text:
# Virasoro Frames and their Stabilizers for the 𝐸₈ Lattice type Vertex Operator Algebra

## 1 Introduction

In this article, we determine, up to automorphisms, the Virasoro frames and their stabilizers for $`V_{E_8}`$, the lattice type vertex operator algebra based on the $`E_8`$-lattice.

In \[DGH\], the basic theory of framed vertex operator algebras (FVOAs) was established. It included some general structure theory of frame stabilizers, the subgroup of the automorphism group fixing the frame setwise. It is a finite group with a normal $`2`$-subgroup of class at most $`2`$ and quotient group which embeds in the common automorphism group of a pair of binary codes. There was no procedure for computing the exact structure. To develop our understanding of FVOA theory, we decided to settle the frame stabilizers definitively for the familiar example $`V_{E_8}`$. This result, with further general theory for analyzing frame stabilizers in lattice type FVOAs, is presented in this article. Even simple questions such as whether the $`C`$-group (defined below) can be nonabelian or of exponent greater than $`2`$ did not seem answerable with the techniques in \[DGH\] (the $`C`$-groups for $`V_{E_8}`$ turn out to be nonabelian for four of the five orbits and elementary abelian for the last orbit). Furthermore, in $`V_{E_8}`$, we also show that there are just five orbits on frames, a point which was left unsettled in \[DGH\].

The study of FVOAs is a special case of the general extension problem of nice rational VOAs. The problem can be formulated completely in terms of the associated modular braided tensor category or 3d-TQFT (cf. \[H\] and the introduction of \[DGH\]). There has been recent progress in this direction \[B, M99\], proving also conjectures from \[FSS\], but a general theory for such extensions is unknown, even for FVOAs. The analysis of Virasoro frame stabilizers contributes to this problem by computing the automorphisms of such extensions. Furthermore, our classification result for the five VFs in $`V_{E_8}`$ can be used to show the uniqueness of the unitary self-dual VOA of central charge $`24`$ with Kac-Moody subVOA $`V_{A_{1,2}}^{16}`$ (cf. \[DGH\], Remark 5.4) since up to roots of unity the associated modular braided tensor category is equivalent to the one for the Virasoro subVOA $`L_{1/2}(0)^{16}`$ (cf. \[MS\]). This seems to be the first uniqueness result for one of the $`71`$ unitary self-dual VOA candidates of central charge $`24`$ given by Schellekens \[Sc\] which is not the lattice VOA of a Niemeier lattice.

Before stating our main results, we review some material about Virasoro frames from \[DGH\].

A subset $`F=\{\omega _1,\mathrm{},\omega _r\}`$ of a simple vertex operator algebra (VOA) $`V`$ is called a Virasoro frame (VF) if the $`\omega _i`$ for $`i=1`$, $`\mathrm{}`$, $`r`$ generate mutually commuting simple Virasoro vertex operator algebras of central charge $`1/2`$ and $`\omega _1+\mathrm{}+\omega _r`$ is the Virasoro element of $`V`$. Such a VOA $`V`$ is called a framed vertex operator algebra (FVOA).

We use the notation of \[DGH\] throughout. In particular, we shall use $`G`$ for the stabilizer of the Virasoro frame $`F`$ in the group $`\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(V)`$. There are two binary codes, $`𝒞`$, $`𝒟`$ and we use $`k`$ for the integer $`dim(𝒟)`$. There will be some obvious modifications of the \[DGH\] notation, such as $`𝒟(F)`$ to indicate dependence of the code $`𝒟`$ on the Virasoro frame $`F`$, $`G(F)`$, $`G_𝒟(F)`$, $`G_𝒞(F)`$, etc. We call the group $`G_𝒟`$ the $`D`$-group of the frame and we call $`G_𝒞`$ the $`C`$-group of the frame (see \[DGH\], Def. 2.7).

Denote for an abelian group $`A`$ with $`\widehat{A}=\mathrm{𝐻𝑜𝑚}(A,^\times )`$ the dual group. Throughout this paper, we use standard group theoretic notation \[Go, H\]. For instance, if $`J`$ is a group and $`S`$ a subset, $`C(S)`$ or $`C_J(S)`$ denotes the centralizer of $`S`$ in $`J`$, $`N(S)`$ or $`N_J(S)`$ denotes the normalizer of $`S`$ in $`J`$ and $`Z(J)`$ denotes the center of $`J`$.

We summarize the basic properties of $`G`$.

###### Proposition 1.1

1. $`G_𝒟G_𝒞`$ and $`G_𝒟`$ and $`G_𝒞/G_𝒟`$ are elementary abelian $`2`$-groups;
2. $`G_𝒟Z(G_𝒞)`$;
3. $`G_𝒟\widehat{𝒟}`$ and $`G_𝒞/G_𝒟`$ embeds in $`\widehat{𝒞}`$;
4. $`G`$ is finite, and the action of $`G`$ on the frame embeds $`G/G_𝒞`$ in $`\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_r`$.

Proof. \[DGH\], Th. 2.8. The assertion $`G_𝒟Z(G_𝒞)`$ is easy to check from the definitions, but unfortunately was not made explicit in \[DGH\]. x

We have that $`G_𝒞/G_𝒟`$ embeds in $`\widehat{𝒞}`$, but general theory has not yet given a definitive description of the image.

We summarize our main results below. See Section 2 for certain definitions. Note that Main Theorem I (ii) just refers to the text for methods.

Main Theorem I

1. In the case of a lattice type VOA based on a lattice $`L`$ and a VF which is associated to a lattice frame, $`X`$, we have a description of $`GN`$, where $`N`$ is the normalizer of a natural torus $`T`$ (see Th. 2.8). It is an extension of the form $`(GT).W_X`$, where $`W`$ is the automorphism group of the lattice and $`W_X`$ is the stabilizer in $`W`$ of $`X`$. Let $`D_X`$ be the subgroup of $`W_X`$ which stabilizes each set $`\{\pm x\}`$, for $`xX`$. Let $`n=\mathrm{𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑘}(L)`$ and suppose that $`L`$ is obtained from the sublattice spanned by $`X`$ by adjoining “glue vectors” forming the $`_4`$-code $`\mathrm{\Delta }2^{\mathrm{}}\times 4^k`$. We have $`G_𝒞N`$, $`G_𝒞T2^{\mathrm{}}\times 4^k`$, $`G_𝒞/(G_𝒞T)D_X`$ and $`GT2^{n\mathrm{}k}\times 4^{\mathrm{}}\times 8^k`$.
2. Assume that in the situation (i) the lattice comes from a marking of a binary code. Then a triality automorphism $`\sigma `$ is defined (cf. \[DGH\], after Theorem 4.10) and one has $`GGN,\sigma >GN`$. In particular the group of permutations induced on the VF by $`GN,\sigma `$ strictly contains the group induced by $`GN`$. We give conditions for identifying these permutation groups. In the case of $`V_{E_8}`$, the cases $`\mathrm{𝑑𝑖𝑚}(𝒟)=1`$, $`2`$ and $`3`$ come from a marking and we prove that $`GN,\sigma =G`$.

Main Theorem II  Let $`V`$ be the lattice VOA based on the $`E_8`$-lattice.

1. There are exactly five orbits for the action of $`\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(V)E_8()`$ on the set of VFs in $`V`$.
2. These five orbits are distinguished by the parameter $`k`$, the dimension of the code $`𝒟`$, and in these respective cases $`G=G(F)`$, the stabilizer of the Virasoro frame $`F`$, has the following structure:

$$\begin{array}{cc}k\hfill & G\hfill \\ & \\ 1\hfill & 2^{1+14}\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_{16}\hfill \\ 2\hfill & 2^{2+12}[\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_82]\hfill \\ 3\hfill & [2^{3+9}2^{4+8}]2^8[\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_3\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_4]\hfill \\ & [2^{3+9}2^{4+8}][\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_4\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_4]\hfill \\ & 2^{4+16}[\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_3\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_4]\hfill \\ 4\hfill & 2^{4+5}[2\mathrm{𝐴𝐺𝐿}(3,2)][2^4\times 8^4]2.\mathrm{𝐴𝐺𝐿}(3,2)\hfill \\ 5\hfill & 2^5\mathrm{𝐴𝐺𝐿}(4,2)4^4[2\mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(4,2)]\hfill \end{array}$$
3. In these five cases, the frame stabilizers $`G`$ are determined up to conjugacy as subgroups of $`E_8()`$ by group theoretic conditions. Sets of conditions which determine them are found in Section 4 and listed below for each $`k`$.

$`G`$ is the normalizer of the unique up to conjugacy subgroup isomorphic to $`2_+^{1+14}`$; equivalently, the unique up to conjugacy subgroup isomorphic to $`2_+^{1+14}\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_{16}`$.

$`G`$ satisfies the hypotheses of this conjugacy result:
In $`E_8()`$, there is one conjugacy class of subgroups which are a semidirect product $`Xt`$, where $`t`$ has order $`2`$, $`X=X_1X_2`$ is a central product of groups of the form $`[2\times 2^{1+6}]\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_8`$ such that $`X_1X_2=Z(X_1)=Z(X_2)`$ and conjugation by $`t`$ interchanges $`X_1`$ and $`X_2`$.

$`G`$ is a subgroup of $`E_8()`$ characterized up to conjugacy as a subgroup $`X`$ satisfying the following conditions:

1. $`X`$ has the form $`[2^{3+9}=2^{4+8}]\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_4^4.\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_4[2^{4+16}]\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_3\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_4`$;
    2. $`X`$ has a normal subgroup $`E2^3`$ which is $`2B`$-pure.

$`G`$ has the form $`[2^4\times 8^4]2.AGL(3,2)2^{4+5+8}AGL(3,2)`$ and is characterized up to conjugacy by this property: it is contained in a subgroup $`G_1`$ of the form $`[2^4\times 8^4][2\mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(4,2)]`$, which is uniquely determined in $`E_8()`$ up to conjugacy in the normalizer of a $`\mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(4,2)`$-signalizer (defined in Section 4.4); in particular, $`G`$ is determined uniquely up to conjugacy in $`G_1`$ as the stabilizer of a subgroup isomorphic to $`2^3`$ in the $`\mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(4,2)`$-signalizer.

$`G`$ is conjugate to a subgroup of the Alekseevski group (see \[A, G76\] and Prop. 3.5) of the form $`2^5\mathrm{𝐴𝐺𝐿}(4,2)4^4[2\mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(4,2)]`$ and the set of all such subgroups of the Alekseevski group form a conjugacy class in the Alekseevski group.

###### Remark 1.2

We stress that there are two main viewpoints to the analysis in this article. One is group structures coming from binary codes and lattices via markings and frames as in \[DGH\]; and the other is the theory of finite subgroups of $`E_8()`$ (for a recent survey, see \[GR99\]).

Appendix 5.1 contains a proof that, given an even lattice $`L`$ of signature $`(p,q)`$, there is an integer $`m8`$ so that $`L`$ embeds as a direct summand of a unimodular even lattice $`M`$ of signature $`(mp,mq)`$ and so that $`\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(M)`$ contains a subgroup which stabilizes $`L`$ and acts faithfully on $`L`$ as $`\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(L)`$. This is similar in spirit to results of James and Nikulin \[J, N\] (which display such embeddings into indefinite lattices) and gives a useful containment of VOAs $`V_LV_M`$.

Appendix 5.2 is a construction of a group extension $`\stackrel{~}{W}`$ of the automorphism group $`W`$ of a lattice $`L`$ by an elementary abelian $`2`$-group. This extension plays a natural role in the automorphism group of $`V_L`$. While this construction is not new, it it useful to make things explicit for certain proofs in this article. Also, there are some historical remarks.

Appendix 5.3 discusses the group extension aspect of the frame stabilizers. At first, it looks like the groups $`G/G_𝒟`$ might split over $`G_𝒞/G_𝒟`$, but some do not.

Appendix 5.4 is a technical result about permutation representations for a classical group.

## 2 Stabilizers for framed lattice VOAs

In \[DGH\], we used the following concept.

###### Definition 2.1

A lattice frame in a rank $`n`$ lattice $`L^n`$ is a set, $`X`$, of $`2n`$ lattice vectors of squared length $`4`$ in $`L`$ such that two elements are equal, opposite or orthogonal. Every lattice frame spans a lattice $`MD_1^n`$, called the frame sublattice.

Clearly, in a given lattice, there is a bijection between lattice frames and frame sublattices (the frame defining the frame sublattice is the set of minimal vectors in that sublattice). Note that in \[DGH\] the term lattice frame means sublattice.

In Chapter 3 of \[DGH\], we constructed, for every integral lattice containing a frame sublattice, a Virasoro frame for the associated rank $`n`$ lattice VOA and determined the decomposition into modules for the Virasoro subVOA $`T_{2n}`$ belonging to this Virasoro frame. In Section 2.1, we will determine the subgroup of the Virasoro frame stabilizer which is visible from this construction. As in \[DGH\], we will use the language of $`_4`$-codes. We also prove a result about the centralizer of $`G_𝒞`$ for some framed lattices. In Section 2.2, we look at lattices with frame sublattices constructed from marked binary codes as in Chapter 4 of \[DGH\]. Here, a triality automorphism is defined; see Theorem 2.19.

### 2.1 General integral even lattices

Let $`V_L`$ be the lattice VOA, based on the integral even lattice $`L`$. For every frame sublattice $`M`$ of $`L`$ there is the associated VF  $`F=\{\omega _1,\mathrm{},\omega _{2n}\}`$ inside $`V_MV_L`$ (cf. \[DGH\], Def. 3.2). If $`X`$ is the lattice frame contained in $`M`$, the associated VF $`F`$ is the set of all $`\frac{1}{16}x(1)^2\pm \frac{1}{4}(e^x+e^x)`$, $`xX`$. We use $`x(n)`$ for the element $`t^nx`$ in $`V_L`$.

Using the notation of \[DGH\], we can describe some structure of the Cartan subalgebra $`𝔥=t^1_{}(L_{})V_L`$ associated to a frame sublattice of $`L`$:

###### Proposition 2.2 (Cartan subalgebra)

Let $`M`$ be a frame sublattice spanned by a lattice frame inside an integral even lattice $`L`$ of rank $`n`$ and let $`T_{2n}`$ be the subVOA of $`V_MV_L`$ generated by the associated Virasoro frame of the lattice VOA $`V_L`$. Then

1. $`𝔥=(V_M)_1`$ is an abelian Lie algebra of rank $`n`$.
2. It is the $`n`$-dimensional highest weight space for the $`T_{2n}`$-submodule of $`V_L`$ isomorphic to the direct sum

$$M(\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2},0,\mathrm{},0)M(0,0,\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2},0,\mathrm{},0)\mathrm{}M(0,\mathrm{},0,\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2}).$$

The summands are spanned by vectors of the form $`x(1)`$, where $`x`$ is in the lattice frame.

Proof. For the first statement, recall that as a graded vector space $`V_M=V_𝔥[M]`$. Since the minimal nonzero squared length of a vector $`x`$ in the lattice $`MD_1^n`$ is $`4`$, i.e. $`e^x[M]`$ has conformal weight $`2`$, the weight one part of $`V_M`$ is just the the weight one part of the Heisenberg VOA $`V_𝔥`$, i.e., in the usual notation, $`𝔥=t^1_{}(M_{})`$. It inherits a toral Lie algebra structure from the Lie algebra $`V_1`$.

For the second statement use Corollary 3.3. (1) of \[DGH\]. Since $`M(h_1,\mathrm{},h_{2n})`$ has minimal conformal weight $`h_1+\mathrm{}+h_{2n}`$ (this is the smallest $`i`$ so that $`M(h_1,\mathrm{},h_{2n})`$ has an $`L(0)`$-eigenvector for the eigenvalue $`i`$) and the weight one part of $`M(0,\mathrm{},0)`$ is zero, the assertion follows. x

Throughout this article, when we work with a VOA based on a lattice with lattice frame, we write $`𝔥`$ for the above Cartan subalgebra $`(V_M)_1`$ of $`(V_L)_1`$.

###### Corollary 2.3

In the situation where the VF comes from a lattice frame, $`G_𝒞`$ normalizes the Cartan subalgebra $`𝔥`$ of $`(V_L)_1`$.

