Pith. sign in

REVIEW 7 minor 57 references

Associated groups of symmetric quandles

T0 review · 0 major / 7 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 that for a symmetric quandle, the associated group of the underlying quandle is a central extension of the associated group of the symmetric quandle, with kernel free abelian on the products $e_x e_{\rho(x)}$.

desk verdict A sound and useful structure theory for associated groups of symmetric quandles; the central extension, pullback, abelianization, and embeddability theorems hold up under scrutiny. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.23507 v4 pith:HUPKT6VS submitted 2025-05-29 math.GT math.GR

Toshiyuki Akita , Kakeru Shikata This is my paper
classification math.GTmath.GR MSC 20F0520N0208A0519C0957K12
keywords symmetricquandleassociatedgroupcentralextensiontwistedWirtingerpresentationabelianizationhomologyembeddabilitygoodinvolution
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 studies the associated group $\mathrm{As}(Q,\rho)$ of a symmetric quandle — a quandle equipped with an involution compatible with the quandle structure — and shows that this group controls the associated group $\mathrm{As}(Q)$ of the underlying quandle. The main structural result is that $\mathrm{As}(Q)$ is a central extension of $\mathrm{As}(Q,\rho)$ whose kernel is a free abelian group spanned by the elements $e_x e_{\rho(x)}$, one for each class of a natural equivalence relation on $Q$. From this the authors derive three characterizations of $\mathrm{As}(Q)$ in terms of $\mathrm{As}(Q,\rho)$, including a pullback diagram involving the two abelianizations, and they compute the abelianization of $\mathrm{As}(Q,\rho)$ as a direct sum of copies of $\mathbb{Z}$ and $\mathbb{Z}/2\mathbb{Z}$. They also prove that a group is $\mathrm{As}(Q,\rho)$ for some symmetric quandle exactly when it admits a twisted Wirtinger presentation, and that a symmetric quandle embeds into its associated group if and only if its underlying quandle does.

What carries the argument

The central object is the associated group of a symmetric quandle, presented by generators $s_x$ and relations $s_y^{-1}s_xs_y=s_{x*y}$ and $s_{\rho(x)}=s_x^{-1}$. The argument is carried by the kernel elements $e_x e_{\rho(x)}$ inside $\mathrm{As}(Q)$: Lemma 3.3 shows they are central, Lemma 3.4 shows they generate the kernel of $\pi_Q$, and Lemma 3.7 uses the classical description of $\mathrm{As}(Q)^{\mathrm{ab}}$ to prove they are linearly independent. A secondary device is the equivalence relation on $Q$ generated by $x\sim x*y$ and $x\sim \rho(x)$; its classes index the free abelian basis, and the same partition governs the $\mathbb{Z}/2\mathbb{Z}$ versus $\mathbb{Z}$ summands in the abelianization of $\mathrm{As}(Q,\rho)$. The group-theoretic characterization is carried by twisted Wirtinger presentations, meaning presentations whose relations all have the form $w^{-1}xw=y^{\varepsilon}$ with $\varepsilon=\pm1$.

What would settle it

For a small finite symmetric quandle, compute the kernel of $\pi_Q\colon \mathrm{As}(Q)\to \mathrm{As}(Q,\rho)$ and check whether the displayed elements $e_x e_{\rho(x)}$ with $x\in C$ form a $\mathbb{Z}$-basis: a nontrivial integer relation among them, or any torsion in the kernel, would disprove Theorem 3.1; equivalently, a nonzero element killed by the map $\mathrm{As}(Q)\to \mathrm{As}(Q,\rho)\times \mathrm{As}(Q)^{\mathrm{ab}}$ would disprove the pullback theorem.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that for every symmetric quandle $(Q,\rho)$ the canonical surjection $\pi_Q\colon \mathrm{As}(Q)\to \mathrm{As}(Q,\rho)$ sending $e_x$ to $s_x$ is a central extension: its kernel $Z(Q,\rho)$ lies in the center of $\mathrm{As}(Q)$ and is freely generated by the products $e_x e_{\rho(x)}$ as $x$ ranges over representatives of the equivalence classes generated by the $\mathrm{As}(Q)$-action on $Q$ together with $\rho$. Because this kernel meets the commutator subgroup trivially, $\pi_Q$ induces an isomorphism of commutator subgroups, and the square formed by the two abelianization maps is a pullback diagram. From this the paper obtains three distinct descriptions of $\mathrm{As}(Q)$ in terms of $\mathrm{As}(Q,\rho)$, a computation of $\mathrm{As}(Q,\rho)^{\mathrm{ab}}$ as a sum of $\mathbb{Z}/2\mathbb{Z}$ and $\mathbb{Z}$ factors, a twisted-Wirtinger-presentation characterization of groups arising as $\mathrm{As}(Q,\rho)$, and a proof that symmetric embeddability is equivalent to ordinary embeddability.

