Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 5 minor 20 references

Angular $k$-uniformity and the Hyperinvariance of Holographic Codes

T0 review · 5 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read A geometric criterion, angular k-uniformity, determines which rotationally symmetric tensors can seed hyperinvariant holographic codes on regular hyperbolic honeycombs in any dimension.

desk verdict Real idea in the angular k-uniformity definition and the X-I code family, but the central no-go theorem is a sketch and the rate formula has a red flag; worth engaging, not ready as-is. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.06577 v1 pith:NWHIZCNI submitted 2025-06-06 hep-th quant-ph

Wanli Cheng This is my paper
classification hep-thquant-ph
keywords angulark-uniformityhyperinvarianttensornetworksholographicquantumerrorcorrectionhyperbolichoneycombsCSScodescomplementaryrecoveryuberholographymulti-tensorisometries
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper introduces a geometric criterion, angular $k$-uniformity, for deciding which rotationally symmetric tensors can seed hyperinvariant holographic codes on regular hyperbolic honeycombs of any dimension. The criterion refines earlier uniformity notions by asking for isometric behaviour only within angular sectors of a tensor's vertex figure, and the paper shows that this sector-level condition is exactly what matches the multi-tensor isometry blocks used in hyperinvariant networks. With this tool it proves a general no-go theorem: when the uniformity level $k$ reaches the facet size of the vertex figure, the network cannot be hyperinvariant and boundary correlations are trivial, whereas the genuinely higher-dimensional case $k=1$ supports nontrivial correlations. The paper supplies explicit rotationally invariant CSS vertex codes at every angular uniformity level used on honeycombs such as $\{5,3,4\}$ and $\{5,3,3,4\}$, and it computes code rate and distance scaling. If correct, the framework turns the search for higher-dimensional holographic codes into a geometric classification problem, with concrete predictions for correlations, complementary recovery, uberholography, and modular extensions.

What carries the argument

The central object is the vertex figure representation, which replaces each vertex tensor by the $(d-1)$-dimensional polytope whose vertices are the tensor's physical indices, together with the geometric uniformity condition defined on it: angular $k$-uniformity requires every strongly angularly connected subset of $k$ indices—a subset contained in one facet of the vertex figure and connected there—to define an isometry to the complementary output, while no larger subset does. This condition carries the argument because it converts the multi-tensor isometry constraints of hyperinvariant networks into a statement about angular sectors of a polytope, making the no-go theorem, the correlation behaviour, and the residual regions of complementary recovery all computable from the Schläfli symbol of the honeycomb. The constructive side of the machinery is the family of $X$–$I$ CSS codes, defined on centrosymmetric polytopes by pairing each vertex with its antipode and taking weight-two $Z$ stabilizers on antipodal pairs plus weight-four $X$ stabilizers on pairs of pairs; these codes are rotationally invariant by construction and realize every angular uniformity level used in the paper's tables.

What would settle it

Evaluate the boundary two-point correlation function $\langle Z_i Z_j\rangle$ on the explicit angular $1$-uniform $\Xi(6)$-based code on $\{5,3,4\}$; the classification predicts nontrivial correlations for $k=1$ and forced triviality at maximal $k$, so a numerical or exact evaluation that finds zero at all separations in the $k=1$ case, or nonzero in the maximal-$k$ case, would falsify it.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that hyperinvariance in holographic tensor networks is governed by a geometric refinement of uniformity that lives on the vertex figure of the lattice: a rotationally invariant vertex tensor $A$ is angular $k$-uniform when every strongly angularly connected set of $k$ physical indices—indices lying together in one facet of the vertex figure and connected in that facet's 1-skeleton—defines an isometry from the logical input plus that set to the complementary output, and no larger set does. On a regular hyperbolic honeycomb this angular sector structure matches the multi-tensor blocks exactly, so the isometry level $k$ becomes a design parameter. The paper proves a general no-go theorem: if $k$ equals the full facet size, the network is not hyperinvariant and cannot have universally nontrivial two-point boundary correlations; on $\{5,3,4\}$, angular $1$-uniformity produces genuine higher-dimensional multi-tensor blocks with nontrivial correlations, while $k=2$ gives 2D-style blocks with correlations suppressed on common $\{5,4\}$ planes. It then shows that a stronger condition, multi-angular $k$-uniformity, allows hyperinvariance, nontrivial correlations, and uberholography to coexist, and it constructs explicit $X$–$I$ CSS codes on centrosymmetric polytopes (the $\Xi(2m)$ family) that realize the required angular uniformity on vertex figures from $d=2$ through $d=4$.

