Information on Result #2169584
There is no linear OA(817, 35, F8, 15) (dual of [35, 18, 16]-code), because 3 times truncation would yield linear OA(814, 32, F8, 12) (dual of [32, 18, 13]-code), but
- construction Y1 [i] would yield
- linear OA(813, 16, F8, 12) (dual of [16, 3, 13]-code), but
- “Hi4†bound on codes from Brouwer’s database [i]
- linear OA(818, 32, F8, 16) (dual of [32, 14, 17]-code), but
- discarding factors / shortening the dual code would yield linear OA(818, 27, F8, 16) (dual of [27, 9, 17]-code), but
- residual code [i] would yield OA(82, 10, S8, 2), but
- bound for OAs with strength k = 2 [i]
- the Rao or (dual) Hamming bound shows that M ≥ 71 > 82 [i]
- residual code [i] would yield OA(82, 10, S8, 2), but
- discarding factors / shortening the dual code would yield linear OA(818, 27, F8, 16) (dual of [27, 9, 17]-code), but
- linear OA(813, 16, F8, 12) (dual of [16, 3, 13]-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.