This paper was converted on www.awesomepapers.org from LaTeX by an anonymous user.
Want to know more? Visit the Converter page.

On the diameter of intersection graphs of finite groups

Melissa Lee School of Mathematics, Monash University, Clayton VIC 3800, Australia [email protected]  and  Kamilla Rekvényi Imperial College London, 180 Queen’s Gate, South Kensington, London, SW7 2AZ, United Kingdom [email protected]
(Date: February 2024)
Abstract.

The intersection graph ΔG\Delta_{G} of a finite group GG is a simple graph with vertices the non-trivial proper subgroups of GG, and an edge between two vertices if their corresponding subgroups intersect non-trivially. These graphs were introduced by Csákány and Pollák in 1969. In this paper we answer two long-standing open questions posed by Csákány and Pollák concerning the diameter of intersection graphs. We prove some necessary conditions for a non-simple group to have an intersection graph of diameter 4. We also construct the first examples of non-simple groups and alternating groups whose intersection graphs have diameter 4.

Let GG be a finite group. The intersection graph ΔG\Delta_{G} of GG is a simple graph with vertices the non-trivial proper subgroups of GG, and an edge between two vertices if the corresponding subgroups intersect non-trivially. These graphs were introduced by Csákány and Pollák [6] in 1969, influenced by earlier work by Bosák [1] on analogous graphs for semigroups. In their paper, Csákány and Pollák prove that a finite non-simple group with disconnected intersection graph either has trivial centre and every proper subgroup is abelian, or it is a direct product of two cyclic groups of prime order. They further show that the intersection graph of every other non-simple finite group has diam(ΔG)4\mathrm{diam}(\Delta_{G})\leq 4 with equality only if GG is an almost simple group of the form G=SCpG=S\rtimes C_{p} for some non-abelian finite simple group and prime pp. Freedman further showed that in fact, pp must be an odd prime [9, p.83]. Despite this reduction, no example of a non-simple group with intersection graph of diameter 4 has been found to date. We change this, by presenting a group whose intersection graph has diameter 4, as well as providing some necessary conditions for any further examples.

Theorem 1.

Suppose GG is a non-simple group with connected intersection graph ΔG\Delta_{G}. Then diam(ΔG)4\mathrm{diam}(\Delta_{G})\leq 4 with equality only if GG is almost simple with socle G0G_{0}, G=G0,gG=\langle G_{0},g\rangle, where gg is a diagonal automorphism of odd prime order pp, and one of the following holds.

  1. (1)

    G0=PSLn(q)G_{0}=\mathrm{PSL}_{n}(q) with n=pn=p prime, and nq1n\mid q-1;

  2. (2)

    G0=PSUn(q)G_{0}=\mathrm{PSU}_{n}(q) with p(n,q+1)p\mid(n,q+1), and either n=pn=p prime, or n=2pn=2p;

  3. (3)

    G0=E6(q)G_{0}=E_{6}(q) or E62(q){}^{2}E_{6}(q) with q±1mod3q\equiv\pm 1\mod 3 respectively and p=3p=3.

Moreover, if G=PGU5(4)G=\mathrm{PGU}_{5}(4), then diam(ΔG)=4\mathrm{diam}(\Delta_{G})=4.

It should be noted that the conditions of Theorem 1 are necessary but not sufficient. For example, G=PGU3(5)G=\mathrm{PGU}_{3}(5) has an intersection graph of diameter 3.

Similar questions concerning the diameter of intersection graphs of non-abelian finite simple groups have also been considered. In 2010, Shen [18] proved that here the intersection graph is always connected and asked whether there is an upper bound for the diameter that holds for all intersection graphs of finite simple groups. In [13], Herzog, Longobardi and Maj showed that for a finite simple group G,G, diam(ΔG)64.\mathrm{diam}(\Delta_{G})\leq 64. This bound was later reduced to 2828 by Ma in [15] and to 55 by Freedman in [8]. The latter result is shown to be sharp with equality for G=𝔹,G=\mathbb{B}, PSU7(2)\mathrm{PSU}_{7}(2) and possibly further PSUn(q)\mathrm{PSU}_{n}(q) examples with nn an odd prime [8]. In particular, in all other cases, diam(ΔG)4\mathrm{diam}(\Delta_{G})\leq 4. In [6], Csákány and Pollák showed that for alternating groups AnA_{n}, we have 3diam(ΔAn)43\leq\mathrm{diam}(\Delta_{A_{n}})\leq 4, however it has been unclear whether the upper bound is sharp. We prove that it is.

