arxiv: 2603.05320 · v2 · submitted 2026-03-05 · 🪐 quant-ph

Recognition: no theorem link

Simplified circuit-level decoding using Knill error correction

Ewan Murphy , Subhayan Sahu , Michael Vasmer

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-15 16:20 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph

keywords quantum error correctionKnill error correctiondecodingfault tolerancequantum LDPC codescircuit-level noisesingle-shot measurement

0 comments

The pith

Knill error correction allows circuit-level decoding to use the same decoder as the simpler code-capacity model.

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

The paper shows that Knill error correction replaces repeated syndrome measurements with one round that consumes an auxiliary logical Bell state. Under locally decaying circuit-level noise, this setup makes the decoding problem equivalent to the code-capacity case, so the simpler decoder applies directly. The equivalence is established by an analytic fault-tolerance proof together with numerical checks on quantum low-density parity-check codes. If correct, the result removes the need for specialized time-constrained decoders when using Knill correction, easing the classical-control burden for large-scale quantum computation.

Core claim

Knill error correction uses a single round of measurements on an auxiliary logical Bell state rather than repeated parity checks; under locally decaying circuit-level noise the resulting decoding problem is provably equivalent to the code-capacity noise model, so the same decoder suffices for both.

What carries the argument

Knill error correction protocol that prepares an auxiliary logical Bell state and performs one round of measurements to obtain syndromes equivalent to those in the code-capacity model.

If this is right

The same decoder used for code-capacity noise works for Knill error correction at circuit level.
Fault tolerance holds for quantum low-density parity-check codes under the stated noise model.
Classical decoding can operate without additional time-constrained machinery beyond the code-capacity decoder.
Numerical benchmarks confirm that performance matches code-capacity expectations for the tested codes.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

The approach may extend to other stabilizer codes if the auxiliary Bell-state preparation can be realized with comparable noise.
Real-time decoding latency could drop because the decoder no longer needs to track measurement history across multiple rounds.
Single-shot methods in general might inherit similar decoder simplifications when auxiliary states satisfy the same noise assumptions.

Load-bearing premise

The fault-tolerance argument and decoder equivalence rest on locally decaying circuit-level noise together with the ability to prepare an auxiliary logical Bell state whose errors obey the same noise model.

What would settle it

A simulation or experiment in which the logical error rate under circuit-level noise, decoded with the code-capacity decoder, exceeds the rate predicted by the code-capacity model by more than the fault-tolerance bound would allow.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2603.05320 by Ewan Murphy, Michael Vasmer, Subhayan Sahu.

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: FIG. 2: Clifford fault tolerant protocols can be defined by: a physical circuit, a (classical) function that [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: FIG. 3: Circuit for the fault tolerant preparation of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4: Numerical simulations comparing the performance of the same decoder for different noise models [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: We acknowledge the use of TikZit to draw [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: FIG. 5: Circuit-level error model for state [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_5.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: FIG. 6: Circuit-level error model for transversal Bell measurement. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_6.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: FIG. 7: Circuit for the compressed Knill error correction protocol. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_7.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Quantum error correction will likely be essential for building a large-scale quantum computer, but it comes with significant requirements at the level of classical control software. In particular, a quantum error-correcting code must be supplemented with a fast and accurate classical decoding algorithm. Standard techniques for measuring the parity-check operators of a quantum error-correcting code involve repeated measurements, which both increases the amount of data that needs to be processed by the decoder, and changes the nature of the decoding problem. Knill error correction is a technique that replaces repeated syndrome measurements with a single round of measurements, but requires an auxiliary logical Bell state. Here, we provide a theoretical and numerical investigation into Knill error correction from the perspective of decoding. We give a self-contained description of the protocol, prove its fault tolerance under locally decaying (circuit-level) noise, and numerically benchmark its performance for quantum low-density parity-check codes. We show analytically and numerically that the time-constrained decoding problem for Knill error correction can be solved using the same decoder used for the simpler code-capacity noise model, illustrating that Knill error correction may alleviate the stringent requirements on classical control required for building a large-scale quantum computer.

