Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 83 references

Passive quantum error correction of photon loss at breakeven

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-04 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper reports that a binomial logical qubit in a superconducting cavity, corrected continuously by a parity-selective photon-addition dissipator, preserves quantum information for 196±1 µs, about 5% longer than the 186±1 µs photon-life

desk verdict A real continuous-AQEC breakeven experiment whose relative margin survives, but the quoted lifetimes are inflated by a 1.5x formula error and the 'beyond photon-lifetime' headline is not supported. read the letter →

arxiv 2510.19794 v1 pith:VTCVATGF submitted 2025-10-22 quant-ph

Shruti Shirol , Sean van Geldern , Hanzhe Xi , Chen Wang This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph MSC 81P70 PACS 03.67.Pp
keywords autonomousquantumerrorcorrectionbosoniccodesbinomialcodephotonlosssuperconductingcavitytransmonbreak-evendriven-dissipative
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper reports that a superconducting-cavity logical qubit, encoded in a superposition of photon-number states and corrected continuously rather than in discrete measurement cycles, keeps its information for 196±1 µs — about 5% longer than the 186±1 µs lifetime of the bare photon qubit in the same device. The correction is autonomous: two combs of microwave drives plus the natural decay of a low-Q reservoir continuously add a photon back when the cavity has lost one, without any measurement or feedback. The authors argue this is the first continuous, passive quantum error correction of photon loss to reach break-even, and that it performs comparably to active error correction with much lighter hardware requirements. If correct, it means a quantum memory can outlive its own elementary excitations by engineering dissipation rather than by performing fast measurements.

What carries the argument

The key object is the PReSPA dissipator, Π̂_cor = √κ_cor Σ_n |2n+1⟩⟨2n|, which selectively adds a photon to the storage cavity only when it is in even parity, returning the binomial code from the single-photon-loss error space to the code space. It is implemented using two simultaneous combs of four-wave-mixing drives and a low-Q reservoir mode; the transmon's photon-number-dependent dispersive shift provides parity selectivity, and matched drive frequencies across n = 1, 3, 5 conceal which-path information so that superposition coherence is preserved. The drive rates are chosen at a critical-damping condition (Ω1 : Ω2 : κr ≈ 1/13 : 1/4 : 1) derived from a 3×3 non-Hermitian model, which yiel

What would settle it

Directly measure the corrected binomial code's process fidelity at a single long wait time, say 300–400 µs, without relying on the two-exponential extrapolation; the breakeven claim predicts it should remain above the Fock encoding's fidelity at that time. If the corrected curve instead crosses below the Fock curve at all times beyond the initial preparation overhead, the reported margin would not hold.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that a continuously driven dissipative process can protect a bosonic logical qubit beyond the lifetime of the individual photons that carry it. The logical qubit is encoded in the binomial code |0_L⟩ = (|1⟩ + |5⟩)/√2, |1_L⟩ = |3⟩, and the correction is performed by the PReSPA dissipator, which adds a photon only when the cavity is in the even-parity error subspace. This returns the state to the code space after a single photon-loss error. Over the whole data set the mean process-fidelity lifetime is τ_process = 191±1 µs, exceeding the Fock |0⟩,|1⟩ encoding's 186±1 µs by 3%; over the last four days the corrected lifetime is 196±1 µs, a 5% margin. The correction acts c

Load-bearing premise

The quoted margin over break-even rests on comparing process-fidelity lifetimes extracted from a two-exponential fit to the Fock |0⟩,|1⟩ encoding's lifetime; if that benchmark or the fit model is not correct, the 5% advantage could vanish.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A logical qubit can be protected from the dominant photon-loss channel without active measurement or real-time feedback; continuous drives plus engineered dissipation suffice.
  • The correction time of about 4 µs is comparable to the cycle time of active QEC demonstrations, so the passive approach need not be slow.
  • The corrected binomial code improves process fidelity by roughly 2.2× over the same code without correction, and its fidelity decay curve crosses the Fock-encoding curve at around 400 µs.
  • At equal hardware coherence, the passive protocol shows error rates competitive with active QEC, with the passive advantage largest for readout-related and recovery-unitary errors.
  • The observed 3–5% margin over break-even is time-averaged and stable over days without recalibration of the correction drives.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the reported margin reproduces on higher-lifetime devices, passive QEC could relieve the readout and feedback bottleneck of active error correction for bosonic memories, since the protocol needs no single-shot readout.
  • The scaling argument in the paper suggests the passive scheme's unwanted-correction error rate grows as the cube of the correction rate, while the active scheme's grows linearly; if so, slower correction on better cavities will favor passive QEC even more.
  • The model leaves codeword distortion uncorrected; the next testable step is adding engineered four-photon dissipation, which the paper identifies as the direct route to further extending the logical lifetime.
  • The unexplained near-linear drive-induced transmon heating (about 0.4 ms⁻¹) will become the limiting error in higher-T1 cavities and deserves targeted spectroscopy; a successful theory of it would change the error budget of all continuous QEC hardware.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper reports continuous, autonomous quantum error correction of a binomial bosonic logical qubit encoded in a superconducting cavity, using the PReSPA dissipative protocol. The authors claim a time-averaged logical process-fidelity lifetime of 191±1 µs over the full run and 196±1 µs over the last four days, exceeding a Fock |0⟩,|1⟩ reference by 3–5%. They characterize the dissipative correction with time-domain population dynamics, Wigner tomography, and multi-day lifetime tracking, and compare their passive scheme to active QEC in an error-budget analysis.

