pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.04817 · v1 · pith:QTNXIEIJnew · submitted 2026-06-03 · 🪐 quant-ph

Effect of isotropic errors on the complexity of Grover's algorithm

Anurag Saha Roy , Jes\'us Lacalle This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-28 06:06 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords isotropic errorsGrover's algorithmquantum searchnoise robustnessnumerical simulationsquantum computingerror analysissuccess probability
0
0 comments X

The pith

Isotropic errors affect Grover's algorithm complexity and success probability in simulations

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

The paper explores the concrete effects of isotropic errors on Grover's search algorithm using numerical simulations. It tracks how these errors, known to resist standard correction, alter the algorithm's performance metrics including query complexity and success probability. A sympathetic reader would care because the work directly addresses whether Grover's algorithm remains viable on real quantum devices subject to this noise type. The simulations are performed with a purpose-built open-source library that implements the isotropic error model.

Core claim

Numerical simulations demonstrate that isotropic errors impact the complexity of Grover's algorithm by influencing its performance and reducing success probability, thereby indicating robustness limitations when the algorithm is run on noisy quantum hardware.

What carries the argument

The isotropic error model applied through numerical simulations of Grover's algorithm using the custom isotropic library.

If this is right

  • Grover's algorithm exhibits reduced success probability when isotropic errors are present.
  • Query complexity of the algorithm increases under the influence of isotropic errors.
  • Implementations of Grover search on noisy intermediate-scale quantum hardware encounter additional performance barriers from this error class.
  • Standard error correction techniques leave the algorithm vulnerable to isotropic noise.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The simulation approach could be extended to quantify exact scaling of query overhead as a function of error strength.
  • Other quantum algorithms relying on amplitude amplification may display analogous sensitivity to isotropic errors.
  • Device calibration protocols could incorporate checks for isotropic noise components to predict Grover performance in advance.

Load-bearing premise

The isotropic error model implemented in the custom library accurately captures the dominant noise affecting Grover's algorithm in real devices.

What would settle it

Direct comparison of simulated success probability and required query count against measured outcomes from Grover's algorithm executed on physical quantum hardware exhibiting isotropic noise.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.04817 by Anurag Saha Roy, Jes\'us Lacalle.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Value of the Density function f(σ, θ0) (left) and Distribution function F(σ, θ0) (right) for d = 2 for different values of σ. An isotropic error is one where the probability density function of the error state Ψ depends only on its distance from a fixed point Φ on the sphere. In other words, the density function is invariant under rotations around the point Φ. This means that the probability of an error oc… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Hinton diagrams of the final statevector before (left) and after (right) applying an isotropic error with σ = 0.999 for a 3-qubit Grover circuit. We see that while the marked state |011⟩ is still visible after adding the error, the population is now spread across many other states, which reduces the overall success probability. Cirq [43] and PennyLane [44] that have their own routines for statevector simul… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Success probability versus number of Grover iterations for different system sizes and isotropic error magnitudes. Each curve on each subplot represents a different value of σ, showing how the success probability evolves with the number of iterations for a given error strength. 12 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Additional number of repetitions required to achieve the error-free success probability as a function of problem size for different isotropic error magnitudes. For σ ≥ 0.9999, k remains below ∼ 10 across all problem sizes. Near-ideal perfor￾mance is recoverable with a small constant repetition overhead, and the overhead grows slowly. When we move on to σ = 0.999, k starts small but then quickly grows beyon… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Growth rate b as a function of isotropic error magnitude σ overlaid with predicted curve from theoretical mixture model based on total gate count. The exponential growth rate b extracted from each fit characterises how rapidly the repetition overhead k increases per additional qubit [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_5.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Isotropic errors have been shown to be immune to conventional error correction techniques. While general theoretical frameworks have been proposed to model such errors, there have been no studies so far analysing their concrete impact on practical use-cases. Here we explore the effect of isotropic errors on the complexity of Grover's search algorithm through numerical simulations, with an analysis of the impact on the algorithm's performance and success probability. The results provide insights into the robustness of Grover's algorithm against isotropic errors, highlighting potential challenges for implementations on noisy quantum hardware. All results presented here are obtained through numerical simulations using the open-source python library \texttt{isotropic} developed as part of this work. The source code, numerical simulations and documentation for the library are available online at https://www.github.com/lazyoracle/isotropic-error-analysis .

