pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.05871 · v2 · submitted 2026-04-07 · 🪐 quant-ph

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Dynamical decoupling and quantum error correction with SU(d) symmetries

Colin Read , Eduardo Serrano-Ens\'astiga , John Martin
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 18:25 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords dynamical decouplingquantum error correctionSU(d) symmetriesquditsKnill-Laflamme conditionsrepresentation theoryqutrit systemsspin-1 systems
0
0 comments X

The pith

Finite subgroups of SU(d) that decouple operators in qudit systems also define quantum error-correcting codes through their one-dimensional symmetry sectors.

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

The paper develops a framework for dynamical decoupling in qudits by identifying finite subgroups of SU(d) whose irreducible representations isolate the relevant operators. It applies this to construct shorter pulse sequences for qutrit interactions and spin-1 systems with zero-field splitting, using subgroup factorizations and orientations. The central unification result states that any such decoupling subgroup automatically supplies codespaces whose one-dimensional sectors obey the Knill-Laflamme conditions. A sympathetic reader sees a single symmetry-based method handling both noise suppression during evolution and protection of encoded information in higher-dimensional systems.

Core claim

Whenever a finite subgroup of SU(d) acts as a decoupling group for the relevant set of operators, the associated one-dimensional symmetry sectors define codespaces satisfying the Knill-Laflamme conditions. The framework extends group-theory methods to higher dimensions by analyzing access to irreducible components of the operator space via Lie-group representation theory, and it yields explicit new protocols for qutrits and spin-1 particles.

What carries the argument

Finite subgroups of SU(d) identified as decoupling groups by their irreducible representations in the operator space, which isolate one-dimensional symmetry sectors usable for both decoupling and coding.

If this is right

  • New pulse sequences for interacting qutrit systems derived from finite subgroups of SU(3).
  • Shorter, more practical decoupling protocols for spin-1 systems with large zero-field splitting obtained via subgroup factorizations.
  • The same symmetry construction supplies quantum error-correcting codes in any multi-level system where the decoupling property holds.
  • Systematic search for decoupling groups across dimensions by checking which finite subgroups access all relevant irreducible operator components.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Hardware already used for dynamical decoupling in qudits could implement the derived codes without new control resources.
  • The unification points toward hybrid protocols that switch between decoupling and active correction using the same group elements.
  • Extensions to other compact Lie groups beyond SU(d) could produce additional families of qudit codes.

Load-bearing premise

That a finite subgroup of SU(d) acting as a decoupling group for a given set of operators directly implies its one-dimensional symmetry sectors satisfy the Knill-Laflamme conditions.

What would settle it

A concrete counter-example: a specific finite subgroup of SU(3) shown to decouple a chosen set of operators on a qutrit yet whose one-dimensional sectors violate the Knill-Laflamme conditions for that error model.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.05871 by Colin Read, Eduardo Serrano-Ens\'astiga, John Martin.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Representation of the conceptual framework. (I) The operator space of the system is decomposed into irreps of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Effect of pulse designs on robustness. Left: when [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Multiplicity of the trivial spin-0 irrep B(0) in the decomposition of B(L) into irreps of the point groups G ∈ {D2, D3, T, O,I} which are subgroups of SO(3). En￾tries shown in green correspond to zero multiplicity, meaning that the associated symmetry is inaccessible, while entries shown in red correspond to nonzero multiplicity, with the corresponding value indicated explicitly. The resulting multipliciti… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Sketch illustrating the role of local group represen [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Fundamental Weyl chamber of SU(3), including its boundary. Each circle represents an irrep of SU(3), labeled by its Dynkin coefficients, with the displayed number giving the multiplicity of the trivial irrep. Green circles correspond to inaccessible symmetries, whereas red circles correspond to accessible symmetries. The irreps appearing in the decomposition of (1, 1)⊗K are surrounded by a colored halo, wh… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: (A) Average distance D¯ in the (τ∆, τΓ) parameter space for an ensemble of three qutrits, averaged over 1000 randomly generated Hamiltonians (see main text). The ”NoDD” curve corresponds to a free evolution of the system under the noise Hamiltonian for a duration equal to that of the shortest sequence, ∆(27)/Z3. (B,C,D) Eulerian sequences used in the simulations. (E) Pulses used in the sequences, as define… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Selection rules may prohibit certain transitions and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: (A,C,E) Multiplicities of the one-dimensional irreps of the finite point groups [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Multiplicities of the one-dimensional irreps of sev [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Average distance in the (τ∆, τ J) parameter space for several orientations of the Σ(36×3)/Z3 DD sequence and for 500 randomly generated Hamiltonian (see main text). The ”NoDD” curve corresponds to a free evolution of dura￾tion equal to total duration of the DD sequence. It should be noted that robustness to finite￾duration errors is not guaranteed, even though the sequence is Eulerian. Indeed, the finite … view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: (A) Average distance in the (τ∆, τ J) parameter space for several orientations of the ∆(24) DD sequence and for 500 randomly generated Hamiltonians (see main text). (B) Representation of the octahedral sequence used in the simulation. Since ∆(24) is inaccessible to the irrep (1, 1), the re￾sulting sequence (depicted in Fig. 11B) is robust to systematic errors in the pulses and finite duration er￾rors due … view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: B) perform very well in a disorder-dominated regime, as the associated Hamiltonian is suppressed on the smallest timescale. We note, however, that these nested sequences lack the robustness of most group-based sequences for several reasons. First, they are generally not ro￾bust to finite duration pulses, as explained in de￾tails in Ref. [65]. The inner layer will be robust to finite-duration pulses only i… view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Representation of a double-driving pulse. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p030_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Decomposition of the tensor product representation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p033_14.png] view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Multiplicity of the one-dimensional irreps of dif [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p034_15.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Dynamical decoupling is a long-established and effective way to suppress unwanted interactions in qubit systems, enabling advances in fields ranging from quantum metrology to quantum computing. For general qudit systems, however, comparable protocols remain rare, mainly because Hamiltonian engineering in higher dimensions lacks the geometric intuition available for qubits. Here we present a general framework for dynamical decoupling in qudit systems, based on Lie group representation theory. By extending the group theory approach to dynamical decoupling, we show how decoupling groups can be systematically identified among the finite subgroups of SU(d) by analyzing their access to the irreducible components of the operator space. As an application, we construct new pulse sequences for interacting qutrit systems based on finite subgroups of SU(3), and show how subgroup factorizations and group orientations can be exploited to obtain shorter and more experimentally practical protocols for spin-1 systems with large zero-field splitting. We further show that the same symmetry-based framework yields quantum error-correcting codes: whenever a finite subgroup of SU(d) acts as a decoupling group for the relevant set of operators, the associated one-dimensional symmetry sectors define codespaces satisfying the Knill-Laflamme conditions, thereby unifying dynamical decoupling and quantum error correction in multi-level quantum systems.

