2 March, 2005

2000 Mathematics Subject Classification. 20F65, (20F67.20E08,57M07).
<ph f="cmbx">Limit groups for relatively hyperbolic groups, II: Makanin-Razborov diagrams</ph>

Daniel Groves

Daniel Groves, Department of Mathematics, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA, 91125, USA E-mail address : groves@caltech.edu

1 Introduction

This paper is a continuation of [17. Throughout this paper, Γ   will denote a torsion-free group which is hyperbolic relative to a collection of free abelian subgroups. For an arbitrary finitely generated group G   , we wish to understand the set Hom ( G , Γ )   of all homomorphisms from G   to Γ   .
In
[17we considered a sequence of homomorphisms { h i : G Γ }   and extracted a limiting G   -action on a suitable asymptotic cone, and then extracted an R   -tree with a nontrivial G   -action. This R   -tree allows much information to be obtained. In particular, in case G = Γ   , we studied Aut ( Γ )   and also proved that Γ   is Hopfian. In this paper, we continue this study, in case G   is an arbitrary finitely generated group.
In particular, we construct a
Makanin-Razborov diagram for G   , which gives a parametrisation of Hom ( G , Γ )   (see Section  6 below). We build on our work from [17, which in turn builds on our previous work of [15and [16. The strategy is to follow [27, § 1 , though there are extra technical difficulties to deal with.
To a system of equations
Σ   over Γ   in finitely many variables there is naturally associated a finitely generated group G Σ   , with generators the variables in Σ   , and relations the equations. The solutions to Σ   in Γ   are in bijection with the elements of Hom ( G Σ , Γ )   . Thus, Makanin-Razborov diagrams give a description of the set of solutions to a given system of equations over Γ   . For free groups, building on the work of Makanin and Razborov, Makanin-Razborov diagrams were constructed by Kharlampovich and Miasnikov [20, and also by Sela [26. For torsion-free hyperbolic groups, Makanin-Razborov diagrams were constructed by Sela [27, and it is Sela's approach that we follow here. Alibegović [2constructed Makanin-Razborov diagrams for limit groups.
Limit groups are hyperbolic relative to their maximal non-cyclic abelian subgroups (see
[8and [1). Limits groups are also torsion-free.
Therefore, the main result of this paper (the construction of Makanin-Razborov diagrams) generalises the main result of
[2. Alibegović has another approach to the construction of Makanin-Razborov diagrams for these relatively hyperbolic groups (see [2,Remark3.7).
The main results of this paper are the following:
Theorem  5.9  Suppose that Γ   is a torsion-free relatively hyperbolic group with abelian parabolics, and that G   is a finitely generated group.
Then
G   is a Γ   -limit group if and only if G   is fully residually Γ   .
Proposition  5.10  Suppose that Γ   is a torsion-free relatively hyperbolic group with abelian parabolics. Then there are only countably many Γ   -limit groups.
Definition  5.14  A group G   is a called equationally Noetherian if every system of equations over G   in finitely many variables is equivalent to a finite subsystem.
Theorem  5.15  Let Γ   be a torsion-free relatively hyperbolic group with abelian parabolics. Then Γ   is equationally Noetherian. Theorem  6.4  Let G   be a finitely generated group and Γ   a torsion-free relatively hyperbolic group with abelian parabolics. Associated to G   is a Makanin-Razborov diagram, with vertices G   and Γ   -limit quotients of G   , and edges a canonical quotient map. Any homomorphism h Hom ( G , Γ )   can be given by compositions of modular automorphisms of the Γ   -limit groups in the diagram with the canonical maps from Γ   -limit groups into their maximal proper shortening quotients, and finally with either embeddings of a Γ   -limit group in the diagram into Γ   , or general homomorphisms of the terminal free groups that appear in the diagram into Γ   .
See Sections  3 ,  4 ,  5 and  6 for definitions and discussion of the terminology in Theorem  6.4 above. The output of Theorem  6.4 is a parametrisation of Hom ( G , Γ )   for an aribtrary finitely generated group G   , in terms of successive proper quotients of G   (with a fixed canonical quotient), modular automorphisms, embeddings into Γ   , and homomorphisms from a free group to Γ   . Note that for a fixed finitely generated free group F   of rank d   , the set Hom ( F , Γ )   can be naturally parametrised by F d   , by the universal property of free groups.
Sela
[28,I.8asked whether Theorems  5.15 and  6.4 hold in the context of CAT ( 0 )   groups with isolated flats. We believe that relatively hyperbolic groups with abelian parabolics are a natural setting for these questions.
An outline of this paper is as follows. In Section
 2 we recall the definition of relatively hyperbolic groups, and recall the construction of limiting R   -trees from [15and [17, as well as other useful results. In Section  3 we improve upon our version of Sela's shortening argument from [16and [17to deal with arbitrary sequences of homomorphisms { h n : G Γ }   where G   is an arbitrary finitely generated group. In Section  4 we recall Sela's construction of shortening quotients from [26, and adapt this construction to our setting. In Section  5 we prove Theorem  5.2 , one of the main technical results of this paper. We also prove Theorems  5.10 ,  5.15 , and a number of structural results about Γ   -limit groups. Finally in Section  6 we construct Makanin-Razborov diagrams over Γ   .
In the future work [18, we will continue to study the elementary theory of torsion-free relatively hyperbolic groups with free abelian parabolic subgroups.
Acknowledgement. I would like to thank Zlil Sela for providing me with the proof of [27,Proposition1.21, which is repeated in the proof of Proposition  5.13 in this paper.

