pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.17140 · v1 · pith:EFEQR5BXnew · submitted 2026-06-15 · 🪐 quant-ph · cond-mat.dis-nn· cond-mat.mes-hall· cond-mat.stat-mech

Projected logical ensembles in surface codes via the random-matrix theory of quantum dots

Mircea Bejan , Jan Behrends , Max McGinley , Benjamin B\'eri This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-27 03:39 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph cond-mat.dis-nncond-mat.mes-hallcond-mat.stat-mech
keywords surface codesprojected logical ensemblequantum error correctionrandom matrix theoryMajorana networksscattering matricesAltland-Zirnbauer classes
0
0 comments X

The pith

Surface code post-measurement logical states form ensembles isomorphic to quantum dot scattering matrices.

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

The paper shows that measurements in surface code quantum error correction, after decoding, produce logical state ensembles whose statistics are identical to those of scattering matrices in a model of mesoscopic quantum dots. This isomorphism holds for codes with one logical qubit under transversal Pauli-X rotations. In chaotic regimes of the dot model, the ensemble becomes universal within random matrix theory, subject to symmetry constraints from the code. This matters because it ties together ideas from quantum error correction, measurement-induced phases, and established universality classes in condensed matter systems.

Core claim

For a surface code with a single logical qubit, the projected logical ensemble is isomorphic to an ensemble of scattering matrices describing mesoscopic quantum dots from a 2D Majorana network model with suitable boundary conditions. In chaotic regimes, the PLE approaches a universal ensemble that is maximally random up to symmetry and decoder-induced constraints, realizing Altland-Zirnbauer classes D or DIII.

What carries the argument

The isomorphism between the Born-weighted post-measurement ensemble after maximum-likelihood decoding and the scattering-matrix ensemble of the 2D Majorana network model.

If this is right

  • The PLE becomes maximally random in chaotic regimes, limited only by the code's symmetries.
  • Symmetry classes D or DIII emerge based on the weights of stabilizers and logical operators.
  • This connection applies specifically to uniform single-qubit Pauli-X rotations on the surface code.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Experiments on quantum dots could be used to probe properties of logical ensembles in QEC.
  • The mapping suggests that universality in one domain implies similar behavior in the other, potentially allowing cross-domain predictions.
  • Similar isomorphisms might exist for other codes or gate sets, extending the connection beyond surface codes.

Load-bearing premise

The Born-weighted post-measurement ensemble after maximum-likelihood decoding on the surface code is exactly isomorphic to the scattering-matrix ensemble of the 2D Majorana network model with the chosen boundary conditions.

What would settle it

Measuring the statistical distribution of logical Pauli operators or state fidelities in a surface code experiment and finding it inconsistent with the predicted random matrix ensemble in the chaotic limit would falsify the claimed isomorphism.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.17140 by Benjamin B\'eri, Jan Behrends, Max McGinley, Mircea Bejan.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Overview of results. (a): Surface code on honeycomb, square, and triangular lattices with qubits (black disks) on [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. (a): Mapping the sum over stabilizer configurations [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: as the leads of the dot, we then find the dot’s scattering matrix [see also [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: (a), for lattices with even coordination number, the arrows in a whole network can be consistently matched, such that a direct construction of a charge-conserving network model is possible without the doubling described in Sec. V A. If one were to do the doubling anyway, one [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Bulk conductivity [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Emergent chaotic quantum dot and projected logical ensemble of the honeycomb surface code under coherent rotations. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Projected logical ensemble [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. (a) Majorana mode (black cross) acting on an empty [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. Wasserstein-1 distance [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12. Bulk conductivity [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: FIG. 13. Emergent chaotic quantum dot and projected logical ensemble of the honeycomb surface code under partial Pauli [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: FIG. 14. Emergent chaotic quantum dot and projected logical ensemble of the triangular surface code under coherent rotations. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_14.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Measurements underpin active quantum error correction (QEC) and have been recognized as a source of novel measurement-induced many-body phenomena. Here, we study the statistical properties of post-measurement logical states arising in QEC on topological codes subject to deterministic transversal unitary gates. Upon syndrome extraction followed by maximum-likelihood decoding, a Born-weighted ensemble arises which we dub the "projected logical ensemble" (PLE). Focusing on surface codes subject to uniform single-qubit Pauli-$X$ rotations, we characterize the measurement-induced randomness of the PLE. To this end, we show that for a code with a single logical qubit, the PLE is isomorphic to an ensemble of scattering matrices describing mesoscopic quantum dots obtained from a 2D Majorana network model with suitable boundary conditions. We uncover regimes where these quantum dots are chaotic such that their scattering matrices are well-described by random matrix theory. In these regimes, the PLE approaches a universal ensemble that is maximally random up to symmetry and decoder-induced constraints. The symmetry constraints, set by stabilizer and logical operator weights, realize Altland-Zirnbauer classes D or DIII, which we both illustrate. Our results establish a fundamental connection between emergent universality concepts in mesoscopic physics, quantum many-body systems, and QEC.

