scholarly journals Existence of finite groups with classical commutator subgroup

1978 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-44 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael D. Miller

AbstractGiven a group G, we may ask whether it is the commutator subgroup of some group G. For example, every abelian group G is the commutator subgroup of a semi-direct product of G x G by a cyclic group of order 2. On the other hand, no symmetric group Sn(n>2) is the commutator subgroup of any group G. In this paper we examine the classical linear groups over finite fields K of characteristic not equal to 2, and determine which can be commutator subgroups of other groups. In particular, we settle the question for all normal subgroups of the general linear groups GLn(K), the unitary groups Un(K) (n≠4), and the orthogonal groups On(K) (n≧7).

1956 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
pp. 580-591 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Steinberg

1. Introduction. There are five well-known, two-parameter families of simple finite groups: the unimodular projective group, the symplectic group,1 the unitary group,2 and the first and second orthogonal groups, each group acting on a vector space of a finite number of elements (2; 3).


2001 ◽  
Vol 71 (2) ◽  
pp. 201-210 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karin Erdmann

AbstractLet K be a field of characteristic p. The permutation modules associated to partitions of n, usually denoted as Mλ, play a central role not only for symmetric groups but also for general linear groups, via Schur algebras. The indecomposable direct summands of these Mλ were parametrized by James; they are now known as Young modules; and Klyachko and Grabmeier developed a ‘Green correspondence’ for Young modules. The original parametrization used Schur algebras; and James remarked that he did not know a proof using only the representation theory of symmetric groups. We will give such proof, and we will at the same time also prove the correspondence result, by using only the Brauer construction, which is valid for arbitrary finite groups.


2013 ◽  
Vol 16 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shawn T. Burkett ◽  
Hung Ngoc Nguyen

Abstract.Using the classical results of G. E. Wall on the parametrization and sizes of (conjugacy) classes of finite classical groups, we present some gap results for the class sizes of the general linear groups and general unitary groups as well as their variations. In particular, we identify the classes in


2020 ◽  
Vol DMTCS Proceedings, 28th... ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott Andrews ◽  
Nathaniel Thiem

International audience Introduced by Kawanaka in order to find the unipotent representations of finite groups of Lie type, gener- alized Gelfand–Graev characters have remained somewhat mysterious. Even in the case of the finite general linear groups, the combinatorics of their decompositions has not been worked out. This paper re-interprets Kawanaka's def- inition in type A in a way that gives far more flexibility in computations. We use these alternate constructions to show how to obtain generalized Gelfand–Graev representations directly from the maximal unipotent subgroups. We also explicitly decompose the corresponding generalized Gelfand–Graev characters in terms of unipotent representations, thereby recovering the Kostka–Foulkes polynomials as multiplicities.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document