2 Preliminaries

2.1 Relatively hyperbolic groups

Relatively hyperbolic groups were first defined by Gromov in his seminal paper on hyperbolic groups [14. Another definition was given by Farb [13, and further definitions given by Bowditch [6. These definitions are all equivalent (see [7and [29). Recently there has been a large amount of interest in these groups (see [1, 7, 9, 10, 11, 21, 30, among others).
The definition we give here is due to Bowditch
[6.
Definition 2.1. A group Γ   with a family G   of finitely generated subgroups is called hyperbolic relative to G   if Γ   acts on a δ   -hyperbolic graph K   with finite quotient and finite edge stabilisers, where the stabilisers of infinite valence vertices are the elements of G   , so that K   has only finitely many orbits of simple loops of length n   for each positive integer n   .
The groups in
G   are called parabolic subgroups of Γ   .
In this paper we will be exclusively interested in relatively hyperbolic groups which are torsion-free and have abelian parabolic subgroups.

2.2 The limiting R   -tree

In this subsection we recall a construction from [17(see also [15for more details). Suppose that Γ   is a torsion-free relatively hyperbolic group with abelian parabolic subgroups. In [17, we constructed a space X   on which Γ   acts properly and cocompactly by isometries. For each parabolic subgroup P   (of rank n   , say) there is in X   an isometrically embedded copy of R n   , with the Euclidean metric, so that the action of P   leaves this Euclidean space invariant and this P   -action is proper and cocompact with quotient the n   -torus.
Suppose now that
G   is a finitely generated group, and that { h n : G Γ }   is a sequence of homomorphisms, and suppose that the h n   do not differ only by post-composition with an inner automorphism of Γ   .
By considering the induced actions of
G   on X   , and passing to a limit, we extract an isometric action of G   on the asymptotic cone X ω   of X   such that this action has no global fixed point. There is a separable G   -invariant subset C X ω   , and by passing to a subsequence { f i }   of { h i }   we may assume that the (appropriately scaled) actions of G   on X   converge in the Gromov-Hausdorff topology to the G   -action on C   .
The space
C   is a tree-graded metric space, in the terminology of Druţ u and Sapir [10. Informally, this means that there is a collection of `pieces' (in this case finite dimensional Euclidean spaces), and otherwise the space is `tree-like' (see [10for the precise definition and many properties of tree-graded metric spaces). By carefully choosing lines in the `pieces', and projecting, an R   -tree T   is extracted from C   . This tree T   comes equipped with an isometric G   -action with no global fixed points and the kernel of the G   -action on T   is the same as the kernel of the G   -action on C   . For more details on this entire construction, see [17and [15.
Definition 2.2. Suppose that { h n : G Γ }   is a sequence of homomorphisms. The stable kernel of { h n }   , denoted Ker ( h n )   , is the set of all g G   so that g ker ( h n )   for all but finitely many n   .
The following theorem recalls some of the properties of the G   -action on the R   -tree T   .
Theorem 2.3 (cf. Theorem 4.4, [15and Theorem 6.4, [17). Suppose that Γ   is a torsion-free group that is hyperbolic relative to a collection of free abelian subgroups and that G   is a finitely generated group. Let { h n : G Γ }   be a sequence of pairwise non-conjugate homomorphisms. There is a subsequence { f i }   of { h i }   and an action of G   on an R   -tree T   so that if K   is the kernel of the action of G   on T   and L : = G / K   then
Thus T   is isometric to a line if and only if L   is abelian. If L   is not abelian then K = Ker ( f i )   .
We now recall the definition of
Γ   -limit groups. There are many ways of defining Γ   -limit groups. We choose a geometric definition using the above construction.
Definition 2.4 (cf. Definition 1.11, [27, Definition 1.2, [17). A strict Γ   -limit group is a quotient G / K   where G   is a finitely generated group, and K   is the kernel of the action of G   on T   , where T   is the R   -tree arising from a sequence of non-conjugate homomorphisms { h n : G Γ }   as described above.
A
Γ   -limit group is a group which is either a strict Γ   -limit group or a finitely generated subgroup of Γ   .
Remark 2.5. There are finitely generated subgroups of torsion-free hyperbolic groups which are not finitely presented (see, for example, [22). Therefore, when Γ   is a torsion-free relatively hyperbolic group with free abelian parabolic subgroups, a Γ   -limit group need not be finitely presented. This presents substantial complications (many of which are already dealt with by Sela in [27), some of which are solved by the application of Theorem  5.7 below.

