Best Known (226−160, 226, s)-Nets in Base 4
(226−160, 226, 66)-Net over F4 — Constructive and digital
Digital (66, 226, 66)-net over F4, using
- t-expansion [i] based on digital (49, 226, 66)-net over F4, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (49, 65)-sequence over F4, using
- Niederreiter–Xing sequence construction II/III [i] based on function field F/F4 with g(F) = 49 and N(F) ≥ 66, using
- T6 from the second tower of function fields by GarcÃa and Stichtenoth over F4 [i]
- Niederreiter–Xing sequence construction II/III [i] based on function field F/F4 with g(F) = 49 and N(F) ≥ 66, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (49, 65)-sequence over F4, using
(226−160, 226, 99)-Net over F4 — Digital
Digital (66, 226, 99)-net over F4, using
- t-expansion [i] based on digital (61, 226, 99)-net over F4, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (61, 98)-sequence over F4, using
- Niederreiter–Xing sequence construction II/III [i] based on function field F/F4 with g(F) = 61 and N(F) ≥ 99, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (61, 98)-sequence over F4, using
(226−160, 226, 421)-Net over F4 — Upper bound on s (digital)
There is no digital (66, 226, 422)-net over F4, because
- extracting embedded orthogonal array [i] would yield linear OA(4226, 422, F4, 160) (dual of [422, 196, 161]-code), but
- residual code [i] would yield OA(466, 261, S4, 40), but
- the linear programming bound shows that M ≥ 327016 444997 139005 823489 073156 791701 824991 264795 866993 154478 474670 227349 271740 416000 / 57 698874 415078 925905 565190 919370 722090 693979 > 466 [i]
- residual code [i] would yield OA(466, 261, S4, 40), but
(226−160, 226, 449)-Net in Base 4 — Upper bound on s
There is no (66, 226, 450)-net in base 4, because
- the generalized Rao bound for nets shows that 4m ≥ 13558 346418 288710 460236 276869 284953 762292 072260 121787 210130 665883 003269 982015 726439 119417 506931 895077 355080 771232 048534 466440 573153 257560 > 4226 [i]