Best Known (24, 24+17, s)-Nets in Base 16
(24, 24+17, 520)-Net over F16 — Constructive and digital
Digital (24, 41, 520)-net over F16, using
- 1 times m-reduction [i] based on digital (24, 42, 520)-net over F16, using
- trace code for nets [i] based on digital (3, 21, 260)-net over F256, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (3, 259)-sequence over F256, using
- trace code for nets [i] based on digital (3, 21, 260)-net over F256, using
(24, 24+17, 660)-Net over F16 — Digital
Digital (24, 41, 660)-net over F16, using
- embedding of OOA with Gilbert–Varšamov bound [i] based on linear OA(1641, 660, F16, 17) (dual of [660, 619, 18]-code), using
- 15 step Varšamov–Edel lengthening with (ri) = (2, 0, 0, 1, 11 times 0) [i] based on linear OA(1638, 642, F16, 17) (dual of [642, 604, 18]-code), using
- trace code [i] based on linear OA(25619, 321, F256, 17) (dual of [321, 302, 18]-code), using
- extended algebraic-geometric code AGe(F,303P) [i] based on function field F/F256 with g(F) = 2 and N(F) ≥ 321, using
- trace code [i] based on linear OA(25619, 321, F256, 17) (dual of [321, 302, 18]-code), using
- 15 step Varšamov–Edel lengthening with (ri) = (2, 0, 0, 1, 11 times 0) [i] based on linear OA(1638, 642, F16, 17) (dual of [642, 604, 18]-code), using
(24, 24+17, 263143)-Net in Base 16 — Upper bound on s
There is no (24, 41, 263144)-net in base 16, because
- 1 times m-reduction [i] would yield (24, 40, 263144)-net in base 16, but
- the generalized Rao bound for nets shows that 16m ≥ 1 461539 568934 449785 456785 157332 184278 112270 416156 > 1640 [i]