Best Known (103, 199, s)-Nets in Base 2
(103, 199, 55)-Net over F2 — Constructive and digital
Digital (103, 199, 55)-net over F2, using
- t-expansion [i] based on digital (100, 199, 55)-net over F2, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (100, 54)-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 6 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 (100, 54)-sequence over F2, using
(103, 199, 65)-Net over F2 — Digital
Digital (103, 199, 65)-net over F2, using
- t-expansion [i] based on digital (95, 199, 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
(103, 199, 230)-Net over F2 — Upper bound on s (digital)
There is no digital (103, 199, 231)-net over F2, because
- extracting embedded orthogonal array [i] would yield linear OA(2199, 231, F2, 96) (dual of [231, 32, 97]-code), but
- residual code [i] would yield OA(2103, 134, S2, 48), but
- the linear programming bound shows that M ≥ 14817 140394 002966 911489 108655 371959 926784 / 1391 278625 > 2103 [i]
- residual code [i] would yield OA(2103, 134, S2, 48), but
(103, 199, 266)-Net in Base 2 — Upper bound on s
There is no (103, 199, 267)-net in base 2, because
- the generalized Rao bound for nets shows that 2m ≥ 856944 045510 773520 790281 237872 466464 530047 378199 716627 366960 > 2199 [i]