Information on Result #575207
There is no linear OOA(4239, 162, F4, 3, 201) (dual of [(162, 3), 247, 202]-NRT-code), because 1 times depth reduction would yield linear OOA(4239, 162, F4, 2, 201) (dual of [(162, 2), 85, 202]-NRT-code), but
- 85 step m-reduction [i] 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
- construction Y1 [i] would yield
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.