Theorem 2.

Let G=AnG=A_{n}, where nn is a prime not equal to 11 or (qd1)/q1(q^{d}-1)/q-1 for some prime power qq and positive integer dd. The intersection graph of GG has diameter 4.

The smallest example of a simple alternating group with an intersection graph of diameter 4 is A13A_{13}, while all smaller alternating groups have intersection graphs of diameter 3.

The remainder of the paper is divided into two sections. The first deals with the proof of Theorem 1, and the second with Theorem 2.

Acknowledgements

The first author acknowledges the support of an Australian Research Council Discovery Early Career Researcher Award (project number DE230100579). The second author was supported by the UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [grant number EP/W522673/1]. The authors would also like to thank Saul Freedman for introducing them to this problem, as well as Aluna Rizzoli for insightful conversations during the completion of this paper. The authors are also grateful to Martin Liebeck for carefully proofreading an earlier draft and highlighting opportunities to simplify some of the arguments.

1. Non-simple groups with connected intersection graphs

In this section we present our result on the intersection graphs of non-simple groups. As discussed in the introduction, our result settles a long-standing open question of Csákány and Pollák whether there exists a finite non-simple group whose intersection graph has diameter 4.4. We prove that such groups exist, and provide some necessary conditions for any further examples.

We first begin with some preliminary results. Note that this result is also in [6].

Lemma 3.

Suppose GG is a finite group with a connected intersection graph with diameter d1d\geq 1. Then there exist cyclic subgroups of prime order A,B<GA,B<G at distance dd.

Proof.

Suppose H1,H2<GH_{1},H_{2}<G are subgroups at distance dd and let AA, BB be cyclic subgroups of GG of prime order with AH1A\leq H_{1} and BH2B\leq H_{2}. Every subgroup of GG intersecting AA also intersects H1H_{1}, and every subgroup of GG intersecting BB also intersects H2H_{2}. Hence if A0A_{0}, A1,,AkA_{1},\dots,A_{k} is a path with A0=AA_{0}=A and Ak=B,A_{k}=B, then H1,A1,,Ak1,H2H_{1},A_{1},\dots,A_{k-1},H_{2} is also path. Therefore, the distance between H1H_{1} and H2H_{2} provides a lower bound for the distance between AA, B,B, which, as the diameter is d,d, is also equal to dd. ∎

We start by describing the groups GG such that ΔG\Delta_{G} has diameter 2.2. Note that one direction of this result is also in [17].

Lemma 4.

Let GG be a finite group. Then diam(ΔG)=2\mathrm{diam}(\Delta_{G})=2 if and only if GG does not have a generating pair of prime order elements.

Proof.

If diam(ΔG)=2,\mathrm{diam}(\Delta_{G})=2, then for any two distinct cyclic subgroups of prime order, A=gaA=\langle g_{a}\rangle and B=gb,B=\langle g_{b}\rangle, there is a proper subgroup that contains both of them. The smallest such subgroup is ga,gb,\langle g_{a},g_{b}\rangle, which therefore is not equal to G,G, so no pairs of prime order elements generate G.G.

If GG does not have a generating pair of prime order elements, then for any two prime order elements ga,g_{a}, gb,g_{b}, the subgroup they generate, ga,gb,\langle g_{a},g_{b}\rangle, is a proper subgroup of G.G. Hence there is a path of length two between A=gaA=\langle g_{a}\rangle and B=gb,B=\langle g_{b}\rangle, in ΔG\Delta_{G}, so by Lemma 3, diam(ΔG)=2.\mathrm{diam}(\Delta_{G})=2.

