On Diameters of Cayley Graphs over Matrix Groups
Abstract.
We establish that for the matrix groups or , there exist absolute constants and such that any symmetric generating set with has a covering number . This result is sharp up to the value of the constant .
1. Introduction
For a finite group and a symmetric generating set (in the sense that ), the Cayley graph is defined as a connected graph with vertex set and edge set
The diameter of this graph is the smallest integer such that every element of can be expressed as a product of at most elements from . The diameter of the group is denoted by , and it represents the maximum among all Cayley graph diameters where runs through all generating sets of .
This becomes an intrinsic property of , rather than being tied to the Cayley graph associated with or any specific generating set.
The diameter of is referred to as the covering number of , denoted by . Babai [1] proposed the following conjecture:
Conjecture 1.
If is a non-Abelian finite simple group, then .
This conjecture remains one of the major unresolved problems in combinatorics. Liebeck and Shalev [7] confirmed the conjecture when the generating set is a normal set. The conjecture was proven by Helfgott [5] for the case , and subsequently, it was verified for finite simple groups of Lie type and bounded rank independently by Pyber and Szabo [8] and Breuillard, Green, and Tao [2]. It remains to prove Babai’s conjecture for alternating groups and for classical groups of unbounded rank. A special case of this conjecture was proven by Halasi [4] for the case where and is a generating set that includes a transvection, defined as a matrix of the form , where is a rank 1 matrix.
In this paper, we prove a special case of this conjecture for the scenario where is the general linear group and is a sufficiently large generating set.
Theorem 2.
If for some , then for some absolute constant , .
Remark 3.
The proof can be readily adapted to work with .
Remark 4.
Although is not a simple group, the theorem also holds for .
This result is sharp up to the absolute constant . Our proof relies on the concept of a groumvirate, which is a conjugate of the natural embedding of in , i.e., the subgroup
where . We define as the uniform measure on .
Theorem 5 (Evra, Kindler, and Lifshitz [3]).
There exists a such that for every subset of , the set contains a groumvirate with density at least .
For a given ,
Thus, to contain a groumvirate on variables, the density of must exceed,
That is
For ,
where . The bound is non-trivial if . For the remainder of the paper, we take and , and we will often omit explicitly stating this assumption.
In this paper, we assume that the groumvirate is expressed in the standard basis, i.e., for some . Since is symmetric, . We may assume without loss of generality that (this does not alter the asymptotics since ).
Corollary 6.
Suppose , , up to a change of basis.
This groumvirate acts as on a subspace of . Our goal is to upgrade it to an action on the whole space.
We define the standard basis to be . The span of a set of vectors is denoted by . For a set , denote and . We define the projection of a vector onto by and its projection onto by . Additionally, we can modify the component of vectors using .
Lemma 7.
Let and , for . Assume that is a linearly independent set and is also linearly independent; then there exists such that , which fixes .
Proof.
Since and are linearly independent sets, there exists an invertible linear transformation such that for every . We can extend to a transformation such that for every . Define to be a matrix representation of in the standard basis, that is . By construction, . ∎
Our main contribution is the following Theorem:
Theorem 8.
Let , and define an action by . Consider the Schreier graph corresponding to this action on the vertex set . Then, any two vertices in are at most steps apart in this graph.
Intuitively, this allows us to upgrade the action of the groumvirate to an arbitrary set of size of columns or rows of our choosing.
Corollary 9.
Any transformation which fixes and is invariant on for , can be constructed in steps.
2. Upgrading The Groumvirate’s Action
Lemma 10.
Let be a vector space of dimension . Let be a linearly independent set, where . There exists such that for every , for every , and for every .
Proof.
Let be a basis of . Since , there exists a vector such that . We inductively add vectors until we obtain a linearly independent set . Applying Lemma 7, there exists a transformation such that for every , for every , and for every . ∎
Lemma 11.
Let be a vector space and . Consider the subspace of such that , then .
Proof.
By Grassmann’s Lemma,
∎
Lemma 12.
There exists such that for .
Proof.
Lemma 13.
There exist , and such that the following hold:
-
(1)
is a basis for .
-
(2)
is a linearly independent set.
-
(3)
.
Proof.
Part 1 is proven by induction on . Since is a generating set, is not invariant under , thus there exists and such that . For the induction step, since is not invariant under , there exists and such that . Therefore, there exists for some or such that , therefore . Hence, is a linearly independent set.
Part 2 is proven by induction. By Lemma 13,
for every .
Thus, there exists such that , set . Assume we have constructed such that is a linearly independent set. For the induction step, if is linearly independent of , set . Otherwise, set where and is linearly independent of . We replace with and proceed to the last part.
For Part 3, the construction of is done inductively, where the induction is on the number of vectors such that . Initially, we are given a set where and is linearly independent. For the base case, we use Lemma 7 to add to for every , where are chosen such that is a linearly independent set. After adding , we apply to all the vectors. We are left with the set
We define . Note that is a linearly independent set.