Proof. We use the proof of Prop. 2.2 and its notation. For every $`(h_1,\mathrm{},h_{2n})`$, the group $`G_𝒞`$ leaves the submodule associated to $`M(h_1,\mathrm{},h_{2n})`$ in the Virasoro module decomposition invariant, so it normalizes the Lie algebra $`𝔥(V_L)_1`$. x

###### Definition 2.4

Elements of $`(V_L)_1`$ act as locally finite derivations under the $`0^{\mathrm{th}}`$ binary composition on $`V_L`$. Such endomorphisms may be exponentiated to elements of $`\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(V_L)`$. For $`h𝔥`$, we define $`\eta (h):=\mathrm{𝑒𝑥𝑝}(2\pi ih_0)`$, so that $`\eta `$ is a homomorphism from $`𝔥`$ to $`\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(V_L)`$. Let $`T:=\eta (𝔥)`$ be the associated torus of automorphisms. The scale factor $`2\pi i`$ gives us the exact sequence

$$0L^{}𝔥\stackrel{\eta }{}T1.$$

Let $`N:=N(T)`$ be the normalizer of the torus $`T`$ in $`\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(V_L)`$ and denote by $`\stackrel{~}{W}`$ the lift of $`W:=\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(L)`$ to a subgroup of $`\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(V_L)`$, as described in Appendix 5.2. Finally, we need the subgroup $`K:=\mathrm{𝑒𝑥𝑝}(2\pi ix_0)x(V_L)_1`$.

###### Proposition 2.5

For any lattice VOA we have

1. $`N=T\stackrel{~}{W}`$ and $`N/TW`$;
2. $`\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(V_L)=KN`$ and $`K`$ is a normal subgroup.

Proof. Part (i) follows from \[DN\] and the construction of $`\stackrel{~}{W}`$ given in Appendix 5.2; part (ii) is due to \[DN\]. x

###### Definition 2.6

For a subset $`X`$ of $`L`$, let $`W_X`$ be its setwise stabilizer. We can identify $`X`$ as a subset $`X`$ of $`V_L`$ via the embedding $`L𝔥`$. Let $`\stackrel{~}{W}_X`$ indicate the setwise stabilizer of $`X`$ in $`\stackrel{~}{W}`$.

When $`X`$ is a lattice frame, $`D_X`$ denotes the subgroup of $`W_X`$ which stabilizes each subset $`\{\pm x\}`$ of $`X`$ (so $`D_X`$ acts “diagonally” with respect to the double basis $`X`$). Always, $`1D_X`$. Let $`\stackrel{~}{D}_X`$ be the preimage in $`\stackrel{~}{W}`$.

Given a lattice frame $`XL`$ we will describe the intersection $`GN`$ of the frame group $`G`$ for the associated VF $`F`$ with $`N`$. By using Prop. 2.2 we will show how to get $`G_𝒞`$ in the course of studying $`GT`$ and $`GN`$.

###### Definition 2.7 (The code $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and integers $`k`$, $`\mathrm{}`$)

Recall $`n=\mathrm{𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑘}(L)`$. Let $`X`$ be the lattice frame and $`M`$ the associated sublattice. We observe that $`MLL^{}M^{}=\frac{1}{4}M`$ and $`M`$ determines a $`_4`$-code $`\mathrm{\Delta }_4^n`$ which corresponds to $`L/MM^{}/M`$ by the identification $`M^{}/M_4^n`$ extending some $`\{\pm 1\}`$-equivariant bijection of $`\frac{1}{4}X`$ with the set of vectors $`(0,\mathrm{},0,\pm 1,0,\mathrm{},0)`$ (cf. \[DGH\], p. 462).

There are integers $`\mathrm{}`$ and $`k`$ such that the code $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is, as an abelian group, isomorphic to $`2^{\mathrm{}}\times 4^k`$.

By Th. 4.7 of \[DGH\], one has $`k=\mathrm{𝑑𝑖𝑚}(𝒟)`$. We have $`\mathrm{}+2kn`$ since $`L`$ is integral and $`\mathrm{}+2k=n`$ if and only if $`L`$ is self-dual. Note that since $`L`$ contains a frame sublattice, its determinant must be an even power of $`2`$. In terms of the $`_4`$-code $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ we get for its automorphism group

$$\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(\mathrm{\Delta })W_X\mathrm{𝑀𝑜𝑛}(n,_4)2^n:\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_n$$

and $`D_X`$ is a normal subgroup of sign changes in $`W_X`$.

###### Theorem 2.8 (The intersection $`GN`$)

For the frame stabilizer $`G`$ and the normal subgroups $`G_𝒞`$ and $`G_𝒟`$ we have:

1. $`G_𝒟T`$, $`G_𝒟=\eta (\frac{1}{2}M+L^{})(\frac{1}{2}M+L^{})/L^{}2^k`$;
2. $`G_𝒞N`$, $`G_𝒞T\mathrm{\Delta }2^{\mathrm{}}\times 4^k`$, $`G_𝒞/(G_𝒞T)D_X`$;
3. $`GT2^{n\mathrm{}k}\times 4^{\mathrm{}}\times 8^k`$, $`GN=(GT)\stackrel{~}{W}_X`$, $`(GN)/G_𝒞2(W_X/D_X)`$, where the wreath product is taken with respect to the action of $`W_X/D_X`$ on the $`n`$-set of pairs $`\{\pm x\}`$, $`xX`$.

Proof. First, we describe $`GT`$. The group $`T`$ acts on the VF, consisting of elements of the form $`\frac{1}{16}x(1)^2\pm \frac{1}{4}(e^x+e^x)`$, $`xX`$. A transformation $`\eta (h)\eta (𝔥)=T`$ will fix $`x(1)^2`$ and send $`e^x+e^x`$ to $`ae^x+a^1e^x`$, with $`a=e^{2\pi i(h,x)}`$.

Using \[DGH\], Th. 4.7, we see that $`\eta (h)T`$ is in $`G_𝒟`$ if $`(h,L\frac{1}{2}M)`$, i.e., if $`h2M^{}+L^{}=\frac{1}{2}M+L^{}`$. Since $`\eta (\frac{1}{2}M+L^{})(\frac{1}{2}M+L^{})/L^{}2^k`$ has the same order as $`\widehat{𝒟}G_𝒟`$, part (i) is proven.

For an element $`\eta (h)`$ of $`T`$ to centralize the frame, the requirement is all of the $`a`$ above equal $`1`$, which is equivalent to $`(h,M)`$. This defines the set $`M^{}=\frac{1}{4}M`$, and its image is $`\eta (M^{})(M^{}+L^{})/L^{}=M^{}/L^{}L/M\mathrm{\Delta }2^{\mathrm{}}\times 4^k`$.

For $`\eta (h)T`$ to stabilize the frame, the requirement is that all $`a\{\pm 1\}`$, which is equivalent to $`(h,M)\frac{1}{2}`$, i.e., $`h\frac{1}{2}M^{}=\frac{1}{8}M`$. The image of $`\frac{1}{8}M`$ under $`\eta `$ is isomorphic to $`(\frac{1}{8}M+L^{})/L^{}2^{n\mathrm{}k}\times 4^{\mathrm{}}\times 8^k`$. The first part of (iii) follows.

For the rest of (ii), one has $`G_𝒞N`$ by Corollary 2.3. Recall notations from Def. 2.6. It is clear that $`G_𝒞(GT)\stackrel{~}{D}_X`$. The action of $`GT`$ on the VF implies that $`G_𝒞`$ meets every coset of $`GT`$ in $`(GT)\stackrel{~}{D}_X`$, i.e., $`(GT)\stackrel{~}{D}_X=(GT)G_𝒞`$, whence $`G_𝒞/(G_𝒞T)D_X`$.

The last two statements of (iii) follow from (ii), the structure of $`GT`$ and Proposition 5.10 (ii). In more detail, $`GN`$ acts on $`X`$ and on $`F`$. In fact, there is the $`GN`$-equivariant map $`FX/\{\pm 1\}`$ by $`\frac{1}{16}x(1)^2\pm \frac{1}{4}(e^x+e^x)\{\pm x\}`$, for $`xX`$. Now, on $`X/\{\pm 1\}`$, $`GN`$ induces $`W_X/D_X`$. The kernel modulo $`G_𝒞`$ is at most a group of order $`2^n`$, where $`n=|X/\{\pm 1\}|`$. On the other hand, $`GT`$ induces a group of this order on $`X`$ and it is in the kernel of this action. Consider the partition $`P`$ of $`X`$ into the $`n`$ pairs $`\{x,x\}`$, $`xX`$. The stabilizer of $`P`$ in $`\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_X`$ is a wreath product $`2\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_n`$, where the normal $`2^n`$ subgroup is the kernel of the action on the $`n`$-set $`P`$. By the Dedekind lemma, any subgroup $`H`$ of $`\mathrm{𝑆𝑡𝑎𝑏}(P)`$ which contains this normal subgroup is a semidirect product, and this remark applies to the action of our group $`GN`$ on $`X`$. x

From the above proof, we get these observations.

###### Corollary 2.9

The exponent of the group $`GT`$ is $`8`$ if $`k1`$. The order of $`G_𝒞`$ is $`2^{\mathrm{}+2k+e}`$, where $`2^e=|D_X|`$. Since $`1D_X`$, $`e1`$. See Tables 2 and 3 in Section 3 for certain values of $`k`$ and $`e`$ when $`V_L=V_{E_8}`$.

In fact, one can consider $`G_𝒞`$ as a group extension in several ways. The above discussion shows that $`G_𝒞`$ is an extension of the abelian group $`G_𝒞T`$ and a group isomorphic to $`D_X`$. On the other hand, $`G_𝒞`$ has the central elementary abelian subgroup $`G_𝒟2^k`$ giving elementary abelian quotient $`2^{\mathrm{}+k+e}`$ (cf. Prop. 1.1).

We next describe the centralizer of $`G_𝒞`$; to this end, we need some background from the theory of Chevalley groups.

Recall that, by definition, a Chevalley group over a field is contained in the automorphism group of a Lie algebra and has trivial center. The associated Steinberg group is a central extension of the Chevalley group and has the property that the preimage of a Cartan subgroup is abelian. See \[Ca\].

In the next result, we formally extend the “normal form” (or “canonical form”) concept for Steinberg groups to a wider class of groups which includes automorphism groups of lattice type VOAs. The notation of \[Ca\] is fairly standard: $`G`$, $`H`$, $`N`$, $`B`$, $`U`$ stand for a Steinberg group, a Cartan subgroup, a subgroup of the normalizer of the Cartan subgroup, a Borel subgroup containing $`H`$, the normal subgroup of $`B`$ generated by root groups. These groups participate in the so-called $`(B,N)`$ pair and normal form structures for $`G`$.

In this article, the symbols $`G`$ and $`N`$ have already been assigned meanings, so we shall deviate from traditional Chevalley theory notations slightly for the next two results. We shall use notations $`R`$, $`H_R`$, $`N_R`$, $`B_R`$, $`U_R`$ for a group $`R`$ with subgroups $`H_R`$, $`N_R`$, $`B_R`$, $`U_R`$ of $`R`$ which will have properties like $`G`$, $`H`$, $`N`$, $`B`$, $`U`$. In an algebraic group $`R`$, $`H_R`$ stands for a maximal torus. If $`R`$ is a torus, $`H_R=N_R=R`$ and $`U_R=1`$. If $`R`$ is an algebraic group and the connected component of the identity $`R^0`$ is a torus, then $`H_R=R^0`$, $`N_R=R`$, $`U_R=1`$. If $`R`$ is a reductive algebraic group, $`H_R`$ is a maximal torus and $`N_R`$ is its normalizer. In Steinberg groups, the group $`N_R`$ is not necessarily the full normalizer of $`H_R`$ and $`H_R=1`$ is possible (for small fields).

The automorphism groups of lattice type VOAs are reductive algebraic groups over the complex numbers, and so are an instance of the group $`R`$ of Lemma 2.10 (iii) with $`R^0`$ the connected component of the identity and $`N_R`$ the normalizer of a maximal torus, usually denoted by the symbol $`T`$ instead of $`H`$ (these subgroups lie in $`R^0`$).

###### Lemma 2.10

1. In a Steinberg group $`R`$ over a field, every element may be written uniquely in the “normal form” $`uhn_wu^{}`$, where, in usual notation,

* $`hH_R`$, a Cartan subgroup;
    * $`N_R`$ is a subgroup containing $`H_R`$ as a normal subgroup and for each $`w`$ in $`N_R/H_R`$, there is a choice of preimage $`n_w`$ in $`N_R`$;
    * $`uU_R`$, the subgroup generated by root groups for the set of positive roots;
    * $`u^{}U_{R,w}`$, the subgroup of $`U_R`$ generated by root groups associated to positive roots $`r`$ such that $`w(r)`$ is negative.
2. We have a normal form as in (i) for direct products of Steinberg groups and tori, and even for central products of universal Steinberg groups and tori.

Suppose that $`R=R_1\mathrm{}R_n`$ is a central product where $`R_i`$ is a torus or a Steinberg group, all over a common field. To each index $`i`$ is associated a sequence $`R_i`$, $`H_{R_i}`$, $`N_{R_i}`$, $`B_{R_i}`$, $`U_{R_i}`$ for which we have a normal form as in (i). Then we have a normal form for $`R`$ given by the sequence $`R`$, $`H_R`$, $`N_R`$, $`B_R`$, $`U_R`$, where $`R=R_1\mathrm{}R_n`$ and $`H_R`$ is the product of the $`H_{R_i}`$ and similarly for $`N_R`$, $`B_R`$, $`U_R`$.
3. We have a normal form as in (i) for groups $`R`$ which contain a normal subgroup $`R_0`$ which is a direct product as in (ii) such that there exists a subgroup $`N_R`$ of $`R`$ satisfying $`N_RR_0=N_{R_0}`$. It suffices to take $`H_R=H_{R_0}`$, $`U_R=U_{R_0}`$, $`B_R=B_{R_0}`$.

Proof. For (i), see \[Ca\]. Parts (ii) and (iii) are formal. x

###### Corollary 2.11

Suppose that $`R`$ is a group as in Lemma 2.10 (iii). Let $`S`$ be a subset of the Cartan subgroup $`H_R`$. Then $`C_R(S)=EC_{N_R}(S)`$, where $`E`$ is generated by all the root groups centralized by $`S`$.

Proof. Let $`gR`$ and $`sS`$. Consider $`g=uhn_wu^{}`$ in normal form and study the conjugate $`{}_{}{}^{s}g:=sgs^1={}_{}{}^{s}u{}_{}{}^{s}h{}_{}{}^{s}n_{w}^{}{}_{}{}^{s}u_{}^{}={}_{}{}^{s}uh{}_{}{}^{s}n_{w}^{}{}_{}{}^{s}u_{}^{}`$. Observe that the Cartan subgroup normalizes each root group, hence also $`U_R`$ and $`U_{R,w}`$, as in Lemma 2.10. If we write $`{}_{}{}^{s}n_{w}^{}=h_1n_w`$, for an element $`h_1H`$, then we get the normal form $`{}_{}{}^{s}u(hh_1)n_w{}_{}{}^{s}u_{}^{}`$ for $`sgs^1`$. Therefore, $`g`$ commutes with $`s`$ if and only if $`u`$, $`u^{}`$ and $`n_w`$ commute with $`s`$. x

Note that the intersection hypothesis of Lemma 2.10 (iii) and $`R=R^0N_R`$ is satisfied by complex reductive algebraic groups, in particular by $`\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(V_L)`$. ($`R^0`$ is the connected component of the identity and $`N_R`$ is the normalizer in $`R`$ of a maximal torus.)

###### Corollary 2.12

Let $`S`$ be a subset of $`T`$. Then $`C_{\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(V_L)}(S)=EC_N(S)`$, where $`E`$ is generated by all the root groups in $`K`$ centralized by $`S`$.

###### Definition 2.13

In a torus $`T`$, let $`T_{(m)}=\{uTu^m=1\}_m^{\mathrm{𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑘}(T)}`$, for an integer $`m>0`$.

