The question and the answer
A multilinear commutator word, also called an outer commutator word, is obtained by repeatedly taking commutators of expressions in disjoint variables. Thus
are examples. We use , and include the one-variable word. Let denote the set of individual -values in , and put .
Problem 21.35, proposed by Yerko Contreras Rojas, Valentina Grazian and Carmine Monetta [1], asks whether an order condition on these values implies that is -nilpotent. Here a finite group is -nilpotent if it has a normal subgroup of order prime to and index a power of , called a normal -complement. The answer is affirmative.
Theorem. Let be a finite group, a prime, and a multilinear commutator word. Then has a normal -complement if and only if
The element may have mixed order. The hypothesis concerns single word values, not arbitrary elements of the verbal subgroup. Contreras Rojas, Grazian and Monetta proved the lower-central-word case for arbitrary finite groups and the derived-word case for soluble groups [2, Theorems C and D].
We give an outline of the proof, including the centralization calculation and the final quasisimple argument. The soluble word calculus and the calculations for extensions of the minimal simple groups are summarized; their full proofs are longer than this note.
Structural results used
Thompson's classification [3] says that a finite nonabelian simple group whose proper subgroups are soluble is isomorphic to one of
The second result concerns a finite quasisimple group : this means that and is nonabelian simple. The theorem of Liebeck, O'Brien, Shalev and Tiep [4, Theorem 1 and Table 1] has the following consequence:
Indeed, every exception in their list has order sharing a prime divisor with the order of the center. The list incorporates Blau's work on central elements [13]. When , (Q) gives the authors' solution of Ore's conjecture [5]: every element of a finite nonabelian simple group is a commutator.
We also use Frobenius' normal -complement criterion: a finite group is -nilpotent if is a -group for every -subgroup of ; see [6, Theorem 5.26].
From orders to centralization
Write and , with disjoint variables in the two copies. If has height , completing its binary tree shows that every -value is a -value. Condition (P) therefore holds for whenever .
The following lemma is the centralization argument of Contreras Rojas, Grazian and Monetta [2, Lemmas 5.1 and 5.2].
Centralization lemma. Suppose (P) holds for . If a -value has order prime to and normalizes a -subgroup , then centralizes .
Proof. Take and set and . The identity
expresses as a conjugate of a -value, hence as a single -value. Here we use closure of derived-word values under inversion and conjugation. Also is such a value, and
If , (P) would imply , contrary to this conjugacy. But , so . Hence commutes with . Since
raising to the power gives . The order of is a power of , and therefore . This holds for every .
The least-counterexample reduction
First suppose that is soluble. One proves the theorem by induction on the defect of the tree of , meaning the number of vertices missing from the complete binary tree of the same height. Defect zero is the derived-word case of [2]. A proper extension of the tree of the same height decreases the defect, and its values remain -values.
Pass to ; condition (P) descends through this quotient. The induction hypothesis puts the verbal subgroups of the proper extensions inside . The outer-word commutator calculus then shows that each -order -value centralizes . This is the Fitting subgroup of and is self-centralizing, so such a value is trivial. The soluble verbal-generation argument gives that is a -group. Lifting through the normal -kernel proves the soluble case. The word-tree, section and generation methods here use the results of [7], [8], [9] and [10].
Fix , and suppose now that is a counterexample of least order. Write for its soluble radical. Minimality gives
with . Here is the Frattini subgroup.
To explain these reductions, a normal -complement lifts through a normal -kernel, giving . For a proper normal subgroup , minimality gives a normal -complement in . This complement is characteristic in and hence normal in , so it is trivial. Thus is a -group. Since , the subgroup is soluble. In particular is perfect and is nonabelian simple.
A proper supplement to would contain a perfect supplement . Minimality makes a -group, and the centralization lemma makes it centralize . The normal-centralizer argument then forces to be central, whereas a central radical with a perfect supplement gives , a contradiction. Hence . The reverse containment, nilpotence of the finite Frattini subgroup and give the equality in (1). Finally, the coprime complement theorem excludes .
The principal intermediate result is the following.
Reduction proposition. A least counterexample satisfying (1) has odd and .
We describe the two parts of its proof. Suppose first that is noncentral. Then is a proper normal subgroup, hence soluble and contained in . By the centralization lemma, every -order -value, for , lies in . It must therefore be trivial.
If is perfect, then , and minimality gives a normal -complement in . The quotient by this complement is both perfect and a -group, hence trivial; thus has -order. Its -values all vanish, forcing . Applying this to the terminal derived subgroup of each proper subgroup of shows that every proper subgroup is soluble. The same holds for , so Thompson's list applies.
For odd , the contradiction comes from a nonidentity -element that is a value of every outer word. A generating good set in a group is a subset such that each has an expression with and . Recursion down a word tree makes every member of a single value of every outer word.
In each of Thompson's groups one constructs such a set , a -subgroup , and elements and with
The even-field projective linear and Suzuki cases use root -subgroups and split tori; the odd-field projective linear cases use a four-group with a tetrahedral normalizer. The case uses a semidihedral -subgroup and an order-four good class. The split-torus calculations include Brandl's construction [11, Lemma 4(c)].
