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:2311.07265

Quotient Space Quantum Codes

JingLei Xia

Published Nov 13, 2023• 0 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

Additive codes and some nonadditive codes use the single and multiple invariant subspaces of the stabilizer G, respectively, to construct quantum codes, so the selection of the invariant subspaces is a key problem. In this paper, I provide the necessary and sufficient conditions for this problem and, establish the quotient space codes to construct quantum codes. These new codes unify additive codes and codeword stabilized codes and can transmit classical codewords. Actually, I give an alternative approach to constructing union stabilizer codes, which is different from that of Markus Grassl and Martin Roetteler, and which is easier to deal with degenerate codes. I also present new bounds for quantum codes and provide a simple proof of the quantum Singleton bound. The quotient space approach provides a concise and clear mathematical framework for the study of quantum error-correcting codes.

DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2311.07265

Related papers

Codeword-stabilized quantum codes on subsystems

Jeonghwan Shin, Jun Heo, Todd A. Brun

Codeword-stabilized quantum codes provide a unified approach to constructing quantum error-correcting codes, including both additive and nonadditive quantum codes. Standard codeword-stabilized quantum codes encode quantum information into subspaces. The more general notion of encoding quantum information into a subsystem is known as an operator (or subsystem) quantum error-correcting code. Most operator codes studied to date are based in the usual stabilizer formalism. We introduce operator quantum codes based on the codeword-stabilized quantum code framework. Based on the necessary and sufficient conditions for operator quantum error correction, we derive an error-correction condition for operator codeword-stabilized quantum codes. Based on this condition, the word operators of a operator codeword-stabilized quantum code are constructed from a set of classical binary errors induced by generators of the gauge group. We use this scheme to construct examples of both additive and nonadditive codes that encode quantum information into a subsystem.

arXiv:1208.6039•Physical Review A•Oct 15, 2012•2 citations

Nonadditive quantum codes

Markus Grassl, Martin Rötteler

Introduction Most quantum error-correcting codes (QECCs) that are designed to correct local errors are stabilizer codes that correspond to additive classical codes. Because of this correspondence, stabilizer codes are also referred to as additive codes, while nonstabilizer codes are called nonadditive codes. Shortly after the invention of stabilizer codes by Gottesman [G96a] and independently Calderbank et al. [CRS+98], the nonadditive ((5, 6, 2)) code was found [RHS+97], which constitutes the first example of a nonadditive quantum code with a higher dimension than any stabilizer code of equal length and minimum distance. About ten years later, the first one-error-correcting ((9, 12, 3)) code and the optimal ((10, 24, 3)) code were found [YCL+09, YCO07], both better than any stabilizer code of the same length. Here we describe a framework that not only allows a joint description of these codes, but also enables the construction of new nonadditive codes with better parameters than the best known stabilizer codes. These codes are based on the classical nonlinear Goethals and Preparata codes, which themselves are better than any classical linear code. In Section 10.3, the framework will be presented from two different points of view, namely union stabilizer codes and codeword stabilized codes, each highlighting different aspects of the construction. To illustrate the relationship of these nonadditive codes to stabilizer codes we first recall the main aspects of the latter. Section 10.4 is devoted to methods for obtaining new codes, including the aforementioned quantum Goethals–Preparata codes.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Sep 5, 2013•6 citations

Codeword Stabilized Quantum Codes

Andrew W. Cross, Graeme Smith, John A. Smolin +1 more

We present a unifying approach to quantum error correcting code design that encompasses additive (stabilizer) codes, as well as all known examples of nonadditive codes with good parameters. We use this framework to generate new codes with superior parameters to any previously known. In particular, we find ((10,18,3)) and ((10,20,3)) codes. We also show how to construct encoding circuits for all codes within our framework.

arXiv:0708.1021•IEEE Transactions on Information Theory•Jan 1, 2009•117 citations

Codeword stabilized quantum codes

Andrew W. Cross, Graeme Smith, John A. Smolin +1 more

We present a unifying approach to quantum error correcting code design that encompasses additive (stabilizer) codes, as well as all known examples of nonadditive codes with good parameters. We use this framework to generate new codes with superior parameters to any previously known. In particular, we find ((10, 18, 3)) and ((10, 20, 3)) codes. We also show how to construct encoding circuits for all codes within our framework.

IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory (ISIT)•Jul 1, 2008•21 citations

Entanglement-assisted codeword stabilized quantum codes

Jeonghwan Shin, Jun Heo, Todd A. Brun

Entangled qubits can increase the capacity of quantum error-correcting codes based on stabilizer codes. In addition, by using entanglement quantum stabilizer codes can be construct from classical linear codes that do not satisfy the dual-containing constraint. We show that it is possible to construct both additive and nonadditive quantum codes using the codeword stabilized quantum code framework. Nonadditive codes may offer improved performance over the more common stabilizer codes. Like other entanglement-assisted codes, the encoding procedure acts only on the qubits on Alice's side, and only these qubits are assumed to pass through the channel. However, errors in the codeword stabilized quantum code framework give rise to effective $Z$ errors on Bob's side. We use this scheme to construct entanglement-assisted nonadditive quantum codes, in particular, $($(5,16,2;1)$)$ and $($(7,4,5;4)$)$ codes.

arXiv:1109.3358•Physical Review A•Dec 22, 2011•25 citations

On the Structure of Additive Quantum Codes and the Existence of Nonadditive Codes

Vwani Roychowdhury, Farrokh Vatan

We first present a useful characterization of additive (stabilizer) quantum error-correcting codes. Then we present several examples of We first present a useful characterization of additive (stabilizer) quantum error--correcting codes. Then we present several examples of nonadditive codes. We show that there exist infinitely many non-trivial nonadditive codes with different minimum distances, and high rates. In fact, we show that nonadditive codes that correct t errors can reach the asymptotic rate R=1-2H(2t/n), where H(x) is the binary entropy function. Finally, we introduce the notion of strongly nonadditive codes (i.e., quantum codes with the following property: the trivial code consisting of the entire Hilbert space is the only additive code that is equivalent to any code containing the given code), and provide a construction for an ((11,2,3)) strongly nonadditive code.

arXiv:quant-ph/9710031•Oct 9, 1997•4 citations
Additive codes and some nonadditive codes use the single and multiple invariant subspaces of the stabilizer G, respectively, to construct quantum codes, so the selection of the invariant subspaces is a key problem. In this paper, I provide the necessary and sufficient conditions for this problem and, establish the quotient space codes to construct quantum codes. These new codes unify additive codes and codeword stabilized codes and can transmit classical codewords. Actually, I give an alternative approach to constructing union stabilizer codes, which is different from that of Markus Grassl and Martin Roetteler, and which is easier to deal with degenerate codes. I also present new bounds for quantum codes and provide a simple proof of the quantum Singleton bound. The quotient space approach provides a concise and clear mathematical framework for the study of quantum error-correcting codes.
Codeword-stabilized quantum codes provide a unified approach to constructing quantum error-correcting codes, including both additive and nonadditive quantum codes. Standard codeword-stabilized quantum codes encode quantum information into subspaces. The more general notion of encoding quantum information into a subsystem is known as an operator (or subsystem) quantum error-correcting code. Most operator codes studied to date are based in the usual stabilizer formalism. We introduce operator quantum codes based on the codeword-stabilized quantum code framework. Based on the necessary and sufficient conditions for operator quantum error correction, we derive an error-correction condition for operator codeword-stabilized quantum codes. Based on this condition, the word operators of a operator codeword-stabilized quantum code are constructed from a set of classical binary errors induced by generators of the gauge group. We use this scheme to construct examples of both additive and nonadditive codes that encode quantum information into a subsystem.
Introduction Most quantum error-correcting codes (QECCs) that are designed to correct local errors are stabilizer codes that correspond to additive classical codes. Because of this correspondence, stabilizer codes are also referred to as additive codes, while nonstabilizer codes are called nonadditive codes. Shortly after the invention of stabilizer codes by Gottesman [G96a] and independently Calderbank et al. [CRS+98], the nonadditive ((5, 6, 2)) code was found [RHS+97], which constitutes the first example of a nonadditive quantum code with a higher dimension than any stabilizer code of equal length and minimum distance. About ten years later, the first one-error-correcting ((9, 12, 3)) code and the optimal ((10, 24, 3)) code were found [YCL+09, YCO07], both better than any stabilizer code of the same length. Here we describe a framework that not only allows a joint description of these codes, but also enables the construction of new nonadditive codes with better parameters than the best known stabilizer codes. These codes are based on the classical nonlinear Goethals and Preparata codes, which themselves are better than any classical linear code. In Section 10.3, the framework will be presented from two different points of view, namely union stabilizer codes and codeword stabilized codes, each highlighting different aspects of the construction. To illustrate the relationship of these nonadditive codes to stabilizer codes we first recall the main aspects of the latter. Section 10.4 is devoted to methods for obtaining new codes, including the aforementioned quantum Goethals–Preparata codes.
Entangled qubits can increase the capacity of quantum error-correcting codes based on stabilizer codes. In addition, by using entanglement quantum stabilizer codes can be construct from classical linear codes that do not satisfy the dual-containing constraint. We show that it is possible to construct both additive and nonadditive quantum codes using the codeword stabilized quantum code framework. Nonadditive codes may offer improved performance over the more common stabilizer codes. Like other entanglement-assisted codes, the encoding procedure acts only on the qubits on Alice's side, and only these qubits are assumed to pass through the channel. However, errors in the codeword stabilized quantum code framework give rise to effective ZZZ errors on Bob's side. We use this scheme to construct entanglement-assisted nonadditive quantum codes, in particular, ((((5,16,2;1)))) and ((((7,4,5;4)))) codes.
We first present a useful characterization of additive (stabilizer) quantum error-correcting codes. Then we present several examples of We first present a useful characterization of additive (stabilizer) quantum error--correcting codes. Then we present several examples of nonadditive codes. We show that there exist infinitely many non-trivial nonadditive codes with different minimum distances, and high rates. In fact, we show that nonadditive codes that correct t errors can reach the asymptotic rate R=1-2H(2t/n), where H(x) is the binary entropy function. Finally, we introduce the notion of strongly nonadditive codes (i.e., quantum codes with the following property: the trivial code consisting of the entire Hilbert space is the only additive code that is equivalent to any code containing the given code), and provide a construction for an ((11,2,3)) strongly nonadditive code.