The argument in the proof of Theorem 1 relies heavily on outer automorphisms normalising certain large parabolic subgroups of groups of Lie type. For this, we require the following lemma.

Lemma 5.

Let SS be a finite non-abelian simple group of Lie type. Then any non-diagonal outer automorphism of odd prime order of SS normalizes a parabolic maximal subgroup of SS. Moreover, any two of these automorphisms normalise parabolic maximal subgroups that are conjugate.

Proof.

First note that Aut(S)\mathrm{Aut}(S) is a split extension of InnDiag(S)\mathrm{InnDiag}(S) by a group ΦSΓS,\Phi_{S}\Gamma_{S}, where ΦS\Phi_{S} and ΓS\Gamma_{S} contain field and graph automorphisms, respectively. By [12, Thm. 2.5.12, Defn. 2.5.13], any non-diagonal outer automorphism gg of SS of odd prime order is a field automorphism, or SPΩ8+(q)S\cong\mathrm{P}\Omega^{+}_{8}(q) or D43(q){}^{3}D_{4}(q) and gg is a graph or graph-field automorphism. In all cases, gg is conjugate to an element of ΦSΓS\Phi_{S}\Gamma_{S}.

Now we show that for any two non-diagonal outer automorphisms g1g_{1} and g2g_{2} there is a parabolic subgroup PP such that both g1g_{1} and g2g_{2} normalize a conjugate of PP.

If g1g_{1} and g2g_{2} are field automorphisms, then, in particular, they are each conjugate to an element of ΦS\Phi_{S} by [12, Defn. 2.5.13]. Now ΦS\Phi_{S} normalises all parabolic subgroups of SS by [12, §2.6], so the claim follows. If g1g_{1} and g2g_{2} are graph or graph-field automorphisms, then SPΩ8+(q)S\cong\mathrm{P}\Omega^{+}_{8}(q) or D43(q){}^{3}D_{4}(q) and the parabolic maximal subgroup P2P_{2} of SS is normalized by ΓS.\Gamma_{S}. Hence P2P_{2} is normalized by ΦSΓS,\Phi_{S}\Gamma_{S}, and as all non-diagonal automorphisms are conjugate to an element of ΦSΓS,\Phi_{S}\Gamma_{S}, g1g_{1} and g2g_{2} both normalize a conjugate of P2,P_{2}, as required. ∎

Remark 1.1.

By [12, Prop. 2.6.9] (see also [3, Chap 8.] and [14, Tables 3.5A–G]), an analogue of Lemma 5 holds for diagonal automorphisms that are conjugate to the so-called “standard” diagonal automorphisms (cf. [3, §1.7.1]). However, not every diagonal automorphism is conjugate to a standard one, and therefore not always contained in a parabolic subgroup, as we shall see in the proof of Theorem 1.

1.1. Proof of Theorem 1

Proof.

By [6], if diam(ΔG)=4,\mathrm{diam}(\Delta_{G})=4, then G=SCp,G=S\rtimes C_{p}, where SS is a non-abelian simple group and pp is an odd prime.

Hence SS cannot be a sporadic group or an alternating group with n=5n=5 or n7n\geq 7, since the outer automorphism group has size at most two in each case. If S=A6S=A_{6}, then |Out(S)|=4|\mathrm{Out}(S)|=4, so again there is no suitable GG. Therefore, SS is a group of Lie type. Write G=SgG=S\rtimes\langle g\rangle, where gg has prime order pp.

Suppose that AA and BB are subgroups at distance 4 in ΔG\Delta_{G}. By Lemma 3, we can assume that AA, BB are cyclic of prime order. First suppose that AA or BB is a subgroup of SS. Without loss, we can assume AS.A\leq S. Since the graph is connected, BB is contained in a maximal subgroup of GG that has size strictly larger than |B|,|B|, so either BB is contained in a conjugate of SS or BB has order pp and is properly contained in a maximal subgroup MBM_{B} of GG with |MB|>p.|M_{B}|>p. If MBM_{B} and SS had a non-trivial intersection then there would be a path between A and B of length 3, contradicting our assumption that their distance is 4. Hence we must have |SMB|=1|S\cap M_{B}|=1. But then |SMB|=|S||MB|>p|S|=|G||SM_{B}|=|S||M_{B}|>p|S|=|G|, a contradiction. Hence we can assume that neither AA nor BB are contained in a conjugate of SS and hence they both have order p.p. We have several cases to consider.

