Lifting a CSS code via its handlebody realization

Virgile Guemard

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 3 cited by

Lifting a CSS code via its handlebody realization

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read CSS code lifting can be performed with the Freedman-Hastings handlebody realization, equivalent to Tanner cone-complex lifting, classifying hypergraph-product code lifts by subgroups of π1(T1)×π1(T2).

desk verdict Useful geometric translation of code lifting with honest caveats; the self-contained HPC classification proof has gaps that need patching. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.14327 v1 pith:SDV3KRNV submitted 2025-05-20 quant-ph cs.ITmath.IT

Virgile Guemard This is my paper · ORCID

classification quant-phcs.ITmath.IT

keywords codeliftinghandlebodyrealizationapproachcodescone-complextanner

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

Quantum error-correcting codes protect quantum information by spreading it across many physical qubits. A popular family, CSS codes, can be described by a small chain complex: a list of vector spaces and maps between them. Freedman and Hastings showed that any such code can be realized as part of a high-dimensional manifold, where the code's checks and qubits become handles of the manifold.

This paper shows how to use that geometric realization to build new codes. Starting from a code, the author constructs a 5-dimensional cell complex, then takes a finite covering space of it, as one would wrap a torus around another torus. The middle dimensions of the covering complex define a new CSS code, called a cellular lift. The author gives explicit formulas for the parity-check matrices of the lifted code and proves the chain-complex condition needed for a valid CSS code.

The paper then compares this cellular lift with the author's earlier Tanner cone-complex lift. The two constructions produce the same families of codes exactly when the original code admits a support-preserving integer lift, a condition that holds for hypergraph-product codes and many other common families but can fail in general; one failing example is given in Appendix A. Under that condition, the fundamental group of the geometric realization matches the Tanner complex, so lifts are classified by subgroups of the fundamental group of the Tanner graphs. For hypergraph-product codes this yields a classification of all cellular lifts by subgroups of π1(T1)×π1(T2).

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The cellular-lift of a hypergraph-product code C, built from a fixed support-preserving Z-lift, is classified by the subgroups of π1(T1)×π1(T2), where T1 and T2 are the Tanner graphs of the two classical codes defining C. This is Theorem 4.10, and the paper argues it is an equivalent formulation of the Tanner-lift classification from [Gue25], expressed through the Freedman-Hastings handlebody realization of the code.

Load-bearing premise

Equivalence between the new cellular-lift and the prior Tanner-lift requires the code to admit a support-preserving Z-lift. Appendix A shows a CSS code built from the Fano plane that admits no such lift, and Section 4.3 explains that without this property the fundamental group of the cellular realization can differ from that of the Tanner cone-complex, so the two lifting procedures are not equivalent. This condition is load-bearing for the claim that the handlebody approach reproduces the Tanner-lift classification.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Here's the short version: this paper makes the Freedman–Hastings handlebody into a working code-lifting device and shows it is essentially the same as the Tanner cone-complex lifting from the author's earlier paper [Gue25]. The construction is explicit, the lifted boundary formulas in Section 4.2 are new, and Theorem 4.4 gives a clean proof that the lifted maps compose to zero. That part is solid.

What's genuinely new: the cellular realization of a code, the explicit covering construction on the 1-skeleton and then lifting 2-cells, and the invariance statements (Lemma 4.7, Theorem 4.6) for realizations with identical 1-skeletons. The paper is also honest about the conditionality: the equivalence with Tanner-lifts requires a support-preserving Z-lift, and Appendix A gives a Fano-plane code that admits none. That limitation is stated clearly, not buried.

The soft spots are in the self-contained classification of HPC lifts (Theorem 4.10). Lemma 4.12's proof requires choosing edge sets E1^f and E2^f that cover all checks/bits with no shared endpoints. That's a spanning-forest assumption that can fail for simple Tanner graphs—e.g., a length-2 repetition code on the C2 side has one check adjacent to both bits, so no such selection exists. The proof doesn't address this. And Lemma 4.14 invokes Lemma 4.7 to claim all cellular realizations have the same pi_1, but Lemma 4.7 only applies when the 1-skeletons are identical. The number of Z-type 1-cells can vary with the pairing choices at X-vertices, so that precondition isn't verified. So the proof of Theorem 4.10 as written has a real gap.

