You're viewing papers too quickly. Please wait a moment.<br>This helps keep the archive available for everyone.
Quick Navigation
Topics
Quantum Error Correction Fault Tolerance
Belief Propagation Convergence Prediction for Bivariate Bicycle Quantum Error Correction Codes
arXiv
Authors: Anton Pakhunov
Year
2026
Paper ID
45402
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
217
Citations
N/A
Abstract
Decoding Bivariate Bicycle (BB) quantum error correction codes typically requires Belief Propagation (BP) followed by Ordered Statistics Decoding (OSD) post-processing when BP fails to converge. Whether BP will converge on a given syndrome is currently determined only after running BP to completion. We show that convergence can be predicted in advance by a single modulo operation: if the syndrome defect count is divisible by the code's column weight w, BP converges with high probability \(100% at p <= 0.001, degrading to 87% at p = 0.01\); otherwise, BP fails with probability >= 90%. The mechanism is structural: each physical data error activates exactly w stabilizers, so a defect count not divisible by w implies the presence of measurement errors outside BP's model space. Validated on five BB codes with column weights w = 2, 3, and 4, mod-w achieves AUC = 0.995 as a convergence classifier at p = 0.001 under phenomenological noise, dominating all other syndrome features \(next best: AUC = 0.52\). The false positive rate scales empirically as O\(p^2.05\) \(R^2 = 0.98\), confirming the analytical bound from Proposition 2. Among BP failures on mod-w = 0 syndromes, 82% contain weight-2 data error clusters, directly confirming the dominant failure mechanism. The prediction is invariant under BP scheduling strategy and decoder variant, including Relay-BP - the strongest known BP enhancement for quantum LDPC codes. These results apply directly to IBM's Gross code [[144, 12, 12]] and Two-Gross code [[288, 12, 18]], targeted for deployment in 2026-2028.
Paper Tools
Category Correction Request
Help us improve classification quality by proposing a better category. Every request is reviewed by an admin.
Sign in to submit a category correction request for this paper.
Log In to SubmitReferences & Citation Signals
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.