Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 7 minor 87 references

Quantum circuits can look hard by every usual measure and still be cheap to simulate classically if you compile them through the right error-correcting code.

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 · grok-4.5

2026-07-10 08:07 UTC pith:I4C72LBE

load-bearing objection Clean constructive result: polar-code compilation freezes MPS bond dimension after encoding while logical circuits still show volume-law entanglement, magic, and non-Gaussianity. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2607.08396 v1 pith:I4C72LBE submitted 2026-07-09 quant-ph

Efficiently simulable quantum circuits with large entanglement, magic, and non-Gaussianity via code-compiled tensor networks

Aydin Deger , Stergios Koutsioumpas , Mark Webster , Hasan Sayginel , Joschka Roffe , Dan E. Browne This is my paper
classification quant-ph
keywords code-compiled quantum circuitsmatrix product statespolar CSS codesclassical simulationentanglementmagicnon-Gaussianitydirect fidelity estimation
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.

Standard diagnostics of classical hardness—volume-law entanglement, large magic, and non-Gaussian correlations—do not always mark the end of efficient simulation. This paper constructs an infinite family of circuits, called code-compiled quantum circuits, whose logical description is dense, nonlocal, and non-Clifford, yet whose physical description after encoding is only onsite phases plus classical qubit relabeling. The bond dimension of a matrix-product-state simulator therefore stays fixed at the cost of the encoder and never grows with circuit depth. The construction uses high-rate polar CSS codes whose automorphisms and transversal diagonal gates turn simple physical operations into complex logical gates. A sympathetic reader cares because the result separates resource content from simulation cost and supplies a classical reference for fidelity benchmarking of devices that run nontrivial logical circuits.

Core claim

There exist infinite families of quantum circuits, realized as logical circuits of high-rate polar CSS codes, that generate volume-law entanglement, large stabilizer Rényi magic, and nonzero interaction distance from the free-fermion manifold, yet admit efficient classical MPS simulation whose bond dimension remains bounded by the encoder cost χ_E = N independent of logical circuit depth.

What carries the argument

Code-compiled quantum circuits (CCQCs): logical circuits compiled through a CSS encoder so that every post-encoding layer is a product of single-qubit diagonal gates and a classically tracked qubit permutation; the encoder alone pays the bond-dimension cost.

Load-bearing premise

The chosen inputs must keep an efficient matrix-product-state description after encoding, so that later onsite and relabeling layers never become the bottleneck.

What would settle it

For a polar instance with growing depth, measure whether the physical MPS bond dimension remains pinned at the encoder value while logical cut entropy, magic density, and interaction distance continue to rise, and check whether physical and logical observables still agree to truncation tolerance.

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

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 7 minor

Summary. The manuscript introduces code-compiled quantum circuits (CCQCs): logical circuits on high-rate CSS codes that are compiled, via automorphisms and transversal diagonal gates from higher levels of the Clifford hierarchy, into physical circuits consisting only of onsite phases and classical qubit relabelings. After a one-time encoding cost, the physical MPS bond dimension is invariant under all subsequent layers (cost formula (16), Algorithm 1). For an infinite polar CSS family the peak encoding bond dimension is χ_E = N (stabilizer-rank formulae (17)–(19)), independent of logical depth. Numerics on [[32,26]] and [[64,57]] instances show that the logical dynamics generate large entanglement, nonzero interaction distance from the Gaussian manifold, and substantial stabilizer Rényi magic, while the compiled physical MPS remains pinned at χ_E. A complementary exact phase-polynomial backend (PhasePoly.jl) is released for monomial subfamilies, and a direct-fidelity-estimation protocol uses the compiled MPS as a classical reference for hardware benchmarking of nontrivial logical circuits.