The first case is when GG does not contain any diagonal automorphisms. By Lemma 5, AA and BB each normalize a conjugate of a fixed parabolic maximal subgroup P<SP<S and PgP\rtimes\langle g\rangle is maximal in GG.

Our second case is when S=PSLn(q)S=PSL_{n}(q) such that nn is composite and AA and BB are generated by diagonal automorphisms. Then by [4, Prop. 3.2.2] AA and BB both fix a pp-dimensional subspace of the natural module of PSLn(q).PSL_{n}(q). In this case are exactly the stabilizers of pp-dimensional subspaces by [19, Section 3.3.3], so they are contained in conjugate parabolic subgroups.

By [16, Lemma 4.1.5], [11, Corollary 1.3] and [5, Thm 2.8.7], the intersection of two conjugate parabolics is always non-trivial. Hence in both of the above cases there is a path of length at most 33 between any two prime order subgroups of G,G, so diam(ΔG)3.\mathrm{diam}(\Delta_{G})\leq 3.

Our third case is S=PSUn(q)S=\mathrm{PSU}_{n}(q) with nn composite and AA, BB generated by diagonal automorphisms of order pp dividing (n,q+1)(n,q+1). By [4, Prop. 3.3.3], the preimage of each of these elements in GUn(q)\mathrm{GU}_{n}(q) each fixes an orthogonal decomposition of the natural module into non-degenerate subspaces. Hence, each is contained in a maximal subgroup MM of GG whose preimage in GUn(q)\mathrm{GU}_{n}(q) preserves an orthogonal decomposition of the natural module into two complementary non-degenerate subspaces of dimension mm and nmn-m for some 1mn/21\leq m\leq n/2 respectively. By [14, Tables 2.1.C, 2.1.D, Lemma 4.1.1], we deduce that if m<n/2m<n/2, then |M|>|G|1/2|M|>|G|^{1/2}. Therefore, if AA and BB are generated by elements that fix a decomposition of the natural module into a pair of non-degenerate subspaces of unequal dimension, then the maximal subgroups M1AM_{1}\geq A, M2BM_{2}\geq B of GG fixing these decompositions must have |G|<|M1||M2|=|M1M2||M1M2|=|G||M1M2||G|<|M_{1}||M_{2}|=|M_{1}M_{2}||M_{1}\cap M_{2}|=|G||M_{1}\cap M_{2}|. This implies |M1M2|>1|M_{1}\cap M_{2}|>1, so AA, BB are at distance 3 in ΔG\Delta_{G}.

With these conditions in mind, we use Magma [2] to prove that the diameter of the intersection graph of PGU4(5)\mathrm{PGU}_{4}(5) is 4. ∎

Remark 1.2.

Note that the only cases remaining when S=PSUn(q)S=\mathrm{PSU}_{n}(q) in the proof of Theorem 1 are those where gg is a diagonal automorphism of prime order pp whose preimage in GUn(q)\mathrm{GU}_{n}(q) does not preserve a decomposition of the natural module into two non-degenerate subspaces of unequal dimension. By [4, Prop. 3.3.3], this implies that either nn is prime, or n=2pn=2p.

2. Intersection graphs of alternating groups with prime degree

We now turn our attention to the intersection graphs of finite simple alternating groups of prime degree. As mentioned in the introduction, Csákány and Pollák [6, p. 246] proved that 3diam(ΔAn)43\leq\mathrm{diam}(\Delta_{A_{n}})\leq 4, with diam(ΔAn)=3\mathrm{diam}(\Delta_{A_{n}})=3 if nn is composite.

As far as we are aware, no example of a finite simple alternating group whose intersection graph has diameter 4 has been discovered to date. We present a family of such groups below.

2.1. Proof of Theorem 2

Proof.

