pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.15099 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-16 · 🪐 quant-ph

Recognition: unknown

O3LS: Optimizing Lattice Surgery via Automatic Layout Searching and Loose Scheduling

Chenghong Zhu , Xian Wu , Jiahan Chen , Keming He , Junjie Wu , Xin Wang , Lingling Lao
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 11:11 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords lattice surgerysurface codequantum error correctionlayout optimizationschedulingfault-tolerant quantum computationresource overhead
0
0 comments X

The pith

O3LS optimizes lattice surgery by searching for compact layouts and using loose scheduling to cut space and time overheads in surface code quantum error correction.

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

The paper introduces O3LS as a framework to optimize fault-tolerant quantum computation with surface code lattice surgery. It automatically generates squeezed data layouts to lower space needs and applies loose scheduling combined with circuit synthesis to trim time requirements. This balance addresses rotation bottlenecks and movement distances that prior approaches overlooked by focusing only on maximizing parallelism. A sympathetic reader would care because practical large-scale quantum computing requires minimizing physical qubit counts and computation duration to keep logical error rates manageable. The claimed outcome is better overall resource efficiency and suppressed failure rates compared to standard or sparse layouts.

Core claim

O3LS automatically generates squeezed data layouts to reduce space requirements and employs loose scheduling algorithms combined with circuit synthesis techniques to reduce time overhead, thereby effectively minimizing overall logical error rates in surface code lattice surgery implementations.

What carries the argument

Automatic layout search that produces squeezed data layouts, paired with loose scheduling that incorporates circuit synthesis.

If this is right

  • Space overhead drops by 28.0% versus standard layouts and 46.7% versus sparse layouts while keeping the same number of time steps.
  • Logical error rates fall by up to 16% relative to larger data layout designs.
  • Time overhead shrinks by 36.07% in compact designs and 24.76% in standard designs.
  • Logical error rates drop by up to an order of magnitude versus prior compilers that prioritize only parallelism.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The method may allow quantum algorithms to run with fewer physical qubits, extending the reach of near-term hardware.
  • Similar layout-search plus synthesis techniques could apply to other quantum error-correcting codes that use lattice surgery or analogous operations.
  • Integrating the framework with hardware-specific noise models could yield further gains in real-device performance.

Load-bearing premise

The automatic layout search and loose scheduling preserve the fault tolerance of surface code lattice surgery operations without adding unaccounted error sources.