2.3 Acylindrical accessibility and JSJ decompositions

In [24, Sela studied acylindrical graph of groups decomposition, and proved an accessibility theorem for k   -acylindrical splittings. Unlike other accessibility results such as [12and [3, Sela's result holds for finitely generated groups, rather than just for finitely presented groups.
We can apply acylindrical accessibility to our limiting construction because (i) tripod stabilisers are trivial; and (ii) maximal abelian subgroups of
Γ   -limit groups are malnormal. See [16for a more detailed discussion of this and of JSJ decompositions.
The construction of the limiting
R   -tree immediately implies that the abelian JSJ of a non-abelian, freely indecomposable strict Γ   -limit group is nontrivial.
We can also apply the arguments of
[26,Theorem3.2and [25,Theorem3.2, as adapted in [16(this adaptation also applies to the results in [17) to prove that the cyclic JSJ decomposition of such a group is nontrivial – see Theorem  5.1 below. But first, we recall the shortening argument.

3 The shortening argument

In [16and [17we described a version of Sela's shortening argument which worked for sequences of surjective homomorphisms to Γ   , and described in [16why this notion is insufficient for all sequences of homomorphisms.
In this section we present another version of the shortening argument, which works for all sequences of homomorphisms
{ h n : G Γ }   , for any finite generated group G   . This version was stated but not proved in [17, and we give the proof here.
There are two equivalent approaches to this version of the shortening argument. The first is to find a group
G ^   which contains G   and shorten using elements of Mod ( G ^ )   , rather than just elements of Mod ( G )   (this approach was used in the proof of [16,Theorem7.9) . The second approach is to use the `bending' moves of Alibegović [2. We use the second approach, because it yields a simpler parametrisation of Hom ( G , Γ )   when we construct Makanin-Razborov diagrams in Section  6 .
Recall the definition of
Mod ( G )   for a finitely generated group G   .
Definition 3.1. Let G   be a finitely generated group. A Dehn twist is an automorphism of one of the following two types:
Definition 3.2 (Generalised Dehn twists). Suppose G   has a graph of groups decomposition with abelian edge groups, and A   is an abelian vertex group in this decomposition. Let A 1 A   be the subgroup generated by all edge groups connecting A   to other vertex groups in the decomposition. Any automorphism of A   that fixes A 1   elementwise can be naturally extended to an automorphism of the ambient group G   . Such an automorphism is called a generalised Dehn twist of G   .
Definition 3.3. Let G   be a finitely generated group. We define M o d ( G )   to be the subgroup of A u t ( G )   generated by:
Similar definitions are made in [26,§5and [4,§1.
We will try to shorten homomorphisms by precomposing by elements of
Mod ( G )   . However, as seen in [16,§3, this is not sufficient to get the most general result. Thus, we also define a further kind of move (very similar to Alibegović's bending move, [2,§2.
Definition 3.4. Suppose that Γ   is a torsion-free group which is hyperbolic relative to free abelian subgroups, that G   is a finitely generated group and that h : G Γ   is a homomorphism. We define two kinds of `bending' moves as follows:
Definition 3.5 (cf. Definition 4.2, [4; Definition 2.11, [2). We define the relation `   ' on the set of homomorphisms h : G Γ   to be the equivalence relation generated by setting h 1 h 2   if h 2   is obtained from h 1   by:
Definition 3.6. Let A   be an arbitrary finite generating set for G   , and let X   be the space upon which Γ   acts properly, cocompactly and isometrically, with basepoint x   . For a homomorphism h : G Γ   define h   by h : = max g A d X ( x , h ( g ) . x ) .   A homomorphism h : G Γ   is short if for any h   such that h h   we have h h   .
The following is the main result of this section.
Theorem 3.7. Suppose that Γ   is a non-abelian, freely indecomposable and torsion-free group which is hyperbolic relative to a collection of free abelian subgroups. Let G   be a freely indecomposable finitely generated group and { h n : G Γ }   be a sequence of non-conjugate homomorphisms which converges to a faithful action of G   on C   as above. Then, for all but finitely many n   , the homomorphism h n   is not short.