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

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript defines the projected logical ensemble (PLE) as the Born-weighted post-measurement ensemble of logical states after syndrome extraction and maximum-likelihood decoding in surface codes under uniform single-qubit Pauli-X rotations. It claims that for a single-logical-qubit surface code the PLE is isomorphic to the scattering-matrix ensemble of a 2D Majorana network model with suitable boundary conditions, and that in chaotic regimes this ensemble approaches a universal random-matrix-theory form respecting Altland-Zirnbauer classes D or DIII set by the stabilizer and logical-operator weights.

Significance. If the claimed isomorphism holds exactly, the work supplies a concrete bridge between measurement-induced ensembles in topological quantum error correction and the established random-matrix theory of mesoscopic quantum dots. The explicit realization of symmetry classes D and DIII through decoder constraints is a concrete strength that could allow transfer of RMT universality results to logical-state statistics.

major comments (2)
  1. [The isomorphism claim (abstract and the section introducing the Majorana network model)] The exact isomorphism between the Born-weighted PLE (after maximum-likelihood decoding) and the scattering-matrix ensemble of the 2D Majorana network is the load-bearing step for the RMT connection. The section presenting the mapping must demonstrate that the chosen boundary conditions preserve the precise stabilizer and logical-operator weights that enforce the Altland-Zirnbauer class D or DIII constraints; any mismatch would invalidate the subsequent claim that the PLE approaches the universal ensemble in chaotic regimes.
  2. [The section on chaotic regimes and universal ensembles] The assertion that the PLE 'approaches a universal ensemble' in chaotic regimes requires explicit verification that the surface-code measurement outcomes map onto the network scattering matrices without additional fitting parameters or regime restrictions. The relevant section should include either an analytic derivation or numerical checks confirming that the symmetry constraints are identical.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Introduction or methods] The definition of the PLE would benefit from an explicit mathematical expression for the Born-weighted probability distribution over logical states.
  2. [Figures] Figure captions should clarify which panels correspond to class D versus class DIII and which decoder is used.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for highlighting the importance of explicit demonstrations in the mapping and chaotic-regime sections. We address each major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [The isomorphism claim (abstract and the section introducing the Majorana network model)] The exact isomorphism between the Born-weighted PLE (after maximum-likelihood decoding) and the scattering-matrix ensemble of the 2D Majorana network is the load-bearing step for the RMT connection. The section presenting the mapping must demonstrate that the chosen boundary conditions preserve the precise stabilizer and logical-operator weights that enforce the Altland-Zirnbauer class D or DIII constraints; any mismatch would invalidate the subsequent claim that the PLE approaches the universal ensemble in chaotic regimes.

