Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T11:59:08.808Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Quasi-isometries between groups with two-ended splittings

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 June 2016

CHRISTOPHER H. CASHEN  and
ALEXANDRE MARTIN
CHRISTOPHER H. CASHEN
Affiliation:
Fakultät für Mathematik, Universität Wien Oskar-Morgenstern-Platz 1, 1090 Wien, Österreich. e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]
ALEXANDRE MARTIN
Affiliation:
Fakultät für Mathematik, Universität Wien Oskar-Morgenstern-Platz 1, 1090 Wien, Österreich. e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We construct a ‘structure invariant’ of a one-ended, finitely presented group that describes the way in which the factors of its JSJ decomposition over two-ended subgroups fit together. For hyperbolic groups satisfying a very general condition, these invariants completely reduce the problem of classifying such groups up to quasi-isometry to a relative quasi-isometry classification of the factors of their JSJ decomposition. Under some additional assumption, our results extend to more general finitely presented groups, yielding a far-reaching generalisation of the quasi-isometry classification of some 3–manifolds obtained by Behrstock and Neumann.

The same approach also allows us to obtain such a reduction for the problem of determining when two hyperbolic groups have homeomorphic Gromov boundaries.

Type
Research Article
Information
Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society , Volume 162 , Issue 2 , March 2017 , pp. 249 - 291
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge Philosophical Society 2016 

