Morita equivalence classes of blocks with elementary abelian defect groups of order 32

Cesare Giulio Ardito

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 63 references

Morita equivalence classes of blocks with elementary abelian defect groups of order 32

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · 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 every block with defect group $(C_2)^5$ is Morita equivalent to exactly one of 34 explicit classes, and that the defect group is invariant under such equivalences.

desk verdict A solid, genuinely new classification for (C2)^5 blocks, held back only by unarchived GAP/Magma computations that a referee should demand. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.02652 v4 pith:TVS63BN4 submitted 2019-08-07 math.RT math.GR

Cesare Giulio Ardito This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.RTmath.GR MSC 20C2016D9020C05

keywords Moritaequivalenceblocktheorydefectgroupelementaryabelian2-groupDonovan'sconjectureHarada's(GB)-localsystemsPicardgroups

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

Two blocks of finite group algebras are Morita equivalent when they have equivalent module categories, so a Morita class is a module-theoretic fingerprint. This paper establishes that every block whose defect group is the elementary abelian 2-group $(C_2)^5$ is Morita equivalent to exactly one representative on an explicit list of 34 classes: 31 principal blocks and 3 nonprincipal blocks of explicit finite groups. No such explicit list was previously known for this defect group, and the result implies that the defect group itself is invariant under Morita equivalence in this case. A corollary is that Harada's conjecture holds for every block with this defect group.

What carries the argument

The engine is the theory of $(G,B)$-local systems: a coherent family of perfect isometries $\Delta_Y$ between the local twisted group algebra determined by the inertial quotient and the blocks of centralizers $\mathrm{C}_G(Y)$ for $Y$ in an upwardly closed, $E$-stable set of subgroups of the defect group, each equivariant for the operation $\lambda\ast\chi$. Existence of such a system lets the paper apply a splitting lemma to pass from $k$ to $O$ and to decompose blocks as tensor products with $OQ$. The second mechanism is crossed-product structure: when a block covers a $G$-stable block $b$ of a normal subgroup of odd index, the block is Morita equivalent to a crossed product whose possible actions are controlled by the Picard group of $b$; the relevant Picard groups are computed through exact sequences for trivial-source and endopermutation-source auto-equivalences. A minimal-counterexample reduction shows that a counterexample would have to be quasiprimitive, with no normal subgroup of index 2, and reduces to a short list of quasisimple starting cases.

What would settle it

Run the GAP OrthogonalEmbeddings computation described in Proposition 3.4 for the two inertial quotients $E=C_3\times C_3$ and $E=(C_7\rtimes C_3)_1$; if for any subgroup $Q$ with $\mathrm{C}_E(Q)=E$ the matrix $N^0$ admits more than one extension up to permutation and sign of rows, the proof's claim of a unique $\mathrm{N}_E(Q)$-stable $\Delta_Q$ fails. Alternatively, exhibit any block with defect group $(C_2)^5$ whose Morita class is not on the list.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Let $O$ be a complete discrete valuation ring with algebraically closed residue field of characteristic 2, let $G$ be a finite group, and let $B$ be a block of $OG$ whose defect group $D$ is isomorphic to $(C_2)^5$. The central claim, Theorem 1.1, is that $B$ is Morita equivalent to the principal block of precisely one of 31 listed groups, or to a nonprincipal block of one of three listed groups $(a),(b),(c)$; the list is exhaustive and the classes are pairwise distinct. The representatives range from the abelian group $(C_2)^5$ itself through products and extensions built from $A_4$, $A_5$, $\mathrm{SL}_2(8)$, $\mathrm{SL}_2(16)$, $\mathrm{SL}_2(32)$, the sporadic group $J_1$, and their automorphism groups, with extraspecial $3$-groups appearing for the nonprincipal classes. The theorem also states that the defect group is invariant under Morita equivalence. The classification fixes the numerical invariants $k(B)$ and $l(B)$ for each class, with a small list of explicitly identified ambiguities, and, because the property in Harada's conjecture is Morita invariant, it suffices to check the listed representatives computationally, which the paper does.

