Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
143 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
46 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Efficient Syndrome Decoder for Heavy Hexagonal QECC via Machine Learning (2210.09730v2)

Published 18 Oct 2022 in cs.IT, math.IT, and quant-ph

Abstract: Error syndromes for heavy hexagonal code and other topological codes such as surface code have typically been decoded by using Minimum Weight Perfect Matching (MWPM) based methods. Recent advances have shown that topological codes can be efficiently decoded by deploying ML techniques, in particular with neural networks. In this work, we first propose an ML based decoder for heavy hexagonal code and establish its efficiency in terms of the values of threshold and pseudo-threshold, for various noise models. We show that the proposed ML based decoding method achieves $\sim5 \times$ higher values of threshold than that for MWPM. Next, exploiting the property of subsystem codes, we define gauge equivalence for heavy hexagonal code, by which two distinct errors can belong to the same error class. A linear search based method is proposed for determining the equivalent error classes. This provides a quadratic reduction in the number of error classes to be considered for both bit flip and phase flip errors, and thus a further improvement of $\sim 14\%$ in the threshold over the basic ML decoder. Lastly, a novel technique based on rank to determine the equivalent error classes is presented, which is empirically faster than the one based on linear search.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (36)
  1. P. W. Shor. Polynomial-time algorithms for prime factorization and discrete logarithms on a quantum computer. SIAM J. Comput., 26(5):1484–1509, October 1997.
  2. L. K. Grover. A fast quantum mechanical algorithm for database search. In Proceedings of the Twenty-eighth Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC ’96, New York, NY, USA, 1996. ACM.
  3. Quantum supremacy using a programmable superconducting processor. Nature, 574(7779):505–510, 2019.
  4. A. Montanaro. Quantum speedup of monte carlo methods. Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 471(2181):20150301, 2015.
  5. P. W. Shor. Scheme for reducing decoherence in quantum computer memory. Phys. Rev. A, 52:R2493–R2496, Oct 1995.
  6. A. M. Steane. Error correcting codes in quantum theory. Phys. Rev. Lett., 77, 1996.
  7. Perfect quantum error correcting code. Phys. Rev. Lett., 77:198–201, Jul 1996.
  8. Towards practical classical processing for the surface code. Physical review letters, 108(18):180501, 2012.
  9. Machine-learning based decoding of surface code syndromes in quantum error correction. Journal of Engineering Research and Sciences, 1(6), 2022.
  10. Topological quantum memory. Journal of Mathematical Physics, 43(9), 2002.
  11. High-threshold universal quantum computation on the surface code. Physical Review A, 80(5):052312, 2009.
  12. Surface code quantum computing with error rates over 1%. Physical Review A, 83(2):020302, 2011.
  13. J. R. Wootton and D. Loss. High threshold error correction for the surface code. Physical review letters, 109(16), 2012.
  14. Quantum codes on a lattice with boundary. arXiv preprint quant-ph/9811052, 1998.
  15. Topological and subsystem codes on low-degree graphs with flag qubits. Physical Review X, 10(1):011022, 2020.
  16. D. Bacon. Operator quantum error-correcting subsystems for self-correcting quantum memories. Physical Review A, 73(1):012340, 2006.
  17. Jack Edmonds. Paths, trees, and flowers. Canadian Journal of Mathematics, 17:449–467, 1965.
  18. Robert Endre Tarjan. Efficiency of a good but not linear set union algorithm. Journal of the ACM (JACM), 22(2):215–225, 1975.
  19. An interpretation of union-find decoder on weighted graphs. arXiv preprint arXiv:2211.03288, 2022.
  20. Almost-linear time decoding algorithm for topological codes. Quantum, 5:595, 2021.
  21. Decoding small surface codes with feedforward neural networks. Quantum Science and Technology, 3(1):015004, 2017.
  22. M. A. Nielsen and I. Chuang. Quantum computation and quantum information, 2002.
  23. G. Torlai and R. G. Melko. Neural decoder for topological codes. Physical review letters, 119(3):030501, 2017.
  24. Surface code design for asymmetric error channels. IET Quantum Communication, 3(3):174–183, 2022.
  25. C. Chamberland and P. Ronagh. Deep neural decoders for near term fault-tolerant experiments. arXiv preprint arXiv:1802.06441, 2018.
  26. S. Krastanov and L. Jiang. Deep neural network probabilistic decoder for stabilizer codes. Scientific reports, 7(1), 2017.
  27. R. Sweke et al. Reinforcement learning decoders for fault-tolerant quantum computation. arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.07207, 2018.
  28. Comparing neural network based decoders for the surface code. IEEE Transactions on Computers, 69(2), 2019.
  29. O. Higgott. Pymatching: A python package for decoding quantum codes with minimum-weight perfect matching. ACM Transactions on Quantum Computing, 3(3):1–16, 2022.
  30. 2d compass codes. Physical Review X, 9(2):021041, 2019.
  31. P Baireuther et al. Machine-learning-assisted correction of correlated qubit errors in a topological code. Quantum, 2:48, 2018.
  32. G. Strang. Linear algebra and its applications. Belmont, CA: Thomson, Brooks/Cole, 2006.
  33. Introduction to algorithms. MIT press, 2022.
  34. plaquette — an all-encompassing fault-tolerance software package. https://docs.plaquette.design/en/latest/.
  35. Ethem Alpaydin. Machine learning. 2021.
  36. Comparing neural network based decoders for the surface code. IEEE Transactions on Computers, 69(2):300–311, 2020.
Citations (4)

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

X Twitter Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com