###### Corollary 2.14

1. $`C_T(G_𝒞)T_{(2)}`$.
2. $`G_𝒞^{}1`$.
3. $`C_{\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(V_L)}(G_𝒞)C_{\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(V_L)}(G_𝒞T)N`$.
4. $`TC_{\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(V_L)}(G_𝒞)/T`$ corresponds to a subgroup of $`W_X`$ under the identification of $`N/T`$ with $`W`$.

Proof. Since $`G_𝒞`$ contains an element $`u`$ corresponding to $`1D_X`$, we have $`C_T(G_𝒞)C_T(u)=T_{(2)}`$, proving (i).

For the proof of (ii), note that $`G_𝒞T`$ has exponent $`4`$.

For (iii), recall that $`G_𝒞T=\eta (M^{})`$. Since $`\eta (M^{})T`$, a maximal torus, we use Lemma 2.12 to deduce that the centralizer of $`\eta (M^{})`$ in $`\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(V_L)`$ is $`EC_N(\eta (M^{}))`$, where $`E`$ is generated by all the root groups with respect to $`T`$ which are centralized by $`\eta (M^{})`$. There are no such root groups since $`(M^{})^{}=M`$, which contains no roots. So, $`E=1`$.

For (iv), just observe that $`C_{\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(V_L)}(G_𝒞)`$ is a subgroup of $`N`$, and leaves invariant $`\eta (M^{})`$. So, in its action on $`𝔥`$, it preserves $`M^{}`$ and $`M`$, hence also $`X`$x

###### Theorem 2.15

Suppose that $`L^{}`$ contains no nonzero elements of $`\frac{1}{4}X+\frac{1}{4}X`$ (e.g., this holds if $`L^{}`$ has no vectors of squared length $`\frac{1}{2}`$ and $`1`$). Then
$`C_{\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(V_L)}(G_𝒞)T_{(2)}`$.

Proof. Let $`C:=C_{\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(V_L)}(G_𝒞)`$. Use Cor. 2.14 (iv) and suppose that $`cC`$ corresponds to a nonidentity element of $`W_X`$. Then there is $`xX`$ so that $`cxx`$. Since $`c`$ is trivial on $`G_𝒞T=\eta (M^{})M^{}/L^{}`$, we get $`\frac{1}{4}x\frac{1}{4}cxL^{}\{0\}`$, a contradiction. So, $`CT`$. From Cor. 2.14 (i), we get $`C=C_T(G_𝒞)T_{(2)}`$x

###### Corollary 2.16

$`C_{\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(V_L)}(G_𝒞)T_{(2)}`$ if $`L`$ is self-dual.

Proof. Since $`L=L^{}`$, every element of $`L^{}`$ has even integer norm, so this is obvious. x

###### Remark 2.17

1. When the conclusion of Theorem 2.15 holds, the subgroup $`C_{\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(V_L)}(G_𝒞)`$ of $`T_{(2)}`$ depends just on the action of $`D_X`$ on $`T_{(2)}\frac{1}{2}L^{}/L^{}`$.
2. In the $`E_8`$ lattice example, $`C_{E_8()}(G_𝒞)T_{(2)}`$, by Cor. 2.16. For $`k=1`$, $`C_{E_8()}(G_𝒞)`$ is contained in $`G_𝒞`$; for $`k=4`$, it is not contained in $`G_𝒞4^4:2`$ (in this case, $`C_{E_8()}(G_𝒞)=T_{(2)}`$). See Section 4.

### 2.2 Lattices from marked binary codes

In the more special situation where a VOA is constructed with the help of binary codes there exists a so-called triality automorphism $`\sigma `$. The triality automorphism was first defined in \[G82\] as an automorphism of the Griess algebra and in \[FLM\] it was extended to an automorphism of the Moonshine module $`V^{\mathrm{}}`$. In \[DGM, DGM2\], it was shown that for any doubly even self-dual code $`C`$ one can define $`\sigma `$ for both of the VOAs $`V_{L_C}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{V}_{\stackrel{~}{L}_C}`$ (cf. \[DGH\], Sect. 4, for the notation).

For binary codes we introduced in \[DGH\] the notation of a marking.

###### Definition 2.18

Let $`n`$ be even. A marking of a length $`n`$ binary code $`C`$ is a partition of the $`n`$ coordinates into $`n/2`$ sets of size $`2`$.

The binary code is a subspace of $`𝔽_2^n`$, but it may be considered as a subset of $`^n`$ by interpreting the coordinates $`0`$ and $`1`$ modulo $`2`$ as the ordinary integers $`0`$ and $`1`$.

For a binary code there is the lattice

$$L_C=\{\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(c+x)cC,x(2)^d\}.$$

The lattice $`L_C`$ is integral and even if the code $`C`$ is doubly-even. Every marking of the binary code $`C`$ determines a frame sublattice inside $`L_C`$ (cf. \[DGH\], p. 425).

Again, let $`F`$ be the VF associated to this lattice frame.

###### Theorem 2.19 (cf. \[DGH\], p. 432)

For the VF $`F`$ inside the lattice VOA $`V_{L_C}`$ constructed from a marked binary doubly-even self-dual code $`C`$, there is a triality automorphism $`\sigma `$ inside $`G(F)`$.

Its image $`\overline{\sigma }G/G_𝒞\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_F\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_{2n}`$ interchanges the Virasoro elements $`\omega _{4i2}`$ and $`\omega _{4i1}`$ for $`i=1`$, $`\mathrm{}`$, $`n/2`$ and fixes the others.

Proof. The existence of $`\sigma `$ was proven \[FLM\], Th. 11.2.1, and \[DGM, DGM2\].

The description is the following (see \[FLM\], (11.1.72), and \[DGM\]): Let $`A_1=\sqrt{2}`$ be the root lattice of $`\mathrm{𝑆𝐿}_2()`$. The group $`\mathrm{𝑆𝐿}_2()`$ acts on the lattice VOA $`V_{A_1}`$ and its module $`V_{A_1+1/\sqrt{2}}`$. On

$$(V_{A_1})_1x(1)e^xe^x𝔰l_2(),$$

where $`x`$ is a generator of the $`A_1`$ root lattice, let $`\overline{\mu }\mathrm{𝑃𝑆𝐿}_2()\mathrm{𝑆𝑂}_3()`$ be the linear map defined by

$$\overline{\mu }(x(1))=e^x+e^x,\overline{\mu }(e^x+e^x)=x(1)\text{and}\overline{\mu }(e^xe^x)=(e^xe^x).$$

Let $`\mu `$ be one of the two elements in $`\mathrm{𝑆𝐿}_2()`$ which maps modulo the center to $`\overline{\mu }`$. On $`V_{L_C}_{cC}V_{A_1+c_1/\sqrt{2}}\mathrm{}V_{A_1+c_n/\sqrt{2}}`$, there is the tensor product action of the direct product of $`n`$ copies of $`\mathrm{𝑆𝐿}_2()`$. The triality automorphism is defined as the diagonal element $`\sigma =(\mu ,\mathrm{},\mu )\mathrm{𝑆𝐿}_2()\times \mathrm{}\times \mathrm{𝑆𝐿}_2()`$ in it. For $`n/8`$ odd, the definition has to be adjusted by replacing the last component by $`\kappa \mu `$, where $`\kappa `$ is the nontrivial central element of $`\mathrm{𝑆𝐿}_2()`$.

Since the code $`C`$ is even, the action of $`\sigma `$ on $`V_{L_C}`$ is independent of the choice for $`\mu `$ (cf. \[FLM\], Remark 11.2.3). One has $`\sigma ^2=1`$.

Now we describe how $`\sigma `$ acts on the Virasoro frame $`FV_{A_1^n}`$ for the standard marking $`\{(1,2),(3,4),\mathrm{},(n1,n)\}`$: For $`i=1`$, $`\mathrm{}`$, $`n/2`$, the Virasoro elements are

$`\omega _{4i3}`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{16}(x_{2i1}(1)+x_{2i}(1))^2+\frac{1}{4}(e^{x_{2i1}+x_{2i}}+e^{x_{2i1}x_{2i}}),`$
$`\omega _{4i2}`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{16}(x_{2i1}(1)+x_{2i}(1))^2\frac{1}{4}(e^{x_{2i1}+x_{2i}}+e^{x_{2i1}x_{2i}}),`$
$`\omega _{4i1}`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{16}(x_{2i1}(1)x_{2i}(1))^2+\frac{1}{4}(e^{x_{2i1}x_{2i}}+e^{x_{2i1}+x_{2i}}),`$
$`\omega _{4i}`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{16}(x_{2i1}(1)x_{2i}(1))^2\frac{1}{4}(e^{x_{2i1}x_{2i}}+e^{x_{2i1}+x_{2i}}),`$
where $`x_i`$ is the generator of the $`i`$-th component of the lattice $`A_1^n`$. The action of $`\mathrm{𝑆𝐿}_2()_{2i1}\times \mathrm{𝑆𝐿}_2()_{2i}`$ on $`x_{2i1}(1)^2`$ and $`x_{2i}(1)^2`$ is trivial and on the vector space spanned by the nine elements

$$x_{2i1}(1)x_{2i}(1),x_{2i1}(1)e^{x_{2i}},\mathrm{},e^{x_{2i1}}e^{x_{2i}}=e^{x_{2i1}x_{2i}}$$

it is the tensor product action of the adjoint action of both factors. The remaining factors $`\mathrm{𝑆𝐿}_2()_j`$ act trivially. It follows immediately by computation that $`\sigma `$ fixes $`\omega _{4i3}`$ and $`\omega _{4i}`$ and interchanges $`\omega _{4i2}`$ with $`\omega _{4i1}`$. x

###### Remark 2.20

A Virasoro frame coming from a lattice frame alone may not have a triality.

## 3 General results about Virasoro frames in $`V_{E_8}`$

From now on, let $`V`$ be the $`E_8`$ lattice VOA, so one has $`\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(V)=E_8()`$ (cf. \[DN\]). In \[DGH\], we found the five Virasoro frames $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$, $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ inside $`V`$. They were constructed with the help of frames in the root lattice $`E_8`$ and markings of the binary Hamming code $`H_8`$ of length $`8`$ as follows:

There are, up to automorphisms, three markings of the Hamming code $`H_8`$, denoted by $`\alpha `$, $`\beta `$, $`\gamma `$ (Th. 5.1 of \[DGH\]). They give the three frame sublattices $`𝒦_8`$, $`𝒦_8^{}`$ and $`_8`$ inside the $`E_8`$ lattice. The final frame $`𝒪_8`$ can be obtained by a twisted construction from $`\gamma `$ (see Th. 5.2. of \[DGH\]). The four VFs $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$, and $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ come from the frames $`𝒦_8`$, $`𝒦_8^{}`$, $`_8`$ and $`𝒪_8`$. The fifth VF $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is obtained by a twisted construction from $`𝒪_8`$ (see Th. 5.3. of \[DGH\]). Table 1 summarizes this. In it, the arrow $``$ (resp. $``$) denotes the untwisted (resp. twisted) construction.

In \[DGH\], Th. 5.3, we showed further that the possible values of $`k=\mathrm{𝑑𝑖𝑚}(𝒟)`$ for any VF are $`1`$, $`2`$, $`3`$, $`4`$, $`5`$ and that they occur for the VFs $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$, $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$, and $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, in this order. For the values $`k\{1,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2},\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3},\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}\}`$, the VF is unique up to automorphisms of $`V`$. For $`k=5`$ this was a conjecture, now proven in Theorem 4.15.

To apply the general discussion about $`GN`$ from the last section, we summarize in Table 2 again the necessary information about the four frame sublattices and the associated $`_4`$-code $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ already given in \[DGH\], Th. 5.2, and \[CS\].

This table together with Theorem 2.8 proves the next theorem.

###### Theorem 3.1

For $`k=1`$, $`2`$, $`3`$, and $`4`$ the structure of $`G_𝒞`$ and $`(GN)/G_𝒞`$ is given in Table 3.

The groups $`G_𝒟`$ are well known subgroups of $`\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(V)E_8()`$, see Prop. 3.5. For general background on subgroups of $`E_8()`$, see \[CG\] and the recent survey \[GR99\].

###### Proposition 3.2 (Involutions in $`E_8()`$)

In the group $`E_8()`$, there are two classes of involutions, denoted $`2A`$ and $`2B`$. Their respective centralizers are connected groups of types $`A_1E_7`$, $`D_8`$, and in more detail, their isomorphism types are $`\mathrm{𝐻𝑆𝑝𝑖𝑛}(16,)`$, $`2A_1E_7`$, which is a nontrivial central product of a fundamental $`\mathrm{𝑆𝐿}(2,)`$ subgroup with a simply connected group of type $`E_7`$ (the factors have common center of order $`2`$). On the adjoint module, of dimension $`248`$, the spectra are $`1^{136},1^{112}`$ and $`1^{120},1^{128}`$.

###### Remark 3.3

Conjugacy classes and centralizers for elements of small orders are discussed in several articles, e.g. \[CG, G91\].

We recall some information about $`2`$-local subgroups of $`E_8()`$.

###### Definition 3.4

A subgroup $`S`$ of a group $`K`$ is $`Y`$-pure if all nonidentity elements of $`S`$ lie in the conjugacy class $`Y`$ of $`K`$. (This definition is often used for elementary abelian $`p`$-subgroups of a larger group.)

###### Proposition 3.5

For each integer $`k=1`$, $`2`$, $`3`$, $`4`$, and $`5`$, there is up to conjugacy a unique $`2B`$-pure elementary abelian subgroup of rank $`k`$ in $`E_8()`$. These groups are toral for $`k4`$ and nontoral for $`k=5`$. Their centralizers and normalizers are described in Table 4.

Proof. \[CG\], (3.8); \[G91\]. x

Let $`F`$ be any VF in $`V`$ and let $`𝒟`$ the associated binary code. We will identify $`G_𝒟`$ as a $`2B`$-pure subgroup in Prop. 3.7.

###### Proposition 3.6

The binary code $`𝒟`$ is equivalent to a code generated by the first $`k=1`$, $`2`$, $`3`$, $`4`$, $`5`$ codewords of the list $`1^{16}`$, $`1^80^8`$, $`(1^40^4)^2`$, $`(1100)^4`$, $`(10)^8`$.

Proof. This result was obtained during the proof of Theorem 5.3 of \[DGH\] by using the decomposition polynomial. x

###### Proposition 3.7

Every involution in $`G_𝒟`$ is of type $`2B`$, so $`G_𝒟`$ is $`2B`$-pure.

###### Remark 3.8

For a general FVOA, one may not expect the group $`G_𝒟`$ to be pure.

Proof. From Proposition 3.6, the code $`𝒟`$ has one codeword of weight $`0`$, $`2^k2`$ codewords of weight $`8`$ and one of weight $`16`$. For the components $`V^I`$ of $`V=_{I𝒟}V^I`$ we have the following decomposition into $`T_{16}`$-modules (see again \[DGH\] proof of Th. 5.3): For $`I=0^{16}`$: $`V^0=_{c𝒞}V(c)`$ with $`𝒞=𝒟^{}`$. For the weight of $`I`$ equal to $`8`$: $`V^I=_{h_i\{0,\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{16}\}}2^{5k}M(h_1,\mathrm{},h_{16})`$, where $`h_i=\frac{1}{16}`$ for $`iI`$ and $`h_i=\frac{1}{2}`$ for an odd number of $`iI`$ and $`h_i=0`$ otherwise. For $`I=1^{16}`$: $`V^I=2^{8k}M(\frac{1}{16},\mathrm{},\frac{1}{16})`$. This gives $`8(2^{5k}1)`$, $`82^{5k}`$, and $`2^{8k}`$ for the dimension of the weight one part $`V_1^I`$ of $`V^I`$, respectively.

Let $`\mu G_𝒟\widehat{𝒟}`$ be an involution. We investigate its action on the weight one part $`V_1`$ of $`V`$. The $`2^{k1}`$ codewords $`I𝒟`$ for which $`\mu `$ acts by $`1`$ on $`V^I`$, i.e., with $`\mu (I)0`$, have weight $`8`$ or $`16`$. It follows from above that the $`1`$-eigenspace of $`\mu `$ on $`V_1`$ has dimension $`2^{k1}2^{8k}=128`$ and the $`+1`$-eigenspace has dimension $`248128=120`$. Therefore, $`\mu `$ is an involution of type $`2B`$ described in Prop. 3.2. xxxxxxxxx x

In our case, the $`2B`$-pureness of $`G_𝒟`$ implies that when it is toral (i.e., $`k4`$), it lies in a maximal totally singular subspace of $`T_{(2)}`$. (The natural quadratic form on this subgroup of the torus is given in \[G91\].) For $`E_8()`$, the set of totally singular subspaces of $`T_{(2)}`$ of a given dimension form an orbit under the Weyl group. For this reason, $`G_𝒟`$ is characterized up to conjugacy in $`E_8()`$ by the integer $`k`$. See \[CG, G91\] for a more detailed discussion.

