Quick Navigation
Topics
Quantum Simulation
Trade-offs in Gauss's law error correction for lattice gauge theory quantum simulations
arXiv
Authors: Balint Pato, Natalie Klco
Year
2026
Paper ID
15651
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
168
Citations
N/A
Abstract
Gauss's law-based quantum error correction (GLQEC) offers a promising approach to reducing qubit overhead in lattice gauge theory simulations by leveraging built-in symmetries. For applications of GLQEC to 1+1D lattice quantum electrodynamics (QED), we identify two significant trade-offs. First, we prove via dimension-counting arguments that GLQEC requires periodic electric fields, thereby constraining the design space for lattice QED simulations. Second, we numerically compare GLQEC with a universal quantum error correction (UQEC) code, specifically the d=3 bitflip repetition code, and find that while GLQEC can achieve lower logical error rates in single-round error correction, it exhibits faster decoherence to the steady-state mixed ensemble under multiple rounds. The mixing speed penalty is manifest in observables of interest for both memory experiments and Hamiltonian evolution. We identify a mixing speed threshold, pth=0.277(2), above which using GLQEC exhibits even faster decoherence than without error correction. Our results highlight fundamental limitations of symmetry-based error correction schemes and inform corresponding constraints on formulations of lattice gauge theories compatible with error-robust quantum simulation techniques.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Quantum Simulation research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2026 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- Gauss's law-based quantum error correction (GLQEC) offers a promising approach to reducing qubit overhead in lattice gauge theory simulations by leveraging built-in symmetries.
Paper Tools
Become a member to use research tools
Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.
Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share
Cite This Paper
Copy URL
Compare
Copy DOI Add to Reading List
Category Correction Request
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.