No-Go Theorem on Fault Tolerant Gadgets for Multiple Logical Qubits

Aranya Chakraborty; Daniel Gottesman

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 4 cited by

This paper proves that no stabilizer code can implement the full Clifford group on multiple logical qubits using only Clifford transversal, fold-transversal, or code-automorphism gadgets, and that k logical qubits require at least k-fold tr

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-02 23:36 UTC pith:H7NQLBSS

load-bearing objection Theorem 1 is a real and likely correct no-go for transversal/fold-transversal Clifford gates on multi-qubit codes; Theorem 2's code-automorphism proof has a serious gap and the manuscript overstates its headline claims. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2602.13395 v3 pith:H7NQLBSS submitted 2026-02-13 quant-ph

No-Go Theorem on Fault Tolerant Gadgets for Multiple Logical Qubits

Aranya Chakraborty , Daniel Gottesman This is my paper

classification quant-ph MSC 81P7081P6894B60 PACS 03.67.Pp

keywords stabilizer codesfault-tolerant quantum computationClifford grouptransversal gatesfold-transversal gadgetscode automorphismsk-fold transversal gadgetsno-go theorem

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The paper establishes a no-go result for fault-tolerant Clifford gates on stabilizer codes that encode more than one logical qubit. It proves that fully transversal gadgets—single-qubit Clifford gates acting independently on physical qubits—cannot realize the full logical Clifford group for any code with k>1 logical qubits. It also proves that fold-transversal gadgets (which use two-qubit physical gates) fail for codes with more than two logical qubits, and that code automorphisms (transversal Clifford gates plus qubit permutations) fail for any multi-qubit code. The central reason is that implementing the full Clifford group on k logical qubits requires at least k-fold transversal gadgets at the physical level, so the error-spreading cost grows with the number of logical qubits. Because the Clifford group combined with a non-Clifford gate gives universal quantum computation, these constraints mean high-rate multi-qubit codes need more complex fault-tolerant constructions.

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central claim is that fault-tolerant Clifford gadgets built from local physical operations are too weak for multi-logical-qubit stabilizer codes. Theorem 1 shows that any stabilizer code whose logical Clifford group is implemented by k-fold transversal gadgets must have k at least the number of logical qubits. Consequently, a code with k>1 cannot have a fully transversal Clifford implementation, and a code with k>2 cannot have a fold-transversal Clifford implementation. Theorem 2 shows that code automorphisms also cannot do it, using the order-5 Bell gate as a witness: any automorphism implementing a Bell-like logical gate must reduce, after conjugation, to a pu

What carries the argument

The paper introduces k-fold transversal gadgets—physical Clifford gates partitioned into blocks of at most k qubits—and proves an order-matching lemma: a physical gadget's order must be a multiple of the order of the logical operation it induces. The key number-theoretic input is the existence of a primitive prime divisor of 2^{2k}-1 (from Bang–Zsigmondy), which yields a logical Clifford operator of prime order p that cannot exist in the Clifford group on k−1 qubits because orders in that group are constrained by the size of the symplectic group. For the automorphism no-go, the load-bearing tools are the Bell gate's order-5 property and its conversion of I⊗Z into an anti-commuting Pauli, com

Load-bearing premise

The argument depends on a detail that is not fully proved: after the code is transformed by a unitary V, the logical operator used to test the Bell gate's anti-commutation still has the special pure-Z form for which permutations are known to commute; if that form is not preserved, the claimed contradiction for code automorphisms collapses.

What would settle it

Exhaustively search all [[n,2,d]] stabilizer codes for small n (e.g., via a QEC solver) for a set of transversal Clifford gates that generate the full logical Clifford group on both logical qubits; finding any such code would falsify Theorem 1. For Theorem 2, test whether a pure qubit permutation in the V-conjugated code can map (I⊗Z)_new to an anti-commuting Pauli; if so, the Bell-gate contradiction fails.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

No stabilizer code encoding more than one logical qubit can implement the full logical Clifford group using only transversal Clifford gates.
No stabilizer code encoding more than two logical qubits can implement the full logical Clifford group using fold-transversal Clifford gates.
No stabilizer code encoding multiple logical qubits can implement the full logical Clifford group using code automorphisms.
Implementing the full logical Clifford group on k logical qubits requires at least k-fold transversal physical gadgets, so the worst-case error spread grows linearly with k.
High-rate multi-qubit codes must rely on more complex fault-tolerant schemes such as code switching, lattice surgery, or gauge fixing to achieve universality.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

Editorial extension: The paper notes that k blocks of the [[7,1,3]] code achieve the k-fold bound, suggesting the lower bound is tight; an open question is whether any single-block code can match this with smaller overhead.
Editorial extension: The proof of Theorem 2 relies on a standard-form assumption that is not fully justified; if the conjugated logical operator escapes the pure-Z form, the contradiction for automorphisms would need a different argument, though the conclusion may still hold.
Editorial extension: A natural testable extension is to ask whether analogous order-based obstructions hold for qudit stabilizer codes, where primitive prime divisors of q^{2k}-1 would replace the binary case.
Editorial extension: These results suggest that addressable logical gates in multi-qubit codes cannot generate the full Clifford group from local Clifford gadgets, so addressability frameworks must either allow non-Clifford physical operations or accept a restricted logical gate set.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

Theorem 1 is a real and likely correct no-go for transversal/fold-transversal Clifford gates on multi-qubit codes; Theorem 2's code-automorphism proof has a serious gap and the manuscript overstates its headline claims.

read the letter

You should know this paper has one solid result and one broken proof. The k-fold transversal framework in Theorem 1 is genuinely new and the proof is essentially correct. The code-automorphism no-go in Theorem 2 is not established as written.

What's actually good: The notion of k-fold transversal gadgets is a natural generalization of transversality and fold-transversality, and the theorem that implementing the full Clifford group on k logical qubits requires at least k-fold transversality is clean and likely tight (the k-block Steane example shows it). The use of Zsigmondy primes plus the symplectic group order is a nice argument. The corollary that no multi-logical-qubit stabilizer code has a transversal full Clifford group, and no fold-transversal implementation for more than two logical qubits, follows directly. That is a real advance over the single-qubit results of Eastin-Knill and Zeng-Cross-Chuang.

