Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 47 references

Uniform expansion in finite groups of Lie type

T0 review · 3 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · 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, for finite simple groups of Lie type of bounded rank, all but a zero-dimensional set of generating pairs produce expander Cayley graphs with a uniform expansion constant, and for prime fields all except a density-zero

desk verdict Proves the expected uniform expansion theorem for bounded-rank groups of Lie type outside a density-zero prime set, plus a dimension-zero exception count; the catch is that the main load-bearing estimate is delegated to an unpublished companion. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.00755 v1 pith:SQWUXUDX submitted 2026-08-01 math.GR

Oren Becker , Emmanuel Breuillard This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.GR MSC 20G4005C4820F6511B30
keywords uniformexpansionCayleygraphsfinitesimplegroupsofLietypeexpandersBourgain-Gamburdmethodanti-concentrationcharactervarietiesdimensionzero
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 takes up the question, posed by Lubotzky and Weiss, whether the full family of Cayley graphs of finite simple groups of Lie type of bounded rank forms a family of expanders with a uniform spectral gap. It answers this up to a negligible set of exceptions: for every fixed rank r and every δ>0, all but O(q^δ) conjugacy classes of generating pairs of any such group G(q) yield ε-expander Cayley graphs, with ε depending only on r and δ; and when q=p is prime, expansion holds for every prime outside a set of density zero. This reduces the uniform expansion conjecture to ruling out a 'zero-dimensional scar' set. The proof extends the Bourgain–Gamburd method to all characteristics and all Lie-type groups by combining new uniform anti-concentration estimates for random walks on algebraic subvarieties with effective arithmetic-nullstellensatz control of reduction modulo primes, plus a counting argument showing that only exponentially many algebraic 'types' can obstruct expansion. If correct, the result makes expansion the generic phenomenon for these groups and opens the door to positive-characteristic super-strong approximation.

What carries the argument

The engine is the Bourgain–Gamburd method, which proves a spectral gap from three inputs: quasi-randomness, a product theorem, and exponential non-concentration of the random walk on proper subgroups. The first two are already known for these groups; the missing piece is uniform non-concentration. The paper obtains it by (i) importing uniform anti-concentration bounds for random walks on algebraic subvarieties over arbitrary algebraically closed fields, which give exponential decay of the probability that a word of length ℓ lands in a proper algebraic subgroup with constants independent of the characteristic; and (ii) a counting lemma (Lemma 2.3) showing that the family of 'types' — the geom

What would settle it

Take SL_2(p) (or any fixed-rank family) and, for a sequence of primes p, enumerate all conjugacy classes of generating pairs (a,b) and compute the non-concentration probability µ^ℓ_S(H) for the largest proper subgroup H at ℓ = floor(C log p) for some fixed C. If for some C and infinitely many p there are more than p^δ conjugacy classes with µ^ℓ_S(H) > e^{-cℓ} for every fixed c>0, then the key estimate (4.2) fails and the dimension-zero theorem collapses. A direct check of the characteristic-uniformity assumption would be to compute, for the subvariety x^p-x=0 inside SL_2 over F_p, whether the

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is Theorem 1.2 (the dimension zero theorem): for every rank bound r and every δ>0, there is ε=ε(r,δ)>0 such that for every prime power q and every finite simple group G(q) of Lie type of rank at most r, all but O_{δ,r}(q^δ) conjugacy classes of generating pairs a,b∈G(q) give Cayley graphs satisfying the ε-expansion inequality |AB| ≥ (1+ε)|B| for all A,B with |B|≤|G|/2 and A generating and containing the identity. A companion result, Theorem 1.1, says that for fixed r and m the family of groups G(p^k) with k≤m is uniformly ε-expanding for all primes p outside a set of density zero, i.e., a set with at most X^δ primes below X for any δ>0. The paper also extends both statement