Load-bearing premise

The linear-independence arguments rely on the stated classical fact that $\mathrm{As}(Q)^{\mathrm{ab}}$ is freely generated by one generator per orbit of the $\mathrm{As}(Q)$-action on $Q$; this fact is used without proof, and if it failed, the central-extension basis, the pullback theorem, and the embeddability theorem would not follow.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For every symmetric quandle, $\mathrm{As}(Q)$ sits in a central extension $0\to \mathbb{Z}^{\oplus C}\to \mathrm{As}(Q)\to \mathrm{As}(Q,\rho)\to 1$, so $\mathrm{As}(Q,\rho)$ together with one 2-cocycle determines $\mathrm{As}(Q)$.
  • The commutator subgroups are isomorphic, $[\mathrm{As}(Q),\mathrm{As}(Q)]\cong [\mathrm{As}(Q,\rho),\mathrm{As}(Q,\rho)]$; in particular, when $\mathrm{As}(Q)^{\mathrm{ab}}\cong \mathbb{Z}$ there is a splitting $\mathrm{As}(Q)\cong [\mathrm{As}(Q,\rho),\mathrm{As}(Q,\rho)]\rtimes \mathbb{Z}$.
  • The abelianization of $\mathrm{As}(Q,\rho)$ is $(\mathbb{Z}/2\mathbb{Z})^{\oplus \Lambda_1}\oplus \mathbb{Z}^{\oplus \Lambda_2}$, and it is isomorphic to the first symmetric quandle homology $H_1(Q,\rho)$.
  • For a connected quandle, the second quandle homology is expressible on the symmetric side: $H_2(Q)\cong (\mathrm{Stab}_{\mathrm{As}(Q,\rho)}(x_0)\cap [\mathrm{As}(Q,\rho),\mathrm{As}(Q,\rho)])_{\mathrm{ab}}$.
  • A symmetric quandle embeds into $\mathrm{As}(Q,\rho)$ exactly when its underlying quandle embeds into $\mathrm{As}(Q)$.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The twisted-Wirtinger characterization suggests that computational tools developed for Coxeter, Artin, and braid groups could be applied to $\mathrm{As}(Q,\rho)$ for the corresponding quandles; the paper opens this direction but does not develop it.
  • The embeddability criterion could serve as a quick obstruction in the study of set-theoretic Yang–Baxter solutions: for a symmetric quandle it suffices to test the underlying quandle's embeddability, since failure of either embeddability implies failure of the other.
  • By analogy with the quandle case, one might seek a Hopf-type formula for the second symmetric quandle homology $H_2(Q,\rho)$ in terms of a presentation of $\mathrm{As}(Q,\rho)$; the paper computes only $H_1(Q,\rho)$ this way.
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

