Generalized binary arrays from quasi-orthogonal cocycles
J. A. Armario, D. L. Flannery

TL;DR
This paper introduces generalized optimal binary arrays (GOBAs) with specific energy properties, providing a construction method based on 2-cocycles and applying it to find negaperiodic Golay pairs from small-length sequences.
Contribution
It extends the concept of perfect binary arrays by defining GOBAs with new energy conditions and offers a construction method using 2-cocycles, also identifying related Golay pairs.
Findings
GOBAs can have even energy not divisible by 4.
A construction procedure for GOBAs using 2-cocycles is provided.
Negaperiodic Golay pairs are derived from small-length GOBAs.
Abstract
Generalized perfect binary arrays (GPBAs) were used by Jedwab to construct perfect binary arrays. A non-trivial GPBA can exist only if its energy is or a multiple of . This paper introduces generalized optimal binary arrays (GOBAs) with even energy not divisible by , as analogs of GPBAs. We give a procedure to construct GOBAs based on a characterization of the arrays in terms of -cocycles. As a further application, we determine negaperiodic Golay pairs arising from generalized optimal binary sequences of small length.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
11institutetext: Departamento de Matemática Aplicada I, Universidad de Sevilla, Avda. Reina Mercedes s/n, 41012 Sevilla, Spain
[email protected]: School of Mathematics, Statistics and Applied Mathematics, National University of Ireland Galway, Galway H91TK33, Ireland
Generalized binary
arrays from quasi-orthogonal cocycles
J. A. Armario
D. L. Flannery
Abstract
Generalized perfect binary arrays (GPBAs) were used by Jedwab to construct perfect binary arrays. A non-trivial GPBA can exist only if its energy is or a multiple of . This paper introduces generalized optimal binary arrays (GOBAs) with even energy not divisible by , as analogs of GPBAs. We give a procedure to construct GOBAs based on a characterization of the arrays in terms of -cocycles. As a further application, we determine negaperiodic Golay pairs arising from generalized optimal binary sequences of small length.
1 Introduction
Let be a binary sequence of length . Reading arguments modulo ,
[TABLE]
is the periodic autocorrelation of at shift . The expansion of , denoted , is the concatenation of and (in that order). A pair , of binary sequences, each of length , such that for (equivalently, for and ), is a negaperiodic Golay pair (NGP). Note that the original definition of NGP in [4] coincides with the definition above by [8, Lemma 2].
We seek good sources of NGPs. This objective is connected to several existence problems in algebraic design theory. For example, Egan showed that NGPs of length are equivalent to certain relative -difference sets in the dicyclic group of order [8, Theorem 3]. Actually, there is a relative -difference set in a central extension of by a group of order , relative to , if and only if there is a Hadamard matrix of order whose expanded (group-divisible) design admits a special regular action by : a cocyclic Hadamard matrix over [6, Theorem 2.4]. By way of [9, Theorem 3.3], Ito [13, p. 370] conjectured that contains such relative difference sets for all . Schmidt [16] has verified Ito’s conjecture up to . Our recent paper [3] initiated the study of quasi-orthogonal cocycles over groups of even order not divisible by , in direct analogy with cocyclic Hadamard matrices. The present paper builds on [3].
It is easy to see that
[TABLE]
The sequence is optimal if equality holds in (1). In particular, is perfect if for . No perfect binary sequence of length is known. Attention consequently turns to the larger class of perfect binary arrays (PBAs). Jedwab [14] introduced generalized perfect binary arrays (GPBAs) to aid in the construction of PBAs. Hughes [11] subsequently demonstrated the cocyclic nature of GPBAs.
A generalized perfect binary sequence (GPBS) is a -dimensional GPBA; such have for all . Each pair of GPBSs is obviously an NGP. However, a GPBS exists only if [14, Result 4.8]. So let be even; since is divisible by , and not every is [math], some must be at least . Thus, we will say that of length is a generalized optimal binary sequence (GOBS) if . Equivalently, is a GOBS if, for ,
[TABLE]
when is odd, and
[TABLE]
when is even. We propose searching for NGPs in the set of GOBs of length , odd.
Just as the notion of GPBA extends that of GPBS to dimensions greater than , a GOBA (generalized optimal binary array) is a higher-dimensional version of a GOBS. Section 3 treats GPBAs and GOBAs from the perspective of [3]. We prove a one-to-one correspondence between GOBAs, quasi-orthogonal cocycles over abelian groups, and abelian relative quasi-difference sets. In Section 4, we outline and apply a method to find NGPs among GOBSs that correspond to quasi-orthogonal cocycles over cyclic groups. The concluding Section 5 looks at an important question for cocyclic designs prompted by the analysis in Section 4.
