Best Known (17, 89, s)-Nets in Base 4
(17, 89, 33)-Net over F4 — Constructive and digital
Digital (17, 89, 33)-net over F4, using
- t-expansion [i] based on digital (15, 89, 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
(17, 89, 40)-Net over F4 — Digital
Digital (17, 89, 40)-net over F4, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (17, 39)-sequence over F4, using
- Niederreiter–Xing sequence construction II/III [i] based on function field F/F4 with g(F) = 17 and N(F) ≥ 40, using
(17, 89, 76)-Net over F4 — Upper bound on s (digital)
There is no digital (17, 89, 77)-net over F4, because
- 19 times m-reduction [i] would yield digital (17, 70, 77)-net over F4, but
- extracting embedded orthogonal array [i] would yield linear OA(470, 77, F4, 53) (dual of [77, 7, 54]-code), but
- “Gur†bound on codes from Brouwer’s database [i]
- extracting embedded orthogonal array [i] would yield linear OA(470, 77, F4, 53) (dual of [77, 7, 54]-code), but
(17, 89, 77)-Net in Base 4 — Upper bound on s
There is no (17, 89, 78)-net in base 4, because
- 21 times m-reduction [i] would yield (17, 68, 78)-net in base 4, but
- extracting embedded orthogonal array [i] would yield OA(468, 78, S4, 51), but
- the linear programming bound shows that M ≥ 28277 344911 736830 143467 290769 718122 389583 167488 / 244673 > 468 [i]
- extracting embedded orthogonal array [i] would yield OA(468, 78, S4, 51), but