Skip to main content

Full text of "Convex cocompact subgroups of mapping class groups"

See other formats


ISSN 1364-0380 (on line) 1465-3060 (printed) 



91 



Qeometry & Topology 

Volume 6 (2002) 91-152 
Published: 14 March 2002 




Convex cocompact subgroups of 
mapping class groups 

Benson Fare 
Lee Mosher 



Department of Mathematics, University of Chicago 
5734 University Ave, Chicago, U 60637, USA 



and 

Department of Mathematics and Computer Science 
Rutgers University, Newark, NJ 07102, USA 



Email: fcirb@math.uchicago.edu and mosher@eindromeda.rutgers.edu 
Abstract 

We develop a theory of convex cocompact subgroups of the mapping class group 
MCG of a closed, oriented surface S of genus at least 2, in terms of the action 
on Teichmiiller space. Given a subgroup G of MCG defining an extension 
1 — TTi (S) -^Vc^G^l^we prove that if Vq is a word hyperbolic group 
then G is a convex cocompact subgroup of MCG. When G is free and convex 
cocompact, called a Schottky subgroup of MCG, the converse is true as well; a 
semidirect product of 7ri(S') by a free group G is therefore word hyperbolic if 
and only if G is a Schottky subgroup of MCG. The special case when G = Z 
follows from Thurston's hyperbolization theorem. Schottky subgroups exist in 
abundance: sufficiently high powers of any independent set of pseudo-Anosov 
mapping classes freely generate a Schottky subgroup. 

AMS Classification numbers Primary: 20F67, 20F65 
Secondary: 57M07, 57S25 

Keywords: Mapping class group, Schottky subgroup, cocompact subgroup, 
convexity, pseudo-Anosov 

Proposed: Walter Neumann Received: 20 October 2001 

Seconded: Shigeyuki Morita, Robion Kirby Accepted: 20 February 2002 



© Qeometry & Topology Vublications 



92 



Benson Farb and Lee Mosher 



1 Introduction 

1.1 Convex cocompact groups 

A convex cocompact subgroup of Isom(H") , the isometry group of hyperbolic 
n-space, is a discrete subgroup G < Isom(H"), with hmit set Ac C 9H"^, such 
that G acts cocompactly on the convex hull Hullc C H" of its limit set Aq. 
It follows that G is a word hyperbolic group with model geometry HuIIg and 
Gromov boundary Ac- Given any finitely generated, discrete subgroup G < 
Isom(H") , G is convex cocompact if and only if any orbit of G is a quasiconvex 
subset of H". Convex cocompact subgroups satisfy several useful properties: 
every infinite order element of G is loxodromic; Ac is the smallest nontrivial 
G-invariant closed subset of H = H'* U ; the action of G on \ Ac 
is properly discontinuous; assuming Ac 7^ , the stabilizer subgroup of Ac 
is a finite index supergroup of G, and it is the relative commensurator of G in 
Isom(H"). 

A Schottky group is a convex cocompact subgroup of Isom(H") which is free. 
Schottky subgroups of Isom(H") exist in abundance and can be constructed 
using the classical ping-pong argument, attributed to Klein: if </>i, . . . ,(pn are 
loxodromic elements whose axes have pairwisc disjoint cndpoints at infinity, 
then sufficiently high powers of (pi, . . . ,(t>n freely generate a Schottky group. ^ 

We shall investigate the notions of convex cocompact groups and Schottky 
groups in the context of Teichmiiller space. Given a closed, oriented surface S 
of genus > 2, the mapping class group MGG acts as the full isometry group of 
the Teichmiiller space T [45].^ This action extends to the Thurston compacti- 
fication T = TuPMJ^ [16]. Teichmiiller space is not Gromov hyperbolic [34], 
no matter what finite covolume, equivariant metric one picks [10], and yet it 
exhibits many aspects of a hyperbolic metric space [38] [32]. A general theory 
of limit sets of finitely generated subgroups of MGG is developed in [36]. 

In this paper we develop a theory of convex cocompact subgroups and Schottky 
subgroups of MGG acting on T, and we show that Schottky subgroups exist 
in abundance. We apply this theory to relate convex cocompactness of sub- 
groups of MGG with the large scale geometry of extensions of surface groups 
by subgroups of MGG. 

^Thc term "Schottky group" sometimes refers explicitly to a subgroup of Isom(H") 
produced by the ping-pong argument, but the broader reference to free, convex cocom- 
pact subgroups has become common. 

^In this paper, MCG includes orientation reversing mapping classes, and so repre- 
sents what is sometimes called the "extended" mapping class group. 

Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



Convex cocompact subgroups of mapping class groups 



93 



Our first result establishes the concept of convex cocompactness for subgroups 
of MCG, by proving the equivalence of several properties: 

Theorem 1.1 (Characterizing convex cocompactness) Given a Gnitely gen- 
erated subgroup G < MCG, the following statements are equivalent: 

• Some orbit of G is quasiconvex in T. 

• Every orbit of G is quasiconvex in T . 

• G is word hyperbolic, and there is a G~equivariant embedding df : dG 
PMJ^ with image Aq such that the following properties hold: 

— Any two distinct points ^,rj E Aq are the ideal endpoints of a unique 

i > 

geodesic {^,ri) in T. 

— Let WHc be the "weak hull" of G , namely the union of the geodesies 

i > 

iCiV) J ^ V ^ ^G- Then the action of G on WHq is cocompact, 
and if f : G ^ WHg is any G-equivariant map then f is a quasi- 
isometry and the following map is continuous: 

f = fUdf: GUdG^T = TuPMJ^ 

Any such subgroup G is said to be convex cocompact. This theorem is proved 
in Section 3.3. 

A convex cocompact subgroup G < MCG shares many properties with convex 
cocompact subgroups of Isom(H") . Every infinite order element of G is pseudo- 
Anosov (Proposition 3.1). The limit set Aq is the smallest nontrivial closed 
subset of T invariant under the action of G, and the action of G on PM^F — Aq 
is properly discontinuous (Proposition 3.2); this depends on work of McCarthy 
and Papadoupolos [36]. The stabilizer of Aq is a finite index supergroup of G 
in MCG, and it is the relative commensurator of G in MCG (Corollary 3.3). 

A Schottky subgroup of MCG = Isom(T) is defined to be a convex cocompact 
subgroup which is free of finite rank. In Theorem 1.4 we prove that if 0i, . . . , 
are pseudo-Anosov elements of MCG whose axes have pairwise disjoint end- 
points in PAiJ^, then for all sufficiently large positive integers ai, . . . ,a„ the 
mapping classes (?!)"\ . . . freely generate a Schottky subgroup of MCG. 

Warning Our formulation of convex cocompactness in T is not as strong 
as in H"' . Although there is a general theory of limit sets of finitely generated 
subgroups of MCG [36], wc have no general theory of their convex hulls. Such a 
theory would be tricky, and unnecessary for our purposes. In particular, when 



Qeometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



94 



Benson Farb and Lee Mosher 



G is convex cocompact, we do not know whether there is a closed, convex, 
G-equivariant subset of T on which G acts cocompactly. One could attempt 
to construct such a subset by adding to WHg any geodesies with endpoints 
in WHg, then adding geodesies with endpoints in that set, etc, continuing 
transfinitely by adding geodesies and taking closures until the result stabilizes; 
however, there is no guarantee that G acts cocompactly on the result. 

1.2 Surface group extensions 

There is a natural isomorphism of short exact sequences 

1 ^ MS,P) -^-^ MCG{S,p) — - — ^ MCG{S) ^ 1 

1 ^MS,P) > Aut(7ri(S',p)) ^Out(7ri(S',p)) > 1 

where MCG{S,p) is the mapping class group of S punctured at the base point 
p. In the bottom sequence, the inclusion TTi{S,p) is obtained by identifying 
T^iiSjp) with its group of inner automorphisms, an injection since 7ri(S',p) is 
centerless. For each based loop £ in S, i{£) is the punctured mapping class 
which "pushes" the base point p around the loop £ (see Section 2.2 for the exact 
definition). The homomorphism q is the map which "forgets" the puncture p. 
Exactness of the top sequence is proved in [7]. The isomorphism MCG{S) « 
Out(7ri(S',p)) follows from work of Dehn-Nielsen [43], Baer [3], and Epstein 
[13]. As a consequence, either of the above sequences is natural for extensions 
of TTi{S) , in the following sense. For any group homomorphism G MGG{S) , 
by applying the fiber product construction to the homomorphisms 

MCG{S,p) G 




MCG{S) 

we obtain a group Fq and a commutative diagram of short exact sequences 
1 ^7ri(5) ^Fg >G ^1 



1 ^ TTl (5) ^ MCGiS, p) ^ MCG{S) 1 

Note that we are suppressing the homomorphism G MCG{S) in the notation 
Fg- If G is free then the top sequence splits and we can write Fg = t^i{S) x 



Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



Convex cocompact subgroups of mapping class groups 



95 



G, where again our notation suppresses a lift G — Aut(7ri(S')) of the given 
homomorphism G MCG{S) ^ Out(7ri(S')). 

Every group extension 1 7ri(S') ^ E ^ G ^ 1 arises from the above 
construction, because the given extension determines a homomorphism G — > 
Out(7ri(S')) « MCG{S) which in turn determines an extension 1 — > 7ri(S') — 
Vg ^ G ^ \ isomorphic to the given extension. 

When P is a cycUc subgroup of MGG, Thurston's hyperbohzation theorem for 

mapping tori (see, eg, [44]) shows that '7ri(S') x P is the fundamental group of 
a closed, hyperbolic 3-manifold if and only if P is a pseudo-Anosov subgroup. 
In particular, 7ri(S') xi P is a word hyperbolic group if and only if P is a convex 
cocompact subgroup of MGG. Our results about the extension groups Fg are 
aimed towards generalizing this statement as much as possible. The theme of 
these results is that the geometry of Fg is encoded in the geometry of the action 
of G on r. 

From [39] it follows that if Fg is word hyperbolic then G is word hyperbolic. 
Our next result gives much more precise information: 

Theorem 1.2 (Hyperbolic extension has convex cocompact quotient) If Fg 
is word hyperbolic then the homomorphism G — > MGG has hnite kernel and 
convex cocompact image. 

This theorem is proved in Section 5. Finiteness of the kernel of G ^ MGG 
is easy to prove, using the fact that 7ri(5) x K is a, subgroup of Fg- UK is 
infinite, then either it is a torsion group, or it has an infinite order element and 
so Fg has a Z © Z subgroup; in either case, Fg cannot be word hyperbolic. 
Because one can mod out by a finite kernel without affecting word hyperbolicity 
of the extension group, this brings into focus the extensions defined by inclusion 
of subgroups of MGG. 

We are particularly interested in free subgroups of MGG. A finite rank, free, 

convex cocompact subgroup is called a Schottky subgroup. For Schottky sub- 
groups we have a converse to Theorem 1.2, giving a complete characterization 
of word hyperbolic groups Fp when F < MGG is free: 

Theorem 1.3 (Surface- by-Schottky group has hyperbolic extension) If F is 
a finite rank, free subgroup of MGG then the extension group Fp = T^iiS) xi F 
is word hyperbolic if and only if F is a Schottky group. 

This is proved in Section 6. Some special cases of this theorem are immediate. 
It is not hard to see that tti (S) xi F has a Z © Z subgroup if and only if there 



Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



96 



Benson Farb and Lee Mosher 



exists a nontrivial element f & F which is not pseudo-Anosov. Such an element 
/, being infinite order, must be reducible. Assuming f £ F is nontrivial and 
reducible, the group 7ri(S') x F contains the subgroup 7ri{S) x (/) which is 
the fundamental group of a closed 3-manifold that contains an incompressible 
torus. Conversely, when 7ri(5) x F has a Z Z subgroup then that subgroup 
must map onto an infinite cyclic subgroup (/) C F whose action on 7ri(S') 
preserves a nontrivial conjugacy class, and so / is not pseudo-Anosov. Theorem 
1.3 is therefore mainly about free, pseudo-Anosov subgroups of MCG (see 
Question 1.5 below). 

The abundance of word hyperbolic extensions of the form tti {S) x F was proved 
in [40]. It was shown by McCarthy [35] and Ivanov [23] that if 0i, . . . , are 
pseudo-Anosov elements of MCG which are pairwise independent, meaning 
that their axes have distinct endpoints in the Thurston boundary VAiJ^ , then 
sufficiently high powers of these elements freely generate a pseudo-Anosov sub- 
group F . The main result of [40] shows in addition that, after possibly making 
the powers higher, the group 7ri(S) x F is word hyperbolic. The nature of 
the free subgroups F < MCG produced in [40] was somewhat mysterious, but 
Theorems 1.2 and 1.3 clear up this mystery by characterizing the subgroups F 
using an intrinsic property, namely convex cocompactness. 

By combining [40] and Theorem 1.3, we immediately have the following result: 

Theorem 1.4 (Abundance of Schottky subgroups) If (pi,. . . ,(pn G MCG 
are pairwise independent pseudo-Anosov elements, then for all sufficiently large 
positive integers ai, . . . ,an the mapping classes , ■ ■ ■ , 0n" freely generate a 
Schottky subgroup F of MCG. 

Finally, we shall show in Section 7 that all of the above results generalize to 
the setting of closed hyperbolic 2-orbifolds. These generalized results find ap- 
plication in the results of [15] , as we now recall. 

1.3 An application 

In the paper [15] we apply our theory of Schottky subgroups of MCG to inves- 
tigate the large-scale geometry of word hyperbolic surface-by-free groups: 

Theorem [15] Let F c MCG{S) be Schottky Then the group Tp = 711(5) x 
F is quasi-isometrically rigid in the strongest sense: 

• Tp embeds with finite index in its quasi-isometry group QI(ri?) . 
Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



Convex cocompact subgroups of mapping class groups 



97 



It follows that: 

• Let H be any finitely generated group. If H is quasi-isometric to Tp, 
then there exists a Gnite normal subgroup N <] H such that H/N and 
Tp are abstractly commensurable. 

• The abstract commensurator group Comm(rF) is isomorphic to Ql{rp) , 
and can be computed explicitly. 

The computation of Comm(rF) ~ Ql(rir) goes as follows. Among all orb- 
ifold subcovers S ^ O there exists a unique minimal such subcovcr such that 
the subgroup F < MCG{S) descends isomorphically to a subgroup F' < 
MCG{0). The whole theory of Schottky groups extends to general closed 
hyperbolic orbifolds, as wc show in Section 7 of this paper. In particular, F' is 
a Schottky subgroup of MCG{0) . By Corollary 3.3 it follows that F' has finite 
index in its relative commensurator N < MCG{0) , which can be regarded as 
a virtual Schottky group. The inclusion N < MCG{0) determines a canonical 
extension 1 7ri(C) Tn ^ N ~> 1, and we show in [15] that the extension 
group r^v is isomorphic to Q^Fp). 

1.4 Some questions 

Our results on convex cocompact and Schottky subgroups of MCG motivate 
several questions. 

Proposition 3.1 implies that if F is a Schottky subgroup of MCG then every 
nontrivial element of F is pseudo-Anosov. 

Question 1.5 Suppose F < MCG is a finite rank, free subgroup all of whose 
nontrivial elements are pseudo-Anosov. Is F convex cocompact? In other 
words, is F a Schottky group? 

A non-Schottky example F would be very interesting for the following reasons. 
There exist examples of infinite, finitely presented groups which are not word 
hyperbolic and whose solvable subgroups are all virtually cyclic, but all known 
examples fail to be of finite type; see for example [9]. If there were a non- 
Schottky subgroup F < MCG as in Question 1.5, then the group 7ri(S') x F 
would be of finite type (being the fundamental group of a compact aspherical 
3-complex), it would not be word hyperbolic (since F is not Schottky), and 
every nontrivial solvable subgroup H < 7ri(S') x F would be infinite cyclic. 
To see why the latter holds, since vri(5) xi F is a torsion free subgroup of 

Qeometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



98 



Benson Farb and Lee Mosher 



MCG{S,p) it follows by [8] that the subgroup H is finite rank free abelian. 
Under the homomorphism H ^ F, the groups image (i7 F) < F and 
kernel(i? — > F) < Tri{S) each are free abelian of rank at most 1, and so it 
suffices to rule out the case where the image and kernel both have rank 1 . But 
in that case we would have a pseudo-Anosov element of MCG{S) which fixes 
the conjugacy class of some infinite order element of ttiS , a contradiction. 

Note that Question 1.5 has an analogue in the theory of Kleinian groups: if G 
is a discrete, cocompact subgroup of Isom(H^), is every free subgroup of G a 
Schottky subgroup? More generally, if G is a discrete, cofinite volume subgroup 
of Isom(H^), is every free loxodromic subgroup of G a Schottky group? The 
first question, at least, would follow from Simon's tame ends conjecture [11]. 

For a source of free, pseudo-Anosov subgroups on which to test question 1.5, 
consider Whittlesey's group [47], an infinite rank, free, normal, pseudo-Anosov 
subgroup of the mapping class group of a closed, oriented surface of genus 2. 

Question 1.6 Is every finitely generated subgroup of Wliittlesey's group a 
Scliottky group? 

Concerning non-free subgroups of MCG, note first that Question 1.5 can also 
be formulated for any finitely generated subgroup of MCG , though we have no 
examples of non-free pseudo-Anosov subgroups. This invites comparison with 

the situation in Isom(H") where it is known for any n > 2 that there exist 
convex cocompact subgroups which are not Schottky, indeed are not virtually 
Schottky. 

Question 1.7 Docs there exist a convex cocompact subgroup G < MCG 
wliich is not Schottky, nor is virtually Schottky? 

The converse to Theorem 1.2, while proved for free subgroups in Theorem 1.3, 
remains open in general. This issue becomes particularly interesting if Ques- 
tion 1.7 is answered affirmatively: 

Question 1.8 If G < MCG is convex cocompact, is the extension group Tq 
word hyperbolic? 

Surface subgroups of mapping class groups are interesting. Gonzalez- Diez and 
Harvey showed that MCG can contain the fundamental group of a closed, 
oriented surface of genus > 2 [19], but their construction always produces 
subgroups containing mapping classes that are not pseudo-Anosov. 

