Skip to main content

Full text of "(Self-)similar groups and the Farrell-Jones conjectures"

See other formats


i (SELF-)SIMILAR GROUPS AND THE FARRELL-JONES 

2 CONJECTURES 

3 LAURENT BARTHOLDI 

o 

Cn ' Abstract. We show that contracting self-similar groups satisfy the Farrell- 

Jones conjectures as soon as their universal contracting cover is non-positivcly 
curved. This applies in particular to bounded self-similar groups. 

We define, along the way, a general notion of contraction for groups acting 

qq ■ on a rooted tree in a not necessarily self-similar manner. 

pj I 4 1. Introduction 

5 Few properties are known to hold for all groups; in the recent years, counterex- 

6 amples have been found to numerous "plausible conjectures", usually formulated 

7 as questions: is there an infinite, finitely generated group all of whose elements 

8 have finite order? is there an amenable group that cannot be produced using ex- 

9 tensions and filtered colimits of virtually abelian groups? is there a group whose 
10 word growth is strictly between polynomial and exponential? 
n The "Farrell- Jones conjectures" , predicting how the algebraic K-/L-theory of the 

&\ \ 12 group ring RG may be expressed in terms of the algebraic K-/L-theory of R and 

13 the group theory of 67, is one of the prominent remaining conjectures [4]. If it is 

14 satisfied by the group G, numerous group-theoretical consequences for G follow, 

15 in particular RG has no non-trivial idempotent if G is torsion-free and R is a 
i6 domain of characteristic 0. The Farrell- Jones conjectures are inherited under many 
17 group-theoretical operations (finite direct and free products, filtered colimits), but 
is possibly not under wreath products; we say the Farrell- Jones conjectures hold with 

19 wreathing if they hold for all wreath products G I P with a finite permutation group 

20 P. 

21 In search of a possible counterexample to the Farrell- Jones conjectures, it might 

22 have been speculated that the "self-similar groups" studied by Aleshin, Grigorchuk, 



(N 



CO 

in 



o 



>< 



23 Gupta and Sidki since the 1970s would play an important role; indeed, these groups 

24 have served to answer or illuminate all the questions in the first paragraph. 

25 Self-similar groups are groups acting in a recursive manner on a regular rooted 

26 tree T<£. If the recursion of every element involves only a linearly growing subtree 

27 of Td, the group is said to be bounded. 

28 We show in this note that considerable care will be required to construct a 

29 counterexample within the class of self-similar groups. We prove (see below for 

30 precise definitions): 

31 Theorem A. Let G be a bounded self-similar group. Then G satisfies the Farrell- 

32 Jones conjectures. 



Date: 26 July 2011. 

The work is supported by the Courant Research Centre "Higher Order Structures" of the 
University of Gottingen. 

1 



LAURENT BARTHOLDI 



33 Theorem B. Let G be a contracting similar group. Then G satisfies the Farrell- 

34 Jones conjectures if its universal contracting cover satisfies the Farrell-Jones con- 
jectures with wreathing. 






36 Corollary C. The Aleshin-Grigorchuk, Gupta-Sidki, GGS, and generalized Grig- 



si 



orchuk groups all satisfy the Farrell-Jones conjectures. 



38 1.1. Acknowledgments. Wolfgang Luck encouraged me to write this short note, 

39 with the intent of narrowing the domains of group theory in which a counterexample 

40 is to be searched. 

41 Thomas Schick and Wolfgang Luck generously provided valuable feedback on a 

42 preliminary version, and clarified for me the status of the Farrell-Jones conjectures 

43 with respect to wreath products. 

44 2. The Farrell-Jones conjectures 

45 We review very briefly the statement of the Farrell-Jones conjectures; we include 

46 them for definiteness, but will never work directly with their definition. 

47 A model for the virtually cyclic classifying space E VC (G) is a topological G-space 

48 X whose isotropy groups are all virtually cyclic, and such that for any topological 

49 G-space Y with virtually cyclic isotropy groups there exists up to G-homotopy a 

50 unique G-map Y — > X. 

