Ideals and Solvability in Skew Braces

G\"ulin Ercan; Marco Damele

REVIEW 1 major objections 5 minor 2 cited by

Ideals and Solvability in Skew Braces

T0 review · 1 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-01 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper proves that nilpotency of the multiplicative group of a finite skew brace forces the additive Fitting subgroup to be an ideal, and that in two-sided skew braces solvability is equivalent for the brace and its two groups.

desk verdict Solid structural results in skew brace theory, but Theorem A's proof leans on an unproved external Hall-subbrace theorem; referee should verify that dependency. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.19955 v1 pith:TWZLJYZI submitted 2026-07-22 math.GR

Marco Damele , Gülin Ercan This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.GR MSC 16T2520D1020D1520F16

keywords skewbraceidealsolvabletwo-sidednilpotentmultiplicativegroupFittingsubgroupYang–Baxterequationfinitequotient

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

This paper establishes two structural results about skew braces—algebraic objects with two group operations linked by a distributive law, used to encode solutions of the Yang–Baxter equation. Theorem A shows that if a finite skew brace has nilpotent multiplicative group, then the additive Fitting subgroup is a non-zero ideal, classifying finite simple skew braces with nilpotent multiplicative group as trivial braces over cyclic groups of prime order. Theorem B shows that in a two-sided skew brace, the internal commutator of any ideal is an ideal of the whole brace, which yields an extension theorem for solvability and proves that for finite two-sided skew braces, solvability of the brace, of the additive group, and of the multiplicative group are equivalent. The paper also records a residual version for infinite skew braces: solvable additive group forces all finite quotients of the multiplicative group to be solvable.

What carries the argument

The additive Fitting subgroup F(B,+)—the largest normal nilpotent subgroup of the additive group—is shown to be an ideal by proving each Sylow component O_p(B,+) is an ideal. The argument uses a group-theoretic fixed-point lemma (Lemma 3.1) on automorphisms of p-power order fixing a Hall p'-subgroup, together with a Hall-subbrace theorem that transfers Hall subgroups from the multiplicative structure to additive subgroups. For two-sided braces, the central device is the characterization ∂(B)=[B,B]_+ + B^2, i.e., the derived ideal is the sum of the additive commutator subgroup and the star-square, and the verification that for any ideal I, the subgroup K=[I,I]_I is invariant under the lambda

What would settle it

Find a finite skew brace B with (B,·) nilpotent for which F(B,+) is not an ideal (contradicting Theorem A), or a finite simple skew brace with nilpotent multiplicative group not isomorphic to Triv(C_p). Alternatively, find a two-sided skew brace B and an ideal I with [I,I]_I not an ideal of B (contradicting Theorem B).

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Let B be a non-zero finite skew brace. If the multiplicative group (B,·) is nilpotent, then the additive Fitting subgroup F(B,+) is a non-zero ideal of B (Theorem A). Consequently, every finite simple skew brace with nilpotent multiplicative group is isomorphic to Triv(C_p) for some prime p; every such brace has an ideal of prime index, and neither B*B nor ∂(B) equals B. In the two-sided setting, for any ideal I of B the internal commutator [I,I]_I is again an ideal of B (Theorem B); this makes solvability closed under extensions and, for finite two-sided braces, equivalent to solvability of either the additive or the multiplicative group. For infinite two-sided braces, solvability of (B,+)

Load-bearing premise

The proof of Theorem A depends on an external theorem (cited to an unpublished preprint, and not proved here) that asserts Hall subgroups of the multiplicative group of a finite skew brace are multiplicative groups of Hall subbraces whenever both associated groups are solvable; if that Hall-subbrace statement is false or inapplicable, the fixed-point argument and the classification of simple braces collapse.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Finite simple skew braces with nilpotent multiplicative group are completely classified as trivial braces Triv(C_p); no exotic examples exist.
Every finite skew brace with nilpotent multiplicative group admits a proper ideal of prime index, so its star-square and derived ideal are proper; in particular, such braces are never 'perfect'.
For finite two-sided skew braces, solvability as a brace, solvability of the additive group, and solvability of the multiplicative group all coincide; thus any structural solvability criterion for either group applies to the brace.
Every finite skew brace with abelian multiplicative group is solvable, and every finite two-sided skew brace of odd order or of order p^n q^m is solvable.
Infinite two-sided skew braces with solvable additive group have the property that every finite quotient of their multiplicative group is solvable, indicating the entire multiplicative group is prosolvable.

