Accelerating the Tesseract Decoder for Quantum Error Correction
Open accessAbstract
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
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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
Quantum error correction and fault tolerance: A comprehensive tutorial
Spencer, D. J., Jain, S. P., Tanggara, A., Sun, Z., Haug, T., Khu, D., & Bharti, K. (2026) · arXiv
- 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)
- arXiv
- 2602.02985
- OpenAlex
- W7127611792
- Cited by
- 0
- References
- 0
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Licence
- 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