51 The Farrell-Jones conjectures assert that the natural map 

HZ{E°°(G),S)^HZ{{.},8), 

52 induced by E VC (G) — > {.}, is an Farrell-Jones for all n. Here S is either the K-theory 

53 spectrum K^ or the L-theory spectrum LV over the orbit category associated 

54 with an additive G-category A. 

55 For our purposes, it suffices to note that the class of groups for which the conjec- 

56 tures are known to hold contains virtually abelian groups, hyperbolic groups [6] for 

57 n < 1, CAT(O) groups 6,27 , cocompact lattices in virtually connected Lie groups, 

58 threefold groups [7] and arithmetic groups over algebraic number fields (unpub- 

59 fished). It is closed under taking subgroups, colimits [5j Corollary 0.8], and finite 

60 direct and free products. (This is the advantage of using the more general version 
6i with coefficients in an additive category — the inheritance properties come almost 

62 for free). 

63 Note that, in general, it is not known whether the conjectures are inherited under 

64 finite extensions. Since every finite extension is a subgroup of the wreath product 

65 with a finite group |23| . the question reduces to whether the conjecture is inherited 

66 by finite wreath products. This is known in some specific cases, in particular for 

67 cocompact lattices in virtually connected Lie groups, threefold groups, arithmetic 

68 groups over algebraic number fields, and CAT(O) groups, as we now explain. 

69 CAT(O) spaces are metric spaces in which triangles are at least as thin as in 

70 euclidean space; see the classical reference [13]. CAT(0) groups, also called non- 
71 positively curved groups, arc groups acting properly, isometrically and cocompactly 

72 on a CAT(0) space of finite topological dimension. That class contains virtually 

73 abelian groups, and is closed under direct, free and finite wreath products. 

74 Lemma 1. If G is CAT(0), then so is Gl P for any finite permutation group P. 



(SELF-)SIMILAR GROUPS AND THE FARRELL-JONES CONJECTURES 3 

75 Proof. Let G act properly discontirmously on the CAT(O) space X, and let P be a 

76 permutation group on n points. Then GlP = G n x P acts properly discontinuously 
on X n , with G n acting coordinatcwise and P by permutation of the coordinates. □ 



77 



100 



3. (Self-)similar groups 



79 We summarize the notion of self-similar group, presenting it in a slightly more 

so general and algebraic manner than is usual; see |25j or [8] for classical references. 

si By G I d we denote the permutational wreath product G d XI &d- 

82 A self-similar group is a group G endowed with a homomorphism cj> : G — >• G}d, 

83 called its self- similarity structure. The integer d is the degree of the self-similarity 

84 structure. Usually, the self-similarity is implicit, and one simply denotes by G the 

85 self-similar group. 

86 The map <fi can be applied diagonally to all entries in G d , yielding a map G d —> 

87 (G I d) d , and therefore a map Gld^(Gld)ld£Gl (d 2 ); more generally, we get 

88 maps G ld n — > G I d n+1 which we all denote by 4>. We may compose these maps, 

89 and write <f> n for the iterate 0" : G — !> G ld n . 

90 By projecting to the permutation part, we then have homomorphisms G — > &d n 

91 and, assembling them together, a permutational action of G on T d := \_\ n>0 {l, ■ ■ ■ , d} n ; 

92 one may identify Td with the vertex set of a rooted <i-rcgular tree, by connecting 

93 Vi . . . v n to v± . . . v n v n +i for all Vi £ {1, . . . , d}, in such a way that G acts by graph 

94 isometries. This action need not be faithful; if it is, then G is called a faithful 

95 self-similar group. 

96 A self-similar group is contracting if there exists a finite subset N C G such that, 

97 for all g £ G and all n large enough, <fi n (g) £ N d x ©a™- The smallest such AT is 

98 called the nucleus of G. 

