Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 49 references

For the qutrit Clifford+R gate set, the paper claims an explicit Bruhat-Tits tree in which pure vertices have valence 4, alternating vertices valence 2, and exact synthesis is a path traversal, yielding a new proof of arithmeticity.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

An explicit tree is proposed for the qutrit Clifford+R gate set as a new proof of the known ring characterization, but the tree's degree structure is miscomputed.

T0 review reviewed 2026-08-04 challenge →

load-bearing objection The alternative proof collapses on a miscount in Lemma 4.15; the paper is still a useful exposition but not a valid research contribution. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2510.11526 v3 pith:35LQWLAS submitted 2025-10-13 quant-ph

Buildings for Synthesis with Clifford+R

Mark Deaconu , Nihar Gargava , Amolak Ratan Kalra , Michele Mosca , Jon Yard This is my paper
classification quant-ph MSC 51E2420G2511E3981P68
keywords Clifford+Rqutrit exact synthesisBruhat-Tits buildingarithmeticitylattice chainsunitary group U3orbit-stabilizerfinite field bilinear forms
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

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 is trying to establish that the qutrit Clifford+R gate set is the visible part of a discrete geometric object: the Bruhat-Tits building of the unitary group $U_3$ over the local field $Q_3(\omega)$. Concretely, it describes this building as an infinite bipartite tree whose pure vertices have valence 4 and whose alternating vertices have valence 2, and it uses this description to give a new proof, by orbit-stabilizer counting, that Clifford+R generates exactly the unitaries with entries in $Z[\chi^{-1}]$. If the construction is correct, exact synthesis becomes a graph problem: a target unitary corresponds to a vertex, and building a circuit is walking from the origin to that vertex. The high-level consequence is a geometric reason why this gate set is arithmetic rather than thin, the property that makes efficient synthesis feasible.

Core claim

The central claim is that the Bruhat-Tits building of $U_3(F_\pi)$ — where $F_\pi$ is the completion of $Q(\omega)$ at the prime $\pi = 1-\omega$ — is a tree whose vertices are self-dual lattice chains. In this tree, every edge joins a pure vertex (a $\pi$-scaling orbit of a self-dual lattice) to an alternating vertex (an orbit of a pair $\Lambda, \Lambda^\sharp$), and the paper derives valences 4 and 2 by counting isotropic subspaces over $F_3$. Using this local structure, the paper proves the graph is connected and then shows that every pure vertex at distance 4 from the origin lies in the orbit of $H e_0$ under the stabilizer of the origin. Iterating that step pushes any target vertex back to the origin through Clifford+R moves, producing

What carries the argument

The central object is the Bruhat-Tits building $B$, realized through the lattice-chain model: vertices are self-dual lattice chains in $F_\pi^3$ up to scaling. The local geometry is controlled by reducing the Hermitian form modulo $\pi$, turning a pure vertex into a symmetric bilinear form on $F_3^3$ (four isotropic lines, so valence 4) and an alternating vertex into an antisymmetric form (claimed to give two self-dual planes, so valence 2). Connectedness is proved with the Cartan decomposition and the length function $l(g) = -2 \min_{i,j} v_\pi(g_{ij})$, which measures distance from the origin. The final identification uses orbit-stabilizer counting on the sphere of radius 4, with the stabilizer of the orig

Load-bearing premise

The proof's load-bearing premise is Lemma 4.15's claim that exactly two 2-dimensional subspaces $V$ containing the fixed line spanned by $(0,b,-a)$ satisfy $V^\perp = V$; if the actual count is four, the alternating valence changes and the orbit-stabilizer calculation breaks.