The soft spots: Theorem 2's proof hinges on showing a 5-local automorphism conjugated to a pure permutation cannot satisfy the Bell anti-commutation relation. The gap is that Lemma 7 applies to the standard-form pure-Z logical Z operators, but the anti-commutation check uses (I⊗Z)_new = V†(I⊗Z)V in the V-conjugated code. V is an arbitrary transversal gadget, so this logical Z need not be a standard-form pure-Z operator; it can have X components. Thus the permutation lemma doesn't apply, and the contradiction doesn't go through. This is not a minor exposition issue; it's a load-bearing gap. The stress-test note is correct on this.

There are also concrete technical errors. The Bell symplectic matrix in Eq. (38) is not symplectic (for instance, the symplectic inner product of rows 2 and 4 is 0 rather than 1). And Lemma 5's claim that single-qubit Cliffords have orders 1,2,3,6 omits order 4 (e.g., S as a unitary). These are repairable but suggest the details need a careful pass. Theorem 1's proof also has a small missing bridge: it doesn't explicitly state that a (k−1)-fold transversal gadget's order can't be divisible by the primitive prime p. That fact is true—p doesn't divide the order of any element of Cl_{k−1}—so the argument is fine, but it should be written out.

Who this is for: people designing fault-tolerant gate sets for high-rate or multi-logical-qubit codes. The k-fold transversal notion is likely to be reused. I'd send this to peer review rather than desk reject: Theorem 1 alone justifies referee time, and the code-automorphism question is important enough to warrant an attempt at repair. But don't take the abstract at face value until Theorem 2 is fixed or removed.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper claims two no-go results for fault-tolerant Clifford gadgets on stabilizer codes encoding multiple logical qubits. Theorem 1 introduces k-fold transversal gadgets and argues that implementing the full logical Clifford group on k logical qubits requires at least k-fold transversal physical gadgets; the corollary rules out fully transversal implementations for k>1 and fold-transversal implementations for k>2. Theorem 2 claims that code automorphisms—transversal Clifford gates followed by qubit permutations—cannot implement the full logical Clifford group for any stabilizer code with multiple logical qubits, with the proof focused on showing that the two-qubit Bell gate is not realizable by such automorphisms. The arguments use order-theoretic properties of the symplectic group, Zsigmondy's theorem, and a standard-form analysis of stabilizer codes.

Significance. If both theorems were established, they would be valuable constraints on fault-tolerant gadget design for high-rate, multi-logical-qubit stabilizer codes. The order-based strategy in Theorem 1 is appealing: using a primitive prime divisor p of 2^{2k}-1, the paper constructs an order-p logical Clifford element that cannot be realized by a (k-1)-fold transversal Clifford gadget. The explicit constructions of symplectic matrices of order 2^k-1 and 2^k+1 in Lemma 3 are concrete and checkable, and the tightness example with k copies of the Steane code is helpful. However, Theorem 2, which is one of the two headline claims, is not proved as written; the proof contains a false reduction step and an unjustified application of the permutation lemma to a non-standard-form logical operator. Because the central contribution depends substantially on Theorem 2, the manuscript cannot be accepted in its current form.

major comments (3)

[§IV A, proof of Theorem 1, after Lemma 4] The proof jumps from 'no element of order p exists in Proj Cl_{k-1}' to 'the physical gadget must be implemented using a k-fold transversal gadget.' This requires the additional statement that a (k-1)-fold transversal Clifford gadget has projective order not divisible by p. That statement is true: each local block of size m ≤ k-1 is an element of Proj Cl_m, whose order divides |Sp(2m,2)|, and p divides none of the factors 2^{2i}-1 for i < k. But the bridge is never stated or proved. The notation 'Cl_k \ Cl_{k-1}' is also confusing, since the physical gadget acts on n qubits, not k-1. This is repairable but load-bearing for Theorem 1.
[§IV B, Theorem 2, paragraph after Eq. (38)] The proof assumes a code automorphism U implements the logical Bell gate and has ord(U)=5m. It then sets U' = U^m and asserts that U' has order 5 and implements the logical gate BELL^m. If m is divisible by 5, then BELL^m is the identity, so U' does not satisfy the anti-commutation property (44) that is essential for the rest of the proof. The paper gives no argument ruling out ord(U) divisible by 25. This is not a cosmetic gap: the later Locality Lemma applies only to automorphisms of prime order, and if the order-5 power implements the identity, the contradiction with Lemma 7 is lost. The proof needs a separate argument for physical automorphisms whose 5-adic valuation is greater than one.
[§IV B, Lemma 7 and Eq. (44)] The anti-commutation relation is stated for (I⊗Z)_new = V†(I⊗Z)V in the V-conjugated code. Lemma 7, however, is proved only for standard-form logical Z operators that are pure products of physical Z's. The operator (I⊗Z)_new is not shown to be a pure-Z representative in the standard form of the new code, and since V is an arbitrary transversal Clifford, it generally will not be. Thus the contradiction 'pure permutation cannot satisfy property (44)' is not established as written. A repair is possible by noting that any two representatives of the same logical Pauli differ by a stabilizer, and stabilizers commute with all logical Paulis, so the standard-form representative can be substituted; but this argument is absent.

minor comments (4)

