Best Known (28, 65, s)-Nets in Base 2
(28, 65, 21)-Net over F2 — Constructive and digital
Digital (28, 65, 21)-net over F2, using
- t-expansion [i] based on digital (21, 65, 21)-net over F2, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (21, 20)-sequence over F2, using
- Niederreiter–Xing sequence construction II/III [i] based on function field F/F2 with g(F) = 21 and N(F) ≥ 21, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (21, 20)-sequence over F2, using
(28, 65, 25)-Net over F2 — Digital
Digital (28, 65, 25)-net over F2, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (28, 24)-sequence over F2, using
- Niederreiter–Xing sequence construction II/III [i] based on function field F/F2 with g(F) = 28 and N(F) ≥ 25, using
(28, 65, 64)-Net over F2 — Upper bound on s (digital)
There is no digital (28, 65, 65)-net over F2, because
- 5 times m-reduction [i] would yield digital (28, 60, 65)-net over F2, but
- extracting embedded orthogonal array [i] would yield linear OA(260, 65, F2, 32) (dual of [65, 5, 33]-code), but
- 1 times code embedding in larger space [i] would yield linear OA(261, 66, F2, 32) (dual of [66, 5, 33]-code), but
- extracting embedded orthogonal array [i] would yield linear OA(260, 65, F2, 32) (dual of [65, 5, 33]-code), but
(28, 65, 65)-Net in Base 2 — Upper bound on s
There is no (28, 65, 66)-net in base 2, because
- 1 times m-reduction [i] would yield (28, 64, 66)-net in base 2, but
- the generalized Rao bound for nets shows that 2m ≥ 20 822013 200742 268544 > 264 [i]