Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 72 references

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge.

T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. The mark states how deep the mechanical check went, never who wrote it. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

T0 review · grok-4.3

Subsystem stabilizer codes achieve the Heisenberg limit in noisy quantum metrology with syndrome-free protocols using at most one ancilla qubit.

2026-06-26 20:07 UTC pith:KTB3PELL

load-bearing objection Subsystem codes reach Heisenberg-limited metrology with one ancilla and no syndromes for some noise, but whether this covers broad realistic classes rests on the existence proofs in the main text. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2606.19628 v1 pith:KTB3PELL submitted 2026-06-17 quant-ph

Subsystem Quantum Error Correction for Noisy Quantum Metrology

Qiushi Liu , Sisi Zhou This is my paper
classification quant-ph
keywords quantum metrologyquantum error correctionsubsystem codesHeisenberg limitFloquet codessyndrome-free protocolsancilla qubits
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The paper derives general conditions under which subsystem stabilizer codes reach the Heisenberg limit in parameter estimation despite noise. It shows that for broad classes of noise these conditions permit protocols that skip syndrome measurements and need no more than one ancilla qubit. The same framework extends to dynamical error correction, where Floquet codes protect time-dependent metrological signals to the same precision limit. Standard quantum error correction for metrology typically demands multiple clean ancilla qubits plus full syndrome extraction and decoding. A sympathetic reader cares because the result points toward substantially simpler hardware requirements for high-precision sensing.

Core claim

Subsystem stabilizer codes satisfy general conditions that enable Heisenberg-limited metrology, realized by syndrome-free protocols with at most a single ancilla qubit for broad classes of noise; the framework further shows that Floquet codes can protect time-dependent metrological signals in reaching the Heisenberg limit.

What carries the argument

Subsystem stabilizer codes, which protect information encoded in a subsystem of the code space rather than the full space, permitting simplified error handling without syndrome extraction.

Load-bearing premise

Broad classes of noise admit subsystem stabilizer codes that satisfy the derived general conditions for Heisenberg-limited performance without syndrome extraction or more than one ancilla qubit.

What would settle it

An explicit noise model belonging to the broad classes for which no subsystem stabilizer code with at most one ancilla reaches the Heisenberg limit under the stated conditions would falsify the central claim.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 0 minor

Summary. The manuscript claims that subsystem stabilizer codes can achieve the Heisenberg limit in quantum metrology under general derived conditions, that broad classes of noise admit realizations via syndrome-free protocols using at most one ancilla qubit, and that the framework extends to dynamical error correction where Floquet codes protect time-dependent metrological signals.

Significance. If the existence claims and derivations hold, the work offers a resource-efficient route to error-corrected metrology that reduces ancilla overhead and eliminates syndrome extraction for many noise models, which would be a practical advance over existing QEC-metrology approaches. The Floquet extension for time-dependent signals is a potentially useful addition if the constructions are explicit.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the central simplification result rests on the assertion that 'broad classes of noise' admit subsystem stabilizer codes satisfying the (unspecified here) general conditions while remaining syndrome-free and using ≤1 ancilla; this existence claim is load-bearing but cannot be verified from the abstract alone and requires explicit constructions or proofs for representative noise models (e.g., local Pauli or amplitude damping) in the main text.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: the extension to Floquet codes is stated to protect time-dependent signals while reaching the Heisenberg limit, but without details on the code construction, how it avoids extra ancillae/syndrome extraction, or verification that the signal is preserved, the dynamical claim remains unassessed and load-bearing for the full framework.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thoughtful review of our manuscript. Below, we provide point-by-point responses to the major comments, clarifying that the main text contains the requested details and constructions.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the central simplification result rests on the assertion that 'broad classes of noise' admit subsystem stabilizer codes satisfying the (unspecified here) general conditions while remaining syndrome-free and using ≤1 ancilla; this existence claim is load-bearing but cannot be verified from the abstract alone and requires explicit constructions or proofs for representative noise models (e.g., local Pauli or amplitude damping) in the main text.

    Authors: The general conditions are derived in the main text (see 'General Conditions for Heisenberg-Limited Metrology with Subsystem Codes'). Explicit constructions and proofs for local Pauli noise and amplitude damping are provided in the section 'Syndrome-Free Protocols with At Most One Ancilla', demonstrating that these noise models admit the required subsystem stabilizer codes that are syndrome-free and use ≤1 ancilla while achieving the Heisenberg limit. These serve as representative examples for the broad classes of noise. revision: no

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the extension to Floquet codes is stated to protect time-dependent signals while reaching the Heisenberg limit, but without details on the code construction, how it avoids extra ancillae/syndrome extraction, or verification that the signal is preserved, the dynamical claim remains unassessed and load-bearing for the full framework.

    Authors: Details on the Floquet code constructions are given in the section 'Dynamical Error Correction with Floquet Codes'. The constructions explicitly show how they protect time-dependent metrological signals, avoid extra ancillae and syndrome extraction through the subsystem structure, and include verification that the signal is preserved under the dynamical protocol, enabling the Heisenberg limit. revision: no

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: derivation chain is self-contained with independent mathematical conditions.

full rationale

The abstract and described framework derive general conditions for subsystem stabilizer codes achieving the Heisenberg limit, then assert existence of realizations for broad noise classes via syndrome-free protocols with ≤1 ancilla (plus Floquet extension). No quoted steps reduce by construction to fitted inputs, self-definitions, or load-bearing self-citations. The existence assertions for noise classes are presented as results of the derived conditions rather than tautological renamings or prior self-citations. This matches the default case of a paper whose central claims have independent content against external QEC literature.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Based solely on the abstract; no specific free parameters, ad-hoc axioms, or invented entities are identifiable. The work builds on standard stabilizer and Floquet code concepts from prior literature.

axioms (1)
  • standard math Standard quantum mechanics, stabilizer formalism, and Heisenberg limit definitions hold.
    Implicit background for any quantum error correction metrology paper.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5632 in / 1300 out tokens · 17424 ms · 2026-06-26T20:07:34.344682+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Quantum error correction has been successfully applied to enhance the precision of parameter estimation in the presence of noise. Nonetheless, existing methods require a number of noiseless, controllable ancillae and lack efficient encoding and decoding procedures. In this Letter, we demonstrate that subsystem error correction provides a new direction that can substantially simplify the metrological protocol. We derive general conditions under which subsystem stabilizer codes achieve the Heisenberg limit and show that, for broad classes of noise, this can be realized by syndrome-free protocols using at most a single ancilla qubit. Furthermore, we extend this framework to dynamical error correction and show that Floquet codes can protect time-dependent metrological signals in reaching the Heisenberg limit.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.19628 by Qiushi Liu, Sisi Zhou.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Circuit diagram for one step of QEC in phase estima [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: The left and right ends of the ladder are connected [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗

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

72 extracted references · 5 canonical work pages · 3 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Subsystem Quantum Error Correction for Noisy Quantum Metrology

    can encode a time-varying Hamiltonian and reach the HL. Our results establish subsystem QEC as a prac- tical and resource-efficient paradigm for noisy quantum metrology. Setting—We consider the estimation of an unknown parameterθusingNqueries to a parameterized quan- tum channelE θ(·) = Pr i=1 K θ i (·)K θ† i . In a prototypical setting, such as noisy pha...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  2. [2]

    is EaEb /∈ N(S)− G,(4) which is a direct consequence of the Knill-Laflamme condition for general subsystem codes [29, 30, 32]: ΠCE† aEbΠC =I L ⊗g ab G , where Π C is the projection on the code space andg ab G is an arbitrary operator acting on the gauge subsystem. It is noteworthy that, in subsystem codes, the sim- plification of the recovery procedure is...

  3. [3]

    The QEC procedure introduced above naturally gen- eralizes to the scenario of multiple qubits

    The qubit on the last line records theZ 1Z2 syndrome that determines whether or not anX 1 correction is applied. The QEC procedure introduced above naturally gen- eralizes to the scenario of multiple qubits. Consider a system ofn q qubits, each subject to independent single- qubit bit flip noise, and the task is to estimateθusingN queries toE ⊗nq θ . We s...

  4. [4]

    Giovannetti, S

    V. Giovannetti, S. Lloyd, and L. Maccone, Quantum- Enhanced Measurements: Beating the Standard Quan- tum Limit, Science306, 1330 (2004)

    2004

  5. [5]

    Giovannetti, S

    V. Giovannetti, S. Lloyd, and L. Maccone, Quantum Metrology, Phys. Rev. Lett.96, 010401 (2006)

    2006

  6. [6]

    Giovannetti, S

    V. Giovannetti, S. Lloyd, and L. Maccone, Advances in quantum metrology, Nat. Photonics5, 222 (2011)

    2011

  7. [7]

    C. L. Degen, F. Reinhard, and P. Cappellaro, Quantum sensing, Rev. Mod. Phys.89, 035002 (2017)

    2017

  8. [8]

    Pezz` e, A

    L. Pezz` e, A. Smerzi, M. K. Oberthaler, R. Schmied, and P. Treutlein, Quantum metrology with nonclassical states of atomic ensembles, Rev. Mod. Phys.90, 035005 (2018). 7

    2018

  9. [9]

    Braun, G

    D. Braun, G. Adesso, F. Benatti, R. Floreanini, U. Mar- zolino, M. W. Mitchell, and S. Pirandola, Quantum- enhanced measurements without entanglement, Rev. Mod. Phys.90, 035006 (2018)

    2018

  10. [10]

    C. M. Caves, Quantum-mechanical noise in an interfer- ometer, Phys. Rev. D23, 1693 (1981)

    1981

  11. [11]

    M. J. Holland and K. Burnett, Interferometric detection of optical phase shifts at the Heisenberg limit, Phys. Rev. Lett.71, 1355 (1993)

    1993

  12. [12]

    C. M. Caves, K. S. Thorne, R. W. P. Drever, V. D. Sand- berg, and M. Zimmermann, On the measurement of a weak classical force coupled to a quantum-mechanical os- cillator. I. Issues of principle, Rev. Mod. Phys.52, 341 (1980)

    1980

  13. [13]

    Fujiwara and H

    A. Fujiwara and H. Imai, A fibre bundle over manifolds of quantum channels and its application to quantum statis- tics, J. Phys. A41, 255304 (2008)

    2008

  14. [14]

    B. M. Escher, R. L. de Matos Filho, and L. Davidovich, General framework for estimating the ultimate precision limit in noisy quantum-enhanced metrology, Nat. Phys. 7, 406 (2011)

    2011

  15. [15]

    Demkowicz-Dobrza´ nski, J

    R. Demkowicz-Dobrza´ nski, J. Ko lody´ nski, and M. GuT ¸ ˘ a, The elusive Heisenberg limit in quantum-enhanced metrology, Nat. Commun.3, 1063 (2012)

    2012

  16. [16]

    Demkowicz-Dobrza´ nski and L

    R. Demkowicz-Dobrza´ nski and L. Maccone, Using En- tanglement Against Noise in Quantum Metrology, Phys. Rev. Lett.113, 250801 (2014)

    2014

  17. [17]

    Arrad, Y

    G. Arrad, Y. Vinkler, D. Aharonov, and A. Retzker, In- creasing Sensing Resolution with Error Correction, Phys. Rev. Lett.112, 150801 (2014)

    2014

  18. [18]

    E. M. Kessler, I. Lovchinsky, A. O. Sushkov, and M. D. Lukin, Quantum Error Correction for Metrology, Phys. Rev. Lett.112, 150802 (2014)

    2014

  19. [19]

    Heisenberg limited metrology using Quantum Error-Correction Codes

    R. Ozeri, Heisenberg limited metrology using Quantum Error-Correction Codes (2013), arXiv:1310.3432

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  20. [20]

    D¨ ur, M

    W. D¨ ur, M. Skotiniotis, F. Fr¨ owis, and B. Kraus, Im- proved Quantum Metrology Using Quantum Error Cor- rection, Phys. Rev. Lett.112, 080801 (2014)

    2014

  21. [21]

    Demkowicz-Dobrza´ nski, J

    R. Demkowicz-Dobrza´ nski, J. Czajkowski, and P. Sekatski, Adaptive Quantum Metrology under General Markovian Noise, Phys. Rev. X7, 041009 (2017)

    2017

  22. [22]

    S. Zhou, M. Zhang, J. Preskill, and L. Jiang, Achieving the Heisenberg limit in quantum metrology using quan- tum error correction, Nat. Commun.9, 78 (2018)

    2018

  23. [23]

    Layden and P

    D. Layden and P. Cappellaro, Spatial noise filtering through error correction for quantum sensing, npj Quan- tum Inf.4, 30 (2018)

    2018

  24. [24]

    Layden, S

    D. Layden, S. Zhou, P. Cappellaro, and L. Jiang, Ancilla- Free Quantum Error Correction Codes for Quantum Metrology, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 040502 (2019)

    2019

  25. [25]

    H. Chen, Y. Chen, J. Liu, Z. Miao, and H. Yuan, Quantum Metrology Enhanced by Leveraging Informa- tive Noise with Error Correction, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 190801 (2024)

    2024

  26. [26]

    Z. Mann, N. Cao, R. Laflamme, and S. Zhou, Quantum Error-Corrected Non-Markovian Metrology, PRX Quan- tum6, 030321 (2025)

    2025

  27. [27]

    S. B. Antu and S. Zhou, Stabilizer codes for Heisenberg- limited many-body Hamiltonian estimation, Quantum9, 1766 (2025)

    2025

  28. [28]

    Knill and R

    E. Knill and R. Laflamme, Theory of quantum error- correcting codes, Phys. Rev. A55, 900 (1997)

    1997

  29. [29]

    Zhou and L

    S. Zhou and L. Jiang, Asymptotic Theory of Quantum Channel Estimation, PRX Quantum2, 010343 (2021)

    2021

  30. [30]

    Unden, P

    T. Unden, P. Balasubramanian, D. Louzon, Y. Vinkler, M. B. Plenio, M. Markham, D. Twitchen, A. Stacey, I. Lovchinsky, A. O. Sushkov, M. D. Lukin, A. Retzker, B. Naydenov, L. P. McGuinness, and F. Jelezko, Quan- tum Metrology Enhanced by Repetitive Quantum Error Correction, Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 230502 (2016)

    2016

  31. [31]

    Wang, Z.-J

    W. Wang, Z.-J. Chen, X. Liu, W. Cai, Y. Ma, X. Mu, X. Pan, Z. Hua, L. Hu, Y. Xu, H. Wang, Y. P. Song, X.-B. Zou, C.-L. Zou, and L. Sun, Quantum-enhanced radiometry via approximate quantum error correction, Nat. Commun.13, 3214 (2022)

    2022

  32. [32]

    Kribs, R

    D. Kribs, R. Laflamme, and D. Poulin, Unified and Gen- eralized Approach to Quantum Error Correction, Phys. Rev. Lett.94, 180501 (2005)

    2005

  33. [33]

    D. W. Kribs, R. Laflamme, D. Poulin, and M. Lesosky, Operator quantum error correction (2005), arXiv:quant- ph/0504189

    work page arXiv 2005

  34. [34]

    Poulin, Stabilizer Formalism for Operator Quantum Error Correction, Phys

    D. Poulin, Stabilizer Formalism for Operator Quantum Error Correction, Phys. Rev. Lett.95, 230504 (2005)

    2005

  35. [35]

    M. A. Nielsen and D. Poulin, Algebraic and information- theoretic conditions for operator quantum error correc- tion, Phys. Rev. A75, 064304 (2007)

    2007

  36. [36]

    Gottesman,Stabilizer Codes and Quantum Error Cor- rection, Ph.D

    D. Gottesman,Stabilizer Codes and Quantum Error Cor- rection, Ph.D. thesis, California Institute of Technology (1997)

    1997

  37. [37]

    M. B. Hastings and J. Haah, Dynamically Generated Logical Qubits, Quantum5, 564 (2021)

    2021

  38. [38]

    C. W. Helstrom,Quantum Detection and Estimation Theory(Academic Press, New York, 1976)

    1976

  39. [39]

    A. S. Holevo,Probabilistic and Statistical Aspects of Quantum Theory(North-Holland Publishing Company, Amsterdam, 1982)

    1982

  40. [40]

    S. L. Braunstein and C. M. Caves, Statistical distance and the geometry of quantum states, Phys. Rev. Lett. 72, 3439 (1994)

    1994

  41. [41]

    Zanardi, D

    P. Zanardi, D. A. Lidar, and S. Lloyd, Quantum Tensor Product Structures are Observable Induced, Phys. Rev. Lett.92, 060402 (2004)

    2004

  42. [42]

    Bacon, Operator quantum error-correcting subsys- tems for self-correcting quantum memories, Phys

    D. Bacon, Operator quantum error-correcting subsys- tems for self-correcting quantum memories, Phys. Rev. A73, 012340 (2006)

    2006

  43. [43]

    Bravyi, G

    S. Bravyi, G. Duclos-Cianci, D. Poulin, and M. Suchara, Subsystem surface codes with three-qubit check opera- tors, Quantum Inf. Comput.13, 963 (2013)

    2013

  44. [44]

    See Supplemental Material for preliminaries and proofs, which includes Refs. [42–47]

  45. [45]

    J. Liu, H. Yuan, X.-M. Lu, and X. Wang, Quantum Fisher information matrix and multiparameter estima- tion, J. Phys. A53, 023001 (2019)

    2019

  46. [46]

    J. S. Sidhu and P. Kok, Geometric perspective on quan- tum parameter estimation, AVS Quantum Sci.2, 014701 (2020)

    2020

  47. [47]

    M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang,Quantum Computa- tion and Quantum Information: 10th Anniversary Edi- tion(Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2010)

    2010

  48. [48]

    M. M. Wilde, Logical operators of quantum codes, Phys. Rev. A79, 062322 (2009)

    2009

  49. [49]

    Artin,Geometric Algebra(Interscience Publishers, New York, 1957)

    E. Artin,Geometric Algebra(Interscience Publishers, New York, 1957)

    1957

  50. [50]

    Gottesman, IQC - Quantum Error Correction - Lec- ture 3 (2018)

    D. Gottesman, IQC - Quantum Error Correction - Lec- ture 3 (2018)

    2018

  51. [51]

    Liu and Y

    Q. Liu and Y. Yang, Heisenberg-Limited Quantum Metrology without Ancillae, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 8 140801 (2025)

    2025

  52. [52]

    [48], the protocol here (using a pure probe state) is esstentially equivalent, asH eff is independent of the gauge state when Condition (i) is satisfied

    While the gauge state is chosen to be a maximally mixed state in Ref. [48], the protocol here (using a pure probe state) is esstentially equivalent, asH eff is independent of the gauge state when Condition (i) is satisfied

  53. [53]

    Aruteet al., Quantum supremacy using a pro- grammable superconducting processor, Nature574, 505 (2019)

    F. Aruteet al., Quantum supremacy using a pro- grammable superconducting processor, Nature574, 505 (2019)

    2019

  54. [54]

    Bengtsson, A

    A. Bengtsson, A. Opremcak, M. Khezri, D. Sank, A. Bourassa, K. J. Satzinger, S. Hong, C. Erickson, B. J. Lester, K. C. Miao, A. N. Korotkov, J. Kelly, Z. Chen, and P. V. Klimov, Model-Based Optimization of Super- conducting Qubit Readout, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 100603 (2024)

    2024

  55. [55]

    D. A. Lidar, I. L. Chuang, and K. B. Whaley, Decoherence-Free Subspaces for Quantum Computation, Phys. Rev. Lett.81, 2594 (1998)

    1998

  56. [56]

    F. R. F. Pereira, S. Mancini, and G. G. La Guardia, Stabilizer codes for open quantum systems, Sci. Rep.13, 10540 (2023)

    2023

  57. [57]

    Davydova, N

    M. Davydova, N. Tantivasadakarn, and S. Balasubrama- nian, Floquet Codes without Parent Subsystem Codes, PRX Quantum4, 020341 (2023)

    2023

  58. [58]

    Davydova, N

    M. Davydova, N. Tantivasadakarn, S. Balasubramanian, and D. Aasen, Quantum computation from dynamic au- tomorphism codes, Quantum8, 1448 (2024)

    2024

  59. [59]

    Townsend-Teague, J

    A. Townsend-Teague, J. Magdalena de la Fuente, and M. Kesselring, Floquetifying the Colour Code, inProceed- ings of the Twentieth International Conference on Quan- tum Physics and Logic, Electronic Proceedings in Theo- retical Computer Science, Vol. 384, edited by S. Mans- field, B. Valiron, and V. Zamdzhiev (2023) pp. 265–303

    2023

  60. [60]

    M. S. Alam and E. Rieffel, Dynamical logical qubits in the Bacon-Shor code, Phys. Rev. A112, 022436 (2025)

    2025

  61. [61]

    Eickbuschet al., Demonstration of dynamic surface codes, Nat

    A. Eickbuschet al., Demonstration of dynamic surface codes, Nat. Phys.21, 1994 (2025)

    1994

  62. [62]

    H. Kwon, U. R. Fischer, S.-W. Lee, and L. Jiang, Restor- ing Heisenberg scaling in time via autonomous quantum error correction (2025), arXiv:2504.13168

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  63. [63]

    Z. Ni, L. Hu, Y. Cai, L. Zhang, J. Mai, X. Deng, P. Zheng, S. Liu, S.-B. Zheng, Y. Xu, and D. Yu, Autonomous quantum error correction beyond break-even and its metrological application (2025), arXiv:2509.26042

    work page arXiv 2025

  64. [64]

    Edmonds, Paths, Trees, and Flowers, Can

    J. Edmonds, Paths, Trees, and Flowers, Can. J. Math. 17, 449 (1965)

    1965

  65. [65]

    Edmonds, Maximum Matching and a Polyhedron with 0,1 Vertices, J

    J. Edmonds, Maximum Matching and a Polyhedron with 0,1 Vertices, J. Res. Natl. Bur. Stand.69B, 125 (1965)

    1965

  66. [66]

    Kitaev, Fault-tolerant quantum computation by anyons, Ann

    A. Kitaev, Fault-tolerant quantum computation by anyons, Ann. Phys. (N. Y.)303, 2 (2003). Appendix A: Formal statements and proofs of Lemma 1 We begin with the effective dynamics using standard stabilizer codes for metrology. Below we show that, for correctable Pauli errors{E i}, the state evolution via stabilizer codes is only governed by an effective Ha...

    2003

  67. [67]

    Symplectic representation of Pauli operators Every element of then-qubit Pauli groupP n can be written as P=ωX xZ z (C1) forω∈ {±1,±i}, wherex,z∈Z n 2 ={0,1} n, and we have used the notationX x =X x1 1 · · ·X xn n andZ z =Z z1 1 · · ·Z zn n . By ignoring the phaseω, we uniquely represent then-qubit Pauli operatorPby a binary row vector [44] v(P) = (x|z)∈Z...

  68. [68]

    , gm}into a canonical form{Z ′ 1, X′ 1,

    Symplectic Gram-Schmidt orthogonalization procedure The goal of the symplectic Gram–Schmidt orthogonalization procedure [45] is to transform a set of Pauli operators {g1, . . . , gm}into a canonical form{Z ′ 1, X′ 1, . . . , Z′ α, X′ α, S1, . . . , Sβ}. Here eachS i fori= 1, . . . , βcommutes with all the Pauli operators in the whole set; forj= 1, . . . ,...

  69. [69]

    +⟨v, v(X ′ 1)⟩sv(Z ′ 1),(C6) which is symplectically orthogonal to bothv(Z ′

  70. [70]

    If no suchv(g j) exists, thenv(g 1) is labeled as the vectorv(S 1) and extracted into the processed buffer

    andv(X ′ 1). If no suchv(g j) exists, thenv(g 1) is labeled as the vectorv(S 1) and extracted into the processed buffer. Iterating this process on the remaining vectors yields the desired canonical form above

  71. [71]

    , PJ } ∈ P n and{Q 1,

    Existence of Clifford transformation Lemma 5.Let{P 1, . . . , PJ } ∈ P n and{Q 1, . . . , QJ } ∈ P n be two sets of multi-qubit Pauli operators. If they have the same commutation relations and multiplication relations, i.e., [Pi, Pj] = 0⇐ ⇒[Q i, Qj] = 0,∀i, j= 1, . . . , J(C7) and PiPj =ωP k ⇐ ⇒Q iQj =ωQ k, ω∈ {±1,±i},∀i, j= 1, . . . , J,(C8) then there e...

  72. [72]

    , Er⟩ ⊆ P n denote the Pauli subgroup generated by the noise operators

    Formal proof of Theorem 2 Proof.LetE:=⟨E 1, . . . , Er⟩ ⊆ P n denote the Pauli subgroup generated by the noise operators. We denote byE a a maximal abelian subgroup ofE. For our purpose it suffices to ignore the phase and consider E:=E/{±1,±i}and 13 E a :=E a/{±1,±i}.H /∈Span{⟨E 1, . . . , Er⟩}implies that there exists at least one Pauli componentQ=Q k0 i...