arXiv Analytics

Sign in

arXiv:1605.03604 [quant-ph]AbstractReferencesReviewsResources

Errors and pseudo-thresholds for incoherent and coherent noise

Mauricio GutiƩrrez, Conor Smith, Livia Lulushi, Smitha Janardan, Kenneth R. Brown

Published 2016-05-11Version 1

We compare the effect of single qubit incoherent and coherent errors on the logical error rate of the Steane [[7,1,3]] quantum error correction code by performing an exact full-density-matrix simulation of an error correction step. We find that the effective 1-qubit process matrix at the logical level reveals the key differences between the error models and provides insight into why the Pauli twirling approximation is a good approximation for incoherent errors and a poor approximation for coherent ones. Approximate channels composed of Clifford operations and Pauli measurement operators that are pessimistic at the physical level result in pessimistic error rates at the logical level. In addition, we observe that the pseudo-threshold can differ by a factor of five depending on whether the error is calculated using the fidelity or the distance.

Related articles: Most relevant | Search more
arXiv:0801.2561 [quant-ph] (Published 2008-01-16, updated 2008-01-28)
Quantum Error Correction Code in the Hamiltonian Formulation
arXiv:1306.0498 [quant-ph] (Published 2013-06-03, updated 2015-05-27)
Syndrome Measurement Order for the [[7,1,3]] Quantum Error Correction Code
arXiv:1303.4291 [quant-ph] (Published 2013-03-18)
Non-Fault Tolerant T-Gates for the [7,1,3] Quantum Error Correction Code