Significance. If the construction holds as stated, the paper cleanly separates standard resource diagnostics (entanglement, magic, non-Gaussianity) from classical simulation cost for an infinite, explicitly constructible circuit family. That is a useful conceptual contribution to the simulability landscape beyond Clifford, matchgate, and low-entanglement regimes. Strengths that raise the work above a pure existence sketch include: (i) first-principles derivation of χ_E from the stabilizer tableau (Eqs. 17–19) with an explicit table for l = 2…7; (ii) small-code worked examples ([[4,2,2]] automorphism CNOT, [[8,3,2]] transversal CCZ) that make the physical/logical dictionary checkable; (iii) a released PhasePoly.jl backend with a clear complexity caveat for level-4 phases; and (iv) a concrete DFE application with end-to-end validation on the [[16,11]] instance. The proviso that encoded inputs must retain an efficient MPS is stated in the abstract and Secs. III/VI and is appropriate.

major comments (2)
  1. The abstract and Introduction claim that random compositions generate “volume-law entanglement entropy.” Sec. IX and Fig. 4(b) only report that S_max “grows substantially,” without a scaling plot versus k or a comparison to the balanced-cut bound 2^{⌊k/2⌋} of Eq. (20). For the central claim that standard hardness indicators are present, either (a) add a quantitative scaling check (e.g., S_max / k or S_max vs. depth for several l) that supports volume-law language, or (b) replace “volume-law” by the weaker but fully supported phrasing “large / extensive entanglement” already used in parts of Sec. IX. This is a wording issue that affects how strongly the hardness-indicator claim can be read, not a flaw in the simulation argument.
  2. The abstract and Sec. III advertise a “broad class of initial states, including dense entangled, magic, and non-Gaussian inputs, provided the encoded state retains an efficient MPS representation.” All numerical resource diagnostics in Sec. IX (Figs. 4–5) use product / stabilizer inputs (|+⟩^{⊗k} and random product states). The proviso is correctly stated, but the gap between advertised input class and demonstrated numerics should be closed either by one non-stabilizer encoded-input example with measured χ_E, or by tightening the abstract/Sec. III language to match what is actually simulated. The existence result for the circuit family itself does not depend on this, but the breadth claim does.
minor comments (7)
  1. Table I (Sec. V): the |Aut| column is written in a hard-to-parse factored form (e.g. “2 42 ·32 ·5·7·31”). A standard integer or cleaner factorization would help readers assess library size.
  2. Sec. V B: distance d = 1 is intentional for a compilation gadget, but a one-sentence explicit statement that d is irrelevant to the simulation claim (and that the construction is not proposed as a memory code) would head off a common misreading.
  3. Fig. 4 caption and panel (a): label the vertical axis units / meaning of the large logical spikes more clearly (bond dimension vs. gate step), and state the truncation cutoff ε = 10^{-10} in the caption as well as the main text.
  4. Sec. VII: the #P-hardness citation for cubic gaps is appropriate; a short forward pointer from the abstract’s “cost is set by higher-degree phase terms” to Eq. (25) and the CCCZ cubic-difference remark would help non-specialist readers.
  5. Encoding artifacts in the PDF source (e.g. “R´ enyi”, “Schollw¨ ock”, “Papi´ c”) should be cleaned for the journal version.
  6. Appendix A figures (level-t=4 matched pairs) are useful; stating the gate counts (90 and 1361) also in the main-text discussion of the level-4 catalog would make the “rich non-Clifford library” claim easier to cite without opening the appendix.
  7. Sec. X DFE example: the representative string Q and r_Q = 0.25 is helpful; briefly note how many of the 600 requests had |r_Q| near zero (and were effectively discarded or down-weighted) so readers can judge sample efficiency.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the efficient-simulability claim is a structural consequence of onsite-plus-relabeling compilation, not a fit or self-definitional loop.

full rationale

The paper’s central chain is generative and independently checked, not circular. Matched physical/logical pairs are obtained from CSS check/logical matrices via automorphism and commutator searches; composing them yields a logical circuit whose physical image is only onsite diagonal/Clifford layers plus permutations. Bond-dimension invariance after encoding follows from elementary MPS facts (single-qubit diagonals preserve Schmidt ranks; permutations are tracked by a classical map µ rather than SWAP networks), formalized in cost formula (16) and Algorithm 1—not by defining efficiency in terms of the resource measures later reported. For the polar family, χ_E = N is read off from the stabilizer-rank formula (17)–(19) applied to the code matrices, then confirmed by encoder propagation; it is not fitted to the volume-law/magic/non-Gaussian diagnostics. Those diagnostics (S_max, m_1 via perfect Pauli sampling, D_F) are measured on the logical side while the physical MPS stays pinned at χ_E, which is an independent numerical comparison, not a prediction forced by a fitted parameter. Self-citations (automorphism search, XP diagonal methods, PhasePoly.jl) supply tools that generate the gate library or an alternate backend; they do not import a uniqueness theorem that forces the existence claim, nor rename a known empirical pattern as a first-principles result. The abstract’s proviso that generic dense magic/non-Gaussian inputs must still encode efficiently is a stated scope limitation, not a circular reduction. Score 0.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 4 axioms · 1 invented entities

