arxiv: v2 [cs.it] 16 Apr 2018

Transcription

1 Rank-Metric Codes and q-polymatroids Elisa Gorla 1, Relinde Jurrius 2, Hiram H. López 3, and Alberto Ravagnani 4 1 Institut de Matématiques, Université de Neuchâtel, Switzerland 2 Faculty of Military Science, Netherlands Defence Academy, The Netherlands 3 Department of Mathematical Sciences, Clemson University, SC, USA 4 School of Mathematics & Statistics, University College Dublin, Ireland arxiv: v2 [cs.it] 16 Apr 2018 Abstract This paper contributes to the study of rank-metric codes from an algebraic and combinatorial point of view. We introduce q-polymatroids, the q-analogue of polymatroids, and develop their basic properties. We associate a pair of q-polymatroids to a rank-metric codes and show that several invariants and structural properties of the code, such as generalized weights, the property of being MRD or an optimal anticode, and duality, are captured by the associated combinatorial object. Introduction and Motivation Rank-metric codes were originally introduced by Delsarte [4] and later rediscovered by Gabidulin[5] and Roth[20]. Due to their application in network coding, the interest in these codes has intensified over the past years and many recent papers have been devoted to their study. While interest in these codes stems from practical applications, rank-metric codes also present interesting algebraic and combinatorial properties. Therefore, their mathematical structure has also been the object of several works. This paper belongs to the latter line of study. Our contributions are twofold: on the one side we study generalized weights of rank-metric codes, and on the other we establish a link with other combinatorial objects. More precisely, we associate to each rank-metric code a q-polymatroid, the q-analogue of a polymatroid, which we define here. In Section 1 we define rank-metric codes and vector rank-metric codes. We recall how to associate a rank-metric code to a vector rank-metric code via the choice of a basis and establish a number of basic, but fundamental facts. In particular, we recall the notions of equivalence for rank-metric codes and vector rank-metric codes and we discuss in detail why these notions are compatible via the association mentioned above. We also explain that, while the choice of a basis affects the rank-metric code obtained via the association above, the equivalence class of the rank-metric code obtained does not depend on the choice of the basis. Generalized weights have been defined and studied in different levels of generality by many researchers. Two of the first definitions of generalized weights for vector rankmetric codes are due to Kurihara, Matsumoto, and Uyematsu [13] and to Oggier and Sboui [14]. More definitions are due to Jurrius and Pellikaan [8] and Martínez-Peñas and Matsumoto [10], who also compared the various definitions. Using the theory of anticodes, 1

2 Ravagnani [18] gave a definition of generalized weights for matrix rank-metric codes, which extends the one from [13]. In this paper, we develop further the theory of generalized weights for rank-metric codes, tying together several previously known results on the subject. We adopt the definition from [18] and, in Section 2, we show that it is invariant with respect to equivalence of rank-metric codes. We also show that the definition of generalized weights for rank-metric codes from [10], which generalizes definitions from [11, 25, 8], is not invariant with respect to code equivalence. The main result of Section 3 is a relation between generalized weights for vector rank-metric codes and generalized weights for the same codes endowed with the Hamming metric. Given the well known link between codes in the Hamming metric and matroids, it is a natural question to ask if there is a q-analogue of this. Rank-metric codes can be viewed as the q-analogue of block-codes endowed with the Hamming metric. So it is natural to ask what is the q-analogue of a matroid. Crapo [3] already studied this combinatorial object from the point of view of geometric lattices. Recently, Jurrius and Pellikaan [9] rediscovered q-matroids and associated a q-matroid to every vector rank-metric code. One goal of the current paper is extending this association to rank-metric codes. With this in mind, we define the q-analogue of a polymatroid, that we call a q-polymatroid. In Section 4 we develop basic properties of q-polymatroids, such as equivalence and duality. In Section 5 we associate to every rank-metric code a pair of q-polymatroids. We also show that the q-polymatroids arising from rank-metric codes are in general not q-matroids. We then show that several structural properties of rank-metric codes depend only on the associated q-polymatroid: In Section 6 we dothis for the minimum distance and the property of being MRD, in Section 7 for the generalized weights and for the property of being an optimal anticode, and in Section 8 for duality. These results are q-analogues of classical results in coding theory. While preparing this manuscript, we became aware that a slightly different definition of q-analogue of a polymatroid was given independently by Shiromoto [22]. While our paper applies this theory to equivalence of codes and to generalized weights, [22] focuses on the weight enumerator of rank-metric codes. Acknowledgements. Elisa Gorla was partially supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation through grant no Hiram H. López was partially supported by CONACyT, CVU no , project Network Codes, and by Universidad Autónoma de Aguascalientes. Alberto Ravagnani was partially supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation through grant no. P2NEP Rank-Metric and Vector Rank-Metric Codes We start by establishing the notation and the definitions used throughout the paper. Notation 1.1. In the sequel, we fix integers n,m 2 and a prime power q. For an integer t, we let [t] := {1,...,t}. We denote by F q the finite field with q elements. The space of n m matrices with entries in F q is denoted by Mat. Up to transposition, we assume without loss of generality that n m. We let Mat(J,c) = {M Mat colsp(m) J} and Mat(J,r) = {M Mat rowsp(m) J}. 2

3 Throughout the paper, we only consider linear codes. All dimensions are computed over F q, unless otherwise stated. Definition 1.2. A (matrix) rank-metric code is an F q -linear subspace C Mat. The dual of C is C = {M Mat Tr(MN t ) = 0 for all N C}, where Tr( ) denotes the trace. It is easy to check that C is a code as well, i.e., that it is F q -linear. The minimum (rank) distance of a non-zero rank-metric code C Mat is the integer d(c) := min{rk(m) M C, M 0}. The next bound relates the dimension of a code C Mat to its minimum distance. It is the analogue for the rank metric of the Singleton bound from classical coding theory. Proposition 1.3 ([4], Theorem 5.4). Let C Mat be a non-zero rank-metric code with minimum distance d. Then dim(c) m(n d+1). Definition 1.4. A code that attains the bound of Proposition 1.3 is called maximum rank distance (MRD) code. We now introduce some transformations that preserve the dimension and the minimum rank distance of a rank-metric code. These will play a central role throughout the paper. Notation 1.5. Let C Mat be a rank-metric code, let A GL n (F q ) and B GL m (F q ). Define ACB := {AMB M C} Mat. When n = m, define the transpose of a rank-metric code C Mat as C t := {M t M C} Mat. As we are interested in structural properties of rank-metric codes, it is natural to study these objects up to equivalence. Linear isometries of the space of matrices of fixed size induce a natural notion of equivalence among rank-metric codes. Definition 1.6. Two rank-metric codes C 1,C 2 Mat are equivalent if there exists an F q -linear isometry f : Mat Mat such that f(c 1 ) = C 2. If this is the case, then we write C 1 C 2. The next theorem gives a characterization of the linear isometries of Mat. It combines results by Hua and Wan, and it can be found in the form stated below in [24, Theorem 3.4]. Theorem 1.7 ([7], [23]). Let f : Mat Mat be an F q -linear isometry with respect to the rank metric. (1) If m < n, then there exist matrices A GL n (F q ) and B GL m (F q ) such that f(m) = AMB for all M Mat. (2) If m = n, then there exist matrices A,B GL m (F q ) such that either f(m) = AMB for all M Mat, or f(m) = AM t B for all M Mat. A class of codes that has recently received a lot of attention is that of vector rank-metric codes, introduced independently by Gabidulin and Roth in [5] and [20], respectively. 3