If questions 1.7 and 1.8 were true, it would raise the stakes on the fascinating 
question of whether there exist surface-by-surface word hyperbolic groups: 



Qeometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



Convex cocompact subgroups of mapping class groups 



99 



Question 1.9 Does there exist a convex cocompact subgroup G < MCG 
isomorphic to the fundamental group of a closed, oriented surface Sg of genus 
g > 2? If so, is the surface-by-surface extension group Tq word hyperbohc? 

Misha Kapovich shows in [25] that when G is a surface group, the extension 
group Tq cannot be a lattice in Isom(CH^). 

1.5 Sketches of proofs 

Although Teichmiiller space T is not hyperbolic in any reasonable sense [34], 
[10] , nevertheless it possesses interesting and useful hyperbolicity properties. To 
formulate these, recall that the action of MCG by isometries on T is smooth 
and properly discontinuous, with quotient orbifold M. = T /MCG called the 
moduli space of S. The action is not cocompact, and we define a subset A C T 
to be cobounded if its image under the universal covering map T — > Al has 
compact closure in M , equivalently there is a compact subset of T whose 
translates under Isom(T) cover A. 

In [38], Minsky proves (see Theorem 3.6 below) that if ^ is a cobounded geodesic 
in T then any projection T ^ £ that takes each point of T to a closest point on 
£ satisfies properties similar to a closest point projection from a (5-hyperbolic 
metric space onto a bi-infinite geodesic. This projection property is a key step 
in the proof of the Masur-Minsky theorem [32] that Harvey's curve complex 
is a 5-hyperbolic metric space. These results say intuitively that T exhibits 
hyperbolicity as long as one focusses only on cobounded aspects. Keeping this 
in mind, the tools of [38] and [32] can be used to prove Theorem 1.1 along the 
classical lines of the proof for subgroups of Isom(H"). 

The proof of Theorem 1.3, that 7ri(S') x: _F is word hyperbolic if F is Schottky, 
uses the Bestvina-Feighn combination theorem [6] . Consider a tree t on which 
F acts freely and cocompactly, and choose an F-equivariant mapping ^ : t — > 
T. Let H — s- T be the canonical hyperbolic plane bundle over Teichmiiller 
space. Pulling back via cf) we obtain a hyperbolic plane bundle vr: TCi t, and 
7ri(S') X F acts properly discontinuously and cocompactly on Hi. This shows 
that Ht is a model geometry for the group 7ri(S') xi F, and in particular Ht is 
a 5-hyperbolic metric space if and only if 7ri(S') xi F is word hyperbolic. 

By the Bestvina-Feighn combination theorem [6] and its converse due to Ger- 
sten [18], hyperbolicity of Tit is equivalent to (5 -hyperbolicity of each "hyper- 
plane" He = 7r~^{£), where £ ranges over all the bi-infinite lines in t and 6 is 
independent of £. 



Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



100 



Benson Farb and Lee Mosher 



Recall that for each Teichmiiller geodesic g, the canonical marked Riemann 
surface bundle Sg over g carries a natural singular SOLV metric; the bundle Sg 
equipped with this metric is denoted . Lifting the metric to the universal 
cover Hg we obtain a singular SOLV space denoted Hg°^^ . 

When F is a Schottky group, convex cocompactness tells us that for each bi- 

infinite geodesic ^ in t, the map ^ — ^ T is a quasigeodesic and there is a unique 
Teichmiiller geodesic g within finite Hausdorff distance from (f)(i) . This feeds 
into Proposition 4.2, a basic construction principle for quasi-isometries which 
will be used several times in the paper. The conclusion is: 

Fact 1.10 The hyperplane Tii is uniformly quasi-isometric to the singular 
SOLV-space Hg^^"^, by a quasi-isometry which is a lift of a closest point map 
i^g. 

Uniform hyperbolicity of singular SOLV-spaces 7^^°^^, where y is a uniformly 
cobounded geodesic in T, is then easily checked by another application of the 
Bestvina-Feighn combination theorem, and Theorem 1.3 follows. 

For Theorem 1.2, we first outline the proof in the special case of a free subgroup 
of MCG. As noted above, using Gersten's converse to the Bestvina-Feighn 
combination theorem, word hyperbolicity of '7ri(5') x F implies uniform hyper- 
bolicity of the hyperplanes He- Now we use a result of Mosher [41], which shows 
that from uniform hyperbolicity of the hyperplanes it follows that the lines 
£ are uniform quasigeodesics in T, and each I has uniformly finite Hausdorff 
distance from some Teichmiiller geodesic g. Piecing together the geodesies g 
in T, one for each geodesic ^ in t, we obtain the data we need to prove that F 
is Schottky. 

The general proof of Theorem 1.2 follows the same outline, except that we 
cannot apply Gersten's converse to the Bestvina-Feighn combination theorem. 
That result applies only to the setting of groups acting on trees, not to the 
setting of Theorem 1.2 where Vq acts on the Cayley graph of G. To handle 
this problem we need a new idea: a generalization of Gersten's converse to the 
Bestvina-Feighn combination theorem, which holds in a much broader setting. 
This generalization is contained in Lemma 5.2. The basis of this result is an 
analogy between the "flaring property" of Bestvina-Feighn and the divergence 
of geodesies in a word hyperbolic group [12]. 

Acknowledgements We are grateful to the referee for a thorough reading of 

the paper, and for making numerous useful comments. 

Both authors are supported in part by the National Science Foundation. 
Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



Convex cocompact subgroups of mapping class groups 



101 



2 Background 

2.1 Coeirse language 

Quasi-isometries and uniformly proper maps Given a metric space X 
and two subsets A,BgX, the Hausdorjf distance dHaus(^) B) is the infimum 
of all real numbers r such that each point of A is within distance r of a point 

of B, and vice versa. 

A quasi-isometric embedding between two metric spaces X,Y is a map / : X — > 
Y such that for some K > 1, C > , we have 

^d{x, y)-C< d{fx, fy) < Kd{x, y)+C 

for each x,y & X . To refer to the constants we say that / is a if, C-quasi- 
isometric embedding. 

For example, a quasigeodesic embedding R ^ X is called a quasigeodesic line 
in X. We also speak of quasigeodesic rays or segments with the domain is 
a half-line or a finite segment, respectively. Since every map of a segment is 
a quasi-isomctry, it usually behooves one to include the constants and speak 
about a (K, C) -quasi- isometric segment. 

A quasi- is ometry between two metric spaces X,Y is a map f : X Y which, 
for some K > 1, C > is a K,C quasi-isometry and has the property that 
image(/) has Hausdorff distance < C from Y . Every quasi-isometry f : X ^ Y 
has a coarse inverse, which is a quasi-isometry f:Y^X such that fof: X — ^ 
X is a bounded distance in the sup norm from Idx , and similarly for fof : y — > 
Y; the sup norm bounds and the quasi-isometry constants of / depend only on 
the quasi-isometry constants of /. 

More general than a quasi-isometric embedding is a uniformly proper embedding 
f:X Y, which means that there exists K > 1, C > 0, and a function 
r: [0, go) — [0, go) satisfying r{t) — oo as t — oo, such that 

r{d{x, y)) < d{fx, fy) < Kd{x, y) + C 

for each x,y e X . 

Geodesic and quasigeodesic metric spaces A metric space is proper if 
closed balls are compact. A metric d on a space X is called a path metric if 
for any x,y £ X the distance d{x, y) is the infimum of the path lengths of 
rectifiable paths between x and ?/, and d is called a geodesic metric if d{x,y) 



Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



102 



Benson Farb and Lee Mosher 



equals the length of some rectifiable path between x and y . The following fact 
is an immediate consequence of the Ascoli-Arzela theorem: 

Fact 2.1 A compact path metric space is a geodesic metric space. More gen- 
erally, a proper path metric is a geodesic metric. □ 

The Ascoli-Arzela theorem also shows that for any proper geodesic metric space 
X , every path homotopy class contains a shortest path. This implies that the 
metric on X lifts to a geodesic metric on any covering space of X . 

A metric space X is called a quasigeodesic metric space if there exists constants 
A, e such that for any x,y € X there exists an interval [a, 6] C R and a A, e 
quasigeodesic embedding a: [a,b] ^ X such that cr(a) = x and a{b) = y. For 
example, if F is a geodesic metric space and X is a subset of Y such that 
dB.aus{X,Y) < oo then X is a quasigeodesic metric space. 

The fundamental theorem of geometric group theory, first known to Efremovich, 
to Schwarzc, and to Milnor, can be given a general formulation as follows. Let 
X be a proper, quasigeodesic metric space, and let the group G act on X 
properly discontinuously and cocompactly, by an action denoted {g,x) i-^ g ■ x. 
Then G is finitely generated, and for any base point xq E X the map G ^ X 
defined hy g i-^ g ■ xq is a quasi-isometry between the word metric on G and 
the metric space X. 

Uniform families of quasi-isometries The next lemma says a family of 
geodesic metrics which is "compact" in a suitable sense has the property that 
any two metrics in the family are uniformly quasi-isometric, with respect to the 
identity map. 

Given a compact space X , let M{X) denote the space of metrics generating 
the topology of X , regarded as a subspace of [0, oo)"'^^"'^ with the topology of 
uniform convergence. 

Lemma 2.2 Let X be a compact, path connected space with universal cover 

X . Let D C AI{X) be a compact family of geodesic metrics. Let D be the 
set of lifted metrics on X . Then there exist K > 1, C > such that for any 
d, d' e D the identity map on X is a K,C quasi-isometry between {X, d) and 
{X,d'). 

Proof By compactness of D, the metric spaces X^ have a uniform injectivity 
radius — that is, there exists e > such that for each d & D every homotopically 



Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



Convex cocompact subgroups of mapping class groups 



103 



nontrivial closed curve in has length > 4e, and it follows that every closed 
e ball in lifts isometrically to X^- Let P C X x X be the set of pairs 
{x,y) E X X X such that for some d & D we have d{x, y) < e. Evidently tti (X) 
acts cocompactly on P , and so we have a finite supremum 

A = sup{d{x, y) \ d £ D and {x, y) G P} 

Given d G D and x,y G X, choose a d-geodesic 7 from x to y and let 
X = xo,xi,... ,Xn-i,Xn = y he a monotonic sequence along 7 such that 
d{xi-i,Xi) = e for i = 1, . . . ,n — 1 and d{xn-i,Xn) < e. For any d' E D 
it follows that: 

c^'l^;, y) < An = A 

Setting K = ^ and C = A the lemma follows. □ 

Hyperbolic metric spaces A geodesic metric space X is hyperbolic if there 
exists (5 > such that for any x,y,z E X and any geodesies xy, yz, 'zx, any 
point on xy has distance < 5 from some point on yzUzx. A finitely generated 
group is word hyperbolic if the Cayley graph of some (any) finite generating set, 
equipped with the geodesic metric making each edge of length 1, is a hyperbolic 
metric space. 

If X is (5-hyperbolic, then for any A > 1 , e > there exists A , depending only 
on S,X,e, such that the following hold: for any x,y £ X , any A, e quasigeodesic 
segment between x and y has Hausdorff distance < A from any geodesic seg- 
ment between x and y; for any x & X , any A, e quasigeodesic ray starting at x 
has Hausdorff distance < A from some geodesic ray starting at x; and any A, e 
quasigeodesic line in X has Hausdorff distance < A from some geodesic line in 
X. 

The boundary of X , denoted dX , is the set of coarse equivalence classes of 
geodesic rays in X, where two rays are coarsely equivalent if they have finite 
Hausdorff distance. For any ^ G dX and xq & X , there is a ray based at xq 
representing ^; we denote such a ray [xq,^). For any ^ 7^ G dX there is 
a geodesic line £ in X such that any point on £ divides it into two rays, one 
representing ^ and the other representing rj. 

Assuming X is proper, there is a compact topology on X U dX in which X is 

dense, which is characterized by the following property: a sequence G XUdX 

> 

converges to ^ £ dX if and only if, for any base point p G X, if [p, ^i) denotes 
Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



dix, y) A~, . 

<-d{x,y) + A 



104 



Benson Farb and Lee Mosher 



either a segment from p to G X , or a ray from p with ideal endpoint G dX , 
then any subsequential hmit of the sequence \p, is a ray with ideal endpoint 
^ . It follows that any quasi-isometric embedding between (5-hyperbolic geodesic 
metric spaces extends to a continuous embedding of boundaries. In particular, 
if X is hyperbolic then the action of Isom(X) on X extends continuously to 
an action on X U dX . 

The following fundamental fact is easily proved by considering what happens 
to geodesies in a 5-hyperbolic metric space under a quasi-isometry. 

Lemma 2.3 For allS>0,K>l,C>0 there exists A> such that the 
following holds. If X, Y are two S -hyperbolic metric spaces and if f,g: X ^ Y 
are two K, C quasi-isometries such that df = dg: dX dY , then: 

dsupif, g) = sup d{f{x),g{x)) < A □ 
xex 

2.2 Teichmiiller space and the Thurston boundary 

Fix once and for all a closed, oriented surface S of genus g > 2. Let C be the 
set of isotopy classes of nontrivial simple closed curves on S . 

The fundamental notation for the paper is as follows. Let T be the Teichmiiller 
space of S . Let be the space of measured foliations on S , and let FMJ^ 
be the space of projective measured foliations on S , with projectivization map 
P : AiJ^ — > FAdJ-^. The Thurston compactification of Teichmiiller space is 7" = 
TUPA^.;^. Let MCG be the mapping class group of S, and let M = T /MCG 
be the moduli space of S. Definitions of these objects are all recalled below. 

The Teichmiiller space T is the set of hyperbolic structures on S modulo iso- 
topy, with the structure of a smooth manifold diffeomorphic to R^^^® given 
by Fenchel-Nielsen coordinates. The Riemann mapping theorem associates to 
each conformal structure on S a unique hyperbolic structure in that confor- 
mal class, and hence we may naturally identify T with the set of conformal 
structures on S modulo isotopy. Given a conformal structure or a hyperbolic 
structure a , we will often confuse a with its isotopy class by writing a . 

There is a length pairing T x C ^ R-|- which associates to each a ^ T , C ^ C 
the length of the unique simple closed geodesic on the hyperbolic surface a in 
the isotopy class C. We obtain a map T — [0, oo)*^ which is an embedding with 
image homeomorphic to an open ball of dimension 6(/ — 6. Moreover, under 
projectivization [0, oo)^ — > P[0, oo)^, T embeds in P[0, oo)^ with precompact 
image. 



Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



Convex cocompact subgroups of mapping class groups 



105 



Thurston's boundary A measured foliation ^ on S is a foliation with 

finitely many singularities equipped with a positive transverse Borel measure, 
with the property that for each singularity s there exists n > 3 such that in 
a neighborhood of s the foliation is modelled on the horizontal measured 
foliation of the quadratic differential z"'~^dz^ in the complex plane. A saddle 
connection of .7^ is a leaf segment connecting two distinct singularities; col- 
lapsing a saddle connection to a point yields another measured foliation on S . 
The set of measured foliations on S modulo the equivalence relation generated 
by isotopy and saddle collapse is denoted MT. Given a measured foliation 
J^, its equivalence class is denoted G A4J-; elements of AiJ- will often be 
represented by the letters X,Y, Z . 

For each measured foliation JT, there is a function Ij^: C [0, oo) defined 
as follows. Given a simple closed curve c, we may pull back the transverse 
measure on to obtain a measure on c, and then integrate over c to obtain 
a number j^J' ■ Define i-j^{c) = i{J-,c) to be the infimum of J^, J" as c' ranges 
over the isotopy class of c. The function ijr is well-defined up to equivalence, 
thereby defining an embedding AiJ^ — > [0, oo)'' whose image is homeomorphic 
to R69-6_|o}. 

Given a measured foliation J^, multiplying the transverse measure by a positive 
scalar r defines a measured foliation denoted r ■ J^, yielding a positive scalar 
multiplication operation R x AiJ^ AiJ^. With respect to the equivalence 
relation .F ~ r ■ J^, r > 0, the set of equivalence classes is denoted PMJ^ 
and the projection is denoted P: — > PMT. We obtain an embedding 
PMT P[0,oo)<^ whose image is homeomorphic to a sphere of dimension 
6g — 7. We often use the letters ^,rf,( to represent points of PMJ^. 

Thurston's compactification theorem [16] says, by embedding into P[0, 00)*^, 
that there is a homeomorphism of triples: 

We will also need the standard embedding C AiJ-, defined on [c] as follows. 
Take an embedded annulus A C S foliated by circles in the isotopy class [c] , 
and assign total transverse measure 1 to the annulus. Choose a deformation 
retraction of each component of the closure of S — A onto a finite 1-complex, 
and extend to a map f : S ^ S homotopic to the identity and which is an 
embedding on int(^). The measured foliation on A pushes forward under / 
to the desired measured foliation on S, giving a well-defined point in MJ^ 
depending only on [c] . 

The intersection number AiJ- x C ^ ' [0, 00) extends continuously to AiJ- x 



Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



106 



Benson Farb and Lee Mosher 



MJ^ — '-^ [0, co) . This intersection number is most efficaciously defined in 
terms of measured geodesic laminations. 

Marked surfaces Having fixed once and for all the surface S, a marked 
surface is a pair (F, (p) where i*" is a surface and (p: S ^ F is a homeomorphism. 
Thus we may speak about a marked hyperbolic surface, a marked Riemann 
surface, a marked measured foliation on a surface, etc. 

Given a marked hyperbolic surface (j): S ^ F, pulling back via ^ determines 
a hyperbolic structure on S and a point of t. Two marked hyperbolic surfaces 
(f>: S ^ F and <p' : S ^ F' give the same element of T if and only if they 
are equivalent in the following sense: there exists an isometry h: F ^ F' such 
that o h o (f>: S ^ S is isotopic to the identity. In this manner, we can 
identify the collection of marked hyperbolic surfaces up to equivalence with the 
Teichmiillcr space T of 5*. This allows us the freedom of representing a point of 
T by a hyperbolic structure on some other surface F , assuming implicitly that 
we have a marking cp: S ^ F. The same discussion holds for marked Riemann 
surfaces, marked measured foliations on surfaces, etc. 

Given two marked surfaces (f): S ^ F, cf)' : S ^ F' , a marked map is a homeo- 
morphism ip: F ^ F' such that o (f) is isotopic to (p' . 