99 Let F denote the free group on N. By definition, the nucleus satisfies the 
condition <fi(N) C N d x &d- The restriction of ^ to iV can therefore uniquely 



101 be extended to a homomorphism <f> : F — > F I d. Set 

B = {weiVuJV 2 uiV 3 c-F|ffl=Gi}- 

102 Similarly, we have 4>{R) C R d x 1. Set F = F/i?. The homomorphism (f> then 

103 induces a homomorphism, again written <p : F ^ F I d. 

104 Note that F is a finitely presented group, and that the natural map TV C F — > 

105 N £ G defines a homomorphism F — > G. We will sec in Lemma [2] that F is 

106 contracting, with nucleus N. However, the self-similarity structure of F need not 

107 be faithful, even if that of G was faithful. We call F the universal contracting cover 

108 of G. Note also that in general the homomorphism F —> G need not be onto, or 

109 equivalently iV need not generate G. This is, however, the case in all examples we 
no present here. 

in Here are some extreme examples; more classical ones appear in Sj4] The full 

112 group W of isometries of Td is self-similar, but not contracting; actually not even 

ii3 countable. Its subgroup {g £ W \ tp n {g) £ {l} d x 6^™ for some n} is faith- 

ii4 fill, self-similar, and contracting with nucleus {I}. Any group G, with <f> : G — > 

ii5 G d the diagonal embedding, defines a non-faithful self-similar structure on G, 

ii6 which is contracting precisely when G is finite. Consider finally A a finite group, 

in and G the group of finitely-supported functions Z — > A. Take d = 2, and set 

us V(/) - ((/o,/i» with / (n) = /(2n) and h{n) = f(2n - I). This defines a 

ii9 self-similarity structure on G, which is not faithful, and contracting with nucleus 



4 LAURENT BARTHOLDI 

120 N = {functions supported on {0, 1}}. Our main result does not give any interesting 

121 information on such actions. 

122 3.1. Similar groups. We now generalize the definitions above to more general 

123 groups. A group G is similar if there exists a sequence G — Gq,Gi, . . . of groups, 

124 a sequence of integers d± , di , . . . , and a sequence of homomorphisms <j) n : G n —¥ 

125 G n +i ld n+ i. The similarity structure is faithful if the corresponding pcrmutational 

126 action on |_|„>o{1j ■ ■ • ,d\\ x ■ ■ ■ x {1, . . . , d n } is faithful. Again abusing notation, 

127 the compositions of (f> n 's are written </>™ : G n — > G n+m I d n+ id n+2 ' ■ ■ d n+m . 

128 Let No, N\, . . . be a sequence of finite sets, with N n c G n for all n. We say that 

129 G contracts to (N n ) n >o if for every g £ G n and every m large enough, <f)™(g) £ 

130 N n+m + x <Sd n+1 d„ +2 -d n+m - 

131 In that case, it is possible, up to enlarging the N n 's, to assume 4> n (N n ) C A,^ 1 x 

132 &d„ + n and we always make that additional assumption. We call the sequence 

133 Nq,Ni,... a nucleus of G . 

134 Note however that the sequence No, N\, . . . is not unique — for example, it is 

135 always possible to replace finitely many of the initial terms by 1. We say G is 

136 generated by its nucleus if N n generates G n for all n. 

137 Extending the previous definition, let F n be the finitely presented group 

F n := (N n | words of length < 3 that are = 1 in G n ). 

138 We then have induced homomorphisms F n — > F n+ \ I d n +\, defining a similarity 

139 structure for the group F := Fq. 

140 Lemma 2. The similar group F contracts to (A„)„> . 

141 We again call F the universal contracting cover of G; note that it depends on the 

142 choice of (A„) n > . 