Significance. If the quantitative claims hold, this would be a notable experimental milestone: the first continuous AQEC implementation for a bosonic code that reaches the break-even point defined by the best physical qubit in the same device. The experimental methods are credible: independent state and process fidelities from Wigner tomography and transmon decoding, multi-day drift tracking, and master-equation fits to the correction dynamics. The use of |f⟩-state intermediate transitions and the critical-damping optimization are technically sensible. However, the headline lifetimes and the 'beyond photon-lifetime limit' claim rest on a specific formula for τ_process that appears to omit the affine factor between average state fidelity and process fidelity. The reported absolute lifetimes are therefore inflated by 1.5×, and the abstract's central quantitative claim is not supported as written. The relative advantage over the Fock-encoded reference may survive, but the paper must be substantially revised.

major comments (3)
  1. [EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS / Supplementary A.7, Eq. for τ_process] The quoted τ_process formula is inconsistent with the stated relation F_process = 0.25 + 1.5(F_avg − 0.5). If F_avg(t) = (1/3)e^{−t/Tp} + (2/3)e^{−t/Teq}, then F_process(t) = −0.5 + 0.5e^{−t/Tp} + e^{−t/Teq}. The initial slope of F_process is 0.5/Tp + 1/Teq, giving τ_process = 1/(0.5/Tp + 1/Teq) = 2TpTeq/(2Tp+Teq). The manuscript instead uses τ_process = 1/[(2/3)/Teq + (1/3)/Tp] = 3TpTeq/(2Tp+Teq), which is the inverse of the initial slope of F_avg, not of F_process. The ratio is 3/2, so the quoted lifetimes (196, 191, 186 µs) are inflated by 50%. Correcting this gives ≈131 µs for the corrected binomial code, below the cavity T1a = 136 µs quoted in Table S1. The abstract's claim that the logical qubit exceeds the photon-lifetime limit is therefore not supported as stated. The relative margin over the Fock |0⟩,|1⟩ encoding survives because both are scaled by the same factor, but the absol
  2. [Abstract and Fig. 3A] The headline 'about 5% beyond' is based on the last four days of a 15-day measurement run, a post-hoc selection. The full-run margin is 3% (191 vs 186 µs). Given the statistically significant day-to-day drift visible in Fig. 3A, the choice of the final four days should be justified a priori or a stability analysis should be presented. As written, the abstract overstates the evidence by emphasizing the more favorable subset without reporting that it was selected after inspecting the full data set.
  3. [Abstract and Table S1] The abstract equates the Fock |0⟩,|1⟩ process-fidelity lifetime (186±1 µs) with 'the T1-limited coherence time of individual photons in the cavity,' but Table S1 gives the cavity photon lifetime as T1a = 136 µs. The process fidelity of a Fock-encoded qubit is not the single-photon lifetime; it includes state-preparation/readout overhead and dephasing. After the τ_process correction, the Fock reference becomes ≈124 µs, which is below T1a. The paper must clearly state what the break-even reference is. If the claim is to exceed the single-photon T1 limit, the corrected data do not support it. If the claim is only to exceed the Fock-encoded process fidelity, then the benchmark should be labeled accordingly and the 'photon-lifetime limit' language removed or qualified.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Supplementary A.7] The sentence 'When (t≪T1a), the process fidelity can be estimated to have a single exponential decay, with a rate that is a weighted average of pole and equator logical state decay rates' is misleading: the rate of F_process is 1.5 times that weighted average, not the weighted average itself. Please correct the derivation and the resulting formula.
  2. [Fig. 3B and fits] The dashed curves are sums of two exponentials derived from independent exponential fits of pole and equator state fidelities. For the Fock encoding, the equator fidelity typically has a nonzero offset (e.g., 0.5 + 0.5e^{−t/T1}); fitting a pure exponential to such data is range-dependent. The fit ranges and the treatment of offsets should be described, or the fits should be replotted with residuals.
  3. [Introduction / Conclusions] The concluding statement that this is 'the first example that quantum information ... persists beyond the limit imposed by the excitation lifetime' is stronger than the corrected numbers support if 'excitation lifetime' means T1a = 136 µs. Please harmonize the wording with the actual benchmark used.
  4. [PASSIVE QEC TECHNIQUE] Typo: 'Linbladian' should be 'Lindbladian' in the sentence defining the PReSPA dissipator.
  5. [Fig. 3A / abstract] The abstract says 'about 5%' while the main text full-run value is 3%. Please make the abstract consistent with the selected analysis window and clearly state whether the full-run or last-four-days value is the primary result.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No load-bearing circularity: the corrected logical lifetime is a measured comparison, not a prediction forced by the fitted model; the main flagged issue is a definitional inconsistency in the τ_process extraction, which is a correctness concern rather than a circular inference.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular in the input-output sense. PReSPA is attributed to Ref. [31], a prior publication with overlapping authors, but that citation is to a previously published independent experimental demonstration, and the present paper supplies its own Hamiltonian (Eq. 3), master-equation calibration (Fig. 2A), Wigner tomography (Fig. 2D), and measured time-domain lifetimes (Fig. 3). The headline logical-lifetime claim is an experimental measurement, not a prediction generated by the self-cited theory. The Fig. 2A master-equation fit uses Ω1 and Ω2 as free parameters, but those fitted rates only calibrate the dissipator; they are not then renamed as the logical coherence time. I do flag a definitional inconsistency in the lifetime extraction: the paper defines F_process = 0.25 + 1.5(F_avg − 0.5) and then quotes τ_process = 1/[(2/3)/T_eq + (1/3)/T_p] (Experimental Results; Supp. Sec. A.7). Algebraically, the t→0 slope of the defined F_process is 0.5/T_p + 1/T_eq, so the quoted formula is the inverse initial slope of F_avg, not of F_process, inflating the quoted lifetimes by a factor 3/2. This affects the absolute 'beyond the photon-lifetime limit' wording and is a genuine correctness/consistency issue, but it is not a circular step: the reported numbers are fits to measured fidelities rather than outputs that were built into their inputs. The use of the Fock process-fidelity lifetime (186 µs) as the breakeven reference is also a benchmark choice, not a circularity. Overall, the central derivation is self-contained and no load-bearing argument reduces to a self-citation or to a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new particles, forces, or abstract entities are postulated. The free parameters are two drive rates (Ω1, Ω2) fit to master-equation dynamics, the two-exponential lifetime model used to define τprocess, and a post-hoc four-day time window that produces the headline 196 µs. The axioms are all standard superconducting-circuit-QED modeling assumptions: the RWA three-level Hamiltonian, Markovian reservoir loss, negligible higher-order nonlinearity, and the Fock-encoding breakeven reference. The reference choice is the most consequential assumption because it defines whether the claimed 3–5% margin is 'beyond the photon lifetime' or 'beyond the process fidelity of the best alternative encoding'.

free parameters (4)
  • Ω1 (PReSPA first-stage drive rate) = 55 kHz
    Fit to the master-equation simulation of the time-domain photon-addition data (Fig. 2A) for all three n=1,3,5 conversion paths. The central correction speed τcor≈4 µs depends on this value. It is also cross-checked against Stark-shift-based estimates (Table S2), which supports but does not eliminate its fitted character.
  • Ω2 (PReSPA second-stage drive rate) = 160 kHz
    Joint fit parameter with Ω1 in the same Fig. 2A master-equation fit; the rates enter the critical-damping hierarchy Ω1:Ω2:κr ≈ 1/13:1/4:1 that determines the correction rate. Table S2 gives an estimated 190 kHz from Stark shift, so the fitted value carries systematic uncertainty.
  • Two-exponential lifetime fit parameters (Tp, Teq) = Tp and Teq per day, yielding τprocess ≈ 191–196 µs
    The headline process-fidelity lifetime is defined by τprocess = 1 / [(2/3)Teq^{-1} + (1/3)Tp^{-1}] and each day's Tp, Teq are independent exponential fits to six-cardinal-state fidelity decays (Supplementary A.7, Fig. 3A). The 5% margin is a fitted quantity, not a direct measured crossing.
  • Post-hoc 'last four days' selection window = days 12–15 of Fig. 3A
    The headline 196±1 µs is quoted for the last four days of a multi-day run, chosen because the authors note 'small but statistically-significant changes' and 'this improvement may be attributed to slightly lower excited-state population...'. This is a post hoc selection that improves the headline margin from 3% to 5%.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The two FWM drive combs implement the effective Hamiltonian H_d = Σ Ω1|n,f,0⟩⟨n-1,g,0| + Ω2|n,g,1⟩⟨n,f,0| + h.c. under RWA, with matched values of ωd1+ωd2, Ω1, Ω2 across n=1,3,5.
    This is the core modeling assumption (Eq. 3, Fig. 1C) that the three conversion paths are indistinguishable; the fidelity of coherent superposition after conversion (Fig. 2D, 84%/75%/62%) tests it but does not fully certify it. If the matched-amplitude or matching-frequency condition failed, the logical coherence preservation would degrade independently of measured populations.
  • domain assumption The transmon ancilla can be treated as a three-level system with |f⟩ as the intermediate; higher levels and measurement-induced transitions are negligible for the main claim.
    Invoked throughout the PReSPA level scheme (Fig. 1C, Eq. 2 with only |e⟩,|f⟩); the supplementary's own spurious-excitation study (Fig. S1) measures populations in 'higher states' that are small but present, and the transmon readout itself induces some higher-state population, so this is an approximation with documented but partially characterized leakage.
  • domain assumption The reservoir mode acts as a Markovian bath with decay κr/2π = 0.58 MHz and no back-action beyond the modeled dissipator D[r]; the emitted photons for all paths are identical in frequency and temporal profile.
    The two-stage cascade model (Supplementary Sec. B, Eq. S3) treats the reservoir as a pure loss channel. The which-path indistinguishability claim is stated (main text near Eq. 3) but not directly measured—the Wigner coherence preservation is the indirect evidence.
  • domain assumption The dispersive and Kerr Hamiltonian terms omitted from Eq. 2 (self-Kerr K/2π=3.3 kHz, χ'q/2π=1.9 kHz) do not materially affect the AQEC dynamics.
    Table S1 lists these terms, and the main text notes 'higher-order terms have negligible effects... and are not included in Eq. (2)'. The Wigner data in Fig. 2D 'There is a deterministic phase-space rotation due to the self-Kerr of the cavity', which is visible, so the assumption is partially violated but handled in analysis.
  • domain assumption The Fock |0⟩,|1⟩ encoding is the correct 'best physical qubit' breakeven reference, and its 186±1 µs process-fidelity lifetime represents the photon-lifetime limit.
    The abstract frames the comparison as 'beyond the photon-lifetime limit', but the reported 186 µs is the process-fidelity lifetime of the Fock encoding including its own state preparation and tomography overhead; the bare cavity T1 is given as 136 µs in Table S1 and in the PReSPA characterization section. The choice of reference determines the meaning of the 5% margin.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Passive quantum error correction of photon loss at breakeven." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/VTCVATGF

@misc{pith2026251019794,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Passive quantum error correction of photon loss at breakeven},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/VTCVATGF}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2510.19794}
}
read the original abstract

Physical qubits in a quantum computer are often represented by superposition states of single particles or excitations. Decay of the excitation itself is a fundamental error channel that is difficult to overcome via external drive or control techniques. Quantum error correcting codes, which encode information in superpositions involving multiple excitations, provide a path to preserve information beyond the capacity of individual excitations, but typically require exquisite active operations on the system. Here, we demonstrate a steady-state driven dissipative quantum system, composed of a superconducting cavity and a transmon ancilla, that preserves a logical qubit beyond the photon-lifetime limit by about 5% using a binomial encoding. This realization of continuous quantum error correction at the breakeven point highlights the quantitative competitiveness of passive correction strategies while circumventing some demanding hardware requirements of its active counterparts.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2510.19794 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

83 extracted references · 4 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Timoney, I

    N. Timoney, I. Baumgart, M. Johanning, A. Varón, A. Retzker, and C. Wunderlich, Quantum gates and memory using microwave-dressed states, Nature476, 185 (2011)

    2011

  2. [2]

    X. Xu, Z. Wang, C. Duan, P. Huang, P. Wang, Y. Wang, N. Xu, X. Kong, F. Shi, X. Rong, and J. Du, Coherence- protected quantum gate by continuous dynamical decou- pling in diamond, Phys. Rev. Lett.109, 070502 (2012)

    2012

  3. [3]

    Leghtas, S

    Z. Leghtas, S. Touzard, I. M. Pop, A. Kou, B. Vlastakis, A.Petrenko, K.M.Sliwa, A.Narla, S.Shankar, M.J.Ha- tridge, M. Reagor, L. Frunzio, R. J. Schoelkopf, M. Mir- rahimi, and M. H. Devoret, Confining the state of light to a quantum manifold by engineered two-photon loss, Science347, 853–857 (2015)

    2015

  4. [4]

    Grimm, N

    A. Grimm, N. E. Frattini, S. Puri, S. O. Mundhada, S. Touzard, M. Mirrahimi, S. M. Girvin, S. Shankar, and M. H. Devoret, Stabilization and operation of a kerr-cat qubit, Nature584, 205 (2020)

    2020

  5. [5]

    Laucht, R

    A. Laucht, R. Kalra, S. Simmons, J. P. Dehollain, J. T. Muhonen, F. A. Mohiyaddin, S. Freer, F. E. Hudson, K. M. Itoh, D. N. Jamieson,et al., A dressed spin qubit in silicon, Nature nanotechnology12, 61 (2017)

    2017

  6. [6]

    Paladino, Y

    E. Paladino, Y. Galperin, G. Falci, and B. Altshuler, 1/f noise: Implications for solid-state quantum information, Reviews of Modern Physics86, 361 (2014)

    2014

  7. [7]

    Viola and E

    L. Viola and E. Knill, Robust dynamical decoupling of quantum systems with bounded controls, Physical review letters90, 037901 (2003)

    2003

  8. [8]

    F. Yan, S. Gustavsson, J. Bylander, X. Jin, F. Yoshihara, D. G. Cory, Y. Nakamura, T. P. Orlando, and W. D. Oliver, Rotating-frame relaxation as a noise spectrum analyser of a superconducting qubit undergoing driven evolution, Nature communications4, 2337 (2013)

    2013

Show all 83 references
  1. [9]

    Huang, P

    Z. Huang, P. S. Mundada, A. Gyenis, D. I. Schuster, A. A. Houck, and J. Koch, Engineering dynamical sweet spots to protect qubits from 1/f noise, Physical Review Applied15, 034065 (2021)

    2021

  2. [10]

    L. B. Nguyen, Y. Kim, A. Hashim, N. Goss, B. Marinelli, B. Bhandari, D. Das, R. K. Naik, J. M. Kreikebaum, A. N. Jordan,et al., Programmable heisenberg inter- actions between floquet qubits, Nature Physics20, 240 (2024)

    2024

  3. [11]

    A. Hajr, B. Qing, K. Wang, G. Koolstra, Z. Pedramrazi, Z. Kang, L. Chen, L. B. Nguyen, C. Jünger, N. Goss, et al., High-coherence kerr-cat qubit in 2d architecture, Physical Review X14, 041049 (2024)

    2024

  4. [12]

    Régladeet al., Quantum control of a cat qubit with bit-flip times exceeding ten seconds, Nature629, 778 (2024)

    U. Régladeet al., Quantum control of a cat qubit with bit-flip times exceeding ten seconds, Nature629, 778 (2024)

    2024

  5. [13]

    N. E. Frattini, R. G. Cortiñas, J. Venkatraman, X. Xiao, Q. Su, C. U. Lei, B. J. Chapman, V. R. Joshi, S. Girvin, R. J. Schoelkopf,et al., Observation of pairwise level de- generacies and the quantum regime of the arrhenius law in a double-well parametric oscillator, Physical ...

    2024

  6. [14]

    Y. Li, Q. Mei, Q.-X. Jie, W. Cai, Y. Li, Z. Liu, Z.-J. Chen, Z. Xie, X. Cheng, X. Zhao,et al., Beating the break-even point with autonomous quantum error cor- rection, arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.16746 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  7. [15]

    DeBry, N

    K. DeBry, N. Meister, A. V. Martinez, C. D. Bruzewicz, X.Shi, D.Reens, R.McConnell, I.L.Chuang,andJ.Chi- averini, Error correction of a logical qubit encoded in a single atomic ion (2025), arXiv:2503.13908 [quant-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Acharya, D

    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

  9. [17]

    Leroux, C

    S.Krinner, N.Lacroix, A.Remm, A.DiPaolo, E.Genois, C. Leroux, C. Hellings, S. Lazar, F. Swiadek, J. Her- rmann,et al., Realizing repeated quantum error correc- tion in a distance-three surface code, Nature605, 669 (2022)

    2022

  10. [18]

    Putterman, K

    H. Putterman, K. Noh, C. T. Hann, G. S. MacCabe, S. Aghaeimeibodi, R. N. Patel, M. Lee, W. M. Jones, H. Moradinejad, R. Rodriguez,et al., Hardware-efficient quantum error correction via concatenated bosonic qubits, Nature638, 927 (2025)

    2025

  11. [19]

    Campagne-Ibarcq, A

    P. Campagne-Ibarcq, A. Eickbusch, S. Touzard, E. Zalys- Geller, N. E. Frattini, V. V. Sivak, P. Reinhold, S. Puri, S. Shankar, R. J. Schoelkopf,et al., Quantum error cor- rection of a qubit encoded in grid states of an oscillator, Nature584, 368 (2020)

    2020

  12. [20]

    L. Hu, Y. Ma, W. Cai, X. Mu, Y. Xu, W. Wang, Y. Wu, H. Wang, Y. Song, C.-L. Zou,et al., Quantum error cor- rection and universal gate set operation on a binomial bosonic logical qubit, Nature Physics15, 503 (2019)

    2019

  13. [21]

    N. Ofek, A. Petrenko, R. Heeres, P. Reinhold, Z. Leghtas, B. Vlastakis, Y. Liu, L. Frunzio, S. M. Girvin, L. Jiang, et al., Extending the lifetime of a quantum bit with error correction in superconducting circuits, Nature536, 441 (2016)

    2016

  14. [22]

    V. V. Sivak, A. Eickbusch, B. Royer, S. Singh, I. Tsiout- sios, S. Ganjam, A. Miano, B. Brock, A. Ding, L. Frun- zio,et al., Real-time quantum error correction beyond break-even, Nature616, 50 (2023)

    2023

  15. [23]

    B. L. Brock, S. Singh, A. Eickbusch, V. V. Sivak, A. Z. Ding, L.Frunzio, S.M.Girvin,andM.H.Devoret,Quan- tum error correction of qudits beyond break-even, Nature 641, 612–618 (2025)

    2025

  16. [24]

    Z. Ni, S. Li, X. Deng, Y. Cai, L. Zhang, W. Wang, Z.-B. Yang, H. Yu, F. Yan, S. Liu,et al., Beating the break- 8 even point with a discrete-variable-encoded logical qubit, Nature616, 56 (2023)

    2023

  17. [25]

    Oreshkov, Continuous-time quantum error correction, inQuantum Error Correction, edited by D

    O. Oreshkov, Continuous-time quantum error correction, inQuantum Error Correction, edited by D. A. Lidar and T. A. Brun (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,

  18. [26]

    C. Ahn, A. C. Doherty, and A. J. Landahl, Continuous quantum error correction via quantum feedback control, Physical Review A65, 042301 (2002)

    2002

  19. [27]

    Cohen and M

    J. Cohen and M. Mirrahimi, Dissipation-induced contin- uous quantum error correction for superconducting cir- cuits, Phys. Rev. A90, 062344 (2014)

    2014

  20. [28]

    V. V. Albert, S. O. Mundhada, A. Grimm, S. Touzard, M. H. Devoret, and L. Jiang, Pair-cat codes: autonomous error-correction with low-order nonlinearity, Quantum Science and Technology4, 035007 (2019)

    2019

  21. [29]

    Q. Xu, G. Zheng, Y.-X. Wang, P. Zoller, A. A. Clerk, and L. Jiang, Autonomous quantum error correction and fault-tolerant quantum computation with squeezed cat qubits, npj Quantum Information9, 78 (2023)

    2023

  22. [30]

    Kapit, Hardware-efficient and fully autonomous quan- tum error correction in superconducting circuits, Phys

    E. Kapit, Hardware-efficient and fully autonomous quan- tum error correction in superconducting circuits, Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 150501 (2016)

    2016

  23. [31]

    J. M. Gertler, B. Baker, J. Li, S. Shirol, J. Koch, and C. Wang, Protecting a bosonic qubit with autonomous quantum error correction, Nature590, 243 (2021)

    2021

  24. [32]

    Z. Li, T. Roy, D. Rodríguez Pérez, K.-H. Lee, E. Kapit, and D. I. Schuster, Autonomous error correction of a sin- gle logical qubit using two transmons, Nature Communi- cations15, 1681 (2024)

    2024

  25. [33]

    W. P. Livingston, M. S. Blok, E. Flurin, J. Dressel, A. N. Jordan, and I. Siddiqi, Experimental demonstration of continuous quantum error correction, Nature Communi- cations13(2022)

    2022

  26. [34]

    Lachance-Quirion, M.-A

    D. Lachance-Quirion, M.-A. Lemonde, J. O. Simoneau, L. St-Jean, P. Lemieux, S. Turcotte, W. Wright, A. Lacroix, J. Fréchette-Viens, R. Shillito,et al., Au- tonomous quantum error correction of gottesman-kitaev- preskill states, Physical Review Letters132, 150607 (2024)

    2024

  27. [35]

    De Neeve, T.-L

    B. De Neeve, T.-L. Nguyen, T. Behrle, and J. P. Home, Errorcorrectionofalogicalgridstatequbitbydissipative pumping, Nature Physics18, 296 (2022)

    2022

  28. [36]

    L. Sun, Y. Xu, Y. Zhou, Z. Hua, W. Wang, J. Zhou, Z. jie Chen, L. Z. de Paula, Q.-X. Jie, G. Xue, H. Yu, W. Cai, C.-L. Zou, and L. Sun, Extending coherence time beyond break-evenpointusingonlydrivesanddissipation(2025), arXiv:2509.22191 [quant-ph]

    2025

  29. [37]

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

    2025

  30. [38]

    A. L. Grimsmo, J. Combes, and B. Q. Baragiola, Quan- tum computing with rotation-symmetric bosonic codes, Phys. Rev. X10, 011058 (2020)

    2020

  31. [39]

    Mirrahimi, Z

    M. Mirrahimi, Z. Leghtas, V. V. Albert, S. Touzard, R. J. Schoelkopf, L. Jiang, and M. H. Devoret, Dynamically protected cat-qubits: a new paradigm for universal quan- tum computation, New Journal of Physics16, 045014 (2014)

    2014

  32. [40]

    Vanselow, B

    A. Vanselow, B. Beauseigneur, L. Lattier, M. Villiers, A. Denis, P. Morfin, Z. Leghtas, and P. Campagne- Ibarcq, Dissipating quartets of excitations in a supercon- ducting circuit (2025), arXiv:2501.05960 [quant-ph]

    2025

  33. [41]

    Axline, M

    C. Axline, M. Reagor, R. Heeres, P. Reinhold, C. Wang, K. Shain, W. Pfaff, Y. Chu, L. Frunzio, and R. J. Schoelkopf, An architecture for integrating planar and 3d cqed devices, Applied Physics Letters109(2016)

    2016

  34. [42]

    Kudra, M

    M. Kudra, M. Jirlow, M. Kervinen, A. M. Eriksson, F. Quijandría, P. Delsing, T. Abad, and S. Gasparinetti, Experimental realization of deterministic and selective photon addition in a bosonic mode assisted by an ancil- lary qubit, Quantum Science and Technology10(2025)

    2025

  35. [43]

    Huang, T

    J. Huang, T. J. DiNapoli, G. Rockwood, M. Yuan, P. Narasimhan, E. Gupta, M. Bal, F. Crisa, S. Garat- toni, Y. Lu,et al., Fast sideband control of a weakly coupled multimode bosonic memory, arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.10623 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  36. [44]

    R. W. Heeres, P. Reinhold, N. Ofek, L. Frunzio, L. Jiang, M.H.Devoret,andR.J.Schoelkopf,Implementingauni- versal gate set on a logical qubit encoded in an oscillator, Nature Communications8(2017)

    2017

  37. [45]

    W. Dai, S. Hazra, D. K. Weiss, P. D. Kurilovich, T. Connolly, H. K. Babla, S. Singh, V. R. Joshi, A. Z. Ding, P. D. Parakh, J. Venkatraman, X. Xiao, L. Frun- zio, and M. H. Devoret, Spectroscopy of drive-induced unwanted state transitions in superconducting circuits (2025), ar...

    2025

  38. [46]

    M. Xia, C. Lledó, M. Capocci, J. Repicky, B. D’Anjou, I. Mondragon-Shem, R. Kaufman, J. Koch, A. Blais, and M. Hatridge, Exceeding the parametric drive strength threshold in nonlinear circuits, arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.03456 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  39. [47]

    M. F. Dumas, B. Groleau-Paré, A. McDonald, M. H. Muñoz Arias, C. Lledó, B. D’Anjou, and A. Blais, Measurement-induced transmon ionization, Phys. Rev. X14, 041023 (2024)

    2024

  40. [48]

    Y. Ma, Y. Xu, X. Mu, W. Cai, L. Hu, W. Wang, X. Pan, H. Wang, Y. P. Song, C.-L. Zou, and L. Sun, Error- transparent operations on a logical qubit protected by quantum error correction, Nature Physics16, 827 (2020)

    2020

  41. [49]

    Reinhold, S

    P. Reinhold, S. Rosenblum, W.-L. Ma, L. Frunzio, L. Jiang, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Error-corrected gates on an encoded qubit, Nature Physics16, 822–826 (2020)

    2020

  42. [50]

    B. J. Brown, D. Loss, J. K. Pachos, C. N. Self, and J. R. Wootton, Quantum memories at finite temperature, Rev. Mod. Phys.88, 045005 (2016)

    2016

  43. [51]

    Connolly, P

    T. Connolly, P. D. Kurilovich, S. Diamond, H. Nho, C. G. L. Bøttcher, L. I. Glazman, V. Fatemi, and M. H. Devoret, Coexistence of nonequilibrium density and equi- librium energy distribution of quasiparticles in a super- conducting qubit, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 217001 (2024)

    2024

  44. [52]

    Q-CTRL, Boulder Opal (2025)

    2025

  45. [53]

    X. Y. Jin, A. Kamal, A. P. Sears, T. Gudmundsen, D. Hover, J. Miloshi, R. Slattery, F. Yan, J. Yoder, T. P. Orlando, S. Gustavsson, and W. D. Oliver, Thermal and residual excited-state population in a 3d transmon qubit, Phys. Rev. Lett.114, 240501 (2015)

    2015

  46. [54]

    Geerlings, Z

    K. Geerlings, Z. Leghtas, I. M. Pop, S. Shankar, L. Frun- zio, R. J. Schoelkopf, M. Mirrahimi, and M. H. Devoret, Demonstrating a driven reset protocol for a supercon- ducting qubit, Phys. Rev. Lett.110, 120501 (2013)

    2013

  47. [55]

    Reiter and A

    F. Reiter and A. S. Sørensen, Effective operator for- malism for open quantum systems, Physical Review A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics85, 032111 (2012)

    2012

  48. [56]

    J. M. Gertler, S. van Geldern, S. Shirol, L. Jiang, and C. Wang, Experimental realization and characteri- zation of stabilized pair-coherent states, PRX Quantum 4, 020319 (2023)

    2023

  49. [57]

    Valadares, N.-N

    F. Valadares, N.-N. Huang, K. T. N. Chu, A. Dorogov, W. Chua, L. Kong, P. Song, and Y. Y. Gao, On-demand transposition across light-matter interaction regimes in bosonic cqed, Nature Communications15, 5816 (2024)

    2024

  50. [58]

    Rosenblum, P

    S. Rosenblum, P. Reinhold, M. Mirrahimi, L. Jiang, L. Frunzio, and R. Schoelkopf, Fault tolerant measure- ment of a quantum error syndrome, Science361, 266 (2018). A Materials and Methods S1 Supplementary Information Passive quantum error correction of Photon Loss at Break-eve...

    2018

  51. [60]

    Qubit and package setup S1

  52. [61]

    Fridge and Measurement setup S1

  53. [62]

    Parameter choices S2

  54. [63]

    Four wave mixing tones generation and calibration S2

  55. [64]

    State Preparation S2

  56. [65]

    Cavity and transmon population measurement S3

  57. [66]

    Model and optimization of two-stage cascaded dissipation S4 C

    Measuring the fidelity of logical state S3 B. Model and optimization of two-stage cascaded dissipation S4 C. Driven transmon Hamiltonian S4 D. Spurious qubit excitations under weak off-resonant drives S6 E. Comparing continuous passive QEC with active QEC in circuit QED S9

  58. [67]

    Double photon loss errors S9

  59. [68]

    Unwanted corrections S9

  60. [69]

    Imperfect unitary recovery S11

  61. [70]

    Materials and Methods

    Error rate comparison conclusion S11 A. Materials and Methods

  62. [71]

    Qubit and package setup We use a 3D-planar hybrid circuit QED architecture as introduced in [41]. The 3D package is made with high pu- rity (99.9995% pure) Aluminum that undergoes a chem- ical etching to smooth out surface irregularities, thus in- creasing the internal Q for m...

  63. [72]

    The fridge setup is shown in supplementary figure S3

    Fridge and Measurement setup The package is mounted on the bracket inside an amuneal can on the mixing chamber. The fridge setup is shown in supplementary figure S3. With this configuration, we achieved the qubit and cavity coherence values stated in Table S1. We have seen an ...

  64. [73]

    The transmon, storage cavity, and readout mode frequencies are chosen so that the required four-wave mixing combs are in a suitable range for the microwave setup

    Parameter choices The frequency placements and coupling strengths are shown in the parameter list presented in Table S1. The transmon, storage cavity, and readout mode frequencies are chosen so that the required four-wave mixing combs are in a suitable range for the microwave ...

  65. [74]

    Four wave mixing tones generation and calibration Thetwofour-wavemixingcombsaresidebandmodulated using two separate Local Oscillators (LO) and Intermedi- ate Frequency (IF) channels from an AWG for IQ mixing. The three square pulses with 100 ns ramp up and ramp down time with ...

  66. [75]

    State Preparation For various PReSPA calibration and characterization ex- periments (e.g., Fig. 2A, C, D), we prepare even-parity Fock states and a superposition of even-parity Fock A Materials and Methods S3 TABLE S1.System ParametersThis table lists all the mode frequencies,...

  67. [76]

    We use a Gaussian pulse 2.4 µs long (4σ) that is selective in frequency, allowing us to drive the ancilla conditioned on different Fock states in the storage cavity

    Cavity and transmon population measurement We probe the photon number in our storage cavity us- ing the transmon ancilla. We use a Gaussian pulse 2.4 µs long (4σ) that is selective in frequency, allowing us to drive the ancilla conditioned on different Fock states in the stora...

  68. [77]

    As discussed in the main text, the lifetimeτprocess is calculated from the pole (Tp) and equator (Teq) logical state lifetimes

    Measuring the fidelity of logical state The performance of PReSPA on the logical codewords is gauged by measuring the fidelity of logical states against the ideal Bloch sphere cardinal states, which can then be used to compute the process fidelity of the correction map. As dis...

  69. [78]

    higher-state

    no transmon pulse, 2.|e⟩ ↔ |f⟩-pulse followed by|g⟩ ↔ |e⟩-pulse, 3.|g⟩ ↔ |e⟩-pulse followed by another|e⟩ ↔ |f⟩fol- lowed by|g⟩ ↔ |e⟩-pulse, 4.|g⟩ ↔ |e⟩ D Spurious qubit excitations under weak off-resonant drives S7 0.94 0.92 0.90 0.88 Stark Shift (kHz) 0.0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.0 ...

  70. [79]

    cycle time

    Double photon loss errors Incurring a second photon-loss error before the first is corrected is the canonical 2nd-order error that is uncor- rected in a 1st-order QEC implementation. Its rate is the result of direct competition between the raw error rate ¯nκand the rate of err...

  71. [80]

    In the passive scheme, the combs of four-wave mix- ing tones can cause detuned transitions out of the logical codespace

    Unwanted corrections The interactions in both schemes leading to correction come at a cost, since they also introduce associated er- rors. In the passive scheme, the combs of four-wave mix- ing tones can cause detuned transitions out of the logical codespace. In the measuremen...

  72. [81]

    The errors on the ancilla, such as|e⟩ → |g⟩decay, pure de- phasing, or spurious|g⟩ → |e⟩excitation (with rateγ↑) may lead to a loss of logical information

    Ancilla errors The ancilla is an integral part of a QEC protocol. The errors on the ancilla, such as|e⟩ → |g⟩decay, pure de- phasing, or spurious|g⟩ → |e⟩excitation (with rateγ↑) may lead to a loss of logical information. Since the an- cilla is utilized in both schemes a bit d...

  73. [82]

    For the passive case, this imperfection stems from the jump and no-jump evolution terms in the Lindblad master equa- tion

    Imperfect unitary recovery Both the active and passive schemes have imperfections in the unitary operation performed for recovery. For the passive case, this imperfection stems from the jump and no-jump evolution terms in the Lindblad master equa- tion. The stochastic nature o...

  74. [83]

    Error rate comparison conclusion TheerrorratestabulatedinTableS3showa performance advantage for the passive approach for the¯n= 3case. In the active case, the QEC performance can be improved by using the smallest binomial encoding (the¯n= 2kit- ten code) and reduce the cadence...

  75. [2013]

    Chap. 8, pp. 237–264

Pith tools

Reviewed August 4, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.