Mapping class groups and moduli space Let Homeo(S') be the group 
of homeomorphisms of S , let Homeoo(5') be the normal subgroup consisting 
of homeomorphisms isotopic to the identity, and let MCG = MCG{S) = 
Homeo(iS')/Homeoo(S') be the mapping class group of S. Pushing a hyperbolic 
structure on S forward via an clement of Homeo(S') gives a well-defined action 
of MCG on T. This action is smooth and properly discontinuous but not 
cocompact. It follows that the moduli space M. = T/MCG is a smooth, 
noncompact orbifold with fundamental group MCG and universal covering 
space T . 

Let Homeo(S',p) be the group of homeomorphisms of S preserving a base 
point p, let Homeoo (S*, p) be the normal subgroup consisting of those home- 
omorphisms which are isotopic to the identity leaving p stationary, and let 
MCG{S,p) = Homeo(5,p)/IIomeoo(5',p). Recall the short exact sequence: 

1 ^ TTiiS,p) ^MCG{S,p) ^MCG{S) -> 1 

The map q is the map which "forgets" the puncture p . To define the map t , for 
each closed loop i: [0, 1] ^ 5 based at p, choose numbers = xq < xi < . . . < 



Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



Convex cocompact subgroups of mapping class groups 



107 



Xn = I and embedded open balls Bi, Bn C S so that £[xi-i,Xi] C -Bj for 
i = I, . . . ,n, and let VTj : S" ^ S" be a homeomorphism which is the identity on 
S — Bi and such that Tri{£{xi-i)) = i{xi) . Then l{£) is defined to be the isotopy 
class rel p of the homeomorphism 7r„ o Tin-i o • • • o tti : {S,p) iS,p) , which 
we say is obtained by "pushing" the point p around the loop £. The mapping 
class L{i) is well-defined independent of the choices made, and independent of 
the choice of £ in its path homotopy class. When £ is simple, l{£) may also 
be described as the composition of opposite Dehn twists on the two boundary 
components of a regular neighborhood of £. For details see [7]. 

As noted in the introduction, by the Dehn-Nielsen-Baer-Epstein theorem, the 
above sequence is naturally isomorphic to the sequence 

1 ^ 7ri{S,p) ^ Aut(7ri(5,p)) ^ Out(7ri(S,p)) ^ 1 



Canonical bundles Over the Tcichmiillcr space T of S there is a canonical 
marked hyperbolic surface bundle S ^ T, defined as follows. Topologically 
S = S X T , with the obvious marking S ^ S x a = ioi each a G 7". 
As a varies over T, one can assign a hyperbolic structure on S in the class 
of a, varying continuously in the C°° topology on Riemannian metrics; this 
follows from the description of Fcnchel-Nielsen coordinates. It follows that on 
each fiber Sa of S there is a hyperbolic structure which varies continuously in 
a. Note that by the Riemann mapping theorem we can also think of S as the 
canonical marked Riemann surface bundle over T. 

The action of MCG on T lifts uniquely to an action on S, such that for each 
fiber Sa and each [h] G MCG the map 

[h] 



is an isometry, and the map 



is in the mapping class [h] . 

The universal cover of S is called the canonical -bundle over T, denoted 
7i ^ T . There is a fibration preserving, isometric action of the once-punctured 
mapping class group MCG{S,p) on the total space 7i such that the quotient 
action of MCG{S,p) on S has kernel Tri{S,p), and corresponds to the given 
action of MCG{S) = MCG{S,p)/Tri{S,p) on S. Also, the action of 7ri{S,p) 
on any fiber of TC is conjugate to the action on the universal cover S by deck 
transformations. Bers proved in [4] that W is a Teichmiiller space in its own 



Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



108 



Benson Farb and Lee Mosher 



right: there is an MCG{S,p) equivariant homeomorphism between Ti and the 
Teichmiiller space of the once-punctured surface S — p. 

The tangent bundle TS has a smooth 2-dimcnsional vertical sub-bundle T^S 
consisting of the tangent planes to fibers of the fibration S ^ T . A connection 
on the bundle 5 — > T is a smooth codimension-2 sub-bundle of TS complemen- 
tary to TyS. The existence of an MCG-equivariant connection on S can be 
derived following standard methods, as follows. Choose a locally finite, equiv- 
ariant open cover of T, and an equivariant partition of unity dominated by this 
cover. For each MCG-orbit of this cover, choose a representative U G T of 
this orbit, and choose a linear retraction TSu — TySu- Pushing these retrac- 
tions around by the action of MCG and taking a linear combination using the 
partition of unity, we obtain an equivariant linear retraction TS — > TyS , whose 
kernel is the desired connection. 

By lifting to H we obtain a connection on the bundle 7i —> T , equivariant with 
respect to the action of the group MCG(S,p) . 

Notation Given any subset ^ C T, or more generally any continuous map 
A T, hy pulling back the bundle S ^ T we obtain a bundle Sa ^ A, as 
shown in the following diagram: 

Sa >5 

A — 

Similarly, the pullback of the bundle H ^ T is denoted Ha A. 



Quadratic differentials Given a conformal structure a on S , & quadratic 

differenti,al q on S^ assigns to each conformal coordinate z an expression of 
the form q[z)dz'^ where q{z) is a complex valued function on the domain of the 
coordinate system, and 

q(z) I -— I = q(w), for overlapping coordinates z,w. 
\dw J 

We shall always assume that the functions q{z) are holomorphic, in other words, 

our quadratic differentials will always be "holomorphic" quadratic differentials. 
A quadratic differential q is trivial if q{z) is always the zero function. 

Given a nontrivial quadratic differential q on S^ , & point p & S^ is a zero of q 
in one coordinate if and only if it is a zero in any coordinate; also, the order of 



Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



Convex cocompact subgroups of mapping class groups 



109 



the zero is well-defined. If p is not a zero then there is a coordinate z near p, 
unique up to multiplication by ±1, such that p corresponds to the origin and 
such that q{z) = 1; this is called a regular canonical coordinate. If p is a zero 
of order n > 1 then up to multiplication by the (n + 2)^^^ roots of unity there 
exists a unique coordinate z in which p corresponds to the origin and such that 
q(z) = ; this is called a singular canonical coordinate. There is a well-defined 
singular Euclidean metric \q{z) \ \dz\^ on S , which in any regular canonical 
coordinate z = x + iy takes the form dx^ + dy^ . In any singular canonical 
coordinate this metric has finite area, and so the total area of S in this singular 
Euclidean metric is finite, denoted ||g|| . We say that q is normalized if ||g|| = 1. 

By the Riemann-Roch theorem, the quadratic differentials on S,j form a com- 
plex vector space QD^ of complex dimension 3(7 — 3, and these vector spaces 
fit together, one for each a G T, to form a complex vector bundle over T de- 
noted QD T . Teichmxiller space has a complex structure whose cotangent 
bundle is canonically isomorphic to the bundle QD. The Teichmiiller metric 
on T induces a Finsler metric on the (real) tangent bundle of T, and the norm 
\\q\\ is dual to this metric. The normalized quadratic differentials form a sphere 
bundle QD^ — > T of real dimension 6g — 7 embedded in QD. 

Corresponding to each quadratic differential q on there is a pair of measured 
foliations, the horizontal foliation J^x{q) and the vertical foliation J^yiq). In a 
regular canonical coordinate z = x + iy, the leaves of J^x (?) Sire parallel to the 
X-axis and have transverse measure \dy\, and the leaves of J^y{q) arc parallel 
to the y-axis and have transverse measure \dx\. The foliations JF^.(g), J-y{q) 
have the zero set of q as their common singularity set, and at each zero of order 
n both have an [n + 2) -pronged singularity, locally modelled on the singularity 
at the origin of the horizontal and vertical measured foliations of z'^dz^ . 

Conversely, consider a transverse pair of measured foliations {!Fx,Ty) on S 
which means that Tx^J'y have the same singular set, are transverse at all regular 
points, and at each singularity s there is a number n > 3 such that Tx and 
J-y are locally modelled on the horizontal and vertical measured foliations of 
z'^'''^dz'^ . Associated to the pair Tx-,^y there are a conformal structure and 
a quadratic differential defined as follows. Near each regular point, there is 
an oriented coordinate z = x + iy in which J^x is the horizontal foliation with 
transverse measure \dy\, and J^y is the vertical foliation with transverse measure 
\dx\. These regular coordinates have conformal overlap. Near any singularity 
s, at which J^xi ^y are locally modelled on the the horizontal and vertical 
foliations of z'^dz'^ , the coordinate z has conformal overlap with any regular 
coordinate. We therefore obtain a conformal structure a{J^xi^y) on S, on 



Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



110 



Benson Farb and Lee Mosher 



which we have a quadratic differential q{J^x,^y) defined in regular coordinates 
by dz'^ . 

A pair of measured foliations (X, Y) G A4T{F) x M.J^{F) is said to jointly fill 
the surface F if, for every Z G MT{F), either i{X,Z) / or i{Y,Z) / 0. 
This condition is invariant under positive scalar multiplication on AiJ^(F) , and 
so joint filling is well-defined for a pair of points in PM.J^{F) . A basic fact is 
that a pair X,Y e M.T{F) jointly fills F if and only if there exist a transverse 
pair of measured foliations Tx^J'y representing X^Y\ moreover, such a pair 
Txi is unique up to joint isotopy, meaning that for any other transverse pair 
J^xj^y representing X,Y respectively, there exists h G Homeoo(<S') such that 
J^'^ = h{Fx)i = h{Ty). These facts may be proved by passing back and 
forth between measured geodesic laminations and measured foliations. 

By uniqueness up to joint isotopy as just described, it follows that for each 
jointly filling pair (X, Y) G MJ-{F) x A4J-{F) there is a conformal structure 
a{J^x,^y) and quadratic differential q{J-'x,^y) on a{X,Y), well-defined up to 
isotopy independent of the choice of a transverse pair TxiJ^y representing X, Y . 
We thus have a well-defined point a{X, Y) G T{F) and a well-defined element 
q{X,Y)eqD,^x,Y)nF)- 

Geodesies and a metric on T We shall describe geodesic lines in T follow- 
ing [17] and [21]; of course everything depends on Teichmiiller's theorem (see 
eg, [1] or [22]). 

Let TV C M!F x MJ^ denote the set of jointly filling pairs, and let PJ^V be 
the image of J^V under the product of projection maps P x P : MJ^ x MJ^ — 
PMJ" X PMJ^. 

Associated to each jointly filling pair {^,rj) G fJ-V we associate a Teichmiiller 

i > 

line (^,T/), following [17]. Choosing a transverse pair of measured foliations 
Tx^Ty representing ^,r/ respectively, we obtain a parameterized Teichmiiller 
geodesic given by the map t (T(e~*.?^^;, e*jFy) ; it follows from Teichmiiller's 
theorem that this map is an embedding R — > T. Uniqueness of J^xi^y up 
to joint isotopy and positive scalar multiplication imply that the map t ^ 
a{e'^^J-x, e^Ty) is well-defined up to translation of the t-paramctcr, as is easily 

checked. Thus, the image of this map is well defined and is denoted (^, r/) ; in ad- 
dition, parameter difference between points on the line is well-defined, and there 
is a well-defined orientation. The positive direction of the geodesic is defined to 
be the point r] = FJ^y G PAiJ-', the projective class of the vertical measured 
foliation; the negative direction is the point ^ = PJ^x £ PMJ^- Note that as 



Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



Convex cocompact subgroups of mapping class groups 



111 



t +00 the vertical measured foliation becomes "exponentially thicker" and so 
dominates over the horizontal foliation which becomes "exponentially thinner" , 
a useful mnemonic for remembering which direction is which. 

Teichmiiller's theorem says that any two distinct points of T lie on a unique 

Teichmiiller line: for any a ^ t £ T there exists a unique pair r/) G PJ-V 

< > 

such that cr, T G 77) . Moreover, if d{a, r) is the parameter difference between 
a and r along this geodesic, then d is a metric on T, called the Teichmiiller 

metric. In particular, each line 77) is, indeed, a geodesic for the Teichmiiller 

i > 

metric. It is also true that the segment [a, r] C rj) is the unique geodesic seg- 
ment connecting a to r, and hence geodesic segments are uniquely extensible. 
Thus we obtain a 1-1 correspondence between oriented geodesic segments and 
the set T X T. Also, every bi-infinite geodesic line in T is uniquely expressible 
in the form (,^, 77) , and so we obtain a 1-1 correspondence between oriented 
geodesic lines and the set PjFP C PMJ^ x PA^JF. 

There is a also 1-1 correspondence between geodesic rays in T and the set 
T X for any a G T and rj £ PAiJ^ there is a unique geodesic ray, 

denoted [a, rj) , whose endpoint is u and whose direction is 77 G PM.T , and every 
geodesic ray has this form. This is an immediate consequence of the Hubbard- 
Masur theorem [21], which says that for each o" G T the map QD^ — >■ M.J- 
taking g 7^ G QD^. to [J'y{q)] is a homcomorphism. 

Throughout the paper, the term "geodesic" will refer to any geodesic segment, 
ray, or line in T . Geodesies in T are uniquely extendable: any geodesic segment 
or ray is contained in a unique geodesic line. Since T is a complete metric 
space, an argument using the Ascoli-Arzela theorem shows that any sequence 
of geodesies, each element of which intersects a given bounded subset of T, has 
a subsequence converging pointwise to a geodesic. 

By unique extendability of geodesies it follows that T is a proper, geodesic 
metric space. Prom the definitions it follows that the action of MCG on T 
is isometric, and so the metric on T descends to a proper, geodesic metric on 
M=T/MCG. 

> 

The reader is cautioned that a geodesic ray [a, 77) is not known to converge in 
T to its direction 77 G PMJ^. However, consider the case where 77 is uniquely 
ergodic, which means that for any measured foliation T representing 77, every 
transverse measure on the underlying singular foliation of is a scalar multiple 
of the given measure on .7^. In this case the ray [a, 77) does converge to r/, as is 
proved by Masur [30] , and so in this situation the direction 77 is also called the 
end or endpoint of the ray. 

Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



112 



Benson Farb and Lee Mosher 



Cobounded geodesies in T A subset A c T is cobounded if the image of 
A under the projection T ^ M is a bounded subset of Ai; equivalently, there 
is a bounded subset of T whose translates by the action of MCG cover A. 
If the bounded set B C M contains the projected image of A then we also 
say that A is B -cobounded. Since At is a proper metric space it follows that 
A is cobounded in T if and only if A is "co-precompact" , meaning that the 
projection of ^ to has compact closure. 

One common gauge for coboundedness, as noted by Mumford [42], is the injec- 
tivity radius of a hyperbolic structure, or to put it another way, the length £{a) 
of the shortest closed geodesic in a hyperbolic structure a For each e > the 
"e-thick subset" of T, namely the set % = {a e T \ i{a) > e}, is an MCG 
equivariant subset of T projecting to a compact subset of ^A , and as e ^ 
this gives an exhaustion of M. by compact sets. A subset of T is therefore 
cobounded if and only if it is contained in the e-thick subset of T for some 
e > 0. 

Extremal length, rather than hyperbolic length, is used to obtain another com- 
mon gauge of coboundedness, and is comparable to the length of the shortest 
geodesic by Maskit's work [27]. 

We rarely use any particular gauge for coboundedness. Instead, the primary way 

in which we use coboundedness is in carrying out compactness arguments over 
closed, bounded subsets. For this reason we rarely refer to any gauge, instead 
sticking with coboundedness as the more primitive mathematical concept. 

> 

One important fact we need is that if p = [a, rj) is a cobounded geodesic ray 

in Teichmiiller space then p converges to r] in Thurston's compactification 

T = TU PMJ^. This follows from two theorems of Masur. First, since p is 

cobounded, the direction rj G FMJ- is uniquely ergodic; this result, proved in 

[29], was later sharpened in [31] to show that if r] is not uniquely ergodic then the 
> 

projection of [a, rj) to moduli space leaves every compact subset. Second, when 
rj is uniquely ergodic, any ray with direction 77 converges to rj in Thurston's 
compactification. This is a small part of a Masur's Two Boundaries Theorem 
[30] , concerning relations between the Teichmiiller boundary and the Thurston 
boundary of T (we will use the full power of this theorem in the proof of 
Theorem 1.1). 

The following result is essentially a consequence of [38] : 



^Also called the "systole" in the differential geometry literature. 
Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



Convex cocompact subgroups of mapping class groups 



113 



Lemma 2.4 (End Uniqueness) If [cr, [r, ry) are two cobounded rays in T 

i > < > 

which have finite Hausdorff distance in T then ^ = t]. If ^'), {"Uif]') are 
two cobounded lines in T which have hnite Hausdorff distance then, up to 
relabelling the ends of one of the lines, we have ^ = rj and ^' = rj' , and so 

Proof For the proof wc review briefly notions of extremal length, in the clas- 
sical setting of simple closed curves, as well as Kerckhoff's extension to the 
setting of measured foliations [26]. 

Recall that for any conformal structure on an open annulus A there is a unique 
Euclidean annulus of the form x (0, M) conformally equivalent to A , with 
M G R+ U {oo}; the modulus of A, denoted M{A), is defined to be the 
number M . For any Riemann surface S^j and any isotopy class of simple closed 
curves [c] G C, the extremal length ^cxt(o', [c]) is the infimum of 1/M{A) taken 
over all annuli A C F whose core is in the isotopy class [c] . 

Kcrckoff proved [26] that the function £ext • ^ ' C) — > (0, oo) defined by 
£cxt{(^- r[c]) ^ r£ext{(^, [c]) extends continuously to a function 4xt '■ ^ x 
[0, oo). Moreover, for any transverse pair of measured foliations Tx^Ty with 
associated conformal structure a = a{J-x,J'y) and quadratic differential q = 
Q{J^x,J^y), we have 




Given X £ MJ- , the extremal length horohall based at X is defined to be 

H{X) = {a \ lcxt{cr,X) < 1}. Note for example that, setting ^ = PX , for 

i > 

every rj G PAiT the extremal length of X at points of (rj,^) decreases strictly 
monotonically to zero as the point moves towards ^, and so every Teichmiiller 
geodesic with positive direction PX eventually enters H{X) in the positive 
direction and, once in, never leaves. Given ^ G PAiJ^, there is a one parameter 
family of extremal length horoballs based at ^, namely H(X) for all X G A4J-^ 
such that PX = ^. 

> > 

For the first sentence of the theorem, consider two geodesic rays [a, 4) , [t, rj) 
such that ^ ^ rf e PMJ^. Pick any extremal length horoball H based at rj. 

