Next Article in Journal
An Ensemble and Multi-View Clustering Method Based on Kolmogorov Complexity
Next Article in Special Issue
Analysis and Optimization of a General Linking Matrix for JSCC Scheme Based on Double LDPC Codes
Previous Article in Journal
Chaos and Predictability in Ionospheric Time Series
Previous Article in Special Issue
Lossy P-LDPC Codes for Compressing General Sources Using Neural Networks
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Linear Codes from Two Weakly Regular Plateaued Balanced Functions

1
School of Mathematical Sciences, Qufu Normal University, Jining 273165, China
2
School of Computer Science, South China Normal University, Guangzhou 510631, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Entropy 2023, 25(2), 369; https://doi.org/10.3390/e25020369
Submission received: 3 December 2022 / Revised: 11 February 2023 / Accepted: 14 February 2023 / Published: 17 February 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Information and Coding Theory)

Abstract

:
Linear codes with a few weights have been extensively studied due to their wide applications in secret sharing schemes, strongly regular graphs, association schemes, and authentication codes. In this paper, we choose the defining sets from two distinct weakly regular plateaued balanced functions, based on a generic construction of linear codes. Then we construct a family of linear codes with at most five nonzero weights. Their minimality is also examined and the result shows that our codes are helpful in secret sharing schemes.

1. Introduction

Throughout this paper, we will denote by F p a finite field with p elements, where p is an odd prime. An [ n , k , d ] linear code C of length n over F p is a k-dimensional linear subspace of F p n with Hamming distance d. The Hamming weight of a codeword c = ( c 0 , c 1 , , c n 1 ) is defined by wt ( c ) = # { c i 0 : 0 i n 1 } . Let A w be the number of codewords with weight w in C. By the weight distribution of C, we mean the sequence 1 , A 1 , A 2 , , A n . The code C is called t-weight if the number of nonzero A j in the sequence ( A 1 , A 2 , , A n ) equals t. The weight distribution contains important information about the codes including the capabilities of error detection and correction. In recent years, many interesting articles have been published on good linear codes [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13]. Besides, many linear codes with a few weights have been constructed from certain special functions, such as square functions [14], Boolean functions [1] and bent functions [8,15,16,17]. Among them, the plateaued functions, introduced by Zheng et al. in [18], have become one of the most attractive functions recently. The authors in [7,9,10,19] have given several families of linear codes using various weakly regular plateaued functions.
There are several methods to construct linear codes, and one of them goes back to the work of Ding et al. [20]. Let q = p m for a positive integer m, 0 s , t m and D = { d 1 , d 2 , , d n } F q * . A class of linear codes over F p is defined by
C D = c ( a ) = T r ( a d 1 ) , T r ( a d 2 ) , , T r ( a d n ) : a F q ,
where T r is the trace function from F q to F p defined by T r ( x ) = x + x p + + x p m 1 for x F q . Here D is called the defining set of C D . Many good linear codes have been derived from this generic approach [3,4,5,9,16,21]. For instance, Sınak et al. [9] constructed a family of linear codes by the defining set:
D = x F q * : f ( x ) = c , c F p ,
where f is a weakly regular s-plateaued balanced function.
As one of the generalizations of [20], Li et al. [22] defined a p-ary linear code by
C D = c ( a , b ) = T r ( a x + b y ) ( x , y ) D : a , b F q ,
where D F q 2 is also called a defining set. Based on this method, the authors in [2,6,10,11,12,13,17] constructed various linear codes from distinct defining sets. In particular, Cheng et al. in [2] introduced several linear codes of (1) with a few weights by the defining sets:
D = ( x , y ) F q 2 \ { ( 0 , 0 ) } : f ( x ) + g ( y ) = 0 , D S Q = ( x , y ) F q 2 \ { ( 0 , 0 ) } : f ( x ) + g ( y ) S Q , D N S Q = ( x , y ) F q 2 \ { ( 0 , 0 ) } : f ( x ) + g ( y ) N S Q ,
where f and g are weakly regular s-plateaued unbalanced functions, S Q (resp. N S Q ) represents the set of square (resp. non-square) elements in F p * . Later, Sınak et al. [10] constructed new linear codes from an extended defining set D of (2) by considering f and g to be weakly regular s-plateaued and t-plateaued functions, respectively. Inspired by the idea in [2,10], we choose a new defining set
D f , g = ( x , y ) F q 2 \ { ( 0 , 0 ) } : f ( x ) + g ( y ) = c , c F p * ,
where f and g are weakly regular s-plateaued and t-plateaued balanced functions, respectively. In this paper, we will investigate the linear codes C D f , g of (1) and determine their parameters and weight distributions using Walsh transform. In fact, as a generalization of [9], the codes we construct will partially extend the results of [2,10].
The rest of this paper is arranged as follows. A summary of weakly regular plateaued functions is presented in Section 2. Section 3 introduces some exponential sums, which will be employed in the subsequent sections. The main results about linear codes C D f , g are given in Section 4, where we investigate the weight distributions of the codes. Section 5 illustrates the minimality and applications of these codes. Finally, in Section 6 we conclude the paper.

2. Mathematical Foundation

In this section, we will introduce some necessary tools about cyclotomic fields and weakly regular plateaued functions. Firstly, some notations are fixed.
(1)
q = p m , where p is an odd prime and m is a positive integer;
(2)
S Q (resp. N S Q ) represents the set of square (resp. non-square) elements in F p * ;
(3)
ζ p is a primitive p-th root of unity;
(4)
T r is the trace function from F q to F p ;
(5)
η is the quadratic character of F p * ;
(6)
p * = η ( 1 ) p = ( 1 ) p 1 2 p and hence p m = η m ( 1 ) p * 2 m .

2.1. Cyclotomic Fields

A cyclotomic field K = Q ( ζ p ) is established from the rational field Q by adjoining ζ p . We call K the p-th cyclotomic field over Q . Actually, the field K is the splitting field of x p 1 , and K is a simple algebraic extension of Q as stated in Theorem 2.47 of [23]. We employ K / Q to stand for the field extension of K over Q .
Lemma 1 
([24]). Let K be the p-th cyclotomic field over Q . Then we have the following results.
(1)
The ring of integers in K is Z [ ζ p ] , where Z is the ring of integers, and { ζ p i : 1 i p 1 } is an integer basis of Z [ ζ p ] .
(2)
The field extension K / Q is Galois of degree p 1 , and the Galois group G a l ( K / Q ) = { σ z : z F p * } , where the automorphism σ z of K is defined as σ z ( ζ p ) = ζ p z .
(3)
The cyclotomic field K has a unique quadratic subfield Q ( p * ) . For z F p * , σ z ( p * ) = η ( z ) p * .
By Lemma 1, for any z F p * and x F p , we have σ z ( ζ p x ) = ζ p z x and σ z ( p * m ) = η m ( z ) p * m .

