aiqbench analysis
This research establishes minimal counterexamples to the MacWilliams extension theorem within qudit stabilizer codes, demonstrating that weight-preserving isomorphisms do not always correspond to local Clifford operations and permutations even when self-orthogonality holds. By constructing inequivalent code pairs at small scales (lengths 3–6), the study clarifies fundamental limits in quantum error correction theory where Shor-Laflamme enumerators fail to uniquely identify codespaces under arbitrary unitaries.
Minimal Counterexamples of the MacWilliams Extension Theorem for Stabilizer Codes
arXiv:2607.26214v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The MacWilliams extension theorem fails for module alphabets with non-cyclic socle, and the label alphabet of qudit stabilizer codes, $\F_{q^2}$ over $\F_q$, is such an alphabet. Quantum error correction, however, only ever sees \emph{self-orthogonal} additive codes, and whether that rigidity rescues the theorem---equivalently, whether every weight-preserving isomorphism of stabilizer groups is implemented by local Cliffords and a qudit permutation---was asked by Gluesing-Luerssen and Pllaha and answered negatively by Pllaha for particular qubit codes. We develop the negative answer systematically and at the smallest possible scales. For every prime power $q$ we construct a pair of $[[q+1,q-1]]_q$ stabilizer codes and a weight-preserving isomorphism between them extending to no monomial transformation; the codespaces are inequivalent even under arbitrary local unitaries combined with permutations, though they share Shor--Laflamme enumerators. Self-orthogonality is automatic here, by two elementary lemmas which also show that Dyshko's threshold-length counterexamples were already self-orthogonal, unremarked. For qubits we prove by exhaustive search that length $3$ is minimal and the counterexample essentially unique. Dropping the ``idle qudit'' invariant that detects these, we find the minimal full-support lengths: $4$ for a non-extendable isometry, $5$ for a weight-isometric pair that is not monomially equivalent, realized by explicit $[[5,2]]$ codes; at length $6$ all nontrivial stabilizer elements can have weight $\ge 4$. Whether these codespaces are locally unitarily equivalent is posed as an open problem, connecting the extension problem to the LU--LC circle of questions.
Abstract:The MacWilliams extension theorem fails for module alphabets with non-cyclic socle, and the label alphabet of qudit stabilizer codes, $\F_{q^2}$ over $\F_q$, is such an alphabet. Quantum error correction, however, only ever sees \emph{self-orthogonal} additive codes, and whether that rigidity rescues the theorem---equivalently, whether every weight-preserving isomorphism of stabilizer groups is implemented by local Cliffords and a qudit permutation---was asked by Gluesing-Luerssen and Pllaha and answered negatively by Pllaha for particular qubit codes. We develop the negative answer systematically and at the smallest possible scales. For every prime power $q$ we construct a pair of $[[q+1,q-1]]_q$ stabilizer codes and a weight-preserving isomorphism between them extending to no monomial transformation; the codespaces are inequivalent even under arbitrary local unitaries combined with permutations, though they share Shor--Laflamme enumerators. Self-orthogonality is automatic here, by two elementary lemmas which also show that Dyshko's threshold-length counterexamples were already self-orthogonal, unremarked. For qubits we prove by exhaustive search that length $3$ is minimal and the counterexample essentially unique. Dropping the ``idle qudit'' invariant that detects these, we find the minimal full-support lengths: $4$ for a non-extendable isometry, $5$ for a weight-isometric pair that is not monomially equivalent, realized by explicit $[[5,2]]$ codes; at length $6$ all nontrivial stabilizer elements can have weight $\ge 4$. Whether these codespaces are locally unitarily equivalent is posed as an open problem, connecting the extension problem to the LU--LC circle of questions.
arXiv:2607.26214 [quant-ph]
(or arXiv:2607.26214v1 [quant-ph] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2607.26214 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 · 322 words
Related coverage
When Are Neural Interaction Discoveries Real? Identifiability, Recoverability, and a Pre-Fit Diagnostic
arXiv · Jun 9, 2026

News
Quantum Computing Report · Jul 25, 2026

Geneva Team Distils Magic States with Qubit Recycling
Quantum Zeitgeist · Sep 16, 2026

Expenditure Horizon: Measuring Optimization Ability, with an Application to NanoGPT
METR · Jul 21, 2026