Here is a list of all quantum codes that admit transversal gates. Applicable to codes living in a tensor-product space, such gates can be written as a tensor product of unitary operations, with each operation acting on its corresponding subsystem.

Name | Transversal gates |
---|---|

3D fermionic surface code | CCZ and CS gates can be obtained for the fermionic 3D surface code on certain manifolds by circuits that can be interpreted as moving and spreading lattice realizations of Kitaev chain and \(p+ip\) defects [1]. |

Bacon-Shor code | Logical Hadamard is transversal in symmetric Bacon-Shor codes up to a qubit permutation [2] and can be implemented with teleportation [3]. Bacon-Shor codes on an \(m \times mk\) lattice admit transversal \(k\)-qubit-controlled \(Z\) gates [4]. |

Ball color code | The 3D ball codes on duals of the truncated octahedron, truncated cuboctahedron, and truncated icosidodecahedron have transveral \(CCZ\) gates. |

Binary dihedral permutation-invariant code | Binary dihedral group gates can be realized transversally, which include subsgroups of any level of the Clifford hierarchy and subgroups which cannot be realized by any qubit stabilizer code. |

Block quantum code | Transversal gates are logical gates on block codes that can be realized as tensor products of unitary operations acting on subsets of subsystems whose size is independent of \(n\). When the subsets are of size one and the single-subsystem unitaries are identical, then the gates are sometimes called strongly transversal. |

Clifford code | Discrete subgroups of \(SU(2)\) can be realized transversally. |

Covariant code | \(G\)-covariant codes defined on a tensor product space consisting of \(n\) subsystems are equivalent to codes with a transversal gate set realizing \(G\). |

Doubled color code | Doubled color codes are triply-even, so they yield a transversal \(T\) gate [5]. Using gauge fixing, the codes admit a Clifford + \(T\) transversal gate set. |

Fibonacci string-net code | A universal transversal gate set could be implemented in a folded version of this code using the techniques introduced in Ref.[6]. |

Five-qubit perfect code | Pauli gates are transversal, along with a non-Pauli Hadamard-phase gate \(SH\) and three-qubit Clifford operation \(M_3\) [7,8]. These realize the \(2T\) binary tetrahedral subgroup of \(SU(2)\). The code does not admit any non-Clifford transversal gates [9]. All such gates can be interpreted as monodromies under a particular notion of parallel transport [10; Exam. 6.4.2]. |

Galois-qudit quantum RM code | QRM\(_{d}(m)\) quantum codes are \(\mathcal{M}_{d}^{m}\) distillation codes of distance \(D=2\). |

Group GKP code | Group-GKP codes corresponding to the \(G^{k_1} \subseteq G^{ k_2} \subset G^{n}\) group construction admit \(X\)-type transversal Pauli gates representing \(G\) [11]. |

Heavy-hexagon code | CNOT gates are transveral for this code. However, for most architectures, all logical gates would be implemented using lattice surgery methods. |

Holographic code | There exist holographic approximate codes with arbitrary transversal gate sets for any compact Lie group [12]. However, for sufficiently localized logical subsystems of holographic stabilizer codes, the set of transversally implementable logical operations is contained in the Clifford group [13]. |

Homological rotor code | All generalized Pauli gates are realized transversally. |

Hypergraph product (HGP) code | Hadamard (up to logical SWAP gates) and control-\(Z\) on all logical qubits [14]. |

Kitaev surface code | Transversal Pauli gates exist and are based on non-trivial loops on surface. Transversal Clifford gates can be done on folded surface codes [15]. |

Pastawski-Yoshida-Harlow-Preskill (HaPPY) code | For locality-preserving physical gates on the boundary, the set of transversally implementable logical operations in the bulk is strictly contained in the Clifford group [13]. |

Qubit CSS code | All CSS codes admit transversal Pauli and CNOT gates [16]. Self-dual CSS codes admit a transversal Hadamard, completing the Clifford group. A CSS code is doubly-even (triply-even) if all \(X\)-type stabilizer generators have weight divisible by four (eight); such codes yield a transversal \(S\) (\(T\)) gate [5]. |

Qubit stabilizer code | All stabilizer codes realize Pauli transformations transversally; for a single logical qubit, these a realize dicyclic subgroup of \(SU(2)\). More generally, transversal logical gates are in a finite level of the Clifford hierarchy, which is shown using stabilizer disjointness [17] (see also [18,19]). Transversal gates for \(n\in\{1,2\}\) are semi-Clifford [20]. |

Single-spin code | When the physical Hilbert space is thought of a collective spin, logical gates for spin codes have the form \(U^{\otimes N}\), where \(U\) is a local rotation on the physical system. |

Surface-17 code | Pauli gates, CNOT gate, and \(H\) gate (with relabeling). |

Three-dimensional color code | Universal transversal gates can be achieved using lattice surgery [21] or code deformation [22,23]. |