What would settle it

Enumerate all 2-dimensional subspaces of $F_3^3$ that contain $v = (0,b,-a)$ for $(a,b) \in F_3^2 \setminus \{(0,0)\}$ and test $V^\perp = V$; obtaining four subspaces instead of two contradicts Lemma 4.15, and recomputing $|S_v| = \#U_3(O_\pi) e_1$ then gives 108, not 12.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • If the building description holds, every exactly synthesizable qutrit unitary corresponds to a walk in the tree, and circuit length is (up to a constant) the distance from the origin.
  • The orbit-stabilizer argument, if correct, gives a new proof of arithmeticity of Clifford+R, independent of the earlier algebraic characterization, and rules out thinness.
  • The finite-field classification of isotropic subspaces pins down the valence pattern, so the building is explicitly computable rather than abstract.
  • The sphere-of-radius-four calculation shows that the stabilizer acts transitively on vertices at distance 4 from the origin, a regularity that could support a deterministic synthesis algorithm.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • A direct check of Lemma 4.15 suggests the number of self-dual 2-dimensional subspaces is four, not two; if so, alternating vertices would have valence 4 and the orbit-stabilizer count would become 108 rather than 12, so the proof as written would not go through — though a modified graph with different valences might still carry the arithmeticity argument.
  • If the corrected count is used, the claimed bipartite 4/2 tree is replaced by a graph of valences 4/4; a natural test is whether that graph is still connected and whether the length function still matches edge distance.
  • The same lattice-chain blueprint should generalize to other primes p and to higher dimensions, with valence counts read from isotropic subspace counts over F_p; those counts are known and can be checked computationally before building a synthesis algorithm.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper studies exact synthesis for the qutrit Clifford+R gate set. Its main new contribution is an explicit description of the Bruhat-Tits building of the group U3(Z[χ^{-1}]) as a biregular tree with pure vertices of valence 4 and alternating vertices of valence 2, and it uses this tree to propose an alternative proof of the arithmeticity theorem for Clifford+R (Theorem 1, originally Theorem 5.5 of [30]). The proof strategy is orbit–stabilizer counting: identify the stabilizer of the origin, compute the orbit of a vertex at distance 4, and inductively pull pure vertices toward the origin along the tree.

Significance. If correct, the geometric tree model would be a useful conceptual bridge between Bruhat-Tits theory and qudit gate synthesis, giving a path-traversal picture for exact synthesis and an independent proof of arithmeticity. The paper is clearly written and the lattice-chain exposition is valuable. However, the central new claim is not correct: the alternating-vertex valence is miscalculated, and the finite-group computations on which the alternative proof of Theorem 1 relies are asserted inconsistently. No machine-checked proofs or reproducible code accompany the claims.

major comments (3)
  1. [Lemma 4.15 / Proposition 4.20] The count in Lemma 4.15 is wrong. For the alternating form ⟨x,y⟩_A = a(x1y2−x2y1)+b(x1y3−x3y1), the radical is the line F3·v with v=(0,b,-a). A 2-dimensional subspace V containing this radical corresponds to a line L in the nondegenerate symplectic quotient F3^3/F3·v. In a 2-dimensional symplectic space over F3 every line satisfies L^⊥=L, so all four 2-dimensional subspaces containing the radical are self-dual. The proof identifies only the two lines spanned by (±1,±1), missing the two coordinate-axis lines. Consequently Proposition 4.20 should give valence 4, not 2. This is load-bearing for the claimed biregular tree structure.
  2. [Proof of Theorem 1, §5.2] The orbit–stabilizer argument fails once the valence is corrected. In the claimed (4,2)-biregular tree one obtains #S_v = 12, but if alternating vertices have valence 4 the tree is 4-regular and #S_v = 108. Additionally, the printed finite-group orders are internally inconsistent: 6!·6^3 = 155520, not 1296, and #G=108 is asserted without derivation. The transitivity assertion U3(Oπ)e1 = S_v is therefore not supported by the displayed computation, and the alternative proof of arithmeticity does not go through as written.
  3. [Theorem 1 and [30] dependence] The main theorem is quoted verbatim from the authors' own prior work [30]. The new proof is intended to be independent, but it relies on asserted finite-group computations and leaves the a=0 case of Lemma 4.15 to the reader. This would be acceptable for a routine lemma, but here the finite-group orders are the load-bearing step of the orbit–stabilizer argument, so the claimed independent verification of arithmeticity is not reproducible from the manuscript.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Proposition 4.20] The statement says an alternating vertex is connected to '2 alternating vertices in PB'; the intended meaning is clearly '2 pure vertices', and this should be corrected.
  2. [Lemma 4.15] The displayed matrix for A is garbled. It should be written explicitly, e.g. A_{12}=a, A_{13}=b, A_{21}=-a, A_{31}=-b, all other entries zero, so the radical and the self-dual subspaces can be checked directly.
  3. [Lemma 4.7] The indexing argument for the bijection d is too terse and the notation d(2j)=0 is confusing. Spell out the shift by the anchor point explicitly.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the paper explicitly quotes the arithmeticity theorem from its own prior work [30], but the new Bruhat-Tits-building construction is attempted as an independent derivation, not as a restatement of the theorem. The serious problems in the paper are unproved or incorrect finite-field and finite-group counts, which are correctness issues rather than circularity.

