Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 45 references

On flag-transitive automorphism groups of $2$-designs with $\lambda$ prime

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read For exceptional and sporadic socles, flag-transitive point-primitive 2-designs with prime λ reduce to two infinite families and three isolated designs.

desk verdict The new G2(q) family and the gap repair are the real content; the sporadic completeness proof is a serious computation whose code should be shipped before it becomes fully checkable. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.04985 v1 pith:SAPKTBCI submitted 2025-05-08 math.GR math.CO

Seyed Hassan Alavi , Ashraf Daneshkhah , Alessandro Montinaro This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.GRmath.CO MSC 05B0505B2520B2520D08
keywords 2-designflag-transitivepoint-primitiveprimeλexceptionalgroupsofLietypesporadicsimpleSuzuki-Titsovoidcosetgeometry
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper tries to finish the classification of $2$-$ (v,k,\lambda)$ designs with $\lambda$ prime when the automorphism group is almost simple, point-primitive, and flag-transitive, and its socle is a finite exceptional or sporadic simple group. It claims that for exceptional socles only two infinite families occur: the Suzuki–Tits ovoid design, with $\lambda=q-1$ where $q-1$ is a Mersenne prime, and a new design built from the coset geometry $\mathrm{Cos}(G_2(q),\mathrm{SU}_3(q)\!:\!\mathbb{Z}_2,[q^6]\!:\!\mathbb{Z}_{q-1})$, with $\lambda=q+1$ where $q+1$ is a Fermat prime. For sporadic socles it claims that exactly three designs exist, with parameter sets $(12,22,11,6,5)$, $(22,77,21,6,5)$, and $(176,1100,50,8,2)$. If correct, the result completes one major branch of the reduction of flag-transitive designs with prime $\lambda$ to almost simple and affine groups.

What carries the argument

The mechanism is the coset geometry construction. Given $T=G_2(q)$, $H=\mathrm{SU}_3(q)\!:\!\mathbb{Z}_2$, and $K=[q^6]\!:\!\mathbb{Z}_{q-1}$, the incidence structure whose points are cosets of $H$ and whose blocks are cosets of $K$, with incidence defined by nonempty intersection, is shown to be a $2$-design. The proof that $\lambda=q+1$ hinges on the action of $H$ on the coset space: the $H$-orbits have sizes $q^2(q^3+1)$ for all but one orbit, and the last has size $(q^2-1)(q^3+1)$; solving the resulting $1$-design equations forces each block through a point to meet those orbits in sizes $q^2$ and $q^2-1$, respectively, giving exactly $q+1$ blocks through any two points. The uniqueness of $K$ comes from a fixed incident point-line pair in $\mathrm{PG}_5(q)$ and the structure of the parabolic stabilizer $T_{\alpha,\ell}=R\!:\!(\mathbb{Z}(L)\times F_{q(q-1)})$.