Central claim rests on standard MPS and stabilizer-code facts plus the constructive existence of sufficiently rich automorphism and transversal-diagonal libraries for the polar family. No free parameters are fitted to produce the hardness-vs-simulability separation; numerical cutoffs affect only the reported diagnostics, not the existence claim.

free parameters (2)
  • MPS truncation cutoff ε = 1e-10
    Set to 10^{-10} for numerical runs; controls reported agreement but not the theoretical bond-dimension bound.
  • Number of DFE Pauli requests / shots = 600 requests, 400 shots
    600 requests and 400 shots per request chosen for the [[16,11]] demonstration; free experimental design parameters, not fitted to a target fidelity.
axioms (4)
  • standard math Onsite diagonal unitaries leave Schmidt ranks (hence MPS bond dimension) invariant across every cut.
    Standard MPS fact used in Sec. VI; follows because a local diagonal operator commutes with the Schmidt decomposition.
  • domain assumption Code automorphisms (permutations + local Cliffords preserving the stabilizer group) induce well-defined logical Clifford gates.
    Standard stabilizer-code theory (cited Refs. 18–20); recovered here via Tanner-graph automorphism search.
  • domain assumption Transversal diagonal operators at Clifford-hierarchy level t that commute appropriately with X-checks act as logical diagonal phase polynomials on the codespace.
    Commutator method of Refs. 21–22; used to populate the non-Clifford sector of the matched library.
  • ad hoc to paper The polar CSS family obtained by selecting structured rows of F^{⊗l} admits an efficient encoder of cost Θ(N log N) and a sufficiently large automorphism group plus usable transversal diagonals.
    Specific construction of Sec. V; verified computationally up to l=6 and tabulated in Table I.
invented entities (1)
  • Code-compiled quantum circuits (CCQCs) independent evidence
    purpose: Name the family of logical circuits obtained by composing matched automorphism and transversal-diagonal pairs through a CSS encoder.
    Defined by construction in Sec. III; not a physical postulate but a named circuit class whose existence is demonstrated.

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-grok45 · 33367 in / 2812 out tokens · 37482 ms · 2026-07-10T08:07:00.807758+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We introduce a family of quantum circuits that possess standard indicators of classical simulation hardness including high entanglement entropy, magic, and non-Gaussianity, yet admit efficient classical simulation via matrix product states (MPS). Our construction uses logical circuits of high-rate Calderbank-Shor-Steane (CSS) codes with enhanced symmetries. Using code automorphisms and transversal diagonal gates from higher levels of the Clifford hierarchy, we realize nonlocal logical Clifford and non-Clifford gates, showing how error-correcting codes can compile complex logical circuits into simple physical operations. Simulation efficiency rests on two properties: (i) diagonal transversal gates do not increase bond dimension, and (ii) permutations are tracked classically via on-the-fly relabeling, avoiding costly SWAP networks. Unlike Clifford or matchgate simulation, our method accepts a broad class of initial states, including dense entangled, magic, and non-Gaussian inputs, provided the encoded state retains an efficient MPS representation. We also release an exact phase-polynomial backend for monomial subfamilies, whose cost is set by higher-degree phase terms rather than entanglement growth. We demonstrate the method on an infinite polar CSS code family, showing bond dimension stays bounded by the encoding cost regardless of circuit depth. These results show that for some circuit families, standard resource measures are individually insufficient to indicate simulation hardness. As a near-term application, we use the compiled MPS as a classical reference for direct fidelity estimation of a quantum device running nontrivial logical circuits. Pauli sampling on the encoded reference, with a Clifford pushback through the known encoder, provides the ideal expectation values, so the logical output fidelity can be estimated from local Pauli readout alone, without costly state tomography.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.08396 by Aydin Deger, Dan E. Browne, Hasan Sayginel, Joschka Roffe, Mark Webster, Stergios Koutsioumpas.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: (d), and its cost is controlled by two properties of the compiled layers. Single-qubit diagonal gates leave the Schmidt rank at every cut of an MPS invariant, and qubit permutations are tracked classically through a qubit-to-site lookup table rather than realized as SWAP networks. Neither operation modifies the stored ten￾sors. Once the encoder has produced the initial encoded MPS, no later logical gate ha… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: shows the square geometry and the bipartition underlying this choice of logical basis. Because the sta￾bilizers are fully symmetric, any transposition of phys￾ical qubits preserves the code space. In the language of Ref. [20], every such permutation is a code automor￾phism, and its logical action is recovered by tracking the logical Paulis. For the physical relabeling SWAP1,2 one finds X¯ 1 7→ X¯ 1, Z¯ 1 7… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: (b) should therefore be interpreted as truncation error from the direct logical simulation, not as a failure of the compiled physical evolution. This is precisely the regime in which the physical representation is useful: it continues to provide a controlled classical reference after the direct tensor-network simulation has exhausted its fixed bond-dimension budget. X. APPLICATION: HARDWARE BENCHMARKING VI… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Representative resource diagnostics for the polar [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Logical-DFE worked example for the polar [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Matched pair from the level- [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Matched pair from the level- [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Encoder [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_9.png] view at source ↗