0 major / 7 minor

Summary. The paper investigates the associated group As(Q,ρ) of a symmetric quandle (Q,ρ) and its relation to the associated group As(Q) of the underlying quandle. Its main results are: (1) Theorem 3.1, which identifies the kernel Z(Q,ρ) of the canonical surjection π_Q: As(Q) → As(Q,ρ) as a central, free abelian subgroup with explicit basis {e_x e_{ρ(x)} | x ∈ C}, and shows Z(Q,ρ) ∩ [As(Q),As(Q)] = 1; (2) Theorem 4.2, which exhibits As(Q) as the pullback of As(Q,ρ) and As(Q)_Ab over As(Q,ρ)_Ab; (3) Corollary 5.3, a group-theoretic characterization of groups As(Q,ρ) as those admitting a twisted Wirtinger presentation; (4) Theorem 6.1, computing As(Q,ρ)_Ab ≅ (Z/2)^{⊕Λ1} ⊕ Z^{⊕Λ2} and identifying this with the first symmetric quandle homology; (5) Proposition 7.2, a left adjointness statement; (6) Corollary 8.2, expressing H_2(Q) for connected Q via stabilizers in As(Q,ρ); and (7) Theorem 10.2, showing that (Q,ρ) embeds in As(Q,ρ) iff Q embeds in As(Q). The paper is clearly structured and the arguments are mostly direct manipulations of the defining presentations.

Significance. If correct, this is a substantial structural contribution to the theory of symmetric quandles and their associated groups. The explicit central extension and pullback descriptions, the twisted Wirtinger characterization, and the abelianization computation are likely to be of use in computing quandle homology and in low-dimensional topological applications. The embeddability criterion is clean and answers a natural question. The paper also generalizes earlier results of Hasegawa for involutive quandles and connects to work of Majid–Rietsch on covering groups. The proofs are standard but careful, with explicit bases and verifiable statements; the main weakness is a number of small omitted justifications and typos that are local and easily repaired.

minor comments (7)
  1. [§2, Proposition 2.1] Proposition 2.1 is stated without proof or reference, although it is used in a load-bearing way in Lemma 3.7 and Theorem 10.2. Please add a citation or a short proof: abelianizing the defining presentation of As(Q) yields the free abelian group on the orbits of the right As(Q)-action.
  2. [§5, proof of Theorem 5.2] The proof asserts that the constructed symmetric quandle Q satisfies condition (1), Q ⊂ G \ {1}, but does not justify it. This can be shown by the homomorphism F(X) → Z/2 sending each generator to 1, which factors through G because every twisted Wirtinger relator w^{-1}xw = y^ε is satisfied modulo 2; it follows that no generator maps to the identity in G.
  3. [§6, proof of Theorem 6.1] The derivation of the presentation of As(Q,ρ)_Ab is compressed, and it relies on Proposition 10.1 before that proposition is proved. Please spell out the elimination of the generators [s_{ρ(xλ)}] for λ ∈ Λ2 via [s_{ρ(xλ)}] = [s_{xλ}]^{-1} and note explicitly that Proposition 10.1 is independent and proved later.
  4. [§7, proof of Proposition 7.2] When defining η(g)(q) = g(s_q), the paper does not explicitly verify that η(g) is a morphism of symmetric quandles. This follows immediately from the defining relations s_{q*r} = s_r^{-1} s_q s_r and s_{ρ(q)} = s_q^{-1}, but the verification should be included.
  5. [§10, proof of Theorem 10.2] The sentence 'Suppose that [ex], [ey]' appears to be missing the inequality; it should read 'Suppose that [ex] ≠ [ey]'.
  6. [§3, Lemma 3.7] In the first sentence of the proof, 'O(ρ(xλ)), O(ρ(xμ)) whenever λ , μ' should be 'O(ρ(xλ)) ≠ O(ρ(xμ)) for λ ≠ μ'.
  7. [§7, Proposition 7.1] In the statement of Proposition 7.1, the target should be (Conj(As(Q,ρ)), Inv(As(Q,ρ))) rather than (Conj(As(Q), ρ), Inv(As(Q,ρ))).

