Write BB code paragraph
This commit is contained in:
@@ -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
|
||||||
|
}
|
||||||
|
|||||||
@@ -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]} \\
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|||||||
@@ -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}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|||||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user