Best Known (182−90, 182, s)-Nets in Base 2
(182−90, 182, 53)-Net over F2 — Constructive and digital
Digital (92, 182, 53)-net over F2, using
- t-expansion [i] based on digital (90, 182, 53)-net over F2, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (90, 52)-sequence over F2, using
- Niederreiter–Xing sequence construction III based on the algebraic function field F/F2 with g(F) = 69, N(F) = 48, 1 place with degree 2, and 4 places with degree 6 [i] based on function field F/F2 with g(F) = 69 and N(F) ≥ 48, using an explicitly constructive algebraic function field [i]
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (90, 52)-sequence over F2, using
(182−90, 182, 60)-Net over F2 — Digital
Digital (92, 182, 60)-net over F2, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (92, 59)-sequence over F2, using
- Niederreiter–Xing sequence construction II/III [i] based on function field F/F2 with g(F) = 92 and N(F) ≥ 60, using
(182−90, 182, 202)-Net over F2 — Upper bound on s (digital)
There is no digital (92, 182, 203)-net over F2, because
- 2 times m-reduction [i] would yield digital (92, 180, 203)-net over F2, but
- extracting embedded orthogonal array [i] would yield linear OA(2180, 203, F2, 88) (dual of [203, 23, 89]-code), but
- residual code [i] would yield OA(292, 114, S2, 44), but
- the linear programming bound shows that M ≥ 26 699890 767307 081769 024311 263232 / 4557 > 292 [i]
- residual code [i] would yield OA(292, 114, S2, 44), but
- extracting embedded orthogonal array [i] would yield linear OA(2180, 203, F2, 88) (dual of [203, 23, 89]-code), but
(182−90, 182, 230)-Net in Base 2 — Upper bound on s
There is no (92, 182, 231)-net in base 2, because
- the generalized Rao bound for nets shows that 2m ≥ 7 030366 636848 093456 042903 577982 643900 812926 459827 559328 > 2182 [i]