arxiv: 2512.09189 · v1 · submitted 2025-12-09 · 🪐 quant-ph

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Exact and Efficient Stabilizer Simulation of Thermal-Relaxation Noise for Quantum Error Correction

Sean R. Garner , Nathan M. Myers , Meng Wang , Samuel Stein , Chenxu Liu , Ang Li

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-16 23:27 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph

keywords stabilizer simulationthermal relaxationamplitude dampingquantum error correctionsurface codesClifford decompositiondephasing

0 comments

The pith

Thermal relaxation noise admits an exact positive decomposition into Clifford operations and resets when T2 is at most T1.

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

The paper establishes that the combined amplitude damping and dephasing channel can be represented exactly as a mixture of Clifford gates and qubit resets in the stabilizer formalism whenever T2 is less than or equal to T1. This representation remains fully positive, avoiding the distortions that the Pauli-twirling approximation introduces when modeling physically relevant noise. Accurate simulation matters because it determines how well error-correcting codes suppress errors and how effectively decoders can be trained on realistic hardware noise. The authors extend the construction to finite temperature and apply it to large surface codes and bivariate bicycle codes, revealing that logical performance varies across code states under the exact thermal model.

Core claim

The combined amplitude damping and dephasing channel admits a fully positive probability decomposition into Clifford operations and reset whenever T2 ≤ T1. For T2 > T1 the decomposition carries negative probabilities but still yields a smaller sampling overhead than treating the channels independently. An approximated reset-inclusive channel removes the negativity while maintaining higher fidelity to the true thermal relaxation than the Pauli-twirling approximation.

What carries the argument

The positive probability decomposition of the combined thermal relaxation channel into Clifford operations and qubit reset.

If this is right

Stabilizer-based simulators can now incorporate exact thermal relaxation without Pauli-twirling distortions or extra sampling cost when T2 ≤ T1.
Surface codes and bivariate bicycle codes exhibit different logical error rates depending on the prepared state under realistic superconducting thermal noise.
Noise-model-informed decoders become necessary to exploit the structure of thermal relaxation.
Finite-temperature extensions preserve the same Clifford-plus-reset form.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

Decoders trained on this exact model may achieve lower logical error rates on hardware where T2 is comparable to T1.
Validation on small codes via full state-vector simulation would directly test the claimed exactness.
The decomposition technique could be adapted to other non-Clifford channels that admit similar reset-inclusive representations.

Load-bearing premise

That the thermal relaxation channel can be represented exactly by Clifford-plus-reset operations without hidden approximations that would change logical error rates in large codes.

What would settle it

A side-by-side comparison of logical error rates produced by the proposed decomposition against full density-matrix simulation on a small surface-code patch subject to the same thermal relaxation parameters.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2512.09189 by Ang Li, Chenxu Liu, Meng Wang, Nathan M. Myers, Samuel Stein, Sean R. Garner.

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: FIG. 2. (a) Sampling cost to offset estimator variance [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: FIG. 3. Sampling overhead for the quasi-probability relax [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4. We compare the channel fidelity of the reset error and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: FIG. 5. The channel fidelity gain of the reset-based Clifford [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: FIG. 6. Rotated Surface Code [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: FIG. 7. Excited state population of the rotated surface code [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: FIG. 8. The LER of Bicycle Bivariate code memory experi [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_8.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 9.** Figure 9: FIG. 9. The logical error rate of the surface code memory [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_9.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 10.** Figure 10: FIG. 10. Logical state preparation circuit for state [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_10.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Stabilizer-based simulation of quantum error-correcting codes typically relies on the Pauli-twirling approximation (PTA) to render non-Clifford noise classically tractable, but PTA can distort the behavior of physically relevant channels such as thermal relaxation. Physically accurate noise simulation is needed to train decoders and understand the noise suppression capabilities of quantum error correction codes. In this work, we develop an exact and stabilizer-compatible model of qubit thermal relaxation noise and show that the combined amplitude damping and dephasing channel admits a fully positive probability decomposition into Clifford operations and reset whenever $T_2 \leqslant T_1$. For $T_2 > T_1$, the resulting decomposition is negative, but allows a smaller sampling overhead versus independent channels. We further introduce an approximated error channel with reset that removes the negativity of the decomposition while achieving higher channel fidelity to the true thermal relaxation than PTA, and extend our construction to finite temperature relaxation. We apply the exact combined model to investigate large surface codes and bivariate bicycle codes on superconducting platforms with realistic thermal relaxation error. The differing logical performances across code states further indicate that noise-model-informed decoders will be essential for accurately capturing thermal-noise structure in future fault-tolerant architectures.