4 Definition 1.8. The rank weight rk(v) of a vector v F n qm is the dimension of the F q -linear space generated by its entries. A vector rank-metric code is an F q m-linear subspace C F n qm. The dual of C is the vector rank-metric code C := {v F n qm v,w = 0 for all w C}, where, is the standard inner product of F n qm. When C {0} is a non-zero vector rankmetric code, the minimum (rank) distance of C is d(c) = min{rk(v) v C, v 0}. Notation 1.9. Let C F n q m be a vector rank-metric code and α F q m and B GL n(f q ). Define αcb := {αvb v C} F n q m. Similarly to the case of rank-metric codes, the linear isometries of F n qm induce a notion of equivalence for vector rank-metric codes. Definition Two vector rank-metric codes C 1,C 2 F n qm are equivalent if there exists an F q m-linear isometry f : F n q m Fn q m such that f(c 1) = C 2. If this is the case, then we write C 1 C 2. The linear isometries of F n qm can be described as follows. Theorem 1.11 ([1]). Let f : F n q m Fn q m be an Fn qm-linear isometry with respect to the rank metric. Then there exist α F q m and B GL n(f q ) such that f(v) = αvb for all v F n q m. There is a natural way to associate a rank-metric code C to a vector rank-metric code C, in such a way that the metric properties are preserved. Given an F q -basis Γ = {γ 1,...,γ m } of F q m and given a vector v F n qm, let Γ(v) denote the unique n m matrix with entries in F q that satisfies m v i = Γ ij (v)γ j for all 1 i n. j=1 Proposition 1.12 ([6], Section 1). The map v Γ(v) is an F q -linear isometry. In particular, if C F n q m is a vector rank-metric code of dimension k over F qm, then Γ(C) is an F q -linear rank-metric code of dimension mk over F q. Moreover, if C {0}, then C and Γ(C) have the same minimum rank distance. As one expects, the rank-metric codes obtained from the same vector rank-metric code using different bases Γ and Γ are equivalent. This result follows from [18, Lemma 27.2]. We include a short proof for completeness. Proposition Let C F n q m be a vector rank-metric code. Let Γ = {γ 1,...,γ m } and Γ = {γ 1,...,γ m } be bases of F q m over F q. Let B GL m (F q ) be the matrix of change of basis between Γ and Γ, that is, B = (B ij ) where m γ i = B ij γ j. Then Γ(C) = Γ (C)B = {MB M Γ (C)}. In particular, Γ(C) Γ (C). j=1 4

5 Proof. Fix v F n q m and 1 i n. Using the definition of Γ (v) and B we obtain ( m m v i = Γ (v) it γ t = m Γ (v) it B tj )γ j. (1) On the other hand, t=1 v i = j=1 t=1 m Γ(v) ij γ j. (2) j=1 We obtain the desired result by comparing (1) and (2). Proposition 1.13 suggests a natural definition of F q m-linear rank-metric code in the F q -linear matrix space Mat. Definition Let C Mat be a rank-metric code. We say that C is F q m-linear if there exists a vector rank-metric code C F n q m and a basis of Γ of F q m over F q such that C Γ(C). Finally, we verify that the rank-metric codes obtained from equivalent vector rankmetric codes are equivalent. Proposition Let C 1,C 2 F n q m be vector rank-metric codes. Let Γ and Γ be bases of F q m over F q. If C 1 C 2, then Γ(C 1 ) Γ (C 2 ). Proof. By Proposition 1.13 we may assume without loss of generality that Γ = Γ = {γ 1,...,γ m }. By definition of Γ γ k γ j = m Γ(γ k γ 1,...,γ k γ m ) jl γ l l=1 If C 1 C 2, then by Theorem 1.11 there exist α F q m and B = (b ij) GL n (F q ) such that C 2 = αc 1 B. If v = (v 1,...,v n ) F n qm, then αv i = m Γ(v) ih αγ h = h=1 Therefore On the other side ( n vb = b k1 v k,..., hence that is k=1 m j=1 h=1 k=1 m Γ(v) ih Γ(αγ 1,...,αγ m ) hj γ j = Γ(αv) = Γ(v)Γ(αγ 1,...,αγ m ). k=1 j=1 m (Γ(v)Γ(αγ 1,...,αγ m )) ij γ j. j=1 ) n n m b kn v k = b k1 Γ(v) kj γ j,..., Γ(vB) ij = n b ki Γ(v) kj = (B t Γ(v)) ij, k=1 Γ(vB) = B t Γ(v). n k=1 j=1 Then for every v C 1 we obtain Γ(αvB) = B t Γ(v)Γ(αγ 1,...,αγ m ) i.e. Γ(C 2 ) = Γ(αC 1 B) = B t Γ(C 1 )Γ(αγ 1,...,αγ m ) Γ(C 1 ) m b kn Γ(v) kj γ j, since B t GL n (F q ) and rk(γ(αγ 1,...,αγ m )) = rk(αγ 1,...,αγ m ) = rk(γ 1,...,γ m ) = m, hence Γ(αγ 1,...,αγ m ) GL m (F q ). 5

6 2 Optimal Anticodes and Generalized Weights Optimal linear anticodes were introduced in [18] with the purpose of studying generalized weights in the rank metric. Definition 2.1. The maximum rank of a rank-metric code C Mat is maxrk(c) := max{rk(m) M C}. A rank-metric code A Mat is an optimal anticode if dim(a) = m maxrk(a). The class of optimal anticodes is closed with respect to duality [17, Theorem 54]. Moreover, it follows from the definitions that if A is an optimal anticode and C Mat is a code with C A, then C is an optimal anticode as well, with the same dimension and maximum rank as A. These properties of optimal anticodes were exploited in [18] to define and study a class of algebraic invariants of rank-metric codes, called (Delsarte) generalized weights. Definition 2.2. Let C Mat be a non-zero code, and let i 1 be an integer. The i-th generalized weight of C is a i (C) := 1 min{dim(a) A Mat is an optimal anticode,dim(c A) i}. m Remark 2.3. If C Mat is a non-zero code, then a 1 (C) is the minimum rank distance of C. See [18, Theorem 30] for details. As one may expect, equivalent codes have the same generalized weights. Proposition 2.4. Let C 1,C 2 Mat be non-zero codes of the same dimension. Assume C 1 C 2. Then a i (C 1 ) = a i (C 2 ) for every integer i 1. In particular, C 1 and C 2 have the same minimum distance. Proof. Since C 1 C 2, there exist A GL n (F q ) and B GL m (F q ) such that either C 2 = AC 1 B, or C 2 = AC1 t B and n = m. We prove the proposition in the second case, as the proof in the first is similar. Let Ant(Mat) denote the set of optimal anticodes in Mat, and fix a positive integer i. The chain of equalities A(A C 1 ) t B = (AA t B) (AC t 1B) = (AA t B) C 2 implies that the isometry f : Ant(Mat) Ant(Mat) defined by f(a) := AA t B gives a bijection between the anticodes A Mat such that dim(a C 1 ) i and the anticodes B Mat such that dim(b C 2 ) i. Then C 1 and C 2 have the same generalized weights by definition. The last part of the statement follows from Remark 2.3. The definition of generalized weights in terms of anticodes suggests the following natural questions. Questions 2.5. Let i be a positive integer. Let C Mat be a rank-metric code, and let A be an optimal anticode such that dim(c A) i and a i (C) = dim(a)/m. (1) Can one find an optimal anticode A such that A A, dim(c A ) i + 1, and a i+1 (C) = dim(a )/m? (2) Can one find an optimal anticode A such that A A, dim(c A ) i 1, and a i 1 (C) = dim(a )/m? 6

7 The following example shows that the answer to both questions is negative. In the example we use the following structure theorem for optimal anticodes. Theorem 2.6 ([21], Theorems 4 and 6). Let A Mat be an optimal anticode. Then either A = Mat(J,c) for a subspace J F n q, or A = Mat(K,r) for a subspace K F m q. The latter can only occur when m = n. Example 2.7. Let q = 2 and n = m = 3. Let C be the rank-metric code generated by the three independent matrices M 1 := 0 0 0, M 2 := 0 1 0, M 3 := Itiseasytocheck thata 1 (C) = 1anda 2 (C) = 2. LetA 1 beanoptimal anticodeofdimension 3 with dim(c A 1 ) 1. Then we have A 1 = Mat( (1,0,0),c) or A 1 = Mat( (1,0,0),r). Let A 2 be an optimal anticode of dimension 6 with dim(c A 2 ) 2. Then we have A 2 = Mat( (0,1,0),(0,0,1),c) or A 2 = Mat( (0,1,0),(0,0,1),r). Notice that one could also define generalized weights for rank-metric codes following a support-based analogy with codes endowed with the Hamming metric. This naturally leads to generalizing the invariants proposed in [11], [25] and [8] as in the following Definition 2.8. This approach has been followed, e.g., in [10]. Definition 2.8. Let C Mat be a non-zero code. The support of a subcode D C is supp(d) := M Dcolsp(M) F n q, where the sum is the sum of vector spaces. The i-th support weight of C is cs i (C) := min{dim(supp(d)) D C, dim(d) = i}. Remark 2.9. Although Definition 2.8 produces an interesting and well-behaved algebraic invariant, we observe that the analogue of Proposition 2.4 does not hold for support weights. In other words, while equivalent codes always have the same generalized weights, they might not have the same support weights. We illustrate this in the following example. Example Let C be the binary code defined by {( ) } a a C := a,b F b b 2. Then C is an optimal anticode of dimension 2. Therefore a 2 (C) = 1. On the other hand, supp(c) = F 2 2, hence cs 2(C) = 2 a 2 (C). Now observe that C C t. In particular, a 2 (C) = a 2 (C t ) = 1. However, cs 2 (C) = 2, while cs 2 (C t ) = 1. We now discuss how generalized weights and support weights relate to each other. Proposition Let C Mat be a non-zero code, and let i 1 be an integer. If m > n, then a i (C) = cs i (C). If m = n, then a i (C) cs i (C). We stress that there exist codes C Mat with m = n and a i (C) < cs i (C), e.g. the code C of Example

8 Proof of Proposition Fix an integer i and let D C with dim(d) = i and cs i (C) = dim(supp(d)). Let J := supp(d) F n q and A := Mat(J,c). Then A is an optimal anticode of dimension dim(a) = m cs i (C). Since D A C, we have dim(a C) dim(d) = i. Therefore a i (C) dim(a)/m = cs i (C). Now assume that m > n and let A Mat be an optimal anticode with the property that dim(a C) i and dim(a) = m a i (C). By Theorem 2.6 we have A = Mat(J,c) for some subspace J F n q with dim(j) = a i (C). Let D A C be a subspace of dimension i. By definition D C and supp(d) J. Hence dim(supp(d)) dim(j) = a i (C). This shows that cs i (C) a i (C). 3 Generalized Weights of Vector Rank-Metric Codes In this section we establish a relation between the generalized rank weights of a vector rank-metric code C F n qm and the generalized Hamming weights of the same code C, regarded as a q m -ary block code endowed with the Hamming metric. We start by recalling the relevant definitions. Definition 3.1. A q-ary block code C is an F q -linear subspace of F n q. The Hamming weight of a vector v F n q is wt(v) := {i [n] v i 0}. The minimum Hamming distance of a non-zero block code C F n q is d H (C) := min{wt(v) v C, v 0}. The maximum weight of a block code C is maxwt(c) := max{wt(v) v C}. We also recall the definition of generalized Hamming weights of a block code [25]. Definition 3.2. The support of a subspace D F n q is the set χ(d) := {i [n] there exists d D with d i 0}. Given an integer i 1, the i-th generalized Hamming weight of a non-zero block code C F n q is d i (C) := min{ χ(d) D C, dimd = i}. Generalized Hammingweights ofcodeinf n q canbecharacterized viaanticodes, provided that q 3. Proposition 3.3 ([18], Proposition 6). We have dim(c) maxwt(c) for every block code C F n q. A block code attaining the bound of Proposition 3.3 is called an optimal Hamming anticode. Theorem 3.4 ([18], Theorem 10). Let C F n q beanon-zero block code, andassume q 3. Let i be a positive integer. Then d i (C) = min{dim(a) A F n q is an optimal Hamming anticode,dim(c A) i}. We now give the corresponding definitions and results for vector rank-metric codes. In the sequel, for a vector v = (v 1,...,v n ) F n q m, we let vq := (v q 1,...,vq n). An F q m-linear subspace V F n q m is called Frobenius-closed if v V implies vq V. Generalized weights for vector rank-metric codes were defined and studied in [13] via Frobenius-closed spaces as follows. Definition 3.5. Let C F n qm be a non-zero vector rank-metric code, and let i be a positive integer. The i-th generalized rank weight of C is m i (C) := min{dim(v) V F n qm is Frobenius-closed, dim(c V) i}. 8

9 Using the results that we have proved so far, it is easy to show that the generalized weights are invariants with respect to equivalence of vector rank-metric codes. Proposition 3.6. Let C 1,C 2 F n q m bevector rank-metric codes and assume that C 1 C 2. Then m i (C 1 ) = m i (C 2 ) for all i. Proof. Let Γ be a basis of F q m over F q. By Proposition 1.15 Γ(C 1 ) Γ(C 2 ), hence a i (C 1 ) = a i (C 2 ) for all i by Proposition 2.4. The thesis now follows from [18, Theorem 28]. As for the case of codes endowed with the Hamming metric, generalized weights of vector rank-metric codes can be characterized via optimal anticodes. Definition 3.7. The maximum rank of a vector rank-metric code C F n qm is the integer maxrk(c) := max{rk(v) v C}. Proposition 3.8 ([18], Proposition 11). Let C F n qm be a vector rank-metric code. Then dim(c) maxrk(c). An optimal vector anticode is a vector rank-metric code A F n qm that attains the bound of Proposition 3.8. Theorem 3.9 ([18], Theorem 10). Let C F n qm be a non-zero vector rank-metric code, and let i be a positive integer. We have m i (C) = min{dim(a) A F n qm is an optimal vector anticode with dim(c A) i}. We can now relate the generalized rank weights of a vector rank-metric code C F n q m to the generalized Hamming weight of the same code, regarded as a q m -ary block code endowed with the Hamming distance. Theorem Let C F n qm be a non-zero vector rank-metric code, and assume q 3. Let i be a positive integer. We have m i (C) = min{d i (D) D C} where denotes equivalence of vector rank-metric codes. In particular, d(c) = min{d H (D) D C}. Proof. Any optimal Hamming anticode A F n qm is also an optimal vector anticode. Therefore d i (C) m i (C) for every vector rank-metric code C F n q m. Let D C be a vector rank-metric code such that d i (D ) = min{d i (D) D C}. Then we have d i (D ) m i (D ) = m i (C), as generalized rank weights are invariant with respect to equivalence. It follows that min{d i (D) D C} m i (C). Now set s := m i (C), and let A F n qm be an optimal vector anticode of dimension s over F q m such that dim(a C) i. Let {b 1,...,b s } be a basis of A over F q m and complete it to a basis {b 1,...,b s,b s+1,...,b n } of F n q m. Let {e 1,...,e n } be the canonical basis of F n q m and define the matrix N = (N ij ) via e j = n N ij b j for 1 j n. i=1 9

10 It is easy to see that AN = {v F n q m v i = 0 for all i > s}. In particular, AN is an optimal Hamming anticode of dimension s. Now observe that dim(an CN) = dim((a C)N) = dim(a C) i, from which we obtain d i (CN) s = m i (C). We therefore conclude that as desired. min{d i (D) D C} d r (NC) m i (C), 4 The q-analogue of a Polymatroid This section introduces q-polymatroids, that are a q-analogue of polymatroids. For more on (poly)matroids, see the standard references [15, 26]. Definition 4.1. A q-polymatroid is a pair P = (F n q,ρ) where n 1 and ρ is a function from the set of all subspaces of F n q to R such that, for all A,B Fn q : (P1) 0 ρ(a) dim(a), (P2) if A B, then ρ(a) ρ(b), (P3) ρ(a+b)+ρ(a B) ρ(a)+ρ(b). Notice that a q-polymatroid such that ρ is integer-valued is a q-matroid according to [9, Definition 2.1]. Remark 4.2. Our definition of q-polymatroid is slightly different from that of (q,r)- polymatroid given by Shiromoto in [22, Definition 2]. However, a (q, r)-polymatroid (E, ρ) as defined by Shiromoto corresponds to the q-polymatroid (E, ρ/r) according to our definition. Moreover, a q-polymatroid whose rank function takes values in Q corresponds to a (q,r)-polymatroid as defined by Shiromoto up to multiplying the rank function for an r which clears denominators. Remark 4.3. One could also define a q-polymatroid P as a pair (F n q,ρ) that satisfies ρ(a) 0 for all A F n q, (P2), and (P3). Up to multiplying the rank function by a suitable constant, onemayadditionallyassumethatρ(x) 1forall1-dimensionalsubspacesx F n q. It is easy to show that this is equivalent to Definition 4.1. The definition of q-polymatroid that we propose is a direct q-analogue of the definition of an ordinary polymatroid, with the extra property that ρ(a) dim(a) for all A. As in the ordinary case, a q-matroid is a q-polymatroid. It is therefore natural to ask whether there are q-polymatroids that are not q-matroids. In this paper, we associate a pair of q- polymatroids to each rank-metric code and we show that these are in general not q-matroids. From a combination of our results and results from [9] it follows that the q-polymatroid associated to a rank-metric code of the form Γ(C), where C is a vector rank-metric code, is a q-matroid. One has the following natural notion of equivalence for q-polymatroids. Definition 4.4. Let (F n q,ρ 1) and (F n q,ρ 2) be q-polymatroids. We say that (F n q,ρ 1) and (F n q,ρ 2 ) are equivalent if there exists an F q -linear isomorphism ϕ : F n q F n q such that ρ 1 (A) = ρ 2 (ϕ(a)) for all A F n q. In this case we write (F n q,ρ 1 ) (F n q,ρ 2 ). We start by introducing a notion of duality for q-polymatroids. 10

11 Definition 4.5. Let P = (F n q,ρ) be a q-polymatroid. For all subspaces A Fn q define ρ (A) = dim(a) ρ(f n q)+ρ(a ), where A is the orthogonal complement of A with respect to the standard inner product on F n q. We call P = (F n q,ρ ) the dual of the q-polymatroid P. Theorem 4.6. The dual P is a q-polymatroid, that is, the function ρ of Definition 4.5 satisfies (P1), (P2) and (P3). Proof. We start with proving (P2). Let A,B F n q such that A B. This means B A and we can find linearly independent 1-dimensional subspaces x i F n q, x i A such that A = B x 1 x l. By applying(p3) to ρ, A andx i, we have that ρ(a+x i ) ρ(a)+1. Using this l times, we get that ρ(a ) ρ(b )+l = ρ(b )+dim(a ) dim(b ). Now we have the following equivalent statements: From this it follows that ρ(a ) ρ(b )+dim(a ) dim(b ) ρ(a ) dim(a )+dim(f n q) ρ(b ) dim(b )+dim(f n q) ρ(a )+dim(a) ρ(b )+dim(b). ρ (A) = dim(a) ρ(f n q)+ρ(a ) dim(b) ρ(f n q)+ρ(b ) = ρ (B). This proves (P2). For (P1), notice that ρ ({0}) = 0 ρ(f n q)+ρ(f n q) = 0, so in combination with (P2) this gives 0 ρ (A) for all F n q. The other inequality of (P1) is proven via We now prove (P3) using linear algebra: ρ (A+B)+ρ (A B) ρ (A) = dim(a) r(f n q )+ρ(a ) dim(a) ρ(f n q )+ρ(fn q ) = dim(a). = dim(a+b)+dim(a B) 2ρ(F n q )+ρ((a+b) )+ρ((a B) ) = dim(a)+dim(b) 2ρ(F n q )+ρ(a B )+ρ(a +B ) dim(a)+dim(b) 2ρ(F n q)+ρ(a )+ρ(b ) = ρ (A)+ρ (B). Now ρ satisfies (P1), (P2) and (P3), so we conclude that the dual of a q-polymatroid is indeed a q-polymatroid. We will need the following property of dual q-polymatroids. Proposition 4.7. Let P 1 = (F n q,ρ 1 ) and P 2 = (F n q,ρ 2 ) be q-polymatroids. If P 1 P 2, then P 1 P 2. Moreover, for every q-polymatroid P we have P = P. 11

12 Proof. By definition, there exists an F q -isomorphism ϕ : F n q Fn q with the property that ρ 1 (A) = ρ 2 (ϕ(a)) for all A F n q. In particular, ϕ(fn q ) = Fn q. Therefore, by definition of ρ 1, for all A F n q we have ρ 1(A) = dim(a) ρ 2 (F n q)+ρ 2 (ϕ(a )). Now let ψ : F n q Fn q be the adjoint of ϕ with respect to the standard inner product of Fn q. Then ϕ is an F q -isomorphism, and ϕ(a) = ψ(a) for all A F n q. Therefore ρ 1(A) = dim(a) ρ 2 (F n q)+ρ 2 (ψ(a) ) = ρ 2(ψ(A)). If P = (F n q,ρ) is a q-polymatroid, then it is straighforward to check that ρ (A) = ρ(a). This implies P = P. 5 Rank-Metric Codes and q-polymatroids Starting from a rank-metric code C Mat, in this section we construct two q-polymatroids: one associated to the column spaces, and the other to the row spaces. They will be denoted by P(C,c) and P(C,r) respectively. As the reader will see in the next sections, several structural properties of C can be read off the associated q-polymatroids. We start by studying subcodes of a given code, whose matrices are supported on a subspace J F n q or K F m q. See [19] for a lattice-theoretic definition of support. Notation 5.1. Let C Mat be a rank-metric code, and let J F n q and K Fm q be subspaces. We define C(J,c) := {M C colsp(m) J} and C(K,r) := {M C rowsp(m) K}, wherecolsp(m) F n q androwsp(m) F m q arethespaces generated over F q bythecolumns, respectively the rows, of M. Notice that C(J,c) and C(K,r) are subcodes of C for all J F n q and K Fm q. In the sequel, we denote by J the orthogonal of a space J F n q with respect to the standard inner product of F n q. We use the same notation for subspaces K F m q. No confusion will arise with the trace-dual of a code C Mat. The following theorem summarizes some important properties of codes supported on given subspaces J F n q and K F m q. Lemma 5.2 ([17], Lemmas 26, 27, 28). Let J F n q and K Fm q be subspaces. We have: (1) dim(mat(j,c)) = mdim(j) and dim(mat(k,r)) = ndim(k), (2) Mat(J,c) = Mat(J,c) and Mat(K,r) = Mat(K,r). (3) dim(c(j,c)) = dim(c) m(n dim(j))+dim(c (J,c)). (4) dim(c(k,r)) = dim(c) n(m dim(k))+dim(c (K,r)). Notation 5.3. Let C Mat be a rank-metric code. For subspaces J F n q and K Fm q define the rational numbers ρ c (C,J) := (dim(c) dim(c(j,c))/m, ρ r (C,K) := (dim(c) dim(c(k,r))/n. 12

13 For simplicity of notation, in the sequel we sometimes drop the index C and denote the rank functions simply by ρ c and ρ r. The following result shows that a rank-metric code C Mat gives rise to a pair of q-polymatroids via ρ c and ρ r. Theorem 5.4. Let C Mat be a rank-metric code. The pairs (F n q,ρ c ) and (F m q,ρ r ) are q-polymatroids. To prove the theorem we need a preliminary result, whose proof is left to the reader. Lemma 5.5. Let I,J F n q be subspaces. We have: (1) Mat(I J,c) = Mat(I,c) Mat(J,c). (2) Mat(I +J,c) = Mat(I,c)+Mat(J,c). Proof of Theorem 5.4. We prove that (F n q,ρ c ) is a q-polymatroid by verifying the properties from Definition 4.1. The proof that (F m q,ρ r ) is a q-polymatroid is completely analogous, hence we omit it. We start by proving (P1). It is clear form the definition that ρ c (J) 0. For the other inequality, we use property 3 of Lemma 5.2: ρ c (J) = (dim(c) dim(c(j )))/m = (dim(c) (dim(c) m(n dimj )+dim(c (J))))/m = dim(j) dim(c (J))/m dim(j). Now let I,J F n q such that I J. Then J I and C(J,c) C(I,c), thus ρ c (I) ρ c (J). This establishes (P2). For (P3), we have dimc((i +J),c)+dimC((I J),c) = dim((c Mat((I +J),c)))+dim((C Mat((I J),c))) = dim(c Mat(I J,c))+dim(C Mat(I +J,c)) = dim(c Mat(I,c) Mat(J,c))+dim(C (Mat(I,c)+Mat(J,c))) dim(c Mat(I,c) Mat(J,c))+dim((C (Mat(I,c))+(C Mat(J,c))) = dim(c Mat(I,c))+dim(C Mat(J,c)), where the first equality follows from the definition, the second from Lemma 5.2, and the third from Lemma 5.5. The inequality follows from the inclusion C (Mat(I,c)+Mat(J,c)) (C Mat(I,c))+(C Mat(J,c)). This shows that ρ c satisfies (P1), (P2) and (P3), so we conclude that (F n q,ρ c) is a q- polymatroid. Notation 5.6. The q-polymatroids associated to a rank-metric code C Mat are denoted by P(C,c) and P(C,r), respectively. 6 Structural Properties of Codes via q-polymatroids In this section we investigate some connections between rank-metric codes and the associated q-polymatroids. We show that the q-polymatroids associated to a code C determine the dimension of the code and its minimum distance, and characterize the property of being MRD. The next proposition immediately follows from the definitions. 13

14 Proposition 6.1. Let C Mat be a rank-metric code. Then dim(c) = m ρ c (C,F n q ) = n ρ r(c,f m q ). We now relate the minimum distance of a code with the rank functions of the associated q-polymatroids. Proposition 6.2. Let C Mat be a non-zero rank-metric code. The following are equivalent: (1) d(c) d, (2) ρ c (J) = dim(c)/m for all J F n q with dim(j) n d+1, (3) ρ r (K) = dim(c)/n for all K F m q with dim(k) m d+1. Proof. It is easy to see that the following are equivalent: (1 ) d(c) d, (2 ) C(J,c) = {0} for all J F n q with dim(j) d 1, (3 ) C(K,r) = {0} for all K F m q with dim(k) d 1. By definition, for all J F n q and K Fm q we have mρ c (J) = dim(c) dim(c(j,c)) and nρ r (K) = dim(c) dim(c(k,r)). Hence (2) (2 ) and (3) (3 ). Therefore, the minimum distance of a rank-metric code can be expressed in terms of the rank function of one of the associated q-polymatroids as follows. Corollary 6.3. Let 0 C Mat. The minimum distance of C is { d(c) = n+1 min d ρ c (J) = dim(c) } m for all J Fn q with dim(j) = d { = m+1 min d ρ r (K) = dim(c) } for all K F m q with dim(k) = d. n This allows us to characterize the property of being MRD in terms of the rank function of one of the associated q-polymatroids. Theorem 6.4. Let C Mat be a non-zero code of minimum distance d. The following are equivalent: (1) C is MRD, (2) ρ c (J) = dim(j) for all J F n q with dim(j) n d+1, (3) ρ c (J) = dim(j) for some J F n q with dim(j) = n d+1, Proof. Assume that C is MRD. We claim that dim(c(j,c)) = dim(c) m(n dim(j)) for all J F n q with dim(j) d 1. This is straightforward if dim(j) = d 1. When dim(j) d, it follows from a general result on extremal codes supported on regular lattices (see [19, Lemma 48]). Let J F n q be a subspace with dim(j) n d + 1. Since dim(j ) d 1 and dim(c(j,c)) = dim(c) m(n dim(j)) we obtain mρ c (J) = dim(c) dim(c(j,c)) = dim(c) dim(c)+mdim(j) = mdim(j). 14

15 This establishes (1) (2). It is clear that (2) implies (3). So we assume that (3) holds and prove (1). Since dim(j) = n d+1, then dim(j ) = d 1, therefore dim(c(j,c)) = 0. It follows that mdim(j) = mρ c (J) = dim(c) dim(c(j,c)) = dim(c), from which we obtain dim(c) = mdim(j) = m(n d+1). Hence C is MRD. Remark 6.5. If m = n and 0 C Mat, then the same proof as in Theorem 6.4 shows that the following are equivalent: C is MRD, ρ c (K) = dim(k) for all K F m q with dim(k) = m d+1 ρ c (K) = dim(k) for some K F m q with dim(k) = m d+1. Combining Proposition 6.2 and Theorem 6.4 we obtain an explicit formula for the rank function of the (column) q-polymatroid associated to an MRD code. Corollary 6.6. Let C Mat be a non-zero MRD code of minimum distance d. Then for all J F n q we have { n d+1 if dim(j) n d+1, ρ c (J) = dim(j) if dim(j) n d+1. (3) Remark 6.7. Theorem 7.2 implies that the q-polymatroid associated to an MRD code has an integer-valued rank function, i.e., it is a q-matroid. It is in fact the uniform q-matroid, as explained in [9, Example 4.16] It is natural to expect that equivalent rank-metric codes give rise to equivalent q- polymatroids. This is true in the following precise sense. Proposition 6.8. Let C 1,C 2 Mat be rank-metric codes. Assume C 1 C 2. If m > n, then P(C 1,c) P(C 2,c) and P(C 1,r) P(C 2,r). If n = m, then one of the following holds: P(C 1,c) P(C 2,c) and P(C 1,r) P(C 2,r), P(C 1,c) P(C 2,r) and P(C 1,r) P(C 2,c). Proof. Since C 1 C 2, then either C 2 = AC 1 B for some invertible A,B, or C 2 = AC t 1 B for some invertible A,B and m = n. Assume first that there exists invertible matrices A,B such that C 2 = AC 1 B. Let ψ : F n q F n q be the F q -linear isomorphism associated to the matrix A with respect to the standard basis. Fix a subspace J F n q. Multiplication by A on the left and B on the right induces a bijection C 1 (J,c) C 2 (ψ(j ),c). (4) Let ϕ : F n q Fn q denote the F q-linear isomorphism associated to the matrix (A 1 ) t with respect to the standard basis. Then we have ψ(j ) = ϕ(j), hence bijection (4) can be thought of as a bijection C 1 (J,c) C 2 (ϕ(j),c). (5) Therefore for all subspaces J F n q we have ρ c (C 1,J) = ρ c (C 2,ϕ(J)). This establishes the q-polymatroid equivalence P(C 1,c) P(C 2,c). The equivalence P(C 1,r) P(C 2,r) can be shown similarly. 15

16 Now assume that n = m and that C 2 = AC1 t B for some invertible matrices A and B. Let ψ : F n q Fn q be the F q-linear isomorphism associated to the matrix B t with respect to the standard basis. Fix a subspace J F n q. Transposition and multiplication by A on the left and by B on the right induces a bijection C 1 (J,c) C 2 (ψ(j ),r). As before, one can see that this implies P(C 1,c) P(C 2,r). The q-polymatroid equivalence P(C 1,r) P(C 2,c) can be proved similarly. Proposition 6.8 says that equivalent codes have equivalent associated q-polymatroids. The next example shows that the converse is false in general, i.e., that inequivalent codes may have equivalent (in fact, even identical) associated q-polymatroids. Example 6.9. Let q = 2 and m = n = 4. Let C 1 be the code of [2, Example 7.2], i.e., the code generated by the four linearly independent binary matrices , , , The code C 1 is MRD and has minimum distance d(c 1 ) = 4. Let C 2 be a rank-metric code obtained from a Gabidulin code C F 4 2 of minimum distance 4 via Proposition 1.12 (the 4 F 2 -basis of F 2 4 chosen for the expansion does not play any role in the sequel). We will first compute the covering radii of C 1 and C 2. As shown in [2, Example 7.2], the code C 1 has covering radius cov(c 1 ) = 2, while it is well known that cov(c 2 ) = d(c) 1 = 3. Since the covering radius of a code is preserved under isometries, we conclude that the codes C 1 and C 2 are not equivalent. On the other hand, the four codes C 1, C 2, C1 t and Ct 2 are all MRD with the same parameters. Therefore by Corollary 6.6 the rank function of their q-polymatroids is determined and given by the formula in (3). All of this shows that P(C 1,c) = P(C 1,r) = P(C 2,c) = P(C 2,r), although C 1 C 2. It is known from [9] that a vector rank-metric code C F n qm gives rise to a q-matroid M(C) on F n q. In our notation, we have M(C) = P(Γ(C),c), (6) where Γ is any F q -basis of F q m. It can be shown that the q-matroid M(C) in (6) is well defined, i.e. it does not depend on the choice of basis. This was originally shown in [9]. It also follows, up to equivalence of q-polymatroids, by combining Proposition 1.13 and Proposition 6.8. Proposition 6.10 ([9], Corollary 4.7). Let C F n qm be a vector rank-metric code, and let Γ,Γ be F q -bases of F q m. We have P(Γ(C),c) = P(Γ (C),c). We continue by showing that there exist rank-metric codes whose associated q-polymatroids are not q-matroids. Even more, in the next example we show that there are q-polymatroids such that no non-zero multiple of their rank function defines a q-matroid. Example Let q = 3 and n = m = 2. Let C be a rank-metric code generated by the matrices ( ) ( ) ( ) M 1 :=, M :=, M :=

17 Consider the subspaces J := (1,0) and I := (0,1). Since C(J,c) = M 3, we have ρ c (C,J) = 1. AsC(I,c) = M 1,M 2,thenρ c (C,I) = 1/2. HenceP(C,c)is aq-polymatroid which is not a q-matroid. Let α R with α 0, and consider the function ρ := αρ c. Since ρ(j) = α, in order for ρ to be the rank function of a q-polymatroid it must be 0 < α 1. Then ρ(i) = α/2 is not an integer, so ρ cannot be the rank function of a q-matroid. 7 Generalized Weights as q-polymatroid Invariants In this section, we provide further evidence that the q-polymatroids associated to a rankmetric code adequately capture the structure of the code. More precisely, we show that the generalized rank-weights of the code are an invariant of the associated q-polymatroids. We also show that the property of being an optimal anticode can be characterized in terms of the rank function of the associated q-polymatroids. In the next theorem, we use the characterization of optimal anticodes from Section 2 to show that the generalized weights of a rank-metric code are invariant of the q-polymatroids associated to the code. Theorem 7.1. Let C Mat be a non-zero rank-metric code and let 1 i dim(c) be an integer. If n > m we have If n = m we have where a i (C) = min{n dim(j) J F n q, dim(c) mρ c(c,j) i}. a i (C) = min{a i (C,c), a i (C,r)}, a i (C,c) := min{n dim(j) J F n q, dim(c) mρ c (C,J) i}, a i (C,r) := min{m dim(k) K F m q, dim(c) nρ r (C,K) i}. Proof. Let J F n q, then by Lemma 5.2 Moreover, by definition, dim(mat(j,c)) = mdim(j ) = m(n dim(j)). (7) dim(c) mρ c (C,J) = dim(c Mat(J,c)), (8) dim(c) mρ r (C,J) = dim(c Mat(J,r)). (9) Assume that m > n. By Theorem 2.6, the optimal anticodes in Mat are the spaces of the form Mat(J,c), where J ranges over the subspaces of F n q. Therefore m a i (C) = min{dim(mat(j,c)) J F n q, dim(c Mat(J,c)) i} = m min{n dim(j) J F n q, dim(c) mρ c (C,J) i}, where the last equality follows from (7) and (8). This proves the first part of the theorem. Now assume that n = m. By Theorem 2.6, the anticodes in Mat are the spaces of the form Mat(J,c) or Mat(J,r), as J ranges over the subspaces of F n q. Then a i (C) = 1 } {dim(mat(j n min,c)) J F n q, dim(c Mat(J,c)) i { } dim(mat(j,r)) J F n q, dim(c Mat(J,r)) i = min{a i (C,c), a i (C,r)}, 17

18 where the last equality follows from (7), (8) and (9). Inthenexttheorem, weprovethat thepropertyofbeinganoptimal anticode iscaptured by the rank function of associated q-polymatroids. Theorem 7.2. Let C Mat be a rank-metric code and let t = maxrk(c). The following are equivalent: 1. C is an optimal anticode, 2. { ρ c (C,J) J F n q} = {0,1,...,t}, or { ρr (C,J) J F n q} = {0,1,...,t} and m = n, 3. ρ c (C,F n q ) = t, or ρ r(c,f n q ) = t and m = n. Proof. (1) (2) By Theorem 2.6, either C = Mat(K,c) for a t-dimensional subspace K F n q, or C = Mat(K,r) for a t-dimensional subspace K F m q, where the latter is only possible if m = n. We assume that C = Mat(K,c), as the proof in the other situation follows from the same chain of equalities, replacing c by r. One has, for all J F n q, ρ c (C,J) = (dim(c) dim(c(j,c))/m = (mt dim(mat(k,c) Mat(J,c))/m = (mt dim(mat(k J,c))/m = (mt m dim(k J ))/m = t dim(k J ), where the third equality follows from Lemma 5.5 and the fourth from Lemma 5.2. Hence we obtain { ρc (C,J) J F n } q = {0,1,...,t} if C = Mat(K,c) and { ρr (C,J) J F n } q = {0,1,...,t} if C = Mat(K,r). (3) (1) We have ρ c (C,F n q) = dim(c)/m and max{ρ r (C,K) K F m q } = ρ r (C,F m q ) = dim(c)/n. Then either dim(c)/m, or dim(c)/n = t and m = n. Either way one has dim(c) = mt, hence C is an optimal anticode. Remark 7.3. Theorem 7.2 implies that the q-polymatroid associated to an optimal anticode has an integer-valued rank function, i.e., it is a q-matroid. 8 Duality In this last section of the paper we establish a connection between the notions of code duality and q-polymatroid duality. We start by showing that the q-polymatroids associated to the dual code C are the duals of the q-polymatroids associated to the original code C. Theorem 8.1. Let C Mat be a rank-metric code. We have P(C,c) = P(C,c) and P(C,r) = P(C,r). 18

19 Proof. We only show the result for P(C,c). The proof for P(C,r) is analogous. Let J F n q be a subspace. We have ρ c (C,J) = (dim(c) dim(c(j,c)))/m. By Definition 4.5, Therefore ρ c(c,j) = dim(j) ρ c (F n q,j)+ρ c (C,J ) = dim(j) dim(c)/m+(dim(c) dim(c(j,c)))/m = dim(j) dim(c(j,c))/m. mρ c(c,j) mρ c (C,J) = mdim(j) dim(c(j,c)) dim(c )+dim(c (J,c)) = mdim(j) dim(c ) dim(c)+mn mdim(j) = mn mn = 0, where the second equality follows from Lemma 5.2, part 3. Finally, it is natural to ask how the q-polymatroid associated to the dual of a vector rank-metric code relate to the q-polymatroid associated to the original vector rank-metric code. It turns out that these q-polymatroids are dual to each other, as the following result shows. Corollary 8.2. Let C F n q m be a vector rank-metric code, and let Γ be a basis of F q m over F q. We have P(Γ(C ),c) = P(Γ (C),c) = P(Γ(C),c), where Γ is the dual of the basis Γ. Proof. Applying [17, Theorem 21] to C we obtain Γ(C ) = Γ (C), hence P(Γ(C ),c) = P(Γ (C),c). On the other hand, Theorem 8.1 gives P(Γ (C),c) = P(Γ (C),c). By Proposition 6.10 we have P(Γ (C),c) = P(Γ(C),c). Therefore by Proposition 4.7 it follows that P(Γ (C),c) = P(Γ(C),c). References [1] T.P. Berger, Isometries for rank distance and permutation group of Gabidulin codes, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 49 (2002), no. 11, [2] E. Byrne and A. Ravagnani, Covering Radius of Matrix Codes Endowed with the Rank Metric, SIAM Journal on Discrete Mathematics, 31 (2017), no. 2, [3] H. Crapo, On the theory of combinatorial independence, Ph.D. Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Mathematics (1964). [4] P. Delsarte, Bilinear forms over a finite field, with applications to coding theory, Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series A, 25 (1978), no. 3, [5] E. Gabidulin, Theory of codes with maximum rank distance, Problems of Information Transmission, 1 (1985), no. 2, [6] E. Gorla, A. Ravagnani, Codes endowed with the rank metric, in Random Network Coding and Designs Over GF(q), Eds. M. Greferath, M. Pavcevic, A. Vazquez-Castro, N. Silberstein, Signals and Communication Technology, Springer-Verlag Berlin (2018). 19

20 [7] L.-K. Hua, A theorem on matrices over a sfield and its applications, Acta Mathematica Sinica, 1 (1951), [8] R. Jurrius, R. Pellikaan, On defining generalized rank weights, Advances in Mathematics of Communications, 11 (2017), no. 1, [9] R. Jurrius, R. Pellikaan, Defining the q-analogue of a matroid, (2016). [10] U. Martínez-Peñas, R. Matsumoto, Unifying notions of generalized weights for universal security on wire-tap networks, 54th Annual Allerton Conference on Communication, Control, and Computing (2016), [11] Kløve, T. The weight distribution of linear codes over GF(q l ) having generator matrix over GF(q), Discrete Mathematics, 23 (1978), [12] R. Kötter, F. R. Kschischang, Coding for Errors and Erasures in Random Network Coding, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 54 (2008), no. 8, [13] J. Kurihara, R. Matsumoto, T. Uyematsu, Relative generalized rank weight of linear codes and its applications to network coding, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 61 (2015), no. 7, [14] F. Oggier, A. Sboui, On the existence of generalized rank weights, in: IEEE ISIT-2012, International Symposium on Information Theory (2012), [15] J. Oxley, Matroid Theory, Oxford Graduate Texts in Mathematics, Second Edition (2011). [16] J. Oxley, G. Whittle, A characterization of Tutte invariants of 2-polymatroids, Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series B, 59 (1993), no. 2, [17] A. Ravagnani, Rank-metric codes and their duality theory. Designs, Codes and Cryptography, 80 (2016), no. 1, [18] A. Ravagnani, Generalized weights: an anticode approach, Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra, 220 (2016), no. 5, [19] A. Ravagnani, Duality of Codes Supported on Regular Lattices, with an Application to Enumerative Combinatorics, Designs, Codes and Cryptography, to appear (2017). [20] R. M. Roth, Maximum-Rank Array Codes and their Application to Criss-cross Error Correction, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 37 (1991), no. 2, [21] C. de Seguins Pazzis, The classification of large spaces of matrices with bounded rank, Israel Journal of Mathematics, 208 (2015), No. 1, [22] K. Shiromoto, Matroids and codes with the rank metric, (2018). [23] Z.-X. Wan, A proof of the automorphisms of linear groups over a sfield of characteristic 2, Scientia Sinica 11 (1962), [24] Z.-X. Wan, Geometry of matrices. In memory of Professor L. K. Hua (1910?1985), World Scientific, Singapore (1996). 20

21 [25] V. Wei, Generalized hamming weights for linear codes, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 37 (1991), no. 5, [26] D. Welsh, Matroid Theory, Dover Publications, INC. Mineola New York (1976). 21