Reading between the lines

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

The Hall-subbrace theorem on which Theorem A rests is invoked from an external preprint; if its statement or proof is verified, Theorem A's approach likely generalizes from nilpotent multiplicative groups to any class where Hall subbraces exist, potentially extending the classification to more classes of finite skew braces.
The fixed-point lemma may be applicable beyond skew braces, to other algebraic structures with two compatible operations where a solvable additive group admits an automorphism group with similar fixed-point properties.
Theorem C suggests a promising direction for infinite skew braces: rather than asking whether the multiplicative group itself is solvable, one can study the prosolvable completion; obstructions like Nasybullov's examples then say the failure is invisible in finite quotients, which may be the right finitary notion of solvability in this setting.
The equivalence for finite two-sided braces could open a path to testing solvability of solutions of the Yang–Baxter equation purely via group-theoretic solvability of the associated brace's groups.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Colleague,

You should know two things about this paper up front. First, the main structural theorems are likely correct and are genuinely new: Theorem A and Theorem B, with the corollaries on finite simple skew braces of nilpotent type and the two-sided solvability equivalence. Second, Theorem A's proof depends on a Hall-subbrace theorem imported from an arXiv preprint [24] that is not proved or reproduced here. That is the paper's real soft spot, and it is the only thing I would send a referee at.

The paper does several things well. The fixed-point lemma (Lemma 3.1) is clean and the reduction to O_p(B,+) is natural. The proof of Theorem B, with the φ_b map and the use of Lemma 4.3, checks out; the induction in Corollary 4.6 is careful. The paper is also honest: Example 1 explicitly shows nilpotent multiplicative group does not force left nilpotency, and Remark 4.8 explains how the solvability notion here relates to Trappeniers' weaker one. The citation pattern looks normal. The self-citations are contextual; none of them supply load-bearing assumptions.

Now the soft spots. The Hall-subbrace theorem [24, Theorem 2.8] is cited in the proof of Theorem A to assert that H = O_{p'}(B,·) is the multiplicative group of a Hall p'-subbrace. Without that, the quotient (H+Q)/Q is not defined and the fixed-point argument has no input. The paper does not prove this theorem or even state a version of it. That is a genuine dependence, not a manufactured one. If [24] is solid, Theorem A and Corollary 3.2 follow; if it has a gap or the statement is misquoted, those results lose their proof. The other examples rely on SmallBrace(32,...) data from [5, Example 38]; that is published data, so I would call it a minor concern, though a referee might ask the authors to double-check the specific instance.

My overall read: the internal mathematics is coherent, the external dependency is the only load-bearing uncertainty. This is a paper for specialists in skew braces and Yang–Baxter/Hopf–Galois structures; it deserves a serious referee, mostly to verify the cited Hall theorem and to check that Theorem B's extension argument has no hidden two-sidedness gap. I would not desk reject it.

Recommendation: send it to review. I would cite Theorem B and the solvability equivalence once the Hall dependency is settled.

Referee Report

1 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies finite skew braces with nilpotent multiplicative group and solvability of two-sided skew braces. Theorem A asserts that for a non-zero finite skew brace with (B,·) nilpotent, the additive Fitting subgroup F(B,+) is a non-zero ideal; the main consequences are that finite simple such skew braces are exactly Triv(C_p), that every such skew brace has an ideal of prime index, and that B∗B≠B and ∂(B)≠B. Example 1 shows multiplicative nilpotency does not imply left nilpotency, and Example 2 shows it does not imply solvability. The second part proves Theorem B: in a two-sided skew brace, [I,I]_I is an ideal of B for every ideal I. This yields an extension theorem for solvability and, combined with existing structure theory, the equivalence for finite two-sided skew braces of solvability of the brace with solvability of either associated group. Theorem C establishes a residual version for infinite two-sided skew braces: additive solvability implies that every finite homomorphic image of the multiplicative group is solvable.