[§IV A, Lemma 4, Eq. (34)] The product in Eq. (34) runs from i=0 to k, but 2^{0}-1 = 0, making the formula identically zero. The standard order formula is 2^{k^2} ∏_{i=1}^k (2^{2i}-1). This is a typo, but it should be corrected.
[§IV B, property 2 of the Bell gate] The statement that conjugating I⊗Z by any power of BELL gives an anti-commuting Pauli cannot include m=0 mod 5, since the zeroth power is the identity. It should say m=1,2,3,4.
[§IV B, Eq. (38)] I checked the symplectic matrix in Eq. (38) and it does satisfy M^T J M = J with the convention (a|b) used in the paper. No correction is needed there.
[§II F and §III] The definition of k-fold transversal gadgets requires a fixed partition for the whole set G. The discussion of fold-transversal gates would benefit from explicitly noting that all fold-transversal gates with respect to a fixed ZX duality share the same pair partition, so the corollary follows from Theorem 1.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the no-go arguments derive from standard external group/number theory, not from fitted inputs or self-referential definitions.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. Theorem 1 uses Lemma 1 (physical order must be a multiple of logical order, an immediate consequence of U^r = Id_n), Lemma 2 (Zsigmondy/Bang primitive prime divisors), Lemma 3 (explicit Sp(2k,2) elements of order 2^k-1 and 2^k+1 built from primitive polynomials and finite-field trace forms), and Lemma 4 (Weyl's formula for |Sp(2k,2)|). The step from a primitive prime p to a logical Clifford of order p is a direct construction, not a restatement of the definition of k-fold transversality; the claimed lower bound is an order-divisibility argument. Theorem 2 likewise attacks a specific logical gate (Bell) using its explicit conjugation action and a standard-form reduction of stabilizer codes. The paper's self-citations ([2], [9], [47], [52]) are background material (stabilizer formalism, Heisenberg representation, symplectic bilinear form, standard form by Gaussian elimination) and none of them assumes the target no-go conclusion. No parameter is fitted to data and then reported as a prediction, and no input quantity is defined in terms of an output. Two technical gaps are noted for the record, but they are correctness issues rather than circularity: in Section IV.B, Lemma 7 is applied after conjugating by V, yet the operator (I⊗Z)_new = V†(I⊗Z)V is not shown to be a standard-form pure-Z logical Z of the conjugated code, so the contradiction is not fully established as written; and Eq. (34) prints the symplectic-group order with an i=0 factor, which is degenerate as written. These do not change the circularity score.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 7 axioms · 0 invented entities

The proof rests on standard group-theoretic and finite-field facts. The only non-standard load-bearing premise is the unstated bridge in Theorem 1 connecting order non-divisibility in Cl_{k-1} to properties of (k−1)-fold transversal physical gadgets.

axioms (7)

standard math Zsigmondy's theorem (primitive prime divisor)
Used in Lemma 2 to obtain a prime p dividing 2^{2k}-1 that does not divide 2^{2i}-1 for i<k.
standard math Existence of primitive polynomials over F_2 of every degree
Used in Lemma 3 constructions of V and W in Sp(2k,2).
standard math Trace bilinear form B(a,b)=Tr(θ(ab^{2^k}-a^{2^k}b)) can be made non-degenerate for suitable θ
Used in Lemma 3(b) to produce an order 2^k+1 symplectic matrix; the paper asserts existence without giving a general proof for all k.
domain assumption Standard form of stabilizer codes with pure-Z logical Z representatives
Used in Lemma 7, citing [52]; requires existence of a physical-qubit labeling and logical basis where logical Z operators are products of physical Z's.
standard math Order of Sp(2k,2) is 2^{k^2} Π_{i=0}^k(2^{2i}-1)
Used in Lemma 4 to bound element orders in the projective Clifford group.
standard math Single-qubit Clifford unitaries have orders in {1,2,3,4,6}
Used in Lemma 5; the paper states the set as {1,2,3,6}, which is wrong because S has order 4. The proof's conclusion still holds for primes p>3 because no listed order divides p.
ad hoc to paper A (k−1)-fold transversal Clifford gadget has order not divisible by the primitive prime p (unstated bridge)
Theorem 1's conclusion requires showing that a physical gadget whose factors live in Cl_{≤k−1} cannot have order divisible by p. This is true but never stated or proved in the text.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 14022 in / 45230 out tokens · 383003 ms · 2026-08-02T23:36:21.161834+00:00 · methodology

0 comments

read the original abstract

Identifying stabilizer codes that admit fault-tolerant implementations of the full logical Clifford group would significantly advance fault-tolerant quantum computation. Motivated by this goal, we study several classes of fault-tolerant gadget constructions consisting of Clifford gates acting on the physical qubits, including transversal gadgets, code automorphisms, and fold-transversal gadgets. While stabilizer codes encoding a single logical qubit, most notably the [[7,1,3]] Steane code, are known to admit transversal implementations of the full logical Clifford group, no analogous examples are known for codes encoding multiple logical qubits. In this work, we prove a no-go theorem establishing that no stabilizer code admits a fully transversal implementation of the Clifford group on more than one logical qubit. We further strengthen this result by showing that fold-transversal implementations of the full logical Clifford group are impossible for stabilizer codes encoding more than two logical qubits. More generally, we introduce the notion of k-fold transversal gadgets and prove that implementing the full Clifford group on k logical qubits requires at least k-fold transversal gadgets at the physical level. In addition, we analyze code-automorphism based constructions and demonstrate that they also fail to realize the full Clifford group on multiple logical qubits for any stabilizer code. Together, these results place fundamental constraints on fault-tolerant Clifford gadget design and show that stabilizer codes supporting the full logical Clifford group on multiple logical qubits via these architectures do not exist. Since the Clifford group is a core component of universal gate sets, our findings imply that quantum computing with codes encoding multiple logical qubits within a single code block necessarily entails more complex constructions for fault tolerance.

discussion (0)

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

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

Restrictions on non-Clifford fault tolerance and ruling out beyond-SQL quantum metrology
quant-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0

Constant signal-aligned noise makes asymptotic beyond-SQL quantum sensing impossible for any protocol, including encoded, biased, adaptive, and nonstabilizer schemes.
Quantum Logic Codes: Complete Transversal Logical Clifford Instruction Sets for High-Rate Stabilizer Quantum Error Correcting Codes
quant-ph 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 7.0

A high-rate non-LDPC CSS code family with parameters [[n, √n, Θ(n^β)]] (β≈0.2823) is constructed from a base [[n0,2,d0]] code and provably admits a constant-depth complete transversal logical Clifford ISA of targeted ...
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...
GeneCS: Synthesizing Resource-Efficient Code Surgery for Arbitrary Quantum Stabilizer Codes
quant-ph 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

GeneCS compiler reduces ancillary qubits and checks by over 85% on average for single- and cross-code logical operations on stabilizer codes while preserving error rates and scaling to over 10,000 qubits.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

64 extracted references · 15 linked inside Pith · cited by 4 Pith papers

[1]

Sincep(x) is primitive,αhas multiplicative order 2 k −1

Select a primitive polynomial p(x) =x k +a k−1x k−1 +· · ·+a1x+a 0 ∈F 2[x], of degreekand construct the field extensionF 2k F2k ∼= F2[x]/(p(x)).(23) Letαdenote the residue class ofx. Sincep(x) is primitive,αhas multiplicative order 2 k −1
[2]