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity found: the main results are derived directly from the defining presentations via standard group-theoretic arguments.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. As(Q,rho) and As(Q) are defined by explicit presentations, and every theorem is proved directly from these presentations. Theorem 3.1's only external input, Proposition 2.1, is the standard fact that As(Q)Ab is the free abelian group on the orbits of the right As(Q)-action; it is stated without proof but is immediate from abelianizing the defining presentation, so it is not a fitted or self-referential input. The linear independence argument in Lemma 3.7 and the basis argument in Theorem 3.1 use exactly that fact. The pullback theorem 4.2 invokes Kishimoto's criterion, an external group-theoretic lemma, and Corollary 3.2, which is proved in the paper. The twisted-Wirtinger characterization (Theorem 5.2) is a direct verification using the defining relations of As(Q,rho); the converse (Corollary 5.3) is a rewriting of the defining relations, but the claim being characterized is defined by those relations, so no result is imported from itself. The abelianization theorem 6.1 follows from the presentation, and Proposition 6.2 is literally the same presentation, which is a stated isomorphism rather than a disguised prediction. The embeddability theorem 10.2 compares the unique basis expansion (10.4) with the abelianization expansion (10.5); the coefficient comparison is valid because As(Q)Ab is free abelian on the orbit representatives provided by Proposition 10.1. Citations to the authors' earlier work ([1], [3], [17]) are background or proof-style references and are not load-bearing; the novel claims do not reduce to any cited result. Accordingly, no circular step is exhibited.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no free parameters and no invented entities; all arguments are group-theoretic derivations from the defining presentations. The background theorems listed are standard results in quandle theory and group theory, properly cited.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The abelianization of the associated group As(Q) of a quandle is freely generated by orbit representatives of the right As(Q)-action on Q (Proposition 2.1).
    Used in the proof of Theorem 3.1 (linear independence of the kernel basis) and Theorem 10.2 (embeddability). Stated as well-known in Section 2.
  • domain assumption Eisermann's formula: for a connected quandle Q, H2(Q) is isomorphic to (Stab_{As(Q)}(x0) ∩ [As(Q),As(Q)])_{Ab}.
    Invoked in Section 8 to express H2(Q) via the stabilizer of the associated group; cited from [14].
  • domain assumption Kishimoto's pullback criterion for squares of groups with a surjective map (Proposition 4.1).
    Used in Theorem 4.2 to prove the pullback and homotopy pullback square; cited from [32].
  • domain assumption Lebed-Vendramin's theorem that As(Q, id_Q) is finite for any finite involutive quandle Q.
    Used in Section 9 (Theorem 9.2) to identify the associated group of an involutive quandle; cited from [39].

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Associated groups of symmetric quandles." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/HUPKT6VS

@misc{pith2026250523507,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Associated groups of symmetric quandles},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/HUPKT6VS}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.23507}
}
read the original abstract

In this paper, we investigate the structure of associated groups of symmetric quandles. Among other results, we explore the relationship between the associated group of a symmetric quandle and that of its underlying quandle. We provide a group-theoretic characterization of associated groups of symmetric quandles. Furthermore, we show that a symmetric quandle is embeddable if and only if its underlying quandle is embeddable, and we determine the abelianization of these associated groups.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

57 extracted references · 43 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Toshiyuki Akita, The adjoint group of a Coxeter quandle , Kyoto J. Math. 60 (2020), no. 4, 1245–1260, DOI 10.1215/21562261-2019-0061. MR4175808 ↑18

    work page doi:10.1215/21562261-2019-0061 2020

  2. [2]

    Knot Theory Ramifications 32 (2023), no

    , Embedding Alexander quandles into groups, J. Knot Theory Ramifications 32 (2023), no. 2, Paper No. 2350011, 4, DOI 10.1142/S0218216523500116. MR4564617 ↑18

    work page doi:10.1142/s0218216523500116 2023

  3. [3]

    Toshiyuki Akita, Aoi Hasegawa, and Masayoshi Tanno, Structure of the associated groups of quandles, Kodai Math. J. 45 (2022), no. 2, 270–281, DOI 10.2996/kmj45205. MR4447657 ↑2, 10, 16

    work page doi:10.2996/kmj45205 2022

  4. [4]

    Toshiyuki Akita and Sota Takase, Groups having Wirtinger presentations and the second group homology, Kobe J. Math. 41 (2024), 33–39. MR4849109 ↑13

    work page 2024

  5. [5]

    Nicol ´as Andruskiewitsch and Mat´ıas Gra˜na, From racks to pointed Hopf algebras, Adv. Math. 178 (2003), no. 2, 177–243, DOI 10.1016/S0001-8708(02)00071-3. MR1994219 ↑1

    doi:10.1016/s0001-8708(02)00071-3 2003

  6. [6]