###### Definition 3.9

Given a frame $`F`$, we denote by $`t(f)`$ the Miyamoto involution of type $`2`$ associated to $`fF`$ (see \[M96\]).

The $`D`$-group $`G_𝒟(F)`$ equals $`t(F)=t(f)fF`$, which is naturally identified with $`\widehat{𝒟}`$, cf. Prop. 1.1. We have seen that for a frame $`F`$ the $`D`$-group $`G_𝒟(F)`$ is $`2B`$-pure of rank $`k`$ and all values $`k\{0,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1},\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2},\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3},\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4},\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}5}\}`$ are obtained by the frames of \[DGH\] and described at the beginning of this section. We shall see that the correspondence between frames and $`2B`$-pure groups is not monic in general. Note also that there is a bijection between $`D`$-groups and subVOAs denoted $`V^0`$ in \[DGH\], defined by $`t(F)V^{t(F)}`$.

###### Proposition 3.10

Let $`F=\{\omega _1,\mathrm{},\omega _{16}\}`$ be a Virasoro frame for $`V`$ and let $`k=\mathrm{𝑑𝑖𝑚}(𝒟)\{1,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2},\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3},\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4},\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}5}\}`$. One has $`|\{t(\omega _i)\omega _iF\}|=2^{k1}`$ and so there are $`2^{k1}`$ distinct Miyamoto involutions coming from the frame. Their set-theoretic complement in the $`D`$-group $`G_𝒟`$ is a codimension one subspace.

Proof. Every Miyamoto involution $`t(\omega _i)`$ acts on $`V^I`$, $`I𝒟`$, by $`1`$ or $`1`$ depending on whether the index $`i`$ is contained in the support of $`I`$ or not. Using the base of the code $`𝒟`$ given in Proposition 3.6, we see that $`t(\omega _i)`$ always acts as $`1`$ on the first base vector and that any combination of signs on the remaining $`k1`$ base vectors is possible. x

###### Corollary 3.11

The normalizer of the set of Miyamoto involutions induces $`\mathrm{𝐴𝐺𝐿}(k1,2)`$ on both the $`D`$-group and on the set of Miyamoto involutions in it.

Proof. Let $`G_𝒟`$ be the $`D`$-group. Since $`G_𝒟`$ is $`2B`$-pure, $`N(G_𝒟)/C(G_𝒟)\mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(k,2)`$ for all $`k\{1,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2},\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3},\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4},\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}5}\}`$ by Prop. 3.5, whence the Corollary. x

###### Lemma 3.12

For all $`k`$, the factor group $`G/G_𝒞`$ embeds in $`\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_d\mathrm{𝐴𝐺𝐿}(k1,2)`$, where $`d=2^{5k}`$.

Proof. By Theorem 2.8 (3) of \[DGH\], $`G/G_𝒞`$ must be a subgroup of $`\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(m_h(V))\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(𝒟)\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_{16}`$ (see \[DGH\], Def. 2.7 for the notation). Using Proposition 3.6 and Theorem C.3 (ii) of \[DGH\] we see immediately that $`\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(𝒟)\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_d\mathrm{𝐴𝐺𝐿}(k1,2)`$. x

###### Remark 3.13

We shall see in Corollary 3.19 that $`G(F)`$ induces the permutation group $`\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_{2^{5k}}\mathrm{𝐴𝐺𝐿}(k1,2)`$ on $`F`$. Unfortunately, this statement does not seem to follow in an obvious way from the previous result.

###### Definition 3.14

Suppose that the group $`J`$ acts on the set $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. A block is a nonempty subset $`B\mathrm{\Omega }`$ so that $`g(B)=B`$ or $`Bg(B)=\mathrm{}`$ for all $`gJ`$. A partition of $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ into blocks is called a system of imprimitivity. If the only systems of imprimitivity are the trivial ones ($`\{\mathrm{\Omega }\}`$, and all $`1`$-sets), we call the action of $`J`$ on $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ primitive. Otherwise, we call the action imprimitive. Note that primitivity implies transitivity if $`|\mathrm{\Omega }|>2`$.

###### Theorem 3.15 (Jordan, 1873)

A primitive subgroup of $`\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_n`$ which contains a $`p`$-cycle, for a prime number $`pn3`$, is $`\mathrm{𝐴𝑙𝑡}_n`$ or $`\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_n`$.

Proof. \[W\], Th. 13.9. x

###### Notation 3.16

We say that the partition of the natural number $`n`$ has type or partition type $`p^aq^b\mathrm{}`$ (for distinct natural numbers $`p`$, $`q`$, $`\mathrm{}`$) if it has exactly $`a`$ parts of size $`p`$, $`b`$ parts of size $`q`$ etc., and the sum $`ap+bq+\mathrm{}`$ is $`n`$. In $`\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_n`$, the stabilizer of such a partition is isomorphic to $`\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_p\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_a\times \mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_q\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_b\times \mathrm{}`$, and when we write such an isomorphism type for a subgroup of $`\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_n`$, it is understood to be the stabilizer of a partition (unless stated otherwise).

###### Lemma 3.17

If $`p>1`$, $`a>1`$, $`\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_p\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_a`$ (the natural subgroup of $`\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_{pa}`$ fixing a partition of type $`p^a`$) is a maximal subgroup of $`\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_{pa}`$.

Proof. Let $`P`$ be the partition fixed by the natural subgroup $`H\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_p\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_a`$ of $`\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_{pa}`$ and let $`K`$ be a subgroup, $`HK\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_{pa}`$. If $`K`$ acts primitively on the $`pa`$ letters, it is $`\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_{pa}`$, by the Jordan theorem 3.15. We suppose $`K`$ acts imprimitively and seek a contradiction. Let $`B`$ be a block from such a system of imprimitively and suppose that $`BA\mathrm{}`$ for some $`AP`$. Then, since the action of $`Stab_H(A)`$ on $`A`$ is $`\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_A`$, we get $`AB`$. Therefore, $`B`$ is a union of parts of $`P`$. Since the action of $`H`$ on the parts of $`P`$ is $`\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_P`$, we deduce that $`B=A`$ since $`|B|<pa`$. Therefore, $`P`$ is the system fixed by $`K`$, whence $`H=K`$, and we are done. x

###### Lemma 3.18

Let $`n=pqr`$ with $`p>1`$, $`q>1`$, $`r1`$ and let $`H\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_p\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_{qr}`$ be the subgroup of $`\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_n`$ fixing a partition $`P`$ of type $`p^{qr}`$. Let $`Q`$ be a partition of type $`(pq)^r`$ of which $`P`$ is a refinement and let $`H_0`$ be the subgroup of $`\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_n`$ which permutes the parts of $`P`$ and fixes all the parts of $`Q`$. Thus, $`H_0_1^r\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_p\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_q`$.

Let $`G_0_1^r\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_{pq}`$ be the subgroup of $`\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_n`$ fixing all parts of $`Q`$. Let $`gG_0`$ and write $`g=g_1\mathrm{}g_r`$ as a product of permutations for which $`\mathrm{𝑠𝑢𝑝𝑝}(g_i)`$ is contained in $`Q_i`$, the $`i^{\mathrm{𝑡ℎ}}`$ part of $`Q`$. Suppose that each $`g_i`$ is not in $`H_0`$. Then $`H_0,g=H_0,g_1,\mathrm{},g_r=G_0_1^r\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_{pq}`$.

Proof. Define $`J=H_0,g`$ and let $`G_i\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_{pq}`$ be the set of permutations which are the identity outside $`Q_i`$, the $`i^{\mathrm{th}}`$ part of $`Q`$, and let $`H_i=HG_i\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_p\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_q`$.

We study the action of $`J`$ on $`Q_i`$, and use the property that $`H_i`$ is maximal in $`G_i`$ (Lemma 3.17). We have the natural projection maps $`G_0=G_1\times \mathrm{}\times G_rG_i`$. Since $`J`$ projects onto $`G_i`$ (by maximality of $`H_i`$ and the hypotheses on the $`g_i`$), it follows that $`JG_i`$ is a normal subgroup of $`G_i`$. The only normal subgroup of $`G_i`$ which contains $`H_i`$ is $`G_i`$: Since $`H_i`$ contains a transposition, a normal overgroup contains all transpositions, so equals $`G_i`$. We conclude that $`J`$ contains each $`G_i`$ and is therefore equal to $`G_0`$. x

###### Corollary 3.19

For $`k=1`$, $`2`$, $`3`$, $`4`$, let $`d=2^{5k}`$. Then $`G/G_𝒞\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_d\mathrm{𝐴𝐺𝐿}(k1,2)`$.

Proof. Use Lemma 3.12 and Theorem 3.1. For $`k=4`$ we are already done. For $`k=1`$, $`2`$, and $`3`$ apply Lemma 3.18 with $`p=2`$, $`q=2^{4k}`$, $`r=2^{k1}`$ and use the description of the image $`\overline{\sigma }G/G_𝒞`$ of the triality automorphism $`\sigma `$ given in Theorem 2.19. x

###### Remark 3.20

The conclusion of Cor. 3.19 is also true for $`k=5`$, but there is no Cartan subalgebra naturally associated to the frame in the nontwisted lattice construction of $`V`$, hence no obvious analogue of Theorem 2.8.

## 4 The five classes of frames in $`V_{E_8}`$

In this section, we describe and characterize the frame stabilizer as a subgroup of $`\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(V)=E_8()`$. We also prove the uniqueness of the Virasoro frame for $`k=5`$.

### 4.1 The case $`k=1`$

###### Theorem 4.1 (Characterization of $`G`$, $`k=1`$)

The $`C`$-group $`G_𝒞`$ is extraspecial of plus type, i.e., $`G_𝒞2_+^{1+14}`$. Also, $`G_𝒞`$ is the unique subgroup of its isomorphism type up to conjugacy in $`\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(V)`$ and $`G=N_{\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(V)}(G_𝒞)2_+^{1+14}.\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_{16}`$

Proof. We now show that $`G_𝒞`$ is extraspecial. Since $`G_𝒞`$ is nonabelian and since $`G_𝒟2`$ and $`G_𝒞/G_𝒟`$ is elementary abelian, it follows that $`G_𝒞^{}=G_𝒟`$.

Now let $`Z`$ be the center of $`G_𝒞`$. It is clear from the action of $`O_2(\stackrel{~}{W}_X)`$ that $`ZG_𝒞`$ has order $`2`$, corresponding to the coset $`e_i+L`$. Due to this action, which is faithful (note that an element corresponding to $`1`$ inverts elements of order $`4`$ in $`TG_𝒞`$), it follows that $`Z`$ has order $`2`$. Since $`G_𝒞`$ has nilpotence class at most $`2`$, it follows that $`Z=G_𝒞^{}`$ and so $`G_𝒞`$ is extraspecial.

From the action of a $`\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_8`$ subgroup of $`\stackrel{~}{W}_X`$, we see that its composition factors within $`G_𝒞`$ are irreducibles of dimensions $`1`$ (three times) and $`6`$ (twice), and that the section $`G_𝒞T/Z`$ is an indecomposable module with ascending factors of dimensions $`6`$, $`1`$ and that $`G_𝒞/G_𝒞T`$ is the dual module, an indecomposable module with ascending factors of dimensions $`1`$, $`6`$.

By \[G91\], (12.2), this extraspecial group is uniquely determined up to conjugation in $`C_{E_8()}(Z)\mathrm{𝐻𝑆𝑝𝑖𝑛}(16,)`$, and so its normalizer looks like $`2_+^{1+14}.\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_{16}`$. By Corollary 3.19, $`G=N_{\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(V)}(G_𝒞)`$ x

### 4.2 The case $`k=2`$

We get the structure $`2^{2+12}[\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_82]`$ for $`G`$, Cor. 3.19, but now we want to understand $`G`$ as a subgroup of $`E_8()`$.

###### Definition 4.2

A wreathing element in a wreath product $`G=H2`$ is an element of $`G`$ outside the direct product $`H_1\times H_2`$ of two copies of $`H`$ which are used in the definition of the wreath product. The same term applies to elements of $`G/Z`$ outside $`H_1\times H_2/Z`$, where $`Z`$ is a normal subgroup of $`G`$ such that $`ZH_1=1=ZH_2`$ (it follows that $`Z`$ is central).

###### Theorem 4.3 (Characterization of $`G`$, $`k=2`$)

$`G`$ satisfies the hypotheses of this conjugacy result:
In $`E_8()`$, there is one conjugacy class of subgroups, each of which is a semidirect product $`Xt`$, where $`t`$ has order $`2`$, $`X=X_1X_2`$ is a central product of groups of the form $`[2\times 2^{1+6}]\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_8`$ such that $`X_1X_2=Z(X_1)=Z(X_2)`$ and $`t`$ interchanges $`X_1`$ and $`X_2`$.

Proof. Let $`H:=N(G_𝒟)2^2D_4^2[2\times \mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_3]`$ and let $`H_1`$, $`H_2`$ be the two central factors of $`H^0`$. Define $`G_i:=GH_1`$. From the structure of $`H/H^0`$, it is clear that $`G_0:=GH^0`$ has index dividing $`4`$ in $`2^{2+12}[\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_82]`$, whence $`G_0O_2(G)`$. For $`i\{1,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}\}`$, let $`i^{}`$ be the other index.

First we argue that $`G_i[2\times 2^{1+6}]\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_8`$. Consider the quotient map $`\pi _i:H^0H^0/G_i\mathrm{𝑃𝑆𝑂}(8,)`$. Then $`\pi _i(O_2(G))`$ is an elementary abelian $`2`$-group in $`H^0/G_i`$, so has rank at most $`8`$ \[G91\]. Since $`G_𝒟\mathrm{𝑘𝑒𝑟}(\pi _i)=H_i^{}`$ and $`\mathrm{𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑘}(G_𝒞/G_𝒟)=12`$, it follows that $`G_𝒞H_i>G_𝒟`$, for all $`i`$. Since $`G_𝒞H_i`$ is normal in $`G_0`$, it has order $`2^8`$ or $`2^{14}`$. The latter is impossible since then we would get a rank $`14`$ elementary abelian subgroup of $`\mathrm{𝑃𝑆𝑂}(8,)`$, which is impossible \[G91\]. The normal structure of $`G_0`$ now implies that $`G_i/G_𝒟`$ contains a copy of $`2^6:\mathrm{𝐴𝑙𝑡}_8`$ and equals this subgroup or has the shape $`2^6:\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_8`$. We now argue that the latter is the case, and this follows from embedding of $`G`$ in $`C\mathrm{𝐻𝑆𝑝𝑖𝑛}(16,)`$, the centralizer in $`E_8()`$ of $`Z(G)2`$ and using the $`16`$-dimensional projective representation of $`C`$, noting that $`G/G_𝒞`$ maps isomorphically to a natural subgroup of the form $`\mathrm{𝑃𝑆𝑂}(8,)2`$, with image $`[2^6:\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_8]2`$. It is clear from this representation, that $`G_0=G_1G_2`$ and that the outer elements $`GG_0`$ correspond to wreathing elements in the above $`\mathrm{𝑃𝑆𝑂}(8,)2`$. In $`H/H^02\times \mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_3`$ (with the second factor corresponding to simultaneous graph automorphisms on both $`H_i`$), such elements would correspond to an involution which projects nontrivially on the first factor. The reason is that a subgroup of $`\mathrm{𝑃𝑆𝑂}(8,):\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_3`$ isomorphic to $`2^6:\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_8`$ is self-normalizing. The wreathing elements in $`G`$ act nontrivially on $`G_𝒟`$ (see Corollary 3.11). This means that an involution of $`GG_0`$ projects nontrivially on the second factor of $`H/H^02\times \mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_3`$. This implies that $`G`$ is unique up to conjugacy in $`E_8()`$ and this uniqueness follows from just the isomorphism type of $`G`$ and the fact that $`G_𝒟`$ is $`2B`$-pure.