Significance. If the main theorems hold, this is a substantial contribution. Theorem A gives a clean structural constraint on a large class of skew braces and a complete classification of finite simple skew braces with nilpotent multiplicative group; Theorem B is a useful ideal-theoretic closure result; Corollary 4.7 is a strong and natural equivalence. The proofs are largely deductive, and the internal steps I checked—Lemma 3.1, the commutator calculations in Theorem B, Corollary 4.6, and Theorem C—are coherent. The paper is honest about its reliance on external results and gives credit to prior work. The main risk is the dependence of Theorem A on an unproved arXiv preprint, [24, Theorem 2.8], which is load-bearing for the paper's central claim; the negative examples also rely on external computations from [5].

major comments (1)

[Section 3, proof of Theorem A] The step 'Since both (B,+) and (B,·) are solvable, [24, Theorem 2.8] ensures H=O_{p'}(B,·) is the multiplicative group of a Hall p'-subbrace' is load-bearing: it is what makes (H+Q)/Q a Hall p'-subgroup of (B,+)/Q and gives Lemma 3.1 its input. Without this step, the fixed-point argument fails and Theorem A, together with Corollaries 3.2–3.4, does not follow. [24] is an arXiv preprint not proved or reproduced in the paper, and the exact statement and hypotheses of [24, Theorem 2.8] are not given. The argument requires not merely existence of some Hall p'-subbrace but that its multiplicative group is the particular subgroup H. Please state the theorem precisely and either prove the needed form or supply a published/verifiable reference. Also, the proof relies on [25, Theorem 1.3(c)] to conclude that (B,+) is solvable; please quote that result explicitly.

minor comments (5)

[Section 2 / Section 3] The term 'Hall p'-subbrace' is used without definition. Define it explicitly, including the requirement that both the additive and multiplicative groups are Hall p'-subgroups.
[Corollary 4.7 / Remark 4.8] The reference to [23] is inconsistent: Corollary 4.7 cites [23, Theorem 4.20], while Remark 4.8 cites [23, Corollary 4.20]. Please check the numbering.
[Examples 2 and 3] The claims about SmallBrace(32,24003)—non-solvability, weak solvability, the unique non-zero proper ideal of order 16, and the assertion that weakly solvable skew braces of order at most 31 are solvable—are imported from [5, Example 38] without reproducing the data. Since these examples are used to justify the necessity of two-sidedness and the failure of solvability from nilpotency, please provide the construction or a reproducible verification.
[Theorem C proof] When writing (B/D,·) ≅ (B,·)/D, clarify that the D on the right denotes the multiplicative subgroup (D,·), not the additive subgroup (D,+). The two coincide as subsets but the notation can confuse.
[Throughout] There are minor typographical and OCR-style issues in the displayed text, e.g. the garbled symbol in the definition of H∗K in Section 2 and inconsistent rendering of O_{p'} and O_p. A careful proofreading pass is needed.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the paper's derivations are deductive, depend on external theorems, and do not reduce to their own inputs.

full rationale

The paper derives Theorem A from a fixed-point lemma (Lemma 3.1) and the Hall-subbrace theorem [24, Theorem 2.8] by Truman, which is an external preprint, not a result of the present authors. The proof does not assume Theorem A or its consequences; it uses independent group-theoretic facts (e.g., [25, Theorem 1.3(c)], [19, Problem 3B.14]) and the cited Hall theorem to identify H = O_{p'}(B,·) as a Hall p'-subbrace. Theorem B is proven from the two-sided brace structure and external results of Trappeniers [23, Lemmas 5.2 and 5.3]. Theorem C uses standard facts about radical rings [12, Theorem 8.1.20] and [1]. The self-citations [13]–[16] appear only in the introduction and are used for context or analogies, not as load-bearing assumptions. There are no fitted parameters, no predictions constructed from the same data they claim to explain, and no instance where a result is assumed in its own proof. The reliance on [24] is an external dependency that could be a correctness risk if the cited theorem were false or misquoted, but it is not circularity under the stated criteria. The derivations are self-contained relative to the cited external theorems, and the target theorems are never used as hypotheses.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 9 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters or invented entities. The contributions are deductive; the ledger records the external theorems that carry the proofs. The most fragile entry is the Hall-subbrace theorem [24, Thm 2.8], because it is an arXiv preprint and it is essential to Theorem A. The two-sided machinery from [23] is also load-bearing for Theorems B and C.