4 Shortening quotients

We now recall the concept of shortening quotients from [26and [27.
Let
G   be a finitely generated group, Γ   a torsion-free relatively hyperbolic group with abelian parabolics and { h n : G Γ }   a stable sequence of homomorphisms, with associated Γ   -limit group L   , and suppose that L   is d   -generated. The shortening procedure constructs a sequence of homomorphisms { ν i : F d Γ }   which has a subsequence converging to a Γ   -limit group Q   , equipped with a canonical epimorphism η : L Q   . We follow the construction from [26, § 3and [25(see [16for more details in this context).
Given the situation described in the previous paragraph, we now describe the construction of
{ ν i }   , Q   and η   . Let Λ L   be the canonical abelian JSJ decomposition for L   , with vertex groups V 1 , , V m   and edge groups E 1 , , E s   .
As in
[26and [16we do not yet know that the edge groups are finitely generated (though this will eventually turn out to be the case; see Proposition  5.11 below).
We can `approximate' the finitely generated group
L   by finitely presented groups U n   , each equipped with a graph of groups decomposition Λ n   which is a `lift' of Λ   . See [26, § 3and [16for more details of this.
The output of this is a commutative diagram:
W 1 κ 1 W 2 κ n 1 W n 1 κ n W n ι 1 ι 2 ι n 1 ι n U 1 κ 1 U 2 κ n 1 U n 1 κ n U n λ 0 λ 1 λ n 1 λ n Γ Γ Γ Γ   The Γ   -limit group L   is the direct limit of the sequence { ( W i , κ ) }   .
The group
U n   comes with a generating set, and a graph of groups decomposition. The equivalence relation used to define short homomorphisms in the previous section is naturally defined also for the set of homomorphisms Hom ( U n , Γ )   . When defining the equivalence relation for `short', we restrict to those elements of Mod ( U n )   which come from the graph of groups decomposition Λ n   .
The group
W i   is a subgroup of U n   (and the map ι n   is inclusion), and comes with a generating set { x 1 1 , , x l 1 1 , , x 1 m , , x l m m , y 1 , , y b }   , which corresponds to a generating set for L   coming from the graph of groups decomposition Λ L   . For a homomorphism h : W i Γ   define the following stretching constant:
μ i ( h ) = max 1 j l i d X ( x , h ( x j i ) . x ) , and
χ r ( h ) = d X ( x , h ( y r ) . x ) .
Also define the corresponding ( m + b )   -tuple tup ( h ) = ( μ 1 ( h ) , , μ m ( h ) , χ 1 ( h ) , , χ r ( h ) ) .   Now for each n 1   choose a homomorphism λ n ^ : W n Γ   so that λ n ^ λ n ι n   and so that tup ( λ n ^ )   is minimal amongst all homomorphisms equivalent to λ n ι n   (the set of ( m + b )   -tuples is given the lexicographic order).
Passing to a subsequence of
{ λ ^ n }   , we obtain an associated Γ   -limit group Q   . There are two cases to consider here: (i) Q   is a strict Γ   -limit group; and (ii) Q   is not a strict Γ   -limit group. In case (ii), let π n : F d Γ   be given by π n = λ ^ n ψ n   , where F d   is the free group of rank d   and ψ n : F d U n   is the canonical quotient map. Since Q   is not a strict Γ   -limit group, we may assume that the (convergent) subsequence of { π n }   is constant, and Q   is isomorphic to a subgroup of Γ   . In this case, since each image λ ^ n ( U n )   is isomorphic to λ ( U n )   via the natural map between generating sets, it is not hard to see that L   and Q   are isomorphic via the natural map between generating sets.
In case
Q   is a strict Γ   -limit group, each vertex group V i   is embedded canonically in Q   (see [26, § 3 or [16, § 7 for more details). We also claim that there is a canonical epimorphism π : L Q   . To see this, it remains to see that each of the relations corresponding to stable letters in Λ L   are preserved when the canonical generating set for L   is mapped to the canonical generating set for Q   . For each such relation w   , there is some n   so that for all m > n   the group U m   includes w = 1   as a defining relation. This defining relation is preserved by the shortening moves, and so holds in the Γ   -limit group Q   .
The above group
Q   is called the shortening quotient of L   associated to { h n : G Γ }   .
Although we speak of
the shortening quotient, it depends on the choices of shortest homomorphism in the equivalence class of h n   , and also on the convergent subsequence of { h n ^ }   chosen. Of course, it also depends on the choice of finite generating set for G   , but we assume this is fixed.
Proposition 4.1 (cf. Proposition 1.15, [27). Let G   be a finitely generated group, and Γ   a torsion free relatively hyperbolic group with abelian parabolics, and let { u s : G Γ }   be a sequence of homomorphisms that converges into an action of a non-abelian, freely indecomposable strict Γ   -limit group L   on an R   -tree T   . If for every index s   , the group u s ( G )   is not isomorphic to L   by the natural map that sends the images of the generators of G   in u s ( G )   to the images of these generators in L   , then every shortening quotient of L   which is obtained from the sequence { u s }   is a proper quotient of L   .

