We can define the (first) homology of a surface $S$ by working with graphs embedded in $S$. That is, we take any (oriented) graph which is 2-cell embedded in $S$, and take cycles modulo boundaries in the usual way. Here, I am talking about homology with coefficients in $\mathbb{Z}$. The group that we get is independent of the graph, so is indeed a topological invariant of the surface.

I work with group-labelled graphs, which are oriented graphs with their edges labelled from a finite abelian group $\Gamma$. Proceeding as above, group-labelled graphs allow us to define group-labelled surfaces. That is, let $G$ be a $\Gamma$-labelled graph 2-cell embedded in a surface $S$. If each face of the embedding has group-value zero (the labels of edges on the boundary of the face sum to zero), then this gives a well-defined map on homology. In fact, the embedding of $G$ in S induces a homomorphism from $H_1(S)$ to $\Gamma$. So, we can forget about the $\Gamma$-labelled graph and just study this homomorphism.

My question is: how does this construction relate to taking homology with coefficients from $\Gamma$?

Someone once told me that what I am really doing is working with cohomology with coefficients in $\Gamma$, but I didn't really get this. Can someone please clarify?

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Depending on how you make your labelling precise it sounds like you're either talking about plain-old cellular cohomology with coefficients (see for example Bredon or Hatcher's books), or you're perhaps taking a further step and looking at cellular cohomology with local coefficients. Hatcher's book covers both ideas in detail. $\endgroup$ – Ryan Budney Mar 18 '10 at 22:52
  • $\begingroup$ Sorry if I was imprecise, but the only restriction on the group-labelling is that each face has group-value zero. I guess my question is that there are two ways to 'mod out' by the group $\Gamma$. One is to work with $\Gamma$-labelled graphs satisfying the face condition. This leads to homomorphisms from $H_1(S)$ into $\Gamma$. The second is to work with coefficients in $\Gamma$, either in homology or cohomology. I was wondering how the two notions are related. Thanks for the links everyone. $\endgroup$ – Tony Huynh Mar 18 '10 at 23:11
  • $\begingroup$ Pardon my ignorance, what does "2-cell embedded" mean? $\endgroup$ – K.J. Moi Mar 18 '10 at 23:22
  • $\begingroup$ 2-cell embedded means that every face is a disk. $\endgroup$ – Tony Huynh Mar 18 '10 at 23:23

Hi Tony.

This is not really a homology-question, the core of it is the fundamental group. The homomorphism you are using is used in the study of Van Kampen diagrams. Consider a presentation $G=\langle A|R\rangle$. A Van Kampen diagram on $S$ is a labeled graph like you have defined it. The only difference is that in a Van Kampen diagram all labels are generators (or their inverses) $a^{\pm 1}$ and not arbitrary words (although you could define it in this general way without problems because of the Van Kampen lemma).

Then every path in this graph has a group word written on it and "reading the word along a path" is a homomorphism {Paths}$\to G$ with respect to composition of paths. It turns out, that this is compatible with homotopy of paths so this induces a homomorphism $\pi_1(S,x_0)\to G$.

This is the general version of your homomorphism: If your $G$ happens to be abelian, then this homomorphism factorizes through $\pi_1(S,x_0)^{ab}$ which is $H_1(S)$ by the Hurewicz theorem.

This point of view clarifies some connections between the geometry of Van Kampen diagrams and group theoretic questions.

For example the Van Kampen lemma tells you that a group word is trivial if and only if there is a Van Kampen diagram on this disk with this word written on the boundary.

Another fact is this one: If there are no nontrivial "reduced" Van Kampen diagrams on the torus, then every two commuting elements of $G$ generate a cyclic subgroup (i.e. $xyx^{-1}y^{-1}=1$ has only the trivial solutions $x=a^k, y=a^m$ for some $a\in G$.). In a similar spirit one can prove: If there are no nontrivial reduced Van Kampen diagrams on the real projective plane, then there are no involutions in $G$ (i.e. $x^2=1$ has only the trivial solution $x=1$), and if there are no nontrivial reduced Van Kampen diagrams on Klein's bottle, then the only element that is conjugated to its own inverse is the identity (i.e. $yxy^{-1}=x^{-1}$ has only the trivial solution $x=1$).

This connection between geometry and group properties becomes less obscure, if one knows the fundamental groups of the disk (1), the torus ($\langle x,y | xyx^{-1}y^{-1}=1\rangle$), the real projective plane ($\langle x | x^2=1\rangle$) and Klein's bottle ($\langle x,y | yxy^{-1}=x^{-1}\rangle$).

  • $\begingroup$ Hi Johannes. Thanks for the response. I was wondering if this is indeed a question about homotopy rather than homology. For example, if I take $\Gamma=\pi_1 (S, x_0)$, then there should be a $\Gamma$-labelling of the graph $G$ so that each cycle in $G$ containing $x_0$ has group-value precisely its homotopy class. I can see this if I take $\Gamma =H_1(S)$, since I can just label each edge of a spanning tree $T$ of $G$ zero, and each non-tree edge $e$ with the homology class of the unique cycle in $T \cup e$. Since these cycles generate the homology, this works. $\endgroup$ – Tony Huynh Mar 19 '10 at 5:23

Browsing a good introduction to algebraic topology up to the Universal coefficient theorem for cohomology would be a good plan. Hatcher's book, which you can get online, for example.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ May's book is also available online on his website if you're not as interested in the geometric aspects of AT. $\endgroup$ – Harry Gindi Mar 18 '10 at 22:49

The reason that this is cohomology and not homology is that you are looking at functions from the cells to the group.

  • $\begingroup$ Perhaps I should be more explicit about the function that I am describing. It is a function $h$ from the closed walks (cycles) of the group-labelled graph $G$ into the group $\Gamma$. Explicitly, $h$ maps a cycle $C$ to the (oriented) sum of the group-labels of the edges of $C$. With the condition that all faces of $G$ have group-value zero, this map becomes well-defined on homology. Let $C_1$ and $C_2$ be homologous. Then, $C_1 \cup C_2$ is the boundary of an orientable component of $S - C_1 \cup C_2$. Since each face of $G$ has group-value zero, we have $h(C_1)-h(C_2)=0$, as required. $\endgroup$ – Tony Huynh Mar 21 '10 at 21:00

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.