assumptions (9)

standard math Fitting subgroup of a finite solvable group is self-centralizing (C_G(F) ≤ F).
Used in Lemma 3.1 to force [G,α] ≤ F; cited to Isaacs [19, Problem 3B.14].
standard math Three Subgroups Lemma.
Used in Lemma 3.1; cited to Isaacs [19, Cor. 4.10].
standard math Finite nilpotent groups decompose as direct products of their Sylow subgroups and have a unique Hall p'-subgroup.
Used at the start of Theorem A to write (B,·) = P × H.
domain assumption For a finite skew brace with nilpotent multiplicative group, the additive group is solvable.
Used at the start of Theorem A; cited to Tsang–Qin [25, Thm 1.3(c)]; without it F(B,+) could be trivial.
domain assumption Hall theorem for finite skew braces: if (B,+) and (B,·) are solvable, every Hall p'-subgroup of (B,·) is the multiplicative group of a Hall p'-subbrace.
Load-bearing in Theorem A; cited to Truman [24, Thm 2.8], an arXiv preprint not proved in this paper.
domain assumption In a two-sided skew brace, every characteristic additive subgroup is an ideal.
Used in Lemmas 4.3 and 4.11 and in Theorem C; cited to Trappeniers [23, Prop 2.3].
domain assumption For a two-sided skew brace B and ideal I, [I,I]_+ and I^2 are left ideals normal in (B,·), and [B,B]_B = [B,B]_+ + B^2.
Gives the formula K = [I,I]_+ + I^2 in Theorem B; cited to [23, Lemmas 5.2–5.3] and [4, Thm 3.6].
domain assumption Finite simple two-sided skew braces are trivial or almost trivial over a finite simple group.
Used in the minimal-counterexample proof of Corollary 4.7; cited to Trappeniers [23, Thm 4.7].
domain assumption A two-sided brace with abelian additive group carries a Jacobson radical ring structure whose adjoint group is (B,·), and adjoint groups of radical rings are SN-groups.
Used in the base case of Theorem C; cited to [12, Thm 8.1.20] and [1].

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Ideals and Solvability in Skew Braces." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/TWZLJYZI

@misc{pith2026260719955,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Ideals and Solvability in Skew Braces},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/TWZLJYZI}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.19955}
}

abstract

We investigate how nilpotency assumptions on the multiplicative group of a finite skew brace constrain its ideal structure and solvability. Our first main result shows that, if \(B=(B,+,\cdot)\) is finite and \((B,\cdot)\) is nilpotent, then the additive Fitting subgroup \(F(B,+)\) is a non-zero ideal of \(B\). As consequences, every finite simple skew brace with nilpotent multiplicative group is isomorphic to \(\Triv(C_p)\) for some prime \(p\), and every such skew brace admits an ideal of prime index. In particular, \[ B*B\neq B \qquad\text{and}\qquad \partial(B) \neq B. \] We also show that nilpotency of the multiplicative group does not, in general, imply either left nilpotency or solvability. Motivated by this obstruction, we then study the solvability of two-sided skew braces, both in the finite and in the general setting. We prove that, whenever \(I\) is an ideal of a two-sided skew brace \(B\), the internal commutator ideal \([I,I]_I\) is again an ideal of \(B\). This yields an extension theorem for solvability and implies that, for finite two-sided skew braces, solvability of the skew brace is equivalent to solvability of either the additive or the multiplicative group. In particular, every finite skew brace with abelian multiplicative group is solvable. Finally, we show that, although this equivalence fails in general for infinite two-sided skew braces, a residual form of it still survives: if the additive group is solvable, then every finite homomorphic image of the multiplicative group is solvable.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

