Best Known (186−90, 186, s)-Nets in Base 2
(186−90, 186, 54)-Net over F2 — Constructive and digital
Digital (96, 186, 54)-net over F2, using
- t-expansion [i] based on digital (95, 186, 54)-net over F2, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (95, 53)-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 5 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 (95, 53)-sequence over F2, using
(186−90, 186, 65)-Net over F2 — Digital
Digital (96, 186, 65)-net over F2, using
- t-expansion [i] based on digital (95, 186, 65)-net over F2, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (95, 64)-sequence over F2, using
- Niederreiter–Xing sequence construction II/III [i] based on function field F/F2 with g(F) = 95 and N(F) ≥ 65, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (95, 64)-sequence over F2, using
(186−90, 186, 210)-Net over F2 — Upper bound on s (digital)
There is no digital (96, 186, 211)-net over F2, because
- 4 times m-reduction [i] would yield digital (96, 182, 211)-net over F2, but
- extracting embedded orthogonal array [i] would yield linear OA(2182, 211, F2, 86) (dual of [211, 29, 87]-code), but
- adding a parity check bit [i] would yield linear OA(2183, 212, F2, 87) (dual of [212, 29, 88]-code), but
- extracting embedded orthogonal array [i] would yield linear OA(2182, 211, F2, 86) (dual of [211, 29, 87]-code), but
(186−90, 186, 248)-Net in Base 2 — Upper bound on s
There is no (96, 186, 249)-net in base 2, because
- the generalized Rao bound for nets shows that 2m ≥ 109 144832 418622 004292 458390 011141 710229 877477 377900 401416 > 2186 [i]