Showing 1–6 of 6 results for author: Amend, N

Restrictions of aspherical arrangements

Authors: Nils Amend, Tilman Moeller, Gerhard Roehrle

Abstract: In this note we present examples of $K(π,1)$-arrangements which admit a restriction which fails to be $K(π,1)$. This shows that asphericity is not hereditary among hyperplane arrangements. In this note we present examples of $K(π,1)$-arrangements which admit a restriction which fails to be $K(π,1)$. This shows that asphericity is not hereditary among hyperplane arrangements. △ Less

Submitted 20 September, 2018; v1 submitted 9 March, 2018; originally announced March 2018.

Comments: 6 pages

MSC Class: 52B30; 55P20; 52C35

Journal ref: Topology and Applications vol 249 (2018) 67 - 72

The topology of arrangements of ideal type

Authors: Nils Amend, Gerhard Roehrle

Abstract: In 1962, Fadell and Neuwirth showed that the configuration space of the braid arrangement is aspherical. Having generalized this to many real reflection groups, Brieskorn conjectured this for all finite Coxeter groups. This in turn follows from Deligne's seminal work from 1972, where he showed that the complexification of every real simplicial arrangement is a $K(π,1)$-arrangement. In this paper… ▽ More In 1962, Fadell and Neuwirth showed that the configuration space of the braid arrangement is aspherical. Having generalized this to many real reflection groups, Brieskorn conjectured this for all finite Coxeter groups. This in turn follows from Deligne's seminal work from 1972, where he showed that the complexification of every real simplicial arrangement is a $K(π,1)$-arrangement. In this paper we study the $K(π,1)$-property for a certain class of subarrangements of Weyl arrangements, the so called arrangements of ideal type ${\mathscr A}_I$. These stem from ideals $I$ in the set of positive roots of a reduced root system. We show that the $K(π,1)$-property holds for all arrangements ${\mathscr A}_I$ if the underlying Weyl group is classical and that it extends to most of the ${\mathscr A}_I$ if the underlying Weyl group is of exceptional type. Conjecturally this holds for all ${\mathscr A}_I$. In general, the ${\mathscr A}_I$ are neither simplicial, nor is their complexification fiber type. △ Less

Submitted 24 October, 2018; v1 submitted 22 January, 2018; originally announced January 2018.

Comments: 11 pages. v2: added a remark about cross sections of the given fibrations and some references. v3: changes as suggested by referee; final version to appear in Algebraic and Geometric Topology

MSC Class: 20F55; 52C35; 14N20

On the $K(π, 1)$-problem for restrictions of complex reflection arrangements

Authors: Nils Amend, Pierre Deligne, Gerhard Roehrle

Abstract: Let $W\subset GL(V)$ be a complex reflection group, and ${\mathscr A}(W)$ the set of the mirrors of the complex reflections in $W$. It is known that the complement $X({\mathscr A}(W))$ of the reflection arrangement ${\mathscr A}(W)$ is a $K(π,1)$ space. For $Y$ an intersection of hyperplanes in $\mathscr A(W)$, let $X(\mathscr A(W)^Y)$ be the complement in $Y$ of the hyperplanes in… ▽ More Let $W\subset GL(V)$ be a complex reflection group, and ${\mathscr A}(W)$ the set of the mirrors of the complex reflections in $W$. It is known that the complement $X({\mathscr A}(W))$ of the reflection arrangement ${\mathscr A}(W)$ is a $K(π,1)$ space. For $Y$ an intersection of hyperplanes in $\mathscr A(W)$, let $X(\mathscr A(W)^Y)$ be the complement in $Y$ of the hyperplanes in $\mathscr A(W)$ not containing $Y$. We hope that $X(\mathscr A(W)^Y)$ is always a $K(π,1)$. We prove it in case of the monomial groups $W = G(r,p,\ell)$. Using known results, we then show that there remain only three irreducible complex reflection groups, leading to just eight such induced arrangements for which this $K(π,1)$ property remains to be proved. △ Less

Submitted 4 October, 2019; v1 submitted 17 August, 2017; originally announced August 2017.

Comments: 20 pages; v2: small changes and further references added, in particular [AMR18], where examples of K(pi,1) arrangements are exhibited which admit restrictions that are not K(pi,1); v3 author added, completely revised, alternate geometric proof of main theorem, 11 pages; v4 minor changes, final version to appear in Compositio Math

MSC Class: 20F55; 52C35; 14N20; 13N15

Journal ref: Compositio Math. 156 (2020) 526-532

Restricting invariants of unitary reflection groups

Authors: Nils Amend, Angela Berardinelli, J. Matthew Douglass, Gerhard Roehrle

Abstract: Suppose that G is a finite, unitary reflection group acting on a complex vector space V and X is the fixed point subspace of an element of G. Define N to be the setwise stabilizer of X in G, Z to be the pointwise stabilizer, and C=N/Z. Then restriction defines a homomorphism from the algebra of G-invariant polynomial functions on V to the algebra of C-invariant functions on X. Extending earlier wo… ▽ More Suppose that G is a finite, unitary reflection group acting on a complex vector space V and X is the fixed point subspace of an element of G. Define N to be the setwise stabilizer of X in G, Z to be the pointwise stabilizer, and C=N/Z. Then restriction defines a homomorphism from the algebra of G-invariant polynomial functions on V to the algebra of C-invariant functions on X. Extending earlier work by Douglass and Roehrle for Coxeter groups, we characterize when the restriction mapping is surjective for arbitrary unitary reflection groups G in terms of the exponents of G and C, and their reflection arrangements. A consequence of our main result is that the variety of G-orbits in the G-saturation of X is smooth if and only if it is normal. △ Less

Submitted 18 November, 2016; v1 submitted 1 March, 2015; originally announced March 2015.

Comments: 28 pages, includes tables; revisions suggested by a referee

Supersolvable restrictions of reflection arrangements

Authors: N. Amend, T. Hoge, G. Roehrle

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

Submitted 8 July, 2014; v1 submitted 4 November, 2013; originally announced November 2013.

Comments: 16 pages; final version, to appear in Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series A

MSC Class: 20F55; 52B30; 52C35; 14N20; 13N15

On inductively free Restrictions of Reflection Arrangements

Authors: Nils Amend, Torsten Hoge, Gerhard Roehrle

Abstract: Let W be a finite complex reflection group acting on the complex vector space V and let A(W) = (A(W), V) be the associated reflection arrangement. In an earlier paper by the last two authros, we classified all inductively free reflection arrangements A(W). The aim of this note is to extend this work by determining all inductively free restrictions of reflection arrangements. Let W be a finite complex reflection group acting on the complex vector space V and let A(W) = (A(W), V) be the associated reflection arrangement. In an earlier paper by the last two authros, we classified all inductively free reflection arrangements A(W). The aim of this note is to extend this work by determining all inductively free restrictions of reflection arrangements. △ Less

Submitted 21 July, 2014; v1 submitted 7 October, 2013; originally announced October 2013.

Comments: 15 pages, final version to appear in Journal of Algebra

MSC Class: 20F55; 52C35; 14N20; 13N15