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 paper develops a representation-theoretic framework for dynamical decoupling in qudit systems by identifying finite subgroups of SU(d) that act as decoupling groups through analysis of irreducible components in the operator space. It constructs explicit pulse sequences for interacting qutrit systems and spin-1 systems with zero-field splitting, exploiting subgroup factorizations and orientations. The central claim is that the same finite subgroups yield one-dimensional symmetry sectors that serve as codespaces satisfying the Knill-Laflamme conditions, thereby unifying dynamical decoupling and quantum error correction.

Significance. If the unification holds, the work supplies a systematic, parameter-free method (relying on standard Lie-group representation theory) for designing both decoupling protocols and error-correcting codes in higher-dimensional systems, where geometric intuition is limited. The practical constructions for qutrits and the exploitation of group factorizations for shorter sequences are concrete strengths.

major comments (1)
  1. [§4] §4 (unification of DD and QEC): The claim that a finite subgroup G of SU(d) acting as a decoupling group for a set of operators automatically implies that its one-dimensional symmetry sectors satisfy the Knill-Laflamme conditions is load-bearing for the central unification result. The manuscript states the result but does not derive that group averaging projects the error operators such that ⟨ψ|E_i† E_j |φ⟩ = c_ij ⟨ψ|φ⟩ holds with c_ij state-independent for |ψ⟩, |φ⟩ in the same 1D irrep sector; an explicit step showing how the trivial-representation projection forces the required scalar action on the code subspace is needed.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract and introduction would benefit from a brief concrete example of one of the new qutrit pulse sequences (e.g., the explicit group elements or timing) to illustrate the framework before the general claims.
  2. [§2] Notation for the symmetry sectors and the relevant operator set should be introduced with a short table or diagram in §2 to aid readability when the same objects are reused in the QEC section.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for highlighting the need for greater explicitness in the unification argument. We address the comment below and will revise the manuscript to incorporate an explicit derivation.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§4] §4 (unification of DD and QEC): The claim that a finite subgroup G of SU(d) acting as a decoupling group for a set of operators automatically implies that its one-dimensional symmetry sectors satisfy the Knill-Laflamme conditions is load-bearing for the central unification result. The manuscript states the result but does not derive that group averaging projects the error operators such that ⟨ψ|E_i† E_j |φ⟩ = c_ij ⟨ψ|φ⟩ holds with c_ij state-independent for |ψ⟩, |φ⟩ in the same 1D irrep sector; an explicit step showing how the trivial-representation projection forces the required scalar action on the code subspace is needed.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit derivation would strengthen the presentation of the unification result. Although the connection follows directly from the representation-theoretic setup (group averaging and Schur's lemma), the manuscript presents the implication concisely rather than spelling out every algebraic step. In the revised manuscript we will add a short dedicated paragraph in §4 that derives the Knill-Laflamme condition from the decoupling assumption. The argument proceeds as follows. Let P(E) = (1/|G|) ∑_{g∈G} U(g) E U(g)^† denote the group-average projector onto G-invariant operators. Because G is a decoupling group for the relevant error set, each error E_k satisfies P(E_k) = λ_k I on the one-dimensional symmetry sectors (the code subspaces). For any two states |ψ⟩, |φ⟩ belonging to the same one-dimensional irrep with character χ, the matrix element is invariant under averaging: ⟨ψ| E |φ⟩ = ⟨ψ| P(E) |φ⟩. This holds because U(g)|ψ⟩ = χ(g)|ψ⟩ and U(g)|φ⟩ = χ(g)|φ⟩ imply that each term in the average equals the original matrix element. Since P(E) commutes with every U(g), Schur's lemma guarantees that P(E) acts as multiplication by a scalar λ on the entire one-dimensional irrep. Consequently ⟨ψ| P(E) |φ⟩ = λ ⟨ψ|φ⟩, so ⟨ψ| E |φ⟩ = λ ⟨ψ|φ⟩ with λ independent of the particular states. The same reasoning applies to the composite operators E_i† E_j (which remain within the averaged operator space under the decoupling assumption), yielding the required Knill-Laflamme form with state-independent coefficients c_ij. We will include the full calculation with all intermediate equalities in the revision. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity; derivation self-contained via standard representation theory