    Authors: We agree that the boundary conditions must be shown to preserve the exact stabilizer and logical-operator weights. In the revised manuscript we have expanded the Majorana-network section with explicit derivations that map the surface-code stabilizers and logical operators onto the network boundaries, confirming that the parity and weight constraints required for classes D and DIII are identically reproduced. These additions remove any ambiguity in the isomorphism. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [The section on chaotic regimes and universal ensembles] The assertion that the PLE 'approaches a universal ensemble' in chaotic regimes requires explicit verification that the surface-code measurement outcomes map onto the network scattering matrices without additional fitting parameters or regime restrictions. The relevant section should include either an analytic derivation or numerical checks confirming that the symmetry constraints are identical.

    Authors: We accept the request for explicit verification. The revised manuscript now includes both an analytic argument establishing the parameter-free correspondence between measurement outcomes and scattering matrices, and numerical checks on small lattices that confirm the symmetry classes remain identical in the chaotic regime. These results are presented in the updated chaotic-regimes section. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: PLE-RMT isomorphism presented as derived mapping

full rationale

The paper states it shows an isomorphism between the projected logical ensemble (after syndrome extraction and maximum-likelihood decoding) and the scattering-matrix ensemble of a 2D Majorana network model. This is framed as a connection to an independently studied RMT ensemble (Altland-Zirnbauer classes), not as a definition, fit, or self-citation reduction. No equations or steps in the provided abstract reduce the result to its inputs by construction, and the reader's assessment notes absence of fitted-parameter or loop issues. The derivation is treated as self-contained against external RMT benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 1 invented entities

The paper introduces the PLE as a new named object and maps it onto an existing Majorana-network model whose chaotic limit is already known to obey RMT. No free parameters are mentioned. The mapping itself rests on domain assumptions from QEC and mesoscopic physics.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Random matrix theory describes the scattering matrices of chaotic quantum dots in the appropriate Altland-Zirnbauer classes.
    Invoked when the abstract states that the PLE approaches the universal ensemble in chaotic regimes.
  • domain assumption The surface-code syndrome extraction plus maximum-likelihood decoding produces a Born-weighted ensemble that admits an exact isomorphism to the chosen Majorana network model.
    This is the load-bearing mapping asserted in the abstract.
invented entities (1)
  • Projected logical ensemble (PLE) no independent evidence
    purpose: To name and study the statistical distribution of post-measurement logical states after decoding.
    New term coined in the abstract to denote the Born-weighted ensemble arising from the QEC process.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5778 in / 1543 out tokens · 77953 ms · 2026-06-27T03:39:13.063697+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

179 extracted references · 11 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    maximally entropic

    Wasserstein-1 distance Here, we compare the logical ensemble E [Eq. (7)] with the Haar ensemble over the upper Bloch hemisphere E ∗ H, which is the appropriate “maximally entropic” ensemble within the constraints given by symmetry class DIII, max- imum likelihood decoder, and initial state |0⟩ [Sec. V D]. For convenience, we compare, using the Wasserstein...

  2. [2]

    max- imally entropic

    Logical state designs Here, we consider a closely related logical ensemble E ′. To construct E ′, after applying the correction operation Cs according to the maximum likelihood decoder [cf. Sec. III A], we apply with probability 1 /2 a logical X. Hence, the states in E ′ can be anywhere on the Bloch sphere for symmetry class DIII, unlike those in E, which...

  3. [3]

    V B [see Eq

    Construction from the effective Gaussian tensor Here, we derive in more detail the scattering matrix of the quantum dot discussed in Sec. V B [see Eq. (29)]. By considering the single-particle action of ˜Ms [Eq. (23)], which we reproduce here for convenience ˜Ms = cos θs 2 (1 +iγ 1γ2) + sin θs 2 eiφs(1−iγ 1γ2)√ 2 ,(E1) we first construct the transfer matr...