Load-bearing premise

The classification rests on computer calculations inside GAP, invoked through the OrthogonalEmbeddings command, that assert uniqueness and stability of certain isometries in Proposition 3.4; those outputs are not supplied as scripts or certificates in the paper, so if any of those computational assertions is wrong, the list of Morita classes could be incomplete or contain duplicates.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

No further Morita equivalence classes of blocks with defect group $(C_2)^5$ exist: the 31 principal and 3 nonprincipal representatives are exhaustive.
Any block Morita equivalent to one of these has an isomorphic defect group, so the defect group's isomorphism class survives Morita equivalence in this case.
Every block with this defect group satisfies Harada's conjecture, because the defining property transfers across Morita equivalence and each listed representative was checked.
The exact invariants $k(B)$ and $l(B)$ distinguish almost all classes; the ambiguous cases are explicitly identified, and any block realizing such an ambiguity would provide a counterexample to Broué's abelian defect group conjecture.

Reading between the lines

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

The same block-chain and crossed-product machinery could plausibly be pushed to larger elementary abelian 2-groups, but the branching over subgroups of $\mathrm{GL}_n(2)$ and the Picard-group computations grow rapidly, so order 64 would require new bounds rather than routine application.
Because the classification is stated over $O$ rather than merely over $k$, the list can serve as a concrete testbed for lifting questions and for comparing $k$-Morita versus $O$-Morita equivalence.
A natural next step the paper leaves open is to decide the derived equivalence and source-algebra equivalence relations among the 34 classes, especially for the nonprincipal blocks (b) and (c), whose derived equivalences are not settled here.

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

Dear colleague,

The short version: this is a real classification result, the first explicit one for elementary abelian defect group (C2)^5, and it verifies Harada's conjecture for those blocks. It deserves a serious referee. The main caveat is not the math but the bookkeeping: several load-bearing steps are handed to GAP and Magma without scripts or certificates, so a referee cannot fully check them from the preprint.

What's new: the list of 31 principal and 3 nonprincipal classes (Theorem 1.1) and the proof that defect groups are invariant under Morita equivalence for this defect group. That is a genuine advance; the literature stops at (C2)^4. The overall strategy is a systematic assembly of known tools—Fong–Reynolds, Fong's second reduction, Puig–Usami local systems, crossed products and Picard groups—rather than a new conceptual framework, but for a classification paper that's normal and the assembly is careful. The verification of Harada's conjecture is a nice bonus, and checking it class-by-class makes sense.

Where it gets soft: Proposition 3.4, which produces (G,B)-local systems for the two non-cyclic inertial quotients, reduces the decisive extension problem to `OrthogonalEmbeddings` in GAP and reports that the solution is unique and NE(Q)-stable. That uniqueness is load-bearing for the Morita equivalences in Proposition 3.5 and for step (III) of the main proof. No scripts, input data, or certificates are in the preprint; the paper points to the PhD thesis for details. Proposition 2.8's enumeration of odd-order subgroups of GL5(2) has the same issue, though that is less worrying because the list of possible inertial quotients matches what one expects and is checked against known classifications. I'm not saying the computations are wrong; I'm saying they are unverifiable from the preprint alone. A referee can handle that by asking for the computational artifacts or an independent run.

The other caveat is explicit in Corollary 5.3: the paper leaves open whether classes (v), (xi), (xii) might contain blocks with different inertial quotients. The author correctly notes that any such example would be a counterexample to Broué's conjecture, which is a strong reason to expect they don't exist. That is a disclosed limitation, not a hidden flaw.

Who this is for: anyone working on Donovan's conjecture or explicit block classification. It moves the boundary one step up and gives a clean target list for (C2)^5. My recommendation is to send it to a good referee, with the clear instruction that the GAP/Magma computations need to be supplied or independently checked before the classification can be signed off. As a desk decision, this is absolutely not a reject; it's a revise-and-resubmit with teeth.

