16
$\begingroup$

Suppose that two finitely generated groups quasi-isometrically embed into each other. Does it follow that the two groups are quasi-isometric? Recall that a quasi-isometry is a quasi-isometric embedding that is quasi-surjective, see e.g. https://www.math.ucdavis.edu/~kapovich/EPR/pc_lectures3.pdf

$\endgroup$
3
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ The answer is certainly negative, the question is only what's the cost for a reasonable answer. Here are a few remarks: 1) the answer is obviously negative for, say, connected graphs of bounded degree (e.g., consider a 3-regular tree and the wedge of the latter and a half-line. 2) If $G$ is the first Grigorchuk group, then $G$ is QI to $G\times G$ and contains a QI-embedded line. Hence $G$ and $G\times\mathbf{Z}$ QI-embed into each other. I guess they are not QI but I can't prove it. $\endgroup$
    – YCor
    Nov 1, 2014 at 22:55
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ 3) Let $H$ be the infinite-dimensional space $\ell^1$ (thanks Alain for a correction, I first said Hilbert by mistake), and let $S=SOL$ (some polycyclic group of Hirsch length 3 and exponential growth). Then $H\times S$ and $H$ embed QI into each other, but are not QI (because only one of the two has simply connected asymptotic cones). I expect this argument could be done by replacing $H$ with some finitely generated group $L$: I'd need a f.g. group $L$ with $L$ containing a QI-embedded tree, with $L\times L$ embedding QI into $L$, and $L$ having a simply connected asymptotic cone. $\endgroup$
    – YCor
    Nov 2, 2014 at 21:17
  • $\begingroup$ Since there're recent interest to this question, I'd be curious about the case when we assume the groups to be word-hyperbolic. $\endgroup$
    – YCor
    Jul 1, 2018 at 17:11

2 Answers 2

16
$\begingroup$

Let $C_n$ be a cyclic groups of order $n$. Then the wreath products $C_2\wr\mathbf{Z}$ and $C_3\wr\mathbf{Z}$ embed QI into each other (for the reverse direction, observe that $C_2\wr\mathbf{Z}$ has a subgroup of index 2 isomorphic to $C_2^2\wr\mathbf{Z}$). But $C_2\wr\mathbf{Z}$ and $C_3\wr\mathbf{Z}$ are not QI, this follows from work of Eskin-Fisher-Whyte ($F\wr\mathbf{Z}$ and $F'\wr\mathbf{Z}$ for $F,F'$ finite groups are QI iff $|F|,|F'|$ have some common power.)

$\endgroup$
9
$\begingroup$

1) LAMPLIGHTER GROUPS

As mentioned by Yves, lamplighter groups over $\mathbb{Z}$ provide counterexamples thanks to Eskin, Fisher, and Whyte's work. Other counterexamples are given by lamplighter groups over one-ended groups thanks to the recent preprint arxiv:2105.04878. More precisely, if $F_1,F_2$ are two finite groups and if $H$ is a finitely presented one-ended group, then $F_1\wr H$ and $F_2 \wr H$ quasi-isometrically embed into each other, but they are not quasi-isometric if $|F_1|,|F_2|$ do not have the same prime divisors. (The converse holds if $H$ is non-amenable. If $H$ is amenable, $|F_1|,|F_2|$ must be powers of a common number and $H$ must admit specific auto-quasi-isometries (which always the case if $H$ is free abelian).) The advantage of these lampligthers is that one can avoid the heavy machinery of coarse differentiation.

2) COXETER GROUPS

Counterexamples can also be found among Coxeter groups. I just give one example, based on the following statement:

Proposition: Let $\Gamma$ be a finite simplicial graph and $u \in V(\Gamma)$ a vertex. Let $\Gamma(u)$ denote the graph obtained by gluing two copies of $\Gamma \backslash \{u\}$ along $\mathrm{link}(u)$. Then the right-angled Coxeter groups $C(\Gamma)$ and $C(\Gamma(u))$ are commensurable.

Sketch of proof. Let $u_1,\ldots, u_k$ denote the vertices of $\Gamma \backslash \mathrm{star}(u)$. Then, by a standard ping-pong argument, one proves that the reflexion subgroup $\langle u_1, \ldots, u_k,u_1^u, \ldots, u_k^u \rangle$ admits $\{u_1, \ldots, u_k,u_1^u, \ldots, u_k^u\}$ as a basis. The commutation graph of this family is precisely $\Gamma(u)$. $\square$

(Some details can be found in arxiv:1910.04230; see Proposition 3.14.)

Now, we apply the proposition to the following graph:

enter image description here

Clearly, $\Gamma(u)$ contains an induced copy of $\Gamma \sqcup \{ \mathrm{pt} \}$, so $C(\Gamma)$ quasi-isometrically embeds into the free product $C(\Gamma) \ast \mathbb{Z}/2\mathbb{Z}$. The reverse quasi-isometric embedding is clear. But $C(\Gamma)$ is one-ended, because $\Gamma$ has no separating complete subgraph, so $C(\Gamma)$ and $C(\Gamma) \ast \mathbb{Z}/2\mathbb{Z}$ cannot be quasi-isometric.