Load-bearing premise

The argument assumes that the uniform anti-concentration theorem for random walks on algebraic subvarieties (stated as Theorem 1.3 of the companion paper [5]) holds with constants independent of the characteristic of the field, including in positive characteristic; if that uniformity fails, the non-concentration-on-subgroups step feeding the Bourgain–Gamburd machine collapses, and with it both main theorems.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If Theorem 1.2 holds, the uniform expansion conjecture for finite simple groups of Lie type reduces to excluding at most O(q^δ) conjugacy classes per group, so any failure would have to be an extremely sparse 'scar' phenomenon.
  • For prime fields, the density-zero exceptional set means that for each fixed rank and exponent bound m, the family G(p^k) with k≤m is a family of expanders on all but a density-zero set of primes.
  • The dimension-zero statement upgrades the earlier power-saving result of [16] from random pairs to all pairs except O(q^δ) conjugacy classes.
  • The method yields super-strong approximation in positive characteristic modulo prime ideals of prime degree or modulo 'most prime ideals', as the paper explicitly notes.
  • The proof applies uniformly to all Lie-type groups, including twisted and Suzuki–Ree groups, without requiring the special subcases that previous work needed.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A natural testable extension is to identify the exceptional 'scar' pairs explicitly: they should be exactly the conjugacy classes whose representative pair is fixed by a Frobenius-type automorphism, and the paper's explicit bounds on degrees and Bezout constants could in principle be used to enumerate them for small rank.
  • The exponential bound on types suggests that the number of exceptions may in fact be much smaller than q^δ; a plausible strengthening would be a fixed polynomial bound O(q^c) for some c<1, or even polylogarithmic in q for fixed rank, though the paper's method only gives O(q^δ) for arbitrary δ.
  • Because the only obstacle to removing the density-zero exceptional primes is the super-exponential bad-reduction bound inherited from general effective nullstellensatz estimates, one might hope that the special structure of word maps (e.g., their ideals having small Groebner bases) could push the bound down to exponential in ℓ, eliminating the exceptions entirely.
  • The dimension-zero approach via character varieties G^m//G may generalize to other families of finite groups where a similar counting of 'types' applies, such as other algebraic-group-valued word maps in positive characteristic.
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

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper addresses the Lubotzky–Weiss uniform expansion conjecture for finite simple groups of Lie type. Theorem 1.1 proves uniform expansion for all finite simple groups G(p^k) of bounded rank with k bounded, after excluding a density-zero (indeed X^δ-sized) set of primes p. Theorem 1.2 proves a “dimension zero” refinement: for every prime power q, all but O_{r,δ}(q^δ) conjugacy classes of generating pairs of G(q) are ε-expanding. The proof combines the Bourgain–Gamburd method with quasirandomness, product theorems, Larsen–Pink/Nori subgroup structure, and a new counting of “types” of subvarieties cut out by word-map equations. The two principal new inputs are a bad-reduction control theorem (Section 2, relying on the companion paper [4]) and a characteristic-uniform anti-concentration bound for random walks on algebraic subvarieties (Sections 3.4 and 4, relying on the companion preprint [5]).

Significance. If the result is valid, it constitutes major progress on a long-standing conjecture: it reduces the uniform expansion conjecture to at most O(q^δ) exceptional conjugacy classes, and proves uniform expansion outside a density-zero set of primes for all bounded-rank groups, extending the earlier SL_2 results. The paper is carefully structured and explicit about parameter dependencies, and it honestly flags the two companion dependencies. Strengths include the type-counting lemma (Lemma 2.3), the clean reduction to structural and subfield subgroups, and the explicit use of characteristic-uniform anti-concentration. The main caveat is that the two external dependencies are load-bearing and one is labelled “in preparation”; as it stands, the theorems are conditional on unverified companion results.