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

This paper shows that Knill error correction simplifies circuit-level decoding to the code-capacity problem for quantum LDPC codes.

read the letter

The main takeaway from this paper is that Knill error correction allows the use of the code-capacity decoder even when dealing with circuit-level noise in quantum LDPC codes. They show this both analytically and through numerical benchmarks. What stands out as new is the demonstration that the time-constrained decoding problem for Knill EC reduces directly to the simpler code-capacity model. The self-contained proof of fault tolerance under locally decaying noise is also a solid addition, as it doesn't lean heavily on prior results for the core argument. The work does well by combining the theoretical reduction with concrete numerics on LDPC codes. This makes the practical benefit clear: less data to process and a simpler decoder, which helps with the classical control requirements for large-scale quantum computers. Soft spots are limited. The equivalence holds under the assumption of locally decaying circuit-level noise and reliable preparation of the auxiliary logical Bell state. If the Bell state preparation introduces errors outside this model, the decoder might not perform as claimed. The benchmarks are good but specific to the codes chosen, so generalization would benefit from more examples. This paper targets experts in quantum error correction who are concerned with decoding efficiency for LDPC codes. Readers looking for ways to mitigate the overhead of repeated syndrome measurements will find it directly useful. It deserves a serious referee. The proof and supporting data are substantial enough to merit detailed review. I recommend sending it through peer review.

Referee Report

0 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript provides a self-contained description of the Knill error-correction protocol, proves its fault tolerance under locally decaying circuit-level noise, and presents numerical benchmarks on quantum LDPC codes. The central result is an analytical and numerical demonstration that the time-constrained decoding problem for Knill EC reduces to the code-capacity noise model, so that the same decoder suffices.

Significance. If the central claim holds, the work is significant because it shows that Knill EC can remove the need for circuit-level-specific decoders, thereby lowering the classical-control overhead for large-scale fault-tolerant quantum computation. The manuscript supplies both a rigorous proof of fault tolerance and explicit numerical experiments on LDPC codes; these are genuine strengths that support the decoder-equivalence result without fitted parameters or circular definitions.

minor comments (2)

The numerical section would benefit from an explicit statement of the precise noise-rate values used in the LDPC benchmarks so that the plotted thresholds can be reproduced directly from the text.
Notation for the auxiliary Bell-state preparation errors is introduced without a dedicated equation number; adding one would improve cross-referencing with the fault-tolerance proof.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their positive review and for recommending acceptance of the manuscript. We are pleased that the central result on reducing circuit-level decoding to the code-capacity model under Knill error correction was viewed as significant and well-supported by the analytical proof and numerical benchmarks.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity detected

full rationale

The paper provides a self-contained description of the Knill EC protocol, an independent analytical proof of fault tolerance under locally decaying circuit-level noise, and numerical benchmarks on LDPC codes. The central claim—that the time-constrained decoder for Knill EC is equivalent to the code-capacity decoder—rests on this proof and explicit experiments rather than on any fitted parameter renamed as prediction, self-definitional mapping, or load-bearing self-citation chain. Standard prior citations to Knill EC appear but are not used to justify uniqueness or to smuggle in an ansatz; the derivation remains externally falsifiable and does not reduce to its inputs by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The work relies on standard quantum stabilizer formalism and a domain-specific noise model without introducing new entities or many fitted parameters beyond simulation settings.

free parameters (1)

circuit noise rates
Varied across numerical benchmarks to test decoder performance under locally decaying noise; not fitted to match a target result.

axioms (2)

standard math Stabilizer formalism and quantum error correction theory
Invoked to define the codes, syndromes, and logical operations throughout the protocol description and proof.
domain assumption Locally decaying circuit-level noise model
Central assumption for the fault-tolerance proof and decoder equivalence; stated explicitly in the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5503 in / 1296 out tokens · 71879 ms · 2026-05-15T16:20:04.222204+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

