Benchmarking the Planar Honeycomb Code

Craig Gidney; Michael Newman; Matt McEwen

doi:10.22331/q-2022-09-21-813

Benchmarking the Planar Honeycomb Code

Craig Gidney¹, Michael Newman¹, and Matt McEwen^1,2

¹Google Quantum AI, Santa Barbara, California 93117, USA
²University of California, Santa Barbara, 93106, USA

Published:	2022-09-21, volume 6, page 813
Eprint:	arXiv:2202.11845v3
Doi:	https://doi.org/10.22331/q-2022-09-21-813
Citation:	Quantum 6, 813 (2022).

Find this paper interesting or want to discuss? Scite or leave a comment on SciRate.

Abstract

We improve the planar honeycomb code by describing boundaries that need no additional physical connectivity, and by optimizing the shape of the qubit patch. We then benchmark the code using Monte Carlo sampling to estimate logical error rates and derive metrics including thresholds, lambdas, and teraquop qubit counts. We determine that the planar honeycomb code can create a logical qubit with one-in-a-trillion logical error rates using 7000 physical qubits at a 0.1% gate-level error rate (or 900 physical qubits given native two-qubit parity measurements). Our results cement the honeycomb code as a promising candidate for two-dimensional qubit architectures with sparse connectivity.

Featured image: The cycle of measurements that defines the planar honeycomb code, and the locations of logical observables throughout this cycle. Uses XYZ=RGB color coding to map Pauli operators to colors.

Estimating overheads for quantum fault-tolerance in the honeycomb code (Talk by Mike Newman)

A short history of the honeycomb code (Talk by Craig Gidney)

Popular summary

In this paper, we benchmarked a new version of the honeycomb code. The old version of the honeycomb code couldn't fit on a flat surface. It had to be wrapped around a donut. That was a problem because many quantum computer architectures place qubits on a flat surface, not on donuts. Although the donut problem was fixed, the fix required changes that we were worried might seriously hurt the performance of the honeycomb code. However, the result of this paper is that the new honeycomb code still performs very well. This shows the honeycomb code is a viable error correcting code candidate for large scale quantum computer architectures, even ones that place qubits on a flat surface.

► BibTeX data

@article{Gidney2022benchmarkingplanar,
  doi = {10.22331/q-2022-09-21-813},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.22331/q-2022-09-21-813},
  title = {Benchmarking the {P}lanar {H}oneycomb {C}ode},
  author = {Gidney, Craig and Newman, Michael and McEwen, Matt},
  journal = {{Quantum}},
  issn = {2521-327X},
  publisher = {{Verein zur F{\"{o}}rderung des Open Access Publizierens in den Quantenwissenschaften}},
  volume = {6},
  pages = {813},
  month = sep,
  year = {2022}
}

► References

[1] Google Quantum AI. Exponential suppression of bit or phase errors with cyclic error correction. Nature, 595 (7867): 383, 2021. 10.1038/s41586-021-03588-y.
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-03588-y

[2] Dave Bacon. Operator quantum error-correcting subsystems for self-correcting quantum memories. Physical Review A, 73 (1): 012340, 2006. 10.1103/PhysRevA.73.012340.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.73.012340

[3] Héctor Bombín and Miguel A Martin-Delgado. Optimal resources for topological two-dimensional stabilizer codes: Comparative study. Physical Review A, 76 (1): 012305, 2007. 10.1103/PhysRevA.76.012305.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.76.012305

[4] Christopher Chamberland, Guanyu Zhu, Theodore J Yoder, Jared B Hertzberg, and Andrew W Cross. Topological and subsystem codes on low-degree graphs with flag qubits. Physical Review X, 10 (1): 011022, 2020. 10.1103/PhysRevX.10.011022.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevX.10.011022

[5] Rui Chao, Michael E Beverland, Nicolas Delfosse, and Jeongwan Haah. Optimization of the surface code design for majorana-based qubits. Quantum, 4: 352, 2020. 10.22331/q-2020-10-28-352.
https://doi.org/10.22331/q-2020-10-28-352

[6] Austin G Fowler. Optimal complexity correction of correlated errors in the surface code. arXiv preprint arXiv:1310.0863, 2013. 10.48550/arXiv.1310.0863.
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1310.0863
arXiv:1310.0863

[7] Craig Gidney. Stim: a fast stabilizer circuit simulator. Quantum, 5: 497, July 2021a. ISSN 2521-327X. 10.22331/q-2021-07-06-497.
https://doi.org/10.22331/q-2021-07-06-497

[8] Craig Gidney. The stim circuit file format (.stim). https://github.com/quantumlib/Stim/blob/main/doc/file_format_stim_circuit.md, 2021b. Accessed: 2021-08-16.
https://github.com/quantumlib/Stim/blob/main/doc/file_format_stim_circuit.md

[9] Craig Gidney, Michael Newman, Austin Fowler, and Michael Broughton. A fault-tolerant honeycomb memory. Quantum, 5: 605, 2021. 10.22331/q-2021-12-20-605.
https://doi.org/10.22331/q-2021-12-20-605

[10] Craig Gidney, Michael Newman, and Matt Mcewen. Data for "Benchmarking the Planar Honeycomb Code". Zenodo, September 2022. 10.5281/zenodo.7072889.
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7072889

[11] Jeongwan Haah and Matthew B Hastings. Boundaries for the honeycomb code. Quantum, 6: 693, 2022. 10.22331/q-2022-04-21-693.
https://doi.org/10.22331/q-2022-04-21-693

[12] Matthew B Hastings and Jeongwan Haah. Dynamically generated logical qubits. Quantum, 5: 564, 2021. 10.22331/q-2021-10-19-564.
https://doi.org/10.22331/q-2021-10-19-564

[13] Alexei Kitaev. Anyons in an exactly solved model and beyond. Annals of Physics, 321 (1): 2–111, 2006. 10.1016/j.aop.2005.10.005.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aop.2005.10.005

[14] Yi-Chan Lee, Courtney G Brell, and Steven T Flammia. Topological quantum error correction in the kitaev honeycomb model. Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment, 2017 (8): 083106, 2017. 10.1088/1742-5468/aa7ee2.
https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-5468/aa7ee2

[15] Muyuan Li, Daniel Miller, Michael Newman, Yukai Wu, and Kenneth R. Brown. 2d compass codes. Physical Review X, 9 (2), may 2019. 10.1103/physrevx.9.021041.
https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevx.9.021041

[16] Martin Suchara, Sergey Bravyi, and Barbara Terhal. Constructions and noise threshold of topological subsystem codes. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, 44 (15): 155301, 2011. 10.1088/1751-8113/44/15/155301.
https://doi.org/10.1088/1751-8113/44/15/155301

[17] James R Wootton. Hexagonal matching codes with two-body measurements. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, 55 (29): 295302, jul 2022. 10.1088/1751-8121/ac7a75.
https://doi.org/10.1088/1751-8121/ac7a75

Cited by

[1] David Aasen, Zhenghan Wang, and Matthew B. Hastings, "Adiabatic paths of Hamiltonians, symmetries of topological order, and automorphism codes", Physical Review B 106 8, 085122 (2022).

[2] David Aasen, Jeongwan Haah, Zhi Li, and Roger S. K. Mong, "Measurement Quantum Cellular Automata and Anomalies in Floquet Codes", arXiv:2304.01277, (2023).

[3] Margarita Davydova, Nathanan Tantivasadakarn, and Shankar Balasubramanian, "Floquet codes without parent subsystem codes", arXiv:2210.02468, (2022).

[4] Adam Paetznick, Christina Knapp, Nicolas Delfosse, Bela Bauer, Jeongwan Haah, Matthew B. Hastings, and Marcus P. da Silva, "Performance of Planar Floquet Codes with Majorana-Based Qubits", PRX Quantum 4 1, 010310 (2023).

[5] Craig Gidney and Dave Bacon, "Less Bacon More Threshold", arXiv:2305.12046, (2023).

[6] Tyler D. Ellison, Yu-An Chen, Arpit Dua, Wilbur Shirley, Nathanan Tantivasadakarn, and Dominic J. Williamson, "Pauli topological subsystem codes from Abelian anyon theories", arXiv:2211.03798, (2022).

[7] Craig Gidney, "A Pair Measurement Surface Code on Pentagons", arXiv:2206.12780, (2022).

[8] Younghun Kim, Jeongsoo Kang, and Younghun Kwon, "Design of Quantum error correcting code for biased error on heavy-hexagon structure", arXiv:2211.14038, (2022).

[9] Craig Gidney, "Stability Experiments: The Overlooked Dual of Memory Experiments", Quantum 6, 786 (2022).

The above citations are from SAO/NASA ADS (last updated successfully 2023-05-29 19:29:19). The list may be incomplete as not all publishers provide suitable and complete citation data.

On Crossref's cited-by service no data on citing works was found (last attempt 2023-05-29 19:29:18).

This Paper is published in Quantum under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license. Copyright remains with the original copyright holders such as the authors or their institutions.