It follows that $`|G:G_0|=2`$ and that $`G_0=G_1G_2`$ (central product), $`G_1G_2=Z(G_1)=Z(G_2)2^2`$. The isomorphism type of $`G`$ will be uniquely determined if we show that there is an involution in $`GG_0`$. But this follows from the above representation in $`\mathrm{𝑆𝑂}(16,)`$ since a wreathing involution has spectrum $`\{1^8,1^8\}`$ and so lifts in the spin group to an involution \[G91, Ch\]. For $`i=1`$, $`2`$, define $`z_i`$ by $`z_i:=O_2(G_i)^{}_2`$.

Finally, we observe from the above $`8`$-dimensional representations of $`G_i`$ that $`O_2(G_i)/O_2(G_i)^{}2^7`$ is an indecomposable module for $`G_i/O_2(G_i)`$ with ascending socle factors of dimensions $`1`$ and $`6`$. Also, for both $`i`$, we may think of $`O_2(G_i)^{}2`$ as the kernel of the representation of $`H_i`$ as $`\mathrm{𝑆𝑂}(8,)`$ (rather than as a half spin group), since the above wreathing involution is realized in the degree $`16`$ orthogonal projective representation of $`C(Z(G))`$. It follows that $`O_2(G_1)^{}=O_2(G_2)^{}`$, i.e., $`z_1=z_2`$. x

### 4.3 The case $`k=3`$

Let $`H:=N(G_𝒟)2^4A_1^8.\mathrm{𝐴𝐺𝐿}(3,2)`$; then $`H^0=C(Z(H^0))`$ and $`C(O_2(H))H^0.2^3`$. See \[CG, G91\].

We have already determined in Theorem 3.1 that $`G_𝒞`$ has the shape $`2^{3+9}=2^{4+8}`$, the latter decomposition coming from the general structure of $`H`$, above.

From earlier sections, we know $`GN2^{3+9}`$. This group, with the triality of Theorem 2.19, will generate $`G`$, a group of the form below (see Cor. 3.19):

$$[2^{3+9}=2^{4+8}]\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_4^4.\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_4[2^{4+16}]\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_3\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_4.$$

What we need is a group theoretic characterization of such a subgroup of $`E_8()`$.

###### Definition 4.4

Let the groups $`X_1`$, $`\mathrm{}`$, $`X_r`$ be given and let $`X=X_1\mathrm{}X_r`$ be a central product. Let $`J`$ be the set of indices $`\{1,\mathrm{},r\}`$ and let $`S`$ be a subset of $`X`$. Let $`Z`$ be the subgroup of $`Z(X)`$ generated by all $`X_iX_jji`$; then $`X/Z`$ is a direct product of the $`X_iZ/Z`$. We define the quasiprojection of $`S`$ to $`X_J:=X_iiJ`$ to be $`X_JS^{}`$, where $`S^{}`$ is the preimage in $`X_J`$ of the projection of $`SZ/Z`$ to $`X_J/Z`$, a direct factor of $`X/Z`$, complemented by $`X_{\{1,\mathrm{},r\}J}`$. (We use this concept in the case where $`X_i`$ is quasisimple.)

Let $`Q_J`$ be the quasiprojection of $`Q`$ to $`H_J`$, $`J\{1,\mathrm{},8\}`$.

###### Theorem 4.5 (Characterization of $`G`$, $`k=3`$)

Let $`X`$ be a finite subgroup of $`E_8()`$ such that

1. $`X`$ has the form $`[2^{3+9}=2^{4+8}]\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_4^4.\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_4[2^{4+16}]\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_3\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_4`$;
2. $`X`$ has a normal subgroup $`E2^3`$ which is $`2B`$-pure.

Then:

$`X`$ is unique up to conjugacy in $`E_8()`$.

If $`H:=N_G(E)2^4A_1^8.\mathrm{𝐴𝐺𝐿}(3,2)`$, then $`XH^0[2^{3+9}=2^{4+8}]\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_4^4=2^{4+16}\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_3^4`$.

If $`H_1`$, $`\mathrm{}`$, $`H_8`$ are the $`\mathrm{𝑆𝐿}(2,)`$-components of $`H^0`$, then $`H_iX\mathrm{𝑄𝑢𝑎𝑡}_8`$ and there is a partition $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ of $`\{1,\mathrm{},8\}`$ into $`2`$-sets so that if $`A\mathrm{\Pi }`$, then $`H_iiAX[\mathrm{𝑄𝑢𝑎𝑡}_8\times \mathrm{𝑄𝑢𝑎𝑡}_8].\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_3`$ (the top $`\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_3`$ layer sits diagonally over the two $`\mathrm{𝑄𝑢𝑎𝑡}_8`$-factors).

Proof. Denote by $`U`$ the normal subgroup indicated by $`2^{3+9}=2^{4+8}`$. Let $`P\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑙}_3(X)`$, $`P33\times 3`$. Then, $`R:=PH^0`$ is abelian (property of a connected group of type $`A_1^8`$), whence $`R3^4`$ is the unique maximal abelian subgroup of $`P`$. In $`H`$, any $`2`$-group $`S`$ satisfying $`S=[S,R]`$ lies in a central product $`Q:=Q_1\mathrm{}Q_8`$ of groups $`Q_i\mathrm{𝑄𝑢𝑎𝑡}_8`$, $`Q_iH_i`$, for $`i\{1,\mathrm{},8\}`$. It follows that $`G_𝒞`$ lies in $`Q2^{4+8}`$ (see \[G91\]).

Now, let $`Z:=O_2(H)`$. Then, $`Z=Z(Q)=Q^{}`$ and $`Q/E2_+^{1+16}`$ is extraspecial with center $`Z/E`$. The outer automorphism group of $`Q/E`$ is $`O^+(16,2)`$, in which the stabilizer of a maximal isotropic subspace $`I`$ of the natural module $`M:=𝔽_2^8`$ has the form

$$2^{120}:\mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(8,2).$$

In this stabilizer, an elementary abelian subgroup of order $`3^4`$ acts on $`I`$ by a direct sum of four distinct $`2`$-dimensional irreducibles, and it has equivalent (= dual) action on $`M/I`$. It follows that $`R`$ decomposes into a direct product $`R=R_1\times R_2\times R_3\times R_4`$ and that the index set $`\{1,\mathrm{},8\}`$ has a partition into $`2`$-sets $`A(1)`$, $`\mathrm{}`$, $`A(4)`$ so that $`R_i3`$ centralizes $`H_j`$ iff $`jA(i)`$ and $`[Q,R_i]=Q_{A(i)}2^{2+4}`$ (from \[G91\], if the involution $`z_i`$ generates $`Z(Q_i)`$ and a product of $`r>0`$ distinct $`z_i`$ equals $`1`$, then $`r4`$).

So far, we have shown that the conjugacy class of a subgroup of $`X`$ of the shape $`2^{4+16}:3^4`$ is unique, namely the conjugacy class of the subgroup $`QR`$. Our frame stabilizer contains a group $`Y`$ of the form $`2^{4+16}.\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_3^42^{4+8}.\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_4^4`$ (Cor. 3.19). In $`N_G(Q)2^{4+16}\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_3^8.\mathrm{𝐴𝐺𝐿}(3,2)`$, there is a unique group containing $`QR`$ which has the form $`2^{4+16}.\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_3^42^{4+8}.\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_4^4`$ (so we now have $`GH^0`$ up to conjugacy). Such a group is contained in $`H^0`$ and in fact it is $`QRT`$, where $`T=T_1\times \mathrm{}\times T_4`$, where $`T_iH_{A(i)}`$, $`T_i4`$ and $`R_iT_i3:4`$ embeds diagonally in $`H_{A(i)}\mathrm{𝑆𝐿}(2,)\times \mathrm{𝑆𝐿}(2,)`$. Given the partition, all such choices of $`T_i`$ are equivalent under conjugation by an element of $`R^{}`$, the unique group of order $`3^8`$ in the torus $`C(R)^0`$. We now deduce the uniqueness up to conjugacy of a subgroup of the form $`[2^{4+16}.\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_3^42^{4+8}.\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_4^4].\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_4`$ by a Frattini argument on the group $`T_1T_2T_3T_4Q/Q`$ of order $`2^4`$ in $`QRT/QY/Q`$, which maps to $`H/H^0`$ as the subgroup of the degree $`8`$ permutation group $`\mathrm{𝐴𝐺𝐿}(3,2)`$ which stabilizes a partition \[DGH\], Appendix A., p. 441. Therefore, $`G`$ is determined up to conjugacy. x

###### Definition 4.6

We use the notation in the proof of the preceeding result. We say that an element of $`Q`$ may be written as a product of elements in the $`Q_i`$ and the number of such elements which are outside $`Z(Q_i)`$ is the $`Q`$-weight. We define the $`Z(Q)`$-weight of a product of a set of $`n`$ distinct $`z_i`$ to be $`n`$.

###### Remark 4.7

In this sense, the products of the $`z_i`$ which are the identity are those whose support forms a word in a Hamming code $`H_8`$ with parameters $`[8,4,4]`$.

###### Corollary 4.8

For $`k=3`$, $`G_𝒞^{}=G_𝒟`$.

Proof. It is clear that every element of $`G_𝒞/Z(Q)`$ has even $`Q`$-weight \[GR94\]. In fact, weights $`0`$, $`2`$, $`4`$ and $`8`$ all occur. It is also clear by looking in the $`Q_{A(i)}`$ that we get all even words in the generators $`z_j`$ as commutators in $`G_𝒞`$. x

### 4.4 The case $`k=4`$

We have $`G_𝒞N=N(T)`$, Cor. 2.3, and we get $`G_𝒞T4^4`$. Also, $`G_𝒞4^4:2`$ (the outer $`2`$ corresponds to an inverting element (note that every inverting element is an involution in this case \[CG, G91\]); here, $`D_X=1`$), $`G_𝒟=G_𝒞^{}=Z(G_𝒞)`$, $`G_𝒞/G_𝒟2^5`$.

Next, $`(GT)G_𝒞[2^4\times 8^4]:2`$ and $`(GT)G_𝒞GN`$. Also, $`D_X2,W_X2.\mathrm{𝐴𝐺𝐿}(3,2)`$.

So, $`G_𝒟O_2(G)^{}`$. Since $`C(G_𝒟)^0=T`$, we get $`GN(G_𝒟)N(T)=N`$ and so $`GN`$. (This is a consequence of Cor. 3.19, proved by different arguments. We remark that since $`G=GN`$, there is no “triality” in this case, a consequence of the earlier result Cor. 3.19).

The structure of $`G`$ is given by Theorem 2.8 and so $`G[2^4\times 8^4].2.\mathrm{𝐴𝐺𝐿}(3,2)2^{4+5+8}.\mathrm{𝐴𝐺𝐿}(3,2)`$.

We now develop a characterization of $`G`$ as a subgroup of $`\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(V)`$.

###### Definition 4.9

A subgroup $`A4^4`$ of $`E_8()`$ is called a $`\mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(4,2)`$-signalizer if $`N(A)/C(A)`$ has a composition factor isomorphic to $`\mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(4,2)`$ (notice that $`\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(A)`$ has the form $`2^{16}.\mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(4,2)`$. (This terminology is adapted from the signalizer concept in finite group theory.)

###### Lemma 4.10

There is one conjugacy class of $`\mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(4,2)`$-signalizers in $`E_8()`$.

Proof. Clearly, $`N(A)`$ has one orbit on the involutions of $`E:=\mathrm{\Omega }_1(A)`$. Since there is no pure $`2A`$-subgroup of rank greater than $`3`$ by \[CG\], this must be a $`2B`$-pure group of order $`16`$. Such a group is unique up to conjugacy. Let $`T`$ be its connected centralizer, a rank $`8`$ torus. In $`W:=W_{E_8}`$, there is no subgroup isomorphic to $`2^4`$ whose normalizer induces $`\mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(4,2)`$ on it, so $`AT`$. Define $`W_A:=\mathrm{𝑆𝑡𝑎𝑏}_W(A)`$ and $`W_E:=\mathrm{𝑆𝑡𝑎𝑏}_W(E)`$. Then $`W_E2^{1+6}\mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(4,2)`$ and $`W_A`$ is a subgroup of this containing a composition factor isomorphic to $`\mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(4,2)`$. It is an exercise with the Lie ring technique that $`\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(A)`$ does not contain $`\mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(4,2)`$ \[G76\]. We now show that $`W_A<W_E`$. If false, $`O_2(W_E)`$ acts trivially on $`E`$ and $`A/E`$, so acts as an elementary abelian 2-group, whereas the element of $`W`$ corresponding to $`1`$ must act nontrivially, yet is in the Frattini subgroup of $`O_2(W_E)`$, contradiction. Since $`O_2(W_E)`$ has just two chief factors under the action of $`W_E`$, the only possibility for $`W_A<W_E`$ is $`W_A2\mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(4,2)`$, the nonsplit extension.

Let $`U:=T_{(2)}`$. Then $`W_A`$ normalizes $`UA=U,A2^4\times 4^4`$. So does $`W_E`$, since $`U`$ is the inverse image in $`T_{(2)}`$ of $`E`$ under the squaring endomorphism. The action of $`W_E`$ on $`UA/E2^8`$ has kernel exactly $`Z(W_E)2`$ (otherwise, we would have $`[A,O_2(W_E)][U,O_2(W_E)]E`$ and get a contradiction as in the previous paragraph). It follows that in $`UA/E`$, the subspace $`A/E`$ has stabilizer in $`W_E`$ equal to $`W_A`$. Also, $`UA/E`$ is a completely reducible $`W_A`$-module, the direct sum of a four dimensional module and its dual.

Now let $`A_1`$ be another $`\mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(4,2)`$ signalizer in $`E_8()`$. By following the above procedure for $`A_1`$ in place of $`A`$, we may arrange $`UA_1=UA`$. We may replace $`A_1`$ by a conjugate with an element of $`W_E`$ so that both $`A`$ and $`A_1`$ are stabilized by $`W_A`$ (property of a parabolic subgroup of $`O^+(8,2)`$). Since there are precisely three $`W_A`$-chief factors within $`UA`$, two isomorphic to the natural module for $`W_A/Z(W_A)\mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(4,2)`$ and the third to the dual module, it follows that $`AA_1E`$ and finally that $`A=A_1`$. x

###### Theorem 4.11 (Characterization of $`G`$, $`k=4`$)

The group $`G`$ is determined up to conjugacy, as described below, in the normalizer of $`A`$, a $`GL(4,2)`$-signalizer, which is, in turn, unique up to conjugacy in $`E_8()`$.

The normalizer in $`E_8()`$ of $`A`$, a $`\mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(4,2)`$-signalizer is a group of the form $`T.[2\mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(4,2)]`$. In $`N(A)`$, let $`u`$ be any element which acts on $`T`$ by inversion. Then $`|u|=2`$. Set $`B:=A,u`$. Then $`N(B)`$ has the form $`4^4.2^8.2\mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(4,2)`$ and the normal subgroup of the shape $`4^4.2^82^4\times 8^4`$ is a characteristic subgroup of $`O_2(B)`$. The group $`G`$ is a subgroup of index $`15`$ in $`N(B)`$ stabilizing a rank three subgroup of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_1(A)`$, and this property characterizes $`G`$ up to conjugacy in $`N(B)`$.

Proof. The maximal subgroup above of $`O_2(B)`$ is the unique maximal subgroup which is abelian, so is characteristic. x

### 4.5 The case $`k=5`$

Let $`F`$ be a frame with $`k=5`$. The $`D`$-group $`G_𝒟`$ is the unique up to conjugacy $`2B`$-subgroup of rank $`5`$ in $`\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(V)`$ and the normalizer of $`G_𝒟`$ is $`2^{5+10}\mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(5,2)`$ (see Prop. 3.5). More precisely, one has:

###### Proposition 4.12

The extension

$$1O_2(N(G_𝒟))/Z(O_2(N(G_𝒟)))N(G_𝒟)/Z(O_2(N(G_𝒟)))\mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(5,2)1$$

is split, though $`N(G_𝒟)`$ does not split over $`O_2(N(G_𝒟))`$. There is a subgroup $`X`$ of $`N(G_𝒟)`$ satisfying $`Z(O_2(N(G_𝒟)))X`$, $`X/Z(O_2(N(G_𝒟)))\mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(5,2)`$ is nonsplit over $`Z(O_2(N(G_𝒟)))`$.