The proof of Theorem 4.3 of [38] shows that H n [a, ^) is bounded. However, 

> > > 

H n [r, 77) is an infinite subray of [r, 77) , and moreover as a point p G [r, 7;) 

travels to infinity in [r, rf) the horoball H contains a larger and larger ball in T 

> > 

centered on p. It follows that [o", ^) and [r, 77) have infinite Hausdorff distance 

in r. 



Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



114 



Benson Farb and Lee Mosher 



The second sentence follows from the first, by dividing each line into two rays. 

□ 

Remark Combining results of Masur mentioned above, one can show that 
even more is true: two cobounded geodesic rays which have finite Hausdorff 
distance are asymptotic, meaning that as they go to oo , the distance between 
the rays approaches zero. To see why, as mentioned earlier Masur proves that 

if [a, rj) is cobounded then 77 is uniquely ergodic. Furthermore, two rays [a, ry) , 
> 

[r, T]) with uniquely ergodic endpoint 77 are asymptotic, according to [28] . 
2.3 Singular SOLV spaces 



Consider a geodesic g = {^,r]) in T, and let Sg ^ g he the canonical marked 
Riemann surface bundle over g , obtained by pulling back the canonical marked 
Ricmann surface bundle S ^ T . Topologically we identify Sg = S x g . Choos- 
ing a transverse pair of measured foliations J-x,^y representing ^,rj respec- 
tively, we have g{t) = a{e~^J^xi&^^y)- Let \dy\ be the transverse measure on 
the horizontal measured foliation J^x and let \dx\ be the transverse measure 
on the vertical measured foliation !Fy. We may assume that the pair J^xi^y is 
normalized, meaning that the Euclidean area equals 1 : 

\\q{Tx,:Fy)\\= ! \dx\x\dy\ = l 
Js 

and hence for all t G R the pair e~^Tx-,^J^y is normalized: 

\q{e-^TxjTy)\ = I \e*dx\x \e~*dy\ = 1 

s 

Note that the singular Euclidean metric on each fiber , may be expressed 
as 

dsl = e^* \dxf + 

Define the singular SOLV metric on Sg to be the singular Riemannian metric 
given by the formula: 

dsl = I'^^l^ + \dy\'^ + '^^^ 

We use the notation <S|°^^ to denote Sg equipped with this metric. The univer- 
sal cover of 5^ is the canonical Poincare disc bundle TCg over g, and lifting the 
singular SOLV metric from to Tig we obtain a singular SOLV space denoted 

^soLv_ rpj^g singular locus of = S x g is the union of the singular lines 

Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



Convex cocompact subgroups of mapping class groups 



115 



s X g, one for each singularity s of the pair Tx^^y Away from the singular 
lines, and 'W'^^^ are locally modelled on 3-dimensional SOLV-geometry. 

On each singular line the metric is locally modelled by gluing together several 
copies of the half-plane y > in SOLV-geometry. 

2.4 Comparing hyperbolic and singular Euclidean structures 

Given cr G T, the Riemann surface Sa has several important metrics in its 
conformal class: a unique hyperbolic metric; and one singular Euclidean metric 
for each q G QD(t- These lift to the universal cover l-i^. Given a, r G T, if 
each Riemann surface »So-, St is given either its unique hyperbolic metric or 
one of its singular Euclidean metrics, then for any marked map ^: Sr ^ 

each lift : Ti^ ~* is a quasi-isometry. We are interested in how the quasi- 
isometry constants of ^ compare to the Teichmiiller distance d((T, r) , although 
we need only the crudest estimates. Proposition 2.5 shows how to bound the 
quasi-isometry constants in terms of d((T, r) . Part 1 of this proposition was first 
proved by Minsky in [37], Lemma 3.3; we give a quicker proof using Lemma 2.2. 

Proposition 2.5 For each bounded subset B C M and each r > there 
exists K>1,C>0,^>0 such that the following hold: 

(1) Suppose that a,T G T are each B-cobounded and d{a,T) < r. Let 
f^^ : Sa ^ Sr be the canonical marked map Sa = Sxa^SxT = Sr- 
If we impose on S„ and S-j- either the hyperbolic metric or the singular 
Euclidean metric associated to some normalized quadratic differential, 
then any lift far '■ 'Ha — of f^T is a K,C quasi-isometry. 

(2) Let (Tj G T, i = 1, 2, 3, be B cobounded and have pairwisc distances < r, 
let metrics be imposed on S^^ as above, and let fij : — > S^-^ , etc. be the 
marked maps as above, with K, C -quasi-isometric lifts fij: Ti-aj ■ 
If /i3 is the unique lift of /13 such that 

9/23 o dfi2 = dfi3, 

then 

if 23 ° /l2,/l3) < A. 

Proof Part (1) is an easy consequence of Lemma 2.2, as follows. Choose a com- 
pact subset A C T whose image in covers B and such that over any point of 
B there exists a point a G A such that B't{(T, r) d A. It follows that the points 
(J, r in (1) may be translated to lie in A. Identifying Sj\_ diffeomorphically with 

Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



116 



Benson Farb and Lee Mosher 



S X A, compactness of A produces a compact family of hyperbolic metrics on 
S , and compactness of the restriction of QD^ to A produces a compact family 
of singular Euclidean metrics. Now apply Lemma 2.2. 

For part (2), note that by compactness of A and of the compactness of the 
restriction of QD^ to A, there exists a uniform 6 such that any hyperbolic 
metric and any normalized singular Euclidean structure determined by an el- 
ement a e A has a (5-hyperbolic universal cover. Part (2) is now a direct 
consequence of Lemma 2.3. □ 



3 Convex cocompact subgroups of Isom(T) 
3.1 Variations of convex cocompactness 

Given a proper, geodesic metric space X, a subset L C X is quasiconvex if 
there exists ^ > such that every geodesic segment in X with endpoints in L 
is contained in the ^-neighborhood of L . 

When G is a finitely generated, discrete subgroup of the isometry group of H" , 
it is well known that the following properties of G are all equivalent to each 
other: 

Orbit Quasiconvexity Any orbit of G is a quasiconvex subset of . 

Single orbit quasiconvexity There exists an orbit of G which is quasicon- 
vex in H". 

Convex cocompact G acts cocompactly on the convex hull of its limit set 
A. 

Moreover, these properties imply that G is word hyperbolic, and there is a 
continuous G-equivariant embedding of the Gromov boundary dG into OH" 
whose image is the limit set A. Similar facts hold for finitely generated groups 
acting discretely on any Gromov hyperbolic space, for example finitely gener- 
ated subgroups of Gromov hyperbolic groups. 

In this section we prove Theorem 1.1, which is a list of similar equivalences 
for finitely generated subgroups of the isometry group of the Teichmiiller space 
T oi S. In this case the entire isometry group Isom(T) acts discretely on 
T, and in fact by Royden's Theorem [45], [24] the canonical homomorphism 
MCG Isom(T) is an isomorphism, except in genus 2 where the kernel is 
cyclic of order 2. 



Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



Convex cocompact subgroups of mapping class groups 



117 



Although T fails to be negatively curved in any reasonable sense, nevertheless 
one can say that it behaves in a negatively curved manner as long as one focusses 
only on cobounded aspects. This, at least, is one way to interpret the projection 
properties introduced by Minsky in [38] and further developed by Masur and 
Minsky in [32]. Given a B-cobounded geodesic g in T, Minsky's projection 
property says that a closest point projection map of T onto g behaves in 
a negatively curved manner, such that the quality of the negative curvature 
depends only on B. See Theorem 3.6 for the precise statement. 

For a finitely generated subgroup G C Isom(T) we can obtain equivalences as 
above, as long as we tack on an appropriate uniform coboundedness property; 
in some cases the desired property comes for free by uniform coboundedness of 
the action of G on any of its orbits. 

First we have some properties of G which are variations on orbit quasiconvexity: 
Orbit quasiconvexity Any orbit of G is quasiconvex in T. 

Single orbit quasiconvexity There exists an orbit of G that is quasiconvex 
in T . 

Weak orbit quasiconvexity There exists a constant A and an orbit O of G, 
and for each x,y & O there exists a geodesic segment [x',y'] in T, such 
that d{x,x') < A, d{y,y') < A, and [x',y'] is in the ^-neighborhood of 
O. 

The latter is a more technical version of orbit quasiconvexity which is quite 
useful in several settings. 

Another property of G is a version of convex cocompactness, into which we 
incorporate the hyperbolicity properties mentioned above: 

Convex cocompact The group G is word hyperbolic, and there exists a con- 
tinuous G-equivariant embedding : dG PAiJ^ with image Aq , 
such that A(3 x Aq — Ac P!FV, and the following holds. Letting 

WHg = u{(cO I C / C G Ag} 

be the weak hull of A^ , if / : G ^ WHg is any G-equivariant map, then 
/ is a quasi-isometry and the map / = / U /oo : GU dG — > WHg UAg is 
continuous. 

In this definition, WH^ is metrized by restricting the Teichmiiller metric on T, 
which a posteriori has the effect of making WHq into a quasigeodesic metric 
space. The definition implies that G acts cocompactly on WH^: since A^ x 
Aq — a is a closed subset of PJ^V it follows that WHc is a closed subset of T ; 

Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



118 



Benson Farb and Lee Mosher 



and since G acts coboundedly on itself it follows that G acts coboundedly on 
WHc ; thus, the image of WHfj in moduli space is closed and bounded, hence 
compact. 

3.2 Properties of convex cocompact subgroups 

In this section we prove several properties of convex cocompact subgroups of 
Isom(T) which are analogues of well known properties in Isom(H") . 

Proposition 3.1 Every infinite order element g of a convex cocompact sub- 
group G < Isom(7") fs MCG is a pseudo-Anosov mapping class. 

Proof Any infinite order element of a word hyperbolic group has source-sink 
dynamics on its Gromov boundary, and so g has source-sink dynamics on dG 
Ag- It follows that g has an axis in WHg. But the elements of Isom(T) 
MCG having an axis in T are precisely the pseudo-Anosovs [5] . □ 

The following is a consequence of work of McCarthy and Papadoupolos [36] . 

Proposition 3.2 If G is a convex cocompact subgroup of Isom(T) then: 

(1) Ag is the smallest nontrivial closed subset of T = T U PAiJ^ invariant 
under G. 

(2) The action of G on PMJ^ \ Aq is properly discontinuous. 

Proof The Gromov boundary of a word hyperbolic group is the closure of the 

fixed points of infinite order elements in the group, and so by Proposition 3.1 
the set Ag is the closure of the fixed points of the pseudo-Anosov elements of 
G. Item (1) now follows from Theorem 4.1 of [36]. 

To prove (2), let 

Z{A) = {C e PMJ^ I there exists C' e A such that i{C, C) = 0} 

Theorem 6.16 of [36] says that G acts properly discontinuously on PAiT — 
Z{A) , and so it suffices to prove that A = Z(A) . Each point G A is the ideal 
endpoint of a cobounded geodesic ray, which implies that (' is uniquely ergodic 
and fills the surface [29], and so if C') = then C = C'- □ 

Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



Convex cocompact subgroups of mapping class groups 



119 



Remark One theme of [36] is that for a general finitely generated subgroup 
G < MCG, there are several different types of "limit sets" for the action of G 
on PMT. Assuming that G contains a pseudo-Anosov element, the two sets 
mentioned in the proof above play key roles in [36]: A(G) which is the closure 
of the fixed points of pseudo-Anosov elements of the subgroup, and is also the 
smallest nontrivial closed G-invariant subset; and the set Z{A{G)). What we 
have proved is that for a convex cocompact subgroup G, these two sets are 
identical. Henceforth we refer to A^ as the limit set for the action of G on 

The analogue of the following result is true for convex cocompact discrete sub- 
groups of H" , as well as for word hyperbolic groups [2] ; the proof here is similar. 

Proposition 3.3 Let G be a convex cocompact subgroup of Isom(T), and 
let Nq and Comm^ be the normalizer and the relative commensurator of G 
in Isom(T) . Then each of the inclusions G < Nq < Commc is of hnite index, 
and we have Commc = Stab(AG') = Stab(WHG) . 

Proof Let Aq be the limit set of G , with weak hull WHo , and note that we 
trivially have Stab(WHG) = Stab(AG) . 

Note that Stab(WHG) acts properly on WH^. Indeed, Isom(T) acts properly 
on T, and so any subgroup of Isom(T) acts properly on any subset of T 
which is invariant under that subgroup. Since G C Stab(WHG'), and since G 
acts cocompactly on WHg , it follows that G is contained with finite index in 
Stab(WHG). This implies that Stab(WH(3) C Commc. To complete the proof 
we only have to prove the reverse inclusion Commo C Stab(WH(3). 

Given g G Isom(T), suppose that g G Commc, and choose finite index sub- 
groups H,K < G such that g~^Hg = K. By the definition of convex cocom- 
pactness it follows that WH^ = WHg = WHi^. Since ^(WHk) = WH^ it 
follows that g G Stab(WHG) . □ 

Remark Another natural property for subgroups G < MCG is quasiconvex- 
ity with respect to the word metric on MCG. It seems possible to us that this 
is not equivalent to orbit quasiconvexity of G in Isom(T) . Masur and Minsky 
[33] give an example of an infinite cyclic subgroup of Isom(T) which is not orbit 
quasiconvex, and yet this subgroup is quasi- isometrically embedded in MCG 
[14]; it may also be quasiconvex in MCG, but we have not investigated this. 



Qeometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



120 



Benson Farb and Lee Mosher 



3.3 Equivalence of definitions: Proof of Theorem 1.1 

Here is our main result equating the various quasiconvexity properties with 
convex cocompactness: 

Theorem 1.1 If G is a Rnitely generated subgroup of Isom(T) , the following 
are equivalent: 

(1) Orbit quasiconvexity 

(2) Single orbit quasiconvexity 

(3) Weak orbit quasiconvexity 

(4) Convex cocompactness 

Because of this theorem we are free to refer to "quasiconvexity" or "convex 
cocompactness" of G without any ambiguity. 

Proof of Theorem 1.1 The key ingredients in the proof are results of Minsky 
from [38] concerning projections from balls and horoballs in T to geodesies in 
T, and results of Masur-Minsky [32] characterizing J-hyperbolicity of proper 
geodesic metric spaces in terms of projections properties to paths. 

To begin with, note that the implications (1) ^ (2) ^ (3) are obvious. We 
now prove that (3) (1). 

Suppose we have an orbit O oi G and a constant A, and for each x,y e O we 
have two points x',y' G T, endpoints of a unique geodesic segment [x',y'] in 
r, such that d{x,x') < A, d{y,y') < A, and [x',y'] C NaIO). The set O maps 
to a single point in Ai and so the projection of Na{0) to is a bounded 
set B. It follows that each [x',y'] is B-cobounded. Now consider an arbitrary 
orbit Oi of G; we must prove that Oi is quasiconvex in T. The orbits 0,0i 
have finite Hausdorff distance C in T. Given xi,yi € Oi, choose x,y ^ O 
within distance C of respectively, and consider the geodesic segment 

[x', y'] and the piecewise geodesic path 

-/ =[x',x]* {x,xi] * [xi,yi] * {yi,y] * [y,y'] 

Of the five subsegments of 7, all but the middle subsegment have length 
< Max{A, C}, and it follows that 7 is a (1, D)-quasigeodesic in T, with D 
depending only on A,C. Since the geodesic [x',y'] is ^B-cobounded we can 
apply the following result of Minsky [38] to obtain 6 , depending only on B and 
D, such that 7 C Ns[x',y']. 



Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



Convex cocompact subgroups of mapping class groups 



121 



Theorem 3.4 (Stability of cobounded geodesies) For any bounded subset B 

of Ai and any K > 1,C > there exists 5 > such that if 7 is a K,C 
quasigeodesic in T with endpoints x,y, and if [x,y] is B-cobounded, then 
C Ns[x,y]. □ 

It follows that C 7 C Ns+aO C Ns+a+c^^i, proving quasiconvexity of 

Oi in r. 



Weak orbit quasiconvexity implies convex cocompactness Fix an orbit 
O of G, and so O is quasiconvex in T. Let Q be the set of all geodesic segments, 

rays, and lines that are obtained as pointwisc limits of sequences of geodesies 
with endpoints in O. Let UQ C T he the union of the elements of Q. The left 
action of G on O is evidently cobounded. By quasiconvexity of O it follows 
that the action of G on the union of geodesic segments with endpoints in O 
is cobounded, which implies in turn that the action of G on UQ is cobounded. 
Since UQ is closed and T is locally compact, it follows that the G action on 
UQ is cocompact. The set UQ therefore projects to a compact subset of M 
which we denote B. All geodesies in Q are therefore H-cobounded. 

Let UQ be equipped with the restriction of the Teichmiiller metric. Note that 
while UQ is not a geodesic metric space, it is a quasigeodesic metric space: 
there exists yl > such that any x,y £ L)Q are within distance A of points 
x',y' £ O C UG , and the geodesic is contained in L)Q . 

To prepare for the proof that G is word hyperbolic, fix a finite generating set for 
G with Cayley graph F , and fix a G-equivariant map f-.F^ UQ taking the 
vertices of F to O and taking each edge of F to an element of Q . Since G acts 
properly and coboundedly on both F and UQ , and since both are quasigeodesic 
metric spaces, it follows that the equivariant map / is a quasi-isometry between 
F and UQ; pick a coarse inverse F: UQ ^F. 

By definition the group G is word hyperbolic if and only if the Cayley graph F 
is (5-hyperbolic for some S > 0. Our proof that G is word hyperbolic will use 
a result of Masur and Minsky, Theorem 2.3 of [32]: 

Theorem 3.5 Let X be a geodesic metric space and suppose that there is a 
set of paths P in X with the following properties: 

Coarse transitivity There exists C > such that for any x,y E X with 
d{x, y) >C there is a path in P joining x and y . 

Contracting projections: There exist a,b,c> 0, and for each path 7: I — 
X in P there exists a map n: X ^ I such that: 



Qeometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



122 



Benson Farb and Lee Mosher 



Coarse projection For each t e I we have diam (7[t, 7r(7t)]) < c. 
Coarse lipschitz If d{x,y) < 1 then diam (7[7rx, Try]) < c. 
Contraction If d{x,^{Trx)) > a and d{x,y) < b ■ d{x,^{Trx)) then 

diam (7[7ra;, Try]) < c 
Then X is S-hyperboUc for some S >(). 