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper develops a general reduction technique for classifying p-blocks with elementary abelian defect groups and applies it to blocks with defect group (C2)^5 over a complete discrete valuation ring with residue field of characteristic two. The main result, Theorem 1.1, asserts that every such block is Morita equivalent to the principal block of one of thirty-one explicitly listed groups or to a nonprincipal block of one of three further groups, and that the elementary abelian defect group is invariant under Morita equivalence. The proof proceeds by a minimal-counterexample argument: it first establishes quasprimitivity and excludes normal subgroups of index 2 using (G,B)-local systems and a result of Watanabe, then analyzes the generalized Fitting subgroup through a chain of normal subgroups, using crossed products and Picard groups for odd index extensions. A corollary verifies Harada's conjecture on the listed representatives. The paper explicitly relies on GAP and Magma computations in several places and openly states two unresolved cases concerning whether inertial quotients are Morita invariants.

Significance. If the classification is correct, it is a substantial contribution: it gives the first explicit Morita equivalence classification for blocks with elementary abelian defect groups of order 32, verifies Harada's conjecture for these blocks, and extends the reach of the (G,B)-local-system method and the crossed-product/Picard-group machinery of Eaton and Livesey. The paper is genuinely theorem-driven, with no fitted parameters and no circular dependence on its own conclusion; its main structural proof is a carefully organized minimal-counterexample reduction. The explicit list of thirty-four classes and the detailed block-chain analysis provide a useful reference. The honesty of the author in flagging the computational dependencies and the two unresolved inertial-quotient cases is commendable, though those same points are the main obstacles to accepting the completeness claims as they stand.

major comments (4)

[§3, Proposition 3.4] The existence of (G,B)-local systems for inertial quotients E = C3×C3 and E = (C7⋊C3)_1 is the load-bearing step needed for Proposition 3.5 and hence for excluding normal subgroups of index 2 in step (III) of the proof of Theorem 1.1. The proof of Proposition 3.4, however, delegates the decisive verification to the GAP command OrthogonalEmbeddings, stating only that there is a unique solution in each required case and that uniqueness implies NE(Q)-stability. No GAP code, input matrices N^0, output logs, or certificates are provided, and the detailed computations are referred to the author's PhD thesis. A reader cannot independently verify this crucial step from the preprint alone. Please provide the computational data, scripts, and certificates, or replace the computational assertion by a complete proof.
[§2, Proposition 2.8] Proposition 2.8 determines the complete list of possible inertial quotients by asserting that 'an explicit computation (using Magma)' yields the displayed diagram of subgroups of GL5(2) of odd order. This enumeration is the starting point for all subsequent case distinctions, including the subsection analysis in the same proposition. The evidence offered is only a diagram with no code or machine-readable output. This is a second load-bearing computational dependence that cannot be checked from the manuscript. Please include the Magma code or an independent derivation of the subgroup classification and the actions on D.
[§5, Corollary 5.3] Corollary 5.3 explicitly leaves open the possibility that a block with inertial quotient (C7⋊C3)_2 is Morita equivalent to the class labeled (v), and that a block with inertial quotient (C7⋊C3)×C3 and 15 simple modules is Morita equivalent to (xi) or (xii). This means that the labels 'i.q. C5', 'i.q. C15', and 'i.q. (C7⋊C3)×C3' in Theorem 1.1 are properties of the chosen representatives, not established invariants of the Morita equivalence classes. Since the theorem presents these labels parenthetically in the list, the current wording could mislead a reader into thinking that the inertial quotient is part of the Morita invariant. Please reformulate the statement so that the labels are explicitly representative-dependent, and discuss the consequences for the completeness claim, including why the two unresolved possibilities do not affect Theorem 1.1 as stated.
[§6, Harada's conjecture] The verification of Harada's conjecture is described as a Magma computation checking, for each of the listed classes, that no proper subset J with fewer than k(B)/2 elements satisfies equation (†). No code, input data, or output is supplied, and the decomposition matrices and character tables used are not listed. Since the claimed verification is a finite but nontrivial computational check across all subsets for several groups, please provide the scripts or a detailed table of the data and verification results.

minor comments (6)

