Instruction: Write an abstract for the following acadamic paper.

Input:
Paper: we have recorded the flight of a fly during take off and landing using digital high speed photography . it is shown that the dynamics of flexible wings are different for these procedures . during this observation fly flew freely in a big box and it was not tethered .
Abstract: in this fluid dynamics video , we demonstrated take off and landing of a fly . the deformation of wings is in focus in this video .

Paper: let @xmath9 be a group with a generating set @xmath10 , and acting on a set @xmath1 . the ( simplicial ) schreier graph @xmath11 of the action @xmath12 is the graph with the set of vertices @xmath1 , where two vertices @xmath13 and @xmath14 are adjacent if and only if there exists @xmath15 such that @xmath16 . the schreier graphs are generalizations of the cayley graph of a group , which corresponds to the action of a group on itself by the left multiplication . the growth of cayley graphs ( growth of groups ) is one of the central objects of study in geometric group theory . the celebrated theorem of m.  gromov characterizes groups of polynomial growth . many classical groups ( like linear groups , solvable groups , hyperbolic groups , etc . ) have either polynomial or exponential growth . the first group of intermediate growth between polynomial and exponential was constructed by r.  grigorchuk @xcite . nowadays , the grigorchuk group is the best known example of automaton groups ( also known as self - similar groups , or groups generated by automata ) .    in this paper , we consider the growth of schreier graphs of automaton groups . every automaton group @xmath9 generated by an automaton @xmath17 over some alphabet @xmath1 naturally acts on the set @xmath18 for every @xmath19 , and on the space @xmath0 of right - infinite sequences over @xmath1 . we get the associated sequence of finite schreier graphs @xmath20 of the action @xmath21 , and the family of orbital schreier graphs @xmath22 for @xmath2 of the action of @xmath9 on the orbit of @xmath4 . the schreier graphs @xmath23 and @xmath5 provide a large source of self - similar graphs , and were studied in relation to such topics as spectrum , growth , amenability , topology of julia sets , etc . ( see @xcite ) . it was noticed in @xcite that for a few automaton groups the sequence of schreier graphs @xmath23 converges to a nice metric space with fractal structure . further , this observation lead to the notion of a limit space of an automaton group , and , more generally , to a limit dynamical system @xcite . the expanding property of this dynamical system corresponds to the contracting property of a group , what brings us to the important class of contracting automaton groups . namely the strong contracting properties of the grigorchuk group was used to prove that it has intermediate growth , while in general a contracting group may have exponential growth . at the same time , all orbital schreier graphs @xmath5 of contracting groups have polynomial growth @xcite . the degree of the growth is related to the asymptotic characteristics of the group such as the complexity of the word problem , the hausdorff dimension of the limit space , the exponent of divergence of geodesics in the associated gromov - hyperbolic self - similarity complex , etc . ( see @xcite ) . most of the studied automaton groups are generated by polynomial automata . these automata were introduced by s.  sidki in @xcite , who tried to classify automaton groups by the cyclic structure of the generating automaton . a finite automaton is called polynomial if the simple directed cycles away from the trivial state are disjoint . the term polynomial " comes from the equivalent definition , where a finite automaton is polynomial if the number of paths of length @xmath24 avoiding the trivial state in the automaton grows polynomially in  @xmath24 . it is an open problem whether contracting groups and groups generated by polynomial automata are amenable . however , it is known that these groups do not contain nonabelian free subgroups @xcite ( but may contain free semigroups and be of exponential growth ) , and that groups generated by polynomial automata of degree @xmath25 ( bounded automata ) are amenable  @xcite . in @xcite v. nekrashevych introduced a general approach to the existence of free subgroups in automaton groups , and applied it to contracting groups and to groups generated by polynomial automata . in order to eliminate one of the cases , he proved that the orbital schreier graphs @xmath5 are amenable , and conjectured @xcite that these graphs may have subexponential growth . this conjecture was based on the results from @xcite , where it is shown that for the group generated by one of the simplest polynomial automata all schreier graphs @xmath5 have intermediate growth . the main goal of this paper is to prove this conjecture . [ theorem_main ] let @xmath9 be a group generated by a polynomial automaton of degree @xmath7 . there exists a constant @xmath26 such that all orbital schreier graphs @xmath27 for @xmath2 have subexponential growth not greater than @xmath28 .    in order to prove theorem  1 we establish certain weak contracting properties of groups generated by polynomial automata . in particular , we prove that the word problem in these groups is solvable in subexponential time bounded above by @xmath29 for some constant  @xmath30 . we also prove theorem  [ theorem_main ] for a more general class of automata ( see theorem  [ theorem_growth_schr_general ] in section  [ generalized version ] ) , which generalizes both polynomial automata and contracting groups . in section  [ section_examples ] we apply theorem  [ theorem_main ] and its generalized version to construct automaton groups with schreier graphs @xmath5 of intermediate growth . in the first example we consider a class of automaton groups , whose schreier graphs @xmath5 are a generalized version of the @xmath8-periodic graph of intermediate growth studied in @xcite . basically , this example shows that for many polynomial automata the schreier graphs @xmath5 have intermediate growth . another example comes from the well - known hanoi tower game on @xmath31 pegs . this game was modeled by automaton groups @xmath32 in @xcite , and , using known estimates on the complexity of the hanoi tower game , it was noticed that the orbital schreier graph @xmath33 for @xmath34 has intermediate growth . the automata generating groups @xmath32 for @xmath34 are not polynomial , but we apply similar arguments to prove that all orbital schreier graphs @xmath35 have intermediate growth . in this section we recall all needed definition , see @xcite for a more detailed introduction . * spaces of words . * let @xmath1 be a finite alphabet with at least two letters . denote by @xmath36 the set of all finite words over @xmath1 ( including the empty word denoted @xmath37 ) . the length of a word @xmath38 is denoted by @xmath39 . let @xmath40 be the space of all infinite sequences ( words ) @xmath41 , @xmath42 , with the product topology of discrete sets @xmath1 . the space @xmath0 is homeomorphic to the cantor set , i.e. , it is compact totally disconnected metrizable topological space without isolated points . * automata . * an invertible _ automaton _ @xmath17 over the alphabet @xmath1 is the triple @xmath43 , where @xmath10 is the set of states of the automaton , @xmath44 is the transition function , and @xmath45 is the output function such that for every @xmath46 the map @xmath47 is a permutation on @xmath1 . all automata in the paper are invertible , and further we omit the term invertible . an automaton is _ finite _ if the set of its states is finite . an automaton @xmath17 is represented by a directed labeled graph ( moore diagram ) , whose vertices are the states of @xmath17 , and for every state @xmath46 and every letter @xmath48 there is an arrow @xmath49 labeled by the pair @xmath50 . this diagram contains complete information about the automaton , and we identify the automaton with its moore diagram . the notation @xmath17 is also used for the state set of the automaton @xmath17 , so that one can talk about a state @xmath51 . a subset @xmath52 ( with induced edges ) is a _ subautomaton _ of @xmath17 if @xmath53 for every @xmath54 and @xmath48 . * automaton groups . * for every state @xmath51 and every finite word @xmath55 there exists a unique path in the automaton @xmath17 starting at the state @xmath56 and labeled by @xmath57 , @xmath58 ,  , @xmath59 for some @xmath60 . then the word @xmath61 is called the image of @xmath62 under @xmath56 , and the end state of this path is denoted by @xmath63 . in other words , for every finite word @xmath64 we define the _ image @xmath65 of @xmath66 under @xmath56 _ and the _ state _ @xmath63 recursively by the rules @xmath67 for every @xmath48 and @xmath64 . the action of states of @xmath17 on the set @xmath18 can be given by the automaton @xmath68 obtained from @xmath17 by passing to the power @xmath18 of the alphabet @xmath1 . the automaton @xmath68 is defined over the alphabet @xmath18 , and has the same states as @xmath17 , but the arrows are @xmath69 labeled by @xmath70 for every @xmath51 and @xmath71 .    in the same way we get an action of every state @xmath51 on the space @xmath0 by looking at the infinite paths in the automaton . since the automata are invertible , all transformations @xmath51 are also invertible . the group @xmath9 generated by all states @xmath51 is called the _ automaton group _ generated by @xmath17 . since every state preserves the length of words in its action on @xmath72 , the states act by isometries on the space @xmath0 , and every automaton group is a subgroup of @xmath73 . the automaton groups generated by @xmath17 and @xmath68 coincide viewed as subgroups of @xmath73 with the natural identification @xmath74 . all automata in the paper are supposed to be minimized , i.e. , different states of a given automaton act differently on  @xmath0 . hence we identify the states with the respective transformations of  @xmath0 . an alternative approach is through self - similar actions . a faithful action of a group @xmath9 on the set @xmath75 is called _ self - similar _ if for every @xmath76 and @xmath64 there exist @xmath77 and @xmath78 such that @xmath79 for all @xmath80 . the element @xmath81 is called the _ restriction ( state ) of @xmath82 at @xmath66 _ and is denoted by @xmath83 . we are using left actions , i.e. , @xmath84 , and hence the restrictions have the property @xmath85 every self - similar action of a group @xmath9 is given by the _ complete automaton _ @xmath86 of the group , whose states are the elements of @xmath9 , and the arrows are @xmath87 labeled by @xmath88 for every @xmath76 and @xmath48 . an automaton group @xmath9 is called _ contracting _ if there exists a finite subset @xmath89 with the property that for every @xmath76 there exists @xmath90 such that @xmath91 for all words @xmath64 of length @xmath92 . the smallest set @xmath93 with this property is called the _ nucleus _ of the group . notice that a finitely generated contracting group can be generated by a finite automaton . a group @xmath9 generated by a finite automaton is contracting if and only if the complete automaton @xmath86 of the group contains only finitely many simple directed cycles .    throughout the paper by a _ cycle _ in an automaton we mean a simple directed cycle . states that lie on cycles are called _ circuit_. an element @xmath82 of an automaton group @xmath9 is circuit if there exists a nonempty word @xmath64 such that @xmath94 . * polynomial automata . * a cycle in an automaton is called trivial if it is a loop at the state acting trivially on @xmath0 ( trivial state , denoted @xmath95 ) . a finite automaton @xmath17 is called _ polynomial _ if different nontrivial cycles in @xmath17 are disjoint . a polynomial automaton @xmath17 is _ of degree @xmath7 _ if the largest number of nontrivial cycles in @xmath17 connected by a directed path is equal to @xmath96 . a finite automaton @xmath17 is polynomial ( of degree @xmath97 ) if and only if the number of directed paths in @xmath17 of length @xmath24 that do not pass through the trivial state is bounded by a polynomial in @xmath24 ( of degree @xmath97 ) . the set of all states ( transformations of @xmath0 ) of all polynomial automata of degree @xmath97 forms a group @xmath98 called the _ group of polynomial automata of degree _ every finitely generated subgroup of @xmath98 is a subgroup of some automaton group generated by a polynomial automaton . we classify the states of a polynomial automaton @xmath17 as follows . a state @xmath51 is _ finitary _ if there exists @xmath90 such that @xmath99 for all @xmath71 . the finitary states are precisely the elements of @xmath100 . the states from @xmath101 are called _ polynomial of degree  @xmath7_. for every polynomial automaton @xmath17 there exists @xmath24 such that for every @xmath51 and @xmath71 the state @xmath63 is either circuit or has degree less