That said, the theorem itself is likely true: the paper explicitly says it is an equivalent version of a result already used in [Gue25], and the equivalence with the Tanner-lift, when the support-preserving Z-lift exists, covers HPCs. So the gap is in the self-contained proof, not necessarily in the mathematical claim. Still, a referee should ask the author to either fix the spanning-forest argument, restrict the statement, or rely explicitly on the prior classification rather than claiming a self-contained proof.

Who is this for? People working on quantum LDPC constructions and topological codes. It gives a different geometric lens and some reusable explicit formulas. It deserves a serious referee; the conditional claims are honest and the construction is genuinely useful. I'd recommend sending it to review, with the expectation that the HPC classification proof needs revision.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper develops a topological code-lifting procedure based on the Freedman-Hastings handlebody realization of a CSS code. It defines a 5-dimensional cellular realization L(C) of a code, introduces the notion of a cellular-lift via finite covers of L(C), and gives explicit formulas for the lifted boundary maps. It then argues that, when the code admits a support-preserving Z-lift, the cellular-lift is equivalent to the author's earlier Tanner cone-complex lift, and it uses this equivalence to classify cellular-lifts of hypergraph-product codes: for C = C1 ⊗ C2*, the lifts are classified by subgroups of π1(T1) × π1(T2), where T1 and T2 are the Tanner graphs of the two classical codes. The paper also contains an appendix exhibiting a CSS code with no support-preserving Z-lift and a corollary asserting that asymptotically good quantum LDPC codes can be obtained by this cellular-lifting procedure.

Significance. If the main theorem and its supporting lemmas are correct, the paper provides a useful handlebody-based perspective on code lifting and an explicit topological counterpart to the author's Tanner cone-complex machinery. The explicit lifted boundary-map formulas in Eqs. (1) and (3), together with the clean proof of the chain-complex condition in Theorem 4.4, are concrete assets, and the support-preserving Z-lift for hypergraph-product codes is given explicitly. The classification statement, subgroups of π1(T1) × π1(T2), is a clean and potentially useful reformulation of known results. However, the paper is transparent that the classification is equivalent to a prior result from [Gue25], and the proof of this equivalence via cellular realizations is where the main technical gaps occur; the significance of the paper therefore depends on whether those gaps can be closed.

major comments (3)

[§4.4, Lemma 4.14] The proof of Lemma 4.14 is not valid as written. The lemma claims that every L ∈ L(C) has π1(L) ≅ π1(T1) × π1(T2), by combining Lemma 4.12's existence of one realization homotopy equivalent to T1 × T2 with 'Theorem 4.7'. However, Theorem 4.6/4.7 applies only to cellular realizations with identical 1-skeletons, and L(C) as defined in §4.1 does not fix the 1-skeleton. In §3.4, the graph Gz is constructed using a pairing of oppositely signed edges at each X-vertex, and the paper itself notes that Gz can be disconnected 'due to the choice of edge pairing'; in §4.1, the Z-type 1-cells are introduced precisely to connect the components of Gz. Different pairings can therefore produce different numbers of Z-type 1-cells and, potentially, different fundamental groups. The proof of Lemma 4.14 never establishes that all L have the same 1-skeleton, so the isomorphism π1(L) ≅ π1(T1) × π1(T2) is not proved for arbitrary L, and Theorem 4.10 is not established by this argument.
[§4.5, Lemma 4.12] Lemma 4.12 contains an unproved, and as stated questionable, graph-theoretic assertion. The proof requires that for each check vertex of T1 and each bit vertex of T2 one can choose edge sets E1^f and E2^f such that, for every z-vertex (v1,v2) ∈ V1^b × V2^c, there exists e ∈ E1^f such that for all v ∈ N(v2) ∪ (v1,v2) the horizontal edge (e,v) lies in the star of (v1,v2), with a symmetric vertical condition. No argument is given that such marked edges exist for arbitrary bipartite Tanner graphs, and the displayed condition is not well formed as written: it mixes a vertex (v1,v2) with the neighbor set N(v2), and e ∈ E1^f need not be incident to v1 merely because it was selected for some check vertex of T1. The proof also asserts that after several local retractions a global deformation retraction can be obtained, but the required spanning-forest property is not proved. Since Lemma 4.12 is the only place where the homotopy equivalence L^2 ≃ T1 × T2 is established, this is a load-bearing gap in the proof of Theorem 4.10.
[§4.3 and Appendix A] The claimed classification depends essentially on the existence of a support-preserving Z-lift, and the paper is not fully self-contained on this point. Section 4.3 states that the cellular-lift and the Tanner-lift are equivalent only when a support-preserving Z-lift exists, and Appendix A gives a CSS code with no such lift. For codes without this property, the paper itself notes that the fundamental group of the cellular realization can differ from that of the Tanner cone-complex. Consequently, Theorem 4.10 is not a classification of all cellular-lifts of all HPCs beyond the support-preserving case, and the proof does not provide an independent derivation of the Tanner-lift classification. The paper should either prove the equivalence in the support-preserving case with full detail or explicitly state Theorem 4.10 as a reformulation of the known classification from [Gue25] rather than as a new classification theorem.

