Best Known (93, 93+98, s)-Nets in Base 2
(93, 93+98, 53)-Net over F2 — Constructive and digital
Digital (93, 191, 53)-net over F2, using
- t-expansion [i] based on digital (90, 191, 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
(93, 93+98, 60)-Net over F2 — Digital
Digital (93, 191, 60)-net over F2, using
- t-expansion [i] based on digital (92, 191, 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
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (92, 59)-sequence over F2, using
(93, 93+98, 195)-Net over F2 — Upper bound on s (digital)
There is no digital (93, 191, 196)-net over F2, because
- 2 times m-reduction [i] would yield digital (93, 189, 196)-net over F2, but
- extracting embedded orthogonal array [i] would yield linear OA(2189, 196, F2, 96) (dual of [196, 7, 97]-code), but
(93, 93+98, 219)-Net in Base 2 — Upper bound on s
There is no (93, 191, 220)-net in base 2, because
- the generalized Rao bound for nets shows that 2m ≥ 3468 899262 731309 080755 782955 179603 847913 575183 919933 398570 > 2191 [i]