CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 4Quantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureQuantum Information and CryptographyQuantum many-body systems

The DOI matches its DataCite record.

Benchmarking logical three-qubit quantum Fourier transform encoded in the Steane code on a trapped-ion quantum computer

Open access
Mayer, Karl, Ryan-Anderson, Ciarán, Brown, Natalie, Durso-Sabina, Elijah, Baldwin, Charles H., Hayes, David, Dreiling, Joan M., Foltz, Cameron, Gaebler, John P., Gatterman, Thomas M., Gerber, Justin A., Gilmore, Kevin, Gresh, Dan, Hewitt, Nathan, Horst, Chandler V., Johansen, Jacob, Mengle, Tanner, Mills, Michael, Moses, Steven A., Siegfried, Peter E., Neyenhuis, Brian, Pino, Juan, Stutz, Russell·2024·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.2404.08616arXiv 2404.08616
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

We implement logically encoded three-qubit circuits for the quantum Fourier transform (QFT), using the [[7,1,3]] Steane code, and benchmark the circuits on the Quantinuum H2-1 trapped-ion quantum computer. The circuits require multiple logical two-qubit gates, which are implemented transversally, as well as logical non-Clifford single-qubit rotations, which are performed by non-fault-tolerant state preparation followed by a teleportation gadget. First, we benchmark individual logical components using randomized benchmarking for the logical two-qubit gate, and a Ramsey-type experiment for the logical $T$ gate. We then implement the full QFT circuit, using two different methods for performing a logical control-$T$, and benchmark the circuits by applying it to each basis state in a set of bases that is sufficient to lower bound the process fidelity. We compare the logical QFT benchmark results to predictions based on the logical component benchmarks.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2404.08616

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Error suppression by increasing the colour code size had not been demonstrated on any experimental platform.

    “As a result, error suppression by increasing the colour code size has not yet been demonstrated, to our knowledge, on any experimental platform.”

    From Scaling and logic in the colour code on a superconducting quantum processor (2025) · cites this paper as [17]

    The Introduction discusses comparing encoded and unencoded circuits, and Section II.A describes this paper’s seven-qubit color code. Neither passage addresses whether increasing color-code size had demonstrated error suppression on any experimental platform. Searches for that claim, larger code distances, and code size found no passage establishing it. (LLM, conf=0.73)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 39