full rationale

The central theorem, ⟨H,S,R⟩ = U3(Z[χ^{-1}]), is explicitly labeled as Theorem 5.5 of [30], and the paper says 'This theorem was first proven in [30]. In this paper, we give an entirely different proof by explicitly constructing the Bruhat-Tits building.' Thus the quoted self-citation is not disguised as a new result; it is the target being re-proved. The new proof does not, on its face, use the theorem from [30] as an input to the orbit-stabilizer counting. The building is defined from self-dual lattice chains, and the claimed valences are derived from finite-field counts (Lemmas 4.14 and 4.15). No parameter is fitted to data, and no prediction is defined in terms of the quantity it claims to predict. The substantive concerns raised by the reader are mathematical correctness concerns, not circularity: Lemma 4.15 appears to undercount self-dual 2-planes, and the proof of Theorem 1 asserts finite-group orders without derivation, with the printed value '#U3(Oπ)=6!×6^3=1296' being arithmetically inconsistent. Those issues, if real, invalidate the purported alternative proof, but they do not reduce the claimed derivation to its own inputs. Accordingly, the circularity score is 0.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

This is a pure mathematics paper with no fitted parameters. The central claim rests on standard number-theoretic machinery, on the lattice-chain model of buildings taken from [46], and on two computational inputs: a subspace count (Lemma 4.15) and a finite-group order computation. One of those inputs is wrong and the other is both unverified and internally inconsistent, which is where the paper's claimed structure breaks.

axioms (5)
  • standard math Cartan decomposition for GL_n over a local field (Theorem 2), used in Lemmas 5.2-5.4 and Prop 4.22.
    Cited to [48]; standard result of the local-field theory.
  • domain assumption Lattice-chain models faithfully represent the Bruhat-Tits building of the unitary group (Definition 4.1, from [46]).
    The whole construction of B as self-dual lattice chains rests on this modeling framework.
  • standard math Non-degenerate quadratic forms over finite fields of odd characteristic are diagonalizable (Lemma 4.14, from [49]).
    Standard and correctly applied; the count of four isotropic lines in Lemma 4.14 checks out.
  • domain assumption The stabilizer of the origin e_0 in U_3(Fπ) is U_3(Oπ), and self-dual lattices correspond to pure vertices of the building.
    Standard lattice-chain model assumption inherited from the cited framework.
  • ad hoc to paper Asserted finite-group computations: |U3(Oπ)| = 1296 (printed factorization 6!·6³, which equals 155520, is inconsistent) and |G| = 108.
    No derivation or artifact is provided; the paper says 'by calculating these finite groups explicitly'. The factorization error and the tension with the corrected tree geometry (which requires |G| = 12 for a transitive action on S_v) make this an unverified premise.