To prove that G is (5-hyperbolic we take P to be the set of geodesic segments 
in G, and we look at the set of paths / oP = {/o7|7£ P} in UQ . Using 
some results of Minsky [38] , we will show that / o P satisfies the hypotheses of 
Theorem 3.5. Then we shall pull the hypotheses back to P and apply Theorem 
3.5. 

The first result of Minsky that we need is the main theorem of [38] : 

Theorem 3.6 (Contraction Theorem) For every bounded subset B of M. 
there exists c > such that if 7 is any B-cobounded geodesic in T then 
the closest point projection T — > 7 satisfies the (a, 6, c) contracting projection 
property with (a, b) = (0, 1) . 

In our context, where we have a uniform B such that each geodesic in Q is 
;B-cobounded, it follows that there is a uniform c such that each geodesic in Q 
satisfies the (0, l,c) contracting projection property. 

Now consider 7 = [xo,xi,. . . ,rc„] a geodesic in the Cay ley graph F, mapping 
via / to a piecewise geodesic /7 = [fxQ, fxi] U • • • U [fxn-i, fxn] in UQ , with 
each subsegment [/x,, /xj+i] an element of ^. It follows that fj is a K,C 
quasigeodesic in T , for K > 1,C > independent of the given geodesic in 
r. The T-geodesic [fxQ,fxn] is B-cobounded. Applying Theorem 3.4 it fol- 
lows that /7 C Nj:i[fxo,fxn], where D depends only on B, K,G . As noted 
above, closest point projection from T onto [fxo,fxn] satisfies the (0,1, c) 
contracting projection property. From this it follows that closest point projec- 
tion tt: T ^ /7 satisfies the {a',b',c') contraction property where {a',b',c') 
depend only on B,K,C. Now define the projection F ^ 7 to be the composi- 
tion r ^ UQ ^ fj —>■ T —>■ J where the last map is closest point projection 
in F. This composition clearly satisfies the {a",b",cf') projection property 
where {a",b",c") depend only on {a',b',c.) and the quasi-isometry constants 
and coarse inverse constants for f,F. 

Geodesies in F are clearly coarsely transitive, and applying Theorem 3.5 it 
follows that G is word hyperbolic. This means that geodesic triangles in F are 

Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



Convex cocompact subgroups of mapping class groups 



123 



uniformly thin, and it implies that for each K, C there is a 5 such that K, C 
quasigeodesic triangles in T are (5-thin. Applying the quasi-isometry between 
r and UQ , it follows that there is a uniform 5 such that for each x,y,z G O 
the geodesic triangle A[x, y, z] in UQ is (5-thin; we fix this 6 for the arguments 
below. 

Now we turn to a description of the "limit set" A C PMJ^ of G, with the 
ultimate goal of identifying it with the Gromov boundary dG. 

^ 

Each geodesic ray in Q has the form [a;, 77), for some x G O, rj G PA4J-; define 
A C PMT be the set of all such points rj, over all geodesic rays in Q . The set 
A is evidently G-equivariant. 



Fact 1 For any x 77 G A, the ray [x,r]) in T is an element of Q. 

^ 

To prove this, by definition of A there exists a ray [y,r)) in Q for some y E O. 

> 

Choose a sequence yi,y2,... G O staying uniformly close to [y,r]) and going 

to infinity. Pass to a subsequence so that the sequence of segments [x, y„] 

> 

converges to some ray [x,rj') G Q; it suffices to show that r]' = r]. Since x is 

> 

fixed and the points y„ stay uniformly close to [y,r]), it follows by Theorem 

> 

3.4 that the segments stay uniformly close to [y,r]), and so [x,rf ) is in 

a finite neighborhood of [y, rf) . The reverse inclusion, that [y, rj) is in a finite 
neighborhood of [x, 77'), is a standard argument: as points move to infinity in 

[x, T]') taking bounded steps, uniformly nearby points move to infinity in [y, rj) 

also taking bounded steps, and thus must come uniformly close to an arbitrary 

> > > 

point of [y, r/). This shows that the rays [x,r]'), [y,r]) have finite Hausdorff 

distance, and applying Lemma 2.4 (End Uniqueness) shows that r) = rj' . 

Note that in the proof of Fact 1 we have established a little more, namely that 
for any x,y e O and G A the rays [x,i]) and [y,r)) have finite Hausdorff 
distance. This will be useful below. 



Fact 2 For any 77 7^ ^ G A there exists a line (77, Q contained in Q. 

From Fact 2 it immediately follows that A x A — A C PTV , that the weak hull 
WHg of A is defined, and that G acts coboundedly on WHo, since G acts 
coboundedly on . 

To prove Fact 2, pick a point x G O, and note that by Fact 1 wc have two 
> > 

rays [x,r]), [x,C,) in Q- Pick a sequence yn ^ O staying uniformly close to 
Qeometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



124 



Benson Farb and Lee Mosher 



> 

[x, rf) and going to infinity, and a sequence Zn & O staying uniformly close 

to [x,C) and going to infinity. We have a sequence of triangles [x,y„,2;„] in 

all (5-thin. Applying Theorem 3.4 there is a D such that the sides 

> 

are contained in the D-neighborhood of [x, rj) , and the sides [x, Zn] are con- 

> 

tained in the D-neighborhood of [x, () . Each side [y„, Zn] , being contained in 

the (5-neighborhood of [x, U [x, Zn] , is therefore contained in the D + S- 

> > 

neighborhood of [x,rf) U [x,Q. 

We claim that the point x is uniformly close to the segments Zn] ■ If not, 
then from uniform thinness of the triangles [x,yn,Zn] it follows that there are 
points y'j € [x, Un] and z'^ G [x, Zn] such that the segments [x, y'^] and [x, z'J 
get arbitrarily long while the Hausdorff distance between them stays uniformly 
bounded. This implies that there are sequences y'^ G [x, rj) going to infinity 
and G [a;, C,) going to infinity such that the Hausdorff distance between the 
segments and [a;,2;^] stays uniformly bounded, which implies in turn 

that the rays [x, rj) and [x, Q have finite Hausdorff distance. Applying End 
Uniqueness 2.4, it follows that rj = contradicting the hypothesis of Fact 2, 
and the claim follows. 

Passing to a subsequence and applying Ascoli-Arzcla it follows that [yn,Zn] 

> 

converges to a line in Q . One ray of this line is Hausdorff close to [x,r]) and so 

> 

has endpoint r], and the other ray is Hausdorff close to [x, () and so has endpoint 

< > 

C, by End Uniqueness. We therefore have lim[?/„,Zn] = (t/,C)) completing the 
proof of Fact 2. 

Now we define a map foo '■ dG A . Recall that the relation of finite Hausdorff 
distance is an equivalence relation on geodesic rays in the Cayley graph F 
of G, and dG is the set of equivalence classes. Consider then a point ^ G 
dG represented by two geodesic rays [xq, xi, . . . ) and [yo,yi,---) with finite 
Hausdorff distance in F. These map to piecewise geodesic, quasigeodcsic rays 
P = [fxQ, fxi] U [/xi, fx2] U • • • and a = [fyo, fyi] U [fyi, fy2] U • • • with finite 
Hausdoff distance in U^. The sequence of geodesic segments [fxo,fxn] in Q 
has a subsequence converging to some ray [fxo,Q in Q, and [fyo,fyn\ has a 
subsequence converging to some ray [fyo,C') in ^. To obtain a well defined 
map dG — A it suffices to prove that C = d ^nd then we can set fooiO = C- 

To prove that ^ = ^' it suffices, by End Uniqueness 2.4, to prove that the rays 

> > 

[fxoX) &nd [fyo,C') have finite Hausdorff distance in T. Since the piecewise 
geodesic rays p, a have finite Hausdorff distance in T , it suffices to prove that p 



Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



Convex cocompact subgroups of mapping class groups 



125 



has finite Hausdorff distance from [/xq, C) , ^'^d similarly a has finite Hausdorff 

> 

distance from [fyo,C')- Consider a point p £ p. For sufficiently large n we 
have p £ pn = [fxo,fxi] U ••• U [fxn-i,fxn]- Applying Theorem 3.4 there 

is a uniform constant D such that pn C Nd ( [fxQ , fxn] ) , and so p is within 

> 

distance D of some point in [fxo,fxn\- Since [/xo,C) is the pointwise limit of 

[fxo, fXn] as n — GO it follows that p is within a uniformly bounded distance 

> > 

of [fxo, () . This shows that p is within a finite neighborhood of [/xq, C) ■ The 

reverse inclusion is a standard argument: as points move along p towards the 

end taking bounded steps, uniformly nearby points move along [/xq, C) towards 

the end also taking bounded steps, and thus must come uniformly close to some 

point of [/xo,C)- 

Hence foo '■ dG — A is well defined. Observe that a similar argument proves 

a little more: if Xj G G converges to ^ G dG then the segments [/xq, /xj] 

> 

converge in the compact-open topology to the ray [/xq, fCl'i details are left to 
the reader. 

We now turn to verifying required properties of /oo • 

> 

To see that /oo is surjective, consider a point G A and pick a ray [x, rj) 'm.Q . It 
follows that p = F ^[x, r/)^ is a quasigcodesic ray in F. Since F is (5-hyperbolic 

it follows that p has finite Hausdorff distance from some geodesic ray /?' in F, 

with endpoint C,' G dG. As shown above, f{p') has finite Hausdorff distance 

> 

from some geodesic ray [x', /ooC') • Since /, F are coarse inverses it follows that 

> > 

[x,?7) has finite Hausdorff distance from [x',/ooC')! ^-^d so by End Uniqueness 
it follows that rj = fooC ■ 

To see that /oo is injective, consider two points r/, C G dG and suppose that 
/oo(^) = fooiO'i let ^ G A be this point. Pick rays p,a in T representing r],C, 

respectively. As wc have just seen, the images /(/)), /(o") have finite Hausdorff 

> > 

distance in T to rays [y, ^) , [z, ^) in Q , respectively. As noted at the end of the 

> > 

proof of Fact 1, the rays [y,^) and [z,^) have finite Hausdorff distance in T; 
applying the coarse inverse F it follows that p, a have finite Hausdorff distance 
in F and therefore rj = (. 

We have shown that /oo is a bijection between dG and A. We want to prove 
that foo is a homeomorphism, and that the extension f = f U foo '■ G U dG — ^ 
T = T U PAiJ^ is continuous. For this purpose first we establish: 

Fact 3 A is a closed subset of PA^JT, and therefore compact. 



Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



126 



Benson Farb and Lee Mosher 



To prove this, choose a sequence G A so that hm (n = Coo in PMJ^; we must 

prove that Coo ^ Choose a point x E O, and apply Fact 1 to obtain rays 

> > 

[x, Cn) • Passing to a subsequence these converge to a limiting ray lim [x, Cm) = 

> 

[a;,C^) in Q, and so C^jo ^ ^- Looking in the unit tangent bundle of T at the 
point X it follows that lim Cn = C^ ! *nd so Coo = C^ ^ ^ • 

Fact 4 /oo : dG — >^ A is a homeomorphism. 

Since both the domain and range are compact Hausdorff spaces it suffices to 
prove continuity in one direction. Continuity of follows by simply noting 
that for fixed x e O and for a convergent sequence ^„ — >^ ^ in A C PMJ^, 
the sequence of rays [x, converges in the compact open topology to the ray 

Fact 5 The map J = f U foo - G Li dG = T \J PMJ^ is continuous. 

To be precise, this map is continuous using the Thurston compactification T 
of T . We prove this by showing first that the map is continuous using the Te- 
ichmiiller compactification, and then we apply Masur's Two Boundaries Theo- 
rem [30] which says that the map from the Teichmiiller compactification to the 
Thurston compactification is continuous at uniquely ergodic points of PM!F. 

First we recall the Teichmiiller compactification in a form convenient for our cur- 
rent purposes. There are actually many different Teichmiiller compactifications, 
one for each choice of a base point in T; we shall fix a base point z = f{x) € O 

for some x £ G. As we have seen, there is a unique geodesic segment [z,z'] 

> 

for each z' G T , and a unique geodesic ray [z,Q for each C £ PAiJ^. The 
Teichmiiller topology on T = T U PMT restricts to the standard topologies 
on T and on PAiJ^, it has T as a dense open subset, and a sequence Zi E T 

converges to C £ PMJ- if and only if the sequence of segments [z, Zi] converges 

> 

to the ray [z, () in the compact open topology; equivalently, letting B denote 

the unit ball in T centered on z, the distance d(z,Zi) goes to infinity and the 

> 

set [z, Zi] n B converges to the set [z, C) n 5 in the Hausdorff topology. 

We already proved in Fact 4 that /oo is continuous; for this we implicitly used 
the fact that the Thurston topology on PMJ^ is identical to the Teichmiiller 

topology, defined by identifying PMJ^ with the unit tangent bundle at x. 
We also observed earlier, after the proof that /oo is well-defined, that if Xj G 
G converges to ^ G dG, then /(xj) G T converges to /oo(0 ^ PMJ-^ in 

Qeometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



Convex cocompact subgroups of mapping class groups 



127 



the Teichmiiller topology on T. Putting these together it follows that / is 
continuous using the Teichmiiller topology on T. Since A = foo{dG) consists 
entirely of uniquely ergodic points in PAiJ^, Masur's Two Boundaries Theorem 
[30] implies that the identity map on T is continuous from the Teichmiiller 
topology to the Thurston topology at each point of A , and so / is continuous 
using the Thurston topology on T. 

We now put the pieces together to complete the proof of convex cocompact- 
ness. Let f : G ^ WHq be an arbitrary G-equivariant map, and define 
: do PAiJ^ to be equal to foo ■ We must prove that /' is a quasi-isometry 
and that the extension f = f 'O f'^: GLidG WHg UAg is continuous. Prom 
Pacts 1-5 above, it follows that the quasi-isometry f : G ^ UQ has continuous 
extension / : GUdG — ^ U^U A, and so UQ is a Gromov hyperbolic metric space 
with Gromov compactification UQ U A . Since WHc C UQ is a G— invariant sub- 
set, it follows that WHc is Gromov hyperbolic with Gromov compactification 
WHgUA. The map /' is a G-equivariant map between quasigeodesic metric 
spaces on which G acts properly and coboundedly by isometries, and hence /' 
is a quasi-isometry. Since d{f'{x),f{x)) is uniformly bounded for x EG, then 
from the fact that = foo it follows that /' is continuous. 

This completes the proof that weak orbit quasiconvexity implies convex cocom- 
pactness. 

Convex cocompact implies weak orbit quasiconvexity Assuming G is 
convex cocompact, pick a finite generating set for G with Cayley graph P and 
G-equivariant, coarsely inverse quasi-isometries /: P ^ WHc, /: WHg — > P. 

Let O be an orbit of G in T. Since G acts coboundedly on WHg it follows 
that O has finite Hausdorff distance from WHg in T. It suffices to show that 
for any two points x,y E O there is a geodesic line whose infinite ends are in 
A such that x, y come within a uniformly finite distance of that line. 

Pick a G-equivariant map g:T ^ T taking the vertices of P bijectively to 
O and each edge of P to a geodesic segment, so / and g differ by a bounded 
amount. Since P is (5-hyperbolic it follows that there is a constant A such that 
any two vertices of P lie within distance A of some bi-infinite geodesic. Pick 
x,y G O, and pick a bi-infinitc geodesic 7 in P such that g~^{x), (y) are 
within distance ^ of 7. Let S,,rj E dG be the two ends of 7. By the statement 
of convex cocompactness, there is & K,G quasigeodesic line in P of the form 



/ ( (/ooC) fooV) ) whose two infinite ends are ^,77, where K, G are independent 




Qeometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



128 



Benson Farb and Lee Mosher 



of ^,77. It follows that 7 and / (j^foo^jfoovij uniformly close, and so 7(7) 

and (foo^, foov) uniformly close, and so the points x, y are uniformly close 
< > 

to (/oo^,/oo??)- □ 



4 Hyperbolic surface bundles over graphs 



In this section our goal is to give an explicit construction of model geometries for 
surface group extensions, and to study regularity properties of these geometries. 
Here is a brief outline; detailed constructions follow. 

Consider a finitely generated group G and a homomorphism f : G ^ Isom(T) ~ 
MCG. Let X be a Cayley graph for G. Choose a map X ^ T which is 
equivariant with respect to the homomorphism /, that is, ^{g-x) = f{g) • , 
X e X,g e G, where we use the • notation to denote an action. By pulling 
back the canonical marked hyperbolic surface bundle S ^ T via the map $ 
we obtain a marked hyperbolic surface bundle 5^ — > X. By pulling back 
the canonical hyperbolic plane bundle H ^ T we obtain a hyperbolic plane 
bundle Hx X , and a covering map Hx Sx with deck transformation 
group 7ri(S'). There is an action of the extension group Tq on TCx such that 
the covering map Hx Sx is equivariant with respect to the homomorphism 

By imposing a G -equivariant, proper, geodesic metric on Sx and lifting to 
Hx , we can then use Hx as a model geometry for the extension group Fq ■ 

We may summarize all this in the following commutative diagrams: 



H ^S MGG{S,p) ^MCG{S) 




Each group in the right hand diagram acts on the corresponding space in the 

left hand diagram, and each map in the left hand diagram is equivariant with 
respect to the corresponding group homomorphism in the right hand diagram. 

We will impose several -equivariant structures on the space Hx , by finding 
appropriate G-equivariant structures on Sx and lifting. 



Qeometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



Convex cocompact subgroups of mapping class groups 



129 



For example, we put an equivariant, proper, geodesic metric on TCx by lifting 
an equivariant, proper, geodesic metric on Sx ■ These metrics will have the 
property that the topological fibrations Sx X , Hx X are also "metric 
fibrations" in the following sense. In a metric space given subsets A^B d Z , 
denote the min distance by dmin(^, -B) = inf{d(a, 6) | a G A, 6 G -B}, and the 
Hausdorff distance by (iHaus(^,-B) = inf{r | A C Nr{B),B C Nr{A)}. 

