Alphabeta Math
How statement and proof provenance work

The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.

  • Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
  • AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
  • AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.

These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.

✓ 37 results · all verified · 8 also independently AI-judged
Every result on this page is machine-checked by a proof checker and read in full and owner-audited; the judge is an additional, independent cross-model AI review of the proofs. The 29 not AI-judged were verified by owner audit (typically over a confirmed judge false positive), not failures.

Cayley Graphs, Word Metrics and Quasi-Isometry

1 · Prerequisites

2 · Summary

Published finite simple graph conventions, the walk and path definitions, and the tree characterisation supply the combinatorial background, while the group-action page supplies Cayley's theorem: every group G is isomorphic to a subgroup of Sym⁡(G) and the algebra pages supply Free group on a set of generators, A free basis of a group, and semidirect products. The metric background comes from Metric space: d(x,y)=0 iff x=y, symmetry, and the triangle inequality; pseudometric and ultrametric, Isometry, isometric embedding, and the subspace metric on a subset, Lipschitz map, α-Hölder map for rational 0<α≤1, and contraction, and the basic boundedness and ball conventions that the word metric and quasi-isometry language reuse.

The page first removes the finiteness restriction from graphs, defines the path metric, and compares it with the published finite-graph distance. It then defines directed and undirected Cayley graphs, proves their connectedness, regularity, and left-translation symmetry, and identifies the word metric with the path metric of the Cayley graph. The free-group section characterises tree Cayley graphs through reduced words. The final section defines coarse Lipschitz maps, quasi-isometries, separated nets, quasi-geodesics, and quasi-isometry type, proves the equivalence and invariance statements among those notions, and records finiteness as a geometric property of finitely generated groups.

3 · Logical flowchart

4 · Definitions, theorems and proofs

DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicablejudge pass (deepseek-v4-pro + gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-26Open item page →

Simple graphs on an arbitrary vertex set

Definition

A simple graph is an ordered pair G=(V,E) in which V is a set and

E⊆[V]2:={ {u,v}⊆V:u≠v }.

The elements of V=V(G) are the vertices and the elements of E=E(G) are the edges. Thus a simple graph has no loops and no parallel edges.

This is the same incidence convention as A finite simple graph is a finite vertex set together with a set of two-element vertex subsets, with the word "finite" removed from the hypothesis on V. Whenever a statement on this page is made for a simple graph, it allows an arbitrary vertex set unless finiteness is stated separately.

DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicablejudge pass (deepseek-v4-pro + gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-26Open item page →

Walks, paths, connectedness and components in a simple graph on an arbitrary vertex set

Definition

Let G=(V,E) be a simple graph in the sense of Simple graphs on an arbitrary vertex set.

A walk, closed walk, trail, path, and cycle in G are defined exactly as in Walks, closed walks, trails, paths and cycles, with length equal to the number of traversed edges, with no finiteness hypothesis on V. In particular, a walk is a finite vertex list (v0,…,vℓ) with {vi−1,vi}∈E for each 1≤i≤ℓ, and a path is a walk with distinct vertices.

Vertices u,v∈V are connected when some path in G has endpoints u and v. The graph G is connected when V≠∅ and every two vertices of G are connected.

For v∈V, the connected component of v is the induced subgraph on CG(v):={ u∈V:u is connected to v }.

These are the same notions as in Connected graphs and connected components defined by the existence of vertex paths, again with the finiteness hypothesis removed.

LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passjudge pass (deepseek-v4-pro + gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-26Open item page →

Every walk contains a path between the same endpoints, of no greater length

Statement

Every walk contains a path between the same endpoints, of no greater length.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The hypotheses of the Statement.

[F1]

A simple graph is a pair (V,E) with V any set and E a set of two-element subsets of V (Simple graphs on an arbitrary vertex set).

[F2]

A walk of length ℓ in a simple graph is a finite vertex list (v0,…,vℓ) with consecutive vertices adjacent; a path is a walk with distinct vertices; the graph is connected when it is nonempty and every two vertices are joined by a path (Walks, paths, connectedness and components in a simple graph on an arbitrary vertex set).

[L1]

Every nonempty subset S⊆N has a least element: there is ℓ∈S with ℓ≤s for all s∈S. (The well-ordering principle).

Proof

technique · contradiction
1.1F1F2L1choose

Among the walks from u to v of length at most that of the given one, the well-ordering principle selects one of least length.

2.1F2step 1.1assume-contra

If a vertex occurred twice in the selected walk, deleting the segment between the two occurrences would give a shorter such walk, contradicting minimality.

3.1F2step 1.1step 2.1discharge-contradiction∎

So the selected walk repeats no vertex and is a path with the same endpoints and no greater length; finiteness of the vertex set is never used.

DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicablejudge pass (deepseek-v4-pro + gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-26Open item page →

The path metric of a connected simple graph

Definition

Let G be a connected simple graph. For vertices u,v∈V(G), connectedness supplies at least one path from u to v, and every such path has a length in N. By The well-ordering principle, the set of these lengths has a least element. The path metric of G is therefore the function

dG:V(G)×V(G)→R,dG(u,v):=min⁡{ ℓ(P):P is a path from u to v }.

Here ℓ(P) is the number of edges traversed by the path P, as in Walks, closed walks, trails, paths and cycles, with length equal to the number of traversed edges. The proof that dG is a metric in the sense of Metric space: d(x,y)=0 iff x=y, symmetry, and the triangle inequality; pseudometric and ultrametric is The path metric of a connected simple graph is a metric on its vertex set.

TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passjudge pass (deepseek-v4-pro + gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-26Open item page →

The path metric of a connected simple graph is a metric on its vertex set

Statement

The path metric of a connected simple graph is a metric on its vertex set.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The hypotheses of the Statement.

[F1]

The path metric of a connected simple graph assigns to two vertices the least length of a path joining them (The path metric of a connected simple graph).

[F2]

A walk of length ℓ in a simple graph is a finite vertex list (v0,…,vℓ) with consecutive vertices adjacent; a path is a walk with distinct vertices; the graph is connected when it is nonempty and every two vertices are joined by a path (Walks, paths, connectedness and components in a simple graph on an arbitrary vertex set).

[L1]

Every walk in a simple graph contains a path with the same endpoints and of no greater length (Every walk contains a path between the same endpoints, of no greater length).

[L2]

A metric on a set satisfies separation, symmetry and the triangle inequality (Metric space: d(x,y)=0 iff x=y, symmetry, and the triangle inequality; pseudometric and ultrametric).

[L3]

A simple graph is a pair (V,E) with V any set and E a set of two-element subsets of V (Simple graphs on an arbitrary vertex set).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1F1F2L3

The only path of length zero joins a vertex to itself, so the distance vanishes exactly on the diagonal.

1.2F1F2

Reversing a path preserves its length, so the distance is symmetric.

1.3F1F2L1

Concatenating two shortest paths gives a walk of the summed length, which the previous lemma replaces by a path no longer, giving the triangle inequality.

2.1L2step 1.1step 1.2step 1.3∎

Steps 1.1, 1.2 and 1.3 establish separation, symmetry and the triangle inequality, so the path metric is a metric.

LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passjudge pass (deepseek-v4-pro + gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-26Open item page →

A bijection of vertex sets is an isometry for the path metrics if and only if it is a graph isomorphism

Statement

Let G and H be connected simple graphs and let φ:V(G)→V(H) be a bijection. Then φ is an isometry for the path metrics if and only if it is a graph isomorphism.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Connected simple graphs G,H and a bijection φ:V(G)→V(H).

[F1]

A simple graph is a pair (V,E) with V any set and E a set of two-element subsets of V (Simple graphs on an arbitrary vertex set).

[F2]

A walk of length ℓ in a simple graph is a finite vertex list (v0,…,vℓ) with consecutive vertices adjacent; a path is a walk with distinct vertices; the graph is connected when it is nonempty and every two vertices are joined by a path (Walks, paths, connectedness and components in a simple graph on an arbitrary vertex set).

[L1]

The path metric of a connected simple graph assigns to two vertices the least length of a path joining them (The path metric of a connected simple graph).

[L2]

The path metric of a connected simple graph is a metric on its vertex set (The path metric of a connected simple graph is a metric on its vertex set).

[L3]

A function f:X→Y is an isometric embedding when it preserves every distance, and it is an isometry when it is also bijective (Isometry, isometric embedding, and the subspace metric on a subset).

[L4]

A graph isomorphism is a vertex bijection φ:V→W such that {u,v} is an edge exactly when {φ(u),φ(v)} is an edge, for all distinct u,v (Graph isomorphisms, automorphisms and graph complements).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1F1F2L1L2L3L4

A graph isomorphism carries paths to paths of the same length in both directions, so it preserves the minima defining the metric.

2.1F1L1L3L4step 1.1∎

Conversely an isometry preserves distance one, and distance one is exactly adjacency, so it preserves the edge relation in both directions.

LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-26Open item page →

On a finite vertex set the graph notions agree, and on connected graphs the two path distances agree

Statement

On a finite vertex set the simple-graph, walk, path, cycle, connectedness and component notions on this page agree with the published finite-graph notions. If the graph is connected, its path metric agrees with the published graph distance; more generally, the same equality holds after restricting to any connected component.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The hypotheses of the Statement.

[F1]

A simple graph is a pair (V,E) with V any set and E a set of two-element subsets of V (Simple graphs on an arbitrary vertex set).

[F2]

A walk of length ℓ in a simple graph is a finite vertex list (v0,…,vℓ) with consecutive vertices adjacent; a path is a walk with distinct vertices; the graph is connected when it is nonempty and every two vertices are joined by a path (Walks, paths, connectedness and components in a simple graph on an arbitrary vertex set).

[L1]

E⊆[V]2:={ {u,v}⊆V:u≠v }. (A finite simple graph is a finite vertex set together with a set of two-element vertex subsets).

[L3]

Vertices u and v of a graph G are connected, or reachable from one another, when a path in G has endpoints u and v. Equivalently, a walk joins them, because turns such a walk into a path. (Connected graphs and connected components defined by the existence of vertex paths).

[L4]

For vertices u,v in one connected component, the published graph distance is the least length of a path joining them (Graph distance within a component, eccentricity, diameter and girth, including the acyclic convention).

[L5]

These are the metric axioms, so shortest-path distance is a metric on C. (Shortest-path distance is a metric on every connected component).

[L6]

By deleting zero or more closed segments from its vertex list, one obtains a path from v0 to vℓ of length at most ℓ. If W repeats a vertex, the resulting path can be chosen to have length strictly less than ℓ. (Every walk between two vertices contains a path between the same endpoints).

[L7]

The path metric of a connected simple graph assigns to two vertices the least length of a path joining them (The path metric of a connected simple graph).

[L8]

The path metric of a connected simple graph is a metric on its vertex set (The path metric of a connected simple graph is a metric on its vertex set).

[L9]

Every walk in a simple graph contains a path with the same endpoints and of no greater length (Every walk contains a path between the same endpoints, of no greater length).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1F1L1

A simple graph whose vertex set is finite is a finite simple graph in the published sense, clause by clause.

