4
$\begingroup$

Suppose that $G$ and $H$ are groups (not isomorphic) and $G\ast H$ the free product. Let $Aut(G)$, $Aut(H)$ be the automorphism groups of $G$ and $H$. What is $Aut(G\ast H)$ ?

$\endgroup$
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ Surely this depends on the particular $G$ and $H$... $\endgroup$ – Alex Kruckman Nov 18 '15 at 2:37
  • $\begingroup$ It is certainly not a straightforward function of $\text{Aut}(G)$ and $\text{Aut}(H)$. For example, take $G = \mathbb{Z}_2, H = \mathbb{Z}_3$. Then $G \ast H \cong PSL_2(\mathbb{Z})$, whose automorphism group is, I imagine, $PGL_2(\mathbb{Z})$. $\endgroup$ – Qiaochu Yuan Nov 18 '15 at 4:25
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Consider the case $G=H=\mathbb{Z}$. Then we have $Aut(G)=Aut(H)=\mathbb{Z}_2$, but $G\ast H=F_2$, which has a very complicated automorphism group. $\endgroup$ – M. Shahryari Nov 18 '15 at 6:51
  • $\begingroup$ It's called "free product". It is also the amalgam (or amalgamated product, but not amalgamate) of the two groups over the trivial subgroup. $\endgroup$ – YCor Nov 18 '15 at 8:10
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @QiaochuYuan, your example isn't a great one, since $\mathrm{Out}(\mathbb{Z}/2)=1$ and $\mathrm{Out}(\mathbb{Z}/3)=\mathrm{Out}(PSL_2(\mathbb{Z}))=\mathbb{Z}/2$, so in the outer automorphism group does in fact arise in a simple way from the outer automorphism groups of the factors. $\endgroup$ – HJRW Nov 18 '15 at 10:12
9
$\begingroup$

This is not an answer, but it's too long for a comment and makes an important point that I hope is useful.

It's not enough to think of your group just as some free product. To understand its automorphism group you need to think of it as a free product in a canonical way, and for this you need the Grushko decomposition. Recall:

Grushko's decomposition theorem: If $G$ is finitely generated then

$G=G_1*\ldots* G_n*F_k$

where each $G_i$ is freely indecomposable (ie isn't $\mathbb{Z}$ and doesn't split as a free product) and $F_k$ is free of rank $k$. Furthermore, the $G_i$ are determined up to conjugacy (and reordering), and $k$ is determined.

The key thing to notice here is that the $F_k$ factor is not determined up to conjugacy, and therefore if $k>0$ then there are complicated automorphisms that arise essentially from the different possible ways to choose $F_k$. However, the picture is relatively simple if $k=0$.

A modern reference on the (outer) automorphism groups of free products is this nice paper of Guirardel and Levitt.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Excellent, thank you! Actually your answer is more then what i was hoping for ! $\endgroup$ – Ofra Nov 18 '15 at 10:24
  • $\begingroup$ In fact, even with only two non free factors, $A,B$ you have complicated automorphism called "partial conjugations" : let $b\in B$, then there exists an automorphism which fixes $B$ and conjugate $A$ to $bAb^{-1}$ $\endgroup$ – Thomas Nov 18 '15 at 12:06
  • $\begingroup$ @Thomas, well, it depends what you mean by 'complicated'. $\endgroup$ – HJRW Nov 18 '15 at 13:01
  • $\begingroup$ It is an automorphism which is not inner, and does not come from $Aut(A)$, $Aut(B)$, an analog of Dehn twist. In fact the automorphism group of $A*B$ is generated by such automorphisms, $Aut(A), Aut(B)$, and inner automorphisms....In the case of $A*Z$, you must add the automorphism which is $Id$ on $A$ and map $t$ to $ta$ if $t$ is the generator of $Z$. The general case is obtained by mixing these sorts of automorphisms... $\endgroup$ – Thomas Nov 18 '15 at 15:01
  • $\begingroup$ @Thomas, on the contrary, it does 'come from ... $\mathrm{Aut}(B)$'. More precisely, it's the composition of an inner automorphism of $B$ (which, as you rightly observe, gives you a non-trivial outer automorphism of the free product) with an inner automorphism of $A*B$. I would classify such things as not 'complicated', though I concede that what one may find complicated is a matter of taste. (But the definition I have in mind is that an automorphism is 'not complicated' if it fixes a point in the deformation space of Grushko decompositions.) ... $\endgroup$ – HJRW Nov 18 '15 at 15:09
5
$\begingroup$

The known reference is Fuchs-Rabinowitz (or Fouxe-Rabinowitz, Mat. Sbornik, 8 (1940), pp 265-276 and 9 (1941) 183-220. The papers are in Russian and German , see MR0003413 for a review. A more recent reference is McCullough Miller, Symmetric automorphisms of free products. Mem. Amer. Math. Soc. 122 (1996), no. 582, viii+97 pp.(MR1329943 )

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Do you know if there exists a proof of Fouxe-Rabinowitz's description of the generators elsewhere in the literature? $\endgroup$ – AGenevois Nov 18 '18 at 9:31
  • $\begingroup$ Collins Zieschang, Rescuing the Whitehead method for free products.Math. Z. 185 (1984), no. 4, 487–504 gives a more precise result...than FR. $\endgroup$ – Thomas Nov 19 '18 at 12:12
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you, I will take a look at the article. $\endgroup$ – AGenevois Nov 19 '18 at 17:39

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.