text:
# The automorphism tower problem revisited

## 1. Introduction

If $`G`$ is a centreless group, then there is a natural embedding of $`G`$ into its automorphism group $`\mathrm{Aut}G`$, obtained by sending each $`gG`$ to the corresponding inner automorphism $`i_g\mathrm{Aut}G`$. In this paper, we will always work with the left action of $`\mathrm{Aut}G`$ on $`G`$. Thus $`i_g(x)=gxg^1`$ for all $`xG`$. If $`\pi \mathrm{Aut}G`$ and $`gG`$, then an easy calculation shows that $`\pi i_g\pi ^1=i_{\pi (g)}`$. Hence the group of inner automorphisms $`\mathrm{Inn}G`$ is a normal subgroup of $`\mathrm{Aut}G`$; and $`C_{\mathrm{Aut}G}(\mathrm{Inn}G)=1`$. In particular, $`\mathrm{Aut}G`$ is also a centreless group. This enables us to define the automorphism tower of $`G`$ to be the ascending chain of groups

$$G=G_0\mathrm{}G_1\mathrm{}G_2\mathrm{}\mathrm{}G_\alpha \mathrm{}G_{\alpha +1}\mathrm{}\mathrm{}$$

such that for each ordinal $`\alpha `$

1. $`G_{\alpha +1}=\mathrm{Aut}G_\alpha `$; and
2. if $`\alpha `$ is a limit ordinal, then $`G_\alpha =\underset{\beta <\alpha }{}G_\beta `$.

(At each successor step, we identify $`G_\alpha `$ with $`\mathrm{Inn}G_\alpha `$ via the natural embedding.)

The automorphism tower is said to terminate if there exists an ordinal $`\alpha `$ such that $`G_{\alpha +1}=G_\alpha `$. This occurs if and only if there exists an ordinal $`\alpha `$ such that $`\mathrm{Aut}G_\alpha =\mathrm{Inn}G_\alpha `$. A classical result of Wielandt  says that if $`G`$ is finite, then the automorphism tower terminates after finitely many steps. Wielandt’s theorem fails for infinite centreless groups. For example, consider the infinite dihedral group $`D_{\mathrm{}}=a,b`$, where $`a`$ and $`b`$ are elements of order 2. Then $`D_{\mathrm{}}=ab`$ is the free product of its cyclic subgroups $`a`$ and $`b`$. It follows that $`D_{\mathrm{}}`$ is a centreless group; and that $`D_{\mathrm{}}`$ has an outer automorphism $`\pi `$ of order 2 which interchanges the elements $`a`$ and $`b`$. It is easily shown that $`\mathrm{Aut}D_{\mathrm{}}=\pi ,i_a`$. Thus $`\mathrm{Aut}D_{\mathrm{}}`$ is also an infinite dihedral group, and so $`\mathrm{Aut}D_{\mathrm{}}D_{\mathrm{}}`$. Hence for each $`n\omega `$, the $`n^{th}`$ group in the automorphism tower of $`D_{\mathrm{}}`$ is isomorphic to $`D_{\mathrm{}}`$; and the automorphism tower of $`D_{\mathrm{}}`$ does not terminate after finitely many steps.

In the 1970s, a number of special cases of the automorphism tower problem were solved. For example, Rae and Roseblade  proved that the automorphism tower of a centreless Černikov group terminates after finitely many steps; and Hulse  proved that the automorphism tower of a centreless polycyclic group terminates in countably many steps. But the problem was not solved in full generality until 1984, when Thomas  showed that the automorphism tower of an arbitrary centreless group eventually terminates; and that for each ordinal $`\alpha `$, there exists a group whose automorphism tower terminates in exactly $`\alpha `$ steps.

###### Definition 1.1.

If $`G`$ is a centreless group, then the height $`\tau (G)`$ of the automorphism tower of $`G`$ is the least ordinal $`\alpha `$ such that $`G_{\alpha +1}=G_\alpha `$.

This raises the question of finding bounds for $`\tau (G)`$ in terms of the cardinality of $`G`$. In his original paper , Thomas proved that if $`G`$ is an infinite centreless group of cardinality $`\kappa `$, then $`\tau (G)\left(2^\kappa \right)^+`$. Soon afterwards, Thomas and Felgner independently noticed that an easy application of Fodor’s Lemma yielded the following slightly better bound.

###### Theorem 1.2 (Thomas ).

If $`G`$ is an infinite centreless group of cardinality $`\kappa `$, then $`\tau (G)<\left(2^\kappa \right)^+`$.

$`\mathrm{}`$

###### Definition 1.3.

If $`\kappa `$ is an infinite cardinal, then $`\tau _\kappa `$ is the least ordinal such that $`\tau (G)<\tau _\kappa `$ for every centreless group $`G`$ of cardinality $`\kappa `$.

Since there are only $`2^\kappa `$ centreless groups of cardinality $`\kappa `$ up to isomorphism, it follows that $`\tau _\kappa <\left(2^\kappa \right)^+`$. On the other hand, Thomas  has shown that for each ordinal $`\alpha <\kappa ^+`$, there exists a centreless group $`G`$ of cardinality $`\kappa `$ such that $`\tau (G)=\alpha `$. Thus $`\kappa ^+\tau _\kappa <\left(2^\kappa \right)^+`$. It is natural to ask whether a better explicit bound on $`\tau _\kappa `$ can be proved in $`ZFC`$, preferably one which does not involve cardinal exponentiation.

The proof of Theorem 1.2 is extremely simple, and uses only the most basic results in group theory, together with some elementary properties of the infinite cardinal numbers. So it is not surprising that Theorem 1.2 does not give the best possible bound for $`\tau _\kappa `$. In contrast, the proof of Wielandt’s theorem is much deeper, and involves an intricate study of the subnormal subgroups of a finite centreless group. The real question behind the search for better explicit bounds for $`\tau _\kappa `$ is whether there exists a subtler, more informative, group-theoretic proof of the automorphism tower theorem for infinite groups. The main result of this paper says that no such bounds can be proved in $`ZFC`$, and thus can be interpreted as saying that no such proof exists. (It is perhaps worth mentioning that the proof of Theorem 1.2 yields that the automorphism tower of a finite centreless group terminates in countably many steps. However, there does not seem to be an easy reduction from countable to finite; and it appears that some form of Wielandt’s analysis is necessary.)

###### Theorem 1.4.

Let $`VGCH`$ and let $`\kappa `$, $`\lambda V`$ be uncountable cardinals such that $`\kappa <\mathrm{cf}(\lambda )`$. Let $`\alpha `$ be any ordinal such that $`\alpha <\lambda ^+`$. Then there exists a notion of forcing $``$, which preserves cofinalities and cardinalities, such that the following statements are true in the corresponding generic extension $`V^{}`$.

1. $`2^\kappa =\lambda `$.
2. There exists a centreless group $`G`$ of cardinality $`\kappa `$ such that $`\tau (G)=\alpha `$.

Thus it is impossible to find better explicit bounds for $`\tau _\kappa `$ when $`\kappa `$ is an uncountable cardinal. However, our methods do not enable us to deal with countable groups; and it remains an open question whether or not there exists a countable centreless group $`G`$ such that $`\tau (G)\omega _1`$.

Most of this paper will be concerned with the problem of constructing centreless groups with extremely long automorphism towers. Unfortunately it is usually very difficult to compute the successive groups in an automorphism tower. We will get around this difficulty by reducing it to the much easier computation of the successive normalisers of a subgroup $`H`$ of a group $`G`$.

###### Definition 1.5.

If $`H`$ is a subgroup of the group $`G`$, then the normaliser tower of $`H`$ in $`G`$ is defined inductively as follows.

1. $`N_0(H)=H`$.
2. If $`\alpha =\beta +1`$, then $`N_\alpha (H)=N_G\left(N_\beta (H)\right)`$.
3. If $`\alpha `$ is a limit ordinal, then $`N_\alpha (H)=\underset{\beta <\alpha }{}N_\beta (H)`$.

It is sometimes necessary for the notation to include an explicit reference to the ambient group $`G`$. In this case, we will write $`N_\alpha (H)=N_\alpha (H,G)`$.

As we will see in Section 2, if $`\alpha `$ is any ordinal, then it is easy to construct examples of pairs of groups, $`H<G`$, such that the normaliser tower of $`H`$ in $`G`$ terminates in exactly $`\alpha `$ steps. The following lemma, which was essentially proved in , will enable us to convert normaliser towers into corresponding automorphism towers.

###### Lemma 1.6.

Let $`K`$ be a field such that $`|K|>3`$ and let $`H`$ be a subgroup of $`\mathrm{Aut}K`$. Let

$$G=PGL(2,K)HP\mathrm{\Gamma }L(2,K)=PGL(2,K)\mathrm{Aut}K.$$

Then $`G`$ is a centreless group; and for each $`\alpha `$, $`G_\alpha =PGL(2,K)N_\alpha (H)`$, where $`N_\alpha (H)`$ is the $`\alpha ^{th}`$ group in the normaliser tower of $`H`$ in $`\mathrm{Aut}K`$.

$`\mathrm{}`$

It is well-known that every group $`G`$ can be realised as the automorphism group of a suitable graph $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Thus the following result implies that every group $`G`$ can also be realised as the automorphism group of a suitable field $`K`$.

###### Lemma 1.7 (Fried and Kollár ).

Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=X,E`$ be any graph. Then there exists a field $`K_\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ of cardinality $`\mathrm{max}\{\left|X\right|,\omega \}`$ which satisfies the following conditions.

1. $`X`$ is an $`\mathrm{Aut}K_\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-invariant subset of $`K_\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.
2. The restriction mapping, $`\pi \pi X`$, is an isomorphism from $`\mathrm{Aut}K_\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ onto $`\mathrm{Aut}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

$`\mathrm{}`$

Combining Lemmas 1.6 and 1.7, we obtain the following reduction of our problem.

###### Lemma 1.8.

Suppose that there exists a graph $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ of cardinality $`\kappa `$ and a subgroup $`H`$ of $`\mathrm{Aut}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ such that

1. $`\left|H\right|\kappa `$; and
2. the normaliser tower of $`H`$ in $`\mathrm{Aut}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ terminates in exactly $`\alpha `$ steps.

Then there exists a centreless group $`T`$ of cardinality $`\kappa `$ such that $`\tau (T)=\alpha `$.

###### Proof.

Let $`K_\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ be the corresponding field, which is given by Lemma 1.7, and let $`T=PGL(2,K_\mathrm{\Gamma })H`$. By Lemma 1.6, $`\tau (T)=\alpha `$. ∎

From now on, fix a regular uncountable cardinal $`\kappa `$ such that $`\kappa ^{<\kappa }=\kappa `$ and an ordinal $`\alpha `$. Roughly speaking, our strategy will be to

1. first construct a pair of groups, $`H<G`$, such that $`\left|H\right|\kappa `$ and the normaliser tower of $`H`$ in $`G`$ terminates in $`\alpha `$ steps; and
2. then attempt to find a cardinal-preserving notion of forcing $``$ which adjoins a graph $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ of cardinality $`\kappa `$ such that $`G\mathrm{Aut}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

Of course, there are many groups $`G`$ for which such a notion of forcing $``$ cannot possibly exist. For example, De Bruijn  has shown that the alternating group $`\mathrm{Alt}(\kappa ^+)`$ cannot be embedded in $`\mathrm{Sym}(\kappa )`$. Consequently, there is no cardinal-preserving notion of forcing $``$ which adjoins a graph $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ of cardinality $`\kappa `$ such that $`\mathrm{Alt}(\kappa ^+)\mathrm{Aut}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

Our next definition singles out a combinatorial condition which is satisfied by all those groups $`G`$ such that $`G`$ is embeddable in $`\mathrm{Sym}(\kappa )`$. (See Proposition 1.11.) Conversely, in Theorem 1.12, we will show that if a group $`G`$ satisfies this combinatorial condition, then there exists a cardinal-preserving notion of forcing $``$ which adjoins a graph $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ of cardinality $`\kappa `$ such that $`G\mathrm{Aut}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

###### Definition 1.9.

Let $`\kappa `$ be a regular uncountable cardinal such that $`\kappa ^{<\kappa }=\kappa `$. Then a group $`G`$ is said to satisfy the $`\kappa ^+`$-compatibility condition if it has the following property. Suppose that $`H`$ is a group such that $`\left|H\right|<\kappa `$. Suppose that $`\left(f_ii<\kappa ^+\right)`$ is a sequence of embeddings $`f_i:HG`$; and let $`H_i=f_i[H]`$ for each $`i<\kappa ^+`$. Then there exist ordinals $`i<j<\kappa ^+`$ and a surjective homomorphism $`\phi :H_i,H_jH_i`$ such that

1. $`\phi f_j=f_i`$; and
2. $`\phi H_i=id_{H_i}`$.