2.1F2L2L3L6L9step 1.1

The walk, path, cycle, connectedness and component notions defined here read verbatim as the published ones on a finite vertex set, and the walk-to-path lemma specialises to the published one.

3.1L4L5L7L8step 2.1∎

The published graph distance is the least length of a path in the same sense. It therefore agrees with the path metric when the graph is connected and, for a disconnected graph, with the path metric of each connected component. The metric statement specialises to the published component-wise one.

DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicablejudge pass (deepseek-v4-pro + gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-26Open item page →

Locally finite graphs and vertex degree without a finiteness hypothesis

Definition

Let G be a simple graph and let v∈V(G). Its neighbourhood is

NG(v):={ w∈V(G):{v,w}∈E(G) }.

If NG(v) is finite, its cardinality is the degree of v and is written deg⁡G(v):=∣NG(v)∣.

The graph G is locally finite if NG(v) is finite for every vertex v. Equivalently, every vertex has finite degree.

LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-26Open item page →

In a connected locally finite graph every ball of the path metric is finite

Statement

In a connected locally finite graph every ball of the path metric is finite.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The hypotheses of the Statement.

[F1]

A graph is locally finite when every vertex has finitely many neighbours (Locally finite graphs and vertex degree without a finiteness hypothesis).

[L1]

The path metric of a connected simple graph assigns to two vertices the least length of a path joining them (The path metric of a connected simple graph).

[L2]

B(x,r) is the open ball, Bˉ(x,r) the closed ball and S(x,r) the sphere of centre x and radius r. The radius is always a strictly positive real; a ball of radius 0 or of negative radius is never written in this library. (Open ball, closed ball and sphere in a metric space).

[L3]

A walk of length ℓ in a simple graph is a finite vertex list (v0,…,vℓ) with consecutive vertices adjacent; a path is a walk with distinct vertices; the graph is connected when it is nonempty and every two vertices are joined by a path (Walks, paths, connectedness and components in a simple graph on an arbitrary vertex set).

[L4]

A set A is finite when A≈n for some n∈N. (The cardinality ∣A∣ of a finite set).

[L5]

Every complete ordered field is Archimedean: for every real x there is a natural number n≥1 with x<n (Every complete ordered field is Archimedean).

Proof

technique · induction
1.1L1base

Fix a vertex x. For each natural number n let Cn:={ y:dG(x,y)≤n }. Then C0={x}, so C0 is finite.

1.2F1L1L3L4ih

Assume Cn is finite. If y∈Cn+1, choose a path (v0,…,vm) from x to y of minimal length m=dG(x,y)≤n+1. If m=0 then y=x∈Cn. If m≥1, then vm−1∈Cn and y lies in NG(vm−1)∪{vm−1}. Hence Cn+1⊆⋃v∈Cn(NG(v)∪{v}). Each set NG(v)∪{v} is finite by local finiteness, so the right-hand side is a finite union of finite sets and is therefore finite; thus Cn+1 is finite.

2.1step 1.2

By step 1.2, if Cn is finite then so is Cn+1.

3.1L1L2L5L6step 1.1step 2.1discharge-induction∎

Therefore every Cn is finite. Now let r>0. By the Archimedean property choose a natural number N≥1 with r<N. Because dG(x,y) is the length of a path, it is a natural number; so dG(x,y)<r<N implies dG(x,y)≤N−1. Hence B(x,r)⊆CN−1, and [L6] makes B(x,r) finite.

DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicablejudge pass (deepseek-v4-pro + gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-26Open item page →

Cycles, trees and forests in a simple graph on an arbitrary vertex set

Definition

Let G be a simple graph.

A cycle in G is a cycle in the sense of Walks, closed walks, trails, paths and cycles, with length equal to the number of traversed edges, that is, a closed walk of length at least 3 whose vertices are distinct except for the repeated endpoint.

The graph G is acyclic if it contains no cycle.

A tree is a connected acyclic simple graph.

A forest is an acyclic simple graph.

TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passjudge pass (deepseek-v4-pro + gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-26Open item page →

A nonempty simple graph is a tree if and only if each pair of vertices is joined by exactly one path

Statement

A nonempty simple graph is a tree if and only if each pair of vertices is joined by exactly one path.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A nonempty simple graph.

[F1]

A cycle is a closed walk of length at least three with distinct vertices apart from its endpoints; a forest is a simple graph with no cycle and a tree is a connected forest (Cycles, trees and forests in a simple graph on an arbitrary vertex set).

[F2]

A walk of length ℓ in a simple graph is a finite vertex list (v0,…,vℓ) with consecutive vertices adjacent; a path is a walk with distinct vertices; the graph is connected when it is nonempty and every two vertices are joined by a path (Walks, paths, connectedness and components in a simple graph on an arbitrary vertex set).

[L1]

A simple graph is a pair (V,E) with V any set and E a set of two-element subsets of V (Simple graphs on an arbitrary vertex set).

[L2]

Every walk in a simple graph contains a path with the same endpoints and of no greater length (Every walk contains a path between the same endpoints, of no greater length).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1F1F2L1given

If paths are unique, nonemptiness together with the existence of a path between each pair makes the graph connected; a cycle of length at least three would give two distinct paths between two of its vertices.

2.1F1F2L2step 1.1∎

Conversely, in a tree two distinct paths with the same endpoints first diverge at some index and first meet again later, and the two segments between those points form a cycle.

DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicablejudge pass (deepseek-v4-pro + gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-26Open item page →

Labelled directed graphs, their underlying simple graphs, and label-preserving isomorphisms

Definition

Let L be a set of labels. A labelled directed graph with label set L is a pair Γ=(V,A) consisting of a vertex set V and a set of labelled arcs

A⊆V×L×V.

An element (u,λ,v)∈A is an arc from u to v labelled by λ. Distinct labels may connect the same ordered pair of vertices; this is why a labelled directed graph is treated here as a digraph variant rather than as a simple graph.

The underlying simple graph of Γ is the simple graph on V whose edge set consists of the unordered pairs {u,v} for which some labelled arc (u,λ,v) or (v,λ,u) exists, with loops {u,u} discarded.

If Γ=(V,A) and Γ′=(V′,A′) are labelled directed graphs with the same label set L, a label-preserving directed graph isomorphism is a bijection φ:V→V′ such that

(u,λ,v)∈A⟺(φ(u),λ,φ(v))∈A′

for all u,v∈V and λ∈L.

DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicablejudge pass (deepseek-v4-pro + gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-26Open item page →

The directed labelled Cayley graph of a group with respect to a subset

Definition

Let G be a group and let S⊆G. The directed labelled Cayley graph of G with respect to S is the labelled directed graph

Cay⁡dir(G,S)

with vertex set G and labelled arc set

A:={ (g,s,gs):g∈G, s∈S }⊆G×S×G.

Thus each generator s∈S supplies from every vertex g a directed edge labelled s to the vertex gs. If e∈S, the graph has a labelled loop at every vertex.

DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicablejudge pass (deepseek-v4-pro + gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-26Open item page →

The Cayley graph of a group with respect to a subset

Definition

Let G be a group with identity e and let S⊆G. The Cayley graph of G with respect to S is the simple graph

Cay⁡(G,S)

with vertex set G and edge set

E:={ {g,gs}:g∈G, s∈(S∪S−1)∖{e} }.

Equivalently, it is the underlying simple graph of The directed labelled Cayley graph of a group with respect to a subset after forgetting directions and labels and then deleting the loops coming from the identity. The exclusion of e is load bearing: it is what keeps the Cayley graph a simple graph in the sense of Simple graphs on an arbitrary vertex set.

DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicablejudge pass (deepseek-v4-pro + gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-26Open item page →

Finitely generated groups

Definition

Let G be a group. A subset S⊆G generates G if ⟨S⟩=G in the sense of The subgroup ⟨S⟩ generated by a subset, the cyclic subgroup ⟨g⟩, and cyclic groups.

The group G is finitely generated if some finite subset S⊆G generates G. Such an S is a finite generating set of G.

LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-26Open item page →

A Cayley graph is connected if and only if the subset generates the group

Statement

A Cayley graph is connected if and only if the subset generates the group.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The hypotheses of the Statement.

[F1]

The Cayley graph of a group G with respect to a subset S has vertex set G and edge set {{g,gs}:g∈G, s∈(S∪S−1)∖{e}} (The Cayley graph of a group with respect to a subset).

[F2]

A walk of length ℓ in a simple graph is a finite vertex list (v0,…,vℓ) with consecutive vertices adjacent; a path is a walk with distinct vertices; the graph is connected when it is nonempty and every two vertices are joined by a path (Walks, paths, connectedness and components in a simple graph on an arbitrary vertex set).

[L1]

⟨S⟩  :=  ⋂{ H  :  H≤G and S⊆H }. (The subgroup ⟨S⟩ generated by a subset, the cyclic subgroup ⟨g⟩, and cyclic groups).

[L2]

An elementary cancellation deletes two adjacent letters xx−1 or x−1x. A word is reduced if no elementary cancellation applies. (Words in an alphabet with formal inverses, elementary cancellation, and reduced words).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1F1F2L1L2

A walk from the identity to g spells an expression for g as a product of elements of S and their inverses, and each such expression is a walk.

2.1F1F2L1step 1.1∎

So the component of the identity is exactly the generated subgroup, and left translation carries it onto the component of any vertex; connectedness therefore means the subgroup is everything.

PropositionStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-26Open item page →

Cayley-graph neighbourhoods are equipotent, and local finiteness is equivalent to finiteness of the symmetrised subset

Statement

Let G be a group, S⊆G, and S±:=(S∪S−1)∖{e}. Left translation gives a bijection between the neighbourhoods of any two vertices of Cay⁡(G,S). The graph is locally finite exactly when S± is finite; in that case it is regular of finite degree ∣S±∣.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A group G, a subset S⊆G, and S±=(S∪S−1)∖{e}.

[F1]

The Cayley graph of a group G with respect to a subset S has vertex set G and edge set {{g,gs}:g∈G, s∈(S∪S−1)∖{e}} (The Cayley graph of a group with respect to a subset).

[L1]

A graph is locally finite when every vertex has finitely many neighbours (Locally finite graphs and vertex degree without a finiteness hypothesis).

[L2]

The degree of v is deg⁡G(v):=∣NG(v)∣, equivalently the number of edges incident with v. A graph is r-regular when every vertex has degree r; it is cubic when it is 3-regular. (Adjacency, incidence, open and closed neighbourhoods, vertex degree, minimum degree and maximum degree).

[L3]

A set A is finite when A≈n for some n∈N. (The cardinality ∣A∣ of a finite set).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1F1L2

The neighbours of g are the elements gs with s in the symmetrised set minus the identity, and left multiplication by hg−1 is a bijection from the neighbours of g to those of h.

2.1F1L1L2L3step 1.1∎

Thus one neighbourhood is finite exactly when all are, which occurs exactly when S± is finite. In that case the degree is defined at every vertex and equals ∣S±∣, so the graph is regular of that finite degree.

TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-26Open item page →

Left translation acts on a Cayley graph by label-preserving automorphisms, freely on vertices

Statement

Left translation acts on a Cayley graph by label-preserving automorphisms, freely on vertices.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The hypotheses of the Statement.

[F1]

The directed labelled Cayley graph of a group G and a subset S has vertex set G and an arc from g to gs labelled s for each g∈G and s∈S (The directed labelled Cayley graph of a group with respect to a subset).

[F2]

The Cayley graph of a group G with respect to a subset S has vertex set G and edge set {{g,gs}:g∈G, s∈(S∪S−1)∖{e}} (The Cayley graph of a group with respect to a subset).

[L1]

A labelled directed graph is a vertex set with a set of arcs each carrying a label, and a labelled isomorphism is a vertex bijection preserving arcs and labels (Labelled directed graphs, their underlying simple graphs, and label-preserving isomorphisms).

[L2]

A left action of G on X is a function G×X→X, written (g,x)↦g⋅x, such that (Left group actions, transitive actions, and faithful actions).

[L3]

A left action of a group G on a set X is free when (A free group action has no nonidentity element fixing a point).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1F1F2L1

Left multiplication by h sends the arc from g to gs to the arc from hg to hgs, which carries the same label.

2.1F1L1L2step 1.1

It is bijective on vertices with inverse left multiplication by h−1, and the assignment is a homomorphism into the label-preserving automorphism group.

3.1L3step 2.1∎

It fixes a vertex only when hg=g, that is only when h is the identity, so the action is free.

TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-26Open item page →

The label-preserving automorphism action on a Cayley graph is the left regular representation of Cayley's theorem

Statement

The label-preserving automorphism action on a Cayley graph is the left regular representation of Cayley's theorem.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The hypotheses of the Statement.

[L1]

Left translation acts on a Cayley graph by label-preserving automorphisms, freely on vertices (Left translation acts on a Cayley graph by label-preserving automorphisms, freely on vertices).

[F1]

The Cayley graph of a group G with respect to a subset S has vertex set G and edge set {{g,gs}:g∈G, s∈(S∪S−1)∖{e}} (The Cayley graph of a group with respect to a subset).

[L2]

Every group G is isomorphic to the subgroup of Sym⁡(G) formed by its left translations λg:x↦gx. (Cayley's theorem: every group G is isomorphic to a subgroup of Sym⁡(G)).

[L3]

A left action of G on X is a function G×X→X, written (g,x)↦g⋅x, such that (Left group actions, transitive actions, and faithful actions).

[L4]

Group isomorphisms, automorphisms and the set Aut⁡(G). (Group isomorphisms, automorphisms and the set Aut⁡(G)).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1F1L1L2L3

Cayley’s theorem embeds a group in the symmetric group on its underlying set by left multiplication, and the action just constructed has exactly those permutations.

2.1L1L2L4step 1.1∎

So the label-preserving automorphism action is that embedding followed by the inclusion of the automorphism group in the symmetric group; the Cayley graph refines the regular action rather than supplying a second embedding theorem.

LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-26Open item page →

For a finite group the Cayley graph is a finite simple graph in the published sense and the two distances agree

Statement

Let G be a finite group and let S be a finite generating set. Then Cay⁡(G,S) is a connected finite simple graph in the published sense, and its path metric agrees with the published graph distance.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A finite group G and a finite generating set S.

[F1]

The Cayley graph of a group G with respect to a subset S has vertex set G and edge set {{g,gs}:g∈G, s∈(S∪S−1)∖{e}} (The Cayley graph of a group with respect to a subset).

[L1]

On a finite vertex set these graph notions are the published ones and the path metric is the published graph distance (On a finite vertex set the graph notions agree, and on connected graphs the two path distances agree).

[L2]

The path metric of a connected simple graph assigns to two vertices the least length of a path joining them (The path metric of a connected simple graph).

[L3]

E⊆[V]2:={ {u,v}⊆V:u≠v }. (A finite simple graph is a finite vertex set together with a set of two-element vertex subsets).

[L4]

Let u and v lie in the same connected component of a graph G. Their distance is (Graph distance within a component, eccentricity, diameter and girth, including the acyclic convention).

[L5]

A set A is finite when A≈n for some n∈N. (The cardinality ∣A∣ of a finite set).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1F1L1L3L5given

The vertex set is the group, which is finite, and the edges are two-element subsets, so the published definition applies verbatim; because S generates G, the Cayley graph is connected.

2.1F1L1L2L4step 1.1∎

Both distances are the least length of a path in the same sense, so they agree.

DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicableaudited 2026-08-26Open item page →

Word length of a group element with respect to a generating set

Definition

Let G be a group and let S⊆G be a generating set. For g∈G, consider the set

LS(g):={ n∈N:g=s1⋯sn for some s1,…,sn∈S∪S−1 }.

This set is nonempty because S generates G. Indeed, the set of all finite products of elements of S∪S−1 contains the identity, is closed under products and inverses, and contains S, so it is a subgroup containing S; conversely every subgroup containing S contains all such products. It is therefore exactly ⟨S⟩=G by The subgroup ⟨S⟩ generated by a subset, the cyclic subgroup ⟨g⟩, and cyclic groups. By The well-ordering principle, it has a least element. The word length of g with respect to S is that least element and is written

∣g∣S:=min⁡LS(g).

Thus ∣g∣S=0 exactly when g is the empty product, that is, the identity of G. When S is finite, such expressions are obtained by evaluating words in the formal alphabet S⊔S−1 of Words in an alphabet with formal inverses, elementary cancellation, and reduced words; distinct formal words can evaluate to the same product when two letters represent the same group element of G.

LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-26Open item page →

Word length is defined on every element and satisfies the subadditivity, inversion and vanishing laws

Statement

Word length is defined on every element and satisfies the subadditivity, inversion and vanishing laws.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The hypotheses of the Statement.

[F1]

The word length ∣g∣S is the least n such that g is a product of n elements of S∪S−1 (Word length of a group element with respect to a generating set).

[L1]

⟨S⟩  :=  ⋂{ H  :  H≤G and S⊆H }. (The subgroup ⟨S⟩ generated by a subset, the cyclic subgroup ⟨g⟩, and cyclic groups).

[L2]

Every nonempty subset S⊆N has a least element: there is ℓ∈S with ℓ≤s for all s∈S. (The well-ordering principle).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1F1L1L2

If S generates, the set of lengths of expressions of g is a nonempty subset of the natural numbers, so it has a least element.

2.1F1L3step 1.1

Concatenating expressions gives subadditivity, and reversing an expression while inverting each letter gives equality of the lengths of g and g−1.

3.1F1step 1.1∎

The empty expression has length zero and represents only the identity, so word length vanishes exactly there.

DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicablejudge pass (deepseek-v4-pro + gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-26Open item page →

The word metric of a group with respect to a generating set

Definition

Let G be a group and let S⊆G be a generating set. The word metric of G with respect to S is the function

dS:G×G→R,dS(g,h):=∣g−1h∣S.

By Word length is defined on every element and satisfies the subadditivity, inversion and vanishing laws, this function satisfies the metric axioms of Metric space: d(x,y)=0 iff x=y, symmetry, and the triangle inequality; pseudometric and ultrametric. Thus (G,dS) is a metric space, called the word metric space of G with respect to S.

TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-26Open item page →

The word metric is a left-invariant metric and coincides with the path metric of the Cayley graph

Statement

The word metric is a left-invariant metric and coincides with the path metric of the Cayley graph.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The hypotheses of the Statement.

[F1]

The word metric of G with respect to S is dS(g,h)=∣g−1h∣S (The word metric of a group with respect to a generating set).

[L1]

Word length is defined on every element and satisfies ∣gh∣S≤∣g∣S+∣h∣S, ∣g−1∣S=∣g∣S, and ∣g∣S=0 exactly when g is the identity (Word length is defined on every element and satisfies the subadditivity, inversion and vanishing laws).

[L2]

The word length ∣g∣S is the least n such that g is a product of n elements of S∪S−1 (Word length of a group element with respect to a generating set).

[L3]

A metric on a set satisfies separation, symmetry and the triangle inequality (Metric space: d(x,y)=0 iff x=y, symmetry, and the triangle inequality; pseudometric and ultrametric).

[L4]

The Cayley graph of a group G with respect to a subset S has vertex set G and edge set {{g,gs}:g∈G, s∈(S∪S−1)∖{e}} (The Cayley graph of a group with respect to a subset).

[L5]

A Cayley graph is connected if and only if its defining subset generates the group (A Cayley graph is connected if and only if the subset generates the group).

[L6]

The path metric of a connected simple graph assigns to two vertices the least length of a path joining them (The path metric of a connected simple graph).

[L7]

The path metric of a connected simple graph is a metric on its vertex set (The path metric of a connected simple graph is a metric on its vertex set).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1F1L1L2L3

The three length laws transported by dS(g,h)=∣g−1h∣S are exactly the three metric axioms.

2.1F1step 1.1

Left invariance is immediate, since (kg)−1(kh)=g−1h.

3.1L2L4L5L6L7step 1.1∎

A walk of length n from g to h in the Cayley graph is the same datum as an expression for g−1h of length n once identity generators are discarded, so the two minima agree.

PropositionStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passverified 2026-09-23 (gpt-6-sol)Open item page →

Balls of a word metric are finite if and only if the generating set is finite

Statement

Balls of a word metric are finite if and only if the generating set is finite.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The hypotheses of the Statement.

[F1]

The word metric of G with respect to S is dS(g,h)=∣g−1h∣S (The word metric of a group with respect to a generating set).

[L1]

The word length ∣g∣S is the least n such that g is a product of n elements of S∪S−1 (Word length of a group element with respect to a generating set).

[L2]

The word metric is a left-invariant metric and coincides with the path metric of the Cayley graph (The word metric is a left-invariant metric and coincides with the path metric of the Cayley graph).

[L3]

In a locally finite connected graph every ball of the path metric is finite (In a connected locally finite graph every ball of the path metric is finite).

[L4]

Every vertex of a Cayley graph has the same degree, and the graph is locally finite exactly when the symmetrised generating set is finite (Cayley-graph neighbourhoods are equipotent, and local finiteness is equivalent to finiteness of the symmetrised subset).

[L5]

B(x,r) is the open ball, Bˉ(x,r) the closed ball and S(x,r) the sphere of centre x and radius r. The radius is always a strictly positive real; a ball of radius 0 or of negative radius is never written in this library. (Open ball, closed ball and sphere in a metric space).

[L6]

A set A is finite when A≈n for some n∈N. (The cardinality ∣A∣ of a finite set).

[L7]

A group is finitely generated when some finite subset generates it (Finitely generated groups).

[L8]

Write ∏i<mAi:={ f:f is a function with domain m and f(i)∈Ai for every i<m }. Then ∏i<mAi is finite and ∣∏i<mAi∣=∏i<m∣Ai∣, the right-hand product being the N-valued one of. (The product rule: ∣A×B∣=∣A∣ ∣B∣, and ∣∏i<mAi∣=∏i<m∣Ai∣).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1F1L1L2L3L4L5L6L7L8

If S is finite the Cayley graph is locally finite, so balls of its path metric are finite; left invariance moves this to every centre.

