Tietze Equivalences

How does one tell when two presentations by generators and relations represent the same
group? In general this is very difficult. In this note we will prove the main theoretical result
about this question.
Let F (X) be the free group on a set X, let R F (X) be a set of relations, and let
N be the normal subgroup of F (X) generated by N . That is, N is the intersection of all
normal subgroups containing R. Note that N may be different than the subgroup generated
by R. We denote the group F (X)/N by hX | Ri and we call it the group generated by
X and subject to the relations R. We note two simple facts about presentations. First, if
s N , then hX | Ri
= hX | R {s}i by an isomorphism that sends the coset of x X
in hX | Ri to the coset of x in hX | R {s}i. Second, if y is a symbol outside of X, and
if f F (X), then hX | Ri
= hX {y} | R {yf 1 }i. To see this, set G = hX | Ri and
G0 = hX {y} | R {yf 1 }i. The inclusion function X X {y} extends uniquely to a
group homomorphism G G0 since every element of R maps to R{yf 1 } under the induced
homomorphism F (X) F (X {y}). Similarly, we have a homomorphism F (X {y}) G
arising from the map X G, given by x 7 x for x X and y 7 f . Every element of
R {yf 1 } is sent to 1 under this map, so it induces a map G0 G. The composition of
the maps G G0 and G0 G is the identity since it is the identity on X, so G
= G0 .
To see the intuitive idea of these two statements, the first fact simply says that adding a
relation that is a consequence of other relations does not change the group, and the second
fact says that adding a generator but then forcing it to be equal to an element of the group
does not change the group.
We formalize the two statements above. If R F (X) and s lies in the normal subgroup
generated by R, then we say that the isomorphism hX | Ri hX | R {s}i, induced by the
identity map on X, is a Tietze equivalence of type I. We call its inverse a Tietze equivalence
of type I0 . Next, if f F (X), the isomorphism hX | Ri hX {y} | R {yf 1 }i induced
by the inclusion map X X {y} is called a Tietze equivalence of type II, and its inverse is
said to be of type II0 . We point out that the inverse map hX {y} | R {yf 1 }i hX | Ri
sends the coset of y to the coset of f . We wish to know how to tell when hX | Ri
= hY | Si.
The surprising result that we prove in this note is that if X, R and Y, S are finite, then
Tietze equivalences are sufficient to determine when two presentations represent the same
group. The unfortunate fact about this is that knowing two presentations of the same group
are related by Tietze equivalences may not help to determine when two presentations do
represent the same group.
1

If X and R are finite sets, then we call hX | Ri a finitely-presented group. In other

words, a group is finitely-presented group if it is finitely generated and any relation among
the generators is a consequence of finitely many given relations.
Theorem. Let : hX | Ri hy | Si be an isomorphism of finitely-presented groups. Then
is a composition of finitely many Tietze equivalences.
To prove the theorem we need a lemma which will be the main step in the proof of the
theorem.
Lemma. Let X and Y be disjoint sets, and let : F (X Y ) F (X) be a homomorphism
with |F (X) = id. Let G = hX | Ri, and let : F (X) G be the canonical projection. Then
ker() is the normal subgroup generated by R {y(y)1 : y Y }.
Proof. The assumption on implies that 2 = . We will use this a few times. It is clear
that R ker() since |F (X) = id. Also, if y Y , then (y(y)1 ) = (y)2 (y)1 = 1
since 2 = . Thus, if C is the normal subgroup generated by R {y(y)1 : y Y }, then
C ker(). To prove the reverse inclusion, let : F (X Y ) F (X Y )/C be the
canonical projection, and let 0 = |F (X) . We first show that = 0 . It is clear that
(x) = 0 ((x)) for any x X since (x) = x. If y Y , then (y(y)1 ) = 1 by definition
of C. Thus, (y) = ((y)) = 0 ((y)) since (y) F (X). Therefore, = 0 since they
agree on the generating set X Y . Since 2 = , we see that = . To finish the proof,
suppose that u ker(). Then ((u)) = 1. This forces (u) ker(). By definition,
ker() is the normal subgroup generated by R. Since R C, we see that ker() C. Also,
(u(u)1 ) = (u)((u))1 = (u)(u)1 = 1
since = . Therefore, u(u)1 ker() = C. Since (u) ker() C, we get u C,
as desired.
Proof of the Theorem. We first point out that there is no loss of generality to assume that X
and Y are disjoint. For ease of notation we will write elements in a quotient group with bars.
While we do this below for several different quotient groups, the ambiguity of this notation
should not cause us problems. We are given an isomorphism : hX | Ri hY | Si. Let
X (resp. Y ) be the natural projection F (X) hX | Ri (resp. F (Y ) hY | Si). For
each x X, choose an element fx F (Y ) with ( X (x))) = Y (fx ) = fx . Similarly,
for each y Y choose gy F (X) so that 1 ( Y (y)) = X (gy ) = gy . Define a map
1 : F (X Y ) F (X) by 1 (x) = x for all x X and 1 (y) = gy for all y Y . Similarly,
define a map 2 : F (X Y ) F (Y ) by 2 (y) = y for all y Y and 2 (x) = fx for all x X.