major comments (3)
  1. [§3.4 and §4 Step 2, Eq. (4.1)] The non-concentration estimate (4.1) is quoted from the companion preprint [5, Theorem 1.3] and is used to prove Lemmas 4.5–4.8 and hence the O(q^δ) exception count in Step 5. The constant c_G is asserted to be independent of the characteristic, and this uniformity is exactly what the proof requires. If c_G depended on p, say c_G ~ 1/log p, then the choice ℓ ≍ 4κ c^{-1} log q in Step 5 would only control fat ℓ-types up to q^{O(δ c/c_p)}, which can exceed q^δ; Lemma 4.5 would no longer give the required dichotomy, and the Bourgain–Gamburd non-concentration step would collapse. The same theorem is used in §3.4 to obtain the non-concentration estimate (3.2) for Theorem 1.1. The paper’s Remark (d) acknowledges this is a necessary step, but the main theorems are not self-contained. Please either include a proof of [5, Theorem 1.3] or restate the main theorems as conditional on it.
  2. [§2, Theorem 2.1 and Proposition 2.2] Proposition 2.4, the bad-reduction control that defines the exceptional set B_δ in Theorem 3.1, is proved using Theorem 2.1 and Proposition 2.2, both quoted from the companion paper [4], labelled “in preparation”. The bounds on log Δ and the resulting count of bad primes are the numerical engine behind the density-zero statement (3.1). Without the proof of [4], the argument for Theorem 1.1 is incomplete. The dependency is admitted, but a referee cannot verify the central claim from the text. The authors should either include the needed results from [4] in this paper or clearly state that the theorems are conditional on [4].
  3. [§4 Step 4, “Further note” after Lemma 4.8] To rule out fat diagonal ℓ-types lying in W_M, the text asserts that if ((a,a^{F0}),(b,b^{F0})) ∈ W_M while ⟨a,b⟩ = G, then G ≤ {g : g^{F0} = α(g)} for some α ∈ Aut G, and that “this is easily seen to be impossible” because F is a proper power of F0. This is load-bearing for the subfield-subgroup exception count, but the impossibility is not demonstrated. A proof can likely be supplied (for example, using Zariski density of G(F_q) and the fact that a nontrivial Frobenius is not an inner automorphism of the algebraic group), but as written the reader is asked to accept a nontrivial assertion. Please expand this argument.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Lemma 2.3 proof] There is a typo: “bytheabove” should be “by the above”. Also the notation d_0^{1+2+···+s} is hard to parse; please clarify the exponent.
  2. [Introduction, Remark (a)] The phrase “super-exponential bound exp(ℓ^{O_r(1)})” appears to understate the double-exponential bound on bad primes that follows from Prop. 2.4 (log Δ ≪ |E|^{r+1} d_0^{O_r(1)} h_0 with |E| exponentially large in ℓ). Since only the number of prime divisors of Δ matters for the density-zero count, this is cosmetic, but the statements should be aligned.
  3. [Theorem 3.11 / Remark 3.12] The reduction to [23, Corollary F] is used without stating the corollary. Please include its precise hypotheses, since the reader otherwise has to consult another paper to verify the conditions on the unipotent radical and the semisimple quotient.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular derivation: the main theorems derive expansion from independent anti-concentration, type-counting, and product-theorem inputs; cited companion results are parameter-free and not defined in terms of the target.

full rationale

The derivation of Theorems 1.1 and 1.2 is not circular. The paper reduces the expansion problem, via the Bourgain–Gamburd criterion, to verifying a non-concentration estimate (3.2)/(4.2). That estimate is obtained from genuinely external inputs: (i) the uniform anti-concentration theorem of the companion paper [5, Thm 1.3], quoted in §3.4 and as (4.1) in §4 Step 2; (ii) Larsen–Pink/Nori structure theory of finite subgroups; and (iii) the combinatorial 'types' bound of Lemma 2.3/4.3, proved in the text. The anti-concentration bound is parameter-free (constants independent of characteristic) and its assumptions (Zariski-dense tuple, proper closed subvariety) do not assume expansion. The paper explicitly notes in Remark (d) that the anti-concentration estimate is a necessary input, and even observes a converse implication, but the quoted proof of [5] is based on the Height gap theorem, not on the present theorem. The type-counting argument and the exceptional-prime/exceptional-class counting (Proposition 2.4, Step 5) are derived, not fitted: the constants ℓ and κ are chosen so that the upper bound 2^{10drℓ} log(q)/log(p) is ≤ q^δ by construction, and no parameter is fitted to the claimed exception count. The citations to [4] and [5] are to separate works with stated independent content; their possible failure would make the theorems false for lack of an input, not because the theorems reduce to their own definitions. Hence no circular step is exhibited, and the score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new physical or mathematical entities. The 'ℓ-types' and 'diagonal ℓ-types' in Section 4 are proof artifacts (geometrically irreducible components of subschemes of character varieties), not postulates requiring independent evidence. The free parameter ledger is empty: all constants are existence claims from the proof, not fitted to data.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Theorem 1.3 of [5]: uniform exponential non-concentration of random walks on algebraic subvarieties, uniform over fields of all characteristics.
    Invoked in §3.4 ('By Theorem 1.3 in [5]') to establish non-concentration on subgroups, and again in §4 Step 2 to bound the probability of hitting V_M^(2). The characteristic-uniformity is essential for Theorem 1.2.
  • domain assumption Effective bounds on irreducible components of Z-schemes and their mod p reduction, Theorem 2.1 and Proposition 2.2 of [4].
    These results from the companion paper [4] are used to prove Proposition 2.4 (bad reduction control) and to reduce the characteristic-zero non-concentration statement to almost all primes in §3.4.
  • standard math Larsen-Pink classification of finite subgroups of algebraic groups [34] and Nori's theorem [40]: every sufficiently M-dense finite subgroup of a simple algebraic group is a subfield subgroup.
    Used in Lemma 3.7 to reduce to G+ = Gtilde(Fp)+ and in §4 to describe proper subgroups as structural or subfield subgroups.
  • standard math Product theorem and quasirandomness for finite simple groups of Lie type ([17], [43], [16], [33], [26], [46]).
    Two of the three ingredients of the Bourgain-Gamburd method, cited in §3.3 and assumed available for the groups treated in Theorems 1.1 and 1.2.
  • domain assumption Golsefidy-Srinivas [23, Corollary F]: expansion for perfect algebraic groups reduces to the semisimple case.
    Quoted in Theorem 3.11 to extend uniform expansion to perfect groups G = H ⋉ U with H semisimple.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Uniform expansion in finite groups of Lie type." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/SQWUXUDX

