MinT - Information on Result #576009

Information on Result #576009

There is no linear OOA(5¹⁷, 25, F₅, 3, 14) (dual of [(25, 3), 58, 15]-NRT-code), because 1 times depth reduction would yield linear OOA(5¹⁷, 25, F₅, 2, 14) (dual of [(25, 2), 33, 15]-NRT-code), but

2 step m-reduction [i] would yield linear OA(5¹⁵, 25, F₅, 12) (dual of [25, 10, 13]-code), but
- constructionÂ Y1 [i] would yield
  1. linear OA(5¹⁴, 17, F₅, 12) (dual of [17, 3, 13]-code), but
    - a result by Hill [i]
  2. 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
      - constructionÂ Y1 [i] would yield
        linear OA(5⁹, 12, F₅, 8) (dual of [12, 3, 9]-code), but
        bound for almost-MDS-codes with dimension nÂ =Â 3 [i]
        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 kÂ =Â 2 [i]
        the Rao or (dual) Hamming bound shows that MÂ â‰¥ 29 > 5² [i]

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.