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.
Transitive p-group permutation modules have point-stabilizer vertices
Statement
For any field of characteristic , finite -group , and subgroup , the permutation module is indecomposable and has vertex .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A field, finite -group and subgroup as stated.
A module induced from a subgroup is relatively projective for that subgroup. (A module is relatively H-projective when it is a direct summand of one induced from H)
Relative -projectivity is equivalent to the identity being a relative trace of a -endomorphism. (Higman's criterion characterizes relative projectivity through the relative trace idempotent test)
A vertex is an inclusion-minimal relative-projectivity -subgroup. (A vertex is a minimal p-subgroup for relative projectivity, and a source is an indecomposable inducing summand there)
The augmentation ideal is nilpotent over any field of characteristic . (For a finite p-group in characteristic p, the augmentation ideal of the group algebra is nilpotent)
Proof
Every nonzero finite-dimensional -module has a nonzero fixed vector: choose the largest with , which exists by [F4]. Every vector in this nonzero space is annihilated by and hence by each . On the other hand is one-dimensional, since invariance means constant coefficients on the transitive basis . If split into two nonzero submodules, their nonzero fixed subspaces would be in direct sum inside , a contradiction. Thus is indecomposable.
The map , , is an isomorphism on coset bases and respects the -action. Therefore is relatively -projective by [F1]. To prove minimality suppose and with , as required by [F2] for relative -projectivity.
Let denote the basis vector and its coefficient functional. For a left coset define . Replacing by does not change this value, since . For , and , so . Each -orbit on has size . Since , that index is a positive power of , and is zero in .
The coefficient of in is . Grouping by the orbits in step 2.1 makes each contribution zero. The coefficient of in is , a contradiction. No proper is therefore a relative-projectivity subgroup. Together with steps 1.1–1.2 and [F3], this says is a vertex.
Sources
Webb, A Course in Finite Group Representation Theory, §§11.3, 11.6 and 12.3–12.5, especially pp.240–245. Local argument and conventions as displayed above.
Depends on
- A module is relatively H-projective when it is a direct summand of one induced from H
- Higman's criterion characterizes relative projectivity through the relative trace idempotent test
- A vertex is a minimal p-subgroup for relative projectivity, and a source is an indecomposable inducing summand there
- For a finite p-group in characteristic p, the augmentation ideal of the group algebra is nilpotent
Used by
Dependency tree · two levels
12 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.
Sources
- Webb, A Course in Finite Group Representation Theory, §§11.3, 11.6 and 12.3–12.5, especially pp.240–245 (standard reference, not scraped)