71 extracted references · 71 canonical work pages · 9 internal anchors

[1]

T.Campbell, B.M

E. T.Campbell, B.M. Terhal,and C. Vuillot, Roads towards fault-tolerant universal quantum computa- tion, Nature549, 172 (2017)

work page 2017
[2]

Gottesman, Surviving as Quantum Computer in a Classical World (2024),https://www.cs.umd

D. Gottesman, Surviving as Quantum Computer in a Classical World (2024),https://www.cs.umd. edu/class/spring2024/cmsc858G/

work page 2024
[3]

Shor, Fault-tolerant quantum computation, in Proceedings of 37th Conference on Foundations of Computer Science(IEEE Comput

P. Shor, Fault-tolerant quantum computation, in Proceedings of 37th Conference on Foundations of Computer Science(IEEE Comput. Soc. Press, Burlington, VT, USA, 1996) pp. 56–65

work page 1996
[4]

A. M. Steane, Active stabilization, quantum com- putation, and quantum state synthesis, Phys. Rev. Lett.78, 2252 (1997)

work page 1997
[5]

Knill, Quantum computing with realistically noisy devices, Nature434, 39 (2005)

E. Knill, Quantum computing with realistically noisy devices, Nature434, 39 (2005)

work page 2005
[6]

Chao and B

R. Chao and B. W. Reichardt, Quantum Error Cor- rection with Only Two Extra Qubits, Physical Re- view Letters121, 050502 (2018)

work page 2018
[7]

Flag fault-tolerant error correction with arbitrary distance codes

C. Chamberland and M. E. Beverland, Flag fault- tolerant error correction with arbitrary distance codes, Quantum2, 53 (2018), arXiv:1708.02246

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018
[8]

Chao and B

R. Chao and B. W. Reichardt, Flag Fault-Tolerant Error Correction for any Stabilizer Code, PRX Quantum1, 010302 (2020)

work page 2020
[9]

Dennis, A

E. Dennis, A. Kitaev, A. Landahl, and J. Preskill, Topological quantum memory, Journal of Mathe- matical Physics43, 4452 (2002)

work page 2002
[10]

A. G. Fowler, A. M. Stephens, and P. Groszkowski, High-threshold universal quantum computation on the surface code, Physical Review A80, 052312 (2009)

work page 2009
[11]

A. A. Kovalev and L. P. Pryadko, Fault tolerance of quantum low-density parity check codes with sublin- ear distance scaling, Physical Review A87, 020304 (2013)

work page 2013
[12]

Fault-Tolerant Quantum Computation with Constant Overhead

D. Gottesman, Fault-tolerant quantum computa- tion with constant overhead, Quantum Information & Computation14, 1338 (2014), arXiv:1310.2984

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014
[13]

Lai, Y.-C

C.-Y. Lai, Y.-C. Zheng, and T. A. Brun, Fault- tolerant preparation of stabilizer states for quantum Calderbank-Shor-Steane codes by classical error- correcting codes, Physical Review A95, 032339 (2017)

work page 2017
[14]

Huang and K

S. Huang and K. R. Brown, Between Shor and Steane: A Unifying Construction for Measuring Error Syndromes, Physical Review Letters127, 090505 (2021)

work page 2021
[15]

Huang and K

S. Huang and K. R. Brown, Constructions for mea- suring error syndromes in Calderbank-Shor-Steane codes between Shor and Steane methods, Physical Review A104, 022429 (2021)

work page 2021
[16]

B. M. Terhal, Quantum Error Correction for Quan- tum Memories, Reviews of Modern Physics87, 307 (2015), arXiv:1302.3428. 10

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015
[17]

