Finitely presented groups with transcendental spectral radius
Pith reviewed 2026-05-24 01:59 UTC · model grok-4.3
The pith
Finitely presented groups exist with transcendental spectral radius.
A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.
Core claim
We provide examples of groups with transcendental spectral radius: We first construct finitely presented examples, using links between decidability of the Word Problem and semi-computability of the spectral radius. This argument extends to the exponential growth rate and the asymptotic entropy. We also construct a finitely generated example with decidable Word Problem, using classical small-cancellation theory. Along the way, we prove that C'(1/6) groups satisfy the Rapid Decay property, and deduce some properties on their spectral radii of independent interest.
What carries the argument
The link between decidability of the word problem and semi-computability of the spectral radius, which is exploited to force the spectral radius to be transcendental.
If this is right
- Finitely presented groups can have transcendental spectral radius for the simple random walk.
- The exponential growth rate of finitely presented groups can be transcendental.
- The asymptotic entropy of finitely presented groups can be transcendental.
- There exist finitely generated groups with decidable word problem whose spectral radius is transcendental.
- Groups satisfying the C'(1/6) small cancellation condition have the rapid decay property.
Where Pith is reading between the lines
- The construction technique may extend to making other numerical invariants of groups transcendental.
- It suggests that decidable word problem does not force the spectral radius to be algebraic.
- Similar links between computability and group invariants could apply to other properties such as growth series coefficients.
Load-bearing premise
A link exists between the decidability of the word problem and the semi-computability of the spectral radius that can be exploited to force the radius to be transcendental in finitely presented groups.
What would settle it
An explicit computation for one of the constructed groups showing that its spectral radius is algebraic rather than transcendental.
read the original abstract
We provide examples of groups with transcendental spectral radius: We first construct finitely presented examples, using links between decidability of the Word Problem and semi-computability of the spectral radius. This argument extends to the exponential growth rate and the asymptotic entropy. We also construct a finitely generated example with decidable Word Problem, using classical small-cancellation theory. Along the way, we prove that $C'(1/6)$ groups satisfy the Rapid Decay property, and deduce some properties on their spectral radii of independent interest.
Editorial analysis
A structured set of objections, weighed in public.
Referee Report
Summary. The paper constructs finitely presented groups with transcendental spectral radius by exploiting links between the decidability of the word problem and the semi-computability of the spectral radius; the argument extends to the exponential growth rate and asymptotic entropy. It also gives a finitely generated example with decidable word problem via classical small-cancellation theory. Along the way it proves that C'(1/6) groups satisfy the Rapid Decay property and deduces some independent properties of their spectral radii.
Significance. If the constructions and the computability reduction hold, the work supplies the first explicit examples of finitely presented groups whose spectral radius (and related invariants) is transcendental. The Rapid Decay theorem for C'(1/6) groups is a self-contained contribution that supplies independent control on the radius for the decidable-WP example and may be of separate interest in geometric group theory.
minor comments (1)
- [Introduction / main theorem] The statement of the main existence theorem (presumably Theorem A or equivalent) would benefit from an explicit sentence clarifying that the transcendence follows from non-computability rather than from any algebraic-number-theoretic obstruction.
Simulated Author's Rebuttal
We thank the referee for their positive assessment of the manuscript and for recommending acceptance. The report contains no major comments requiring a point-by-point response.
Circularity Check
No significant circularity
full rationale
The derivation is an existence construction: finitely presented groups are built so that undecidability of the word problem forces the spectral radius to be non-computable (hence transcendental) via an external computability reduction. The Rapid Decay result for C'(1/6) groups is proved separately to control the radius in the decidable-WP case. No equation or step equates a claimed prediction to a fitted input, no load-bearing premise reduces to a self-citation chain, and no ansatz or uniqueness claim is smuggled in. The argument is self-contained against external benchmarks in computability and small-cancellation theory.
Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger
axioms (1)
- standard math Standard axioms and results of geometric group theory and small-cancellation theory (C'(1/6) condition)
Lean theorems connected to this paper
-
IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/RealityFromDistinction.leanreality_from_one_distinction unclear?
unclearRelation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.
Theorem A. There exists a finitely presented group G such that the spectral radius ρ(G,S) is transcendental for all finite symmetric generating sets S.
-
IndisputableMonolith/Cost/FunctionalEquation.leanwashburn_uniqueness_aczel unclear?
unclearRelation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.
Theorem 2.1 … if ρ(G,S) is upper semi-computable then the restricted word problem on W is decidable.
What do these tags mean?
- matches
- The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
- supports
- The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
- extends
- The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
- uses
- The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
- contradicts
- The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
- unclear
- Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.