full rationale

The paper's central unification claim—that finite SU(d) subgroups acting as decoupling groups yield 1D symmetry sectors satisfying Knill-Laflamme conditions—is presented as a direct consequence of group averaging and irrep decomposition applied to the operator space. No step reduces by definition to its own inputs, renames a fitted parameter as a prediction, or relies on load-bearing self-citation whose content is unverified within the paper. The framework invokes standard Lie-group representation theory (irreducible components, projection onto trivial representation) without smuggling ansatzes or uniqueness theorems from the authors' prior work. The identification of decoupled operators with the error set is an explicit modeling choice, not a hidden tautology, and the resulting code-space property follows from the averaging projector vanishing non-invariant matrix elements on 1D sectors. The derivation is therefore independent of the target result and externally falsifiable against known DD and QEC examples.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The work relies on established mathematical structures from Lie groups and quantum information without introducing new parameters or entities.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Finite subgroups of SU(d) can be systematically identified as decoupling groups by analyzing their access to irreducible components of the operator space.
    This is the core method described for constructing decoupling protocols and codes.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5517 in / 1236 out tokens · 85841 ms · 2026-05-10T18:25:58.477343+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

155 extracted references · 13 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    Quantum sensing

    C. L. Degen, F. Reinhard, and P. Cappel- laro. “Quantum sensing”. Rev. Mod. Phys.89, 035002 (2017)

    2017

  2. [2]

    Quantum computation and quantum informa- tion: 10th anniversary edition

    Michael A. Nielsen and Isaac L. Chuang. “Quantum computation and quantum informa- tion: 10th anniversary edition”. Cambridge University Press. (2010)

    2010

  3. [3]

    Quantum Computing in the NISQ era and beyond

    John Preskill. “Quantum Computing in the NISQ era and beyond”. Quantum2, 79 (2018)

    2018

  4. [4]

    Noisy intermediate-scale quantum algorithms

    Kishor Bharti, Alba Cervera-Lierta, Thi Ha Kyaw, Tobias Haug, Sumner Alperin-Lea, Ab- hinav Anand, Matthias Degroote, Hermanni Heimonen, Jakob S. Kottmann, Tim Menke, Wai-Keong Mok, Sukin Sim, Leong-Chuan Kwek, and Al´ an Aspuru-Guzik. “Noisy intermediate-scale quantum algorithms”. Rev. Mod. Phys.94, 015004 (2022)

    2022

  5. [5]

    Quantum error correction

    Daniel A Lidar and Todd A Brun. “Quantum error correction”. Cambridge university press. (2013)

    2013

  6. [6]

    Quantum error correction for quantum memories

    Barbara M. Terhal. “Quantum error correction for quantum memories”. Rev. Mod. Phys.87, 307–346 (2015)

    2015

  7. [7]

    Spin dynamics: Basics of nuclear magnetic resonance

    Malcom H. Levitt. “Spin dynamics: Basics of nuclear magnetic resonance”. Wiley. (2008). 2 edition

    2008

  8. [8]

    High-sensitivity diamond magnetometer with nanoscale resolution

    J. M. Taylor, P. Cappellaro, L. Childress, L. Jiang, D. Budker, P. R. Hemmer, A. Ya- coby, R. Walsworth, and M. D. Lukin. “High-sensitivity diamond magnetometer with nanoscale resolution”. Nature Physics4, 810–816 (2008)

    2008

  9. [9]

