Jensen's Functional Equation on Involution-Generated Groups: An ($\mathrm{SR}_2$) Criterion and Applications

Basic Information

• Paper ID: 2511.02870
• Title: Jensen's Functional Equation on Involution-Generated Groups: An ($\mathrm{SR}_2$) Criterion and Applications
• Author: Đặng Võ Phúc (FPT University, Vietnam)
• Classification: math.GR (Group Theory)
• Publication Date: November 17, 2025 (arXiv v2)
• Paper Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.02870

Abstract

This paper investigates Jensen's functional equations on a group $G$ with values in an abelian group $H$:

• (J1): $f(xy)+f(xy^{-1})=2f(x)$
• (J2): $f(xy)+f(x^{-1}y)=2f(y)$

The author proposes a novel structural criterion $(\mathrm{SR}_2)$ (involution square root criterion) and proves that under this criterion, every solution of (J1) necessarily satisfies (J2) and automatically becomes a group homomorphism. This criterion applies to various reflection-generated groups, particularly the symmetric group $S_n$ and odd-order dihedral groups. The research methodology is independent of 2-divisibility in $H$, complementing classical complex-valued theory.

Research Background and Motivation

Problem Background

1. Classical Jensen Equation: On the real line, Jensen's equation $f(\frac{x+y}{2})=\frac{f(x)+f(y)}{2}$ characterizes convexity. On non-commutative groups, two symmetric Jensen-type equations (J1) and (J2) naturally arise.
2. Existing Theory:
   • C.T. Ng 3-5 developed reduction formulas on free groups, linear groups, semidirect products and other important group classes
   • Stetkær 6 proved that complex-valued solutions factor through the second derived quotient $G/[G,[G,G]]$
   • Recent work 1,2 studied Jensen equations with endomorphisms on semigroups, but relies on 2-torsion-free assumptions
3. Special Nature of Symmetric Groups: Ng asserted in 4,5 that all Jensen solutions on $S_n$ are homomorphisms, but did not publish detailed proofs. Trinh and Hieu 7 later provided the first elementary proof, with the key observation that any product of two transpositions in $S_n$ is always a square element.

Research Motivation

1. Absence of Unified Framework: Existing theory either depends on special properties of the complex field (divisibility by 2) or requires semigroup endomorphism structure, lacking a unified criterion based on pure group structure.
2. Generalization of Symmetric Group Results: The key observation in 7 (products of transpositions are squares) suggests the existence of more general structural conditions.
3. Technical Challenges: How can one derive complete characterization of solutions from structural properties of $G$ alone, without assuming $H$ is divisible by 2?

Importance of This Paper's Contributions

• Proposes a pure group-theoretic structural criterion applicable to arbitrary abelian-group-valued functions
• Unifies explanations of important examples such as symmetric groups and odd-order dihedral groups
• Reveals the algebraic essence of the geometric intuition "generated by involutions + products are squares"

Core Contributions

1. Proposes the $(\mathrm{SR}_2)$ Criterion: Defines a purely group-theoretic condition based on involutions and square roots, guaranteeing that $S_1(G,H) = S_{1,2}(G,H) = \mathrm{Hom}(G,H)$.
2. Main Theorem (Theorem 2.8): Proves that on groups satisfying $(\mathrm{SR}_2)$, every solution of (J1) automatically satisfies (J2) and is a group homomorphism, without assuming $H$ is divisible by 2.
3. Characterization of Solution Spaces: Provides transparent descriptions of solution spaces through abelianization $G^{ab}=G/[G,G]$, with combinatorial characterization when $G^{ab}$ is a 2-group (Corollary 2.9).
4. Verification of Applications:
   • Recovers known results for symmetric groups $S_n$ (Theorem 3.1)
   • Completely handles dihedral groups $D_m$, proving $(\mathrm{SR}_2)$ holds if and only if $m$ is odd (Theorem 3.2)
   • Constructs explicit counterexamples for even-order cases (Example 3.4)
5. Theoretical Contributions: Develops technical tools independent of 2-divisibility (Lemmas 2.3-2.7), including explicit three-variable commutation formulas and rearrangement invariance theorems.

Detailed Methodology

Problem Setup

Problem Formulation:

• Input: A group $G$ (multiplicative), an abelian group $H$ (additive)
• Objective: Characterize all functions $f:G\to H$ satisfying (J1) with $f(e)=0$
• Core Question: When does $S_1(G,H) = \mathrm{Hom}(G,H)$?

