MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417474343 · doi:10.1103/qfwc-584t

Characterizing Physical and Logical Errors in a Transversal CNOT Gate via Cycle Error Reconstruction

2025· article· en· W4417474343 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review X · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersHORIZON EUROPE Research InfrastructuresArmy Research OfficeIntelligence Advanced Research Projects ActivityRWTH Aachen UniversityAustrian Science FundDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftOffice of the Director of National Intelligence
KeywordsScalabilityOverhead (engineering)Component (thermodynamics)QuantumQubitQuantum computerError detection and correctionControlled NOT gateQuantum error correction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The development of prototype quantum information processors has progressed to a stage where small instances of logical qubit systems perform better than the best of their physical constituents. Advancing toward fault-tolerant quantum computing will require an understanding of the underlying error mechanisms in logical primitives as they relate to the performance of quantum error correction. In this work we demonstrate the novel capability to characterize the physical error properties relevant to fault-tolerant operations via cycle error reconstruction. We illustrate this diagnostic capability for a transversal controlled- () gate, a prototypical component of quantum logical operations, in a 16-qubit register of a trapped-ion quantum computer. Our error characterization technique offers three key capabilities: (i) identifying context-dependent physical layer errors, enabling their mitigation, (ii) contextualizing component gates in the environment of logical operators, validating the performance differences in terms of characterized component-level physics, and (iii) providing a scalable method for predicting quantum error correction performance using pertinent error terms, differentiating correctable versus uncorrectable physical layer errors. The methods with which our results are obtained have scalable resource requirements that can be extended with moderate overhead to capture overall logical performance in increasingly large and complex systems.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review XSame topicQuantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureFrench-language works237,207