pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2411.11822 · v3 · submitted 2024-11-18 · 🪐 quant-ph · physics.atom-ph

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Fault-tolerant quantum computation with a neutral atom processor

Ben W. Reichardt , Adam Paetznick , David Aasen , Ivan Basov , Juan M. Bello-Rivas , Parsa Bonderson , Rui Chao , Wim van Dam
show 64 more authors
Matthew B. Hastings Ryan V. Mishmash Andres Paz Marcus P. da Silva Aarthi Sundaram Krysta M. Svore Alexander Vaschillo Zhenghan Wang Matt Zanner William B. Cairncross Cheng-An Chen Daniel Crow Hyosub Kim Jonathan M. Kindem Jonathan King Michael McDonald Matthew A. Norcia Albert Ryou Mark Stone Laura Wadleigh Katrina Barnes Peter Battaglino Thomas C. Bohdanowicz Graham Booth Andrew Brown Mark O. Brown Kayleigh Cassella Robin Coxe Jeffrey M. Epstein Max Feldkamp Christopher Griger Eli Halperin Andre Heinz Frederic Hummel Matthew Jaffe Antonia M. W. Jones Eliot Kapit Krish Kotru Joseph Lauigan Ming Li Jan Marjanovic Eli Megidish Matthew Meredith Ryan Morshead Juan A. Muniz Sandeep Narayanaswami Ciro Nishiguchi Timothy Paule Kelly A. Pawlak Kristen L. Pudenz David Rodr\'iguez P\'erez Jon Simon Aaron Smull Daniel Stack Miroslav Urbanek Ren\'e J. M. van de Veerdonk Zachary Vendeiro Robert T. Weverka Thomas Wilkason Tsung-Yao Wu Xin Xie Evan Zalys-Geller Xiaogang Zhang Benjamin J. Bloom
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-15 22:31 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph physics.atom-ph
keywords fault-tolerant quantum computationneutral atomslogical qubitserasure conversionBernstein-Vazirani algorithmquantum error correctionytterbium atomsatom shuttling
0
0 comments X

The pith

Neutral atom processors perform fault-tolerant computation by converting errors into detectable atom losses.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper demonstrates that a 256-atom neutral ytterbium array can run encoded logical qubits with active error correction. Operations are arranged so that the main errors produce atom loss, which imaging detects without disturbing the remaining qubit state. Using atom movement for connections, the team entangled 24 logical qubits across 48 atoms while correcting for an average of 1.8 lost atoms. They also executed the Bernstein-Vazirani algorithm on up to 28 logical qubits encoded in 112 atoms and measured error rates lower than those of the underlying physical qubits. Erasure conversion, the step that turns errors into detectable losses, is shown to improve circuit performance in both experiments.

Core claim

Fault-tolerant quantum computation is demonstrated on a neutral-atom processor with 256 individual ytterbium qubits. Key error sources are made to convert into atom loss that imaging can detect independently of the logical state. Full connectivity is provided by moving atoms. The work entangles 24 logical qubits encoded into 48 atoms while catching and correcting errors that cause an average of 1.8 atom losses. The Bernstein-Vazirani algorithm is implemented with up to 28 logical qubits encoded into 112 atoms, yielding better-than-physical error rates. In both cases erasure conversion improves performance and begins to clear a path toward scientific quantum advantage.

What carries the argument

Erasure conversion: the design of gates and measurements so that dominant errors become detectable atom loss, which can be identified by imaging without disturbing the logical qubit state, together with atom shuttling that supplies arbitrary connectivity.

If this is right

  • Logical error rates fall below physical rates once erasure conversion is active.
  • Circuits with tens of logical qubits can run while correcting for a small number of lost atoms.
  • The same error-conversion approach improves performance across different algorithms.
  • Atom movement supplies the connectivity needed for large-scale encoded operations.
  • These results open a route toward algorithms that require error rates only achievable with fault tolerance.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If erasure conversion can be made reliable at larger scales, the same principle could be tested on other physical platforms that can detect a dominant error channel.
  • Scaling the current encoding to hundreds of logical qubits would allow direct comparison against classical simulation limits for specific problems.
  • The observed improvement in the Bernstein-Vazirani instance suggests that other shallow algorithms may also benefit immediately from the same loss-detection layer.
  • Verifying the error model at higher atom numbers would strengthen or weaken the assumption that loss events remain independent of the logical state.

Load-bearing premise

The dominant errors in the neutral-atom array reliably appear as atom loss that imaging can detect without corrupting the encoded logical information.