5 Γ   -limit groups

In this section we follow [27in order to understand Γ   -limit groups, and Hom ( G , Γ )   , where Γ   is an aribitrary finitely generated group. The main technical results of this section are Theorem  5.1 , Theorem  5.2 and Theorem  5.7 .
These results are then applied to prove various applications of these results: Theorem
 5.9 , Proposition  5.10 , Theorem  5.15 , and in the next section the construction of Makanin-Razborov diagrams.
Theorem 5.1 (cf. Theorem 3.2, p. 14, [26). Let Γ   be a torsion-free group which is hyperbolic relative to a collection of free abelian subgroups, and let L   be a strict Γ   -limit group which is nonabelian and freely indecomposable. Then L   admits a principal cyclic splitting.
Let G   be a fixed finitely generated group. Define an order on the set of Γ   -limit groups that are quotients of G   as follows: suppose R 1   and R 2   are both Γ   -limit groups that are quotients of G   , and that η i : G R i   are the (fixed) canonical quotient maps. We say R 1 > R 2   if there exists an epimorphism with non-trivial kernel τ : R 1 R 2   so that η 2 = τ η 1   . We say that R 1   and R 2   are equivalent if there is an isomorphism τ : R 1 R 2   so that η 2 = τ η 1   .
The following is one of the main technical results of this paper.
Theorem 5.2 (cf. Theorem 1.12, [27). Let Γ   be a torsion-free group which is hyperbolic relative to free abelian subgroups, and let G   be a finitely generated group. Every decreasing sequence of Γ   -limit groups that are quotients of G   : R 1 > R 2 > R 3 > ,   terminates after finitely many steps.
For limit groups, the analogous result has a short proof using algebraic geometry (see [4). However (as observed by M. Kapovich; see, for example, [5, § 1.4), not all hyperbolic groups are linear and the same is therefore true for relatively hyperbolic groups.
Before we prove Theorem
 5.2 , we prove the following lemma (implicit in [27,p.7):
Lemma 5.3. Let Ξ   be a finitely generated group, let L   be a Ξ   -limit group and suppose that L   is d   -generated. Then L   can be obtained as a limit of homomorphisms { h n : F d Ξ }   , where F d   is the free group of rank d   .
Corollary 5.6. Let Γ   be a torsion-free relatively hyperbolic group with abelian parabolics, and let L   be a Γ   -limit group.
Then
L   is Hopfian.
Corollary  5.6 generalises one of the main results of [17, and implies that the relation defined on Γ   -limit groups which are quotients of a fixed group G   is a partial order. The proof of the following theorem is identical to that of [27,Theorem1.17.
Theorem 5.7 (cf. Theorem 1.17, [27). Let G   be a finitely generated group and Γ   a torsion-free relatively hyperbolic group with abelian parabolics, and let { h n : G Γ }   be a sequence of homomorphisms. Then there exists a finite sequence of Γ   -limit groups: G L 1 L 2 L s ,   for which
