This paper was converted on www.awesomepapers.org from LaTeX by an anonymous user.
Want to know more? Visit the Converter page.

Diagrams realizing prescribed sublink diagrams for virtual links and welded links

Naoko Kamada Graduate School of Science, Nagoya City University
1 Yamanohata, Mizuho-cho, Mizuho-ku, Nagoya, Aichi 467-8501 Japan
Abstract.

Jin and Lee [3] proved the following: Suppose that D1,,DnD_{1},\dots,D_{n} are link diagrams. Given a link LL which is partitioned into sublinks L1,,LnL_{1},\dots,L_{n} admitting diagrams D1,,DnD_{1},\dots,D_{n} respectively, there is a diagram DD of LL whose restrictions to L1,,LnL_{1},\dots,L_{n} are isotopic to D1,,DnD_{1},\dots,D_{n}, respectively. In this paper we show that a similar result does hold for welded links and does not for virtual links.

This work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number 19K03496.

1. Introduction

G. T. Jin and J. H. Lee [3] proved the following theorem.

Theorem 1 (G. T. Jin and J. H. Lee [3]).

Suppose that D1,,DnD_{1},\dots,D_{n} are link diagrams. Given a link LL which is partitioned into sublinks L1,,LnL_{1},\dots,L_{n} admitting diagrams D1,,DnD_{1},\dots,D_{n} respectively, there is a diagram DD of LL whose restrictions to L1,,LnL_{1},\dots,L_{n} are isotopic in 2\mathbb{R}^{2} to D1,,DnD_{1},\dots,D_{n}, respectively.

Virtual links were introduced by L. H. Kauffman [8] as equivalence classes of virtual link diagrams in 2\mathbb{R}^{2} under a certain equivalence relation. They are in one-to-one correspondence with stable equivalence classes of links in thickened surfaces [1, 7]. Welded links were introduced by R. Fenn R. Rimanyi, and C. Rouke [2] as equivalence classes of welded link diagrams in 2\mathbb{R}^{2} under another equivalence relation. Both virtual links and welded links are generalizations of links.

In this paper we prove the following.

Theorem 2.

Suppose that D1,,DnD_{1},\dots,D_{n} are diagrams of welded links. Given a welded link LL which is partitioned into sublinks L1,,LnL_{1},\dots,L_{n} admitting diagrams D1,,DnD_{1},\dots,D_{n} respectively, there is a diagram DD of LL whose restrictions to L1,,LnL_{1},\dots,L_{n} are isotopic in 2\mathbb{R}^{2} to D1,,DnD_{1},\dots,D_{n}, respectively.

A similar statement to Theorems 1 and 2 does not hold for virtual links.

Theorem 3.

There exist diagrams D1D_{1} and D2D_{2} of virtual links, and a virtual link LL which is partitioned into L1L_{1} and L2L_{2} admitting diagrams D1D_{1} and D2D_{2} such that LL does not admit any diagram DD whose restrictions to L1L_{1} and L2L_{2} are isotopic in 2\mathbb{R}^{2} to D1D_{1} and D2D_{2}, respectively.

2. Virtual links and welded links

We recall virtual links and welded links.

In this paper a diagram means a collection of immersed oriented loops in 2\mathbb{R}^{2} such that the multiple points are transverse double points which are classified into classical crossings and virtual crossings: A classical crossing is a crossing with over/under information as usual in knot theory, and a virtual crossing is a crossing without over/under information [8]. A virtual crossing is depicted as a crossing encircled with a small circle. (Such a circle is not considered as a component of the diagram.) A classical crossing is also called a positive or negative crossing according to the sign of the crossing as usual in knot theory.

Two diagrams are v-equivalent or equivalent as virtual links if they are related by a finite sequence of local moves depicted in Figure  1 except WR up to isotopies of 2\mathbb{R}^{2}. A virtual link is an equivalence class of diagrams under this equivalence relation.

