PreprintCited by 1Quantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureParallel Computing and Optimization TechniquesError Correcting Code Techniques

Accelerating the Tesseract Decoder for Quantum Error Correction

Open access
Grbic, Dragana, Beni, Laleh Aghababaie, Shutty, Noah·2026·arXiv

Abstract

Quantum Error Correction (QEC) is essential for building robust, fault-tolerant quantum computers; however, the decoding process often presents a significant computational bottleneck. Tesseract is a novel Most-Likely-Error (MLE) decoder for QEC that employs the A* search algorithm to explore an exponentially large graph of error hypotheses, achieving high decoding speed and accuracy. This paper presents a systematic approach to optimizing the Tesseract decoder through low-level performance enhancements. Based on extensive profiling, we implemented four targeted optimization strategies, including the replacement of inefficient data structures, reorganization of memory layouts to improve cache hit rates, and the use of hardware-accelerated bit-wise operations. We achieved significant decoding speedups across a wide range of code families and configurations, including Color Codes, Bivariate-Bicycle Codes, Surface Codes, and Transversal CNOT Protocols. Our results demonstrate consistent speedups of approximately 2x for most code families, often exceeding 2.5x. Notably, we achieved a peak performance gain of over 5x for the most computationally demanding configurations of Bivariate-Bicycle Codes. These improvements make the Tesseract decoder more efficient and scalable, serving as a practical case study that highlights the importance of high-performance software engineering in QEC and providing a strong foundation for future research.

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2602.02985

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • By using the established A* search with an admissible heuristic, these decoders achieve high accuracy while pruning most of the search space.

    “By using the established A* search with an admissible heuristic, these decoders achieve high accuracy while pruning most of the search space [210].”

    From Quantum error correction and fault tolerance: A comprehensive tutorial (2026) · cites this paper as [210]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Grbic, D., Beni, L. A., & Shutty, N.
Affiliations
  • Rice University (US)
  • Google (United States) (US)
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2026
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W7127611792
Cited by
0
References
0
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Funders
Rice University
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Quantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Hardware and Architecture › Parallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Error Correcting Code Techniques
Keywords
quantum error correction, A* algorithm, decoder optimization, cache optimization, memory layout, surface code, color codes, bivariate bicycle codes, 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