Regular and singular maximal abelian algebras

Written by GPT-6.1 Sol (OpenAI), Ultra, September 2026. Self-checked by the writing AI. Original text: CC0 1.0.

Maximal abelianness says that every operator commuting with an abelian algebra already belongs to it. Regularity asks a different question: do the unitaries carrying the algebra onto itself generate the whole ambient algebra? We prove regularity for the purely atomic and the diffuse maximal abelian algebras in B(H)B(H), with HH separable. Then we prove singularity of the algebra generated by one free-group generator inside L(F2)L(\mathbb F_2).

The singularity proof has a concrete mechanism. Reduced words make an infinite cyclic subgroup malnormal: its conjugates intersect it trivially unless the conjugating word lies in that subgroup. This forces mixed coefficient expectations to vanish along sufficiently large powers of the generator. A unitary normalizing the cyclic algebra must consequently have all its coefficients in that algebra.

We use the normal group trace and coefficient uniqueness from Section 4 of Crossed-product coefficients and factor tests. The trace-preserving expectation theorem is Theorem 9.1 of Traces, part B. Spatial isomorphism and diffuse classification are Theorems 7.4 and 8.4 of Abelian operator algebras, together with its countable-generation Theorem 8.2. We use those existing classification proofs without repeating them. The double commutant theorem is in The double commutation theorem. Rational-translation ergodicity and the expected-MASA trace restriction are Lemma 4.1 and Theorem 1.2 of Expected maximal abelian algebras and factor types. Elementary tools are reduced words, Hilbert-space orthogonal projection and the trace Cauchy–Schwarz inequality. The linked programme lessons contain the complete prerequisite proofs. Anantharaman and Popa’s freely readable draft treats finite tracial normalizers; Sinclair and Smith’s freely readable paper develops the asymptotic-homomorphism method and its implication for normalizers; Takesaki’s book provides further context. Here the reduced-word lemma proves the required group property directly, and the full two-step polynomial estimate and expectation argument control every normalizing unitary. The conclusions concern regularity and singularity, with no quantitative strong-singularity bound, Popa invariant or hyperbolic-group theorem asserted.

1. Three normalizer conditions

For a unital abelian von Neumann algebra D⊆MD\subseteq M, set NM(D)={v∈U(M):vDv∗=D},NM(D)=NM(D)′′.(1.1) \mathcal N_M(D)= \{v\in\mathcal U(M):vDv^*=D\},\qquad N_M(D)=\mathcal N_M(D)''. \tag{1.1} Every unitary of DD belongs to NM(D)\mathcal N_M(D), and those unitaries generate DD. Indeed, continuous functional calculus writes each self-adjoint contraction dd as the real part of the unitary d+i(1−d2)1/2d+i(1-d^2)^{1/2}; scaling and linear decomposition give all of DD.

For a maximal abelian DD in a factor MM, the source terminology is:

We will also use the regular and singular equalities in general ambient algebras. A diffuse singular maximal abelian algebra in a factor is not semiregular: its normalizer generates a diffuse abelian algebra, whose centre is itself.

2. Maximal abelian algebras in B(H)B(H)

Assume throughout this section that HH is a nonzero separable Hilbert space and D⊆B(H)D\subseteq B(H) is maximal abelian.

Proposition 2.1. If DD is atomic, then DD is regular.

Proof. Let (pi)i∈I(p_i)_{i\in I} be its minimal projections, with sum 11. The index set is finite or countable, since their nonzero ranges are pairwise orthogonal in a separable Hilbert space.

Each pip_i has rank one. For T∈B(piH)T\in B(p_iH), regard TT as zero on (1−pi)H(1-p_i)H. Every d∈Dd\in D is scalar on piHp_iH, because Dpi=CpiDp_i=\mathbb Cp_i, so TT commutes with DD. Maximal abelianness gives T∈DT\in D, and then T∈Dpi=CpiT\in Dp_i=\mathbb Cp_i. Thus B(piH)=CpiB(p_iH)=\mathbb Cp_i, which forces dim⁡piH=1\dim p_iH=1.

Choose unit vectors δi∈piH\delta_i\in p_iH. They form an orthonormal basis, and DD is exactly the diagonal algebra in that basis. One inclusion follows from commutativity with the pip_i; the other follows because every bounded diagonal is a strong limit of its finite diagonal compressions.

The unitary swapping two basis vectors and fixing all the others normalizes DD. Denote it by UijU_{ij}. Then, for i≠ji\ne j, piUijpj=∣δi⟩⟨δj∣.(2.1) p_iU_{ij}p_j=|\delta_i\rangle\langle\delta_j|. \tag{2.1} Since pi,pj∈D⊆NB(H)(D)p_i,p_j\in D\subseteq N_{B(H)}(D), all rank-one matrix units lie in the normalizer algebra. Finite matrix compressions of any T∈B(H)T\in B(H) are finite combinations of these matrix units and converge strongly to TT. Hence NB(H)(D)=B(H)N_{B(H)}(D)=B(H). The one-dimensional case is immediate. □\square

Proposition 2.2. If DD is nonatomic, then DD is regular.

Proof. An algebra represented on a separable Hilbert space is countably generated in the strong topology, and every orthogonal family of nonzero projections is countable. The abelian classification prerequisites therefore identify DD abstractly with L∞[0,1]L^\infty[0,1]. Theorem 7.4 of Abelian operator algebras implements this isomorphism by a unitary because both represented algebras are maximal abelian. Removing the null endpoint identifies the multiplication model with D0={Mf:f∈L∞(T)}on L2(T). D_0=\{M_f:f\in L^\infty(\mathbb T)\} \quad\text{on }L^2(\mathbb T). Regularity is preserved by unitary conjugation, so it suffices to prove it for D0D_0.

For q∈Q/Zq\in\mathbb Q/\mathbb Z, let (Vqξ)(x)=ξ(x−q). (V_q\xi)(x)=\xi(x-q). Lebesgue invariance makes VqV_q unitary, and VqMfVq∗=Mf( ⋅−q).(2.2) V_qM_fV_q^*=M_{f(\,\cdot-q)}. \tag{2.2} Thus all VqV_q normalize D0D_0. Let BB be the von Neumann algebra generated by D0D_0 and the VqV_q. Since D0′=D0D_0'=D_0, every T∈B′T\in B' has the form MfM_f. Commutation with every VqV_q means that ff is fixed by all rational translations. The previously proved translation lemma makes ff constant almost everywhere. Hence B′=C1B'=\mathbb C1, and the double commutant theorem gives B=B′′=(C1)′=B(L2(T)). B=B''=(\mathbb C1)'=B(L^2(\mathbb T)). The normalizer contains all these generators, proving regularity. □\square

Corollary 2.3. A nonatomic maximal abelian algebra in B(H)B(H) is regular but has no normal norm-one retraction from B(H)B(H) onto it.

Proof. Regularity is Proposition 2.2. If there were such a retraction, the expected-MASA trace theorem would make the canonical operator trace semifinite on DD. There would be a nonzero a∈D+a\in D_+ with finite operator trace. A nonzero spectral projection p=1[ε,∞)(a)p=1_{[\varepsilon,\infty)}(a) would then have finite rank. The nonzero finite-dimensional algebra DpDp contains a minimal projection, which is also minimal in DD. This contradicts nonatomicity. □\square

Thus regularity does not imply existence of a normal expectation.

Proposition 2.4 (the mixed case). Let zz be the sum of the minimal projections of DD. If z≠0,1z\ne0,1, then NB(H)(D)=B(zH)⊕B((1−z)H).(2.3) N_{B(H)}(D)=B(zH)\oplus B((1-z)H). \tag{2.3} In particular DD is neither regular nor semiregular.

Proof. A unitary normalizing DD permutes its minimal projections, and hence fixes their sum zz. It is block diagonal for H=zH⊕(1−z)HH=zH\oplus(1-z)H. This proves the inclusion ⊆\subseteq in (2.3).

The corner algebras DzDz and D(1−z)D(1-z) are maximal abelian on their respective Hilbert spaces. For example an operator on zHzH commuting with DzDz, extended by zero on the other block, commutes with DD and so belongs to DzDz. The first corner is atomic, the second nonatomic. Propositions 2.1 and 2.2 make their normalizers generate their respective full operator algebras. Extend each corner normalizer by the identity on the other block; the resulting unitary normalizes DD. Since z,1−z∈Dz,1-z\in D, compression of the generated algebra yields both whole blocks in (2.3). The equality follows. Its centre is Cz+C(1−z)\mathbb Cz+\mathbb C(1-z), so it is not a factor and is properly smaller than B(H)B(H). □\square