Given Theorem  5.7 , if a sequence { h n : G Γ }   converges into a Γ   -limit group L   , then by passing to a subsequence we may assume that each h n   factors through the canonical quotient map η : G L   , so we may replace { h n }   by a sequence of homomorphisms from L   to Γ   . This simplifies the definition of shortening quotients considerably, since we may start with a sequence { h n : L Γ }   . Proposition  4.1 still holds in this context (in fact the proof is easier).
Definition 5.8. Let Γ   and G   be finitely generated groups.
We say that
G   is fully residually Γ   is for every finite G   there is a homomorphism h : G Γ   which is injective on   .
Theorem 5.9. Let Γ   be a nonabelian torsion-free relatively hyperbolic group with abelian parabolics. A finitely generated group G   is a Γ   -limit group if and only if it is fully residually Γ   .
Proposition 5.10. Let Γ   be a torsion-free relatively hyperbolic group with abelian parabolics. Then there are only countably many Γ   -limit groups.
The following result follows from the proof of Proposition  5.10 .
Corollary 5.11. Any abelian subgroup of a Γ   -limit group is finitely generated free abelian.
Proposition 5.12 (cf. Proposition 1.20, [27). Let G   be a finitely generated group and Γ   a torsion-free relatively hyperbolic group with abelian parabolics. Let R 1 , R 2   be a sequence of Γ   -limit groups that are all quotients of G   so that R 1 < R 2 < .   Then there exists a Γ   -limit group R   , a quotient of G   , so that R > R m   for all m   .
Propositions  5.10 and  5.12 imply that there are maximal elements for the set of Γ   -limit groups which are quotients of a fixed finitely generated group G   , under the order described before Theorem  5.2 .
Recall that we say that two
Γ   -limit groups which are quotients of G   , η 1 : G R 1   and η 2 : G R 2   are equivalent if there is an isomorphism τ : R 1 R 2   so that η 2 = η 1 τ   .
Proposition 5.13 (cf. Proposition 1.21, [27). Let G   be a finitely generated group and Γ   a torsion-free group hyperbolic relative to free abelian subgroups. Then there are only finitely many equivalence classes of maximal elements in the set of Γ   -limit groups that are quotients of G   .
Definition 5.14. A group G   is a called equationally Noetherian if every system of equations over G   in finitely many variables is equivalent to a finite subsystem.
The following theorem answers a question (essentially) asked by Sela [28,I.8(ii). We believe that relatively hyperbolic groups with abelian parabolics form a more natural context for this question than CAT ( 0 )   groups with isolated flats. In this context, [28,I.8(i)was answered by the author in [17and [28,I.8(iii)is answered in Theorem  6.4 below.
Theorem 5.15 (cf. Theorem 1.22, [27). Suppose that Γ   is a torsion-free relatively hyperbolic group with abelian parabolics.
Guba [19proved the analogous theorem for free groups, whilst Sela [27proved it for torsion-free hyperbolic groups.