[§1, Introduction] The abbreviation 'i.q.' is used throughout the theorem and later sections but is not defined in the introduction; it would help to define it explicitly as 'inertial quotient' at first use.
[§2, Proposition 2.8] The diagram of subgroups of GL5(2) is difficult to read as typeset, with arrows appearing broken or overlapping; please redraw it with a clearer layout or replace it with a table of inclusions and actions.
[§3, Proposition 3.4] The notation O∗L̂ and LK(ĈL(Y)) is used without a full definition of the twisted group algebra and its character group; a brief explanation or references to [48, §5.12] and [58, §1.2] would improve readability.
[§5, Corollary 5.3] The two paragraphs discussing the pairs (16,5) and (32,15) are dense and would benefit from being split into clearly separated cases or a table summarizing which classes can have which inertial quotients.
[References] Reference [2] is cited as an arXiv preprint from 2019; if it has appeared in a journal, the published version should be cited.
[Throughout] There are several typographical issues such as 'abeli an' in the abstract and 'isometrics' for 'isometries'; a careful proofread is recommended.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the classification is proved from external block-theoretic classifications and computations, with no fitted parameter or self-referential reduction.

full rationale

This is a classification theorem proved by a minimal-counterexample induction over normal subgroup chains. The derivation is self-contained in the sense required by the circularity check: the input is a block with defect group (C2)^5, and the output is a finite list of Morita equivalence classes; no quantity in the output is used to define the input, and no parameter is fitted to a subset of the target data and then relabeled as a prediction. The proof uses prior classifications as external theorems: the quasisimple case is imported from [15], the (C2)^4 case from [17], perfect-isometry extension theorems from [49], [50], [62], and Picard-group computations from [5], [18], [42]. These are normal mathematical dependencies, not circularity. The only citation involving the present author is [2], used for a GAP method to search for extensions of isometries in Proposition 3.4; the proposition's decisive claims, such as 'GAP shows that in each case there is a unique solution', are asserted computational outputs rather than conclusions imported from [2]. Although those computations are not independently reproducible from the preprint and constitute a correctness and completeness risk, they do not make the argument circular. The final verification of Harada's conjecture is an explicit check of each listed class, not a prediction forced by construction. No step in the proof reduces an equation to itself, and no Morita equivalence class is defined in terms of the conclusion. Score 0.

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

The paper rests on standard block-theoretic machinery and several heavy external classifications. No free parameters or invented entities are introduced. The most fragile item is the set of computational assertions that are not reproducible from the preprint alone.

assumptions (4)

standard math Classification of finite simple groups, including Schreier's conjecture, is assumed in the reduction argument in the proof of Theorem 1.1.
Used implicitly when proving that G/F*(G) is solvable for t <= 2 and when citing the Atlas of finite groups for outer automorphism groups.
domain assumption Eaton, Kessar, Külshammer, and Sambale's classification of quasisimple 2-blocks with abelian defect groups is taken as input (Proposition 2.9).
This classification is the starting point for the block chains in Section 5; the main theorem would need modification if this classification were incomplete.
domain assumption Eaton's classification of Morita equivalence classes for defect group (C2)^4 (main theorem of [17]) is used as an external input.
Used repeatedly in Section 3 and Section 5 when reducing blocks of normal subgroups with defect group (C2)^4; the result is independent of this paper.
ad hoc to paper The GAP and Magma computational outputs reported in Proposition 3.4, Corollary 5.3, and Section 6 are correct.
The uniqueness claims for isometry extensions, the Loewy length computations, and the verification of Harada's conjecture all depend on these computations, which are not accompanied by machine-readable scripts or certificates.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Morita equivalence classes of blocks with elementary abelian defect groups of order 32." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/TVS63BN4

@misc{pith2026190802652,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Morita equivalence classes of blocks with elementary abelian defect groups of order 32},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/TVS63BN4}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.02652}
}

read the original abstract

We describe a general technique to classify blocks of finite groups, and we apply it to determine Morita equivalence classes of blocks with elementary abelian defect groups of order 32 with respect to a complete discrete valuation ring with an algebraically closed residue field of characteristic two. As a consequence we verify that a conjecture of Harada holds on these blocks.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

63 extracted references · 63 canonical work pages

[1]

Alperin, Local Representation Theory, Cambridge Studies in Advanced mathematics 11, Cambridge University Press (1986)

J.L. Alperin, Local Representation Theory, Cambridge Studies in Advanced mathematics 11, Cambridge University Press (1986)

work page 1986
[2]

