Code | Description |
---|---|

3D subsystem surface code | Subsystem generalization of the surface code on a 3D cubic lattice with stabilizer generators of weight at most three. |

3D surface code | A variant of the Kitaev surface code on a 3D lattice. The closely related solid code [1] consists of several 3D surface codes stitched together in a way that the distance scales faster than the linear size of the system. |

Abelian TQD stabilizer code | Modular-qudit stabilizer code whose codewords realize 2D modular gapped Abelian topological order. The corresponding anyon theory is defined by an abelian group and a Type-III group cocycle that can be decomposed as a product of Type-I and Type-II group cocycles; see [2; Sec. IV.A]. |

Abelian quantum double stabilizer code | Modular-qudit stabilizer code whose codewords realize 2D modular gapped Abelian topological order with trivial cocycle. The corresponding anyon theory is defined by an abelian group. All such codes can be realized by a stack of modular-qudit surface codes because all abelian groups are Kronecker products of cyclic groups. |

Abelian topological code | Code whose codewords realize topological order associated with an Abelian anyon theory, equivalently, a unitary braided fusion category which is an Abelian group under fusion [3]. |

Analog stabilizer code | Also known as a linear, symplectic, or Gaussian stabilizer code. Oscillator-into-oscillator stabilizer code encoding \(k\) logical modes into \(n\) physical modes. An \(((n,k,d))_{\mathbb{R}}\) analog stabilizer code is denoted as \([[n,k,d]]_{\mathbb{R}}\), where \(d\) is the code's distance. |

Analog surface code | Also called a continuous-variable (CV) surface code. An analog CSS version of the Kitaev surface code. |

Approximate secret-sharing code | A family of \( [[n,k,d]]_q \) CSS codes approximately correcting errors on up to \(\lfloor (n-1)/2 \rfloor\) qubits, i.e., with approximate distance approaching the no-cloning bound \(n/2\). Constructed using a non-degenerate CSS code, such as a polynomial quantum code, and a classical authentication scheme. The code can be viewed as an \(t\)-error tolerant secret sharing scheme. Since the code yields a small logical subspace using large registers that contain both classical and quantum information, it is not useful for practical error correction problems, but instead demonstrates the power of approximate quantum error correction. |

Bacon-Shor code | CSS subsystem stabilizer code defined on an \(m_1 \times m_2\) lattice of qubits. It is said to be symmetric when \(m_1=m_2\). The \(X\)-type and \(Z\)-type stabilizers defined as \(X\) and \(Z\) operators acting on all qubits on adjacent columns and rows, respectively. Let \(O_{i,j}\) denote an operator acting on the qubit at a position \((i,j)\) on the lattice, with \(i\in\{0,1,\ldots ,m_1-1\}\) and \(j\in\{0,1,\ldots,m_2-1\}\). The code's stabilizer group is \begin{align} \mathsf{S}=\langle X_{i,*}X_{i+1,*},Z_{*,j}Z_{*,j+1}\rangle~, \tag*{(1)}\end{align} with generators expressed as products of nearest-neightbour 2-qubit gauge operators, \begin{align} \begin{split} X_{i,*}X_{i+1,*}= \bigotimes_{k=0}^{m_2-1} X_{i,k}X_{i+1,k} \\ Z_{*,j}Z_{*,j+1}=\bigotimes_{k=0}^{m_1-1} Z_{k,j}Z_{k,j+1}~. \end{split} \tag*{(2)}\end{align} Syndrome extraction can be done by measuring these gauge operators, which are on fewer qubits and local. |

Balanced product (BP) code | Family of CSS quantum codes based on products of two classical codes which share common symmetries. The balanced product can be understood as taking the usual tensor/hypergraph product and then factoring out the symmetries factored. This reduces the overall number of physical qubits \(n\), while, under certain circumstances, leaving the number of encoded qubits \(k\) and the code distance \(d\) invariant. This leads to a more favourable encoding rate \(k/n\) and normalized distance \(d/n\) compared to the tensor/hypergraph product. |

Binary quantum Goppa code | Also known as a quantum AG code. Binary quantum Goppa codes are a family of \( [[n,k,d]]_q \) CSS codes for \( q=2^m \), generated using classical Goppa codes. |

Bosonic stabilizer code | Also known as a continuous-variable (CV) stabilizer code. Bosonic code whose codespace is defined as the common \(+1\) eigenspace of a group of mutually commuting displacement operators. Displacements form the stabilizers of the code, and have continuous eigenvalues, in contrast with the discrete set of eigenvalues of qubit stabilizers. As a result, exact codewords are non-normalizable, so approximate constructions have to be considered. |

Braunstein five-mode code | A \([[5,1,3]]_{\mathbb{R}}\) analog stabilizer version of the five-qubit perfect code. |

Bravyi-Bacon-Shor (BBS) code | An \([[n,k,d]]\) CSS subsystem stabilizer code generalizing Bacon-Shor codes to a larger set of qubit geometries. Defined through a binary matrix \(A\) such that physical qubits live on sites \((i,j)\) whenever \(A_{i,j}=1\). The gauge group is generated by 2-qubit operators, including \(XX\) interations between any two qubits sharing a column in \(A\), and \(ZZ\) interations between two qubits sharing a row. The code parameters are: \(n=\sum_{i,j}A_{i,j}\), \(k=\text{rank}(A)\), and the distance is the minimum weight of any row or column. |

Bring's code | Also called a small stellated dodecahedron code. A \([[30,8,3]]\) hyperbolic surface code on a quotient of the \(\{5,5\}\) hyperbolic tiling called Bring's curve. Its qubits and stabilizer generators lie on the vertices of the small stellated dodecahedron. Admits a set of weight-five stabilizer generators. |

Calderbank-Shor-Steane (CSS) stabilizer code | A stabilizer code admitting a set of stabilizer generators that are either \(Z\)-type or \(X\)-type operators. The two sets of stabilizer generators can often, but not always, be related to parts of a chain complex over the appropriate ring or field. |

Chiral semion subsystem code | Modular-qudit subsystem stabilizer code with qudit dimension \(q=4\) that is characterized by the chiral semion topological phase. Admits a set of geometrically local stabilizer generators on a torus. |

Classical-product code | A CSS code constructed by separately constructing the \(X\) and \(Z\) check matrices using product constructions from classical codes. A particular \([[512,174,8]]\) code performed well [4] against erasure and depolarizing noise when compared to other notable CSS codes, such as the asymptotically good quantum Tanner codes. |

Clifford-deformed surface code (CDSC) | A generally non-CSS derivative of the surface code defined by applying a constant-depth Clifford circuit to the original (CSS) surface code. Unlike the surface code, CDSCs include codes whose thresholds and subthreshold performance are enhanced under noise biased towards dephasing. Examples of CDSCs include the XY code, XZZX code, and random CDSCs. |

Cluster-state code | Code consisting of cluster states [5], which are stabilizer states defined on a graph. There is one stabilizer generator \(S_v\) per graph vertex \(v\) of the form \begin{align} S_v = X_{v} \prod_{w\in N(v)} Z_w~, \tag*{(3)}\end{align} where the neighborhood \(N(v)\) is the set of vertices which share an edge with \(v\). |

