Best Known (23, 68, s)-Nets in Base 3
(23, 68, 32)-Net over F3 — Constructive and digital
Digital (23, 68, 32)-net over F3, using
- t-expansion [i] based on digital (21, 68, 32)-net over F3, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (21, 31)-sequence over F3, using
- Niederreiter–Xing sequence construction II/III [i] based on function field F/F3 with g(F) = 21 and N(F) ≥ 32, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (21, 31)-sequence over F3, using
(23, 68, 79)-Net over F3 — Upper bound on s (digital)
There is no digital (23, 68, 80)-net over F3, because
- extracting embedded orthogonal array [i] would yield linear OA(368, 80, F3, 45) (dual of [80, 12, 46]-code), but
- construction Y1 [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
- OA(312, 80, S3, 6), but
- discarding factors would yield OA(312, 75, S3, 6), but
- the Rao or (dual) Hamming bound shows that M ≥ 551451 > 312 [i]
- discarding factors would yield OA(312, 75, S3, 6), but
- linear OA(367, 74, F3, 45) (dual of [74, 7, 46]-code), but
- construction Y1 [i] would yield
(23, 68, 81)-Net in Base 3 — Upper bound on s
There is no (23, 68, 82)-net in base 3, because
- 1 times m-reduction [i] would yield (23, 67, 82)-net in base 3, but
- extracting embedded orthogonal array [i] would yield OA(367, 82, S3, 44), but
- the linear programming bound shows that M ≥ 11063 764601 718263 371177 932141 744468 313023 / 98 314060 > 367 [i]
- extracting embedded orthogonal array [i] would yield OA(367, 82, S3, 44), but