Representation varieties and genus-three Torelli maps

Basic Information

• Paper ID: 2510.13491
• Title: Representation varieties and genus-three Torelli maps
• Authors: Allen Bao, Anunoy Chakraborty, David L. Duncan, Jordan Larson, Kelson McBride
• Classification: math.GT (Geometric Topology)
• Publication Date: October 15, 2025 (arXiv preprint)
• Paper Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.13491

Abstract

This paper investigates families of Torelli homeomorphisms on genus-three surfaces given by powers of boundary pair maps. For each such homeomorphism φ, the authors determine the number of connected components of the fixed point set of the induced map on the representation variety of the surface, as well as the number of connected components of the representation variety of the mapping torus of φ.

Research Background and Motivation

Problem Background

1. Importance of representation varieties: In the latter half of the twentieth century, representation varieties became increasingly common in the toolkit of low-dimensional topologists, appearing in various applications ranging from deformation spaces of geometric structures to manifold invariants arising from gauge-theoretic constructions.
2. Complexity of the Torelli group: The Torelli group I(Σ) consists of surface homeomorphisms that induce the identity map on homology. For genus 2, McCullough-Miller proved that I(Σ) is not finitely generated, but for genus 3 and higher, Dehn twists are insufficient to generate the entire Torelli group.
3. Core questions: The paper poses two fundamental questions:
   • Question 1: When φ is a Torelli map, is R(Σφ) connected?
   • Question 2: When φ is a Torelli map, is FixR(φ*) connected?

Research Motivation

The authors discover that the answers to both questions are negative, which contradicts intuitive expectations about the simplicity of Torelli maps and reveals the complex topological structure of representation varieties under the action of Torelli maps.

Core Contributions

1. Negative answers to fundamental questions: Proves that the representation variety and fixed point set of Torelli maps are not necessarily connected, overturning some intuitive beliefs in the field.
2. Exact computation of connected components: For powers Φ^n of boundary pair maps Φ = T_{γ1} ∘ T_{γ2}^{-1}, provides exact formulas for the number of connected components of various spaces.
3. Constructive proof methods: Provides constructive proofs from which explicit representations in each connected component can be constructed and the dimension of smooth strata can be detected.
4. Establishes connections between different spaces: Through the natural surjection X(Σφ) ↠ FixX(φ*), introduces techniques from symplectic geometry and ergodic theory into low-dimensional topology.

Detailed Methods

Task Definition

Study the connectedness of the following spaces for powers Φ^n of specific boundary pair maps Φ = T_{γ1} ∘ T_{γ2}^{-1} on a genus-three surface Σ:

• The SU(2)-representation variety R(Σ_{Φ^n}) of the mapping torus
• The character variety X(Σ_{Φ^n}) of the mapping torus
• The fixed point sets FixR((Φ^n)) and FixX((Φ^n))

Core Technical Methods

1. Fundamental group representation of mapping tori

For the mapping torus Σφ, its fundamental group admits the presentation:

⟨τ, α1, β1, α2, β2, α3, β3 | ∏[αi,βi] = 1, φ*αi = τ^{-1}αiτ, φ*βi = τ^{-1}βiτ⟩

2. Action computation of boundary pair maps

Lemma 7: For n ≥ 0, the isomorphism Φ^n_* acts on generators as:

• α1 ↦ χ^n α1 χ^{-n}
• β1 ↦ β1 α1^n χ^{-n}
• α2 ↦ α2, β2 ↦ β2
• α3 ↦ χ^n α3 χ^{-n}
• β3 ↦ χ^n β3 χ^{-n}

where χ := α3, β3α1.

3. Fiber analysis of commutator maps

Proposition 5: All fibers of the commutator map μ: SU(2) × SU(2) → SU(2), (A,B) ↦ A,B are connected.

This is a key technical tool in the analysis, established by proving that μ^{-1}(-1) is homeomorphic to the 3-sphere.

Technical Innovations

1. Stratified analysis strategy: Decomposes the representation variety into different subsets D+, D0, D-, corresponding to A1^n = ±1 and other cases, then analyzes the connectedness of each subset.
2. Projection map technique: Constructs projection maps p+: D+ → {(k,ℓ) ∈ Z² | 0 ≤ k,ℓ ≤ ⌊n/2⌋}, determining the number of connected components by analyzing fiber connectedness.
3. Extended fixed point sets: Introduces the extended R-fixed point set F̃ixR(φ) = {ρ ∈ R(Σ) | ∃T ∈ G, φ*ρ = T^{-1}ρT}, serving as a bridge between representation varieties and character varieties.

