Codes over finite fields for multidimensional signals (Q5925795)

In previous work by Huber and by the authors, it was shown how to construct linear block codes for 4-dimensional and 6-dimensional signal spaces by working over the Gaussian integer rings \(\mathbb{Z}[i]\) and \(\mathbb{Z}[\omega]\), or respectively the cyclotomic fields \(\mathbb{Q}(e^{2\pi i/n})\) with \(n\in \{5,8,12\}\). For the last construction to succeed, it is necessary to have that the mentioned cyclotomic field is a principal ideal domain. In this paper, the authors investigate the cyclotomic fields for \(n\in \{1,3,4,5,7,8,9,11,12, 13,15,16,17, 19,20,21,24, 25,27,28,29,32, 33,35,36,40, 44, 45,48,60,\) \(84\}\), which are, according to the authors' reference [18] the only \(n\) not equal to \(2\text{ mod }4\) for which the mentioned cyclotomic field is such a PID. For these values of \(n\) the authors construct linear block codes over the algebraic integer ring of the cyclotomic field for \(\phi(n)\)-dimensional signal space, which are able to correct one error coming from the group of roots of unity in the mentioned cyclotomic field. An extensive example is given. The example contradicts Table III. In Table III it is mentioned that \(1+2\xi_{16}+ \xi^2_{16}+ \xi^4_{16}\) has norm 97, however this is not true. The element \(1+ 2\xi_{16}+ \xi^2_{16}+ \xi^3_{16}\) has norm 97, as stated in the example! This suggests that the tables in the paper must be subject to closer inspection. In Table IV in the explanation of the notation \([a_0,a_1,\dots, a_7]\), the left-hand side should read: \(a_0+ a_1\xi_{16}+\cdots+ a_7\xi^7_{16}\). Moreover, I think that an explanation of how to calculate this table in an elegant way should have been included in the paper. The calculation of the syndrom in the example should have been explained to somewhat more extent. More precisely how should we handle the fourth component of the received vector. This component is not in Table IV. Should we write it as a sum of elements of Table IV (which can actually be done in several ways)? If one does, the calculations seem to fit with the results given in the paper.