Quantum Tanner code [1]
Description
Member of a family of QLDPC codes based on two compatible classical Tanner codes defined on a two-dimensional Cayley complex, a complex constructed from Cayley graphs of groups. For certain choices of codes and complex, the resulting codes have asymptotically good parameters. See Ref. [2] for explicit instances based on dihedral groups. This construction has been generalized to Schreier graphs [3].
The underlying geometric complex of the code is a left-right Cayley complex \(\operatorname{Cay}_2(A,G,B)\), where \(G\) is a finite group and \(A=A^{-1}\), \(B=B^{-1}\) are two symmetric generating sets satisfying the total no-conjugacy condition: \(ag\ne gb\) for any \(g\in G\), \(a\in A\), and \(b\in B\). The vertices of the complex are group elements, i.e., \(V=G\). If necessary, the double cover of the graph should be taken so that the graph is bipartite, \(V=V_0\sqcup V_1\).
There are two types of edges in the resulting complex, \begin{align}
In the quantum Tanner construction, qubits are placed on the squares of the left-right Cayley complex. Two classical codes \(C_A\) and \(C_B\) of blocklengths \(|A|\) and \(|B|\), respectively, are chosen, yielding local codes \(C_0 = C_A\otimes C_B\) and \(C_1 = C_A^\perp\otimes C_B^\perp\). The quantum Tanner code is a CSS code defined by the classical Tanner codes \(C_Z = T(\mathcal G_0^\square, C_0^\perp)\) and \(C_X = T(\mathcal G_1^\square, C_1^\perp)\). The figure below depicts an example of a stabilizer generator.

Figure I: An example of a \(Z\) generator on a \(V_0\) local view when \(C_A = \operatorname{span}\{111\}\) and \(C_B=\operatorname{span}\{110, 011\}\). The faces incident to a \(V_0\) vertex are in bijection with the set \(A\times B\), and a codeword of \(C_0 = C_A\otimes C_B\) can be described using this set.
To achieve asymptotically good parameters, fixed classical local codes are chosen so that their dual tensor codes are sufficiently robust, and the left-right Cayley complexes are chosen to be sufficiently expanding. The family is defined using a family of groups \(G\) of increasing size but constant-size generating sets \(A\), \(B\).
Protection
For correctly chosen complexes and local codes, the distance scales as \(d=\Theta(n)\). Minimum distance bound obtained using robustness of dual tensor-product codes [4].Rate
Asymptotically good QLDPC codes. When \(C_A\) and \(C_B\) are chosen to have complementary rates \(\rho\) and \(1-\rho\), with \(\rho\ne 1/2\), the number of encoded qubits scales as \(k=\Theta(n)\) [1].Decoding
Linear-time potential-based decoder similar to the small-set-flip decoder for quantum expander codes [5].Linear-time decoder [6].Logarithmic-time mismatch decomposition decoder [4].Fault Tolerance
For asymptotically good quantum Tanner codes built from TNC Ramanujan complexes with sufficiently large fixed local degree, there are constants \(\eta,\tau>0\) with the following property [7; Thm. 6.1]. For large enough \(n\), every qubit set \(U\) with \(|U|\leq\eta n/2\) is correctable and has intrinsic cut cost \(\chi_U\geq 2\tau|U|\) [7; Thm. 6.1]. Every pure code state has entanglement entropy at least \(\tau|U|\) across such a \(U\) [7; Thm. 6.1]. Under any data placement on any hardware graph, a region holding such a \(U\) behind \(b>0\) hardware edges forces exact syndrome-extraction depth at least \(\tau|U|/b\) [7; Cor. 6.2]. On a square grid of \(N\) sites with \(n\leq N\leq cn^2\) for fixed \(c>0\), the minimum depth over circuits and data placements is \(\Theta(\max\{1,n/\sqrt{N}\})\) [7; Cor. 7.3].Code Capacity Threshold
Independent \(X,Z\) noise: lower bound under potential-based decoder [5; Corr. 15].Realizations
Used to obtain explicit lower bounds in the sum-of-squares game [8].States that, on average, achieve small violations of check operators for quantum Tanner codes require a circuit of non-constant depth to make. They are used in the proof [9] of the NLTS conjecture [10].Notes
For details, see talk by A. Leverrier.Cousins
- Single-shot code— Certain quantum Tanner codes facilitate single-shot decoding [11].
- Good QLDPC code— Quantum Tanner code construction yields asymptotically good QLDPC codes.
- Regular binary Tanner code— Regular binary Tanner codes are used in constructing quantum Tanner codes.
- Tensor-product code— Tensor codes are used in constructing quantum Tanner codes.
- Expander LP code— Quantum Tanner codes are an attempt to construct asymptotically good QLDPC codes that are similar to but simpler than expander lifted-product codes; see Ref. [6] for connection between the codes.
- Left-right Cayley complex code— Applying the CSS construction to two left-right Cayley complex codes yields quantum Tanner codes, and one can simultaneously prove a linear distance for the quantum code and local testability for one of its constituent classical codes [1].
- Classical-product code— A \([[512,174,8]]\) classical-product code performed well [12] against erasure and depolarizing noise when compared to a member of an asymptotically good quantum Tanner code family.
- Multivariate multicycle (MM) code— Collapsed 5D through 9D MM codes have lower check weights than small instances of quantum Tanner codes [13] (cf. [2,14]).
Member of code lists
- Asymptotically good QLDPC codes and friends
- Quantum codes
- Quantum codes based on homological products
- Quantum codes with a rate
- Quantum codes with code capacity thresholds
- Quantum codes with fault-tolerant gadgets
- Quantum codes with notable decoders
- Qubit CSS codes
- Qubit QLDPC codes (non-lattice)
- Realized quantum codes
- Single-shot codes and friends
Primary Hierarchy
References
- [1]
A. Leverrier and G. Zémor, “Quantum Tanner codes”, (2022) arXiv:2202.13641
- [2]
R. K. Radebold, S. D. Bartlett, and A. C. Doherty, “Explicit Instances of Quantum Tanner Codes”, (2025) arXiv:2508.05095
- [3]
O. Å. Mostad, E. Rosnes, and H.-Y. Lin, “Generalizing Quantum Tanner Codes”, (2024) arXiv:2405.07980
- [4]
A. Leverrier and G. Zémor, “Decoding quantum Tanner codes”, (2022) arXiv:2208.05537
- [5]
S. Gu, C. A. Pattison, and E. Tang, “An efficient decoder for a linear distance quantum LDPC code”, (2022) arXiv:2206.06557
- [6]
A. Leverrier and G. Zémor, “Efficient decoding up to a constant fraction of the code length for asymptotically good quantum codes”, (2022) arXiv:2206.07571
- [7]
C.-T. Chu, “The Intrinsic Cost of Quantum Syndrome Extraction”, (2026) arXiv:2609.39705
- [8]
M. Hopkins and T.-C. Lin, “Explicit Lower Bounds Against \(Ω(n)\)-Rounds of Sum-of-Squares”, (2022) arXiv:2204.11469
- [9]
A. Anshu, N. P. Breuckmann, and C. Nirkhe, “NLTS Hamiltonians from Good Quantum Codes”, Proceedings of the 55th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing 1090 (2023) arXiv:2206.13228 DOI
- [10]
M. H. Freedman and M. B. Hastings, “Quantum Systems on Non-\(k\)-Hyperfinite Complexes: A Generalization of Classical Statistical Mechanics on Expander Graphs”, (2013) arXiv:1301.1363
- [11]
S. Gu, E. Tang, L. Caha, S. H. Choe, Z. He, and A. Kubica, “Single-Shot Decoding of Good Quantum LDPC Codes”, Communications in Mathematical Physics 405, (2024) arXiv:2306.12470 DOI
- [12]
D. Ostrev, D. Orsucci, F. Lázaro, and B. Matuz, “Classical product code constructions for quantum Calderbank-Shor-Steane codes”, Quantum 8, 1420 (2024) arXiv:2209.13474 DOI
- [13]
F. A. Mian, O. Gwilliam, and S. Krastanov, “Multivariate Multicycle Codes for Complete Single-Shot Decoding”, (2026) arXiv:2601.18879
- [14]
A. Leverrier, W. Rozendaal, and G. Zémor, “Small quantum Tanner codes from left–right Cayley complexes”, (2025) arXiv:2512.20532
- [15]
N. P. Breuckmann, private communication, 2022
- [16]
A. Leverrier, “Mapping the toric code to the rotated toric code”, 2022 URL
Page edit log
- Victor V. Albert (2026-10-16) — most recent
- Victor V. Albert (2026-06-08)
- Shouzhen (Bailey) Gu (2023-02-21)
- Victor V. Albert (2023-02-21)
- Victor V. Albert (2022-08-12)
- Victor V. Albert (2022-04-26)
Cite as:
“Quantum Tanner code”, The Error Correction Zoo (V. V. Albert & P. Faist, eds.), 2026. https://errorcorrectionzoo.org/c/quantum_tanner, arXiv:2606.11484