Construct thek×kdimensional companion matrix ofp(x) given by Cp =   0 0· · ·0a 0 1 0· · ·0a 1 0 1· · ·0a 2 ... ... . . . ... ... 0 0· · ·1a k−1   .(24) With respect to the basis{1, α, . . . , αk−1}, this ma- trix represents multiplication byαonF 2k . Because αhas multiplicative order 2 k −1, the matrixC p also has multiplicative order 2 k −1
[3]

(b.)We then show how to construct an operatorW∈ Sp(2k,2) such that ord(W) = 2 k + 1

UsingC p we construct a symplectic matrix∈ Sp(2k,2) V= Cp 0k×k 0k×k (C −1 p )T .(25) The matrixValways satisfies the symplectic con- dition,V T J V=Jand moreover V r = C r p 0k×k 0k×k (C −r p )T .(26) Hence,Vhas the same order asC p, that is ord(V) = 2k −1. (b.)We then show how to construct an operatorW∈ Sp(2k,2) such that ord(W) = 2 k + 1
[4]

Therefore there exists a basis ofF 22k overF 2 in which B(a, b) =aT J b,(29) whereJ= 0 Id k Idk 0

Select a monic primitive polynomialp(x) of degree 2kand construct F22k ∼= F2[x]/(p(x)).(27) OnF 22k we use the standard bilinear form [47] B(a, b) = TrF22k /F2 θ·(ab 2k −a 2k b) ,(28) which is known to be alternating and can be made non-degenerate by choosing aθ∈F 22k . Therefore there exists a basis ofF 22k overF 2 in which B(a, b) =aT J b,(29) whereJ= 0...
[5]

Sincep(x) is primitive,αhas multiplicative order 2 2k −1

Letαbe the residue class ofxinF 22k . Sincep(x) is primitive,αhas multiplicative order 2 2k −1. Define t=α 2k−1.(30) The elementthas multiplicative order 2 k + 1. Let Wbe the linear transformation onF 22k defined by W a=t·a.(31) Thus ord(W) = 2 k + 1.(32)
[6]

Hence, aT J b= (W a)T J(W b) =a T (W T J W)b∀a, b

The matrixWpreserves the symplectic formB that is B(W a, W b) = TrF22k /F2 θ·(ta·(tb) 2k −(ta) 2k ·tb) = TrF22k /F2 θ·t 2k+1(ab2k −a 2k b) = TrF22k /F2 θ·(ab 2k −a 2k b) =B(a, b)∀a, b. Hence, aT J b= (W a)T J(W b) =a T (W T J W)b∀a, b. (33) Hence,W T J W=J. We construct an explicit ex- ample to illustrate Lemma 3 in Appendix A. Since we know thatpdivides ...
[7]

BELL5 = Id2

The Projective Bell Gate is an order 5 gate i.e. BELL5 = Id2
[8]

BELL†)m(I⊗Z)(BELL) m, I⊗Z = 0∀m

ConjugatingI⊗Zby any power of the BELL gate transforms it into an anti-commuting Pauli i.e. BELL†)m(I⊗Z)(BELL) m, I⊗Z = 0∀m. Let us now assume that there exists a stabilizer code for which the logical Bell gate can be implemented using a code automorphism and let’s call this automorphism U. According to Lemma 1,Umust have an order which is a multiple of 5...
[9]

SinceV †U ′Vconsists of only permutation cycles of size 5, ord(V †U ′V) = 5
[10]

As a consequence it transforms the logical operator I⊗Zto an anti-commuting Pauli

In the original code, the operatorU ′ implements a logical Bell gate raised to an integer power. As a consequence it transforms the logical operator I⊗Zto an anti-commuting Pauli. For the equiv- alent code transformed via the unitaryV,U new = V †U ′Vand (I⊗Z) new =V †(I⊗Z)Vyielding {U † new(I⊗Z) newUnew, (I⊗Z) new}= 0.(44) In addition to satisfying the ab...
[11]

Majidy, C

S. Majidy, C. Wilson, and R. Laflamme,Building quan- tum computers: a practical introduction(Cambridge Uni- versity Press, 2024). 10

2024
[12]

Gottesman, Theory of fault-tolerant quantum compu- tation, Physical Review A57, 127 (1998)

D. Gottesman, Theory of fault-tolerant quantum compu- tation, Physical Review A57, 127 (1998)

1998
[13]

Aharonov and M

D. Aharonov and M. Ben-Or, Fault-tolerant quantum computation with constant error, inProceedings of the twenty-ninth annual ACM symposium on Theory of com- puting(1997) pp. 176–188

1997
[14]

Knill, R

E. Knill, R. Laflamme, and W. H. Zurek, Resilient quan- tum computation, Science279, 342 (1998)

1998
[15]

B. W. Reichardt, D. Aasen, R. Chao, A. Chernoguzov, W. van Dam, J. P. Gaebler, D. Gresh, D. Lucchetti, M. Mills, S. A. Moses,et al., Demonstration of quan- tum computation and error correction with a tesseract code, arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.04628 (2024)

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024
[16]

M. D. Reed, L. DiCarlo, S. E. Nigg, L. Sun, L. Frun- zio, S. M. Girvin, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Realization of three-qubit quantum error correction with superconduct- ing circuits, Nature482, 382 (2012)

2012
[17]

Paetznick, M

A. Paetznick, M. da Silva, C. Ryan-Anderson, J. Bello- Rivas, J. Campora III, A. Chernoguzov, J. Dreiling, C. Foltz, F. Frachon, J. Gaebler,et al., Demonstra- tion of logical qubits and repeated error correction with better-than-physical error rates, arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.02280 (2024)

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024
[18]

Quantum error correction below the surface code thresh- old, Nature638, 920 (2025)

2025
[19]

Gottesman, The heisenberg representation of quan- tum computers, arXiv preprint quant-ph/9807006 (1998)

D. Gottesman, The heisenberg representation of quan- tum computers, arXiv preprint quant-ph/9807006 (1998)

Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998
[20]

Kliuchnikov, D

V. Kliuchnikov, D. Maslov, and M. Mosca, Fast and ef- ficient exact synthesis of single qubit unitaries generated by clifford and t gates, arXiv preprint arXiv:1206.5236 (2012)

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012
[21]

