pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.17230 · v1 · pith:QMNB77MOnew · submitted 2026-05-17 · 🪐 quant-ph · cond-mat.dis-nn· cond-mat.stat-mech· cs.LG

Maximum Likelihood Decoding of Quantum Error Correction Codes

Hanyan Cao , Ge Yan , Yuxuan Du , Feng Pan This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-20 13:50 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph cond-mat.dis-nncond-mat.stat-mechcs.LG
keywords decodingquantumapproximatecodeslikelihoodmodelsperspectivetensor
0
0 comments X

The pith

A topical review unifying statistical mechanics, tensor network, and AI approaches to approximate maximum likelihood decoding for quantum error correction codes.

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

Quantum error correction protects quantum information from noise, but it needs a decoder to figure out what error happened from noisy measurements. The best possible decoder is maximum likelihood decoding, which picks the most probable logical outcome by adding up probabilities over every possible error that matches the observed syndrome. This is optimal in theory but too slow for large codes. The review shows three ways researchers are approximating it: by turning the problem into a spin glass model from physics whose phase transitions reveal thresholds, by using tensor networks to contract the probability graph efficiently, and by training neural networks to guess the likely corrections from data. These methods connect to each other and have been tested on both simulations and real hardware.

Core claim

Among all possible decoding strategies, maximum likelihood decoding (MLD) is provably optimal, since it identifies the logical group with largest likelihood by summing over all possible errors within logical class consistent with the observed syndrome.

Load-bearing premise

That the three surveyed approaches (statistical mechanics, tensor networks, and AI) can be meaningfully compared and connected as complementary approximations to the same intractable MLD problem without introducing systematic biases in the reviewed literature.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.17230 by Feng Pan, Ge Yan, Hanyan Cao, Yuxuan Du.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: A decoding-oriented view of the surface-code pipeline. (a) A rotated distance-3 patch with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Roadmap of the three perspectives used in this review. Each approach is organized around [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: The statistical-mechanical mapping for quantum error correction. (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: (a) Tensor network representation of a surface code ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Tensor network in detector picture. (a) Tensor network representation of a DEM com [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_5.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Quantum error correction (QEC) is indispensable for realizing fault-tolerant quantum computation, yet its effectiveness hinges critically on the classical decoding algorithm that interprets noisy syndrome measurements. Among all possible decoding strategies, maximum likelihood decoding (MLD) is provably optimal, since it identifies the logical group with largest likelihood by summing over all possible errors within logical class consistent with the observed syndrome. Despite its optimality, MLD is computationally intractable in general (#P-hard), motivating a rich landscape of exact and approximate algorithms. In this topical review, we provide a unified perspective on MLD by surveying recent advances through three complementary lenses: statistical mechanics, tensor networks, and artificial intelligence. From the statistical mechanics viewpoint, the MLD problem maps onto evaluating partition functions of disordered spin models, enabling exact solutions for certain codes and noise models as well as threshold estimation via phase-transition analysis. From the tensor network perspective, approximate contraction of tensor networks on the code's factor graph yields decoders that closely approach MLD accuracy with polynomial computational cost. From the artificial intelligence perspective, neural-network-based decoders, including autoregressive generative models and recurrent transformers, learn to approximate the MLD distribution from data, achieving high accuracy with the parallelism afforded by modern hardware accelerators. We discuss the connections among these three approaches, review their application to both simulated and experimental quantum hardware, and outline open challenges including real-time decoding, scalability to large code distances, and generalization to high-rate quantum low-density parity-check codes.

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

0 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript is a topical review on maximum likelihood decoding (MLD) for quantum error correction. It states that MLD is provably optimal by summing likelihoods over all errors in each logical coset consistent with the observed syndrome, notes its #P-hardness, and surveys three families of approximations: mappings to statistical-mechanics partition functions of disordered spin models (for exact solutions and phase-transition thresholds), tensor-network contractions on the code factor graph (for polynomial-cost near-MLD decoders), and neural-network / autoregressive / transformer models trained to approximate the MLD distribution. The review examines interconnections among the three approaches, applications to simulated and experimental hardware, and open problems including real-time decoding, large-distance scalability, and high-rate QLDPC codes.

