2) in the definition of a permodular sub-
group by properties that are easier to work with. One of them will be that g e NG(M)
if o(g, M) is infinite. The others are concerned with elements of finite order modulo
M. First of all note that for a modular subgroup M of G and g e G, by 2.1.5,
[<M,g>/M] [<g>/<g> n M] and hence
(3) [ <M, g>/M] is finite if and only if o(g,M) is finite.
We have to compute MG in a similar way as we did for finite groups in 5.1.6.
6.2.4 Lemma. For M < G, let I (M) he the set of elements x e G such that o(x, M) is
a prime power or infinite, and let J(M) = {x E I(M)Io(x,M) < oc}.
(a) if M mod G, then MG =n {MXIx e 1(M)} = n {M<M.X>Ix e 1(M)}.
(b) If M pmo G, then M, =n {wx e J(M)} = n {M;M.X>Ix e J(M)}.
Proof. It is clear that (a) implies (b) since for a permodular subgroup M of G, by
6.2.3, MX = M = M,M,X if o(x, M) is infinite. So we have to prove (a). To accomplish
this, first note that
(4) MG < n {M<M.X>I x e 1(M)} < n {MXIx e I(M)} =: D(M)
since the successive intersections involve fewer conjugates of M. We have to show
that D(M) < M9 for all g e G; then it will follow that D(M) < n Mg = M, and
gEG
equality will hold in (4). So let g e G. If g e 1(M), then clearly D(M) < M. Thus
suppose that g 0 1(M) and let o(g, M) = n = p;' ... p<' be the prime factor decom-
position of o(g, M). For i = 1, ..., t, put ni = n/p, and take ri, si e 77 such that
1 = p-ri + nisi. Since (g",',)",' = g"', c M, we have gi,Si a I(M), and hence by 2.1.5,
<ge>)9" = n <gi'',>)9".' )y.,,,

D(M) < n M9"" < i=1
n (M u ((M u
i=1
gr''>19
= n (M u (g,,>)9 = I n (M u <g..,>)) = (M u n
= (M u <g"))9 = M9, as desired.
6.2.5 Lemma. Let M he a modular subgroup of the group G normalized by every g e G

with o(g, M) infinite. Then the following properties are equivalent:
(a) M is permodular in G;
(b) <M, g> : MI is finite for every g e G such that o(g, M) is finite;
(c) H : MI is finite for every H < G such that M < H and [HIM] is finite;
(d) X : M I is finite for every X < G such that M < X and [X/M] is a finite chain.
Proof. If M pmo G and g c- G such that o(g,M) < then by (3), [<M,g>/M] is
finite and by (2), 1 <M, g> : M I < oc. Thus (a) implies (b). If (b) holds and M < H < G
such that [HIM] is finite, then again by (3), o(x, M) < oc for all x e H. So if X =
{ <M, x> I x E H}, it follows from (b) that IX: MI < oc for every X E X. Clearly, H is
covered irreducibly by the set 3`* of maximal elements of X and, by 6.1.3, I H : X I < oc
for every X e 3r*. It follows that JH : MI is finite. Thus (b) implies (c) and we want
to show next that (c) implies (a). So suppose that (c) holds and let g e G and
M < Y< <M, g> such that [<M, g>/Y] is finite. If o(g,M) is infinite, then by
assumption, M o <M, g> and <M, g>/M is cyclic. Thus I <M, g> : YI < x. And if
o(g,M) < x, then [<M, g>/M] is finite and (c) implies that I <M, g> : MI < oc. In
particular, I <M, g> : YJ is finite and M is permodular in G.
We have shown that (a), (b), and (c) are equivalent, and it is clear that (c) implies
(d). To complete the proof of the lemma, we finally show that (d) implies (b). So
suppose that (d) holds and let g E G such that o(g, M) < or- Then by (3), [<M, g>/M]
is finite and we show by induction on 1 [<M, g>/M] I that I< M,g>: MI < X. For this
we may assume that <M, g> = G and that [G/M] is not a chain. Since [G/M] is
isomorphic to the subgroup lattice of a finite cyclic group, there exist two different
maximal subgroups R and S of G containing M such that [G/T] = { T, R, S, G}
where T = R n S. By (c) of 2.1.6, every subgroup of G containing M is modular in G.
In particular, T mod G and, by 6.2.4, TG = TR n Ts since for x e I(T), [<T,x>/T] is
either a chain or infinite and hence <T, x> E J R, S, T1. By 2.1.5, R = <M, h> for
some h e <g> and the induction assumption implies that IR : MI < X. In particular,
I R : TI < X and hence R/TR is a finite group. Similarly, S/Ts is finite and therefore
I T/TR n T51 < x. Since TG = TR n Ts, we see that R/TG and S/To are finite groups.
Since T/T0 and an element of prime power order of G/TG cannot generate G/TG, this
element has to lie in R/TG or S/TG. Therefore G/TG contains only finitely many such
elements and, of course, no element of infinite order. But then every element of G,/Tc
is the product of its primary components and it follows that G/TG can only contain
a finite number of elements. In particular, I G : R I < oe and hence I G : M I < -)c., as
desired.
One disadvantage of permodular as compared with modular subgroups is that

they do not, at first sight, have the nice inheritance properties of the latter. For
example, it is not so easy to see that the join of two permodular subgroups is again
permodular. This is proved in 6.2.21 after some detours; however we shall need
earlier the special cases of this result given in the following lemma. We do not know
a simple, direct proof of 6.2.21.
6.2.6 Lemma. Let M he a permodular subgroup of the group G.

(a) If H < G, then M n H is permodular in H.
(b) If N g G, then MN is permodular in G and MN/N is permodular in GIN.
(c) I/ L is permodular in G such that [M u L/M] and [M u L/L] are finite, then
M u L is permodular in G.
(d) For every g c G, M u M9 is permodular in G.
Proof. (a) By 2.1.6, M n H mod H. If g e H, then o(g, M n H) = o(g, M). There-

fore if o(g, M n H) is infinite, then M9 = M and hence also (M n H)9 = M n H.
If o(g, M n H) < or, and <M, g> = T, then by (2), 1 T : MI < oc and hence T/MT
is a finite group. Thus <M n H, g>/<M n H, g> n MT is finite and, since
<MnH,g>nMT<MnH, it follows that I<MnH,g>:MnHl<oc. By 6.2.5,
M n H is permodular in H.
(b) Again by 2.1.6, MN mod G. For g c- G such that o(g, MN) is infinite, o(g, M) is
also infinite and hence (MN)9 = MN. Now suppose that o(g, MN) < oc. If o(g, M) is
infinite, then again g e N6(MN) and hence I <MN, g> : MNI < oc. And if o(g, M) < x,
then by (2), I <M, g> : MI < or- and therefore I <MN, g>: MN I = I N <M, g> : NM I
is finite. By 6.2.5, MN is permodular in G and hence MN/N is permodular in G/N.
(c) By 2.1.6, H = M u L mod G. If g e G and o(g, H) is infinite, then o(g, M) and
o(g, L) are infinite and hence H9 = M9 u L9 = M u L = H. We want to verify (d) of
6.2.5 for H and use induction on the length of the chain [X/H]. So suppose that
H < X < G, [X/H] is a finite chain and I Y: HI < oc for all chains [Y/H] of smaller
length. If Hx < X, then X/Hx is a finite group, JH' : HI < oo by induction and
hence I X : HI < oc; so assume that Hx = X. Then since [X/H] is a chain, there
exists x e X such that X = H u HX. As H = M u L and [X/Hx] [X/H] is a chain,
it follows that X = M u HX or X = L u HX; without loss of generality suppose
that X = M u HX. Then [X/M] [HX/HX n M] [H/H n MX-`]. By 6.2.3 and
(b) of 6.2.5, either MX = M or (M, x>/M(M,X> is a finite group. In both cases,
I M: M n MX Ì < oo. By (c) of 6.2.5, I H : MI < oo and hence I H: M n MX-'I < oo.
Since H n MX ` > M n MX-`, it follows that IH: H n MX-'I < oo and therefore
[H/H n MX `] is a finite lattice. Thus [X/M] is finite and, by 6.2.5, IX : MI < x. In
particular, IX: HI < oc and H pmo G.
(d) Clearly, Mg pmo G and M < M u M9 < (M, g>. By 6.2.3 and 6.2.5, either
Mg = M or I (M,g> : MI < oo. In both cases, [M u Mg/M] and [M u M9/M9] are
finite and, by (c), M u Mg is permodular in G.
We often have to consider elements or finite subsets of MG. We show next that in
such a situation we may usually assume that G is finitely generated modulo M, and
then prove the basic result that in this case IM : MI is finite for a permodular
subgroup M of G. Recall that a group G is finitely generated modulo its subgroup H
if there exists a finite subset F of G such that G = <H, F>.
6.2.7 Lemma. If M < G and F is a finite subset of MG, then there exists a subgroup
L of G containing M such that L is finitely generated modulo M and F c ML.
Proof. For any x e F c MG, there exist z; E G and y; e M=1 such that x = y, ... y,,.
Therefore if L is generated by M and all these z;, then L is finitely generated modulo
M and all the y, e ML. Thus x e ML and it follows that F = ML.
6.2.8 Lemma. If M is permodular in G and G is finitely generated modulo M, then

CMG : MI is finite.
Proof. Let G = (M, g, , ... , gm >. We prove the assertion by induction on the sum s
of all the o(g,, M) (i = I__ , m) which are finite. If Mgi = M for all i, then M a G and
IMG : MI = 1 clearly is finite. So suppose that Mgt M, say, and consider H =
M u M9'. By 6.2.3 and 6.2.5, o(g, , M) and I H : MI < (M, g,) : MI are finite. By (d)
of 6.2.6, H is permodular in G = (H,g...... gm> and the sum of all the o(g1,H)
(i = 1, ... , m) which are finite is less than s. For, since M < H < (M, g 1 >, it fol-
lows that M n <g, > < H n <g, > and hence o(g, , H) < o(g, , M); furthermore, clearly,
o(g, H) < o(g, M) for all g c- G and if o(g, M) is infinite, then so is o(g, H) since IH : MI
is finite. The induction assumption implies that 111: HI < oc. Since M = H and
H : M I < oc, it follows that I M : M I < oc.
Permodularity and permutability
In 5.1.1 we proved that a subgroup of a finite group is permutable if and only if it is

modular and subnormal. However, it follows from the results of Chapter 2 that a
permutable subgroup of an infinite group need not be subnormal. The following

example will also show that some other conceivable statements are not true.
6.2.9 Example. Let p be a prime, T an abelian group of type p, and G = T(z> the
semidirect product of T and an infinite cyclic group <z> with respect to the auto-
morphism t -+ t'+P (t E T) of T (or t - t5 for p = 2). By 2.4.11, every subgroup of G
is permutable in G. Since the automorphism induced by z in the cyclic subgroup of
order p" of T has order p"-', we have <z> = 1; also a normal subgroup H of G
containing <z> has abelian factor group and therefore contains G' = T, thus <z> =
G. In particular, <z> is not subnormal in G. For later use, note that if N is an infinite
cyclic group, then by 2.5.14 there exists a projectivity 9 from the abelian group
G = T x N to G mapping the normal subgroup N of G to the core-free, infinite
cyclic subgroup <z> of G.
The example shows that in order to generalize Theorem 5.1.1 and to give a crite-
rion for a modular or permodular subgroup M of an arbitrary group to be permu-
table, we have to weaken the assumption that M is subnormal. For the relevant
generalizations of subnormality we refer the reader to Robinson [ 1982], pp. 344 and
364. Note that every subnormal subgroup is ascendant and every ascendant sub-
group is serial.
6.2.10 Theorem (Stonehewer [1972], [1976a]; Zacher [1982b]). The following pro-
perties of a subgroup M of the group G are equivalent:
(a) M is permutable in G,
(b) M is permodular and serial in G,
(c) M is modular and ascendant in G.
Proof. We first show that (b) and (c) follow from (a). So let M be permutable in G.
By 6.2.2, M is permodular and hence also modular in G. Since every ascendant
subgroup is serial, it remains to be shown that M is ascendant in G. For this we
consider the set X of ascending series (for ordinals p) of the form
(5) M = M0 M1 MP < MG
such that M,, per G and Ma,,/Ma is a finite cyclic group for every ordinal x < p. If
we order X in the usual way-two series are comparable if one of them is an initial
part of the other-Zorn's Lemma yields a maximal element in I; let (5) be this
series and put H = M. We show that H = M; then, clearly, M is ascendant in G.
So suppose, for a contradiction, that H M. Then there exists g e G such that
H < HH9. Since H is permutable in G, we can assert HH9 < H(g> and by 6.2.3,
o(g, H) < oo. It follows that I HH9 : HI is finite and hence H :9:!g HH9 by 5.1.1.
Therefore if we put Lo = HH9 and form the successive normal closures Li+1 = HL,
(i = 0, 1, ...) of H, this series reaches H. For the last member L, different from H, of
this series, H a L and L/H is cyclic since H < L< H(g>. Furthermore L is permu-
table in G since it is a join of conjugates of H. Thus we can extend the series (5) by
putting Mp+1 = L, and this contradicts the maximality of this series.
Now suppose conversely that (b) or (c) is satisfied. Thus M is modular and ascen-
dant, or permodular and serial in G, and we have to show that M is permutable
in G, that is, <M,x) = M<x) for all x e G. For this we may assume that
M:9:9 <M, x) = T. For, if M is permodular in G, then M:9 T for o(x, M) infinite;
in addition, if o(x,M) < oo, then [TIM] is finite and M serial in T implies that
M :!9!9 T. If M is not permodular in G, then M is ascendant in T and hence M a g T
since [TIM] [<x>/<x> n M] satisfies the maximal condition. So suppose that
(6) M=M"aMn_1
Since M mod T. we have M1 = M u (<x> n M1) and by induction on the length of
the chain (6), M1= M(<x) n M1). It follows that T= M1 <x> = M(<x) n M1) (x) =
M <x ).
We want to show next that a permodular subgroup M is permutable if there is an

element of infinite order modulo M. For this we need a simple lemma.
6.2.11 Lemma. If M pmo G and g e G such that o(g, M) = oc, then M" n <g) = 1
for all x e G.
Proof. Suppose, for a contradiction, that there exists x c G such that M" n <g) =
<g") for some n e k. Then <M, g") < M u M" < <M, x) and, by assumption,
o(g", M) = oc. Thus by (3), [ (M, g")/M] is infinite, therefore [ <M, x)/M] and
o(x, M) are infinite as well. By 6.2.3, Mx = M and then M n <g) = <g"). But this
contradicts the assumption that o(g, M) is infinite.
6.2.12 Theorem (Zacher [1982b]). Let M be a permodular subgroup of the group G

and suppose that there exists g e G such that o(g, M) is infinite. Then
MaA(M):= <xEGIo(x,M)= oc> aG
and hence M is permutable in G.
Proof. Let g c G such that o(g, M) is infinite. For z e M,
[<zg)l<zg) n M] "' [<M,zg)lM] = [<M,g)/M] "' [<g)l<g) n M].
It follows that o(zg, M) is infinite and hence z E <g, zg) < A(M). Thus M < A(M)
and M g A(M) by 6.2.3. Let x e G. Then by 6.2.11, Mx n <g) = 1 and hence
o(g, Mx) is infinite. Thus g e A(Mx) and it follows that A(M) < A(MX). Since Mx is
permodular in G, we get the other inclusion and hence A(M) = A(Mx) = A(M)".
Thus A(M) a G; in particular, M:9!9 G and, by 6.2.10, M is permutable in G.
An example of a nonnormal permutable subgroup M with an element of infinite

order modulo M is given in Exercise 6.3.2.
Periodic permodular subgroups
We come to the main subject of this section, the structure of G/MG and MG/MG for
a permodular subgroup M of G. We first of all collect the results proved so far on
MG and M/MG.
6.2.13 Remark. Let M be permodular in G and let J(M) be the set of elements x E G
such that o(x, M) is a prime power. By 6.2.4,
(7) MG = n {M<M,x>I x e J(M)}.
Let x e J(M) and T = (M, x). Then [T/M] [(x>/(x) n M] and hence
(8) [T/M] is a finite chain.
By 6.2.5, 1 T : M I is finite and therefore T/MT is a finite group. By 5.1.3,
(9) T/MT is nonabelian of order pq or a finite p-group;

and in the latter case, M is permutable in T, by 6.2.10. In any case,
(10) M/MT is a finite primary group.
In particular, M/MG is a subdirect product of finite nilpotent groups.
We now study permodular subgroups M for which M/MG is periodic.
6.2.14 Theorem. Let M be a permodular subgroup of the group G such that M/MG is
periodic. Then M/MG is the direct product of its Sylow subgroups and MG/MG is
locally finite. In particular, M/MG is locally nilpotent.
Proof. Of course, we may assume that MG = 1, and we show first that with this
condition M is p-closed for every prime p. To do this we let x, y be p-elements of M
and suppose that z is a p'-element in (x, y). In every finite nilpotent factor group
M/N of M, the elements xN and yN generate a p-group and zN is a p'-element in
this p-group; thus z e N. By 6.2.13, M is a subdirect product of finite nilpotent
groups and it follows that z = 1. Thus (x, y> is a p-group and M is p-closed. This
holds for every prime p and hence M is the direct product of its Sylow subgroups.
Now let g...... g,, E M and H = <g...... gm>. We show that
(11) H is finite.
Since H < M is the direct product of its Sylow subgroups, it will follow that H is a
finite nilpotent group and that M is locally finite and locally nilpotent. As every
element is the product of its primary components and M is the direct product of its
Sylow subgroups, we may assume in the proof of (11) that all the g, are p-elements
for a fixed prime p. Let p" be the maximal order of such an element g;. We show that
(12) H(") = 1;
then H is a finitely generated soluble torsion group and hence finite (see Robinson
[1982], p. 147). To prove (12), we may assume that r > I and, by 6.2.13, we have to
show that W1 < MT for all the groups T = <M, x> with x e J(M). If T/MT is non-
abelian of order pq, then H(') < M' < MT; and if T/MT is a q-group for some prime
q p, then all the g; are contained in MT and hence H < MT. Finally, suppose that
T/MT is a finite p-group. Then HMT/MT < S2,(T/MT) and, by (d) of 5.2.8, this group
is soluble of derived length at most r. Thus again H(') < MT and (12) holds.
It remains to show that MG is locally finite. For this let F be a finite subset of MG.
By 6.2.7 there exists a subgroup L of G containing M such that L is finitely generated
modulo M and F c ML. By 6.2.8, I ML: MI is finite. Therefore <F> n M is a sub-
group of finite index in <F> and hence is finitely generated (see Robinson [1982], p.
36). Since M is locally finite, <F> n M, and hence <F>, is finite. Thus MG is locally
finite.
We want to show that if M is permutable in G, then the Sylow subgroups of

M/MG appearing in 6.2.14 are permutable in G/MG and their normal closures are the
Sylow subgroups of MG/MG. In fact, we prove more general assertions.
6.2.15 Lemma. Let it be a set of primes and M a n-subgroup of the group G. If

(a) M !9:!g G or
(b) M per G,
then MG is a n-group.
Proof. (a) Let M = Mo < . . . 9 M. = G. We prove the assertion by induction on n.

Let H = Then the induction assumption yields that MH is a n-group, and
since H 9 G, we have M" < MG < H. It follows that M" < MG and MG = (MH)G is
a product of normal n-subgroups. Then every element of MG lies in a product of
finitely many normal n-subgroups and hence is a n-element. Thus MG is a n-group.
(b) Let x e MG. By 6.2.7 there exists a subgroup L of G containing M that is
finitely generated modulo M such that x e M' and, by 6.2.8, 1 ML: M I < cc. By
6.2.10, M is ascendant in G, hence subnormal in M' and therefore also in L. By (a),
ML is a n-group. Thus x is a n-element and MG is a n-group.
Note that since the product of normal n-subgroups is a normal n-subgroup, it

follows from 6.2.15 that, quite generally, the join of permutable (or subnormal)
n-subgroups is a n-group.
6.2.16 Lemma. Let M = A x B be a periodic permutable subgroup of G and suppose

that (o(a), o(b)) = 1 for all a e A, b e B. Then A and B are permutable in G.
Proof. We show that A per G. Let n = n(A) be the set of primes dividing the order
of an element of A and let x n G. We have to prove that A<x> = <x>A. If o(x) is
infinite, then by 6.2.3, x e NG(M) and hence x e NG(A). So we may assume that
o(x) < oc and then, of course, that o(x) = p" for some prime p. Let H = M<x>. Then
IH:MI = <x>: <x> n MI and hence IM : Mn MI = lMM: MI is a power ofp for
every y e H. Therefore if p 0 n, then A <_ MI and, as a characteristic subgroup of this
group, A 9 H. Finally, suppose that p e n. By 6.2.10, M <9 H, hence A :9!!g H, and
(a) of 6.2.14 shows that A" is a it-group. Hence A"<x) is a n-group and it follows
that A"(.x) n M = A. Now (11) of 5.1 yields that A is permutable in A"(x) and this
implies that A(x) = <x> A.
The above results sufficiently elucidate the structure of MG/MG for periodic per-
mutable subgroups M of G (see Theorem 6.3.1). We turn to the more general case of
periodic permodular subgroups; we wish to prove a structure theorem similar to
5.1.14 for finite groups. For this purpose it is convenient to introduce a notation for
the situation that appears in this theorem. In the literature the term "Schmidt struc-
ture" has been used (see Stonehewer [1976b], Zacher [1982a]), but we prefer to
speak of P-embedded subgroups instead.
P-embedding
The subgroup M of the group G is called P-embedded in G if G/MG is a periodic

group of the form
(13) G/MG = (S1 /MG X S2/MG x ) x T/MG,
where the number of factors Si/MG may be finite (nonzero) or infinite, and for all i, j,
(14) Si/MG is a nonabelian (possibly infinite) P-group,
(15) (o(x), o(y)) = 1 for all x E Si/MG and y E SJ/MG with j 0 i or y E T/MG,
(16) M/MG = (Q1/MG X Q2/MG x ) x (M n T)/MG and Qi/MG is a nonnormal
Sylow subgroup of Si/MG, and
(17) M n T is permutable in G.
Every P-embedded subgroup is permodular in G, as the reader may easily prove.
Our aim is to show the converse, at least for nonpermutable subgroups in periodic
groups. The situation in arbitrary groups is more complicated; see Exercises 3 and 4.
6.2.17 Theorem. Let M be a permodular subgroup of the group G such that M/MG is
periodic. Then M is permutable or P-embedded in G.
Proof. We assume that M is not permutable in G and also, of course, that

(18) MG=1.
By 6.2.12, o(g, M) is finite for every g c- G and, since M is periodic, it follows that
(19) G is periodic.
By 6.2.14, M is the direct product of its Sylow subgroups. Since M is not permutable
in G, there exist Sylow subgroups of M that are not permutable in G. Let Q be one
of these, q the corresponding prime and K the q-complement of M, so that
(20) M = Q x K.
We shall show in a number of steps that IQI = q, QG is a nonabelian P-group,

G = QG X CG(QG) and the groups QG and CG(QG) are coprime.
Since Q is not permutable in G, there exists x e G of prime power order such that
Q <x> <x) Q. Let x be such an element and X = <M, x). Since M is permodular
in G, IX : MI is finite. If M were permutable in X, then by 6.2.16, Q would also be
permutable in X and hence Q<x) = <x>Q, a contradiction. Thus M is not per-
mutable in X, but x c- J(M); by 6.2.13, X/Mx is nonabelian of order rs for primes r
and s. If Q < Mx, then Q would be a characteristic subgroup of Mx a X and there-
fore x c- NG(Q). This is not the case; hence QM, = M and it follows that IM: MxI =
q is the smaller prime dividing IX/Mx I. Thus we have shown:
(21) If x e G is of prime power order such that Q<x) <x)Q, and if X = <M, x>,
then IM : MxI = q and X/Mx is nonabelian of order rq for some primer > q.
Suppose that x and X are as before, let y c- G and consider H = <M, x, y> = <X, y).
Since M is a maximal subgroup of X, we see that X = M u M" is permodular in G
by (d) of 6.2.6. It follows that I H : XI, and hence also I H : MI, is finite. Then H/MH
is a finite group containing the core-free modular subgroup M/MH with Sylow
q-subgroup QMH/MH. By 5.1.14, M is P-embedded in H. If QMH were permutable
in H, it would also be permutable in X, and then M = (QMH)Mx would be permu-
table in X, contradicting (21). Thus QMH/MH is not permutable in H/MH and hence
it cannot lie in the permutable part of the decomposition (16) of M/MH. Therefore:
(22) If x is as in (21), y e G and H = <M, x, y), then H/MH is a finite group, M is
P-embedded in H, (QMH)H/MH is a nonabelian P-group, and QMH/MH is a
Sylow q-subgroup of order q of H/MH.
In particular, IQ : Q n MHI = q = I Q : Q n M, 1. But X < H implies MH < Mx
and it follows that Q n M. = Q n MH < MH < My. Since y c- G was arbitrary,
Q n M,< MG = I and hence
(23) IQI = q.
Now suppose that y is a q-element. If <Q,y) is a q-group and again H = <M, x, y),
then by (22), QMH/MH is a Sylow q-subgroup of H/MH; on the other hand,
(Q, y)MH/MH is a q-group. It follows that (Q, y) < QMH < M and then y e Q since
Q is the only Sylow q-subgroup of M. This shows that Q is a Sylow q-subgroup of
G. If (Q,y) is not a q-group, then Q(y> # <y)Q and we may choose y = x in (21).
We obtain that y is contained in a conjugate of M in X = <M,x) and then, clearly,
y is contained in a conjugate of Q. Thus
(24) Q E Sylq(G) and every q-element of G is contained in QG.
Now let g e G\NG(Q), so that Q9 0 Q. Since Q E Sylq(G), we have Q<x) # <x>Q for
Q9 = <x>. Therefore if X = (M,x) = <M,Q9), then by (21), X/Mx is a nonabelian
group of order rq for some prime r > q. By (23), Mx is the q-complement K in
M = Q x K. Furthermore, Q9K/K is a subgroup of order q in X/K and hence is
conjugate to M/K. Thus Q9K is conjugate to M and it follows that Q9K = Q9 x K.
Thus K is centralized by Q9 and, since g was arbitrary,
(25) QG < CG(K).
The nonabelian group <M, Q9 )/K of order rq has a unique minimal normal sub-
group S9/K, say; clearly, <M,Qg) = (Sg,M). Let S = (SoIg e G\NG(Q)>; then
QGK/K = (S,M)/K. For g,h e G\NG(Q), again write X = <M,Qg) and H =
<M, Qg, Qh) = (Sg, Sh, M ). Then K = MH and, by (22), H/K is a finite group in
which M/K is a modular, nonpermutable subgroup of order q that together with its
conjugates QgK/K and QhK/K generates H/K. By 5.1.9, H/K is a nonabelian P-
group. Thus ISg/KI = ISh/KI, [Sg/K,Sh/K] = 1 and M/K induces a universal power
automorphism in S9Sh/K. This shows that S/K is an elementary abelian p-group for
some prime p, and SM/K = QGK/K is a nonabelian P-group. By (25), QG n K <
Z(QG) and since QG/QG n K QGK/K, as a nonabelian P-group, has trivial centre,
it follows that QG n K = Z(QG) a G. Now MG = 1 implies that QG n K = I and
hence that
(26) QG is a nonabelian P-group.
Let P be the normal Sylow p-subgroup of Q'. We want to show that P is the set of
p-elements of G. For this we choose a conjugate Qg = <x) 0 Q of Q and put X =
(M, x). If M contained an element of order p, then, since n M<M.y> < n m,, = 1,
yeG veG
there would exist a subgroup H = <X, y) of G such that M/MH contains an element
of order p. By (22), this implies that M is P-embedded in H and (QMH)H/MH is a
nonabelian P-group. By (26), p would divide I(QMH)H/MHI and hence, by (15), could
not divide IM: MHI, a contradiction. Thus M does not contain an element of order
p. Now let y be an arbitrary p-element of G and, this time, H = <X, y). Then again
by (22) and (26), (QMH)H/MH contains the unique Sylow p-subgroup of H/MH. It
follows that y E QHMH < QGM and, since M does not contain p-elements, y E QG.
Thus y e P and hence
(27) P is the unique Sylow p-subgroup of G.
We finally show that
(28) G = QG X CG(QG).
Every element is the product of its primary components and, by (24) and (27), QG
contains every p-element and every q-element of G. Therefore to prove (28), we only
have to show that for every prime t such that p 0 t 0 q, every element of order t" of
G centralizes QG. So let x be such an element. If Q<x) (x> Q, we would consider
X = <M,x) and obtain from (21) and (26) that IX/M,rI = pq. It would follow that
x e MX and hence Qx = Q, a contradiction. Thus Q<x) = <x>Q and hence
IQ<x)I = qt". By (26), Q = Q<x) n QG a Q<x) and so x e NG(Q). If g e G, then xg-'
also is a t-element; therefore xg-' e NG(Q), that is, x e NG(Qg). Thus x normalizes
every q-subgroup of QG and, since in this P-group every subgroup is the join of
q-subgroups or is the unique Sylow p-subgroup of such a join, every subgroup of QG
is normalized by x. Hence x induces a power automorphism in Q' which, by 1.4.3,
is trivial since Z(QG) = 1. Thus x e CG(QG) and (28) holds.
To complete the proof of Theorem 6.2.17, let Q1, Q2, ... be those Sylow subgroups
of M which are not permutable in G and let R be the join of the other Sylow
subgroups of M. Then R is permutable in G and M = (Q 1 x Q2 x . . ) x R. Let Q.
be a qi-group. By (26), for every qi, the group Q? is a nonabelian P-group in which
a prime pi > qi is involved. By (28), all these pi are distinct and also different from the
qi; let n = {pi, qiJi > 1}. Then (Q1 X Q2 X P = QC X QZ x is the set of n-
elements, and CG(QG X QZ x ) = n Co(Qq) = T is the set of n'-elements of G. In
particular, i'-1
G x QZ x ... ) x T
and R = M n T is permutable in G. Thus M is P-embedded in G.
As an immediate consequence of Theorem 6.2.17 we get the corresponding result

in the case that G is finitely generated modulo M.
6.2.18 Theorem (Zacher [1982b]). Let M be a permodular subgroup of the group G

and suppose that G is finitely generated modulo M. Then IMG : MI is finite, Mc/Mc is
a locally finite group of finite exponent and, if M is not permutable in G, then M is
P-embedded in G.
Proof. We may assume that MG = 1; let MG = H. By 6.2.8, I H : MI < oc and hence

HIM is a finite group of order n, say. For g e G, also (MH)9 a H and JH/(MH)91 = n.
Therefore if x e H, then x" E (MN)9 < M9 and it follows that x" E n Mg = MG = 1.
ge G
Thus H is periodic of exponent dividing n. The other assertions now follow from
6.2.14 and 6.2.17.
The join of two permodular subgroups
We finally want to show that the join of two permodular subgroups is permodular.
For this we need a general result on permodular subgroups that is a consequence of
Theorem 6.2.18 and is of independent interest.
6.2.19 Theorem. If M is permodular in G, then M is permutable in MG".
Proof. Let Per(M) = {x E GI M per (M, x> }. We want to show that Per(M) is a
subgroup of G containing MG", that is
(29) M < MG" < Per(M) < G.
This will prove the theorem since every x e Per(M) satisfies M(x) = <x>M and so
(29) implies that M is permutable in MG". To prove (29), we take x, y E Per(M),
a, b, c, d e G and show that
(30) xy-' E Per(M) and [[a,b],[c,d]] E Per(M).
This will imply that Per(M) < G and G" < Per(M); since obviously M c Per(M),
(29) will follow. To prove (30), consider L = (M, a, b, c, d, x, y>. Then L is finitely
generated modulo M and, by 6.2.18, either M is permutable in L or M is P-em-
bedded in L and ML/ML has finite exponent. In the first case, L s Per(M) and (30)
holds; in the second case, let
L/ML = S, /ML x ... X S,/ML X T/ML

and
M/ML = Q 1 /ML x ... x Q,/ML x (M n T )/ML
be the decompositions described in (13) and (15). We claim that

(31) Per(M) n L = MT
Indeed M n T is permutable and the Q; are normal in MT, so M = Q1 ... Qr( M n T)
is permutable in MT and hence MT c Per(M) n L. And if z e L\ MT, then z =
zl ... z,t where z; E S;, t c T and zj Qj for some j. Since the orders modulo M. of
these elements are coprime, there exists m e N such that zmML = zJML. It follows
that <zjML> < <zML) and hence (zz, QQ> < <z, M>. Since <zj, QJ>/ML is nonabelian
of order pq for primes p, q and p > q = JQJ/MLA, the subgroup M n <zz, QQ> = Qj
is not permutable in <zz, QQ>. In particular, M cannot be permutable in <M, z> and
thus z 0 Per(M). This proves (31), and (30) is an immediate consequence. For, since
x, y e Per(M) n L = MT, we have xy-' E MT 9 Per(M) and since the factor group
LIT n- S1/ML x x Sr/ML is metabelian, [ [a, b], [c, d ] ] is contained in T and
hence in Per(M).
6.2.20 Lemma. Let G be a soluble group. If M is a maximal subgroup of G that is

modular in G, then I G : M I is a prime.
Proof. We use induction on the derived length of G. If G' < M, then M a G and
I G: MI is a prime; so suppose that G' M. Since M is a maximal subgroup of G, it
follows that G = G'M and, since M is modular in G, M n G' is maximal and modu-
lar in G'. By induction, I G': M n G' j = I G : M I is a prime.
6.2.21 Theorem (Zacher [ 1982b] ). If M and L are permodular subgroups of the group
G, then M u L is permodular in G.
Proof. By 2.1.6, H = M u L is modular in G. If g e G and o(g, H) is infinite, then

o(g, M) and o(g, L) are infinite and hence H9 = M9 u L9 = M u L = H. We want to
verify (d) of 6.2.5 for H. So let H < X < G such that [X/H] is a finite chain. We have
to show that JX : HI is finite and may assume that X = G. Let R = G"H. Since
[R/H] is a chain, there exists x e G" such that R = (H, x). By 6.2.19, M is per-
mutable in G"M and hence M(x) = <x>M. Similarly, L<x> = <x>L and thus R =
H<x>. It follows that JR : HI = I<x>: <x> n HI and [<x>/<x> n H] [R/H] is
finite since H is modular in G. Thus JR : HI is finite. By (c) of 2.1.6, every subgroup of
G containing H is modular in G; in particular, every subgroup of GIG" contain-
ing R/G" is modular in G/G". By 6.2.20, any two successive members of the chain
[(G/G")/(R/G")] have prime index in each other and it follows that IG: RI is finite.
Thus I G : HI is finite and, by 6.2.5, H is permodular in G.
We mention without proof three further results of Zacher [1982b]. First of all,
Theorem 6.2.21 is the main step needed to prove that the relation p on the subgroup
lattice of a group G defined by
(32) HpK if and only if H < K and H pmo K
is a normality relation on L(G). This concept was introduced by Zassenhaus [1958],
p. 76 who proved a Jordan-Holder Theorem for lattices with a normality relation.
However, since every permutable subgroup is permodular, the remark following
5.2.8 also applies here. Permodular subgroups are the lattice-theoretic approxima-
tion to normal subgroups (and their projective images) which we shall use; however,
in fact, they approximate permutable subgroups more precisely. It would be prefera-
ble to have a better lattice-theoretic approximation of normal subgroups to work
with.
The second result is that if (Mi)iEl is a local system of subgroups of M such that
every M; is permodular in G, then M is permodular in G. Using this, Theorem 6.2.21
implies that the join of an arbitrary family of permodular subgroups is permodular
in G.
Thirdly, Theorem 5.1.13 also holds for permodular subgroups of infinite groups:
Zacher shows that M pmo G if and only if M pmo <M, g) for every g e G.
We finally remark that quite a few of the results in this section, in particular 6.2.3,
6.2.8, 6.2.14 and Theorem 6.2.17, were inspired by and are more or less due to
Stonehewer [1976b], who proved them for modular subgroups in Tarski-free groups.
Exercises
All the exercises in this section are due to Zacher [1982b].

1. Let M be permodular in G and suppose that there exists g E G such that o(g, M)
is infinite. Show that M/MG is a subdirect product of finite cyclic groups, hence is
abelian, and MG/MG is nilpotent of class at most 2.
2. If M is P-embedded in G, show that M is permodular in G.
3. We say that M is locally P-embedded in G if there exists a family (Hi)i., of
subgroups Hi of G containing M with the following properties.
(i) M is P-embedded in Hi for every i e I.
(ii) For all i, j e I there exists k c I such that Hi u H. < Hk.
(iii) G is the set-theoretic union of the Hi.
Show that a subgroup M of G is permodular and not permutable in G if and only
if M is locally P-embedded in G.
4. For every i e 1V, let pi and qi be primes such that qiI pi - 1 and { pi, qi} n { pj, qj} _ 0
for i -A j; let Si = (a,,bi) be a nonabelian group of order pigi and bi-taibi =
with ri c- Z. Put S = Dr <ai> and let r be the automorphism of S satisfying a, = a;
iE M
for all i. Finally, let M = (r) and G = SM be the semidirect product with respect
to this automorphism.
(a) Show that M is permodular and not permutable in G.
(b) Show that M is infinite cyclic and MG = 1; hence M is not P-embedded in G.
6.3 Permutable subgroups of infinite groups 303
5. Let M be a subgroup of a group G such that M is permodular in (M, g> for every
g e G and suppose that G is finitely generated modulo M.
(a) Show that (MG: MI is finite.
(b) If M is not permutable in G, show that M is P-embedded in G.
6. Show that a subgroup M of the group G is permodular in G if and only if M is
permodular in <M, g> for every g e G. (Hint: Use Exercises 3 and 5.)
6.3 Permutable subgroups of infinite groups

Theorems 6.2.17 and 6.2.18 reduce the problem of determining the structure of
G/MG for a permodular subgroup M to the case where M is permutable in G; at least
this is so in the two situations that are important for us, namely when M/MG is
periodic and when G is finitely generated modulo M. The results of 6.2 also give the
structure of MG/MG in these situations; the only additional result proved in this
section is that MGIMG is nilpotent if G is finitely generated modulo M. Again no
systematic treatment of permutable subgroups is intended, but a number of special
results will be proved in the remainder of this section to prepare the way for the
study of the structure of NG/NG and NG/NG for a normal subgroup N of G and a
projectivity from G to G. Basic for this is a theorem of Busetto and Napolitani
[1990] stating that if G is generated by a permutable subgroup M and a subset F,
then MG is generated by the M(x) for x e F.
Periodic permutable subgroups
To give the structure of MG/MG for a permutable subgroup M of G with M/MG

periodic, we only have to collect the results proved in 6.2.14-6.2.16.
6.3.1 Theorem. Let M be a permutable subgroup of the group G such that M/MG is
periodic. Then MG/MG is locally finite and the direct product of its Sylow subgroups,
the Sylow subgroups of M/MG are permutable in G/MG and their normal closures are
the Sylow subgroups of MG/MG.
Proof. We may assume that MG = 1. By 6.2.14, MG is locally finite and M is the

direct product of its Sylow subgroups MP (p c P). Then M' is the product of the
normal closures Mp By 6.2.16, MP is permutable in G, and 6.2.15 shows that Mp is
P.
a p-group. It follows that the product of the MG is direct and that MSG is the Sylow
p-subgroup of MG. El
The above theorem in particular implies that for a permutable subgroup M of G

with M/MG periodic, MG/MG is locally nilpotent. It need not be nilpotent; in fact,
M/MG need not even be soluble (see Exercise 4). If G is finitely generated modulo M,
then by 6.2.18, M/MG is periodic and we want to show that MG/MG is nilpotent in
this case. For this we need the following lemma.
6.3.2 Lemma. Let M be permutable in G, g1..... g,,, E G and H = M"... M9-. Then
H/(Mg,)H is finite and nilpotent for every i = 1, ..., m.
Proof. If o(g;, M) is infinite, M9i = M. Thus we may assume that gi = 1, o(g,, M) < 00
for all j and G = (M, g...... g). Then by 6.2.8, 1 Mc : MI < ac; in particular, H/MH
is a finite group. It remains to be shown that this group is nilpotent. For this let
g be one of the g; with j : i and L = H(g). Since H per G and o(g, M) < 00, the
index IL: HI is finite, and hence L/ML is a finite group. By 5.2.3, ML/ML is nilpotent
and therefore H n ML/ML is nilpotent as well. Since ML < MH, finally, H n ML/MH
is a nilpotent normal subgroup of H/MH containing MMg/MH. Thus MMg/MH is
contained in the Fitting subgroup of H/MH and, since H is generated by these MM9,
it follows that H/MH is nilpotent.
6.3.3 Theorem (Lennox [1981]). If M is a permutable subgroup of the group G such

that G is finitely generated modulo M, then MG/MG is nilpotent.
Proof. Let H = Mo. By 6.2.8, I H : MI is finite and hence there exist g2, ..., g,,, E G
such that H = MM92 ... Mg-. By 6.3.2, H/MH is nilpotent. Hence some term K of the
lower central series of H is contained in MH, and K < G since K is a characteristic
subgroup of H = M'. It follows that K < MG and hence Mo/Ms is nilpotent.
We remark that although Theorem 5.2.12 and Busetto [1979] contain partial
results in this direction, there is no analogue of the Maier-Schmid Theorem for
infinite groups. In fact, Exercise 6 shows that MG /Ms need not be hypercentrally
embedded in G even if M is a permutable subgroup of a finitely generated p-group
G. In this example, M/Ms is infinite and it remains an open problem whether a finite
core-free permutable subgroup of a group G is contained in the hypercentre of G.
Furthermore, there are examples of (nonperiodic) core-free permutable subgroups
which are not locally soluble (see Gross [1982]).
The normal closure of a permutable subgroup
In the remainder of this section we shall study rather special aspects of permutable
subgroups which are necessary for the applications to projective images of normal
subgroups. First we want to describe the normal closure of a permutable subgroup
M in G and in Mo. For this we need a very simple technical lemma.
6.3.4 Lemma. If M per G and g c- G, then M<g> = M(M<g> n (g)) = MMg.
Proof. Since M is permutable in G, we have M<g> < M(g), and Dedekind's law
yields that M<g> = M(M<g> n (g)). Furthermore, MM9 < M(g) = M9(g) and
again Dedekind's law implies that MM9 = M(MM9 n (g)) = M9(MM9 n (g)). It
follows that MM9 is normalized by g. Thus MM9 < M(g) and hence MM9 = M<9>.
6.3.5 Theorem (Busetto and Napolitani [1990]). Let M be a permutable subgroup

and F a subset of the group G such that G = <M, F>. Then
MG = (M<X>Ix E F> = M(M<x> n (x>Ix e F>.
Proof. First of all note that we may assume IF1 = 2 and only have to show that
(1) MG = M<x>M<Y> if G = (M,x,y>.
For, if this holds, then for every x, y e F,
(M<X>)<Y> < M<M,X,y> = M<X>M<Y> < (M<X>)<y>
and hence (M<x))<y> = M<x>M<y>. Thus if H = (M<x>I x E F>, then

H<y> = (M<x>(x E F><Y> = ((M<X>)<Y>lx
e F> = (M<x>M<y>(x E F> = H
and hence y e NG(H). This holds for arbitrary y E F and, since G = (M, F>, it follows
that H a G. Thus MG < H, and the other inclusion is trivial since H is generated by
conjugates of M. Therefore MG = H = (M<x>lx E F> = M(M<x>n(x> xeF>, by
6.3.4, and the theorem will be proved.
So assume that G = <M, x, y>, and consider T = M<x> = (M9ig e (x>>. As a join
of permutable subgroups, T is permutable in G and, if we apply 6.3.4 to T, we obtain
that T<x''> = TTxy = TTY = T<y). Therefore T<'> = (M<x))<3 is normalized by y
and xy, hence is normal in (M, xy, y> = G and so contains M'; on the other hand,
(M<x>)<y> is generated by conjugates of M. It follows that
(2) MG = (M<X>)<Y>
and by 6.3.4 applied to the permutable subgroup M<x>,
MG = (M<x>)<y> = M<X>(M<X> n (y)) <_ M<X>(MG n (y>).
The other inclusion is trivial and again by 6.3.4,

(3) MG = M(M<x> n (x>)(MG n (y>)
For the proof of (1) we may assume that MG = 1. By (2), we have to show that
(4) (M<x>)<y> = M<x>M <y>
Since G is finitely generated modulo M, by 6.2.18 and 6.3.1, MG has finite exponent
and M is the direct product of its Sylow subgroups which are permutable in G.
Now if M = AB with A and B permutable in G, then MX = AXBX for every sub-
group X of G; so if (4) holds for A and B, it follows that
(M(x>)<y> = (A<x>)<Y>(B<x>)<Y> = A<x>A<y>B<x>B<Y> = M<X>M<y>
as desired. Therefore we may assume that M is a p-group for some prime p and that
G = (M, x, y> and MG = 1. By 6.2.15 and 6.2.8,
(5) MG is a p-group and 1 MG : MI is finite;
write H = MG. Then H/MH is a finite p-group; let v be the natural epimorphism from
H to HIM,,. If H n (x> = M<x> n (x>, then (3) and (4) with x and y interchanged
yields
MG = M(M<y> n (y>)(MG n (x>) = M(M<y> n (y>)(M<x> n (x>) < M<Y>M<x>
and hence MG = M<x>M<y>, as desired. So suppose that H n (x) -A M<x> n <x>.

Then M<x> n <x> is contained in the maximal subgroup of the cyclic p-group
H n <x>. Since MH < M<x> < H, this also holds for the images under v and, since H"
is a finite p-group, it follows that (M<x> n (x>)" is contained in the Frattini subgroup
of H". Then (3) and the main property of the Frattini subgroup yield that
H' = (M<x> n (x))"M"(H n (y))" = M"(H n (y>)"
and hence H = MMH (H n (y>) = M(H n (y>). Since H n (y) is a cyclic p-group,
it follows that [H/M] is a chain and therefore either M<x> < M<'> or M<Y> < M<x>.
In the first case, as M<Y> < M(y), it follows from (2) that MG = (M<x>)<Y> < M<y>,
and hence MG = M<Y> = M<x>M<Y>; in the second case, the same argument with x
and y interchanged yields that MG = M<x>, but this contradicts our assumption that
H n (x> M<x> n <x>. Thus MG = M<x>M<Y>, as desired.
6.3.6 Corollary. MMG = e F> if M is permutable in G = <M, F>.
Proof. By 6.3.5, MG = M(M<x> n (x> lx e F>. Now apply Theorem 6.3.5 to MG

and the set-theoretic union of the M<x> n <x> (x e F) in place of G and F.
NNG/N
The above result will be used to determine the structure of for a normal
subgroup N of G and a projectivity from G to G. The structure of MG/MM" is rather
simple, even for arbitrary permutable subgroups.
6.3.7 Theorem. If M per G, then MG/MMG is nilpotent of class at most 2.
Proof. Let H = MG and S = MH. Then S is generated by conjugates of M and hence

is permutable in G. If x e G, then Sx a Hx = H and SS' < S(x>, so that SSx/S is a
cyclic normal subgroup of HIS. Since the automorphism group of a cyclic group
is abelian, SSx/S is centralized by the commutator subgroup (H/S)' of HIS. But
H = MG = SG and therefore HIS is generated by these SS'/S. It follows that
(H/S)' < Z(H/S). Thus HIS is nilpotent of class at most 2.
As an application of Corollary 6.3.6 we prove the following rather technical result

that will be needed in 6.6.
6.3.8 Lemma. Let p e P, H a core free permutable p-subgroup of G and M = fl(H).

(a) Then MG is an elementary abelian p-group.
(b) If M is permutable in G and H is not normal in HG, then MG < HHG.
Proof. (a) By 6.2.10, a permutable maximal subgroup of a group is normal. There-

fore every element of order p of G normalizes H9 and hence also its characteristic
subgroup S2(H9) = Ma; it follows that M9 < MG for every g E G.
Let X E G\NG(H) and T = H(x). By 6.2.3, o(x,H) = IT : HI < oo and therefore
T/HT is a finite group in which H/HT is a permutable p-subgroup. By 5.1.5, this
p-subgroup is normalized by the p'-component of xHT, and so 5.2.8 shows that
0(H/HT) is elementary abelian. This group contains MHT/HT and hence M/M n HT
is elementary abelian. Since HG = 1, the intersection of all these M n HT is trivial
and so M is elementary abelian.
It follows that M9 n H = M9 n M and MM9/M M9/M9 n M = M9/M9 n H
M9H/H for every g E G. Now M9/M9 n H is elementary abelian and M9H/H is
cyclic since its subgroup lattice is isomorphic to an interval in [H(g)/H]
[(g)/(g) n H]. Thus MM9/M is cyclic of order dividing p. Since MM9 a MG, the
group MG/M is generated by cyclic normal subgroups of order p and hence is an
elementary abelian p-group. Since MG = 1, the same holds for MG.
(b) Let S = H"` and x c G. We have to show that M<X> < S. If x c NG(M), then
clearly M<X> = M < S; so suppose that x 0 NG(M). Then since M is permutable in
G, 5.2.7 and 5.1.5 imply that o(x) is finite and divisible by p. Let P be the subgroup
of order p in (x). By (a), M<x> < M(x) is elementary abelian and hence M<X) =
MP. Let X = H<X> n (x). If X NG(H), then HP < Hx < S since X < HG; in par-
ticular, M<X> = MP < S, as desired. So we may assume that
(6) X = H<X> n (x) < NG(H).
By assumption and 6.3.5, H is not normal in HG = H<H<Y) n (y)Iy c G) and hence
there exists y c G such that
(7) Y = Ho'> n (y) NG(H).
Let L = (H, x, y) and Z = H<Xy> n (xy). Now M g H and therefore 6.3.5 and 6.3.4
applied to the permutable subgroup M of L = <H, y, xy) yield that
(8) M<X> < ML = M<y>M(Xy> = (M<y> n (Y))M(M<XY>
n (xy>).
Of course, HL < HG and by 6.3.6, S = H"G > = HXHY = HXHZ = HY = Hz
HHL
since X normalizes H. By (7), H < HY < H(y) and as HY is a p-group, it contains

the subgroup of order p of (y). Since M<)'> is elementary abelian, M<Y> n (y) is con-
tained in this subgroup of order p of (y) and it follows that M<Y> n (y) < HY < S.
Now Z NG(H) since HY = Hz, and the same argument with xy in place of y
shows that M<Xy> n (xy) < Hz < S. By (8), M<x> < S, as desired.
We do not know whether the hypothesis that Q(H) is permutable in G is redun-

dant in Lemma 6.3.8(b).
Groups generated by cyclic permutable subgroups
If N < G and (p is a projectivity from G to G, then NG/N is generated by subgroups

of the form ()V v NX)c '/N for x e G. These groups are cyclic permodular subgroups
of G/ N since N u NX < <N, x>. Therefore we shall need two further technical results
on groups containing many cyclic permutable subgroups.
6.3.9 Lemma. Let G be a p-group generated by a family X of cyclic permutable
subgroups, and suppose that S is a nonabelian subgroup of G such that every subgroup
of S is permutable in G and S does not contain subgroups isomorphic to the quaternion
group Q8. If S is not generated by two elements, then IS n f2(Z(G))I >_ p2.
Proof. Since any two subgroups of S permute, S is a nonabelian locally finite p-
group with modular subgroup lattice. By 2.4.15, Exp S is finite. Furthermore, S is
not hamiltonian since it does not contain subgroups isomorphic to Q8, and by 2.5.9
there exists an abelian p-group lattice-isomorphic to S. An abelian group of finite
exponent is a direct product of cyclic groups (see Robinson [1982], p. 105) and, since
S is not generated by two elements, it follows that
(9) Q(S) is elementary abelian of order at least p'.
Let 1 g e f(S). Since <g) per G, we have I <x> <g> : <x> l < p, and hence <x> _
<x> for every x e G. Thus g induces a power automorphism in G that centralizes
S22(G) if p = 2; for, an element of order 4 inverted by g would generate, together with
g, a dihedral group of order 8 in which <g> is not permutable. Let C, D e X. By
5.2.14, CD is a metacyclic M-group and 2.3.24 shows that the power automorphism
induced by g in CD is universal if CD is an M*-group. If CD is not an M*-group, it
is a metacyclic hamiltonian M-group and, by 2.3.8, the only such group is Q8i then
CD < S2,(G) is centralized by g. In any case, there exists r E 1L such that x9 = x' for
all x e CD and, since o(g) = p and g centralizes S22(G) if p = 2,
(10) r - I (mod p), r - I (mod 4) if p = 2, and r - I (mod I D I).
We have to consider two cases. If {ICI IC e 3:} is not bounded, we claim that
g e Z(G). If this is false, there is a C E X such that C = <c> and c9 i4 c. Then there
exists D = <d> e X such that o(d) > o(c) = p" and for the universal power auto-
morphism x -+ x' induced by g in CD, we have r - 1 (mod p""). It follows that
r = 1 (mod p") and hence cQ = c, a contradiction. This shows that g centralizes
every C e X and thus g e Z(G) since G = <C I C e I ). Thus S2(S) < Z(G) and
IS n f(Z(G))I > p3.
Now assume that { I C I I C e X} is bounded and take C E X such that ICI is maxi-
mal. This time, at least Co(s)(C) < Z(G). For, if g e C0(S)(C) and D E X, then the
power automorphism x -+ x' induced by g in CD satisfies r - 1 (mod ICI) and, since
ICI > IDI, it follows that g centralizes D; again G = <DID E I) implies g e Z(G).
Now for p > 2, Aut C is cyclic and for p = 2, (10) shows that the automorphisms
induced by f(S) in C lie in the cyclic subgroup of Aut C generated by x -+ x5. Thus
f2(S)rC0(5)(C) is cyclic and, by (9), IS n f(Z(G))I > p2.
6.3.10 Lemma. Let M be a permutable subgroup and F a subset of the group G such
that H = <M, F) is a p-group for some prime p and I H : MI is finite. Assume further
that for all x, y e F, <M, x) is permutable in G and the interval [<M, x, y)/M] is
isomorphic to the subgroup lattice of some p-group. Then every subgroup T such that
M < T < MH is permutable in G.
Proof. Our first aim is to show that we may assume that G is a finite p-group. We
have to show that
(11) T <c> _ (c) T for every c e G
and for this we clearly may assume that G = (H, c> and M = 1. As a join of the
permutable subgroups (M,x)', (x e F), H is permutable in G. So G = H(c> and we
first consider the case that o(c, H) is infinite. Then [G/H] [(c)/(c) n H] is iso-
morphic to the subgroup lattice of an infinite cyclic group and therefore o(g, H) is
infinite for every g e G\H. In particular, o(g, M) is infinite and by 6.2.3, g E NG(M)
for all g e G`,,H. Since these elements generate G, it follows that M < G. But then
M" = M and the assertion is trivial.
So suppose that o(c, H) = I G : HI < ac. Then our hypothesis yields that IG : MI < cc
and G is a finite group since M = 1. To prove (11), we now may assume that o(c)
is a power of some prime q. By 5.2.4, G/C(M) is a p-group. So if q 0 p, it follows
that c e C(M) and hence T(c> = (c> T. Therefore it remains to consider the case
q = p and, since H is a p-group, we are finally reduced to the situation that
(12) G is a finite p-group.
Now we argue by induction on IM": MI. If x, y c- F, then M<"> < M(x) and hence
[M "'/M] is a chain. Furthermore, by assumption, [(M, x, y>/M] L(W) for some
p-group W. Since (M, x> and (M, y> are modular in [ (M, x, y>/M], the group W is
the product of two cyclic permutable subgroups and hence is an M-group by 5.2.14.
Then 2.5.9 shows that W is lattice-isomorphic to an abelian p-group or is hamil-
tonian, and in the latter case, W Qg since it is generated by two elements. Thus for
all x,yEF,
(13) [<M, x, y>/M] is isomorphic to L(Q8) or to the subgroup lattice of an abelian
p-group generated by two elements.
Let x c F such that IM''> : MI is maximal. If M<''> < M<z> for every y e F, then
by 6.3.5, M" = (M<`'>ly e F> < Mos>, and hence [M"/M] is a chain. M" is permu-
table in G being a join of conjugates of M and, by 5.2.10, T is permutable in G. So
suppose that there exists y c F such that M`''' M<`l and let L = (M, x, y). We
claim that there exists N < G such that
(14) M < N < M", NIM is elementary abelian of order p2 and every R < G sat-
isfying M < R < N is permutable in G.
To see this, first note that by 6.3.5, ML = M<x>M<'", so that [MLIM] is not a chain.
Therefore, if [ML,,M] had only one atom, it could not be isomorphic to the sub-
group lattice of an abelian group and, by (13), it would follow that [L;'M] L(Q8).
Since L is a p-group, ML < L and hence [ML/M] would be a chain, a contradiction.
Thus [ML/ 114] has more than one atom and, if N is the join of two of these, M < N
and N, M is elementary abelian of order p2. again by (13). Let M < R < N. Any
element w in an abelian p-group W = <a> x (b> has the form w = a"b' with
integers n = ip', m = jp', i _* 0 j (mod p) and r < s, say. So if a = a'b'ps then
w = a' e <a> and W = (a,b>. If we apply this via (13) to [L/M] L(W), we see
that there exist u. t' E L such that L = <M, u, v> and R < (M, u). Since [ML/M] is
not a chain, M' = M<">M(L) M<`> and hence M < M(">. Now [M(u)/M] is a
chain containing R and M("> and, since IR : M = p, it follows that R < Me"'. Again
by 5.2.10, R is permutable in G and (14) holds.
It is easy to see now that every R such that M < R < N satisfies the hypotheses of
the lemma. Clearly, (R, F) = H is a finite p-group, and (R, x) = (M, x) R is per-
mutable in G where x e F; if R < (M, x, y) with y c- F, then by (13), [(R, x, y)/R] =
[<M, x, y)/R] is isomorphic to the subgroup lattice of an abelian p-group and, if
R (M, x, y), then [ (R, x, y)/R] [ (M, x, y)/M]. Furthermore RH = MH so that
RH : R1 = <c>TR is a subgroup of G. If there exists such an R satisfying
<c, T) n R = M, then Dedekind's law implies that (c, T) _ <c, T) n (c> T R =
(c) T((c, T) n R) = (c) TM = <c> T and therefore <c) T = T <c>. So assume that
R < (c, T) and hence
(15) (c, T) = TR (c) for all R such that M < R < N.
Then N < TR(c) = T(c)R and, again by Dedekind's law, N = (N n T<c>)R. It
follows that N n T(c) R; let z e (N n T(c>)\R. Then z = td with t e T, and
d e (c), and since N/M is elementary abelian, S = <M, z> satisfies M < S < N.
By (14), S is permutable in G and, since M < S n T has index p in S, we have
1ST: TI < p. Thus z e NG(T) and hence T = Tz = T`d = It follows that
Ta.
S= (M, td><T(d)s T(c) and (15) yields that <c, T) = TS(c> s TT(c)(c> =
Thus <c, T) = T(c) and so, finally, T(c) = <c> T, as desired.
Using similar methods, Napolitani and Zacher [1983] and Cardin [1984] deter-
mined the structure of groups G generated by a family X of (cyclic) permutable
subgroups such that for all C, D E 1, every subgroup of CD is permutable in G. Such
a group G is locally nilpotent (see Robinson [1982], p. 344, and recall that every
permutable subgroup is ascendant), so the problem divides into the nonperiodic case
and the investigation of p-groups. We give their results without proof.
6.3.11 Theorem. Let G be a group generated by a family X of cyclic permutable sub-
groups such that. for all C, D E X, every subgroup of CD is permutable in G.
(a) (Napolitani and Zacher [1983]) If G is periodic, then G is metabelian.
(b) (Cardin [1984]) I/'G is not periodic, then L(G) is modular.
The exact structure of p-groups with this property is given in Exercise 7. Napoli-
tani and Zacher used their theorem to show that N"7'/N is metabelian for N < G and
a projectivity from G to G. Following Busetto and Napolitani [1990], we shall
similarly use 6.3.9 and 6.3.10 to prove the stronger result that NG/N is metabelian.
Exercises
1. (Gross [1971]) Let M be a core-free permutable subgroup of the group G.
(a) If n e N and x, y e M such that x" = I = y", show that (xy)" = 1.
(b) Show that T(M) = {x e Mlo(x) < oc} is a locally nilpotent and locally finite
subgroup of G. (Hint: Use 5.2.8 and Exercise 5.2.4.)
6.4 Lattice-theoretic characterizations of classes of infinite groups 311
2. (Gross [1975a]) Let M be a permutable subgroup of the group G and n e N.

(a) If M is subnormal in G of defect at most n, that is, there exist M; < G such that
M = MO a M = G, show that M/MG is soluble with derived length at
most n - 1.
(b) Deduce from 6.2.12 that M/Mc is abelian if there exists g c G such that
o(g, M) is infinite; compare with Exercise 6.2.1.
(c) Let G = <a, b, c l az = b8 = [a, c] = 1 , [a, b] = 64, b -' cb = c-'> and H = <a>.
Show that H is permutable in G, o(c, H) is infinite and IH : Hot = 2.
3. Let (G;); E, be a collection of coprime (periodic) groups and suppose that for every
i e I, M. per G.. Show that M = Dr M. is permutable in G = Dr G..
IEI IEI
4. Let P = [P1,P2, } be the set of primes and for every n c N, let G be a finite
.
containing a core-free permutable subgroup M. with derived length n

(by Stonehewer [1974], such G. exist). Show that G = Dr G. contains a non-
soluble core-free permutable subgroup. "E N
5. (Busetto [1980b]) Let n > 3 and G = <x,y!y2 = 1, y-'xy = x-'>. Show that
M = <xy`> is permutable in G, infinite cyclic and I M/MGI = 2n z.
6. (Busetto and Napolitani [1992]) Let p be a prime such that there exists an ex-
tended Tarski group T of exponent p3 (see Olshanskii [1991], p. 344 for the
existence of such a prime). Let A be the group algebra of the Tarski group
T/Z(T) over the field with p elements, N the augmentation ideal of A and let G
be the semidirect product of N by Twhere the action of T on N is induced by
T;Z(T) via right multiplication in A.
(a) Show that G is a finitely generated p-group (note that since T/Z(T) is finitely
generated, N is a finitely generated right ideal of A) with S2(G) = NQ(T)
elementary abelian.
(b) Show that [S2(G), G] = [N, G] = N (note that since T/Z(T) is perfect, N2 = N
as an ideal of A) and hence G is perfect.
(c) If y e G\NZ(T), show that <gP2> = fl(T) (note that g = xy with x e T'\Z(T),
yENandhence g"=xPwwith wcN).
(d) If M is a maximal subgroup of S2(G) such that S2(T) M N, show that
.MG/MG
M is permutable in G, M/Mc is infinite and is not hypercentrally
embedded in G.
7. (Cardin [1984]) Show that the p-group G is generated by a family X of cyclic
permutable subgroups such that for all C, D E it, every subgroup of CD is permu-
table in G, if and only if L(G) is modular or p = 2 and G = H x A where A is
an elementary abelian 2-group and H is a central product of the form Q' De,
Q8 D'' C4, Q8+' DS for some n e N in which the central subgroups of order 2 of the
2n or 2n + I factors are identified.
6.4 Lattice-theoretic characterizations of classes of infinite groups

In this section we want to extend the lattice-theoretic characterizations of 5.3
to arbitrary groups.
Simple groups
6.4.1 Theorem (Zacher [1982b]). The group G is simple if and only if I and G are
the only permodular subgroups of G.
Proof If 1 and G are the only permodular subgroups of G, then G in particular has
no proper nontrivial normal subgroups, that is, G is simple. Conversely, let G be
simple and suppose, for a contradiction, that there exists a permodular subgroup M
of G different from I and G. Then MG" = G and, by 6.2.19, M is permutable in G;
furthermore, of course, MG = I and MG = G. We now follow an argument due to
Stonehewer [1972] and show that every finitely generated subgroup of G is residu-
ally nilpotent and therefore has a normal series with abelian factors; such groups are
called SI-groups (see Robinson [1982], p. 365). A theorem of Malcev (see Kurosh
[1956], p. 183) will then imply that G is an SI-group, contradicting the simplicity
of G. So let X = G = M. Then there exist finitely many elements
q ,. . , , gm E G such that X < My' ... M9"'. Let g E G and H = M9M9' ... M9^-. By
.
6.3.2, H/(My)H is nilpotent and hence so is X/X n (M9)H. Since X n (M9)H < My, the
intersection of all these normal subgroups of X is contained in MG = I and it follows
that X is residually nilpotent. F1
Since projectivities map permodular subgroups onto permodular subgroups, we

get the following corollary.
6.4.2 Corollary (Zacher [1982a]). If G is a simple group and cp is a projectivity from

G to a group G, then G is also simple.
Perfect groups
A group is perfect if it equals its commutator subgroup, that is, if it has only trivial
abelian factor groups. To express this property in the language of lattice theory,
we have to find a good translation for "abelian group". The Tarski groups show
that "modular lattice" is inadequate for infinite groups; on the other hand, our
results on groups with modular subgroup lattice show that we only have to avoid
the Tarski groups. So the following definition should work:
We call a lattice L permodular if it is modular and for all a, h e L such that
h < a, [a/h] is a finite lattice whenever it has finite length.
6.4.3 Theorem. The following properties of the group G are equivalent.

(a) L(G) is permodular.
(b) L(G) is modular and G is soluble (or metahelian).
(c) Every subgroup of G is permodular in G.
Proof. If L(G) is permodular, then no Tarski group can be involved in G and, by

2.4.21, G is metabelian.
Now let L(G) be modular and G soluble. Then every subgroup M of G clearly
is modular in G. Let g E G and M < Y< (M,g> such that [(M,g>/Y] is a finite
lattice. Then there exist subgroups X; such that Y = X0 < < X = (M, g> and Xi
is maximal in Xi+, for all i. By 6.2.20, lXi+, : Xj is a prime and it follows that
(M,g> : YJ < x. Thus M is permodular in G.
Finally, suppose that every subgroup of G is permodular in G. Then L(G) is clearly
modular. If B < A < G are such that [A/B] is of finite length, then there exists a
chain of subgroups B = AO < < A. = A with Ai maximal in Ai+1 for all i. Since
Ai is permodular in G, the index 1Ai+1 : Ail is finite. It follows that JA : BI < x and
hence [A/B] is a finite lattice. Thus L(G) is permodular.
Theorem 6.4.3 in particular implies that the subgroup lattice of an abelian group
is permodular. We can now characterize the class of perfect groups; however, it is
somewhat easier to state this in terms of nonperfect groups.
6.4.4 Theorem (Zacher [ 1982b]). The group G is not perfect if and only if there exists
a proper permodular subgroup M of G having one of the following three properties.
(1) [G/M] is a finite chain.
(2) [G/M] is permodular and contains an element X such that [X/M] is isomorphic
to the subgroup lattice of an infinite cyclic group.
(3) [G/M] is isomorphic to the partially ordered set (N, <) of positive integers
and every subgroup of M that is invariant under P(M) is permodular in G.
Proof. First suppose that G is not perfect. Then GIG' is a nontrivial abelian group.
If there exists an element of infinite order in GIG', then M = G' satisfies (2). So
suppose that GIG' is a torsion group. It is well-known (see Robinson [1982], p. 107)
that an abelian group which is not torsion-free has a nontrivial direct factor which
is either cyclic of prime power order or quasicyclic; let M/G' be a complement to
such a direct factor in GIG'. Then M is permodular in G and [G/ M] is a finite
chain, that is (1) holds, or G/M Cp, for some prime p and hence [G/M] 2- (N, <)
in this case. Every subgroup of M that is invariant under P(M) is characteristic
in M, hence normal in G, in particular permodular in G. Thus (3) holds.
Conversely, suppose that M is a proper permodular subgroup of G having one
of the properties (1)-(3). If (1) is satisfied, then IG : MI < x and hence GIMG is a
finite group. By 5.1.3, it is a p-group or a P-group; in any case, G is not perfect.
If (2) holds and x E X\ M, then [(x)/(x) n M] a- [(M, x>/M] and hence o(x, M)
is infinite. By 6.2.12, M a A(M) a G and by 6.4.3, G/A(M) and A(M)/.M are metabe-
lian. Thus Gl'4' < M < G and G is not perfect. Finally, suppose that (3) holds and, for
a contradiction, that G is perfect. Then G" = G and by 6.2.19,
(4) M is permutable in G.
Since [G/M] 2t (N, <), it follows that
(5) G is not finitely generated modulo M.
Furthermore, there exists a subgroup M, of G such that M is maximal in M1. Since
M is permutable in G, the index IM1 : MI = p is a prime. For every proper subgroup
H of G containing M, [HIM] is a finite chain and hence

(6) H = M <x> for some x e G.
Therefore J H : MI is finite and by 5.1.3,
(7) HIM, is a finite p-group.
If M/MH were cyclic for every M < H < G, it would follow that G" < M. For, (5)
and (6) show that any four elements a, b, c, d of G together with M generate a proper
subgroup H = M<x> of G. It follows by 5.2.13, that H/MH = (M/MH)<xMH> is
metacyclic, and hence [[a,b],[c,d]] E H" < MH < M. Thus G" < M, a contradic-
tion. Hence there exists a noncyclic factor group M/MH and therefore a normal
subgroup K of M such that
(8) M/ K is elementary abelian of order p2.
Let D = n K. If a E P(M), then K is permodular in M and hence I M : KI < cc.
aCP(M)
Suppose first that K is not normal in M and let N1, ..., NP+1 be the maximal sub-
groups of M containing K. Then none of the Ni is normal in M; for, N;:9 M
would imply that K = N; n N, g NN for all j i and hence K g M. Therefore
(K)M = M. Since the lattice [M/K"] is directly indecomposable, 5.1.14 shows
that M/(K)M is a P-group or K" is permutable in M. In the latter case, 6.2.10
would imply that K a Ni for all i and hence again K a M, a contradiction. Thus
M,'(K)M is a P-group and, since K is contained in exactly p + I maximal sub-
groups of M, it follows that M/(K)M E P(n, p) for some n e N. If K a M, then, as a
projective image of M/K, M/K E P(2, p). In both cases, M" < K" and xP(P-1) E K"
for every x E M. This holds for all a E P(M) and hence M" < D and xP(p-1) E D for
all x c M. Thus
(9) MID is metabelian of exponent dividing p(p - 1);
we remark that by Exercise 6.5.8, M/D is an elementary abelian p-group. Now
suppose, for a contradiction, that M < Dc. Since I M/K I = p2, there exist x, y E M
such that M = <K, x, y> and by 6.2.7 there exists a subgroup L > D of G, finite-
ly generated modulo D, such that x,y c- DL. Write L = and H =
<M, z 1, ... , By (5) and (6), H = M <g> < G for some g c G and it follows that
<D, x, y> < DL < DH = D"' <e> = D<9' < <D, g>.
Since D is invariant under P(M), our assumption (3) implies that D is permodular in
G and hence [<D,g>/D] [<g>/<g> n D] is a distributive lattice. It follows that
<D, x. y>/D is cyclic and hence <K, x, y>/K = M/K is cyclic, a contradiction. Thus
(10) M $ D;
let Dc = N. Then N # G and by (9), MN/N a- M/M n N is metabelian of exponent
dividing p(p - 1). Since G is perfect, MN # G. It follows that [G/MN] (1, <) and
MN/N is a permutable subgroup of GIN of exponent dividing p(p - 1). For every
element uN in some conjugate of MN/N, the index I(MN/N)<uN> : MN/NI divides
o(uN) and hence p(p - 1); on the other hand, by (7), IMN : MNI is a power of p.
Thus u is contained in the atom of the infinite chain [G/MN] and, since uN was
arbitrary, it follows that (MN)' < G. But then again [G/(MN)c] (N, <) and, by
1.2.3, G/(MN)G is abelian, a final contradiction. Thus G is not perfect.
As in the finite case, we can use Theorem 6.4.4 to characterize the final term Gr,
of the (transfinitely extended) derived series of G. For, this subgroup is clearly per-
fect, it contains every perfect subgroup of G, and hence it is the maximum perfect
subgroup of G. We only note the usual corollary; recall that a group G for which
G = 1 is called hypoabelian.
6.4.5 Corollary (Napolitani [1982]). If cp is a projectivity from the group G to a

group G, then (G :< )' = G a,. In particular, the classes of perfect and of hypoabelian
groups are invariant under projectivities.
Generalized soluble groups
We want to generalize our characterizations 5.3.5 and 5.3.7 of finite soluble and
supersoluble groups. There are several classes of infinite groups that are candidates
for such a generalization. We remind the reader that a group G is called hyperabelian
(hypercyclic) if every nontrivial epimorphic image of G contains a nontrivial abelian
(cyclic) normal subgroup. Equivalent is (see Robinson [1972a], p. 14) that there
exists an ascending series of normal subgroups N. of G, y an ordinal number,
such that No = 1, N. = G, Na+1/N1 is abelian (cyclic) for every ordinal x < y and
Np = U Na for limit ordinals fl. If y can be chosen finite, G is called soluble (super-
2<P
soluble). We first characterize the class of hyperabeliah groups and for this we have
to study permodular subgroups with permodular subgroup lattice.
6.4.6 Lemma. If M is a nontrivial permodular subgroup of G with permodular sub-

group lattice, then MG contains a nontrivial abelian normal subgroup of G.
Proof. First consider the case that MG is torsion-free. Let g E G and L = <M, g>.
By 6.2.8, I ML : MI and I ML : M-11 are finite and hence so is l ML : M n M91. By 2.4.9,
M and M9 are abelian and therefore M n M9 < Z(M u M9). It follows that
M u M9/Z(M u M9) is finite. A well-known theorem of Schur's (see Robinson [1982],
p. 278) states that then (M u M9)' is finite and hence trivial since MG is torsion-free.
Thus M u Mg is abelian for every g E G. This shows that M< Z(MG), and that
Z(MG) is a nontrivial abelian normal subgroup of G.
Now suppose that MG is not torsion-free. Then there exist elements of prime order
p, say, in MG. If any two of these commute, then A = is an
elementary abelian characteristic subgroup of MG, and hence a nontrivial abelian
normal subgroup of G contained in MG. So suppose that u, v are elements of order
p of MG such that [u, v] : 1. Then u = a,... a, and v = a,+l ... a where ai e M9i,
gi e G; let L= <M, g 1, ... , and H = M u Ma l u . u Mg-. By 6.2.21, H is per-

modular in G. Clearly,
(11) u,veH<ML
and we want to show that [u, v] E HG. For this let x E G such that o(x, H) is a prime
power and let T = <H, x>. By 6.2.13, T/HT is nonabelian of order rs or a finite
r-group for primes r, s. In the first case, H/HT is abelian and hence [u, v] E HT; in the
second, H/HT is a core-free permutable subgroup of the r-group T/HT with cyclic
supplement <xHT>, and then (c) of 5.2.8 shows that [u, v] E HT. Thus in both cases,
[u, v] e HT and, since HG is the intersection of these HT, it follows that
(12) 1 0 [u, v] E HG.
By 6.2.8, IML : MI < oc. Since H< ML, it follows that IH : MI, and hence H/MH,
is finite. By 5.2.5, MH/MH is soluble. If Ho = MH and H; = MH(M9i u . U M9j )
for i = 1, ..., n, then MH = Ho < < H = H, Hi mod H and [Hi,,/Hi] is iso-
morphic to an interval in [H, u <gi+1 >/Hi] [<gi+1 >/<gi+1 > n Hi]. Hence every
[Hi,,/Hi] is distributive and, by 5.3.7, H/MH is supersoluble. By 6.4.3, M is soluble.
Since H/MH, MH/MH and M. are soluble, we finally conclude that H is soluble.
By (12), HG 1, so it contains a nontrivial abelian characteristic subgroup A.
Since HG < MG, we see that A is an abelian normal subgroup of G contained in MG.
6.4.7 Theorem (Busetto [1980a], Zacher [1982b]). The group G is hyperabelian if

and only if it has an ascending series of permodular subgroups M,, of G, y an
ordinal number, such that MO = 1, My = G, [Ma+1/Ma] is permodular for every ordi-
nal x < y and M. = U M, for limit ordinals /1.
a<fl
Proof. If G is hyperabelian, there exists an ascending series (M,),<,, of normal sub-

groups M, of G such that Ma,,/M, is abelian for every a, and this series clearly has
the desired properties. Conversely, suppose that is a series with the properties
stated in the theorem and let N be a proper normal subgroup of G. Define 6 =
min{a < -II M,,:4 Then M, < N for every e < b and hence 6 is not a limit ordinal.
It follows that Mb_1 < N < MaN and thus MN/N is a nontrivial permodular sub-
group of G/N with subgroup lattice isomorphic to [Mb/Ma n N], that is, with per-
modular subgroup lattice. By 6.4.6 there exists a nontrivial abelian normal subgroup
in GIN. Thus G is hyperabelian.
It is interesting to note that the property of Theorem 6.4.7 with finite y, which
seems to be the most natural lattice-theoretic approximation of solubility, in fact
does not characterize the class of soluble groups. Indeed, Stonehewer [1973] has
constructed a nonsoluble group G that is the product of two metabelian subgroups
H and K which are permutable in G and have modular subgroup lattice. By 6.4.3,
L(H) and L(K) are permodular and so I < H < G, H is permodular in G, [H/1] and
[G/H] [K/H n K] are permodular. If we restrict ourselves to finitely generated
groups, the situation is better.
6.4.8 Theorem (Previato [1978]). Let G be a finitely generated group. Then G is

soluble if and only if there exist subgroups Mi of G such that I = MO < < M = G,
Mi is permodular in G and [Mi+,/Mi] is permodular (i = 0,...,n - 1).
Proof. The members of the derived series of a soluble group of course have the given
property. So suppose, conversely, that G has a chain of subgroups Mi as described
in the theorem. We show by induction on the length n of this chain that G is soluble.
For this let M, = M; by 6.4.3, M is soluble. Since G is finitely generated, 6.2.8
yields that CMG : MI < oo and hence MG/MMG is a finite group. The existence of a
chain 1 = Mo < . < M = G of modular subgroups Mi with modular intervals
[Mi+,/Mi] is inherited by subgroups and factor groups. Therefore MG/MMQ has such
a chain and hence, by 5.3.5, is soluble. Thus MG is soluble and, since the chain of the
M; MG/MG (i = I__ , n) in GIMG has length n - I and G/MG is finitely generated,
the induction assumption implies that G/MG is soluble. Thus G is soluble.
Since the cyclic groups are characterized lattice-theoretically, it is possible to

decide in the subgroup lattice whether a group is finitely generated. Therefore Theo-
rem 6.4.8 yields a lattice-theoretic characterization of the class of finitely generated
soluble groups. A lattice-theoretic characterization of the class of all soluble groups
is not known. However, we shall prove in 6.6.4 that this class at least is invariant
under projectivities.
Recall that a group G is polycyclic if there exists a finite chain 1 = Go < <G=G
of subgroups G; such that Gi a G;+, and G;+, /Gi is cyclic (i = 0, ... , n - 1). It is
well-known (see Robinson [1982], p. 147) that the polycyclic groups are precisely
the hyperabelian or (finitely generated) soluble groups satisfying the maximal condi-
tion for subgroups. Therefore 6.4.7 and 6.4.8 both yield lattice-theoretic character-
izations of the class of polycyclic groups. We give another characterization which is
closer to the above definition.
6.4.9 Theorem. The group G is polycyclic if and only if there exist subgroups Mi of G
such that I = Mo < < M. = G, M; is permodular in Mi+ [Mi+,/Mi] is distribu-
tive and satisfies the maximal condition (i = 0,...,n - 1).
Proof. A polycyclic group clearly has this property. So suppose, conversely, that G
is a group with such a chain of subgroups Mi. We use induction on the length n of
this chain to prove that G is polycyclic. The induction assumption implies that
is polycyclic; furthermore, is permodular in G. Since satisfies the
maximal condition, there exists a subgroup M of G containing and maximal
with respect to these two properties. Suppose, for a contradiction, that M is not
normal in G. Then by 6.2.13 there exists x c J(M) such that M MX and, if T =
<M, x>, T/MT is nonabelian of order pq or a finite p-group, p and q primes. In both
cases, T/ MT and MT are polycyclic and hence so is T. In particular, M U MX is
polycyclic and, by 6.2.6, permodular in G. This contradicts the maximality of M.
Thus M g G and, since [G/M] is distributive and satisfies the maximal condition,
G/M is cyclic. It follows that G = M is polycyclic.
We remark that we did not use the deeper results of 6.2 to prove Theorems
6.4.7-6.4.9; note that we can use 6.2.6(d) instead of 6.2.21 in the proof of 6.4.6.
Supersoluble groups
In the following characterization of supersoluble groups, however, we have to study

cyclic permodular subgroups and for this we need Theorem 6.2.17.
6.4.10 Lemma. If M is a finite cyclic permodular subgroup of the group G, then

MG/MG is hypercyclically embedded in G.
Proof. We may assume that M. = 1. By 6.2.17, M is permutable or P-embedded

in G. In the first case, 5.2.12 yields that MG is hypercentrally embedded in G.
In the second case, G = S x T where S is a direct product of P-groups, MG =
S x (M n T)G and M n T is permutable in G. Clearly, S is hypercyclically embedded
in G and so is (M n T)G, again by 5.2.12. Finally (c) of 5.2.1 shows that MG is hyper-
cyclically embedded in G.
6.4.11 Theorem (Busetto [1980b], Zacher [1982b]). The group G is supersoluble if

and only if there exist subgroups M. of G such that I = Mo < < M = G, M;
is permodular in G, [M;+1/M;] is distributive and satisfies the maximal condition
(i=0,...,n-1).
Proof. In the first place, every supersoluble group has this property. Suppose, con-
versely, that G is a group with such a chain of subgroups M.. We use induction on
the length n of this chain to prove that G is supersoluble. Let M = M1; then M is
cyclic. By 2.1.7, L(G) satisfies the maximal condition. In particular, G is finitely
generated and 6.2.18 shows that MG/MG is periodic. Therefore M/MG is a finite
cyclic permodular subgroup of G/MG and, by 6.4.10, MG/MG is hypercyclically
embedded in G. Since G satisfies the maximal condition, this implies that there exists
a finite chain MG = No < - - < N,,, = MG of normal subgroups Ni of G such that
-
Ni,, /N; is cyclic (i = 0, ... , m - 1). Since MG is cyclic and G/MG, by induction, is
supersoluble, it follows that G is supersoluble.
To characterize the class of hypercyclic groups, one also has to study infinite
cyclic permodular subgroups.
6.4.12 Lemma. Let M be an infinite cyclic subgroup of G and let T(MG) be the torsion
subgroup of MG.
(a) If M is permutable in G, then T(MG) < Zx(G).
(b) If M is permodular in G, then T(MG) is hypercyclically embedded in G.
The proof of 6.4.12 is complicated. We refer the reader to Busetto [1980b] where
he proves (a) and instead of (b) the corresponding result for modular subgroups in
Tarski-free groups; this proof can be carried over literally to permodular subgroups
in arbitrary groups. Note that Exercise 6.3.5 shows that in general Ma Zx(G) if M
is an infinite cyclic permutable subgroup of G. In the same way as 6.4.7 follows from
6.4.6, the results on cyclic permodular subgroups yield the following theorem.
6.4.13 Theorem (Busetto [1980b], Zacher [1982b]). The group G is hypercyclic if

and only if it has an ascending series (M,),<, of permodular subgroups M. of G, "l an
ordinal number, such that Mo = 1, M., = G, [M,+I/M,] is distributive and satisfies the
maximal condition for every ordinal x < y and M. = U M, for limit ordinals fl.
2<a
Further topics
There are a number of interesting open problems. First of all, we do not know a
lattice-theoretic characterization of the class of soluble groups; this is perhaps the
most exciting problem altogether on subgroup lattices of groups. Furthermore, we
would like to know which classes of groups are described by properties (b) and (c)
of Theorem 5.3.5 if the word "modular" throughout is replaced by "permodular".
Finally, there are many classes of generalized soluble groups of which it is not known
whether they are invariant under projectivities; naturally, no lattice-theoretic char-
acterizations of these classes are known. An important exception is the class of
SN-groups, that is, of groups possessing a series with abelian factors (see Robinson
[1982], p. 365). As a special case of a general theorem on varieties of groups, Hickin
and Phillips [1973] prove that G is an SN-group if and only if for every finitely
generated subgroup K I of G, K' < K. Using Theorem 6.4.4, it is now easy to give
a lattice-theoretic characterization of this class of groups.
We conclude this section with a lattice-theoretic characterization of a somewhat
different type of class of groups; for similar results see Exercises 3--5.
6.4.14 Theorem (de Giovanni and Franciosi [1983]). The group G is residually
supersoluble if and only if for every nontrivial element x in G there exist subgroups Mi
of G such that x 0 Mo < ... < M = G, M. is permodular in G, [Mi+1 /Mi] is distribu-
tive and satisfies the maximal condition (i = 0, ... , n - 1).
Proof. A residually supersoluble group of course has the given property. For
the proof of the converse, we need some preliminaries. Let us call a chain
M = M0 < < M = G of permodular subgroups M; of G such that [Mi+1 /Mi] is
distributive and satisfies the maximal condition (i = 0, ... , n - 1) a supersoluble
chain connecting M and G. Then for N a G,
(13) MN/N = MON/N < . . < MAN/N = GIN
is a supersoluble chain connecting MN/N and G/N. In particular, for N = MG, the
chain (13) connects MG/MG with G/MG and 6.4.11 shows that
(14) G/Mc is supersoluble.
By 2.1.7, [G/M] satisfies the maximal condition and hence G is finitely generated
modulo M. Thus 6.2.8 yields that IMG : MI < xc. Therefore if G/Mc is finite, then
IG : All < x and G/ MG is a finite group. By 5.2.5, MG/ MG is hypercyclically em-

bedded in G and, considering (14), we conclude that
(15) G,/MG is supersoluble if G/MG is finite.
If G/MG is not finite, then G/MG has a torsion-free normal subgroup R/MG of finite
index (see Robinson [1982], p. 148). Every x e R \ Al' has infinite order modulo Al
and, by 6.2.12, M is permutable in G, M < A(M) < G and R < MGA(M) < A(M).
Thus IG : A(M)( < x and hence M has only finitely many conjugates M9i, .., M9^.
Then Al' = M5i ... M9^ and, by 6.3.2, MG/(M9,)M,, is finite and nilpotent for all
n
i = 1, ..., n. Since MG = n (M9i)M,,, it follows that MG/MG is a finite nilpotent

i=I
group. Considering (14), we obtain in this case, and hence in general,
(16) G'MG is polycyclic.
Now suppose that G is a group with the property given in the theorem and let
I x e G. We have to find a normal subgroup N of G such that x 0 N and G/N is
supersoluble. By assumption there exist a permodular subgroup M of G and a
supersoluble chain M = All < < Mn = G connecting M and G such that x 0 M.
Then by (16), G/MG is polycyclic and a well-known theorem of Malcev's (see Rob-
inson [1982], p. 148) says that M is the intersection of subgroups of finite index in
G. Since x 0 M, there exists such a subgroup H of finite index such that x 0 H; let
N = HG. Then GiN is finite, x 0 N and (13) is a supersoluble chain connecting
MN/N and G/N. Since MN < H, we have (MN)G = N, and therefore (15) applied
to MN/N shows that GIN is supersoluble. Thus G is residually supersoluble.
Finally we remark that most of the results of this section differ slightly from the
theorems proved in the cited papers. For example, the classes of hyperabelian, hyper-
cyclic, and hence also of supersoluble (that is hypercyclic with maximal condition)
groups were characterized by Busetto [1980a], [1980b] using properties of modular
subgroups in certain Tarski-free groups. Zacher [l982b] realized that the main tools
in these papers can be proved literally the same way for permodular subgroups of
arbitrary groups using the corresponding properties of permodular subgroups; this
yielded Lemmas 6.4.6, 6.4.10 and 6.4.12. He then stated the characterizations of hyper-
abelian and of hypercyclic groups that are more or less Theorems 6.4.7 and 6.4.13.
Exercises
1. Let p > 2 be a prime, G = <a, h, xIaP = h = [a, h] = 1, a' = ab, hx = h> and
Al = <a, hx">. Show that M per G and <a> is invariant under P(M) but not
permodular in G.
2. Use 6.4.10 and 6.4.12 to prove 6.4.13.
3. (de Giovanni and Franciosi [1983]) Show that the group G is residually poly-
cyclic if and only if for every nontrivial element x e G there exist subgroups M; of
G such that x Mo < < Mn = G, M. is permodular in G, [M;+,/Mi] is per-
modular and satisfies the maximal condition (i = 0, ... , n - 1).
6.5 Projective images of normal subgroups of infinite groups 321
4. Show that the group G is residually polycyclic if and only if for every nontrivial
element x e G there exist a permodular subgroup M and subgroups M; of G such
that x 0 M = MO < < M = G, M; is permodular in Mi+1, [M;+1 /M;] is dis-
tributive and satisfies the maximal condition (i = 0, ... , n - 1).
5. Find a lattice-theoretic characterization for the class of residually finitely gener-
ated soluble groups (de Giovanni and Franciosi [1983]).
6.5 Projective images of normal subgroups of infinite groups

and index preserving projectivities
The main result of this section will be that N' and NG are normal subgroups of G if
N a G and cp is a projectivity from G to G; therefore cp induces a projectivity from
to G/NE;. This, in particular, will reduce all problems about projective images
of subgroups of finite index to the corresponding problems for finite groups. We use
this fact to give some applications to index preserving projectivities. We show that
a projectivity is index preserving if it preserves all the indices in cyclic subgroups.
This enables us to generalize the results of 4.2 on singular projectivities of finite
groups to locally finite groups; for example, we prove that every projectivity of such
a group induces an index preserving projectivity in the second commutator sub-
group. We prove some results on singular projectivities of groups with elements of
infinite order and show that index preserving projectivities of arbitrary groups map
ascending subgroups to ascending subgroups and therefore preserve the Gruenberg
radical. Finally we give a lattice-theoretic characterization of the locally finite radi-
cal of a group.
Criteria for normality
First of all we give a number of useful criteria for a projective image of a normal
subgroup to be normal. All these are immediate consequences of our results on
permodular subgroups in 6.2.
6.5.1 Theorem (Zacher [1980]). If N a G and GIN is infinite cyclic, then N1, a G for
every projectivity tp from G to a group G.
Proof: By 6.2.1, N` is permodular in G. Let x e G such that G = <N, x). Then

G=N' u <x> and <x> =(y) is cyclic. Since [(y)/(y) n N']^-[(x)/(x) n N]a-
L(G/N), it follows that o(y,N") is infinite. By 6.2.3, y normalizes N` and hence
NIP aG.
In the sequel we frequently have to study nonnormal projective images of normal

subgroups. We collect the basic features of this situation.
6.5.2 Remark. Let cp be a projectivity from G to G, let N 9 G and suppose that

N = N is not normal in G. Since N is permodular in G, 6.2.13 shows that
(1) Nc = n tN<N,v>iy e J(N)}.

In particular, there exists y E J(N) such that NY 0 N; let T, D, M < G such that
T = <N, y>, D = NT and M = N. As a projective image of N,
(2) M = N`y`0 ' is permodular in G.
Furthermore, [T/N`] [T/N] ^-, [<y>/<y> n N] is a finite chain and hence
NnNY <N<NuNl'.Thus
(3) D < N n M < N < NM < T and [TIN] [TIM] is a finite chain;
it follows that
(4) TIN is cyclic of prime power order.
Finally, (9) in 6.2.13 shows that
(5) T/D is a finite p-group
or nonabelian of order pq for primes p, q. In the second case let p > q and LID be a
minimal subgroup of T/D different from N/D and M/D. Then D = N n M < M and
D = N n L:9 L and hence D g M u L = T. Being a projective image of T/D, the
group T/D belongs to P(2, p); since N _< T but N is not normal in T there exists a
prime r such that
(6) IT/DI =pr,IN/DI =p>r,IT/DI =pq,N/DI =q<p.