Notation:

• $S_1(G,H)$: Solution set of (J1)
• $S_2(G,H)$: Solution set of (J2)
• $S_{1,2}(G,H) := S_1(G,H) \cap S_2(G,H)$
• $H[2] := \{h\in H : 2h=0\}$: 2-torsion subgroup
• $G^{ab} := G/[G,G]$: Abelianization

Core Criterion: The $(\mathrm{SR}_2)$ Property

Definition 2.1: A group $G$ satisfies $\mathrm{SR}_2(I)$ if:

1. $G = \langle I \rangle$ (generated by an involution set $I$, where $i^2=e, \forall i\in I$)
2. For any $a,b\in I$, there exists $t\in G$ such that $t^2=ab$

Geometric Intuition:

• Condition 1: The group is generated by "reflections"
• Condition 2: Any product of two reflections can be expressed as a square of some element ("products are squares")

Key Examples:

• $S_n$: Taking $I$ as all transpositions, any product of two transpositions is the square of a 3-cycle or 4-cycle
• $D_m$ ($m$ odd): Taking $I$ as all reflections $\{sr^k\}$, since 2 is invertible in $\mathbb{Z}_m$

Technical Framework

Phase One: Basic Identities (Without Division by 2)

Lemma 2.3: For a solution $f$ of (J1) with $f(e)=0$:

1. Oddness and Square Law: $f(x^{-1})=-f(x)$, $f(x^2)=2f(x)$
2. Three-Variable Commutation Formula (explicit, without 1/2): $f(xyz) = 2f(x) - f(xz^{-1}y^{-1})$$f(xzy) = 2f(x) - f(xy^{-1}z^{-1})$
3. Corollary: $f(xyz)-f(xzy) = f(xy^{-1}z^{-1}) - f(xz^{-1}y^{-1})$

Technical Innovation: These formulas completely avoid division by 2, forming the foundation for subsequent proofs.

Phase Two: 2-Torsion of Involutions

Theorem 2.5: For involutions $a,b$ and a solution $f$ of (J1):

1. $2f(a)=0$, $2f(b)=0$
2. $2f(ab)=0$
3. If $(\mathrm{SR}_2)$ provides $t$ such that $t^2=ab$, then $f(ab)=2f(t)$ and $4f(t)=0$

Lemma 2.6: If $g$ can be written as a product of involutions, then $2f(g)=0$. In particular, if $G$ is generated by involutions, then $2f\equiv 0$.

Proof Strategy: Induction on involution word length, utilizing the expansion of (J1) at $(x,y)=(X,a)$ where $a$ is an involution.

Phase Three: Rearrangement Invariance

Theorem 2.7: If $G$ is generated by involutions, $f$ satisfies (J1) with $f(e)=0$, then: $f(xyz) = f(xzy) \quad (\forall x,y,z\in G)$

Proof Strategy:

1. Using the three-variable formula from Lemma 2.3 and $2f\equiv 0$, reduce the difference $f(xyz)-f(xzy)$ to $2f(xz^{-1}y)$
2. By Lemma 2.6, this difference is zero

Significance: Exchanging adjacent factors in an involution word does not change the value of $f$, which is key to proving additivity.

Main Theorem Proof Architecture (Theorem 2.8)

Objective: Prove $f(xy)=f(x)+f(y)$ for all $x,y\in G$.

Strategy: Induction on the involution word length $\ell(y)$ of $y$.

Base Case $\ell(y)=1$ ($y=j$ is an involution)

Define the "deviation function": $c(j;x) := f(xj)-f(x)$

Step A (2-Torsion): By Theorem 2.5, $2c(j;x)=0$.

