Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T10:00:57.823Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A Generalized Rao Bound for Ordered Orthogonal Arrays and (t, m, s)-Nets

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 November 2018

W. J. Martin
Affiliation:
Mathematics and Statistics University of Winnipeg Winnipeg, Manitoba R3B 2E9
D. R. Stinson
Affiliation:
Combinatorics and Optimization University of Waterloo Waterloo, Ontario N2L 3G1
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

In this paper, we provide a generalization of the classical Rao bound for orthogonal arrays, which can be applied to ordered orthogonal arrays and $\left( t,\,m,\,s \right)$-nets. Application of our new bound leads to improvements in many parameter situations to the strongest bounds (i.e., necessary conditions) for existence of these objects.

Keywords

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Mathematical Society 1999

References

[1] Clayman, A. T., Lawrence, K. M., Mullen, G. L., Niederreiter, H. and Sloane, N. J. A., Updated tables of parameters of (T, M, S)-nets. J. Combin. Des., to appear (see also http://www.emba.uvm.edu/jcd/toappear.html).Google Scholar
[2] Edel, Y. and Bierbrauer, J., Construction of digital nets from BCH-codes. In: Monte Carlo and Quasi-Monte Carlo Methods 1996 (Salzburg), Lecture Notes in Statist. 127 (1998), 221231.Google Scholar
[3] Lawrence, K. M., Combinatorial bounds and constructions in the theory of uniform point distributions in unit cubes, connections with orthogonal arrays and a poset generalization of a related problem in coding theory. PhD Thesis, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1995.Google Scholar
[4] Lawrence, K. M., A combinatorial characterization of (t, m, s)-nets in base b. J. Combin. Des. 4 (1996), 275293.Google Scholar
[5] Lawrence, K. M., The orthogonal array bound for (t, m, s)-nets is not always attained. Preprint.Google Scholar
[6] Martin, W. J. and Stinson, D. R., Association schemes for ordered orthogonal arrays and (T, M, S)-nets. Canad. J. Math. (2) 51 (1999), 326346.Google Scholar
[7] Mullen, G. L. and Schmid, W. Ch., An equivalence between (T, M, S)-nets and strongly orthogonal hypercubes. J. Combin. Theory A 76 (1996), 164174.Google Scholar
[8] Mullen, G. L. and Whittle, G., Point sets with uniformity properties and orthogonal hypercubes. Monatsh. Math. 113 (1992), 265273.Google Scholar
[9] Niederreiter, H., Point sets and sequences with small discrepancy. Monatsh.Math. 104 (1987), 273337.Google Scholar
[10] Rao, C. R., Factorial experiments derivable from combinatorial arrangements of arrays. Suppl. J. Roy. Statist. Soc. 9 (1947), 128139.Google Scholar
[11] Schmid, W. Ch., (T, M, S)-nets: digital constructions and combinatorial aspects. PhD Thesis, Universität Salzburg, 1995.Google Scholar
[12] Schmid, W. Ch. and Wolf, R., Bounds for digital nets and sequences. Acta Arith. 78 (1997), 377399.Google Scholar
[13] Sobol, M., The distribution of points in a cube and the approximate evaluation of integrals. Ž. Vyčisl. Mat. i Mat. Fiz. 7 (1967), 784802. In Russian.Google Scholar