Information on Result #517992
There is no (8, 80, 2322)-net in base 64, because the generalized Rao bound for nets shows that 64m ≥ 3 146225 264235 909920 729481 449982 968435 369868 272243 696932 507446 836547 548541 584737 869342 232201 208624 793712 046242 248383 564625 633447 509112 999547 893280 > 6480
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 (8, 81, 2322)-net in base 64 | [i] | m-Reduction | |
| 2 | No (8, 82, 2322)-net in base 64 | [i] | ||
| 3 | No (8, 83, 2322)-net in base 64 | [i] | ||
| 4 | No (8, 84, 2322)-net in base 64 | [i] | ||
| 5 | No (8, 85, 2322)-net in base 64 | [i] | ||
| 6 | No (8, 86, 2322)-net in base 64 | [i] | ||
| 7 | No (8, 87, 2322)-net in base 64 | [i] | ||
| 8 | No (8, 88, 2322)-net in base 64 | [i] | ||
| 9 | No (8, 89, 2322)-net in base 64 | [i] | ||
| 10 | No (8, 90, 2322)-net in base 64 | [i] | ||
| 11 | No (8, 91, 2322)-net in base 64 | [i] | ||