Paper detail

On the Diophantine problem in some one-relator groups

We study the Diophantine problem, i.e. the decision problem of solving systems of equations, for some families of one-relator groups, and provide some background for why this problem is of interest. The method used is primarily the Reidemeister--Schreier method, together with general recent results by Dahmani & Guirardel and Ciobanu, Holt & Rees on the decidability of the Diophantine problem in general classes of groups. First, we give a sample of the methods of the article by proving that the one-relator group with defining relation $a^mb^n = 1$ is virtually a direct product of hyperbolic groups for all $m, n \geq 0$, and thus conclude decidability of the Diophantine problem in such groups. As a corollary, we obtain that the Diophantine problem is decidable in any torus knot group. Second, we study the two-generator, one-relator groups $G_{m,n}$ with defining relation a commutator $[a^m, b^n] = 1$, where $m, n \geq 1$. In doing so, we define and study a natural class of groups (RABSAGs), related to right-angled Artin groups (RAAGs). We reduce the Diophantine problem in the groups $G_{m,n}$ to the Diophantine problem in groups which are virtually certain RABSAGs. As a corollary of our methods, we show that the submonoid membership problem is undecidable in the group $G_{2,2}$ with the single defining relation $[a^2, b^2] = 1$. We use the recent classification by Gray & Howie of RAAG subgroups of one-relator groups to classify the RAAG subgroups of some RABSAGs, showing the potential usefulness of one-relator theory to this area. Finally, we define and study Newman groups $\operatorname{NG}(p,q)$, which are $(p+1)$-generated one-relator groups generalising the solvable Baumslag--Solitar groups. We show that all such groups are hyperbolic, and thereby also conclude decidability of their Diophantine problem.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.