Is there an algorithm to decide if a word is in a finitely generated subgroup of a free group?












11















Let $S$ be a finite set and $F$ is the free group on that set. Is there an algorithm which takes as input a sequence of $w,w_1,ldots,w_kin F$ and decides whether $win langle w_1,ldots,w_krangle$?




This question keeps appearing in some of my work. My intuition is that this has been solved somewhere. It seems very related to the Nielsen-Schreier theorem and, to my understanding, Nielsen's proof of this theorem gave an algorithm for finding a free generating set for any finitely generated subgroup of a free group - which is very closely related to this problem. I also have found various literature referring to this as a "generalized word problem" and various undecidability results relating to the problem in general - but, even though nothing suggests that this is undecidable for a free group, I've not come across any algorithm for deciding it.






gr.group-theory







share|cite|improve this question
























  • If you can decide this then you can decide whether $F/langle w_1,...,w_krangle$ is trivial, just check for each $w$ being an element of $S$, right? Thus it's undecideable...
    – Dima Pasechnik
    2 days ago








  • 1




    @DimaPasechnik: What you write down is not a group since the subgroup you are trying to take the quotient by is not normal.
    – Andy Putman
    2 days ago










  • oops, right. sorry for noise.
    – Dima Pasechnik
    2 days ago






  • 3




    This is known as "solvable uniform (subgroup) membership problem".
    – YCor
    2 days ago










  • I saw this in the hot questions list and went, "Huh! We worked on something similar at Hampshire but didn't get far.". Lo and behold :D
    – TreFox
    2 days ago
















11















Let $S$ be a finite set and $F$ is the free group on that set. Is there an algorithm which takes as input a sequence of $w,w_1,ldots,w_kin F$ and decides whether $win langle w_1,ldots,w_krangle$?




This question keeps appearing in some of my work. My intuition is that this has been solved somewhere. It seems very related to the Nielsen-Schreier theorem and, to my understanding, Nielsen's proof of this theorem gave an algorithm for finding a free generating set for any finitely generated subgroup of a free group - which is very closely related to this problem. I also have found various literature referring to this as a "generalized word problem" and various undecidability results relating to the problem in general - but, even though nothing suggests that this is undecidable for a free group, I've not come across any algorithm for deciding it.






gr.group-theory







share|cite|improve this question
























  • If you can decide this then you can decide whether $F/langle w_1,...,w_krangle$ is trivial, just check for each $w$ being an element of $S$, right? Thus it's undecideable...
    – Dima Pasechnik
    2 days ago








  • 1




    @DimaPasechnik: What you write down is not a group since the subgroup you are trying to take the quotient by is not normal.
    – Andy Putman
    2 days ago










  • oops, right. sorry for noise.
    – Dima Pasechnik
    2 days ago






  • 3




    This is known as "solvable uniform (subgroup) membership problem".
    – YCor
    2 days ago










  • I saw this in the hot questions list and went, "Huh! We worked on something similar at Hampshire but didn't get far.". Lo and behold :D
    – TreFox
    2 days ago














11












11








11


1






Let $S$ be a finite set and $F$ is the free group on that set. Is there an algorithm which takes as input a sequence of $w,w_1,ldots,w_kin F$ and decides whether $win langle w_1,ldots,w_krangle$?




This question keeps appearing in some of my work. My intuition is that this has been solved somewhere. It seems very related to the Nielsen-Schreier theorem and, to my understanding, Nielsen's proof of this theorem gave an algorithm for finding a free generating set for any finitely generated subgroup of a free group - which is very closely related to this problem. I also have found various literature referring to this as a "generalized word problem" and various undecidability results relating to the problem in general - but, even though nothing suggests that this is undecidable for a free group, I've not come across any algorithm for deciding it.






gr.group-theory







share|cite|improve this question
















Let $S$ be a finite set and $F$ is the free group on that set. Is there an algorithm which takes as input a sequence of $w,w_1,ldots,w_kin F$ and decides whether $win langle w_1,ldots,w_krangle$?