Step B (Absorption Law): Using rearrangement and the square law, prove $f(Zt^2) = -f(Z) \quad (\forall Z,t)$

Step C (Invariance): Prove that $c(j;\cdot)$ is invariant under two types of right multiplication:

1. Right multiplication by involution $j$: $c(j;xj)=c(j;x)$ (using 2-torsion)
2. Right multiplication by square $t^2$: $c(j;xt^2)=c(j;x)$ (using rearrangement + absorption law)

Step D (Key Application of $(\mathrm{SR}_2)$):

• For any involution $a$, by $(\mathrm{SR}_2)$ there exists $t$ such that $t^2=ja$
• Therefore $a=jt^2$, so $c(j;xa) = c(j;xjt^2) \stackrel{\text{Step C(ii)}}{=} c(j;xj) \stackrel{\text{Step C(i)}}{=} c(j;x)$
• Since $G$ is generated by involutions, $c(j;x)$ is independent of $x$
• Taking $x=e$ gives $c(j;x)=f(j)$, i.e., $f(xj)=f(x)+f(j)$

Inductive Step $\ell(y)\geq 2$

Let $y=Yj$ where $\ell(Y)=\ell(y)-1$ and $j\in I$. Then: $f(xy) = f(x(Yj)) = f((xY)j) \stackrel{\text{base}}{=} f(xY)+f(j) \stackrel{\text{IH}}{=} f(x)+f(Y)+f(j) = f(x)+f(Yj)$

The last step again applies the base case to $f(Yj)=f(Y)+f(j)$.

Verification of (J2): By homomorphism property and oddness: $f(xy)+f(x^{-1}y) = f(x)+f(y)+(-f(x))+f(y) = 2f(y)$

Technical Innovations

1. Techniques Avoiding Division by 2:
   • Traditional methods (e.g., 6) rely on forms like $\frac{1}{2}f([x,y])$ for commutator corrections
   • This paper completely bypasses this requirement through explicit three-variable formulas (Lemma 2.3)
2. Deviation Function Method:
   • Define $c(j;x)$ and prove its invariance under specific operations
   • This is the core of proving additivity, more systematic than directly verifying $f(xj)=f(x)+f(j)$
3. Geometric-Algebraic Correspondence:
   • $(\mathrm{SR}_2)$ formalizes geometric intuition (reflection generation + products are squares)
   • Step D in the proof precisely captures how this condition works: reducing any involution to the form $jt^2$
4. Fine Control of Word Length Induction:
   • Induction on involution word length rather than general word length of group elements
   • Ensures each step can exploit special properties of involutions

Experimental Setup

Note: This is a pure mathematics theory paper without traditional "experiments," but includes theoretical verification and example construction.

Verification Cases

Case 1: Symmetric Group $S_n$ (Theorem 3.1)

Objective: Verify that $S_n$ satisfies $(\mathrm{SR}_2)$.

Method: Take $I$ as all transpositions. For any two transpositions $\tau_1,\tau_2$, consider cases:

1. $\tau_1=\tau_2$: $\tau_1\tau_2=e=e^2$
2. Intersecting at one point (e.g., $(ab),(bc)$): Product is 3-cycle $(abc)$; take $t=(acb)$ so $t^2=(abc)$
3. Disjoint (e.g., $(ab),(cd)$): Product is $(ab)(cd)$; take $t=(acbd)$ so $t^2=(ab)(cd)$

Conclusion: $(\mathrm{SR}_2)$ holds, so all solutions have the form $f(\sigma) = \begin{cases} 0 & \sigma\text{ is even permutation} \\ u & \sigma\text{ is odd permutation} \end{cases}$ where $u\in H[2]$.

Case 2: Dihedral Group $D_m$ (Theorem 3.2)

Presentation: $D_m = \langle r,s \mid r^m=e, s^2=e, srs=r^{-1}\rangle$

Reflection Set: $I = \{sr^k : 0\leq k < m\}$

Case 1 ($m$ odd):

• Any two reflections $(sr^i)(sr^j) = r^{j-i}$
• Since 2 is invertible in $\mathbb{Z}_m$ (there exists $u$ such that $2u\equiv 1\pmod{m}$)
• Can take $t=r^{(j-i)u}$ so that $t^2=r^{j-i}$
• Conclusion: $(\mathrm{SR}_2)$ holds

Case 2 ($m$ even, e.g., $m=2k$):

• $s\cdot(sr) = r$ is not a square ($D_4$'s square set is $\{e,r^2\}$)
• Conclusion: $(\mathrm{SR}_2)$ fails

Counterexample Construction (Example 3.4)

Objective: For even $m=2k$, construct a solution of (J1) that is not a homomorphism.