2.1F1L1L5L6algebra∎

If S is infinite then the open ball of radius 2 about the identity contains every element of S∪S−1: the identity, if present, has word length 0, and every other element of that union has word length 1. Since this union contains the infinite set S, the ball is infinite.

PropositionStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-26Open item page →

The word metric is the largest left-invariant metric in which each generator and its inverse lie within distance one of the identity

Statement

The word metric is the largest left-invariant metric in which each generator and its inverse lie within distance one of the identity.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The hypotheses of the Statement.

[F1]

The word metric of G with respect to S is dS(g,h)=∣g−1h∣S (The word metric of a group with respect to a generating set).

[L1]

The word length ∣g∣S is the least n such that g is a product of n elements of S∪S−1 (Word length of a group element with respect to a generating set).

[L2]

Word length is defined on every element and satisfies ∣gh∣S≤∣g∣S+∣h∣S, ∣g−1∣S=∣g∣S, and ∣g∣S=0 exactly when g is the identity (Word length is defined on every element and satisfies the subadditivity, inversion and vanishing laws).

[L3]

The word metric is a left-invariant metric and coincides with the path metric of the Cayley graph (The word metric is a left-invariant metric and coincides with the path metric of the Cayley graph).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1F1L1L2L4

For a competing left-invariant metric with the stated property, the triangle inequality along a shortest expression bounds the competing distance by the word length.

2.1F1L1L3step 1.1∎

The word metric itself gives every symmetrised generator distance one from the identity, so it satisfies the constraint and dominates every competitor.

PropositionStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-26Open item page →

Right translation by a fixed element displaces every point of a word metric space by exactly the word length of that element

Statement

Right translation by a fixed element displaces every point of a word metric space by exactly the word length of that element.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The hypotheses of the Statement.

[F1]

The word metric of G with respect to S is dS(g,h)=∣g−1h∣S (The word metric of a group with respect to a generating set).

[L1]

The word length ∣g∣S is the least n such that g is a product of n elements of S∪S−1 (Word length of a group element with respect to a generating set).

[L2]

The word metric is a left-invariant metric and coincides with the path metric of the Cayley graph (The word metric is a left-invariant metric and coincides with the path metric of the Cayley graph).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1F1L1L2

Left invariance gives dS(h,hg)=∣g∣S for every h, so right translation by g displaces every point by the same amount.

2.1F1L1L2step 1.1∎

Hence right translation by g is at bounded distance ∣g∣S from the identity map, and it is the identity exactly when that displacement is zero.

TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedverified 2026-09-26 (gpt-6-sol)Open item page →

The Cayley graph of a free group with respect to a free basis is a tree

Statement

The Cayley graph of a free group with respect to a free basis is a tree.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The hypotheses of the Statement.

[F1]

The Cayley graph of a group G with respect to a subset S has vertex set G and edge set {{g,gs}:g∈G, s∈(S∪S−1)∖{e}} (The Cayley graph of a group with respect to a subset).

[L1]

A Cayley graph is connected if and only if its defining subset generates the group (A Cayley graph is connected if and only if the subset generates the group).

[L2]

A cycle is a closed walk of length at least three with distinct vertices apart from its endpoints; a forest is a simple graph with no cycle and a tree is a connected forest (Cycles, trees and forests in a simple graph on an arbitrary vertex set).

[L3]

A simple graph is a tree if and only if every two of its vertices are joined by exactly one path (A nonempty simple graph is a tree if and only if each pair of vertices is joined by exactly one path).

[L4]

A free group on a set X is a group F(X) together with a map i:X→F(X) such that, for every group G and every function u:X→G, there is a unique group homomorphism u^:F(X)→G satisfying (Free group on a set of generators).

[L5]

The subset B is a free basis of F if (F,i) is a free group on the set B in the sense of. (A free basis of a group).

[L6]

An elementary cancellation deletes two adjacent letters xx−1 or x−1x. A word is reduced if no elementary cancellation applies. (Words in an alphabet with formal inverses, elementary cancellation, and reduced words).

[L7]

The reduced words on X⊔X−1 form a group when the product of reduced words is their concatenation followed by free reduction. (Reduced words form the free group on an alphabet).

[L8]

Every class in W(X)/∼ contains exactly one reduced word. (Every class in W(X)/∼ contains exactly one reduced word).

Proof

technique · contradiction
1.1F1L1L4L5

A free basis generates, so the Cayley graph is connected.

1.2F1L2L6L7assume-contra

Suppose it contains a cycle g0,…,gn−1 of length n≥3, with gn=g0. On each right Cayley edge, the quotient gj−1gj+1 is a basis letter or its inverse. No two consecutive labels cancel, including the last and first: such cancellation would immediately return to the preceding vertex, contrary to the distinct vertices in a simple cycle. Thus the cyclic sequence of edge labels is a nonempty reduced word.

2.1L2L8step 1.1step 1.2discharge-contradiction∎

The product of its labels telescopes to g0−1gn=e. A nonempty reduced word cannot represent the identity by uniqueness of normal form, a contradiction. The graph is connected and has no cycle, hence is a tree.

CorollaryStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-26Open item page →

With respect to a free basis, the word length of an element is the length of its reduced word

Statement

With respect to a free basis, the word length of an element is the length of its reduced word.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The hypotheses of the Statement.

[F1]

The word length ∣g∣S is the least n such that g is a product of n elements of S∪S−1 (Word length of a group element with respect to a generating set).

[L1]

Word length is defined on every element and satisfies ∣gh∣S≤∣g∣S+∣h∣S, ∣g−1∣S=∣g∣S, and ∣g∣S=0 exactly when g is the identity (Word length is defined on every element and satisfies the subadditivity, inversion and vanishing laws).

[L2]

The Cayley graph of a free group with respect to a free basis is a tree (The Cayley graph of a free group with respect to a free basis is a tree).

[L3]

An elementary cancellation deletes two adjacent letters xx−1 or x−1x. A word is reduced if no elementary cancellation applies. (Words in an alphabet with formal inverses, elementary cancellation, and reduced words).

[L4]

The reduced words on X⊔X−1 form a group when the product of reduced words is their concatenation followed by free reduction. (Reduced words form the free group on an alphabet).

[L5]

Every class in W(X)/∼ contains exactly one reduced word. (Every class in W(X)/∼ contains exactly one reduced word).

[L6]

The subset B is a free basis of F if (F,i) is a free group on the set B in the sense of. (A free basis of a group).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1F1L1L3L6

A reduced word of length n is an expression of length n, so the word length is at most the reduced length.

2.1F1L2L3L4L5step 1.1∎

An expression shorter than the reduced word would free-reduce to a second reduced word for the same element, contradicting uniqueness of normal form.

TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-26Open item page →

If no product of two members of a generating set is the identity and the Cayley graph is a tree, the set is a free basis

Statement

If no product of two members of a generating set is the identity and the Cayley graph is a tree, the set is a free basis.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The hypotheses of the Statement.

[F1]

The Cayley graph of a group G with respect to a subset S has vertex set G and edge set {{g,gs}:g∈G, s∈(S∪S−1)∖{e}} (The Cayley graph of a group with respect to a subset).

[L1]

A cycle is a closed walk of length at least three with distinct vertices apart from its endpoints; a forest is a simple graph with no cycle and a tree is a connected forest (Cycles, trees and forests in a simple graph on an arbitrary vertex set).

[L2]

A simple graph is a tree if and only if every two of its vertices are joined by exactly one path (A nonempty simple graph is a tree if and only if each pair of vertices is joined by exactly one path).

[L3]

The Cayley graph of a free group with respect to a free basis is a tree (The Cayley graph of a free group with respect to a free basis is a tree).

[L4]

A free group on a set X is a group F(X) together with a map i:X→F(X) such that, for every group G and every function u:X→G, there is a unique group homomorphism u^:F(X)→G satisfying (Free group on a set of generators).

[L5]

The subset B is a free basis of F if (F,i) is a free group on the set B in the sense of. (A free basis of a group).

[L6]

The reduced words on X⊔X−1 form a group when the product of reduced words is their concatenation followed by free reduction. (Reduced words form the free group on an alphabet).

[L7]

Every class in W(X)/∼ contains exactly one reduced word. (Every class in W(X)/∼ contains exactly one reduced word).

[L8]

An elementary cancellation deletes two adjacent letters xx−1 or x−1x. A word is reduced if no elementary cancellation applies. (Words in an alphabet with formal inverses, elementary cancellation, and reduced words).

Proof

technique · contradiction
1.1L3L4L5L6

The universal property gives a surjection from the free group on S onto G restricting to the identity on S.

2.1L6L7L8step 1.1chooseassume-contra

Assume, for contradiction, that the kernel is nontrivial, and take a shortest nonempty reduced word in it; its length is at least two, since the map is injective on S.

3.1F1step 2.1cases

Length exactly two is excluded by the hypothesis that no product of two members of S is the identity.

4.1F1L1L2L4L5step 2.1step 3.1cases-exhaustivedischarge-contradiction∎

Length at least three gives distinct partial products, by minimality, and these form a cycle in the Cayley graph, contradicting that it is a tree; so the kernel is trivial.

DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicablejudge pass (deepseek-v4-pro + gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-26Open item page →

Geodesics and geodesic metric spaces

Definition

Let (X,d) be a metric space and let x,y∈X.

A geodesic segment from x to y is a map γ:[0,ℓ]→X for some real ℓ≥0 such that

γ(0)=x,γ(ℓ)=y,d(γ(s),γ(t))=∣s−t∣ for all s,t∈[0,ℓ].

Necessarily ℓ=d(x,y), by substituting s=0 and t=ℓ.

The metric space X is geodesic if every two points of X are joined by a geodesic segment.

DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicablejudge pass (deepseek-v4-pro + gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-26Open item page →

Coarse Lipschitz maps and quasi-isometric embeddings

Definition

Let (X,dX) and (Y,dY) be metric spaces and let f:X→Y.

The map f is coarse Lipschitz if there are reals A≥0 and B≥0 such that

dY(f(x),f(x′))≤A dX(x,x′)+Bfor all x,x′∈X.

It is a quasi-isometric embedding if there are reals λ≥1 and c≥0 such that

λ−1dX(x,x′)−c≤dY(f(x),f(x′))≤λdX(x,x′)+cfor all x,x′∈X.

Thus a quasi-isometric embedding is a coarse Lipschitz map whose distances are also controlled from below, up to the same kind of additive error.

DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicablejudge pass (deepseek-v4-pro + gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-26Open item page →

Bounded distance between two maps into a metric space

Definition

Let X be a set, let (Y,dY) be a metric space, and let f,g:X→Y.

The maps f and g are at bounded distance from one another if there is a real C≥0 such that

dY(f(x),g(x))≤Cfor every x∈X.

In that case one also says that f and g are at finite distance.

LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-26Open item page →

Bounded distance is an equivalence relation and is preserved by pre-composition and by post-composition with a coarse Lipschitz map

Statement

Bounded distance is an equivalence relation and is preserved by pre-composition and by post-composition with a coarse Lipschitz map.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The hypotheses of the Statement.

[F1]

Two maps into a metric space are at bounded distance when the distance between their values is bounded uniformly (Bounded distance between two maps into a metric space).

[L1]

A map is (L,C)-coarse Lipschitz when d(f(x),f(x′))≤L d(x,x′)+C, and an (L,C)-quasi-isometric embedding when in addition L−1d(x,x′)−C≤d(f(x),f(x′)) (Coarse Lipschitz maps and quasi-isometric embeddings).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1F1

Reflexivity, symmetry and transitivity follow from the metric axioms with the bounds added.

2.1F1step 1.1

Pre-composition changes no value, so it preserves the bound exactly.

3.1F1L1step 1.1∎

Post-composition with an (L,C)-coarse Lipschitz map multiplies the bound by L and adds C; without the coarse Lipschitz hypothesis the bound need not survive.

DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicablejudge pass (deepseek-v4-pro + gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-26Open item page →

Coarsely dense subsets, quasi-inverses and quasi-isometries

Definition

Let (X,dX) and (Y,dY) be metric spaces.

A subset A⊆Y is coarsely dense in Y if there is a real R≥0 such that for every y∈Y there is an a∈A with dY(y,a)≤R. Thus every point of Y lies within one uniform bound of an actual point of A. When A is nonempty this is equivalent, after enlarging the bound if necessary, to boundedness of the point-to-set distance from Bounded subset, diameter, distance from a point to a set, and distance between two sets in a metric space. The quantified form also covers the empty space without invoking the undefined expression d(y,∅).

Let f:X→Y and g:Y→X be coarse Lipschitz maps. Then g is a quasi-inverse of f if both composites g∘f and id⁡X, and f∘g and id⁡Y, are at bounded distance in the sense of Bounded distance between two maps into a metric space.

A quasi-isometry is a coarse Lipschitz map that admits a coarse Lipschitz quasi-inverse. Two metric spaces are quasi-isometric if some quasi-isometry between them exists.

LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-26Open item page →

Composites of coarse Lipschitz maps and of quasi-isometric embeddings are again such, with explicit constants

Statement

Composites of coarse Lipschitz maps and of quasi-isometric embeddings are again such, with explicit constants.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The hypotheses of the Statement.

[F1]

A map is (L,C)-coarse Lipschitz when d(f(x),f(x′))≤L d(x,x′)+C, and an (L,C)-quasi-isometric embedding when in addition L−1d(x,x′)−C≤d(f(x),f(x′)) (Coarse Lipschitz maps and quasi-isometric embeddings).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1F1algebra

Substituting the inequality for the inner map into the one for the outer map bounds the composite above with constants L1L2 and L2C1+C2.

2.1F1step 1.1∎

The same substitution on the lower bounds gives the other inequality, with the constants recorded rather than absorbed.

LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-26Open item page →

A map at bounded distance from a quasi-isometric embedding is one, with the additive constant enlarged

Statement

A map at bounded distance from a quasi-isometric embedding is one, with the additive constant enlarged.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The hypotheses of the Statement.

[F1]

A map is (L,C)-coarse Lipschitz when d(f(x),f(x′))≤L d(x,x′)+C, and an (L,C)-quasi-isometric embedding when in addition L−1d(x,x′)−C≤d(f(x),f(x′)) (Coarse Lipschitz maps and quasi-isometric embeddings).

[L1]

Two maps into a metric space are at bounded distance when the distance between their values is bounded uniformly (Bounded distance between two maps into a metric space).

[L2]

Bounded distance is an equivalence relation, is preserved by pre-composition, and is preserved by post-composition with a coarse Lipschitz map (Bounded distance is an equivalence relation and is preserved by pre-composition and by post-composition with a coarse Lipschitz map).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1F1L1

Two applications of the triangle inequality, one at each argument, relate the two maps’ distances up to twice the bound.

2.1F1L2step 1.1∎

Enlarging the additive constant by twice the bound gives both inequalities, with the multiplicative constant unchanged.

TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedverified 2026-09-23 (gpt-6-sol)Open item page →

A quasi-isometric embedding with coarsely dense image has a quasi-inverse quasi-isometric embedding

Statement

Assume the Axiom of Choice (The Axiom of Choice).

A quasi-isometric embedding with coarsely dense image has a quasi-inverse quasi-isometric embedding.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The hypotheses of the Statement, including the Axiom of Choice.

[F1]

A subset is coarsely dense when every point of the space is within a fixed distance of it, and a quasi-isometry is a coarse Lipschitz map admitting a coarse Lipschitz quasi-inverse (Coarsely dense subsets, quasi-inverses and quasi-isometries).

[L1]

A map is (L,C)-coarse Lipschitz when d(f(x),f(x′))≤L d(x,x′)+C, and an (L,C)-quasi-isometric embedding when in addition L−1d(x,x′)−C≤d(f(x),f(x′)) (Coarse Lipschitz maps and quasi-isometric embeddings).

[L2]

Two maps into a metric space are at bounded distance when the distance between their values is bounded uniformly (Bounded distance between two maps into a metric space).

[A1]

Every family of nonempty sets has a choice function >. (The Axiom of Choice).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1F1L1A1choose

Let f:X→Y be an (L,C)-quasi-isometric embedding whose image is R-coarsely dense. By the definition of coarse density, for every y∈Y the set {x∈X:dY(f(x),y)≤R} is nonempty, so the Axiom of Choice gives a map g:Y→X with dY(f(g(y)),y)≤R for every y∈Y.

2.1L1step 1.1

For y,y′∈Y, the lower quasi-isometric-embedding inequality for f gives L−1dX(g(y),g(y′))−C≤dY(f(g(y)),f(g(y′)))≤dY(y,y′)+2R, so dX(g(y),g(y′))≤L dY(y,y′)+L(C+2R). Likewise dY(y,y′)≤dY(y,f(g(y)))+dY(f(g(y)),f(g(y′)))+dY(f(g(y′)),y′) is at most 2R+L dX(g(y),g(y′))+C, so g is a quasi-isometric embedding.

3.1F1L2step 1.1step 2.1∎

By step 1.1 the composite f∘g is at bounded distance at most R from id⁡Y. Also L−1dX(g(f(x)),x)−C≤dY(f(g(f(x))),f(x))≤R, so dX(g(f(x)),x)≤L(C+R) for every x∈X; hence g∘f is at bounded distance from id⁡X. Therefore g is a coarse Lipschitz quasi-inverse of f.

CorollaryStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passverified 2026-09-23 (gpt-6-sol)Open item page →

A map is a quasi-isometry exactly when it is a quasi-isometric embedding with coarsely dense image

Statement

Assume the Axiom of Choice (The Axiom of Choice).

A map is a quasi-isometry exactly when it is a quasi-isometric embedding with coarsely dense image.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The hypotheses of the Statement, including the Axiom of Choice.

[F1]

A subset is coarsely dense when every point of the space is within a fixed distance of it, and a quasi-isometry is a coarse Lipschitz map admitting a coarse Lipschitz quasi-inverse (Coarsely dense subsets, quasi-inverses and quasi-isometries).

[L1]

Under the Axiom of Choice, a quasi-isometric embedding with coarsely dense image admits a quasi-inverse quasi-isometric embedding (A quasi-isometric embedding with coarsely dense image has a quasi-inverse quasi-isometric embedding).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1F1L1

If a map is a quasi-isometric embedding with coarsely dense image, the previous theorem supplies a quasi-inverse quasi-isometric embedding, so the map is a quasi-isometry.

1.2F1given

Conversely, let g be a coarse Lipschitz quasi-inverse of the coarse Lipschitz map f. If dY(f(g(y)),y)≤R for every y∈Y, then every target point lies within distance R of f[X], so the image of f is coarsely dense.

2.1F1L1step 1.2algebra∎

Choose coarse Lipschitz bounds dY(fx,fx′)≤AfdX(x,x′)+Bf and dX(gy,gy′)≤AgdY(y,y′)+Bg, enlarging Ag to at least 1. If dX(g(f(x)),x)≤D for every x, the triangle inequality gives dX(x,x′)≤2D+AgdY(fx,fx′)+Bg. Thus dY(fx,fx′)≥Ag−1dX(x,x′)−(2D+Bg)/Ag. Enlarging the multiplicative and additive constants to dominate both this lower bound and the upper bound for f makes f a quasi-isometric embedding. Combined with step 1.2, this proves the converse. AC is used only for the forward implication through [L1].

TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passjudge pass (deepseek-v4-pro + gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-26Open item page →

Being quasi-isometric is reflexive, symmetric and transitive

Statement

Being quasi-isometric is reflexive, symmetric and transitive.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The hypotheses of the Statement.

[F1]

A subset is coarsely dense when every point of the space is within a fixed distance of it, and a quasi-isometry is a coarse Lipschitz map admitting a coarse Lipschitz quasi-inverse (Coarsely dense subsets, quasi-inverses and quasi-isometries).

[L1]

Bounded distance is an equivalence relation, is preserved by pre-composition, and is preserved by post-composition with a coarse Lipschitz map (Bounded distance is an equivalence relation and is preserved by pre-composition and by post-composition with a coarse Lipschitz map).

[L2]

Composites of coarse Lipschitz maps and of quasi-isometric embeddings are again such, with explicit constants (Composites of coarse Lipschitz maps and of quasi-isometric embeddings are again such, with explicit constants).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1F1

For every metric space X, the identity map id⁡X is coarse Lipschitz and is its own quasi-inverse, so X is quasi-isometric to itself.

2.1F1step 1.1

If g is a quasi-inverse of a quasi-isometry f:X→Y, then f is a quasi-inverse of g, so Y is quasi-isometric to X.

3.1F1L1L2step 2.1∎

If f:X→Y has quasi-inverse g and h:Y→Z has quasi-inverse k, then h∘f is coarse Lipschitz and g∘k is a coarse Lipschitz quasi-inverse of it: the composites (g∘k)∘(h∘f)=g∘(k∘h)∘fand(h∘f)∘(g∘k)=h∘(f∘g)∘k are at bounded distance from the relevant identities by compatibility of bounded distance with composition. Thus quasi-isometry is transitive.

DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicablejudge pass (deepseek-v4-pro + gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-26Open item page →

The quasi-isometry group of a metric space

Definition

Let (X,d) be a metric space. Consider the set of all quasi-isometries f:X→X. Two such maps are identified when they are at bounded distance, an equivalence relation by Bounded distance is an equivalence relation and is preserved by pre-composition and by post-composition with a coarse Lipschitz map.

The set of these equivalence classes is written

QI(X).

It is called the quasi-isometry group of X. The fact that composition of maps descends to these equivalence classes and makes QI(X) into a group is proved in Quasi-isometries modulo bounded distance form a group, and a quasi-isometry induces an isomorphism of these groups.

PropositionStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-26Open item page →

Quasi-isometries modulo bounded distance form a group, and a quasi-isometry induces an isomorphism of these groups

Statement

Quasi-isometries modulo bounded distance form a group, and a quasi-isometry induces an isomorphism of these groups.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The hypotheses of the Statement.

[F1]

The quasi-isometry group of a metric space is the set of quasi-isometries of it modulo bounded distance (The quasi-isometry group of a metric space).

[L1]

Bounded distance is an equivalence relation, is preserved by pre-composition, and is preserved by post-composition with a coarse Lipschitz map (Bounded distance is an equivalence relation and is preserved by pre-composition and by post-composition with a coarse Lipschitz map).

[L2]

A subset is coarsely dense when every point of the space is within a fixed distance of it, and a quasi-isometry is a coarse Lipschitz map admitting a coarse Lipschitz quasi-inverse (Coarsely dense subsets, quasi-inverses and quasi-isometries).

[L3]

A group is a monoid (G,∗,e) in which every element is invertible. (Group and abelian group).

[L4]

Group isomorphisms, automorphisms and the set Aut⁡(G). (Group isomorphisms, automorphisms and the set Aut⁡(G)).

[L5]

A binary relation ∼ on A is an equivalence relation when it is reflexive on A, symmetric and transitive, that is, when it is (Equivalence relation, equivalence class, and the quotient set A/∼).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1F1L1L5

Composition is well defined on bounded-distance classes, by the compatibility lemma.

2.1F1L2L3step 1.1

Associativity is inherited from composition of maps, the class of the identity is neutral, and the class of any chosen quasi-inverse is a two-sided inverse, because the composites are at bounded distance from the identities by definition of quasi-isometry.

3.1F1L1L4step 2.1∎

If f:X→Y has quasi-inverse g:Y→X, then [h]↦[f∘h∘g] is a homomorphism QI(X)→QI(Y) whose inverse is [k]↦[g∘k∘f]; the compatibility lemma shows both are well defined on bounded-distance classes.

DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicablejudge pass (deepseek-v4-pro + gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-26Open item page →

Bilipschitz embeddings and bilipschitz equivalences of metric spaces

Definition

Let (X,dX) and (Y,dY) be metric spaces and let f:X→Y.

The map f is a bilipschitz embedding if there is a real L≥1 such that

L−1dX(x,x′)≤dY(f(x),f(x′))≤L dX(x,x′)for all x,x′∈X.

It is a bilipschitz equivalence if it is in addition bijective (Injection, surjection, bijection).

Two metric spaces are bilipschitz equivalent if some bilipschitz equivalence between them exists.

PropositionStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-26Open item page →

Every isometry is a bilipschitz equivalence and every bilipschitz equivalence is a quasi-isometry, and two metrics on one set are Lipschitz equivalent exactly when the identity is a bilipschitz equivalence between them

Statement

Every isometry is a bilipschitz equivalence and every bilipschitz equivalence is a quasi-isometry, and two metrics on one set are Lipschitz equivalent exactly when the identity is a bilipschitz equivalence between them.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The hypotheses of the Statement.

[F1]

A map is a bilipschitz embedding when c−1d(x,x′)≤d(f(x),f(x′))≤c d(x,x′) for some c>0, and a bilipschitz equivalence when it is a bijective such map with bilipschitz inverse (Bilipschitz embeddings and bilipschitz equivalences of metric spaces).

[L1]

A map is (L,C)-coarse Lipschitz when d(f(x),f(x′))≤L d(x,x′)+C, and an (L,C)-quasi-isometric embedding when in addition L−1d(x,x′)−C≤d(f(x),f(x′)) (Coarse Lipschitz maps and quasi-isometric embeddings).

[L2]

A subset is coarsely dense when every point of the space is within a fixed distance of it, and a quasi-isometry is a coarse Lipschitz map admitting a coarse Lipschitz quasi-inverse (Coarsely dense subsets, quasi-inverses and quasi-isometries).

[L3]

Isometric embedding and isometry. A function f:X→Y is an isometric embedding if (Isometry, isometric embedding, and the subspace metric on a subset).

[L4]
  • d and d′ are topologically equivalent if they have the same metric topology: Td=Td′. - d and d′ are uniformly equivalent if for every real ε>0 there are reals δ>0 and δ′>0 such that, for all x,y∈X, d(x,y)<δ  ⟹  d′(x,y)<εandd′(x,y)<δ′  ⟹  d(x,y)<ε. - d and d′ are Lipschitz equivalent if there are reals α,β>0 with α d(x,y)  ≤  d′(x,y)  ≤  β d(x,y)for all x,y∈X. (Topologically, uniformly and Lipschitz equivalent metrics on a set).
[L5]

If d and d′ are Lipschitz equivalent, they are uniformly equivalent. (Lipschitz equivalence implies uniform equivalence implies topological equivalence).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1F1L3

An isometry is a bilipschitz equivalence with multiplicative constant one.

2.1F1L1L2step 1.1

If f:X→Y is a bilipschitz equivalence, then f and f−1 are both coarse Lipschitz with additive constant zero, and the composites are the identities; hence f is a quasi-isometry.

3.1F1L4L5step 2.1∎

Two metrics on one set are Lipschitz equivalent exactly when the identity between them is a bilipschitz equivalence; this is a comparison of two definitions written on the same data.

DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicablejudge pass (deepseek-v4-pro + gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-26Open item page →

Separated nets in a metric space

Definition

Let (X,d) be a metric space and let A⊆X.

For a real δ>0, the subset A is δ-separated if

d(a,a′)≥δfor all distinct a,a′∈A.

For a real R≥0, the subset A is an R-net in X if for every x∈X there is an a∈A with d(x,a)≤R. For nonempty A this is equivalent, after enlarging R if needed, to a uniform bound on the point-to-set distance of Bounded subset, diameter, distance from a point to a set, and distance between two sets in a metric space. The empty subset is therefore an R-net exactly when X is empty.

A separated net in X is a subset that is δ-separated for some δ>0 and is an R-net for some R≥0.

TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passverified 2026-09-26 (gpt-6-sol)Open item page →

Two metric spaces are quasi-isometric if and only if each contains a separated net and the two nets are bilipschitz equivalent

Statement

Assume the Axiom of Choice (The Axiom of Choice).

Two metric spaces are quasi-isometric if and only if each contains a separated net and the two nets are bilipschitz equivalent.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The hypotheses of the Statement, including the Axiom of Choice.

[F1]

A subset of a metric space is a separated net when its points are uniformly separated and it is coarsely dense (Separated nets in a metric space).

[L1]

A map is (L,C)-coarse Lipschitz when d(f(x),f(x′))≤L d(x,x′)+C, and an (L,C)-quasi-isometric embedding when in addition L−1d(x,x′)−C≤d(f(x),f(x′)) (Coarse Lipschitz maps and quasi-isometric embeddings).

[L2]

A quasi-isometry is a coarse Lipschitz map with a coarse Lipschitz quasi-inverse; both composites are at bounded distance from the relevant identities (Coarsely dense subsets, quasi-inverses and quasi-isometries).

[L3]

A map is a bilipschitz embedding when c−1d(x,x′)≤d(f(x),f(x′))≤c d(x,x′) for some c>0, and a bilipschitz equivalence when it is a bijective such map with bilipschitz inverse (Bilipschitz embeddings and bilipschitz equivalences of metric spaces).

[A1]

Every family of nonempty sets has a choice function >. (The Axiom of Choice).

[L4]

Under the Axiom of Choice, every nonempty poset in which every chain has an upper bound has a maximal element (Zorn's lemma).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1L1L2givenalgebra

Suppose first that X and Y are quasi-isometric. If X is empty, a quasi-inverse Y→X forces Y empty, and the empty subsets are separated nets linked by their unique bilipschitz equivalence. Otherwise choose a quasi-isometry f:X→Y with coarse Lipschitz quasi-inverse g:Y→X. Let g have constants Lg≥1,Cg≥0 and let dX(gf(x),x)≤DX and dY(fg(y),y)≤DY. Then dX(x,x′)≤LgdY(fx,fx′)+Cg+2DX, so f has a quasi-isometric lower bound; its coarse Lipschitz bound supplies the upper bound. Fix common constants L≥1,C≥0 for these bounds. The second composite estimate says f[X] is DY-coarsely dense.

2.1F1L4step 1.1

Put δ:=2LC+1. Zorn's lemma applied to the poset of δ-separated subsets of X gives a maximal one A: a union of a chain is still separated, and the empty set starts the poset. For each x∈X there must be an a∈A with dX(x,a)<δ, since otherwise adjoining x would contradict maximality. Thus A is a δ-separated, δ-net; in particular it is nonempty. This quantified argument also covers the initially empty candidate subset without using d(x,∅).

3.1F1L1L3step 1.1step 2.1

For distinct a,a′∈A, separation absorbs the additive error: dY(fa,fa′)≥(L−1−C/δ)dX(a,a′) and dY(fa,fa′)≤(L+C/δ)dX(a,a′). The first coefficient is positive because δ>LC. Hence f∣A is a bilipschitz equivalence onto f[A], and f[A] is separated. Given y∈Y, choose x∈X with dY(y,fx)≤DY and then a∈A with dX(x,a)<δ; one has dY(y,fa)<DY+Lδ+C. Thus f[A] is also a net in Y.

4.1F1L2L3A1givenalgebrastep 3.1∎

Conversely, suppose separated nets A⊆X and B⊆Y are linked by a bilipschitz equivalence ϕ:A→B. If A is empty, its net property forces X empty, while bijectivity forces B and hence Y empty; their unique maps are quasi-inverses. Otherwise choose net radii RX,RY and, using choice, select maps pX:X→A and pY:Y→B within those radii, with pX(a)=a and pY(b)=b on the nets. The triangle inequality gives dX(pXx,pXx′)≤dX(x,x′)+2RX, and likewise for pY, so both maps are coarse Lipschitz. Define F:X→Y by F=ϕpX and G:Y→X by G=ϕ−1pY, viewing the net values in their ambient spaces. Bilipschitz bounds make both maps coarse Lipschitz. Since pX and pY fix their nets, GF=pX and FG=pY; these are within RX and RY of the respective identities. Hence F and G are quasi-inverses and X,Y are quasi-isometric. Together with step 3.1, this proves both directions.

PropositionStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-26Open item page →

The nonempty metric spaces quasi-isometric to a one-point space are exactly those of finite diameter

Statement

The nonempty metric spaces quasi-isometric to a one-point space are exactly those of finite diameter.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The hypotheses of the Statement.

[F1]

A subset is coarsely dense when every point of the space is within a fixed distance of it, and a quasi-isometry is a coarse Lipschitz map admitting a coarse Lipschitz quasi-inverse (Coarsely dense subsets, quasi-inverses and quasi-isometries).

[L1]

A map is (L,C)-coarse Lipschitz when d(f(x),f(x′))≤L d(x,x′)+C, and an (L,C)-quasi-isometric embedding when in addition L−1d(x,x′)−C≤d(f(x),f(x′)) (Coarse Lipschitz maps and quasi-isometric embeddings).