Two diagrams are w-equivalent or equivalent as welded links if they are related by a finite sequence of local moves depicted in Figure 1 up to isotopies of 2\mathbb{R}^{2}. A welded link is an equivalence class of diagrams under this equivalence relation.

A diagram without virtual crossings is called a classical link diagram. Two classical link diagrams are r-equivalent or equivalent as classical links if they are related by a finite sequence of local moves R1, R2 and R3 depicted in Figure 1 up to isotopies of 2\mathbb{R}^{2}.

It is known that two classical link diagrams are equivalent as classical links if and only if they are equivalent as virtual (or welded) links. In this sense, virtual links and welded links are generalizations of classical links.

\allinethickness.8pt \allinethickness.8pt \allinethickness.8pt R1 R2 R3

\allinethickness.8pt \allinethickness.8pt \allinethickness.8pt \allinethickness.8pt VR1 VR2 VR3 VR4

\allinethickness.8pt WR

Figure 1. Moves

Let DD^{\prime} be a diagram obtained from a diagram DD by one of the local moves depicted in Figure 1, a support of the move is a region MM in 2\mathbb{R}^{2} which is homeomorphic to the 22-disk such that DD and DD^{\prime} are identical in 2M\mathbb{R}^{2}\setminus M and that DMD\cap M and DDD^{\prime}\cap D^{\prime} are depicted in the figure.

A detour move is a deformation of a diagram depicted in Figure 2 (i), where the box stands for a diagram which does not change. Two diagrams related by a detour move are equivalent as virtual links and as welded links.

An over detour move is a deformation of a virtual/welded link diagram in Figure 2 (ii). Two diagrams related by a detour move are equivalent as welded links.

Refer to caption
Figure 2. Two detour moves

3. Proof of Theorem 2

We introduce three moves depicted in Figure 3, which do not change the equivalence class of a diagram as a welded link.

For each move in the figure, in the left hand side of the move, let α\alpha be the vertical arc and let v0,v1,,vmv_{0},v_{1},\dots,v_{m} be crossings on α\alpha appearing in this order from the bottom to the top. Let β0,β1,,βm\beta_{0},\beta_{1},\dots,\beta_{m} be the arcs intersecting α\alpha at v0,v1,,vmv_{0},v_{1},\dots,v_{m}, respectively. Move β\beta toward the top along α\alpha and we obtain an arc β0\beta_{0}^{\prime} as in the right hand side.

(i) An under finger move is as follows: At v0v_{0}, β0\beta_{0} is under α\alpha. For each i{1,,m}i\in\{1,\dots,m\}, when viv_{i} is a classical crossing, the two crossings of β0\beta_{0}^{\prime} and βi\beta_{i} are classical crossings where β0\beta_{0}^{\prime} is under βi\beta_{i}. When viv_{i} is a virtual crossing, the two crossings of β0\beta_{0}^{\prime} and βi\beta_{i} are virtual crossings. The intersection of β0\beta_{0}^{\prime} and α\alpha is a classical crossing where β0\beta_{0}^{\prime} is under α\alpha.

(ii) An over finger move is as follows: At v0v_{0}, β0\beta_{0} is over α\alpha. For each i{1,,m}i\in\{1,\dots,m\}, the two crossings of β0\beta_{0}^{\prime} and βi\beta_{i} are classical crossings where β0\beta_{0}^{\prime} is over βi\beta_{i}. The intersection of β0\beta_{0}^{\prime} and α\alpha is a classical crossing where β0\beta_{0}^{\prime} is over α\alpha.

(iii) A virtual finger move is as follows: At v0v_{0}, β0\beta_{0} meets α\alpha as a virtual crossing. For each i{1,,m}i\in\{1,\dots,m\}, the two crossings of β0\beta_{0}^{\prime} and βi\beta_{i} are virtual crossings. The intersection of β0\beta_{0}^{\prime} and α\alpha is also a virtual crossing.

An over finger move is an over detour move, and a virtual finger move is a detour move.