Color code | A family of abelian topological CSS stabilizer codes defined on a \(D\)-dimensional lattice which satisfies two properties: The lattice is (1) a homogeneous simplicial \(D\)-complex obtained as a triangulation of the interior of a \(D\)-simplex and (2) is \(D+1\)-colorable. Qubits are placed on the \(D\)-simplices and generators are supported on suitable simplices [6]. For 2-dimensional color code, the lattice must be such that it is 3-valent and has 3-colorable faces, such as a honeycomb lattice. The qubits are placed on the vertices and two stabilizer generators are placed on each face [7]. |

Crystalline-circuit qubit code | Code dynamically generated by unitary Clifford circuits defined on a lattice with some crystalline symmetry. A notable example is the circuit defined on a rotated square lattice with vertices corresponding to iSWAP gates and edges decorated by \(R_X[\pi/2]\), a single-qubit rotation by \(\pi/2\) around the \(X\)-axis. This circuit is invariant under space-time translations by a unit cell \((T, a)\) and all transformations of the square lattice point group \(D_4\). |

Dihedral \(G=D_m\) quantum-double code | Quantum-double code whose codewords realize \(G=D_m\) topological order associated with a \(2m\)-element dihedral group \(D_m\). Includes the simplest non-Abelian order \(D_3 = S_3\) associated with the permutation group of three objects. |

Dinur-Hsieh-Lin-Vidick (DHLV) code | Stub. |

Distance-balanced code | Galois-qudit CSS code constructed from a CSS code and a classical code using a distance-balancing procedure based on a generalized homological product. The initial code is said to be unbalanced, i.e., tailored to noise biased toward either bit- or phase-flip errors, and the procedure can result in a code that is treats both types of errors on a more equal footing. The original distance-balancing procedure [8], later generalized [9; Thm. 4.2], can yield QLDPC codes [8; Thm. 1]. |

Double-semion stabilizer code | Modular-qudit stabilizer code with qudit dimension \(q=4\) that is characterized by the double semion topological phase. The code can be obtained from the \(\mathbb{Z}_4\) surface code by condensing the anyon \(e^2 m^2\) [10]. Originally formulated as a non-stabilizer qubit code [11]. |

Doubled color code | Family of \([[2t^3+8t^2+6t-1,1,2t+1]]\) subsystem color codes (with \(t\geq 1\)), constructed using a generalization of the doubling transformation [12], that admit a Clifford + \(T\) transversal gate set using gauge fixing. |

EA analog stabilizer code | Constructed using a variation of the analog stabilizer formalism designed to utilize pre-shared entanglement between sender and receiver. |

EA qubit stabilizer code | Constructed using a variation of the stabilizer formalism designed to utilize pre-shared entanglement between sender and receiver. A code is typically denoted as \([[n,k;c]]\) or \([[n,k,d;c]]\), where \(d\) is the distance of the underlying non-EA \([[n,k,d]]\) code, and \(c\) is the number of required pre-shared maximally entangled Bell states. While other entangled states can be used, there is always a choice a generators such that the Bell state suffices while still using the fewest ebits. |

Expander LP code | Family of \(G\)-lifted product codes constructed using two random classical Tanner codes defined on expander graphs [13]. For certain parameters, this construction yields the first asymptotically good QLDPC codes. Classical codes resulting from this construction are one of the first two families of \(c^3\)-LTCs. |

Fiber-bundle code | Also called a twisted product code. CSS code constructed by combining a random LDPC code as the base and a cyclic repetition code as the fiber of a fiber bundle. After applying distance balancing, a QLDPC code with distance \(\Omega(n^{3/5}\text{polylog}(n))\) and rate \(\Omega(n^{-2/5}\text{polylog}(n))\) is obtained. |

Five-qubit perfect code | Five-qubit stabilizer code that is the smallest qubit stabilizer code to correct a single-qubit error. Its generators that are symmetric under cyclic permutation of qubits, \begin{align} \begin{split} S_1 &= IXZZX \\ S_2 &= XZZXI \\ S_3 &= ZZXIX \\ S_4 &= ZXIXZ~. \end{split} \tag*{(4)}\end{align} |

Five-rotor code | Extension of the five-qubit stabilizer code to the integer alphabet, i.e., the angular momentum states of a planar rotor. The code is \(U(1)\)-covariant and ideal codewords are not normalizable. |

Floquet code | Also called a Hastings-Haah code. Dynamically-generated stabilizer-based code whose logical qubits are generated through a particular sequence of check-operator measurements such that the number of logical qubits is larger than when the code is viewed as a static subsystem stabilizer code. |

Floquet color code | Also called the CSS Floquet code. Floquet code on a trivalent lattice whose parent topological phase is the \(\mathbb{Z}_2\times\mathbb{Z}_2\) 2D color-code phase and whose measurements cycle logical quantum information between the three \(\mathbb{Z}_2\) surface-code condensed phases of the parent phase. The code's ISG is the stabilizer group of one of the three surface codes. |

Folded quantum Reed-Solomon (FQRS) code | CSS code on \(q^m\)-dimensional Galois-qudits that is constructed from folded Reed-Solomon (FRS) codes via the Galois-qudit CSS construction. This code is used to construct Singleton-bound approaching approximate quantum codes. |

Fractal surface code | Kitaev surface code on a fractal geometry, which is obtained by removing qubits from the surface code on a cubic lattice. Stub. |

Fracton code | A code whose codewords make up the ground-state space of a fracton-phase Hamiltonian. |

Freedman-Meyer-Luo code | Hyperbolic surface code constructed using cellulation of a Riemannian Manifold \(M\) exhibiting systolic freedom [14]. Codes derived from such manifolds can achieve distances scaling better than \(\sqrt{n}\), something that is impossible using closed 2D surfaces or 2D surfaces with boundaries [15]. Improved codes are obtained by studying a weak family of Riemann metrics on closed 4-dimensional manifolds \(S^2\otimes S^2\) with the \(Z_2\)-homology. |

Frobenius code | Let \(C\) be a quantum cyclic code on \(n\) prime-dimensional qudits. \(C\) is a Frobenius code if there exists a positive integer \(t\) such that \(n\) divides \(p^t +1\). |

Fusion-based quantum computing (FBQC) code | Code whose codewords are resource states used in an FBQC scheme. Related to a cluster state via Hadamard transformations. |

GKP cluster-state code | Multi-mode code encoding logical qubits into a cluster-state stabilizer code concatenated with a single-mode GKP code. Provides a way to perform a continuous-variable (CV) analogue of fault-tolerant MBQC. |

GKP-stabilizer code | Multimode GKP code with an infinite-dimensional logical space. Can be obtained by considering an \(n\)-mode GKP code with a finite-dimensional logical space, removing stabilizers such that the logical space becomes infinite dimensional, and applying a Gaussian circuit. |

Galois-qudit BCH code | True Galois-qudit stabilizer code constructed from BCH codes via either the Hermitian construction or the Galois-qudit CSS construction. |

Galois-qudit CSS code | An \([[n,k,d]]_q \) Galois-qudit true stabilizer code admitting a set of stabilizer generators that are either \(Z\)-type or \(X\)-type Galois-qudit Pauli strings. Codes can be defined from chain complexes over \(GF(q)\) via an extension of qubit CSS-to-homology correspondence to Galois qudits. |

Galois-qudit GRS code | True \(q\)-Galois-qudit stabilizer code constructed from generalized Reed-Solomon (GRS) codes via either the Hermitian construction [16–18] or the Galois-qudit CSS construction [19,20]. |

Galois-qudit RS code | Also called a polynomial code (QPyC). An \([[n,k,n-k+1]]_q\) (with \(q>n\)) Galois-qudit CSS code constructed using two Reed-Solomon codes over \(GF(q)\). |

Galois-qudit stabilizer code | An \(((n,K,d))_q\) Galois-qudit code whose logical subspace is the joint eigenspace of commuting Galois-qudit Pauli operators forming the code's stabilizer group \(\mathsf{S}\). Traditionally, the logical subspace is the joint \(+1\) eigenspace, and the stabilizer group does not contain \(e^{i \phi} I\) for any \(\phi \neq 0\). The distance \(d\) is the minimum weight of a Galois-qudit Pauli string that implements a nontrivial logical operation in the code. |

Galois-qudit topological code | Abelian topological code, such as a surface [21,22] or color [23] code, constructed on lattices of Galois qudits. |

Generalized bicycle (GB) code | A quasi-cyclic Galois-qudit CSS code constructed using a generalized version of the bicycle ansatz [24] from a pair of equivalent index-two quasi-cyclic linear codes. |

Generalized homological-product CSS code | CSS code whose properties are determined from an underlying chain complex, which often consists of some type of product of other chain complexes. |

Generalized homological-product code | Stabilizer code whose properties are determined from an underlying chain complex, which often consists of some type of product of other chain complexes. The Qubit CSS-to-homology correspondence yields an interpretation of codes in terms of manifolds, thus allowing for the use of various products from topology in constructing codes. |

Generalized surface code | Also called the \(D\)-dimensional surface or \(D\)-dimensional toric code. CSS-type extenstion of the Kitaev surface code to arbitrary \(D\)-dimensional manifolds. The 4D surface code serves as a self-correcting quantum memory, while surface codes in higher dimensions can have distances not possible in lower dimensions. |

Golden code | Variant of the Guth-Lubotzky hyperbolic surface code that uses regular tessellations for 4-dimensional hyperbolic space. |

Good QLDPC code | Also called asymptotically good QLDPC codes. A family of QLDPC codes \([[n_i,k_i,d_i]]\) whose asymptotic rate \(\lim_{i\to\infty} k_i/n_i\) and asymptotic distance \(\lim_{i\to\infty} d_i/n_i\) are both positive. |

Gottesman-Kitaev-Preskill (GKP) code | Quantum lattice code for a non-degenerate lattice, thereby admitting a finite-dimensional logical subspace. Codes on \(n\) modes can be constructed from lattices with \(2n\)-dimensional full-rank Gram matrices \(A\). |

Group GKP code | Group-based quantum code whose construction is based on nested subgroups \(H\subset K \subset G\). Logical subspace is spanned by basis states that are equal superpositions of elements of cosets of \(H\) in \(K\), and can be finite- or infinite-dimensional. |

Guth-Lubotzky code | Hyperbolic surface code based on cellulations of certain four-dimensional manifolds. The manifolds are shown to have good homology and systolic properties for the purposes of code construction, with corresponding codes exhibiting linear rate. |

Haah cubic code | Class of stabilizer codes on a length-\(L\) cubic lattice with one or two qubits per site. We also require that the stabilizer group \(\mathsf{S}\) is translation invariant and generated by two types of operators with support on a cube. In the non-CSS case, these two are related by spatial inversion. For CSS codes, we require that the product of all corner operators is the identity. We lastly require that there are no non-trival ''string operators'', meaning that single-site operators are a phase, and any period one logical operator \(l \in \mathsf{S}^{\perp}\) is just a phase. Haah showed in his original construction that there is exactly one non-CSS code of this form, and 17 CSS codes [25]. The non-CSS code is labeled code 0, and the rest are numbered from 1 - 17. Codes 1-4, 7, 8, and 10 do not have string logical operators [25,26]. |

Heavy-hexagon code | Subsystem stabilizer code on the heavy-hexagonal lattice that combines Bacon-Shor and surface-code stabilizers. Encodes one logical qubit into \(n=(5d^2-2d-1)/2\) physical qubits with distance \(d\). The heavy-hexagonal lattice allows for low degree (at most 3) connectivity between all the data and ancilla qubits, which is suitable for fixed-frequency transom qubits subject to frequency collision errors. |

Hemicubic code | Stub. |

Hexagonal GKP code | Single-mode GKP qudit-into-oscillator code based on the hexagonal lattice. Offers the best error correction against displacement noise in a single mode due to the optimal packing of the underlying lattice. |

Hierarchical code | Member of a family of \([[n,k,d]]\) qubit stabilizer codes resulting from a concatenation of a constant-rate QLDPC code with a rotated surface code. Concatenation allows for syndrome extraction to be performed efficiently on a 2D geometry at the expense of a logarithmically vanishing rate. |

High-dimensional expander (HDX) code | CSS code constructed from a Ramanujan quantum code and an asymptotically good classical LDPC code using distance balancing. Ramanujan quantum codes are defined using Ramanujan complexes which are simplicial complexes that generalise Ramanujan graphs [27,28]. Combining the quantum code obtained from a Ramanujan complex and a good classical LDPC code, which can be thought of as coming from a 1-dimensional chain complex, yields a new quantum code that is defined on a 2-dimensional chain complex. This 2-dimensional chain complex is obtained by the co-complex of the product of the 2 co-complexes. The length, dimension and distance of the new quantum code depend on the input codes. |

Homological bosonic code | An \([[n,1]]_{\mathbb{R}}\) analog CSS code defined using homological structres associated with an \(n-1\) simplex. Relevant to the study of spacetime replication of quantum information [29]. |

Homological product code | CSS code formulated using the homological product of two chain complexes (see Qubit CSS-to-homology correspondence). Stub. |

Homological rotor code | A homological quantum rotor code is an extension of analog stabilizer codes to rotors. The code is stabilized by a continuous group of rotor X-type and Z-type generalized Pauli operators. Codes are formulated using an extension of the qubit CSS-to-homology correspondence to rotors. The homology group of the logical operators has a torsion component because the chain complexes are defined over the ring of integers, which yields codes with finite logical dimension, i.e., encoding logical qudits instead of only logical rotors. Such finite-dimensional encodings are not possible with analog stabilizer codes. |

Honeycomb Floquet code | Floquet code based on the Kitaev honeycomb model [30] whose logical qubits are generated through a particular sequence of measurements. |

Hyperbolic surface code | An extension of the Kitaev surface code construction to hyperbolic manifolds. Given a cellulation of a manifold, qubits are put on \(i\)-dimensional faces, \(X\)-type stabilizers are associated with \((i-1)\)-faces, while \(Z\)-type stabilizers are associated with \(i+1\)-faces. |

Hypergraph product (HGP) code | A family of \([[n,k,d]]\) CSS codes whose construction is based on two binary linear seed codes \(C_1\) and \(C_2\). |

