Automorphisms of valued Hahn groups

Abstract: Hahn groups endowed with the canonical valuation play a fundamental role in the classification of valued abelian groups. In this paper we study the group of valuation (respectively order) preserving automorphisms of a Hahn group $G$. Under the assumption that $G$ satisfies some lifting property, we prove a structure theorem decomposing the automorphism group into a semidirect product of two notable subgroups. We characterise a class of Hahn groups satisfying the aforementioned lifting property. For some special cases we provide a matrix description of the automorphism group.

\section{Introduction}\label{sec:introduction}
In \cite{conrad}, Conrad describes the group of order preserving automorphisms of a Hahn sum as a certain group of matrices. Droste and G\"obel \cite{droste-goebel} extend this approach to balanced Hahn sum (see Definition \ref{def-hahn-sum-prod}). Hofberger \cite{hofbergerthesis} describes the group of automorphisms of Hahn fields as a semidirect product of so-called internal and external automorphisms. Building up on Hofberger's work we completed the description of the group of valuation preserving automorphisms of Hahn fields \cite{ours-fields}.

In this paper we extend the approach of \cite{ours-fields} to the study of $ v\text{-}\Aut G $ and $ o\text{-}\Aut G $ for a Hahn group $ G $.
We introduce the notion of (canonical) lifting property for a general Hahn group and, based on \cite{KKS-rayner-structures}, we prove that this is satisfied by a relatively large class of Hahn groups. We then decompose $ v\text{-}\Aut G $ (resp. $ o\text{-}\Aut G $) for Hahn groups satisfying the canonical lifting property. This extends the main result obtained in \cite{droste-goebel} (for the special case of balanced Hahn sums), to this large class of Hahn groups.

The paper is organised as follows.
In Section~\ref{sec:definitions-and-notation} we provide the definitions and notations that will be needed. In Section~\ref{sec:the-lifting-property} we introduce the important notion of \email{lifting property}. Subsection~\ref{sec:lifting-property-with-respect-to-the-rank} focusses on order preserving automorphisms and on the lifting property with respect to the rank (Definition~\ref{def:lifting-property-rank}). Theorem~\ref{lifting-principal-convex-sbgps} characterises automorphisms of the rank that lift by means of principal convex subgroups. We use this result to show that the lifting property with respect to the rank is not preserved by taking lexicographic sums (Example~\ref{es:lifting-not-preserved-lex-sums}).
In Subsection~\ref{section-lifting-skeleton} we study valuation preserving automorphisms and we introduce the lifting property with respect to the skeleton (Definition~\ref{def:lifting-property-skeleton}). The main result of the section is Theorem~\ref{hofberger-groups}, which provides a semidirect product decomposition of the $ v\text{-}\Aut G $ of a Hahn group $ G $ satisfying the lifting property w.r.t. the skeleton. In Subsection~\ref{sec:rayner-groups}, based on \cite{KKS-rayner-structures}, we introduce Rayner groups (Definition~\ref{def:rayner-group}) and characterise those that satisfy the lifting property w.r.t. the skeleton (Theorem~\ref{prop:rayner-groups-canonical-stable}).
Section~\ref{sec:matrices} focusses on Hahn sums, providing a description of the group of order preserving automorphism as a group of matrices, generalising results of \cite{conrad} and \cite{droste-goebel}. Proposition~\ref{prop:oAutGamma-G-direct product} gives a decomposition of the subgroup of order preserving automorphisms that induce the identity on the rank while Theorem~\ref{thm:DG-semidirect-enhanced} provides the matrix group representation.

\section{Definitions and notation}\label{sec:definitions-and-notation}
Let $ \Gamma $ be a (totally) ordered set and for all $ \gamma\in\Gamma $ let $ A_\gamma $ be an (divisible ordered) abelian group. For an element $ a = (a_\gamma)_{\gamma\in\Gamma} \in \prod_{\gamma\in\Gamma}A_\gamma $ we define the \emph{support} of $ a $
to be the set $ \supp a = \{\gamma\in\Gamma : a_\gamma\neq 0\} $.
\begin{defn}[Hahn group]
	\label{def-hahn-sum-prod}
	\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
	\item
	The \emph{Hahn sum} of the $ A_\gamma $'s, denoted by $ \coprod_{\gamma\in\Gamma}A_\gamma $ is the set of elements of the full cartesian product with finite support:
	\[
	\coprod_{\gamma\in\Gamma}A_\gamma = \left\lbrace a\in\prod_{\gamma\in\Gamma}A_\gamma : |\supp a|<\infty  \right\rbrace.
	\]
	\item
	The \emph{Hahn product} of the $ A_\gamma $'s, denoted by $ \HH_{\gamma\in\Gamma}A_\gamma $ is the set of elements of the full direct product with well ordered support:
	\[
	\HH_{\gamma\in\Gamma}A_\gamma = \left\lbrace a\in\prod_{\gamma\in\Gamma}A_\gamma : \supp a \text{ is well ordered}  \right\rbrace.
	\]
	The Hahn sum is a subgroup of the Hahn product.
	\item
	A group comprised between them will be called a \emph{Hahn group}.
	\item
	If for all $ \gamma\in\Gamma $ we have $ A_\gamma\simeq A $ for a given abelian group $A$ we say that $ G $ is a \emph{balanced Hahn group}.
	\end{enumerate}
\end{defn}
\begin{notation}
	We will use the following notation for the elements of $ G $:
	\[
	\sum_{\gamma\in\Gamma}a_\gamma\1_\gamma := (a_\gamma)_{\gamma\in\Gamma}.
	\]
\end{notation}
\begin{defn}\label{der:skeleton}\label{def:rank}
	Let $ \coprod_{\gamma\in\Gamma}A_\gamma \leq G \leq \HH_{\gamma\in\Gamma}A_\gamma $ be a Hahn group.
	\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
	\item
	The pair $ [\Gamma;\{A_\gamma:\gamma\in\Gamma\}] $ will be called the \emph{skeleton} of $ G $ and denoted by $ S(G) $.
	\item
	If $ G $ is balanced, with $ A_\gamma\simeq A $ for all $ \gamma\in\Gamma $, we will write $ S(G) = [\Gamma; A] $.
	\item
	In the sequel we will also refer to $ \Gamma $ as the \emph{rank of} $ G $ (sometimes denoted by $ \rk G $) and to the groups $ A_\gamma $ as the \emph{components of} $ G $.
	\end{enumerate}
\end{defn}
\begin{defn}
	Let $ G_1,G_2 $ be Hahn groups and let $ S(G_i) = [\Gamma_i:\{ A^i_\gamma : \gamma\in\Gamma_i \}],\ i=1,2 $ be the respective skeletons. An \emph{isomorphism} $ \tau:S(G_1)\rightarrow S(G_2) $ consists of an isomorphism $ \tau_\Gamma:\Gamma_1\rightarrow\Gamma_2 $ of ordered sets, and for all $ \gamma\in\Gamma_1 $ an isomorphism
	$ \tau_\gamma\colon A^1_\gamma\rightarrow A^2_{\tau_\Gamma(\gamma)} $
	of ordered groups. We will also write
	$ \tau = [\tau_\Gamma;\{\tau_\gamma:\gamma\in\Gamma_1\}]. $

	An automorphism of $ S(G) $, for a Hahn group $G$, is hence defined in the obvious way and we will denote by $ \Aut S(G) $ the group of automorphisms of $ S(G) $ under composition.
\end{defn}

Notice that, an automorphism of the skeleton is, in particular, an automorphism of the rank. However, there can be automorphism of the rank that are not part of any automorphism of the skeleton:
\begin{es}
	Let $ G = \coprod_\mathbb Z A_n $ where $ A_{2n} = \mathbb Q $ and $ A_{2n+1} = \mathbb R $ for all $ n\in\mathbb Z $. Then $\sigma_\mathbb Z\colon n\mapsto n+1 $ is an automorphism of the chain $ \mathbb Z $ that cannot appear in any automorphism of the skeleton, as there is no isomorphism between $ A_n $ and $ A_{n+1} $, for any $ n $.
\end{es}

For the remaining of this section, let us fix a Hahn group $ G $ with skeleton $ S(G) = [\Gamma;\{A_\gamma:\gamma\in\Gamma\}] $.

\begin{defn}\label{def:valuation-and-ordering}
	Since all elements of $G$ have well ordered support, we can define a valuation with value set $ \Gamma $ by
	\[
	v_{\min}\colon G \longrightarrow \Gamma\cup\{\infty\},\quad v_{\min}(0)=\infty,\ v_{\min}(g) = \min\supp(g) \text{ for } g\neq 0.
	\]
	We will call $ v_{\min} $ the \emph{canonical valuation on} $ G $ and if the context is clear we will simply denote it by $ v $.
\end{defn}
Unless otherwise stated we will always consider $ G $ endowed with its canonical valuation $ v $.

\begin{defn}\label{def:val-pres}
	An automorphism $ \sigma $ of $ G $ is said to be \emph{valuation preserving} if there exists a chain automorphism $ \sigma_{\Gamma} $ of $ \Gamma $ such that, for all $ g\in G $, we have $ \sigma_{\Gamma}(v(g)) = v(\sigma(g)) $.

	The valuation preserving automorphisms for ma group under composition that we will denote by $ v\text{-}\Aut G $.
\end{defn}
\begin{rmk}[{\cite[Lemma~0.1]{salma-monograph}}]
	\label{rmk:induced-autom}
	An automorphism $ \sigma\in\Aut G $ is valuation preserving if and only if the map $ \sigma_\Gamma\colon\Gamma\rightarrow\Gamma,\ v(x)\mapsto v(\sigma(x)) $
	is a well defined automorphism of chains. We will say that $ \sigma_{\Gamma} $ is the chain automorphism \emph{induced on $ \Gamma $ by $ \sigma $}.\qed
\end{rmk}
\begin{defn}\label{def:val-pres-iso}
	More generally, let $ G_1,G_2 $ be Hahn groups with skeletons $ S(G_i) = [\Gamma_i:\{ A^i_\gamma : \gamma\in\Gamma_i \}],\ i=1,2 $ and let $ v_1,v_2 $ be the canonical valuations on $ G_1 $ and $ G_2 $, respectively. An isomorphism $ \rho\colon G_1\to G_2 $ is said to be \emph{valuation preserving} if there exists an isomorphism of chains $ \rho_\Gamma\colon\Gamma_1\to\Gamma_2 $ such that, for all $ g\in G_1 $ we have $ \rho_\Gamma(v_1(g)) = v_2(\rho(g)) $.
\end{defn}

\begin{lemma}[{\cite[Lemma~0.2]{salma-monograph}}]
	\label{lemma:induced-autom-skeleton}
	Let us keep the notation of Definition~\ref{def:val-pres-iso}.
	A valuation preserving isomorphism $ \sigma\colon G_1\rightarrow G_2 $ of Hahn groups naturally induces an isomorphism of the skeletons $ [\sigma_\Gamma;\{\sigma_\gamma:\gamma\in\Gamma_1\}] \colon S(G_1)\rightarrow S(G_2) $ by:
	$ \sigma_\Gamma(v_1(g)) = v_2(\sigma(g)) $ for all $ v_1(g)\in\Gamma_1 $ and for each $ \gamma\in\Gamma_1 $ and each $ g_\gamma\in A^1_\gamma $ set $ \sigma_\gamma(g_\gamma) = \sigma(g)_{\sigma_\Gamma(\gamma)} $, for some $ g\in G_1 $ with $ v_1(g)=\gamma $.

	In particular, a valuation preserving automorphism $ \sigma\inv\text{-}\Aut G $ induces an automorphism $ \sigma_S = [\sigma_\Gamma;\{\sigma_\gamma:\gamma\in\Gamma\}]\in\Aut S(G) $ of the skeleton where $ \sigma_\Gamma\ino\text{-}\Aut \Gamma $ is defined as in Remark~\ref{rmk:induced-autom} and $ \sigma_\gamma\colon A_\gamma\to A_{\sigma_\Gamma(\gamma)} $ is given by $ \sigma_\gamma(a) = (\sigma(a\1_\gamma))_{\sigma_\Gamma(\gamma)} $.
	\qed
\end{lemma}

\begin{defn}\label{def:lex-order}\label{def:oAut}
	Assume all the components $ A_{\gamma} $ to be ordered groups and denote by $ <_\gamma $ the order relation on $ A_\gamma $. then we can order $ G $ lexicographically by setting, for all $ g \in G $
	\[g>_{\lex}0\iff g_{v(g)}>_{v(g)}0. \]

	An automorphism $ \sigma $ is said to be \emph{order preserving} if for all $ g\in G $ we have $ g>0\Rightarrow \sigma(g)>0 $. The order preserving automorphisms also form a group under composition which will be denoted by $ o\text{-}\Aut G $.
\end{defn}

\begin{rmk}\label{rmk:oAut<vAut}
	Assume all the components $ A_\gamma $ to be ordered \textit{archimedean} groups.
	Then an order preserving automorphism of $ G $ is automatically valuation preserving.
	So we have $ o\text{-}\Aut G\leq v\text{-}\Aut G\leq \Aut G. $\qed
\end{rmk}

\section{The lifting property}\label{sec:the-lifting-property}

Let $ G $ be a Hahn group with skeleton $ S(G) = [\Gamma;\{A_\gamma:\gamma\in\Gamma\}] $.
In Section~\ref{sec:definitions-and-notation} we saw that a valuation preserving automorphism $ \sigma\inv\text{-}\Aut G $ induces an automorphism $\sigma_S\in\Aut S(G) $ of the skeleton (Lemma~\ref{lemma:induced-autom-skeleton}) and, in particular, an automorphism $ \sigma_\Gamma\ino\text{-}\Aut \Gamma $ of the rank (Remark~\ref{rmk:induced-autom}). In this section we will study under what conditions, given an automorphism of the skeleton (resp. rank) we can find an automorphism of the group that induces it. In Section~\ref{sec:lifting-property-with-respect-to-the-rank} we will study automorphisms of the chain $ \Gamma $ that lift to \emph{order preserving} automorphisms of $ G $ and in Section~\ref{section-lifting-skeleton} automorphisms of $ S(G) $ that lift to \emph{valuation preserving} automorphisms of $ G $.