###### Example 1.10.

To get an understanding of Definition 1.9, it will probably be helpful to see an example of a group which fails to satisfy the $`\kappa ^+`$-compatibility condition. So we will show that $`\mathrm{Alt}(\kappa ^+)`$ does not satisfy the $`\kappa ^+`$-compatibility condition. Let $`H=\mathrm{Alt}(4)`$. For each $`3i<\kappa ^+`$, let $`\mathrm{\Delta }_i=\{0,1,2,i\}`$ and let $`f_i:\mathrm{Alt}(4)\mathrm{Alt}(\mathrm{\Delta }_i)`$ be an isomorphism. If $`3i<j<\kappa ^+`$, then

$$\mathrm{Alt}(\mathrm{\Delta }_i),\mathrm{Alt}(\mathrm{\Delta }_j)=\mathrm{Alt}(\mathrm{\Delta }_i\mathrm{\Delta }_j)\mathrm{Alt}(5).$$

Since $`\mathrm{Alt}(5)`$ is a simple group, there does not exist a surjective homomorphism from $`\mathrm{Alt}(\mathrm{\Delta }_i),\mathrm{Alt}(\mathrm{\Delta }_j)`$ onto $`\mathrm{Alt}(\mathrm{\Delta }_i)`$.

###### Proposition 1.11.

Let $`\kappa `$ be a regular uncountable cardinal such that $`\kappa ^{<\kappa }=\kappa `$, and let $`G\mathrm{Sym}(\kappa )`$. Then $`G`$ satisfies the $`\kappa ^+`$-compatibility condition.

###### Proof.

Let $`H`$ be a group such that $`\left|H\right|<\kappa `$, and let $`\left(f_ii<\kappa ^+\right)`$ be a sequence of embeddings $`f_i:HG`$. For each $`i<\kappa ^+`$, let $`H_i=f_i[H]`$; and let $`Z_i`$ be a subset of $`\kappa `$ chosen so that

1. $`\left|Z_i\right|<\kappa `$;
2. $`Z_i`$ is $`H_i`$-invariant; and
3. $`gZ_iid_{Z_i}`$ for all $`1gH_i`$.

After passing to a suitable subsequence if necessary, we can suppose that the following conditions hold.

1. There exists a fixed subset $`Z`$ such that $`Z_i=Z`$ for all $`i<\kappa ^+`$.
2. For each $`i<\kappa ^+`$, let $`r_i:H_i\mathrm{Sym}(Z)`$ be the restriction mapping, $`ggZ`$; and let $`\pi _i:H\mathrm{Sym}(Z)`$ be the embedding defined by $`\pi _i=r_if_i`$. Then $`\pi _i=\pi _j`$ for all $`i<j<\kappa ^+`$.

Fix any pair of ordinals $`i`$, $`j`$ such that $`i<j<\kappa ^+`$. Let $`\rho :H_i,H_j\mathrm{Sym}(Z)`$ be the restriction mapping, $`ggZ`$. Then $`\rho \left[H_i,H_j\right]=r_i\left[H_i\right]`$, and so we can define a surjective homomorphism $`\phi :H_i,H_jH_i`$ by $`\phi =r_i^1\rho `$. Clearly $`\phi H_i=id_{H_i}`$; and it is easily checked that $`\phi f_j=f_i`$. ∎

###### Theorem 1.12.

Let $`\kappa `$ be a regular uncountable cardinal such that $`\kappa ^{<\kappa }=\kappa `$, and let $`G`$ be a group which satisfies the $`\kappa ^+`$-compatibility condition. Then there exists a notion of forcing $``$ such that

1. $``$ is $`\kappa `$-closed;
2. $``$ has the $`\kappa ^+`$-$`c.c.`$; and
3. $`\underset{}{}\text{ There exists a graph }\mathrm{\Gamma }\text{ of cardinality }\kappa \text{ such that }G\mathrm{Aut}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

Furthermore, if $`\left|G\right|=\lambda `$, then $`\left|\right|=\mathrm{max}\{\kappa ,\lambda ^{<\kappa }\}`$.

Combining Proposition 1.11 and Theorem 1.12, we see that if $`\kappa `$ is an uncountable cardinal such that $`\kappa ^{<\kappa }=\kappa `$ and $`G`$ is an arbitrary subgroup of $`\mathrm{Sym}(\kappa )`$, then there exists a cardinal-preserving notion of forcing $``$ and a graph $`\mathrm{\Gamma }V^{}`$ such that $`G\mathrm{Aut}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. This result is not true of arbitrary subgroups of $`\mathrm{Sym}(\omega )`$; for Solecki  has shown that no uncountable free abelian group is the automorphism group of a countable first-order structure.

Theorem 1.12 will be proved in Section 3. It is now easy to explain the main points of the proof of Theorem 1.4. Assume that $`VGCH`$. Let $`\kappa `$ be a regular uncountable cardinal, and let $`\lambda `$ be a cardinal such that $`\mathrm{cf}(\lambda )>\kappa `$. Let $`\alpha `$ be any ordinal such that $`\alpha <\lambda ^+`$. In Section 2, we will prove that there exists a notion of forcing $``$ such that

1. $``$ is $`\kappa `$-closed;
2. $``$ has the $`\kappa ^+`$-$`c.c.`$;

and such that the following statements are true in the generic extension $`V^{}`$.

1. $`2^\kappa =\lambda `$.
2. There exist groups $`H<G<\mathrm{Sym}(\kappa )`$ such that $`|H|=\kappa `$ and the normaliser tower of $`H`$ in $`G`$ terminates in exactly $`\alpha `$ steps.

By Proposition 1.11, $`G`$ satisfies the $`\kappa ^+`$-compatibility condition. Hence we can use Theorem 1.12 to generically adjoin a graph $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ of cardinality $`\kappa `$ such that $`G\mathrm{Aut}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. A moment’s thought shows that the normaliser tower of $`H`$ in $`G`$ is an absolute notion. Thus Lemma 1.8 yields a centreless group $`T`$ of cardinality $`\kappa `$ such that $`\tau (T)=\alpha `$. The case when $`\kappa `$ is a singular cardinal requires a little more work, and will be dealt with in Section 4. The remainder of this section will be devoted to another two easy applications of Theorem 1.12.

###### Application 1.13.

A well-known open problem asks whether there exists a countable structure $``$ such that $`\mathrm{Aut}`$ is the free group on $`2^\omega `$ generators. Using Theorem 1.12, it is easy to establish the consistency of the existence of a structure $`𝒩`$ of cardinality $`\omega _1`$ such that $`\mathrm{Aut}𝒩`$ is the free group on $`2^{\omega _1}`$ generators. It is not known whether the existence of such a structure can be proved in $`ZFC`$.

###### Theorem 1.14.

Let $`V`$ be a transitive model of $`ZFC`$ and let $`\kappa `$, $`\lambda `$, $`\theta `$ be cardinals such that $`\kappa ^{<\kappa }=\kappa <\lambda \theta =\theta ^\kappa `$. Then there exists a notion of forcing $``$, which preserves cofinalities and cardinalities, such that the following statements are true in $`V^{}`$.

1. $`2^\kappa =\theta `$; and
2. there exists a graph $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ of cardinality $`\kappa `$ such that $`\mathrm{Aut}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is the free group on $`\lambda `$ generators.

###### Proof.

After performing a preliminary forcing if necessary, we can also suppose that $`2^\kappa =\theta `$. Let $`F`$ be the free group on $`\lambda `$ generators. Then it is enough to show that $`F`$ satisfies the $`\kappa ^+`$-compatibility condition. Let $`H`$ be a (necessarily free) group such that $`\left|H\right|<\kappa `$, and let $`\left(f_ii<\kappa ^+\right)`$ be a sequence of embeddings $`f_i:HF`$. For each $`i<\kappa ^+`$, let $`H_i=f_i[H]`$. Then $`H_ii<\kappa ^+`$ is a free group of cardinality at most $`\kappa ^+`$. By Theorem 5.1 , there exists an embedding of $`H_ii<\kappa ^+`$ into $`\mathrm{Sym}(\kappa )`$. So Proposition 1.11 yields the existence of ordinals $`i<j<\kappa ^+`$ and a surjective homomorphism $`\phi :H_i,H_jH_i`$ such that $`\phi f_j=f_i`$ and $`\phi H_i=id_{H_i}`$. ∎

###### Application 1.15.

Theorem 1.6  says that if $`G`$ is a finitely generated centreless group, then the automorphism tower of $`G`$ terminates in countably many steps. It is conceivable that a more general result holds; namely, that the automorphism tower of $`G`$ terminates in countably many steps, whenever $`G`$ is a countable centreless group such that $`\mathrm{Aut}G`$ is also countable. To see why this might be true, let $`G`$ be such a group. Then, by Kueker , there exists a finite subset $`FG`$ such that each automorphism $`\pi \mathrm{Aut}G`$ is uniquely determined by its restriction $`\pi F`$. In terms of the automorphism tower of $`G`$, this says that there is a finite subset $`FG`$ such that $`C_{G_1}(F)=1`$. Suppose that the “rigidity” of $`F`$ within $`G=G_0`$ is propagated along the automorphism tower of $`G`$; ie. that $`C_{G_\alpha }(F)=1`$ for all ordinals $`\alpha <\omega _1`$. Then the proof of Theorem 1.6  shows that the automorphism tower of $`G`$ terminates in countably many steps.

###### Question 1.16.

Let $`G`$ be a centreless group such that $`\left|\mathrm{Aut}G\right|=\omega `$. Does there exist a finite subset $`FG`$ such that $`C_{G_\alpha }(F)=1`$ for all ordinals $`\alpha <\omega _1`$?

If $`\left|G_\alpha \right|=\omega `$ for all $`\alpha <\omega _1`$, then Fodor’s Lemma implies that there exists an ordinal $`\beta <\omega _1`$ and a finite subset $`F_\beta `$ of $`G_\beta `$ such that $`C_{G_\alpha }(F_\beta )=1`$ for all $`\beta \alpha <\omega _1`$; and so $`\tau (G)<\omega _1`$. This observation suggests the following weak form of Question 1.16, which is also open.

###### Question 1.17.

Does there exist a centreless group $`G`$ such that $`\left|\mathrm{Aut}G\right|=\omega `$ and $`\left|\mathrm{Aut}(\mathrm{Aut}G)\right|=2^\omega `$?

Of course, a positive answer to Question 1.16 implies a negative answer to Question 1.17. Using Theorem 1.12, it is easy to establish the consistency of the existence of a centreless group $`G`$ of cardinality $`\omega _1`$ such that $`\left|\mathrm{Aut}G\right|=\omega _1`$ and $`\left|\mathrm{Aut}(\mathrm{Aut}G)\right|=2^{\omega _1}`$. Once again, it is not known whether the existence of such a group can be proved in $`ZFC`$.