Proof. \[G76\], Section 1. x

The group $`X`$ has been called the Dempwolff group\[Th, G76\], and we call $`N(G_𝒟)`$ the Alekseevski-Thompson group. The first discussion of this group in the literature on finite subgroups of Lie groups was probably \[A\], but Thompson discovered it independently around early 1974 while studying the sporadic group $`F_3`$ which embeds in $`E_8(3)`$ \[Th, G76\].

It follows from Corollary 3.11 that the frame stabilizer is contained in the subgroup of $`N(G_𝒟)`$ which preserves the set $`t(F)`$ of Miyamoto involutions, an affine hyperplane of $`G_𝒟`$.

Though $`t`$ restricted to $`F`$ gives a bijection with a set of $`16`$ involutions in $`G_𝒟`$, it is possible that some other frame $`F^{}F`$ satisfies $`t(F)=t(F^{})`$. We shall prove now that an affine hyperplane $`t(F)G_𝒟E_8()`$ corresponds to a unique frame in $`V`$, i.e., all VFs with $`k=5`$ are equivalent under $`\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(V)`$, so in particular are equivalent to the VF $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ of \[DGH\].

Let $`V^0=V^{G_𝒟}`$ be the subVOA fixed by the $`D`$-group. It is the vertex operator algebra studied in \[G98\]. It has automorphism group $`O^+(10,2)`$, graded dimension $`1+0q^1+156q^2+\mathrm{}`$ and is isomorphic to the VOA $`V_{\sqrt{2}E_8}^+`$.

###### Proposition 4.13

The action of the normalizer $`N(G_𝒟)2^{5+10}\mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(5,2)`$ induces the action of a parabolic subgroup $`P2^{10}:\mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(5,2)`$ of $`O^+(10,2)`$ on $`V^0`$.

Proof. The kernel of the action of $`G`$ on $`V^0`$ is $`G_𝒟`$. In fact, if $`K`$ is the (possibly larger) subgroup of $`E_8()`$ which acts trivially on $`V^0`$, then it acts trivially on the frame $`F`$, so is contained in $`G`$. Therefore, $`K=G_𝒟`$.

Thus $`N(G_𝒟)/G_𝒟`$ acts faithfully on $`V^0`$, so gives a subgroup of shape $`2^{10}:GL(5,2)`$ of $`O^+(10,2)`$. Such a subgroup is unique up to conjugacy. It is the stabilizer of a maximal totally singular subspace in $`𝔽_2^{10}`$. x

The relevant Virasoro elements of $`V^0`$ are $`496`$ in number and may be identified with the nonsingular points $`𝒩`$ in the space $`𝔽_2^{10}`$ with a maximal Witt index quadratic form (see \[G98\], 6.8). Under this identification, a Virasoro frame of $`V^0`$ corresponds to a set of nonsingular vectors in $`𝔽_2^{10}`$ spanning a $`5`$-dimensional subspace which is totally singular with respect to the bilinear form associated to the quadratic form (reason: all Miyamoto involutions $`\sigma `$ of type $`2`$ associated to a frame commute and commutativity corresponds in this case to orthogonality of the corresponding members of $`𝒩`$). In it, the set of nonsingular vectors is the nontrivial coset of the $`4`$-dimensional subspace of totally singular vectors and zero.

Recent work of Lam \[L\] shows that $`\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(V^0)`$ is transitive on frames within $`V^0`$. One should keep in mind that frames in $`V^0`$ may have different values of $`k`$ as frames in $`V`$. Next, we give a short proof of transitivity on frames.

###### Proposition 4.14

In $`V^0`$, there is one orbit of $`\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(V^0)`$ on frames.

Proof. By Witt’s theorem, the $`5`$-dimensional subspace corresponding to a frame is unique up to isometry of $`𝔽_2^{10}`$. Transitivity of $`\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(V^0)`$ on its frames follows at once. x

The orbits of the parabolic subgroup $`P`$ on such subspaces are studied in Appendix 5.4. We use this to show:

###### Theorem 4.15

For $`k=5`$, there is one $`E_8()`$ orbit of such Virasoro frames in $`V`$. If $`F`$, $`F^{}`$ are frames with $`k=5`$ and $`t(F)=t(F^{})`$, then $`F=F^{}`$.

For its proof we need:

###### Lemma 4.16

For $`k4`$, $`G_𝒞`$ contains a group $`E^{}`$ which is elementary abelian of order $`2^5`$ and is $`2B`$-pure, contains $`G_𝒟`$ and has the property that $`TE^{}`$ has rank $`4`$.

Proof. Let $`u`$ be any element of $`G_𝒞`$ which corresponds in $`N/T`$ to $`1`$. Then $`u`$ is an involution (see \[G91\]) and it centralizes $`T_{(2)}`$. For all $`k4`$, such $`u`$ exist in $`G_𝒞`$ and $`G_𝒞`$ contains a maximal totally singular subspace of $`T_{(2)}`$ containing $`G_𝒟`$, say $`E_1`$. Take $`E^{}=E_1u`$. This group is $`2B`$-pure, see \[G91\]. x

Proof of Theorem 4.15. The group $`G_𝒟`$ of a VF with $`k=5`$ is up to conjugation unique in $`E_8()`$ and has normalizer $`2^{5+10}\mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(5,2)`$ which induces the action of $`2^{10}:\mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(5,2)P`$ on $`V^0`$ by Prop. 4.13.

We claim that, for every $`k\{1,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2},\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3},\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4},\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}5}\}`$, there is a frame $`F^{}`$ from $`V`$ with $`k=\mathrm{𝑑𝑖𝑚}(G_𝒟(F^{}))`$ which is contained in $`V^0`$, the fixed point VOA for $`G_𝒟`$. For $`k=5`$, this is obvious. For $`k4`$, this will follow if we show that the group $`G_𝒞(F^{})`$ contains a conjugate of $`G_𝒟`$, since if $`g^1`$ is an element conjugating $`G_𝒟`$ into $`G_𝒞(F^{})`$ one has $`g(F^{})V^{gG_𝒞(F^{})g^1}V^{G_𝒟}`$. By Lemma 4.16 and Prop. 3.5, we are done.

On a $`P`$-orbit, the values of $`k`$ are constant. Since Proposition 5.13 shows that we have five orbits and all five values of $`k`$ are represented there, $`P`$ acts transitively on the set of frames of $`V^0`$ with a fixed value of $`k`$, and in particular we have transitivity for $`k=5`$. x

We refer to Section 5.4 for the definition of the $`J`$-indicator and the collection of subspaces, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$. We need to know something about the $`(k,j)`$-bijection $`\{1,2,3,4,5\}\{0,1,2,3,4\}`$ indicated in the proof of Th. 4.15.

###### Definition 4.17

Define $`P_j`$ as the stabilizer in $`P`$ of some member of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ with $`J`$-indicator $`j`$. Using $`G/G_𝒟P`$, let $`H_j`$ be the subgroup of $`N(G_𝒟)`$ with $`H_j/G_𝒟P_j`$.

###### Lemma 4.18

The cases of $`J`$-indicator $`0`$ or $`4`$ correspond to frames $`F^{}V^0`$ with $`k=1`$ or $`5`$. Thus, $`\{1,5\}\{0,4\}`$ under the $`(k,j)`$-bijection.

Proof. From Prop. 5.14 and Cor. 5.15, $`H_j`$ has a normal subgroup $`Q`$ of order $`2^9`$ resp. $`2^{19}`$ and $`H_j/Q\mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(4,2)`$. Let $`F^{}`$ be the associated frame. So, $`H_jG(F^{})`$ and we want to show that $`k=1`$ or $`5`$ for $`F^{}`$.

We assume $`k1`$, $`5`$ and derive a contradiction. According to the shapes of frame stabilizers for $`k\{2,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3},\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}\}`$, the fact that $`H_j/Q\mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(4,2)`$ implies $`k=2`$. In $`H_j`$, the chief factors afford irreducible modules for $`H_j/Q\mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(4,2)`$ of dimensions $`1`$, $`4`$ and $`6`$. In a frame stabilizer for $`k=2`$, only dimensions $`1`$ and $`6`$ occur. x

###### Lemma 4.19

Let $`K`$ be a $`4`$-dimensional subgroup of $`G_𝒟2^5`$. Then, $`O_2(N(G_𝒟))/K`$ $`2^{5+10}/K`$ is isomorphic to the direct product $`2^4`$ with the extraspecial group $`2^{1+6}`$.

Proof. This follows from (3) in Section 3 of \[G76\]. The above quotient group is nonabelian with derived group of order $`2`$ and admits the action of $`N(G_𝒟)N(K)2^{5+10}AGL(4,2)`$. Since this subgroup embeds in a torus normalizer, the above structure is forced. x

###### Proposition 4.20

The frame $`F`$ with $`k=5`$ corresponds to the $`J`$-indicator $`0`$. Therefore, $`50`$ and $`14`$ under the $`(k,j)`$-bijection.

Proof. Take $`k=5`$. We assume by Lemma 4.18 that the $`J`$-indicator is $`4`$ and work for a contradiction. Then by Corollary 5.15, $`G(F)=H_42^{5+10}\mathrm{𝐴𝐺𝐿}(4,2)`$ and $`G_𝒞2^{5+10}`$.

The action of $`G_𝒞`$ on $`V`$ respects the decomposition into $`T_{16}`$-modules. As in the proof of Prop. 3.7 (cf. also \[M98\]) one has that for an $`8`$-set $`I𝒟`$ each irreducible $`T_{16}`$-module $`M(h_1,h_2,\mathrm{},h_{16})`$ with $`h_i=\frac{1}{16}`$ for $`iI`$ and $`h_i=\frac{1}{2}`$ for an odd number of $`iI`$ has multiplicity $`1`$. Let $`M`$ be one of the eight irreducibles from above with $`h_i=\frac{1}{2}`$ for exactly one $`i`$. In $`M`$, the weight $`1`$ subspace $`MV_1`$ is one dimensional.

The action of $`G_𝒟\widehat{𝒟}`$ on $`V^IM`$ has as kernel the $`4`$-dimensional subgroup $`K`$ of elements in $`\widehat{𝒟}`$ whose kernel contain $`I`$. By Lemma 4.19, one has $`G_𝒞/K2^{1+6}\times 2^4`$, where the center of the extraspecial group $`2^{1+6}`$ is $`G_𝒟/K`$. Faithful irreducible modules for $`2^{1+6}`$ have dimension $`8`$ (cf. \[Go, H\]), so we have a contradiction.

The Proposition follows now from Lemma 4.18. x

###### Theorem 4.21 (Characterization of $`G`$, $`k=5`$)

The frame stabilizer for $`k=5`$ has shape $`2^5\mathrm{𝐴𝐺𝐿}(4,2)4^4[2\mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(4,2)]`$, where the factor $`2`$ indicates an involution inverting the normal $`4^4`$ subgroup. Such a subgroup is uniquely determined up to conjugacy as a subgroup of $`E_8()`$ by these conditions. In particular, $`G_𝒞=G_𝒟`$ is elementary abelian.

Proof. The structure of $`G/G_𝒞`$ follows from Prop. 4.20 and Cor. 5.15.

For the characterization, one can modify the argument of Theorem 4.11. To do so, we must locate a suitable $`\mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(4,2)`$-signalizer within $`G`$, see Def. 4.9.

(i) We define the group $`A`$ by $`A:=[O_2(G),G]`$. It follows from the vanishing of the $`\mathrm{𝐸𝑥𝑡}^1`$ group for modules $`\{1,4\}`$ (in either order) that $`O_2(G)=At(f)`$, a semidirect product, that the four dimensional chief factors in $`G_𝒞`$ are isomorphic (by commutation with an element of $`t(f)`$, for $`fF`$). Since these irreducibles are not self dual, $`O_2(G)^{}`$ has rank $`4`$ and $`O_2(G)=At(f)`$ is a semidirect product, for any $`fF`$.

We want to show that $`A`$ is homocyclic of type $`4^4`$. For $`\mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(4,2)`$, the $`6`$ dimensional module $`44`$ is irreducible, so $`A`$ is abelian. We assume that $`A`$ is elementary abelian and derive a contradiction.

Let $`AE`$, a maximal elementary abelian $`2`$-subgroup of $`\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(V)E_8()`$. The classification in \[G91\] shows just two conjugacy classes of such $`E`$, of ranks $`8`$ and $`9`$. If $`\mathrm{𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑘}(E)=8`$, we have a contradiction since $`\mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(4,2)`$ is not involved in $`N(E)`$. Therefore, $`\mathrm{𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑘}(E)=9`$, which means that $`E`$ contains a unique subgroup $`E_1`$ of index $`2`$ which lies in a maximal torus, $`T`$ (so $`E_1=T_{(2)}`$). Such a subgroup is characterized in $`E`$ as the unique maximal subgroup of $`E`$ whose complement in $`E`$ contains only involutions in class $`2B`$. From \[G91\], we may take $`T`$ to be the connected centralizer of $`A_1:=O_2(G)^{}`$, a $`2B`$-pure rank $`4`$ elementary abelian subgroup. In $`C(A_1)/T2^{1+6}`$, $`O_2(G)`$ maps to a subgroup whose normalizer in $`N(A_1)T.2^{1+6}\mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(4,2)`$ has a section isomorphic to $`\mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(4,2)`$. This means $`O_2(G)Tu`$, where $`u`$ is an involution in the torus normalizer corresponding to $`1`$ in the Weyl group.

It follows that $`A=[O_2(G),G][Tu,G]T`$. Therefore, $`AE_1`$, so $`A=E_1`$. We now have a final contradiction, since $`E_1`$ is a self dual module for its normalizer, whereas $`A`$ has chief factors consisting of two non self dual modules, contradiction. This proves $`A4^4`$.

(ii) In $`G`$, the unique normal abelian subgroup maximal with respect to containment is $`A`$. x

## 5 Appendix

### 5.1 Equivariant unimodularizations of even lattices

Sometimes it is convenient to have a lattice embedded in another lattice whose determinant avoids certain primes, and it can be useful to do this in a way which respects automorphisms.

First, we recall some basic facts concerning extensions of lattices (cf. \[N\]). An even lattice $`L`$ defines a quadratic space  $`(A,q)`$, where $`A=L^{}/L`$, $`L^{}=\{xL(x,y)\text{for all }yL\}`$ the dual lattice, and $`q:L^{}/L/2`$ is the quadratic form $`x(modL)(x,x)(mod2)`$. Even overlattices $`M`$ of $`L`$ define isotropic subspaces $`C=M/L`$ of $`(A,q)`$ and this correspondence is one to one. An automorphism $`g`$ of $`L`$ extends to an automorphism of $`M`$ if and only if the induced automorphism $`\overline{g}\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(A,q)`$ fixes the subspace $`C`$. A subgroup $`C`$ of $`A`$ generated by a set of elements is isotropic if the generating elements are isotropic and orthogonal to each other with respect to the $`/`$-valued bilinear form obtained by taking the values of $`b(x,y)=\frac{1}{2}(q(x+y)q(x)q(y))`$. The determinant $`\mathrm{𝑑𝑒𝑡}(L)`$ of $`L`$ is the order of $`A`$. If $`A`$ has exponent $`N`$, then $`q`$ takes values in $`\frac{1}{2N}(2)/2`$. There is an orthogonal decomposition $`(A,q)=_{p|\mathrm{𝑑𝑒𝑡}(L)}(A_p,q_p)`$ of quadratic spaces, where $`A_p`$ is the Sylow $`p`$-subgroup of $`A`$. A sublattice $`L`$ of a lattice $`M`$ is called primitive if $`M/L`$ is free. Let $`K=L_M^{}`$ the orthogonal complement of $`L`$ in $`M`$. Then, $`L`$ is primitive exactly if the projection of $`M/(LK)`$ to $`K^{}/K`$ is injective.