    ↑1, 18 ASSOCIATED GROUPS OF SYMMETRIC QUANDLES 21

    Valeriy Bardakov, Mohamed Elhamdadi, and Mahender Singh, Yang–Baxter Equation and Re- lated Algebraic Structures (2025), available at https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.23175. ↑1, 18 ASSOCIATED GROUPS OF SYMMETRIC QUANDLES 21

    arXiv 2025

  7. [7]

    Beggs and Shahn Majid, Quantum Riemannian geometry, Grundlehren der mathema- tischen Wissenschaften [Fundamental Principles of Mathematical Sciences], vol

    Edwin J. Beggs and Shahn Majid, Quantum Riemannian geometry, Grundlehren der mathema- tischen Wissenschaften [Fundamental Principles of Mathematical Sciences], vol. 355, Springer, Cham, 2020. MR4292536 ↑11, 12

    work page 2020

  8. [8]

    Scott Carter, Daniel Jelsovsky, Seiichi Kamada, Laurel Langford, and Masahico Saito,Quan- dle cohomology and state-sum invariants of knotted curves and surfaces , Trans

    J. Scott Carter, Daniel Jelsovsky, Seiichi Kamada, Laurel Langford, and Masahico Saito,Quan- dle cohomology and state-sum invariants of knotted curves and surfaces , Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 355 (2003), no. 10, 3947–3989, DOI 10.1090/S0002-9947-03-03046-0. MR1990571 ↑1, 2

    doi:10.1090/s0002-9947-03-03046-0 2003

Show all 57 references
  1. [9]

    Scott Carter, Kanako Oshiro, and Masahico Saito, Symmetric extensions of dihedral quandles and triple points of non-orientable surfaces, Topology Appl

    J. Scott Carter, Kanako Oshiro, and Masahico Saito, Symmetric extensions of dihedral quandles and triple points of non-orientable surfaces, Topology Appl. 157 (2010), no. 5, 857–869, DOI 10.1016/j.topol.2009.12.002. MR2593699 ↑2

    2010 doi

  2. [10]

    Algebra Appl

    Nicholas Cazet, Quandles with one nontrivial column, J. Algebra Appl. 24 (2025), no. 8, Paper No. 2550201, 17, DOI 10.1142/S0219498825502019. MR4899477 ↑3

    2025 doi

  3. [11]

    K- Theory 6 (2010), no

    Maura Clancy and Graham Ellis, Homology of some Artin and twisted Artin groups , J. K- Theory 6 (2010), no. 1, 171–196, DOI 10.1017/is008008012jkt090. MR2672155 ↑4

    2010 doi

  4. [12]

    Edwin Clark, Mohamed Elhamdadi, Xiang-dong Hou, Masahico Saito, and Timothy Yeat- man, Connected quandles associated with pointed abelian groups, Pacific J

    W. Edwin Clark, Mohamed Elhamdadi, Xiang-dong Hou, Masahico Saito, and Timothy Yeat- man, Connected quandles associated with pointed abelian groups, Pacific J. Math. 264 (2013), no. 1, 31–60, DOI 10.2140/pjm.2013.264.31. MR3079760 ↑3

    2013 doi

  5. [13]

    Dhanwani, Hitesh R

    Neeraj K. Dhanwani, Hitesh R. Raundal, and Mahender Singh, Dehn quandles of groups and orientable surfaces , Fund. Math. 263 (2023), no. 2, 167–201, DOI 10.4064/fm271-6-2023. MR4669143 ↑2, 18

    2023 doi

  6. [14]

    Michael Eisermann, Quandle coverings and their Galois correspondence , Fund. Math. 225 (2014), no. 1, 103–168, DOI 10.4064/fm225-1-7. MR3205568 ↑2, 16

    2014 doi

  7. [15]

    Agust ´ın Garc´ıa Iglesias and Leandro Vendramin, An explicit description of the second coho- mology group of a quandle , Math. Z. 286 (2017), no. 3-4, 1041–1063, DOI 10.1007/s00209- 016-1794-7. MR3671570 ↑2

    2017 doi

  8. [16]