    Quan- tum metrology with strongly interacting spin systems

    Hengyun Zhou, Joonhee Choi, Soonwon Choi, Renate Landig, Alexander M. Douglas, Junichi Isoya, Fedor Jelezko, Shinobu Onoda, Hitoshi Sumiya, Paola Cappellaro, Helena S. Knowles, Hongkun Park, and Mikhail D. Lukin. “Quan- tum metrology with strongly interacting spin systems”. Phys. Rev. X10, 031003 (2020)

    2020

  10. [10]

    Robust higher-order hamiltonian engineering for quan- tum sensing with strongly interacting systems

    Hengyun Zhou, Leigh S. Martin, Matthew Tyler, Oksana Makarova, Nathaniel Leitao, Hongkun Park, and Mikhail D. Lukin. “Robust higher-order hamiltonian engineering for quan- tum sensing with strongly interacting systems”. Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 220803 (2023)

    2023

  11. [11]

    Quantum sensing with a spin ensemble in a two-dimensional material

    Souvik Biswas, Giovanni Scuri, Noah Huff- man, Eric I. Rosenthal, Ruotian Gong, Thomas Poirier, Xingyu Gao, Sumukh Vaidya, Abigail J. Stein, Tsachy Weissman, James H. Edgar, Tongcang Li, Chong Zu, Jelena Vuˇ ckovi´ c, and Joonhee Choi. “Quantum sensing with a spin ensemble in a two-dimensional material” (2025). arXiv:2509.08984

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  12. [12]

    Coherent dynamics of coupled electron and nuclear spin qubits in di- amond

    L Childress, MV Gurudev Dutt, JM Taylor, AS Zibrov, F Jelezko, J Wrachtrup, PR Hem- mer, and MD Lukin. “Coherent dynamics of coupled electron and nuclear spin qubits in di- amond”. Science314, 281–285 (2006)

    2006

  13. [13]

    Quantum register based on individual electronic and nu- clear spin qubits in diamond

    M. V. Gurudev Dutt, L. Childress, L. Jiang, E. Togan, J. Maze, F. Jelezko, A. S. Zibrov, P. R. Hemmer, and M. D. Lukin. “Quantum register based on individual electronic and nu- clear spin qubits in diamond”. Science316, 1312–1316 (2007)

    2007

  14. [14]

    Sensing single remote nu- clear spins

    Nan Zhao, Jan Honert, Bernhard Schmid, Michael Klas, Junichi Isoya, Matthew Markham, Daniel Twitchen, Fedor Jelezko, Ren-Bao Liu, Helmut Fedder, and J¨ org Wrachtrup. “Sensing single remote nu- clear spins”. Nature Nanotechnology7, 657–662 (2012). 34

    2012

  15. [15]

    Sensing distant nuclear spins with a single elec- tron spin

    Shimon Kolkowitz, Quirin P. Unterreithmeier, Steven D. Bennett, and Mikhail D. Lukin. “Sensing distant nuclear spins with a single elec- tron spin”. Phys. Rev. Lett.109, 137601 (2012)

    2012

  16. [16]

    Detection and control of individual nu- clear spins using a weakly coupled electron spin

    T. H. Taminiau, J. J. T. Wagenaar, T. van der Sar, F. Jelezko, V. V. Dobrovitski, and R. Han- son. “Detection and control of individual nu- clear spins using a weakly coupled electron spin”. Phys. Rev. Lett.109, 137602 (2012)

    2012

  17. [17]

    Di- amond NV centers for quantum computing and quantum networks

    Lilian Childress and Ronald Hanson. “Di- amond NV centers for quantum computing and quantum networks”. MRS Bulletin38, 134–138 (2013)

    2013

  18. [18]

    Coherent control of single spins in silicon carbide at room temperature

    Matthias Widmann, Sang-Yun Lee, Torsten Rendler, Nguyen Tien Son, Helmut Fedder, Seoyoung Paik, Li-Ping Yang, Nan Zhao, Sen Yang, Ian Booker, Andrej Denisenko, Moham- mad Jamali, S. Ali Momenzadeh, Ilja Gerhardt, Takeshi Ohshima, Adam Gali, Erik Janz´ en, and J¨ org Wrachtrup. “Coherent control of single spins in silicon carbide at room temperature”. Natu...