143 Proof. Consider n £ N. For every g £ N^ 2 C G n , there exists m £ N such that 

144 4>n{d) e ^n+rn " +2 " " +m x &d n +id n +2---d„ +m , by the contraction condition. Since 

145 there are finitely many g's under consideration, there exists m n £ N such that 

<Pn K N n) € N n+m n X b d n+1 d„ +2 ---d n + mn ■ 

146 On the other hand, consider w £ F n a word of length £ < 2 in the alphabet N n , and 

147 denote by W and w respectively its image in G n and in F n . The entries in <)>™ n (w) 

148 have length precisely t, by construction. They are termwise equal, in G n + mn , to the 

149 entries of (j)™ n (w). Since F n+nin contains all relations of length < 3, these entries 

150 are also termwise equal in F n+rrin . It follows that, for every w £ F n of length < 2, 

151 all entries of 4>™ n (w) all belong to N n+nin . 

152 Consider now g £ F n , of length £ < 2 k in the alphabet N n . Set inductively 

153 no = n and n, + i = m + m ni . By the previous paragraph, the entries of </>™"(g) 

154 have length < 2 fc_1 over N n+m , n = N ni , and more generally the entries of (f>n k ~ n 

155 have length < 2° in A„ fc , that is, they belong to N nk . □ 

156 We call a similar group contracting if it has been endowed with a sequence 

157 (A„)„>o to which it contracts. Note that this fixes the choice of a contracting 

158 finitely presented cover. Similar contracting groups naturally include self-similar 

159 groups, by considering constant sequences G, (f>, N and F. 

i6o Note that we explicitly allow the sequences G, 4> to be constant while the A n 's 

i6i increase. Quite generally, if each G n is countable, then there exists a sequence of 



(SELF-)SIMILAR GROUPS AND THE FARRELL-JONES CONJECTURES 5 

162 finite sets to which it contracts; namely, enumerate G n = {<7n,i, 9n,2, ■ ■ ■}, and let 

163 N n be the set of coordinates of </>m _m (<7m,z) for all i,m < n. Understandably, our 

164 main result applies formally to such constructions, but does not yield any useful 

165 information. 

166 3.2. Main result. 

167 Proposition 1. Let G be a faithful contracting similar group, generated by its 

168 nucleus. If all terms F n of the universal contracting cover of G satisfy the Farrell- 

169 Jones conjectures with wreathing, then G satisfies the Farrell-Jones conjectures. 

no Proof. In the self-similar case, set Kq = 1 < F, and K n +i = <P^ 1 (Kf l ) for all n > 0; 

171 and finally Koo = (J n >o ^"- More generally, in the similar case, set K„ = ker(</>™)<! 

172 F and K x = U„> K n . 

173 There is an natural homomorphism 7r : F / K^ — > G, which we prove to be an 

174 Farrcll- Jones. Let g £ F be in the kernel of ir; then, because F is contracting, there 

175 isnGN such that 4> n {g) belongs to N^ 1 '" dn x &di—d n ! furthermore, the permutation 

176 is trivial because (f> n ir(g) = 4> n (\) — 1, and the entries in N n are trivial because F n 

177 contains relations of length 1 in N n . Therefore g <E K n so g e K^, as was to be 

178 shown. 

179 We then have G = lim F/K n , and because the Farrell-Jones conjectures are sta- 
i8o ble under colimits it suffices to see that F/K n satisfies the Farrcll- Jones conjectures. 
i8i By the first Farrell-Jones theorem, FJK„ is a subgroup of F n lali ■ ■ ■ d n , so it suffices 

182 to show that F n ld± ■ ■ ■ d n satisfies the Farrell-Jones conjectures. Since F n satisfies 

183 the Farrell-Jones conjectures with wreathing, we are done. □ 

184 As stated in the introduction, Proposition [1] applies in particular to contracting 

185 similar groups whose universal contracting cover are CAT(O) groups, lattices in 

186 virtually connected Lie groups, or arithmetic groups over algebraic function fields. 

187 4. Examples 

188 We now give some examples of contracting, similar groups, recall some of their 

189 basic properties, and show that they satisfy the Farrell-Jones conjectures. 

