Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 32 references

Finite $s$-geodesic transitive graphs under certain girths

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper proves a normal-quotient reduction theorem for connected $(G,s)$-geodesic transitive graphs of girth $2s-2$ or $2s-1$ ($5\le s\le 8$), with the Foster graph as the only exceptional case, and rules out $s=7$.

desk verdict Solid reduction results for s-geodesic transitive graphs with bounded girth; the flagged Lemma 3.5 gap is a misread, but the missing Magma code deserves a fix. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.05803 v2 pith:7LHVEQUR submitted 2025-06-06 math.CO

Jun-Jie Huang This is my paper
classification math.CO MSC 20B1520B3005C25
keywords s-geodesictransitivegraphs-arcgirthnormalquotientcoverquasiprimitivegroupbiquasiprimitiveFoster
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

Finite $s$-geodesic transitive graphs are graphs whose automorphism group is transitive on shortest paths of each length up to $s$; this paper studies them in the narrow-girth range $2s-2$ or $2s-1$ for $5\le s\le 8$. The central result is a reduction theorem: whenever such a graph has a nontrivial normal subgroup acting with at least three vertex-orbits, the graph is a normal cover of its quotient by that subgroup. Either the quotient has the same girth and inherits $s$-geodesic transitivity, or the original graph is the Foster graph, a triple cover of the 8-cage $\Delta_{4,2}$, in which case $s=6$. The theorem also rules out $s=7$ and shows that primitive and biprimitive automorphism-group actions cannot occur, while quasiprimitive or biquasiprimitive actions must be almost simple. If correct, this reduces the classification of the whole family to almost-simple group actions, with only one exceptional graph.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is the normal-quotient reduction: one contracts the orbits of a normal intransitive subgroup $N$ to form the quotient graph $\Gamma_N$, and the assumption that $\Gamma$ is a cover makes geodesics and arc-transitivity lift between the two graphs. The argument is carried by the intersection-array parameters $b_i,c_i$, which count how many neighbours a vertex has at distance $i+1$ and $i-1$ from a fixed vertex, together with the criterion that small $b_i$ forces geodesic transitivity. The exceptional candidates are the classical generalized polygons $\Delta_{3,q}$, $\Delta_{4,q}$, $\Delta_{5,q}$ and the Foster and Biggs\,--\,Smith graphs, whose intersection arrays are listed and used to eliminate all covers except the Foster graph. The type-AS conclusion for quasiprimitive actions comes from applying the O'Nan--Scott-type structure theory for quasiprimitive permutation groups to the 4-arc-transitive action.

What would settle it

A computer search or construction that produces a connected $(G,7)$-geodesic transitive graph of girth $12$ or $13$ with a nontrivial normal intransitive subgroup having at least three vertex-orbits would refute the theorem's claim that $s=7$ cannot occur; equivalently, finding any cover of $\Delta_{4,2}$ other than the Foster graph that satisfies the theorem's transitivity conditions would refute the exceptional-case classification.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The load-bearing claim is Theorem 1.2: let $\Gamma$ be a connected $(G,s)$-geodesic transitive graph with girth $2s-2$ or $2s-1$, $5\le s\le 8$, and let $N$ be a nontrivial normal intransitive subgroup of $G$ with at least three orbits on $V(\Gamma)$. Then $\Gamma$ is an $N$-normal cover of $\Gamma_N$, $s\ne 7$, and either the quotient $\Gamma_N$ has the same girth as $\Gamma$, diameter larger than $s$, and is $(G/N,s)$-geodesic transitive, or $\Gamma$ is the Foster graph with $(s,\Gamma_N,g_\Gamma)=(6,\Delta_{4,2},10)$. The paper also proves Theorem 1.3: when $G$ acts quasiprimitively or biquasiprimitively on the vertex set, the relevant permutation group is almost simple of type AS, and $G$ cannot be primitive or biprimitive. The route is to show that the quotient is $(s-1)$-arc transitive, bound its girth between $2s-4$ and $g_\Gamma$, and then force all non-same-girth cases into the short list of geodesic-transitive graphs in Table 1; among those, only the Foster graph survives the cover conditions.

