MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <505d2471-2174-612c-7b1e-695f26d0f841@abelian.org>
References: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1702260842210.642@mailn.lipkowski.org>
 <e527c978-0559-b8f6-23ce-57ebd9b13cc2@abelian.org> <58B34590.3030802@posteo.de>
 <58B34924.6060005@posteo.de> <81b61b29-0b37-3e1c-1a42-f9153a1c7870@abelian.org>
 <cdab3d60-c422-756b-59c0-b596dc06c8ec@abelian.org> <505d2471-2174-612c-7b1e-695f26d0f841@abelian.org>
From: Roger Lapthorn <rogerlapthorn@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2017 09:55:43 +0000
Message-ID: <CAHAQVWO4Vy_RJ-37b2MuNSxJ-9q2FXRdP+-S5ega_oP4DNQVWQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org" <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Subject: Re: VLF: 16K19A?
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1146f482efc88b054a2103e8
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Status: RO

--001a1146f482efc88b054a2103e8
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

One thing is certain. Both Paul and Stefan know FAR more than most of us!
Keep up the great work "pushing the boundaries".

73s
Roger G3XBM

On 6 March 2017 at 21:35, Paul Nicholson <vlf0403@abelian.org> wrote:

>
> The search for a good rate 1/16 K=19 code continues without
> success.
>
> I improved the code search program.  It examines 2 million
> polynomials per CPU second.  After some hundreds of CPU
> hours it finds about 80,000 potential codes and these go for
> further testing.  Some of these look quite good, 96 of them
> have minimum distance equal to the Heller bound.
>
> But strangely none perform better than 8K19A when using long
> lists (eg 500k list size).   Several do better than 8K19A but
> only up to list length of 10 or so.
>
> Perhaps there is some subtle mistake in the program?  So I
> tested the search program on rate 1/8 K=19 and it soon produced
> several new good codes, one of which is consistently better
> than 8K19A at all list lengths.
>
> So something strange is going on.  I didn't have this difficulty
> with the stronger codes.   The more I learn about this subject,
> the less I seem to know.  Something I don't understand is
> happening here.
>
> --
> Paul Nicholson
> --
>
>

--001a1146f482efc88b054a2103e8
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div>One thing is certain. Both Paul and Stefan know FAR m=
ore than most of us! Keep up the great work &quot;pushing the boundaries&qu=
ot;.</div><div><br></div><div>73s</div><div>Roger G3XBM</div></div><div cla=
ss=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On 6 March 2017 at 21:35,=
 Paul Nicholson <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:vlf0403@abelian.org=
" target=3D"_blank">vlf0403@abelian.org</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquot=
e class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc sol=
id;padding-left:1ex"><br>
The search for a good rate 1/16 K=3D19 code continues without<br>
success.<br>
<br>
I improved the code search program.=C2=A0 It examines 2 million<br>
polynomials per CPU second.=C2=A0 After some hundreds of CPU<br>
hours it finds about 80,000 potential codes and these go for<br>
further testing.=C2=A0 Some of these look quite good, 96 of them<br>
have minimum distance equal to the Heller bound.<br>
<br>
But strangely none perform better than 8K19A when using long<br>
lists (eg 500k list size).=C2=A0 =C2=A0Several do better than 8K19A but<br>
only up to list length of 10 or so.<br>
<br>
Perhaps there is some subtle mistake in the program?=C2=A0 So I<br>
tested the search program on rate 1/8 K=3D19 and it soon produced<br>
several new good codes, one of which is consistently better<br>
than 8K19A at all list lengths.<br>
<br>
So something strange is going on.=C2=A0 I didn&#39;t have this difficulty<b=
r>
with the stronger codes.=C2=A0 =C2=A0The more I learn about this subject,<b=
r>
the less I seem to know.=C2=A0 Something I don&#39;t understand is<br>
happening here.<br>
<br>
--<br>
Paul Nicholson<br>
--<br>
<br>
</blockquote></div><br></div>

--001a1146f482efc88b054a2103e8--