1540 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INFORMATION THEORY, VOL. 49, NO.

6, JUNE 2003

Optimal Quaternary Linear Rate- Codes

of Length
T. Aaron Gulliver, Senior Member, IEEE,
Patric R. J. Östergård, Senior Member, IEEE, and
Nikolai I. Senkevitch

Abstract—In this correspondence, we classify all optimal linear

[ 2 ] codes over up to length 18. In particular, we show that
there is a unique optimal [12 6 6] code and three optimal [16 8 7]
codes, up to equivalence.
Index Terms—Codes over , optimal linear codes.

I. INTRODUCTION
A quaternary linear [n; k] code C is a k -dimensional vector sub-
space of n 4 , where 4 is the finite field of four elements. The elements
of 4 are taken to be f0; 1; ; 2 g, where is denoted by 2 and 2 is
denoted by 3. The rate of a linear [n; k] code C is defined as k=n. The
elements of C are called codewords. The weight wt(x) of a codeword
x is the number of nonzero coordinates. The minimum weight of C is
the smallest weight among all nonzero codewords of C . An [n; k; d]
code is an [n; k] code with minimum weight d.
The weight enumerator of C is
n points in PG(2; 4), which are denoted by (x; y; z ) with x; y; z 2 4 .
WC (y) = Ai yi
i=0
where Ai is the number of codewords of weight i in C .
The dual code C ? of C is defined as
C ? = fx 2 4n jx 1 y = 0 for all y 2 C g
where the Hermitian inner product is defined as x 1 y = xy with the
conjugacy operation y = y 2 . A code C is (Hermitian) self-dual if
C = C ? . This corresponds to the family 4H in [10]. Note that there are
several families of self-dual codes over 4 , such as Euclidean (4E ), but
we consider only Hermitian self-dual codes here. A code C is formally
self-dual if C and C ? have identical weight enumerators. Self-dual
codes are by definition also formally self-dual.
A linear [n; k] code C is optimal if C has the highest minimum
weight among all linear [n; k] codes (see [1] for current bounds on
the highest minimum weight). It is trivial that there is a unique quater-
nary linear code with parameters [2; 1; 2]. It is well known that there
are unique optimal quaternary [4; 2; 3] and [6; 3; 4] linear codes, up
to equivalence, the latter being the hexacode [10]. (The transforma-
tions which give equivalent codes for the family 4H are monomials
Manuscript received December 15, 1999; revised May 8, 2001. This work was
supported in part by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of
Canada and the Academy of Finland under Grants 44517 and 100500.
T. A. Gulliver was with the Department of Electrical and Electronic Engi-
neering, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand. He is now with
the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Victoria,
STN CSC, Victoria, BC V8W 3P6, Canada (e-mail: agullive@ece.uvic.ca).
Fig. 1. The hyperoval of PG(2; 4).
and global conjugation.) This [6; 3; 4] code corresponds to the unique
hyperoval of PG(2; 4) (or the 6-arc, six points no three on a line), as
shown in Fig. 1. The columns of the generator matrix correspond to
The lines are denoted by [a; b; c] with a; b; c 2 4 . The notation and
terminology for geometry follows that in [3]. The order of the auto-
morphism group is 2160 = 24 3 33 3 5 (cf. [10]). Recently, Olsson has
shown that the [18; 9; 8] code over 4 is unique [8].
A natural question that now arises is how many inequivalent optimal
linear rate–1=2 codes are there for other small lengths? In the next sec-
tion, we present the classification of all optimal linear [n; n=2] codes
up to length 18.
II. CLASSIFICATION OF CODES UP TO LENGTH 18
A. Classification of Codes
In the classification of codes, we are only interested in one repre-
sentative from each code equivalence class. There is no unique defini-
tion of code equivalence; we here use the definition that two codes are
equivalent if one can be obtained from the other by using a distance-pre-
serving transformation that also preserves any special characteristics of
the code (here, linearity).
The set of all such transformations for linear codes are exactly those
obtained by a composition of a monomial transformation and global
action of a field automorphism. This result seems to be well known,
but the only place where we have seen a proof of it is [7, Theorem
A.2]. This definition differs somewhat from the definition given in [10],
where the special case of dual linear codes are considered (but the def-
initions coincide for small fields). See also [2, p. 27].
The optimal codes are determined in the following way. Every
[n; n=2; d] code is equivalent to a code with generator matrix of the
form (I ; A) where A is an n=2 2 n=2 matrix (or with a parity-check
matrix of the same size). Thus, we need only consider n=2 2 n=2

matrices rather than n 2 n=2 generator (or parity-check) matrices.

P. R. J. Östergård is with the Department of Electrical and Communications
Engineering, Helsinki University of Technology, 02015 HUT, Finland (e-mail:
Patric.Ostergard@hut.fi). The set of generator matrices A was constructed under the condition
N. I. Senkevitch is with the Department of Electrical and Electronic that the first row of a code with minimum weight d is (00 1 1 1 01 1 1 1 1),
with d 0 1 ones. Alternatively, parity-check matrices with the first
Engineering, University of Canterbury, Private Bag 4800, Christchurch, New

column consisting of d 0 1 ones may be constructed. We need only con-

Zealand (nick.senkevitch@alliedtelesyn.co.nz).
Communicated by P. Solé, Associate Editor for Coding Theory.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TIT.2003.811929 sider those generator matrices A that are the lexicographically smallest

0018-9448/03$17.00 © 2003 IEEE

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INFORMATION THEORY, VOL. 49, NO. 6, JUNE 2003 1541

among all matrices obtained from A by permuting its rows. This or- TABLE I
dering is defined by regarding an 4 -vector as an integral vector by AUTOMORPHISM ORDERS FOR THE [8; 4; 4] CODES
mapping 0 to 0, 1 to 1, to 2, and 2 to 3.
The final generator (or parity-check) matrices are constructed by
adding one row (column) at a time and after each such step removing
copies of equivalent codes and codes that have minimum distance less
than d. The equivalence check was carried out using an approach that is
described in detail in [9]. The approach is based on a transformation of
the code into a graph. The graph is then fed into the program nauty [6],
which returns a certificate. Two codes have the same certificate exactly
when they are equivalent.
In the worst case, it takes exponential time for the program nauty
to compute a certificate. For the small instances considered here,
however, the time consumed is not prohibitive, and the classification
was completed using less than a week of CPU time. Most of the
time was used to classify the [14; 7; 6] codes. As those codes have
the same minimum distance as the optimal [12; 6; 6] code, there
is a multitude of such codes and, in particular, of intermediate
codes in the search.
Many of the computations were carried out independently in Finland
and New Zealand. The algebra software Magma was utilized by
the first author for determining code equivalence and automorphism
groups under monomial transformations (see also [5] for an algorithm
for determining monomial equivalence of codes), however, the results
presented in this correspondence also include global conjugation. 1000 0111 1000 0111
G8 9 1 =
0100 1011 ; G8 9 2 = 0100 1011
; ;
0010 1102 ; ;
0010 1102
B. Length 8
0001 1210 0001 1213
The maximum minimum distance of a quaternary linear [8; 4] code 1000 0111 1000 0111
is d = 4 [1]. The results of this search show that an optimal quaternary
G8 9 3 =
0100 1011 ; G8 10 = 0100 1011
linear [8; 4; 4] code is equivalent to one of C8; 1 , C8; 2 , C8; 3 , C8; 4 , 0010 1203 0010 1123
; ; ;

C8; 5 , C8; 6 , C8; 7; 1 , C8; 7; 2 , C8; 7; 3 , C8; 8; 1 , C8; 8; 2 , C8; 8; 3 , C8; 9; 1 , 0001 1313 0001 1132
C8; 9; 2 , C8; 9; 3 , and C8; 10 with generator matrices respectively.
The weight enumerators of C8; 1 , C8; 2 , C8 3 , C8 4 , C8 5 , C8 6 ,
1000 0111 1000 0111 C8; 7; 1 , C8; 7; 2 , C8; 7; 3 , C8; 8; 1 , C8; 8; 2 ,
; ; ;

C8 8 3 , C8 9 1 , C8 9 2 ,
;

0100 0123 0100 0123

; ; ; ; ; ;

G8 = ; G8 = C8; 9; 3 , and C8; 10 codes are

;1
0010 0132 ;2
0010 1011
0001 1011 0001 1023 W8 = 1 + 54y4 + 24y5 + 72y6 + 72y7 + 33y8
;1

1000 0111 1000 0111 W8 2 = 1 + 39y4 + 36y5 + 78y6 + 84y7 + 18y8

;

G8 = 0100 0123 ; G8 = 0100 0123 W8 3 = 1 + 36y4 + 36y5 + 96y6 + 60y7 + 27y8

;3
0010 1011 ;4
0010 1011 ;

0001 1101 0001 1102 W8 4 = 1 + 33y4 + 48y5 + 78y6 + 72y7 + 24y8

;

1000 0111 1000 0111 W8 5 = 1 + 30y4 + 60y5 + 60y6 + 84y7 + 21y8

;

G8 = 0100 0123 ; G8 = 0100 1011 W8 6 = 1 + 42y4 + 168y6 + 45y8

;5
0010 1011 ;6
0010 1101 ;

0001 1202 0001 1110 W8 7 = 1 + 30y4 + 48y5 + 96y6 + 48y7 + 33y8

;

1000 0111 1000 0111 W8 8 = 1 + 24y4 + 72y5 + 60y6 + 72y7 + 27y8

;

G8 = 0100 1011 ; G8 = 0100 1011 W8 9 = 1 + 27y4 + 60y5 + 78y6 + 60y7 + 30y8

; 7; 1
0010 1101 ; 7; 2
0010 1102 ;

0001 1112 0001 1120 W8 10 = 1 + 18y4 + 96y5 + 24y6 + 96y7 + 21y8

;

1000 0111 1000 0111 where Ci; j; k has weight enumerator Wi; j , and k is omitted if only one
G8 = 0100 1011 ; G8 = 0100 1011 code has this weight enumerator.
; 7; 3
0010 1102 ; 8; 1
0010 1102 There are 16 inequivalent optimal quaternary linear [8; 4; 4] codes.
0001 1130 0001 1121 It is interesting that three of these—C8; 4 , C8; 7; 1 , and C8; 9; 1 —do not
have global conjugation in their automorphism group. By applying
1000 0111 1000 0111 global conjugation to these three codes, we get a total of 19 distinct
G8 = 0100 1011 ; G8 = 0100 1012 codes if only monomial permutations are used to test equivalence.
; 8; 2
0010 1123 ; 8; 3
0010 1120 Table I gives the orders of the automorphism groups for the [8; 4; 4]
0001 1203 0001 1203 codes.
1542 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INFORMATION THEORY, VOL. 49, NO. 6, JUNE 2003

TABLE II
AUTOMORPHISM ORDERS FOR THE [10; 5; 5] CODES

TABLE III
N (n), N (n) AND N (n) FOR 2   18
n

Fig. 2. The portion of PG(3; 4) corresponding to C .

Code C8; 6 is the unique self-dual code of length 8 with minimum

distance 4. The codes corresponding to W8; 7 , W8; 8 , W8; 9 , and W8; 10
are all formally self-dual.
The [8; 4; 4] codes over 4 correspond to sets of eight (possibly All codes with these weight enumerators are formally self-dual.
repeated) points of PG(3; 4), no 5 in a plane. The columns of the Table II gives the orders of the automorphism groups for the [10; 5; 5]
generator matrix correspond to points in PG(3; 4), which are denoted codes.
by (w; x; y; z ) with w; x; y; z 2 4 . The lines are denoted by
[a; b; c; d] with a; b; c; d 2 4 . These sets can be classified into
D. Length 12
16 types, corresponding to the codes above. For example, C8; 6 is The classification of optimal quaternary linear [12; 6; 6] codes
shown in Fig. 2. A priori a point of multiplicity 2 could occur because shows that there is a unique code C12 with generator matrix
the projection from such a point would be a hyperoval of PG(2; 4).
Indeed, C8; 1 has dual distance 2. 100000 011111
010000 101122
C. Length 10 001000 110212
G12 = :
The classification of optimal quaternary linear [10; 5; 5] codes 000100 112320
shows that such a code must be equivalent to one of thefour codes 000010 121331
C10; 1; 1 ; C10; 1; 2 ; C10; 2 ; and C10; 3 with generator matrices 000001 122103

10000 01111 10000 01111 The weight enumerator of C12 is

01000 10112 01000 10112 6 7 8 9
W12 = 1 + 330y + 396y + 495y + 1320y
G10; 1; 1 = 00100 11021 ; G10; 1; 2 = 00100 11021
10 11 12
00010 11210 00010 11210 +990y + 396y + 168y :

00001 12101 00001 12131

This code is formally self-dual, and the order of its automorphism
10000 01111 10000 01111 group is jAut(C12 )j = 3960 = 23 3 32 3 5 3 11. Note that this corre-
01000 10112 01000 10112 sponds to the extended quadratic residue code of length 12 over 4 .
G10; 2 = 00100 11021 ; G10; 3 = 00100 11021
00010 11210 00010 11302 E. Length 14
00001 12233 00001 13310 Because the minimum distance of optimal [14; 7] codes is only
d = 6, there are a great number of optimal codes. In particular, we have
respectively. The weight enumerators of C10; 1; 1 ; C10; 1; 2 ; C10; 2 ; and found that there are 80 988 [14; 7; 6] codes with 2310 possible weight
C10; 3 are enumerators. The codes have automorphism groups of the following
5 6 7 8 9 10
sizes: 3; 6; 9; 12; 18; 21; 24; 36; 42; 48; 54; 72; 144; 252; and 6552.
W10; 1 = 1 + 90y + 180y + 180y + 315y + 210y + 48y The number of codes corresponding to each size is 78 469, 2238, 24,
5 6 7 8 9 10 169, 25, 4, 27, 8, 7, 3, 3, 6, 3, 1, and 1, respectively. To save space,
W10; 2 = 1 + 93y + 165y + 210y + 285y + 225y + 45y
these codes are listed at the www page: http://www.hut.fi/~pat/qua-
5 6 7 8 9 10
W10; 3 = 1 + 96y + 150y + 240y + 255y + 240y + 42y ternary.html. Of note is that only one weight enumerator is even:
6 8 10 12 14
1 + 273y + 2457y + 7098y + 6006y + 549y , and this
where Ci; j; k has weight enumerator Wi; j , and k is omitted if only one corresponds to the unique self-dual code q14 in [10], which is the
code has this weight enumerator. extended quadratic residue code of length 14 over 4 . The order of
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INFORMATION THEORY, VOL. 49, NO. 6, JUNE 2003 1543

its automorphism group is jAut(q14 )j = 6552 = 23 3 32 3 7 3 13. same minimum distance as the optimal [18; 9; 8] codes, which leads to
Indeed, this is the only weight enumerator with gaps. an extensive number of (final and intermediate) codes, which, in turn,
affects the size of memory needed and the computation time (cf. our
F. Length 16 earlier comment on [14; 7; 6] codes).
The classification of optimal quaternary linear [16; 8; 7] codes Let NT (n), NS (n), and NF (n) denote the number of optimal codes,
shows that there are three codes, C16; 1 ; C16; 2 , and C16; 3 , with the number of optimal Hermitian self-dual codes and the number of
generator matrices optimal formally self-dual codes which are not self-dual. In Table III,
we list the values of NT (n), NS (n), and NF (n) for 2  n  18.
10000000 11111100
01000000 32211010 ACKNOWLEDGMENT
00100000 23311001
The authors would like to thank David Glynn who provided the geo-
00010000 13020211
G16; 1 = metric interpretation of the [6; 3; 4] and [8; 4; 4] codes.
00001000 30230311
00000100 20131121
REFERENCES
00000010 31332221
00000001 23003131
[1] A. E. Brouwer, “Bounds on the size of linear codes,” in Handbook of
Coding Theory, V. S. Pless and W. C. Huffman, Eds. Amsterdam, The
10000000 11111100 Netherlands: Elsevier, 1998, pp. 295–461.
[2] R. L. Griess, Jr., Twelve Sporadic Groups. Berlin, Germany: Springer-
01000000 32211010
Verlag, 1998.
00100000 23311001 [3] J. W. P. Hirschfeld, Projective Geometries Over Finite Fields, 2nd
00010000 13020211 ed. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford Univ. Press, 1998.
G16; 2 = [4] W. C. Huffman, “Characterization of quaternary extremal codes
00001000 22012311
of lengths 18 and 20,” IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory, vol. 43, pp.
00000100 00223221 1613–1616, Sept. 1997.
00000010 31221131 [5] J. S. Leon, “Computing automorphism groups of error-correcting
codes,” IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory, vol. IT–28, pp. 496–511, May
00000001 03210331
1982.
10000000 11111100 [6] B. D. McKay, “nauty User’s Guide (version 1.5),” Comp. Sci. Dept.,
Australian Nat. Univ., Canberra, Tech. Rep. TR-CS-90-02, 1990.
01000000 32211010 [7] J. Olsson, “Linear codes with performance close to the Singleton
00100000 23121001 bound,” Ph.D. dissertation, Linköping, Sweden, 1999.
00010000 23210211 [8] , “On the quaternary [18,9,8] code,” in Proc. WCC’99 Workshop
G16; 3 = : on Coding and Cryptography, Paris, France, Jan. 1999, pp. 65–73.
00001000 10302211 [9] P. R. J. Östergård, “Classifying subspaces of Hamming spaces,” Des.
00000100 33311121 Codes Cryptogr., vol. 27, pp. 297–305, 2002.
00000010 12003121 [10] E. M. Rains and N. J. A. Sloane, “Self-dual codes,” in Handbook of
Coding Theory, V. S. Pless and W. C. Huffman, Eds. Amsterdam, The
00000001 11010331 Netherlands: Elsevier, 1998, pp. 177–294.
All three codes have weight enumerator
7 8 9 10 11
W16 = 1 + 720y + 810y + 4800y + 3360y + 18144y
12 13 14 15 16
+7560y + 20160y + 4320y + 5328y + 333y :

C16; 1 is isodual, and the order of its automorphism group is

jAut(C16; 1 )j = 90 = 2 3 32 3 5:

C16; 2 is the dual of C16; 3 , and the order of their automorphism

groups is

jAut(C16; 2 )j = jAut(C16; 3 )j = 1440 = 25 3 32 3 5:

G. Length 18
The classification of optimal quaternary linear [18; 9; 8] codes
shows that there is a unique code C18 , which confirms the result given
by Olsson [8]. Note that this is the unique extremal self-dual [18; 9; 8]
code [4].

III. SUMMARY
The problem of classifying optimal linear codes is more difficult than
classifying extremal quaternary self-dual codes as the significant struc-
ture of the latter codes can be utilized in that process. So, whereas ex-
tremal quaternary codes have been classified up to length 20, we had
to stop the current classification at length 18. One reason for the diffi-
culty of classifying the optimal [20; 10; 8] codes is that they have the