  4. [4]

    partial Pauli twirling

    Isomorphism with the final state correlation matrix Since |ϕs⟩ [Eq. (20)] is an unnormalized Gaussian state, it is instructive to consider its correlation matrix. Again switching to Majoranas via χ2j−1 = (Q k<j τ x k )τ z j , χ2j = (Q k<j τ x k )τ y j for j = 1, . . . ,4, the corresponding cor- relation matrix Γ (χ) s,jk = i 2 ⟨ϕs|[χj, χk]|ϕs⟩/⟨ϕ s|ϕs⟩rea...

  5. [5]

    P. W. Shor, Phys. Rev. A52, R2493 (1995)

    1995

  6. [6]

    A. R. Calderbank and P. W. Shor, Phys. Rev. A54, 1098 (1996)

    1996

  7. [7]

    A. M. Steane, Phys. Rev. Lett.77, 793 (1996)

    1996

  8. [8]

    Gottesman, arXiv:quant-ph/9705052 (1997)

    D. Gottesman, arXiv:quant-ph/9705052 (1997)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  9. [9]

    Aharonov and M

    D. Aharonov and M. Ben-Or, SIAM J. Comp.38, 1207 (2008)

    2008

  10. [10]

    Knill, R

    E. Knill, R. Laflamme, and W. H. Zurek, Proc. R. Soc. A454, 365–384 (1998)

    1998

  11. [11]

    S. B. Bravyi and A. Y. Kitaev, arXiv:quant-ph/9811052 (1998)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  12. [12]

    Dennis, A

    E. Dennis, A. Kitaev, A. Landahl, and J. Preskill, J. Math. Phys.43, 4452 (2002)

    2002

  13. [13]

    Kitaev, Ann

    A. Kitaev, Ann. Phys.303, 2 (2003). 22

    2003

  14. [14]

    Gottesman, A

    D. Gottesman, A. Kitaev, and J. Preskill, Phys. Rev. A 64, 012310 (2001)

    2001

  15. [15]

    N. P. Breuckmann and J. N. Eberhardt, PRX Quantum 2, 040101 (2021)

    2021

  16. [16]

    B. M. Terhal, Rev. Mod. Phys.87, 307 (2015)

    2015

  17. [17]

    M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang,Quantum Computa- tion and Quantum Information(CUP, Cambridge, U.K., 2010)

    2010

  18. [18]

    Ryan-Andersonet al., Phys

    C. Ryan-Andersonet al., Phys. Rev. X11, 041058 (2021)

    2021

  19. [19]

    Krinneret al., Nature605, 669–674 (2022)

    S. Krinneret al., Nature605, 669–674 (2022)

    2022

  20. [20]

    G. Q. AI, Nature614, 676 (2023)

    2023

  21. [21]

    Bluvsteinet al., Nature626, 58–65 (2023)

    D. Bluvsteinet al., Nature626, 58–65 (2023)

    2023

  22. [22]

    Acharyaet al., Nature638, 920–926 (2024)

    R. Acharyaet al., Nature638, 920–926 (2024)

    2024

  23. [23]

    Bluvsteinet al., Nature649, 39 (2026), [Erratum: Nature 650, E3 (2026)]

    D. Bluvsteinet al., Nature649, 39 (2026), [Erratum: Nature 650, E3 (2026)]

    2026

  24. [24]

    Dasuet al., arXiv:2602.22211 (2026)

    S. Dasuet al., arXiv:2602.22211 (2026)

    arXiv 2026

  25. [25]

    Gottesman and I

    D. Gottesman and I. L. Chuang, Nature402, 390–393 (1999)

    1999

  26. [26]

    Raussendorf and H

    R. Raussendorf and H. J. Briegel, Phys. Rev. Lett.86, 5188 (2001)

    2001

  27. [27]

    Bravyi and A

    S. Bravyi and A. Kitaev, Phys. Rev. A71, 022316 (2005)

    2005

  28. [28]

    Horsman, A

    D. Horsman, A. G. Fowler, S. Devitt, and R. V. Meter, New J. Phys.14, 123011 (2012)

    2012

  29. [29]

    Skinner, J

    B. Skinner, J. Ruhman, and A. Nahum, Phys. Rev. X9, 031009 (2019)

    2019

  30. [30]

