Information on Result #584725
There is no linear OOA(3241, 175, F3, 4, 186) (dual of [(175, 4), 459, 187]-NRT-code), because 2 times depth reduction would yield linear OOA(3241, 175, F3, 2, 186) (dual of [(175, 2), 109, 187]-NRT-code), but
- 75 step m-reduction [i] would yield linear OA(3166, 175, F3, 111) (dual of [175, 9, 112]-code), but
- construction Y1 [i] would yield
- linear OA(3165, 171, F3, 111) (dual of [171, 6, 112]-code), but
- residual code [i] would yield linear OA(354, 59, F3, 37) (dual of [59, 5, 38]-code), but
- 1 times truncation [i] would yield linear OA(353, 58, F3, 36) (dual of [58, 5, 37]-code), but
- residual code [i] would yield linear OA(317, 21, F3, 12) (dual of [21, 4, 13]-code), but
- 1 times truncation [i] would yield linear OA(353, 58, F3, 36) (dual of [58, 5, 37]-code), but
- residual code [i] would yield linear OA(354, 59, F3, 37) (dual of [59, 5, 38]-code), but
- OA(39, 175, S3, 4), but
- discarding factors would yield OA(39, 100, S3, 4), but
- the Rao or (dual) Hamming bound shows that M ≥ 20001 > 39 [i]
- discarding factors would yield OA(39, 100, S3, 4), but
- linear OA(3165, 171, F3, 111) (dual of [171, 6, 112]-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.