Construction and Decoding of Quantum Margulis Codes

M. Pacenti, D. Chytas, and B. Vasic, Construction and Decoding of Quantum Margulis Codes (2025), arXiv:2503.03936 [quant-ph]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025
[18]

Knill, Fault-Tolerant Postselected Quantum Computation: Schemes (2004), arXiv:quant- ph/0402171

E. Knill, Fault-Tolerant Postselected Quantum Computation: Schemes (2004), arXiv:quant- ph/0402171

work page arXiv 2004
[19]

Fault-Tolerant Postselected Quantum Computation: Threshold Analysis

E. Knill, Fault-Tolerant Postselected Quan- tum Computation: Threshold Analysis (2004), arXiv:quant-ph/0404104

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004
[20]

Raveendran, N

N. Raveendran, N. Rengaswamy, F. Rozpędek, A. Raina, L. Jiang, and B. Vasić, Finite Rate QLDPC-GKP Coding Scheme that Surpasses the CSS Hamming Bound, Quantum6, 767 (2022)

work page 2022
[21]

D.Gottesman,StabilizerCodesandQuantumError Correction (1997), arXiv:quant-ph/9705052

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997
[22]

A. R. Calderbank and P. W. Shor, Good quantum error-correcting codes exist, Physical Review A54, 1098 (1996)

work page 1996
[23]

A. M. Steane, Error Correcting Codes in Quantum Theory, Physical Review Letters77, 793 (1996)

work page 1996
[24]

N. P. Breuckmann and J. N. Eberhardt, Quantum Low-Density Parity-Check Codes, PRX Quantum2, 040101 (2021)

work page 2021
[25]

S. B. Bravyi and A. Y. Kitaev, Quantum codes on a lattice with boundary (1998), arXiv:quant- ph/9811052

work page arXiv 1998
[26]

Panteleev and G

P. Panteleev and G. Kalachev, Degenerate Quan- tum LDPC Codes With Good Finite Length Perfor- mance, Quantum5, 585 (2021)

work page 2021
[27]

Roffe, D

J. Roffe, D. R. White, S. Burton, and E. Campbell, Decoding across the quantum low-density parity- check code landscape, Phys. Rev. Res.2, 043423 (2020)

work page 2020
[28]

MacKay,Information Theory, Inference, and Learning Algorithms(2003)

D. MacKay,Information Theory, Inference, and Learning Algorithms(2003)

work page 2003
[29]

Gidney, Stim: a fast stabilizer circuit simulator, Quantum5, 497 (2021)

C. Gidney, Stim: a fast stabilizer circuit simulator, Quantum5, 497 (2021)

work page 2021
[30]

In principle, the two auxiliary blocks can be in dif- ferent stabilizer codes, however here we specialize to the same code

work page
[31]

M. Cain, C. Zhao, H. Zhou, N. Meister, J. P. B. Ataides, A. Jaffe, D. Bluvstein, and M. D. Lukin, Correlated Decoding of Logical Algorithms with Transversal Gates, Physical Review Letters133, 240602 (2024)

work page 2024
[32]

K. H. Wan, M. Webber, A. G. Fowler, and W. K. Hensinger, An iterative transversal CNOT decoder (2024), arXiv:2407.20976 [quant-ph]

work page arXiv 2024
[33]

H. Zhou, C. Zhao, M. Cain, D. Bluvstein, N. Maskara, C. Duckering, H.-Y. Hu, S.-T. Wang, A.Kubica,andM.D.Lukin,Low-overheadtransver- sal fault tolerance for universal quantum computa- tion, Nature646, 303 (2025)

work page 2025
[34]

M. Cain, D. Bluvstein, C. Zhao, S. Gu, N. Maskara, M.Kalinowski, A.A.Geim, A.Kubica, M.D.Lukin, andH.Zhou,Fastcorrelateddecodingoftransversal logical algorithms (2025), arXiv:2505.13587 [quant- ph]

work page arXiv 2025
[35]

Skoric, D

L. Skoric, D. E. Browne, K. M. Barnes, N. I. Gille- spie, and E. T. Campbell, Parallel window decod- ing enables scalable fault tolerant quantum compu- tation, Nature Communications14, 7040 (2023)

work page 2023
[36]

Berent, T

L. Berent, T. Hillmann, J. Eisert, R. Wille, and J. Roffe, Analog Information Decoding of Bosonic Quantum Low-Density Parity-Check Codes, PRX Quantum5, 020349 (2024)

work page 2024
[37]

T. R. Scruby, T. Hillmann, and J. Roffe, High-threshold, low-overhead and single-shot de- codable fault-tolerant quantum memory (2024), arXiv:2406.14445 [quant-ph]

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024
[38]

Bombín, C

H. Bombín, C. Dawson, Y.-H. Liu, N. Nickerson, F. Pastawski, and S. Roberts, Modular decoding: Parallelizable real-time decoding for quantum com- puters (2023), arXiv:2303.04846 [quant-ph]

work page arXiv 2023
[39]

A. J. Malcolm, A. N. Glaudell, P. Fuentes, D. Chan- dra, A. Schotte, C. DeLisle, R. Haenel, A. Ebrahimi, J. Roffe, A. O. Quintavalle, S. J. Beale, N. R. Lee-Hone, and S. Simmons, Computing Efficiently in QLDPC Codes (2025), arXiv:2502.07150 [quant- ph]

work page arXiv 2025
[40]

Sahay, Y

K. Sahay, Y. Lin, S. Huang, K. R. Brown, and S. Puri, Error Correction of Transversal cnot GatesforScalableSurface-CodeComputation,PRX Quantum6, 020326 (2025)

work page 2025
[41]

Zhang, Z.-Y

J. Zhang, Z.-Y. Chen, J.-N. Li, T.-H. Wei, H.-Y. Liu, X.-N. Zhuang, Q.-S. Li, Y.-C. Wu, and G.-P. Guo, Scalable Constant-Time Logical Gates for Large-Scale Quantum Computation Us- ing Window-Based Correlated Decoding (2025), arXiv:2410.16963 [quant-ph]

work page arXiv 2025
[42]

Serra-Peralta, M

M. Serra-Peralta, M. H. Shaw, and B. M. Terhal, Decoding across Transversal Clifford Gates in the Surface Code, PRX Quantum7, 010335 (2026)

work page 2026
[43]

L. D. Brown, T. T. Cai, and A. DasGupta, Inter- val Estimation for a Binomial Proportion, Statisti- cal Science16, 10.1214/ss/1009213286 (2001)

work page doi:10.1214/ss/1009213286 2001
[44]

Higgott and C

O. Higgott and C. Gidney, Sparse Blossom: Cor- recting a million errors per core second with minimum-weight matching, Quantum9, 1600 (2025), arXiv:2303.15933 [quant-ph]

work page arXiv 2025
[45]

Roffe, LDPC: Python tools for low density parity check codes (2022)

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

work page 2022
[46]

Paetznick, M

A. Paetznick, M. P. da Silva, C. Ryan-Anderson, J. M. Bello-Rivas, J. P. C. III, A. Chernogu- zov, J. M. Dreiling, C. Foltz, F. Frachon, J. P. Gaebler, T. M. Gatterman, L. Grans-Samuelsson, D. Gresh, D. Hayes, N. Hewitt, C. Holliman, C. V. 11 Horst, J. Johansen, D. Lucchetti, Y. Matsuoka, M.Mills, S.A.Moses, B.Neyenhuis, A.Paz, J.Pino, P. Siegfried, A. Su...

work page arXiv 2024
[47]

Baranes, M

G. Baranes, M. Cain, J. P. B. Ataides, D. Blu- vstein, J. Sinclair, V. Vuletić, H. Zhou, and M. D. Lukin, Leveraging Qubit Loss Detection in Fault- Tolerant Quantum Algorithms, Physical Review X 16, 011002 (2026)

work page 2026
[48]

Ryan-Anderson, N

C. Ryan-Anderson, N. C. Brown, C. H. Bald- win, J. M. Dreiling, C. Foltz, J. P. Gaebler, T. M. Gatterman, N. Hewitt, C. Holliman, C. V. Horst, J. Johansen, D. Lucchetti, T. Mengle, M. Matheny, Y. Matsuoka, K. Mayer, M. Mills, S. A. Moses, B. Neyenhuis, J. Pino, P. Siegfried, R. P. Stutz, J. Walker, and D. Hayes, High- fidelity and Fault-tolerant Teleporta...

work page arXiv 2024
[49]

Chang, Q

K. Chang, Q. Su, and S. Puri, Taming coherent noise with teleportation (2025), arXiv:2508.04947 [quant-ph]

work page arXiv 2025
[50]

Gong and J

A. Gong and J. M. Renes, Improved Logical Error Rate via List Decoding of Quantum Polar Codes, in2024 IEEE International Symposium on Infor- mation Theory (ISIT)(2024) pp. 2496–2501

work page 2024
[51]

Gottesman and I

D. Gottesman and I. L. Chuang, Demonstrating the viability of universal quantum computation using teleportation and single-qubit operations, Nature 402, 390 (1999)

work page 1999
[52]

Bluvstein, S

D. Bluvstein, S. J. Evered, A. A. Geim, S. H. Li, H. Zhou, T. Manovitz, S. Ebadi, M. Cain, M. Kalinowski, D. Hangleiter, J. P. Bonilla Ataides, N. Maskara, I. Cong, X. Gao, P. Sales Rodriguez, T. Karolyshyn, G. Semeghini, M. J. Gullans, M. Greiner, V. Vuletić, and M. D. Lukin, Logical quantum processor based on reconfigurable atom ar- rays, Nature626, 58 (2024)

work page 2024
[53]

J. A. Muniz, D. Crow, H. Kim, J. M. Kindem, W. B. Cairncross, A. Ryou, T. C. Bohdanowicz, C.-A. Chen, Y. Ji, A. M. W. Jones, E. Megidish, C. Nishiguchi, M. Urbanek, L. Wadleigh, T. Wilka- son, D. Aasen, K. Barnes, J. M. Bello-Rivas, I. Bloomfield, G. Booth, A. Brown, M. O. Brown, K. Cassella, G. Cowan, J. Epstein, M. Feldkamp, C. Griger, Y. Hassan, A. Hei...

work page arXiv 2025
[54]

J.-S. Chen, E. Nielsen, M. Ebert, V. Inlek, K. Wright, V. Chaplin, A. Maksymov, E. Páez, A. Poudel, P. Maunz, and J. Gamble, Benchmark- ing a trapped-ion quantum computer with 30 qubits, Quantum8, 1516 (2024)

work page 2024
[55]

Helios: A 98-qubit trapped-ion quantum computer

A. Ransford, M. S. Allman, J. Arkinstall, J. P. C. III, S. F. Cooper, R. D. Delaney, J. M. Dreil- ing, B. Estey, C. Figgatt, A. Hall, A. A. Husain, A. Isanaka, C. J. Kennedy, N. Kotibhaskar, I. S. Madjarov, K. Mayer, A. R. Milne, A. J. Park, A. P. Reed, R. Ancona, M. P. Andersen, P. Andres- Martinez, W. Angenent, L. Argueta, B. Arkin, L. Ascarrunz, W. Bak...