3. Subgroup coefficients and the trace Hilbert space

For a countable discrete group GG, let ugu_g be left translation on ℓ2(G)\ell^2(G) and M=L(G),τ(x)=⟨xδe,δe⟩,∥x∥2=τ(x∗x)1/2.(3.1) M=L(G),\qquad \tau(x)=\langle x\delta_e,\delta_e\rangle,\qquad \|x\|_2=\tau(x^*x)^{1/2}. \tag{3.1} The earlier group-trace proof gives a faithful normal tracial state. Its coefficients are xg=τ(xug∗),∥x∥22=∑g∣xg∣2.(3.2) x_g=\tau(xu_g^*),\qquad \|x\|_2^2=\sum_g|x_g|^2. \tag{3.2} The map x↦xδex\mapsto x\delta_e extends to a unitary from the completion L2(M,τ)L^2(M,\tau) onto ℓ2(G)\ell^2(G): it is isometric by (3.1), and its range contains the basis ugδe=δgu_g\delta_e=\delta_g. Thus finite group polynomials approximate every x∈Mx\in M in the 22-norm. This is a Hilbert-space assertion, and does not assert convergence of unordered operator Fourier sums.

Let K≤GK\leq G, and put AK={uk:k∈K}′′⊆MA_K=\{u_k:k\in K\}''\subseteq M.

Lemma 3.1. There is a faithful normal trace-preserving expectation EK:M→AKE_K:M\to A_K, and its coefficients satisfy (EK(x))g={xg,g∈K,0,g∉K.(3.3) (E_K(x))_g= \begin{cases} x_g,&g\in K,\\ 0,&g\notin K. \end{cases} \tag{3.3} It is the L2L^2 orthogonal projection onto ℓ2(K)\ell^2(K) under the preceding identification. In particular x∈AKx\in A_K exactly when xg=0x_g=0 for g∉Kg\notin K.

Proof. The trace restriction to AKA_K is faithful, finite and normal, so Theorem 9.1 of the trace prerequisite applies. It gives EKE_K, bimodularity and τ(EK(x)b)=τ(xb)(b∈AK).(3.4) \tau(E_K(x)b)=\tau(xb)\qquad(b\in A_K). \tag{3.4} For g∈Kg\in K, take b=ug∗b=u_g^* to get the first part of (3.3). Every element of AKA_K has zero coefficients off KK: this holds for polynomials in uku_k, and then holds on their ultraweak closure because each coefficient functional is normal. This gives the second part.

Normal coefficient uniqueness now shows that an xx with all coefficients off KK zero equals EK(x)E_K(x). The L2L^2 description follows from (3.3). Alternatively (3.4) says directly that x−EK(x)x-E_K(x) is orthogonal to AKA_K. Its Hilbert closure is ℓ2(K)\ell^2(K), since it contains the basis (δk)k∈K(\delta_k)_{k\in K}. □\square

We will repeatedly use ∥EK(x)∥2≤∥x∥2,∥xy∥2≤∥x∥∥y∥2,∥xy∥2≤∥x∥2∥y∥.(3.5) \|E_K(x)\|_2\leq\|x\|_2,\quad \|xy\|_2\leq\|x\|\|y\|_2,\quad \|xy\|_2\leq\|x\|_2\|y\|. \tag{3.5} The first inequality is orthogonal projection. The second follows from x∗x≤∥x∥21x^*x\leq\|x\|^2 1; the third follows by taking adjoints and using the trace identity.

4. Reduced words in the free group

Let G=F2=⟨a,b⟩G=\mathbb F_2=\langle a,b\rangle, the group of reduced words in a±1,b±1a^{\pm1},b^{\pm1}, and let K=⟨a⟩K=\langle a\rangle. Every word g∉Kg\notin K can be written g=arvas,r,s∈Z,(4.1) g=a^r v a^s,\qquad r,s\in\mathbb Z, \tag{4.1} where vv is a nonempty reduced word whose first and last letters are bb or b−1b^{-1}. Obtain this form by removing the maximal initial and terminal strings of aa-letters. There is no cancellation at either displayed boundary.

Lemma 4.1. The subgroup KK is malnormal: gKg−1∩K={e}(g∉K).(4.2) gKg^{-1}\cap K=\{e\}\qquad(g\notin K). \tag{4.2} Moreover, the conjugation orbit {anga−n:n∈Z}\{a^n g a^{-n}:n\in\mathbb Z\} is infinite for every g∉Kg\notin K.