6 Makanin-Razborov diagrams

In this final section, we describe the construction of Makanin-Razborov diagrams for Γ   , which give a description of the set Hom ( G , Γ )   , where Γ   is an arbitrary finitely generated group. This is analogous to the constructions in [26, § 5 and [27, § 1 .
Let
R   be a freely indecomposable Γ   -limit group, and let r 1 , , r m R   be a fixed generating set for R   . We assume that we always use the generating set { r 1 , , r m }   to define the length of homomorphisms, and hence to find short homomorphisms.
We need to understand those shortening quotients of
R   obtained from sequences of homomorphisms { h n : R Γ }   so that each h n ( R )   is a proper quotient of R   . By Proposition  4.1 , each such shortening quotient is a proper quotient of R   .
Following
[26, 27we say that two proper shortening quotients S 1 , S 2   of R   are equivalent if there is an isomorphism τ : S 1 S 2   so that the canonical quotient maps η i : R S i   , for i = 1 , 2   satisfy η 2 = τ η 1   .
This defines an equivalence relation on the set of shortening quotients of
R   , paired with the canonical quotient maps: { ( S i , η i : R S i ) }   .
Let
S Q ( R , r 1 , , r m )   be the set of (proper) shortening quotients of R   . On the set S Q ( R , r 1 , , r m )   we define a partial order as follows:
given two proper shortening quotients
S 1 , S 2   of R   , along with canonical quotients η i : R S i   , we say that S 1 > S 2   if there exists a proper epimorphism ν : S 1 S 2   so that η 2 = ν η 1   .
Lemma 6.1 (cf. Lemma 1.23, [27). Let R   be a freely-indecomposable Γ   -limit group. Let S 1 < S 2 < S 3 <   (where S j S Q ( R , r 1 , , r m )   ) be a properly increasing sequence of (proper) shortening quotients of R   . Then there exists a shortening quotient S S Q ( R , r 1 , , r m )   so that for each j   we have S > S j   .
Lemma 6.2 (cf. Lemma 1.24, [27). Let R   be a freely-indecomposable Γ   -limit group. The set, S Q ( R , r 1 , , r m )   , of (proper) shortening quotients of R   contains only finitely many equivalence classes of maximal elements with respect to the partial order.
We can now use shortening quotients to `encode and simplify' all homomorphisms from a freely-indecomposable Γ   -limit group into Γ   .
Proposition 6.3 (cf. Proposition 1.25, [27). Suppose that R   is a freely-indecomposable Γ   -limit group. Let r 1 , , r m R   be a generating set for R   , and let M 1 , , M k   be a set of representatives of the (finite) set of equivalence classes of maximal (proper) shortening quotients in S Q ( R , r 1 , , r m )   , equipped with the canonical quotient maps η i : R M i   , for i = 1 , , k   .
Let
h : R Γ   be a homomorphism which is not an embedding.
Then there exist a (not necessarily unique) index
1 i k   , a modular automorphism φ h Mod ( R )   , and a homomorphism h M i : M i Γ   so that h φ h = h M i η i   /
Finally, we now construct Makanin-Razborov diagrams over Γ   . Let G   be an aribtrary finitely generated group. By Proposition  5.13 , G   has finitely many (equivalence classes of ) maximal Γ   -limit quotients, R 1 , , R s   , say. We now continue with each of the R i   in parallel.
Let
R   be one such maximal Γ   -limit quotient of G   . The there is a free factorisation, R = H 1 * * H l * F g   , where each H i   is a freely-indecomposable non-cyclic subgroup of R   and F g   is a finitely generated free group. Let r 1 1 , , r m 1 1 R   generate H 1   , and r 1 2 , , r m 2 2 R   generate H 2   , etc.
By Lemma
 6.1 the set of (proper) shortening quotients of H i   contain maximal elements, and by Lemma  6.2 there are only finite many equivalence classes of maximal Γ   -limit quotients of each H i   . For i = 1 , , l   , let M 1 i , , M k i I   be a collection of representatives of the equivalence classes of maximal proper shortening quotients in S Q ( H i , r 1 i , , r m i i )   , and let η j i : H i M j i   be the canonical quotient map.
We now define the
Makanin-Razborov diagram of G   iteratively. Start by mapping G   to its finite collection of maximal Γ   -limit quotients, and continue with each of the maximal Γ   -limit quotients in parallel.
Denote such a maximal
Γ   -limit quotient of G   by R   . Factor R   into H 1 * * H l * F g   as above. To each of the factors H i   associate k i   directed edges starting at H i   and terminating at M j i   , a maximal shortening Γ   -limit quotient of H i   . Do not proceed from F g   .
Now for each
M j i   we find a free product factorisation and to each (nonfree) factor associate the finitely many maximal shortening quotients.
This procedure terminates after finitely many steps by Theorem
 5.2  (and Konig's Lemma). We have constructed the Makanin-Razborov diagram associated to G   .
In summary, we have
Theorem 6.4 (cf. Theorem 1.26, [27). Let G   be a finitely generated group and Γ   a torsion-free relatively hyperbolic group with abelian parabolics. Associated to G   is a Makanin-Razborov diagram, with vertices Γ   -limit quotients, and edges the canonical quotient map. Any homomorphism h Hom ( G , Γ )   can be given by compositions of modular automorphisms of the Γ   -limit groups in the diagram with the canonical maps from Γ   -limit groups into their maximal proper shortening quotients, and finally with either embeddings of a Γ   -limit group in the diagram into Γ   , or general homomorphisms of the terminal free groups that appear in the diagram into Γ   .
Theorem  6.4 answers a question (essentially) asked by Sela [28,ProblemI.8(iii). See the discussion above Theorem  5.15 above.
In the future work
[18we will continue the study of the elementary theory of Γ   .
References