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

87 extracted references · 87 canonical work pages · 21 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Starting from the stabilizer generators [H X |HZ] construct the three block form by findingH:= [HX |HZ|HX ⊕H Z]

    work page

  2. [2]

    Vertices corresponding to rows are colored blue, and vertices corresponding to columns are colored red

    Construct the Tanner graphGof the binary linear code with parity check matrixHby adding a vertex for each column and row. Vertices corresponding to rows are colored blue, and vertices corresponding to columns are colored red

    work page

  3. [3]

    Edges encode which bits participate in which check, i.e., we draw an edge between column nodec i and check nodev j iffH j,i = 1

    work page

  4. [4]

    Add edges between bits which correspond to the same qubit – this limits column permutations to those which corresponds to qubit permutations and single qubit Clifford gates

    work page

  5. [5]

    Find the automorphism group Aut(G) using a graph automorphism package. 8

    work page

  6. [6]

    This method allows us to find automorphisms of large codes in a short amount of time and study their logi- cal gates efficiently

    Extract the induced logical Clifford by tracking the action on the logical operators and adding the re- quired Pauli corrections following [20]. This method allows us to find automorphisms of large codes in a short amount of time and study their logi- cal gates efficiently. Note that as discussed in [20], this does not necessarily yield the full automorph...

    work page

  7. [7]

    We choose the logical basis ¯X1 =X 1X2, ¯Z1 =Z 1Z3, ¯X2 =X 1X3, ¯Z2 =Z 1Z2.(7) Figure 2 shows the square geometry and the bipartition underlying this choice of logical basis

    Automorphism example: the[[4,2,2]]code We begin with the [[4,2,2]] code, a four-qubit CSS code encoding two logical qubits with stabilizers S=⟨X 1X2X3X4, Z 1Z2Z3Z4⟩. We choose the logical basis ¯X1 =X 1X2, ¯Z1 =Z 1Z3, ¯X2 =X 1X3, ¯Z2 =Z 1Z2.(7) Figure 2 shows the square geometry and the bipartition underlying this choice of logical basis. Because the sta-...

    work page

  8. [8]

    QEC Readout Testbed

    Diagonal example: the[[8,3,2]]cube code We next use the [[8,3,2]] cube code [55–58], which is a standard small code example of a transversal non-Clifford logical gate. Figure 3 shows the cube labeling and the signedT /T † pattern used below. We use the generating set S=⟨X 1X2X3X4X5X6X7X8, Z 1Z2Z3Z4, Z 5Z6Z7Z8, Z1Z2Z5Z6, Z 1Z3Z5Z7⟩, and we choose the logic...

    work page 2000

  9. [9]

    A. J. Daley, I. Bloch, C. Kokail, S. Flannigan, N. Pearson, M. Troyer, and P. Zoller, Nature607, 667 (2022)

    work page 2022

  10. [10]