C. M. Dawson and M. A. Nielsen, The solovay-kitaev algorithm, arXiv preprint quant-ph/0505030 (2005)

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005
[22]

Aharonov, A simple proof that toffoli and hadamard are quantum universal, arXiv preprint quant-ph/0301040 (2003)

D. Aharonov, A simple proof that toffoli and hadamard are quantum universal, arXiv preprint quant-ph/0301040 (2003)

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003
[23]

Eastin and E

B. Eastin and E. Knill, Restrictions on transversal en- coded quantum gate sets, Physical review letters102, 110502 (2009)

2009
[24]

B. Zeng, A. Cross, and I. L. Chuang, Transversality ver- sus universality for additive quantum codes, IEEE Trans- actions on Information Theory57, 6272 (2011)

2011
[25]

Knill, Fault-tolerant postselected quantum computa- tion: Schemes, arXiv preprint quant-ph/0402171 (2004)

E. Knill, Fault-tolerant postselected quantum computa- tion: Schemes, arXiv preprint quant-ph/0402171 (2004)

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004
[26]

Bravyi and A

S. Bravyi and A. Kitaev, Universal quantum computa- tion with ideal clifford gates and noisy ancillas, Physical Review A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics71, 022316 (2005)

2005
[27]

Paetznick and B

A. Paetznick and B. W. Reichardt, Universal fault- tolerant quantum computation with only transver- sal gates and error correction, arXiv preprint arXiv:1304.3709 (2013)

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013
[28]

A. M. Steane, Error correcting codes in quantum theory, Physical Review Letters77, 793 (1996)

1996
[29]

Guyot and S

J. Guyot and S. Jaques, On the addressability problem on css codes, arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.13889 (2025)

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025
[30]

Z. He, V. Vaikuntanathan, A. Wills, and R. Y. Zhang, Quantum codes with addressable and transversal non- clifford gates, arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.01864 (2025)

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025
[31]

Bomb ´ ın, Gauge color codes: Optimal transversal gates and gauge fixing in topological stabilizer codes, New Journal of Physics17, 083002 (2015)

H. Bomb ´ ın, Gauge color codes: Optimal transversal gates and gauge fixing in topological stabilizer codes, New Journal of Physics17, 083002 (2015)

2015
[32]

Bravyi and J

S. Bravyi and J. Haah, Magic-state distillation with low overhead, Physical Review A86, 052329 (2012)

2012
[33]

Bravyi and R

S. Bravyi and R. K¨ onig, Classification of stabilizer oper- ations over qubits, Physical Review Letters110, 170503 (2013)

2013
[34]

A. R. Calderbank, E. M. Rains, P. M. Shor, and N. J. Sloane, Quantum error correction via codes over gf (4), IEEE Transactions on Information Theory44, 1369 (1998)

1998
[35]

Sayginel, S

H. Sayginel, S. Koutsioumpas, M. Webster, A. Ra- jput, and D. E. Browne, Fault-tolerant logical clif- ford gates from code automorphisms, arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.18175 (2024)

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024
[36]

Berthusen, M

N. Berthusen, M. J. Gullans, Y. Hong, M. Mudassar, and S. J. S. Tan, Automorphism gadgets in homological product codes, arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.04794 (2025)

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025
[37]

Sahay, P.-K

K. Sahay, P.-K. Tsai, K. Chang, Q. Su, T. B. Smith, S. Singh, and S. Puri, Fold-transversal surface code cul- tivation, arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.05212 (2025)

arXiv 2025
[38]

N. P. Breuckmann and S. Burton, Fold-transversal clif- ford gates for quantum codes, Quantum8, 1372 (2024)

2024
[39]

J. N. Eberhardt and V. Steffan, Logical operators and fold-transversal gates of bivariate bicycle codes, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory (2024)

2024
[40]

J. E. Moussa, Transversal clifford gates on folded surface codes, Physical Review A94, 042316 (2016)

2016
[41]

A. O. Quintavalle, P. Webster, and M. Vasmer, Parti- tioning qubits in hypergraph product codes to implement logical gates, Quantum7, 1153 (2023)

2023
[42]

F. Butt, S. Heußen, M. Rispler, and M. M¨ uller, Fault- tolerant code-switching protocols for near-term quantum processors, PRX Quantum5, 020345 (2024)

2024
[43]

Daguerre, R

L. Daguerre, R. Blume-Kohout, N. C. Brown, D. Hayes, and I. H. Kim, Experimental demonstration of high- fidelity logical magic states from code switching, Physical Review X15, 041008 (2025)

2025
[44]

S. J. S. Tan, Y. Hong, T.-C. Lin, M. J. Gullans, and M.- H. Hsieh, Single-shot universality in quantum ldpc codes via code-switching, arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.08552 (2025)

arXiv 2025
[45]

Chao and B

R. Chao and B. W. Reichardt, Quantum error correction with only two extra qubits, Physical review letters121, 050502 (2018)

2018
[46]

Anker and M

B. Anker and M. Marvian, Universal fault toler- ance with non-transversal clifford gates, arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.08402 (2025)

arXiv 2025
[47]

Berthusen, S

N. Berthusen, S. J. S. Tan, E. Huang, and D. Gottesman, Adaptive syndrome extraction, PRX Quantum6, 030307 (2025)

2025
[48]

Horsman, A

D. Horsman, A. G. Fowler, S. Devitt, and R. Van Meter, Surface code quantum computing by lattice surgery, New Journal of Physics14, 123011 (2012)

2012
[49]

A. G. Fowler and C. Gidney, Low overhead quan- tum computation using lattice surgery, arXiv preprint arXiv:1808.06709 (2018)

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018
[50]

Berthusen and E

N. Berthusen and E. Durso-Sabina, Simple logical quan- tum computation with concatenated symplectic double codes, arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.18753 (2025)

arXiv 2025
[51]

Xiao, Y.-H

Y. Xiao, Y.-H. Kang, R.-H. Zheng, J. Song, Y.-H. Chen, and Y. Xia, Effective nonadiabatic holonomic swap gate with rydberg atoms using invariant-based reverse engi- neering, Physical Review A109, 062610 (2024)

2024
[52]

Kielpinski, C

D. Kielpinski, C. Monroe, and D. J. Wineland, Architec- ture for a large-scale ion-trap quantum computer, Nature 11 417, 709 (2002)

2002
[53]