minor comments (5)

[§4.3, Lemma 4.5 proof] The phrase 'π1(L) and T(C) (the Tanner cone-complex)' conflates the Tanner graph T(C) with the Tanner cone-complex K(C); the proof should refer to the fundamental group of the cone-complex K(C), not of the graph T(C).
[§3.1 and §4.4] There are several typographical errors: 'bundary' in Section 3.1, 'indix' in Section 3.1, 'classication' in Section 4.4, and 'repeatidly' in the proof of Lemma 4.7.
[References] The reference [hes] is given as a MathOverflow URL with the author name in the citation key; it should be formatted as a standard bibliographic entry with author, title, URL, and access date.
[§4.2, Theorem 4.6 proof] The proof of Theorem 4.6 states that replacing the 2-cells 'does not change the incidence' between lifts of a Z-check and its neighboring qubits; this step is asserted without justification and should be expanded, since it is part of the claimed invariance of the resulting code.
[§4.5, Example 4.13] In Example 4.13, 'the simplest spanning forest has on edge out of two' should read 'has one edge out of two'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity found: the handlebody classification is an independent geometric derivation, with a non-circular proof gap in Lemma 4.14.

full rationale

The claimed derivation is not circular. The classification in Theorem 4.10 is based on Lemma 4.12, which explicitly constructs a cellular realization whose 2-skeleton deformation retracts to the same complex as T1 x T2, and on Lemma 4.14, which invokes the internal invariance Lemma 4.7 to pass to arbitrary cellular realizations. These are constructions and internal topological arguments, not fits of the target statement into the input. The paper openly labels Theorem 4.10 as an equivalent formulation of the Tanner-lift classification from the author's earlier [Gue25], but the proof does not simply cite that result; it attempts an independent derivation. The support-preserving Z-lift assumption is stated explicitly (Definitions 2.5-2.6, Section 4.3), with Appendix A exhibiting a code that fails it, so the conditional scope of the equivalence is acknowledged rather than hidden. The main caveat is a correctness gap, not circularity: Lemma 4.14 applies Lemma 4.7, whose hypothesis requires identical 1-skeletons, but Section 3.4 (footnote 7) and Section 4.1 indicate that Z-type 1-cells depend on an edge-pairing choice, so different elements of L(C) can have different 1-skeletons. That would invalidate the proof of Lemma 4.14, but it does not make the theorem's content identical to its inputs by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The construction depends on a chosen Z-lift and on the standard covering-space machinery. No additional physical entities are postulated. The most fragile entries are the existence of the spanning forests in Lemma 4.12 and the support-preserving Z-lift condition, which the paper itself shows is not universal.

free parameters (1)

Integer coefficients of the chosen Z-lift (e∂1, e∂2) = Odd integers; for HPC the naive lift uses entries in {0, ±1}, Section 4.5
The cell complex L(C) is defined relative to a fixed Z-lift (Definition 4.1 and Section 4.5). Choosing a different support-preserving lift can change the cellular realization, and the equivalence to the Tanner-lift is investigated only for support-preserving lifts.