Load-bearing premise

The Foster-graph case rests on the unproved step that one counting condition ($b_{s-1}=1$) forces the stronger condition ($b_s\le 1$) that the paper's geodesic-transitivity criterion actually requires.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For every graph in the stated class, the normal quotient either inherits the same girth and $s$-geodesic transitivity, or the graph is the Foster graph; no other exceptional covers exist.
  • The case $s=7$ is impossible: no connected $(G,7)$-geodesic transitive graph of girth $12$ or $13$ can admit a nontrivial normal intransitive subgroup with at least three orbits.
  • Classification of these graphs is reduced to determining almost-simple quasiprimitive or biquasiprimitive actions; primitive and biprimitive actions are excluded.
  • Currently the only known graph of this family with $s\ge 5$ is the Foster graph, and Theorem 1.2 constrains any future examples to arise from the almost-simple quotient case.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the reduction theorem survives scrutiny, a complete classification for $5\le s\le 8$ becomes a finite problem about almost simple groups with prescribed local stabilizers, rather than a global graph search.
  • The exceptional Foster-graph case is conditional on an unproved implication in Lemma 3.5: the paper derives $b_{s-1}=1$ and then applies a geodesic-transitivity criterion that formally requires $b_s\le 1$; verifying that implication, or repairing the step, is the first task a reader should attempt.
  • A natural test is to search computationally over covers of $\Delta_{4,2}$: Theorem 1.2 predicts that among covers satisfying the stated geodesic-transitivity and girth conditions, the Foster graph is the only one, a prediction that can be checked by enumerating small covers of the 8-cage.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies finite connected (G,s)-geodesic transitive graphs with girth 2s-2 or 2s-1, where 5 <= s <= 8 and G is a subgroup of Aut(Γ). The main results are two theorems. Theorem 1.2 gives a normal-quotient reduction: if N is a nontrivial intransitive normal subgroup with at least three orbits, then Γ is a normal N-cover of Γ_N, s≠7, and either the quotient has the same girth and is (G/N,s)-geodesic transitive, or Γ is the Foster graph and (s,Γ_N,gΓ)=(6,Δ4,2,10). Theorem 1.3 states that if G acts quasiprimitively or biquasiprimitively on the vertices, then the associated permutation group is almost simple, and that primitive and biprimitive actions are impossible. The proofs use the Jin-Praeger normal quotient framework, Weiss's classification of s-arc transitive graphs, Li's classification of primitive and biprimitive s-transitive graphs, and distance-regular graph results, together with several Magma computations in the exceptional case Lema 4.3.