This question keeps appearing in some of my work. My intuition is that this has been solved somewhere. It seems very related to the Nielsen-Schreier theorem and, to my understanding, Nielsen's proof of this theorem gave an algorithm for finding a free generating set for any finitely generated subgroup of a free group - which is very closely related to this problem. I also have found various literature referring to this as a "generalized word problem" and various undecidability results relating to the problem in general - but, even though nothing suggests that this is undecidable for a free group, I've not come across any algorithm for deciding it.






gr.group-theory




gr.group-theory






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited 2 days ago









YCor

27.1k380132




27.1k380132










asked 2 days ago









Milo Brandt

223110




223110












  • If you can decide this then you can decide whether $F/langle w_1,...,w_krangle$ is trivial, just check for each $w$ being an element of $S$, right? Thus it's undecideable...
    – Dima Pasechnik
    2 days ago








  • 1




    @DimaPasechnik: What you write down is not a group since the subgroup you are trying to take the quotient by is not normal.
    – Andy Putman
    2 days ago










  • oops, right. sorry for noise.
    – Dima Pasechnik
    2 days ago






  • 3




    This is known as "solvable uniform (subgroup) membership problem".
    – YCor
    2 days ago










  • I saw this in the hot questions list and went, "Huh! We worked on something similar at Hampshire but didn't get far.". Lo and behold :D
    – TreFox
    2 days ago


















  • If you can decide this then you can decide whether $F/langle w_1,...,w_krangle$ is trivial, just check for each $w$ being an element of $S$, right? Thus it's undecideable...
    – Dima Pasechnik
    2 days ago








  • 1




    @DimaPasechnik: What you write down is not a group since the subgroup you are trying to take the quotient by is not normal.
    – Andy Putman
    2 days ago










  • oops, right. sorry for noise.
    – Dima Pasechnik
    2 days ago






  • 3




    This is known as "solvable uniform (subgroup) membership problem".
    – YCor
    2 days ago










  • I saw this in the hot questions list and went, "Huh! We worked on something similar at Hampshire but didn't get far.". Lo and behold :D
    – TreFox
    2 days ago
















If you can decide this then you can decide whether $F/langle w_1,...,w_krangle$ is trivial, just check for each $w$ being an element of $S$, right? Thus it's undecideable...
– Dima Pasechnik
2 days ago






If you can decide this then you can decide whether $F/langle w_1,...,w_krangle$ is trivial, just check for each $w$ being an element of $S$, right? Thus it's undecideable...
– Dima Pasechnik
2 days ago






1




1




@DimaPasechnik: What you write down is not a group since the subgroup you are trying to take the quotient by is not normal.
– Andy Putman
2 days ago




@DimaPasechnik: What you write down is not a group since the subgroup you are trying to take the quotient by is not normal.
– Andy Putman
2 days ago












oops, right. sorry for noise.
– Dima Pasechnik
2 days ago




oops, right. sorry for noise.
– Dima Pasechnik
2 days ago




3




3




This is known as "solvable uniform (subgroup) membership problem".
– YCor
2 days ago




This is known as "solvable uniform (subgroup) membership problem".
– YCor
2 days ago












I saw this in the hot questions list and went, "Huh! We worked on something similar at Hampshire but didn't get far.". Lo and behold :D
– TreFox
2 days ago




I saw this in the hot questions list and went, "Huh! We worked on something similar at Hampshire but didn't get far.". Lo and behold :D
– TreFox
2 days ago










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















15














Let $T$ be a finite subset of the free group on a set $S$. Nielsen's original proof (described nicely in the beginning of Lyndon and Schupp's book) gives an algorithmic process to find a free generating set $T'$ for the subgroup generated by $T$ with the following very nice property: for a word $u$ in $T'$, the $T'$-length $|u|_{T'}$ of $u$ is at least the $S$-length $|u|_S$ of $u$. To recognize if a word $w$ in $S$ lies in the subgroup generated by $T$, it is thus enough to check whether it equals any of the finitely many words of length at most $|w|_S$ in $T'$.



But of course there are much faster and better ways to do this. The nicest algorithm (which runs very fast) is based on Stallings folding and can be found in



Stallings, John R.
Topology of finite graphs.
Invent. Math. 71 (1983), no. 3, 551–565.



I don't have the paper handy right now, so I'm not sure if the algorithm is made explicit in it, but if you understand this paper then it should be clear how to do what you want.






