Weak generalized topological Hedetniemi conjecture

For a finite group GG and finite free GG-spaces (or finite free GG-simplicial complexes) XX and YY, the generalized topological Hedetniemi conjecture asserts that ind⁡G(X×Y)=min⁡{ind⁡G(X),ind⁡G(Y)}\operatorname{ind}_G(X\times Y)=\min\{\operatorname{ind}_G(X),\operatorname{ind}_G(Y)\}. In particular, its weak index-nn form asks whether ind⁡G(X)=ind⁡G(Y)=n\operatorname{ind}_G(X)=\operatorname{ind}_G(Y)=n implies that the product has the corresponding controlled index, namely ind⁡G(X×Y)=n\operatorname{ind}_G(X\times Y)=n.

References

Primary source

arXiv

Progress summary

Refreshed
Claimed solved

A new preprint claims the generalized conjecture fails as strongly as possible for many finite groups, although the claim has not been independently verified.

The conjecture predicts that two finite free spaces whose individual mapping indices are small should have a product with similarly controlled index. Bui and Daneshpajouh established a broad index-one counterexample in 2023, and a newer preprint claims counterexamples at every prescribed index.

Known results

  • For GG neither a cyclic pp-group nor a generalized quaternion group, Bui and Daneshpajouh constructed finite free GG-complexes with ind⁡K1=ind⁡K2=1\operatorname{ind}K_1=\operatorname{ind}K_2=1 but ind⁡(K1×K2)=0\operatorname{ind}(K_1\times K_2)=0 (2023).
  • For cyclic pp-groups and generalized quaternion groups of 22-power order, they proved the corresponding index-one implication.
  • They formulated the higher-index statements HCTn(G)HCT_n(G) and HCXn(G)HCX_n(G) and proved HCXn(G)⇒HCTn(G)HCX_n(G)\Rightarrow HCT_n(G).

August 25, 2026 higher-index counterexamples

The preprint On a Weak Form of the Topological Hedetniemi Conjecture claims that the earlier counterexamples extend from index-one factors to factors of every prescribed index nn, yielding arbitrarily strong failure for groups outside the cyclic prime-power and generalized quaternion cases. This is a claimed resolution of the stated generalized problem, not an independently verified result, and it does not address the original Z/2\mathbb{Z}/2 conjecture.

Current status (as of August 2026): The index-one generalized conjecture is known to fail for the specified groups, and a preprint claims failure at every prescribed index nn; that higher-index claim remains unverified, while the original Z/2\mathbb{Z}/2 problem is separate.

Sources

Solutions 0

No solutions have been posted yet.