pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2603.00837 · v2 · submitted 2026-02-28 · 🪐 quant-ph

Recognition: no theorem link

ReloQate: Transient Drift Detection and In-Situ Recalibration in Surface Code Quantum Error Correction

Maxwell Poster , Jason Chadwick , Jonathan Mark Baker
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-15 17:31 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords surface codequantum error correctiondrift detectionlogical error ratedetector fire rateremappingrecalibrationstabilizer codes
0
0 comments X

The pith

Surface code quantum error correction can predict logical error rates from detector fire rates and remap drifted qubits to fresh tiles in real time.

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

The paper shows that parity information from stabilizer measurements in surface codes can be turned into real-time predictions of logical error rates without separate characterization runs. A model is built by sampling physical error rates on hardware and fitting them to detector fire rates, which track how often parity checks fail across rounds. The predictions are kept conservative so that responses can finish before error rates rise too high. This predictor is paired with a remapping step that moves affected logical qubits to unused tiles in a patch layout while the original tiles are recalibrated. The combination is presented as workable for small code distances and readily extendable to other stabilizer codes.

Core claim

By sampling physical error rates from real hardware, a prediction model is inferred that maps detector fire rate, or parity of stabilizer measurements across QEC rounds, to logical error rates. This mapping allows on-the-fly LER predictions without the typical characterization overhead. The predictor is paired with a remapping scheme that moves drifted logical qubits to fresh tiles while original tiles are recalibrated. Results demonstrate DFR-based prediction to be an effective LER predictor and remapping as a spatially efficient and timely mitigation response for small code distances.

What carries the argument

Detector fire rate (DFR) from parity of stabilizer measurements across rounds, fitted to predict logical error rate (LER) from sampled physical errors and trigger remapping to fresh tiles.

If this is right

  • Real-time LER estimates become available without pausing for full error characterization.
  • Remapping uses space efficiently in patch-based architectures while drifted tiles are recalibrated.
  • Conservative timing of predictions gives enough margin for responses to complete before error rates exceed tolerance.
  • The same DFR-to-LER mapping extends to other stabilizer codes beyond surface codes.
  • Drift mitigation becomes feasible at small code distances where full recalibration overhead is high.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Frequent full-system calibrations could be reduced by handling local drifts through targeted remapping.
  • The approach may combine with other adaptive strategies for non-stationary noise in larger quantum processors.
  • Controlled drift-injection experiments on current devices could test how well the fitted model generalizes beyond the sampled data.
  • This addresses a practical barrier to scaling where hardware noise changes over time rather than staying fixed.

Load-bearing premise

That a prediction model fitted from sampled physical error rates will produce accurate yet conservative real-time LER estimates on live hardware without additional characterization overhead or post-hoc adjustments.