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • In fact the algorithm can be thought of as a special case of Todd-Coxeter coset enumeration.
    – Derek Holt
    2 days ago






  • 1




    @DerekHolt: Conversely, having "grown up" with Stallings' algorithm, I've never needed to learn the Todd--Coxeter algorithm explicilty, since you can recover it in any group by pulling back to a free group. But I guess Todd--Coxeter comes with no guarantees that it will successfully distinguish cosets in general.
    – HJRW
    2 days ago






  • 1




    Yes, in general if two cosets are equal, then Todd-Coxeter will eventually establish their equality, but you cannot predict how long it will take (which is inevitable since the question is undecidable). But for free groups, where there are no relations, there is a bound on the total time.
    – Derek Holt
    2 days ago






  • 2




    The algorithm is made pretty explicit there.
    – Benjamin Steinberg
    2 days ago











Your Answer





StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "504"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathoverflow.net%2fquestions%2f319740%2fis-there-an-algorithm-to-decide-if-a-word-is-in-a-finitely-generated-subgroup-of%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









15














Let $T$ be a finite subset of the free group on a set $S$. Nielsen's original proof (described nicely in the beginning of Lyndon and Schupp's book) gives an algorithmic process to find a free generating set $T'$ for the subgroup generated by $T$ with the following very nice property: for a word $u$ in $T'$, the $T'$-length $|u|_{T'}$ of $u$ is at least the $S$-length $|u|_S$ of $u$. To recognize if a word $w$ in $S$ lies in the subgroup generated by $T$, it is thus enough to check whether it equals any of the finitely many words of length at most $|w|_S$ in $T'$.



But of course there are much faster and better ways to do this. The nicest algorithm (which runs very fast) is based on Stallings folding and can be found in



Stallings, John R.
Topology of finite graphs.
Invent. Math. 71 (1983), no. 3, 551–565.



I don't have the paper handy right now, so I'm not sure if the algorithm is made explicit in it, but if you understand this paper then it should be clear how to do what you want.






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • In fact the algorithm can be thought of as a special case of Todd-Coxeter coset enumeration.
    – Derek Holt
    2 days ago






  • 1




    @DerekHolt: Conversely, having "grown up" with Stallings' algorithm, I've never needed to learn the Todd--Coxeter algorithm explicilty, since you can recover it in any group by pulling back to a free group. But I guess Todd--Coxeter comes with no guarantees that it will successfully distinguish cosets in general.
    – HJRW
    2 days ago






  • 1




    Yes, in general if two cosets are equal, then Todd-Coxeter will eventually establish their equality, but you cannot predict how long it will take (which is inevitable since the question is undecidable). But for free groups, where there are no relations, there is a bound on the total time.
    – Derek Holt
    2 days ago






  • 2




    The algorithm is made pretty explicit there.
    – Benjamin Steinberg
    2 days ago
















15














Let $T$ be a finite subset of the free group on a set $S$. Nielsen's original proof (described nicely in the beginning of Lyndon and Schupp's book) gives an algorithmic process to find a free generating set $T'$ for the subgroup generated by $T$ with the following very nice property: for a word $u$ in $T'$, the $T'$-length $|u|_{T'}$ of $u$ is at least the $S$-length $|u|_S$ of $u$. To recognize if a word $w$ in $S$ lies in the subgroup generated by $T$, it is thus enough to check whether it equals any of the finitely many words of length at most $|w|_S$ in $T'$.



But of course there are much faster and better ways to do this. The nicest algorithm (which runs very fast) is based on Stallings folding and can be found in



Stallings, John R.
Topology of finite graphs.
Invent. Math. 71 (1983), no. 3, 551–565.