What would settle it

Recompute the sporadic sieve from scratch: for every maximal subgroup $H$ of each almost simple group with sporadic socle, generate all candidate parameters from $r(k-1)=\lambda(v-1)$, $rv=bk$, and the index conditions, then for the survivors check whether a subgroup $K$ of the required index exists inside a maximal subgroup $N$ and whether its orbits produce the required block set; any flag-transitive point-primitive design outside Table 1 would refute Theorem 1.2. Separately, for Theorem 1.1, compute the coset geometry $\mathrm{Cos}(G_2(4),\mathrm{SU}_3(4)\!:\!\mathbb{Z}_2,[4^6]\!:\!\mathbb{Z}_3)$ and check directly whether each pair of points lies in exactly $\lambda=5$ blocks; a different value would refute Lemma 2.3.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is a structural dichotomy, with a new object on one side. For $T\ne G_2(q)$, earlier work had already handled the exceptional socles, and the paper keeps that conclusion: the only design is the Suzuki–Tits ovoid design in $\mathrm{PG}_3(q)$, with $T={}^2B_2(q)$, $q=2^{2a+1}\ge8$ and $\lambda=q-1$ a Mersenne prime. For $T=G_2(q)$ with $q\ge4$ even, the paper identifies a gap in that earlier argument and closes it: the only possible design is the coset geometry $\mathrm{Cos}(T,H,K)$ with $H=\mathrm{SU}_3(q)\!:\!\mathbb{Z}_2$ and $K=[q^6]\!:\!\mathbb{Z}_{q-1}$, with parameters $(q^3(q^3-1)/2,(q+1)(q^6-1),(q+1)(q^3+1),q^3/2,q+1)$, and $\lambda=q+1$ must be a Fermat prime. Lemmas 2.3 and 2.4 show this geometry is indeed a $2$-design with $T$ acting flag-transitively and that any design with those parameters is isomorphic to it. For sporadic socles the claim is a finite list: the three designs in Table 1, no more.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the finite computation in Section 3—listing maximal subgroups, candidate parameters, subdegrees, subgroups of the required index, and orbit tests—was done correctly and completely; a single missed subgroup or faulty orbit check could admit extra sporadic designs.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If Theorem 1.1 is correct, the exceptional-socle case is closed: any such design is isomorphic to the Suzuki–Tits ovoid design or to the new $\mathrm{Cos}(G_2(q),\mathrm{SU}_3(q)\!:\!\mathbb{Z}_2,[q^6]\!:\!\mathbb{Z}_{q-1})$ geometry, with $\lambda$ a Mersenne or Fermat prime respectively.
  • The new $G_2(q)$ design exists for every even $q\ge4$, and whenever $q+1$ is a Fermat prime the full almost simple group $G=T\!:\!\langle\varphi\rangle$ also acts flag-transitively on it, as shown at the end of the proof of Theorem 1.1.
  • If Theorem 1.2 is correct, the sporadic-socle classification has exactly three members; no symmetric design with sporadic socle and prime $\lambda$ occurs, and the nonsymmetric examples are precisely the three rows of Table 1.
  • A corollary drawn in the paper, using the companion result for point-imprimitive designs, is that for these socles no flag-transitive point-imprimitive examples with prime $\lambda$ exist, so point-primitivity is automatic whenever the socle is exceptional or sporadic.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Editorial inference: the Mersenne condition on $q-1$ and the Fermat condition on $q+1$ suggest that the eventual full classification for prime $\lambda$ may be cut by elementary prime-number obstructions; in particular, if the list of Fermat primes is finite, the $G_2(q)$ family is finite even though the group-theoretic construction works for all even $q$.
  • Editorial inference: the construction via a Hermitian unital inside a Desarguesian line spread of $\mathrm{PG}_5(q)$ is geometric enough that one could try to build the same coset geometry for other Lie-type groups containing $\mathrm{SU}_3(q)\!:\!\mathbb{Z}_2$ as a maximal subgroup; success would extend the family beyond $G_2(q)$.
  • Editorial inference: a fully independent recomputation of the sporadic sieve, starting from the 124 candidate parameter sets and the 166 surviving tuples, would turn the finite classification from a recorded computation into a reproducible one; the paper does not include the scripts or logs.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies flag-transitive and point-primitive automorphism groups of nontrivial 2-(v,k,λ) designs with λ prime, in the almost simple case where the socle is an exceptional group of Lie type or a sporadic simple group. For exceptional socle, it claims that the only examples are the Suzuki-Tits ovoid design and a new infinite family of designs arising from a coset geometry Cos(G2(q), SU3(q):Z2, [q^6]:Z_{q-1}), with q even and q+1 a Fermat prime. For sporadic socle, it claims that only the three parameter sets listed in Table 1 occur, with the proof resting on a GAP-based enumeration in Section 3. The paper also argues that the new G2(q) design is unique up to isomorphism and that the full almost simple group acts on it.