Cartan matrices and Brauer's k(B)-Conjecture V

C.G. Ardito, B. Sambale, Cartan matrices and Brauer’s k(B)-conjecture V , available arXiv:1911.10710v1 (2019)

work page Pith review arXiv 2019
[3]

Aschbacher, Finite Group Theory , Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics 10, Cambridge University Press (2000)

M. Aschbacher, Finite Group Theory , Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics 10, Cambridge University Press (2000)

work page 2000
[4]

Bidwell, Automorphisms of direct products of ﬁnite groups II , Archiv der Mathematik 91 (2008)

J. Bidwell, Automorphisms of direct products of ﬁnite groups II , Archiv der Mathematik 91 (2008)

work page 2008
[5]

Boltje, R

R. Boltje, R. Kessar, M. Linckelmann, On Picard groups of blocks of ﬁnite groups , Journal of Algebra 558 (2020), 70-101

work page 2020
[6]

Bosma, J

W. Bosma, J. J. Cannon, C. Fieker, A. Steel, Handbook of Magma functions, Edition 2.16 (2010)

work page 2010
[7]

Brou´ e and L

M. Brou´ e and L. Puig, Characters and local structure in G-algebras, Journal of Algebra 63-2 (1980), 306-317

work page 1980
[8]

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 group s, Oxford niversity Press, Eyn- sham (1985)

work page 1985

Show all 63 references

[9]

Craven, C

D. Craven, C. W. Eaton, R. Kessar, M. Linckelmann, The structure of blocks with a Klein four defect group , Mathematische Zeitschrift 268 (2011), 441-476

2011
[10]

Craven, R

D. Craven, R. Rouquier, Perverse equivalences and Brou´ e’s conjecture, Advances in Math- ematics 248 (2013), 1-58. 29

2013
[11]

Curtis, I

C.W. Curtis, I. Reiner Methods of representation theory, with applications to ﬁni te groups and orders Vol. I and II , Wiley-Interscience (1981)

1981
[12]

Dade, Deux groupes ﬁnis distincts ayant la mˆ eme alg` ebre de group e sur tout corps , Mathematische Zeitschrift 119 (1971), 345-348

E.C. Dade, Deux groupes ﬁnis distincts ayant la mˆ eme alg` ebre de group e sur tout corps , Mathematische Zeitschrift 119 (1971), 345-348

1971
[13]

Dade, Endo-permutation modules over p-groups, I, II , Annals of Mathematics 107 (1978), 459-494, 108 (1978), 317-346

E.C. Dade, Endo-permutation modules over p-groups, I, II , Annals of Mathematics 107 (1978), 459-494, 108 (1978), 317-346

1978
[14]

D¨ uvel,On Donovan ’s conjecture, Journal of Algebra 272-1 (2004), 1-26

O. D¨ uvel,On Donovan ’s conjecture, Journal of Algebra 272-1 (2004), 1-26

2004
[15]

Eaton, R

C.W. Eaton, R. Kessar, B.K¨ ulshammer, B. Sambale, 2 -blocks with abelian defect groups , Advances in Mathematics 254 (2014), 706-735

2014
[16]

Eaton, Morita equivalence classes of 2-blocks of defect three , Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society 144-5 (2016), 1961-1970

C.W. Eaton, Morita equivalence classes of 2-blocks of defect three , Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society 144-5 (2016), 1961-1970

2016
[17]

Eaton, Morita equivalence classes of blocks with elementary abeli an defect groups of order 16, available arXiv:1612.03485v4 (2017)

C.W. Eaton, Morita equivalence classes of blocks with elementary abeli an defect groups of order 16, available arXiv:1612.03485v4 (2017)

2017 arXiv
[18]

Eaton, M

C.W. Eaton, M. Livesey, Some examples of Picard groups of blocks , Journal of Algebra 558 (2020), 350-370

2020
[19]

Eaton, M

C.W. Eaton, M. Livesey, Donovan ’s conjecture and blocks with abelian defect groups , Pro- ceedings of the American Mathematical Society 147 (2019)

2019
[20]

