Research article Special Issues

A complete classification of weakly Dedekind groups

  • A finite group is called a weakly Dedekind group if all its noncyclic subgroups are normal. In this paper, we determine the complete classification of weakly Dedekind groups.

    Citation: Huaguo Shi, Zhangjia Han, Pengfei Guo. A complete classification of weakly Dedekind groups[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(4): 7955-7972. doi: 10.3934/math.2024387

    Related Papers:

    [1] Fawaz Aseeri, Julian Kaspczyk . The conjugacy diameters of non-abelian finite $ p $-groups with cyclic maximal subgroups. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(5): 10734-10755. doi: 10.3934/math.2024524
    [2] Huadong Su, Ling Zhu . Thickness of the subgroup intersection graph of a finite group. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(3): 2590-2606. doi: 10.3934/math.2021157
    [3] Adeel Farooq, Musawwar Hussain, Muhammad Yousaf, Ahmad N. Al-Kenani . A new algorithm to compute fuzzy subgroups of a finite group. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(9): 20802-20814. doi: 10.3934/math.20231060
    [4] Yan Wang, Kai Yuan, Ying Zhao . Perfect directed codes in Cayley digraphs. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(9): 23878-23889. doi: 10.3934/math.20241160
    [5] Aman Ullah, Muhammad Ibrahim, Tareq Saeed . Fuzzy cosets in AG-groups. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(3): 3321-3344. doi: 10.3934/math.2022185
    [6] Zhuonan Wu, Zengtai Gong . Algebraic structure of some complex intuitionistic fuzzy subgroups and their homomorphism. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(2): 4067-4091. doi: 10.3934/math.2025189
    [7] Madeleine Al Tahan, Sarka Hoskova-Mayerova, B. Davvaz, A. Sonea . On subpolygroup commutativity degree of finite polygroups. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(10): 23786-23799. doi: 10.3934/math.20231211
    [8] Supriya Bhunia, Ganesh Ghorai, Qin Xin . On the fuzzification of Lagrange's theorem in $ (\alpha, \beta) $-Pythagorean fuzzy environment. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(9): 9290-9308. doi: 10.3934/math.2021540
    [9] Aneeza Imtiaz, Hanan Alolaiyan, Umer Shuaib, Abdul Razaq, Jia-Bao Liu . Applications of conjunctive complex fuzzy subgroups to Sylow theory. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(1): 38-54. doi: 10.3934/math.2024003
    [10] Hui Chen . Characterizations of normal cancellative monoids. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(1): 302-318. doi: 10.3934/math.2024018
  • A finite group is called a weakly Dedekind group if all its noncyclic subgroups are normal. In this paper, we determine the complete classification of weakly Dedekind groups.



    The groups involved in this paper are always finite. We denote by Ω1(G) the subgroup of G generated by its elements of order p for a fixed prime p, π(G) denotes the set of all prime divisors of |G|, Cn denotes a cyclic group of order n, and

    (G)=apaG.

    All unexplained notations and terminologies are standard as in [1].

    The normality of subgroups plays an important role in group theory. An important topic in group theory is to investigate the groups in which certain subgroups are assumed to be normal. There are many remarkable examples about this topic, and the so-called Dedekind group is one typical result. A group G is called a Dedekind group if every subgroup of G is normal in G. The structure of Dedekind groups has been completely determined by Dedekind and Baer (see [1, Theorem 5.3.7]). A group G is Dedekind if and only if G is abelian or the direct product of a quaternion group of order 8, an elementary abelian 2-group, and an abelian group with all its elements of odd order. Subsequently, many authors dealt with the generalization of Dedekind groups. Here, we mention some of them. Pic [2] considered groups in which every subgroup S is quasinormal, that is, S satisfies SH=HS for all subgroups H of G. Buckley et al. [3] dealt with groups in which every subgroup has at most two conjugacy classes. Bozikov and Janko [4] gave a complete classification of p-groups, all of whose noncyclic subgroups are normal. The research [5] classified p-groups whose non-normal abelian subgroups are cyclic. Brandl [6] and Han et al. [7] classified groups in which all non-normal subgroups are conjugate. The further results can be found in [8,9,10,11,12,13].

    One of the aims of this paper is to classify p-groups whose noncyclic subgroups are normal completely. Our method of proof is elementary, which is different from a result in [4, Theorem 1.1]. The other aim is to give a complete classification of non-nilpotent groups whose noncyclic subgroups are normal.

    Definition 1.1. A group is called a weakly Dedekind group if all noncyclic subgroups are normal.

    It is clear that the class of weakly Dedekind groups is closed under taking subgroups and quotient groups.

    Remark 1.2. A weakly Dedekind group G has a normal Sylow subgroup.

    Proof. Let p be the smallest prime dividing |G|. If a Sylow p-subgroup P is normal in G, then we are done. If P is cyclic, then P has a normal p-complement N in G. By induction, N has a normal Sylow subgroup Q, so Q is normal in G.