I don't have the paper handy right now, so I'm not sure if the algorithm is made explicit in it, but if you understand this paper then it should be clear how to do what you want.






share|cite|improve this answer





















  • In fact the algorithm can be thought of as a special case of Todd-Coxeter coset enumeration.
    – Derek Holt
    2 days ago






  • 1




    @DerekHolt: Conversely, having "grown up" with Stallings' algorithm, I've never needed to learn the Todd--Coxeter algorithm explicilty, since you can recover it in any group by pulling back to a free group. But I guess Todd--Coxeter comes with no guarantees that it will successfully distinguish cosets in general.
    – HJRW
    2 days ago






  • 1




    Yes, in general if two cosets are equal, then Todd-Coxeter will eventually establish their equality, but you cannot predict how long it will take (which is inevitable since the question is undecidable). But for free groups, where there are no relations, there is a bound on the total time.
    – Derek Holt
    2 days ago






  • 2




    The algorithm is made pretty explicit there.
    – Benjamin Steinberg
    2 days ago














15












15








15






Let $T$ be a finite subset of the free group on a set $S$. Nielsen's original proof (described nicely in the beginning of Lyndon and Schupp's book) gives an algorithmic process to find a free generating set $T'$ for the subgroup generated by $T$ with the following very nice property: for a word $u$ in $T'$, the $T'$-length $|u|_{T'}$ of $u$ is at least the $S$-length $|u|_S$ of $u$. To recognize if a word $w$ in $S$ lies in the subgroup generated by $T$, it is thus enough to check whether it equals any of the finitely many words of length at most $|w|_S$ in $T'$.



But of course there are much faster and better ways to do this. The nicest algorithm (which runs very fast) is based on Stallings folding and can be found in



Stallings, John R.
Topology of finite graphs.
Invent. Math. 71 (1983), no. 3, 551–565.



I don't have the paper handy right now, so I'm not sure if the algorithm is made explicit in it, but if you understand this paper then it should be clear how to do what you want.






share|cite|improve this answer












Let $T$ be a finite subset of the free group on a set $S$. Nielsen's original proof (described nicely in the beginning of Lyndon and Schupp's book) gives an algorithmic process to find a free generating set $T'$ for the subgroup generated by $T$ with the following very nice property: for a word $u$ in $T'$, the $T'$-length $|u|_{T'}$ of $u$ is at least the $S$-length $|u|_S$ of $u$. To recognize if a word $w$ in $S$ lies in the subgroup generated by $T$, it is thus enough to check whether it equals any of the finitely many words of length at most $|w|_S$ in $T'$.



But of course there are much faster and better ways to do this. The nicest algorithm (which runs very fast) is based on Stallings folding and can be found in



Stallings, John R.
Topology of finite graphs.
Invent. Math. 71 (1983), no. 3, 551–565.



I don't have the paper handy right now, so I'm not sure if the algorithm is made explicit in it, but if you understand this paper then it should be clear how to do what you want.







share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered 2 days ago









Andy Putman

31.3k5133213




31.3k5133213












  • In fact the algorithm can be thought of as a special case of Todd-Coxeter coset enumeration.
    – Derek Holt
    2 days ago






  • 1




    @DerekHolt: Conversely, having "grown up" with Stallings' algorithm, I've never needed to learn the Todd--Coxeter algorithm explicilty, since you can recover it in any group by pulling back to a free group. But I guess Todd--Coxeter comes with no guarantees that it will successfully distinguish cosets in general.
    – HJRW
    2 days ago






  • 1




    Yes, in general if two cosets are equal, then Todd-Coxeter will eventually establish their equality, but you cannot predict how long it will take (which is inevitable since the question is undecidable). But for free groups, where there are no relations, there is a bound on the total time.
    – Derek Holt
    2 days ago






  • 2




    The algorithm is made pretty explicit there.
    – Benjamin Steinberg
    2 days ago


















  • In fact the algorithm can be thought of as a special case of Todd-Coxeter coset enumeration.
    – Derek Holt
    2 days ago






  • 1




    @DerekHolt: Conversely, having "grown up" with Stallings' algorithm, I've never needed to learn the Todd--Coxeter algorithm explicilty, since you can recover it in any group by pulling back to a free group. But I guess Todd--Coxeter comes with no guarantees that it will successfully distinguish cosets in general.
    – HJRW
    2 days ago






  • 1




    Yes, in general if two cosets are equal, then Todd-Coxeter will eventually establish their equality, but you cannot predict how long it will take (which is inevitable since the question is undecidable). But for free groups, where there are no relations, there is a bound on the total time.
    – Derek Holt
    2 days ago






  • 2




    The algorithm is made pretty explicit there.
    – Benjamin Steinberg
    2 days ago
















In fact the algorithm can be thought of as a special case of Todd-Coxeter coset enumeration.
– Derek Holt
2 days ago