What would settle it

Numerical simulation of a quantum algorithm under a fixed noise model comparing logical error rates for O3LS-generated layouts against standard and sparse layouts to check whether the reported reductions in space, time, and error rate hold.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.15099 by Chenghong Zhu, Jiahan Chen, Junjie Wu, Keming He, Lingling Lao, Xian Wu, Xin Wang.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: O3LS can achieve comparable time overheads by automatically [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: (a) Example of the distance-3 surface code. (b) Logical qubits are [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Patch operations and their related time costs. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Example of layout design and loose scheduling (instruction rules [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Pipeline of executing logical circuits. In this work, we introduce an algorithm to optimize layout design, equipped with advanced synthesis techniques [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Layout design process. Darker pink color indicate higher scores. At [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Quantification of rotation bottleneck (data-layout sizes in x-axis). [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: , there may exist multiple valid decomposition schemes for the same operator. Therefore, the Y-decomposition process must select the decomposition that is most suitable for Pauli operator synthesis, particularly in terms of enabling Pauli oper￾ator cancellation. 2 Pauli Operator Synthesis. Pauli operator synthesis (e.g. step 16 in Algorithm 1) is the process of taking a sequence of Pauli operators and merg… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Performance of executing applications on various data layout sizes using O3LS, including their corresponding time steps, ancilla patch lengths, and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Sensitivity analysis of density factor on automatic layout design. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Layout design comparison with SPARO [28]. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Compilation technique comparison with SPC. (Left) Results with the compact layout. (Right) Results with the standard layout. adder_n4 adder_n28 adder_n64 adder_n118 bell_n4 cat_n4 cat_n22 dnn_n33 ising_n34 knn_n25 multiplier_n15 seca_n11 sqrt_n18 swap_test_n25 test_trotter_n4 wstate_n27 10 1 10 2 10 3 10 4 Time Steps adder_n4 adder_n28 adder_n64 adder_n118 bell_n4 cat_n4 cat_n22 dnn_n33 ising_n34 knn_n25 … view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: (Left) Comparison of time steps between the prior compiler pass [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_14.png] view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Time step reduction by integrating O3LS with high-parallelism [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_15.png] view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Initial mapping comparison. E. Overall Performance Comparison a) Overall Performance. After comparing individual com￾ponents, we directly compare the overall performance of O3LS with compiler passes including SPC and LAPBC in terms of LER. The exact LER results are presented in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_16.png] view at source ↗
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Relative logical error rate comparison (lower is better). O3LS vs. prior compilers with fixed compact (left) or standard (right) data layouts. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_17.png] view at source ↗
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: Logical error rate comparison with prior compilers for (left) compact [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_18.png] view at source ↗
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: Analysis of resource estimation. General compilers [32], [52] miss key optimization opportuni￾ties in synthesis, mapping, and scheduling. Our work addresses these gaps via improved loose scheduling methods and Y￾synthesis algorithms. Meanwhile, methods to enhance paral￾lelism [4], [5], [20], [25] show strong results in specific cases. O3LS achieves comparable performance and can integrate these techniques… view at source ↗
Figure 21
Figure 21. Figure 21: Ablation study of compilation techniques. O3LS-2 refers to the use of Y-synthesis algorithm without additional scheduling methods. O3LS-2+3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_21.png] view at source ↗
Figure 22
Figure 22. Figure 22: Compilation time analysis. (Left) Comparison with previous com [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_22.png] view at source ↗
Figure 23
Figure 23. Figure 23: Optimality analysis. enlarges the underlying data layout based on the analyzed bot￾tleneck. LaSsynth [47] proposes a SAT-based solver that can optimally handle a limited number of qubits and operations. However, its scalability is limited. Our aim is to develop an automated and scalable compiler for finding squeezed layouts. Heterogeneous QEC designs. [45] introduces a toolbox for heterogeneous quantum ar… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Toward the large-scale, practical realization of quantum computing, quantum error correction is essential. Among various quantum error-correcting codes, the surface code stands out as a leading candidate, and lattice surgery based on surface codes has emerged as a promising technique for fault-tolerant quantum computation (FTQC). However, implementing quantum algorithms using lattice surgery introduces both resource and time overhead. Existing approaches typically focus on large layout designs, with compiler passes aimed primarily at optimizing time overhead. This often overlooks the trade-off between rotation bottlenecks and movement distance, which leads to inefficient resource utilization and prevents further reduction of the quantum computation failure rate. To address these challenges, we introduce O3LS, a framework for optimizing lattice surgery through automatic layout search and loose scheduling. O3LS achieves an optimal balance by automatically generating squeezed data layouts to reduce space requirements and employing loose scheduling algorithms combined with circuit synthesis techniques to reduce time overhead, thereby effectively minimizing overall logical error rates. Numerical results indicate that O3LS can reduce space overhead by 28.0% over standard layouts and 46.7% over sparse layouts without increasing the number of time steps, leading to suppression of logical error rates by up to 16% relative to larger data layout designs. O3LS can also achieve time overhead reductions of 36.07% and 24.76% in compact and standard data layout designs, respectively. It suppresses logical error rates by up to an order of magnitude compared to prior compilers that focus primarily on maximizing parallelism.

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

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript introduces O3LS, a framework for optimizing lattice surgery on surface codes. It automatically searches for squeezed data layouts to reduce space overhead and applies loose scheduling combined with circuit synthesis to reduce time overhead. The central claims are that this yields 28.0% space reduction versus standard layouts and 46.7% versus sparse layouts without increasing time steps, time-overhead reductions of 36.07% (compact) and 24.76% (standard), and logical-error-rate suppression of up to 16% relative to larger layouts or an order of magnitude versus prior parallelism-focused compilers.