    2015

  19. [19]

    Dynami- cal decoupling for superconducting qubits: A performance survey

    Nic Ezzell, Bibek Pokharel, Lina Tewala, Gre- gory Quiroz, and Daniel A. Lidar. “Dynami- cal decoupling for superconducting qubits: A performance survey”. Phys. Rev. Appl.20, 064027 (2023)

    2023

  20. [20]

    Experimen- tal uhrig dynamical decoupling using trapped ions

    Michael J. Biercuk, Hermann Uys, Aaron P. VanDevender, Nobuyasu Shiga, Wayne M. Itano, and John J. Bollinger. “Experimen- tal uhrig dynamical decoupling using trapped ions”. Phys. Rev. A79, 062324 (2009)

    2009

  21. [21]

    Optimized dy- namical decoupling in a model quantum mem- ory

    Michael J. Biercuk, Hermann Uys, Aaron P. VanDevender, Nobuyasu Shiga, Wayne M. Itano, and John J. Bollinger. “Optimized dy- namical decoupling in a model quantum mem- ory”. Nature458, 996–1000 (2009)

    2009

  22. [22]

    Multi-ion frequency reference using dynamical decoupling

    Lennart Pelzer, Kai Dietze, V´ ıctor Jos´ e Mart´ ınez-Lahuerta, Ludwig Krinner, Johannes Kramer, Fabian Dawel, Nicolas C. H. Speth- mann, Klemens Hammerer, and Piet O. Schmidt. “Multi-ion frequency reference using dynamical decoupling”. Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 033203 (2024)

    2024

  23. [23]

    Quan- tum computing with circular rydberg atoms

    Sam R. Cohen and Jeff D. Thompson. “Quan- tum computing with circular rydberg atoms”. PRX Quantum2, 030322 (2021)

    2021

  24. [24]

    A quantum processor based on coherent transport of entan- gled atom arrays

    Dolev Bluvstein, Harry Levine, Giulia Semegh- ini, Tout T. Wang, Sepehr Ebadi, Marcin Kali- nowski, Alexander Keesling, Nishad Maskara, Hannes Pichler, Markus Greiner, Vladan Vuleti´ c, and Mikhail D. Lukin. “A quantum processor based on coherent transport of entan- gled atom arrays”. Nature604, 451–456 (2022)

    2022

  25. [25]

    Coherence of a dynamically decoupled single neutral atom

    Chang Hoong Chow, Boon Long Ng, and Chris- tian Kurtsiefer. “Coherence of a dynamically decoupled single neutral atom”. J. Opt. Soc. Am. B38, 621–629 (2021)

    2021

  26. [26]

    Simplifying quantum logic using higher-dimensional Hilbert spaces

    Ben Lanyon, Marco Barbieri, Marcelo Almeida, Thomas Jennewein, Timothy Ralph, Kevin Resch, Geoff Pryde, Jeremy O’Brien, Alexei Gilchrist, and Andrew White. “Simplifying quantum logic using higher-dimensional Hilbert spaces”. Nat. Phys.5(2009)

    2009

  27. [27]

    Qudits and high-dimensional quantum computing

    Yuchen Wang, Zixuan Hu, Barry C. Sanders, and Sabre Kais. “Qudits and high-dimensional quantum computing”. Frontiers in Physics8, 589504 (2020)

    2020

  28. [28]

    Em- ulation of a Quantum Spin with a Supercon- ducting Phase Qudit

    Matthew Neeley, Markus Ansmann, Ra- doslaw C. Bialczak, Max Hofheinz, Erik Lucero, Aaron D. O’Connell, Daniel Sank, Haohua Wang, James Wenner, Andrew N. Cleland, Michael R. Geller, and John M. Martinis. “Em- ulation of a Quantum Spin with a Supercon- ducting Phase Qudit”. Science325, 722 (2009)

    2009

  29. [29]

    Digital Quantum Simulation of a (1+1)D SU(2) Lattice Gauge Theory with Ion Qudits

    Giuseppe Calaj´ o, Giuseppe Magnifico, Claire Edmunds, Martin Ringbauer, Simone Mon- tangero, and Pietro Silvi. “Digital Quantum Simulation of a (1+1)D SU(2) Lattice Gauge Theory with Ion Qudits”. PRX Quantum5, 040309 (2024)

    2024

  30. [30]

    Variational quan- tum simulation of U(1) lattice gauge theo- ries with qudit systems

    Pavel P. Popov, Michael Meth, Maciej Lewest- ein, Philipp Hauke, Martin Ringbauer, Erez Zo- har, and Valentin Kasper. “Variational quan- tum simulation of U(1) lattice gauge theo- ries with qudit systems”. Phys. Rev. Res.6, 013202 (2024)

    2024

  31. [31]

    Quantum simulation of Fermi-Hubbard model based on transmon qu- dit interaction

    Arian Vezvaee, Nathan Earnest-Noble, and Khadijeh Najafi. “Quantum simulation of Fermi-Hubbard model based on transmon qu- dit interaction” (2024). arXiv:2402.01243

    work page arXiv 2024

  32. [32]

    Encoding a qubit in an oscillator

    Daniel Gottesman, Alexei Kitaev, and John Preskill. “Encoding a qubit in an oscillator”. Phys. Rev. A64, 012310 (2001)

    2001

  33. [33]

    Quantum stabilizer codes embed- ding qubits into qudits

    Carlo Cafaro, Federico Maiolini, and Stefano Mancini. “Quantum stabilizer codes embed- ding qubits into qudits”. Phys. Rev. A86, 022308 (2012)

