On ultraproduct approximations and property (T) factors

If M is a property (T) factor and \theta: M^{\mathcal U} \to (L\mathbb F_n)^{\mathcal V} were an isomorphism, then as M is full we have \theta(M)' \cap (L\mathbb F_n)^{\mathcal V} = \mathbb C and so the hypotheses of Theorem 1.3 are satisfied. There must then exist finite-dimensional subfactors A_\iota \subset L\mathbb F_n so that \theta(M) \subset \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal V} A_\iota \subset (L\mathbb F_n)^{\mathcal V}. But then \theta(M)' \cap (L\mathbb F_n)^{\mathcal V} would contain the non-separable subfactor \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal V} (A_\iota' \cap L\mathbb F_n), giving a contradiction.

This follows from Proposition 7.8 and Theorem 1.3.

Suppose first that M is an enforceable II_1 factor, then M is McDuff and has the Jung property. Let \mathcal U be a countably incomplete ultrafilter and let p \in \mathcal P(M' \cap M^{\mathcal U}) be a projection with trace 1/2. Take u \in \mathcal U(M^{\mathcal U}) so that pu = up^\perp. Since M is McDuff, there exists an isomorphism \theta: p M^{\mathcal U} p \to M^{\mathcal U}. By the Jung property there exists v \in \mathcal U(M^{\mathcal U}) so that for w \in \mathcal U(M) we have \theta(p w ) = v \theta( u w p^\perp u^* ) v^*, and hence p w \theta^{-1}(v) u w^* = \theta^{-1}(v) u p^\perp for all w \in \mathcal U(M). Since E_{M' \cap M^{\mathcal U}}( \theta^{-1}(v) u) is in the strong closure of convex combinations of the form w \theta^{-1}(v) u w^* with w \in \mathcal U(M), we then see that p E_{M' \cap M^{\mathcal U}}( \theta^{-1}(v) u) = \theta^{-1}(v) u p^\perp, from which we deduce E_{M' \cap M^{\mathcal U}}( u^* \theta^{-1}(v^*) ) p E_{M' \cap M^{\mathcal U}}( \theta^{-1}(v) u) = p^\perp, which shows that p \sim p^\perp in M' \cap M^{\mathcal U}. Hence, we see that \mathcal Z( M' \cap M^{\mathcal U} ) cannot contain a projection of trace 1/2 and so cannot be diffuse, which forces \mathcal Z( M' \cap M^{\mathcal U} ) = \mathbb C. Hence, M is super McDuff and thus the property of being super McDuff is enforceable.

If being super McDuff is enforceable, then some finitely generic factor is super McDuff. Thus, to finish the proof we may show that every super McDuff finitely generic factor is enforceable. Finitely generic factors are locally universal and have the generalized Jung property [Go21]. From [AtGoKE22, Proposition 6.3.5], it then follows that if M is finitely generic and super McDuff, then M has the Jung property. Since M is also locally universal it then follows from the previous corollary that M is an enforceable factor.

If \xi \in \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} \mathcal H_\iota and \eta \in \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} \mathcal K_\iota are left-right-bounded, then we may choose representations \xi = (\xi_\iota)^{\mathcal U} and \eta = (\eta_\iota)^{\mathcal U} where each of these families is uniformly left-right-bounded. Thus, the family (\xi_\iota \otimes_{N_\iota} \eta_\iota )^{\mathcal U} is also uniformly left-right-bounded and so defines a vector in \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} \mathcal H_\iota \, \overline{\otimes}_{N_\iota}\, \mathcal K_\iota.

Using (?) we see that the association \xi \otimes_{\prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} N_\iota} \eta \mapsto (\xi_\iota \otimes_{N_\iota} \eta_\iota )^{\mathcal U} \in \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} \mathcal H_\iota \, \overline{\otimes}_{N_\iota}\, \mathcal K_\iota gives a well-defined isometric \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} M_\iota-\prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} N_\iota bimodular map on the dense span of vectors of this type. Hence, extends to a canonical embedding as stated above.

We let \pi_\iota: M_\iota \otimes_{\rm bin} N_\iota^{\rm op} \to \mathbb B(\mathcal H_\iota) and \rho_\iota: M_\iota \otimes_{\rm bin} N_\iota^{\rm op} \to \mathbb B(\mathcal K_\iota) denote the associated representations. We also denote the associated representations of the ultraproducts by

and

respectively.

If we let A \subset \ell^\infty(M_\iota \otimes_{\rm bin} N_\iota^{\rm op}) denote the C^*-algebra generated by \ell^\infty(M_\iota) and \ell^\infty(N_\iota^{\rm op}), then A naturally acts on \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} \mathcal K_\iota, and if we denote by q: A \to \mathbb B( \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} \mathcal K_\iota) the corresponding representation, then we see that the image of q is \rho^{\mathcal U}\left( \left(\prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} M_\iota \right) \otimes_{\rm bin} \left(\prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} N_\iota \right)^{\rm op} \right). Thus, if z \in (\prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} M_\iota) \otimes_{\rm bin} (\prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} N_\iota)^{\rm op}, then there exist z_\iota \in M_\iota \otimes_{\rm bin} N_\iota^{\rm op} with \| z_\iota \| \leq \| \rho^{\mathcal U}(z) \| so that (z_\iota)_\iota \in A with q( (z_\iota)_\iota) = \rho^{\mathcal U}(z).

Fix \xi \in \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} \mathcal H_\iota with \| \xi \| \leq 1 and take \xi_\iota \in \mathcal H_\iota with \| \xi_\iota \| \leq 1 so that \xi = (\xi_\iota)^{\mathcal U}. We then have

Hence \pi^{\mathcal U} \prec \rho^{\mathcal U}.

This follows from [Ha85] by noticing that the proofs in [Ha85] give quantitative estimates. Indeed, by the proofs Lemma 3.4 and Proposition 3.5 in [Ha85] if \varepsilon > 0 is fixed, and n \in \mathbb N, then if we take \delta, \eta > 0 such that (2\eta + 4 \eta^{1/2} )^{1/2} + \eta + 2 \eta^{1/2} \leq \delta and if u_1, \ldots, u_n \in \mathcal U(M) are such that there exist \phi: M \to \mathbb M_p(\mathbb C), and \psi: \mathbb M_p(\mathbb C) \to M are u.c.p. with \| \psi \circ \phi(u_k) - u_k \|_2 < \delta for 1 \leq k \leq n, then there exists q \in \mathbb N and u.c.p. maps \phi': M \to \mathbb M_q(\mathbb C) and \psi': \mathbb M_q(\mathbb C) \to M with \tau \circ \psi' = \operatorname{tr}_q and \operatorname{tr}_q \circ \phi' = \tau such that \| \psi' \circ \phi'(u_k) - u_k \|_2 < \delta for 1 \leq k \leq n. The proof of Proposition 3.5 in [Ha85] then shows that there exist unitaries v_1, \ldots, v_n in a finite-dimensional von Neumann subalgebra B \subset M so that (u_1, \ldots, u_n) and (v_1, \ldots, v_n) are \delta-related in the terminology of [Ha85]. However, by Theorem 4.2 in [Ha85], there exists a universal \delta = \delta(n, \varepsilon), which is independent of the factor M, so that if these n-tuples are \delta-related, then there is a unitary w \in \mathcal U(M) so that \| w u_k - v_k w \|_2 < \varepsilon for 1 \leq k \leq n. Hence, \| u_k - \mathbb E_{w^* B w}(u_k) \|_2 < \varepsilon for 1 \leq k \leq n.