In fact the algorithm can be thought of as a special case of Todd-Coxeter coset enumeration.
– Derek Holt
2 days ago




1




1




@DerekHolt: Conversely, having "grown up" with Stallings' algorithm, I've never needed to learn the Todd--Coxeter algorithm explicilty, since you can recover it in any group by pulling back to a free group. But I guess Todd--Coxeter comes with no guarantees that it will successfully distinguish cosets in general.
– HJRW
2 days ago




@DerekHolt: Conversely, having "grown up" with Stallings' algorithm, I've never needed to learn the Todd--Coxeter algorithm explicilty, since you can recover it in any group by pulling back to a free group. But I guess Todd--Coxeter comes with no guarantees that it will successfully distinguish cosets in general.
– HJRW
2 days ago




1




1




Yes, in general if two cosets are equal, then Todd-Coxeter will eventually establish their equality, but you cannot predict how long it will take (which is inevitable since the question is undecidable). But for free groups, where there are no relations, there is a bound on the total time.
– Derek Holt
2 days ago




Yes, in general if two cosets are equal, then Todd-Coxeter will eventually establish their equality, but you cannot predict how long it will take (which is inevitable since the question is undecidable). But for free groups, where there are no relations, there is a bound on the total time.
– Derek Holt
2 days ago




2




2




The algorithm is made pretty explicit there.
– Benjamin Steinberg
2 days ago




The algorithm is made pretty explicit there.
– Benjamin Steinberg
2 days ago


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to MathOverflow!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid …



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid …



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathoverflow.net%2fquestions%2f319740%2fis-there-an-algorithm-to-decide-if-a-word-is-in-a-finitely-generated-subgroup-of%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







-

Popular posts from this blog

"Incorrect syntax near the keyword 'ON'. (on update cascade, on delete cascade,)

Image
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ height:90px;width:728px;box-sizing:border-box; } 2 total noob sorry any help greatly appreciated. I keep getting this "Incorrect syntax near the keyword 'ON'." heres my codes code one CREATE TABLE supplier ( supplierID INT PRIMARY KEY, ISBN INT FOREIGN KEY REFERENCES book(ISBN), price DECIMAL (5,2), ON UPDATE CASCADE, ON DELETE CASCADE, ); code two CREATE TABLE orders ( orderID INT PRIMARY KEY, customerID INT FOREIGN KEY REFERENCES customer(customerID), ISBN INT FOREIGN KEY REFERENCES book(ISBN), orderDate date, ON UPDATE CASCADE, ON DELETE CASCADE, ); Ive run out of stuff to try other than dumbing it down to uselessness. ...
Read more

Alcedinidae

Image
Alcedinidae Martin-pêcheur à dos bleu ( Alcedo azurea ) Classification (COI) Règne Animalia Embranchement Chordata Sous-embr. Vertebrata Classe Aves Ordre Coraciiformes Famille Alcedinidae Rafinesque, 1815 Les Alcédinidés ou Alcedinidae forment une famille d'oiseaux plus connus sous les noms de martins-pêcheurs et martins-chasseurs. Sommaire 1 Description 2 Répartition et habitat 3 Systématique 3.1 Liste alphabétique des genres 3.2 Liste des espèces 4 Chez les Anciens : l'alcyon 4.1 Étymologie (Littré) 4.2 Oiseau « fabuleux » ? 5 Notes 6 Articles connexes 7 Liens externes 7.1 Bibliographie Description | Ce sont des oiseaux compacts de taille petite à moyenne (10 à 46 cm), au bec droit et long, en forme de poignard. Leurs pattes sont courtes, et ils portent un plumage aux couleurs vives. Répartition et habitat | Cosmopolites, ils fréquentent surtout ...
Read more

Origin of the phrase “under your belt”?

Image
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0; } 17 1 Today, I found myself discussing what students should have "under their belts" during a lecture, and I wondered to myself if there was some inappropriate undertone here that I might be unaware of. Question : What is the origin of the phrase "under your belt"? A google search revealed some webpages (e.g. [1]) that assert its origin is related to consumption of food -- once a meal has been eaten, it's under your belt (which is a relief). However, with such websites, I have no way to determine fact from "random guy on the internet making stuff up". etymology idioms ...
Read more