    Gra ˜na, I

    M. Gra ˜na, I. Heckenberger, and L. Vendramin, Nichols algebras of group type with many qua- dratic relations, Adv. Math. 227 (2011), no. 5, 1956–1989, DOI 10.1016/j.aim.2011.04.006. MR2803792 ↑2

    2011 doi

  9. [17]

    ↑2, 10, 18

    Aoi Hasegawa, Associated groups of involutive quandles and their second quandle homology , Thesis (Ph.D)–Hokkaido University, 2024. ↑2, 10, 18

    2024

  10. [18]

    Eri Hatakenaka and Takefumi Nosaka, Some topological aspects of 4-fold symmetric quan- dle invariants of 3-manifolds , Internat. J. Math. 23 (2012), no. 7, 1250064, 31, DOI 10.1142/S0129167X12500644. MR2945646 ↑2

    2012 doi

  11. [19]

    Group Theory 17 (2014), no

    Istv ´an Heckenberger and Leandro Vendramin, Nichols algebras over groups with finite root system of rank two II, J. Group Theory 17 (2014), no. 6, 1009–1034, DOI 10.1515/jgth-2014-

    2014 doi

  12. [20]

    James Howie, On the asphericity of ribbon disc complements , Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 289 (1985), no. 1, 281–302, DOI 10.2307/1999700. MR0779064 ↑13

    1985 doi

  13. [21]

    Humphreys, Reflection groups and Coxeter groups , Cambridge Studies in Ad- vanced Mathematics, vol

    James E. Humphreys, Reflection groups and Coxeter groups , Cambridge Studies in Ad- vanced Mathematics, vol. 29, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1990. MR1066460 (92h:20002) ↑18

    1990

  14. [22]

    Knot Theory Ramifications 21 (2012), no

    Yeonhee Jang and Kanako Oshiro, Symmetric quandle colorings for spatial graphs and handlebody-links, J. Knot Theory Ramifications 21 (2012), no. 4, 1250050, 16, DOI 10.1142/S0218216511010024. MR2890467 ↑2

    2012 doi

  15. [23]

    Pure Appl

    David Joyce, A classifying invariant of knots, the knot quandle, J. Pure Appl. Algebra23 (1982), no. 1, 37–65, DOI 10.1016/0022-4049(82)90077-9. MR0638121 ↑1

    1982 doi

  16. [24]

    Knots Everything, vol

    Seiichi Kamada, Quandles with good involutions, their homologies and knot invariants , Intel- ligence of low dimensional topology 2006, Ser. Knots Everything, vol. 40, World Sci. Publ., Hackensack, NJ, 2007, pp. 101–108, DOI 10.1142/9789812770967 0013. MR2371714 ↑2, 6, 7, 14, 16

    2006 doi

  17. [25]

    Part III, Banach Center Publ., vol

    , Quandles and symmetric quandles for higher dimensional knots, Knots in Poland III. Part III, Banach Center Publ., vol. 103, Polish Acad. Sci. Inst. Math., Warsaw, 2014, pp. 145– 158, DOI 10.4064/bc103-0-6. MR3363811 ↑2, 4, 6 22 TOSHIYUKI AKITA AND KAKERU SHIKATA

    2014 doi

  18. [26]

    1, 17–39

    , Quandles and knot invariants , Sugaku Expositions 29 (2016), no. 1, 17–39. MR3524589 ↑1

    2016

  19. [27]

    301 (2021), Paper No

    , Tensor products of quandles and 1-handles attached to surface-links, Topology Appl. 301 (2021), Paper No. 107520, 18, DOI 10.1016/j.topol.2020.107520. MR4312970 ↑2

    2021

  20. [28]

    Knot Theory Ramifications24 (2015), no

    Seiichi Kamada, Jieon Kim, and Sang Youl Lee, Computations of quandle cocycle invariants of surface-links using marked graph diagrams, J. Knot Theory Ramifications24 (2015), no. 10, 1540010, 35, DOI 10.1142/S0218216515400106. MR3402903 ↑2

    2015 doi

  21. [29]