190 We follow a slightly unorthodox path to define (self-) similar groups: we first give 

191 their contracting covers, and then simply say that the group itself is the faithful 

192 quotient of the cover. This, of course, defines uniquely the self-similar group G 

193 in question: it is the quotient of its universal contracting cover F by the normal 

194 subgroup Koo < F. 

195 We denote by {(gi, ■ ■ ■ , ffd))c an element of the wreath product G } d, with a 

196 written as a product of disjoint cycles. 

197 4.1. The Aleshin and Grigorchuk groups. The Alcshin-Grigorchuk group is 

198 obtained as follows. Set 

F= (a,b,c,d\ a 2 ,b 2 ,c 2 ,d 2 ,bcd) =C 2 *(C 2 x C* 2 ), 

199 and define <fi : F — > F I 2 by 

0(a) = «l,l))(l,2), 4>(b) = i(a,c)), 0(c) = «a,d», <f>(d) = ((l,b». 

200 Let G be the faithful self-similar quotient of F. 

201 This group (up to finite index) was first considered in [I], providing a "tan- 

202 gible" example of infinite, finitely generated, torsion group (the first examples of 



6 LAURENT BARTHOLDI 

203 groups with these properties are due to Golod [17] ). Grigorchuk proved in [18] 

204 that its word growth is strictly between polynomial and exponential, and in |20] 

205 that it is amenable, but not elementary amenable. It is contracting, with nucleus 

206 {1, a, b, c, d}. 

207 Since F is CAT(0), as a free product of finite groups, G satisfies the Farrell- Jones 

208 conjectures by Proposition [1] 

209 More elaborate examples have also been constructed by Grigorchuk [19] . Fix an 

210 infinite sequence u> = loquii • • • of epimorphisms [C<z X C2) = (b,c,d) — > (a) = C'2, 

211 and assume that u) contains infinitely many of each of the three possible epimor- 

212 phisms. Define homomorphisms </>„ : F — > F } 2 for all n > by 

4>{a) = ((1,1))(1,2), <j,{x) = ((u n {x),x)) for x e {b,c,d}. 

213 Let Gu, be the faithful similar quotient of F using this similarity structure. 

214 Again, G w is contracting with nucleus N„ = {l,a, 6, c, d} for all n £ N, so all 

215 such groups satisfy the Farrell- Jones conjectures. There are uncountably many such 

216 groups, and they all are torsion 2-groups of intermediate word growth. 

217 4.2. The Gupta-Sidki groups. The Gupta-Sidki groups are obtained as follows. 

218 Choose a prime p > 3, set 

F= (a,t\a p ,t p ) = C P *C P , 

219 and define <p : F — >• F } p by 

<f>(a) = ((1, . . . , 1»(1, ...,p), 4>{t) = {(a, a" 1 , 1, ... , l,t)). 

220 Let G be the faithful self-similar quotient of F. 

221 These groups are shown in [22] to be infinite, finitely-generated torsion p-groups. 

222 Since F is CAT(0), as a free product of finite groups, G satisfies the Farrell- Jones 

223 conjectures by Proposition [T] 

224 4.3. Bounded groups. Assume that G is a self-similar group, and that, for every 

225 g <G G, there exists a bound B £ N such that, for all n £ N, there are at most 

226 B non-trivial entries in <fi n (g)- Note that it suffices to check this property for the 

227 generators of G; and that it holds for the generators of the Grigorchuk group with 

228 B = 2, and those of the Gupta-Sidki groups for B = 3. 

229 It is then known (see [12]) that G is contracting. More precisely, G is isomorphic 

230 to a subgroup of a self-similar group of very special type (see [lljL Fix an integer 

231 d > 2, set 

F = & d *{& d l& d - 1 ), 

232 and define <fi : F — >• F I d by 

0(a) = ((1, . . ., IK cp{g := ((A, . . . , f d ^))r) = ((f u . . . , f d - 1: g))r. 

