Best Known (2, 9, s)-Nets in Base 64
(2, 9, 80)-Net over F64 — Constructive and digital
Digital (2, 9, 80)-net over F64, using
- t-expansion [i] based on digital (1, 9, 80)-net over F64, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (1, 79)-sequence over F64, using
- Niederreiter–Xing sequence construction II/III [i] based on function field F/F64 with g(F) = 1 and N(F) ≥ 80, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (1, 79)-sequence over F64, using
(2, 9, 97)-Net over F64 — Digital
Digital (2, 9, 97)-net over F64, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (2, 96)-sequence over F64, using
- Niederreiter–Xing sequence construction II/III [i] based on function field F/F64 with g(F) = 2 and N(F) ≥ 97, using
(2, 9, 129)-Net in Base 64 — Constructive
(2, 9, 129)-net in base 64, using
- 5 times m-reduction [i] based on (2, 14, 129)-net in base 64, using
- base change [i] based on digital (0, 12, 129)-net over F128, using
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (0, 128)-sequence over F128, using
- generalized Faure sequence [i]
- Niederreiter–Xing sequence construction II/III [i] based on function field F/F128 with g(F) = 0 and N(F) ≥ 129, using
- the rational function field F128(x) [i]
- Niederreiter sequence [i]
- net from sequence [i] based on digital (0, 128)-sequence over F128, using
- base change [i] based on digital (0, 12, 129)-net over F128, using
(2, 9, 1889)-Net in Base 64 — Upper bound on s
There is no (2, 9, 1890)-net in base 64, because
- 1 times m-reduction [i] would yield (2, 8, 1890)-net in base 64, but
- the generalized Rao bound for nets shows that 64m ≥ 281 823792 021136 > 648 [i]