If R_\iota \subset M_\iota are hyperfinite, then as R_\iota-M_\iota bimodules we have L^2 M_\iota \prec L^2 M_\iota \, \overline{\otimes}\, L^2 M_\iota and hence by Proposition 3.3, we have weak containment of normal Hilbert (\prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} R_\iota)-(\prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} M_\iota) bimodules L^2 (\prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} M_\iota ) = \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} (L^2M_\iota) \prec \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} (L^2 M_\iota \, \overline{\otimes}\, L^2 M_\iota). Thus if (?) holds, then restricting to a separable von Neumann subalgebra M_0 \subset M we see that (?) holds for M_0. But weak containment is a local property, and since M_0 \subset M was an arbitrary separable von Neumann subalgebra we have that (?) holds also for M. The implication (?) \implies (?) is trivial.

Our proof of (?) \implies (?) follows the proof of Theorem 2.2 from [AD95]. Suppose we have weak containment of M-M bimodules L^2 M \prec \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} (L^2 M_\iota \, \overline{\otimes}\, L^2 M_\iota). Then there exists a net \alpha_k: M \to M of completely positive maps, each of which is a finite sum of coefficients of \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} (L^2 M_\iota \, \overline{\otimes}\, L^2 M_\iota) such that we have ultraweak operator topology convergence \alpha_k(x) \to x for x \in M. Moreover, we may assume \alpha_k(1) \leq 1 by Lemma 1.6 in [ADHa90]. Thus, if F \subset \mathcal U(M) is finite and \varepsilon > 0 we may find K_0 \in \mathbb N and \zeta_k = (\zeta_{k, \iota})_\iota \in \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} (L^2 M_\iota \, \overline{\otimes}\, L^2 M_\iota) for 1 \leq k \leq K_0 so that \| \sum_{k = 1}^{K_0} \theta_k(x) - x \|_2 < \varepsilon for all x \in F, where \theta_k: M \to M is the c.p. map associated to \zeta_k satisfying

By approximation, we may assume that \zeta_{k, \iota} = \sum_{j = 1}^{J_{k, \iota}} \xi_{k, j}^\iota \otimes b_{k, j}^\iota \in (L^2 M_\iota) \odot M_\iota with \{ \xi_{k, j}^\iota \}_{j = 1}^{J_{k, \iota}} orthonormal. Since we may assume \sum_{k = 1}^{K_0} \theta_k(1) \leq 1, we may multiply on the right by some projection in M_\iota and likewise assume that \sum_{k = 1}^{K_0} \| \zeta_{k, \iota} y \|^2 \leq \| y \|_2^2 for y \in M_\iota. We let \phi_{k, \iota}: M_\iota \to \mathbb M_{J_{k, \iota}}(\mathbb C) and \psi_{k, \iota}: \mathbb M_{J_{k, \iota}}(\mathbb C) \to M_\iota be the c.p. maps defined by \phi_{k, \iota}(x) = ( \langle x \xi_{k, j}^\iota, \xi_{k, \ell}^\iota \rangle )_{j, \ell} and \psi_{k, \iota}( (\alpha_{j \ell})_{j \ell}) = \sum_{j, \ell = 1}^{J_{k, \iota}} \alpha_{j \ell} b_{k, j}^\iota (b_{k, \ell}^\iota)^*. Setting \phi_\iota = \oplus_{k = 1}^{K_0} \phi_{k,\iota} and \psi_\iota = \sum_{k = 1}^{K_0} \psi_{k, \iota}\circ \operatorname{Ad} (P_{k, \iota}) where P_{k, \iota}: \mathbb C^{\sum_{j = 1}^{K_0} J_{j, \iota}} \to \mathbb C^{J_{k, \iota}} is the corresponding orthogonal projection, we then have that \psi_\iota \circ \phi_\iota is the completely positive map corresponding to the vector \oplus_{k = 1}^{K_0} \zeta_{k, \iota}, and so we have \mathbb E_{M} \circ (\psi_\iota \circ \phi_\iota)^{\mathcal U}(x) = \sum_{k = 1}^{K_0} \theta_k(x) for x \in F.

This then shows that (?) holds except that the maps \phi_\iota and \psi_\iota may not be unital. However, since \{ \xi_{k, j}^\iota \}_{j = 1}^{J_{k, \iota}} are orthonormal we see that \phi_\iota is unital and we then have \psi_\iota(1) = \psi_\iota \circ \phi_\iota(1) \leq 1. If we fix states \eta_\iota in the matrix algebras, then replacing \psi_\iota with \psi_\iota'(T) = \eta_\iota(T) (1 - \psi_\iota(1)) + \psi_\iota(T) we see that the maps may be taken to be unital.

The implication (?) \implies (?) follows directly from Haagerup’s result above (Theorem 3.4). Indeed, if M_0 \subset M is separable, let \{ u_n \}_{n = 1}^\infty \subset \mathcal U(M_0) enumerate a countable set of unitaries that generate M_0 as a von Neumann algebra. For each unitary u_n, we choose a representation u_n = (u_{n, \iota})^{\mathcal U} where u_{n, \iota} is unitary. Set

From (?) and Theorem 3.4 we have \mathcal U(I_N) = 1 for each N. If \mathcal U( \cap_N I_N) = 0, then we may set A_\iota = A_{N, \iota} where N is the maximal number such that \iota \in I_N (set A_\iota = \mathbb C if \iota \not\in I_1 or if \iota \in \cap_{N \in \mathbb N} I_N, both of which are \mathcal U-null). We then have M_0 \subset \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} A_\iota. Otherwise, if \mathcal U( \cap_N I_N) = 1, then set R_\iota = \{ u_{n, \iota} \}_n'', which is approximately finite-dimensional and hence hyperfinite for \mathcal U-almost every \iota.

We take F, \varepsilon> 0 and u as above. We take u_\iota \in \mathcal U(M_\iota^1 \, \overline{\otimes}\, M_\iota^2) so that u = (u_\iota)^{\mathcal U}. We set v_\iota = (u_\iota^* \otimes 1) (1 \otimes \sigma(u_\iota) ) \in \mathcal U( M_\iota^1 \, \overline{\otimes}\, M_\iota^2 \, \overline{\otimes}\, M_\iota^1 ) where \sigma: M_\iota^1 \, \overline{\otimes}\, M_\iota^2 \to M_\iota^2 \, \overline{\otimes}\, M_\iota^1 is the flip. Setting v = (v_\iota)^{\mathcal U}, for x \in F we have \| ( \theta_1(x) \otimes 1 \otimes 1) v - v (1 \otimes 1 \otimes \theta_1(x) ) \|_2 \leq 2 \varepsilon. Theorem 3.5 then shows that \theta_1(M) is matricially approximable with respect to (N_\iota^1)_\iota. The case for \theta_2(M) is similar.

Since the embeddings \theta_1 and \theta_2 are unitarily conjugate, it follows from Corollary 3.7 that M embeds into R^{\mathcal U}. With this extra condition, the result is then given by Corollary 4.8 in [AtKE21].

We let C denote the universal C^*-algebra generated by a sequence of contractions \{ x_n \}_{n = 1}^\infty. We fix a *-homomorphism \theta: C \to M \subset N^{\mathcal U} with weakly dense image and we choose *-homomorphisms \theta_\iota: C \to N so that \theta(x_n) = (\theta_\iota(x_n))^{\mathcal U} for each n \in \mathbb N. We also let d be a metric on the state space of C that induces the weak^*-topology and we choose a decreasing sequence of sets I_n \subset I so that \mathcal U(I_n) = 1 and \cap_n I_n = \emptyset.