    Since the structure of Dedekind groups is well known, we discuss weakly Dedekind groups, which are not Dedekind.

    Remark 1.3. Let π be a set of primes. A direct product of a π-group and a π'-group is weakly Dedekind, but not Dedekind if and only if one factor is weakly Dedekind but not Dedekind, and the other is cyclic.

    Proof. Let G=M×N be a weakly Dedekind but not Dedekind group with M a π-group and N a π'-group. Then G has a non-normal subgroup H×K, where HM and KN. Hence, HM or KN. Without loss of generality, let HM, then H×NG and H×N is cyclic by hypothesis. Thus, N is cyclic, so G has the required form.

    The converse is clear.

    Definition 1.4. A weakly Dedekind group that is not Dedekind and cannot be expressed as a proper direct product of a π-group and a π'-group is called a weakly primitive Dedekind group.

    Finally, we give the complete classification of weakly primitive Dedekind groups. The specific results are as shown below.

    Theorem A. Let G be a p-group. Then G is weakly primitive Dedekind if and only if G is isomorphic to one of the following groups:

    (1) the quaternion group Q16 of order 16;

    (2) G=a,b,ca4=1,b2=a2,[a,b]=a2,[a,c]=[b,c]=1,ca,ba2, |c|>2;

    (3) G=a,b,c,da4=d2=1,c2=b2=a2,[a,b]=[c,d]=a2,[a,c]=[a,d]=[b,c]=[b,d]=1;

    (4) G=a,bapm=1, bpn=1, [b,a]=apm1, where m,n2;

    (5) G=a,bap=bpn=1,[a,b]=c,[a,c]=[b,c]=cp=1, where c=bpn1 if n1;

    (6) G=a,ba9=1,b3=a3,[a,b]=c,c3=1,[a,c]=1,[b,c]=a6;

    (7) G=a,b,cap=bpn=cp=1,[a,b]=1, where [a,c]=bpn1,[b,c]bpn1 and n2;

    (8) G=a,ba8=1,a4=b4,[a,b]=a2 or a6.

    Theorem B. Let G be a group with |π(G)|>1. Then G is weakly primitive Dedekind if and only if G is isomorphic to one of the following groups:

    (1) G=a,bap=br=1,[a,b]=at+1, where

    tr1(mod p),  r=ki=1qnii,  trqnii1(mod p)

    for any 1in;

    (2) G=a,b,ca4=1,b2=a2,[a,b]=a2,c3n=1,ac=b,bc=ab or ba;

    (3) G=a,b,capm=bp=cr=1,ab=ac=a,bc=bt, where

    tr1(mod p),  r=ki=1qnii,  trqnii1(mod p)

    for any 1in;

    (4) G=a,b,cap=bp=cr=1,[a,b]=1,ac=b,bc=ambn, where p is a prime. Write

    M=[01mn]

    and

    r=ki=1qnii,

    then

    Mr[1001](mod p),

    where Mk has no eigenvalues (over the field of p elements Fp) or Mk (taken modulo p) is the identity matrix for any kr, and Mrqtii has no eigenvalues for any 1in.

    We collect some lemmas, which will be frequently used in the sequel.

    Lemma 2.1. Let G be a group with |π(G)|>1. If G is weakly primitive Dedekind, then G=PC, where C is cyclic and q|C/CC(P)| for any prime divisor q of |C|.

    Proof. By Remark 1.2, there exists a normal Sylow subgroup P of G. Hence, P has a complement C since G is solvable. By hypothesis, C is not normal in G, so it is cyclic.

    Let Q be a Sylow q-subgroup of C for a prime q. If C=Q, the proof is complete. If CQ, then there exists a Hall subgroup D of C such that C=D×Q. It is clear that Q acts on P nontrivially. Otherwise, G=PD×Q, a contradiction. Hence, q|C/CC(P)|.

    Lemma 2.2. Let G be a 2-group and |Ω1(Z(G))|2. If G is weakly primitive Dedekind, then G/Ω1(G) has no subgroup isomorphic to the quaternion group Q8 of order 8.

    Proof. Assume that there is a quaternion group KΩ1(G)/Ω1(G) of order 8 contained in G/Ω1(G). By hypothesis, Ω1(G) is an elementary abelian subgroup of G, which is contained in Z(G). Hence,

    KΩ1(G)=Ω1(K).

    Writing Ω=Ω1(K), then

    KΩ1(G)/Ω1(G)K/KΩ1(G)=K/Ω

    is a quaternion group of order 8. Choosing a minimal generating system aΩ,bΩ of K/Ω, then

    a4Ω=Ω,  b2Ω=a2Ωand[a,b]Ω=a2Ω.

    Noting that Ω is an elementary abelian subgroup, which is contained in Z(K), then a,b are all of order 8, a2,b2,[a,b] are contained in Z(K), and [a,b]2=a4. Thus,

    1=[a,b2]=[a,b]2=a4,

    a contradiction.