Proof. With (4.1), for k≠0k\ne0, gakg−1=arvakv−1a−r.(4.3) g a^k g^{-1}=a^r v a^k v^{-1}a^{-r}. \tag{4.3} This word is reduced at all boundaries involving a displayed power of aa: the bordering letters of vv are bb-letters. It retains bb-letters and cannot belong to KK. This proves (4.2).

If anga−n=amga−ma^n g a^{-n}=a^m g a^{-m} with n≠mn\ne m, then gg commutes with an−ma^{n-m}. Consequently gan−mg−1=an−mg a^{n-m}g^{-1}=a^{n-m} is a nonidentity element of gKg−1∩KgKg^{-1}\cap K, contradicting (4.2). All conjugates are distinct. □\square

Proposition 4.2. The algebra A=AK={ua}′′ A=A_K=\{u_a\}'' is a diffuse maximal abelian subalgebra of L(F2)L(\mathbb F_2).

Proof. It is abelian because KK is cyclic. Suppose x∈Mx\in M commutes with uau_a. It is fixed by conjugation with all uanu_a^n. The coefficient conjugation formula makes xgx_g constant along {anga−n}\{a^n g a^{-n}\}. For g∉Kg\notin K, this orbit is infinite by Lemma 4.1. Square summability in (3.2) therefore forces xg=0x_g=0. Lemma 3.1 puts xx in AA. Thus A′∩M=AA'\cap M=A.

To see diffuseness, decompose ℓ2(G)\ell^2(G) over right cosets KtKt. Left translations by KK preserve each ℓ2(Kt)\ell^2(Kt), and the unitary δk↦δkt\delta_k\mapsto\delta_{kt} identifies this action with the regular action on ℓ2(K)\ell^2(K). Hence the represented algebra AA is a faithful normal amplification of L(K)L(K). Since K≅ZK\cong\mathbb Z, the trigonometric orthonormal basis identifies L(K)L(K) with the multiplication algebra L∞(T)L^\infty(\mathbb T), as in the earlier circle coefficient example. Every positive-measure set on the circle splits into two positive-measure sets. Thus L∞(T)L^\infty(\mathbb T), and hence AA, has no minimal projection. □\square

5. The mixing estimate and singularity

Write EA=EKE_A=E_K, and set wn=uanw_n=u_a^n for n≥1n\geq1.

Lemma 5.1. If x,y∈Mx,y\in M satisfy EA(x)=EA(y)=0E_A(x)=E_A(y)=0, then ∥EA(xwny)∥2⟶0.(5.1) \|E_A(xw_n y)\|_2\longrightarrow0. \tag{5.1} For arbitrary x,y∈Mx,y\in M, this gives ∥EA(xwny)−EA(x)wnEA(y)∥2⟶0.(5.2) \|E_A(xw_n y)-E_A(x)w_nE_A(y)\|_2\longrightarrow0. \tag{5.2}

Proof. First let x=ugx=u_g, y=uhy=u_h with g,h∉Kg,h\notin K. Their mixed product is uganhu_{g a^n h}. If ganhg a^n h and gamhg a^m h both belong to KK, then (ganh)(gamh)−1=gan−mg−1∈K. (g a^n h)(g a^m h)^{-1} =g a^{n-m}g^{-1}\in K. Malnormality forces n=mn=m. Thus EA(ugwnuh)E_A(u_g w_nu_h) can be nonzero for at most one integer nn. For finite polynomials p,qp,q supported off KK, only finitely many such pairs of words occur. It follows that EA(pwnq)=0E_A(pw_nq)=0 for all sufficiently large nn.

For general x,yx,y as in (5.1), their coefficient vectors are supported off KK. Given ε>0\varepsilon>0, choose a finite polynomial pp supported off KK with ∥x−p∥2<ε2(1+∥y∥). \|x-p\|_2<\frac{\varepsilon}{2(1+\|y\|)}. After pp has been chosen, choose a finite polynomial qq supported off KK with ∥y−q∥2<ε2(1+∥p∥). \|y-q\|_2<\frac{\varepsilon}{2(1+\|p\|)}. For all sufficiently large nn, EA(pwnq)=0E_A(pw_nq)=0, and (3.5) gives ∥EA(xwny)∥2≤∥(x−p)wny∥2+∥pwn(y−q)∥2≤∥x−p∥2∥y∥+∥p∥∥y−q∥2<ε. \begin{aligned} \|E_A(xw_n y)\|_2 &\leq \|(x-p)w_n y\|_2+\|pw_n(y-q)\|_2\\ &\leq\|x-p\|_2\|y\|+\|p\|\|y-q\|_2 <\varepsilon. \end{aligned} No uniform operator-norm bound on the approximating polynomial was assumed.

