Sha-rigidity of adjoint Chevalley groups of types A_1, A_2, B_2, G_2 over commutative rings

Let X=(x_{ij})\in \mathrm{M}_3(R) commute with x_\alpha(1). Writing out Xx_\alpha(1)=x_\alpha(1)X and comparing entries gives consecutively x_{21}=x_{23}=0, then x_{31}=0, then x_{22}=x_{11}=x_{33}, and finally x_{13}=2x_{32}. Renaming a=x_{11}, b=x_{12}, h=x_{32} yields the claimed form.

Embed R into the product of its localizations S=\prod_{\mathfrak m} R_{\mathfrak m}. It suffices to show that for each maximal ideal \mathfrak m, the image B_{\mathfrak m}\in G(\mathbf A_1,R_{\mathfrak m}) forces h_{\mathfrak m}=d_{\mathfrak m}=0 and a_{\mathfrak m}=1.

Fix \mathfrak m and write R_{\mathfrak m} as a local ring. Using the Gauss decomposition G=TUVU for \mathbf A_1, we may write

with t\in R_{\mathfrak m}^* and \alpha,\beta,\gamma\in R_{\mathfrak m}. Multiplying these factors explicitly gives (compare the (3,1) and (2,3) entries)

If \beta\in R_{\mathfrak m}^*, then \alpha\beta+1=\beta\gamma+1=0, and the resulting matrix has a zero on the diagonal positions (2,2) and (1,1), which is incompatible with the block form of B_{\mathfrak m}. Hence \beta is not a unit, i.e. \beta\in\mathfrak mR_{\mathfrak m}. But then \alpha\beta\in\mathfrak mR_{\mathfrak m}, so \alpha\beta+1\in 1+\mathfrak mR_{\mathfrak m}\subseteq R_{\mathfrak m}^*, and similarly \beta\gamma+1\in R_{\mathfrak m}^*. Therefore the above equalities force \beta=0.

With \beta=0 we have x_{-\alpha}(\beta)=1, hence B_{\mathfrak m}\in TU, and in particular the (2,1)-entry must vanish. Thus ad=0 in R_{\mathfrak m}, and since a\in R^* in the group, we get d=0. Then also B_{\mathfrak m} becomes upper triangular, forcing h=0, and finally comparing the (3,3)-entry gives a=1.

Assume that Y and \varphi(Y) are conjugate over R. Then they remain conjugate over every localization R_{\mathfrak m}, and hence also over the residue field of every such localization. Choose a maximal ideal \mathfrak m for which the residue field has characteristic different from 7. Reducing to that residue field and then passing to an algebraic closure, we may work inside \operatorname{PGL}_3(K) for an algebraically closed field K with \operatorname{char} K\ne 7. In the standard realization,

Since the graph automorphism sends x_\gamma(1) to x_\gamma(-1), it sends w_\gamma(1) to w_\gamma(-1), and therefore \varphi(Y) lifts to

If Y and Y' were conjugate in \operatorname{PGL}_3(K), then there would exist g\in \operatorname{GL}_3(K) and \lambda\in K^* such that gYg^{-1}=\lambda Y'. Comparing determinants gives \lambda^3=1, while comparing traces gives 1=2\lambda, so \lambda=1/2. Hence 2^3=1 in K, i.e. 7=0, a contradiction.

By the computation above, after an inner normalization \varphi fixes every root subgroup X_\alpha pointwise, hence \varphi=\mathrm{id} on E_{\mathrm{ad}}(\mathbf A_2,R). Undoing the normalization yields that the original locally inner endomorphism is inner.

Let \varphi:G_{\mathrm{ad}}(\mathbf A_2,R)\to G_{\mathrm{ad}}(\mathbf A_2,R) be a locally inner endomorphism. By Theorem 4.4, after an inner normalization \varphi is the identity on the elementary subgroup E_{\mathrm{ad}}(\mathbf A_2,R), which is normal in G_{\mathrm{ad}}(\mathbf A_2,R). Take any g\in G_{\mathrm{ad}}(\mathbf A_2,R) and any root element x=x_\alpha(1)\in E_{\mathrm{ad}}(\mathbf A_2,R). Then g\,x\,g^{-1}\in E_{\mathrm{ad}}(\mathbf A_2,R), and hence

Therefore g^{-1}\varphi(g) centralizes E_{\mathrm{ad}}(\mathbf A_2,R). For Chevalley groups of rank at least 2 the centralizer of the elementary subgroup coincides with the center, and in the adjoint group the center is trivial. Hence g^{-1}\varphi(g)=1 and \varphi(g)=g for all g, i.e. \varphi=\mathrm{id}. Undoing the normalization shows that every locally inner endomorphism of G_{\mathrm{ad}}(\mathbf A_2,R) is inner.

Over k_J, commuting with \overline X_4=x_{\alpha+2\beta}(\overline b) forces the Weyl part in the Bruhat decomposition of \overline X_3 to be trivial. Lifting to R_J and using the same short Gauss comparison as in the case \mathbf A_2, all U^--parameters vanish and the torus part must be trivial. We are left with

Substituting into (?) and comparing U^+-coordinates yields b_2=b_1 and b_3=b+\frac{b_1^2-b_1}{2}, while b_4 can be killed by conjugating with a suitable element of C(X_0).

By Theorem 5.4, after an inner normalization a locally inner endomorphism of G_{\mathrm{ad}}(\mathbf B_2,R) acts trivially on E_{\mathrm{ad}}(\mathbf B_2,R). Since \mathbf B_2 has rank 2, the subgroup E_{\mathrm{ad}}(\mathbf B_2,R) is normal in G_{\mathrm{ad}}(\mathbf B_2,R), and the same argument as in the proof of Theorem 4.5 shows that the endomorphism is trivial after normalization. Undoing the normalization yields the claim.

By Theorem 6.1, after an inner normalization a locally inner endomorphism of G_{\mathrm{ad}}(\mathbf G_2,R) acts trivially on E_{\mathrm{ad}}(\mathbf G_2,R). Since \mathbf G_2 has rank 2, the elementary subgroup is normal in the full adjoint group, and the same centralizer argument as in the proof of Theorem 4.5 shows that the normalized endomorphism is the identity. Undoing the normalization yields the claim.