Best Known (90, 128, s)-Nets in Base 16
(90, 128, 1061)-Net over F16 — Constructive and digital
Digital (90, 128, 1061)-net over F16, using
- generalized (u, u+v)-construction [i] based on
- digital (2, 14, 33)-net over F16, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (2, 32)-sequence over F16, using
- Niederreiter–Xing sequence construction II/III [i] based on function field F/F16 with g(F) = 2 and N(F) ≥ 33, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (2, 32)-sequence over F16, using
- digital (19, 38, 514)-net over F16, using
- trace code for nets [i] based on digital (0, 19, 257)-net over F256, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (0, 256)-sequence over F256, using
- generalized Faure sequence [i]
- Niederreiter–Xing sequence construction II/III [i] based on function field F/F256 with g(F) = 0 and N(F) ≥ 257, using
- the rational function field F256(x) [i]
- Niederreiter sequence [i]
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (0, 256)-sequence over F256, using
- trace code for nets [i] based on digital (0, 19, 257)-net over F256, using
- digital (38, 76, 514)-net over F16, using
- trace code for nets [i] based on digital (0, 38, 257)-net over F256, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (0, 256)-sequence over F256 (see above)
- trace code for nets [i] based on digital (0, 38, 257)-net over F256, using
- digital (2, 14, 33)-net over F16, using
(90, 128, 14321)-Net over F16 — Digital
Digital (90, 128, 14321)-net over F16, using
(90, 128, large)-Net in Base 16 — Upper bound on s
There is no (90, 128, large)-net in base 16, because
- 36 times m-reduction [i] would yield (90, 92, large)-net in base 16, but