For (5.2), write x=EA(x)+x0x=E_A(x)+x_0 and y=EA(y)+y0y=E_A(y)+y_0. Bimodularity and wn∈Aw_n\in A make the two cross terms zero under EAE_A, so EA(xwny)−EA(x)wnEA(y)=EA(x0wny0). E_A(xw_n y)-E_A(x)w_nE_A(y)=E_A(x_0w_n y_0). Apply (5.1). □\square

Theorem 5.2. The diffuse maximal abelian algebra A={ua}′′A=\{u_a\}'' is singular in the type-II1_1 factor L(F2)L(\mathbb F_2): NM(A)=U(A).(5.3) \mathcal N_M(A)=\mathcal U(A). \tag{5.3}

Proof. The earlier ICC theorem makes M=L(F2)M=L(\mathbb F_2) a type-II1_1 factor. Let v∈U(M)v\in\mathcal U(M) normalize AA, and put d=EA(v)∈Ad=E_A(v)\in A. Contractivity gives ∥d∥≤1\|d\|\leq1. For every nn, vwnv∗v w_n v^* is a unitary in AA, so EA(vwnv∗)=vwnv∗,∥EA(vwnv∗)∥2=1. E_A(vw_n v^*)=vw_n v^*,\qquad \|E_A(vw_n v^*)\|_2=1. Apply Lemma 5.1 to x=vx=v, y=v∗y=v^*. Since EA(v∗)=d∗E_A(v^*)=d^*, it yields ∥vwnv∗−dwnd∗∥2⟶0.(5.4) \|vw_n v^*-d w_n d^*\|_2\longrightarrow0. \tag{5.4} The algebra AA is abelian, and thus dwnd∗=∣d∣2wnd w_n d^*=|d|^2w_n has 22-norm ∥∣d∣2∥2\||d|^2\|_2, independent of nn. Taking norms in (5.4) gives τ(∣d∣4)=∥∣d∣2∥22=1. \tau(|d|^4)=\||d|^2\|_2^2=1. But 0≤∣d∣4≤10\leq|d|^4\leq1 and τ(1)=1\tau(1)=1. Faithfulness makes ∣d∣4=1|d|^4=1, and therefore ∣d∣2=1|d|^2=1. Lemma 3.1 makes EAE_A an orthogonal projection in L2L^2, so ∥v−d∥22=∥v∥22−∥d∥22=1−1=0. \|v-d\|_2^2=\|v\|_2^2-\|d\|_2^2=1-1=0. Faithfulness gives v=d∈Av=d\in A. Its unitarity in MM is then unitarity in AA. Conversely every unitary of AA normalizes AA. This proves (5.3). □\square

The proof controls arbitrary normalizing unitaries, not only the group unitaries ugu_g. Malnormality of the subgroup alone would not justify that conclusion without the L2L^2 approximation and expectation argument.

6. Graded exercises with complete solutions

Exercise 6.1 (introductory: diagonal normalizers). Let DD be the diagonal algebra on ℓ2(I)\ell^2(I), where II is finite or countably infinite. Prove that its unitary normalizers are exactly the monomial unitaries Uδi=ziδσ(i),∣zi∣=1, U\delta_i=z_i\delta_{\sigma(i)},\qquad |z_i|=1, with σ\sigma a permutation of II. Show that the diagonal unitaries and finite transpositions already generate B(ℓ2(I))B(\ell^2(I)) as a von Neumann algebra.

Solution. A normalizer induces an automorphism of DD, so it permutes the minimal projections pi=∣δi⟩⟨δi∣p_i=|\delta_i\rangle\langle\delta_i|. Thus UpiU∗=pσ(i)Up_iU^*=p_{\sigma(i)} for a permutation σ\sigma, which gives the displayed formula with unimodular ziz_i. Conversely such a unitary takes MfM_f to Mf∘σ−1M_{f\circ\sigma^{-1}}, so it normalizes DD.

The diagonal unitaries generate DD, hence all pip_i. A finite transposition UijU_{ij} gives piUijpj=eijp_iU_{ij}p_j=e_{ij} for i≠ji\ne j, and eii=pie_{ii}=p_i. Thus every matrix unit lies in the generated algebra. If PF=∑i∈FpiP_F=\sum_{i\in F}p_i, then PFTPFP_FTP_F is a finite combination of these units and tends strongly to TT for every T∈B(ℓ2(I))T\in B(\ell^2(I)). The generated von Neumann algebra is therefore all of B(ℓ2(I))B(\ell^2(I)).