Load-bearing premise

The argument's load-bearing premise is that information can only flow one way through the network, with each vertex receiving at most $k$ wires, and that a vertex already receiving the maximum number of wires will trap a local boundary operator; the paper asserts this flow picture rather than deriving it from the isometry conditions.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • On any non-simplicial regular hyperbolic honeycomb, the angular $k$-uniformity level of the vertex tensor fixes whether the network is hyperinvariant: maximal facet-sized $k$ yields a no-go situation, while $k=1$ yields genuinely higher-dimensional multi-tensor blocks with nontrivial two-point correlations.
  • For the $\{5,3,4\}$ honeycomb, the angular $1$-uniform construction leaves a two-dimensional residual region in complementary recovery, whereas the angular $2$-uniform construction leaves only a one-dimensional residual curve; the paper derives this from sector geometry.
  • Multi-angular $k$-uniformity is the condition under which hyperinvariance, nontrivial boundary correlations, and uberholography can coexist, so it extends the design space beyond perfect-tensor codes.
  • The explicit $\Xi(2m)$ CSS codes realize the required rotational invariance and angular uniformity on all regular vertex figures in two, three, and four dimensions, with code rate and distance scaling computed through recursively defined transfer matrices.
  • The framework extends to heterogeneous networks and qLEGO-style modular constructions, so at least one vertex-tensor class must be (multi-)angular $1$-uniform to support nontrivial correlations in square-faced tilings with mixed vertex degrees.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If angular $k$-uniformity is the right organizing principle, the same sector-based isometry test could be applied to numerically optimized tensor networks, where the angular sectors are not fixed by lattice symmetry but learned; the paper itself lists variational constructions as an open direction.
  • The dimensional pattern in the paper's tables suggests a general tension: as the facet size of the vertex figure grows with dimension, the gap between the no-go level and $k=1$ widens, so higher-dimensional hyperinvariant codes may need multi-angular isometries to keep correlations nontrivial.
  • A straightforward extension is to test the same criterion on simplicial honeycombs, where the paper's angular-connectivity definition needs modification; one prediction is that a mixed multi-angular condition would be required to recover the correlation results proven for non-simplicial lattices.
  • The $X$–$I$ code family may be reusable outside holography as a systematic source of rotationally symmetric CSS codes with prescribed isometry sectors, which could feed modular quantum-error-correction constructions.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

5 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper introduces a geometric refinement of k-uniformity, called angular k-uniformity, and claims that it provides a systematic framework for identifying and constructing hyperinvariant holographic tensor networks and codes on regular hyperbolic honeycombs in arbitrary dimension. The framework is illustrated with explicit CSS code constructions of the X-I family on polytopes such as the octahedron, together with Hadamard edge tensors, and with transfer-matrix estimates of code rate and distance. The paper also presents a general no-go theorem (Theorem 1) intended to explain when maximal angular k-uniformity forces trivial boundary correlations, and it extends the discussion to multi-angular uniformity, uberholography, complementary recovery, and heterogeneous/qLEGO architectures.

Significance. If the central claims were established, the paper would supply a useful geometry-aware design principle for hyperinvariant tensor networks beyond the 2D Evenbly constructions, and the explicit X-I code family is a concrete and potentially reusable ingredient. The transfer-matrix rate/distance calculations are also a concrete starting point. However, the central no-go theorem is stated without proof, the multi-tensor isometry verifications are graphical rather than algebraic, and the reported code rate contains an internal inconsistency. The geometric notion of angular k-uniformity is suggestive, but the systematic classification and construction claims currently outrun the demonstrated results.