\subsection{Lifting from the rank to $ o\text{-}\Aut G $}\label{sec:lifting-property-with-respect-to-the-rank}
Let $G$ be a Hahn group with skeleton $ S(G) = [\Gamma;\{A_\gamma:\gamma\in\Gamma\}] $ and let $ \bbG = \HH_\Gamma A_\gamma $ be the corresponding Hahn product.
In this section we will assume that all the components $ A_\gamma $ of the skeleton of $ G $ be archimedean ordered abelian groups and we will consider the induced lexicographic order on $ G $ (Definition~\ref{def:lex-order}).
Let $\sigma \in o\text{-}\Aut G$. Then, by Remark~\ref{rmk:oAut<vAut}, $ \sigma\inv\text{-}\Aut G $ and therefore, it induces an automorphism $\sigma_{\Gamma}\ino\text{-}\Aut \Gamma $ given by $\sigma_{\Gamma}(v(g)) = v(\sigma(g))$ (Remark~\ref{rmk:induced-autom}).
This gives rise to a group homomorphism
\begin{equation}\label{eq:phi-rank}
\Phi_\Gamma:o\text{-}\Aut G \longrightarrow o\text{-}\Aut \Gamma,\ \sigma\longmapsto \sigma_\Gamma.
\end{equation}
It is straightforward to verify that this is a group homomorphism.

\begin{defn}
	\label{def:rank-int}
	The kernel $ \ker\Phi_\Gamma $ of the map \eqref{eq:phi-rank}
	is a normal subgroup of $ o\text{-}\Aut G $ that we call the
	\emph{subgroup of internal o-automorphisms} of $G$.
	We will denote it  by $\Into\text{-}\Aut G$.
\end{defn}
\begin{defn}\label{def:lifting-property-rank}
We say that an automorphism $\tau \in o\text{-}\Aut\Gamma$ \emph{lifts to $ G $} if there exists an automorphism $\sigma\ino\text{-}\Aut G$ such that $\Phi_\Gamma(\sigma) = \tau$.
If the map $ \Phi_\Gamma $ defined in \eqref{eq:phi-rank} admits a section, i.e., an injective group homomorphism $ \Psi_\Gamma\colon o\text{-}\Aut \Gamma\hookrightarrow o\text{-}\Aut G $ such that $ \Phi_\Gamma\circ\Psi_\Gamma = \id_{o\text{-}\Aut \Gamma} $, we say that $ G $ has 	the \emph{lifting property with respect to $ \Psi_\Gamma $}.
\end{defn}
\begin{defn}
	\label{def:rank-ext}
	Assume $ G $ has the lifting property with respect to a fixed section $ \Psi_\Gamma $ of $ \Phi_\Gamma $.
	The subgroup $ \Psi_\Gamma(o\text{-}\Aut G) $ of $ o\text{-}\Aut G $ will be called the subgroup of $ \Psi_\Gamma $\emph{-external automorphisms of $G$} and denoted by $\pExt{\Psi_\Gamma}o\text{-}\Aut G$.
\end{defn}
\begin{defn}\label{def:can-lift-prop-rank}
Assume $ G $ is balanced, say $ A_\gamma = A $ for all $ \gamma $. Then for the Hahn product $ \bbG = \HH_\Gamma A $ there exists always the \emph{canonical section}
\[
\Psi^c_\Gamma\colon o\text{-}\Aut \Gamma\to o\text{-}\Aut \bbG,\ \tau\longmapsto \tilde\tau
\]
where $ \tilde\tau $ is defined by
\[
\tilde\tau\left( \sum_\gamma g_\gamma\1_\gamma\right) = \sum_\gamma g_\gamma\1_{\tau(\gamma)}.
\]
We call $ \tilde\tau $ the \emph{canonical lift of $ \tau $ to $ \bbG $.}

\noindent If, moreover, $ \tilde\tau(G) = G $ we say that $ \tau $ \emph{lifts canonically} to an automorphism of $ G $ and call $ \tilde\tau|_G $ the \emph{canonical lift} of $ \tau $ to $ G $. If all automorphisms of $ \Gamma $ lift canonically we say that $ G $ has the \emph{canonical lifting property with respect to} $ \Gamma $.
\end{defn}

Now we give a characterisation of the automorphisms of the rank $ \Gamma $ that lift to an order-preserving automorphism or $ G $ by means of its principal convex subgroups (Definition~\ref{def:princ-convex-sbg}). We do this in
Theorem~\ref{lifting-principal-convex-sbgps}, after proving a preliminary lemma.
\begin{defn}\label{def:princ-convex-sbg}
	For an element $ \gamma\in\Gamma $, the \emph{principal convex subgroup of $ G $ associated to $ \gamma $} is the subgroup $ C_\gamma := \{x\in G : v(x)\geq \gamma \} $.
\end{defn}
\begin{lemma}
	\label{h-commutes-C}
	Let $\sigma\inv\text{-}\Aut G$ and let $g\in G$ and $C_g := \{x\in G:\ v(x)\geq v(g)\}$. Then we have:
	$$\sigma(C_g) = C_{\sigma(g)} = \{x:\ v(x) \geq v(\sigma(g))\}.$$
	\begin{proof}
		Let $ \sigma_\Gamma$ be the automorphism of the chain $\Gamma$ induced by $\sigma$.
		Let $x\in C_g$. Then
		$$v(x)\geq v(g) \Rightarrow v(\sigma(x)) = \sigma_\Gamma (v(x)) \geq \sigma_\Gamma (v(g)) = v(\sigma(g))$$
		so $\sigma(x) \in C_{\sigma(g)}$, that is $\sigma(C_g) \subseteq C_{\sigma(g)}$.

		Vice versa, let $x\in C_{\sigma(g)}$. Then
		$$
		v(x) \geq v(\sigma(g)) \Rightarrow
		v(\sigma^{-1}(x)) = \tilde \sigma^{-1}(v(x)) \geq \sigma_\Gamma^{-1}(v(\sigma(g)))= v(\sigma^{-1}(\sigma(g)))=v(g)
		$$
		because $\sigma_\Gamma^{-1}$ is also an automorphism of $\Gamma$.
		So $\sigma^{-1}(x) \in C_g$, that is $x\in \sigma(C_g)$.
		Hence $\sigma(C_g) \supseteq C_{\sigma(g)}$, which completes the proof.
	\end{proof}
\end{lemma}

\begin{theorem}
	\label{lifting-principal-convex-sbgps}
	Let $\tau\ino\text{-}\Aut\Gamma$. Then $\tau$ lifts to an automorphism
	$\sigma \in o\text{-}\Aut G$ if and only if, for all $\gamma\in\Gamma$ there is an isomorphism
	$$
	\sigma_\gamma\colon C_\gamma \overset{\sim}{\longrightarrow} C_{\tau(\gamma)}
	$$
	such that
	\begin{equation}
	\label{cond-gamma-delta}
	\gamma>\delta \Rightarrow \sigma_\delta|_{C_\gamma}=\sigma_\gamma.
	\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
	Assume that $\tau$ lifts to $ \sigma\ino\text{-}\Aut G $. Let $\gamma\in\Gamma$ and choose $g\in G$ such that
	$v(g) = \gamma$. Recall that, by definition, $v(\sigma(g)) = \tau (v(g))$.
	Then Lemma~\ref{h-commutes-C} gives
	$$
	C_\gamma =C_g = \{x:\ v(x)\geq \gamma = v(g)\}\simeq C_{\sigma(g)} = \{x:\ v(x) \geq \tilde \sigma(v(g)) = \tau(\gamma)\} = C_{\tau(\gamma)}.
	$$
	where the isomorphism is simply given by $\sigma$, which is order preserving, so
	condition \eqref{cond-gamma-delta} is satisfied.

	Vice versa, suppose that for all $\gamma\in\Gamma$ there is an isomorphism
	$$
	\sigma_\gamma\colon C_\gamma \overset{\sim}{\longrightarrow} C_{\tau(\gamma)}
	$$
	such that $\gamma>\delta \Rightarrow \sigma_\gamma(C_\gamma)\subset \sigma_\delta(C_\delta)$.
	We want to construct a lift $\sigma \in o\text{-}\Aut G$ of $\tau$. We define it as follows:
	for $x\in G$ with $v(x) = \gamma$, set $\sigma(x):=\sigma_\gamma(x)$. First let us show that
	$\sigma$ is a well defined group morphism. Let $x,y \in G$. We have two cases:\\
	\textbf{Case 1.}
	$v(x)\neq v(y)$, and we can assume $v(x)<v(y)$.
	Then $v(x+y)=v(x) =:\gamma$. So we have
	$$
	\sigma(x-y) = \sigma_\gamma (x-y) = \sigma_\gamma(x) - \sigma_\gamma(y) = \sigma(x) - \sigma_{v(y)}(y) = \sigma(x) - \sigma(y)$$
	where in the second-last equality we used condition~\eqref{cond-gamma-delta}.\\
	\textbf{Case 2.} $v(x) = v(y) = \delta$. Then $v(x+y) =: \gamma \geq \delta$. Then
	$$
	\sigma(x-y) = \sigma_\gamma(x-y) = \sigma_\delta(x-y) = \sigma_\delta(x) - \sigma_\delta(y) = \sigma(x) - \sigma(y).
	$$
	Again, for the second equality we used condition~\eqref{cond-gamma-delta}.

	To show that $\sigma$ is an automorphism, we define its inverse. Similarly to what we did
	to define $\sigma$ we define $\sigma^{-1}$ as follows: for $x\in G$ with
	$v(x) = \tau(\gamma)$ we set $\sigma^{-1}(x) = \sigma_\gamma^{-1}(x) $.
	Checking that this is a
	well defined group morphism is done the same way as it was done for $\sigma$. To see that this is indeed the inverse of $ \sigma $, let $x\in G$ with
	$v(x)=\gamma$.
	Recall that $\sigma_\gamma(x) \in C_{\tau(\gamma)}$ and $\sigma_\gamma^{-1}: C_{\tau(\gamma)}\rightarrow C_\gamma$. So
	$$
	\sigma^{-1}(h(x)) = \sigma^{-1}(\sigma_\gamma(x)) = \sigma_\gamma^{-1}(\sigma_\gamma(x)) = x
	$$
	and similarly $\sigma(\sigma^{-1}(x)) = x$. So $\sigma$ is an automorphism of $G$, which completes the proof.
\end{proof}

The following example shows that, in general, the lifting property is not preserved after taking lexicographic sums.
\begin{es}\label{es:lifting-not-preserved-lex-sums}
	Let $\Gamma = \mathbb Q$ and $G = (\HH_{q<0}\mathbb Q)\sqcup \mathbb Q\sqcup (\coprod_{q>0}\mathbb Q)$. So $\Gamma = \rk G = \mathbb Q$. Consider the automorphism of the chain $\mathbb Q$ defined by $\tilde h (q)= q+2$ and assume that $\tilde h$ lifts to an automorphism $h$ of $G$. Let $g\in G$ be such that $v(g) = -1/2$. So $v(h(g)) = \tilde h(-\frac{1}{2})=\frac{3}{2}>1$. By Lemma~\ref{h-commutes-C} we have $C_g \simeq C_{h(g)}$.  Now $C_{h(g)} = \{x:\ v(x) \geq \frac{3}{2}\}\subseteq\coprod_{q>0}\mathbb Q$ is countable. But
	$C_g = \{x:\ v(x)\geq -\frac{1}{2}\}$ is uncountable. To prove this, we show that
	the uncountable set $\{0,1\}^\mathbb N$ of functions $f:\mathbb N\rightarrow\{0,1\}$ can be embedded
	into $C_g$. We construct the embedding as follows: to each function $f:\mathbb N\rightarrow\{0,1\}$
	we associate the element $f^* = (f^*_q)_{q<0}\in\HH_{q<0}\mathbb Q$ defined by
	$$
	f^*_q =
	\begin{cases}
	f(n) \text{ if } q = -\frac{1}{2+n}\\
	0 \text{ otherwise.}
	\end{cases}
	$$
	First, notice that, for all $f\in \{0,1\}^\mathbb N$, the element $f^*$ belongs to $C_g$: indeed
	we have $\supp f^* \subseteq \{-\frac{1}{2+n}|n\in\mathbb N\}$ which is well ordered,
	so $f^*\in\HH_{q<0}\mathbb Q$ and $v(f^*)\geq -\frac{1}{2}$. Finally,
	the map $f\mapsto f^*$ is injective, for if $f\neq g$ then there exists $n\in\mathbb N$ such
	that $$f^*_{-\frac{1}{2+n}} = f(n)\neq g(n) = g^*_{-\frac{1}{2+n}}.$$\qed
\end{es}

Last example shows that, even if two Hahn groups have the lifting property, after we take the lexicographic sum not all automorphism of the skeleton will lift. The next proposition characterises those that do.

\begin{prop}\label{prop:condition-lifting-preserved-lex}
	Let $G_1,G_2$ be two groups with the lifting property (with respect to the rank) and consider $G =G_1\coprod G_2$. Then $\rk G=\rk G_1 + \rk G_2$. Let $\tau$ be an automorphism of $\rk G$ such that $\tau|_{\rk G_i}\ino\text{-}\Aut(\rk G_i) $ for $i=1,2$.
	Then $\tau$ lifts to an automorphism of $G$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
	Let $ \Gamma:= \rk G $ and $ \Gamma_i :=\rk G_i $ for $ i=1,2 $. Let $ \tau \ino\text{-}\Aut \Gamma $ be such that $ \tau_i :=\tau|_{\Gamma_i}\in o\text{-}\Aut\Gamma_i $ for $ i=1,2 $. Since both $ G_i $'s have the lifting property, let $ \sigma_i\inv\text{-}\Aut G_i $ be a lift of $ \tau_i $ and define $ \sigma\colon G\rightarrow G $ through $ \sigma(g_1\1_1 + g_2\1_2):=\sigma_1(g_1)\1_1+\sigma_2(g_2)\1_2 $. It is straightforward to verify that this is an automorphism of $ G $.
\end{proof}

\subsection{Lifting from the skeleton to $ v\text{-}\Aut G $}
\label{section-lifting-skeleton}
As a generalisation of the problem discussed in Section~\ref{sec:lifting-property-with-respect-to-the-rank}, we can consider the \emph{lifting property with respect to the skeleton}, and ask under what conditions an automorphism of the skeleton of a Hahn group lifts to an automorphism of the group.
Recall that (Lemma~\ref{lemma:induced-autom-skeleton}) a valuation preserving automorphism $ \sigma\inv\text{-}\Aut G $ induces an automorphism $ \sigma_S \in\Aut S(G) $ of the skeleton.
This gives rise to a map, that we will denote by $ \Phi_S $, in analogy to the one in \eqref{eq:phi-rank}:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:phi-skeleton}
	\Phi_S\colon v\text{-}\Aut G \longrightarrow \Aut S(G),\ \sigma\longmapsto[\sigma_\Gamma;\{\sigma_{\gamma}:\gamma\in\Gamma\}].
\end{equation}
It is straightforward to verify that $ \Phi_S $ is a group homomorphism.

\begin{defn}\label{def:internal}
	The kernel of the map $ \Phi_S $ defined in \eqref{eq:phi-skeleton} is a normal subgroup of $ v\text{-}\Aut G $ called \emph{the group of internal v-automorphisms} and denoted by $ \Intv\text{-}\Aut G $.