What would settle it

A direct comparison on hardware showing that DFR predictions deviate substantially from measured logical error rates during a controlled drift, or that remapping fails to keep logical errors below threshold for small distances.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2603.00837 by Jason Chadwick, Jonathan Mark Baker, Maxwell Poster.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Timeline of a drifted qubit. During 𝑑 rounds of error correction, a detector fire rate (DFR) is accrued for a surface code. Detectors are fired when measurements of a parity qubit in a given round don’t agree with prior measurements of that same parity qubit. The DFR is the fraction of detectors that fire (the number of fired detectors divided by the total number of detectors). Each DFR is stored within a … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: 𝑑 = 3 surface code undergoing a remap operation. Stored on the left-most tile of the first row is a 𝑑 = 3 surface code. Each black dot denotes a physical qubit. Black dots at intersections indicate data qubits, while black dots within solid colors or on the round edges indicate parity qubits. The surface code first expands into the far right tile in the first row. Expansion is performed such that its edge … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Examples of the drift noise models considered in this work. The slow model exhibits drift on the timescale of hours, while the volatile model varies on the timescale of seconds. (a) Lognormally-distributed physical qubit drift rates for the slow model, matching the distribution observed on an IBM device in Ref. [7]. (b) Resulting logical error rate drift over time for 𝑑 = 7 surface code patches consisting … view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Left: Detector fire rates and logical error rates sampled from instances of surface codes with lognormally-distributed physical error rates. The detector fire rate of a surface code patch can be used to accurately predict the logical error rate of the patch without directly measuring it. Right: Prediction performance of an LER trace for a 𝑑 = 3 surface code under various buffer sizes over time (cycles). La… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: , we study the choice 𝑘 for various drift speeds in the consistent drift model. Importantly, small buffer sizes fluctuate rapidly in their predicted logical error rate, which illustrates the point from above. Highly volatile predictions can be safe, but will result in excess resource overheads, regardless of the choice of response. However, large buffer sizes shift too slowly to accurately keep up with the… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The fit to the DFR vs. LER data yield a predictor that can estimate the LER for a given observed DFR. We can tune the parameter 𝛼 to determine the width of the prediction confidence interval, which allows us to tune the sensitivity of the drift detection module. A lower value of 𝛼 yields a larger confidence interval, making the detection module more sensitive [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Prediction rarely results in detecting an LER breach (i.e. surpassing target threshold) at the same time as the true LER. Ideally, parameters should be set to minimize the time gap between the two. The x-axis indicates the offset from the ‘best’ preset. That is, the difference between the ‘high’/‘low’ interval bounds for a given 𝛼, and the ‘best’ (median) value for the interval. This difference is then mul… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: An example of a naive remap operation, which we avoid. Left: 𝑞4 scheduling a remap into a routing channel. Right: The instruction CNOT 𝑞0, 𝑞2 now cannot execute. This is an example of a i) a qubit being cordoned off, wherein the only fix is scheduling another remap operation for 𝑞4 and ii) general operation congestion has to be rerouted to a different routing channel. (were the architecture larger), exace… view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: LER history of a logical qubit undergoing an ar￾chitectural memory experiment. The predictor detects when a breach is imminent, and a remap is performed in response. Each drop in LER is indicative of a remap operation execut￾ing [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Demonstration of a code deformation response. Routing channels are maintained at a code distance 𝑑 + 𝛿, while each logical qubit idles with distance 𝑑 < 𝑑 + 𝛿. Upon calibration, the logical qubit expands into the 𝛿 distance of the routing channels, and forms a superstabilizer around qubits in the first calibration group via code deformation. Here, a nominally 𝑑 = 3 qubit begins calibration, expanding into… view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Relative percent error of an architectural memory experiment. The logical qubit is maintained on a 2×2 grid of logical tiles, wherein each tile shares a trace, though begins the experiment at a different point in the trace, ensuring there always exists a minimum LER tile. Similar to previous data, larger buffer sizes yield better prediction performance, even during remap operations. Proximity to zero is i… view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Crossover reloqation-qubit ratio for varying val￾ues of 𝑑 and 𝛿. The spatial efficiency of reloqation diminishes with 𝑑 2 , making it more ideal for smaller distances, as the fraction of available reloqation patches while still remaining spatially efficient. We draw the same plot but solving for 𝑀 and using 𝑁 = 1000 qubits to demonstrate the actual num￾ber of reloqation patches that would be available at … view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Conceptual timing diagram for a system implementing dynamic remapping as a calibration scheduler against a system implementing deformations via static calibration scheduling with calibration frequency 𝑓𝑑𝑒 𝑓 𝑜𝑟𝑚 = 1 Δ𝑡 . Δ𝑡 is typically determined via characterization prior to execution such that the target LER is maintained or beaten. Note that, because deviations in drift parameters can occur mid-executi… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Quantum error correction (QEC) promises to exponentially suppress qubit noise, but typically assumes spatially-uniform and temporally-constant noise rates. However, real quantum hardware exhibits variation in noise levels over time, which will be amplified by QEC if not addressed. To mitigate this drift in error rates, we leverage transient information readily available in surface code quantum error correction to predict logical error rates (LER) in real time. We infer a prediction model by sampling physical error rates from real hardware, and mapping detector fire rate (DFR), or parity of stabilizer measurements across QEC rounds, to LER. This allows for on-the-fly LER predictions without the typical characterization overhead required to determine LER. This method can easily be extended to other stabilizer codes. Importantly, we observe that this prediction should be accurate yet conservative (i.e. give an upper estimate) to enable appropriately fast responses to real-time physical error changes. That is, responses should be executed marginally ahead of time to allow for their execution to complete, and minimize time spent (ideally none) above intolerable error rates. More importantly, we pair this predictor with a scheme which remaps drifted logical qubits to fresh tiles in a patch-based architecture while their original tiles are recalibrated. Our results demonstrate DFR-based prediction to be an effective LER predictor, and remapping as a spatially efficient and timely mitigation response for small code distances, both of which are significant steps in furthering practical QEC.

