Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

arXiv:0905.1059

New quantum caps in PG(4,4)

Daniele Bartoli, Stefano Marcugini, Fernanda Pambianco

Published May 7, 2009• 2 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

Calderbank, Rains, Shor and Sloane (see \cite{Sloane}) showed that error-correction is possible in the context of quantum computations. Quantum stabilizer codes are a class of additive quaternary codes in binary projective spaces, which are self-orthogonal with respect to the symplectic form. A geometric description is given in \cite{Bierbra}, where also the notion of quantum cap is introduced. Quantum caps correspond to the special case of quantum stabilizer codes of distance $d=4$ when the code is linear over GF(4). In the present paper we review the translation from quantum error-correction to symplectic geometry and study quantum codes in PG(4,4) where we construct complete quantum caps with 20, 29, 30, 32, 33, 34, 36 and 38 points and incomplete quantum caps with 10, 12, 13, 20, 23, 24, 25 and 26 points and we prove the non existence of 11-quantum caps. In particular the quantum caps of sizes 36 and 38 yield positive answers to the existence questions of quantum codes $[[36,26,4]]$ and $[[38,28,4]]$ that remained open in the data base \cite{codetable}.

DOI
10.48550/arxiv.0905.1059

Related papers

New Quantum Caps in PG(4, 4)

Daniele Bartoli, Giorgio Faina, Stefano Marcugini +1 more

Abstract Calderbank, Rains, Shor, and Sloane (see [10]) showed that quantum stabilizer codes correspond to additive quaternary codes in binary projective spaces, which are self‐orthogonal with respect to the symplectic form. A geometric description is given in [8, 19]. In [8] the notion of a quantum cap is introduced. Quantum caps are equivalent to quantum stabilizer codes of minimum distance when the code is linear over . In this paper, we determine the valuesksuch that there exists a quantumk‐cap in , corresponding to pure linear quantum codes, proving, by exhaustive search, that no 11, 37, 39‐quantum caps exist. Moreover we give examples of quantum caps in not already known in the literature.

Journal of Combinatorial Designs•Jun 18, 2012•17 citations

Stabilizer codes from modified symplectic form

Tejas Gandhi, Piyush P. Kurur, Mittal, Rajat

Stabilizer codes form an important class of quantum error correcting codes which have an elegant theory, efficient error detection, and many known examples. Constructing stabilizer codes of length $n$ is equivalent to constructing subspaces of $\mathbb{F}_p^n \times \mathbb{F}_p^n$ which are "isotropic" under the symplectic bilinear form defined by $\left\langle (\mathbf{a},\mathbf{b}),(\mathbf{c},\mathbf{d}) \right\rangle = \mathbf{a}^{\mathrm{T}} \mathbf{d} - \mathbf{b}^{\mathrm{T}} \mathbf{c}$. As a result, many, but not all, ideas from the theory of classical error correction can be translated to quantum error correction. One of the main theoretical contribution of this article is to study stabilizer codes starting with a different symplectic form. In this paper, we concentrate on cyclic codes. Modifying the symplectic form allows us to generalize the previous known construction for linear cyclic stabilizer codes, and in the process, circumvent some of the Galois theoretic no-go results proved there. More importantly, this tweak in the symplectic form allows us to make use of well known error correcting algorithms for cyclic codes to give efficient quantum error correcting algorithms. Cyclicity of error correcting codes is a "basis dependent" property. Our codes are no more "cyclic" when they are derived using the standard symplectic forms (if we ignore the error correcting properties like distance, all such symplectic forms can be converted to each other via a basis transformation). Hence this change of perspective is crucial from the point of view of designing efficient decoding algorithm for these family of codes. In this context, recall that for general codes, efficient decoding algorithms do not exist if some widely believed complexity theoretic assumptions are true.

arXiv:1708.00617•Aug 2, 2017•1 citation

Upper bounds on minimum distance of nonbinary quantum stabilizer codes

Santosh Kumar

The most popular class of quantum error correcting codes is stabilizer codes. Binary quantum stabilizer codes have been well studied, and Calderbank, Rains, Shor and Sloane (July 1998) have constructed a table of upper bounds on the minimum distance of these codes using linear programming methods. However, not much is known in the case of nonbinary stabilizer codes. In this thesis, we establish a bridge between selforthogonal classical codes over the finite field containing q2 elements and quantum codes, extending and unifying previous work by Matsumoto and Uyematsu (2000), Ashikhmin and Knill (November 2001), Kim and Walker (2004). We construct a table of upper bounds on the minimum distance of the stabilizer codes using linear programming methods that are tighter than currently known bounds. Finally, we derive code construction techniques that will help us find new codes from existing ones. All these results help us to gain a better understanding of the theory of nonbinary stabilizer codes.

•Nov 1, 2005•0 citations

The Spectrum of Quantum Caps in PG(4,4)

Daniele Bartoli, Stefano Marcugini, Fernanda Pambianco

We prove the non existence of quantum caps of sizes 37 and 39. This completes the spectrum of quantum caps in PG(4, 4). This also implies the non existence of linear [[37,27,4]] and [[39,29,4]]-codes. The problem of the existence of non linear quantum codes with such parameters remains still open.

arXiv:0912.4461•Dec 22, 2009•0 citations

New Quantum Codes Constructed by Quantum Caps in PG(3,9) and PG(4,9)

Husheng Li, Ruihu Li, Qiang Fu

In this paper, we present a computer-supported method of searching for quantum caps. By means of this method and relevant knowledge of combinatorics, many quantum caps in$PG(3,9)$and$PG(4,9)$are constructively proven to exist. Then, according to the theorem that each quantum cap corresponds to a quantum error-correcting code with$d=4$, we obtain 278 quantum error-correcting codes. Most of these results break the GV bound, and a number of them are optimal quantum codes or have improved parameters.

