Best Known (89, 170, s)-Nets in Base 2
(89, 170, 52)-Net over F2 — Constructive and digital
Digital (89, 170, 52)-net over F2, using
- t-expansion [i] based on digital (85, 170, 52)-net over F2, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (85, 51)-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 3 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 (85, 51)-sequence over F2, using
(89, 170, 57)-Net over F2 — Digital
Digital (89, 170, 57)-net over F2, using
- t-expansion [i] based on digital (83, 170, 57)-net over F2, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (83, 56)-sequence over F2, using
- Niederreiter–Xing sequence construction II/III [i] based on function field F/F2 with g(F) = 83 and N(F) ≥ 57, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (83, 56)-sequence over F2, using
(89, 170, 196)-Net over F2 — Upper bound on s (digital)
There is no digital (89, 170, 197)-net over F2, because
- 1 times m-reduction [i] would yield digital (89, 169, 197)-net over F2, but
- extracting embedded orthogonal array [i] would yield linear OA(2169, 197, F2, 80) (dual of [197, 28, 81]-code), but
- adding a parity check bit [i] would yield linear OA(2170, 198, F2, 81) (dual of [198, 28, 82]-code), but
- extracting embedded orthogonal array [i] would yield linear OA(2169, 197, F2, 80) (dual of [197, 28, 81]-code), but
(89, 170, 240)-Net in Base 2 — Upper bound on s
There is no (89, 170, 241)-net in base 2, because
- 1 times m-reduction [i] would yield (89, 169, 241)-net in base 2, but
- the generalized Rao bound for nets shows that 2m ≥ 820 991540 653731 051583 609607 927603 130175 503483 454958 > 2169 [i]