Significance. The paper addresses a problem posed by Jin and Praeger and extends the known s=4 normal quotient reduction to s=5,...,8. If correct, Theorem 1.2 provides a clean dichotomy for normal quotients of these graphs, and Theorem 1.3 strongly restricts the primitive and quasiprimitive cases, confirming the Foster graph as the only known nontrivial example. The paper is generally carefully written and uses standard, powerful classification tools. The main reduction arguments (Lemmas 3.3, 3.4, and the use of Proposition 2.2) are for the most part detailed and correct. However, the proof of the exclusion s≠7 in Lemma 3.2 is incomplete, and the Magma computations in Lemma 4.3 are not independently verifiable from the text, which affects the robustness of the classification claims.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 3, Lemma 3.2] The proof that s≠7 assumes that Σ contains two distinct types of 7-arcs, namely a 7-geodesic and a 7-arc lying in a 12- or 13-cycle. This presupposes that Σ has a 7-geodesic, i.e., that diam(Σ) ≥ 7. If diam(Σ) ≤ 6, then Σ can be the generalized hexagon Δ5,q, which has diameter 6, girth 12, and is 7-arc transitive. In that case there is no 7-geodesic, and all 7-arcs are non-geodesic, so the stated contradiction to 7-arc transitivity does not arise. This case is not handled elsewhere: Lemma 3.4 subsequently uses Lemma 3.2 to exclude s=7 when diam(Σ)≤s, and therefore the omission leaves a gap in the proof of Theorem 1.2's conclusion s≠7.
  2. [Section 4, Lemma 4.3] The proof of the case (k,G_u)=(14,Z13^2.(Z4:PGL(2,13))) relies on several Magma computations that are not documented: the nonexistence of subgroups of index 2·13^3, the conjugacy of Hall 13′-subgroups of G_{u,u1}, the orbit lengths of G_{u,u4} on Γ4(u), and the assertion that the orbital graph corresponding to an orbit of length 6 has girth 3. These computations are load-bearing because they eliminate the only primitive candidate for s=5 with valency 14, and hence are needed for Theorem 1.3. The text should either include the Magma code or a log, or replace the assertion about the orbital graph's girth with a self-contained argument.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Lemma 3.5] The sequence (u0,u1,...,u_{s-1},w_{s-4},w_{s-5},...,w_1,u'0) is a (2s-4)-arc, not a (2s-3)-arc as stated in the text.
  2. [Lemma 3.5] The phrase 'the s-arc (B0,...,B_{s-1})' should read 'the (s-1)-arc', since the sequence contains s vertices and hence s-1 edges.
  3. [Lemma 4.4, case (b.2)] In the subcase (G,G_u,k,s-1)=(M12.Z2,Z2^3:GL(2,3),4,4), the divisibility from Eq. (3) gives 108·b4 dividing |G_u| = 384. Since 108 does not divide 384, the correct conclusion is that this subcase is impossible, not that b4=1 as written.
  4. [Throughout] There are several small typos, e.g., 'compete multipartite' in the proof of Theorem 1.2 should be 'complete multipartite', and the reference in Lemma 3.2 to '[28, Theorem]' would benefit from a more precise statement of the cited result.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity; the central reduction is powered by external classification theorems, and the author's own citations are background or non-load-bearing.

full rationale

Theorems 1.2 and 1.3 are obtained by applying external results: the Jin–Praeger normal quotient proposition (Prop. 2.4), Biggs's girth lower bound, Weiss's 8-transitive nonexistence, Li's classification of vertex-primitive and vertex-biprimitive s-transitive graphs, Praeger's quasiprimitive O'Nan–Scott theorem, and the distance-regular table (Prop. 2.3) from Brouwer–Cohen–Neumaier and Jin–Devillers–Li–Praeger. None of these external inputs contains the target theorem as an assumption. The author's prior papers appear mainly as sources of examples ([9,10,11]) or in one minor supporting citation for the elementary divisibility b0...bs divides |G_u0| ([8, Cor. 2.6]); the paper derives that divisibility immediately before the equation, so the self-citation is not load-bearing. The reader's suspected gap in Lemma 3.5 is not a circularity: Proposition 2.2(2) is applied with t = s−1, and since Γ is (G,s)-geodesic transitive it is automatically (G,s−1)-geodesic transitive, so b^Γ_{s−1}=1 is precisely the hypothesis b_t≤1. The Foster-graph conclusion then follows from the external geodesic-transitive classification in Table 1 and the uniqueness of the 3-cover of Δ_{4,2} from [3]. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no uniqueness assertion is imported from the authors' own prior work. The absence of Magma code/logs in Lemma 4.3 is a reproducibility issue, not circularity. Overall score 1 reflects minor, non-load-bearing self-citations only.

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

The main theorems are conditional on standard deep classifications, mostly based on the classification of finite simple groups, and on the correctness of stated Magma computations. There are no fitted free parameters and no invented entities. The most fragile item is the Magma verification in Lemma 4.3, whose code is not provided.