###### Definition 5.1

Let $`M`$ be a lattice and $`L`$ a sublattice. We say that an automorphism $`\alpha `$ of $`L`$ extends (weakly) to $`M`$ if there is $`\beta \mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(M)`$ so that $`\beta |_L=\alpha `$. We say that a subgroup $`S\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(L)`$ extends (weakly) to $`M`$ if every element extends and we say that it extends strongly if there is a subgroup $`R\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(M)`$ which leaves $`L`$ invariant and the restriction of $`R`$ to $`L`$ gives an isomorphism of $`R`$ onto $`S`$. In this case, call such $`R`$ a strong extension of $`S`$ to $`M`$.

###### Definition 5.2

Let $`L`$ be an even lattice. An equivariant unimodularization of $`L`$ is an unimodular lattice $`M`$ containing $`L`$ as a primitive sublattice such that $`\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(L)`$ extends strongly to $`M`$.

###### Theorem 5.3 (James, \[J\])

An equivariant unimodularization $`M`$ of an even lattice $`L`$ exists of rank at most $`2\mathrm{𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑘}(L)+2`$.

One can take for $`M`$ the orthogonal sum of $`\mathrm{𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑘}(L)+1`$ hyperbolic planes. A somewhat stronger result can be found in \[N\] (see Prop. 1.14.1 and Th. 1.14.2).

The above unimodularizations from \[J, N\] are all indefinite. The next theorem shows that one can get equivariant definite unimodularizations of a definite lattice. For its proof we need:

###### Lemma 5.4

(i) Let $`p`$ be an odd prime and $`r0`$. Then, $`1`$ is the sum of two squares in $`/p^r`$. (ii) For all $`r0`$, one can write $`1`$ is a sum of four squares in $`/2^r`$.

Proof. (i) When $`r=1`$, we quote the well known fact that every element in a finite field is a sum of two squares. Part (i) is now proved by induction on $`r`$: Assume that $`r1`$ and that $`a`$, $`b`$ are integers such that $`a^2+b^2=1+p^rm`$, for some integer $`m`$. Let $`x`$, $`y`$ be integers and consider $`(a+p^rx)^2+(b+p^ry)^2=1+p^rm+2p^r[ax+by]+p^{2r}e`$, for some integer $`e`$. Since not both $`a`$ and $`b`$ can be divisible by $`p`$ we can solve $`2[ax+by]m(modp)`$ for integers $`x`$, $`y`$. Thus, $`1`$ is a sum of two squares modulo $`p^{r+1}`$.

Part (ii) follows from a similar argument, or from Lagrange’s theorem that every nonnegative integer is a sum of four integer squares. x

###### Theorem 5.5

Let $`L`$ be an even lattice of signature $`(n_1,n_2)`$. Then there exists an equivariant unimodularization of the lattice $`L`$ whose rank is $`8\mathrm{𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑘}(L)`$ and signature is $`(8n_1,8n_2)`$. If $`det(L)`$ is odd, there is one whose rank is $`4\mathrm{𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑘}(L)`$ and signature is $`(4n_1,4n_2)`$. In particular, if the lattice is definite, this unimodularization is also definite.

Proof. Assume first that $`\mathrm{𝑑𝑒𝑡}(L)`$ is odd and let $`(A,q)`$ be the finite quadratic space associated $`L`$. Let $`K=LLLL`$ having the associated quadratic space $`(B,q^{})=(A,q)(A,q)(A,q)(A,q)`$. We decompose $`(A,q)`$ as the orthogonal sum

$$(A,q)=\underset{p|\mathrm{𝑑𝑒𝑡}(L)}{}(A_p,q_p),$$

where $`A_p/p^{a_{p,1}}+/p^{a_{p,2}}+\mathrm{}+/p^{a_{p,n_p}}`$ is an abelian $`p`$-group with $`a_{p,1}a_{p,2}\mathrm{}a_{p,n_p}`$ of order $`p^{a_p}`$, where $`a_p:=a_{p,1}+a_{p,2}+\mathrm{}+a_{p,n_p}`$.

Fix a prime $`p|\mathrm{𝑑𝑒𝑡}(L)`$. Using Lemma 5.4, let $`r`$, $`s`$ so that $`r^2+s^21(modp^{a_{p,1}})`$. We let

$$D_p=\{(rx,sx,0,x)xA_p\}\text{and}E_p=\{(sx,rx,x,0)xA_p\}.$$

Since $`q_p(\pm rx)+q_p(\pm sx)+q_p(\pm x)=p^{a_{p,1}}q_p(x)2/2`$, the groups $`D_p`$ and $`E_p`$ are isotropic subspaces of $`(A_p,q_p)(A_p,q_p)(A_p,q_p)(A_p,q_p)`$. They are orthogonal to each other, so that $`C_p=D_p+E_p`$ is also isotropic and has order $`p^{2a_p}`$.

Finally, let $`C=_{p|\mathrm{𝑑𝑒𝑡}(L)}C_p`$. It is an isotropic subspace of $`(B,q^{})`$ with $`|A|^2`$ elements and it is invariant under the diagonal action of $`\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(L)`$ induced on $`(B,q^{})`$. Since $`|C|^2=|B|`$, the overlattice $`M`$ of $`K`$ belonging to $`C=M/KB`$ is a definite even unimodular lattice having an automorphism group which contains a strong extension of $`\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(L)`$ and $`L`$ is also primitive.

Now, we do the case of even $`\mathrm{𝑑𝑒𝑡}(L)`$. This time we take $`K=L\mathrm{}L`$ ($`8`$ times) with associated quadratic space $`(B,q^{})=(A,q)\mathrm{}(A,q)`$ ($`8`$ times). We proceed in a similar spirit:

For $`p=2`$, let $`r`$, $`s`$, $`t`$, $`u`$ be integers such that $`r^2+s^2+t^2+u^21(mod2^{a_{2,1}+1})`$ and define

$$\begin{array}{ccccccccccc}D_2& =& \hfill \{(rx,& \hfill sx,& \hfill tx,& \hfill ux,& \hfill x,& \hfill 0,& \hfill 0,& \hfill 0)& xA_2\},\hfill \\ E_2& =& \hfill \{(sx,& \hfill rx,& \hfill ux,& \hfill tx,& \hfill 0,& \hfill x,& \hfill 0,& \hfill 0)& xA_2\},\hfill \\ F_2& =& \hfill \{(x,& \hfill 0,& \hfill 0,& \hfill 0,& \hfill rx,& \hfill sx,& \hfill tx,& \hfill ux)& xA_2\}\text{ and}\hfill \\ G_2& =& \hfill \{(\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}\; 0},& \hfill x,& \hfill 0,& \hfill 0,& \hfill sx,& \hfill rx,& \hfill ux,& \hfill tx)& xA_2\}.\hfill \end{array}$$

Since $`q_2(\pm rx)+q_2(\pm sx)+q_2(\pm tx)+q_2(\pm ux)+q_2(\pm x)=2^{a_{2,1}+1}q_2(x)=2/2/2`$, the groups $`D_2`$, $`E_2`$, $`F_2`$ and $`G_2`$ are totally isotropic subspaces of $`(A_2,q_2)\mathrm{}(A_2,q_2)`$. They are pairwise orthogonal, so that $`C_2:=D_2+E_2+F_2+G_2`$ is also isotropic and has order $`2^{4a_2}`$.

For the odd primes, we let $`C_p=(D_p+E_p)(D_p+E_p)`$. As in the preceding cases, we see that the overlattice $`M`$ of $`K`$ belonging to $`C=_{p|\mathrm{𝑑𝑒𝑡}(L)}C_p`$ has all the required properties. x

If we try only to double the rank of $`L`$, we may not find an unimodularization in general, but we can achieve the following:

###### Theorem 5.6

Let $`L`$ be an even lattice with signature $`(n_1,n_2)`$. Then there exists an even lattice $`M`$ of signature $`(2n_2,2n_2)`$ containing $`L`$ as a primitive sublattice such that $`\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(L)`$ can be strongly extended to a subgroup of $`\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(M)`$ and $`\mathrm{𝑑𝑒𝑡}(M)`$ is a power of an arbitrarily large prime.

Proof. The Dirichlet Theorem implies that there are infinitely many primes $`s`$ satisfying $`s1(mod2\mathrm{𝑑𝑒𝑡}(L))`$. Let $`s`$ be such a prime.

Let $`L[s]`$ be a lattice which as a group is isomorphic to $`L`$ by $`\psi :LL[s]`$ with bilinear form defined by $`(\psi (x),\psi (y))=s(x,y)`$. Then, $`\mathrm{𝑑𝑒𝑡}(L[s])=s^n\mathrm{𝑑𝑒𝑡}(L)`$, where $`n=\mathrm{𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑘}(L)`$. Extend $`\psi `$ to maps between the rational vector spaces spanned by $`L`$ and $`L[s]`$.

We will define $`M`$ as an overlattice of $`K=LL[s]`$. Proceeding as in the proof of the last theorem, let $`C=\{(x,\psi (x))xA\}(B,q^{})`$. We have $`q^{}((x,\psi (x)))=(1+s)q(x)2/2`$, i.e., $`C`$ is isotropic. The determinant of the overlattice $`M`$ belonging to $`C`$ is $`\mathrm{𝑑𝑒𝑡}(K)/|C|^2=s^n\mathrm{𝑑𝑒𝑡}(L)^2/\mathrm{𝑑𝑒𝑡}(L)^2=s^n`$. We get an extension of $`\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(L)`$ to $`M`$ by taking the diagonal subgroup of $`\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(L)\times \mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(L[s])`$, with respect to the isomorphism $`\psi `$. This diagonal subgroup preserves both $`LL[s]`$ and $`C`$ hence also $`M`$. x

### 5.2 Lifting $`\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(L)`$ to the automorphism group of $`V_L`$

This section is written by the first author (RLG).

We need to describe a lifting of the automorphism group $`W`$ of the even lattice $`L`$ to a group of automorphisms $`\stackrel{~}{W}`$ of the VOA $`V_L`$. This group will have a normal elementary abelian subgroup of rank equal to the rank of $`L`$ and the quotient by it will be $`W`$. It will normalize a natural torus of automorphisms, whose rank is again equal to the rank of $`L`$.

For preciseness, we define the group $`\stackrel{~}{W}`$ by using the definition of $`\widehat{L}`$, the unique (in the sense of extensions) group such that there is a short exact sequence $`1\{\pm 1\}\widehat{L}L1`$ with the property that $`x^2=(1)^{\frac{1}{2}(x,x)}`$ (it follows that $`[x,y]=(1)^{(x,y)}`$) for $`x`$, $`yL`$ (inner products for elements of $`\widehat{L}`$ are evaluated on their images in $`L`$).

###### Definition 5.7

We define $`\stackrel{~}{W}`$ as the subgroup of the automorphism group of the abstract group $`\widehat{L}`$ which preserves the given quadratic form on $`L`$ via its action on the quotient by $`\{\pm 1\}`$. We call $`\stackrel{~}{W}`$ the group of isometry automorphisms of $`\widehat{L}`$.

A construction will exhibit structure of $`\stackrel{~}{W}`$ and make useful actions available. It is clear from the definition that $`\stackrel{~}{W}`$ participates in a short exact sequence $`12^n\stackrel{~}{W}W1`$ where $`n=\mathrm{𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑘}(L)`$, so that any group constructed as a subgroup of the group of isometry automorphisms which fits into the middle of such a short exact sequence must be the group of isometry automorphisms. So, the choices made in a particular construction do not affect the isomorphism type of the group constructed.

Our construction expresses some unity between two different contexts where such extensions have occurred. In the case where $`L`$ is between the root lattice and its dual, for a root system $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ whose indecomposable components have types ADE, the group $`\stackrel{~}{W}`$ will be a subgroup of $`G:\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, where $`G`$ is a simply connected and connected group of type $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is the group of Dynkin diagram automorphisms, lifted to $`G`$. The basic reference for such a lift is \[Ti\], which relates the lift to the sign problem for the definition of a Lie algebra, given a root system. When $`L`$ is the Leech lattice, we get a group $`\stackrel{~}{W}`$ which comes up in the theory of the Monster simple group \[G81, G82\]. Other examples of lattices and sporadic simple groups come up this way. See Remark 5.8 for more background.

We now present this author’s basic theory of $`\stackrel{~}{W}`$. It is self-contained, except for applications to VOA theory, for which we assume the standard theory of the VOA structure on the space $`V_L`$ used in Prop. 5.9. The use of $`2`$-regularizations here is probably new.

###### Remark 5.8 (Some history)

Several finite dimensional representations (including projective ones) of such groups had been known for a long time to group theorists and Lie theorists. When $`L`$ is the root lattice of a type ADE Lie algebra, $`\stackrel{~}{W}`$ is a subgroup of the maximal torus normalizer in the simply connected group generated by explicitly defined lifts of the fundamental reflections and the elements of order $`2`$ in the torus \[Ti\]. In finite group theory, one looks at the study of $`2`$-local subgroups in finite simple groups, especially centralizers of involutions, for occurrences of groups like $`\stackrel{~}{W}`$, up to central extension. For this author, his involvement started with \[G73\], in which certain linear groups of shape $`2_\epsilon ^{1+2n}.O^ϵ(2n,2)`$ and $`4.2^{2n}.\mathrm{𝑆𝑝}(2n,2)`$ were constructed and analyzed. (A few years later, the article \[BRW\] came to his attention.) See especially the ideas in \[G76, G76b\], which this author adapted in 1979 to an action of $`\stackrel{~}{W}`$ on the vector space $`V_L`$ where $`L`$ is the Leech lattice, and the same idea worked without change for odd determinant lattices. A version of his ideas was reported in \[K\], but the report seems to be flawed. See also \[G81, G82, G86\].

The VOA concept came later, in the mid 80s. See the basic reference \[FLM\] for VOA theory, which gives a treatment of $`\widehat{L}`$, $`\stackrel{~}{W}`$ and its action on certain VOAs. The action of $`\stackrel{~}{W}`$ defined earlier on the vector space $`V_L`$ turns out to respect the VOA structure on $`V_L`$. One can describe $`\stackrel{~}{W}`$ as the set of group automorphisms of $`\widehat{L}`$ which preserve the bilinear form on $`L`$, a neat characterization \[FLM\] on which the Definition 5.7 is based. The object $`\widehat{L}`$ is not needed to construct $`\stackrel{~}{W}`$ but was used heavily in \[FLM\]; possibly these authors were the first to construct $`\widehat{L}`$ and show its relevance to VOA theory. The sign problem for constructing Lie algebras and VOAs had a new solution in the late 70s with the so-called epsilon function \[FK, Se\] and the epsilon function was later used as a cocycle for creating the group extension $`\widehat{L}`$. See \[G96\] and references therein for a general discussion about structure constants and group extensions.

#### 5.2.1 The construction of $`\stackrel{~}{W}`$ when $`\mathrm{𝑑𝑒𝑡}(L)`$ is odd

For simplicity at first, let us consider the case where $`L`$ has odd determinant. This is equivalent to the nonsingularity of the $`𝔽_2`$-valued bilinear form on $`L/2L`$ derived from the integer valued one on $`L`$ by reduction modulo $`2`$. Then $`n`$ is even and there is an extraspecial $`2`$-group $`E`$, unique up to isomorphism, so that the squaring and commutator maps from $`E`$ to $`E^{}`$ are essentially the $`𝔽_2`$-valued quadratic form and bilinear form on $`L/2L`$.

Let $`M`$ be the essentially unique faithful irreducible module for $`E`$. The action of $`E`$ extends to the faithful action of a group $`BE.W`$ in such a way that the action of $`B`$ on $`E/E^{}`$ is identified with the action of $`W`$ on $`L/2L`$. The group $`\stackrel{~}{W}`$ is defined by a pullback diagram:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\stackrel{~}{W}& & W\\ & & \\ B/E^{}& & W/\{\pm 1\}\end{array}$$

The extension $`1E^{}EL/2L0`$ is given by a cocycle $`\epsilon :L\times L\{\pm 1\}`$ (and identification of $`\{\pm 1\}`$ with $`E^{}`$), which is bilinear as a function and so is constant on pairs of cosets of $`2L`$ in $`L`$.