assumptions (7)

domain assumption Every finite-dimensional F2 chain complex representing a CSS code admits a Z-lift (integer lift of the parity-check matrices).
Invoked at the start of Section 3 to lift the code before building the handlebody; the existence is a theorem of [FH21].
standard math Galois correspondence: connected covers of a well-behaved space are classified by subgroups of its fundamental group.
Theorem 4.3 is the basis for classifying cellular-lifts and for counting qubits as |Q|·[π1(L):H].
standard math Laudenbach-Poenaru theorem: diffeomorphisms of #t S1×S2 extend over ♮t S1×D3.
Used in Example 3.3 to identify the attaching regions Y with #t S3×S1.
standard math Hatcher Proposition 1.26: attaching 2-cells kills the normal subgroup generated by their boundary loops, and attaching cells of dimension at least 3 does not change π1.
Quoted as Proposition 4.8 and used repeatedly in the proof of Lemma 4.7 and Theorem 4.6.
domain assumption Support-preserving Z-lifts exist for hypergraph-product codes and other product-type families.
Needed for the equivalence in Section 4.3 and for the classification in Section 4.5; the naive lift displayed there is support-preserving, and Appendix A shows the assumption can fail for other codes.
standard math The Fano plane cannot be embedded as a configuration of points and lines over Q.
Used in Appendix A to prove that the projective-plane CSS code has no support-preserving Z-lift; the example is attributed to [hes].
ad hoc to paper For every HPC one can choose disjoint spanning forests E^f_1, E^f_2 such that each z-vertex's star contains a marked horizontal and a marked vertical edge.
This is asserted in the proof of Lemma 4.12 without proof, and the deformation retraction to K depends on it.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Lifting a CSS code via its handlebody realization." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/SDV3KRNV

@misc{pith2026250514327,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Lifting a CSS code via its handlebody realization},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/SDV3KRNV}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.14327}
}

read the original abstract

We present a topological approach to lifting a quantum CSS code. In previous work, we proposed lifting a CSS code by constructing covering spaces over its 2D simplicial complex representation, known as the Tanner cone-complex. This idea was inspired by the work of Freedman and Hastings, which associates CSS codes with handlebodies. In this paper, we show how the handlebody realization of a code can also be used to perform code lifting, and we provide a more detailed discussion of why this is essentially equivalent to the Tanner cone-complex approach. As an application, we classify lifts of hypergraph-product codes via their handlebody realization.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.14327 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2: (a) Handle structure of a 4-dressed-handle. 1-handles are represented as segments, and 2-handles [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** FIG. 3: (a) Example of a handle structure of a 5-dressed-handle, where its components are represented [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (3 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4: (a) Tanner graph of the code considered in Example 3.5, with qubits shown in blue and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_4.png]

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: FIG. 5: Manifold [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_5.png]

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: FIG. 6: The top left figure represents a local view (the closure of the star) of a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

Transversal non-Clifford gates on almost-good quantum LDPC and quantum locally testable codes
quant-ph 2026-04 conditional novelty 7.5 of 10

Almost-good qLDPC and qLTC codes admit nontrivial transversal logical multi-controlled-Z gates via cohomological cup products and two-way product-expanding punctured Reed–Solomon local codes.
Lifting Lifted Product Codes
quant-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.5 of 10

Group-extension lifts systematically enlarge any LP code, transfer logical gadgets via chain maps (often with less surgery overhead), improve some code parameters, and give candidate thermodynamic families with cohere...
Transversal non-Clifford gates on qLDPC codes breaking the $\sqrt{N}$ distance barrier and quantum-inspired geometry with $\mathbb{Z}_2$ systolic freedom
quant-ph 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

A triple homological product of good quantum LDPC codes achieves distance N^(2/3) with transversal CCZ gates and prepares N^(1/3) magic states in a single round.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

27 extracted references · 21 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers

[1]