Eaton, F

C.W. Eaton, F. Eisele and M. Livesey, Donovan ’s conjecture, blocks with abelian defect groups and discrete valuation rings , Mathematische Zeitschrift 295 (2020), 249-264

2020
[21]

Eaton et al., Block library, https://wiki.manchester.ac.uk/blocks/ (2019)

C.W. Eaton et al., Block library, https://wiki.manchester.ac.uk/blocks/ (2019)

2019
[22]

Eisele, On the geometry of lattices and ﬁniteness of Picard groups , available arXiv:1908.00129 (2019)

F. Eisele, On the geometry of lattices and ﬁniteness of Picard groups , available arXiv:1908.00129 (2019)

2019 arXiv
[23]

Eisele, The Picard group of an order and K¨ ulshammer reduction , Algebras and Repre- sentation Theory (2020)

F. Eisele, The Picard group of an order and K¨ ulshammer reduction , Algebras and Repre- sentation Theory (2020)

2020
[24]

Erdmann, Blocks whose defect groups are Klein four groups: a correcti on, Journal of Algebra 76 (1982), 505-518

K. Erdmann, Blocks whose defect groups are Klein four groups: a correcti on, Journal of Algebra 76 (1982), 505-518

1982
[25]

Feit, The Representation Theory of Finite Groups , Elsevier (1982)

W. Feit, The Representation Theory of Finite Groups , Elsevier (1982)

1982
[26]

The GAP Group, GAP - Groups, Algorithms, and Programming, Version 4.11.0 , https://www.gap-system.org (2020)

2020
[27]

M. Geck, D. Testerman, J. Thevenaz, Group Representation Theory, Fundamental sciences, EPFL Press (2007)

2007
[28]

Gorenstein, Finite Groups , AMS Chelsea Publishing Series, American Mathematical Society (2007)

D. Gorenstein, Finite Groups , AMS Chelsea Publishing Series, American Mathematical Society (2007)

2007
[29]

Isaacs, Character Theory of Finite Groups , Dover Books on Mathematics

I.M. Isaacs, Character Theory of Finite Groups , Dover Books on Mathematics. Dover Pub- lications (2013)

2013
[30]

Karpilovsky, Group Representations Vol.2, §1: Second cohomology groups , North- Holland Mathematics Studies 177 (1993), 3-64

G. Karpilovsky, Group Representations Vol.2, §1: Second cohomology groups , North- Holland Mathematics Studies 177 (1993), 3-64. 30

1993
[31]

Kessar, S

R. Kessar, S. Koshitani and M. Linckelmann, Conjectures of Alperin and Brou´ e for 2-blocks with elementary abelian defect groups of order 8 , Journal f¨ ur die reine und angewandte Mathematik 671 (2012), 85-130

2012
[32]

Kessar and G

R. Kessar and G. Malle, Quasi-isolated blocks and Brauer’s height zero conjecture , Annals of Mathematics 178 (2013), 321–384

2013
[33]

Koshitani and B

S. Koshitani and B. K¨ ulshammer, A splitting theorem for blocks , Osaka Journal of Mathe- matics 33 (1996), 343-346

1996
[34]

Koshitani, J

S. Koshitani, J. M¨ uller and F. Noeske, Brou´ e’s abelian defect group conjecture holds for the sporadic simple Conway group Co3, Journal of Algebra 358 (2011), 354-380

2011
[35]

K¨ ulshammer, Crossed products and blocks with normal defect groups , Communications in Algebra 13 (1985), 147-168

B. K¨ ulshammer, Crossed products and blocks with normal defect groups , Communications in Algebra 13 (1985), 147-168

1985
[36]

K¨ ulshammer,Donovan ’s conjecture, crossed products and algebraic group actions , Israel Journal of Mathematics, 92-1 (1995), 295-306

B. K¨ ulshammer,Donovan ’s conjecture, crossed products and algebraic group actions , Israel Journal of Mathematics, 92-1 (1995), 295-306

1995
[37]

K¨ ulshammer and L

B. K¨ ulshammer and L. Puig, Extensions of nilpotent blocks , Inventiones Mathematicae 102 (1990), 17-71

1990
[38]

