Best Known (102−86, 102, s)-Nets in Base 4
(102−86, 102, 33)-Net over F4 — Constructive and digital
Digital (16, 102, 33)-net over F4, using
- t-expansion [i] based on digital (15, 102, 33)-net over F4, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (15, 32)-sequence over F4, using
- Niederreiter–Xing sequence construction II/III [i] based on function field F/F4 with g(F) = 15 and N(F) ≥ 33, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (15, 32)-sequence over F4, using
(102−86, 102, 36)-Net over F4 — Digital
Digital (16, 102, 36)-net over F4, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (16, 35)-sequence over F4, using
- Niederreiter–Xing sequence construction II/III [i] based on function field F/F4 with g(F) = 16 and N(F) ≥ 36, using
(102−86, 102, 72)-Net over F4 — Upper bound on s (digital)
There is no digital (16, 102, 73)-net over F4, because
- 34 times m-reduction [i] would yield digital (16, 68, 73)-net over F4, but
- extracting embedded orthogonal array [i] would yield linear OA(468, 73, F4, 52) (dual of [73, 5, 53]-code), but
- construction Y1 [i] would yield
- extracting embedded orthogonal array [i] would yield linear OA(468, 73, F4, 52) (dual of [73, 5, 53]-code), but
(102−86, 102, 73)-Net in Base 4 — Upper bound on s
There is no (16, 102, 74)-net in base 4, because
- 38 times m-reduction [i] would yield (16, 64, 74)-net in base 4, but
- extracting embedded orthogonal array [i] would yield OA(464, 74, S4, 48), but
- the linear programming bound shows that M ≥ 14291 293180 820859 023858 530456 787498 418848 137216 / 35 673715 > 464 [i]
- extracting embedded orthogonal array [i] would yield OA(464, 74, S4, 48), but