A Counterexample to Byott's Conjecture for Finite Skew Braces
math.GR 2026-07 accept novelty 9.0 of 10

An explicit finite skew brace with soluble additive group and insoluble multiplicative group, with quotient PSL2(7), disproves Byott's conjecture.
Powerful multiplicative groups do not force right nilpotence in finite braces
math.GR 2026-08 accept novelty 8.0 of 10

For every odd prime p, a uniform family of finite left braces of order p^{2p+1} has powerful multiplicative group of class two but nonterminating right series, disproving the Shalev-Smoktunowicz conjecture in every od...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

25 extracted references · 4 linked inside Pith · cited by 2 Pith papers

[24]

P. J. Truman, Analogues of Sylow’s first theorem, Cauchy’s theorem, and Hall’s theorem for skew braces, Preprint, arXiv:2606.18414, 2026

arXiv 2026
[5]

Ballester-Bolinches, R

A. Ballester-Bolinches, R. Esteban-Romero, P. Jiménez-Seral and V. Pérez- Calabuig, Soluble skew left braces and soluble solutions of the Yang–Baxter equation,Adv. Math.455(2024), Paper No. 109880, 27 pp

2024
[1]

Amberg, O

B. Amberg, O. Dickenschied and Ya. P. Sysak, Subgroups of the adjoint group of a radical ring,Canad. J. Math.50(1998), no. 1, 3–15

1998
[2]

Bachiller, Extensions, matched products, and simple braces,J

D. Bachiller, Extensions, matched products, and simple braces,J. Pure Appl. Algebra222(2018), no. 7, 1670–1691

2018
[3]

Bachiller, F

D. Bachiller, F. Cedó, E. Jespers and J. Okniński, Asymmetric product of left braces and simplicity; new solutions of the Yang–Baxter equation,Commun. Contemp. Math.21(2019), no. 8, Paper No. 1850042, 30 pp

2019
[4]

Ballester-Bolinches, R

A. Ballester-Bolinches, R. Esteban-Romero, M. Ferrara, V. Pérez-Calabuig and M. Trombetti, Central nilpotency of left skew braces and solutions of the Yang–Baxter equation,Pacific J. Math.335(2025), no. 1, 1–32

2025
[6]

Burnside, On groups of orderpαqβ,Proc

W. Burnside, On groups of orderpαqβ,Proc. London Math. Soc.2(1904), 388–392

1904
[7]

N. P. Byott, Solubility criteria for Hopf–Galois structures,New York J. Math. 21(2015), 883–903

2015

Show all 25 references

[8]

N. P. Byott, On insoluble transitive subgroups in the holomorph of a finite soluble group,J. Algebra638(2024), 1–38

2024
[9]

N. P. Byott, On a family of simple skew braces,J. Algebra Appl.25(2026), Paper No. 2650230, 26 pp

2026
[10]

F. Cedó, E. Jespers and J. Okniński, An abundance of simple left braces with abelian multiplicative Sylow subgroups,Rev. Mat. Iberoam.36(2020), no. 5, 1309–1332

2020
[11]

F. Cedó, A. Smoktunowicz and L. Vendramin, Skew left braces of nilpotent type,Proc. Lond. Math. Soc.118(2019), no. 6, 1367–1392

2019
[12]

Cedó and L

F. Cedó and L. Vendramin,Groups, Radical Rings, and the Yang–Baxter Equation: A Combinatorial Approach to Solutions, Progress in Mathematics, vol. 361, Birkhäuser, Cham, 2026. 18 MARCO DAMELE AND GÜLİN ERCAN

2026
[13]

Damele and A

M. Damele and A. Loi, On simply connected simple Lie skew braces with nilpotent multiplicative group, Preprint, arXiv:2606.24287 [math.GR], 2026

2026 arXiv
[14]

Damele, On finite perfect two-sided skew braces, Preprint, arXiv:2605.22302, 2026

M. Damele, On finite perfect two-sided skew braces, Preprint, arXiv:2605.22302, 2026

2026 arXiv
[15]

