Quick Navigation

Topics

Quantum Error Correction Fault Tolerance

A Fault-Tolerant Honeycomb Memory

Crossref
Authors: Craig Gidney, Michael Newman, Austin Fowler, Michael Broughton

Year

2021

Paper ID

13665

Status

Peer-reviewed

Abstract Read

~2 min

Abstract Words

211

Citations

84

Abstract

Recently, Hastings & Haah introduced a quantum memory defined on the honeycomb lattice. Remarkably, this honeycomb code assembles weight-six parity checks using only two-local measurements. The sparse connectivity and two-local measurements are desirable features for certain hardware, while the weight-six parity checks enable robust performance in the circuit model.In this work, we quantify the robustness of logical qubits preserved by the honeycomb code using a correlated minimum-weight perfect-matching decoder. Using Monte Carlo sampling, we estimate the honeycomb code's threshold in different error models, and project how efficiently it can reach the "teraquop regime" where trillions of quantum logical operations can be executed reliably. We perform the same estimates for the rotated surface code, and find a threshold of 0.2%−0.3% for the honeycomb code compared to a threshold of 0.5%−0.7% for the surface code in a controlled-not circuit model. In a circuit model with native two-body measurements, the honeycomb code achieves a threshold of 1.5%<p<2.0%, where p is the collective error rate of the two-body measurement gate - including both measurement and correlated data depolarization error processes. With such gates at a physical error rate of 10−3, we project that the honeycomb code can reach the teraquop regime with only 600 physical qubits.

Paper Tools

Publisher Compare Add to Reading List

References & Citation Signals

Local Citation Graph (Related-Paper Links)

Current Paper #13665 #48374 Proceedings 9th Workshop on Qua...

External citation index: OpenAlex citation signal • updated 2026-04-16 09:12:01

Community Reactions

Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.

Score: 0
Likes: 0 Dislikes: 0

Sign in to react to this paper.

Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)

Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)

No written reviews yet.