F (X)

F (X YM )
MMM
MM2M
MMM
&

qq
qqq
q
q
xqqq 1

hX | Ri

F (Y )

/ hY | Si

We claim that the diagram commutes. To see this, if x X, then

X 1 (x) = (1 (x)) = (x) = fx = 2 (x) = Y (2 (x)).
Also, if y Y , then
(1 (y)) = (gy ) = (1 (y)) = y
= 2 (y).
Therefore, X 1 and Y 2 agree on the generating set X Y , so they are equal. Let

1
A = x1
: y Y }. By the lemma, ker( Y 2 ) is the normal
2 (x) : x X and B = {y 1 (y)
subgroup of F (X Y ) generated by S A and ker( X 1 ) is the normal subgroup generated
by R B. Because is injective, ker( X 1 ) = ker( X 1 ). However, as X 1 = Y 2 , we
see that these two kernels are equal. Therefore, we have isomorphisms
s

hX Y | R Bi hX Y | R S A Bi hX Y | S Ai
that are compositions of Tietze equivalences of type I and type I0 , respectively. To make
this statement we need |A B| to be finite, which is true since |A| |X| and |B| |Y |.
The maps s and t are given by the simple formulas s(z) = z and t(z) = z for all z X Y ;
note however that we are working in three different quotient groups in these two equations.
Moreover, we have an isomorphism : hX | Ri hX Y | R Bi that is a composition
of Tietze equivalences of type II; the number is equal to the number of elements of Y .
Similarly, we have an isomorphism : hY | Si hX Y | S Ai that is a composition of
Tietze equivalences of type II. The maps and are given by the formulas (x) = x and
(y) = y for x X and y Y . The inverse map 1 satisfies 1 (x) = 2 (x), by definition
of A, and it is a composition of Tietze equivalences of type II0 .

hX | Ri

/ hY | Si
O

hX Y | R Bi

hX Y | S Ai

ii4
iiii
i
i
i
iiii t
iiii

UUUU
UUUU
UUU
s UUUUU
U*

hX Y | R S A Bi

To prove that = 1 ts, if x X, then

1 ts(x) = 1 (t(s(x)) = 1 (t(x)) = 1 ((x)) = 2 (x)
= fx = (x).
Therefore, = 1 ts since they agree on the generating set X of hX | Ri. Therefore, is
a composition of Tietze equivalences, as we wanted to prove.
3

Example. The group S3 can be described in the two following ways. First, if x = (12)
and y = (123), then S3 = hx, y | x2 = 1, y 3 = 1, xyx = y 2 i. On the other hand, if a = (12)
and b = (23), then S3 = ha, b | a2 = 1, b2 = 1, aba = babi. Noticing that b = xy, we can
go between these two presentations in the following way. The following set of equivalences
demonstrates every step, trivial as most are.

x, y | x2 , y 3 , xyxy 2

I
x, y | x2 , y 3 , xyxy 2 , xyxy

I0
x, y | x2 , y 3 , xyxy

II
x, y, z | x2 , y 3 , xyxy, z(xy)1

I
x, y, z | x2 , y 3 , xyxy, z 2 , z(xy)1

I0
x, y, z | x2 , y 3 , z 2 , z(xy)1

I
x, y, z | x2 , y 3 , x1 zx1 zx1 z, z 2 , z(xy)1

I0
x, y, z | x2 , x1 zx1 zx1 z, z 2 , z(xy)1

I
x, y, z | x2 , x1 zx1 zx1 z, xzxzxz, z 2 , z(xy)1

I0
x, y, z | x2 , xzxzxz, z 2 , z(xy)1

I
x, y, z | x2 , xzxzxz, z 2 , z(xy)1 , y 1 xz

I0
x, y, z | x2 , z 2 , xzxzxz, y 1 xz

II0
x, z | x2 , z 2 , xzxzxz

I
x, z | x2 , z 2 , xzxzxz, xzx(zxz)1

I0
x, z | x2 , z 2 , xzx(zxz)1

The number of steps may help to indicate that it is, in general, difficult to determine when
two presentations represent the same group.
Example. As an example of how difficult can be the problem of showing that two presentations are equal, we note that G = hx, y | xy 2 = y 3 x, yx2 = x3 yi is the trivial group. This
can be verified with Maple, using the group package. It is a challenging exercise to prove
this without a machine.