Main Theorems

Theorem A (Connected components of representation and character varieties)

Let Σ be a genus-three surface and Φ = T_{γ1} ∘ T_{γ2}^{-1} be the boundary pair map shown in Figure 1. For each n ∈ Z:

• When n is even: R(Σ_{Φ^n}) has n² + 1 connected components, X(Σ_{Φ^n}) has n² connected components
• When n is odd: Both R(Σ_{Φ^n}) and X(Σ_{Φ^n}) have n² connected components

Theorem B (Fixed point set of character variety)

The number of connected components of the fixed point set FixX((Φ^n)*) is:

• When n is even: n²/2 + 1
• When n is odd: (n² + 1)/2

Theorem C (Fixed point set of representation variety)

The fixed point set FixR((Φ^n)) has the same number of connected components as FixX((Φ^n)).

Proof Strategy

Proof of Theorem C

1. Reduction to set D: Establishes π0(FixR(φ*)) ≅ π0(D) through the projection pD: FixR(φ*) → D
2. Decomposition analysis: Decomposes D into D+ ∪ D0 ∪ D-, where D± correspond to cases A1^n = ±1
3. Connectedness computation:
   • The closure of D0 is connected
   • D+ has (⌊n/2⌋+1)² connected components, of which ⌊n/2⌋+1 intersect D0
   • D- has (⌊(n-1)/2⌋+1)² connected components, of which ⌊(n-1)/2⌋+1 intersect D0
4. Final calculation: Total number of connected components is ⌊n²/2⌋ + 1

Proof of Theorem A

1. Space decomposition: R(Σφ) = ({1} × FixR(φ*)) ∪ ({-1} × FixR(φ*)) ∪ F+ ∪ F0 ∪ F-
2. Closure analysis: Proves that the closures of F+, F0, F- are all connected and contain the trivial representation
3. Component calculation: Obtains |π0(R(Σφ))| = 2⌊n²/2⌋ + 1

Conclusions and Discussion

Main Conclusions

1. Breaking intuition: The representation variety and fixed point set of Torelli maps are not necessarily connected, even though Torelli maps act trivially on homology.
2. Exact formulas: Provides exact formulas for the number of connected components of various related spaces for powers of boundary pair maps.
3. Method generality: The analytical methods can be extended to other Lie groups with similar properties, such as SU(n) and U(n).

Limitations

1. Specific maps: Results apply only to specific boundary pair maps; a complete theory for general Torelli maps remains open.
2. Genus restriction: Analysis focuses on the genus-three case; higher genera may require different techniques.
3. Computational complexity: For large values of n, the number of connected components grows as n², which may pose computational challenges.

Future Directions

1. Generalization: Extend to more general Torelli maps and surfaces of higher genus.
2. Geometric interpretation: Seek deeper geometric meaning behind the formulas for the number of connected components.
3. Application exploration: Use these results to study other topological properties of 3-manifolds.

In-Depth Evaluation

Strengths

1. Theoretical breakthrough: Provides negative answers to fundamental questions in the field, with significant theoretical value.
2. Technical innovation: Develops new techniques for analyzing the connectedness of representation varieties, particularly stratified analysis and projection methods.
3. Computational precision: Provides exact formulas for the number of connected components, rather than merely existence results.
4. Constructive proofs: Proofs are constructive, allowing explicit construction of representations in each connected component.

Weaknesses

1. Limited scope: Results are restricted to specific boundary pair maps; generality remains to be improved.
2. Geometric intuition: Lacks geometric intuition for why such numbers of connected components arise.
3. Computational complexity: For practical computation, complexity may become problematic when n is large.

Impact

1. Theoretical contribution: Provides new perspectives for representation variety theory and Torelli group research.
2. Method value: Developed techniques may apply to other related problems.
3. Inspirational significance: Reveals that seemingly simple topological objects may possess complex algebraic-geometric structures.

Applicable Scenarios

1. Theoretical research: Applicable to theoretical work on representation varieties, character varieties, and Torelli groups.
2. 3-manifold topology: Can be used to study topological properties of mapping tori.
3. Algebraic geometry: Provides concrete examples for studying connectedness of moduli spaces.

References

The paper cites 18 important references covering classical and frontier work in representation variety theory, Torelli groups, 3-manifold topology, and related fields, providing a solid theoretical foundation for the research.

Through sophisticated technical analysis, this paper resolves fundamental questions in representation variety theory and reveals the rich algebraic-geometric structure underlying seemingly simple topological constructions, laying an important foundation for further research in related fields.