Skip to content
aiqbench takeQuantum Computing

aiqbench analysis

This research establishes that approximating the minimum distance of quantum stabilizer codes is computationally hard even within a linear additive gap, closing a previous theoretical gap limited to $O(\sqrt{N})$. The findings provide rigorous fine-grained complexity bounds under standard conjectures like SETH and Gap-ETH, clarifying the limits of efficient algorithms for this fundamental metric in quantum error correction.
Sources coveringarXiv, LessWrong
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

Hardness of Approximating Quantum Code Distance Beyond $\sqrt{N}$

arXiv2 min read

arXiv:2609.33956v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We study the computational complexity of approximating the minimum distance of a stabilizer code. Classically, the minimum distance problem is NP-hard to approximate even to within an additive gap linear in the block length. For quantum codes, however, the reductions of Kapshikar and Kundu and of Grigorescu, Jha and Samperton reach only an additive $O(\sqrt{N})$ gap in the block length $N$. We close this gap and, in a separate direction, initiate the fine-grained study of the problem. We show that no randomized algorithm approximates the distance to within an additive $\alpha N$, for a constant $\alpha > 0$, unless $\mathsf{NP} \subseteq \mathsf{coRP}$. In the fine-grained setting, for every $\varepsilon > 0$, no randomized $2^{(1-\varepsilon)\kappa}\,\mathrm{poly}(N)$-time algorithm computes the distance of a code with $\kappa$ logical qubits unless SETH falls; and no randomized $2^{o(N)}$-time algorithm approximates the distance to within a linear additive gap, on instances where block length, number of logical qubits, and gap are simultaneously linear, unless non-uniform Gap-ETH falls.

Abstract:We study the computational complexity of approximating the minimum distance of a stabilizer code. Classically, the minimum distance problem is NP-hard to approximate even to within an additive gap linear in the block length. For quantum codes, however, the reductions of Kapshikar and Kundu and of Grigorescu, Jha and Samperton reach only an additive $O(\sqrt{N})$ gap in the block length $N$. We close this gap and, in a separate direction, initiate the fine-grained study of the problem. We show that no randomized algorithm approximates the distance to within an additive $\alpha N$, for a constant $\alpha > 0$, unless $\mathsf{NP} \subseteq \mathsf{coRP}$. In the fine-grained setting, for every $\varepsilon > 0$, no randomized $2^{(1-\varepsilon)\kappa}\,\mathrm{poly}(N)$-time algorithm computes the distance of a code with $\kappa$ logical qubits unless SETH falls; and no randomized $2^{o(N)}$-time algorithm approximates the distance to within a linear additive gap, on instances where block length, number of logical qubits, and gap are simultaneously linear, unless non-uniform Gap-ETH falls.

arXiv:2609.33956 [quant-ph]

(or arXiv:2609.33956v1 [quant-ph] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.33956 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 251 words

Related coverage