    Hangleiter, Has quantum advantage been achieved? (2026), arXiv:2603.09901 [quant-ph]

    D. Hangleiter, Has quantum advantage been achieved? (2026), arXiv:2603.09901 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2026

  11. [11]

    The Heisenberg Representation of Quantum Computers

    D. Gottesman, inGroup22: Proceedings of the XXII International Colloquium on Group Theoretical Meth- ods in Physics(International Press, 1999) pp. 32–43, also available as arXiv:quant-ph/9807006, arXiv:quant- ph/9807006

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  12. [12]

    Improved Simulation of Stabilizer Circuits

    S. Aaronson and D. Gottesman, Physical Review A70, 052328 (2004), arXiv:quant-ph/0406196

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  13. [13]

    B. M. Terhal and D. P. DiVincenzo, Physical Review A 65, 032325 (2002)

    work page 2002

  14. [14]

    Jozsa and A

    R. Jozsa and A. Miyake, Proceedings of the Royal Society A464, 3089 (2008)

    work page 2008

  15. [15]

    L. G. Valiant, SIAM Journal on Computing31, 1229 (2002)

    work page 2002

  16. [16]

    Jordan-Wigner formalism for arbitrary 2-input 2-output matchgates and their classical simulation

    R. Jozsa, A. Miyake, and S. Strelchuk, Jordan-wigner formalism for arbitrary 2-input 2-output matchgates and their classical simulation (2015), arXiv:1311.3046 [quant- ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  17. [17]

    Efficient classical simulation of slightly entangled quantum computations

    G. Vidal, Physical Review Letters91, 147902 (2003), arXiv:quant-ph/0301063

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  18. [18]

    The density-matrix renormalization group in the age of matrix product states

    U. Schollw¨ ock, Annals of Physics326, 96 (2011), arXiv:1008.3477

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  19. [19]

    T. B. Wahl and S. Strelchuk, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 180601 (2023)

    work page 2023

  20. [20]

    Bravyi and D

    S. Bravyi and D. Gosset, Physical Review Letters116, 250501 (2016)

    work page 2016

  21. [21]

    Bravyi, D

    S. Bravyi, D. Browne, P. Calpin, E. Campbell, D. Gosset, and M. Howard, Quantum3, 181 (2019)

    work page 2019

  22. [22]

    Extending Matchgate Simulation Methods to Universal Quantum Circuits

    A. Mocherla, L. Lao, and D. E. Browne, Extending matchgate simulation methods to universal quantum cir- cuits (2023), arXiv:2302.02654 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  23. [23]

    Classical simulation of parity-preserving quantum circuits

    C. Wille and S. Strelchuk, Classical simulation of parity- preserving quantum circuits (2025), arXiv:2504.19317 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  24. [24]

    A. R. Calderbank and P. W. Shor, Physical Review A 54, 1098 (1996)

    work page 1996

  25. [25]

    A. M. Steane, Physical Review Letters77, 793 (1996)

    work page 1996

  26. [26]

    Calderbank, E

    A. Calderbank, E. Rains, P. Shor, and N. Sloane, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory44, 1369 (1998)

    work page 1998

  27. [27]

    Grassl and M

    M. Grassl and M. Roetteler, in2013 IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory(2013) pp. 534–538

    work page 2013

  28. [28]

    Sayginel, S

    H. Sayginel, S. Koutsioumpas, M. Webster, A. Rajput, and D. E. Browne, PRX Quantum6, 030343 (2025)

    work page 2025

  29. [29]

    S. X. Cui, D. Gottesman, and A. Krishna, Physical Re- view A95, 012329 (2017)

    work page 2017

  30. [30]

    M. A. Webster, A. O. Quintavalle, and S. D. Bartlett, New Journal of Physics25, 103018 (2023)

    work page 2023

  31. [31]

    S. P. Jain and V. V. Albert, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Information Theory6, 127 (2025)

    work page 2025

  32. [32]

    Restrictions on Transversal Encoded Quantum Gate Sets

    B. Eastin and E. Knill, Physical Review Letters102, 110502 (2009), arXiv:0811.4262

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  33. [33]

    The Smallest Code with Transversal T

    S. Koutsioumpas, D. Banfield, and A. Kay, The Smallest Code with Transversal T (2022), arXiv:2210.14066

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  34. [34]

