Information on Result #2164071
There is no linear OA(4156, 164, F4, 118) (dual of [164, 8, 119]-code), because 2 times truncation would yield linear OA(4154, 162, F4, 116) (dual of [162, 8, 117]-code), but
- construction Y1 [i] would yield
- linear OA(4153, 158, F4, 116) (dual of [158, 5, 117]-code), but
- residual code [i] would yield linear OA(437, 41, F4, 29) (dual of [41, 4, 30]-code), but
- 1 times truncation [i] would yield linear OA(436, 40, F4, 28) (dual of [40, 4, 29]-code), but
- residual code [i] would yield linear OA(48, 11, F4, 7) (dual of [11, 3, 8]-code), but
- 1 times truncation [i] would yield linear OA(436, 40, F4, 28) (dual of [40, 4, 29]-code), but
- residual code [i] would yield linear OA(437, 41, F4, 29) (dual of [41, 4, 30]-code), but
- OA(48, 162, S4, 4), but
- discarding factors would yield OA(48, 121, S4, 4), but
- the Rao or (dual) Hamming bound shows that M ≥ 65704 > 48 [i]
- discarding factors would yield OA(48, 121, S4, 4), but
- linear OA(4153, 158, F4, 116) (dual of [158, 5, 117]-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.