Significance. If the survey accurately captures the cited literature, the unified framing supplies a useful organizing lens for the community working on decoders for fault-tolerant quantum computation. The explicit linkage of statistical-mechanics, tensor-network, and AI techniques around the same intractable MLD task, together with the discussion of hardware demonstrations and concrete open challenges, gives the review practical value beyond a simple literature list.

minor comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract, final sentence: the phrase 'generalization to high-rate quantum low-density parity-check codes' is listed as an open challenge; the main text should add a short paragraph (perhaps in the final section) explaining why current tensor-network or AI methods encounter specific obstacles for high-rate QLDPC constructions.
  2. [Tensor-network perspective] Section on tensor-network decoders: the claim that approximate contraction 'closely approaches MLD accuracy' would benefit from a brief quantitative benchmark (e.g., logical-error-rate ratio to exact MLD on a small code) rather than a qualitative statement.
  3. [Applications to hardware] Figure captions and text references to experimental hardware results should uniformly cite the specific device, code distance, and noise model so readers can locate the original data.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive and accurate summary of our topical review, as well as for the favorable significance assessment and recommendation of minor revision. We appreciate the recognition of the unified perspective linking statistical mechanics, tensor networks, and AI approaches to approximate maximum likelihood decoding.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in survey of MLD approximations

full rationale

This topical review organizes existing literature on maximum likelihood decoding for quantum error correction codes around three external methodological lenses (statistical mechanics, tensor networks, and AI) without presenting any original derivation chain, fitted parameters, or self-referential predictions. The optimality statement for MLD is explicitly described as a standard, provably optimal result under the independent Pauli noise model and is not derived or justified internally via equations or self-citations within the paper. All technical content is attributed to cited external works, and the survey structure introduces no load-bearing steps that reduce by construction to the paper's own inputs or prior author results. The paper is therefore self-contained as a review with no detectable circularity.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

The review rests on standard background results in quantum error correction and statistical mechanics; no new free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are introduced by the paper itself.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5805 in / 1059 out tokens · 22478 ms · 2026-05-20T13:50:10.486151+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

110 extracted references · 110 canonical work pages · 9 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Nielsen and Isaac L

    Michael A. Nielsen and Isaac L. Chuang.Quantum Computation and Quantum Infor- mation: 10th Anniversary Edition. Cambridge University Press, 2010. doi: 10.1017/ CBO9780511976667

    work page 2010

  2. [2]

    Simulated quantum computation of molecular energies.Science, 309(5741):1704–1707, 2005

    Alán Aspuru-Guzik, Anthony D Dutoi, Peter J Love, and Martin Head-Gordon. Simulated quantum computation of molecular energies.Science, 309(5741):1704–1707, 2005. doi: 10. 1126/science.1113479

    work page 2005

  3. [3]

    End-to-end quantum simulation of a chemical system.arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.05835, 2024

    Wim van Dam, Hongbin Liu, Guang Hao Low, Adam Paetznick, Andres Paz, Marcus Silva, Aarthi Sundaram, Krysta Svore, and Matthias Troyer. End-to-end quantum simulation of a chemical system.arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.05835, 2024. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2409.05835. URLhttps://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2409.05835

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2409.05835 2024

  4. [4]

    Polynomial-time algorithms for prime factorization and discrete logarithms on a quantum computer.SIAM review, 41(2):303–332, 1999

    Peter W Shor. Polynomial-time algorithms for prime factorization and discrete logarithms on a quantum computer.SIAM review, 41(2):303–332, 1999. doi: 10.1137/S0036144598347011

    work page doi:10.1137/s0036144598347011 1999

  5. [5]

    Suppressing quantum errors by scaling a surface code logical qubit

    Google Quantum AI. Suppressing quantum errors by scaling a surface code logical qubit. Nature, 614(7949):676–681, 2023. doi: 10.1038/s41586-022-05434-1

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-022-05434-1 2023

  6. [6]

    Quantum error correction below the surface code threshold.Nature, 638:920–926, 2025

    Google Quantum AI and Collaborators. Quantum error correction below the surface code threshold.Nature, 638:920–926, 2025. doi: 10.1038/s41586-024-08449-y

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

  7. [7]

    How to factor 2048 bit rsa integers in 8 hours using 20 million noisy qubits.Quantum, 5:433, 2021

