Best Known (61, 184, s)-Nets in Base 3
(61, 184, 48)-Net over F3 — Constructive and digital
Digital (61, 184, 48)-net over F3, using
- t-expansion [i] based on digital (45, 184, 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
(61, 184, 64)-Net over F3 — Digital
Digital (61, 184, 64)-net over F3, using
- t-expansion [i] based on digital (49, 184, 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
(61, 184, 195)-Net over F3 — Upper bound on s (digital)
There is no digital (61, 184, 196)-net over F3, because
- extracting embedded orthogonal array [i] would yield linear OA(3184, 196, F3, 123) (dual of [196, 12, 124]-code), but
- residual code [i] would yield OA(361, 72, S3, 41), but
- the linear programming bound shows that M ≥ 41997 386805 997720 199850 152210 995911 / 228095 > 361 [i]
- residual code [i] would yield OA(361, 72, S3, 41), but
(61, 184, 261)-Net in Base 3 — Upper bound on s
There is no (61, 184, 262)-net in base 3, because
- 1 times m-reduction [i] would yield (61, 183, 262)-net in base 3, but
- the generalized Rao bound for nets shows that 3m ≥ 2078 845684 576933 358067 568715 743925 965523 903994 051886 776704 306918 519316 182415 217142 216565 > 3183 [i]