We shall show in 6.5.6 that D < T. Therefore if (5) holds, then (p -' induces a projec-
tivity from the nonabelian p-group T/D onto T/D and 2.2.6 implies that
(7) T/D and T/D are finite p-groups.
Note that for the moment only (5) or (6) holds in the situation we consider: as soon
as 6.5.6 is proved, we shall know that (6) or (7) is satisfied.
The above discussion in particular yields (where again 6.5.6 is used for the last
assertion in (b)):
6.5.3 Theorem. Let cp be a projectivity from the group G to the group G, let N < G
and K < G such that K' = (N`)6.
(a) if I G : NI = r is a prime, then either N" :9 6 or there exist primes p and q such
that G/K` and G/K are contained in P(2, p) and, more precisely,
I G/K I = pr, I N/K I = p > r, I G/K` I = pq, I N`/K I = q 2. Then G/K' is a finite primary
group; if N" is not normal in G, then G/K and G/K" are finite p-groups.
Proof. By assumption, G/N is cyclic of prime power order; let x e G such that G =
<N, x> and let <x>" = <y>. If N" is not normal in G, then (N")'' N" and T = G
satisfies the assumptions of 6.5.2. If IG : NI = r is a prime, then (5) cannot hold since
maximal subgroups of finite p-groups are normal. Therefore (6) is satisfied and that
is the assertion in (a). Now suppose that IG/NI = p" and n >_ 2. Then (6) cannot hold
and hence G/K" is a finite primary group. Clearly this is also true if N" a G. Since
GIN is a p-group, the last assertion in (b) follows from (7); for this we need 6.5.6.
In the following criterion we extend 5.4.9 (a) to infinite groups. Exercise 2, how-
ever, shows that (b) and (c) of 5.4.9 do not hold for arbitrary groups. Since the group
G in this example is perfect, it shows in addition that normal subgroups of perfect
groups in general are not mapped to normal subgroups under projectivities (com-
pare with Theorem 5.3.4 for finite groups).
6.5.4 Theorem. Let N be a normal subgroup of the group G and suppose that one of
the following is satisfied:
(a) G/N has no nontrivial cyclic normal subgroup.
(b) N is perfect.
(c) N has no proper subgroup offinite index. _
Then N" a G for every projectivity co from G to a group G.
Proof. Suppose, for a contradiction, that N" is not normal in G and let y, T, M be
as in 6.5.2. Then N n M < N < NM and [N/N n M] [NM/ M] is a finite chain.
By 6.2.6, N n M is permodular in N and 6.2.5 yields that IN: N n M I is finite. This
contradicts (c) and also (b) because of 5.1.3. Furthermore, NM/N is a finite cyclic
permodular subgroup in G/N. By 6.4.10 there exists a nontrivial cyclic normal sub-
group in G/N and this contradicts (a). Thus we get a contradiction if any of our three
assumptions hold. It follows that N" < G in all cases.
The normality of N and Ni
We come to the main result of this section. We want to show that the preimages of
the core and the normal closure of a projective image of a normal subgroup are
normal subgroups. The main step in the proof of this theorem is the following partial
result.
6.5.5 Lemma. Let N a G and G/N be finitely generated. If cp is a projectivity from

G to a group G and H" = (N"), then H a G.
Proof. Let N" = N_and K = N. Then N is permodular in G and G is finitely

generated modulo N. By 6.2.8, INc : NI < oc, hence [H/N] and therefore also
(8) 1 H : N I is finite.
We suppose, for a contradiction, that the lemma is false and choose a counter-
example in which IH: NI is as small as possible. For every normal subgroup L of G
such that N < L < H, we have (LQ)G = H and the minimality of I H : NJ implies that
L = N. Thus N is the maximal normal subgroup of G contained in H and since H is
not normal in G,
(9) N = HG < H.
If N is not permutable in G, then by 6.2.18, N is P-embedded in G. Thus G/K is
periodic, G/K = S/K x U/K with coprime groups S/K and U/K and S/K is a P-
group whose nonnormal Sylow subgroup is N n S/K. By 1.6.4, L(G/K) L(S/K) x
L(U/K) and [G/N] [S u N/N] x [U u N/N]. Now cp induces an isomorphism
from L(G/N) onto this lattice and it follows from 1.6.5 that G/N = SN/N x UN/N.
In particular, SN a G; but SN < H since 9!5; NG = H, and (9) implies that SN = N,
a contradiction. Thus
(10) N is permutable in G.
Since N is not normal in G, there exists y c J(N) such that N" 0 N; let T = <N, y)
and M = Ny as in 6.5.2 and let x e G such that <x> = <y)'. Then T = <N, x> and
T/N is cyclic of order p" for some prime p and n e N. By 6.2.6, MN/N is permodular
in G/N; furthermore, R< N u Ny < H and (9) imply that (MN)G = N. If MN is not
permutable in G, then by 6.2.18, MN is P-embedded in G; hence G/N is periodic and
there exist coprime groups S/N and U/N such that G/N = S/N x U/N and S/N is a
P-group containing the p-group MN/N. Since N is subnormal but not normal in T,
we see that [T/N] is a chain of length at least 2. Thus T/N is cyclic of order at least
p2 and must be contained in the P-group S/N, a contradiction. We conclude that
MN/N is a cyclic permutable subgroup of G/N. By 5.2.11, every subgroup of MN/N
is permutable in G/N. In particular,
(11) f)(T/N) = R/N is a permutable subgroup of order p of G/N contained in
H/N.
By (9), R is not normal in G and (b) of 5.2.9 shows that we may choose z E G such
that Rz -A R and o(zN) = p' for some m E N. Let W = <N, x, z>, p be the projectivity
induced by p in W and Hg = (N')W. By 5.2.9, RG/N = R/N x (RG/N nZ(G/N)) and
(9) implies that H n RG = R. Since x e W and R < MN, we have R < NW = Ho < H
and hence also R = Ho n RG. So if Ho < W, then R = Ho n RG < W, contradicting
R : R. Thus Ho is not normal in W, that is, the lemma is false for the normal
subgroup N of W and the projectivity p. Therefore we may assume without loss of
generality that G = W, that is
(12) G = <N, x, z>.
Now let A/N be a cyclic q-subgroup of G/N for some prime q 0 p. Let A = <N, a>
and <a> = ; then b e J(N). Therefore if N6 N, then, applying (11) to <N, a> =
A in place of <N, x> = T, we obtain that f2(A/N) = R, IN is a permutable subgroup
of order q of GIN contained in H/N. By 5.2.9, R, IN is centralized by the p-elements
xN and zN, and thus R, < G, contradicting (9). Thus Nb = N and hence
(13) N -<A'*.
Write C/N = CG/N(R/N) and suppose next that A/N is a cyclic p-subgroup of GIN
such that A C. Then by (e) of 5.2.9, S2(A/N) < Z(G/N) and (9) implies that
A n H = N. Since H" g G, it follows that N" = A" n H" < A" in this case also.
Finally, let B/N be any cyclic subgroup of GIN such that B $ C. Then by 5.2.9, B/N
is finite and its p'-part is contained in C/N. It follows that its p-part is not contained
in C/N and therefore (13) holds for every Sylow subgroup A/N of B/N; thus
N" < B". Now C/N G/N since RZ R, and hence G/N is generated by the cyclic
subgroups B/N not contained in C/N. It follows that N" < G and H = N < G, a
contradiction.
6.5.6 Theorem (Busetto [1982]). Let N_be a normal subgroup of the group G, cp a
projectivity from G to a group G, H = NG and K = NG, that is H" the normal closure
and K" the core of N" in G. Then H and K are normal subgroups of G.
Proof. We first show that H g G. So take g E G and let X be the set of all subgroups
F of G such that <N, g> < F and F/N is finitely generated. For F E I, let H(F) be the
subgroup of _F such that H(F)" = NF. By 6.5.5, H(F) < F; in particular, H(F)9 =
H(F). Since NF < NE, we have H(F) < H; on the other hand, to every y E G there
exists x e G such that <x>" = <y> and hence N'' < NF for F = <N, g, x> E X. Thus
H = <H(F)IF E 1>. It follows that H9 = H and since g was arbitrary, H < G.
We have proved the assertion of the theorem about the normal closure for arbi-
trary normal subgroups and projectivities, of course. This result immediately implies
the assertion for the core. For, if we apply it to the normal subgroup K" = NG of G
and the projectivity cp-1, it yields that (KG)" < G. Since K < N < G, we obtain
K < KG < N, and hence NG= K9< (KG)" < N. But NZ; is the largest normal sub-
group of G contained in N. It follows that (KG)" = NG = K" and hence K =
KG<G.
Subgroups of finite index
An immediate consequence of Busetto's theorem and the Zacher-Rips Theorem is

the following result that was first proved by Rips in an unpublished manuscript.
6.5.7 Theorem (Rips). Let H be asubgroup of finite index of the group G and let cp be
a projectivity from G to a group G. Then there exists a normal subgroup K of G such
that K < H, K" < G and G/K and G/K" are finite groups.
Proof. Let N = HG and K < G such that K" = (N")z;. Then K < H, K" < G and, by
6.5.6, K < G. Furthermore I G : NJ < oo and therefore by 6.1.7 I G : N"I < oc. It fol-
lows that G/K" is finite and, as a projective image of this group, G/K is finite,
too.
Index preserving projectivities
We give an application of Rips's theorem to a problem on index preserving projec-

tivities. It is easy to see that a projectivity 9 between finite groups is index preserving
if it preserves indices in the cyclic subgroups. For, if this is the case, (p has to map
Sylow p-subgroups to p-groups of the same order and 4.2.1 yields the assertion. It
was unknown for some time whether this was also true for infinite groups.
6.5.8 Theorem (Zacher [1980]). A projectivity is index preserving if and only if it

induces in every cyclic subgroup an index preserving projectivity.
Proof. One implication is trivial. To prove the other, let (p be a projectivity from
G to G inducing in every cyclic subgroup an index preserving projectivity, and
let K < H < G. If I H : K I is infinite, then so is 1W': KÌ, by 6.1.7; so suppose that
I H : K I is finite. Then by 6.5.7 there exists a normal subgroup N of H such that
N < K, N`P a H11 and H/N and H`/N`0 are finite. If A/N is a cyclic subgroup of
H/N and B/ N < A/N, then there exists a c H such that A/N = <aN> = <a> N/N
and hence B/N = (B n <a>)N/N. It follows that A`/N` = <a> PN`/N`, B`/N`0 =
)N'/N`0 and hence
I A`0/N" : B`/N` I = I <a>": (B r <a> )` I = I <a>: B n <a> I = I A/N : B/N I.
Thus the projectivity induced by cp in H/N induces index preserving projectivities in

the cyclic subgroups of H/N and hence is index preserving since H/N is finite. As
N < K < H, it follows that I H` : K` I = I H : K I, as desired.
Not much is known about singular projectivities between infinite torsion groups.
For example, any two Tarski groups have isomorphic subgroup lattices and there-
fore these groups possess singular projectivities. On the other hand, using Theorem
6.5.8, it is not difficult to generalize the main results of 4.2 to locally finite groups;
we do this for Corollary 4.2.9.
6.5.9 Theorem. Every projectivity of a locally finite group G induces an index preserv-
ing projectivity in the second commutator subgroup G".
Proof. By 6.5.8, we have to show that for every x e G", I <x> "l = I <x>1. Now x is a
product of commutators of elements of G' which in turn are products of commuta-
tors of elements of G. Hence there exists a finitely generated subgroup F of G such
that x c- V. Since G is locally finite, F is finite and, by 4.2.9, cp induces an index
preserving projectivity in V. It follows that I (x> 11J = I <x>1, as desired.
Some results on singular projectivities of groups with elements of infinite order

can be found in Zacher [1982a]. We prove one of these which will be used in the next
section. For this we need two simple lemmas.
6.5.10 Lemma. Let (p be a projectivity from the cyclic group X to the group Y,
let K < H < X such that I H : KI = p is a prime and suppose that I H" : K111 = q. 1f
U < V < X such that I V : UI = p" (n e N), then I V": UÌ = q". (We say that (p maps
p-indices in X to q-indices in Y.)
Proof. There exists N < X such that I X : N I = p; let I Y : N" I = r. If S < X such that
IX : SI = p' (m c r\i), then XIS is cyclic of order p', and hence Y/S" is cyclic of order
.s' for some prime s. Since S < N, we have that r divides the order of Y/S" and hence
I Y : S"I = r'. Now suppose that U < V < X such that I V : UI = p" and let IX: VI =
p t where (p, t) = 1, k > 0. Then if R is the subgroup of index pk and T that of
k
index pk+" in X, it follows that T n V = U and TV = R. Therefore I V" : U"I =

I VIP: T" n V"I = I R" : T"I = r". If we apply this to V = H and U = K, we get that
r = q, as desired.
6.5.11 Lemma. Let G = XP where X is infinite cyclic and IPI = p. If cp is a projec-

tivity from G to a group G, then I P"I = p and cp maps p-indices in X to p-indices in X".
Proof: G/XG is finite since I G : X1 = p. Thus XG is infinite cyclic; let N be the sub-
group of index pz in XG and H = XGP. We want to show that N" < H". If XG is
centralized by P, then H = XG x P has exactly p infinite cyclic subgroups inter-
secting in the subgroup of index p in X. The image of this subgroup is centralized
by the images of these infinite cyclic groups and hence by H"; in particular,
N" < Z(H'). If XG is not centralized by P, then p = 2, X = XG and G is an infinite
dihedral group. In this case, X is the only infinite cyclic subgroup of G and hence
X" < G. In both cases, N" < H" and cp induces a projectivity from H/N to H"/N".
Since H/N is neither cyclic nor elementary abelian, 2.2.6 shows that H"/N" is a
p-group. It follows that IP"I = I P"N"/ N"I = p and, by 6.5.10, cp maps p-indices in X
to p-indices in X".
6.5.12 Theorem. Suppose that the group G has an abelian normal subgroup A contain-
ing elements of infinite order and let qp be a projectivity from G to a group G.
(a) Then I HIP I =IHI for every subgroup H of G.
(b) If there exists a subgroup of order p in G, p a prime, then I V11': U"I = p for all
U < V < A such that I V : U I = p (that is, (p maps p-indices in A to p-indices in A").
Proof. If IHI is infinite, then so is H"I; thus in the proof of (a), we may assume that
IHI is finite. If (a) holds for all subgroups of prime order in G, then cp induces index
preserving projectivities in the Sylow subgroups of H, and 4.2.1 shows that IH"I _
CHI. Therefore to prove (a), we may assume that
(14) CHI = p is a prime.
This is also the assumption in (b) and we now prove both assertions simultaneously.
More precisely, we show that IH"I = p, that is (a) holds, and that
(15) I V" : U" I = p if U < V < A, I V : U I = p and V is infinite cyclic.
For this we clearly may assume that G = AH. Let V be an infinite cyclic subgroup
of A and write B = <V"Ih e H>. Then B is invariant under H and hence B a G. As
a finitely generated abelian group,
(16) B = B, x x B, with cyclic groups B. (r e N).
Since B is infinite, at least one of the B; is also infinite, say B,. If all the other B; are
finite, then I B : B, I is finite, hence so is I B : B, I for all h c- H and, since H = p, I B : X
is finite where X = n B;. It follows that X is an infinite cyclic group invariant
hcH
under H and 6.5.11, applied to XH, yields that I H11 = p and that cp maps p-indices
in X to p-indices in X". Since I B : XI is finite, X n V 0 1 and then 6.5.10 implies that
I V` : UÌ = p. Thus (15) holds in this case.
Now suppose that B; is infinite for some i > 2, let N = <b2Ib e B> and L = BH.
Then N < L and L/N is a finite p-group that is neither cyclic nor elementary abelian.
By 2.6.10, cp is induced by an isomorphism on B. In particular, I VP: UÌ = p, N`0 < B`
and I N : K I = I N": K" I for every subgroup K of N. By (a) of 6.5.3, N` a (NH)".
Thus M < L` and cp induces a projectivity from L/N to L`/N4'. By 2.2.6, L`/N` is a
p-group and hence I H4I = H4N`/NI = p. This completes the proof of (a) and of
(15).
We finally prove (b) for arbitrary V < A. Since I V : UI = p, we have V = U<g>
for some g E A and I<g>: <g> n UI = IV: UI = p. Then V` = U`0 u <g>4' and, by
(a) or (15), I <g>4: <g>" n UPI = p. So if U`0 < VP, it follows that I VI: U4I =
I <g>4': <g>4' n U4I = p. If U` is not normal in V` and K` = (U`),,., then 6.5.3(a)
yields that V/K and V`0/K`0 are in P(2, s) where s = I V : U" 1. Since V is abelian, V/K
is elementary abelian of order sz and it follows that s = I V : UI = p, as desired.
We mention without proof a much deeper result.
6.5.13 Theorem (Stonehewer and Zacher [1991b]). Let cp be a projectivity from G to

G and suppose that M is a permodular subgroup of G having an ascending series with
factors locally finite or abelian. Let h(M) be the sum of the torsion free ranks of the
abelian.factors of this series and assume that h(M) >_ 3 or h(M) = 2 and either L(M) is
modular or there exists g e G such that o(g, M) is infinite. Then cp is index preserving.
Ascendant subgroups and the Gruenberg radical
We finally generalize 5.4.11 to infinite groups and apply the result to the image of the
Gruenberg radical under a projectivity.
6.5.14 Lemma. Let cp be an index preserving projectivity from G to G.

(a) if N < G, then M is permutable in G. _
(b) If N is ascendant in G, then N` is ascendant in G.
Proof. (a) We have to show that M<y> = < y> N` for all y e G. For this purpose let
x be an element of G such that <x)4' = <y> and put T = <N,x>. If TIN is infinite,
then even N" < T`0 = <N4, y), by 6.5.1. If T/ N is finite, then by 6.5.7 there exists a
normal subgroup K of T such that K < N, K`0 a T` and T/ K and T4'/ K4' are finite.
Since co induces an index preserving projectivity in T/ K, 5.4.11 implies that N'0/K10
is permutable in T4/K` and hence N4'<y> = N4K4<y> = M<y>K4' = <y>K4N` _
<y> N`0.
(b) Let (N,),< be an ascending series such that No = N and N., = G. Then (a) and
6.2.10 imply that (N,"),,,, is an ascending chain such that No = Nl*, N; is ascendant
in N.",, for all x < y and N' = G. By transfinite induction, we obtain that N is
ascendant in N; for all x < y. Thus N is ascendant in G.
Recall that the Gruenberg radical of a group G is the join of all the cyclic ascen-
dant subgroups of G. Now if (p is an index preserving projectivity from G to G, then
cp-' is also index preserving and 6.5.14 shows that cp and (p -' map cyclic ascendant
subgroups to cyclic ascendant subgroups. It follows that the joins of all these sub-
groups in G and G are mapped onto each other. Thus we have the following result.
6.5.15 Theorem (Zacher [1982a]). Every index preserving projectivity from G to G

maps the Gruenberg radical of G to the Gruenberg radical of G.
The locally finite radical
We finally give a lattice-theoretic characterization of the locally finite radical GL%r

the join of all locally finite normal subgroups, of a group G. We also show that G'11
is locally finite, a classical result in the theory of radicals (see Robinson [1972a], p.
35). We need the following simple lemma.
6.5.16 Lemma. Let H and K be locally finite subgroups of a group G. If H is per-

modular in G, then H u K is locally finite.
Proof. Let F be a finitely generated subgroup of H u K. Since every generator of F

is a product of finitely many elements of H and K, there exist finitely generated
subgroups A of H and B of K such that F < A u B. Since H and K are locally finite,
A and B are finite. By 6.2.6, M = H n (A u B) is permodular in A u B. Clearly
A< M< A u B, so A u B = M u B and, since M is modular in A u B, we see that
[A u B/M] [B/B n M] is a finite lattice. By 6.2.5, JA u B : MI is finite. It follows
that M is finitely generated (see Robinson [1982], p. 36); therefore, as a subgroup of
H, it is finite. Thus A u B is finite and hence so is F.
6.5.17 Theorem (Stonehewer and Zacher [1994]). If G is a group, then GLI is locally
finite and is the join of all locally finite permodular subgroups of G. In particular,
(GL'Y) = 6L-"for every projectivity (p from G to a group G.
Proof. Since every normal subgroup is permodular, GL's is contained in the join J of
all locally finite permodular subgroups of G. If F is a finitely generated subgroup of
J, then F is contained in a join K of finitely many locally finite permodular sub-
groups of G. By 6.2.21 and 6.5.16, the join of any two of these is permodular and
locally finite, and hence so is K. Thus F is finite and J is locally finite. It follows that
J < GL'i and so GL's = J is locally finite. By 1.2.12 and 6.2.1, every projectivity maps
locally finite permodular subgroups to locally finite permodular subgroups. It fol-
lows that (GL',)`' = GL't if cp is a projectivity from G to G.
Exercises
In Exercises 1, 3, 4, and 7 assume that rp is a projectivity from G to G. _
1. (Zacher [I 982a]) If N < G and G/N is a finite perfect group, show that N < G.
2. (Busetto and Napolitani [1992]) Let G be the group constructed in Exercise
6.3.6, let i2(T) = (eo) and N = Ke1) x N, where <e1) is cyclic of order p. Let a
be the automorphism of n(G) satisfying eo = eo, ei = eoe, and x = x for all
x e N,. Show that there exists an autoprojectivity cp of G induced by a on n(G)
and by the identity on [G/S2(T)]. Note that N is not normal in G although G is
perfect and there exists no normal subgroup L of G such that L < N and NIL is
cyclic.
3. Show that cp is index preserving if and only if for all U < V < G such that U is a
normal subgroup of prime index in V, U' < V and I VW : U1*J = I V : UI. _
4. If cp is index preserving and N g G, show that N' is w-ascendant in G, that
is, there exist subgroups Hi of G (i e NO) such that Ho = N", Hi < H;+1 for
all i and U Hi = G. (Hint: Define H1= <g e G1o(g, NW) E P u {oc}) and H;+, _
<g c iE:N
GIo(g, Hi) e P).)
5. Generalize Theorem 4.2.7 to locally finite groups.
6. Let B be a normal subgroup of prime index in the group A and let (C1)iE, be a
family of normal subgroups of A such that Ci < B and A/Ci is a P-group for all
i E I. If <Cili c- /) is a proper subgroup of B, show that A/n Ci is a P-group.
iEI
7. (Zacher [1980]) Let N 9 G such that GIN E P(n, p), p a prime, 2 < n < oc and
let K = (NP)d. Show that either N 9 G or IN: K I = p and G/K e P(n + 1, p).
8. (Zacher [1982a]) Let N < G such that GIN is elementary abelian of order p",
2 < n < oc. Show that G/ n Na is an elementary abelian p-group.
a E P(G)
9. (Zacher [1980]) Let N < G such that I G/N I is a prime. Show that G/ n Na is
,IEP(G)
abelian or a P-group.
10. (Stonehewer and Zacher [1991b]) Let G be the semidirect product of a sub-
group A of (Q, +) containing Z by an infinite cyclic group <g>, and suppose that
the action of g on A is multiplication by m/n, (m, n) = 1. If p and q are primes
dividing mn, show that there exists an autoprojectivity go of G and an element
x c A such that rp maps p-indices in <x> to q-indices in (x)4'.
6.6 The structure of NG/NG_ and TV-'ITV-6 and

projective images of soluble groups
We come now to the deeper results on the structure of NG/NU and NG/& for a
normal subgroup N of G and a projectivity from G to G. The main theorem will be
that NG/NZ; and NG/N are soluble of derived length 4 and 5, respectively. As for
finite groups, we first prove that N is permutable or P-embedded in G. This will
reduce our problem, and also many others, to the case that N is permutable in G.
After further reductions we may assume that G and G are p-groups and LNG: NJ is
6.6 The structure of N',/N0- and N,/N- and projective images of soluble groups 331
finite so that we can apply the results of 5.5 and 6.3. As an important application
of our methods we get that projective images of soluble groups are soluble and
obtain a bound for the derived length of the image group.
The structure of N/N0- and N/N0-
We first study the structure of N/N0- and Here we reap the reward of our
efforts in 5.5.
6.6.1 Theorem (Busetto and Napolitani [1991]). Let N be a normal subgroup of the
group G and tp a project ivity.from G to a group G. Then N/N6- and N/N0- are subdirect
products of finite primary groups with modular subgroup lattices; in particular, they
are metabelian. Furthermore, N/Nc is nilpotent of class at most 2 with commutator
subgroup of exponent at most 2.
Proof. We shall prove all the assertions simultaneously. Since, by 6.5.6, rp induces a
projectivity from_ G/N to we may assume that & = I and, of course, N : I.
Then by 6.5.2, N is the intersection of the N<N,Y> where y e J(N). If the statements
of the theorem hold for all these (N, y) in place of G, then they also hold for G;
therefore we may finally assume that G = (N, y) for some y e J(N), and hence that
GIN is cyclic of prime power order. By 6.5.3, G and G then lie in P(2, p) or are finite
p-groups for some prime p. In the first case, N and N are cyclic and, clearly, all the
assertions of the theorem hold. In the second case, Hypothesis 5.5.1 is satisfied. By
5.5.2 and 5.5.8, N and N are p-groups with modular subgroup lattices and I N' I < 2.
In particular, N and N are metabelian.
It is not known whether N/NZ; is nilpotent (of class at most 2). In Example 5.5.5
and Exercise 5.5.2, N0- = 1, c(N) = 2 and N' is cyclic of order 4 and p, respectively. It
is another interesting open problem whether N/N0- is an M-group and IN' I < 2 for
arbitrary groups G.
Projective images of soluble groups
Another immediate consequence of the results in 5.5 and 6.5 is the theorem on
projective images of soluble groups which we are now going to present. More gener-
ally, we study projective images of normal subgroups with soluble factor group.
Recall that for n e N, G(" is the n-th term of the derived series of G and G" =
<g"Ig c- G); thus GZ is the smallest normal subgroup of G whose factor group is an
elementary abelian 2-group. The basic result is the following lemma.
6.6.2 Lemma. Let N be a normal subgroup with abelian factor group of the group G.
If co is a projectivity from G to a group G, then (G")2 and (N`'GZ)" are contained in N`0;
in particular, 6(3) < N.
Proof. We have to show that all the natural generators of (G")2 and (R62 )" are
contained in N. Since these generators are squares of products of iterated commuta-
tors, or iterated commutators of products of elements of N with squares of elements
of G, we may assume that G is finitely generated modulo N. Then GIN is a finitely
generated abelian group and hence a direct product of cyclic groups. It follows that
N is the intersection of normal subgroups of G_with cyclic factor groups of infinite
or prime power order. Let M be one of these. If M a G, then G/M is cyclic and hence
G' < M. If M is not normal in G, then by 6.5.1, G/M is finite and 6.5.3 shows that
G/MZ; and G/MG- are either P-groups or finite p-groups for some prime p. In the first
case, G" < M; in the second, Hypothesis 5.5.1 is satisfied for G/MZ; and By
5.5.9, (G")2 and (NG2)" < (MG2)" are contained in MU < M. In any case, (G")2 and
(NG2)" are contained in the intersection of all the M, that is, in N. Since G"1(6" )2 is
abelian, it follows that G13j < (G")2 < N.
group G such that GIN is soluble of derived length n E N. If go is a projectivity from G
to some group G, then 613ni < N.
Proof. We use induction on n, the case n = 1 being settled by Lemma 6.6.2. If n > 2,
there exists a normal subgroup M of G such that N < M _<. G, G/M is abelian
and M/N is soluble of derived length n - 1. By 6.6.2, 03) < M and, by induction,
M,3n-31 < N; thus 613") < N, as desired.
6.6.4 Corollary. If G is a soluble group of derived length d(G) = n and cp is a projec-

tivity from G to a group G, then G is soluble of derived length d(G) < 3n - 1.
Proof. We apply Theorem 6.6.3 to N = G("-" and get that &3n-3) < N. As a projec-
tive image of an abelian group, N is metabelian by 2.4.21. It follows that G(3n-') = 1.
The above corollary improves an older result due to Yakovlev [1970]. Using
different methods, he had proved that d(G) < 4n3 + 14n2 - 8n and thereby was the
first to show that G is soluble. Even the new bound may not be best possible. For,
since projective images of abelian groups are metabelian, an obvious conjecture is
that d(G) < 2d(G). Furthermore, the only examples known for which d(G) # d(G)
are the projectivities between abelian and nonabelian groups, and Example 5.5.5
in which d(G) = 2 and d(G) = 3. Therefore it is even possible that we have the
same phenomenon as for the Fitting length of finite groups (see 4.3.3), namely, that
only for small derived length can it happen that d(G) : d(G), and d(G) = d(G) for
d(G) > 4.
P-embedding
Our next aim is to show that N is either permutable or P-embedded in G. For this
we first of all have to show that N/NN is periodic if N is not permutable in G. We
6.6 The structure of N/NG- and N/N0_ and projective images of soluble groups 333
prove a slightly more general result. Note that if N is permutable in G, N/Ni; need
not be periodic: in Example 6.2.9, N = (z) is infinite cyclic and core-free.
6.6.5 Lemma. Let N g G and let cp be a projectivity from G to G. If N is soluble and

N' is not permutable in G, then N is periodic.
Proof. Assume, for a contradiction, that N is not periodic. Since N is soluble, there
exists m e N such that N'') = 1. Now N/Nj is periodic and N/N(') is not; hence
there exists i e N such that N/N'`-'> is periodic and N/N(') is not. We put A = N('-')
and B = N(') = A'. Then since N a G,
(1) B < A < N, B < G, A a G, A/B is abelian, N/A is periodic and NB is not
periodic.
Thus there exists an element of infinite order in N/B and, by 6.2.12,
(2) B is permutable in G.
Since N/A is periodic, A/B contains an element of infinite order and, as an abelian
group, is then generated by elements of infinite order. By 6.5.1,
(3) B < A.
Since N is not permutable in G, there exists y e G such that o(y, N) is a prime power
and N<y) zA <y)N. We may assume that G = <N, y); let K = NN. By 6.2.10, N is
not subnormal in G and then 6.5.3 shows that there exist primes p, q, r such that G/K
and G/K lie in P(2, p) and, more precisely,
(4) IG:NI=p>q=IN:KI,IG:NJ=r<p=IN:KI.
Let S/K be one of the p + I minimal subgroups of G/K, and write IS: KI = s and
S/K I = t, so that s = p or s = r and t = port = q. Then there exists g e G such that
S = K(g), and it follows that I(g): <g) n K I = IS: K I = s and I<g)4': <g)4' n K I =
S:KI=t.By6.5.10,
(5) cp maps s-indices in (g) to t-indices in <g)4'.
Now suppose that o(g, B) is finite. Then since B = N(') < N' < K, we see that s =
<g): <g) n KI divides I<g): <g) n BI = o(g,B), and therefore <g)/<g) n B con-
tains a subgroup X/<g) n B of order s. Then BX/BI = I X : X n BI = s and hence
B a (BX)4' since B is maximal and ascendant, by (2) and 6.2.10, in (BX)4'. Since
B a A, cp induces a projectivity p from AX/B to (AX)4'/B and A/B is a nonperiodic
abelian normal subgroup of AX/B. By 6.5.12, I(BX/B)I = s and p maps s-indices in
A_/B to s-indices in A/B. On the other hand, X < <g) and (5) imply that I(BX/B)I =
B X/BI = I X/B n X I = J Y: (<g> n B)4'I = t and hence s = t. We have shown:
I
(6) If o(g, B) is finite, then s = t and the projectivity ' induced by cp in A/B maps
s-indices in A/B to s-indices in A/B.
We now apply (5) and (6) to various subgroups of G/K. For S = N, (4) shows that
s = p and t = q p. Therefore (6) implies that if N = K <u), then o(u, B) is infinite
and (5) yields that cp maps p-indices in to q-indices in <u)4'. Since G/A is periodic
and o(u) is infinite, n A = <a> : 1 and

(7) <aB> is an infinite cyclic subgroup of A/B in which 0 maps p-indices to
q-indices.
Now let S/K be such that IS/KI = p and let S = K<v>. If IS/KI = p, then o(c,B) is
infinite since otherwise (6) and (7) would contradict each other. Again <v> n A =
<h> : I and <bB> is an infinite cyclic subgroup of A/B. By (5), cp maps p-indices in
<h> to p-indices in ". Then (7) implies that <aB> n <bB> = I and, by 2.6.10, 0 is
induced by an isomorphism. But this contradicts (7). Thus IS/KI : p, in particular
(8) r < p.
Finally, let T'K be a subgroup of order r of G/K that is different from S/K and let
T = K <w>. Then I T/K I = q and by (5), cp maps r-indices in <w> to q-indices in
<w>4'. If o(w, B) is finite, (6) implies that r = q and that 0 maps q-indices to q-indices.
But then by (7), ii maps p-indices and q-indices in <aB> to q-indices, and this is
impossible. Therefore o(w, B) is infinite, again <w> n A = (c> 0 1 and <cB> is an
infinite cyclic subgroup of A/B in which 0 maps r-indices to q-indices. In (aB>, tli
maps p-indices to q-indices and since r p, it follows that (aB> n <cB> = 1. Again
Baer's theorem yields that 0 is induced by an isomorphism and this contradicts (7).
6.6.6 Theorem (Zacher [1982a], Napolitani and Zacher [1983]). Let N be a normal
subgroup of the group G, (p a projectivity from G to a group G, H = NG and K = NZ;,
that is, H'' is the normal closure and K`0 the core of N in G. Then H and K are normal
subgroups of G. If N1* is not permutable in G, then G/K is periodic and there are primes
pi. qi and n; E N u ( x, } such that
G/K = (S, / K X S2/K x ) x T/K and G/K" = (Sr/K x Sz /K" x ) x T`/K'

where the number of factors S1/K may be finite (nonzero) or infinite and for all i E N,
(a) Si"M is a P-group of order p",qi, pi > qi and all the direct factors S,/K'
(j e N), T`,, K` are coprime,
(b) S; / K E P(ni + 1, pi) and all the direct factors S;/K (j e N), T/K are coprime,
(c) N/K = ((N n S, )/K x (N n S2)/K x ) x (N n T)11 K, I(N r Si)/K I = pi,
I(N n S1)`/KPI = qi and (N n T)P is permutable in G,
(d) H/K = x Sz/K x ) x (H n T)/K and (H n T)' is the normal closure
of (N n T` in T`.
Proof. That H and K are normal subgroups of G has been shown in 6.5.6. In the
remainder of the proof we may therefore assume that K = I and that N is not
permutable in G. Then by 6.6.1, N is soluble and hence periodic, by 6.6.5; by 6.2.17,
N is P-embedded in G. This means that G is periodic and a direct product G =
(S1 X S2 x ) x T of coprime groups Si and T, where Si is a P-group of order p",q,
Pi>gi,ni ENU,x},N=((Nn
N n T is permutable in G. By 1.6.6, G = (S1 X S2 x ) x T with coprime groups Si
and T By 2.2.5, Si E P(ni + 1, p,) and IN n SiI = pi for all i since N a G. Thus (a)-(c)
are satisfied and (d) follows from 2.2.2.
6.6 The structure of N' NG and N/NiT and projective images of soluble groups 335
Like Theorem 5.4.7 for finite groups, the above result reduces questions about
projective images N of normal subgroups to the case where N is permutable in G.
The difference from the situation for finite groups, however, is that there is no
Maier-Schmid Theorem for permutable subgroups of infinite groups.
The structure of N/N- and iv/N6
We shall prove a number of deep structural restrictions for the groups N/NU and
N; Ni;. One reason for this is that N/N is generated by finite cyclic permutable
subgroups of the form '/N (x E G) and is therefore hypercyclically em-
bedded in G (see Exercise 4). The main reason, however, is that the results of 6.2
and 6.3 reduce most of these problems to the case that N/N is a finite p-group. We
make this more precise.
6.6.7 Remark. Let N 9 G, cp a projectivity.from G to G, H = N, K = NZ; and S =

N" where H = Hl*. If we want to prove that
(a) S o G, or
(b) H/N is metabelian, or
(c) H/K is soluble of derived length at most 5,
we may assume without loss of generality that
(9) K = 1,
(10) N4' is permutable in G,
(11) IH : NJ and IH`: N"I are finite,
(12) H and H` are p-groups of finite exponent for some prime p, and
(13) H" is nilpotent.
Proof: First of all, all three statements deal with the structure of G/K or G;'K and,
since cp induces a projectivity from G/K to G/K, clearly we may assume that K = 1.
Suppose next that N is not permutable in G. Then G = (S1 x S, x ) x T has
all the properties given in Theorem 6.6.6. In particular,
S = (S1 X S2 x ...) x (N n T)f''''
and, if (a) holds for the normal subgroup N n T of T with permutable image (N n T)4',
then it also holds for N in G. Similarly, since the Si and S; are metabelian, also (b)
and (c) hold in general if they are true for N n T in T Thus we may assume that N
is permutable in G.
We show next that in all three cases we may assume that
(14) G/N is finitely generated.
In the proof of (a), we suppose, for a contradiction, that S is not normal in G. Then
there exists g c S such that S9 S and, since 9 = <NYly E H), there exists y E H
such that ((N1')` `)9 S. Since H = <NIz E G>, there exist z1, ..., z, c G such that
y E N" ... N"-. So if W = <N,g,_<z;>'P-'Ii = 1,...,r> and So = Nom, then (NY)'P< So
and ((NY)"-')9 So since y e NW and So < S. Thus So is not normal in W and
we may assume that G = W is finitely generated modulo N. In the proof of (b), we
have to show that H" < N, hence that for all xi e H, [[x1,x2], [x3,x4]] E N.
Since <xi>'* = <yi> with y; e H = <NÌz e G>, there exist z1, ..., z., E G such that
yi c- N=1 ... N== for i = 1, 4. So if W = <N, <zi)` ' Ii = 1, ..., s> and (b)
holds for normal subgroups with finitely generated factor groups, then
[[x1,x2], [X3,x4]] E (NW)" < N and thus H" < N. For assertion (c), the situation is
similar; we just have to consider longer commutators of elements in H. Thus in all
three cases we may assume that (14) holds and then, of course, again that K = 1 for
this smaller group G.
It follows that G is finitely generated modulo N. By 6.2.18_and 6.3.3, I H : NI < x
and H is nilpotent of finite exponent. Thus H = PI x . . x P, is a direct product of
finitely many Sylow subgroups P. By 1.6.6, H = PI x . x P, with coprime groups
Pi, and so N = (N n PI) x x (N n P,) where the N n Pi are characteristic sub-
groups of N and hence normal subgroups of G. Now clearly H = HI x x H, and
S = SI x x S, where H; = (N n Pi) and Si = (N n Pi)"% Thus if one of our state-
ments holds for every N n Pi, it holds for N. Thus we may assume that N is one of
the N n Pi, that is, H is a nilpotent p-group of finite exponent for some prime p and
IH: NJ < x. Then [H/N] and hence H/N is finite so that (11) and (13) hold. Fur-
thermore H is locally finite and if H is not a p-group, 2.2.7 shows that H is abelian;
thus S = N < G, H is metabelian and therefore (a)-(c) hold. Therefore we may
assume that H is a p-group; as a projective image of H, it clearly has finite exponent.
6.6.8 Lemma. Let N g G, cp a projectivity from G to G, H = N and S = N" where

H = H`P. Then S g G and HIS is abelian.
Proof. By the above remark, we may assume in the proof of the first assertion that
(9)-(13) are satisfied. Thus N is a p-group of finite exponent p" and we use induction
on n to show that S:9 G. Let M = fl(N). Then M a G and hence M is modular in
6. Since H is nilpotent, M is ascendant in G (see Robinson [1982], p. 350) and
so by 6.2.10, M is permutable in G. By 6.3.8 applied to the core-free permu-
table p-subgroup N of G, 1V is elementary abelian and either k < NG = H or
Mc < N" = S. In the first case, S = N a G, as desired. So suppose that Mc < S and
let L < G such that L = Mo. By 6.5.6, L a G and cp induces a projectivity 0 from
GIL to GIL. Since L is elementary abelian, NL/L is a normal p-subgroup of exponent
pn-1 of GIL and H/L is the normal closure of its image NL/L under IJi in GIL. Since
L < S a H, we have (NL/L)"!L = 91L and the induction assumption yields that
S/L g G/L. Thus S a G, as desired.
To prove that HIS is abelian, no reduction is necessary. We need only note that
S < H a G and S is modular in G since S a G; thus by 6.2.10,
(15) 9 is permutable in G.
6.6 The structure of Ns/N6- and N'/NG- and projective images of soluble groups 337
Now let x e H, g e G and write (x)" _ (x), (g)w _ (g) and (xg),* = (z). By 6.3.5
applied to the permutable subgroup S of W = <9_t, g) = (S, x, z ), we have SW =
SAX>SC9i = S<=>S<Z>. Since S a H and Y E H, it follows that S<x> = S and hence
SW = S<9> = S<=> < (g)S n (z>S = ((g)S)` n ((xg)S),P.
It follows that (S<s>)v '/S < (g)S/S n <xg> S/S is centralized by gS and xgS, and
hence by xS. Now SG = H implies that HIS is generated by these subgroups
(S19>)1''/S and hence it follows that xS E Z(H/S). Since x e H was arbitrary, HIS is
abelian.
Remark 6.6.7 implies that in the proofs of the next two theorems we may also
assume that (9)-(13) are satisfied. We want to describe the basic structure of S/N in
this situation. Clearly, H = (NNXIx e G) and, since N < NNX < N(x), there exists
y e (x) such that NNX = R(y). By (11), H : NJ < cc and hence there are finitely
many y, E H such that
(16) H = and N(y,) is permutable in G
since N (y,) is the product of two permutable subgroups. Then 6.3.5 implies that
(17) S = (N<Y,>1 i = 1,...,n).
Now H/N and H_/NH are finite p-groups and hence all subgroups between N and
H and between N and H are subnormal in G and G, respectively. Since cp and q0`
map modular subgroups to modular subgroups, it follows from 6.2.10 that for all
L E [H/N],
(18) L is permutable in G (in H) if and only if L is permutable in G (in H).
As a join of permutable subgroups, N<Y,> is clearly permutable in G and since
N<r,> < N(YC),
(19) (N<,',>)`' '/N is a cyclic permutable subgroup of G/N (i = 1,...,n).

Of course, (17) and (19) show that S/N is generated by cyclic permutable subgroups.
Since N(y,) is permutable in G and [(N, y;, yy)/N] is isomorphic to the subgroup
lattice of the p-group (N, y,, yj)1* /N, it is clear that M = N and F = {yl,...,
satisfy the assumptions of Lemma 6.3.10. It follows that every subgroup T of d such
that N < T < N" = S is permutable in G and, by (18), this yields that
(20) every subgroup of S containing N is permutable in G.
In particular, S/N is an M-group and we finally want to show that it is an M*-group.
So suppose, for a contradiction, that there is a quaternion group Q8 involved in S/N.
Then by 2.3.8, S/N = S1/N X Sz/N where Sl/N Q8 and Sz/N is an elementary
abelian 2-group. By (17) and (19), S/N is generated by the cyclic subgroups
(N<r,>)P '/N (i = 1, ... , n) and it follows that two of these, for i = 1, 2, say, have order
4 and generate a quaternion group. However, by (16) and (18), the (N(y,))w /N,
i = 1, 2, are cyclic permutable subgroups of the 2-group H/N. By 5.2.14, they gener-
ate a metacyclic M-group containing this Q8 and therefore equal to this Q8. It
follows that N<''l > = N<yl ), a contradiction since all the conjugates of N in N<yl )
must lie in the maximal subgroup of N<yl) containing N. Thus
(21) S/N is an M*-group.
We can now prove the announced result on the structure of H/N.
6.6.9 Theorem (Busetto andNapolitani [1990]). If N a G and cp is a projectivity

from G to a group G, then N/N is metabelian.
Proof. Again let H = N and S = N". By 6.6.7, we may assume that (9)-(13) hold,
so that (16)-(21) are also satisfied; let y; (i = I__ , n) be as defined in (16). In particu-
lar, H is a p-group and H/N is finite. Therefore it is possible to use induction on
IH : LI to prove the following result:
(22) If N < L< S and L g H, then H/L is metabelian.
The theorem follows on setting L = N. To prove (22), we first handle the case that
S/L is metacyclic. Since HIS is abelian, (22) clearly holds if S/L is abelian. Thus we
assume that
(23) S/L is metacyclic but not cyclic.
By (17) and (19), S/L is generated by the cyclic permutable subgroups (N<Y,))c 'L/L
(i = I__ , n) and, since S/L is metacyclic, there exist a, b e H such that <a>" = < y; ),
<b)` = <y,) and S/L = ((N<Y,>)' L/L)((N<y,>)' L/L). Since (N<a)) = N<y;) per G,
we obtain N<a) per G, and hence <L,a)/L is permutable in H/L; similarly for
<L, b)/L. Since S a G, finally,
(24) <L, a)/L and <L, b)/L are permutable subgroups of H/L and L<a>'L
We choose elements a, b e H satisfying (24) such that
(25) <L, a, b)/L has maximal order
and put R = <L, a, b). Then R/L is the product of two cyclic permutable subgroups
and hence, by 5.2.14, is a metacyclic M-group. If R/L _- Q8, then <L, a)/L and
<L, b)/L have order 4 and by (24), S/L is contained in the subgroup of order 2 in this
Q8. But we assume that S/L is not cyclic, a contradiction. Thus
(26) R/L is a metacyclic M*-group.
We denote the natural epimorphism from H to H/L by v and want to show that for
z c H,
(27) [S', z'] = 1 if <z") n R' = 1.
To see this, we study L Since 3:9 H and <L, z) n S < <L, z) n R = L, we see
that L` = <L, z)" rSt g <L, z), and hence that L<z>' = L. By (18), L per H and
6.3.5 implies that
L<a">'
= L<a>"L<z>" = L<az>OL<z>' = L<a> = L<az>

6.6 The structure of NG/NG_ and NG/NG_ and projective images of soluble groups 339
Thus (L<)") L<a> n L<az> and this shows that (L<>")`0 '/L is
centralized by aL and azL and hence by zL. The same holds for (L(6>)I '/L and,
since S/L is generated by these two groups, it is centralized by zL. This proves (27).
Since R' is metacyclic, there exists a cyclic normal subgroup T' of R' with cyclic
factor group R"/T" and we claim that
(28) T' n S' a H'.
For this we show that every cyclic permutable subgroup <z'> of H' normalizes
T' -) S'; since, by (16), H" is generated by cyclic permutable subgroups, this will
suffice to prove (28). Now for <z'> there are three possibilities. If <z'> < R', it
clearly normalizes T" n S' since T' n S' 9 R'. If (z'> n R' = 1, then by (27), z'
centralizes S' and hence also T" n S". Thus it remains to consider the case that
(29) 1 <z'> n R' 0 <z">.
By 2.5.9, the M*-group R' is lattice-isomorphic to an abelian group in which the
Frattini subgroup does not contain a maximal cyclic subgroup. It follows that there
exists c' e R' such that (z'> n R' < (c'> and c" 4)(R'). If <a', c'> and <b', c'>
were both proper subgroups of R', then c" would be contained in the maximal
subgroup of R' containing <a'> and (b'>, respectively, and, since the intersection of
these is V(R"), it would follow that c' E cb(R"). This is not the case and hence
(30) R' = (a', c'>,
say. From <z"> n R' < <c'> we obtain that
(31) (c", z'> n R' = (c'> (z'> n R' = <c"> (<z'> n R") = <c").
Since HIS is abelian and S < R < H, we have R a H and hence <c"> 9 <c",z").
Thus <c',z'> is the product of two cyclic permutable subgroups and hence is a
metacyclic M-group by 5.2.14. If this were a quaternion group, then o(c') =
I (L, c> : LI = 4 and hence L1* a (L, c>", by (53) of 5.5. Then by (24), 6.3.5 and (30),
S = L<>"L1 = LR = L<>'L<`>m = L<>-.
Therefore S/L would be cyclic, contradicting our assumption (23). Thus

(32) W, z'> is a metacyclic M*-group.
Suppose, for a contradiction, that o(z') > o(c''). Then z' has maximal order in the
M*-group <c', z'> and by 2.3.11 there exists t" E <c', z'> such that <c', z'> _
<t', z'> and <t'> n <z'> = 1. Since 1 (z'> n R' < (c"), we have <c'> n <z'> 1
and hence <t'> n <c'> = 1. By (31), <t'> n R' = <t'> n <c', z"> n R" _
<t"> n <c") = 1. It follows that <L, t> n S = L, hence L' = <L, t> n Sw 9 (L, t>
and so L <'>' = L. Then <a",c",z'> = <R', z'> = <a',t",z""> and S a H together
with 6.3.5 imply that
9 = L<R,2>- = L<>L(Z>'L<`>m = L<)L(Z>"

and thus a, z satisfy (24). Now (a''> n <z') < <a"> n R' n <z'> < <a''> n <c'> and
I <z''> I > I <c'> I; thus I <a", z'> I > I <a', c'> I = I R' l = I <L, a, b>/LI, which contradicts
the choice of a, b. Thus
(33) o(c') > o(z'').
Now c' has maximal order in the M*-group <c", z'> and there exists t' such that
<c',z'> = <c'', t'> and <c'> n <t'> = 1. By (31), <t'> n R' < <t'> n <c'> = I and
(27) shows that t" centralizes S'. Since S' n T' is normalized by c" e R', it follows
that <c', t'> < N,,,(S' n T'). In particular, z" normalizes S'' n T" and this proves
(28).
By (28), S' n T' is a cyclic normal subgroup of H'. Since the automorphism group
of a cyclic group is abelian, H"/CH,(S" n T") is abelian and hence (H')' centralizes
S' n T'. By 6.6.8, HIS is abelian and therefore (H")' < S". So, finally,
T' n S' n (H')' = T' -) (H')' is a central subgroup of (H')' with cyclic factor group
(H'')'/T" n (H')' T"(H")'/T". It follows that (H')' is abelian and thus H' is
metabelian. This proves (22) in the case that S/L is metacyclic.
For the general case, we use induction on I H : LI and assume that S/L is not
metacyclic. If S/L is abelian, then H/L is metabelian by 6.6.8. Thus we also assume
that S/L is not abelian. Then (16), (20) and (21) show that H/L and S/L satisfy the
hypotheses of Lemma 6.3.9. Since S/L is not metacyclic but an M*-group, it is
not generated by two elements and 6.3.9 yields that it contains two different mini-
mal normal subgroups L1/L and L2/L of H/L. By induction, H/Li is metabelian for
i = 1, 2 and, since L, n L2 = L, it follows that H/L is metabelian. This completes the
proof of (22) and of the theorem.
The main theorem
We come to our final result on the structure of N/NU and No/NN. By 6.6.1 and 6.6.9,
N/NG- and N/N are metabelian so that N/N_ is soluble of derived length at most
4. Furthermore, since N/N is metabelian, Theorem 6.6.3 yields that (N)(6' < N,
and hence N/NG_ is soluble of derived length at most 6. However this can be im-
proved.
group G and cp a projectivity from G to a group G. Then N/Ni7 and N'/NZ are soluble
of derived length at most 4 and 5, respectively.
Proof. Again let H = Nand S = V. We have to show that H1" is contained in N;

as a normal subgroup of G it will then be contained in &, and N/NG_ will be soluble
of derived length at most 5. By 6.6.7, we may assume that (9)-(13), and hence also
(16)-(21), are satisfied. By (11), (12) and 6.6.9, H/N is a finite metabelian p-group; let
N< M a Hsuch that HIM and M/N are abelian. Then if p > 2, Lemma 6.6.2
shows that H" < M and M" < N, so that Hi4' < N.
Thus we can suppose that p = 2. Since HIS is abelian, we may assume that M < S.
Let L/M = c2(S/ M) and TIN = (D(M/N) so that L/M and MIT are elementary abe-
6.6 The structure of N' /N0 and 9/& and projective images of soluble groups 341
lian 2-groups. By 6.3.7, H/S is nilpotent of class at most 2; in particular, H" < S.
Since HIM is abelian, (H")2 < M by 6.6.2. Therefore [H"M/M] 2t [H"/H" n k] is
an interval in [H"/(H")2], and hence (H"M)' '/M is an elementary abelian subgroup
of S/M. Thus (H"M) '/M < O(S/M) = L/M and H" < L.
Now M/N is abelian and therefore by 6.6.2, (NM2)" = T" < N. Finally, since LIT
is a 2-group of exponent at most 4, (53) of 5.5 shows that T a L. By (21), S/N is an
M*-group. Hence L/T and its projective image L/T are M*-groups of exponent at
most 4; by 2.3.7, LIT is abelian. It follows that H(5) < N.
Theorem 6.6.10 is the culmination of the work of four mathematicians from Padua:
Busetto, Menegazzo, Napolitani and Zacher. The first step, however, was taken
by Yakovlev [1970], who proved that under Hypothesis 5.5.1, d(G) < 24d(N) - 20.
He used this to show that a projective image of an arbitrary soluble group G
is soluble and its derived length is at most 4n3 + 14n2 - 8n if d(G) = n. Then
Menegazzo [1978] realized that, in fact, N is abelian if Hypothesis 5.5.1 is satisfied
and p > 2; he deduced that for an arbitrary finite group of odd order, N/NG is
abelian and therefore N/N6- is metabelian. The Zacher-Rips Theorem prepared the
ground for an investigation of projective images of normal subgroups in infinite
groups, and Zacher [1982a] showed that if it were possible to prove a similar, but
perhaps somewhat weaker, result for p = 2-for example, that under Hypothesis
5.5.1, d(N) is bounded by a constant c-then for arbitrary groups, N/N6- would
be soluble of derived length at most c. This was carried out by Busetto [1984]
with c = 3, and he proved that N/N6- and N/N6- are soluble of derived length at
most 3 and 4, respectively. At the same time Busetto and Stonehewer [1985] pro-
duced Example 5.5.5 showing that N/N6- in general need not be abelian. Meanwhile,
Napolitani and Zacher [1983] had shown that N/Nd and N/N6- are soluble and
that d(N/N) < 32. Busetto and Menegazzo [1985] proved Theorem 6.6.3 with 6n
instead of 3n, and improved Busetto's bound to d(N/Nd) < 3; their result also
yielded better bounds for the derived length of N/NZ and Finally Busetto
and Napolitani [1990], [1991] obtained the results of 5.5 and 6.6 in the form
presented here.
Elements of infinite order
We conclude this chapter with a remark that is perhaps somewhat surprising.

Whereas for the proof of Theorem 6.6.10 we needed nearly all of our deep results of
Chapters 5 and 6, the situation is much simpler if GIN contains an element of infinite
order. In fact, N/N6- and N/& are abelian in this case and the proof of this is quite
elementary, using only 6.2.3, 6.2.11 and 6.3.5.
group G and q a projectivity from G to a group G. If GIN contains an element of
infinite order, then N/N6- and N/N6- are abelian.
Proof. Write H = N, K = N-G and let g e G be such that o(gN) is infinite; by 6.2.12,
N is permutable in G. By 6.5.1, N< >' = N and therefore 6.3.5 implies that for
x e G,
N<X.g>, = N<X>1R<g>m = N<Xg>wR<g>m = N<X>" = N<Xg>
It follows that (N<X>")4 ' < N(x) n N(xg) and (N<X>)'P-'/N is centralized by xN
and xgN and hence also by gN. Since H/N is generated by these (N<X>m)1'/N,
x e G, the group H/N is centralized by gN. It follows that the group (H,g)/N =
(H/N,gN) is generated by elements of infinite order and that these elements cen-
tralize H/N. Thus H/N < Z((H,g)/N) and, as a cyclic extension of a central sub-
group, (H, g)/N is abelian.
By 6.5.1, N a (H, g)`0 and p induces a projectivity from (H, g)/N to (H, g)`0/N.
The first group is abelian and hence the second is an M-group with elements of
infinite order. By 6.2.3, H/N is generated by finite cyclic subgroups of the form
N<Y>/N, y e G; therefore it is contained in the torsion subgroup of (H, g)"/N, and
hence is abelian by 2.4.8. Thus H' < N and since H' a G, H' < Nd = K, that is, H/K
is abelian.
If z e G, then a = cpzcp-' is an autoprojectivity of G. Since <H, g)/N is generated
by elements of infinite order, N g (H, g) and a induces a projectivity from
(H, g)/N to (H, g)"/N". Thus (H, g)/N is an M-group with abelian torsion sub-
group and therefore H/N is abelian. But H = H since H g G and it follows that
H/ ft NP=À ' = H/K is abelian.
_EG
There exist examples in which G/N is not periodic and N is not normal in G; see
Exercise 6.
Exercises
In Exercises 1-5 let N a G, (p a projectivity from G to G, H = NG, K = Nd and
S = NH. Exercises 3-6 are due to Busetto and Napolitani [1990].
1. If G/N is a torsion group without nontrivial 2-elements and Gt") < N, show that
G'(2n) < N.
2. If G is a finite group of odd order, show that H/K and H/K are soluble of derived
length at most 3 and 4, respectively.
3. Let S, = S and S;+, = NS' (i E rkJ). Show that Si g G and S;/Si+1 < Z(H/S;+,) for
allieN.
4. Show that H/N is hypercyclically embedded in G, and hypercentrally embedded
in G if N is permutable in G. (Hint: Use 6.4.10 and 5.2.12.)
5. For every n e N, construct N, G, cp such that H/N is nilpotent of class n. (Hint:
By2.5.9,G=(a,b,claPr=bPrt'=cP'=[a,b]=1,a`=a'+ b`=b'+P) has an
autoprojectivity mapping (a) to (c).) _
6. Let G = (a, b, cI a2 = b8 = [a, b] = [a, c] = 1, c'=c-'> and G = with
the same defining relations except that [a, b] = I is replaced by [a, b] = b4. Show
that there exists a projectivity from G to G mapping (a) to (a); note that (a) a G,
G/(a) contains elements of infinite order and (a) is not normal in G (see
Exercise 6.3.2).
Chapter 7
Classes of groups and their projectivities
In this final chapter on projectivities of groups we study certain interesting classes

of groups and try to find out whether they are invariant under projectivities and,
especially, which groups in these classes are determined by their subgroup lattices.
Recall that a group G is said to be determined by its subgroup lattice if it is
isomorphic to every group G such that L(G) L(G); it is strongly determined by
its subgroup lattice if every projectivity of G is induced by a group-isomorphism.
Groups with this property we have met are the noncyclic elementary abelian 2-
groups (see 2.2.5 and 2.6.7), the hamiltonian 2-groups (see 2.5.1), and the abelian
groups with two independent elements of infinite order (see 2.6.10). Not strongly
determined but at least determined by their subgroup lattices are the following: the
infinite cyclic groups (see 1.2.6), the additive group of rational numbers (see 2.6.14),
the generalized quaternion groups, certain dihedral groups, and the alternating
group A4 (see 1.4). We shall show that many other groups have these properties.
In 1941 Sadovskii proved that every free group F of rank r > 2 is strongly
determined by its subgroup lattice. We prove this, and, in fact, a more general
result on 2-free groups, in 7.1 using a lattice-theoretic description, due to Yakovlev
[1974], of the subgroup lattice, the elements and the multiplication of F. This will,
in addition, yield a characterization of those lattices which are isomorphic to the
subgroup lattice of an arbitrary group, a result interesting in itself. We mention,
but do not prove, generalizations of Sadovskii's theorem to free products and free
products with amalgamation.
Another theorem of Sadovskii's is that every nonabelian torsion-free nilpotent
group is strongly determined by its subgroup lattice. We use an unpublished manu-
script of G.E. Wall's to prove this in 7.2. In addition, we give a lattice-theoretic
characterization, due to Kontorovic and Plotkin [1954], of the class of torsion-free
nilpotent groups.
For mixed and periodic nilpotent groups the situation is not so good since there
are obvious examples of nilpotent and nonnilpotent groups with isomorphic sub-
group lattices and of projectivities between nonisomorphic nilpotent groups. How-
ever, in 7.3 we give a lattice-theoretic characterization of the class of finitely
generated nonperiodic nilpotent groups. There are also generalizations of Sadovskii's
theorem to mixed nilpotent groups. The main result in this direction, which is due to
Yakovlev [1988], is that a nilpotent group G of class n containing a free nilpotent
group of class n as a subgroup is strongly determined by its subgroup lattice. How-
ever, we shall not prove this but only note that the assumption cannot be weakened
to the hypothesis that G contains a torsion-free subgroup of class n or contains two
344 Classes of groups and their projectivities
independent elements of infinite order; this last assumption does not even imply that
G is determined by its subgroup lattice. On the other hand, we shall prove a theorem
due to Barnes and Wall [1964] stating that every normalizer preserving projectivity
maps a nonabelian almost free group of a nilpotent variety to an isomorphic group.
This will yield as a corollary that every nilpotent group of class 2 and exponent p is
determined by its subgroup lattice.
A nilpotent torsion group is the direct product of its primary components, and
its subgroup lattice then is the direct product of the subgroup lattices of these
components. Therefore in our study of subgroup lattices of periodic nilpotent
groups in 7.4, we restrict our attention to nilpotent p-groups. We first use the ideas
of Kontorovic and Plotkin to characterize the nilpotent groups among the p-groups.
This yields that every projectivity maps nonabelian nilpotent p-groups to nilpotent
p-groups, a result due to Yakovlev [1965]. Furthermore we obtain a lattice-theoretic
characterization of the class of nilpotent primary groups and P-groups. Finally, we
study finite p-groups and prove that p-groups of maximal class are nearly always
mapped to p-groups of maximal class under projectivities, a result due to Caranti
[1979].
The lattice-theoretic characterizations of 5.3 and 6.4 show that certain classes
of soluble and generalized soluble groups are invariant under projectivities. In 7.5
we prove in addition that the rank of a finite soluble group is preserved under
projectivities, and present some further results of Schmidt [1974], [1987] on forma-
tions of finite soluble groups. Roughly speaking, we show that if I is defined locally
by classes j(p) which are invariant under projectivities, then I is also invariant
under projectivities and a-residual and a-projectors are mapped onto 1-residual
and a-projectors, respectively, by every projectivity between finite soluble groups.
At the other end of the spectrum of solubility, we prove that the class of radical
groups is invariant under projectivities, a result due to Pekelis [1972b].
In the final three sections of this chapter we return to the question of whether
the members of a given class of groups are determined or even strongly determined
by their subgroup lattices. In 7.6 we study direct products of groups and prove
a generalization of Suzuki's theorem that the direct product of two isomorphic
copies of a finite nonabelian simple group is determined by its subgroup lattice; we
show that this still holds for arbitrary perfect groups with trivial centre. We deal
briefly with the more general question whether the direct product of n isomorphic
groups (n > 2) is (strongly) determined by its subgroup lattice. There are results in
this direction for certain classes of groups due to Schmidt [1982] and Schenke
[1987a], [1987b]. Similarly, we only sketch the results on projectivities of wreath
products due to Menegazzo [1973] and to Arshinov and Sadovskii [1973]. Finally
we show that a finite perfect group with trivial centre has the property that the direct
product of all its pairwise nonisomorphic projective images is determined by its
subgroup lattice.
In 7.7 we present a fruitful general method to prove that a given group generated
by involutions is determined by its subgroup lattice. This method is applied to
permutation groups and we are able to show in this way that every triply transitive
permutation group of degree at least 4 which is generated by involutions is deter-
mined by its subgroup lattice. The same holds for large classes of doubly transitive
7.1 Free groups 345
and even certain primitive groups. All these results are due to Schmidt [1975b],
[1977b], [ 1980a].
Finally, in 7.8 we note that the classification of finite simple groups yields that
every finite nonabelian simple group is determined by its subgroup lattice. Unfortu-
nately, a direct proof for this important result is not known; but the methods of 7.7
at least yield proofs for certain classes of finite simple groups. In contrast to this, it
is not difficult to see that these groups in general are not strongly determined by
their subgroup lattices. Here the alternating groups and also the 3-dimensional
projective special linear groups yield examples; we study the groups of autoprojec-
tivities of the alternating groups and also of the finite symmetric groups in some
detail. We finish this chapter by determining the finite lattice-simple groups, that is,
the finite groups G having no nontrivial proper P(G)-invariant subgroup. These
are precisely the cyclic groups of square-free order, the P-groups, and the direct
products of isomorphic nonabelian simple groups.
7.1 Free groups
We give necessary and sufficient conditions for a lattice L to be isomorphic to the

subgroup lattice of a free group F of rank r > 2. For this purpose we describe the
elements of F and their multiplication in the lattice. And since we are able to identify
the normal subgroups of F, we also get a characterization of those lattices which are
isomorphic to the subgroup lattice of an arbitrary group. Another immediate conse-
quence will be that F and, more generally, every 2-free group, is strongly determined
by its subgroup lattice . First of all we need some definitions.
Cyclic elements and complexes
7.1.1 Definition. Let L = (L, <) = (L, n, u) be a complete lattice and 0 its least
element. An element a c L is called cyclic if [a/O] is a distributive lattice with
maximal condition, the set of cyclic elements of L is denoted by C(L) or C, for short.
For a, h E C and A, B C, we define a o h= {x E CJx u a= x u h= a u h} and
AoB={xECJxEaoh, ac-A, hEB}. We also write aoB for AoB if A={a}
consists of only one element.
All the a o h and A o B are subsets of C and we clearly have
(1) aoa=[a/O]andaoO={a};
Indeed, every b c- [a/0] is contained in C and satisfies h u a = a = a u a. and the
only element x c L such that x u a = x u 0 = a, is x = a. By 1.2.5. the cyclic
elements of the subgroup lattice L(G) of a group G are the cyclic subgroups of G and,
if x,yEG,
(2) <x''y")E<x>o(vjfor all v,pEl= {+1,-1},
since <x''y"> u <x> = <x`y"> u <y> = <x> u <y> = <x,y>. It will be one of the
fundamental properties of a free group F that for x, y E F with x :A1 1 0 y and
<x> n <y) = 1, the set <x> o <y> precisely consists of the four elements <xy>,
<x-' y), <xy-' > and <x-' y-`) (see 7.1.7). In general, however, <x> o <y> contains
other cyclic subgroups; for example, if G = <x> x <y> is the elementary abelian
group of order p2 for some prime p, every subgroup of order p of G different from
<x> and <y> lies in <x> o <y>.
7.1.2 Definition. Let L and C = C(L) be as in 7.1.1, let n e F, ei e C (i = I__, n) and

put E = (e,_., e a = (A1..... is called an a-com-
plex with respect to E if for all i, j e { 1, ... , n} with i : j,
(3) A; is a 2-element subset of e; o a and
(4) aioaane;oej96 0forallaiEA;,aaeAj.
Let K(a, E) be the set of all a-complexes with respect to E. We call E_
({e, }, ... , {e }) the 0-complex with respect to E and put K (0, E) = {f;}. Finally, a
complex is an a-complex for some a e C and .AY(E) is the set of all complexes with
respect to E, where two such complexes a = (A1..... and /3 = (B...... are
considered equal if and only if Ai = B; for all i = 1, ..., n.
If there is no ambiguity, we omit the phrase "with respect to E" and speak of
complexes and a-complexes. Of course, K(a, E) may be empty for some a E C; for
example, this will certainly be so if a 0 0 and lei o al < 1 for some i. In subgroup
lattices it is often possible to construct examples in the following way.
7.1.3 Example. Let G be a group and L = L(G) so that C is the set of cyclic sub-
groups of G; take nontrivial elements gi (i = I...... n) of G, define ei = <gi> and put
E = (e,,...,en) = (<gl>,...,<gn>)
(a) Let I a E G. By (2), ei o <a> = <gi> o <a> contains the (not necessarily dis-
tinct) elements <gia>, <gi-' a>, <gia-' >, and <g ' a-') of C. Therefore if <gia> 4-
<g; ' a> for all i e {1..... n}, then Ai = { <gia>, <g; ' a> } is a 2-element subset of
ei o <a>; and for v, p e { + 1, - 1}, both <g,'a> o <gj a> and <g1> o <g1> contain the
element <gi",y,-"> of C, again by (2). It follows that <g;'a> o <gj a> n <g;> o <gj> 0 0
if i j, and hence a = (A,,..., is an <a>-complex with respect to E.
(b) Suppose that G is torsion-free and g-'ag a-' for all a, g e G with a 0 1.
(Note that in a free group, g-'ag = a-' implies a = I, see (18), so that the condition
is satisfied.) Then for q : 1, the element g-' a is different from the two generators ga
and (ga)-` = a-'q-' of the group <ga> and it follows that <g'a> 4- <ga>. Thus
the assumption <gia> 0 <g; ' a> of (a) is satisfied, and a = (A...... with A; =
I< gia>, <gi à) } is an <a>-complex with respect to E. We denote it by x(a, E) and
putr.(l,E)=E=({<g,)},...,{<gn>}).
Finally, we define a multiplication of complexes.
7.1.4 Definition. Let L, C, n, E, _Y(E) be as in 7.1.2 and let a = (A1..... and

/3 = (B,,..., be complexes in .AY(E). We define the product a/3 of x and /3 to be the
7.1 Free groups 347
set of all complexes S = (D, , ... , D.) e W '(E) for which there exist a, h, d e C such
that
(5) deaob,
(6) x c K (a, E), /3 E K (h, E), S e K (d, E), and
(7) all i,je{1,...,n}.

For subsets A, B of f(E), we define AB = U {af3Ia e A, /3 e B} and also write A(3 for
AB if B = { /3} consists of only one element.
Clearly, x/3 and AB are (possibly empty) subsets of t -(E). We continue to study
Example 7.1.3 and show the following.
7.1.5 Lemma. Let G be a torsion free group and g-' xg : x-' for all x, g e G with
x 1.Ifa,h,deGaresuch that ab=danda=x(a,E),/3=x(b,E), 5=x(d,E)are
the complexes constructed in 7.1.3, then S e af3.
Proof. Let x=(A,,...,A,1), /3=(B1 and S=(D,,...,Dr). By 7.1.3, xE

K (<a>, E), /3 e K (<b), E), S e K (<d ), E) and by (2), <d> = <ab) E <a) o <h>. It re-
mains to be shown that (7) holds. For a # 1, A; = { <g;a), <g,-'a> } and if a = 1,
x = E so that A; = { <gi> } = { <gia) }. In both cases, (2) implies that <g;ag, ') =
<g;db-' gj-.') is contained in <g;a) o <gi) c Ai o ej and in <g,d) o <g;h) c Di o B3.
Thus Di o B; n Ai o ej : 0 and (7) holds.
We can now give a sufficient condition for a lattice to be isomorphic to the

subgroup lattice of a group.
7.1.6 Theorem (Yakovlev [1974]). Let L be a complete lattice in which every element
is the join of cyclic elements, and suppose that there exists a system E = (e,,...,en) of
elements e; E C = C(L) with the following properties.
(8) For every a e C such that a -A 0, IK(a,E)I = 2.
(9) If a E C, a = (A , , ... , E K (a, E), x' = (A', , ... , A;,) E K (a, E) and a x', then
A' :A for
(10) If a,bEC,xeK(a,E),and (3EK(b,E)such that x=/3,then a=b.

(11) For all a, /3 e .K(E), the product af3 consists of a unique complex x
(12) For all x, /3. y E .flE), (a/3) y = a(f3'r).
(13) Let a e C and X C such that a< U X and let x c K(a, E). Then
there exist finitely many elements hi e X and f3 i E K(hi, E) such that
(f'3...)f3m-1)flm
//
x E ((...(f3,/32)
Then G = A (E) with the operation *: G x G -+ G given by (11), (a, f3) i- a * /3 for
x, f3 e G, is a group whose subgroup lattice is isomorphic to L.
Proof. By (11) and (12), * is an associative binary operation on G and we show first
that (G, *) is a group with identity element & = ({e, },..., For this let . E G, that
is, x = (A,,..., e K(a. E) for some a e C. We show that or c ae; it will follow from
(11) that
(14) x*F=x.
If a = 0, then x = e and, since 0 o 0 = {O}, (5) and (6) show that EE can only contain
the 0-complex r; by (11), F * E = r.. So suppose that a 0 0. Then by (1), a c a o 0 so
that (5) and (6) hold for /3 = P. and d = x. To prove (7), let i, j C { 1,..., n}. By (3), A; is
a 2-element subset of e; o a s C and therefore contains an element c 0 0 of C. By
(8) there exists a c-complex and hence ej o c 0 0. Since ee o c = c o eJ . c A; o e1, it
follows that A; o ej 96 0 and that (7) holds. Thus x E xE and this proves (14).
Again let a 0 0 and x = (A,,..., e K(a, E). By (8) there exists a unique further
complex x'=(A',,...,A;,)in K(a,E).By (1)and (9),OEaoaand e;oA}nA;oej#0
so that (5)-(7) hold for /f = oc' and S = E. Thus e c aa' and (11) yields that
(15) x*2'=E.
This shows that (G, *) is a group. By (10), for every x e G there exists a unique a e C
such that x E K(a, E) and by (8), the map is G -i C defined by x' = a if x E K(a, E) is
surjective. Since L is a complete lattice, we may form arbitrary joins in L and hence
there exists the map cp: L(G) --> L defined by H = U x' for H e L(G). We show that
aeH
cp is an isomorphism, which will prove the theorem. First, to see that rp is surjective,
let x c L and consider H = {x E G12' < x}. For x, /3 e H and S = of * /3, (5) and (6)
show that b' E x' o /3'; then Definition 7.1.1 implies that S' < 7'u /3' < x and so
d E H. By (15). (x-' )' = x' < x and hence x-' E H. Thus H is a subgroup of G. By
assumption, x is the join of the cyclic elements contained in x and, since i is surjec-
tive, any such element is of the form x' where x e H. It follows that x = U a' = H.
Thus tp is surjective. 2eH
Now suppose that A, B < G such that A0 < B`1. If a E A, then x' < A" < B` _
U /3' and by (13) applied to a = x' and X = {(3'x/3 E B} there exist b,, ..., b, C X
fEB
and /3i c K(b;, E) such that x Since b; E X, there exists /3 e B such that
/3' = b; =/3; and(15)implies that /3;=/3or3;=/3-'.Inanycase, /3;eBforall i and
hence x c B. Thus A < B. It follows that if A(P = B", then A < B and B < A and
therefore A = B. This shows that (p is injective and hence bijective. Furthermore
All < B` implies A < B, as we have just shown, and the reverse implication follows
trivially from the definition of (p. By 1.1.2, cp is an isomorphism. D
Conversely we want to show that the subgroup lattice of a free group of rank at
least 2 satisfies the assumptions of Theorem 7.1.6. We handle a slightly larger class
of groups since our method works in the more general situation as well.
2-free groups
A group is called 2-free if it is nonabelian and any two of its elements generate a free
group. If G is a free group of rank r > 2, the Nielsen-Schreier Theorem says that
7.1 Free groups 349
every subgroup of G is free; in particular, G is 2-free. However, a 2-free group need

not even be locally free: an example can be found in Baumslag [1962].
We note some simple properties of the subgroup F = <a, h) generated by two
elements a, b of a 2-free group. By definition, F is free and has some rank r < 2, of
course. If r < 1, F is cyclic and, in particular, ah = ha. Since any two nontrivial
subgroups of an infinite cyclic group intersect nontrivially, it follows that r = 2 if
a 0 1 -A h and <a> n <h> = 1. Now suppose that r = 2. Then F is free on {a, b} (see
Robinson [1982], p. 160) and therefore every element in F can be written uniquely
in normal form with respect to the generators a, h. Therefore if a'b3 = h3a' for some
i, j c- 7L, it follows that i = 0 or j = 0. In particular, <a> n <h> = 1. We have proved
the following three assertions.
Let G be a 2-free group and let a, b c- G.
(16) If <a> n <h) 0 1, then <a,b) is cyclic and ah = ha.
(17) If <a> n <h) = I and a :j4- 1 0 h, then F = <a, b) is free on {a, h}.
(18) If there exist i, j e 7L\{0} such that a'b' = b'a', then ab = ba.
Furthermore, let c e G and suppose that <a'c> n j4 1 0 <asc) n <h> for some
r, s e 7L such that r 0 s. Then by (16), CG(b) contains a'c and asc and hence also
a'c(asc)-' = a'-s. By (18), ah = ba and, using (17), we get the following.
(19) Let a 0 1 j4 b and <a> n <b) = 1. If c c- G and r c- Z such that <a'c) n <h) 0
then <asc) n = I for every integer s 0 r.
Now we can prove the following simple, but basic fact.
7.1.7 Lemma. If G is a 2 free group and a, b c- G such that a I : b and (a) n (h) = 1,
then
<a> o (h) = { <ab), (a-'b>, (ab-' ), (a-, b-,)}
and these four groups are distinct.
Proof. By (17), F = <a, b) is free on {a, b} and by (2), the four assigned groups lie
in <a> o <h>. If <x> E <a> o , then F = <a, h) = <a, x) = <h, x) contains x and
therefore x can be written in normal form with respect to {a, h}, that is, x =
asi hPi ... a"-b,, where n >- 1, x,, fl E 7L and xj, f, e 7L\{0} for i > 1 and ] < n. Since
F = <a, x>, there exist x, x' E 7L such that the normal form of y = a"xa" starts and
ends with nontrivial powers of h. If we write y = cwc-' where w e F is cyclically
reduced and c c F is reduced, then y' = CW'c-' is reduced for every r E 7L\ {0}, and
we see that the normal form of y' starts and ends with nontrivial powers of b.
It follows that an equation of the form b = a"yap ... a'1-Y 6, with 7, , Sm e 7L and
6j c- 7L\{0} for i > 1 and j < m can only hold for m = 1, 0 and ya, = h; on the
other hand, h c- F = (a, x> = <a, a'xa'') _ <a, y) and hence b satisfies an equation
of this form. Thus y = b" and hence x = a-zh"a-" where v e I = { + 1, - I } and
x, x' e Z. In exactly the same way we see that x = bfla"h Q' where p e I and fl, E 77.
It follows that x = a"h" or x = b"a" where it, v E I. These 8 elements are clearly
distinct and generate the 4 assigned subgroups.
We need a technical lemma.
7.1.8 Lemma. Let G be a 2 -free group, k, 1, r, s, t c- 7L and a, h, c e G such that

a l j4 hand<a>c = 1.
(a) (a'h'>o<a'bs)n<ak>o<a'> 0,then r=s.
<h-.+'>.
(b) If <ab'> o <b'> n <a> o <hi> 0 0, then <b'> = <b"'> or <h5> =
Proof. By (17), F = <a, h> is free on {a, h}.

(a) If <akbr> n <a'bs> -A 1, then (16) implies that akb'a'bs = a'hsa' b' and, since
k j4 0 : 1, this equation can only hold if r = s. So suppose that <akbr> n <a'bs> = 1.
Then by 7.1.7, (akb'> o <albs> consists of the four groups <akb'a'hs>, <b-'a'-kbs>,
<akh'-sa-') and <h-'a-kb-'a-`>. By assumption, one of these groups lies in
<ak> o <a'> and hence its generators are contained in <ak,a'> n-, <a>. In all cases,
this implies that r = s.
(b) Let X E <ab'> o <b'> n <a> o . Since F is free on {a, b}, <a> n <b'> = 1.
And if <ah'> n <hs> :j4- 1, then by (16), bs would centralize ab' and hence also a;
therefore (18) would imply that ab = ba, a contradiction. Thus <ab'> n <b'> = 1.
If r = 0 = s, then by (1), X = <ab'> = <a> and hence t = 0 and <b'> = 1 =
<b'+'>. Suppose next that r = 0 and s - 0. Then X = <a> and by 7.1.7 there exist
signs , v c- 1 = { + 1, -1 } such that <a> = X = <(ab')''(bs)">. It follows that v = 1
and t = -ps so that <b'> = <b'> = <b'+'>. Now suppose that r -A 0 and s = 0.
Then there exist p, v c- I such that <ab'> = X = <a'b'o>. This implies v = 1
and t = r, that is, <bs> = 1 = <b-'+`J Finally, if r -A 0: s, there exist signs
v, p, ., o) e I such that <(ab')'bs"> = <a"b',>. If v = - 1, we get that t = 0 and
sy = rw so that <b5> = <hi> _ <b'+'>; if v = 1, it follows that t + s y = rcw and
hence <bs> = <b-su> = <b-w'+'>. In all cases, <b5> = <h'+`> or <b5> = <b-'+'J as
desired.
We are now going to describe the product of two elements of a 2-free group in the
subgroup lattice.
7.1.9 Lemma. Let G he a 2 -free group and let u, v c G be such that u 1 -A v and
 n <v> = 1. Let 259 < m c N and for i = 1, ..., in, let k;, I. E l\{0} be such that
ui = uk' and vi = v'' satisfy
(20) <ui> 0 <u3> and <vi> <vi> for all i 0j.
If a, h, c c- G are such that
(21) n <a> = n = n <c> = (v> n = 1
and i f f o r every pair (i, j) with i, j c { 1, ... , m} there exist signs i., It, v E I = { + 1, - 1 }
satisfying
(22) <utc> o (vf b> n <ui a> o <vi> 0 0
then c = ab.
Proof. By (20), there can be at most one i for which ui'a = 1 with ) c I is satisfied;
for this equation implies <u1> = <a>. The same holds for the equation u c = 1 and
7.1 Free groups 351
for the relations <ui"a) n <v> 0 1 and <u;"c) n <v> 0 1; the latter follows from (19)
applied to u and v in place of a and b. Therefore we may assume without loss
of generality that if one of these equations or relations holds for some ; E I and
i E {1,...,m}, then i e {1,...,4}; that is,
(23) u a : 1 : u;"c and (u a) n <v) = 1 = n <v> for all i > 5 and i. E I.
In the sequel, we shall always assume that 5 < i < m. Then we may apply (19)
with v, uic instead of a, b, and deduce that there is at most one l E 1L such that
<v'b) n <uic) 0 1. By (20), there is at most one k = k1(i) e {1,...,m} such that
v' = vk for some u e I, that is, satisfying <v,"b> n (uic) 0 1. Similarly, there is at
most one k = k2(i) E { 1, ... , m} such that <vk b> n <u-.'c> A 1 for some p c- I. Thus
if j is different from k1(i) and kz(i), then n (vj b) = 1 and, by (23), also
<ui'a) n (vj ) = I for all ., p, v c I. This, in particular, holds for the triple (%, p, v) that
satisfies (22) for the pair (i,j). By (23), furthermore, ui"c 0 1 ui'a and, since v 0 1
and <v> n = 1, also vj 0 1 0 v; b. Therefore by 7.1.7,
 o (vj b> = { <(ui"c)'(vj b)1 > I x, fl e I j
and
<ui a> o (vi> = { ((ui a)1 v>I?, 8 E 11,
and (22) implies that there exist signs x, 6, co c I such that

((ui'a)Yvis)aO
(24) (ui c)'(vb)' =
Thus if i c- { 5, ... , m} is fixed, then for every one of the at least 257 indices
jE{1,...,m}\{k1(i),k2(i)} there exists an 8-tuple ().,p,v,x,/1,y,6,w) of signs such
that (24) holds. Since there are only 28 = 256 different such 8-tuples, there exist two
different indices j for which the 8-tuples in (24) coincide. That is, for the given i, there
exist an 8-tuple (;.,,u, v, x, Q, 6, (o) of signs and two indices j, k c { 1, ... , m} such that
j0k,
(25) (ui c)'(v; b) = ((ui''a)7 vj )w and
(26) (ui c)'(v b)n = ((u, a)yvk)W.

We want to simplify these equations and first show that they can only hold if
(27) co = 1.
So suppose, for a contradiction, that w = - 1 and consider first the case that i3 = 1.
Then (25) yields (u c)'v; b = vj-b(u, a)-' and hence vj (ui"c)'vj = (u;'a)-''b-1. From (26)
we get the same equation with v; replaced by vk and it follows that
vf(ui C)2vj = Vk(ui C)2v ;
but this is impossible since by (23) and (17), F = (u c,v> is free on {u c,v} and
Vjb -A vk. Similarly for /3 = -1, we get the equation
vj a(ui a) ' vj = vk a(ui a) vk
and therefore the same contradiction. Thus (27) holds. Since w = 1, (25) implies
(28) (vjb)ev,-b = (u c)-'(ui a)'
and (26) yields the same equation with vj replaced by vk. It follows that
(29) (vj b)p vj
' = (vk b)fi vk'.
If b 1, then by (21) and (17), <b,v) is free on {b,v} and, since <vj> and <Vk > are
different subgroups of <v>, we obtain vj vk for all p c- Z\{0}. It follows that (29)
"_b _b
can only hold for 1 and v; = vk = 1; thus (28) implies
(30) b-' = (u c)-'(u; a)'.
P-' vka_b
If b = 1, (29) yields vj = and it follows that /i - 6 = 0; therefore once
again (28) implies (30).
Thus we have shown that for every i e { 5, ... , m} there exists a quadruple (i., v, x, y)
of signs such that (30) holds. Since there are only 16 such quadruples but m > 259,
there exist two different indices i, h c- {5,... , m} for which these quadruples coincide;
that is,
(31) (ui.c)'b-' = (u,'a)' and
(32) (uj c)'b-' = (una)'.
We study the four possibilities for the signs x and y. If x = y = 1, then (31) and (32)
yield that uj = abc-' = un -". It follows from (20) that i - v = 0 and hence ab = c,
as desired. In the other three cases, (31) and (32) yield equations of the form
(33) uxun = yz = un xui"
where p, rl E I and x, y, z c- {a, b, c, a-', h-', c-' }: indeed, in the case x = 1
we get ui "a-' ui cb-' = uh "a-' uh "; if y = 1 = - x, we have ui"c-' u,- = ab =
uh`'c ' uh'; and for x = y = - 1, finally, uk b-' u; = ca-' = uh`b-' uN. If x --,4 I in
(33), then by (21) and (17), <u,x> would be free on {u,x}; it would follow that
u = ui, contradicting (20). Thus x = 1 and hence u+" = uf+", which again is only
possible if p + r1 = 0. So (33) implies that yz = x = I and this in all three cases yields
the desired equation c = ab.
We can now prove, as stated above, that the subgroup lattice of a 2-free group
satisfies the assumptions of Theorem 7.1.6. Of course, it is complete and any of its
elements is the join of cyclic elements; so we have to find a system E with the
properties (8)-(13). For this we just have to take enough cyclic subgroups (u>, <v),
<ui), <vi> as in Lemma 7.1.9. But first of all we give such a system a name.
7.1.10 Definition. A basic system of a complete lattice L is a family
E _ (e11,...,eim,e21,..., e2m,. ..,enl,...,enm)

7.1 Free groups 353
of elements ei, e C(L)\{D} satisfying

(34) e,J ekl for all i, k e { 1, ... , n} and j, I E { 1, ... , m} such that (i, j) (k,1),
(35) there exist el, ..., en e C(L) such that e; n ek = 0 for i 0 k and eij < e; for all
iE{1,...,n},je{1,...,m},and
(36) n > 5, m > 259.
7.1.11 Theorem. Let G be a 2 -free group.

(a) Then L(G) possesses basic systems.
(b) Every basic system E of L(G) satisfies (8)-(13). The map o: G -+ .AY(E) mapping
every a E G to the complex x(a, E) defined in 7.1.3 is an isomorphism from G onto
the group (.,f (E), *) defined in 7.1.6. Furthermore, K(<a>, E) = {x(a, E),x(a-', E)} _
{a,(a-')} for 1 0 a c G.
Proof (a) Let n, m c- F such that n >_ 5 and m >_ 259. Since G is not abelian, there
exist x, y c- G such that xy # yx and then F = (x, y> is a free group of rank 2. It is
well-known (see Robinson [1982], p. 157) that such a group contains a free sub-
group H of infinite rank. So if H = <X> is free on X, we may choose n distinct
elements g,..... gn E X, and then clearly <gi> n <gk> = 1 for i k. Every <g,>
contains m distinct subgroups (g,,> 1 and the system of these <g1> is a basic
system of L(G).
(b) Now let (g..>) be a basic system of
L(G) and let g; E G such that
(37) <g1 > < (g,) and (gi> n <gk) = 1 for all j e {1,...,m} and i,k e {1,...,n},
i k;
let C be the set of cyclic elements of L(G). We have to prove that E satisfies (8)-(13)
and we show first that (8) holds, that is, I K (<a>, E)I = 2 for every 1 # <a> E C. Since
G is torsion-free and, by (18), g-'ag a-' for all g c- G, 7.1.3 shows that K(<a>,E)
contains the two complexes
(38) x = x(a, E) = (A 11, ... A.) and a' = x(a-' E) Anm)
where Aij = { (g,ja>, <g-'a> } and A;, = { <g,1a-' >, <gJ' a-') }. These are different.
Indeed, by (37) there exists i e {1.....n} such that <a> n (g1> = I and, by (17),
<a, g1> is free on {a, g1 } so that <g,1 a> <g,i a-'> for both ;! E I = { + 1, - 11; thus
Ail -0 A', and hence x # Y. To prove (8), we therefore have to show that there are
no further <a>-complexes with respect to E.
So suppose that = (C11,..., Cnm) e K (<a>, E). By (37) there exists i e { 1, ... , n}
such that <g1> n <a> = l; let j, I E { 1, ... , m} such that j 1. By (3) and 7.1.7, C,;
is a 2-element subset of <gij> o <a> = {<g a")j%,u E I}. For <g"a"> E Cij and
<g;ia`'') E C,l (i, p, v,w E I), (4) yields that <g a"> o <gnaw> n < > o (g'> :A 0 and
(a) of 7.1.8 implies that = w. This shows that there exists p = (i) E I such that
C,j _ {<gij a"lil>,<g;J'a'">} for every j e {1,...,m}. We now fix an i e {I,...,n}
such that <,g,> n <a> = 1, put p = u(i) and show that for all k e { 1, ... , n} and
E {1,...,rn}
(39) Ckl = {( gkla'>,(gklla">}
This is clear if k = i. So let k : i and suppose first that <90 n <a> = 1. Then
(k) exists and (4) implies that <g;3a"(`)) o <gkla"(k,> n (g;3) <gk,) 0 for all
j, l E { 1, ... , m}. It follows from 7.1.9 with u = g;, v = gk and a, b, c replaced by
1, a"(k), a'"), that u(k) = u(i) = u and hence (39) holds for k. Now suppose that
(90 n <a> A 1. By (16), (9k, a> = <h> is cyclic. Let <c> E Ck,. Then <c> E (gk,) o <a)
and hence (c) < <9k1, a> < <gk,a> = <h). Thus there exist r, s, t e 1L such that
gk, = h', c = h' and a" = h'. By (4), again
<.gaa") <c) n <9a) <9ki) = <9nh') <h'> n <9u> <h') :?, 0

and (g;,) n <h> = 1 since (g;) n <gk) = I. Therefore the assumptions of 7.1.8(b)
are satisfied with a, b replaced by g;,, h and hence <h5> = <h'+') or (h3> = (h-"' >
that is, <c> = <gk,a, > or <c> = <gk,la"). Since ICk,I = 2, it follows that Ck, consists
of these two groups and (39) is also proved in this case. So (39) holds for all k, 1. Now
ifp= 1,then 7=x, and if y 1, we get ;= 2'. Thus
(40) K(<a>, E) = {x, x'}
and (8) holds. Moreover, (2) shows that if i, k e { I__, n} and j, I E { I__, m}, then
<g11a9ki1) is contained in <9i3) o <94ia-1) c <g;3) o Ak, and in <g;3a) <gk,)
A;3 o <gk,). Thus <g;3) A'k, n A3 <gk,) : 0 and this proves (9).
Let 1 h e G and = x(b, E) = (B1 1 , ... , B..). Suppose that /3 = x, that is, B3 =
A;3 for all i,j. Since n > 5 and <a> and , by (37), can intersect at most two of the
(gk) nontrivially, there exist two indices, I and 2, say, such that <g1> n (a) =
(91) n (b) = <92> n <a> = <92) n (b) = 1. If i, j e {1,...,m}, then <g11a) E Ail
and <923b) E B2J = A23, and hence by (4), <911a) <923b) n <911) <923> 0.
Now 7.1.9 applied with u = 91, v = g2, u; = gl; and v3 = g2j yields that a = h. Thus
we have shown:
(41) If a, b e G such that x(a, E) = x(b, E), then a = h.
So if <a>, E C, x e K((a), E) and /3 E K(<b), E) such that x = /3, then, by (40),
x = x(a', E) and /3 = x(b", E) for some i.,,a e I and, by (41), a" = b" and hence (a)
. This proves (10).
By (40), Y(E) = {x(a, E)Ia E G} where we denote the trivial complex e by x(1, E).
Thus if x, /3 E Y (E), there exist a, b e G such that x = x(a, E) and /3 = x(h, E). We
show that
(42) x/3 = {x(ab, E)};
this will prove (11). By 7.1.5, x(ah, E) E x/3. So suppose that b = (D,,_.' E x/3
and let d e G such that 6 = x(d, E). Since n > 5 and any of the groups <a>, (b), (d )
can intersect at most one of the <gk) nontrivially, there exist two indices, again I
(g, (g,
If we write x = (A11 , ... , and /3 = (B11,.. . , then by Definition 7.1.4,
m}, and this
6 E x/3 implies that D1; a B23 n A 1; (g2J> e 0 for all i, j e { 1,._m),
means that for any such pair (Q) there exist signs y, v e I such that
<g ;d) <g2Jb) n <g' ;a) o (923) 0. Thus the assumptions of Lemma 7.1.9 are
satisfied with u; = 91; and v3 = g21 and it follows that d = ab. This proves (42) and
hence also (11).
7.1 Free groups 355
If we write x * /3 for the unique complex in x/3, the map *:.%((E) x 1'(E) -+ 1(E)
x for a on and
G - by a and
that a a an isomorphism from G onto
this group. In particular, * is associative, that is, (12) holds. Furthermore, by (40) and
(38),
K(<a),E) = {x(a,E),x(a-',E)} = {a,(a-1)}
for I a e G. Finally, to prove (13), let <a> e C and X s C such that

<a> , E). Then x = x(a A, E) for some i. e I and, since
U X = <x I <x) e X ), there exist finitely many <b;) e X such that a" = b, ... b,. So if
we write /3; = x(b;, E), then /3; E K ((be ), E) and
x=x(a'-,E)=(a')=b; *...*b, =P,*...*ir
Thus (13) holds and this finishes the proof of the theorem.
Subgroup lattices of free groups
We can now characterize the subgroup lattices of free groups.
7.1.12 Theorem. Let r >_ 2 be a cardinal number. A group G is free of rank r if and
only if its subgroup lattice L has the following properties.
(43) For every c e C(L)\{O}, [c/O] is infinite.
(44) ifa,beC(L)suchthat auboC(L)andifdaob,thendna=dnb=0.
(45) There exists a basic system E of L and a subset S of C(L) such that BSI = r,
U S = U L and that for every finite sequence b,, ... , b, of elements b; E S with
b; : b,+, (i = 1, ... , s - 1) and a; e L with 0 -A a; < b; and x; e K (a;, E), the
trivial complex E is not contained in (...((2,x2)x3)...);.
Proof. Suppose first that G is free on X and JXJ = r. For c c C(L)\{O} there exists
I g c G such that c = (g) and, since <g) is infinite cyclic, [c/O] ^ L((g)) is
infinite. Thus (43) holds. Let (a), <h> E C(L) such that (a) u 0 C(L) and sup-
pose that (d) E <a> o (b). Then, by (16) and 7.1.7, <a> n = 1 and d = a)b"
where i . , p c { + 1 , - I. If <d) n (a) o 1, then, again by (16), a would centralize d
and hence also b; but this would contradict (17). Thus <d> n <a> = 1, similarly
<d> n = I and so (44) holds. Finally, by 7.1.11 there exists a basic system E of
L; let a: G - 1(E) be the isomorphism given in 7.1.11(b) and let S = { <x)Ix E X}.
Then BSI = r and U S = <xIx E X) = G = U L. Suppose that b;, a;, x; are as in (45).
Then b. _ <x;) for some x; E X, a; = <y;) where 1 y; E (x;), and a; E K(a;, E) _
{y (y; ')}, by 7.1.11; thus there exists k; E 7L\{0} such that x; = (xi ). As E
satisfies (11), the only complex contained in (... ((x, 22)x3)... ); is x, * *;; and
` ` = k.... xka 1 since G is free on X and x x for

all i. Thus a, * * as 0 1 = E and (45) holds.
Conversely, suppose that G is a group whose subgroup lattice L satisfies (43)-(45)
and let E and S be as in (45). By (43), G is torsion-free and (44) implies that
g-' xg x-' for all g, x e G such that x 1. Indeed, if x, g c G such that
g-' xg = x-' 1, then <x, g> would be nonabelian and hence, in particular,
<x) u <g> 0 C(L) and g 0 1; by (2), <xg> e <x) o <g> but g-'xg = x-' would imply
I * gZ = (xg)z E <xg> n <g>, contradicting (44). Thus G satisfies the assumptions
of 7.1.3(b) and 7.1.5. It follows that there exists the complex x(a, E) defined in 7.1.3
and that x(ab, E) E x(a, E)x(b, E) for all a, b e G. A trivial induction yields that for
a,,...,a.EG,
(46) x(a, ... as, E) e (... ((x(a,, E)x(a2, E))x(a3, E))...)x(a., E).
We want to prove that G is free on X where we obtain X by choosing from every
subgroup <x> E S one of its generators. For this we have to show (see Robinson
[1982], p. 47) that every element of G can be written uniquely as a product of powers
of the x; e X. Since U S = U L = G, the set X generates G. If there were an element
that could be written in two different ways, there would exist s c N, x; E X
(i = I__ , s) with x; # xi+, for all i and k; E 7L\{0} such that 1 = x; ... xs=. If
b. = <xi> E S, ai = <x;`z> < <bi> and a, = x(xk-, E) E K(ai, E), then (46) implies that
E = x(1, E) = x(x;, ... xs=, E) E (... ((a, a2)a3)...)as and this contradicts (45). Thus G
is free onXandlXJ=r.
7.1.13 Theorem (Yakovlev [1974]). Let r > 2 be a cardinal number. The lattice L is
isomorphic to the subgroup lattice of a free group of rank r if and only if L is complete,
any of its elements is the join of cyclic elements and L has the properties (43)-(45)
where the basic system E in addition satisfies (8)-(13).
Proof. If L has these properties, then by 7.1.6 there exists a group G such that
L L(G); and, since L(G) satisfies (43)-(45), G is free of rank r, by 7.1.12.
Conversely, if L = L(G) and G is free of rank r, then L is complete, any element of
L is the join of cyclic elements and, by 7.1.12, L has the properties (43)-(45). By (b)
of 7.1.11, the basic system E in (45) satisfies (8)-(13).
Characterization of subgroup lattices
To characterize those lattices which are isomorphic to the subgroup lattice of an

arbitrary group, we have to identify the normal subgroups in the subgroup lattice of
a free group. To do this, we describe conjugation by elements.
7.1.14 Definition. If L is a lattice and x, y c- C(L), we define
yTx=
7.1.15 Lemma. If G is a 2 -free group and a, b e G such that a # 1 j4 b and
<a> n = 1, then T (a> = { <ba>, }.
7.1 Free groups 357
Proof. By 7.1.7, <a> o = { <a"b"> 1, v c- I} where I = { + 1, -1 } and, since

<a, b> is free on {a, b}, we have <a"b"> n <a> = 1 for all p, v c- 1. Thus, again by
7.1.7,
(47) (<a> o ) -<a>= {<(a"b")'a">Ip,v,i.,w c I}.

By (1), <a> -(a>= {<ak>Ik e Z} and therefore 7.1.7 and (1), in the case k = 0, yield
that
(48) (<a> o <a>) o _ {<akb'>Ik c 71,1 E I}.
Now <(a"b')-' a"> = <b-"a-"+A> = <a"-' b"> and hence (47) and (48) show that
an element <c> E C(L(G)) is contained in (<a> o ) o <a> and not contained in
(<a> o <a>) o if and only if
(49) <c> _ <a"b"a"> where p, i, v c 1.
By (48), <a> o ( o ) = { <a'bk> I, E I, k e 7l} and hence every element of
(<a> o ( o )) o <a> is of the form <(a'bk)Iab> where ,, f, 6c I, kEZ. So if
p = ;! in (49), then <c2> = <a"b"a2b"al> 0 (<a> o ( o )) o <c>; since, how-
ever, <c2> E <c> o <c>, it follows that <c> o <c> (<a> o ( o )) o <a>. On the
other hand, if p = then <c> = <a"b'a-"> = " and, by (1),
<c> o <c> = [<c>l1] c {<a'b"a '>Ii c I,n c 7l} 9 (<a> o ( o )) o <a>.
This shows that <c> E T <a> if and only if u that is, if and only if <c> =
<ba> or <c> = .
An immediate consequence of 7.1.15 is the following description of normal sub-

groups in a 2-free group.
7.1.16 Lemma. Let G be a 2 -free group and let N < G. Then N g G if and only if
 T <a> c [N/1] for all a c G, b c N such that a I b and <a> n = 1.
Proof. If N g G and a E G, b c- N such that a 1 b and <a> n <b) = 1, then by

7.1.15, T <a> (b>, <b-'>} [N/I]. Conversely, suppose that this condition
holds and let a c- G, b E N. If <a, b> is abelian, then clearly b = b c- N. And if <a, b>
is not abelian, then a 1 0 b and, by (16), <a> n = 1; the assumption and 7.1.15
yield that E T <a> c [N/1] and hence b E N. Thus N a G.
We can now give the desired characterization of subgroup lattices.
7.1.17 Theorem (Yakovlev [1974]). The lattice L is isomorphic to the subgroup lat-
tice of some group if and only if there exist a lattice L* and an element d E L* with the
following properties.
(50) L* is a complete lattice in which every element is the join of cyclic elements;
furthermore, L* satisfies (43)-(45) for some cardinal number r > 2 where for
the basic system E in addition (8)-(13) hold.
(51) If a, be C(L*)`,,{O} such that an b = 0 and b< d, then b T a c [d/O].

(52) L [I*/d] where 1* is the greatest element of L*.
Proof. If L L(G) for some group G, then there exist a cardinal number r > 2, a
free group F of rank r, and a normal subgroup N of F such that G F/N. Thus, if
L* = L(F) and d = N, then L [I*/d] and (50) and (51) hold by 7.1.13 and 7.1.16.
Conversely, suppose that L* and d e L* satisfy (50)-(52). Then by 7.1.13 there
exists a free group F of rank r such that L(F) L*; let N be the image of d under
this isomorphism. By (51) and 7.1.16, N a F and (52) implies that L L(F/N).
Using similar ideas, Scoppola [1981], [1985] characterizes the subgroup lattices
of torsion-free abelian groups of rank at least 2 and of abelian groups containing
two independent elements of infinite order.
Projectivities of free groups
The results proved so far show at once that a free group is determined by its sub-
group lattice. Indeed, if G is free of rank r > 2 and cp is a projectivity from G to a
group G, then L(G) inherits the properties (43)-(45) from L(G); by 7.1.12, G is free of
rank r and hence G G. It is also not difficult to show that cp is induced by an
isomorphism from G onto G. We prove this, more generally, for 2-free groups.
7.1.18 Theorem (Yakovlev [1974]). Every projectivity of a 2 -free group is induced by

a unique isomorphism.
Progf. Let G be a 2-free group and let cp be a projectivity from G to a group G.