    Deger, PhasePoly.jl: Fast exact simulation of mono- mial quantum circuits via phase polynomials,https: 20 //github.com/aydindeger/PhasePoly.jl(2026), julia package, version 0.1.0

    A. Deger, PhasePoly.jl: Fast exact simulation of mono- mial quantum circuits via phase polynomials,https: 20 //github.com/aydindeger/PhasePoly.jl(2026), julia package, version 0.1.0

    work page 2026

  35. [35]

    Quantum circuits and low-degree polynomials over F_2

    A. Montanaro, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical50, 084002 (2017), arXiv:1607.08473 [quant- ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  36. [36]

    Fast classical simulation of Harvard/QuEra IQP circuits

    D. Maslov, S. Bravyi, F. Tripier, A. Maksymov, and J. Latone, Fast classical simulation of harvard/quera iqp circuits (2024), arXiv:2402.03211 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  37. [37]

    J. M. Renes, D. Sutter, F. Dupuis, and R. Renner, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory61, 6395 (2015)

    work page 2015

  38. [38]

    A. J. Ferris and D. Poulin, Phys. Rev. Lett.113, 030501 (2014)

    work page 2014

  39. [39]

    J. M. Renes, F. Dupuis, and R. Renner, Physical Review Letters109, 050504 (2012), arXiv:1109.3195

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  40. [40]

    J. K. Pachos and Z. Papic, SciPost Phys. Lect. Notes , 4 (2018)

    work page 2018

  41. [41]

    Matos, A

    G. Matos, A. Hallam, A. Deger, Z. Papi´ c, and J. K. Pa- chos, Physical Review B104, L180408 (2021)

    work page 2021

  42. [42]

    Deger, A

    A. Deger, A. Daniel, Z. Papi´ c, and J. K. Pachos, PRX Quantum4, 040339 (2023)

    work page 2023

  43. [43]

    Leone, S

    L. Leone, S. F. E. Oliviero, and A. Hamma, Physical Review Letters128, 050402 (2022)

    work page 2022

  44. [44]

    S. T. Flammia and Y.-K. Liu, Physical Review Letters 106, 230501 (2011)

    work page 2011

  45. [45]

    Lami and M

    G. Lami and M. Collura, Physical Review Letters131, 180401 (2023)

    work page 2023

  46. [46]

    Almheiri, X

    A. Almheiri, X. Dong, and D. Harlow, Journal of High Energy Physics2015, 163 (2015)

    work page 2015

  47. [47]

    Pastawski, B

    F. Pastawski, B. Yoshida, D. Harlow, and J. Preskill, Journal of High Energy Physics2015, 149 (2015)

    work page 2015

  48. [48]

    Dehaene and B

    J. Dehaene and B. De Moor, Physical Review A68, 042318 (2003)

    work page 2003

  49. [49]

    Gottesman and I

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

    work page 1999

  50. [50]

    Bravyi and A

    S. Bravyi and A. Kitaev, Physical Review A71, 022316 (2005)

    work page 2005

  51. [51]

    Raussendorf, D

    R. Raussendorf, D. E. Browne, and H. J. Briegel, Phys. Rev. A68, 022312 (2003)

    work page 2003

  52. [52]

    Hebenstreit, R

    M. Hebenstreit, R. Jozsa, B. Kraus, S. Strelchuk, and M. Yoganathan, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 080503 (2019)

    work page 2019

  53. [53]

    Dias and R

    B. Dias and R. Koenig, Quantum8, 1350 (2024)

    work page 2024

  54. [54]

    C. Oh, M. Oszmaniec, O. Reardon-Smith, and Z. Zim- bor´ as, Classical simulation of free-fermionic dynam- ics and quantum chemistry with magic input (2026), arXiv:2604.26813 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  55. [55]

    Stabilizer Codes and Quantum Error Correction

    D. Gottesman, Stabilizer Codes and Quantum Error Cor- rection (1997), arXiv:quant-ph/9705052

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  56. [56]

    Gottesman, Surviving as a Quantum Computer in a Classical World, 2024 Draft (2024)

    D. Gottesman, Surviving as a Quantum Computer in a Classical World, 2024 Draft (2024)

    work page 2024

  57. [57]