We begin by noting that n5,7,13,17n\neq 5,7,13,17, since each can be written as (qd1)/(q1)(q^{d}-1)/(q-1) for some prime power qq and positive integer d2d\geq 2. We also note that n=11n=11 is excluded by assumption (although we do deal with this case later in Lemma 6).

Let n=23.n=23. In this case an element of order 2323 is contained in two maximal subgroups isomorphic to M23M_{23}. Using GAP [10] we verify that subgroups generated by the 2323-cycles

ga\displaystyle g_{a} =(1,13,16,4,22,2,8,20,21,6,17,9,19,14,18,11,15,23,12,5,3,7,10)\displaystyle=(1,13,16,4,22,2,8,20,21,6,17,9,19,14,18,11,15,23,12,5,3,7,10)
gb\displaystyle g_{b} =(1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23)\displaystyle=(1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23)

and are of distance 4 by confirming that the M23M_{23} maximal subgroups they are each contained in intersect trivially. Hence diam(ΔA23)=4.\mathrm{diam}(\Delta_{A_{23}})=4.

For the remainder of the proof, we therefore suppose either n=19n=19, or n29n\geq 29. Let A=gaA=\langle g_{a}\rangle and B=gbB=\langle g_{b}\rangle, where ga=(1,2,,n2,n1,n)g_{a}=(1,2,\dots,n-2,n-1,n) and gb=ga(n1,n)=(1,2,,n2,n,n1)g_{b}=g_{a}^{(n-1,n)}=(1,2,\dots,n-2,n,n-1). Every maximal subgroup of AnA_{n} containing gag_{a} or gbg_{b} must be transitive of prime degree. Thus, by the classification of transitive groups of prime degree [7, p.99 Claims (i)-(v)], the only maximal subgroup of GG containing AA is NG(A)n:n12N_{G}(A)\cong n:\frac{n-1}{2}, and similarly, the only maximal subgroup of GG containing BB is NG(B)n:n12N_{G}(B)\cong n:\frac{n-1}{2}. Suppose 1hNG(A)NG(B)1\neq h\in N_{G}(A)\cap N_{G}(B). Note that hh has order dividing n12\frac{n-1}{2}, since AA and BB are distinct. Moreover, hh preserves a partition of {1,n}\{1,\dots n\} into two parts of size n12\frac{n-1}{2}, and one part of size 1. In particular, hh fixes exactly one point. Relabelling via a conjugate of gag_{a} if necessary, we may suppose that hh fixes 1, so now ga=(1,2,,n2,n1,n)g_{a}=(1,2,\dots,n-2,n-1,n) and gb=ga(k,k+1)g_{b}=g_{a}^{(k,k+1)} with 1kn11\leq k\leq n-1. Hence gah=(1,(2)h,(3)h,,(n)hg_{a}^{h}=(1,(2)h,(3)h,\dots,(n)h and the ithi^{th} position of gbhg_{b}^{h} is similarly (i)h(i)h unless i=ki=k or k+1,k+1, in which case it is (k+1)h(k+1)h and (k)h,(k)h, respectively.

Since hh normalises ga\langle g_{a}\rangle and gb\langle g_{b}\rangle, there exist 1<i,jn11<i,j\leq n-1 such that gah=gaig_{a}^{h}=g_{a}^{i} and gbh=gbjg_{b}^{h}=g_{b}^{j}.

We now fall into one of two cases: either k=1k=1, or k1k\neq 1.

Suppose k=1k=1. Then (3)h=2i+1(3)h=2i+1, so (3)h=2i+1modn(3)h=2i+1\mod n. On the other hand, (3)h=j+2modn(3)h=j+2\mod n, so jmodn=2i1modnj\mod n=2i-1\mod n. Now consider (4)h(4)h. We have (4)h=3i+1modn(4)h=3i+1\mod n and also (4)h=2j+2modn=4imodn(4)h=2j+2\mod n=4i\mod n. Therefore, i=j=1i=j=1 and hh centralises both gag_{a} and gbg_{b}, a contradiction.