K¨ ulshammer and B

B. K¨ ulshammer and B. Sambale,The 2-blocks of defect 4 , Representation Theory (electronic only) 17 (2013)

2013
[39]

Linckelmann, The source algebras of blocks with a Klein four defect group , Journal of Algebra 167 (1994), 821-854

M. Linckelmann, The source algebras of blocks with a Klein four defect group , Journal of Algebra 167 (1994), 821-854

1994
[40]

Linckelmann, The block theory of ﬁnite group algebras, Volume 1 and 2 , London Math- ematical Society Student Texts 91-92, Cambridge University Press (2018)

M. Linckelmann, The block theory of ﬁnite group algebras, Volume 1 and 2 , London Math- ematical Society Student Texts 91-92, Cambridge University Press (2018)

2018
[41]

Linckelmann, On automorphisms and focal subgroups of blocks , PIMS Summer School and Workshop, Springer, Cham (2016)

M. Linckelmann, On automorphisms and focal subgroups of blocks , PIMS Summer School and Workshop, Springer, Cham (2016)

2016
[42]

Livesey, On Picard groups of blocks with normal defect groups , available arXiv:1907.12167v3 (2019)

M. Livesey, On Picard groups of blocks with normal defect groups , available arXiv:1907.12167v3 (2019)

2019 arXiv
[43]

McKernon, 2-Blocks whose defect group is homocyclic and whose inertia l quotient con- tains a Singer cycle , Journal of Algebra 563 (2020), 30-48

E. McKernon, 2-Blocks whose defect group is homocyclic and whose inertia l quotient con- tains a Singer cycle , Journal of Algebra 563 (2020), 30-48

2020
[44]

Murai, On blocks of normal subgroups of ﬁnite groups , Osaka Journal of Mathematics 50 (2013), 1007-1020

M. Murai, On blocks of normal subgroups of ﬁnite groups , Osaka Journal of Mathematics 50 (2013), 1007-1020

2013
[45]

Navarro, Characters and blocks of ﬁnite groups , London Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series 250, Cambridge University Press (1998)

G. Navarro, Characters and blocks of ﬁnite groups , London Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series 250, Cambridge University Press (1998)

1998
[46]

Okuyama, Some examples of derived equivalent blocks of ﬁnite groups , preprint (1997)

T. Okuyama, Some examples of derived equivalent blocks of ﬁnite groups , preprint (1997)

1997
[47]

Puig, Nilpotent blocks and their source algebras , Inventiones Mathematicae 93 (1988), 77-116

L. Puig, Nilpotent blocks and their source algebras , Inventiones Mathematicae 93 (1988), 77-116

1988
[48]

Puig, Pointed groups and construction of modules , Journal of Algebra 116 (1988), 7-129

L. Puig, Pointed groups and construction of modules , Journal of Algebra 116 (1988), 7-129

1988
[49]

Puig and Y

L. Puig and Y. Usami, Perfect isometries for blocks with abelian defect groups an d Klein four inertial quotients , Journal of Algebra 160 (1993), 192-225

1993
[50]

Puig, Source Algebras of p-Central Group Extensions , Journal of Algebra 235 (2001), 359-398

L. Puig, Source Algebras of p-Central Group Extensions , Journal of Algebra 235 (2001), 359-398. 31

2001
[51]

Puig, Nilpotent extensions of blocks , Mathematische Zeitschrift 269 (2011), 115-136

L. Puig, Nilpotent extensions of blocks , Mathematische Zeitschrift 269 (2011), 115-136

2011
[52]

Rickard, Splendid equivalences: derived categories and permutatio n modules, Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society 72 (1996), 331-358

J. Rickard, Splendid equivalences: derived categories and permutatio n modules, Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society 72 (1996), 331-358

1996
[53]

Robinson, On Brauer’s k(B) problem , Journal of Algebra 147-2 (1992), 450-455

G. Robinson, On Brauer’s k(B) problem , Journal of Algebra 147-2 (1992), 450-455

1992
[54]

Sambale, Blocks of Finite Groups and Their Invariants , Vol

B. Sambale, Blocks of Finite Groups and Their Invariants , Vol. 2127. Berlin: Springer (2014)

2014
[55]