###### Theorem 1.18.

Let $`\kappa `$ be a regular uncountable cardinal such that $`\kappa ^{<\kappa }=\kappa `$. Then it is consistent that there exists a centreless group $`G`$ of cardinality $`\kappa `$ such that $`\left|\mathrm{Aut}G\right|=\kappa `$ and $`\left|\mathrm{Aut}(\mathrm{Aut}G)\right|=2^\kappa `$.

###### Proof.

Let $`V`$ be the ground model. For each $`\alpha `$, $`\xi <\kappa `$, let $`Z_\xi ^\alpha =z_\xi ^\alpha `$ be an infinite cyclic group. For each $`\xi <\kappa `$, let $`A_\xi =\underset{\alpha <\kappa }{}Z_\xi ^\alpha `$; and let $`B=\underset{\xi <\kappa }{}A_\xi `$. Define an action of $`\mathrm{Sym}(\kappa )`$ on $`B`$ by $`\pi z_\xi ^\alpha \pi ^1=z_{\pi (\xi )}^\alpha `$ for all $`\alpha `$, $`\xi <\kappa `$; and let $`W=B\mathrm{Sym}(\kappa )`$ be the corresponding semidirect product. Let $`H=\underset{\xi <\kappa }{}Z_\xi ^\xi `$. Then the members of the normaliser tower of $`H`$ in $`W`$ are

1. $`N_0(H)=H`$;
2. $`N_1(H)=B`$;
3. $`N_2(H)=W`$.

Clearly $`W`$ is embeddable in $`\mathrm{Sym}(\kappa )`$; and so $`W`$ satisfies the $`\kappa ^+`$-compatibility condition. Let $``$ be the notion of forcing, given by Theorem 1.12, which adjoins a graph $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ of cardinality $`\kappa `$ such that $`W\mathrm{Aut}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Let $`K_\mathrm{\Gamma }V^{}`$ be the corresponding field, which is given by Lemma 1.7. Then $`G=PGL(2,K_\mathrm{\Gamma })H`$ is a group such that

$$\left|\mathrm{Aut}G\right|=\left|PGL(2,K_\mathrm{\Gamma })B\right|=\kappa $$

and

$$\left|\mathrm{Aut}(\mathrm{Aut}G)\right|=\left|PGL(2,K_\mathrm{\Gamma })W\right|=2^\kappa .$$

Our set-theoretic notation mainly follows that of Kunen . Thus if $``$ is a notion of forcing and $`p`$,$`q`$, then $`qp`$ means that $`q`$ is a strengthening of $`p`$. We say that $``$ is $`\kappa `$-closed if for every $`\lambda <\kappa `$, every descending sequence of elements of $``$

$$p_0p_1\mathrm{}p_\xi \mathrm{},\xi <\lambda ,$$

has a lower bound in $``$. If $`V`$ is the ground model, then we will denote the generic extension by $`V^{}`$ if we do not wish to specify a particular generic filter $`H`$. If we want to emphasize that the term $`t`$ is to be interpreted in the model $`M`$ of $`ZFC`$, then we write $`t^M`$; for example, $`\mathrm{Sym}(\lambda )^M`$.

Our group-theoretic notation is standard. For example, the (restricted) wreath product of $`A`$ by $`C`$ is denoted by $`A\text{wr}C`$; and the direct sum of the groups $`H_\xi `$, $`\xi <\lambda `$, is denoted by $`\underset{\xi <\lambda }{}H_\xi `$. If $`\pi \mathrm{Sym}(\kappa )`$, then $`\mathrm{supp}(\pi )=\{\alpha \kappa \pi (\alpha )\alpha \}`$; and if $`\lambda `$ is an infinite cardinal such that $`\lambda \kappa `$, then $`\mathrm{Sym}_\lambda (\kappa )=\{\pi \mathrm{Sym}(\kappa )\left|\mathrm{supp}(\pi )\right|<\lambda \}`$.

## 2. Realising normaliser towers within infinite symmetric groups

Let $`\kappa `$ be a regular uncountable cardinal such that $`\kappa ^{<\kappa }=\kappa `$. In this section, we will study the problem of realising long normaliser towers within $`\mathrm{Sym}(\kappa )`$. In particular, we will prove that if $`\alpha `$ is any ordinal, then there exists a generic extension $`V^{}`$ such that a normaliser tower of height $`\alpha `$ can be realised in $`\mathrm{Sym}(\kappa )^V^{}`$.

First for each ordinal $`\alpha `$, we will construct a pair of groups, $`H<G`$, such that the normaliser tower of $`H`$ in $`G`$ terminates in exactly $`\alpha `$ steps.

###### Definition 2.1.

The ascending chain of groups

$$W_0W_1\mathrm{}W_\alpha W_{\alpha +1}\mathrm{}$$

is defined inductively as follows.

1. $`W_0=C_2`$, the cyclic group of order 2.
2. Suppose that $`\alpha =\beta +1`$. Then

$$W_\beta =W_\beta 1\left[W_\beta W_\beta ^{}\right]\sigma _{\beta +1}=W_{\beta +1}.$$

Here $`W_\beta ^{}`$ is an isomorphic copy of $`W_\beta `$; and $`\sigma _{\beta +1}`$ is an element of order 2 which interchanges the factors $`W_\beta 1`$ and $`1W_\beta ^{}`$ of the direct sum $`W_\beta W_\beta ^{}`$ via conjugation. Thus $`W_{\beta +1}`$ is isomorphic to the wreath product $`W_\beta \text{wr}C_2`$.
3. If $`\alpha `$ is a limit ordinal, then $`W_\alpha =\underset{\beta <\alpha }{}W_\beta `$.

###### Lemma 2.2.

$`\left|W_\alpha \right|\mathrm{max}\{|\alpha |,\omega \}`$ for all ordinals $`\alpha `$.

###### Proof.

This follows by an easy induction on $`\alpha `$. ∎

###### Lemma 2.3.

1. If $`1n<\omega `$, then the normaliser tower of $`W_0`$ in $`W_n`$ terminates in exactly $`n+1`$ steps.
2. If $`\alpha \omega `$, then the normaliser tower of $`W_0`$ in $`W_\alpha `$ terminates in exactly $`\alpha `$ steps.

###### Proof.

(a) It is easily checked that

$$N_1(W_0,W_n)=W_0W_0^{}W_1^{}\mathrm{}W_{n1}^{}$$

and that

$$N_2(W_0,W_n)=W_1W_1^{}\mathrm{}W_{n1}^{};$$

and that, in general, for each $`0\mathrm{}n1`$,

$$N_{\mathrm{}+1}(W_0,W_n)=W_{\mathrm{}}\underset{\mathrm{}m<n}{}W_m^{}.$$

(b) For example, consider the case when $`\alpha >\omega `$. Then for each $`\mathrm{}\omega `$,

$$N_{\mathrm{}+1}(W_0,W_\alpha )=W_{\mathrm{}}\underset{\mathrm{}\beta <\alpha }{}W_\beta ^{};$$

and for each $`\gamma `$ such that $`\omega \gamma <\alpha `$,

$$N_\gamma (W_0,W_\alpha )=W_\gamma \underset{\gamma \beta <\alpha }{}W_\beta ^{}.$$

###### Remark 2.4.

Unfortunately, the group $`W_{\kappa ^+}`$ does not satisfy the $`\kappa ^+`$-compatibility condition. To see this, let

$$H=C_2\text{wr}C_2=\left[ab\right]c;$$

and for each limit ordinal $`i<\kappa ^+`$, let $`f_i:HW_{\kappa ^+}`$ be the embedding such that $`f_i(a)=\sigma _{i+1}`$ and $`f_i(c)=\sigma _{i+2}`$. (Here we are using the notation which was introduced in Definition 2.1.) Let $`i`$, $`j`$ be any limit ordinals such that $`i<j<\kappa ^+`$. Then

$$H_i,H_j\left(\left(C_2\text{wr}C_2\right)\text{wr}C_2\right)\text{wr}C_2.$$

Suppose that there exists a a surjective homomorphism $`\phi :H_i,H_jH_i`$ such that

1. $`\phi f_j=f_i`$; and
2. $`\phi H_i=id_{H_i}`$.

Then $`\phi (\sigma _{j+1})=\phi (\sigma _{i+1})=\sigma _{i+1}`$ and $`\phi (\sigma _{j+2})=\phi (\sigma _{i+2})=\sigma _{i+2}`$. Consider the element $`x=\sigma _{j+1}\sigma _{j+2}\sigma _{j+1}\sigma _{j+2}H_j`$. Then it is easily checked that

1. $`x`$ lies in the centre of $`H_j`$; and
2. $`\sigma _{j+1}y\sigma _{j+1}^1=xyx^1`$ for all $`yH_i`$.

Thus $`z=\phi (x)`$ lies in the centre of $`H_i`$. Since $`\phi (\sigma _{j+1})=\sigma _{i+1}`$, we find that

$$\sigma _{i+1}y\sigma _{i+1}^1=zyz^1=y$$

for all $`yH_i`$. But this contradicts the fact that $`\sigma _{i+1}`$ is a noncentral element of $`H_i`$.

Thus if $`\alpha \kappa ^+`$, then $`W_\alpha `$ is not embeddable in $`\mathrm{Sym}(\kappa )`$. However, the above argument does not rule out the possibility that $`W_\alpha `$ is embeddable in the quotient group $`\mathrm{Sym}(\kappa )/\mathrm{Sym}_\kappa (\kappa )`$; and this is enough for our purposes.

###### Lemma 2.5.

Let $`\kappa `$ be an infinite cardinal such that $`\kappa ^{<\kappa }=\kappa `$. Suppose that $`\gamma `$ is an ordinal, and that there exists an embedding

$$f:W_\gamma \mathrm{Sym}(\kappa )/\mathrm{Sym}_\kappa (\kappa ).$$

Then for each ordinal $`\alpha \gamma `$, there exist groups $`HG\mathrm{Sym}(\kappa )`$ such that $`|H|=\kappa `$ and the normaliser tower of $`H`$ in $`G`$ terminates in exactly $`\alpha `$ steps.

###### Proof.

For each $`\alpha \gamma `$, let $`H^\alpha `$ be the subgroup of $`\mathrm{Sym}(\kappa )`$ such that $`f\left[W_\alpha \right]=H^\alpha /\mathrm{Sym}_\kappa (\kappa )`$. Since $`|\mathrm{Sym}_\kappa (\kappa )|=\kappa ^{<\kappa }=\kappa `$, it follows that $`|H^0|=\kappa `$.

###### Claim 2.6.

For each ordinal $`\beta `$,

$$f\left[N_\beta (W_0,W_\alpha )\right]=N_\beta (H^0,H^\alpha )/\mathrm{Sym}_\kappa (\kappa ).$$

###### Proof.

We will argue by induction on $`\beta `$. The result is clear when $`\beta =0`$, and no difficulties arise when $`\beta `$ is a limit ordinal. Suppose that $`\beta =\xi +1`$ and that the result holds for $`\xi `$. Let $`R=N_\xi (H^0,H^\alpha )`$; and for each subgroup $`K`$ such that $`\mathrm{Sym}_\kappa (\kappa )KH^\alpha `$, let $`\overline{K}=K/\mathrm{Sym}_\kappa (\kappa )`$. Then

$$f\left[N_{\xi +1}(W_0,W_\alpha )\right]=N_{\overline{H^\alpha }}(\overline{R});$$

and so we must show that

$$N_{\overline{H^\alpha }}(\overline{R})=\overline{N_{H^\alpha }(R)}.$$

But this is an immediate consequence of the Correspondence Theorem for subgroups of quotient groups, together with the observation that the normaliser of any subgroup $`L`$ is the largest subgroup $`M`$ such that $`L\mathrm{}M`$. ∎

It is now easy to complete the proof of Lemma 2.5. Applying Lemma 2.3 and Claim 2.6, we see that if $`\alpha \omega `$, then the normaliser tower of $`H^0`$ in $`H^\alpha `$ terminates in exactly $`\alpha `$ steps; and that if $`2\alpha =n<\omega `$, then the normaliser tower of $`H^0`$ in $`H^{n1}`$ terminates in exactly $`n`$ steps. This just leaves the cases when $`\alpha =0,1`$. When $`\alpha =0`$, we can take $`H=G=\mathrm{Alt}(\kappa )`$; and when $`\alpha =1`$, we can take $`H=\mathrm{Alt}(\kappa )`$ and $`G=\mathrm{Sym}(\kappa )`$. ∎

The next result implies that if $`\omega <\kappa ^\kappa =\kappa `$ and $`W`$ is any group, then there exists a cardinal-preserving notion of forcing $``$ such that in $`V^{}`$, the group $`W`$ is embeddable in $`\mathrm{Sym}(\kappa )/\mathrm{Sym}_\kappa (\kappa )`$. (If $`|W|^\kappa >|W|`$, then just embed $`W`$ in a larger group $`L`$ such that $`|L|^\kappa =|L|`$; and then apply Lemma 2.7 to $`L`$.)