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 / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript examines the impact of isotropic errors on Grover's search algorithm via numerical simulations conducted with a newly developed open-source Python library called 'isotropic'. It reports analyses of the algorithm's performance, complexity, and success probability under varying isotropic error strengths, concluding that such errors pose potential challenges for noisy quantum hardware implementations. All presented results derive from these forward simulations rather than analytic derivations.

Significance. If the simulations are correctly implemented and validated, the work offers concrete numerical evidence on how isotropic errors (known to evade standard quantum error correction) degrade Grover's quadratic speedup and success probability. This could inform hardware design considerations for search algorithms. However, the simulation-only approach without reported comparisons to analytic limits or established error models reduces the potential for broader theoretical impact or falsifiable predictions.

major comments (2)
  1. [Numerical Simulations and Results] The description of the numerical simulation protocol—including the precise implementation of the isotropic error model in the library, the number of Monte Carlo runs, convergence criteria, and any data exclusion rules—is insufficient. This prevents assessment of statistical reliability and reproducibility of the reported performance degradation.
  2. [Analysis of Impact on Grover's Algorithm] No validation of the simulation results against known analytic limits (e.g., zero-error Grover complexity or perturbative error regimes) or comparison to alternative noise models is presented. This leaves open whether the observed effects on query complexity are artifacts of the custom library implementation.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract and introduction could more explicitly state the scope limitation to simulation-based exploration rather than claiming general 'insights into robustness'.
  2. [Figures] Figure captions and axis labels should include units for error strength parameters and explicit definitions of success probability to improve clarity.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive comments on our manuscript. We address each major comment below and indicate the corresponding revisions.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Numerical Simulations and Results] The description of the numerical simulation protocol—including the precise implementation of the isotropic error model in the library, the number of Monte Carlo runs, convergence criteria, and any data exclusion rules—is insufficient. This prevents assessment of statistical reliability and reproducibility of the reported performance degradation.

    Authors: We agree that the original description was insufficient for full reproducibility. In the revised manuscript we will expand the Methods section to detail the isotropic error model implementation in the 'isotropic' library, state that 10,000 Monte Carlo runs were used per data point, specify convergence criteria based on success probability stabilizing within 1% across successive batches, and confirm that no data were excluded. These changes will directly address the concerns about statistical reliability. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Analysis of Impact on Grover's Algorithm] No validation of the simulation results against known analytic limits (e.g., zero-error Grover complexity or perturbative error regimes) or comparison to alternative noise models is presented. This leaves open whether the observed effects on query complexity are artifacts of the custom library implementation.

    Authors: We partially agree. While analytic results for isotropic errors on Grover's algorithm are not available in the literature, the library was internally validated to recover the exact O(sqrt(N)) scaling in the zero-error limit. In the revision we will add explicit validation against the ideal Grover case and a short comparison to the depolarizing channel. Full perturbative analytic comparisons remain outside the paper's numerical scope, but the added checks and open-source code mitigate concerns about implementation artifacts. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity

full rationale

The paper reports numerical simulations of Grover's algorithm under an isotropic error model using a library developed for this work. No derivation chain, fitted parameters renamed as predictions, or load-bearing self-citations of theorems exist. All claims are direct simulation outputs with no reduction to inputs by construction. The work is self-contained as forward simulation against an external model.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review; ledger entries are inferred from the simulation framing and stated novelty claim.

free parameters (1)
  • isotropic error strength parameters
    Numerical values controlling error magnitude in the simulations; required to produce the reported performance curves.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The isotropic error model in the library matches the physical noise intended for study.
    Invoked when mapping simulation outputs to claims about real hardware robustness.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5661 in / 1088 out tokens · 27306 ms · 2026-06-28T06:06:51.291990+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

44 extracted references · 34 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Physical Review A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics86(3), 032324 (2012) https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevA.86.032324

    Fowler, A.G., Mariantoni, M., Martinis, J.M., Cleland, A.N.: Surface codes: Towards practical large-scale quantum computation. Physical Review A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics86(3), 032324 (2012) https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevA.86.032324