Damele, Simple skew braces with cyclic Sylow subgroups, Preprint, arXiv:2607.17125 [math.GR], 2026

M. Damele, Simple skew braces with cyclic Sylow subgroups, Preprint, arXiv:2607.17125 [math.GR], 2026

2026 arXiv
[16]

Damele, Finite skew braces whose additive group is aZ-group,Arch

M. Damele, Finite skew braces whose additive group is aZ-group,Arch. Math. (Basel), to appear; arXiv:2603.22980, 2026

2026
[17]

Feit and J

W. Feit and J. G. Thompson, Solvability of groups of odd order,Pacific J. Math.13(1963), no. 3, 775–1029

1963
[18]

Guarnieri and L

L. Guarnieri and L. Vendramin, Skew braces and the Yang–Baxter equation, Math. Comp.86(2017), no. 307, 2519–2534

2017
[19]

I. M. Isaacs,Finite Group Theory, Graduate Studies in Mathematics, vol. 92, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2008

2008
[20]

Nasybullov, Connections between properties of the additive and the multi- plicative groups of a two-sided skew brace,J

T. Nasybullov, Connections between properties of the additive and the multi- plicative groups of a two-sided skew brace,J. Algebra540(2019), 156–167

2019
[21]

Rump, Braces, radical rings, and the quantum Yang–Baxter equation,J

W. Rump, Braces, radical rings, and the quantum Yang–Baxter equation,J. Algebra307(2007), no. 1, 153–170

2007
[22]

Smoktunowicz and L

A. Smoktunowicz and L. Vendramin, On skew braces,J. Comb. Algebra2 (2018), no. 1, 47–86, with an appendix by N. P. Byott and L. Vendramin

2018
[23]

Trappeniers, On two-sided skew braces,J

S. Trappeniers, On two-sided skew braces,J. Algebra631(2023), 267–286

2023
[25]

Tsang and C

C. Tsang and C. Qin, On the solvability of regular subgroups in the holomorph of a finite solvable group,Internat. J. Algebra Comput.30(2020), no. 2, 253–265. Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Cagliari, Via Ospedale 72, 09124 Cagliari, Italy Email a...

2020

Pith tools

Reviewed August 1, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [24]

P. J. Truman, Analogues of Sylow’s first theorem, Cauchy’s theorem, and Hall’s theorem for skew braces, Preprint, arXiv:2606.18414, 2026

arXiv 2026

[2] [5]

Ballester-Bolinches, R

A. Ballester-Bolinches, R. Esteban-Romero, P. Jiménez-Seral and V. Pérez- Calabuig, Soluble skew left braces and soluble solutions of the Yang–Baxter equation,Adv. Math.455(2024), Paper No. 109880, 27 pp

2024

[3] [1]

Amberg, O

B. Amberg, O. Dickenschied and Ya. P. Sysak, Subgroups of the adjoint group of a radical ring,Canad. J. Math.50(1998), no. 1, 3–15

1998

[4] [2]

Bachiller, Extensions, matched products, and simple braces,J

D. Bachiller, Extensions, matched products, and simple braces,J. Pure Appl. Algebra222(2018), no. 7, 1670–1691

2018

[5] [3]

Bachiller, F

D. Bachiller, F. Cedó, E. Jespers and J. Okniński, Asymmetric product of left braces and simplicity; new solutions of the Yang–Baxter equation,Commun. Contemp. Math.21(2019), no. 8, Paper No. 1850042, 30 pp

2019

[6] [4]

Ballester-Bolinches, R

A. Ballester-Bolinches, R. Esteban-Romero, M. Ferrara, V. Pérez-Calabuig and M. Trombetti, Central nilpotency of left skew braces and solutions of the Yang–Baxter equation,Pacific J. Math.335(2025), no. 1, 1–32

2025

[7] [6]

Burnside, On groups of orderpαqβ,Proc

W. Burnside, On groups of orderpαqβ,Proc. London Math. Soc.2(1904), 388–392

1904

[8] [7]

N. P. Byott, Solubility criteria for Hopf–Galois structures,New York J. Math. 21(2015), 883–903

2015