major comments (5)
  1. [Sec. IV B, Theorem 1] Theorem 1 is the foundation of the claimed systematic classification, but it is stated without proof and the supporting argument is a DAG heuristic: the text asserts that a sink vertex with k_max inputs traps a single-site boundary operator because neighboring vertices have at most k_max-1 inputs and can treat the operator as an unknown input. This is not derived from the multi-tensor isometry conditions, and operator propagation in a tensor network is controlled by the isometry blocks rather than by graph in-degree. Since the "Corr." column of Table II is filled using this theorem, the central no-go claim is currently unsupported. In addition, for the {5,3,4} honeycomb the maximal angular k would be 3 (the facet size of the octahedral vertex figure), yet the paper analyzes only k=1,2, so the theorem is never actually confronted with the constructed examples.
  2. [Sec. IV E, Figs. 19-20] The multi-tensor isometry conditions for the X-I code constructions are said to be "graphically shown" via operator pushing, but no algebraic verification is presented. For a claim that a given tensor network block is an isometry, one must specify the block, compute the contraction of the block with its adjoint, and verify the expected identity; graphical pushing of X and Z operators is suggestive but does not by itself establish the multi-tensor isometry, especially because the edge tensors are Hadamard gates that mix the two bases. This verification is load-bearing: without it, the constructed codes cannot be certified as hyperinvariant.
  3. [Sec. IV F, Eq. (9)] The reported code rate ρ=2 for the {5,3,4} honeycomb is impossible for an isometric bulk-to-boundary encoding: it would mean that the number of logical bulk qubits is asymptotically twice the number of boundary physical qubits, so no isometric embedding of the logical space into the boundary space exists. This indicates an error in the rate formula (5)-(7), most likely in the definition of N_bulk(n) or in the u vector and normalization, and it undermines the quantitative scaling claims in this section. The rate formula should be corrected and checked against the explicit Ξ(6) construction.
  4. [Appendix A and Sec. V B.1] The abstract and introduction claim that angular k-uniformity enables "systematic identification and construction" of hyperinvariant codes on regular hyperbolic honeycombs in arbitrary dimension, but Appendix A classifies only compact regular honeycombs and omits the quasi-compact families described in Sec. III A. Moreover, many entries in Table II (e.g., the k=5,...,12 rows for {3,3,3,5}) are not accompanied by explicit vertex-code constructions; Sec. V B.1 concedes that the construction table is incomplete. The classification therefore currently exceeds what is demonstrated.
  5. [Sec. IV D, Definition 4] Multi-angular k-uniformity is underspecified: the input region I_in is an arbitrary disjoint union of angularly connected subsets, but no bound is imposed on the total size |I_in|. For the map from H_{L∪I_in} to the complement to be an isometry, one needs |L| + |I_in| ≤ n - |I_in|, i.e., |I_in| ≤ (n-|L|)/2. Without such a bound, the definition can demand an isometry that is dimensionally impossible. This needs to be fixed before the uberholography analysis in this section can be evaluated.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Sec. IV B] The paragraph beginning "As discussed in Refs. [4–7], HaPPY codes prohibit..." appears twice nearly verbatim; one copy should be removed.
  2. [Sec. V B.5] The last sentence of item 5 is incomplete: "...may broaden the applicability of angulark-uniformity in practical settings.ximate eror correcting like [19]" should be completed or deleted.
  3. [Sec. IV F, Eq. (6)] The vectors u and v(n) and the notation n, k, p are not all defined before Eq. (6); in particular, u is introduced only after Eq. (7). Please define all symbols before use.
  4. [Sec. IV B, Theorem 1] The phrase "not universally non-trivial" is ambiguous; the surrounding text interprets it as "trivial correlations", but the theorem statement should say exactly what is claimed.
  5. [Appendix B, Table III] The truncation symbols t, tr, rr are used without definitions, and the color scheme in Table II will be hard to read when printed in grayscale; consider labeling rows directly.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

The general no-go theorem's correlation predictions restate the asserted DAG in-degree model rather than follow from the isometry conditions; independent X-I code constructions and the absence of fitted parameters keep the circularity moderate.

  1. other [Sec. IV B (Theorem 1 and DAG argument, pp. 7-8); Corr. column of Tables I and II]
    "Under DAG analysis, hyperinvariance can be interpreted as the *removal* of specific directional arrows in order to cap the number of incoming edges at each vertex. ... if a sink vertex has k max inputs and is acted on by an single-site operator, then all adjacent vertices have ≤k max−1 inputs and may simply treat it as an unknown input indices and leaving the operator in a local loop without propagating its influence to deeper regions of the bulk. Hence, when k=k max, the network suppresses bulk correlation."