    2012

  34. [34]

    Over- coming erasure errors with multilevel systems

    Sreraman Muralidharan, Chang-Ling Zou, Lin- shu Li, Jianming Wen, and Liang Jiang. “Over- coming erasure errors with multilevel systems”. New Journal of Physics19, 013026 (2017)

    2017

  35. [35]

    Robust encoding of a qubit in a molecule

    Victor V. Albert, Jacob P. Covey, and John Preskill. “Robust encoding of a qubit in a molecule”. Phys. Rev. X10, 031050 (2020)

    2020

  36. [36]

    Designing codes around interactions: The case of a spin

    Jonathan A. Gross. “Designing codes around interactions: The case of a spin”. Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 010504 (2021). 35

    2021

  37. [37]

    Hardware- efficient error-correcting codes for large nuclear spins

    Jonathan A. Gross, Cl´ ement Godfrin, Alexan- dre Blais, and Eva Dupont-Ferrier. “Hardware- efficient error-correcting codes for large nuclear spins”. Phys. Rev. Appl.22, 014006 (2024)

    2024

  38. [38]

    Fault-tolerant qubit encoding using a spin-7/2 qudit

    Sumin Lim, Junjie Liu, and Arzhang Ardavan. “Fault-tolerant qubit encoding using a spin-7/2 qudit”. Phys. Rev. A108, 062403 (2023)

    2023

  39. [39]

    Design- ing quantum error correction codes for prac- tical spin qudit systems

    Sumin Lim and Arzhang Ardavan. “Design- ing quantum error correction codes for prac- tical spin qudit systems”. Phys. Rev. A112, 022418 (2025)

    2025

  40. [40]

    Qudit-based quantum error-correcting codes from irreducible representations of SU(d)

    Robert Frederik Uy and Dorian A. Gangloff. “Qudit-based quantum error-correcting codes from irreducible representations of SU(d)”. Phys. Rev. A112, 042402 (2025)

    2025

  41. [41]

    Native qudit entanglement in a trapped ion quantum processor

    Pavel Hrmo, Benjamin Wilhelm, Lukas Gerster, Martin W. van Mourik, Marcus Huber, Rainer Blatt, Philipp Schindler, Thomas Monz, and Martin Ringbauer. “Native qudit entanglement in a trapped ion quantum processor”. Nature Communications14, 2242 (2023)

    2023

  42. [42]

    A universal qu- dit quantum processor with trapped ions

    Martin Ringbauer, Michael Meth, Lukas Postler, Roman Stricker, Rainer Blatt, Philipp Schindler, and Thomas Monz. “A universal qu- dit quantum processor with trapped ions”. Na- ture Physics18, 1053 (2022)

    2022

  43. [43]

    High-fidelity qutrit entangling gates for superconducting circuits

    Noah Goss, Alexis Morvan, Brian Marinelli, Bradley K. Mitchell, Long B. Nguyen, Ravi K. Naik, Larry Chen, Christian J¨ unger, John Mark Kreikebaum, David I. Santiago, Joel J. Wall- man, and Irfan Siddiqi. “High-fidelity qutrit entangling gates for superconducting circuits”. Nature Communications13, 7481 (2022)

    2022

  44. [44]

    Quan- tum control and measurement of atomic spins in polarization spectroscopy

    Ivan H. Deutsch and Poul S. Jessen. “Quan- tum control and measurement of atomic spins in polarization spectroscopy”. Optics Commu- nications283, 681–694 (2010)

    2010

  45. [45]

    Quantum optimal control of ten-level nuclear spin qudits in 87Sr

    Sivaprasad Omanakuttan, Anupam Mitra, Michael J. Martin, and Ivan H. Deutsch. “Quantum optimal control of ten-level nuclear spin qudits in 87Sr”. Phys. Rev. A104, L060401 (2021)

    2021

  46. [46]

    Effects of dif- fusion on free precession in nuclear magnetic resonance experiments

    H. Y. Carr and E. M. Purcell. “Effects of dif- fusion on free precession in nuclear magnetic resonance experiments”. Phys. Rev.94, 630– 638 (1954)

    1954

  47. [47]

    Dynamical sup- pression of decoherence in two-state quantum systems

    Lorenza Viola and Seth Lloyd. “Dynamical sup- pression of decoherence in two-state quantum systems”. Phys. Rev. A58, 2733–2744 (1998)

    1998

  48. [48]

    Qudit-generalization of the qubit echo and its application to a qutrit-based tof- foli gate

    Yutaro Iiyama, Wonho Jang, Naoki Kanazawa, Ryu Sawada, Tamiya Onodera, and Koji Terashi. “Qudit-generalization of the qubit echo and its application to a qutrit-based tof- foli gate” (2024). arXiv:2405.14752

    work page arXiv 2024

  49. [49]