2 Quasi-orthogonal cocycles and related
combinatorial structures
Let and be finite groups, with abelian. A map such that and
[TABLE]
is a (normalized) cocycle over . If is any map that is normalized (i.e., ) then defines a cocycle , called a coboundary. The set of all cocycles over forms an abelian group , whose quotient by the subgroup of coboundaries is the second cohomology group . We display as a cocyclic matrix . If and is Hadamard then is said to be orthogonal.
The row excess of a cocyclic matrix indexed by is the sum of the absolute values of all row sums, apart from row . The cocycle equation (2) guarantees that is orthogonal if and only if is optimal, i.e., zero.
For the rest of this section, .
Proposition 1
- (i)
If then .
- (ii)
If then .
Proof
See [3, Proposition 1].
In analogy with the definition of orthogonal cocycles, we say that is quasi-orthogonal if its matrix has least possible row excess: by Proposition 1, either and , or and (coboundaries were excluded from the notion of quasi-orthogonality in [3]).
Lemma 1
Let . Then is quasi-orthogonal if and only if for , or and for .
Proof
See [3, Lemma 2.4].
It is not known whether quasi-orthogonal cocycles always exist. Indeed, we do not know of a group such that does not contain a quasi-orthogonal element (in contrast, there are several non-existence results for orthogonal cocycles, e.g., due to Ito [12]). We have found quasi-orthogonal coboundaries over many abelian , but none over non-abelian such as dihedral groups, apart from the dihedral group of order . Thirdly, for all such that is a sum of two squares that we tested, we always found a quasi-orthogonal cocycle over some group of order with attaining the maximum established by Ehlich-Wojtas. These existence questions all merit deeper investigation.
Let be a group with a normal subgroup of order and index . A relative -difference set in relative to (the forbidden subgroup) is a -subset of a transversal for in such that
[TABLE]
Relative -difference sets are especially interesting. If is even then they are equivalent to cocyclic Hadamard matrices [6, Corollary 2.5], whereas none exist if is odd [10]. In the latter case there is a natural analog of relative difference set. Suppose that and let be a normal (hence central) subgroup of . A relative -quasi-difference set in with forbidden subgroup is a transversal for in containing a subset of size [math] or such that, for all ,
[TABLE]
We call extremal if . (This modifies the original definition in [3] of relative quasi-difference set, to allow quasi-orthogonal coboundaries).
The next result is mostly Proposition 4.3 in [3]. For each we have a canonical central extension with element set and multiplication defined by .
Proposition 2
The cocycle is quasi-orthogonal if and only if is a relative -quasi-difference set in with forbidden subgroup , where is extremal for .
Remark 1
The requisite subset of corresponds to the rows of with zero sum.
3 Generalized binary arrays with optimal autocorrelation
Jedwab [14] showed that a GPBA is equivalent to an abelian relative difference set, and Hughes [11] identified its underlying orthogonal cocycle. In this section we carry over these ideas into the setting of quasi-orthogonal cocycles.
We start with an adaptation of some material from [11] and [14]. The cyclic group of order will be written additively, i.e., as under addition modulo . Let be an -tuple of positive integers greater than , and let . A binary -array is just a set map ; it has energy . We view a binary sequence as an -array with .
Given and a type vector , let . Then
[TABLE]
are elementary abelian -subgroups of . Note that is a (central) extension of by . For we obtain the short exact sequence
[TABLE]
where maps to the generator of and . This sequence determines a cocycle after choice of a transversal map . Specifically, set ; then
[TABLE]
We can express as a product of cocycles on cyclic groups. Define by , evaluating the exponent as an ordinary integer.
Proposition 3 ([11, Lemma 3.1])
- (i)
.
- (ii)
* if and only if is odd for all such that .*
Each cocycle has an associated short exact sequence
[TABLE]
where and . The following is standard.
Proposition 4
If and are cohomologous, say , then (3) and (4) are equivalent short exact sequences: the isomorphism defined by makes the diagram
[TABLE]
commute.
We broaden concepts defined earlier only for sequences. The expansion of a binary -array with respect to a type vector is the map on given by
[TABLE]
where denotes modulo . For any array and , let .
Lemma 2
If then , and if then .
Corollary 1
* where is any transversal for in .*
Lemma 3
The isomorphism in Proposition 4 maps onto .
Proof
(Cf. [11, p. 330].) Let and write for modulo ; then . Conversely, where is the generator of if and otherwise. By Lemma 2, .
