Random pairs of commuting permutations

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
2
down vote

favorite












Let $Omega_n subseteq mathrmSym(n)^4$ be the set of all $4$-tuples $(sigma_1,sigma_2,tau_1,tau_2)$ of permutations of $1,ldots,n$ such that $sigma_j tau_k = tau_k sigma_j$ for each pair $(j,k) in 1,2^2$.



Any four permutations determine a $8$-regular edge-labeled directed graph on $1,ldots,n$. (Of course, the graph might not be simple.) I am interested in understanding the local structure of this graph when the four permutations are chosen uniformly at random from $Omega_n$. In particular, I would like to know whether the commutativity constraint enforces any other kind of constraint on the structure of the graph, in the sense that a significant number of short cycles other than commutators need to occur.



A more precise formulation of the problem is as follows. Let $mathbbF_r$ be the free group on $r$ generators and let $G = mathbbF_2 times mathbbF_2$. Fixing an indexation for the generators of $G$, each element of $Omega_n$ determines a unique homomorphism from $G$ to $mathrmSym(n)$. We identify a uniform random element of $Omega_n$ with the associated random homomorphism, to be denoted $phi$. Consider the following questions.



(1) Is it the case that for every nontrivial element $g in G$ and every $epsilon > 0$ the probability that $frac1n|mathrmFix(phi(g))| leq epsilon$ tends to $1$ as $n to infty$? I emphasize that $g$ and $epsilon$ are fixed before the limit.



(2) Is it the case that for every nontrivial element $g in G$ the expectation of the random variable $frac1n|mathrmFix(phi(g))|$ tends to $0$ as $n to infty$?



Clearly a positive answer to Question (1) implies a positive answer to Question (2). A positive answer to Question (1) is exactly the assertion that the uniform measures on $Omega_n$ form a random sofic approximation to $G$. Intuitively, this would mean that a uniform random element of $Omega_n$ has no 'unnecessary' structure.



Note that residual finiteness of $G$ implies that there exists a sequence $(phi_n:G to mathrmSym(n))_n=1^infty$ of homomorphisms such that for each $g in G$ the set $mathrmFix(phi_n(g))$ is empty for sufficiently large $n$.



A final (vague) question is whether this model can be generated in any way other than its definition. The model given by a uniformly chosen $4$-tuple of permutations with no additional constraints is contiguous with a uniform random $8$-regular graph, and there are multiple ways of generating this. In this case the elementary theory shows that the analog of Question (1) with $G$ replaced by $mathbbF_4$ has a positive answer.










share|cite|improve this question

























    up vote
    2
    down vote

    favorite












    Let $Omega_n subseteq mathrmSym(n)^4$ be the set of all $4$-tuples $(sigma_1,sigma_2,tau_1,tau_2)$ of permutations of $1,ldots,n$ such that $sigma_j tau_k = tau_k sigma_j$ for each pair $(j,k) in 1,2^2$.



    Any four permutations determine a $8$-regular edge-labeled directed graph on $1,ldots,n$. (Of course, the graph might not be simple.) I am interested in understanding the local structure of this graph when the four permutations are chosen uniformly at random from $Omega_n$. In particular, I would like to know whether the commutativity constraint enforces any other kind of constraint on the structure of the graph, in the sense that a significant number of short cycles other than commutators need to occur.



    A more precise formulation of the problem is as follows. Let $mathbbF_r$ be the free group on $r$ generators and let $G = mathbbF_2 times mathbbF_2$. Fixing an indexation for the generators of $G$, each element of $Omega_n$ determines a unique homomorphism from $G$ to $mathrmSym(n)$. We identify a uniform random element of $Omega_n$ with the associated random homomorphism, to be denoted $phi$. Consider the following questions.



    (1) Is it the case that for every nontrivial element $g in G$ and every $epsilon > 0$ the probability that $frac1n|mathrmFix(phi(g))| leq epsilon$ tends to $1$ as $n to infty$? I emphasize that $g$ and $epsilon$ are fixed before the limit.



    (2) Is it the case that for every nontrivial element $g in G$ the expectation of the random variable $frac1n|mathrmFix(phi(g))|$ tends to $0$ as $n to infty$?



    Clearly a positive answer to Question (1) implies a positive answer to Question (2). A positive answer to Question (1) is exactly the assertion that the uniform measures on $Omega_n$ form a random sofic approximation to $G$. Intuitively, this would mean that a uniform random element of $Omega_n$ has no 'unnecessary' structure.



    Note that residual finiteness of $G$ implies that there exists a sequence $(phi_n:G to mathrmSym(n))_n=1^infty$ of homomorphisms such that for each $g in G$ the set $mathrmFix(phi_n(g))$ is empty for sufficiently large $n$.