    Seiichi Kamada and Kanako Oshiro, Homology groups of symmetric quandles and cocycle invariants of links and surface-links, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 362 (2010), no. 10, 5501–5527, DOI 10.1090/S0002-9947-2010-05131-1. MR2657689 ↑2, 6, 14, 16, 17

    2010 doi

  22. [30]

    Pure Appl

    Biswadeep Karmakar, Deepanshi Saraf, and Mahender Singh, Generalized (co)homology of symmetric quandles over homogeneous Beck modules, J. Pure Appl. Algebra 229 (2025), no. 6, Paper No. 107956, 31, DOI 10.1016/j.jpaa.2025.107956. MR4881590 ↑3

    2025

  23. [31]

    , Automorphisms, cohomology and extensions of symmetric quandles (2024), available at https://arxiv.org/abs/2407.02971. ↑3

    2024

  24. [32]

    Daisuke Kishimoto, Right-angled Coxeter quandles and polyhedral products , Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 147 (2019), no. 9, 3715–3727, DOI 10.1090/proc/14534. MR3993765 ↑10

    2019 doi

  25. [33]

    V . S. Kulikov, Alexander polynomials of plane algebraic curves , Izv. Ross. Akad. Nauk Ser. Mat. 57 (1993), no. 1, 76–101, DOI 10.1070/IM1994v042n01ABEH001534 (Russian, with Russian summary); English transl., Russian Acad. Sci. Izv. Math. 42 (1994), no. 1, 67–89. MR1220582 ↑13

    1993 doi

  26. [34]

    , Geometric realization of C-groups, Izv. Ross. Akad. Nauk Ser. Mat. 58 (1994), no. 4, 194–203, DOI 10.1070/IM1995v045n01ABEH001627 (Russian, with Russian summary); Eng- lish transl., Russian Acad. Sci. Izv. Math. 45 (1995), no. 1, 197–206. MR1307063 ↑13

    1994 doi

  27. [35]

    , Fundamental groups of the complements to submanifolds of a sphere of codimension 2, Tr. Mat. Inst. Steklova231 (2000), 284–293 (Russian, with Russian summary); English transl., Proc. Steklov Inst. Math. 4(231) (2000), 271–280. MR1841759 ↑4

    2000

  28. [36]

    Yu. V . Kuz′min, On a method for constructing C-groups , Izv. Ross. Akad. Nauk Ser. Mat. 59 (1995), no. 4, 105–124, DOI 10.1070/IM1995v059n04ABEH000033 (Russian, with Russian summary); English transl., Izv. Math. 59 (1995), no. 4, 765–783. MR1356352 ↑2

    1995 doi

  29. [37]

    , Groups of knotted compact surfaces, and central extensions , Mat. Sb. 187 (1996), no. 2, 81–102, DOI 10.1070/SM1996v187n02ABEH000110 (Russian, with Russian summary); English transl., Sb. Math. 187 (1996), no. 2, 237–257. MR1392843 ↑13

    1996 doi

  30. [38]

    Victoria Lebed, Conjugation groups and structure groups of quandles (2024), available at https://arxiv.org/abs/2407.02955. ↑2

    2024 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Victoria Lebed and Leandro Vendramin, On structure groups of set-theoretic solutions to the Yang-Baxter equation , Proc. Edinb. Math. Soc. (2) 62 (2019), no. 3, 683–717, DOI 10.1017/s0013091518000548. MR3974961 ↑1, 2, 17, 18

    2019 doi

  32. [40]

    Majid and K

    S. Majid and K. Rietsch, Lie theory and coverings of finite groups , J. Algebra 389 (2013), 137–150, DOI 10.1016/j.jalgebra.2013.02.042. MR3065997 ↑3, 11

    2013 doi

  33. [41]

    S. V . Matveev, Distributive groupoids in knot theory , Mat. Sb. (N.S.) 119(161) (1982), no. 1, 78–88, 160 (Russian). MR0672410 ↑1

    1982

  34. [42]

    Takefumi Nosaka, 4-fold symmetric quandle invariants of 3-manifolds , Algebr. Geom. Topol. 11 (2011), no. 3, 1601–1648, DOI 10.2140/agt.2011.11.1601. MR2821435 ↑2

    2011 doi

  35. [43]

