Information on Result #585743
There is no linear OOA(2130, 141, F2, 5, 65) (dual of [(141, 5), 575, 66]-NRT-code), because 3 times depth reduction would yield linear OOA(2130, 141, F2, 2, 65) (dual of [(141, 2), 152, 66]-NRT-code), but
- 1 step m-reduction [i] would yield linear OA(2129, 141, F2, 64) (dual of [141, 12, 65]-code), but
- construction Y1 [i] would yield
- linear OA(2128, 137, F2, 64) (dual of [137, 9, 65]-code), but
- residual code [i] would yield linear OA(264, 72, F2, 32) (dual of [72, 8, 33]-code), but
- adding a parity check bit [i] would yield linear OA(265, 73, F2, 33) (dual of [73, 8, 34]-code), but
- “BJV†bound on codes from Brouwer’s database [i]
- adding a parity check bit [i] would yield linear OA(265, 73, F2, 33) (dual of [73, 8, 34]-code), but
- residual code [i] would yield linear OA(264, 72, F2, 32) (dual of [72, 8, 33]-code), but
- OA(212, 141, S2, 4), but
- discarding factors would yield OA(212, 91, S2, 4), but
- the Rao or (dual) Hamming bound shows that M ≥ 4187 > 212 [i]
- discarding factors would yield OA(212, 91, S2, 4), but
- linear OA(2128, 137, F2, 64) (dual of [137, 9, 65]-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.