We claim that for each n \in \mathbb N, there exist m \geq n and \iota_{n} \in I_m \setminus I_{m-1} having the property that whenever \rho: C \to N is *-homomorphism satisfying d( \tau_N \circ \rho, \tau_M \circ \theta) < 1/m, then there exists a unitary u \in \mathcal U(\tilde N) so that \| u \rho(x_k) u^* - \theta_{\iota_{n}}(x_k) \|_2 \leq 1/n for all k \leq n. Otherwise, we could find some n_0 \in \mathbb N and choose for each m \geq n_0 and \iota \in I_m \setminus I_{m-1} a *-homomorphism \rho_\iota: C \to N satisfying d( \tau_N \circ \rho_\iota, \tau_M \circ \theta) < 1/m and having the property that

But then, setting \rho(x) = (\rho_\iota(x))^{\mathcal U} we see that \rho gives a well-defined *-homomorphism from C into N^{\mathcal U} that satisfies \tau_{N^{\mathcal U}} \circ \rho = \tau_M \circ \theta so that this defines an embedding of M into N^{\mathcal U}. Moreover, we would have

contradicting the hypothesis.

Having established this claim, we inductively define sequences m_n \in \mathbb N, and \iota_n \in I_{m_n} \setminus I_{m_n - 1} by setting m_0 = 1, and choosing m_n \geq \max \{2^n, m_{n-1} \} and \iota_n \in I_{m_n} \setminus I_{m_n - 1} so that the above claim holds for the integer \max \{ 2^{n}, m_{n-1} \}. Note that we have d( \tau_N \circ \theta_{\iota_n}, \tau_M \circ \theta) \to 0.

Since \lim_{\iota \to \mathcal U} d(\tau_N \circ \theta_\iota, \tau_M \circ \theta) = 0, we see that for each n \in \mathbb N and \mathcal U-almost every \iota \in I there exists u_\iota \in \mathcal U(\tilde N) so that \| u_\iota \theta_\iota(x_k) u_\iota^* - \theta_{\iota_n}(x_k) \|_2 \leq 2^{-n} for k \leq n. By the triangle inequality we may then find v_{n} \in \mathcal U(\tilde N) so that for k \leq n we have

We now consider the sequence of *-homomorphisms \alpha_n: C \to \tilde N given by

From the discussion above we have \| \alpha_{n + 1}(x_k) - \alpha_n(x_k) \|_2 \leq 2^{-n + 1} for k \leq n, and hence it follows that for each k \in \mathbb N the sequence \{ \alpha_n(x_k) \}_n is Cauchy in \| \cdot \|_2 and hence converges to some a_k \in \tilde N. The *-homomorphism \alpha: C \to N defined by \alpha(x_k) = a_k then satisfies \tau_N \circ \alpha = \tau_M \circ \theta and so defines a trace-preserving embedding of M into \tilde N.

If the inclusion N \subset \tilde N is existential, then we may find the v_n from (?) inside of N^{\mathcal V} for some ultrafilter \mathcal V, and it is then easy to see that writing v_n = (v_{n, \kappa})^{\mathcal V} we have that for \mathcal V-almost every \kappa, (?) is satisfied for the unitary v_{n, \kappa}. Thus, in this case we may assume v_n \in N so that \alpha maps into N \subset \tilde N.

Suppose we have M \subset N^{\mathcal V} and we have an existential embedding N \subset M^{\mathcal U}. We may assume that \mathcal V is countably incomplete. By the Jung property, any two embeddings of M into N^{\mathcal V} \subset (M^{\mathcal U})^{\mathcal V} are conjugate by a unitary in (M^{\mathcal U})^{\mathcal V} \cong M^{\mathcal U \times \mathcal V} and so by Theorem 3.10 we have an embedding of M into N.

Suppose M is locally universal and has the Jung property. It follows easily that M is existentially closed. If N is any existentially closed II_1 factor, then M and N embed into each other’s ultrapowers. Hence, M embeds into N by the previous corollary. The fact that M is a prime model of its theory then follows from [Go21, Corollary 3.16].

We only need to prove the forward implication. Suppose that \phi: M \to \ell^\infty( I, N_\iota) gives a u.c.p. lift and suppose there exist injective von Neumann subalgebras R_\iota \subset M_\iota so that M \subset \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} R_\iota \subset \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} N_\iota. Consider the normal conditional expectation \mathbb E: \ell^\infty( I, N_\iota) \to \ell^\infty(I, R_\iota) given by \mathbb E((x_\iota)_\iota) = ( \mathbb E_{R_\iota}(x_\iota) )_\iota and let q: \ell^\infty( I, N_\iota) \to \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} N_\iota be the canonical quotient map. Since M \subset \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} R_\iota it follows that q \circ \mathbb E \circ \phi gives the identity map. Since the identity map has a u.c.p. factorization through the injective von Neumann algebra \ell^\infty(I, R_\iota), we then have that M is injective.

By [Po14, Section 1.2] we may find a separable von Neumann subalgebra M_0 \subset M such that p \in M_0 and \mathbb E_{\mathcal Z(M_0)}(x) = \mathbb E_{\mathcal Z(M)}(x) for x \in M_0, so we will assume M is separable. We then consider a direct integral decomposition into factors M = \int_X^\oplus M_x \, d\mu(x) where (X, \mu) is a standard probability space and we identify L^\infty(X, \mu) with \mathcal Z(M), and (M_x, \tau_x)_{x \in X} is a measurable field of finite factors.

We may then decompose p as p = \int p_x \, d\mu(x), where p_x \in \mathcal P(M_x). We fix some c > 0 so that the set E = \{ x \in X \mid \tau_x(p_x) \geq c \} has positive measure. We then choose a measurable field of projections (q_x)_{x \in X} so that \tau(q_x) = c and q_x \leq p_x for x \in E. Setting q = \int q_x \, d\mu(x) and r = 1_E, we then have \mathbb E_{\mathcal Z(M)}(q) = c, qr \not= 0, and qr \leq p.

It suffices to consider the case when M is separable. If M is matricially approximable with respect to (N_\iota)_\iota, then there exist finite-dimensional factors A_\iota \subset N_\iota so that M \subset \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} A_\iota \subset \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} N_\iota. If p \in \mathcal P(M) is as above, then we may assume that p_\iota \in \mathcal P(A_\iota) so that we then have pMp \subset \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} p_\iota A_\iota p_\iota \subset \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} p_\iota N_\iota p_\iota, showing that pMp is matricially approximable with respect to (p_\iota N_\iota p_\iota)_\iota.

Conversely, if pMp is matricially approximable with respect to (p_\iota N_\iota p_\iota)_\iota and if p has central support 1, then we may find a sequence of partial isometries (v_n)_n \subset M so that v_n^* v_n \leq p and \sum_n v_n v_n^* = 1. If A_\iota \subset p_\iota N_\iota p_\iota are finite-dimensional von Neumann subalgebras such that pMp \subset \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} A_\iota, then for any n \in \mathbb N we may choose representations v_n = (v_{n, \iota})^{\mathcal U} with v_{n, \iota} partial isometries in N_\iota so that v_{n, \iota}^* v_{n, \iota} \leq p_\iota and r_\iota = \sum_{n = 1}^N v_{n, \iota} v_{n, \iota}^* \in \mathcal P(N_\iota). Setting r = (r_\iota)^{\mathcal U} we then have

Hence, we see that rMr is matricially approximable with respect to (r_\iota N_\iota r_\iota). Since \mathcal U is countably incomplete we see that M is matricially approximable with respect to (N_\iota)_\iota.

We now suppose again that M is matricially approximable with respect to (N_\iota)_\iota so that M \subset \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} A_\iota \subset \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} N_\iota where A_\iota are finite-dimensional factors. Note that

and \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} (A_\iota' \cap N_\iota) is a factor.