233 Since F is CAT(0), as a free product of finite groups, G satisfies the Farrell-Jones 

234 conjectures by Proposition [T] 

235 Note that the faithful quotient of F is amenable; this is how [11] show that all 

236 bounded self-similar groups are amenable. 



(SELF-)SIMILAR GROUPS AND THE FARRELL-JONES CONJECTURES 7 

237 4.4. Dynamics. Let / be a branched covering of a topological space M ; this means 

238 there is an open dense subset Mo C M and a covering / : Mo — > M. We assume 

239 / has finite degree d. Let Pf denote the post-critical locus of /: 



Pf= Uaaam 



n>l 

240 Assume finally that M \ Pf is path-connected. Choose a basepoint *, and for 

241 each x e / _1 (*) choose an arc £ x from * to x in M \ Pf. Number also / _1 (*) as 

242 {xi,...,Xd}- 

243 These data define a self-similar group as follows. It is again defined via a cover, 

244 F := tti(M \ Pf,*)- Consider 7 £ F. For each x t £ / _1 (*); let 7, denote the 

245 unique /-lift of 7 that starts at Xi, and let it end at x„m G / (*)• Define then 

246 4> '■ F — > F I d by 

^(7)-((^ ( 1 1 )7i^i,---,C( 1 d )7A))^ 

247 If M is in fact a locally simply connected metric space, and / is uniformly 

248 expanding (meaning there exists A > 1 such that d(fx, fy) > Xd(x, y) whenever 

249 d(x,y) is sufficiently small), then F is contracting. 

250 This applies in particular to M a complex manifold and / a holomorphic map 

251 (which is then expanding for the Kobayashi metric). 

252 The special case M = C and / a degrec-2 polynomial has been extensively 

253 studied in [10] , The cover F is a free group, so this provides more examples of groups 

254 satisfying the Farrell- Jones conjectures. One important such example, associated 

255 with the map f(z) = z 1 — 1, has been studied in |21j and [5]; it is amenable, 

256 orderable, of exponential growth, and residually poly-Z. 

257 Other examples, on higher-dimensional manifolds, have been considered by Koch 

258 et al. [lUEl]. There, the universal contracting cover is the sphere braid group. 

259 5. Conclusion 

260 We have shown that if a counter-example to the Farrell- Jones conjectures exists 

261 in the class of (self-)similar groups, it will not be an easy matter to establish that 

262 fact. 

263 For one thing, with very few exceptions, non-contracting self-similar groups are 

264 intractable (it required considerable effort to prove that the elementary example 

265 of [2] is a free group!) 

266 For another, calculations in a contracting self-similar groups are usually reduced 

267 to calculations in a finitely presented group, in which one may manipulate words. 

268 It would be surprising that the Farrell- Jones conjectures fail for self-similar group, 

269 yet be unsettled for its cover. 

270 Since the Farrell- Jones conjectures is not settled for the sphere braid group, we 

271 have, at the present, no argument to check the Farrell- Jones conjectures on the 

272 faithful self-similar quotient of the braid groups that arise in this manner. 

273 Let G be a self-similar group, and let e S N be given. Assume that, for every 

274 g G G, there exists a bound BgN such that, for all n £ N, there are at most Bn e 

275 non-trivial entries in (j) n (g). Then G is said to be of polynomial activity growth of 

276 degree e; see [26], who proves that such groups do not contain free subgroups. 

277 It is then known [3] that G embeds, possibly for larger d, in a specific group 

278 P(d, e) of polynomial activity growth, defined by its cover as follows. Set £_i = &d 



8 LAURENT BARTHOLDI 

279 and S, = Ej_i I &d-i for i = 0, . . . , e; set 

F = E_i *•••*£<,, 

and define : F — > F ; d by 

0(cr) = ((l,...,l»<r, 

0(5) = «/i, • • • , /*-i, ff»r for g = «/i, . . . , / d _i))r ££„!> 0. 