[L2]

Bounded subset. A is bounded if A=∅ or there are x0∈X and a real r>0 with A⊆B(x0,r). (Bounded subset, diameter, distance from a point to a set, and distance between two sets in a metric space).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1F1L1L2choose

Let X be nonempty and bounded, so X⊆B(x0,r) for some x0∈X and r>0. The constant map c:X→{∗} and the map s:{∗}→X with s(∗)=x0 are coarse Lipschitz; one has c∘s=id⁡{∗}, and for every x∈X the distance between s(c(x))=x0 and x is less than r. Hence c is a quasi-isometry.

2.1F1L2step 1.1∎

Conversely, if c:X→{∗} is a quasi-isometry and s:{∗}→X is a quasi-inverse, then for some r>0 every x∈X satisfies dX(s(c(x)),x)=dX(s(∗),x)<r. Thus X⊆B(s(∗),r) and is bounded, hence has finite diameter.

TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-26Open item page →

The identity map between the word metrics of two finite generating sets is a bilipschitz equivalence

Statement

The identity map between the word metrics of two finite generating sets is a bilipschitz equivalence.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The hypotheses of the Statement.

[F1]

The word metric of G with respect to S is dS(g,h)=∣g−1h∣S (The word metric of a group with respect to a generating set).

[L1]

The word length ∣g∣S is the least n such that g is a product of n elements of S∪S−1 (Word length of a group element with respect to a generating set).

[L2]

Word length is defined on every element and satisfies ∣gh∣S≤∣g∣S+∣h∣S, ∣g−1∣S=∣g∣S, and ∣g∣S=0 exactly when g is the identity (Word length is defined on every element and satisfies the subadditivity, inversion and vanishing laws).

[L3]

The word metric is a left-invariant metric and coincides with the path metric of the Cayley graph (The word metric is a left-invariant metric and coincides with the path metric of the Cayley graph).

[L4]

A map is a bilipschitz embedding when c−1d(x,x′)≤d(f(x),f(x′))≤c d(x,x′) for some c>0, and a bilipschitz equivalence when it is a bijective such map with bilipschitz inverse (Bilipschitz embeddings and bilipschitz equivalences of metric spaces).

[L5]
  • d and d′ are topologically equivalent if they have the same metric topology: Td=Td′. - d and d′ are uniformly equivalent if for every real ε>0 there are reals δ>0 and δ′>0 such that, for all x,y∈X, d(x,y)<δ  ⟹  d′(x,y)<εandd′(x,y)<δ′  ⟹  d(x,y)<ε. - d and d′ are Lipschitz equivalent if there are reals α,β>0 with α d(x,y)  ≤  d′(x,y)  ≤  β d(x,y)for all x,y∈X. (Topologically, uniformly and Lipschitz equivalent metrics on a set).
[L6]

A group is finitely generated when some finite subset generates it (Finitely generated groups).

[L7]

A set A is finite when A≈n for some n∈N. (The cardinality ∣A∣ of a finite set).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1F1L1L6L7choose

Let c be the largest word length in the second metric of a member of the first symmetrised set; finiteness of that set is exactly what makes the maximum exist.

2.1F1L1L2L3step 1.1

Expanding an element of length n in the first metric and applying the triangle inequality along the expression bounds its second length by cn.

3.1F1L4L5step 2.1∎

Exchanging the roles of the two sets gives the reverse inequality, so the identity is a bilipschitz equivalence and the two metrics are Lipschitz equivalent.

DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicablejudge pass (deepseek-v4-pro + gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-26Open item page →

The quasi-isometry type of a finitely generated group

Definition

Let G be a finitely generated group. Choose a finite generating set S and form the word metric space (G,dS) of The word metric of a group with respect to a generating set.

By The identity map between the word metrics of two finite generating sets is a bilipschitz equivalence, the word metrics are bilipschitz equivalent; by Every isometry is a bilipschitz equivalence and every bilipschitz equivalence is a quasi-isometry, and two metrics on one set are Lipschitz equivalent exactly when the identity is a bilipschitz equivalence between them they are therefore quasi-isometric. Hence the quasi-isometry class of (G,dS) is independent of the chosen finite generating set S.

This well-defined quasi-isometry class is the quasi-isometry type of G.

PropositionStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passjudge pass (deepseek-v4-pro + gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-26Open item page →

A finitely generated group is finite if and only if it is quasi-isometric to a point

Statement

A finitely generated group is finite if and only if it is quasi-isometric to a point.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The hypotheses of the Statement.

[F1]

A finitely generated group is quasi-isometric to a metric space when its word metric for some, equivalently every, finite generating set is (The quasi-isometry type of a finitely generated group).

[L1]

Balls of a word metric are finite if and only if the generating set is finite (Balls of a word metric are finite if and only if the generating set is finite).

[L2]

The nonempty metric spaces quasi-isometric to a one-point space are exactly those of finite diameter (The nonempty metric spaces quasi-isometric to a one-point space are exactly those of finite diameter).

[L3]

Bounded subset. A is bounded if A=∅ or there are x0∈X and a real r>0 with A⊆B(x0,r). (Bounded subset, diameter, distance from a point to a set, and distance between two sets in a metric space).

[L4]

A set A is finite when A≈n for some n∈N. (The cardinality ∣A∣ of a finite set).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1F1L2L3L4

A finite group has finite diameter in any word metric, hence is quasi-isometric to a point.

2.1F1L1L2L3L4step 1.1∎

Conversely finite diameter with a finite generating set makes the whole group a ball of finite radius, and such balls are finite.

PropositionStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-26Open item page →

A subgroup of finite index in a finitely generated group is finitely generated, and its inclusion is a quasi-isometry

Statement

A subgroup of finite index in a finitely generated group is finitely generated, and its inclusion is a quasi-isometry.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The hypotheses of the Statement.

[F1]

A group is finitely generated when some finite subset generates it (Finitely generated groups).

[L1]

The word length ∣g∣S is the least n such that g is a product of n elements of S∪S−1 (Word length of a group element with respect to a generating set).

[L2]

Word length is defined on every element and satisfies ∣gh∣S≤∣g∣S+∣h∣S, ∣g−1∣S=∣g∣S, and ∣g∣S=0 exactly when g is the identity (Word length is defined on every element and satisfies the subadditivity, inversion and vanishing laws).

[L3]

The word metric of G with respect to S is dS(g,h)=∣g−1h∣S (The word metric of a group with respect to a generating set).

[L4]

A map is (L,C)-coarse Lipschitz when d(f(x),f(x′))≤L d(x,x′)+C, and an (L,C)-quasi-isometric embedding when in addition L−1d(x,x′)−C≤d(f(x),f(x′)) (Coarse Lipschitz maps and quasi-isometric embeddings).

[L5]

A subset is coarsely dense when every point of the space is within a fixed distance of it, and a quasi-isometry is a coarse Lipschitz map admitting a coarse Lipschitz quasi-inverse (Coarsely dense subsets, quasi-inverses and quasi-isometries).

[L6]
[L7]

gH:={gh:h∈H},Hg:={hg:h∈H}. (Left and right cosets gH and Hg of a subgroup).

[L8]

For a subgroup H≤G, the set of distinct left cosets {gH:g∈G} is a partition of G: every element belongs to a left coset, every coset is nonempty, and two left cosets are either equal or disjoint. (The left cosets of a subgroup partition the group).

[L9]

A set A is finite when A≈n for some n∈N. (The cardinality ∣A∣ of a finite set).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1F1L6L7L8L9choose

Fix a finite left transversal T for H in G that contains the identity; the cosets partition the group and there are finitely many of them.

2.1F1L1L2step 1.1

Rewriting a product of ambient generators by pushing transversal representatives to the right expresses each subgroup element in the finite set of products that fall back into the subgroup, so that set generates it.

3.1L1L3L4L5step 1.1step 2.1∎

Write each g∈G uniquely as g=r(g)t(g) with r(g)∈H and t(g)∈T. If h=gs with s∈S∪S−1 and g=r(g)t(g), h=r(h)t(h), then r(g)−1r(h)=t(g)s t(h)−1∈H is one of the finitely many subgroup elements used in step 2.1; so dH(r(g),r(h))≤1 in the word metric of H for the generating set built there. Chaining along a shortest S-expression gives dH(r(g),r(h))≤dG(g,h), so r:G→H is Lipschitz. Since r is the identity on H and every g=r(g)t(g) lies within max⁡t∈T∣t∣S of the inclusion of r(g), the composites r∘i and i∘r are the identity on H and at bounded distance from the identity on G respectively. Therefore the inclusion i:H↪G is a quasi-isometry with quasi-inverse r.

PropositionStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-26Open item page →

The quotient map by a finite normal subgroup is a quasi-isometry of word metric spaces

Statement

The quotient map by a finite normal subgroup is a quasi-isometry of word metric spaces.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The hypotheses of the Statement.

[F1]

A group is finitely generated when some finite subset generates it (Finitely generated groups).

[L1]

The word length ∣g∣S is the least n such that g is a product of n elements of S∪S−1 (Word length of a group element with respect to a generating set).

[L2]

Word length is defined on every element and satisfies ∣gh∣S≤∣g∣S+∣h∣S, ∣g−1∣S=∣g∣S, and ∣g∣S=0 exactly when g is the identity (Word length is defined on every element and satisfies the subadditivity, inversion and vanishing laws).

[L3]

The word metric of G with respect to S is dS(g,h)=∣g−1h∣S (The word metric of a group with respect to a generating set).

[L4]

A map is (L,C)-coarse Lipschitz when d(f(x),f(x′))≤L d(x,x′)+C, and an (L,C)-quasi-isometric embedding when in addition L−1d(x,x′)−C≤d(f(x),f(x′)) (Coarse Lipschitz maps and quasi-isometric embeddings).

[L5]

A subset is coarsely dense when every point of the space is within a fixed distance of it, and a quasi-isometry is a coarse Lipschitz map admitting a coarse Lipschitz quasi-inverse (Coarsely dense subsets, quasi-inverses and quasi-isometries).

[L6]

The quotient group, or factor group, G/N has the left cosets (The quotient group G/N and coset product (gN)(hN)=ghN).

[L7]

The subgroup N is normal in G when (Normal subgroup: invariance under conjugation).

[L8]

A set A is finite when A≈n for some n∈N. (The cardinality ∣A∣ of a finite set).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1F1L1L2L3L4L6L7

The image of a finite generating set generates the quotient, so the quotient map does not increase word length and is one-Lipschitz.

2.1L1L3L6L8step 1.1choose

Let M=max⁡{∣n∣S:n∈N}, which exists because N is finite. For each coset gˉ∈G/N, choose a representative s(gˉ)∈G of minimal word length in that coset, breaking ties lexicographically in the fixed finite alphabet S∪S−1; then the quotient map q satisfies q(s(gˉ))=gˉ. If hˉ=gˉ q(t) with t∈S∪S−1, then s(gˉ)−1s(hˉ)t−1∈N, so ∣s(gˉ)−1s(hˉ)∣S≤M+1. Chaining along a shortest quotient expression gives dG(s(gˉ),s(hˉ))≤(M+1)dG/N(gˉ,hˉ), so s:G/N→G is Lipschitz.