	If the context is clear we will drop the ``$ v $'' from the notation and terminology.
\end{defn}
\begin{rmk}\label{rmk:internal-by-valuation}
	An automorphism $\sigma\inv\text{-}\Aut G$ is internal if and only if, for all $g\in G$, we have
	\begin{equation}
	\label{eq:internal-by-valuation}
	v(g)=v(\sigma(g))\quad\text{ and }\quad g_{v(g)}=\sigma(g)_{v(g)}.
	\end{equation}
	Indeed, conditions \eqref{eq:internal-by-valuation} are equivalent to $ \Phi(\sigma)=\id_{S(G)} $.
	\qed
\end{rmk}

\begin{defn}\label{def:lifting-property-skeleton}
We say that an automorphism $\tau \in \Aut S(G)$ \emph{lifts to $ G $} if there exists an automorphism $\sigma\inv\text{-}\Aut G$ such that $\Phi_S(\sigma) = \tau$.
If the map $ \Phi_S $ defined in \eqref{eq:phi-skeleton} admits a section, i.e., an injective group homomorphism $ \Psi_S\colon \Aut S(G)\hookrightarrow v\text{-}\Aut G $ such that $ \Phi_S\circ\Psi_S = \id_{\Aut S(G)} $, we say that $ G $ has the \emph{lifting property with respect to $ \Psi_S $}.
\end{defn}
\begin{defn}
\label{def:skeleton-ext}
Assume $ G $ has the lifting property with respect to a fixed section $ \Psi_S $ of $ \Phi_S $.
The subgroup $ \Psi_S(\Aut S(G)) $ of $ v\text{-}\Aut G $ will be called the subgroup of $ \Psi_S $\emph{-external automorphisms of $G$} and denoted by $\pExt{\Psi_S}\Aut G$.
If no confusion can arise we will just write $ \Ext\Aut G $.
\end{defn}

\begin{rmk}
	If $ G $ has the lifting property with respect to a given section $ \Psi_S $ then the homomorphism $ \Phi_S $
	defined in \eqref{eq:phi-skeleton} is surjective and every $ \tau\in\Aut S(G) $ lifts to an automorphism $ \sigma\inv\text{-}\Aut G $. The first isomorphism theorem thus yields
	\[
	\Aut S(G)\simeq\frac{v\text{-}\Aut G}{\Int\Aut G}.
	\]
\qed\end{rmk}

In \cite[Section~3]{ours-fields} we generalise a result of Hofberger \cite[Satz~2.2]{hofbergerthesis}, providing a decomposition of the group of valuation preserving automorphisms of a Hahn field with the lifting property into the semidirect product of its subgroups of internal and external automorphisms. Here we generalise this result further to Hahn groups with the lifting property.

\begin{theorem}
	\label{hofberger-groups}
	Let $G$ be a Hahn group with the lifting property with respect to a given section $ \Psi_S $ of $ \Phi_S $.
	Then we can decompose $ v\text{-}\Aut G $ into the (inner) semidirect product of its subgroups of internal and external automorphisms:
	$$v\text{-}\Aut G = \Int\Aut G \rtimes \Ext\Aut G.$$
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}

	Let us consider
	the sequence
	$$
	\xymatrix{
		\Int\Aut G \ar[r]^-\iota &
		v\text{-}\Aut G \ar[r]^-{\Phi_S} &
		\Aut S(G) \ar@{-->}@/^1pc/[l]^{\Psi_S}
	}
	$$
	where $\iota$ is the canonical embedding. By definition of $ \Int\Aut G $, we have $\im \iota = \ker\Phi$, so the sequence is exact. Therefore (see \cite[Theorem~3.3]{conrad-note-splitting}) we have
	\[
	v\text{-}\Aut G = \im \iota \rtimes \im \Psi = \ker\Phi\rtimes \im\Psi
	= \Int\Aut G \rtimes \Ext\Aut G.
	\]
\end{proof}

Now that we have established a decomposition result, we want to further investigate the
two subgroups $\Int\Aut G$ and $\Ext\Aut G$. The latter is isomorphic to $ \Aut S(G) $.
The former is a bit more mysterious.

\subsection{Rayner groups and the canonical lifting property}\label{sec:rayner-groups}
In Section~\ref{section-lifting-skeleton} we introduced the lifting property with respect to the skeleton. Now we are going to define a stronger lifting property and study some distinguished classes of Hahn groups that fulfil it.
\begin{defn}\label{def:can-lift-prop-skeleton}
	For the Hahn product $ \bbG = \HH_\Gamma A_\gamma $ there exists always the \emph{canonical section}
	\[
	\Psi^c_S\colon \Aut S(G)\to v\text{-}\Aut \bbG,\ \tau = [\tau_\Gamma;\{\tau_\gamma : \gamma\in\Gamma \}]\longmapsto \tilde\tau
	\]
	where $ \tilde\tau $ is defined by
	\[
	\tilde\tau\left( \sum_\gamma g_\gamma\1_\gamma\right) = \sum_\gamma \tau_\gamma(g_\gamma)\1_{\tau_\Gamma(\gamma)}.
	\]
	We call $ \tilde\tau $ the \emph{canonical lift of $ \tau $ to $ \bbG $.}

	\noindent If, moreover, $ \tilde\tau(G) = G $ we say that $ \tau $ \emph{lifts canonically} to an automorphism of $ G $ and call $ \tilde\tau|_G $ the \emph{canonical lift of $ \tau $ to $ G $}. If all automorphisms of $ S(G) $ lift canonically we say that $ G $ has the \emph{canonical lifting property with respect to} $ S(G) $.
\end{defn}

As announced above, we are going to introduce a special class of Hahn groups that have the canonical lifting property.

A family $ {\mathcal F} $ of subsets of $ \Gamma $
is said to be a \emph{group family with respect to} $ \Gamma $
(cf. \cite[Paragraph 2]{rayner1968})
if the following properties are satisfied:
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
	\item the elements of $ {\mathcal F} $ are well ordered subsets of $ \Gamma $;
	\item $ A,B\in{\mathcal F} \Rightarrow A\cup B\in{\mathcal F} $;
	\item $ A\in{\mathcal F}\wedge B\subseteq A \Rightarrow B\in{\mathcal F} $.
\end{enumerate}
\begin{prop}[{\cite[Theorem~1]{rayner1968}}]\label{prop:rayner-family-yield-groups}
	If $ {\mathcal F} $ is a group family then the set $ \bbG({\mathcal F}) $ of elements of $ \bbG $ whose supports belong to $ {\mathcal F} $ is a subgroup of $ \bbG $.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
	By property (i) all elements of $ {\mathcal F} $ are well ordered so they can occur as supports of elements of $ \bbG $. Since for all $ g\in \bbG $ we have $ \supp g = \supp(-g) $ then $ g\in\bbG({\mathcal F}) $ implies $ -g\in\bbG({\mathcal F}) $. If $ g,h\in\bbG({\mathcal F}) $, then $ \supp(g+h)\subseteq \supp g \cup \supp h $: the latter is in $ {\mathcal F} $ by (ii) and hence by (iii) the former is too. So $ g+h\in\bbG({\mathcal F}) $. It follows then that also $ 0\in\bbG({\mathcal F}) $ so $ \bbG({\mathcal F}) $ is indeed a subgroup of $ \bbG $.
\end{proof}
\begin{defn}\label{def:rayner-group}
	Groups obtained as in Proposition~\ref{prop:rayner-family-yield-groups} will be called \emph{Rayner groups}. These generalise an analogous notion (Rayner fields) introduced by Rayner in \cite{rayner1968} in the context of Hahn fields. Further \emph{Rayner structures} are introduced and studied in \cite{KKS-rayner-structures}.
\end{defn}

The next result gives a necessary and sufficient condition for a Rayner group to satisfy the canonical lifting property.
\begin{theorem}\label{prop:rayner-groups-canonical-stable}
	Let $ \bbG $ be the Hahn product over the skeleton $ [\Gamma;\{ A_\gamma:\gamma\in\Gamma \}] $. Let $ {\mathcal F} $ be a group family with respect to $ \Gamma $. Then the Rayner group $ G = \bbG({\mathcal F}) $ has the canonical lifting property with respect to the skeleton if and only if $ {\mathcal F} $ is stable under the action of $ \Aut S(G) $, that is, for all $ [\bar\tau;\{ \tau_\gamma:\gamma\in\Gamma \}]\in\Aut S(G) $ and for all $ T\in{\mathcal F} $ we have $ \bar\tau(T)=T $.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
	Assume that $ {\mathcal F} $ be stable under $ \Aut S(G) $ and let $ g = \sum g_\gamma\1_\gamma\in G $. Let also $ \tau=[\bar\tau;\tau_\gamma] $ be an automorphism of $ S(G) $. Then $ \supp\left( \sum\tau_\gamma(g_\gamma)\1_{\bar\tau(\gamma)}\right) = \{ \bar\tau(\gamma):\gamma\in\supp g \} = \bar\tau(\supp g) $ which, by our assumption, belongs to $ {\mathcal F} $. Thus $ \sum\tau_\gamma(g_\gamma)\1_{\bar\tau(\gamma)} \in G $ and so $ G $ has the canonical lifting property with respect to the skeleton.

	Vice versa, assume that $ G $ has the canonical lifting property and let $ T\in{\mathcal F} $. Let $ g = \sum g_\gamma\1_\gamma \in G $ be such that $ \supp(g)=T $. Then, for all $ [\bar\tau;\tau_\gamma] $ we have $ h:= \sum\tau_\gamma(g_\gamma)\1_{\bar\tau(\gamma)}\in G $, so in particular
	$ \supp h \in {\mathcal F} $. So $ {\mathcal F} $ is stable under action of $ \Aut S(G) $.
\end{proof}

\begin{defn}
	Let $ \kappa $ be an infinite regular cardinal and let $ {\mathcal F}_\kappa $ be the family of all well ordered subsets of $ \Gamma $ of cardinality smaller than $ \kappa $. The $ \kappa $-bounded subgroup of $ \bbG $ consists of all elements of $ \bbG $	with support of cardinality less than $ \kappa $, and will be denoted by $ \bbG_\kappa $.

	\noindent Notice that the Hahn sum and the Hahn product are special cases of $ \kappa $-bounded subgroups, with $ \kappa = \aleph_0 $ and $ \kappa = |\bbG|^+ $ respectively.
\end{defn}

\begin{cor}\label{cor:k-bdd-have-canonical-lifting}
	Let $ \kappa $ be an infinite regular cardinal. Then $ \bbG_\kappa $ has the canonical lifting property. In particular, $ \bbG $ and $ \coprod_\Gamma A_\gamma $ have the canonical lifting property.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
	By Proposition~\ref{prop:rayner-groups-canonical-stable} it suffices to show that the family $ {\mathcal F}_\kappa $ of well ordered subsets of $ \Gamma $ is stable under $ \Aut S(G) $. Let $ [\bar\tau;\{ \tau_\gamma:\gamma\in\Gamma \}]\in\Aut S(G) $ and let $ T $ be a well ordered subset of $ \Gamma $ of cardinality less than $ \kappa $. Then $ \bar\tau(T) $ will have the same cardinality as $ T $, because $ \bar\tau $ is an automorphism of $ \Gamma $. Since it is also order preserving then $ \bar\tau(T) $ will also be well ordered, hence $ \bar\tau(T)\in{\mathcal F}_\kappa $.
\end{proof}

Analogous results to the ones contained in this section hold for Rayner fields: see \cite[Section~3.2]{ours-fields}.

\section{Automorphism groups as groups of matrices}\label{sec:matrices}
In this section we are going to generalise and sharpen results of Conrad \cite{conrad} and Droste-G\"obel \cite{droste-goebel}. The first describes the group of order preserving automorphisms of a Hahn sum as a certain group of triangular matrices. The latter obtain a semidirect product decomposition, which is different from the one we gave in Theorem~\ref{hofberger-groups}.

Let $ \Gamma $ be a chain, $ \{A_\gamma:\gamma\in\Gamma\} $ a family of ordered abelian groups and $ G = \coprod_{\gamma\in\Gamma}A_\gamma $ the Hahn sum. Let $ \End A_\gamma $ be the ring of endomorphisms of $ A_\gamma $ (with pointwise addition and composition). For all $ \alpha,\beta\in\Gamma $ let $ H_{\alpha\beta} = \Hom(A_\beta,A_\alpha) $ be the group of homomorphisms from $ A_\beta $ into $ A_\alpha$ (with pointwise addition). Let $ \Delta $ be the set of all $ \Gamma\times\Gamma $-matrices $ (\sigma_{\alpha\beta}) $ where
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
	\item $ \sigma_{\alpha\alpha}\in\End A_\alpha $;
	\item $ \sigma_{\alpha\beta}\in H_{\alpha\beta} $;
	\item for every $ \beta $ and for all $ a\in A_\beta $ we have $ \sigma_{\alpha\beta}(a)=0 $ for all but finitely many $ \alpha $.
\end{enumerate}
Then $ \Delta $ forms a ring with respect to the usual matrix addition and multiplication (condition (iii) ensures that the product be well defined).
\begin{rmk}\label{rmk:isom-End-Delta}
There is an isomorphism between the rings $ \End G $ and $\Delta $.
Indeed, for $ a=\sum a_\gamma\1_\gamma\in G $ and $ (\sigma_{\alpha\beta})\in\Delta $ we can consider the row vector $ (a_\gamma) $ and multiply it on the left to get
\begin{equation}\label{eq:formula-matrix-multiplication}
(a_\gamma)(\sigma_{\alpha\beta}) = \left(\sum_{\alpha\in\supp(a)} \sigma_{\alpha\beta}(a_\alpha)\right)_{\beta\in\Gamma} =: (b_\beta)_{\beta\in\Gamma}
\end{equation}
where the sum on the right hand side makes sense because the $ \supp (a) $ is finite.
Then it is clear that the map $ \sigma: \sum a_\gamma\1_\gamma\mapsto \sum b_\gamma\1_\gamma $ is an endomorphism of $ G $ induced by $ (\sigma_{\alpha\beta}) $.