Hypersphere product code | Stub. |

Kitaev chain code | An \([[n,1,1]]_{f}\) Majorana stabilizer code forming the ground-state of the Kitaev Majorana chain (a.k.a. Kitaev Majorana wire) in its fermionic topological phase, which is equivalent to the 1D quantum Ising model in the symmetry-breaking phase via the Jordan-Wigner transformation. The code is usually defined using the algebra of two anti-commuting Majorana operators called Majorana zero modes (MZMs) or Majorana edge modes (MEMs). |

Kitaev current-mirror qubit code | Member of the family of \([[2n,(0,2),(2,n)]]_{\mathbb{Z}}\) homological rotor codes on a thin Möbius strip. The ideal code can be obtained from a Josephson-junction [31] system [32]. |

Kitaev honeycomb code | Code whose logical subspace is labeled by different fusion outcomes of Ising anyons present in the nonabelian topological phase of the Kitaev honeycomb model [30]. Each logical qubit is constructed out of four Majorana operators, which admit braiding-based gates due to their nonabelian statistics and which can be used for topological quantum computation. |

Kitaev surface code | A family of abelian topological CSS stabilizer codes whose generators are few-body \(X\)-type and \(Z\)-type Pauli strings associated to the stars and plaquettes, respectively, of a cellulation of a two-dimensional surface (with a qubit located at each edge of the cellulation). Toric code often either refers to the construction on the two-dimensional torus or is an alternative name for the general construction. The construction on surfaces with boundaries is often called the planar code [33–35]. Codewords correspond to ground states of the surface code Hamiltonian, and error operators create or annihilate pairs of anyonic charges or vortices. |

Lifted-product (LP) code | Also called a Panteleev-Kalachev (PK) code. Code that utilizes the notion of a lifted product in its construction. Lifted products of certain classical Tanner codes are the first (asymptotically) good QLDPC codes. |

Lloyd-Slotine nine-mode code | A \([[9,1,3]]_{\mathbb{R}}\) analog CSS version of Shor's nine-qubit code. |

Lossless expander balanced-product code | QLDPC code constructed by taking the balanced product of lossless expander graphs. Using one part of a quantum-code chain complex constructed with one-sided loss expanders [36] yields a \(c^3\)-LTC [37]. Using two-sided expanders, which are only conjectured to exist, yields an asymptotically good QLDPC code family [38]. |

Low-depth random Clifford-circuit qubit code | An \([[n,k]]\) qubit stabilizer code whose encoder is an \(n\)-qubit unitary transformation that takes a \(k\)-qubit state as input (with \(k\leq n\), and the remaining \(n-k\) qubits initialized to \(|0\rangle^{\otimes n-k}\) ) to give a corresponding state in the codespace as the output. An \(n\)-qubit quantum circuit with random two-qubit Clifford gates can act as an encoder into a code with distance \(d\) with high probability, with a size (i.e. number of gates in the circuit) at most \(O(n^2 log n)\)). Noting that two gates acting on disjoint qubits could in fact be executed simultaneously, this is equivalent to the depth (number of time steps in the circuit) being at most \(O(log^3 n)\). |

Majorana stabilizer code | A stabilizer code whose stabilizers are products of an even number of Majorana fermion operators, analogous to Pauli strings for a traditional stabilizer code and referred to as Majorana stabilizers. The codespace is the mutual \(+1\) eigenspace of all Majorana stabilizers. In such systems, Majorana fermions may either be considered individually or paired into creation and annihilation operators for fermionic modes. Codes can be denoted as \([[n,k,d]]_{f}\) [39], where \(n\) is the number of fermionic modes. |

Matching code | Member of a class of qubit stabilizer codes based on the abelian phase of the Kitaev honeycomb model. |

Modular-qudit CSS code | An \(((n,K,d))_q\) modular-qudit stabilizer code admitting a set of stabilizer generators that are either \(Z\)-type or \(X\)-type Pauli strings. Codes can be defined from two classical codes and/or chain complexes over the ring \(\mathbb{Z}_q\) via an extension of qubit CSS-to-homology correspondence to modular qudits. The homology group of the logical operators has a torsion component because the chain complexes are defined over a ring, which yields codes whose logical dimension is not a power of \(q\). |

Modular-qudit stabilizer code | An \(((n,K,d))_q\) modular-qudit code whose logical subspace is the joint eigenspace of commuting qudit Pauli operators forming the code's stabilizer group \(\mathsf{S}\). Traditionally, the logical subspace is the joint \(+1\) eigenspace, and the stabilizer group does not contain \(e^{i \phi} I\) for any \(\phi \neq 0\). The distance \(d\) is the minimum weight of a qudit Pauli string that implements a nontrivial logical operation in the code. |

Modular-qudit surface code | Also known as the \(\mathbb{Z}_q\) surface code. Extension of the surface code to prime-dimensional [21,40] and more general modular qudits [41]. Stabilizer generators are few-body \(X\)-type and \(Z\)-type Pauli strings associated to the stars and plaquettes, respectively, of a tessellation of a two-dimensional surface. Since qudits have more than one \(X\) and \(Z\)-type operator, various sets of stabilizer generators can be defined. Ground-state degeneracy and the associated phase depends on the qudit dimension and the stabilizer generators. |

Molecular code | Encodes finite-dimensional Hilbert space into the Hilbert space of \(\ell^2\)-normalizable functions on the group \(SO_3\). Construction is based on nested subgroups \(H\subset K \subset SO_3\), where \(H,K\) are finite. The \(|K|/|H|\)-dimensional logical subspace is spanned by basis states that are equal superpositions of elements of cosets of \(H\) in \(K\). |

NTRU-GKP code | Multi-mode GKP code whose underlying lattice is utilized in variations of the NTRU cryptosystem [42]. Randomized constructions yield asymptotically good GKP code families. |

Pastawski-Yoshida-Harlow-Preskill (HaPPY) code | Also known as a hyperbolic pentagon code (HyPeC). Holographic code constructed out of a network of perfect tensors that tesselates hyperbolic space. Physical qubits are associated with uncontracted tensor legs at the boundary of the tesselation, while logical qubits are associated with uncontracted legs in the bulk. The code serves as a minimal model for several aspects of the AdS/CFT holographic duality and potentially a dF/CFT duality [43]. The construction below is described for qubits, but straightforward generalizations exist to modular qudits, oscillators, and rotors [44]. |

Projective-plane surface code | A family of Kitaev surface codes on the non-orientable 2-dimensional compact manifold \(\mathbb{R}P^2\) (in contrast to a genus-\(g\) surface). Whereas genus-\(g\) surface codes require \(2g\) logical qubits, qubit codes on \(\mathbb{R}P^2\) are made from a single logical qubit. |

Quantum Reed-Muller code | A CSS code formed from a classical Reed-Muller code (or its punctured versions) in which polynomials over finite fields encode data. This is done by transforming these polynomials into the stabilizer generator matrices. |

Quantum Reed-Solomon code | Also called prime-qudit polynomial code (QPyC). Prime-qudit CSS code constructed using two Reed-Solomon codes. |

Quantum Tanner code | Member of a family of QLDPC codes based on two compatible classical Tanner codes defined on a two-dimensional Cayley complex. For certain choices of codes and complex, the resulting codes have asymptotically good parameters. |

Quantum check-product code | Stub. |

Quantum convolutional code | One-dimensional translationally invariant qubit stabilizer code whose whose stabilizer group can be partitioned into constant-size subsets of constant support and of constant overlap between neighboring sets. Initially formulated as a quantum analogue of convolutional codes, which were designed to protect a continuous and never-ending stream of information. Precise formulations sometimes begin with a finite-dimensional lattice, with the intent to take the thermodynamic limit; logical dimension can be infinite as well. |

Quantum divisible code | Consider a CSS code whose \(Z\)-stabilizers are determined by the dual of a classical \([n, k_1]\) linear binary code \(C_1\), and whose \(X\)-stabilizers are determined by a classical \([n, k_2]\) binary code \(C_2 \subset C_1\). This code is quantum divisible if all weights in \(C_2\) share a common divisor \(\Delta > 1\), and all weights in each coset of \(C_2\) in \(C_1\) are congruent to \(\Delta\). |

Quantum expander code | CSS codes constructed from a hypergraph product of bipartite expander graphs [13] with bounded left and right vertex degrees. For every bipartite graph there is an associated matrix (the parity check matrix) with columns indexed by the left vertices, rows indexed by the right vertices, and 1 entries whenever a left and right vertex are connected. This matrix can serve as the parity check matrix of a classical code. Two bipartite expander graphs can be used to construct a quantum CSS code (the quantum expander code) by using the parity check matrix of one as \(X\) checks, and the parity check matrix of the other as \(Z\) checks. |

Quantum lattice code | Bosonic stabilizer code on \(n\) bosonic modes whose stabilizer group is an infinite countable group of oscillator displacement operators which implement lattice translations in phase space. |

Quantum low-density parity-check (QLDPC) code | Also called a sparse quantum code. Member of a family of \([[n,k,d]]\) modular-qudit or Galois-qudit stabilizer codes for which the number of sites participating in each stabilizer generator and the number of stabilizer generators that each site participates in are both bounded by a constant as \(n\to\infty\). A geometrically local stabilizer code is a QLDPC code where the sites involved in any syndrome bit are contained in a fixed volume that does not scale with \(n\). As opposed to general stabilizer codes, syndrome extraction of the constant-weight check operators of a QLDPC codes can be done using a constant-depth circuit. |

Quantum parity code (QPC) | Also called a generalized Shor code [45]. A \([[m_1 m_2,1,\min(m_1,m_2)]]\) CSS code family obtained from concatenating an \(m_1\)-qubit phase-flip repetition code with an \(m_2\)-qubit bit-flip repetition code. Logical codewords are \begin{align} \begin{split} |\overline{0}\rangle&=\frac{1}{2^{m_2/2}}\left(|0\rangle^{\otimes m_1}+|1\rangle^{\otimes m_1}\right)^{\otimes m_2}\\ |\overline{1}\rangle&=\frac{1}{2^{m_2/2}}\left(|0\rangle^{\otimes m_1}-|1\rangle^{\otimes m_1}\right)^{\otimes m_2}~. \end{split} \tag*{(5)}\end{align} |

Quantum polar code | Entanglement-assisted CSS code utilized in a quantum polar coding scheme producing entangled pairs of qubits between sender and receiver. In such a scheme, the amplitude and phase information of a quantum state is handled in complementary fashion [46] using an encoding based on classical polar codes. Variants of the initial scheme have been developed for degradable channels [47] and extended to arbitrary channels [48]. |

Quantum repetition code | Encodes \(1\) qubit into \(n\) qubits according to \(|0\rangle\to|\phi_0\rangle^{\otimes n}\) and \(|1\rangle\to|\phi_1\rangle^{\otimes n}\). Also known as a bit-flip code when \(|\phi_i\rangle = |i\rangle\), and a phase-flip code when \(|\phi_0\rangle = |+\rangle\) and \(|\phi_1\rangle = |-\rangle\). |

Quantum spatially coupled (SC-QLDPC) code | QLDPC code whose stabilizer generator matrix resembles the parity-check matrix of SC-LDPC codes. There exist CSS [49] and stabilizer constructions [50]. In either case, the stabilizer generator matrix is constructed by "spatially" coupling sub-matrix blocks in chain-like fashion (or, more generally, in grid-like fashion) to yield a band matrix. The sub-matrix blocks have to satisfy certain conditions amongst themselves so that the resulting band matrix is a stabilizer generator matrix. |

Quantum-double code | Group-GKP stabilizer code whose codewords realize 2D modular gapped topological order defined by a finite group \(G\). The code's generators are few-body operators associated to the stars and plaquettes, respectively, of a tessellation of a two-dimensional surface (with a qudit of dimension \( |G| \) located at each edge of the tesselation). |

Qubit BCH code | Qubit stabilizer code constructed from a self-orthogonal binary BCH code via the CSS construction, from a Hermitian self-orthogonal quaternary BCH code via the stabilizer-over-\(GF(4)\) construction, or by taking a Euclidean self-orthogonal BCH code over \(GF(2^m)\), converting it to a binary code, and applying the CSS construction. |

Qubit CSS code | An \([[n,k,d]]\) stabilizer code admitting a set of stabilizer generators that are either \(Z\)-type or \(X\)-type Pauli strings. Codes can be defined from two classical codes and/or chain complexes over \(\mathbb{Z}_2\) per the qubit CSS-to-homology correspondence below. |

Qubit stabilizer code | Also called a Pauli stabilizer code. An \(((n,2^k,d))\) qubit stabilizer code is denoted as \([[n,k]]\) or \([[n,k,d]]\), where \(d\) is the code's distance. Logical subspace is the joint eigenspace of commuting Pauli operators forming the code's stabilizer group \(\mathsf{S}\). Traditionally, the logical subspace is the joint \(+1\) eigenspace of a set of \(2^{n-k}\) commuting Pauli operators which do not contain \(-I\). The distance is the minimum weight of a Pauli string that implements a nontrivial logical operation in the code. |

Raussendorf-Bravyi-Harrington (RBH) cluster-state code | Also called an RHG (Raussendorf-Harrington-Goyal) cluster-state code. A three-dimensional cluster-state code defined on the bcc lattice (equivalently, a cubic lattice with qubits on edges and faces). |

Rotated surface code | Also called a checkerboard code. CSS variant of the surface code defined on a square lattice that has been rotated 45 degrees such that qubits are on vertices, and both \(X\)- and \(Z\)-type check operators occupy plaquettes in an alternating checkerboard pattern. |

Rotor GKP code | GKP code protecting against small angular position and momentum shifts of a planar rotor. |

Rotor stabilizer code | Rotor code whose codespace is defined as the common \(+1\) eigenspace of a group of mutually commuting rotor generalized Pauli operators. The stabilizer group can be either discrete or continuous, corresponding to modular or linear constraints on angular positions and momenta. Both cases can yield finite or infinite logical dimension. Exact codewords are non-normalizable, so approximate constructions have to be considered. |

Singleton-bound approaching AQECC | Approximate quantum code of rate \(R\) that can tolerate adversarial errors nearly saturating the quantum Singleton bound of \((1-R)/2\). The formulation of such codes relies on a notion of quantum list decoding. Sampling a description of this code can be done with an efficient randomized algorithm with \(2^{-\Omega(n)}\) failure probability. |

Skew-cyclic CSS code | Stub. |

Spacetime circuit code | Qubit stabilizer code used to correct faults in Clifford circuits, i.e., circuits up made of Clifford gates and Pauli measurements. The code utilizes redundancy in the measurement outcomes of a circuit to correct circuit faults. |