3.1L5step 2.1∎

For every g∈G, the elements s(q(g)) and g lie in the same coset, so s(q(g))−1g∈N and therefore dG(s(q(g)),g)≤M. Thus q∘s=id⁡G/N and s∘q is at bounded distance from id⁡G. Therefore q is a quasi-isometry with quasi-inverse s.

DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicablejudge pass (deepseek-v4-pro + gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-26Open item page →

Quasi-geodesics and quasi-geodesic metric spaces

Definition

Let (X,d) be a metric space.

A map γ:I→X from an interval I⊆R is a (λ,c)-quasi-geodesic if λ≥1, c≥0, and

λ−1∣s−t∣−c≤d(γ(s),γ(t))≤λ∣s−t∣+cfor all s,t∈I.

A (λ,c)-quasi-geodesic segment from x to y is such a map with domain a closed bounded interval [a,b] and with γ(a)=x, γ(b)=y.

The metric space X is quasi-geodesic if there are constants λ≥1 and c≥0 such that every two points of X are the endpoints of some (λ,c)-quasi-geodesic segment.

PropositionStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-26Open item page →

The vertex set of a connected simple graph with its path metric is a (1,1)-quasi-geodesic space

Statement

The vertex set of a connected simple graph with its path metric is a (1,1)-quasi-geodesic space.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The hypotheses of the Statement.

[F1]

A (c,b)-quasi-geodesic is a (c,b)-quasi-isometric embedding of a closed real interval, and a space is (c,b)-quasi-geodesic when every two of its points are joined by one (Quasi-geodesics and quasi-geodesic metric spaces).

[L1]

The path metric of a connected simple graph assigns to two vertices the least length of a path joining them (The path metric of a connected simple graph).

[L2]

The path metric of a connected simple graph is a metric on its vertex set (The path metric of a connected simple graph is a metric on its vertex set).

[L3]

A geodesic of length L in a metric space is an isometric embedding of the interval [0,L], and the space is geodesic when every two points are the endpoints of one (Geodesics and geodesic metric spaces).

[L4]

A map is (L,C)-coarse Lipschitz when d(f(x),f(x′))≤L d(x,x′)+C, and an (L,C)-quasi-isometric embedding when in addition L−1d(x,x′)−C≤d(f(x),f(x′)) (Coarse Lipschitz maps and quasi-isometric embeddings).

[L5]

It is written ⌊x⌋ and called the integer part, or floor, of x. (Integer part: for every real x there is exactly one integer m with m≤x<m+1).

Proof

technique · constructive
1.1F1L1L2L5construct

Given two vertices, parametrise a path realising their distance by sending each integer point of [0,d] to the corresponding vertex and each intermediate real to the nearer endpoint of its unit subinterval.

2.1L4step 1.1

The distances so obtained differ from those of the interval by at most one, so the parametrisation is a (1,1)-quasi-isometric embedding.

3.1F1L3step 2.1discharge-construct∎

Hence every two vertices are joined by a (1,1)-quasi-geodesic, so the space is (1,1)-quasi-geodesic and not geodesic unless it is a single point.

CorollaryStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passjudge pass (deepseek-v4-pro + gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-26Open item page →

A group with the word metric of any generating set is a (1,1)-quasi-geodesic space

Statement

A group with the word metric of any generating set is a (1,1)-quasi-geodesic space.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The hypotheses of the Statement.

[L1]

The word metric is a left-invariant metric and coincides with the path metric of the Cayley graph (The word metric is a left-invariant metric and coincides with the path metric of the Cayley graph).

[L2]

The vertex set of a connected simple graph with its path metric is a (1,1)-quasi-geodesic space (The vertex set of a connected simple graph with its path metric is a (1,1)-quasi-geodesic space).

[F1]

The word metric of G with respect to S is dS(g,h)=∣g−1h∣S (The word metric of a group with respect to a generating set).

[L3]

A group is finitely generated when some finite subset generates it (Finitely generated groups).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1F1L1L3

The word metric is the path metric of the Cayley graph, which is connected because the set generates.

2.1L2step 1.1∎

The previous proposition then applies verbatim.

PropositionStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-26Open item page →

The composite of a quasi-geodesic with a quasi-isometric embedding is a quasi-geodesic, with computed constants

Statement

The composite of a quasi-geodesic with a quasi-isometric embedding is a quasi-geodesic, with computed constants.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The hypotheses of the Statement.

[F1]

A (c,b)-quasi-geodesic is a (c,b)-quasi-isometric embedding of a closed real interval, and a space is (c,b)-quasi-geodesic when every two of its points are joined by one (Quasi-geodesics and quasi-geodesic metric spaces).

[L1]

A map is (L,C)-coarse Lipschitz when d(f(x),f(x′))≤L d(x,x′)+C, and an (L,C)-quasi-isometric embedding when in addition L−1d(x,x′)−C≤d(f(x),f(x′)) (Coarse Lipschitz maps and quasi-isometric embeddings).

[L2]

Composites of coarse Lipschitz maps and of quasi-isometric embeddings are again such, with explicit constants (Composites of coarse Lipschitz maps and of quasi-isometric embeddings are again such, with explicit constants).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1F1L1L2

A quasi-geodesic is by definition a quasi-isometric embedding of a closed interval.

2.1F1L2step 1.1∎

The composition lemma applied to two quasi-isometric embeddings gives the conclusion, with the constants that lemma records.

PropositionStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-26Open item page →

A coarse Lipschitz map between word metric spaces of finitely generated groups is Lipschitz

Statement

A coarse Lipschitz map between word metric spaces of finitely generated groups is Lipschitz.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The hypotheses of the Statement.

[F1]

A map is (L,C)-coarse Lipschitz when d(f(x),f(x′))≤L d(x,x′)+C, and an (L,C)-quasi-isometric embedding when in addition L−1d(x,x′)−C≤d(f(x),f(x′)) (Coarse Lipschitz maps and quasi-isometric embeddings).

[L1]

The word length ∣g∣S is the least n such that g is a product of n elements of S∪S−1 (Word length of a group element with respect to a generating set).

[L2]

The word metric of G with respect to S is dS(g,h)=∣g−1h∣S (The word metric of a group with respect to a generating set).

[L3]

The word metric is a left-invariant metric and coincides with the path metric of the Cayley graph (The word metric is a left-invariant metric and coincides with the path metric of the Cayley graph).

[L4]

A group is finitely generated when some finite subset generates it (Finitely generated groups).

[L5]

Proof

technique · direct
1.1F1L1L2L4

Two points at distance one differ by a single generator, so their images are at distance at most L+C.

2.1L1L2L3step 1.1

Chaining along a shortest expression bounds the image distance by (L+C) times the source distance.

3.1F1L5step 2.1∎

So the map is Lipschitz with constant L+C; the argument uses that the word metric takes integer values and that adjacent points are at distance one, so it does not extend to an arbitrary metric source.

CorollaryStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passverified 2026-09-26 (gpt-6-sol)Open item page →

A bijective quasi-isometry between word metric spaces of finitely generated groups is a bilipschitz equivalence

Statement

A bijective quasi-isometry between word metric spaces of finitely generated groups is a bilipschitz equivalence.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The hypotheses of the Statement.

[F1]

A subset is coarsely dense when every point of the space is within a fixed distance of it, and a quasi-isometry is a coarse Lipschitz map admitting a coarse Lipschitz quasi-inverse (Coarsely dense subsets, quasi-inverses and quasi-isometries).

[L1]

A coarse Lipschitz map between word metric spaces of finitely generated groups is Lipschitz (A coarse Lipschitz map between word metric spaces of finitely generated groups is Lipschitz).

[L2]

A map is (L,C)-coarse Lipschitz when d(f(x),f(x′))≤L d(x,x′)+C, and an (L,C)-quasi-isometric embedding when in addition L−1d(x,x′)−C≤d(f(x),f(x′)) (Coarse Lipschitz maps and quasi-isometric embeddings).

[L3]

A map is a bilipschitz embedding when c−1d(x,x′)≤d(f(x),f(x′))≤c d(x,x′) for some c>0, and a bilipschitz equivalence when it is a bijective such map with bilipschitz inverse (Bilipschitz embeddings and bilipschitz equivalences of metric spaces).

[L4]

Proof

technique · direct
1.1F1L2

Let f:G→H be a bijective quasi-isometry, and let g:H→G be a coarse Lipschitz quasi-inverse. If dG(g(f(x)),x)≤R for every x∈G and g is (A,B)-coarse Lipschitz, then for y=f(x) and y′=f(x′) one has dG(f−1(y),f−1(y′))=dG(x,x′)≤A dH(y,y′)+(B+2R). So the set-theoretic inverse f−1 is coarse Lipschitz.

2.1L1L4step 1.1

Both f and f−1 are therefore coarse Lipschitz, hence Lipschitz by the previous proposition.

3.1L3L4step 2.1∎

Enlarge Lipschitz constants for f and f−1, if needed, to choose L,M≥1. Then M−1dG(x,x′)≤dH(f(x),f(x′))≤L dG(x,x′) for all x,x′∈G, so f is a bilipschitz equivalence, including when both groups are trivial.

DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicablejudge pass (deepseek-v4-pro + gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-26Open item page →

Quasi-isometry invariants and geometric properties of finitely generated groups

Definition

Let P be a property of finitely generated groups.

The property P is a quasi-isometry invariant if, whenever G and H are finitely generated and have the same quasi-isometry type, the truth of P for G implies its truth for H.

Equivalently, P depends only on the quasi-isometry type of the group. In geometric group theory one also says that such a property is geometric.

PropositionStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passjudge pass (deepseek-v4-pro + gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-08-26Open item page →

Finiteness is a geometric property of finitely generated groups

Statement

Finiteness is a geometric property of finitely generated groups.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The hypotheses of the Statement.

[F1]

A quasi-isometry invariant is a map on finitely generated groups constant on quasi-isometry classes, and a property is geometric when its indicator is such an invariant (Quasi-isometry invariants and geometric properties of finitely generated groups).

[L1]

A finitely generated group is finite if and only if it is quasi-isometric to a one-point space (A finitely generated group is finite if and only if it is quasi-isometric to a point).

[L2]

A finitely generated group is quasi-isometric to a metric space when its word metric for some, equivalently every, finite generating set is (The quasi-isometry type of a finitely generated group).

[L3]

Being quasi-isometric is a reflexive, symmetric and transitive relation on metric spaces (Being quasi-isometric is reflexive, symmetric and transitive).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1F1L1L2L3

Two quasi-isometric finitely generated groups are simultaneously quasi-isometric to a point, by transitivity of the relation.

2.1F1step 1.1∎

Being quasi-isometric to a point characterises finiteness, so the indicator of finiteness is a quasi-isometry invariant and finiteness is a geometric property.

5 · Examples, counterexamples and false statements

None yet.

Sources