The cocycle $`\epsilon `$ may be used in an obvious way to construct a group $`\widehat{L}`$, which participates in the short exact sequence $`1Z\widehat{L}L0`$, where $`Z:=z_2`$, and which maps onto the group $`E`$. Since then $`\widehat{L}`$ also participates in a pullback diagram

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\widehat{L}& & L\\ & & \\ E& & L/2L,\end{array}$$

the construction of $`\stackrel{~}{W}`$ and the above diagram makes it clear that it acts faithfully as a group of automorphisms of $`\widehat{L}`$.

#### 5.2.2 The construction of $`\stackrel{~}{W}`$ for arbitrary nonzero values of $`\mathrm{𝑑𝑒𝑡}(L)`$

In general, the lattice $`L`$ will not have odd determinant, so a modification of the above program is needed. One way is to choose a different (nonabelian) finite $`2`$-group to play the role of $`E`$, but the modifications to the previous argument which one seems to need are not attractive. Instead, our idea is to embed $`L`$ suitably in an odd determinant lattice and deduce what we need for $`L`$. This is achieved by any equivariant embedding into a lattice of odd determinant, see Theorems 5.3, 5.5 and 5.6. We call such a lattice a $`2`$-regularization of $`L`$.

We now carry out the earlier construction for $`J`$, a $`2`$-regularization of $`L`$. We have our definition of $`\stackrel{~}{W}_J`$, the group of isometry automorphisms of $`\widehat{J}`$.

Since $`\widehat{L}`$ is naturally a subgroup of $`\widehat{J}`$, for which the pullback diagrams are compatible, with compatible epsilon-functions, there is in $`W_J`$, by definition of $`2`$-regular extension, a subgroup $`W_L`$ which we may identify with $`\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(L)`$. Let $`\stackrel{~}{W}_{L,J}`$ be the preimage of $`W_L`$ in $`\stackrel{~}{W}_J`$. Finally, the group $`\stackrel{~}{W}`$ we seek for $`\widehat{L}`$ is just the image of $`\stackrel{~}{W}_{L,J}`$ in $`\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(\widehat{L})`$. The kernel of this map is the normal elementary abelian $`2`$-subgroup of rank equal to $`\mathrm{𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑘}(J)\mathrm{𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑘}(L)`$ in $`\stackrel{~}{W}_{L,J}`$ which acts trivially on $`\widehat{L}`$.

#### 5.2.3 Proof that $`\stackrel{~}{W}`$ acts faithfully as a group of VOA automorphisms

We shall define the action of $`\stackrel{~}{W}`$ on $`V_L`$ below. The definition will make it clear that $`\stackrel{~}{W}`$ acts as a group of invertible linear transformations on $`V_L`$ which respects grading.

We have the space $`V:=V_L=\mathrm{SS}[L]`$, based on the rank $`n`$ even integer lattice, $`L`$. The lattice $`L`$ has the group of isometries, $`W`$. There is the simple way to define a linear action of $`W`$ on $`V`$ by $`w:pe^xw(p)e^{w(x)}`$, but this will not be an automorphism of VOA structures in general. One has to make a modification and replace an action of $`W`$ with an action of a group $`\stackrel{~}{W}2^n.W`$. This construction applies to the case where $`L`$ is the root lattice of a simple Lie algebra and gives the familiar subgroup of the torus normalizer lifting the Weyl group \[Ti\]. However, our argument is based only on properties of lattices and finite group theory, and uses no Lie theory. For this author, the ideas came from experience with centralizers of involutions in finite simple groups.

The tensor factor $`[L]`$ of $`V`$ should be thought of as the quotient $`[\widehat{L}]/(e^1+e^z)`$ of the group algebra of $`\widehat{L}`$ by the ideal generated by $`e^1+e^z`$, which has the effect of making multiplication by $`e^z`$ act as $`1`$. Since $`\stackrel{~}{W}`$ acts as automorphisms of $`\widehat{L}`$, we get an action as automorphisms of its group algebra and the above quotient. The previous “naive” definition of the action of $`W`$ on the space $`[L]`$ would not seem to (except in the degenerate case $`(L,L)2`$) give algebra automorphisms of $`[\widehat{L}]/(e^1+e^z)`$ when this is identified with $`[L]`$ by a linear mapping of the form $`e^xc_xe^{\overline{x}}`$, where bar indicates the natural map of $`\widehat{L}`$ onto $`L`$, and $`xc_x`$ is a set function to the nonzero complex numbers. Sometimes, one writes $`V_L=\mathrm{SS}[L]\stackrel{~}{}`$ or $`V_L=\mathrm{SS}[L]_ϵ`$ to indicate that the second factor is identified linearly with the group algebra $`[L]`$ (the subscript $`ϵ`$ refers to a cocycle giving $`\widehat{L}`$ from $`L`$).

It follows that $`\stackrel{~}{W}`$ has a natural action on the space $`V_L`$ via the above natural action of $`W`$ on the polynomial algebra $`\mathrm{SS}`$.

###### Proposition 5.9

$`\stackrel{~}{W}`$ acts as automorphisms of the VOA $`V_L`$.

Proof. Clearly, we have a degree preserving group of invertible linear transformations. It preserves the principal Virasoro element which has the form $`_ix_i(1)^2`$, for an orthonormal basis $`\{x_ii=1,\mathrm{},\mathrm{𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑘}(L)\}`$, so corresponds to the natural quadratic form on the complex vector space spanned by the lattice. By linearity, the verification that $`\stackrel{~}{W}`$ is a group of automorphisms is reduced to checking preservation of products of the form $`a_nb`$, where $`a=pe^x`$ and $`b=qe^y`$. For such elements, $`Y(a,z)b`$ has a clear general shape. At each $`z^{n1}`$, we get a finite sum of monomial expressions, each evaluated with the usual annihilation and creation operations and multiplication in the algebra $`[\widehat{L}]`$. Since elements of $`\stackrel{~}{W}`$ act as automorphisms of $`\widehat{L}`$, it is easy to check that they preserve all the basic compositions involved in such monomials. x

This completes our basic theory of $`\stackrel{~}{W}`$.

See Def. 2.6 and Def. 2.4 for the definitions of $`W_X`$, $`D_X`$ and $`T`$, which occur in the next result.

###### Proposition 5.10

Let $`X`$ be a lattice frame in $`L`$ and let $`F`$ be the associated VF, i.e., $`\frac{1}{16}x(1)^2\pm \frac{1}{4}(e^x+e^x)`$, $`xX`$.

1. In the group $`\stackrel{~}{W}2^n.W`$, the stabilizer of $`F`$ is just $`2^n.D_X`$.
2. In $`N=N(T)=T\stackrel{~}{W}`$, the stabilizer of $`F`$ has the form $`N_F=(TN_F)\stackrel{~}{W}_X`$, so as a group extension looks like $`(TN_F).W_X`$.

Proof. (i) Obvious from the form of the action of $`\stackrel{~}{W}`$.

(ii) Suppose $`w\stackrel{~}{W}`$ and the coset $`Tw`$ contains an element $`g=tw`$ in $`N_F`$. Such an element takes $`\frac{1}{16}x(1)^2\pm \frac{1}{4}(e^x+e^x)`$ to a vector in $`V_L`$ of the form $`\frac{1}{16}w(x)(1)^2\pm \frac{1}{4}(ae^{w(x)}+a^1e^{w(x)})`$, for some nonzero scalar $`a`$. For this to be in $`F`$, we need $`a=\pm 1`$ and the image of $`w`$ in $`W`$ must be in $`W_X`$. x

### 5.3 Nonsplit Extensions

We discuss extension theoretic aspects of a few frame stabilizers.

First take $`k=1`$, for which $`G2^{1+14}.\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_{16}`$. This group is a subgroup of $`H:=N_{\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(V)}(G_𝒟)`$ and in the $`16`$-dimensional orthogonal projective representation of $`H`$, it corresponds to the determinant $`1`$ subgroup $`J_1`$ of a group $`J2\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_{16}`$ stabilizing a double orthonormal basis $`D`$. We claim that $`J_1`$ does not contain a subgroup isomorphic to $`\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_{16}`$, though it does obviously contain a subgroup $`A`$ isomorphic to $`\mathrm{𝐴𝑙𝑡}_{16}`$. We may take $`A`$ as the subgroup of $`J_1`$ stabilizing a orthonormal basis $`BD`$.

We claim that $`J_1`$ does not contain a subgroup isomorphic to $`\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_{16}`$ or a central extension by a group of order 2. Suppose by way of contradiction that $`S`$ is such a subgroup. The representation of $`J_1`$ is induced and the same is true for $`S`$. Let $`T`$ be a relevant index $`16`$ subgroup of $`S`$, stabilizing the $`2`$-set $`\{v,v\}`$ in $`D`$. Since the action of $`S`$ is faithful, the induced representation for $`T`$ must be faithful on $`Z(T)`$, which has order $`1`$ or $`2`$. If $`Z(S)`$ is nontrivial, $`Z(S)=Z(T)=\{\pm 1\}`$. It follows that $`T`$ splits over $`Z(T)`$. This means that $`S`$ splits over $`Z(S)`$ and so we may assume that $`S\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_{16}`$. So, the degree $`16`$ representation for $`S`$ is the standard degree $`16`$ permutation module or that module tensored with the degree $`1`$ sign representation. Neither one gives a map of $`S`$ to $`\mathrm{𝑆𝐿}(16,)`$, a contradiction which proves the claim.

Since $`G/G_𝒟J_1/Z(J_1)2^{14}\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_{16}`$, the claim implies that

$$1G_𝒞/G_𝒟G/G_𝒟\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_{16}1$$

and

$$1G_𝒞G\mathrm{𝑆𝑦𝑚}_{16}1$$

are nonsplit. However, $`G`$ does contain an extension $`2\mathrm{𝐴𝑙𝑡}_{16}`$.

For $`k=5`$, $`G`$ does not split over $`G_𝒞`$. If it did, the group denoted $`A`$ in the proof of Th. 4.21 would be elementary abelian, a possibility which was disproved in that discussion.

### 5.4 Orbits of parabolic subgroups of orthogonal groups

Assume $`𝔽`$ is a perfect field of characteristic $`2`$. We set up notation to discuss certain orbits of a parabolic subgroup in $`O^+(2n,𝔽)`$.

Let $`W`$ be a $`2n`$ dimensional vector space over the perfect field $`𝔽`$ of characteristic $`2`$ and suppose that $`W`$ has a nonsingular quadratic form $`Q`$ with maximal Witt index, i.e., there are totally singular $`n`$-dimensional subspaces $`J`$, $`K`$ so that $`W=JK`$ as vector spaces. Denote by $`(.,.)`$ the associated bilinear form: $`Q(x+y)=Q(x)+Q(y)+(x,y)`$, for all $`x`$, $`yW`$.

Let $`P`$ be the subgroup of the isometry group $`\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(Q)`$ which stabilizes $`J`$. Thus, $`P`$ has the form $`𝔽^{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{2}\right)}:\mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(n,𝔽)`$ and is a maximal parabolic of $`\mathrm{\Omega }^+(2n,𝔽)`$.

Let $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ denote the set of $`n`$-dimensional subspaces which are totally singular with respect to the bilinear form but for which the set of singular vectors and zero forms a codimension $`1`$ subspace. This is a nonempty set, for if $`vW`$ is nonsingular, $`𝔽v+[Jv^{}]\mathrm{\Sigma }`$. Since $`𝔽`$ is perfect, any two members of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ are isometric.

###### Remark 5.11

We observe that if $`A\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ and $`S_1`$, $`S_2`$ are any equal dimensional subspaces of $`S`$, the codimension $`1`$ subspace in $`A`$ consisting of zero and all singular vectors, then $`A/S_1`$ and $`A/S_2`$ are isometric because the isometry group $`\mathrm{𝐴𝑢𝑡}(A)\mathrm{𝐴𝐺𝐿}(S)`$ induces $`\mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(S)`$ on $`S`$.

###### Definition 5.12

For $`A\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, we define the $`J`$-indicator $`j(A)=\mathrm{𝑑𝑖𝑚}(AJ)`$. This is an integer from $`0`$ to $`n1`$, and all these values occur.

###### Proposition 5.13

Two members of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ are in the same $`P`$ orbit if and only if they have the same $`J`$-indicator.

Proof. One direction is obvious, so let us assume that $`A`$, $`B\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ both have the same indicator $`d`$. The images of $`A`$, $`B`$ in $`W/J`$ are both $`(nd)`$-dimensional,

so we may assume that the images are equal since $`P`$ induces the full general linear group on $`W/J`$. It follows that $`R:=AJ=BJ`$ is the radical of $`J+A=J+B`$.

Let $`A_1`$ complement $`R`$ in $`A`$ and $`B_1`$ complement $`R`$ in $`B`$. Using the Remark, we know that $`A_1`$ and $`B_1`$ are isometric, say by an isometry $`\psi `$, which corresponds elements of $`A_1`$ and $`B_1`$ which are congruent modulo $`J`$: $`\psi `$ is just the composite of isometries $`A_1A/RB/RB_1`$, where the middle isometry is based on congruence modulo $`J`$.

We now define an isomorphism of $`J+A=J+B`$ with itself by $`\phi :u+au+\psi (a)`$, for $`aA_1`$. We verify that this is an isometry by using $`a\psi (a)J`$: $`Q(u+a)=Q(u)+Q(a)+(u,a)=Q(u)+Q(\psi (a))+(u,\psi (a))=Q(u+\psi (a))`$, where $`Q`$ is our quadratic form. Observe that this map takes $`A=A_1+R`$ to $`B=B_1+R`$.

Now, by Witt’s theorem, $`\phi `$ extends to an isometry of $`W`$. Since it obviously fixes $`J`$, this extension lies in $`P`$. Therefore, $`A`$ and $`B`$ lie in a single $`P`$-orbit. x

###### Proposition 5.14

Let $`A\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, let $`H`$ its stabilizer inside $`P`$ and let $`U`$ be the unipotent radical of $`H`$ (when $`𝔽`$ is a finite field of characteristic $`2`$, $`U=O_2(H)`$). With $`j=j(A)`$, the $`J`$-indicator, one has $`H/U\mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(j,𝔽)\times \mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(nj1,𝔽)`$.

Proof. This is an exercise with actions of classical groups. We consider $`0R:=AJT:=A+J=R^{}W`$. Then $`R`$ is the radical of $`T`$ and $`T/R`$ is a nonsingular space of maximal Witt index. Note that in $`T/R`$, $`J/R`$ and $`A/R`$ are maximal isotropic with respect to the bilinear form and give a direct sum decomposition of $`T/R`$ as a vector space. Let $`J^{}`$ be a complement in $`J`$ to $`R`$ and let $`A^{}`$ be a complement in $`A`$ to $`R`$. Then $`M:=J^{}+A^{}`$ is a nonsingular subspace whose orthogonal complement contains $`R`$.

It follows that the action of $`H`$ on $`M`$ is the direct sums of the actions on $`J^{}`$ and $`A^{}`$, which are dual. The action could be as large as $`\mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(nj,𝔽)`$ but is in fact just $`\mathrm{𝐴𝐺𝐿}(nj1,𝔽)`$ since $`A^{}`$ is not totally singular with respect to the quadratic form. (More precisely, $`H`$ stabilizes $`S=\{xAQ(x)=0\}`$ and is trivial on $`A/S`$.)

Note that the actions of $`H`$ on $`R`$ and $`W/R`$ are dual, and are each $`\mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(j,𝔽)`$. This can be seen with action of a subgroup of $`H`$ on $`M^{}`$. x

It is an exercise with linear algebra to work out the structure of $`U`$. For brevity, we record only the cases $`j=0`$ and $`4`$.

###### Corollary 5.15

In the notation of the previous result, take $`n=5`$ and $`𝔽=𝔽_2`$. Then $`\mathrm{𝐺𝐿}(4,2)`$ occurs as a quotient group of $`H`$ for just $`j=0`$ and $`j=4`$. If $`j=0`$, $`|U|=2^4`$. If $`j=4`$, $`|U|=2^{14}`$.

Proof. The previous result allows only $`j=0`$ and $`j=4`$. If $`j=0`$, $`W=JA`$ implies that $`H`$ acts faithfully on both factors. The case $`j=4`$ is an exercise. x