Quick Navigation

Topics

Quantum Error Correction Fault Tolerance

Game-Theoretic Discovery of Quantum Error-Correcting Codes Through Nash Equilibria

arXiv
Authors: Rubén Darío Guerrero

Year

2025

Paper ID

51107

Status

Preprint

Abstract Read

~2 min

Abstract Words

162

Citations

N/A

Abstract

Quantum error correction code discovery has relied on algebraic constructions with predetermined structure or computational search lacking mechanistic interpretability. We introduce a game-theoretic framework recasting code optimization as strategic interactions between competing objectives, where Nash equilibria systematically generate codes with desired properties. We validate the framework by demonstrating it rediscovers the optimal $[\![15,7,3]\!]$ quantum Hamming code (Calderbank-Shor-Steane 1996) from competing objectives without predetermined algebraic structure, with equilibrium analysis providing transparent mechanistic insights into why this topology emerges. Applied across seven objectives - distance maximization, hardware adaptation, rate-distance optimization, cluster-state generation, surface-like topologies, connectivity enhancement, and Fisher information maximization - the framework generates distinct code families through objective reconfiguration rather than algorithm redesign. Scalability to hardware-relevant sizes is demonstrated at $n=100$ qubits, discovering codes including $[\![100,50,4]\!]$ with distance-4 protection and 50\% encoding rate, with tractable $O\(n^3\)$ per-iteration complexity enabling discovery in under one hour. This work opens research avenues at the intersection of game theory and quantum information, providing systematic, interpretable frameworks for quantum system design.

Paper Tools

Show Paper arXiv Publisher Compare Add to Reading List

References & Citation Signals

Local Citation Graph (Related-Paper Links)

Current Paper #51107

External citation index: OpenAlex citation signal

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.