Refer to caption
Figure 3. Under, over and virtual finger moves

Given a diagram of DD of a welded link LL and a sublink L0L_{0}, the restriction of DD to L0L_{0} is the diagram obtained from DD by removing the components not belonging to L0L_{0}. It is denoted by D(L0)D(L_{0}).

Lemma 4.

Let DD be a diagram of a welded link LL partitioned into L1L_{1} and L2L_{2}. Let D1D_{1} be a diagram obtained from D(L1)D(L_{1}) by a local move depicted in Figure 1. There is a diagram DD^{\prime} of LL such that D(L1)D^{\prime}(L_{1}) is isotopic to D1D_{1} in 2\mathbb{R}^{2} and D(L2)=D(L2)D^{\prime}(L_{2})=D(L_{2}).

Proof.

We say that a simple arc γ\gamma in a diagram is an arc of type (i), (ii), (iii), (iv) or (v) and it is drawn with a thick line, a thick dotted line, a thin line, a thin dotted line, or a thin dashed line, respectively, if one of the following conditions (i)–(v) is satisfied respectively, see Figure 4:

  • (i)

    (On a thick line,) no condition is required.

  • (ii)

    (On a thick dotted line,) at each classical crossing on γ\gamma, the arc γ\gamma is an under arc.

  • (iii)

    (On a thin line,) there is no crossing on γ\gamma.

  • (iv)

    (On a thin dotted line,) every crossing on γ\gamma is a classical crossing where γ\gamma is an over arc.

  • (v)

    (On a thin dashed line,) every crossing on γ\gamma is a virtual crossing.

Refer to caption
Figure 4. segments of virtual link diagrams

For example, the three moves in Figure 5 stand for the three finger moves in Figure 3.

Refer to caption
Figure 5. Under, over and virtual finger moves

In what follows, let MM be a support of the local move sending D(L1)D(L_{1}) to D1D_{1}.

The case of R1. First we consider the case where an R1 move from left to right in Figure 1 is applied. Take a small arc AA in D(L1)D(L_{1}) in MM and take a small rectangular disk in MM, say Δ\Delta, containing AA and avoiding D(L2)D(L_{2}). Apply an R1 move from the left to the right in Δ\Delta as in Figure 6 (i) and we obtain a desired diagram DD^{\prime}. (The shaded region is MΔM\setminus\Delta.)

We consider the case where an R1 move from right to left in Figure 1 is applied. Let cc be a self crossing of D(L1)D(L_{1}) which is removed by the R1 move. Take a small rectangular region in MM, say Δ\Delta, containing cc and avoiding D(L2)D(L_{2}). Apply a sequence of deformation to D(L1)D(L_{1}) as in Figure 6 (ii) and we obtain a desired diagram DD^{\prime}. (The shaded region is MΔM\setminus\Delta. The first deformation is an over finger move. The second deformation is an over detour move. The third deformation is an R1 move.)

Refer to caption
Figure 6. The case of R1

The case of VR1. We consider the case where a VR1 move in Figure 1 is applied. By a similar argument to the case of an R1 move, we have a desired diagram DD^{\prime}. See Figure 7. (In (ii), the first deformation is a virtual finger move. The second deformation is a detour move. The third deformation is a VR1 move.)

Refer to caption
Figure 7. The case of VR1 move

The case of R2. We consider the case where an R2 move from left to right in Figure 1 is applied. Take small arcs A1,A2A_{1},A_{2} in D(L1)D(L_{1}) and take a pair of small rectangular regions in MM, say Δ1,Δ2\Delta_{1},\Delta_{2} containing A1,A2A_{1},A_{2} and avoiding D(L2)D(L_{2}) as in the left of Figure 8 (i). Applying an over finger move as in Figure 8 (i) and we obtain a desired diagram DD^{\prime}. (The shaded region is M(Δ1Δ2)M\setminus(\Delta_{1}\cup\Delta_{2}).)