assumptions (6)
  • standard math Li's classification of finite vertex-primitive and vertex-biprimitive s-transitive graphs for s≥4 (Theorem 1.3 in [19])
    Used in Lemma 4.3 to enumerate possible primitive actions and in Lemma 4.4 for biprimitive actions; if this classification is incomplete, Lemmas 4.3 and 4.4 collapse.
  • standard math Weiss's theorem that no finite 8-arc transitive graph of valency at least 3 exists
    Used in Lemma 3.2 to rule out s=7 and to constrain arc transitivity of the quotient; quoted from [28].
  • standard math Classification of connected geodesic transitive graphs that are s-transitive for s≥4 (Proposition 2.3, Table 1)
    Used in Lemma 3.4 to identify the quotient when diam(Σ)≤s, yielding the Δ3,q, Δ4,q and Δ5,q cases; quoted from [3,16].
  • standard math Structure of stabilizers of 4-arc transitive graphs (Proposition 2.1)
    Used in Lemma 4.2 to restrict the quasiprimitive type to HA, AS, TW or PA and to bound local actions; quoted from [28,29].
  • standard math The claim that the Foster graph is the unique 3-cover of the Tutte 8-cage Δ4,2
    Used in Lemma 3.5, sufficiency direction; quoted from [3, p.398] without proof.
  • ad hoc to paper Magma-verified facts about the Monster group stabilizer G_u in the (14, Z_13^2.(Z4:PGL(2,13))) case
    Used in Lemma 4.3 to exclude c4=7 and to analyze the local action; not accompanied by code or output, so the reader must trust the computation.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Finite $s$-geodesic transitive graphs under certain girths." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/7LHVEQUR

@misc{pith2026250605803,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Finite $s$-geodesic transitive graphs under certain girths},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/7LHVEQUR}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.05803}
}
abstract

For an integer $s\geq1$ and a graph $\Gamma$, a path $(u_0, u_1, \ldots, u_{s})$ of vertices of $\Gamma$ is called an {\em $s$-geodesic} if it is a shortest path from $u_0$ to $u_{s}$. We say that $\Gamma$ is {\em $s$-geodesic transitive} if, for each $i\leq s$, $\Gamma$ has at least one $i$-geodesic, and its automorphism group is transitive on the set of $i$-geodesics. In 2021, Jin and Praeger [J. Combin. Theory Ser. A 178 (2021) 105349] have studied $3$-geodesic transitive graphs of girth $5$ or $6$, and they also proposed to the problem that to classify $s$-geodesic transitive graphs of girth $2s-1$ or $2s-2$ for $s=4, 5, 6, 7, 8$. The case of $s = 4$ was investigated in [J. Algebra Combin. 60 (2024) 949--963]. In this paper, we study such graphs with $s\geq5$. More precisely, it is shown that a connected $(G,s)$-geodesic transitive graph $\Gamma$ with a nontrivial intransitive normal subgroup $N$ of $G$ which has at least $3$ orbits, where $G$ is an automorphism group of $\Gamma$ and $s\geq 5$, either $\Gamma$ is the Foster graph and $\Gamma_N$ is the Tutte's $8$-cage, or $\Gamma$ and $\Gamma_N$ have the same girth and $\Gamma_N$ is $(G/N,s)$-geodesic transitive. Moreover, it is proved that if $G$ acts quasiprimitively on its vertex set, then $G$ is an almost simple group, and if $G$ acts biquasiprimitively, the stabilizer of biparts of $\Gamma$ in $G$ is an almost simple quasiprimitive group on each of biparts. In addition, $G$ cannot be primitive or biprimitive.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

32 extracted references · 28 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Biggs, Algebraic Graph Theory, Cambridge University Press, New York, 1974

    N.L. Biggs, Algebraic Graph Theory, Cambridge University Press, New York, 1974

    work page 1974

  2. [2]

    Bosma, J

    W. Bosma, J. Cannon, C. Playoust, The MAGMA algebra system I: The user language, J. Symbolic Comput. 24 (1997) 235–265. https://doi.org/10.1006/jsco.1996.0125

    arXiv 1997

  3. [3]

    Brouwer, A.M

    A.E. Brouwer, A.M. Cohen, A. Neumaier, Distance-Regular Graphs, Springer Berlin, Heidelberg, 1989

    work page 1989

  4. [4]

    Conway, R.T

    J.H. Conway, R.T. Curtis, S.P. Norton, R.A. Parker, R.A. Wilson, Atlas of Finite Groups: Maximal Subgroups and Ordinary Characters for Simple Groups, Oxford University Press, Eynsham, 1985

    work page 1985

  5. [5]

