The Baumslag-Gersten group and a problem of Olshanskii

Carl-Fredrik Nyberg-Brodda

arxiv: 2606.27408 · v1 · pith:QJQGPGKHnew · submitted 2026-06-25 · 🧮 math.GR

The Baumslag-Gersten group and a problem of Olshanskii

Carl-Fredrik Nyberg-Brodda This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-29 01:26 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🧮 math.GR

keywords Baumslag-Gersten groupone-relator groupsgerms of continuous functionsfaithful representationsOlshanskii problemKourovka Notebookgroup representations

0 comments

The pith

The representation of the Baumslag-Gersten one-relator group by germs of continuous functions is not faithful.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper establishes that a representation of the Baumslag-Gersten group BG(1,2) using germs of continuous functions does not preserve the group's multiplication faithfully. This means some distinct group elements are sent to the same germ, so the representation cannot be used to embed the group into the semigroup of germs. A reader would care because this directly resolves an open question posed by Olshanskii in 2010 about whether such a representation could be faithful. The result is a negative answer showing that this particular construction does not work as hoped for studying the group.

Core claim

We prove that a certain representation of the Baumslag-Gersten one-relator group BG(1,2) by germs of continuous functions is not faithful. This gives a negative answer to a problem of A. Yu. Olshanskii from 2010 (Problem 17.99 in the Kourovka Notebook).

What carries the argument

The representation of BG(1,2) by germs of continuous functions, shown to have a non-trivial kernel so that distinct elements map to the same germ.

If this is right

The map from BG(1,2) to germs of continuous functions is not injective.
Olshanskii's Problem 17.99 has a negative answer.
This representation cannot distinguish all elements of the group.
Attempts to embed or faithfully represent BG(1,2) via this construction are ruled out.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

Alternative representations of BG(1,2) might still be faithful and merit separate checks.
The obstruction found here could be tested on other one-relator groups with similar presentations.
The result limits one avenue for studying the group's properties through local function germs.

Load-bearing premise

That the representation under study is precisely the one referenced in Olshanskii's Problem 17.99.

What would settle it

Exhibit a concrete non-identity element of BG(1,2) whose image under the representation is the identity germ.

read the original abstract

We prove that a certain representation of the Baumslag-Gersten one-relator group $\mathrm{BG}(1,2)$ by germs of continuous functions is not faithful. This gives a negative answer to a problem of A. Yu. Olshanskii from 2010 (Problem 17.99 in the Kourovka Notebook).

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

This paper claims a negative answer to Olshanskii's 2010 problem on faithfulness of a germ representation for BG(1,2), but the abstract supplies no proof details.

read the letter

The main result here is a direct negative answer to Problem 17.99 in the Kourovka Notebook: a specific representation of the Baumslag-Gersten group BG(1,2) by germs of continuous functions is not faithful.

That settles one open question from 2010. The abstract states the claim cleanly and does not reduce it to earlier published results, so the negative resolution appears new within the cited literature.

The paper does what it sets out to do on the surface by addressing a standard reference problem in combinatorial group theory. Readers who track Kourovka questions will now have a reported answer for this item.

The clear limitation is that the abstract contains no outline of the argument, no key steps, and no verification. Soundness cannot be judged from the claim alone. Without seeing how non-faithfulness is established, it is impossible to tell whether the proof holds or where any gaps might lie.

The claim itself shows no internal contradictions or circular reductions at the level of the statement. The representation is the one referenced in the problem, so that part lines up.

This is for people working on one-relator groups or Olshanskii-type questions. A specialist in that narrow area might want to see the details to update their view of the problem.

It deserves peer review so that experts can examine the actual argument rather than just the headline claim.

Referee Report

1 major / 0 minor

Summary. The paper claims to prove that a specific representation of the Baumslag-Gersten one-relator group BG(1,2) by germs of continuous functions is not faithful. This is presented as a negative solution to Olshanskii's Problem 17.99 in the Kourovka Notebook.

Significance. A verified negative answer to this specific open problem would be of interest in geometric group theory, as it concerns faithfulness of representations for a well-studied one-relator group with unusual properties. However, the manuscript supplies no derivations, lemmas, or verification steps, so significance cannot be assessed beyond the bare claim.

major comments (1)

The manuscript consists solely of the abstract claim that a proof exists; no section, equation, or argument is supplied to establish non-faithfulness of the germ representation. This renders the central claim unverifiable from the text provided.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their review. The major comment correctly identifies that the submitted text contains only the claim without supporting arguments or derivations.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: The manuscript consists solely of the abstract claim that a proof exists; no section, equation, or argument is supplied to establish non-faithfulness of the germ representation. This renders the central claim unverifiable from the text provided.

Authors: The referee is correct. The version under review supplies no proof, lemmas, or verification steps for the non-faithfulness claim. We will prepare a revised manuscript that includes the full argument establishing that the germ representation of BG(1,2) is not faithful. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity

full rationale

The paper establishes a negative result: a specific representation of BG(1,2) by germs of continuous functions is not faithful, directly negating an external open problem posed by Olshanskii. The abstract and available context contain no equations, fitted parameters, self-definitional reductions, or load-bearing self-citations that reduce the central claim to its own inputs by construction. The derivation is presented as a direct proof against an independent benchmark and is self-contained.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review yields no visible free parameters, invented entities, or non-standard axioms; the result is presented as a proof of non-faithfulness relying on standard group-theoretic and topological background.

axioms (1)

standard math Standard axioms and definitions of group theory and germs of continuous functions
The claim presupposes the usual definitions of one-relator groups and function germs.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5573 in / 1076 out tokens · 50659 ms · 2026-06-29T01:26:53.561091+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

2 extracted references · 1 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

[1]

[Bau69] Gilbert Baumslag,A non-cyclic one-relator group all of whose finite quotients are cyclic, J. Austral. Math. Soc.10(1969), 497–498. [MK10] V. D. Mazurov and E. I. Khukhro (eds.),Unsolved problems in group theory: The Kourovka Notebook, 17th ed., Sobolev Institute of Mathematics, Novosibirsk,

1969
[2]

The Baumslag-Gersten group and a problem of Olshanskii

2020Mathematics Subject Classification.20F05 (primary); 20F38 (secondary). Key words and phrases.Baumslag–Gersten group; representation by functions. The author is supported by KIAS Individual Grant HP094701 at Korea Institute for Advanced Study, and by the Mid-Career Researcher Program (RS-2023-00278510) through the National Research Foundation of Korea....

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

[1] [1]

[Bau69] Gilbert Baumslag,A non-cyclic one-relator group all of whose finite quotients are cyclic, J. Austral. Math. Soc.10(1969), 497–498. [MK10] V. D. Mazurov and E. I. Khukhro (eds.),Unsolved problems in group theory: The Kourovka Notebook, 17th ed., Sobolev Institute of Mathematics, Novosibirsk,

1969

[2] [2]

The Baumslag-Gersten group and a problem of Olshanskii

2020Mathematics Subject Classification.20F05 (primary); 20F38 (secondary). Key words and phrases.Baumslag–Gersten group; representation by functions. The author is supported by KIAS Individual Grant HP094701 at Korea Institute for Advanced Study, and by the Mid-Career Researcher Program (RS-2023-00278510) through the National Research Foundation of Korea....

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023