Vice versa, if $ \sigma\in\End G $ and $ a=\sum a_\gamma\1_\gamma\in G $
let $ b=\sum b_\gamma\1_\gamma := \sigma(a) $. Then for all $
\alpha\in\Gamma $ define $ \sigma_{\alpha\beta}(a_\alpha):= b_\beta $.
Since $ b\in G $ then $ \supp b $ is finite and therefore $
\sigma_{\alpha\beta} $ satisfies condition (iii) above. Hence $ (\sigma_{\alpha\beta})\in \Delta $ and it is easy to verify that the correspondence $ \sigma \mapsto (\sigma_{\alpha\beta}) $ is an isomorphism of $ \End G $ onto $ \Delta $.
Thus the group $ \Aut G $ corresponds isomorphically to the group of units in $ \Delta $. Here by $ \Aut G $ we mean \emph{all} automorphisms of $ G $ as an abelian group, order (reps. valuation) preserving or otherwise. \qed
\end{rmk}

Now we see how we can characterise the order preserving automorphisms.
Let us consider the multiplicative monoid $ T $ of all matrices $ (\sigma_{\alpha\beta}) \in\Delta $ such that
\begin{enumerate}[(i')]
	\item $ (\sigma_{\alpha\beta}) $ is lower triangular;
	\item for all $ \alpha\in\Gamma $, $ \sigma_{\alpha\alpha}\ino\text{-}\Aut A_\alpha $.
\end{enumerate}
The order we consider on $ G $ is the lexicographic one, as always (cf. Definition~\ref{def:valuation-and-ordering}).
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:conrad-lemma0}
A matrix $ (\sigma_{\alpha\beta})\in T $ induces, via the correspondence described in Remark~\ref{rmk:isom-End-Delta}, an order preserving endomorphism $ \sigma $ on $ G $.
In particular, an invertible matrix in $ T $ induces an order preserving automorphism of $ G $.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $ a = \sum_\gamma a_\gamma\1_\gamma >0 $ with $ v(a)=\gamma $. Then
\begin{align*}
\sigma(a) = (a)_\alpha(\sigma_{\alpha\beta}) &= \left(\sum_{\alpha\geq\gamma}\sigma_{\alpha\beta}(a_\alpha) \right)_{\beta\in\Gamma} \\&= \left(\sum_{\alpha\geq\gamma}\sigma_{\alpha\beta}(a_\alpha) \right)_{\beta\geq\gamma} = \sigma_{\gamma\gamma}(a_\gamma)+\left(\sum_{\alpha\geq\gamma}\sigma_{\alpha\beta}(a_\alpha) \right)_{\beta>\gamma}>0
\end{align*}
where the third equality holds because $ \sigma_{\alpha\beta} $ is lower triangular and the final inequality is due to the fact that, by (ii'), $ \sigma_{\gamma\gamma} $ is order preserving.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}\label{cor:conrad-lemma0}
	Let $ U $ denote the group of units (the invertible matrices) in $ T $.
	Then $ U $ embeds into $ o\text{-}\Aut G $.
\end{cor}
\begin{rmk}
From the proof of Lemma~\ref{lemma:conrad-lemma0} it is clear that all $ o $-automorphisms of $ G $ induced by the elements $ (\sigma_{\alpha\beta})\in U $ induce the identity on $ \Gamma $. If, moreover, such an automorphism also induces the identity on each component then it will be an internal automorphism. Again, from the formula in the proof of Lemma~\ref{lemma:conrad-lemma0}, we see that this happens if and only if $ \sigma_{\alpha\alpha}=1 $ for all $ \alpha\in\Gamma $.
\qed
\end{rmk}
\begin{prop}\label{prop:oAutGamma-G-direct product}
	Let us denote by $ o\text{-}\Aut_\Gamma G $ the automorphisms of $ G $ that induce the identity on the chain $ \Gamma $.
	Similarly, let $ \Aut_\Gamma S(G) $ denote the group of automorphisms of the skeleton whose component on $ \Gamma $ is the identity.
	Then we have
	\[
	o\text{-}\Aut_\Gamma G \simeq \Int\Aut G \rtimes \Aut_\Gamma S(G).
	\]
	It follows, in particular, that $ o\text{-}\Aut_\Gamma G $ forms a group.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
	Let $ U^1 $ be the subgroup of $ U $ given by all the \emph{unitriaugular} matrices of $ T $ (all the diagonal entries are 1). Then $ \Int\Aut G \simeq U^1 $. When we multiply two diagonal matrices, the elements on the diagonal of the product are the products of the corresponding diagonal entries. Hence $ U^1 $ is a normal subgroup of $ U $. Moreover, every element $ (\sigma_{\alpha\beta})\in U $ is the product of an element in $ U^1 $ and a diagonal matrix: namely $ (\sigma_{\alpha\beta})=(\sigma_{\alpha\beta})^1(\sigma_{\alpha\beta})^d $ where $ (\sigma_{\alpha\beta})^1 $ is obtained by $ (\sigma_{\alpha\beta}) $ replacing all diagonal elements by 1 and $ (\sigma_{\alpha\beta})^d $ is the diagonal matrix with the diagonal entries of $ (\sigma_{\alpha\beta}) $ on its diagonal. And finally, if we denote by $ U^d $ the subgroup of diagonal matrices in $ U $ we have $ U^d\cap U^1=\{ 1 \} $. Hence $ U = U^1\rtimes U^d $.
\end{proof}
The last proposition gives us a matrix description of the group of automorphisms that induce the identity on $ \Gamma $.
But we know that every automorphism of the skeleton (there might be some where the component on $ \Gamma $ is not trivial) lifts to an automorphism of $ G $, because Hahn sums have the (canonical) lifting property. So, in order to completely describe $ o\text{-}\Aut G $, we need to take into account the lifts of automorphisms of the skeleton with non trivial component on $ \Gamma $. Let $ \Aut_\Gamma'S(G)  $ be a complement of $ \Aut_\Gamma S(G) $ in $\Aut S(G) $. It consists exactly of all those automorphisms of the skeleton that are not the identity on $ \Gamma $, plus the identity $ \id_{S(G)} $. Then this is a subgroup. We have:
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:DG-semidirect-enhanced}
	We have
	\[
	o\text{-}\Aut G = \left( U^1 \rtimes U^d \right)
	\rtimes \Aut_\Gamma'S(G).
	\]
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
	By proposition~\ref{prop:oAutGamma-G-direct product} we have
	$ o\text{-}\Aut_\Gamma G \simeq \Int\Aut G \times \Aut_\Gamma S(G) \simeq U^1 \rtimes U^d $ hence it suffices to show that $ o\text{-}\Aut G \simeq o\text{-}\Aut_\Gamma G \rtimes \Aut_\Gamma'S(G) $. We notice immediately that the two groups have trivial intersection and that $ o\text{-}\Aut_\Gamma G $ is normal inside $ o\text{-}\Aut G $. To show that they generate $ o\text{-}\Aut G $ we take an automorphism $ \sigma\ino\text{-}\Aut G $. This will induce an automorphism $ \tau\in\Aut S(G) $ which might or might not fix $ \Gamma $. In any case, if we lift $ \tau $ to a $ \tilde{\tau}\ino\text{-}\Aut G $ we certainly have that $ \sigma\tilde\tau^{-1} $ induces the identity on $ \Gamma $. So $ \sigma = (\sigma\tilde\tau^{-1})\tilde\tau $.
\end{proof}

Theorem~\ref{thm:DG-semidirect-enhanced} improves \cite[Corollary~3.2]{droste-goebel} in two ways: it provides a generalisation from the balanced case to that of a Hahn sum over an arbitrary skeleton and gives a more precise description of $ o\text{-}\Aut G $ by identifying the internal automorphisms within the group of matrices $ U $.

\addcontentsline{toc}{section}{\refname}
\printbibliography
\end{document}

Group Theory (math.GR); Commutative Algebra (math.AC); Logic (math.LO)

Automorphisms of valued Hahn groups


Families of linear semigroups with intermediate growth

Abstract: Methods from additive number theory are applied to construct families of finitely generated linear semigroups with intermediate growth.

\section{Growth functions of finitely generated semigroups}
Let $\mathcal{S}$ be a finitely generated semigroup and let $A$ be a set of generators for $\mathcal{S}$.  Every element $x \in \mathcal{S}$ can be written as a word with letters from the set $A$, that is, as a finite product of elements of $A$.  The \emph{length} of $x$ with respect to $A$, denoted $\ell_A(x)$, is the
number of letters in the shortest word that represents $x$.  Note that $\ell_A(x) = 1$ if and only if $x \in A$.  We shall assume that  \ensuremath{\mathcal S}\ contains an identity element 1 and that $1 \notin A$.  We define $\ell_A(1) = 0.$

Let $\ensuremath{ \mathbf N } = \{1,2,3,\ldots\}$ denote the set of positive integers and $\ensuremath{ \mathbf N }_0 = \ensuremath{ \mathbf N } \cup \{0\}$ the set of nonnegative integers.
For every  $n \in \ensuremath{ \mathbf N }_0$, let $\lambda_A(n)$ denote the number of elements of \ensuremath{\mathcal S}\ of length exactly $n$.
We define the \emph{growth function} $\gamma_{A}(n)$ of $\mathcal{S}$ with respect to $A$ by
\[
\gamma_{A}(n) = \ensuremath{\text{card}}(\{x\in \mathcal{S} : \ell_A(x) \leq n\}) = \sum_{m=0}^n \lambda_A(m).
\]
The function $\gamma_A(n)$ is an increasing function that counts the number of elements of \ensuremath{\mathcal S}\ of length at most $n$.  If $\ensuremath{\text{card}}(A) = k $,  then, for all nonnegative integers $n$,
\[
\lambda_A(n) \leq k^n
\]
and
\[
\gamma_A(n) \leq
\begin{cases}
n+1 & \text{if $k=1$}\\
\frac{k^{n+1}-1}{k-1}  & \text{if $k>1$.}
\end{cases}
\]

The semigroup $\mathcal{S}$ has \emph{polynomial growth} with respect to the generating set $A$ if there exist positive numbers $c$ and $d$ such that $\gamma_A(n) \leq cn^d$ for all sufficently large $n$.  In this case,  $\log \gamma_A(n) \leq \log c + d\log n$ and so
\[
\limsup_{n\rightarrow\infty} \frac{\log \gamma_A(n)}{\log n} < \infty.
\]
If $\mathcal{S}$ does not have polynomial growth, then
\[
\limsup_{n\rightarrow\infty} \frac{\log \gamma_A(n)}{\log n} = \infty.
\]
We say that $\mathcal{S}$ has \emph{superpolynomial growth} if
\[
\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} \frac{\log \gamma_A(n)}{\log n} = \infty.
\]

The semigroup $\mathcal{S}$ has \emph{exponential growth} with respect to the generating set $A$ if there exists $\theta > 1$ such that $\gamma_A(n) \geq \theta^n$ for all sufficently large $n$.  In this case,  $\log \gamma_A(n) \geq n \log \theta$ and so
\[
\liminf_{n\rightarrow\infty} \frac{\log \gamma_A(n)}{n} > 0.
\]
If \ensuremath{\mathcal S}\ does not have exponential growth, then
\[
\liminf_{n\rightarrow\infty} \frac{\log \gamma_A(n)}{n} = 0.
\]
We say that the $\mathcal{S}$ has \emph{subexponential growth} if
\[
\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} \frac{\log \gamma_A(n)}{n} = 0.
\]
The semigroup $\mathcal{S}$ has \emph{intermediate growth} with respect to $A$ if the growth of $\mathcal{S}$ is both superpolynomial and subexponential.

