Information on Result #564021
There is no linear OOA(1681, 124, F16, 2, 76) (dual of [(124, 2), 167, 77]-NRT-code), because 3 step m-reduction would yield linear OA(1678, 124, F16, 73) (dual of [124, 46, 74]-code), but
- construction Y1 [i] would yield
- OA(1677, 81, S16, 73), but
- the linear programming bound shows that M ≥ 20 058253 259194 796242 490750 709498 450326 191022 155255 442417 783937 598455 532112 408827 665059 378347 638784 / 37999 > 1677 [i]
- linear OA(1646, 124, F16, 43) (dual of [124, 78, 44]-code), but
- discarding factors / shortening the dual code would yield linear OA(1646, 97, F16, 43) (dual of [97, 51, 44]-code), but
- construction Y1 [i] would yield
- OA(1645, 49, S16, 43), but
- the linear programming bound shows that M ≥ 79 689768 125026 220634 634045 411816 077548 174434 353547 313152 / 47 > 1645 [i]
- linear OA(1651, 97, F16, 48) (dual of [97, 46, 49]-code), but
- discarding factors / shortening the dual code would yield linear OA(1651, 68, F16, 48) (dual of [68, 17, 49]-code), but
- residual code [i] would yield OA(163, 19, S16, 3), but
- 1 times truncation [i] would yield OA(162, 18, S16, 2), but
- bound for OAs with strength k = 2 [i]
- the Rao or (dual) Hamming bound shows that M ≥ 271 > 162 [i]
- 1 times truncation [i] would yield OA(162, 18, S16, 2), but
- residual code [i] would yield OA(163, 19, S16, 3), but
- discarding factors / shortening the dual code would yield linear OA(1651, 68, F16, 48) (dual of [68, 17, 49]-code), but
- OA(1645, 49, S16, 43), but
- construction Y1 [i] would yield
- discarding factors / shortening the dual code would yield linear OA(1646, 97, F16, 43) (dual of [97, 51, 44]-code), but
- OA(1677, 81, S16, 73), 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.