6
$\begingroup$

Higman's Criterion is a fundamental result in the representation theory of a finite group $G$ over a field $k$ of characteristic $p>0$. One version is the following (I hope the notation is standard enough):

Let $M$ be a $kG$-module and let $H$ be a subgroup of $G$. Then $M$ is a direct summand of ${\rm Ind}_H^G\,{\rm Res}_H^G\, M$ if and only if there is a $kH$-endomorphism $\psi$ of $M$ such that ${\rm tr}_H^G(\psi)=1_M$.

Question: suppose that $M$ has a $kH$-endomorphism $\psi$ such that ${\rm tr}_H^G(\psi)=1_M$. Does $\psi M$ contain a $kH$-submodule $L$ such that $L$ is a direct summand of ${\rm Res}_H^G\,M$ and $M$ is a direct summand of ${\rm Ind}_H^G\,L$?

Motivation: Notice that if $L$ is a direct summand of ${\rm Res}_H^G\,M$ and if $N$ is a submodule of ${\rm Res}_H^G\,M$ containing $L$, then $L$ is a direct summand of $N$. As a consequence, if $N$ is a submodule of ${\rm Res}_H^G\,M$ which contains $\psi M$, then $M$ is a direct summand of ${\rm Ind}_H^G\,N$. The standard argument proving the `if' implication in Higman's Criterion appears to show this consequence directly. This seems to me to be a mysterious property of $\psi M$, at least if my Question has a negative answer.

Going back to generalities, let $M$ be a $kG$-module and suppose that $M$ is a direct summand of ${\rm Ind}_H^G\,N$, where $N$ is a $kH$-module. One version of Higman's Theorem produces a $kH$-endomorphism $\phi$ of $M$ such that $t_H^G(\phi)=1_M$. This $\phi$ `factors through' $N$ in the sense that it is a composition $\phi=\phi_2\circ\phi_1$ where $\phi_1:{\rm Res}_H^G\,M\rightarrow N$ and $\phi_2:N\rightarrow{\rm Res}_H^G\,M$. Set $L=\phi M$. Then $L$ is both a submodule and quotient module of ${\rm Res}_H^G\,M$ and a subquotient ${\rm Im}(\phi_1)/{\rm Im}(\phi_1)\cap{\rm ker}(\phi_2)$ of $N$ and $M\mid{\rm Ind}_H^G\,L$.

$\endgroup$

1 Answer 1

2
$\begingroup$

This has the rather easy answer: No!

Let $G$ be a finite group of order divisible by $p$ that has a $p$-block $B$ of defect $0$ and let $M$ be the unique simple $kG$-module in $B$. Take $H$ to be any nontrivial $p$-subgroup of $G$. Then $k_H$ is a submodule of Res$_H^G(M)$, as $k_H$ is the unique simple $kH$-module. So $M$ is a submodule of Ind$_H^G(k_H)$, by Frobenius reciprocity. But $M$ is a projective $kG$-module. So $M$ is a direct summand of Ind$_H^G(k_H)$.

Now by the last paragraph in my posted question there is a $kH$-homomorphism $\phi$ of $M$ such that t$_H^G(\phi)=1_M$ and $\phi$ factors through $k_H$. So $\phi M\cong k_H$. But Res$_H^G(M)$ is a projective $kH$-module and $k_H$ is a non-projective $kH$-module (as $p$ divides $|H|$). So $\phi M$ has no submodule that is a direct summand of Res$_H^G(M)$.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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