We review some standard facts about growth functions.
Let $A$ and $B$ be finite generating sets for $\mathcal{S}$, and let
\[
c_A = \max(\ell_A(b) : b \in B )
\]
and
\[
c_B = \max(\ell_B(a) : a \in A ).
\]
Then
\[
\gamma_{B}(n) \leq \gamma_{A}(c_An)
\]
and
\[
\gamma_{A}(n) \leq \gamma_{B}(c_B n).
\]
These inequalities imply that the growth function $\gamma_A(n)$ is polynomial, superpolynomial, subexponential, or exponential if and only if
the growth function $\gamma_B(n)$ is, respectively,  polynomial, superpolynomial, subexponential, or exponential.

\begin{lemma}    \label{intermed:lemma:fone-to-one}
Let $\mathcal{S}$ and $\mathcal{T}$ be finitely generated semigroups and let $f: S \rightarrow T$ be an injective semigroup homomorphism.  If $A$ is any finite generating set for \ensuremath{\mathcal S}, then there is a finite generating set $B$ for \ensuremath{\mathcal T}\  such that
\[
\gamma^{(S)}_A(n) \leq \gamma^{(T)}_B(n)
\]
for all $n \in \ensuremath{ \mathbf N }_0.$  If the growth of $\mathcal{T}$ is polynomial or subexponential, then the growth of $\mathcal{S}$ is, respectively, polynomial or subexponential.
If the growth of $\mathcal{S}$ is superpolynomial or exponential, then the growth of $\mathcal{T}$ is, respectively, superpolynomial or exponential.
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
Let $A$ be a finite generating set for $\mathcal{S}$, let $B'$ be any finite generating set for $\mathcal{T}$, and let $B = B' \cup f(A).$    If $\ell_A(s) = m$, then $s=a_1\cdots a_m$ for some $a_1,\ldots,a_m \in A$.  Since $f(s) = f(a_1)\cdots f(a_m)$, it follows that  $\ell_B(f(s)) \leq m.$  Since $f$ is one-to-one, it follows that $\gamma^{(S)}_A(n) \leq \gamma^{(T)}_B(n)$.  This inequality implies the statements about growth rates.
\end{proof}

\begin{lemma}    \label{intermed:lemma:subsemi}
Let $\mathcal{S}$ be a finitely generated subsemigroup of a finitely generated semigroup $\mathcal{T}$.  If the growth of $\mathcal{T}$ is polynomial or subexponential, then the growth of $\mathcal{S}$ is, respectively, polynomial or subexponential.
If the growth of $\mathcal{S}$ is superpolynomial or exponential, then the growth of $\mathcal{T}$ is, respectively, superpolynomial or exponential.
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
This follows immediately from Lemma~\ref{intermed:lemma:fone-to-one}.
\end{proof}

\begin{lemma}    \label{intermed:lemma:fonto}
Let $\mathcal{S}$ and $\mathcal{T}$ be finitely generated semigroups and let $f: S \rightarrow T$ be a surjective semigroup homomorphism.  If $A$ is any finite generating set for \ensuremath{\mathcal S}, then $B = \{f(a): a\in A\}$  is a finite generating set for \ensuremath{\mathcal T}, and
\[
\gamma^{(S)}_A(n) \geq \gamma^{(T)}_B(n)
\]
for all $n \in \ensuremath{ \mathbf N }_0$.
If the growth of $\mathcal{S}$ is polynomial or subexponential, then the growth of $\mathcal{T}$ is, respectively, polynomial or subexponential.
If the growth of $\mathcal{T}$ is superpolynomial or exponential, then the growth of $\mathcal{S}$ is, respectively, superpolynomial or exponential.
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
Let $y \in \ensuremath{\mathcal T}.$  Since $f$ is onto, there exists $x \in \ensuremath{\mathcal S}$ such that $f(x) = y.$  If $\ell_A^{(S)}(x) = m,$ then there is a sequence $a_1,\ldots, a_m \in A$ such that $y = f(x) = f(a_1)\cdots f(a_m)$, and so $B = \{f(a) : a \in A\}$ is a generating set for \ensuremath{\mathcal T}.  Conversely, if $y \in \ensuremath{\mathcal T}$ and $\ell_B(y) = m$, then there exist $a_1,\ldots,a_m\in A$ such that
$y=f(a_1)\cdots f(a_m)$.  Let $x=a_1\cdots a_m \in \ensuremath{\mathcal S}$.
Then $f(x) = y$ and $\ell_A(x) \leq m.$  This implies that $\gamma^{(T)}_B(n) \leq \gamma^{(S)}_A(n)$ for all $n$, and the growth conditions follow directly from this inequality.
\end{proof}

The growth of a finitely generated abelian semigroup  $\mathcal{S}$ is always polynomial.  Indeed, if $A$ is a set of generators for  $\mathcal{S}$ with $\ensuremath{\text{card}}(A) = k$, then
\[
\lambda_A(n) \leq {n+k-1 \choose k-1} \ll n^{k-1}
\]
and
\[
\gamma_A(n) \leq {n+k \choose k} \ll n^k.
\]
More precisely, Khovanskii~\cite{khov92,khov95}, Nathanson~\cite{nath00d}, Nathanson and Ruzsa~\cite{nath02a}  proved that there is a polynomial $f_A(x)$ with integer coefficients such that $\lambda_A(n) = f_A(n)$ for all sufficiently large integers $n$.
It follows that there is a polynomial $F_A(x)$ with integer coefficients such that $\gamma_A(n) = F_A(n)$ for all sufficiently large $n$.

The growth of finitely generated free semigroups of rank at least two is always exponential.  If \ensuremath{\mathcal S}\ is the free  semigroup generated by a set of $k \geq 2$ elements,
then $\lambda_A(n) = k^n$ and $\gamma_A(n) = (k^{n+1}-1)/(k-1)> k^n.$
By Lemma~\ref{intermed:lemma:subsemi}, a  semigroup that contains a free subsemigroup on two generators has exponential growth.

Semigroups of intermediate growth are more difficult to construct.
Beljaev, Sesekin, and Trofimov~\cite{belj-sese-trof77} proved that the free semigroup generated by two elements $e$ and $g$ with the relations $e^2 = e$ and $eg^ieg^je = eg^jeg^ie$ for all nonnegative integers $i$ and $j$ is a semigroup of intermediate growth.
Okni{\` n}ski~\cite{okni98} constructed two examples of linear semigroups, that is, subsemigroups of the multiplicative semigroup $M_n(\ensuremath{\mathbf Z})$ of $n \times n$ matrices.  Let $\ensuremath{\mathcal S}_1$ be the subsemigroup of $M_2(\ensuremath{\mathbf Z})$ generated by the set
\[
A = \left\{ \left(\begin{matrix}
1 & 1 \\
0 & 1
\end{matrix}\right),
\left(\begin{matrix}
1 & 0 \\
1 & 0
\end{matrix}\right)
\right\}
\]
and let $\ensuremath{\mathcal T}_1$ be the subsemigroup of $M_3(\ensuremath{\mathbf Z})$ generated by the set
\[
A = \left\{ \left(\begin{matrix}
1 & 1 & 1\\
0 & 2 & 1\\
0 & 0 & 1
\end{matrix}\right),
\left(\begin{matrix}
1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1
\end{matrix}\right)
\right\}.
\]
Both $\ensuremath{\mathcal S}_1$ and $\ensuremath{\mathcal T}_1$ are homomorphic images of the Beljaev, Sesekin, and Trofimov semigroup and have intermediate growth.
Nathanson~\cite{nath99b} gave a simple number-theoretical proof that $\mathcal{S}^{(1)}$ has intermediate growth, and Lavrik-M\" annlin~\cite{lavr01} computed the growth function of $\mathcal{S}^{(1)}$.
Grigorchuk~\cite{grig88} and Shneerson~\cite{shne01a,shne04a,shne05a} have also investigated the growth of semigroups.

In this paper we apply ideas from additive number theory to construct families of linear semigroups of intermediate growth that generalize Okni{\` n}ski's examples.

\section{Partition functions of  sets of positive integers}
Results about the intermediate growth of groups and semigroups often use estimates for the asymptotics of partition functions in additive number theory.  We review some of these results here.

Let $A$ be a set of positive integers and let $p_A(n)$ denote the number of partitions of $n$ into parts belonging to $A$.  If $A = \ensuremath{ \mathbf N }$ is the set of all positive integers, then  $p(n) = p_{\ensuremath{ \mathbf N }}(n)$ is the classical partition function.

If $A$ is a nonempty finite set of relatively prime positive integers and $\ensuremath{\text{card}}(A) = r,$ then
\[
p_A(n) = \left( \frac{1}{\prod_{a\in A} a} \right)\frac{n^{r-1}}{(r-1)!} + O\left(n^{r-2}\right)
\]
(Nathanson~\cite{nath00a} and~\cite[Theorem 15.2]{nath00aa}).
Let $p_r(n)$ denote the number of partitions of $n$ into at most $r$ parts, let $\hat{p}_r(n)$ denote the number of partitions of $n$ into exactly $r$ parts, and let $\hat{q}_r(n)$ denote the number of partitions of $n$ into exactly $r$ distinct parts.  Since the number of partitions of $n$ into at most $r$ parts is equal to the number of partitions of $n$ into parts belonging to the set $A = \{1,2,\ldots,r\}$, it follows that
\[
p_r(n) = \frac{n^{r-1}}{r!(r-1)!} + O\left(n^{r-2}\right)
\]
and
\begin{equation}  \label{intermed:pkn}
\hat{p}_r(n) = p_r(n)-p_{r-1}(n) = \frac{n^{r-1}}{r!(r-1)!} + O\left(n^{r-2}\right).
\end{equation}
We note that $p_r(n)$ and $\hat{p}_r(n)$ are increasing functions of $n$, and
\begin{equation}      \label{intermed:prp}
p(n) =  \sum_{r=1}^n \hat{p}_r(n).
\end{equation}

If $n=a_1+\cdots + a_r$ is a partition of $n$ into $r$ distinct positive parts $a_1 > \cdots > a_r$, then $n \geq r(r+1)/2$ and
\[
n - \frac{r(r-1)}{2} = (a_1- (r-1)) +( a_2 - (r-2)) + \cdots + (a_2 -1) + a_1
\]
is a partition of $n - r(r-1)/2$ into $r$ parts.  This identity establishes a bijection between partitions into exactly $r$ distinct parts and partitions into exactly $r$ parts, and so
\begin{equation}  \label{intermed:qkn}
\hat{q}_r(n) = \hat{p}_r(n - r(r-1)/2)  = \frac{n^{r-1}}{r!(r-1)!} + O\left(n^{r-2}\right).
\end{equation}

The set $A$ has asymptotic density  $d(A) = \alpha$ if
\[
\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} \frac{1}{n} \sum_{\substack{a \in A\\ a\leq n}} 1 = \alpha.
\]
If $d(A) = \alpha>0$ and $\gcd(A) = 1$,
then
\begin{equation}    \label{intermed:part}
\log p_A(n) \sim c_0\sqrt{\alpha n}
\end{equation}
where
\[
c_0 = 2\sqrt{\frac{\pi^2}{6}}.
\]
(An elementary proof of~\eqref{intermed:part} is in Nathanson~\cite[Theorem 16.1]{nath00aa}.)
In particular, if $A = \ensuremath{ \mathbf N }$, then $\alpha = 1$ and the partition function $p(n) = p_{\ensuremath{ \mathbf N }}(n)$ satisfies the Hardy-Ramanujan asymptotic estimate
\[
\log p(n) \sim  c_0\sqrt{ n}.
\]
If $A$ is the set of odd positive integers, then $\alpha = 1/2$
and $\log p_A(n) \sim  c_0\sqrt{n/2}.$
Let $q(n)$ denote the number of partitions of $n$ into distinct positive integers.  Since the number of partitions of an integer into distinct parts is equal to the number of partitions into odd parts, it follows that
\[
\log q(n) \sim  c_0\sqrt{n/2}.
\]

\section{A condition for subexponential growth}

\begin{lemma}       \label{intermed:lemma:gijcondition}
Let $\mathcal{S}$ be a semigroup generated by a set $A = \{e,g\}$, where $e$ is an idempotent.  The set
\[
\mathcal{S}_0 = e\mathcal{S}e = \{exe:x\in \mathcal{S}\}
\]
is a subsemigroup of $\mathcal{S}$ with identity $e$, and is generated by the set $\{ eg^ke: k = 0,1,2,3,\ldots \}$.
Define $g^0=1.$  Then
\[
\mathcal{S} = \{g^i\}_{i=0}^{\infty} \cup \bigcup_{i,j=0}^{\infty} g^{i}\mathcal{S}_0g^{j}.
\]
Suppose that, for all nonnegative integers $i_1,j_1,i_2,j_2$,
\begin{equation}     \label{intermed:gijcondition}
g^{i_1}\mathcal{S}_0g^{j_1} \cap g^{i_2}\mathcal{S}_0g^{j_2} \neq \emptyset
\text{ if and only if } (i_1,j_1) = (i_2,j_2).
\end{equation}
For all nonnegative integers $i$ and $j$, let
 \[
 \gamma_{i,j}(n) = \ensuremath{\text{card}}\{y\in g^i\ensuremath{\mathcal S}_0 g^j : \ell_A(y) \leq n\}
 \]
 and let $\gamma_0(n) = \gamma_{0,0}(n).$  Then
 \[
 \gamma_{i,j}(n) \leq \gamma_0(n-i-j).
 \]
 \end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
Let $x \in g^i\ensuremath{\mathcal S}_0g^j.$
By condition~\eqref{intermed:gijcondition}, every representation of $x$ as a word in $e$ and $g$ must be of the form $x = g^iy'g^j$ for some $y' \in \ensuremath{\mathcal S}_0$.  Therefore,
\[
\ell_A(x) = \min\{i+j+\ell_A(y') :   y' \in \ensuremath{\mathcal S}_0 \text{ and } x = g^iy'g^j \}
= i + j + \ell_A(y)
\]
for some $y \in \ensuremath{\mathcal S}_0$.
If $\ell_A(x) = m$, then $\ell_A(y) = m-i-j$  and so $\gamma_{i,j}(n) \leq \gamma_0(n-i-j).$
\end{proof}

\begin{theorem}   \label{intermed:theorem:subexponential}
Let $\mathcal{S}$ be a semigroup generated by a set $A =
\{e,g\}$, where $e$ is an idempotent, and let $\mathcal{S}_0 =
e\mathcal{S}e.$
Suppose that
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)]
For all nonnegative integers $k_1$ and $k_2$,
\[
eg^{k_1}eg^{k_2}e = eg^{k_2}eg^{k_1}e
\]
\item[(ii)]
For all nonnegative integers $i_1,j_1,i_2,j_2$,
\[
g^{i_1}\mathcal{S}_0g^{j_1} \cap g^{i_2}\mathcal{S}_0g^{j_2} \neq \emptyset
\text{ if and only if } (i_1,j_1) = (i_2,j_2).
\]
\end{enumerate}
Then the semigroup $\mathcal{S}$ has subexponential growth.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
If $e=1$, then $\ensuremath{\mathcal S} = \ensuremath{\mathcal S}_0 = \{g^i\}_{i=0}^{\infty}$ and condition~(ii) is not satisfied.  Thus, we can assume that $e\neq 1$.
If $1 \in \ensuremath{\mathcal S}_0$, then  there exist positive integers $k_1,\ldots,k_r$ such that $eg^{k_1}eg^{k_2}e \cdots eg^{k_r}e=1.$  Multiplying this identity by $e$, we obtain $e=1$, which is absurd.  Therefore, $1 \notin \ensuremath{\mathcal S}_0$.