Suppose first q \in \mathcal P(M' \cap \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} N_\iota) has scalar central trace. Then we may find a unitary u \in \mathcal U( M' \cap \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} N_\iota) so that u^* q u \in \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} (A_\iota' \cap N_\iota) and taking a representation u^*q u = (r_\iota)^{\mathcal U} with r_\iota \in \mathcal P(A_\iota' \cap N_\iota) we then have

and hence M q \subset u ( \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} A_\iota r_\iota ) u^* \subset q ( \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} N_\iota ) q showing that Mq is matricially approximable with respect to (q_\iota N_\iota q_\iota)_\iota.

The next case we consider is when q \in \mathcal Z(M' \cap \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} N_\iota). Since \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} (A_\iota' \cap N_\iota) \subset M' \cap \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} N_\iota we then have

so that taking a representation q = (q_\iota)^{\mathcal U} with q_\iota \in \mathcal P(A_\iota) we have

again showing that Mq is matricially approximable with respect to (q_\iota N_\iota q_\iota)_\iota.

For the general case q \in \mathcal P(M' \cap \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} N_\iota), we consider a maximal family of nonzero pairwise orthogonal projections \{ q_k \}_k \subset \mathcal P(M' \cap \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} N_\iota) such that choosing a representation q_k = (q_{k ,\iota})^{\mathcal U} we have that Mq_k is matricially approximable with respect to (q_{k, \iota} N_\iota q_{k, \iota})_\iota. If q - \sum_k q_k \not= 0, then by Lemma 4.4 there is a projection r_1 \in \mathcal P(M' \cap \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} N_\iota) with scalar central trace and a projection r_2 \in \mathcal P(\mathcal Z( M' \cap \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} N_\iota )) so that r_1 r_2 \not= 0 and r_1 r_2 \leq q - \sum_k q_k. However, the argument above would then contradict the maximality of the family \{ q_k \}_k and so we conclude that q = \sum_k q_k. As explained above, this then shows that Mq is matricially approximable with respect to (q_\iota N_\iota q_\iota)_\iota.

The converse assertion that when Mq is matricially approximable with respect to (q_\iota N_\iota q_\iota)_\iota and q \in \mathcal P(M' \cap \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} N_\iota) has central support 1 follows just as in the second paragraph above.

We suppose \theta(M) is matricially approximable with respect to N_2. Then there exist finite-dimensional subfactors B_\kappa \subset N_2 so that \theta(M) \subset \prod_{\kappa \to \mathcal V} B_\kappa \subset N_2^{\mathcal V}. Since M \subset N_1 has weak spectral gap we have

Hence,

Let P \subset N_2 be a separable von Neumann subalgebra and suppose \theta^{-1}(P) is matricially approximable with respect to N_1. Let A_\iota \subset N_1 be finite-dimensional subfactors such that \theta^{-1}(P) \subset \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} A_\iota \subset N_1^{\mathcal U}. Since M is type II_1 and A_\iota is finite-dimensional, there exists a unitary u_\iota \in \mathcal U(N_1) so that u_\iota A_\iota u_\iota^* \subset M. Set u = (u_\iota)^{\mathcal U} \in \mathcal U(N_1^{\mathcal U}), so that u \theta^{-1}(P) u^* \subset M^{\mathcal U} \subset N_1^{\mathcal U}.

From above, we then have P \subset \theta(u)^* \left(\prod_{\kappa \to \mathcal V} B_\kappa \right) \theta(u), and so P is amenable by Proposition 4.1.

If \theta(\alpha(M)) \subset \prod_{\kappa \to \mathcal V} B_\kappa \subset \prod_{\kappa \to \mathcal V} P_\kappa with B_\kappa \subset P_\kappa finite-dimensional subfactors, then just as in the proof of Theorem 4.6 we see that

If \theta^{-1}(Q) \subset \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} A_\iota \subset \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} N_\iota with A_\iota \subset N_\iota finite-dimensional subfactors, then we may find u_\iota \in \mathcal U(N_\iota) so that u_\iota A_\iota u_\iota^* \subset \alpha_\iota(M), and so setting u = (u_\iota)^{\mathcal U} we have u \left( \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} A_\iota \right) u^* \subset \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} \alpha_\iota(M) and hence

The last assertion of the theorem then follows from Theorem 4.2.

Replacing v with v | v |^{-1}, we may assume that v is a nonzero partial isometry with v^* v \in M_1' \cap N and vv^* \in M_2' \cap N. We let \mathcal F denote the set of all such intertwining partial isometries and define a partial ordering on \mathcal F by v \prec w if v^*v \leq w^*w, vv^* \leq ww^*, and wv^*v = v. By Zorn’s Lemma we may find u \in \mathcal F that is maximal with respect to this partial ordering.

Set p = u^*u \in M_1' \cap N and q = u u^* \in M_2' \cap N. If u \not\in \mathcal U(N), then as M_1' \cap N and M_2' \cap N are factors we may choose partial isometries w_1 \in M_1' \cap N and w_2 \in M_2' \cap N so that w_1w_1^* \leq p, w_1^*w_1 \leq p^\perp, w_2w_2^* \leq q,w_2^*w_2 \leq q^\perp and w_2w_2^* u = u w_1 w_1^* \not= 0. Considering u + w_2^* u w_1 would then contradict maximality of u \in \mathcal F. Thus, we conclude that u \in \mathcal U(N).

We fix a decreasing sequence I_n \subset I so that \cap_n I_n = \emptyset and \mathcal U(I_n) = 1 for each n \in \mathbb N. Fix c > 0 and S \subset M finite so that if P denotes the projection onto the space of M central vectors for some normal Hilbert bimodule, then \| P^\perp \xi \| \leq c ( \sum_{x \in S} \| [x, \xi] \|^2 )^{1/2}. Let \theta_\iota: S \to N_\iota so that \| \theta_\iota(x) \| \leq \| x \| and (\theta_\iota(x) )^{\mathcal U} = x for each x \in S.

For each \iota \in I, let \rho_\iota: \operatorname{Aut}(N_\iota) \to [0, \infty) be the continuous function defined by

and let

Note that \operatorname{Inn}(N_\iota) \subset \mathcal G_\iota and \mathcal G_\iota is a closed set. We claim that for \mathcal U-almost every \iota \in I, the set \mathcal G_\iota is also open.

To see this, for \beta_1, \beta_2 \in \operatorname{Aut}(N_\iota) set d_{\iota}(\beta_1, \beta_2) = ( \sum_{x \in S} \| \beta_1( \theta_\iota(x) ) - \beta_2( \theta_\iota(x) ) \|_2^2 )^{1/2}. This is a continuous pseudometric on \operatorname{Aut}(N_\iota), and by the triangle inequality we have \rho_\iota(\beta_1) \leq \rho_\iota(\beta_2) + d_{ \iota}(\beta_1, \beta_2).

If \mathcal G_\iota were not open for \mathcal U-almost every \iota \in I, then we could choose \alpha_\iota \in \mathcal G_\iota, and \beta_\iota \in \operatorname{Aut}(N_\iota) \setminus \mathcal G_\iota so that

We then choose for \iota \in I_n \setminus I_{n + 1} a unitary u_\iota \in \mathcal U(N_\iota) so that ( \sum_{x \in S} \| u_\iota \alpha_\iota( \theta_\iota(x) ) u_\iota^* - \theta_\iota(x) \|_2^2 )^{1/2} \leq 1/2c + 1/n. We define the automorphism \tilde \alpha \in \operatorname{Aut}(\prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} N_\iota) by \tilde \alpha( ( x_\iota)^{\mathcal U}) = (u_\iota \alpha_\iota( x_\iota) u_\iota^* )^{\mathcal U}. By construction we have

There then exists w \in \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} N_\iota with \| w - 1 \|_2 \leq 1/2 so that \tilde \alpha(x) w = w x for x \in M. Proposition 5.1 then provides a unitary v \in \mathcal U(\prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} N_\iota) so that \tilde \alpha(x) v = v x for all x \in M. Choosing a representation v = (v_\iota)^{\mathcal U} with v_\iota \in \mathcal U(N) we then have

for each x \in S. Thus, we have \lim_{\iota \to \mathcal U} \rho_\iota( \alpha_\iota) = 0, and hence \lim_{\iota \to \mathcal U} \rho_\iota(\beta_\iota) = 0, contradicting the fact that \beta_\iota \not \in \mathcal G_\iota for \mathcal U-almost every \iota.

