MinT - Best Known (85−83, 85, s)-Nets in Base 32

Best Known (85−83, 85, s)-Nets in Base 32

(85−83, 85, 44)-Net over F₃₂ — Constructive and digital

Digital (2, 85, 44)-net over F₃₂, using

t-expansion [i] based on digital (1, 85, 44)-net over F₃₂, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (1, 43)-sequence over F₃₂, using
  - Niederreiterâ€“Xing sequence constructionÂ II/III [i] based on function field F/F₃₂ with g(F) = 1 and N(F) ≥ 44, using
    - a function field by SÃ©mirat [i]

(85−83, 85, 53)-Net over F₃₂ — Digital

Digital (2, 85, 53)-net over F₃₂, using

net from sequence [i] based on digital (2, 52)-sequence over F₃₂, using
- Niederreiterâ€“Xing sequence constructionÂ II/III [i] based on function field F/F₃₂ with g(F) = 2 and N(F) ≥ 53, using
  - sharp bound on the number of rational points on curves with genus 2 [i]

(85−83, 85, 98)-Net over F₃₂ — Upper bound on s (digital)

There is no digital (2, 85, 99)-net over F₃₂, because

19 times m-reduction [i] would yield digital (2, 66, 99)-net over F₃₂, but
- extracting embedded orthogonal array [i] would yield linear OA(32⁶⁶, 99, F₃₂, 64) (dual of [99, 33, 65]-code), but
  - residual code [i] would yield OA(32², 34, S₃₂, 2), but
    - bound for OAs with strength kÂ =Â 2 [i]
    - the Rao or (dual) Hamming bound shows that MÂ â‰¥ 1055 > 32² [i]

(85−83, 85, 171)-Net in Base 32 — Upper bound on s

There is no (2, 85, 172)-net in base 32, because

1 times m-reduction [i] would yield (2, 84, 172)-net in base 32, but
- extracting embedded orthogonal array [i] would yield OA(32⁸⁴, 172, S₃₂, 82), but
  - the linear programming bound shows that MÂ â‰¥ 55247 037733 293434 061032 503217 217874 783879 875974 189849 376042 794293 976190 858815 670524 653995 680660 403017 825779 663068 648234 977192 570295 156736 / 20118 640571 > 32⁸⁴ [i]