    2012

  2. [2]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:1108.5738 (2011) https://doi.org/10

    Landahl, A.J., Anderson, J.T., Rice, P.R.: Fault-tolerant quantum comput- ing with color codes. arXiv preprint arXiv:1108.5738 (2011) https://doi.org/10. 48550/arXiv.1108.5738

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  3. [3]

    Nature638(8052), 920–926 (2025) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-08449-y

    Google Quantum AI: Quantum error correction below the surface code threshold. Nature638(8052), 920–926 (2025) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-08449-y

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-024-08449-y 2025

  4. [4]

    Nature Physics 20(7), 1084–1090 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41567-024-02479-z

    Xu, Q., Bonilla Ataides, J.P., Pattison, C.A., Raveendran, N., Bluvstein, D., Wurtz, J., Vasi´ c, B., Lukin, M.D., Jiang, L., Zhou, H.: Constant-overhead fault- tolerant quantum computation with reconfigurable atom arrays. Nature Physics 20(7), 1084–1090 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41567-024-02479-z

    work page doi:10.1038/s41567-024-02479-z 2024

  5. [5]

    Nature Physics, 1–6 (2026) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41567-025-03090-6

    Besedin, I., Kerschbaum, M., Knoll, J., Hesner, I., B¨ odeker, L., Colmenarez, L., Hofele, L., Lacroix, N., Hellings, C., Swiadek, F., et al.: Lattice surgery realized on two distance-three repetition codes with superconducting qubits. Nature Physics, 1–6 (2026) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41567-025-03090-6

    work page doi:10.1038/s41567-025-03090-6 2026

  6. [6]

    and Geim, Alexandra A

    Bluvstein, D., Evered, S.J., Geim, A.A., Li, S.H., Zhou, H., Manovitz, T., Ebadi, S., Cain, M., Kalinowski, M., Hangleiter, D.,et al.: Logical quantum processor based on reconfigurable atom arrays. Nature626(7997), 58–65 (2024) https:// doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-06927-3

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06927-3 2024

  7. [7]

    Nature605(7911), 669–674 (2022) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-04566-8

    Krinner, S., Lacroix, N., Remm, A., Di Paolo, A., Genois, E., Leroux, C., Hellings, C., Lazar, S., Swiadek, F., Herrmann, J.,et al.: Realizing repeated quantum error correction in a distance-three surface code. Nature605(7911), 669–674 (2022) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-04566-8

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-022-04566-8 2022

  8. [8]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.04628 (2024) https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2409.04628

    Reichardt, B.W., Aasen, D., Chao, R., Chernoguzov, A., Dam, W., Gaebler, J.P., Gresh, D., Lucchetti, D., Mills, M., Moses, S.A.,et al.: Demonstration of quantum computation and error correction with a tesseract code. arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.04628 (2024) https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2409.04628

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2409.04628 2024

  9. [9]

    Quantum Information Processing 16(2) (2017) https://doi.org/10.1007/s11128-016-1507-5

    Oliveira, A.L., Buksman, E., Cohn, I., Lacalle, J.: Characterizing error propaga- tion in quantum circuits: the isotropic index. Quantum Information Processing 16(2) (2017) https://doi.org/10.1007/s11128-016-1507-5

    work page doi:10.1007/s11128-016-1507-5 2017

  10. [10]

    Quantum Information and Computation19(15 & 16), 1294– 1312 (2019) https://doi.org/10.26421/QIC19.15-16-3

    Lacalle, J., Pozo Coronado, L.M.: Variance of the sum of independent quantum computing errors. Quantum Information and Computation19(15 & 16), 1294– 1312 (2019) https://doi.org/10.26421/QIC19.15-16-3

    work page doi:10.26421/qic19.15-16-3 2019

  11. [11]

    Quantum Information Processing20(1) (2021) https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s11128-020-02980-3

    Lacalle, J., Pozo-Coronado, L.M., Oliveira, A.L.: Quantum codes do not fix 16 isotropic errors. Quantum Information Processing20(1) (2021) https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s11128-020-02980-3

    work page doi:10.1007/s11128-020-02980-3 2021

  12. [12]

    Quantum Information Processing25(2), 38 (2026) https://doi.org/10.1007/s11128-025-05037-5

    Lacalle, J., Pozo Coronado, L.M., Mart´ ın-Cuevas, R.: Fidelity of the sum of inde- pendent quantum computing errors. Quantum Information Processing25(2), 38 (2026) https://doi.org/10.1007/s11128-025-05037-5

    work page doi:10.1007/s11128-025-05037-5 2026

  13. [13]

    Quantum Infor- mation Processing4, 399–431 (2005) https://doi.org/10.1007/s11128-005-0002-1

    Scott, A.J.: Probabilities of failure for quantum error correction. Quantum Infor- mation Processing4, 399–431 (2005) https://doi.org/10.1007/s11128-005-0002-1

    work page doi:10.1007/s11128-005-0002-1 2005

  14. [14]

    Quantum Information & Computation13(3-4), 181–194 (2013) https: //doi.org/10.26421/QIC13.3-4-1

    Preskill, J.: Sufficient condition on noise correlations for scalable quantum com- puting. Quantum Information & Computation13(3-4), 181–194 (2013) https: //doi.org/10.26421/QIC13.3-4-1

    work page doi:10.26421/qic13.3-4-1 2013

  15. [15]

    Quantum Information & Computation14(15), 1338–1372 (2014) https://doi.org/ 10.26421/QIC14.15-16-5

    Gottesman, D.: Fault-tolerant quantum computation with constant overhead. Quantum Information & Computation14(15), 1338–1372 (2014) https://doi.org/ 10.26421/QIC14.15-16-5

    work page doi:10.26421/qic14.15-16-5 2014

  16. [16]

    Quantum Information & Computation9(7), 541–572 (2009) https://doi.org/10.26421/QIC9.7-8-1

    Cross, A.W., DiVincenzo, D.P., Terhal, B.M.: A comparative code study for quan- tum fault tolerance. Quantum Information & Computation9(7), 541–572 (2009) https://doi.org/10.26421/QIC9.7-8-1

    work page doi:10.26421/qic9.7-8-1 2009

  17. [17]

    Quantum Information & Computation13(5), 439–451 (2013) https://doi.org/10.26421/QIC13.5-6-5

    Hill, C.D., Fowler, A.G., Wang, D.S., Hollenberg, L.C.L.: Fault-tolerant quantum error correction code conversion. Quantum Information & Computation13(5), 439–451 (2013) https://doi.org/10.26421/QIC13.5-6-5

    work page doi:10.26421/qic13.5-6-5 2013

  18. [18]

    Quantum Information & Computation14(9), 721–740 (2014) https://doi.org/10.26421/QIC14.9-10-1

    Duclos-Cianci, G., Poulin, D.: Fault-tolerant renormalization group decoder for abelian topological codes. Quantum Information & Computation14(9), 721–740 (2014) https://doi.org/10.26421/QIC14.9-10-1

    work page doi:10.26421/qic14.9-10-1 2014

  19. [19]

    Quantum Information Processing15, 4361–4390 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1007/s11128-016-1406-9

    Hocker, D., Zheng, Y., Kosut, R., Brun, T., Rabitz, H.: Survey of control perfor- mance in quantum information processing. Quantum Information Processing15, 4361–4390 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1007/s11128-016-1406-9

    work page doi:10.1007/s11128-016-1406-9 2016

  20. [20]

    Quantum Information Processing15, 3489–3518 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1007/s11128-016-1337-5

    Hocker, D., Kosut, R., Rabitz, H.: Peet: a matlab tool for estimating physical gate errors in quantum information processing systems. Quantum Information Processing15, 3489–3518 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1007/s11128-016-1337-5

    work page doi:10.1007/s11128-016-1337-5 2016

  21. [21]

    Quantum Information & Computation6, 97–165 (2006) https://doi.org/10.26421/QIC6.2-1

    Aliferis, P., Gottesman, D., Preskill, J.: Quantum accuracy threshold for concate- nated distance-3 codes. Quantum Information & Computation6, 97–165 (2006) https://doi.org/10.26421/QIC6.2-1

    work page doi:10.26421/qic6.2-1 2006

  22. [22]