Square-lattice GKP code | Single-mode GKP qudit-into-oscillator code based on the rectangular lattice. Its stabilizer generators are oscillator displacement operators \(\hat{S}_q(2\alpha)=e^{-2i\alpha \hat{p}}\) and \(\hat{S}_p(2\beta)=e^{2i\beta \hat{x}}\). To ensure \(\hat{S}_q(2\alpha)\) and \(\hat{S}_p(2\beta)\) generate a stabilizer group that is Abelian, there is a constraint that \(\alpha\beta=2q\pi\) where \(q\) is an integer denoting the logical dimension. |

Stabilizer code | A code whose logical subspace is the joint eigenspace (usually with eigenvalue \(+1\)) of a set of commuting unitary operators forming the code's stabilizer group. They can be block codes defined of tensor-product spaces of qubits or qudits, or non-block codes defined on single sufficiently large Hilbert spaces such as bosonic modes or group spaces. |

Stabilizer code over \(GF(4)\) | An \([[n,k,d]]\) stabilizer code constructed from a quaternary classical code using the one-to-one correspondence between the four Pauli matrices \(\{I,X,Y,Z\}\) and the four elements \(\{0,1,\alpha^2,\alpha\}\) of the quaternary field \(GF(4)\). |

Stabilizer code over \(GF(q^2)\) | An \([[n,k,d]]_q\) Galois-qudit stabilizer code constructed from a classical code over \(GF(q^2)\) using the one-to-one correspondence between the Galois-qudit Pauli matrices and elements of the Galois field \(GF(q^2)\). |

Subsystem QPC | Subsystem version of the QPC which has the same parameters as the subspace version, but requires significantly fewer stabilizer measurements, resulting in a much simpler error recovery routine. |

Subsystem color code | Stub. |

Subsystem modular-qudit stabilizer code | Also called a gauge stabilizer code. Modular-qudit generalization of a subsystem qubit stabilizer code. Can be obtained by taking a modular qudit stabilizer code and assigning some of its logical qubits to be gauge qubits. For composite qudit dimensions, such codes need not encode an integer number of qudits. |

Subsystem qubit stabilizer code | Also called a gauge stabilizer code. A stabilizer code with some of its logical qubits denoted as gauge qubits and not used for storage of logical information. Note that this doesnt lead to new codes but does lead to new error correction and fault tolerance procedures. Subsystem codes are denoted by \([[n,k,r,d]]\), similar to stabilizer codes, but with an extra parameter \(r\) denoting the number of gauge qubits. |

Subsystem rotated surface code | Subsystem version of the rotated surface code. |

Subsystem surface code | Subsystem version of the surface code defined on a square lattice with qubits placed at every vertex and center of everry edge. |

Surface-17 code | A \([[9,1,3]]\) rotated surface code named for the sum of its 9 data qubits and 8 syndrome qubits. It uses the smallest number of qubits to perform error correction on a surface code with parallel syndrome extraction. |

Tensor-product HDX code | Code constructed in a similar way as the HDX code, but utilizing tensor products of Ramanujan complexes in order to improve code distance from \(\sqrt{n}\log n\) to \(\sqrt{n}~\text{polylog}(n)\). The utility of such tensor products comes from the fact that one of the Ramanujan complexes is a collective cosystolic expander as opposed to just a cosystolic expander. |

Tetron Majorana code | Also called a Majorana box qubit or Majorana qubit. An \([[n,2,2]]_{f}\) Majorana stabilizer code forming the even-fermion-parity ground-state subspace of two parallel Kitaev Majorana chains in their fermionic topological phase. An extension using three Kitaev chains and housing two logical qubits of the same parity is called the hexon Majorana code. |

Three-fermion (3F) model code | A 3D topological code whose low-energy excitations realize the three-fermion anyon theory [51–53] and that can be used as a resource state for fault-tolerant MBQC [54]. |

Three-fermion (3F) subsystem code | Modular-qudit 2D subsystem stabilizer code whose low-energy excitations realize the three-fermion anyon theory [51–53]. One version uses two qubits at each site [10], while other manifestations utilize a single qubit per site and only two-body interactions [52,55]. All are expected to be equivalent to each other under local Clifford transformations. |

Three-qutrit code | A \([[3,1,2]]_3\) prime-qudit CSS code that is the smallest qutrit stabilizer code to detect a single-qutrit error. with stabilizer generators \(ZZZ\) and \(XXX\). The code defines a quantum secret-sharing scheme and serves as a minimal model for the AdS/CFT holographic duality. It is also the smallest non-trivial instance of a quantum maximum distance separable code (QMDS), saturating the quantum Singleton bound. The codewords are \begin{align} \begin{split} | \overline{0} \rangle &= \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}} (| 000 \rangle + | 111 \rangle + | 222 \rangle) \\ | \overline{1} \rangle &= \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}} (| 012 \rangle + | 120 \rangle + | 201 \rangle) \\ | \overline{2} \rangle &= \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}} (| 021 \rangle + | 102 \rangle + | 210 \rangle)~. \end{split} \tag*{(6)}\end{align} The elements in the superposition of each logical codeword are related to each other via cyclic permutations. |

Three-rotor code | \([[3,1,2]]_{\mathbb Z}\) rotor code that is an extension of the \([[3,1,2]]_3\) qutrit CSS code to the integer alphabet, i.e., the angular momentum states of a planar rotor. The code is \(U(1)\)-covariant and its ideal codewords, \begin{align} |\overline{x}\rangle = \sum_{y\in\mathbb{Z}} \left| -3y,y-x,2(y+x) \right\rangle~, \tag*{(7)}\end{align} where \(x\in\mathbb{Z}\), are not normalizable. |

Translationally invariant stabilizer code | A geometrically local qubit, modular-qudit, or Galois-qudit stabilizer code with qudits organized on a lattice modeled by the additive group \(\mathbb{Z}^D\) for spatial dimension \(D\) such that each lattice point, referred to as a site, contains \(m\) qudits of dimension \(q\). The stabilizer group of the translationally invariant code is generated by site-local Pauli operators and their translations. |

Transverse-field Ising model (TFIM) code | A 1D translationally invariant stabilizer code whose encoding is a constant-depth circuit of nearest-neighbor gates on alternating even and odd bonds that consist of transverse-field Ising Hamiltonian interactions. The code allows for perfect state transfer of arbitrary distance using local operations and classical communications (LOCC). |

Triorthogonal code | A triorthogonal \(m \times n\) binary matrix is triorthogonal if its rows \(r_1, \ldots, r_m\) satisfy \(|r_i \cdot r_j| = 0\) and \(|r_i \cdot r_j \cdot r_k| = 0\), where addition and multiplication are done on \(\mathbb{Z}_2\). The triorthogonal code associated with the matrix is constructed by mapping non-zero entries in even-weight rows to \(X\) operators, and \(Z\) operators for each row in the orthogonal complement. |

True Galois-qudit stabilizer code | Also called a linear stabilizer code. A \([[n,k,d]]_q\) stabilizer code whose stabilizer's symplectic representation forms a linear subspace. In other words, the set of \(q\)-ary vectors representing the stabilizer group is closed under both addition and multiplication by elements of \(GF(q)\). In contrast, Galois-qudit stabilizer codes admit sets of vectors that are closed under addition only. |

