Information on Result #2160742
There is no linear OA(3180, 189, F3, 121) (dual of [189, 9, 122]-code), because 1 times truncation would yield linear OA(3179, 188, F3, 120) (dual of [188, 9, 121]-code), but
- construction Y1 [i] would yield
- linear OA(3178, 184, F3, 120) (dual of [184, 6, 121]-code), but
- residual code [i] would yield linear OA(358, 63, F3, 40) (dual of [63, 5, 41]-code), but
- 1 times truncation [i] would yield linear OA(357, 62, F3, 39) (dual of [62, 5, 40]-code), but
- residual code [i] would yield linear OA(318, 22, F3, 13) (dual of [22, 4, 14]-code), but
- 1 times truncation [i] would yield linear OA(317, 21, F3, 12) (dual of [21, 4, 13]-code), but
- residual code [i] would yield linear OA(318, 22, F3, 13) (dual of [22, 4, 14]-code), but
- 1 times truncation [i] would yield linear OA(357, 62, F3, 39) (dual of [62, 5, 40]-code), but
- residual code [i] would yield linear OA(358, 63, F3, 40) (dual of [63, 5, 41]-code), but
- OA(39, 188, S3, 4), but
- discarding factors would yield OA(39, 100, S3, 4), but
- the Rao or (dual) Hamming bound shows that M ≥ 20001 > 39 [i]
- discarding factors would yield OA(39, 100, S3, 4), but
- linear OA(3178, 184, F3, 120) (dual of [184, 6, 121]-code), but
Mode: Bound (linear).
Optimality
Show details for fixed k and m, n and k, k and s, k and t, n and m, m and s, m and t, n and s, n and t.
Compare with Markus Grassl’s online database of code parameters.
Other Results with Identical Parameters
None.
Depending Results
None.