We therefore conclude that \mathcal G_\iota is a clopen neighborhood of \operatorname{Inn}(N) for \mathcal U-almost every \iota \in I. If \alpha_\iota \in \operatorname{Aut}(N) is in the connected component of the identity, it then follows that \alpha_\iota \in \mathcal G_\iota for \mathcal U-almost every \iota. But then, repeating the argument above, it follows that there exists u \in \mathcal U(\prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} N_\iota) so that \alpha(x) = u xu^* for all x \in M.

By Proposition 6.2, the N_\iota-N_\iota bimodule L^2(N_\iota *_{B_\iota} Q_\iota) \ominus L^2(N_\iota) is weakly contained in the coarse bimodule. Thus, if M' \cap p ( \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} N_\iota *_{B_\iota} Q_\iota ) p \not\subset p (\prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} N_\iota )p, then since M is a factor we would have weak containment of M-bimodules L^2M \prec \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} (L^2 (p_\iota N_\iota p_\iota) \, \overline{\otimes}\, L^2 (p_\iota N_\iota p_\iota) ). Theorem 3.5 then gives the result.

If \theta^{-1} (Q_0) \subset \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} A_\iota \subset \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} N_\iota with A_\iota \subset N_\iota finite-dimensional factors, then as M_\iota is type II_1 there exists a unitary u \in \mathcal U( \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} N_\iota) so that u^* \theta^{-1}(Q_0) u \subset \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} M_\iota and hence \theta(u^*) Q_0 \theta(u) \subset \theta \left( \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} M_\iota \right) \subset P^{\mathcal V}. This then gives weak containment of Hilbert Q_0-Q_0 bimodules L^2 Q_0 \prec L^2(( P *_B Q )^{\mathcal V}) \, \overline{\otimes}_{P^{\mathcal V}}\, L^2(( P *_B Q)^{\mathcal V}). Since B is amenable, we have that L^2(P *_B Q) is a weakly coarse P-Q bimodule, and then applying Lemma 3.2, Proposition 3.3 and Theorem 3.5 we obtain the result.

The last assertion of the theorem then follows from Theorem 4.2.

An N-N bimodule spanning set of vectors for L^2 \tilde N is given by \hat{1} and vectors of the form u_{w_1} a_1 u_{w_2} a_2 \cdots a_{n -1} u_{w_n} a_n where w_i \in \mathbb F_2 \setminus \{ e \} and a_i \in N with E_B(a_i) = 0, together with vectors of the form u_{w_1} a_1 u_{w_2} a_2 \cdots a_{n -1} u_{w_n} where w_i \in \mathbb F_2 \setminus \{ e \} and a_i \in N with E_B(a_i) = 0. In all of these cases except the two exemptions above, if v is a vector of this form it follows that we have \tau(x v \alpha(y) v^*) = \tau(E_B(x) E_B(y) ) \| v \|_2^2, and hence this gives rise to a bimodule isomorphic to L^2 \langle N, B \rangle, which is weakly contained in L^2N \, \overline{\otimes}\, L^2N since B is amenable.

The span of vectors of the form x e_P y, x, y \in N is dense in L^2 \langle N, P \rangle and since this also forms an N-N bimodule it must also be dense in the space of left-bounded vectors with respect to the norm \| L_A \|. Thus, it suffices to verify \pi^*( A \otimes_N B) = AB for A = x_1 e_P y_1 and B = x_2 e_P y_2 with x_1, x_2, y_1, y_2 \in N. (The inequality on the \| \cdot \|_2 would then follow from general facts on relative tensor products of bimodules.) In this case the result follows easily from the computation that for a, b \in N we have

Let P \subset N be an inclusion of tracial von Neumann algebras and suppose A, B \in L^2\langle N, P \rangle satisfy the inequalities above. For \kappa > 0 we let P_\kappa = 1_{[\kappa, \infty)}(| A |^2), which is a finite trace projection in \langle N, P \rangle satisfying \operatorname{Tr}(P_\kappa) \leq \kappa^{-1} \operatorname{Tr}( | A |^2 ) \leq \kappa^{-1}. We let \mathcal K \subset L^2 N denote the range of P_\kappa. This is a right Hilbert P module and we may choose a Pimsner-Popa basis \{ y_n \}_n \subset L^2 N. Moreover, since \operatorname{Tr}(P_\kappa) is finite, this basis is at most countable and we can choose such a basis so that setting p_n = \mathbb E_P(y_n^* y_n) \in \mathcal P(P) we have p_n \geq p_{n + 1} for each n.

Since \| L_A \| \leq 1, for x \in N we have

We therefore conclude that \sum_n y_n^* y_n \in N \subset L^2N and we have the uniform bound \| \sum_n y_n^* y_n \| \leq \kappa^{-1}. In particular, there can be no more than \kappa^{-1} elements in \{ y_n \}_n, since p_n \geq p_{n + 1} for each n.

We consider the polar decomposition A = V | A | and we set z_n = V(y_n). Since \| R_A \| \leq 1, a similar computation as above shows that for x \in N we have \| x \|_2^2 \geq \| x A \|_2^2 \geq \kappa \sum_n \| x z_n \|_2^2. Hence, we also have \sum_n z_n^* z_n \in N \subset L^2N and \| \sum_n z_n^* z_n \|_2^2 \leq \kappa^{-1}.

If \delta > 0 is such that \sup_{a, b \in (N)_1 } | \langle A, a e_P b \rangle | < \delta, we then conclude that

Taking the supremum of the left supports of y_n, then gives a projection p \in \mathcal P(N) with \tau(p) \leq \kappa^{-1} \tau(p_1) \leq \kappa^{-5/2} \delta such that p^{\perp} y_n = 0 for each n, and hence p^{\perp} P_\kappa = 0. Thus, \| p^\perp | A |^2 p^\perp \| \leq \kappa so that

Since \delta and \kappa are arbitrary, this then gives the result.

Set

Suppose M is matricially inapproximable with respect to (N_\iota)_\iota and a is a nonzero M-central vector in L^2(\tilde N)_\alpha. By cutting with a spectral projection of | a | we may assume that y \in \tilde N and so we may write a = (a_\iota)^{\mathcal U} with \| a_\iota \| \leq \| a \|. By Lemma 3.1 and Proposition 6.7, we have an isomorphism of M-M bimodules

where \mathcal H_\iota is an N_\iota-N_\iota bimodule that is weakly contained in L^2N_\iota \, \overline{\otimes}\, L^2N_\iota. Propositions 3.3, 6.3 and Theorem 3.5 then show that the projection of a onto the \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} \mathcal H_\iota is zero, and thus the projection of a onto either \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} L^2\langle N_\iota, P_\iota \rangle or \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} L^2\langle N_\iota, Q_\iota \rangle must be non-zero.

