A 3D lattice of stars with layer coding would probably be more topologically protected
> 0.3516 to 0.9844
With what density in the lattice compared to other redundancy protocols? Is there a limit to how tightly such CNOT stars can be packed into a lattice?
Would you just fab lattices in that shape instead, or should the 2D and 3D lattice layouts change?
Would there be value in vortically curving the trace arms (?) of the lattices; is there even more stability in vortices in this application too?
If stars work, Are there snowflake or crystal designs that are even more error-free, for 2D layer coding or 3D surface coding?
What of this changes in moving to optical qudits, for example?
dnalang•4w ago
Standard QEC (Surface Code) fails at this depth because the gate error rate (~2%) is above the threshold. Instead of correction, I implemented a distributed consensus protocol (Majority Vote) using a 10-qubit Star Topology.
It’s effectively a "Self-Healing" logical qubit. The repo has the raw telemetry and the bimodal error graph.I believe this is the software bridge we need while we wait for hardware error rates to drop below 0.1%. Happy to answer questions about the topology.