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

REFERENCES

[1] Behrstock, J. A., Kleiner, B., Minsky, Y. N. and Mosher, L. Geometry and rigidity of mapping class groups. Geom. Topol. 16 (2012), no. 2, 781–888.Google Scholar
[2] Behrstock, J. A. and Neumann, W. D. Quasi-isometric classification of graph manifold groups. Duke Math. J. 141 (2008), no. 2, 217–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[3] Behrstock, J. A. and Neumann, W. D. Quasi-isometric classification of non-geometric 3-manifold groups. J. Reine Angew. Math. 669 (2012), 101–120.Google Scholar
[4] Bestvina, M. and Feighn, M. A combination theorem for negatively curved groups. J. Differential Geom. 35 (1992), no. 1, 85–101.Google Scholar
[5] Biswas, K. and Mj, M. Pattern rigidity in hyperbolic spaces: duality and PD subgroups. Groups Geom. Dyn. 6 (2012), no. 1, 97–123.Google Scholar
[6] Bonk, M. and Schramm, O. Embeddings of Gromov hyperbolic spaces. Geom. Funct. Anal. 10 (2000), no. 2, 266–306.Google Scholar
[7] Bourdon, M. and Pajot, H. Rigidity of quasi-isometries for some hyperbolic buildings. Comment. Math. Helv. 75 (2000), no. 4, 701–736.Google Scholar
[8] Bourdon, M. and Pajot, H. Cohomologie lp et espaces de Besov. J. Reine Angew. Math. 558 (2003), 85–108.Google Scholar
[9] Bowditch, B. H. Cut points and canonical splittings of hyperbolic groups. Acta Math. 180 (1998), no. 2, 145–186.Google Scholar
[10] Bridson, M. R. and Haefliger, A. Metric spaces of non-positive curvature. Grundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschaften, vol. 319 (Springer, Berlin, 1999).Google Scholar
[11] Buyalo, S. and Schroeder, V. Elements of asymptotic geometry. EMS Monogr. Math. European Mathematical Society (EMS) (Zürich, 2007).Google Scholar
[12] Cashen, C. H. Quasi-isometries between tubular groups. Groups Geom. Dyn. 4 (2010), no. 3, 473–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[13] Cashen, C. H. Splitting line patterns in free groups. Algebr. Geom. Topol. 16 (2016), no. 2, 621–673.Google Scholar
[14] Cashen, C. H. and Macura, N. Line patterns in free groups. Geom. Topol. 15 (2011), no. 3, 1419–1475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[15] Dani, P. and Thomas, A. Bowditch's JSJ tree and the quasi-isometry classification of certain Coxeter groups. Preprint (2014), arXiv:1402.6224v4.Google Scholar
[16] Dunwoody, M. J. The accessibility of finitely presented groups. Invent. Math. 81 (1985), no. 3, 449–457.Google Scholar
[17] Dunwoody, M. J. and Sageev, M. E. JSJ-splittings for finitely presented groups over slender groups. Invent. Math. 135 (1999), no. 1, 25–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[18] Farb, B. and Mosher, L. A rigidity theorem for the solvable Baumslag–Solitar groups. Invent. Math. 131 (1998), no. 2, 419–451, With an appendix by Daryl Cooper.Google Scholar
[19] Farb, B. and Mosher, L. Quasi-isometric rigidity for the solvable Baumslag–Solitar groups. II. Invent. Math. 137 (1999), no. 3, 613–649.Google Scholar
[20] Forester, M. On uniqueness of JSJ decompositions of finitely generated groups. Comment. Math. Helv. 78 (2003), no. 4, 740–751.Google Scholar
[21] Fujiwara, K. and Papasoglu, P. JSJ-decompositions of finitely presented groups and complexes of groups. Geom. Funct. Anal. 16 (2006), 70–125.Google Scholar
[22] Gromov, M. Infinite groups as geometric objects. Proceedings of the International Congress of Mathematicians, vol. 1, 2 (Warsaw, 1983) (Warsaw) (PWN, 1984), pp. 385–392.Google Scholar
[23] Gromov, M. Hyperbolic groups Essays in group theory. Math. Sci. Res. Inst. Publ. vol. 8. (Springer, New York, 1987), pp. 75–263.Google Scholar
[24] Guirardel, V. and Levitt, G. Trees of cylinders and canonical splittings. Geom. Topol. 15 (2011), no. 2, 977–1012.Google Scholar
[25] Guirardel, V. and Levitt, G. JSJ decompositions of groups. Preprint (2016), arXiv:1602.05139v1.Google Scholar
[26] Kapovich, I. The combination theorem and quasiconvexity. Internat. J. Algebra Comput. 11 (2001), no. 2, 185–216.Google Scholar
[27] Kapovich, M. and Kleiner, B. Hyperbolic groups with low-dimensional boundary. Ann. Sci. École Norm. Sup. (4) 33 (2000), no. 5, 647–669.Google Scholar
[28] Kleiner, B. and Leeb, B. Rigidity of quasi-isometries for symmetric spaces and Euclidean buildings. Inst. Hautes Études Sci. Publ. Math. (1997), no. 86, 115–197 (1998).Google Scholar
[29] Leighton, F. T. Finite common coverings of graphs. J. Combin. Theory Ser. B 33 (1982), no. 3, 231–238.Google Scholar
[30] Malone, W. Topics in geometric group theory. Ph.D. thesis, University of Utah (2010).Google Scholar
[31] Markovic, V. Quasisymmetric groups. J. Amer. Math. Soc. 19 (2006), no. 3, 673–715.Google Scholar
[32] Martin, A. Non-positively curved complexes of groups and boundaries. Geom. Topol. 18 (2014), no. 1, 31–102.Google Scholar
[33] Martin, A. and Świątkowski, J. Infinitely-ended hyperbolic groups with homeomorphic Gromov boundaries. J. Group Theory 18 (2015), no. 2, 273–289.Google Scholar
[34] Mj, M. Pattern rigidity and the Hilbert–Smith conjecture. Geom. Topol. 16 (2012), no. 2, 1205–1246.Google Scholar
[35] Mosher, L., Sageev, M. and Whyte, K. Quasi-actions on trees II: finite depth Bass–Serre trees. Mem. Amer. Math. Soc. 214 (2011), no. 1008, vi+105.Google Scholar
[36] Neumann, W. D. On Leighton's graph covering theorem. Groups Geom. Dyn. 4 (2010), no. 4, 863–872.Google Scholar
[37] Pansu, P. Métriques de Carnot–Carathéodory et quasi-isométries des espaces symétriques de rang un. Ann. of Math. (2) 129 (1989), no. 1, 1–60.Google Scholar
[38] Papasoglu, P. Quasi-isometry invariance of group splittings. Ann. of Math. (2) 161 (2005), no. 2, 759–830.Google Scholar
[39] Papasoglu, P. and Whyte, K. Quasi-isometries between groups with infinitely many ends. Comment. Math. Helv. 77 (2002), no. 1, 133–144.Google Scholar
[40] Rips, E. and Sela, Z. Structure and rigidity in hyperbolic groups. I. Geom. Funct. Anal. 4 (1994), no. 3, 337–371.Google Scholar
[41] Rips, E. and Sela, Z. Cyclic splittings of finitely presented groups and the canonical JSJ decomposition. Ann. of Math. (2) 146 (1997), no. 1, 53–109.Google Scholar
[42] Schwartz, R. E. Symmetric patterns of geodesics and automorphisms of surface groups. Invent. Math. 128 (1997), no. 1, 177–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[43] Serre, J.-P. Trees. Springer Monographs in Mathematics (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2003), Translated from the French original by John Stillwell, Corrected 2nd printing of the 1980 English translation.Google Scholar
[44] Stallings, J. R. On torsion-free groups with infinitely many ends. Ann. of Math. (2) 88 (1968), 312–334.Google Scholar
[45] Stallings, J. R. Group Theory and Three-Dimensional Manifolds (Yale University Press, New Haven, Conn., 1971), A James K. Whittemore Lecture in Mathematics given at Yale University (1969), Yale Mathematical Monographs, 4.Google Scholar
[46] Tukia, P. Quasiconformal extension of quasisymmetric mappings compatible with a Möbius group. Acta Math. 154 (1985), no. 3–4, 153–193.Google Scholar
[47] Vavrichek, D. M. The quasi-isometry invariance of commensuriser subgroups. Groups Geom. Dyn. 7 (2013), no. 1, 205–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[48] Whyte, K. The large scale geometry of the higher Baumslag–Solitar groups. Geom. Funct. Anal. 11 (2001), 1327–1343.Google Scholar
[49] Xie, X. Quasi-isometric rigidity of Fuchsian buildings. Topology 45 (2006), no. 1, 101–169.Google Scholar
[50] Xie, X. Quasi-symmetric maps on the boundary of a negatively curved solvable Lie group. Math. Ann. 353 (2012), no. 3, 727–746.CrossRefGoogle Scholar