Let $\gamma_0(n)$ denote the number of elements  $y \in \mathcal{S}_0$ such that $\ell_A(y) \leq n.$
If $y \in \mathcal{S}_0$ and $\ell_A(y) = m \leq n$, then conditions~(i) and~(ii) imply that  either $y=e$ or there exist positive integers $r$ and $k_1 \geq \cdots \geq k_r$ such that
\[
y = eg^{k_1}eg^{k_2}e \cdots eg^{k_r}e
\]
and
\[
\ell_A(y) = k_1+k_2+\cdots + k_r+r+1 = m.
\]
Thus, to every $y \in \ensuremath{\mathcal S}_0$ with $\ell_A(y) =m$ there are associated  a positive integer $r$ and a partition of $m-r-1$ into exactly $r$ parts, and so the number of elements $y \in \mathcal{S}_0$ of length exactly $m$ is
\[
\lambda_0(m) = \gamma_0(m)-\gamma_0(m-1)
\leq \sum_{r=1}^m \hat{p}_r(m-r-1) \leq \sum_{r=1}^m \hat{p}_r(m) = p(m)
\]
by~\eqref{intermed:prp}.  Since $1 \notin \ensuremath{\mathcal S}_0$, we have
\[
\gamma_0(n)= \sum_{m=1}^n \lambda_0(m) \leq  \sum_{m=1}^n p(m) \leq np(n).
\]

Let $\gamma_{i,j}(n)$ denote the growth function of the set
$g^{i}\mathcal{S}_0g^{j}$ with respect to the generating set
$A$.   By Lemma~\ref{intermed:lemma:gijcondition},
\[
\gamma_{i,j}(n) \leq \gamma_0(n-i-j).
\]
By condition~(ii), if $g^i = g^j$, then $g^i\ensuremath{\mathcal S}_0 g^i = g^j \ensuremath{\mathcal S}_0 g^j$ and so $i = j.$
Therefore, for every $n \geq 0$ there is exactly one element in the set $\{g^i\}_{i=0}^{\infty}$ of length  $n$, and
\begin{align*}
\gamma_A(n) & \leq \sum_{i=0}^{n} \sum_{j=0}^{n}\gamma_{i,j}(n) + n+1 \\
& \leq \sum_{i=0}^{n} \sum_{j=0}^{n}\gamma_{0}(n-i-j) + n +1\\
& \leq (n+1)^2\gamma_{0}(n) + n+1 \\
& \leq 2(n+1)^3 p(n).
\end{align*}
From the asymptotic formula~\eqref{intermed:part} for the partition function, we obtain
\[
\log \gamma_A(n) \leq \log 2(n+1)^3 + \log p(n) \ll \sqrt{n}
\]
and so
\[
\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} \frac{\log \gamma_A(n)}{n} = 0.
\]
Thus, the growth function $\gamma_A(n)$ is subexponential.
\end{proof}

\section{Sequences with many partition products}
Let  $W=\{w_k\}_{k=1}^{\infty}$ be a sequence of elements in a semigroup $(\mathcal{X},\ast)$ such that
\[
w_{k_1}\ast w_{k_2} = w_{k_2} \ast w_{k_1}
\]
for all positive integers $k_1,k_2.$
To every finite sequence of positive integers $k_1, k_2, \ldots, k_r$ we associate the element $w_{k_1}\ast w_{k_2} \ast \cdots \ast w_{k_r} \in \ensuremath{\mathcal X}$.
For every integer $r \geq 1$, let $W_r(n)$ denote the subset of $\mathcal{X}$ associated to partitions of positive integers not exceeding $n$ into exactly $r$ parts, that is, $w \in W_r(n)$ if and only if there is a sequence of positive integers  $k_1 \geq k_2 \geq \cdots \geq k_r$ such that
$k_1 + k_2 + \cdots + k_r \leq n$ and $w = w_{k_1}\ast w_{k_2} \ast\cdots \ast w_{k_r}$.
We define
\[
\Phi(r) = \liminf_{n\rightarrow\infty} \frac{\log \ensuremath{\text{card}}(W_r(n))}{\log n} .
\]
The sequence $\{w_k\}_{k=1}^{\infty}$ has \emph{many partition products in $W$} if
\[
\lim_{r\rightarrow\infty} \Phi(r) = \infty.
\]

Here are some examples of sequences with many partition products.

\begin{theorem}   \label{intermed:theorem:Ud}
For every positive integer $d$, let $\ensuremath{\mathcal U}_d$ be the multiplicative semigroup of all positive integers $u$ such that $u \equiv 1\pmod{d}.$
The sequence
\[
W = \{dk+1\}_{k=1}^{\infty}
\]
has many partition products.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
Let $r \geq 1$ and let  $k_1 \geq k_2 \geq \cdots \geq k_r$ be a sequence of positive integers with $k_1+k_2+\cdots + k_r \leq n.$
Associated to this sequence is the integer $(dk_1+1)(dk_2+1)\cdots (dk_r+1) \in W_r(n).$
Let \ensuremath{\mathcal K}\ denote the set of positive integers $k$ such that $dk+1$ is prime, and let $K(t)$ count the number of elements $k\in \ensuremath{\mathcal K}$ with $k\leq t.$
If $k_1 \geq k_2 \geq \cdots \geq k_r$ and $j_1 \geq j_2 \geq \cdots \geq j_r$ are distinct sequences of elements of \ensuremath{\mathcal K}\ such that $k_1 \leq n/r$ and $j_1 \leq n/r$, then $k_1+k_2+ \cdots + k_r \leq n$ and $j_1+j_2+\cdots + j_r \leq n$, hence  $(dk_1+1)(dk_2+1)\cdots (dk_r+1) \in W_r(n)$ and $(dj_1+1)(dj_2+1)\cdots (dj_r+1) \in W_r(n)$.  By the fundamental theorem of arithmetic,  $(dk_1+1)(dk_2+1)\cdots (dk_r+1)  \neq (dj_1+1)(dj_2+1)\cdots (dj_r+1)$, and so
\[
\ensuremath{\text{card}}(W_r(n)) \geq {K(n/r) + r-1 \choose r} \geq \frac{K(n/r)^r}{r!}.
\]
Let $\pi(x,d,1)$ denote the number of prime numbers $p \leq x$ such that $p\equiv 1\pmod{d}.$  Let
\[
x = \frac{dn}{r} + 1.
\]
Then $dk+1 \leq x$ is prime if and only if $k \leq n/r$.
By the prime number theorem for arithmetic progressions, for sufficiently large $n$ we have
\[
K(n/r) = \pi(x,d,1) \gg \frac{x}{\log x} \gg \frac{n}{r\log n}
\]
where the implied constants depend only on $d$.
Therefore,
\[
\ensuremath{\text{card}}(W_r(n)) \geq \frac{K(n/r)^r}{r!} \gg \frac{n^r}{r!r^r(\log n)^r}
\]
and so
\[
\log\left( \ensuremath{\text{card}}(W_r(n))\right) \gg  r\log n -\log (r!r^r) - r\log\log n
\]
and
\[
\Phi(r) = \liminf_{n\rightarrow\infty} \frac{ \log\left( \ensuremath{\text{card}}(W_r(n))\right) }{\log n} \gg r.
\]
It follows that
\[
\lim_{r\rightarrow\infty} \Phi(r) = \infty
\]
and the sequence $\{dk+1\}_{k=1}^{\infty}$ has many partition products.  This completes the proof.
\end{proof}

In additive number theory, a sequence $\{b_k\}_{k=k_0}^{\infty}$ contained in an additive abelian semigroup is called a $\hat{B}_r$-sequence if sums of $r$ distinct terms of the sequence are distinct, that is, if $k_1 < k_2< \cdots < k_r$ and $j_1 < j_2 < \cdots < j_r$, and if
\[
b_{k_1} + b_{k_2} + \cdots + b_{k_r} = b_{j_1} + b_{j_2} + \cdots + b_{j_r}
\]
then $k_i = j_i$ for $i=1,\ldots,r.$  The sequence is called a $\hat{B}_{\infty}$-sequence if all finite sums of distinct elements of the set are distinct, that is, if $k_1<k_2< \cdots < k_r$ and $j_1 < j_2 < \cdots < j_s$, and if
\[
b_{k_1} + b_{k_2} + \cdots + b_{k_r} = b_{j_1} + b_{j_2} + \cdots + b_{j_s}
\]
then $r=s$ and $k_i = j_i$ for $i=1,\ldots,r.$    If $\{b_ k\}_{k=k_0}^{\infty}$ is a sequence of positive real numbers such that $\sum_{k=k_0}^{\ell-1} b_k < b_{\ell}$ for all $\ell > k_0$, then the sequence is a $\hat{B}_{\infty}$-sequence.  In particular, a $\hat{B}_{\infty}$-sequence is a $\hat{B}_r$-sequence for all $r \geq 1.$

\begin{lemma}    \label{intermed:lemma:ctr}
Let $c,c_1,d,$ and $t$  be positive real numbers with $t > 2$, and let $\{e_k\}_{k=1}^{\infty}$ be a sequence of real numbers such that $|e_k| \leq c_1k^d$ for all $k \geq 1$.  There is an integer $k_0$ such that the sequence
\[
\{ ct^k + e_k\}_{k=k_0}^{\infty}
\]
is a strictly increasing $\hat{B}_{\infty}$-sequence.
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
Let $b_k = ct^k + e_k$ for $k \geq 1.$
Since $t>2$ and $|e_k| \leq c_1k^d$,  there is an integer $k_0$ such that
\[
0 < b_k <  b_{k+1}
\]
for all $k \geq k_0$, and also
\begin{equation}      \label{intermed:partprodineq}
\frac{c_1(t-1)(k+1)^{d+1}}{c(d+1)(t-2)} < t^k
\end{equation}
for all $k > k_0.$  Let $\ell > k_0.$
Using~\eqref{intermed:partprodineq} and the inequality
\[
\sum_{k=1}^{\ell} k^d < \frac{(\ell +1)^{d+1}}{d+1}
\]
we obtain
\begin{align*}
\sum_{k=k_0}^{{\ell}-1} b_k
& = c\sum_{k=k_0}^{{\ell}-1}t^k +  \sum_{k=k_0}^{{\ell}-1}e_k  \\
& < \frac{ct^{\ell}}{t-1} + c_1 \sum_{k=k_0}^{{\ell}-1} k^d \\
& < ct^{\ell} - c_1{\ell}^d \\
& \leq b_{\ell}.
\end{align*}
This completes the proof.
\end{proof}

\begin{theorem}      \label{intermed:theorem:Br}
Let $c,c_1d,$ and $t$  be positive real numbers with $t > 2$, and let $\{e_k\}_{k=1}^{\infty}$ be a sequence of real numbers such that $|e_k| \leq c_1k^d$ for all $k \geq 1$.  Let $k_0$ be a positive integer such that sequence
\[
W = \{ ct^k + e_k\}_{k=k_0}^{\infty}
\]
is a $\hat{B}_{\infty}$-sequence.  Then $W$ has many partial products.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
Let $b_k = ct^k + e_k$ for $k \geq 1$.   By Lemma~\ref{intermed:lemma:ctr}, there is an integer $k_0$ such that
$W = \{ ct^k + e_k\}_{k=k_0}^{\infty}$ is a strictly increasing $\hat{B}_r$-sequence for every positive integer $r$.
To every partition $n = k_1 +  \cdots + k_r$ into exactly $r$ distinct parts $ k_1 > k_2 > \cdots > k_r$, we associate the real number $b_{k_1+k_0} + b_{k_2+k_0} + \cdots + b_{k_r+k_0} \in  W_r(n+rk_0).$  Since $W$ is a $\hat{B}_r$-sequence, it follows that different partitions are associated to different real numbers, and so, by the partition asymptotic~\eqref{intermed:qkn},
\[
\ensuremath{\text{card}}(W_r(n+rk_0)) \geq \hat{q}_r(n) \gg n^{r-1}
\]
and
\[
\Phi(r) = \liminf_{n\rightarrow\infty}\frac{\log \ensuremath{\text{card}}(W_r(n))}{\log n} \geq r-1.
\]
This completes the proof.
\end{proof}

\section{A condition for superpolynomial growth}

\begin{theorem}     \label{intermed:theorem:superpolynomial}
Let $\mathcal{S}$ be a semigroup generated by a set $A =
\{e,g\}$, where $e$ is an idempotent. Let $\mathcal{S}_0 =
e\mathcal{S}e = \{exe:x\in \mathcal{S}\}.$ Suppose that, for all
nonnegative integers $k_1$ and $k_2$,
\[
eg^{k_1}eg^{k_2}e = eg^{k_2}eg^{k_1}e.
\]
Let $\varphi$ be a semigroup homomorphism from $\mathcal{S}_{0}$
into a semigroup $(\ensuremath{\mathcal X},\ast)$ such that the sequence
\[
W = \{\varphi(eg^k e)\}_{k=1}^{\infty}
\]
has many partition products in $\ensuremath{\mathcal X}$.  Then the semigroup $\mathcal{S}$ has superpolynomial growth.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
Let $w_k = \varphi(eg^ke)$ for $k = 1,2,\ldots.$
Then
\begin{align*}
w_{k_1}\ast w_{k_2} & = \varphi(eg^{k_1}e) \ast \varphi(eg^{k_2}e)
=  \varphi(eg^{k_1}eg^{k_2}e)  \\
& =  \varphi(eg^{k_2}eg^{k_1}e)
=  \varphi(eg^{k_2}e) \ast \varphi(eg^{k_1}e) \\
& = w_{k_2}\ast w_{k_1}
\end{align*}
for all $k_1, k_2 \in \ensuremath{ \mathbf N }_0.$  If $y =  eg^{k_1}eg^{k_2}e \cdots eg^{k_r}e \in \mathcal{S}_0$, then
\[
\varphi(y) = \varphi\left(eg^{k_1}e\right)\ast
\varphi\left(eg^{k_2}e \right)\ast  \cdots
\ast\varphi\left(eg^{k_r}e\right) = w_{k_1}\ast  w_{k_2} \ast \cdots
\ast  w_{k_r}.
\]

