Demonstration of logical qubits and repeated error correction with better-than-physical error rates (2404.02280v3)
Abstract: The promise of quantum computers hinges on the ability to scale to large system sizes, e.g., to run quantum computations consisting of more than 100 million operations fault-tolerantly. This in turn requires suppressing errors to levels inversely proportional to the size of the computation. As a step towards this ambitious goal, we present experiments on a trapped-ion QCCD processor where, through the use of fault-tolerant encoding and error correction, we are able to suppress logical error rates to levels below the physical error rates. In particular, we entangled logical qubits encoded in the [[7,1,3]] code with error rates 9.8 times to 500 times lower than at the physical level, and entangled logical qubits encoded in a [[12,2,4]] code based on Knill's C4/C6 scheme with error rates 4.7 times to 800 times lower than at the physical level, depending on the judicious use of post-selection. Moreover, we demonstrate repeated error correction with the [[12,2,4]] code, with logical error rates below physical circuit baselines corresponding to repeated CNOTs, and show evidence that the error rate per error correction cycle, which consists of over 100 physical CNOTs, approaches the error rate of two physical CNOTs. These results signify a transition from noisy intermediate scale quantum computing to reliable quantum computing, and demonstrate advanced capabilities toward large-scale fault-tolerant quantum computing.
- P. W. Shor, Scheme for reducing decoherence in quantum computer memory, Phys. Rev. A 52, R2493 (1995).
- A. M. Steane, Simple quantum error-correcting codes, Phys. Rev. A 54, 4741 (1996).
- E. Knill, R. Laflamme, and W. H. Zurek, Resilient quantum computation, Science 279, 342 (1998).
- B. M. Terhal and G. Burkard, Fault-tolerant quantum computation for local non-markovian noise, Phys. Rev. A 71, 012336 (2005).
- P. Aliferis, D. Gottesman, and J. Preskill, Quantum accuracy threshold for concatenated distance-3 codes, Quantum Info. Comput. 6, 97–165 (2006), arXiv:quant-ph/0504218 .
- R. Raussendorf and J. Harrington, Fault-tolerant quantum computation with high threshold in two dimensions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 190504 (2007).
- K. M. Svore, Defining logical qubits: Criteria for Resilient Quantum Computation (2023), (alt link) [Online; accessed 30-March-2024].
- J. Haah, What is Your Logical Qubit? (2024), (alt link) [Online; accessed 30-March-2024].
- D. Gottesman, Quantum fault-tolerance in small experiments, arXiv:1610.03507 [quant-ph] (2016).
- S. T. Flammia and Y.-K. Liu, Direct fidelity estimation from few pauli measurements, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 230501 (2011), arXiv:1104.4695 [quant-ph] .
- M. P. da Silva, O. Landon-Cardinal, and D. Poulin, Practical characterization of quantum devices without tomography, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 210404 (2011), arXiv:1104.3835 [quant-ph] .
- Quantinuum: Access to the H-Series Quantum Computer, https://www.quantinuum.com/hardware#access (2024), [Online; accessed 30-March-2024].
- Azure Quantum, https://quantum.microsoft.com (2024), [Online; accessed 30-March-2024].
- QIR Alliance, https://www.qir-alliance.org/ (2024), [Online; accessed 30-March-2024].
- IARPA, ELQ—Entangled Logical Qubits (2024), (alt link) [Online; accessed 29-March-2024].
- H. Goto, Minimizing resource overheads for fault-tolerant preparation of encoded states of the steane code, Scientific reports 6, 1 (2016).
- R. Chao and B. W. Reichardt, Fault-tolerant quantum computation with few qubits, npj Quantum Information 4, 1 (2018), arXiv:1705.05365 [quant-ph] .
- J. Preskill, Reliable quantum computers, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 454, 385 (1998).
- S. Bravyi and A. Kitaev, Universal quantum computation with ideal clifford gates and noisy ancillas, Phys. Rev. A 71, 022316 (2005).
- D. Gottesman, Opportunities and challenges in fault-tolerant quantum computation (2022), arXiv:2210.15844 [quant-ph] .
- N. Delfosse and A. Paetznick, Spacetime codes of clifford circuits (2023), arXiv:2304.05943 [quant-ph] .
- Details of the code and construction of logical operations will be made available in Ref. \rev@citealpPaetznick2024.
- The measurement of Y𝑌Yitalic_Y parities requires more complex circuitry (effectively applying the S𝑆Sitalic_S gate to change bases), so we leave these more complex experiments for future work.
- Other rules based on information about the error models bias are certainly possible, but were not considered for these experiments.
- P. Prabhu and B. W. Reichardt, Distance-four quantum codes with combined postselection and error correction, arXiv:2112.03785 [quant-ph] (2021).
- We also ran experiments where we measured XZ𝑋𝑍XZitalic_X italic_Z and ZX𝑍𝑋ZXitalic_Z italic_X cross-parities for each Bell pair, and confirmed that the distribution was close to uniform.
- A. Paetznick et al. (2024), (to appear).
- E. Knill, Scalable quantum computation in the presence of large detected-error rates (2003), arXiv:quant-ph/0312190 [quant-ph] .
- X. Zhou, D. W. Leung, and I. L. Chuang, Methodology for quantum logic gate construction, Phys. Rev. A 62, 052316 (2000), arXiv:quant-ph/0002039 .
- J. Leon, Computing automorphism groups of error-correcting codes, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 28, 496 (1982).
- M. Grassl and M. Roetteler, Leveraging automorphisms of quantum codes for fault-tolerant quantum computation, in 2013 IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory (2013) pp. 534–538.
- J. R. Taylor, An Introduction to Error Analysis: The Study of Uncertainties in Physical Measurements, 2nd ed. (University Science Books, 1996).
- J. A. Hanley and A. Lippman-hand, If nothing goes wrong, is everything all right?, Journal of the American Medical Association 249, 1743 (1983).
- M. A. Nielsen, A simple formula for the average gate fidelity of a quantum dynamical operation, Physics Letters A 303, 249 (2002).