Pith. Sign in

RECORD

Quantum error correction in the presence of spontaneous emission

PaperPDF from arXiv

data files

Paper breakdownThe authors' claims, conditions and measurements, as JSON Signed receiptProof this review has not been altered
X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit Hacker News
M. B. Plenio, V. Vedral, P. L. Knight (Imperial College London)

Quantum Physics · Submitted 14 Mar 1996

abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review

The authors' main claim We present a quantum error correcting code that is invariant under the conditional time evolution between spontaneous emissions and which can correct for one general error.

how it is stated · asserted 1.00 read the record →

Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗
Cite ▾
arXiv IDquant-ph/9603022 (version 2)
Pith ID5FLBYEBK, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review
CitationM. B. Plenio, P. L. Knight (Imperial College London), V. Vedral. "Quantum error correction in the presence of spontaneous emission." arXiv:quant-ph/9603022 (1996). https://pith.science/paper/5FLBYEBK
Claim paper

The compiled record

The paper's own sentences, arranged. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Open the compiled record

Compiled by classifier-1.13.0 via TypeSafe API, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 2,837 input tokens.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.07 · states limitation 0.25 · human participants 0.02 · controlled comparison 0.03 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.44 · compares with prior results 0.88 · mentions code or data availability 0.02.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v2. Results and the main claim are underlined; .

We present a quantum error correcting code that is invariant under the conditional time evolution between spontaneous emissions and which can correct for one general error. The code presented here generalizes previous error correction codes in that not all errors lead to different error syndromes. This idea may lead to shorter codes than previously expected.

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#sentencerolethe authors' own workstates the main conclusionstrength
s0 We present a quantum error correcting code that is invariant under the conditional time evolution between spontaneous emissions and which can correct for one general error. contribution 1.00 0.93 0.74 asserted 1.00
s1 The code presented here generalizes previous error correction codes in that not all errors lead to different error syndromes. contribution 0.88 0.79 0.15 asserted 1.00
s2 This idea may lead to shorter codes than previously expected. interpretation 0.97 0.19 0.14 hedged possibility 1.00

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: method or tool 0.79 · evidence from proof or derivation 0.90.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read
  • arXiv listing abstract v2
not examined
  • full text
  • figures and tables
  • references and citing sentences
  • relations to other papers
levels run
  • P abstract
not run
  • S sections
  • T body sentences
  • C citations
  • R cross-paper relations

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

The paper
Original abstract

We present a quantum error correcting code that is invariant under the conditional time evolution between spontaneous emissions and which can correct for one general error. The code presented here generalizes previous error correction codes in that not all errors lead to different error syndromes. This idea may lead to shorter codes than previously expected.

Human review

How Pith checks papers → · Full audit of this paper →

References

Discussion

Know something about this paper? Leave a comment, or highlight any passage above to comment on it.