Let $\gamma_A(n)$ denote the growth function of $\mathcal{S}$ with respect to $A$,
and let $\gamma_0(n)$ denote the growth function of $\mathcal{S}_0$ with respect to $A$.
Fix a positive integer $r$.  If $w \in W_r(n-r-1)$, then there are positive
integers $k_1, k_2, \ldots, k_r$ such that
\[
w_{k_1} \ast   w_{k_2} \ast   \cdots \ast   w_{k_r} = w
\]
and
\[
k_1 + \cdots + k_r \leq n-r-1.
\]
Let
\[
y = eg^{k_1}eg^{k_2}e\cdots eg^{k_h}e \in \mathcal{S}_0.
\]
Then
\[
\varphi(y) = w_{k_1} \ast   w_{k_2} \ast   \cdots \ast   w_{k_r} = w
\]
and
\[
\ell_A(y) \leq k_1+k_2+\cdots + k_r +r+1 \leq n.
\]
Thus, to every element $w \in W_r(n-r-1)$ there is at least one element $y\in \mathcal{S}_0$ with $\varphi(y) = w$ and $\ell_A(y) \leq n$, and so
\[
\gamma_0(n) \geq \ensuremath{\text{card}}(W_r(n-r-1)).
\]
It follows that
\[
\liminf_{n\rightarrow\infty} \frac{\log\gamma_A(n)}{\log n}
\geq
\liminf_{n\rightarrow\infty} \frac{\log\gamma_0(n)}{\log n}
\geq \liminf_{n\rightarrow\infty} \frac{\log\ensuremath{\text{card}}(W_r(n-r-1))}{\log n} =  \Phi(r).
\]
Since this inequality is true for all positive integers $r$ and $\Phi(r)$ tends to infinity, it follows that
\[
\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} \frac{\gamma_A(n)}{\log n} = \infty
\]
and so the growth function $\gamma_A(n)$ is superpolynomial.
\end{proof}

\section{The semigroups $\mathcal{S}^{(d)}$}
\begin{theorem}   \label{intemed:theorem:Sd}
Let $d$ be a positive integer and let $\mathcal{S}^{(d)}$ be the subsemigroup of $M_2(\ensuremath{\mathbf Z})$ generated by the matrices
\[
g = \left(\begin{matrix}
1 & d \\
0 & 1
\end{matrix}\right)
\]
and
\[
e = \left(\begin{matrix}
1 & 0  \\
1 & 0
\end{matrix}\right).
\]
The semigroup $\ensuremath{\mathcal S}^{(d)}$ has intermediate growth.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
Multiplying matrices, we obtain
\[
eg^ke = (dk+1)e
\]
and
\[
eg^{k_1}eg^{k_2}e = (dk_1+1)(dk_2+1) = eg^{k_2}eg^{k_1}e
\]
for all nonnegative integers $k_1,k_2.$
It follows that $\ensuremath{\mathcal S}^{(d)}$ satisfies condition~(i) of
Theorem~\ref{intermed:theorem:subexponential}, and
\[
\mathcal{S}^{(d)}_0 = e\mathcal{S}^{(d)}e = \{ (dk+1)e : k = 0,1,2,\ldots\} = \{ue : u \in \mathcal{U}_d\}
\]
where $\mathcal{U}_d$ is the multiplicative semigroup of positive integers that are congruent to 1 modulo $d$.

For all $u \in \ensuremath{\mathcal U}_d$ and all nonnegative integers $i$ and $j$,
\[
g^i ue g^j =
u \left(\begin{matrix}
1 & di \\
0 & 1
\end{matrix}\right)
\left(\begin{matrix}
1 & 0  \\
1 & 0
\end{matrix}\right)
 \left(\begin{matrix}
1 & dj \\
0 & 1
\end{matrix}\right)
=
u\left(\begin{matrix}
di +1& dj+d^2 ij \\
1 & dj
\end{matrix}\right).
\]
Let $u_1,u_2 \in \ensuremath{\mathcal U}_d$ and $i_1,i_2,j_1,j_2 \in \ensuremath{ \mathbf N }_0$.  Then
\[
g^{i_1} u_1e g^{j_1} = g^{i_2} u_2e g^{j_2}
\]
if and only if $u_1=u_2$ and $(i_1,j_1) = (i_2,j_2).$
Thus, the semigroup $\ensuremath{\mathcal S}^{(d)}$ also satisfies condition~(ii) of
Theorem~\ref{intermed:theorem:subexponential}, and so has subexponential growth.

The function
\[
\varphi: \mathcal{S}_0^{(d)} \rightarrow \mathcal{U}_d
\]
defined by
\[
\varphi(ue) = u
\]
is a semigroup homomorphism.
Let $w_k = \varphi(eg^ke) = \varphi((dk+1)e) = dk+1$ and $W = \{dk+1\}_{k=1}^{\infty}$.  By Theorem~\ref{intermed:theorem:Ud}, the sequence $W$ has  many partition products.  By Theorem~\ref{intermed:theorem:superpolynomial}, the semigroup $\mathcal{S}^{(d)}$ has superpolynomial growth.
This completes the proof.
\end{proof}

\begin{problem}
If $d'$ divides $d$, then $\mathcal{S}^{(d)}$ is a subsemigroup of $\mathcal{S}^{(d')}$.  In particular, for every positive integer $d$, the semigroup $\mathcal{S}^{(d)}$ is a finitely generated subsemigroup of the Okni{\` n}ski semigroup $\mathcal{S}^{(1)}$.
Let $\mathcal{S}$ be finitely generated subsemigroup of a finitely generated semigroup $\mathcal{S}$.  How are the growth rates of $\mathcal{S'}$ and $\mathcal{S}$ related?
\end{problem}

\section{Subsemigroups of $M_3(\ensuremath{ \mathbf{R} })$}

For $k \geq 0$ and $m \geq 1$, let $F_k(x_1,\ldots,x_m)$ be the symmetric function of degree $k$ in $m$ variables defined by
\[
F_k(x_1,\ldots,x_m) = \sum_{\substack{(i_1,\ldots,i_m)\in \ensuremath{ \mathbf N }_0^m \\ i_1+i_2+\cdots + i_m=k}} x_1^{i_1}\cdots x_m^{i_m}.
\]
Define  $F_k(x_1,\ldots,x_m)=0$
for $k<0$.   If $k \geq 1$ and $m \geq 2$, then
\[
F_k(x_1,\ldots,x_m) = x_1F_{k-1}(x_1,x_2,\ldots,x_m) + F_k(x_2,\ldots,x_m).
\]
In particular,
\begin{equation}   \label{intermed:symmetric2}
F_k(x_1,x_2) = x_1F_{k-1}(x_1,x_2) + x_2^k
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}   \label{intermed:symmetric3}
F_k(x_1,x_2,x_3) = x_1F_{k-1}(x_1,x_2,x_3) + F_k(x_2,x_3).
\end{equation}

\begin{lemma}     \label{intermed:lemma:semigroupT}
Consider the upper triangular matrices
\[
g = \left(\begin{matrix}
s & v & w \\
0 & t & u \\
0 & 0 & r
\end{matrix}\right)
\]
and
\[
e = \left(\begin{matrix}
1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1
\end{matrix}\right)
\]
with coefficients in a ring.
For all $k \geq 0,$ define
\begin{align*}
u_k & = uF_{k-1}(r,t) \\
v_k & = vF_{k-1}(s,t) \\
w_k & = wF_{k-1}(r,s) + uv F_{k-2}(r,s,t).
\end{align*}
Then
\begin{equation}  \label{intermed:e2e}
e^2=e
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}  \label{intermed:matrixgk}
g^k = \left(\begin{matrix}
s^k & v_k & w_k \\
0 & t^k & u_k \\
0 & 0 & r^k
\end{matrix}\right)
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}  \label{intermed:matrix-egke}
eg^{k}e = \left(
\begin{matrix}
s^k & 0 & w_{k} \\
0 & 0& 0 \\
0 & 0 & r^k
\end{matrix}
\right)
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}  \label{intermed:matrix-egk1k2e}
eg^{k_1}eg^{k_2}e  = \left(\begin{matrix}
s^{k_1+k_2} & 0 & s^{k_1}w_{k_2}+r^{k_2}w_{k_1} \\
0 & 0& 0 \\
0 & 0 & r^{k_1+k_2}
\end{matrix}\right).
\end{equation}
For $k_1,k_2\in \ensuremath{ \mathbf N }_0$,
\begin{equation}  \label{intermed:k1k2commute}
eg^{k_1}eg^{k_2}e = eg^{k_2}eg^{k_1}e
\end{equation}
if and only if
\begin{equation}  \label{intermed:k1k2commutebecause}
s^{k_1}w_{k_2}+r^{k_2}w_{k_1} = s^{k_2}w_{k_1}+r^{k_1}w_{k_2}.
\end{equation}
If $r=s=1$, then~\eqref{intermed:k1k2commute} holds for all $k_1,k_2\in \ensuremath{ \mathbf N }_0.$
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
Identity~\eqref{intermed:matrixgk} holds for $k=0$ and $k=1$.  If the formula is true for some
$k \geq 1$, then~\eqref{intermed:symmetric2} and~\eqref{intermed:symmetric3} imply that
\begin{align*}
g^{k+1} & = \left(\begin{matrix}
s^k & v_k & w_k \\
0 & t^k & u_k \\
0 & 0 & r^k
\end{matrix}\right)
 \left(\begin{matrix}
s & v & w \\
0 & t & u \\
0 & 0 & r
\end{matrix}\right) \\
& = \left(\begin{matrix}
s^{k+1} & s^kv+v_kt & s^kw+v_ku+w_kr\\
0 & t^{k+1} & t^ku+u_kr \\
0 & 0 & r^{k+1}
\end{matrix}\right) \\
& = \left(\begin{matrix}
s^{k+1} & v_{k+1} & w_{k+1}\\
0 & t^{k+1} & u_{k+1} \\
0 & 0 & r^{k+1}
\end{matrix}\right)
\end{align*}
and identity~\eqref{intermed:matrixgk} follows by induction on $k$.
Identities~\eqref{intermed:matrix-egke} and~\eqref{intermed:matrix-egk1k2e} follow by matrix multiplication,
and~\eqref{intermed:k1k2commute}
and~\eqref{intermed:k1k2commutebecause}
follow from inspection of~\eqref{intermed:matrix-egk1k2e}.
This completes the proof.
\end{proof}

\begin{theorem}   \label{intermed:theorem:semigroupT}
Let $t,u,v,w$ be real numbers with $t > 2$.  Let $\mathcal{T}$ be the subsemigroup of $M_3(\ensuremath{ \mathbf{R} })$ generated by the matrices
\[
e = \left(\begin{matrix}
1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1
\end{matrix}\right)
\]
and
\[
g = \left(\begin{matrix}
1 & v & w \\
0 & t & u \\
0 & 0 & 1
\end{matrix}\right)
\]
The semigroup \ensuremath{\mathcal T}\ has intermediate growth.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
For every $k\in \ensuremath{ \mathbf N }$, let
\[
t_k = 1 + t + t^2 + \cdots + t^{k-1} = \frac{t^k-1}{t-1}
\]
and
\[
w_k = \frac{uv t^k}{(t-1)^2}  + \left(w-\frac{uv}{t-1}\right)k - \frac{uv}{(t-1)^2}.
\]
By Lemma~\ref{intermed:lemma:semigroupT},  we have $e^2=e$,
\[
g^k = \left(
\begin{matrix}
1 & vt_k & w_k \\
0 & t^k & ut_k \\
0 & 0 & 1
\end{matrix}
\right)
\]
\[
eg^ke = \left(
\begin{matrix}
1 & 0 & w_k \\
0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1
\end{matrix}
\right)
\]
and
\[
eg^{k_1}eg^{k_2}e = eg^{k_2}eg^{k_1}e
\]
for $k_1,k_2\in \ensuremath{ \mathbf N }_0$.

Let $\ensuremath{\mathcal T}_0 = e\ensuremath{\mathcal T} e.$  Then $\ensuremath{\mathcal T}_0$ consists of all matrices of the form
\[
eg^{k_1}eg^{k_2}e\cdots eg^{k_r}e =
\left(
\begin{matrix}
1 & 0 & w_{k_1}+w_{k_2}+\cdots + w_{k_r} \\
0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1
\end{matrix}
\right)
\]
where $k_1,\ldots, k_r$ is a finite sequence of nonnegative integers.
For $i,j \in \ensuremath{ \mathbf N }_0$, the set $g^i\ensuremath{\mathcal T}_0 g^j$ consists of all matrices of the form
\begin{equation}   \label{intermed:eMatrix}
g^ieg^{k_1}eg^{k_2}e\cdots eg^{k_r}e g^j=
\left(
\begin{matrix}
1 &  vt_j & w_i + w_j + w_{k_1}+w_{k_2}+\cdots + w_{k_r} \\
0 & 0 & ut_i \\
0 & 0 & 1
\end{matrix}
\right)
\end{equation}
Since $\{t_i\}_{i=0}^{\infty}$ is a strictly increasing sequence of real numbers,
formula~\eqref{intermed:eMatrix} implies that for all $i_1,i_2,j_1,j_2 \in \ensuremath{ \mathbf N }_0$,
\[
g^{i_1}\ensuremath{\mathcal T}_0 g^{j_1} \cap g^{i_2}\ensuremath{\mathcal T}_0 g^{j_2} \neq \emptyset
\]
if and only if
\[
(i_1,j_1) = (i_2,j_2).
\]
Thus, the semigroup \ensuremath{\mathcal T}\ satisfies conditions~(i) and~(ii) of Theorem~\ref{intermed:theorem:subexponential} and so has subexponential growth.

Define the function $\varphi:\ensuremath{\mathcal T}_0 \rightarrow \ensuremath{ \mathbf{R} }$ by
\[
\varphi(eg^ke) = w_k = ct^k + e_k
\]
where $c = uv/(t-1)^2$ and $e_k = (w-uv/(t-1))k -c = O(k)$. Then $\varphi$ is a homomorphism from $\ensuremath{\mathcal T}_0$ into the additive group of real numbers.  By Theorem~\ref{intermed:theorem:Br}, there is an integer $k_0$ such that the sequence $W = \{w_k\}_{k=k_0}^{\infty}$ has many partial products.  By Theorem~\ref{intermed:theorem:superpolynomial}, the semigroup \ensuremath{\mathcal T}\ has superpolynomial growth.
This completes the proof.
\end{proof}

\emph{Acknowledgements.}
I wish to thank David Newman, Kevin O'Bryant, and Lev Shneerson for helpful discussions about this work.