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 presents ReloQate, a method for transient drift detection and mitigation in surface code quantum error correction. It infers a DFR-to-LER prediction model by sampling physical error rates on hardware and uses this for real-time LER estimates without standard characterization overhead. The approach is paired with a remapping scheme that relocates logical qubits to fresh tiles in a patch-based architecture while recalibrating drifted tiles. The central claim is that DFR-based prediction is effective for LER and that remapping is spatially efficient and timely for small code distances.

Significance. If the mapping proves accurate and conservative under live transient drift, the work could meaningfully advance practical QEC by enabling in-situ responses to time-varying noise using only existing stabilizer data. The avoidance of extra characterization overhead and the focus on conservative upper-bound predictions to permit timely remapping are conceptually attractive strengths for hardware-constrained settings.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the claim that 'our results demonstrate DFR-based prediction to be an effective LER predictor' is unsupported by any quantitative metrics, error bars, baseline comparisons, or validation details against transient drift. This is load-bearing for the central effectiveness assertion.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: the DFR-to-LER mapping is obtained by sampling physical error rates, yet no evidence or analysis is provided on whether the fitted relationship remains accurate and conservative when noise becomes non-stationary or spatially correlated, which is required for the timely-remapping guarantee.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: 'patch-based architecture' is referenced without a definition or citation to prior work on tile-based surface-code layouts.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback on our manuscript. The comments highlight areas where the abstract can be strengthened to better reflect the quantitative results and validation details presented in the main text. We address each point below and will incorporate revisions to ensure the claims are appropriately supported.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the claim that 'our results demonstrate DFR-based prediction to be an effective LER predictor' is unsupported by any quantitative metrics, error bars, baseline comparisons, or validation details against transient drift. This is load-bearing for the central effectiveness assertion.

    Authors: We agree that the abstract statement is broad and would benefit from explicit reference to supporting metrics. The main text (Sections 4 and 5) presents quantitative evaluations, including mean prediction error, error bars from multiple simulation runs, and comparisons against baseline LER estimation methods under transient drift conditions. To address this, we will revise the abstract to briefly note these metrics and the observed conservativeness of the predictions. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the DFR-to-LER mapping is obtained by sampling physical error rates, yet no evidence or analysis is provided on whether the fitted relationship remains accurate and conservative when noise becomes non-stationary or spatially correlated, which is required for the timely-remapping guarantee.

    Authors: The manuscript evaluates the DFR-to-LER mapping under non-stationary noise models that incorporate transient drifts, showing that predictions remain conservative (upper bounds) in the tested scenarios to enable timely remapping. However, explicit analysis of spatially correlated noise is limited to the cases considered. We will revise the abstract to clarify the validation conditions and conservativeness results. We can expand the spatial correlation analysis in a revision if the referee recommends specific additional tests. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; DFR-LER mapping is a fitted predictor with independent validation claims

full rationale

The paper infers a DFR-to-LER mapping by sampling physical error rates on hardware and then applies the resulting model for real-time predictions under transient drift. This is a standard empirical fitting procedure whose outputs are not equivalent to the inputs by construction; the model is trained on sampled data and tested for generalization to new, time-varying conditions. No equations, self-citations, or uniqueness theorems are invoked in the abstract or description that would reduce the central claim to a tautology or prior self-result. The derivation chain remains self-contained against external benchmarks (hardware sampling and observed remapping performance), so the score is 0.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the existence of a stable mapping from DFR to LER that can be learned from hardware samples and remains conservative under drift. No new physical entities are postulated.