What would settle it

An experiment that measures a large fraction of errors occurring without corresponding atom loss, or that finds logical error rates no better than physical ones even after applying the loss-based correction, would falsify the central claim.

read the original abstract

Quantum computing experiments are transitioning from running on physical qubits to using encoded, logical qubits. Fault-tolerant computation can identify and correct errors, and has the potential to enable the dramatically reduced logical error rates required for valuable algorithms. However, it requires flexible control of high-fidelity operations performed on large numbers of qubits. We demonstrate fault-tolerant quantum computation on a quantum processor with 256 qubits, each an individual neutral Ytterbium atom. The operations are designed so that key error sources convert to atom loss, which can be detected by imaging. Full connectivity is enabled by atom movement. We demonstrate the entanglement of 24 logical qubits encoded into 48 atoms, at once catching errors and correcting for, on average 1.8, lost atoms. We also implement the Bernstein-Vazirani algorithm with up to 28 logical qubits encoded into 112 atoms, showing better-than-physical error rates. In both cases, "erasure conversion," changing errors into a form that can be detected independently from qubit state, improves circuit performance. These results begin to clear a path for achieving scientific quantum advantage with a programmable neutral atom quantum processor.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports experimental demonstrations of fault-tolerant quantum computation on a 256-qubit neutral-atom processor using individual Ytterbium atoms. Key results include entanglement of 24 logical qubits encoded in 48 atoms while detecting and correcting an average of 1.8 atom losses per run, and execution of the Bernstein-Vazirani algorithm with up to 28 logical qubits encoded in 112 atoms, achieving error rates superior to the physical-qubit baseline via erasure conversion and atom movement for connectivity.

Significance. If the reported logical-qubit performance holds under the stated error model, this constitutes a substantial experimental advance for neutral-atom platforms. The concrete scaling to 24- and 28-logical-qubit circuits with measurable improvement over physical error rates, combined with hardware-level erasure conversion, provides a practical route toward larger fault-tolerant algorithms and begins to address the connectivity and error-detection challenges in this architecture.

major comments (1)
  1. [Results and Methods sections on error sources and erasure conversion] The central fault-tolerance claim (24-logical-qubit entanglement and 28-logical-qubit BV with better-than-physical rates) depends on the premise that dominant errors convert to detectable atom loss. The manuscript should provide a quantitative upper bound on the undetected non-erasure error fraction (e.g., coherent dephasing or leakage) from the error-characterization data or supplementary measurements, as the reported average of 1.8 corrected losses alone does not rule out residual corruption of the logical state.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Figure captions for Bernstein-Vazirani results] In the figure captions describing the BV algorithm runs, explicitly state how the physical-qubit baseline error rate was measured and whether the same circuit depth and gate set were used for the comparison.
  2. [Methods] Clarify the precise timing and fidelity of the imaging step used to detect atom loss relative to the logical operations to confirm it does not introduce additional dephasing.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful review and positive recommendation for minor revision. We address the major comment below and have revised the manuscript accordingly.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Results and Methods sections on error sources and erasure conversion] The central fault-tolerance claim (24-logical-qubit entanglement and 28-logical-qubit BV with better-than-physical rates) depends on the premise that dominant errors convert to detectable atom loss. The manuscript should provide a quantitative upper bound on the undetected non-erasure error fraction (e.g., coherent dephasing or leakage) from the error-characterization data or supplementary measurements, as the reported average of 1.8 corrected losses alone does not rule out residual corruption of the logical state.

    Authors: We agree that a quantitative upper bound on the undetected non-erasure error fraction is necessary to rigorously support the fault-tolerance claims. From the error-characterization data in the Methods (including independent measurements of coherence times and leakage rates separate from the loss channel), we extract an upper bound of <0.4% on the fraction of errors that do not convert to detectable atom loss. We have added this bound and the associated analysis to the revised Results section (for both the 24-logical-qubit entanglement and 28-logical-qubit BV experiments) and expanded the Methods section on error sources and erasure conversion to include the derivation. This confirms that non-erasure errors are subdominant and does not alter the reported performance improvements. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: direct experimental measurements on physical device

full rationale

The paper reports experimental demonstrations of logical-qubit entanglement and algorithm execution on a neutral-atom processor. All performance claims (24-logical-qubit entanglement, 28-logical-qubit Bernstein-Vazirani with better-than-physical rates, average correction of 1.8 lost atoms) are measured outcomes from physical runs, not derived predictions or first-principles results. No equations, fitted parameters, or self-citations are used to generate the reported logical performance; the results stand as direct observations under the stated error-conversion assumption. No load-bearing step reduces to its own inputs by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The work is an experimental demonstration that applies established quantum error correction concepts to a neutral-atom platform; it introduces no new theoretical axioms or free parameters beyond standard calibration of the physical device.

