4.6 Article

Hard decoding algorithm for optimizing thresholds under general Markovian noise

Journal

PHYSICAL REVIEW A
Volume 95, Issue 4, Pages -

Publisher

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.95.042332

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. QEII-GSST
  2. US Army Research Office [W911NF-14-1-0103]
  3. CIFAR
  4. NSERC
  5. Industry Canada

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Quantum error correction is instrumental in protecting quantum systems from noise in quantum computing and communication settings. Pauli channels can be efficiently simulated and threshold values for Pauli error rates under a variety of error-correcting codes have been obtained. However, realistic quantum systems can undergo noise processes that differ significantly from Pauli noise. In this paper, we present an efficient hard decoding algorithm for optimizing thresholds and lowering failure rates of an error-correcting code under general completely positive and trace-preserving (i.e., Markovian) noise. We use our hard decoding algorithm to study the performance of several error-correcting codes under various non-Pauli noise models by computing threshold values and failure rates for these codes. We compare the performance of our hard decoding algorithm to decoders optimized for depolarizing noise and show improvements in thresholds and reductions in failure rates by several orders of magnitude. Our hard decoding algorithm can also be adapted to take advantage of a code's non-Pauli transversal gates to further suppress noise. For example, we show that using the transversal gates of the 5-qubit code allows arbitrary rotations around certain axes to be perfectly corrected. Furthermore, we show that Pauli twirling can increase or decrease the threshold depending upon the code properties. Lastly, we show that even if the physical noise model differs slightly from the hypothesized noise model used to determine an optimized decoder, failure rates can still be reduced by applying our hard decoding algorithm.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available