Metric fibration property A map of metric spaces f-.Z^Y satisfies the 
metric fibration property if Y is covered by neighborhoods U such that 
a y,z E U then 

dnnn{r\y),r\z)) = ^^Haus (?/), (^)) = dY{y,z) 

4.1 Metrics and connections on surface bundles over paths 

The marked hyperbolic surface bundle over a path in T Consider first 
a smooth path a: I ^ T, defined on a closed connected subset / C R, that 
is, a closed interval, a closed ray, or the whole line. Pulling back the canonical 
marked hyperbolic surface bundle S ^ T via the map a we obtain a marked 
hyperbolic surface bundle Sq, ^ I ■ We impose a Riemannian metric on Sq, as 
follows. 

Recall that we have chosen a connection on the bundle iS — ^ T. By pulling back 
the connection on the bundle S ^ T we obtain a connection on the bundle 
Sa ^ 1 1 that is, a 1-dimensional sub-bundle of TSa which is complementary to 
the vertical sub-bundle TySa ■ There is a unique vector field V on Sa parallel to 
the connection such that the projection map Sa ^ I takes each vector of V to 
a positive unit vector in the tangent bundle of / C R. There is now a unique 
Riemannian metric on S whose restriction to T^Sa is the given hyperbolic 
metric along leaves of Sa, and such that F is a unit vector field orthogonal 
to TySa- Since / is closed subset of R, the path metric on S^ induced from 
this Riemannian metric is proper, and so by Fact 2.1 we may regard Sa as a 
geodesic metric space. 

Here is another description of the Riemannian metric on . Integrcition of 
the connection sub-bundle defines a 1-dimensional foliation on Sa transverse 
to the surface fibration, whose leaves are called connection paths. Choosing a 
base leaf of the fibration Sa ~^ I , and identifying this base leaf with S , we may 
project along connection paths to define a fibration Sa ^ S . Combining this 
with the fibration Sa ^ I we obtain a diffeomorphism Sa ^ S x I . Letting gt 

Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



130 



Benson Farb and Lee Mosher 



be the given Riemannian metric of curvature —1 on the leaf St ^ S x t, t E I, 
we obtain the Riemannian metric on Sq, via the formula 

Remark The metric on Sa depends on the choice of a connection on the 
bundle 5 — > T. However, when a is cobounded, two different connections on 
S will induce metrics on Sa which axe bilipschitz equivalent, with bilips- 
chitz constant depending only on the pair of connections and on the cobound- 
edness of a, not on a itself. 

For each s,t E I we have a connection map hst' Sg ^ St, defined by moving 
each point of Ss along a connection path until it hits St- Clearly wc have 
hst ° = hrt, {r, s,t G /). Notice that the map hgt takes each point of Sg to 
the unique closest point on St, and that point is at distance |s — i|. In fact, 
starting from an arbitrary point on Ss, all paths to St have length > |s — f|, 
and the connection path is the unique one with length = |s — t| . It follows that 
the map Sa ^ I satisfies the metric fibration property. 

Consider more generally a piecewise smooth path a: I T . On each subinter- 
val I' G I over which a is smooth, there is a Riemannian metric as constructed 
above. At a point t e I where two such subintervals meet, the Riemannian 
metrics on the two sides agree when restricted to St- We therefore have a 
piecewise Riemannian metric on Sa , inducing a proper geodesic metric. The 
connection paths which are defined over each smooth subinterval I' d I piece 
together to give connection paths on all of Sa , and we obtain connection maps 
hst '■ Ss ^ St for all s,t E I. 

Note that since the connection on S ^ T is equivariant with respect to the ac- 
tion of MCG, the piecewise Riemannian metric on each Sa is natural, meaning 
that for any h G MCG , the induced map Sa Shoa is an isometry. Similarly, 
the connection paths and connection maps are also natural. 

Each connection map hst '■ Ss ^ St is clearly a diffeomorphism, and since its 
domain is compact it follows that hst is bilipschitz. The next proposition ex- 
hibits some regularity, bounding the bilipschitz constant of hst by a function 
of |s — t| that depends only on the coboundedness of the path a: I ^ T , and 
a lipschitz constant for a. For technical reasons we state the lemma only for 
paths a: I ^ T which are piecewise affine, meaning that / is a concatenation 
of subintervals /' such that a | /' is an affine path, a constant speed reparam- 
eterization of a Teichmiiller geodesic. Piecewise affine paths are sufficient for 
all of what follows. 



Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



Convex cocompact subgroups of mapping class groups 



131 



Lemma 4.1 For each bounded subset B C M. and each p > 1 there exists 
K > 1 such that the following happens. If a: I T is a B-cobounded, 
p-lipschitz, piecewise afhne path, then for each s,t & I the connection map 
hgt : Sg ^ St is Xl*"*! -bilipschitz. 

In what follows we shall describe the conclusion of this proposition by saying 
that K is a bilipschitz constant for the connection maps on 5q, . 

Proof A standard lemma found in most O.D.E. textbooks shows that if $ is 
a smooth flow on a compact manifold then there is a constant K >1 such that 
||^t(^)|| < -f^'*' ll^ll- We can plug into this argument as follows. 

The conclusion of the lemma is local, and so it suffices to prove it under the 
assumption that / = [0, 1] and that a is affine. There exists a compact subset 
A (Z T such that any ;B-cobounded, p-lipschitz path a: [0,1] — > T, can be 
translated by the action of MCG to lie in the set A. Let C{Ajp) be the set 
of all /9-lipschitz affine paths [0, 1] ^, a compact space in the compact open 
topology. By naturality of the metric on 5« , it suffices to prove the lemma for 
a G C{A,p). For each a G C{A,p) and each vector w tangent to a fiber Sg, 
s G [0,1], define: 



l{w) = lim - log 



t^o t \ \\w\\ J dt 



log 

=0 



\Dhs^s+t{w)\\ 



\w\ 



Since l{cw) = l{w) for c ^ 0, we may regard l{w) as a function defined on 
the projective tangent bundle of S crossed with /, a compact space. As w 
varies, and as a varies over the compact space C{A, p) , the function l{w) varies 
continuously, and so by compactness l{w) has a finite upper bound I. Setting 
= e', it now follows by standard methods that ||/is^s_|_t(it;)|| < \\w\\ when 
w is tangent to Sg, and so hs,s+t is -f^'*' bilipschitz. □ 



The hyperbolic plane bundle over a path in T Letting a : I — > T be a 
piecewise affine path as above, by pulling back the canonical hyperbolic plane 
bundle 7i — ^ T we obtain a bundle Tia I ■ Note that there is a universal 
covering map Tia — > Sa with deck transformation group '7ri(S') such that the 
composition Tia Sa ^ S equals the composition TLa H ^ S , and also 
the composition Ha Sa ^ I equals the fibration map Ha I ■ By lifting 
the piecewise Riemannian metric from Sa we obtain a piecewise Riemannian 
metric on Ha , inducing a proper, geodesic metric. The map Ha I satisfies 
the metric fibration property. The connection paths on Sa lift to connection 



Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



132 



Benson Farb and Lee Mosher 



paths on Ha , and we obtain connection maps hgt '■ Hs Ht ■ By applying 
Lemma 4.1 it follows that if a is ;S-cobounded and /9-lipschitz then the same 
constant K = K{B,p) is a bilipschitz constant for the connection maps on Tia- 

4.2 Metrics and connections on surface bundles over graphs 

Let f:G^ MCG be a homomorphism defined on a finitely generated group G. 
We have a canonical extension 1 — tti (S) Tq ^ G ^ 1. 

Fix once and for all a Cayley graph X for G , on which G acts cocompactly with 
quotient a rose. Fix a geodesic metric on X with each edge having length 1. 
Choose a G-equivariant map $ : X ^ T taking each edge of X to an affine 
path in T. Letting ||$|| be the maximum speed of the map ie, the maximal 
length of the image of an edge of X under it follows that $ is a ||$||-lipschitz 
map. Evidently the image of <1> is a cobounded subset of T , because the vertices 
of X map to a single orbit and each edge of X maps to a geodesic of length 
< ||$||. Choose a compact set B C M so that image($) is B-cobounded. 

Using the method of Section 4.1, for each edge e of X we have a bundle <Se — >■ e 
equipped with a Riemannian metric. Given any vertex v oi X , for any two 
edges e, e' incident to v the Riemannian metrics on Se and S^' fit together 
isometrically at ■ We may therefore paste together the Riemannian metrics 
on Se for all edges e to obtain a marked hyperbolic surface bundle Sx X 
equipped with a piecewise Riemannian metric. The induced path metric on Sx 
is a proper, geodesic metric. By naturality of the metrics on the bundles Sg, 
the action of G on X lifts to an isometric action on Sx ■ 

By lifting the metric from Sx to its universal cover Ttx we obtain a hyper- 
bolic plane bundle Hx X on which the extension group acts cocom- 
pactly, equipped with a Fq equivariant, piecewise Riemannian metric, inducing 
a proper, geodesic metric on Hx ■ Note in particular that Tq is thus quasi- 
isometric to Hx ■ 

Note that this construction produces bundles Sx X and Hx X isomor- 
phic to the pullback bundles described at the beginning of Section 4. Since each 
map Se ^ e, He ^ e satisfies the metric fibration property, it follows that the 
maps Sx — X , Hx — X also satisfy that property. 

The connections on the spaces Se , for edges e of X , piece together to define a 
G— equivariant connection on Sx- To make sense out of this, we consider only 
the connection map defined for a piecewise path 7 : [a, ^ X , as follows. The 
bundle Sx X pulls back to give a bundle S^ — > [a, 5] , and the connection 



Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



Convex cocompact subgroups of mapping class groups 



133 



paths over each edge of X piece together to give connection paths on , with 
an induced connection map : 5^(a) '^7(6) • follows immediately from 
Lemma 4.1 that is i^i'^^W-bilipschitz, where K = K{B, ||$||). 

By lifting to Tix , for each picccwise geodesic path 7 : [a,b] X we similarly 
obtain a K^^^^'^'> bilipschitz connection map /i-y : 'H-y(a) — >■ ^7(5) ■ 

4.3 Lcirge scale geometry of surface bundles over paths 

Our goal now is to compare metrics on Ti.^ and Tip for paths 7, /3 in T which 
are closely related. 

Given a metric space Z, two paths 7,/?: / Z, and a constant ^ > 0, we 
say that 7, /3 are A-fellow travellers if d{'-f{t), P{t)) < A for all t & I. More 
generally, given paths I^Z,^: J^Z,a constant A> 0, and constants 
A > l,e > 0, we say that 7, (3 are asynchronous A-fellow travellers with 
respect to a A, e quasi-isometry (j): I ^ J if the paths 7 and (3 o (j) are 
fellow travellers. It is a well known and simple fact that given a quasigeodesic 
j: I ^ Z and another path p-. J ^ Z , the following are equivalent: 

(1) P is a quasigeodesic and /3,7 have finite Hausdorff distance; 

(2) P is an asynchronous fellow traveller of 7. 

Moreover, the constants are uniformly related: in 1 =^ 2, there exist asyn- 
chronous fellow traveller constants A, A, e depending only on the quasigeodesic 
constants for /3 and the Hausdorff distance of /9,7; in 2 => 1, there exist 
quasigeodesic constants for (3 and a bound on the Hausdorff distance between 
(3 and 7 depending only on the asynchronous fellow traveller constants. 

The following proposition says that if j: I ^ T, (3: J ^ T are asynchronous 
fellow travellers in T, then there is a fiber preserving quasi-isometry Hj -^Hp. 

Moreover, if 7 is a geodesic, and if instead of wc use the singular SOLV space 
7^^°^^, then there is a fiber preserving quasi-isometry H^°^^ Hp. 

Proposition 4.2 For each bounded subset B C M, and each p > 1, \ > I, 
e>0,A>0,K>l, there exists K' >1, C >0 such that the following hold. 
Suppose that ^f. I ^ T , j3: J ^ T are B-cobounded p-Lipschitz, piecewise 
afhne paths in T . Suppose also that 7, f3 are asynchronous A-fellow travellers, 
with respect to a X,e quasi-isometry cp: / — > J. Then: 



Qeometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



134 



Benson Farb and Lee Mosher 



(1) There exists a commutative diagram 




such that the top row preserves markings, and such that any Ufted map 
Hj — Hp is a K',C' quasi-isometry. 
(2) If 7 is a geodesic, then there exists a commutative diagram 



such that the top row preserves markings, and such that any Ufted map 
H^°^'^ H/3 is a K',C' quasi-isometry 

One way to interpret item (1) of this proposition is that a cobounded, hpschitz 
path in Teichmiiller space has a well-defined geometry associated to it: ap- 
proximate the given path by a piecewise afiine path and take the associated 
hyperbolic plane bundle; the metric on that bundle is well-defined up to quasi- 
isometry, independent of the approximation. A further argument shows that 
the geometry is independent of the choice of an equivariant connection on the 
bundle S ^ T: any two equivariant connections are related in a uniformly 
bilipschitz manner over any cobounded subset of 7". 

Proof Both (1) and (2) are proved in the same manner using Proposition 2.5; 

we prove only (1). 

To smooth the notation in the proof we denote t' = (p{t) , we let St denote the 
fiber of S^, we let 5^, denote the corresponding fiber 5/3(,^(f')) of Sg, etc. 

To prove (1), by applying Proposition 2.5(1) we choose for each t G R a marked 
map $t : »St — S'^, for which any lift ^t'-Ht ^ H[, is a if i , Ci quasi-isometry, 
where the constants Ki,Ci depend only on B,A. Since each preserves 
markings we may choose the lifts $t so that for any s, t we have a commutative 
diagram of induced boundary maps: 




I 



dhst 



Qeometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



Convex cocompact subgroups of mapping class groups 



135 



Applying Proposition 2.5(2) it follows that if we strip off the d symbols from 
the above diagram, and if we choose s, t so that |s — t| < 1, then we obtain the 
following diagram, a coarsely commutative diagram in the sense that the two 
paths around the diagram differ in the sup norm by a constant C2 depending 
only on B,p,X,e,A,K: 

is 



n, 

hs,t 

H 



Define Hj -^Hp so that $ | T^s = To prove that $ is a quasi-isometry 
we need only show that if x, y G satisfy d{x,y) < 1 then r/($(x), $(y)) is 
bounded by a constant depending only on B, p, X,e, A, K , and then carry out 
the similar argument with inverses. 

Given x,y & H.^ with d{x,y) < 1, choose s,t so that x G Tig, y ^TLt- By the 
metric fibration property we have |s — t| < 1. Changing notation if necessary 
we may assume that s <t. Let a be the geodesic in H^y connecting x and y, 
and by the metric fibration property note that a C Ti.[s-i,t+i] ■ Consider the 
map p: TC[s-i,t+i] ~^ T~^t whose restriction to TCj. is the connection map hrt', 
it follows that p is bilipschitz with constant X*-s+2 ^ The distance in 

Ht between the point p{x) = hst{x) and the point y is therefore at most . 
Mapping over to 7^^ we have 

d{^x)My)) < d{^x),hs't'mx)))+d{hs't'{Hx))Mhst{x))) 

+ d{^hstix))My)) 

< \s' -f'\+C2 + {KiK^ + Ci) 
and since \s' — t'\ < A |s — i| + e < A + e, the proof is done. □ 



5 Hyperbolic extension implies convex cocompact 
quotient 

In this section we prove Theorem 1.2. 

Fix a homomorphism f : G ^ MCG defined on a finitely generated group G, 
and suppose that the extension group Tq is word hyperbolic. We must prove 
that / has finite kernel and that f{G) is a convex cocompact subgroup of 
MCG. 



Qeometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



136 



Benson Farb and Lee Mosher 



Fix a Cayley graph X for G and an /-equivariant map X — > G which 
is affine on edges of X . Choose a bounded subset B C M and a number 
p > 1 such that is ;S-cobounded and p-hpschitz. We have a hyperbohc 
plane bundle Hx X, and an action of on Hx, such that the fibration 
Hx — > X is equivariant with respect to the homomorphism To — G. We 
also have a piecewise Riemannian metric for which TCx X satisfies the 
metric fibration property. We also have a connection on TCx , in the form of a 
connection map h^: 'H^(a) ^7(6) for geodesic path 7: [a,6] — > X. The 
connection and metric are each equivariant with respect to Tq- Since Hx is 
a proper geodesic metric space, it follows that TCx is a model geometry for 
Tq- Since Tq is word hyperbolic, it follows that TCx is (^-hyperbolic for some 
5>0. 

Fact 5.1 For each point x £ X , the inclusion map TCx ^ T^x is uniformly 
proper, with uniform properness data independent of x . 

Proof This follows because the subgroup of Vq stabilizing TCx is the normal 
subgroup 7ri(S'), and the inclusion map 7ri(S') Tq is uniformly proper with 
respect to word metrics, a fact that holds for any finitely generated subgroup 
of a finitely generated group. □ 

For each geodesic path 7: / ^ X, / a closed, connected subset of R, we 
obtain a piecewise affine path <1> o 7: / T and a hyperbolic plane bundle 
Ti^ — > /, which can be regarded either as the pullback of the bundle TC ^ T 
via $ o 7, or as the restriction of the bundle TCx X to ^. In either case, 
we obtain a piecewise Riemannian metric and connection on TC-f, natural with 
respect to the action of 7ri(S'). The connection on TC-f has bilipschitz constant 
K depending only on B and p, meaning that for any s,i G R, the connection 
map hst: Hs TCt is kI^"*! -bilipschitz. 

Here is an outline of the proof of Theorem 1.2. 

Our main task will be to prove that for each geodesic path 7 : I X , the space 
TC~^ is a 5' -hyperbolic metric space, for some constant S' depending only on B, 
p, and S. Of course, when / is a finite segment the space TC-y is quasi-isometric 
to the hyperbolic plane and so TCy is a hyperbolic metric space, but uniformity 
of the hyperbolicity constant 6' is crucial. This is obtained using the concept of 
flaring, introduced by Bestvina and Feighn for their combination theorem [6], 
and further developed by Gersten in [18]. The combination theorem says, in 
an appropriate context, that flaring implies hyperbolicity. Gersten's converse, 
proved in the same context, says that hyperbolicity implies flaring. We shall 



Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



Convex cocompact subgroups of mapping class groups 



137 



give a new technique for proving the converse, which apphes in a much broader, 
"higher-dimensional" context, and using this technique we show that since Tix 
is 5-hyperbohc it follows that each satisfies flaring, with uniformity of 
constants. Then we shall apply the Bestvina-Feighn combination theorem in 
its original context to conclude that is (5' -hyperbolic. 