The -array is a GPBA of type if
[TABLE]
When , this condition becomes (by Corollary 1)
[TABLE]
In the latter event is a PBA; which is equivalent to being orthogonal (we return to this case later in the section). More generally, a GPBA is equivalent to a relative difference set in relative to , hence equivalent also to a cocyclic Hadamard matrix over : see [11, Theorem 5.3] and [14, Theorem 3.2]. So a GPBA can exist only if its energy is or a multiple of . Theorems 3.1 and 3.2 below are analogous results for .
Assume that unless stated otherwise. Let be odd. Thus, if then splits over by Proposition 3, and so is never zero by Corollary 1 and Lemma 2.
Definition 1
A GOBA of type is a binary -array such that
- (i)
,
and if then
- (ii)
.
A GOBS as defined in Section 1 is a GOBA( with . When , Definition 1 reduces to
[TABLE]
we call satisfying this condition an optimal binary array (OBA).
Lemma 4 ([14, Lemma 3.1])
For any array ,
[TABLE]
where and .
Proof
Routine counting.
Theorem 3.1
Let be a binary -array, be a non-zero type vector, and . Then is a GOBA of type if and only if is a relative -quasi-difference set in with forbidden subgroup ; furthermore, is extremal if .
Proof
We continue with the notation of Lemma 4. By Lemma 3, is a full transversal for in . Also, by Lemma 2; thus .
For each , denote by : this is the number of such that . Since , Lemma 4 implies that
[TABLE]
Let . According to (5), Definition 1 (i) holds if and only if
[TABLE]
Lemma 2 yields
[TABLE]
Thus for if and only if Definition 1 (ii) holds.
Remark 2
Theorem 3.1 remains valid when is replaced by its complement .
Theorem 3.2
A (normalized) binary -array is a GOBA of type if and only if is quasi-orthogonal.
Proof
This is a consequence of Theorem 3.1, Remark 2, Proposition 2, and Lemma 3.
We proceed to formulate ‘base’ cases of Theorems 3.1 and 3.2. Let . Since is Hadamard equivalent to a group-developed matrix, and such a matrix has constant row sum, can be orthogonal only if is square. This situation has been extensively studied.
Theorem 3.3
Let , and let be a subset of of size . Define where is the characteristic function of . Then the following are equivalent.
- (i)
* is orthogonal.*
- (ii)
* is a Menon-Hadamard difference set in .*
- (iii)
* is a relative -difference set in with forbidden subgroup .*
- (iv)
* is a perfect nonlinear function.*
If is abelian then (i) – (iv) are further equivalent to
- (v)
* is a PBA.*
Proof
See [15, Theorem 1] for (iii) (iv). The other equivalences are given by Theorem 2.6 and Lemma 2.10 of [6].
Remark 3
In Theorem 3.3 and Theorem 3.4 below we may assume that is normalized, by taking the complement of (and thus also of ) if necessary.
The next theorem is an analog of the previous one for (recall that we have not found quasi-orthogonal coboundaries over non-abelian at orders greater than ).
Theorem 3.4
Let be abelian of order , and let be a -subset of with characteristic function . Define where . Then the following are equivalent.
- (i)
* is quasi-orthogonal.*
- (ii)
* is a -almost difference set in .*
- (iii)
* is an extremal relative -quasi-difference set in with forbidden subgroup .*
- (iv)
* is an OBA.*
If a difference set with parameters does not exist, then (i) – (iv) are further equivalent to
- (v)
* has optimal nonlinearity .*
Proof
Put .
(i) (iv): Lemma 1 and the fact that is the sum of row in .
(i) (ii): by Lemma 4, or if and only if or , respectively. Identity (19) of [5] then accounts for this part.
(i) (iii): Proposition 2 together with the isomorphism defined by ; cf. Proposition 4.
(ii) (v): see [5, Theorem 25].
Remark 4
The condition attached to (v) is only needed for (v) (ii). No difference sets with the stated parameters are known; see [5, Remark II, p. 224].
We end this section with a discussion of calculating GOBAs. Label the elements of as , and let be the characteristic function of . Up to relabeling, is a basis of , where is an elementary coboundary. Choose . We first try to find quasi-orthogonal such that . Straightforward linear algebra gives the decomposition . Then is a GOBA(s) of type over .