    Lemma 2.3. Let G be a p-group. Suppose that G does not contain the quaternion group Q8 and Z(G) is noncyclic. If G is weakly primitive Dedekind, then Ω1(G) is an elementary abelian subgroup of type (p,p) and

    GΩ1(G)Φ(G)Z(G).

    Proof. Since

    |Ω1(Z(G))|p,

    and all noncyclic subgroups of G are normal, we have that Ω1(G) is an elementary abelian subgroup of G which is contained in Z(G). Hence,

    aΩ1(G)G

    for any element a of G, so G/Ω1(G) is a Dedekind group. By Lemma 2.2, G/Ω1(G) is abelian. Therefore, [a,b]Ω1(G), and the order of [a,b] is p for any two elements a,b of G, which implies GZ(G). Since the order of [a,b] is p, we have

    [ap,b]=[a,b]p=1.

    Thus, we get apZ(G). Furthermore,

    GΩ1(G)Z(G)andΦ(G)Z(G)

    by the argument above.

    If Ω1(G) is not an elementary abelian subgroup of type (p,p), then there are three different subgroups, A1,A2,A3, of order p in Ω1(G) such that

    A1A2A3=A1×A2×A3.

    Thus, for any cyclic subgroup A of G, we have

    A=AA1AA2AA3G,

    a contradiction, which implies that Ω1(G) is of type (p,p).

    If Ω1(G)Φ(G), then G=H×B, where B is of order p. By hypothesis again, H is cyclic, which implies that G is abelian, a contradiction.

    Lemma 2.4. Let G=PC with (|P|,|C|)=1. If G is weakly primitive Dedekind, then

    (1) Φ(P) is cyclic and C acts on Φ(P) trivially;

    (2) The number of elements of any minimal generating system of P is less than or equal to 2.

    Proof. (1) Suppose that Φ(P) is noncyclic or C acts on Φ(P) as nontrivial. We have Φ(P)CG and hence, Φ(P) must act on {CggG} transitively. By Frattini's argument,

    P=Φ(P)NP(C)=NP(C),

    which implies CG, so G=P×C, a contradiction.

    (2) Assume that the number of elements of any minimal generating system of Q is more than 2. We choose a proper generating system {b1,,bk,a1,,al} of P such that biNP(C), but ajNP(C) and the value of k are to be the maximum. By hypothesis, l1. Let

    K=b1,,bk,a2,,al.

    Clearly, K is noncyclic. Moreover, KCG and K acts on {CggG} transitively. Therefore, P=KNP(C), and there exists bNP(C) such that

    P=b1,,bk,b,a2,,al,

    which contradicts the maximality of k.

    In this section, we give some relevant results of proofs of Theorems A and B.

    Theorem 3.1. Suppose that G is a 2-group containing a quaternion group of order 16. Then G is weakly primitive Dedekind if and only if G is isomorphic to Q16.

    Proof. Let

    H=a,ba8=1,b2=a4,ab=a1

    be a quaternion group of order 16 contained in G. Obviously bG. Since all noncyclic subgroups of G are normal, we have HG.

    Now, we claim |Ω1(G)|=2. Suppose |Ω1(G)|2 and let cH be an element of order 2, then b2,cG, so cb=c or b2c, which implies

    b=Hb,cG,

    a contradiction. Therefore, |Ω1(G)|=2 and G is a quaternion group.

    If |G|32, then we can assume

    G=c,bc16=1,b2=c8,cb=c1.

    So

    bc=bc2b,c4andb,c4G,

    a contradiction. Thus, G is isomorphic to Q16.

    The converse is clear.

    Theorem 3.2. Let G be a 2-group containing a quaternion group K of order 8 but not 16, and G/K be cyclic. Then G is weakly primitive Dedekind if and only if

    G=a,b,ca4=1,b2=a2,[a,b]=a2,[a,c]=[b,c]=1,

    where

    ca,ba2and|c|>2.

    Proof. Let

    G=a,b,candK=a,ba4=1,b2=a2,[a,b]=a2,

    where

    c2m=1andH=cK.

    We first claim |H|4. If |H|=4, we write H=a and let uc be an element of order 8, then u2=a. Since K is noncyclic, we have KG and hence, [b,u]K. Let [b,u]=w. If |w|=2, then w=b2, bu=b3, and bu2=b, contrary to u2=a. If |w|=4 and wu2, then u2,w=K and hence, c,w=G, contrary to GΦ(G). Assume |w|=4 and w=u2. If w=u2, then u,b is a quaternion group of order 16, a contradiction. If w=u6, then ub,b2G, contrary to the hypothesis. Therefore, we get |H|2.

    We next claim that every subgroup of K is normal in G. If not, the generator c induces an automorphism of order 2 on K, then we can choose proper generators a,b of K such that ac=b,bc=a. Thus, c2,aG and c2,a is cyclic. Since |H|2, we have c2=1 or c2=a2. If c2=1, then

    G=a,b,ca4=1,b2=a2,[a,b]=a2,c2=1,ac=b,bc=a.