For u, v c G, there exist x, y e G such that <x> = and (y> = (v) and then
(x, y> 0 = (x)1 u (y)`0 = (u, v>. Since G is 2-free, (x, y> is free and, by 7.1.12 or
1.2.5, <u, v> is free. Thus G is 2-free.
By 7.1.11 there exists a basic system E = (ell , ... , en,,,) of L(G) and the map
a: G -- .X''(E) defined by x' = r(x, E) for x e G is an isomorphism from G onto
(.K'(E), *). Then Definition 7.1.10 shows that E _ (e`1, , ... , e) is a basic system of
L(G) and (b) of 7.1.11 implies that the map r: G _f(E) defined by u` = x(u, E) is an
isomorphism from G onto (Jf''(E), *).
We extend cp in the usual way to subsets I of L(G), that is, define X' _
{XÌX e X}. Since cp is an isomorphism from L(G) onto L(G),
(53) (a o h)" = all o b` for all a, b e C = C(L(G)).
For an a-complex x = (A,,,..., e if(E), we define x = (A'1...., A" ). Then
7.1.2 shows that A is a 2-element subset of (e;, o a)` = eV o a* and that (4) holds for
the A? and e9?. Thus a is an a`l-complex with respect to E, that is,
(54) 2 E K(a , E) if x e K(a, E), a e C.
Thus p defines a map from -'''E) into 7f(E). The inverse map is defined in exactly
the same way, using cp-' instead of cp, so that p is bijective. If x, fi e Af(E), then
7.1 Free groups 359
6 = x * fi is the unique complex for which there exist a, b, d e C satisfying (5)-(7). By

(53) and (54), the images xP, (3P, 6P and all, b", d` also satisfy (5)-(7), that is, (a * fl )P =
d E aPf3P = {aP * 13P}. Thus (a * #)P = aP * 13P and p is an isomorphism. It follows
that = elpt ' is an isomorphism from G onto G. Now 7.1.11 and (54) show that for
x e G and <x> = <u),
C x 1}P = {Za (x-1)6 }Pi = K(<x>,E)Pr' = K(,E)L-' = {u,u-'}.
{
This implies that <x> = = <x>11, that is, cp and coincide on the cyclic and
hence on all subgroups of G. Thus cp is induced by M. By 1.5.8 and 1.4.2, Pot G = 1
and so is the unique isomorphism inducing cp.
As a corollary to Yakovlev's theorem we get a classical result of Sadovskii's.
7.1.19 Theorem (Sadovskii [1941]). Every nonabelian locally free group is strongly
Proof. Let G be a nonabelian locally free group and cp be a projectivity from G to a

group G. Let .q' be the set of all nonabelian finitely generated subgroups of G.
Clearly, every element of G is contained in some X E 9; and if X, Y E So, then
Z = <X, Y> is finitely generated and hence lies in Y. Thus St is a local system of
subgroups of G. Every X E .91 is a nonabelian free group and so, by 7.1.18, the
projectivity induced by cp in X is induced by a unique group-isomorphism. By 1.3.6,
cp is induced by an isomorphism from G onto G.
Free products
It was shown by Sadovskii [1947] that every group decomposable into a nontrivial
free product is determined by its subgroup lattice; but he left open the question
whether, in this case, every projectivity is induced by an isomorphism. This problem
was solved independently by Arshinov [1970a] and Holmes [1969] who proved that
every nontrivial free product is strongly determined by its subgroup lattice. Holmes,
in addition, studied free products with amalgamation. We give his main result with-
out proof.
7.1.20 Theorem (Holmes [1969]). Let G be the free product of the groups A and B
with amalgamated subgroup C = A n B where A :A1 C 0 Band suppose that IA : Cl > 2
or IB : Cl > 2. Let cp be a projectivity from G to a group G.
(a) If CaG,then 6^fG.
(b) If C < Z(G), then cp is induced by a unique group-isomorphism.
Another generalization of Sadovskii's theorem was given by Yakovlev. He studied

groups with a set X of generators such that every projectivity of a subgroup of the
form <x1,x2,x3> (x, E X, x1 # x2 -A x3 x1) is induced by a unique isomorphism.
He was able to show that, under slight additional assumptions, such a group is
determined by its subgroup lattice. As a corollary, he obtained the following result.
7.1.21 Theorem (Yakovlev [1986]). Assume that the group G has a presentation with
generators x1, ..., x and a single defining relation w = 1. If w is cyclically reduced
and contains at least three distinct generating elements, then G is determined by its
subgroup lattice.
7.2 Torsion-free nilpotent groups
Another important class of groups which are strongly determined by their subgroup
lattices is the class of nonabelian torsion-free locally nilpotent groups. We prove this
result, due to Sadovskii, using an unpublished manuscript of G.E. Wall's. First we
give a simple lattice-theoretic characterization for this class of groups.
Lattice-theoretic characterization
A group G is nilpotent if and only if it has a central series. And since a subgroup H
of G is central if and only if H u (.x> is abelian for every x c G, we can try to use the
obvious description of cyclic and abelian groups to identify central subgroups and
central series in L(G).
7.2.1 Definition. Let L be a complete lattice, 0 its least and I its greatest element,
and let C(L) be the set of cyclic elements of L as defined in 7.1.1.
(a) The element a e L is modularly embedded in L if and only if [a v c/0] is a
modular lattice for all c c C(L).
(b) A modular chain (of length t) in L is a finite chain 0 = ao < < a, = I such
that is modularly embedded in [I/a;] for all i = 0, ..., t - 1.
7.2.2 Lemma. Let G be a torsion-free group and H < G. Then H is modularly em-
bedded in L(G) if and only if H < Z(G).
Proof First suppose that H is modularly embedded in L(G) and let x e G. Then
L(H u (x>) -_ [H v (.x>, l] is modular and, since G is torsion-free, 2.4.9 shows that
H u <x> is abelian. Thus H < Z(G). Conversely, if H < Z(G) and X is a cyclic
element in L(G), then X is a cyclic group and hence H u X is abelian. Thus
[H u X,`1] is modular and H is modularly embedded in G.
Of course, a group G is torsion-free if and only if [X/1] is infinite for every

X E L(G) such that X 0 1. Therefore to characterize the class of torsion-free
nilpotent groups, we only have to tell when a torsion-free group is nilpotent. For
this, let us call an element a of a complete lattice L isolated if a n c = 0 or a n c = c
whenever c e C(L). Then a subgroup H of a torsion-free group G is isolated in L(G)
if and only if o(x, H) is infinite for every x e G\H, and a normal subgroup N of G is
isolated in L(G) if and only if G/ N is torsion-free. It is well-known (see Robinson
7.2 Torsion-free nilpotent groups 361
[1982], p. 133) that for a torsion-free nilpotent group G and every n E N,

(1) is torsion-free;
thus these iterated centres are isolated elements of L(G).
7.2.3 Theorem (Kontorovic and Plotkin [1954]). Let G be a torsion free group.
Then G is nilpotent (of class at most c) if and only if L(G) possesses a modular chain
(qf length c) consisting of isolated elements.
Proof: If G is nilpotent, then the ascending central series of G is a modular chain

in L(G) and, by (1), every ZJG) is isolated in L(G). Conversely, suppose that
1 = Ho < . < H, = G is a modular chain in L(G) consisting of isolated elements H;.
We use induction on c to show that G is nilpotent of class at most c. By 7.2.2,
H = H, < Z(G). Thus if c = 1, G = H is abelian and we are done. So let c > 2 and
assume that the assertion is true for c - 1. Since H is isolated in L(G), the group G/H
is torsion-free and 1 = H, /H < < HC/H = G/H is a modular chain of length
c - I in L(G/H) consisting of isolated elements. By induction, G!H is nilpotent of
class at most c - I and hence G is nilpotent of class at most c.
gyp-mappings
In the remainder of this section we show that every projectivity cp of a nonabelian

torsion-free nilpotent group G is induced by a group-isomorphism. Basic for the
proof of this result is the notion of a (p-mapping, that is, an element map x: G --> G
such that
(2) H`0=H'={x'jxeH}forallH<G,and
(3) xIA is an isomorphism for every abelian subgroup A of G.
By (2), G2 = G`0 = G so that x is surjective. And for x, y e G, (2) and (3) imply that x'
generates <x>4'; so if x' = y', then <x>4' = <y>" and (3) yields that x = y. Thus
(4) every (p-mapping is bijective.
We use Theorem 2.6.10 to show that cp-mappings exist. First of all we note that cp is
normalizer preserving.
7.2.4 Lemma. Every projectivity of a torsion free locally nilpotent group is normal-
izer preserving.
Proof. Let G be a torsion-free locally nilpotent group and let cp be a projectivity

from G to a group G. By 5.6.5, we have to show that (H')` = (H")' for every 2-
generator subgroup H of G. Since G is locally nilpotent, H is nilpotent of class c, say.
By 7.2.2, Z(H)`0 = Z(H11) and, since H/Z(H) is torsion-free, a trivial induction yields
that Z.(H)4 = Z;(H10) for i = 1, ..., c. In particular, H4' is nilpotent of class c (see also
Theorem 7.2.3).
Now if H is abelian, then H` is also abelian and (H')4' = I = (H)'. If H is non-

abelian, then H/Zc_2(H) is also nonabelian and so H/Zt_1(H) is not cyclic. On the
other hand, H/Zc_1(H) is a homomorphic image of the abelian 2-generator group
H/H'. By the structure of finitely generated abelian groups there exist generators x,
y of H/H' such that Zc_1(H)/H' = <x',y'> where i, j c Z. Since H/Z,(H) is torsion-
free and not cyclic, it follows that H' = Zc_1(H). Similarly, (H4')' = Z,_1(H4') and
hence (H')4' = (H`')', as required.
7.2.5 Lemma. Let G be a torsion free nilpotent group which is not locally cyclic and
let (p be a projectivity from G to a group G.
(a) There exist exactly two cp-mappings 21 and 22; for all x c G, x'2 = (x")-1.
(b) If 1 H < G and 0 is the projectivity induced by cp in H, there exist exactly
two 0-mappings and these are a,IH and 0(2IH.
Proof. (a) By Zorn's Lemma, every abelian subgroup A : 1 of G is contained in a

maximal abelian subgroup M of G. We claim that M contains two independent
elements of infinite order. This is clear if M = G; for, in this case, by assumption, M
has a finitely generated noncyclic subgroup. And if M G, then Z(G) < M and
M/Z(G) is torsion-free; hence if I z e Z(G) and x c M\Z(G), then <x> n <z> = 1.
By 2.6.10, (p is induced by an isomorphism on M and therefore also on A. Then 1.5.7
shows that
(5) (p is induced on A by exactly two isomorphisms a and d and a' = (a6)-1 for all
aEA.
Let (I: Z(G) -' Z(G)4' be one of these two isomorphisms for A = Z(G). For every
x e G, the subgroup A, = <x, Z(G) > is abelian and hence there is a unique isomor-
phism ax: Ax -+ A4' inducing (p on Ax whose restriction to Z(G) is f3. Let x: G - G be
defined by x' = x'x for x e G. We want to show that a is a (p-mapping. For this
suppose that A and M are as before. Then Z(G) < M and by (5) there exists a unique
isomorphism ;,: M - MP inducing cp on M such that ; IZ(G) If a E A, then xa =
and hence a' = a'. Thus 2IA = IIA is an isomorphism and (3) holds. The same
argument applied to A = A. shows that <x>' = <x)' = <x>" for x c G. It follows
that (2) is satisfied and x is a (p-mapping.
So if fl, and #2 are the isomorphisms inducing 9 on Z(G), we obtain two cp-
mappings 21 and 22 such that 2i'Z(G) _ (3.. If x is any 9-mapping, then cp is induced
on Z(G) by the isomorphism 2l,(,) and it follows from (5) that 21z(a) = A for some i.
Since cp is induced on A. by the isomorphisms ocIAx and aiIA, whose restrictions to
Z(G) both are /3;, it follows that cIA. = 2;IAx and hence x' = x''. This holds for all
.x E G and so x = x,. Thus 21 and x2 are the only (p-mappings and, since 21IAx
and x2IAx are different isomorphisms inducing cp on A, again (5) yields that x'2 _
(x2 )-1
(b) It is clear that the restriction of a (p-mapping to H is a /i-mapping and, by (a),
)tl I II : x2IH. If H is abelian, then (3) implies that the -mappings are just the isomor-
phisms inducing ,Li and, by 1.5.7, H has at most two such isomorphisms. If H is
nonabelian, then by (a), there are exactly two 0-mappings. In both cases, it follows
that xlIH and 11 1H are all the 4-mappings.
Our aim is to show that one of the two cp-mappings constructed in the above
lemma is an isomorphism; the other will then be an anti-isomorphism, that is, will
satisfy (xy)' = y'x' for all x, y e G. We use induction on the class of G to prove this
and first settle the basis for this induction.
Nilpotent groups of class 2
We remind the reader that a torsion-free nilpotent group G is an R-group (see

Kurosh [1956], p. 247) so that for all x, y e G:
(6) If x' = y' for some m c 7Z\{0}, then x = y.
(7) If there exist m, n e ZL\{0} such that xm'y" = y"x', then xy = yx.
Furthermore, if H = <x, y> has class 2, then <[x, y] > < H' < Z(H); and if
x'y'[x, y]k e Z(H), then y' E CH(x) and (7) implies that j = 0. Similarly i = 0 and it
follows that
(8) H' = < [x, y] > = Z(H).
7.2.6 Theorem (Pekelis and Sadovskii [1963]). Let G he atorsion-free nilpotent

group of class 2 and let (p be a projectivity from G to a group G. Then one of the two
(p-mappings (see 7.2.5) is an isomorphism, the other is an anti-isomorphism.
Proof. Let x be one of the two cp-mappings and let a, b e G. Then by (3),
(9) (ah)' = a'h' if ab = ba;
in particular,
(10) (a")' = (a')" for all n e Z.
Now suppose that ah -A ba and let H = <a, b>. By (8), H' = < [b, a] > = Z(H) and,
since (p is normalizer preserving and induced by a,
(11) <[b,a]3> = Z(H)4 = Z(H4') = (H')' = <[b',a']>.
Since H/Z(H) is not cyclic, 2.6.10 yields that the projectivity induced by (P in H/Z(H)
is induced by an isomorphism. On the other hand, (p is induced by x and it follows
that there exist E, 6 e { + 1, - 1) and zl E Z(H4') such that (ab)' = (a')`(b')azl. We put
x = (a')' and y = (b')' so that H` = <x,y> and Z(H`) = (H`0)' _ <[y,x]>. If we
further put c = [b, a] and z = [y,x], then by (11), <c'> = Z(HP) <z> and so
(12) c'=z" where ve{+1,-1},c=[b, a], z=[y,x];
in addition there exists r c 7L such that zl = z' and hence
(13) (ab)'=xyz'where rci,x=(a')`,y=(b')aande,6c{+1,-1}.
By (3), (abc)' _ (ab)'c' and therefore
(14) (ba)' _ (abc)' = yxzr+v-1
For n e N, we put H. _ <a", b"> and compute (a"bn)a in two different ways. By
(10), Hn = <(a")a,(b")"> _ <xn,yn>. By (10) and (13), ((ab)")a = ((ab)")" = (xY)"z'" _
xny"z2 where z2 E Z(H"). Since anb" _ (ab)"c1 with c1 E Z(H), (9) implies that
(a"b")a = ((ab)")acj = x"y"Z2C1 = X"y"Z3 where Z3 = Z2Ci e Z(H"). Now Z3 =
y-"x-"(a"b")a E H. and hence z3 e Z(H") n Z(H,','). By (7), H. is not abelian
and therefore Z(H") = (Hn )' = <[y",x"]>, by (11). It follows that there exists k" E 77
such that z3 = [y", x"]k^ = [y x]"2k^ = z"2k^ Thus, finally,
x"Y"zn2k"
(15) (a"b")' =
On the other hand, since (a"-'bn-')ba = a"-'b "a = a"b"[b",a] = a"b"c" and
ba(a"-' b' -') = ba"b"-' = a"b [b, a"] b"-' = anb"c", the elements ba and an'b"-'
commute. Therefore (9) and (10) imply that
(16) (anbn)a(ca)" = (anbncn)a = (an-Ibn-Iba)a = (an-Ibn-I)a(ba)a.
Suppose first that v = 1 in (12), that is, c' = z. Then by induction we obtain that
(17) (a"b")a = x"y"z"' for all n E N.
Indeed, this is (13) if n = 1; and if (17) holds for n - 1, then (16) and (14) yield
(anbnT azn = (an-' bn-I)a(ba)a = x"-Iyn-1 Z(n-1)ryxZr = xnynZnZnr
ll 1 ,
as required. Now (15) and (17) imply that n2k" = nr and hence nk" = r for all n e N.
For n > Irl, however, this can only hold if kn = 0 = r. Then (13) and (14) yield that
(18) (ab)' = xy and (ba)a = (abc)a = xyz = yx.
Now suppose that v = - I in (12), that is, c' = z-'. Then we similarly obtain that
(19) (anbn)2 = xnyn.n(r+n-1).
Indeed, this again is (13) if n = 1; and if (19) holds for n - 1, then (16) and (14) yield
(anbnT 8z = (an-Ibn-I)2(ba)a = xn-Iyn-1Z(n-I)(r+n-2)yxZr-2
l = xnynZI,(n-111)(r+n-2)+r-2
and this implies (19). Now (15) and (19) imply that nkn = r + n - 1 and hence
n(k" - 1) = r - I for all n E N; this yields r - 1 = 0. By (13) and (14),
(20) (ab)2 = xyz = yx and (ba)a = (abc)a = xy.
Now (18) and (20) show that either (ab)a = xy = (aa)`(ba)a or (ab)a = yx = (ba)a(a2Y
and we want to prove that in both cases, e = S = 1. Since (18) and (20) are
symmetric in a and b, it suffices to show that e = 1. For this, we study
(abc)a = ((ac)b)a and use our results with a, b replaced by ac, b. Then there exist
i., p E + 1, -1 } such that either (acb)a = ((ac)")Z(b2)" = (a'))(ba)"(ca)" or (acb)2 =
(b2)"(a2)A(c2)" = (aa)'(ba)"[(ba)",(aa) ](ca)". Again suppose first that v = 1 in (12).
Then by (18), (abc)a = xyz = (aa)`(b')aca and therefore
(a2)`(ha)aca = (aa)A(b")"(c')` or (aa)`(ba)c2 = (a") (ba)"C(ba)",(aa)~J(ca)"

Since every element of H` can be written uniquely in the form (a')'(b')`w with s, t E 77
and w e Z(H`), the first equation implies that e = i = 1 and the second that e = i,
b = p and z = ca = [(b')a,(a')'](c')E = [y,x]zf = z'+E a contradiction. Thus e = 1
in this case. And if v = - 1, (20) yields that (abc)' = xy = (a')E(b')a and hence
(a')E(b')a = (a')"(b')"(c')" or (aa)E(ba)s = (aa)z(b")"[(ba) (aa)i.](ca)d
This time the first equation leads to a contradiction and the second implies that
e = i., S = p and 1 = [(b')b, (a')E] (c')E = [y, x] z-E = z' -E. Again it follows that c =
1. Thus we have shown that e = S = 1 so that (18) and (20) yield the following result.
(21) Either (ab)' = a'b' and (ba)' = b'a' or (ab)2 = b'a' and (ba)' = a'b'.
By (9), this also holds if ab = ba and hence for all a, b e G. In the remainder of the
proof we shall show that (21) and (9) imply that for all a, b E G, either (ab)' = a'b',
that is, x is an isomorphism, or (ab)' = b'a', that is, x is an anti-isomorphism. By
7.2.5, the other (p-mapping will then be an anti-isomorphism or an isomorphism,
respectively. First of all, (21) implies that (aba)2 e{a'b'a',(a')2b',b'(a')2} and
{a2 b, bat } = 1(a ')2 b', b'(a')2 }. By (4), x is bijective and it follows that
(22) (aba)' = a'b'a' for all a, b e G.
Now suppose, for a contradiction, that a is neither an isomorphism nor an anti-
isomorphism. We then claim that there exist elements u, v, w E G such that
(23) (uv)' = u'v' # v'u', (uw)' = w'u' # Ow', and w'u'v' = vauaw'.
To prove this, we first show that the sets R = {a a G(ag)' = a'g' for all g E G} and
S = {a e G(ag)' = g'a' for all g e G} are subgroups of G. For this let g E G and take
a, b e R. Then (abg)' = a'(bg)' = a'b'g' = (ab)'g' and hence ab e R; furthermore,
by (10), (ga-' )' = ((ag-' )')-' = (a'(g-' )')-' = g'(a-' )' and then (21) shows that
(a-'g)' = (a-')'g that is, a' E R. If a, b e S, then (abg)' = (bg)'a' = g'b'a' =
g'(ab)' and hence ab e S; furthermore, (ga-')' = ((ag-')')-' = ((g')-'a')-' =
(a-')'g' and then (a-' g)' = g'(a-' )', that is, a-' E S. Thus R and S are subgroups of
G. If R = G, x would be an isomorphism; if S = G, a would be an anti-isomorphism.
Thus our assumption implies that R G : S and, since a group cannot be the
set-theoretic union of two proper subgroups, there exists u E G such that u 0 R and
u S. Let
V={gEGl(ug)'=u'g':g'u'} and W={gEGl(ug)'=g'u'#u'g'}.

Now V 0 since u S, and W : 0 since u R; further, an element q e G that does
not lie in V or in W satisfies u'g' = g'u', hence (ug)' = (gu)' and therefore ug = gu.
Thus G is the disjoint union of CG(u), V, and W. So if vw = wv for all v E V, w E W, we
could choose v c- V and investigate the three possibilities for uv. From uv E CG(u)
it would follow that v c- CG(u), a contradiction. Also uv e V would imply that
u = uvv-' E <V> 5 CGW) and hence uw = wu, again a contradiction. It would
follow that uv c- W so that, by (22), (uuv)' = (uv)au' = u'v'U' = (uvu)'; since x is bijec-
tive, this would imply that uv = vu, a final contradiction. Thus there exist v e V,
w c W such that vw # wv, and we claim that the three elements u, v, w satisfy (23).
The first two equations are clear since v c- V and w e W. To prove the third,
we compute (vuw)'. By (21), (v(uw))2 E {v'(uw)',(uw)2v'} _ {v'w'U',w'U'v'} and
((VU)V%,)' E {(VU)2W2, w'(vu)'} = {v'U'w2, W'v'u2}. Since vw wv, we have v'w'u2
w'v'u2, again by (21); similarly, v'w'u' # v'u2w' and w'u'v' # w'v'u'. It follows
that w'u'v' = (vuw)' = v2u'w2 and this proves (23).
We now take u, v, w e G satisfying (23) and study (uvuw)2. By (21) and (22),
((uvu)w)' E {U 2v'U'W', w'u'v'u'} and ((uv)(uw))' e {u'v2w'u2, W'u'u'v'}.
However, as before, u'v'u'w' 0- u2v'w'u' and w'u'v'u' w'u'u'v' and, by (23),

u2v'u'w' = u'w'u'v' w'u2u'v2 and w'u'v'u' = v'u'w'u2 0 u2v'w2u'. This is a
contradiction. Thus or is an isomorphism or an anti-isomorphism.
Finitely generated nilpotent groups
Before we carry out the induction announced above, we remind the reader of some
further properties of a torsion-free nilpotent group G of class c > 2. As for regular
p-groups, the commutator collecting process yields that for all primes p > c and
iE N,
(24) GP' = <xP'lx e G> _ {xP'lx c- G} and
(25) K.(GP) < K;(G)P
If Li(G)/Ki(G) is the torsion subgroup of G/Ki(G), then
(26) G = L, (G) > L2(G) > . . > LA(G) > LC+, (G) = I is a central series.
.
Indeed, if Z./L1(G) = Z(G/Li(G)), then by (1), G/Zi is torsion-free and, since

[K1_1(G),G] = K;(G) < Li(G), it follows that Ki_1(G) < Zi and then Li_,(G) < Zi.
Thus G = L 1(G) > . . > Lc+, (G) = I is a central series and c(G) = c implies that
.
L;(G) > Li+1(G) for i = 1, ..., c.

In the sequel we shall mainly study torsion-free nilpotent groups which are finitely
generated. It is well-known (see Robinson [1982], p. 132) that for such a group G,
(27) L(G) satisfies the maximal condition
and hence, in particular, every subgroup is finitely generated. Furthermore
(28) n G" = I for every infinite subset I of N.
n E I
Indeed, every x c n G" is contained in n H" where H = <g c Gjg' = x for some
nE! nEI
m e Z {0} >; by (7) and (27), H is a finitely generated torsion-free abelian group and
hence n H" = 1.
nEI
Finally, if G = <x, y> is generated by two elements, then G/ZZ_, (G) is a torsion-
free abelian group of rank 2 and hence also
(29) GIG' = <xG', yG'> is torsion-free of rank 2.
Moreover, G' = K2(G) = <[x, y], K3(G)> (see Huppert [1967], p. 258) and if the
cyclic group G'/K3(G) were finite, it would follow that L3(G) > G' = L,(G), contra-
dicting (26). Thus G/G' and G'/K3(G) are torsion-free and hence also
(30) G/K3(G) is torsion-free.
7.2.7 Theorem. Let G be a finitely generated torsion free nilpotent group, cp a

projectivity from G to a group G and x a cp-mapping. Then x is an isomorphism or an
anti-isomorphism.
The proof of this theorem is long and technical; it will be given in the next three
lemmas. We use induction on the class c of G. If G is abelian, then by (3), x is an
isomorphism; if c = 2, Theorem 7.2.6 yields the assertion. So we assume in the sequel
that G, cp, x are as in the theorem, that
(31) c > 3
and that the assertion is true for groups of smaller class. By 7.2.4, cp is normalizer
preserving. Therefore 5.6.2 and a trivial induction yield that for all H < G and i E N,
(32) K;(H)l = K;(H`0) and hence L;(H)' = Li(HP).
Furthermore, if K < Z(H), then cp induces a projectivity 0 in H/K and a induces a
map x*: H/K -+ H"/K" defined by (xK)a' = x1K`0 for x e H. Clearly, x* induces the
projectivity iii. And if K < A < H such that A/K is abelian, then c(A) < 2 and, by
7.2.5, x'A is a p-mapping where p is the projectivity induced by cp in A. By 7.2.6 or
(3), xIA is an isomorphism or an anti-isomorphism and hence the map induced by x
or x* in the abelian group A/K is an isomorphism. Thus (3) holds for x* and 2* is a
0-mapping. By (27), H/K is finitely generated so that our inductive hypothesis yields
the following.
(33) If H < G, K < Z(H) and H/K is torsion-free and of class c(H/K) < c, then 2
induces an isomorphism or an anti-isomorphism in H/K.
For every H < G, we write H = H/L,(H) and apply (33) to this group. By (26),
LJH) < Z(H) and H/L,(H) is torsion-free of class c(H) < c. Thus by (33),
(34) x induces an isomorphism or an anti-isomorphism in H = H,'LC(H).
7.2.8 Lemma. Let y, a e G, H = < y, a> and K = <y', (ysa)` > where r, s, t E Z. ff 2
induces an isomorphism in G but not in K, then [y, a] E L,(G), c(H) = 2 and )'I H is an
anti-isomorphism.
Proof. By assumption and (34), x induces in G/L,(G) an isomorphism and in

K/L,(K) an anti-isomorphism which is not an isomorphism. In particular, K is not
cyclic and hence r : 0 # t. Since LJK) < L,(G) n K < K, we see that x induces in
K/(L,(G) n K) an isomorphism and an anti-isomorphism. It follows that this group
is abelian and hence [y', (ysa)`] E LA(G). Since G/L,(G) is torsion-free, (7) then implies
that [y, ysa] E LA(G) and so, finally, L y, a] E LA(G) < Z(G). Thus c(H) < 2. Since x
does not induce an isomorphism in k, it follows that '7CIH is not an isomorphism. By
(33), xIH is an anti-isomorphism and H is not abelian.
Let 1: G , G be defined by x' = x-' for x c G. By 7.2.5 and (34), one of the two
cp-mappings a and ai induces an isomorphism in G, the other an anti-isomorphism
which is not an isomorphism since c(G) = c - 1 > 2. We choose the map inducing
an isomorphism and come to the main step in the proof of Theorem 7.2.7.
7.2.9 Lemma. Let a he the cp-mapping inducing an isomorphism in G' and suppose that
G = N <x> where N g G and aI N is an isomorphism or an anti-isomorphism. Then a is
an isomorphism from G onto G.
Proof. Let t c 1 and a, b c N. Since x induces an isomorphism in G = G/L,(G), there

exist elements h,(a) and f(b, a) in L,(G) < Z(G) such that
(35) (xà)x = (xa)àah,(a)a and
(36) (aa)lxb)' = (axb)2f(b, a)a.
We first show in several steps that the lemma will be proved if we can show that
f(l,a) = I for all a E N.
(a) If the assumptions of the lemma imply that f(l,a) = I for all a c N, then
f(h, a) = 1 for all a, b c- N.
Proof. Let b e N. Then G = N<xb> and the assumptions of the lemma also hold
with x replaced by xb. So if these assumptions imply that f(l, a) = I for all a E N,
this will also be true for the function f *: N x N -* L,(G) defined via (36) for xb
instead of x. This means that (a2)(xb)' = (axb)f*(1 a)' = (axb)' and thus f(h,a) = 1.
Since h e N was arbitrary, (a) holds.
(b) If f(b, a) = 1 for all a, b e N, then aIN is an isomorphism.
Proof. For a, b c N, (35) and (36) together with f(h,a) = f(l,a) = 1 and hl(b)' E Z(G)
imply that
(axb)a = (aa))xb)' = (aa)x'b'h,(b)'

= ((aa)x)bl = ((ax)a)b3
If alN is an isomorphism, we are done. And if IN is an anti-isomorphism, then

(axb)a = (h-' axh)a = ha(ax)a(ha)-' = ((ax)a)'b'1 '. For arbitrary g, y e G,
(37) (gY)' = (ga)Y = (ga)(Y) implies that gY = g.

Indeed, this assumption yields [(ya)z, ga] = 1 so that, by (7), [y', g'] = 1; thus g2 =
(g')Y' = (gY)' and, since a is bijective, gY = g.
Now (37) applied with g = a' and y = h yields that [ax, h] = I and, since a and
h are arbitrary elements of N, it follows that N is abelian. But then the anti-
isomorphism IN is also an isomorphism and (b) holds.
(c) If f(l,a) = I for all a c N, then (a'')' = (a')'x')` for all a e N, t e Z.

Proof. By (36), (a')x' = (ax)' and hence ax = a'x''-' for all a e N. It follows that
ax' = a2(x')12 ' for all t e 7L and this yields (c).
(d) If f(b, a) = 1 = h,(a) for all a, b e N and t e 71, then x is an isomorphism.
Proof. For a, b e N and s, t e 7L, (35), (b), and (c) imply that
(xsax'b)a = (xs+fax'b)a
= (x2)s+((a`b)a =
(xa)s+r(ax')aba
= (xa)s+`(aa)(x')^ba = (xs)sas(xs)`ba
= (xsa)'(x`b)'.
Thus a is multiplicative and hence an isomorphism.
(e) Iff(b,a)=I for all a,bEN,then h,(a)=I for all aENandtE7L.

Proof. Let t e 7L and a E N. We put y = x' and study Uk = a''k-' e N and
uk = (aa)(Y9)k '+ -+Y=+' fork e N. By induction on k, we get the well-known formulae
(38) (ya)k = ykuk and (y'a')k = (Y)kUk.

Clearly, (b) and (c) together with (x`)' = (x')` imply that for all k e N,
(39) Uk = Vk
We choose a prime p > c, put H = <y, a> and K = <yp,(ya)p> = <yp, up>, and claim
that x induces an isomorphism in K. Indeed, otherwise 7.2.8 would imply that
c(H) = 2 and xIH is an anti-isomorphism. Using (c), we would get
(a2)(Y,)-'
(as)Y' = (ay)2 = (y-' ay)s = y2aa(Y2)-' =
and, by (37), ay = a. But then H would be abelian, a contradiction. Thus Of induces

an isomorphism in k and hence
((ya)")2 = (Ypup)' _ (Y")aup = (Y2)"Up = (Y'a')p (mod LJK)4').
On the other hand, (35) and h,(a)' E Z(G) imply that
((Ya)p)s = ((xà)s)p = ((xa)àah,(a)a)p = (Ysas)p(h,(a)p)'.
It follows that h,(a)p E LJK). By (30), L3(K) = K3(K) and, since K < Gp, (25) yields
that LJK) < L3(K) = K3(K) < K3(Gp) < K3(G)p' < Gp3. By (24), h,(a)p = gp' for
some g e G and then (6) implies that h,(a) E GP'. This holds for all primes p > c; by
(28), h,(a) = 1 and (e) holds.
Now (a), (d), and (e) yield that to prove the lemma, we only have to show that
f(l,a) = I for all a e N. To do this, however, we shall need some further steps. We
put f(1, a) = f(a) for a e N, first derive some general properties of this function
f : N -+ LA(G), then prove the desired result under additional assumptions on N; the
general case follows. First note that the defining equation (36) now reads
(40) (a2)x' = (ax)2f(a)2 for all a E N.
If xjN is an isomorphism, then ((ab)')x' = ((ab)x)'f(ab)' = (ax)'(bx)'f(ab)' for all
a, b c- N and ((ab)')x' = (a')x (b')x' = (ax)'(bx)'f(a)'f(b)' since f(a)' E Z(6); if Of IN
is an anti-isomorphism, ((ab)')x' = ((ab)x)'f(ab)' = (bx)'(ax)'f(ab)' and ((ab)')x' =
(b')x'(a')x' = (bx)(ax).f(a).f(b)'. In both cases, .f(ab)' = .f(a).f(b) = (f(a)f(b))8, by
(3). Since a is bijective, it follows that
(41) f : N -+ Z(G) is a homomorphism.
Another consequence {o of (40), via a simple induction, is that
(42) (a')(x')' = (ax' )J (axt t }...+x+l ) for all a E N, t e N.
Indeed, if t = 1, this is (40); and if (42) holds for t - 1, then (40), L,(G)' < Z(6), and
(41) yield that
(a')(x')t ((a')`)'- I )x' I)f(a x' }...+s+1)2)x

= = ((ax[
t) f(ax'-1+...+s+1) '+-.-+x+I)
_ =
(ax')f(axI
(ax')f(ax'
This proves (42) and, raising both sides of this equation to the s-th power, we obtain
((as)xI)(.f(ax'-1+...+x+1 )s) for
(43) ((as))(x')' =
a e N, t e Nl, s E Z.
For every a E N, we define by induction ao = a and a;+i = [a;, x]. We put a', = f(a;)
and claim that for all i > 0,
(44) v;: N Z(G) is a homomorphism.
This is clear for i = 0 since vo = f is a homomorphism by (41). Since a; = (ax);,
av"' = .f(a1+t) = .f(aT ' af) = .f(a1)-'.f((ax)j) = (av')-'(ax)v';
therefore if v; is a homomorphism, then since Nv' < Z(G), it follows that for all
a,beN,
(ab)t..t = ((ab)v')-'((ab)x)v' = (av,)-'(ax)vi(bt,)-'(bx)v, = av,rtbv
Thus v;+1 is also a homomorphism and (44) holds.

We study more closely the factor f(a' +- +x+l) appearing in (42) and first claim
that fort > 1,
t+...+x+1)
(45) .f(ax` = .f(ag)(`+i)
=o
For t = 1, both sides of this equation equal f(a); so suppose that (45) holds for t. If
ax' ax=-'ai'-';
s e NJ, then ax'-' = [a,x]x'-' = La", x] = a-"+xs and hence = fur-
thermore (a, )i = ai+1 Using (41), we therefore obtain

.
f(ax'+...+x+i) = f(axl-1+...+x+1)f(ax'-1+...+x+i)f(a)
= CII
f(ai)(i+1))( f(ai+i)('+1)) f(a)
1-o J ì=o l
f(ai)(!+i)
1=0
f(ai)(i+1)+(i))f(ac)(`)
l _ i=o
fl
since a, e Kc+, (G) = 1. This proves (45).
For 0 < i < c - 1, we write c! I 1) as a polynomial in t, that is, in the form

i+
t
(46) c! _ Y_ ::,jtj where ;ij E Z.
i+ j=,
Then we obtain from (45)
c-1
f(axt- I+...+x+1 ) C! =
C-1
/1 c
f(a1)Y-1 = f(al)"',"f
i=0 j=1 i=o
that is
c
f(ax'-1+...+x+1)c!
(47) _ fl gj(a)" where gj(a) = 11 f(ai)"".
j=1 i=0
By (46), x:01 = c! and -'c! so that

(48) g1(a) = f(ao)`f(a1) 112n'...
We can now prove the desired result in the crucial case.
(f) If G = <x,b) and N = <b)G, then f(a) = 1 for all a c- N and hence x is an
isomorphism.
Proof. Let i c- 7L and a = bx'; let p > c be a prime and put K = <xP, aP). Then a
induces an isomorphism in k; indeed, otherwise, by 7.2.8, H = <x, a> = G would be
of class 2 which contradicts (31). Thus ((aP)x")' _ ((aP)")(x')" (mod Lc(K)") and then
f(axo-I+...+x+1)P f(ax-1+...+x+1)dP
(43) shows that e Lc(K). By (47), fl E LJK).
j=1
As in the proof of (e), Lc(K) < L3(K) = K3(K) < K3(GP) < GP' and it follows that
g, (a)Pzg2 (a)P3 ... E GP'. Thus g, (a) p2 e Go' and then (24) and (6) yield that g, (a) E GP.
This holds for all p > c and therefore, by (28), g,(a) = 1, that is, g,(bx`) = 1. By (47)
and (44), g, is a homomorphism from N to Z(G) and we have just shown that its
kernel contains <bx'li e 7L) = " = N. Thus
(49) g, (a) = I for all a e N.
Now suppose, for a contradiction, that there exists a e N such that f(a) : 1. Then
since a; E K;+, (G) = I for i > c, there exists k e {0, ... , c - 1 } such that f(ak) : I and
f(a1) = I for all i > k. By (48) with a replaced by ak,
(ak+l)-1112)c!
=J
(ak)c'
gl(ak) = J (ak)c J
so that (49) implies f(ak)e! = 1. Since G is torsion-free, it follows that f(ak) = 1, the
desired contradiction. Thus f(a) = I for all a e N and, by (a), (d), and (e), of is an
isomorphism. This proves (f).
We return to the general situation.
(g) Let b e N. Then (50) or (51) holds.

(50) (ab)' = (a2)(xb)' for all a e N.
(51) (a")' =(a' )uxb)=r' and [xb, a] E Z(G) for all a e N.
Proof. Let y = xb. For a E N, define H = (y, a> = (y, M> where M = <a>H a H
and let ,Li be the projectivity induced by tp in H. By 7.2.5, xdH is a 4i-mapping and,
since M < N, xIM is an isomorphism or an anti-isomorphism. So if x induces an
isomorphism in H, the assumptions of 7.2.9 are satisfied with G and x replaced by H
and 11H; by (f), xIH is an isomorphism and hence (ay)' _ (a')y'. And if x does not
induce an isomorphism in H, we apply 7.2.8 with K = H = (y, a>, that is, r = t = 1
and s = 0; it follows that [y, a] E L,(G) < Z(G) and aIH is an anti-isomorphism, that
is, (ay)' = (y-1ay)' = y'a'(y')-1. Thus we obtain that either
(52) (a'')' = (a')y' or
(53) [y, a] E Z(G) and (a'')' = (a')ly')
Suppose, for a contradiction, that there exist u, v e N such that (uy)' = (u')y'
(u')(y') ' and (vy)' = (v')1''"-'(v')y'. By (52) and (53) there exists e E { + 1, - 1 } such
that (ay)' = (a')ly"' where a = uv. If aIN is an isomorphism, it follows that
(ua)y2(Ua)(Y')-' = (uy)a(vy)a = ((uv)y)3 = ((uv)')(Y.)
= (u')(y)'(v a)ly').
For e = 1, we obtain (v')(y')-' = (v')y' and if e = - 1, (U2)y' _ (u')(y')-'; neither is the

case. Similarly, if xl,1, is an anti-isomorphism, we get the same contradiction. So we
see that the equations in (52) or (53) are satisfied simultaneously for all a e N. Thus
either (50) holds or every a e N satisfies the equation in (51). In the latter case, either
[y, a] E Z(G) by (53), or (52) holds for a and then, by (37), [y, a] = 1 e Z(G). Thus
(51) holds and this proves (g).
(h) For all a e N, f(a) = 1, that is, (ax)' = (a')x'
Proof. The assertion is that (50) holds for b = 1. Thus by (g), we may suppose that
(51) holds for b = 1, that is
(54) (ax)' = (a')(x') for all a e N.
If [xb,d] E Z(G) for all b, d c N, then G = N<x> would imply that G' < Z(G) and
this would contradict (31). Thus there exist b, d e N such that
(55) [xb, d] 0 Z(G).
By (g), such an element b satisfies (50) and, since x induces an isomorphism in
(xb)' - x'b' (mod Z(G)). It follows that
(ab)a = (a')(xb)' = (aa)x'b' for all a E N.
(56)
So if ocl,, is an isomorphism, = (b')-'(ax)aba = ((ax)a)b'
((a')x')b' = (axb)a = (b-'axb)a
and hence (ax)' = (a')x', as desired. Therefore suppose, for a contradiction, that IN
(a2)x'b' = (axb)a = (b-'axb)a
is an anti-isomorphism. Then (56) and (54) imply that =
b2(ax)'(b')-' = for all a c N and hence (x')2 = (b')-2 (mod CG(N4')). By
(7), G/Cj(N) is torsion-free and therefore by (6), x' _ (b')-' (mod CU(N")), that is,
x'b' E Cj(N). Now (56) yields (axb)' = a' and hence axb = a for all a e N; this
contradicts (55). Thus (h) holds and Lemma 7.2.9 follows from (a), (d), (e), and (h).
The following lemma finishes the proof of Theorem 7.2.7.
7.2.10 Lemma. or is an isomorphism or an anti-isomorphism.
Proof. Let I be the set of all the subgroups H of G for which xIH is an isomorphism
or an anti-isomorphism. Since G is finitely generated, L(G) satisfies the maximal
condition, by (27), and therefore X contains a maximal element N. We have to show
that N = G. So suppose, for a contradiction, that N # G. Then since G is nilpotent,
there exists x c NG(N)\N; let H = <N, x> and (i be the projectivity induced by cp in
H. Then H 0 X and hence, by (33), c(H) = c. By 7.2.5, xlH and atlH, where g' = g-'
for all g c- G, are the two 0-mappings and (34) implies that xlH or ally induces in H
an isomorphism. By 7.2.9, this map is then an isomorphism from H onto H. It
follows that H e 3:, a contradiction. Thus N = G and the lemma follows.
The main theorem
7.2.11 Theorem (Sadovskii [1964]). Every projectivity of a nonabelian torsion free

locally nilpotent group is induced by a unique isomorphism.
Proof. Let G be a nonabelian torsion-free locally nilpotent group and let cp be a

projectivity from G to a group G. By 1.5.8, cp is induced by at most one isomorphism.
By 1.3.6, we may assume that G is finitely generated since the set of nonabelian
finitely generated subgroups is a local system of subgroups of G. Thus G is nilpotent.
If c(G) = 2, the assertion follows from 7.2.6, and if c(G) > 3, then 7.2.5 and 7.2.7
imply that there exists an isomorphism inducing cp.
We combine Theorem 7.2.11 and Sadovskii's Approximation Theorem to obtain

the following result.
7.2.12 Theorem. Let G he a nonabelian group and let .' he a family of normal sub-
groups of G such that
(a) for every X, Y E .9' there exists Z E .90 with Z < X n Y,
(b) n X = 1, and
XE V
(c) GIN is torsion-free and locally nilpotent for every N E Y.
Then every projectivity of G is induced by a unique isomorphism.
Proof. Let (p be a projectivity from G to a group G. By (b) and (c), G is torsion-free

and hence 1.5.8 implies that (p is induced by at most one isomorphism. Let .% _
(X E ,-VIG' X}. Then, clearly, (a) and (c) hold with 9 replaced by .And (b)
implies that for I - g c G, there exist X, Y E. such that g X and G' 4 Y; by (a)
there exists Z c Y such that Z < X n Y. Then Z E and g 0 Z; since G/Z is tor-
sion-free, it follows that <g> n Z = 1. By 6.5.1 and 7.2.11, N a G for every N E
and the projectivity induced by cp in GIN is induced by a unique isomorphism from
G/N onto G/N`0. By 1.3.8, (p is induced by an isomorphism from G to G.
It is well-known (see Robinson [1982], p. 159) that if F is a free group,

n K.(F) = I and F/K;(F) is torsion-free. Thus Theorem 7.2.12 yields another proof
iEN
for the fact (see 7.1.18) that every projectivity of a nonabelian free group is induced
by a unique isomorphism. Another important class of groups which can be approxi-
mated by torsion-free nilpotent groups is the class of free polynilpotent groups (see
Smelkin [1964]). So we have the following result.
7.2.13 Corollary (Sadovskii [1965a]). Every projectivity of a free polynilpotent

group (in particular, of a free soluble group of given derived length) is induced by a
unique isomorphism.
Exercises
1. Give a lattice-theoretic characterization of the n-th centre of a torsion-free

nilpotent group.
2. (Scott [1957]) Let a be a bijective map from the group G to the group G such that
(x),)' = x'y' or (xy)' = y'x' for all x, y c G. Show that x is an isomorphism or an
anti-isomorphism. (Hint: First show that x satisfies (9) and (21).)
7.3 Mixed nilpotent groups

We would like to prove for mixed and periodic nilpotent groups analogues of the
results for torsion-free nilpotent groups. However, this is too much to expect since
there are examples of nilpotent and nonnilpotent groups with isomorphic subgroup
lattices and of projectivities between nonisomorphic nilpotent groups. For example,
7.3 Mixed nilpotent groups 375
in 6.2.9 we noted that the semidirect product G = T <z> of an abelian group T of

type px and an infinite cyclic group <z) with respect to the automorphism t -. t1+p
(t e T) is lattice-isomorphic to the direct product G = T x <z>. Clearly, G is abelian
and IZ"(G)I = p" for all n c t\J so that G is not nilpotent.
Finitely generated groups
We want to show that the situation is better for finitely generated nonperiodic
nilpotent groups. Such a group G has a finite torsion subgroup T(G), and if one
constructs a central series in G containing T(G), it is well-known (see Robinson
[1982], p. 133) that one can take infinite cyclic factor groups above T(G) and cyclic
factor groups of prime order below T(G). Thus L(G) has a cyclic modular chain in
the following sense.
7.3.1 Definition. A modular chain 0 = ao < 5 a" = I in a complete lattice L

is called cyclic if there exists k e {0,...,n - 1} such that [a,/a,_1] L(C2) for
i = 1, ..., k and [ai/a,_1] c L(C,) for i = k + 1, ..., n; recall that C, is the cyclic
group of order r.
7.3.2 Theorem. The group G is finitely generated non periodic nilpotent if and only if
L(G) has a cyclic modular chain.
Proof. Let I = Ho < .. < H" = G be a cyclic modular chain in L(G). We have to
show that G is finitely generated, nonperiodic, and nilpotent. For this we shall need
the following assertion which we prove by induction on i = 0, ..., n.
(*) If x c G is of finite order, then [<H,, x)/H,] is finite and distributive.
Indeed, for i = 0, [<H,,x)/H,] L(<x)) is finite and distributive. If [<H,,x)/H,]
has this property, then <H,,x) is a cyclic element in [G,/H,] and, since Hi,, is
modularly embedded in this lattice, [<H,+1,x)/H,] is a modular lattice. By 2.1.5,
[ <H,+1 , x)1 H,+1 ] = [H;+1 u <H,, x)/H1+1 ] is isomorphic to [<H,, x)1 <H,, x) n H;+1 ],
and this is an interval in [<H,, x)/H,], hence is finite and distributive. Thus (*) holds
for i=0,...,n.
We now prove the statements on G by induction on n, the length of the cyclic
modular chain in L(G); let k be as in Definition 7.3.1. If n = 1, then k = 0 and so
L(G) L(Cx). By 1.2.6, G n C. is finitely generated nonperiodic nilpotent. So let
n > I and suppose that the assertion is correct for groups with cyclic modular chains
of smaller lengths. If k = 0, then [H1+1/H,] L(C,) for all i and hence G is torsion-
free. Indeed, if I x c- G had finite order, there would exist a maximal i e {0, ... , n}
such that x H,; by (*), [<H,,x)/H,] would be a nontrivial finite interval in
[H1+1/H1], which is impossible in L(Cj). Thus by 7.2.2, H1 < Z(G) and the induction
assumption implies that G/H1 is finitely generated, nonperiodic and nilpotent. Since
Cx ^- H1 < Z(G), the group G also has this property.
Therefore let k > 0. Then H1 is cyclic of prime order p. Let x e G\Hn_1. If x had
finite order, then by (*), [<Hn_1,x)/Hn_1] would be finite and nontrivial and this
again is impossible since [G/H,,_,] L(C.). Hence o(x) = x and L(<H,,x>) is

modular since H, is modularly embedded in L(G). By 2.4.11, H, :!9 <H,, x> and
x induces a power automorphism a - a' in H, for which r - I (mod p). Thus x
centralizes H,. Since G is generated by the elements x e it follows that
H, < Z(G). By induction, G/H, is finitely generated, nonperiodic and nilpotent;
since IH1 I = p, the group G also has this property.
An easy consequence of Theorem 7.3.2 is the following lattice-theoretic character-

ization of the class of nonperiodic locally nilpotent groups.
7.3.3 Theorem. The group G is nonperiodic and locally nilpotent if and only if there
exists a cyclic element X in L(G) such that for every finite set of cyclic elements
X,, ..., X. in L(G), the lattice [X u X, u u has a cyclic modular chain.
Proof. If G is a nonperiodic locally nilpotent group, take x e G of infinite order and

put X = <x>. Then for every finite set of cyclic elements X,, ..., X in L(G), H =
<X, X, , ... , is a nonperiodic finitely generated and hence nilpotent subgroup of
G. By 7.3.2 there exists a cyclic modular chain in L(H) [H/I]. Conversely, suppose
that G satisfies our condition, and take a finite subset S of G. If X,..... X. are the
subgroups generated by the elements of S and H = <X, X,, ... , then L(H) has
a cyclic modular chain and, by 7.3.2, H is nilpotent and nonperiodic. In particular,
G is nonperiodic, <S> is nilpotent and thus G is locally nilpotent.
It follows from Theorems 7.3.2 and 7.3.3 that the classes of nonperiodic finitely
generated nilpotent and of nonperiodic locally nilpotent groups are invariant under
projectivities, a result due to Pekelis [1961b]. Note that the order of succession of
the cyclic intervals in Definition 7.3.1 is important. Indeed, the subgroup lattice of
the direct product G of an infinite cyclic group and a nonabelian group of order pq, p
and q primes, has a modular chain I = Ho < H, < Hz < H3 = G with [H1/Ho]
L(C,) and [H;/Hi_,] L(C2) for i > 1; but G is not nilpotent.
Groups with torsion-free subgroups
In the light of Sadovskii's theorem on torsion-free nilpotent groups it is reasonable

to expect that Baer's theorem on abelian groups with two independent elements of
infinite order might generalize to nilpotent groups. However, the following example
shows that this is not the case.
7.3.4 Example (Pekelis [ 1965] ). Let G = <a, b j [a, b] 3 = [[a, b], a] = [[a, b], h] = 1)'.
If we put c = [h, a], then G' = <c> < Z(G) = <a3> x <b3> x <c)'; thus G is nil-
potent of class 2 and possesses two independent elements a and h of infinite order.
Every g e G can be written uniquely in the form g = zr where z e Z(G) and
r e R = {a`h'IO < i,j < 2}. We define a bijective map a: G --+ G by g = z'r' where
r = r for all re {I,a,a2,b,b2,ab}, r = rc2 for re {ab2,a2b,a2b2} and oiZ(c) is
the automorphism satisfying (a3) = a3, (h3) = b3, c = c2. It is easy to check
that Q2 = I and that a satisfies the assumptions of Theorem 1.3.1; thus a induces a
nontrivial autoprojectivity cp in G. Since (a) = (a), (b) = (b), and
(ab) = (ab), we see that cp cannot be induced by an automorphism of G.
So it is clear that we need stronger assumptions for a nilpotent group G to obtain

that every projectivity of G is induced by an isomorphism. In this spirit, Pekelis
[1967] proved that a nilpotent group of class 2 with a torsion-free subgroup of the
same class has this property. On the other hand, he gave an example showing that
this assertion does not hold with 2 replaced by 3, and Arshinov [1971] produced
similar examples for all c > 3 (see Exercise 2). Further results of this type, mainly for
groups with torsion-free direct factors, can also be found in Arshinov [1971]. We
state the most interesting general result in this direction without proof.
7.3.5 Theorem (Yakovlev [ 1988] ). Let n e N, n >_ 2.

(a) If G is a nilpotent group of class n containing a subgroup isomorphic to a free
nilpotent group of class n, then G is strongly determined by its subgroup lattice.
(b) If K is a torsion free nilpotent group of class n > 3 generated by 2 elements and
K is not a free nilpotent group of class n, then there exist a nilpotent group G of class
n containing K as a subgroup and a projectivity of G which is not induced by an
isomorphism.
We finally mention that for a nilpotent group G, the existence of two independent
elements of infinite order does not imply that G is determined by its subgroup lattice.
7.3.6 Example (Arshinov [1971]). Let A be a torsion-free abelian group, p a prime

and n E N such that 4 < n < p. For,,,,, y2 e {1.....p - 1 }, let B;= G"(y,) be the group
of order p" constructed in 5.6.7 and, finally, G = A x B1 and G = A x B2. By (b) of
5.6.7 there exists a bijective map T: B1 B2 inducing a projectivity from B, to B2 and
whose restriction to every maximal subgroup of B1 is an isomorphism; let a: G - G
be defined by (ab) = ab' for a e A, b e B1. The reader may show that a satisfies the
assumptions of Theorem 1.3.1 and therefore induces a projectivity from G to G. By
(a) of 5.6.7, G G, in general.
Normalizer preserving projectivities
By 5.6.2, a normalizer preserving projectivity of a nilpotent group maps central

series to central series. We study the projectivities induced in the central factors. For
this we need the following result on multilinear mappings.
7.3.7 Lemma. Let A...... A,, L, M be (additive) abelian group, cp a projectivity from
L to M and suppose that f: (A,..... A,) -+ L and g: (A,..... A,) M are such that
(1) f and g are multilinear, that is, additive in every component,
(2) L = (f(x,,.. ,x,)Ix1 E A,), M = (g(x,,...,x,)Ix1 e A1), and
(3) (f(x1,...,x,))l = (g(xl,...,x,)) for all xi e A,.
Then there exists an isomorphism x from L onto M such that

(4) f(.xi,...,x,)2 = 9(x1...... ,) for all x; E Ai.
Proof: We use induction on t. For t = 1, f and g are epimorphisms from Al onto L

and M, respectively, and by (3), Kerf = Kerg. Then the map x: L -+ M such that
.f'(x)' = g(x) (x c A1) is well-defined and an isomorphism satisfying (4). So let t > 2,
and assume that the lemma is correct for smaller numbers of abelian groups Ai. First
note that the assertion of the lemma is equivalent to the following.
(5) If C is a finite subset of A = (A1,..., A,,), then I f(x) = 0 if and only
XEC
if I g(x) = 0.
XEC
Indeed, if x: L -* M is an isomorphism satisfying (4), then Y_ f(x)) _ Y g(x) for

(Ec XEC
every finite subset C of A; in particular, (5) holds. Conversely, suppose that (5) is
satisfied. By (2), for every w c L there exists a finite subset C of A such that
w = Y f(x) and we put w = g(x). Then (5) and (1) imply that x is well defined
XEC XEC
and injective; by (2), x is surjective and the additivity of x and (4) follow directly from
the definition of x.
Now suppose that C is a finite subset of A. Every x c C has the form
x = (x...... x,) where xi c Ai. For i = 1,...,t, we put A* = <xilx E C> 5 Ai;
furthermore A* _ (A*....,.4*), f* = 9* = L* = <f*(a)lac A*>, M* _
<g*(a)la c A*>, and consider the projectivity cq* induced by p in L*. Clearly, (1)-(3)
hold for the starred groups and maps. So if we can prove (5) for these, then, since C
is a subset of A*,
I .f(x) = Op 1XEC
XEC
f*(x) = 0G' 1 XEC
g*(x) = 0G' Y_ g(x) = 0,
XEC
as desired. Thus we may assume that all the Ai are finitely generated. Since f is
multilinear, it follows that L too is finitely generated and therefore a direct sum of
cyclic groups. Since every cyclic group is residually a cyclic primary group, there
exist subgroups Li of L (i c 1) such that L/Li is cyclic of prime power order for
all i c I and n Li = 0. Let Mi = L; and define.f : A L/ Li and gi: A - M/Mi by
IEl
fi(x) =.f(x) + Li and gi(x) = g(x) + Mi. Then again (1)-(3) hold for fi, gi, and the
projectivity'pi induced by (p in L/Li; in addition, since n Li = 0, also n Mi = 0.
IEC ,EC
Thus if (5) holds for cyclic groups of prime power order, then
Y f(x) = 0.<> Y f(x) c Li for all i.<> Y g(x) c Mi for all ie> Y g(x) = 0,
XEC XEC SEC SEC
as desired. Therefore we may assume for the proof of the lemma that
(6) L is cyclic of order p', p a prime, in c N.
As a projective image of L, M is cyclic of order q', q e P. For k e t\J and x =

(x1,...,x,)EA, (kf(x)>0 = (f(kx1,x2....,x,)>' = (kg(x)>.
Hence.f(x) and g(x) have the same order and (2) implies that p = q. We may there-
fore assume that
(7) M = L.
Then q is the trivial autoprojectivity and (3) becomes

(8) (f(x)> = (g(x)> for all x e A.
Therefore there exists kx E Z such that (kx, p) = 1 and g(x) = kx f(x). Let rx denote
the order of f(x) in the group L. Then we claim that
(9) kx - k,, (mod ry) for all x, y e A such that rx > ry > 1.
This will prove the lemma. Indeed, by (2) there exists z E A such that <f(z)> = L and,
if we put k = k_ then k - ky (modry) and hence kf(y) = kyf(y) = g(y) for all y E A.
Thus the map x: L - L defined by wa = kw (w e L) is an automorphism of L sat-
isfying f(y) = g(y) for all y e A.
It remains to prove (9). For this take x = (x1....,x,) E A and y = (y...... y,) E A
such that rx > ry > 1. Consider the maps a, r from A, to L defined by a' =
J(x11...,xr_1,a) and a' = f(yl,..., y,-,, a) for a E A,. As f is multilinear, a and r
are homomorphisms; and A; # 0: A;, since x' = f(x), y, = f(y), and rx > ry > 1.
Therefore pA and pA, are subgroups of index p in A, and A;, respectively, and it
follows that their preimages a'(pA') and r-'(pAr) are subgroups of index pin A,.
Since a group cannot be the set-theoretic union of two proper subgroups, there
exists d E A, such that d 0 a-' (pA) and d r-' (pA; ). Then d pA' and d' pA,
so that (do> = A' and (d'> = A;. Let u = (x1.... ,x,_1,d) and v = (y1,..., yi_1,d).
Then J(u) = d and f(u) = d', so that A' = (f(u)) and A; = <f(v)>. Since
f(x) = x, e A' = <.[(u)> and, similarly, f(y) = y' c (f(u)>, it follows that
(10)
We define a': A, - L and r': A, - L with respect to g in the same way as U, T for J;
that is, a = g(x....... ,_1,a) and a` = g(y,,...,y,_,,a) for all a c- A,. By (8), A, _
A is a subgroup L of L and we may apply the lemma in the case t = I to the
homomorphisms a and a' from A, to L. We obtain an isomorphism fl: L -i L sat-
isfying u = a for all a E A,. For a = x, and a = d, this yields f(x)fl = g(x) and
f(u)' = g(u). Since automorphisms of L are multiplications with integers prime to p,
there exists i e t\1 such that g(x) = if(x) and g(u) = if(u). It follows that k,f(x) =
g(x) = if(x) and hence kX - i (mod rx); similarly, k = i (mod Since rx < r., finally,
(11) kx - k. (mod rx).
In the same way, applying the lemma in the case t = I to r and r', we obtain
(12) ky - k,, (modry).
Finally, for d e A, chosen above, there are multilinear mappings f and
from (A A,-,) into L = <f(z,,...,zt_1,d)Izi E A,> defined by f(z,,...,zt_1) _
f(z_., z,_1, d) and y(zl,..., zt_1) = g(z,,..., z,_ 1, d). By the induction assumption
there exits an automorphism h of L such that f(z,,...,z,_,)a = g(z,,...,zt_1) for all

c A1. In particular,
f(u)' =.f(x,,...,x,-l,d)s = f(x,,...,x,-1)S = g(x,...... X,)
= g(x,,...,x,-l, d) = g(u)
and, similarly, .((r)" = g(v). Again there exists an integer j such that g(u) = jf(u) and
g(v) = and it follows that k. = j (mod r.) and k,. - j (mod r,.). Thus k. = k,
(mod r) where r = min(r., r,,). Now (10) and the assumption rx > ry, yield that r > r,.
and then, by (11) and (12), kz = k = k,, = kv (mod ry). This proves (9) and the
lemma.
We study properties of a fixed normalizer preserving projectivity between two

groups G and G. It is convenient for this purpose to represent G and G as factor
groups of an auxiliary group F. In the applications, F will be a suitable free or
relatively free group. _
So let G, G, F be groups, q a projectivity from G to G, i.: F - G and p: F -* G
epimorphisms. We say that cp is compatible with the pair (;.,P) if K'" = K" for all
K E L(F). More generally, we say that (p is compatible with the pair (2, p) on the
section P/Q of F if K"`' = K" whenever Q < K < P, that is, if cp induces a projectivity
from P"/Q'- to P"/Q" which is compatible with the restrictions 2', p' of i., p to P/Q.
7.3.8 Remark. If co is compatible with the pair (2, p), then the map a: G - G defined
by (x'') = x" (x E F) is an isomorphism from G onto G inducing cp.
Proof. For every K < F, K" Ò = K". Since cp is a projectivity, it follows that K" = 1
if and only if K' = 1. Thus Ker i = Kerp and a is an isomorphism. For every
H < G, there exists K < F such that K" = H and then H` = K" = K" = H. Thus
cp is induced by a.
7.3.9 Theorem. Let G, G, F he groups, 2: F -+ Gand p: F -+ G epimorphisms and cp

a normalizer preserving projectivity from G to G. Let P,/Q,, ..., P,/Q, he central
sections of F, that is, [Pi, F] < Qi for i = 1, .... t, on each of which cp is compatible
with (;.,,u). Finally, let
P = [P,..... P,] and Q= [Q1,P2....IP1][P,,Q2,P31 ... I P,]...[P1,...1P,-1,Q11.
Then P/Q is a central section of 'F and cp is compatible with (;.,,u) on P/Q.
Proof. The theorem is trivial for t = 1. And it suffices to prove the assertion for
t = 2; the theorem for t sections will then follow by induction. Indeed, suppose that
t > 3 and the theorem holds for t - I sections. Then if P = [P...... P,-, ] and Q' =
[Q1,P2....,P,-1][PI,Q2,P3,...,P,-1]...[P1....,P,_2,Q,-1], by induction, P/Q is a
central section of F on which cp is compatible with (;.,p); and the theorem for
t = 2 applied to P/Q and P,/Q, yields the same for P*%Q* where P* = [P, P,] =
[P1 ,...,P,] = Pand
Q* = [Q, P] [P, Q,]
= [Q1,P2,...,P,]...[P1,...1
P,-2,Q,-1,P1][P1,...,P,-1,Q,] = Q,
that is, for P/Q.

So suppose that t = 2, P = [P1,P2] and Q = [Q1,P2][P1,Q2]. By the Three
Subgroup Lemma (see (7) of 1.5), [P, F] = [P1, P2, F] < IF, P1, P2] [P2, F, P, ] <
[Q1, P2] [Q2, P1 ] = Q, that is, P/Q is a central section of F. Let u, v e P1 and
x, y e P2. Then [u, x] E P and, since P/Q < Z(G/Q),
(13) [uu, x] _ [u, x]`[v,, x] - [u, x] [c, x] (mod Q).
Similarly,
(14) [u, xy] [u, x] [u, y] (mod Q).
If we choose v E Q and y E Q2, then [L, x] and [u, y] lie in Q so that [ut, x]
1
[u, x] _ [u, xy] (mod Q). It follows that the map (P1 /Q, , P2/Q2) -+ P/Q sending
(uQ1,xQ2) to [u,x]Q is well-defined and, by (13) and (14), bilinear. Since i and it are
homomorphisms, the maps
f: (P1 /Q1,P2/Q2) - PA/QA; (uQ1,xQ2)~ [u A,xA]QA
and
9:(P1/Q1,P2/Q2)-'P"/Q"; (uQ1,xQ2)~[u",x"]Q"
are also bilinear and, as P = [P1,P2], their images generate P"/Q" and P";'Q", re-
spectively. Now cp is compatible with (2,p) on P1/Q1 and P2/Q2; furthermore, cp
is normalizer preserving and therefore, by 5.6.2, preserves mixed commutators. It
follows that P"`0 = [P P2 ]"* = [Pi "0, Pz `0] = [Pi , P21 ] = P, similarly Q;-" = Q" and
<[u,x],Q>AW
= <[<u,Q1>,<x,Q2>],Q>4 =
<[<u,Q1>",<x,Q2>"],Q"> _ <[u",x"],Q">
Therefore cp induces a projectivity ip from P"/Q" to P",/Q" satisfying
<J (uQ1,xQ2)>' = <[u",x"],Q">/Q" = <9(uQ1,xQ2)>
By 7.3.7 there exists an isomorphism a: P"/Q" P"/Q" such that J'(uQ1,xQ2)' =

g(uQ1,xQ2) and hence ([u,x]Q)" = ([u,x]Q)" for all u e P1, x e P,. Since P =
[Pl, P2], it follows that (wQ)" = (wQ)" for all w e P. So if Q < K < P, then
(K"/Q")' = K"!Q" and (K"/Q")' = K"`0/Q" since x induces the projectivity Cp. Thus
K" = K" and q is compatible with (;;,p) on P/Q.
A simple consequence of the above theorem is that a normalizer preserving

projectivity from G to G which is induced by an isomorphism on GIG', is induced by
isomorphisms on every factor K;(G)/K;+1(G) of the lower central series of G (see
Exercise 3). For certain nilpotent groups, we can say a little more.
Almost free groups of nilpotent varieties
We remind the reader of some basic properties of varieties of groups (see Robinson
[1982], pp. 54-60). Let W be a nonempty set of words in the indeterminates xi
(i e N). Then for every group G, the verbal subgroup of G determined by W is defined
to be
(15) W(G) = <w(91,92.... )19i e G,w e W>.
The variety 23(W) determined by W is the class of all groups G such that W(G) = 1.
Such a variety is called nilpotent (or abelian) if it consists of nilpotent (or abelian)
groups. A group F e 23 is called 23 free on a subset X of F if for each map a from X
to a group G E 1J there exists a unique homomorphism /3: F -+ G extending a. If F is
a free group on a set X c F, then
(16) F = F/W(F) is 23-free on X = {xW(F)Ix e X};
conversely, every 0-free group is of the form F/W(F) for some (absolutely) free
group F.
If W = {xi'xz'x1x2}, then W(G) = G' for every group G,'Z3(W) is the variety of
abelian groups and a free abelian group F/F' is a direct product of infinite cyclic
groups (see Robinson [1982], p. 59). A verbal subgroup in this abelian group F/F'
has the form (F'/F')" for some nonnegative integer n and therefore, if F is a free group
of an abelian variety,
(17) F is a direct product of isomorphic cyclic groups.
Finally, let 23 be a nilpotent variety and F a 0-free group; let c = c(F) be the class
of F. Then a factor group
(18) G = F/M where M < K,(F)
is called an almost free group of 23.
7.3.10 Theorem (Barnes and Wall [1964]). Let 23 be a nilpotent variety, G a non-
abelian almost free group of 0 and G e 13. If G is finite, assume further that G is not
generated by two elements. If there exists a normalizer preserving projectivity from G
to G, then
G = F/M be as in (18) and let q be a normalizer preserving projectivity

from G to G. Since M < K,(F), we have c(G) = c(F) = c and, as G is not abelian,
c > 2. Thus KjF) < F' and hence G/G' F/F'. Let W be a set of words in
x1, x2, ... such that 23 = B(W) and let W* = W v {xl'xz'x1x2}. Then F = F/W(F)
for some free group F and, by (15), W*(F) = F'W(F). It follows that F/W*(F) =
F/(F'W(F)) F/F' ^- GIG'. Therefore GIG' is a free group of the abelian variety
O(W*) and so, by (17), is a direct product of isomorphic cyclic groups. Let cli be the
projectivity induced by (p in GIG'. It is well-known (see M. Hall [1961], p. 155) that
for a subgroup H of a nilpotent group G,
(19) G = G'H implies that H = G.
In particular, G and GIG' have the same number of generators. Therefore if k is the
number of isomorphic cyclic direct factors in the direct product GIG', then k > 2. If
GIG' is finite, then so is G (see Robinson [1982], p. 127) and the assumption of the
theorem yields k >_ 3. By 2.6.10 and 2.6.7 (or better Exercise 2.6.1), 0 is induced by
an isomorphism a: GIG'- G/G'.
Let A : F - G = F/M and a: G --+ GIG' be the natural epimorphisms. Then
;,au: F - 6/6' is an epimorphism. Now F is l3-free on some set X c F and for every
x E X, xZma = yG' where y e G. Since F is 8-free on X and G E 1l, there exists a
homomorphism p: F -+ G such that x" = y for all x E X. Thus f .1ma = f"G' for all
f e F and hence G = G'F". Since G is nilpotent, (18) yields G = F", that is, p is an
epimorphism. For F' < K <_ F, the definitions of 0, a, a, p imply that K''P/G' =
(KAIG')" = (K'`*)"" = KAQe = K"/G'. Thus K-110 = K" and (p is compatible with ().,)
on the section F/F' of F. We now apply 7.3.9 with P,/Q1 = F/F' for i = 1, ... , t
and obtain that 9 is compatible with ().,,u) on K1(F)/K,+1(F) for t = 1, ... , c.
Since Kc+1(F) = 1 < Ker.? = M < Kc(F), it follows that (Ker A)" = (Ker A)"' = 1,
that is, Ker i! < Ker p. Suppose, for a contradiction, that Ker A < Ker p and take
f e (Ker p)\(Ker A). Then f e K.(F)\Kt+1(F) for some i e { 1,..., c} and f a 0 Ki+1(F)'`
since KerA < Kc(F). Since (p is compatible with (A, p) on K;(F)/Ki+1(F), it follows
that K.+1 (F)" = K,+1(F);"P < <f, Kj+1(F)> p = <f, K;+1(F)>" = K;+1 (F)", a con-
tradiction. Thus Ker). = Ker p and G G.
7.3.11 Remark. Normally our aim is to prove that a given group (for example, an
almost free group of a certain nilpotent variety) is determined by its subgroup lattice.
In this regard, the above theorem contains three troublesome assumptions, namely
that
(a G is not generated by two elements if it is finite,
(b) G E 'B, and
(c) the projectivity (p from G to G is normalizer preserving.
However, we can say the following.
(a) Barnes and Wall [1964] prove the theorem without the assumption that G is
not a finite 2-generator group. In this case, GIG' can be the direct product of two
isomorphic finite cyclic groups and cp need not be induced by an isomorphism on
GIG'. After an easy reduction this leads to the case that G is a finite p-group gener-
ated by two elements. If c(G) < 3, it is possible to write down generators and rela-
tions for G and G and to see that G G. If c(G) > 4, then G/K4,(G) G/K4,(G) and
one can show (see Exercise 4) that lp is induced by an isomorphism t on G/G'G"'
where p' = Exp Kc(F). The argument then proceeds as in the general case using an
isomorphism a: GIG' -+ G/G' which induces t.
(b) Sometimes G E0 follows from the fact that cp is normalizer preserving. For
example, let W = {xr, 1X1, X2, ... , xc+1 ] } so that !O(W) = 23(p", c) is the variety of
nilpotent groups of class at most c and exponent dividing p" (p a prime). If

G C'I3(p",c) is nonabelian and (p is a normalizer preserving projectivity from G to G,
then by 2.2.7, G is a p-group and so G E J3(p", c).
(c) Also the assumption that (p is normalizer preserving is not always needed. By
5.6.6, for example, this is the case if Exp G = p. Therefore we get as a corollary to
Theorem 7.3.10 that every nonabelian almost free group in B(p,c) is determined by
its subgroup lattice. For c = 2, finally, we obtain the following result.
7.3.12 Theorem. Every nilpotent group of class 2 and exponent p (a prime) is deter-
mined by its subgroup lattice.
Proof. Let c(G) = 2, Exp G = p and qp a projectivity from G to a group G. If G is

generated by two elements, then I G I = p3 and GG; suppose therefore that G is not
generated by two elements. Since Exp G = p, GIG' is a vector space over GF(p); let
(g,G');E, be a basis of this vector space. By (16) there exists a group F which is
13(p, 2)-free on a set { f I i E I} c F of the same cardinality. Since G E I3(p, 2), there
exists a homomorphism /3: F G such that g; for all i e I. By (19), /3 is an
epimorphism. Thus (F')'1 = G' and the basis (f F');E, of F/F' is mapped to the basis
(g;G);E, of G/G' by the epimorphism from F/F' onto G/G' induced by /i. It follows
that Ker /3 < F' and, since G is not abelian, Kerfl < F' = K2 (F). Thus G is a non-
abelian almost free group in T(p, 2). By 2.2.7, G is a p-group of exponent p, of course.
By 5.6.6, cp is normalizer preserving and hence c(G) = 2. Thus G E 23(p, 2) and all the
assumptions of Theorem 7.3.10 are satisfied. It follows that G G.
Exercises
1. In Examples 7.3.4 and 7.3.6, verify that o satisfies the assumptions of Theorem
1.3.1.
2. (Arshinov [1971]) Let p e P, 3 < n e N and
N = <a3) X ... X Can+1) x (C1) X ... X <Cn-2 )
where o(a1) = oo and o(c1) = p for all i. Let H = N<a2) and G = H<a1) be
semidirect products with respect to the automorphisms a and /3, respectively,
given by a3 = a3C1, a; = ai (i > 3), ca = cici+l (i = 1,...,n - 3), cn-2 = C-2 and
of = a,a,+1 (i = 2,...,n), a#+1 = a"+1, cp = c; (i = 1,...,n - 2).
(a) Show that G is nilpotent of class n and <a1,af> is a torsion-free nilpotent
subgroup of G of the same class.
(b) For g E G, g = a i az b (r, s C 71, b E N), let g" =g if rs = 0 (mod p) and g
9C,'-2 where r + s + t = 0 (mod p) if rs * 0 (mod p). Show that o : G -- G is
bijective and induces an autoprojectivity lp of G.
(c) Show that (p is not induced by an isomorphism.
7.4 Periodic nilpotent groups 385
3. (Barnes and Wall [1964]) Let q be a normalizer preserving projectivity from G to

G. If cp is induced by an isomorphism on GIG', show that qp is induced by isomor-
phisms on Ki(G)/Ki+,(G) for all i >_ 1. (Hint: Represent G as a factor group of a
free group and study the proof of Theorem 7.3.10.)
4. (Barnes and Wall [1964]) Let G be a finite p-group of class 3 generated by two
elements and suppose that G is Z-free for some variety 0; let p` = Exp K3(G). If
cp is a normalizer preserving autoprojectivity of G, show that q is induced on
G/G'GP' by an automorphism of G/G'G`.
7.4 Periodic nilpotent groups

A nilpotent torsion group is the direct product of its primary components, and its
subgroup lattice is then the direct product of the subgroup lattices of these compo-
nents. Therefore we have to study subgroup lattices and projectivities of primary
nilpotent groups. We want to use the concepts of Kontorovic and Plotkin to give a
lattice-theoretic characterization of this class of groups where, of course, allowance
must be made for the P-groups. However, for every Tarski p-group G, L(G) is
modular and therefore has a modular chain 1 = Ho < H, = G of length 1; but G is
not nilpotent and is lattice-isomorphic to any other (nonprimary) Tarski group.
Therefore we have to avoid the Tarski groups, and we do this just as in 6.4. Recall
that a lattice L is permodular if it is modular and every interval of finite length in L
is finite.
Permodular chains
7.4.1 Definition. Let L be a complete lattice and let a, ao, ..., a, E L. Then a is
permodularly embedded in L if [a u c10] is permodular for all c E C(L), and
0 = ao < < a, = I is a permodular chain in L if ai+1 is permodularly embedded
in [I/ai] for every i = 0, ..., t - 1.
We need some simple inheritance properties of these concepts.
7.4.2 Lemma. Let G be a p-group, p a prime, K a permutable subgroup of G,

K < H < G and suppose that H is permodularly embedded in [G/K].
(a) Then H is permutable in G.
(b) If C is a cyclic element in [G/K], there exists c c G such that C = K<c>.
(c) If N < G, then NH is permodularly embedded in [G/NK].
Proof. (a) It suffices to prove the assertion in the special case that H = K<x> for
some x E G. Indeed, if x E H, then K<x> is permodularly embedded in [G/K]; and if
all these K <x> are permutable in G, then so is H = <K <x> Ix E H>. So suppose that
H = K <x>, let y c- G and put T = <H, y); we have to show that H < y> = < y> H.
Since K per G, we have that [K<y>/K] ^ [<y)t/<y> n K] is a finite chain and hence
K(),> is cyclic in [G/K]. Since H is permodularly embedded in [G/K], it follows

that [K (y) u H/K] = [T/K] is a permodular lattice. In particular, H mod [T/K]
and hence, by (c) of 2.1.6, H mod T. Then [T/H] L-t [ (y)/(y) n H] and [H/K] 2t
[(x)/(x) n K] are finite chains. So [T/K] has finite length and, as a permodular
lattice, is finite. By 6.2.5, IT: K I < x; thus T/KT is a finite p-group and H is a
subnormal modular subgroup of T By 6.2.10, H per T; in particular, H(y> _
(y) H, as desired.
(b) Since [C/K] satisfies the maximal condition, C is finitely generated modulo K
and hence, by 6.2.8, I Kc : K I < x. Furthermore, [C/Kc] is distributive, and so C/K`
is cyclic. Since G is periodic, C/Kc is finite. Thus I C : K I < x and C/Kc is a finite
p-group. Since [C/K] is distributive, there is exactly one maximal subgroup D of C
containing K and every element c e C\D satisfies C = K(c>.
(c) Since N and K are permutable in G, we have NK per G. So if C is a cyclic ele-
ment in [G/NK], then by (b) there exists c c- G such that C = NK <c>. Since K per G,
the element K <c> is cyclic in [G/K] and, as H is permodularly embedded in
this lattice, [H u K (c)/K] = [H u (c)/K] is permodular. Thus [NH u C/NK] =
[H u <c> u NK/NK] [H u (c)/(H u (c)) n NK] is permodular and therefore
NH is permodularly embedded in [G/NK].
7.4.3 Corollary. Let G be a p-group and 1 = Ho < < H, = G be a permodular

chain in L(G).
(a) Then H; is permutable in G for i = 0, ... , t.
(b) If N a G, then 1 = NHo/ N < < NH,/N = G/N is a permodular chain in
L(G/N).
Proof. Clearly, Ho per G. If Hi per G, then H. = K and Hi,, = H satisfy the assump-
tions of 7.4.2. Thus H;+1 per G and (a) holds. By (c) of 7.4.2, NH;,, is permodularly
embedded in [G/NH;] and this proves (b).
Nilpotent p-groups
7.4.4 Lemma. Let G be a p-group and suppose that H is permodularly embedded in

L(G).
(a) If Exp H = p" (n E t\l), then H < Z2,,(G).
(b) If Exp H = x, then H < Z(G).
Proof. (a) We use induction on n. Clearly, every subgroup of H is permodularly

embedded in L(G) and thus permutable in G by 7.4.2. So if M < H is of order p and
X < G is cyclic, then I MX 1 2 and N = Z2(G). Then by 7.4.2, HN/N
is permodularly embedded in L(G/N) and Exp(HN/N) < p"-'. By induction,
HN/N < Z2(n_1)(G/N) = Z2n(G)/N. Thus H < Z,"(G) and (a) holds.
(b) Let x c- G. Then <H, x> is a p-group with permodular subgroup lattice. If S is
a finite subset of (H,x>, then by 2.1.5, L((S>) has finite length and hence is finite;
thus <S> is finite and (H, x> is locally finite. By 2.4.15, a nonabelian locally finite
p-group with modular subgroup lattice has finite exponent. Thus (H, x> is abelian
and H < Z(G).
The above lemma is the crucial step towards our lattice-theoretic characterization
of primary nilpotent groups. As an immediate consequence we get a characterization
of nilpotency in p-groups.
7.4.5 Theorem. Let G be a p-group, p a prime. Then G is nilpotent if and only if L(G)
has a permodular chain.
Proof: If G is nilpotent, its ascending central series is a permodular chain in L(G).

Conversely, let I = Ho < . . < H, = G be a permodular chain in L(G) and let
N = HG. By 7.4.4, N< Z(G) or N< ZZ"(G) where p" = Exp H1. By 7.4.3,
1 = H1 N/N < ... < H,N/N = GIN is a permodular chain of length t - 1 in L(G/N).
By induction G/N, and hence also G, is nilpotent.
A second important consequence of Lemma 7.4.4 is that projective images of

nonabelian nilpotent p-groups are nilpotent. We also get an upper bound for the
class of such an image.
7.4.6 Theorem (Yakovlev [1965]). Let p be a prime and G a nilpotent _p-group which
is not elementary abelian. If G is a group such that L(G) L(G), then G is a nilpotent
primary group and
(a) c(G) = c(G) if Exp G = p or Exp G = x,
(b) c(G)<, 2nc(G) if Exp G = p", 2 < n c- N.
Proof. Let co be a projectivity from G to G. As a nilpotent p-group, G is locally finite

(see Robinson [1982], p. 147). If G is locally cyclic, then so is G and we are done; so
suppose that G is not locally cyclic. Then by 2.2.7, G is a_p-group. Put c = c(G) and
Hi = Zi(G)` for i = 0, ..., c. Then I = Ho < < H, = G is a permodular chain in
L(G) and, by 7.4.5, G is nilpotent. _
(a) If Exp G = p, then by 5.6.6, cp is normalizer preserving and hence Hi = Zi(G)
for all i, that is, c(G) = c. So let Exp G = oo. Then we prove c(G) < c(G) by induction
on c; application of this result to cp-1 will yield the other inequality. It is well-known
(see Robinson [1982], p. 133) that if the centre of a nilpotent group has finite
exponent, then so does the whole group. Therefore Exp Z(G) = x and, by 7.4.4,
H1 < Z(G). Thus if c = 1, then G is abelian and the assertion holds; so let c > 1 and
suppose that the assertion is true for groups of smaller class. Clearly, cp induces a
projectivity from G/Z(G) to G/H1. Therefore if Exp(G/Z(G)) = x, the induction
assumption implies that c(G/H1) < c - I and hence c(G) < c. Finally, suppose that
Exp(G/Z(G)) = p' < cc and let K = KE(G) be the last nontrivial term of the
descending central series of G. Since K`0 < H1 < Z(G), it follows that cp induces a
projectivity from G/K to G/K' and c(G/K) = c - 1. For x c- Kc_1(G) and y e G, we
have [x, y] E K < Z(G), and hence [x, y]P" _ [x P-, y] = 1, as xP"' E Z(G). Since K is
generated by these commutators, it follows that Exp K < p'; thus Exp(G/K) = x.
By induction, c(G/K") < c - 1 and hence c(G) < c.
(b) We use induction on c to show that a (nilpotent) p-group G of exponent pn

whose subgroup lattice possesses a permodular chain 1 = Ho < < H, = G of
length c satisfies c(G) < 2nc. By 7.4.4, Hl < Z2n(G) = N and, in particular, the asser-
tion holds for c = 1. By 7.4.3, 1 = Hl N/N < . . < HCN/N = GIN is a permodular
chain of length c - 1 in L(G/N) and, by induction, c(G/N) < 2n(c - 1). Thus
c(G) < 2nc, as desired.
An arbitrary nilpotent torsion group G is the direct product of its primary compo-
nents G. If q is a projectivity from G to a group G, then by 1.6.6, G = Dr GP with
PEP
coprime groups GP and, by 2.2.5 and 7.4.6, these GP are P-groups and nilpotent
primary groups. However, note that G need not be nilpotent even if all the Gp are
nilpotent. And there are direct products of coprime finite p-groups which are not
lattice-isomorphic to any nilpotent group.
7.4.7 Example. Let P = {pl,p2,...}.

_ (a) For every n e t\J, let G. be the abelian group of type (p," p."-') and let
Gn = <x,ylxP" = yP"-` = l,x'' = x'+P) where p = pn. Then G = Dr G. is abelian
_ _ nE N
and G = Dr Gn is lattice-isomorphic to G since every Gn is lattice-isomorphic to G.
nE N
and the direct factors are coprime. Since c(Gn) = n, the group G is not nilpotent.
(b) For every n e N, let Hn be a such that every projective image of Hn
has class at least n (by 7.4.12, we may take any pn-group of maximal class n + 1).
Then every projectivity cp maps H = Dr H. to Dr H.", and this group is not
nE nE
nilpotent since c(Hf) > n.
Lattice-theoretic characterization
To give a lattice-theoretic characterization of the class of nilpotent primary groups

we combine our concept of permodular embedding with the obvious fact that every
element of a group G has prime power order if and only if for every cyclic element C
of L(G), the lattice [C/1] is finite and directly indecomposable.
7.4.8 Lemma. Let G be a group such that

(1) [C/1] is finite and directly indecomposable for every cyclic element C of L(G)
and
(2) there exists a nontrivial subgroup of G which is permodularly embedded in L(G).
Then there is a prime p such that either
(a) G is a p-group with Z(G) 0 1 or
(b) G = PQ where P is a normal p-subgroup of G, IQ I is a prime dividing p - 1 and
Q operates fixed-point-freely on P. In this case, if G is not a P-group, then every
permodularly embedded element of L(G) is a normal elementary abelian p-subgroup
of G.
Proof. By (1), G is a torsion group and

(3) every element of G has prime power order.
Let 1 : H < G be permodularly embedded in L(G) and take a minimal subgroup M
of H. Then
(4) IMI = p for some prime p.
Let x E G and let K be a nontrivial finite p-subgroup of H. Then K is permo-
dularly embedded in L(G) and so [<K,x>/1] is a permodular lattice. Therefore
[<K, x>/K] [<x>/<x> n K] is a finite chain, hence [<K,x>/1] has finite length
and so is finite. Thus <K,x> is a finite group with modular subgroup lattice. By 2.4.4
and (3),
(5) <K, x> is a finite p-group or a finite nonabelian P-group.
If G is a p-group, then M < Z2(G) by 7.4.4. Thus Z(G) 0 1 and (a) holds. So assume
that G is not a p-group and suppose first that there exist r-elements in G where r is
a prime, r > p. We claim that G is a P-group in this case. To show this, let R be the
set of r-elements in G, and take x, y E R such that x -A I -A y. By (5), <M, x> is a finite
P-group and so o(x) = r and <x>M = <x> since r > p. Furthermore, the P-group
<M, x> is generated by conjugates of M and so x E MG. Since all conjugates of M are
permodularly embedded in L(G), <x> a MG. Similarly, <y> a MG and so <x> <y> is
elementary abelian of order at most r2. It follows that xy = yx and xy-' E R. Thus
R is an elementary abelian r-group and R < MG. By (3), CG(R) is an r-group, hence
CG(R) = R. Since every subgroup of R is normal in MG, we see that M induces a
nontrivial power automorphism in R and so RM is a P-group. Furthermore, G/R is
isomorphic to a subgroup of Aut R in which this power automorphism is central.
Hence RM/R < Z(G/R) and, again by (3), G/R is a p-group. Since RM a G, we have
shown that
(6) MG = RM is a P-group.
Suppose, for a contradiction, that RM < G and take g E G\RM. Since G/R is a
p-group, g is a p-element. If <M, g> were a finite nonabelian P-group, then
I<M,g>l = r' p for some k since no other primes are involved in G. But this would
imply that g c- MG, a contradiction. Therefore, by (4), <M, g> is a finite p-group
operating fixed-point-freely on R. Then M is the only minimal subgroup of <M, g>
(see Huppert [1967], p. 502) and hence <M,g> _ <g> is cyclic. In particular,
g c CG(M). Since G is generated by the elements g E G\RM, it follows that
M < Z(G), contradicting (3). Thus we have shown that G = RM is a P-group and
(b) holds.
It remains to consider the case that H is a p-group where p is the largest prime
involved in G. Let N = O(G) = <x c- G I (o(x), p) = 1 >. Since G is not a p-group,
N 1. Let K be a nontrivial cyclic subgroup of H and take 1 -A x c- G with
(o(x),p) = 1. By (5), <K, x> is a nonabelian P-group of order p'q for some prime
q < p. Thus
(7) 1 K I = p, o(x) is a prime and K g <K, x> < N.
Since x was arbitrary, K g N. In particular, M g N. So if P = CN,(M), then P g N

is a p-group and N/P is cyclic of order dividing p - 1. By (7), 1N : PI = q is a prime.
Thus N = PQ where IQI = q and Q operates fixed-point-freely on P, by (3). Since P
is a characteristic subgroup of N, P a G. Every p-element of G/P normalizes NIP, a
cyclic group of order q < p, and thus centralizes N/P. But G/P does not contain
elements of composite order. This shows that every p-element of G is contained in
P< N and that N = G. By (7), H is elementary abelian and normal in G. Thus (b)
holds.
7.4.9 Lemma. Let G be a group such that

(8) every interval in L(G) is directly indecomposable and
(9) L(G) has a permodular chain.
Then there is a prime p such that either
(a) G is a nilpotent p-group or
(b) G = PQ where P is a normal abelian p-subgroup o f G, I Q I is a prime dividing
p - 1 and Q induces nontrivial power automorphisms in P.
Proof. We shall need the following simple fact.

(10) A finite group G of order p"q satisfying (8) has the structure given in (b) if p
and q are primes such that q divides p - 1.
Indeed, if P E Sylp(G) and Q = <a> E Sylq(G), then P g G and P/cD(P) =
N,/T(P) x x N,/D(P) where Ni a G and I N;/D(P)I = p for all i (see 4.1.7).
If a induced different powers in N,/(D(P) and N2/D(P), say, then [G/H] =
{G, N, H, N2 H, H} would be the direct product of two chains of length 1 where
H = N3 ... N,Q, a contradiction. Thus a induces the same power in every N;/Qt(P)
and so G/(D(P) is a P-group. Hence if X is a proper subgroup of P, there exist
maximal subgroups M, and M2 of G with X < M, n M2 and M, -A P -A M2. By
induction, M, and M2 have the structure given in (b) and so X a <M1, M2 > = G.
Thus every subgroup of P is normal in G, that is, Q induces power automorphisms
in P, and P is abelian since p > 2. This proves (10).
To prove the lemma, we use induction on the length t of a permodular chain
1 = Ho < H, < < H, = G in L(G). By (8), G is a torsion group and therefore
satisfies the assumptions of 7.4.8. If G is a p-group for some prime p, then by 7.4.5, G
is nilpotent and (a) holds; if G is a P-group, (b) is satisfied. So we may assume that G
is neither a p-group nor a P-group. Then by 7.4.8 there are primes p and q such that
q divides p - 1 and G = PQ where P is a normal p-subgroup of G, I Q I = q and Q
operates fixed-point-freely on P; furthermore, H, is an elementary abelian p-group
and normal in G. By induction, H, = P or P/H1 is abelian. In both cases, P is
metabelian and so locally finite. Therefore, if x and y are nontrivial elements of P
and Q = <a>, then
x"-',
L = <x, x, .. , y, y...... yp9-' >
is finite and invariant under Q. Hence LQ is a finite group of order p"q satisfying (8)
and, by (10), L is abelian and <x>" = <x>. Thus xy = yx and since x and y are
arbitrary, P is abelian. So <x> a G and Q induces power automorphisms in P.
We come to the desired characterization.
7.4.10 Theorem. The group G is a nilpotent p-group for some prime p or a P-group if
and only if it has the following properties.
(i) Every interval in L(G) is directly indecomposable.
(ii) L(G) has a permodular chain.
(iii) If S < T < G such that [S/1] is a chain of length 2 and S is maximal in T, then
[T/1] is modular or is isomorphic to the subgroup lattice of the dihedral group D8 of
order 8.
Proof. Let G be a nilpotent p-group. If [H/K] were a directly decomposable interval

in L(G), then, since G satisfies the normalizer condition, L(NH(K)/K) would be
directly decomposable, in contradiction to 1.6.5. Thus (i) holds and (ii) follows from
7.4.5. Finally, if S and T are as in (iii), then T is a group of order p3 with a cyclic
subgroup of order p2. Such a group has modular subgroup lattice or is isomorphic
to D8. Hence (iii) is also satisfied. If G is a P-group, L(G) is isomorphic to the
subgroup lattice of a suitable elementary abelian group and therefore also satisfies
(i)-(iii).
Conversely, let G be a group satisfying (i)-(iii). Then by 7.4.9, either G is a
nilpotent p-group or G = PQ where P is a normal abelian p-subgroup of G, IQ I is a
prime dividing p - I and Q induces nontrivial power automorphisms in P. If P
contained an element x of order p2, then S = <x> < <x>Q = T would satisfy the
assumptions of (iii). But [T/1] is not modular since T = <Q, Q"). Also [T/1] is not
isomorphic to L(D8) since p > 2. This contradiction shows that P is elementary
abelian and G is a P-group.
It should be mentioned that Theorem 7.4.10 is inspired by a lattice-theoretic

characterization of finite p-groups and P-groups due to Suzuki [1951a]; see
Exercises 3 and 4, also Suzuki [1956].
Finite p-groups
Apart from the results of 2.5 and 2.6 on abelian groups, not much is known about
the problem: which finite p-groups are (strongly) determined by their subgroup
lattices. So it seems better to ask which classes of p-groups are invariant under
projectivities; by 2.2.6, we may restrict our attention to projectivities between p-
groups. Unfortunately, this question is not a very fruitful one either. It is rather easy
to answer, in general. For example, the order, exponent, number of generators,
Frattini length of a p-group are obviously invariant under these projectivities; on the
other hand, properties depending on commutator calculus, like class or derived
length, are not invariant, as the projectivities between p-groups with modular sub-
group lattices show. So there are only a few classes which are serious candidates for
study. One of these, the class of metacyclic p-groups, was handled in 5.2.13. We
briefly look at regular p-groups and then consider groups of maximal class.
Recall that a finite p-group G is regular if for all x, y E G,
(11) xPyP = (xY)P fl dP
with suitable d; E <x, y>'. This class of groups is not invariant under index preserving
projectivities. Indeed, if we put m = p - 1 in Exercise 5.5.1, then c(G) = p - 1 and
hence G is regular (see Huppert [1967], p. 322); in G, however, (bff_,)P = bPfo and,
since Exp G' = p, this contradicts (11). In any case, since projectivities between p-
groups satisfy and t (G)" = ?J (G) for all n e N, at least the power
structure of regular p-groups is preserved under these projectivities (see Exercise 5).
p-groups of maximal class
Let G be a finite p-group, IGI = p", n > 2. Recall that G is said to be of maximal class
if c(G) = n - 1. Then every factor of the upper and lower central series of G, except
the uppermost one, has order p and hence for i = 0, ..., n - 2,
(12) Z;(G) = is the unique normal subgroup of order p' of G.
We shall use the following characterization (see Huppert [1967], p. 375):
(13) G is of maximal class if and only if there exists s E G such that ICG(s)I = p2.
Let n > 4 and suppose that s e G such that ICG(s)I = p2. Then
(14) <Z(G),s> 0 Z2(G).
Indeed, since IZ2(G)I = p2, the equality <Z(G), s> = Z2(G) would imply that CG(s) _
CG(Z2(G)) is a normal subgroup of index p in G; hence IGI = p3, a contradiction.
Furthermore, we write Z = Z(G) and claim that
(15) ICGIz(sZ)I = p2.
Indeed, by (14), <Z2(G),s>/Z is a subgroup of order p2 of CG,z(sZ). So if (15) were
false, there would exist H/Z < CG/z(sZ) containing <Z2(G), s>/Z as a maximal sub-
group. Since <Z2(G), s>/Z is central in CGJz(sZ), it follows that H/Z is abelian and
hence c(H) = 2. On the other hand, IHI = p4 and IC1,(s)I = p2; by (13), c(H) = 3.
This contradiction proves (15).
In general, projectivities do not map p-groups of maximal class to p-groups of
maximal class. For example, if p > 2, the nonabelian group of order p3 and exponent
p2 has maximal class and is lattice-isomorphic to the abelian group of type (p2, p).
However, the following two theorems show that the majority of groups in this class
are invariant under projectivities.
7.4.11 Theorem (Caranti [1979]). Let G be a p-group of maximal class, IGI = p",
n > 4 and lets E G such that ICG(s)I = p2 and o(s) = p. If cp is a projectivity from G to
a group G, then 6 is a p-group of maximal class and Z;(G)I* = Z1(G) for all i.
Proof. By 2.2.6, G is a p-group. Write Z = Z(G) and S = <s>. Since I <Z, S> I = p2,
the group <Z, S> is abelian. Suppose, for a contradiction, that ICZ;(S0)I > p3. Then
there exists K< G such that <Z,S>0 < K4' < CU(S4) and IKI = p3. Since Z is the
unique minimal normal subgroup of G, we have Z" a G, by 5.4.2. It follows that
<Z4, S4') is central in K4' and hence K4 is abelian. But I CG(S)I = p2 implies that K is
not abelian and so K4' is of type (p2, p). Since I KZ2(G) : K1 < p, there exists H < G
such that KZ2(G) < H and IHI = p4. By (13), H is of maximal class. Furthermore,
by assumption, ISI = p so that <Z, S> = S2(K) g H. Since H has only one normal
subgroup of order p2, it follows that <Z,S> = Z2(G), contradicting (14). Thus
IC,(S,*)I = p2 and, by (13), 6 is of maximal class. For i = 1, ..., n - 2, Z;(G)/Zi_1(G)
is the unique minimal normal subgroup of G/Zi_1(G) so that by 5.4.2 and a trivial
induction, Z;(G)4 < G. Since Z.(G) is the unique normal subgroup of order p` of G, it
follows that Z.(G)4 = Z-(G).
7.4.12 Theorem (Caranti [1979]). Let G be a p-group of maximal class, IGI = p",
n > 4, and let cp be a projectivity from G to a group G. If G is not a p-group of maximal
class, then
(a) c(G) = c(G) - 1 and Z,(6) = Z;+1(G)" for all i >- 1,
(b) Exp S2(G) = p and I G : S2(G)I = p,
pp+1
(c) IGI <
Proof. Again by 2.2.6 and 5.4.2, IGI = p" and Z4 a G where Z = Z(G). _
(a) First consider the case that IGI = p4. Suppose, for a contradiction, that Z;/Z`0
is abelian. Then G/Z" is of type (p2, p) and therefore contains two cyclic subgroups
Ar/Z4' of order p2. Then A;/Z is cyclic, hence the A, are abelian and Al n A2 < Z(G).
But this implies that IZ(G)I > p2, a contradiction. Thus G/Z4' is not abelian. Since G
is not of maximal class, it follows that c(G) = 2 and Z4' < Z(G). On the other hand,
IZ(G/Z4)I = p and hence Z(G) = QD(G) = Z2(G)4. Thus (a) holds in this case. Now
suppose that IGI >- p5 and let s e G such that ICG(s)I = p2. By 7.4.11, o(s) = p2
and hence Z < <s>. So by (15), G/Z satisfies the assumptions of Theorem 7.4.11,
and therefore c(G/Z4') = n - 2 and Zi+1(G)4/Z4' = Zi(G/Z4') for all i > 1. Since
c(G) < n - 1, we obtain Z4' < Z(G) and Z(G/Z4') = Z(G)/Z4'. Thus Z1(G/Z4')
Zj(G)/Z4' for all i > 1 and (a) follows.
(b), (c) We prove both assertions simultaneously and consider a group G of mini-
mal order for which (b) or (c) is false. Lets e G such that ICG(s)I = p2 and let Mbe a
maximal subgroup of G containing s. By (13), M is of maximal class. By (a), Z(G) =
Z2(G)4 < Z(M4) since Z2(G) < cb(G) < M; thus M" is not of maximal class. If
IMI >- p4, the minimality of G implies that (b) and (c) hold for M, that is, IMI < pP+1
and S2(M) is a maximal subgroup of exponent p of M. Since S2(M) a G and
I G : sl(M)I = p2, we have S2(M) = G' and hence
(16) Exp G' = p and IGI < pP+2,
If IMI < p4, then clearly IGI = p4 < pp+2. Let t e G\Z be such that o(t) = p and
consider H = CG(t). By 7.4.11, IHI = p3 and since <Z,t> < f (Z(H)), we conclude
that H is abelian and I G: 12(H)I < p2. It follows that G' < S2(H) and hence (16) also
holds in this case.
If IGI = pp", there exists a maximal subgroup G, of G such that i2(G,) = K3(G)
(see Huppert [1967], p. 370 for p > 2; if p = 2, we can take the cyclic maximal
subgroup of G). But by (16), K2(G) = G' < fl(G,), a_contradiction. Thus IGI < pP+l.
Therefore by (a), c(G) = c(G) - 1 < p - 1 and so G is regular (see Huppert [1967],
p. 322). Then Exp i2(G) = p and hence also Exp K2(G) = p. Since G is a counter-
example to (b) or (c), it follows that IG : S2(G)i : p. By (16), G' < Q(G), and S2(G) = G'
since o(s) = p2. By a well-known property of regular p-groups (see Huppert [1967],
p. 327), IZ5(G)I = IG : Q(G)I and hence IZ5(G)I = IG : S2(G)I = p2. Thus there exists
x e G such that x 0 Z; let N = <x, G'>. Then S2(N) = G' and N is regular
since I NI < pP. Therefore IZ5(N)I = IN: S2(N)J = p and so <xP> = J(N) g G. This
contradicts (12).
Caranti [1979] proved that IGI < pP in 7.4.12(c) and he constructed all the p-
groups of maximal class which are lattice-isomorphic to groups of smaller class.
There are two series of such groups, one of which we present in Exercise 7. We
mention that the 2-groups of maximal class are the dihedral, generalized quaternion,
and semidihedral groups (see Huppert [1967], p. 339), and all these groups are easily
seen to be determined by their subgroup lattices since they contain cyclic maximal
subgroups and differ in the number of minimal subgroups. So we could have as-
sumed p > 2 in our investigations. Finally, for p > 2, two lattice-isomorphic but
nonisomorphic groups of order p and class 3 are the groups 9) and 10) in Exercise 6.
Exercises
1. If H is permodular in the group G, and C is a cyclic element in [G/H], show that

there exists c c G such that C = <H, c>.
2. Let G be a nilpotent p-group such that Exp G = a,. Show that every projectivity
of G is normalizer preserving.
3. (Suzuki [1951a]) Let G be a finite group such that L(G) is lower semimodular and
all intervals in L(G) are directly indecomposable. If (D (G) = 1, show that G is a
P-group. (Hint: By 5.3.11, G is supersoluble.)
4. (Suzuki [1951a]) Show that a finite group G has a lower semimodular subgroup
lattice all of whose intervals are directly indecomposable if and only if G is either
a p-group or satisfies (b) of 7.4.9.
5. Let us call a finite p-group G an fl-group if for every section A of G and all n e N,
is c AlaP" = 1}. (Thus every regular p-group is an fl-group.) Show that
if G is an Q-group and cp is a projectivity from G to a p-group G, then G is an
fl-group.
6. It is well-known (see Huppert [1967], p. 346) that for p > 3 there are exactly 15
pairwise nonisomorphic groups of order p. Show that among these (in Huppert's
notation) just the following are lattice-isomorphic: 2) and 6), 3) and 7), 4) and 14),
9) and 10), 13) and 15). Note that the groups of maximal class are 9), 10), 12),
and 13).
7.5 Soluble groups 395
7. (Caranti [1979]) Let 3 < n < p and G = <s, s, , s2, ... , with defining rela-
tions s = s"_,, sp = I (1 < i < n - 1), [si,s] = s;+, (1 < i < n - 2) and [s;, s;] = I
(1 < i, j < n - 1). Let G be the group obtained, replacing in these relations
[sn_2,s] = s"_, by [sn_2,s] = 1. Show that IGI = IGI = p", c(G) = n - 1, c(G) _
n - 2, and that G and G are lattice-isomorphic.
7.5 Soluble groups

We have seen that the class of soluble groups is invariant under projectivities. How-
ever, there are only a few general theorems saying that the members of a certain class
of soluble groups are determined (or even strongly determined) by their subgroup
lattices. On the contrary, projectivities between nonisomorphic groups of this type
occur in abundance. Examples can be found in 4.1.7, 4.2.12, 5.6.8, 5.6.9, and in the
literature cited in 5.6. In addition, Yakovlev [1975] constructed a projectivity
between two nonisomorphic nonabelian torsion-free soluble groups, and thus
showed that Sadovskii's theorem on torsion-free nilpotent groups does not general-
ize to soluble groups. More accessible is the question as to which classes of soluble
and generalized soluble groups are invariant under projectivities. We study this
problem in two rather different situations. First and foremost we investigate forma-
tions of finite soluble groups; and then at the end of this section we show that an
important class of generalized soluble groups, the class of radical groups, is invariant
Finite soluble groups
We already know classes of finite soluble groups which are invariant under projecti-
vities, and in some cases we have also given lattice-theoretic characterizations of
these classes. For the convenience of the reader we give references in the following
table. All groups considered are finite.
Class of Groups Reference Characterization

Soluble groups
Groups of Fitting length k, k > 3
Groups of p-length 1, 1 >- 2
4.3.4
4.3.3
4.3.8
-
5.3.5
Supersoluble groups 5.3.8 5.3.7 and 5.3.9

Supersoluble groups inducing automorphism 5.3.11 Groups with lower
groups of at most prime order in every semimodular subgroup
chief factor lattice
The most important invariants of a finite soluble group G are the derived length,
the Fitting length, and the rank of G. We have seen that derived length is not
preserved by projectivities, and we now show that the rank of G is preserved. Let us
recall that if 1 = Go < G1 < . < G = G is a chief series of G with I Gi : Gi_1 I = p;',
pi E P and ri e N, i = I__ , n, then the rank r(G) of G is the unordered n-tuple
(r...... of the dimensions of the chief factors of G. By the Jordan-Holder Theo-
rem, r(G) is independent of the choice of the chief series. We write a(r) for the class
of soluble groups of rank r = (r1, ... , and define Gk to be the class of all soluble
groups whose chief factors have dimension at most k (k c- N).
7.5.1 Theorem (Schmidt [1972b]). If p is a projectivity from a finite soluble group G

to a group G, then r(G) = r(G). Thus all the classes Ca(r) and Sk are invariant under
projectivities.
Proof. We proceed by induction on IGI. Let N be a minimal normal subgroup of G.