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025
[56]

B. W. Reichardt, Improved ancilla preparation scheme increases fault-tolerant threshold (2004), arXiv:quant-ph/0406025

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004
[57]

Goswami, M

A. Goswami, M. Mhalla, and V. Savin, Fault- tolerant preparation of quantum polar codes en- coding one logical qubit, Physical Review A108, 042605 (2023)

work page 2023
[58]

Goswami, M

A. Goswami, M. Mhalla, and V. Savin, Factory- based fault-tolerant preparation of quantum polar codes encoding one logical qubit, Physical Review A110, 012438 (2024)

work page 2024
[59]

Gong and J

A. Gong and J. M. Renes, Computation with quan- tum Reed-Muller codes and their mapping onto 2D atom arrays (2024), arXiv:2410.23263 [quant-ph]

work page arXiv 2024
[60]

G. M. Sommers, M. Foss-Feig, D. Hayes, D. A. Huse, and M. J. Gullans, Observation of a fault tolerance threshold with concatenated codes, Physical Review Research7, 043271 (2025)

work page 2025
[61]

Kanomata and H

N. Kanomata and H. Goto, Fault-tolerant quantum computing with a high-rate symplectic double code (2025), arXiv:2509.15457 [quant-ph]

work page arXiv 2025
[62]

Y. Ibe, Y. Hirano, Y. Ozu, T. Kawakubo, and K. Fujii, Measurement-Based Fault-Tolerant Quan- tum Computation on High-Connectivity Devices: A Resource-Efficient Approach toward Early FTQC (2025), arXiv:2510.18652 [quant-ph]

work page arXiv 2025
[63]

Yamasaki and M

H. Yamasaki and M. Koashi, Time-Efficient Constant-Space-Overhead Fault-Tolerant Quantum Computation, Nature Physics20, 247 (2024)

work page 2024
[64]

Yoshida, S

S. Yoshida, S. Tamiya, and H. Yamasaki, Concate- nate codes, save qubits, npj Quantum Information 11, 1 (2025)

work page 2025
[65]

Litinski, Blocklet concatenation: Low-overhead fault-tolerant protocols for fusion-based quantum computation (2025), arXiv:2506.13619 [quant-ph]

D. Litinski, Blocklet concatenation: Low-overhead fault-tolerant protocols for fusion-based quantum computation (2025), arXiv:2506.13619 [quant-ph]

work page arXiv 2025
[66]

M. B. Hastings, A Class of Cyclic Quantum Codes (2025), arXiv:2509.06865 [quant-ph]

work page arXiv 2025
[67]

Murphy, Hex: modular simulation toolkit for quantum error correction (2026)

E. Murphy, Hex: modular simulation toolkit for quantum error correction (2026)

work page 2026
[68]

Horsman, A

C. Horsman, A. G. Fowler, S. Devitt, and R. V. Meter, Surface code quantum computing by lattice surgery, New Journal of Physics14, 123011 (2012)

work page 2012
[69]

Aaronson and D

S. Aaronson and D. Gottesman, Improved simula- tion of stabilizer circuits, Physical Review A70, 052328 (2004). Appendix A: Proofs We provide the detailed definitions and proofs of the lemmas for fault tolerance with Knill error correction (Knill EC) presented earlier

work page 2004
[70]

Definitions Definition 1. Locally decaying (LD) proba- bility distribution:For a given finite setA, a probability distributionpover the power set ofA, p: Pow[A]→[0,1]is locally decaying with rateτ iff for any subsetB⊆A, the total probability that any subsetB ′ ⊆Adrawn according to it is upper bounded as, X B′:B⊆B ′⊆A p(B′)≤τ |B|.(A1) Definition 2. Locally...

work page
[71]

Proof of Lemma 1 Proof.ForE⊆D∪A, define T(E) :={i∈[n] :e i ∩E̸=∅}, wheree i = (d i, ai)is an “edge” (cardinality-two set) corresponding to the CNOT betweendi anda i. Since each edge covers two qubits, |T(E)| ≥ |E| 2 .(A3) For qubits in edgeei to end up in error support on that edge, it must be because either the input qubits to that edge were affected by ...

work page