    It is easy to see that a2,cG, a contradiction. If c2=a2, then c4=1. Now, let

    T=cb,c(cb)8=1,(cb)4=c2,(cb)c=(cb)1.

    T is a quaternion group of order 16, a contradiction. If the generator c induces an automorphism of order 4 on K, then we get c2,aG, which is noncyclic, a contradiction also.

    Finally, since every subgroup of K is normal in G, we can choose a proper generator c such that c acts on K trivially. Hence,

    G=a,b,ca4=1,b2=a2,[a,b]=a2,[a,c]=[b,c]=1,

    where

    ca,ba2.

    By the structure of Dedekind groups, we have |c|>2.

    The converse is clear.

    Remark 3.3. By the proof of Theorem 3.2, let K be a quaternion group of order 8 and G=K,a be a 2-group. If G is weakly primitive Dedekind, then we can choose some proper generator a such that G=K,a, a acts on K trivially, and |aK|2.

    Theorem 3.4. Let G be a 2-group containing a quaternion group of order 8 but not 16, and G/K be noncyclic. Then G is weakly primitive Dedekind if and only if

    G=a,b,c,da4=d2=1,c2=a2=b2,[a,b]=[c,d]=a2,[a,c]=[a,d]=[b,c]=[b,d]=1.

    Proof. Let K=a,b be a quaternion group of order 8 and H=c,d,,x such that {cK,dK,,xK} is a minimal generating system of G/K. By Remark 3.3 and the structure of Dedekind groups, we can choose a proper H such that |HK|2 and H acts trivially on K.

    If HK=1, then

    u=a2,uHG

    for any element u in H, which implies that H is a Dedekind group. If the exponent of H is 2, then G itself is a Dedekind group, a contradiction. Hence, the exponent of H is greater than 2. Assume that v is an element of order 4 and wv2 is an element of order 2 in H, then va,wG, a contradiction. Hence, there is a unique element of order 2 in H, which implies that H=c,d is a quaternion group of order 8 by hypothesis. Thus, ca,dbG, a contradiction, so |HK|=2. In this case, there exists an element c of order 4 in H such that c2=a2. Hence, caG.

    Now we claim that H is not a Dedekind group. If H is Dedekind but not a quaternion group, then there are two elements v,w in H of order 2 that are in the center of G. Thus, we have

    ca=ca,vca,wG,

    a contradiction. If H is a quaternion group, then

    H=c,dandKH=a2.

    Hence, ca,dbG, a contradiction also. Thus, our claim holds.

    By the same argument as above, H cannot contain any quaternion group, then there exists an element d of order 2 in H such that da2. If [c,d]=1, then

    ca=ca,a2ca,dG,

    a contradiction. By hypothesis, a2,dG and hence, [c,d]=a2.

    Writing H1=c,d, we prove H=H1. If not, we choose H2H such that |H2/H1|=2, and let e be an element of smallest possible order satisfying eH2H1. Our proof will be divided into three cases:

    (1) |e|=2.

    Note a2,caG. We have

    ca3=(ca)e=cea,

    so [c,e]=a2. Similarly, [d,e]=a2, and it makes [cd,e]=1. On the other hand, eG holds by [a2,e]=1, then eZ(G), a contradiction.

    (2) |e|=4.

    Assume a2=e2. If [c,e]=1, then |ce|=2. Therefore, H2=H1,ce, which contradicts the choice of e. Hence, [c,e]1. Since a2,caG, we have

    ca3=(ca)e=cea.

    Hence, [c,e]=a2, which implies that c,e is a quaternion group, a contradiction. Assume e2a2. We can choose a proper generator d of H1 such that d=e2. Hence, [d,c]=a2, thus [e,c]1. On the other hand, since a2,caG, we get

    (ca)e=ca3=cea.

    Thus, ce=c3, which implies cd=c, a contradiction.

    (3) |e|=8.

    Clearly, e2=c. Since dG and a2,dG, we get de=da2, which implies dc=d, a contradiction. Thus,

    H=H1=c,d.

    In a word,

    G=a,b,c,da4=d2=1,c2=b2=a2,[a,b]=[c,d]=a2,[a,c]=[a,d]=[b,c]=[b,d]=1.

    Conversely, since

    G=[u,v]gu,v{a,b,c,d},gG=a2,

    we have that all elements of G can be written as aibjckdl by computations, and where 0i3,0j,k,l1. Furthermore, if one of i,j,k is an odd number, then

    (aibjckdl)2=a2

    holds certainly. Now we consider any binary generated subgroup G1 of G. Clearly, if there exists an odd number of i,j,k such that aibjckdlG1, then G1G. For any aibjckdlG1, if all of i,j, and k are even numbers, then G1=a2,d, so G1G. That is, G is weakly primitive Dedekind.

