A classification of Curtis-Tits amalgams
Abstract
A celebrated theorem of Curtis and Tits on groups with finite BN-pair shows that roughly speaking these groups are determined by their local structure. This result was later extended to Kac-Moody groups by P.~Abramenko and B.~M\"uhlherr. Their theorem states that a Kac-Moody group is the universal completion of an amalgam of rank two (Levi) subgroups, as they are arranged inside itself. Taking this result as a starting point, we define a Curtis-Tits structure over a given diagram to be an amalgam of groups such that the sub-amalgam corresponding to a two-vertex sub-diagram is the Curtis-Tits amalgam of some rank- group of Lie type. There is no a priori reference to an ambient group, nor to the existence of an associated (twin-) building. Indeed, there is no a priori guarantee that the amalgam will not collapse. We then classify these amalgams up to isomorphism. In the present paper we consider triangle-free simply-laced diagrams. Instead of using Goldschmidt's lemma, we introduce a new approach by applying Bass and Serre's theory of graphs of groups. The classification reveals a natural division into two main types: "orientable" and "non-orientable" Curtis-Tits structures. Our classification of orientable Curtis-Tits structures naturally fits with the classification of all locally split Kac-Moody groups using Moufang foundations. In particular, our classification yields a simple criterion for recognizing when Curtis-Tits structures give rise to Kac-Moody groups. The class of non-orientable Curtis-Tits structures is in some sense much larger. Many of these amalgams turn out to have non-trivial interesting completions inviting further study.
Cite
@article{arxiv.0907.1388,
title = {A classification of Curtis-Tits amalgams},
author = {Rieuwert Blok and Corneliu Hoffman},
journal= {arXiv preprint arXiv:0907.1388},
year = {2010}
}
Comments
In this version it is emphasized that the main result is the classification of Curtis-Tits amalgams. The results themselves and their proofs are unchanged