280 These are non-contracting self-similar groups if e > 1; for e < 1, the faithful quotient 
28i is amenable [3J[H], while amenability of the faithful quotient is open for larger e. 

282 The arguments in [55] show that the nucleus N of P(d, e), while infinite, admits 

283 a partial well ordering, such that every g G N has the form g £ S_x or 0(g) = 

284 ((<7i, . . . ,gd-i,g}) with gi < g for all i G {1, ...,d— 1}. Presumably this means 

285 that arguments similar to those given here show that P(d, e), and therefore all its 

286 subgroups, satisfy the Farrell- Jones conjectures. 

287 It has been conjectured by Nekrashevych that all contracting self-similar groups 

288 are amenable; although no conclusive link has been established between amenability 

289 and the Farrell- Jones conjectures. 

290 At the other extreme of contracting self-similar groups lie bireversible groups. 

291 These are self-similar groups (G, </>) such that the map G X {1, ...,d} -4 G x 

292 {1, . . . , d}, given by (g, i) i-> (g i: <r(i)) if (f>(g) = ({g 1: . . .,g d ))cr, is a bijection. They 

293 are related to the infinite simple groups constructed in [151116) . They would seem 

294 like a natural class in which to look at counterexamples, though all examples studied 

295 up to now are lattices in virtually connected Lie groups. 

296 References 

Stanislav V. Alesin, Finite automata and the Burnside problem for periodic groups, Mat. 
Zametki 11 (1972), 319-328. 

, A free group of finite automata, Vestnik Moskov. Univ. Ser. I Mat. Mekh. 4 (1983), 

12-14. 

Gideon Amir, Omer Angel, and Balint Virag, Amenability of linear- activity automaton groups 

(2009), available at larXlv : math/0905 . 2007 1 

Arthur Bartels, Wolfgang Luck, and Holger Reich, On the Farrell- J ones conjecture and its 

applications, J. Topol. 1 (2008), no. 1, 57-86, DOI 10.1112/jtopol/jtm008. MR2365652 

(2008m:19001) 

Arthur Bartels and Wolfgang Luck, On crossed product rings with twisted involutions, 

their module categories and L-theory, Cohomology of groups and algebraic _R"-theory, Adv. 

Lect. Math. (ALM), vol. 12, Int. Press, Somerville, MA, 2010, pp. 1-54, available at 

wwwmath.uni-muenster .de/u/bartelsa/research/bl- crossed.pdf MR2655174 

, The Borel conjecture for hyperbolic and CAT(0) groups (2009), available at 

larXiv:0901.0442v2l 

Arthur Bartels, F. Thomas Farrell, and Wolfgang Luck, The Farrell- J ones conjecture for 
cocompact lattices (2011), available at arXiv: 1101.0469vl 

Laurent Bartholdi, Rostislav I. Grigorchuk, and Zoran Sunik, Branch groups, Hand- 
book of algebra, Vol. 3, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 2003, pp. 989-1112, available at 
arXiv:math/0510294 MR2035113 (2005f:20046) 

Laurent Bartholdi and Balint Virag, Amenability via random walks, Duke Math. J. 130 
(2005), no. 1, 39-56, DOI 10. 1215/S0012- 7094-05-13012-5, available at |arXlv: math/ 03052621 
MR2176547 (2006h:43001) 

Laurent Bartholdi and Volodymyr V. Nekrashevych, Iterated Monodromy Groups of 
Quadratic Polynomials, I, Groups Geom. Dyn. 2 (2008), no. 3, 309-336, available at 
|arXiv:mat h/0611177 MR2415302 



297 


[1] 


298 




299 


[2] 


300 




301 


[3] 


302 




303 


W 


304 




305 




306 


[5] 


307 




308 




309 




310 


[6] 


311 




312 


[-} 


313 




314 


[8] 


315 




316 




317 


[9] 