    Theorem 3.5. Let G be a p-group such that G does not contain a quaternion group of order 8 and Z(G) is noncyclic. Then G is weakly primitive Dedekind if and only if

    G=a,bapm=1,bpn=1,[a,b]=apm1,

    where m,n2.

    Proof. Our proof will be divided into three steps:

    (1) G is a 2-generated group.

    If not, choose three generators u,v,w in a minimal generating system of G. By Lemma 2.3, up1, vp1, up and vp are contained in Z(G), which implies that

    H=up,vp,w

    is abelian. Again by Lemma 2.3, Ω1(G) is of type (p,p), so H is cyclic or a direct product of two cyclic subgroups. If H is cyclic, then upw. Hence, there exists a maximal cyclic subgroup w in u,w. By hypothesis, G does not contain any quaternion group and there exists an element u1u,w of order p such that

    u,w=u1,w.

    By Lemma 2.3, we know Ω1(G)Φ(G). Hence, uw, which contradicts the choice of u. If H is a direct product of two cyclic subgroups, then H is 2-generated. Assume H=up,vp, then wu,v, which contradicts the choice of w. By the same argument as above, we get Hup,w and Hvp,w also, a contradiction.

    (2) G is a meta-cyclic group.

    Suppose that G is not meta-cyclic. Let {a,b} be a generating system satisfying

    apm=1,  bpn=apt,  [a,b]=c

    and let b be a generator of smallest possible order. Obviously, ca or b. If p=2,n=t=1, then

    (ab1)2=a2b2[b1,a]=[ab1,a].

    Hence,

    G=a,ab1andab1G,

    that is, G is meta-cyclic, a contradiction. If p=2, n=1, t>1, then by Lemma 2.3, we have a2t1Z(G), (b1a2t1)2=1, so

    G=a,b1a2t1,

    which contradicts Lemma 2.3. Assume p2 or n1. If apt1, then |b|>pn. By the choice of b, nt. Since

    (baptn)pn=bpnapt[aptn,b](pn2)=[aptn,b](pn2),

    we can get

    (baptn)pn=1

    provided p2 or n1. Now,

    G=a,baptn,

    which contradicts the choice of b. Hence, apt=1, that is, ab=1. By Lemma 2.3, we assume that

    c=aipm1bjpn1,pi,pj.

    Let r be a natural number satisfying jr1(mod p). Then,

    [ar,airpmnb]=airpm1bjrpn1=(airpmnb)pn1.

    Hence,

    G=ar,airpmnbandairpmnbG,

    a contradiction.

    (3) Completing the proof.

    By (1) and (2), we can choose two generators a,b of G such that apm=1,bpn=apt, and [a,b]a, where the order of b comes to the smallest. Now, we show apt=1. If apt1, then [a,b]b. By the choice of b, we get nt. If p=2, n=t=1, and m=2, then G is a quaternion group of order 8, a contradiction. If p=2, n=t=1, and m>2, then

    (a1b)2=a2b2[b,a1]=a2m1.

    Writing d=a1b, then

    G=a,d=a,a2m2d.

    Hence,

    (a2m2d)2=a2m1d2=1,

    contrary to the choice of b. If p=2, n=1, and t>1, then by Lemma 2.3, we have

    a2t1Z(G),   (b1a2t1)2=1andG=a,b1a2t1,

    contrary to Lemma 2.3. So, we assume p2 or n1. Since

    (baptn)pn=bpnapt[aptn,b](pn2)=[aptn,b](pn2),

    we get

    (baptn)pn=1

    provided p2 or n1. Now,

    G=a,baptn,

    which contradicts the choice of b. Thus, apt=1, and therefore,

    G=a,bapm=1,bpn=1,[b,a]=apm1,

    where m,n2.

    Conversely, it is clear that

    G=apm1.

    For any proper subgroup of G, which is binary generated, since G is also a binary generated group, we have

    |HΦ(G)/Φ(G)|p.

    If

    HΦ(G)/Φ(G)=1,

    then

    HΦ(G)=Z(G),

    so HG. If

    |HΦ(G)/Φ(G)|=p,

    then we can choose the appropriate generating system u,v of H such that uΦ(G),vΦ(G). Let

    u=ai1pm1bj1pn1,v=ai2pm2bj2pn2,

    where at least one of i1 and j1 is more than 0, as well as i2 and j2, which prime to p, at least one of m1,n1 is 0, m2 and n2 are both more than 0. If j1 or j2 is 0, then apm1H, so HG. Now we can assume that j1 and j2 are both more than 0. Without loss of generality, we can choose the appropriate power of u,v (still written as u,v) such that H=u,v, where

    u=ai1pm1bpn1,   v=ai2pm2bpn2.

    If m1m2, then

    1upm2m1v1.

    Since H is noncyclic, then

    upm2m1v1a

    by computations. Thus,

    apm1upm2m1v1.

    Therefore, HG. Similarly, if m1>m2, the result holds. So G is weakly primitive Dedekind.

    By Theorem 3.5, the following remark holds.

