Group codes over fields are asymptotically good
Martino Borello, Wolfgang Willems

TL;DR
This paper proves that group codes over finite fields of any characteristic are asymptotically good, extending previous results from binary fields to all finite fields.
Contribution
It establishes the asymptotic goodness of group codes over arbitrary finite fields, generalizing prior work limited to binary fields.
Findings
Group codes over finite fields are asymptotically good.
The result extends to fields of any characteristic.
Supports the potential of group codes in coding theory applications.
Abstract
Group codes are right or left ideals in a group algebra of a finite group over a finite field. Following ideas of Bazzi and Mitter on group codes over the binary field, we prove that group codes over finite fields of any characteristic are asymptotically good.
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.
Group codes over fields are asymptotically good
Martino Borello
and
Wolfgang Willems
Abstract.
Group codes are right or left ideals in a group algebra of a finite group over a finite field. Following ideas of Bazzi and Mitter on group codes over the binary field [3], we prove that group codes over finite fields of any characteristic are asymptotically good.
M. Borello is with Université Paris 8, Laboratoire de Géométrie, Analyse et Applications, LAGA, Université Sorbonne Paris Nord, CNRS, UMR 7539, F-93526, Saint-Denis, France
W. Willems is with Otto-von-Guericke Universität, Magdeburg, Germany, and Universidad del Norte, Barranquilla, Colombia
Keywords. Group algebra, group code, asymptotically good
MSC classification. 94A17, 94B05, 20C05
1. Introduction
Let be a finite field of characteristic and let be a finite group. By a group code or, more precisely, a -code we denote a right or left ideal in the group algebra . Many interesting linear codes are group codes. For example, cyclic codes of length are group codes for a cyclic group ; Reed-Muller codes are group codes for an elementary abelian -group [4, 7]; the binary extended self-dual Golay code is a group code for the symmetric group on letters [5] and the dihedral group of order [14]. Many best known codes are group codes as well. For instance, contains a and a group code [13]. Both codes improved earlier examples in Grassl’s list [11].
Already in 1965, Assmus, Mattson and Tyrun [2] asked the question whether the class of cyclic codes, i.e., the class of group codes over cyclic groups, is asymptotically good. The answer is still open. In [3], Bazzi and Mitter proved that the class of group codes over the binary field is asymptotically good. Using the trivial fact that by field extensions neither the dimension nor the minimum distance changes, group codes are asymptotically good in characteristic . In this note we use the ideas of Bazzi and Mitter to prove our main result.
Theorem. Group codes over fields are asymptotically good in any characteristic.
The proof mainly follows the lines of [3] and does not distinguish between the prime and odd for the characteristic of the underlying field.
For different primes let denote the order of modulo . In order to construct a sequence of particular binary group algebras over dihedral groups, in [3] the authors need a set of primes with which has positive density in the set of all primes. Such a set is obviously given by all primes . For odd primes the analog is far less obvious, but has already been proved by Wiertelak in 1977 (see [15]). In the following unified proof (i.e., any prime) we heavily use results from modular representation theory.
2. The structure of the group algebra
Let be a fixed prime and let be a prime such that divides (there are infinitely many such , by Dirichlet’s Theorem). For such that and , we define the group by
[TABLE]
Note that is a nonabelian metacyclic group. In the case and the group is a dihedral group which has been considered in [3] to prove the Theorem over the binary field .
Next we put and . Any element of can uniquely be written as
[TABLE]
with . If (with ) is an element of , we define by
[TABLE]
Clearly, the map is an -algebra automorphism. From the relation we get for all , so that
[TABLE]
for all .
Now we realize as . Since is a semisimple algebra by Maschke’s Theorem ([1], p. 116), we have, due to Wedderburn’s Theorem ([1], Chap. 5, Sect. 13, Theorem 16), a unique decomposition
[TABLE]
into -sided ideals , where each is a simple algebra over . If
[TABLE]
is a factorization of into irreducible polynomials , then
[TABLE]
We may suppose that , so that .
Now let be a primitive -th root of unity in an extension field of . It is well-known by basic Galois theory that, for every , there exists exactly one coset in such that
[TABLE]
and the map is one-to-one. Furthermore, , which is the multiplicative order of in . In particular,
[TABLE]
for . The automorphism maps each to some . More precisely, corresponds to the coset . In particular, iff .
In what follows we need to understand which conditions on and imply for all . Note that obviously .
Lemma 2.1**.**
The following conditions are equivalent.
- (1)
* for all .* 2. (2)
There exists such that . 3. (3)
.
Proof.
