Let $S$ be a finite simple group. All representations below are over the complex numbers. Let

  • $d_0(S)$ be the smallest dimension of a faithful representation of $S$,
  • $d_1(S)$ be the smallest dimension of a faithful representation of some central extension of $S$, and
  • $d_2(S)$ be the smallest dimension of a faithful representation of some finite group admitting $S$ as quotient (or, equivalently, of some finite group admitting $S$ as Jordan-Hölder factor).

In a sense, $d_2(S)$ can be thought of the smallest dimension in which $S$ occurs linearly. On the other hand, $d_0$ and $d_1$ are well-documented, but, as far as I know, not $d_2$.

Trivially $d_0\ge d_1\ge d_2$, and the left-hand inequality can be strict: $d_0(\mathrm{Alt}_5)=3>2=d_1(\mathrm{Alt}_5)$.

Does there exist $S$ with $d_1(S)>d_2(S)$?

I'd be interested as well by any information about $d_2$, including values for small non-abelian simple groups, or some particular families.

Note: in a naive attempt to show $d_1=d_2$, we could wonder if any finite group having $S$ as quotient admits a subgroup isomorphic to some central extension of $S$; a counterexample is pointed out by Derek Holt here.


2 Answers 2


Seems that $S = O_{2n}^\pm(2)$ are examples of this for $n=5$, and probably for all $n \geq 5$. Such $S$ is a Jordan-Hölder factor of the automorphism group of the extraspecial group $2^{1+2n}_\pm$, so $d_2 \leq 2^n$. But the Schur multiplier is trivial, so $d_0 = d_1$, and the ATLAS of Conway et al. reports minimal faithful representations of dimensions $154$ for $O_{10}^-(2)$ and $155$ for $O_{10}^+(2)$, both larger than $2^5 = 32$.

  • $\begingroup$ Also $d_0=d_1=34$ for $O_8^-(2)$ but $d_2 \leq 2^4 = 16$. (But for $O_8^+(2)$ we run into the Weyl group of $E_8$.) $\endgroup$ Sep 8, 2015 at 17:03
  • $\begingroup$ If I understand correctly, some central extension of order 2 of $\mathrm{Aut}(2^{1+2n}_\pm)$ (rather than $\mathrm{Aut}(2^{1+2n}_\pm)$ itself) admits a faithful representation of dimension $2^n$, is that correct? $\endgroup$
    – YCor
    Sep 9, 2015 at 8:37
  • $\begingroup$ Right, the $2^n$ dimensional representation of the automorphism group is projective but not linear. $\endgroup$ Sep 9, 2015 at 14:42
  • $\begingroup$ The faithful representation of $ 2_+^{1+2n}.O_{2n}^+(2) $ (the order 2 central extension of $ Aut(2_+^{1+2n}) $ which you mentioned) under consideration here can be realized very concretely as the normalizer in the real orthogonal group $ O_{2^n}(\mathbb{R}) $ of the subgroup generated by tensor powers of $ X=\begin{bmatrix} 0 & 1 \\ 1 & 0 \end{bmatrix} $ and $ Z=\begin{bmatrix} 1 & 0 \\ 0 & -1 \end{bmatrix} $. In other words $ 2_+^{1+2}=<X,Z> $ and $ 2_+^{1+4}=<X\otimes X ,X \otimes Z, Z \otimes X, Z \otimes Z> $. See for example Self Dual Codes and Invariant Theory ch.6 real Clifford group $\endgroup$ Mar 8, 2022 at 13:15

Searching and starting from Noam's answer, I found some extra information:

the phenomenon pointed out by Noam on automorphism groups of extraspecial 2-groups seems to appear in: R.L. Griess, Jr. Automorphisms of extra special groups and nonvanishing degree 2 cohomology. Pacific J. Math 48 (73) 403-422. (Link, MR link)

The discussion about $d_1$ and $d_2$ seems to appear in: W. Feit and J. Tits, Projective representations of minimum degree of group extensions, Canad. J. Math. 30 (1978) 1092-1102, and continues in P. Kleidman and M. Liebeck. On a theorem of Feit and Tits, Proc. AMS 107(2), 1989, 315-322. (Link, MR link)

Feit-Tits establish that if $d_2(S)<d_1(S)$, then $S$ is of Lie type over a finite field of characteristic 2, and in this case $d_2$ is a power of 2. Kleidman and Liebeck establish the precise list of those such groups of Lie type that indeed satisfy $d_2<d_1$, including the computation of $d_2$.

In particular, it follows from this classification that the smallest dimension in which some finite simple groups ``occur" but not through a projective representation is 16, namely for the groups $\Omega_8^-(2)$, $\mathrm{Sp}_8(2)$, $\mathrm{Sp}_4(4)$.

Besides, if we consider representations over an algebraically closed field of characteristic $p\ge 5$, defining $d_i^{(p)}$ in the same fashion: the picture is exactly the same. In char. 3 it's essentially the same up to a minor difference in the classification among those $S$ of Lie type over a field of characteristic 2. On the other hand in characteristic 2 it's dramatically different: $d_1^{(2)}(S)=d_2^{(2)}(S)$ for all $S$.


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.