Significance. If the classification is correct, it substantially advances the program of classifying flag-transitive 2-designs with prime λ, and the new G2(q) family is an interesting explicit construction. The paper makes good use of prior reductions and of standard subgroup and orbit information, and the coset-geometry construction is concrete enough to check parameter-by-parameter. The sporadic part, however, is a computer-assisted classification in which the computational evidence is not shipped; this is an important reproducibility weakness. The Suzuki-Tits parameter set also contains a basic design-theoretic inconsistency that must be fixed before the theorem can be accepted.

major comments (4)
  1. [Theorem 1.1(a) and Abstract] The displayed parameter set for the Suzuki-Tits ovoid design cannot be correct. For a 2-(v,k,λ) design the identity b=vr/k is forced; substituting (v,b,r,k,λ)=(q^2+1, q^2(q^2+1)/(q−1), q^2, q, q−1) gives vr/k = q(q^2+1), not q^2(q^2+1)/(q−1). Moreover, for q=8, which is admissible because q−1=7 is a Mersenne prime, the printed b is not an integer. The parameter set should be corrected (presumably b=q(q^2+1)) and the citation to [39] checked against the corrected formula.
  2. [Lemma 2.1, around Eq. (2.1)] The inference "If λ ≠ q+1, then SL2(q) ≤ T_B/R" is not a consequence of the displayed order |T_B/R| = f1 q(q^2−1)/λ. For q=8, λ=7 and f1=1 this order is 72, whereas |SL2(8)|=504, so the subgroup cannot contain SL2(8). Thus the argument as written does not rule out the possibility λ | q−1. If an additional condition from [39, Lemma 3.8] excludes that possibility, it must be stated; this step is load-bearing because it is what forces λ=q+1.
  3. [Proof of Theorem 1.1, first sentence] The case T ≠ G2(q) is dispatched by reference to [39], which by its title concerns non-symmetric designs. The theorem as stated covers all nontrivial 2-designs, including symmetric ones. Please state explicitly how symmetric designs with exceptional socle are excluded (for example by [5], [6] or [11]), or restrict the statement accordingly.
  4. [Section 3, Tables 4-6] The completeness part of Theorem 1.2 depends on a GAP enumeration whose code and logs are not included. The entries 'nsubG', 'nsubN', 'nsubK', 'norb' and 'ndes' in Table 6, together with the final Design-package check on the five orbits B1–B5, are the only evidence excluding 166 candidate tuples, and none of these computations can be reproduced from the manuscript. Please supply the GAP code and the full output/logs, or an independent verification of the enumeration, so that the classification is machine-checkable.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract] The HS parameter set is printed as (176,1100,50,2); the value k=8 is missing and the tuple should be (176,1100,50,8,2).
  2. [Section 2, construction of D0] The symbol H is used both for the subgroup SU3(q):Z2 and for an orbit of length q^3+1 in the paragraph beginning "Denote by H the ¯H-orbit"; this overloading is confusing and should be fixed.
  3. [Lemma 2.2] The sentence "Then M = W : C with W a Sylow 2-subgroup of G" should read "W a Sylow 2-subgroup of M", since W has order q^6 and G has a larger 2-part.
  4. [Table 1, line 2] The point stabilizer for M22 is printed as PSU3(4); its order is incompatible with the degree v=22, so this is presumably PSL3(4), and the corresponding row for M22:2 should be checked in the same way.
  5. [Throughout] Several statements say "where q+1 a Fermat prime" or "where q−1 is a Mersenne prime"; these are missing verbs or articles and should be copy-edited.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the new design is constructed and its parameters are computed from group data, not fitted; the sporadic classification rests on an unshipped GAP computation but that is a reproducibility issue, not circularity.

full rationale

The paper's central derivation for the exceptional-socle case is self-contained. In Lemma 2.1 the parameter set for the G2(q) case is obtained from the existing framework of Zhang and Shen [39] plus a corrected analysis of the t=1, ε=− case; the conclusion λ=q+1 follows from the Sylow/subgroup argument using [13, Table 8.5], not from an assumed answer. Lemmas 2.2–2.4 then construct the coset geometry Cos(T,H,K), compute v0=|T:H|, b0=|T:K|, r0=|H:Q|, k0=|K:Q| from subgroup orders, and derive λ0=q+1 by solving the orbit equations (2.2) and (2.3). These are exact computations from group-theoretic data, with no free parameter fitted and no candidate quantity renamed as a prediction. The Suzuki–Tits ovoid family is taken from the external classification [39] and the explicit construction [3]. For the sporadic case, the parameter sets are generated by the arithmetic conditions (i)–(vii), then successively eliminated by subdegree divisibility, by GAP searches for subgroups K of index b, and by orbit/design checks. The five surviving K-orbits B1–B5 are explicitly listed and then rejected by the Design package call. This is a finite computation whose code and logs are not shipped, so the completeness claim of Theorem 1.2 is not independently reproducible from the manuscript alone; however, that is an auditability/computational-risk issue, not a circularity. There are self-citations (e.g., [1], [10], [31]), but they are prior classifications or reductions with independent content and stated assumptions that do not include the target theorem. In particular, the remark 'We already know by [1] that λ is an odd prime' is a minor self-citation to the first author's submitted preprint, but it is not load-bearing for the main construction, and the surrounding argument would also exclude λ=2. No 'prediction' reduces by construction to an input, and no fitted value is relabelled as a derived parameter.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No numerical parameters are fitted; all design parameters are derived from group actions. The proofs rest on standard classification results, maximal subgroup tables, prior reductions, and GAP computations.

assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Classification of finite simple groups (CFSG) and completeness of the maximal subgroup classifications for sporadic groups, including the Monster ([14], [20]).
    Section 3 enumerates H from the maximal subgroups of sporadic groups; a missing maximal subgroup could hide a design.
  • domain assumption Maximal subgroup tables for low-dimensional classical groups and for G2(q), in particular [13, Tables 8.5, 8.28, 8.29, 8.30].
    Lemmas 2.1 and 2.2 use these tables to identify T_α and T_B and to rule out SL2(q) subgroups in SU3(q):Z2.
  • domain assumption Higman-McLaughlin coset geometry results [24, Lemmas 1 and 2].
    Lemma 2.3 takes the parameter count and flag-transitivity of Cos(T,H,K) from [24].
  • domain assumption Reduction theorem for flag-transitive point-primitive 2-designs with λ prime ([38]).
    The paper treats only almost simple groups with exceptional or sporadic socle; the reduction to this case is prior work.
  • domain assumption Correctness of GAP 4.12.2 and the packages AtlasRep and Design for subgroup enumeration, subdegree computation, and design testing.
    Theorem 1.2 is a finite computation whose outputs are recorded in Tables 3-6 but no code is shipped.
  • standard math Standard design identities: r(k-1)=λ(v-1), rv=bk, r divides λ times each nontrivial subdegree (property (vi)).
    Used throughout Section 3 to generate and filter candidate parameter sets.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of On flag-transitive automorphism groups of $2$-designs with $\lambda$ prime." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/SAPKTBCI

@misc{pith2026250504985,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: On flag-transitive automorphism groups of $2$-designs with $\lambda$ prime},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/SAPKTBCI}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.04985}
}
abstract

In this article, we study $2$-$(v,k,\lambda)$ designs $\mathcal{D}$ with $\lambda$ prime admitting flag-transitive and point-primitive almost simple automorphism groups $G$ with socle $T$ a finite exceptional simple group or a sporadic simple groups. If the socle of $G$ is a finite exceptional simple group, then we prove that $\mathcal{D}$ is isomorphic to one of two infinite families of $2$-designs with point-primitive automorphism groups, one is the Suzuki-Tits ovoid design with parameter set $(v,b,r,k,\lambda)=(q^{2}+1,q^{2}(q^{2}+1)/(q-1),q^{2},q,q-1)$ design, where $q-1$ is a Mersenne prime, and the other is newly constructed in this paper and has parameter set $(v,b,r,k,\lambda)=(q^{3}(q^{3}-1)/2,(q+1)(q^{6}-1),(q+1)(q^{3}+1),q^{3}/2,q+1)$, where $q+1$ a Fermat prime. If $T$ is a sporadic simple group, then we show that $\mathcal{D}$ is isomorphic to a unique design admitting a point-primitive automorphism group with parameter set $(v,b,r,k,\lambda)=(176,1100,50,2)$, $(12,22,11,6,5)$ or $(22,77,21,6,5)$.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

45 extracted references · 31 canonical work pages

  1. [39]

    Zhang, J

    Y. Zhang, J. Shen, Flag-transitive non-symmetric 2-de signs with λ prime and exceptional groups of Lie type, AIMS Math. 9 (9) (2024) 25636–25645. URL https://doi.org/10.3934/math.20241252

    work page doi:10.3934/math.20241252 2024

  2. [5]