    Remark 3.6. Let G be a p-group such that G does not contain a quaternion group of order 8 and Z(G) is noncyclic. If G is weakly primitive Dedekind, then

    Ω1(G)=Ω1(a)aG,|a|>p.

    Theorem 3.7. Let G be a p-group such that G does not contain a quaternion group of order 8 and Z(G) is cyclic. Then G is weakly primitive Dedekind if and only if G is isomorphic to one of the following groups:

    (1) G=a,bap=bpn=1,[a,b]=c,[a,c]=[b,c]=cp=1, where c=bpn1 if n1;

    (2) G=a,ba9=1,b3=a3,[a,b]=c,c3=1,[a,c]=1,[b,c]=a6;

    (3) G=a,b,cap=bpn=cp=1,[a,b]=1, where [a,c]=bpn1,[b,c]bpn1,n2;

    (4) G=a,ba8=1,a4=b4,[a,b]=a2 or a6.

    Proof. Let C be a subgroup of order p in Z(G). By hypothesis, there exists another subgroup A of order p, which is different from C. Since Z(G) is cyclic, we have AG. Hence, we obtain that ACG by hypothesis, which implies

    |G/NG(A)|=p.

    Thus,

    Φ(G)NG(A)=CG(A).

    We claim apG for any aG. If Ca, then aCG and

    ap=(aC)G.

    If Ca, then

    Aa=ACaG,

    so

    ap=(Aa)G.

    Let H be any cyclic subgroup of G whose order is greater than p. Then C is the unique subgroup of order p in H since apG for any aG. Hence,

    Ω1(a)aG,|a|>p=C.

    We claim that CG(A) is abelian. If not, then there exists at least one non-normal subgroup in CG(A) by hypothesis. Since A and C are both contained in Z(CG(A)), we get that

    Ω1(CG(A))=Ω1(a)aCG(A),|a|>pΩ1(a)aG,|a|>p=C

    by Remark 3.6, which contradicts AΩ1(CG(A)).

    Since CG(A) is abelian, then CG(A) is a direct product of some cyclic subgroups. In fact, the number of direct product factors of CG(A) is at most two by hypothesis. On the other hand, A cannot be contained in any cyclic subgroup. Thus, there is an element u such that

    CG(A)=Au=A×uandΩ1(u)=C.

    For any HG, we have HACG, so

    HAC/(AC)G/(AC),

    which implies that G/(AC) is a Dedekind group. Our proof will be divided into two cases as shown below.

    Case 1. G/(AC) is abelian.

    Obviously, for any g,hG, we have [g,h]AC and [g,h]p=1 by the structure of Dedekind groups.

    We claim gpZ(G) for any gG. If gCG(A), then

    G=g,CG(A).

    By what has been shown in the first paragraph, we know

    |G/CG(A)|=p.

    Thus, gpCG(A) and gpZ(G) by the fact that CG(A) is abelian. If gCG(A), then gCG(AC). So gCG([g,h]) and

    [gp,h]=[g,h]p=1

    for any hG. Furthermore, gpZ(G) and (G)Z(G).

    Let A=a. Since CG(A)=a,u is a maximal subgroup of G, there exists a generator b of G such that G=a,u,v. Hence, there is a subset of {a,u,v} which can form a minimal generating system of G. Obviously, anyone of {a},{u},{v},{a,u} is not a minimal generating system of G.

    Suppose that {a,v} is a minimal generating system of G. Let bpn=1 and [a,v]=c. Since cAC and [a,vp]=1, then

    [a,c]=[v,c]=cp=1.

    If n1, then cvp as cZ(G), so vpZ(G) and Z(G) is cyclic. Moreover, we can choose some proper a such that c=vpn1. Hence,

    G=a,vap=vpn=1,[a,v]=c,[a,c]=[v,c]=cp=1,

    where c=vpn1 if n1. By choosing some proper symbols, G is a group of type (1).

    Suppose that {u,v} is a minimal generating system of G. Since Ω1(u)=C, we have up1. If aΦ(G), then there exists a generator w such that a,w=G. By the same argument as above, we also get that G is a group of type (1). Assume aΦ(G). Since (G)Z(G), we get aG. Let a=[u,v]. Then

    [a,v]=Cu.

    On the other hand, since vpZ(G), we have vpu.

    We claim up=vp. If not, then vpup. Since upZ(G), then up is a maximal subgroup of up,v. Hence, there exists an element wup,v of order p such that vup,w, so G=u,w. Now, [u,w]=C since w,CG, which implies G=C, contrary to aG. Thus, our claim holds and

    G=u,vupn=1,up=vp,a=[u,v],c1=[a,v],ap=1,c1Ω1(u),[a,u]=1.

    Obviously, |G|=pn+2. If p=2, then

    (vu)2=v2u2a

    and a(G), which contradicts (G)Z(G). If p5, then

    (vu)p=vpupap(p1)/2c(p2)(p1)p/61=vpup.