If NO is a minimal normal subgroup of G, then N and NO have the same dimension.
By induction, r(61N0) = r(G/N) and hence r(G) = r(G). Now suppose that NO is not
a minimal normal subgroup of G. Then by 5.4.4, N is cyclic and there exists a normal
subgroup S of G such that N < S, SO < G, and S and SO are hypercyclically em-
bedded in G and G, respectively. Thus if m is the length of L(S), every chief series of
G through S has m of its factors below S and all of these have dimension 1. The same
holds for SO in G. By induction, r(G/S0) = r(G/S) and it follows that r(G) = r(G).
The above result generalizes Iwasawa's theorem that the class a1 of supersoluble
groups is invariant under projectivities. It is not difficult also to extend the lattice-
theoretic characterization 5.3.7 of G1 to the classes 3k (see Exercise 1).
Another interesting class of finite soluble groups is the class 1: of Sylow tower
groups. Recall that G e 2 if and only if there exists a chain I = Go < - < Gr = G of
normal subgroups G; of G such that Gi+1/Gi is a Sylow subgroup of G/Gi for i =
0,...,r- 1.
7.5.2 Theorem (Schmidt [1972b]). The class Z of Sylow tower groups is invariant
Proof. Let G e 2 and p be a projectivity from G to a group G. We use induction on

I_GI to show that G E 1. If G = S x T where S is a P-group and (ISI, I TI) = 1, then
G = SO x TO, (ISO1,1 TO1) = 1, and SO is a P-group. Thus SO e 2 and, by induction,
TO E 2; since (IS" I, I TOE) = 1, it follows that G e Z. Now suppose that G is not
P-decomposable and let P I be a normal Sylow p-subgroup of G. By 4.3.2, PO _
Oq(G) for some prime q. If PO e Sylq (G), then G e 2, by induction. And if PO is not a
Sylow q-subgroup of G, then cp-1 is singular at q and by 4.2.6 there exists a normal
q-complement NO in G. By induction, NO E 2 and then also G e Z.
The types of the Sylow towers in G and G can of course differ. Indeed, the number
of primes dividing IGI can be twice the number of primes dividing IGI; for example,
if G and G are direct products of coprime P-groups. But also if G is not P-
decomposable, the number of primes involved in IGI and IGI can be different: Theo-
rem 4.1.6 shows that the nonabelian group of order 63 and exponent 21 and the
dihedral group of order 42 are lattice-isomorphic. By Example 4.1.7(b) there are

lattice-isomorphic groups of order 113.7 and 113. 19 with minimal normal sub-
groups of order 113. This shows that the class of groups with a Sylow tower with
respect to the natural ordering of the primes is not invariant under projectivities.
This contradicts Theorem 6.2 in Schmidt [1987]; a corrected version of this "theo-
rem" is given in Exercise 2.
To obtain deeper results, we need some simple facts from the theory of formations.
Formations of finite soluble groups
A formation is a class R of soluble groups with the following properties:

(1) If NaGea,then GIN ea.
(2) If N1, N2 a G such that GIN; e a (i = 1, 2), then G/(N, n N2) e
A formation a is called saturated if G/D(G) E a implies G e a.
It follows from (2) that if a is a formation, then in every finite soluble group G
there exists a unique smallest normal subgroup whose factor group lies in a; this is
called the a-residual G. It is the intersection of all the normal subgroups N of G
such that GIN e a. Furthermore it is well-known that if R is saturated, then in every
finite soluble group G there exists a canonical conjugacy class of subgroups S of
G, called a-projectors, defined by the condition that SN/N is a-maximal in GIN for
every normal subgroup N of G (see Robinson [1982], p. 272). We describe a con-
struction for formations due to W. Gaschutz and give some examples.
For every prime p, let R(p) be a class of groups. Define a to be the class of all
finite soluble groups G such that G/CG(H/K) e R(p) for every chief factor H/K of
order divisible by p of G. It is clear that a satisfies (1). And since the chief
factors of G/(N, n N2) are G-isomorphic to those of GIN, or GIN2, it follows that
G/(N, n N2) e #1 if GIN, and GIN2 are in a. Thus a is a formation, called the forma-
tion defined locally by the classes R(p). If all the 1(p) are formations, then a is
saturated (see Robinson [1982], p. 269).
7.5.3 Examples. All groups considered are finite and soluble.

(a) The class 2I of abelian groups clearly is a formation. Since G/D(G) e 2I for
every p-group G, the class 2I is not saturated.
(b) If j(p) = { 1 } for all primes p, the formation defined locally by the R(p) is the
class of groups with central chief factors, that is, the class 91 of nilpotent groups.
(c) Let I be a formation, R(p) = I for all primes p and let a be the formation
defined locally by the R(p). If G e a, then G/F(G) a I since F(G), the Fitting sub-
group of G, is the intersection of the centralizers of the chief factors of G (see Rob-
inson [1982], p. 129). Thus G e 911, the class of all groups with nilpotent I-residual.
Conversely, if G e 913x, then G/F(G) a I and hence G e R. Thus R = 911. Of particu-
lar interest in the theory of finite soluble groups are the class 9121 of nilpotent-
by-abelian groups and the formations 915, s e 1, of groups of Fitting length at
most s.
(d) It is easily seen that the classes C3,,, k e N, are formations. Of these, only the
formation G, of supersoluble groups is saturated: it is defined locally by the forma-
tions 91P of abelian groups of exponent dividing p - 1 (see Huppert [1967], pp.
712-715).
(e) For every prime p, let 3P be the class of groups consisting of the trivial group
and all the cyclic groups of prime order q dividing p - 1. Since 3P c 21p, the
formation defined locally by these classes 3P consists of those supersoluble groups
inducing automorphism groups of at most prime order in their chief factors. By
5.3.11, this is the class 971L of groups with lower semimodular subgroup lattice.
We come to our main result.
7.5.4 Theorem (Schmidt [1974], [1987]). For every prime p, let R(p) be a class of
finite soluble groups such that
(3) 3,, c ti(p) and
(4) if X, Y are lattice-isomorphic irreducible subgroups of GL(n, p), n e N, and
X E tar(p)\3p, then Y E R(p).
Then the formation I defined locally by the classes ti(p) is invariant under
projectivities.
Proof. Let G E fj and cp be a projectivity from G to a group G. We use induction on

I G I to show that G e Suppose first that G is P-decomposable, that is, G = S x T
where S is a P-group and (ISI, I TI) = 1. Then by 1.6.6, G = S4' x T"; furthermore
T G/S E It and hence by induction, 6/S" T" E . Therefore if H/K is a chief
factor of G of order a power of p such that K > S", then G/CG(H/K) e R(p). Also if
H 5 Se', then G/CG(H/K) e 3p c t` (p) since S' is a P-group. Thus G e R and we may
assume that G is not P-decomposable.
Now let N_ be a minimal normal subgroup of G. If N is not a minimal normal
subgroup of G, then by 5.4.4 there exists a minimal subgroup M of Z(G) such that
Ml' < Z_(G); let I M`0I = q. By induction, G/M E a; also, G/CG-(M) = I E j(q) and
hence G E I. So suppose that N is a minimal normal subgroup of G and let
IN I = p". Then by induction, 6/N4' E c(J. If n > 2 or n = I and tp and p' are
regular at p, then by 5.4.5, CG(N)4' = CU(N4) and q induces a projectivity from
X = G/CG(N) to Y = Since INS = p" = IN4j, both groups are irreducible
subgroups of GL(n, p) and X e R(p) since G e 11. If X 0 3p, then by (4), Y =
G/CC(N4') e c(p) and hence G e t`5. And if X E 3p, then IXI divides p - 1 and the
irreducibility of X implies n = I (see Huppert [1967], p. 165). Since Y < GL(l, p)
C,_, is lattice-isomorphic to X, the subgroup Y is cyclic of prime order dividing
p - 1 (or Y = 1) and hence Y E 3p S R(p), by (3). Again it follows that G E I.
It remains to consider the case that N4 < G, INI = p and cp or (p-' is singular at
p; let IN'I = q. If p-' is singular at q, then by 4.2.6 there exists a normal q-comple-
ment with abelian factor group in G, since G is P-indecomposable. Then N4' is a
central chief factor so that 6/CU(NP) = 1 e (q) and G e . So suppose that tp-' is
regular at q. Then p = q, cp is singular at p and by 4.2.6 there exists a normal
p-complement K in G such that K g G_ and G/K'' is cyclic or a P-group. It follows

that G/CG-(N`') E 3P c J(p) and again G e It, as desired.
Theorem 7.5.4 and Example 7.5.3(c) show that if I is a formation of finite soluble
groups satisfying (3) and (4) in place of I(p), then I = 91X is invariant under
projectivities. Now, obviously, 913` satisfies (3) and (4) and a trivial induction yields
that 9251 is invariant under projectivities for all s e N. We give examples of forma-
tions X with this property. The formation 21 of abelian groups clearly satisfies (3). By
Schur's Lemma, every irreducible subgroup of GL(n, p) has cyclic centre. And since
the class of cyclic groups is invariant under projectivities, it follows that 21 satisfies
(4). Thus the class 9121 is invariant under projectivities although 91 and 2I are not. By
1.6.6 and 2.2.6, every projective image of a nilpotent group with cyclic centre is
nilpotent and therefore 91 satisfies (4). Thus we get that for t >_ 2, the formations 91`
are invariant under projectivities, a result already known from 4.3.3. Finally, by
7.5.1, the formations Sk satisfy (3) and (4). So we have the following result.
7.5.5 Corollary. If X is a formation of finite soluble groups satisfying (3) and (4) in
place of I(p), then 9253 is invariant under projectiuities for every s e N. In particular,
the saturated formations 9152t, 915Gk and 91' (s, k > 1; t > 2) are invariant under
projectivities.
Of course, the classes I(p) = 3P also satisfy (3) and (4) and are the smallest classes
with this property. In fact, the following holds and will be used later.
7.5.6 Remark. Let 10 { 1 } be a formation defined locally by classes a(p). If I is

invariant under projectivities, then 3P 9 I(p) for every prime p. Thus the formation
JD1L of groups with lower semimodular subgroup lattice is the smallest nontrivial
formation which is defined locally and is invariant under projectivities.
Proof. Let 1 G E a and p e P. Then there exists N a G such that GIN is cyclic of
prime order. Since GIN E a and a is invariant under projectivities, it follows that
CP E I; thus 1 E I(p). Furthermore, CP x CP E I and hence for every prime q
dividing p - I, the nonabelian group of order pq lies in I. Therefore Cq E R(p) and
hence 3P c I(p). Now 7.5.3(e) shows that 971L c I.
Residuals and projectors
We want to show now that every projectivity between finite soluble groups maps
a-residual to I(-residual and a-projectors to a-projectors if I is a formation which
is invariant under projectivities. In the case of the a-residual, we need an additional
assumption which will now be explained. For short, let us say that (G, H, K) is a
P-hypercentral triple if H, K are normal subgroups of G such that K < H and
G/K = S, /K x . x Sr/K x T/K

where 0<relandforalli,je{1,...,r},
(5) S;/K is a P-group,
(6) (ISf/K I,IS;/KI) = 1 = (IS1/KI,IT/KI) for i :j,
(7) H/K = S1/K x x Sr/K x (H n T)/K, and
(8) (H n T)/K is hypercentrally embedded in G.
A formation I is called P-hypercentrally closed if for every P-hypercentral triple
(G, H, K), G/H e It implies that G/K e I. The formations studied above have this
property.
7.5.7 Lemma. If R is a formation defined locally by classes j(p) such that 3P c_ R(p)
for every prime p, then tR is P-hypercentrally closed.
Proof. Let (G, H, K) be a P-hypercentral triple and suppose that G/H e R. We have
to show that G/K e R and may assume without loss of generality that K = 1. Then
G is soluble; let X/Y be a chief factor of G such that I X/YI is a power of the prime p.
Then X/Y is G-isomorphic either to a chief factor of G/H, and so G/CG(X/Y) e R(p)
since G/H e (1, or to a chief factor contained in H. By (7) and (8), in the latter case,
X/Y is central or contained in some S.; in both cases, G/CG(X/Y) e 3P. Thus in any
case, G/CG(X/Y) E R(p) and G e R.
7.5.8 Theorem (Schmidt [1987]). Let R be a formation which is invariant under

projectivities and P-hypercentrally closed. If G is a finite soluble group and qP a
projectivity from G to a group G, then (G)'' = G.
Proof. Let Gj = N, H' = (Nc)o and K = (N)d. By 5.4.7, (G, H, K) is a P-

hypercentral triple. Since G/N e t( and I is a formation, G/H e a and, since is
P-hypercentrally closed, G/K e R. But N is the smallest normal subgroup of G with
factor group in I. It follows that N = K and thus N = K a G. Since R is invariant
under projectivities, GIN" e R and therefore (G;j)' = N > G. If we apply this re-
sult to the soluble group G and q in place of G and cp, we obtain (G )" > Gj.
Thus (G,)" = G,1, as desired.
7.5.9 Corollary. If (I is a formation defined locally by classes j(p) satisfying (3) and
(4), then (G;,) = G,1 for every projectivity cp from a soluble group G to a group G.
Proof. By 7.5.4 and 7.5.7, R is invariant under projectivities and P-hypercentrally

closed. Now 7.5.8 yields the assertion.
Note that the above corollary improves Theorem 7.5.4 and applies to all the
formations in Corollary 7.5.5. For a-projectors, the situation is even better. They
exist in every soluble group if and only if It is saturated; and in this case, they behave
well.
7.5.10 Theorem (Schmidt [1987]). Let a be a saturated formation which is invariant

under projectivities. If S is an a-projector of the soluble group G and (p a projectivity
from G to a group G, then S" is an a-projector of G.
Proof. If it = { 11, there is nothing to be shown; so suppose that a A { 11. It is

well-known (see Huppert [1967], p. 710) that a is defined locally by formations R(p).
By 7.5.6, 3 -- R(p) for all primes p and, by 7.5.7, a is P-hypercentrally closed. Now
let NO < G. We have to show that S"N"/N" is a-maximal in 6/N". Since S e a and
ii is invariant under projectivities, S" e I and hence SON"/N" S`/S`0 n NO e a.
Let M< G such that S"N" < Mw and M"/N" is a-maximal in 6/N". If we put
H = Nc and K = No, then by 5.4.7, (G, H", K") is a P-hypercentral triple. Since
M"/N" E R and NO < M" n H" < Mw, we have M"H"/H" -_ M"/M" n H" e a.
Also (M"H", H", K") is a P-hypercentral triple and a is P-hypercentrally closed;
it follows that M"H"/K" e R. Thus MH/K E a. The choice of M implies that
S"K" <_ S"N" < M" and hence SK < MH. Since S is an a-projector, SK/K is
a-maximal in G/K. It follows that SK = MH and then SON" > S"K" > M".
Thus SON" = M" and SON"/N" is a-maximal in G;N". This shows that S" is an
a-projector of G.
Lattice-theoretic characterizations of the formations studied in 7.5.5 are not

known; in fact, this is an interesting problem even for 9191 or 912. On the other hand
such characterizations are known for 91L and S1, and, more generally, S, (see
Exercise 1). Then it is possible, under the usual assumptions on a, to give lattice-
theoretic characterizations of the a-residual and of s-projectors (see Exercise 5).
A different approach is used by Hauck and Kurzweil [1990] to characterize the
prefrattini subgroups discovered by Gaschiitz in 1962. They show that for a sub-
group H of a finite soluble group G, all the subgroups K E [G/H] which are minimal
with respect to the property that the interval [G/K] is complemented are conjugate
in G; furthermore they identify these groups as the H-prefrattini subgroups intro-
duced by Kurzweil [1989]. For H = 1, one obtains the prefrattini subgroups, which
are therefore characterized in the subgroup lattice of G.
Further results on intervals in finite soluble groups are contained in Kurzweil
[1985] and Heineken [1987].
Infinite soluble and generalized soluble groups
Some of the results of Chapters 4 and 5 have been generalized to infinite groups. By
6.6.4, the class of soluble groups is invariant under projectivities, however a lattice-
theoretic characterization of this class is not known. In 6.4 we gave lattice-theoretic
characterizations of the classes of hypoabelian, hyperabelian, finitely generated
soluble, polycyclic, and supersoluble groups, and mentioned that the classes of
hypercyclic and of SN-groups can also be characterized.
Some rather special classes of infinite soluble groups were characterized by
Plotkin [1957] and Pekelis [1961a]. Intervals in hyperabelian groups were studied
by Plaumann, Strambach and Zacher [1985], and Stonehewer and Zacher [1988].
We finish this section by showing that another important class of generalized

soluble groups, the class of radical groups, is invariant under projectivities. Actually,
we prove a somewhat stronger result on the iterated Hirsch-Plotkin radicals which
is a direct generalization of Theorem 4.3.3 on the iterated Fitting subgroups of finite
groups.
Radical groups
Recall that the Hirsch-Plotkin radical R(G) of a group G is the unique maximal
normal locally nilpotent subgroup of G. It is well-known (see Robinson [1982],
p. 344) that
(9) R(G) contains all the ascendant locally nilpotent subgroups of G.
Furthermore, since R(G) is locally nilpotent, the elements of finite order in R(G) form
a characteristic subgroup T = T(R(G)), the torsion subgroup of R(G). Clearly,
(10) R(G)/T is torsion-free and T is a direct product of p-groups.
If G is finite, R(G) = F(G) and so the following result generalizes Lemma 4.3.2(b).
7.5.11 Lemma. Let tp be a projectivity from G to G such that R(G)I : R(G). Then
G is periodic and P-decomposable, that is, G = H x K where H E P(n, p) for some
n c N u { x }, p c P, and H and K are coprime; furthermore, cp or (p-1 is singular at p.
Proof. We assume that the conclusions of the lemma do not hold and show that
then
(11) R(G)'P < R(G);
by symmetry, it will follow that R(G) = R(G), the desired contradiction.
Let R = R(G) and suppose first that R is not periodic. Then by 7.3.3, R' is locally
nilpotent. Let T = T(R) be the torsion subgroup of R and let W = (x E GI o(x) = oc>.
By (10), R/T is torsion-free. Since R is generated by the elements outside T, we
have R < W. By 6.5.1, T4 g W4' and cp induces a projectivity 0 from WIT to Wco/Tw.
If R/T is abelian, then by 6.6.5, (R/T)O is permutable in (WIT)O. And if RIT is
nonabelian, then by 7.2.11, ip is induced by an isomorphism on R/T and 6.6.6(c)
shows that (R/T)" is permutable in (W/T)'. In any case, it follows from 6.2.10 that
R' is ascendant in W. Since W = (x E GIo(x) = cc> a G, the subgroup R4' is
ascendant in G. By (9), R4' < R(G), as desired.
Now let R be periodic and suppose, for a contradiction, that (11) does not hold.
By (10), R is a direct product of locally nilpotent p-groups and, by 1.6.6, R" is the
direct product of the images of these groups. Since R' R(G), there exists a p-
component S of R such that S 4 R(G). By (9), either SW is not locally nilpotent and
hence by 2.2.7,
(12) S is an elementary abelian p-group and SW is a nonabelian P-group;
or SIO is not ascendant in G and hence, by 6.2.10, in particular,

(13) Sc is not permutable in G.
We show first that G is a torsion group. So suppose, for a contradiction, that there
exists an element x of infinite order in G. Then by 6.6.6 (or 6.2.12), Sc" is permutable
in G and hence (12) is satisfied. Let Pc be the Sylow p-subgroup of Sc and L = S(x>.
By 6.5.1, S1* a Lc and hence P10 g L' since P` is characteristic in Sc"; again by 6.5.1,
P :!g L. Thus cp induces a projectivity from L/P to Lc"/P` and 6.5.11 applied to this
projectivity yields that IS/PI = BSc"/P101. But IS/PI = p IS"/PI*I, a contradiction.
Thus
(14) G is periodic.
We want to show next that (12) is satisfied. So assume that (13) holds and let
H = SG, N = Sz;. Then by 6.6.6 applied to the normal p-subgroup S of G, GIN =
H/N x K/N where H/N and K/N are coprime, H/N e P(n, p) for some n e N u { oc If,
I S/N I = p and J Sc/N"I = q : p. Since we assume that the conclusions of the lemma
do not hold, N # 1. By 2.2.7, S is either locally cyclic or elementary abelian. In the
latter case, (12) holds, as desired. So suppose that S is locally cyclic. Then S is finite
since it contains the maximal subgroup N. It follows that the Sylow p-subgroup of
H is a nilpotent normal subgroup of G; hence it is contained in R(G) and therefore
is S. Thus H is finite, cp is singular at p on H and, since S is cyclic of order at least p2,
4.2.6 implies that there exists a normal p-complement in H. But S < H and hence
H/N is a nonabelian group in P(n, p), a contradiction.
It remains to consider the case that (12) is satisfied. Then there exists M < S such
that I M I = p and IM"I # p. We claim that
(15) M g G.
Since Mc is not permutable in the P-group S`, and hence also not in G, it will follow
from 6.6.6 that G satisfies the conclusions of the lemma. This will contradict the
choice of G.
To prove (15), suppose, for a contradiction, that M is not normal in G and take
x e G such that M" 0 M and o(x) = s is a prime power. Then
W=
is a finite group since all the Mx' are minimal subgroups of the abelian group S and
their join is invariant under <x>. Clearly, cp induces a p-singular projectivity in W.
Since M is a nonnormal and S n W > M is a normal p-subgroup of W, it is clear that
(a) of 4.2.6 cannot be satisfied by this projectivity. Thus there exists a normal p-
complement C in W with abelian factor group WIC. If x is a p-element, (S n W) <x>
is a p-subgroup of W and hence is abelian; and if x is a p'-element, then x e C and
[M, x] < S n C = 1. In both cases, M" = M, a contradiction. This proves (15) and
the lemma.
Recall that the upper Hirsch-Plotkin series of a group G is the ascending series
1 = R0(G) < R, (G) < - in which Rz+1(G)/R,,(G) is the Hirsch-Plotkin radical of
- -
G/R,(G) for every ordinal x. This series becomes stationary at a certain ordinal '/ and
the term R,(G) is then called the Hirsch-Plotkin hyperradical R(G) of G. Finally, G is
called radical if R(G) = G. We come to our main result.
7.5.12 Theorem (Zacher [1982a]). If cp is a projectivity from the group G to a group

G, then for all n e N such that n > 2.
Proof. Suppose that the theorem is false. Then there exists a smallest integer n > 2
for which there is a projectivity (p between two groups G and G such that R (G)'P 0-
If G is periodic and {S1,S2,...} is the set of P-subgroups which are coprime
direct factors of G, then G = (S1 X S2 x ) x K where_K is P-indecomposable.
Since n > 2, (S1 X S2 x ) x R (K). By 1.6.6, G = (ST x SZ x ...) x KW
and then Rn(G) = (S; x SZ x ) x R (K)" # R (K'P). Thus
we may assume without loss of generality that G = K is P-indecomposable if G is
periodic. Then 7.5.11 yields that
(16) R(G)" = R(G); write R(G) = R.
Let ip be the projectivity induced by cp in G/R. Since
R.-1(G/R)`D = (R,i(G)/R)` = R,i(G)/Rw = R.-1(G/R`'),
the minimality of n implies that n = 2. And by 7.5.11 applied to (p, G/R is periodic
and G/R = H/R x K/R where H/R and K/R are coprime, H/R E P(m, p) for some
m e N u {oo}, p e P, and ip or 0 -1 is singular at p. Since the situation is symmetric
in G and d, we may assume that ip is singular at p. Then if H/R is elementary abelian,
there exist x, y c- H such that
(17) o(xR) = p = o(yR) and I<xR> I = p # q = I<yR>Ì;
and if H/R is not abelian, there exist x, y, z e H such that
(18) o(xR) = p : o(yR) = o(zR) and I<yR>0I = p q = I<xR> I = I<zR>#I
Now suppose first that R is periodic. Then in both cases we may choose x as a
p-element and want to show that <x> g H. For this let w e H and consider W =
<x, y, w>. Every finitely generated subgroup of R is a finitely generated nilpotent
torsion group and therefore is finite; thus R is locally finite and hence so is H (see
Robinson [1982], pp. 133 and 411). Thus W is finite and qp induces a p-singular
projectivity in W. By 4.2.6, either every p-subgroup of W is normal in W or W has a
normal p-complement. In the first case, <x)' = <x>, as desired. In the second case,
WR/R W/W r R also has a normal p-complement and hence is abelian. Therefore
(17) holds and the Sylow p-subgroups of W are not cyclic. Then I<x>I = p = I<x)Ì
and, by 4.2.10, x e Z(W). So again <x> v = <x> and, since w e H was arbitrary, it
follows that <x> g H. Thus <x> is a subnormal nilpotent subgroup of G and, by (9),
<x) < R. This contradicts (17) or (18).
It remains to consider the case that R is not periodic; let T = T(R). Then cp
induces a projectivity from G/T to 6/T" and since our final argument only concerns
this projectivity, we may assume that T = 1. Then R is torsion-free. Let u e H\R.
Since H/ R E P(m, p), we obtain u' E R for some prime r. If o(u) is finite, it follows
that o(u) = r. Take 1 : w e R and consider W = <w, w',..., w"'-` > (u>. Since R is
locally nilpotent, <w, w",..., w"'-'> = W n R is a nontrivial nilpotent normal sub-
group of W. Hence W has a nontrivial torsion-free abelian normal subgroup and by
6.5.12,
(19) I`'I = II.

If o(u) is infinite and tp is induced by an isomorphism on R, then tp is index
preserving on <u'> < R and hence, by 6.5.10, on also. But I <yR>0I : I <yR> I in
(17) and (18). Therefore it follows from (19) that o(y) is infinite and that tp is not
induced by an isomorphism on R. By 7.2.11 and 2.6.10, R is abelian of rank 1. Now
if (17) holds, then by 6.5.12, there is no p-element in H and hence o(x) = o(y) = co.
Furthermore, by 6.5.10, tp maps p-indices in <x> to p-indices in <x>` and p-indices
in <y> to q-indices in <y>. But this is impossible since <x> n (y> : 1. Similarly, if
(18) holds and o(yR) = r = o(zR), then tp maps r-indices in <y> n (z> to p-indices
and q-indices in (<y> n <z>)`0, the same contradiction.
By an obvious transfinite induction, we get the result announced above.
7.5.13 Corollary (Pekelis [1972b], [1976]). If tp is a projectivity from the group G

to a group G, then R(G)4' = R(G). In particular, the class of radical groups is invariant
Exercises
1. (Schmidt [1987]) For k e N, let us call a lattice L with least element 0 and
greatest element I poly-k-modular if there exist elements x, E L such that
0 = xo < < X. = I, xi mod L and [xi+1/xi] is a modular lattice of length at
most k (i = 0, ... , r - 1). Show that a group G lies in Sk if and only if L(G) is
poly-k-modular.
2. For every ordering -< of the set P of primes, denote by I, the class of groups
with a Sylow tower with respect to -<; thus G e 2, if and only if there exists a
chain 1 = Go < < G, = G of normal subgroups Gi of G such that Gi/G1_1 is a
Sylow qi-subgroup of G/G1_1 for i = 1, ..., r and qr < q,_1 < - -< q,. Show that
-
2.< is not invariant under projectivities. [Hint: Suppose that 1 < is invariant
under projectivities and prove the following assertions.
(a) IfgIp - 1, then q -< p.
(b) If q -< p -< r, then oq(p) # or(p); here oq(p) is the order of p modulo q, that is,
the smallest natural number n such that p" = 1 (mod q).
(c) There is no ordering of P satisfying (a) and (b). (Use a computer to produce a
table of all oq(p) for p, q < 250.)]
3. (Schmidt [1973]) For p E P, let Up be the formation of abelian groups with
square-free exponent dividing p - 1 and let fl be the saturated formation de-
fined locally by the Q..
(a) Show that UL c fl c a 1.

(b) Show that C is the smallest nontrivial saturated formation which is invariant
4. Show that not every saturated formation containing UL is invariant under
projectivities.
5. (Schmidt [1987]) Let I be a formation of finite soluble groups and 2 a class of
lattices such that for every group X, we have X e I if and only if L(X) e 2.
Assume further that I is P-hypercentrally closed and that [I/x] e 2 for all
x mod Le 2. Let G be a finite soluble group.
(a) Show that G;, is the smallest modular subgroup M of G such that [G/M] e 2.
(b) Show that a subgroup S of G is an a-projector of G if and only if for every
M mod G, we have that [S u M/M] e 2 and [T/M] 2 for all T:!:-, G such
that SuM<T.
6. (Schmidt [1987]). Let k e F and G be a soluble group.
(a) Show that the ak-residual of G is the smallest modular subgroup M of G with
[G/M] poly-k-modular.
(b) Show that the subgroup S of G is an Gk-projector of G if and only if for every
M mod G, the interval [S u M/M] is poly-k-modular and [TIM] is not poly-
k-modular for all T< G such that S u M < T
7.6 Direct products of groups

In 1951 Suzuki showed that the direct product of a finite simple group with itself
is determined by its subgroup lattice. We use his method to prove a generaliza-
tion of this result and also study projectivities of direct products of groups more
systematically.
General properties
If G = Dr G., and cp is a projectivity from G to a group G, the first question to ask

AEA_
is whether G = Dr G. It is clear that this is false in general: every projectivity from
AA
a finite abelian to a nonabelian group is a counterexample. On the other hand, by
1.6.6, the assertion is true in the important case where the GA are coprime. Other
positive results follow from our general theorems on projective images of normal
subgroups. We prove an additional assertion of this type.
7.6.1 Lemma. Let G = H x K and suppose that X < K such that X n N(K) = 1
where N(K) is the norm of K. If qp is a projectivity from G to a group G, then H is
normalized by X`0.
Proof. Suppose, for a contradiction, that H is not normalized by X and take

x e X" such that (H'*)" # H. Then M = H4`P is a modular subgroup of G sat-
7.6 Direct products of groups 407
isfying M n K = H"'`-' n K`""-' = (H n K)c"c-' = 1. For every A < K, therefore,

A = A u (M n K) = (A u M) n K a A u M since M mod G and K :!g G. Thus M
normalizes A and it follows that (H u M) n K< N(K). Now H u M = H" u H""
is contained in H u X and hence H u M < H x X. Since M H, we finally
obtain that 1 96 (H u M) n X < (H u M) n K < N(K), and this contradicts our
assumption on X.
In the following theorem we collect an obvious corollary of Lemma 7.6.1 and

some consequences of our results on projective images of normal subgroups.
7.6.2 Theorem. Let G = Dr GA with subgroups GA (A e A) and let cp be a projectivity

A
from G to a group G. Then G = Dr GT if every GA has one of the following properties.
AEn
(i) Z(GA) = 1.
(ii) GA is perfect and finite.
(iii) GA is generated by elements of infinite order and order 2.
Proof. We have to show that Gx is normalized by G,`, for every ).,,u e A; then all the
G are normal subgroups of G and G = Dr GT. For this we clearly may assume that
AEA
i p and G = G. x G,,. Suppose first that 1. Then by 1.4.3, 1 and
7.6.1 yields that G' is normalized by G,. If G G/GA is a finite perfect group,
then by 6.5.7 and (c) of 5.4.9, Gx < G. Finally, suppose that G, = <xlx e X> where
X G and o(x) E {2, oc } for every x e X. Let x e X and put H = <GA, x> = GA x <x>.
If o(x) = oc, then GT < H by 6.5.1. And if o(x) = 2 and Gw is not normal in Hg', then
by 6.5.3 there exists K < GA such that H/K and H`/K are contained in P(2, p) for
some prime p. But <x>K/K is a normal subgroup of order 2 in H/K. Thus p = 2 and
H`/K` is elementary abelian of order 4. This contradiction shows that Gx < H".
Since G, = x>"Ix E X>, it follows that GT is normalized by G.
We show next that projectivities of direct products sometimes preserve indices

and normalizers.
7.6.3 Lemma. Let G = H x K be a finite group and p a prime dividing I HI and I KI.
If G admits a p-singular projectivity, then G has elementary abelian Sylow p-subgroups
and a normal p-complement. Furthermore, in one of the two groups H or K, the Sylow
p-subgroup is a direct factor.
Proof. Let rp be a p-singular projectivity from G to a group G, and let P e Sylo (G)
such that I P" 10 I P I. Since p divides I H I and I K I, P is not cyclic and hence elemen-
tary abelian, by 2.2.6.
Suppose, for a contradiction, that G does not possess a normal p-complement.
Then by 4.2.6, G = S x T where (IS 1, I TI) = I and S is a P-group containing P as
a proper normal subgroup. Let IS : PI = q and Q e Sylq(S). Then Q e Sylq(G) and
IQ I = q. It follows that Q is contained in one of the two direct factors of G = H x K.
So Q < H, say, and then P n K < Cp(Q) = 1 since S is a P-group. But P n K is a
Sylow p-subgroup of K, a contradiction. Thus G has a normal p-complement N.
Let Po be the Sylow p-subgroup of Pg'. Then Po is a maximal subgroup of

P and, by 4.2.10, PO < Z(G). If P n K < P0, then P n K < Z(K) and hence
K = (P n K) x (N n K); and if P n K P0, then P = PO(P n K) < CG(H) and it
follows that H = (P n H) x (N n H).
It follows from 7.6.3, or simply from the fact that a nonabelian P-group is directly
indecomposable, that a projectivity cp of a direct product G = H x K of two
isomorphic finite groups H and K is index preserving if G = H4 x K4'. Zacher
[1981] proved that if G is infinite, it is at least true that (p induces index preserving
projectivities in the direct factors. We shall need not this but a similar result on
normalizers.
7.6.4 Lemma. Let G= H x K, H K and suppose that cp is a projectivity from G to

a group G such that G = H4' x K4'. Then H4 K4' and the projectivity 0 induced by
cp in H is normalizer preserving. In particular, (X')" = (X`)' and Z(X)" = Z(X4) for
every subgroup X of H.
Proof. Clearly, (p maps diagonals with respect to H and K onto diagonals with
respect to 111' and K4'. By 1.6.2, H4 K4' and hence (p-1 satisfies the assumptions of
the lemma. Therefore to prove that i is normalizer preserving, it suffices to show
that for every X < H, the inclusion NH(X)4' < NH.(X4') holds; application of this
result to cp-' will yield the other inclusion.
So let X < H, N = NH(X), e: H -+ K be an isomorphism, M = N', and consider
L = N x M < G. By 1.6.2, D = {xx'lx e N} is a diagonal in Land, since X :!g L, we
see that XD is a subgroup of L such that XD n N = X. Since G = H4' x K4', we have
L` = N" x M4', and hence M4' centralizes X4'. Also, X4' = (XD)4' n N4 o (XD)4' so
that D4 normalizes X4'. Since L = D4 u M4', it follows that X4 o L4'. In particular,
NH(X)4' = N < NHm(X4'), as desired. Thus 0 is normalizer preserving. By 5.6.4, 0 is
also centralizer preserving and, by 5.6.2 and 5.6.3, (X')4' = (X`)' and Z(X)4' = Z(X4)
for all X < H.
Note that if G is not the direct product of H4' and K", then (p in general neither
preserves normalizers nor indices. This is shown by the obvious example of P-
groups.
The direct product of two isomorphic groups
The basic tools in the study of projectivities of a direct product G = H x K of two

isomorphic groups H and K are the diagonals; these are the subgroups D of G such
that D n H = 1 = D n K and DH = G = DK. By 1.6.2, these subgroups are in one-
to-one correspondence with the isomorphisms from H to K, and hence also with the
automorphisms of H. It follows that a projectivity (p from G to a group G such that
G = H4' x K4' induces a bijective map i from Aut H to Aut H4'. We study this map
and want to show first that it induces an isomorphism i* from Aut H/Pot H onto
Aut H4'/Pot H4'. This is particularly interesting if Z(H) = 1. For in this case, Pot H = 1
and Z(H`0) = I so that i = i* is an isomorphism from Aut H onto Aut Hl*. Hence
(Inn H)' and Inn H are normal subgroups of Aut H isomorphic to H and H',
respectively. We shall give an example to show that (Inn H)' Inn M, in general.
However, our main result will be that (Inn H)' Inn H'/(Inn H)' n Inn H' is at least
abelian. This will imply that (Inn H)' = Inn H and hence H H" if H has trivial
centre and is perfect.
So let G = H x K and E: H -+ K be a fixed isomorphism. By 1.6.2, for every
isomorphism 6 from H to K,
(1) D(6) = {xx'lx c H}
is a diagonal in G (with respect to H and K) and every diagonal has this form. For
a c Aut H, let 8 be the autoprojectivity of G induced by the automorphism i' of G
defined by
(2) i1: xy-+ xyfor xEH,yc- K.
Clearly, & is an autoprojectivity of G fixing H and every subgroup of K. In particu-
lar, it has to map diagonals onto diagonals. Also
(3) D(TE)' = D(a-'TE)
since (xx") = xx" = x(x)-"" for T E Aut H and x c H. We study images of
diagonals under an autoprojectivity of G fixing H and every subgroup of K.
7.6.5 Lemma. Let be an autoprojectivity of G such that H'" = H and Y'" = Y for
all Y K; let a, re AutH.
(a) If D' = D for some diagonal D, then X " = X for all X < D and all X < H.
(b) If X'" = X for all X < H and D(ae) = D(TE), then aT-' e Pot H.
(c) If D(E)S' = D(aE), then D(TE)'' = D(arxE) for some a c- Pot H.
Proof. (a) For every X < D, by Dedekind's law, X = XH n D = (H u (XH n K)) n D,

and this subgroup is clearly invariant under 0. Similarly, if X < H, then X =
XKnH=((XKnD)uK)nHand it follows that XO = X. D(TE)4'-'
(b) Let a = UT-' and = &t/i'. By (3), D(aE)" = = D(aE) and then (a)
implies that X" = X for all X < H. Since a = 4i, it follows that X' = X for all
X < H. Thus a = at-' e Pot H.
(c) This time, let p = 06. By (3), D(E)" = D(e) and hence again X" = X for all
X < H. Then (b) implies that D(TE)" = D(Tae) where T(Ta)-1 = Tx"' T"' e Pot H.
Thus x c- Pot H and, by (3), D(TE)O = D(TaE)a ' = D(araE).
Now suppose that cp is a projectivity from G to a group G_ such that G =

H1* x K1*; put H = H and K1* = K. Then D(E)'* is a diagonal in G with respect to
H and k and hence D(E)'* = D(E') for some isomorphism e' from H onto K. For
a E Aut H, D(aE)' is a diagonal in G, and hence there exists a unique a' e Aut H such
that D(aE)' = D(6 E'); define a' = a'. Then by 1.6.2, i is a bijective map from Aut H
onto Aut H and we show that it induces an isomorphism in Aut H/Pot H.
7.6.6 Theorem (Suzuki [1951a]). Let G = H x K, H Kand let cp be a projectivity
from G to a group 6 such that 6 = H" x Kl*; put H1* = H and K" = K. Let e be an
isomorphism from H onto K, D(E)" = D(e') and let i be the map from Aut H onto Aut H
defined by
(4) D(ac)" = D(cr'E') for a E Aut H.
Then i induces an isomorphism i* from Aut H/Pot H onto Aut H/Pot H.
Proof. Let a, r e Aut H. If a = err-' E Pot H, then p = cp-' &cp is an autoprojectivity

of G such that X'' = X for all subgroups X of H and K. Furthermore, by (3) and (4),
D(u'E')" = D(QE)"* = D(TE)` = D(T'E').
Now (b) of 7.6.5 yields that a'(T')-' E Pot H. Conversely, E Pot H implies
QT-' E Pot H, since i-' is constructed from E' and cp-' in the same way as i from E and
cp. Thus i induces a bijective map i* from Aut H/Pot H onto Aut H/Pot H. For
= (p-'&-'(p, D(E') ' = D(QE)I* = D(a'E'), by (3), and hence by (c) of 7.6.5 there exists
Q E Pot H such that D(a'T'f E') = D(T'E')O = D(ATE)" = D((at)'E'). Thus (at)' =
and i* is an isomorphism.
The above theorem is the essence of Suzuki's method. If H is a nonabelian simple

group, then by 6.4.2 and 6.5.4, H" is also simple and G = H" x K4'. Hence the
assumptions of Theorem 7.6.6 are satisfied and, furthermore, Pot H = 1 and Inn H
is the unique minimal normal subgroup of Aut H. It follows that i = t* is an isomor-
phism and H (Inn H)' = Inn H4 H4'. Thus we get the theorem, proved by Suzuki
[1951 a] in the finite case and by Zacher [1981] in general, that G is determined by
its subgroup lattice if H is a nonabelian simple group. We want to prove a more
general result, and for this we have to study the map i more closely. We mention in
passing that i* is independent of the choice of e and that, in general, i is not an
isomorphism. This can be seen, for example, if H is a cyclic group of prime order
p>5.
7.6.7 Lemma. Suppose that the hypotheses of Theorem 7.6.6 are satisfied and let
X < H and a E Aut H. Then
(a) (Xe)w = (XI')`,
(b) X' = X if and only if (X4')' = X4', and
(c) [X, x]`0 = [X`0, a'] if X. = X.
In particular, [H, a]' = [R, o('] and CH(af
Proof. (a) Clearly, (X x X`) n D(e) is a diagonal in X x X1 < G. Since G =

H x k, it follows that (X x X`)4' = X4' x (X`)4' and hence ((X x X`) n D(E))4' _
(X x (X`)') n D(E') is a diagonal in X' x (X`)4'. It follows that (X`)4' = (X4')".
(b) Let us define D(X, a, E) = D(xE) n (X x X`). Then by (a) and (4),
(5) D(X, a, r)" = D(ae)4' n (X4' x (X`)4') = D(x'E') n (X4' x (X`0)`) = D(X4', a', E').
By 1.6.2, D(X, a, E) is a diagonal in X x X` if and only if the map x -i x` (x E X) is
an isomorphism from X onto X`. This is the case if and only if XS = X. Similarly,
D(X4, a', E') is a diagonal in X4' x (X4')" if and only if (X`0)" = Xw. And finally, since
cp is a projectivity, D(X, x, c) is a diagonal in X x X` if and only if D(X, a, c)`0 =

D(X`0,x',c') is a diagonal in X` x (X`)4' = X` x (X4')`. Summarizing, we obtain (b).
(c) Suppose that a, /i E Aut H such that X' = X = XB and let N a X. Then we
claim that
(6) D(X, a, c) < D(X, f3, c)N if and only if [X, a/i-' ] < N.
Indeed, if D(X, a, c) < D(X, fl, c)N, then for every x e X, there exist elements z e X
and a E N such that xx" = zzpà = zazfl`. It follows that x = za, x' = za and hence
[x, a fl-' ] = x-' x'p-' = a-' E N. Thus [X, af3-' ] < N. Conversely, if [X, a/3-' ] < N,
then for every x e X, x' = (x [x, a f3-' ] )P = (xa)fl for some a e N and therefore xx" _
xa(xa)aà-' e D(X, f3, c)N. Thus (6) holds.
To prove (c), we apply (6) with N = [X, a] and /3 = idH, the trivial automorphism;
note that N < X, by (6) of 1.5. Thus by (6), D(X, a, c) < D(X, idH, c)N. By 7.6.4,
N4 a X10 and, since cp is a projectivity, using (5) we get that D(X4,x',c') <
D(X4,(idH)',c')N4'. Now (4) shows that (idH)' = idH and, by (b), (X4')" = X4'. Hence
(6) for G = H x k yields that [X`, a'] < N" _ [X, a]4'. If we apply this result to
9- and i-', we obtain that [X,2] < [X`0, a']4 and (c) follows. Now X = H and
X = CH(a) satisfy the assumption of (c). It follows that [11,,i]" _ [Ti, a'] and
[Cn(a)4, a'] = [CH(a), x]w = 1. Thus CH(")`P < CH(a') and, if we apply this result to
cp - ' and i-', we get the other inclusion.
We come to our main result.
7.6.8 Theorem (Schmidt [1981]). Let G = H x K where H z- K and Z(H) = 1 and

suppose that cp is a projectivity from G to a group G. Put H4' = H and K` = K, let u
he the natural isomorphism from H onto Inn H, that is, x= = z -'xz for x, z e H;
similarly r for H._
(a) Then G = H x k, H K, Z(H) = I and the map i constructed in 7.6.6 is an
isomorphism from Aut H onto Aut H.
(b) If N is a characteristic subgroup of H or a normal subgroup of H contained in
H', then N"N4't/N' n Not is abelian. In particular, (Inn H)' Inn H/(Inn H)' n Inn H is
abelian.
(c) The maximal perfect subgroup of H is isomorphic to the maximal perfect sub-
group of H.
Proof. (a) By 7.6.2, G = H x K and then 7.6.4 implies that H -_ K and Z(H) = 1. It
follows from 1.4.3 that Pot H = I = Pot H and, by 7.6.6, i = i* is an isomorphism
from Aut H onto Aut H.
(b) Let X < H, E = X' u X`t, A = X' n XP', and suppose that Xt a E and
E. Then E/A = X'/A x X`t/A and we show that
(7) E/A is abelian.
For this let x e X' and x e X`0; let D < X such that D`0' = A. For z e H and
fl eAutH,
z[X',6l = (Y-i(xzx-')'5 'X)p = (x1 xA)-'zx-1 x' = z[X'01,
Aut H
Figure 21
so that [x', #] = [x, #]T, a well-known formula. It implies that [x, x']T =
[x", x'] E [XI", X'] < A since X' and xc" are normal subgroups of E. Therefore
[x, oc'] E AT ' = D" for all x E X" and hence [X", a'] < D". Since x c- X, we have
Xz = X and, by (c) of 7.6.7, it follows that [X, x] < D. This holds for all x e X; thus
X' = [X, X] < D. By 7.6.4, (X")' = (X')` < D" and hence X`0/D'0 is abelian. So,
finally, X``/D'0' = X"T/A is abelian. If we apply this result to c0-1 and t-1, we obtain
that X/X"T' ' n X is abelian. Thus X/X`t n X' = X'/A is abelian and (7) holds.
Now if N is a characteristic subgroup of H, then by (b) of 7.6.7, N'' is characteristic
in H and hence N' and Nwt are normal subgroups of Aut H. By (7), N'N'T/N' n N"
is abelian. In particular, (Inn H)' Inn H/(Inn H)'n Inn H is abelian and hence (H')'
and (H')T are contained in A = (Inn H)' n Inn H. Thus if N is a normal subgroup
of H contained in H', then by 7.6.4, N" is a normal subgroup of H contained in
H'. It follows that N' and Nmt are normal subgroups of A > N'N"T. By (7),
N'N`0T/N' n Nwt is abelian.
(c) Let S be the maximal perfect subgroup of H. Then S is characteristic in H and,
by 7.6.4 (or 6.4.5), Sc is the maximal perfect subgroup of H. It follows from (b) that
S' = S' n S"T = Sc,T and hence Sc" = S'T ' S.
7.6.9 Corollary. If H is a perfect group with trivial centre and K Z H, then G =

H x K is determined by its subgroup lattice.
Proof. By (a) of 7.6.8, a projective image G' of G satisfies GI = HI x K' where

H" K"' and, by (c),HP ^- H. Thus G" G.
The main idea in Theorem 7.6.8 is to try to prove that (Inn H)' = Inn H; since
H Inn H and H Inn H, this implies that H H. We were able to do this when
H = H'; it can also be proved if this hypothesis is replaced by the assumption that
H is generated by involutions (see Zacher [1981]). We leave this as an exercise for
the reader, and remark that in 7.7.8 we shall prove H H in this situation using
quite different methods. We want to show now that 7.6.9 does not hold without the
assumption that H is perfect so that in the situation of Theorem 7.6.8, in general,
(Inn H)' : Inn H.
7.6.10 Example. Let q > 7 and p be primes such that ql p - 1, and let r E N such
that r # I (mod p) and rQ - 1 (mod p). Recall that in 5.6.8 for every p e {2, ... , q - 1 },
we defined the Rottlander group
G"=<x,Y,alx"=Y=a9=Cx, Y] = 1,a--lxa=xr a-1ya=yrl>
and proved that all the G are lattice-isomorphic, but G G, if and only if p = v or
pv = I (mod q). We claim that if p : q - 1 : v, then G x G and G, x G,, also have
isomorphic subgroup lattices.
Proof. Let H = <x1,x2,a> G K = <x3,x4,b> such that o(x1) = p, x;x, = xjx;

for all i, j and xi = x'1, x2 = x2", x3 = x3, x4 = x4. Let G = H x K = NA where
N = <x1,x2ix3,x4> and A = <a,b>, and put Ni = <x,> for i = 1, ..., 4. We deter-
mine the centralizers and eigenspaces in N of the subgroups of order q of A. Since
p 0 (mod q), we obtain CN(a) = N3 x N4, CN(b) = N1 x N2 and CN(ab") = 1 for
0 < i. < q. Since p Ef= 1 (mod q), the other eigenspaces of a are N1 and N2, those of b
are N3 and N4, and those of ab are N1 x N3 and N2 x N4. Since p 0 q - I, p2 * I
(mod q) and there exists p' E {2, ... , q - 2} such that p 0 p' and pp' - 1 (mod q).
Then the eigenspaces of ab" are N1, N2 x N3, N4 and those of ab," are N, x N4, N2,
N3. Finally, if) i { 1, p, p' }, all the exponents r, r", r ;L' r' are pairwise incongruent
modulo p, and hence N,, N2, N3, N4 are the eigenspaces of ab". This eigen-
space situation is more or less independent of p. Let H = <x1,x2ic> G,, K =
<x3, x4+ d> where x` = x', x`2 =
1
X3 d = x'3, xd4 = x' 4, and define G = H x K = NB
xr'
where B = <(-,d>; let v' E {2__q - 2} such that vv' - I (mod p). Then the identity
r on N and every projectivity T from A to B such that <a> = <c>, <h)` = <d>,
<ab)' = <cd>, <ab">t = <cd`> and <abl">' = <cd,"> satisfy the assumptions of The-
orem 4.1.6. Indeed, since qlp - 1, a subspace P of N is invariant under an element
of A or B if and only if it is a direct sum of subspaces of eigenspaces of this element.
By 4.1.6, there exists a projectivity from G to G.
It is easy to see that for the projectivity constructed above, ((Inn H)')' = (Inn H)'
in the notation of 7.6.8. It is an open problem whether this holds in general.
Direct products of isomorphic groups
The Fundamental Theorem of Projective Geometry states that every isomorphism

of the lattice of subspaces of a vector space of dimension n > 3 onto the lattice of
subspaces of another vector space is induced by a semilinear map between the two
spaces. In particular, the ground fields are isomorphic. This theorem suggests the
following general question.
Given an algebraic structure X closed with respect to direct products, does there
exist an integer n = n(91) such that the n-fold direct product of every member of RI is
determined by its lattice of substructures?
The P-groups show that the cyclic groups of prime order p > 2 are counter-
examples to this conjecture for the algebraic structure "group"; and there are also
less trivial examples (see Exercise 7). Therefore we have to make additional assump-
tions on the projectivities considered. The most natural one is that they preserve the
direct decomposition. This leads to the following two problems.
7.6.11 Problem. Let X be a class of groups. Does there exist an integer n such that
whenever X E X, G = X 1 x x X with X1 X for all i = 1, ..., n, and (p is a
projectivity from G to a group G satisfying G = X11 x x Xn , then
(A) X; X1 (and hence G G), or even
(B) (p is induced by an isomorphism?
In particular, does there exist such an integer for the class X of all groups?
Clearly when n = 1 (A) or (B) is satisfied precisely when every group in X is

determined or strongly determined by its subgroup lattice. So the two problems in
7.6.11 can be considered as natural generalizations of the main problems studied in
this chapter. We want to discuss them briefly without giving proofs since most of the
results known are rather special and require long and technical computations.
Problem (A) is wide open. Example 7.6.10 shows that the Rottlander groups need
at least three direct factors. But there is no example known in which n = 3 would not
suffice. So it might be true that, as in the Fundamental Theorem of Projective
Geometry, n = 3 will solve Problem (A) for the class X of all groups. This was proved
by Baer for abelian groups (see 2.6.7 and 2.6.10, and note that the assumptions in
7.6.11 imply that G is abelian). It is also proved in 7.6.9 for perfect groups with trivial
centre; for these groups and for abelian groups with elements of infinite order, even
n = 2 suffices. Another class of groups is handled by Schmidt [1982] who proves
that if X is a finite group with a proper elementary abelian normal Hall subgroup
N such that Cx(N) = N, then n = 3 suffices. Note that the Rottlander groups are
covered by this theorem.
Problem (B) is solved for the class X of all groups. There are groups, even with
trivial centre, such that no integer n has the required property.
7.6.12 Example (Schmidt [ 1982] ). Let p > 2 be a prime and n c- N.

(a) Let G = A1B1 x A2B2 be a finite group with elementary abelian normal p-
subgroups Ai, (p,lBil) = 1 = (IB1 l,IB2D) and CA;(Bi) = 1 for i = 1, 2. Let N = Al x A2,
H = B1 x B,, take s c N such that 0 * s 0 1 (mod p), and define u: N - N by
(xy), = xy.s for x c- A, y c- A2. Finally, for U < G, that is U = MK' where z e N,
M < N, K < NH(M) (see 4.1.5), define U` = MK` Then cp is an autoprojectivity of
G which induces the trivial autoprojectivity in N and in H and which is not induced
by an automorphism of G.
(b) Let q and r be different primes dividing p - 1 and let X be the direct product
of a nonabelian group of order pq and a nonabelian group of order pr. If
G = X, x x X. where X; X for i = 1, ..., n, then there exists an autoprojec-

tivity cp of G satisfying X? = X; for all i which is not induced by an automorphism
of G. Clearly, I X I = p2 qr and Z(X) = 1.
Proof. (a) First note that N is an elementary abelian normal Hall subgroup of
G with complement H. Since (IB,I,1B21) = 1, every subgroup K of H has the
form K = (K n B,) x (K n B2), and hence CN(K) = CN(K n B,) n CN(K n B2) =
C,q,(K n B,) x CA2(K n B2). Since a fixes every subgroup of A, and A2, it follows
that CN(K) = CN(K). If M < N is invariant under K, then by 4.1.3 and (1) of
1.5, M = [M, K] x C,(K) and [M, K] = [M, K n B2] [M, K rB, ]""2. Since
[M, K n B2] < A2 and [M, K n Bt ] < A,, we obtain that [M, K] = [M, K]. Thus
if CN(K) < M, then M = [M, K] x CN(K) and hence M = M.
Now let U; < G (i = 1,2), that is U; = M;K;i where zi e N, M. < N and
K; < NH(Mi), and suppose that U1 < U2. Then by 4.1.5, K, < K2, M, < M2 and
z, zZ 1 E CN(K, )M2. Therefore CN(K2) < CN(K1) and, since a is an isomorphism,
zi(zi)-1 = (z,zz1)Q E(CN(Kj)CN(K2)M2)' = CN(K1)CN(K2)M2 = CN(K,)M2.

Again by 4.1.5, M, K', < M2K2: and hence (p is well-defined and order preserving.
The map constructed with respect to a-1 in the same way as (p with respect to a is
the inverse of gyp. Thus (p is a projectivity which clearly fixes every subgroup of N and
H. An automorphism p of G inducing co therefore would have to fix H and to induce
a power automorphism in N; on the other hand, it would satisfy H=' = (Hz)`* =
(Hz)" = H=" and, since CN(H) = 1, it would follow from 4.1.1 that zQ = z" for all
z c- N. But, since s * 1 (mod p), a is not a power automorphism.
(b) Let Xi = M;Q1 x L;R; where Mij = IL;I = p, JQil = q and JRij = r for all
i=1, ..., n. Then A, = M, x . x M,,, A2 = L, x x L,,, B, = Q1 x x Q.
and B2 = R, x x R satisfy the assumptions of (a). The autoprojectivity cp
constructed there fixes every subgroup of N and H, hence every Mi, Li, Qi, Ri and
so, finally, all the Xi.
Similar examples of groups of order page with nontrivial centre are given by
Schenke [1987b]; see Exercise 8. Although these examples destroy any hope for a
general theorem, there are positive results for interesting classes of groups. First
of all note that in Problem (A) every integer greater than n also has the desired
property; but this is not so clear for Problem (B). Baer's theorems mentioned above
show that (B) holds for every n > 2 if X consists of abelian groups with elements of
infinite order, and for every n > 3 if X is the class of all abelian groups. In 7.7.6 we
shall prove that (B) holds for n = 2 if 3 is the class of dihedral groups. Again
Schmidt [1982] proves that every n > 3 satisfies (B) for the class of all finite groups
X = NH with normal elementary abelian p-subgroup N and abelian q-group H
operating faithfully on N, p and q being different primes. Also Schenke [1987a],
[1987b] studies finite p-groups and proves that (B) holds for every
(8) n > 2 if X has class at most 4 and exponent p,
(9) n > p - 2 if X is metabelian of exponent p,
(10) n 3if Xis of class 2and p:t- 2.
In addition, for every prime p >_ 7, he constructs a group of class 5 and exponent p
for which n = 2 does not satisfy (B). And he shows that for every n E N there exists
a prime p and a metabelian group X of exponent p such that n does not satisfy (B)
for X. This shows that although the bound p - 2 in (9) might not be best possible,
there is no integer n satisfying (B) for all metabelian groups of exponent p and all
primes p.
The methods of Schenke and Schmidt are quite different. In both cases, the results
follow from more general investigations. Schmidt considers under which conditions
a projectivity cp of a finite group G = NH with elementary abelian normal Hall
subgroup N and complement H is induced by an isomorphism. He shows that this
is true in a certain minimal situation and then examines how to extend isomor-
phisms inducing cp on subgroups of the form NH;, Hi < H. In this way he is able to
show that cp is induced by an isomorphism if H is an abelian q-group with three
independent elements of maximal order and CH(N) = 1. This implies the result
mentioned above.
Schenke's method is more closely related to the given problem. He uses Baer's
ideas to study a projectivity cp from a direct product G = H x K of two p-groups H
and K of equal exponent to a p-group G = H x K". His main tools are Baer maps;
these are maps a: G -+ G for which there exist x E H, y e K with o(x) = o(y) = Exp G
such that for all aEHandbEK,
(11) a = f(a; y, y, (p), b" = f(b; x, x8, gyp) and (ab)2 = aab2
where f is the map defined in 2.6.2. In the situation of 7.6.11, Schenke shows that
every Baer map x induces gyp, and that for every automorphism a of X;, a71Qa; is an
'
automorphism of X if a; is the restriction of a to X;. Using this property, he is able
to handle the minimal situation that X is the nonabelian group of order p3 and
exponent p. Then he uses induction to show that under the assumptions of (8)-(10)
there is a Baer map which is an isomorphism.
Wreath products
A well-known construction which uses direct products of isomorphic groups is the

wreath product of two groups A and B. To define this, let N be the set of functions
f : B -+ A satisfying f(b) = 1 for all but a finite number of elements b e B. With the
obvious multiplication, f, f2(b) = f,(b)f2(b) (b E B), N is a group, and an action of B
on N is established as follows: if f e N and b e B, then f' is the function defined by
the equation
(12) fb(c) = f(cb-1) for c e B.
It is easy to check that, with this definition, B acts as a group of automorphisms on

N. The semidirect product of N with B acting as above is the (standard restricted)
wreath product of A with B and is denoted by A wr B; the normal subgroup N is
called the base group of the wreath product. The following properties of A wr B =
NB are easy to prove and are, in fact, well-known (see Suzuki [1982], pp. 268-279).
ForbeB,letA,= If ENJf(c)= I for all b cc B}. Then

(13) N = Dr Ab, A, n- A and (Ab)c = Abc for all b, c c B.
beB
Conversely, this property characterizes the wreath product.
(14) If G = MC where M = Dr Mc and (Mc) = Mc, for all c, d c C, then G

CEC
M, wr C.
As a consequence we get the following two properties which are basic for inductive
proofs.
(15) If X < Ab (b E B) and C < B, then <X, C> 2f X wr C.
(16) If C < B and T is a left transversal to C in B, then NC A wr C where A =
Dr A,
tET
We now briefly report the known results on projectivities of wreath products
without giving proofs. So let G A wr B with nontrivial groups A, B and let cp be a
projectivity from G to a group G. First of all, the image Nwof the base group N is a
normal subgroup of G (see Menegazzo [1973]). However, in general, G need not be
a wreath product. For example, if I A I = 29 and I B I = 3, then I NJ = 293 and, since B
centralizes the "diagonal" { (a, a, a) I a E A } of N but does not centralize N, it follows
(see 4.1.7) that N = N, x N2 where IN, I = 29, 1 N21 = 292, N, = C,,,(B) and B oper-
ates irreducibly on N2. Since 51292 - 1, a group C of order 5 can operate irreducibly
on N2 and, by 4.1.6, G = N, x N2 B is lattice-isomorphic to G* = N, x N2 C.
Clearly, G* is not a wreath product. On the other hand, there is the following
positive result.
7.6.13 Theorem (Menegazzo [1973]). Let G A wr B where A : 1 and 2 < J BI < c
and let q be a projectivity from G to a group G.
(a) Then G = N4B4, N4 g G, N4' = Dr Ab and Ab A'* for all b, c c- B.
bEB
(b) If A is locally finite and B4I = IB1, then N' = Dr (A'*)b and hence G
b E Bm
A" wr B`0.
Here (b) is an immediate consequence of (a). Indeed, since A"< N` and

N`0 = (A, u B)w n N` _ (Ai u B`0) n N' _ (Af)B, one only has to show that
AT n <(A")bI I b e B"> = 1. For this one may assume that A is finite, then (a) and
the assumption in (b) imply that I N4I = IAOIJBI = I AT j1B11, and this yields the
assertion. To prove (a), one has to show that [A6 , Af] = I for all b, c c- B such that
h c. Properties (15) and (16) reduce this to the case where A is cyclic of prime
power order and CBI = q or 4, q a prime, q 96 2. Here Nw is abelian and, in general,
G is even determined by its subgroup lattice (see Exercises 9 and 10). It is an open
problem to give precise conditions under which G G in 7.6.13. For torsion-free
groups, the situation is better.
7.6.14 Theorem (Arshinov and Sadovskii [1973]). The wreath product G = A wr B
of two nontrivial torsion free groups A and B is strongly determined by its subgroup
lattice.
Sketch of proof. Let cp be a projectivity from G to a group Cr. First consider the case
that A and B are infinite cyclic. Then G is residually torsion-free nilpotent (see
Smelkin [1964]), and hence the family ." of all normal subgroups X of G with
nonabelian torsion-free nilpotent factor group G/X satisfies the assumptions (18)
and (19) of Sadovskii's Approximation Theorem in 1.3. By 6.5.1 and 7.2.11, if
X E .", then X a G and cp is induced by a unique isomorphism on G/X. Thus by
1.3.8, cp is induced by an isomorphism from G to G. This proves Theorem 7.6.14 in
the special case that A ^- C, B.
If A and B are arbitrary torsion-free groups, then by 7.6.2 and 6.5.1,
N4' = Dr Ab g G. Let b, c c- B. Since there are diagonals in Ab x A, there exist
IEB
diagonals in Ab x A and hence all the Ab are isomorphic. By (15), if I * a c- A, and
1 b c B, then <a, b> <a> wr is strongly determined by its subgroup lattice, as
we have just seen. By 1.5.8, Pot <a, b> = I and hence cp is induced on <a, b> by a
unique isomorphism v(a, b): <a, b> <a, b>4'. So, if we fix a c A, we obtain a map
rr: B -+ B4' defined by b = b1"1" and satisfying " = <be> for all b e B. If we fix
b c- B, we can define maps r,: Ac - A" (c c- B) by a' = a"(. b, for a c- A, and these can
be put together to a map r: N = Dr Ac - N' = Dr A". It is not difficult to show
CEB CEB
that a and 2 are independent of the choices of a c- Ac and b c B, and that they are, in
fact, isomorphisms satisfying <b-' ab>4' = <(ba)-l a`b> for all a c N, b c B. Thus
there is an isomorphism co: G -+ G such that COIN = r and wIB = a, and it is possible
to show that the projectivity q is induced by co.
Direct products of lattice-isomorphic groups
Finally we study the following problem. If X is a group which has only finitely
many pairwise nonisomorphic projective images-call them X,,..., X.-is
G = X1 x x X. determined by its subgroup lattice? The following example
shows that this is not the case.
7.6.15 Example. Let p > 2 be a prime and X = X1 be the abelian group of type
(p2, p). Then n = 2, X2 = <c, dl c2 = d P = 1, [c, d] = c> is the nonabelian group of
order p3 and exponent p2, and we claim that the group G = X1 X X2 is not deter-
Proof. Let A = X 1 x <c , d > < G and a: G G be defined by x' = x 1 + for

all x e G. Since G' = <c"> < Z(G), it follows from (4) of 1.5 that
(xY)1+p = x1+pY1+p[y,x](2 )
1
= xl+py1+p
for all x, y c G, that is,

(17) a is a power automorphism of G.
Therefore the situation is similar to the proof of Theorem 2.5.9: here IG : Al = p so
that s = 1 = m, but G is not abelian. Nevertheless we can construct a crossed
isomorphism of G in the same way as in that proof. We put r = 1 + p,,u = write

x e G in the form x = ac") with a e A and 1 < i(x) < p, and define
(18) f(x) = a' for j e 7L such that (j) = i(x) (mod p).
We copy Baer's argument literally and obtain that f(x) is well-defined,
(19) A={xEGIf(x)=id}
and f : G End G satisfies (2)-(4) of 2.5 and (d) of 2.5.8. By 2.5.2 and 2.5.8, there is
a new operation o defined by
(20) x o y = xf(r) y
for x, y e G such that G* = (G, o) is a group and the identity is an f-isomorphism

inducing a projectivity from G to G*. Clearly, i(c) = I and (1) = 1 so that f(c) = a.
By (19) and (20), the inverse of an element of A is the same in G and G*. Let b be the
inverse of c in G*, that is, I = b o c = bf(`)c. If a is an element of order p2 in X1, then
b o a o c o a-1 = (ba)f(c)ca-1 = bf<<iaf(Oca-1 = bf(`)ca"pa-1 = aP
and
b o d-1 o cod = (bd-')f (')cd = bf(<)(d-1)1+Pcd = bf(`)d-1cd = bf(`)ccP = cP
since o(d) = p. Thus the commutator subgroup of G* contains aP and cP and, since
G' J = p, it follows that G* # G.
However, there is a positive result for a large class of finite groups.
7.6.16 Theorem (Schmidt [1980b]). Let X be a finite group such that Z(X) = 1 or
X = X', and let G = X 1 x x X. where X,__ X. are all the pairwise nonisomor-
phic projective images of X. Then G is determined by its subgroup lattice.
Proof. First note that, by 1.6.10, every finite group with infinitely many pairwise
nonisomorphic projective images has a nontrivial cyclic direct factor. Thus X indeed
has only finitely many such images and G is well-defined. Let (p be a projectivity
from G to a group G. We want to show that
(21) G = X; x . . x X .
If X is perfect, then by 5.3.4, every X. is perfect and (21) follows from 7.6.2. Now
suppose that Z(X) = 1 and, for a contradiction, that X? is not normal in G for some
i. Then there exists k e It__ n} such that Xr is not normalized by X11,. And, since
Xk is generated by its elements of prime power order, there exists a cyclic subgroup
C of prime power order p' of Xk such that X,1' is not normalized by C". Clearly, p
divides IX,I since otherwise by 1.6.6, (Xi x C)" = X,? x C". If cp were singular at p,
then by 7.6.3 applied to H = Xi and K = Dr X,, the group G would have a normal
Jmi
p-complement and, for some j e { 1, ... , n}, X, = P x Q where 1 0- P E Sylp (XX). Let
a be a projectivity from X3 to X. Then, again by 1.6.6, X = P x Q and Z(P) = 1

since Z(X) = 1. By 2.2.6, P would be a nonabelian group in P(m, p) for some m. But
the definition of G implies that X is isomorphic to a subgroup of G and hence would
have a normal p-complement. This contradiction shows that qp is not singular at p.
Let D = Q(C) be the minimal subgroup of C. By 4.3.5, X < (Xi x D)4' and
hence, in particular, D < C. Furthermore, by 7.6.1 applied to X, x Xk, we have
C n N(Xk) A 1 and hence D < N(Xk). Let r be a projectivity from Xk to X. By 1.4.3,
N(X) = 1, and hence there exists a subgroup M of Xk such that M = M but M` is
not normalized by DT. Again by 4.3.5, r is singular at p. Since C is cyclic of order at
least p2, 4.2.6 shows that there exists a normal p-complement N in Xk with cyclic
factor group such that NT a X. If P is a Sylow p-subgroup of MD containing D, then
P = (M n P)D; since P is cyclic and M n D = 1, it follows that P = D. Thus M =
MD n N and then MT = (MT u DL) n N' :!g ML u D'. This final contradiction shows
that Xi g G for all i and (21) follows.
All the X7 are projective images of X. If two of them, Xr and X;, say, were
isomorphic, then by 1.6.2 there would exist diagonals in the group X5 x X7 =
(Xi x XJP, and hence also in Xi x X;. It would follow that X, XX, contradicting
our assumption. Therefore XT, ..., Xf are pairwise nonisomorphic projective
images of X and, since X possesses only n of these, it follows that the X"
are isomorphic to the X1 in some arrangement. Thus G = X" x x X. 2 -
X, x x X. = G, as required.
Exercises
1. (Lukacs and Palfy [1968]) If G = H x K, H K and L(G) is modular, show
that G is abelian. (Do not use the results of 2.4.)
2. Show that the isomorphism t* in 7.6.6 is independent of the choice of C.
3. Let X be a finite group such that Z(X) = 1 and let G = H x K where
H Aut X K. Show that G is determined by its subgroup lattice.
4. Let G = H x K and define
R(H, K) = Ja c P(G)IH = H and X = X for all X <K},
S(H,K) = Ju e P(G)jX = X for all X < H and all X < K}.
(a) Show that S(H, K) a R(H, K) and R(H, K)/S(H, K) is isomorphic to a sub-
group of P(H) containing PA(H).
(b) If H K, show that R(H, K)/S(H, K) zt PA (H).
5. (Zacher [1981]) If the group H in Theorem 7.6.8 is generated by involutions,
show that (Inn H)' = Inn H. Deduce that G G.
6. Show that for the Rottlander groups G, we have L(Gi, x Gr,) L(GQ_, x G,_,)
if 2<p<q-2.
In the next two exercises let 3 < n e N, p and q be different primes, X, _
N, H, where N, is an elementary abelian normal p-subgroup of X, and H, is a
q-group. With the obvious notation, assume that X, = N;Hi are isomorphic to X,
(i = 2,..., n) and let G = X, x x X,N=N, x . x x . x H,,.
7.7 Groups generated by involutions 421
7. (Schmidt [1982]) Assume in addition that H1 is abelian of exponent q', r >_ 2

and r > 3 in case q = 2, and that CHL(Nj) = c2(H1). Show that there exists a
semidirect product G = NH lattice-isomorphic to G in which H is a nonabelian
M-group. (Hint: Use 4.1.9.)
8. (Schenke [1987b]) Assume that 2 < qlp - 1, IN11 = p, H1 is the nonabelian
group of order q3 and exponent q and JH1 : CH1(Nl)I = q. Show that G has an
autoprojectivity cp which satisfies Xr = X, for all i and is not induced by an
automorphism. (Hint: Use 4.1.9 to construct an autoprojectivity of G which is
trivial on G/CH(N) and induced on H1 by a suitable automorphism of H1.)
9. (Menegazzo [1973]) Let G = A wr B where A is cyclic of order p", IBS = q, p and
q primes, n e N, and assume that cp is a projectivity from G onto a group G; let
N be the base group of G.
(a) If p q, show that NP N; if in addition IB"I = q, show that G G.
(b) If p=g02,show that G^--G.
(c) If p = q = 2 and [D'*, Bl*] = 1 where D = {(a, a) I a E A} is the diagonal in
N, show that G _- G.
10. (Menegazzo [ 1973]) (a) Show that G = A wr B is determined by its subgroup
lattice if A is cyclic of order 2" (n e N) and IBI = 4.
(b) Show that C8 wr C2 is not determined by its subgroup lattice.
11. (Zacher [1981]) Show that for every group H there exists a group K such that
H x K is determined by its subgroup lattice. (Hint: Take a suitable free group
K.)
7.7 Groups generated by involutions
The following is a general idea to prove that a group G is determined by its sub-
group lattice. It is clear that if cp is a projectivity from G to a group G, then G
operates on L(G) via the map r sending every x E G to the autoprojectivity r(x) of G
given by
(1) Hr(x) = H` X(,0 for H < G.
So one could try to prove that G is isomorphic to G by showing that G and G
operate in the same way on L(G). Unfortunately, this is much too difficult. To
simplify matters, however, one could restrict oneself to a suitable subset A of L(G)
and to a system D of generators of G and try to prove that for every d E D and
<x) = <d>", the elements x and d operate in the same way on A. For this, A would
have to be a union of conjugacy classes of subgroups of G; otherwise G would not
operate on A. Furthermore, it seems that this can only work for elements d and x
which are the unique generators of the subgroups they generate, that is, for involu-
tions. We shall show in this section that this idea works and give some applications.
The most interesting will be to show that certain multiply transitive permutation
groups and classical groups are determined by their subgroup lattices. In addition,
an application to lattice-simple groups will be given in 7.8.
2-singular projectivities
To prove these results, we first of all have to guarantee that I <d >"I = 2 if d E D is an
involution. For any prime p and a projectivity cp between arbitrary groups G and G,
let us say that q is p-regular if it maps every subgroup of order p of G to a subgroup
of order p in G. Note that for finite groups this is equivalent to our definition of
p-regularity in 4.2. So we have to study 2-singular projectivities of groups gener-
ated by involutions, and we start with groups generated by two involutions. Now
if G = <d, e) where o(d) = o(e) = 2 and o(de) = n E f01 u { oo }, then (de)" = dded =
ed = (de)-' so that G is the semidirect product of a cyclic group <a> = <de> of order
n, and a cyclic group <d> of order 2 with respect to the automorphism given by
ad = a-1; such a group is called a dihedral group of order 2n. Note that (a'd)2 =
a'a-' = 1 for all i e 1L so that every element in G\<a) has order 2.
7.7.1 Lemma. Let n E N u { oo }, G be a dihedral group of order 2n, that is, G = <d, e)
where o(d) = o(e) = 2 and o(de) = n, and let cp be a projectivity from G to a group G;
put <d) = <x> and <e> = <y>. _
(a) If n = oo, then cp is 2-regular, <de> = <xy) and G G.
(b) If n = p is a prime, then G E P(2, p). If q is 2-regular, then <de> = <xy).
(c) If n is neither infinite nor a prime, then <de> is a cyclic normal subgroup of
order n in G and o(x) = o(y) = q for some prime q. If q = 2, then cp is 2-regular,
<de)" = <xy) and G nf G. If q > 2, then either q does not divide n and x operates
fixed-point-freely on <de> or n = qn' where (n', q) = 1.
Proof. (a) If n = oo, <de> is the unique cyclic maximal subgroup of G. Since every
projectivity maps cyclic subgroups to cyclic subgroups, <de> is the unique cyclic
maximal subgroup of G, and by 6.5.11, cp is 2-regular. In particular, o(x) = o(y) = 2,
G = <x, y) _ <xy, x> is an infinite dihedral group and <de)'* = <xy).
(b) That G E P(2, p) follows from 2.2.5. If p is 2-regular, then <de> = <xy) since
<de> and <xy) are the only minimal subgroups of G and G of order different from 2
(if p > 2) or different from <d>, <e>, <x), <y) (if p = 2).
(c) Again, <de> is the unique cyclic maximal subgroup of G; hence <de> is a
cyclic normal subgroup of G and o(x) = 1 G/<de)'*l = o(y) is a prime q. Let I <de> l = m.
We have to show that m = n.
First suppose that q = 2. Then G is generated by the involutions x and y
and hence is a dihedral group with cyclic maximal subgroup <xy). It follows that
<xy) = <de>". Since every element in G\<xy) has order 2, thenumber of minimal
subgroups of G not contained in <xy) is m. Thus m = n and G_ G. Clearly, q is
2-regular. Indeed, if n is even, this follows from 2.2.6 since the Sylow 2-subgroups of
G are noncyclic. And if n is odd, the Sylow 2-subgroups of G are the complements to
<de> in G; they are mapped to the complements to <xy) in G and hence to sub-
groups of order 2.
Now let q > 2. If q does not divide m, then x operates fixed-point-freely on <de),*
since every nontrivial fixed element z e <de> ' would yield a cyclic group <zx> of
composite order whose preimage <zx)"-' would be a dihedral group, a contradic-
tion. Thus there exist exactly m complements to <de>" in G. The number of
complements to <de> in G is n and it follows that m = n. Finally, suppose that q

divides m and let Q" be the Sylow q-subgroup of <de> Then Q"<x> is a noncyclic
.
q-group whose preimage Q<d> is not a q-group. By 2.2.6, Q<d> E P(r,q) for some
r E N and hence I Q I = q since Q is cyclic and Q g Q <d )'. Let R" be the complement
to Q" in <de> . Then the dihedral group R <d> is mapped by (p to R" <x> and
(IR"I,q) = 1. By (b) or the case of (c) just considered, IRI = IRI. It follows that
m = I R` I I Q1 I = I R I q = n. Since I QP I = q, finally, n = qn' where (n', q) = 1.
The structure of finite groups with 2-singular projectivities is well-known. By

4.2.6, such a group G is either P-decomposable, that is, G = S x T where S is a
P-group of order 2p" for some prime p > 2, n e f\l, and (ISI, I TI) = 1, or G has a
normal 2-complement K with cyclic factor group G/K such that K`0 a G. A similar
result for arbitrary groups is not known. Even the most moderate conjecture that a
group G generated by involutions with a 2-singular projectivity is either a P-group
or has a normal subgroup K such that I G : K I = 2, K` a G and every element in K
has infinite or finite odd order has not been confirmed yet. An immediate conse-
quence would be that all subgroups of order 2 of G are mapped onto subgroups of
the same order if G is not a P-group. We can prove this much weaker result and it
will suffice for our applications.
7.7.2 Lemma. Let G be a group generated by involutions and cp a projectivity from G

to a group G. If there exist involutions a, b e G such that I <a>'I A I "I, then G is a
nonabelian P-group.
Proof. Let D be the set of involutions in G. If a E D, then I<a)'* I is a prime; let q be

the smallest prime occurring among the I <a)4I for a E D. We study the groups (a, b>
and (a, b, c> where a, b, c e D and first of all note the following immediate conse-
quence of 7.7.1.
(2) Let a, b e D such that I <a>4'I = q, I <b4'> I = p and q < p. Then <a, b> is a
dihedral group of order 2p and <a, b)4' is a nonabelian group of order pq.
Indeed, (a, b> is a dihedral group of order 2r for some r e N u { oc } and I <a>4I A
I 4I. By 7.7.1, r is a prime and <a, b)4' E P(2, r). Since p and q divide the order of
<a, b)'4', this group is nonabelian of order pq, r = p, and <a, b> is a dihedral group of
order 2p.
(3) Let a, b c- D such that I <a>4I = q, I 4I = p and q < p. If c c- D such that
c (a, b), then <a, b, c>4' is a P-group of order p2q, <a, b, c> E P(3, p) and
<ab, ac, bc> is elementary abelian of order p2.
To prove this, we first show that H = <a, b, c> is finite. If I <c>4'I = r > q, then by
(2), <a, b)4' and <a, c)'`0 are nonabelian of order pq and rq, respectively. It follows
that <a>" normalizes <b)4' and <c>"' and hence also <b)4' u <c)'4' = <b, c)4'. Since
I(b>'*I = p > q > 2, the projectivity 9 is 2-singular on the dihedral group <b, c).
By 7.7.1, <b,c>4' is finite; hence so is <b,c)4'<a)'` = H4' and H. Now suppose that
I <c>PI = q. Then by (2), <b)4' is normalized by <a>" and <c)4' and hence also by
<a, c)'`. If <a, c)4' were to contain an element of infinite order, it would follow from
6.5.11 that p = I <h)PI = I <b) I = 2, a contradiction. Therefore <a, c) is a finite

dihedral group, and <b)'D<a,c)`D = H`0 and H are finite. Thus, in all cases, H =
<a, b, c> is a finite group generated by involutions in which 9 induces a 2-singular
projectivity. If there existed a normal 2-complement K in H such that K`0 < H`, then
q = I <a)I = I H`0 : K111 = <b)10I = p, a contradiction. By 4.2.6, H is a P-group of
order 2r" for some prime r. Since c <a, b), we have n = 2; thus H E P(3, r) and
therefore also H" E P(3, r). Since p and q divide IHÌ and q < p, it follows that r = p,
I HÌ = p2q and H E P(3, p). Now ab, ac, be are contained in the normal subgroup of
order p2 of H and, since H is generated by a and these three elements, it follows that
<ab, ac, bc) is elementary abelian of order p2. This proves (3).
(4) Let b, c e D such that I <b)'I = p > q, I <c)'PI > q and b c. Then <b, c)` is
elementary abelian of order p2.
To prove this, take an element a c D such that I <a)`0I = q. Then by (2), <a. b)`0 is
nonabelian of order pq. Therefore is the unique minimal subgroup of order
different from q in <a, b>' and hence c 0 <a, b). By (3), <a, h, c)` is a P-group of order
p2q and <b, c)`0 = u <c> is the elementary abelian normal subgroup of order
p2 of <a, b, c)'.
To complete the proof of the lemma, we fix an involution b E D such that I ' =
p > q and show that
(5) A = <abla c- D) is an elementary abelian p-group.
Since (ab)' = ba = (ab)-' for all a c D, it will follow that b inverts a system of genera-
tors of the abelian group A and hence every element of A. Hence G = <aIa E D) _
A will be a nonabelian P-group.
To prove (5), we show that all the generators ab (b a E D) of A have order p and
any two of them commute. For this let a, c c D be such that a b 0 c, and suppose
first that <a>" or <c)4' has order q; let I <a)41 = q, say. Then by (2), <a, b) is a
dihedral group of order 2p and hence o(ab) = p. If c c <a, h), then <cb) = <ab) is the
subgroup of order p in <a, b), that is, cb has order p and commutes with ab. If
c 0 <a, b), then by (3), <ab, ac, bc) is elementary abelian of order p2; again ab and cb
have order p and commute. Now suppose that I <a)4'I > q and I <c>4' > q. By (4),
<b, a)` and <b, c)` are elementary abelian of order p2 and then so is <a, c>'P if a : c.
Thus <a>", <b)`0, <c)4' are subgroups of order p in G centralizing each other and
therefore generating an elementary abelian subgroup of order p' or p2 of G. It
follows that <a, b, c) is a P-group of order 2p2 or 2p and the elements ah and cb have
order p and commute. This proves (5) and the lemma.
It is not difficult to generalize the above lemma to the situation that G is not
generated by involutions; then G = S x T where S = <a E GIa2 = 1) is a non-
abelian P-group and S and T are coprime (see Exercise 2). Conversely, if G is such a
group and S E P(n, p), there exist autoprojectivities cp of S, and hence of G, such that
I <a)4I = p : 2 = I 4I for certain involutions a, b c- S. We note an immediate
consequence of Lemma 7.7.2.
7.7.3 Corollary. If G is a group containing two commuting involutions, then every
projectivity of G is 2-regular.
Proof. These two involutions generate a four group H and hence the subgroup S
generated by all the involutions in G cannot be a nonabelian P-group. Thus if cp is a
projectivity of G, then by 7.7.2 there exists a prime q such that I <a>" I = q for every
involution a e S. Since H' = 4, it follows that q = 2 and cp is 2-regular. Li
We want to compare the operation of an involution and its projective images

on the subgroup lattice. The next lemma takes care of the fixed points under this
operation.
7.7.4 Lemma. Let G be a group generated by involutions, cp a projectivity from G to

a group G and suppose that G is not a P-group.
(a) If a E G is an involution, <a> P = <x> and H < G such that H' = H, then
(H"')x = H.
(b) If N a G, then N` a G.
Proof. Since G is generated by involutions, (b) of course follows from (a). To prove
(a), suppose, for a contradiction, that (H"')" 0 H" and let T = H<a>. Then I T : HI =
2 and by 6.5.3 there exist a prime p and a normal subgroup K of T contained in H
such that I T/K I = 2p, K`' a TW and T`/KI* is a nonabelian group in P(2, p). By 7.7.2
there exists a prime q such that I <d>111 = q for every involution d in G. So if U/K is
a subgroup of order 2 of T/K, then U = (K<a>)' = K<a'> for some t c- T; hence
U` = Kl*<at>' and I UP,!KPI = I<a'> I = q. It follows that H`/K" is the subgroup of
order p in T"/K`0, a contradiction. El
Involutions and conjugacy classes
We can now show that the idea described at the beginning of this section indeed
works. We present it in its most general form.
7.7.5 Theorem (Schmidt [1980a]). Let G be a group, D a set of involutions in G, A a

set of subgroups of G and cp a projectivity from G to a group G with the following
properties.
(6) G = <did c- D).
(7) A' =A(that is,HEAfor all HeA,dED).
(8) If d c- D, H E A and <d> = <x>, then (H`)"
(a) Then G/ n N0(H) is isomorphic to G/ n Nz;(H`).
H. A, HEe _
(b) Let n NC(H) = 1. 1J' G is finite or D G = D, then G is isomorphic to G.
HcA
Proof. (a) For y c G and H < G, let W'') = HWY'W '. If d c D, H E A, and <x> = <d)10,
then H`(") = H E A, by (8) and (7). Since G = <did c- D>, the group G is generated by
these elements x, and it follows that A9 = A for all g E G and Ar(Y) _ A for all y E G.
Thus G and 6 operate on A via the homomorphisms v: G --+ Sym A given by
H'(Q' = H9 (g c G) and p: G - Sym A defined by H(1) = H`('') (y e G) for H E A. By

(8), v(d) = p(x) for every d e D and <x> = <d>". Since G is generated by these
involutions, it follows that G" = G. Thus G/Ker v z G" = G G/Kerp; since
Ker v = n NG(H) and Ker p= n NeJH4 ), (a) follows.
IIEA HEA
(b) By (a), G is isomorphic to G/ n Nd(H(O). If G is finite, it follows that G G
HEA
since the finite group G cannot admit a projectivity onto a_proper factor group.
Now let D = D and suppose, for a contradiction, that G is not isomorphic to G;
then Kerp 1. Ford c D and <x> = <d>", p(x) = v(d). Since visa monomorphism,
it follows that o(p(x)) = 2, and hence o(x) = 2. Therefore, if G were a P-group, it
would follow that G G, a contradiction; thus G is not a P-group. Then also G is
not a P-group and is generated by involutions. By 7.7.2, cp and IP-' are 2-regular and
by 7.7.4, K = (Kerp) ' a G. Since Z(G) = 1 and G = <did e D)', there exists d c- D
such that CK(d) K. Let u c- K such that ud u and let v = u-du. Then v,d =
u ' ud = v ' and hence <v, d> is a dihedral group of order 2m where m = o(v) 1.
Since K a G, we have v c K and o(v) 2; indeed, otherwise <v>" would be a sub-
group of order 2 of G normalizing every H' (H E A) and 7.7.4 applied to Ip-' would
yield that v c n NG(H) = 1, a contradiction. Thus d and e = d are two different
HEA
involutions in D (here we use that D = D) and de E <v> < K. Let <d>" = <x>
and <e>" = <y>. Since cp is 2-regular, 7.7.1 shows that <de>" = <xy> and hence
xy e Kerp. For every H E A, also Hd c A and so by (8), H10 = (H4)YY = ((Hd)")y =
(Hde)'', that is H = Hde. It follows that de c n NG(H) = I and hence d = e. This
HEA
contradiction shows that G G.
To apply Theorem 7.7.5, we have to choose a set D of involutions and a suitable

set A of subgroups of G satisfying (6)-(8). Here (6) and (7) have to be assumed, that
is, we have to assume that G is generated by (these) involutions and for A we have to
take a union of conjugacy classes of subgroups of G, and then we have to try to
prove that (8) holds. In view of Lemma 7.7.1 and our discussion on projective images
of conjugacy classes in 5.6, there are two situations in which this could perhaps be
possible, namely if
(i) A={<d>IdED}or
(ii) A is a conjugacy class of maximal subgroups of G or, in the language of the
theory of permutation groups, G is a primitive (or multiply transitive) permutation
group on a set S2 and A is the set of stabilizers of the points.
We start with the first possibility and need the following result which is interesting
in its own right.
7.7.6 Lemma. Let n e t\J u { cc }. If S and T are dihedral groups of order 2n, then
G = S x T is strongly determined by its subgroup lattice.
Proof. Let cp be a projectivity from G to a group G. We have to show that cp is

induced by an isomorphism. By 7.7.3, cp is 2-regular and then 7.7.1 implies that if
d, e are involutions in G and <d>" = <x>, <e> _ <y>, then
(9) <de> = <xy> and o(de) = o(xy);
it follows that <d, e)" (d, e>. This holds in particular for S and T and by 7.6.2,
(10) G = S4' x T" where S -- S and T -- T; thus G 2w G.
We fix the following notation. Let S = <a, s) where o(a) = n, o(s) = 2 and a' = a-'
Then s and as are involutions generating S. Therefore if <s>4' = and <as>'* =
<cu> where c e S`, then by (9), <a>4' = <c> and o(c) = o(a) = n; furthermore S` =
<c, u) and c" = c-'. Let Z. = Z be the ring of integers if n = x and Z. = 7Z/(n) if
n e N. Then every involution in S not contained in <a> can be written uniquely in
the form a's where i e Zn; similarly for the involutions in S4'\(c). Since <a>" = (c),
for every i e Z. there exists a unique j e Z. such that <a's>'* = <ciu>. Thus we obtain
a bijective map v: Z - Z. satisfying
(11) <a's>'* = <c''('1u) for all i e Zn.
Since <s>4' = and <as>'* = <cu>,
(12) v(0) = 0 and v(l) = 1.
We handle T and T4' in the same way. Let T = (b, t> where o(b) = n, o(t) = 2 and
b` = h- '; let <t>' = <v> and <bt>'* = <dv). Then T`0 = <d, v), o(d) = n and d' _
d-'. Let p: Zn -+ Z. be defined by
(13) <hir>' _ <d1'(i)v) for all j e Zn.
Then as above
(14) p(0) = O and p(1) = 1.
We want to show that v and p are the identity on Z. For this let i, j E Z,,. Then
<a's)" = (c''""u) and (bit)" = <d(i)v) and therefore by (9),
(15) <a'hist)" = = <c'(i)du'uv)
For i = j = 0, we obtain that <st)`0 = <uv) and then by (15) and (9),
(16) <a'hi)` = <c'(')dv(i)).
Now (15) and (14) imply that <a'bst>'* = <c"(')duv) and (15), (12), and (14) yield that
(ast)10 = <cuv). Again by (9),
<a'-'b)`' = <a'bstast)4' = <c'(')duvcuv) = <c'(')-'d).
On the other hand, by (16) and (14), <a'-'h)` = <c""-"d) Thus <c''")-'d) =
<c''"-"d) and, since o(c) = o(d) = n, it follows that v(i - 1) = v(i) - 1. This holds
for all i e Zn. Since v(0) = 0, a trivial induction yields that v is the identity. In exactly
the same way it may be proved that p is the identity; thus we have shown that
(17) v(i) = i = p(i) for all i e Zn.
Now let a: G -+ G be the isomorphism satisfying a" = c, s'= u, b' = d, and t' = v.
We want to show that H4' = H" for all H < G and it suffices to do this for cyclic H.
So let H = <g), g = a'bis''t' where i, j e Z. and h, k e {0, 11. If h = k = I or
h = k = 0, then <g)4' = (g)' by (15) and (17), or (16) and (17) respectively. So let
h = 1, k = 0 (the case h = 0, k = 1 is similar). Then g = a'sb' a <a's> x <ba> and

g2 = b2j since as is an involution. So if <b2'> = <by>, then <g> = <a's> x <ba>. By
(11) and (17), (a's>" = <c'u> _ <a's>' and, since <b'> ' = <bj>' as already shown, it
follows that <g>4' = (g>'. And if <b2j> <by>, then <g> is the unique subgroup
different from <a's> <b2j> and <by> contained properly between <a's> x <ba> and
<b2j>. Since these four groups are mapped in the same way by q and a, it follows
that <g>4' = <g>'. Thus p is induced by a.
We can now give our first general application of Theorem 7.7.5.
7.7.7 Theorem (Schmidt [1980a]). Let F be a subgroup of the group G with the
following properties.
(18) Z(F) = 1 and
F is generated by a set D of involutions satisfying DF = D.
(20) Let d, e e D and S = <d, e>. If o(de) 0 {1, 2, 3, 4, 6, oo }, then there exists a sub-
group T of CG(S) isomorphic to S or to an infinite dihedral group and satisfying
SnT=1.
If cp is a projectivity from G to a group G, then F`0 is isomorphic to F.
Proof. We verify the assumptions of Theorem 7.7.5 for F, the projectivity 0 from F
to F` induced by gyp, D and A = {<d>Id e D}. By (19), (6) and (7) hold. We have to
show that (8) is satisfied; then, since n NF(H) = n CF(d) = Z(F) = 1 and DF = D,
HeA
it will follow from 7.7.5 (b) that F P = F`0.
We show first that p is 2-regular. For this let d, e e D. If o(de) 0 { 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, oc },
then by (20) there exist two commuting involutions in G and hence cp is 2-regular, by
7.7.3. The same is true if o(de) = 2, 4, or 6. So assume that o(de) E {3, oo} for any two
different elements d, e e D. Since F = <did n D> and Z(F) = 1, we see that IDS >_ 2.
So if the group Go generated by the involutions in G were a P-group, it would lie in
P(m, 3) for some m c N u {oc} and, as F < Go, this would contradict (18). Thus Go is
not a P-group and by 7.7.2 there exists a prime q such that IH4I = q for every
subgroup H of order 2 of G. Suppose, for a contradiction, that q 0 2. Then by 7.7.1,
o(de) = 3 and <d, e> is nonabelian of order 6. Therefore <d, e>" lies in P(2,3) and
contains three subgroups of order q 2. Thus q = 3, <d, e>10 is elementary abelian of
order 9 and so <d>4 and <e>4 are commuting subgroups of order 3 in G. This holds
for every pair d, e of different elements in D and, since D generates F, it follows that
F`0 is an elementary abelian 3-group. But then F e P(n, 3) for some n, contradicting
(18). Thus q = 2 and
(21) p is 2-regular.
To prove (8) fort , let d e D, H = <e> e A, <d>4' = <x>, and S = (d, e>. Suppose first
that o(de) 0 { 1, 2,3,4,6, oo}. Then by (20) there exists T < CG(S) such that S n T = 1
and T ^- S or T is an infinite dihedral group. If T a- S, then by 7.7.6, 9 is induced
by an isomorphism on <S, T> S x T. In particular,
(22) there exists an isomorphism a: S -+ S10 such that X' = X` for all X < S.
We show that this is also true if T is an infinite dihedral group. Indeed, by 7.6.2
and 7.7.1, (S x T)" = S" x T" and T" T Let N g T such that TIN S. Then q
induces a projectivity from <S, T )/N S x (TIN) onto <S, T >4'/N' and by 7.7.6
there exists an isomorphism y: SN/N (SN)"/N" such that (V/N) = V"/N for all
N < V < SN. If /1: S SN/N and S: S"N"/N" S" are the natural isomorphisms,
then x = flyd is an isomorphism from S onto S" satisfying Xa = XPy6 = (XN/N)'6 =
((XN)"/N")6 = (X"N"/N")6 = X" for every X < S. Thus (22) also holds in this case,
and it is clear that (22) implies (8). Indeed, since d e S and H < S, the equalities
<x) = <d)" = <d> imply that x = d. Then (HO)" = (H")x = (Ha )d- = (Hd)a =
(H d)" = (Hd)'', as desired.
Now suppose that o(de) c { 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, oc }. If o(de) = 1, then H = <d > and so
(Hd)'' = H'' = (Hi')'. If o(de) = 2, S and SO are elementary abelian of order 4 and
hence again (Hd)'l = HO _ (HO )x. If o(de) = 4, then S and SO are dihedral groups of
order 8. Here H and Hd are the unique minimal subgroups of S which together with
S
5
S
d d
<d>
<d>
o'de) = 2 o(de) = 3 o(de)-4

Figure 22
<d> generate S. Then HO and (Hd)O have the same property in SO with respect to <x>
and hence are conjugate under x. Exactly the same argument applies if o(de) = 6;
here 4 of the 6 involutions in S\<de) together with d generate subgroups of order 6,
4, and 2 of S. Similarly, if o(de) = co, S and SO are infinite dihedral groups. Since
every element in S\<de) has the form (de)'d (i e Z), there are exactly two subgroups
of order 2 in S which together with <d> generate S, namely <(de)d) = Hd and
<(de)-' d) = H. Their images have the same property in S'' with respect to <d >O =
<x> and hence are conjugate under x. Thus (HO)' = (Hd)0, as desired. Finally, sup-
pose that o(de) = 3. Then, since cp is 2-regular, SO is nonabelian of order 6 and HO
and (Hd)'" are the unique subgroups of order 2 different from <d> O in SO. Thus
(HO)x = (Hd)'' and (8) holds in all cases.
In general, we shall use Theorem 7.7.7 in the situation that F = G. However, there
will also be an application in 7.8.17 in which F < G and, of course, we have the
following general consequence.
7.7.8 Corollary. Let H be a group generated by involutions and with trivial centre. If
K H or K is an infinite dihedral group, then G = H x K is determined by its sub-
group lattice.
Proof. Let cp be a projectivity from G to a group G. Then by 7.6.2 and7.7.3, G =

H x K` and cp is 2-regular. We apply 7.7.7 with F = H to prove that H19 -_ H. It
will also follow that K' -_ K if K ^-, H; and by 7.7.1, K`' K if K is an infinite
dihedral group. So, in both cases, G H x K = G, as desired.
By assumption, Z(H) = 1. If H E P(n, 3) for some n, then by 2.2.5, H1* e P(n, 3) and,
since cp is 2-regular, it follows that HP _- H. So we may assume that H 0 P(n, 3). Thus
(18) holds for F = H and (19) is satisfied if we take for D the set of all involutions in
H. Finally, S = <d, e) < H for all d, e e D. So if K H, there exists T !:-t:: K < CG(S)
such that T S; and if K is an infinite dihedral group, we may choose T = K. In
both cases, (20) is satisfied and by 7.7.7, H' = H.
Holmes [1971] has shown that for two lattice-isomorphic Rottlander groups H,
and H2, the groups H1 x K and H2 x K are lattice-isomorphic if K is an infinite
dihedral group.
Multiply transitive permutation groups
If G is a permutation group on a set Sl and a e fl, we write G. for the stabilizer of a

in G and a for the orbit of a under G, that is, G. _ {g E GIa9 = a} and ac =
{a9I g e G}. Then it is well-known that
(23) GQ=G,gforallgeGandIa'I=IG:G,I
So if G is transitive on S2, the set A = {G,Ia E Sl} of stabilizers of the points of Sl is a
class of conjugate subgroups of G. Recall that G is said to be k-transitive on I
(k E N,k < I(lI) if for any two ordered k-tuples (al,...,a,,) and (fl1,...,/fk) consisting
of distinct elements of Q, there exists g e G such that z? = fl, for i = 1, ... , k. Clearly,
for k > 2, every k-transitive group is (k - 1)-transitive, and the stabilizer G, of a
point a in a k-transitive group G is (k - 1)-transitive on 0\{a}.
Now let G be 2-transitive on S and assume that ISlI > 3. We put A = {G,Ia e 01
and want to look out for the assumptions of Theorem 7.7.5. Clearly (6) has to be
assumed. If G, < M < G, there exists x e M such that ax 4 a and, since G, is transi-
tive on 0 \{a}, it follows that M is transitive on 0. Thus for g e G, there exists y e M
such that a93' = a; hence gy c- G, < M and so g = (gy)y-1 e M. Therefore M = G
and this shows that
(24) A is a conjugacy class of maximal subgroups of G.
In particular, (7) holds. Moreover, since G, is transitive on b2\{a} and IK2I > 3, we
have G, # 1. Since G is faithful on n, it follows that NG(G,) = G. and
(25) n NG(H) = n G. = I.
HEA aco
Furthermore, if S2 is finite, (23) shows that
(26) I G.: G.# I = 1 = I G : G, I - 1 for o. 1 e Q.
I S2I -
If G E P(n, p) for some prime p and n c- Fi u {oo }, then, since every p-subgroup of G
is normal in G and G, has trivial core, it follows that IG,I = q is the smaller prime
involved in G and so IGI = pq. By (26), q = p - 1 and hence p = 3. Thus we have

shown:
(27) If G is a P-group, then 152 = 3 and G S3.
Now suppose that 101 >_ 4 and q is a projectivity from G to a group G; consider
H = G. e A. If H4 g G, then, since H is a maximal subgroup of G, it would follow
that IG: HI is a prime and, by 6.5.3, G/Hc would be a P-group. But since HG = 1,
this would contradict (27). Thus H41 is not normal in G and hence H`. So
we have the following:
(28) If IQI > 4, then H` for all H e A and n NU(H`) = 1.
HED
Now 7.7.5 and (23)-(28) suggest the following procedure to prove that G is deter-
7.7.9 Remark. Let G be a doubly transitive permutation group on a set fl, IfIl > 4,
and assume that G is generated by a set D of involutions. If we want to prove that G
is determined by its subgroup lattice and q is a given projectivity from G to a group
G, we put A = {G,ja a S2} and try to verify the assumptions of Theorem 7.7.5. By
assumption and (24), (6) and (7) are satisfied. So we have to prove (8); then 7.7.5(a)
together with (25) and (28) will yield that G - G. To do this, we let d e D, H = G. e A
and <d>41 = <x). If d e H, then x E H` and hence (H4)x = H41 _ (H")", as desired. So
we are left with the case that d 0 H, that is, a" _ /3 with a f3 e S2. Since d is an
involution, it follows that f3" = a and hence by (23),
(29) G = Gp, Gf = G and G" = G.
By (27), G is not a P-group and then 7.7.4 implies that
(30) (Gp)x=Gp.
Finally, x 0 G = NG-(GQ) by (28) since d 0 G,; thus
(31) (G4)x :7-c G;.
Since H = G. and H" = Gp, we have to show that (G)' = G.; then (8) will hold.
If G is 3-transitive, this is quite easy since the stabilizers G. and GB are character-
ized in the interval [G/G,p].
(32) Let G be triply transitive on S2, IQ > 4 and let a, Q e S2 such that or ft. Then
[GIG,,,] has precisely 3 atoms, namely G Gp, and a subgroup X satisfying
IX:G,pj=2.
Proof. Since G. is 2-transitive on S2\{a}, G,p is a maximal subgroup of G. and,
similarly, of G. Furthermore, since G is 2-transitive, there exists g e G such that
a9 = /3 and Y9 = a. Then g 0 G,p, but gz a G,p and, by (23), Gas = (G, n Gp)9 =
G; n GJ = Gp n G, = Gp. It follows that J<g, G,p>: G,pj = 2 and, since g 0 G. and
g 0 Gp, <g, G,p> is a third atom in [G/Gp]. Therefore to prove (32) we have to show
that if X is an atom in [G/Gap] and Ga 0 X Gp, then X = <g, Gap>. Since Gap is
maximal in G. and Gp, we obtain X. = X n G. = Gap = X n Gp = Xp. If X were
transitive on S2, there would exist x c X such that ax = fi and hence by (23), G 'ft =
XQ = Xp = G. It would follow that Xa = Gap a X and the transitivity of X would
imply that Gap = 1. But since G is 3-transitive, Gap is transitive on fl\ lot, #I and
IS2\ {a, /3} I >- 2, a contradiction. Therefore X is not transitive on S2. Since Gap < X is
transitive on S2\{a,/3} and X. = Gap = Xp, it follows that ax = /3 and /fix = a for
every x c X \Gap. Then xg c Gap and hence x c- <g, Gap). Thus X = <g, G.,>, as de-
sired.
We can now give our first application of Theorem 7.7.5 to multiply transitive
permutation groups.
7.7.10. Theorem. Every triply transitive permutation group of degree at least 4 which
is generated by involutions is determined by its subgroup lattice.
Proof. Let G be 3-transitive on the set fl, IS2I > 4, D the set of involutions in G and
cp, A, d, x, a, fi as in Remark 7.7.9. We have to show that (G)x = GB. By (32) there
are precisely 3 subgroups of G containing G.", as a maximal subgroup, namely G.",
G,", and <d, Gap>41. Since, by (30), G.", is normalized by x, these subgroups have to be
permuted by x. Now x c- <d, Gap>w and, by (31), (G, ',*)x : G". It follows that (G,',')' =
G , as desired.
The most interesting groups satisfying the assumptions of Theorem 7.7.10 are the
symmetric and alternating groups. More generally, if for every set S2 and infinite
cardinal A we define Sym(S2, A) = {g e Sym f1l I {a E S21a9 a} I < Al, then these
groups too fall under Theorem 7.7.10. We collect these and some other examples in
the following corollary. For the finite symmetric and alternating groups, Exercises 9
and 10 show some other methods to prove the desired result.
7.7.11 Corollary. The following groups are determined by their subgroup lattices:
(a) Sym S2 and, more generally, Sym(S2,A) for every set S2 with IS2I > 4 and every
infinite cardinal A.
(b) AItQ2, Ifl I > 4.
(c) PGL(2, F) where F is a field, I F1 > 3.
(d) The five Mathieu groups Mil, M12, M22, M23, M24.
Proof. (a) Every permutation can be decomposed into cycles, every finite cycle is a
product of transpositions and
(..., -1,0, 1,...) = [(0, 1)(-1,2)(-2,3)...][(0,2)(-1,3)(-2,4)...].