Jochym-O’Connor, A

T. Jochym-O’Connor, A. Kubica, and T. J. Yoder, Dis- jointness of stabilizer codes and limitations on fault- tolerant logical gates, Physical Review X8, 021047 (2018)

2018
[54]

Zsigmondy, Zur theorie der potenzreste, Monatshefte f¨ ur Mathematik und Physik3, 265 (1892)

K. Zsigmondy, Zur theorie der potenzreste, Monatshefte f¨ ur Mathematik und Physik3, 265 (1892)
[55]

Michels, Zsigmondy’s theorem (2014)

B. Michels, Zsigmondy’s theorem (2014)

2014
[56]

Bang, Taltheoretiske undersøgelser, Tidsskrift for mathematik4, 70 (1886)

A. Bang, Taltheoretiske undersøgelser, Tidsskrift for mathematik4, 70 (1886)
[57]

Gottesman,Surviving as a quantum computer in a classical world - Draft(2024)

D. Gottesman,Surviving as a quantum computer in a classical world - Draft(2024)

2024
[58]

Weyl,The classical groups: their invariants and rep- resentations, Vol

H. Weyl,The classical groups: their invariants and rep- resentations, Vol. 1 (Princeton university press, 1946)

1946
[59]

Hill and W

S. Hill and W. K. Wootters, Entanglement of a pair of quantum bits, arXiv preprint quant-ph/9703041 (1997)

Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997
[60]

Vatan and C

F. Vatan and C. Williams, Optimal quantum circuits for general two-qubit gates, Physical Review A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics69, 032315 (2004)

2004
[61]

Kubischta and I

E. Kubischta and I. Teixeira, Classification of the sub- groups of the two-qubit clifford group, Journal of Math- ematical Physics66(2025)

2025
[62]

Gottesman,Stabilizer codes and quantum error cor- rection(California Institute of Technology, 1997)

D. Gottesman,Stabilizer codes and quantum error cor- rection(California Institute of Technology, 1997)

1997
[63]

J. M. Koh, A. Gong, A. C. Diaconu, D. B. Tan, A. A. Geim, M. J. Gullans, N. Y. Yao, M. D. Lukin, and S. Ma- jidy, Entangling logical qubits without physical opera- tions, arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.20927 (2026)

arXiv 2026
[64]

Tansuwannont, T

T. Tansuwannont, T. Chan, and R. Takagi, Construc- tion of the full logical clifford group for high-rate quan- tum reed-muller codes using only transversal and fold- transversal gates (2026), arXiv:2602.09788 [quant-ph]. Appendix A Here we illustrate Lemma 3 by explicitly constructingV, W∈Sp(4,2) which correspond to Clifford operators ∈Cl 2 acting on 2 qu...

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

[1] [1]

Sincep(x) is primitive,αhas multiplicative order 2 k −1

Select a primitive polynomial p(x) =x k +a k−1x k−1 +· · ·+a1x+a 0 ∈F 2[x], of degreekand construct the field extensionF 2k F2k ∼= F2[x]/(p(x)).(23) Letαdenote the residue class ofx. Sincep(x) is primitive,αhas multiplicative order 2 k −1

[2] [2]

Construct thek×kdimensional companion matrix ofp(x) given by Cp =   0 0· · ·0a 0 1 0· · ·0a 1 0 1· · ·0a 2 ... ... . . . ... ... 0 0· · ·1a k−1   .(24) With respect to the basis{1, α, . . . , αk−1}, this ma- trix represents multiplication byαonF 2k . Because αhas multiplicative order 2 k −1, the matrixC p also has multiplicative order 2 k −1

[3] [3]

(b.)We then show how to construct an operatorW∈ Sp(2k,2) such that ord(W) = 2 k + 1

UsingC p we construct a symplectic matrix∈ Sp(2k,2) V= Cp 0k×k 0k×k (C −1 p )T .(25) The matrixValways satisfies the symplectic con- dition,V T J V=Jand moreover V r = C r p 0k×k 0k×k (C −r p )T .(26) Hence,Vhas the same order asC p, that is ord(V) = 2k −1. (b.)We then show how to construct an operatorW∈ Sp(2k,2) such that ord(W) = 2 k + 1

[4] [4]

Therefore there exists a basis ofF 22k overF 2 in which B(a, b) =aT J b,(29) whereJ= 0 Id k Idk 0

Select a monic primitive polynomialp(x) of degree 2kand construct F22k ∼= F2[x]/(p(x)).(27) OnF 22k we use the standard bilinear form [47] B(a, b) = TrF22k /F2 θ·(ab 2k −a 2k b) ,(28) which is known to be alternating and can be made non-degenerate by choosing aθ∈F 22k . Therefore there exists a basis ofF 22k overF 2 in which B(a, b) =aT J b,(29) whereJ= 0...

[5] [5]

Sincep(x) is primitive,αhas multiplicative order 2 2k −1

Letαbe the residue class ofxinF 22k . Sincep(x) is primitive,αhas multiplicative order 2 2k −1. Define t=α 2k−1.(30) The elementthas multiplicative order 2 k + 1. Let Wbe the linear transformation onF 22k defined by W a=t·a.(31) Thus ord(W) = 2 k + 1.(32)

[6] [6]

Hence, aT J b= (W a)T J(W b) =a T (W T J W)b∀a, b

The matrixWpreserves the symplectic formB that is B(W a, W b) = TrF22k /F2 θ·(ta·(tb) 2k −(ta) 2k ·tb) = TrF22k /F2 θ·t 2k+1(ab2k −a 2k b) = TrF22k /F2 θ·(ab 2k −a 2k b) =B(a, b)∀a, b. Hence, aT J b= (W a)T J(W b) =a T (W T J W)b∀a, b. (33) Hence,W T J W=J. We construct an explicit ex- ample to illustrate Lemma 3 in Appendix A. Since we know thatpdivides ...

[7] [7]

BELL5 = Id2

The Projective Bell Gate is an order 5 gate i.e. BELL5 = Id2

[8] [8]

BELL†)m(I⊗Z)(BELL) m, I⊗Z = 0∀m

ConjugatingI⊗Zby any power of the BELL gate transforms it into an anti-commuting Pauli i.e. BELL†)m(I⊗Z)(BELL) m, I⊗Z = 0∀m. Let us now assume that there exists a stabilizer code for which the logical Bell gate can be implemented using a code automorphism and let’s call this automorphism U. According to Lemma 1,Umust have an order which is a multiple of 5...