Example 1
The maps \phi_{1}={\small\left[\begin{array}[]{rrr}1&-1&\phantom{-}1\\ 1&1&\phantom{-}1\end{array}\right]}, \phi_{2}={\small\left[\begin{array}[]{rrr}1&\phantom{-}1&-1\\ 1&\phantom{-}1&1\end{array}\right]}, \phi_{3}={\small\left[\begin{array}[]{rrr}1&1&-1\\ 1&-1&\phantom{-}1\end{array}\right]} on are GOBA()s of type , , , respectively. We display each quasi-orthogonal cocycle as a Hadamard (componentwise) product:
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Note that is a quasi-orthogonal coboundary; as are all the .
Example 2
The map {\small\left[\begin{array}[]{rrrrrrrrr}1&\ -1&1&\ -1&\ -1&\phantom{-}1\\ 1&1&\ -1&1&1&1\\ 1&1&1&1&1&1\end{array}\right]}^{\top} on is a GOBA() of type . Its quasi-orthogonal cocycle is .
4 Negaperiodic Golay pairs
In this section we explore how GOBSs can be used to construct NGPs.
Proposition 5 ([8, Theorem 3])
Binary sequences , of length form an NGP if and only if is a relative -difference set in the dicyclic group .
Remark 5
By Proposition 5 and [2, Theorems 5.6 and 5.7], NGPs of length exist for all prime powers .
Proposition 5 ties NGPs into the mainstream theory of cocyclic Hadamard matrices: by [9, Proposition 6.5], existence of a -difference set in is equivalent to existence of certain orthogonal cocycles over the dihedral group of order . (Incidentally, this gives another justification of Remark 5, via Ito’s Hadamard groups of quadratic residue type [12, pp. 986–987].) These cocycles lie in a single cohomology class, with representative labeled in [9]; , are ‘inflation’ variables and is the ‘transgression’ variable in a Universal Coefficients theorem decomposition of .
The next theorem makes Proposition 5 more explicit. It shows how to translate directly between cocycles and NGPs. When the latter are complementary GOBSs, this implies existence of orthogonal cocycles if there exist quasi-orthogonal cocycles at half the order (unfortunately, the process does not reverse).
Theorem 4.1
Let with elements ordered as . Also let , be binary sequences of length , and define to be or [math] depending on whether or , respectively. Then is an NGP if and only if is an orthogonal cocycle over , where is the cohomology class representative labeled in [9, Section 6].
Proof
The center of is . Since , we may define a transversal map by
[TABLE]
where is the Kronecker delta. Assuming that and are normalized, let be the cocycle for , i.e., . By Proposition 5 and [6, Corollary 2.5], is orthogonal if and only if is an NGP.
Set and . Then has matrix
[TABLE]
where is back negacyclic, and is with rows and swapped for . Furthermore, under the stipulated ordering of .
We now undertake a case study of quasi-orthogonal cocycles over cyclic groups. Let and index matrices by in this order. The set where (as defined before Proposition 3) is a basis of . We get an elementary coboundary matrix by normalizing the back circulant matrix whose first row is s except for the th entry. Also, is the back negacyclic matrix of order .
Lemma 5
Let , say . Then
- (i)
*up to sign, has **th row sum equal to its *th row sum.
- (ii)
*The *th row sum of is [math].
- (iii)
* is quasi-orthogonal if and only if the *th row sum of is [math] for even and for odd .
Proof
If then row of or its negation is row cycled positions to the right. Part (i) then follows. For (ii), observe that row in is , whereas the first half of row in is identical to the second half. Finally, (iii) holds because the number of s in any row of is even; and the rows of indexed by an even (respectively, odd) integer have an odd (respectively, even) number of s.
We use an approach borrowed from [1] to count the negative entries in a -cocyclic matrix. Negating row of gives a generalized coboundary matrix , with exactly two s in each non-initial row : these are in columns and , where denotes the residue of modulo . (Although is not cocyclic, row negation preserves row excess.) Hence the two generalized coboundary matrices with in position are and .
A set defines an -walk if there is an ordering of its elements such that and both have in row and column , for . The walk is an -path if its initial (equivalently, final) element shares a in row with a generalized coboundary matrix not in the walk itself. Clearly, the number of s in row of is where is the number of maximal -paths in . To calculate we set up a bipartite graph on vertex sets and . Draw an edge between and if or . The number of maximal paths in this bipartite graph is .
Next, let be the number of columns where and share a in row . These column indices comprise the intersection of and the set of endpoints of the previously calculated maximal -paths.
Theorem 4.2 (cf. [1, Proposition 1])
A -cocyclic matrix is quasi-orthogonal if and only if, for ,
[TABLE]
Proof
The number of s in row of is , so Lemma 5 gives the result.
Corollary 2
Let with . If is quasi-orthogonal then .