    Craig Gidney and Martin Ekerå. How to factor 2048 bit rsa integers in 8 hours using 20 million noisy qubits.Quantum, 5:433, 2021. doi: 10.22331/q-2021-04-15-433

    work page doi:10.22331/q-2021-04-15-433 2048

  8. [8]

    Peter W. Shor. Scheme for reducing decoherence in quantum computer memory.Physical Review A, 52:R2493–R2496, 1995. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevA.52.R2493

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.52.r2493 1995

  9. [9]

    Andrew M. Steane. Error correcting codes in quantum theory.Physical Review Letters, 77 (5):793–797, 1996. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.77.793

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.77.793 1996

  10. [10]

    A. R. Calderbank and Peter W. Shor. Good quantum error-correcting codes exist.Physical Review A, 54(2):1098–1105, 1996. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevA.54.1098

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.54.1098 1996

  11. [11]

    Stabilizer Codes and Quantum Error Correction

    Daniel Gottesman.Stabilizer codes and quantum error correction. California Institute of Technology, 1997. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.quant-ph/9705052

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.quant-ph/9705052 1997

  12. [13]

    Exact decoding of quantum error- correcting codes.Phys

    Hanyan Cao, Shoukuan Zhao, Dongyang Feng, Zisong Shen, Haisheng Yan, Tang Su, Weijie Sun, Huikai Xu, Feng Pan, Haifeng Yu, and Pan Zhang. Exact decoding of quantum error- correcting codes.Phys. Rev. Lett., 134:190603, May 2025. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.134. 190603. URLhttps://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.134.190603. 26

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.134 2025

  13. [14]

    Hardness of decoding quantum stabilizer codes.IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 61(9):5209–5223, 2015

    Pavithran Iyer and David Poulin. Hardness of decoding quantum stabilizer codes.IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 61(9):5209–5223, 2015. doi: 10.1109/TIT.2015.2422294

    work page doi:10.1109/tit.2015.2422294 2015

  14. [15]

    Paths, trees, and flowers.Canadian Journal of Mathematics, 17:449–467,

    Jack Edmonds. Paths, trees, and flowers.Canadian Journal of Mathematics, 17:449–467,

    work page

  15. [16]

    doi: 10.4153/CJM-1965-045-4

    work page doi:10.4153/cjm-1965-045-4 1965

  16. [17]

    Blossom V: A new implementation of a minimum cost perfect matching algorithm.Mathematical Programming Computation, 1(1):43–67, 2009

    Vladimir Kolmogorov. Blossom V: A new implementation of a minimum cost perfect matching algorithm.Mathematical Programming Computation, 1(1):43–67, 2009. ISSN 18672949. doi: 10.1007/s12532-009-0002-8

    work page doi:10.1007/s12532-009-0002-8 2009

  17. [18]

    Pymatching: A python package for decoding quantum codes with minimum- weight perfect matching.ACM Transactions on Quantum Computing, 3(3):1–16, 2022

    Oscar Higgott. Pymatching: A python package for decoding quantum codes with minimum- weight perfect matching.ACM Transactions on Quantum Computing, 3(3):1–16, 2022. doi: 10.1145/3505637

    work page doi:10.1145/3505637 2022

  18. [19]

    Sparse blossom: correcting a million errors per core second with minimum-weight matching.Quantum, 9:1600, January 2025

    Oscar Higgott and Craig Gidney. Sparse blossom: correcting a million errors per core second with minimum-weight matching.Quantum, 9:1600, 2025. doi: 10.22331/q-2025-01-20-1600

    work page doi:10.22331/q-2025-01-20-1600 2025

  19. [20]

    and Imai, H

    Yue Wu and Lin Zhong. Fusion blossom: Fast mwpm decoders for qec. In2023 IEEE International Conference on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE), volume 1, pages 928–938. IEEE, 2023. doi: 10.1109/QCE57702.2023.00107

    work page doi:10.1109/qce57702.2023.00107 2023

  20. [21]

    Almost-linear time decoding algorithm for topo- logical codes.Quantum, 5:595, 2021

    Nicolas Delfosse and Naomi H. Nickerson. Almost-linear time decoding algorithm for topo- logical codes.Quantum, 5:595, 2021. doi: 10.22331/q-2021-12-02-595

    work page doi:10.22331/q-2021-12-02-595 2021

  21. [22]