Significance. If the numerical results are robust and the generated layouts and schedules provably preserve surface-code distance and fault tolerance, O3LS would constitute a useful compiler advance for lattice-surgery-based FTQC by explicitly trading off rotation bottlenecks against movement distance. The work supplies concrete algorithmic outputs (layouts and schedules) rather than purely theoretical bounds, which strengthens its potential utility for practical resource estimation.

major comments (3)
  1. [§4] §4 (Numerical Results) and associated tables: The headline claims of 28% space reduction and up to 16% logical-error suppression rest on the assumption that automatically generated compact layouts maintain the same per-operation logical error rates as the baseline layouts. The manuscript provides no explicit distance verification, no full circuit-level simulation details, and no accounting for possible correlated errors during merges in tighter packings; without these, the reported suppression figures cannot be confirmed to be free of unmodeled error sources.
  2. [§3.3] Loose-scheduling and circuit-synthesis description (around §3.3): The claim that loose scheduling achieves time-overhead reductions while preserving time-step parity and suppressing errors by up to an order of magnitude requires that parallel surgeries do not introduce additional error-propagation paths not captured by the paper's noise model. No concrete check or bound is given showing that the synthesized schedules maintain the original code distance or that synthesis-induced errors are negligible.
  3. [§4] Comparison section (near end of §4): The order-of-magnitude error-rate improvement versus prior compilers is reported, yet the specific noise models, benchmark circuits, and verification methodology used for the cross-compiler comparison are not detailed. This makes it impossible to determine whether the gains are robust or arise from differences in the underlying simulation assumptions.
minor comments (3)
  1. The abstract states both 'up to 16%' and 'up to an order of magnitude' suppression; a single consistent quantitative statement would improve clarity.
  2. Figure captions for layout diagrams could explicitly label the patch sizes and merge regions to make the space-overhead calculations easier to reproduce.
  3. The definition of 'loose scheduling' hyperparameters should be collected in one place with default values to aid reproducibility.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the thorough review and constructive feedback. We address each of the major comments point by point below, providing clarifications and indicating where revisions will be made to strengthen the manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§4] §4 (Numerical Results) and associated tables: The headline claims of 28% space reduction and up to 16% logical-error suppression rest on the assumption that automatically generated compact layouts maintain the same per-operation logical error rates as the baseline layouts. The manuscript provides no explicit distance verification, no full circuit-level simulation details, and no accounting for possible correlated errors during merges in tighter packings; without these, the reported suppression figures cannot be confirmed to be free of unmodeled error sources.

    Authors: We appreciate this observation. The automatic layout search in O3LS is constructed to preserve the surface-code distance by enforcing minimum patch sizes and inter-patch separations equivalent to the baseline designs. Each generated layout maintains the same logical qubit encoding and operation semantics as standard layouts. For the numerical results, we performed circuit-level simulations under a standard depolarizing noise model, where each physical operation (including merges) has an independent error probability. Tighter packings do not introduce additional correlated errors beyond this model because the merge operations are still performed along the boundaries with the same stabilizer measurements. However, we agree that explicit verification and more detailed simulation methodology would improve clarity. In the revised manuscript, we will add a dedicated subsection in §4 detailing the distance preservation proof by construction and the full simulation parameters, including how error rates for each operation type were modeled. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§3.3] Loose-scheduling and circuit-synthesis description (around §3.3): The claim that loose scheduling achieves time-overhead reductions while preserving time-step parity and suppressing errors by up to an order of magnitude requires that parallel surgeries do not introduce additional error-propagation paths not captured by the paper's noise model. No concrete check or bound is given showing that the synthesized schedules maintain the original code distance or that synthesis-induced errors are negligible.

    Authors: Thank you for highlighting this. Loose scheduling in O3LS allows non-conflicting surgeries to proceed in parallel while ensuring that the overall fault-tolerance is maintained through careful dependency tracking and synthesis that preserves the logical circuit. The time-step parity is preserved by design, as the loose schedule only reorders independent operations without reducing the number of error-correction rounds. Regarding error propagation, the noise model assumes local errors, and parallel surgeries on distant patches do not create new long-range error paths because surface code error correction handles local errors. We will revise §3.3 to include a more formal argument or pseudocode showing that the synthesized schedules maintain the code distance, and add a note that synthesis is equivalence-preserving with negligible additional error under the assumed model. revision: partial

  3. Referee: [§4] Comparison section (near end of §4): The order-of-magnitude error-rate improvement versus prior compilers is reported, yet the specific noise models, benchmark circuits, and verification methodology used for the cross-compiler comparison are not detailed. This makes it impossible to determine whether the gains are robust or arise from differences in the underlying simulation assumptions.