than the degree of @xmath56 . notice , that if @xmath51 is a nontrivial circuit state , then for every @xmath24 there exists precisely one word @xmath71 such that @xmath56 and @xmath63 have the same degree as polynomial states , and @xmath102 for all @xmath103 , @xmath104 , has degree less than the degree of @xmath56 . * schreier graphs . * let @xmath9 be an automaton group generated by a finite subset @xmath10 . the _ schreier graph @xmath105 _ is the graph with the set of vertices @xmath18 , where two vertices @xmath66 and @xmath106 are adjacent if there exists @xmath15 such that @xmath107 . orbital schreier graph @xmath108 _ for @xmath2 is the graph whose vertex set is the orbit @xmath109 and two vertices @xmath66 and @xmath106 are adjacent if there exists @xmath15 such that @xmath107 . the orbital schreier graphs @xmath110 are precisely the connected components of the schreier graph @xmath111 of the action @xmath112 . every orbital schreier graph @xmath5 is a limit of the finite schreier graphs @xmath23 in the local gromov - hausdorff topology on pointed graphs . * growth of graphs . * let @xmath113 be a locally finite connected graph . the _ growth function _ @xmath114 of @xmath113 with respect to its vertex @xmath66 is equal to the number of vertices in the closed ball @xmath115 of radius @xmath24 centered at @xmath66 . there is a partial order on the growth functions . given two functions @xmath116 we say that @xmath117 has _ growth _ not greater than @xmath82 ( denoted @xmath118 ) if there exists a constant @xmath119 such that @xmath120 for all @xmath90 . if @xmath118 and @xmath121 then @xmath117 and @xmath82 are called equivalent @xmath122 and have the same growth . formally , by the growth we can understand the equivalence class of a function . then , for any two vertices of the graph @xmath113 , the respective growth functions are equivalent , and one can talk about the growth of @xmath113 . a graph @xmath113 has _ subexponential growth _ if its growth function has growth not greater than the exponential growth @xmath123 with @xmath124 , and is not equivalent to it . the growth is _ superpolynomial _ if it is greater than every polynomial function , and the growth is _ intermediate _ if it is superpolynomial and subexponential . let @xmath9 be a finitely generated group with finite generating set @xmath10 . the _ length _ @xmath125 of @xmath76 with respect to @xmath10 is equal to the distance between the trivial element @xmath95 and @xmath82 in the cayley graph @xmath126 , i.e. , @xmath127 and @xmath128 the growth function @xmath129 of the group @xmath9 is the growth function of the cayley graph @xmath126 with respect to the vertex @xmath95 , i.e. , @xmath130 is equal to the number of elements @xmath76 of length @xmath131 . the growth functions of the cayley graphs @xmath132 and @xmath133 , for any two finite generating sets @xmath134 and @xmath135 , are equivalent . the growth of schreier graphs @xmath136 of an automaton group @xmath9 also does not depend on the choice of a finite generating set @xmath10 of the group . working with automaton groups it is useful to assume that a generating set @xmath10 is _ self - similar _ ( automaton ) , i.e. , @xmath137 for every @xmath46 and @xmath64 . for example , we will frequently use the following observation . if there is a presentation @xmath138 for @xmath139 then for every @xmath64 we get the _ induced presentation _ @xmath140 where @xmath141 , and @xmath142 for @xmath143 . in particular , if @xmath10 is self - similar then @xmath144 and @xmath145 . also , it is usually assumed that @xmath10 is _ symmetric _ , i.e. , @xmath146 . all logarithms in the paper are with base @xmath147 , except if directly indicated . usually , a logarithm appears as @xmath148 , and the base can be hidden in the constant @xmath149 . also ( to avoid some multiple brackets ) we use the convention that @xmath150 and @xmath151 so that @xmath152 for all @xmath153 , otherwise one can just replace @xmath154 by @xmath155 . let us recall how to prove that for contracting groups the schreier graphs @xmath5 have polynomial growth ( see ( * ? ? ? * section  2.13.4 ) , @xcite ) . let @xmath9 be a finitely generated contracting group with nucleus @xmath93 , and let @xmath10 be a finite symmetric self - similar generating set of @xmath9 that contains @xmath93 . we can choose a constant @xmath149 such that @xmath156 for all @xmath157 and every word @xmath64 of length @xmath158 . consider an element @xmath76 and let @xmath138 for @xmath139 with @xmath159 . then @xmath160 and hence the element @xmath83 has length @xmath161 . it follows that @xmath91 for all words @xmath64 of length @xmath162 . this justifies the term contracting group : the length of restrictions exponentially decreases ( contracts " ) until they become elements of the nucleus . now consider the schreier graph @xmath163 for a sequence @xmath164 . let @xmath165 be the ball of radius @xmath24 in the graph @xmath5 centered at the vertex @xmath4 . notice that if @xmath166 for @xmath167 and @xmath168 then @xmath169 . let @xmath31 be the least integer greater than @xmath148 . then each sequence in the ball @xmath165 is of the form @xmath170 for some @xmath171 and @xmath172 for some @xmath173 . hence @xmath174 which is a polynomial in @xmath24 . more precise estimate can be given using the contracting coefficient of the group ( see ( * ? ? ? * proposition  2.13.8 ) ) . we want to apply similar arguments to groups generated by polynomial automata , and first we will establish certain weak contracting properties of these groups . [ lemma_weak_contr_poly ] let @xmath9 be a finitely generated subgroup of @xmath98 . there exists a constant @xmath149 such that for every @xmath76 and every word @xmath64 of length @xmath175 the state @xmath83 is either circuit or belongs to @xmath176 .    to prove lemma  [ lemma_weak_contr_poly ] we use induction on @xmath7 . however there is one slight difficulty , that in order to apply the induction hypothesis we may need to consider the length of the element @xmath83 for a different generating set than the length of @xmath82 . to overcome this problem we will make a few assumptions so that the groups involved in the induction have consistent generating sets .    