    Y. Li, X. Chen, and M. P. A. Fisher, Phys. Rev. B98, 205136 (2018)

    2018

  31. [31]

    Y. Li, X. Chen, and M. P. A. Fisher, Phys. Rev. B100, 134306 (2019)

    2019

  32. [32]

    S. Choi, Y. Bao, X.-L. Qi, and E. Altman, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 030505 (2020)

    2020

  33. [33]

    M. J. Gullans and D. A. Huse, Phys. Rev. X10, 041020 (2020)

    2020

  34. [34]

    Ippoliti, M

    M. Ippoliti, M. J. Gullans, S. Gopalakrishnan, D. A. Huse, and V. Khemani, Phys. Rev. X11, 011030 (2021)

    2021

  35. [35]

    M. P. A. Fisher, V. Khemani, A. Nahum, and S. Vijay, Ann. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys.14, 1 (2023)

    2023

  36. [36]

    C.-M. Jian, B. Bauer, A. Keselman, and A. W. W. Lud- wig, Phys. Rev. B106, 134206 (2022)

    2022

  37. [37]

    J. S. Cotler, D. K. Mark, H.-Y. Huang, F. Hern´ andez, J. Choi, A. L. Shaw, M. Endres, and S. Choi, PRX Quantum4, 010311 (2023)

    2023

  38. [38]

    Choiet al., Nature613, 468–473 (2023)

    J. Choiet al., Nature613, 468–473 (2023)

    2023

  39. [39]

    W. W. Ho and S. Choi, Phys. Rev. Lett.128, 060601 (2022)

    2022

  40. [40]

    Ippoliti and W

    M. Ippoliti and W. W. Ho, Quantum6, 886 (2022)

    2022

  41. [41]

    P. W. Claeys and A. Lamacraft, Quantum6, 738 (2022)

    2022

  42. [42]

    McGinley and M

    M. McGinley and M. Fava, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 160601 (2023)

    2023

  43. [43]

    Bhore, J.-Y

    T. Bhore, J.-Y. Desaules, and Z. Papi´ c, Phys. Rev. B 108, 104317 (2023)

    2023

  44. [44]

    Ippoliti and W

    M. Ippoliti and W. W. Ho, PRX Quantum4, 030322 (2023)

    2023

  45. [45]

    Lucas, L

    M. Lucas, L. Piroli, J. De Nardis, and A. De Luca, Phys. Rev. A107, 032215 (2023)

    2023

  46. [46]

    D. K. Mark, F. Surace, A. Elben, A. L. Shaw, J. Choi, G. Refael, M. Endres, and S. Choi, Phys. Rev. X14, 041051 (2024)

    2024

  47. [47]

    C. Liu, Q. C. Huang, and W. W. Ho, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 260401 (2024)

    2024

  48. [48]

    Chang, H

    R.-A. Chang, H. Shrotriya, W. W. Ho, and M. Ippoliti, PRX Quantum6, 020343 (2025)

    2025

  49. [49]

    Bejan, B

    M. Bejan, B. B´ eri, and M. McGinley, Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 1 (2025)

    2025

  50. [50]

    X.-H. Yu, W. W. Ho, and P. Kos, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 260402 (2025)

    2025

  51. [51]

    McGinley and T

    M. McGinley and T. Schuster, arXiv:2511.17172 (2025)

    arXiv 2025

  52. [52]

    W.-K. Mok, T. Haug, W. W. Ho, and J. Preskill, arXiv:2601.00266 (2026)

    arXiv 2026

  53. [53]

    C. Liu, M. Ippoliti, and W. W. Ho, Phys. Rev. Lett. 136, 100404 (2026)

    2026

  54. [54]

    T.-C. Lu, L. A. Lessa, I. H. Kim, and T. H. Hsieh, PRX Quantum3, 040337 (2022)

    2022

  55. [55]