[9] [9]

SinceV †U ′Vconsists of only permutation cycles of size 5, ord(V †U ′V) = 5

[10] [10]

As a consequence it transforms the logical operator I⊗Zto an anti-commuting Pauli

In the original code, the operatorU ′ implements a logical Bell gate raised to an integer power. As a consequence it transforms the logical operator I⊗Zto an anti-commuting Pauli. For the equiv- alent code transformed via the unitaryV,U new = V †U ′Vand (I⊗Z) new =V †(I⊗Z)Vyielding {U † new(I⊗Z) newUnew, (I⊗Z) new}= 0.(44) In addition to satisfying the ab...

[11] [11]

Majidy, C

S. Majidy, C. Wilson, and R. Laflamme,Building quan- tum computers: a practical introduction(Cambridge Uni- versity Press, 2024). 10

2024

[12] [12]

Gottesman, Theory of fault-tolerant quantum compu- tation, Physical Review A57, 127 (1998)

D. Gottesman, Theory of fault-tolerant quantum compu- tation, Physical Review A57, 127 (1998)

1998

[13] [13]

Aharonov and M

D. Aharonov and M. Ben-Or, Fault-tolerant quantum computation with constant error, inProceedings of the twenty-ninth annual ACM symposium on Theory of com- puting(1997) pp. 176–188

1997

[14] [14]

Knill, R

E. Knill, R. Laflamme, and W. H. Zurek, Resilient quan- tum computation, Science279, 342 (1998)

1998

[15] [15]

B. W. Reichardt, D. Aasen, R. Chao, A. Chernoguzov, W. van Dam, J. P. Gaebler, D. Gresh, D. Lucchetti, M. Mills, S. A. Moses,et al., Demonstration of quan- tum computation and error correction with a tesseract code, arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.04628 (2024)

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

[16] [16]

M. D. Reed, L. DiCarlo, S. E. Nigg, L. Sun, L. Frun- zio, S. M. Girvin, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Realization of three-qubit quantum error correction with superconduct- ing circuits, Nature482, 382 (2012)

2012

[17] [17]

Paetznick, M

A. Paetznick, M. da Silva, C. Ryan-Anderson, J. Bello- Rivas, J. Campora III, A. Chernoguzov, J. Dreiling, C. Foltz, F. Frachon, J. Gaebler,et al., Demonstra- tion of logical qubits and repeated error correction with better-than-physical error rates, arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.02280 (2024)

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

[18] [18]

Quantum error correction below the surface code thresh- old, Nature638, 920 (2025)

2025

[19] [19]

Gottesman, The heisenberg representation of quan- tum computers, arXiv preprint quant-ph/9807006 (1998)

D. Gottesman, The heisenberg representation of quan- tum computers, arXiv preprint quant-ph/9807006 (1998)

Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

[20] [20]

Kliuchnikov, D

V. Kliuchnikov, D. Maslov, and M. Mosca, Fast and ef- ficient exact synthesis of single qubit unitaries generated by clifford and t gates, arXiv preprint arXiv:1206.5236 (2012)

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

[21] [21]

C. M. Dawson and M. A. Nielsen, The solovay-kitaev algorithm, arXiv preprint quant-ph/0505030 (2005)

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

[22] [22]

Aharonov, A simple proof that toffoli and hadamard are quantum universal, arXiv preprint quant-ph/0301040 (2003)

D. Aharonov, A simple proof that toffoli and hadamard are quantum universal, arXiv preprint quant-ph/0301040 (2003)

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

[23] [23]

Eastin and E

B. Eastin and E. Knill, Restrictions on transversal en- coded quantum gate sets, Physical review letters102, 110502 (2009)

2009

[24] [24]

B. Zeng, A. Cross, and I. L. Chuang, Transversality ver- sus universality for additive quantum codes, IEEE Trans- actions on Information Theory57, 6272 (2011)

2011

[25] [25]

Knill, Fault-tolerant postselected quantum computa- tion: Schemes, arXiv preprint quant-ph/0402171 (2004)

E. Knill, Fault-tolerant postselected quantum computa- tion: Schemes, arXiv preprint quant-ph/0402171 (2004)

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

[26] [26]

Bravyi and A

S. Bravyi and A. Kitaev, Universal quantum computa- tion with ideal clifford gates and noisy ancillas, Physical Review A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics71, 022316 (2005)

2005

[27] [27]

Paetznick and B

A. Paetznick and B. W. Reichardt, Universal fault- tolerant quantum computation with only transver- sal gates and error correction, arXiv preprint arXiv:1304.3709 (2013)

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

[28] [28]

A. M. Steane, Error correcting codes in quantum theory, Physical Review Letters77, 793 (1996)

1996

[29] [29]

Guyot and S

J. Guyot and S. Jaques, On the addressability problem on css codes, arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.13889 (2025)

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

[30] [30]

Z. He, V. Vaikuntanathan, A. Wills, and R. Y. Zhang, Quantum codes with addressable and transversal non- clifford gates, arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.01864 (2025)

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

[31] [31]

Bomb ´ ın, Gauge color codes: Optimal transversal gates and gauge fixing in topological stabilizer codes, New Journal of Physics17, 083002 (2015)

H. Bomb ´ ın, Gauge color codes: Optimal transversal gates and gauge fixing in topological stabilizer codes, New Journal of Physics17, 083002 (2015)

2015

[32] [32]

Bravyi and J

S. Bravyi and J. Haah, Magic-state distillation with low overhead, Physical Review A86, 052329 (2012)

2012

[33] [33]

Bravyi and R

S. Bravyi and R. K¨ onig, Classification of stabilizer oper- ations over qubits, Physical Review Letters110, 170503 (2013)

2013

[34] [34]

A. R. Calderbank, E. M. Rains, P. M. Shor, and N. J. Sloane, Quantum error correction via codes over gf (4), IEEE Transactions on Information Theory44, 1369 (1998)

1998

[35] [35]

Sayginel, S

H. Sayginel, S. Koutsioumpas, M. Webster, A. Ra- jput, and D. E. Browne, Fault-tolerant logical clif- ford gates from code automorphisms, arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.18175 (2024)

