MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1874981471 · doi:10.26421/qic6.2-1

Quantum accuracy threshold for concatenated distance-3 code

2006· article· en· W1874981471 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueQuantum Information and Computation · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConcatenation (mathematics)Upper and lower boundsDiscrete mathematicsCode (set theory)QuantumNoise (video)MathematicsAlgorithmHilbert spaceComputer scienceCombinatoricsQuantum mechanicsPhysicsPure mathematicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We prove a new version of the quantum threshold theorem that applies to concatenation of a quantum code that corrects only one error, and we use this theorem to derive a rigorous lower bound on the quantum accuracy threshold $\varepsilon_0$. Our proof also applies to concatenation of higher-distance codes, and to noise models that allow faults to be correlated in space and in time. The proof uses new criteria for assessing the accuracy of fault-tolerant circuits, which are particularly conducive to the inductive analysis of recursive simulations. Our lower bound on the threshold, $\varepsilon_0 \ge 2.73\times 10^{-5}$ for an adversarial independent stochastic noise model, is derived from a computer-assisted combinatorial analysis; it is the best lower bound that has been rigorously proven so far.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.881
Threshold uncertainty score0.715

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.243 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it