    By choosing proper elements u,v such that vp=up, we get (vu)p=1. Since vu,CG and Cu, we have

    G=v,u=vu,uand|vu,u|=pn+1,

    contrary to |G|=pn+2. Hence, p=3. By choosing proper elements u,v such that u3=v3, we have c1=u6 by

    (vu)3=v3u3a3c1=u6c1,

    so

    G=u,vu9=1,v3=u3,a=[u,v],a3=1,[a,u]=1,[a,v]=u6.

    By choosing some proper symbols, G is a group of type (2).

    Suppose that {a,u,v} is a minimal generating system of G. Let |u|=pn. Since a,u is a maximal subgroup of G, we have |G|=pn+2. On the other hand,

    uu,vG,

    so u is a maximal subgroup of u,v. Hence, there exists an element w of order p satisfying u,v=u,w, so G=a,u,w. Obviously, Aw cannot be a subgroup of G. If not, then

    A=ACAwG,

    a contradiction. On the other hand, ACw is a subgroup of G, so [a,w]=C. Since [u,w]wC and [up,w]=1, then [u,w]C. Thus,

    G=a,u,wap=upn=wp=1,[a,u]=1,

    where

    [a,w]=upn1,[u,w]upn1,  n2.

    By choosing some proper symbols, G is a group of type (3).

    Case 2. G/(AC) is non-abelian.

    In this case, we have that G/(AC) is a direct product of a quaternion group and an elementary abalian 2-group. Write K=AC, C=c1, and A=a. Let

    T/K=uK,vKu4K=K,v2K=u2K,[u,v]K=u2K

    be a quaternion subgroup of G/K. Then u2v2K and [u,v]u2K. Since

    Ω1(g)gG,|g|>p=C,

    we have u4=v4=c1 and u8=1. By the symmetry of u and v, we choose some proper generators (we still call them u and v) of T such that

    T=u,vu8=1,u4=v4=c1,u2v2=a,[u,v]=u2oru6.

    Obviously, uCG(a) and vCG(a).

    Now, we show G=T. If GT, then there exists an element wGT. By hypothesis, the exponent of G is less than 8. On the other hand,

    CG(A)=A×u

    and uCG(a), hence, we get CG(a)=a,u. If wCG(a), then wa,u, contrary to wT. If wCG(a), then wvCG(a) and wva,u, a contradiction also. Thus, we get G=T. By choosing some proper symbols, G is a group of type (4).

    Conversely, it is easy to check that anyone of types (1)–(4) is weakly primitive Dedekind.

    In this section, we complete the proofs of Theorems A and B.

    Proof of Theorem A. It follows from Theorems 3.1–3.7 clearly.

    proof of Theorem B. By Lemma 2.1, Lemma 2.4, and the structure of Dedekind groups, we have G=PC with P,C of coprime order, P is of type (1) or (5) in Theorem A, or a cyclic p-group, a quaternion group Q8, or Cpm×Cp, C is a cyclic subgroup of G, and q|C/CC(P)| for any prime divisor q of |C|. In the first place, P can't be the group of type (1) in Theorem A since

    C/CC(P) Aut(P)

    and Aut(Q16) is a 2-group.

    If P is a group of type (5) in Theorem A, let R

    P=u,vup=vpn=1,[u,v]=w,[u,w]=[v,w]=wp=1,

    where w=vpn1 if n1, then u,wG. If C acts on u,w trivially, then CG, a contradiction. Hence, C acts on u,w nontrivially. By Lemma 2.4, C acts trivially on w. Hence, there exists a C-invariant subgroup in u,w (without loss of generality, write this subgroup u) such that C acts nontrivially on u. Hence, uCG and

    u=u,wuCG,

    a contradiction.

    If P is cyclic and |P|=pm, then p3 since the automorphism group of a 2-group is a 2-group and

    C/CC(P) Aut(P).

    We claim m=1. If not, then Ω1(P)Φ(P). By Lemma 2.4, C acts trivially on Φ(P). Of course, C acts trivially on Ω1(P). Thus, C must act trivially on P, a contradiction. Therefore, P is of order p.

    Let

    G=a,bap=1,br=1,ab=bt

    and

    r=ki=1qnii.

    For any 1in and any prime divisor q of |C|, we have

    trqnii1(mod p)

    since q|C/CC(P)|, so G is a group of type (1).

    If

    P=a,ba4=1,b2=a2,[a,b]=a2

    and C=c, then ac=b,bc=ab or ba by the structure of Aut(P) and 2r. Furthermore, r=3n since q|C/CC(P)| for any prime divisor q of |C|, so G is a group of type (2).

    If P is a group of type Cpm×Cp and C acts decomposably on P, then by Lemma 2.4, C acts on Φ(P) trivially and all noncyclic subgroups are normal in G. Hence, we choose proper generators a,b,c such that

    G=a,b,capm=bp=cr=1,ab=ac=a,bc=bt,

    where t1(mod p),tr1(mod p). Clearly, b,c is of type (1). Thus,

    G=a,b,capm=bp=cr=1,ab=ac=a,bc=bt,

    where

    tr1(mod p),  r=ki=1qnii,trqnii1(mod p)

    for any 1in, so G is a group of type (3).