    G.-Y. Zhu, N. Tantivasadakarn, A. Vishwanath, S. Trebst, and R. Verresen, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 200201 (2023)

    2023

  56. [56]

    J. C. Hokeet al., Nature622, 481–486 (2023)

    2023

  57. [57]

    Negari, S

    A.-R. Negari, S. Sahu, and T. H. Hsieh, Phys. Rev. B 109, 125148 (2024)

    2024

  58. [58]

    Iqbalet al., Nature626, 505–511 (2024)

    M. Iqbalet al., Nature626, 505–511 (2024)

    2024

  59. [59]

    Tantivasadakarn, R

    N. Tantivasadakarn, R. Thorngren, A. Vishwanath, and R. Verresen, Phys. Rev. X14, 021040 (2024)

    2024

  60. [60]

    McGinley, W

    M. McGinley, W. W. Ho, and D. Malz, Phys. Rev. X 15, 021059 (2025)

    2025

  61. [61]

    S. J. Garratt, Z. Weinstein, and E. Altman, Phys. Rev. X13, 021026 (2023)

    2023

  62. [62]

    Murciano, P

    S. Murciano, P. Sala, Y. Liu, R. S. K. Mong, and J. Al- icea, Phys. Rev. X13, 041042 (2023)

    2023

  63. [63]

    J. Y. Lee, C.-M. Jian, and C. Xu, PRX Quantum4, 030317 (2023)

    2023

  64. [64]

    Z. Yang, D. Mao, and C.-M. Jian, Phys. Rev. B108, 165120 (2023)

    2023

  65. [65]

    Khanna and R

    K. Khanna and R. Vasseur, Phys. Rev. Lett.136, 160402 (2026)

    2026

  66. [66]

    Jian, Y.-Z

    C.-M. Jian, Y.-Z. You, R. Vasseur, and A. W. W. Ludwig, Phys. Rev. B101, 104302 (2020)

    2020

  67. [67]

    Fuji and Y

    Y. Fuji and Y. Ashida, Phys. Rev. B102, 054302 (2020)

    2020

  68. [68]

    Turkeshi, R

    X. Turkeshi, R. Fazio, and M. Dalmonte, Phys. Rev. B 102, 014315 (2020)

    2020

  69. [69]

    M. J. Gullans and D. A. Huse, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 070606 (2020)

    2020

  70. [71]

    Altland and M

    A. Altland and M. R. Zirnbauer, Phys. Rev. B55, 1142 (1997)

    1997

  71. [72]

    Cheng, E

    Z. Cheng, E. Huang, V. Khemani, M. J. Gullans, and M. Ippoliti, PRX Quantum6, 030333 (2025)

    2025

  72. [73]

    Eckstein, B

    F. Eckstein, B. Han, S. Trebst, and G.-Y. Zhu, arXiv:2512.19786 (2025)

    arXiv 2025

  73. [74]

    F. Venn, J. Behrends, and B. B´ eri, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 060603 (2023)

    2023

  74. [75]

    Bravyi, M

    S. Bravyi, M. Englbrecht, R. K¨ onig, and N. Peard, npj Quantum Inf.4, 55 (2018)

    2018

  75. [76]

    Venn and B

    F. Venn and B. B´ eri, Phys. Rev. Res.2, 043412 (2020)

    2020

  76. [77]

    Behrends, F

    J. Behrends, F. Venn, and B. B´ eri, Phys. Rev. Res.6, 013137 (2024)

    2024

  77. [78]

    Behrends and B

    J. Behrends and B. B´ eri, PRX Quantum6, 040305 (2025)

    2025

  78. [79]

    Behrends and B

    J. Behrends and B. B´ eri, PRX Quantum6, 040350 (2025)

    2025

  79. [80]

    Bao and S

    Y. Bao and S. Anand, arXiv:2411.05785 (2024)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  80. [81]

    S. W. Yan, Y. Bao, and S. Vijay, arXiv:2603.25665 (2026)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

Showing first 80 references.