3) RIGHT-ANGLED ARTIN GROUPS

Given a simplicial graph $\Gamma$, the associated right-angled Artin group is defined by the following presentation: $$A_\Gamma = \langle V(\Gamma) \mid [u,v]=1, \ \{ u,v \} \in E(\Gamma) \rangle$$ where $V(\Gamma)$ and $E(\Gamma)$ denote the vertex- and edge-sets of $\Gamma$ respectively.

First, a general statement. A graph $\Gamma$ is join if there exists a partition $V(\Gamma)= A \sqcup B$ such that $A,B$ are both non-empty and such that any vertex of $A$ is adjacent to any vertex of $B$.

Proposition: Let $\Gamma$ be a finite simplicial graph which is not a join and which is not reduced to a single vertex. Then $A_\Gamma$ contains a quasi-isometrically embedded subgroup isomorphic to the free product $A_\Gamma \ast \mathbb{Z}$.

Sketch of proof. Let $\Gamma^e$ denote the extension graph of $\Gamma$, ie., the graph whose vertices are the conjugates $gug^{-1}$, where $g \in A_\Gamma$ and $u \in V(\Gamma)$, and whose edges link two elements when they commute. In Embedability between right-angled Artin groups, Kim and Koberda prove that, if $\Lambda$ is a finite induced subgraph of $\Gamma^e$, then $A_\Lambda$ embeds into $A_\Gamma$. It turns out that $\Gamma^e$ is unbounded since $\Gamma$ is not a join, so that $\Gamma^e$ contains an induced subgraph isomorphic to $\Gamma \sqcup \{ \text{vertex} \}$, hence $A_\Gamma \ast \mathbb{Z} \leq A_\Gamma$.

I don't know if it follows from their argument that the embedding is quasi-isometric, but, in the alternative proof I gave of their theorem in my thesis (see Section 8.5), it is not difficult to show that the embedding I construct is quasi-isometric. $\square$

Corollary: If $\Gamma$ is a finite connected simplicial graph which is not a join, then $A_\Gamma$ and $A_\Gamma \ast \mathbb{Z}$ quasi-isometrically embeds into each other, but they are not quasi-isometric.

The fact that $A_\Gamma$ and $A_\Gamma \ast \mathbb{Z}$ are not quasi-isometric follows from the observation that $A_\Gamma$ is one-ended (as $\Gamma$ is connected and contains at least two vertices).

Now, a concrete example. Consider the right-angled Artin group $$A= \langle a,b,c,d \mid [a,b]=[b,c]=[c,d]=1 \rangle.$$ Of course, $A$ quasi-isometrically embeds into $A \ast \mathbb{Z}$. Conversely, an embedding as mentioned above shows that the subgroup $$\langle a,b,c,d^2,ada^{-1} \rangle= \langle a,b,c,d^2 \rangle \ast \langle ada^{-1} \rangle \simeq A \ast \mathbb{Z}$$ is quasi-isometrically embedded into $A$, which can also be proved directly. However, $A$ and $A \ast \mathbb{Z}$ are not quasi-isometric since $A$ is one-ended.

4) A HYPERBOLIC EXAMPLE

According to arxiv:1812.07799, there exist a torsion-free one-ended hyperbolic group $G$ containing two isomorphic quasiconvex subgroups $H_1,H_2 \leq G$ such that $H_1$ (resp. $H_2$) has finite (resp. infinite) index in $G$. As a consequence of a theorem claimed by Gromov (and proved by Arzhantseva), $G$ contains a subgroup isomorphic to the free product $H_2 \ast \mathbb{Z}$. As a consequence, $G$ and $G\ast \mathbb{Z}$ quasi-isometrically embed into each other but they are not quasi-isometric.

$\endgroup$
6
  • $\begingroup$ To show that $A_\Gamma$ and $A_\Gamma\ast\mathbf{Z}$ are not QI, it's enough to know that $A_\Gamma$ is 1-ended, which, unless I remember incorrectly, precisely holds when the graph is not a join (although I'm not sure to be aware of a completely immediate proof). (Note that the graph is a join iff the complement graph -same vertices, other edges- is non-connected). $\endgroup$
    – YCor
    Jul 1, 2018 at 17:08
  • $\begingroup$ In fact, $A_\Gamma$ is one-ended iff $\Gamma$ is connected and not reduced to a single vertex. But you're right, it is not necessary to use Stallings' theorem, it would be more elementary to use the fact the RAAG is one-ended. $\endgroup$
    – AGenevois
    Jul 1, 2018 at 17:56
  • $\begingroup$ Oh you're right, I got confused, connectedness of $\Gamma$ (rather than the complement graph) is the right condition. $\endgroup$
    – YCor
    Jul 1, 2018 at 21:30
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ (I removed Baumslag-Solitar groups from the list of examples. A recent preprint (arxiv:2204.03983) shows that, given two solvable Baumslag-Solitar groups, if one quasi-isometrically embeds in the other, then they must be quasi-isometric. So the situation is more subtle than I first thought.) $\endgroup$
    – AGenevois
    Apr 12, 2022 at 6:25
  • $\begingroup$ I also did the same confusion, thinking that they embed into each other. If, say, we consider the fibre product description $b(x)+b(y)=0$ inside $H^2\times T_{1+3}$ for $BS(1,3)$ and restrict to $T_{1+2}$, what we get is not a cocompact space for $BS(1,2)$, but form some non-unimodular group (the scaling of the real part of $b$ is not the right one). $\endgroup$
    – YCor
    Apr 12, 2022 at 7:13

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

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