###### Lemma 2.7.

Let $`V`$ be a transitive model of $`ZFC`$ and let $`\kappa `$, $`\lambda `$ be cardinals such that $`\omega <\kappa ^{<\kappa }=\kappa <\lambda =\lambda ^\kappa `$. Let $`W`$ be any group of cardinality $`\lambda `$. Then there exists a notion of forcing $``$ such that

1. $``$ is $`\kappa `$-closed.
2. $``$ has the $`\kappa ^+`$-$`c.c.`$;

and such that the following statements are true in the generic extension $`V^{}`$.

1. $`2^\kappa =\lambda `$.
2. There exists an isomorphic embedding

$$f:W\left(\mathrm{Sym}(\kappa )/\mathrm{Sym}_\kappa (\kappa )\right)^V^{}.$$

###### Proof.

Let $`\mathrm{\Omega }=_{\alpha <\kappa }\{\alpha \}\times \alpha `$. We will work with the symmetric group $`\mathrm{Sym}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ rather than with $`\mathrm{Sym}(\kappa )`$. Let $``$ be the notion of forcing consisting of the conditions

$$p=(\delta _p,H_p,E_p)$$

such that the following hold.

1. $`\omega \delta _p<\kappa `$.
2. $`H_p`$ is a subgroup of $`W`$ such that $`|H_p||\delta _p|`$.
3. $`E_p`$ is a function which assigns a permutation $`e_{\pi ,\xi }^p\mathrm{Sym}(\{\xi \}\times \xi )`$ to each pair $`(\pi ,\xi )H_p\times \delta _p`$.

We set $`q=(\delta _q,H_q,E_q)p=(\delta _p,H_p,E_p)`$ if and only if

1. $`\delta _p\delta _q`$;
2. $`H_pH_q`$;
3. $`E_pE_q`$; and
4. if $`\delta _p\xi <\delta _q`$, then the restriction to $`H_p`$ of the function, $`\pi e_{\pi ,\xi }^q`$, is an isomorphic embedding of $`H_p`$ into $`\mathrm{Sym}(\{\xi \}\times \xi )`$.

###### Claim 2.8.

$``$ is $`\kappa `$-closed.

###### Proof of Claim 2.8.

This is clear. ∎

###### Claim 2.9.

$``$ has the $`\kappa ^+`$-$`c.c.`$.

###### Proof of Claim 2.9.

Suppose that $`p_i=(\delta _{p_i},H_{p_i},E_{p_i})`$ for $`i<\kappa ^+`$. Using the $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$-System Lemma and the assumption that $`\kappa ^{<\kappa }=\kappa `$, after passing to a suitable subsequence if necessary, we can suppose that the following conditions are satisfied.

1. There exists a fixed ordinal $`\delta `$ such that $`\delta _{p_i}=\delta `$ for all $`i<\kappa ^+`$.
2. There exists a fixed subgroup $`H`$ such that $`H_{p_i}H_{p_j}=H`$ for all $`i<j<\kappa ^+`$.
3. There exists a fixed function $`E`$ such that $`E_{p_i}H=E`$ for all $`i<\kappa ^+`$.

Now fix any two ordinals $`i<j<\kappa ^+`$. Let $`H^+=H_{p_i},H_{p_j}`$ be the subgroup generated by $`H_{p_i}H_{p_j}`$; and let $`E^+`$ be any extension of $`E_{p_i}E_{p_j}`$ which satisfies condition (c). Then $`q=(\delta ,H^+,E^+)`$ is a common lower bound of $`p_i`$ and $`p_j`$. ∎

###### Claim 2.10.

For each $`\alpha <\kappa `$, the set $`C_\alpha =\{p\delta _p\alpha \}`$ is dense in $``$.

###### Proof of Claim 2.10.

Let $`p=(\delta _p,H_p,E_p)`$. Then we can suppose that $`\delta _p<\alpha `$. We can define an isomorphic embedding $`\phi :H_p\mathrm{Sym}(H_p)`$ by setting $`\phi (h)(x)=hx`$ for all $`xH_p`$. Since $`\left|H_p\right|\left|\delta _p\right|`$, it follows that there exists an isomorphic embedding $`\phi _\xi :H_p\mathrm{Sym}(\{\xi \}\times \xi )`$ for each $`\delta _p\xi <\alpha `$. Hence there exists a condition $`q=(\delta _q,H_q,E_q)p`$ such that $`H_q=H_p`$ and $`\delta _q=\alpha `$. ∎

###### Claim 2.11.

For each $`\pi W`$, the set $`D_\pi =\{p\pi H_p\}`$ is dense in $``$.

###### Proof of Claim 2.11.

Let $`p=(\delta _p,H_p,E_p)`$. Let $`H^+=H_p,\pi `$ be the subgroup generated by $`H_p\{\pi \}`$, and let $`E^+`$ be any extension of $`E_p`$ to $`H^+`$ which satisfies condition (c). Then $`q=(\delta _q,H_q,E_q)p`$. ∎

Let $`F`$ be a generic filter, and let $`V^{}=V[F]`$ be the corresponding generic extension. Working within $`V^{}`$, for each $`\pi W`$, let

$$e(\pi )=\{e_{\pi ,\xi }^p\text{ There exists }pF\text{ such that }\pi H_p\text{ and }\xi <\delta _p\}.$$

Then $`e(\pi )\mathrm{Sym}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$. Let $`\mathrm{Sym}_\kappa (\mathrm{\Omega })=\{\psi \mathrm{Sym}(\mathrm{\Omega })|\mathrm{supp}(\psi )|<\kappa \}`$; and define the function

$$f:W\mathrm{Sym}(\mathrm{\Omega })/\mathrm{Sym}_\kappa (\mathrm{\Omega })$$

by $`f(\pi )=e(\pi )\mathrm{Sym}_\kappa (\mathrm{\Omega })`$. Then it is enough to show that $`f`$ is an isomorphic embedding.

###### Claim 2.12.

If $`1\pi W`$, then $`f(\pi )1`$.

###### Proof of Claim 2.12.

Choose a condition $`p=(\delta _p,H_p,E_p)F`$ such that $`\pi H_p`$. If $`\xi `$ is any ordinal such that $`\delta _p\xi <\kappa `$, then $`e(\pi )\{\xi \}\times \xi id_{\{\xi \}\times \xi }`$. Hence $`e(\pi )\mathrm{Sym}_\kappa (\mathrm{\Omega })`$. ∎

###### Claim 2.13.

$`f`$ is a group homomorphism.

###### Proof of Claim 2.13.

Let $`\pi _1`$, $`\pi _2W`$. Let $`p=(\delta _p,H_p,E_p)F`$ be a condition such that $`\pi _1`$, $`\pi _2H_p`$. Let $`\xi `$ be any ordinal such that $`\delta _p\xi <\kappa `$; and let $`qF`$ be a condition such that $`qp`$ and $`\xi <\delta _q`$. Then

$$e_{\pi _1,\xi }^qe_{\pi _2,\xi }^q=e_{\pi _1\pi _2,\xi }^q.$$

It follows that

$$e(\pi _1)\mathrm{Sym}_\kappa (\mathrm{\Omega })e(\pi _2)\mathrm{Sym}_\kappa (\mathrm{\Omega })=e(\pi _1\pi _2)\mathrm{Sym}_\kappa (\mathrm{\Omega }).$$

Finally it is easily checked that $`||=\lambda `$; and it follows that $`V^{}2^\kappa =\lambda `$. This completes the proof of Lemma 2.7. ∎

Summing up our work in this section, we obtain the following result.

###### Theorem 2.14.

Let $`V`$ be a transitive model of $`ZFC`$ and let $`\kappa `$, $`\lambda `$ be cardinals such that $`\omega <\kappa ^{<\kappa }=\kappa <\lambda =\lambda ^\kappa `$. Let $`\alpha `$ be any ordinal such that $`\alpha <\lambda ^+`$. Then there exists a notion of forcing $``$ such that

1. $``$ is $`\kappa `$-closed;
2. $``$ has the $`\kappa ^+`$-$`c.c.`$;

and such that the following statements are true in the generic extension $`V^{}`$.

1. $`2^\kappa =\lambda `$.
2. There exist groups $`H<G<\mathrm{Sym}(\kappa )`$ such that $`|H|=\kappa `$ and the normaliser tower of $`H`$ in $`G`$ terminates in exactly $`\alpha `$ steps.

###### Proof.

Let $`\gamma `$ be an ordinal such that $`\mathrm{max}\{\alpha ,\lambda \}\gamma <\lambda ^+`$. Then $`|W_\gamma |=\lambda `$. Let $``$ be the notion of forcing obtained by applying Lemma 2.7 to $`W=W_\gamma `$. By Lemma 2.5, $``$ satisfies our requirements. ∎

## 3. Closed groups of uncountable degree

In this section, we will prove Theorem 1.12. Let $`\kappa `$ be a regular uncountable cardinal such that $`\kappa ^{<\kappa }=\kappa `$, and let $`G`$ be a group which satisfies the $`\kappa ^+`$-compatibility condition. Let $`L`$ be a first-order language consisting of $`\kappa `$ binary relation symbols. The following notion of forcing $``$ is designed to adjoin a structure $``$ of cardinality $`\kappa `$ for the language $`L`$ such that $`G\mathrm{Aut}`$. This is sufficient; for then we can use one of the standard procedures to code $``$ into a graph $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ of cardinality $`\kappa `$ such that $`\mathrm{Aut}\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{Aut}`$. ( Cf. Section 5.5 of Hodges .)

###### Definition 3.1.

Suppose that $`L_0L`$ and that $`𝒩`$ is a structure for the language $`L_0`$. Then a restricted atomic type in the free variable $`v`$ for the language $`L_0`$ using parameters from $`𝒩`$ is a set $`t`$ of formulas of the form $`R(v,a)`$, where $`RL_0`$ and $`a𝒩`$. An element $`c𝒩`$ is said to realise $`t`$ if $`𝒩\phi [c]`$ for every formula $`\phi (v)t`$. If no element of $`𝒩`$ realises $`t`$, then $`t`$ is said to be omitted in $`𝒩`$. Notice that if $`t`$ is omitted in $`𝒩`$, then $`t`$ is not the trivial restricted atomic type $`\mathrm{}`$.

###### Definition 3.2.

Let $``$ be the notion of forcing consisting of the conditions

$$p=(H,\pi ,𝒩,T)$$

such that the following hold.

1. $`H`$ is a subgroup of $`G`$ such that $`\left|H\right|<\kappa `$.
2. There exists an ordinal $`0<\delta <\kappa `$ and a subset $`L(𝒩)[L]^{<\kappa }`$ such that $`𝒩`$ is a structure with universe $`\delta `$ for the language $`L(𝒩)`$.
3. $`\pi :H\mathrm{Aut}𝒩`$ is a group homomorphism.
4. $`T`$ is a set of restricted atomic types in the free variable $`v`$ for the language $`L(𝒩)`$ using parameters from $`𝒩`$. Furthermore, $`\left|T\right|<\kappa `$; and each $`tT`$ is omitted in $`𝒩`$.