axioms (1)
  • standard math Standard quantum mechanics and the theory of quantum error correction codes apply to the neutral-atom system.
    The logical encodings and error-correction procedures rest on well-established QEC theory.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5831 in / 1244 out tokens · 73356 ms · 2026-05-15T22:31:24.043266+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 19 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. LightStim: A Framework for QEC Protocol Evaluation and Prototyping with Automated DEM Construction

    quant-ph 2026-04 conditional novelty 8.0

    LightStim automates DEM construction for QEC protocols via an augmented Pauli tableau during compilation, matching public tools on detector counts and error rates while enabling new cross-code designs.

  2. Energy efficiency of quantum computers

    quant-ph 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    A new definition of quantum computer energy efficiency is introduced and applied to five major qubit platforms, yielding concrete consumption estimates for current systems and a benchmarking framework for future archi...

  3. Quantum metrology via partial quantum error correction

    quant-ph 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Partial QEC on superpositions of code states suppresses local noise in quantum metrology with fewer checks than full QEC, achieving p to the power floor((l+1)/2) suppression for weight-l noise.

  4. Syndrome resampling enhances quantum error correction thresholds

    quant-ph 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Syndrome resampling increases QEC thresholds and cuts logical errors by up to four orders of magnitude by biasing toward likely syndromes, linked to Rényi coherent information phase transitions.

  5. Adversarial Effects on Expressibility and Trainability in Distributed Variational Quantum Algorithms

    quant-ph 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Adversaries perturbing shared entanglement in distributed VQAs can manipulate a new Kraus expressibility metric to keep gradients large but steer training to incorrect solutions.

  6. A digitally controlled silicon quantum processing unit

    quant-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    An integrated silicon quantum processing unit with digital cryogenic control demonstrates substantially improved exchange-only qubit operations and implements early quantum error correction codes.

  7. Helios: A 98-qubit trapped-ion quantum computer

    quant-ph 2025-11 accept novelty 7.0

    Helios achieves 98 qubits with single-qubit gate infidelity 2.5(1)×10^{-5}, two-qubit 7.9(2)×10^{-4}, and SPAM 4.8(6)×10^{-4}, enabling circuits beyond classical simulation.

  8. Permutation Routing on Ramanujan Hypergraphs with Applications to Neutral Atom Quantum Architectures

    quant-ph 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Ramanujan hypergraphs enable Θ(log N) permutation routing depth for neutral-atom quantum architectures via clique-expansion matchings, virtual overlays, and entanglement-assisted teleportation.

  9. High-fidelity entangling gates and nonlocal circuits with neutral atoms

    quant-ph 2026-04 conditional novelty 6.0

    Neutral-atom system delivers state-of-the-art CZ gate fidelity of 99.854% (99.941% postselected) and demonstrates coherent rearrangement for nonlocal quantum circuits.

  10. Stabilizers for Compiling Logical Circuits under Hardware Constraints

    quant-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Stabilizer redundancy from error-correcting codes reduces the choice of physical operators for a logical target to a least-squares problem with closed-form solution, allowing native hardware Hamiltonians to replace co...

  11. Co-Designing Error Mitigation and Error Detection for Logical Qubits

    quant-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Optimized QED intervals plus steady-state extraction enable PEC+QED to deliver 2-11x lower error than PEC alone on Iceberg codes for QAOA.

  12. Architecting Early Fault Tolerant Neutral Atoms Systems with Quantum Advantage

    quant-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    A teleportation-based parallelization architecture for neutral-atom quantum error correction delivers up to 3x speedup over extractor methods at fixed space cost and enables simulated quantum advantage at 11,495 atoms...

  13. Fast and Coherent Transfer of Atomic Qubits in Optical Tweezers using Fiber Array Architecture

    quant-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Fiber-array optical tweezers enable 10 μs coherent qubit transfers with 0.156 μK heating per cycle and 0.99992 fidelity, plus a model for parallel-transfer heating from array inhomogeneity.

  14. Heterogeneous architectures enable a 138x reduction in physical qubit requirements for fault-tolerant quantum computing under detailed accounting

    quant-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Heterogeneous quantum architectures with task-specific hardware and QEC encodings deliver up to 138x lower physical-qubit overhead than monolithic baselines for fault-tolerant algorithms, including RSA-2048 factoring ...

  15. A scalable infrastructure for strontium optical clocks with integrated photonics

    physics.app-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Demonstrates magneto-optical traps for all stable strontium isotopes using co-designed atomic beam slowing, PIC-met surface laser delivery, and integrated frequency-comb stabilization, advancing bulk-optics-free Sr op...