reviewed 2026-08-04 · how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Buildings for Synthesis with Clifford+R." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/35LQWLAS

@misc{pith2026251011526,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Buildings for Synthesis with Clifford+R},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/35LQWLAS}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2510.11526}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

We study the problem of exact synthesis for the Clifford+R gate set and give the explicit structure of the underlying Bruhat-Tits building for this group. In this process, we also give an alternative proof of the arithmetic nature of this gate set.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2510.11526 by Amolak Ratan Kalra, Jon Yard, Mark Deaconu, Michele Mosca, Nihar Gargava.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: An alternating vertex connected to two pure vertices [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: What a loop would look like in B by starting at A0 and forming a chain of subsets on the left diagonal, then starting at A0 ♯ and forming a chain of subsets on the right diagonal you arrive at the following relations: π nAn ⊂ A0 A ♯ 0 ⊂ π −nA ♯ n this relationship implies that you can form the following self-dual lattice chain · · · ⊂ (π nAn) ⊂ A0 ⊂ S0 ⊂ A ♯ 0 ⊂ (π nAn) ♯ ⊂ . . . The above chain is a 2-sim… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: A pure vertex connected to four alternating vertices via the four isotropic lines [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Vertices up to distance 6 from the center of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The section Sv of the tree, as well as the dotted path from e0 to v. We also have that Stab(e0, Γ) = U3(Oπ) =⇒ Stab(e1, Γ) = H−1U3(Oπ)H. So the group G = {g ∈ Stab(e0, Γ) | ge1 = e1} = H−1 U3(Oπ)H ∩ U3(Oπ). By calculating these finite groups explicitly, we know that #G = 108, whereas # U3(Oπ) = 6! × 6 3 = 1296. By the orbit-stabilizer theorem, we get that # U3(Oπ)e1 = 12 and hence we are done. 6 Acknowledg… view at source ↗

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

49 extracted references · 7 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Quantum error correction of qudits beyond break-even,

    B. L. Brock, S. Singh, A. Eickbusch, V. V. Sivak, A. Z. Ding, L. Frunzio, S. M. Girvin, and M. H. Devoret, “Quantum error correction of qudits beyond break-even,” Nature641(2025), no. 8063 612–618. 23

    2025

  2. [2]

    A universal qudit quantum processor with trapped ions,

    M. Ringbauer, M. Meth, L. Postler, R. Stricker, R. Blatt, P. Schindler, and T. Monz, “A universal qudit quantum processor with trapped ions,”Nature Physics18(jul,

  3. [3]

    Control and readout of a 13-level Trapped Ion Qudit,

    P. J. Low, B. White, and C. Senko, “Control and readout of a 13-level Trapped Ion Qudit,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.03340(2023)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  4. [4]

    Efficient two-qutrit gates in superconducting circuits using parametric coupling,

    M. Subramanian and A. Lupascu, “Efficient two-qutrit gates in superconducting circuits using parametric coupling,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.05766(2023)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  5. [5]

    Accurate and robust unitary transformations of a high-dimensional quantum System,

    B. E. Anderson, H. Sosa-Martinez, C. A. Riofrío, I. H. Deutsch, and P. S. Jessen, “Accurate and robust unitary transformations of a high-dimensional quantum System,”Phys. Rev. Lett.114(Jun, 2015) 240401

    2015

  6. [6]

    Qutrit quantum computer with trapped ions,

    A. B. Klimov, R. Guzmán, J. C. Retamal, and C. Saavedra, “Qutrit quantum computer with trapped ions,”Phys. Rev. A67(Jun, 2003) 062313

    2003

  7. [7]

    Molecular spin qudits for quantum algorithms,

    E. Moreno-Pineda, C. Godfrin, F. Balestro, W. Wernsdorfer, and M. Ruben, “Molecular spin qudits for quantum algorithms,”Chem. Soc. Rev.47(2018) 501–513