Thus Sym(S2, A) is generated by involutions and, of course, 3-transitive on SZ if
E21 > 4.
(b) As shown in 1.4, A4 is determined by its subgroup lattice. In addition for
101 >- 5, A1tS2 is 3-transitive and generated by involutions since it is simple and
contains involutions.
(c) It is well-known that PGL(2, F) is sharply 3-transitive on the projective line

(see Huppert [1967], p. 151 or (33) below). We leave it as an exercise for the reader
to show that every element in this group is even the product of two involutions.
(d) The Mathieu group M. is 3-transitive of degree n and simple (see Huppert and
Blackburn [1982b], pp. 297-303), and hence is generated by involutions.
We come now to doubly transitive permutation groups generated by involutions.

Here we need additional properties to prove that such a group is determined by its
subgroup lattice. Some of these occur in the following groups.
7.7.12 Example. Let V be a vector space of dimension n >- 2 over the field F. Then
the general linear group GL(V) operates on the set 0 of 1-dimensional subspaces of
V and the kernel of this operation is the group of scalar transformations of V. Let
G = PSL(n, F) = SL(V)/Z where Z is the set of scalar transformations of determi-
nant 1, and let a, /3, y be three distinct elements of S2. Then we claim that
(a) G is a doubly transitive permutation group on S2 and
(b) G., fixes at most one further point of 0, except when n = 2 and IFJ = 3.
Furthermore, if n > 3, then
(c) Gp has exactly 4 orbits on fl and
(d) there exists an involution t E G such that t = (afJ)(y)... and G = <t"Ix E G).
Proof. Let 6, E E S2 such that S E and let a = <u), /I = <v>, S = <w), E = <z). Then
u, v and w, z are linearly independent and there exists a E SL(V) such that u = w,
v = cz with suitable c E F. Then g = aZ satisfies a9 = b, I'9 = E and thus G is 2-
transitive on n.
To prove the other assertions, suppose first that n = 2 and I FI > 4. Then there
exist u,vE V and C E F such that a = ,/3= (v>,y= (u+v>,and0 c2 1. Let
aESL(V)be definedby u=cu,v=c-'v.Then g=aZEG#and y90y;thus (b)
holds in this case. We mention in passing that if 6 E 4\{a,/3}, then b = <au + v) for
some a c- F\ {0} and there exists a e GL(V) satisfying u = au, v = v so that 2 = a,
= /3, and y = S; this shows that PGL(V), is transitive on S2\lot, /#} and hence
(33) PGL(V) is triply transitive on f2 if n = 2.
Now assume that n > 3 and define Fa, _ {S E S2\{a,/3}I6 < a + /3} and &, =
{b E Q\{a,Q}1S $ a + Q}. If y, 6 E F.., we may again choose u, v E V such that a =
<u), /i = <v>, y = , 6 = <au + v> for some a c- F\ {0}; also there exists w E V
such that u, v, w are linearly independent. Then there are a, z c- SL(V) such that
u=au,v=v,w=a-'w and ut=v,vt=u,wt=-w,rz=1.And if y,6EO,,
then a = , /I = <v), y = <w>, 6 = <z> where u, v, w and u, v, z are linearly inde-
pendent. Then there are a, r a SL(V) satisfying u = u, v = v, w = cz for suitable
c e F, ut = v, vt = u, wt = -w, and t2 = 1. In both cases, g = aZ E G, and satisfies
y9 = S, whereas t = xZ is an involution in G such that a` = /3, fl' = a, and y` = y. It
follows that {x}, {Q}, IF,,,, and A,# are the orbits of G, on 0 and since J0,I > 1 this
also implies (b). Finally, since G is simple (see Robinson [1982], p. 72), the conju-
gates of t = (x/3)(y)... generate G.
We now show that if G is a finite 2-transitive group generated by involutions, then

(b) of 7.7.12 yields that G is determined by its subgroup lattice.
7.7.13 Theorem (Schmidt [1975b]). Let G be a doubly transitive permutation group

on a finite set Q, IS21 = n > 4, such that the stabilizer Gap of two distinct points
a, Q E Q fixes at most one further point. If G is generated by involutions, then G is
Proof. Let cp be a projectivity from G to a group G, D the set of involutions in G and

A = {Gala e (2}. We first prove that
(34) (A")9 = A" for all g e G.
For this we have to show that HLc9 = H`9`-' e A for all H E A and g e G. Since the
stabilizers of the points are maximal subgroups, their images generate G, and hence
it suffices to show that HT(9) E A for all g e G,','(2 E S2). Clearly, Ga E A and for
a $ e S2, we have G1(9) _ (Gp n Ga)`(9) = GpT(9) n G. If G were P-decomposable, it
would be a P-group since it is generated by involutions; but this contradicts (27).
Thus G is not P-decomposable and, by 5.6.10, r(g) is index preserving. Thus
G(9): Gt(9) n Ga 1 =1 G(e): G=as) I= I G: Ga I= n - 1
a a a as a
by (26). This shows that the orbit of a under G,'(s) has length n - 1, and hence there
exists a unique point y c- Q not contained in this orbit. It follows that G'(9) < G. and
then G;(9) = G. since both groups are maximal subgroups of G. Thus A'(') = A and
(34) holds.
To prove the theorem, we have to show that (G, 'P)' = G where d, x, a, $ are as in
Remark 7.7.9. By (30) and (31), (G p)x = G,',', and (G.11)' G.". Since (A")x = A", it
follows that x permutes the Gy" (y c- S2) containing G. If Gap does not fix a third point
of fl, then G. and Gp are the unique elements of A containing Gap, and therefore
(G,',*)' = G'. So suppose that there exists y e S2 such that a 0 y # 3 and Gap fixes y.
Then by assumption, Ga, Gp, and G., are the unique elements of A containing Gap. By
(29), Gp = Gap, and hence d operates on {Ga, Gp, G,,}. Since G = Gp and G = GG, it
follows that G = G. Then (24) implies that d c- GY and so x c- G'. Therefore (GP)' =
Gf and hence again (G,")' = Gp , as desired. El
By 7.7.12, the groups PSL(n, q), n > 2, q a prime power, q > 4 if n = 2, satisfy the
assumptions of Theorem 7.7.13. In fact, it is known that in every finite simple 2-
transitive permutation group the stabilizers of two points fix at most one further
point. Thus the unitary groups PSU(3, q2), q > 3 a prime power, the symplectic
groups Sp(2m, 2), m > 3, the Suzuki groups, the Ree groups, the Higman-Sims group
and Conway's group (.3) also fall under our theorem.
Futhermore note that the proof of (34) did not use our additional assumption on
Gap; nor did it really require that G be generated by involutions. Thus, in general, if
G is a finite doubly transitive permutation group of degree at least 4 and cp is a
projectivity from G to a group G, then G operates on A and it is possible to show
that G is 2-transitive on A. A consequence of this for soluble doubly transitive
groups is given in Exercise 5.
We now show that for a possibly infinite 2-transitive permutation group G, prop-
erties (c) and (d) of 7.7.12 yield that G is determined by its subgroup lattice.
7.7.14 Theorem (Schmidt [1980a]). A doubly transitive permutation group G on a set

Q, ICII >_ 4, is determined by its subgroup lattice if it has the following three properties:
(35) G is generated by involutions having fixed points on f2.
(36) If a, /3, y are three distinct elements of fl, there exists s e G such that
s = (a)(fly)... .
(37) For or, /3 E 0 such that a 54- /3, Ga, has exactly 4 orbits on fl.
Proof. Let G be a group satisfying (35)-(37), D the set of involutions in G having

fixed points on f2 and cp, A, d, x, a, /3 as in Remark 7.7.9. We have to show that
(G, )" = G"_ By (31), (GQ )" # Ga ; let F = G"9_'. Since d E D, there exists y E 0 such
that d = (af)(y)... and by (36) there exists s e G such that s = (a)(/3y).... Let S =
<s,Ga,), T = Ga,Y and W = <T,s,d). Then TS = T = T, s2 E T, sd = (a/3y)... and
hence (sd)3 E T; it follows that WIT is a dihedral group of order 6. Therefore d and
dS are involutions such that W = <T,d,ds) and again by 7.7.4, T" a W". Thus cp
induces a projectivity from WIT onto W"/TI*, and hence
(38) W/TI* is either elementary abelian of order 9 or dihedral of order 6.
Suppose, for a contradiction, that I W"/TÌ = 9. Then (<T, s)")" = <T, s>', and hence
by (30), x normalizes (T, s, Ga,) = <s, G8,)"' = S". Since s = (a) (fly)... and S"", ' _
S, we have Ga, < S < G. and so S n S < G. n GQ = G. Therefore S is not normal
in <S, d) and, by 6.5.3, <S, d)/S(s.e> E P(2, p) for some prime p. It follows that Gaa =
S n Sd a S, and hence by (23), GaQ = (Gafl)S = G.Y. Thus Gaff fixes y and therefore, by
(37), has the four orbits {a}, { /3}, {y}, and S2\ {a, /3, y} = I' on (2. The orbits of F >_ Gafl
on Q are joins of these orbits of Ga,. Since yd = y, we have x e G' and so
F9 = (F n G,)1* = F" n G"' = (GQ )" n (Gv)" = (Ga,)" = (G s)" = Gas,
by (30). Thus FY = GaR and, since Ga, < S < F, it follows that IyFI = IF: GaQI > 4.
Thus yF n F Q and hence r s yF. Also /3 E yF since s = (a)(/3y)... E S < F. Next
F G8, so S2\ {a} is not an orbit of F and, finally, y' = 0. Let g e F such that ya = a.
Then GQ, = F9 = FF = F n Q. > S. However this is impossible since Ga, has 4 orbits
on fl whereas S has at most 3 since it contains Ga, and s = (/3, y)... .
This contradiction shows that W"IT is dihedral of order 6. Again by 7.7.4,
<T, sd>" a W"' and hence o(x) = I< T, d)": TÌ = 2. The involution xT permutes the
two subgroups of order 2 of W"/T"' not containing xT". Thus (<T, s)")" = (<T, s)d)cO
and then S = <T, s, Ga,) and (30) imply that (S`)" = (S )c. Therefore if S = Ga, we are
done; so suppose that S < G. By 7.7.2, cp is 2-regular, hence G is generated by
involutions and not a P-group. Since (G,1,0)' = F"' and x is an involution, (G, ','r-) F4)"
= G, n F and then 7.7.4 yields that (Ga n F)" = Ga n F. It follows that Ga n F <
G. n GQ = Ga,; on the other hand, by (30), Ga# < Ga n F and thus G., = Ga n F = Fa.
Now let {a}, {f3}, r, and F2 be the orbits of G., on fl, and let y e F1, say. Since
s = (f3)(ay)... E Sd = S`0X`- < F, we see that F, s aF. If aF = {a} v I,1, then F. =

G2 is transitive on aF\{a} and hence F is 2-transitive on or'; but as F. < S < F, this
contradicts (24). If /3 e aF, there exists g e F such that a9 = f3 and then G'9', = Fa =
FF > S. This is impossible since GQ, has 4 orbits on S2 whereas S has at most 3.
Since aF is a join of orbits of G2 , the only remaining possibility is that aF =
{a} u F, u F2. Then fl\{aF} = { f3} is invariant under F, that is F = G,. Thus (G,,,')X
= G.10, as desired.
7.7.15 Corollary. If n > 3 and F is any field, then PSL(n, F) is determined by its
subgroup lattice.
Proof. This follows from 7.7.12 and 7.7.14.
If F is a field in which - 1 is not a square, it is easy to see that PSL(2, F) does not
contain involutions with fixed points on Q. Therefore these groups do not satisfy the
assumptions of Theorem 7.7.14. However it can be shown, using 7.7.5 directly, that
PSL(2,F) also is determined by its subgroup lattice if BFI > 3; see Schmidt [1980a]
where this result and 7.7.15 are proved for arbitrary skew-fields F. Yakovlev [1986]
studies the groups EL (R) generated by all transvections of dimension n over an
associative ring R with identity. He shows that such a group is determined by its
subgroup lattice if n > 4 and the additive group of R either contains an element of
infinite order or is generated by elements of prime order.
Classical groups
The methods of this section can also be applied to the other classical groups, that is
the symplectic, orthogonal, and unitary groups over fields. We only state the results
and give some brief comments on the proofs; for details see Schmidt [1980a].
7.7.16 Theorem. Let V be a finite-dimensional nonsingular symplectic, orthogonal, or

unitary vector space over the field F. In any of the following cases, G is determined by
its subgroup lattice.
(A) G = PSp(V), V symplectic, dim V > 12 if char F # 2, dim V > 4 if char F = 2.
(B) G = PS1(V), V orthogonal, ind V > 12 if char F : 2, ind V > 6 if (char F = 2
or) - 1 is a square in F.
(C) G = PSU(V), V unitary, ind V > 6 if char F # 2, ind V > 2 if char F = 2.
Sketch of proof. In all cases, G = G'/Z where G is the group of all isometries of V
and Z = Z(G). First let char F zA 2 and recall that the index of V is the dimension of
a maximal isotropic subspace of V. Thus our assumptions imply the existence of
hyperbolic planes H in V, that are subspaces H = <u, v> such that (u, u) = 0 = (v, v)
and (u, v) = 1. For every such H, we let aH be the linear map on V satisfying xN =
-X for x e H and xN = x for x c H'. Since V = H +Q H1, a, is an isometry of V and
allZ is a well-defined involution in G. We let be the set of all hyperbolic planes in
V, D = {arZIH E -5} and verify the assumptions of Theorem 7.7.7 for Gin place of
F. Since G is simple, G = (did e D>; so (18) and (19) are satisfied. If d = aHZ and
e = aKZ are elements in D and S = <d, a>, then S is trivial on H' n K' and, since
ind V is big enough, it is possible to find subspaces X, Y of V and an isometry p of
V such that H + K <_ X, X 1 Y and X = Y. Then it is easy to see that T = S
satisfies (20). So by 7.7.7, G is determined by its subgroup lattice. If char F = 2, we
can work with transvections, that is to say, maps a of the form x = x + A(x, v)v for
certain ;. E F and v e V satisfying (v, v) = 0. Here aZ is an involution in G and a fixes
elementwise the hyperplane <v>'. That is the reason why our method yields better
results in this case.
Every finite classical simple group is determined by its subgroup lattice; see 7.8.1
and 7.8.2.
Finite Coxeter groups
We finish this section with a result of quite a different flavour. Recall that a Coxeter
group is a group G generated by a set S of involutions such that the relations
(39) (st)m(s,') = 1 for (s, t) E I
are defining relations for G; here, for s, t e S, m(s, t) is the order of st and I is the set
of pairs (s, t) for which m(s, t) is finite. The number BSI is called the rank of G; so
Coxeter groups of rank 2 are just the dihedral groups.
7.7.17 Theorem (Uzawa [1986]). Every finite Coxeter group G of rank r > 3 is de-
termined by its subgroup lattice.
Proof. Let rp be a projectivity from G to a group G and let S be as above. It is

well-known (see Suzuki [1982], p. 359) that every Coxeter group of rank r > 3
contains two commuting involutions (even in S). By 7.7.3, cp is 2-regular and then
7.7.1 shows that o(st) = o(xy) if s, t e S, <s>" = (x> and (t)" = (y>. Thus G is
generated by a set of involutions satisfying the relations (39). Since these are defining
relations for G, there exists an epimorphism from G onto G. But a finite group
cannot be lattice-isomorphic to a proper factor group and it follows that G ^ G.
Exercises
1. (Uzawa [1986]) Let G be the dihedral group of order 2n and n = p;1 ... p'' the
prime factorization with p, < . . < p,. Show that G is determined by its sub-
group lattice if and only if one of the following holds:
(a) n is even,
(b) n is odd, e, > 1 and gcd(p, - 1,...,p, - 1) = 2, or
(c) n is odd, e , = 1 and gcd(p,, p2 - 1, ... , p, - 1) = 1
2. (Schmidt [1980a]) Let G be a group and cp a projectivity from G to a group G.

If there exist involutions a, b e G such that I (a)"I I <b)"I, show that G =
S x T where S is a nonabelian P-group generated by involutions and S and T
are coprime.
3. (Schmidt [1980a]) Let G be a group, D a set of involutions and A a set of
subgroups of G with the following properties.
(a) G=<dldED)andG0P(n,3)forallnEN u{cc}.
(b) AG = A and n NG(H) = 1.
HcA
(c) If a E D and H E A, then K = K for all K e A\{H, Ha} such that
HnH"<K<<H,H).
Show that if there exists a projectivity cp from G to a group G such that
(A")G = AO, then G G.
4. (Schmidt [1975b]) Let G be a finite doubly transitive permutation group on the
set 0, 1012!! 4, and let cp be a projectivity from G to a group G. Show that G can
be regarded as a doubly transitive permutation group on A = {Gala e S2}.
5. (Schmidt [1975b]) Show that for p' >- 4, the group I'(p') of all semilinear map-
pings
(a OO,aEAutGF(p'))
on GF(p') is determined by its subgroup lattice. (Hint: Use Exercise 4 and
Huppert's theorem on soluble doubly transitive permutation groups; see
Huppert and Blackburn [1982b], p. 379.)
6. (Schmidt [I975b]) Let p and r be primes, p 1 (modr), r > 2, S2 = GF(p')
and S = F(p'). Let T= {x - x + bib e i2}, M = {x -* axIO a e S2} and A =
{x -+ xaia e Aut f2}.
(a) Show that S contains precisely r + 1 subgroups of index r, namely TM, a
subgroup containing A and r - 1 other subgroups, all 2-transitive on fl.
(b) Show that any two of these r - I remaining subgroups are lattice-
isomorphic but not isomorphic.
7. (Schmidt [1980a]) Show that a doubly transitive permutation group G on a set
fl, 101 >- 4, is determined by its subgroup lattice if it has the following two
properties.
(a) G is generated by involutions having fixed points on ft
(b) If a, /3, y are three distinct elements of S2, there exists s e G such that
s = (a) (#y)... and G. = <s, Gae).
8. (Holmes [1971]) Show that if H1 and H2 are lattice-isomorphic Rottlander

groups and K is an infinite dihedral group, then H1 x K and H2 x K are lattice-
isomorphic. (Hint: Use 1.6.1.)
9. (a) Show that the symmetric group S is the only group of order n! which
contains a core-free subgroup of index n. Use 4.2.6 and 5.4.11 to conclude that
S. is determined by its subgroup lattice if n > 4.
(b) Give a similar proof for A,,, n it 5.
10. Show that if D is the set of transpositions in the symmetric group S and d, e e D,
then o(de) E { 1, 2,3 1. Use Theorem 7.7.7 to conclude that S is determined by its
subgroup lattice if n >- 4.
7.8 Finite simple and lattice-simple groups 439
7.8 Finite simple and lattice-simple groups

Many problems in group theory were solved by the classification of finite simple
groups. Among these is one of the most interesting problems on subgroup lattices of
groups.
7.8.1 Theorem. Every nonabelian finite simple group is determined by its subgroup
lattice.
Proof. Let G be a nonabelian finite simple group and let cp be a projectivity from G
to a group G. By 5.3.2 and 4.2.8, G is a simple group of the same order as G. Using
the classification of finite simple groups, Kimmerle, Lyons, Sandling and Teague
[1990] have shown that the only pairs of nonisomorphic finite simple groups of the
same order are PSL(3,4) and PSL(4,2) and, in the Lie notation, and
for some n > 3 and some odd q. In the same paper they show that PSL(3,4)
and PSL(4, 2) have different numbers of elements of order 5, and that and
have different numbers of involutions if n > 3 and q is odd. Since cp is index
preserving, this cannot happen for G and G. It follows that G G. (Note that all
the exceptional groups mentioned above are classical simple groups, so that the
methods of 7.7 show that they are determined by their subgroup lattices; see
Remark 7.8.2 below.)
Elementary proofs
Unfortunately, a direct proof of Theorem 7.8.1 is not known. But more elementary
proofs are available for certain classes of finite simple groups. For doubly transitive
simple groups, in particular the alternating and the projective special linear groups,
Theorem 7.7.13 yields the desired result. But the methods of 7.7 also work under
weaker assumptions than 2-transitivity and therefore it is possible to handle all the
classical finite simple groups in this way. We only sketch this briefly; for details see
Schmidt [1977b].
7.8.2 Remark. (a) A primitive permutation group G on a finite set S2 is determined

by its subgroup lattice if it has the following four properties.
(i) G is generated by involutions.
(ii) The stabilizer G, of a point a E S2 has precisely two orbits on 0\{7} (that is, G
is a rank 3 group) and these have different lengths; let A, be the larger orbit.
(iii) G = <G,,I a e 12, P e A,>.
(iv) The stabilizer of two different points fixes at most one further point.
The proof of this theorem uses 7.7.5 and elementary properties of rank 3 groups.
(b) Let V be a nonsingular symplectic, orthogonal, or unitary vector space of
dimension n over the field GF(q) with q elements, and assume that one of the follow-
ing holds:
(A) V symplectic, n > 4, q 0 3, G = PSp(V) = PSp(n,q).
(B) V orthogonal, n > 7, q odd, G = PQ(V) = Pfl(n, q).
(C) V orthogonal, n = 2m > 8, q even, G = PS2(V) = Pc(n, q).

(D) V unitary, n > 4, q a square, G = PSU(V) = PSU(u, q).
In any of these cases, G is a primitive permutation group on the set
f) = { <v> 10 v e V, (v, v) = 0}, respectively 0 = { <v> 10 : v e V, f (v) = 0} in case
(C) where f is the quadratic form associated to V. By Witt's theorem, the stabilizer
G. of a point a = <v> E SZ has the orbits Al = { <w> e S2I(v, w) = 0} and
A2 = { (w) I(v, w) = 1 }, and G also satisfies the other assumptions in (a).
(c) The classical simple groups not included in (A)-(D) are isomorphic either to
groups on the list or to groups PSL(2, q) and are therefore covered by (a) or Theo-
rem 7.7.13. The only exceptions are the groups PSp(2n, 3) in which the stabilizer of
two points fixes two further points; they are handled in Exercise 1. Thus all the
classical finite simple groups are covered by Theorem 7.7.5 and its consequences.
An immediate consequence of Theorem 7.7.7 is that every finite simple group

generated by a conjugacy class D of {3,4}-transpositions, that is, satisfying o(de) < 4
for all d, e e D, is determined by its subgroup lattice. This covers all the Chevalley
and Steinberg groups over GF(2) and the three Fischer groups.
Finally, there is a short general argument for arbitrary groups of Lie type, which,
however, uses a deep theorem of Tits'.
7.8.3 Theorem (Li [1983]). Every finite simple group G of Lie type of rank n > 2 is
Proof. Let cp be a projectivity from G to a group G. Then G operates on L(G) via the
map T, sending every x e G to the autoprojectivity T(x) of G defined by H`(") =
Hl" I" " for H < G. Let p be the characteristic of the ground field and B the normal-
izer of a Sylow p-subgroup of G; recall that the parabolic subgroups of G are the
subgroups containing some conjugate of B, and that the set A of all parabolic
subgroups together with the dual of the inclusion relation is the building of G. By
4.2.8, every autoprojectivity of G is index preserving and hence maps Sylow p-
subgroups to Sylow p-subgroups. Since the normalizer of a Sylow p-subgroup P is
the largest subgroup of G containing P but no other Sylow p-subgroup, T(x) per-
mutes the normalizers of the Sylow p-subgroups and therefore maps parabolic
subgroups to parabolic subgroups. So T(x) induces an automorphism o(x) of the
building A of G. If x e (B9)`, then T(x) fixes every subgroup containing B9, and hence
a(x) is type preserving. Since G is generated by the (B9)0, we conclude that o is a
homomorphism from G into the group of all type preserving automorphisms of A.
By a well-known theorem of Tits [1974], this group contains a normal subgroup
G* G with soluble factor group. Since G is simple, it follows that G is isomorphic
to a subgroup of G. But G and G are lattice-isomorphic finite groups; thus G G, as
desired.
Unfortunately, all these partial results cannot prove 7.8.1. No simple direct proof
of this theorem, without using the classification of finite simple groups, is known; it
would be highly desirable to have such a proof even if it used the Feit-Thompson
Theorem.
The second main problem, whether or not every nonabelian finite simple group is
strongly determined by its subgroup lattice, is much easier to solve. This is equiva-
lent to asking the question if, for every nonabelian finite simple group G,
(1) P(G) = PA(G).
Indeed, (1) is satisfied for every group G which is strongly determined by its sub-
group lattice. Conversely, suppose that (1) holds for every nonabelian finite simple
group G. Then, since every projective image G of G is simple, 1.4.3 and (1) would
imply that
Aut G PA(G) = P(G) ^- P(G) = PA(G) Aut G;
and, since a nonabelian simple group is isomorphic to the unique minimal normal
subgroup of its automorphism group, it would follow that G ^- G. So we would
obtain, without using 7.8.1 or the classification of finite simple groups, that G is
determined by its subgroup lattice, and (1) then says that every projectivity of G is
induced by an isomorphism. We mention in passing that the weaker property
(2) PI (G) a P(G),
for every nonabelian finite simple group G, would suffice to give an elementary proof
of Theorem 7.8.1 (see Exercise 2). Metelli [1971] proved that all the minimal simple
groups that is, nonabelian finite simple groups all of whose proper subgroups are
soluble, satisfy (1) and therefore also (2). However, we are now going to show that
neither property holds for arbitrary finite simple groups. For this, surprisingly
enough, it suffices to study the alternating groups. But for completeness sake we will
also treat the finite symmetric groups and give some brief comments on infinite
symmetric and alternating groups.
Symmetric and alternating groups
In the sequel let n >_ 4, S2 = { 1, ... , n} and G = Sym S2 = S. or G = Alt D = A.; write
G; = {g E Gli9 = i} and A = {G;Ii E S2}
so that G. is the stabilizer of the point i e S2 in G and A is the set of all stabilizers. We
want to investigate the group P(G) of autoprojectivities of G. The idea is to show
that (except when n = 6) P(G) operates on A, and then to study this operation. For
this purpose we have to establish some basic properties of A.
7.8.4 Lemma. If M < G such that I G : M = n, there exists x E Aut G such that
M.
Proof. Let { Mx,,..., Mx } with x = I be the set of cosets of M in G and consider

the permutation representation a: G -+ S. of G on this set: g' maps i e S2 to j c S2 if
and only if Mx;g = Mx1. Since A. is simple for n > 5, n Mx = 1; this also holds for
xeG
n = 4 since I M I = 3 or 6 in that case. So a is a monomorphism and, since G is the

unique subgroup of its order in Sn, it follows that G' = G, that is, x E Aut G. Now
g e M if and only if Mg = M and this holds if and only if n9' = n. Thus M' = Gn, as
desired.
Let D be the set of 3-cycles in S. Since (12n) 0 and An_, is a maximal

subgroup of An, a trivial induction yields that
(3) An = <(123),(124),...,(12n)>.
A product of two 3-cycles has one of the following four types
(4) (123)(124) = (14)(23), (123)(142) = (234), (123)(145) = (12345), (123)(456).
Again a simple induction yields the following result.
(5) Ifl <m<-n-3and x...... that o(xixj)=2for i0j,then M
.... . . . . X , , > has at least n - m - 2 fixed points on 0.
Indeed, this is obvious for m = 1; so suppose that m > 2 and <x...... x,n_, > has at
least n - (m -1) - 2 = n - m - 1 fixed points. Since o(x,x,n) = 2, we see from (4)
that two of the points moved by x,n are also moved by x,. It follows that
<x,,..., has at least (n - m - 1) - 1 fixed points.
7.8.5 Lemma. If n 0 6, G has only one conjugacy class of subgroups of index n

(namely A).
Proof. Assume first that G = A. and, since the assertion is obvious for n = 4, that
n > 5. We show that
(6) D' = D for all a e Aut G.
To see this, first note that by (4), D' is a conjugacy class of elements of order 3 of G
such that o(de) < 5 for all d, e e D. Suppose, for a contradiction, that D' 0 D. Then
there exists x e D'\D. Since o(x) = 3 and x 0 D, the cycle decomposition of x
contains at least two 3-cycles. If x has a fixed point, so that we may assume x =
(123)(456)(7)..., then for g = (34)(67) E G, y = x9 = (124)(357)(6)... E D' and xy =
(1473256) ... has order divisible by 7, a contradiction. On the other hand, if x has
no fixed points, then n 6 implies that x has the form (123) (456) (789) ... , say;
once again, if g = (34)(67), then y = x9 = (124)(357)(689)... E D' and now xy =
(147932586)... has order divisible by 9. This contradiction shows that D' = D.
Now let M be a subgroup of index n in G. By 7.8.4 there exists a e Aut G such that
G = M and, by (3), G = An_, _ <(123),(124),. .. , (12 n -1)>. If xi = (12 i + 2)', then
by (6) and (4), xi E D and o(xix;) = o((12i+2)(12j+2)) = 2 for i 0 j. Thus by (5), the
group M = G' = <x 1, ... , xi_3 > has at least n - (n - 3) - 2 = 1 fixed points on 0.
So M < Gi for some i and then M = Gi since both groups have the same order. This
proves the lemma for G = An.
If G = S. and M <- G such that I G : MI = n, then I An: M n Anl = n or n/2. Since
the simple group A. does not admit a homomorphism into the symmetric group Sk
fork < n, it follows that IAn: M n AnI = n. So M n A. = Gi n A. for some i, as we have
just shown. Now Ana G, so M j4 G. implies that M n A = Gi n A o M u G. = G,

a contradiction. Thus M = Gi, as desired.
7.8.6 Lemma. If n = 6, G has exactly two conjugacy classes F and A of subgroups of
index 6; forMEVandNEA,IM:MnNJ=6.
Proof. Let S = S5 and T = <(12345),(1243)> < S. Then ITI = 20 and hence
IS: TI = 6. Thus the permutation representation lI of S on the cosets of T is a
homomorphism from S into G = S6 with Ker/I = n Tx = 1. It follows that
xeS
SO S = S5, and so I G : SO 1 = 6. If { Tx1,... , Tx6 } are the cosets of Tin S, then the
stabilizer of i in SO is SO n G. _ (Tx')fl, and hence SO n G. T Since Gi n GG S4 for
i : j, this shows that SO 0 A = {Gili e S2}. Clearly, SO n A6 is a subgroup of index 6
in A6 which intersects Gi in a subgroup of order 10. So there exist at least two
conjugacy classes of subgroups of index 6, both in S6 and in A6.
Now let G = S6 or A6 and M, N< G such that I G : MI = I G : N J = 6. We claim
that
(7) 1M: M n NI = 6 if M and N are not conjugate.
To see this, consider the operation of M on the set A of cosets of N in G. The
stabilizer of the coset N in M n N and hence I M: M n N I 5. Also IM: M n NJ = 5 would imply that M
has one orbit of length 5 and therefore also one fixed point on A. Thus M < Nx for
some x e G and, since both groups have the same order, it would follow that
M = Nx, contradicting our assumption. So IM: M n NI = 6 and (7) holds.
Now let M1, ..., Mk be representatives of the conjugacy classes of subgroups of
index 6 in G; thus k > 2 as we have seen. Since 311MiI, there exists x, e Mi such that
o(xi) = 3. If xi were conjugate to x; for some i 0 j, then x9 = x; E M9 n M; for some
g e G; but by (7), I M9 n M;I is not divisible by 3, a contradiction. Since G has only
two conjugacy classes of elements of order 3, with representatives (123) and
(123)(456), we obtain that k = 2. The second assertion of 7.8.6 follows from (7).
7.8.7 Remark. By 4.2.8, every autoprojectivity a of G is index preserving. So 7.8.5

shows that for n : 6, a induces a permutation Q of A. The map a -+ 6 is clearly a
homomorphism from P(G) into Sym A S. with kernel
K = {a e P(G) I G' = Gi for all i e 01.
By the homomorphism theorem, P(G)/K is isomorphic to a subgroup of Sn.
To study the kernel K, we need the following simple result.
7.8.8 Lemma. Let n, k, q be natural numbers such that kQ - 1 (mod n) and k' * I
(mod n) for 1 < r < q.
(a) If x = (1, ... , n) is a cycle of length n and s: S2 -a S2 is defined by i 5 = ik (mod n)
foriES2={I__ nl, then seSn,o(s)=gandxs=xk.
(b) If k = n - I in (a), then s e A. if and only if n - 1 (mod 4) or n - 2 (mod 4).
(c) If y e S. and T E Aut<y>, there exists t c S. such that o(t) = o(r) and y` = yT.
Proof. (a) Clearly, i" - ik' (mod n); since k' - 1 (mod n), it follows that s9 is the
identity on 0. Therefore s is a permutation and, since k' # 1 (mod n) for 1 < r < q,
we have o(s) = q and is-' - ik9-' (mod n). Thus is-'"s - (ik9-' + 1)k - i + k - ik
(mod n) and hence s-' xs = xk.
(b) If k = n - 1, then s interchanges i and n - i for all i = 1, ... , n - 1 and hence
s is a product of (n - 1)/2 or (n - 2)/2 transpositions according as n is odd or even.
These numbers are even if and only if n - 1 (mod 4) or n - 2 (mod 4), respectively.
(c) Let Y = Y1...Yd be the cycle decomposition of y and suppose that y' = yk =
Yi .. Yd, k E N. If yi is a cycle of length m and q is the smallest natural number
satisfying k9 - 1 (mod m), then qI o(r). By (a) there exists si E Sn, operating only on the
m points moved by yi, such that o(si) = q and yj' = y'. Then t = sl ... sd E S satisfies
y` = yk = y` and o(t) = o(r).
7.8.9 Lemma. If G = S. and a E P(G) such that (G1) = Gi for all i e S2, then a = 1.
Proof. We have to show that <g) = <g> for every g E G and use induction on the
number v(g) of points moved by g to prove this first for involutions g. If g is a
transposition (j), then <g> = n Gk and hence <g> = <g>. So suppose that
i#k#j
v(g) > 2. Then the cycle decomposition of g yields involutions gi such that
v(gi) < v(g) and g = 9192 = 9291. By the induction assumption, <gi) = <gi> and
hence <g1,g2>" = (g1,g2>; thus the third subgroup <g> of order 2 of the four-
group <g1, 92 > is invariant under a.
Now let g E G such that o(g) > 2. By 7.8.8 there exists s E G such that s2 = 1 and
g' = g-'. Then H = <g, s> is generated by involutions and hence H = H. Since
every element in H\<g> has order 2, each maximal subgroup of H different from <g>
is generated by involutions. Thus a fixes all these maximal subgroups and hence also
(g)
7.8.10 Theorem (Suzuki [1951a], Zacher [1965]). Let n e N, n >- 4.
(a) If n : 6, z S..
(b) P(S6) = PA(S6), PI(S6) S61 I P(S6) : PI(S6)I = 2.
(c) Every projectivity of S. is induced by a unique isomorphism.
Proof. (a) By 7.8.7 and 7.8.9, is isomorphic to a subgroup of S. On the other

hand, since 1, it follows from 1.4.3 that S,,. Thus P(S) = S..
(b) By 7.8.6, G = S6 has two conjugacy classes F and A of subgroups of index 6.
If M, N E A and a e P(G), then M n N ^ S4 and, since a is index preserving,
M' n N = (M n N) has order 24. By 7.8.6, M and N are conjugate. It follows
that A = A or A = F, and hence I P(G) : LI < 2 if L = IT e P(G)jAt = Al. By 7.8.9,
L operates faithfully on A and so is isomorphic to a subgroup of S6. On the other
hand, S6 ^J PI(G) < L and hence L = PI(G) S6. By 7.8.4, P1(G) < PA(G) and so,
finally, PA(G) = P(G) and I P(G) : PI(G)I = 2.
(c) If cp is a projectivity from G = S. to a group G, then by 7.7.11, G G. By (a) or
(b), (p is induced by an isomorphism a which is unique, by 1.4.2 and 1.4.3.
Note that by 1.4.3, Aut S,,; thus 7.8.10(a) implies that Aut S S. for
n # 6. It is well-known (see Huppert [1967], p. 199) that A6 PSL(2,9). Therefore
S6 is a subgroup of index 2 of Aut A6 n-, PI'L(2, 9), and hence this group operates
as a group of automorphisms on S6. So 7.8.10(b) implies that P(S6) = PA(S6)
Aut S6 PTL(2, 9).
It is quite obvious that we could handle the alternating groups in the same way as
the symmetric groups if we could prove the analogue of Lemma 7.8.9. However this
is only possible for certain integers n.
7.8.11 Lemma. Let n >_ 5, G = A. and a E P(G) such that (Gi) = Gi for all i e n. If
x c G such that o(x) = p' (p c P, r c J) and <x> -t- <x>, then
(a) p = 3,
(b) x fixes at most one point of S2,
(c) x is a cycle (of length 3'),
(d) r is odd.
Proof. (a) We show first in several steps that most cyclic subgroups of G are
invariant under a. So let g E G.
(8) If g is a 3-cycle, then <g> _ <g>.
Indeed, if g = (i, j, k), then <g> is the intersection of all the G. with m E Sl\{i, j, k}.
(9) If g2 = 1, then <g> = <g>.
As in the proof of 7.8.9, we use induction on v(g) to prove this. If v(g) = 0, then g = 1,
while v(g) = 2 is impossible since G = A. So let v(g) = 4 and g = (12)(34), say. Since
n >_ 5, the subgroups H = n Gi and K = ((125)> are invariant under a. Clearly,
i>5
H ^-, A5 and <(125),(12)(34)> = NH(K) is invariant under a since it is the unique
subgroup of order 6 between H and K. The same argument applies to the group
<(345),(12)(34)>, and it follows that a also fixes the intersection <(12)(34)> of these
two groups. Now let v(g) > 4. Then the cycle decomposition of g yields involutions
gi E G such that 4 < v(gi) < v(g) and g = 9192 = 9291. By induction, <gi> = <gi>
and hence <91,92> = <g1,g2>; therefore the third subgroup (g> of order 2 of the
four-group <g1,g2> is invariant under a.
(10) If there exists an involution s e G such that gS = g-1, then <g> = <g>.
Indeed, <g, s> and all maximal subgroups of <g, s> different from <g> are generated
by involutions; thus a fixes all these groups and hence also <g>.
(11) If g' = 1, then <9> = <g>.
Again we use induction on v(g) to prove this. By (8), (11) holds if v(g) = 3. If v(g) = 6,
then g = (123)(456), say, and s = (12)(45) E G satisfies gS = g-1; thus (10) implies
that <g> = <g>. Finally, if v(g) > 6, the cycle decomposition of g yields elements
gi E G of order 3 with disjoint supports such that g = 919293. By induction, <g1 >,
<9293>, <9192>, <93> are invariant under a. Since <g1,g2g3> and <g192,93>
are different elementary abelian groups of order 9 containing g, it follows that
<g> = (<91 > v <9293>) n (<9192> v <g3>) is invariant under a.

(12) If o(g) = 2", then <gy' = <g>.
Let k > 2 and g = g1... g,, be the cycle decomposition of g. Since every cycle of even
length is an odd permutation, m is even. By 7.8.8 there exist involutions s; E S
operating on the points moved by gi such that g'! = g.-'; let s = s, ... If one of the
gi is a transposition, then either s E G or sgi e G, and g' = g-' = g'gi since gi central-
izes g; by (10), <g>c = <g>. If none of the gi is a transposition, then v(gi) = 0 (mod 4)
and hence, by (b) of 7.8.8, si G for i = 1, ..., m. Since m is even, it follows that s E G
and <g>6 = <g>, again by (10).
(13) If o(g) = p' and p > 3, then <g>a = <g>.
We use induction on o(g) to prove this. So suppose that (13) holds for elements of
smaller order than g and let r be an automorphism of order p - I of <g>. By 7.8.8
there exists t c- S such that o(t) = p - I and g' = gr. Since p > 3 and IS.: GI = 2, we
have <t> n G 1; let s e <t> n G be of prime order q, say. Then <g, s> and all
maximal subgroups of <g, s> different from <g> are generated by subgroups of order
q. By (9), (11), or induction, all these groups are invariant under a and then so is <g>.
This proves (13); clearly, (12) and (13) imply (a).
(b) If g c- G fixes two points i and j of Q, and s E S. is the involution satisfying
gs = g-' constructed in 7.8.8, then s or (Q )s is an involution in G inverting g. Thus
(10) implies that <g>d = <g> and this proves (b).
(c) We show first that the cycle decomposition of x contains at most two cycles.
To see this, suppose that g c- G such that o(g) = 3' and g = 819293 where the gi : I
have disjoint supports. Then o(g) is the least common multiple of the o(gi)
and so 3' = o(g) = o(g2) > o(gi) (i = 1, 3), say. Let S = <g1g2> v <g3> and
T = <91> v <9293). If y c S n T, then y = (g192)i93 = 9',(9293)' for i, j, k, m E N.
Since the product of the <gi> is direct, it follows that i = m (mod 3') and g3 = 93 = 93
Thus y = (8,8283)', E <g> and so S n T = <g>. The 3-elements g1, 93, 9192, 9293 all
have more than one fixed point on fl; therefore by (b), a fixes S and T and hence <g>.
Now let g = 8192 with disjoint cycles g1 of length 3' and g2 of length 3'. If r = k,
the involutions si inverting gi constructed in 7.8.8 are either both odd or both even;
in any case, s = s1s2 E G and by (10), <g> = <g>. So let r > k. Consider the semi-
direct product H = N of an elementary abelian group N = <a, > x x <a3, ,
331-'
of order and a cyclic group of order 3r-1 with respect to the operation
a, = ai+, 3'-' - 1), ail-Ib = a, (note that H C3 wr Car- i; see (14) of 7.6).
Then c = a, b satisfies c3' = a,... air-i and hence o(c) = Y. If M is a complement
to S2(<c>) in N, then M<c> = H and M n <c> = 1; furthermore, Ml = 1 since
Z(H) = S2(<c>). Thus H operates faithfully on the 3' cosets of M in H and c is a cycle
of length 3'. Since all cycles of length 3' in S are conjugate, there exists a subgroup
S C3 wr C31-1 of G containing g, and having the same support as g,. Let A
be the base group of S and T = A<g>. Then S = A<g1>; and Tn <g1,g2> =
<g>(A n <g1,g2>) = <g> since A is elementary abelian and intersects <g2> trivially
so that An <g1,g2> = S2(<g>). Since r > k, we have T n <g2> = <g> n <g2> = 1
and T <g2> = <A, g1, g2) = S x <g2>. Thus T is isomorphic to S and hence is gen-
erated by elements of order at most 3'-'. Since n > 3r + 3k, every such element either
has two fixed points on 0- as do g, and g2-or has three cycles in its cycle
decomposition. By (b) and the first part of the proof of (c), a fixes T and <g g2>,
and hence also T n <g g2> _ <g>. Thus x is a cycle.
(d) If r were even, then 3' - I (mod 4) and hence by 7.8.8 there exists an involution
s c- G inverting the cycle x of length 3'. By (10), <x> = <x>, a contradiction. Thus r
is odd.
7.8.12 Theorem (Schmidt [1977a]). If n > 5, n : 6 and not of the form n = 3'
or n = 3' + 1 where r is odd, then PA(A,,) S,,; furthermore P(A6) =
PA(A6) PFL(2,9). Every projectivity of these alternating groups is induced by a
unique isomorphism.
Proof. Let G = A,, and K = {a c- P(G) I G = G; for all i c- 0}. If K : 1, there would
exist a c K and x e G of prime power order such that <x>a # <x>. By 7.8.11, x
would then be a cycle of length 3', r odd, with at most one fixed point, and it would
follow that n = 3' or n = 3' + 1, a contradiction. Thus K = 1 and by 7.8.7, P(G) is
isomorphic to a subgroup of S,,. On the other hand, S. is a subgroup of Aut A.
PA(AJ < P(G), and it follows that P(G) = PA(G) S,,. The proofs of the other
statements are similar to the corresponding proofs for S. in 7.8.10 and are left to the
reader.
Using Sadovskii's Local Theorem, Corollary 1.3.7, we can extend the results of
7.8.10 and 7.8.12 to infinite sets.
7.8.13 Corollary. If X is an infinite set, then the alternating group AR X and the
group of finitary permutations Sym(X, N,) are strongly determined by their subgroup
lattices.
Zacher [1977] has shown that for infinite X, every normal subgroup of Sym X is
strongly determined by its subgroup lattice; see Exercise 7.
We now treat the cases n = 3' and n = 3' + 1, r odd.
7.8.14 Lemma. Let n = 3' or n = 3' + I (r > 2) and suppose that X is a cyclic sub-
group of order 3' in G = 5,,. If X < H < G, then 1.
Proof. Suppose that the lemma is false and choose a minimal counterexample
H < G; write H; for the stabilizer of the point i c- S in H. Then H = QX where Q 1
is a normal 3'-subgroup of H. If q is a prime dividing IQ I, then by 4.1.3 there exists
an X-invariant Sylow q-subgroup of Q, and the minimality of H implies that Q is a
q-group. If n = 3', then X is transitive on S and hence so is H. Therefore I H : Hil = 3'
and so Q < H; for all i e 0. It follows that Q = 1, a contradiction. Thus n = 3' + 1.
If H is not transitive on S2, then H has orbits of lengths 3' and 1 and, as above, Q = 1.
So H is transitive on S2 and then 3' + 1 = n = q' for some m since X is contained
in the stabilizer H. of some point i c Q. It follows that q = 2 and m < 2, since
3' + 1 2 or 4 (mod 8). Thus r < 1, contradicting our assumption r > 2.
7.8.15 Theorem. Let n = 3' or n = 3' + 1, r odd, r > 3 and let G = A. Then PA(G)
and P1(G) are not normal in P(G).
Proof. Let x = (12 ... 3') be a cycle of length 3' in G and X = <x>. If y e Cs,(X)
and I' = 1, then ii' = IX'- 'y = 1YX'-' = Ix'-' = i for all i e { 1,..., 3'}, and hence y = 1.
Since X < Cs,(X), this shows that CC,(X) operates regularly on { 1, ... , 3r } and so has
order 3'. Thus Cs,(X) = X. Therefore Ns.(X)/X and NG(X)/X are isomorphic to
subgroups of Aut X, and this group is cyclic of order 2.3r-1 (see Huppert [1967], p.
84). By 7.8.8, Ns,(X)/X Aut X; since r is odd, 3' - 3 (mod 4) and therefore the
involution s satisfying x' = x-1 constructed in 7.8.8 is not contained in G. So
NG(X)/X is cyclic of order 3r-1. Let H be the subgroup of order 3r+1 between X and
NG(X). Then X is a cyclic subgroup of index 3 in H, and hence the structure of H is
well-known. By 2.3.4 and 2.3.5, for example, H is an M-group and I H : Q'._1(H) J = 3.
So H has 3 cyclic subgroups of order 3'; let A be the set of these cyclic maximal
subgroups of H. Then we claim the following.
(14) If YeAand Y<M<G,then H<M.
To prove this, suppose, for a contradiction, that H -4 M. If Y = <y>, then y is a cycle
of length 3' since n < 3' + 1. So Y is conjugate to X in S. and hence NA(Y)/Y
NG(X)/X is cyclic of order 3r-1. Thus H is the unique subgroup of NG(Y) in which Y
is a maximal subgroup. Since H M, it follows that Y = NM(Y) and hence Y is a
Sylow 3-subgroup of M contained in the centre of its normalizer. By a theorem of
Burnside (see Robinson [1982], p. 280) there exists a normal 3-complement Q in M.
By 7.8.14, Q = I and hence Y = M, a contradiction. Now we can construct auto-
projectivities of G which are not induced by automorphisms.
(15) If r is a permutation of A, then a: L(G) -- L(G) defined by Y' = Y` for Y e A
and Y = Y for Y 0 A is an autoprojectivity of G.
Of course, a is bijective. Let U < V< G. If U, V 0 A, then U = U < V = V. If
V e A, then U = U < b(V) = D(H) < V; and if U E A, then by (14), H < V and
hence U< H < V = V. Thus in all cases, U < V implies that U < V. The same
holds for a-1 and so a is a projectivity.
An automorphism x inducing this projectivity a has to fix every involution in G.
Since G is generated by involutions, it follows that x = 1; but this is impossible if
r 0 1. Thus a is not induced by an automorphism and hence P(G) :?-4 PA(G). But we
can improve on this. Since G is simple, there exists g c G such that H9 H. Let it be
the autoprojectivity of G induced by the inner automorphism induced by g; so
n c P1(G). Then X"-' 0 A and hence = X-'"-"N = X-' X if we choose
X-"n-Iff"
r c- Sym A such that X` X. Thus a ' n-1 Qn 0 1. On the other hand, if U < G such
that I UI = 2, then U '" " = U"-" = U, since a fixes all subgroups of order 2. So
again an automorphism x of G inducing the projectivity a-1 n-1 Qn would have to fix
every involution in G and would therefore be the identity, a contradiction. Thus
a-1 n-1 air 0 PA(G) and, since it E PI(G) < PA(G), this shows that PI(G) and PA(G)
are not normal in P(G).
The following theorem gives more information about the structure of P(A") in the
exceptional cases; the proof is left to the reader (see Exercises 4-6).
7.8.16 Theorem (Schmidt [1977a]). Let n = 3' or n = 3' + 1, r odd, r > 3 and let
G = A,,. Write K = {a e P(G)IG7 = G; for all i c- S1}, and let L be the set of all
v e P(G) fixing every noncyclic subgroup of G. Then K and L are normal subgroups of
P(G) and
(a) P(G)/K S.,
(b) K/L is isomorphic to a subgroup of a direct product of groups isomorphic to S3
(it is not known whether K L),
(c) L is the direct product of (3' - 1)!/2.3' (if n = 3') or (3' - 1)!(3' + 1)/2.3' (if
n = 3r + 1) groups isomorphic to S3.
Simple groups of Lie type
A large number of simple Chevalley groups have been shown to be strongly deter-
mined by their subgroup lattices. This was done for the simple groups PSL(2, q) by
Metelli [1968], [1969], and for PSL(3, 3) and the Suzuki groups in Metelli [1971].
For a Chevalley group G of rank at least 2, P(G) operates as a group of auto-
morphisms on the building A of G, as was shown in the proof of Theorem 7.8.3; and
if K is the kernel of this operation, it follows from Tits' theorem that P(G)/K
Aut G. So it remains to study this kernel K. It was proved by Volklein [1986a] that
K = I for the groups of type B,, C,, D21, 2D21, 3D4, G2, F4 if p > 3 and of type E7, E8
if p > 7. Similar results have been obtained by Costantini [1989b] for simple alge-
braic groups over the algebraic closure of the prime field GF(p). These groups are
strongly determined by their subgroup lattices for all odd primes with the sole
exception of the groups of type A2. These groups are in fact also exceptional in the
finite case. Volklein [1986a], [1986b] and Costantini [1990] show that the groups
PSL(3, q) in general are not strongly determined by their subgroup lattices;
PSL(3, 17) is the smallest example of this kind (see Costantini [1989a]).
Lattice-simple groups
A group G is called lattice-simple if for every subgroup H of G such that 1 < H < G,
there exists a e P(G) such That H H; that is, G does not contain any nontrivial
proper P(G)-invariant subgroup. Obvious examples of such groups are the direct
products of isomorphic simple groups: these groups are even characteristically
simple (see Robinson [1982], p. 84). In particular, every elementary abelian group
and therefore, by 2.2.3, every P-group is lattice-simple. By 1.2.7, the subgroup lattice
of a cyclic group of square-free order is a direct product of chains of length one, and
hence such groups are lattice-simple. We now show that, conversely, every finite
lattice-simple group is one of the examples mentioned above.
7.8.17 Theorem (Suzuki [1951a], Schmidt [1978]). The finite group G is lattice-
simple if and only if it has one of the following properties.
(i) G is a P-group.
(ii) G is cyclic ofsquare free order.
(iii) G is a direct product of isomorphic (nonabelian) simple groups.
Proof. It remains to be shown that every finite lattice-simple group G has one of the
properties (i)-(iii). To see this, consider the set 97l of all modular subgroups of prime
order in G and let L = <MIM E 972). Clearly, L is P(G}invariant and hence L = G
or L = 1.
Suppose first that L = G. If there exists M E 972 which is not permutable in G, then
by 5.1.9, G = MG x K where M' is a P-group and (IMGI, IKI) = 1. By 4.2.4, M' is
P(G)-invariant. It follows that G = M' and (i) holds. So suppose that every M E 972
is permutable in G. Then by 5.2.9, L = <MGI M E 9J1> is the product of nilpotent
normal subgroups, and hence G = L is nilpotent. Since 'D(G) is P(G)-invariant,
(D(G) = 1. Therefore if G is a p-group, (i) holds. If G is not a p-group and P is a
nontrivial Sylow p-subgroup of G, there exists a e P(G) such that P 0 P. Since P is
the unique Sylow p-subgroup of G, it follows that P is not a p-group. But P is
nilpotent and hence by 2.2.6, P is cyclic. So G is cyclic and of square-free order since
(D(G) = 1. Thus (ii) holds.
Now suppose that L = 1, that is, G has no modular subgroup of prime order. Let
N be a minimal normal subgroup of G. Then N is not cyclic and hence by 5.4.4, N
is a minimal normal subgroup of G for every a E P(G). Clearly, M = <Nl a E P(G)>
is P(G)-invariant and hence M = G; it follows that G = N x N' x x N for
certain a; E P(G). As a minimal normal subgroup, N is a direct product of isomor-
phic simple groups; since it is a direct factor of G, it follows that N is simple. By 7.8.1,
all the N are isomorphic to N and so G satisfies (iii). However, we need not use the
classification of finite simple groups here; using the Feit-Thompson Theorem only,
we can verify the assumptions of Theorem 7.7.7 for N and a = a, (i = 1, ... , r) in
place of F and cp. Indeed, since N is simple, Z(N) = 1 and N is generated by involu-
tions. Let D be the set of all involutions in N, let d, e c- D and S = <d, e>. By 4.2.8, a
is index preserving since G is a direct product of simple groups. So 7.7.1 shows that
S ti S and, clearly, S < No < CG(S). Thus T = S satisfies (20) of 7.7. By Theorem
7.7.7, N N and G satisfies (iii).
Exercises
1. (Schmidt [1977b]) Show that for n> 2, the group G = PSp(2n, 3) =
Sp(2n, 3)/Z(Sp(2n, 3)) satisfies the assumptions of Theorem 7.7.5 if one takes
D = {aZ(Sp(2n, 3))1a2 = 1 # a E Sp(V)} and A = {Gala E S2} in the notation of
7.8.2(b).
2. Let G and G be nonabelian finite simple groups such that P1(G) 9 P(G) and
P1(G) a P(G). If L(G) L(G), show that G ti G (without using 7.8.1, of course).
In the next three exercises let n = Y or n = 3' + 1, r odd, r >_ 3 and G = A,,.
3. Show that CP(G)(PI (G)) : 1 (compare with the well-known result that
CA,,,X(Inn X) = 1 if Z(X) = 1).
4. Let S E Sy13 (G) and write K(S) for the set of all a e P(S) fixing every subgroup of
exponent at most 3'-' of S. Let a E K(S) and X < S such that X # X.
(a) Show that X is metacyclic of exponent 3'.
(b) If X is not cyclic, show that there exist K(S)-invariant subgroups U, V, W of S
such that U < V < W, U <X < W, and IW/UI =9.
(Hint: Note that S is an iterated wreath product of cyclic groups of order 3; see
Robinson [1982], p. 41.)
5. If H < G and a e K (defined in 7.8.7) such that H 0 H, show that H is a meta-
cyclic 3-group of exponent Y.
6. Prove Theorem 7.8.16.
7. (Zacher [1977]) Let X be an infinite set and G a nontrivial normal subgroup of
Sym X. Show that every projectivity of G is induced by a unique isomorphism.
(Hint: Consult Scott [1964], pp. 305-315 for the basic properties of Sym X. In
particular, note that G = Alt X or G = Sym(X, A) for some infinite cardinal A so
that by 7.7.11, G is determined by its subgroup lattice.)
Chapter 8
Dualities of subgroup lattices
We say that a group G has a dual if there exists a duality from its subgroup lattice
onto the subgroup lattice of a group G, that is, a bijective map 6: L(G) -* L(G) such
that for all H, K E L(G), H < K if and only if Kb < H. Not every group has a dual,
for instance the quaternion group has none, and it is an interesting problem to
determine all groups with duals_
In 1939 Baer proved that every group with dual is a torsion group and that an
abelian group has a dual if and only if it is a torsion group whose primary compo-
nents are finite. In 1951 Suzuki determined the nilpotent and the finite soluble
groups with duals. It turned out that the latter are precisely the projective images of
finite abelian groups. In 1961 Zacher showed that every finite group with dual is
soluble and determined the infinite soluble groups with duals. Again these are pro-
jective images of abelian groups; as torsion groups, they are locally finite. In 1971
Zacher proved conversely that every locally finite group with dual is soluble. Thus
the structure of these groups is known and we present it in this chapter.
It should be mentioned that all these results will be proved using elementary
methods, except the last one, that every locally finite group with dual is soluble. This
proof uses the Feit-Thompson Theorem. Finally, the Tarski groups are examples of
groups with duals which are not locally finite and the structure of an arbitrary group
with dual is not known.
8.1 Abelian groups with duals
In this section we determine the abelian groups with duals and also give some
general results on dualities between subgroup lattices. First of all, we have the
following "dual" to Theorem 1.1.2.
8.1.1 Lemma. Let 6 be a bijective map of a lattice L to a lattice L. Then the following
properties are equivalent.
(a) For all x, y e L, x < y if and only if xa > ya
(b) (x n y)a = xb u yb for all x, y e L.
(c) (xuy)a=x'3nybforallx, y E L.
Furthermore, if 6 satisfies (a) and S is a subset of L such that n S exists, then U Sb
exists and (n S)a =U Sa; similarly (U S) = n Sb if U S exists.
8.1 Abelian groups with duals 453
Proof. Let x, y e L. By 1.1.1, the three statements x < y, x n y = x and x u y = y are

equivalent. Therefore if (b) is satisfied, x < y if and only if x = (x n y) = x u y,
and this holds if and only if x > y. Thus (b) (and similarly (c)) implies (a). Con-
versely, if S satisfies (a) and S is a subset of L such that z = n S exists, then z > s
for every s e S. Hence z is an upper bound of S. If w is any upper bound of S, then
w > s and so w-' < s for all s e S. It follows that w-' < n S = z and hence w > z.
This shows that z is the least upper bound of S and that (n S) =U S. In particu-
lar (b) holds. The corresponding result for U S follows similarly.
A bijective map S: L L with one and therefore all of the properties (a)-(c)
of 8.1.1 is called a duality from L to L. For brevity, if G and G are groups and
b: L(G) L(G) is a duality, we also call b a duality from G_onto G; and we say that
G has a dual if there exists a duality from G to some group G. It is clear that not every
group has a dual; for instance the quaternion group and a quasicyclic group have
none, since a group G with a maximal subgroup containing every proper subgroup
of G is cyclic. It is also not difficult to see that the infinite cyclic group has no dual.
We prove a more general result.
8.1.2 Theorem (Baer [1939b]). If a group G has a dual, then G is a torsion group.
Proof. Suppose, for a contradiction, that z is an element of infinite order in G. Let

Z = <z> and Z; = <z2' > for i c- N. Then Z > Z, > Z2 > .. is a descending chain of
subgroups of G such that n Z, = 1. By 8.1.1, Z < Z; < ZZ < is an ascending
.
ic rI
chain of subgroups of G whose join is 1 = G. Consider the subgroup W = <z3> of
Z. Since Z covers W, we see that Z is a maximal subgroup of W and therefore
W = <Z, w> for some w e W\Z. Since G = <Zli E > and the join of an ascend-
ing chain of subgroups is the set-theoretical union of these subgroups, there exists
k c- J such that w e Zk. It follows that W = <Z, w> < <Z, Zk) = Z, and hence
z2k
W > Zk. But 0 <z3> = W, a contradiction.
Finite abelian groups
We want to show next that every finite abelian group A has a dual. For this we have
to consider the character group of A.
8.1.3 Lemma. Let A be a finite abelian group, written multiplicatively, and let A* =
Hom(A, C*) be the set of all homomorphisms from A into the multiplicative group C*
of complex numbers. For a, T E A*, define c o T E A* by x` = xx` (x c A).
(a) Then (A*, o ) is a group isomorphic to A; it is called the character group of A.
(b) If 1 x c- A, there exists a e A* such that x 1.
Proof. (a) It is trivial to verify that (A*, o) is an abelian group. As a finite abelian
group, A = <a, > x x <an> for certain a, E A. Suppose that o(a;) = n, and let r, be
a primitive n.-th root of unity in C. For every y = air ... a map
454 Dualities of subgroup lattices
XY: A C* by
(a ... ax")X' = E1 IY1 . . . E. "Y" (xi E 77).
The reader may easily verify that XY E A* and that the map x: A -+ A* sending y e A
to xY is a homomorphism. If a E A*, then (a)"' = (a') = 1 = 1 for all i = 1, ..., n.
Therefore a is an n.-th root of unity in C and there exists y; E 77 such that a' = &Y-.
It follows that
(ai' ... Ei'x' (aj ...

where y =ail ... E A. Thus X is surjective. And if z = a71... E Ker x,, then
1 = a!- = E;' for i = 1, ... , n. Since E; is a primitive n;-th root of unity, it follows that
n; divides z; and hence a;' = 1. Thus z = 1 and x is injective. So, finally, x is an
isomorphism between A and A*.
(b) Let x = ai' ... a Then there exists i e { 1, ... , n} such that a; ' 1 and, since
o(a;) = o(s1), it follows that a = Xa, satisfies x = E; 1.
8.1.4 Theorem (Baer [1937]). A finite abelian group A is self-dual, that is, there exists
a duality from A onto A.
Proof. We show first that there exists a duality from A onto its character group A*.
For X < A and S< A*, we define
X1={aEA*Ix=IforallxEX} and ST={aEAla=l for allaES}.

Of course, X1 and ST are subgroups of A* and A, respectively, so that
l: L(A) -- L(A*) and T: L(A*) -+ L(A) are well-defined maps. If x e X and a E X1,
then x = 1. This shows that x E (X1)T and hence X < (X1)T. If z e A\X, then
zX 0 1 in AIX and by (b) of 8.1.3 there exists T E (A/X)* such that (zX)` 0 1. So if
a: A -+ AIX is the natural epimorphism, then a = aT E A* satisfies x' = xa` = P = 1
for all x e X and z = (zX)` 0 1. Thus a E X1 and hence z (X1)T. This shows that
(X 1)T = X and that 1 is injective; for, X; = XZ implies X, = (X; )T = (X )T = X2.
.
Since A and A* are isomorphic, !L(A)I = IL(A*)I and it follows that 1 is bijective.
Clearly, X < Y if and only if X1 > Y1. Thus 1 is a duality from A onto A*. And if
p is the projectivity induced by an isomorphism from A* to A, it is obvious that
b = 1p is a duality from A onto A.
Basic properties of dualities
To determine the infinite abelian groups with duals we need some general properties
of dualities between subgroup lattices. These, of course, will also be used in the study
of arbitrary locally finite groups with duals. The first two results are rather obvious.
8.1.5 Lemma. (a) Suppose that Lo, ..., L. are lattices and that for i = 1, ..., n the
mapping Q;: L;_, - L. is a duality or an isomorphism. Then p = a,... Q" is an isomor-
phism (respectively a duality) from Lo onto L if the number of dualities among the o;
is even (respectively odd).
(b) Let G and G be groups and S a duality from G onto G. If a E P(G), then
6`66 e P(G); if r e P(G), then STb-' e P(G). In particular, if x c- G, then the map
v: L(G) -+ L(G) given by H" = ((Ha-')" )a for H < G is an autoprojectivity of G;
similarly, for u c- G, the map p: L(G) -+ L(G) given by K" = ((K')') a_' for K < G is an
autoprojectivity of G. We call v the autoprojectivity of G induced by x c- G (via S) and
usually write v = S-'x(; similarly, p = Sub-' is the autoprojectivity of G induced by
uEG(via 6).
Proof. (a) As a product of bijective maps, p is bijective. Every duality among the ai
inverts the order relation. So it will finally be preserved if the number of dualities
among the a, is even, and it will be inverted if this number is odd.
(b) Application of (a) to S-'a8 and STS-' yields the first statement of (b). Then if
we apply this to the autoprojectivities of G and G induced by the inner automor-
phisms given by x and u, respectively, we get the second statement.
8.1.6 Lemma. Let S be a duality from G onto G, 1 < H < K < G and suppose that
H a K and Kb a Ha. Then b induces a duality from K/H onto H8/K'. In particular, if
N _a G, then S induces a duality from GIN onto Na.
Proof. Clearly, the restriction /3 of S to [K/H] is a duality from [K/H] onto

[Ha/Ko]. If a: L(K/H) - [K/H] and y: [Ha/Ka] -+ L(Ha/Ka) are the natural isomor-
phisms, then by 8.1.5, a/3y is a duality from K/H onto Ha/K6 and (X/H)"PY = Xa/Ka
for H < X < K. This proves the first statement of the lemma. If H = N g G = K,
then Ka = 1 a Ha and so S induces a duality from GIN onto Na.
The following result is an important special case of the above situation.
8.1.7 Lemma. Let S be a duality from G onto G and let X < G. If X is invariant under
P(G), then Xa is invariant under P(G) and S induces dualities in X and in G/X.
Proof. If T E P(G), then by 8.1.5, STS -' E P(G). Since X is invariant under P(G), we
have X = Xaà-' and then Xa = (X)T. Thus Xa is invariant under P(G). In particular,
X a G and Xa g G. By 8.1.6, S induces dualities from G/X onto Xa and from X onto
61V.
We finally reduce our main problem to the study of groups with directly indecom-
posable subgroup lattices.
8.1.8 Lemma. Let (GA)AEA be a family of coprime torsion groups and let G = Dr GA.
_ AEA
(a) If there exists a duality S from G onto a group G, then G = Dr Ga where
zEA
GA = U G and the Gz are coprime torsion groups. In particular, S induces a duality
#z
from G/GA GA onto Gs, that is, every GA has a dual.
(b) Conversely, if every GA is self-dual, then so is G.
Proof. (a) By 8.1.1, U Gx = n Gx = la = G and U d'n GA =

ZeA AEA #Z
a
n G v G, _ (Gz v Gz) = G = 1. Since GA and Gz are coprime and G =

#A
Gx x Gz, it follows that G. is the unique complement to G, in G. If x E G6, then dxd
is an autoprojectivity of G fixing Gx and hence also GA. It follows that (G)x = G.
Thus Gz a G and G = Dr G. If two of these groups, Gz and G, say, were to contain
AEA _
elements of the same prime order p, there would exist a subgroup P of order p of G
neither contained in GA nor in Gz. But then P-' would be a maximal subgroup of
G neither containing Gx nor Gz and this would contradict 1.6.4. Thus the Gz are
coprime.
(b) Suppose that (L1)AEA is a family of lattices, L = Dr Lx and, for every ). E A, 8Z
zen
is an autoduality of LA. For f e L define f a E L by f a(A) = f (2)a& (A e A). Since all the
8,i are bijective, so is b: L -. L. Further f < g with f, g e L, if and only if f(A) < g(A)
for all A E A; moreover this is the case if and only if f(A)" >_ g(2)ax for all A E A, that
is, f a > gb. Thus S is an autoduality of L. Now by 1.6.4, L(G) Dr L(G,A). Since
zen
every L(GA) has an autoduality, so does Dr L(GA) and then also L(G).
AEA
We remark that part (a) of Lemma 8.1.8 follows from a more general property of
dualities between lattices (see Exercise 2) together with 1.6.4 and 1.6.5. It is an open
problem whether (b) holds under the weaker assumption that every Gx has a dual.
Infinite abelian groups
By 8.1.8 we need only study abelian p-groups; the crucial case is handled by
8.1.9 Lemma. An infinite elementary abelian p-group has no dual.
Proof. Let P be an infinite elementary abelian p-group and let B = {aAJ2 e Al be a

basis of P; write r = I A I. Then P = Dr <a,> and every element of P is a product
IEn
of finitely many different elements of B* = E A, 0 < k < p - 1}. Hence there
exists an injective map from P into the set of finite subsets of B* and it follows that
IPI <- I kl IPIBI = J BI = r. In particular, P has at most r cyclic subgroups; on the other
hand, P contains all the <a'> (A E A) and therefore P has precisely r minimal sub-
groups. Every maximal subgroup M of P determines exactly p - 1 nontrivial homo-
morphisms of P into a cyclic group Z of order p having M as their kernel. Thus the
number of maximal subgroups of P is IHom(P, Z)I. Since B is a basis of P, every map
from B into Z can be extended to a unique homomorphism from P to Z. Therefore
I Hom(P, Z)I = plBI = 2' and we have shown that
(1) P has r minimal and 2' maximal subgroups.
Now suppose that b is a duality from an elementary abelian p-group G onto a group
6. If 1 j4 u e G, then by 8.1.6, 6 induces a duality from G/'-' onto . Thus
G/<u)a-' is an elementary abelian p-group with distributive subgroup lattice and

hence is cyclic of order p. So
(2) every nontrivial element of G is of prime order.
Let 1 v E G such that <v> and put W = <u)a-' n <v)a-'. By (2), '-' and
<v)a-' are two different maximal subgroups of G, and hence G/W is elementary
abelian of order p2. Again by 8.1.6, b induces a duality from G/W onto Ws = <u, v)
and, since G/W is self-dual, <u, v> is a projective image of G/W. By 2.2.5,
(3) <u, v) E P(2, p) if 1 0 u, v e e; and <u) <v>.
Let H = { x E G I o(x) is a power of p}. If x, y E H, then by (2), either I <x, y) l divides p

or x 1 y and <x> <y>. In this case, (3) implies that <x, y) is elementary abe-
lian of order p2 since a nonabelian group in P(2, p) has only one subgroup of order
p. In any case, we see that o(x) divides p, xy-' e H and xy = yx. Thus
(4) H is an elementary abelian p-subgroup of G.
Clearly, H a G. By 8.1.6, 6 induces a duality from Ha-' onto the p'-group 61H, and
(3) applied to this duality yields that G/H is cyclic of prime order.
Now suppose, for a contradiction, that G is infinite. Then H too is infinite and 6
induces a duality bo from the infinite elementary abelian p-group P = G/Ha-' onto
H. Let r be the number of minimal subgroups of P. Then by (1), P has 2' maximal
subgroups. These are mapped by So onto the minimal subgroups of H. Therefore,
again by (1), H has 2Z" maximal subgroups and these are mapped by So' onto the
minimal subgroups of P. It follows that r = 22', a contradiction.
It follows from 8.1.9 that every abelian p-group with dual is finite. Indeed, we
prove a much more general result.
8.1.10 Lemma. Every locally finite p-group with dual is finite.
Proof. Let G be a locally finite p-group and S a duality from G to some group G.
Since finite p-groups are nilpotent, G is locally nilpotent. Therefore every maximal
subgroup of G is normal in G (see Robinson [1982], p. 345) and hence G/ b(G) is
elementary abelian. By 8.1.6, G/(D(G) has a dual and therefore is finite. Thus G =
H.V(G) for some finitely generated subgroup H of G. Since G is locally finite, H is
finite. If H < G, then H6 > I and by 8.1.2 there would exist a subgroup M6 of prime
order contained in Ha. Then M would be a maximal subgroup of G containing H
and it would follow that G = HD(G) < M, a contradiction. Thus G = H is finite.
We can now prove our final result on abelian groups with duals.
8.1.11 Theorem (Baer [1939b]). An abelian group G has a dual if and only if G is a
torsion group and every primary component of G is finite. In this case, G is even
self-dual and every dual of G is lattice-isomorphic to G.
Proof. Suppose first that G has a dual. Then by 8.1.2, G is a torsion group and
therefore is the direct product of its primary components. By 8.1.8, every such com-
ponent has a dual and hence is finite, by 8.1.10. Conversely, let G = Dr Gp with finite
pEP
abelian p-groups Gp. By 8.1.4, every Gp is self-dual and then so is G, by 8.1.8. Now
8.1.5 shows that if b is a duality from G to a group G and 9 is an autoduality of G,
then 9S is a projectivity from G to G.
Exercises
1. (Baer [1937]) In the notation of the proof to Theorem 8.1.4, show that for every
X < A, X A*/X1 -_ A/Xa and AIX X' Xa.
2. Let (L; )A E s be a family of complete lattices; write IA, OA for the greatest and least
elements of LA, respectively. Let L = Dr LA and, for all ). E A, define gA E L by
.LEA
gA(p) = I. for p i) and gA(a) = OA. If b is a duality from L onto a lattice L, and
0 is the least element of L, show that the map cp sending every x E L to the
function x` defined by xw(A.) = x n gx (A, E A) is an isomorphism from L onto
Dr [gz/0].
AEA
8.2 The main theorem

By 8.1.5, every projective image of a group with dual has a dual. Therefore the
results of 8.1 and Chapter 2 yield that the following groups have duals.
8.2.1 Theorem. Let G = Dr GA with finite coprime groups GA, and suppose that every
AEA
GA either is a P-group or a nonhamiltonian p-group with modular subgroup lattice.
Then G is self-dual.
Proof. By 2.2.3 or 2.5.9, GA is lattice-isomorphic to a finite abelian group. By 8.1.4,

every GA is self-dual and then so is G, by 8.1.8.
The aim of this chapter is to prove that, conversely, every locally finite group G
with dual has the above structure. We state this result in a form which also describes
the image of G under the duality.
8.2.2 Main Theorem (Suzuki, Zacher). Let G be a locally finite group and S a duality
from G to a group G. Then there exist subgroups GA of G with the following properties.
(a) G = Dr GA and the GA are coprime.
AEA
(b) G = Dr Ga where GA = U G,, and the Gz are coprime.
ACA *A
(c) For every ). e A, there are primes p, q (not necessarily distinct) such that
8.2 The main theorem 459
(1) Gx is a cyclic p-group, G is a cyclic q-group; or

(2) G;, and G$ are in P(n, p) for some n e N; or
(3) GA and Gx are finite nonhamiltonian p-groups with modular subgroup
lattices.
As mentioned in the introduction of this chapter, Suzuki [1951a] proved this
theorem for finite soluble groups and Zacher [1961a] extended it to arbitrary solu-
ble groups; later Zacher [1961b], [1966], [1971] showed that, respectively, every
finite, locally soluble, and, finally, locally finite group with dual is soluble. We shall
prove directly in 8.3 that an arbitrary soluble group with dual has the structure
given in 8.2.2, and then in 8.4 and 8.5 we shall study finite and locally finite groups.
In addition, we shall prove in 8.5 the following result on arbitrary groups with
dual. Recall that GL' is the largest locally finite normal subgroup of the group G; let
G' (respectively G) be the join of all finite (respectively soluble) normal subgroups
of G and write G;j (respectively G;) for the intersection of all subgroups of finite
index (respectively normal subgroups with soluble factor group) of G.
8.2.3 Theorem (Stonehewer and Zacher [1994]). Let 6 be a duality from the group G
to the group G. Then
(a) G" = G;j = Ga is a perfect group and has no proper subgroup of finite index,
(b) G' = G5,
(c) (G")a = G' and (G')a = G",
(d) Z(G") = G" n G' and hence G"G' /Z(G") = G"/Z(G") x G'/Z(G"), and
(e) G"/Z(G") and G'/Z(G") are coprime.
It follows from 8.1.6 that 6 induces dualities from GIG" onto G' and from G' onto
G/G", so that these groups have the structure given in 8.2.2. Furthermore 6 induces
a duality between the perfect groups G"/Z(G") and G"G'/G' G"/Z(G"). The struc-
ture of these groups is not known: every Tarski group is self-dual and, using a
theorem of Obraztsov [1990], it is easy to construct many other infinite simple
groups with duals.
Consequences of the main theorem
In the remainder of this section we give some corollaries to the Main Theorem and
handle some special cases. These corollaries will follow once 8.2.2 has been proved,
but of course they will also hold in the inductive situations of this proof for dualities
which are not counterexamples and therefore satisfy 8.2.2.
First of all, if we are only interested in the structure of a group with dual, we have
the following more elegant version of the statements in 8.2.1 and 8.2.2.
8.2.4 Theorem. The locally finite group G has a dual if and only if G is a direct
product of finite coprime groups G. such that every Gx is either a P-group or a non-
hamiltonian p-group with modular subgroup lattice.
By 2.4.5, every finite group with modular subgroup lattice is metabelian. There-
fore all the G. in 8.2.4 are metabelian and then so is G. By 2.2.3 and 2.5.9, every
G. is lattice-isomorphic to an abelian p-group where p is a prime dividing GAI.
Thus these abelian groups are coprime and, by 1.6.4, their direct product is lattice-
isomorphic to G. Using 8.1.11, we get the following result.
8.2.5 Corollary. Every locally finite group G with dual is metabelian and lattice-
isomorphic to an abelian group. Thus G is self-dual and every dual of G is lattice-
isomorphic to G.
Finally, every GA is supersoluble and a nonnormal Sylow subgroup of G,; has

prime order. So we get the following result.
8.2.6 Corollary. Let G be a finite group with dual. Then G is supersoluble and every
nonnormal Sylow subgroup of G has prime order.
Special cases
In the remainder of this section let G be a group and 6 a duality from G to a group
6. We start with the proof of the Main Theorem and handle some special cases.
8.2.7 Lemma. If G is abelian, d satisfies 8.2.2.
Proof. By 8.1.11, G = Dr GA with finite p-groups GA. By 8.1.8, G = Dr d' where

E A A E A
G; = U G,,, the images G are coprime torsion groups, and d induces a duality from
u#
G!G;, GA onto Ga; again by 8.1.11, Gx is lattice-isomorphic to G.. So (a) and (b) of
8.2.2 hold and, by 2.2.6, (1) or (2) is satisfied, or 16'1 I = G;, I. In this case, G. and Ga
clearly are nonhamiltonian p-groups with modular subgroup lattices for some prime
p. Thus S satisfies 8.2.2.
8.2.8 Lemma. If G is a P-group, then G and G lie in P(n, p) for some n E N, p e P.
Proof: By 2.2.3 there exists a projectivity cp from G to an elementary abelian group

G*. Then (P `8 is a duality from G* to G and, by 8.1.9, G* is finite. Thus G* E P(_ n, p)
for some n e N, p e P. By 8.1.11, G is lattice-isomorphic to G*; by 2.2.5, G and G_ lie
in P(n, p).
8.2.9 Lemma. If G is a locally finite p-group, b satisfies 8.2.2.
Proof: By 8.1.10, G is finite and we use induction on IGI to show that 6 has the
required properties. By 8.2.7, we may assume that G is not abelian; in particular, G
is neither elementary abelian nor cyclic and hence
(4) ((G) y-L 1, 1 G : 1(G)I = pt, m > 2.
8.2 The main theorem 461
By 8.1.6, d induces a duality from G/D(G) onto D(G)6 and. 8.2.8 shows that
(D(G)' E P(m, p). Suppose, for a contradiction, that (D(G)' is not a p-group. Then
'D(G)' is a nonabelian P-group of order p'-'q, p > q e P. If J(D(G)j > p, there exists
a minimal normal subgroup N of G such that 1 < N < (D(G). Since GIN is neither
cyclic nor elementary abelian, the induction assumption implies that G/N and Na
are p-groups; but '1(G)6 < Na is not a p-group, a contradiction. Thus J(D(G)j = p and
IGI = pm+'
By 8.1.7, (D(G)' < G. Let P be the Sylow p-subgroup of (D(G)a. Then P is character-
istic in (D(G)' and hence normal in G; let Ma be a minimal normal subgroup of G
contained in P. Since L(G) satisfies the Jordan-Dedekind chain condition, so does
L(G) and hence, by 5.3.9, G is supersoluble. Thus IMbI = p and I M I = p'. By 8.1.6, ij
induces a duality from M onto 6/Ma which, by induction, satisfies 8.2.2. Since
(D(G)'/M' is a normal subgroup of order p n-2q of G/Ma, the group 6/Mb is not a
p-group, nor does it lie in P(m, p). Thus M and G/Ma are cyclic of prime power order.
This implies that m = 2 so that I G I = p3 and 161 = pq2.
The Sylow q-subgroups of G are cyclic and intersect trivially since (D(G)' contains
nonnormal subgroups of order q. Thus 1(G) = 1 and hence G is generated by mini-
mal subgroups. Since p > q >_ 2, it follows that G has exponent p; but M is cyclic of
order p2. This contradiction shows that
(5) D(G)' is a p-group.
It follows that every minimal subgroup of G has order p, and Sylow's theorem
implies that G is a p-group. By 2.1.8, L(G) is lower semimodular and so its image
L(G) under the duality S' is upper semimodular. Thus L(G) is lower and upper
semimodular and hence modular, by 2.1.10. If G were hamiltonian, then by 2.3.12,
G = Q x A where Q QB and d induces a duality from G/A Q8 onto A'. Then Ab
has only one maximal subgroup, hence is cyclic, and L(A) is a chain; but this is not
the case. Thus Gis a nonhamiltonian p-group with modular subgroup lattice. The
same is true for G, so (3) holds and d satisfies 8.2.2.
Finally, we have the following rather obvious general remark.
8.2.10 Lemma. Let G = A x B with coprime groups A and B. If d induces dualities in

G/A and in G 'B which satisfy 8.2.2, then S satisfies 8.2.2.
Proof. By 8.1.8, G = Aa x B where Ab and Ba are coprime. By assumption, G/A B

and Aa are direct products of groups satisfying (1), (2), or (3). The same holds for
G/B A and Bb and then also for G = A x B and G = AS x B.
Exercises
1. (Suzuki [1951a]) Show that a nilpotent group G has a dual if and only if G is a
torsion group and every primary component of G is a finite M*-group.
8.3 Soluble groups with duals

The aim of this section is to prove the following special case of our Main Theorem.
8.3.1 Theorem (Suzuki [1951 a], Zacher [1961a]). Every duality S of a soluble group
G to a group G satisfies 8.2.2.
To prove this we suppose the theorem is false and choose a "minimal counter-
example" in the following way: if there exists a finite soluble group with a duality
violating 8.2.2, we take a group G of minimal order with this property; and if there
is no such finite group, we take a counterexample G with minimal derived length
d(G). In both cases, we study a duality 6 from G to a group G for which 8.2.2 does
not hold. Then b has the following properties:
(1) S does not satisfy 8.2.2,
(2) if G is finite, every duality 9 of a finite soluble group X such that I X < I G I
satisfies 8.2.2, and
(3) if G is infinite, every duality 9 of a soluble group X such that IXI is finite or
d(X) < d(G) satisfies 8.2.2.
Throughout this section we assume that S: L(G) -+ L(G) is such a minimal counter-
example; let d(G) = n. The special cases settled in 8.2 yield the following results.
8.3.2 Lemma. G is a nonabelian locally finite group. If G is finite, L(G) is directly

indecomposable.
Proof By 8.1.2, G is a soluble torsion group and hence locally finite (see Robinson
[1982], p. 147). By 8.2.7, G is not abelian. Suppose, for a contradiction, that G is
finite and L(G) is directly decomposable. Then by 1.6.5, G = A x B where A : I V- B
and (IAI,IBI) = 1. By (2), the dualities induced by b in G/A and GIB satisfy 8.2.2
and hence so does S, by 8.2.10. But this contradicts (1). Thus L(G) is directly
indecomposable.
We prove another general remark.
8.3.3 Lemma. If G is finite, G is supersoluble.
Proof. Suppose, for a contradiction, that G is not supersoluble. If N is a minimal

normal subgroup of G, then by 8.1.6, 6 induces a duality in GIN. By (2), this duality
satisfies 8.2.2 and hence, by 8.2.6, GIN is supersoluble. Since G is not supersoluble, it
follows that N is the unique minimal normal subgroup of G, N is not cyclic and, by
Huppert's theorem (see Robinson [1982], p. 268), N D(G). Since N is not cyclic,
5.4.4 implies that N is a minimal normal subgroup of G for every a E P(G). Thus
N = N for every a E P(G) and, by 8.1.7, Nb g G. Since N (D(G), there exists a
maximal subgroup M of G such that N M. Then N n M a NM = G and hence
N n M = 1. Therefore 6 = Na u Ma = NM and, since Mb is a minimal subgroup
8.3 Soluble groups with duals 463
of G, it follows that Na has prime index in G. Thus N is cyclic of prime order, a

contradiction.
Since d(G) = n, we have G(") = 1 and G("-') 1. Consider first the case that G("-')
is a p-group for some prime p.
8.3.4 Lemma. If 0"-'1 is a p-group, every autoprojectivity of G is regular at p.
Proof. Suppose that this is false. Then there exist o E P(G) and a E G such that
I<a>I = p and I <a>61 p. Since G'"-') = (G"n-2))' :e 1, there exist x, y E G(n-2) such
that [x, y] :e- 1. Let H be a finite subgroup of G containing a, x, y. Then a induces
a projectivity from H onto H" which is singular at p since a c H. If a satisfies (b)
of 4.2.6, H contains a normal p-complement N with abelian factor group. Thus
[x, y] E H'< N and so [x, y] E N n G("-') = 1, since N is a p'-group and G("-'
is a p-group. This contradiction shows that (a) of 4.2.6 holds, that is, H = S x T
where S is a P-group containing a Sylow p-subgroup of H and (ISI, I TI) = 1. Since
1 :e- [x, y] E H n G("-'), H n G("-') is a nontrivial normal p-subgroup of H and hence
p is the larger prime dividing ISI. Thus

(4) H = S x T,(ISI,ITI)=1,SEP(m,p)for some mEN.
In particular, since G is locally finite, this holds for H = <a, x, y>. Let <a, x, y> _
S o x T o where ISOI = p'kq, p > q, and let b e So such that o(b) = q and ab = a' (r e 7/);
note that o(a) = p and hence <a> a So. Now let P be the set of all p-elements and K
the set of all {p,q}'-elements of G, and let w be an arbitrary q-element. For c, d e P
and u, v e K, consider H = <a, x, y, c, d, u, v, w>. Since G is locally finite, H is a finite
subgroup of G and hence H = S x T as in (4). It follows that a, c, d c- S and so
cd-' E P, cd = dc, and o(c) < p; thus P is an elementary abelian p-group. Further-
more, a E S implies b 0 CG(S); therefore q is the smaller prime dividing ISI and b c- S.
Thus cb = c' and, since c was an arbitrary element of P, this shows that P is a
P-group. Also w e S < P, which implies that P is the set of all {p, q}-elements
of G. Finally, u, v e T and so uv-' E T s K; hence the set K of all {p,q}'-elements is
a subgroup of G. It follows that G = P x K.
By 8.1.6, S induces dualities 6, in G/K P and S2 in G/P(b>. By 8.2.8, G/K
is finite and Sl satisfies 8.2.2. Since Gl"-') < P, we have d(G/P) < n and so (2)
or (3) implies that S2 satisfies 8.2.2. But then by 8.2.10, S also satisfies 8.2.2, a
contradiction.
8.3.5 Lemma. If G4"-" is a p-group and P E Sylp(G), then P!9 G and G is finite.
Proof. Suppose, for a contradiction, that P is not normal in G. By (2) or (3), G/O"-')
has the structure given in 8.2.2 and, since PIG('-') is a nonnormal Sylow p-subgroup
of G/G("-'), it follows that G/G("-') = S/G("-1) x T/G("-1) where SIG('-') and
T/G") are coprime and S/G("-') is a P-group of order rmp, r > p. Then G("-') is the
intersection and S the join of all the Sylow p-subgroups of G. If a E P(G), then by
8.3.4, a and a-' are regular at p and hence a maps Sylow p-subgroups of G to Sylow
p-subgroups. Thus G("-') and S are invariant under P(G) and therefore, by 8.1.7, 6
induces dualities b, in G("-" and SZ in S. By 8.1.10, 0`1 is finite and so S is a finite

{ p, r}-group with indecomposable subgroup lattice. If S < G, then by (2) or (3),
6, satisfies 8.2.2 and hence S is a P-group. But G("-" is a normal p-subgroup of S
and since p < r, it follows that G("-" = 1, a contradiction. Thus G = S is a finite
{p, r}-group. By 8.3.3, G is supersoluble and, since r > p, R < G if R e Sylr(G) (see
Robinson [1982], p. 145). By 8.3.2, n > 2 and therefore G' >_ G(`). Since GIG("-')
is a P-group of order rmp, it follows that G' = R x G("-') is abelian and hence
1 = G" < G("-" < G'. This contradiction shows that
(5) P<G.
Again by 8.3.4, 8.1.7 and 8.1.10, P is invariant under P(G); therefore it has a dual and
so is finite. Suppose, for a contradiction, that G is not finite. Then G/P is infinite and
G'"-" < P. By (3), G/P is an infinite direct product of finite coprime groups satisfying
(1)-(3) of 8.2.2. If there exists a prime q p and a q-element x 0 CG(P), then let K be
the set of all {p,q}'-elements and y be any q-element of G; if there is no such prime,
let K be the set of p'-elements in G and put x = 1 = y. In any case, if u, v e K, there
exists a finite join H/P of components of the above decomposition ofG/P such that
u, v, x, y e H. Since Ha is characteristic in Pa < G, we obtain Ha < G and hence 6
induces a duality in the finite subgroup H of G. By (3), this duality satisfies 8.2.2 and
it follows that H = Q x L where Q = <P, x> and L are coprime, and Q is a P-group
if x 1. Thus uv-' e L c K and hence K is a subgroup of G. Now if x: 1, then Q
contains y and hence is the set of {p,q}-elements of G; thus G = Q x K. If x = 1,
then P = Q and G = P x K = Q x K in this case too. By (3), the dualities induced
by 6 in G/K and in G/Q satisfy 8.2.2; for, G/K Q is finite and d(G/Q) < n since
G'"-" < P. By 8.2.10, S satisfies 8.2.2, a contradiction. Thus G is finite.
8.3.6 Lemma. G'"-') is not a p-group.
Proof. Suppose that G("-') is a p-group. Then by 8.3.5, G is finite and has a normal
Sylow p-subgroup P. By 8.3.4, P is invariant under P(G) and so by 8.1.7, Pa < G.
Finally, by 8.2.9, G is not a p-group. Thus
(6) P<G,Pa<G,P0G.
Since G is soluble, there exists a complement K to P in G. Thus P n K = 1 and hence
G = P6Ka. So if X < P, Dedekind's law implies that Xa = Pa (Xa n Kb) and hence
X = P n (X u K) < X u K since P < G. By 8.3.2, L(G) is not directly decomposable
and hence K CG(P). Thus
(7) P has a complement K inducing nontrivial power automorphisms in P.
We show next that P is elementary abelian. So suppose, for a contradiction, that
(D(P) 1 and let N be a minimal normal subgroup of P contained in'i(P). By (7),
N < G and, by (2), the duality induced by 6 in GIN satisfies 8.2.2. Now P:5 G
implies that 1(P) < cD(G) (see Robinson [1982], p. 131). Therefore if L(G/N) were
directly decomposable, then so would L(G/O(G)) be, and then also L(G), by 1.6.9; but
this contradicts Lemma 8.3.2. Thus L(G/N) is directly indecomposable and, since
P/N is a nontrivial proper normal Sylow p-subgroup of GIN, it follows that GIN is
a P-group of order pm'q, p > q, m e N. Thus IKI = q and ING(K)I = q or pq. Hence
there are I G : NG(K)I = pni+1 or p' conjugates to K, that is, complements to P in G.
Since I G : PI = q, clearly I P61 is a prime s. And since P is not elementary abelian and
8.2.2 holds for the duality induced in P, the group G/Pa is a t-group for some prime
t. By 8.2.9, G is not a primary group; for, in this case 6-1, and hence also b, would
satisfy 8.2.2. Thus s t and the complements to Pa in G are the Sylow t-subgroups
r
of G. Their number is 16: N6(K)I = 1 or s. Since S maps complements of P to

complements of Pa, it follows that pn` or prn+1 is equal to 1 or s. This is only possible
if m = 1 and s = p = I G: NG(K)I. Thus IGI = p2q, NG(K) = NK and P is cyclic since
D(P) 1. But then K centralizes N and hence P; so G = P x K, a contradiction.
Thus V(P) = 1, that is
(8) P is elementary abelian.
We show next that K is an abelian q-group for some prime q. First of all, if there are
two different minimal normal subgroups N, and N2 of G, then the dualities induced
in GIN; satisfy 8.2.2 and hence, by 8.2.5, G" < N, n N2 = 1. So n = 2 and G' =
G("-' < P; this implies that K G/P is abelian. By (7) and (8), every minimal sub-
group of P is normal in G. Thus K is abelian if IPI > p2. If IPI = p and CK(P): 1,
then CK(P) contains a minimal normal subgroup of G different from P and so K is
abelian; and if CK(P) = 1, then K is isomorphic to a subgroup of Aut P and hence is
even cyclic. Thus in all cases,
(9) K is abelian.
Now K = Q, x . x Q, is the direct product of its Sylow subgroups Q; and G/ P =
S, /P x x S,/P where Si = PQ;. Suppose, for a contradiction, that r > 2. By 8.1.8,
P = Tb x x T,b where T, = U SJ and the are coprime. So Ps = Ss x
jmi
where Si' is a characteristic subgroup of Pb 9 G and hence Ss a G. Thus S induces a
duality from Si onto G/Sf. By (2), Si = P x Q; or S; is a P-group. In the latter case, P
.
is a normal p-subgroup of S, and hence S, e P(k, p) for some k e N. Also, by 8.2.8,

6/Ss e P(k, p) and, as Ps/Sa is a nontrivial normal subgroup of this P-group, p divides
I Pb/Sa l
= I T81. Since these Ti' are coprime, this can happen for at most one i. Thus
there exists j e { 1, ... , r} such that S; = P x Qj and, since K is abelian, it follows that
Q; <_ Z(G). But Q, is a Sylow subgroup of G, hence L(G) is directly decomposable
and this contradicts 8.3.2. Thus
(10) K is a q-group for some prime q.
Suppose, for a contradiction, that IPI > p2 and let N < P such that INI = p. By (7)
and 1.5.4, K induces nontrivial universal power automorphisms in P. So K does not
centralize P/N and, by (2), G/N is a P-group. Thus I K I = q and G = PK is a P-
group. By 8.2.8, 6 satisfies 8.2.2, a contradiction. Thus
(i1) IPI = p.
Now suppose that CK(P) 0 1. Since K is abelian, CK(P) < Z(G); let N < CK(P) such
that INI = q. Then GIN has a dual and, by (7), K/N is not normal in GIN. By (2) and
8.2.8, GIN is a P-group of order pq and Na e P(2, p). Since Pa n Na a N6, we have
I P6 n N1 = p. So S induces a duality from the q-group G/P K of order q2 onto P6,

a group whose order is divisible by p > q. It follows that G/P and Pa are cyclic of
prime power order. By 8.2.9, G is not a p-group. It follows that I K6 0 p, Na is
nonabelian and is the unique maximal subgroup of G containing K6. Thus NN(K6) =
Ka and Ks has p2 conjugates in G. These are mapped by S-' to complements of P in
G; but P has only p complements. This contradiction shows that
(12) CK(P) = I.
Now K is isomorphic to a subgroup of Aut P and hence is cyclic. Then G/P and Pb
are also cyclic so that Mb < G if M6 is the minimal subgroup of P6. By (1) and 8.2.8,
G P(2, p) and hence M contains P properly, has a dual and has nonnormal Sylow
q-subgroups, by (12). Thus by (2), M is a P-group of order pq and Z;/Ma E P(2, p).
Since Pb < G, we obtain I Pa : _M61 = p and hence I Pa I = p2. Again by 8.2.9, G is not
a p-group. So I K61 p and G/M is nonabelian. Now P has p complements, the
same holds for Pa and this implies that Ms < Ni;(K6). It follows that K centralizes
Ma and hence also P6; but then G/ M6 is abelian, a final contradiction.
It remains to study the case that G("-') is not a primary group.
8.3.7 Lemma. (a) n = 2.
(b) For every prime r, let S, be the r-component and T, the r'-component of G', so
that G' = Sr x Tr. Then either
(13) G/Tr is a direct product of coprime finite primary groups, or
(14) G,', = X,/T, x Y,/T, where Xr/T, e P(m, r) for some m e N, Y/T, is a direct
product of coprime finite primary groups and X,/T, and Y/T, are coprime; in
this case, G/G' is an r'-group.
(c) Every primary subgroup of G is finite.
Proof. Let r be a prime. Since G("-') is an abelian torsion group, G("-" = R x K
where R is the r-component and K the r'-component of G("-'). Then the duality bo
induced by S in G/K satisfies (2) and (3) and (G/K)("-') = G(`" /K is an r-group; by
8.3.6, So cannot satisfy (1), that is, 8.2.2 holds for 60. Thus G/K is a direct product of
coprime finite P-groups and p-groups. In particular, G/K has finite Sylow r-sub-
groups and is metabelian, by 8.2.5. Since K is an r'-group, it follows that G has finite
Sylow r-subgroups and G" is an r'-group. This holds for every prime r and therefore
every primary subgroup of G is finite and G" = 1. Thus (a) and (c) hold.
Now G("-')/K = G'/K is an r-group and therefore lies in a component X/K of the
above direct decomposition of G/K. The other components are then abelian and
hence primary groups. If X/K also is a primary group, (13) holds. If X/K is not
primary, it is a P-group with nontrivial normal r-subgroup G'/K and hence lies in
P(m, r) for some m e N. Then (X/K)' = G'/K is the Sylow r-subgroup of G/K so that
G/G' is an r'-group. Thus (14) holds.
8.3.8 Lemma. Let p > q be primes, P e Sylp(G), Q E Sylq(G) and suppose that
[P, Q] 1. Then G = PQ x Y where PQ is a finite P-group and Y a normal { p, q}-
complement of G.
Proof. Let r be a prime and let T, be as in 8.3.7. If r zA p, then PT/T, and QTr/Tr lie
in different components of the decomposition of G/Tr; for, either these components
are primary groups or they lie in P(m, r) and r 0 p > q. It follows that [P, Q] < T,.
If also [P, Q] < TP, we would obtain [P, Q] < n Tr = 1, a contradiction; thus
rEP
[P, Q] TP. It follows that (14) holds for r = p and PQTP/TP = XP/TP e P(m,p) for
some m e N; let Y = YP. Then G'/TP = PTP/TP and hence
(15) P<G'andIQG':G'I = q.
Thus G/G' is not a q'-group and so 8.3.7 yields that (13) holds for r = q. So QT,,/T, is
a direct factor in G/Tq containing the q-group G'/T,. But then by (15), G'/T" =
(G/Tq)' = (QT/T,)' = (QG'/Tq)' is of index q in the finite q-group QG'/Tq and this
implies that QG'/Tq is cyclic of order q. It follows that Tq = G', that is, G' is a
q'-group, and IQI = q. Then TP is a {p,q}'-group and, since P is characteristic in
G', P:9 G and PQ is a { p, q}-group. So PQ n TP = 1 and PQ PQTP/TP = XP/TP.
Also PQ n Y = I since Y is a {p, q}'-group and PQ u Y = PQTPY = XPYP = G.
Thus
(16) PQ is a finite P-group and Y is a normal {p,q}-complement of G.