Now suppose k1k\neq 1. Let {1,,n}{1,k,k+1,(k)h1,(k+1)h1}\ell\in\{1,\dots,n\}\setminus\{1,k,k+1,(k)h^{-1},(k+1)h^{-1}\}. Then

()h=(1)i+1modn,(\ell)h=(\ell-1)i+1\mod n,

while

()h=(1)j+1modn,(\ell)h=(\ell-1)j+1\mod n,

implying that i=ji=j.

Since gb=ga(k,k+1),g_{b}=g_{a}^{(k,k+1)}, also gbi=(gai)(k,k+1)=(gah)(k,k+1).g_{b}^{i}=(g_{a}^{i})^{(k,k+1)}=(g_{a}^{h})^{(k,k+1)}. Without loss of generality we can assume that there is >′′>1\ell^{\prime}>\ell^{\prime\prime}>1 such that ()h=k(\ell^{\prime})h=k and (′′)h=k+1.(\ell^{\prime\prime})h=k+1. Note that unless i=1,i=1, ′′2,\ell^{\prime}-\ell^{\prime\prime}\geq 2, so at least one of them is not kk or k+1.k+1. Now gbh=(1,,(1)h,()h,(+1)h,,(′′1)h,(′′)h,(′′+1)h,)g_{b}^{h}=(1,\dots,(\ell^{\prime}-1)h,(\ell^{\prime})h,(\ell^{\prime}+1)h,\dots,(\ell^{\prime\prime}-1)h,(\ell^{\prime\prime})h,(\ell^{\prime\prime}+1)h,\dots) and also, gbh=(gah)(k,k+1)=1,,(1)h,(′′)h,(+1)h,,(′′1)h,()h,(′′+1)h,).g_{b}^{h}=(g_{a}^{h})^{(k,k+1)}=1,\dots,(\ell^{\prime}-1)h,(\ell^{\prime\prime})h,(\ell^{\prime}+1)h,\dots,(\ell^{\prime\prime}-1)h,(\ell^{\prime})h,(\ell^{\prime\prime}+1)h,\dots). Hence ()h=(′′)h,(\ell^{\prime})h=(\ell^{\prime\prime})h, which is a contradiction.

It follows hh does not exist, NG(A)NG(B)={1}N_{G}(A)\cap N_{G}(B)=\{1\} and therefore PP and QQ are at distance at least 4 in ΔG\Delta_{G} and so diam(ΔG)=4\mathrm{diam}(\Delta_{G})=4.

Now we consider the cases when n=11n=11 or (qd1)/q1(q^{d}-1)/q-1 for some prime q.q. We first prove that the intersection graph of A11A_{11} has diameter 3.

Lemma 6.

diam(ΔA11)=3.\mathrm{diam}(\Delta_{A_{11}})=3.

Proof.

By Lemma 3 and [6, p.246], we can assume that if there exists a pair of subgroups at distance 4, then they are two cyclic groups AA, BB of order 11.

Every element of order 11 is contained in an M11M_{11}, and |M11|=7920|M_{11}|=7920. If AA and BB are at distance 4, then the M11sM_{11}s (call them H1,H2H_{1},H_{2}) must meet only in the identity. But |H1H2||H1||H2|/|H1H2|=|H1||H2|=79202>|A11||H_{1}H_{2}|\geq|H_{1}||H_{2}|/|H_{1}\cap H_{2}|=|H_{1}||H_{2}|=7920^{2}>|A_{11}|, a contradiction. So H1H_{1} and H2H_{2} must intersect non-trivially, and PP and QQ are at distance 3. ∎

Finally we show that for An,A_{n}, where nn is a prime of the form (qd1)/q1(q^{d}-1)/q-1 for some prime q,q, there are examples where the intersection graph has diameter 33 and an example where it is 44.

Lemma 7.

The intersection graphs of A5A_{5} and A7A_{7} have diameter 33 and the intersection graph of A13A_{13} has diameter 4.4.

Proof.