  1. D. Gottesman, Quantum fault tolerance in small experi- ments (2016), arXiv:1610.03507 [quant-ph]. · arXiv
  2. C. Ryan-Anderson, J. G. Bohnet, K. Lee, D. Gresh, A. Hankin, J. P. Gaebler, D. Francois, A. Chernoguzov, D. Lucchetti, N. C. Brown, T. M. Gatterman, S. K. Halit, K. Gilmore, J. A. Gerber, B. Neyenhuis, D. Hayes, and R. P. Stutz, Phys. Rev. X 11, 041058 (2021). · DOI · Paper page
  3. C. Ryan-Anderson, N. C. Brown, M. S. Allman, B. Arkin, G. Asa-Attuah, C. Baldwin, J. Berg, J. G. Bohnet, S. Braxton, N. Burdick, J. P. Campora, A. Chernoguzov, J. Esposito, B. Evans, D. Francois, J. P. Gaebler, T. M. Gatterman, J. Gerber, K. Gilmore, D. Gresh, A. Hall, A. Hankin, J. Hostetter, D. Lucchetti, K. Mayer, J. My- ers, B. Neyenhuis, J. Santiago, J. Sedlacek, T. Skripka, A. Slattery, R. P. Stutz, J. Tait, R. Tobey, G. Vittorini, J. Walker, and D. Hayes, Implementing fault-tolerant en- tangling gates on the five-qubit code and the color code (2022), arXiv:2208.01863 [quant-ph]. · arXiv
  4. K. Yamamoto, S. Duffield, Y. Kikuchi, and D. Muñoz Ramo, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, 013221 (2024). · DOI
  5. Y. Wang, S. Simsek, T. M. Gatterman, J. A. Gerber, K. Gilmore, D. Gresh, N. Hewitt, C. V. Horst, M. Ma- theny, T. Mengle, B. Neyenhuis, and B. Criger, Fault- tolerant one-bit addition with the smallest interesting colour code (2023), arXiv:2309.09893 [quant-ph]. · arXiv
  6. R. S. Gupta, N. Sundaresan, T. Alexander, C. J. Wood, S. T. Merkel, M. B. Healy, M. Hillenbrand, T. Jochym- O'Connor, J. R. Wootton, T. J. Yoder, A. W. Cross, M. Takita, and B. J. Brown, Nature 625, 259 (2024). · DOI · Paper page
  7. D. Bluvstein, S. J. Evered, A. A. Geim, S. H. Li, H. Zhou, T. Manovitz, S. Ebadi, M. Cain, M. Kalinowski, D. Hangleiter, J. P. Bonilla Ataides, N. Maskara, I. Cong, X. Gao, P. Sales Rodriguez, T. Karolyshyn, G. Semegh- ini, M. J. Gullans, M. Greiner, V. Vuletić, and M. D. Lukin, Nature 626, 58 (2024). · DOI · Paper page
  8. M. P. da Silva, C. Ryan-Anderson, J. M. Bello-Rivas, A. Chernoguzov, J. M. Dreiling, C. Foltz, J. P. Gaebler, T. M. Gatterman, D. Hayes, N. Hewitt, J. Johansen, D. Lucchetti, M. Mills, S. A. Moses, B. Neyenhuis, A. Paz, J. Pino, P. Siegfried, J. Strabley, S. J. Wernli, R. P. Stutz, and K. M. Svore, Demonstration of logical qubits and repeated error correction with better-than- physical error rates (2024), arXiv:2404.02280 [quant-ph]. · arXiv
  9. J. M. Pino, J. M. Dreiling, C. Figgatt, J. P. Gaebler, S. A. Moses, M. S. Allman, C. H. Baldwin, M. Foss-Feig, D. Hayes, K. Mayer, C. Ryan-Anderson, and B. Neyen- huis, Nature 592, 209 (2021). · DOI · Paper page
  10. S. A. Moses, C. H. Baldwin, M. S. Allman, R. An- cona, L. Ascarrunz, C. Barnes, J. Bartolotta, B. Bjork, P. Blanchard, M. Bohn, J. G. Bohnet, N. C. Brown, N. Q. Burdick, W. C. Burton, S. L. Campbell, J. P. Campora, C. Carron, J. Chambers, J. W. Chan, Y. H. Chen, A. Chernoguzov, E. Chertkov, J. Colina, J. P. Curtis, R. Daniel, M. DeCross, D. Deen, C. Delaney, J. M. Dreiling, C. T. Ertsgaard, J. Esposito, B. Estey, M. Fabrikant, C. Figgatt, C. Foltz, M. Foss-Feig, D. Fran- cois, J. P. Gaebler, T. M. Gatterman, C. N. Gilbreth, J. Giles, E. Glynn, A. Hall, A. M. Hankin, A. Hansen, D. Hayes, B. Higashi, I. M. Hoffman, B. Horning, J. J. Hout, R. Jacobs, J. Johansen, L. Jones, J. Karcz, T. Klein, P. Lauria, P. Lee, D. Liefer, S. T. Lu, D. Luc- chetti, C. Lytle, A. Malm, M. Matheny, B. Mathew- son, K. Mayer, D. B. Miller, M. Mills, B. Neyenhuis, L. Nugent, S. Olson, J. Parks, G. N. Price, Z. Price, M. Pugh, A. Ransford, A. P. Reed, C. Roman, M. Rowe, C. Ryan-Anderson, S. Sanders, J. Sedlacek, P. Shevchuk, P. Siegfried, T. Skripka, B. Spaun, R. T. Sprenkle, R. P. Stutz, M. Swallows, R. I. Tobey, A. Tran, T. Tran, E. Vogt, C. Volin, J. Walker, A. M. Zolot, and J. M. Pino, Phys. Rev. X 13, 041052 (2023). · DOI · Paper page
  11. A. Steane, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sci- ences 452, 2551-2577 (1996). · DOI · Paper page
  12. E. Knill, D. Leibfried, R. Reichle, J. Britton, R. B. Blakestad, J. D. Jost, C. Langer, R. Ozeri, S. Seidelin, and D. J. Wineland, Phys. Rev. A 77, 012307 (2008). · DOI · Paper page
  13. E. Magesan, J. M. Gambetta, and J. Emerson, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 180504 (2011). · DOI