    Investigations on Automorphism Groups of Quantum Stabilizer Codes

    H. Hao, Investigations on Automorphism Groups of Quantum Stabilizer Codes (2021), arXiv:2109.12735 [cs, math]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  58. [58]

    Barenco, C

    A. Barenco, C. H. Bennett, R. Cleve, D. P. DiVincenzo, N. Margolus, P. Shor, T. Sleator, J. A. Smolin, and H. Weinfurter, Phys. Rev. A52, 3457 (1995)

    work page 1995

  59. [59]

    M. A. Webster, B. J. Brown, and S. D. Bartlett, Quantum 6, 815 (2022)

    work page 2022

  60. [60]

    Tanner, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 27, 533 (1981)

    R. Tanner, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 27, 533 (1981)

    work page 1981

  61. [61]

    Junttila and P

    T. Junttila and P. Kaski, inProceedings of the Ninth Workshop on Algorithm Engineering and Experiments (ALENEX 2007)(2007) pp. 135–149

    work page 2007

  62. [62]

    B. D. McKay and A. Piperno, Journal of Symbolic Com- putation60, 94 (2014)

    work page 2014

  63. [63]

    Bomb´ ın and M

    H. Bomb´ ın and M. A. Martin-Delgado, Physical Review Letters97, 180501 (2006)

    work page 2006

  64. [64]

    Bomb´ ın, New Journal of Physics17, 083002 (2015)

    H. Bomb´ ın, New Journal of Physics17, 083002 (2015)

    work page 2015

  65. [65]

    Vasmer and D

    M. Vasmer and D. E. Browne, Physical Review A100, 012312 (2019)

    work page 2019

  66. [66]

    Honciuc Menendez, A

    D. Honciuc Menendez, A. Ray, and M. Vasmer, Physical Review A109, 062438 (2024)

    work page 2024

  67. [67]

    Gong and J

    A. Gong and J. M. Renes, in2024 IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory (ISIT)(2024) pp. 2496–2501

    work page 2024

  68. [68]

    Channel polarization: A method for constructing capacity-achieving codes for symmetric binary-input memoryless channels

    E. Arıkan, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory55, 3051 (2009), arXiv:0807.3917

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  69. [69]

    A. M. Steane, Phys. Rev. A54, 4741 (1996)

    work page 1996

  70. [70]

    Bravyi and J

    S. Bravyi and J. Haah, Phys. Rev. A86, 052329 (2012)

    work page 2012

  71. [71]

    M. B. Hastings and J. Haah, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 050504 (2018)

    work page 2018

  72. [72]

    M. M. Wilde and S. Guha, IEEE Transactions on Infor- mation Theory59, 1175 (2013), arXiv:1109.2591

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  73. [73]

    Entanglement in the stabilizer formalism

    D. Fattal, T. S. Cubitt, Y. Yamamoto, S. Bravyi, and I. L. Chuang, Entanglement in the stabilizer formalism (2004), arXiv:quant-ph/0406168 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  74. [74]

    Nahum, J

    A. Nahum, J. Ruhman, S. Vijay, and J. Haah, Physical Review X7, 031016 (2017)

    work page 2017

  75. [75]

    Hayden and J

    P. Hayden and J. Preskill, Journal of High Energy Physics2007, 120 (2007)

    work page 2007

  76. [76]

    Sekino and L

    Y. Sekino and L. Susskind, Journal of High Energy Physics2008, 065 (2008)

    work page 2008

  77. [77]

    Van den Nest, New Journal of Physics13, 123004 (2011)

    M. Van den Nest, New Journal of Physics13, 123004 (2011)

    work page 2011

  78. [78]

    M. Amy, D. Maslov, and M. Mosca, IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems33, 1476 (2014), arXiv:1303.2042 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  79. [79]

    Z. Chen, H. Chen, Y. Jin, E. Jang, M. Xu, V. Chan, W. W. Ro, and E. Z. Zhang, Leveraging phase polynomials for quantum circuit optimization (2026), arXiv:2506.20624 [cs.PL]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  80. [80]

    Classical simulation of quantum circuits by half Gauss sums

    K. Bu and D. E. Koh, Communications in Mathematical Physics390, 471 (2022), arXiv:1812.00224 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

Showing first 80 references.