without loss of generality , we can assume that the group @xmath9 is an automaton subgroup of @xmath98 . let @xmath10 be a finite symmetric self - similar generating set of @xmath9 . let @xmath177 be an automaton subgroup of @xmath9 generated by @xmath178 for @xmath179 . the generating set @xmath180 is again symmetric and self - similar . notice that , in general , the group @xmath177 may not coincide with @xmath181 . let us prove that the length of cycles in the complete automaton @xmath86 of the group @xmath9 is bounded . without loss of generality , by passing to a power of the alphabet , we can assume that the alphabet @xmath1 and the generating set @xmath10 satisfy the following conditions : + 1 ) for every @xmath46 and @xmath48 the state @xmath182 is either circuit or has degree less than the + degree of @xmath56 ; + 2 ) for every nontrivial circuit state @xmath46 there exists ( unique ) @xmath48 such that @xmath183 + ( every cycle in @xmath10 is a loop ) . + ( for example , one can pass to the alphabet @xmath184 , where @xmath31 is a multiple of the length of every cycle in @xmath10 , and is greater than the diameter of @xmath10 ) . let us prove that then every cycle in the automaton @xmath86 is a loop , i.e. , for every circuit element @xmath76 there exists a letter @xmath48 such that @xmath185 . assume @xmath94 for a nonempty word @xmath186 and let @xmath138 for @xmath139 with @xmath159 . notice that @xmath187 for every @xmath188 , because otherwise @xmath94 can be expressed as a product @xmath189 with @xmath190 . over all presentations of @xmath82 as a product @xmath191 we consequently for @xmath192 choose the one with the largest number of circuit generators from @xmath193 and then with the largest number of the rest generators from @xmath180 . consider the induced presentation : @xmath194 where @xmath142 with @xmath141 . by our choice of the presentation @xmath138 we should get @xmath195 then @xmath196 where @xmath197 is the first letter of @xmath198 , and we get @xmath199 . it also follows that @xmath200 for @xmath201 , @xmath202 , and in its induced presentation @xmath203 every generator @xmath204 belongs to the set @xmath205 . in particular , the length of @xmath206 with respect to the generating set @xmath205 of the group @xmath207 is not greater than @xmath24 . further we will use this property without specifying the generating set .    to the rest of this section we always assume that the group @xmath9 and the generating set @xmath10 satisfy the above assumptions . we will prove a slightly stronger formulation of lemma  1 . * lemma  1*. * _ there exists a constant @xmath149 such that for every @xmath208 for @xmath139 and every word @xmath64 of length @xmath209 either @xmath210 and in the induced presentation @xmath211 every generator @xmath212 belongs to @xmath205 , or the element @xmath83 is circuit , @xmath213 for some @xmath48 , and the induced presentations of @xmath83 and @xmath214 coincide as words in generators . _    the proof goes by induction on @xmath7 . for @xmath215 the group @xmath9 is a subgroup of the group @xmath100 of finitary elements . there exists a constant @xmath149 such that for all words @xmath66 of length @xmath158 we have @xmath99 for every @xmath46 ( actually by our assumption 1 ) on the generating set @xmath10 we can take @xmath216 ) . hence for every product @xmath208 for @xmath139 we get @xmath217 and in the induced presentation of @xmath83 every element is trivial . we assume the lemma holds for the groups @xmath218 ( with @xmath7 replaced by @xmath31 ) for @xmath219 with some common constant @xmath220 . let @xmath76 be a circuit element and @xmath185 for a letter @xmath48 . let @xmath221 , @xmath139 , be a presentation such that the induced presentation of @xmath222 coincides with @xmath223 as a word in generators . then for every word @xmath64 either @xmath224 and every generator in the induced presentation of @xmath83 belong to @xmath205 , or @xmath94 ( in the case @xmath225 ) and the induced presentation of @xmath83 coincides with @xmath223 . consider the product @xmath226 for @xmath227 , @xmath228 , and its restrictions @xmath229 for words @xmath64 of length @xmath230 . we have the following cases . if @xmath231 then @xmath232 , so further assume @xmath233 and let us look at @xmath234 . by the assumption on the length of the word @xmath66 the element @xmath234 either belongs to @xmath235 or it is circuit ( with the specific induced presentation ) . + if @xmath236 then @xmath237 for @xmath238 . + if @xmath234 is circuit and @xmath239 then @xmath240 is circuit , here @xmath241 . + if @xmath234 is circuit and @xmath242 then @xmath243 for @xmath238 . + hence in all cases the element @xmath244 for @xmath245 is either circuit , or belongs to @xmath207 , or it is of the form @xmath246 for @xmath238 . in the last case we can apply the same arguments to the product @xmath246 . after @xmath7 steps we get either a circuit state or an element of @xmath207 . in the worst case we need to take the words of length @xmath247 choose a constant @xmath248 such that @xmath249 is greater than the value of the equation above . then the element @xmath240 for words @xmath64 of length @xmath250 is either circuit or belongs to @xmath207 , and the conditions on the induced presentation of @xmath240 are satisfied . let @xmath251 be circuit elements and consider the product @xmath252 for @xmath253 . assume @xmath254 is expressed as a product in generators of length @xmath255 with the same properties as the one of @xmath82 above , and @xmath81 is expressed as a product of @xmath24 generators from @xmath205 . then the element @xmath256 for @xmath64 of length @xmath257 with @xmath258 is either circuit or belongs to @xmath207 with the specific induced presentation . now consider an arbitrary element @xmath259 for @xmath139 . let us partition the product @xmath260 on blocks @xmath261 such that every block @xmath262 contains only generators from @xmath205 ( may be trivial ) , and @xmath254 is either a generator from @xmath263 , or @xmath254 is circuit and the induced presentation of @xmath264 coincides with the presentation @xmath254 for some @xmath48 . notice that the sum of lengths of all @xmath262 and @xmath254 is equal to @xmath24 . by passing to the induced presentation of the state @xmath265 on any letter @xmath48 we can assume that every element @xmath254 is circuit . consider every product @xmath266 , @xmath267 , and so on , in the presentation ( [ eqn_lemma_g = ghgh ... ] ) . every such block restricted to a word of length @xmath268 is either circuit or belongs to @xmath207 . hence the state @xmath83 for words @xmath64 of length @xmath269 can be expressed as a product ( [ eqn_lemma_g = ghgh ... ] ) with @xmath270 positions with some circuit elements @xmath254 . applying the same procedure @xmath271 