Open olexandr-konovalov opened 4 years ago
The names up to degree 50 are from a paper by Buekenhout. I suspect the rest is more ad-hoc. A reason for distinguishing Sn and Sym(n) could be whether it is the natural permutation representation.
Alexander
Hi Alex
Some of the names were just made up by me at some point, and others were made up by other people. I think I never expected them to be taken very seriously, so feel free to give them a good spring clean. I did loads of htem over the course of a single afternoon, and another batch several years later.
The 2 for the dihedral group is because there are two different conventions for dihedral names, it’s to try to clarify which one
Colva
@hulpke but what about the following then:
gap> G:=PrimitiveGroup(10,8);
A(10)
gap> H:=PrimitiveGroup(45,6);
A(10)
gap> F:=PrimitiveGroup(120,18);
Alt(10)
gap> Size(G);
1814400
gap> List([G,H,F],StructureDescription);
[ "A10", "A10", "A10" ]
gap> List([G,H,F],MovedPoints);
[ [ 1 .. 10 ], [ 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19,
20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38,
39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45 ],
[ 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22,
23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41,
42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60,
61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79,
80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98,
99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114,
115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120 ] ]
gap>
PrimitiveGroup(45,6)
is A(10)
but it does not act on [ 1 .. 10 ]
.
These two groups have same name but different structure descriptions:
17^2:24 : [ [ 289, 34 ], [ 289, 35 ] ]
[ 289, 34 ] non-isomorphic to [ 289, 35 ] :
(C17 x C17) : C24
(C17 x C17) : SL(2,3)
Shouldn't it be 17^2:SL(2,3)
for the 2nd?
PrimitiveGroup(45,6)
isA(10)
but it does not act on[ 1 .. 10 ]
.
Names up to degree 50 are from Buekenhout and do not fit any systematic scheme.
@alex-konovalov the name for PrimitiveGroup(289, 35)
is indeed misleading, there is no C_24 factor there (indeed, the set of orders of elements in this group is [ 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 17 ]
). So that's another bug in the names and should be fixed.
A fix for PrimitiveGroup(289, 35)
and also for PrimitiveGroup(100,14)
submitted in #36.
Next, I am going to use M(n) for Mathieu groups. We have
[ 9, 3 ] 3^2:Q(8)=M(9)
[ 10, 6 ] M(10)
[ 11, 6 ] M(11)
[ 12, 1 ] M(11)
[ 12, 2 ] M(12)
[ 21, 4 ] PSL(3, 4)=M(21)
[ 22, 1 ] M(22)
[ 22, 2 ] M(22):2
[ 23, 5 ] M(23)
[ 24, 1 ] M(24)
[ 36, 3 ] M(10)
[ 45, 2 ] M(10)
[ 1288, 1 ] M(23)
[ 1288, 2 ] M(24)
[ 1320, 1 ] M(12)
[ 1320, 2 ] M(12):2
[ 1584, 1 ] M(12):2
[ 1771, 1 ] M(23)
[ 1771, 2 ] M(24)
[ 2024, 1 ] M(24)
but also
[ 55, 4 ] M_11
[ 66, 2 ] M_11
[ 66, 3 ] M_12
[ 77, 1 ] M_22
[ 77, 2 ] M_22.2
[ 121, 48 ] M_11 wreath Sym(2)
[ 144, 3 ] M_12
[ 144, 4 ] M_12.2
[ 144, 5 ] M_12.2
[ 144, 6 ] M_11 wreath Sym(2)
[ 144, 7 ] M_12 wreath Sym(2)
[ 165, 3 ] M_11
[ 176, 3 ] M_22
[ 220, 1 ] M_12
[ 231, 1 ] M_22
[ 231, 2 ] M_22.2
[ 243, 29 ] 3^5:(2 x M_11)
[ 243, 30 ] 3^5:M_11
[ 243, 31 ] 3^5:(2 x M_11)
[ 243, 32 ] 3^5:M_11
[ 253, 4 ] M_23
[ 253, 5 ] M_23
[ 256, 150 ] 2^8:M_10
[ 276, 4 ] M_24
[ 330, 1 ] M_22
[ 330, 2 ] M_22.2
[ 396, 1 ] M_12
[ 396, 2 ] M_12.2
[ 484, 1 ] M_22 wreath Sym(2)
[ 484, 2 ] M_22^2.2^2
[ 484, 3 ] M_22^2.4
[ 484, 4 ] Aut(M_22) wreath Sym(2)
[ 495, 3 ] M_12
[ 495, 4 ] M_12.2
[ 495, 5 ] M_12
[ 495, 6 ] M_12.2
[ 506, 1 ] M_23
[ 529, 1 ] M_23 wreath Sym(2)
[ 576, 1 ] M_24 wreath Sym(2)
[ 616, 1 ] M_22
[ 616, 2 ] M_22.2
[ 672, 5 ] M_22
[ 672, 6 ] M_22.2
[ 729, 462 ] 3^6:2.M_12
[ 759, 1 ] M_24
[ 880, 1 ] M_12.2
Names up to degree 50 are from Buekenhout and do not fit any systematic scheme.
Indeed, the smallest degree where Sym
and Alt
appear is 55. OTOH, A
and S
appear across the library many times.
Mathieu groups names unification now also in #36.
Asking @hulpke and @colva - how stable are the names of primitive groups? Are we free to change them when we decide that it is sensible? While working on #34, I have seen a mix of several conventions, for example:
S
andSym
A
andAlt
C(N)
and justN
(for a cyclic group of ordern
).Furthermore, we have
[ 11, 6 ] : M(11)
[ 55, 4 ] : M_11
Also curious why for the dihedral group there is always 2 as a factor, e.g.
D(2*5)
for the dihedral group of order 10 (but not for the generalised quaternion group).