On tensor products of CSS codes

Benjamin Audoux and Alain Couvreur. On tensor products of CSS codes . Annales de l’Institut Henri Poincaré D, Combinatorics, Physics and their Interactions , 6(2):239–287, March 2019

work page 2019
[2]

Breuckmann and Jens N

Nikolas P. Breuckmann and Jens N. Eberhardt. Balanced Product Quantum Codes . IEEE Transactions on Information Theory , 67(10):6653--6674, October 2021

work page 2021
[3]

Breuckmann and Jens Niklas Eberhardt

Nikolas P. Breuckmann and Jens Niklas Eberhardt. Quantum Low-Density Parity-Check Codes . PRX Quantum , 2(4), October 2021

2021
[4]

A. R. Calderbank and Peter W. Shor. Good quantum error-correcting codes exist . Physical Review A , 54(2):1098--1105, August 1996

work page 1996
[5]

Locally testable codes with constant rate, distance, and locality

Irit Dinur, Shai Evra, Ron Livne, Alexander Lubotzky, and Shahar Mozes. Locally testable codes with constant rate, distance, and locality. In Proceedings of the 54th Annual ACM SIGACT Symposium on Theory of Computing , STOC ’22, page 357–374. ACM, June 2022

work page 2022
[6]

Building manifolds from quantum codes

Michael Freedman and Matthew Hastings. Building manifolds from quantum codes . Geometric and Functional Analysis , 31(4):855–894, June 2021

work page 2021
[7]

Freedman and David A

Michael H. Freedman and David A. Meyer. Projective Plane and Planar Quantum Codes . Foundations of Computational Mathematics , 1(3):325--332, July 2001

work page 2001
[8]

Freedman, David A

Michael H. Freedman, David A. Meyer, and Feng Luo. Z2-systolic freedom and quantum codes , volume 1. Chapman and Hall/ CRC , Boca Raton, Floride, February 2002

work page 2002

Show all 27 references

[9]

Lifts of quantum css codes

Virgile Guemard. Lifts of quantum css codes. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory , pages 1--1, 2025

2025
[10]

Algebraic topology

Allen Hatcher. Algebraic topology . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2002

2002
[11]

Lift chain complex from F _2 to Z

David E Speyer (https://mathoverflow.net/users/297/david-e speyer). Lift chain complex from F _2 to Z . MathOverflow. URL:https://mathoverflow.net/q/167615 (version: 2014-05-19)

2014
[12]

Hastings, Jeongwan Haah, and Ryan O'Donnell

Matthew B. Hastings, Jeongwan Haah, and Ryan O'Donnell. Fiber bundle codes: breaking the n1/2 polylog(n) barrier for Quantum LDPC codes . In Proceedings of the 53rd Annual ACM SIGACT Symposium on Theory of Computing , STOC 2021, page 1276–1288, New York, NY, USA, 2021. Associa...

2021
[13]

A.Yu. Kitaev. Fault-tolerant quantum computation by anyons . Annals of Physics , 303(1):2--30, January 2003

2003
[14]

A note on 4-dimensional handlebodies

Fran c ois Laudenbach and Valentin Po\'enaru. A note on 4-dimensional handlebodies. Bulletin de la Soci\'et\'e Math\'ematique de France , 100:337--344, 1972

1972
[15]

Lyndon and Paul E

Roger C. Lyndon and Paul E. Schupp. Combinatorial Group Theory . Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2001

2001
[16]

Quantum Tanner codes

Anthony Leverrier and Gilles Z \'e mor. Quantum Tanner codes . In FOCS 2022 - IEEE 63rd Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science , pages 872--883, Denver, United States, October 2022. IEEE

2022
[17]

Decoding quantum tanner codes

Anthony Leverrier and Gilles Zémor. Decoding quantum tanner codes. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory , 69(8):5100--5115, 2023

2023
[18]

Asymptotically good Quantum and locally testable classical LDPC codes

Pavel Panteleev and Gleb Kalachev. Asymptotically good Quantum and locally testable classical LDPC codes . In Proceedings of the 54th Annual ACM SIGACT Symposium on Theory of Computing , STOC ’22. ACM, June 2022

