pith. sign in

arxiv: 2503.05003 · v3 · submitted 2025-03-06 · 🪐 quant-ph

Parallel Logical Measurements via Quantum Code Surgery

Alexander Cowtan , Zhiyang He , Dominic J. Williamson , Theodore J. Yoder This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-23 00:25 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords quantum error correctionLDPC codescode surgerylogical measurementsfault tolerancestabilizer codesparallel operationsquantum computing
0
0 comments X

The pith

A code surgery scheme measures t logically disjoint Pauli products in parallel using O(t ω (log t + log³ω)) ancillas in time O(d) while preserving LDPC structure and fault distance for any stabilizer LDPC code.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper presents a generalized quantum code surgery method that extends lattice surgery to perform many logical measurements at once on stabilizer LDPC codes. For any collection of logically disjoint Pauli product operators acting on t logical qubits, with each single logical Pauli having weight at most ω, the construction allocates ancilla qubits that grow only as O(t ω (log t + log³ω)) and finishes the measurements in time O(d) independent of t. It keeps the original code's low-density parity-check property and its fault distance without preparing separate logical codeblocks. A sympathetic reader would care because earlier surgery techniques could handle only a small number of overlapping measurements before ancilla costs or distance loss became prohibitive.

Core claim

The central claim is that quantum code surgery can be extended to a parallel scheme applicable to any qubit stabilizer LDPC code. For a collection of logically disjoint Pauli product measurements supported on t logical qubits, the scheme uses O(t ω (log t + log³ω)) ancilla qubits, where ω ≥ d is the maximum weight of the single logical Pauli representatives involved, and completes the task in time O(d) independent of t. The construction preserves both the LDPC property and the fault distance of the original code without requiring ancillary logical codeblocks.

What carries the argument

The parallel code surgery construction, which allocates a shared ancilla region to simultaneously enact multiple disjoint logical Pauli measurements via a sequence of stabilizer checks and corrections that scale logarithmically in t and ω.

If this is right

  • The scheme applies to every stabilizer LDPC code without modification to the base code.
  • Fault distance remains exactly that of the original code after the parallel measurements.
  • Total runtime stays O(d) no matter how large t grows.
  • No separate preparation of ancillary logical codeblocks is required.
  • The resulting code after surgery remains LDPC.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The logarithmic overhead factors suggest that further improvements in ancilla routing could reduce the scheme to strictly linear ancilla cost.
  • Because time is independent of t, the method could be combined with sequential non-Clifford gate implementations that rely on many measurements without accumulating large depth penalties.
  • The disjointness requirement implies that the technique is most useful when logical operators have been chosen or compiled to minimize overlap.
  • Preservation of LDPC density opens the possibility of iterating the surgery many times inside a larger computation while keeping decoder complexity controlled.

Load-bearing premise

The input measurements must form a collection of logically disjoint Pauli product operators.

What would settle it

An explicit construction or simulation showing that t disjoint measurements on an LDPC code require asymptotically more than O(t ω (log t + log³ω)) ancillas or more than O(d) time while still preserving LDPC density and fault distance would falsify the efficiency claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2503.05003 by Alexander Cowtan, Dominic J. Williamson, Theodore J. Yoder, Zhiyang He.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: An example logical circuit with three timesteps of Pauli product measurements. Each timestep [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: A summary of our core construction. (a) We start with an arbitrary quantum LDPC code [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Comparison of different surgery schemes. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: A Tanner graph for the J9, 1, 3K Shor code. where a row [u|v] corresponds to a generator of the stabiliser group, and therefore check on Q, i u·vX(u)Z(v), for u, v ∈ F n 2 . Definition 2.2. A qubit CSS code Q is a qubit stabiliser code where the generators of S can be split into two sets SX and SZ. SX contains Pauli products with terms drawn from {X, I} and SZ terms drawn from {Z, I}. Thus there is a stabi… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Examples of scalable Tanner graphs. Depicting large Tanner graphs directly becomes unwieldy, so we use scalable notation5 to make them more compact. Qubits are gathered into disjoint named sets Q0, Q1, Q2, ..., and the same for checks C0, C1, C2, ... . An edge between Qi and Cj is then labeled with the stabiliser check matrix of Q restricted to Qi and lifted to Cj , so we have [CX|CZ] ∈ F |Cj |×2|Qi | 2 . … view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Illustration of brute-force branching logical representatives with overlapping support. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Scalable Tanner graph for brute-force branching. Starting with a union of logicals [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Measuring Z¯ lZ¯ r without measuring either logical operator individually. The adapter edges joining auxiliary graphs Gl and Gr into one larger auxiliary graph are those hosting the qubits Q. The matrices Tl , Tr, Pl , Pr are efficiently determined using the SkipTree algorithm, [45, Thm. 7]. We do not include in this diagram qubits or checks outside the supports of the logicals Z¯ l and Z¯ r, and instead s… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Branching and gauging measurement for two [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Illustration of brute-force branching followed by gauging logical measurements, with adapters [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Implementations of the Pauli product measurement [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Conversion of the regular set of Pauli product measurements [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_12.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Quantum code surgery is a flexible and low overhead technique for performing logical measurements on quantum error-correcting codes, which generalises lattice surgery. In this work, we present a code surgery scheme, applicable to any qubit stabiliser low-density parity check (LDPC) code, that fault-tolerantly measures many logical Pauli operators in parallel. For a collection of logically disjoint Pauli product measurements supported on $t$ logical qubits, our scheme uses $O\big(t \omega (\log t + \log^3\omega)\big)$ ancilla qubits, where $\omega \geq d$ is the maximum weight of the single logical Pauli representatives involved in the measurements, and $d$ is the code distance. This is all done in time $O(d)$ independent of $t$. Our proposed scheme preserves both the LDPC property and the fault-distance of the original code, without requiring ancillary logical codeblocks which may be costly to prepare. This addresses a shortcoming of several recently introduced surgery schemes which can only be applied to measure a limited number of logical operators in parallel if they overlap on data qubits.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

0 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents a quantum code surgery scheme applicable to any qubit stabilizer LDPC code for fault-tolerantly measuring many logically disjoint Pauli product operators in parallel on t logical qubits. It claims an ancilla overhead of O(t ω (log t + log³ω)) with ω ≥ d the maximum weight of the involved logical Pauli representatives, execution in time O(d) independent of t, and preservation of both the LDPC property and the original code's fault distance, without requiring preparation of ancillary logical codeblocks.

Significance. If the construction, resource analysis, and fault-distance proof hold, the result would be significant for fault-tolerant quantum computation: it supplies an explicit, asymptotically bounded method for parallel logical measurements on general LDPC codes that avoids the parallelism limits of prior surgery schemes when operators overlap. The parameter-free scaling, O(d) runtime, and explicit preservation statements are strengths that could be directly compared to existing lattice-surgery and code-surgery overheads.

minor comments (2)
  1. The abstract and introduction should include an explicit, early definition of 'logically disjoint' (including whether it refers to disjoint support on data qubits, commuting logical representatives, or both) so that the scope of the O(t ω (log t + log³ω)) bound and fault-distance claim is immediately clear to readers.
  2. A brief comparison table or paragraph contrasting the new ancilla scaling against the 'limited number of logical operators in parallel' limitation of the referenced prior surgery schemes would help readers assess the improvement quantitatively.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their positive summary, recognition of the significance of the parallel code-surgery construction, and recommendation of minor revision. The manuscript introduces an explicit, asymptotically bounded protocol for measuring t logically disjoint Pauli products on arbitrary qubit stabilizer LDPC codes using O(t ω (log t + log³ω)) ancillas in O(d) time while preserving the LDPC property and fault distance, without ancillary logical blocks.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: explicit construction yields stated bounds under stated assumption

full rationale

The paper presents an explicit new code-surgery construction for parallel measurement of logically disjoint Pauli products. The ancilla scaling O(t ω (log t + log³ω)), O(d) time, and preservation of LDPC property plus fault distance are derived directly from the details of that construction (as described in the abstract). The logically-disjoint precondition is an explicit hypothesis of the claim rather than a hidden self-definition or fitted input; no self-citation chain, ansatz smuggling, or renaming of known results is required to reach the stated performance. The derivation is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The abstract relies on standard stabiliser formalism and LDPC code assumptions without introducing new free parameters or invented entities.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Stabiliser formalism and LDPC property of quantum codes
    Scheme is stated to apply to any qubit stabiliser LDPC code.
  • domain assumption Fault-tolerance definitions for logical measurements
    Claims preservation of fault-distance.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5724 in / 1317 out tokens · 149128 ms · 2026-05-23T00:25:06.709547+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 12 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. LightStim: A Framework for QEC Protocol Evaluation and Prototyping with Automated DEM Construction

    quant-ph 2026-04 conditional novelty 8.0

    LightStim automates DEM construction for QEC protocols via an augmented Pauli tableau during compilation, matching public tools on detector counts and error rates while enabling new cross-code designs.

  2. In-Situ Simultaneous Magic State Injection on Arbitrary CSS qLDPC Codes

    quant-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 8.0

    A new in-situ scheme prepares logical magic states inside arbitrary CSS qLDPC codes using only syndrome-extraction ancillas, with simulations on the [[144,12,12]] BB code and [[225,9,4]] hypergraph-product code showin...

  3. The Pinnacle Architecture: Reducing the cost of breaking RSA-2048 to 100 000 physical qubits using quantum LDPC codes

    quant-ph 2026-02 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Pinnacle Architecture using QLDPC codes reduces physical qubits needed to factor RSA-2048 to under 100,000 at 10^{-3} error rate.

  4. Concatenating Algebraic Codes over High-Rate Quantum LDPC Codes

    quant-ph 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Concatenating quantum Reed-Solomon outer codes over the gross code using Galois qudits reaches teraquop regime at 10^{-3} physical noise with lower overhead than prior two-gross-code constructions.

  5. Forced Gap Post-Selection for Quantum LDPC Codes and their Operations

    quant-ph 2026-05 conditional novelty 6.0

    Forced-gap post-selection on bivariate bicycle codes and surgery gadgets improves logical error rates by a factor of more than 4 using Relay-BP decoding at fixed post-selection rate.

  6. CAbLECAR: efficiently scheduling QLDPC codes on a tileable spin qubit chip with shuttling

    quant-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    CAbLECAR provides a robotics-inspired shuttle scheduler that enables QLDPC codes on tileable spin-qubit hardware, yielding up to 86% faster schedules and orders-of-magnitude gains in encoding efficiency and logical er...

  7. Efficient Routing of Quantum LDPC Codes on Programmable 2D Toric Architectures

    quant-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    A programmable 2D toric oscillator network enables efficient routing for bivariate bicycle LDPC codes, reducing long-range couplers to O(sqrt(n)) and achieving 3.06% logical error rate per cycle in simulations for the...

  8. Shor's algorithm is possible with as few as 10,000 reconfigurable atomic qubits

    quant-ph 2026-03 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Shor's algorithm for cryptographically relevant problems becomes feasible on neutral-atom systems with as few as 10,000 reconfigurable physical qubits via high-rate quantum error correction.

  9. Accelerating Fault-Tolerant Quantum Computation with Good qLDPC Codes

    quant-ph 2025-10 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    A new scheme for fault-tolerant quantum computation on qLDPC codes achieves constant qubit overhead and time overhead O(d^{1+o(1)}) for good codes, faster than prior code surgery methods for a<2.

  10. Optimizing Parallel Execution of Commuting Pauli Product Rotations

    quant-ph 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Two new heuristics reduce hardware-limited depth of commuting PPR groups by 10-20% on average (up to 50%) in QASMBench circuits compiled to PPRs.

  11. GeneCS: Synthesizing Resource-Efficient Code Surgery for Arbitrary Quantum Stabilizer Codes

    quant-ph 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    GeneCS compiler reduces ancillary qubits and checks by over 85% on average for single- and cross-code logical operations on stabilizer codes while preserving error rates and scaling to over 10,000 qubits.

  12. Benchmarking fault-tolerant quantum computing hardware via QLOPS

    quant-ph 2025-07 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Proposes QLOPS as an integrated benchmarking metric for FTQC hardware that factors in code rates, decoder throughput, latency, and accuracy, illustrated via RSA-2048 factoring resource estimates.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

87 extracted references · 87 canonical work pages · cited by 12 Pith papers · 7 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Suppressing quantum errors by scaling a surface code logical qubit.Nature, 614(7949):676–681, 2023

    Google Quantum AI. Suppressing quantum errors by scaling a surface code logical qubit.Nature, 614(7949):676–681, 2023

    work page 2023

  2. [2]

    Quantum error correction below the surface code threshold.Nature, 638:920–926, 2024

    Google Quantum AI and Collaborators. Quantum error correction below the surface code threshold.Nature, 638:920–926, 2024

    work page 2024

  3. [3]

    Bluvstein, S

    D. Bluvstein, S. J. Evered, A. A. Geim, S. H. Li, H. Zhou, T. Manovitz, et al. Logical quantum processor based on reconfigurable atom arrays.Nature, 626(7997):58–65,

    work page

  4. [4]

    doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06927-3. 27

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06927-3

  5. [5]

    P. S. Rodriguez, J. M. Robinson, P. N. Jepsen, Z. He, C. Duckering, C. Zhao, K. Wu, J. Campo, K. Bagnall, M. Kwon, et al. Experimental demonstration of logical magic state distillation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.15165, 2024

    work page arXiv 2024

  6. [6]

    Lacroix, A

    N. Lacroix, A. Bourassa, F. J. H. Heras, L. M. Zhang, et al. Scaling and logic in the color code on a superconducting quantum processor.Nature, 2025

    work page 2025

  7. [7]

    N. P. Breuckmann and J. N. Eberhardt. Quantum Low-Density Parity-Check Codes. PRX Quantum, 2(4):040101, 2021. doi:10.1103/PRXQuantum.2.040101

    work page doi:10.1103/prxquantum.2.040101 2021

  8. [8]

    Bravyi, A

    S. Bravyi, A. W. Cross, J. M. Gambetta, D. Maslov, P. Rall, and T. J. Yoder. High- threshold and low-overhead fault-tolerant quantum memory.Nature, 627:778–782,

    work page

  9. [9]

    doi:10.1038/s41586-024-07107-7

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-024-07107-7

  10. [10]

    Q. Xu, J. P. B. Ataides, C. A. Pattison, N. Raveendran, D. Bluvstein, et al. Constant- overhead fault-tolerant quantum computation with reconfigurable atom arrays.Na- ture Physics, 20(7):1084–1090, 2024. doi:10.1038/s41567-024-02479-z

    work page doi:10.1038/s41567-024-02479-z 2024

  11. [11]

    A. Kitaev. Fault-tolerant quantum computation by anyons.Ann. Phys., 303:3–20,

    work page

  12. [12]

    doi:10.1016/S0003-4916%2802%2900018-0

    work page doi:10.1016/s0003-4916

  13. [13]

    Blasi, A

    D. Horsman, A. G. Fowler, S. Devitt, and R. Van Meter. Surface code quantum computing by lattice surgery.New J. Phys., 14:123011, 2012. doi:10.1088/1367- 2630/14/12/123011

    work page doi:10.1088/1367- 2012

  14. [14]

    J. Moussa. Transversal Clifford gates on folded surface codes.Physical Review A, 94:042316, 2016. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.94.042316

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.94.042316 2016

  15. [15]

    Magic state cultivation: growing T states as cheap as CNOT gates

    C. Gidney, N. Shutty, and C. Jones. Magic state cultivation: growing T states as cheap as CNOT gates. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2409.17595

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2409.17595

  16. [16]

    Leveraging automorphisms of quantum codes for fault-tolerant quantum computation

    Markus Grassl and Martin Roetteler. Leveraging automorphisms of quantum codes for fault-tolerant quantum computation. In2013 IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory, pages 534–538. IEEE, 2013

    work page 2013

  17. [17]

    N. P. Breuckmann and S. Burton. Fold-Transversal Clifford Gates for Quantum Codes.Quantum, 8:1372, 2024. doi:10.22331/q-2024-06-13-1372

    work page doi:10.22331/q-2024-06-13-1372 2024

  18. [18]

    Quintavalle, P

    A. Quintavalle, P. Webster, and M. Vasmer. Partitioning qubits in hypergraph prod- uct codes to implement logical gates.Quantum, 7:1153, 2023. doi:10.22331/q-2023- 10-24-1153

    work page doi:10.22331/q-2023- 2023

  19. [19]

    J. N. Eberhardt and V. Steffan. Logical Operators and Fold-Transversal Gates of Bivariate Bicycle Codes.IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 71(2):1140– 1152, 2025

    work page 2025

  20. [20]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.18175 (2024)

    Hasan Sayginel, Stergios Koutsioumpas, Mark Webster, Abhishek Rajput, and Dan E Browne. Fault-Tolerant Logical Clifford Gates from Code Automorphisms.arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.18175, 2024

    work page arXiv 2024

  21. [21]

    Malcolm, Andrew N

    A. Malcolm, A. Glaudell, P. Fuentes, D. Chandra, et al. Computing Efficiently in QLDPC Codes. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2502.07150

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2502.07150

  22. [22]

    Guanyu Zhu, Shehryar Sikander, Elia Portnoy, Andrew W Cross, and Benjamin J Brown. Non-Clifford and parallelizable fault-tolerant logical gates on constant and almost-constant rate homological quantum LDPC codes via higher symmetries.arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.16982, 2023

    work page arXiv 2023

  23. [23]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.13130 (2024)

    Thomas R Scruby, Arthur Pesah, and Mark Webster. Quantum rainbow codes.arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.13130, 2024. 28

    work page arXiv 2024

  24. [24]

    Quantum LDPC Codes with Transversal Non- Clifford Gates via Products of Algebraic Codes.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.14662, 2024

    Louis Golowich and Ting-Chun Lin. Quantum LDPC Codes with Transversal Non- Clifford Gates via Products of Algebraic Codes.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.14662, 2024

    work page arXiv 2024

  25. [25]

    Transversal non-Clifford gates for quantum LDPC codes on sheaves

    Ting-Chun Lin. Transversal non-Clifford gates for quantum LDPC codes on sheaves. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.14631, 2024

    work page arXiv 2024

  26. [26]

    Classifying Logical Gates in Quantum Codes via Cohomology Operations and Symmetry.arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.15848, 2024

    Po-Shen Hsin, Ryohei Kobayashi, and Guanyu Zhu. Classifying Logical Gates in Quantum Codes via Cohomology Operations and Symmetry.arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.15848, 2024

    work page arXiv 2024

  27. [27]

    Cups and Gates I: Cohomology invariants and logical quantum operations

    Nikolas P Breuckmann, Margarita Davydova, Jens N Eberhardt, and Nathanan Tan- tivasadakarn. Cups and Gates I: Cohomology invariants and logical quantum opera- tions.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.16250, 2024

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  28. [28]

    Guanyu Zhu. A topological theory for qLDPC: non-Clifford gates and magic state fountain on homological product codes with constant rate and beyond theN 1/3 dis- tance barrier.arXiv preprint arxiv:2501.19375, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  29. [29]

    Huang, T

    S. Huang, T. Jochym-O’Connor, and T. J. Yoder. Homomorphic Logical Measure- ments.PRX Quantum, 4:030301, 2023. doi:10.1103/PRXQuantum.4.030301

    work page doi:10.1103/prxquantum.4.030301 2023

  30. [30]

    Q. Xu, H. Zhou, G. Zheng, D. Bluvstein, J. P. B. Ataides, M. D. Lukin, and L. Jiang. Fast and Parallelizable Logical Computation with Homological Product Codes.Phys. Rev. X, 15:021065, May 2025

    work page 2025

  31. [31]

    L. Z. Cohen, I. H. Kim, S. D. Bartlett, and B. J. Brown. Low-overhead fault-tolerant quantum computing using long-range connectivity.Sci. Adv., 8, eabn1717, 2022. doi:10.1126/sciadv.abn1717

    work page doi:10.1126/sciadv.abn1717 2022

  32. [32]

    Journal of Mathemat- ical Physics43(9), 4452–4505 (2002) https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1499754

    E. Dennis, A. Kitaev, A. Landahl, and J. Preskill. Topological quantum memory.J. Math. Phys., 43(9):4452–4505, September 2002. doi:10.1063/1.1499754

    work page doi:10.1063/1.1499754 2002

  33. [33]

    Algorithmic fault tolerance for fast quantum computing

    H. Zhou et al. Algorithmic Fault Tolerance for Fast Quantum Computing. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2406.17653

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2406.17653

  34. [34]

    Physical Review Letters 102(11), doi:10.1103/physrevlett.102.110502

    B. Eastin and E. Knill. Restrictions on Transversal Encoded Quantum Gate Sets. Phys. Rev. Lett., 102:110502, 2009. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.102.110502

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.102.110502 2009

  35. [35]

    Z. He, V. Vaikuntanathan, A. Wills, and R. Y. Zhang. Quantum Codes with Address- able and Transversal Non-Clifford Gates.arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.01864, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  36. [36]

    Bravyi, G

    S. Bravyi, G. Smith, and J. A. Smolin. Trading Classical and Quantum Computa- tional Resources.Phys. Rev. X, 6:021043, 2016. doi:10.1103/PhysRevX.6.021043

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevx.6.021043 2016

  37. [37]

    A game of surface codes: Large-scale quantum computing with lattice surgery

    D. Litinski. A Game of Surface Codes: Large-Scale Quantum Computing with Lattice Surgery.Quantum, 3 p (2019,3):128, 2019. doi:10.22331/q-2019-03-05-128

    work page doi:10.22331/q-2019-03-05-128 2019

  38. [38]

    Vuillot, L

    C. Vuillot, L. Lao, B. Criger, C. G. Almud´ ever, K. Bertels, and B. M. Terhal. Code deformation and lattice surgery are gauge fixing.New J. Phys., 21:033028, 2019. doi:10.1088/1367-2630/ab0199

    work page doi:10.1088/1367-2630/ab0199 2019

  39. [39]

    Weight Reduction for Quantum Codes

    M. B Hastings. Weight reduction for quantum codes.arXiv preprint arXiv:1611.03790, 2016

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  40. [40]

    B Hastings

    M. B Hastings. On quantum weight reduction.arXiv preprint arXiv:2102.10030, 2021

    work page arXiv 2021

  41. [41]

    E. Sabo, L. G. Gunderman, B. Ide, M. Vasmer, and G. Dauphinais. Weight-Reduced Stabilizer Codes with Lower Overhead.PRX Quantum, 5:040302, Oct 2024. 29

    work page 2024

  42. [42]

    D. J. Williamson and T. J. Yoder. Low-overhead fault-tolerant quantum computation by gauging logical operators. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2410.02213

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2410.02213

  43. [43]

    B. Ide, M. G. Gowda, P. J. Nadkarni, and G. Dauphinais. Fault-Tolerant Logical Measurements via Homological Measurement.Phys. Rev. X, 15:021088, Jun 2025

    work page 2025

  44. [44]

    Cowtan and S

    A. Cowtan and S. Burton. CSS code surgery as a universal construction.Quantum, 8:1344, 2024. doi:10.22331/q-2024-05-14-1344

    work page doi:10.22331/q-2024-05-14-1344 2024

  45. [45]

    A. Cowtan. SSIP: automated surgery with quantum LDPC codes.arXiv:2407.09423, 2024

    work page arXiv 2024

  46. [47]

    Freedman and M

    M. Freedman and M. Hastings. Building manifolds from quantum codes.Geometric and Functional Analysis, 31:855, 2021. doi:10.1007/s00039-021-00567-3

    work page doi:10.1007/s00039-021-00567-3 2021

  47. [48]

    Universal adapters between quantum LDPC codes,

    E. Swaroop, T. Jochym-O’Connor, and T. J. Yoder. Universal adapters between quantum LDPC codes. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2410.03628

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2410.03628

  48. [49]

    Time-Efficient Logical Operations on Quantum Low-Density Parity Check Codes.Phys

    Guo Zhang and Ying Li. Time-Efficient Logical Operations on Quantum Low-Density Parity Check Codes.Phys. Rev. Lett., 134:070602, Feb 2025

    work page 2025

  49. [50]

    Hyperbolic and semi-hyperbolic surface codes for quantum stor- age.Quantum Science and Technology, 2(3):035007, 2017

    Nikolas P Breuckmann, Christophe Vuillot, Earl Campbell, Anirudh Krishna, and Barbara M Terhal. Hyperbolic and semi-hyperbolic surface codes for quantum stor- age.Quantum Science and Technology, 2(3):035007, 2017

    work page 2017

  50. [51]

    Universal quantum computing with twist-free and temporally encoded lattice surgery

    C. Chamberland and E. T. Campbell. Universal Quantum Computing with Twist- Free and Temporally Encoded Lattice Surgery.PRX Quantum, 3:010331, 2022. doi:10.1103/PRXQuantum.3.010331

    work page doi:10.1103/prxquantum.3.010331 2022

  51. [52]

    PhD thesis, Cali- fornia Institute of Technology, 1997

    Daniel Gottesman.Stabilizer codes and quantum error correction. PhD thesis, Cali- fornia Institute of Technology, 1997

    work page 1997

  52. [53]

    Low-overhead fault-tolerant quantum computation by gauging logical operators

    Dominic J Williamson and Theodore J Yoder. Low-overhead fault-tolerant quantum computation by gauging logical operators.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.02213, 2024

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  53. [54]

    Universal adapters between quantum LDPC codes,

    Esha Swaroop, Tomas Jochym-O’Connor, and Theodore J Yoder. Universal adapters between quantum LDPC codes.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.03628, 2024

    work page arXiv 2024

  54. [55]

    Cross, Z

    Andrew Cross, Zhiyang He, Patrick Rall, and Theodore Yoder. Improved QLDPC Surgery: Logical Measurements and Bridging Codes.arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.18393, 2024

    work page arXiv 2024

  55. [56]

    Gowda, Priya J

    Benjamin Ide, Manoj G. Gowda, Priya J. Nadkarni, and Guillaume Dauphinais. Fault-tolerant logical measurements via homological measurement.Phys. Rev. X, 15:021088, Jun 2025

    work page 2025

  56. [57]

    Hamma, P

    A. Hamma, P. Zanardi, and X. G. Wen. String and membrane con- densation on three-dimensional lattices.Phys. Rev. B, 72:035307, 2005. doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.72.035307

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.72.035307 2005

  57. [58]

    Panteleev and G

    P. Panteleev and G. Kalachev. Asymptotically good Quantum and locally testable classical LDPC codes. InProceedings of the 54th Annual ACM SIGACT Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC 2022, page 375–388, New York, NY, USA, 2022. Association for Computing Machinery

    work page 2022

  58. [59]

    Z. He, A. Cowtan, D. J. Williamson, and T. J. Yoder. Extractors: QLDPC Archi- tectures for Efficient Pauli-Based Computation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.10390, 2025. 30

    work page arXiv 2025

  59. [60]

    T. J. Yoder, E. Schoute, P. Rall, E. Pritchett, J. M. Gambetta, A. W. Cross, M. Car- roll, and M. E. Beverland. Tour de gross: A modular quantum computer based on bivariate bicycle codes.arXiv:2506.03094, 2025

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  60. [61]

    Carette, D

    T. Carette, D. Horsman, and S. Perdrix. SZX-Calculus: Scalable Graphical Quantum Reasoning, 44th International Symposium on Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science (MFCS 2019). doi:10.4230/LIPIcs.MFCS.2019.55

    work page doi:10.4230/lipics.mfcs.2019.55 2019

  61. [62]

    J. P. Tillich and G. Z´ emor. Quantum LDPC Codes With Positive Rate and Minimum Distance Proportional to the Square Root of the Blocklength.IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 60(2):1193–1202, February 2014. doi:10.1109/TIT.2013.2292061

    work page doi:10.1109/tit.2013.2292061 2014

  62. [63]

    Bravyi and B

    S. Bravyi and B. Terhal. A no-go theorem for a two-dimensional self-correcting quantum memory based on stabilizer codes.New J. Phys., 11:043029, 2009. doi:10.1088/1367-2630/11/4/043029

    work page doi:10.1088/1367-2630/11/4/043029 2009

  63. [64]

    Personal communications

    Tomas Jochym-O’Connor. Personal communications

    work page

  64. [65]

    Stabilizer Entanglement Distillation and Efficient Fault-Tolerant Encoders.PRX Quantum, 6(1), March 2025

    Yu Shi, Ashlesha Patil, and Saikat Guha. Stabilizer Entanglement Distillation and Efficient Fault-Tolerant Encoders.PRX Quantum, 6(1), March 2025

    work page 2025

  65. [66]

    Geo- metrically Enhanced Topological Quantum Codes.arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.10403, 2025

    David Aasen, Jeongwan Haah, Matthew B Hastings, and Zhenghan Wang. Geo- metrically Enhanced Topological Quantum Codes.arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.10403, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  66. [67]

    The intractability of computing the minimum distance of a code

    Alexander Vardy. The intractability of computing the minimum distance of a code. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 43(6):1757–1766, 2002

    work page 2002

  67. [68]

    Dumer, D

    I. Dumer, D. Micciancio, and M. Sudan. Hardness of approximating the minimum distance of a linear code.IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 49(1):22–37, 2003

    work page 2003

  68. [69]

    I. H. Kim, Y. Liu, S. Pallister, W. Pol, S. Roberts, and E. Lee. Fault-tolerant resource estimate for quantum chemical simulations: Case study on Li-ion battery electrolyte molecules.Phys. Rev. Res., 4:023019, Apr 2022

    work page 2022

  69. [70]

    Simplified quantum weight reduc- tion with optimal bounds.arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.09601, 2025

    Min-Hsiu Hsieh, Xingjian Li, and Ting-Chun Lin. Simplified quantum weight reduc- tion with optimal bounds.arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.09601, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  70. [71]

    High-rate surgery: towards constant-overhead logical operations.arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.08523, 2025

    Guo Zheng, Liang Jiang, and Qian Xu. High-rate surgery: towards constant-overhead logical operations.arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.08523, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  71. [72]

    Hillmann, G

    T. Hillmann, G. Dauphinais, I. Tzitrin, and M. Vasmer. Single-shot and measurement- based quantum error correction via fault complexes. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2410.12963

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2410.12963

  72. [73]

    Nou´ edyn Baspin, Lucas Berent, and Lawrence Z. Cohen. Fast surgery for quantum ldpc codes, 2025

    work page 2025

  73. [74]

    Williamson, and Theodore J

    Alexander Cowtan, Zhiyang He, Dominic J. Williamson, and Theodore J. Yoder. Fast and fault-tolerant logical measurements: Auxiliary hypergraphs and transversal surgery.arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.14895, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  74. [75]

    https://tikzit.github.io/index.html

    TikZit. https://tikzit.github.io/index.html

    work page

  75. [76]

    MacLane, Categories for the working mathematician , Graduate Texts in Mathematics, Springer, Berlin (2nd ed

    S. MacLane.Categories for the Working Mathematician. Graduate Texts in Mathe- matics 5. Springer, second edition, 1997. doi:10.1007/978-1-4757-4721-8

    work page doi:10.1007/978-1-4757-4721-8 1997

  76. [77]

    Audoux and A

    B. Audoux and A. Couvreur. On tensor products of CSS Codes.Ann. Inst. Henri Poincar´ e Comb. Phys. Interact., 6(2):239–287, 2019. doi:10.4171/aihpd/71. 31

    work page doi:10.4171/aihpd/71 2019

  77. [78]

    C. A. Weibel.An Introduction to Homological Algebra. Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics, Cambridge University Press, 1994. doi:10.1017/CBO9781139644136

    work page doi:10.1017/cbo9781139644136 1994

  78. [79]

    Homology, hopf algebras and quantum code surgery.arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.01496, 2025

    Alexander Cowtan. Homology, hopf algebras and quantum code surgery.arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.01496, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  79. [80]

    Daniel, Ilan Tzitrin, and Michael Vasmer

    Arthur Pesah, Austin K. Daniel, Ilan Tzitrin, and Michael Vasmer. Fault-tolerant transformations of spacetime codes, 2025

    work page 2025

  80. [81]

    Cross, Z

    A. Cross, Z. He, A. Natarajan, M. Szegedy, and G. Zhu. Quantum Locally Testable Code with Constant Soundness.Quantum, 8:1501, 2024. doi:10.22331/q-2024-10-18-

    work page doi:10.22331/q-2024-10-18- 2024

Showing first 80 references.