times we get either a circuit state or an element of @xmath207 . choose a constant @xmath149 such that @xmath272 ( here we use @xmath273 ) . then @xmath83 for @xmath64 of length @xmath274 is either circuit or belongs to @xmath207 , and in both cases it has the required induced presentation . the word problem in every finitely generated subgroup of @xmath98 is solvable in subexponential time . we use the same notations and assumptions as above . consider an element @xmath259 for @xmath139 . let @xmath31 be the least integer greater than @xmath275 . the element @xmath82 is trivial if and only if it acts trivially on @xmath184 and every element @xmath83 for @xmath276 is trivial . notice that the size of @xmath184 is subexponential in @xmath24 . consider the induced presentation @xmath277 with @xmath278 . if @xmath279 for all @xmath188 , then the problem reduces to the word problem in the group @xmath207 . otherwise , @xmath83 is circuit and there exists @xmath48 such that the induced presentation @xmath280 coincides with the presentation @xmath277 letter by letter , i.e. , @xmath281 for all  @xmath188 . then @xmath83 is trivial if and only if it acts trivially on @xmath1 and every element @xmath282 for @xmath201 , @xmath283 , is trivial . again the problem reduces to the word problem in @xmath207 . by induction we conclude that the word problem is solvable in subexponential time with an upper bound @xmath284 for some constant @xmath220 . we are ready to prove the main result . [ theorem_growth_schreier_poly ] let @xmath9 be a finitely generated subgroup of @xmath98 . there exists a constant @xmath149 such that every orbital schreier graph @xmath27 for @xmath2 has subexponential growth not greater than @xmath285 . the proof goes by induction on @xmath7 . for @xmath215 the group @xmath286 is finite , and every schreier graph @xmath5 has at most @xmath287 vertices . we can also start the induction from @xmath288 using the fact that in this case the group @xmath289 is contracting ( see @xcite ) . we suppose by induction that the statement holds for the group @xmath207 and every schreier graph @xmath290 has subexponential growth not greater than @xmath291 with some constant @xmath220 . fix a sequence @xmath164 and consider the ball @xmath165 in the graph @xmath163 of radius @xmath24 centered at the vertex @xmath4 . if @xmath166 for @xmath167 and @xmath168 then @xmath169 . hence for every fixed @xmath31 each sequence in the ball @xmath165 is of the form @xmath170 for some @xmath171 and @xmath172 for some @xmath292 , where @xmath293 it follows that @xmath294 . let @xmath295 be the ball of radius @xmath24 in the group @xmath207 with respect to its generating set @xmath205 . let @xmath31 be the least integer greater than @xmath296 given in lemma  [ lemma_weak_contr_poly ] . then for every @xmath297 there exists @xmath48 such that @xmath185 . hence @xmath298 where @xmath299 for @xmath48 . by induction hypothesis the size of the orbit @xmath300 is not greater than @xmath301 . let us estimate the size of the orbits @xmath302 . let @xmath48 be the first letter of the word @xmath66 and consider the following cases . if @xmath303 then for @xmath304 we have @xmath305 for some @xmath306 ; and for @xmath307 with @xmath201 , @xmath308 , we have @xmath309 for some @xmath306 and @xmath310 . hence we get estimates @xmath311 for @xmath201 , @xmath283 . if @xmath312 for @xmath313 then for @xmath304 we have @xmath314 for some @xmath315 and @xmath310 ; and for @xmath307 with @xmath201 , @xmath283 , we have @xmath316 for some @xmath306 and @xmath310 . hence we get estimates @xmath317 for some constant @xmath248 .    as a corollary we recover the following result from ( * ? ? ? * corollary  4.6 ) . the orbital schreier graphs @xmath5 for @xmath2 of groups generated by polynomial automata are amenable . theorem  [ theorem_main ] can be generalized to automaton groups with a certain combination of contracting and polynomial properties . [ theorem_growth_schr_general ] let @xmath17 be a finite automaton with subautomaton @xmath318 such that different cycles in @xmath319 are disjoint , and the group generated by @xmath318 is contracting . let @xmath9 be the automaton group generated by @xmath17 . there exists a constant @xmath149 such that every orbital schreier graph @xmath27 for @xmath2 has subexponential growth bounded above by @xmath285 , where @xmath7 is the maximal number of different cycles in @xmath319 connected by a directed path . the proof goes by induction on @xmath7 following the same strategy as in the proof of theorem  [ theorem_growth_schreier_poly ] . first , we make a few assumptions about the generating sets to make our life easier . we can assume that the generating sets @xmath17 and @xmath318 are symmetric , and @xmath318 contains the nucleus @xmath93 of the contracting group @xmath320 . let @xmath180 for @xmath321 be the largest subautomaton of @xmath17 such that @xmath322 contains at most @xmath31 cycles connected by a directed path . then every @xmath180 is also symmetric and self - similar . we pass to a power of the alphabet so that every cycle in @xmath319 , and hence in @xmath323 , is actually a loop ; and for every @xmath324 and @xmath48 either @xmath325 or @xmath182 is circuit . let @xmath177 be the group generated by @xmath180 . in particular , @xmath326 and we use notation @xmath327 . the group @xmath328 is contracting with nucleus @xmath93 . indeed , by construction , there are no cycles in @xmath329 , and hence @xmath330 for all @xmath331 and all words @xmath66 of length greater than the diameter of  @xmath329 .    [ lemma_cycles_are_loops_generalized ] the length of cycles in the complete automaton @xmath86 of the group @xmath9 is bounded . take a circuit element @xmath76 . let @xmath94 for a nonempty word @xmath66 , and @xmath332 for every beginning @xmath106 of @xmath66 . over all presentation of @xmath82 as a product @xmath191 for @xmath139 with @xmath159 , we consequently choose the one with the largest number of circuit elements @xmath333 and then with the largest number of any elements @xmath333 , for @xmath321 . consider the induced presentation  : @xmath334 where @xmath142 with @xmath141 . notice , that this presentation also satisfies the above assumptions , as is the induced presentation @xmath335 for every iteration @xmath336 of the word @xmath66 . in particular , every @xmath337 is actually circuit , because otherwise the presentation given by @xmath335 would contain more circuit generators than the chosen one .    