Overhead analysis of universal concatenated quantum codes

Christopher Chamberland, Tomas Jochym-O'Connor, and Raymond Laflamme
Phys. Rev. A 95, 022313 – Published 8 February 2017

Abstract

We analyze the resource overhead of recently proposed methods for universal fault-tolerant quantum computation using concatenated codes. Namely, we examine the concatenation of the 7-qubit Steane code with the 15-qubit Reed-Muller code, which allows for the construction of the 49- and 105-qubit codes that do not require the need for magic state distillation for universality. We compute a lower bound for the adversarial noise threshold of the 105-qubit code and find it to be 8.33×106. We obtain a depolarizing noise threshold for the 49-qubit code of 9.69×104 which is competitive with the 105-qubit threshold result of 1.28×103. We then provide lower bounds on the resource requirements of the 49- and 105-qubit codes and compare them with the surface code implementation of a logical T gate using magic state distillation. For the sampled input error rates and noise model, we find that the surface code achieves a smaller overhead compared to our concatenated schemes.

  • Figure
  • Figure
  • Figure
  • Figure
  • Figure
  • Figure
  • Figure
10 More
  • Received 27 September 2016
  • Corrected 15 February 2017

DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.95.022313

©2017 American Physical Society

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Quantum Information, Science & Technology

Corrections

15 February 2017

Erratum

Publisher's Note: Overhead analysis of universal concatenated quantum codes [Phys. Rev. A 95, 022313 (2017)]

Christopher Chamberland, Tomas Jochym-O'Connor, and Raymond Laflamme
Phys. Rev. A 95, 029904 (2017)

Authors & Affiliations

Christopher Chamberland1,*, Tomas Jochym-O'Connor1,2,†, and Raymond Laflamme1,3,4

  • 1Institute for Quantum Computing and Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada N2L 3G1
  • 2Walter Burke Institute for Theoretical Physics and Institute for Quantum Information & Matter, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California 91125, USA
  • 3Perimeter Institute, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada N2L 2Y5
  • 4Canadian Institute For Advanced Research, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5G 1Z8

  • *c6chambe@uwaterloo.ca
  • trjochym@uwaterloo.ca

Article Text (Subscription Required)

Click to Expand

References (Subscription Required)

Click to Expand
Issue

Vol. 95, Iss. 2 — February 2017

Reuse & Permissions
Access Options
Author publication services for translation and copyediting assistance advertisement

Authorization Required


×
×

Images

×

Sign up to receive regular email alerts from Physical Review A

Log In

Cancel
×

Search


Article Lookup

Paste a citation or DOI

Enter a citation
×