    Devillers, W

    A. Devillers, W. Jin, C.H. Li, C.E. Praeger, Local 2-geodesic transitivity and clique graphs, J. Combin. Theory Ser. A 120 (2013) 500–508. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcta.2012.10.004

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jcta.2012.10.004 2013

  6. [6]

    Devillers, W

    A. Devillers, W. Jin, C.H. Li, C.E. Praeger, Finite 2-geodesic transitive graphs of prime valency, J. Graph Theory 80 (2015) 18–27. https://doi.org/10.1002/jgt.21835

    work page doi:10.1002/jgt.21835 2015

  7. [7]

    Godsil, G.F

    C.D. Godsil, G.F. Royle, Algebraic Graph Theory, Springer, New York, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2001

    work page 2001

  8. [8]

    Geodesic transitive graphs of small valency

    J.-J. Huang, Geodesic transitive graphs of small valency, https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv. 2506.04670

    work page Pith review arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2506.04670

Show all 32 references
  1. [9]

    Huang, Y.-Q

    J.-J. Huang, Y.-Q. Feng, J.-X. Zhou, F.-G. Yin, Two-geodesic transitive graphs of order pn with n ≤ 3, J. Combin. Theory Ser. A, 202 (2024), 105814. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcta.2023. 105814

    2024 doi

  2. [10]

    Huang, Y.-Q

    J.-J. Huang, Y.-Q. Feng, J.-X. Zhou, F.-G. Yin, The classification of two-distance transitive dihe- drants, J. Algebra, 667 (2025) 508–529. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jalgebra.2024.12.023

    2025 doi

  3. [11]

    Huang, Y.-Q

    J.-J. Huang, Y.-Q. Feng, J.-X. Zhou, On tetravalent 3-geodesic transitive graphs, submitted

  4. [12]

    Ivanov, R.A

    A.A. Ivanov, R.A. Liebler, T. Penttila, C.E. Praeger, Antipodal distance-transitive covers of com- plete bipartite graphs, Eur. J. Comb. 18 (1997) 11–33. https://doi.org/10.1006/eujc.1993. 0086

    1997 doi

  5. [13]

    Jin, Finite 3-geodesic transitive but not 3-arc transitive graphs, Bull

    W. Jin, Finite 3-geodesic transitive but not 3-arc transitive graphs, Bull. Aust. Math. Soc. 91 (2015) 183–190. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0004972714000690

    2015 doi

  6. [14]

    Jin, Finite 2-geodesic-transitive graphs of valency twice a prime, Eur

    W. Jin, Finite 2-geodesic-transitive graphs of valency twice a prime, Eur. J. Combin. 49 (2015) 117–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejc.2015.03.002

    2015 doi

  7. [15]

    Jin, The pentavalent three-geodesic-transitive graphs, Discrete Math

    W. Jin, The pentavalent three-geodesic-transitive graphs, Discrete Math. 341 (2018) 1344–1349 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.disc.2018.02.009

    2018 doi

  8. [16]

    W. Jin, A. Devillers, C.H. Li, C.E. Praeger, On geodesic transitive graphs, Discrete Math. 338 (2015) 168–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.disc.2014.11.005

    2015 doi

  9. [17]

    Jin, C.E

    W. Jin, C.E. Praeger, Normal quotients of diameter at most two of finite three-geodesic-transitive graphs, J. Combin. Theory Ser. A 178 (2021) 105349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcta.2020. 105349

    2021 doi

  10. [18]

    W. Jin, L. Tan, Finite 4-geodesic-transitive graphs with bounded girth, J. Algebra Combin. 60 (2024) 949–963. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10801-024-01358-3 . FINITE s-GEODESIC TRANSITIVE GRAPHS UNDER CERTAIN GIRTHS 13

    2024 doi

  11. [19]

    Li, The finite vertex-primitive and vertex-biprimitive s-transitive graphs for s ≥ 4, Trans

    C.H. Li, The finite vertex-primitive and vertex-biprimitive s-transitive graphs for s ≥ 4, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 353 (2001) 3511–3529. https://doi.org/10.1090/S0002-9947-01-02768-4

    2001 doi

  12. [20]