    If P is of type Cpm×Cp and C acting on P is indecomposable, then by Lemma 2.4, C acts on Φ(P) trivially and all noncyclic subgroups are normal in G. Hence, m=1, and we can choose three proper generators a,b,c such that ap=bp=cr=1, where ab=a,ac=b, and bc=ambn. Now, take P as a vector space in Fp and c as a linear transformation of P, then the matrix induced by c is

    M=[01mn].

    Since cr=1, we have

    Mr[1001](mod p).

    On the other hand, for any subgroup K of C, we easily know that K must act on P trivially if K acts on P reducibly. Thus, the matrix Mk corresponding to the generator of K either has no eigenvalues or is an identity matrix in Fp. Therefore,

    G=a,b,cap=bp=cr=1,[a,b]=1,ac=b,bc=ambn.

    Let

    M=[01mn].

    Thus,

    Mr[1001](mod p),

    where Mk has no eigenvalues or is an identity matrix in Fp for any kr. Let

    r=ki=1qnii.

    Mrqtii has no eigenvalues since q|C/CC(P)| for any 1in and any prime divisor q of |C|, so G is a group of type (4).

    Conversely, it is easy to check that anyone of types (1)–(4) is weakly primitive Dedekind.

    We give the complete classification of p-groups whose noncyclic subgroups are normal. Our method of proof is elementary, which is different from Bozikov and Janko's in [4], and give the complete classification of non-nilpotent groups whose noncyclic subgroups are normal.

    The authors declare they have not used Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the creation of this article.

    This work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 12061030) and Hainan Provincial Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 122RC652). The authors are grateful to the referees for their valuable suggestions, which polished this article largely.

    The authors declare no conflicts of interest.



    [1] D. J. S. Robinson, A course in the theory of groups, Springer-Verlag, New York-Heidelberg-Berlin, 1980. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-8594-1
    [2] G. Pic, Despre structura grupurilor quasihamiltoniene, Buletin Ştiinţific, 1949.
    [3] J. T. Buckley, J. C. Lennox, J. Wieglod, Generalizations of Hamiltonian groups, Ric. Mat., 41 (1992), 369–376.
    [4] Z. Bozikov, Z. Janko, A complete classification of finite p-groups all of whose noncyclic subgroups are normal, Glas. Mat., 44 (2009), 177–185. https://doi.org/10.3336/gm.44.1.10 doi: 10.3336/gm.44.1.10
    [5] L. H. Zhang, J. Q. Zhang, Finite p-groups all of whose non-normal abelian subgroups are cyclic, J. Algebra Appl., 12 (2013), 1350052. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219498813500527 doi: 10.1142/S0219498813500527
    [6] R. Brandl, Groups with few non-normal subgroups, Comm. Algebra, 23 (1995), 2091–2098. https://doi.org/10.1080/00927879508825330 doi: 10.1080/00927879508825330
    [7] Z. J. Han, G. Y. Chen, H. G. Shi, A new proof of cassification of finite groups whose non-normal subgroups are conjugate, Adv. Math., 46 (2017), 97–102. https://doi.org/10.11845/SXJZ.2015047B doi: 10.11845/SXJZ.2015047B
    [8] P. F. Bai, X. Y. Guo, K. P. Shum, On finite NDC-groups, Bull. Malays. Math. Sci. Soc., 43 (2020), 3099–3123. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40840-019-00856-z doi: 10.1007/s40840-019-00856-z
    [9] A. Fattahi, Groups with only normal and abnormal subgroups, J. Algebra, 28 (1974), 15–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-8693(74)90019-2 doi: 10.1016/0021-8693(74)90019-2
    [10] X. Guo, J. Wang, On generalized Dedekind groups, Acta Math. Hungar., 122 (2009), 37–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10474-009-7178-2 doi: 10.1007/s10474-009-7178-2
    [11] Z. C. Shen, W. J. Shi, J. S. Zhang, Finite non-nilpotent generalizations of Hamiltonian groups, Bull. Korean Math. Soc., 48 (2011), 1147–1155. https://doi.org/10.4134/BKMS.2011.48.6.1147 doi: 10.4134/BKMS.2011.48.6.1147
    [12] Z. C. Shen, J. S. Zhang, W. J. Shi, On a generalization of Hamiltonian groups and a dualization of PN-groups, Commun. Algebra, 41 (2013), 1608–1618. https://doi.org/10.1080/00927872.2011.644609 doi: 10.1080/00927872.2011.644609
    [13] Q. W. Song, H. P. Qu, Finite 2-groups whose subgroups are cyclic or normal, Math. Pract. Theory, 38 (2008), 191–197.
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2024 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(973) PDF downloads(64) Cited by(0)

Other Articles By Authors

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog