Existence of generalized Bhaskar Rao designs with block size 3

There are well-known necessary conditions for the existence of a generalized Bhaskar Rao design over a group G, with block size k=3. The recently proved Hall-Paige conjecture shows that these are sufficient when v=3 and λ=|G|. We prove these conditions are sufficient in general when v=3, and also when |G| is small, or when G is dicyclic. We summarize known results supporting the conjecture that these necessary conditions are always sufficient when k=3.     

Group divisible designs with block size four and two groups

We give some constructions of new infinite families of group divisible designs, GDD(n,2,4;λ₁,λ₂), including one which uses the existence of Bhaskar Rao designs. We show the necessary conditions are sufficient for 3?n?8. For n=10 there is one missing critical design. If λ₁>λ₂, then the necessary conditions are sufficient for . For each of n=10,15,16,17,18,19, and 20 we indicate a small minimal set of critical designs which, if they exist, would allow construction of all possible designs for that n. The indices of each of these designs are also among those critical indices for every n in the same congruence class mod 12.     

Construction of optimal ternary constant weight codes via Bhaskar Rao designs

In this note, we consider a construction for optimal ternary constant weight codes (CWCs) via Bhaskar Rao designs (BRDs). The known existence results for BRDs are employed to generate many new optimal nonlinear ternary CWCs with constant weight 4 and minimum Hamming distance 5.     

Balanced incomplete block designs with block size 8

The necessary conditions for the existence of a balanced incomplete block design on υ ≥ k points, with index λ and block size k, are that: For k = 8, these conditions are known to be sufficient when λ = 1, with 38 possible exceptions, the largest of which is υ = 3,753. For these 38 values of υ, we show (υ, 8, λ ) BIBDs exist whenever λ > 1 for all but five possible values of υ, the largest of which is υ = 1,177, and these five υ's are the only values for which more than one value of λ is open. For λ>1, we show the necessary conditions are sufficient with the definite exception of two further values of υ, and the possible exception of 7 further values of υ, the largest of which is υ=589. In particular, we show the necessary conditions are sufficient for all λ> 5 and for λ = 4 when υ ≠ 22. We also look at (8, λ) GDDs of type 7^m. Our grouplet divisible design construction is also refined, and we construct and exploit α ‐ frames in constructing several other BIBDs. In addition, we give a PBD basis result for {n: n ≡ 0, 1; mod 8, n ≥ 8}, and construct a few new TDs with index > 1. © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Combin Designs 9: 233–268, 2001     

Generalized Bhaskar Rao Designs with Block Size 3 over Finite Abelian Groups

We show that if G is a finite Abelian group and the block size is 3, then the necessary conditions for the existence of a (v,3,λ;G) GBRD are sufficient. These necessary conditions include the usual necessary conditions for the existence of the associated (v,3,λ) BIBD plus λ≡ 0 (mod|G|), plus some extra conditions when |G| is even, namely that the number of blocks be divisible by 4 and, if v = 3 and the Sylow 2-subgroup of G is cyclic, then also λ≡ 0 (mod2|G|).     

Decomposable super‐simple NRBIBDs with block size 4 and index 6

Necessary conditions for the existence of a super‐simple, decomposable, near‐resolvable ‐balanced incomplete block design (BIBD) whose 2‐component subdesigns are both near‐resolvable ‐BIBDs are (mod ) and . In this paper, we show that these necessary conditions are sufficient. Using these designs, we also establish that the necessary conditions for the existence of a super‐simple near‐resolvable ‐RBIBD, namely (mod ) and , are sufficient. A few new pairwise balanced designs are also given.     

Super-simple balanced incomplete block designs with block size 4 and index 5

In statistical planning of experiments, super-simple designs are the ones providing samples with maximum intersection as small as possible. Super-simple designs are also useful in other constructions, such as superimposed codes and perfect hash families etc. The existence of super-simple (v,4,λ)-BIBDs have been determined for λ=2,3,4 and 6. When λ=5, the necessary conditions of such a design are that and v≥13. In this paper, we show that there exists a super-simple (v,4,5)-BIBD for each and v≥13.     

Super‐simple resolvable balanced incomplete block designs with block size 4 and index 3

The necessary conditions for the existence of a super‐simple resolvable balanced incomplete block design on v points with k = 4 and λ = 3, are that v ≥ 8 and v ≡ 0 mod 4. These conditions are shown to be sufficient except for v = 12. © 2003 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Super‐simple resolvable balanced incomplete block designs with block size 4 and index 2

The necessary conditions for the existence of a super‐simple resolvable balanced incomplete block design on v points with block size k = 4 and index λ = 2, are that v ≥ 16 and . These conditions are shown to be sufficient. © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Combin Designs 15: 341–356, 2007     

Resolvable balanced incomplete block designs with subdesigns of block size 4

In this paper, we look at resolvable balanced incomplete block designs on v points having blocks of size 4, briefly (v,4,1) RBIBDs. The problem we investigate is the existence of (v,4,1) RBIBDs containing a (w,4,1) RBIBD as a subdesign. We also require that each parallel class of the subdesign should be in a single parallel class of the containing design. Removing the subdesign gives an incomplete RBIBD, i.e., an IRB(v,w). The necessary conditions for the existence of an IRB(v,w) are that v?4w and . We show these conditions are sufficient with a finite number (179) of exceptions, and in particular whenever and whenever w?1852.We also give some results on pairwise balanced designs on v points containing (at least one) block of size w, i.e., a (v,{K,w^*},1)-PBD.If the list of permitted block sizes, K₅, contains all integers of size 5 or more, and v,w∈K₅, then a necessary condition on this PBD is v?4w+1. We show this condition is not sufficient for any w?5 and give the complete spectrum (in v) for 5?w?8, as well as showing the condition v?5w is sufficient with some definite exceptions for w=5 and 6, and some possible exceptions when w=15, namely 77?v?79. The existence of this PBD implies the existence of an IRB(12v+4,12w+4).If the list of permitted block sizes, K₁₍₄₎, contains all integers , and v,w∈K₁₍₄₎, then a necessary condition on this PBD is v?4w+1. We show this condition is sufficient with a finite number of possible exceptions, and in particular is sufficient when w?1037. The existence of this PBD implies the existence of an IRB(3v+1,3w+1).     

Realizations for direct constructions of resolvable Steiner 2‐designs with block size 5

We consider direct constructions due to R. J. R. Abel and M. Greig, and to M. Buratti, for ({ν},5,1) balanced incomplete block designs. These designs are defined using the prime fields F_p for certain primes p, are 1‐rotational over G ⊕ F_p where G is a group of order 4, and are also resolvable under certain conditions. We introduce specifications to the constructions and, by means of character sum arguments, show that the constructions yield resolvable designs whenever p is sufficiently large. © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Combin Designs 8:207–217, 2000     

Splitting balanced incomplete block designs with block size 3 × 2

Splitting balanced incomplete block designs were first formulated by Ogata, Kurosawa, Stinson, and Saido recently in the investigation of authentication codes. This article investigates the existence of splitting balanced incomplete block designs, i.e., (v, 3k, λ)‐splitting BIBDs; we give the spectrum of (v, 3 × 2, λ)‐splitting BIBDs. As an application, we obtain an infinite class of 2‐splitting A‐codes. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Group divisible 3‐designs with block size four and group type 1ns1

In this article, we mainly consider the existence problem of a group divisible design GDD $\left(3,4,n+s\right)$ of type $1^n{s}^1$. We present two recursive constructions for this configuration using candelabra systems and construct explicitly a few small examples admitting given automorphism groups. As an application, several new infinite classes of GDD $\left(3,4,n+s\right)$s of type $1^n{s}^1$ are produced. Meanwhile a few new infinite families on candelabra quadruple systems with group sizes being odd and stem size greater than one are also obtained.     

Existence of large sets of disjoint group‐divisible designs with block size three and type 2n41

Large sets of disjoint group‐divisible designs with block size three and type 2ⁿ4¹ (denoted by LS (2ⁿ4¹)) were first studied by Schellenberg and Stinson and motivated by their connection with perfect threshold schemes. It is known that such large sets can exist only for n ≡ 0 (mod 3) and do exist for any n ? {12, 36, 48, 144} ∪ {m > 6 : m ≡ 6,30 (mod 36)}. In this paper, we show that an LS (2^{12k + 6}4¹) exists for any k ≠ 2. So, the existence of LS (2ⁿ4¹) is almost solved with five possible exceptions n ∈ {12, 30, 36, 48, 144}. This solution is based on the known existence results of S (3, 4, v)s by Hanani and special S (3, {4, 6}, 6m)s by Mills. Partitionable H (q, 2, 3, 3) frames also play an important role together with a special known LS (2¹⁸4¹) with a subdesign LS (2⁶4¹). © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Group divisible designs with block size 4 and type

Building upon the work of Wei and Ge (Designs, Codes, and Cryptography 74, 2015), we extend the range of positive integer parameters g, u, and m for which group divisible designs with block size 4 and type are known to exist. In particular, we show that the necessary conditions for the existence of these designs when and are sufficient in the following cases: , with one exception, 2⁶5¹, , and .     

Self‐converse Mendelsohn designs with block size 4 and 5

A (v, k, λ)‐Mendelsohn design(X, ℬ︁) is called self‐converse if there is an isomorphic mapping ƒ from (X, ℬ︁) to (X, ℬ︁⁻¹), where ℬ︁⁻¹ = {B⁻¹ = 〈x_k, x_k−1,…,x₂, x₁〉: B = 〈x₁, x₂,…,x_k−1, x_k〉 ϵ ℬ︁}. In this paper, we give the existence spectrum for self‐converse (v, 4, 1)– and (v, 5, 1)– Mendelsohn designs. © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Combin Designs 8: 411–418, 2000