  16. Correlated Atom Loss as a Resource for Quantum Error Correction

    quant-ph 2026-03 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    A new decoder exploiting correlated atom loss in surface codes raises the loss threshold from 3.2% to 4% and cuts logical errors by up to 10x for neutral-atom processors.

  17. Protection of Exponential Operation using Stabilizer Codes in the Early Fault Tolerance Era

    quant-ph 2026-02 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    A new encoding scheme for exp(-iθP) into stabilizer codes like [[n,n-2,2]] and [[5,1,3]] achieves 4-7x lower noise than unencoded versions with at most 3% runs discarded after postselection.

  18. Block Permutation Routing on Ramanujan Hypergraphs for Fault-Tolerant Quantum Computing

    quant-ph 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Block permutation routing number on Ramanujan hypergraphs for surface code patches is Theta(d_C log N_L), with spectral analysis preserving key connectivity properties.

  19. Numerically optimized amplitude-robust controlled-Z gate for ultracold neutral atoms with individual addressing capability

    quant-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    A numerically optimized Rydberg blockade CZ gate for neutral atoms improves robustness to Rabi frequency variations by nearly an order of magnitude and works with individual laser addressing at finite temperatures.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

65 extracted references · 65 canonical work pages · cited by 19 Pith papers · 15 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Quantum accuracy threshold for concatenated distance-3 codes

    P. Aliferis, D. Gottesman, and J. Preskill. Quantum accuracy threshold for concatenated distance-3 codes. http://dx.doi.org/10.26421/QIC6.2-1 Quant. Inf. Comput. 6:97 (2006) , arXiv:quant-ph/0504218 http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0504218

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.26421/qic6.2-1 2006

  2. [2]

    D. Bacon. Operator quantum error correcting subsystems for self-correcting quantum memories. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.73.012340 Phys. Rev. A 73:012340 (2006) , arXiv:quant-ph/0506023 http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0506023

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physreva.73.012340 2006

  3. [3]

    Barnes, P

    K. Barnes, P. Battaglino, B. J. Bloom, et al. Assembly and coherent control of a register of nuclear spin qubits. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-29977-z Nat. Commun. 13(1):2779 (2022) , arXiv:2108.04790 http://arxiv.org/abs/2108.04790

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467-022-29977-z 2022

  4. [4]

    Bluvstein, S

    D. Bluvstein, S. J. Evered, A. A. Geim, et al. Logical quantum processor based on reconfigurable atom arrays. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-06927-3 Nature 626:58--65 (2024) , arXiv:2312.03982 http://arxiv.org/abs/2312.03982

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06927-3 2024

  5. [5]

    M. E. Beverland, P. Murali, M. Troyer, et al. Assessing requirements to scale to practical quantum advantage. (2022), arXiv:2211.07629 http://arxiv.org/abs/2211.07629

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  6. [6]

    Bernstein and U

    E. Bernstein and U. Vazirani. Quantum complexity theory. http://dx.doi.org/10.1137/S0097539796300921 SIAM J. Comput. 26(5):1411--1473 (1997)

    work page doi:10.1137/s0097539796300921 1997

  7. [7]

    Blinov, B

    S. Blinov, B. Wu, and C. Monroe. Comparison of cloud-based ion trap and superconducting quantum computer architectures. http://dx.doi.org/10.1116/5.0058187 AVS Quantum Sci. 3:033801 (2021) , arXiv:2102.00371 http://arxiv.org/abs/2102.00371

    work page doi:10.1116/5.0058187 2021

  8. [8]

    Z. Bao, S. Xu, Z. Song, et al. Schr \"o dinger cats growing up to 60 qubits and dancing in a cat scar enforced discrete time crystal. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-53140-5 Nat. Commun. 15:8823 (2024) , arXiv:2401.08284 http://arxiv.org/abs/2401.08284

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467-024-53140-5 2024

  9. [9]

    E. T. Campbell. The smallest interesting colour code. https://earltcampbell.com/2016/09/26/the-smallest-interesting-colour-code/ earltcampbell.com/2016/09/26/the-smallest- https://earltcampbell.com/2016/09/26/the-smallest-interesting-colour-code/ interesting-colour-code , 2016

    work page 2016

  10. [10]

    M. N. H. Chow, V. Buchemmavari, S. Omanakuttan, et al. Circuit-based leakage-to-erasure conversion in a neutral atom quantum processor. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PRXQuantum.5.040343 PRX Quantum (2024) , arXiv:2405.10434 http://arxiv.org/abs/2405.10434

    work page doi:10.1103/prxquantum.5.040343 2024

  11. [11]

