Best Known (35, 35+33, s)-Nets in Base 2
(35, 35+33, 25)-Net over F2 — Constructive and digital
Digital (35, 68, 25)-net over F2, using
- (u, u+v)-construction [i] based on
- digital (8, 24, 11)-net over F2, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (8, 10)-sequence over F2, using
- Niederreiter–Xing sequence construction II/III [i] based on function field F/F2 with g(F) = 8 and N(F) ≥ 11, using
- Niederreiter–Xing sequence (Piršić implementation) with equidistant coordinate [i]
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (8, 10)-sequence over F2, using
- digital (11, 44, 14)-net over F2, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (11, 13)-sequence over F2, using
- Niederreiter–Xing sequence construction II/III [i] based on function field F/F2 with g(F) = 11 and N(F) ≥ 14, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (11, 13)-sequence over F2, using
- digital (8, 24, 11)-net over F2, using
(35, 35+33, 29)-Net over F2 — Digital
Digital (35, 68, 29)-net over F2, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (35, 28)-sequence over F2, using
- Niederreiter–Xing sequence construction II/III [i] based on function field F/F2 with g(F) = 35 and N(F) ≥ 29, using
(35, 35+33, 90)-Net in Base 2 — Upper bound on s
There is no (35, 68, 91)-net in base 2, because
- 1 times m-reduction [i] would yield (35, 67, 91)-net in base 2, but
- extracting embedded orthogonal array [i] would yield OA(267, 91, S2, 32), but
- the linear programming bound shows that M ≥ 16 438557 726869 234988 875776 / 92225 > 267 [i]
- extracting embedded orthogonal array [i] would yield OA(267, 91, S2, 32), but