    Theorem 1 is stated without proof, and its correlation conclusion is justified solely by the DAG in-degree argument, but the DAG model is asserted ('the encoding structure corresponds to a directed acyclic graph (DAG) on the tiling'), not derived from the single- or multi-tensor isometry conditions. Within that model, 'maximally angular k-uniform' is definitionally 'k equals the full size of a (d−1)-dimensional facet,' i.e., the sink's in-degree k_max, and the trapping claim for a sink with k_max inputs is the theorem's own conclusion restated as a property of the model. Thus the prediction 'when k=k_max, the network suppresses bulk correlation' reduces to the DAG model's trapping premise, and the Corr.

full rationale

The paper contains no fitted parameters and no load-bearing self-citations: the 2D no-go theorem (Lemma 1) is cited from Cao, Pollack and Wang [5] and the Evenbly-code constructions from Steinberg et al. [6,7], none of which are the present author's own prior work, so the self-citation patterns (3-5) do not apply. The explicit X-I code constructions of Sec. IV E, the verified operator-pushing checks of the multi-tensor isometry conditions (Figs. 19-20), and the vertex-figure classification of Appendix B are independent, concrete content that does not reduce to the framework's definitions. The circularity concern is concentrated in Sec. IV B: the general no-go theorem is stated without proof, and its correlation conclusion ('when k=k_max, the network suppresses bulk correlation') is justified only by the DAG in-degree model, where k_max is definitionally the angular-uniformity parameter k and the trapping behavior asserted for a sink with k_max inputs is the theorem's conclusion restated. The Corr. column of Table II is thereby a repackaging of the DAG heuristic, which is partial circularity because no independent derivation from the isometry conditions is given. Separately flagged issues are correctness risks rather than circular steps: the reported code rate rho_{5,3,4}=2 in Eq. (9) exceeds unity, which is impossible for an isometric encoding; the DAG argument assumes a neighbor with k_max-1 inputs can 'treat it as an unknown input,' whereas Definition 3(i) guarantees isometry only for subsets of size exactly k, not k-1; and Sec. IV D's claim that hyperinvariance, uberholography, and nontrivial correlations can coexist is explicitly left without the required multi-tensor construction ('remains an open task'), as is the distance analysis in Sec. IV F ('will be provided in a future version'). These gaps undermine the systematic framing but do not eliminate the independent construction content, so the moderate score of 4 reflects partial definitional self-reference rather than a fully forced derivation.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The framework rests on assumptions about DAG flow and vertex-figure locality that are introduced in this paper and not rigorously established. The rate calculation appears to contain an error (ρ=2), and the explicit constructions rely on graphical proofs rather than complete formal verification.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Bulk information must be isometrically encodable into the boundary; hyperinvariance (multi-tensor isometries) is required for a well-defined holographic encoding.
    Sec. IV B: 'For an HTN or code to be well-defined, bulk information must be isometrically encodable into the boundary. If no multi-tensor isometries are enforced, then the encoding structure corresponds to a DAG.'
  • ad hoc to paper Information flow in the network is captured by a directed acyclic graph where each cell has a source and a sink, and bounding incoming edges at sinks controls operator propagation.
    Sec. IV B and Fig. 9: sink vertices with k_max inputs trap single-site operators in local loops. This is used to derive correlation suppression but is not proven.
  • domain assumption A tensor's physical indices correspond to vertices of the vertex figure, and angular connectivity within facets determines which index subsets are legitimate isometric inputs.
    Definition 1 and Definition 3: the whole framework is built on the vertex figure representation.
  • ad hoc to paper Operator pushing through Hadamard edge tensors, as shown graphically, correctly establishes the multi-tensor isometry conditions for the constructed codes.
    Sec. IV E, Fig. 19: 'The proof of the multi-tensor isometry condition is graphically shown in Fig. 19 via operator pushing.'
  • standard math Perron-Frobenius transfer-matrix analysis applies to the recursive foliation of hyperbolic honeycombs, so the asymptotic code rate and distance are governed by the largest eigenvalue.
    Sec. IV F: Eqs. (4-7) assume a transfer matrix for layer statistics, following Boyle et al. [13].