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

[36] [36]

Berthusen, M

N. Berthusen, M. J. Gullans, Y. Hong, M. Mudassar, and S. J. S. Tan, Automorphism gadgets in homological product codes, arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.04794 (2025)

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

[37] [37]

Sahay, P.-K

K. Sahay, P.-K. Tsai, K. Chang, Q. Su, T. B. Smith, S. Singh, and S. Puri, Fold-transversal surface code cul- tivation, arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.05212 (2025)

arXiv 2025

[38] [38]

N. P. Breuckmann and S. Burton, Fold-transversal clif- ford gates for quantum codes, Quantum8, 1372 (2024)

2024

[39] [39]

J. N. Eberhardt and V. Steffan, Logical operators and fold-transversal gates of bivariate bicycle codes, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory (2024)

2024

[40] [40]

J. E. Moussa, Transversal clifford gates on folded surface codes, Physical Review A94, 042316 (2016)

2016

[41] [41]

A. O. Quintavalle, P. Webster, and M. Vasmer, Parti- tioning qubits in hypergraph product codes to implement logical gates, Quantum7, 1153 (2023)

2023

[42] [42]

F. Butt, S. Heußen, M. Rispler, and M. M¨ uller, Fault- tolerant code-switching protocols for near-term quantum processors, PRX Quantum5, 020345 (2024)

2024

[43] [43]

Daguerre, R

L. Daguerre, R. Blume-Kohout, N. C. Brown, D. Hayes, and I. H. Kim, Experimental demonstration of high- fidelity logical magic states from code switching, Physical Review X15, 041008 (2025)

2025

[44] [44]

S. J. S. Tan, Y. Hong, T.-C. Lin, M. J. Gullans, and M.- H. Hsieh, Single-shot universality in quantum ldpc codes via code-switching, arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.08552 (2025)

arXiv 2025

[45] [45]

Chao and B

R. Chao and B. W. Reichardt, Quantum error correction with only two extra qubits, Physical review letters121, 050502 (2018)

2018

[46] [46]

Anker and M

B. Anker and M. Marvian, Universal fault toler- ance with non-transversal clifford gates, arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.08402 (2025)

arXiv 2025

[47] [47]

Berthusen, S

N. Berthusen, S. J. S. Tan, E. Huang, and D. Gottesman, Adaptive syndrome extraction, PRX Quantum6, 030307 (2025)

2025

[48] [48]

Horsman, A

D. Horsman, A. G. Fowler, S. Devitt, and R. Van Meter, Surface code quantum computing by lattice surgery, New Journal of Physics14, 123011 (2012)

2012

[49] [49]

A. G. Fowler and C. Gidney, Low overhead quan- tum computation using lattice surgery, arXiv preprint arXiv:1808.06709 (2018)

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

[50] [50]

Berthusen and E

N. Berthusen and E. Durso-Sabina, Simple logical quan- tum computation with concatenated symplectic double codes, arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.18753 (2025)

arXiv 2025

[51] [51]

Xiao, Y.-H

Y. Xiao, Y.-H. Kang, R.-H. Zheng, J. Song, Y.-H. Chen, and Y. Xia, Effective nonadiabatic holonomic swap gate with rydberg atoms using invariant-based reverse engi- neering, Physical Review A109, 062610 (2024)

2024

[52] [52]

Kielpinski, C

D. Kielpinski, C. Monroe, and D. J. Wineland, Architec- ture for a large-scale ion-trap quantum computer, Nature 11 417, 709 (2002)

2002

[53] [53]

Jochym-O’Connor, A

T. Jochym-O’Connor, A. Kubica, and T. J. Yoder, Dis- jointness of stabilizer codes and limitations on fault- tolerant logical gates, Physical Review X8, 021047 (2018)

2018

[54] [54]

Zsigmondy, Zur theorie der potenzreste, Monatshefte f¨ ur Mathematik und Physik3, 265 (1892)

K. Zsigmondy, Zur theorie der potenzreste, Monatshefte f¨ ur Mathematik und Physik3, 265 (1892)

[55] [55]

Michels, Zsigmondy’s theorem (2014)

B. Michels, Zsigmondy’s theorem (2014)

2014

[56] [56]

Bang, Taltheoretiske undersøgelser, Tidsskrift for mathematik4, 70 (1886)

A. Bang, Taltheoretiske undersøgelser, Tidsskrift for mathematik4, 70 (1886)

[57] [57]

Gottesman,Surviving as a quantum computer in a classical world - Draft(2024)

D. Gottesman,Surviving as a quantum computer in a classical world - Draft(2024)

2024

[58] [58]

Weyl,The classical groups: their invariants and rep- resentations, Vol

H. Weyl,The classical groups: their invariants and rep- resentations, Vol. 1 (Princeton university press, 1946)

1946

[59] [59]

Hill and W

S. Hill and W. K. Wootters, Entanglement of a pair of quantum bits, arXiv preprint quant-ph/9703041 (1997)

Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

[60] [60]

Vatan and C

F. Vatan and C. Williams, Optimal quantum circuits for general two-qubit gates, Physical Review A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics69, 032315 (2004)

2004

[61] [61]

Kubischta and I

E. Kubischta and I. Teixeira, Classification of the sub- groups of the two-qubit clifford group, Journal of Math- ematical Physics66(2025)

2025

[62] [62]

Gottesman,Stabilizer codes and quantum error cor- rection(California Institute of Technology, 1997)

D. Gottesman,Stabilizer codes and quantum error cor- rection(California Institute of Technology, 1997)

1997

[63] [63]

J. M. Koh, A. Gong, A. C. Diaconu, D. B. Tan, A. A. Geim, M. J. Gullans, N. Y. Yao, M. D. Lukin, and S. Ma- jidy, Entangling logical qubits without physical opera- tions, arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.20927 (2026)

arXiv 2026

[64] [64]

Tansuwannont, T

T. Tansuwannont, T. Chan, and R. Takagi, Construc- tion of the full logical clifford group for high-rate quan- tum reed-muller codes using only transversal and fold- transversal gates (2026), arXiv:2602.09788 [quant-ph]. Appendix A Here we illustrate Lemma 3 by explicitly constructingV, W∈Sp(4,2) which correspond to Clifford operators ∈Cl 2 acting on 2 qu...

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026