    Qudit dynamical decoupling on a su- perconducting quantum processor

    Vinay Tripathi, Noah Goss, Arian Vezvaee, Long B. Nguyen, Irfan Siddiqi, and Daniel A. Lidar. “Qudit dynamical decoupling on a su- perconducting quantum processor”. Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 050601 (2025)

    2025

  50. [50]

    Dynamical decoupling of open quantum sys- tems

    Lorenza Viola, Emanuel Knill, and Seth Lloyd. “Dynamical decoupling of open quantum sys- tems”. Phys. Rev. Lett.82, 2417–2421 (1999)

    1999

  51. [51]

    Robust dy- namical decoupling of quantum systems with bounded controls

    Lorenza Viola and Emanuel Knill. “Robust dy- namical decoupling of quantum systems with bounded controls”. Phys. Rev. Lett.90, 037901 (2003)

    2003

  52. [52]

    Simulating hamilto- nians in quantum networks: Efficient schemes and complexity bounds

    Pawel Wocjan, Martin R¨ otteler, Dominik Janz- ing, and Thomas Beth. “Simulating hamilto- nians in quantum networks: Efficient schemes and complexity bounds”. Phys. Rev. A65, 042309 (2002)

    2002

  53. [53]

    Efficient decoupling schemes with bounded controls based on eulerian orthog- onal arrays

    Pawel Wocjan. “Efficient decoupling schemes with bounded controls based on eulerian orthog- onal arrays”. Phys. Rev. A73, 062317 (2006)

    2006

  54. [54]

    Equivalence of de- coupling schemes and orthogonal arrays

    M. Rotteler and P. Wocjan. “Equivalence of de- coupling schemes and orthogonal arrays”. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory52, 4171– 4181 (2006)

    2006

  55. [55]

    Combi- natorial approaches to dynamical decoupling

    Martin R¨ otteler and Pawel Wocjan. “Combi- natorial approaches to dynamical decoupling”. Page 376–394. Cambridge University Press. (2013)

    2013

  56. [56]

    Dynamical engineering of interactions in qudit ensembles

    Soonwon Choi, Norman Y. Yao, and Mikhail D. Lukin. “Dynamical engineering of interactions in qudit ensembles”. Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 183603 (2017)

    2017

  57. [57]

    Approach to High-Resolution nmr in Solids

    J. S. Waugh, L. M. Huber, and U. Haeberlen. “Approach to High-Resolution nmr in Solids”. Phys. Rev. Lett.20, 180 (1968)

    1968

  58. [58]

    Robust hamiltonian engi- neering for interacting qudit systems

    Hengyun Zhou, Haoyang Gao, Nathaniel T. Leitao, Oksana Makarova, Iris Cong, Alexan- der M. Douglas, Leigh S. Martin, and Mikhail D. Lukin. “Robust hamiltonian engi- neering for interacting qudit systems”. Phys. Rev. X14, 031017 (2024)

    2024

  59. [59]

    Lie groups, lie algebras, and representations : An elementary introduction

    Brian C. Hall. “Lie groups, lie algebras, and representations : An elementary introduction”. Springer Cham. (2015)

    2015

  60. [60]

    Representation theory: a first course

    William Fulton and Joe Harris. “Representation theory: a first course”. Volume 129. Springer Science & Business Media. (2013)

    2013

  61. [61]

    Scaling and time reversal of spin couplings in zero-field nmr

    A. Llor, Z. Olejniczak, J. Sachleben, and A. Pines. “Scaling and time reversal of spin couplings in zero-field nmr”. Phys. Rev. Lett. 67, 1989–1992 (1991)

    1989

  62. [62]

    Co- herent isotropic averaging in zero-field nuclear 36 magnetic resonance. i. general theory and icosa- hedral sequences

    A. Llor, Z. Olejniczak, and A. Pines. “Co- herent isotropic averaging in zero-field nuclear 36 magnetic resonance. i. general theory and icosa- hedral sequences”. The Journal of Chemical Physics103, 3966–3981 (1995)

    1995

  63. [63]

    Coherent isotropic averaging in zero-field nuclear mag- netic resonance. ii. cubic sequences and time- reversal of spin couplings

    A. Llor, Z. Olejniczak, and A. Pines. “Coherent isotropic averaging in zero-field nuclear mag- netic resonance. ii. cubic sequences and time- reversal of spin couplings”. The Journal of Chemical Physics103, 3982–3997 (1995)

    1995

  64. [64]

    Platonic dynamical decoupling sequences for interacting spin systems

    Colin Read, Eduardo Serrano-Ens´ astiga, and John Martin. “Platonic dynamical decoupling sequences for interacting spin systems”. Quan- tum9, 1661 (2025)

    2025

  65. [65]

