Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-12
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 k of characteristic p, finite p-group R, and subgroup LR, the permutation module V=k[R/L] is indecomposable and has vertex L.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A field, finite p-group and subgroup as stated.

[F1]

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)

[F2]

Relative T-projectivity is equivalent to the identity being a relative trace of a T-endomorphism. (Higman's criterion characterizes relative projectivity through the relative trace idempotent test)

[F4]

The augmentation ideal IR is nilpotent over any field of characteristic p. (For a finite p-group in characteristic p, the augmentation ideal of the group algebra is nilpotent)

Proof

technique · direct
1.1

Every nonzero finite-dimensional kR-module W has a nonzero fixed vector: choose the largest j0 with IRjW0, which exists by [F4]. Every vector in this nonzero space is annihilated by IR and hence by each r1. On the other hand VR is one-dimensional, since invariance means constant coefficients on the transitive basis R/L. If V split into two nonzero submodules, their nonzero fixed subspaces would be in direct sum inside VR, a contradiction. Thus V is indecomposable.

F4
1.2

The map kRkLkV, r1rL, is an isomorphism on coset bases and respects the R-action. Therefore V is relatively L-projective by [F1]. To prove minimality suppose T<L and idV=TrTR(α) with αEndkT(V), as required by [F2] for relative T-projectivity.

F1F2
2.1

Let e denote the basis vector L and λ its coefficient functional. For a left coset rT define c(rT)=λ(rα(r1e)). Replacing r by rt does not change this value, since α(t1v)=t1α(v). For lL, l1e=e and λ(lv)=λ(v), so c(lrT)=c(rT). Each L-orbit on R/T has size [L:LrTr1]. Since T<L, that index is a positive power of p, and is zero in k.

step 1.2
3.1

The coefficient of e in TrTR(α)(e) is rTc(rT). Grouping by the orbits in step 2.1 makes each contribution zero. The coefficient of e in idV(e) is 1, a contradiction. No proper T<L is therefore a relative-projectivity subgroup. Together with steps 1.1–1.2 and [F3], this says L is a vertex.

F2F3step 1.1step 1.2step 2.1

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

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