    Quantum Information & Computation10(5), 456–469 (2010) https://doi.org/10.26421/QIC10.5-6-6

    Wang, D.S., Fowler, A.G., Stephens, A.M., Hollenberg, L.C.L.: Threshold error rates for the toric and planar codes. Quantum Information & Computation10(5), 456–469 (2010) https://doi.org/10.26421/QIC10.5-6-6

    work page doi:10.26421/qic10.5-6-6 2010

  23. [23]

    Quantum Information Processing9, 541–549 (2010) https://doi.org/10.1007/s11128-010-0181-2

    Aggarwal, V., Calderbank, A.R., Gilbert, G., Weinstein, Y.S.: Volume thresholds 17 for quantum fault tolerance. Quantum Information Processing9, 541–549 (2010) https://doi.org/10.1007/s11128-010-0181-2

    work page doi:10.1007/s11128-010-0181-2 2010

  24. [24]

    Quantum Information & Computation16(15), 1261–1281 (2016) https://doi.org/ 10.26421/QIC16.15-16-1

    Criger, B., Terhal, B.: Noise thresholds for the [4,2,2]-concatenated toric code. Quantum Information & Computation16(15), 1261–1281 (2016) https://doi.org/ 10.26421/QIC16.15-16-1

    work page doi:10.26421/qic16.15-16-1 2016

  25. [25]

    Quantum Information & Computation12(9), 813–819 (2012) https://doi.org/10.26421/QIC12.9-10-6

    Ozen, M., Guzeltepe, M.: Quantum codes from codes over gaussian integers with respect to the mannheim metric. Quantum Information & Computation12(9), 813–819 (2012) https://doi.org/10.26421/QIC12.9-10-6

    work page doi:10.26421/qic12.9-10-6 2012

  26. [26]

    Quantum Information & Computation13(1), 21–35 (2013) https://doi.org/10.26421/QIC13.1-2-3

    Li, R., Zou, F., Liu, Y., Xu, Z.: Hermitian dual containing bch codes and con- struction of new quantum codes. Quantum Information & Computation13(1), 21–35 (2013) https://doi.org/10.26421/QIC13.1-2-3

    work page doi:10.26421/qic13.1-2-3 2013

  27. [27]

    Quantum Information Processing18, 40 (2019) https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11128-018-2156-7

    Chen, J., Chen, Y., Huang, Y., Feng, C.: New optimal asymmetric quan- tum codes and quantum convolutional codes derived from constacyclic codes. Quantum Information Processing18, 40 (2019) https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11128-018-2156-7

    2019

  28. [28]

    Quantum Information Processing11, 591–604 (2012) https: //doi.org/10.1007/s11128-011-0269-3

    La Guardia, G.G.: Asymmetric quantum reed-solomon and generalized reed- solomon codes. Quantum Information Processing11, 591–604 (2012) https: //doi.org/10.1007/s11128-011-0269-3

    work page doi:10.1007/s11128-011-0269-3 2012

  29. [29]

    Quantum Infor- mation Processing1, 135–144 (2002) https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1019623208633

    Boulant, N., Pravia, M.A., Fortunato, E.M., Havel, T.F., Cory, D.G.: Experimen- tal concatenation of quantum error correction with decoupling. Quantum Infor- mation Processing1, 135–144 (2002) https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1019623208633

    work page doi:10.1023/a:1019623208633 2002

  30. [30]

    Quantum Information Processing11, 1511–1521 (2012) https: //doi.org/10.1007/s11128-011-0312-4

    Evans, Z.W.E., Stephens, A.M.: Optimal correction of concatenated fault-tolerant quantum codes. Quantum Information Processing11, 1511–1521 (2012) https: //doi.org/10.1007/s11128-011-0312-4

    work page doi:10.1007/s11128-011-0312-4 2012

  31. [31]

    Quantum Information & Computation14(15), 1424–1440 (2014) https://doi.org/ 10.26421/QIC14.15-16-8

    Albuquerque, C., Palazzo Jr., R., Silva, E.: Families of codes of topological quantum codes from tessellations{4i+2,2i+1},{4i,4i},{8i-4,4}and{12i-6,3}. Quantum Information & Computation14(15), 1424–1440 (2014) https://doi.org/ 10.26421/QIC14.15-16-8

    work page doi:10.26421/qic14.15-16-8 2014

  32. [32]

    Quantum Information Processing14, 4057–4066 (2015) https://doi.org/10.1007/s11128-015-1115-9

    Naghipour, A., Jafarizadeh, M.A., Shahmorad, S.: Topological quantum codes from self-complementary self-dual graphs. Quantum Information Processing14, 4057–4066 (2015) https://doi.org/10.1007/s11128-015-1115-9

    work page doi:10.1007/s11128-015-1115-9 2015

  33. [33]

    Quantum Science and Technology3(1), 015007 (2018) https://doi.org/10

    Greenbaum, D., Dutton, Z.: Modeling coherent errors in quantum error correc- tion. Quantum Science and Technology3(1), 015007 (2018) https://doi.org/10. 1088/2058-9565/aa9a06

    2018

  34. [34]

    npj Quantum Information4, 55 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1038/ 18 s41534-018-0106-y

    Bravyi, S., Englbrecht, M., K¨ onig, R., Peard, N.: Correcting coherent errors with surface codes. npj Quantum Information4, 55 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1038/ 18 s41534-018-0106-y

    2018

  35. [35]

    Nature Communications5, 4679 (2014) https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms5679

    Piltz, C., Sriarunothai, T., Var´ on, A.F., Wunderlich, C.: A trapped-ion-based quantum byte with 10 −5 next-neighbour cross-talk. Nature Communications5, 4679 (2014) https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms5679

    work page doi:10.1038/ncomms5679 2014

  36. [36]

    Physical Review B97(4), 045431 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.97.045431

    Buterakos, D., Throckmorton, R.E., Das Sarma, S.: Crosstalk error correc- tion through dynamical decoupling of single-qubit gates in capacitively coupled singlet-triplet semiconductor spin qubits. Physical Review B97(4), 045431 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.97.045431

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.97.045431 2018

  37. [37]

    https://github.com/lazyoracle/isotropic-error-analysis

    Saha Roy, A.: Isotropic: A Python Package for Isotropic Error Analysis in Quantum Computing. https://github.com/lazyoracle/isotropic-error-analysis

  38. [38]

    Cambridge University Press (2002)

    Nielsen, M.A., Chuang, I.L.: Quantum Computation and Quantum Infor- mation. Cambridge University Press (2002). https://doi.org/10.1017/ CBO9780511976667

    2002

  39. [39]

    Cengage Learning, Boston, MA (2015)

    Burden, R.L., Faires, J.D., Burden, A.M.: Numerical Analysis, 10 edn. Cengage Learning, Boston, MA (2015)

    2015

  40. [40]

    Simpson, T.: A New Treatise of Fluxions. Tho. Gardner, London (1737). Early work on the fluxional method

  41. [41]

    A fast quantum mechanical algorithm for database search

    Grover, L.K.: A fast quantum mechanical algorithm for database search. arXiv preprint arXiv:quant-ph/9605043 (1996) https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv. quant-ph/9605043

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv 1996

  42. [42]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.08810 (2024) https://doi.org/10.48550/ arXiv.2405.08810

    Javadi-Abhari, A., Treinish, M., Krsulich, K., Wood, C.J., Lishman, J., Gacon, J., Martiel, S., Nation, P.D., Bishop, L.S., Cross, A.W.,et al.: Quantum computing with qiskit. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.08810 (2024) https://doi.org/10.48550/ arXiv.2405.08810

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  43. [43]

    11354328

    Cirq Developers: Cirq. Zenodo (2025) https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO. 4062499

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo 2025

  44. [44]

    PennyLane: Automatic differentiation of hybrid quantum-classical computations

    Bergholm, V., Izaac, J., Schuld, M., Gogolin, C., Ahmed, S., Ajith, V., Alam, M.S., Alonso-Linaje, G., AkashNarayanan, B., Asadi, A.,et al.: Pennylane: Auto- matic differentiation of hybrid quantum-classical computations. arXiv preprint arXiv:1811.04968 (2018) https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1811.04968 19

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1811.04968 2018