Now assume we are given
where and
is a linearly independent set. By Lemma 10 and 11, there exists a transformation such that for every such that . This is where the assumption comes into play.
With some abuse of notation, we assume are already in . Now we add to all the vectors such that
is a linearly independent set. We set , and . Thus and
and for ,
We set , and proceed inductively. As each step takes operations in and there are steps, the number of operations required to construct is . ∎
Lemma 14.
There exists such that is a linearly independent set.
Proof.
We prove this lemma by induction on , where is the maximum number such that is linearly independent. For the base case , since is a generating set, , there exists such that .
For the induction step, assume we have constructed such that is linearly independent. If is linearly independent of , then we are done. Otherwise, for some . As is linearly independent of , .
Let . Since , there exists such that . Consider the vector space spanned by the set which has a basis .
Let , by Lemma 11, . So there exist such that is a linearly independent set.
Let be a linear transformation such that for every . For ,
Since ,
Since ,
On the other hand,
Since are linearly independent and then is a linearly independent set.
Suppose towards contradiction that is linearly dependent on , then there exist such that
In particular, since is a direct sum of vector spaces
thus . On the other hand,
thus
So for , the set is linearly independent. As every iteration takes steps and there are such iterations, it takes steps to construct . ∎
Our goal is to modify so that in addition to for , we will also have . To achieve this, we first prove the following lemma,
Lemma 15.
Let and , where has full column rank; then there exists such that has full column rank.
Proof.
We prove by induction on . If , then we are done. Otherwise, there exists such that ; without loss of generality, assume . Since , there exists for such that . Thus for ,
∎
Lemma 16 (Swapping Lemma).
Proof.
In Lemma 12, we constructed which such that for every . Thus the matrix is of the form
where has full column rank and also has full column rank. Since has full column rank there exists such that has rank . Applying from the right
Now is full rank. We apply from the right.
renaming
We have
Now we apply
from the right.
As has full row rank we can apply from the left to get
from some and . Apply
from the right to obtain
Restricting our focus on the first indices of the matrix
as we could construct the matrix , we can also construct by applying the inverse transformations in reverse order
Conjugating the constructable matrix (as it is in the groumvirate)
by the matrix ,
Applying a permutation matrix from both sides which swaps the columns with the , we get a matrix
and
which is the desired swap matrix. ∎
3. Constructing the Matrix Group via Its Bruhat Decomposition
Our proof relies on the following decomposition of known in the literature as the Bruhat decomposition (a reference for the case is proven in [6]).
Theorem 17.
where is the group of lower-triangular matrices and is the set of monomial matrices (the set of matrices in which each row and column contains exactly one non-zero element).
To construct a matrix , we construct its Bruhat decomposition and and we compose all elements to get .
Lemma 18.
The triangular matrices can be constructed in steps, i.e., .
Proof.
Lemma 19.
The monomial matrices can be constructed in steps, i.e., .
4. A Matching Lower Bound on the Diameter
Let for . We define the generating set
where is the swap between and which fixes the other basis vectors. This is a generating set because it generates the swap matrix (as transpositions generate the permutations). Moreover,
for an appropriately chosen . Let . Assume , where . Define , and for . We set and . Let
and
We prove that for every . Assume is a swap between and then iff swaps and , thus . Otherwise acts on so it cannot change for any . Therefore
But since is the matrix that swaps with , and thus
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank Noam Lifshitz for his guidance, Elad Tzalik for helpful discussions, and Edan Orzech for reviewing the manuscript.
References
- [1] László Babai and Ákos Seress. On the diameter of permutation groups. European journal of combinatorics, 13(4):231–243, 1992.
- [2] Emmanuel Breuillard, Ben Green, and Terence Tao. The structure of approximate groups. Publications mathématiques de l’IHÉS, 116:115–221, 2012.
- [3] Shai Evra, Guy Kindler, and Noam Lifshitz. Polynomial bogolyubov for special linear groups via tensor rank, 2024.
- [4] Zoltán Halasi. Diameter of cayley graphs of sl (n, p) with generating sets containing a transvection. Journal of Algebra, 569:195–219, 2021.
- [5] Harald Andrés Helfgott. Growth and generation in. Annals of Mathematics, pages 601–623, 2008.
- [6] Matthieu JOSEPH. Dynamics and subgroups of sln(z). https://www.imo.universite-paris-saclay.fr/ matthieu.joseph/minicourseFMJH.pdf, 2023.
- [7] Martin W Liebeck and Aner Shalev. Diameters of finite simple groups: sharp bounds and applications. Annals of mathematics, pages 383–406, 2001.
- [8] László Pyber and Endre Szabó. Growth in finite simple groups of lie type. Journal of the American Mathematical Society, 29(1):95–146, 2016.