IEEE Access•Jan 1, 2020•4 citations

Quantum Codes Constructed by Quantum Caps in PG (4, 5)

Chaofeng Guan, Ruihu Li, Husheng Li +4 more

Abstract In this paper, 57 quantum caps in PG (4,5) are found using a computer-supported search method, and related quantum error-correcting codes are constructed via CSS construction. By comparison, most of these codes have good parameters, and some of them enhance the existing results.

Journal of Physics Conference Series•Jun 1, 2021•0 citations
Calderbank, Rains, Shor and Sloane (see \cite{Sloane}) showed that error-correction is possible in the context of quantum computations. Quantum stabilizer codes are a class of additive quaternary codes in binary projective spaces, which are self-orthogonal with respect to the symplectic form. A geometric description is given in \cite{Bierbra}, where also the notion of quantum cap is introduced. Quantum caps correspond to the special case of quantum stabilizer codes of distance d=4d=4d=4 when the code is linear over GF(4). In the present paper we review the translation from quantum error-correction to symplectic geometry and study quantum codes in PG(4,4) where we construct complete quantum caps with 20, 29, 30, 32, 33, 34, 36 and 38 points and incomplete quantum caps with 10, 12, 13, 20, 23, 24, 25 and 26 points and we prove the non existence of 11-quantum caps. In particular the quantum caps of sizes 36 and 38 yield positive answers to the existence questions of quantum codes [[36,26,4]][[36,26,4]][[36,26,4]] and [[38,28,4]][[38,28,4]][[38,28,4]] that remained open in the data base \cite{codetable}.
Abstract Calderbank, Rains, Shor, and Sloane (see [10]) showed that quantum stabilizer codes correspond to additive quaternary codes in binary projective spaces, which are self‐orthogonal with respect to the symplectic form. A geometric description is given in [8, 19]. In [8] the notion of a quantum cap is introduced. Quantum caps are equivalent to quantum stabilizer codes of minimum distance when the code is linear over . In this paper, we determine the valuesksuch that there exists a quantumk‐cap in , corresponding to pure linear quantum codes, proving, by exhaustive search, that no 11, 37, 39‐quantum caps exist. Moreover we give examples of quantum caps in not already known in the literature.
Stabilizer codes form an important class of quantum error correcting codes which have an elegant theory, efficient error detection, and many known examples. Constructing stabilizer codes of length nnn is equivalent to constructing subspaces of Fpn×Fpn\mathbb{F}_p^n \times \mathbb{F}_p^nFpn​×Fpn​ which are "isotropic" under the symplectic bilinear form defined by ⟨(a,b),(c,d)⟩=aTd−bTc\left\langle (\mathbf{a},\mathbf{b}),(\mathbf{c},\mathbf{d}) \right\rangle = \mathbf{a}^{\mathrm{T}} \mathbf{d} - \mathbf{b}^{\mathrm{T}} \mathbf{c}⟨(a,b),(c,d)⟩=aTd−bTc. As a result, many, but not all, ideas from the theory of classical error correction can be translated to quantum error correction. One of the main theoretical contribution of this article is to study stabilizer codes starting with a different symplectic form. In this paper, we concentrate on cyclic codes. Modifying the symplectic form allows us to generalize the previous known construction for linear cyclic stabilizer codes, and in the process, circumvent some of the Galois theoretic no-go results proved there. More importantly, this tweak in the symplectic form allows us to make use of well known error correcting algorithms for cyclic codes to give efficient quantum error correcting algorithms. Cyclicity of error correcting codes is a "basis dependent" property. Our codes are no more "cyclic" when they are derived using the standard symplectic forms (if we ignore the error correcting properties like distance, all such symplectic forms can be converted to each other via a basis transformation). Hence this change of perspective is crucial from the point of view of designing efficient decoding algorithm for these family of codes. In this context, recall that for general codes, efficient decoding algorithms do not exist if some widely believed complexity theoretic assumptions are true.
The most popular class of quantum error correcting codes is stabilizer codes. Binary quantum stabilizer codes have been well studied, and Calderbank, Rains, Shor and Sloane (July 1998) have constructed a table of upper bounds on the minimum distance of these codes using linear programming methods. However, not much is known in the case of nonbinary stabilizer codes. In this thesis, we establish a bridge between selforthogonal classical codes over the finite field containing q2 elements and quantum codes, extending and unifying previous work by Matsumoto and Uyematsu (2000), Ashikhmin and Knill (November 2001), Kim and Walker (2004). We construct a table of upper bounds on the minimum distance of the stabilizer codes using linear programming methods that are tighter than currently known bounds. Finally, we derive code construction techniques that will help us find new codes from existing ones. All these results help us to gain a better understanding of the theory of nonbinary stabilizer codes.
In this paper, we present a computer-supported method of searching for quantum caps. By means of this method and relevant knowledge of combinatorics, many quantum caps inPG(3,9)PG(3,9)PG(3,9)andPG(4,9)PG(4,9)PG(4,9)are constructively proven to exist. Then, according to the theorem that each quantum cap corresponds to a quantum error-correcting code withd=4d=4d=4, we obtain 278 quantum error-correcting codes. Most of these results break the GV bound, and a number of them are optimal quantum codes or have improved parameters.