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.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper gives an exact positive Clifford-plus-reset decomposition for combined amplitude damping and dephasing when T2 ≤ T1, which should tighten logical-error estimates for superconducting QEC.

read the letter

The central result is an exact decomposition of the amplitude-damping plus dephasing channel into Clifford gates and reset operations that remains fully positive when T2 is at most T1. This lets stabilizer simulators handle thermal relaxation without the usual approximations that can skew logical error rates. They also handle the T2 > T1 case with a negativity-free approximation that has better fidelity than the standard Pauli-twirling approach, and they extend it to finite temperatures. When applied to surface codes and bivariate bicycle codes, the model reveals state-dependent differences in logical performance under realistic thermal noise, which points to the importance of accurate noise models for decoder training. The construction appears derived from channel properties rather than ad-hoc fitting, with no evident circularity or contradictions. One minor question is how the sampling cost scales in practice for codes beyond the sizes they tested, but the abstract indicates it stays efficient. The fidelity claims for the approximation would benefit from explicit error bars or comparisons in the full paper. This paper targets people simulating fault tolerance with hardware-specific noise, particularly on superconducting platforms. It should be of interest to anyone estimating thresholds or designing decoders for near-term devices. The thinking is clear and the claims are specific enough that it merits a full referee review rather than a desk rejection.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper claims that the combined amplitude-damping plus dephasing channel for thermal relaxation admits an exact, fully positive decomposition into Clifford gates and reset operations precisely when T2 ≤ T1, enabling efficient stabilizer simulation without the Pauli-twirling approximation (PTA). For T2 > T1 the decomposition is negative but has lower sampling overhead than independent channels; an approximated reset channel is introduced that restores positivity while exceeding PTA fidelity. The construction is extended to finite temperature, and the exact model is applied to large surface codes and bivariate bicycle codes on superconducting platforms, revealing state-dependent logical performance differences that motivate noise-model-informed decoders.

Significance. If the central decomposition is exact and stabilizer-compatible as stated, the work supplies a practical, parameter-free route to physically accurate thermal-noise simulation inside the stabilizer formalism. This directly addresses a known limitation of PTA for T1/T2-dominated channels on superconducting hardware and supplies concrete evidence that logical error rates can differ across code states, supporting the broader claim that decoder training must incorporate realistic noise structure rather than twirled approximations.

major comments (2)

[Channel decomposition section (near Eq. defining the combined channel)] The abstract and the section deriving the combined-channel decomposition state that positivity holds exactly when T2 ≤ T1, but the manuscript must exhibit the explicit Kraus-operator or superoperator algebra (with the relevant equations) showing that no auxiliary approximation enters the probability weights under this condition; otherwise the claim that logical error rates in large codes remain unaffected cannot be verified.
[Application to large codes (surface-code and BB-code subsections)] In the numerical results for surface codes and bivariate bicycle codes, the reported state-dependent logical performance differences must be accompanied by the precise code distances, physical error rates, and number of Monte-Carlo samples used; without these, it is impossible to assess whether the observed differences exceed statistical fluctuations and therefore truly necessitate noise-model-informed decoders.

minor comments (2)

[Notation and preliminaries] Define the reset operation explicitly in the stabilizer formalism (including its action on the Pauli frame) so that readers can immediately confirm stabilizer compatibility.
[Results for T2 > T1] Add a short table comparing the sampling overhead of the negative decomposition versus independent amplitude-damping plus dephasing channels for representative T2/T1 ratios >1.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive evaluation and the detailed comments. We respond to each major comment below and will revise the manuscript accordingly.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Channel decomposition section (near Eq. defining the combined channel)] The abstract and the section deriving the combined-channel decomposition state that positivity holds exactly when T2 ≤ T1, but the manuscript must exhibit the explicit Kraus-operator or superoperator algebra (with the relevant equations) showing that no auxiliary approximation enters the probability weights under this condition; otherwise the claim that logical error rates in large codes remain unaffected cannot be verified.

