MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Optimal Thresholds for Fracton Codes and Random Spin Models with Subsystem Symmetry

2022· preprint· en· W4226134739 on OpenAlexafffund
Janik Schönmeier-Kromer, Ke Liu, Oscar Viyuela, Lode Pollet, M. A. Martín-Delgado

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicTheoretical and Computational Physics
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersFP7 Ideas: European Research CouncilMinisterio de Economía y CompetitividadArmy Research OfficeBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMinistry of Economic AffairsEuropean Commission
KeywordsFractonToric codePhysicsMinistateSymmetry (geometry)Statistical physicsQuantumIsing modelTopology (electrical circuits)Theoretical physicsQuantum mechanicsQuantum computerMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fracton models provide examples of novel gapped quantum phases of matter that host intrinsically immobile excitations and therefore lie beyond the conventional notion of topological order. Here, we calculate optimal error thresholds for quantum error correcting codes based on fracton models. By mapping the error-correction process for bit-flip and phase-flip noises into novel statistical models with Ising variables and random multibody couplings, we obtain models that exhibit an unconventional subsystem symmetry instead of a more usual global symmetry. We perform large-scale parallel tempering Monte Carlo simulations to obtain disorder-temperature phase diagrams, which are then used to predict optimal error thresholds for the corresponding fracton code. Remarkably, we found that the X-cube fracton code displays a minimum error threshold (7.5%) that is much higher than 3D topological codes such as the toric code (3.3%), or the color code (1.9%). This result, together with the predicted absence of glass order at the Nishimori line, shows great potential for fracton phases to be used as quantum memory platforms.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.270 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review LettersSame topicTheoretical and Computational PhysicsFrench-language works237,207