    S. H. Alavi, M. Bayat, A. Daneshkhah, Almost simple group s of Lie type and symmetric designs with λ prime, The Electronic Journal of Combinatorics 28 (2) (2021 ) P2.13. URL https://doi.org/10.37236/9366

    work page doi:10.37236/9366 2021

  3. [6]

    S. H. Alavi, M. Bayat, A. Daneshkhah, Finite exceptional groups of Lie type and symmetric designs, Discrete Mathematics 345 (8) (2022) 112894. URL https://doi.org/10.1016/j.disc.2022.112894

    arXiv 2022

  4. [11]

    S. H. Alavi, A. Daneshkhah, F. Mouseli, Almost simple gr oups as flag-transitive automorphism groups of symmetric designs with λ prime, Ars Math. Contemp. 23 (4) (2023) Paper No. 3, 10

    work page 2023

  5. [1]

    S. H. Alavi, Almost simple group as flag-transitive autom orphism groups of 2-designs with λ = 2, Submitted. URL https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2307.05195

    arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2307.05195

  6. [2]

    S. H. Alavi, Flag-transitive block designs and finite exc eptional simple groups of Lie type, Graphs and Combinatorics 36 (4) (2020) 1001–1014. URL https://doi.org/10.1007/s00373-020-02161-0

    work page doi:10.1007/s00373-020-02161-0 2020

  7. [3]

    S. H. Alavi, A note on two families of 2-designs arose from Suzuki-Tits ovoid, Algebra and Discrete Mathematics 34 (2) (2022) 169–175. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.12958/adm1687

    work page doi:10.12958/adm1687 2022

  8. [4]

    S. H. Alavi, M. Bayat, J. Choulaki, A. Daneshkhah, Flag-t ransitive block designs with prime replication number and almost simple groups, Designs, Code s and Cryptography 88 (5) (2020) 971–992. URL https://doi.org/10.1007/s10623-020-00724-z

    work page doi:10.1007/s10623-020-00724-z 2020

Show all 45 references
  1. [7]

    S. H. Alavi, M. Bayat, A. Daneshkhah, A. Montinaro, Affine g roups as flag-transitive and point-primitive automorphism groups of symmetric designs , Discrete Mathematics 348 (10) (2025) 114555. URL https://doi.org/10.1016/j.disc.2025.114555

    2025

  2. [8]

    S. H. Alavi, M. Bayat, A. Daneshkhah, M. Tadbirinia, Clas sical groups as flag-transitive automorphism groups of 2-designs with λ = 2, J. Combin. Theory Ser. A 206 (2024) Paper No. 105892, 37. URL https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcta.2024.105892

    2024

  3. [9]

    S. H. Alavi, T. C. Burness, Large subgroups of simple grou ps, J. Algebra 421 (2015) 187–233. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jalgebra.2014.08.026

    2015 doi

  4. [10]

    S. H. Alavi, A. Daneshkhah, Sporadic simple groups as fla g-transitive automorphism groups of symmetric designs, J. Combin. Des. 32 (3) (2024) 127–168. URL https://doi.org/10.1002/jcd.21928

    2024 doi

  5. [12]

    T. Beth, D. Jungnickel, H. Lenz, Design theory. Vol. I, v ol. 69 of Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications, 2nd ed., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1999. URL https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511549533

    1999 doi

  6. [13]

    J. N. Bray, D. F. Holt, C. M. Roney-Dougal, The maximal su bgroups of the low-dimensional finite classical groups, vol. 407 of London Mathematical Soc iety Lecture Note Series, Cam- bridge University Press, Cambridge, 2013, with a foreword b y Martin Liebeck. URL http://dx.doi....