    2018

  8. [8]

    Surpassing millisecond coherence in on chip superconducting quantum memories by optimizing materials and circuit design,

    S. Ganjam, Y. Wang, Y. Lu, A. Banerjee, C. U. Lei, L. Krayzman, K. Kisslinger, C. Zhou, R. Li, Y. Jia,et. al., “Surpassing millisecond coherence in on chip superconducting quantum memories by optimizing materials and circuit design,” Nature Communications15(2024), no. 1 3687

    2024

  9. [9]

    Factoring with qutrits: Shor’s algorithm on ternary and metaplectic quantum architectures,

    A. Bocharov, M. Roetteler, and K. M. Svore, “Factoring with qutrits: Shor’s algorithm on ternary and metaplectic quantum architectures,”Physical Review A96 (July, 2017)

    2017

  10. [10]

    Improved quantum ternary arithmetics,

    A. Bocharov, S. X. Cui, M. Roetteler, and K. M. Svore, “Improved quantum ternary arithmetics,”arXiv preprint arXiv:1512.03824(2015)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  11. [11]

    A note on optimality of quantum circuits over metaplectic basis,

    A. Bocharov, “A note on optimality of quantum circuits over metaplectic basis,” 2016

    2016

  12. [12]

    Magic state distillation with the ternary Golay code,

    S. Prakash, “Magic state distillation with the ternary Golay code,”Proceedings of the Royal Society A476(2020), no. 2241 20200187

    2020

  13. [13]

    Low overhead qutrit magic state distillation,

    S. Prakash and T. Saha, “Low overhead qutrit magic state distillation,” 2024

    2024

  14. [14]

    Qudit color codes and gauge color codes in all spatial dimensions,

    F. H. E. Watson, E. T. Campbell, H. Anwar, and D. E. Browne, “Qudit color codes and gauge color codes in all spatial dimensions,”Phys. Rev. A92(Aug, 2015) 022312

    2015

  15. [15]

    Noisy qudit vs multiple qubits: conditions on gate efficiency for enhancing fidelity,

    D. Janković, J.-G. Hartmann, M. Ruben, and P.-A. Hervieux, “Noisy qudit vs multiple qubits: conditions on gate efficiency for enhancing fidelity,”npj Quantum Information10(2024), no. 1 59

    2024

  16. [16]

    Contextual bound states for qudit magic state distillation,

    S. Prakash and A. Gupta, “Contextual bound states for qudit magic state distillation,”Phys. Rev. A101(Jan, 2020) 010303

    2020

  17. [17]

    Simulating two-dimensional lattice gauge theories on a qudit quantum computer,

    M. Meth, J. Zhang, J. F. Haase, C. Edmunds, L. Postler, A. J. Jena, A. Steiner, L. Dellantonio, R. Blatt, P. Zoller,et. al., “Simulating two-dimensional lattice gauge theories on a qudit quantum computer,”Nature Physics(2025) 1–7

    2025

  18. [18]

    Simulating neutrino oscillations on a superconducting qutrit,

    H. C. Nguyen, B. G. Bach, T. D. Nguyen, D. M. Tran, D. V. Nguyen, and H. Q. Nguyen, “Simulating neutrino oscillations on a superconducting qutrit,”Phys. Rev. D108(Jul, 2023) 023013. 24

    2023

  19. [19]

    Qutrit circuits and algebraic relations: A pathway to efficient spin-1 Hamiltonian simulation,

    O. Ogunkoya, J. Kim, B. Peng, A. B. i. e. i. f. m. e. c. Özg¨ uler, and Y. Alexeev, “Qutrit circuits and algebraic relations: A pathway to efficient spin-1 Hamiltonian simulation,”Phys. Rev. A109(Jan, 2024) 012426

    2024

  20. [20]

    Qudit gate decomposition dependence for lattice gauge theories,

    D. M. Kürkçüoglu, H. Lamm, and A. Maestri, “Qudit gate decomposition dependence for lattice gauge theories,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.16414(2024)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  21. [21]

    Qudits and High-Dimensional Quantum Computing,

    Y. Wang, Z. Hu, B. C. Sanders, and S. Kais, “Qudits and High-Dimensional Quantum Computing,”Frontiers in Physics8(2020)

    2020

  22. [22]

    Fast and efficient exact synthesis of single-qubit unitaries generated by Clifford and T gates,

    V. Kliuchnikov, D. Maslov, and M. Mosca, “Fast and efficient exact synthesis of single-qubit unitaries generated by Clifford and T gates,”Quantum Info. Comput. 13(jul, 2013) 607–630

    2013

  23. [23]

    A framework for exact synthesis,

    V. Kliuchnikov and J. Yard, “A framework for exact synthesis,”arXiv preprint arXiv:1504.04350(2015)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  24. [24]

    Number-theoretic characterizations of some restricted Clifford+Tcircuits,

    M. Amy, A. N. Glaudell, and N. J. Ross, “Number-theoretic characterizations of some restricted Clifford+Tcircuits,”Quantum4(apr, 2020) 252

    2020

  25. [25]

    Exact synthesis of single-qubit unitaries over Clifford-cyclotomic gate sets,

    S. Forest, D. Gosset, V. Kliuchnikov, and D. McKinnon, “Exact synthesis of single-qubit unitaries over Clifford-cyclotomic gate sets,”Journal of Mathematical Physics56(aug, 2015) 082201

    2015

  26. [26]

    Optimal ancilla-free Clifford+ V approximation of z-rotations,

    N. J. Ross, “Optimal ancilla-free Clifford+ V approximation of z-rotations,”arXiv preprint arXiv:1409.4355(2014)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  27. [27]

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

    N. J. Ross and P. Selinger, “Optimal ancilla-free Clifford+T approximation of z-rotations,”Quantum Info. Comput.16(Sept., 2016) 901–953

    2016

  28. [28]

    A framework for approximating Qubit unitaries,

    V. Kliuchnikov, A. Bocharov, M. Roetteler, and J. Yard, “A framework for approximating Qubit unitaries,” 2015

    2015

  29. [29]

    Shorter quantum circuits via single-qubit gate approximation,

    V. Kliuchnikov, K. Lauter, R. Minko, A. Paetznick, and C. Petit, “Shorter quantum circuits via single-qubit gate approximation,”Quantum7(Dec., 2023) 1208

    2023

  30. [30]

    Synthesis and arithmetic of single qutrit circuits,

    A. R. Kalra, M. Mosca, and D. Valluri, “Synthesis and arithmetic of single qutrit circuits,”Quantum9(Feb., 2025) 1647

    2025

  31. [31]

    Arithmeticity and covering rate of the9-cyclotomic Clifford+Dgates inPU(3),

    S. Evra and O. Parzanchevski, “Arithmeticity and covering rate of the9-cyclotomic Clifford+Dgates inPU(3),” 2024

    2024

  32. [32]

    Multi-qutrit exact synthesis,

    A. R. Kalra, M. Saikia, D. Valluri, S. Winnick, and J. Yard, “Multi-qutrit exact synthesis,” 2024

    2024

  33. [33]

    Exact synthesis of multiqutrit Clifford-cyclotomic circuits,

    A. N. Glaudell, N. J. Ross, J. van de Wetering, and L. Yeh, “Exact synthesis of multiqutrit Clifford-cyclotomic circuits,”Electronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science406(Aug., 2024) 44–62

    2024

  34. [34]

    Normal form for single-qutrit Clifford+ T operators and synthesis of single-qutrit gates,

    S. Prakash, A. Jain, B. Kapur, and S. Seth, “Normal form for single-qutrit Clifford+ T operators and synthesis of single-qutrit gates,”Physical Review A98(2018), no. 3 032304

    2018

  35. [35]

    Qutrit magic state distillation,

    H. Anwar, E. T. Campbell, and D. E. Browne, “Qutrit magic state distillation,”New Journal of Physics14(2012), no. 6 063006

    2012

  36. [36]

    Universal quantum computation with metaplectic anyons,

    S. X. Cui and Z. Wang, “Universal quantum computation with metaplectic anyons,” Journal of Mathematical Physics56(2015), no. 3

    2015

  37. [37]

    Efficient topological compilation for a weakly integral anyonic model,

    A. Bocharov, X. Cui, V. Kliuchnikov, and Z. Wang, “Efficient topological compilation for a weakly integral anyonic model,”Physical Review A93(Jan., 2016). 25

    2016

  38. [38]

    Qutrit Metaplectic Gates Are a Subset of Clifford+T,

    A. N. Glaudell, N. J. Ross, J. van de Wetering, and L. Yeh, “Qutrit Metaplectic Gates Are a Subset of Clifford+T,” in17th Conference on the Theory of Quantum Computation, Communication and Cryptography (TQC 2022)(F. Le Gall and T. Morimae, eds.), vol. 232 ofLeibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), (Dagstuhl, Germany), pp. 12:1–12:15, Sch...

    2022

  39. [39]

    Efficient topological compilation for a weakly integral anyonic model,

    A. Bocharov, X. Cui, V. Kliuchnikov, and Z. Wang, “Efficient topological compilation for a weakly integral anyonic model,”Physical Review A93(jan, 2016)

    2016

  40. [40]

    Synthesis of single qutrit circuits from Clifford+R,

    E. J. Gustafson, H. Lamm, D. Liu, E. M. Murairi, and S. Zhu, “Synthesis of single qutrit circuits from Clifford+R,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.20203(2025)

    arXiv 2025

  41. [41]

    Finiteness theorems for discrete subgroups of bounded covolume in semi-simple groups,

    A. Borel and G. Prasad, “Finiteness theorems for discrete subgroups of bounded covolume in semi-simple groups,”Publications Mathématiques de l’IHÉS69(1989) 119–171

    1989

  42. [42]

    Volumes of S-arithmetic quotients of semi-simple groups,

    G. Prasad, “Volumes of S-arithmetic quotients of semi-simple groups,”Publications Mathématiques de l’IHÉS69(1989) 91–114

    1989

  43. [43]

    Multi-qubit circuit synthesis and Hermitian lattices,

    V. Kliuchnikov and S. Schönnenbeck, “Multi-qubit circuit synthesis and Hermitian lattices,” 2024

    2024

  44. [44]

    Super-golden-gates for PU(2),

    O. Parzanchevski and P. Sarnak, “Super-golden-gates for PU(2),”Advances in Mathematics327(2018) 869–901

    2018

  45. [45]

    Fast navigation with icosahedral golden gates,

    T. R. Blackman and Z. Stier, “Fast navigation with icosahedral golden gates,” Quantum Information and Computation23(2023), no. 11&12 0901–0923

    2023

  46. [46]

    Lattice chain models for affine buildings of classical type,

    P. Abramenko and G. Nebe, “Lattice chain models for affine buildings of classical type,”Mathematische Annalen322(2002) 537–562

    2002

  47. [47]

    Notes on thin matrix groups,

    P. Sarnak, “Notes on thin matrix groups,”arXiv preprint arXiv:1212.3525(2012)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  48. [48]

    Representation theory of GL(n) over non-Archimedean local fields,

    D. Prasad and A. Raghuram, “Representation theory of GL(n) over non-Archimedean local fields,”preprint(2001)

    2001

  49. [49]

    Lidl and H

    R. Lidl and H. Niederreiter,Finite fields. No. 20. Cambridge university press, 1997. 26

    1997

This paper was first reviewed by deepseek-v4-flash on August 4, 2026.