two consecutive elements @xmath337 and @xmath338 in the presentation can not both lie in @xmath93 . indeed , in this case @xmath339 for all sufficiently large @xmath106 . hence @xmath335 can be expressed as a product of less than @xmath24 generators for large enough iteration @xmath336 , contradicting @xmath159 .    our choice of the presentation @xmath138 and the assumptions on the generating set @xmath10 force @xmath340 for every @xmath341 . hence @xmath342 ( here @xmath343 ) , where @xmath42 is the unique letter such that @xmath344 . if @xmath345 for @xmath346 then @xmath347 and we still get @xmath342 with @xmath348 . assume @xmath349 , and hence @xmath350 with @xmath351 . consider the induced presentations of @xmath352 for every @xmath353 . if @xmath341 then the @xmath188-th generator in the presentation of every @xmath352 remains the same and is equal to @xmath337 . let us trace the positions with elements from @xmath93 . if @xmath345 then the @xmath188-th element in the presentation of @xmath352 is equal to @xmath354 . hence these @xmath188-th elements change according to the vertices of the path in the nucleus @xmath93 that starts at the state @xmath337 and goes along arrows with left label @xmath197 . it follows that every position is pre - periodic . we can eliminate the pre - periods by passing from the presentation @xmath355 to the induced presentation @xmath356 for large enough @xmath357 , and hence we assume that every position repeats periodically . if @xmath357 is a multiple of the lengths of every cycle in @xmath93 , then the induced presentation of @xmath352 coincides with @xmath191 letter by letter , and hence @xmath356 . it follows that the length of the word @xmath66 is bounded by the least common multiple of the length of cycles in the nucleus @xmath93 .    if @xmath358 then @xmath359 , @xmath360 , and we can apply the same arguments . let @xmath361 be the upper bound on the length of cycles in @xmath86 . just to notice , in general , we can not pass to a power of the alphabet to transform every cycle into a loop , i.e. , to make @xmath362 , as was possible in the case of polynomial automata . further , we will use the fact proved in lemma  [ lemma_cycles_are_loops_generalized ] , that if @xmath363 for @xmath364 is circuit and @xmath94 then @xmath365 for every @xmath77 , @xmath366 , and the length of @xmath367 with respect to @xmath368 is not greater than the length of @xmath82 with respect to  @xmath180 . the formulation of lemma  1 remains the same ( with @xmath369 ) . [ lemma_weak_contr_poly_generalized ] there exists a constant @xmath149 such that for every @xmath259 for @xmath139 and every word @xmath64 of length @xmath209 the element @xmath83 is either circuit , or @xmath224 . the proof is basically the same as the one of lemma  1*. let us indicate only the main argument . we assume the lemma holds for the groups @xmath218 for @xmath370 with some common constant @xmath220 . let @xmath76 be a circuit element . consider the product @xmath226 for @xmath253 and its restrictions @xmath229 for words @xmath64 of length @xmath371 . we have the following cases . if @xmath224 then @xmath232 . so further assume @xmath372 , and hence @xmath83 and @xmath82 lie on the same cycle . there exists a nonempty word @xmath106 of length @xmath373 such that @xmath374 . let us look at @xmath234 , which either belongs to @xmath235 or is circuit . if @xmath236 then @xmath375 for circuit @xmath376 and @xmath377 . otherwise @xmath234 is circuit , and let @xmath378 be the length of the cycle at @xmath234 . then the length of the word @xmath379 is a multiple of @xmath380 and of @xmath357 . if @xmath381 then @xmath382 and the state @xmath240 is circuit ; otherwise @xmath383 . hence in all cases the state @xmath384 for a word @xmath4 of length @xmath385 is either circuit , or it belongs to @xmath207 , or it is of the form @xmath386 for circuit @xmath387 and @xmath238 with @xmath388 . eventually , in the worst case , we will need to consider the product @xmath226 for circuit @xmath82 and @xmath389 . in this case we can apply the same arguments as in the proof of lemma  [ lemma_cycles_are_loops_generalized ] . the rest of the proof is the same . now we can return to the growth of schreier graphs . if @xmath288 then the group @xmath9 is contracting and the statement holds . we suppose by induction that the statement holds for the group @xmath207 with some constant @xmath220 . take a sequence @xmath164 and consider the schreier graph @xmath163 . we will use the estimate . let @xmath295 be the ball of radius @xmath24 in the group @xmath207 with respect to its generating set @xmath205 . let @xmath31 be the least integer greater than @xmath296 from lemma  [ lemma_weak_contr_poly_generalized ] . then for every @xmath297 there exists a nonempty word @xmath106 of length @xmath373 such that @xmath390 . hence @xmath391 where @xmath392 . by induction hypothesis the size of the orbit @xmath300 is not greater than @xmath301 . let us estimate the size of the orbits @xmath393 . if @xmath394 then for every @xmath395 we get @xmath305 for some @xmath396 . if @xmath397 for @xmath398 , @xmath399 , and @xmath400 , then for every @xmath395 we get @xmath314 for some @xmath401 and @xmath310 . summarizing all estimates we get @xmath402 for some constant @xmath248 . * omega - periodic graphs*. let @xmath403 be the binary alphabet . for every finite word @xmath404 over @xmath1 consider the automaton @xmath405 shown in figure  [ fig_automatonomega ] , where we use notation @xmath406 and @xmath407 . every automaton @xmath405 is polynomial of degree @xmath408 . the automaton @xmath405 is a subautomaton of @xmath409 , and we get an increasing chain of polynomial automata @xmath410 for every @xmath42 . hence every orbital schreier graph @xmath411 for @xmath2 is a subgraph of @xmath412 . this allows us to construct the schreier graph @xmath411 consequently as @xmath413 , by looking at the action of the states @xmath414 . we start from the orbital schreier graphs @xmath415 of the automaton @xmath416 . the transformation @xmath417 is called the adding machine , because its action on a sequence @xmath418 corresponds to the addition of @xmath419 to the binary number @xmath420 . in particular , the infinite cyclic group generated by @xmath416 acts faithfully on every its orbit on @xmath0 . hence every schreier graph @xmath415 for @xmath2 is a line , i.e. , its vertices can be identified with @xmath421 via the map @xmath422 , and the edges are @xmath423 for all @xmath424 . notice that for every state @xmath425 