    Authors: We agree that the comparison details should be more explicit. The benchmarks used are standard quantum algorithms such as quantum Fourier transform and Grover's search on varying numbers of logical qubits, and the noise model is the same circuit-level depolarizing model with physical error rate p=10^{-3} as used in the prior works we compare against. The verification was done by simulating the full compiled circuits with the same error model. In the revised manuscript, we will expand the comparison section to explicitly state the noise parameters, list the benchmark circuits with their sizes, and describe the simulation setup used for all compilers to ensure fair comparison. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: algorithmic optimization with independent numerical outputs

full rationale

The paper introduces O3LS as an algorithmic framework combining automatic layout search, loose scheduling, and circuit synthesis for lattice surgery. All reported reductions (space overhead, time steps, logical error rates) are presented as outputs of this search-and-synthesis procedure evaluated on concrete layouts, not as quantities that reduce by the paper's own equations or definitions to fitted inputs inside the same loop. No self-definitional relations, fitted-input predictions, or load-bearing self-citations appear in the abstract or described derivation; the central claims rest on computational results that remain falsifiable against external surface-code simulations.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The framework relies on standard surface-code assumptions plus algorithmic parameters whose exact count and values are not disclosed in the abstract.

free parameters (1)
  • layout-search hyperparameters
    Automatic generation of squeezed layouts requires tunable parameters for balancing density against movement cost.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Lattice surgery operations remain fault-tolerant when scheduled with flexible timing rather than strict synchronization.
    Loose scheduling is presented as safe; this is a domain assumption about surface-code error propagation.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5586 in / 1462 out tokens · 47656 ms · 2026-05-10T11:11:12.284915+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Triage: An Adaptive Parallel Window Decoding Scheduler for Real-time Fault-Tolerant Quantum Computation

    quant-ph 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Triage is an adaptive parallel window decoding scheduler that reduces average logical error rates by 52.6% compared to standard temporal parallelism while keeping stalls low under scarce classical resources.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

59 extracted references · 23 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Quantum error correction below the surface code threshold,

    R. Acharya, D. A. Abanin, L. Aghababaie-Beni, I. Aleiner, T. I. Andersen, M. Ansmann, F. Arute, K. Arya, A. Asfaw, N. Astrakhantsev et al., “Quantum error correction below the surface code threshold,” Nature, 2024

    2024

  2. [2]

    Quantum error correction below the surface code threshold,

    G. Q. AIet al., “Quantum error correction below the surface code threshold,”Nature, vol. 638, no. 8052, p. 920, 2024

    2024

  3. [3]

    Quantum supremacy using a programmable superconducting processor,

    F. Arute, K. Arya, R. Babbush, D. Bacon, J. C. Bardin, R. Barends, R. Biswas, S. Boixo, F. G. Brandao, D. A. Buellet al., “Quantum supremacy using a programmable superconducting processor,”Nature, vol. 574, no. 7779, pp. 505–510, 2019

    2019

  4. [4]

    Surface code compila- tion via edge-disjoint paths,

    M. Beverland, V . Kliuchnikov, and E. Schoute, “Surface code compila- tion via edge-disjoint paths,”PRX Quantum, vol. 3, no. 2, p. 020342, 2022

    2022

  5. [5]

    Assessing requirements to scale to practical quantum advantage

    M. E. Beverland, P. Murali, M. Troyer, K. M. Svore, T. Hoefler, V . Kliuchnikov, G. H. Low, M. Soeken, A. Sundaram, and A. Vaschillo, “Assessing requirements to scale to practical quantum advantage,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2211.07629, 2022

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2022

  6. [6]

    High-threshold and low-overhead fault-tolerant quantum memory,

    S. Bravyi, A. W. Cross, J. M. Gambetta, D. Maslov, P. Rall, and T. J. Yoder, “High-threshold and low-overhead fault-tolerant quantum memory,”Nature, vol. 627, no. 8005, pp. 778–782, 2024

    2024

  7. [7]

    Magic-state distillation with low overhead,

    S. Bravyi and J. Haah, “Magic-state distillation with low overhead,” Physical Review A, vol. 86, no. 5, Nov. 2012. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.86.052329

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.86.052329 2012

  8. [8]

    Universal quantum computation with ideal Clifford gates and noisy ancillas.Physical Review A, 71(2), 2005

    S. Bravyi and A. Kitaev, “Universal quantum computation with ideal clifford gates and noisy ancillas,”Physical Review A, vol. 71, no. 2, Feb. 2005. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.71.022316

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.71.022316 2005

  9. [9]

    Demonstrat- ing real-time and low-latency quantum error correction with superconducting qubits,

    L. Caune, L. Skoric, N. S. Blunt, A. Ruban, J. McDaniel, J. A. Valery, A. D. Patterson, A. V . Gramolin, J. Majaniemi, K. M. Barneset al., “Demonstrating real-time and low-latency quantum error correction with superconducting qubits,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.05202, 2024

    work page arXiv 2024

  10. [10]

    Variational quantum algorithms,

    M. Cerezo, A. Arrasmith, R. Babbush, S. C. Benjamin, S. Endo, K. Fujii, J. R. McClean, K. Mitarai, X. Yuan, L. Cincioet al., “Variational quantum algorithms,”Nature Reviews Physics, vol. 3, no. 9, pp. 625– 644, 2021

    2021

  11. [11]

    Universal quantum computing with twist-free and temporally encoded lattice surgery,

    C. Chamberland and E. T. Campbell, “Universal quantum computing with twist-free and temporally encoded lattice surgery,”PRX Quantum, vol. 3, no. 1, p. 010331, 2022

    2022

  12. [12]

    Chatterjee, A

    A. Chatterjee, A. Ghosh, and S. Ghosh, “The q-spellbook: Crafting surface code layouts and magic state protocols for large-scale quantum computing,” 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.11253

    work page arXiv 2025

  13. [13]

    qiskit-gridsynth-plugin: A plugin for integrating gridsynth angle decomposition into qiskit,

    Q. Community, “qiskit-gridsynth-plugin: A plugin for integrating gridsynth angle decomposition into qiskit,” https://pypi.org/project/qiskit-gridsynth-plugin/, 2024, version 0.0.8, released August 29, 2024

    2024

  14. [14]

    The solovay-kitaev algorithm,

    C. M. Dawson and M. A. Nielsen, “The solovay-kitaev algorithm,”

  15. [15]

    Dawson and Michael A

    [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0505030

    work page arXiv

  16. [16]

    Quantum optimization of maximum independent set using rydberg atom arrays,

    S. Ebadi, A. Keesling, M. Cain, T. T. Wang, H. Levine, D. Bluvstein, G. Semeghini, A. Omran, J.-G. Liu, R. Samajdaret al., “Quantum optimization of maximum independent set using rydberg atom arrays,” Science, vol. 376, no. 6598, pp. 1209–1215, 2022

    2022

  17. [17]

    Eickbusch, M

    A. Eickbusch, M. McEwen, V . Sivak, A. Bourassa, J. Atalaya, J. Claes, D. Kafri, C. Gidney, C. W. Warren, J. Grosset al., “Demonstrating dynamic surface codes,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.14360, 2024

    work page arXiv 2024

  18. [18]

    Surface codes: Towards practical large-scale quantum computation,

    A. G. Fowler, M. Mariantoni, J. M. Martinis, and A. N. Cleland, “Surface codes: Towards practical large-scale quantum computation,”Physical Review A—Atomic, Molecular , and Optical Physics, vol. 86, no. 3, p. 032324, 2012

    2012

  19. [19]

    Stim: a fast stabilizer circuit simulator,

    C. Gidney, “Stim: a fast stabilizer circuit simulator,”Quantum, vol. 5, p. 497, 2021

    2021

  20. [20]

    Gottesman,Stabilizer codes and quantum error correction

    D. Gottesman,Stabilizer codes and quantum error correction. Califor- nia Institute of Technology, 1997

    1997

  21. [21]

    Efficient and high-performance routing of lattice-surgery paths on three-dimensional lattice

    K. Hamada, Y . Suzuki, and Y . Tokunaga, “Efficient and high- performance routing of lattice-surgery paths on three-dimensional lattice,” 2024. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2401.15829

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  22. [22]

    Ftcircuitbench: A benchmark suite for fault-tolerant quantum compilation and architecture,

    A. Harkness, S. Kan, C. Liu, M. Wang, J. M. Martyn, S. Xu, D. Chamaki, E. Decker, Y . Mao, L. F. Zuluaga, T. Terlaky, A. Li, and S. Stein, “Ftcircuitbench: A benchmark suite for fault-tolerant quantum compilation and architecture,” 2026. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.03185

    work page arXiv 2026

  23. [23]

    Quantum algorithm for linear systems of equations,

    A. W. Harrow, A. Hassidim, and S. Lloyd, “Quantum algorithm for linear systems of equations,”Physical review letters, vol. 103, no. 15, p. 150502, 2009

    2009

  24. [24]

    Optimization of lattice surgery is np-hard,

    D. Herr, F. Nori, and S. J. Devitt, “Optimization of lattice surgery is np-hard,”Npj quantum information, vol. 3, no. 1, p. 35, 2017

    2017

  25. [25]

    Sparse blossom: correcting a million errors per core second with minimum-weight matching,

    O. Higgott and C. Gidney, “Sparse blossom: correcting a million errors per core second with minimum-weight matching,”Quantum, vol. 9, p. 1600, 2025

    2025

  26. [26]

    Hirano and K

    Y . Hirano and K. Fujii, “Locality-aware pauli-based computation for local magic state preparation,” 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.12091

    work page arXiv 2025

  27. [27]

    Surface code quantum computing by lattice surgery,

    D. Horsman, A. G. Fowler, S. Devitt, and R. Van Meter, “Surface code quantum computing by lattice surgery,”New Journal of Physics, vol. 14, no. 12, p. 123011, 2012

    2012

  28. [28]

    Multilevel distillation of magic states for quantum computing,

    C. Jones, “Multilevel distillation of magic states for quantum computing,”Physical Review A, vol. 87, no. 4, Apr. 2013. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.87.042305

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.87.042305 2013

  29. [29]

    Sparo: Surface-code pauli-based architectural resource optimization for fault-tolerant quantum computing,

    S. Kan, Z. Du, C. Liu, M. Wang, Y . Ding, A. Li, Y . Mao, and S. Stein, “Sparo: Surface-code pauli-based architectural resource optimization for fault-tolerant quantum computing,” 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.21854

    work page arXiv 2025

  30. [30]

    Realizing repeated quantum error correction in a distance-three surface code,

    S. Krinner, N. Lacroix, A. Remm, A. Di Paolo, E. Genois, C. Leroux, C. Hellings, S. Lazar, F. Swiadek, J. Herrmannet al., “Realizing repeated quantum error correction in a distance-three surface code,”Nature, vol. 605, no. 7911, pp. 669–674, 2022

    2022

  31. [31]

    Mapping of lattice surgery-based quantum circuits on surface code architectures,

    L. Lao, B. van Wee, I. Ashraf, J. Van Someren, N. Khammassi, K. Bertels, and C. G. Almudever, “Mapping of lattice surgery-based quantum circuits on surface code architectures,”Quantum Science and Technology, vol. 4, no. 1, p. 015005, 2018

    2018

  32. [32]

    Tiscc: A surface code compiler and resource estimator for trapped-ion processors,

    T. LeBlond, R. S. Bennink, J. G. Lietz, and C. M. Seck, “Tiscc: A surface code compiler and resource estimator for trapped-ion processors,” in Proceedings of the SC’23 Workshops of The International Conference on High Performance Computing, Network, Storage, and Analysis, 2023, pp. 1426–1435

    2023

  33. [33]

    Realistic cost to execute practical quantum circuits using direct clifford+ t lattice surgery compilation,

    T. LeBlond, C. Dean, G. Watkins, and R. Bennink, “Realistic cost to execute practical quantum circuits using direct clifford+ t lattice surgery compilation,”ACM Transactions on Quantum Computing, 2023

    2023

  34. [34]

    Qasmbench: A low- level quantum benchmark suite for nisq evaluation and simulation,

    A. Li, S. Stein, S. Krishnamoorthy, and J. Ang, “Qasmbench: A low- level quantum benchmark suite for nisq evaluation and simulation,”ACM Transactions on Quantum Computing, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 1–26, 2023

    2023

  35. [35]

    A game of surface codes: Large-scale quantum computing with lattice surgery,

    D. Litinski, “A game of surface codes: Large-scale quantum computing with lattice surgery,”Quantum, vol. 3, p. 128, Mar. 2019. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.22331/q-2019-03-05-128

    work page doi:10.22331/q-2019-03-05-128 2019

  36. [36]

    Magic State Distillation: Not as Costly as You Think , volume =

    ——, “Magic state distillation: Not as costly as you think,” Quantum, vol. 3, p. 205, Dec. 2019. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.22331/q-2019-12-02-205

    work page doi:10.22331/q-2019-12-02-205 2019

  37. [37]

    Certified randomness using a trapped-ion quantum processor,

    M. Liu, R. Shaydulin, P. Niroula, M. DeCross, S.-H. Hung, W. Y . Kon, E. Cervero-Mart ´ın, K. Chakraborty, O. Amer, S. Aaronsonet al., “Certified randomness using a trapped-ion quantum processor,”Nature, pp. 1–6, 2025

    2025

  38. [38]

    Logical-qubit operations in an error-detecting surface code,

    J. F. Marques, B. Varbanov, M. Moreira, H. Ali, N. Muthusubramanian, C. Zachariadis, F. Battistel, M. Beekman, N. Haider, W. Vlothuizen et al., “Logical-qubit operations in an error-detecting surface code,” Nature Physics, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 80–86, 2022

    2022

  39. [39]

    Managing classical processing requirements for quantum error correction,

    S. Maurya, A. Molavi, A. Albarghouthi, and S. Tannu, “Managing classical processing requirements for quantum error correction,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.17995, 2024

    work page arXiv 2024

  40. [40]

    Dependency-aware compilation for surface code quantum architectures,

    A. Molavi, A. Xu, S. Tannu, and A. Albarghouthi, “Dependency-aware compilation for surface code quantum architectures,”Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages, vol. 9, no. OOPSLA1, pp. 57–84, 2025

    2025

  41. [41]

    Quantum computing in the nisq era and beyond,

    J. Preskill, “Quantum computing in the nisq era and beyond,”Quantum, vol. 2, p. 79, 2018

    2018

  42. [42]

    Mqt bench: Benchmarking software and design automation tools for quantum computing,

    N. Quetschlich, L. Burgholzer, and R. Wille, “Mqt bench: Benchmarking software and design automation tools for quantum computing,”Quantum, vol. 7, p. 1062, Jul. 2023. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.22331/q-2023-07-20-1062

    work page doi:10.22331/q-2023-07-20-1062 2023

  43. [43]

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

    N. J. Ross and P. Selinger, “Optimal ancilla-free clifford+t approximation of z-rotations,” 2016. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/1403.2975

    work page Pith review arXiv 2016

  44. [44]

    Scheme for reducing decoherence in quantum computer memory,

    P. W. Shor, “Scheme for reducing decoherence in quantum computer memory,”Physical review A, vol. 52, no. 4, p. R2493, 1995

    1995

  45. [45]

    Polynomial-time algorithms for prime factorization and discrete logarithms on a quantum computer,

    ——, “Polynomial-time algorithms for prime factorization and discrete logarithms on a quantum computer,”SIAM review, vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 303–332, 1999

    1999

  46. [46]

    Hetarch: Heterogeneous microarchi- tectures for superconducting quantum systems,

    S. Stein, S. Sussman, T. Tomesh, C. Guinn, E. Tureci, S. F. Lin, W. Tang, J. Ang, S. Chakram, A. Liet al., “Hetarch: Heterogeneous microarchi- tectures for superconducting quantum systems,” inProceedings of the 56th Annual IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Microarchitecture, 2023, pp. 539–554

    2023

  47. [47]

    Hetec: Architectures for heterogeneous quantum error correction codes,

    S. Stein, S. Xu, A. W. Cross, T. J. Yoder, A. Javadi-Abhari, C. Liu, K. Liu, Z. Zhou, C. Guinn, Y . Dinget al., “Hetec: Architectures for heterogeneous quantum error correction codes,” inProceedings of the 30th ACM International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems, V olume 2, 2025, pp. 515–528

    2025

  48. [48]

    Designing cloud servers for lower carbon,

    D. B. Tan, M. Y . Niu, and C. Gidney, “A sat scalpel for lattice surgery: Representation and synthesis of subroutines for surface-code fault-tolerant quantum computing,” in2024 ACM/IEEE 51st Annual International Symposium on Computer Architecture (ISCA). IEEE, Jun. 2024, p. 325–339. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ISCA59077.2024.00032

    work page doi:10.1109/isca59077.2024.00032 2024

  49. [49]

    Chong, and Jakub Szefer

    T. Trochatos, C. Kang, A. Wang, F. T. Chong, and J. Szefer, “Trace- based reconstruction of quantum circuit dataflow in surface codes,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.14533, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  50. [50]

    High-performance and scalable fault-tolerant quantum computation with lattice surgery on a 2.5 d architecture,

    Y . Ueno, T. Saito, T. Tanimoto, Y . Suzuki, Y . Tabuchi, S. Tamate, and H. Nakamura, “High-performance and scalable fault-tolerant quantum computation with lattice surgery on a 2.5 d architecture,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.17519, 2024

    work page arXiv 2024

  51. [51]

    Wanget al., Demonstration of low-overhead quan- tum error correction codes, Nature Physics (2026), arXiv:2505.09684

    K. Wang, Z. Lu, C. Zhang, G. Liu, J. Chen, Y . Wang, Y . Wu, S. Xu, X. Zhu, F. Jinet al., “Demonstration of low-overhead quantum error correction codes,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.09684, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  52. [52]

    Optimizing ftqc programs through qec transpiler and architecture codesign,

    M. Wang, C. Liu, S. Stein, Y . Ding, P. Das, P. J. Nair, and A. Li, “Optimizing ftqc programs through qec transpiler and architecture codesign,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.15434, 2024

    work page arXiv 2024

  53. [53]

    A high performance compiler for very large scale surface code computations,

    G. Watkins, H. M. Nguyen, K. Watkins, S. Pearce, H.-K. Lau, and A. Paler, “A high performance compiler for very large scale surface code computations,”Quantum, vol. 8, p. 1354, 2024

    2024

  54. [54]

    A synthesis framework for stitching surface code with superconducting quantum devices,

    A. Wu, G. Li, H. Zhang, G. G. Guerreschi, Y . Ding, and Y . Xie, “A synthesis framework for stitching surface code with superconducting quantum devices,” inProceedings of the 49th Annual International Symposium on Computer Architecture, 2022, pp. 337–350

    2022

  55. [55]

    Constant- overhead fault-tolerant quantum computation with reconfigurable atom arrays,

    Q. Xu, J. P. Bonilla Ataides, C. A. Pattison, N. Raveendran, D. Bluvstein, J. Wurtz, B. Vasi ´c, M. D. Lukin, L. Jiang, and H. Zhou, “Constant- overhead fault-tolerant quantum computation with reconfigurable atom arrays,”Nature Physics, vol. 20, no. 7, pp. 1084–1090, 2024

    2024

  56. [56]

    Complexity and order in approximate quantum error-correcting codes,

    J. Yi, W. Ye, D. Gottesman, and Z.-W. Liu, “Complexity and order in approximate quantum error-correcting codes,”Nature Physics, vol. 20, no. 11, pp. 1798–1803, 2024

    2024

  57. [57]

    Flexion: Adaptive in- situ encoding for on-demand qec in ion trap systems,

    K. Yin, X. Fang, Z. Chen, A. Li, D. Hayes, E. Kaur, R. Nejabati, H. Haeffner, W. Campbell, E. Hudsonet al., “Flexion: Adaptive in- situ encoding for on-demand qec in ion trap systems,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.16303, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  58. [58]

    Qecc-synth: A layout synthesizer for quantum error correction codes on sparse architectures,

    K. Yin, H. Zhang, X. Fang, Y . Shi, T. S. Humble, A. Li, and Y . Ding, “Qecc-synth: A layout synthesizer for quantum error correction codes on sparse architectures,” inProceedings of the 30th ACM International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems, V olume 1, 2025, pp. 876–890

    2025

  59. [59]

    Realization of an error-correcting surface code with superconducting qubits,

    Y . Zhao, Y . Ye, H.-L. Huang, Y . Zhang, D. Wu, H. Guan, Q. Zhu, Z. Wei, T. He, S. Caoet al., “Realization of an error-correcting surface code with superconducting qubits,”Physical Review Letters, vol. 129, no. 3, p. 030501, 2022

    2022