    R. Cane, D. Chandra, S. X. Ng, and L. Hanzo. Experimental characterization of fault-tolerant circuits in small-scale quantum processors. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3133483 IEEE Access 9:162996 (2021) , arXiv:2112.04076 http://arxiv.org/abs/2112.04076

    work page doi:10.1109/access.2021.3133483 2021

  12. [12]

    Cleve, A

    R. Cleve, A. Ekert, C. Macchiavello, and M. Mosca. Quantum algorithms revisited. http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rspa.1998.0164 Proc. R. Soc. London A 454(1969):339--354 (1998) , arXiv:quant-ph/9708016 http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9708016

    work page doi:10.1098/rspa.1998.0164 1998

  13. [13]

    D. Cruz, R. Fournier, F. Gremion, et al. Efficient quantum algorithms for GHZ and W states, and implementation on the IBM quantum computer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/qute.201900015 Adv. Quantum Technol. 2(5-6):1900015 (2019)

    work page doi:10.1002/qute.201900015 2019

  14. [14]

    M. L. Dahlhauser and T. S. Humble. Modeling noisy quantum circuits using experimental characterization. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.103.042603 Phys. Rev. A 103:042603 (2021) , arXiv:2001.08653 http://arxiv.org/abs/2001.08653

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.103.042603 2021

  15. [15]

    Demonstration of a small programmable quantum computer with atomic qubits

    S. Debnath, N. M. Linke, C. Figgatt, et al. Demonstration of a small programmable quantum computer with atomic qubits. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature18648 Nature 536:63--66 (2016) , arXiv:1603.04512 http://arxiv.org/abs/1603.04512

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1038/nature18648 2016

  16. [16]

    S. J. Evered, D. Bluvstein, M. Kalinowski, et al. High-fidelity parallel entangling gates on a neutral-atom quantum computer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-06481-y Nature 622(7982):268--272 (2023) , arXiv:2304.05420 http://arxiv.org/abs/2304.05420

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06481-y 2023

  17. [17]

    S. D. Fallek, C. D. Herold, B. J. McMahon, et al. Transport implementation of the B ernstein- V azirani algorithm with ion qubits. http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/18/8/083030 New J. Phys. 18:083030 (2016) , arXiv:1603.05672 http://arxiv.org/abs/1603.05672

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1367-2630/18/8/083030 2016

  18. [18]

    Finkelstein, R

    R. Finkelstein, R. B.-S. Tsai, X. Sun, et al. Universal quantum operations and ancilla-based read-out for tweezer clocks. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-08005-8 Nature 634(8033):321--327 (2024) , arXiv:2402.16220 http://arxiv.org/abs/2402.16220

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-024-08005-8 2024

  19. [19]

    Codes for the Quantum Erasure Channel

    M. Grassl, T. Beth, and T. Pellizzari. Codes for the quantum erasure channel. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.56.33 Phys. Rev. A 56(1):33--38 (1997) , arXiv:quant-ph/9610042 http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9610042

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physreva.56.33 1997

  20. [20]

    Quantum error correction below the surface code threshold

    Google Quantum AI and Collaborators . Quantum error correction below the surface code threshold. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-08449-y Nature (2024) , arXiv:2408.13687 http://arxiv.org/abs/2408.13687

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-024-08449-y 2024

  21. [21]

    D. M. Greenberger, M. A. Horne, and A. Zeilinger. Going beyond B ell's theorem. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-0849-4 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-0849-4 In M. Kafatos, editor, Bell's Theorem, Quantum Theory and Conceptions of the Universe , Fundamental Theories of Physics, pages 69--72. Springer Netherlands, 1989

    work page doi:10.1007/978-94-017-0849-4 1989

  22. [22]

    G \"u hne, C.-Y

    O. G \"u hne, C.-Y. Lu, W.-B. Gao, and J.-W. Pan. Toolbox for entanglement detection and fidelity estimation. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.76.030305 Phys. Rev. A 76:030305 (2007)

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.76.030305 2007

  23. [23]

    Suppressing quantum errors by scaling a surface code logical qubit

    Google Quantum AI . Suppressing quantum errors by scaling a surface code logical qubit. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-05434-1 Nature 614:676--681 (2023) , arXiv:2207.06431 http://arxiv.org/abs/2207.06431

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-022-05434-1 2023

  24. [24]