free parameters (1)
  • DFR-to-LER mapping parameters
    Model coefficients inferred from sampled physical error rates; these are fitted values that define the predictor.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Surface code stabilizer measurements provide transient information sufficient to infer logical error rates
    Invoked in the abstract when stating that DFR can be mapped to LER without full characterization.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5568 in / 1320 out tokens · 48131 ms · 2026-05-15T17:31:47.703475+00:00 · methodology

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

34 extracted references · 34 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    A., Aghababaie-Beni, L., Aleiner, I., Ander- sen, T

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

    work page 2024

  2. [2]

    S., Wootton, J

    Carroll, M. S., Wootton, J. R., and Cross, A. W.Subsystem surface and compass code sensitivities to non-identical infidelity distributions on heavy-hex lattice, 2024

    work page 2024

  3. [3]

    D., Kang, C., Viszlai, J., Lin, S

    Chadwick, J. D., Kang, C., Viszlai, J., Lin, S. F., and Chong, F. T. Averting multi-qubit burst errors in surface code magic state factories. In2024 IEEE International Conference on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE)(Sept. 2024), IEEE, p. 1089–1101

    work page 2024

  4. [4]

    J., Hertzberg, J

    Chamberland, C., Zhu, G., Yoder, T. J., Hertzberg, J. B., and Cross, A. W.Topological and subsystem codes on low-degree graphs with flag qubits.Physical Review X 10, 1 (Jan. 2020)

    work page 2020

  5. [5]

    N., and Joynt, R.Using stochastic reso- nance of two-level systems to increase qubit decoherence times, 2024

    Choi, Y., Coppersmith, S. N., and Joynt, R.Using stochastic reso- nance of two-level systems to increase qubit decoherence times, 2024

    work page 2024

  6. [6]

    L., Low, P

    Day, M. L., Low, P. J., White, B. M., Islam, R., and Senko, C.Limits on atomic qubit control from laser noise, 2021

    work page 2021

  7. [7]

    Fang, X., Yin, K., Zhu, Y., Ruan, J., Tullsen, D., Liang, Z., Sorn- borger, A., Li, A., Humble, T., Ding, Y., and Shi, Y.Caliscalpel: In-situ and fine-grained qubit calibration integrated with surface code quantum error correction, 2024

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    Gidney, C.Stim: a fast stabilizer circuit simulator.Quantum 5(July 2021), 497

    work page 2021

  9. [9]

    T., Scheer, E., Pekola, J

    Gümüş, E., Majidi, D., Nikolić, D., Raif, P., Karimi, B., Peltonen, J. T., Scheer, E., Pekola, J. P., Courtois, H., Belzig, W., and Winkelmann, C. B.Calorimetry of a phase slip in a josephson junction.Nat. Phys. 19, 2 (Jan. 2023), 196–200

    work page 2023

  10. [10]

    M., Li, M., Hays, M., Pontseele, W

    Harrington, P. M., Li, M., Hays, M., Pontseele, W. V. D., Mayer, D., Pinckney, H. D., Contipelli, F., Gingras, M., Niedzielski, B. M., Stickler, H., Yoder, J. L., Schwartz, M. E., Grover, J. A., Serniak, K., Oliver, W. D., and Formaggio, J. A.Synchronous detection of cosmic rays and correlated errors in superconducting qubit arrays, 2024

    work page 2024

  11. [11]

    R.Using detector likelihood for benchmarking quantum error correction, 2024

    Hesner, I., Hetényi, B., and Wootton, J. R.Using detector likelihood for benchmarking quantum error correction, 2024

    work page 2024

  12. [12]

    R.Creating entangled logical qubits in the heavy-hex lattice with topological codes.PRX Quantum 5(Dec 2024), 040334

    Hetényi, B., and Wootton, J. R.Creating entangled logical qubits in the heavy-hex lattice with topological codes.PRX Quantum 5(Dec 2024), 040334

    work page 2024

  13. [13]

    Klimov, P. V., Kelly, J., Chen, Z., Neeley, M., Megrant, A., Burkett, B., Barends, R., Arya, K., Chiaro, B., Chen, Y., Dunsworth, A., Fowler, A., Foxen, B., Gidney, C., Giustina, M., Graff, R., Huang, T., Jeffrey, E., Lucero, E., Mutus, J. Y., Naaman, O., Neill, C., Quintana, C., Roushan, P., Sank, D., V ainsencher, A., Wenner, J., White, T. C., Boixo, S....

    work page 2018

  14. [14]

    P., Ding, X.-F., and Yu, H.-F.Cosmic- ray-induced correlated errors in superconducting qubit array.Nature Communications 16, 1 (May 2025)

    Li, X., Wang, J., Jiang, Y.-Y., Xue, G.-M., Cai, X., Zhou, J., Gong, M., Liu, Z.-F., Zheng, S.-Y., Ma, D.-K., Chen, M., Sun, W.-J., Yang, S., Yan, F., Jin, Y.-R., Zhao, S. P., Ding, X.-F., and Yu, H.-F.Cosmic- ray-induced correlated errors in superconducting qubit array.Nature Communications 16, 1 (May 2025)

    work page 2025

  15. [15]

    F., Viszlai, J., Smith, K

    Lin, S. F., Viszlai, J., Smith, K. N., Ravi, G. S., Yuan, C., Chong, F. T., and Brown, B. J.Codesign of quantum error-correcting codes and modular chiplets in the presence of defects. InProceedings of the 29th ACM International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems, Volume 2(Apr. 2024), ASPLOS ’24, ACM, p. 216–231

    work page 2024

  16. [16]

    2019), 128

    Litinski, D.A game of surface codes: Large-scale quantum computing with lattice surgery.Quantum 3(Mar. 2019), 128

    work page 2019

  17. [17]

    C., Bengtsson, 14 ReloQate: Transient Drift Detection and In-Situ Recalibration in Surface Code Quantum Error Correction A., Bilmes, A., Buckley, B

    McEwen, M., Faoro, L., Arya, K., Dunsworth, A., Huang, T., Kim, S., Burkett, B., Fowler, A., Arute, F., Bardin, J. C., Bengtsson, 14 ReloQate: Transient Drift Detection and In-Situ Recalibration in Surface Code Quantum Error Correction A., Bilmes, A., Buckley, B. B., Bushnell, N., Chen, Z., Collins, R., Demura, S., Derk, A. R., Erickson, C., Giustina, M.,...

    work page 2021

  18. [18]

    C., Bengtsson, A., Bilmes, A., Buckley, B

    McEwen, M., Faoro, L., Arya, K., Dunsworth, A., Huang, T., Kim, S., Burkett, B., Fowler, A., Arute, F., Bardin, J. C., Bengtsson, A., Bilmes, A., Buckley, B. B., Bushnell, N., Chen, Z., Collins, R., Demura, S., Derk, A. R., Erickson, C., Giustina, M., Harrington, S. D., Hong, S., Jeffrey, E., Kelly, J., Klimov, P. V., Kostritsa, F., Laptev, P., Locharla, ...

    work page 2021

  19. [19]

    M., Seiler, A., Lisenfeld, J., Ustinov, A

    Meissner, S. M., Seiler, A., Lisenfeld, J., Ustinov, A. V., and Weiss, G.Probing individual tunneling fluctuators with coherently controlled tunneling systems.Physical Review B 97, 18 (2018)

    work page 2018

  20. [20]

    H., and Lisenfeld, J.Towards understanding two- level-systems in amorphous solids: insights from quantum circuits

    Müller, C., Cole, J. H., and Lisenfeld, J.Towards understanding two- level-systems in amorphous solids: insights from quantum circuits. Reports on Progress in Physics 82, 12 (Oct. 2019), 124501

    work page 2019

  21. [21]

    M.Cqm: Cyclic qubit mappings

    Poster, M., Sethi, S., and Baker, J. M.Cqm: Cyclic qubit mappings. In2024 IEEE International Conference on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE)(2024), vol. 01, pp. 1058–1064

    work page 2024

  22. [22]

    Proctor, T., Revelle, M., Nielsen, E., Rudinger, K., Lobser, D., Maunz, P., Blume-Kohout, R., and Young, K.Detecting and tracking drift in quantum information processors.Nature Communications 11, 1 (Oct. 2020)

    work page 2020

  23. [23]

    J., Eichler, C., Blais, A., Müller, M., Krin- ner, S., and Wallraff, A.Experimentally informed decoding of stabilizer codes based on syndrome correlations, 2025

    Remm, A., Lacroix, N., Bödeker, L., Genois, E., Hellings, C., Swiadek, F., Norris, G. J., Eichler, C., Blais, A., Müller, M., Krin- ner, S., and Wallraff, A.Experimentally informed decoding of stabilizer codes based on syndrome correlations, 2025

    work page 2025

  24. [24]

    P., Ustinov, A

    Schlör, S., Lisenfeld, J., Müller, C., Bilmes, A., Schneider, A., Pap- pas, D. P., Ustinov, A. V., and Weides, M.Correlating decoherence in transmon qubits: Low frequency noise by single fluctuators.Physical Review Letters 123, 19

    work page

  25. [25]

    Siegel, A., Strikis, A., Flatters, T., and Benjamin, S.Adaptive sur- face code for quantum error correction in the presence of temporary or permanent defects.Quantum 7(July 2023), 1065

    work page 2023

  26. [26]

    In2022 55th IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Microarchitecture (MICRO)(2022), pp

    Suzuki, Y., Sugiyama, T., Arai, T., Liao, W., Inoue, K., and Tanimoto, T.Q3de: A fault-tolerant quantum computer architecture for multi-bit burst errors by cosmic rays. In2022 55th IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Microarchitecture (MICRO)(2022), pp. 1110–1125

    work page 2022

  27. [27]

    R.Estimating decoding graphs and hyper- graphs of memory qec experiments, 2025

    Takou, E., and Brown, K. R.Estimating decoding graphs and hyper- graphs of memory qec experiments, 2025

    work page 2025

  28. [28]

    T., and Carroll, M.Two-level-system dynamics in a superconducting qubit due to background ionizing radiation.PRX Quantum 4, 2 (June 2023)

    Thorbeck, T., Eddins, A., Lauer, I., McClure, D. T., and Carroll, M.Two-level-system dynamics in a superconducting qubit due to background ionizing radiation.PRX Quantum 4, 2 (June 2023)

    work page 2023

  29. [29]

    T., and Han, S

    W ang, H., Liu, P., Liu, Y., Gu, J., Baker, J., Chong, F. T., and Han, S. Dgr: Tackling drifted and correlated noise in quantum error correction via decoding graph re-weighting, 2024

    work page 2024

  30. [30]

    D., Abdullah, S., Kurinsky, N

    Wilen, C. D., Abdullah, S., Kurinsky, N. A., Stanford, C., Car- dani, L., D’Imperio, G., Tomei, C., Faoro, L., Ioffe, L. B., Liu, C. H., Opremcak, A., Christensen, B. G., DuBois, J. L., and McDermott, R.Correlated charge noise and relaxation errors in superconducting qubits.Nature 594, 7863 (June 2021), 369–373

    work page 2021

  31. [31]

    D., and Gullans, M

    Xiao, X., Hangleiter, D., Bluvstein, D., Lukin, M. D., and Gullans, M. J.In-situ benchmarking of fault-tolerant quantum circuits. i. clifford circuits, 2026

    work page 2026

  32. [32]

    Yin, K., Fang, X., Shi, Y., Humble, T., Li, A., and Ding, Y.Surf- deformer: Mitigating dynamic defects on surface code via adaptive deformation, 2024

    work page 2024

  33. [33]

    G., un Lee, S., Zhou, S., and Jiang, L.Efficient learning of logical noise from syndrome data, 2026

    Zheng, H., Chu, C.-T., Chen, S., Manes, A. G., un Lee, S., Zhou, S., and Jiang, L.Efficient learning of logical noise from syndrome data, 2026

    work page 2026

  34. [34]

    Zhou, J., Li, S., Pan, G.-Z., Zhang, G., Chen, T., and Xue, Z.-Y.Nonadi- abatic geometric quantum gates that are insensitive to qubit-frequency drifts.Physical Review A 103, 3 (Mar. 2021). 15

    work page 2021