We set $`(H_2,\pi _2,𝒩_2,T_2)(H_1,\pi _1,𝒩_1,T_1)`$ if and only if

1. $`H_1H_2`$.
2. $`𝒩_1`$ is a substructure of $`𝒩_2`$.
3. For all $`hH_1`$ and $`\alpha 𝒩_1`$, $`\pi _2(h)(\alpha )=\pi _1(h)(\alpha )`$.
4. $`T_1T_2`$.

It is clear that the components $`(H,\pi ,𝒩)`$ in each condition $`p`$ are designed to generically adjoin a structure $``$ of cardinality $`\kappa `$ for the language $`L`$, together with an embedding $`\pi ^{}`$ of $`G`$ into $`\mathrm{Aut}`$. The set $`T`$ of restricted atomic types is needed to kill off potential extra automorphisms $`g\mathrm{Aut}\pi ^{}[G]`$, and thus ensure that $`\pi ^{}`$ is surjective.

###### Lemma 3.3.

$``$ is $`\kappa `$-closed.

###### Proof.

This is clear. ∎

###### Lemma 3.4.

$``$ has the $`\kappa ^+`$-$`c.c.`$

###### Proof.

Suppose that $`p_i=(H_i,\pi _i,𝒩_i,T_i)`$ for $`i<\kappa ^+`$. After passing to a suitable subsequence if necessary, we can suppose that the following conditions hold.

1. There exists a fixed structure $`𝒩`$ such that $`𝒩_i=𝒩`$ for all $`i<\kappa ^+`$.
2. There exists a fixed set of restricted atomic types $`T`$ such that $`T_i=T`$ for all $`i<\kappa ^+`$.
3. There is a fixed group $`H`$ such that for each $`i<\kappa ^+`$, there exists an isomorphism $`f_i:HH_i`$.
4. For each $`i<\kappa ^+`$, let $`\psi _i:H\mathrm{Aut}𝒩`$ be the embedding defined by $`\psi _i=\pi _if_i`$. Then $`\psi _i=\psi _j`$ for all $`i<j<\kappa ^+`$.

Since $`G`$ satisfies the $`\kappa ^+`$-compatibility condition, there exist ordinals $`i<j<\kappa ^+`$ and a surjective homomorphism $`\phi :H_i,H_jH_i`$ such that

1. $`\phi f_j=f_i`$; and
2. $`\phi H_i=id_{H_i}`$.

Let $`H_i,H_j\mathrm{Aut}𝒩`$ be the homomorphism defined by $`\pi =\pi _i\phi `$. Clearly $`\pi _i\pi `$. Note that if $`xH_j`$, then

$`\pi _i\phi (x)`$ $`=\pi _i\left(\phi f_j\right)f_j^1(x)`$
$`=\pi _if_if_j^1(x)`$
$`=\pi _j(x).`$
Thus we also have that $`\pi _j\pi `$. Consequently, we can define a condition $`pp_i`$, $`p_j`$ by

$$p=(H_i,H_j,\pi ,𝒩,T).$$

###### Lemma 3.5.

For each $`p=(H,\pi ,𝒩,T)`$, there exists $`p^+=(H,\pi ^+,𝒩^+,T)p`$ such that $`\pi ^+:H\mathrm{Aut}𝒩^+`$ is an embedding.

###### Proof.

Let $`𝒩^+`$ be the structure for the language $`L(𝒩)`$ such that

1. the universe of $`𝒩^+`$ is the disjoint union $`𝒩H`$;
2. for each relation $`RL(𝒩)`$, $`R^{𝒩^+}=R^𝒩`$.

In particular, if $`x𝒩^+𝒩`$, then $`x`$ only realises the trivial restricted atomic type $`\mathrm{}`$ over $`𝒩`$. Hence none of the restricted atomic types in $`T`$ is realised in $`𝒩^+`$. Let $`\pi ^+:H\mathrm{Aut}𝒩^+`$ be the embedding such that for each $`hH`$,

1. $`\pi ^+(h)(x)=\pi (h)(x)`$ for all $`x𝒩`$; and
2. $`\pi ^+(h)(x)=hx`$ for all $`xH`$.

Then $`p^+=(H,\pi ^+,𝒩^+,T)p`$. ∎

There is a slight inaccuracy in the proof of Lemma 3.5, as the universe of $`𝒩^+`$ should really be an ordinal $`\delta <\kappa `$. However, the proof can easily be repaired: simply replace $`𝒩^+`$ by a suitable isomorphic structure. Similar remarks apply to the proofs of Lemmas 3.6 and 3.8.

###### Lemma 3.6.

For each $`aG`$,

$$D_a=\{(H,\pi ,𝒩,T)aH\}$$

is a dense subset of $``$.

###### Proof.

Let $`aG`$ and $`p=(H,\pi ,𝒩,T)`$. We can suppose that $`aH`$. Let $`H^+=H,a`$. Let $`C=\{g_iiI\}`$ be a set of left coset representatives for $`H`$ in $`H^+`$, chosen so that $`1C`$. Let $`𝒩^+`$ be the structure for the language $`L(𝒩)`$ such that

1. the universe of $`𝒩^+`$ is the cartesian product $`C\times 𝒩`$; and
2. for each relation $`RL(𝒩)`$,

$$((g_i,x),(g_j,y))R^{𝒩^+}\text{ iff }i=j\text{ and }(x,y)R^𝒩.$$

By identifying each $`x𝒩`$ with the element $`(1,x)𝒩^+`$, we can regard $`𝒩`$ as a substructure of $`𝒩^+`$. Once again, each element $`(g_i,x)𝒩^+𝒩`$ only realises the trivial restricted atomic type $`\mathrm{}`$ over $`𝒩`$; and hence none of the restricted atomic types in $`T`$ is realised in $`𝒩^+`$.

Define an action of $`H^+`$ on $`𝒩^+`$ as follows. If $`gH^+`$ and $`(g_i,x)𝒩^+`$, then

$$g(g_i,x)=(g_j,\pi (h)(x)),$$

where $`jI`$ and $`hH`$ are such that $`gg_i=g_jh`$. It is easily checked that this action yields a homomorphism $`\pi ^+:H^+\mathrm{Aut}𝒩^+`$; and that $`(H^+,\pi ^+,𝒩^+,T)p`$. ∎

###### Lemma 3.7.

For each $`\alpha <\kappa `$,

$$E_\alpha =\{(H,\pi ,𝒩,T)\alpha 𝒩\}$$

is a dense subset of $``$.

###### Proof.

Left to the reader. ∎

Let $`F`$ be a generic filter, and let $`V^{}=V[F]`$ be the corresponding generic extension. Working within $`V^{}`$, define

$$=\{𝒩\text{ There exists }p=(H,\pi ,𝒩,T)F\}$$

and

$$\pi ^{}=\{\pi \text{ There exists }p=(H,\pi ,𝒩,T)F\}.$$

Then $``$ is a structure for $`L`$ of cardinality $`\kappa `$, and $`\pi ^{}`$ is an embedding of $`G`$ into $`\mathrm{Aut}`$. So the following lemma completes the proof of Theorem 1.12.

###### Lemma 3.8.

$`\pi ^{}:G\mathrm{Aut}`$ is a surjective homomorphism.

###### Proof.

Suppose that $`g\mathrm{Aut}\pi ^{}[G]`$. Let $`\stackrel{~}{}`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\pi }`$ be the canonical $``$-names for $``$ and $`\pi ^{}`$; and let $`\stackrel{~}{g}`$ be a $``$-name for $`g`$. Then there exists a condition $`pF`$ such that

$$p\stackrel{~}{g}\mathrm{Aut}\stackrel{~}{}\text{ and }\stackrel{~}{g}\stackrel{~}{\pi }(h)\text{ for all }hG.$$

Using the fact that $``$ is $`\kappa `$-closed, we can inductively construct a descending sequence of conditions $`p_m=(H_m,\pi _m,𝒩_m,T_m)`$ for $`m\omega `$ such that the following hold.

1. $`p_0=p`$.
2. For all $`x𝒩_m`$, there exists $`y𝒩_{m+1}`$ such that $`p_{m+1}\stackrel{~}{g}(x)=y`$.
3. For all $`hH_m`$, there exists $`z𝒩_{m+1}`$ such that $`p_{m+1}\stackrel{~}{g}(z)\pi _{m+1}(h)(z)`$.

Let $`q=(H,\pi ,𝒩,T)`$ be the greatest lower bound of $`\{p_mm\omega \}`$ in $``$. Then $`qp`$, and there exists $`g^{}\mathrm{Aut}𝒩\pi [H]`$ such that $`q\stackrel{~}{g}𝒩=g^{}`$. Let $`𝒩^+`$ be the structure defined as follows.

1. The universe of $`𝒩^+`$ is the disjoint union $`𝒩H`$.
2. For each relation $`RL(𝒩)`$, $`R^{𝒩^+}=R^𝒩`$.
3. For each $`x𝒩`$, let $`R_xLL(𝒩)`$ be a new binary relation symbol. Then we set $`(h,y)R_x^{𝒩^+}`$ iff $`hH`$, $`y𝒩`$ and $`\pi (h)(x)=y`$.

Once again, it is clear that none of the restricted atomic types in $`T`$ is realised in $`𝒩^+`$. Let $`\pi ^+:H\mathrm{Sym}𝒩^+`$ be the embedding such that

1. $`\pi ^+(h)(x)=\pi (h)(x)`$ for all $`x𝒩`$; and
2. $`\pi ^+(h)(x)=hx`$ for all $`xH`$.

Then it is easily checked that $`\pi ^+[H]\mathrm{Aut}𝒩^+`$. Finally let $`t`$ be the restricted atomic type defined by

$$t=\{R_x(v,g^{}(x)x𝒩\};$$

and let $`T^+=T\{t\}`$.

###### Claim 3.9.

$`t`$ is omitted in $`𝒩^+`$.

###### Proof of Claim 3.9.

If $`z𝒩^+`$ realises $`t`$, then $`z=hH`$. And if $`x𝒩`$, then $`𝒩^+R_x(h,g^{}(x))`$, and so $`\pi (h)(x)=g^{}(x)`$. But this contradicts the fact that $`g^{}\mathrm{Aut}𝒩\pi [H]`$. ∎

Thus $`q^+=(H,\pi ^+,𝒩^+,T^+)`$. To simplify notation, suppose that $`q^+F`$; so that $`g^{}g`$. Then for each $`x𝒩`$, we have that $`R_x(1,x)`$, and hence $`R_x(g(1),g^{}(x))`$. But this means that $`g(1)`$ realises $`t`$, which is the final contradiction. ∎

## 4. $`\tau _\kappa `$ is increasing

In this section, we will complete the proof of Theorem 1.4. So let $`VGCH`$ and let $`\kappa `$, $`\lambda V`$ be uncountable cardinals such that $`\kappa <\mathrm{cf}(\lambda )`$. Let $`\alpha `$ be any ordinal such that $`\alpha <\lambda ^+`$. It is well-known that there exists a centreless group $`T`$ of cardinality $`\kappa `$ such that $`\mathrm{Aut}T=\mathrm{Inn}T`$. (For example, we can take $`T=PGL(2,K)`$, where $`K`$ is a rigid field of cardinality $`\kappa `$. The existence of such a field follows from Lemma 1.7.) Thus we can assume that $`\alpha 1`$. First consider the case when $`\kappa `$ is a regular cardinal. Let $``$ be the notion of forcing which is given by Theorem 2.14. Then the following statements are true in the corresponding generic extension $`M=V^{}`$.

1. $`\kappa ^{<\kappa }=\kappa `$.
2. $`2^\kappa =\lambda `$.
3. There exist groups $`H<G<\mathrm{Sym}(\kappa )`$ such that $`|H|=\kappa `$ and the normaliser tower of $`H`$ in $`G`$ terminates in exactly $`\alpha `$ steps.

