Information on Result #550183
There is no linear OOA(514, 29, F5, 2, 11) (dual of [(29, 2), 44, 12]-NRT-code), because 1 times depth reduction would yield linear OA(514, 29, F5, 11) (dual of [29, 15, 12]-code), but
- construction Y1 [i] would yield
- linear OA(513, 17, F5, 11) (dual of [17, 4, 12]-code), but
- linear OA(515, 29, F5, 12) (dual of [29, 14, 13]-code), but
- discarding factors / shortening the dual code would yield linear OA(515, 25, F5, 12) (dual of [25, 10, 13]-code), but
- construction Y1 [i] would yield
- linear OA(514, 17, F5, 12) (dual of [17, 3, 13]-code), but
- linear OA(510, 25, F5, 8) (dual of [25, 15, 9]-code), but
- discarding factors / shortening the dual code would yield linear OA(510, 22, F5, 8) (dual of [22, 12, 9]-code), but
- construction Y1 [i] would yield
- linear OA(59, 12, F5, 8) (dual of [12, 3, 9]-code), but
- linear OA(512, 22, F5, 10) (dual of [22, 10, 11]-code), but
- discarding factors / shortening the dual code would yield linear OA(512, 18, F5, 10) (dual of [18, 6, 11]-code), but
- residual code [i] would yield OA(52, 7, S5, 2), but
- bound for OAs with strength k = 2 [i]
- the Rao or (dual) Hamming bound shows that M ≥ 29 > 52 [i]
- residual code [i] would yield OA(52, 7, S5, 2), but
- discarding factors / shortening the dual code would yield linear OA(512, 18, F5, 10) (dual of [18, 6, 11]-code), but
- construction Y1 [i] would yield
- discarding factors / shortening the dual code would yield linear OA(510, 22, F5, 8) (dual of [22, 12, 9]-code), but
- construction Y1 [i] would yield
- discarding factors / shortening the dual code would yield linear OA(515, 25, F5, 12) (dual of [25, 10, 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.
Other Results with Identical Parameters
None.
Depending Results
None.