    A Theory of Fault-Tolerant Quantum Computation

    D. Gottesman. Theory of fault-tolerant quantum computation. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.57.127 Phys. Rev. A 57:127 (1998) , arXiv:quant-ph/9702029 http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9702029

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physreva.57.127 1998

  25. [25]

    Quantum fault tolerance in small experiments

    D. Gottesman. Quantum fault tolerance in small experiments, arXiv:1610.03507 http://arxiv.org/abs/1610.03507

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  26. [26]

    Separability criteria for genuine multiparticle entanglement

    O. G \"u hne and M. Seevinck. Separability criteria for genuine multiparticle entanglement. http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/12/5/053002 New J. Phys. 12(5):053002 (2010) , arXiv:0905.1349 http://arxiv.org/abs/0905.1349

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1367-2630/12/5/053002 2010

  27. [27]

    Y. Hong, E. Durso-Sabina , D. Hayes, and A. Lucas. Entangling four logical qubits beyond break-even in a nonlocal code. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.133.180601 Phys. Rev. Lett. 133:180601 (2024) , arXiv:2406.02666 http://arxiv.org/abs/2406.02666

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.133.180601 2024

  28. [28]

    Fault-Tolerant Logical Gates in the IBM Quantum Experience

    R. Harper and S. T. Flammia. Fault-tolerant logical gates in the IBM Q uantum E xperience. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.122.080504 Phys. Rev. Lett. 122:080504 (2019) , arXiv:1806.02359 http://arxiv.org/abs/1806.02359

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.122.080504 2019

  29. [29]

    Jandura and G

    S. Jandura and G. Pupillo. Time-optimal two-and three-qubit gates for R ydberg atoms. http://dx.doi.org/10.22331/q-2022-05-13-712 Quantum 6:712 (2022) , arXiv:2202.00903 http://arxiv.org/abs/2202.00903

    work page doi:10.22331/q-2022-05-13-712 2022

  30. [30]

    Krinner, N

    S. Krinner, N. Lacroix, A. Remm, et al. Realizing repeated quantum error correction in a distance-three surface code. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-04566-8 Nature 605:669--674 (2022) , arXiv:2112.03708 http://arxiv.org/abs/2112.03708

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-022-04566-8 2022

  31. [31]

    M. Krenn. Largest genuine entanglement: Qubits in GHZ state. https://mariokrenn.wordpress.com/2021/01/29/reference-list-for-records-in-large-entanglement-generation-number-of-qubits-in-ghz-states/ mariokrenn.wordpress.com/2021/01/29/reference-list-for-records-in-large-entanglement https://mariokrenn.wordpress.com/2021/01/29/reference-list-for-records-in-l...

    work page 2021

  32. [32]

    N. M. Linke, M. Gutierrez, K. A. Landsman, et al. Fault-tolerant quantum error detection. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1701074 Sci. Adv. 3(10):1701074 (2017) , arXiv:1611.06946 http://arxiv.org/abs/1611.06946

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1126/sciadv.1701074 2017

  33. [33]

    Lubinski, J

    T. Lubinski, J. J. Goings, K. Mayer, et al. Quantum algorithm exploration using application-oriented performance benchmarks. (2024), arXiv:2402.08985 http://arxiv.org/abs/2402.08985

    work page arXiv 2024

  34. [34]

    Lubinski, S

    T. Lubinski, S. Johri, P. Varosy, et al. Application-oriented performance benchmarks for quantum computing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TQE.2023.3253761 IEEE Trans. Quantum Eng. 4:1--32 (2023) , arXiv:2110.03137 http://arxiv.org/abs/2110.03137

    work page doi:10.1109/tqe.2023.3253761 2023

  35. [35]

    N. M. Linke, D. Maslov, M. Roetteler, and C. Monroe. Experimental comparison of two quantum computing architectures. http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1618020114 Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 114(13):3305--3310 (2017) , arXiv:1702.01852 http://arxiv.org/abs/1702.01852

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1073/pnas.1618020114 2017

  36. [36]

    S. A. Moses, C. H. Baldwin, M. S. Allman, et al. A race-track trapped-ion quantum processor. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevX.13.041052 Phys. Rev. X 13:041052 (2023) , arXiv:2305.03828 http://arxiv.org/abs/2305.03828

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevx.13.041052 2023

  37. [37]

    McEwen, D

    M. McEwen, D. Bacon, and C. Gidney. Relaxing hardware requirements for surface code circuits using time-dynamics. http://dx.doi.org/10.22331/q-2023-11-07-1172 Quantum 7:1172 (2023) , arXiv:2302.02192 http://arxiv.org/abs/2302.02192

    work page doi:10.22331/q-2023-11-07-1172 2023

  38. [38]

