The projective-index classification conjecture for finite linear group actions on C2\mathbb{C}^2

About 3 years old · traced to

Let GG be a finite group with a linear action on C2\mathbb{C}^2. Its projective indices τPG\tau_P^G and associated canonical group are among the following possibilities: {(0,0)}\{(0,0)\} for a cyclic group; {(0,0),(1,1),(3,3),…,(m∗,m∗)}\{(0,0),(1,1),(3,3),\ldots,(m^*,m^*)\} for a binary dihedral group of order 4m4m; {(0,0),(1,1),(2,2),(5,5)}\{(0,0),(1,1),(2,2),(5,5)\} for a binary tetrahedral group; {(0,0),(1,1),(2,2),(3,3),(5,5),(7,7),(11,11)}\{(0,0),(1,1),(2,2),(3,3),(5,5),(7,7),(11,11)\} for a binary octahedral group; or {(p,p):p=0,1,2,3,4,5,7,8,9,11,13,14,17,19,23,29}\{(p,p):p=0,1,2,3,4,5,7,8,9,11,13,14,17,19,23,29\} for a binary icosahedral group.

Projective-index classification conjecture. Every finite group with a linear action on C2\mathbb{C}^2 has one of these five projective-index sets and associated canonical groups.

The paper explains that the list of canonical groups is known, and that the remaining issue is excluding further projective indices (p,p)(p,p) with p>100p>100, beyond the range computed. Thus the classification is supported by computation but is not established in full.

References

Primary source

Mozhgan Mohammadpour and Shayne Waldron, “Complex spherical designs from group orbits”, arXiv:2308.02499 (2024).

Progress summary

Never refreshed

Nothing recorded yet. Refresh searches the literature and the public web for attempts on this problem, and writes the first summary here.

Solutions 0

No solutions have been posted yet.