Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Subsystem many-hypercube codes: High-rate concatenated codes with low-weight syndrome measurements

Ryota Nakai1,* and Hayato Goto1,2

  • *Contact author: rnakai@riken.jp

Phys. Rev. Applied 25, 014032 – Published 13 January, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/xbzn-vn37

Abstract

Quantum error-correcting codes (QECCs) require high encoding rates in addition to high thresholds unless a sufficiently large number of physical qubits are available. Many-hypercube (MHC) codes, defined as concatenations of the [[6,4,2]] quantum error-detecting code, have been proposed as high-performance and high-encoding-rate QECCs. However, concatenated codes have the disadvantage that the syndrome weight grows exponentially with respect to the concatenation level. To address this issue, here we propose subsystem quantum codes based on MHC codes. In particular, we study the smallest subsystem MHC codes, namely, subsystem codes derived from concatenated [[4,2,2]] error-detecting codes. The resulting codes have a constant syndrome-measurement weight of 4, while keeping high encoding rates. We build block-MAP and neural-network decoders and show that they demonstrate superior performance to the bounded-distance decoder.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (42)

  1. D. Gottesman, Surviving as a quantum computer in a classical world (2024). https://www.cs.umd.edu/class/spring2024/cmsc858G/.
  2. M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information: 10th Anniversary Edition (Cambridge University Press, New York, 2010).
  3. A. Kitaev, Fault-tolerant quantum computation by anyons, Ann. Phys. 303, 2 (2003).
  4. S. B. Bravyi and A. Y. Kitaev, Quantum codes on a lattice with boundary, arXiv:quant-ph/9811052 [quant-ph].
  5. A. G. Fowler, M. Mariantoni, J. M. Martinis, and A. N. Cleland, Surface codes: Towards practical large-scale quantum computation, Phys. Rev. A 86, 032324 (2012).
  6. S. Bravyi, A. W. Cross, J. M. Gambetta, D. Maslov, P. Rall, and T. J. Yoder, High-threshold and low-overhead fault-tolerant quantum memory, Nature 627, 778 (2024).
  7. H. Yamasaki and M. Koashi, Time-efficient constant-space-overhead fault-tolerant quantum computation, Nat. Phys. 20, 247 (2024).
  8. H. Goto, High-performance fault-tolerant quantum computing with many-hypercube codes, Sci. Adv. 10, eadp6388 (2024).
  9. S. Yoshida, S. Tamiya, and H. Yamasaki, Concatenate codes, save qubits, npj Quantum Inf. 11, 88 (2025).
  10. A. R. Calderbank and P. W. Shor, Good quantum error-correcting codes exist, Phys. Rev. A 54, 1098 (1996).
  11. A. M. Steane, Simple quantum error-correcting codes, Phys. Rev. A 54, 4741 (1996).
  12. P. Liu, M. Xu, H. Zhou, H. Wang, U. A. Acar, and Y. Shi, ConiQ: Enabling concatenated quantum error correction on neutral atom arrays, arXiv:2508.05779 [cs.AR].
  13. R. Rines et al., Demonstration of a logical architecture uniting motion and in-place entanglement: Shor’s algorithm, constant-depth CNOT ladder, and many-hypercube code, arXiv:2509.13247 [quant-ph].
  14. P. W. Shor, Scheme for reducing decoherence in quantum computer memory, Phys. Rev. A 52, R2493 (1995).
  15. E. Knill, R. Laflamme, and L. Viola, Theory of quantum error correction for general noise, Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 2525 (2000).
  16. D. Poulin, Stabilizer formalism for operator quantum error correction, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 230504 (2005).
  17. D. Bacon, Operator quantum error-correcting subsystems for self-correcting quantum memories, Phys. Rev. A 73, 012340 (2006).
  18. M. B. Hastings and J. Haah, Dynamically generated logical qubits, Quantum 5, 564 (2021).
  19. J. Haah and M. B. Hastings, Boundaries for the honeycomb code, Quantum 6, 693 (2022).
  20. C. Gidney, M. Newman, A. Fowler, and M. Broughton, A fault-tolerant honeycomb memory, Quantum 5, 605 (2021).
  21. C. Gidney, M. Newman, and M. McEwen, Benchmarking the planar honeycomb code, Quantum 6, 813 (2022).
  22. A. Townsend-Teague, J. Magdalena de la Fuente, and M. Kesselring, Floquetifying the colour code, Electron. Proc. Theor. Comput. Sci. 384, 265 (2023).
  23. H. Bombin, D. Litinski, N. Nickerson, F. Pastawski, and S. Roberts, Unifying flavors of fault tolerance with the ZX calculus, Quantum 8, 1379 (2024).
  24. M. Davydova, N. Tantivasadakarn, and S. Balasubramanian, Floquet codes without parent subsystem codes, PRX Quantum 4, 020341 (2023).
  25. A. Dua, N. Tantivasadakarn, J. Sullivan, and T. D. Ellison, Engineering 3D floquet codes by rewinding, PRX Quantum 5, 020305 (2024).
  26. M. S. Alam and E. Rieffel, Dynamical logical qubits in the Bacon-Shor code, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 022436 (2024).
  27. L. Vaidman, L. Goldenberg, and S. Wiesner, Error prevention scheme with four particles, Phys. Rev. A 54, R1745 (1996).
  28. M. Grassl, T. Beth, and T. Pellizzari, Codes for the quantum erasure channel, Phys. Rev. A 56, 33 (1997).
  29. D. Poulin, Optimal and efficient decoding of concatenated quantum block codes, Phys. Rev. A 74, 052333 (2006).
  30. N. Maskara, A. Kubica, and T. Jochym-O’Connor, Advantages of versatile neural-network decoding for topological codes, Phys. Rev. A 99, 052351 (2019).
  31. P. Baireuther, M. D. Caio, B. Criger, C. W. J. Beenakker, and T. E. O’Brien, Neural network decoder for topological color codes with circuit level noise, New J. Phys. 21, 013003 (2019).
  32. P. Panteleev and G. Kalachev, Degenerate quantum LDPC codes with good finite length performance, Quantum 5, 585 (2021).
  33. E. Knill, Quantum computing with realistically noisy devices, Nature 434, 39 (2005).
  34. B. W. Reichardt, Fault-tolerant quantum error correction for Steane’s seven-qubit color code with few or no extra qubits, Quantum Sci. Technol. 6, 015007 (2020).
  35. C. Gidney, Stim: A fast stabilizer circuit simulator, Quantum 5, 497 (2021).
  36. J. Roffe, D. R. White, S. Burton, and E. Campbell, Decoding across the quantum low-density parity-check code landscape, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 043423 (2020).
  37. J. Roffe, LDPC: Python tools for low density parity check codes (2022). https://pypi.org/project/ldpc/.
  38. S. Varsamopoulos, B. Criger, and K. Bertels, Decoding small surface codes with feedforward neural networks, Quantum Sci. Technol. 3, 015004 (2017).
  39. P. Baireuther, T. E. O’Brien, B. Tarasinski, and C. W. J. Beenakker, Machine-learning-assisted correction of correlated qubit errors in a topological code, Quantum 2, 48 (2018).
  40. C. Chamberland and P. Ronagh, Deep neural decoders for near term fault-tolerant experiments, Quantum Sci. Technol. 3, 044002 (2018).
  41. S. Varsamopoulos, K. Bertels, and C. G. Almudever, Comparing neural network based decoders for the surface code, IEEE Trans. Comput. 69, 300 (2020).
  42. Within the number of samples used for training: NNs with more nodes and layers do not necessarily perform better and sometimes perform worse at level 4.

Outline

Information

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation