Write BB code paragraph

This commit is contained in:
2026-04-24 14:16:02 +02:00
parent 4e1bd62504
commit 267d431542
3 changed files with 97 additions and 32 deletions

View File

@@ -38,6 +38,11 @@
long=low-density parity-check long=low-density parity-check
} }
\DeclareAcronym{qldpc}{
short=QLDPC,
long=quantum low-density parity-check
}
\DeclareAcronym{ml}{ \DeclareAcronym{ml}{
short=ML, short=ML,
long=maximum likelihood long=maximum likelihood
@@ -82,3 +87,8 @@
short=PDF, short=PDF,
long=probability density function long=probability density function
} }
\DeclareAcronym{bb}{
short=BB,
long=bivariate bicycle
}

View File

@@ -1400,23 +1400,47 @@ corresponding physical qubit, the rest to the $Z$ operators.
\label{fig:sec} \label{fig:sec}
\end{figure} \end{figure}
% %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
% \subsection{Decoding Stabilizer Codes}
% \label{subsec:Decoding Stabilizer Codes}
%
%
%
% \noindent\indent\red{[The QEC decoding problem
% \cite[Sec.~2.3]{yao_belief_2024}]} \\
% \indent\red{[+ Degeneracy]} \\
% \indent\red{[``The task of decoding is therefore to infer, from a
% measured syndrome, the most likely error coset rather than the exact
% physical error.''
% % tex-fmt: off
% \cite[Sec.~II~B)]{koutsioumpas_colour_2025}%
% % tex-fmt: on
% ]} \\
% \indent\red{[Fixing the error after finding it
% \cite[Sec.~10.5.5]{nielsen_quantum_2010} -> This
% may require introducing the gates as unitary]}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\subsection{Calderbank-Shor-Steane Codes} \subsection{Calderbank-Shor-Steane Codes}
\label{subsec:Calderbank-Shor-Steane Codes} \label{subsec:Calderbank-Shor-Steane Codes}
% Intro
Stabilizer codes are especially practical to work with when they can Stabilizer codes are especially practical to work with when they can
handle $X$- and $Z$-type errors independently. handle $X$ and $Z$ type errors independently.
As $Z$ errors anti-commute with $X$ operators in the stabilizers and As $Z$ errors anti-commute with $X$ operators in the stabilizers and
vice versa, this property translates into being able to split the vice versa, this property translates into being able to split the
stabilizers into some being made up of only $X$ stabilizers into some being made up of only $X$
operators and some only of $Z$ operators. operators and some only of $Z$ operators.
We call such codes \ac{css} codes. We call such codes \ac{css} codes.
We can see this property in \autoref{eq:steane}, in the check matrix We can see this property in \autoref{eq:steane} in the check matrix
of the Steane code. of the Steane code.
% Construction
We can exploit this separate consideration of $X$ and $Z$ errors in We can exploit this separate consideration of $X$ and $Z$ errors in
the construction of \ac{css} codes. the construction of \ac{css} codes.
We can combine two binary linear codes $\mathcal{C}_1$ and We combine two binary linear codes $\mathcal{C}_1$ and
$\mathcal{C}_2$, each responsible for correcting one type of error $\mathcal{C}_2$, each responsible for correcting one type of error
\cite[Sec.~10.5.6]{nielsen_quantum_2010}. \cite[Sec.~10.5.6]{nielsen_quantum_2010}.
Using the dual code of $\mathcal{C}_2$ \cite[Eq.~3.4]{ryan_channel_2009} Using the dual code of $\mathcal{C}_2$ \cite[Eq.~3.4]{ryan_channel_2009}
@@ -1437,10 +1461,11 @@ we can construct the check matrix as
\end{align*} \end{align*}
In order to yield a valid stabilizer code, $\mathcal{C}_1$ and In order to yield a valid stabilizer code, $\mathcal{C}_1$ and
$\mathcal{C}_2$ must satisfy the commutativity condition $\mathcal{C}_2$ must satisfy the commutativity condition
\begin{align*} \begin{align}
\label{eq:css_condition}
\bm{H}(\mathcal{C}_2^\perp) \bm{H}(\mathcal{C}_1)^\text{T} = \bm{0} \bm{H}(\mathcal{C}_2^\perp) \bm{H}(\mathcal{C}_1)^\text{T} = \bm{0}
.% .%
\end{align*} \end{align}
We can ensure this is the case by choosing them such that We can ensure this is the case by choosing them such that
$\mathcal{C}_2 \subset \mathcal{C}_1$. $\mathcal{C}_2 \subset \mathcal{C}_1$.
@@ -1448,29 +1473,63 @@ $\mathcal{C}_2 \subset \mathcal{C}_1$.
\subsection{Quantum Low-Density Parity-Check Codes} \subsection{Quantum Low-Density Parity-Check Codes}
\label{subsec:Quantum Low-Density Parity-Check Codes} \label{subsec:Quantum Low-Density Parity-Check Codes}
\noindent\red{[(?) Mention color and surface codes]} \\ % Intro
\noindent\red{[Constant overhead scaling]} \\
\noindent\red{[Scaling of minimum distance with code length]} \\
\noindent\red{[Bivariate Bicycle codes]} \\
\noindent\red{[Decoding QLDPC codes (syndrome-based BP)]} \\
\noindent\red{[Degeneracy -> BP+OSD, BPGD]} \\
\noindent\red{[``The task of decoding is therefore to infer, from a
measured syndrome, the most likely error coset rather than the exact
physical error.''
% tex-fmt: off
\cite[Sec.~II~B)]{koutsioumpas_colour_2025}%
% tex-fmt: on
]} \\
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Various methods of constructing \ac{qec} codes exist
\subsection{Decoding Quantum Codes} \cite{swierkowska_eccentric_2025}.
\label{subsec:Decoding Quantum Codes} \red{[topological codes]}
\red{[(?) Mention color and surface codes]}.
A more recent development is that of quantum \ac{ldpc} (\acs{qldpc}) codes.
\noindent\indent\red{[The QEC decoding problem % Why QLDPC codes are interesting
\cite[Sec.~2.3]{yao_belief_2024}]} \\
\indent\red{[+ Degeneracy]} \\ \indent\red{[Constant overhead scaling]} \\
\indent\red{[+ Short cycles]} \\ \indent\red{[Scaling of minimum distance with code length]} \\
\indent\red{[Fixing the error after finding it
\cite[Sec.~10.5.5]{nielsen_quantum_2010} -> This % Bivariate Bicycle codes
may require introducing the gates as unitary]}
% TODO: Introduce H_X and H_Z above
A recent addition to the class of \ac{qldpc} codes is that of \ac{bb}
codes \cite[Sec.~3]{bravyi_high-threshold_2024}.
These are a special type of \ac{css} code, where $\bm{H}_X$ and
$\bm{H}_Z$ are constructed from two matrices $\bm{A}$ and $\bm{B}$ as
\begin{align*}
\bm{H}_X = [\bm{A} \vert \bm{B}]
\hspace*{5mm} \text{and} \hspace*{5mm}
\bm{H}_Z = [\bm{B}^\text{T} \vert \bm{A}^\text{T}]
.%
\end{align*}
This way, we can guarantee the satisfaction of the commutativity
condition (\autoref{eq:css_condition}).
To define $\bm{A}$ and $\bm{B}$ we first introduce some additional notation.
We denote the identity matrix as $\bm{I_l} \in \mathbb{F}^{l\times l}$ and
the \emph{cyclic shift matrix} as $\bm{S_l} \in \mathbb{F}^{l\times
l},~S_{l,i,j}= \delta_{i+1,j}$, with $l \in \mathbb{N}$.
We further define
\begin{align*}
x = \bm{S}_l \otimes \bm{I}_m
\hspace*{5mm} \text{and} \hspace*{5mm}
y = \bm{I}_l \otimes \bm{S}_m
.%
\end{align*}
We can then construct $\bm{A}$ and $\bm{B}$ as bivariate polynomials
\begin{align*}
\bm{A} = \bm{A}_1 + \bm{A}_2 + \bm{A}_3
\hspace*{5mm} \text{and} \hspace*{5mm}
\bm{B} = \bm{B}_1 + \bm{B}_2 + \bm{B}_3
,%
\end{align*}
where $\bm{A}_i$ and $\bm{B}_i$ are powers of $\bm{x}$ or $\bm{y}$.
\ac{bb} codes have large minimum distance $d_\text{min}$ and high rate,
offering a more than 10-time reduction of encoding overhead over the
surface code.
Additionally, they posess short-depth syndrome measurement circuits,
leading to lower time requirements for the syndrome extraction
and thus lower error rates \cite[Sec.~1]{bravyi_high-threshold_2024}.
% Decoding QLDPC codes
\indent\red{[Decoding QLDPC codes (syndrome-based BP)]} \\
\indent\red{[Short cycles]} \\
\indent\red{[Degeneracy + short cycles -> BP+OSD, BPGD]} \\

View File

@@ -10,9 +10,5 @@
\subsection{Detector Error Models} \subsection{Detector Error Models}
\section{Practical Considerations} \section{Practical Considerations}
\subsection{Practical Methodology} \subsection{Practical Methodology}
\indent\red{[(?) Figure from presentation, showing where the LER
calculation takes place]} \\
\subsection{Stim} \subsection{Stim}