Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T14:10:49.310Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On tensor induction of group representations

Part of: Representation theory of groups

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 April 2009

L. G. Kovács
L. G. Kovács
Affiliation:
Mathematics IAS Australian National UniversityGPO Box 4 Canberra 2601, Australia
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Let G be a (not necessarily finite) group and ρ a finite dimensional faithful irreducible representation of G over an arbitrary field; write ρ¯ for ρ viewed as a projective representation. Suppose that ρ is not induced (from any proper subgroup) and that ρ¯ is not a tensor product (of projective representations of dimension greater than 1). Let K be a noncentral subgroup which centralizes all its conjugates in G except perhaps itself, write H for the normalizer of K in G, and suppose that some irreducible constituent, σ say, of the restriction p↓K is absolutely irreducible. It is proved that then (ρ is absolutely irreducible and) ρ¯ is tensor induced from a projective representation of H, namely from a tensor factor π of ρ¯↓H such that π↓K = σ¯ and ker π is the centralizer of K in G.

MSC classification

Secondary: 20C15: Ordinary representations and characters 20C20: Modular representations and characters
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Australian Mathematical Society , Volume 49 , Issue 3 , December 1990 , pp. 486 - 501
Copyright
Copyright © Australian Mathematical Society 1990

References

[1]Berger, T. R., ‘Hall-Higman type theorems V,’ Pacific J. Math. 73 (1977), 1–62.Google Scholar
[2]Bolt, Beverly, Room, T. G., and Wall, G. E., ‘On the Clifford collineation, transform and similarity groups. II,’ J. Austral. Math. Soc. 2 (1961–1962), 60–79.Google Scholar
[3]Bolt, Beverly, Room, T. G., and Wall, G. E., ‘On the Clifford collineation, transform and similarity groups. II,’ J. Austrah Math. Soc. 2 (1961–1962), 80–96.Google Scholar
[4]Curtis, Charles W. and Reiner, Irving, Methods of representation theory I, Wiley, New York, Chichester, Brisbane, Toronto, 1981.Google Scholar
[5]Holt, Derek F. and Plesken, W., Perfect groups, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1989.Google Scholar
[6]Huppert, B., Endliche Gruppen I, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, 1967.Google Scholar
[7]Huppert, B. and Blackburn, N., Finite groups III, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, 1982.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[8]Kovács, L. G., ‘Two results on wreath products,’ Arch. Math. 45 (1985), 111–115.Google Scholar
[9]Kovács, L. G., ‘Some theorems on wreath products,’ Publ. Math. Debrecen 35 (1988), 155–160.Google Scholar
[10]Robinson, D. J. S., ‘Applications of cohomology to the theory of groups,’ in Groups—St. Andrews 1981, ed. by Campbell, C. M. and Robertson, E. F., London Math. Soc. Lecture Notes Ser. 71, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1982, pp. 46–80.Google Scholar