Let $`M`$ be the notion of forcing, given by Theorem 1.12, which adjoins a graph $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ of cardinality $`\kappa `$ such that $`G\mathrm{Aut}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Then, applying Lemma 1.8, we find that the following statements are true in $`M^{}`$.

1. $`2^\kappa =\lambda `$.
2. There exists a centreless group $`T`$ of cardinality $`\kappa `$ such that $`\tau (T)=\alpha `$.

Next suppose that $`\kappa `$ is a singular cardinal. By the above argument, there is a generic extension $`V^{}`$ in which the following statements are true.

1. $`2^{\omega _1}=2^\kappa =\lambda `$.
2. There exists a centreless group $`T`$ of cardinality $`\omega _1`$ such that $`\tau (T)=\alpha `$.

Let $`G=T\times \mathrm{Alt}(\kappa )`$. Clearly $`|G|=\kappa `$; and the following theorem implies that $`\tau (G)=\tau (T)=\alpha `$. This completes the proof of Theorem 1.4.

###### Theorem 4.1.

Suppose that $`\omega \theta <\kappa `$. If $`H`$ is a centreless group of cardinality $`\theta `$ such that $`\tau (H)1`$, then $`\tau (H\times \mathrm{Alt}(\kappa ))=\tau (H)`$.

###### Corollary 4.2.

If $`\omega \theta <\kappa `$, then $`\tau _\theta \tau _\kappa `$.

The remainder of this section will be devoted to the proof of Theorem 4.1. Let $`G=H\times \mathrm{Alt}(\kappa )`$; and let $`H_\beta `$, $`G_\beta `$ be the $`\beta ^{th}`$ groups in the automorphism towers of $`H`$, $`G`$ respectively. We will eventually prove by induction that $`G_\beta =H_\beta \times \mathrm{Sym}(\kappa )`$ for all $`\beta 1`$. To accomplish this, we need to keep track of $`\phi [\mathrm{Alt}(\kappa )]`$ for each automorphism $`\phi `$ of $`G_\beta `$. The next lemma shows that for all $`\phi \mathrm{Aut}G_\beta `$, either $`\phi [\mathrm{Alt}(\kappa )]H_\beta `$ or $`\phi [\mathrm{Alt}(\kappa )]\mathrm{Sym}(\kappa )`$. The main point will be to eliminate the possibility that $`\phi [\mathrm{Alt}(\kappa )]H_\beta `$. This is straightforward when $`\beta `$ is a successor ordinal. To deal with the case when $`\beta `$ is a limit ordinal, we will make use of the result that $`\mathrm{Alt}(\kappa )`$ is strictly simple.

###### Lemma 4.3.

Suppose that $`A`$ is a simple nonabelian normal subgroup of the direct product $`H\times S`$. Then either $`AH`$ or $`AS`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`1g=xyA`$, where $`xH`$ and $`yS`$. If $`y=1`$, then the conjugacy class $`g^A=x^A`$ is contained in $`H`$, and so $`A=g^AH`$. So suppose that $`y1`$. Let $`\pi :H\times SS`$ be the canonical projection map. Then $`1y\pi [A]S`$ and $`\pi [A]A`$. Hence there exists an element $`z\pi [A]S`$ such that $`zyz^1y`$. Since $`A\mathrm{}H\times S`$, it follows that

$$1zyz^1y^1=zxyz^1y^1x^1=zgz^1g^1AS.$$

Arguing as above, we now obtain that $`AS`$. ∎

###### Definition 4.4.

Let $`H`$ be a subgroup of the group $`G`$. Then $`H`$ is said to be an ascendant subgroup of $`G`$ if there exist an ordinal $`\gamma `$ and a set of subgroups $`\{H_\beta \beta \gamma \}`$ such that the following conditions are satisfied.

1. $`H_0=H`$ and $`H_\gamma =G`$.
2. If $`\beta <\gamma `$, then $`H_\beta \mathrm{}H_{\beta +1}`$.
3. If $`\delta `$ is a limit ordinal such that $`\delta \gamma `$, then $`H_\delta =_{\beta <\delta }H_\beta `$.

###### Definition 4.5.

A group $`A`$ is strictly simple if it has no nontrivial proper ascendant subgroups.

###### Theorem 4.6 (Macpherson and Neumann ).

For each $`\kappa \omega `$, the alternating group $`\mathrm{Alt}(\kappa )`$ is strictly simple.

$`\mathrm{}`$

###### Lemma 4.7.

Suppose that $`H`$ is a centreless group. Let $`\tau =\tau (H)`$ and let $`H_\tau `$ be the $`\tau ^{th}`$ group in the automorphism tower of $`H`$. If $`A`$ is a strictly simple normal subgroup of $`H_\tau `$, then $`AH_0`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`\beta \tau `$ be the least ordinal such that $`AH_\beta `$. First suppose that $`\beta `$ is a limit ordinal. Then $`A=_{\gamma <\beta }\left(AH_\gamma \right)`$, and $`AH_\gamma \mathrm{}AH_{\gamma +1}`$ for all $`\gamma <\beta `$. Consequently, if $`\gamma <\beta `$ is the least ordinal such that $`AH_\gamma 1`$, then $`AH_\gamma `$ is a nontrivial ascendant subgroup of $`A`$. But this contradicts the assumption that $`A`$ is strictly simple.

Next suppose that $`\beta =\gamma +1`$ is a successor ordinal. Since $`AH_\gamma `$ is a proper normal subgroup of $`A`$, it follows that $`AH_\gamma =1`$. Now notice that $`AH_{\gamma +1}N_{H_\tau }(H_\gamma )`$ and $`H_\gamma H_\tau =N_{H_\tau }(A)`$, This implies that $`[A,H_\gamma ]AH_\gamma =1`$. (For example, see Lemma 1.1.3 of Suzuki .) But then $`AC_{H_{\gamma +1}}(H_\gamma )=1`$, which is a contradiction. The only remaining possibility is that $`\beta =0`$. ∎

We will also make use of the well-known results that $`\mathrm{Aut}(\mathrm{Alt}(\kappa ))=\mathrm{Sym}(\kappa )`$ and $`\mathrm{Aut}(\mathrm{Sym}(\kappa ))=\mathrm{Sym}(\kappa )`$. (For example, see Theorem 11.4.8 of Scott .)

###### Proof of Theorem 4.1.

Let $`\tau =\tau (H)`$; and let

$$H=H_0\mathrm{}H_1\mathrm{}\mathrm{}H_\beta \mathrm{}H_{\beta +1}\mathrm{}\mathrm{}H_\tau =H_{\tau +1}=\mathrm{}$$

be the automorphism tower of of $`H`$. Let $`G=H\times \mathrm{Alt}(\kappa )`$; and let

$$G=G_0\mathrm{}G_1\mathrm{}G_2\mathrm{}\mathrm{}G_\beta \mathrm{}G_{\beta +1}\mathrm{}\mathrm{}$$

be the automorphism tower of $`G`$. We will prove by induction on $`\beta 1`$ that $`G_\beta =H_\beta \times \mathrm{Sym}(\kappa )`$.

First consider the case when $`\beta =1`$. Let $`\phi \mathrm{Aut}G`$ be any automorphism. Then $`\phi [\mathrm{Alt}(\kappa )]`$ is a simple nonabelian normal subgroup of the direct product $`G=H\times \mathrm{Alt}(\kappa )`$. By Lemma 4.3, either $`\phi [\mathrm{Alt}(\kappa )]H`$ or $`\phi [\mathrm{Alt}(\kappa )]\mathrm{Alt}(\kappa )`$. Since $`\left|\phi [\mathrm{Alt}(\kappa )]\right|=\kappa >\theta =|H|`$, it follows that $`\phi [\mathrm{Alt}(\kappa )]\mathrm{Alt}(\kappa )`$. As $`\phi [\mathrm{Alt}(\kappa )]`$ is a normal subgroup of $`G`$, we must have that $`\phi [\mathrm{Alt}(\kappa )]=\mathrm{Alt}(\kappa )`$. Note that $`C_G(\mathrm{Alt}(\kappa ))=H`$. Hence we must also have that $`\phi [H]=H`$. It follows that

$$G_1=\mathrm{Aut}G=\mathrm{Aut}H\times \mathrm{Aut}(\mathrm{Alt}(\kappa ))=H_1\times \mathrm{Sym}(\kappa ).$$

Next suppose that $`\beta =\gamma +1`$ and that $`G_\gamma =H_\gamma \times \mathrm{Sym}(\kappa )`$. Let $`\phi \mathrm{Aut}G_\gamma `$ be any automorphism. By Lemma 4.3, either $`\phi [\mathrm{Alt}(\kappa )]H_\gamma `$ or $`\phi [\mathrm{Alt}(\kappa )]\mathrm{Sym}(\kappa )`$. As $`\mathrm{Alt}(\kappa )`$ is a strictly simple group, Lemma 4.7 implies that $`\phi [\mathrm{Alt}(\kappa )]\mathrm{Sym}(\kappa )`$. Since $`\phi [\mathrm{Alt}(\kappa )]`$ is a simple normal subgroup of $`G_\gamma `$, it follows that $`\phi [\mathrm{Alt}(\kappa )]=\mathrm{Alt}(\kappa )`$. Using the facts that $`C_{G_\gamma }(\mathrm{Alt}(\kappa ))=H_\gamma `$ and $`C_{G_\gamma }(H_\gamma )=\mathrm{Sym}(\kappa )`$, we now see that $`\phi [H_\gamma ]=H_\gamma `$ and $`\phi [\mathrm{Sym}(\kappa )]=\mathrm{Sym}(\kappa )`$. Hence

$$G_{\gamma +1}=\mathrm{Aut}G_\gamma =\mathrm{Aut}H_\gamma \times \mathrm{Aut}(\mathrm{Sym}(\kappa ))=H_{\gamma +1}\times \mathrm{Sym}(\kappa ).$$

Finally no difficulties arise when $`\beta `$ is a limit ordinal. ∎


format: text

text:
# The CFH Optical PDCS survey (COP) I: The Data

## 1 Introduction

One of the main goals of the study of distant rich clusters of galaxies is to understand their origin and evolution. Clusters are invaluable cosmological probes, since the evolution of cluster abundances is strongly dependent on the underlying cosmology and therefore can constrain cosmological models (e.g. Bahcall et al. 1997, Oukbir & Blanchard 1992 and 1997, Reichart et al 1999, Nichol et al. 1999). In order to be able to exploit this potential, large statistically representative spectroscopic samples are, however, required.

There are two types of samples that are being developed: those based on optical selection criteria and those based on X-ray detections. Below z of about 0.1, optically selected studies (e.g. ENACS: Katgert et al. 1996) have had about as many clusters in them as those selected via their X-ray fluxes. Up until recently, however, the higher redshift work has been dominated by X-ray selection techniques (e.g. CNOC: Carlberg et al. 1996 SHARC: Romer et al. 2000; RDCS: Rosati et al. 1998; WARPS: Jones et al. 1998; Vikhlinin et al. 1998). To greatly enlarge the sample of detailed studies of redshift about 0.4 optically selected clusters, we have embarked on a photometric and redshift campaign based on the Palomar Distant Cluster survey (Postman et al. 1996, see also Holden et al. 1999). We have observed a significant number of regions on the sky (10) and obtained about 70 redshifts per line of sight. These pointings were known to contain candidate clusters of galaxies based on the PDCS studies (e.g. Postman et al. 1996, Holden et al. 1997).

The main purpose of this paper is to publish the COP survey data and to describe the data reduction so as to lay a foundation for future papers. The interpretation of the results is, therefore, given in later papers (e.g. Holden et al. 2000). The outline of this paper is as follows. In Section 2, we give the observational strategy. In Section 3, we describe the way we have reduced and analyzed our photometry. In Section 4, we describe the way we have reduced and analyzed our spectroscopy. In the last section, we give an analysis of the redshift and spatial distribution of the galaxies in our sample. The data are given in tables 6-15.

