EQUIVARIANT TOPOLOGICAL COMPLEXITY HELLEN COLMAN AND MARK GRANT Abstract. We define and study an equivariant version of Farber’s topological complexity for spaces with a given compact group action. This is a special case of the equivariant sectional category of an equivariant map, also defined in this paper. The relationship of these invariants with the equivariant Lusternik- Schnirelmann category is given. Several examples and computations serve to highlight the similarities and differences with the non-equivariant case. We also indicate how the equivariant topological complexity can be used to give estimates of the non-equivariant topological complexity. 1. Introduction The sectional category of a map p: E → B, denoted secat(p), is the minimum number of open sets needed to cover B, on each of which p admits a homotopy section. It was first studied extensively by Svarcˇ [19] for fibrations (under the name genus) and later by Berstein and Ganea [2] for arbitrary maps. The notion of sectional category generalizes the classical (Lusternik-Schnirelmann) category, since secat(p) = cat(B) whenever E is contractible and p is surjective. For a general overview of these and other category-type notions, we refer the reader to the survey article of James [14] and the book of Cornea-Lupton-Oprea-Tanr´e[5]. Further to the classical applications of category to critical point theory, the concept of sectional category has been applied in a variety of settings. We mention the work of Smale [17] and Vassiliev [20] on the complexity of algorithms for solving polynomial equations, and applications to the theory of embeddings [19]. More recently, Farber has applied these ideas to the motion planning problem in robotics [8, 9]. He defines the topological complexity of a space X, denoted TC(X), to be the sectional category of the free path fibration on X. The topological complexity is a numerical homotopy invariant which measures the ‘navigational complexity’ of arXiv:1205.0166v2 [math.AT] 5 Sep 2012 X, when viewed as the configuration space of a mechanical system. Along with various related invariants, it has enjoyed much attention in the recent literature (see [12, 1, 13] for example). In this paper we begin a systematic study of the equivariant versions of these notions. For simplicity, we restrict to compact group actions (although most of our results remain true for proper actions). Let G be a compact Hausdorff topological group, and let p: E → B be a G-map. Then the equivariant sectional category of p, denoted secatG (p), is the minimum number of invariant open sets needed to cover B, on each of which p admits a G-homotopy section. If p is a G-fibration, this is equivalent to asking for a G-equivariant section on each open set in the 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 55M99, 57S10 (Primary); 55M30, 55R91 (Secondary). Key words and phrases. Equivariant LS-category, equivariant sectional category, equivariant topological complexity. 1 2 HELLENCOLMANANDMARKGRANT cover. In the case when the actions are trivial, secatG (p) reduces to the ordinary (non-equivariant) sectional category secat (p). The equivariant sectional category does not seem to have appeared in the lit- erature until now, although we note below (Corollary 4.7) that it generalizes the equivariant category, or G-category, in many cases of interest. This latter invariant has been extensively studied (see for example [7, 15, 4]), and gives a lower bound for the number of critical orbits of a G-invariant functional on a G-manifold. We include a review of some of its properties in Section 3 below, where we also prove product inequalities for equivariant category. The equivariant topological complexity of a G-space X, denoted TCG(X), is de- fined in Section 5 to be the equivariant sectional category of the free path fibration π : XI → X × X, where G acts diagonally on the product and in the obvious way on paths in X. After proving that TCG(X) is a G-homotopy invariant (Theorem 5.2), we give several inequalities relating TCG(X) to the equivariant and non- equivariant categories and topological complexities of the various fixed point sets. We also show by examples that TCG(X) can be equal to TC(X), or at the other extreme, one can be finite and the other infinite (this always happens for example if X is a G-manifold which is connected but not G-connected). For a group acting on itself by left translations, we show that TCG(G) = cat(G), so that category of Lie groups is obtained as a special case of equivariant topological complexity (Theorem 5.11). Various other results are