Proof
We have , and by Theorem 4.2. Thus . On the other hand, since the basis of coboundaries forms a -path, at least coboundaries must be removed to get -paths. Hence .
Corollary 2 is equivalent to
Lemma 6
If is a GOBS containing occurrences of then .
Proof
Negating all odd index entries or all even index entries of a GOBS produces another GOBS. So it may be assumed that .
We search for NGPs in the set of quasi-orthogonal cocycles over , motivated by the ubiquity of these cocycles and the optimal autocorrelation of each map in the resulting pair. Computer-aided searches found the NGPs in Table 1.
Each sequence in Table 1 starts with and is designated by an integer string, where in the string means a run of identical entries in the sequence, and is an alternating subsequence of length . There are no NGPs among the sequences coming from quasi-orthogonal cocycles over (however, as we know, NGPs of length exist). This gap could be related to the maximal determinant problem: the Ehlich-Wojtas bound is not attainable because is not a sum of two squares.
Egan [8] classified NGPs of length for up to equivalence with respect to five elementary operations as defined in [4]. The set of NGPs that come from GOBSs is invariant under each elementary operation. Table 2 records the number of such NGPs of length , and the number of their equivalence classes. To compare against [8, Table 2], we have included the total number of NGPs of length and the number of their equivalence classes.
5 Normal cocyclic matrices
This section is essentially independent of the main thrust of the paper. Nonetheless, it addresses a fundamental question in algebraic design theory, which we answer in special cases that were the focus of Section 4.
A matrix is normal if it commutes with its transpose (possibly up to row or column permutations), i.e., , where denotes the Grammian . Many kinds of pairwise combinatorial designs are normal matrices (the defining pairwise constraint on rows implies the same constraint on columns; see [7, Chapter 7]). We also note that the matrix of a quasi-orthogonal cocycle is normal [3, Remark 6]. Thus, by the following lemma derived from (2), a cocycle is quasi-orthogonal if and only if has optimal column excess.
Lemma 7
For any group and ,
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
We use Lemma 7 to prove that cocyclic matrices for two familiar classes of indexing groups are normal.
Proposition 6
Let be abelian or dihedral of order , odd, and let where if is dihedral. Then is normal (under the same indexing of rows and columns by the elements of ).
Proof
We suppose that is generated by and , with , and index rows and columns by the elements of under the ordering . A representative for the non-identity element of has matrix
[TABLE]
Thus, if is abelian then is symmetric and so trivially normal.
Henceforth is dihedral. Let . We collect together some basic properties of .
- (i)
For each , ; and for each , . Thus, if then the th row sum and th column sum of are zero. 2. (ii)
Since , the th row sum of equals its th column sum for .
Now we consider the Grammian quadrants in turn.
If and then
[TABLE]
by Lemma 7 and (i); similarly.
Let and . Then
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
These entries are equal by the identity .
Finally, let . Then
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Since , we are done by (ii).
Remark 6
There are plenty of examples of non-normal cocyclic matrices for and divisible by .
Acknowledgments.
The authors thank Kristeen Cheng for reading the manuscript, and Víctor Álvarez for his assistance with computations. We are also grateful to Ronan Egan, who shared his insights on NGPs with us. Remark 5 and reference [2] were kindly provided by one of the referees. This research has been supported by project FQM-016 funded by JJAA (Spain).
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] Álvarez, V., Armario, J. A., Frau, M. D., and Real, P.: A system of equations for describing cocyclic Hadamard matrices. J. Combin. Des. 16 (2008), 276–290.
- 2[2] Arasu, K. J., Chen, Y. Q., Pott, A.: Hadamard and conference matrices. J. Algebraic Combin. 14 (2001), 103–117.
- 3[3] Armario, J. A. and Flannery, D. L.: On quasi-orthogonal cocycles. J. Combin. Des. 26 (2018), 401–411.
- 4[4] Balonin, N. and Djokovic, D.: Negaperiodic Golay pairs and Hadamard matrices. Inf. Control Syst. 5 (2015), 2–17.
- 5[5] Carlet, C. and Ding C.: Highly nonlinear mappings. J. Complexity 20 (2004), 205–244.
- 6[6] de Launey, W., Flannery, D. L., and Horadam, K. J.: Cocyclic Hadamard matrices and difference sets. Discr. Appl. Math. 102 (2000), 47–62.
- 7[7] de Launey, W. and Flannery, D. L.: Algebraic design theory. Mathematical Surveys and Monographs, vol. 175. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI (2011).
- 8[8] Egan, R.: On equivalence of negaperiodic Golay pairs. Des. Codes Cryptogr. 85 (2017), 523–532.