    2013 doi

  7. [14]

    J. H. Conway, R. T. Curtis, S. P. Norton, R. A. Parker, R. A . Wilson, Atlas of finite groups, Oxford University Press, Eynsham, 1985, maximal subgroups and ordinary characters for simple groups, With computational assistance from J. G. Tha ckray

    1985

  8. [15]

    B. N. Cooperstein, Maximal subgroups of G2(2n), Journal of Algebra 70 (1) (1981) 23 – 36. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0021-8693(81)90241-6

    1981 doi

  9. [16]

    Daneshkhah, Ree groups as automorphism groups of blo ck designs, Ex

    A. Daneshkhah, Ree groups as automorphism groups of blo ck designs, Ex. Countex. 5 (2024) Paper No. 100137, 2. URL https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exco.2024.100137

    2024

  10. [17]

    Davies, Flag-transitivity and primitivity, Discre te Math

    H. Davies, Flag-transitivity and primitivity, Discre te Math. 63 (1) (1987) 91–93. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0012-365X(87)90154-3

    1987 doi

  11. [18]

    Dembowski, Finite geometries, Ergebnisse der Mathe matik und ihrer Grenzgebiete, Band 44, Springer-Verlag, Berlin-New York, 1968

    P. Dembowski, Finite geometries, Ergebnisse der Mathe matik und ihrer Grenzgebiete, Band 44, Springer-Verlag, Berlin-New York, 1968

    1968

  12. [19]

    Devillers, H

    A. Devillers, H. Liang, C. E. Praeger, B. Xia, On flag-tra nsitive 2-(v, k, 2) designs, J. Combin. Theory Ser. A 177 (2021) 105309, 45. URL https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcta.2020.105309

    2021

  13. [20]

    Dietrich, M

    H. Dietrich, M. Lee, T. Popiel, The maximal subgroups of the Monster, Adv. Math. 469 (2025) Paper No. 110214. URL https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aim.2025.110214

    2025

  14. [21]

    J. D. Dixon, B. Mortimer, Permutation groups, vol. 163 o f Graduate Texts in Mathematics, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1996. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-0731-3

    1996 doi

  15. [22]

    H. Dong, S. Zhou, Affine groups and flag-transitive tripla nes, Sci. China Math. 55 (12) (2012) 2557–2578. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11425-012-4476-x

    2012 doi

  16. [23]

    URL http://www.gap-system.org

    The GAP Group, GAP – Groups, Algorithms, and Programmin g, Version 4.12.2 (2022). URL http://www.gap-system.org

    2022

  17. [24]

    D. G. Higman, J. E. McLaughlin, Geometric ABA-groups, Illinois J. Math. 5 (1961) 382–397

    1961

  18. [25]

    Huppert, Endliche Gruppen

    B. Huppert, Endliche Gruppen. I, Die Grundlehren der Ma thematischen Wissenschaften, Band 134, Springer-Verlag, Berlin-New York, 1967

    1967

  19. [26]

    Kleidman, M

    P. Kleidman, M. Liebeck, The subgroup structure of the fi nite classical groups, vol. 129 of London Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series, Cambridg e University Press, Cambridge, 1990. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511629235

    1990 doi

  20. [27]

    Liang, A

    H. Liang, A. Montinaro, A classification of the flag-tran sitive 2-( v,k,2) designs, J. Combin. Theory Ser. A 211 (2025) Paper No. 105983. URL https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcta.2024.105983

    2025

  21. [28]

    Liang, S

    H. Liang, S. Zhou, Flag-transitive point-primitive au tomorphism groups of nonsymmetric 2- (v, k, 2) designs, J. Combin. Des. 24 (9) (2016) 421–435. URL https://doi.org/10.1002/jcd.21516

    2016 doi

  22. [29]

    Liang, S

    H. Liang, S. Zhou, Flag-transitive point-primitive no n-symmetric 2-( v, k, 2) designs with al- ternating socle, Bull. Belg. Math. Soc. Simon Stevin 23 (4) ( 2016) 559–571. URL http://projecteuclid.org/euclid.bbms/1480993587

    2016

  23. [30]

    M. W. Liebeck, C. E. Praeger, J. Saxl, On the 2-closures o f finite permutation groups, J. London Math. Soc. (2) 37 (2) (1988) 241–252. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1112/jlms/s2-37.2.241

    1988 doi

  24. [31]

    Montinaro, The Higman-mclaughlin theorem for the fla g-transitive 2-designs with λ prime, arXiv e-prints (2025) arXiv:2504.11407