We consider the case where an R2 move from right to left in Figure 1 is applied. Let c1,c2c_{1},c_{2} be self crossings of D(L1)D(L_{1}) which are removed by the R2 move in MM. Take small rectangular regions in MM, say Δ1,Δ2\Delta_{1},\Delta_{2}, containing c1,c2c_{1},c_{2} and avoiding D(L2)D(L_{2}). Apply a sequence of deformation to D(L1)D(L_{1}) as in Figure 8 (ii) and we obtain a desired diagram DD^{\prime}. (The first deformation is an under finger move. The second deformation is an over detour move.)

Refer to caption
Figure 8. The case of R2

The case of VR2. By a similar argument to the case of R2, we have a desired diagram DD^{\prime}. See Figure 9. (In (i), the deformation is a virtual finger move. In (ii), the first deformation is a virtual finger move. The second deformation is a detour move.)

Refer to caption
Figure 9. The case of VR2

The case of R3. We consider the case where an R3 move from left to right in Figure 1 is applied. Let c1,c2c_{1},c_{2} and c3c_{3} be the three crossings of D(L1)D(L_{1}) where the R3 move is applied, and take small rectangular regions in MM, say say Δ1,Δ2,Δ3\Delta_{1},\Delta_{2},\Delta_{3}, containing c1,c2,c3c_{1},c_{2},c_{3} and avoiding D(L2)D(L_{2}). Apply a sequence of deformation to D(L1)D(L_{1}) as in Figure 10 and we obtain a desired diagram DD^{\prime}. (The shaded region is M(Δ1Δ2Δ3)M\setminus(\Delta_{1}\cup\Delta_{2}\cup\Delta_{3}). The first deformation is a consecutive application of two under finger moves. The second deformation is an over detour move.)

An R3 move from right to left is not necessary, since it is obtained from an R3 move from left to right by rotating the figure by 180 degree.

Refer to caption
Figure 10. The case of R3

The case of VR3. We consider the case where a VR3 move from left to right in Figure 1 is applied. Apply a sequence of deformation to D(L1)D(L_{1}) as in Figure 11 and we obtain a desired diagram DD^{\prime}. (The first deformation is a consecutive application of two virtual finger moves. The second deformation is a detour move.) A VR3 move from right to left is not necessary.

Refer to caption
Figure 11. The case of VR3

The case of VR4. We consider the case where an VR4 move from left to right in Figure 1 is applied. Apply a sequence of deformation to D(L1)D(L_{1}) as in Figure 12 and we obtain a desired diagram DD^{\prime}. (The first deformation is a consecutive application of two virtual finger moves. The second deformation is a detour move.) A VR4 move from right to left is not necessary.

Refer to caption
Figure 12. The case of VR4

The case of WR. We consider the case where an WR move from left to right in Figure 1 is applied. Apply a sequence of deformation to D(L1)D(L_{1}) as in Figure 13 and we obtain a desired diagram DD^{\prime}. (The first deformation is a consecutive application of two over finger move. The second deformation is an under finger move. The third deformation is an over detour move.) A WR move from right to left is not necessary. \square

Refer to caption
Figure 13. The case of WR
Lemma 5.

Let DD be a diagram of a welded link LL partitioned into L1L_{1} and L2L_{2}. Let D1D_{1} be a diagram of L1L_{1}. There is a diagram DD^{\prime} of LL such that D(L1)D^{\prime}(L_{1}) is isotopic to D1D_{1} in 2\mathbb{R}^{2} and D(L2)=D(L2)D^{\prime}(L_{2})=D(L_{2}).

Proof.

Using Lemma 4 inductively, we obtain the result. \square

Proof of Theorem 2.

Suppose that D1,,DnD_{1},\dots,D_{n} are welded link diagrams. Let LL be a welded link partitioned into sublinks L1,,LnL_{1},\dots,L_{n} admitting diagrams D1,,DnD_{1},\dots,D_{n} respectively.

