<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Fault-Tolerant Operation of a Quantum Error-Correction Code · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2009.11482/</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/2009.11482/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Fault-Tolerant Operation of a Quantum Error-Correction Code — mentioned by da-bacon</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38523522</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2009.11482:38523522</guid><pubDate>Mon, 04 Dec 2023 21:42:28 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Yes, for some definition of logical qubit. One of the first example is the experiment of Egan et al where they demonstrated a fault-tolerant QEC measurement using 13 physical qubits. https://arxiv.org/abs/2009.11482 They show improvements in the logical performance on the codes, but it is still a pretty small improvement (factor of 2). Another example is the experiment we performed at Google https://arxiv.org/abs/2207.06431 where we used superconducting qubits. In that experiment we showed that we were able to go from a small code to a slightly larger code and that the error got &amp;quot;slightly…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2009.11482/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>quant-ph</category></item><item><title>Fault-Tolerant Operation of a Quantum Error-Correction Code — mentioned by Strilanc</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28898477</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2009.11482:28898477</guid><pubDate>Sun, 17 Oct 2021 18:17:04 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;This is the paper: https://arxiv.org/abs/2009.11482 It&amp;#x27;s actually from last year, and other groups have done better experiments since then (in particular, experiments doing multiple rounds of correction instead of just immediately smashing the system and analyzing the pieces). It&amp;#x27;s quite funny to see a big deal being made of this paper now rather than a year ago.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2009.11482/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>quant-ph</category></item><item><title>Fault-Tolerant Operation of a Quantum Error-Correction Code — HN submission</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24587623</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:submission:2009.11482:24587623</guid><pubDate>Fri, 25 Sep 2020 07:58:41 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Fault-Tolerant Operation of a Quantum Error-Correction Code&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;2 points; 0 discussion replies on HN. &lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2009.11482/"&gt;Paper and source history&lt;/a&gt;. A submission is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>quant-ph</category></item></channel></rss>