The lifting argument passes through the central quotient . A suitable good set there maps onto , and its full inverse image is good in . Combining this with the coprime normalizer argument gives a lift of normalizing a -subgroup that maps isomorphically onto , while retaining as a value of every outer word. Lift to . Then
has nontrivial image by (2). It is a value of every nonleaf outer word: use as a value of the left child and its conjugate as a value of the right child. The leaf case is immediate. Since is odd, has -order, contradicting the vanishing of the -values. This excludes a noncentral radical when is odd.
The prime requires a separate argument. First, Thompson's theorem implies solubility of every odd-order group: a least nonsoluble odd-order group would be minimal nonabelian simple, whereas every group on the list has even order. A proper perfect subgroup of a least counterexample at has odd order, by the normal-complement argument above, and is therefore trivial. Thus is minimal simple even when is central.
One must now exclude perfect Frattini -extensions of the five families. This requires control of commutator fibres through the -kernel, using linear algebra and representation theory. The even-field and odd-field projective linear cases, and the Suzuki cases yield the required order obstruction. The smallest parameters, including and , are treated separately. The representation calculations include the relevant characteristic-two instance of Steinberg's tensor description [12]. These extension calculations are a substantial part of the proof and are not reproduced here. Together with the odd-prime argument, they establish the reduction proposition.
The central radical and the conclusion
It remains to exclude . Since has trivial center, (1) gives
Thus is quasisimple with -power center. By (Q), every -element of is an ordinary commutator. The following observation converts these elements into values of the required word.
Central-extension lemma. Let have central kernel, and suppose every element of is a commutator. Then every nonleaf outer commutator word has the same set of values in as the ordinary commutator word.
Proof. Induction on the word shows that every outer word is surjective on . Given and an ordinary commutator , choose a -value and a -value whose images are and . Such lifts exist because word evaluation commutes with a surjective homomorphism. The elements and are central, so
Hence every ordinary commutator is a -value. The reverse inclusion follows from the outermost bracket.
Apply the lemma to , using Ore's theorem. Every -element of is consequently a value of every outer word, including ; the one-variable case is immediate. For any -subgroup , the centralization lemma now shows that every -element of centralizes . Each Sylow -subgroup of , for , is therefore contained in , and is a -group.
Frobenius' criterion gives a normal -complement in , and hence in its subgroup , a contradiction. This completes the forward implication, with the intermediate calculations summarized above.
Conversely, suppose is a normal -complement. Every -element lies in . If and , then , so its image in the -group is nonidentity. The element has the same image, giving . In particular, (P) holds.
Credit and the formal record
The question, the earlier cases and the centralization argument are due to Contreras Rojas, Grazian and Monetta. The classification, commutator, word-calculus and representation-theoretic results cited above are prior work. Nilradical contributed the additional word and extension arguments and their assembly into the general result, together with its formalization.
The Lean formalization takes exactly two mathematical hypotheses: Thompson's minimal-simple classification and (Q). Their published proofs are not formalized here. All other steps, including Frobenius' criterion, are proved dependencies. We acknowledge Yawara Ishida and the OddOrder contributors, the Qiuzhen-CFSG and Tau Ceti contributors, and the Lean and mathlib communities for reused mathematics and code; Comparator, lean4export and Nanoda for verification tools; and The GAP Group for computational software.
References
-
E. I. Khukhro and V. D. Mazurov (eds.), The Kourovka Notebook, 21st ed., 2026, Problem 21.35, p. 172. arXiv:1401.0300v46.
-
Y. Contreras Rojas, V. Grazian and C. Monetta, p-nilpotency criteria for some verbal subgroups, J. Algebra 609 (2022), 926–936. DOI; author version.
-
J. G. Thompson, Nonsolvable finite groups all of whose local subgroups are solvable, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 74 (1968), 383–437. DOI.
-
M. W. Liebeck, E. A. O'Brien, A. Shalev and P. H. Tiep, Commutators in finite quasisimple groups, Bull. Lond. Math. Soc. 43 (2011), 1079–1092. DOI; author version.
-
M. W. Liebeck, E. A. O'Brien, A. Shalev and P. H. Tiep, The Ore conjecture, J. Eur. Math. Soc. 12 (2010), 939–1008. Publisher's text.
-
I. M. Isaacs, Finite Group Theory, Graduate Studies in Mathematics 92, Amer. Math. Soc., 2008, §5E, Theorem 5.26. Publisher's bibliographic pages.
-
J. da Silva Alves and P. Shumyatsky, On nilpotency of higher commutator subgroups of a finite soluble group, Arch. Math. 116 (2021), 1–6. DOI; author version.
-
C. Acciarri, G. A. Fernández-Alcober and P. Shumyatsky, A focal subgroup theorem for outer commutator words, J. Group Theory 15 (2012), 397–405. DOI; author version.
-
E. Detomi, M. Morigi and P. Shumyatsky, On the rank of a verbal subgroup of a finite group, J. Aust. Math. Soc. 113 (2022), 145–159. DOI; author version.
-
G. A. Fernández-Alcober and M. Morigi, Outer commutator words are uniformly concise, J. Lond. Math. Soc. 82 (2010), 581–595. DOI; author version.
-
R. Brandl, Groups with abelian Sylow subgroups, J. Aust. Math. Soc. 88 (2010), 43–47. DOI.
-
R. Steinberg, Representations of Algebraic Groups, Nagoya Math. J. 22 (1963), 33–56. Publisher's text.
-
H. I. Blau, A fixed-point theorem for central elements in quasisimple groups, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 122 (1994), 79–84. DOI.