318 




319 




320 


[If 


321 




322 





(SELF-)SIMILAR GROUPS AND THE FARRELL-JONES CONJECTURES 



323 
324 
325 
326 
327 
328 
329 
330 
331 
332 
333 
334 
335 
336 
337 
338 
339 
340 
341 
342 
343 
344 
345 
346 
347 
348 
349 
350 
351 
352 
353 
354 
355 
356 
357 
358 
359 
360 

361 
362 
363 



[12 
[13 

[H 
[15 
[16 

[17 

[18 

[19 

[20 
[21 

[22 
[23 

[21 
[25 
[26 
[27 



Laurent Bartholdi, Vadim A. Kaimanovich, and Volodymyr V. Nekrashevych, On amenabil- 
ity of automata groups, Duke Math. J. 154 (2010), no. 3, 575-598, available at 
larXiv : math/0802 ■ 2837] 

Ievgen V. Bondarenko and Volodymyr V. Nekrashevych, Post-critically finite self-similar 
groups, Algebra Discrete Math. 4 (2003), 21-32. MR2070400 (2005d:20041) 
Martin R. Bridson and Andre Haefliger, Metric spaces of non-positive curvature, Springcr- 
Verlag, Berlin, 1999. 

Xavier Buff, Adam Epstein, Sarah Koch, and Kevin Pilgrim, On Thurston's pullback map, 
Complex dynamics, A K Peters, Wellesley, MA, 2009, pp. 561-583. MR2508269 (2010g:37071) 
Marc Burger and Shahar Mozes, Finitely presented simple groups and products of trees, C. 
R. Acad. Sci. Paris Scr. I Math. 324 (1997), no. 7, 747-752. 

, Groups acting on trees: from local to global structure, Inst. Hautes Etudes Sci. Publ. 

Math. 92 (2000), 113-150 (2001). MR1839488 (2002i:20041) 

Evgucnii S. Golod, On nil-algebras and finitely approximable p-groups, Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR 

Scr. Mat. 28 (1964), 273-276. 

Rostislav I. Grigorchuk, On the Milnor problem of group growth, Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 

271 (1983), no. 1, 30-33. 

, Degrees of growth of finitely generated groups and the theory of invariant means, 

H3B. Akhm- Hay K CCCP Ccp. MaT. 48 (1984), no. 5, 939-985. English translation: Math. 
USSR-Izv. 25 (1985), no. 2, 259-300. 

, An example of a finitely presented amenable group that does not belong to the class 

EG, Mat. Sb. 189 (1998), no. 1, 79-100. 

Rostislav I. Grigorchuk and Andrzcj Zuk, Spectral properties of a torsion-free weakly branch 
group defined by a three state automaton, Computational and statistical group theory (las 
vegas, nv/hoboken, nj, 2001), 2002, pp. 57-82. 

Narain D. Gupta and Said N. Sidki, On the Burnside problem for periodic groups, Math. Z. 
182 (1983), 385-388. 

Leo Kaloujnine and Marc Krasner, Le produit complet des groupes de permutations 
et le probleme d'extension des groupes, C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris 227 (1948), 806-808 
(French). MR0027758 (10,351c) 

Sarah C. Koch, Teichmuller theory and applications to endomorphisms o/P™, Ph.D. Thesis, 
2007. 

Volodymyr V. Nekrashevych, Self-similar groups, Mathematical Surveys and Monographs, 
vol. 117, Amer. Math. Soc, Providence, RI, 2005. 

Said N. Sidki, Finite automata of polynomial growth do not generate a free group, Geom. 
Dedicata 108 (2004), 193-204. MR2112674 (2005h:20060) 

Christian Wegner, The K-theoretic Farrell- Jones conjecture for G AT (O)-groups (2010), avail- 
able at larXiv : 1012 ■ 3349v2l 



Mathematisches Institut, Georg-August Universitat zu Gottingen, Bunsenstrasse 
3-5, D-37073 Gottingen, Germany 

E-mail address: laurent.bartholdiOgmail.com