2.2. Weakly Regular Plateaued Functions

In this subsection, we will introduce some properties of weakly regular functions. Let f be a p-ary function from F q to F p . The Walsh transform (see Page 73 of [25]) of f on β F q is defined as a complex-valued function χ ^ f on F q ,
χ ^ f ( β ) = x F q ζ p f ( x ) T r ( β x ) .
A function f is said to be balanced over F q if f takes every element of F p the same number p m 1 of pre-images. Otherwise, it is unbalanced. Clearly, f is balanced if and only if χ ^ f ( 0 ) = 0 .
Bent functions are the ones satisfying | χ ^ f ( β ) | 2 = p m . For a bent function f, if p m 2 χ ^ f ( β ) = ζ p g ( β ) for every β F q and some p-ary function g, then f is called regular bent. On the other hand, f is weakly regular bent if there exists a complex number u with | u | = 1 and a p-ary function g such that u p m 2 χ ^ f ( β ) = ζ p g ( β ) for all β F q . The function g is also weakly regular bent.
As an extension of bent functions, Zheng et al. [18] firstly introduced the notion of plateaued functions in characteristic 2. It was later extended again by Mesnager [15] in any odd characteristic p. A function f is called s-plateaued if | χ ^ f ( β ) | 2 { 0 , p m + s } for every β F q , where s is an integer with 0 s m . It is worth noting that every bent function is 0-plateaued. The Walsh support of an s-plateaued f is defined by
S f = { β F q : | χ ^ f ( β ) | 2 = p m + s } .
By the Parseval identity, we have # S f = p m s , which verifies the following lemma.
Lemma 2 
(Lemma 1, [15]). Let f be an s-plateaued function. Then for β F q , | χ ^ f ( β ) | 2 takes p m s times the value p m + s and p m p m s times the value 0.
The notion of weakly regular s-plateaued functions is due to Mesnager et al. [19].
Definition 1 
([19]). Let f be an s-plateaued function, where 0 s m . Then, f is called weakly regular s-plateaued if there exists a complex number u with | u | = 1 , such that
χ ^ f ( β ) { 0 , u p m + s 2 ζ p g ( β ) }
for all β F q , with g being a p-ary function over F q and g ( β ) = 0 for all β F q \ S f . Otherwise, f is called non-weakly regular s-plateaued. Note that a weakly regular f is said to be regular if u = 1 . Moreover, if a weakly regular s-plateaued function f satisfies χ ^ f ( 0 ) = 0 (resp. χ ^ f ( 0 ) 0 ), then f is said to be weakly regular s-plateaued balanced (resp. unbalanced).
Lemma 3 
(Lemma 5, [19]). Let β F q and f be a weakly regular s-plateaued function. For every β S f we have
χ ^ f ( β ) = ε f p * m + s ζ p f * ( β ) ,
where ε f = ± 1 is the sign of χ ^ f and f * is a p-ary function over F q with f * ( β ) = 0 for all β F q \ S f .
In the literature, two subclasses of weakly regular plateaued functions were introduced by setting two homogeneous conditions. Let f be a weakly regular s-plateaued function, where 0 s m , and let WRPB (resp. WRP) denote the class of these balanced (resp. unbalanced) functions that meet the following two homogeneous conditions:
(1)
f ( 0 ) = 0 ;
(2)
There exists an even positive integer h f with gcd ( h f 1 , p 1 ) = 1 , such that f ( z x ) = z h f f ( x ) for any z F p * and x F q .
Remark 1. 
For every f   WRPB (resp. f   WRP), we have 0 S f (resp. 0 S f ).
The classical work on weakly regular s-plateaued functions was presented by Mesnager et al. [7] and Sınak [9].
Lemma 4 
(Lemma 6, [7] and Lemma 4, [9]). Let β F q and f WRPB or f WRP with χ ^ f ( β ) = ε f p * m + s ζ p f * ( β ) . Then, for every z F p * , z β S f if β S f , otherwise, z β F q \ S f .
Lemma 5 
(Propositions 2 and 3, [7] and Lemma 5, [9]). Let β F q and f WRPB or f WRP with χ ^ f ( β ) = ε f p * m + s ζ p f * ( β ) for every β S f . Then
(1)
f * ( 0 ) = 0 ;
(2)
We have f * ( z β ) = z l f f * ( β ) for any z F p * and β S f , where l f is an even positive integer with gcd ( l f 1 , p 1 ) = 1 .
Lemma 6 
(Lemma 4, [7]). Let f be a weakly regular s-plateaued function. Then for x F q ,
β S f ζ p f * ( β ) + T r ( β x ) = ε f η m ( 1 ) p * m s ζ p f ( x ) ,
where ε f = ± 1 is the sign of χ ^ f and f * is a p-ary function over F q with f * ( β ) = 0 for all β F q \ S f .
Lemma 7 
(Lemma 10, [7]). Let f be a weakly regular s-plateaued function with χ ^ f ( β ) = ε f p * m + s ζ p f * ( β ) for every β S f . For c F p , define
N f ( c ) = # { β S f : f * ( β ) = c } .
When m s is even, we have
N f ( c ) = p m s 1 + ε f η m + 1 ( 1 ) ( p 1 ) p * m s 2 , i f   c = 0 , p m s 1 ε f η m + 1 ( 1 ) p * m s 2 , i f   c F p * .
Otherwise,
N f ( c ) = p m s 1 , i f   c = 0 , p m s 1 + ε f η ( c ) η m ( 1 ) p * m s 1 , i f   c F p * .