Construction: Take $u,c\in H[2]$ and define $f(r^{2t})=0, \quad f(r^{2t+1})=u, \quad f(sr^j)=c$

Verification of (J1): Since $2f\equiv 0$, we only need to verify $f(xy)=f(xy^{-1})$, checking four cases individually.

Non-Homomorphism Property: $f(sr) = c \neq c+u = f(s)+f(r)$ when $u\neq 0$.

Significance: Shows that failure of $(\mathrm{SR}_2)$ indeed causes the theorem conclusion to fail.

Experimental Results

Summary of Main Results

Theoretical Findings

1. Precision of Sufficiency:
   • $(\mathrm{SR}_2)$ is a sufficient condition for $S_1=\mathrm{Hom}$
   • Counterexamples suggest some form of "products are squares" is necessary
2. Universality of 2-Torsion:
   • Under $(\mathrm{SR}_2)$, all solutions automatically satisfy $2f\equiv 0$ (Lemma 2.6)
   • Solution space is determined by a single parameter $u\in H[2]$ (when $G^{ab}$ is a 2-group)
3. Odd-Even Dichotomy:
   • For dihedral groups, the parity of $m$ completely determines whether $(\mathrm{SR}_2)$ holds
   • This directly relates to invertibility of 2 in $\mathbb{Z}_m$

Comparison with Existing Theory (Section 4)

Comparison with Stetkær 6's Complex-Valued Theory:

• 6: $f(xy)=f(x)+f(y)+\frac{1}{2}f([x,y])$ on $G/[G,[G,G]]$
• This paper: $(\mathrm{SR}_2)$ ensures commutator terms vanish, without division by 2

Comparison with Semigroup Theory 1,2:

• 1,2: Requires endomorphism structure + 2-torsion-free assumption
• This paper: Pure group structure assumption ($(\mathrm{SR}_2)$), applicable to arbitrary abelian group $H$

Advantages:

• More general value domains (no 2-torsion-free requirement)
• Clearer geometric/combinatorial meaning
• Unified treatment of multiple classical examples

Related Work

History of Jensen's Equation

1. Classical Theory on Real Line: Jensen's equation characterizes the midpoint property of convex functions
2. Generalizations to Groups:
   • C.T. Ng 3-5: Systematic study on free groups, linear groups, semidirect products
   • 4 asserts all solutions on $S_n$ are homomorphisms (detailed proof not published)
   • 5: Pexider-type variants
3. Complex-Valued Theory:
   • Stetkær 6: Factorization through $G/[G,[G,G]]$, explicit formulas
   • Odd solution quotient group isomorphic to $\mathrm{Hom}([G,G]/[G,[G,G]],\mathbb{C})$
4. Generalizations to Semigroups:
   • Akkaoui 2: Semigroups with endomorphisms, 2-torsion-free assumption
   • Aissia et al. 1: Pexider-Drygas type equations

Positioning of This Paper

• Fills a Gap: 7 first gave elementary proof for $S_n$; this paper abstracts its core observation (transposition products are squares) into $(\mathrm{SR}_2)$
• Technical Breakthrough: Develops systematic methods without division by 2 (Lemmas 2.3-2.7)
• Scope of Applications: Applies to reflection-generated groups (subclass of Coxeter groups)

Conclusions and Discussion

Main Conclusions

1. Core Theorem: On groups satisfying $(\mathrm{SR}_2)$, $S_1(G,H) = S_{1,2}(G,H) = \mathrm{Hom}(G,H) \cong \mathrm{Hom}(G^{ab},H)$
2. Application Verification:
   • Recovers known results for $S_n$
   • Complete characterization of dihedral groups (odd-order case)
   • Constructs counterexamples for even-order case
3. Methodological Contributions: Establishes technical framework independent of 2-divisibility

Limitations

1. Necessity of Criterion:
   • $(\mathrm{SR}_2)$ is sufficient but not necessary
   • May exist groups not satisfying $(\mathrm{SR}_2)$ but still having $S_1=\mathrm{Hom}$
2. Complete Characterization of Coxeter Groups:
   • Example 3.5 gives only partial results
   • Complete Coxeter theory characterization requires further work
3. Non-Abelian Value Domains:
   • Methods depend on commutativity of $H$
   • Generalization to non-commutative values requires new approaches
4. Computational Complexity:
   • Verifying $(\mathrm{SR}_2)$ may require checking all involution pairs
   • May be computationally difficult for large groups

Future Directions

1. Complete Theory for Coxeter Groups:
   • Characterize which Coxeter groups satisfy $(\mathrm{SR}_2)$
   • Relationship with Coxeter matrices
2. Exploration of Necessary Conditions:
   • Find necessary conditions for $S_1=\mathrm{Hom}$
   • May involve deep group structure (center, derived series)
3. Algorithmic Aspects:
   • Efficient algorithms for verifying $(\mathrm{SR}_2)$
   • Compute dimension of solution spaces
4. Directions of Generalization:
   • More general functional equations (e.g., d'Alembert equation)
   • Continuous solutions on topological groups

In-Depth Evaluation

Strengths

1. Conceptual Innovation:
   • $(\mathrm{SR}_2)$ criterion is elegant and concise with clear geometric intuition
   • Successfully abstracts special techniques from $S_n$ into general principle
2. Technical Rigor:
   • Completely avoids division by 2, expanding applicability
   • Clear proof structure (deviation function + word length induction)
   • Three-variable formula (Lemma 2.3) is a technical highlight
3. Complete Results:
   • Not only provides sufficient conditions but constructs counterexamples showing boundaries
   • Odd-even dichotomy for dihedral groups is convincing
4. Writing Quality:
   • Clear logic, progressing from motivation to theorem to applications
   • Complete technical details, highly reproducible
   • Remarks provide timely intuitive explanations

Weaknesses

1. Limitations of Criterion:
   • Geometric meaning of $(\mathrm{SR}_2)$ ("reflection generation") restricts applicability
   • Cannot apply to non-reflection-generated groups (e.g., certain finite simple groups)
2. Incomplete Coxeter Theory:
   • Example 3.5 provides only suggestive discussion
   • Lacks systematic treatment of general Coxeter groups
3. Connection with Classical Theory:
   • Precise relationship with 6's $G/[G,[G,G]]$ theory not fully elaborated
   • Could more explicitly state when $(\mathrm{SR}_2)$ implies $[G,G]=[G,[G,G]]$
4. Computational Examples:
   • Could include more concrete group calculations (e.g., $A_n$, certain matrix groups)
   • Explicit formulas for solution space dimension (when $G^{ab}$ is not a 2-group)

Impact

1. Theoretical Contribution:
   • Provides new perspective for Jensen equation theory (group structure vs. value domain properties)
   • May inspire research on other functional equations
2. Application Potential:
   • Reflection groups important in geometry and representation theory
   • Methods may generalize to other symmetry problems
3. Reproducibility:
   • Proofs are completely elementary, requiring no deep theory
   • Easy to generalize and modify

Applicable Scenarios

1. Direct Applications:
   • Symmetric groups $S_n$ (combinatorics)
   • Odd-order dihedral groups (geometric symmetry)
   • Certain Weyl and Coxeter groups (Lie theory)
2. Potential Applications:
   • Reflection-generated groups in geometric group theory
   • Finite mirror groups (crystallographic groups)
   • Certain automorphism groups
3. Non-Applicable Cases:
   • Non-involution-generated groups (e.g., cyclic groups $C_n$, $n$ odd)
   • Even-order dihedral groups (already shown to fail)
   • General non-commutative groups (require other methods)

Key References

3 C.T. Ng, Jensen's functional equation on groups, Aequationes Math. 39 (1990), 85–99.
4 C.T. Ng, Jensen's functional equation on groups, III, Aequationes Math. 62 (2001), 143–159.
6 H. Stetkær, On Jensen's functional equation on groups, Aequationes Math. 66 (2003), 100–118.
7 L.C. Trinh, T.T. Hieu, Jensen's functional equation on the symmetric group $S_n$, Aequationes Math. 82 (2011), 269–276.

Summary

Through proposing the $(\mathrm{SR}_2)$ criterion, this paper provides an elegant structural solution to Jensen's equation on groups. The core innovation lies in formalizing geometric intuition (reflection generation + products are squares) into an algebraic condition, and developing systematic techniques independent of 2-divisibility. While the criterion has limited applicability (primarily to reflection-generated groups), it provides complete and transparent theory within this scope. The odd-even dichotomy for dihedral groups and unified explanation of symmetric group results demonstrate the power of the method. Future generalizations to Coxeter groups and more general structures are worth anticipating.