## 2 Target Selection and Observations

### 2.1 Observing strategy

Our project required the measurement of a large number of redshifts ($``$ 100) of faint galaxies ($`V_{PDCS}`$$``$23) for a significant number of clusters ($``$ 10). It was necessary, therefore, to optimize our spectroscopic observations to get as many useful spectra as possible per night. We had photometric data in our fields (the PDCS catalog: Postman et al. 1996) prior to our CFH observations which considerably reduced the number of nights necessary to produce the spectroscopic catalogue (compared for example to the time needed to achieve the CNOC survey, Yee et al. 1996).

The first goal of the survey was to study the reality of the selected cluster candidates: are these real physical systems or are these only galaxy number count enhancements due to superposition effects (see Holden et al. 2000)? This placed a requirement on the number of redshifts we needed along the line of sight (Katgert et al. 1996). Moreover, we wanted to compute a global velocity dispersion for each cluster. This required $``$10 redshifts in the main groups (the $`clusters`$) to allow us to use robust estimators (see e.g. Adami et al. 1998c).

Assuming a line-of-sight contamination between 50 and 75% for a cluster at z$``$0.4 (see e.g. Carlberg et al. 1996) and a success rate of 70% (see Adami et al. 1998b) for our magnitude ranges, we needed to obtain between 50 and 60 spectra for each line of sight in the ideal situation of 1 cluster per line of sight. Since there could be 2 structures (or more) per pointing, however, we set a goal of measuring 100 spectra for each pointing (to yield about 70 redshifts).

In order to have a statistically representative set of more than 10 lines of sight with more than 70 redshifts, we have used the CFH-MOS multi-slits spectrograph for its high multiplex gain.

We wanted to measure the radial velocity of our targets with an uncertainty of less than 150 km s-1 because this precision is almost the same as the one obtained for ENACS and CNOC galaxies (e.g. Katgert et al 1996, Mazure et al 1996, Yee et al. 1996). This allows an accurate comparison with these two surveys. Following Adami et al. (1998b) and Yee et al. (1996), we have used the CFH O300 grism, which provides a dispersion of about 5 Å.px-1 with the STIS2 CFH CCD (pixels of 0.43”). The precision in the velocity measurement depends of both the resolution given by the grism and slit width (theoretical limiting factor) and the observational conditions (observational limiting factor). The resolution of the O300 grism allowed us to reach the required velocity accuracy.

We observed extended objects that were a few arcsecs in diameter. In order to properly subtract the sky in our spectra, we used slitlet lengths of 11 arcsecs. This setup allowed us to place about 40 slitlets per mask for the full spectral range of about 6500 Å delivered by the grism to be used. The setup would require about 3 masks per pointing to reach our goal of 100, however. In this case, the amount of time needed to observe 10 line of sights would have been prohibitive. To reduce the amount of time required and increase the multiplexing capabilities of the instrument to place $``$70 slitlets on each mask, we used CFH blocking filters (see Table 1 and see also the CNOC survey: Yee et al. 1996). This was effective, since we had estimates of the cluster redshifts (Postman et al. 1996), which have been confirmed to be accurate (see Holden et al. 1997) enough for our purposes. These estimates allowed us to chose the right CFH filter so as to span a spectral range that included at least 3 lines for each spectrum (typically selected from \[OII\], H&K, G band, H$`\beta `$, \[OIII\] and H$`\alpha `$). For each of the two filters used, Table 1 shows the redshift range that gives dispersed spectra of galaxies at that redshift that include the \[OII\], H&K and G band spectral features. Table 2 gives the filter used for each line of sight.

### 2.2 Cluster candidate selection

We selected cluster candidates to match the CFH telescope capabilities. It was impossible with the telescope time availability to sample structures at redshifts significantly greater than 0.5 (see Lubin et al. 1998 and references therein for such a study). We decided, therefore, to restrict our sample to cluster candidates in the estimated redshift range $`0.3<z<0.5`$. We also selected clusters so as to be able to complete the sample in only two semesters at the CFHT. Therefore, targets were selected from the PDCS fields at 9 and 13 hours for the Spring semester and from the PDCS fields at 16, 0 and 2 hours for the Autumn semester. We selected also the candidate clusters with both a richness class 1 or greater and significant density peaks in the galaxy distribution (see Fig. 1, 2 and 3) and we used the highest galaxy density areas. These densest areas coincided with or were close to the cluster centers given in Lubin et al. (1996) in most cases. PDCS34 was the exception. We observed at a position about 5’ to the North of the given cluster center, slightly different from Lubin et al. (1996), as we found no galaxy concentration at the exact coordinates of PDCS34.

In order to describe the galaxy distribution on the sky, we have computed the local projected galaxy density and produced isodensity contours for the PDCS galaxies using an adaptative kernel technique (e.g. Adami et al 1998a and ref. therein) for each line of sight. This technique adapts the size of the map window to the local density of objects. The same technique has been used in Adami et al (1998a) to study the ENACS clusters. Where the galaxy density is higher, the window used to compute the density of objects is reduced to a value consistent with producing a statistically significant number of galaxies. Where the galaxy density is lower, the window is larger so as to produce a similarly valid statistic for the density estimate. We have then produced the Figures 1,2 and 3.

Finally, among the cluster candidates matching the previous conditions, we selected those ones that were detected in X-rays (Holden et al. 1997, 1999) whenever possible (only 3 of the 10 lines of sight).

### 2.3 Mask design

We optimized the number of slitlets per mask to increase the efficiency of the survey. It is possible to show that for a field with a very high density of targets, the optimal configuration is to place the slitlets in band configurations. With our limiting magnitude and slitlet width, however, this is not the best method to use because the density of targets is not always the same. To take this into account, we have adapted the Minimal Spanning Tree (MST hereafter) method (e.g. Dussert et al. 1986) in order to find the optimal configuration according to the filter used. We only give a brief description here: for a given set of points, the MST process finds the minimal total length of a tree covering this set (without a loop). If we fix the area (thus the length of tree) the MST exactly finds the maximum number of slits that can be put in that area (according to the constraints: size of the slits, magnitudes, filter ..etc…). We have checked this method by showing that it gives a band configuration for a high density of targets. We show in Figures 4 and 5 the typical configuration given by this method for 2 of the lines of sight: PDCS62 and PDCS67. PDCS62 has a high density of targets (3.97 gal arcmin2) while PDCS67 has a lower target density (2.20 gal arcmin2). The slit distribution for PDCS62 is close to a band configuration.

Practically, we designed the masks in three steps. First, the primary potential targets were selected from the galaxies with a low enough magnitude to provide a reasonable success rate (percentage of observed galaxies with a redshift successfully measured) according to the planned exposure time. This exposure time was chosen to observe galaxies brighter than V$`{}_{PDCS}{}^{}19`$ at the mean redshift of the survey (z$``$0.4). This is about 1.5 magnitude fainter than the typical values of M in nearby clusters (see e.g. Rauzy et al. 1998).

We used the MST selection for these galaxies first. Table 2 gives these magnitude ranges with the real success rates. The mean value is 66$`\%`$, only slightly lower than the expected value. Then, the secondary potential targets were selected from the galaxies in the next 0.5 magnitude bin (in principle too faint to provide the same S/N, see Table 2 for the $`V_{PDCS}`$ magnitude range). Finally, if some space remained on the mask after selecting these two types of targets, we also assigned slitlets to contain other objects, typically in the $`V_{PDCS}`$ magnitude range  or selected by ”eye” during the night (tertiary targets).

We did not select the galaxies on the basis of their color, in order to avoid selection effects along the line of sight. Also, the second mask for PDCS62 has been partially designed by hand (during the night with the image acquired at the CFH telescope) because the PDCS photometric data did not cover all the field (only about 50$`\%`$).

## 3 The photometry

### 3.1 The PDCS data

We selected 10 lines of sight (see Table 2 and Fig. 1-3 and 6) for our observations which include 14 PDCS cluster candidates that are described in Postman et al. (1996). We have used the original PDCS photometry to select the galaxy targets. The PDCS photometry was carried out in the 4-shooter Palomar $`V`$ and $`I`$ filters and calibrated in the AB system. We will refer to it as $`V_{PDCS}`$ and $`I_{PDCS}`$ from now on. Postman et al. (1996) showed how this photometry compared to the Vega-system standard system. Here, we briefly describe the comparison between systems: the effective wavelength of the $`V_{PDCS}`$ filter is $``$100Å bluer and about 50$`\%`$ wider than the standard Johnson’s $`V`$. $`I_{PDCS}`$ has nearly the same width as the Kron-Cousins $`I`$ filter, but the effective wavelength is about 500Å redder. The zero points of the $`V_{PDCS}`$ and $`I_{PDCS}`$ magnitudes are based on the $`AB`$ magnitude system of Oke $`\&`$ Gunn (1983). The magnitudes of Vega are $`V_{PDCS}`$=+0.03 and $`I_{PDCS}`$=+0.46. The relation between ($`V_{PDCS}`$, $`I_{PDCS}`$) and (V,I) are:

$`V=V_{PDCS}0.020.056(V_{PDCS}I_{PDCS})+0.012(V_{PDCS}I_{PDCS})^2`$

and

$`I=I_{PDCS}0.43+0.089(V_{PDCS}I_{PDCS})`$

The uncertainty for $`V_{PDCS}I_{PDCS}`$ is almost 0.2 magnitude (Lubin 1996).

Since we used the PDCS star/galaxy classification to select the galaxies to observe, it is of interest to determine how well this selection performed. Given our observational strategy with blocking filters, faint stars remain unidentified because no obvious spectral feature falls within our spectral coverage. The same is true for faint galaxies at redshifts outside the optimal range of the filter used and for galaxies only detected at low signal-to-noise. The validity of the star/galaxy separation can only then be tested against other methods for these cases. We have thus compared the PDCS star/galaxy selection against the classification scheme of Sextractor (Bertin $`\&`$ Arnouts 1996). Figure 7 shows the comparison for the West PDCS62 spectroscopic field using a $`V`$ image taken at CFH (see below). We have plotted the ANN (Artificial Neural Network) parameter of Sextractor characterizing the nature of the objects versus the $`V_{PDCS}`$ magnitude for the PDCS objects classified as $`galaxies`$. The objects in Figure 7 are, therefore, only galaxies according to the PDCS classification. The Sextractor ANN parameter spans the range , being close to 1 if the object is classified by Sextractor as a star and moving closer to 0 if the object resembles a galaxy. There is a low contamination rate at faint magnitudes: a few number of objects classified as galaxies by the PDCS are interpreted as stars if we use Sextractor. We conclude, therefore, that we optimized the selection of our targets as can be seen by the ”ridge line” near 0 in Figure 7. However, according to the mask design technique, we targeted sometimes, in the tertiary-target-class, objects that were classified as stars by the PDCS, but which were later found to be galaxies. These objects represent, however, less than 3$`\%`$ of the sample and are not a significant source of error.

### 3.2 The CFH photometry

Besides the multislit spectroscopy, we have also imaged the fields of study with the CFHT. The field of view of the frames obtained was $`10^{}\times 10^{}`$. The imaged areas are shown in Fig. 6 (the photometric fields are slightly larger than the spectroscopic fields of Fig. 6 which cover about $`8^{}\times 8^{}`$). We used the $`R`$, $`V`$, $`2503`$ and $`4611`$ filters. The $`2503`$ and $`4611`$ filters were the blocking filters used for the spectroscopy (to limit the extent of the spectra) and are described in Table 1. They are, respectively, a very wide $`V`$ filter and a filter similar to a combination of the $`V`$+$`R`$ filters. The $`V`$ filter is a standard Johnson filter (centered at 5470Å, and FWHM of 880Å) and the $`R`$ filter is similar to the Kron-Cousins $`R`$ but somewhat narrower without the red tail. It is centered at 6500Å, and has a FWHM of 1280Å. From now on we will refer to these filters as $`V_{COP}`$ and $`R_{COP}`$.