Exercise 6.2 (intermediate: a mixed maximal abelian algebra). On H=C⊕L2(T), H=\mathbb C\oplus L^2(\mathbb T), consider D={λ⊕Mf:λ∈C, f∈L∞(T)}. D=\{\lambda\oplus M_f:\lambda\in\mathbb C,\ f\in L^\infty(\mathbb T)\}. Prove maximal abelianness and compute its normalizer algebra. Decide whether it is regular, semiregular or singular.

Solution. The projection z=1⊕0z=1\oplus0 belongs to DD. Any operator commuting with DD commutes with zz, so it is block diagonal. Its first block is scalar; its second commutes with all multiplications and is itself a multiplication. Hence D′=DD'=D.

The projection zz is the sole minimal projection of DD, since the circle multiplication algebra is diffuse. Every normalizer fixes zz, so its generated algebra is contained in C⊕B(L2(T))\mathbb C\oplus B(L^2(\mathbb T)). The unitaries 1⊕Vq1\oplus V_q, q∈Q/Zq\in\mathbb Q/\mathbb Z, normalize DD. Together with its multiplication unitaries they generate the whole second block by Proposition 2.2. Compression by z,1−zz,1-z therefore gives NB(H)(D)=C⊕B(L2(T)). N_{B(H)}(D)=\mathbb C\oplus B(L^2(\mathbb T)). This is properly smaller than B(H)B(H) and has a two-dimensional centre, so DD is neither regular nor semiregular. It is not singular either: a nonidentity rational translation 1⊕Vq1\oplus V_q is a normalizer outside DD. For example it does not commute with multiplication by the indicator of an arc moved by that translation.

Exercise 6.3 (advanced: replacing the generator by its square). In M=L(F2)M=L(\mathbb F_2), put A={ua}′′,D={ua2}′′. A=\{u_a\}'',\qquad D=\{u_a^2\}''. Compute D′∩MD'\cap M and NM(D)\mathcal N_M(D). Explain why DD is not a maximal abelian algebra and why the singularity theorem for AA cannot be transferred to it.

Solution. If xx commutes with ua2u_a^2, its coefficients are constant along the conjugation orbits a2nga−2na^{2n}g a^{-2n}. For g∉⟨a⟩g\notin\langle a\rangle, those orbits are infinite by the malnormality argument: equality at distinct exponents would make gg commute with a nonzero even power of aa. Square summability forces all coefficients off ⟨a⟩\langle a\rangle to vanish, and Lemma 3.1 puts xx in AA. Conversely AA commutes with DD, so D′∩M=A.(6.1) D'\cap M=A. \tag{6.1} The inclusion D⊂AD\subset A is proper: every coefficient of an element of DD off ⟨a2⟩\langle a^2\rangle vanishes by Lemma 3.1, whereas the coefficient of uau_a at aa is 11. Thus DD is not maximal abelian.

If vv normalizes DD, conjugation carries its relative commutant onto itself: v(D′∩M)v∗=(vDv∗)′∩M=D′∩M. v(D'\cap M)v^*=(vDv^*)'\cap M=D'\cap M. By (6.1), vv normalizes AA. Theorem 5.2 forces v∈U(A)v\in\mathcal U(A). Conversely every unitary of the abelian AA commutes with DD and normalizes it. Hence NM(D)=U(A),NM(D)=A. \mathcal N_M(D)=\mathcal U(A),\qquad N_M(D)=A. In particular uau_a is a normalizer outside DD. The subgroup ⟨a2⟩\langle a^2\rangle also fails malnormality: conjugation by a∉⟨a2⟩a\notin\langle a^2\rangle fixes that whole subgroup. Both the maximality and the mixing hypothesis used for the primitive generator are lost.

References

[Takesaki] M. Takesaki, Theory of Operator Algebras I, Springer-Verlag, 1979.

[Earlier lessons] The group trace, trace-preserving expectation, abelian classification, translation lemma and expected-MASA trace theorem linked above, with their specific proof locators.

[Anantharaman–Popa] Claire Anantharaman and Sorin Popa, An introduction to II1 factors, author-hosted draft IIunV15.

[Sinclair–Smith] Allan M. Sinclair and Roger R. Smith, Strongly Singular Masas in Type II1 Factors, arXiv:math/0107075v1, 10 July 2001.

Editable source · Sources and component terms