3. Exponential Sums Associated with Functions in WRPB

In this section, we will present auxiliary results on exponential sums related to weakly regular plateaued balanced functions. These results are very useful in the subsequent sections.
Lemma 8 
([23]). For any b F p * , we have
(1)
x F p * ζ p b x = 1 ;
(2)
x F p * η ( x ) = 0 ;
(3)
x F p * η ( x ) ζ p x = p * ;
(4)
x F p ζ p b x 2 = η ( b ) p * .
Lemma 9. 
Assume that g WRPB or g WRP with χ ^ g ( β ) = ε g p * m + t ζ p g * ( β ) for every β S g . For c F p * , we define
R g , S Q ( c ) = # { b S g : g * ( b ) c S Q } , R g , N S Q ( c ) = # { b S g : g * ( b ) c N S Q } .
When m t is even, we have
R g , S Q ( c ) = p 1 2 p m t 1 + 1 + p η ( c ) 2 ε g η m + 1 ( 1 ) p * m t 2 , R g , N S Q ( c ) = p 1 2 p m t 1 + 1 p η ( c ) 2 ε g η m + 1 ( 1 ) p * m t 2 .
Otherwise, we have
R g , S Q ( c ) = p 1 2 p m t 1 1 + η ( c ) 2 ε g η m ( 1 ) p * m t 1 , R g , N S Q ( c ) = p 1 2 p m t 1 + 1 η ( c ) 2 ε g η m ( 1 ) p * m t 1 .
Proof. 
For c F p * , we define
R = z F p b S g ζ p z 2 ( g * ( b ) c ) .
Note that
N g ( c ) = # { b S g : g * ( b ) = c } .
From Lemmas 2 and 8, we obtain
N g ( c ) + R g , S Q ( c ) + R g , N S Q ( c ) = p m t ,
R = p N g ( c ) + p * R g , S Q ( c ) p * R g , N S Q ( c ) .
On the other hand, from Lemmas 6 and 8, we have
R = b S g 1 + z F p * ζ p z 2 ( g * ( b ) c ) = p m t + z F p * ζ p c z 2 σ z 2 b S g ζ p g * ( b ) = p m t + ε g η m ( 1 ) p * m t z F p * ζ p c z 2 = p m t + ε g η m ( 1 ) p * m t η ( c ) p * 1 .
The desired assertion then follows from (3)–(5) and Lemma 7. □
Lemma 10 
(Lemma 3.12, [10]). Assume f , g WRPB or f , g WRP with χ ^ f ( α ) = ε f p * m + s ζ p f * ( α ) and χ ^ g ( β ) = ε g p * m + t ζ p g * ( β ) for every α S f and every β S g , respectively. Let
T ( 0 ) = # { ( a , b ) S f × S g : f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) = 0 } , T ( c ) = # { ( a , b ) S f × S g : f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) = c } , w h e r e   c F p * .
Then we have
T ( 0 ) = p 2 m s t 1 + p 1 p ε f ε g p * 2 m s t , i f   s + t   i s   e v e n , p 2 m s t 1 , i f   s + t   i s   o d d , T ( c ) = p 2 m s t 1 p 1 ε f ε g p * 2 m s t , i f   s + t   i s   e v e n , p 2 m s t 1 + η ( c ) ε f ε g p * 2 m s t 1 , i f   s + t   i s   o d d .
Lemma 11. 
Assume f , g WRPB or f , g WRP with χ ^ f ( α ) = ε f p * m + s ζ p f * ( α ) and χ ^ g ( β ) = ε g p * m + t ζ p g * ( β ) for every α S f and every β S g , respectively. For c F p * , define
T S Q ( c ) = # { ( a , b ) S f × S g : f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) c S Q } , T N S Q ( c ) = # { ( a , b ) S f × S g : f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) c N S Q } .
When s + t is even, we have
T S Q ( c ) = T N S Q ( c ) = p 1 2 p 2 m s t 1 p 1 ε f ε g p * 2 m s t .
Otherwise,
T S Q ( c ) = p 1 2 p 2 m s t 1 + ε f ε g η ( c ) p * 2 m s t 1 , T N S Q ( c ) = p 1 2 p 2 m s t 1 ε f ε g η ( c ) p * 2 m s t 1 .
Proof. 
Let c F p * . It is obvious that
# { ( a , b ) S f × S g : f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) c = 0 } = T ( 0 ) .
We define an exponential sum
T = z F p a S f b S g ζ p z 2 f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) c .
It is evident by definition that
T = p T ( 0 ) + p * T S Q ( c ) p * T N S Q ( c ) .
On the other hand, it follows from Lemmas 6 and 8 that
T = z F p a S f b S g ζ p z 2 f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) c = a S f b S g z F p * ζ p z 2 c ( f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) ) + 1 = p 2 m s t + z F p * σ z 2 c a S f ζ p f * ( a ) b S g ζ p g * ( b ) = p 2 m s t + ε f ε g p * 2 m s t z F p * η 2 m s t z 2 c = p 2 m s t + ( p 1 ) ε f ε g p * 2 m s t , i f   s + t   i s   e v e n , p 2 m s t + ( p 1 ) η ( c ) ε f ε g p * 2 m s t , i f   s + t   i s   o d d .
Combining Lemma 10 and the fact that
T ( 0 ) + T S Q ( c ) + T N S Q ( c ) = # { ( a , b ) S f × S g } = p 2 m s t ,
we obtain the desired assertion. □
Lemma 12. 
Assume f , g WRPB or f , g WRP with χ ^ f ( α ) = ε f p * m + s ζ p f * ( α ) and χ ^ g ( β ) = ε g p * m + t ζ p g * ( β ) for every α S f and every β S g , respectively. For c F p * , define
V S Q ( c ) = # { ( a , b ) S f × S g : f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) c S Q } , V N S Q ( c ) = # { ( a , b ) S f × S g : f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) c N S Q } .
When s + t is even, we get
V S Q ( c ) = p 1 2 p 2 m s t 1 + 1 + p η ( c ) 2 p ε f ε g p * 2 m s t , V N S Q ( c ) = p 1 2 p 2 m s t 1 + 1 p η ( c ) 2 p ε f ε g p * 2 m s t .
Otherwise,
V S Q ( c ) = p 1 2 p 2 m s t 1 1 + η ( c ) 2 ε f ε g p * 2 m s t 1 , V N S Q ( c ) = p 1 2 p 2 m s t 1 + 1 η ( c ) 2 ε f ε g p * 2 m s t 1 .
Proof. 
Obviously,
# { ( a , b ) S f × S g : f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) c = 0 } = T ( c ) .
Let us define an exponential sum
V = z F p a S f b S g ζ p z 2 ( f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) c ) .
Clearly,
V = p T ( c ) + p * V S Q ( c ) p * V N S Q ( c ) .
By a similar procedure as we have done in the proof of Lemma 11, we have
V = z F p a S f b S g ζ p z 2 ( f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) c ) = a S f b S g z F p * ζ p z 2 ( f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) c ) + 1 = p 2 m s t + z F p * ζ p c z 2 σ z 2 a S f ζ p f * ( a ) b S g ζ p g * ( b ) = p 2 m s t + ε f ε g p * 2 m s t z F p * ζ p c z 2 = p 2 m s t + ε f ε g p * 2 m s t η ( c ) p * 1 .
Using Lemma 10 and the fact that
T ( c ) + V S Q ( c ) + V N S Q ( c ) = # { ( a , b ) S f × S g } = p 2 m s t ,
we complete the proof of this lemma. □

4. Main Results

Before we go any further, we make the following assumptions for the remainder of the paper. Assume that f , g WRPB with χ ^ f ( α ) = ε f p * m + s ζ p f * ( α ) and χ ^ g ( β ) = ε g p * m + t ζ p g * ( β ) , where ε f , ε g { ± 1 } and 0 s , t m for every α S f and every β S g , respectively. Here f * and g * are defined by Lemma 5 satisfying f * ( z x ) = z l f f * ( x ) and g * ( z x ) = z l g g * ( x ) , where z F p * , x F q and l f , l g { 2 , p 1 } . In order to determine the weight distributions of C D f , g , we define
N c = # ( x , y ) F q 2 \ { ( 0 , 0 ) } : f ( x ) + g ( y ) = c , T r ( a x + b y ) = 0 ,
where ( a , b ) F q 2 \ { ( 0 , 0 ) } and c F p * .

