Best Known (208−141, 208, s)-Nets in Base 3
(208−141, 208, 48)-Net over F3 — Constructive and digital
Digital (67, 208, 48)-net over F3, using
- t-expansion [i] based on digital (45, 208, 48)-net over F3, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (45, 47)-sequence over F3, using
- Niederreiter–Xing sequence construction II/III [i] based on function field F/F3 with g(F) = 45 and N(F) ≥ 48, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (45, 47)-sequence over F3, using
(208−141, 208, 72)-Net over F3 — Digital
Digital (67, 208, 72)-net over F3, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (67, 71)-sequence over F3, using
- Niederreiter–Xing sequence construction II/III [i] based on function field F/F3 with g(F) = 67 and N(F) ≥ 72, using
(208−141, 208, 209)-Net over F3 — Upper bound on s (digital)
There is no digital (67, 208, 210)-net over F3, because
- 6 times m-reduction [i] would yield digital (67, 202, 210)-net over F3, but
- extracting embedded orthogonal array [i] would yield linear OA(3202, 210, F3, 135) (dual of [210, 8, 136]-code), but
- residual code [i] would yield linear OA(367, 74, F3, 45) (dual of [74, 7, 46]-code), but
- residual code [i] would yield linear OA(322, 28, F3, 15) (dual of [28, 6, 16]-code), but
- “HHM†bound on codes from Brouwer’s database [i]
- residual code [i] would yield linear OA(322, 28, F3, 15) (dual of [28, 6, 16]-code), but
- residual code [i] would yield linear OA(367, 74, F3, 45) (dual of [74, 7, 46]-code), but
- extracting embedded orthogonal array [i] would yield linear OA(3202, 210, F3, 135) (dual of [210, 8, 136]-code), but
(208−141, 208, 282)-Net in Base 3 — Upper bound on s
There is no (67, 208, 283)-net in base 3, because
- 1 times m-reduction [i] would yield (67, 207, 283)-net in base 3, but
- the generalized Rao bound for nets shows that 3m ≥ 692 039531 995136 150543 966355 539887 281881 296030 952216 043339 055917 059403 349186 223074 692855 422147 621517 > 3207 [i]