2022
[19]

Quantum ldpc codes with almost linear minimum distance

Pavel Panteleev and Gleb Kalachev. Quantum ldpc codes with almost linear minimum distance. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory , 68(1):213--229, 2022

2022
[20]

Local Quantum Codes from Subdivided Manifolds , arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.06755 , 2023

Elia Portnoy. Local Quantum Codes from Subdivided Manifolds , arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.06755 , 2023

2023 arXiv
[21]

Peter W. Shor. Scheme for reducing decoherence in quantum computer memory . Physical Review A , 52(4):R2493--R2496, October 1995

1995
[22]

A. M. Steane. Error Correcting Codes in Quantum Theory . Physical Review Letters , 77(5):793--797, July 1996

1996
[23]

A. M. Steane. Multiple-particle interference and quantum error correction . Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences , 452(1954):2551--2577, November 1996

1954
[24]

Quantum ldpc codes with positive rate and minimum distance proportional to the square root of the blocklength

Jean-Pierre Tillich and Gilles Zémor. Quantum ldpc codes with positive rate and minimum distance proportional to the square root of the blocklength. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory , 60(2):1193--1202, 2014

2014
[25]

Matrices in the theory of signed simple graphs, arXiv preprint arXiv:1303.3083 , 2013

Thomas Zaslavsky. Matrices in the theory of signed simple graphs, arXiv preprint arXiv:1303.3083 , 2013

2013 arXiv
[26]

A topological theory for qLDPC: non-Clifford gates and magic state fountain on homological product codes with constant rate and beyond the n^ 1/3 distance barrier

Guanyu Zhu. A topological theory for qLDPC: non-Clifford gates and magic state fountain on homological product codes with constant rate and beyond the n^ 1/3 distance barrier. arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.19375 , 2025

2025
[27]

Cross, and Benjamin J

Guanyu Zhu, Shehryar Sikander, Elia Portnoy, Andrew W. Cross, and Benjamin J. Brown. Non-Clifford and parallelizable fault-tolerant logical gates on constant and almost-constant rate homological quantum LDPC codes via higher symmetries. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.16982 , 2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

On tensor products of CSS codes

Benjamin Audoux and Alain Couvreur. On tensor products of CSS codes . Annales de l’Institut Henri Poincaré D, Combinatorics, Physics and their Interactions , 6(2):239–287, March 2019

work page 2019

[2] [2]

Breuckmann and Jens N

Nikolas P. Breuckmann and Jens N. Eberhardt. Balanced Product Quantum Codes . IEEE Transactions on Information Theory , 67(10):6653--6674, October 2021

work page 2021

[3] [3]

Breuckmann and Jens Niklas Eberhardt

Nikolas P. Breuckmann and Jens Niklas Eberhardt. Quantum Low-Density Parity-Check Codes . PRX Quantum , 2(4), October 2021

2021

[4] [4]

A. R. Calderbank and Peter W. Shor. Good quantum error-correcting codes exist . Physical Review A , 54(2):1098--1105, August 1996

work page 1996

[5] [5]

Locally testable codes with constant rate, distance, and locality

Irit Dinur, Shai Evra, Ron Livne, Alexander Lubotzky, and Shahar Mozes. Locally testable codes with constant rate, distance, and locality. In Proceedings of the 54th Annual ACM SIGACT Symposium on Theory of Computing , STOC ’22, page 357–374. ACM, June 2022

work page 2022

[6] [6]

Building manifolds from quantum codes

Michael Freedman and Matthew Hastings. Building manifolds from quantum codes . Geometric and Functional Analysis , 31(4):855–894, June 2021

work page 2021

[7] [7]

Freedman and David A

Michael H. Freedman and David A. Meyer. Projective Plane and Planar Quantum Codes . Foundations of Computational Mathematics , 1(3):325--332, July 2001

work page 2001

[8] [8]

Freedman, David A

Michael H. Freedman, David A. Meyer, and Feng Luo. Z2-systolic freedom and quantum codes , volume 1. Chapman and Hall/ CRC , Boca Raton, Floride, February 2002

work page 2002