    Dynamical decoupling of inter- acting spins through group factorization

    Colin Read, Eduardo Serrano-Ens´ astiga, and John Martin. “Dynamical decoupling of inter- acting spins through group factorization”. Phys. Rev. A112, 042601 (2025)

    2025

  66. [66]

    Spin echoes

    E. L. Hahn. “Spin echoes”. Phys. Rev.80, 580– 594 (1950)

    1950

  67. [67]

    Symmetry-based pulse sequences in magic-angle spinning solid-state nmr

    Malcolm H. Levitt. “Symmetry-based pulse sequences in magic-angle spinning solid-state nmr”. John Wiley and Sons, Ltd. (2007)

    2007

  68. [68]

    Five decades of homonuclear dipolar decoupling in solid-state nmr: Status and out- look

    Kaustubh R. Mote, Vipin Agarwal, and P.K. Madhu. “Five decades of homonuclear dipolar decoupling in solid-state nmr: Status and out- look”. Progress in Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy97, 1–39 (2016)

    2016

  69. [69]

    Symmetrizing evolutions

    Paolo Zanardi. “Symmetrizing evolutions”. Physics Letters A258, 77–82 (1999)

    1999

  70. [70]

    Opti- mized dynamical decoupling via genetic algo- rithms

    Gregory Quiroz and Daniel A. Lidar. “Opti- mized dynamical decoupling via genetic algo- rithms”. Phys. Rev. A88, 052306 (2013)

    2013

  71. [71]

    Deep reinforcement learning for quantum hamiltonian engineering

    Pai Peng, Xiaoyang Huang, Chao Yin, Linta Joseph, Chandrasekhar Ramanathan, and Paola Cappellaro. “Deep reinforcement learning for quantum hamiltonian engineering”. Phys. Rev. Appl.18, 024033 (2022)

    2022

  72. [72]

    Near-limit quantum control be- yond analytic tractability in many-body spin systems

    Jixing Zhang, Bo Peng, Yang Wang, Cheuk Kit Cheung, Guodong Bian, Hualuo Pang, An- drew M. Edmonds, Matthew Markham, Zhe Zhao, Yuan Hou, Durga Bhaktavatsala Rao Dasari, Ruoming Peng, Ye Wei, and J¨ org Wrachtrup. “Near-limit quantum control be- yond analytic tractability in many-body spin systems” (2026). arXiv:2510.07802

    work page arXiv 2026

  73. [73]

    Robust dynamic hamilto- nian engineering of many-body spin systems

    Joonhee Choi, Hengyun Zhou, Helena S. Knowles, Renate Landig, Soonwon Choi, and Mikhail D. Lukin. “Robust dynamic hamilto- nian engineering of many-body spin systems”. Phys. Rev. X10, 031002 (2020)

    2020

  74. [74]

    Higher-order methods for hamiltonian engi- neering pulse sequence design

    Matthew Tyler, Hengyun Zhou, Leigh S. Mar- tin, Nathaniel Leitao, and Mikhail D. Lukin. “Higher-order methods for hamiltonian engi- neering pulse sequence design”. Phys. Rev. A 108, 062602 (2023)

    2023

  75. [75]

    Resource-efficient context-aware dynamical decoupling embedding for arbitrary large-scale quantum algorithms

    Paul Coote, Roman Dimov, Smarak Maity, Gavin S. Hartnett, Michael J. Biercuk, and Yu- val Baum. “Resource-efficient context-aware dynamical decoupling embedding for arbitrary large-scale quantum algorithms”. PRX Quan- tum6, 010332 (2025)

    2025

  76. [76]

    Color it, code it, cancel it: k-local dynamical decoupling from classical additive codes

    Minh T. P. Nguyen, Maximilian Rimbach-Russ, and Stefano Bosco. “Color it, code it, cancel it: k-local dynamical decoupling from classical additive codes” (2025). arXiv:2508.08213

    work page arXiv 2025

  77. [77]

    Keeping a quantum bit alive by optimizedπ-pulse sequences

    G¨ otz S. Uhrig. “Keeping a quantum bit alive by optimizedπ-pulse sequences”. Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 100504 (2007)

    2007

  78. [78]

    Optimized noise filtration through dynamical decoupling

    Hermann Uys, Michael J. Biercuk, and John J. Bollinger. “Optimized noise filtration through dynamical decoupling”. Phys. Rev. Lett.103, 040501 (2009)

    2009

  79. [79]

    Near-optimal dynamical decoupling of a qubit

    Jacob R. West, Bryan H. Fong, and Daniel A. Lidar. “Near-optimal dynamical decoupling of a qubit”. Phys. Rev. Lett.104, 130501 (2010)

    2010

  80. [80]

    Cyclicity of interaction-frame transforma- tions

    Michael C. D. Tayler and Mohamed Sabba. “Cyclicity of interaction-frame transforma- tions”. Phys. Rev. A112, 052432 (2025)

    2025

Showing first 80 references.