We have to show that PQ g G; then G = PQ x Y, as desired. So suppose, for a
contradiction, that PQ is not normal in G. Then since P a G, there exist a prime r
and a Sylow r-subgroup R of G such that p : r 0 q and [Q, R] 1. By (15) and (16),
R < G', RQ is a finite P-group and there exists a normal {r, q}-complement Z in G.
Then PQR is a { p, q, r}-group and Y n Z a { p, q, r}'-group so that PQR n (Y n Z) = 1.
Furthermore, G/Y n Z is finite. So by (2) or (3), if Y n Z 0 1, the duality induced
in G/Y n Z would satisfy 8.2.2. But PQR G/Y n Z is not directly decomposable, a
contradiction. Thus Y n Z = 1 and G = PQR is finite. If N is a minimal subgroup of
P, then N is centralized by PR < G' and normalized by Q so that N 9 G. By (2), the
duality induced in G/N satisfies 8.2.2 and it follows that N = P. Thus IPI = p, simi-
larly I R I = r and so I G I = pqr. Then PR is the unique cyclic subgroup of composite
order of G and hence is invariant under P(G). By 8.1.7, (PR)' = Pan Ra a G.
Now Pa e P(2, r) since G/P e P(2, r), and so I Ps n Rb I = r; but R E P(2, p) since
G/R E P(2, p), and hence I Pa n R'J = p. This contradiction shows that PQ 9 G and
G=PQ x Y.
Proof of Theorem 8.3.1. By 8.3.7, every Sylow subgroup of G is finite. If any two
Sylow subgroups of different order centralize each other, G is the direct product of
its Sylow subgroups. And if there exist Sylow subgroups of different order not cen-
tralizing each other, then by 8.3.8, the join of any such pair is a finite P-group and a
direct factor of G. In any case, G = Dr GA with coprime finite groups GA which are
AEA
p-groups or P-groups. By 8.1.8, G = Dr Gx where GA = U G and the Gz are co-
AEA M#A
prime. For every . e A, 6 induces a duality SA from G/GA GA onto G. By 8.2.8
and 8.2.9, these aA satisfy 8.2.2. It follows that 6 satisfies 8.2.2, a final contradiction.
Exercises
1. Try to prove Theorem 8.3.1 for finite groups in the shortest possible way.
8.4 Finite groups with duals
The aim of this section is to prove that every finite group G with dual is soluble.
Together with Theorem 8.3.1 this will imply that every duality 6 of G satisfies 8.2.2.
In the crucial case of this proof, G will be simple so that 8.1.6-8.1.8 will not be of
much help. However, it is possible to find certain proper sections of G which have
duals and to which the induction assumption may therefore be applied. For this
purpose, we introduce the following two concepts both of which are generalizations
of P(G)-invariance.
P(G)-connected subgroups
Let H and X be subgroups of an arbitrary group G. We say that X is P(G)-connected

to H if H = H implies X = X for a e P(G).
8.4.1 Remark. (a) If H = G (or H = 1), every a c- P(G) satisfies H = H and there-
fore X is P(G)-connected to G if and only if X is invariant under P(G).
(b) Conversely, if X < H and X is invariant under P(H), then X is P(G)-
connected to H; for, every u c- P(G) satisfying H = H induces an autoprojectivity
in H and hence fixes X. Thus subgroups like fi(H) or Q(H) are P(G)-connected to H.
(c) Finally, note that if X is P(G)-connected to H. then NG(H) < NG(X). For, every
g c- NG(H) induces an autoprojectivity in G fixing H and therefore also X; thus
X9 = X and g e NG(X).
Since we are studying dualities of groups, we are not only interested in the case
that X < H, but also in the situation that H < X or even that H and X are incompa-
rable. This is shown by the following simple result and, in particular, its corollary.
8.4.2 Lemma. Let 6 be a duality from the group G to the group G and let H, X < G.
If X is P(G)-connected to H, then X' is P(G)-connected to Ha; in particular,
Ha < NN(X).
Proof. Let T E P(G) such that (Ha)` = Ha. By 8.1.5, bib-' e P(G) and H"'-' H.
Since X is P(G)-connected to H, it follows that X6à-' = X and hence (XO)` = Xa.
Thus Xa is P(6)-connected to Ha. By (c) of 8.4.1, Ha < N-(X).
This lemma will mainly be used in the following two situations.

8.4 Finite groups with duals 469
8.4.3 Corollary. Let 6 be a duality from G to G, let H, X< G and suppose that X is
P(G)-connected to H.
(a) If H g X, then Xs a Ha and 6 induces a duality from X/H onto Ha/X'.
(b) If H n X = 1, then Xa g G and 6 induces a duality from X onto G/Xa.
Proof. If H g X, then Xa < Ha and hence Xa < Ha, by 8.4.2. And if H n X = 1, then
NG-(X) > Ha u Xa = (H n X)a = G, that is, Xa g G. By 8.1.6, b induces dualities in
X/H and X, respectively.
P(G)-normality
Let H and K be subgroups of a group G such that H < K. We say that H is

P(G)-normal in K if H g K for all a e P(G).
Of course, H :!g K if H is P(G)-normal in K; but P(G)-normality strongly depends
on the group G (see Exercise 2). It is important that if G has a dual, then K/H is
contained in a factor L/H with dual.
8.4.4 Lemma. Let G be a group, H < K < G and suppose that H is P(G)-normal in
K. If 6 is a duality from G to a group G, and La is the core of Ka in Ha, then
H g L = U Ka"a-' and hence 6 induces a duality from L/H onto Ha/La.
uUH
Proof. Clearly, Ha >_ Ka > La so that H < K < L. By 8.1.1, L = n (K0)" _

C H,
U Kaua Now 8.1.5 shows that (5u(' e P(G) for every u e Ha, -and therefore
u EH
H = Ha"a-' < Kaua-' since H is P(G)-normal in K. Thus H:9 L and, by 8.1.6, 6
induces a duality from L/H onto Ha/La.
The main theorem
In the remainder of this section we prove the result announced above.
8.4.5 Theorem (Zacher [1961b]). Every finite group with dual is soluble.
To prove this, we suppose the theorem is false and choose a counterexample G of

minimal order; let b be a duality from G to a group G. Then if X is a group such that
XI<I and X has a dual, it follows that X is soluble and, by 8.3.1, that
(1) every duality of X satisfies 8.2.2.
Of course, G is not soluble; indeed we show first that our inductive hypothesis
implies that G and G are in fact simple.
8.4.6 Lemma. G and 6 are nonabelian simple groups.

Proof. We suppose the lemma is false and show that there exists a subgroup R
of G such that 1 < R < G and R = R for all a E P(G). By 8.1.7, S induces dualities
in R and in G/R; then by induction, R and G/R, and therefore G, are soluble, a
contradiction.
If G is not simple, there exists N < G such that 1 < N < G. By 8.1.6, GIN has a
dual and therefore, by induction, it is soluble. Thus if R = Ga is the soluble residual
of G, then R < N < G and, of course, R 1 since G is not soluble. By 5.3.6, R = R
for all a e P(G). _
Now suppose that G is not simple. Then there exists N < G such that 1 < N < G
and Na g G. Again by 8.1.6, S induces a duality from N onto G/Na; by (1), N and
GIN' are soluble. Let R < G be such that Ra = G. Then Ra < Na < G; if Rb = 1, the
group G is soluble and hence by 8.3.1 applied to S', G is soluble, a contradiction.
Thus 1 < R < G and, again by 5.3.6, Ra is invariant under P(G). By 8.1.7, R = R for
all a e P(G).
In the sequel let q be the smallest prime dividing IGI and let Q E Sylq(G). Of course,
the Feit-Thompson Theorem implies that q = 2; however, we do not need this. In
fact, the proof of Theorem 8.4.5 does not use any of the deeper results proved in the
course of the classification of finite simple groups. We shall only need some transfer
arguments culminating in Griin's Second Theorem. So, for example, the additional
assumption in the following lemma, that Q is not a generalized quaternion group, is
superfluous by a well-known theorem of Brauer and Suzuki. However, it will be no
problem to get rid of this assumption later on.
8.4.7 Lemma. If Q is not a generalized quaternion group, there exists Q1 E Sylq(G)

such that Q, 0 Q and Q n Q1 : 1.
Proof. Suppose, for a contradiction, that Q n Q1 = 1 for all Q1 E Sylq(G) such that
Q1 Q. Since G is simple, 1 < Q < G and Q is not cyclic (see Robinson [1982],
p. 280). By assumption, Q is not a generalized quaternion group and it follows (see
Robinson [1982], p. 138) that Q has at least two minimal subgroups. Let H be one
of these and let a E P(G) such that H = H. By 4.2.8, a is index preserving and hence
Q E Sylq(G). So if Q Q, then 1 :?6 H < Q n Q, a contradiction. Thus Q = Q, that
is Q is P(G)-connected to H. By 8.4.2, Qb < Ha. So if K is another minimal subgroup
of Q, it follows that Qa _< HS u Ka = (H n K)s = 1a = G. But this contradicts the
simplicity of G.
The above lemma suggests the study of maximal intersections of different Sylow
q-subgroups of G. For this we shall need the following technical result.
8.4.8 Lemma. Suppose that N < K < G, INI = q, N < K and K/N is a P-group of
order p"q where q < p E P. Then n = 1.
Proof. Let P E Sylq(K). Then P operates on the cyclic group N of order q and since
q < p, we can assert that P centralizes N. Thus PN = P x N. Let H < P such that
CHI = p. Then H is characteristic in H x N g K and hence H :!g K. So if S E Sylq(K),
then H is the unique subgroup of order p in HS. By 4.2.8, every autoprojectivity r of

G is index preserving. It follows that P is an elementary abelian p-group and that
H is the unique subgroup of order p in (HS). Thus H a P u S = K, that is, H
is P(G)-normal in K. By 8.4.4 there exists L < G such that K < L, H g L and b
induces a duality in L/H; by (1), this duality satisfies 8.2.2. Since q2 divides the order
of L/H, this group has a normal Sylow q-subgroup, by 8.2.6. Then K/NH also has a
normal Sylow q-subgroup and since K/N is a P-group of order p"q, it follows that
IK : NHI = q. Thus H = P and n = 1, as desired.
We come to the main step in the proof of Theorem 8.4.5. Recall that q is the
smallest prime dividing IGI.
8.4.9. Lemma. Let D 0 1 be a maximal intersection of two different Sylow q-

subgroups of G. Then IDI = q, I NG(D) I = pq2 where q NQ;(D) > D and the
choice of D implies that Q. = Ti. Thus Si < Qi and hence S; = NQ;(D) and D = S1 n S2.
This shows that NG(D) has nonnormal Sylow q-subgroups and D = Oq(NG(D)).
Let r E P(G) such that D = D. By 8.4.6 and 4.2.8, a is index preserving. Thus D =
D = Oq(NG(D)) a NG(D) and hence NG(D) < NG(D). Since G is finite, this implies
that NG(D) = NG(D), that is, NG(D) is P(G)-connected to D. By 8.4.3, S induces a
duality in NG(D)/D and since NG(D)/D has nonnormal Sylow q-subgroups, it follows
from (1) that
(2) NG(D)/D = A/D x BID where (IA/DI,IB/DI) = 1 and AID is a P-group of or-
der p"q,p>q,nER.
We have to study A and show first that (D(A) = 1 or 4)(A) = D; in fact, we prove a
more general result that will be applied several times in the sequel.
(3) Let H < D and D < K < A such that pq divides I K: DI. If H is P(G)-normal
in K, then H=IorH=D.
To prove this, suppose that 1 < H < D. By 8.4.4 there exists a subgroup L of G such
that K < L, H g L and L/H has a dual. Since pq divides I K : DI, K/D has nonnormal
Sylow q-subgroups and then so does L/H. Therefore by (1) and 8.2.6, IL/HI is not
divisible by q2. It follows that H = D, as desired. Now D(A)' = D(A) g A for all
a e P(G). Thus sD(A) is P(G)-normal in A and, since A/D is a P-group, '(A) < D. So
we may apply (3) with H = D(A) and K = A to obtain that
(4) '(A) = 1 or cb(A) = D.
We want to show that IDI = q and, as a first step, we prove this in a special case.
(5) Let P E Sylq(A). If C,(D) 1, then IDI = q.
To see this, put C = C,.(D) and K = CS where S E Sylq(A). Since CD g A, it follows
that K = CS = CDS is a subgroup of A containing D; also pq divides IK : DI since
Figure 23
C 1. Let a E P(G). If H D, then HC = H x C and hence H' a (HC)', by 1.6.7.

So if H 9 S, it follows that H a C u S = K. We now apply this argument three
times. First, H ='b(S) < D and, clearly, H = (D(S) < S. Thus H < K and so H
is P(G)-normal in K. By (3),'b(S) = 1 or t(S) = D. If'b(S) = D, then S is cyclic; hence
S is cyclic and every subgroup H of D satisfies H < S. If I(S) = 1, then S is
elementary abelian; since a is index preserving, S too is elementary abelian and
again H a S for all H < D. In both cases, it follows that every subgroup H of D is
P(G)-normal in K. By (3), H = 1 or H = D, that is IDI = q, as desired.
(6) IDI = q.
Suppose that this is false and let P E Sylp(A), as before. The Frattini argument ap-
plied to the normal subgroup PD of A yields that A = DNA(P). So if I(A) = D, it
would follow that A = NA(P) and hence [P, D] q2.
Since q is the smallest prime dividing IGI, a minimal subgroup of D which is normal
in A is centralized by A. Therefore if every minimal subgroup of D were normal in
A, then C,(D) = P and, again by (5), IDI = p, a contradiction. Thus there exist mini-
mal subgroups of D which are not normal in A. Since G is simple, Da can be normal
in the image of at most one of these minimal subgroups, that is, there exists
(6b) H < D such that IHI = q, H A and D H6.
Let La = n (D6)" be the core of Da in H6. Then by 8.1.1, L = U D'"'-' and, by

" E H 11 E HI
(6a) and (6b), H < D < L. Since every autoprojectivity a of G is index preserving, D
is elementary abelian and hence H < D for every a c P(G). By 8.4.4, H 9 L and b
induces a duality from L/H onto Ha/La; by (1), this duality satisfies 8.2.2. Since every
autoprojectivity bub-' of G (u E H6) is index preserving, L is a join of q-groups; in
particular, L(L/H) is directly indecomposable. Furthermore, since D is elementary
abelian, Da/La is the intersection of maximal subgroups of Ha/La, and Da 4 Ha im-
plies that Ha/La is not a primary group. It follows that

(6c) Ha/LO is a P-group of order rms, r > s,
and L/H e P(m + 1, r); since L is generated by q-groups,
(6d) L/H is an elementary abelian q-group (and q = r) or a nonabelian P-group
of order rmq, r > q.
Now H < D < L. So if L/H is abelian, L< NG(D) and then IL: DI = q, by (2). And if
L/H is not abelian, 8.4.8 applied with N = H and K = L yields that I L : HI = rq. In
both cases,
(6e) D is a maximal subgroup of L.
We finally show that
(6f) Da is a p-group
where p is the prime appearing in (2). For this we choose x e A such that HX 0 H,
and consider the autoprojectivity r = 6-'xb of G induced by x. Then Ha and HOT =
HxO
are different maximal subgroups of G and hence G = Ha u HOT. Furthermore,
DOT = DXO = DO since x e A < NG(D). And finally, by (6e), LO is a maximal subgroup
of DO; also ADO/LOI = t e P since LO a DO. Because r is index preserving, 4.3.5 yields
that LOT -< DOT = Da and ADO/LaTI = t. So if N = 0'(D), then N = OT(LO) = Ot(LOT).
Thus N is characteristic in LO -< Ha and hence N < Ha. Moreover, since Ha/La is a
P-group, Ha is the join of subgroups in which La is maximal and so 4.3.5 implies that
LOT < HOT. Therefore N g HOT also and hence N < HO u HOT = G. But G is simple
and it follows that N = 1, that is Da is a t-group. Since AID is a P-group, AO is the
intersection of maximal subgroups of DO and so AO < Da. By 8.1.6, b induces a
duality from A/D onto D6/A6 and, by 8.2.8, D6/A" E P(n + 1, p). Thus t = p and (6f)
holds.
It follows from (6f) that p divides MHO/LOS. Therefore r > p > q in (6c) and hence
L/H cannot be an elementary abelian q-group. By (6d), L/H is a nonabelian P-group
of order r'q and so D is not normal in L. By (6e), D is a maximal subgroup of L and,
by (2), D is also maximal in S if S E Sylq(A). Now S : L since D < S; let M = L u S.
Then LO and SO are different maximal subgroups of the p-group Da and hence
Da/(La n Sa) = DO/MO is elementary abelian of order p2. So _ [MID] \, {M, D, S}
is an antichain on which S operates by conjugation. Since 1 2CI = p, the q-group S
must fix some X e X and then X g S u X = M. It follows that D = X n Y :!g Y for
every Y e 1 such that Y X, and, since these Y generate M, we get that D a M. In
particular, D g L and this contradiction finally proves (6).
Now we may apply Lemma 8.4.8 with N = D and K = A and obtain that I A/ D _
pq. Thus
(7) J A I = pqz.
It remains to be shown that NG(D) = A; then (6), (7), and (2) contain all the
assertions of the lemma. Since IDS = q is the smallest prime dividing IGI, we have
D < Z(NG(D)); in addition, D is a normal Hall subgroup of B and so the Schur-
Zassenhaus Theorem implies that B = D x H where (I D 1, 1 H 1) = 1. Then H is char-
acteristic in B :!g NG(D) and hence H g NG(D); thus NG(D) = A x H and (I A I,1 HI) = 1.
By 1.6.6, NG(D)" = A x H for every a e P(G), that is, H is P(G)-normal in NG(D).
By 8.4.4 there exists L< G such that NG(D) < L, H g L and L/H has a dual. Since
A NG(D)/H < L/H, q2 divides IL/HI. So if H 1, (1) and 8.2.6 would imply that
L/H has a normal Sylow q-subgroup; but (2) shows that A has nonnormal Sylow
q-subgroups, a contradiction. Thus H = 1, that is NG(D) = A, as desired.
Recall that q is the smallest prime dividing IGI and Q e Sylq(G). Lemma 8.4.9
implies that Q is small and q = 2; so we can finally work with involutions.
8.4.10 Lemma. IQI < q2; hence q = 2, Q is elementary abelian of order 4 and
I NG(Q)lCG(Q)I = 3.
Proof. Suppose, for a contradiction, that IQI > q3. We show first that for every
gE G,
(8) Z(Q) < Q9 implies Q9 = Q.

For, if Z(Q) < Q9 and Q9 Q, there would exist a maximal intersection D of two
different Sylow q-subgroups of G such that D > Q n Q9 > Z(Q). By 8.4.9, IDI = q
and I NG(D)I = pq2 for some prime p. So it would follow that D = Z(Q) and hence
Q < NG(D), impossible since IQI >_ q3. Thus (8) holds and a similar argument yields
that
(9) Z(Q) < Q.
Indeed this is clear if Q is a generalized quaternion group. If Q is not of this type,

then by 8.4.7 there exists a maximal intersection D : 1 of Q and another Sylow
q-subgroup Q 1 Again by 8.4.9, I D I = q and I NG(D)I = pq2 for some prime p. Since
.
Z(Q) < NG(D), it follows that IZ(Q)I < q2 and hence Z(Q) < Q.
Now Z(Q) is a characteristic subgroup of Q, and hence NG(Q) < NG(Z(Q)). If
g e NG(Z(Q)), then Z(Q) = Z(Q)9 < Q9 and so by (8), Q9 = Q. Thus g e NG(Q), that is,
NG(Q) = NG(Z(Q)). Let a E P(G) such that Z(Q)" = Z(Q). Since a is index preserving,
Q" is a Sylow q-subgroup of G containing Z(Q) and hence by (8), Q = Q. It follows
that Q is the unique Sylow q-subgroup of NG(Q) and so NG(Q)" < NG(Q). Since G is
finite, this implies that NG(Q) = NG(Q). Thus we have shown that
(10) X = NG(Q) = NG(Z(Q)) is P(G)-connected to Z(Q).
By 8.4.3, 6 induces a duality in X/Z(Q) and by (1), this duality satisfies 8.2.2. Thus
X / Z(Q) is a direct product of coprime P-groups and p-groups. By (9), Z(Q) < Q < X.
Since q is the smallest prime dividing IGI, the direct factor of the decomposition
of X/Z(Q) containing Q/Z(Q) is either a q-group or a nonabelian P-group of order
p"q, p > q, n e N. In both cases, X = NG(Z(Q)) has a normal subgroup of index q.
Now (8) shows that G is q-normal, that is, Z(Q)9 < Q implies Z(Q)9 = Z(Q); for,
Z(Q)9 < Q implies Z(Q) < Q9-', hence Q9 = Q and then Z(Q)9 = Z(Q9) = Z(Q).
So Grun's Second Theorem (see Robinson [1982], p. 285) yields that G has a nor-
mal subgroup of index q; but by 8.4.6, G is simple. This contradiction shows that
QI < q2. It is a well-known consequence of Burnside's criterion for p-nilpotence (see
Robinson [1982], p. 280) that now q = 2, Q is elementary abelian of order 4 and

I NG(Q)ICG(Q)I = 3.
8.4.11 Lemma. If t e G is an involution, CG(t) g G.
Proof. By 8.4.7 there exists a nontrivial intersection D = Q n Q1 of Q and another

Sylow 2-subgroup Q1 of G. By 8.4.10, IQI = 4 so that D has order 2 and is a maximal
intersection of two different Sylow 2-subgroups; in addition, ING(Q)/CG(Q)I = 3 im-
plies that all involutions in G are conjugate. So we may assume that D = <t); put
C = CG(t) = NG(D). Then by 8.4.9, C/D is nonabelian of order 2p for some prime
p > 2; let P E Sylp(C). Then PD = P x D < C so that P < C, and hence P is the
unique subgroup of order p of C.
We want to show that C is P(G)-connected both to D and to P; by 8.4.2, this will
imply that C < D u P = (D n P) = G, as desired. Clearly, C is the join of all the
Sylow 2-subgroups of G containing D. So if a c- P(G) such that D = D, a is index
preserving and hence permutes these Sylow 2-subgroups. Thus C = C, that is, C is
P(G)-connected to D.
Now let a e P(G) such that P = P. Since a is index preserving, (DP)' is a cyclic
group of order 2p containing P. We show that t is the unique involution in G
centralizing P. This will imply that D = <t) = D and, as we have just shown, it will
follow that C = C, as desired. So suppose, for a contradiction, that s e G is an
involution such that t s E CG(P). Then <s, t> is a dihedral group centralizing P;
hence <s, t) n P = 1. Furthermore, since C/D is nonabelian, P Z(C); hence s 0 C
and <s, t) is not a 2-group. Now P is the unique subgroup of order p of C and
therefore P is P(G)-normal in C = CG(t). Then P is the unique subgroup of order p
of CG(s) since CG(s) is conjugate to CG(T); thus it is P(G)-normal in CG(s). Hence
P is P(G)-normal in CG(t) U CG(s) and by 8.4.4 there exists L < G such that
CG(t) U CG(s) < L and L/P has a dual. Since IC/PI = 4, (1) and 8.2.6 imply that L/P
has a normal Sylow 2-subgroup; but <s, t> PIP _- (s, t> does not. This contradiction
shows that t is the unique involution of G centralizing P. Thus D = D and C = C,
as desired.
Proof of Theorem 8.4.5. By 8.4.6, a minimal counterexample G to Theorem 8.4.5

is simple and, by 8.4.10, I G I is even. If t e G is an involution, it follows that
1 < CG(t) < G. By 8.4.11, CG(t) 9 G; but by 8.4.6, G is simple. This contradiction
proves the theorem.
Exercises
1. Give examples of subgroups H, X of a group G such that X is P(G)-connected to
H and
(a) 1 < H < X <G,or
(b) H$XandX H, or
(c) X < H and X is not invariant under P(H).
2. Find groups H:,--- K < G < G* such that

(a) H is P(G)-normal in K but H is not P(G*)-normal in K,
(b) H is not P(G)-normal in K but H is P(G*)-normal in K.
3. (Calcaterra [1987]) Let A be a group acting on a finite group G and suppose that
(A, G) satisfies the double centralizer property (or DCP), that is, C0CA(H) = H for
any subgroup H of G and CACG(B) = B for any subgroup B of A.
(a) If A = A, x x A with coprime groups A;, show that G = G1 x xG
with coprime groups G. such that (A;, G;) satisfies the DCP for all i.
(b) If A is nontrivial and L(A) is directly indecomposable, show that either
(i) A I= q and I G I= p where p and q are primes such that q I p- 1, or
(ii) A and G lie in P(n, p) for some prime p and integer n.
8.5 Locally finite groups with duals
The aim of this section is to show that every locally finite group with dual is soluble;
this together with Theorem 8.3.1 will complete the proof of the Main Theorem 8.2.2
of this chapter. For this purpose we first of all have to prove Theorem 8.2.3(a),
without using 8.2.2, of course.
Subgroups of finite index
8.5.1 Theorem. If G is a group with dual, then G" = G; = G a where Gj is the intersec-
tion of all subgroups of finite index in G and G: is the intersection of all normal
subgroups of G with soluble factor group.
Proof. First of all, if H is a subgroup of finite index in G, then G/Hc is a finite group;
by 8.1.6, G/Hc has a dual and hence is soluble, by 8.4.5. Now if N is an arbitrary
normal subgroup of G with soluble factor group, then 8.3.1 and 8.2.5 yield that GIN
is metabelian. Thus G" < N; in particular, G" < HG < H. It follows that G" < Ga
and G" < Ga. Conversely, since G/G" is soluble, obviously G < G"; furthermore, the
duality induced in G/G" satisfies 8.2.2 and hence G/G" is aVdirect product of finite
groups. Therefore G" is the intersection of normal subgroups of finite index in G and
soGj<G". Thus G" = G:= Gj.
8.5.2 Corollary. If G is a group with dual, G" is a perfect group with dual and has no
proper subgroup of finite index.
Proof: By 8.5.1, G" = G,,j = Ga. Since Ga_ G and GIG"' is soluble, we see that
(G")' = G> G a = G"; thus G" is perfect. The Zacher-Rips Theorem 6.1.7 shows
that G; is invariant under P(G). By 8.1.7, G" = G, has a dual and then 8.5.1 applied
to this group yields that (G")j = (G")" = G". Thus G" has no proper subgroup of
finite index.
8.5 Locally finite groups with duals 477
The locally soluble radical S(G)
For a locally finite group G, define S(G) to be the join of all locally soluble normal
subgroups of G.
Suppose that N/S(G) is a locally soluble normal subgroup of G/S(G) and let H be
a finitely generated subgroup of N. Since G is locally finite, H is a finite group.
Therefore H/H n S(G) ^- HS(G)/S(G) is soluble since N/S(G) is locally soluble. And
the finite subgroup H n S(G) of S(G) is contained in the join of a finite number of
locally soluble normal subgroups N,, ..., Nk of G. If K is a finitely generated sub-
group of N, N2, then again K is finite and therefore K n N, is soluble; and since
N,N,/N, NZ/N, n NZ is locally soluble, KN1/N1 K/K n N, is soluble. Thus K
is soluble and so N, N2 is locally soluble. An obvious induction yields that N, ... Nk
is locally soluble and hence H n S(G) is soluble. So, finally, H is soluble and this
shows that N is locally soluble. This holds in particular for N = S(G), that is
(1) S(G) is locally soluble;
moreover, we have shown that N < S(G), that is
(2) S(G/S(G)) = 1.
Now suppose that a E P(G). By 6.6.10 and (2), S(G)' a G. By 6.6.4 and 1.2.11, the
class of locally soluble groups is invariant under projectivities. Thus by (1), S(G)' is
a locally soluble normal subgroup of G and hence S(G) < S(G). This result applied
to u-' yields the other inclusion. Thus S(G)' = S(G) and hence
(3) S(G) is invariant under P(G).
By 8.1.2, a locally soluble group with dual is locally finite. Thus our next result is a
partial case of the main theorem of this section.
8.5.3 Theorem (Zacher [1966]). Every locally soluble group with dual is soluble.
Proof. Suppose that the theorem is false and consider a counterexample G. Then by
8.5.2, G" 0 1 is a perfect locally soluble group with dual and we may assume that
G = G" is perfect.
Since G is locally soluble, every chief factor H/K of G is abelian (see Robinson
[1982], p. 367) and we show that H/K is even central. For this we may assume that
K = I since G/K is also a perfect locally soluble group with dual. Then H is a
normal p-subgroup of G for some prime p and hence lies in the intersection OP(G) of
all the Sylow p-subgroups of G. By 6.5.9, every autoprojectivity of G is index preserv-
ing and therefore OP(G) is invariant under P(G). By 8.1.7 and 8.1.10, OP(G) has a dual
and is finite. Thus H is finite and, since G/CG(H) is isomorphic to a group of auto-
morphisms of H, it follows that G/CG(H) is finite. But by 8.5.2, G has no proper
subgroup of finite index; so CG(H) = G, that is, H/K is central.
Thus every chief factor of G is central and this implies that every finitely gener-
ated, hence finite, subgroup of G has a central series. Thus G is locally nilpotent and
hence it is the direct product of its primary components (see Robinson [1982],
p. 342). By 8.1.6 and 8.1.10, these are finite p-groups. Since G is perfect, it follows
that G = 1, a contradiction.
8.5.4 Corollary. If G is a locally finite group and b a duality from G to a group G, then
S(G) is a soluble group with dual and S(G) is perfect.
Proof. By (1), (3), and 8.1.7, S(G) is a locally soluble group with dual, and 8.5.3
implies that S(G) is soluble. Suppose, for a contradiction, that S(G) is not perfect.
Since S induces a duality from G/S(G) onto S(G) and S(G/S(G)) = 1, we may assume
that S(G) = 1. Then G' < G and hence there exists a subgroup H of prime order
of G such that G' < H < G. If 6 E P(G), then b-'ub E P(G) and therefore HO _
(H) 'a' is a projective image of the normal subgroup H of prime index in G.
By 6.5.3, this projective image contains G"; thus Ha > G" for all a e P(G).Now
L= U H is clearly invariant under P(G) and, by 8.1.1, L = n Ha >_ G"; by
ae P(G) _ a EP(G)
8.1.7, 6 induces a duality from L onto the soluble group G/L. But then 8.3.1 implies
that L is soluble, a contradiction since S(G) = 1.
The main theorem
We come to the proof of the result announced above.
8.5.5 Theorem (Zacher [1971]). Every locally finite group with dual is soluble.
Again we need several steps to prove this. In contrast to the finite case, however,
we shall use the Feit-Thompson Theorem at several points in this proof. First of all,
we need the following fact (see Robinson [1982], p. 415):
(4) every infinite locally finite group has an infinite abelian subgroup.
No proof of this is known which avoids using the Feit-Thompson Theorem. An-
other frequently used result is:
(5) if G is locally finite and S < G is such that o(s) 0 2 for all s e S, then S is locally
soluble;
indeed, every finitely generated subgroup of S is a finite group of odd order and
hence soluble.
In the sequel, let G be a locally finite group and S a duality from G to a group
We start with the following special case of 8.5.5.
8.5.6 Lemma. If G has a finite Sylow 2-subgroup, G is soluble.
Proof. We suppose that this is false and choose a counterexample b: L(G) - L(G)
for which the order of the Sylow 2-subgroups of G is minimal; recall that these Sylow
2-subgroups are conjugate since one of them is finite (see Robinson [1982], p. 413).
By 8.4.5, G is infinite. By 8.5.2 and 8.1.6, S induces a duality in G"/S(G") and the
Sylow 2-subgroups of this group cannot have larger order than those of G. Thus we
may assume that G = G" is perfect and, by (2), that S(G) = 1; it follows from 8.5.4
that G is perfect. Thus
(6) G and 6 are perfect.
For c c- G of prime order, we define Xc = Q(CG(c)) = <x E CG(C)10(X) C- P>. Let

a E P(G) such that <c> = <c). By 6.5.9, a is index preserving. If x E CG(c) such that
o(x) E P, then <c, x> is either elementary abelian of order p or p2 or cyclic of order
pq for primes p and q. The same then holds for <c, x), and therefore <x) centralizes
<c) = <c>. Thus <x> < X, and, since these elements x generate X, it follows that
X, < Xc. This result applied to a-' yields the other inclusion. Thus
(7) Xc is P(G)-connected to <c> and hence X,/<c) has a dual,
by 8.4.3. Now suppose, for a contradiction, that every element of G has prime power
order. By (4), G has an infinite abelian subgroup A which then has to be a p-group
for some prime p. Moreover, if c E A has order p, then CG(c) is also a p-group and
hence is a locally finite p-group with dual. By 8.1.10, Xc is finite and, since
Q(A) < Xc, it follows that A has finite p-rank. Thus A is a direct product of finitely
many cyclic and quasicyclic groups (see Robinson [1982], p. 107) and, since A is
infinite, there exists a quasicyclic subgroup K of A; let H < K such that I H I = p. By
1.2.3, every projective image of K is locally cyclic (in fact, quasicyclic, by Exercises
1.2.1 and 1.2.2). Thus H is P(G)-normal in K and, by 8.4.4, L/H has a dual where
L = U Ka"a-'. Since H = Ha"a-' is centralized by Kb"a-' for every u c- Ha, we have
YEHs
L< CG(H) and hence L is a p-group. Again by 8.1.10, L/H is finite, a contradiction
since H < K < L. Thus not every element of G has prime power order and hence
there exists c c- G such that
(8) o(c) = q c- P and Xc is not a q-group.
Let q be the smallest prime such that there exists c c- G satisfying (8). If q = 2, then
Xc/<c) has Sylow 2-subgroups of smaller order than G; the choice of G implies that
X,/<c) is soluble. If q j4 2, then XX does not contain elements of order 2; by (5) and
(7), Xc/<c) is a locally soluble group with dual and hence is soluble, by 8.5.3. In both
cases, by 8.3.1, Xc/<c) is a direct product of finite primary groups and P-groups.
Since q is the smallest prime involved in X, it follows that X/<c) has a normal
q-complement N/<c). Let Q be the set of q'-elements of Xc. If x, y c- Q, then (c, x, y)
is a finite subgroup of N in which <c> is a central Hall subgroup; thus <c, x, y) =
<c) x (Q n <c, x, y)) and hence xy -' E Q. So Q is a subgroup of N and N = <c> x Q.
If a E P(G) such that <c> = <c>, then by (7), X' = Xc and hence Q = Q, since a
is index preserving. So Q is P(G)-connected to <c) and, by 8.4.3, Qb < G and S
induces a duality from Q onto G/Qb. The choice of q implies that the q'-group Q does
not contain elements of order 2 and, by (5), Q is locally soluble. By 8.5.3 and 8.3.1, Q
and G/Qa are soluble and, since G is perfect, Q = 1. But then X, is a q-group,
contradicting (8).
8.5.7 Lemma. Let H < G such that H is not locally soluble. Then every primary
subgroup of CG(H) is finite.
Proof. We suppose the lemma is false and consider a counterexample H < G; let
C = CG(H). Since H is not locally soluble, there exists a finitely generated subgroup
of H which is not soluble; since G is locally finite, this subgroup is finite and its
soluble residual K is a nontrivial finite perfect subgroup of H. Let B be a maximal

normal subgroup of K. Then K/B is simple and, by 5.4.9, B is P(G)-normal in K. By
8.4.4, A/B has a dual where A = U Ku-' is perfect since, by 5.3.4, it is a join of
uEBo
perfect groups. On the other hand, B is a finite normal subgroup of A, and so
A/BCA(B) is a finite group with dual and hence is soluble, by 8.4.5. Thus A = BLA(B)
and so K = B(CA(B) n K)=BCK(B). Then CK(B)/(B n CK(B)) ^ K/B and B n CK(B)=
Z(CK(B)). So if F is the soluble residual of CK(B), then F is a finite perfect subgroup
of H such that F/Z(F) is simple. Since CG(H) < CG(F), the group F is a counter-
example to the lemma and so we may assume that H is a finite perfect group and
H/Z(H) is simple.
It follows that Z(H) is P(G)-normal in HC. For, since H is perfect and the factor
group HC/C H/Z(H) is simple, 6.5.4 implies that H a (HC)' and C' :!9 (HC)' for
every a e P(G); hence Z(H) = H n C a (HC)'. Again by 8.4.4 there exists W< G
such that HC < W, Z(H) a W and W/Z(H) has a dual. In this group, H/Z(H) is a
finite simple subgroup whose centralizer contains C/Z(H); therefore, since Z(H)
is finite, this centralizer contains an infinite primary subgroup. Thus H/Z(H) is a
counterexample to the lemma and so we finally may assume that
(9) H is a finite simple group.
It follows that CG(H) = C0(H) for every a e P(G). For, if X is a p-subgroup of
C0(H), then, since H = 0(H), 1.6.8 implies that [H, X] = 1. Since CG(H) is gener-
ated by primary subgroups, we obtain that CG(H) < C0(H); and if we apply this
result to a-1 and the simple group H, we get the other inclusion. This shows, in
particular, that C is P(G)-connected to H and, since H n C = 1, 8.4.3 yields that
(10) CaG.
Let D = U Hu and put M = C u D and N = C n D. As we have just shown,
Hud_'
u E C6
is centralized by Cub-' = C for all u e G. Thus D is centralized by C; so
N< Z(M) and M/N = C/N x D/N. Similarly, it is clear that D = n (H)u is in-
U C,
variant under Cs and so by (10), M = Co n D 9 CD = N and the factor group
N/M = C/M x D/M. By 8.1.6, b induces a duality from M/N onto N/M and
we claim that
(11) C/M and D/M are coprime.
To prove this, suppose, for a contradiction, that both groups contain a subgroup
of order p e P. The join of these is elementary abelian of order p2 and therefore
contains a subgroup T/M of order p which is neither contained in C/M nor
in D/M. Thus T n C = M = T n D and hence T u C = M = T u D. Since
[C, D] < N and D g M, it follows that T n D is normalized by C and by T and
hence by C u T = M. In particular, T n D 9 D and [D/T n D] is dual isomorphic to
[T u D/D] nt [T/M]. So D/T n D is cyclic of prime order, a contradiction since
D = U Hub ' is generated by simple groups and hence is perfect. Thus (11) holds.
v E Co
Now (11) and 8.1.8 imply that C/N and DIN are coprime. Since H n C = 1, the
finite simple group H is isomorphic to a subgroup of D/N and the Feit-Thompson
Figure 24
Theorem implies that D/N has elements of order 2. Thus C/N has none and so, by
(5), it is locally soluble; since N < Z(C), we conclude that C is locally soluble. Now 6
induces a duality from C onto 6/0 and 8.5.3 implies that C is soluble. By 8.3.1,
every primary subgroup of C is finite, a final contradiction.
We come to the last step in the proof of Theorems 8.5.5 and 8.2.2.
8.5.8 Lemma. IfG01,G0G'.
Proof. Suppose, for a contradiction, that G = G'. By 8.5.4, S(G) is soluble and, since
S(G/S(G)) = 1, we may assume that S(G) = 1. So again by 8.5.4, we have that
(12) G and G are perfect.
By 8.5.6, every Sylow 2-subgroup of G is infinite. Let S n Sy12(G) and suppose, for a
contradiction, that S has a subgroup of the form A x B where A and B are infinite
elementary abelian or quasicyclic groups; let H = U Baxa By 6.5.9, every auto-
Ad
projectivity v of G is index preserving. So (A x B)x6is either elementary abelian or
a locally finite 2-group with modular subgroup lattice and infinite exponent; by
2.4.15, (A x B) is abelian in this case also. It follows that if x n A', then A = Aaxa-'
centralizes Baxa-' and hence A < CG(H). In particular, A a AH and, since Hb =

n (B)x is invariant under A, (AH)b = Ab n Hs a A. By 8.1.6, 6 induces a duality
xeAd
from AH/A onto Ab/(AH)a. Now AH/A contains the infinite 2-group AB/A and
hence, by 8.5.3 and 8.3.1, cannot be locally soluble; it follows that H is not locally
soluble. But CG(H) contains the infinite 2-group A, and this contradicts Lemma
8.5.7. The contradiction first of all shows that every abelian subgroup of S has finite
rank and therefore (see Robinson [1982], p. 107) S satisfies the minimal condition
for abelian subgroups. So S is a Cernikov group (see Robinson [1982], p. 408), that
is, contains a subgroup E of finite index isomorphic to a direct product of quasicyclic
groups. Since S is infinite and does not contain subgroups isomorphic to the direct
product of two quasicyclic groups, it follows that E is quasicyclic. Thus
(13) S has a quasicyclic subgroup E of finite index.
If M is any group containing a quasicyclic subgroup E of finite index, then for every
quasicyclic subgroup F of M, the subgroup EM n F has finite index in F, and hence
EM n F = F. Thus F 5 E and then F = E; so E is the unique quasicyclic subgroup
of M. In particular, E < S, and we want to show that S = NG(E). First of all, if
a e P(G) and X is a cyclic subgroup of NG(E), then E is of finite index in M = EX
and hence is the unique quasicyclic subgroup of M. Then E' is the unique qua-
sicyclic subgroup of M, that is, X < NG(E). It follows that NG(E) < NG(E), and
this result for u-1 and E yields the other inclusion. Thus
(14) NG(E) = NG(E) for all a e P(G).
In particular, NG(E) is P(G)-connected to E. By 8.4.3, 6 induces a duality in NG(E)/E.
This group has a finite Sylow 2-subgroup S/E and hence is soluble, by 8.5.6. Then
8.3.1 implies that NG(E)/E is a direct product of P-groups and p-groups, and there-
fore possesses a normal 2-complement K/E. Since Aut E is a 2-group, K < CG(E)
and, since G is locally finite, it follows that the set Q of 2'-elements of K is a subgroup
of K and K = E x Q. By (14), every a e P(G) satisfying E = E fixes NG(E); therefore
it fixes Q since a is index preserving. Thus Q is P(G)-connected to E and, by 8.4.3,
Qb < G. By (5), Q is locally soluble; hence Q and G/Qb are soluble, by 8.5.3 and 8.3.1.
Since G is perfect, it follows that Q = 1. So K = E and
(15) NG(E) = S.
Now let D be the subgroup of order 4 of E, and suppose, for a contradiction, that
NG(D) is a 2-group. If a E P(G) satisfies D' = D, then D is a characteristic subgroup
of E < S, and hence D g S. It follows that S < NG(D) = S and, similarly, S-' < S
so that S = S. Thus S is P(G)-connected to D and, by 8.4.3, S/D has a dual; but
this contradicts 8.1.10 since S/D is infinite. So we see that NG(D) is not a 2-group,
that is, there exists a subgroup H of prime order p > 2 normalizing and hence
centralizing D. Let X = H<x e CG(H)lo(x) = 4> and consider a e P(G) such that
H = H. By 1.6.7 and since a is index preserving, a maps cyclic subgroups of order
4 of CG(H) to cyclic subgroups of order 4 of CG(H), and it follows that X = X. Thus
(16) X is P(G)-connected to H
and, by 8.4.3, S induces a duality in X/H. Clearly, D < X. Let T be a Sylow 2-
subgroup of X containing D, and let Sl e Sy12(G) such that T< S. By (13) and (15)
there exists a quasicyclic subgroup E1 of finite index in Sl, and NG(E1) = S. So
H:4 CG(EI), but H 5 CG(X) < CG(T) and hence E1 n T < E1. Since E1 is quasi-
cyclic, it follows that E1 n T is finite. Furthermore, T/E1 n T is isomorphic to a
subgroup of S1/E1 and hence is also finite. Thus T is finite and, by 8.5.6, X/H is
soluble. Since Exp T > 4, TH/H cannot be contained in a P-group. Thus 8.3.1 im-
plies that the Sylow 2-subgroup TH/H is a direct factor of X/H. Since H < Z(X), we
have TH = T x H and hence T :!g X. By (16), every a E P(G) satisfying H = H fixes
X and hence T. So T is P(G)-connected to Hand, by 8.4.3, Tag G. Thus S induces
a duality from T onto G/T and, by 8.4.5, G/T is soluble. Since G is perfect, it
follows that T = 1; but D < T, a final contradiction.
Proof of Theorems 8.5.5 and 8.2.2. Let G be a locally finite group with dual. Then by
8.5.2, G" is a perfect locally finite group with dual, and so by 8.5.8, G" = 1. Thus G is
soluble and this proves Theorem 8.5.5. The Main Theorem 8.2.2 follows from 8.5.5
and 8.3.1.
Arbitrary groups with duals
In the remainder of this section we give the proof of Theorem 8.2.3. Since Theorem
8.5.1 and Corollary 8.5.2 are just part (a) of this theorem, it remains to prove (b)-(e).
Of these, (b)-(d) are immediate consequences of 8.2.2 and (a).
Proof of Theorem 8.2.3. Let 6 be a duality from the group G to the group G. Then b
induces a duality from G/G" onto (G"). Therefore (G") has the structure given in
8.2.2 and hence is the join of finite soluble characteristic subgroups. By 8.5.1, G" =
Ga and the Zacher-Rips Theorem shows that this group is invariant under P(G). By
8.1.7, (G") g G and hence every characteristic subgroup of (G") is normal in G. It
follows that (G") < 611 < GLa and (G") < Ga < GLa. Conversely, by 6.5.17, GLa is
invariant under P(G); again by 8.1.7, N = (GLa) g G and S induces a duality from
G/N onto GLa. Since 6L11 is locally finite, 8.2.2 implies that GIN is metabelian; thus
N > G" and GLa = N < (G"). It follows that (G") = GLa = Ga = Ga. If we apply
this result to 6-', we obtain (G") = GLa = Ga = Ga and so (Ga) = G". Thus (b)
and (c) hold.
By (c), b induces a duality from G" n Ga onto G/GaG" and 8.2.2 implies that
G" n G' is a direct product of coprime finite groups Hi. It follows that Hi a G and
G'/CG..(Hi) is finite since it is isomorphic to a subgroup of Aut Hi. But G" has no
proper subgroup of finite index, so Hi <_ Z(G"). Thus G" n Ga < Z(G"). The reverse
inclusion is obvious, so Z(G") = G" n G' and (d) holds.
Suppose, for a contradiction, that G'/Z(G") and Ga/Z(G") are not coprime, and let
p be a prime such that both groups contain a subgroup of order p. Since Ga/ Z(G")
has the structure given in 8.2.2, there exists a normal subgroup N of Ga such that
Z(G") < N < G' and Ga/N is cyclic of order p or nonabelian of order pq, p _> q E P.
Then S induces a duality from H = G"Ga/N = G"N/N x Ga/N onto N/G" n Ga,
and H" = G"N/N, by (a). Moreover, if Ha = K/N, then K is locally finite as an
extension of a locally finite group by a locally finite group (see Robinson [1982],
p. 411); hence K < (G"Ga)a < Ga and so Ha = Ga/N. Thus H is a counterexample to
(e) and we may assume that G = H; that is,
(17) G = G" x F where F = Ga has order p or pq and G" has a subgroup A of
order p.
Let B be the normal subgroup of order p of F and consider T = A x B. Clearly T is

elementary abelian of order p2; therefore it contains a third subgroup C of order p.
If Ba a G, it follows that Ta = Aa n Bb _= Ca n Bb < Aa u Ca = G. Thus S induces a
duality from T onto G/Ta and hence G/Ta is metabelian. Therefore 6"< Ta; how-
ever, by (c), Fa = G". It follows that Fa < T and hence T < F, a contradiction
since A 4 F. _
Thus Ba is not normal in G. Since Fa = G" a G, it follows that B # F and so
IF = pq, p > q. Now b induces a duality from F onto G/Fa and so G/Fa e P(2, p).
Hence there exists a subgroup Q of order q of F such that Qa < G; let M = A x F =
TQ. Since p > 2, there exist two different subgroups C and D of T which are
not normalized by Q. It follows that C u Q = D u Q = TQ = M and hence Ma =
Ca n Qa = Da n Qa < Ca u Da = G. Again this implies that Z;/Ma is metabelian;
hence Fa = G" < Ma and so M < F, a final contradiction.
Exercises
1. (Stonehewer and Zacher [1994]) Let G be a group with dual, p a prime and P the
p-component of Z(G").
(a) If X is a p-subgroup of G", show that either X < P or P < X.
(b) If G"/Z(G") has a nontrivial p-element, show that P is cyclic.
2. Let G be a p-group with dual and p a prime.
(a) Show that Z(G") = 1.
(b) If G is self-dual, show that either G is finite or G is perfect and has trivial
centre.
3. (Foguel [1992]) If G is a locally finite group such that (Aut G, G) satisfies the
double centralizer property (see Exercise 8.4.3), show that G is trivial, cyclic of
order 3, or the symmetric group on 3 letters.
Chapter 9
Further lattices
In this final chapter we study briefly the other four lattices connected with a group
which were introduced in 1.1 together with L(G): the lattice 91(G) of normal sub-
groups, the lattice R(G) of composition subgroups, the centralizer lattice (E(G), and
the coset lattice 91(G). In each case we wish to determine the structure of groups
for which the given lattice has special properties and to find out how far a group is
determined by this lattice. Since 91(G), R(G), and 1(G) may be rather small compared
with L(G), the latter problem in these cases can only be tackled under rather strong
assumptions on the groups involved, and the results are usually much weaker than
those for subgroup lattices.
First we describe the groups G for which 91(G) is directly decomposable, give a
criterion for a finite group to have a distributive lattice of normal subgroups, and
show that 91(G) is complemented if and only if G is a direct product of simple groups.
Then we show that isomorphisms between lattices of normal subgroups map abelian
groups to abelian groups, with the obvious exceptions of groups of rank 1. In the
remainder of 9.1 we study isomorphisms and dualities between 91(G) and 92(G),
where we assume that G is a finite nilpotent and G a finite soluble group. The main
result here is due to Heineken [1965] and states that if in addition G has only
noncyclic Sylow subgroups, and c(G) < 2 or G' is nilpotent, then G is nilpotent and
I G I = I G I. This theorem has been generalized to many classes of infinite groups.
In the study of R(G) in 9.2 we restrict our attention to finite groups although
some of the results hold more generally for groups with a composition series. We
determine when R(G) is directly decomposable, show that R(G) is modular if and
only if every subnormal section of order p3 has modular subgroup lattice, and that
R(G) is distributive if and only if every subnormal section of order p2 is cyclic.
Moreover R(G) is complemented if and only if 91(G) is complemented. Our main
result on isomorphisms cp: R(G) -+ R(G) is due to Pazderski [1972] and says that if
p > 2 is a prime and OP(G) is not cyclic, then OP(G)w = OP(G); similarly OP(G)4' =
OP(G) if G/OP(G) is not cyclic. Both assertions also hold for p = 2 under the
additional assumption that G, or in the second case G and G, are soluble; these
assumptions are needed since R(Q8) a- R(PI'L(2, q2)) for 2 < q e P. Finally we study
dualities between lattices of subnormal subgroups of finite soluble groups.
In 9.3 we show that every group with distributive centralizer lattice is abelian,
and characterize groups G for which (E(G) is directly decomposable. The structure
of groups with modular centralizer lattice is not known. However we present the
characterization, due to Schmidt [1970c], of finite groups G for which l(G) is (mod-
ular) of length 2 and use it to show that the groups SL(2, 2") are the only nonabelian
486 Further lattices
finite simple groups with modular centralizer lattice, a result due to Antonov [1987].
Finally we determine those finite groups G for which E(G) = L(G) or, more gener-
ally, in which every subgroup containing the centre is a centralizer.
The study of coset lattices of groups was initiated by Curzio [1953]. Since the
atoms of 93(G) are the sets {g} with g c- G and the interval [G/{g}] in 9R(G) is
isomorphic to L(G), the coset lattice determines rather strongly the structure of G.
In particular, every isomorphism a: 91(G) -+ 91(G) can be considered as a bijective
map from G to G preserving cosets; such a map will be called an R-isomorphism.
Using our results on projectivities of abelian groups of torsion-free rank r > 2 and
on torsion-free locally nilpotent groups, we prove in 9.4 that every R-isomorphism
of such a group is an isomorphism or an antiisomorphism. These results are due to
Loiko who also showed that the situation is different for mixed abelian groups of
torsion-free rank 1. Gaschiitz and Schmidt [1981] introduced the concept of an
affinity; this is an R-isomorphism a: G -. G satisfying (xH) = xH and (Hx) _
Hx for all x e G, H < G. In general even such a map need not be an isomorphism,
and there exist affinities between nonisomorphic groups. But we show that every
affinity of G is an isomorphism if G is generated by elements of infinite order and
involutions, or if Z(G) = 1, or if G is a finite perfect group.
9.1 Lattices of normal subgroups

We have seen in 2.1.4 that the lattice of normal subgroups is a modular sublattice
of the subgroup lattice of the group G. Since %(G) can be much smaller than L(G),
rather different groups may have isomorphic lattices of normal subgroups. We give
some examples of this phenomenon.
9.1.1 Examples. Let G be a group.

(a) %(G) is a chain of length one if and only if G is simple.
(b) If G is abelian, %(G) = L(G). In particular, 9l(Cp.,) is a chain of length n for
every prime p and n E N.
(c) For 3 < n 4, A. is a simple normal subgroup of index 2 in S and hence
91(S,,) is a chain of length 2. Similarly, for every odd prime power q > 5, Z(SL(2, q))
is a normal subgroup of order 2 with simple factor group in SL(2, q) and hence also
9l(SL(2, q)) is a chain of length 2. Finally, since A4 and Klein's four group are the
only normal subgroups of S4, it follows that 91(S4) is a chain of length 3.
(d) For every odd prime p >_ 5, 91(PI'L(2, pz)) 91(Aut A6) ^- 91(D8) 91(Q8) _
L(Q8) since all these groups have a unique minimal normal subgroup with factor
group elementary abelian of order 4.
We introduce a concept which is quite useful in the study of 91(G).
G-isomorphic normal subgroups
Let A and B be normal subgroups of G. A map a: A -- B is a G-isomorphism if it

is an isomorphism satisfying (ag)a = (a')9 for all a e A, g e G; A and B are called
9.1 Lattices of normal subgroups 487
G-isomorphic if there exists a G-isomorphism between them. We note some simple

properties of this concept.
9.1.2 Lemma. Let A and B be G-isomorphic normal subgroups of G.

(a) Then CG(A) = CG(B).
(b) If A<RaG,B<SaGand RnS=1,then A x B<Z(R x S).
(c) If A n B = 1, then A x B is abelian.
Proof. (a) Let a: A -+ B be a G-isomorphism. If c e CG(A) and b = a' E B, then b` =

(a')` _ (a`)' = a' = b. Thus c e Co(B) and hence C0(A) < CG(B). Since (b9)'-' =
((a')9)'-' = a9 = ((a')' ')9 = (b'-')9, also a-' is a G-isomorphism. It follows that
CA(B) < CG(A) and hence that CG(A) = CG(B), as desired.
(b) Since A n S = 1, we have S < CG(A); similarly, R < CG(B). By (a), CG(A) _
CA(B) and hence A x B is centralized by R x S.
(c) Apply (b) with A = R and B = S.
We now show that it is possible to decide in 91(G) whether or not two normal
subgroups A and B with trivial intersection are G-isomorphic.
9.1.3 Lemma. Let A, B g G such that A n B = 1.

(a) If a: A -+ B is a G-isomorphism, then C = {aa'la c A} is a normal subgroup of G
satisfying A x B = A x C = B x C.
(b) Conversely, if there exists a normal subgroup C of G such that A x B =
A x C = B x C, then A and B are G-isomorphic and abelian.
Proof. (a) By 1.6.2, C is a diagonal in A x B and we only have to show that C a G;

then A x B = A x C = B x C. So let g c G. Since a is a G-isomorphism, (aa')9 =
a9(a9)' E C for all a e A. Thus C9 < C and hence C a_ G.
(b) By assumption, C is a diagonal in A x B and so, by 1.6.2, C = {aa'ja e Al
for some isomorphism a: A -+ B. Let a e A, g e G. Since C a G, we have (aa')9 =
a9(a')9 e C and hence (a')9 = (a9)'. Thus a is a G-isomorphism. By 9.1.2, A and B are
abelian.
If we apply 9.1.3 to minimal normal subgroups, we obtain information about

certain intervals in 91(G). We add an index N to distinguish in our notation between
these and intervals in L(G); thus if S, T e 91(G) such that T:5 S, then
[S/T]N = {X E 91(G)IT < X < S}.
Furthermore, recall that M is the (modular) lattice of length 2 with n atoms.
9.1.4 Lemma. Let A and B be different minimal normal subgroups of G.

(a) If A and B are G-isomorphic, they are abelian and [A x B/1]N M for some
cardinal n >_ 3.
(b) If A and B are not G-isomorphic, then [A x B/1]N M2.
Proof. Since A and B are different minimal normal subgroups, A n B = 1. As 91(G)

is modular, [A x B/1]N has length 2 and therefore is some M where n 2. By 9.1.3,
A and B are G-isomorphic if and only if n > 3.
Groups with special lattices of normal subgroups
We now study groups whose lattices of normal subgroups have certain special pro-
perties. First we use 1.6.1 to characterize those groups G for which 91(G) is directly
decomposable.
9.1.5 Theorem (Curzio ([1964b]). The lattice 91(G) of normal subgroups of the group
G is directly decomposable if and only if G = H x K where H # 1 0 K and any two
nontrivial central factors X/Y of H and SIT of K are coprime (recall that X/Y is a
central factor of H if Y < X < H and [X, H] < Y).
Proof. Suppose first that G = H x K has this property. We claim that for every
U E 92(G),
(1) U=(UnH) x (UnK).
Indeed, since U a G and [H, K] = 1, we obtain [UK n H, H] < [UK, H] < U n H
and [UH n K, K] < U n K. Thus if (1) did not hold, then by 1.6.1, UK n H/U n H
and UH n K/U n K would be isomorphic nontrivial central factors in H and K
respectively. But this implies that there exist central factors of the same prime order
p in H and K, which contradicts our assumption. Thus (1) holds. Now we de-
fine maps cp: 92(G) - 91(H) x 91(K) and i/i: 91(H) x 91(K) 9t(G) by
U''=(UnH,UnK) and (V,W)'k=V X W

for U E 9t(G), V E 91(H), W E 91(K). Then (1) shows that U = U and since, trivi-
ally, (V, W)0' = ((V x W) n H, (V x W) n K) = (V, W), it follows that cp and 0 are
inverse maps. Thus cp is bijective and hence is an isomorphism by 1.1.2. Thus 91(G)
is directly decomposable.
Suppose conversely that 92(G) = L1 x L2 where the Li are nontrivial lattices.
If Ol, 11 and 02, 12 are least and greatest elements of L1 and L2, respectively,
then H = (I1, 02) and K = (01,12) are normal subgroups of G such that H n K =
(01, 02) = 1 and H u K = (11,12) = G. Thus G = H x K. Suppose, for a contradic-
tion, that there are nontrivial central factors in H and K which are not coprime.
Since an infinite cyclic group has factors of every prime order, this implies that
there are central factors X/Y of H and SIT of K of the same prime order p. Then
[X x S, G] = [X, H] [S, K] < Y x T so that (X x S)/(Y x T) is a central elemen-
tary abelian subgroup of order p2 in Gi(Y x T). Thus [(X x S)/(Y x T)]N ti MD+1;
but [(X x S)/(Y x T)]N [X/Y]N x [S/T]N M2, a contradiction.
Note that 1.6.5 and 9.1.5 imply that if L(G) is directly decomposable for a group
G, then so is 91(G). However, there are groups with 9t(G) decomposable and L(G)
indecomposable; see Exercise 1 or simply take G = S3 X C3.
The structure of groups with distributive lattice of normal subgroups is not

known. For finite groups, we have the following characterization.
9.1.6 Theorem (Pazderski [1987]). The following properties of a finite group G are
equivalent.
(a) 91(G) is distributive.
(b) In every factor group GIN, any two G/N-isomorphic minimal normal subgroups
coincide.
(c) In every factor group GIN, any two GIN-isomorphic normal subgroups coincide.
(d) The socle of every factor group GIN is a direct product of pairwise non-GIN-
isomorphic minimal normal subgroups.
Proof. Suppose first that 91(G) is distributive. If A/JV and BIN were different G/N-
isomorphic minimal normal subgroups of GIN, then by 9.1.4, [AB/N]N M for
some n >_ 3, impossible in a distributive lattice. Thus (a) implies (b).
Now suppose that (b) holds and that L1/N and L2/N are two G/N-isomorphic
normal subgroups of GIN; let a: L1/N -+ L2/N be a G/N-isomorphism. If L, = N,
then L2 = N and L1 = L2. So suppose that L1 > N and let M1/N < L, IN be a
minimal normal subgroup of GIN. Since a is a G/N-isomorphism, (M1/N) = M2/N
is a minimal normal subgroup of GIN which is G/N-isomorphic to M1/N. By (b),
M, = M2 = M. Now a induces a G/M-isomorphism a': L1/M - L2/M and an obvi-
ous induction yields that L1 = L2. Thus (b) implies (c).
Now suppose that (c) holds. It is well-known that a modular lattice is distributive
if and only if it does not contain a sublattice isomorphic to M3 (see Gratzer [1978],
p. 59). Thus if 91(G) were not distributive, there would exist distinct normal sub-
groups A, B, C of G such that AnB=AnC=BnC=Nand AuB=ABC=
B u C. By 9.1.3, A/N and B/N would be G/N-isomorphic, which contradicts our
assumption (c). Thus (c) implies (a).
Finally, it is well-known that the socle of a group is a direct product of minimal
normal subgroups and that any two such decompositions are G-isomorphic (see
Robinson [1982], pp. 80-84). So (b) and (d) are equivalent.
9.1.7 Remark. There are a number of recent results on groups with distributive
lattice of normal subgroups; we can only mention the most interesting of these. For
the proofs and for further results we refer the reader to the literature cited.
(a) Let G be a finite group. Pazderski [1987] proves that if 91(G) is distributive,
then every factor group of G has a faithful irreducible character. Longobardi and
Maj [1986a] show that the converse is true for groups with nilpotent commutator
subgroup, but does not hold in general. Their example has supersoluble commuta-
tor subgroup.
(b) Again Longobardi and Maj [1986a] show that there are finite soluble groups
of arbitrarily large derived length with distributive lattice of normal subgroups.
(c) (Pazderski [1987]) If G is a finite soluble group with 91(G) distributive, then
Aut G is soluble of derived length at most 2k where k is the socle length of G.
(d) (Maj [1984]) The following properties of an infinite supersoluble group G are
equivalent.
(i) 91(G) is distributive.

(ii) Every finite factor group of G has distributive lattice of normal subgroups.
(iii) G = G' (x) where G' is finite of odd order, 92(G/Z(G)) is distributive, and
Z(G/N) is cyclic for every N a G.
(e) Longobardi and Maj [1986b] determine the neutral elements in the lattice of
normal subgroups of a finite supersoluble group and prove that if G is an infinite
supersoluble group, then N is neutral in 9t(G) if and only if NT/T is neutral in
9t(G/T) for every finite factor group G/T of G.
We mention a result of a different character: every finite distributive lattice is

isomorphic to the lattice of normal subgroups of a wreath product of finite non-
abelian simple groups (Silcock [1977]) and of a finite soluble group (Palfy [1986]).
Straightforward applications of Zorn's Lemma yield the following result.
9.1.8 Theorem. Let G be a group. Then 91(G) is complemented if and only if G is a

direct product of simple groups.
Proof. If G = Dr G, with simple groups G,1 and N a G, Zorn's Lemma implies

AEn
that there exists K c 91(G) maximal with the property that N n K = 1. If NK G,
there would exist i e A such that Gz $ NK. Since G, is simple, it would follow that
NK n G, = 1 and hence NKG, = N x K x G,1. So KG, :!g G and N n KG = 1,
contradicting the maximality of K. Thus NK = G and K is a complement to N in
92(G).
Conversely, suppose that 92(G) is complemented and G 0 1. Then we claim that
G contains a simple normal subgroup. Indeed, if 1 g e G, Zorn's Lemma implies
that there exists M E 92(G) maximal with the property that g M. Thus M G; let
N be a complement to M in 92(G). Then G = N x M and if N were not simple, there
would exist N1 c 92(G) such that 1 < N, < N. Let K be a complement to N, in 91(G)
and let N2=NnK.Then N= NnN1K=N,(NnK)=N1N2so that N2is acom-
plement to N1 in N. Thus G = N1 x N2 x M and the maximality of M implies that
g c N1M n N2M = M, a contradiction. Thus N is simple. Now Zorn's Lemma im-
plies that there exists a maximal direct product S of simple normal subgroups of G.
If S 0 G, then G = S x T for some T 1 and, since 91(T) must be complemented,
there exists a simple normal subgroup N of T, as we have shown. But this contra-
dicts the maximality of S. Thus S = G, as desired.
Isomorphisms between lattices of normal subgroups
In the remainder of this section we study isomorphisms and dualities between the
lattices of normal subgroups of two groups G and G. As usual, we want to show that
G and G must be to some extent similar. The examples in 9.1.1 show that this can
only be done under rather restrictive assumptions on G and G. We shall study the
situation where one of the two groups is abelian or nilpotent. First of all we present
some simple general properties.
9.1.9 Lemma. Let cp: 91(G) 91(G) be an isomorphism.

(a) If A a G, then 91(G/A) f-- 91(G/A4').
(b) If A and B are G-isomorphic normal subgroups of G such that A n B = 1, then
A" and B1* are 6-isomorphic and abelian.
(c) If NA g G (i! E A) such that N = (NAIL e A> = Dr NA, then N`P = Dr N,"'. If, in
AEA AEA
addition, all the NA are G-isomorphic and IAI >_ 2, then N',' is abelian.
Proof. (a) This is obvious since 91(G/A) fit [G/A]N.

(b) By (a) of 9.1.3 there exists a normal subgroup C of G which is a diagonal in
A x B. Then C has the same property in Ac' x B` and now (b) of 9.1.3 yields that
Ac' and B4' are G-isomorphic and abelian.
(c) Since N = Dr NA, we have that 1 = 1` _ (NA n (N, j 9 e A))` _
AEA
Nx n <N''0 I 0 t e A> and hence N4' = Dr N, ,P. If NA and N are G-isomorphic and
AEA
i 96 , then by (b), N' and N, are abelian. Thus Nc is abelian if IAI >_ 2.
It follows immediately from 9.1.9 that if G is a torsion-free abelian group of rank

ro(G) > 2, then G is abelian. So cp is a projectivity from G to G and by 2.6.10, G G.
We want to show that this result holds for a larger class of abelian groups.
Images of abelian groups
We start with torsion groups; clearly, by 9.1.5, we may restrict our attention to
p-groups. By 9.1.1, we have to assume that G is not cyclic and the crucial case is
handled in the following lemma.
9.1.10 Lemma. Let G = R x S be abelian, R Co., (1 < n < oo) and B < S such that
CBI = p. If (p: 91(G) - 91(G) is an isomorphism, then G = R` x S` and R" R.
Proof. Clearly G = R` x S`; so we have to show that R` R. Let A be the sub-

group of order p of R. Then A and B are G-isomorphic; hence by 9.1.9, A" and B`
are G-isomorphic and 9.1.2 (b) shows that A` x B` < Z(G). It follows that
L(A4' x B`) _ [A` x B`/l], ^- [A x B/1]N = L(A x B)
and hence A` x Bc is elementary abelian of order p2. Thus

(2) IA4I = p and A" < Z(G).
It suffices to show that R` is abelian. Indeed, since G = R` x Sc, it will then follow
that L(R`) = [R4'/l]N [R/1], = L(R) is a chain of length n. And since I AÌ = p,
Exercise 1.2.2 (or Theorem 1.2.3) will imply that R4 Cp. R, as desired.
For n c- N, we prove the lemma by induction on n. The induction assumption
applied to G/A = R/A x SA/A yields that R`/A` is cyclic of order pn-'. Since
Ac' < Z(R4'), it follows that R` is abelian.
So let n = x and A. be the subgroup of order p' of R. Then (2) applied to the
isomorphism from 91(G/A;) to 92(G/A;) induced by co yields that Ai1/A? < Z(G/A;)
and I AT 1 /A; I = p. Thus
(3) IA" p' for allkEN.
Now suppose, for a contradiction, that Z(R) < Rw. Since Z(RIO) a G, it follows that
Z(R`) = A? for some j e N. Choose a e Aj+1 \A? and define the map a: R` -+ R` by
x = [x, a] where x e RIP. Since AJ+1/A? < Z(G/Ar), we have x = [x, a] E A _
Z(R11) and hence by (1) of 1.5, (xy) = [xy, a] _ [x, a] [y, a] = xy for all x, y c- R.
Thus a is a homomorphism from R into Z(R"); let K be its kernel. Then the
homomorphism theorem implies that R`/K - (R") < A? is finite. Since a 0 Z(R`),
we have (R`0)6 0 1 and hence K < R". Every proper normal subgroup of R is
normal in G and therefore of the form Ak for some k e N. By (3), K is finite and hence
R' is finite. But this is impossible since R has an infinite chain of subgroups A;.
Thus R4' is abelian, as desired.
9.1.11 Theorem (Curzio [1965]). Let G be an abelian p-group which is not locally
cyclic. If cp: 91(G) 91(G) is an isomorphism, then G is abelian (and isomorphic to G).
Proof. We use induction on n to show that the groups S2n(G)` are abelian for all
n e N. Since G = U S2n(G), it follows that G = U S2n(G)" is abelian. So cp is a
MEN MEN
projectivity from G to G and by 2.6.8, G ^- G.
By assumption, S21(G) is not cyclic and hence 9.1.9(c) yields that S21(G)` is abe-
lian. Now suppose that n > 2 and that Qn_1(G)` is abelian. It is well-known (see
Robinson [1982], p. 105) that S2n(G) is a direct product of cyclic groups and hence
QM(G) = Rn x S. where R. is a direct product of k cyclic groups of order p"
(0< k< x) and S. < S2n_1(G). Then S,"< SZn_1(G)` is abelian and n,,(G)` = R x S.".
If k > 2, then 9.1.9(c) implies that R1 is abelian; therefore so is S2n(G)`. If k = 0,
we are done. So suppose that k = 1. Then G/S2n_1(G) has a unique subgroup of order
p and hence is isomorphic to C,, (1 < m < x). If m < x, then G = Stn+rn_1(G) =
R x S where R ^- Cp"+,,-, and 1 S < S2n_1(G). Again S < S2n_1(G)11 is abelian and
by 9.1.10, RIO R; thus G = R4' x S( is abelian. So, finally, assume that m = x.
Then G/S2n_1(G) C, . and the map r: G -+ G defined by x` = x""-' is an endomor-
phism satisfying KerT = S2n_1(G), and hence GT G/KerT C<. Since a divisible
subgroup of an abelian group is a direct factor (see Robinson [1982], p. 93), it
follows that G = G` x T where 1 -A T< S2n_1(G). Again T`0 < S2n_1(G)` is abelian
and by 9.1.10, (Gt)r and G = (GT)` x T' are abelian.
We can now also prove the desired result for abelian groups of torsion-free rank
at least 2.
9.1.12 Theorem (Brandl [1986]). Let G be an abelian group which contains two ele-
ments a and b of infinite order such that <a> n = 1. If cp: 91(G) -+ 91(G) is an
isomorphism, then 6 is abelian (and isomorphic to G).
Proof. Let ro(G) be the torsion-free rank of G. By assumption, ro(G) >_ 2 and the
definition of ro(G) (or Zorn's Lemma) implies that there exists a free abelian group
F < G of rank ro(F) = ro(G) such that G/F is a torsion group. For p e P, let Sr/F be
the p'-component of G/F. If F = {xPIx e F}, then G/FP is also a torsion group; let
TP/FP be the p'-component of G/FP. Since F/FP is a p-group and TP/FP a p'-group,
F n TP = FP. So TPF/F TP/FP is a p'-group and hence TP < SP. Since FTP/TP
-F/FP and ro(F) > 2, we see that G/TP is a p-group which is not locally cyclic. By
9.1.11, G/ p` is abelian and hence G' < p" < S. Now F = n S, and it follows that
G'<ns;=(nsv)w=Fm.
v
PEP
PEP PEP
With F, every F" _ {x"jx e F} (n c N) is free abelian of rank ro(G) and G/F" is a
torsion group. So we may apply the above result with F" in place of F and obtain
that G' < (F")". Thus G' < n (F")' = (n F")' = 1 and G is abelian. Now (p is a
nEN
projectivity from G to G andn"
by 2.6.10, G ^- G.
As an application of 9.1.12, we get the following result for arbitrary groups G

and G.
9.1.13 Corollary. Let cp: 91(G) - 91(G) be an isomorphism. If ro(G/G') >_ 2, then
G/G' G/G' and (G')m = G'.
Proof. Since q induces an isomorphism from 9t(G/G') onto 9.1.12 im-

plies that G/G' ^- G/(G')`. In particular, G' < (G')' and ro(G/G') >_ 2. So we may
apply 9.1.12 to the isomorphism induced by cp-1 in 91(G/G') and obtain that
G/(G')4'-' is abelian. Thus G'< (G')"' and hence (G')' < G'. It follows that (G')' = G',
as desired.
The case ro(G) = 1 has not been settled yet. For example, it is not known whether
a group whose lattice of normal subgroups is isomorphic to that of an infinite cyclic
group is abelian (and hence infinite cyclic). Under the additional assumption that G
is soluble, however, we get the desired result.
9.1.14 Theorem (Curzio [1965]). Let G_be abelian of torsion free rank ro(G) = 1. If
cp: 9t(G) - 9t(G) is an isomorphism and G is soluble, then G is abelian and ro(G) = 1.
Proof. Assume first that G is torsion-free. Then it is well-known (see Robinson

[1982], p. 112) that G is isomorphic to a subgroup of (0, +) and hence is countable;
it follows that there exist infinite cyclic groups N such that N, < N2 < and G =
X
U N. Let N = <x>. Since N,1' is soluble, there exists a characteristic abelian sub-
group A of NNP such that A 1. Then A a_ G and A"' = (x") for some n E
For every prime p not dividing n, Ni = <x") u <x"); hence N`P = A u <x">' and
NT/(xP)m A/A n <x"> is abelian. Thus (Nil)' < n (x">' _ (n <x")), = 1
PYR Pk"
and hence Ni'D is abelian. Since G = U Nil' and N1 < NN < , it follows that G is
i=1
abelian. Then q is a projectivity from G to 6 and therefore ro(G) = ro(G) = 1.
Now suppose that G is an arbitrary abelian group with ro(G) = 1 and let T =
T(G) be the torsion subgroup of G. If X e G\T, then o(x) = oe and hence (x> n T = 1.
It follows that (T x <x))O = T x <x>', that is, T' is centralized by <x>". Since
G = U <x)', the group G is generated by these <x> and hence T < Z(6). By the
xeG T
case already settled, G/T" is torsion-free abelian of rank 1. Therefore if x, y e G,
<x, y>/<x, y> n T <x, y> T/T is cyclic and, since <x, y> n T< Z(6), it follows that
<x, y> is abelian. Thus G is abelian, cp is a projectivity from G to G, and ro(G) =
ro(G) = 1.
Images of nilpotent groups
We now study the situation when G is a finite nilpotent group. Example 9.1.1(d)
shows that here we must assume not only that the Sylow subgroups of G are not
cyclic but also that the image group G is soluble. Then, of course, we can only hope
to prove that G is nilpotent and not that G G. However, the following example
shows that even this is not possible.
9.1.15 Example. Let N = <x, y> be elementary abelian of order 9, and D the sub-
group of Aut N generated by the automorphisms a and /3 of N defined by x = y,
y'=xandxQ=x-1,yv=y. Then o(a)=o($)=2and o(a/J)=4since x'#=yand
y''# = x-'. Thus D is a dihedral group of order 8 and we consider the semidirect
product G = ND. Then N is the unique minimal normal subgroup of G and G/N D.
The dihedral group G of order 16 has a unique minimal normal subgroup Z(G)
of order 2 with factor group G/Z(G) D. It follows that 91(G) - R(G), but G is not
nilpotent.
In the above example, G' = NZ(D) is supersoluble and c(G) = 3. However, under
slightly stronger assumptions, we can prove the desired result. For this we need a
simple lemma.
9.1.16 Lemma. Let G be a finite p-group of class 2. If G has only one minimal normal
subgroup N, then GIN has at least 2 minimal normal subgroups.
Proof. Since G is not abelian, G/Z(G) is not cyclic; so there exist two different
minimal subgroups X/Z(G) and Y/Z(G) of G/Z(G). Let X/Z(G) = <xZ(G)> and
g e G. Then x e Z(G) and 1 = [x", g] = [x, g]P since G' < Z(G). Therefore [x, g] e N,
the unique minimal subgroup of Z(G), and, since this holds for all g e G, we
see that xN e Z(G/N). Thus X/N = <x, Z(G)>/N < Z(G/N) and, similarly,
YIN < Z(G/N). So Z(G/N) is not cyclic since it contains two different subgroups of
the same order. It follows that G/N has at least 2 minimal normal subgroups.
9.1.17 Theorem (Heineken [1965]). Let G and G be finite groups such that
91(G) 91(G) and assume that G is nilpotent with all its nontrivial Sylow subgroups
noncyclic. If
(a) G' is nilpotent or

(b) c(G) < 2 and G is soluble,
then G is nilpotent and IGI = I G!.
Proof. We use induction on IGI. Let cp: 91(G) 91(G) be an isomorphism. Since G
is nilpotent, G = Gl x x G, with nontrivial Sylow subgroups G; and by 9.1.9,
G = G4' x ... x G;. Clearly, all the G; and G; satisfy the assumptions of the theorem
and therefore we may assume that G is a p-group.
If G is abelian, then by 9.1.11, G is isomorphic to G and we are done. So let G' 0 1
and N be a minimal normal subgroup of G. Then N < Z(G) and, since G is not
abelian, G/N is not cyclic. By induction,
(4) G/N'* is a p-group which is not cyclic
since GIN is not cyclic. Suppose, for a contradiction, that G is not a p-group. Then
since G is soluble,
(5) N'' is an elementary abelian q-group for some prime q p.
If M were a minimal normal subgroup of G such that M 0 N, then by (4) 6/M", and
hence also N9M"/M9 N`, would be a p-group, a contradiction. Thus
(6) N is the unique minimal normal subgroup of G.
By Schur's Lemma, every irreducible subgroup of GL(m, q) has cyclic centre and
hence
(7) Z(G/CG(N`)) is cyclic.
We show that this implies that N" < CU(N"). Indeed, if (b) holds, then by 9.1.16, G/N
has two different minimal normal subgroups. Then G/N' has the same property and,
since it is a p-group, this implies that its centre is not cyclic. By (7), N1* QjN`).
Now suppose that (a) holds. Then we claim that G' < ;(N1*). Indeed, this is clear if
N" n G' = 1; and if N10 n G' 1, then N4 r) Z(G') : 1 by a well-known property of
the nilpotent group G'. Since N' is a minimal normal subgroup of G, it follows that
N' < Z(G'). Thus G' < QJNI'); hence G/CU(N") is abelian and therefore cyclic, by
(7). Since GIN" is not cyclic, N 0 Q(N`).
Thus in both cases, N'' < CU(N`) and hence by (4) and (5), ;(N9') = N x P for
some nontrivial p-group P. Since P is a characteristic subgroup of Ci;(N'0) g G, it
follows that P 9 G and hence P"-' a G, contrary to (6). This contradiction shows
that G is a p-group and then IGI = p" = IGI where n is the length of 91(G).
Theorem_ 9.1.17(a) had been proved by Curzio [1962] under the stronger assump-
tion that G is supersoluble. If c(G) = 2 in 9.1.17, however, even the assumption that
G is soluble is rather strong. Using 9.1.16, it is not difficult to show that Example
9.1.1(d) is "worst possible" in this situation; that is, if G is a p-group of class 2 and
is not a p-group, then G has a unique minimal normal subgroup N'' and I G1N4'I =
IG/NI (see Exercise 11). Much deeper is the result of Longobardi and Maj [1987]
that if G and G are finite p-groups with 91(G) - 91(G) and c(G) = 2, then c(G) < 3.
An example in which c(G) = 3 is given in Exercise 12.
9.1.18 Remark. Heineken's theorem has been generalized to many classes of infinite
groups. We mention some of these results; for the proofs and for further results in
this direction we refer the reader to the literature cited. So let G and G be groups
such that 91(G) 91(G) and assume that G is not locally cyclic.
(a) (Franchetta and Tuccillo [1976]) Let G be a hypercentral p-group with the
following property.
(8) If G' 0 1, there exists N a G such that N < G' and I G'/NI = p.
If G' is hypercentral, then G is a hypercentral p-group such that IGI = IGI
The additional assumption (8), in fact, is needed; indeed, if G = N and G =
M<v> with N C2x, M C,, (p > 2), u and v involutions inverting N and M,
respectively, then G and G have isomorphic lattices of normal subgroups. Here G is
a hypercentral 2-group and G' = N has no subgroup of index 2. _
(b) (de Giovanni and Franciosi [1985]) If G is a nilpotent p-group and G' is
hypercentral, then G is a hypercentral p-group such that IGI = IGI. _
(c) (Longobardi and Maj [1987]) If G is a nilpotent p-group of class 2 and G is
soluble, then G is a nilpotent p-group of class at most 3.
_ (d) (de Giovanni and Franciosi [1985]) Let G be a torsion-free nilpotent group. If
G is hypercyclic or if G is finitely generated and G' hypercentral, then G is torsion-
free nilpotent and c(G) = c(G).
(e) (Brandl [1986]) If G is a finitely generated torsion-free nilpotent group of class
2, then so is G.
Dualities
Results similar to those for isomorphisms hold for dualities between lattices of
normal subgroups. Again we consider only finite nilpotent groups G, but now we
assume that G is supersoluble; recall that then (see Robinson [1982], pp. 145-146)
(9) G has nilpotent commutator subgroup and normal subgroups of order r and
of index s where r is the largest and s the smallest prime dividing IGI.
9.1.19 Lemma. Let G be a noncyclic finite p-group, G a finite supersoluble group and
6: 91(G) -+ 91(G) a duality.
(a) If Z(G) is not cyclic, IGI =IGI
(b) If Z(G) is cyclic, then G' is a p-group and E;/G' a cyclic q-group, p > q E P.
Proof. Since G is not cyclic, G/D(G) is elementary abelian of order p" where n >_ 2.
So if M = Q>(G)a, then IM/1]N is dual and hence also isomorphic to [G/(D(G)]N
L(G/O(G)). By 9.1.4, M_= M, x x M. with G-isomorphic minimal normal sub-
groups M. of G. Since G is supersoluble, I M; I = r for some prime r and an element
g e G induces the same power in every M,. Thus every subgroup of M is normal in
G and so [M/1]N = L(M). It follows that r = p and I M I = p"
(a) Now if Z(G) is not cyclic, then the product S of all the minimal normal sub-
groups of G is an elementary abelian central subgroup of order p' of G where m >_ 2.
Therefore [G/S6]N [S/1]N = L(S) and by 9.1.4, as above, G/S' is elementary abelian
of order p'. Every maximal normal subgroup of G contains Sb and therefore has
index p in G, every minimal normal subgroup of G is contained in M and therefore
has order p. By (9), G is a p-group and then IGI = p' = IGI where k is the length
of 91(G).
(b) Since Z(G) is cyclic, G has a unique minimal normal subgroup N and Na is the
unique maximal normal subgroup of G. Thus 6/6' is an abelian group with only one
maximal subgroup and hence is a cyclic q-group for some prime q. By (9), G' is
nilpotent and hence is a p-group since every minimal normal subgroup of G has
order p. If p = q, then G is cyclic since it has only one maximal normal subgroup.
But M is elementary abelian of order p", n > 2, a contradiction. Thus p 0 q and then
by (9), p > q.
Note that if G is a nonabelian group of order p3 and G a P-group of order pzq,
then 91(G) is dual to 91(G). Thus case (b) in Lemma 9.1.19 actually occurs.
9.1.20 Theorem (Curzio [1962]). Let G be a finite nilpotent group all of whose non-
trivial Sylow subgroups have noncyclic centre. If G is_a finite supersoluble group and
6: 91(G) -+ 91(G) is a duality, then G is nilpotent and IGI = IGI.
Proof. Since G is nilpotent, G = G, x x G, with nontrivial Sylow subgroups G.

Then, as in 8.1.8, G = G; x x G; where G; = U G. So b induces a duality from
#i
91(G/G;) 91(G;) onto 91(G) and by (a) of 9.1.19, I GbI = I G;I. Thus G is nilpotent and
IGI = IGI.
Theorem 9.1.20 has also been generalized to infinite groups; see Franciosi [1981]
and de Giovanni and Franciosi [1986].
Exercises
1. (Curzio [1964b]) (a) Let G be an infinite supersoluble group. If 91(G) is directly

decomposable, show that G = H x K where H is infinite and K is a finite
group of odd order.
(b) Construct an infinite supersoluble group for which 91(G) is directly decom-
posable. (Note that by 1.6.5 and (a), L(G) cannot be directly decomposable.)
2. Let G be a finite group.
(a) (Curzio [1957b]) If any two normal subgroups of G have different order,
show that 91(G) is distributive.
(b) Give an example of a group G with 91(G) distributive having two normal
subgroups of the same order.
3. (Curzio [1964b]) Let G be a supersoluble group. Show that 92(G) is a chain if
and only if G is either a cyclic p-group or a group of order p"q' with cyclic Sylow
subgroups and trivial centre (p and q primes, p : q).
4. (Longobardi and Maj [1986a]) Let G be a finite group and A, B 9 G such that
(JAI, IBI) = 1. If 91(G/A) and %(G/B) are distributive, show that 92(G) is distribu-
tive.
5. (Longobardi and Maj [1986a]) Let G = P<x> be a finite supersoluble group, P

a normal Sylow p-subgroup and P n <x> = 1. Show that 91(G) is distributive if
and only if <a>" = " for all a, b e P for which there exists r e 77 such that
ax= a' andbx=b'.
6. (Maj [1984]) If G is an infinite supersoluble group, show that 91(G) is distribu-
tive if and only if 91(GIN) is distributive for every finite factor group GIN of G.
(Hint: First show that this condition implies that G = G' <x> where G' is finite of
odd order.)
7. Show that 91(G) is a Boolean algebra (that is, it is distributive and comple-
mented) if and only if G is a direct product of simple groups such that no two
abelian factors are isomorphic.
8. (Zitarosa [1952]) If G is a finite nilpotent group, show that N is a neutral
element in 91(G) if and only if N is the unique normal subgroup of its order in G.
9. (Longobardi and Maj [1986b]) Let G be a finite group with normal Sylow
p-subgroup P. Show that P is a neutral element of 91(G) and that N e 91(G) is
neutral in 91(G) if and only if N n P and NP/P are neutral elements in 92(G) and
91(G/P), respectively.
10. (Longobardi and Maj [1986b]) If G is an infinite supersoluble group and N a
neutral element in 9I(G), show that either N or GIN is finite.
It. (Brandl [1986]) Let G and G be finite groups, G a p-group of class 2 and suppose
that 91(G) 91(G). _
(a) If Z(G) is not cyclic, show that IGI = IGI.
(b) If Z(G) is cyclic and N is the (unique) minimal normal subgroup of G, show
that I G/NIQ I = I G/N I.
12. (Heineken [1965]) Let p > 2, G = <x,y,zIx"2 = yZ = z"2 = EX, Z] = [y,z] = 1,
[x, y] = z> and let G be the group with the same defining relations except that
[x, z] = 1 is replaced by [x, z] = z. Show that 92(G) ^- 91(G), c(G) = 2 and
c(G) = 3.
9.2 Lattices of subnormal subgroups

We have seen in 1.1 that the set R(G) of all composition subgroups of a group G is
a sublattice of L(G) and that if G has a composition series, the composition sub-
groups coincide with the subnormal subgroups of G. In this section we are going to
study the lattice R(G), but mainly for finite groups. Since in this case the term
"subnormal subgroup" is more common, we shall usually speak of the lattice of
subnormal subgroups of G. Some of the results also hold in the more general situa-
tion where G has a composition series, but in most cases it is not known what
happens for arbitrary groups.
General properties of subnormal subgroups
Recall that S :9!9 G if and only if there exist subgroups S; of G (i = 0, ... , n) such that
(1) S=So9S1 g...aS=G;
9.2 Lattices of subnormal subgroups 499
the smallest integer n for which there exists such a chain (1) is called the defect of S
in G. If H<G and (1) holds, then
S n H :g:9 H. In particular, S !9:9 H if S g g G and S< H< G. It follows
that
(2) S :!5i H if S, H E R(G) and H covers S in R(G).
It is obvious that Sag H :9!9 G implies S g g G and that if N g G and N< S< G,
then S :9:9 G if and only if S/N :9!9 GIN. So we have the following basic property
of the lattice of subnormal subgroups of a group G with a composition series.
(3) If N < H < G, H !9:9 G and N a H, then [H/N]K =- R(H/N).
Here, for arbitrary S, T ER(G) such that T < S, we write
[S/T]K = {X ga GET < X < S}
for the interval in R(G).

Now let G be finite, it a set of primes and S satisfy (1). Then 0"(S;) is a char-
acteristic subgroup of Si g Si,, and hence a normal 7r-subgroup of Si,,. Thus
0.(S;)< On(Si+1) and so, by induction,
(4) 0.(S) :!g On(G).
In particular, S < O"(G) if S is a 7t-subgroup of G. In just the same way we see that
if S is soluble, then S < Ga, the soluble radical of G. It follows that SG < Ga and so
we have:
(5) If S is a soluble subnormal subgroup of G, then SG is soluble.

Dually, suppose that N a G and GIN is a rr-group. Then O"(G) < N and N/O"(G) is
a rr-group; so O"(N) <_ O"(G). On the other hand, O"(N) is a characteristic subgroup
of N a G and hence a normal subgroup of G with factor group a rr-group. Thus
O"(G) < 0"(N) and then 0"(N) = O"(G). This generalizes to a subnormal subgroup
S whose index in G is a rr-number, that is, is divisible only by primes in it.
(6) If S a g G and I G: SI is a rr-number, then 0"(S) = O"(G).
Indeed, for the S. in (1), O"(S) = 0"(S,) = = O"(S") = O"(G). Clearly, (4) implies
the following property which we, in fact, proved in 6.2.15 for arbitrary groups G.
(7) If S is a subnormal 7r-subgroup of G, then SG is a n-group.
It follows that
(8) [S, T] = 1 if S and T are coprime subnormal subgroups of G.
Indeed, [S, T] < S' n TG = 1 since SG is a it-group and TG a ir'-group for a suitable
set it of primes. Less trivial is the following result of Wielandt.
(9) Let S, T :9:9 G such that S n T = 1. If S is a nonabelian simple group, then
[S,T]=1.
Proof. Suppose that (9) is wrong and choose a counterexample S, T for which the
defect d of S in J = <S, T> is minimal; let S = So a a Sd = J. If d < 1, then S a J
and [S, T] g S. Since [S, T] 0 1 and S is simple, it follows that S = [S, T], so
that S < T' and V = J. Therefore T = J by subnormality of T, and this implies
S = S n T = 1, a contradiction. Thus d > 2 so that S S' for some t E T. Since
S n S' !9!9 S and S is simple, S n S' = 1. Now S` < Sd_1 and the minimality of d
yields [S, S'] = 1. So for any x, y e S, by (1) of 1.5,
I = [x, Y'] = [x,Y[Y, t]] = [x, [y, t]] [x, y][r.r[;
since [S, T] a J, it follows that [x, y] e [S, T]. Thus S' < [S, T]; but S = S' since S
is nonabelian simple and so S < [S, T]. As before this leads to T' = J and the
contradiction S = 1.
Again let S be a nonabelian simple subnormal subgroup of G. By (9), any two

different conjugates of S centralize each other and hence S" g SG = <S91g e G> for
all x e G. By Zorn's Lemma, SG is the direct product of some of these S". Thus we
have shown:
(10) If S !9!9 G and S is a nonabelian simple group, then SG is a direct product of
conjugates of S.
It is easy to see that SG is also a minimal normal subgroup of G. Note that neither
this nor any of properties (9) and (10) in general holds if IS! is a prime; this is shown
by any nonnormal subgroup S of order p of a finite p-group G. We discuss some
further examples.
9.2.1 Examples. Let G be a finite group.

(a) 1(G) is a chain of length one if and only if G is simple. (Note that for p e P,
R(Cp< x Cp) is also a chain of length 1.)
(b) If G is nilpotent, every subgroup of G is subnormal and hence R(G) = L(G). In
particular, R(Cph) is a chain of length n for every prime p and n E N.
(c) The unique maximal normal subgroup of S4 is A4 and that of A4 is V4. So we
get the lattices S1(G) in Figure 25 for G = Q8, A4, and S4. Now let G = Q8C3 be the
semidirect product of Q8 by a subgroup of order 3 of its automorphism group. This
R(08) R(A4) R(S,) R(Q8C3)
Figure 25
C3 permutes transitively the subgroups of order 4 of Q8 and hence G has no normal

subgroup of index 2. Thus Q8 is the unique maximal normal subgroup of G and
R(G) consists of G and the subgroups of Q8.
(d) Finally, as in 9.1.1 we see that for 3 < n 4 and every odd prime power q > 5,
R(S.) R(SL(2, q)) is a chain of length 2; furthermore, for every odd prime p 5,
R(PFL(2, p2)) R(Aut A6) R(Q8) = L(Q8).
Groups with special lattices of subnormal subgroups
We now study groups whose lattices of composition subgroups have certain special
properties. First we use 1.6.1 to characterize those groups G with composition series
for which R(G) is directly decomposable; note the similarity to Theorem 9.1.5.
9.2.2 Theorem (Tamaschke [1961]). Let G be a group with a composition series.

