Best Known (6, 6+38, s)-Nets in Base 4
(6, 6+38, 17)-Net over F4 — Constructive and digital
Digital (6, 44, 17)-net over F4, using
- t-expansion [i] based on digital (5, 44, 17)-net over F4, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (5, 16)-sequence over F4, using
- Niederreiter–Xing sequence construction II/III [i] based on function field F/F4 with g(F) = 5 and N(F) ≥ 17, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (5, 16)-sequence over F4, using
(6, 6+38, 20)-Net over F4 — Digital
Digital (6, 44, 20)-net over F4, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (6, 19)-sequence over F4, using
- Niederreiter–Xing sequence construction II/III [i] based on function field F/F4 with g(F) = 6 and N(F) ≥ 20, using
(6, 6+38, 30)-Net over F4 — Upper bound on s (digital)
There is no digital (6, 44, 31)-net over F4, because
- 18 times m-reduction [i] would yield digital (6, 26, 31)-net over F4, but
- extracting embedded orthogonal array [i] would yield linear OA(426, 31, F4, 20) (dual of [31, 5, 21]-code), but
- “Bou†bound on codes from Brouwer’s database [i]
- extracting embedded orthogonal array [i] would yield linear OA(426, 31, F4, 20) (dual of [31, 5, 21]-code), but
(6, 6+38, 33)-Net in Base 4 — Upper bound on s
There is no (6, 44, 34)-net in base 4, because
- 15 times m-reduction [i] would yield (6, 29, 34)-net in base 4, but
- extracting embedded orthogonal array [i] would yield OA(429, 34, S4, 23), but
- the linear programming bound shows that M ≥ 129 127208 515966 861312 / 435 > 429 [i]
- extracting embedded orthogonal array [i] would yield OA(429, 34, S4, 23), but