Let D=D(0)D=D^{(0)} be a diagram of LL. By considering LL to be partitioned into L1L_{1} and LL1L\setminus L_{1} and applying Lemma 5, there is a diagram D(1)D^{(1)} of LL such that D(0)(L1)D^{(0)}(L_{1}) is isotopic to D(1)(L1)D^{(1)}(L_{1}) and D(0)(LL1)=D(1)(LL1)D^{(0)}(L\setminus L_{1})=D^{(1)}(L\setminus L_{1}).

Inductively, for i=2,,ni=2,\dots,n, assume that we have a diagram D(i1)D^{(i-1)}. By considering LL to be partitioned into LiL_{i} and LLiL\setminus L_{i} and applying Lemma 5, there is a diagram D(i)D^{(i)} of LL such that D(i1)(Li)D^{(i-1)}(L_{i}) is isotopic to D(i)(Li)D^{(i)}(L_{i}) and D(i1)(LLi)=D(i)(LLi)D^{(i-1)}(L\setminus L_{i})=D^{(i)}(L\setminus L_{i}).

Then D=D(n)D^{\prime}=D^{(n)} is a desired diagram. \square

4. Proof of Theorem 3

In order to prove Theorem 3, we use the notion of the 2-cyclic covering of a virtual link, introduced in [5, 6].

Let DD be a diagram. Moving DD by an isotopy of 2\mathbb{R}^{2}, we assume that DD is on the left of the yy-axis and all crossings have distinct yy-coordinates. Let DD^{*} be a copy of DD on the right of the yy-axis which is obtained from DD by sliding along the xx-axis. Let v1,,vkv_{1},\dots,v_{k} be the virtual crossings of DD and let v1,,vkv^{*}_{1},\dots,v^{*}_{k} be the corresponding virtual crossings of DD^{*}. For each i{1,,k}i\in\{1,\dots,k\}, we denote by lil_{i} the horizontal line containing viv_{i} and viv_{i}^{*}, and let N(li)N(l_{i}) be a regular neighborhood of lil_{i} in 2\mathbb{R}^{2}. Consider a diagram, denoted by D~\widetilde{D}, obtained from DDD\cup D^{*} by replacing the intersection with N(li)N(l_{i}) for each i{1,,k}i\in\{1,\dots,k\} as in Figure 14. We call the diagram D~\widetilde{D} a 2-cyclic covering diagram of DD.

Refer to caption
Figure 14. 2-cyclic covering diagram

For example, for the diagram DD depicted in Figure 15 (i), the diagram DDD\cup D^{*} is as in (ii). Then we have a 2-cyclic covering diagram D~\widetilde{D} as in (iii).

Refer to caption
Figure 15. A 2-cyclic covering diagram
Theorem 6 ([5, 6]).

Let DD and DD^{\prime} be diagrams. If DD is equivalent to DD^{\prime} as a virtual link, D~\widetilde{D} is equivalent to D~\widetilde{D^{\prime}} as a virtual link.

Refer to [5, 6] for details. By this theorem, the 2-cyclic covering is defined for a virtual link. For a virtual link LL, the 2-cyclic covering of LL, denoted by L~\widetilde{L}, is defined to be the equivalence class of D~\widetilde{D} for a diagram DD of LL.

When LL is partitioned into L1,,LnL_{1},\dots,L_{n}, then the 2-cyclic covering L~\widetilde{L} is partitioned into L~1,,L~n\widetilde{L}_{1},\dots,\widetilde{L}_{n}.

Proof of Theorem 3.

Let DiD_{i} (i=1,2)(i=1,2) be a loop with no crossings. Let D=D1D2D^{\prime}=D^{\prime}_{1}\cup D^{\prime}_{2} be the diagram depicted in Figure 16 (i), and let LL be a virtual link presented by DD which is partitioned into L1L_{1} and L2L_{2} with D(Li)=DiD^{\prime}(L_{i})=D^{\prime}_{i} (i=1,2)(i=1,2). We assert that there is no diagram DD of LL such that the restriction D(Li)D(L_{i}) to LiL_{i} is isotopic to DiD_{i} for i=1,2i=1,2.