By By Lemma 3 and [6, p.246] we can assume that if there exists a pair of subgroups at distance 4, then they are two cyclic groups AA, BB of order n. For n=5n=5, the size a of a maximal subgroup MM containing an nn-cycle is at least 1010, and since 102>6010^{2}>60, these all need to intersect, so there are no cyclic subgroups of order nn that are distance 44 apart from each other. Similarly for n=7n=7, if MM is a maximal subgroup containing an nn-cycle then |M|120|M|\geq 120 and 1202>7!2120^{2}>\frac{7!}{2} so the diameter is again 33. For n=13,n=13, we show using GAP [10] that the subgroups generated by ga=(1,8,10,13,7,5,6,12,9,11,3,4,2)g_{a}=(1,8,10,13,7,5,6,12,9,11,3,4,2) and gb=(1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13)g_{b}=(1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13) are of distance 44 away from each other by intersecting the maximal subgroups they are contained in, so the diameter of the intersection graph is 4.4.

The question of the diameter of the intersection graph of AnA_{n}, with n=(qd1)/(q1)n=(q^{d}-1)/(q-1) with qq a prime power and d2d\geq 2 remains open in general.

References

  • [1] J. Bosák. The graphs of semigroups. In Theory of Graphs and its Applications (Proc. Sympos. Smolenice, 1963), pages 119–125. Publ. House Czech. Acad. Sci., Prague, 1964.
  • [2] Wieb Bosma, John Cannon, and Catherine Playoust. The Magma algebra system. I. The user language. J. Symbolic Comput., 24(3-4):235–265, 1997.
  • [3] John N. Bray, Derek F. Holt, and Colva M. Roney-Dougal. The maximal subgroups of the low-dimensional finite classical groups, volume 407 of London Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2013. With a foreword by Martin Liebeck.
  • [4] Timothy C. Burness and Michael Giudici. Classical groups, derangements and primes, volume 25 of Australian Mathematical Society Lecture Series. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2016.
  • [5] Roger W. Carter. Finite groups of Lie type. Wiley Classics Library. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., Chichester, 1993. Conjugacy classes and complex characters, Reprint of the 1985 original, A Wiley-Interscience Publication.
  • [6] B. Csákány and G. Pollák. The graph of subgroups of a finite group. Czechoslovak Math. J., 19(94):241–247, 1969.
  • [7] John D. Dixon and Brian Mortimer. Permutation groups, volume 163 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1996.
  • [8] Saul D. Freedman. The intersection graph of a finite simple group has diameter at most 5. Arch. Math. (Basel), 117(1):1–7, 2021.
  • [9] Saul D. Freedman. Diameters of graphs related to groups and base sizes of primitive groups. PhD thesis, University of St Andrews, 2022.
  • [10] The GAP Group. GAP – Groups, Algorithms, and Programming, Version 4.11.1, 2021.
  • [11] Phillipe Gille and Robert Guralnick. Unipotent subgroups of stabilizers, 2022.
  • [12] Daniel Gorenstein, Richard Lyons, and Ronald Solomon. The classification of the finite simple groups. Number 3. Part I. Chapter A, volume 40.3 of Mathematical Surveys and Monographs. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1998. Almost simple KK-groups.
  • [13] Marcel Herzog, Patrizia Longobardi, and Mercede Maj. On a graph related to the maximal subgroups of a group. Bull. Aust. Math. Soc., 81(2):317–328, 2010.
  • [14] Peter Kleidman and Martin Liebeck. The subgroup structure of the finite classical groups, volume 129 of London Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1990.
  • [15] Xuanlong Ma. On the diameter of the intersection graph of a finite simple group. Czechoslovak Math. J., 66(141)(2):365–370, 2016.
  • [16] Kamilla Rekvényi. The orbital diameter of primitive permutation groups. PhD thesis, Imperial College London, 2023.
  • [17] Hossein Shahsavari and Behrooz Khosravi. Characterization of some families of simple groups by their intersection graphs. Comm. Algebra, 48(3):1266–1280, 2020.
  • [18] Rulin Shen. Intersection graphs of subgroups of finite groups. Czechoslovak Math. J., 60(135)(4):945–950, 2010.
  • [19] Robert A. Wilson. The finite simple groups, volume 251 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag London, Ltd., London, 2009.