    B66, Res

    , Central extensions of groups and adjoint groups of quandles, Geometry and analysis of discrete groups and hyperbolic spaces, RIMS Kˆokyˆuroku Bessatsu, vol. B66, Res. Inst. Math. Sci. (RIMS), Kyoto, 2017, pp. 167–184. MR3821082 ↑1, 18

    2017

  36. [44]

    MR3729413 ↑16, 18

    , Quandles and topological pairs: Symmetry, knots, and cohomology, SpringerBriefs in Mathematics, Springer, Singapore, 2017. MR3729413 ↑16, 18

    2017

  37. [45]

    Kanako Oshiro, Triple point numbers of surface-links and symmetric quandle cocycle in- variants, Algebr. Geom. Topol. 10 (2010), no. 2, 853–865, DOI 10.2140/agt.2010.10.853. MR2629767 ↑2 ASSOCIATED GROUPS OF SYMMETRIC QUANDLES 23

    2010 doi

  38. [46]

    Knot Theory Ramifications 20 (2011), no

    , Homology groups of trivial quandles with good involutions and triple linking numbers of surface-links , J. Knot Theory Ramifications 20 (2011), no. 4, 595–608, DOI 10.1142/S0218216511009340. MR2796229 ↑2

    2011 doi

  39. [47]

    , Quandles versus symmetric quandles for oriented links (2020), available at https: //arxiv.org/abs/2010.09983. ↑2, 7

    2020 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Hayley Ryder, An algebraic condition to determine whether a knot is prime , Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 120 (1996), no. 3, 385–389, DOI 10.1017/S0305004100074958. MR1388194 ↑18

    1996 doi

  41. [49]

    335 (2023), Paper No

    Masahico Saito and Emanuele Zappala, Extensions of augmented racks and surface ribbon cocycle invariants , Topology Appl. 335 (2023), Paper No. 108555, 19, DOI 10.1016/j.topol.2023.108555. MR4594919 ↑2

    2023

  42. [50]

    org/abs/1506.02389

    David Stanovsk ´y, The origins of involutory quandles (2015), available at https://arxiv. org/abs/1506.02389. ↑6

    2015 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Luc Ta, Equivalences of racks, Legendrian racks, and symmetric racks (2025), available at https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.08090. ↑3

    2025 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Hiroshi Tamaru, Two-point homogeneous quandles with prime cardinality, J. Math. Soc. Japan 65 (2013), no. 4, 1117–1134, DOI 10.2969/jmsj/06541117. MR3127819 ↑1

    2013

  45. [53]

    Pure Appl

    Yuta Taniguchi, A homogeneous presentation of symmetric quandles, J. Pure Appl. Algebra227 (2023), no. 1, Paper No. 107167, 7, DOI 10.1016/j.jpaa.2022.107167. MR4441473 ↑3

    2023

  46. [54]

    Knot Theory Ramifications 32 (2023), no

    , Good involutions of generalized Alexander quandles , J. Knot Theory Ramifications 32 (2023), no. 12, Paper No. 2350081, 7, DOI 10.1142/S0218216523500815. MR4688855 ↑3, 6

    2023 doi

  47. [55]

    Japan Acad

    Takeshi Yajima, Wirtinger presentations of knot groups, Proc. Japan Acad. 46 (1970), no. 10, suppl. to 46 (1970), no. 9, 997–1000. MR0281781 ↑13

    1970

  48. [56]

    Knot Theory Ramifications 33 (2024), no

    Jumpei Yasuda, Computation of the knot symmetric quandle and its application to the plat index of surface-links, J. Knot Theory Ramifications 33 (2024), no. 3, Paper No. 2450005, 25, DOI 10.1142/S0218216524500056. MR4766150 ↑2

    2024 doi

  49. [57]

    , Characterizations of knot groups and knot symmetric quandles of surface-links(2024), available at https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.20081. ↑3 DEPARTMENT OF MATHEMATICS , F ACULTY OF SCIENCE , H OKKAIDO UNIVERSITY , S AP- PORO , 060-0810 J APAN Email address: akita@math.sci.hokudai....

    2024 arXiv

Pith tools

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