Triorthogonal code | Admits transversal \(T\) gates [24] and the controlled-controlled-\(Z\) gate [25]. |

Two-dimensional color code | Transversal CNOT can be implemented via braiding [23]. |

W-state code | All logical gates can be implemented transversally. The logical unitary \(U_L\) can be performed with the physical unitary \(U_L\otimes U_L\otimes\cdots\otimes U_L\), where on the physical space \(U_L\) is taken to act trivially on \(\ket\perp\), i.e., \( U_L\ket\perp = \ket\perp\). |

\(((7,2,3))\) permutation-invariant code | Binary icosahedral group \(2I\) gates can be realized transversally [26]. |

\([[15, 7, 3]]\) Hamming-based CSS code | Single-qubit Clifford operations applied transversally yield the corresponding Clifford gates on one of the logical qubits [27]. CNOT gate because it is a CSS code. Transversal CCZ gate [25]. |

\([[15,1,3]]\) quantum Reed-Muller code | This code is the smallest qubit stabilizer code with a transversal gate outside of the Clifford group [28]. A transversal logical \(T^\dagger\) is implemented by applying a \(T\) gate on every qubit [29–31]. A subsystem version yields a transversal \(CCZ\) gate [25]. The code fails to have a transversal Hadamard gate; otherwise, it would violate the Eastin-Knill theorem. |

\([[2^r-1, 1, 3]]\) quantum Reed-Muller code | \(Z\)-rotation by angle \(-\pi/2^{r-1}\) [32]. These are the smallest qubit stabilizer codes with such a gate [28]. |

\([[2^r-1, 2^r-2r-1, 3]]\) Hamming-based CSS code | Pauli, Hadamard, and CNOT gates. |

\([[2^{2r-1}-1,1,2^r-1]]\) quantum punctured Reed-Muller code | All single-qubit Clifford gates. |

\([[2m,2m-2,2]]\) error-detecting code | Transveral CNOT gates can be performed by first teleporting qubits into different code blocks [7]. |

\([[4,2,2]]\) CSS code | Transversal Pauli, Hadamard, and two-qubit \(R\) [33]. A transversal \(CZ\) gate is realized by the rotation \(\sqrt{Z}\otimes\sqrt{Z}^{\dagger}\otimes\sqrt{Z}^{\dagger}\otimes\sqrt{Z}\). Adding \(XYZI\) to the stabilizer group produces a \([[4,1,2]]\) subcode that admits weight-two logical Pauli operations [34]. |

\([[7,1,3]]\) Steane code | All single-qubit Clifford gates, which realize the \(2O\) binary octahedral subgroup of \(SU(2)\) [16,18]. |

\([[8,3,2]]\) CSS code | CZ gates between any two logical qubits [35] and CCZ gate [35–37]. |

\([[k+4,k,2]]\) H code | Hadamard and \(TXT^{\dagger}\) gates, with the latter Clifford-equivalent to Hadamard, and where \(T=\exp(i\pi(I-Z)/8)\) is the \(\pi/8\)-rotation gate. |

## References

- [1]
- M. Barkeshli, P.-S. Hsin, and R. Kobayashi, “Higher-group symmetry of (3+1)D fermionic \(\mathbb{Z}_2\) gauge theory: logical CCZ, CS, and T gates from higher symmetry”, (2023) arXiv:2311.05674
- [2]
- P. Aliferis and A. W. Cross, “Subsystem Fault Tolerance with the Bacon-Shor Code”, Physical Review Letters 98, (2007) arXiv:quant-ph/0610063 DOI
- [3]
- X. Zhou, D. W. Leung, and I. L. Chuang, “Methodology for quantum logic gate construction”, Physical Review A 62, (2000) arXiv:quant-ph/0002039 DOI
- [4]
- T. J. Yoder, “Universal fault-tolerant quantum computation with Bacon-Shor codes”, (2017) arXiv:1705.01686
- [5]
- S. Bravyi and A. Cross, “Doubled Color Codes”, (2015) arXiv:1509.03239
- [6]
- G. Zhu, M. Hafezi, and M. Barkeshli, “Quantum origami: Transversal gates for quantum computation and measurement of topological order”, Physical Review Research 2, (2020) arXiv:1711.05752 DOI
- [7]
- D. Gottesman, “Theory of fault-tolerant quantum computation”, Physical Review A 57, 127 (1998) arXiv:quant-ph/9702029 DOI
- [8]
- D. Gottesman, “Stabilizer Codes and Quantum Error Correction”, (1997) arXiv:quant-ph/9705052
- [9]
- E. M. Rains, “Quantum codes of minimum distance two”, (1997) arXiv:quant-ph/9704043
- [10]
- D. Gottesman and L. L. Zhang, “Fibre bundle framework for unitary quantum fault tolerance”, (2017) arXiv:1309.7062
- [11]
- P. Faist et al., “Continuous Symmetries and Approximate Quantum Error Correction”, Physical Review X 10, (2020) arXiv:1902.07714 DOI
- [12]
- K. Dolev et al., “Gauging the bulk: generalized gauging maps and holographic codes”, Journal of High Energy Physics 2022, (2022) arXiv:2108.11402 DOI
- [13]
- S. Cree et al., “Fault-Tolerant Logical Gates in Holographic Stabilizer Codes Are Severely Restricted”, PRX Quantum 2, (2021) arXiv:2103.13404 DOI
- [14]
- A. O. Quintavalle, P. Webster, and M. Vasmer, “Partitioning qubits in hypergraph product codes to implement logical gates”, Quantum 7, 1153 (2023) arXiv:2204.10812 DOI
- [15]
- J. E. Moussa, “Transversal Clifford gates on folded surface codes”, Physical Review A 94, (2016) arXiv:1603.02286 DOI
- [16]
- P. W. Shor, “Fault-tolerant quantum computation”, (1997) arXiv:quant-ph/9605011
- [17]
- T. Jochym-O’Connor, A. Kubica, and T. J. Yoder, “Disjointness of Stabilizer Codes and Limitations on Fault-Tolerant Logical Gates”, Physical Review X 8, (2018) arXiv:1710.07256 DOI
- [18]
- B. Zeng, A. Cross, and I. L. Chuang, “Transversality versus Universality for Additive Quantum Codes”, (2007) arXiv:0706.1382
- [19]
- J. T. Anderson and T. Jochym-O’Connor, “Classification of transversal gates in qubit stabilizer codes”, (2014) arXiv:1409.8320
- [20]
- B. Zeng, X. Chen, and I. L. Chuang, “Semi-Clifford operations, structure ofCkhierarchy, and gate complexity for fault-tolerant quantum computation”, Physical Review A 77, (2008) arXiv:0712.2084 DOI
- [21]
- A. J. Landahl and C. Ryan-Anderson, “Quantum computing by color-code lattice surgery”, (2014) arXiv:1407.5103
- [22]
- H. Bombin, “Clifford gates by code deformation”, New Journal of Physics 13, 043005 (2011) arXiv:1006.5260 DOI
- [23]
- A. G. Fowler, “Two-dimensional color-code quantum computation”, Physical Review A 83, (2011) arXiv:0806.4827 DOI
- [24]
- S. Bravyi and J. Haah, “Magic-state distillation with low overhead”, Physical Review A 86, (2012) arXiv:1209.2426 DOI
- [25]
- A. Paetznick and B. W. Reichardt, “Universal Fault-Tolerant Quantum Computation with Only Transversal Gates and Error Correction”, Physical Review Letters 111, (2013) arXiv:1304.3709 DOI
- [26]
- E. Kubischta and I. Teixeira, “A Family of Quantum Codes with Exotic Transversal Gates”, (2023) arXiv:2305.07023
- [27]
- R. Chao and B. W. Reichardt, “Fault-tolerant quantum computation with few qubits”, npj Quantum Information 4, (2018) arXiv:1705.05365 DOI
- [28]
- S. Koutsioumpas, D. Banfield, and A. Kay, “The Smallest Code with Transversal T”, (2022) arXiv:2210.14066
- [29]
- E. Knill, R. Laflamme, and W. Zurek, “Threshold Accuracy for Quantum Computation”, (1996) arXiv:quant-ph/9610011
- [30]
- J. T. Anderson, G. Duclos-Cianci, and D. Poulin, “Fault-Tolerant Conversion between the Steane and Reed-Muller Quantum Codes”, Physical Review Letters 113, (2014) arXiv:1403.2734 DOI
- [31]
- E. T. Campbell, B. M. Terhal, and C. Vuillot, “Roads towards fault-tolerant universal quantum computation”, Nature 549, 172 (2017) arXiv:1612.07330 DOI
- [32]
- B. Zeng et al., “Local unitary versus local Clifford equivalence of stabilizer and graph states”, Physical Review A 75, (2007) arXiv:quant-ph/0611214 DOI
- [33]
- D. Gottesman, “Quantum fault tolerance in small experiments”, (2016) arXiv:1610.03507
- [34]
- S. P. Jordan, E. Farhi, and P. W. Shor, “Error-correcting codes for adiabatic quantum computation”, Physical Review A 74, (2006) arXiv:quant-ph/0512170 DOI
- [35]
- H. Chen et al., “Automated discovery of logical gates for quantum error correction (with Supplementary (153 pages))”, Quantum Information and Computation 22, 947 (2022) arXiv:1912.10063 DOI
- [36]
- A. Kubica, B. Yoshida, and F. Pastawski, “Unfolding the color code”, New Journal of Physics 17, 083026 (2015) arXiv:1503.02065 DOI
- [37]
- E. Campbell, “The smallest interesting colour code,” Online available at https://earltcampbell.com/2016/09/26/the-smallest-interesting-colour-code/ (2016), accessed on 2019-12-09.