Next we will apply a result of Mosher [41] which says that since is hyper- 
bolic, the path <^o^:7— >Tisa quasigeodesic which is Hausdorff close to a 
Teichmiillcr geodesic, again with uniformity of constants. This will quickly im- 
ply finiteness of the kernel of /. The collection of these Teichmiiller geodesies, 
one for each geodesic 7 in X, will be used to verify the orbit quasiconvexity 
property for the group f{G). 

In what follows, a path I ^ X will often be confused with the composed path 
I — ^ X — ^ T; the context should make the meaning clear. 

Remark The context of the Bestvina-Fcighn combination theorem, and Ger- 
sten's converse, is the following. Consider a finite graph of groups F, with word 
hyperbolic vertex and edge groups, such that each edge-to-vertex group injec- 
tion is a quasi-isometric embedding. Associated to this is the Bass-Serre tree 
T, and a graph of spaces X T on which ttiF acts properly discontinuously 
and cocompactly. For each path in the tree T , Bestvina-Feighn define a flaring 
condition on the portion of X lying over that path. The combination theorem 
combined with Gersten's converse says that flaring is satisfied uniformly over 
all paths in the Bass-Serre tree if and only if ttiF is word hyperbolic. When G 
is a free group mapped to MCG then the extension 1 ttiS ^ Tq ^ G ^ 1 
fits into this context, because Tq is the fundamental group of a graph of groups 
with edge and vertex groups isomorphic to ttiS , and with isomorphic edge-to- 
vertex injections, where the underlying graph is a rose with fundamental group 
G. This was the technique used in [40] to construct examples where F^ is 
word hyperbolic. When G is not free then this doesn't work, motivating our 
"higher-dimensional" version of Gersten's result. 

5.1 Flciring 

Motivated by the statement of the Bestvina-Feighn combination theorem, we 
make the following definitions. 

Consider a sequence of positive real numbers (rj)j^j, indexed by a subinterval 
J of Z. 

Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



138 



Benson Farb and Lee Mosher 



The L-lipschitz condition says that r^/r^ < lI' ■'I for ah i,j, or equivalently 



Given k > 1, an integer n > 1, and ^4 > 0, we say that (rj) satisfies the 
(k, n, A) -flaring property if, whenever the three integers j — n, j , j + n are ah 
in J, we have: 



The number A is called the flaring threshold. Having a positive flaring threshold 
A allows the sequence to stay bounded by A on arbitrarily long intervals. 
However, at any place where the sequence has a value larger than A , exponential 
growth kicks in inexorably, in either the positive or the negative direction. 

Consider a piecewise affine, cobounded, lipschitz path 7 : / ^ T and the corre- 
sponding hyperbolic plane bundle ^ I. A X-quasivertical path in 7i.y is a 
A-lipschitz path a: I' —>■ H^y, defined on a subinterval I' C I , which is a section 
of the projection map Hj I. For example, a A-quasivertical path is a con- 
nection path if and only if it is 1-quasivertical. Note that each A-quasivertical 
path is a (A, 0)-quasigeodesic. 

The vertical flaring property for the fibration TCy 7 says that there exists 
K > 1, an integer n > 1, and a function A{X): [l,oo) (0, 00), such that if 
a,/3: / — Hj are two A-quasivertical paths with the same domain I' , then 
setting J = 7' n Z the sequence 



satisfies the K,n,A{X) flaring property, where dj is the distance function on 
TCj , j £ J . One can check that if the vertical flaring property holds for some 
function A(X) then it holds for a function which grows linearly. 

Lemma 5.2 (Hyperbolicity of Hx implies vertical flaring of Hj) 

With notation as above, for every 5 there exists k, n, A{X) such that if Ttx 
is 5~hypcrboMc then for each bi-infinite geodesic 7 in X the Hbration Hj — >■ / 
satisfies k, n, A{X) vertical flaring. 

The intuition behind the proof is that the flaring property is exactly analogous 
to the geodesic divergence property in hyperbolic groups, described by Cannon 
in [12]. The geodesic divergence property says that in a (5 -hyperbolic metric 
space, if p is a base point and if a, (3 are a pair of geodesic rays based at p, and 
if di is the shortest length of a path between a{i) and (5{i) that stays outside 
of the ball of radius i centered on p, then the sequence di satisfies a flaring 
property with constants independent of a,/?. In our context, a and (5 will no 



fi/fj < L whenever \i — j\ = 1. 





Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



Convex cocompact subgroups of mapping class groups 



139 



longer have one endpoint in common. But the quasivertical property together 
with the metric fibration property give us just what we need to adapt Cannon's 
proof of geodesic divergence given in [12], substituting the geodesic triangles in 
Cannon's proof with geodesic rectangles. 

Proof We use d for the metric on Hx ■ 

First observe that any A -quasivertical path a in H^y is a (A, 0)-quasigeodesic 
in Hx ) in feet 

|s - i| < d{a{s),a{t)) < A |s - i| 

The upper bound is just the fact that a is A-lipschitz, and the lower bound 
follows from the metric fibration property for Hx X , together with the fact 
that 7 is a geodesic in X . 

Consider then a pair of A-quasivertical paths a,/3: /' Hj defined on a 
subinterval I' C I , and let J = I' Ci Z = We assume that 

j+ — j- is even and let jo = € J. For each j G J we have a fiber Hj 

isometric to H^, with metric denoted dj. We must prove that the sequence 
^0 ~ satisfies K,n,A flaring, with K,n independent of A and 

with K,n,A independent of a, /?, and 7. 

For j,k E J let hjk ■ Hj —>■ Hk be the connection map, a K\^~''\ bilipschitz 
map. 

For each j e J we have an Hj geodesic pj : [0, Dj] — Hj with endpoints a{j) , 

Claim 5.3 There is a family of quasivertical paths v described as follows: 

• For each j £ J and each t G [0, Dj] the family contains a unique qua- 
sivertical path Vjt'. — > Hry that passes through the point Pj{t). 
If we fix j E J, we thus obtain a parameterization of the family Vjt by 
points t e [0,Dj]. 

• The ordering of the family Vjt induced by the order on t e [0, Dj] is 

independent of j . The first path Vjo in the family is identified with a , 
and the last path vjOj is identified with [3. 

• Each Vjt is X' -quasivertical, where X' depends only on X and K . 
When j is assumed fixed, we write vt for the path Vjt ■ 

Qeometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



140 



Benson Farb and Lee Mosher 



Proof of claim Given G J, consider the following {K, 0)-quasigeodesic 

in Hj'. 

Pj = hj^ij o pj_i : [0, Dj^i] -> Tij 

Since connection paths are geodesies, and since a,P are A-quasivertical, it fol- 
lows that the endpoint p'j{0) = hj-ij{a(j — 1)) and the corresponding endpoint 
Pj{0) = a{j) have distance in Hx at most A-|- 1, and similarly for the opposite 
endpoints p'-{Dj^i) = hj^ij{(3{j — 1)) and Pj{Dj) = (3{j). Each endpoint of p'^ 
and the corresponding endpoint of pj therefore have distance in Tij bounded by 
a constant depending only on A; this follows from Fact 5.1. Since the spaces Hj 
are all isometric to , it follows that the Hausdorff distance between pj and 
p'j in Tij is bounded by a constant depending only on K , A, which implies in 
turn that there is a quasi-isometric reparameterization rj : [0, -Dj-i] [0, Dj] 
such that 

dj{p'j{t),Pj{rj{t)))<D 

where the constant D and the quasi-isometry constants for Vj depend only on 
K, A. By possibly increasing the quasi-isometry constants we may assume fur- 
thermore that rj is an orientation preserving homeomorphism. It follows that 
we may connect the point pj-i{t) to the point Pj{rj{t)) by a A'-quasivertical 
path defined over the interval [j — C H, where A' depends only on K, A; 
when t = we may choose the path to be a | [j — 1, j] , and when t = -Dj-i we 
may choose the path /3 | [j — By piecing together these paths as j varies 
over J, we obtain the required family of paths v. □ 

We use (5-hyperbolicity of TCx in the following manner. First, for any geodesic 
rectangle a * b * c * d in TCx it follows that any point on a is within distance 
26 of 6 U c U d. Second, for any (A',0) quasigeodesic in Hx, the Hausdorff 
distance to any geodesic with the same endpoints is bounded by a constant Si 
depending only on 5, X' . For any rectangle of the form v*a*w*a' where a, a' 
are geodesies and v,w are (A',0) quasigeodesics, it follows that any point on v 
is within distance 82 = 25 + 25i of aU wU a' . 

By Fact 5.1 there exists a constant ^3 such that: 

for all j & J,x,y & Hj, if d{x, y) < (1 + X')S2 then dj{x, y) < 63 

We are now ready to define the flaring parameters K,n,A. Let 

3 

n=[S2 + 353\ + 1 
A = 63 

Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



Convex cocompact subgroups of mapping class groups 



141 



where [x\ is the greatest integer < x . Assuming as we may that j± = jo ±n 
(and so the Hausdorff distance between Hj^ and Hj^ in Hx equals n), we 
must prove: 

• if Djg > A then max{Dj_ , > kDj^. 

Case 1 m8iX.{Dj_,Dj_^} < 663 It follows that there is a rectangle in Hx of 
the form a*a- * fd * a+ where a± is a geodesic in Tlx with the same endpoints 
as pj_j_, and where a± has length < 653. Consider now the point a{jo), whose 
distance from some point z e a- U (3 U a-^- is at most 62- li z e a- then it 
follows that 

6(^3 

d{a{jo),'Hj^) <S2 + — <n, 

a contradiction. We reach a similar contradiction if 2; G (J+. Therefore z e (3. 

It follows that z = P{s) G Tis for some s such that \s — jo\ < S2, and so by 
following along /3 a length at most X'62 we reach the point /3(jo) • This shows 
that d{a{jo), P{jo)) < (1 + X')S2, and so Dj^^ < 63, that is, Dj^ < A. 

Case 2 max{Dj , Dj^} > 35^ In the family v, we claim that there is a 
discrete subfamily a = vtQ,vtj^, . . . , vtj^ = /?, with to < ti < ■ ■ ■ < tx , such that 
the following property is satisfied: for each k = 1,... ,K, letting 

then we have 

max{Afc_,Afc+} G [3(53,653]. 

By assumption of Case 2, the subfamily {a = vto, P = vt^^} has the property 
max{Ajt_, Ajt+} = msLX.{Dj_, Dj_^} > 3Ss (for k = I). Suppose by induction 
that we have a subfamily a = vtQ,vt-i^, . . . , vtj^ = P , with to < ti < ■ ■ ■ < tx , 
such that max{A^._, A^^} > 36^ for all k, but suppose that max{A^._, A^.+} > 
6(^3 for some k. If, say, Ay^^ > 6^3, then we subdivide the geodesic segment 
Pj+b*fe-i(i+)'^*fe(i+)] ^^^f ^ point t G pj_^_, yielding two subsegments of 
length > 3Ss , and we add the path Vj_^_t to our subfamily; similarly, if Aj._ > 6^3 
then we subdivide the interval pj_ [vti^_i (j_), (i-)] i^i ^sili. This process must 
eventually stop, because 




thereby proving the claim. 



Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



142 



Benson Farb and Lee Mosher 



Prom the exact same argument as in Case 1, using the fact that 

max{Afe_, Afe+} < 6^3, 

it now follows that 

Afeo = (%_iOo),%Oo)) < S3 

for all A; = 1,... 
We therefore have: 

K 



k=l 

K K 

Dj_ + Dj^ = ^ Afe_ + Afe+ > max{Afc_, Ak+} 

k=l k=l 

>K-3S3 
3 

max{i:)j_,Dj_^} > ^K63 
- 2 JO 

This completes the proof of Lemma 5.2. 



Remark The argument given in Lemma 5.2, while stated explicitly only for 
groups of the form Tq, generalizes to a much broader context. Graphs of 
groups, the context for the Bestvina-Feighn combination theorem [6] and Ger- 
sten's converse [18], have been generalized to triangles of groups by Gersten 
and Stallings [46], and to general complexes of groups by Haefliger [20]. The 
arguments of Lemma 5.2 will also apply to show that a developable complex of 
groups with word hyperbolic fundamental group satisfies a flaring property over 
any geodesic in the universal covering complex. A converse would also be nice, 
giving a higher dimensional generalization of the Bestvina-Feighn combination 
theorem, but we do not know how to prove such a converse, nor do we have 
any examples to which it might apply (see Question 1.7 in the introduction). 

Next we have: 

Lemma 5.4 (Flaring implies hyperbolic) For each bounded subset B <Z M, 
each p> I, and each set of flaring data k > 1, n > 1, A{X), there exists S >0 
such that the following holds. If 'j: I ^ T is a B -coboundcd, p-lipschitz, 
piecewise afEne path defined on a subinterval / C R, and if the metric Hbration 
H'y — > / satisfies K,n,A{X) vertical flaring, then H.^ is 5 -hyperbolic. 



Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



Convex cocompact subgroups of mapping class groups 



143 



Proof This is basically an immediate application of the Bestvina-Feighn com- 
bination theorem [6]. To be formally correct, some remarks are needed to trans- 
late from our present geometric setting, of a hyperbolic plane bundle I , 
to the combinatorial setting of [6], and to justify that our vertical flaring prop- 
erty for H-y corresponds to the "hallways flare condition" of [6] . 

We may assume that the endpoints of the interval /, if any, are integers. 

The first observation is that there is a 7ri(S')-equivariant triangulation r of H-y 
with the following properties: 

Graph of spaces 

• For each n G J = I HZ there is a 2-dimensional subcomplex r„ 
which is a triangulation of the hyperbolic plane Hn ■ 

• Each 1-cell of r is either horizontal (a 1-cell of some r„ ) , or vertical 
(connecting a vertex of some r„ to a vertex of some r„+i); 

• each 2-cell of r is either horizontal (a 2-cell of some Tn), or vertical 
(meaning that the boundary contains exactly two vertical 1-cells) . 

Bounded combinatorics There is an upper bound depending only on B, p 
for the valence of each 0-cell and the number of sides of each 2-cell. 

Quasi-isometry The inclusion of the 1-skeleton of r into is a quasi- 
isometry with constants depending only on B and p . 

To see why r exists as described, consider the marked hyperbolic surface bundle 
^ I . For each hyperbolic surface Sn, n & J , there is a geodesic triangulation 
Tn of Sn with One vertex, whose edges have length bounded only in terms of B . 
It follows that there are constants K' , C' depending only on B , such that if r„ 
is the lifted triangulation in , then the inclusion of the 1-skeleton of Tn into 
Tin is a {K',C') quasi-isometry. Then, regarding {JneJ^^>- '^^ triangulation 
of U neJ'^n, we can extend to a cell-decomposition r of which is a graph 
of spaces of bounded combinatorics. The existence of r uses the fact that each 
connection map /in,n+i • ^n+i is iiT-bilipschitz, so by moving each vertex 

of r„ along a connection path into 5^+1 and them moving a finite distance to 
a vertex of r„+i we obtain a {K" , C") -quasi-isometry h'^^n+i '■ —>■ T^n+i , with 
{K", C") depending only on K , and from this we easily construct r so that its 
lift r has the desired properties. 

The second observation is that vertical flaring in is equivalent to the "hall- 
way flare condition" of [6] for r , and this equivalence is uniform with respect to 
the parameters in each property. To see why, note that quasivertical paths in 
Ti^ correspond to thin paths in r as defined implicitly in [6] Section 2: an edge 

Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



144 



Benson Farb and Lee Mosher 



path a: I' = [m, n] — ^ r is p-thin if the restriction of a to each subinterval 
[i, i + 1] Hcs in T[j and is a concatenation of at most p edges. Under the 
quasi-isometry r H.^ and its coarse inverse H.^ — > r, A-quasivertical paths 
in correspond to p-thin paths with a uniform relation between A and p. 

In order to complete the translation from the geometric setting to the combi- 
natorial setting, while the results of [6] are stated only when r is the universal 
cover of a finite graph of spaces, nevertheless, the proofs hold as stated for 
any graph of spaces with uniformly bounded combinatorics: all the steps in 
the proof extend to such graphs of spaces, regardless of the presence of a deck 
transformation group with compact quotient. The conclusion of the combina- 
tion theorem is the 6' hyperbolicity of the 1-skeleton of r , with 5' depending 
only on the flaring constants for r, which depend in tTirn only on ;B, p, and the 
flaring constants for Ti^. It follows that Ti^ is 6 hyperbolic with the correct 
dependency for the constant 5. □ 



5.2 Proof of Theorem 1.2 



We adopt the notation from the beginning of Section 5: a homomorphism 
/: G — ^ MCG determining the group Fc, a Cayley graph X for G, and a 

piecewise affine /-equivariant map $ : X ^ T which is 6-cobounded and p- 
lipschitz. We have already proved, in Section 1.2, that word hyperbolicity of 
Tg implies finiteness of the kernel of / . 

Letting be the 0-skeleton, on which G acts transitiveily, it follows that 
$(X°) is an orbit of f{G) in T . We prove that /(G) is convex cocompact by 
proving that satisfies orbit quasiconvexity. 

Choose two points x, y G X^ . Let 7 : 7 X be a geodesic segment connecting 
X to y . Consider the composed path I — > X — > T , which by abuse of notation 
we shall also denote 7. There is a corresponding hyperbolic plane bundle 
I . Recall that 7 is ;B-cobounded and p-lipschitz in T, with B, p independent 
of 7. Now apply Lemmas 5.2 and 5.4, to conclude that Hj is 5-hyperbolic, 
with S independent of 7. 

Now we quote the following result to obtain a Teichmiiller geodesic: 

Theorem 5.5 [41] For every bounded set B C Ai , p > 1, and 6 > 0, there 
exists A > 1, e > 0, and A such that the following hold. If j: I ^ T is 
B-cobounded and p-lipschitz, and if Ti.^ is 6 -hyperbolic, then 7 is a (A, e)- 
quasigeodesic, and there exists a Teichmiiller geodesic g, sharing any endpoints 
of 7 , such that 7 and g have Hausdorff distance at most A . □ 



Qeometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



Convex cocompact subgroups of mapping class groups 



145 



Letting g be the Teichmiiller geodesic connecting x to y provided by the theo- 
rem, it fohows that g is contained in the A + p neighborhood of ^{X^). Since 
x,y G are arbitrary, this proves orbit quasiconvexity, and so f{G) is 

convex cocompact. 