of the automaton @xmath405 if @xmath426 , for @xmath427 , and we take the first position @xmath24 with @xmath428 , then @xmath429 and @xmath430 . it follows that each @xmath425 preserves the orbits of the action of @xmath417 on @xmath0 . hence the orbits of @xmath431 for every word @xmath66 coincide with the orbits of @xmath432 , and we can identify the vertex set of every schreier graph @xmath411 for @xmath2 with the set @xmath421 . every state @xmath425 of the automaton @xmath433 acts on the infinite sequences as follows @xmath434 for every @xmath2 and @xmath435 . notice that every sequence from @xmath0 appears in for suitable numbers @xmath436 . further , for every fixed @xmath437 , the edges defined by , when @xmath4 runs through @xmath0 , are periodic , namely , these edges are invariant under the shift @xmath438 on @xmath421 . it follows that all schreier graphs @xmath411 for @xmath2 are unions of periodic subgraphs on @xmath421 , and hence they are @xmath8-periodic in the terminology of @xcite . the schreier graph @xmath439 ( see figure  [ fig_omegagraph ] ) was defined in @xcite as an example of a graph of intermediate growth ( its growth is equivalent to @xmath440 ) connected to the long range percolation on @xmath421 . all orbital schreier graphs @xmath441 for @xmath2 of the automaton @xmath442 were studied in @xcite , where it was proved that the family of these graphs contains uncountably many pairwise nonisomorphic graphs , all of them except @xmath443 are locally isomorphic , and all have intermediate growth . the groups generated by @xmath442 and @xmath444 are the same , and the automata @xmath445 are just different generating sets of this group . hence the schreier graphs @xmath446 also have intermediate growth . the schreier graphs @xmath411 for every nonempty word @xmath66 have growth not less than the growth of @xmath441 or of @xmath446 . hence their growth is superpolynomial , and then theorem  [ theorem_main ] implies that all orbital schreier graphs @xmath411 for @xmath2 and @xmath447 have intermediate growth . actually , if we take the automaton shown in figure  [ fig_automatonomega ] and change the labels of the edges passing from the states @xmath448 in any way we want , we still get the automaton whose all schreier graphs @xmath5 have intermediate growth . more generally , if we take any polynomial automaton @xmath17 over @xmath1 that contains @xmath449 ( with any labels at @xmath450 ) as a subautomaton , then all orbital schreier graphs @xmath451 have intermediate growth . * nonpolynomial example . * consider the automaton @xmath318 over the alphabet @xmath403 shown in figure  [ fig_automnonpoly ] . the automaton @xmath318 is not polynomial , but satisfies the conditions of theorem  [ theorem_growth_schr_general ] . the group @xmath452 is the infinite cyclic group , which coincides with the automaton group generated by the subautomaton of @xmath318 with states @xmath453 . the group @xmath454 is contracting with nucleus @xmath455 , while the group @xmath9 generated by @xmath318 is not contracting . theorem  [ theorem_growth_schr_general ] implies that all orbital schreier graphs @xmath456 for @xmath2 have subexponential growth .    to obtain a lower bound we can use the previous example . we notice that the group @xmath454 acts faithfully on every its orbit on @xmath0 . the states @xmath457 act similarly to the states @xmath458 , namely , @xmath459 and @xmath460 for @xmath2 and @xmath461 . it follows that the schreier graph @xmath441 can be seen as a subgraph of the schreier graph @xmath456 via the map @xmath462 for every @xmath2 . hence all orbital schreier graphs @xmath456 have intermediate growth . * hanoi graphs*. the hanoi tower game on @xmath31 pegs is played with @xmath24 disks of distinct size placed on @xmath31 pegs , @xmath463 . initially , all disks are placed on the first peg according to their size so that the smallest disk is at the top , and the largest disk is at the bottom . a player can move only one top disk at a time from one peg to another peg , and can never place a bigger disk over a smaller disk . the goal of the game is to transfer the disks from the first peg to another peg . more generally , one can take any two configurations of disks and ask a player to transform one configuration to another one , where a configuration is any arrangement of @xmath24 disks on @xmath31 pegs such that a bigger disk does not lie on a smaller disk . for more information about this game , its history , solutions , and open problems , we refer the reader to @xcite and the references therein . the hanoi tower game is modeled by the hanoi graphs @xmath464 . the vertices of the graph @xmath464 are the configurations of @xmath24 disks on @xmath31 pegs , and two configurations are adjacent if one can pass from one to another by a single disk move . then the hanoi tower game is equivalent to finding a path in the graph @xmath464 between two given vertices . in particular , the diameter of the hanoi graph gives an upper bound on the optimal number of steps in the hanoi tower game . it was noticed in @xcite that the game can be also modeled by a finite automaton @xmath465 over the alphabet @xmath466 , called the hanoi towers automaton on @xmath31 pegs . in this model , the pegs are identified with the letters of the alphabet @xmath1 , and the disks are labeled by @xmath467 according to their size . then the configurations of @xmath24 disks on @xmath31 pegs can be encoded by words of length @xmath24 over @xmath1 , where the word @xmath62 corresponds to the unique configuration in which the disk @xmath188 is placed on the peg @xmath197 . the automaton @xmath465 has the trivial state @xmath95 and the state @xmath468 for every transposition @xmath469 on @xmath1 with two arrows @xmath470 labeled by @xmath471 and @xmath472 , and the loop at @xmath468 labeled by @xmath473 for every @xmath474 . for example , the automaton @xmath475 is shown in figure  [ fig_automhanoi ] ( the loops at the trivial state @xmath95 are not drawn ) . the action of the state @xmath468 on a word of length @xmath24 corresponds to a single disk move between the pegs @xmath188 and @xmath476 . hence the schreier graph @xmath477 is precisely the hanoi graph @xmath464 . the complexity of the hanoi tower game highly depends on whether @xmath478 or @xmath34 . in the case @xmath478 , the hanoi graph @xmath479 has diameter @xmath480 , and this is the smallest number of steps to win the game . the automaton @xmath481 is bounded and generates a contracting group . all orbital schreier graphs @xmath482 for @xmath2 have polynomial growth of degree @xmath483 .    