MinT - Best Known (53, 105, s)-Nets in Base 2

Best Known (53, 105, s)-Nets in Base 2

(53, 105, 36)-Net over F₂ — Constructive and digital

Digital (53, 105, 36)-net over F₂, using

t-expansion [i] based on digital (51, 105, 36)-net over F₂, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (51, 35)-sequence over F₂, using
  - Niederreiterâ€“Xing sequence constructionÂ III based on the algebraic function field F/F₂ with g(F)Â =Â 41, N(F)Â =Â 32, 1 place with degree 2, and 3 places with degree 4 [i] based on function field F/F₂ with g(F) = 41 and N(F) ≥ 32, using an explicitly constructive algebraic function field [i]

(53, 105, 40)-Net over F₂ — Digital

Digital (53, 105, 40)-net over F₂, using

t-expansion [i] based on digital (50, 105, 40)-net over F₂, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (50, 39)-sequence over F₂, using
  - Niederreiterâ€“Xing sequence constructionÂ II/III [i] based on function field F/F₂ with g(F) = 50 and N(F) ≥ 40, using
    - Drinfeld modules of rank 1 [i]

(53, 105, 117)-Net over F₂ — Upper bound on s (digital)

There is no digital (53, 105, 118)-net over F₂, because

extracting embedded orthogonal array [i] would yield linear OA(2¹⁰⁵, 118, F₂, 52) (dual of [118, 13, 53]-code), but
- adding a parity check bit [i] would yield linear OA(2¹⁰⁶, 119, F₂, 53) (dual of [119, 13, 54]-code), but
  - â€œJaâ€ bound on codes from Brouwerâ€™s database [i]

(53, 105, 120)-Net in Base 2 — Upper bound on s

There is no (53, 105, 121)-net in base 2, because

2 times m-reduction [i] would yield (53, 103, 121)-net in base 2, but
- extracting embedded orthogonal array [i] would yield OA(2¹⁰³, 121, S₂, 50), but
  - the linear programming bound shows that MÂ â‰¥ 2 256052 985033 382604 596500 655046 131712 / 211575 > 2¹⁰³ [i]