given, including a lower bound in terms of equi- variant cohomology (Theorem 5.15) and an inequality which bounds the ordinary topological complexity of the fibre space with fibre X associated to a numerable principal G-bundle by the product of TCG(X) and the topological complexity of the base space (Theorem 5.16). The invariant TCG(X) has an interpretation in terms of the motion planning problem, when X is viewed as the configuration space of a mechanical system which exhibits G as a group of symmetries. Namely, it is the minimum number of domains of continuity of motion planners in X which preserve the symmetry. Whilst we do not pursue this viewpoint here, it is conceivable that the invariant TCG(X) may find applications in practical problems of engineering. For more background on the topological approach to motion planning, we refer the reader to [10]. The computation of category and topological complexity in the non-equivariant case are difficult problems which continue to inspire a great deal of research in homotopy theory, and serve to gauge the power of new topological techniques. We believe that the equivariant counterparts of these problems can fill a similar niche in equivariant homotopy theory. Acknowledgements. The work of the first author was done during a sabbatical leave granted by the City Colleges of Chicago in the spring of 2012. This paper was finalized during the visit of the first author to the University of Nottingham. She gratefully acknowledges the host institution for its hospitality and the AWM-NSF Travel Grant for its economic support. Both authors thank the anonymous referee for suggestions which greatly improved the exposition of the paper. 2. Topological Complexity We begin by recalling some definitions and fixing some notation. The term fibration will always refer to a Hurewicz fibration. The sectional category of a EQUIVARIANTTOPOLOGICALCOMPLEXITY 3 fibration was introduced by Svarcˇ (under the name genus) and generalized to any map by Berstein and Ganea. Definition 2.1. [2] The sectional category of a map p: E → B, denoted secat(p), is the least integer k such that B may be covered by k open sets {U1,...,Uk} on each of which there exists a map s: Ui → E such that ps: Ui → B is homotopic .∞ =(to the inclusion iUi : Ui ֒→ B. If no such integer exists we set secat(p The sets Ui ⊆ B in the above definition are called sectional categorical for p. Remark 2.2. Svarc’sˇ original definition [19] of the genus of a fibration p: E → B was as the least integer k such that B may be covered by k open sets {U1,...,Uk} on each of which there exists a local section of p, that is to say a map s: Ui → E such that ps = iUi . It is easy to see (using the HLP) that this coincides with secat(p) defined above. Remark 2.3. In this paper, all our category-type invariants are un-normalized (they are equal to the number of open sets in the cover). For instance, secat(p)=1 if and only if p admits a homotopy section. Thus our definitions exceed by one those in the book [5], but are in agreement with those used in previous works of the authors, such as [4, 13]. Recall that the (Lusternik-Schnirelmann) category of a space X, denoted cat(X), is the least k such that X may be covered by k open sets {U1,...,Uk} such that .each inclusion iUi : Ui ֒→ X is null-homotopic. The Ui are called categorical sets The sectional category of a surjective fibration p: E → B is bounded above by the category of the base, secat(p) ≤ cat(B), and they coincide if the space E is contractible [19]. Lower bounds for the sectional category can be found using cohomology. If I is an ideal in the commutative ring R, the nilpotency of I, denoted nil I, is the maximum number of factors in a nonzero product of elements from I. Let H∗ denote cohomology with coefficients in an arbitrary commutative ring. Proposition 2.4. [19] Let p: E → B be a fibration and p∗ : H∗(B) → H∗(E) be the induced homomorphism. Then secat (p) > nil ker p∗. The topological complexity of a space X, denoted TC(X), is a homotopy invari- ant defined by Farber [8] in order to study the motion planning problem in robotics. We recall now some of its important properties. For more detail we refer the reader to the original papers of Farber [8, 9, 10]. For any space X, let XI denote the space of paths in X endowed with the compact-open topology. The free path fibration is the map π : XI → X × X given by π(γ) = (γ(0),γ(1)). It is surjective if X is path-connected. Definition 2.5. The topological complexity of a space X is TC(X) = secat(π), the sectional category of the free path fibration π : XI → X × X.