    Li, Finite s-arc transitive graphs of prime-power order, Bull

    C.H. Li, Finite s-arc transitive graphs of prime-power order, Bull. London Math. Soc. 33 (2001) 129–137. https://doi.org/10.1112/blms/33.2.129

    2001 doi

  13. [21]

    C.H. Li, J. M. Pan, Finite 2-arc-transitive abelian Cayley graphs, Eur. J. Combin. 29 (2008) 148–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejc.2006.12.001

    2008 doi

  14. [22]

    Potoˇ vnik, A list of 4-valent 2-arc-transitive graphs and finite faithful amalgams of index (4 , 2), Eur

    P. Potoˇ vnik, A list of 4-valent 2-arc-transitive graphs and finite faithful amalgams of index (4 , 2), Eur. J. Combin. 30 (2009) 1323–1336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejc.2008.10.001

    2009 doi

  15. [23]

    C. E. Praeger, An O’Nan-Scott theorem for finite quasiprimitive permutation groups and an ap- plication to 2-arc transitive graphs, J. London Math. Soc. 47 (1993) 227–239. https://doi.org/ 10.1112/jlms/s2-47.2.227

    1993 doi

  16. [24]

    Praeger, On a reduction theorem for finite, bipartite 2-arc-transitive graphs, Australas

    C.E. Praeger, On a reduction theorem for finite, bipartite 2-arc-transitive graphs, Australas. J. Comb. 7 (1993) 21–36

    1993

  17. [25]

    Praeger, C.H

    C.E. Praeger, C.H. Li, A.C. Niemeyer, Finite transitive permutation groups and vertex-transitive graphs. In: Hahn, G., Sabidussi, G.(eds.) Graph Symmetry: Algebraic Methods and Applications. NATO Advanced Science Institute Series C 497, pp. 277–318. Klumer, Dordrecht (1997). h...

    1997 doi

  18. [26]

    Stroth, R

    G. Stroth, R. Weiss, A new construction of the group Ru, Quart. J. Math. Oxford Ser. (2) 41 (1990), 237–243. https://doi.org/10.1093/qmath/41.2.237

    1990 doi

  19. [27]

    Tutte, A family of cubical graphs, Proc

    W.T. Tutte, A family of cubical graphs, Proc. Camb. Philos. Soc. 43 (1947) 459–474. https: //doi.org/10.1017/S0305004100023720

    1947 doi

  20. [28]

    Weiss, The nonexistence of 8-transitive graphs, Combinatorica 1 (1981), 309–311

    R. Weiss, The nonexistence of 8-transitive graphs, Combinatorica 1 (1981), 309–311. https:// doi.org/10.1007/BF02579337

    1981 doi

  21. [29]

    Weiss, s-Transitive graphs, in: Algebraic Methods in Graph Theory, vols

    R. Weiss, s-Transitive graphs, in: Algebraic Methods in Graph Theory, vols. I, II, Szeged, 1978, in: Colloq. Math. Soc. Janos Bolyai, vol. 25, North-Holland, Amesterdam, Ney York, 1981, pp.827–847

    1978

  22. [30]

    Weiss, Distance-transitive graphs and generalized polygons, Arch

    R. Weiss, Distance-transitive graphs and generalized polygons, Arch. Math 45 (1985), 186–192. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01270491

    1985 doi

  23. [31]

    Wilson, P

    R. Wilson, P. Walsh, J. Tripp, I. Suleiman, R. Parker, S. Norton, S. Nickerson, S. Linton, J. Bray, R. Abbott, Atlas of Group Representations-Version 3, http://brauer.maths.qmul.ac.uk/ Atlas/v3/

  24. [32]

    Zhou, On automorphism groups of bi-quasiprimitive 2-arc-transitive graphs, J

    J.-X. Zhou, On automorphism groups of bi-quasiprimitive 2-arc-transitive graphs, J. Algebra, 620 (2023) 344–362. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jalgebra.2022.12.030. Jun-Jie Huang, School of Mathematical Sciences, Laboratory of Mathematics and Complex Systems, MOE, Beijing Normal U...

    2023 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.