Clearly implies . By the discussion above, for some iff , which happens iff . So implies . Obviously follows from . ∎
Let denote the order of modulo and suppose that . Thus for some . We may take in the definition of , since and . In this case we have for , by Lemma 2.1.
Now let
[TABLE]
The set of primes is infinite and it has positive density (see for instance [15]).
From now on, we assume that .
Let and recall that with . If we put
[TABLE]
for , then obviously
[TABLE]
Theorem 2.2**.**
The structure of is as follows.
- a)
All are -sided ideals of .
- b)
As a left -module we have . In particular, is uniserial of dimension and all composition factors are isomorphic to the trivial -module.
- c)
For all minimal left ideals in are projective -modules. Thus is a completely reducible left -module for .
- d)
* is indecomposable as a -sided ideal, hence a -block of . In particular, contains up to isomorphism exactly one irreducible left -module which is of dimension .*
- e)
* for and contains up to isomorphism exactly one irreducible left -module, say , of dimension .*
Proof.
a) Clearly, is a left ideal. It is also a right ideal since by Lemma 2.1, and for .
b) This follows immediately from representation theory (see for instance ([12], Chap. VII, Example 14.10)).
c) Let be a finite splitting field for ([12], Chap. VII, Theorem 2.6). Thus every irreducible character of is of degree . If is not the trivial character, then, according to the action of on , the induced character is an irreducible character for , by Clifford’s Theorem. Furthermore is afforded by an irreducible projective -module ([12], Chap. VII, Theorem 7.17). Thus all non-trivial irreducible -modules are projective. Now, let be an irreducible non-trivial -module and denote by the space regarded as an module. Then, by ([12], Chap. VII, Theorem 1.16 a)), is a direct sum of Galois conjugates of , which are all projective since no one is the trivial module. Finally, by ([12], Chap. VII, Ex. 19 in Sec. 7), the module is a projective -module, and by ([12], Chap. VII, Theorem 1.16 d)), for some irreducible -module . Thus is projective. Since obviously all irreducible non-trivial -modules can be described this way we are done.
d) Note that is not irreducible as a left module since is a minimal ideal in . Clearly, as a left -module. Thus has an extension to the irreducible -module . But all extensions are isomorphic since is a -group. Thus has up to isomorphism exactly one irreducible -module and has exactly non-isomorphic -modules. If some is a direct sum of two non-zero -sided ideals, then contains at least two non-isomorphic irreducible -modules, a contradiction.
e) By c) and d), we know that contains up to isomorphism exactly one irreducible left -module, say , which has dimension . Thus with components . That has the indicated matrix algebra structure now follows by Wedderburn’s Theorem. ∎
Lemma 2.3**.**
For we have
- a)
* is a subfield of .*
- b)
.
Proof.
a) This is obviously true.
b) Since acts fixed point freely on we get . Now, it is sufficient to show that for , which implies
[TABLE]
Let be a splitting field for . To prove that for first note that , where and is a linear non-trivial character of . Thus acts regularly on the set , which proves that the fixed point space of on has dimension . This implies that the fixed point space on also has dimension , i.e. . ∎
In order to determine all minimal left ideals in we need the following notation. For we denote by the image of in the factor group .
Lemma 2.4**.**
For we have the following.
- a)
For , the space is a minimal left ideal in .
- b)
* iff .*
- c)
Each minimal left ideal of is of the form with .
Proof.
a) This is clear since for and .
b) Suppose that with . Thus
[TABLE]
with and . Since
[TABLE]
we obtain , hence . It follows
[TABLE]
hence . Conversely, if , then obviously .
c) Since by Lemma 2.3, we have constructed so far exactly minimal left ideals. According to Lemma 2.2 e) we have . It is well-known that there is a bijection between the set of minimal left ideals in and the set of 1-dimensional subspaces in a -dimensional vector space over , which has cardinality . ∎
3. Asymptotically good group codes
In this section we prove that group codes are asymptotically good in any characteristic. We set here and we consider the group algebra . All the notations are as in Section 2.
Lemma 3.1** (Chepyzhov [8]).**
Let denote a non-decreasing function and let
[TABLE]
If , with , then is infinite and dense in the set of all primes. In particular, if , then the set of primes such that grows faster than is infinite and dense in the set of all primes.
Proof.
Let be the set of primes less than which are not in (i.e., if is the set of primes less than , then ). Since is the multiplicative order of modulo , there exists, for every in , two integers and such that
[TABLE]
Thus
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
By the Prime Number Density Theorem, we have . Thus the set is infinite, even dense in the set of all primes. ∎
Remark 3.2**.**
Since has positive density, there are infinitely many such that grows faster than .