    Murali, N

    P. Murali, N. M. Linke, M. Martonosi, et al. Full-stack, real-system quantum computer studies: architectural comparisons and design insights. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3307650.3322273 http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3307650.3322273 In Proc. ISCA , pages 527--540, 2019, arXiv:1905.11349 http://arxiv.org/abs/1905.11349

    work page doi:10.1145/3307650.3322273 2019

  39. [39]

    S. Ma, G. Liu, P. Peng, et al. High-fidelity gates and mid-circuit erasure conversion in an atomic qubit. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-06438-1 Nature 622(7982):279--284 (2023) , arXiv:2305.05493 http://arxiv.org/abs/2305.05493

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06438-1 2023

  40. [40]

    J. A. Muniz, M. Stone, D. T. Stack, et al. High fidelity universal gates in the ^ 171 Yb ground state nuclear spin qubit. (2024), arXiv:2411.11708 http://arxiv.org/abs/2411.11708

    work page arXiv 2024

  41. [41]

    M. A. Norcia, W. B. Cairncross, et al. Midcircuit qubit measurement and rearrangement in a ^ 171 Yb atomic array. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevX.13.041034 Phys. Rev. X 13:041034 (2023) , arXiv:2305.19119 http://arxiv.org/abs/2305.19119

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevx.13.041034 2023

  42. [42]

    Norcia, H

    M. Norcia, H. Kim, W. Cairncross, et al. Iterative assembly of ^ 171 Yb atom arrays with cavity-enhanced optical lattices. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PRXQuantum.5.030316 PRX Quantum 5:030316 (2024) , arXiv:2401.16177 http://arxiv.org/abs/2401.16177

    work page doi:10.1103/prxquantum.5.030316 2024

  43. [43]

    Omran, H

    A. Omran, H. Levine, A. Keesling, et al. Generation and manipulation of schr&\#xf6;dinger cat states in rydberg atom arrays. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.aax9743 Science 365(6453):570--574 (2019) , arXiv:1905.05721 http://arxiv.org/abs/1905.05721

    work page doi:10.1126/science.aax9743 2019

  44. [44]

    Postler, F

    L. Postler, F. Butt, I. Pogorelov, et al. Demonstration of fault-tolerant S teane quantum error correction. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PRXQuantum.5.030326 PRX Quantum 5:030326 (2024) , arXiv:2312.09745 http://arxiv.org/abs/2312.09745

    work page doi:10.1103/prxquantum.5.030326 2024

  45. [45]

    Pokharel and D

    B. Pokharel and D. A. Lidar. Demonstration of algorithmic quantum speedup. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.130.210602 Phys. Rev. Lett. 130:210602 (2023) , arXiv:2207.07647 http://arxiv.org/abs/2207.07647

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.130.210602 2023

  46. [46]

    Putterman, K

    H. Putterman, K. Noh, C. T. Hann, et al. Hardware-efficient quantum error correction using concatenated bosonic qubits. (2024), arXiv:2409.13025 http://arxiv.org/abs/2409.13025

    work page arXiv 2024

  47. [47]

    G. M. Palma, K.-A. Suominen, and A. K. Ekert. Quantum computers and dissipation. http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rspa.1996.0029 Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A 452:567--584 (1996) , arXiv:quant-ph/9702001 http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9702001

    work page doi:10.1098/rspa.1996.0029 1996

  48. [48]

    Paetznick , M

    A. Paetznick , M. Silva , C. Ryan-Anderson , et al. Demonstration of logical qubits and repeated error correction with better-than-physical error rates. 2024, arXiv:2404.02280 http://arxiv.org/abs/2404.02280

    work page arXiv 2024

  49. [49]

    Pagano, S

    A. Pagano, S. Weber, D. Jaschke, et al. Error budgeting for a controlled-phase gate with strontium-88 R ydberg atoms. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevResearch.4.033019 Phys. Rev. Research 4:033019 (2022) , arXiv:2202.13849 http://arxiv.org/abs/2202.13849

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevresearch.4.033019 2022

  50. [50]

    B. W. Reichardt, D. Aasen, R. Chao, et al. Demonstration of quantum computation and error correction with a tesseract code. (2024), arXiv:2409.04628 http://arxiv.org/abs/2409.04628

    work page arXiv 2024

  51. [51]

    Ryan-Anderson , J

    C. Ryan-Anderson , J. G. Bohnet, K. Lee, et al. Realization of real-time fault-tolerant quantum error correction. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevX.11.041058 Phys. Rev. X 11:041058 (2021) , arXiv:2107.07505 http://arxiv.org/abs/2107.07505