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Angular $k$-uniformity and the Hyperinvariance of Holographic Codes." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/NWHIZCNI

@misc{pith2026250606577,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Angular $k$-uniformity and the Hyperinvariance of Holographic Codes},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/NWHIZCNI}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.06577}
}
read the original abstract

Holographic quantum error-correcting codes, often realized through tensor network architectures, have emerged as compelling toy models for exploring bulk-boundary duality in AdS-CFT. By encoding bulk information into highly entangled boundary degrees of freedom, they capture key features of holography such as subregion duality, operator reconstruction, and complementary recovery. Among them, hyperinvariant tensor networks-characterized by the inclusion of edge tensors and the enforcement of multi-tensor isometries-offer a promising platform for realizing features such as state dependence and nontrivial boundary correlations. However, existing constructions are largely confined to two-dimensional regular tilings, and the structural principles underlying hyperinvariance remain poorly understood, especially in higher dimensions. To address this, we introduce a geometric criterion called angular k-uniformity, which refines standard k-uniformity and its planar variants by requiring isometric behavior within angular sectors of a tensor's rotationally symmetric layout. This condition enables the systematic identification and construction of hyperinvariant holographic codes on regular hyperbolic honeycombs in arbitrary dimension, and extends naturally to heterogeneous networks and qLEGO architectures beyond regular tilings. Altogether, angular k-uniformity provides a versatile, geometry-aware framework for analyzing and designing holographic tensor networks and codes with hyperinvariant features such as nontrivial boundary correlations and state-dependent complementary recovery.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.06577 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Tensor network representations of isometry constraints in HTNs and HICs. Red legs denote logical indices; black [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (18 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Vertex figure representations of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Vertex figure representations of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_12.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: FIG. 14 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_14.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: FIG. 15. An Ξ(4) code embedded in a square, which is first [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_15.png]
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: FIG. 16. An Ξ(6) code embedded in an octahedron, a hexagon [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_16.png]
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: FIG. 18. Four ways to construct vertex tensors for HTN/HIC on [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_18.png]
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: FIG. 19. Graphical proof of the multi-tensor isometry condition via operator pushing. The red filling on nodes represent a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_19.png]
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: FIG. 20. The graphical proof of multi-tensor isometry condition of angular 1-uniform hyperinvariant code on [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_20.png]
Figure 21
Figure 21. Figure 21: FIG. 21 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_21.png]
Figure 22
Figure 22. Figure 22: FIG. 22. The vertex figure representation of “One Pentagon” and “Five Triangles” blocks of honeycomb [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_22.png]
Figure 23
Figure 23. Figure 23: FIG. 23. The decomposition of “Two Hundred Two Tetrahedra”. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_23.png]
Figure 24
Figure 24. Figure 24: FIG. 24. The decomposition of “Two Hundred Sixty-Two Tetrahedra”. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_24.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

20 extracted references · 19 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    The LargeNlimit of supercon- formal field theories and supergravity.Adv

    Juan Martin Maldacena. The LargeNlimit of supercon- formal field theories and supergravity.Adv. Theor. Math. Phys., 2:231–252, 1998

    work page 1998

  2. [2]

    Holographic derivation of entanglement entropy from the anti–de sit- ter space/conformal field theory correspondence.Phys

    Shinsei Ryu and Tadashi Takayanagi. Holographic derivation of entanglement entropy from the anti–de sit- ter space/conformal field theory correspondence.Phys. Rev. Lett., 96:181602, May 2006

    work page 2006

  3. [3]

    Holographic quantum error-correcting codes: toy models for the bulk/boundary correspon- dence.Journal of High Energy Physics, 2015:1–55, 06 2015

    Fernando Pastawski, Beni Yoshida, John Preskill, and Daniel Harlow. Holographic quantum error-correcting codes: toy models for the bulk/boundary correspon- dence.Journal of High Energy Physics, 2015:1–55, 06 2015

    work page 2015

  4. [4]

    1-isometry

    *Ais not a perfect tensor. While this condition serves as a necessary criterion for distinguishing nontrivial constructions on general{p, q} hyperbolic tilings with evenq >4, and is sufficient for the special case{p,4}, it does not fully characterize hyper- invariance in general settings. In Sec. IV, we introduce the stronger notions of angulark-uniformit...

    work page

  5. [5]

    Hyper-invariant tensor networks and holography.Phys

    Glen Evenbly. Hyper-invariant tensor networks and holography.Phys. Rev. Lett., 119:141602, 10 2017. 17

    work page 2017

  6. [6]

    Hyperin- variant multiscale entanglement renormalization ansatz: Approximate holographic error correction codes with power-law correlations.Phys

    ChunJun Cao, Jason Pollack, and Yixu Wang. Hyperin- variant multiscale entanglement renormalization ansatz: Approximate holographic error correction codes with power-law correlations.Phys. Rev. D, 105:026018, Jan 2022

    work page 2022

  7. [7]

    Far from perfect: Quantum error correction with (hyperinvariant) evenbly codes, 07 2024

    Matthew Steinberg, Junyu Fan, Robert Harris, David Elkouss, Sebastian Feld, and Alexander Jahn. Far from perfect: Quantum error correction with (hyperinvariant) evenbly codes, 07 2024

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    Holographic codes from hyperinvariant tensor networks

    Matthew Steinberg, Sebastian Feld, and Alexander Jahn. Holographic codes from hyperinvariant tensor networks. Nature Communications, 14:7314, 11 2023

    work page 2023

Show all 20 references
  1. [9]

    Absolute maximal en- tanglement and quantum secret sharing.Phys

    Wolfram Helwig, Wei Cui, Jos´ e Ignacio Latorre, Ar- nau Riera, and Hoi-Kwong Lo. Absolute maximal en- tanglement and quantum secret sharing.Phys. Rev. A, 86:052335, Nov 2012

    2012

  2. [10]

    Latorre, Arnau Riera, and Karol ˙Zyczkowski

    Dardo Goyeneche, Daniel Alsina, Jos´ e I. Latorre, Arnau Riera, and Karol ˙Zyczkowski. Absolutely maximally en- tangled states, combinatorial designs, and multiunitary matrices.Phys. Rev. A, 92:032316, Sep 2015

    2015

  3. [11]

    Planar maximally entangled states.Phys

    Mehregan Doroudiani and Vahid Karimipour. Planar maximally entangled states.Phys. Rev. A, 102:012427, Jul 2020

    2020

  4. [12]

    YL. Wang. Planar k-uniform states: a generalization of planar maximally entangled states.Quantum Inf Process, 20(271), Aug 2021

    2021

  5. [13]

    Harris, Nathan A

    Robert J. Harris, Nathan A. McMahon, Gavin K. Bren- nen, and Thomas M. Stace. Calderbank-shor-steane holo- graphic quantum error-correcting codes.Phys. Rev. A, 98:052301, Nov 2018

    2018

  6. [14]

    Con- formal quasicrystals and holography.Phys

    Latham Boyle, Madeline Dickens, and Felix Flicker. Con- formal quasicrystals and holography.Phys. Rev. X, 10:011009, Jan 2020

    2020

  7. [15]

    Universal fault- tolerant logic with heterogeneous holographic codes

    Matthew Steinberg, Junyu Fan, Jens Eisert, Sebastian Feld, Alexander Jahn, and Chunjun Cao. Universal fault- tolerant logic with heterogeneous holographic codes. 4 2025

    2025

  8. [16]

    Quantum Lego: Build- ing Quantum Error Correction Codes from Tensor Net- works.PRX Quantum, 3(2):020332, 2022

    ChunJun Cao and Brad Lackey. Quantum Lego: Build- ing Quantum Error Correction Codes from Tensor Net- works.PRX Quantum, 3(2):020332, 2022

    2022

  9. [17]

    Gullans, Brad Lackey, and Zi- tao Wang

    ChunJun Cao, Michael J. Gullans, Brad Lackey, and Zi- tao Wang. Quantum Lego Expansion Pack: Enumera- tors from Tensor Networks.PRX Quantum, 5(3):030313, 2024

    2024

  10. [18]

    LEGO HQEC: A Software Tool for Analyzing Holo- graphic Quantum Codes

    Junyu Fan, Matthew Steinberg, Alexander Jahn, Chunjun Cao, Aritra Sarkar, and Sebastian Feld. LEGO HQEC: A Software Tool for Analyzing Holo- graphic Quantum Codes. 10 2024

    2024

  11. [19]

    Quantum Lego and XP Stabilizer Codes

    Ruohan Shen, Yixu Wang, and ChunJun Cao. Quantum Lego and XP Stabilizer Codes. 10 2023

    2023

  12. [20]

    Residual

    ChunJun Cao and Brad Lackey. Approximate Bacon- Shor Code and Holography.JHEP, 05:127, 2021. 18 Appendix A: Summary of Results T ABLE II:Summary of properties of hyperinvariant holographic tensor networks and codes on compact regular hyperbolic tiling/honeycombs. Lattice Unifo...

    2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.