for @xmath34 , the hanoi tower game can be solved in subexponential number of moves , asymptotically in @xmath484 moves ( see @xcite ) . in particular , the diameter of the hanoi graph @xmath464 and the schreier graph @xmath477 is asymptotically @xmath484 . one can apply this asymptotic estimates to the orbital schreier graphs @xmath485 for @xmath2 . it is easy to see that the growth function @xmath129 of each graph @xmath485 satisfies @xmath486 , where @xmath487 is the diameter of the graph @xmath477 . hence the upper bound on the diameter of @xmath477 implies a superpolynomial lower bound on the growth of @xmath485 , namely @xmath488 with some constant @xmath119 . this was used in ( * ? ? ? * theorem  2.1 ) to conclude that the schreier graph @xmath489 for @xmath34 has intermediate growth between @xmath490 and @xmath491 for some constants @xmath492 . the automaton @xmath465 for @xmath34 is not polynomial , and does not satisfy the assumptions of theorem  [ theorem_growth_schr_general ] . however , we can apply similar ideas to give the subexponential upper bound @xmath493 on the growth of every schreier graph @xmath485 for @xmath2 .      to provide an upper bound we follow similar arguments as in the proofs on theorems [ theorem_growth_schreier_poly ] and [ theorem_growth_schr_general ] . we will show only the case @xmath494 , the general case is analogous . let @xmath32 be the automaton group generated by @xmath465 . notice that for every state @xmath56 of the automaton @xmath465 and every word @xmath64 if @xmath495 then @xmath496 and @xmath497 . it immediately follows that every cycle in the complete automaton @xmath498 of the group @xmath32 is a loop labeled by @xmath473 for some letter @xmath48 . the group @xmath499 is contracting with nucleus @xmath500 . then for every @xmath501 , @xmath502 , the restriction @xmath83 belongs to @xmath93 for all words @xmath66 of length @xmath503 . hence every schreier graph @xmath482 has subexponential ( polynomial ) growth not greater than @xmath504 and the automaton @xmath475 . for @xmath48 denote by @xmath505 the subautomaton of @xmath475 consisting of states that fix the letter @xmath13 . the group generated by @xmath505 acts on the words over @xmath506 in the same way as the group @xmath499 acts on @xmath507 , and that is where we can apply the inductive arguments . in particular , if @xmath138 for @xmath508 then for every word @xmath64 that contains at least @xmath154 letters different from @xmath13 the restriction @xmath83 belongs to @xmath475 , in other words , @xmath83 fixes one more letter except @xmath13 .    take two different letters @xmath509 and consider elements @xmath221 for @xmath510 and @xmath511 for @xmath512 . take an arbitrary word @xmath64 of length @xmath513 with @xmath514 . if the word @xmath66 contains at least @xmath154 letters not equal to @xmath13 then @xmath515 . otherwise , @xmath66 contains at least @xmath154 letters equal to @xmath13 , and then @xmath516 contains at least @xmath154 letters equal to @xmath13 . since @xmath517 , we get @xmath518 . it follows that for every word of length @xmath519 there exists a letter @xmath306 such that every generator in the induced presentation of @xmath520 belongs to @xmath521 ( i.e. , @xmath240 is circuit ) . let us prove that there exists a constant @xmath248 such that for every product @xmath522 , @xmath523 , and every word @xmath64 of length @xmath524 there exists @xmath48 such that every generator @xmath212 in the induced presentation @xmath525 belongs to @xmath505 ( hence @xmath83 is circuit , here @xmath213 ) . we partition the presentation @xmath138 on blocks @xmath526 such that every @xmath527 contains only generators from @xmath528 for some letter @xmath48 ( depending on @xmath188 ) . consider the products @xmath529 , @xmath530 ,  , and their restrictions on words @xmath66 of length @xmath531 . using the above property we get that the element @xmath83 can be expressed as a product with @xmath532 elements @xmath254 . applying the same procedure @xmath533 times , we get an element with needed properties . the existence of the constant @xmath248 follows . consider the schreier graph @xmath534 for @xmath164 . we will use estimate with @xmath31 being the least integer greater than @xmath535 . then @xmath536 where @xmath537 consists of those elements @xmath538 that can be expressed as a product of no more than @xmath24 elements from @xmath505 . every element @xmath304 fixes every occurrence of the letter @xmath13 in the sequence @xmath539 , and changes every other letter in the same way as the group @xmath499 acts on @xmath506 . hence the orbit @xmath540 has subexponential growth not greater than @xmath541 . we get the upper bound @xmath542 for some constant @xmath149 .    * weakly contracting groups . * one of the main properties used in the proof of theorems  [ theorem_main ] and [ theorem_growth_schr_general ] leads us to the following definition . we say that a group @xmath9 generated by a finite automaton is _ weakly contracting _ if the length of cycles in the complete automaton @xmath86 of the group is bounded . every finitely generated contracting group is weakly contracting . the groups generated by polynomial automata , the groups from theorem  [ theorem_growth_schr_general ] , and the hanoi towers groups are also weakly contracting . it is natural to ask which properties can be generalized to this class of groups . is the word problem in weakly contracting groups solvable in subexponential time ? do weakly contracting groups not contain nonabelian free subgroups ? do the orbital schreier graphs @xmath5 of weakly contracting groups have subexponential growth ?
Abstract:

Answer: every automaton group naturally acts on the space @xmath0 of infinite sequences over some alphabet @xmath1 . for every @xmath2 we consider the schreier graph @xmath3 of the action of the group on the orbit of @xmath4 . we prove that for a large class of automaton groups all schreier graphs @xmath5 have subexponential growth bounded above by @xmath6 with some constant @xmath7 . in particular , this holds for all groups generated by automata with polynomial activity growth ( in terms of s.  sidki ) , confirming a conjecture of v.  nekrashevych . we present applications to @xmath8-periodic graphs and hanoi graphs . + * mathematics subject classification 2000 * : 20f65 , 05c25 , 20f69 . + * keywords * : automaton group , schreier graph , subexponential growth .