    A. Montinaro, The Higman-mclaughlin theorem for the fla g-transitive 2-designs with λ prime, arXiv e-prints (2025) arXiv:2504.11407

    2025 arXiv

  25. [32]

    Montinaro, Y

    A. Montinaro, Y. Zhao, Z. Zhang, S. Zhou, Designs with a s imple automorphism group, Finite Fields Appl. 99 (2024) Paper No. 102488, 20. URL https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ffa.2024.102488

    2024

  26. [33]

    O’Reilly-Regueiro, Biplanes with flag-transitive a utomorphism groups of almost simple type, with alternating or sporadic socle, European J

    E. O’Reilly-Regueiro, Biplanes with flag-transitive a utomorphism groups of almost simple type, with alternating or sporadic socle, European J. Combi n. 26 (5) (2005) 577–584. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejc.2004.05.003

    2005 doi

  27. [34]

    O’Reilly-Regueiro, On primitivity and reduction fo r flag-transitive symmetric designs, J

    E. O’Reilly-Regueiro, On primitivity and reduction fo r flag-transitive symmetric designs, J. Combin. Theory Ser. A 109 (1) (2005) 135–148. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcta.2004.08.002 13

    2005 doi

  28. [35]

    O’Reilly-Regueiro, Biplanes with flag-transitive a utomorphism groups of almost simple type, with classical socle, J

    E. O’Reilly-Regueiro, Biplanes with flag-transitive a utomorphism groups of almost simple type, with classical socle, J. Algebraic Combin. 26 (4) (200 7) 529–552. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10801-007-0070-7

    doi

  29. [36]

    O’Reilly-Regueiro, Biplanes with flag-transitive a utomorphism groups of almost simple type, with exceptional socle of Lie type, J

    E. O’Reilly-Regueiro, Biplanes with flag-transitive a utomorphism groups of almost simple type, with exceptional socle of Lie type, J. Algebraic Combi n. 27 (4) (2008) 479–491. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10801-007-0098-8

    2008 doi

  30. [37]

    X. Zhan, S. Zhou, Flag-transitive non-symmetric 2-des igns with ( r, λ) = 1 and sporadic socle, Des. Codes Cryptography 81 (3) (2016) 481–487. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10623-015-0171-6

    2016 doi

  31. [38]

    Zhang, J

    Y. Zhang, J. Chen, Reduction for flag-transitive point- primitive 2-( ν, k, λ) designs with λ prime, J. Combin. Des. 32 (2) (2024) 88–101. URL https://doi.org/10.1002/jcd.21927

    2024 doi

  32. [40]

    Zhang, Z

    Y. Zhang, Z. Zhang, S. Zhou, Reduction for primitive flag -transitive symmetric 2- ( v, k, λ) designs with λ prime, Discrete Math. 343 (6) (2020) 111843, 4. URL https://doi.org/10.1016/j.disc.2020.111843

    2020

  33. [41]

    Zhang, S

    Y. Zhang, S. Zhou, Flag-transitive non-symmetric 2-de signs with ( r, λ) = 1 and Exceptional Groups of Lie type, The Electronic Journal of Combinatorics 27 (2) (2020) P2.9

    2020

  34. [42]

    S. Zhou, H. Dong, Sporadic groups and flag-transitive tr iplanes, Sci. China Ser. A 52 (2) (2009) 394–400. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11425-009-0011-0

    2009 doi

  35. [43]

    S. Zhou, H. Dong, Alternating groups and flag-transitiv e triplanes, Des. Codes Cryptogr. 57 (2) (2010) 117–126. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10623-009-9355-2

    2010 doi

  36. [44]

    S. Zhou, H. Dong, Exceptional groups of Lie type and flag- transitive triplanes, Sci. China Math. 53 (2) (2010) 447–456. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11425-009-0051-5

    2010 doi

  37. [45]

    E. De Giorgi

    S. Zhou, H. Dong, W. Fang, Finite classical groups and fla g-transitive triplanes, Discrete Math. 309 (16) (2009) 5183–5195. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.disc.2009.04.005 Seyed Hassan Alavi, Department of Mathematics, F aculty of S cience, Bu-Ali Sina University, Hamedan, Ir...

    2009 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.