Lemma 3.3**.**
If be the set of left ideals in of dimension , then .
Proof.
Recall that are the irreducible modules in where and for . An ideal of dimension is a direct sum of at most of these irreducible modules. There are at most such sums and the assertion follows from . ∎
Let and let be the multiplicative group of units of .
Lemma 3.4**.**
If such that and
[TABLE]
then .
Proof.
We may decompose , with and put . Since for (recall that is isomorphic to a field), we get
[TABLE]
By Lemma 2.4, we have
[TABLE]
where and It follows
[TABLE]
Finally,
[TABLE]
since . ∎
In order to prove Theorem 3.6 we need the following result which is a special case of ([10], Theorem 3.3). Let us recall that a group code is a balanced code, as observed in [3, Lemma 2.2.].
Lemma 3.5**.**
Let be a group code. Then
[TABLE]
for all , where
[TABLE]
is the -ary entropy function.
Theorem 3.6**.**
Let and consider the unique decomposition into the -blocks described in Theorem 2.2.
Now we choose a left ideal of as
[TABLE]
*where each is taken uniformly at random among the non-zero irreducible left ideals of .
If satisfies , then the probability that the minimum relative distance of is below is at most
[TABLE]
Proof.
Since every irreducible left ideal is of the form given in Lemma 2.4, the above randomized construction is equivalent to consider
[TABLE]
where is selected uniformly at random from with . Since is a group, we have for all , hence
[TABLE]
for all . Let
[TABLE]
By definition of the minimum distance, we have that
[TABLE]
We can partition as
[TABLE]
so that
[TABLE]
Let be the set of left ideals in of dimension . Then
[TABLE]
by Lemma 3.3. For any and any , we can define
[TABLE]
as in Lemma 3.4. Using this we get
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
where is the set of elements of weight in .
It is easy to see that each can occur with the same probability as , so that the above probability is independent of . Thus we have
[TABLE]
by Lemma 3.4.
Moreover, is a group code, so that, by Lemma 3.5, we have
[TABLE]
for all (which is true, since ). Putting together all previous inequalities we have
[TABLE]
so that, by the convexity,
[TABLE]
Finally, if , then
[TABLE]
∎
Corollary 3.7**.**
Group codes over finite fields are asymptotically good.
Proof.
We have to prove the assertion only for prime fields. The general case then follows by field extension (see ([9], Proposition 12)). According to Lemma 3.1 and Remark 3.2, we may choose a sequence of primes in such that and for . Let with . Thus the assumption in Theorem 3.6 is satisfied for all and we can find a left ideal in with relative minimum distance at least . Furthermore, . Thus
[TABLE]
This shows that the sequence of the left ideals is asymptotically good. ∎
Remark 3.8**.**
Note that the groups are -nilpotent with cyclic Sylow -subgroups. Thus the asymptotically good sequence we constructed in Corollary 3.7 is a sequence of group codes in code-checkable group algebras [6]. In such algebras all left and right ideals are principal.**
Acknowledgement. The first author was partially supported by PEPS - Jeunes Chercheur-e-s - 2018. We are very grateful to Pieter Moree who brought to our attention his paper [15]. Thanks also goes to anonymous referees who pointed out some inconsistencies in an earlier version.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] J.L. Alperin and R.B. Bell , Groups and representations, Graduate Text in Math. , Springer Verlag 1995.
- 2[2] E.F. Assmus, H.F. Mattson and R. Turyn , Cyclic codes, Report AFCRL-65-332 of the Appl. Res. Lab. , Sylvania Electronic Systems 1965.
- 3[3] L.M.J. Bazzi and S.K. Mitter , Some randomized code constructions from group actions, IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory, vol. 52, pp. 3210-3219, 2006.
- 4[4] S.D. Berman , On the theory of group codes, Kibernetika, vol. 3, pp. 31-39, 1967.
- 5[5] F. Bernhardt, P. Landrock and O. Manz , The extended Golay codes considered as ideals, J. Comb. Theory, Series A, vol. 55, pp. 235-246, 1990.
- 6[6] M. Borello, J. de la Cruz and W. Willems , Checkable codes in group algebras, ar Xiv: 1901.10979 , 2019.
- 7[7] P. Charpin , Une généralisation de la construction de Berman des codes de Reed-Muller p 𝑝 p -aire, Comm. Algebra, vol 16, pp. 2231-2246, 1988.
- 8[8] V. Chepyzhov , New lower bounds for minimum distance of linear quasi-cyclic and almost linear cyclic codes, Probl. Peredachi Inf., vol 28, pp. 33-44, 1992.