    A final (vague) question is whether this model can be generated in any way other than its definition. The model given by a uniformly chosen $4$-tuple of permutations with no additional constraints is contiguous with a uniform random $8$-regular graph, and there are multiple ways of generating this. In this case the elementary theory shows that the analog of Question (1) with $G$ replaced by $mathbbF_4$ has a positive answer.










    share|cite|improve this question























      up vote
      2
      down vote

      favorite









      up vote
      2
      down vote

      favorite











      Let $Omega_n subseteq mathrmSym(n)^4$ be the set of all $4$-tuples $(sigma_1,sigma_2,tau_1,tau_2)$ of permutations of $1,ldots,n$ such that $sigma_j tau_k = tau_k sigma_j$ for each pair $(j,k) in 1,2^2$.



      Any four permutations determine a $8$-regular edge-labeled directed graph on $1,ldots,n$. (Of course, the graph might not be simple.) I am interested in understanding the local structure of this graph when the four permutations are chosen uniformly at random from $Omega_n$. In particular, I would like to know whether the commutativity constraint enforces any other kind of constraint on the structure of the graph, in the sense that a significant number of short cycles other than commutators need to occur.



      A more precise formulation of the problem is as follows. Let $mathbbF_r$ be the free group on $r$ generators and let $G = mathbbF_2 times mathbbF_2$. Fixing an indexation for the generators of $G$, each element of $Omega_n$ determines a unique homomorphism from $G$ to $mathrmSym(n)$. We identify a uniform random element of $Omega_n$ with the associated random homomorphism, to be denoted $phi$. Consider the following questions.



      (1) Is it the case that for every nontrivial element $g in G$ and every $epsilon > 0$ the probability that $frac1n|mathrmFix(phi(g))| leq epsilon$ tends to $1$ as $n to infty$? I emphasize that $g$ and $epsilon$ are fixed before the limit.



      (2) Is it the case that for every nontrivial element $g in G$ the expectation of the random variable $frac1n|mathrmFix(phi(g))|$ tends to $0$ as $n to infty$?



      Clearly a positive answer to Question (1) implies a positive answer to Question (2). A positive answer to Question (1) is exactly the assertion that the uniform measures on $Omega_n$ form a random sofic approximation to $G$. Intuitively, this would mean that a uniform random element of $Omega_n$ has no 'unnecessary' structure.



      Note that residual finiteness of $G$ implies that there exists a sequence $(phi_n:G to mathrmSym(n))_n=1^infty$ of homomorphisms such that for each $g in G$ the set $mathrmFix(phi_n(g))$ is empty for sufficiently large $n$.



      A final (vague) question is whether this model can be generated in any way other than its definition. The model given by a uniformly chosen $4$-tuple of permutations with no additional constraints is contiguous with a uniform random $8$-regular graph, and there are multiple ways of generating this. In this case the elementary theory shows that the analog of Question (1) with $G$ replaced by $mathbbF_4$ has a positive answer.










      share|cite|improve this question













      Let $Omega_n subseteq mathrmSym(n)^4$ be the set of all $4$-tuples $(sigma_1,sigma_2,tau_1,tau_2)$ of permutations of $1,ldots,n$ such that $sigma_j tau_k = tau_k sigma_j$ for each pair $(j,k) in 1,2^2$.



      Any four permutations determine a $8$-regular edge-labeled directed graph on $1,ldots,n$. (Of course, the graph might not be simple.) I am interested in understanding the local structure of this graph when the four permutations are chosen uniformly at random from $Omega_n$. In particular, I would like to know whether the commutativity constraint enforces any other kind of constraint on the structure of the graph, in the sense that a significant number of short cycles other than commutators need to occur.



      A more precise formulation of the problem is as follows. Let $mathbbF_r$ be the free group on $r$ generators and let $G = mathbbF_2 times mathbbF_2$. Fixing an indexation for the generators of $G$, each element of $Omega_n$ determines a unique homomorphism from $G$ to $mathrmSym(n)$. We identify a uniform random element of $Omega_n$ with the associated random homomorphism, to be denoted $phi$. Consider the following questions.



      (1) Is it the case that for every nontrivial element $g in G$ and every $epsilon > 0$ the probability that $frac1n|mathrmFix(phi(g))| leq epsilon$ tends to $1$ as $n to infty$? I emphasize that $g$ and $epsilon$ are fixed before the limit.



      (2) Is it the case that for every nontrivial element $g in G$ the expectation of the random variable $frac1n|mathrmFix(phi(g))|$ tends to $0$ as $n to infty$?



      Clearly a positive answer to Question (1) implies a positive answer to Question (2). A positive answer to Question (1) is exactly the assertion that the uniform measures on $Omega_n$ form a random sofic approximation to $G$. Intuitively, this would mean that a uniform random element of $Omega_n$ has no 'unnecessary' structure.



      Note that residual finiteness of $G$ implies that there exists a sequence $(phi_n:G to mathrmSym(n))_n=1^infty$ of homomorphisms such that for each $g in G$ the set $mathrmFix(phi_n(g))$ is empty for sufficiently large $n$.