@misc{pith2026260800755,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Uniform expansion in finite groups of Lie type},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/SQWUXUDX}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.00755}
}
abstract

We prove that finite simple groups $G(p)$ of bounded rank and with $p$ prime have uniform expansion, that is, the family of all the Cayley graphs forms a family of (two-sided) expanders, except perhaps when $p$ belongs to a small family of exceptional primes. Furthermore, for all prime powers $q$, the set of possible exceptions to uniform expansion of $G(q)$ is shown to have ``dimension zero''. We also extend these results to semisimple and perfect algebraic groups.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

47 extracted references · 45 canonical work pages

  1. [14]

    Emmanuel Breuillard and Alex Gamburd,Strong uniform expansion inSL(2,p ), Geom. Funct. Anal.20(2010), no. 5, 1201–1209. MR2746951↑1, 2, 3

    work page 2010

  2. [16]

    ,Expansion in finite simple groups of Lie type, J. Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS)17 (2015), no. 6, 1367–1434.↑2, 3, 9, 10, 12, 13, 15, 18, 19

    work page 2015

  3. [5]

    ,Uniform spectral gaps, non-abelian Littlewood-Offord and anti-concentration for random walks, preprint arXiv:2512.15364.↑3, 10, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19

    arXiv

  4. [4]

    Oren Becker and Emmanuel Breuillard,Effective bounds for algebraic varieties: height, discriminant, mod p reduction, in preparation.↑2, 3, 4, 5, 6

    work page

  5. [1]

    Norbert A’Campo and Marc Burger,Réseaux arithmétiques et commensurateur d’après G. A. Margulis, Invent. Math.116(1994), no. 1-3, 1–25. MR1253187↑10

    work page 1994

  6. [2]

    Nir Avni and Tsachik Gelander,Mixed identities in linear groups – effective version, preprint arXiv:2510.03492.↑4

    arXiv

  7. [3]

    Jitendra Bajpai and Daniele Dona,A CFSG-free explicit Jordan’s theorem over arbitrary fields, preprint arXiv:2411.11632.↑16

    work page arXiv

  8. [6]

    Oren Becker, Emmanuel Breuillard, and Péter Varjú,Random character varieties, in preparation (2025).↑2, 10

    work page 2025

Show all 47 references
  1. [7]

    Combin.81(2019), 298–308.↑3

    Arindam Biswas,On a Cheeger type inequality in Cayley graphs of finite groups, European J. Combin.81(2019), 298–308.↑3

    2019

  2. [8]

    4, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2006.↑4

    Enrico Bombieri and Walter Gubler,Heights in Diophantine geometry, New Mathematical Monographs, vol. 4, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2006.↑4

    2006

  3. [9]

    Jean Bourgain and Alex Gamburd,Uniform expansion bounds for Cayley graphs of SL2(Fp), Ann. of Math. (2)167(2008), no. 2, 625–642. MR2415383↑1, 2, 13

    2008

  4. [10]

