Best Known (29, 29+36, s)-Nets in Base 2
(29, 29+36, 21)-Net over F2 — Constructive and digital
Digital (29, 65, 21)-net over F2, using
- t-expansion [i] based on digital (21, 65, 21)-net over F2, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (21, 20)-sequence over F2, using
- Niederreiter–Xing sequence construction II/III [i] based on function field F/F2 with g(F) = 21 and N(F) ≥ 21, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (21, 20)-sequence over F2, using
(29, 29+36, 25)-Net over F2 — Digital
Digital (29, 65, 25)-net over F2, using
- t-expansion [i] based on digital (28, 65, 25)-net over F2, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (28, 24)-sequence over F2, using
- Niederreiter–Xing sequence construction II/III [i] based on function field F/F2 with g(F) = 28 and N(F) ≥ 25, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (28, 24)-sequence over F2, using
(29, 29+36, 65)-Net over F2 — Upper bound on s (digital)
There is no digital (29, 65, 66)-net over F2, because
- 4 times m-reduction [i] would yield digital (29, 61, 66)-net over F2, but
- extracting embedded orthogonal array [i] would yield linear OA(261, 66, F2, 32) (dual of [66, 5, 33]-code), but
(29, 29+36, 67)-Net in Base 2 — Upper bound on s
There is no (29, 65, 68)-net in base 2, because
- 2 times m-reduction [i] would yield (29, 63, 68)-net in base 2, but
- extracting embedded orthogonal array [i] would yield OA(263, 68, S2, 34), but
- adding a parity check bit [i] would yield OA(264, 69, S2, 35), but
- the (dual) Plotkin bound shows that M ≥ 73 786976 294838 206464 / 3 > 264 [i]
- adding a parity check bit [i] would yield OA(264, 69, S2, 35), but
- extracting embedded orthogonal array [i] would yield OA(263, 68, S2, 34), but