Suppose that the former conclusion holds. Let A denote the projection of a onto \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} L^2\langle N_\iota, P_\iota \rangle and note that A is N-left-right-bounded by \| y \|. Hence, we may write A = (A_\iota)^{\mathcal U} where A_\iota \in L^2\langle N_\iota, P_\iota \rangle satisfy \| x A_\iota \|_2, \| A_\iota x \|_2 \leq ( \| y \| + 1 ) \| x \|_2 for each x \in N_\iota. If A \perp L^2\langle N, P \rangle \subset \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} L^2\langle N_\iota, P_\iota \rangle, then we must have \lim_{\iota \to \mathcal U} \sup_{a, b \in (N_\iota)_1} | \langle A, a e_{P_\iota} b \rangle | = 0 and it then follows from Lemmas 6.8 and 6.9 that ( A_\iota \otimes_N A_\iota^* )^{\mathcal U} gives a non-zero M-central vector in \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} ( ( L^2\langle N_\iota, P_\iota \rangle \otimes_N L^2\langle N_\iota, P_\iota \rangle ) \ominus \mathcal H_\iota ), where \mathcal H_\iota \subset L^2\langle N_\iota, P_\iota \rangle is the Hilbert N_\iota-N_\iota sub-bimodule generated by the vector e_{P_\iota} \otimes_{N_\iota} e_{P_\iota}. However, as M is matricially inapproximable with respect to (N_\iota)_\iota, this cannot occur by Proposition 6.1 and Theorem 3.5. It follows therefore that A \not\perp L^2 \langle N, P \rangle and thus taking the projection of A onto L^2\langle N, P \rangle gives a non-zero M-central vector in L^2 \langle N, P \rangle, which shows M \prec_N P.

By Popa’s Intertwining Theorem there then exist e \in \mathcal P(M), p \in \mathcal P(P), a normal unital *-homomorphism \theta: eMe \to pPp and a vector v \in eNp so that xv = v \theta(x) for x \in eMe. Take representations e =(e_\iota)^{\mathcal U} and p = (p_\iota)^{\mathcal U} with e_\iota \in \mathcal P(N_\iota), and p_\iota \in \mathcal P(P_\iota). We also take representations v = (v_\iota)^{\mathcal U} where v_\iota \in e_\iota N_\iota p_\iota are partial isometries. Since M is matricially inapproximable with respect to (N_\iota)_\iota and since M' \cap N is a factor, it follows from Proposition 4.5 that vv^* eMe is matricially inapproximable with respect to (v_\iota v_\iota^* e_\iota N e_\iota v_\iota v_\iota^*)_\iota. Conjugating by v^* and again using Proposition 4.5 then shows that \theta(e M e) is matricially inapproximable with respect to (p_\iota N p_\iota)_\iota. Since v^*v \in \theta(M)' \cap pNp, we have from Proposition 6.3 that v^*v \in p P p. The argument in [BrOz08, Lemma F.18] may then be applied to construct a unitary u \in \mathcal U(N) such that u M u^* \subset P.

If instead the projection of a onto \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} L^2\langle N_\iota, Q_\iota \rangle is non-zero, then we similarly deduce that M \prec_N Q, and from this we would similarly obtain a unitary u \in \mathcal U(N) such that u M u^* \subset Q.

If x \in \Gamma and s, t \in \Sigma, then \langle \lambda_s \widehat{ \lambda_x } \tilde \alpha(\lambda_t^*), \widehat{\lambda_x} \rangle is zero unless s = x^{-1} \alpha(t) x, so that s \in \Sigma \cap x \alpha(\Sigma) x^{-1}. Thus, we see that the L\Sigma-bimodule spanned by \widehat{\lambda_x} is isomorphic to a bimodule induced from a L (\Sigma \cap x \alpha(\Sigma) x^{-1} )-L\Sigma bimodule. Since \Sigma \cap x \alpha(\Sigma) x^{-1} is amenable, this bimodule is weakly contained in the coarse bimodule. Since such vectors span a dense subspace of L^2 N, the result follows.

We take superfactors N_\iota \subset \tilde N_\iota and automorphisms \alpha_\iota \in \operatorname{Aut}( \tilde N_\iota) in the connected component of the identity such that we have weak containment of bimodules as in (?). We let \alpha = (\alpha_\iota)^{\mathcal U} \in \operatorname{Aut}\left( \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} \tilde N_\iota \right).

If M' \cap \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} \tilde N_\iota \not= M' \cap \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} N_\iota, then by Proposition 3.3 we have inclusions of M-M Hilbert bimodules

Otherwise, if M' \cap \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} \tilde N_\iota = M' \cap \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} N_\iota is a factor, then by Theorem 5.2 there exists u \in \mathcal U( \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} \tilde N_\iota ) so that \alpha(x) = ux u^* for x \in M \subset \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} N_\iota. From (?) and Proposition 3.3 we then also have weak containment of M-M bimodules L^2M \prec \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} (L^2 N_\iota \, \overline{\otimes}\, L^2 N_\iota).

Thus, in either case we have L^2M \prec \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} (L^2 N_\iota \, \overline{\otimes}\, L^2 N_\iota), and so the result then follows from Theorem 3.5.

For 1 \leq j \leq k, we suppose N_\iota^j \subset \tilde N_\iota^j and \alpha_\iota^j \in \operatorname{Aut}(\tilde N_\iota^j) are automorphisms in the connected component of the identity so that we have weak containment of N_\iota^j-N_\iota^j bimodules

We use the following notation:

Let E \subset \{ 1, 2, \ldots, k \} denote the set of indices j such that we have

By applying a rearrangement, we will assume that E = \{ 1, 2, \ldots, k_0 \} for some 0 \leq k_0 \leq k. For each 1 \leq j \leq k_0 there exists a nonzero element u_j \in M' \cap \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} Q_\iota^j \subset \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} \tilde N_\iota with \mathbb E_{\prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} N_\iota}(u_j) = 0. Since M' \cap \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} N_\iota is a factor, we may multiply each u_j on the left and right by elements in M' \cap \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} N_\iota so that we may assume u_1u_2 \cdots u_{k_0} \not= 0 (take this product to be 1 if k_0 = 0).

For k_0 < j \leq k we set \alpha^j = ( {\rm id} \otimes \alpha_\iota^j \otimes {\rm id} )^{\mathcal U} \in \operatorname{Aut}( \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} Q_\iota^j) and we see that Theorem 5.2 applies, giving a unitary u_j \in \mathcal U( \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} Q_\iota^j ) that satisfies x u = u \alpha^j(x) for x \in M. Setting

we then have that u \not= 0, and if x \in M, then x u = u \alpha_{k_0+ 1} \circ \alpha_{k_0 + 2} \circ \cdots \circ \alpha_k(x).

If 1 \leq j \leq k_0, then from the definition of u above we see that u may be written as u = a u_j b where a, b \in \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} Q_\iota(j). We therefore have

Thus, we may represent u as u = (u_\iota)^{\mathcal U} where \mathbb E_{Q_\iota(j)}(u) = 0 for each 1 \leq j \leq k_0, i.e.,

The twisted N_\iota-N_\iota bimodule structure on each \mathcal H_\iota given by a \xi b = a \xi \alpha_{k_0 + 1} \circ \alpha_{k_0 + 2} \circ \cdots \circ \alpha_k( b ) is weakly contained in the coarse bimodule, and as u represents an M-central element in the \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} N_\iota-\prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} N_\iota Hilbert bimodule \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} \mathcal H_\iota, it then follows from Theorem 3.5 that M is matricially approximable with respect to (N_\iota)_{\iota \in I}.

Given n \in \mathbb N, we let k_n denote the largest integer k so that k \leq n and such that there exists an irreducible representation \rho_k: \operatorname{SL}_3(\mathbb Z) \to U(k). We then define the representation \pi_n: \operatorname{SL}_3(\mathbb Z) \to U(n) by \pi_n(t) = \rho_k \oplus \operatorname{id}_{n-k}. We may then consider the representation \pi: \operatorname{SL}_3(\mathbb Z) \to \mathcal U( \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} \mathbb M_{n_\iota}(\mathbb C) ) given by \pi = (\pi_{n_\iota})^{\mathcal U}.

For each prime p we have a canonical surjection \operatorname{SL}_3(\mathbb Z) \to \operatorname{SL}_3(\mathbb Z/p\mathbb Z), and hence any irreducible unitary representation of \operatorname{SL}_3(\mathbb Z/p\mathbb Z) gives an irreducible unitary representation of \operatorname{SL}_3(\mathbb Z). In particular, there is the Steinberg Representation of \operatorname{SL}_3(\mathbb Z/p\mathbb Z), which is an irreducible representation of dimension p^3. By the Prime Number Theorem, it then follows that given any \varepsilon > 0, and large enough n, there exists a finite-dimensional irreducible representation of \operatorname{SL}_3(\mathbb Z) into U(k) where (1-\varepsilon)n < k \leq n. From property (T), we then conclude that

Hence, \pi( \operatorname{SL}_3(\mathbb Z))'' is an irreducible subfactor of \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} \mathbb M_{n_\iota} (\mathbb C) with property (T) [CoJo85]. By [Be07] we have that, in fact, \pi( \operatorname{SL}_3(\mathbb Z))'' \cong L( \operatorname{SL}_3(\mathbb Z) ).

Just combine Theorems 5.2 and 6.10.

Set N = N_0 *_{A_0} N_1 *_{A_1} \cdots *_{A_{k-1}} N_k and \tilde N = \tilde N_0 *_{A_0} \tilde N_1 *_{\tilde A_1} \cdots *_{\tilde A_{k-1}} \tilde N_\ell. For 1 \leq i \leq k (resp. 1 \leq j \leq \ell) we take M_i \subset N_i (resp. \tilde M_j \subset \tilde N_j) to be a type II_1 property (T) subfactor with factorial relative commutant. We also take P_i \subset N_i (resp. \tilde P_j \subset \tilde N_j), satisfying (?). We suppose \theta: N^{\mathcal U} \to \tilde N^{\mathcal V} is an isomorphism. We may assume that \mathcal U and \mathcal V are countably incomplete.

After possibly interchanging N and \tilde N, we may assume from Theorem 4.7 that whenever 1 \leq i \leq k and \alpha_\iota: P_i \to N_i are embeddings such that (\alpha_\iota)_\iota has uniform weak spectral gap, then letting \alpha: P_i \to N_i^{\mathcal U} be the embedding defined by \alpha(x) = (\alpha_\iota(x) )^{\mathcal U} we have that \theta ( \alpha(P_i)) is matricially inapproximable with respect to \tilde N. For the same reason, we may also assume that \theta(M_i) is matricially inapproximable with respect to \tilde N.

By Theorem 7.11, for each i \in \{ 1, 2, \ldots, k \} there exists some j_i \in \{ 0, 1, 2, \ldots, \ell \} and u_i \in \mathcal U(\tilde N^{\mathcal V}) so that u_i \theta( M_i ) u_i^* \subset \tilde N_{j_i}^{\mathcal V}. Note that we cannot have j_i = 0 by Theorem 7.5.

If B \subset N_i^{\mathcal U} is any separable von Neumann subalgebra that contains M_i, then from (?) there exist \alpha_\iota \in \operatorname{Aut}(N_1) so that setting \alpha = (\alpha_\iota)^{\mathcal U} as above we have B \subset \alpha(P_i)' \cap N_i^{\mathcal U}. Since M_i \subset B, we then have from Proposition 6.3 that

A second application of Proposition 6.3 then shows us that

Since B \subset N_i^{\mathcal U} was an arbitrary separable von Neumann subalgebra containing M_i, it then follows that

We now fix some j_0 \in \{ 1, 2, \ldots, \ell \} so that j_0 \not= j_i for some i \in \{ 1, 2, \ldots, k \}. If \beta_\kappa \in \operatorname{Aut}(\tilde N_{j_0}) and we set \beta = (\beta_\kappa)^{\mathcal V}, then by Proposition 6.5 we have that \theta^{-1}( \beta(\tilde P_{j_0} ) ) is matricially inapproximable with respect to N. For the same reason, we see that \theta^{-1}( \tilde M_{j_0} ) is also matricially inapproximable with respect to N. Thus, from the same argument in the previous paragraph we may find i \in \{ 1, 2, \ldots, k \} and v \in \mathcal U( N^{\mathcal U}) so that \theta^{-1}(\tilde N_{j_0}^{\mathcal U}) \subset v^* N_i^{\mathcal U} v. We then have

and so by Remark 6.4 we have j_0 = j_i and u_i \theta(v) \in \mathcal U(\tilde N_{j_0}^{\mathcal U}). In particular, this also shows that j_0 is in the range of the map \{ 1, 2, \ldots, k \} \ni i \mapsto j_i, and so we can apply the same result for any j \not= j_0 as well. We have thus concluded that for each j \in \{ 1, 2, \ldots, \ell \} the von Neumann subalgebra \tilde N_j^{\mathcal V} is conjugate in \tilde N^{\mathcal V} to a von Neumann subalgebra of the form \theta( N_i^{\mathcal U} ) for i \not= 0. Because of Remark 6.4, there can be at most one such subalgebra \theta(N_i^{\mathcal U}), and for the same reason we see that the map \{ 1, 2, \ldots, k \} \ni i \mapsto j_i must be injective so that k = \ell and after permutation of indices we have each \tilde N_i^{\mathcal V} is conjugate to \theta(N_i^{\mathcal U}) so that N_i \equiv \tilde N_i for each 1 \leq i \leq k.

We denote the first copy of N in N * N by N_1 and the second copy by N_2. We also let \tilde N_1 and \tilde N_2 denote the corresponding copies in (N * N) \rtimes \mathbb Z/2\mathbb Z. We suppose, by way of contradiction, that we have an isomorphism

We let M_i \subset N_i (resp. \tilde M_i \subset \tilde N_i) be property (T) subfactors with factorial relative commutant and take P_i \subset N_i (resp. \tilde P_i \subset \tilde N_i) i \in \{ 1, 2 \}, satisfying condition (?) from the definition of the class \mathcal C_T.

We assume that whenever i \in \{ 1, 2 \} and \alpha_\iota: P_i \to N_i are embeddings such that (\alpha_\iota)_\iota has uniform weak spectral gap, then letting \alpha: P_i \to N_i^{\mathcal U} be the embedding defined by \alpha(x) = (\alpha_\iota(x) )^{\mathcal U} we have that \theta ( \alpha(P_i)) is matricially inapproximable with respect to \tilde N. We also assume that \theta(M_i) is matricially inapproximable with respect to \tilde N. If this were not the case, then by Theorem 4.7 we could exchange the roles of (N_1 * N_2)^{\mathcal U} and ( \tilde N_1 * \tilde N_2)^{\mathcal V} \rtimes \mathbb Z/2\mathbb Z and proceed similarly.

We now show how the conclusion of Theorem 7.11 is still valid in this setting. Indeed, as before, we may consider the free product deformation \alpha_t * \alpha_t \in \operatorname{Aut}( ( \tilde N_1 * L\mathbb Z) * (\tilde N_2 * L \mathbb Z) ) from [IoPePo08, Section 2.2]. Since this deformation commutes with the free flip, we extend it to a deformation on \tilde \alpha_t \in \operatorname{Aut} ( ( (\tilde N_1 * L \mathbb Z) * (\tilde N_2 * L \mathbb Z) ) \rtimes \mathbb Z/2\mathbb Z ) so that \tilde \alpha_t is the identity on the generator of \mathbb Z/ 2\mathbb Z. Just as in the case for free products, we see that the orthogonal complement of the trivial ( \tilde N_1 * \tilde N_2 ) \rtimes \mathbb Z/ 2 \mathbb Z-bimodule in L^2 ( ( ( \tilde N_1 * L \mathbb Z) * (\tilde N_2 * L \mathbb Z) ) \rtimes \mathbb Z/2\mathbb Z ) is contained in a direct sum of the coarse bimodule, and so the argument in Proposition 6.3 shows that

is a factor.

By Theorem 5.2 we then conclude that we have an inclusion of \theta( M_i )-bimodules

where the right action is twisted by the flip automorphism on ( (\tilde N_1 * L \mathbb Z) * (\tilde N_2 * L \mathbb Z) \rtimes \mathbb Z/2\mathbb Z)^{\mathcal V}.

We now note that, just as in Proposition 6.7, The ( \tilde N_1 * \tilde N_2) \rtimes \mathbb Z/2\mathbb Z Hilbert bimodule L^2 (( (\tilde N_1 * L \mathbb Z) * (\tilde N_2 * L \mathbb Z) ) \rtimes \mathbb Z/2\mathbb Z )_{\alpha_1} decomposes as a direct sum of the bimodule L^2( \langle ( \tilde N_1 * \tilde N_2 ) \rtimes \mathbb Z/2\mathbb Z, \tilde N_1 \rangle ) and a bimodule that is weakly contained in the coarse bimodule. (Note that since \tilde N_1 and \tilde N_2 are conjugate, we only have one direct summand of the basic construction here).

Applying Theorem 3.5, it then follows that we have \theta(M_i) \prec_{(( \tilde N_1 * \tilde N_2) \rtimes \mathbb Z/2\mathbb Z)^{\mathcal V}} \tilde N_1. Proposition 6.3 remains valid in this setting and so, applying the argument in Theorem 6.10 just as above, we see that there are unitaries v_i \in \mathcal U( (( \tilde N_1 * \tilde N_2) \rtimes \mathbb Z/2\mathbb Z)^{\mathcal V} ) so that \theta(N_i^{\mathcal U} ) \subset v_i \tilde N_1^{\mathcal V} v_i^*.

We now note that \theta^{-1}(\tilde M_1) cannot be matricially approximable with respect to N_1 * N_2, because if A_\iota \subset N_1 * N_2 were finite-dimensional such that \theta^{-1}(\tilde M_1) \subset \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} A_\iota, then just as above we would have

But since \theta(N_i^{\mathcal U} ) \subset v_i \tilde N_1^{\mathcal V} v_i^*, this would then give a contradiction by showing that N_1 is amenable.

We may then apply the argument exactly as in Theorem 7.12 to show that there exists a unitary u \in \mathcal U( (N_1 * N_2)^{\mathcal U} ) so that \theta^{-1}(\tilde N_1^{\mathcal V} ) \subset u N_1^{\mathcal U} u^*. But this then shows that u \theta^{-1}(v_2) N_2^{\mathcal U} \theta^{-1}(v_2)^* u^* \subset N_1^{\mathcal U}, which contradicts the fact that N_2 is not amenable.

Suppose \mathcal U is a countably incomplete ultrafilter, and take a property (T) II_1 factor M \subset N^{\mathcal U} with factorial relative commutant. Such an inclusion M \subset N^{\mathcal U} exists because we can take a decomposition N \cong \mathbb M_{n_\iota}(\mathbb C) \otimes (M_{n_\iota}(\mathbb C)' \cap N) and consider the representations \pi_{n_\iota}: SL_3(\mathbb Z) \to \mathcal U(n_\iota) from Proposition 7.8. The ultraproduct representation \pi: SL_3(\mathbb Z) \to \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} \mathbb M_{n_\iota}(\mathbb C) \subset N^{\mathcal U} then satisfies \pi(SL_3(\mathbb Z))' \cap N^{\mathcal U} \cong \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} (M_{n_\iota}(\mathbb C)' \cap N).

By the Downward Löwenheim-Skolem Theorem (see [FaHaSh14, Theorem 2.3]) we may find a separable II_1 factor P \subset N^{\mathcal U} so that M \subset P and such that the inclusion P \subset N^{\mathcal U} is elementary. There are then ultrafilters \mathcal V, \mathcal V' such that the embedding P \subset N^{\mathcal U} extends to an isomorphism P^{\mathcal V} \cong (N^{\mathcal U})^{\mathcal V'}. Since M has (T) and M' \cap N^{\mathcal U} is a factor, we have that M' \cap (N^{\mathcal U})^{\mathcal V'} is also a factor, and hence so is M' \cap P.

To make notation easier, let us label the copies of N in N * N * R as N_1 and N_2 and let us label the copies of N in N * N * P as \tilde N_1 and \tilde N_2. Suppose \theta: (N_1 * N_2 * R)^{\mathcal U} \to (\tilde N_1 * \tilde N_2 * P)^{\mathcal V} were an isomorphism. Essentially the same proof as in Theorem 7.12 then shows that, after permutation of indices, there exist u_1, u_2 \in \mathcal U( (\tilde N_1 * \tilde N_2 * P )^{\mathcal V}) so that \theta( N_i^{\mathcal U} ) = u_i \tilde N_i^{\mathcal V} u_i^*.

Since M_0 \subset P is a property (T) subfactor with factorial relative commutant, Proposition 6.5 and Theorem 7.11 show that there exists i \in \{ 1, 2 \} and v \in \mathcal U( (N_1 * N_2 * R)^{\mathcal U}) so that v \theta^{-1}(M_0) v^* \subset N_i^{\mathcal U}. But then M_0 \subset \theta(v^*) \theta(N_i^{\mathcal U}) \theta(v) \subset \theta(v^*) u_i \tilde N_i^{\mathcal V} u_i^* \theta(v), which would show that M_0 is amenable, giving a contradiction.

If Q \subset \mathcal M is a separable von Neumann subalgebra, then it was already established explicitly in [BoChIo17, Corollary 2.5] that there exists j \in J with A_j \subset Q' \cap \mathcal M, hence we only need to show the second defining characteristic. Given j \in J, it is shown in [BoChIo17, Corollary 2.12] that there exists a separable von Neumann subalgebra Q_0 \subset \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} M^{\overline \otimes t_\iota} with the property that Q_0' \cap \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} (M^{\overline \otimes t_\iota} \overline \otimes N) \subset \prod_{\iota \to \mathcal U} (P_{n_\iota}^{\overline \otimes t_\iota} \overline \otimes N). If we let Q be the von Neumann algebra generated by Q_0 and N, then as N is full we have

The relative commutant of N in L( T_\alpha(\Gamma) ) \overline \otimes N is L( T_\alpha(\Gamma) ), which is a factor. Also, if we write \alpha = (\alpha_1, \alpha_2, \alpha_3, \ldots) and \alpha' = (\alpha_2, \alpha_3, \ldots), then using the decomposition T_\alpha(\Gamma) = T_{\alpha_1}( T_{\alpha'}(\Gamma) ) we have embeddings \beta_i: L\Gamma \to L\Gamma_i \subset L( T_{\alpha} (\Gamma) ), and x \in L( T_\alpha(\Gamma)), then we have \| \mathbb E_{\beta_i(L\Gamma)' \cap L( T_\alpha(\Gamma))}(x ) - x \|_2 \to 0. Since \Gamma has (T), the sequence (\beta_i)_i has uniform weak spectral gap.