Information on Result #510028
There is no (2, 16, 124)-net in base 16, because the generalized Rao bound for nets shows that 16m ≥ 18 506952 222034 991146 > 1616
Mode: Bound.
Optimality
Show details for fixed k and m, k and s, k and t, m and s, m and t, t and s.
Other Results with Identical Parameters
None.
Depending Results
The following results depend on this result:
| Result | This result only | Method | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | No (2, 17, 124)-net in base 16 | [i] | m-Reduction | |
| 2 | No (2, 18, 124)-net in base 16 | [i] | ||
| 3 | No (2, 19, 124)-net in base 16 | [i] | ||
| 4 | No (2, 20, 124)-net in base 16 | [i] | ||
| 5 | No (2, 21, 124)-net in base 16 | [i] | ||
| 6 | No (2, 22, 124)-net in base 16 | [i] | ||
| 7 | No (2, 23, 124)-net in base 16 | [i] | ||
| 8 | No (2, 24, 124)-net in base 16 | [i] | ||
| 9 | No (2, 25, 124)-net in base 16 | [i] | ||