  1. E. Alibegović, A combination theorem for relatively hyperbolic groups, Bull. LMS, to appear.
  2. E. Alibegović, Makanin-Razborov diagrams for limit groups, preprint.
  3. M. Bestvina and M. Feighn, Bounding the complexity of simplicial group actions, Invent. Math. 103 (1991), 449–469.
  4. M Bestvina and M. Feighn, Notes on Sela's work: Limit groups and Makanin-Razborov diagrams, preprint.
  5. M. Bestvina, Questions in geometric group theory, available at http://www.math.utah.edu/   bestvina.
  6. B. Bowditch, Relatively hyperbolic groups, preprint.
  7. F. Dahmani, Classifying spaces and boundaries for relatively hyperbolic groups, Proc. London Math. Soc. (3) 86 (2003), 666–684.
  8. F. Dahmani, Combination of convergence groups, Geom. Topol. 7 (2003), 933–963.
  9. F. Dahmani, Accidental parabolics and relatively hyperbolic groups, preprint.
  10. C. Druţ u and M. Sapir, Tree-graded spaces and asymptotic cones of groups, preprint.
  11. C. Druţ u and M. Sapir, Relatively hyperbolic groups with rapid decay property, preprint.
  12. M. Dunwoody, The accessibility of finitely presented groups, Invent. Math. 81 (1985), 449–457.
  13. B. Farb, Relatively hyperbolic groups, GAFA 8 (1998), 810–840.
  14. M. Gromov, Hyperbolic groups, in Essays in group theory (S.M. Gersten, ed.), Springer Verlag, MSRI Publ. 8 (1987), 75-263.
  15. D. Groves, Limits of (certain) CAT ( 0 )   groups, I: Compactification, preprint. Available at http://arxiv.org/abs/math.GR/0404440.
  16. D. Groves, Limits of (certain) CAT ( 0 )   groups, II: The Hopf property and the shortening argument, preprint. Available at http://arxiv.org/abs/math.GR/0408080.
  17. D. Groves, Limit groups for relatively hyperbolic groups, I: The basic tools, preprint. Available at http://arxiv.org/abs/math.GR/0412492.
  18. D. Groves, The elementary theory of torsion-free relatively hyperbolic groups with abelian parabolics, in preparation.
  19. V. Guba, Equivalence of infinite systems of equations in free groups and semigroups to finite subsystems, Math. Zametki 40 (1986), 321–324.
  20. O. Kharlampovich and A. Miasnikov, Irreducible affine varieties over a free group. I, II. J. Alg. 200 (1998), 472–516, 517–570.
  21. D. Osin, Relatively hyperbolic groups: Intrinsic geometry, algebraic properties, and algorithmic properties, preprint.
  22. E. Rips, Subgroups of small cancellation groups, Bull. LMS 14 (1982), 45–47.
  23. E. Rips and Z. Sela, Structure and rigidity in hyperbolic groups I, GAFA 4 (1994), 337—371.
  24. Z. Sela, Acylindrical accessibility for groups, Invent. Math. 129 (1997), 527–565.
  25. Z. Sela, Endomorphisms of hyperbolic groups I: The Hopf property, Topology 38 (1999), 301-321.
  26. Z. Sela, Diophantine geometry over groups, I: Makanin-Razborov diagrams. Publ. Math. IHES 93 (2001), 31–105.
  27. Z.. Sela, Diophantine geometry over groups VIII: The elementary theory of a hyperbolic group, preprint.
  28. Z. Sela, Diophantine geometry over groups: a list of research problems, http://www.ma.huji.ac.il/   zlil/problems.dvi/
  29. A. Szczepanski, Relatively hyperbolic groups, Michigan Math. J. 45 (1998), 611–618.
  30. A. Yaman, A topological characterisation of relatively hyperbolic groups, J. Reine Angew. Math. 566 (2004), 41–89.

Daniel Groves, Department of Mathematics, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA, 91125, USA E-mail address : groves@caltech.edu