Then R(G) is directly decomposable if and only if G = H x K where H K and
1
no abelian composition factor of H is isomorphic to a composition factor of K.
Proof. Suppose first that G = H x K has this property. We claim that for every
UeR(G),
(11) U=(UnH)x(UnK).
Indeed, let U = U a Ui_1 a a Uo = G and suppose, for a contradiction, that
(11) does not hold for U. Since (11) is trivially satisfied for Uo = G, there exists
a smallest integer k such that (11) does not hold for Uk. We may suppose that U =
Uk so that U a U1i_1 = S x T where S = Uk_1 n H and T = U1i_1 n K. By 1.6.1,
UT n S/U n S and US n T/U n T are nontrivial isomorphic factors in S < H and
T< K, respectively. Since U a S x T, we have [UT n S, S] < [UT, S] < U n S, so
UT n S/U n S is abelian, as a central factor in S. Since U and S x T are subnormal
subgroups of G, it follows that UT n S:!9!9 H and US n T a a K. Thus a composi-
tion factor of UT n S/U n S is an abelian composition factor of H which is iso-
morphic to a composition factor of K, a contradiction. This proves (11). Now as
in the proof of 9.1.5, cp: R(G) -+ R(H) x R(K) defined by U` = (U n H, U n K) for
U e R(G) is an isomorphism.
Suppose conversely that R(G) = L1 x L2 where the L. are nontrivial lattices. If
01, , and 02, 12 are least and greatest elements of L1 and L2, respectively, then
H = (11, 02) and K = (01, I2) are subnormal subgroups of G such that H n K =
(01, 02) = 1 and H u K = (11,12) = G. Since H is the unique complement of K
in R(G), every (inner) automorphism of G fixing K also fixes H. It follows that
K < NG(H) and so H a G. Similarly, K g G and hence G = H x K. If X/Y and SIT
were composition factors of the same prime order p in H and K, respectively, then
as in the proof of Theorem 9.1.5, (X x S)/(Y x T) would be an elementary abelian
factor of order p2 in G and, by (3), [(X x S)/(Y x T)]K !-- Mp+1, a contradiction.
Thus H and K have no isomorphic abelian composition factors.
Next we study finite groups with modular and distributive lattices of subnormal
subgroups. Here we have two similar results.
9.2.3 Theorem (Zappa [1956b]). The following properties of the finite group G are
equivalent.
(a) R(G) is modular.
(b) If T :g Sag G and SIT is a p-group, p a prime, then L(S/T) is modular.
(c) If T :g S as G and IS/TI = p3, p a prime, then L(S/T) is modular.
Proof. If R(G) is modular and T!9 S :9!9 G such that SIT is a p-group, then by (3),
L(S/T) = R(SIT) [SIT]K'S modular. Thus (a) implies (b), while it is trivial that (b)
implies (c).
Now suppose that G satisfies (c). By 2.1.8, R(G) is lower semimodular. We show
that R(G) is also upper semimodular; then by 2.1.10, R(G) is modular and (c) implies
(a). For this, since R(G) is finite, it suffices to show that if H, K E R(G) such that H
and K cover H n K, then H u K covers H (see Gratzer [1978], p. 173). By (2),
H n K a H u K and by (3), we may assume that G = H u K and H n K = 1. Then
H and K are minimal subnormal subgroups of G, hence simple groups, and we claim
that HK = KH. Indeed, this follows from (9) if H or K is nonabelian, and from (8) if
H I and I K I are different primes. And if I H I_ I K I = p e P, then by (4), H u K is a
p-group. Our assumption implies that every section of order p3 of H U K has modu-
lar subgroup lattice. By 2.3.3, H u K is an M-group and by 2.3.2, HK = KH, as
desired. Now if X E R(G) such that H< X < HK, then X = H(X n K) and, since K
is simple, X n K = I or X n K = K. Thus X = H or X = HK and so HK covers H
in R(G).
9.2.4 Theorem (Zacher [1957]). The following properties of the finite group G are
equivalent.
(a) R(G) is distributive.
(b) If T g S 99 G and S/T is a p-group, p a prime, then SIT is cyclic.
(c) If T :Q S:9 -_9 G and IS/TI = p2, p a prime, then SIT is cyclic.
Proof. If R(G) is distributive and T:9 S 99 G such that SIT is a p-group, then by
(3), L(S/T) = R(SIT) [S/T]K is distributive and hence S/T is cyclic by 1.2.4. Thus
(a) implies (b) and again (b) clearly implies (c).
Now suppose that G satisfies (c). If K a H a a G such that I H/K I = p3, then every
subgroup of order p2 of H/K is cyclic and hence, by 2.3.3, L(H/K) is modular; by
9.2.3, R(G) is modular. Suppose, for a contradiction, that R(G) is not distributive.
Then since R(G) is finite, there exists a 5-element sublattice {A, B, C, N, M} of R(G)
such that AnB=AnC=BnC=N,AuB=AuC=BuC=M andA,B,C
all cover N (see Birkhoff [1948], p. 134). Then M covers A, B, C and hence by
(2), A, B, C, and N are normal subgroups of M. Thus M/N = A/N x B/N =
A/N x C/N = B/N x C/N with simple groups A/N, B/N, C/N. By 9.1.3 applied to
M/N, A/N B/N is abelian and hence M/N is elementary abelian of order p2,
contradicting our assumption. Thus R(G) is distributive and (c) implies (a).
9.2.5 Corollary (Zappa [1956a]). Let G be a finite soluble group. Then R(G) is dis-
tributive if and only if every Sylow subgroup of G is cyclic.
Proof. If R(G) is distributive, then by 9.2.4, every chief factor of G is cyclic, that is, G
is supersoluble. So G has a Sylow tower (see Robinson [1982], p. 145) and again
9.2.4 implies that every Sylow subgroup of G is cyclic. Conversely, any group with
cyclic Sylow subgroups clearly satisfies (b) of 9.2.4.
Another characterization of finite groups with distributive lattice of subnormal

subgroups is given in Exercise 2. Using some deeper properties of the permutizer
PH(K) = (X IX < H, XK = KX> of two subnormal subgroups H and K, it is possi-
ble to generalize 9.2.3 and 9.2.4 to infinite groups. We give this result without proof.
9.2.6 Theorem (Napolitani [1970]). Let G be a group and SN(G) the partially or-
dered set of all subnormal subgroups of G.
(a) SN(G) is a modular sublattice of L(G) if and only if for all S, T< G such that
T :!g Sag G and IS/TI = p3, p a prime, L(S/T) is modular.
(b) SN(G) is a distributive sublattice of L(G) if and only if for all S, T< G such that
T :g Sag G and IS/TI = p2, p a prime, S/T is cyclic.
Our next result together with Theorem 9.1.8 shows that for a finite group, R(G) is
complemented if and only if 91(G) is complemented; and in this case, R(G) = 91(G).
9.2.7 Theorem (Curzio [1958]). The following properties of the finite group G are
equivalent.
(a) R(G) is complemented.
(b) Every minimal normal subgroup of G is a direct factor of G.
(c) G is a direct product of simple groups.
(d) R(G) is relatively complemented.
Proof. Suppose first that R(G) is complemented and let N be a minimal normal
subgroup of G. Then N E R(G) and hence there exists M e R(G) such that
G = N u M = NM and N n M = 1. Since M is a proper subnormal subgroup of G,
there exists L a G such that M < L < G. By Dedekind's law, L = (N n L)M. Since
N is a minimal normal subgroup of G, N n L = N or N n L = 1. In the first
case, L = NM = G, a contradiction. Hence N n L = 1 and so M = L g G and
G = N x M. Thus (a) implies (b).
We use induction on IGI to show that (b) implies (c). Let N be a minimal normal
subgroup of G and let M < G such that G = N x M. If R is a minimal normal
subgroup of M, then since M is a direct factor, R is a minimal normal subgroup of
G. By assumption there exists S < G such that G = R x S; it follows that M =
R x (M n S). Thus M satisfies (b) and therefore, by induction, it is a direct product
of simple groups. Then G = N x M is also such a direct product and (c) holds.
Now if G satisfies (c), then by 9.1.8, 91(G) is complemented. Thus every normal
subgroup N of G is a direct factor and hence every normal subgroup of N is normal
in G. It follows that every subnormal subgroup is normal, that is, 51(G) = 91(G).
Then R(G) is modular and complemented and hence relatively complemented. Thus
(c) implies (d), while it is clear that (d) implies (a).
We finally mention that Pazderski [1972] determined the finite soluble groups
having a unique minimal subnormal subgroup (see Exercise 4) and that Tamaschke
[1961] characterized the neutral elements of R(G) for a group G with a composition
series. He shows that N E 52(G) is neutral in R(G) if and only if for every S E 51(G), no
abelian composition factor between N and N n S is isomorphic to a composition
factor between S and N n S.
Isomorphisms between lattices of subnormal subgroups
We are now going to study isomorphisms between lattices of subnormal subgroups

of two groups G and G. Here we restrict our attention to finite groups and, in fact,
most often even to finite soluble groups. First we want to show that under suitable
assumptions, suggested by the examples in 9.2.1, such an isomorphism maps p-
groups to p-groups and, more generally, Op(G) to Oo(G) and O(G) to O(G). For this
we need the following simple lemma.
9.2.8 Lemma. Let G and G be finite groups and (p: 51(G) -+ R(G) an isomorphism. If
N, H E R(G) such that N < H and H/N is a noncyclic elementary abelian p-group,
then Nw 9 H' and H`0/NI* H/N.
Proof. Since H/N is not cyclic, there exists D E R(G) such that N < D < H and
IH/DI=p2;letM,ER(G)such that D<M.<H(i= 1,2,3)andM1 :A M2:94 M3 :0 MI -
By (2), M; < H`0; hence D4' = M; n MZ < H` and H`0/D4' = Mr /D`0 x Mf/D4' for all
i j. By 9.1.3, H4'/D`0 is abelian and then L(H'/D`0) ^- [H4!D4']K [H/D]K - L(H/D).
By 2.2.5, H4'/D`0 is elementary abelian of order p2. Since N' is the intersection of all
subgroups D4' such that N < D < H and H/DI = p2, it follows that N10 < H4' and
H10/N10 is an elementary abelian p-group. But then I H`0/N4 I = p" = I H/N I where n is
the length of [H4'/N']K - [H/N]K and hence H4'/N4 - H/N.
9.2.9 Theorem (Curzio [1957a], Zacher [1962]). Let G be a finite p-group and
q : R(G) -+ R(G) an isomorphism. _
(a) If G has at least 2 minimal subgroups, then G =IGI _
(b) If G is generalized quaternion and G is a finite soluble group, then G G.
Proof. (a) We use induction on I G I. Since G has 2 minimal subgroups, G is not cyclic
and hence G/(D(G) is an elementary abelian p-group of order p" for some n >_ 2. By
9.2.8, IG: b(G)4I = p". So if D(G) = 1, we are done. And if I(G) :A 1, we choose
A, B < G of order p such that A < Z(G) and A : B. Then AB is elementary abelian
of order p2, hence AB ; G and so there exists a maximal subgroup M of G contain-
ing AB. By induction, M101 = M and, since 16: M1* 1 = p, it follows that IGI =IGI
(b) Let I G I = 2" and N= Z(G). Then Nw is the unique minimal subnormal sub-
group of G. Hence N` < G and IN4I = p, a prime, since G is a finite soluble group.
Now G/N is a dihedral group and so by (a), JO/N`01 = I G/NI = 2"-'. Since IN4I = p,
the group G/C;(N4') is cyclic; on the other hand, R(G/N4') is not a chain and hence
G/N`0 is not cyclic. Thus N4' < CG(N`0). So if p > 2, then Q(N4') = N`P x S for some
nontrivial 2-group S; but then S would contain a minimal subnormal subgroup of

G, a contradiction. It follows that p = 2 and 161 = I G I. Then L(G) = R(G), so G has
only one minimal subgroup and hence is generalized quaternion of order 2". Thus
GAG.
We want to generalize Theorem 9.2.9 to an assertion on the images of OP(G) and

OP(G). For this we need the following lemma.
9.2.10 Lemma. Let G and G he finite groups, cp: R(G) -+ R(G) an isomorphism and it
a set of primes. If G is soluble, then OjG) and O' (G)" are characteristic subgroups
of G.
Proof. (a) Let N = On(G). We use induction on I G I to show that N is characteristic

in G. We may assume that N A 1 and claim that there exists
(12) L g G such that 1 -A L < N and LW is characteristic in G.
By induction, it will follow that NW/LW is characteristic in G/LW and then N is
characteristic in G, as desired. To prove (12), consider a minimal normal subgroup
M of G contained in N. If MW is characteristic in G, we are done. So assume that M'
is not characteristic in G. Since M is the join of minimal subnormal subgroups, the
same holds for MW and hence there exist a minimal subnormal subgroup R' < M"
and a e Aut G such that (R4)a RW. Since G is soluble, I RWI = I(RW)aI = p, a prime.
Let L< G such that L = OP(G). By (4), R and (R")a are different minimal sub-
groups of Li" and hence by 9.2.9, L is a p-group. Therefore I R I = p and p e it since
R < M < N. Again by (4), L < OP(G) < N. Hence OP(G) has more than one minimal
subgroup; so 9.2.9 and (4) imply that OP(G) is a p-group and OP(G)Y < OP(G) = Lu'.
It follows that L = OP(G) a G and L satisfies (12).
(b) Now let N = 0"(G). There are subgroups L of G such that
(13) N < L as G and LIP is characteristic in G;
for example, L = G satisfies (13). Let L be minimal with this property and suppose,
for a contradiction, that N < L. Since N10 g g L", there exists a maximal subnor-
mal subgroup KW of L" containing NW. By (2), K4' a LO and, since G is soluble,
ELI': KWI = p, a prime. The minimality of L implies that K is not characteristic in G;
thus there exists a e Aut G such that (KW)a -* K". For every such a, (K")8 is a normal
subgroup of index p in (LW)a = LW; hence M" = n_ (KW)a is characteristic in G
ac AutG
and LW/MW is a noncyclic elementary abelian p-group. By 9.2.8, M a L and L/M is
an elementary abelian p-group. Thus I L : K I = p and p e it since N < K. It follows
that I G : MI = I G : LI IL: MI is a rr-number and hence by (6), N = OR(G) = O(M) < M;
but this contradicts the minimality of L. Thus N = L and N" is a characteristic
subgroup of G.
We can now prove the desired result on OP(G)" and OP(G)"'. We clearly have to
assume that OP(G) and G/OP(G) are not cyclic; but the examples in (d) of 9.2.1 show
that for p = 2, an additional assumption is needed.
9.2.11 Theorem (Pazderski [1972] ). Let G and G be finite groups, p: R(G) -+ R(G) an
isomorphism and p a prime.
(a) Assume that OP(G) is not cyclic and if p = 2, in addition, that G is soluble. Then
OP(G)4' = Op(G). _
(b) Assume that G/OP(G) is not cyclic and if p = 2, in addition, that G and G are
soluble. Then OP(G)4' = OP(G).
Proof. (a) Let N = OP(G). By 9.2.9, N is a p-group and so N4' < OP(G), by (4).
If N4' < OP(G), take H such that N4' < H< OP(G) and I H : N"I = p. Since N4' is
not cyclic, neither is H and hence 'D(H) < N4' < H. By 9.2.8, H4' '/D(H)4-' is an
elementary abelian p-group. So H4-' is a subnormal p-subgroup of G and by (4),
H4 < OP(G) = N, a contradiction. Thus N4' = OP(G), as desired. _
(b) We use induction on IGI to show that OP(G)4' > OP(G). Then 6/OP(G) is not
cyclic and the above assertion for cp-t yields the other inclusion. So let N = OP(G),
DIN = (D(G/N) and assume that the assertion is true for groups of smaller order.
Since GIN is not cyclic, neither is G/D and so by 9.2.8, D4 < G and G/D4' is an
elementary abelian p-group. Thus D4' > OP(G) and we are done if D = N. So we may
assume that G/N is not elementary abelian.
If M is a maximal subgroup of G containing N, then 16: M4I = p and by (6),
OP(M) = OP(G) = N and OP(MP) = OP(G). If M/N is not cyclic, the induction as-
sumption yields that N4' = OP(M)4' > OP(M10) = OP(G), as desired. So we may as-
sume that G/N has only cyclic maximal subgroups. Since it is not elementary abelian
of order p2, it then has only one minimal subgroup and is isomorphic to Q8. Thus
p = 2, hence G is soluble, by assumption, and so N4' a G, by 9.2.10. Now 9.2.9 yields
that GIN" -_ Q8 and hence N4' > 02(G), as desired.
Our second main result on isomorphisms between lattices of subnormal sub-

groups is that under suitable assumptions they are "index preserving".
9.2.12 Theorem (Heineken [1965]). Let G and G be finite soluble groups,

cp: R(G) - R(G) an isomorphism and p a prime. If OP'(G)/OP'P(G) is not cyclic, then
Hl*: K4I = p for every composition factor H/K of order p of G.
Proof. We use induction on I G I and first note that for any normal subgroup N and
subgroups Y< X of a group,
(14) 1X:Yj=IXN:YNIIXnN:YnNI.
Indeed, if we write T = X n YN = Y(X n N), then IX : TI _ IX : X n YNI _
IX N : YNI and I T : YJ _ I Y(X n N) : YI = IX n N : Y n NI, and (14) follows.
Now let K a H << G such that JH : KI = p. Since G is soluble and K4' is a maxi-
mal subnormal subgroup of H4',
(15) 1 H4': K4' is a prime.
If G is a p-group, then OP'(G) = G and OP'P(G) = 1 so that G is not cyclic. By 9.2.9,

G is a p-group and IH4' : K"I = p. So we may assume that G is not a p-group; write
R = OP'(G), S = OP(R), P = OP(G), and Q = Op-(G). By 9.2.10, RIO, S4', P4', Q4' are
normal subgroups of G. By (14), I HR: KR I H n R : K n R I= I H: K I= p and, since

G/R is a p'-group, it follows that I H n R : K n R I = p. If R G, the induction
assumption applies to R and so p = j(H n R)W : (K n R)1*I = I H4 r) RP : K n R"j;
then (14) shows that p divides I H": K"I and (15) implies that I H4' : K4I = p, as
desired. So we may assume that
(16) G = R = OP'(G).
Suppose that there exists T < S such that 1 < T a G, T4' < G, and HT # KT. Then
by (14), JHT: KTI = p and we may apply the induction assumption to G/T. We
obtain that I H4T4 : KT4' = p and then again IH'P: KWI = p, by (14) and (15). So we
may assume that
(17) HT = KT for all T<Ssuch that I <T<GandT"< G.
Since G/S is a p-group and Q a p'-group, Q< Sand I H n Q: K n Q I is prime to p.
So (14) implies that HQ # KQ and, since Q4 g G, it follows from (17) that
(18) Q = 1.
This implies that P is the Fitting subgroup of G and so CG(P) < P, by a well-known
property of soluble groups (see Robinson [1982], p. 144). If P were cyclic, then
GICG(P), as a subgroup of Aut P, would be abelian. Thus G/P is abelian and (16)
implies that G/P is a p-group. But then G is a p-group, contrary to our assumption.
Thus P is not cyclic and by 9.2.9,
(19) P is a p-group.
Since G is not a p-group, S # 1 and by (18), every minimal normal subgroup of G is
a p-group; thus T = P n S 1. Of course, T a G and T" = P4' n S4' < G. By (17),
HT = KT and then (14) shows that I H n T : K n Tj = p. Since T4' < P is a p-
group, I H4 n T4': Mr) T J = p and again (14) and (15) yield that JH` : K"I = p.
9.2.13 Corollary. Let G and G be finite soluble groups, q : R(G) -* R(G) an isomor-
phism and assume that for every prime p dividing IGI, the group OP'(G)/OP'P(G) is not
cyclic. Then IH4I = IHI for every H E R(G).
Proof. By 9.2.12, cp maps every composition factor of G onto a composition factor

of the same order in G. It follows that IH4I = I H I for every H ER(G).
Exercise 6 shows that it is not possible to replace the assumption on the factor
group OP'(G)/OP'P(G) in Theorem 9.2.12 by the assumption that the Sylow p-
subgroups of G are not cyclic.
Dualities
We have seen in Chapter 8 that for a group G to have a duality of L(G) is a rather
restrictive property. The same holds for R(G), at least if G has sufficient subnormal
subgroups. We want to show that if G is a finite soluble group of odd order with a
duality 6: R(G) -+ R(G) and G is finite soluble, then G is supersoluble. For this we
need some preliminaries.
9.2.14 Lemma. If R(G) has finite length and b: R(G) --+.q(C) is a duality, then R(G) is
modular.
Proof. By 2.1.8, R(G) and R(G) are lower semimodular. It follows that R(G) is upper
semimodular and hence modular, by 2.1.10.
By (3), we have the following inheritance properties (compare with 8.1.6).
9.2.15 Lemma. Let G and G be finite groups and 6: R(G) R(G) a duality.
(a) If N g G, then b induces a duality from R(GIN) to R(N").
(b) If N a G, then 6 induces a duality from R(N) to R(6/N).
More interesting are the following two results on maximal elementary abelian
sections.
9.2.16 Lemma. Let G and G be finite soluble groups and 6: R(G) -+ R(G) a duality.
Suppose that p is a prime and N is the join of all subnormal subgroups of order p of G.
Then N is an elementary abelian normal p-subgroup of G and N is a characteristic
subgroup of G. If N is not cyclic, 6IN _- N.
Proof. This is clear if there are no subnormal subgroups of order p in G, that is if

N = 1; so let N # 1. Then N is the intersection of maximal subnormal subgroups of
G and hence N G, by (2). Thus b induces a duality from R(N) onto R(G/N). By
(4), every subnormal subgroup of order p of G is contained in Op(G) and therefore N
is a normal p-subgroup of G. So R(N) = L(N) and by 9.2.14, L(N) is modular. Since
N is generated by subgroups of order p, it follows from 2.3.5 that N is elementary
abelian. Thus R(N) is self-dual and so R(6/N) R(N). By 9.2.8, 6IN N if N is
not cyclic; in any case, since G is soluble, G/N is an elementary abelian q-group of
order q" for some prime q (with q = p if n > 1). Suppose, for a contradiction, that there
exists a normal subgroup M of index q in G such that N M. Then GIN'(-) M
is elementary abelian of order q"+', b induces a duality from R(NM) onto
R(6/N n M), and hence NM is elementary abelian of order q"+'. Since INS = p, it
follows that q = p and then M < N, by definition of N. Thus N < M, a contradic-
tion. So we see that there is no such M, that is, N is the intersection of all normal
subgroups of index q in G. In particular, N is a characteristic subgroup of G and all
assertions of the lemma hold.
9.2.17 Lemma. Suppose that N a G such that N is elementary abelian of order p",
GIN is elementary abelian of order q', p and q primes, CG(N) = N and Z(G) = 1. If G
is a finite soluble group and S: R(G) -- R(G) a duality, then either I G(= pq or G A4
andG^ Q8.
Proof. In the first place p 0 q since Z(G) = 1. If INI = p, then GICG(N) is cyclic and
hence I G I = pq. So suppose that n >_ 2. By 9.2.16, N a 6 and 6/N is elementary
abelian of order p". Let Q e Sylq(G). Then by 4.1.3, N = [N, Q] CN(Q) = [N, Q] since
CN(Q) < Z(G) = 1. Thus N< G' and so every maximal normal subgroup of G con-
tains N. It follows that
(20) every minimal subnormal subgroup of G is contained in Nb.
Now 9.2.16 applied to the duality induced in R(GIN) yields that Nb is elementary
abelian of order q` if m > 2; and if m = 1, IN'I is a prime since G is soluble. Sup-
pose, for a contradiction, that G is not a p-group. Then (I NbI, I G/N' I) = I and so
CU(N') = N8 x P for some p-group P; by (20), P = 1, that is, CU(N) = N. Since
61N is not cyclic, it follows that INI is not a prime; so m > 2 and INI = q'. As in
4.1.7, by Maschke's Theorem, N is a completely reducible GF(p)Q-module, that is,
N = N, x x N, with irreducible Q-modules Ni. By Schur's Lemma, Q/CQ(Ni) is
cyclic and, since Q is elementary abelian, IQ: CQ(Ni)I < q for all i. Now CG(N) = N
and it follows that
qm=IQI=IQ:CQ(N)I= Q: n=1CQ(Ni) < qr < q"
since I N I = p" and so r < n. Thus m < n and equality implies that I Ni I = p and
IQ: CQ(Ni)I = q for all i, so thatgjp - 1. Since CG(N) = Nb, the same argument
applies to G = NS for S e Sylq(G) and yields that n < m and equality implies that
plq - 1. But since m < n and n < m, we have equality and so get the contradiction
that qlp - 1 and pIq - 1. Thus G is a p-group. It follows that m = 1 and by (20), Nb
is the unique minimal (subnormal) subgroup of G. Since 6/N is elementary abelian,
G Qg and so INI = 4; then IG : NI = 3 since CG(N) = N, and G ^- A4, as desired.
We can now prove the result announced above.
9.2.18 Theorem (Zacher [1962]). Let G and G be finite soluble groups and let
S: R(G) R(G) be a duality. If I GI is odd, then G is supersoluble.
Proof. We use induction on I GI. By 9.2.15, S induces a duality in R(G/ I (G)). If

D(G): 1, then by induction, G/D(G) is supersoluble and then so is G (see Robinson
[1982], p. 268). So let d>(G) = 1. Then F(G) is a direct product of minimal normal
subgroups of G (see Robinson [1982], p. 131). If N, and N2 are two of these, then
again by induction, G/Ni is supersoluble (i = 1, 2) and then so is GIN, n NZ = G.
Thus we may assume that N = F(G) is the unique minimal normal subgroup of G;
let I NI = p". By 9.2.16, N is the join of all subnormal subgroups of order p of G and
Nb is a characteristic subgroup of G. If N = G, we are done. So let N G. Then for
some prime q, the join M/N of all subnormal subgroups of order q of G/N is non-
trivial; 9.2.16 applied to the duality induced by S in R(GIN) yields that M/N is
elementary abelian of order q' for some m e N and Mb is a characteristic subgroup
of N. So Mb < G and 6 induces a duality from R(M) onto R(G/Mb) which satisfies
the assumptions of 9.2.17. Indeed, N = F(G) and a well-known property of soluble
groups (see Robinson [1982], p. 144) yields that N = CG(N) = CM(N). It follows that
Z(M) < N; since Z(M) a G and N is a minimal normal subgroup of G, we have

Z(M) = 1. Now I G I is odd and so 9.2.17 implies that I N = p. By induction, GIN is
supersoluble and so, finally, G is supersoluble.
The assumption that I G I is odd is needed in Theorem 9.2.18. In fact, in (c) of 9.2.1,
we saw that A4 and Q8 have dual lattices of subnormal subgroups and that R(Q8C3)
is self-dual; clearly, A4 and Q8C3 are not supersoluble. On the other hand, these are
the only bad examples.
9.2.19 Theorem (Zacher [1962]). Let G and G be finite soluble groups and let
d: R(G) - R(G) be a duality. Then G = H x K where (I HI, I K I) = 1, H is supersoluble
and K is isomorphic to A4i Q8C3, or 1.
We sketch a proof of this theorem in Exercise 8 and mention that it has been
extended to infinite groups by Franchetta [1978].
X-subnormal subgroups
We finally report on an interesting generalization of the lattice of subnormal sub-

groups. Let I be a class of finite groups which is closed under extensions, epimor-
phic images, and subgroups. A subgroup H of G is called X-normal in G if H a G or
G/Hc e 1; then, of course, H is called 1-subnormal in G if there exist Hi < G such
that H=Ho<H1 Hi is X-normal in H1+1fori=0,...,n-1.
9.2.20 Theorem (Kegel [1978]). For every finite group G, the set Rr(G) of all 1-
subnormal subgroups of G is a sublattice of L(G).
Clearly, R3(G) contains R(G) for every class 1; furthermore A.T(G) = R(G) if
I= {
I
}
and R}(G) = L(G) if I is the class of all groups. For every set it of primes,
we may choose the class I of rt-groups. In this way we obtain infinitely many
functors R.., assigning to every finite group G a sublattice R.T(G) of L(G) containing
R(G).
Exercises
1. If S is a nonabelian simple subnormal subgroup of G, show that So is a minimal
normal subgroup of G.
2. (Zacher [1957]) If G is a finite group, show that R(G) is distributive if and only if
for all S, T :!g G such that T < S and SIT is a p-group for some prime p, SIT is
cyclic. (Hint: First show that if G has this property and H e S1(G) is soluble, then
every Sylow subgroup of H is cyclic and H a G.)
3. Let G be a finite soluble group. Show that R(G) is a chain if and only if either G
is a cyclic p-group or G = PQ where P a- G is a cyclic p-group, Q a cyclic q-group,
p and q different primes, and CG(P) = P.
9.3 Centralizer lattices 511
4. (Pazderski [1972]) Let G be a finite soluble group. Show that G has only one
minimal subnormal subgroup if and only if it has one of the following properties.
(a) G = PQ where P a G is a cyclic p-group, p a prime, IQI divides p - 1, and
CG(P) = P.
(b) G is a generalized quaternion group.
(c) G = Q8C3 as defined in Example 9.2.1.
(d) G has a normal subgroup N Q8 such that G/N S3 and CG(N) = Z(N).
5. Determine R(G) for the groups G in Exercise 4(d). Note that there are two differ-
ent such groups, a semidirect product and a non-splitting extension of Q8 by S3-
6. (Heineken [1965]) Show that there are groups G and G with R(G) R(G) sat-
isfying l G/G' l= 2, 16101 = 3, and G' G' A x B where J A I= 21819, I B I=
31819; here a cyclic group of order 19 operates irreducibly on elementary abelian
groups of order 218 and 318, respectively.
7. (Curzio [1957d]) Let G be a finite supersoluble group without nontrivial cyclic
Sylow subgroups. If R(G) is self-dual, show that G is nilpotent.
8. (Zacher [1962]) Let G and G be finite soluble groups and let S: R(G) - R(G) be
a duality.
(a) If 02(G) is cyclic, show that G is supersoluble.
(b) If G is not supersoluble and IGI = p''20 for some prime p, show that G A,
orG^_-Q8C3.
(c) Prove Theorem 9.2.19. (Hint: Study 02(G)H where H is a Hall {2,31'-sub-
group of G.)
9.3 Centralizer lattices

In this section we study the centralizer lattice E(G) which we defined in 1.1. Again
our main aim will be to determine the structure of groups whose centralizer lattices
have special properties and to find out which groups are determined by their central-
izer lattices (modulo abelian direct factors). But since E(G) is only a meet-sublattice
of L(G), there is the additional question: under which conditions is CM(G) a sublattice
of L(G) or even 5(G) = L(G)?
Throughout this section we shall write C(X) for CG(X) if X < G and there is no
ambiguity. We also write Z for the centre Z(G) of G and CC(X) for C(C(X)) and use
an index C to denote intervals in CE(G). Thus if H, K E CM(G) and K < H, then
[H/K]c = {X E E(G)IK < X < H}.
Basic properties of centralizers
It is well-known and easy to prove that for every set X of subgroups of G,
(1) n C(X) = C U X I and U C(X) < CI ( X I.

xE.r XE. / XEz \XE[ /
By 1.1.6, it follows from (1) that CM(G) = {C(X)IX E L(G)} is a complete meet-
sublattice of L(G). We write A and v for the operations of this lattice and have that
for H, K EE(G),
(2) HAK=HnKand HuK<HvK=n{XE(Y (G)IH<XandK<X}.
The least element of CM(G) is Z(G) = C0(G) and the largest element is G = Ca(l). For
all subgroups X, Y of G, we clearly have that X < Y implies C(Y) < C(X) and that
X < CC(X). This yields the following important property of E(G).
9.3.1 Theorem. The map CI L(a): (((G) CM(G) is an involutory duality, that is, for all
H, K E L(G),
(3) H < K if and only if C(K) < C(H) and
(4) CC(H) = H.
It follows that
(5) C(H A K) = C(H) v C(K) and C(H v K) = C(H) A C(K).
Proof. Let H, K E (((G) and take X< G such that H = CG(X). Then X < CC(X)
and H < CC(H); and the first inclusion implies that C(CC(X)) < C(X), that is,
CC(H) < H. Thus H = CC(H) and (4) holds. It follows that the map CI,,a) is bijec-
tive; indeed, it is surjective since H = C(C(H)), and it is injective since C(H) = C(K)
implies that H = CC(H) = CC(K) = K. Now if H< K, then clearly C(K) < C(H),
and C(K) < C(H) yields H = CC(H) < CC(K) = K. Thus (3) holds and CI a(G) is a
duality of CM(G). Finally, (5) follows from 8.1.1; in fact, since E(G) is a complete lattice,
8.1.1 even yields the infinite analogue of (5).
We give some simple examples of centralizer lattices.
9.3.2 Examples. Let G be a group, Z = Z(G), p and q primes such that qj p - 1, and
k,ncN.
(a) G is abelian if and only if G = Z, that is, if and only if C(G) is the trivial lattice
containing only one element.
(b) On the other hand, if G is nonabelian of order pq, then every subgroup of G is
a centralizer so that CE(G) = L(G). Similarly, if G is a p-group and IG : ZI = p2, then
every subgroup of G lying properly between G and Z is abelian and hence is its own
centralizer; thus E (G) = [G/Z].
(c) We write G E 7R(k) if s(Q) is (modular) of length 2 and has k atoms. Thus all
the groups considered in (b) lie in 9R(p + 1). More generally, we claim that if G is a
finite nonabelian group with an abelian normal subgroup N of prime index, then
G E TI(IN : ZI + 1). Indeed, since G is nonabelian and G/N is cyclic, N Z and
hence N = CG(N) E CE(G). Let IG : NJ = p and A = U-(G)\ {Z, N, G}. If H E A, then
H = CG(X) for some X < G such that X $ N. Therefore Ca(N n H) > NX = G and
so N n H < Z. On the other hand, every centralizer contains Z and so N n H = Z.
It follows that H N, hence NH = G and III: ZI = I G : NJ = p. Thus all the H E A
have the same order and A u {N} is an antichain, that is, (l:(G) is of length 2. If
x E G \, N, then <x> Z < Cc(<x>) E A and hence I <x> Z : Z I = p. It follows that every
element in G/Z not contained in N/Z has order p and, since there are (p - 1)IN/ZI
such elements, Al I= IN: ZI. Thus G E 9JI(IN : ZI + 1) and this proves our assertion.
As special cases we obtain that A4 E M(5) and that G e 9JI(p" + 1) if G is a non-
abelian P-group of order p"q. Here, if n >- 2, there are subgroups of order q in G
generating a subgroup of order pq and hence E (G) is not a sublattice of L(G).
Another special case is the dihedral group D2" of order 2n whose centre is nontrivial
(and of order 2) if and only if n is even. Thus D4k E 9J2(k + 1) for all k >- 2 and
D2kE9Jl(k+ 1) ifkisodd, k> 3.
(d) Let G = SL(2, 2"), n > 2. Then G has a partition E consisting of the Sylow
2-subgroups of order 2" and the maximal cyclic subgroups of order 2" + 1 and
2" - I (see 3.5.1). We claim that ((G) consists of Z = 1, G, and the groups in E.
Indeed, every component X of E is abelian and so X < CG(x) for every 1 x E X. If
X < CG(x) and y e CG(x)\X, then by 3.5.2, x and y have the same prime order p.
Then <x, y> is elementary abelian of order p2 and contained in a Sylow p-subgroup
P. Since the Sylow subgroups for odd primes are cyclic (they are contained in com-
ponents of E), p = 2 and P e E. But then x E P A X implies P = X and so y E X, a
contradiction. Thus X = CG(x) for every 1 x e X. By (1), every centralizer is an
intersection of element centralizers and since E is a partition, the assertion follows.
Now it is well-known (see Huppert [1967], pp. 191-194) that the normalizers of the
components of E have orders 2"(2" - 1), 2(2" + 1), 2(2" - 1), respectively, and, since
every component contains a Sylow subgroup of G, all components of the same order
are conjugate. Since IGI = (2" + 1)2"(2" - 1), it follows that
IEI =(2"+ 1)+q(2"- 1)2"+Z(2"+ I)2"=22n+2"+ 1.

Thus SL(2, 2") E 9JI(22n + 2" + 1). So we see that SL(2, 2") and the dihedral group of
order 4(22n + 2"), that is, a nonabelian simple and a metacyclic group, have isomor-
phic centralizer lattices.
(e) Let G = S4. Then G has no element of order 6 and hence every proper central-
izer in G is either a 2-group or a 3-group. It follows easily that CE(G) consists of 1, G,
and the centralizer lattices of the Sylow subgroups of G. Since G has 4 Sylow 3-
Figure 26
subgroups of order 3 and 3 Sylow 2-subgroups isomorphic to D. intersecting in the

Klein four-group, we obtain the lattice ((G) displayed in Figure 26.
If H is a subgroup of G, the only connection between (E(H) and E(G) in general is

that every element K in E(H) is of the form K = CH(X) = CG(X) n H for some
X < H and hence is the intersection of H with an element of Cr(G). Since the intersec-
tion of two centralizers is a centralizer, it follows that K e E(G) if H E tr(G). Thus
(6) E (H) -_ [H/Z(H)]e if H e E(G).
The following two simple remarks are used quite often. First, if x e G, then
(7) CG(x) = Cc(<x>) EE(G),
that is, every element centralizer belongs to E(G). The other is that every abelian
subgroup of G is contained in a maximal abelian subgroup of G and these also
belong to CSE(G).
(8) If A is a maximal abelian subgroup of G, then A = C(A) E CE(G).

Indeed, A < C(A) since A is abelian. And if x e C(A), then B = <A, x> is an abelian
subgroup of G containing A and hence equal to A by maximality of A. Thus x e A
and A = C(A) E L(G). Conversely, if H E tr(G) satisfies H = C(H), then H is clearly a
maximal abelian subgroup of G. Thus the maximal abelian subgroups are precisely
the fixed points of the duality C in,Theorem 9.3.1.
We come to another important general property of (r(G).
9.3.3 Lemma. Let H E CY(G). Then CY(H v C(H)) = [H v C(H)/H A C(H)]e.
Proof. For short, let F = H v C(H) and D = H A C(H). Then by 9.3.1,
C(F) = C(H v C(H)) = C(H) A CC(H) = C(H) A H = D
and hence C(D) = CC(F) = F. Since D < F, it follows that D = Z(F). Now if
X E C1(F), then X > Z(F) = D and, by (6), X EE(G); thus X E [F/D]c. Conversely,
if X c [F/D],, then D < X < F and hence by (3), D = C(F) < C(X) < C(D) = F.
Thus C(X)= CF(X), and if we apply this to C(X) in place of X, we obtain that
X = CC(X) = CF(C(X)) E Cr(F).
Let us call an atom of CV-(G) a minimal centralizer and an antiatom a maximal

centralizer of G. If N is a minimal centralizer of G and x E N\Z(G), then
x E CG(x) n N E Cr(G) so that Z(G) < CG(x) n N < N. The minimality of N implies
that CG(x) n N = N and hence N < CG(x). Since this clearly also holds for x e Z(G),
we have shown that
(9) every minimal centralizer is abelian.
If M is a maximal centralizer, then by (4), Z(G) C(M) and hence there exists an
element x (of prime power order if G is finite) in C(M)\Z(G). Then M < CG(x) < G
and so M = CG(x). Thus
(10) every maximal centralizer is of the form M = CG(x) where x can be chosen of
prime power order if G is finite.
But the main property of a maximal centralizer is the following consequence of 9.3.3
and (9).
9.3.4 Lemma. If M is a maximal centralizer of G, then QM) < M and Ch(M)

[M/C(M)]C.
Proof. Since CIc(G) is a duality, C(M) is a minimal centralizer of G and hence is

abelian, by (9). It follows that QM) < CC(M) = M. Now 9.3.3 yields that L(M) =
[M/C(M)]C.
Finally, suppose that G is nonabelian and (1(G) satisfies the maximal condition.
Then maximal centralizers exist and, by (8), every maximal abelian and hence
(11) every abelian subgroup of G is contained in a maximal centralizer.
In particular, every element of G is contained in a maximal centralizer and since G
cannot be the set-theoretic union of two proper subgroups, it follows that
(12) G has at least 3 maximal centralizers.
Distributive centralizer lattices
There are no distributive centralizer lattices except the trivial one, a fact that can be
proved quite simply.
9.3.5 Theorem. Let G be a group. Then (1(G) is distributive if and only if G is abelian.
Proof. If G is abelian, then I1(G)I = 1 and therefore (1(G) is distributive. Suppose

conversely that (1(G) is distributive and let a, b e G. Then CG(b) A CG(ab) _
CG(b) n CG(ab) < CG(a) and hence the distributive law implies that
CG(a) = CG(a) v (CG(b) A CG(ab)) = (CG(a) v CG(b)) A (CG(a) v CG(ab)).
Now b e CG(b) < CG(a) v CG(b) and b = a-lab e CG(a) u CG(ab) < CG(a) v CG(ab),
by (2). Therefore b is contained in the right hand side of the above equation and so
b c CG(a). Thus ab = ba and G is abelian.
Direct products
It is easy to see that, in contrast to subgroup lattices, the centralizer lattice of an

arbitrary direct product of groups is the direct product of the centralizer lattices of
the direct factors. We restrict ourselves to a finite number of direct factors and prove
a more general result. For this we need a name for the set of all commutators of
elements of a group, which, as is well-known, in general is different from the commu-

tator subgroup. So let us write Com G = { [x, y] Ix, y e G}.
9.3.6 Theorem. If G = HK such that [H, K] = 1 and Com H n Com K = 1, then

E(G) 1r(H) x C;(K). In particular, if G = H x K, then t(G) E(H) x E(K).
Proof. We show first that for every subset M of G,

(13) C0(M) = CH(M)CK(M).
For this let c E CG(M) and x e M. Since G = HK, there exist elements c,, x, E H
and c2, x2 E K such that c = c, c2 and x = x, x2. Since [H, K] = 1, we have
1 = [c, x] = [c,, x, ] [c2, x2] and hence I= [x2, c2] E Com H n Com K = 1.
So c, centralizes x, and hence also x; this holds for all x e M so that c, E CH(M).
Similarly, c2 E CK(M) and we see that CG(M) < CH(M)CK(M). Since the other
inclusion is trivial, (13) follows.
Now let X = CH(R) E !(H) and Y = CK(S) E (_E (K) where R < H and S < K. Then
RS is a subgroup of G since [H, K] = 1, and, by (13), CG(RS) = CH(RS)CK(RS) =
CH(R)CK(S) = X Y. This shows that there is a well-defined map 0: &(H) x &(K) - E(G)
satisfying (X, Y)'' = X Y. Since K n H < Z(H) < X,
(14) XKnH=X(KnH)=X.
So if A e t(H), B E C!(K), and (A, B)'" _ (X, Y)O, then X = XK n H = X YK n H =
ABK n H = AK n H = A; similarly, Y = B and >G is injective. For T< G = HK,
Dedekind's law implies that TK = (TK n H)K and TH = H(TH n K). So by (13),
CG(T) = CH(T)CK(T) = CH(TK)CK(TH) = CH(TK n H)CK(TH n K)
and this shows that t,1i is surjective. Finally, (A, B) < (X, Y) clearly implies (A, B)'' _
AB < X Y = (X, Y)''; conversely, if (A, B)'" < (X, Y)'', then AB :!5; X Y < XK and by
(14), A < X K n H = X. Similarly, B < Y and so (A, B) < (X, Y). By 1.1.2, 0 is an
isomorphism.
Exercise 3 shows that the assumption Com H n Com K = 1 is needed in the

above theorem. In fact, we are now going to show that for groups whose centralizer
lattice has finite length, the converse of 9.3.6 almost holds. For this we need the
following auxiliary result.
9.3.7 Lemma. Assume that G = HK where H = CG(K) and K = CG(H). If A E CS(H)

and B e CE(K), then AB E (E(G).
Proof. By (6), A, B e f(G) and, by (2), AB < A v B. Let x e A v B and write x =

x, x2 where x, E H, x2 E K. Then by 9.3.1, x e A v B< A v K = CC(A) v C(H) =
C(C(A) A H) = C(CH(A)). Therefore every c e CH(A) satisfies 1 [c, x] = [c, x, x2] _
[c, x, ] since [c, x2] E [H, K] = 1. Thus x, E CH(CH(A)) = A. Similarly, x2 e B and
so x = x, x2 E AB. It follows that AB = A v B e E(G).
9.3.8 Theorem. Let G be a group such that E(G) has finite length. Assume that CM(G)
is the direct product of two lattices L, and L2, write 0, 11 and 02, 12 for the least and
greatest elements of L, and L2, respectively, and let H = (I1, 02) and K = (01 ,12).
Then
(a) CG(H) = K and CG(K) = H,
(b) Com H n Com K = 1, and
(c) E(H) = [H/Z(G)lc L1, (E(K) = [K/Z(G)lc L2, and hence C1(HK) ('(G).
Proof. (a) If IL1 1 = 1, then H = Z(G), K = G, and (a)-(c) hold trivially. So we may
assume that I L 1 II I L2 and show first by induction on the length of CM(G) that
(15) [H, K] = 1.
By (12), G contains at least 3 maximal centralizers. These have the form (1 x) or
(Y, 12) with antiatoms x of L2 and y of L1i hence at least one of the two lattices has
more than one antiatom. So let x1, x2 be two different antiatoms of L2, say, and
let M = (I,, x) where x = x1 or x = x2. Then by 9.3.4, C(M) < M and E(M) _
[M/C(M)]c. So C(M) = (w,z) where w e L1, z e L2 and z < x; it follows that
[M/C(M)lc = [(11,x)/(w, z)] = {(s, t)Iw < s < I, z 5 t < x} = [11/w] x [x/z].
Since [M/C(M)lc is a proper interval in E(G), by induction, (15) holds for M. So if

Ho = (11, z) and Ko = (w, x), then [Ho, KO] = 1. Now H < Ho and (01,x) < K0;
thus (01,x) < C(H). If we apply this with x = x1 and x = x2, it follows that
K = (01,12) _ (01,x1) v (01,x2) < C(H) and (15) holds.
By (15), C(H) > K = (01,12) and hence C(H) = (u,12) for some u c- L1; similarly
C(K) = (11, v) with v e L2. Since G = (11,12) = H v K, Theorem 9.3.1 yields that
Z(G) = C(H) A C(K) = (u, v). It follows that u = 01 and v = 02; thus C(H) _
(01,12) = K and C(K) = H.
(b) Let a E H and b e K. Every X E 2(G) = L 1 x L2 satisfies X= (X A H) V (X A K)
and so CG(ab) = CH(ab) v CK(ab) = CH(a) v CK(b) since [H, K] = 1. By 9.3.7
applied to the group HK there exists T:!!-, HK such that CH(a)CK(b) = CHK(T).
Then CH(a) and CK(b) are contained in CG(T); it follows that
CHK(ab) = CG(ab) n HK = (CH(a) v CK(b)) n HK < CG(T) n HK
and hence CHK(ab) < CHK(T) = CH(a)CK(b). Since the other inclusion is trivial, we
have shown that
(16) CHK(ab) = CH(a)CK(b) for all a e H, b E K.
Now suppose, for a contradiction, that Com H n Com K 0 1. Then there exist
a, c E H and b, d e K such that 1 0 [a, c] = [d, b]. Since [H, K] = 1, this implies
that 1 = [a, c] [b, d] = [ab, cd] and hence cd e CHK(ab) = CH(a)CK(b), by (16). Since
dc-K, it follows that c E CH(a)K n H = CH(a)(K n H) = CH(a), contradicting
[a, c] 0 1. Thus Com H n Com K = 1.
(c) Of course, [H/Z]c = { (x, 02 )I X E L 1 } ^ L 1 and we show that 5(H) = [H/Z]c.
Indeed, if X e (1(H), then by (6), X e (1(G) and so Z < X < H; thus 1(H) c [H/Z]e.
Conversely, if X e [H/Z],, then CG(X) CG(H) = K and hence CG(X) = (y,12) _
Y v K for some y c L1 and Y = (y, 02) < H. By 9.3.1,
X = CG(CG(X)) = CG(Y v K) = CG(Y) A H = CH(Y) E 1(H).
Thus 1(H) = [H/Z]c L,, similarly (1(K) L2 and, by 9.3.6,1(HK) - L1 x LZ =

(s (G).
If we combine Theorems 9.3.6 and 9.3.8, we obtain a result that was proved by
Antonov [1987] for finite groups with modular centralizer lattices.
9.3.9 Corollary. Let G be a group such that (1(G) has finite length. Then 1(G) is a
direct product of two lattices L1 and L2 if and only if G contains subgroups H
and K such that 1(HK) 1(G), [H, K] = 1, Com H n Com K = 1, (1(H) L1 and
(1(K) L2.
It is not known whether 9.3.8 and 9.3.9 are true without the assumption that 1(G)
has finite length. Exercise 4 shows that HK may be a proper subgroup of G in
Theorem 9.3.8, although, of course, G is the join of H and K in the centralizer lattice.
Modular centralizer lattices
There are many groups with modular centralizer lattice and so there are only a few
general results about these groups and lattices. One of them is the simple fact that
their length is even if it is finite. After proving this we shall study finite groups with
centralizer lattice of length 2 and, as an application, determine all finite simple
groups with modular centralizer lattice.
9.3.10 Lemma. If L(G) is modular and of finite length 1, then I is even.
Proof. Recall from 2.1.10 that (1(G) satisfies the Jordan-Dedekind chain condition,
and consider a maximal abelian subgroup A of G. By (8), A = C(A) e (1(G) and hence
there exists a maximal chain Z(G) = A0 < A, < < A. = A < Ai+1 < < A, = G
in (1(G) containing A. Then Z=A0 < < A,=A and Z=C(A,) < ... < A
are two maximal chains from Z to A and therefore have the same length. Thus
n = I - n, that is, l = 2n is even.
Let us write G e 9J1 if (1(G) is (modular) of length 2. So 1771 is the union of the classes
931(k), k e N u {ox}, defined in 9.3.2(c). We shall also say that G is an 971-group if
G E 971, trusting that the reader will not confuse these with the M-groups studied in
Chapter 2. If G is an 971-group, then every H e (1(G)\{G, Z} is a minimal centralizer
and hence is abelian, by (9). Conversely, if G is nonabelian and every proper central-
izer of G is abelian, then every H e (E(G)\ { G, Z} is contained in a maximal abelian
subgroup A of G. If H < A, it would follow that A = C(A) < C(H) and so C(H)
would not be abelian, a contradiction. Therefore H = A and since two different

maximal abelian subgroups cannot be contained in each other, it follows that G E 93t.
Thus
(17) G e 931 if and only if G is nonabelian and every proper centralizer of G is
abelian.
Now if H < G e 931, then every proper centralizer of H is contained in a proper
centralizer of G and hence is abelian. So (17) implies that
(18) every subgroup of an 931-group is an 991-group or abelian.
The main property of 971-groups, however, is the following. Recall from 3.5 that a
partition of a group G is a set E of nontrivial subgroups of G such that every
nonidentity element of G is contained in a unique subgroup X e E.
9.3.11 Lemma. If G is an 931-group, then the set E of all M/Z(G) where M is a

maximal abelian subgroup of G is a normal partition of G/Z(G); we call E the central-
izer partition of G/Z(G).
Proof. Let Z = Z(G). If x e G, then x e <x> < M for some maximal abelian sub-
group M of G; thus xZ e M/Z. And if xZ e M, /Z n M2/Z for two different maximal
abelian subgroups M, and M2 of G, then x e M, n M2 = M, A M2 = Z and hence
xZ = I in G/Z. This shows that E is a partition. If M is a maximal abelian subgroup
of G and g e G, then Mg is a maximal abelian subgroup of G and so Y. is normal.
Using the results of 3.5 on partitions of finite groups, we obtain the following
characterization of finite 991-groups.
9.3.12 Theorem (Schmidt [1970c]). A finite group G is an 931-group (and lies in 931(k))
if and only if it is a group of one of the following types:
(i) G = A x P where A is abelian and P is a p-group in 931(k), p a prime; here k= 1
(mod p).
(ii) G is nonabelian and has an abelian normal subgroup N of prime index; here
k = IN:Z(G)I+1.
(iii) G/Z(G) is a Frobenius group with Frobenius kernel F/Z(G) and Frobenius
complement K/Z(G) where F and K are abelian; here k = IF: Z(G)I + 1.
(iv) G/Z(G) is a Frobenius group with Frobenius kernel F/Z(G) and Frobenius
complement K/Z(G) where K is abelian, Z(F) = Z(G), F/Z(G) is a p-group, p a prime,
and F is an 931-group; here k = IF: Z(G)j + m if F E 931(m).
(v) G/Z(G) S4 and V is not abelian if V/Z(G) is the Klein four-group; here k = 13.
(vi) G/Z(G) PSL(2, p") or PGL(2, p"), G' SL(2, p"), p a prime, p" > 3; here k =
pen+p"+1.
(vii) G/Z(G) ^ PSL(2, 9) or PGL(2, 9), G' is isomorphic to the representation group
of PSL(2,9) in the sense of Schur; here k = 121.
Proof. We show first that every 972-group has one of the properties (i)-(vii); then we
prove that, conversely, every such group indeed lies in 931(k) where k is as stated. So
assume that G is an 971-group, let Z = Z(G) and let E be the centralizer partition of
G%Z. By 3.5.10 and 3.5.11, we know the possible structure of G/Z and, since the
partition E is normal, 3.5.7 and 3.5.9 show in addition that if G/Z is a Frobenius
group, then the Frobenius complements are components of E. Also, if G/Z S,,
then E consists of the maximal cyclic subgroups of G/Z. So we have to consider the
following six possibilities for G/Z.
(a) G/Z is a p-group for some prime p. Let A be the p'-component of Z and
P e Sylp(G). Then G = A x P, A is abelian and, by 9.3.6, E(P) CM(G). Thus G is of
type (i).
(b) G/Z has a normal subgroup N/Z e Y. of prime index. Since N/Z e E, the group
N is abelian and so (ii) holds.
(c) G/Z is a Frobenius group and the Frobenius complements are components of E.
Let F/ Z be the Frobenius kernel and K/Z a Frobenius complement of G/Z. Then K
is abelian since K/Z e E. If F too is abelian, then (iii) holds. Thus we assume that F
is not abelian. By (18), F is an 931-group and hence Z(F) = A, n A2 for some maximal
abelian subgroups A; of F. If M, is a maximal abelian subgroup of G containing A;
(i = 1, 2), it follows that M, M2 and Z(F) = A, n A2 < M, n M2 = Z. Since Z < F,
the other inclusion is trivial and so Z(F) = Z. As a Frobenius kernel, F/Z is nil-
potent (see 3.5.1) and hence is a p-group for some prime p, by 3.5.3. Thus (iv) holds.
(d) G/Z S, and E consists of the maximal cyclic subgroups of S,. Since V/ Z is not
cyclic, it is not contained in a component of E and so V is not contained in a
maximal abelian subgroup of G. Thus V is not abelian and (v) holds.
(e) G/Z a- PSL(2, p") or PGL(2, p"), p a prime, p" > 4. Let H = G'Z. Since H/Z
PSL(2, p") is simple, H'Z = H and hence H/H' is central in G/H' of index at most 2.
Thus G/H' is abelian, that is, G' = H' = (G'Z)' = G". Therefore G' r) Z < (G')' n Z(G')
and, by a well-known theorem of Schur's (see Huppert [1967], p. 629), G' n Z
is isomorphic to a subgroup of the Schur multiplier M of G'/G' n Z H/Z
PSL(2, p"). Now this Schur multiplier and the representation group of PSL(2, p") are
well-known (see Huppert [1967], p. 646). If p = 2 and p" 0 4, then M = I and so
G' PSL(2, 2") = SL(2, 2"), as desired. If p > 2 and p" 0 9, then I MI = 2 and so
G' PSL(2, p") or SL(2, p"). Let p" 0 5 and suppose, for a contradiction, that G' 2f
PSL(2, p"). Then p" + 1 or p" - 1 has 4 as a proper factor and G' contains a dihedral
group D of this order (see Huppert [1967], p. 213). Then Z(D) 0 1 and CG(Z(D)) is a
nonabelian proper centralizer in G, a contradiction. Thus G' SL(2. p"), as desired.
We are left with the exceptional cases p" = 4, 5, 9. Here PGL(2,4) = PSL(2,4)
PSL(2, 5) has representation group SL(2, 5), so that if G/Z at PSL(2, 5), then (vi)
holds with p" = 4 or p" = 5. Now let G/Z PGL(2, 5) and suppose, for a contradic-
tion, that G' PSL(2, 5). Then G r) Z = I and if A e Sy12(G'), S e Sy12(G) and A < S,
then A = G n S a S and so A n Z(S) 0 1. Thus S < Co(A n Z(S)) < G and, since
S is nonabelian, this is impossible. Thus G' ti SL(2, 5) and (vi) holds. Finally, if
p" = 9, then I M I = 6 and, as shown above, G' PSL(2,9). So G' n Z I and we
claim that IG' n ZI # 3. Indeed, if IG' n ZI = 3, a Sylow 2-subgroup S of G' would
be dihedral of order 8 and, since Z(S) 4 Z, there would exist a nonabelian central-
izer in G. Thus IG' n ZI = 2 or 6 and so (vi) or (vii) holds.
(f) G/Z Sz(q), q a power of 2. The group Sz(q) has nonabelian Sylow 2-
subgroups which, by 3.5.3, have to be contained in components of E. Since all
components of Y. are abelian, this case cannot occur.
Now assume that, conversely, G has one of the properties (i)-(vii). If G satisfies (i),
then by 9.3.6, L(G) L(P); so G e M(k) where k = 1 (mod p), by 3.5.10. If G is of type
(ii), then G E M(IN : ZI + 1), by (c) of 9.3.2. If G satisfies (iii) or (iv), then, since K/Z
operates fixed-point-freely on F/Z, every proper centralizer of G is contained in F or
in a conjugate of K. So if F and K are abelian, (1(G) = {Z,F,G} u {K9Ig e C} and
therefore G e W (k) where k= I G: NG(K) I+ 1= I G: K I+ I =I F: Z I+ 1. And if
F E 9JI(m) and Z(F) = Z, then (1(G) consists of Z, G, the maximal abelian subgroups
of F, and the conjugates of K; thus G E TI(k) where k = IF: ZI + m.
Now let G be of type (v) and M a maximal centralizer of G. We claim that M/Z is
a maximal cyclic subgroup of G/Z; since S4 has 13 of these, it will follow that
G E M(13). By (10), M = CG(x) for some p-element x e G\Z and, since M/Z central-
izes xZ, we have that M/Z is a p-group. Therefore we are done if p = 3. So let p = 2,
S/Z be a Sylow 2-subgroup of G/Z containing M/Z, and D/Z be the cyclic subgroup
of order 4 of S/Z. As a cyclic extension of a central subgroup, D is abelian. Since V
is nonabelian, Z(V) = Z and hence Z(S) = Z. So I M : ZI 5 4 and Z < Z(M) implies
that M is abelian. If D = M, we are done. And if D 0 M, then D n M < Z(S) = Z
and hence M/Z is a maximal cyclic subgroup of order 2 of G/Z, as desired.
We leave it as an exercise for the reader to show that every group of type (vi) and
(vii) is an 9JI-group. In the first case, the centralizer partition E of G/Z is described in
3.5.1(e); it has the Sylow p-subgroups of G/Z as components. As in Example 9.3.2(c)
for SL(2,2") one shows that jEI = pen + p" + 1. In the second case, the centralizer
partition of G/Z consists of the maximal cyclic subgroups of G/Z, of which there are
34+4(32+ 1) = 121.
As particular cases of the above theorem we obtain that GL(2, p") and SL(2, p") lie
in 9JI(p2n + p" + 1) for p" > 3. Also note that the two representation groups of S4
satisfy (v); one of them is GL(2, 3) (see Huppert [1967], p. 653).
Our theorem does not say much in the case where G is a p-group in M. Here if
x E Z2(G)\Z, then G'< CG(Z2(G)) < CG(x) < G and so N = CG(x) is a normal maxi-
mal abelian subgroup of G with abelian factor group; by 3.5.3, every element in
G/Z\,N/Z has order p. If IG: NI = p, then G is a p-group with an abelian subgroup
of index p and so its structure is well-known. If IG: NI > p2, Rocke [1975] shows
that c(G) 2 and
r > 0, he constructs a p-group G E 931 of class p having a normal maximal abelian
subgroup N of index p" such that IN: G'ZI = p'
Since SL(2, p") is not simple for p > 2, Theorem 9.3.12 yields that the only finite
nonabelian simple `J-groups are the groups SL(2, 2"). We shall now show that these
groups are the only finite nonabelian simple groups with modular centralizer lattice.
For this we need the following two results which are perhaps of independent interest.
The first one implies that every finite group in 9JI(p" + 1) is soluble. We mention in
passing another strange result of this kind: If k is even, every finite group in 9JI(k) is
soluble. This follows immediately from Theorem 9.3.12 and the simple fact that
pen + p" + 1 is odd for every prime p and n e N.
9.3.13 Lemma. Let p be a prime, n e Ni, and G a finite group.

(a) If G e 9R(p" + 1), then either G/Z(G) is a p-group or G has a maximal abelian
subgroup A such that A/Z(G) is a p-group and B/Z(G) is a p'-group for every other
maximal abelian subgroup B of G.
(b) If E(G) is isomorphic to the lattice of subspaces of a vector space over GF(p"),
then G e 9R(p" + 1) or G/Z(G) is a p-group.
Proof. (a) Let G e 931(p" + 1). Since 12, q2m + q' = gm(gm + 1), and 120 are not
prime powers, G is not of type (v), (vi), or (vii). Suppose, for a contradiction, that G
is of type (iv). Then F/Z is a q-group in 93(m) for some q e P, m e N and so p" + 1=
IF: ZI + m = 1 (mod q), by (i) of 9.3.12. Thus p = q, let IF: ZI = p'. Since m is the
number of components of a partition of F/Z, clearly m < p' and so m = pst + 1
where s < r and (t, p) = 1. It follows that p" = p' + pst = ps(p'-s + t); but p'-s + t is
not a power of p. This contradiction shows that G is of type (i), (ii), or (iii). Now if G
is of type (i), then G/Z is a q-group and p" + I = 1 (mod q) implies that p = q. If G
is of type (ii), then IN: ZI = p" and IG : NI = q e P. So if q = p, G/Z is a p-group; and
if q : p, every maximal abelian subgroup B 0 N of G satisfies IB/ZI = I G/NI = q so
that B/Z is a p'-group. Similarly, if G is of type (iii), IF : ZI = p" and the Frobenius
complements have order prime to IF/ZI. This proves (a).
(b) If H E E(G), then by (6), C&(H) c [H/Z(H)]c. Suppose that this interval has
length 2. Then E(H) has length 2, that is, H is an 931-group. Further [H/Z(H)]c is
isomorphic to the lattice of subspaces of a 2-dimensional vector space over GF(p")
and therefore has p" + 1 atoms. If X is such an atom and x e X \ Z(H), there exists
a maximal abelian subgroup A of H such that x e A. Then x e X n A and, since X
and A are atoms in [H/Z(H)]c and x 0 Z(H), it follows that X = A E E(H). Thus we
have shown:
(19) If H E CM(G) such that [H/Z(H)]c has length 2, then 3(H) = [H/Z(H)]c and
HE9R(p"+ 1).
By 9.3.10, !(G) has even length 1. If I= 2, then (19) shows that G E 931(p" + 1),
as desired. So we may assume that l >_ 4 and we have to show first that A/Z is
a p-group for every minimal centralizer A of G. For this we need the following
assertion.
(20) Let A, B be atoms of CS(G) such that [A, B] = 1. If A/Z is a p-group, then so
is B/Z.
To show this we may, of course, assume that A 0- B. Since A and B are atoms, C(A)
and C(B) are antiatoms of CM(G). And since any two maximal subspaces of a vector
space have a common complement, there is an atom D of 3(G) such that
D C(A) and D C(B). It follows that H = A v B v D is not abelian. However,
since [A, B] = 1, (9) yields that AB is abelian and hence is contained in a maximal
abelian subgroup X of H. By (8) and (6), X e CE(G) and so A v B< X; since
[H/Z(G)]c has length at most 3, it follows that A v B = X. Now H = X v D implies
that Z(H) = H A C(H) = H A C(X) A C(D) = CH(X) A C(D) = X A C(D). Since
C(D) is an antiatom of E(G) and E(G) is modular, X n C(D) is maximal in X and so
Z(H) is an atom of CE(G). Thus [H/Z(H)]c has length 2 and, by (19), H E 9R(p" + 1).
By (a), H/Z(H) is a p-group or has a maximal abelian subgroup N such that N/Z(H)
is a p-group and Y/Z(H) is a p'-group for any other maximal abelian subgroup Y of
H. In the latter case, since AZ(H)/Z(H) A/A n Z(H) = A/Z is a nontrivial p-group
contained in X/Z(H), it follows that X = N. Thus in both cases X/Z(H) is a p-group;
hence B/Z is a p-group since B/Z BZ(H)/Z(H) < X/Z(H). This proves (20).
(21) If A is an atom of K(G), then A/Z is a p-group.
Indeed, let B be an atom of E(G) such that B C(A) and let H = A v B. Since
((H) c [H/Z]c and this interval has length 2, we must have Z(H) = Z and so
H E TI(p" + 1), by (19). Now (a) implies that H contains an atom X of CM(G) such that
X/Z is a p-group. Since 12! 4, we have H 0 G and so C(H) contains an atom Y of
LE(G). Then [X, Y] = 1 = [Y, A] and, applying (20) twice, we obtain that Y/Z and
A/Z are p-groups. This proves (21).
Finally we use induction on the length l of ((G) to show that G/Z is a p-group (if
I > 4); this will complete the proof of the lemma. Since every element x e G lies in a
maximal abelian subgroup of G, it suffices to show that A/Z is a p-group for every
maximal abelian subgroup A of G. For this let M be a maximal centralizer contain-
ing A. Then Z < C(M) = Z(M) < A < M < G. So if I = 4, [M/Z(M)]c has length 2
and by (19), M E 9JI(p" + 1). Since [A/Z]c is isomorphic to the lattice of subspaces
of a 2-dimensional vector space, there exists an atom X Z(M) of L(G) such that
X 5 A. By (21), X/Z and Z(M)/Z are p-groups and X/Z XZ(M)/Z(M) < A/Z(M);
it follows from (a) that A/Z(M) is a p-group. Thus A/Z is a p-group, as desired. If
I > 4, then by 9.3.10, 1 > 6 and so (QM) = [M/Z(M)]c has length at least 4. By
induction and (21), M/Z(M) and Z(M)/Z are p-groups and then so is A/Z.
9.3.14 Theorem. (Antonov [1987]). If G is a finite nonabelian simple group with

modular centralizer lattice, then G SL(2, 2")for some n > 2.
Proof. Suppose, for a contradiction, that the length I of K(G) is at least 4. Since
the join of all atoms of (1;(G) is clearly a normal subgroup of G and G is simple, this
join-in L(G) and in E(G)-equals G. By a well-known property of modular lattices
(see Crawley and Dilworth [1973], p. 30), L(G) is complemented.
Now suppose, for a contradiction, that &(G) is directly decomposable. Then there
exist nontrivial lattices Li (i = 1, 2) with least elements Oi and greatest elements Ii
such that L(G) = L, x L2 and L, is directly indecomposable. If H = (11,02) and
K = (01,12), then by 9.3.8, [H, K] = 1 and E(H) = [H/Z(G)]c ^- L1. For g e G,
H9 E C!(G); hence H9 = (x,y) with x e L1, y e L2 and
((H9) _ ([H/Z(G)]c)9 = [H9/Z(G)]c [x/0i] x [Y/02].

On the other hand, E(H9) L(H) is directly indecomposable and it follows that
x = 0, or y = 02, that is, H9 < K or H9 = H. In any case, H9 < HK for all g e G
and, since G is simple, it follows that HK = G. But K centralizes H, a contradiction.
Thus L(G) is a finite, directly indecomposable, complemented, modular lattice of
length at least 4 and it is well-known (see Crawley and Dilworth [1973], Chapter 13)
that such a lattice is isomorphic to the lattice of subspaces of a vector space over
some finite field GF(p"). But now 9.3.13(b) yields that G is a p-group, a contradic-
tion. It follows that 1 < 3 and so l = 2, by 9.3.10. Thus G is an 912-group and, by
9.3.12, G SL(2, 2") for some n > 2.
The structure of arbitrary finite groups with modular centralizer lattices is not
known; only very special classes of such groups have been investigated. By 9.3.13,
every finite group whose centralizer lattice is isomorphic to the lattice of subspaces
of a vector space of dimension at least 3 over GF(p") is a p-group. Antonov [1987]
shows that IA : ZI < p' for every minimal centralizer A of such a group and deter-
mines the group if I A : ZI = p" for all such A.
Jiirgensen [1976] studies finite groups with modular centralizer lattices of length
4. She shows that such a group is soluble if it has trivial centre and the intersection
N of all the maximal centralizers of G is different from Z; Exercise 9 gives an
example of such a group. If N = Z, then either G/Z is a p-group or (((G) is decom-
posable into a direct product of two lattices of length 2; in this case 9.3.8 and 9.3.12
give the structure of G.
Finally, Vasileva [1977] studies 9112-groups, that is, non-912-groups whose maxi-
mal centralizers are either abelian or in 991. These centralizer lattices, of course, need
not be modular, an example is C!(S4). Her main result is that the finite simple 912-
groups are precisely the groups PSL(2, q) (q odd, q > 5), Sz(22n+1) (n > 1), PSL(3, q)
(q > 2), PSU(3,q) (q > 2), the Janko group J,, the alternating group A7, and the
Mathieu group M,,.
Characterization by centralizer lattices
By 9.3.6, ((G) (QG x A) for every abelian group A. So at best it is possible to

characterize a group modulo abelian direct factors or in a certain class of groups, for
example, among the groups with trivial centre. Vasileva's theorem and Theorem
9.3.12 (or 9.3.14) yield such characterizations. We give three other results of this type
without proof; all these proofs are quite technical and use rather special properties
of the groups studied.
9.3.15 Theorem. Let G be a finite group, p a prime, n e N.

(a) (Schmidt [1970d]) If L(G) ^- CS(J,), then G = A x J, where A is abelian.
(b) (Schmidt [1972a]) If (V-(G) (((PSL(2, p")) and Z(G) = 1, then G PSL(2, p").
(c) (Vasileva [1976]) If 11(G) ^_ p")) and Z(G) = 1, then G PSL(3, p").
11(G) as a sublattice of L(G)
Finally we turn to the question of when L(G) is a sublattice of L(G). This is certainly
the case if 1(G) = L(G), that is, if every subgroup of G is a centralizer. The finite
groups with this property were determined by Gaschiitz in 1955. More generally, we
study finite groups G for which 1(G) = [G/Z(G)], that is, in which every subgroup
containing the centre is a centralizer. This property is inherited by subgroups.
9.3.16 Lemma. If (-f (G) = [G/Z(G)] and H < G, then .(H) = [H/Z(H)].
Proof. By 9.3.1, the centralizer map is a duality of [G/Z]. In particular, for all
X, Y > Z, we have C(X n Y) = C(X) u C(Y). Using this, 9.3.1, and Dedekind's law,
we get for Z(H) < A < H,
CH(CH(A)) = C(C(A) n H) n H = C((C(A) n H)Z) n H = C(C(A) n HZ) n H
= (CC(A) u C(H)) n H = (CC(AZ) u C(H)) n H
= AC(H) n H = A(C(H) n H) = AZ(H) = A.
Thus A e E(H), as desired.
9.3.17 Theorem. The finite group G satisfies CM(G) = [G/Z(G)] if and only if
G = G1 x x G, x A where (IG1I,IG;I) = 1 = (IGiI,JAI) for i 0 j, A is abelian,
and every G. is either a { p, q}-group with IGi/Z(Gi)I = pq or a p-group satisfying
(((Gi) = [Gi/Z(Gr)], p and q primes.
Proof. Suppose that G has this structure. Then G/Z G1/Z(G1) x x G,/Z(G,).
If IGi/Z(Gj)I = pq and Z(Gi) < X < Gi, then X is a maximal abelian subgroup of G.
and hence X E E(G1). Thus !(G1) = [Gi/Z(G1)] for all i; by 9.3.6 and 1.6.4,
1(G) ((G1) x ... x E(Gr) = [G1/Z(G1)] x ... x [Gr/Z(Gr)] [G/Z].
Since E(G) is a subset of [G/Z], it follows that E(G) = [G/Z].

Suppose conversely that E(G) = [G/Z]. Then by 9.3.1, G/Z has a dual and hence,
by 8.2.3, is a direct product of coprime p-groups and P-groups. Now, in general, if
G/Z = X/Z x Y/Z where X/Z is a n-group and Y/Z is a n'-group, then G = H x K
with n-group H and n'-group K satisfying H/Z(H) X/Z. Indeed, 0,.(Z) is a
normal Hall subgroup in X and hence has a complement H in X, by the Schur-
Zassenhaus Theorem. Then X = H x 0,.(Z) and H a G since H is characteristic
in X < G. Similarly, Y = O,(Z) x K where K is a normal n'-subgroup of G. Since
0,,(Z)< H and 0,.(Z)< K, it follows that G = H x K. Now Z(H) = H n Z and so
H/Z(H) -- X/Z.
If we apply this to the given direct decomposition of G/Z, we see that G =
G1 x x G, x A where A is abelian, (IGiI,IG;I) = 1 = (IGiI,IAI) for i j, and
Gi/Z(GL) is a p-group or a P-group. By 9.3.16, E(G1) _ [Gi/Z(G3)] for all i. If Gi/Z(G3)
is a P-group of order p"q, p > q, then G,/Z(G1) has a unique maximal normal sub-
group (of order p"). Since the centralizer duality maps normal subgroups to normal
subgroups, it follows that G]/Z(G1) has only one minimal normal subgroup. But
every subgroup of order p of G;/Z(G;) is normal, so n = 1.
If we add the condition Z(G) = 1 in the above theorem, we get the structure of
finite groups in which every subgroup is a centralizer.
9.3.18 Corollary (Gaschutz [1955]). Let G be a finite group. Then S.(G) = L(G) if
and only if G = G1 x - - x G, where ((Gil,JG;j) = 1 for all i j and every G; is non-
-
abelian of order pq, p and q primes.
Theorem 9.3.17 characterizes the finite groups G with E(G) = [G/Z(G)] modulo
the p-groups with this property. The structure of these groups is also known; we give
it without proof.
9.3.19 Theorem (Reuther [1977], Cheng [1982]). The following properties of the
finite p-group G are equivalent:
(a) (_V(G) = [G/Z(G)],
(b) [G/Z(G)] is modular and G' is cyclic,
(c) G' = <a> is cyclic and [<a>, G] < <a4>.
Independently, and more generally, Antonov [1980] determined all groups G for
which G/Z(G) is locally finite and CM(G) = [G/Z(G)].
We return to the more general question of when E(G) is a sublattice of L(G). By
(1), this is clearly the case if
(22) C(X n Y) = C(X) u C(Y) for all X, Y< G.
However, this condition is much stronger. Reuther [1975] shows that a finite group
G satisfies (22) if and only if G = G1 x . . x G, where (IGig, J G,I) = 1 for all i O j and
.
the G. are abelian, isomorphic to Q8, or have order pq", p > q, and cyclic Sylow
subgroups. Clearly (22) implies that the map C2: L(G) -+ L(G) sending every X < G
to CC(X) is a homomorphism. Antonov [1980] studies the much weaker property
that CZ is a homomorphism from L(G) to CM(G); since
C2(X U Y) = C(C(X) n C(Y)) = C2(X) V C2(Y)

holds in general, this amounts to the condition that
(23) C2(X n Y) = CZ(X) A C2(Y) for all X, Y < G.
Nevertheless he is able to determine all groups G satisfying (23) for which G/Z(G) is
locally finite. For finite groups, he obtains the same structure theorem as Reuther
so that (22) and (23) are equivalent for these groups. Both Reuther and Antonov
also study groups for which the equations in (22) and (23) only hold for all
X, Y E [G/Z(G)].
We finish this section by mentioning a result of quite a different nature.
9.3.20 Theorem (Antonov [1991]). If (E(G) is a sublattice of L(G) for a finite group
G, then L(G) is modular.
Exercises
1. Show that every abelian centralizer is the intersection of maximal abelian sub-
groups.
9.4 Coset lattices 527
2. If (G;,)AEA is a family of groups, show that L I Dr GA) Dr !(G;).

\AEA AeA
3. (Schmidt [1970c]). Let G1 = H, x K, with H, ^- Q8 K1 and let G = G1/D
where D is the diagonal in the direct product Z(H1) x Z(K 1); let H = H1 D/D
and K = K1D/D. Show that H Q8 K, G = HK and [H,K] = 1, but
L(G) * L(H) x L(K).
4. (Jurgensen [1976]) Let P = <a> x be elementary abelian of order 25 and
let c, d e Aut P be defined by a` = a-1, b` = b, and xd = x2 for all x e P. Let
Q = <c, d> < Aut P and G = PQ be the semidirect product of P and Q. Finally,
let e = cd 2, H = <a, c> and K = <b, a>. Show that H K D10, H = CG(K),
K = Cc, (H), I G : HK I = 2, and L(G) E(H) x E, (K).
5. (Antonov [1987]) If G is a finite group and H < G such that IL(H)I = IL(G)I,
show that L(H) L(G).
6. (Vasileva [1976]) If G is a finite group, H < K < G and L(H) L(G), show that
L(K) L(G).
7. (Antonov [1987]) Let G be a finite p-group such that L(G) is isomorphic to the
lattice of subspaces of a vector space over GF(p"). If I A : Z(G)I = p" for every
minimal centralizer A of G, show that L(G) is a sublattice of L(G).
8. (Jurgensen [1976]) Suppose that G is a finite group such that L(G) is modular of
length 4 and the intersection N of all the maximal centralizers of G is different
from Z(G).
(a) Show that [G/N]c has length 2 and GIN has a normal partition.
(b) If Z(G) = 1, show that G is soluble.
9. (Jurgensen [1976]) Let
M = <a,b,cIa3 = b3 = c3 = 1,[a,b] = c,[a,c] = [b,c] = 1>
be the nonabelian group of order 27 and exponent 3 and let x E Aut M such that
as = a2, ba = b, ca = c2. Show that the semidirect product G = M<a) has
centralizer lattice modular of length 4.
10. If G is a finite group such that L(G) L(S4), show that G/Z(G) S4.
11. (Reuther [1975]) If G is a finite nonabelian p-group satisfying (22), show that
G ." Q8_
9.4 Coset lattices

In this final section we study the coset lattice 91(G) which was defined in 1.1.
Our first main problem, to determine the groups whose coset lattices have special
properties, is not a very fruitful one: almost any interesting lattice property is
satisfied by nearly all or by very few coset lattices, or else it holds in 91(G) if and only
if it holds in L(G). More interesting is the study of isomorphisms between coset
lattices. Since the atoms of 91(G) are the one-element subsets of G and for any such
atom {g}, the interval [G/{g}] in 93(G) is isomorphic to L(G), two groups with
isomorphic coset lattices have the same order and isomorphic subgroup lattices.
Nevertheless there are nonisomorphic groups with isomorphic coset lattices. An

isomorphism o: 93(G) -+ fl(G) can be regarded as a bijective map from G to G
preserving cosets. We consider under which conditions a is an isomorphism from G
to G.
Basic properties of 9i(G)
Recall that ER(G) is the set of all right cosets of subgroups of G together with the
empty set 0. With the set-theoretic inclusion as relation, 93(G) is a complete meet-
sublattice of the lattice of all subsets of G; we write A and v for the intersection and
join in 9(G). If H, K G and a, b E G, then Ha n Kb = 0 or
(1) Ha A Kb =Ha nKb =HxnKx=(HnK)xfor every xEHa nKb.
Clearly, Ha and Kb are contained in <H, K, ba-' >a. Conversely, if Mx is a coset
containing Ha and Kb, then a c- Mx implies Ha c Mx = Ma and hence H < M;
similarly K < M and ba-' E M since a, b e Mx. Thus <H, K, ba-' >a is the smallest
coset containing Ha and Kb, that is,
(2) Ha v Kb = <H, K, ba-' >a.
Since aH = (aHa-' )a, every left coset is a right coset and conversely; thus fl(G) is the
set of all (right or left) cosets of G. We shall need the following characterization of
cosets.
(3) A subset X of G is an element of IN(G) if and only if xy-' z e X for all
x, y,zEX.
Indeed, for h; e H, we have hta(h2a)-'h3a = h1h2'h3a e Ha. Conversely, suppose
that X 0 satisfies the condition, let S = {xy ' jx, y E X} and x, y, u, v e X. Then
(xy-')(uv-')-' = xy-'vu-' E S since xy-'v e X, and so S is a subgroup of G. Fur-
thermore xy-'v E X implies Sv c X and x = xv-'v E Sv yields X c Sv; thus X = Sv
is a coset.
The least element of 93(G) is the empty set 0 and the greatest element is the coset
G. The atoms in the lattice of all subsets of G are the one-element subsets of G and
these are cosets of the trivial subgroup 1. Therefore
(4) the atoms of tR(G) are the sets {g} where g c G.
Since the subgroups of G are precisely the cosets containing 1, we have that
(5) [G/1] = L(G).
Here, and throughout this section, intervals are taken in 31(G). Note that if T is a
subgroup of G, an interval [S/T] in 9i(G) only contains subgroups of G so that we
do not need to distinguish between intervals in fl(G) and L(G).
For g e G and X, Y c G, it is obvious that X c Y if and only if Xg c Yg; and if
X = Ha is a right coset, so is Xg = Hag. Therefore the map
(6) pg: `R(G) given by X9 = Xg for 0 # X E fl(G) is an isomorphism.
Since 9R(G) is the set of all left cosets in G, the map

(7) A9:'R(G) -+ 'R(G) given by Xz9 = g-1X for 0 0 X E SR(G) is an isomorphism.
Now 19 = {g} yields [G/{g}] [G/1] and hence
(8) [G/{g}] L(G) for every atom {g} of tR(G).
Finally, note that for every subgroup H of G, clearly,
(9) [H/O] = HR(H).
Groups with special coset lattices
As mentioned above, coset lattices do not usually have nice lattice properties. For
example, if I < H < G and a e G\H, then {0, {a}, Ha, <H, a>, H} is a nonmodular
sublattice of 9R(G). Thus a group with modular coset lattice is cyclic of at most prime
order. With a little more effort, we can prove the following.
9.4.1 Theorem (Curzio [1957c], Loiko [1962]). The following properties of a group
G are equivalent.
(a) R(G) is modular.
(b) 91(G) is lower semimodular.
(c) I G I is a prime or 1.
Proof. By 2.1.5, every modular lattice is lower semimodular and so (a) implies
(b). Now let SR(G) be lower semimodular and suppose, for a contradiction, that
1 < H < G; let a e G\H. By Zorn's Lemma there exists a subgroup M maximal with
respect to the properties H < M < <H, a> and a 0 M (see the proof of Lemma 3.1.1).
Clearly, M is a maximal subgroup of (H, a> and, by (2), (H, a> = M v Ma. So
M v Ma covers M in 94(G), but M A Ma = 0 c {a} c Ma. As 93(G) is lower semi-
modular, this is a contradiction. It follows that G is cyclic of at most prime order.
Finally, if IGJ is a prime p, then tR(G) is of length 2 and has p atoms. So 9 (G) is
modular.
Since a lattice of length 2 is distributive if and only if it has at most 2 atoms, we

obtain from 9.4.1 the following.
9.4.2 Corollary. 'R(G) is distributive if and only if IGI < 2.
9.4.3 Theorem (Curzio [1957c]). ER(G) is directly decomposable if and only if

G1 = 2.
Proof. If G = { 1, g}, then ER(G) = {0, { 1 }, { g}, G} is the direct product of two chains
of length 1. Assume conversely that R(G) = L1 x L2 with nontrivial lattices L.. Let
Oi and 1i be the least and greatest elements of L1, respectively, and let (11, 02) = Hu
and (01,12) = Kv where H, K < G and u, v c- G. Every atom { g} of 'R(G) is of the
form (x,02) or (Ol,y) with x e L1, y e L2 and hence is contained in Hu or Kv. So if

I e Hu, say, we see that G is the set-theoretic union of H and Kv. It follows that
K H and Hv E- Kv, that is, H = K is a subgroup of index 2 in G. But then
H = (11, 02) is maximal in G = (11,12) and hence (01, 02) = 0 is also maximal in
(01,12) = Hv. Thus Hv is an atom of 91(G) and this yields H = 1 and I GI = 2.
Exceptions to the statement made at the beginning of this subsection are the
following two results.
9.4.4 Theorem (Curzio [1957c]). If every proper subgroup of G is contained in a

maximal subgroup, then 91(G) is complemented. In particular, if G is finite or cyclic,
91(G) is complemented.
Proof. Let X e 91(G) such that 0 c X c G. Then there exist H < G and a e G such
that X = Ha. By assumption there exists a maximal subgroup M of G containing H.
ba-'
For every b e G\Ma, we have 0 M and hence by (2), Ha v Mb = G. Clearly,
Ha A Mb 9 Ma n Mb = 0 and so Mb is a complement to X = Ha in 91(G).
9.4.5 Theorem (Curzio [1957c]). If G is a finite group, then 91(G) is relatively

complemented if and only if L(G) is relatively complemented.
Proof. If 91(G) is relatively complemented, then so is its interval L(G). Suppose

conversely that L(G) is relatively complemented and let [X/Y] be a nontrivial inter-
val in 91(G). If Y # 0, then Y = bK for some b e G, K < G and the automorphism
/!b of 91(G) maps [X/Y] to [b-'X/K]. This is an interval in L(G) and hence is
complemented. Now let Y = 0. Then X = aH for some a e G, H < G and ;,, maps
[X/Y] to [H/QS] = 91(H). Since H is finite, 91(H) is complemented, by 9.4.4. Thus
every interval of 91(G) is complemented and so 91(G) is relatively complemented.
Groups whose coset lattices are self-dual, or upper semimodular, or satisfy the
Jordan-Dedekind chain condition are treated in Exercises 1-3. Similar results as for
91(G) were proved by d'Andrea [1969] for the lattice 91N(G) of all cosets of G with
respect to normal subgroups of G (see Exercise 4).
91-isomorphisms
A bijective map a: G - G is called an IX-isomorphism if for every subset X of G, we

have X E 91(G) if and only if X E 91(G); a is called normed if l = 1. Clearly, every
91-isomorphism induces an isomorphism from 91(G) onto 91(G). Conversely, an
isomorphism 0: 91(G) --+ 9R(6) maps every atom {g} of 91(G) to an atom {g} of 91(G)
and the map g - g is an 91-isomorphism from G to G inducing 0. Therefore it
is an equivalent problem to study isomorphisms between coset lattices or 91-
isomorphisms between groups; we prefer to do the latter. So in the sequel we
consider the maps p9 and 1.9 defined in (6) and (7) as element maps; these are 91-
isomorphisms. The product of two 9i-isomorphisms clearly is an 91-isomorphism.

The maps p and i sending every g e G to p9 and ate, respectively, are isomorphisms
from G to subgroups Rt G and Lt G of the group RP(G) of all 9R-automorphisms of
G; to obtain this, we have to multiply by g-1 in (7). We call Rt G (and Lt G) the group
of right (and left) translations of G and have that
(10) RP(G) = RP(G)1 Rt G = RP(G)1 Lt G
if RP(G)1 is the group of all normed 91-automorphisms of G. _
More generally, if a: G G is any 9t-isomorphism, then r = ai. 1,: G -+ G satisfies
1` = (1) 1
1 = I and hence is a normed 9I-isomorphism. So we have shown that
(11) 92(G) and 9R(G) are isomorphic if and only if there exists a normed 9R-
isomorphism from G to G.
Therefore it suffices to study normed 93-isomorphisms. Every isomorphism or anti-
isomorphism a is a normed 9I-isomorphism since in this case (Hx) = Haxa or xH
is a coset if H < G and x e G. Conversely, we wish to find criteria for a normed
93-isomorphism a: G -+ G to be an isomorphism or an antiisomorphism. We start by
giving some basic properties of a. A subset X of G is a subgroup of G if and only if
X e 9I(G) and 1 e X. Since a is a normed 91-isomorphism, this holds if and only if
X e 9t(G) and I = 1 e X, that is, if and only if X < G. Thus
(12) a induces a projectivity & from G to G.
In particular, a maps cyclic subgroups to cyclic subgroups and hence satisfies
(13) <g> _ <g> for every g e G;
this also follows from the fact that <g> is the smallest coset containing 1 and g.
Clearly, (13) implies that o(g) = o(g) and so <g> ^- <g>. We have shown:
(14) Every cyclic group is determined by its coset lattice.
This is one of the few cases in which (12) and I GI = 161 yield that G and G are
isomorphic. If o(g) is infinite, we can even show that a induces an isomorphism in
W.
9.4.6 Lemma (Loiko [1961]). If a: G -+ G is a normed 9i-isomorphism and u e G is
an element of infinite order, then (u)k = (uk) for all k e Z.
Proof. Put u = v. Then by (13), = <v> and we show by induction on k that
(uk) = vk for k e N; since uk and u-k are the only generators of (uk>, it will follow
that (u-k) = v-k. For k = 0 and k = 1, the assertion is clear. So let k >_ 1 and assume
that (u') = v' for i = 0, ..., k. By (6) and (7), r = a ),k is an 91-isomorphism
satisfying It = v-k(uk) = 1, by our induction assumption. By (12), r induces a
projectivity and, since ` = v-k = <v>, it follows that uT = v or u= = v-1. On
the other hand, the definition of r yields u` = v-k(uk+1 ) and hence (uk+1 ) = vk+1
or vk-1. Since a is bijective and vk-1 = (uk-1)a we obtain that (uk+1) = Vk+1 as
desired.
Further lattices
The above Icmiu. is fundamental in the study of 9I-isomorphisms. As a first

consequent, wr note the following.
9.4.7 Lemma. If o: G -- G is a normed'.R-isomorphism and a, b e G such that o(b) _

o(ah) = ac, then (aba) = aba.
Proof. Let r = pb-, u p,.. Then r is a normed 93-isomorphism since 1 t =

(b-')b = 1, by 9.4.6. Furthermore (ab)t = (abb-')b = ab and, since o(ab) = oc,
again 9.4.6 yields (aba)b = (abab)' = ((ab)')2 = abab. Thus (aba) = aba.
It is to be expected that if the projectivity 8 in (12) is induced by an isomorphism,

then a has some interesting properties. We show that if G has enough elements of
infinite order, then a is in fact an isomorphism or an antiisomorphism in this
situation. For this we need the following result.
9.4.8 Lemma. Let G be a group which is torsion free or has an element of infinite
order in its centre. If co: G G is a normed 9l-automorphism such that H' = H for all
subgroups H of G, then either x' = x for all x E G or x` = x-' for all x E G.
Proof. Suppose first that G is torsion-free and let 1 0 x c- G. Then x and x-' are the
only generators of <x> and, since <x>' = <x>, it follows that x' = x or x' = x-'.
Suppose, for a contradiction, that a, b e G such that a 0 1 0 b, a' = a and b' = b-'.
Then by 9.4.7, (aba)' = a'b'a' = ab-'a; on the other hand, (aba)' = aba or
(aba)-'. In the first case, we obtain b = b-', a contradiction since o(b) = cc. So
ab-' a = a-' b-' a-' and hence b-' a2b = a-2. This holds for every nontrivial element
b_2a2b2
b e G which is inverted by co. By 9.4.6, (b2)' = b-2 and so = a-2; but
b-'a2b = a-2 implies b-'a 2b2 = a2. This contradiction shows that co maps every
element of G to the same power.
Now suppose that Z(G) contains an element z of infinite order. Again x' = x or
x-' for all x E G of infinite order; let z' = z' where e E { + 1, -1}. We claim that
x' = x` for all x e G. If <x> n <z> 0 1, then I ; x' c- (z> for some i c- 77; by 9.4.6,
(x`)' = (x')' and then x' = x'. If (x> n (z> = I and o(x) = cc, then (x, z>
<x> x <z> is torsion-free and hence x` = x', as we have just shown. Thus x' = x`
for all x c G of infinite order. Now suppose that o(x) is finite. Since z e Z(G), x(z> is
a coset containing a unique element of finite order, namely x. By (13), to preserves
the order of an element and hence (x<z>)' is a coset in which x' is the unique
element of finite order. Now (x(z>)` contains (xz)' = x`z` and (xz2)` = x`(z`)2 and
therefore, by (3), it contains xez`(x`(zt)2)-'x`z` = x`. Thus x' = x`, as desired.
9.4.9 Theorem. Let G be a group which is torsion free or has an element of infinite
order in its centre. If a: G - G is a normed 9R-isomorphism such that the projectivity
& induced by a is induced by an isomorphism, then a is an isomorphism or an anti-
isomorphism.
Proof. Let a be an isomorphism inducing 6. Then co = ace' is a normed 'R-

automorphism of G satisfying H' = H for all H < G. By 9.4.8, co is an isomorphism
or an antiisomorphism and then so is a = coot.
We have shown in a number of cases that every projectivity of a given group is

induced by an isomorphism. So Theorem 9.4.9 covers some classes of groups which
were handled directly, without using the results on projectivities, by Loiko.
9.4.10 Corollary. Let a: G G be a normed 9i'-isomorphism.

(a) (Loiko [1961], [1963]) If G is torsion free abelian or mixed abelian of torsion-
free rank r > 2, then a is an isomorphism.
(b) If G is a locally free group, then a is an isomorphism or an antiisomorphism.
(c) (Loiko [1965c], Bruno [1970]) If G is a locally nilpotent torsion free group or
a free polynilpotent group, then a is an isomorphism or an antiisomorphism.
Proof. In all cases, G is torsion-free or has an element of infinite order in its centre.
To apply Theorem 9.4.9, we have to show that 6 is induced by an isomorphism. By
2.6.10, 7.1.19, 7.2.11, and 7.2.13, this holds in all cases except possibly when G is
torsion-free abelian of rank 1. In this case, if a, b e G, then <a, b> is cyclic and hence
(ab) = ab" by 9.4.6; thus a is an isomorphism.
Mixed abelian groups of torsion-free rank 1 do not fall under Theorem 9.4.9 since
in general they are not even determined by their subgroup lattices: we have shown
in 2.5.15 that every M-group with elements of infinite order is lattice-isomorphic to
such an abelian group. For coset lattices, the situation is not so simple; it was
clarified by Loiko in a special case. We give his result without proof.
9.4.11 Theorem (Loiko [1965a]). Let G be a mixed abelian group of torsion free
rank 1 which splits over its torsion subgroup T(G). There exists an 91-isomorphism
from G to the group G if and only if T(G) T(G), G/T(G) G/T(G), G = T(G)H
for some torsion free subgroup H, and for every element z e G of infinite order and
every Sylow p-subgroup Tp of T(G) there exists an integer i(z, p) with the following
properties:
(i) z-laz = a3-2i(z.) for all a e Tp,
(ii) i(z, p) = 1 if Exp T, = oc,
(iii) 2(i(z, p) - 1)2 = 0 (mod p") and i(zk, p) 1 + (i(z, p) - 1)k (mod p") for all
kEJifExpT,=p".
It follows from this theorem that there are mixed abelian groups G of torsion-free
rank 1 and nonabelian groups G_such that (i) 91(G) 9I(G), and, on the other hand,
(ii) L(G) L(G) and 'R(G) 93(6) (see Exercises 6 and 7). For finite abelian groups,
the situation is different. Here Theorem 2.5.9 shows that every locally finite non-
hamiltonian p-group G with modular subgroup lattice is R-isomorphic to a suitable
abelian group G (see the proof of 9.4.12). Since Baer proved this theorem in 1944,
these were the first examples of nonisomorphic groups with isomorphic coset lattices
that were discovered. The 91-isomorphisms a: G - 6 constructed in 2.5.9 satisfy
(Hx) = Hx for all H < G and x e G; so every right coset of H is mapped to a right
coset of H. However, this is not true for left cosets. Indeed, since x E (xH) and G
is abelian, it would follow that xH = (xH) = (Hx) = Hx; so H9 G for all
H < G, a contradiction if G is not abelian. Similar phenomena occur in all the other
examples mentioned above and we use the remainder of this section to study 91-
isomorphisms for which this does not happen. Since they preserve the affin structure
of G, they will be called affinities.
Affinities
An 9i-isomorphism a: G -+ G is called an affinity if

(15) (Hx) = Hx and (xH) = xH for all H < G and x e G.
Note that a bijective map a satisfying (15) in general is not an 9R-isomorphism. It is
rather obvious that a satisfies 1 = 1 and maps subgroups of G to subgroups of G,
but G may have more subgroups. For example, any normed bijective map from a
cyclic to an elementary abelian group of order 4 satisfies (15), and this is by no means
the only example (see Exercise 9). So the extra condition in the following criterion is
needed.
9.4.12 Lemma. A bijective map a: G - G is an affinity if and only if a induces a

projectivity from G to G and satisfies (15).
Proof. If a is an affinity, then {1} = (<1> l) = <1>1 = {(1)2} and hence 1 = 1.