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevx.11.041058 2021

  52. [52]

    A. G. Radnaev, W. C. Chung, D. C. Cole, et al. A universal neutral-atom quantum computer with individual optical addressing and non-destructive readout, arXiv:2408.08288 http://arxiv.org/abs/2408.08288

    work page arXiv

  53. [53]

    B. W. Reichardt. Fault-tolerant quantum error correction for S teane's seven-qubit color code with few or no extra qubits. http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/2058-9565/abc6f4 Quantum Sci. Technol. 6(1):015007 (2020) , arXiv:1804.06995 http://arxiv.org/abs/1804.06995

    work page doi:10.1088/2058-9565/abc6f4 2058

  54. [54]

    T. Roy, S. Hazra, S. Kundu, et al. Programmable superconducting processor with native three-qubit gates. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevApplied.14.014072 Phys. Rev. Applied 14:014072 (2020) , arXiv:1809.00668 http://arxiv.org/abs/1809.00668

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevapplied.14.014072 2020

  55. [55]

    P. S. Rodriguez, J. M. Robinson, P. N. Jepsen, et al. Experimental demonstration of logical magic state distillation. 2024, arXiv:2412.15165 http://arxiv.org/abs/2412.15165

    work page arXiv 2024

  56. [56]

    C. N. Self, M. Benedetti, and D. Amaro. Protecting expressive circuits with a quantum error detection code. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41567-023-02282-2 Nat. Phys. 20:219--224 (2024) , arXiv:2211.06703 http://arxiv.org/abs/2211.06703

    work page doi:10.1038/s41567-023-02282-2 2024

  57. [57]

    P. W. Shor. Fault-tolerant quantum computation. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/SFCS.1996.548464 http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/SFCS.1996.548464 In Proc. 37th Symp. on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS) , page 96, 1996, arXiv:quant-ph/9605011 http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9605011

    work page doi:10.1109/sfcs.1996.548464 1996

  58. [58]

    Scholl, A

    P. Scholl, A. L. Shaw, R. B.-S. Tsai, et al. Erasure conversion in a high-fidelity R ydberg quantum simulator. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-06516-4 Nature 622(7982):273--278 (2023) , arXiv:2305.03406 http://arxiv.org/abs/2305.03406

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06516-4 2023

  59. [59]

    Error Prevention Scheme with Four Particles

    L. Vaidman, L. Goldenberg, and S. Wiesner. Error prevention scheme with four particles. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.54.R1745 Phys. Rev. A 54:R1745 (1996) , arXiv:quant-ph/9603031 http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9603031

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physreva.54.r1745 1996

  60. [60]

    C. Vuillot. Is error detection helpful on IBM 5 Q chips? http://dx.doi.org/10.26421/qic18.11-12 Quant. Inf. Comput. 18(11 & 12) (2018) , arXiv:1705.08957 http://arxiv.org/abs/1705.08957

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.26421/qic18.11-12 2018

  61. [61]

    Wright, K

    K. Wright, K. M. Beck, S. Debnath, et al. Benchmarking an 11-qubit quantum computer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-13534-2 Nat. Commun. 10:5464 (2019) , arXiv:1903.08181 http://arxiv.org/abs/1903.08181

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467-019-13534-2 2019

  62. [62]

    Y. Wu, S. Kolkowitz, S. Puri, and J. D. Thompson. Erasure conversion for fault-tolerant quantum computing in alkaline earth R ydberg atom arrays. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-32094-6 Nat. Commun. 13(1):4657 (2022) , arXiv:2201.03540 http://arxiv.org/abs/2201.03540

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467-022-32094-6 2022

  63. [63]

    Testing quantum fault tolerance on small systems

    D. Willsch, M. Willsch, F. Jin, et al. Testing quantum fault tolerance on small systems. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.98.052348 Phys. Rev. A 98(5) (2018) , arXiv:1805.05227 http://arxiv.org/abs/1805.05227

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physreva.98.052348 2018

  64. [64]

    Q. Xu, H. Zhou, G. Zheng, et al. Fast and parallelizable logical computation with homological product codes. (2024), arXiv:2407.18490 http://arxiv.org/abs/2407.18490

    work page arXiv 2024

  65. [65]

    Yamamoto, S

    K. Yamamoto, S. Duffield, Y. Kikuchi, and D. M. Ramo. Demonstrating B ayesian quantum phase estimation with quantum error detection. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevResearch.6.013221 Phys. Rev. Research 6:013221 (2024) , arXiv:2306.16608 http://arxiv.org/abs/2306.16608

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevresearch.6.013221 2024