Sambale, Cartan matrices and Brauer’s k(B)-conjecture IV, Journal of the Mathemat- ical Society of Japan, 69-2 (2017), 735-754

B. Sambale, Cartan matrices and Brauer’s k(B)-conjecture IV, Journal of the Mathemat- ical Society of Japan, 69-2 (2017), 735-754

2017
[56]

Sambale, Remarks on Harada’s conjecture, Israel Journal of Mathematics, 228-2 (2018), 513-526

B. Sambale, Remarks on Harada’s conjecture, Israel Journal of Mathematics, 228-2 (2018), 513-526

2018
[57]

Th´ evenaz, G-algebras and modular representation theory , Oxford University Press (1995)

J. Th´ evenaz, G-algebras and modular representation theory , Oxford University Press (1995)

1995
[58]

Usami, Perfect isometrics and isotypies for blocks with abelian de fect groups and inertial quotients isomorphic to Z3 × Z3, Journal of Algebra 182 (1996), 140-164

Y. Usami, Perfect isometrics and isotypies for blocks with abelian de fect groups and inertial quotients isomorphic to Z3 × Z3, Journal of Algebra 182 (1996), 140-164

1996
[59]

Ward, On Ree’s series of simple groups , Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 121-1 (1966), 62-89

H.N. Ward, On Ree’s series of simple groups , Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 121-1 (1966), 62-89

1966
[60]

Watanabe, Notes on p-blocks of characters of ﬁnite groups , Journal of Algebra 136 (1991), 109-116

A. Watanabe, Notes on p-blocks of characters of ﬁnite groups , Journal of Algebra 136 (1991), 109-116

1991
[61]

A. Watanabe, A remark on a splitting theorem for blocks with abelian defec t groups , RIMS Kokyuroku Vol.1140, Research Institute for Mathemati cal Sciences, Kyoto Univer- sity (2000) 76-79

2000
[62]

Watanabe, On perfect isometries for blocks with abelian defect groups and cyclic hyper- focal subgroups, Kumamoto Journal of Mathematics 18 (2005), 85-92

A. Watanabe, On perfect isometries for blocks with abelian defect groups and cyclic hyper- focal subgroups, Kumamoto Journal of Mathematics 18 (2005), 85-92

2005
[63]

Zhou, On the p′–extensions of inertial blocks , Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society 144 (2016), 41-54

Y. Zhou, On the p′–extensions of inertial blocks , Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society 144 (2016), 41-54. 32

2016

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Alperin, Local Representation Theory, Cambridge Studies in Advanced mathematics 11, Cambridge University Press (1986)

J.L. Alperin, Local Representation Theory, Cambridge Studies in Advanced mathematics 11, Cambridge University Press (1986)

work page 1986

[2] [2]

Cartan matrices and Brauer's k(B)-Conjecture V

C.G. Ardito, B. Sambale, Cartan matrices and Brauer’s k(B)-conjecture V , available arXiv:1911.10710v1 (2019)

work page Pith review arXiv 2019

[3] [3]

Aschbacher, Finite Group Theory , Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics 10, Cambridge University Press (2000)

M. Aschbacher, Finite Group Theory , Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics 10, Cambridge University Press (2000)

work page 2000

[4] [4]

Bidwell, Automorphisms of direct products of ﬁnite groups II , Archiv der Mathematik 91 (2008)

J. Bidwell, Automorphisms of direct products of ﬁnite groups II , Archiv der Mathematik 91 (2008)

work page 2008

[5] [5]

Boltje, R

R. Boltje, R. Kessar, M. Linckelmann, On Picard groups of blocks of ﬁnite groups , Journal of Algebra 558 (2020), 70-101

work page 2020

[6] [6]

Bosma, J

W. Bosma, J. J. Cannon, C. Fieker, A. Steel, Handbook of Magma functions, Edition 2.16 (2010)

work page 2010

[7] [7]

Brou´ e and L

M. Brou´ e and L. Puig, Characters and local structure in G-algebras, Journal of Algebra 63-2 (1980), 306-317

work page 1980

[8] [8]

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 group s, Oxford niversity Press, Eyn- sham (1985)

work page 1985