6 Schottky groups 

Definition A Schottky subgroup of MCG is a free, convex cocompact sub- 
group. 

The hmit set A C ^M.T of a Schottky subgroup is therefore a Cantor set, and 
every nontrivial element is pseudo-Anosov. 

In this section we prove Theorem 1.3, that a surfacc-by-frcc group is word 
hyperbolic if and only if the free group is Schottky. One direction is already 
proved by Theorem 1.2, and so we need only prove that when F C MCG is a 
Schottky subgroup then Vp tti{S) xi F is word hyperbolic. 

Continuing with earlier notation, let A C PMJ^ be the limit set of F with 
weak hull WH^. Let t be a Cayley graph for the group F, a tree on which 

F acts properly discontinuously with quotient a rose. Let t ^ T be an 
F-equivariant map, affine on each edge, and p-lipschitz for some p > 1. There 
is a bounded subset B C M so that both WHa and $(t) are H-cobounded. 
We have a hyperbolic plane bundle Ht — > t, on which 7ri(5) xi F acts properly 
discontinuously and cocompactly, and we have a piecewise Riemannian metric 
on Til on which 7ri(S') xi F acts by isometrics. 

We must prove that Tit is 5 -hyperbolic. By the Bestvina-Feighn combina- 
tion theorem [6], it is enough to show that for each bi-infinite geodesic 7 in 
t, the bundle Hj — R satisfies vertical flaring, with flaring data K,n,A{X) 
independent of the choice of 7 (see the proof of Lemma 5.4 for translating the 
combinatorial setting of [6] to our present geometric setting). 

Since F is convex cocompact, there is a geodesic line g in WHa which has 
finite Hausdorff distance from ^>(7). Let 7ig"^^ be the singular SOLV-space 
thereby obtained. By Proposition 4.2, the closest point map ^ ^ g lifts to a 
quasi- isometry T-i-./ 7i^°^^ , with quasi-isometry constants independent of 7, 
depending only on B and p. It therefore suffices to check the flaring condition 
in 7Y^°^^, with flaring data independent of anything. 

2 

Take any k with 1 < k < i^^-, say k = 2.6. Let n = 2. We show that for 
any A there is an A such that any two A quasivertical lines in "W^^^ satisfy 



Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



146 



Benson Farb and Lee Mosher 



the (k, 2, ^) -flaring condition. For this argument we do not need that g is 
cobounded (although in that case may not have bounded geometry). 

Let a, a' : [—2, 2] Ti.g°^^ be two A quasivertical Hnes, lying over a length 
4 subsegment [r — 2, r + 2] of (7 ~ R. Let Xi,yi be the points where a, a' 
respectively intersect 7ir+i ■ Let ^0 = xq and let be obtained by flowing xq 
vertically into Hr+i] define rjo = yo and rji similarly. Note that for i G [—2,2] 
the points and Xi are connected in Hg°^^ by a path which goes along a from 
Ci to ^0 travelling a distance at most 2A, and then vertically from ,^0 = to 
Xi; the vertical projection of this path into Hi has length at most 2e^A, and so 
di{xi,^i) < 2e^A. Similarly, di{yi,r]i) <2e'^X. 

We turn for the moment to showing that the sequence 

dr+i{Ci,Vi), ^ = -2,-1,0,1,2 

2 

satisfies the (^^, 2, 0) -flaring condition. In the singular Euclidean surface 
Hr+i, let £i be the geodesic from ^i to rji, so the above sequence becomes: 

len(£i), i = -2,-1,0,1,2 

The singular Euclidean geodesic £0 is a concatenation of subsegments of con- 
stant slope, two consecutive subsegments meeting at a singularity. If at least 
half of io has slope of absolute value > 1 then: 

^len(4)-^-e2<len(£2) 

If at least half of £0 has slope of absolute value < 1 , we get a similar inequality 
but with len(£_2) on the right hand side. We have therefore shown: 

e2 



max{dr+2{^2,m),dr-2{^-2,r]-2)} > -^-j=doi^Q,r]o) 



It follows that 



e2 



max{dr+2ix2,y2),dr-2ix-2,y-2)} > ■^-y=doixo,yo) -2e A 

> Kdo(xo,yo) 

where the last inequality holds as long as: 

"o(a;o, yo) > ^ = 

2V2 "'^ 

This ends the proof that 7ri(5) xi F is word hyperbolic when F is Schottky. 



Qeometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



Convex cocompact subgroups of mapping class groups 



147 



7 Extending the theory to orbifolds 

In this section we sketch how the theory can be extended to 2-dimensional 
orbifolds. We shall consider only those compact orbifolds whose underlying 
2-mamfold is closed, and whose orbifold locus therefore consists only of cone 
points, what we shall call a cone orbifold. The reason for this restriction is that 
if the underlying 2-manifold has nonempty boundary then the orbifold does not 
support any pseudo-Anosov homeomorphisms, since the isotopy classes of the 
boundary curves must be permuted.^ 

As it turns out, the mapping class group and Teichmiiller space of a cone orbifold 
depend not on the actual orders of the different cone points, but only on the 
partition of the set of cone points into subsets of constant order. For example, 
a spherical orbifold with one Z/2 cone point and three Z/4 cone points has the 
same mapping class group and Teichmiiller space as a spherical orbifold with 
three Z/42 cone points and one Z/1000 cone point. The relevant structures can 
therefore be described more directly and economically in the following manner. 

Let 5 be a closed surface, not necessarily orientable. Let P = {Pj}jg7 be 
a finite, pairwise disjoint collection of finite, nonempty subsets of S. Let 
Homeo(S', P) be the group of homeomorphisms of S which leave invariant 
each of the sets Pi, i e I. Let Homeoo(S', P) be the component of the iden- 
tity of Homeo(<S', P) with respect to the compact open topology; equivalently, 
Homeoo(S', P) consists of all elements of Homeo(S', P) which are isotopic to 
the identity through elements of Homeo(S', P) . The mapping class group is 
MCG{S,P) = Homeo(5,P)/Homeoo(5,P). 

To define the Teichmiiller space, first we must widen the concept of a conformal 
structure so that it applies to non-orientable surfaces, and we do this by allowing 
overlap maps which arc anticonformal as well as conformal. The Teichmiiller 
space T{S, P) is then defined to be the set of conformal structures on S modulo 
the action of Homeoo(>S', P) . Quadratic differentials and measured foliations on 
(S*, P) are defined using the usual local models at points oi S — UP, but at a 
point of P a quadratic differential can have the local model z'^^'^dz^ for any 
n > 1; the horizontal measured foliation of z'^^'^dz'^ is the local model for 
an n-pronged singularity of a measured foliation. Thus, at a point of UP a 
measured foliation can have any number of prongs > 1 , whereas a singularity 
in S — UP must have > 3 prongs as usual. With these definitions, Teichmiiller 
maps are defined as usual, making T{S, P) into a proper geodesic metric space 

''While the monograph [16] develops a kind of pseudo-Anosov theory on a bounded 
surface, it is not appropriate for our present purposes. 

Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



148 



Benson Farb and Lee Mosher 



on which MCG{S, P) acts properly discontinuously, but not cocompactly; also, 
pseudo-Anosov homeomorphisms of {S, P) are defined as usual. 

We shall assume that {S, P) actually supports a pseudo-Anosov homeomor- 
phism which has an n-pronged singularity with n =^ 2. This rules out a small 
number of special cases, as follows. When 5 is a sphere, UP must have at least 
four points. When S is a projective plane, UP must have at least two points. 
When 5 is a torus or Klein bottle, UP must have at least one point. When S 
is the surface of Euler characteristic — 1 , namely the connected sum of a torus 
and a projective plane, the curve along which the torus and the projective plane 
are glued is actually a characteristic curve for S, meaning that it is preserved 
up to isotopy by any mapping class; therefore, in order for (S, P) to support a 
pseudo-Anosov homeomorphism, UP must have at least one point. 

Now we apply these concepts to 2-dimensional cone orbifolds. Suppose O is a 
cone orbifold with underlying surface S . Let P„ be the set of Z/n cone points, 
and let P = {Pn}n>2- Then we may define the mapping class group MCG{0) 
to be MCG(S',P), and the Teichmiiller space T{0) to be 7(5", P). Note that 
with the restrictions above on the type of (S", P) , the orbifold O has negative 
Euler characteristic. It follows that if O — > O is the orbifold universal covering 
map, then for any conformal structure on O the lifted conformal structure is 
isomorphic to the Riemann disc. It follows that any conformal structure on 
O can be TmiqTicly uniformized to produce a hyperbolic structure, with a cone 
angle of 27r/n at each Z/n cone point. 

At this stage we must confront the fact that the universal extension for surface 
groups, as formulated in Section 1.2, must be reformulated before it can be 
applied to orbifolds. The Dehn-Nielsen-Baer-Epstein theorem is still true, as 
long as one uses orbifold fundamental groups: if p is a generic point of the 
cone orbifold O, and if ■Ki[0,p) is the orbifold fundamental group, then we 
have MCG{0) k, 0\xt{'Ki{0,p)). However, the "once-punctured" mapping 
class group MCG{0,p) is not isomorphic to Aut(7ri(0,p)) . For example, take 
a based simple loop i which bounds a disc whose interior contains a single Z/n 
cone point. In the group 7ri{0,p) , the loop i represents an element of order n, 
and under the usual injection 7ri{0,p) ^ Aut(7ri(0,p)) we obtain an element 
of order n. However, the element of MCG{0,p) obtained by pushing p around 
£ has infinite order in MCG{0,p). 

To repair this we need another group to take over the role of MCG{0,p). 

Let Homeo(C') denote the group of homeomorphisms of O which are lifts of 
homeomorphisms of O, that is, a homeomorphism f : O ^ O is in the group 
Homeo(O) if and only if there exists a homeomorphism f : O ^ O such that 



Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



Convex cocompact subgroups of mapping class groups 



149 



the following diagram commutes: 



O 



f 



O 



With respect to the compact open topology, Homeo(O) becomes a topological 
group. Let Homeoo(C) be the component of the identity Homeo(O) . Equiv- 
alently, Homeoo(O) is the subgroup of elements of Homeo(O) isotopic to the 
identity through elements of Homeo(C) ; alternatively it is the subgroup of 
Homeo(O) acting trivially on the circle at infinity of O ^ . Define 

MCG{0) = Hotmo(C>)/Ho^oo(C'). 

Note that universal covering map O ^ O induces a surjective homomorphism 
MCG{0) MCG{0), and the kernel is the group of deck transformations, 
isomorphic to 7Ti{0). We now have a natural isomorphism of short exact se- 
quences 



■7ri(0) ^MCG{0) 



MCG{0) 



-^1 



■7ri(0) 



Aut(7ri(0)) > Out(7ri(0)) 



-^1 



where we have suppressed the generic base point needed to define -KiiO). 

We are now in a position to state that our main results, Theorem 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 
and 1.4, are true with the orbifold O in place of the surface 5, and the proofs 
are unchanged. Although the references that we quote are stated solely in terms 
of surfaces, namely [38] and [32] for Theorem 1.1, [39] for Theorem 1.2, and [40] 
for Theorem 1.4, nevertheless all the proofs in those references work just as well 
for orbifolds instead of surfaces. 



References 

[1] W Abikoff, The real analytic theory of Teichmuller space, volume 820 of Lecture 
Notes in Mathematics, Springer (1980) 

[2] G N Arzhantseva, On quasiconvex subgroups of word hyperbolic groups, Ge- 
ometriae Dedicata 98 (2001) 191-208 



Qeometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



150 



Benson Farb and Lee Mosher 



[3] R Baer, Isotopien von Kurven auf orientierbaren, geschlossenen Fldchen und 
ihr Zusammenhang mit der topologischen Deformation der Fldchen, J. Reine 
Angew. Math. 159 (1928) 101-116 

L Bers, Fiber spaces over Teichmuller spaces, Acta Math. 130 (1973) 89-126 

L Bers, An extremal problem for quasiconformal mappings and a theorem by 

Thurston, Acta Math. 141 (1978) 73 98 

M Bestvina, M Feighn, A combination theorem for negatively curved groups, 
J. Diff. Geom. 35 (1992) 85-101 

J Birman, Braids, links, and mapping class groups, volume 82 of Annals of 
Math. Studies, Princeton University Press (1974) 

J Birman, A Lubotzky, J McCarthy, Abelian and solvable subgroups of the 

mapping class groups, Duke Math. J. 50 (1983) 1107-1120 

N Brady, Branched coverings of cubical complexes and subgroups of hyperbolic 
groups, J. London Math. Soc. (2) 60 (1999) 461-480 

J Brock, B Farb, Curvature and rank of Teichmuller space (2001), preprint, 
arXiv : math . GT/0109045 

R D Canary, Covering theorem,s for hyperbolic 3 manifolds, preprint 

J Cannon, The theory of negatively curved spaces and groups, from: "Er- 
godic theory, symboHc dynamics, and hyperbolic spaces", (C Series T Bedford, 
MKeane, editor), Oxford Univ. Press (1991) 

DBA Epstein, Curves on 2-manifolds and isotopies. Acta Math. 115 (1966) 
83-107 

B Farb, A Lubotzky, Y Minsky, Rank one phenomena for mapping class 
groups, Duke Math. J. 106 (2001) 581-597 

B Farb, L Mosher, The geometry of surface-by-free groups, Geom. Punct. 
Anal. (2002), to appear, preprint, arXiv:math.GR/0008215 

A Fathi, F Laudenbach, V Poenaru, et al., Travaux de Thurston sur les 
surfaces, volume 66-67 of Asterisque, Societe Mathematique de France (1979) 

F Gardiner, H Masur, Extremal length geometry of Teichmuller space. Com- 
plex Variables Theory Appl. 16 (1991) 209-237 

S Gersten, Cohomological lower bounds for isoperimetric functions on groups. 
Topology 37 (1998) 1031-1072 

G Gonzalez-Diez, WJ Harvey, Surface subgroups inside mapping class 

groups. Topology 38 (1999) 57-69 

A Haefliger, Complexes of groups and orbihedra, from: "Group theory from a 
geometrical viewpoint (Trieste, 1990)", World Sci. Publishing, River Edge, NJ 
(1991) 504-540 

J Hubbard, H Maisur, Quadratic differentials and foliations. Acta Math. 142 
(1979) 221-274 



Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



Convex cocompact subgroups of mapping class groups 



151 



[22] Y Imayoshi, M Taniguchi, An introduction to Teichmiiller spaces, Springer 
(1992) 

[23] N V Ivanov, Subgroups of TeichmiiUer modular groups, volume 115 of Trans- 
lations of Mathematical Monographs, Amer. Math. Soc. (1992) 

[24] N V Ivanov, Automorphisms of complexes of curves and Teichmiiller spaces, 
from: "Progress in knot theory and related topics", Travaux en Cours 56, Her- 
mann, Paris (1997) 113 120 

[25] M Kapovich, On normal subgroups in the fundamental groups of complex sur- 
faces (1998), preprint, arXiv : math . GT/9808085 

[26] S Kerckhoff, The asymptotic geometry of Teichmiiller space, Topology 19 
(1980) 23-41 

[27] B Maskit, Comparison of hyperbolic and extremal lengths, Ann. Acad. Sci. 
Fenn. Scries A I Math. 10 (1985) 381-386 

[28] H Masur, Uniquly ergodic quadratic differentials. Comment. Math. Helv. 55 
(1980) 255-266 

[29] H Masur, Interval exchange transformations and measured foliations, Ann. of 
Math. 115 (1982) 169 200 

[30] H Masur, Two boundaries of Teichmiiller space, Duke Math. J. 49 (1982) 183- 
190 

[31] H Masur, Hausdorff dimension of the set of nonergodic foliations of a quadratic 
differential, Duke Math. J. 66 (1992) 387-442 

[32] H Masur, Y Minsky, Geometry of the complex of curves, I. Hyperbolicity, 
Invent. Math. 138 (1999) 103 149 

[33] H Masur, Y Minsky, Unstable quasigeodesics in Teichmiiller space, from: "In 
the tradition of Ahlfors and Bers (Stony Brook, NY, 1998)" , Contemp. Math. 
256, Amer. Math. Soc. (2000) 239-241 

[34] H Masur, M Wolf, TeichmAiller space is not Gromov hyperbolic, Ann. Acad. 
Sci. Fenn. Ser. A I Math. 20 (1995) 259 267 

[35] J McCarthy, A "Tits-alternative" for subgroups of surface mapping class 
groups. Trans. AMS 291 (1985) 582-612 

[36] J McCarthy. A Papadopoulos, Dynamics on Thurston's sphere of projective 

measured, foliations. Comment. Math. Helv. 64 (1989) 133-166 

[37] Y Minsky, On rigidity, limit sets, and end invariants of hyperbolic 3-manifolds, 
Jour. AMS 7 (1994) 539—588 

[38] Y Minsky, Quasi-projections in Teichmiiller space, J. Reine Angew. Math. 473 
(1996) 121-136 

[39] L Mosher, Hyperbolic extensions of groups, J. Pure and Appl. Alg. 110 (1996) 
305-314 



Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002) 



152 



Benson Farb and Lee Mosher 



[40] L Mosher, A hyperbolic-by-hyperbolic hyperbolic group, Proc. AMS 125 (1997) 

3447-3455 

[41] L Mosher, Stable quasigeodesics in Teichmiiller space and ending laminations 
(2001), preprint, arXiv:math.GR/0107035 

[42] D Mumford, A remark on Mahler's compactness theorem, Proc. Amer. Math. 
Sec. 28 (1971) 289-294 

[43] J Nielsen, Untersuchungen zur Topologie der geschlossenen zweiseitigen 
Flachen, Acta Math. 50 (1927) 189-358 

[44] J-P Otal, Le theoreme d'hyperbolisation pour les varietes fibrees de dimension 
3, Asterisque 235, Societe Mathematique de France (1996) 

[45] H Royden, Report on the Teichmiiller metric, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 65 

(1970) 497-499 

[46] J StalHngs, Non-positively curved triangles of groups, from: "Group theory 
from a geometrical viewpoint (Trieste, 1990)", World Sci. Publishing (1991) 

491 503 

[47] K Whittlesey, Normal all pseudo-Anosov subgroups of mapping class groups. 
Geometry and Topology 4 (2000) 293-307 



Geometry & Topology, Volume 6 (2002)