    David J. C. MacKay, Graeme Mitchison, and Paul L. McFadden. Sparse-graph codes for quantumerrorcorrection.IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 50(10):2315–2330, 2004. doi: 10.1109/TIT.2004.834737

    work page doi:10.1109/tit.2004.834737 2004

  22. [23]

    On the iterative decoding of sparse quantum codes.Quantum Information and Computation, 8(10):986–1000, 2008

    David Poulin and Yeojin Chung. On the iterative decoding of sparse quantum codes.Quantum Information and Computation, 8(10):986–1000, 2008. doi: 10.26421/QIC8.10-8

    work page doi:10.26421/qic8.10-8 2008

  23. [24]

    White, Simon Burton, and Earl Campbell

    Joschka Roffe, David R. White, Simon Burton, and Earl Campbell. Decoding across the quantum low-density parity-check code landscape.Physical Review Research, 2(4):043423,

    work page

  24. [25]

    doi: 10.1103/PhysRevResearch.2.043423

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevresearch.2.043423

  25. [26]

    Degenerate quantum LDPC codes with good finite length performance.Quantum, 5:585, 2021

    Pavel Panteleev and Gleb Kalachev. Degenerate quantum LDPC codes with good finite length performance.Quantum, 5:585, 2021. doi: 10.22331/q-2021-11-22-585

    work page doi:10.22331/q-2021-11-22-585 2021

  26. [27]

    Optimal complexity correction of correlated errors in the surface code

    Austin G Fowler. Optimal complexity correction of correlated errors in the surface code.arXiv preprint arXiv:1310.0863, 2013. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1310.0863. URLhttps://doi.org/10. 48550/arXiv.1310.0863

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1310.0863 2013

  27. [28]

    Improved decoding of circuit noise and fragile boundaries of tailored surface codes.Physical Review X, 13(3):031007, 2023

    Oscar Higgott, Thomas C. Bohdanowicz, Aleksander Kubica, Steven T. Flammia, and Earl T. Campbell. Improved decoding of circuit noise and fragile boundaries of tailored surface codes. Physical Review X, 13(3):031007, 2023. ISSN 2160-3308. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevX.13.031007

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevx.13.031007 2023

  28. [29]

    Improved accuracy for decoding surface codes with matching synthesis.arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.12135, 2024

    Cody Jones. Improved accuracy for decoding surface codes with matching synthesis.arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.12135, 2024. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2408.12135

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2408.12135 2024

  29. [30]

    Fowler, Matteo Mariantoni, John M

    Austin G. Fowler, Matteo Mariantoni, John M. Martinis, and Andrew N. Cleland. Surface codes: Towards practical large-scale quantum computation.Physical Review A, 86(3):032324,

    work page

  30. [32]

    Breuckmann and Jens N

    Nikolas P. Breuckmann and Jens N. Eberhardt. Quantum low-density parity-check codes. PRX Quantum, 2(4):040101, 2021. doi: 10.1103/PRXQuantum.2.040101

    work page doi:10.1103/prxquantum.2.040101 2021

  31. [33]

    State preservation by repetitive error detection in a superconducting quantum circuit.Nature, 519(7541):66–69,

    Julian Kelly, Rami Barends, Austin G Fowler, Anthony Megrant, Evan Jeffrey, Theodore C White, Daniel Sank, Josh Y Mutus, Brooks Campbell, Yu Chen, et al. State preservation by repetitive error detection in a superconducting quantum circuit.Nature, 519(7541):66–69,

    work page

  32. [34]

    URLhttps://www.nature.com/articles/nature14270

    doi: 10.1038/nature14270. URLhttps://www.nature.com/articles/nature14270

    work page doi:10.1038/nature14270

  33. [35]

    Exponential suppression of bit or phase errors with cyclic error correc- tion.Nature, 595(7867):383–387, 2021

    Google Quantum AI. Exponential suppression of bit or phase errors with cyclic error correc- tion.Nature, 595(7867):383–387, 2021. doi: 10.1038/s41586-021-03588-y

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03588-y 2021

  34. [36]

    A. Yu. Kitaev. Fault-tolerant quantum computation by anyons.Annals of Physics, 303(1): 2–30, 2003. doi: 10.1016/S0003-4916(02)00018-0

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1016/s0003-4916(02)00018-0 2003

  35. [37]

    Quantum codes on a lattice with boundary

    Sergey B Bravyi and A Yu Kitaev. Quantum codes on a lattice with boundary.arXiv preprint quant-ph/9811052, 1998. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.quant-ph/9811052

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.quant-ph/9811052 1998

  36. [38]

    Bombín and M

    H. Bombín and M. A. Martin-Delgado. Topological quantum distillation.Physical Review Letters, 97(18):180501, 2006. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.97.180501

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.97.180501 2006

  37. [39]

    Bombin and M

    H. Bombin and M. A. Martin-Delgado. Optimal resources for topological two-dimensional stabilizer codes: Comparative study.Physical Review A, 76, 7 2007. ISSN 10502947. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevA.76.012305

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.76.012305 2007

  38. [40]

    Fault-tolerant quantum computing with color codes

    Andrew J Landahl, Jonas T Anderson, and Patrick R Rice. Fault-tolerant quantum computing with color codes.arXiv preprint arXiv:1108.5738, 2011. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1108.5738. URL https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1108.5738

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1108.5738 2011

  39. [41]

    Austin G. Fowler. 2-d color code quantum computation.Physical Review A, 83(4):042310,

    work page

  40. [42]

    doi: 10.1103/PhysRevA.83.042310

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.83.042310

  41. [43]

    Quantum LDPC codes with positive rate and minimum distanceproportionaltothesquarerootoftheblocklength.IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 60(2):1193–1202, 2014

    Jean-Pierre Tillich and Gilles Zémor. Quantum LDPC codes with positive rate and minimum distanceproportionaltothesquarerootoftheblocklength.IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 60(2):1193–1202, 2014. doi: 10.1109/TIT.2013.2292061

    work page doi:10.1109/tit.2013.2292061 2014

  42. [44]

    Efficient decoding of random errors for quantum expander codes

    Omar Fawzi, Antoine Grospellier, and Anthony Leverrier. Efficient decoding of random errors for quantum expander codes. InProceedings of the 50th Annual ACM SIGACT Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 521–534, 2018. doi: 10.1145/3188745.3188886

    work page doi:10.1145/3188745.3188886 2018

  43. [45]

    Asymptotically good quantum and locally testable clas- sical LDPC codes.STOC ’22: Proceedings of the 54th Annual ACM SIGACT Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 375–388, 2022

    Pavel Panteleev and Gleb Kalachev. Asymptotically good quantum and locally testable clas- sical LDPC codes.STOC ’22: Proceedings of the 54th Annual ACM SIGACT Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 375–388, 2022. doi: 10.1145/3519935.3520017

    work page doi:10.1145/3519935.3520017 2022

  44. [46]

    Low treewidth embeddings of planar and minor-free metrics

    Anthony Leverrier and Gilles Zémor. Quantum Tanner codes.FOCS ’22: IEEE 63rd An- nual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 872–883, 2022. doi: 10.1109/ FOCS54457.2022.00117

    work page arXiv 2022

  45. [47]

    High-threshold and low-overhead fault-tolerant quantum memory.Na- ture, 627(8005):778–782, 2024

    Sergey Bravyi, Andrew W Cross, Jay M Gambetta, Dmitri Maslov, Patrick Rall, and Theodore J Yoder. High-threshold and low-overhead fault-tolerant quantum memory.Na- ture, 627(8005):778–782, 2024. doi: 10.1038/s41586-024-07107-7

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-024-07107-7 2024

  46. [48]

    Bombin, Ruben S

    H. Bombin, Ruben S. Andrist, Masayuki Ohzeki, Helmut G. Katzgraber, and M. A. Martin- Delgado. Strong resilience of topological codes to depolarization.Physical Review X, 2(2), apr 2012. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevX.2.021004. 28

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevx.2.021004 2012

  47. [49]

    Relaxing hardware requirements for surface code circuits using time-dynamics.Quantum, 7:1172, 2023

    Matt McEwen, Dave Bacon, and Craig Gidney. Relaxing hardware requirements for surface code circuits using time-dynamics.Quantum, 7:1172, 2023. doi: 10.22331/q-2023-11-07-1172

    work page doi:10.22331/q-2023-11-07-1172 2023

  48. [50]

    Stim: A fast stabilizer circuit simulator.Quantum, 5:497, 2021

    Craig Gidney. Stim: A fast stabilizer circuit simulator.Quantum, 5:497, 2021. doi: 10.22331/ q-2021-07-06-497

    work page 2021

  49. [51]

    Removing leakage-induced correlated errors in superconducting quantum error correction.Nature communications, 12(1):1761, 2021

    Matt McEwen, Dvir Kafri, Z Chen, Juan Atalaya, KJ Satzinger, Chris Quintana, Paul Victor Klimov, Daniel Sank, C Gidney, AG Fowler, et al. Removing leakage-induced correlated errors in superconducting quantum error correction.Nature communications, 12(1):1761, 2021. doi: 10.1038/s41467-021-21982-y

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467-021-21982-y 2021

  50. [52]

    Overcom- ing leakage in quantum error correction.Nature Physics, 19(12):1780–1786, 2023

    Kevin C Miao, Matt McEwen, Juan Atalaya, Dvir Kafri, Leonid P Pryadko, Andreas Bengts- son, Alex Opremcak, Kevin J Satzinger, Zijun Chen, Paul V Klimov, et al. Overcom- ing leakage in quantum error correction.Nature Physics, 19(12):1780–1786, 2023. doi: 10.1038/s41567-023-02226-w

    work page doi:10.1038/s41567-023-02226-w 2023

  51. [53]

    Benchmarking coherent errors in controlled-phase gates due to spectator qubits.Physical Review Applied, 14(2):024042, 2020

    Sebastian Krinner, Stefania Lazar, Ants Remm, Christian K Andersen, Nathan Lacroix, Gra- ham J Norris, Christoph Hellings, Mihai Gabureac, Christopher Eichler, and Andreas Wall- raff. Benchmarking coherent errors in controlled-phase gates due to spectator qubits.Physical Review Applied, 14(2):024042, 2020. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevApplied.14.024042

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevapplied.14.024042 2020

  52. [54]

    Resisting high- energy impact events through gap engineering in superconducting qubit arrays.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.15644, 2024

    Matt McEwen, Kevin C Miao, Juan Atalaya, Alex Bilmes, Alex Crook, Jenna Bovaird, John Mark Kreikebaum, Nicholas Zobrist, Evan Jeffrey, Bicheng Ying, et al. Resisting high- energy impact events through gap engineering in superconducting qubit arrays.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.15644, 2024. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2402.15644. URLhttps://doi.org/10.48550/ arXiv.2402.15644

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2402.15644 2024

  53. [55]

    Direct evidence for cosmic-ray-induced correlated errors in superconducting qubit array.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.04245, 2024

    Xue-Gang Li, Jun-Hua Wang, Yao-Yao Jiang, Guang-Ming Xue, Xiao-Xia Cai, Jun Zhou, Ming Gong, Zhao-Feng Liu, Shuang-Yu Zheng, Deng-Ke Ma, et al. Direct evidence for cosmic-ray-induced correlated errors in superconducting qubit array.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.04245, 2024. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2402.04245. URLhttps://doi.org/10.48550/ arXiv.2402.04245

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2402.04245 2024

  54. [56]

    Optimization of decoder priors for accurate quantum error correction.Physical Review Letters, 133(15):150603, 2024

    Volodymyr Sivak, Michael Newman, and Paul Klimov. Optimization of decoder priors for accurate quantum error correction.Physical Review Letters, 133(15):150603, 2024. doi: 10. 1103/PhysRevLett.133.150603

    work page 2024

  55. [57]

    Differentiable maximum likelihood noise estimation for quantum error correction, 2026

    Hanyan Cao, Dongyang Feng, Cheng Ye, and Feng Pan. Differentiable maximum likelihood noise estimation for quantum error correction, 2026. URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2602. 19722

    work page 2026

  56. [58]

    Topological quantum memory.Journal of Mathematical Physics, 43(9):4452–4505, 2002

    Eric Dennis, Alexei Kitaev, Andrew Landahl, and John Preskill. Topological quantum mem- ory.Journal of Mathematical Physics, 43(9):4452–4505, September 2002. ISSN 0022-2488, 1089-7658. doi: 10.1063/1.1499754

    work page doi:10.1063/1.1499754 2002

  57. [59]

    Exploiting degeneracy in belief propagation decoding of quantum codes.npj Quantum Information, 8:111, 2022

    Kao-Yueh Kuo and Ching-Yi Lai. Exploiting degeneracy in belief propagation decoding of quantum codes.npj Quantum Information, 8:111, 2022. doi: 10.1038/s41534-022-00623-2

    work page doi:10.1038/s41534-022-00623-2 2022

  58. [60]

    Fast decoders for topological quantum codes

    Guillaume Duclos-Cianci and David Poulin. Fast decoders for topological quantum codes. Physical Review Letters, 104(5):050504, 2010. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.104.050504. 29

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.104.050504 2010

  59. [61]

    A renormalization group decoding algorithm for topological quantum codes

    Guillaume Duclos-Cianci and David Poulin. A renormalization group decoding algorithm for topological quantum codes. In2010 IEEE Information Theory Workshop, pages 1–5, 2010. doi: 10.1109/CIG.2010.5592866

    work page doi:10.1109/cig.2010.5592866 2010

  60. [62]

    Decoding color codes by projection onto surface codes.Physical Review A, 89(1):012317, 2014

    Nicolas Delfosse. Decoding color codes by projection onto surface codes.Physical Review A, 89(1):012317, 2014. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevA.89.012317

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.89.012317 2014

  61. [63]

    Efficient near-optimal decoding of the surface code through ensembling.Physical Review Letters, 136(7):070603, 2026

    Noah Shutty, Michael Newman, and Benjamin Villalonga. Efficient near-optimal decoding of the surface code through ensembling.Physical Review Letters, 136(7):070603, 2026. doi: 10.1103/77j6-32xx

    work page doi:10.1103/77j6-32xx 2026

  62. [64]

    Browne, Kenton M

    Luka Skoric, Dan E. Browne, Kenton M. Barnes, Neil I. Gillespie, and Earl T. Campbell. Parallel window decoding enables scalable fault tolerant quantum computation.Nature Com- munications, 14:7040, 2023. doi: 10.1038/s41467-023-42482-1

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467-023-42482-1 2023

  63. [65]

    Scalable surface-code decoders with parallelization in time.PRX Quantum, 4(4):040344, 2023

    Xinyu Tan, Fang Zhang, Rui Chao, Yaoyun Shi, and Jianxin Chen. Scalable surface-code decoders with parallelization in time.PRX Quantum, 4(4):040344, 2023. doi: 10.1103/ PRXQuantum.4.040344

    work page 2023

  64. [66]

    Modular decoding: Parallelizable real-time decoding for quantum computers.arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.04846, 2023

    Héctor Bombín, Chris Dawson, Ye-Hua Liu, Naomi Nickerson, Fernando Pastawski, and Sam Roberts. Modular decoding: Parallelizable real-time decoding for quantum computers.arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.04846, 2023. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2303.04846

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2303.04846 2023

  65. [67]

    Exact results and critical properties of the Ising model with competing interactions.Journal of Physics C: Solid State Physics, 13(21):4071–4076, 1980

    Hidetoshi Nishimori. Exact results and critical properties of the Ising model with competing interactions.Journal of Physics C: Solid State Physics, 13(21):4071–4076, 1980. doi: 10.1088/ 0022-3719/13/21/012

    work page 1980

  66. [68]

    Chubb and Steven T

    Christopher T. Chubb and Steven T. Flammia. Statistical mechanical models for quantum codes with correlated noise.Annales de l’Institut Henri Poincaré D, 8(2):269–321, 2021. doi: 10.4171/AIHPD/105

    work page doi:10.4171/aihpd/105 2021

  67. [69]

    Tuckett, Stephen D

    David K. Tuckett, Stephen D. Bartlett, Steven T. Flammia, and Benjamin J. Brown. Fault- tolerant thresholds for the surface code in excess of5%under biased noise.Physical Review Letters, 124(13):130501, 2020. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.124.130501

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.124.130501 2020

  68. [70]

    Error threshold estimates for surface code with loss of qubits.Physi- cal Review A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics, 85(6):060301, 2012

    Masayuki Ohzeki. Error threshold estimates for surface code with loss of qubits.Physi- cal Review A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics, 85(6):060301, 2012. doi: 10.1103/ PhysRevA.85.060301

    work page 2012

  69. [71]

    Tailoring surface codes for highly biased noise.Physical Review X, 9(4):041031, 2019

    David K Tuckett, Andrew S Darmawan, Christopher T Chubb, Sergey Bravyi, Stephen D Bartlett, and Steven T Flammia. Tailoring surface codes for highly biased noise.Physical Review X, 9(4):041031, 2019. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevX.9.041031

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevx.9.041031 2019

  70. [72]

    The XZZX surface code.Nature communications, 12(1):2172, 2021

    J Pablo Bonilla Ataides, David K Tuckett, Stephen D Bartlett, Steven T Flammia, and Benjamin J Brown. The XZZX surface code.Nature communications, 12(1):2172, 2021. doi: 10.1038/s41467-021-22274-1

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467-021-22274-1 2021

  71. [73]

    A combinatorial solution of the two-dimensional ising model

    Mark Kac and John C Ward. A combinatorial solution of the two-dimensional ising model. Physical Review, 88(6):1332, 1952. doi: 10.1103/PhysRev.88.1332

    work page doi:10.1103/physrev.88.1332 1952

  72. [74]

    Leslie G. Valiant. Quantum circuits that can be simulated classically in polynomial time. SIAM Journal on Computing, 31(4):1229–1254, 2002. doi: 10.1137/S0097539700377025. 30

    work page doi:10.1137/s0097539700377025 2002

  73. [75]

    Efficient algorithms for maximum likelihood decoding in the surface code.Physical Review A, 90(3):032326, 2014

    Sergey Bravyi, Martin Suchara, and Alexander Vargo. Efficient algorithms for maximum likelihood decoding in the surface code.Physical Review A, 90(3):032326, 2014. doi: 10.1103/ PhysRevA.90.032326

    work page 2014

  74. [76]

    BlockBP decoder for the surface code.Physical Review Research, 7:043025, 2025

    Aviad Kaufmann and Itai Arad. BlockBP decoder for the surface code.Physical Review Research, 7:043025, 2025. doi: 10.1103/z2qt-smfb

    work page doi:10.1103/z2qt-smfb 2025

  75. [77]

    Ferris and David Poulin

    Andrew J. Ferris and David Poulin. Tensor networks and quantum error correction.Physical Review Letters, 113(3):030501, 2014. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.113.030501

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.113.030501 2014

  76. [78]

    Bohdanowicz, Elizabeth Crosson, Chinmay Nirkhe, and Henry Yuen

    Thomas C. Bohdanowicz, Elizabeth Crosson, Chinmay Nirkhe, and Henry Yuen. Tensor networks for exact and approximate maximum likelihood decoding. InProceedings of the 51st Annual ACM SIGACT Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 481–490, Phoenix AZ USA, June 2019. ACM. ISBN 978-1-4503-6705-9. doi: 10.1145/3313276.3316384

    work page doi:10.1145/3313276.3316384 2019

  77. [80]

    General tensor network decoding of 2d pauli codes.arXiv preprint arXiv:2101.04125, 2021

    Christopher T Chubb. General tensor network decoding of 2d pauli codes.arXiv preprint arXiv:2101.04125, 2021. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2101.04125. URLhttps://doi.org/10.48550/ arXiv.2101.04125

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2101.04125 2021

  78. [81]

    Tensor-network decoding beyond 2d.PRX Quantum, 5(4):040303, 2024

    Christophe Piveteau, Christopher T Chubb, and Joseph M Renes. Tensor-network decoding beyond 2d.PRX Quantum, 5(4):040303, 2024. doi: 10.1103/PRXQuantum.5.040303

    work page doi:10.1103/prxquantum.5.040303 2024

  79. [82]

    Giacomo Torlai and Roger G. Melko. Neural decoder for topological codes.Physical Review Letters, 119(3):030501, 2017. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.030501

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.119.030501 2017

  80. [83]

    Deep neural network probabilistic decoder for stabilizer codes.Scientific Reports, 7:11003, 2017

    Stefan Krastanov and Liang Jiang. Deep neural network probabilistic decoder for stabilizer codes.Scientific Reports, 7:11003, 2017. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-11266-1

    work page doi:10.1038/s41598-017-11266-1 2017

Showing first 80 references.