Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 1311.0620

Supersolvable restrictions of reflection arrangements

N. Amend·T. Hoge·G. Roehrle
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Let A = (A,V) be a complex hyperplane arrangement and let L(A) denote its intersection lattice. The arrangement A is called supersolvable, provided its lattice L(A) is supersolvable. For X in L(A), it is known that the restriction A^X is supersolvable provided A is. Suppose that W is a finite, unitary reflection group acting on the complex vector space V. Let A(W) = (A(W), V) be its associated hyperplane arrangement. In earlier work by the last two authors, we classified all supersolvable reflection arrangements. Extending this work, the aim of this note is to determine all supersolvable restrictions of reflection arrangements. It turns out that apart from the obvious restrictions of supersolvable reflection arrangements there are only a few additional instances. Moreover, in our previous work, we classified all inductively free restrictions A(W)^X of reflection arrangements A(W). Since every supersolvable arrangement is inductively free, the supersolvable restrictions A(W)^X of reflection arrangements A(W) form a natural subclass of the class of inductively free restrictions A(W)^X. Finally, we characterize the irreducible supersolvable restrictions of reflection arrangements by the presence of modular elements of dimension 1 in their intersection lattice. This in turn shows that reflection arrangements as well as their restrictions are of fiber type if and only if they are strictly linearly fibered.

Explore related subjects

math.COmath.GR

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

N. Amend, T. Hoge, G. Roehrle. 2014-07-08. Supersolvable restrictions of reflection arrangements. https://arxiv.org/abs/1311.0620

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Adjunctions, Box Products, and Forcing Families

Sidorenko's conjecture states that the number of copies of any given bipartite graph in another graph of given density is asymptotically minimized by a random graph. For bipartite graphs containing a cycle, the forcing conjecture further asserts that asymptotic equality characterizes quasi-random graphs. We establish an adjoint identity for a general class of graph-substitution operators and use it to obtain Sidorenko and forcing results for balanced blow-ups, subdivisions, Cartesian products, and strong products.

math.CO↗
arXiv2026

On the Cost Number of Graphs with Determining Number Two

A distinguishing vertex coloring of a graph $G$ is a vertex coloring such that only the identity automorphism of $G$ preserves the coloring. A graph is $2$-distinguishable if it admits a distinguishing vertex coloring with two colors, and its cost $ρ(G)$ is the minimum size of a color class in such a coloring. The determining number of a graph $G$, denoted by $Det(G)$, is the minimum size of a subset $S\subseteq V(G)$ such that only the trivial automorphism fixes every element of $S$ pointwise. Boutin (J. Combin. Math. Combin. Comput. 85: 161-171, 2013) asked if $ρ(G)$ and $Det(G)$ can be arbitrarily far apart. While the case for $Det(G) = 1$ is trivial, the answer remained unknown for $Det(G) \ge 2$. In this manuscript, we show that if $Det(G)=2$ then not only is $ρ(G)$ bounded, but in fact $ρ(G) \leq 4$. This is the first resolution of Boutin's question for any nontrivial fixed determining number. Moreover, for every fixed $Det(G)= n$, we construct examples giving a lower bound on any possible upper bound for $ρ(G)$ in terms of $n$.

math.CO↗