Best Known (60, 183, s)-Nets in Base 3
(60, 183, 48)-Net over F3 — Constructive and digital
Digital (60, 183, 48)-net over F3, using
- t-expansion [i] based on digital (45, 183, 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
(60, 183, 64)-Net over F3 — Digital
Digital (60, 183, 64)-net over F3, using
- t-expansion [i] based on digital (49, 183, 64)-net over F3, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (49, 63)-sequence over F3, using
- Niederreiter–Xing sequence construction II/III [i] based on function field F/F3 with g(F) = 49 and N(F) ≥ 64, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (49, 63)-sequence over F3, using
(60, 183, 190)-Net over F3 — Upper bound on s (digital)
There is no digital (60, 183, 191)-net over F3, because
- extracting embedded orthogonal array [i] would yield linear OA(3183, 191, F3, 123) (dual of [191, 8, 124]-code), but
- residual code [i] would yield OA(360, 67, S3, 41), but
- the linear programming bound shows that M ≥ 367 404168 771298 835858 389852 553067 / 8575 > 360 [i]
- residual code [i] would yield OA(360, 67, S3, 41), but
(60, 183, 256)-Net in Base 3 — Upper bound on s
There is no (60, 183, 257)-net in base 3, because
- 1 times m-reduction [i] would yield (60, 182, 257)-net in base 3, but
- the generalized Rao bound for nets shows that 3m ≥ 781 175611 443379 070895 810035 654264 084185 027808 609504 416115 703310 742324 995556 156842 693395 > 3182 [i]