MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Let $G$ be a group $H\leq G$ a subgroup of finite index. Further, let ${\mathcal E}^G_H$ denote the class of those short exact sequences of $G$-modules (over some fixed base ring) which split when regarded as sequences of $H$-modules. Then $(G\text{-mod},{\mathcal E}^G_H)$ is a Frobenius category.

Does anybody know if it is true that $(G\text{-mod},{\mathcal E}^G_H)$ is not Frobenius if $(G:H)=\infty$?

To show this, it would be enough to construct for and pair $(G,H)$ with $(G:H)=\infty$ an $H$-module $M$ such that the canonical $H$-split map

$\text{Ind}^G_H M\hookrightarrow\text{Coind}^G_H\text{Res}^G_H\text{Ind}^G_H M$

is not $G$-split. For example, if $M$ is the trivial $H$-module, this map becomes

${\mathbb Z}[G/H]\hookrightarrow\text{Hom}_{{\mathbb Z}H}({\mathbb Z}G,{\mathbb Z}[G/H])$

$g_0 H\longmapsto (g\mapsto g g_0 H)$.

Unfortunately, I'm not able to proof that this map is not $G$-split.

share|cite|improve this question

If you take $G$ infinite and $H=(1)$ trivial, you are asking whether the category $G$-mod, with the class of short exact sequences which split in the category of abelian groups, is Frobenius. In that category $\mathbb ZG$ is projective, yet it is not injective---indeed, the relative $\mathrm{Ext}$-groups $\mathrm{Ext}_{\mathbb ZG,\mathbb Z}^p(\mathbb Z,\mathbb ZG)$ are just the usual $\mathrm{Ext}$'s, and they are not zero in general.

share|cite|improve this answer
Thank you for your answer! Do you also know an example working for any H and G? Somehow it would be nice to see that $(G\text{-mod},{\mathcal E}^G_H)$ is Frobenius if and only if $(G:H)<\infty$). – Hanno Becker Jan 22 '10 at 16:01

The representation $\mathrm{Hom}_{H}(\mathbb{Z}G,\mathbb{Z}[G/H])$ is the $\mathbb Z$-valued functions on the $G$-set $G\times_HG/H$ such that the each fiber of the natural map $G\times_HG/H\to G/H$ is only has finitely many non-zero entries.

Now, what would a map of this representation to the trivial one look like? It would have to send the characteristic function of at least one element $\delta_x$ to a non-zero value. But, take a transversal $t:G/H\to G$ and consider $\sum_{k\in G/H}t(k)\cdot \delta_x$. This is a perfectly good element of $\mathrm{Hom}_{H}(\mathbb{Z}G,\mathbb{Z}[G/H])$, but it is sent to $\infty$ by our coinvariant. Thus, the coinvariants are trivial. The coinvariants of $\mathbb{Z}[G/H]$ are not trivial, and any inclusion which is not injective on coinvariants does not split.

So indeed this exact structure is Frobenius if and only if the index is finite.

share|cite|improve this answer
Thank you, Ben! One question concerning your identification of $\text{Hom}_H({\mathbb Z}G,{\mathbb Z}[G/H])$ with the ${\mathbb Z}$-valued functions on $G\times_H G/H$: In the former, the image of some element in $G$ has only finitely many nonzero coefficients in ${\mathbb Z}[G/H]$, whereas you impose no finiteness conditions on the functions on $G\times_H G/H$. How does this fit together? – Hanno Becker Jan 22 '10 at 21:28
Ben, yet another question: How do you know from the infinity of the G-orbits that the coinvariants are trivial? – Hanno Becker Jan 22 '10 at 22:46
With your first comment, you're right that I made a mistake (fixed above), but it makes no difference to the argument. On the second point, I've tried to clarify. – Ben Webster Jan 22 '10 at 23:44
It's not clear to me why there has to exist a characteristic function on which the given map does not vanish. Further, what's the formal argument to show that there's no integer value $\sum_{k\in G/H} t(k)\cdot\delta_x$ could be sent to? (One could try to split off a large finite sum to see that it's value equals a large multiple of $\delta_x$'s value -- but this doesn't help, because the remaining sum/function could have an equally large value. Reminds me a bit of the proof that ${\mathbb Z}^{{\mathbb N}}$ is not free.) – Hanno Becker Jan 23 '10 at 8:35

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.