All fields were imaged for 5 minutes, except for PDCS16 and the two first fields of PDCS38 that were exposed for 15 and 8 minutes, respectively (see Table 3). The images have been photometrically calibrated in the Vega system using several Landolt standard fields (Landolt 1992). Given that most of the fields were observed in only one filter, the photometric calibrations only include a extinction term and a zero point but not a color term. The uncertainties in our photometry were dominated by the fluctuations of the zero points, computed at different airmasses throughout the night, due to imperfect photometric conditions. The internal statistical errors within a field are negligible, except for the faintest objects. We estimate the systematic zero-point error in our measured magnitudes to be less than 0.15 mag for the observations taken in February 1998 (see Table 3) and less than 0.10 mag for the August 1998 observations. Table 3 summarizes our observations.

We used the $`V_{COP}`$ exposure for the second field of PDCS62 to complete the $`V_{PDCS}`$ data. This cluster was not completely covered by the PDCS photometry. To transform our magnitudes into a $`V_{PDCS}`$, we have computed the relation between $`V_{PDCS}`$ and our $`V_{COP}`$ for the first field of PDCS62 and applied it to the second field where the $`V_{COP}`$ magnitudes were also available. The best fit obtained was:

$`V_{PDCS}V_{COP}=0.28(V_{COP}block_{4611})+0.14`$

We plot finally on Fig. 8 the relations between $`V_{PDCS}`$ and $`I_{PDCS}`$, and between $`V_{PDCS}`$ and $`R_{COP}`$ for all the galaxies in our sample.

### 3.3 Galactic extinction

The fields chosen for the PDCS were selected from high-latitude Gun & Oke (1975) survey areas. We avoided regions of high extinction. As expected, the galactic extinction values obtained from the Burstein & Heiles (1982) and Schlegel et al (1998) reddening maps are low. The mean extinction in the $`V_{PDCS}`$ band is 0.027 and lower than this value for the $`I_{PDCS}`$ filter in all the fields (Postman et al 1996). Given the small extinction values and our photometric errors we have chosen not to correct for extinction.

## 4 The CFH spectroscopy

### 4.1 Computing the redshifts

We have used both the MIDAS (public ESO reduction package) and IRAF (see e.g. Kurtz & Mink 1998) packages to reduce the 2-Dimensional spectra to 1-Dimensional spectra. The details of the method used can be found in Holden et al. (1999). We computed the redshift from the 1-dimensional spectra from emission lines and from cross-correlation techniques (e.g. Tonry $`\&`$ Davis 1979). If there were more than two emission lines (”only”), we computed the emission line redshift measuring the centroid of the identified lines using gaussian fits and averaging the redshifts. For absorption line dominated spectra, we cross-correlated the spectra with 4 different spectroscopic templates (M31, M32, a 20 Gyear old E/SO Bruzual & Charlot (1993) model and finally a spectrum resulting from the combination of 1959 low-z high quality absorption line spectra: Kurtz & Mink 1998). We used the IRAF/RVSAO package to compute the redshifts. For absorption line dominated galaxies, we produced 4 estimates of the redshift, one from each template. To select a unique value, we proceeded as follows:

-1st: eliminated all the redshift estimates lower than -0.015 assuming that even the infalling galaxies of the Virgo cluster have velocities greater than -4500 km s-1. This limit is clearly an extreme value.

-2nd: eliminated all the redshift estimates with a cross-correlation coefficient lower than 3 (see Kurtz $`\&`$ Mink 1998, Tonry $`\&`$ Davis 1979).

-3rd: selected as the true redshift the estimate with the best cross-correlation coefficient if there was a gap of more than 1 with the second best coefficient.

-4th: assumed the mean value of the redshifts with the best cross-correlation coefficients if they were in agreement (difference less than 300 km s-1).

-5th: if neither the 3rd nor 4th conditions were fulfilled, we have simply assumed the value of the redshift with the best cross-correlation coefficient.

Using this approach, we obtained 636 redshifts (see Table 2 and 4 for details). We present a sub-sample of 4 spectra in Fig 9. The lower left spectrum is typical of our best signal to noise. It represents a galaxy at z=0.462 with a cross-correlation coefficient of 13.26. The lower right spectrum is a galaxy where we have used emission lines to deduce the redshift (z=0.658), e.g. the \[OII\] line shown on the figure (at $``$6180Å). This spectrum is typical of the worse spectra we used, but the cross-correlation method also was able to detect the CaII H$`\&`$K lines around 6600Å. The upper spectra (left and right) are typical of all our sample. The upper left spectrum is a galaxy at z=0.461 (cross-correlation coefficient of 4.33) and the upper right spectrum is a galaxy at z=0.459 with both absorption line features (cross-correlation coefficient of 3.54) and emission line features (\[OII\]).

### 4.2 Checking the redshifts

To check the validity of the assigned redshifts we have ”eye-balled” all the emission line redshifts and also checked a randomly selected sample of absorption line dominated spectra. Our visual inspection confirmed the validity of our computationally derived redshifts.

For 19 objects, we also had two separate spectra and, hence, two independent measurements of the redshift. These objects were observed twice due to overlaps in observing runs done at CFH and at the 4 meter Mayall telescope (see Holden et al. 1997). In order to estimate the uncertainties of our redshifts, we have then plotted the percentage difference between the two estimates versus the cross-correlation coefficient $`r`$ (Tonry $`\&`$ Davis 1979). Fig. 10 shows the 18 galaxies with less than 2.5$`\%`$ of difference. The mean error for the redshift estimate is 0.7% of the redshift (or 0.0016 in redshift). The 19th galaxy, although having a cross-correlation coefficient of $`r`$=4.2, had a discrepancy of 42% . This is clearly due to one wrong redshift. This galaxy was observed twice at CFHT. The first observation provides a redshift of 0.15364 and a correlation coefficient of 4.2. The second observation yielded a redshift of 0.08958 and a correlation coefficient of 4.2. However, for this observation, the second best estimate (with another template) of the redshift is 0.15673 with a correlation coefficient of 3.71, still acceptable. Using the second value of the redshift, the difference is only 2$`\%`$ for the initially discrepant galaxy. Assuming that these 19 galaxies are representative of our entire sample, we estimate that less than about 5% of our sample has a false redshift assignment. This has a negligible effect on conclusions we draw based on these results.

## 5 Analysis

### 5.1 Final catalogues

We identified the objects we measured at CFH (redshift + RCOP magnitude) with the galaxies in the PDCS survey in order to build catalogues with position (measured at CFH), redshift, RCOP magnitude and VPDCS and IPDCS magnitude (Tables 6-15). This is also a way to estimate the uncertainty for the coordinates of the galaxies. We found a mean difference between the PDCS coordinates and the coordinates measured at CFH of 3.5”$`\pm `$2.3”. This is typically the uncertainty for the coordinates we give in table 6-15.

We also classified the galaxies in redshift space as members of a structure or as field galaxies. This was a first step. A more detailed classification is discussed in Holden et al. (2000), but we give these results in order to present a complete overview of the data. In order to make this classification, we have searched the velocity distribution of each line of sight for gaps of more than 1000 km s-1. If we had more than 5 galaxies between two successive gaps, we have called these galaxies a structure. This is exactly the same method used to define the structures in the ENACS catalog (Katgert et al. 1996). The method does not completely avoid the inclusion of some interloppers, but, to a first approximation, it defines the compact structures (gravitationally bound) in redshift space. We summarize the results in Table 4, Table 6 to 15 and in Figures 11 and 12.

### 5.2 Completeness and spatial representativity

We show in Fig. 13 the variation of the completeness level of the spectroscopic catalogue compared to the photometric catalogue. This completeness level $`C`$ is defined as the ratio between the number of galaxies with a measured redshift (galaxies targeted $`and`$ successfully measured) and the total number of galaxies. It is different from the success rate, which is only the ability to deduce the redshift of a target. We see on Fig. 13 that this level is constant around 35$`\%`$ from $`V_{PDCS}`$=16.5 to $`V_{PDCS}`$=21.0. This relatively low level is because we did not have time to put a slit on all the available galaxies. The percentages of the 2 brightest bins of Fig. 13 are based on a low number of galaxies, since, we targeted more faint galaxies than bright galaxies explicitely to try to keep constant the completeness level $`C`$. This constant sampling is important for studying the galaxy distribution along the line of sights because it prevents us from severe redshift selection effects. For the faintest galaxies, the completeness level drops down to 6$`\%`$ for $`V_{PDCS}`$=22.5. These percentages were computed using all the lines of sight put together except PDCS61 for which the exposure time was very short. These percentages do not change considerably from pointing to pointing (except for PDCS61). For several types of analysis, it may be useful to give an analytical expression of the variation of the completeness level $`C`$. For the magnitudes brighter than $`V_{PDCS}`$=20.5, $`C`$=35.5$`\%`$. For the fainter magnitudes, assuming a power law model, the best fit is:

$`C=10^{0.44(V_{PDCS}24.07)}\%`$

To test for selection effects in the spatial distribution of the galaxies for which we measured redshift, we compared the spatial distribution of our redshift measured sample to that of all the PDCS galaxies. For this comparison, we have used a bidimensional Kolmogorov-Smirnov test as a function of the V limiting magnitude to determine the variation of this representativity level as a function of the photometric depth of the sample. A value of the representativity level given by the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test close to 100$`\%`$ means that the two distributions on the sky are very similar: the galaxies with a measured redshift are a statistically representative sub-sample in term of spatial distribution. A value lower than 90$`\%`$ means that this sub-sample is statistically different at the level of 10$`\%`$. We see in Tab. 5 that, except for PDCS30-45, the two spatial distributions are indistinguishable for the magnitudes brighter than 21. Note that the case of PDCS30-45 is not easely explained (see Tab. 5).

## 6 Summary

We have presented and given the data gathered in the COP survey. The spectroscopic and photometric observations were performed with the MOS/STIS2 instrument during 6 nights at the CFH telescope with the grism O300 and 2 blocking filters to enhance the multiplex gain of MOS. We have used a method based on the MST theory to optimize the number of slits per mask. This allowed us to measure 636 redshifts for 10 PDCS lines of sight. These lines of sight were selected to hold PDCS candidate clusters, with significant peaks in the galaxy density distribution.

The success rate (percentage of targeted galaxies with a successfully measured redshift) was close to 70$`\%`$ for the primary targets (typically brighter than VPDCS=22.). The completeness level (percentage of all galaxies with a measured redshift) was about 35$`\%`$ down to VPDCS=20.5. The galaxies with a redshift were proved to be a spatially representative sub-sample down to VPDCS=20.5 (no significant spatial selection effects). Finally, the percentage of false redshifts was about 5$`\%`$, based on 19 galaxies observed twice.

A comparison of the photometry from the PDCS (Postman et al. 1996) catalogs and from the new images we have obtained at the CFH telescope shows that the different magnitude systems can be cross-calibrated. This confirmation is important for the reliability of future works based on the multi-color photometry of COP. After identification between the PDCS catalogues and our new images, we built catalogues with redshift, coordinates and VPDCS, IPDCS and RCOP magnitude (Tab. 6-15).

We have classified the galaxies along the lines of sight into field and structure galaxies using a gap technique (Katgert et al. 1996). In total we have observed 18 significant structures along the 10 lines of sight (Tab. 4). As noted in the introduction, the interpretation of the results is given elsewhere (e.g. Holden et al. 2000).

CA thanks the staff of the Dearborn Observatory for their hospitality during his postdoctoral fellowship. The authors thanks the CFHT TAC for support. BH would like to acknowledge support from the following: NSF AST-9256606, NASA grant NAG5-3202, NASA GO-06838.01-95A, and the Center for Astrophysical Research in Antarctica, a National Science Foundation Science and Technology Center.