Suppose that there is a diagram DD of LL such that the restriction D(Li)D(L_{i}) to LiL_{i} is isotopic to DiD_{i} for i=1,2i=1,2. Consider a 2-cyclic covering diagram D~\widetilde{D} of DD and let D~=D~1D~2\widetilde{D}=\widetilde{D}_{1}\cup\widetilde{D}_{2}. The diagram D~i\widetilde{D}_{i} presents the sublink L~i\widetilde{L}_{i} for i=1,2i=1,2.

Consider a 2-cyclic covering diagram D~\widetilde{D^{\prime}} of DD^{\prime} and let D~=D~1D~2\widetilde{D^{\prime}}=\widetilde{D^{\prime}}_{1}\cup\widetilde{D^{\prime}}_{2}. The diagram D~i\widetilde{D^{\prime}}_{i} presents the sublink L~i\widetilde{L}_{i} for i=1,2i=1,2.

By Theorem 6, the diagram D~i\widetilde{D}_{i} is equivalent to the diagram D~i\widetilde{D^{\prime}}_{i} as a virtual link for i=1,2i=1,2.

As seen in Figure 16 (ii), the diagram D~1\widetilde{D^{\prime}}_{1} is a diagram consisting of two components with linking number 11. (The linking number of a diagram with two components is the sum of signs of classical non-self crossings divided by 22. It is an invariant of a virtual link with two components.)

On the other hand, the diagram D~1\widetilde{D}_{1} is a diagram consisting of two components with linking number 0. (This is seen as follows: D1D_{1} is a loop with no crossings, D1D1D_{1}\cup D^{*}_{1} is a pair of loops with no crossings. The diagram D~1\widetilde{D}_{1} is obtained from (D1D2)(D1D2)(D_{1}\cup D_{2})\cup(D^{*}_{1}\cup D^{*}_{2}) by replacement as in Figure 14, there is no classical crossing on D~1\widetilde{D}_{1}.)

This is a contradiction. \square

Refer to caption Refer to caption
(i) (ii)
Figure 16. A diagram D=D1D2D^{\prime}=D^{\prime}_{1}\cup D^{\prime}_{2} and the 2-cyclic covering diagram

The proof above shows that there exists a virtual link L=L1L2L=L_{1}\cup L_{2} with two components such that when we forget L2L_{2}, L1L_{1} is equivalent to the trivial knot and that for any diagram DD of LL, the restriction D(L1)D(L_{1}) has at least one crossing.

References

  • [1] J. S. Carter, S. Kamada and M. Saito, Stable equivalence of knots on surfaces and virtual knot cobordisms, J. Knot Theory Ramifications 11 (2002), 311–322.
  • [2] R. Fenn, R. Rimanyi, C. Rouke, The braid-permutation group, Topology 36 (1997), 123–135.
  • [3] J. H. Lee, G. T. Jin, Link diagrams realizing prescribed subdiagram partitions, Kobe J. Math. 18 (2001), 199 – 202.
  • [4] N. Kamada, On the Jones polynomials of checkerboard colorable virtual knots, Osaka J Math. 39 (2002), 325–333.
  • [5] N. Kamada, Coherent double coverings of virtual link diagrams, J. Knot Theory Ramifications 27 (2018), 1843004 (18 pages).
  • [6] N. Kamada, Cyclic covering of virtual link diagrams, Internat. J. Math. 30 (2019), 1950072 (16 pages).
  • [7] N. Kamada and S. Kamada, Abstract link diagrams and virtual knots, J. Knot Theory Ramifications 9 (2000), 93–106.
  • [8] L. H. Kauffman, Virtual knot theory, European J. Combin. 20 (1999), 663–690.
  • [9] S. Satoh and K. Taniguchi, The writhe of a virtual knot, Fundamenta Mathematicae 225(1) (2014), 327–341.