  14. C. Piveteau, D. Sutter, S. Bravyi, J. M. Gambetta, and K. Temme, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 200505 (2021). · DOI · Paper page
  15. H. Bombin and M.-A. Martin-Delgado, Physical review letters 98, 160502 (2007).
  16. A. J. Landahl, J. T. Anderson, and P. R. Rice, Fault- tolerant quantum computing with color codes (2011), arXiv:1108.5738 [quant-ph]. · arXiv
  17. A. J. Landahl and C. Ryan-Anderson, arXiv preprint arXiv:1407.5103 (2014). · arXiv
  18. D. Gottesman, An introduction to quantum error cor- rection and fault-tolerant quantum computation (2009), arXiv:0904.2557 [quant-ph]. · arXiv
  19. H. Goto, Scientific reports 6, 1 (2016).
  20. B. Eastin and E. Knill, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 110502 (2009). · DOI · Paper page
  21. C. Chamberland and A. W. Cross, Quantum 3, 143 (2019). · DOI
  22. L. Postler, S. Heußen, I. Pogorelov, M. Rispler, T. Feld- ker, M. Meth, C. D. Marciniak, R. Stricker, M. Ring- bauer, R. Blatt, P. Schindler, M. Müller, and T. Monz, Nature 605, 675 (2022). · DOI · Paper page
  23. S. Sivarajah, S. Dilkes, A. Cowtan, W. Simmons, A. Edg- ington, and R. Duncan, Quantum Science and Technol- ogy 6, 014003 (2020). · DOI · Paper page
  24. A. W. Cross, L. S. Bishop, J. A. Smolin, and J. M. Gambetta, Open quantum assembly language (2017), arXiv:1707.03429 [quant-ph]. · arXiv
  25. A. A. Mele, Introduction to haar measure tools in quantum information: A beginner's tutorial (2023), arXiv:2307.08956 [quant-ph]. · arXiv
  26. J. Combes, C. Granade, C. Ferrie, and S. T. Flammia, Logical randomized benchmarking (2017), arXiv:1702.03688 [quant-ph]. · arXiv
  27. K. Temme, S. Bravyi, and J. M. Gambetta, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 180509 (2017). · DOI · Paper page
  28. A. Barenco, C. H. Bennett, R. Cleve, D. P. DiVincenzo, N. Margolus, P. Shor, T. Sleator, J. A. Smolin, and H. Weinfurter, Phys. Rev. A 52, 3457 (1995). · DOI · Paper page
  29. B. Koczor, J. J. L. Morton, and S. C. Benjamin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 130602 (2024). · DOI
  30. H. Choi, F. T. Chong, D. Englund, and Y. Ding, Fault tolerant non-clifford state preparation for arbitrary rota- tions (2023), arXiv:2303.17380 [quant-ph]. · arXiv
  31. Y. Nam, Y. Su, and D. Maslov, npj Quantum Informa- tion 6, 26 (2020). · DOI
  32. H. F. Hofmann, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 160504 (2005). · DOI
  33. W. K. Wootters and B. D. Fields, Annals of Physics 191, 363 (1989). · DOI
  34. M. A. Nielsen, Physics Letters A 303, 249 (2002). · DOI · Paper page
  35. L. Wright, C. M. Keever, J. T. First, R. Johnston, J. Tillay, S. Chaney, M. Rosenkranz, and M. Lubasch, Noisy intermediate-scale quantum simulation of the one-dimensional wave equation (2024), arXiv:2402.19247 [quant-ph]. · arXiv
  36. J. P. Gaebler, C. H. Baldwin, S. A. Moses, J. M. Dreiling, C. Figgatt, M. Foss-Feig, D. Hayes, and J. M. Pino, Phys. Rev. A 104, 062440 (2021). · DOI · Paper page
  37. J. Preskill, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sci- ences 454, 385 (1998).
  38. D. Gottesman and I. L. Chuang, Nature 402, 390 (1999).
  39. X. Zhou, D. W. Leung, and I. L. Chuang, Physical Re- view A 62, 052316 (2000).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Mayer, K., Ryan-Anderson, C., Brown, N., Durso-Sabina, E., Baldwin, C. H., Hayes, D., Dreiling, J. M., Foltz, C., Gaebler, J. P., Gatterman, T. M., Gerber, J. A., Gilmore, K., Gresh, D., Hewitt, N., Horst, C. V., Johansen, J., Mengle, T., Mills, M., Moses, S. A., Siegfried, P. E., Neyenhuis, B., Pino, J., & Stutz, R.
ORCID
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2024
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2404.08616
arXiv
2404.08616
OpenAlex
W4394839177
Cited by
4
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Quantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum Information and Cryptography
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum many-body systems
Keywords
quantum Fourier transform, Steane code, logical qubits, trapped-ion quantum computing, randomized benchmarking, process fidelity, fault-tolerant quantum computing

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review