By (12), a induces a projectivity. Conversely, suppose that a induces a projectivity
and satisfies (15); let 0 X gi G. If X E 91(G), then X = Hx for some H < G, x E G
and our assumptions on a imply that H < G and X = Hx E 91(G). If X E 9R(G),
there exist K < G and Y E G such that X = Ky = Hx = (Hx) for some H < G,
x c- G; so X = Hx e 91(G). Thus a is an 91-isomorphism satisfying (15).
Recall from (4) of 1.3 the associativity identities for the amorphy a of a map
a: G -- G. We defined a(x, y) = (y)-1(x)-1(xy) and obtained that
(16) a(x, y)`"a(xy, z) = a(y, z)a(x, yz) for all x, y, z E G.
We show next that affinities are characterized by the behaviour of their amorphies.
9.4.13 Theorem. The bijective map a: G G with amorphy a is an affinity if and

only if
(a) a induces a projectivity from G to G and
(b) a(x,y) E <x> n <y> for all x, y c- G.
If a is an affinity, then (xy) = xy for all x, y e G such that o(x) or o(y) is infinite.
Proof. If a is an affinity, then 9.4.12 shows that (a) holds and that for x, y E G, we
have (xy) E (x(y>) = x<y>; hence a(x,y) e <y> since <y> is a subgroup of G.
Similarly, (xy) E <x>y and so a(x, y)(Y)-' e <x>. Since <y> is cyclic, a(x, y)Y)-' _
a(x, y) and (b) holds.
Now assume that a satisfies (a) and (b) and let x c- G, H < G. For h E H, we have
(xh)" = x"h"a(x, h) E x"H" since a(x, h) E <h>" 5 H" < G. Hence
(17) (xH)" c x"H" for all x c- G, H < G.
If u c- G is of infinite order and U = <u)', then U" is infinite cyclic. Using induction
on I U : H 1, we show that (xH)" = x"H" for all x E U, H < U. This is true for
U : HI = 1; so assume it to be true for subgroups of smaller index than I U : HI = n
and let U = x1 H u u x"H with x = x1 be the coset decomposition of U with
respect to H. Then
U" =(x1H)"u ...u (x"H)" x'H"u ...u x"H"
and therefore I U': H"I < n. The induction assumption implies that every subgroup
of index <n of U" has a preimage different from H and so I U" : H"I = n. It follows
that the xH" are distinct and that (x,H)" = x'H" for all i. In particular, (xH)" _
x"H", as desired. By 9.4.12, a induces an affinity in U and so by 9.4.6,
(18) (u")k = (ilk)" for all k E Z.
Now assume that a(x,y) 0 1 for some elements x, y E G such that o(x) or o(y) is
infinite. Since a(x, y) E <x>" n (y>', it follows that o(x) = o(y) = oo and a(x, y) =
(x")' = (y")f for r, s E Z. By (18), x' = y' and, applying the associativity identities (16)
to x, x-', x'y, we get
a(x X-')(x,Y)a(X1-r xrY) = a(X-',x'Y)a(x,Y).
Again by (18), a(x, x-') = I and so (y")' = a(x, y) E <x'y>" = <ys+1 >" = <(Y")s+1
This contradiction shows that a(x, y) = 1 and proves that

(19) (xy)" = x"y" for all x, y e G such that o(x) or o(y) is infinite.
By 9.4.12, it remains to be shown that a satisfies (15). So let x E G, H < G and h E H.
If o(h) is infinite, then by (19), x"h" = (xh)" E (xH)"; if o(h) is finite, then I(x<h>)"I =
a(h) = I x"<h>" I and so x"h" E x" <h>" = (x <h>)", by (17). Thus x"H" c (xH)" and
so (xH)" = x"H". Since (hx)" = h"x"a(h, x) = h"a(h, x)x" E H"x", we obtain in the
same way (Hx)" = H"x".
The above theorem enables us to construct affinities which are not isomorphisms
and even affinities between nonisomorphic groups.
9.4.14 Examples. (a) Let G be a group and let N and M be subgroups of G such
that 1 <N< M < G and N< <x> for all x E G\M. For 1 od E N, the map
a=Qd:G-+Gdefined by x"=xfor xEMand x"=xdfor xEG\M is an affinity;
it is an automorphism if and only if I G: MI = 2 and dz = 1.
Note that if G = x V is a p-group such that o(u) = p" > p' = Exp V and
m > 1, then N = <u"-') = t$ _1(G) and M = <a""-"> x B = satisfy the
above assumptions.
(b) Let 2<pEP,andlet H=<u,v,wju"=v"=w"=1,[v,u]=w=w=w")
be the nonabelian group of order p3 and exponent p. Denote by a the automorphism
of order p of H given by u2 = uv-', v = v. Let s be a quadratic nonresidue modulo

pandG=H<g>,G=H<g>where gP=w,gP=ws,andh9=ha=ha forallhEH.
Then G and G are nonisomorphic groups of order p (see Huppert [1967], p. 347)
and the map a: G - G defined by (g'x) = g'x for x c- H, i c- {0,...,p - l} is an
affinity.
Proof. (a) Of course, a is bijective. For H < G, we have H = H if H < M and

H < HN = H if H -t M. Thus H = H in any case. Now N < Z(G) since G is
generated by the elements in G\M and these elements centralize N. It follows
that a(x, y) = 1 if one of x and y is contained in M. If .x, y E G\M, then
a(x, y) = d- y-' d-' x-' (xy) = d-2 if xy e M and a(x, y) = d' if xy 0 M. In any
case, a(x, y) E N < <x> r <y> = <x> r <y>. By 9.4.13, a is an affinity. And a is an
automorphism if and only if a(x, y) = 1 for all x, y c- G\M, and this is the case if and
only ifd2 = 1 and xy EM for all x, y G\\M.
(b) Clearly, a is bijective and an easy computation shows that for x = g'h, y = g'k
(h, k E H, i, j E {0, ... , p - 11), (xy) = xy if i + j - p. Now H = S2(G) = f2(G) and <w> = i(G) = U(G) and hence we see that
(xy) E (x, y> and a(x, y) E (x) r <y). Since a-' has the corresponding pro-
perties, it follows from 1.3.1 that a induces a projectivity, and then from 9.4.13 that
a is an affinity.
It is another immediate consequence of Theorem 9.4.13 that affinities map abelian

groups onto abelian groups.
9.4.15 Theorem. If a: G -- G is an affinity and H < G is abelian, then H is abelian

and Z(G) = Z(G).
Proof. Let x, y e G such that xy = yx. If o(x) or o(y) is infinite, then by 9.4.13,
xy = (xy) = (yx) = yx. So assume that o(x) and o(y) are finite. Then W =
<x, y> is a finite abelian group, hence W = <w,,..., w,) with <wr> n <wj> = I and
so, by (b) of 9.4.13, a(wi, ww) = 1 for i 0 j if a is the amorphy of Q. Since a induces
a projectivity, W = <wi,...,w, > and w'wj = (w;ww) _ (www,) = wJ'w; for i 0 j.
Thus W is abelian and xy = yx. This shows that every abelian subgroup H of G is
mapped to an abelian subgroup of G and that Z(G) < Z(G). Since a-' is also an
affinity, we get the other inclusion.
If a: G G is any map, an element x c- G is called right regular for a if (_xg) _

xg or, equivalently, a(x, g) = I for all g e G; Reg'(a) is the set of right regular
elements for a. Left regular elements and Reg`(a) are defined correspondingly.
9.4.16 Lemma. If a: G -- G is an affinity, then Reg'(a) and Reg'(a) are subgroups of G.
Proof. Since 1 = 1, 1 E Reg'(a). If x, y E Reg'(a), then (xyg)' = x(yg) = xyg =

(xy)g for all g e G and hence xy E Reg'(a). If o(x) is finite, this also implies that
x-' E Regr(a), and if o(x) is infinite, x-' E Reg'(a) by 9.4.13. Thus Regr(a) is a sub-
group of G and the proof for Reg'(a) is similar.
We come to our first main result on regular elements. For this we need the
following lemma.
9.4.17 Lemma. If a: G - G is an affinity, then t: G - G defined by gt = ((g-')')-'

for g e G is also an affinity.
Proof. Of course, t induces the same projectivity as a. For H< G and x e G, we

have
(Hx)t = ((x-'H)`)-1 = ((x-' )f HQ)-' = Ha((x-1)a)-l = H`xt.
Similarly, (xH)t = xtHT and by 9.4.12, t is an affinity.
9.4.18 Theorem (Schmidt [1984a]). Let G be a group, let Reg'G be the set of all
elements of G which are right regular for every affinity from G to any group G and
define Reg' G similarly. Then Reg' G = Reg' G =: Reg G is a characteristic subgroup
of G containing all elements of infinite order and all involutions of G.
Proof. Let a: G -- G be an affinity. By 9.4.16, Reg'G and Reg'G are subgroups of G.

Let X E Reg' G. If t is defined as in 9.4.17, then x-' E Reg'(t) and so for g E G,
((gx))-' = (x-ig-i)t = (x-')t(g-1)t = (xa)-'(ga)-'
= (gaxa)-',
that is, (gx)a = gxa. Thus X E Reg'(a) and, since a was arbitrary, x e Reg' G. So
Regr G < Reg' G and the other inclusion is proved similarly.
Now let x c- Reg G and of e Aut G. For every g c- G there exists y e G such that
g = ya and, since as is an affinity, (x'g) = (xay') = (xy)Q' = xaayaa = (xa)'g'. Thus
x' E Reg'(a) and, since a was arbitrary, it follows that xa E Reg' G = Reg G. So
(Reg G)a < Reg G and Reg G is a characteristic subgroup of G.
By 9.4.13, Reg G contains every element of infinite order. So, finally, let x c- G be
an involution and H = 11, x}. Then for g e G, Hg = { g, xg} and by (15),
{ga,(xg)a} = (Hg) = Haga = {g,xaga}.
It follows that (xg)' = xaga and so x e Reg' G.
9.4.19 Corollary. If G is generated by involutions and elements of infinite order, every

affinity of G is an isomorphism.
Semiaffinities
We call an 9R-isomorphism a: G -- G a left affinity if it satisfies (xH)' = xH' and a

right affinity if it satisfies (Hx)' = H' x' for all H < G and x e G. It is interesting
to note that these semiaffinities have similar properties to those just established for
affinities. Schmidt [1983] shows that for a left affinity, every element of infinite order
and every involution is left regular, but also gives examples in which certain such
elements are not right regular. Nevertheless we obtain as a corollary that for groups
generated by elements of infinite order, every left affinity is an isomorphism, a result
due to Loiko [1972]. Similar assertions hold for right affinities since for every right
affinity a, the map z defined in 9.4.17 is a left affinity and conversely.
The structure of Am G and G/Reg G
We come to our main result on the amorphy of an affinity.
9.4.20 Theorem (Gaschiitz and Schmidt [1981], Schmidt [1984a]). If v: G -> G is

an affinity and a the amorphy of a, then a(x, y) E Z(G) for all x, y e G.
Proof. Suppose, for a contradiction, that there exist x, y e G such that a(x, y) Z(G);
by 9.4.13, x and y have finite order, and we can choose them so that o(x) is as small
as possible. If x = xlx2 with o(xl) and o(x2) less than o(x), then the associativity
identities (16) with x1, x2, y would imply
a(X,Y) = (a(x1,x2)(v1)-'a(X2,Y)a(XI ,X2Y)

E Z(G),
a contradiction. Thus o(x) = p", p a prime, n e N.

Let z e G such that a(x, y) does not commute with z. Then a(x, y) 0 <z'>. Since
o(x) = o(x) = p", the subgroups of <x) form a chain and by 9.4.13,
<a(z,x)) <_ <X) n <z) < <a(X,Y)) < <x) n <Y).
Hence a(z, x)y' = a(z, x) = a(x, y)kp with k e Z and the associativity identities for
z, x, y yield
(20) 1 = a(X, Y)' -kpa(Z, xY)a(zX, Y)-1.
Since a(x,y) and a(zx,y) are elements of <y), they commute with y and (20)
implies that [a(z, xy), y] = 1. In addition, a(z, xy) commutes with (xy) =
xya(x y) = x(y)S (s E 71), and hence also with x. Since a(x, y) E <x), equation
(20) yields [a(zx, y), x] = 1. Now a(zx, y) also commutes with (zx) = z"(x)` (t E Z)
and hence with z. As a(z,xy) E <z), again (20) implies that a(x,y)l-kp commutes
with z. Since a(x, y) E <x) is a p-element, <a(x, y)1-kp) = <a(x, y)) and so a(x, y)
commutes with z, the desired contradiction.
The above theorem is fundamental in the study of affinities. If a: G - G is an

affinity and N :!g G, then xN = (xN) = (Nx) = Nx for all x e G. So N a G
and 9.4.13 shows that the map
(21) ir: G/N -. 6/N, Nx i- Nx is an affinity.
And if N = Z(G), Theorems 9.4.15 and 9.4.20 show that this map is an isomorphism.
9.4.21 Corollary. Every affinity o : G - G induces an isomorphism from G/Z(G) onto

G/Z(G).
Another immediate consequence of 9.4.20 is that the associativity identities

become
(22) a(x, y)a(xy, z) = a(y, z)a(x, yz) for all x, y, z c- G
if a is the amorphy of an affinity o : G G. To study the situation inside G, we
introduce Am(a) = <a(x, y)'-'Ix, y e G) and define the amorphy Am G of G to be the
subgroup generated by all the Am(o) where a ranges over the affinities from G to
groups G.
9.4.22 Theorem. If G is a group, then Am G is a characteristic subgroup of G

contained in Z(G).
Proof. By 9.4.20 and 9.4.15, Am G < Z(G). Let a E Aut G and let a: G - G be an
affinity with amorphy a. Then T = or-'a is an affinity and its amorphy b satisfies
xYa(x,Y) _ (xY)Q = (x2Y2)2= xyb(x,Y)

for all x, y e G. So (a(x, y)'-')* _ (b(x`, y8))`-' e Am G.
In the remainder of this section we want to show that G/Reg G is 7t-closed for
every set it of primes; this will yield another criterion for a group to have the
property that every affinity is an isomorphism.
9.4.23 Lemma. Let a: G - G be an affinity, a the amorphy of a, and let u, v e G

such that uv = vu and (u) n (v) = 1. Then a(uv, x) = a(u, x)a(v, x) and a(x, uv) _
a(x, u)a(x, v) for all x e G.
Proof. By (22), a(u, v)a(uv, x) = a(v, x)a(u, vx) and by 9.4,13, a(u, v) e (u) n (v) = 1.
Hence
(23) a(uv, x) = a(v, x)a(u, vx).
Interchanging u and v, we get a(uv, x) = a(u, x)a(v, ux). Since
a(v, x), a(v, ux) E <v) n Z(G) and a(u, vx), a(u, x) E (u) n Z(G)
and the product of these two groups is direct, it follows that a(u, vx) = a(u, x). By
(23), a(uv, x) = a(u, x)a(v, x), as desired. The other equation is proved in just the same
way applying (22) to x, u, v in place of u, v, x.
By a trivial induction, 9.4.23 yields that if x, y e G are elements of finite order and
x = fl xp, y = fl yp are their primary decompositions, then
PCP PEP
(24) a(x, Y) = fl a(xp, Y) = fl a(x, y) = fl a(xp, Yp)

PEP pEP PEP
and a(x,, vP) is the p-primary component of a(x, y); for the proof of the last equation
note that a(x, yP) _ fl a(xq, yp) = a(xp, yP) since <xq>a n <yp> = 1 for q 0 p.
qc P
Recall that a group G is n-closed for a set it of primes if the product of any two
rr-elements of G is a rr-element.
9.4.24 Theorem (Schmidt [1984a]). If G is a group, then G/Reg G is 7r-closed for

every set it of primes. In particular, if G/Reg G is finite, it is nilpotent.
Proof. Suppose that x(Reg G) and y(Reg G) are nontrivial 7r-elements in G/Reg G.
Then by 9.4.18, o(x) and o(y) are finite and so we may choose x and y as 7r-elements.
If o(xy) is infinite, then xy e Reg G. So we may assume that o(xy) is finite; let
xy = uv = vu where u is a n-element and v is a n'-element. We have to show that for
every affinity a: G G with amorphy a and every z c- G, we have a(v, z) = 1; then
v c- Reg'G = Reg G and x(Reg G)y(Reg G) = u(Reg G) is a n-element. By 9.4.18 and
(24), it suffices to do this for z e G of prime power order p".
If p e it, then 9.4.13 implies that a(v, z) e <v> n <z) = 1. So let p 0 it. Then a(x, y),
a(y, z), a(x, yz) all are ir-elements in Z(G), whereas a(xy, z) is a n -element; hence (22)
implies that a(xy, z) = 1. Since a(u, z) e c n <z> = 1, it follows from 9.4.23 that
a(v, z) = a(uv, z) = a(xy, z) = 1, as desired. Thus G/Reg G is n-closed for every set it
of primes and a finite group with this property is nilpotent.
9.4.25 Corollary. If G is a finite perfect group, then every affinity of G is an

isomorphism.
Much more can be said about Am G and G/Reg G. First of all, Am G is locally
cyclic. Furthermore it is possible to describe Am G and Reg G within G; note that for
the definition of these subgroups one has to consider every affinity from G to any
group G. Call a subgroup S of G a p-collecting subgroup of G if it contains every
element of infinite order and every p'-element of G and satisfies K = n <x> o 1;
xEG S
call K the p-collector of S. It is easy to see that the intersection TP(G) of all p-
collecting subgroups of G is a p-collecting subgroup of G, and it is possible to show
that for p > 5, Reg G < TP(G) and TP(G)/Reg G is the p'-component of G/Reg G.
Dually, the join of all p-collectors in G is not in general a p-collector, but it is the
p-component of Am G. If p = 2 or 3, the same results hold modulo a few exceptional
cases. For details and proofs see Schmidt [1984a].
Exercises
1. (Curzio [1957c]) If 93(G) is a self-dual lattice, show that IGI is a prime or 1.
2. (Loiko [1962]) Let G be a finite group. Show that 91(G) is upper semimodular if
and only if G is a p-group.
3. (Loiko [1962]) Show that 91(G) satisfies the Jordan-Dedekind chain condition if
and only if L(G) does.
4. (d'Andrea [1969]) Let SRN(G) be the lattice consisting of all cosets of G with
respect to normal subgroups and the empty set.
(a) Show that SRN(G) is modular if and only if G is simple or G = 1; show that
9RN(G) is distributive if and only if I G I < 2.
(b) Show that RN(G) is directly decomposable if and only if I G I = 2.
(c) Show that 'RN(G) is complemented if and only if every proper normal
subgroup of G is contained in a maximal normal subgroup of G.
5. (Loiko [1972]) If a: G - G is an 'R-isomorphism, show that (a<a-' b)) =
a"((a)-'ba> and ((ba-' )a)" = <b(a)-' )a".
6. (Loiko [1965a]) Let p > 2, G = (a) x <w> and G = (z) where o(a) =
o(b) = p2, o(w) = o(z) = cc and z-'bz = b'-2P. Show that the map a: G , G
defined by (a'ws) = b'"+SP)zs is an SR-isomorphism. Find H < G and x E G such
that (Hx)" 0 Hx.
7. (Loiko [1965a]) Let p > 2, G = <a> x <w> and G = <b) <z> where o(a) _
o(b) = p3, o(w) = o(z) = oo and z-`bz = b'+2P. Show that ER(G) %(G); note
that by 2.5.15, L(G) n-- L(6).
8. (Loiko [1965a]) Let G = <a> x <w> where o(a) = 2", n > 2, and o(w) = x. De-
fine a: G G by (a`w') = c(i, k)a`wk where c(i, k) = a2 -1 if i and k are odd and
c(i, k) = I in all other cases. Show that o. is a normed 931-automorphism but no
automorphism of G.
9. If G is a cyclic and G an arbitrary group of order p", show that there exists a
bijective map a: G -+ G satisfying (15).
10. (Schmidt [1983]) Let a: G G be bijective, a the amorphy of a and assume that
v induces a projectivity from G to G. Show that
(i) (xH)=xH for allH<GandxeG
implies
(ii) a(x, y) E <y> for all x, y e G,
and this implies
(iii) (xy) = x"y for all x, y e G such that o(x) = o(y) = cc.
11. Use Exercise 10 to prove Loiko's theorem saying that for a group generated by
elements of infinite order, every left affinity is an isomorphism.
12. Let p > 2 be a prime, G = <g) a cyclic group of order p", n >_ 1, and let H =
<gP>. Show that the map a: G --+ G defined by (gx) = g2x and (g2x)" = gx for
all x c- H and y = y for all y e G\(gH u g2H) is an affinity of G.
13. (Gaschiitz and Schmidt [1981]) Let G be a group.
(a) If x, y e G such that <x> n (y) = 1 = <xy) n (y), show that y e Reg G.
(b) If x and y are p-elements of G such that x 0 Reg G and y Reg G, show that
14. (Schmidt [1984a]) Show that Am G is locally cyclic.

Bibliography
IN. Abramovskii
1967. Groups whose lattice of subgroups is a lattice with relative complements (Rus-
sian). Algebra i Logika 6, 5-8.
A.B. d'Andrea
1969. Sul reticolo SN(G). Ricerche Mat. 18, 128-140.
V.A. Antonov
1980. Groups of Gaschutz type and groups close to them. Math. Notes 27, 405-414.
1987. Finite groups with a modular lattice of centralizers. Algebra and Logic 26, 403-
422.
1991. The finite groups in which the lattice of centralizers is a sublattice of the subgroup
lattice. Soviet Math. (Iz. VUZ) 35, no. 3, 4-12.
M.N. Arshinov
1970a. Projection of a free product and group isomorphisms. Siberian Math. J. 11, 8-14.
1970b. Projectivities of pure supersoluble groups (Russian). Dokl. Akad. Nauk BSSR 14,
984-985.
1971. Lattice isomorphisms of certain classes of infinite groups. Dissertation Moscow.
M.N. Arshinov and L.E. Sadovskii
1972. Some lattice-theoretical properties of groups and semi-groups. Russian Math. Sur-
veys 27, no. 6, 149-191.
1973. The lattice definability of wreath products (Russian). Trudy Moskov Mat. Obsc. 29,
207-213.
R. Baer
1934. Der Kern, eine charakteristische Untergruppe, Compositio Math. 1, 254-283.
1937. Dualism in abelian groups. Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 43, 121-124.
1939a. The significance of the system of subgroups for the structure of the group. Amer.
J. Math. 61, 1-44.
1939b. Duality and commutativity of groups. Duke Math. Journal 5, 824-838.
1943. A theory of crossed characters. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 54, 103-170.
1944. Crossed isomorphisms. Amer. J. Math. 66, 341-404.
1952. Linear algebra and projective geometry. Academic Press, New York.
1956. Norm and hypernorm. Publ. Math. Debrecen 4, 347-350.
1961 a. Partitionen endlicher Gruppen. Math. Z. 75, 333-372.
1961b. Einfache Partitionen endlicher Gruppen mit nichttrivialer Fittingscher Unter-
gruppe. Archiv Math. 12, 81-89.
1964. Irreducible groups of automorphisms of abelian groups. Pacific J. Math. 14, 385-
406.
D.W. Barnes
1962. Lattice embeddings of prime power groups. J. Austral. Math. Soc. 2, 17-34.
1964. Projectivities in finite groups. J. Austral. Math. Soc. 4, 308-326.
D.W. Barnes and G.E. Wall
1964. On normaliser preserving lattice isomorphisms between nilpotent groups. J. Aus-
tral. Math. Soc. 4, 454-469.
Bibliography 543
P.P. Barysovec
1977. Finite nonabelian groups with complemented nonabelian subgroups. Ukrainian
Math. J. 29, 541-544.
1981a. Finite nonnilpotent groups in which all the nonabelian subgroups are comple-
mented. Ukrainian Math. J. 33, 117-122.
1981b. On a class of finite groups with complemented nonabelian subgroups. Ukrainian
Math. J. 33, 225-229.
G. Baumslag
1962. On generalized free products. Math. Z. 78, 423-438.
H. Bechtell
1965. Elementary groups. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 114, 355-362.
1969. A note on permutable complements. Amer. Math. Monthly 76, 799-800.
T.R. Berger and F. Gross
1982. A universal example of a core-free permutable subgroup. Rocky Mountain J.
Math. 12, 345-365.
Ja.G. Berkovic
1966. Finite groups satisfying weakened Jordan-Dedekind conditions concerning chains
(Russian). Finite Groups, 14-23. Nauka i Tehnika, Minsk.
M. Bianchi and M.C. Tamburini Bellani
1977. Sugli IM-gruppi finiti e i loro duali. Istit. Lombardo Accad. Sci. Lett. Rend. A 111,
429-436.
G. Birkhoff
1967. Lattice Theory. Amer. Math. Soc. Coll. Publ. XXV, 3rd Ed., Providence.
N. Bourbaki
1968. Elements of mathematics: Theory of sets. Hermann, Paris.
R.H. Bradway, F. Gross and W.R. Scott
1971. The nilpotence class of core-free quasinormal subgroups. Rocky Mountain J.
Math. 1, 375-382.
R. Brandl
1986. On groups with certain lattices of normal subgroups. Archiv Math. 47, 6-11.
1988. The Dilworth number of subgroup lattices. Archiv Math. 50, 502-510.
1989. Groups whose lattices of normal subgroups are distributive. Glasgow Math. J. 31,
183-188.
B. Bruno
1970. Un teorema di approssimazione per gli S-isomorfismi. Boll. Un. Mat. Ital. (4) 3,
225-229.
1972. Coppie n-distributive ed u-distributive net reticolo dei sottogruppi di un grup-
po. Ist. Veneto Sci. Lett. Arti Atti Cl. Sci. Mat. Natur. 131, 147-153.
G. Busetto
1979. Propriety di immersione dei sottogruppi quasinormali periodici. Matematiche 34,
243-249.
1980a. Una caratterizzazione reticolare dei gruppi iperabeliani. Atti Accad. Naz. Lincei
Rend. Cl. Sci. Fis. Mat. Natur. (8) 68, 95-98.
1980b. Propriety di immersione dei sottogruppi modulari localmente ciclici nei gruppi.
Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Padova 63, 269-284.
1982. Sottogruppi normali e proiettivity. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Padova 67, 105-
110.
1984. Normal subgroups and projectivities. J. Algebra 88, 52-62.
1985. On the embedding of core-free projective images of normal subgroups. Ann. Mat.
Pura Appl. (4) 142, 91-103.
544 Bibliography
G. Busetto and F. Menegazzo

1985. Groups with soluble factor groups and projectivities. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ.
Padova 73, 249-260.
G. Busetto and F. Napolitani
1990. On projectivities of groups. Rend. Circ. Mat. Palermo (2) Suppl. 23. 45-55.
1991. On the behaviour of normal subgroups under projectivities. J. Algebra 141, 93
105.
1992. On some questions concerning permutable subgroups of finitely generated groups
and projectivities of perfect groups. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Padova 87, 303-
305.
G. Busetto and S.E. Stonehewer
1985. A nonabelian normal subgroup with a core-free projective image. J. Algebra 97,
329-346.
R.A. Calcaterra
1987. Group actions with inverting centralizers. Archiv Math. 49, 465-469.
A. Caranti
1979. Proiettivita dei p-gruppi di classe massimale. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Padova 61.
393-404.
M. Cardin
1984. Su una classe di gruppi con molti sottogruppi quasinormali. Rend. Sem. Mat.
Univ. Padova 72, 157-161.
S.N. Cernikov
1954. Groups with systems of complemented subgroups. Amer. Math. Soc. Transl. (2) 17
(1961), 117-152.
1967. Groups with given properties of systems of infinite subgroups. Ukrainian Math. J.
19, 715-731.
1980. Groups with complemented infinite abelian subgroups. Math. Notes 28, 788-
792.
N.V. Cernikova
1956. Groups with complemented subgroups. Amer. Math. Soc. Transl. (2) 17, (1961),
153-172.
Y. Cheng
1982. On finite p-groups with cyclic commutator subgroup. Archiv Math. 39, 295-298.
C. Christensen
1964. Complementation in groups. Math. Z. 84, 52-69.
C.D.H. Cooper
1968. Power automorphisms of a group. Math. Z. 107, 335-356.
M. Costantini
1989a. Sul gruppo delle autoproiettivita di PSL(3, q). Riv. Mat. Pura Appl. 4, 79-88.
1989b. On the lattice automorphisms of certain algebraic groups. Dissertation Warwick.
1990. On lattice automorphisms of the special linear group. Atti Accad. Naz. Lincei
P. Crawley and R.P. Dilworth
1973. Algebraic theory of lattices. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs.
M. Curzio
1953. Su di un particolare isomorfismo di struttura. Ricerche Mat. 2, 288-300.
1955. Gli automorfismi del reticolo dei laterali dei sottogruppi d'un gruppo. Ricerche
Mat. 4, 3-14.
1957a. Sul reticolo dei sottogruppi di composizione di alcuni gruppi finiti. Boll. Un. Mat.
Ital. (3) 12, 284-289.
Bibliography 545
1957b. Alcune osservazioni sul reticolo dei sottogruppi d'un gruppo finito. Ricerche Mat.
6,96-110.
1957c. Propriety di struttura delle classi laterali relative ad un gruppo. Matematiche
(Catania) 12, 51-57.
1957d. Sui gruppi supersolubili per cui it reticolo dei sottogruppi di composizione 6
autoduale. Matematiche (Catania) 12, 74-79.
1957e. Sui gruppi tp-isomorfi ad un gruppo speciale finito. Rend. Accad. Sci. Fis. Mat.
Napoli (4) 24, 70-75.
1958. Sui sottogruppi di composizione dei gruppi finiti. Ricerche Mat. 7, 265-280.
1960. Alcuni criteri di finitezza per i gruppi a condizione massimale o minimale.
Ricerche Mat. 9, 248-254.
1962. Certains criteres de nilpotence pour les groupes finis. Bull. Sci. Math. (2) 86, 74-80.
1964a. Elementi u-quasi-distributivi in alcuni reticoli di gruppi. Ricerche Mat. 13, 70-79.
1964b. Sui gruppi per cui sono riducibili alcuni reticoli di sottogruppi notevoli. Mate-
matiche (Catania) 19, 1-10.
1965. Una caratterizzazione reticolare dei gruppi abeliani. Rend. Mat. e Appl. (5) 24,
1-10.
M. Curzio and S. Rao
1981. Sui fattori principali degli IM-gruppi. Ricerche Mat. 30, 279-295.
G. Daues and H. Heineken
1975. Dualiti ten and Gruppen der Ordnung p6. Geometriae Dedicata 4, 215-220.
F. De Giovanni and S. Franciosi
1981. Debole complementazione in teoria dei gruppi. Ricerche Mat. 30, 35-56.
1982. Sui gruppi sottomodulari infiniti. Rend. Circ. Mat. Palermo (2) 31, 257-266.
1983. Una caratterizzazione reticolare dei gruppi residualmente supersolubili. Boll. Un.
Mat. Ital. A(6) 2, 355-360.
1985. Isomorfismi tra reticoli di sottogruppi normali di gruppi nilpotenti senza torsione.
Ann. Univ. Ferrara Sez. VII (N.S.) 91, 91-98.
1986. Alcuni isomorfismi duali tra reticoli di sottogruppi normali. Boll. Un. Mat. Ital. A
(6) 5, 185-192.
1987. Sui gruppi nei quasi ogni sottogruppo finito a dotato di complemento. Mate-
matiche 38, 201-220.
WE. Deskins
1963. On quasinormal subgroups of finite groups. Math. Z. 82, 125-132.
R.P. Dilworth
(See P. Crawley and R.P. Dilworth)
L. Di Martino and M.C. Tamburini Bellani
1980. Do finite simple groups always contain subgroups which are not intersection of
maximal subgroups? Istit. Lombardo Accad. Sci. Lett. Rend. A 114, 65-72.
1981. On the solvability of finite IM-groups. Istit. Lombardo Accad. Sci. Lett. Rend. A
115, 235-242.
N.T. Dinerstein
1968. Finiteness conditions in groups with systems of complemented subgroups. Math.
Z. 106, 321-326.
M. Emaldi
1969. Sui gruppi risolubili complementati. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Padova 42, 123-128.
1970. Una nota sui gruppi risolubili complementati. Boll. Un. Mat. Ital. (4) 3, 858-862.
1971. Sui gruppi relativamente complementati. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Padova 46, 15-18.
1978. Una caratterizzazione reticolare dei gruppi completamente fattorizzabili. Rend.
Sem. Mat. Univ. Padova 59, 17-18.
546 Bibliography
1985a. Sui gruppi completamente fattorizzabili. Rend. Accad. Sci. Fis. Mat. Napoli (4) 52,
35-39.
1985b. Sui gruppi risolubili con molti sottogruppi massimali sensitivi. Matematiche
(Catania) 40, 3-9.
M. Emaldi and G. Zacher
1965. I gruppi risolubili relativamente complementati. Ricerche Mat. 14, 3-8.
W. Feit
1983. An interval in the subgroup lattice of a finite group which is isomorphic to M,.
Algebra Universalis 17, 220-221.
T. Foguel
1992. Galois-theoretical groups. J. Algebra 150, 321-323.
A. Fort
1975. Gruppi finiti debolmente modulari. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Padova 53, 269-
290.
1978. Gruppi finiti debolmente supersolubili. Atti Accad. Naz. Lincei Rend. Cl. Sci. Fis.
Mat. Natur. (8) 64, 270-272.
1983. I gruppi finiti nei quali tutti i sottogruppi massimi sono duali di Dedekind. Rend.
Accad. Naz. Sci. XL Mem. Mat. (5) 7, 1-5.
A. Franchetta
1978. Sui gruppi con la struttura subnormale dotata di duale. Ricerche Mat. 27, 333-
341.
A. Franchetta and F. Tuccillo
1976. Su una classe di gruppi ipercentrali. Atti Accad. Naz. Lincei Rend. Cl. Sci. Fis.
Mat. Natur. (8) 59, 232-237.
S. Franciosi
1981. Alcuni omomorfismi duali tra reticoli di sottogruppi e reticoli di sottogruppi nor-
mali. Ricerche Mat. 30, 179-193.
(See also F. De Giovanni and S. Franciosi)
L. Fuchs
1960. Abelian groups. Pergamon Press, New York.
W. Gaschiitz
1955. Gruppen, deren samtliche Untergruppen Zentralisatoren rind. Archiv Math. 6,
5-8.
W. Gaschutz and R. Schmidt
1981. Affinitaten endlicher Gruppen. J. Reine Angew. Math. 326, 187-197.
E. Gasparini and C. Metelli
1984. On projectivities of abelian groups of torsionfree rank one. Boll. Un. Mat. Ital. A
(6) 3, 363-371.
L. Gerhards
1970. Uber die Struktur bizyklischer Gruppen. J. Reine Angew. Math. 241, 180-199.
Yu.M. Gorcakov
1960. Primarily factorizable groups. Soviet Math. Dokl. 1, 1001-1002.
D. Gorenstein
1982. Finite simple groups: An introduction to their classification. Plenum Press, New
York and London.
G. Gratzer
1978. General lattice theory. Birkhauser Verlag, Basel and Stuttgart.
F. Gross
1971. p-subgroups of core-free quasinormal subgroups. Rocky Mountain J. Math. 1,
541-550.
Bibliography 547
1975a. Subnormal core-free, quasinormal subgroups are solvable. Bull. London Math.
Soc. 7, 93-95.
1975b. p-subgroups of core-free quasinormal subgroups. II. Rocky Mountain J. Math. 5,
349-359.
1982. Infinite permutable subgroups. Rocky Mountain J. Math. 12, 333-343.
(See also T.R. Berger and F. Gross; R.H. Bradway, F. Gross and W.R. Scott)
P. Hall
1937. Complemented groups. Journal London Math. Soc. 12, 201-204.
M. Hall
1961. On the lattice of normal subgroups of a group. Proc. Sympos. Pure Math., Vol. II,
American Math. Soc., Providence, R.1., 185-194.
P. Hauck and H. Kurzweil
1990. A lattice-theoretic characterization of pre-Frattini subgroups. Manuscripta Math.
66, 295-301.
H. Heineken
1965. Uber die Charakterisierung von Gruppen durch gewisse Untergruppenverbiinde.
J. Reine Angew. Math. 220, 30-36.
1987. A remark on subgroup lattices of finite soluble groups. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ.
Padova 77, 135-147.
(See also G. Daues and H. Heineken)
K.K. Hickin and R.E. Phillips
1973. On classes of groups defined by systems of subgroups. Archiv Math. 24, 346-
350.
D.G. Higman
1951. Lattice homomorphisms induced by group homomorphisms. Proc. Amer. Math.
Soc. 2, 467-478.
C.S. Holmes
1969. Projectivities of free products. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Padova 42, 341-387.
1971. Direct products with isomorphic lattices. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Padova 45, 71-
80.
1976. Groups of order p3q with identical subgroup structures. Atti Accad. Sci. Ist. Bolo-
gna Cl. Sci. Fis. Rend. (13) 3, 113-123.
1984. Generalized Rottlander, Honda, Yff groups. Houston J. Math. 10, 405-414.
1988. Automorphisms of the lattice of subgroups of 7Lp.n x 7L,, . Archiv Math. 51, 491-
495.
1989. Nearly normal projectivities. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Padova 82, 151-156.
K. Honda
1952. On finite groups whose Sylow subgroups are all cyclic. Comm. Math. Univ. Sancti
Pauli 1, 5-39.
D.R. Hughes and J.G. Thompson
1959. The Hp problem and the structure of Ho groups. Pacific J. Math. 9, 1097-1102.
B. Huppert
1960. Gruppen mit modularer Sylow-Gruppe. Math. Z. 75, 140-153.
1961. Zur Sylowstruktur autlosbarer Gruppen. Archiv Math. 12, 161-169.
1967. Endliche Gruppen I. Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg New York.
B. Huppert and N. Blackburn
1982a. Finite groups 11. Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg New York.
1982b. Finite groups III. Springer -Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg New York.
N. Ito
1951. Note on (LM)-groups of finite orders. Kodei Math. Sem. Rep. 1-6.
548 Bibliography
N. Ito and J. Szep

1962. Uber die Quasinormalteiler von endlichen Gruppen. Acta Sci. Math. (Szeged) 23,
168-170.
S.G. Ivanov
1969. Standard and dually standard elements of the lattice of subgroups of a group.
Algebra and Logic 8, 253-256.
1985. L-homomorphisms of locally soluble torsion-free groups (Russian). Mat. Zametki
37, 627-635.
K. Iwasawa
1941. Uber die endlichen Gruppen and die Verbande ihrer Untergruppen. J. Fac. Sci.
Imp. Univ. Tokyo. Sect. 1.4,171-199.
1943. On the structure of infinite M-groups. Jap. J. Math. 18, 709-728.
A.W. Jones
1945. The lattice isomorphisms of certain finite groups. Duke Math. J. 12, 541-560.
R. Jiirgensen
1976. Gruppen mit modularem Zentralisatorverband der Dimension 4. Dissertation
Kiel.
O.H. Kegel
1961. Die Nilpotenz der HP Gruppen. Math. Z. 75, 373-376.
1978. Untergruppenverbande endlicher Gruppen, die den Subnormalteilerverband echt
enthalten. Archiv Math. 30, 225-228.
E.I. Khukhro
1993. Nilpotent groups and their automorphisms. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin New York.
W. Kimmerle, R. Lyons, R. Sandling, and D.N. Teague
1990. Composition factors from the group ring and Artin's theorem on orders of simple
groups. Proc. London Math. Soc. (3) 60, 89-122.
R. Kochendbrfer
1969. Soluble groups with complemented subnormal subgroups. J. Austral. Math. Soc.
10, 465-468.
P. Kohler
1983. M, as an interval in a subgroup lattice. Algebra Universalis 17, 263-266.
P.G. Kontorovic and B.I. Plotkin
1954. Lattices with an additive basis (Russian). Mat. Sbornik 35 (77), 187-192.
A.G. Kurosh
1955. The theory of groups 1. Chelsea Publ. Comp., New York.
1956. The theory of groups II. Chelsea Publ. Comp., New York.
H. Kurzweil
1985. Endliche Gruppen mit vielen Untergruppen. J. Reine Angew. Math. 356, 140-
160.
1989. Die Praefrattinigruppe im Intervall eines Untergruppenverbandes. Archiv Math.
53, 235-244.
(See also P. Hauck and H. Kurzweil)
J.C. Lennox
1981. A note on quasinormal subgroups of finitely generated groups. J. London Math.
Soc. (2) 24, 127-128.
J.C. Lennox and S.E. Stonehewer
1987. Subnormal subgroups of groups. Clarendon Press, Oxford.
S. Li
1983. On the subgroup lattice characterization of finite simple groups of Lie type. Chi-
nese Ann. Math. Ser. B 4, 165-169.
Bibliography 549
W. Lindenberg
1970. Uber die Struktur zerfallender bizyklischer p-Gruppen. J. Reine Angew. Math.
241, 118-146.
N.V. Loiko
1961. The S-isomorphism of torsion-free Abelian groups (Russian). Ural. Gos. Univ.
Mat. Zap. 3, 67-71.
1962. Lattice properties of cosets of a group (Russian). Sibirsk. Mat. Z. 3, 79-86.
1963. S-isomorphisms of mixed abelian groups of rank r 2 (Russian). Ural. Gos. Univ.
Mat. Zap. 4, 57-59.
1965a. S-isomorphisms of mixed abelian groups of rank r = 1 (Russian). Sibirsk. Mat. Z.
6, 1053-1067.
1965b. S-isomorphisms of metabelian torsion-free groups (Russian). Ural. Gos. Univ. Mat.
Zap. 5, 61-66.
1965c. Natural S-isomorphisms of torsion-free groups (Russian). Mat. Zap. Krasnoyarsk
1,46-53.
1972. On S-isomorphisms of groups generated by elements of infinite order. Siberian
Math. J. 13, 151-154.
P. Longobardi
1982. Gruppi finiti a fattoriali modulari. Note Mat. 2, 73-100.
P. Longobardi and M. Maj
1976. Su di un teorema di Heineken. Riv. Mat. Univ. Parma (4) 2, 315-320.
1985. Su una classe di gruppi proiettivamente invariante. Ricerche Mat. 34, 325-
332.
1986a. Finite groups with nilpotent commutator subgroup, having a distributive lattice of
normal subgroups. J. Algebra 101, 251-261.
1986b. Elementi neutri nel reticolo dei sottogruppi normali di un gruppo supersolubile.
Boll. Un. Mat. Ital. A (6) 5, 121-128.
1987. On the nilpotence of groups with a certain lattice of normal subgroups. Group
Theory (Bressanone 1986), 107-114, Lecture Notes in Math. 1281, Springer-Verlag,
Berlin New York.
A. Lucchini
1986. Sui gruppi it cui gruppo delle autoproiettivita a transitivo sugli atomi. Rend. Sem.
Mat. Univ. Padova 75, 275-294.
1988. On p-groups whose L-automorphism group is transitive on the atoms. Rend. Sem.
1991. On subgroups of index p'. Comm. Algebra 19, 2851-2864.
E. Lukacs and P.P. Palfy
1986. Modularity of the subgroup lattice of a direct square. Archiv Math. 46, 18-19.
R. Lyons
(See W. Kimmerle, R. Lyons, R. Sandling, and D.N. Teague)
K. Mahdavi and J. Poland
1992. On lattice-isomorphic abelian groups. Archiv Math. 58, 220-230.
1993. On lattice isomorphic of mixed abelian groups. Archiv Math. 60, 327-329.
R. Maier and P. Schmid
1973. The embedding of quasinormal subgroups in finite groups. Math. Z. 131, 269-272.
M. Mainardis
1991. Projektivitaten zwischen abelschen and nichtabelschen Gruppen. Archiv Math.
57, 332-338.
1992. A simple proof of Baer's and Sato's theorems on lattice-isomorphisms between
groups. Atti. Accad. Naz. Lincei Rend. Cl. Sci. Fis. Mat. Natur. (9) 3, 173-176.
550 Bibliography
M. Maj
1984. Gruppi infiniti supersolubili con it reticolo dei sottogruppi normali distributivo.
Rend. Accad. Sci. Fis. Mat. Napoli (4) 51, 15-20.
(See also P. Longobardi and M. Maj)
A. Mann
1978. Conjugacy classes in finite groups. Israel J. Math. 31, 78-84.
C. Marchionna Tibiletti
1972. Su alcuni reticoli legati ad un gruppo. 1st. Lombardo Accad. Sci. Lett. Rend. A 106,
470-504.
E. Martino
1973. Elementi neutri nel reticolo dei sottogruppi d'un gruppo. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ.
Padova 50, 345-354.
F. Menegazzo
1970a. Sui gruppi relativamente complementati. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Padova 43, 209-
214.
1970b. Gruppi nei quali ogni sottogruppo e intersezione di sottogruppi massimali. Atti
Accad. Naz. Lincei Rend. Cl. Sci. Fis. Mat. Natur (8) 48, 559-562.
1971. Dual-Dedekind subgroups in finite groups. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Padova 45,
99-111.
1973. Isomorfismi reticolari e prodotti intrecciati. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Padova 50,
331-344.
1974. On index preserving projectivities of finite groups. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Padova
52, 227-242.
1978. Normal subgroups and projectivities of finite groups. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ.
Padova 59, 11-15.
(See also G. Busetto and F. Menegazzo)
C. Metelli
1968. Sugli isomorfismi reticolari del gruppo proiettivo lineare speciale PSL(2,p). 1st.
Veneto Sci. Lett. Arti Atti Cl. Sci. Mat. Natur. 127, 73-78.
1969. Sugli isomorfismi reticolari di PSL(2, pf). Atti Accad. Naz. Lincei Rend. Cl. Sci.
Fis. Mat. Natur. (8) 47, 446-452.
1971. I gruppi semplici minimali sono individuati reticolarmente in senso stretto. Rend.
(See also E. Gasparini and C. Metelli)
M.D. Miller
1975. On the lattice of normal subgroups of a direct product. Pacific J. Math. 60, 153-
158.
L.S. Mozarovskaja
1978. Some properties of finite supersoluble groups. Ukrainian Math. J. 30, 191-192.
K. Nakamura
1966. Uber den Quasinormalteiler der regularen p-Gruppe von der Klasse 2. Nagoya
Math. J. 26, 61-67.
1968. Uber einige Beispiele der Quasinormalteiler einer p-Gruppe. Nagoya Math. J. 31,
97-103.
1970. Beziehungen zwischen den Strukturen von Normalteiler and Quasinormalteiler.
Osaka J. Math. 7, 321-322.
1979. Charakteristische Untergruppen von Quasinormalteilern. Archiv Math. 32, 513-515.
F. Napolitani
1965. Elementi u-quasi distributivi nel reticolo dei sottogruppi di un gruppo. Ricerche
Mat. 14, 93-101.
Bibliography 551
1967a. Sui p-gruppi modulari finiti. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Padova 39, 296-303.
1967b. Sui gruppi risolubili complementati. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Padova 38, 118-120.
1968. Elementi r'-quasi distributivi ed u.c.r.-elementi del reticolo dei sottogruppi di un
gruppo finito. Ricerche Mat. 17, 95-108.
1970. Modularity e distributivity nell'insieme dei sottogruppi subnormali. Rend. Sem.
1971. Gruppi finiti minimali non modulari. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Padova 45, 229-
248.
1973. Submodularity nei gruppi finiti. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Padova 50, 355-363.
1982. Isomorfismi reticolari e gruppi perfetti. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Padova 67, 181-
184.
F. Napolitani and G. Zacher
1983. Uber das Verhalten der Normalteiler unter Projektivitaten. Math. Z. 183, 371-
380.
(See also G. Busetto and F. Napolitani)
B.H. Neumann
1954. Groups covered by permutable subsets. J. London Math. Soc. 29, 236-248.
W. Niegel
1973a. Die Untergruppenverbande von Gruppen, deren Ordnungen hochstens drei Prim-
faktoren enthalten. J. Reine Angew. Math. 258, 1-22.
1973b. Die Untergruppenstruktur der Gruppen mit quadratfreier Ordnung. J. Reine
Angew. Math. 259, 48-64.
V.N. Obraztsov
1990. An imbedding theorem for groups and its corollaries. Math. USSR-Sb. 66, 541-
553.
A. Yu. Olshanskii
1979. Infinite groups with cyclic subgroups. Soviet Math. Dokl. 20, 343-346.
1991. Geometry of defining relations in groups. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.
0. Ore
1937. Structures and group theory I. Duke Math. J. 3, 149-173.
1938. Structures and group theory II. Duke Math. J. 4, 247-269.
U. Ostendorf
1991. Projektivitatstypen torsionsfreier abelscher Gruppen vom Rang 1. Rend. Sem.
P.P. Palfy
1986. On partial ordering of chief factors in solvable groups. Manuscripta Math. 55,
219-232.
1988. On Feit's examples of intervals in subgroup lattices. J. Algebra 116, 471-479.
P.P. Pylfy and P. Pudlyk
1980. Congruence lattices of finite algebras and intervals in subgroup lattices of finite
groups. Algebra Universalis 11, 22-27.
(See also E. Lukycs and P.P. Pylfy)
K.J. Paulsen
1975. Uber Untergruppenverbande von Gruppen mit Hallschen Normalteilern. Disser-
tation Kiel.
G. Pazderski
1972. Uber Gruppen mit isomorphen Subnormalteilerverbanden. Publ. Math. Debrecen
19, 1-19.
1987. On groups for which the lattice of normal subgroups is distributive. Beitrdge
Algebra Geom. 24, 185-200.
552 Bibliography
A.S. Pekelis
1961a. Lattice isomorphisms of solvable groups. Soviet Math. Dokl. 1, 845-847.
1961 b. Lattice isomorphisms of locally nilpotent nonperiodic groups (Russian). Ural. Gos.
Univ. Mat. Zap. 3, 72-76.
1963. Lattice isomorphisms of locally nilpotent torsion-free groups (Russian). Uspehi
Mat. Nauk 18, 187-190.
1965. Lattice isomorphisms of mixed nilpotent groups (Russian). Sibirsk. Mat. Z. 6,
1315-1321.
1967. Structural isomorphisms of mixed metabelian groups. Siberian Math. J. 8, 625-
630.
1972a. The lattice of subgroups of a nilpotent nonperiodic group. Math. Notes 11, 240-
243.
1972b. Lattice isomorphisms of radical groups. Soviet Math. Dokl. 13, 649-653.
1976. Lattice characterization of radicals in a group (Russian). Latviisk. Mat. Ezegodnik
Vyp. 18, 128-142.
AS. Pekelis and L.E. Sadovskii
1963. Projections of a metabelian torsion-free group. Soviet Math. Dokl. 4, 918-920.
R.E. Phillips
(See K.K. Hickin and R.E. Phillips)
P. Plaumann, K. Strambach and G. Zacher
1985. Gruppen mit geometrischen Abschnitten im Untergruppenverband. Monatshefte
Math. 99, 117-145.
B.I. Plotkin
1954. Lattice isomorphisms of soluble R-groups (Russian). Doklady Akad. Nauk SSSR
(N.S.) 95, 1141-1144.
1957. Radical and semi-simple groups (Russian). Trudy Moskov. Mat. Obsc. 6, 299-
336.
(See also P.G. Kontorovic and B.I. Plotkin)
J. Poland
1985. On verifying lattice isomorphisms between groups. Archiv Math. 44, 309-3 10.
(See also K. Mahdavi and J. Poland)
S. Pontier
1966a. Sur les groupes (demi-groupes) dont le treillis des sous-groupes (sous-demi-
groupes) est geometrique. C.R. Acad. Sci. Paris Ser. A-B 262, A1435-A1437.
1966b. Demi-groupes dont le treillis des sous-demi-groupes est geometrique. Groupes
dont le treillis des sous-groupes est geometrique. Proprietes annexes. Publ. Dep.
Math. (Lyon) 3, fasc. 4, 1-66.
E. Previato
1975. Una caratterizzazione dei sottogruppi di Dedekind di un gruppo finito. Atti
Accad. Naz. Lincei Rend. Cl. Sci. Fis. Mat. Natur. (8) 59, 643-650.
1976. Sui sottogruppi di Dedekind nei gruppi infiniti. Atti Accad. Naz. Lincei Rend. Cl.
Sci. Fis. Mat. Natur. (8) 60, 388-394.
1978. Una caratterizzazione reticolare dei gruppi risolubili finitamente generati. Istit.
Veneto Sci. Lett. Arti Atti Cl. Sci. Mat. Natur. 136, 7-11.
1982. Some families of simple groups whose lattices are complemented. Boll. Un. Mat.
Ital. B (6) 1, 1003-1014.
P. Pudlak and J. Tuma
1980. Every finite lattice can be embedded in a finite partition lattice. Algebra Univer-
salis 10, 74-95.
(See also P.P. Palfy and P. Pudlak)
Bibliography 553
S. Rao
(See M. Curzio and S. Rao)
M. Reuther
1975. Endliche Gruppen, in denen das Erzeugnis zweier Zentralisatoren wieder ein
Zentralisator ist. Dissertation Kiel.
1977. Endliche Gruppen, in denen alle das Zentrum enthaltenden Untergruppen
Zentralisatoren sind. Archiv Math. 29, 45-54.
D.J.S. Robinson
1964. Groups in which normality is a transitive relation. Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc. 60,
21-38.
1965. Joins of subnormal subgroups. Illinois J. Math. 9, 144-168.
1968. A note on finite groups in which normality is transitive. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 19,
933-937.
1972a. Finiteness conditions and generalized soluble groups, Vol. 1. Springer-Verlag,
Berlin.
1972b. Finiteness conditions and generalized soluble groups, Vol. 2. Springer-Verlag,
Berlin.
1982. A course in the theory of groups. GTM 80, Springer-Verlag, New York Heidelberg
Berlin.
D. M. Rocke
1975. p-groups with abelian centralizers. Proc. London Math. Soc. (3) 30, 55-75.
J.S. Rose
1965. Abnormal depth and hypereccentric length in finite soluble groups. Math. Z. 90,
29-40.
A. Rottlander
1928. Nachweis der Existenz nichtisomorpher Gruppen von gleicher Situation der Un-
tergruppen. Math. Z. 28, 641-653.
R. Rudolph
1982. Ein Untergruppensatz fur modulare Gruppen. Monatsh. Math. 94, 149-153.
L.E. Sadovskii
1941. Uber die Strukturenisomorphismen von Freigruppen. Doklady 32, 171-174.
1944. Structural isomorphisms of free groups and of free products (Russian). Mat.
Sbornik 14 (56), 155-173.
1947. On structural isomorphisms of free products of groups (Russian). Mat. Sbornik 21
(63), 63-82.
1957a. The lattice of subgroups of a nilpotent torsion-free group (Russian). Uspehi Mat.
Nauk (N.S.) 12, 201-204.
1957b. Structure isomorphisms of a free metabelian group (Russian). Mat. Sbornik 42 (84),
445-460.
1964. On the definability by lattices of a locally nilpotent torsion-free group. Soviet
Math. Dokl. 5, 294-297.
1965a. An approximation theorem and lattice isomorphisms. Soviet Math. Dokl. 6, 424-
427.
1965b. Projectivities and isomorphisms of nilpotent groups (Russian). Izv. Akad. Nauk
SSSR Ser. Mat. 29, 171-208.
1968. Some lattice-theoretical problems in the theory of groups. Russian Math. Surveys
23, no. 3, 125-156.
(See also M.N. Arshinov and L.E. Sadovskii; A.S. Pekelis and L.E. Sadovskii)
R. Sandling
554 Bibliography
S. Sato
1949. On groups and the lattices of subgroups. Osaka Math. J. 1, 135-149.
1951. Note on lattice-isomorphisms between Abelian groups and non-Abelian groups.
Osaka Math. J. 3, 215-220.
1952. On the lattice homomorphisms of infinite groups I. Osaka Math. J. 4, 229-234.
M. Schenke
1986. On weakly Dedekind subgroups. Ricerche Mat. 35, 113-123.
1987a. Analoga des Fundamentalsatzes der projektiven Geometrie in der Gruppen-
theorie I. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Padova 77, 255-303.
1987b. Analoga des Fundamentalsatzes der projektiven Geometrie in der Gruppen-
theorie II. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Padova 78, 175-225.
E. Schenkman
1960. On the norm of a group. Illinois J. Math. 4, 150-152.
P. Schmid
(See R. Maier and P. Schmid)
R. Schmidt
1968. Eine verbandstheoretische Charakterisierung der auflosbaren and der uberaufli s-
baren endlichen Gruppen. Archiv Math. 19, 449-452.
1969. Modulare Untergruppen endlicher Gruppen. Illinois J. Math. 13, 358-377.
1970a. Modular subgroups of finite groups II. Illinois J. Math. 14, 344-362.
1970b. Endliche Gruppen mit vielen modularen Untergruppen. Abh. Math. Sem. Univ.
Hamburg 34, 115-125.
1970c. Zentralisatorverbande endlicher Gruppen. Rend. Sem. Math. Univ. Padova 44,
97-131.
1970d. Charakterisierung der einfachen Gruppe der Ordnung 175 560 durch ihren Zen-
tralisatorverband. Math. Z. 116, 299-306.
1972a. A characterization of PSL(2, p") by its centralizer lattice. J. Algebra 21, 280-29 1.
1972b. Verbandsisomorphismen endlicher autlosbarer Gruppen. Archiv Math. 23, 449-
458.
1974. Lattice isomorphisms and saturated formations of finite soluble groups. Proceed-
ings of the Second International Conference on the Theory of Groups (Australian
Nat. Univ., Canberra, 1973), 605-610. Lecture Notes in Math., Vol. 372, Springer,
Berlin.
1975a. Normal subgroups and lattice isomorphisms of finite groups. Proc. London Math.
Soc. (3) 30, 287-300.
1975b. Untergruppenverbande zweifach transitiver Permutationsgruppen. Math. Z. 144,
161-168.
1977a. Verbandsautomorphismen der alternierenden Gruppen. Math. Z. 154, 71-78.
1977b. Untergruppenverbande endlicher einfacher Gruppen. Geometriae Dedicata 6, 275-
290.
1978. Untergruppenverbande direkter Produkte von Gruppen. Archiv Math. 30, 229-235.
1980a. Untergruppenverbande involutorisch erzeugter Gruppen. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ.
Padova 63, 95-126.
1980b. Projektivitaten direkter Produkte endlicher Gruppen. Archiv Math. 35, 79-84.
1981. Der Untergruppenverband des direkten Produktes zweier isomorpher Gruppen.
J. Algebra 73, 264-272.
1982. Untergruppenverbande endlicher Gruppen mit elementarabelschen Hallschen
Normalteilern. J. Reine Angew. Math. 334, 116-140.
1983. Semiaffinitaten von Gruppen. Math. Z. 182, 291-302.
1984a. Affinities of groups. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Padova 72, 163-190.
Bibliography 555
1984b. Verbandstheoretische Charakterisierungen der Endlichkeit des Indexes einer Un-

tergruppe in einer Gruppe. Archiv Math. 42, 492-495.
1986. Gruppen mit modularem Untergruppenverband. Archiv Math. 46, 118-124.
1987. Untergruppenverbande endlicher aufl6sbarer Gruppen. Group Theory (Bressanone
1986), 130-150, Lecture Notes in Math. 1281, Springer-Verlag, Berlin New York.
(See also W. Gaschiitz and R. Schmidt)
C.M. Scoppola
1981. Sul reticolo dei sottogruppi di un gruppo abeliano senza torsione di rango diverso
da 1: una caratterizzazione reticolare. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Padova 65, 205-221.
1985. Una caratterizzazione reticolare del reticolo dei sottogruppi di un gruppo abe-
liano contenente due elementi aperiodici indipendenti. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ.
Padova 73, 191-207.
W.R. Scott
1957. Half-homomorphisms of groups. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 8, 1141-1144.
1964. Group theory. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs.
(See also R.H. Bradway, F. Gross and W.R. Scott)
G.M. Seitz and C.R.B. Wright
1969. On finite groups whose Sylow subgroups are modular or quaternion-free. J. Alge-
bra 13, 374-381.
M.I. Sergeev
1964. Completely FN-factorizable groups. Soviet Math. Dokl. 5,461-464.
H.L. Silcock
1977. Generalized wreath products and the lattice of normal subgroups of a group.
Algebra Universalis 7, 361-372.
A.L. Smelkin
1964. Free polynilpotent groups. Soviet Math. Dokl. 4, 950-953.
A.E. Spencer
1971. Self dual finite groups. 1st. Veneto Sci. Lett. Arti Atti Cl. Sci. Mat. Natur. 130,
385-391.
R.F. Spring
1963. Lattice isomorphisms of finite non-abelian groups of exponent p. Proc. Amer.
Math. Soc. 14, 407-413.
S.E. Stonehewer
1972. Permutable subgroups of infinite groups. Math. Z. 125, 1-16.
1973. Permutable subgroups of some finite p-groups. J. Austral. Math. Soc. 16, 90-
97.
1974. Permutable subgroups of some finite permutation groups. Proc. London Math.
Soc. (3) 28, 222-236.
1976a. Modular subgroups of infinite groups. Symposia Mathematica, Vol. X VII (Con-
vegno sui Gruppi Infiniti, INDAM, Roma, 1973), 207-214. Academic Press, Lon-
don.
1976b. Modular subgroup structure in infinite groups. Proc. London Math. Soc. (3) 32,
63-100.
S.E. Stonehewer and G. Zacher
1988. On groups with an interval isomorphic to a projective geometry. J. Pure Appl.
Algebra 53, 187-196.
1990a. Lattice homomorphisms of groups and dual standard subgroups. Rend. Circ. Mat.
Palermo (2) Suppl. 23, 289-297.
1990b. Dual-standard subgroups in nonperiodic locally soluble groups. Atti. Accad. Naz.
Lincei Rend. Cl. Sci. Fis. Mat. Natur. (9) 1, 101-104.
556 Bibliography
1991a. Dual-standard subgroups of finite and locally finite groups. Manuscripta Math.
70, 115-132.
1991b. Lattice homomorphisms of nonperiodic groups. J. Algebra 138, 48-90.
1994. Dualities of groups. To appear.
(See also G. Busetto and S.E. Stonehewer; J.C. Lennox and S.E. Stonehewer)
K. Strambach
(See P. Plaumann, K. Strambach and G. Zacher)
M. Suzuki
1951a. On the lattice of subgroups of finite groups. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 70, 345-371.
1951b. On the L-homomorphisms of finite groups. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 70, 372-386.
1956. Structure of a group and the structure of its lattice of subgroups. Springer-Verlag,
Berlin Heidelberg New York.
1961. On a finite group with a partition. Archiv Math. 12, 241-254.
1982. Group theory I. Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg New York.
1986. Group theory II. Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg New York.
Ja.P. Sysak
1977. Finite elementarily factorizable groups. Ukrainian Math. J. 29, 51-58.
J. Szep
(See N. Ito and J. Szep)
0. Tamaschke
1961. Gruppen mit reduziblem Subnormalteilerverband. Math. Z. 75, 211-214.
M.C. Tamburini Bellani
(See M. Bianchi and M.C. Tamburini Bellani; L.Di Martino and M.C. Tamburini
Bellani)
D.N. Teague
J.G. Thompson
1967. An example of core-free quasinormal subgroups of p-groups. Math. Z. 96, 226-227.
(See also D.R. Hughes and J.G. Thompson)
J. Tits
1974. Buildings of spherical type and finite BN-pairs. Lecture Notes in Math. 386,
Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg New York.
M.V. Tsybanev
1973. On abelian normal subgroups all of whose subgroups are m-complemented. Alge-
bra and Logic 13, 41-45.
1980. Solvable F-factorizable groups. Siberian Math. J. 21, 298-302.
F. Tuccillo
(See A. Franchetta and F. Tuccillo)
J. Tuma
1989. Intervals in subgroup lattices of infinite groups. J. Algebra 125, 367-399.
(See also P. Pudlak and J. Tuma)
T. Uzawa
1986. Finite Coxeter groups and their subgroup lattices. J. Algebra 101, 82-94.
A.V. Vasileva
1976. A characterization of the group PSL3(q) by its centralizer lattice. Algebra and
Logic 15, 320-335.
1977. Centralizer lattices of finite simple groups. Siberian Math. J. 18, 188-196.
Ph. Vassiliou
1967. Eine Bemerkung fiber die von dem Zentralisator bestimmte Abbildung. Prakt.
Akad. Athenon 42, 286-289.
Bibliography 557
P. Venzke
1972. Finite groups with many maximal sensitive subgroups. J. Algebra 22, 297-308.
1975. Finite groups whose maximal subgroups are modular. Atti Accad. Naz. Lincei
H. Volklein
1986a. On the lattice automorphisms of the finite Chevalley groups. Indag. Math. 48,
213-228.
1986b. On the lattice automorphisms of SL(n,q) and PSL(n,q). Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ.
Padova 76, 207-217.
R.W.v.d. Waall
1973. On modular p-groups. J. Algebra 25, 125-127.
1975. On modular p-groups II. Indag. Math. 37, 79-82.
G.E. Wall
1965. On Hughes' HD problem. Proc. Internat. Conf. Theory of Groups (Canberra 1965),
357-362. Gordon and Breach, New York.
(See also D.W. Barnes and G.E. Wall)
P.M. Whitman
1946. Lattices, equivalence relations, and subgroups. Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 52, 507-
522.
G.M. Whitson
1977. A lattice theoretic generalization of normal subgroups. J. Algebra 49, 387-410.
1978. Finite groups whose subgroup, composition subgroup, or normal subgroup lattice
is an ortholattice. Algebra Universalis 8, 123-127.
H. Wielandt
1939. Eine Verallgemeinerung der invarianten Untergruppen. Math. Z. 45, 209-244.
C.R.B. Wright
(See G.M. Seitz and C.R.B. Wright)
B.V. Yakovlev
1965. On the lattice isomorphisms of periodic nilpotent groups (Russian). Ural. Gos.
Univ. Mat. Zap. 5, 106-116.
1970. Lattice isomorphisms of solvable groups. Algebra and Logic 9, 210-222.
1974. Conditions under which a lattice is isomorphic to the lattice of subgroups of a
group. Algebra and Logic 13, 400-412.
1975. An example of solvable torsion-free groups which are lattice isomorphic but not
isomorphic. Algebra and Logic 14, 282-301.
1986. Lattice definability of matrix and certain other groups. Algebra and Logic 25,
696-744.
1988. Strict lattice determination of mixed nilpotent groups. Algebra and Logic 27, 376-
384.
P. Yff
1967. Groups with identical subgroup structures. Math. Z. 99, 178-181.
G. Zacher
1952. Determinazione dei gruppi d'ordine finito relativamente complementati. Rend.
Accad. Sci. Fis. Mat. Napoli (4) 19, 200-206.
1953. Caratterizzazione dei gruppi risolubili d'ordine finito complementati. Rend. Sem.
1955a. Sugli elementi modulari in un p-gruppo. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Padova 24, 165-
182.
1955b. Un criterio di non semplicita di un gruppo finito. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Padova
24, 215-219.
558 Bibliography
1956. Sugli elementi modulari di un gruppo finito. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Padova 26,
70-84.
1957. Sui gruppi finiti per cui it reticolo dei sottogruppi di composizione a distributivo.
Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Padova 27, 75-79.
1960. On lattice dual-homomorphisms between finite groups. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ.
Padova 30, 65-75.
1961 a. I gruppi risolubili con duale. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Padova 31, 104-113.
1961b. Caratterizzazione dei gruppi immagini omomorfe duali di un gruppo finito. Rend.
1962. Sui gruppi risolubili finiti col reticolo dei sottogruppi di composizione dotato di
duale. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Padova 32, 325-327.
1965. Sul reticolo dei sottogruppi di un gruppo di permutazione. Cedam, Padova.
1966. Sui gruppi localmente finiti con duale. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Padova 36, 223-
242.
1971. Determination of locally finite groups with duals. J. Algebra 18, 426-
431.
1977. Sul reticolo dei sottogruppi del gruppo simmetrico. Rend. Istit. Mat. Univ. Trieste
9,122-126.
1978. La classe dei gruppi iperciclici a proiettivamente invariante. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ.
Padova 59, 263-268.
1980. Una caratterizzazione reticolare della finitezza dell' indice di un sottogruppo in
un gruppo. Atti Accad. Naz. Lincei Rend. Cl. Sci. Fis. Mat. Natur (8) 69, 317-
323.
1981. Sul reticolo dei sottogruppi del quadrato cartesiano di un gruppo semplice. Rend.
1982a. Sulle immagini dei sottogruppi normali nelle proiettivita. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ.
Padova 67, 39-74.
1982b. Una relazione di normality sul reticolo dei sottogruppi di un gruppo. Ann. Mat.
Pura Appl. (4) 131, 57-73.
1984. Union-omomorfismi tra gruppi. Rend. Accad. Naz. Sci. XL Mem. Mat. (5) 8, 247-
260.
1985. Sottogruppi normali e r-omomorfismi completi tra gruppi. Ann. Mat. Pura Appl.
(4) 139, 83-106.
1988. Conoscenze attuali relative ad alcuni aspetti del reticolo dei sottogruppi di un
gruppo. Rend. Circ. Mat. Palermo (2) Suppl. 19, 39-60.
(See also M. Emaldi and G. Zacher; F. Napolitani and G. Zacher; P. Plaumann,
K. Strambach and G. Zacher; S.E. Stonehewer and G. Zacher)
G. Zappa
1949. Sulla condizione perche un omomorfismo ordinario sia anche un omomorfismo
strutturale. Giorn. Mat. Battaglini (4) 78, 182-192.
1951a. Sulla condizione perche un emitropismo inferiore tipico tra due gruppi sia un
omotropismo. Giorn. Mat. Battaglini (4) 80, 80-101.
1951b. Sulla risolubilita dei gruppi finiti in isomorfismo reticolare con un gruppo risolu-
bile. Giorn. Mat. Battaglini (4) 80, 213-225.
1951c. Determinazione degli elementi neutri net reticolo dei sottogruppi di un gruppo
finito. Rend. Accad. Sci. Fis. Mat. Napoli (4) 18, 22-28.
1956a. Sui gruppi finiti risolubili per cui it reticolo dei sottogruppi di composizione e
distributivo. Boll. Un. Mat. Ital. (3) 11, 150-157.
1956b. Sui gruppi finiti per cui it reticolo dei sottogruppi di composizione a modulare.
Boll. Un. Mat. Ital. (3) 11, 315-318.
Bibliography 559
H. Zassenhaus
1958. The theory of groups. Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, Gottingen.
1. Zimmermann
1989. Submodular subgroups in finite groups. Math. Z. 202, 545-557.
A. Zitarosa
1952. Sugli elementi neutri del reticolo dei sottogruppi normali di un gruppo speciale
finito. Ricerche Mat. 1, 249-254.
Index of Names
Abramovskii, IN. 129 Feit, W. 10

d'Andrea, A.B. 530, 541 Foguel, T. 484
Antonov, V.A. 518, 523, 524, 526, 527 Fort, A. 87, 232, 234
Arshinov, M.N. 344, 359, 377, 384, 417 Franchetta, A. 496, 510
F ranc i osi , S. 125 , 133 , 135, 319 , 320, 321 ,
Baer, R. 13, 14, 25, 34, 41, 50, 51, 89, 93, 496, 497
94, 101, 103, 104, 106, 115, 121, 146, 148, Fuchs, L. 110
152, 156, 414, 416, 452, 453, 454, 457, 458
Barnes, D.W. 272, 274, 275, 279, 344, 382, Gaschiitz, W. 23, 397, 486, 524, 526, 538,
383 , 385 541
Barysovec, P.P. 125 Gasparini, E. 108, 113
Baumslag, G. 349 Gorcakov, Yu.M. 125
Bec hte ll , H . 125 , 126, 134 G oursat, E . 34
Berger, T.R. 220 Gross, F. 220, 222, 227, 304, 310, 311
Ber k ov i c, J a. G . 232 , 234
Bi anchi , M . 131 H a ll , P . 114 , 122 , 126
B ra dway, R . H . 220 H auc k , P. 401
Brandl, R. 40, 492, 496, 498 Heineken, H. 277, 401, 485, 494, 498, 506,
Bruno, B. 16,533 511
Busetto, G. 65, 200, 225, 227, 253, 254, Hickin, K.K. 319
264, 270, 271, 282, 303, 304, 305, 310, 311, Higman, D.G. 142
316, 318, 319, 320, 325, 33 0, 331, 332, 338, Holmes, C.S. 104, 200, 276, 277, 359, 430,
340 , 341 , 342 438
H ond a, K . 200, 276, 277
Calcaterra, R.A. 476 Hughes, D.R. 147
Caranti, A. 277, 344, 3 92, 393, 394, 395 Huppert, B. 34, 187
Cardin, M. 310, 311
Cernikov, S.N. 125 Ito, N. 222, 233, 243
Cernikova, N.V. 123, 124, 126 Ivanov, S.G. 136, 144
Cheng, Y. 526 Iwasawa, K. 41, 55. 65, 71, 75, 79, 86, 199,
Christensen, C. 121 228, 231
C ooper, C D . H . 1 , 29 , 30, 34
.
C ost an ti n i , M. 449 J ones, A W .

. 65 , 87
Curzio, M. 10, 121, 134, 137, 486, 488, Jiirgensen, R. 524, 527
492, 493 , 495, 497 , 503 , 504 , 511 , 529 , 530 ,
540 Kegel, O.H. 148, 510
Khukhro, E.I. 148
Daues, G. 277 Kimmerle, W. 439
De Giovanni, F. 125, 133, 135, 319, 320, Kochendorfer, R. 125
321, 496, 497 Kontorovic, P.G. 343, 361, 385
Deskins, W.E. 222 Kurosh, A.G. 43
Di Martino, L. 131, 134 Kurzweil, H. 401
Dinerstein, N.T. 121
Lennox, J . C . 304
Emaldi, M. 118. 120, 121, 123, 126, 129, Li, S. 440
130, 134 Loiko, N.V. 529, 531, 533, 538, 540, 541
562 Index of Names
Longobardi, P. 87, 489, 490, 496, 497, 498 Schenkman, E. 30

Lukacs, E. 420 Schmid, P. 218
Lyons, R. 439 Schmidt, R. 23, 41, 82, 157, 175, 180, 184,
199, 200, 202, 209, 215, 216, 219, 229, 230,
Mahdavi, K. 112 232, 236, 239, 241, 243, 277, 278, 287, 288,
Maier, R. 218 344, 345, 396, 397, 398, 400, 401, 405, 406,
Mainardis, M. 77 , 96, 97, 98, 100 411, 414, 415, 416, 419, 421, 425, 428, 434,
Maj, M. 87, 489, 490, 496, 497, 498 435, 436, 438, 439, 447, 449, 450, 485, 486,
Martino, E. 143 519, 524, 527, 537, 538, 540, 541
Menegazzo, F. 65, 114, 129, 130, 131, 132, Scoppola, C.M. 358
134, 157, 187, 195, 196, 197, 200, 250, 253, Scott, W.R. 220, 374
254, 271, 282, 341, 344, 417, 421 Seitz, G.M. 67, 187, 197
Metelli, C. 108, 113, 441, 449 Sergeev, M.I. 126
Mozarovskaja, L.S. 126 Silcock, H.L. 490
Smelkin, A.L. 374, 418
Nakamura, K. 222, 227 Spring, R.F. 273
Napolitani, F. 65, 68, 87, 120, 137, 139, Stonehewer, S.E. 43, 144, 145, 209, 220,
143, 145, 200, 226, 254, 264, 270, 282, 303, 253, 254, 293, 297, 302, 311, 312, 316, 328,
305, 310, 311, 315, 330, 331, 332, 334, 338, 329, 330, 341, 401, 459, 484
340, 341, 342, 503 Strambach, K. 401
Neumann, B.H. 283 Suzuki, M. 1, 25, 37, 39, 41, 52, 65, 115,
Niegel, W. 277 142, 144, 146, 152, 157, 172, 181, 185,
200, 228, 229, 230, 2.33, 239, 391, 394,
Obraztsov, V.N. 459 406, 409, 410, 444, 449, 452, 458, 459,
Olshanskii, A.Yu. 82, 311 461, 462
Ore, O. 1, 12, 16, 43, 222 Sysak, Ja.P. 125
Ostendorf, U. 111 Szep, J. 222, 243
Palfy, P.P. 10, 420, 490 Tamaschke, O. 501, 504

Paulsen, K.-J. 160, 164, 176, 186, 187, 197, Tamburini Bellani, M.C. 131, 134
198 Teague, D.N. 439
Pazderski, G. 485, 489, 504, 506, 511 Thompson, J.G. 147, 227
Pekelis, A.S. 344, 363, 376, 377, 401, 405 Tits, J. 440
Phillips, R.E. 319 Tsybanev, M.V. 126
Plaumann, P. 401 Tuccillo, F. 496
Plotkin, B.I. 343, 361, 385, 401 Tuma, J. 9, 10
Poland, J. 19, 112
Previato, E. 116, 120, 204, 209, 215, Uzawa, T. 437
317
Pudlak, P. 9 Vasileva, A.V. 524, 527
Venzke, P. 133, 234, 235
Rao, S. 134 Volklein, H. 449
Reuther, M. 526, 527
Rips, E. 281, 286, 325 v.d.Waall, R.W. 67
Robinson, D.J.S. 33 Wall, G.E. 148, 272, 274, 275, 279, 343,
Rocke, D.M. 521 344, 360, 382, 383, 385
Rose, J.S. 40 Whitman, P.M. 9
Rottlander, A. 200, 275, 276 Whitson, G.M. 216
Rudolph, R. 83 Wielandt, H. 6, 499
Wright, C.R.B. 67, 187, 197
Sadovskii, L.E. 1, 21, 22, 343, 344, 359,
360, 363, 373, 374, 417 Yakovlev, B.V. 282, 332, 341, 343, 344,
Sandling, R. 439 347, 356, 357, 358, 360, 377, 387, 395,
Sato, S. 41, 65, 96, 99, 142, 233 436
Schenke, M. 48, 344, 415, 416, 421 Yff, P. 200,276,277
Index of Names 563
Zacher, G. 114, 118, 119, 128, 129, 144, 444,447,451,452,458,459,462,469,477,

145, 200, 226, 243, 281, 282, 286, 287, 289, 478, 484, 502, 504, 509, 510, 511
293,294,297,300,301,302,310,312,313, Zappa, G. 115, 141, 142, 143, 144, 157,
316,318,319,320, 321, 326, 328, 329, 330, 181,502
334, 341, 401, 404, 408, 410, 412, 420, 421, Zitarosa, A. 498
Index of Subjects
A C
abelian group(s) 43, 86, 94-113, 491-494, centre 273, 536
536 of a finite perfect group 229
character group of 453 of a p-group 243
elementary 25, 49-52, 131 of a Sylow subgroup 195-197
of torsion-free rank 1 107-113,493,533 of a torsion-free group 360
of torsion-free rank > 2 106, 358, 492, ZJG) 183
533 cen t ra lizer
periodic 94, 96, 103-105, 397, 492 duality 512
power automorphisms of 32 lattice 8, 511-527
projectivities between 103, 104, maximal 514
110-113 minimal 514
projectivities of 94, 96, 99, 106 partition 519
R-isomorphisms of 533 preserving projectivity 272-273
with duals 452-458 C-group 121-126
abelian Sylow subgroup 185-187, 197 chain 3, 16
abelian variety 382 modular 360, 375
absorption identities 2 permodular 385-391
admissible subgroup of a partition 147 supersoluble 319
affinity 534-541 chain condition 4
algebraic lattice 9 ascending 4, 46
almost free group of a variety 382 descending 4
alternating group 10, 26, 115-116, 432, Jordan-Dedekind 47, 231--234, 540
441-449 character group 453
amorphy of a group 539-541 characterization
amorphy of a map 17,534,538-541 lattice-theoretic 14
antiatom 3 of subgroup lattices 357
antichain 3 classical group 436, 439
antiisomorphism 90, 363, 374, 532 class of groups invariant under
ascendant subgroup 293, 328 projectivities 14
ascending chain condition 4, 46 classical groups 436. 439
associativity identities 17, 534, 539 class with lattice-theoretic
atom 3 characterization 14
automorphism finite nilpotent-by-abelian groups 399
of group 24 finite soluble groups of Fitting length
of lattice 4 k 180, 399
power 24, 29-34 finite soluble groups of rank r 396
autoprojectivity 23-29 formation 398
groups of Lie type 440
B hypoabelian groups 315
Baer map 416 locally 2"-groups 15
basic system 352 P-groups 51
bound radical groups 405
greatest lower 2 soluble groups 332
least upper 2 Sylow tower groups 396
lower/upper 2 class of groups with lattice-theoretic
Index of Subjects 565
characterization 14 core 199

cyclic groups 13 coset lattice 8, 527-541
finite groups 15 cover
finitely generated nonperiodic nilpotent elements of a lattice 3
groups 375 irreducibly a group 283
finitely generated soluble groups 317 Coxeter group 437
finite soluble groups 229, 230 crossed isomorphism 90-96
finite soluble groups with chief factors of cyclic
dimension at most k 405 element 345
free groups 356 group 12-16,28
hyperabelian groups 316 L, (G) 18
hypercyclic groups 319 modular chain 375
locally cyclic groups 12 permutable subgroup 223-225, 307-
locally finite groups 15-16 311, 318
nilpotent p-group or P-group 391
nonperiodic locally nilpotent D
groups 376 decomposable subgroup lattice 36-39
perfect groups 229, 313 Dedekind element 43
P-groups 70, 394 Dedekind subgroup 289
polycyclic groups 317 defect of a subnormal subgroup 125, 499
residually finite groups 287 D-embedded subgroup 289
residually finitely generated soluble derived length 332
groups 321 descending chain condition 4
residually polycyclic groups 320 determined by subgroup lattice vii, 343
residually supersoluble groups 319 alternating group 432
simple groups 228, 312 classical group 436, 439
SN-groups 319 dihedral group 422, 437
supersoluble groups 230, 231, 318 direct product of two isomorphic
torsion-free nilpotent groups 361 groups 412,429
commutators 29 finite Coxeter group 437
set of 516 finite simple group 432, 434, 439
commutator subgroup 29, 272 infinite cyclic group 13
second 174, 326, 476 nilpotent group of class 2 and exponent
compact element 9 p 384
comparable elements 3 projective general/special linear
compatible projectivity 380 group 156, 432, 434, 436
complement 115 quaternion group 28
permutable 121 strongly 343
relative 127 Suzuki group 156, 434
sectional (or S-) 122 symmetric group 432, 438
complemented lattice 115 diagonal 35, 408-411
of cosets 530 dihedral group 27, 422, 426, 437
of normal subgroups 490 generalized 149
of subgroups 115-135 directly decomposable
of composition subgroups 503 centralizer lattice 515-518, 527
complete coset lattice 529
lattice 2 lattice 8
meet-sublattice 7 lattice of composition subgroups 501
complex 346 lattice of normal subgroups 488
component of a partition 145 subgroup lattice 36-39
composition series 6 direct product of
composition subgroup 6,498-511 groups 34-40
conjugacy class 278-280, 425 isomorphic groups 408-416, 426, 429
conjugacy preserving projectivity 272 lattice-isomorphic groups 418-420
coprime groups 36 lattices 8
566 Index of Subjects
distributive modularly embedded 360

centralizer lattice 515 neutral 135,142-145,498
coset lattice 529 permodularly embedded 385
element 136 polymodular 234
lattice 11 semimodular 49, 216
lattice of composition standard 136-137, 141
subgroups 502-503, 510 uniquely complemented 136, 138-141
lattice of normal subgroups 489, 497- embedding
498 hypercentral 217
pair of elements 16, 40 hypercyclic 217
subgroup lattice 12-13 modular 360
double centralizer property 476, 484 of lattices in subgroup lattices 9
doubly transitive permutation group 434, permodular 385
435, 438 exponent of a group 178
duality 453 extended Tarski group 82, 88
abelian groups with dual 454, 457
between lattices of composition F
subgroups 507-511 finite group 15
between lattices of normal Fitting
subgroups 496 length 180, 399
centralizer 512 series 118, 180
groups with dual 452-484; 458, 459 subgroup 116,178-181
dually modular element 87 formation of finite soluble
groups 397-401, 405-406
E .F-projector 397, 401
elementary abelian group 25, 49-52, 131 Frattini subgroup 38, 115
element map 17,20,101-107 free group 345-359, 374, 533
Baer map 416 of a variety 382
derived from a projectivity 101-103 2-free group 348-359
inducing a projectivity 17, 20 free polynilpotent group 374, 533
cp-mapping 361 free product of groups 359
element of a group .-residual 397, 400
height of 107 Frobenius group 145, 519
inducing the power k in a subgroup 257
left regular 536 G
order modulo a subgroup 206 G-isomorphism 486
right regular 536 greatest element 3
type of 108 greatest lower bound 2
element(s) of a lattice group(s)
compact 9 abelian 43, 86, 94-113, 397, 452-458,
comparable 3 491-494, 533, 536
cyclic 345 alternating 10, 26, 115-116, 432,
Dedekind 43 441-449
dually modular 87 amorphy of 539-541
greatest 3 C- 121-126
isolated 360 classical 436, 439
join-distributive 136-137, 141-142 coprime 36
join-quasi-distributive 136-137 covered irreducibly by cosets (subgroups)
least 3 283
maximal 3 Coxeter 437
meet-distributive 136, 138, 143-145 cyclic 12-16, 28
meet-quasi-distributive 136, 138, determined by its subgroup lattice vii,
143-145 343
minimal 3 dihedral 27, 422, 426, 437
modular 43-46, 144 elementary abelian 25, 49-52, 131
finite 15 simple 116, 156, 228, 312, 432, 434,

finitely generated modulo subgroup 439-441,449,523
292 SK- 126
free 345-359, 374, 533 SN- 319
free polynilpotent 374, 533 soluble 118-121, 130-132, 181, 229,
Frobenius 145, 519 315-321, 332, 395-406, 462-468,
generalized dihedral 149 506-511
generated by involutions 421-451, 537 strongly determined by its subgroup
hamiltonian 55, 60, 68, 89 lattice 343
hyperabelian 315, 316 supersoluble 122, 230-234, 318
hypercyclic 123, 315, 319 Suzuki 116, 146, 152, 156, 434
hypoabelian 315 Sylow tower 396, 405
IM- 130-135 symmetric 115, 149, 177, 432, 438,
K- 115-124 441-445, 447, 451, 513, 527
lattice-isomorphic 4 T-, T*- 127
lattice-simple 449 Tarski 82, 88
locally cyclic 12 2-free 348-359
locally finite 15-16 with dual 452-484; 458, 459
locally free 359, 533 with identical subgroup
locally nilpotent 373, 376, 533 structures 275-277
locally X- 15 with normal Hall subgroup 158-166
M- 54-100;55,71,75,79,82 with partition 145-156; 152
902- 518-523 Gruenberg radical 329
M*- 55, 58-69
metacyclic 225 H
nilpotent 47, 54, 360-395, 494-498, Hall subgroup 158-166
533 hamiltonian group 55, 60, 68, 89
nilpotent-by-abelian 397 Hasse diagram 5
of all autoprojectivities 23-29 height of element in abelian group 107
of all power automorphisms 24, 29-34 Hirsch-Plotkin
of Lie type 440,449 hyperradical 404, 405
i2- 394 radical 402
p- 52-69, 79, 94, 220-225, 243-274, series 403, 404
279, 385-395, 460, 504 homomorphism of lattice 4
P- 49-54 Hughes subgroup 147
P*- 69, 89 hyperabelian group 315, 316
P-decomposable 170 hypercentral embedding 217
perfect 186, 219, 229, 243, 313, 330, 540 hypercentre 183, 243
permutation 115, 430-449 hypercyclic
polycyclic 317 embedding 217
projective general/special linear 116, group 315, 319
120, 146, 152, 156, 177, 432-436, 519, K-group 123
523-524 hypoabelian group 315
Prefer 16
p-soluble 183, 196 I
quaternion 28 identical subgroup structures 275-277
radical 402-405 IM-group 130-135
RC- 129-130 index preserving projectivity 166-178,
residually finite 287 325-329, 408
residually finitely generated soluble 321 induce a power in a subgroup 257
residually polycyclic 320 inner automorphism 24
residually supersoluble 319 interval 5, 10, 401
RK- 127-135 invariant under projectivities 14
Rottlander 162, 276, 413, 430 (see class of groups invariant under
SC- 122-124 projectivities)
involution 421-451, 537 lattice-theoretic characterization 14

isolated element 360 (see class of groups with lattice-theoretic
isomorphism characterization)
between lattices of composition least element 3
subgroups 504-507 least upper bound 2
between lattices of normal left affinity 537
490-496
subgroups length of a poset 3, 39
crossed 90-96 locally cyclic group 12
of lattice 4 locally finite group 15-16
R- 530 M-group 78-82
Iwasawa triple 60-69 of finite exponent 178
p-group 53, 79, 94, 273
J RK-group 130
join-distributive element 136-137, SC-group 123
141-142 with dual 458, 478
join-distributive pair 16 locally finite radical 329, 459
join-quasi-distributive element 136-137 locally free group 359, 533
Jordan-Dedekind chain condition 47, locally nilpotent group 373, 376, 533
231-234,540 locally P-embedded subgroup 302
locally soluble radical 477
K locally I-group 15
K-group 115-124 local system of subgroups 21
lower semimodular lattice 47-48, 233,
L 394, 399, 529
lattice 2
algebraic 9 M
centralizer 8, 511-527 map
complemented 115 amorphy of 17, 534, 538-541
complete 2 Baer 416
coset 8, 527-541 element 17, 20, 101-107
directly decomposable 8 normed 530
distributive 11 rp- 361
lower semimodular 47-48 maximal centralizer 514
modular 41-48 maximal condition 4, 46
of composition subgroups 6, 47, 498- maximal element 3
511 maximal sensitive subgroup 133, 234
of cosets with respect to normal meet-distributive element 136, 138,
subgroups 541 143-145
of divisors of n 11 meet-distributive pair 16, 40
of normal subgroups 5, 43, 486-498 meet-quasi-distributive element 136, 138,
of subnormal subgroups 7,47,498-511 143-145
partition 10 meet-sublattice 7
permodular 312 metacyclic p-group 225
poly-k-modular 405 M-group 54-100;55,71,75,79,82
polymodular 234 971-group 518-523
relatively complemented 127 M*-group 55, 58-69
sectionally complemented 126 minimal centralizer 514
semimodular 46-48, 233 minimal condition 4
subgroup 3 minimal element 3
upper semimodular 46-48 minimal normal subgroup 235-238
weakly join-complemented 133 modular
weakly meet-complemented 135 centralizer lattice 518-524, 527
weakly modular 87 coset lattice 529
lattice-isomorphic groups 4 dually 87
lattice-simple group 449 element 43--46, 144
lattice 41-48 permodular chain 385-391

lattice of composition subgroups 502- permodular lattice 312
503 permodularly embedded element 385
subgroup 43,200-220,232 permodular subgroup 288-303
subgroup lattice 54-88 permutable complement 121
weakly 87 permutable subgroup 43, 201, 202, 216-
modular chain 360 227, 293, 296, 303-311, 318
cyclic 375 permutably complemented subgroup
modularly embedded element 360 121
permutation group 430-449
N doubly transitive 434, 435, 438
neutral element 135, 142-145, 498 primitive 115, 439
nilpotent-by-abelian group 397 triply transitive 432
nilpotent group 360-395 P(G)-connected subgroups 468
finite 47, 54, 494-498 P(G)-normal subgroup 469
of class 2 and exponent p 384 p-group
periodic 387, 391 finite 52-69, 220-223, 243-272, 274,
torsion-free 361, 373, 533 279, 391-395, 504
nilpotent residual 181 locally finite 53, 79, 94, 273, 460
nilpotent variety 382-385 metacyclic 225
normal closure 199, 207 nilpotent 387, 391
of a permutable subgroup 304 of maximal class 392-395
normal Hall subgroup 158-166 regular 392
normality relation 302 with modular subgroup lattice 54-69,
normalizer preserving projectivity 272- 79, 94
275, 377-385, 408 P-group 49-54
normal partition 146 P*-group 69, 89
normal subgroup 5, 43, 486-498 p -mapping 361
minimal 235-238 P-hypercentrally closed formation 400
projective image of 239, 321-323, 334, P-hypercentral triple 399
340 p-length 183
d'-normal 510 p-normal 195
normed map 530 polycyclic group 317
norm of a group 24, 30 poly-k-modular lattice 405
polymodular element 234
0 polymodular lattice 234
Q-group 394 poset 1
OP(G) 181, 506 length 3, 39
OP(G) 178, 506 width 3, 39-40
o(x, H) 206 power automorphism 24, 29-34
of abelian group 32
P of M*-group 68
p-adic unit 32-33 of nonperiodic group 33
pair universal 32
join-distributive 16 prefrattini subgroup 401
meet-distributive 16, 40 p-regular projectivity 167-178, 422-
partially ordered set 1 424
partition lattice 10 primitive permutation group 115, 439
partition of a group 145-156, 519 product
p-collecting subgroup 540 direct 8, 34-40, 406-421, 426, 429
p-collector 540 free 359
P-decomposition 170 wreath 416-418
P-embedded subgroup 297 projective general/special linear group
perfect group 186, 219, 229, 243, 313, 330. 116, 120, 146, 152, 156, 177, 432-436,
540 519,523-524
projectivity 4 soluble 230, 234

between abelian groups 103, 104, 110- supersoluble 234
113 residually finite group 287
between finite groups with normal Hall residually finitely generated soluble
subgroups 160 group 321
centralizer preserving 272-273 residually polycyclic group 320
compatible with a pair of epimorphisms residually supersoluble group 319
380 right affinity 537
conjugacy preserving 272 R-isomorphism 530
index preserving 166-178, 325-329, RK-group 127-135
408 Rottlander group 162, 276, 413, 430
induced by a crossed isomorphism 93
induced by a group-isomorphism 20- S
24 saturated formation 397
induced by an element map 17, 20 SC-group 122-124
induced in a factor group 22 Schmidt structure 297
induced in a subgroup 15 sectional complement (or S-complement)
invariant under 14 122
normalizer preserving 272-275, 377- sectionally complemented lattice 126
385, 408 semiaffinity 537
of abelian groups 94, 96, 99, 106 semimodular element 49, 216
of M-groups 89, 94, 99 semimodular lattice 46-48, 233, 394, 399,
p-regular (or regular at p) 167-178, 529, 540
422-424 serial subgroup 293
p-singular (or singular at p) 167-178, simple group 116, 156, 228, 312, 432, 434,
422-424 439-441, 449, 523
singular 166-178 singular at p 167-178, 422-424
projector of a formation 397, 401 singular projectivity 166-178
Priifer group 16 SK-group 126
p-singular projectivity 167-178, 422-424 SN-group 319
p-soluble group 183, 196 soluble group(s) 181, 229, 317, 332,
395-406, 506-511
Q derived length of 332
quasinormal subgroup 43 Fitting length of 180, 399
quaternion group 28 formation of 397-401, 405-406
generalized 315-321
R IM-group 132
radical K-group 118-121
Gruenberg 329 rank of 396
Hirsch-Plotkin 402 RK-group 130
locally finite 329, 459 with dual 462-468
locally soluble 477 soluble radical 230, 234
soluble 230, 234 soluble residual 230, 234
radical group 402-405 standard element 136-137, 141
rank of soluble group 396 strongly determined by subgroup lattice
RC-group 129-130 343
regular at p 167-178, 422-424 abelian group of torsion-free rank > 2
regular element 536 106
regular p-group 392 alternating group A,,, n : 3' or 3' + 1,
relative complement 127 r odd 447
relatively complemented lattice 127 direct product of isomorphic dihedral
residual groups 426
nilpotent 181 free group of rank > 2 358
92k- 240 free polynilpotent group 374
of a formation 397, 400 hamiltonian 2-group 89
nonabelian locally free group 359 permodular 312

nonabelian torsion-free locally nilpotent relatively complemented 127-135
group 373 sectionally complemented 126
simple group of Lie type (# A 2) 449 strongly determined by 343
symmetric group 444, 447, 451 upper semimodular 233
2-free group 358 weakly join-complemented 133
wreath product of torsion-free groups weakly meet-complemented 135
417 weakly modular 87
strongly embedded subgroup 153 sublattice 5
subgroup(s) meet- 7
admissible (of a partition) 147 subnormal subgroup 6, 240-243, 498-
ascendant 293, 328 511
commutator 29, 272 defect of 125, 499
composition 6, 498-511 projective image of 240-243
cyclic 15, 18 :2"- 510
Dedekind 289 supersoluble
D-embedded 289 chain 319
diagonal 35, 408-411 group 230-234, 318
Fitting 116, 178-181 K-group 122
Frattini 38, 115 residual 234
G-isomorphic 487 Suzuki group 116, 146, 152, 156, 434
Hall 158-166 Sylow subgroup 166
Hughes 147 abelian 185-187, 197--198
locally P-embedded 302 centre of 195-197
local system of 21 Sylow tower group 396, 405
maximal sensitive 133, 234 symmetric group 115, 149, 177, 432, 438,
modular 43, 200-220, 232 441-445, 447, 451, 513, 527
of finite index 282-288, 325, 476 S4 149, 513, 527
p-collecting 540
P-embedded 297 T
permodular 288-303 Tarski group 82, 88
permutable 43,201,202,216-227,293, T-group 127
296, 303-311, 318 T*-group 127
permutably complemented 121 triple
P(G)-connected 468 Iwasawa 60-69
P(G)-normal 469 P-hypercentral 399
prefrattini 401 triply transitive permutation group 432
quasinormal 43 type of abelian group 104, 108
serial 293 type of element in abelian group 108
strongly embedded 153
subnormal 6, 240-243, 498-511 U
Sylow 166, 185-187, 195-198 uniquely complemented element 136,
verbal 382 138-141
subgroup lattice(s) 3 unit (p-adic) 32-33
chain 16 universal power automorphism 32
characterization of 357 upper Hirsch-Plotkin series 403, 404
complemented 115-126 upper semimodular lattice 46-48, 233,
determined by vii, 343 540
directly decomposable 36-39
distributive 12-13 V
IM- 130-135 variety 382-385
Jordan-Dedekind chain condition 231- verbal subgroup 382
234
lower semimodular 47, 233, 394, 399 W
modular 54-88; 55, 71, 75, 79, 82 weakly join-complemented lattice 133
weakly meet-complemented lattice 135 X

weakly modular lattice 87 I-normal subgroup 510
width of a poset 3, 39-40 I-subnormal subgroup 510
wreath product 416-418
ISSN 0935-6572
ISBN 3-11-011213-2

Schmidt SubgroupLatticesOfGroups

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Schmidt SubgroupLatticesOfGroups

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

DE GRUYTER Roland Schmidt

0. H. Kegel, Albert-Ludwigs-Universitat, Freiburg

I The Analytical and Topological Theory of Semigroups, K. H. Hofmann,

1991 Mathematics Subject Classification: 20-01, 20-02

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Schmidt, Roland, 1944-

Die Deutsche Bibliothek - Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Copyright 1994 by Walter de Gruyter & Co., D-10785 Berlin.

Preface ............................................................ vii

Notation .......................................................... xiii

3.1 Groups with complemented subgroup lattices (K-groups) ............. 115

4.1 Normal Hall subgroups .......................................... 158

5.1 Modular subgroups of finite groups ................................ 200

6.1 Subgroups of finite index ......................................... 282

9.3 Centralizer lattices .............................................. 511

Bibliography ....................................................... 542

Throughout this list, G denotes a group, I a class of groups, L a lattice, p a prime, it

IV, fro, 7L set of natural numbers, nonnegative integers, integers

Lattice theory notation

S,n,U partial order, intersection, union in L

Group theory notation

HS G, H < G H is a subgroup, a proper subgroup of G

1.1 Basic concepts of lattice theory

An element x of a poset P is said to be a lower bound for the subset S of P if x < s

Since (xny)nx=xn(xny)=(xnx)ny=xny,xny<x. Similarly x r) y!5; y.

Minimal and maximal elements, chains and antichains

For elements x, y of a poset P we write x < y if x 5 y and x 0 y. If x < y and there

Isomorphisms and projectivities

Let L and L be lattices. A map a: L -. L is called a homomorphism if

Proof. Let x, y c- L. By 1.1.1, x < y if and only if x n y = x (or x u y = y). It follows

An easy, but useful, consequence of this result is that a projectivity of a group is

Proof. Let H < G. Then by 1.1.2, HW _ (xU (x>)4= zU (x)- = xU <x> = H.

A subset of a lattice is called a sublattice if it is closed with respect to the operations

[y/x] = {z E Llx < z < y}.

We mention two sublattices of the subgroup lattice of a group G.

Lattice of normal subgroups

SJR(G) = {NON L:3 G}.

Lattice of composition subgroups

We say that the subgroup H of G is subnormal in G, and we write H g a G, if there

1.1.4 Lemma. If H is a composition subgroup of type n in G, H < K < G and

Proof. Let K = K. a Krn_1 9 g KO = G and let (11) be a composition series

Proof. Let A, B e R(G). Then there are composition series

that A is not normal in A v B. Then there exists b e B such that A6 # A. Since

Lemma 1.1.4 shows that in a group G with a composition series (from G to 1)

Proof. For a subset S of M let S* be the set of upper bounds of S in M. By hypothe-

If G is a group, L(G) is an example of a complete meet-sublattice of the lattice of

Let (1(G) be the set of all centralizers of subgroups of G. Since for Hi 5 G,

(4;(G) is a complete meet-sublattice of L(G); in general it is not a sublattice (see

and (x...... x.) 5 if and only if xi < yi for all i = 1, ..., n.

T: [x/0] x [y/O] - [x v y/0]; (u, v) i-- w

Embedding of lattices in subgroup lattices

1.1.8 Theorem (Whitman [1946]). Every lattice is isomorphic to a sublattice of the

The situation is more complex if one tries to replace "sublattice" by "interval" in

elements. Now if H is a subgroup of a group G and g e G, then <H, g) clearly

1.1.10 Theorem (Tuma [1989]). Every algebraic lattice is isomorphic to an interval in

1.2 Distributive lattices and cyclic groups

A lattice L is called distributive if for all x, y, z e L the distributive laws hold:

(xny)u(xnz) _ ((xny)ux)n((xny)uz) = xn(zu(xny))

thus (2) holds. The other implication follows similarly.

1.2.2 Lemma. If n e N u {oo}, then L(C,,) ^- T,,.

Groups with distributive subgroup lattices

<ab) u (<a> n <b>) = (<ab) u <a>) n (<ab) u <b>) = <a, b).

<g) = <g") <grs) = (A n <g>)(B n C n <g)) < A(B n Q.

Again it follows that x e A(B n Q. Thus AB n AC :!5; A(B n C), as required.