    Math.179(2010), no

    Jean Bourgain, Alex Gamburd, and Peter Sarnak,Affine linear sieve, expanders, and sum-product, Invent. Math.179(2010), no. 3, 559–644. MR2587341↑4

    2010

  5. [11]

    Emmanuel Breuillard,A height gap theorem for finite subsets ofGLd(Q)and nonamenable subgroups, Ann. of Math. (2)174(2011), no. 2, 1057–1110.↑3

    2011

  6. [12]

    ,Diophantine geometry and uniform growth of finite and infinite groups, Pro- ceedings of the International Congress of Mathematicians—Seoul 2014. Vol. III, 2014, pp. 27–50. MR3729017↑1

    2014

  7. [13]

    1–50.↑3, 4, 9, 11, 13, 18 UNIFORM EXPANSION IN FINITE GROUPS OF LIE TYPE 21

    ,Approximate subgroups and super-strong approximation, Groups St Andrews 2013, 2015, pp. 1–50.↑3, 4, 9, 11, 13, 18 UNIFORM EXPANSION IN FINITE GROUPS OF LIE TYPE 21

    2013

  8. [15]

    Math.192(2012), no

    Emmanuel Breuillard, Ben Green, Robert Guralnick, and Terence Tao,Strongly dense free subgroups of semisimple algebraic groups, Israel J. Math.192(2012), no. 1, 347–379. MR3004087↑16, 17

    2012

  9. [17]

    Emmanuel Breuillard, Ben Green, and Terence Tao,Approximate subgroups of linear groups, Geom. Funct. Anal.21(2011), no. 4, 774–819.↑3, 9, 13

    2011

  10. [18]

    Dyn.5(2011), no

    ,Suzuki groups as expanders, Groups Geom. Dyn.5(2011), no. 2, 281–299. MR2782174↑3

    2011

  11. [19]

    Emmanuel Breuillard and Alexander Lubotzky,Expansion in simple groups, Dynamics, geometry, number theory—the impact of Margulis on modern mathematics, [2022]©2022, pp. 246–275. MR4422056↑1

    2022

  12. [20]

    Sean Eberhard, Brendan Murphy, Laszlo Pyber, and Endre Szabo,Growth in linear groups, Duke Math Journal (to appear), arXiv:2107.06674.↑13

    arXiv

  13. [21]

    Alireza Golsefidy Salehi and Peter Sarnak,The affine sieve, J. Amer. Math. Soc.26 (2013), no. 4, 1085–1105. MR3073885↑4

    2013

  14. [22]

    Alireza Golsefidy Salehi and Srivatsa Srinivas,Random walks on direct products of groups, J. Eur. Math. Soc. (2024).↑2

    2024

  15. [23]

    ,Random walk on group extensions, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. (2025).↑3, 15

    2025

  16. [24]

    Varjú,Expansion in perfect groups, Geom

    Alireza Golsefidy Salehi and Péter P. Varjú,Expansion in perfect groups, Geom. Funct. Anal.22(2012), no. 6, 1832–1891. MR3000503↑4

    2012

  17. [25]

    Number 3

    Daniel Gorenstein, Richard Lyons, and Ronald Solomon,The classification of the finite simple groups. Number 3. Part I. Chapter A, Mathematical Surveys and Monographs, vol. 40, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1998. Almost simpleK-groups. MR1490581↑9

    1998

  18. [26]

    Timothy Gowers,Quasirandom groups, Combin

    W. Timothy Gowers,Quasirandom groups, Combin. Probab. Comput.17(2008), no. 3, 363–387. MR2410393↑3

    2008

  19. [27]

    Grove,Classical groups and geometric algebra, Graduate Studies in Mathematics, vol

    Larry C. Grove,Classical groups and geometric algebra, Graduate Studies in Mathematics, vol. 39, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2002. MR1859189↑13

    2002

  20. [28]

    Guralnick,Some applications of subgroup structure to probabilistic generation and covers of curves, Algebraic groups and their representations (Cambridge, 1997), 1998, pp

    Robert M. Guralnick,Some applications of subgroup structure to probabilistic generation and covers of curves, Algebraic groups and their representations (Cambridge, 1997), 1998, pp. 301–320.↑10

    1997

  21. [29]

    Guralnick and Pham Huu Tiep,Decompositions of small tensor powers and Larsen’s conjecture, Represent

    Robert M. Guralnick and Pham Huu Tiep,Decompositions of small tensor powers and Larsen’s conjecture, Represent. Theory9(2005), 138–208. MR2123127↑16

    2005

  22. [30]

    Harald. A. Helfgott,Growth and generation inSL2(Z/pZ), Ann. of Math. (2)167(2008), no. 2, 601–623. MR2415382↑3

    2008

  23. [31]

    David Hertzig,Forms of algebraic groups, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc.12(1961), 657–660. MR125181↑10

    1961

  24. [32]

    Shlomo Hoory, Nathan Linial, and Avi Wigderson,Expander graphs and their applications, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. (N.S.)43(2006), no. 4, 439–561. MR2247919↑1

    2006

  25. [33]

    Seitz,On the minimal degrees of projective representations of the finite Chevalley groups, J

    Vicente Landazuri and Gary M. Seitz,On the minimal degrees of projective representations of the finite Chevalley groups, J. Algebra32(1974), 418–443. MR360852↑3, 13, 18 UNIFORM EXPANSION IN FINITE GROUPS OF LIE TYPE 22

    1974

  26. [34]

    Larsen and Richard Pink,Finite subgroups of algebraic groups, J

    Michael J. Larsen and Richard Pink,Finite subgroups of algebraic groups, J. Amer. Math. Soc.24(2011), no. 4, 1105–1158. MR2813339↑9, 15, 18

    2011

  27. [35]

    125, Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel, 1994

    Alexander Lubotzky,Discrete groups, expanding graphs and invariant measures, Progress in Mathematics, vol. 125, Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel, 1994. With an appendix by Jonathan D. Rogawski. MR1308046↑1

    1994

  28. [36]

    ,private communication(2020).↑3

    2020

  29. [37]

    212, Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel, 2003.↑4

    Alexander Lubotzky and Dan Segal,Subgroup growth, Progress in Mathematics, vol. 212, Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel, 2003.↑4

    2003

  30. [38]

    Alexander Lubotzky and Benjamin Weiss,Groups and expanders, Expanding graphs (Princeton, NJ, 1992), 1993, pp. 95–109. MR1235570↑1, 2

    1992

  31. [39]

    133, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2011

    Gunter Malle and Donna Testerman,Linear algebraic groups and finite groups of Lie type, Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics, vol. 133, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2011. MR2850737↑13

    2011

  32. [40]

    Nori,On subgroups of GLn(Fp), Invent

    Madhav V. Nori,On subgroups of GLn(Fp), Invent. Math.88(1987), no. 2, 257–275. MR880952↑9, 11, 12

    1987

  33. [41]

    Richard Pink,Strong approximation for Zariski dense subgroups over arbitrary global fields, Comment. Math. Helv.75(2000), no. 4, 608–643. MR1789179↑4

    2000

  34. [42]

    139, Academic Press, Inc., Boston, MA, 1994

    Vladimir Platonov and Andrei Rapinchuk,Algebraic groups and number theory, Pure and Applied Mathematics, vol. 139, Academic Press, Inc., Boston, MA, 1994. Translated from the 1991 Russian original by Rachel Rowen.↑10

    1994

  35. [43]

    László Pyber and Endre Szabó,Growth in finite simple groups of Lie type, J. Amer. Math. Soc.29(2016), no. 1, 95–146.↑3, 13

    2016

  36. [44]

    Rapinchuk,Strong approximation for algebraic groups, Thin groups and super- strong approximation, 2014, pp

    Andrei S. Rapinchuk,Strong approximation for algebraic groups, Thin groups and super- strong approximation, 2014, pp. 269–298. MR3220894↑4

    2014

  37. [45]

    Ribet,On l-adic representations attached to modular forms, Invent

    Kenneth A. Ribet,On l-adic representations attached to modular forms, Invent. Math. 28(1975), 245–275. MR419358↑12

    1975

  38. [46]

    J.64(1991), no

    Peter Sarnak and Xiao Xi Xue,Bounds for multiplicities of automorphic representations, Duke Math. J.64(1991), no. 1, 207–227. MR1131400↑3

    1991

  39. [47]

    164, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2015

    Terence Tao,Expansion in finite simple groups of Lie type, Graduate Studies in Mathe- matics, vol. 164, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2015. MR3309986↑3, 13 Oren Becker Department of Pure Mathematics and Mathematical Statistics Centre for Mathematical Sciences ...

    2015

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.