4.1. The Determination of N c

In fact, the value N 0 was investigated in [10]. Now we only dedicate ourselves to exploring the case that c 0 . We shall determine the values of N c of (6) for c 0 in Lemmas 13 and 14. Without loss of generality, when l f l g , we only consider the case that l f = 2 and l g = p 1 .
Lemma 13. 
Suppose that s + t is even, ( a , b ) ( 0 , 0 ) and c F p * . Then, if ( a , b ) S f × S g , we always have N c = p 2 m 2 , and if ( a , b ) S f × S g , we have the following cases. When l f = l g = p 1 ,
N c = p 2 m 2 + ( p 1 ) 2 ε f ε g p * 2 ( m 2 ) + s + t , i f   f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) = c , p 2 m 2 ( p 1 ) ε f ε g p * 2 ( m 2 ) + s + t , i f   f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) c .
When l f = l g = 2 ,
N c = p 2 m 2 + ( p + 1 ) ε f ε g p * 2 ( m 2 ) + s + t , i f   η ( f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) ) = η ( c ) , p 2 m 2 ( p 1 ) ε f ε g p * 2 ( m 2 ) + s + t , otherwise .
Otherwise, when l f = 2 and l g = p 1 ,
N c = p 2 m 2 + ( p 1 ) 2 ε f ε g p * 2 ( m 2 ) + s + t , i f   f * ( a ) = 0 , g * ( b ) = c , p 2 m 2 ( p 1 ) ε f ε g p * 2 ( m 2 ) + s + t , i f   f * ( a ) = 0 , g * ( b ) c o r   f * ( a ) 0 , g * ( b ) = c , p 2 m 2 + ( η ( 1 ) p + 1 ) ε f ε g p * 2 ( m 2 ) + s + t , i f   f * ( a ) ( g * ( b ) c ) S Q , p 2 m 2 ( η ( 1 ) p 1 ) ε f ε g p * 2 ( m 2 ) + s + t , i f   f * ( a ) ( g * ( b ) c ) N S Q .
Proof. 
Let c 0 . By definition and the orthogonal property of characters,
N c = 1 p 2 x , y F q z F p ζ p z ( f ( x ) + g ( y ) c ) h F p ζ p h T r ( a x + b y ) 1 p z F p ζ p c z = p 2 m 2 + 1 p 2 x , y F q z F p * ζ p c z h F p * ζ p z ( f ( x ) + g ( y ) ) + h T r ( a x + b y ) = p 2 m 2 + p 2 S c ,
where
S c = x , y F q z F p * ζ p c z h F p * ζ p z ( f ( x ) + g ( y ) ) + h T r ( a x + b y ) .
Now let us determine S c . It follows that
S c = z F p * ζ p c z h F p * x F q ζ p z f ( x ) T r ( h a x ) y F q ζ p z g ( y ) T r ( h b y ) = z F p * ζ p c z h F p * x F q ζ p z ( f ( x ) T r ( h z a x ) ) y F q ζ p z ( g ( y ) T r ( h z b y ) ) = z F p * ζ p c z h F p * σ z χ ^ f h a z χ ^ g h b z .
When ( a , b ) S f × S g , from Lemma 4, we deduce that ( h a z , h b z ) S f × S g for z , h F p * . Then one easily checks
S c = 0 .
When ( a , b ) S f × S g , again from Lemma 4, we see that ( h a z , h b z ) S f × S g for z , h F p * . The valuation of S c is considered naturally under three cases of l f = l g = p 1 , l f = l g = 2 and l f l g , respectively.
(1)
The first case is that l f = l g = p 1 . From Lemma 5,
S c = ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t z F p * ζ p c z h F p * ζ p z ( h z ) p 1 ( f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) ) = ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t h F p * z F p * ζ p ( f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) c ) z = ( p 1 ) 2 ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t , i f   f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) = c , ( p 1 ) ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t , i f   f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) c .
(2)
The second case is that l f = l g = 2 . Again from Lemma 5,
S c = ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t z F p * ζ p c z h F p * ζ p z ( h z ) 2 ( f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) ) = ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t z F p * ζ p c z h F p * ζ p f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) z h 2 = ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t z F p * ζ p c z h F p ζ p f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) z h 2 1 = ( p 1 ) ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t , i f   f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) = 0 ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t η ( c ) η ( f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) ) p * + 1 , i f   f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) 0 = ( p + 1 ) ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t , i f   η ( f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) ) = η ( c ) , ( p 1 ) ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t , otherwise .
(3)
The last case is that l f = 2 and l g = p 1 . From Lemma 5,
S c = ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t z F p * ζ p c z h F p * ζ p z ( h z ) 2 f * ( a ) + ( h z ) p 1 g * ( b ) = ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t z F p * ζ p z ( g * ( b ) c ) h F p * ζ p h 2 z f * ( a ) = ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t z F p * ζ p z ( g * ( b ) c ) h F p ζ p h 2 z f * ( a ) 1 = ( p 1 ) ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t z F p * ζ p z ( g * ( b ) c ) , i f   f * ( a ) = 0 ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t z F p * ζ p z ( g * ( b ) c ) η ( z f * ( a ) ) p * 1 , i f   f * ( a ) 0 = ( p 1 ) 2 ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t , i f   f * ( a ) = 0 , g * ( b ) = c ( p 1 ) ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t , i f   f * ( a ) = 0 , g * ( b ) c ( p 1 ) ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t , i f   f * ( a ) 0 , g * ( b ) = c ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t η f * ( a ) ( g * ( b ) c ) p * + 1 , i f   f * ( a ) 0 , g * ( b ) c = ( p 1 ) 2 ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t , i f   f * ( a ) = 0 , g * ( b ) = c , ( p 1 ) ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t , i f   f * ( a ) = 0 , g * ( b ) c , ( p 1 ) ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t , i f   f * ( a ) 0 , g * ( b ) = c , ( η ( 1 ) p + 1 ) ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t , i f   f * ( a ) ( g * ( b ) c ) S Q , ( η ( 1 ) p 1 ) ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t , i f   f * ( a ) ( g * ( b ) c ) N S Q .
Hence, we obtain the desired assertion from (7). □
Lemma 14. 
Suppose that s + t is odd, ( a , b ) ( 0 , 0 ) and c F p * . Then, if ( a , b ) S f × S g , we always have N c = p 2 m 2 , and if ( a , b ) S f × S g , we have the following cases. When l f = l g = p 1 , we have
N c = p 2 m 2 + ( p 1 ) ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t 3 , i f   f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) c S Q , p 2 m 2 ( p 1 ) ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t 3 , i f   f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) c N S Q , p 2 m 2 , otherwise
When l f = l g = 2 ,
N c = p 2 m 2 + η ( c ) ( p 1 ) ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t 3 , i f   f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) = 0 , p 2 m 2 2 η ( c ) ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t 3 , i f   η ( f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) ) = η ( c ) , p 2 m 2 , otherwise .
Otherwise, when l f = 2 and l g = p 1 ,
N c = p 2 m 2 + ( p 1 ) ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t 3 , i f   f * ( a ) = 0 , g * ( b ) c S Q o r   f * ( a ) S Q , g * ( b ) = c , p 2 m 2 ( p 1 ) ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t 3 , i f   f * ( a ) = 0 , g * ( b ) c N S Q o r   f * ( a ) N S Q , g * ( b ) = c , p 2 m 2 2 ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t 3 , i f   f * ( a ) S Q , g * ( b ) c S Q , p 2 m 2 + 2 ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t 3 , i f   f * ( a ) N S Q , g * ( b ) c N S Q , p 2 m 2 , otherwise .
Proof. 
The proof is similar to that of Lemma 13 by noting (7) and (8). From (8), S c = 0 unless ( a , b ) S f × S g . In the following, we set ( a , b ) S f × S g .
(1) The first case we consider is that l f = l g = p 1 . Then
S c = ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t z F p * ζ p c z η ( z ) h F p * ζ p z ( h z ) p 1 ( f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) ) = ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t h F p * z F p * ζ p ( f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) c ) z η ( z ) = 0 , i f   f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) = c η ( f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) c ) ( p 1 ) ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t + 1 , i f   f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) c = 0 , i f   f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) = c , ( p 1 ) ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t + 1 , i f   f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) c S Q , ( p 1 ) ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t + 1 , i f   f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) c N S Q .
(2) The second case is that l f = l g = 2 . Now we have
S c = ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t z F p * ζ p c z η ( z ) h F p * ζ p z ( h z ) 2 ( f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) ) = ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t z F p * ζ p c z η ( z ) h F p * ζ p f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) z h 2 = ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t z F p * ζ p c z η ( z ) h F p ζ p f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) z h 2 1 = η ( c ) ( p 1 ) ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t + 1 , i f   f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) = 0 ( η ( f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) ) + η ( c ) ) ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t + 1 , i f   f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) 0 = η ( c ) ( p 1 ) ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t + 1 , i f   f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) = 0 , 2 η ( c ) ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t + 1 , i f   η ( f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) ) = η ( c ) , 0 , i f   η ( f * ( a ) + g * ( b ) ) η ( c ) .
(3) The last case is that l f = 2 and l g = p 1 . Then we deduce that
S c = ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t z F p * ζ p c z η ( z ) h F p * ζ p z ( h z ) 2 f * ( a ) + ( h z ) p 1 g * ( b ) = ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t z F p * ζ p z ( g * ( b ) c ) η ( z ) h F p * ζ p h 2 z f * ( a ) = ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t z F p * ζ p z ( g * ( b ) c ) η ( z ) h F p ζ p h 2 z f * ( a ) 1 = ( p 1 ) ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t z F p * ζ p z ( g * ( b ) c ) η ( z ) , i f   f * ( a ) = 0 ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t z F p * ζ p z ( g * ( b ) c ) η ( z ) η ( z f * ( a ) ) p * 1 , i f   f * ( a ) 0 = 0 , i f   f * ( a ) = 0 , g * ( b ) = c ( p 1 ) η ( g * ( b ) c ) ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t + 1 , i f   f * ( a ) = 0 , g * ( b ) c ( p 1 ) η ( f * ( a ) ) ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t + 1 , i f   f * ( a ) 0 , g * ( b ) = c η ( f * ( a ) ) + η ( g * ( b ) c ) ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t + 1 , i f   f * ( a ) 0 , g * ( b ) c = ( p 1 ) ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t + 1 , i f   f * ( a ) = 0 , g * ( b ) c S Q o r   f * ( a ) S Q , g * ( b ) = c , ( p 1 ) ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t + 1 , i f   f * ( a ) = 0 , g * ( b ) c N S Q o r   f * ( a ) N S Q , g * ( b ) = c , 2 ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t + 1 , i f   f * ( a ) S Q , g * ( b ) c S Q , 2 ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t + 1 , i f   f * ( a ) N S Q , g * ( b ) c N S Q , 0 , otherwise .
So, we obtain the conclusion from (7), completing the proof. □

4.2. Weight Distributions of C D f , g

Recall that
D f , g = ( x , y ) F q 2 \ { ( 0 , 0 ) } : f ( x ) + g ( y ) = c ,
where f , g WRPB and c F p * , and a class of linear codes C D f , g are defined by
C D f , g = c ( a , b ) = T r ( a x + b y ) ( x , y ) D f , g : a , b F q .
The length n c of these linear codes equals the size of D f , g . So it is determined by
n c = # ( x , y ) F q 2 \ { ( 0 , 0 ) } : f ( x ) + g ( y ) = c = 1 p x , y F q z F p ζ p z f ( x ) + g ( y ) c = p 2 m 1 + 1 p z F p * ζ p c z x F q ζ p z f ( x ) y F q ζ p z g ( y ) = p 2 m 1 + 1 p z F p * ζ p c z σ z ( χ ^ f ( 0 ) χ ^ g ( 0 ) ) = p 2 m 1 .
For the weight distributions of C D f , g , where c 0 , we have the following two theorems.
Theorem 1. 
Let s + t be even and c F p * , the code C D f , g be defined by (9) and (10). If l f = l g = p 1 , then C D f , g is a three-weight [ p 2 m 1 , 2 m ] linear code with weight distribution listed in Table 1. If l f = l g = 2 , then C D f , g is a three-weight [ p 2 m 1 , 2 m ] linear code with weight distribution listed in Table 2. Otherwise, if l f = 2 and l g = p 1 , then C D f , g is a five-weight [ p 2 m 1 , 2 m ] linear code with weight distribution listed in Table 3. For abbreviation, we write τ = 2 m + s + t , γ = 2 m s t , G 1 = N f ( 0 ) N g ( c ) and
G 2 = p 1 2 ( N f ( i ) R g , S Q ( c ) + N f ( j ) R g , N S Q ( c ) ) , G 3 = p 1 2 ( N f ( i ) R g , N S Q ( c ) + N f ( j ) R g , S Q ( c ) ) ,
where i S Q and j N S Q .
Proof. 
For c 0 , the length of C D f , g is n c = p 2 m 1 . Let ( a , b ) F q 2 \ { ( 0 , 0 ) } and the weight of nonzero codeword c ( a , b ) be denoted by wt ( c ( a , b ) ) . Then we obviously have that
wt ( c ( a , b ) ) = n c N c ,
where N c is given by Lemma 13. Precisely, when ( a , b ) S f × S g , we have
wt ( c ( a , b ) ) = ( p 1 ) p 2 m 2 ,
and the number of such codewords is p 2 m p 2 m s t 1 , according to Lemma 2. Furthermore, when ( a , b ) S f × S g , there are three different cases.
The first case is that l f = l g = p 1 . Then it follows from Lemma 13 that
wt ( c ( a , b ) ) = ( p 1 ) p 2 m 2 ( p 1 ) ε f ε g p * 2 ( m 2 ) + s + t , T ( c )   t i m e s , ( p 1 ) p 2 m 2 + ε f ε g p * 2 ( m 2 ) + s + t , F 1   t i m e s ,
where F 1 = p 2 m s t T ( c ) , and T ( c ) is computed in Lemma 10. This gives the weight distribution in Table 1.
The second case is that l f = l g = 2 . In this case, it follows from Lemma 13 again that
wt ( c ( a , b ) ) = ( p 1 ) p 2 m 2 ( p + 1 ) ε f ε g p * 2 ( m 2 ) + s + t , T S Q ( c )   t i m e s , ( p 1 ) p 2 m 2 + ε f ε g p * 2 ( m 2 ) + s + t , F 2   t i m e s ,
where F 2 = p 2 m s t T S Q ( c ) , and T S Q ( c ) is computed in Lemma 11. We thus get the weight distribution in Table 2.
Finally, we consider the third case that l f = 2 and l g = p 1 . By Lemma 13 again, we have
wt ( c ( a , b ) ) = ( p 1 ) p 2 m 2 ( p 1 ) ε f ε g p * 2 ( m 2 ) + s + t , G 1   t i m e s , ( p 1 ) p 2 m 2 ( η ( 1 ) p + 1 ) ε f ε g p * 2 ( m 2 ) + s + t , G 2   t i m e s , ( p 1 ) p 2 m 2 + ( η ( 1 ) p 1 ) ε f ε g p * 2 ( m 2 ) + s + t , G 3   t i m e s , ( p 1 ) p 2 m 2 + ε f ε g p * 2 ( m 2 ) + s + t , G 4   t i m e s ,
where G 4 = p 2 m s t i = 1 3 G i . The multiplicity of each nonzero weight comes from Lemmas 7 and 9, namely,
G 1 = # { ( a , b ) S f × S g : f * ( a ) = 0 , g * ( b ) = c } = N f ( 0 ) N g ( c ) , G 2 = # { ( a , b ) S f × S g : f * ( a ) ( g * ( b ) c ) S Q } = p 1 2 ( N f ( i ) R g , S Q ( c ) + N f ( j ) R g , N S Q ( c ) ) , G 3 = # { ( a , b ) S f × S g : f * ( a ) ( g * ( b ) c ) N S Q } = p 1 2 ( N f ( i ) R g , N S Q ( c ) + N f ( j ) R g , S Q ( c ) ) ,
where i S Q and j N S Q . The weight distribution is summarized in Table 3. □
Theorem 2. 
Let s + t be odd, c F p * and the code C D f , g be defined by (9) and (10). If l f = l g = p 1 , then C D f , g is a three-weight [ p 2 m 1 , 2 m ] linear code with weight distribution listed in Table 4. If l f = l g = 2 , then C D f , g is a three-weight [ p 2 m 1 , 2 m ] linear code with weight distribution listed in Table 5. If l f = 2 , l g = p 1 , then C D f , g is a five-weight [ p 2 m 1 , 2 m ] linear code with weight distribution listed in Table 6. For briefness, we set τ = 2 m + s + t , γ = 2 m s t and
I 1 = N f ( 0 ) R g , S Q ( c ) + p 1 2 N f ( i ) N g ( c ) , I 2 = N f ( 0 ) R g , N S Q ( c ) + p 1 2 N f ( j ) N g ( c ) , I 3 = p 1 2 N f ( i ) R g , S Q ( c ) , I 4 = p 1 2 N f ( j ) R g , N S Q ( c ) ,
where i S Q and j N S Q .
Proof. 
Let c 0 and ( a , b ) F q 2 \ { ( 0 , 0 ) } . The weight of nonzero codeword c ( a , b ) is given by
wt ( c ( a , b ) ) = n c N c ,
where n c = p 2 m 1 and N c is computed in Lemma 14. According to Lemma 14, when ( a , b ) ( 0 , 0 ) , three distinct cases shall be distinguished.
For the first case l f = l g = p 1 , it follows from Lemma 14 that
wt ( c ( a , b ) ) = ( p 1 ) p 2 m 2 ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t 3 , V S Q ( c )   t i m e s , ( p 1 ) p 2 m 2 + ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t 3 , V N S Q ( c )   t i m e s , ( p 1 ) p 2 m 2 , F 3   t i m e s ,
where F 3 = p 2 m 1 V S Q ( c ) V N S Q ( c ) , V S Q ( c ) and V N S Q ( c ) are computed in Lemma 12. From the above arguments, we obatain the conlusion given in Table 4.
For the second case l f = l g = 2 , it follows from Lemma 13 again that
wt ( c ( a , b ) ) = ( p 1 ) p 2 m 2 η ( c ) ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t 3 , T ( 0 )   t i m e s , ( p 1 ) p 2 m 2 + 2 η ( c ) ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t 3 , T S Q ( c )   t i m e s , ( p 1 ) p 2 m 2 , F 4   t i m e s ,
where F 4 = p 2 m 1 T ( 0 ) T S Q ( c ) , and T ( 0 ) and T S Q ( c ) are computed in Lemmas 10 and 11, respectively. This yields the weight distribution in Table 5.
Finally, for the third case l f = 2 and l g = p 1 , by Lemma 13 again, we have
wt ( c ( a , b ) ) = ( p 1 ) p 2 m 2 ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t 3 , I 1   t i m e s , ( p 1 ) p 2 m 2 + ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t 3 , I 2   t i m e s , ( p 1 ) p 2 m 2 + 2 ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t 3 , I 3   t i m e s , ( p 1 ) p 2 m 2 2 ε f ε g p * 2 m + s + t 3 , I 4   t i m e s , ( p 1 ) p 2 m 2 , I 5   t i m e s ,
where I 5 = p 2 m 1 i = 1 4 I i . The multiplicity can be determined from Lemmas 7 and 9, namely,
I 1 = # { ( a , b ) S f × S g : f * ( a ) = 0 , g * ( b ) c S Q o r f * ( a ) S Q , g * ( b ) = c } = N f ( 0 ) R g , S Q ( c ) + p 1 2 N f ( i ) N g ( c ) , I 2 = # { ( a , b ) S f × S g : f * ( a ) = 0 , g * ( b ) c N S Q o r f * ( a ) N S Q , g * ( b ) = c } = N f ( 0 ) R g , N S Q ( c ) + p 1 2 N f ( j ) N g ( c ) , I 3 = # { ( a , b ) S f × S g : f * ( a ) S Q , g * ( b ) c S Q } = p 1 2 N f ( i ) R g , S Q ( c ) , I 4 = # { ( a , b ) S f × S g : f * ( a ) N S Q , g * ( b ) c N S Q } = p 1 2 N f ( j ) R g , N S Q ( c ) ,
where i S Q and j N S Q . This gives the weight distribution in Table 6. □

5. Minimality of the Codes and Their Applications

In 1979, Shamir [26] and Blakley [27] introduced the notion of secret sharing schemes. Since then, secret sharing schemes have become an important application of linear codes. In recent years, secret sharing schemes have been widely used in cloud environments, banking systems, electronic voting systems and so on.
Any linear code can be employed to construct secret sharing schemes by considering the access structure. However, the access structure based on a linear code is very complicated, and only can be determined in several special cases. One of these cases is that each codeword of the code is minimal.
If a nonzero codeword of a linear code C solely covers its scalar multiples, but no other nonzero codewords, then it is called a minimal codeword. The code C is said to be minimal if each nonzero codeword of C is minimal.
It is naturally difficult to find minimal codes by definition. Fortunately, in 1998, Ashikhmin and Barg [28] provided simple criteria to determine whether a given linear code is minimal.
Lemma 15 
(Ashikhmin-Barg Bound [28]). Let C be a linear code over F p . Then all nonzero codewords of C are minimal, provided that
w m i n w m a x > p 1 p ,
where w m i n and w m a x stand for the minimum and maximum nonzero weights in C, respectively.
Now we will show under what circumstances the linear codes constructed in this paper are minimal. The following theorem is verified directly according to Lemma 15.
Theorem 3. 
When 2 m ( s + t ) 4 with any odd prime p, the linear codes described in Table 1, Table 2, Table 3, Table 4, Table 5 and Table 6 are minimal.
Under the framework [29], the minimal codes in Theorem 3 can be applied to construct secret sharing schemes with good access structures. An example is showed in detail in the following.
Theorem 4 
(Proposition 2, [29]). Let C be an [ n , k ] code over F q , and let G = [ g 0 , g 1 , , g n 1 ] be its generator matrix. If C is minimal, then in the secret sharing schemes based on the dual code C , there are altogether q k 1 minimal access sets. In addition, we have the following assertions.
(1)
If g i is a multiple of g 0 , 1 i n 1 , then participant P i must be in every minimal access set. Such a participant is called a dictatorial participant.
(2)
If g i is not a multiple of g 0 , 1 i n 1 , then participant P i must be in ( q 1 ) q k 2 out of q k 1 minimal access sets.
Now, we take the code C D f , g described in Table 1 as an example. If we take p = 5 , m = 4 , s + t = 4 and ϵ f ϵ g = 1 , then C D f , g has length n = 78125 and dimension k = 8 . From Table 1, the weight enumerator of C D f , g is 1 + 120 z 52500 + 389999 z 62500 + 505 z 65000 . The code C D f , g is minimal due to Theorem 3. Note that the minimum distance of its dual code is d = 2 . According to Theorem 4, we get the following theorem.
Theorem 5. 
Let p = 5 , m = 4 , s + t = 4 and ϵ f ϵ g = 1 and G = [ g 0 , g 1 , , g 78124 ] be the generator matrix of the code C D f , g described in Table 1. Then in the secret sharing scheme based on the dual code C D f , g , there are altogether 5 7 minimal access sets. In addition, we have the following assertions.
(1)
If g i is a multiple of g 0 , 1 i 78124 , then participant P i must be in every minimal access set and P i is a dictatorial participant.
(2)
If g i is not a multiple of g 0 , 1 i 78124 , then participant P i must be in 4 × 5 6 out of 5 7 minimal access sets.

6. Conclusions

The paper studied the construction of linear codes from two weakly regular s-plateaued and t-plateaued balanced functions. Hence, this was an extension of the results in [2] and [10]. Additionally, because of the minimality, the codes we constructed are suitable for secret sharing schemes. However, no one finds an example of weakly regular plateaued balanced functions in the set WRPB . It would be desirable to find such a function, but we have not been able to do this.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, S.Y. and T.Z.; methodology, S.Y.; validation, S.Y., T.Z. and P.L.; writing—original draft preparation, T.Z.; writing—review and editing, S.Y. and T.Z.; visualization, P.L.; supervision, S.Y. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 12071247), Research and Innovation Fund for Graduate Dissertations of Qufu Normal University (No. LWCXS202251), and Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province, China (No. 2021A1515011607).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Chen, H.; Ding, C.S.; Mesnager, S.; Tang, C.M. A novel application of Boolean functions with high algebraic immunity in minimal codes. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 2021, 67, 6856–6867. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Cheng, Y.J.; Cao, X.W. Linear codes with few weights from weakly regular plateaued functions. Discret. Math. 2021, 344, 112597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Heng, Z.L.; Ding, C.S.; Zhou, Z.C. Minimal linear codes over finite fields. Finite Fields Their Appl. 2018, 54, 176–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  4. Heng, Z.L.; Li, D.X.; Du, J.; Chen, F.L. A family of projective two-weight linear codes. Des. Codes Cryptogr. 2021, 89, 1993–2007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Kong, X.L.; Yang, S.D. Complete weight enumerators of a class of linear codes with two or three weights. Discret. Math. 2019, 342, 3166–3176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. Lu, H.; Yang, S.D. Two classes of linear codes from Weil sums. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 180471–180480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Mesnager, S.; Sınak, A. Several classes of minimal linear codes with few weights from weakly regular plateaued functions. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 2020, 66, 2296–2310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Özbudak, F.; Pelen, R.M. Two or three weight linear codes from non-weakly regular bent functions. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 2022, 68, 3014–3027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Sınak, A. Minimal linear codes from weakly regular plateaued balanced functions. Discret. Math. 2021, 344, 112215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Sınak, A. Construction of minimal linear codes with few weights from weakly regular plateaued functions. Turk. J. Math. 2022, 46, 953–972. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Yang, S.D. Complete weight enumerators of linear codes based on Weil sums. IEEE Commun. Lett. 2021, 25, 346–350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Zhang, T.H.; Lu, H.; Yang, S.D. Two-weight and three-weight linear codes constructed from Weil sums. Math. Found. Comput. 2022, 5, 129–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Zheng, D.B.; Zhao, Q.; Wang, X.Q.; Zhang, Y. A class of two or three weights linear codes and their complete weight enumerators. Discret. Math. 2021, 344, 112355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Tang, C.M.; Qi, Y.F.; Huang, D.M. Two-weight and three-weight linear codes from square functions. IEEE Commun. Lett. 2016, 20, 29–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Mesnager, S. Characterizations of plateaued and bent functions in characteristic p. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Sequences and their Applications, SETA—2014, Melbourne, VIC, Australia, 24–28 November 2014; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2014; pp. 72–82. [Google Scholar]
  16. Tang, C.M.; Li, N.; Qi, Y.F.; Zhou, Z.C.; Helleseth, T. Linear codes with two or three weights from weakly regular bent functions. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 2016, 62, 1166–1176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Wu, Y.N.; Li, N.; Zeng, X.Y. Linear codes with few weights from cyclotomic classes and weakly regular bent functions. Des. Codes Cryptogr. 2020, 88, 1255–1272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Zheng, Y.L.; Zhang, X.M. Plateaued functions. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Information and Communications Security, Sydney, NSW, Australia, 9–11 November 1999; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 1999; pp. 284–300. [Google Scholar]
  19. Mesnager, S.; Özbudak, F.; Sınak, A. Linear codes from weakly regular plateaued functions and their secret sharing schemes. Des. Codes Cryptogr. 2019, 87, 463–480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Ding, C.S.; Niederreiter, H. Cyclotomic linear codes of order 3. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 2007, 53, 2274–2277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Luo, G.J.; Ling, S. Application of optimal p-ary linear codes to alphabet-optimal locally repairable codes. Des. Codes Cryptogr. 2022, 90, 1271–1287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Li, C.J.; Yue, Q.; Fu, F.W. A construction of several classes of two-weight and three-weight linear codes. Appl. Algebra Eng. Commun. Comput. 2017, 28, 11–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Lidl, R.; Niederreiter, H. Finite Fields; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1997. [Google Scholar]
  24. Ireland, K.; Rosen, M. A Classical Introduction to Modern Number Theory; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 1990. [Google Scholar]
  25. Mesnager, S. Bent Functions: Fundamentals and Results; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  26. Shamir, A. How to share a secret. Commun. ACM 1979, 22, 612–613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Blakley, G.R. Safeguarding cryptographic keys. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Managing Requirements Knowledge (MARK), New York, NY, USA, 4–7 June 1979; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 1979; pp. 313–317. [Google Scholar]
  28. Ashikhmin, A.; Barg, A. Minimal vectors in linear codes. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 1998, 44, 2010–2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Yuan, J.; Ding, C.S. Secret sharing schemes from three classes of linear codes. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 2006, 52, 206–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Table 1. The weight distribution of C D f , g when l f = l g = p 1 and 2 | s + t .
Table 1. The weight distribution of C D f , g when l f = l g = p 1 and 2 | s + t .
WeightMultiplicity
01
( p 1 ) p 2 m 2 p 2 m p γ 1
( p 1 ) ( p 2 m 2 ( p 1 ) ε f ε g p * τ 4 ) p γ 1 p 1 ε f ε g p * γ
( p 1 ) ( p 2 m 2 + ε f ε g p * τ 4 ) ( p 1 ) p γ 1 + p 1 ε f ε g p * γ
Table 2. The weight distribution of C D f , g when l f = l g = 2 and 2 | s + t .
Table 2. The weight distribution of C D f , g when l f = l g = 2 and 2 | s + t .
WeightMultiplicity
01
( p 1 ) p 2 m 2 p 2 m p γ 1
( p 1 ) p 2 m 2 ( p + 1 ) ε f ε g p * τ 4 p 1 2 ( p γ 1 p 1 ε f ε g p * γ )
( p 1 ) p 2 m 2 + ε f ε g p * τ 4 p + 1 2 p γ 1 + p 1 2 p ε f ε g p * γ
Table 3. The weight distribution of C D f , g when l f = 2 , l g = p 1 and 2 | s + t .
Table 3. The weight distribution of C D f , g when l f = 2 , l g = p 1 and 2 | s + t .
WeightMultiplicity
01
( p 1 ) p 2 m 2 p 2 m p γ 1
( p 1 ) ( p 2 m 2 ( p 1 ) ε f ε g p * τ 4 ) G 1
( p 1 ) p 2 m 2 ( η ( 1 ) p + 1 ) ε f ε g p * τ 4 G 2
( p 1 ) p 2 m 2 + ( η ( 1 ) p 1 ) ε f ε g p * τ 4 G 3
( p 1 ) ( p 2 m 2 + ε f ε g p * τ 4 ) p γ G 1 G 2 G 3
Table 4. The weight distribution of C D f , g when l f = l g = p 1 and 2 s + t .
Table 4. The weight distribution of C D f , g when l f = l g = p 1 and 2 s + t .
WeightMultiplicity
01
( p 1 ) ( p 2 m 2 ε f ε g p * τ 3 ) p 1 2 p γ 1 1 + η ( c ) 2 ε f ε g p * γ 1
( p 1 ) ( p 2 m 2 + ε f ε g p * τ 3 ) p 1 2 p γ 1 + 1 η ( c ) 2 ε f ε g p * γ 1
( p 1 ) p 2 m 2 p 2 m 1 ( p 1 ) p γ 1 + η ( c ) ε f ε g p * γ 1
Table 5. The weight distribution of C D f , g when l f = l g = 2 and 2 s + t .
Table 5. The weight distribution of C D f , g when l f = l g = 2 and 2 s + t .
WeightMultiplicity
01
( p 1 ) ( p 2 m 2 η ( c ) ε f ε g p * τ 3 ) p γ 1
( p 1 ) p 2 m 2 + 2 η ( c ) ε f ε g p * τ 3 p 1 2 ( p γ 1 + ε f ε g η ( c ) p * γ 1 )
( p 1 ) p 2 m 2 p 2 m 1 p + 1 2 p γ 1 p 1 2 ε f ε g η ( c ) p * γ 1
Table 6. The weight distribution of C D f , g when l f = 2 , l g = p 1 and 2 s + t .
Table 6. The weight distribution of C D f , g when l f = 2 , l g = p 1 and 2 s + t .
WeightMultiplicity
01
( p 1 ) ( p 2 m 2 ε f ε g p * τ 3 ) I 1
( p 1 ) ( p 2 m 2 + ε f ε g p * τ 3 ) I 2
( p 1 ) p 2 m 2 + 2 ε f ε g p * τ 3 I 3
( p 1 ) p 2 m 2 2 ε f ε g p * τ 3 I 4
( p 1 ) p 2 m 2 p 2 m 1 I 1 I 2 I 3 I 4
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Yang, S.; Zhang, T.; Li, P. Linear Codes from Two Weakly Regular Plateaued Balanced Functions. Entropy 2023, 25, 369. https://doi.org/10.3390/e25020369

AMA Style

Yang S, Zhang T, Li P. Linear Codes from Two Weakly Regular Plateaued Balanced Functions. Entropy. 2023; 25(2):369. https://doi.org/10.3390/e25020369

Chicago/Turabian Style

Yang, Shudi, Tonghui Zhang, and Ping Li. 2023. "Linear Codes from Two Weakly Regular Plateaued Balanced Functions" Entropy 25, no. 2: 369. https://doi.org/10.3390/e25020369

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop