The Near-optimal Performance of Quantum Error Correction Codes
Abstract: The Knill-Laflamme (KL) conditions distinguish exact quantum error correction codes, and it has played a critical role in the discovery of state-of-the-art codes. However, the family of exact codes is a very restrictive one and does not necessarily contain the best-performing codes. Therefore, it is desirable to develop a generalized and quantitative performance metric. In this Letter, we derive the near-optimal channel fidelity, a concise and optimization-free metric for arbitrary codes and noise. The metric provides a narrow two-sided bound to the optimal code performance, and it can be evaluated with exactly the same input required by the KL conditions. We demonstrate the numerical advantage of the near-optimal channel fidelity through multiple qubit code and oscillator code examples. Compared to conventional optimization-based approaches, the reduced computational cost enables us to simulate systems with previously inaccessible sizes, such as oscillators encoding hundreds of average excitations. Moreover, we analytically derive the near-optimal performance for the thermodynamic code and the Gottesman-Kitaev-Preskill (GKP) code. In particular, the GKP code's performance under excitation loss improves monotonically with its energy and converges to an asymptotic limit at infinite energy, which is distinct from other oscillator codes.
- E. Knill and R. Laflamme, Phys. Rev. A 55, 900 (1997).
- S. B. Bravyi and A. Y. Kitaev, Quantum codes on a lattice with boundary (1998), arXiv:quant-ph/9811052 [quant-ph] .
- P. W. Shor, Phys. Rev. A 52, R2493 (1995).
- D. Gottesman, A. Kitaev, and J. Preskill, Phys. Rev. A 64, 012310 (2001).
- J. J. Wallman and J. Emerson, Phys. Rev. A 94, 052325 (2016).
- M. Reimpell and R. F. Werner, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 080501 (2005).
- A. S. Fletcher, P. W. Shor, and M. Z. Win, Phys. Rev. A 75, 012338 (2007).
- A. Denys and A. Leverrier, Quantum 7, 1032 (2023).
- The channel fidelity is equivalent to the entanglement fidelity for maximally entangled states.
- K. Audenaert and B. De Moor, Phys. Rev. A 65, 030302 (2002).
- R. L. Kosut and D. A. Lidar, Quantum Information Processing 8, 443–459 (2009).
- K. Noh, V. V. Albert, and L. Jiang, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 65, 2563 (2019).
- D. S. Schlegel, F. Minganti, and V. Savona, Phys. Rev. A 106, 022431 (2022).
- R. L. Kosut, A. Shabani, and D. A. Lidar, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 020502 (2008).
- H. Barnum and E. Knill, Journal of Mathematical Physics 43, 2097 (2002).
- H. K. Ng and P. Mandayam, Phys. Rev. A 81, 062342 (2010).
- D. Petz, Quart. J. Math. Oxford Ser. 39, 97 (1988).
- M. Wilde, Quantum Information Theory (Cambridge University Press, 2017).
- J. Tyson, Journal of Mathematical Physics 51, 092204 (2010).
- C. Bény, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 080501 (2011).
- C. Bény and O. Oreshkov, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 120501 (2010).
- P. Mandayam and H. K. Ng, Phys. Rev. A 86, 012335 (2012).
- S. Zhou, Z.-W. Liu, and L. Jiang, Quantum 5, 521 (2021).
- M. Horodecki, P. Horodecki, and R. Horodecki, Phys. Rev. A 60, 1888 (1999).
- M. A. Nielsen, Physics Letters A 303, 249–252 (2002).
- M. Berta and M. Tomamichel, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 62, 1758 (2016).
- V. Karimipour, F. Benatti, and R. Floreanini, Phys. Rev. A 101, 032109 (2020).
- D. Kribs, R. Laflamme, and D. Poulin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 180501 (2005).
- M. Koashi and M. Ueda, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 2598 (1999).
- A. Mohan, J. Sikora, and S. Upadhyay, (2023), arXiv:2312.04023 [quant-ph] .
- N. Johnston, V. Russo, and J. Sikora, (2023), arXiv:2311.17047 [quant-ph] .
- 𝒪~(g(n))~𝒪𝑔𝑛\tilde{\mathcal{O}}(g(n))over~ start_ARG caligraphic_O end_ARG ( italic_g ( italic_n ) ) is shortened for 𝒪(g(n)logkg(n))𝒪𝑔𝑛superscript𝑘𝑔𝑛\mathcal{O}(g(n)\log^{k}g(n))caligraphic_O ( italic_g ( italic_n ) roman_log start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_g ( italic_n ) ).
- J. L. Daletskii and S. Krein, AMS Translations 2, (47)1 (1965).
- M. Carlsson, (2018), arXiv:1810.01464 [math.FA] .
- S. B. Korolev, E. N. Bashmakova, and T. Y. Golubeva, (2023), arXiv:2312.16000 [quant-ph] .
- J. Harrington and J. Preskill, Phys. Rev. A 64, 062301 (2001).
- A. Steane, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 452, 2551–2577 (1996).
- M. Srednicki, Phys. Rev. E 50, 888 (1994).
- C. M. Caves, Journal of Superconductivity 12, 707 (1999).
- M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information: 10th Anniversary Edition (Cambridge University Press, 2010).
- V. P. Belavkin, Radiotekhnika i Elektronika 20, 1177 (1975).
- A. S. Kholevo, Theory of Probability & Its Applications 23, 411 (1979), https://doi.org/10.1137/1123048 .
- P. A. Hausladen and W. K. Wootters, Journal of Modern Optics 41, 2385 (1994).
- G. E. Crooks, Phys. Rev. A 77, 034101 (2008).
- C. C. Aw, F. Buscemi, and V. Scarani, AVS Quantum Science 3, 045601 (2021).
- H. Kwon and M. S. Kim, Phys. Rev. X 9, 031029 (2019).
- F. Buscemi and V. Scarani, Phys. Rev. E 103, 052111 (2021).
- H. Kwon, R. Mukherjee, and M. S. Kim, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 020403 (2022).
- D. Biswas, G. M. Vaidya, and P. Mandayam, (2023), arXiv:2305.11093 [quant-ph] .
Paper Prompts
Sign up for free to create and run prompts on this paper using GPT-5.
Top Community Prompts
Collections
Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.
