Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-16T15:31:34.511Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sofic entropy and amenable groups

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 June 2011

LEWIS BOWEN
LEWIS BOWEN*
Affiliation:
Texas A&M University, Mailstop 3368, College Station, TX, 77843-3368, USA (email: [email protected])
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In previous work, the author introduced a measure-conjugacy invariant for sofic group actions called sofic entropy. Here, it is proven that the sofic entropy of an amenable group action equals its classical entropy. The proof uses a new measure-conjugacy invariant called upper-sofic entropy and a theorem of Rudolph and Weiss for the entropy of orbit-equivalent actions relative to the orbit change σ-algebra.

Type
Research Article
Information
Ergodic Theory and Dynamical Systems , Volume 32 , Issue 2: Daniel J. Rudolph – in Memoriam , April 2012 , pp. 427 - 466
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

[Bo10a]Bowen, L.. Measure conjugacy invariants for actions of countable sofic groups. J. Amer. Math. Soc. 23 (2010), 217–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[Bo10b]Bowen, L.. Entropy for expansive algebraic actions of residually finite groups. Ergod. Th. & Dynam. Sys. to appear, arXiv:0909.4770.Google Scholar
[CFW81]Connes, A., Feldman, J. and Weiss, B.. An amenable equivalence relation is generated by a single transformation. Ergod. Th. & Dynam. Sys. 1(4) (1982), 431–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[Dy59]Dye, H. A.. On groups of measure preserving transformation. I. Amer. J. Math. 81 (1959), 119–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[Dy63]Dye, H. A.. On groups of measure preserving transformations. II. Amer. J. Math. 85 (1963), 551–576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[ES10]Elek, G. and Szabó, E.. Sofic representations of amenable groups. Preprint, arXiv:1010.3424.Google Scholar
[Gl03]Glasner, E.. Ergodic Theory via Joinings (Mathematical Surveys and Monographs, 101). American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[Gro99]Gromov, M.. Endomorphisms of symbolic algebraic varieties. J. Eur. Math. Soc. 1(2) (1999), 109–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[KL1]Kerr, D. and Li, H.. Entropy and the variational principle for actions of sofic groups. Preprint, arXiv:1005.0399.Google Scholar
[KL2]Kerr, D. and Li, H.. Soficity, amenability and dynamical entropy. Preprint, arXiv:1008.1429.Google Scholar
[Ma40]Mal’cev, A. I.. On faithful representations of infinite groups of matrices. Mat. Sb. 8 (1940), 405–422, Amer. Math. Soc. Transl. (2) 45 (1965), 1–18.Google Scholar
[Ol85]Moulin Ollagnier, J.. Ergodic Theory and Statistical Mechanics (Lecture Notes in Mathematics, 1115). Springer, Berlin, 1985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[OW80]Ornstein, D. and Weiss, B.. Ergodic theory of amenable group actions. I. The Rohlin lemma. Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. (N.S.) 2(1) (1980), 161–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[OW87]Ornstein, D. and Weiss, B.. Entropy and isomorphism theorems for actions of amenable groups. J. Anal. Math. 48 (1987), 1–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[Pe08]Pestov, V.. Hyperlinear and sofic groups: a brief guide. Bull. Symbolic Logic 14(4) (2008), 449–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[Ro88]Rosenthal, A.. Finite uniform generators for ergodic, finite entropy, free actions of amenable groups. Probab. Theory Related Fields 77(2) (1988), 147–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[RW00]Rudolph, D. J. and Weiss, B.. Entropy and mixing for amenable group actions. Ann. of Math. (2) 151(3) (2000), 1119–1150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[We00]Weiss, B.. Sofic groups and dynamical systems. Ergodic Theory and Harmonic Analysis, Mumbai, 1999. Sankhyā Ser. A 62(3) (2000), 350–359.Google Scholar
[WZ92]Ward, T. and Zhang, Q.. The Abramov–Rohlin entropy addition formula for amenable group actions. Monatsh. Math. 114(3–4) (1992), 317–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar