pith. sign in

arxiv: 2406.17995 · v4 · pith:4AAJTY6Wnew · submitted 2024-06-26 · 🪐 quant-ph · cs.AR

Managing Classical Processing Requirements for Quantum Error Correction

Satvik Maurya , Abtin Molavi , Aws Albarghouthi , Swamit Tannu This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-24 00:06 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph cs.AR
keywords quantum error correctiondecoder managementfault-tolerant quantum computingclassical processingscheduling frameworkquantum operating systemcapacity planningerror syndrome processing
0
0 comments X

The pith

A two-level framework reduces decoder hardware requirements for quantum error correction by 10-40 percent.

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

The paper shows that demand for classical decoders in quantum error correction fluctuates sharply between high-activity bursts and low periods. Provisioning hardware for the peaks wastes resources while average-case setups risk failures. The authors introduce a two-level scheduling system that manages decoders as shared resources under the quantum operating system. This method cuts the needed hardware by 10 to 40 percent in tested fault-tolerant scenarios. If the approach works, it makes large-scale quantum computers more feasible by solving a key systems-level bottleneck in classical processing.

Core claim

The paper establishes that decoder demand fluctuations form a capacity planning problem best addressed by a two-level framework treating decoders as shared accelerators. This framework enables efficient scheduling that lowers hardware needs by 10-40% across benchmarks while meeting timing constraints, proving that decoder management is essential for practical fault-tolerant quantum computing.

What carries the argument

The two-level framework that schedules fluctuating decoder demands by treating classical processors as shared accelerators managed by the quantum operating system.

Load-bearing premise

The demand patterns from the benchmarks accurately reflect real quantum hardware behavior and the scheduling can occur fast enough to avoid violating microsecond error-correction deadlines.

What would settle it

Deploy the two-level scheduler on actual quantum hardware and check if it maintains decoder response times under one microsecond during peak loads or if demand varies beyond the benchmark patterns.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2406.17995 by Abtin Molavi, Aws Albarghouthi, Satvik Maurya, Swamit Tannu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: (a) Fewer decoders result in a slowdown in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: (a) A logical qubit (𝑑 = 3); (b) Syndrome generation and measurements; (c) A typical procedure for detecting er￾rors by decoding syndromes. Owing to their relatively relaxed connectivity requirements that can be realized with hardware available today, we focus specifically on the Surface Code. A single rotated Surface Code patch of distance 𝑑 = 3 is shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Consumption of a magic (𝑇 ) state with LS. being applied, all prior errors that affected 𝑃 must be known before |𝑚⟩ is applied to prevent errors from spreading [57]. Lattice Surgery can be used to perform a 𝑍 ⊗ 𝑍 operation on 𝑃 and |𝑚⟩ to apply the magic state [39, 40]. Once the 𝑍 ⊗ 𝑍 operation is performed, the decoding result of 𝑃 prior to Lattice Surgery is combined with the decoding result of Lattice S… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: (a) Exponential increase in the decoder latency per round (in nanoseconds) as the number of rounds is increased from [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: (Left) Decoders for every logical qubit; (Right) Time [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: (a) Illustration of the longest undecoded sequence – [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: (a) Slowdown in the processing of outstanding [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: (a) Increase in the average number of bit-flips in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Compilation framework – the rewrite pass changes [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Baseline statistics. • The All Qubits configuration denotes the baseline where all qubits have a decoder. • Max. Concurrency is the configuration where the number of hardware decoders in the system corresponds to the peak concur￾rent critical decodes for every workload shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Hardware decoders normalized with the Midpoint [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Longest undecoded sequence when using the (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Reduction in the longest undecoded sequence [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_15.png] view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Total reduction in decoders required when consid [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_16.png] view at source ↗
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: (a) Total decoding task required to process the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_18.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Large-scale quantum computers promise transformative speedups, but their viability hinges on fast and reliable quantum error correction (QEC). At the center of QEC are decoders-classical algorithms running on hardware such as FPGAs, GPUs, or CPUs that process error syndromes to detect errors every microsecond to preserve fault-tolerance. Quantum processors, therefore, operate not in isolation, but as accelerators tightly coupled with powerful classical digital hardware. A key challenge is that decoder demand fluctuates unpredictably: bursts of activity can require orders of magnitude more decodes than idle periods. Provisioning hardware for the worst case wastes resources, while provisioning for the average case risks catastrophic slowdowns. We show that this mismatch is a systems problem of capacity planning and scheduling, and propose a two-level framework that treats decoders as shared accelerators managed by the quantum operating system. Our approach reduces decoder requirements by 10-40% across fault-tolerant benchmarks, demonstrating that efficient decoder scheduling is essential to making FTQC practical.

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

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a two-level framework in which a quantum operating system manages shared classical decoders as accelerators for quantum error correction. Decoder demand is treated as a capacity-planning and scheduling problem to accommodate unpredictable bursts; the central empirical claim is that the approach reduces required decoder resources by 10-40% on fault-tolerant benchmarks while preserving the microsecond-scale timing needed for fault tolerance.

Significance. If the timing constraint is rigorously satisfied, the work would usefully shift attention from decoder algorithms alone to systems-level resource management for FTQC, potentially lowering classical hardware overhead. The benchmark-driven reduction is a concrete data point, but its value depends on explicit verification that worst-case latency never exceeds the QEC cycle time.

major comments (2)
  1. [Results / Evaluation] The central claim (abstract and § on results) that the two-level scheduler delivers 10-40% decoder reduction without violating fault-tolerance timing is load-bearing yet unsupported by any reported analysis of queuing delay, context-switch cost, or tail latency under the observed bursty workloads. The manuscript notes that bursts can be “orders of magnitude” above average but supplies no numbers or bounds on scheduler-induced delay relative to the ~1 µs QEC window; without this, the practicality conclusion cannot be evaluated.
  2. [Abstract and Evaluation] The numerical claim of 10-40% reduction (abstract) is presented without accompanying workload models, benchmark selection criteria, error bars, or statistical methodology. This omission prevents independent assessment of whether the reported savings are robust or sensitive to particular decoder-demand traces.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Introduction] Notation for the two-level hierarchy (quantum OS vs. decoder pool) should be introduced with a diagram or explicit equations early in the manuscript to avoid ambiguity when discussing scheduling policies.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback highlighting the need for more rigorous verification of timing constraints and statistical details in our evaluation. We address each major comment below and will revise the manuscript accordingly to strengthen the presentation of our results.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Results / Evaluation] The central claim (abstract and § on results) that the two-level scheduler delivers 10-40% decoder reduction without violating fault-tolerance timing is load-bearing yet unsupported by any reported analysis of queuing delay, context-switch cost, or tail latency under the observed bursty workloads. The manuscript notes that bursts can be “orders of magnitude” above average but supplies no numbers or bounds on scheduler-induced delay relative to the ~1 µs QEC window; without this, the practicality conclusion cannot be evaluated.

    Authors: We agree that explicit bounds on scheduler-induced delays are necessary to fully support the practicality claim. The framework incorporates priority-based preemptive scheduling and capacity reservation to ensure microsecond-scale responses, but the current manuscript focuses on average-case resource savings. In revision we will add a new evaluation subsection with queuing analysis, measured tail latencies, and context-switch overheads from the bursty traces, confirming all delays remain within the QEC cycle time. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract and Evaluation] The numerical claim of 10-40% reduction (abstract) is presented without accompanying workload models, benchmark selection criteria, error bars, or statistical methodology. This omission prevents independent assessment of whether the reported savings are robust or sensitive to particular decoder-demand traces.

    Authors: The reported savings come from trace-driven simulations on standard fault-tolerant benchmarks (surface code and color code under depolarizing noise). In the revision we will expand the methods and results sections to document the exact workload generation process, benchmark parameters, selection rationale, and statistical methodology including error bars from repeated runs, allowing independent verification of robustness. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: empirical benchmark results on proposed scheduler

full rationale

The paper proposes a two-level decoder scheduling framework and reports 10-40% resource reductions from fault-tolerant benchmarks. No equations, fitted parameters, self-citations, or ansatzes are present in the provided text that would reduce the central claim to a definitional identity or forced prediction. The result is presented as an outcome of applying the framework to external workloads, making the derivation self-contained against benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the domain assumption that decoder workloads are bursty and schedulable at the systems level; no free parameters, new physical entities, or ad-hoc axioms are stated in the abstract.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Decoder demand fluctuates unpredictably with bursts requiring orders of magnitude more decodes than idle periods
    Stated directly in the abstract as the core systems challenge motivating the framework.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5706 in / 1202 out tokens · 27766 ms · 2026-05-24T00:06:29.502978+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 4 Pith papers

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

  1. Mitigating Classical Resource Costs in Quantum Error Correction via Generalized qLDPC Predecoding

    quant-ph 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    An automated predecoder generator for arbitrary qLDPC codes cuts decoder utilization by up to 3963x and supports hardware scaling to tens or hundreds of thousands of logical qubits within power limits.

  2. Triage: An Adaptive Parallel Window Decoding Scheduler for Real-time Fault-Tolerant Quantum Computation

    quant-ph 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Triage is an adaptive parallel window decoding scheduler that reduces average logical error rates by 52.6% compared to standard temporal parallelism while keeping stalls low under scarce classical resources.

  3. O3LS: Optimizing Lattice Surgery via Automatic Layout Searching and Loose Scheduling

    quant-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    O3LS reduces space overhead by up to 46.7% and time overhead by up to 36% in lattice surgery while suppressing logical error rates by up to an order of magnitude compared with prior layout and scheduling approaches.

  4. Constraint-Optimal Driven Allocation for Scalable QEC Decoder Scheduling

    quant-ph 2025-12 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    CODA is a new global-optimization scheduler for QEC decoders that reduces longest undecoded sequences by 74% across 19 benchmarks and scales linearly with qubit count.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

67 extracted references · 67 canonical work pages · cited by 4 Pith papers · 4 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Acharya, L

    Rajeev Acharya, Laleh Aghababaie-Beni, Igor Aleiner, Trond I. Andersen, Markus Ansmann, Frank Arute, Kunal Arya, Abraham Asfaw, Nikita Astrakhantsev, Juan Atalaya, Ryan Babbush, Dave Bacon, Brian Ballard, Joseph C. Bardin, Johannes Bausch, Andreas Bengtsson, Alexander Bilmes, Sam Blackwell, Sergio Boixo, Gina Bortoli, Alexandre Bourassa, Jenna Bovaird, Le...

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2408.13687 2024

  2. [2]

    Suppressing quantum errors by scaling a surface code logical qubit

    Rajeev Acharya, Igor Aleiner, Richard Allen, Trond I. Andersen, Markus Ans- mann, Frank Arute, Kunal Arya, Abraham Asfaw, Juan Atalaya, Ryan Babbush, Dave Bacon, Joseph C. Bardin, Joao Basso, Andreas Bengtsson, Sergio Boixo, Gina Bortoli, Alexandre Bourassa, Jenna Bovaird, Leon Brill, Michael Broughton, Bob B. Buckley, David A. Buell, Tim Burger, Brian Bu...

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-022-05434-1 2023

  3. [3]

    Narges Alavisamani, Suhas Vittal, Ramin Ayanzadeh, Poulami Das, and Moinud- din Qureshi. 2024. Promatch: Extending the Reach of Real-Time Quantum Error Correction with Adaptive Predecoding. https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2404. 03136

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2404 2024

  4. [4]

    Baker, Casey Duckering, David I

    Jonathan M. Baker, Casey Duckering, David I. Schuster, and Frederic T. Chong

    work page

  5. [5]

    Choquette

    Virtual Logical Qubits: A Compact Architecture for Fault-Tolerant Quantum Computing. IEEE Micro 41, 3 (May 2021), 95–101. https://doi.org/10.1109/mm. 2021.3072789

    work page doi:10.1109/mm 2021

  6. [6]

    Barnes, Tomasz Bialas, Okan Buğdaycı, Earl T

    Ben Barber, Kenton M. Barnes, Tomasz Bialas, Okan Buğdaycı, Earl T. Campbell, Neil I. Gillespie, Kauser Johar, Ram Rajan, Adam W. Richardson, Luka Skoric, Canberk Topal, Mark L. Turner, and Abbas B. Ziad. 2023. A real-time, scalable, fast and highly resource efficient decoder for a quantum computer. https: //doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2309.05558

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2309.05558 2023

  7. [7]

    Johannes Bausch, Andrew W Senior, Francisco J H Heras, Thomas Edlich, Alex Davies, Michael Newman, Cody Jones, Kevin Satzinger, Murphy Yuezhen Niu, Sam Blackwell, George Holland, Dvir Kafri, Juan Atalaya, Craig Gidney, Demis Hassabis, Sergio Boixo, Hartmut Neven, and Pushmeet Kohli. 2023. Learning to Decode the Surface Code with a Recurrent, Transformer-B...

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2310.05900 2023

  8. [8]

    Michael Beverland, Vadym Kliuchnikov, and Eddie Schoute. 2022. Surface Code Compilation via Edge-Disjoint Paths. PRX Quantum 3, 2 (May 2022). https: //doi.org/10.1103/prxquantum.3.020342

    work page doi:10.1103/prxquantum.3.020342 2022

  9. [9]

    Assessing requirements to scale to practical quantum advantage

    Michael E. Beverland, Prakash Murali, Matthias Troyer, Krysta M. Svore, Torsten Hoefler, Vadym Kliuchnikov, Guang Hao Low, Mathias Soeken, Aarthi Sundaram, and Alexander Vaschillo. 2022. Assessing requirements to scale to practical quantum advantage. https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2211.07629

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2211.07629 2022

  10. [10]

    Blunt, György P

    Nick S. Blunt, György P. Gehér, and Alexandra E. Moylett. 2024. Compilation of a simple chemistry application to quantum error correction primitives. Physical Review Research 6, 1 (March 2024). https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevresearch.6. 013325

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevresearch.6 2024

  11. [11]

    Evered, Alexandra A

    Dolev Bluvstein, Simon J. Evered, Alexandra A. Geim, Sophie H. Li, Hengyun Zhou, Tom Manovitz, Sepehr Ebadi, Madelyn Cain, Marcin Kalinowski, Dominik Hangleiter, J. Pablo Bonilla Ataides, Nishad Maskara, Iris Cong, Xun Gao, Pedro Sales Rodriguez, Thomas Karolyshyn, Giulia Semeghini, Michael J. Gullans, Markus Greiner, Vladan Vuletić, and Mikhail D. Lukin....

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06927-3 2023

  12. [12]

    Héctor Bombín, Chris Dawson, Ye-Hua Liu, Naomi Nickerson, Fernando Pastawski, and Sam Roberts. 2023. Modular decoding: parallelizable real-time decoding for quantum computers. https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2303.04846

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2303.04846 2023

  13. [13]

    Cross, Jay M

    Sergey Bravyi, Andrew W. Cross, Jay M. Gambetta, Dmitri Maslov, Patrick Rall, and Theodore J. Yoder. 2024. High-threshold and low-overhead fault- tolerant quantum memory. Nature 627, 8005 (March 2024), 778–782. https: //doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-07107-7

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-024-07107-7 2024

  14. [14]

    Sergey Bravyi and Jeongwan Haah. 2012. Magic-state distillation with low overhead. Physical Review A 86, 5 (Nov. 2012). https://doi.org/10.1103/physreva. 86.052329

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva 2012

  15. [15]

    Britt and Travis S

    Keith A. Britt and Travis S. Humble. 2017. High-Performance Computing with Quantum Processing Units. ACM Journal on Emerging Technologies in Computing Systems 13, 3 (March 2017), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1145/3007651

    work page doi:10.1145/3007651 2017

  16. [16]

    Ilkwon Byun, Junpyo Kim, Dongmoon Min, Ikki Nagaoka, Kosuke Fukumitsu, Iori Ishikawa, Teruo Tanimoto, Masamitsu Tanaka, Koji Inoue, and Jangwoo Kim. 2022. XQsim: modeling cross-technology control processors for 10+K qubit quantum computers. InProceedings of the 49th Annual International Symposium on Computer Architecture (ISCA ’22). ACM. https://doi.org/1...

    work page doi:10.1145/3470496.3527417 2022

  17. [17]

    Laura Caune, Brendan Reid, Joan Camps, and Earl Campbell. 2023. Belief propa- gation as a partial decoder. https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2306.17142

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2306.17142 2023

  18. [18]

    Andrew Cross, Zhiyang He, Patrick Rall, and Theodore Yoder. 2024. Improved QLDPC Surgery: Logical Measurements and Bridging Codes. arXiv:2407.18393 [quant-ph] https://arxiv.org/abs/2407.18393

    work page arXiv 2024

  19. [19]

    Open Quantum Assembly Language

    Andrew W. Cross, Lev S. Bishop, John A. Smolin, and Jay M. Gambetta. 2017. Open Quantum Assembly Language. https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.1707.03429

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1707.03429 2017

  20. [20]

    M. P. da Silva, C. Ryan-Anderson, J. M. Bello-Rivas, A. Chernoguzov, J. M. Dreiling, C. Foltz, F. Frachon, J. P. Gaebler, T. M. Gatterman, L. Grans-Samuelsson, D. Hayes, N. Hewitt, J. Johansen, D. Lucchetti, M. Mills, S. A. Moses, B. Neyenhuis, A. Paz, J. Pino, P. Siegfried, J. Strabley, A. Sundaram, D. Tom, S. J. Wernli, M. 12 Managing Classical Processi...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2404.02280 2024

  21. [21]

    Poulami Das, Aditya Locharla, and Cody Jones. 2022. LILLIPUT: a lightweight low-latency lookup-table decoder for near-term Quantum error correction. In Proceedings of the 27th ACM International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems (ASPLOS ’22) . ACM. https: //doi.org/10.1145/3503222.3507707

    work page doi:10.1145/3503222.3507707 2022

  22. [22]

    Pattison, Srilatha Manne, Douglas M

    Poulami Das, Christopher A. Pattison, Srilatha Manne, Douglas M. Carmean, Krysta M. Svore, Moinuddin Qureshi, and Nicolas Delfosse. 2022. AFS: Accurate, Fast, and Scalable Error-Decoding for Fault-Tolerant Quantum Computers. In 2022 IEEE International Symposium on High-Performance Computer Architecture (HPCA). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/hpca53966.2022.00027

    work page doi:10.1109/hpca53966.2022.00027 2022

  23. [23]

    Nicolas Delfosse. 2020. Hierarchical decoding to reduce hardware requirements for quantum computing. https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2001.11427

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2001.11427 2020

  24. [24]

    Nicolas Delfosse, Andres Paz, Alexander Vaschillo, and Krysta M. Svore. 2023. How to choose a decoder for a fault-tolerant quantum computer? The speed vs accuracy trade-off. https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2310.15313

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2310.15313 2023

  25. [25]

    Yongshan Ding, Adam Holmes, Ali Javadi-Abhari, Diana Franklin, Margaret Martonosi, and Frederic Chong. 2018. Magic-State Functional Units: Mapping and Scheduling Multi-Level Distillation Circuits for Fault-Tolerant Quantum Architectures. In 2018 51st Annual IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Mi- croarchitecture (MICRO). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/micr...

    work page doi:10.1109/micro.2018.00072 2018

  26. [26]

    Austin G. Fowler. 2015. Minimum weight perfect matching of fault-tolerant topological quantum error correction in average O(1) parallel time. Quantum Info. Comput. 15, 1–2 (jan 2015), 145–158

    work page 2015

  27. [27]

    Fowler, Matteo Mariantoni, John M

    Austin G. Fowler, Matteo Mariantoni, John M. Martinis, and Andrew N. Cle- land. 2012. Surface codes: Towards practical large-scale quantum computation. Physical Review A 86, 3 (Sept. 2012). https://doi.org/10.1103/physreva.86.032324

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.86.032324 2012

  28. [28]

    Spiro Gicev, Lloyd C. L. Hollenberg, and Muhammad Usman. 2023. A scalable and fast artificial neural network syndrome decoder for surface codes. Quantum 7 (July 2023), 1058. https://doi.org/10.22331/q-2023-07-12-1058

    work page doi:10.22331/q-2023-07-12-1058 2023

  29. [29]

    Craig Gidney. 2021. Stim: a fast stabilizer circuit simulator. Quantum 5 (July 2021), 497. https://doi.org/10.22331/q-2021-07-06-497

    work page doi:10.22331/q-2021-07-06-497 2021

  30. [30]

    Anqi Gong, Sebastian Cammerer, and Joseph M. Renes. 2024. Toward Low- latency Iterative Decoding of QLDPC Codes Under Circuit-Level Noise. https: //doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2403.18901

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2403.18901 2024

  31. [31]

    Gupta, Neereja Sundaresan, Thomas Alexander, Christopher J

    Riddhi S. Gupta, Neereja Sundaresan, Thomas Alexander, Christopher J. Wood, Seth T. Merkel, Michael B. Healy, Marius Hillenbrand, Tomas Jochym-O’Connor, James R. Wootton, Theodore J. Yoder, Andrew W. Cross, Maika Takita, and Benjamin J. Brown. 2024. Encoding a magic state with beyond break-even fidelity. Nature 625, 7994 (Jan. 2024), 259–263. https://doi....

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586- 2024

  32. [32]

    Oscar Higgott and Craig Gidney. 2023. Sparse Blossom: correcting a million errors per core second with minimum-weight matching. https://doi.org/10. 48550/ARXIV.2303.15933

    work page arXiv 2023

  33. [33]

    Quintavalle, Jens Eisert, Robert Wille, and Joschka Roffe

    Timo Hillmann, Lucas Berent, Armanda O. Quintavalle, Jens Eisert, Robert Wille, and Joschka Roffe. 2024. Localized statistics decoding: A parallel decoding algorithm for quantum low-density parity-check codes. https://doi.org/10. 48550/ARXIV.2406.18655

    work page arXiv 2024

  34. [34]

    Dominic Horsman, Austin G Fowler, Simon Devitt, and Rodney Van Meter. 2012. Surface code quantum computing by lattice surgery. New Journal of Physics 14, 12 (Dec. 2012), 123011. https://doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/14/12/123011

    work page doi:10.1088/1367-2630/14/12/123011 2012

  35. [35]

    Junpyo Kim, Dongmoon Min, Jungmin Cho, Hyeonseong Jeong, Ilkwon Byun, Junhyuk Choi, Juwon Hong, and Jangwoo Kin. 2024. A Fault-Tolerant Million Qubit-Scale Distributed Quantum Computer. In Proceedings of the 27th ACM International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems. ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3620665.3640388

    work page doi:10.1145/3620665.3640388 2024

  36. [36]

    Emanuel Knill and Raymond Laflamme. 1997. Theory of quantum error- correcting codes. Physical Review A 55, 2 (Feb. 1997), 900–911. https://doi. org/10.1103/physreva.55.900

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.55.900 1997

  37. [37]

    Tyler Leblond, Christopher Dean, George Watkins, and Ryan Bennink. 2024. Realistic Cost to Execute Practical Quantum Circuits using Direct Clifford+T Lattice Surgery Compilation. ACM Transactions on Quantum Computing 5, 4 (Oct. 2024), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1145/3689826

    work page doi:10.1145/3689826 2024

  38. [38]

    Ang Li, Samuel Stein, Sriram Krishnamoorthy, and James Ang. 2023. QASMBench: A Low-Level Quantum Benchmark Suite for NISQ Evaluation and Simulation. ACM Transactions on Quantum Computing 4, 2 (Feb. 2023), 1–26. https://doi. org/10.1145/3550488

    work page doi:10.1145/3550488 2023

  39. [39]

    Smith, Gokul Subramanian Ravi, Charles Yuan, Frederic T

    Sophia Fuhui Lin, Joshua Viszlai, Kaitlin N. Smith, Gokul Subramanian Ravi, Charles Yuan, Frederic T. Chong, and Benjamin J. Brown. 2023. Codesign of quantum error-correcting codes and modular chiplets in the presence of defects. https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2305.00138

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2305.00138 2023

  40. [40]

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

    work page doi:10.22331/q- 2019

  41. [41]

    Daniel Litinski. 2019. Magic State Distillation: Not as Costly as You Think. Quantum 3 (Dec. 2019), 205. https://doi.org/10.22331/q-2019-12-02-205

    work page doi:10.22331/q-2019-12-02-205 2019

  42. [42]

    C. L. Liu and James W. Layland. 1973. Scheduling Algorithms for Multipro- gramming in a Hard-Real-Time Environment. J. ACM 20, 1 (Jan. 1973), 46–61. https://doi.org/10.1145/321738.321743

    work page doi:10.1145/321738.321743 1973

  43. [43]

    Bardin, An- dreas Bengtsson, Alexander Bilmes, Bob B

    Matt McEwen, Lara Faoro, Kunal Arya, Andrew Dunsworth, Trent Huang, Seon Kim, Brian Burkett, Austin Fowler, Frank Arute, Joseph C. Bardin, An- dreas Bengtsson, Alexander Bilmes, Bob B. Buckley, Nicholas Bushnell, Zijun Chen, Roberto Collins, Sean Demura, Alan R. Derk, Catherine Erickson, Marissa Giustina, Sean D. Harrington, Sabrina Hong, Evan Jeffrey, Ju...

    work page doi:10.1038/s41567-021-01432-8 2021

  44. [44]

    Kai Meinerz, Chae-Yeun Park, and Simon Trebst. 2022. Scalable Neural Decoder for Topological Surface Codes. Physical Review Letters 128, 8 (Feb. 2022). https: //doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.128.080505

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.128.080505 2022

  45. [45]

    Miao, Matt McEwen, Juan Atalaya, Dvir Kafri, Leonid P

    Kevin C. Miao, Matt McEwen, Juan Atalaya, Dvir Kafri, Leonid P. Pryadko, An- dreas Bengtsson, Alex Opremcak, Kevin J. Satzinger, Zijun Chen, Paul V. Klimov, Chris Quintana, Rajeev Acharya, Kyle Anderson, Markus Ansmann, Frank Arute, Kunal Arya, Abraham Asfaw, Joseph C. Bardin, Alexandre Bourassa, Jenna Bovaird, Leon Brill, Bob B. Buckley, David A. Buell, ...

    work page doi:10.1038/s41567-023-02226-w 2023

  46. [46]

    Ramon W. J. Overwater, Masoud Babaie, and Fabio Sebastiano. 2022. Neural- Network Decoders for Quantum Error Correction Using Surface Codes: A Space Exploration of the Hardware Cost-Performance Tradeoffs. IEEE Transactions on Quantum Engineering 3 (2022), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1109/tqe.2022.3174017

    work page doi:10.1109/tqe.2022.3174017 2022

  47. [47]

    Nils Quetschlich, Lukas Burgholzer, and Robert Wille. 2023. MQT Bench: Bench- marking Software and Design Automation Tools for Quantum Computing.Quan- tum (2023). MQT Bench is available at https://www.cda.cit.tum.de/mqtbench/

    work page 2023

  48. [48]

    Baker, Arash Fayyazi, Sophia Fuhui Lin, Ali Javadi-Abhari, Massoud Pedram, and Frederic T

    Gokul Subramanian Ravi, Jonathan M. Baker, Arash Fayyazi, Sophia Fuhui Lin, Ali Javadi-Abhari, Massoud Pedram, and Frederic T. Chong. 2023. Bet- ter Than Worst-Case Decoding for Quantum Error Correction. In Proceed- ings of the 28th ACM International Conference on Architectural Support for Pro- gramming Languages and Operating Systems, Volume 2 (ASPLOS ’2...

    work page doi:10.1145/3575693.3575733 2023

  49. [49]

    Decoding across the quantum low-density parity- check code landscape

    Joschka Roffe, David R. White, Simon Burton, and Earl Campbell. 2020. Decoding across the quantum low-density parity-check code landscape. Physical Review Research 2, 4 (Dec. 2020). https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevresearch.2.043423

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevresearch.2.043423 2020

  50. [50]

    Optimal ancilla-free Clifford+T approximation of z-rotations

    Neil J. Ross and Peter Selinger. 2014. Optimal ancilla-free Clifford+T approxima- tion of z-rotations. https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.1403.2975

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1403.2975 2014

  51. [51]

    Peter W. Shor. 1995. Scheme for reducing decoherence in quantum computer memory. Physical Review A 52, 4 (Oct. 1995), R2493–R2496. https://doi.org/10. 1103/physreva.52.r2493

    work page 1995

  52. [52]

    Browne, Kenton M

    Luka Skoric, Dan E. Browne, Kenton M. Barnes, Neil I. Gillespie, and Earl T. Campbell. 2023. Parallel window decoding enables scalable fault tolerant quantum computation. Nature Communications 14, 1 (Nov. 2023). https: //doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-42482-1

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467-023-42482-1 2023

  53. [53]

    Smith, Benjamin J

    Samuel C. Smith, Benjamin J. Brown, and Stephen D. Bartlett. 2023. Local Prede- coder to Reduce the Bandwidth and Latency of Quantum Error Correction. Phys- ical Review Applied 19, 3 (March 2023). https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevapplied. 19.034050

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevapplied 2023

  54. [54]

    Houck, Isaac L

    Samuel Stein, Sara Sussman, Teague Tomesh, Charles Guinn, Esin Tureci, Sophia Fuhui Lin, Wei Tang, James Ang, Srivatsan Chakram, Ang Li, Margaret 13 1 Martonosi, Fred Chong, Andrew A. Houck, Isaac L. Chuang, and Michael De- marco. 2023. HetArch: Heterogeneous Microarchitectures for Superconducting Quantum Systems. In 56th Annual IEEE/ACM International Sym...

    work page doi:10.1145/3613424.3614300 2023

  55. [55]

    Cross, Theodore J

    Samuel Stein, Shifan Xu, Andrew W. Cross, Theodore J. Yoder, Ali Javadi-Abhari, Chenxu Liu, Kun Liu, Zeyuan Zhou, Charles Guinn, Yufei Ding, Yongshan Ding, and Ang Li. 2024. Architectures for Heterogeneous Quantum Error Correction Codes. https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2411.03202

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2411.03202 2024

  56. [56]

    Yasunari Suzuki, Takanori Sugiyama, Tomochika Arai, Wang Liao, Koji Inoue, and Teruo Tanimoto. 2022. Q3DE: A fault-tolerant quantum computer architecture for multi-bit burst errors by cosmic rays. In 2022 55th IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Microarchitecture (MICRO) . IEEE, 1110–1125. https://doi.org/10. 1109/micro56248.2022.00079

    work page arXiv 2022

  57. [57]

    Xinyu Tan, Fang Zhang, Rui Chao, Yaoyun Shi, and Jianxin Chen. 2022. Scalable surface code decoders with parallelization in time. https://doi.org/10.48550/ ARXIV.2209.09219

    work page arXiv 2022

  58. [58]

    Barbara M. Terhal. 2015. Quantum error correction for quantum memories. Reviews of Modern Physics 87, 2 (April 2015), 307–346. https://doi.org/10.1103/ revmodphys.87.307

    work page 2015

  59. [59]

    Yu Tomita and Krysta M. Svore. 2014. Low-distance surface codes under realistic quantum noise. Physical Review A 90, 6 (Dec. 2014). https://doi.org/10.1103/ physreva.90.062320

    work page 2014

  60. [60]

    Yosuke Ueno, Masaaki Kondo, Masamitsu Tanaka, Yasunari Suzuki, and Yutaka Tabuchi. 2021. QECOOL: On-Line Quantum Error Correction with a Supercon- ducting Decoder for Surface Code. In 2021 58th ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference (DAC). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/dac18074.2021.9586326

    work page doi:10.1109/dac18074.2021.9586326 2021

  61. [61]

    Yosuke Ueno, Masaaki Kondo, Masamitsu Tanaka, Yasunari Suzuki, and Yutaka Tabuchi. 2022. NEO-QEC: Neural Network Enhanced Online Superconducting Decoder for Surface Codes. https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2208.05758

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2208.05758 2022

  62. [62]

    Savvas Varsamopoulos, Ben Criger, and Koen Bertels. 2017. Decoding small sur- face codes with feedforward neural networks. Quantum Science and Technology 3, 1 (Nov. 2017), 015004. https://doi.org/10.1088/2058-9565/aa955a

    work page doi:10.1088/2058-9565/aa955a 2017

  63. [63]

    Suhas Vittal, Poulami Das, and Moinuddin Qureshi. 2023. Astrea: Accurate Quantum Error-Decoding via Practical Minimum-Weight Perfect-Matching. In Proceedings of the 50th Annual International Symposium on Computer Architecture (ISCA ’23). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3579371.3589037

    work page doi:10.1145/3579371.3589037 2023

  64. [64]

    George Watkins, Hoang Minh Nguyen, Keelan Watkins, Steven Pearce, Hoi- Kwan Lau, and Alexandru Paler. 2024. A High Performance Compiler for Very Large Scale Surface Code Computations. Quantum 8 (May 2024), 1354. https: //doi.org/10.22331/q-2024-05-22-1354

    work page doi:10.22331/q-2024-05-22-1354 2024

  65. [65]

    Stasiu Wolanski and Ben Barber. 2024. Ambiguity Clustering: an accurate and efficient decoder for qLDPC codes. https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2406.14527

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2406.14527 2024

  66. [66]

    Yue Wu, Namitha Liyanage, and Lin Zhong. 2022. An interpretation of Union- Find Decoder on Weighted Graphs. https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2211.03288

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2211.03288 2022

  67. [67]

    Ziad, Ankit Zalawadiya, Canberk Topal, Joan Camps, György P

    Abbas B. Ziad, Ankit Zalawadiya, Canberk Topal, Joan Camps, György P. Gehér, Matthew P. Stafford, and Mark L. Turner. 2024. Local Clustering Decoder: a fast and adaptive hardware decoder for the surface code. https://doi.org/10.48550/ ARXIV.2411.10343 14

    work page arXiv 2024