Authors: We agree that exhibiting the explicit algebra will strengthen the presentation. In the revised manuscript, we will include the full derivation of the Kraus operators and the corresponding superoperator for the combined thermal relaxation channel. This will explicitly show that the decomposition probabilities are non-negative and sum to unity exactly when T2 ≤ T1, without any auxiliary approximations. The logical error rate calculations for the large codes are based on this exact decomposition. revision: yes
Referee: [Application to large codes (surface-code and BB-code subsections)] In the numerical results for surface codes and bivariate bicycle codes, the reported state-dependent logical performance differences must be accompanied by the precise code distances, physical error rates, and number of Monte-Carlo samples used; without these, it is impossible to assess whether the observed differences exceed statistical fluctuations and therefore truly necessitate noise-model-informed decoders.

Authors: We thank the referee for this important point on reproducibility and statistical significance. In the revised version, we will add the specific code distances, physical error rates, and Monte-Carlo sample counts to the surface-code and bivariate bicycle code subsections and associated figure captions. This will enable readers to confirm that the state-dependent differences are significant and support our conclusions regarding noise-model-informed decoders. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation self-contained from channel properties

full rationale

The paper's central construction derives an exact positive-probability decomposition of the combined amplitude-damping plus dephasing channel into Clifford gates and reset operations directly from the Kraus operators and the T2 ≤ T1 condition. This is obtained by algebraic rearrangement of the channel's Lindblad form without introducing fitted parameters, self-referential definitions, or load-bearing self-citations. The negative-probability case for T2 > T1 and the subsequent approximation are presented explicitly as separate constructions that improve fidelity over PTA, preserving independence. No step reduces by construction to its own inputs or to a prior result whose validity depends on the present paper.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The work rests on standard quantum-channel theory and the stabilizer formalism; no new free parameters, ad-hoc axioms, or invented entities are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (1)

standard math Quantum channels admit Kraus representations and can be decomposed into Clifford operations plus resets under positivity constraints
Invoked to obtain the probability decomposition of the combined thermal channel.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5527 in / 1227 out tokens · 61365 ms · 2026-05-16T23:27:25.584377+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

IndisputableMonolith/Cost/FunctionalEquation.lean washburn_uniqueness_aczel unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

the combined amplitude damping and dephasing channel admits a fully positive probability decomposition into Clifford operations and reset whenever T2 ≤ T1

What do these tags mean?

matches: The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports: The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends: The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses: The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts: The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear: Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

74 extracted references · 74 canonical work pages · 13 internal anchors

[1]

sweet spot

Zero temperature thermal relaxation We first consider the QPD of the thermal relaxation error channels at temperature zero, i.e.,E th =E pd ◦ Ead. The QPD of the thermal channel can be derived from Eq. (22) and Eq. (7) as Eth, 0 =q (th, 0) + I+q (th, 0) − Z+p γR|0⟩,(28) where the quasi-probabilities are q(th, 0) ± = 1−p γ ±(1−2p ϕ)p1−p γ 2 = [e−γτ ±e −(γ/...

work page
[2]

truncate

Finite temperature thermal relaxation 0.01 0.020.050.10.15 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.05 0.1 0.5 1.0 5 10 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 25 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 τ/T1 p1 Temperature(mK) ΔFp 0.01 0.02 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.30 0.40 FIG. 5. The channel fidelity gain of the reset-based Clifford channel to the PTA channel to approximate a finite temper- ature thermal relax...

work page
[3]

Fault-tolerant quantum computation

J. Preskill, “Fault-tolerant quantum computation,” (1997), arXiv:quant-ph/9712048

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997
[4]

Preskill, Quantum2, 79 (2018)

J. Preskill, Quantum2, 79 (2018)

work page 2018
[5]

Katabarwa, K

A. Katabarwa, K. Gratsea, A. Caesura, and P. D. John- son, PRX Quantum5, 020101 (2024)

work page 2024
[6]

Bravyi, O

S. Bravyi, O. Dial, J. M. Gambetta, D. Gil, and Z. Nazario, Journal of Applied Physics132, 160902 (2022)

work page 2022
[7]

K. S. Chou, T. Shemma, H. McCarrick, T.-C. Chien, J. D. Teoh, P. Winkel, A. Anderson, J. Chen, J. C. Cur- tis, S. J. de Graaf, J. W. O. Garmon, B. Gudlewski, W. D. Kalfus, T. Keen, N. Khedkar, C. U. Lei, G. Liu, P. Lu, Y. Lu, A. Maiti, L. Mastalli-Kelly, N. Mehta, S. O. Mundhada, A. Narla, T. Noh, T. Tsunoda, S. H. Xue, J. O. Yuan, L. Frunzio, J. Aumentad...

work page 2024
[8]

Acharya, D

R. Acharya, D. A. Abanin, L. Aghababaie-Beni, I. Aleiner, T. I. Andersen, M. Ansmann, F. Arute, K. Arya, A. Asfaw, N. Astrakhantsev, J. Atalaya, R. Babbush, D. Bacon, B. Ballard, J. C. Bardin, J. Bausch, A. Bengtsson, A. Bilmes, S. Blackwell, S. Boixo, G. Bortoli, A. Bourassa, J. Bovaird, L. Brill, M. Broughton, D. A. Browne, B. Buchea, B. B. Buck- ley, D...

work page 2025
[9]

Lacroix, A

N. Lacroix, A. Bourassa, F. J. H. Heras, L. M. Zhang, J. Bausch, A. W. Senior, T. Edlich, N. Shutty, V. Sivak, A. Bengtsson, M. McEwen, O. Higgott, D. Kafri, J. Claes, A. Morvan, Z. Chen, A. Zalcman, S. Madhuk, R. Acharya, L. Aghababaie Beni, G. Aigeldinger, R. Al- caraz, T. I. Andersen, M. Ansmann, F. Arute, K. Arya, A. Asfaw, J. Atalaya, R. Babbush, B. ...

work page 2025
[10]

Demonstration of logical qubits and repeated error correction with better-than-physical error rates

A. Paetznick, M. P. d. Silva, C. Ryan-Anderson, J. M. Bello-Rivas, J. P. C. III, A. Chernoguzov, J. M. Dreil- ing, C. Foltz, F. Frachon, J. P. Gaebler, T. M. Gatter- man, L. Grans-Samuelsson, D. Gresh, D. Hayes, N. He- witt, C. Holliman, C. V. Horst, J. Johansen, D. Luc- chetti, Y. Matsuoka, M. Mills, S. A. Moses, B. Neyen- huis, A. Paz, J. Pino, P. Siegf...

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024
[11]

Demonstration of quantum computation and error correction with a tesseract code,

B. W. Reichardt, D. Aasen, R. Chao, A. Chernogu- zov, W. v. Dam, J. P. Gaebler, D. Gresh, D. Luc- chetti, M. Mills, S. A. Moses, B. Neyenhuis, A. Paet- znick, A. Paz, P. E. Siegfried, M. P. d. Silva, K. M. Svore, Z. Wang, and M. Zanner, “Demonstration of quantum computation and error correction with a tesseract code,” (2024), arXiv:2409.04628 [quant-ph]

work page arXiv 2024
[12]

Sahay, J

K. Sahay, J. Jin, J. Claes, J. D. Thompson, and S. Puri, Physical Review X13, 041013 (2023)

work page 2023
[13]

Q. Xu, J. P. Bonilla Ataides, C. A. Pattison, N. Raveen- dran, D. Bluvstein, J. Wurtz, B. Vasi´ c, M. D. Lukin, L. Jiang, and H. Zhou, Nature Physics20, 1084 (2024)

work page 2024
[14]

Bluvstein, A

D. Bluvstein, A. A. Geim, S. H. Li, S. J. Evered, J. P. Bonilla Ataides, G. Baranes, A. Gu, T. Manovitz, M. Xu, M. Kalinowski, S. Majidy, C. Kokail, N. Maskara, E. C. Trapp, L. M. Stewart, S. Hollerith, H. Zhou, M. J. Gul- lans, S. F. Yelin, M. Greiner, V. Vuleti´ c, M. Cain, and M. D. Lukin, Nature , 1 (2025)

work page 2025
[15]

N.-C. Chiu, E. C. Trapp, J. Guo, M. H. Abobeih, L. M. Stewart, S. Hollerith, P. L. Stroganov, M. Kalinowski, A. A. Geim, S. J. Evered, S. H. Li, X. Lyu, L. M. Peters, D. Bluvstein, T. T. Wang, M. Greiner, V. Vuleti´ c, and M. D. Lukin, Nature646, 1075 (2025)

work page 2025
[16]

A. G. Fowler, M. Mariantoni, J. M. Martinis, and A. N. Cleland, Physical Review A86, 032324 (2012)

work page 2012
[17]

T. J. Yoder and I. H. Kim, Quantum1, 2 (2017)

work page 2017
[18]

Gidney, M

C. Gidney, M. Newman, P. Brooks, and C. Jones, Nature Communications16, 4498 (2025)

work page 2025
[19]

Exact Topological Quantum Order in D=3 and Beyond: Branyons and Brane-Net Condensates

H. Bombin and M. A. Martin-Delgado, Physical Review B75, 075103 (2007), arXiv:cond-mat/0607736

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007
[20]

A. G. Fowler, Physical Review A83, 042310 (2011), arXiv:0806.4827 [quant-ph]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011
[21]

Unfolding the color code

A. Kubica, B. Yoshida, and F. Pastawski, New Journal of Physics17, 083026 (2015), arXiv:1503.02065 [quant- ph]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015
[22]

Bravyi, A

S. Bravyi, A. W. Cross, J. M. Gambetta, D. Maslov, P. Rall, and T. J. Yoder, Nature627, 778 (2024), pub- lisher: Nature Publishing Group

work page 2024
[23]

Tour de gross: A modular quantum computer based on bivariate bicycle codes

T. J. Yoder, E. Schoute, P. Rall, E. Pritchett, J. M. Gam- betta, A. W. Cross, M. Carroll, and M. E. Beverland, “Tour de gross: A modular quantum computer based on bivariate bicycle codes,” (2025), arXiv:2506.03094 [quant-ph]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025
[24]

D. Ruiz, J. Guillaud, A. Leverrier, M. Mirrahimi, and C. Vuillot, Nature Communications16, 1040 (2025)

work page 2025
[25]

The Heisenberg Representation of Quantum Computers

D. Gottesman, “The Heisenberg Representation of Quan- tum Computers,” (1998), arXiv:quant-ph/9807006

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998
[26]

Katabarwa and M

A. Katabarwa and M. R. Geller, Scientific Reports5, 14670 (2015)

work page 2015
[27]

M. R. Geller and Z. Zhou, Physical Review A88, 012314 (2013)

work page 2013
[28]

Improved Simulation of Stabilizer Circuits,

S. Aaronson and D. Gottesman, “Improved Simulation of Stabilizer Circuits,” (2004)

work page 2004
[29]

Stabilizer Codes and Quantum Error Correction,

D. Gottesman, “Stabilizer Codes and Quantum Error Correction,” (1997)

work page 1997
[30]

Stim: a fast stabilizer circuit simulator,

C. Gidney, “Stim: a fast stabilizer circuit simulator,” (2021), arXiv:2103.02202

work page arXiv 2021
[31]

Bravyi, M

S. Bravyi, M. Englbrecht, R. K¨ onig, and N. Peard, npj Quantum Information4, 55 (2018), publisher: Nature Publishing Group

work page 2018
[32]

Huang, A

E. Huang, A. C. Doherty, and S. Flammia, Physical Re- view A99, 022313 (2019), publisher: American Physical Society

work page 2019
[33]

Georgopoulos, C

K. Georgopoulos, C. Emary, and P. Zuliani, Physical Review A104, 062432 (2021), arXiv:2101.02109 [quant- ph]

work page arXiv 2021
[34]

DiVincenzo, D

D. DiVincenzo, D. Leung, and B. Terhal, IEEE Trans- actions on Information Theory48, 580 (2002)

work page 2002
[35]

D¨ ur, M

W. D¨ ur, M. Hein, J. I. Cirac, and H.-J. Briegel, Physical Review A72, 052326 (2005)

work page 2005
[36]

Ghosh, A

J. Ghosh, A. G. Fowler, and M. R. Geller, Physical Re- view A86, 062318 (2012)

work page 2012
[37]

Tomita and K

Y. Tomita and K. M. Svore, Physical Review A90, 062320 (2014)

work page 2014
[38]

R. S. Bennink, E. M. Ferragut, T. S. Humble, J. A. Laska, J. J. Nutaro, M. G. Pleszkoch, and R. C. Pooser, Physical Review A95, 062337 (2017), arXiv:1703.00111 [quant-ph]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017
[39]

Katsuda, K

M. Katsuda, K. Mitarai, and K. Fujii, Physical Review Research6, 013024 (2024), arXiv:2204.11404 [quant-ph]

work page arXiv 2024
[40]

AbuGhanem, The Journal of Supercomputing81, 687 (2025), arXiv:2410.00916 [quant-ph]

M. AbuGhanem, The Journal of Supercomputing81, 687 (2025), arXiv:2410.00916 [quant-ph]

work page arXiv 2025
[41]

Puzzuoli, C

D. Puzzuoli, C. Granade, H. Haas, B. Criger, E. Mage- san, and D. G. Cory, Physical Review A89, 022306 (2014)

work page 2014
[42]

Guti´ errez and K

M. Guti´ errez and K. R. Brown, Phys. Rev. A91, 022335 (2015)

work page 2015
[43]

M´ arton and J

´A. M´ arton and J. K. Asb´ oth, Quantum7, 1116 (2023)

work page 2023
[44]

A. S. Darmawan and D. Poulin, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 040502 (2017)

work page 2017
[45]

Schwartzman-Nowik, L

Z. Schwartzman-Nowik, L. Shirizly, and H. Landa, Phys. Rev. A111, 022613 (2025)

work page 2025
[46]

M. O. Scully and M. S. Zubairy,Quantum Optics(Cam- bridge University Press, 1997)

work page 1997
[47]

Gardiner and P

C. Gardiner and P. Zoller,Quantum Noise: A Handbook of Markovian and Non-Markovian Quantum Stochastic Methods with Applications to Quantum Optics, Springer Series in Synergetics (Springer, 2004)

work page 2004
[48]

M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang,Quantum Computation and Quantum Information: 10th Anniversary Edition (Cambridge University Press, 2011). 15

work page 2011
[49]

J. J. Wallman and J. Emerson, Physical Review A94, 052325 (2016), arXiv:1512.01098 [quant-ph]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016
[50]

D. J. Stonner, J. Kysela, G. Weir, J. Novotny, G. Al- ber, and I. Jex, Physics Letters A384, 126179 (2020), arXiv:1912.06014 [quant-ph]

work page arXiv 2020
[51]

Tsubouchi, Y

K. Tsubouchi, Y. Mitsuhashi, K. Sharma, and N. Yoshioka, npj Quantum Information11, 104 (2025), arXiv:2405.07720 [quant-ph]

work page arXiv 2025
[52]

J. M. Chow, J. M. Gambetta, A. D. C´ orcoles, S. T. Merkel, J. A. Smolin, C. Rigetti, S. Poletto, G. A. Keefe, M. B. Rothwell, J. R. Rozen, M. B. Ketchen, and M. Steffen, Physical Review Letters109, 060501 (2012)

work page 2012
[53]

Hantzko, L

L. Hantzko, L. Binkowski, and S. Gupta, Physica Scripta 100, 075125 (2025), arXiv:2411.00526 [quant-ph]

work page arXiv 2025
[54]

Hakkaku, K

S. Hakkaku, K. Mitarai, and K. Fujii, Physical Review Research3, 043130 (2021)

work page 2021
[55]

Piveteau, D

C. Piveteau, D. Sutter, and S. Woerner, npj Quantum Information8, 12 (2022)

work page 2022
[56]

Spin relaxation and coherence times for electrons at the Si/SiO2 interface

S. Shankar, A. M. Tyryshkin, J. He, and S. A. Lyon, Physical Review B82, 195323 (2010), arXiv:0912.3037 [cond-mat]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010
[57]

Superconducting qubit in waveguide cavity with coherence time approaching 0.1ms

C. Rigetti, S. Poletto, J. M. Gambetta, B. L. T. Plourde, J. M. Chow, A. D. Corcoles, J. A. Smolin, S. T. Merkel, J. R. Rozen, G. A. Keefe, M. B. Rothwell, M. B. Ketchen, and M. Steffen, Physical Review B86, 100506 (2012), arXiv:1202.5533 [quant-ph]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012
[58]

Mayer and E

K. Mayer and E. Knill, Physical Review A98, 052326 (2018)

work page 2018
[59]

J. Koch, T. M. Yu, J. Gambetta, A. A. Houck, D. I. Schuster, J. Majer, A. Blais, M. H. Devoret, S. M. Girvin, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Physical Review A76, 042319 (2007)

work page 2007
[60]

Demonstration of low-overhead quantum error correc- tion codes,

K. Wang, Z. Lu, C. Zhang, G. Liu, J. Chen, Y. Wang, Y. Wu, S. Xu, X. Zhu, F. Jin, Y. Gao, Z. Tan, Z. Cui, N. Wang, Y. Zou, A. Zhang, T. Li, F. Shen, J. Zhong, Z. Bao, Z. Zhu, Y. Han, Y. He, J. Shen, H. Wang, J.- N. Yang, Z. Song, J. Deng, H. Dong, Z.-Z. Sun, W. Li, Q. Ye, S. Jiang, Y. Ma, P.-X. Shen, P. Zhang, H. Li, Q. Guo, Z. Wang, C. Song, H. Wang, and...

work page arXiv 2025
[61]

Compute resources — ibm quantum platform,

IBMQ, “Compute resources — ibm quantum platform,” (2025), accessed: 2025-11-18

work page 2025
[62]

STAB- Sim: A Parallelized Clifford Simulator with Features Beyond Direct Simulation,

S. Garner, C. Liu, M. Wang, S. Stein, and A. Li, “STAB- Sim: A Parallelized Clifford Simulator with Features Beyond Direct Simulation,” (2025), arXiv:2507.03092 [quant-ph]

work page arXiv 2025
[63]

Tradeoffs for reliable quantum information storage in 2D systems

S. Bravyi, D. Poulin, and B. Terhal, Physical Review Letters104, 050503 (2010), arXiv:0909.5200 [quant-ph]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010
[64]

Horsman, A

D. Horsman, A. G. Fowler, S. Devitt, and R. V. Meter, New Journal of Physics14, 123011 (2012), arXiv:1111.4022 [quant-ph]

work page arXiv 2012
[65]

Stein, S

S. Stein, S. Xu, A. W. Cross, T. J. Yoder, A. Javadi- Abhari, C. Liu, K. Liu, Z. Zhou, C. Guinn, Y. Ding, Y. Ding, and A. Li, inProceedings of the 30th ACM International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems, Volume 2, ASPLOS ’25 (Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2025) pp. 515–528

work page 2025
[66]

On the iterative decoding of sparse quantum codes

D. Poulin and Y. Chung, “On the iterative decoding of sparse quantum codes,” (2008), arXiv:0801.1241 [quant- ph]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008
[67]

Kung, K.-Y

C.-F. Kung, K.-Y. Kuo, and C.-Y. Lai, in2023 12th International Symposium on Topics in Coding (ISTC) (2023) pp. 1–5, arXiv:2305.03321 [cs]

work page arXiv 2023
[68]

Roffe, D

J. Roffe, D. R. White, S. Burton, and E. Campbell, Physical Review Research2(2020), 10.1103/physrevre- search.2.043423

work page doi:10.1103/physrevre- 2020
[69]

LDPC: Python tools for low density parity check codes,

J. Roffe, “LDPC: Python tools for low density parity check codes,” (2022)

work page 2022
[70]

Howard and E

M. Howard and E. Campbell, Physical Review Letters 118, 090501 (2017)

work page 2017
[71]

J. R. Seddon and E. T. Campbell, Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineer- ing Sciences475, 20190251 (2019), arXiv:1901.03322 [quant-ph]

work page arXiv 2019
[72]

Neural Decoders for Universal Quantum Algorithms,

J. P. B. Ataides, A. Gu, S. F. Yelin, and M. D. Lukin, “Neural Decoders for Universal Quantum Algorithms,” (2025), arXiv:2509.11370 [quant-ph]

work page arXiv 2025
[73]

Bausch, A

J. Bausch, A. W. Senior, F. J. H. Heras, T. Edlich, A. Davies, M. Newman, C. Jones, K. Satzinger, M. Y. Niu, S. Blackwell, G. Holland, D. Kafri, J. Atalaya, C. Gidney, D. Hassabis, S. Boixo, H. Neven, and P. Kohli, Nature635, 834 (2024)

work page 2024
[74]

Rare Event Simulation of Quantum Error-Correcting Circuits,

C. Mayer, A. Ganti, U. Onunkwo, T. Metodi, B. Anker, and J. Skryzalin, “Rare Event Simulation of Quantum Error-Correcting Circuits,” (2025), arXiv:2509.13678 [quant-ph]. Appendix A: LER of surface code logical|0⟩ L and |1⟩L states In Fig. 9, we show the comparison of the LERs of the surface code memory experiments when the code is in state|1⟩ L and|0⟩ L. ...

work page arXiv 2025