      A final (vague) question is whether this model can be generated in any way other than its definition. The model given by a uniformly chosen $4$-tuple of permutations with no additional constraints is contiguous with a uniform random $8$-regular graph, and there are multiple ways of generating this. In this case the elementary theory shows that the analog of Question (1) with $G$ replaced by $mathbbF_4$ has a positive answer.







      co.combinatorics gr.group-theory pr.probability






      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question











      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question










      asked 3 hours ago









      burtonpeterj

      588213




      588213




















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          3
          down vote













          This is not the case, in fact in both cases the limit is 1/2. This is because with probability going to 1 as $n to +infty$ a uniformly random morphism $mathbb F_2 times mathbb F_2 to mathrmSym(n)$ is trivial on one of the factors. The latter claim follows from Dixon's theorem that a random pair of independently chosen permutations almost surely generates a primitive group, in fact the full alternating or symmetric group so it has a trivial commutant, so for large $n$ a typical representation of $mathbb F_2 times F_2$ to $mathrmSym(n)$ has one factor acting with primitive image and the other trivially.



          In terms of graphs this means that the graphs you defined converge to the mean of the Schreier coset graphs of $1 times mathbb F_2$ and $mathbb F_2 times 1$.






          share|cite|improve this answer




















            Your Answer




            StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
            return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
            StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
            StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
            );
            );
            , "mathjax-editing");

            StackExchange.ready(function()
            var channelOptions =
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "504"
            ;
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
            createEditor();
            );

            else
            createEditor();

            );

            function createEditor()
            StackExchange.prepareEditor(
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            convertImagesToLinks: true,
            noModals: false,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: 10,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            );



            );













             

            draft saved


            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathoverflow.net%2fquestions%2f313904%2frandom-pairs-of-commuting-permutations%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest






























            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes








            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes








            up vote
            3
            down vote













            This is not the case, in fact in both cases the limit is 1/2. This is because with probability going to 1 as $n to +infty$ a uniformly random morphism $mathbb F_2 times mathbb F_2 to mathrmSym(n)$ is trivial on one of the factors. The latter claim follows from Dixon's theorem that a random pair of independently chosen permutations almost surely generates a primitive group, in fact the full alternating or symmetric group so it has a trivial commutant, so for large $n$ a typical representation of $mathbb F_2 times F_2$ to $mathrmSym(n)$ has one factor acting with primitive image and the other trivially.



            In terms of graphs this means that the graphs you defined converge to the mean of the Schreier coset graphs of $1 times mathbb F_2$ and $mathbb F_2 times 1$.






            share|cite|improve this answer
























              up vote
              3
              down vote













              This is not the case, in fact in both cases the limit is 1/2. This is because with probability going to 1 as $n to +infty$ a uniformly random morphism $mathbb F_2 times mathbb F_2 to mathrmSym(n)$ is trivial on one of the factors. The latter claim follows from Dixon's theorem that a random pair of independently chosen permutations almost surely generates a primitive group, in fact the full alternating or symmetric group so it has a trivial commutant, so for large $n$ a typical representation of $mathbb F_2 times F_2$ to $mathrmSym(n)$ has one factor acting with primitive image and the other trivially.



              In terms of graphs this means that the graphs you defined converge to the mean of the Schreier coset graphs of $1 times mathbb F_2$ and $mathbb F_2 times 1$.






              share|cite|improve this answer






















                up vote
                3
                down vote










                up vote
                3
                down vote









                This is not the case, in fact in both cases the limit is 1/2. This is because with probability going to 1 as $n to +infty$ a uniformly random morphism $mathbb F_2 times mathbb F_2 to mathrmSym(n)$ is trivial on one of the factors. The latter claim follows from Dixon's theorem that a random pair of independently chosen permutations almost surely generates a primitive group, in fact the full alternating or symmetric group so it has a trivial commutant, so for large $n$ a typical representation of $mathbb F_2 times F_2$ to $mathrmSym(n)$ has one factor acting with primitive image and the other trivially.



                In terms of graphs this means that the graphs you defined converge to the mean of the Schreier coset graphs of $1 times mathbb F_2$ and $mathbb F_2 times 1$.






                share|cite|improve this answer












                This is not the case, in fact in both cases the limit is 1/2. This is because with probability going to 1 as $n to +infty$ a uniformly random morphism $mathbb F_2 times mathbb F_2 to mathrmSym(n)$ is trivial on one of the factors. The latter claim follows from Dixon's theorem that a random pair of independently chosen permutations almost surely generates a primitive group, in fact the full alternating or symmetric group so it has a trivial commutant, so for large $n$ a typical representation of $mathbb F_2 times F_2$ to $mathrmSym(n)$ has one factor acting with primitive image and the other trivially.



                In terms of graphs this means that the graphs you defined converge to the mean of the Schreier coset graphs of $1 times mathbb F_2$ and $mathbb F_2 times 1$.







                share|cite|improve this answer












                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer










                answered 25 mins ago









                Jean Raimbault

                1,803920




                1,803920



























                     

                    draft saved


                    draft discarded















































                     


                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function ()
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathoverflow.net%2fquestions%2f313904%2frandom-pairs-of-commuting-permutations%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                    );

                    Post as a guest













































































                    Comments

                    Popular posts from this blog

                    What does second last employer means? [closed]

                    Installing NextGIS Connect into QGIS 3?

                    One-line joke