Information on Result #1853040

There is no (66, m, 555)-net in base 9 for arbitrarily large m, because m-reduction would yield (66, 1661, 555)-net in base 9, but

Mode: Bound.

Optimality

Show details for fixed m and s, m and t, t and s.

Other Results with Identical Parameters

None.

Depending Results

The following results depend on this result:

ResultThis
result
only
Method
1No (66, 554)-sequence in base 9 [i]Net from Sequence
2No (66, 66+k, 555)-net in base 9 for arbitrarily large k [i]Logical Equivalence (for Nets with Unbounded m)
3No (66, m, 555)-net in base 9 with unbounded m [i]
4No digital (66, 66+k, 555)-net over F9 for arbitrarily large k [i]
5No digital (66, m, 555)-net over F9 with unbounded m [i]