\def$'$} \def\cprime{$'$} \def\cprime{$'${$'$} \def$'$} \def\cprime{$'$} \def\cprime{$'${$'$} \def$'$} \def\cprime{$'$} \def\cprime{$'${$'$}
\providecommand{\bysame}{\leavevmode\hbox to3em{\hrulefill}\thinspace}
\providecommand{\MR}{\relax\ifhmode\unskip\space\fi MR }
\providecommand{\MRhref}[2]{%
  \href{http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=#1}{#2}
}
\providecommand{\href}[2]{#2}

Group Theory (math.GR); Number Theory (math.NT)


Modular periodicity of the Euler numbers and a sequence by Arnold

Abstract: For any positive integer $q$, the sequence of the Euler up/down numbers reduced modulo $q$ was proved to be ultimately periodic by Knuth and Buckholtz. Based on computer simulations, we state for each value of $q$ precise conjectures for the minimal period and for the position at which the sequence starts being periodic. When $q$ is a power of $2$, a sequence defined by Arnold appears, and we formulate a conjecture for a simple computation of this sequence.

\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:introduction}

The sequence of Euler up/down numbers $(E_n)_{n\geq0}$ is the sequence with exponential generating series
\begin{equation}
\sum_{n=0}^{\infty} \frac{E_n}{n!} x^n = \sec x + \tan x.
\end{equation}
It is referenced as sequence A000111 in~\cite{OEIS} and its first terms are
\[
1, 1, 1, 2, 5, 16, 61, 272, 1385, 7936, 50521, 353792, 2702765,\ldots
\]
The numbers $E_n$ were shown by Andr\'e~\cite{A79} to count up/down permutations on $n$ elements (see Section~\ref{sec:powerof2}).

Knuth and Buckholtz~\cite{KB67} proved that for any integer $q\geq1$, the sequence $(E_n \mod q)_{n\geq 0}$ is ultimately periodic. For any $q \geq 1$ we define :
\begin{itemize}
 \item $s(q)$ to be the minimum number of terms one needs to delete from the sequence $(E_n \mod q)_{n \geq 0}$ to make it periodic ;
 \item $d(q)$ to be the smallest period of the sequence $(E_n \mod q)_{n \geq s(q)}$.
\end{itemize}
For example, the sequence $(E_n \mod 3)$ starts with
\[
1,1,1,2,2,1,1,2,2,1,1,2,2,\ldots
\]
so one might expect to have $s(3)=1$ and $d(3)=4$. Clearly $s(1)=0$ and $d(1)=1$. In the remainder of this paper, we formulate precise conjectures for the values of $s(q)$ and $d(q)$ for any $q\geq2$.

\subsection*{Organisation of the paper}
In Section~\ref{sec:oddprime} we reduce the problem to the case when $q$ is a prime power and we conjecture the values of $s(q)$ and $d(q)$ when $q$ is an odd prime power. In Section~\ref{sec:powerof2} we conjecture the values of $s(q)$ and $d(q)$ when $q$ is a power of $2$, after having introduced the Entringer numbers and a sequence defined by Arnold describing the $2$-adic valuation of the Entringer numbers. In Section~\ref{sec:Arnold}, we provide a simple construction which conjecturally yields the Arnold sequence.

\section{Case when $q$ is not a power of $2$}
\label{sec:oddprime}

The following lemma implies that it suffices to know the values of $s(q)$ and $d(q)$ when $q$ is a prime power in order to know the values of $s(q)$ and $d(q)$ for any $q \geq 2$.

\begin{lem}
Fix $q \geq 2$ and write its prime number decomposition as
\begin{equation}
q=\prod_{i=1}^k p_i^{\alpha_i},
\end{equation}
where $k\geq1$, $p_1,\ldots,p_k$ are distinct prime numbers and $\alpha_1,\ldots,\alpha_k$ are positive integers.
Then
\begin{align}
s(q)&=\max_{1 \leq i \leq k} s(p_i^{\alpha_i}) \\
d(q)&=\lcm (d(p_1^{\alpha_1}),\ldots,d(p_k^{\alpha_k})).
\end{align}
\end{lem}

The proof is elementary and uses the Chinese remainder theorem.

When $q$ is an odd prime power, Knuth and Buckholtz~\cite{KB67} found the following :

\begin{thm}[\cite{KB67}]
\label{thm:KB}
Let $p$ be an odd prime number.
\begin{enumerate}
 \item If $p \equiv 1 \mod 4$, then
 \begin{equation*}
 d(p)=p-1.
 \end{equation*}
 \item If $p \equiv 3 \mod 4$, then
 \begin{equation*}
 d(p)=2p-2.
 \end{equation*}
 \item For any $k\geq1$,
 \begin{equation*}
 s(p^k)\leq k.
 \end{equation*}
 \item For any $k\geq 2$,
 \begin{equation*}
 d(p^k) | p^{k-1} d(p).
 \end{equation*}
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}

We conjecture the following for the exact values of $s(q)$ and $d(q)$ when $q$ is an odd prime power :

\begin{conj}
\label{conj:oddprime}
Let $p$ be an odd prime number.
\begin{enumerate}
 \item For any $k\geq1$,
 \begin{equation*}
 s(p^k)=k.
 \end{equation*}
 \item For any $k\geq 2$,
 \begin{equation*}
 d(p^k)=p^{k-1} d(p).
 \end{equation*}
\end{enumerate}
\end{conj}
Conjecture~\ref{conj:oddprime} is supported by Mathematica simulations done for all odd prime powers $q<1000$.

\section{Entringer numbers and case when $q$ is a power of $2$}
\label{sec:powerof2}

Formulating a conjecture analogous to Conjecture~\ref{conj:oddprime} for powers of $2$ requires to define, following Arnold~\cite{A91}, a sequence describing the behavior of the $2$-adic valuation of the Entringer numbers.

\subsection{The Seidel-Entringer-Arnold triangle}

The Entringer numbers are a refined version of the Euler numbers, enumerating some subsets of up/down permutations. For any $n\geq0$, a permutation $\sigma\in\mathcal S_n$ is called \emph{up/down} if for any $2\leq i \leq n$, we have $\sigma(i-1)<\sigma(i)$ (resp. $\sigma(i-1)>\sigma(i)$) if $i$ is even (resp. $i$ is odd). Andr\'e~\cite{A79} showed that the number of up/down permutations on $n$ elements is $E_n$. For any $1 \leq i \leq n$, the \emph{Entringer number} $e_{n,i}$ is defined to be the number of up/down permutations $\sigma\in\mathcal S_n$ such that $\sigma(n)=i$. The Entringer numbers are usually displayed in a triangular array called the Seidel-Entringer-Arnold triangle, where the numbers $(e_{n,i})_{1 \leq i\leq n}$ appear from left to right on the $n$-th line (see Figure~\ref{fig:SEAtriangle}).

\begin{figure}[htpb]
\[
\begin{matrix}
&&&&1&&&& \\
&&&&&&&& \\
&&&0&&1&&& \\
&&&&&&&& \\
&&1&&1&&0&& \\
&&&&&&&& \\
&0&&1&&2&&2& \\
&&&&&&&& \\
5&&5&&4&&2&&0 \\
\end{matrix}
\]
\caption{First five lines of the Seidel-Entringer-Arnold triangle.}
\label{fig:SEAtriangle}
\end{figure}

The Entringer numbers can be computed using the following recurrence formula (see for example~\cite{S97}). For any $n\geq2$ and for any $1\leq i \leq n$, we have
\begin{equation}
e_{n,i}=
\begin{cases}
\sum_{j<i} e_{n-1,j} &\text{ if } $n$ \text{ is even} \\
\sum_{j\geq i} e_{n-1,j} &\text{ if } $n$ \text{ is odd}
\end{cases}.
\end{equation}

\subsection{Arnold's sequence}

Replacing each entry of the Seidel-Entringer-Arnold triangle by its $2$-adic valuation, we obtain an infinite triangle denoted by $T$ (see Figure~\ref{fig:2valuationtriangle}).

\begin{figure}[htpb]
\[
\begin{matrix}
&&&&0&&&& \\
&&&&&&&& \\
&&&\infty&&0&&& \\
&&&&&&&& \\
&&0&&0&&\infty&& \\
&&&&&&&& \\
&\infty&&0&&1&&1& \\
&&&&&&&& \\
0&&0&&2&&1&&\infty \\
\end{matrix}
\]
\caption{First five lines of the triangle $T$ of $2$-adic valuations of the Entringer numbers.}
\label{fig:2valuationtriangle}
\end{figure}
We read this triangle $T$ diagonal by diagonal, with diagonals parallel to the left boundary. For any $i\geq1$, denote by $D_i$ the $i$-th diagonal of the triangle $T$ parallel to the left boundary. For example $D_1$ starts with $0,\infty,0,\infty,0,\ldots$. For any $i\geq1$, denote by $m_i$ the minimum entry of diagonal $D_i$. Arnold~\cite{A91} observed that the further away one moves from the left boundary, the higher the $2$-adic valuation of the Entringer numbers becomes. In particular, he observed (without proof) that the sequence $(m_i)_{i\geq1}$ was weakly increasing to infinity. He defined the following sequence : for any $k \geq 1$,
\[
u_k:=\max \left\{i\geq1 | m_i < k \right\}.
\]
In other words, $u_k$ is the number of diagonals containing at least one entry that is not zero modulo $2^k$. The sequence $(u_k)_{k\geq1}$ is referenced as the sequence A108039 in OEIS~\cite{OEIS} and its first few terms are given in Table~\ref{tab:firstterms}.

\begin{table}[htbp]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
  \hline
  $k$  & 1& 2 & 3 & 4 & 5 & 6 & 7 & 8 & 9 & 10 & 11 & 12 & 13 & 14 & 15 & 16 & 17 & 18 \\
  \hline
  $u_k$ & 2 & 4 & 4 & 4 & 8 & 8 & 8 & 8 & 10 & 12 & 12 & 16 & 16 & 16 & 16 & 16 & 18 & 20 \\
  \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{The first few values of $u_k$.}
\label{tab:firstterms}
\end{table}

Note that the first few terms given by Arnold were incorrect, because the entry $4$ appeared four times, whereas it should be appearing only three times. We also remark that we cannot define any sequence analogous to $(u_k)$ when studying the $p$-adic valuations of the Entringer numbers for odd primes $p$. Indeed, the $p$-adic valuation $0$ seems to appear in diagonals of arbitrarily high index.

\subsection{Case when $q$ is a power of $2$}

Using the sequence $(u_k)_{k\geq1}$, we formulate the following conjecture for $s(q)$ and $d(q)$ when $q$ is a power of $2$ :

\begin{conj}
\label{conj:powersoftwo}
For any $k\geq 1$, we have
 \begin{equation}
 s(2^k)=u_k.
 \end{equation}
Furthermore, if $k\geq1$ and $k\neq2$, we have
\begin{equation}
d(2^k)= 2^k.
\end{equation}
Finally, we have $d(4)=2$.
\end{conj}
Numerical simulations performed on Mathematica for $k\leq 12$ support Conjecture~\ref{conj:powersoftwo}.

\section{Construction of Arnold's sequence}
\label{sec:Arnold}

In this section we provide a construction which conjecturally yields Arnold's sequence $(u_k)_{k\geq1}$.

We denote by $\mathbb Z_+$ the set of nonnegative integers and we denote by
\[
S:=\bigsqcup_{d\geq1}\mathbb Z_+^d
\]
the set of all finite sequences of nonnegative integers. We define a map $f:S\rightarrow S$, which maps each $\mathbb Z_+^d$ to $\mathbb Z_+^{2d}$, as follows. Fix $\underline{x}=(x_1,\ldots,x_d)\in S$. If all the $x_i$'s are equal to $x_d$, we set
\[
f(\underline{x})=(x_d,\ldots,x_d,2x_d,\ldots ,2x_d),
\]
where $x_d$ and $2x_d$ both appear $d$ times on the right-hand side.
Otherwise, define
\[
s:=\max \left\{ 1 \leq i \leq d-1 | x_i \neq x_d \right\}
\]
and set
\[
f(\underline{x})=(x_1,\ldots,x_d,x_1+x_d,\ldots,x_{s-1}+x_d,2x_d,\ldots,2x_d),
\]
where $2x_d$ appears $d-s+1$ times on the right-hand side.
For example, we have
\begin{equation}
f((2,4,4,4))=(2,4,4,4,8,8,8,8)
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
f(2,4,4,4,8,8,8,8)=(2,4,4,4,8,8,8,8,10,12,12,16,16,16,16,16).
\end{equation}
By iterating this function $f$ indefinitely, one produces an infinite sequence :

\begin{lem}
Fix $d\geq1$ and $\underline{x}\in\mathbb Z_+^d$. There exists a unique (infinite) sequence $(X_k)_{k\geq 1}$ such that for any $k\geq1$ and for any $n\geq \log_2 (k/d)$, $X_k$ is the $k$-th term of the finite sequence $f^n(\underline{x})$.
\end{lem}

This infinite sequence is called the \emph{$f$-transform} of $\underline{x}$. The lemma follows from the observation that for any $\ell\geq1$ and for any $\underline{y}\in \mathbb Z_+^\ell$, $\underline{y}$ and $f(\underline{y})$ have the same first $\ell$ terms.

We can now formulate a conjecture about the construction of the sequence $(u_k)_{k\geq1}$ :
\begin{conj}
\label{conj:Arnold}
Arnold's sequence $(u_k)_{k\geq1}$ is the $f$-transform of the quadruple $(2,4,4,4)$.
\end{conj}
Conjecture~\ref{conj:Arnold} is supported by the estimation on Mathematica of $u_k$ for every $k\leq 512$.

\section*{Acknowledgments}

The author acknowledges the support of the Fondation Simone et Cino Del Duca.

\bibliographystyle{alpha}

Combinatorics (math.CO); Number Theory (math.NT)