<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Comparing the Overhead of Topological and Concatenated Quantum Error Correction · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1312.2316/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1312.2316/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Comparing the Overhead of Topological and Concatenated Quantum Error Correction — mentioned by cohomologo</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14390555</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1312.2316:14390555</guid><pubDate>Mon, 22 May 2017 02:26:48 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;The point where it gets interesting for realistic physics and chemistry applications is around 100 (error-corrected) logical qubits and 10^8 coherent operations, see for example https://arxiv.org/abs/1510.03859. The error correction adds another factor of at least 100 or so in both qubits and gates needed (but possibly much bigger than 100, depending on qubit quality), see for example https://arxiv.org/abs/1312.2316. Other fields of application - factoring large integers, for example - takes many many more qubits to be interesting. While it&amp;#x27;s good to get people excited about the potential of…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1312.2316/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>quant-ph</category></item></channel></rss>