Two-dimensional hyperbolic surface code | Hyperbolic surface codes based on a tessellation of a closed 2D manifold with a hyperbolic geometry (i.e., non-Euclidean geometry, e.g., saddle surfaces when defined on a 2D plane). |

X-cube model code | A Type-I fracton code supporting a subextensive number of logical qubits. |

XY surface code | Also called the tailored surface code (TSC). Non-CSS derivative of the surface code whose generators are \(XXXX\) and \(YYYY\), obtained by mapping \(Z \to Y\) in the surface code. |

XYZ product code | A non-CSS QLDPC code constructed from three classical codes. The construction of an XYZ product code is similar to that of a hypergraph product code and related codes. The idea is that rather than taking a product of only two classical codes to produce a CSS code, a third classical code is considered, acting with Pauli-\(Y\) operators. |

XYZ\(^2\) hexagonal stabilizer code | An instance of the matching code based on the Kitaev honeycomb model. It is described on a hexagonal lattice with \(XYZXYZ\) stabilizers on each hexagonal plaquette. Each vertical pair of qubits has an \(XX\), \(YY\), or \(ZZ\) link stabilizer depending on the orientation of the plaquette stabilizers. |

XZZX surface code | Non-CSS variant of the rotated surface code whose generators are \(XZXZ\) Pauli strings associated, clock-wise, to the vertices of each face of a two-dimensional lattice (with a qubit located at each vertex of the tessellation). |

Zero-pi qubit code | A \([[2,(0,2),(2,1)]]_{\mathbb{Z}}\) homological rotor code on the smallest tiling of the projective plane \(\mathbb{R}P^2\). The ideal code can be obtained from a four-rotor Josephson-junction [31] system after a choice of grounding [32]. |

\((5,1,2)\)-convolutional code | Quantum convolutional code with the stabilizer generators \begin{align} \begin{array}{cccccccc} X & Z & I & I & I & I & I & \cdots\\ Z & X & X & Z & I & I & I & \cdots\\ I & Z & X & X & Z & I & I & \cdots\\ I & I & Z & X & X & Z & I & \cdots\\ \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \ddots \end{array} \tag*{(8)}\end{align} |

\(D_4\) hyper-diamond GKP code | Two-mode GKP qudit-into-oscillator code based on the \(D_4\) hyper-diamond lattice. |

\([[15, 7, 3]]\) Hamming-based CSS code | Self-dual Hamming-based CSS code that admits permutation-based CZ logical gates. |

\([[15,1,3]]\) quantum Reed-Muller code | \([[15,1,3]]\) CSS code that is most easily thought of as a tetrahedral 3D color code. This code contains 15 qubits, represented by four vertices, four face centers, six edge centers, and one body center. The tetrahedron is cellulated into four identical polyhedron cells by connecting the body center to all four face centers, where each face center is then connected by three adjacent edge centers. Each colored cell corresponds to a weight-8 \(X\)-check, and each face corresponds to a weight-4 \(Z\)-check. A logical \(Z\) is any weight-3 \(Z\)-string along an edge of the entire tetrahedron. The logical \(X\) is any weight-7 \(X\)-face of the entire tetrahedron. |

\([[2^r, 2^r-r-2, 3]]\) quantum Hamming code | A family of stabilizer codes of distance \(3\) that saturate the asymptotic quantum Hamming bound. Can be obtained from the CSS construction using a first-order \([2^r,r+1,2^{r-1}]\) RM code and a \([2^r,2^r-1,2]\) even-weight code [56]. |

\([[2^r-1, 1, 3]]\) quantum Reed-Muller code | Member of CSS code family constructed with a first-order punctured RM\((1,r)\) \([2^r-1,r+1,2^{r-1}-1]\) code and its even subcode for \(r \geq 3\). Each code transversally implements a member of an infinite family of diagonal gates from the Clifford hierarchy [57]. |

\([[2^r-1, 2^r-2r-1, 3]]\) Hamming-based CSS code | CCS code constructed with a classical Hamming code \([2^r-1,2^r-1-r,3]=C_X=C_Z\) a.k.a. a first-order punctured Reed-Muller code RM\((r-2,r)\). |

\([[2^r-1, 2^r-2r-1, 3]]_p\) prime-qudit CSS code | A family of CSS codes extending Hamming-based CSS codes to prime qudits of dimension \(p\) by expressing the qubit code stabilizers in local-dimension-invariant (LDI) form [58]. |

\([[2^{2r-1}-1,1,2^r-1]]\) quantum punctured Reed-Muller code | Member of CSS code family constructed with a punctured self-dual RM \([2^r-1,2^{r-1},\sqrt{2}^{r-1}-1]\) code and its even subcode for \(r \geq 2\). |

\([[2m,2m-2,2]]\) error-detecting code | Also known as the iceberg code. CSS stabilizer code for \(m\geq 2\) with generators \(\{XX\cdots X, ZZ\cdots Z\} \) acting on all \(2m\) physical qubits. Admits a basis such that each codeword is a superposition of a computational basis state labeled by a bitstring \(b\) and a state labeled by the negation of \(b\). Such states generalize the two-qubit Bell states and three-qubit GHz states and are often called (qubit) cat states or poor-man's GHz states. |

\([[4,2,2]]\) CSS code | Four-qubit CSS stabilizer code is the smallest qubit stabilizer code to detect a single-qubit error. Admits generators \(\{XXXX, ZZZZ\} \) and codewords \begin{align} \begin{split} |\overline{00}\rangle = (|0000\rangle + |1111\rangle)/\sqrt{2}~{\phantom{.}}\\ |\overline{01}\rangle = (|0011\rangle + |1100\rangle)/\sqrt{2}~{\phantom{.}}\\ |\overline{10}\rangle = (|0101\rangle + |1010\rangle)/\sqrt{2}~{\phantom{.}}\\ |\overline{11}\rangle = (|0110\rangle + |1001\rangle)/\sqrt{2}~. \end{split} \tag*{(9)}\end{align} This code is the smallest instance of the toric code, and its various single-qubit subcodes are small planar surface codes. |

\([[5,1,3]]_q\) Galois-qudit code | True stabilizer code that generalizes the five-qubit perfect code to Galois qudits of prime-power dimension \(q=p^m\). It has \(4(m-1)\) stabilizer generators expressed as \(X^{\gamma} Z^{\gamma} Z^{-\gamma} X^{-\gamma} I\) and its cyclic permutations, with \(\gamma\) iterating over basis elements of \(GF(q)\) over \(GF(p)\). |

\([[5,1,3]]_{\mathbb{Z}_q}\) modular-qudit code | Modular-qudit stabilizer code that generalizes the five-qubit perfect code using properties of the multiplicative group \(\mathbb{Z}_q\) [59]; see also [60; Thm. 13]. It has four stabilizer generators consisting of \(X Z Z^\dagger X^\dagger I\) and its cyclic permutations. A concise expression for a set of codewords can be found in [44; Sec. VI.B]. |

\([[7,1,3]]\) Steane code | A \([[7,1,3]]\) CSS code that is the smallest qubit CSS code to correct a single-qubit error. The code is constructed using the classical binary \([7,4,3]\) Hamming code for protecting against both \(X\) and \(Z\) errors. |

\([[8,3,2]]\) code | Smallest 3D color code whose physical qubits lie on vertices of a cube and which admits a transversal CCZ gate. Similar constructions exist on \(d\)-dimensional hypercubes and are called hyperoctahedron \([[2^d,d,2]]\) codes [61]. |

\([[9,1,3]]\) Shor code | Nine-qubit CSS code that is the first quantum error-correcting code. |

\([[9,1,3]]_{\mathbb{Z}_q}\) modular-qudit code | Modular-qudit CSS code that generalizes the \([[9,1,3]]\) Shor code using properties of the multiplicative group \(\mathbb{Z}_q\). |

\([[k+4,k,2]]\) H code | Family of \([[k+4,k,2]]\) CSS codes with transversal Hadamard gates; relevant to magic state distillation. The four stablizer generators are \(X_1X_2X_3X_4\), \(Z_1Z_2Z_3Z_4\), \(X_1X_2X_5X_6...X_{k+4}\), and \(Z_1Z_2Z_5Z_6...Z_{k+4}\).' |

\(\mathbb{Z}_3\times\mathbb{Z}_9\)-fusion subsystem code | Modular-qudit 2D subsystem stabilizer code whose low-energy excitations realize a non-modular anyon theory with \(\mathbb{Z}_3\times\mathbb{Z}_9\) fusion rules. Encodes two qutrits when put on a torus. |

\(\mathbb{Z}_q^{(1)}\) subsystem code | Modular-qudit subsystem stabilizer code, based on the Kitaev honeycomb model [30] and its generalization [62], that is characterized by \(\mathbb{Z}_q^{(1)}\) topological order [63], which is modular for odd prime \(q\) and non-modular otherwise. Encodes a single \(q\)-dimensional qudit when put on a torus for odd \(q\), and a \(q/2\)-dimensional qudit for even \(q\). This code can be constructed using geometrically local gauge generators, but does not admit geometrically local stabilizer generators. For \(q=2\), the code reduces to the subsystem code underlying the Kitaev honeycomb model code as well as the honeycomb Floquet code. |

## References

- [1]
- K. P. Michnicki, “3D Topological Quantum Memory with a Power-Law Energy Barrier”, Physical Review Letters 113, (2014) arXiv:1406.4227 DOI
- [2]
- T. D. Ellison et al., “Pauli Stabilizer Models of Twisted Quantum Doubles”, PRX Quantum 3, (2022) arXiv:2112.11394 DOI
- [3]
- L. Wang and Z. Wang, “In and around abelian anyon models \({}^{\text{*}}\)”, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical 53, 505203 (2020) arXiv:2004.12048 DOI
- [4]
- D. Ostrev et al., “Classical product code constructions for quantum Calderbank-Shor-Steane codes”, (2022) arXiv:2209.13474
- [5]
- H. J. Briegel and R. Raussendorf, “Persistent Entanglement in Arrays of Interacting Particles”, Physical Review Letters 86, 910 (2001) arXiv:quant-ph/0004051 DOI
- [6]
- A. M. Kubica, The ABCs of the Color Code: A Study of Topological Quantum Codes as Toy Models for Fault-Tolerant Quantum Computation and Quantum Phases Of Matter, California Institute of Technology, 2018 DOI
- [7]
- H. Bombin, “An Introduction to Topological Quantum Codes”, (2013) arXiv:1311.0277
- [8]
- M. B. Hastings, “Weight Reduction for Quantum Codes”, (2016) arXiv:1611.03790
- [9]
- S. Evra, T. Kaufman, and G. Zémor, “Decodable quantum LDPC codes beyond the \(\sqrt{n}\) distance barrier using high dimensional expanders”, (2020) arXiv:2004.07935
- [10]
- T. D. Ellison et al., “Pauli topological subsystem codes from Abelian anyon theories”, (2022) arXiv:2211.03798
- [11]
- M. A. Levin and X.-G. Wen, “String-net condensation: A physical mechanism for topological phases”, Physical Review B 71, (2005) arXiv:cond-mat/0404617 DOI
- [12]
- K. Betsumiya and A. Munemasa, “On triply even binary codes”, Journal of the London Mathematical Society 86, 1 (2012) arXiv:1012.4134 DOI
- [13]
- S. Hoory, N. Linial, and A. Wigderson, “Expander graphs and their applications”, Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society 43, 439 (2006) DOI
- [14]
- M. H. Freedman, “Z\({}_{\text{2}}\)–Systolic-Freedom”, Proceedings of the Kirbyfest (1999) DOI
- [15]
- E. Fetaya, “Bounding the distance of quantum surface codes”, Journal of Mathematical Physics 53, 062202 (2012) DOI
- [16]
- L. Jin and C. Xing, “A Construction of New Quantum MDS Codes”, (2020) arXiv:1311.3009
- [17]
- X. Liu, L. Yu, and H. Liu, “New quantum codes from Hermitian dual-containing codes”, International Journal of Quantum Information 17, 1950006 (2019) DOI
- [18]
- L. Jin et al., “Application of Classical Hermitian Self-Orthogonal MDS Codes to Quantum MDS Codes”, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 56, 4735 (2010) DOI
- [19]
- D. Aharonov and M. Ben-Or, “Fault-Tolerant Quantum Computation With Constant Error Rate”, (1999) arXiv:quant-ph/9906129
- [20]
- Z. Li, L.-J. Xing, and X.-M. Wang, “Quantum generalized Reed-Solomon codes: Unified framework for quantum maximum-distance-separable codes”, Physical Review A 77, (2008) arXiv:0812.4514 DOI
- [21]
- S. S. Bullock and G. K. Brennen, “Qudit surface codes and gauge theory with finite cyclic groups”, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical 40, 3481 (2007) arXiv:quant-ph/0609070 DOI
- [22]
- I. Andriyanova, D. Maurice, and J.-P. Tillich, “New constructions of CSS codes obtained by moving to higher alphabets”, (2012) arXiv:1202.3338
- [23]
- P. Sarvepalli, “Topological color codes over higher alphabet”, 2010 IEEE Information Theory Workshop (2010) DOI
- [24]
- D. J. C. MacKay, G. Mitchison, and P. L. McFadden, “Sparse-Graph Codes for Quantum Error Correction”, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 50, 2315 (2004) arXiv:quant-ph/0304161 DOI
- [25]
- J. Haah, “Local stabilizer codes in three dimensions without string logical operators”, Physical Review A 83, (2011) arXiv:1101.1962 DOI
- [26]
- A. Dua et al., “Sorting topological stabilizer models in three dimensions”, Physical Review B 100, (2019) arXiv:1908.08049 DOI
- [27]
- A. Lubotzky, R. Phillips, and P. Sarnak, “Ramanujan graphs”, Combinatorica 8, 261 (1988) DOI
- [28]
- G. Davidoff, P. Sarnak, and A. Valette, Elementary Number Theory, Group Theory and Ramanujan Graphs (Cambridge University Press, 2001) DOI
- [29]
- P. Hayden and A. May, “Summoning information in spacetime, or where and when can a qubit be?”, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical 49, 175304 (2016) arXiv:1210.0913 DOI
- [30]
- A. Kitaev, “Anyons in an exactly solved model and beyond”, Annals of Physics 321, 2 (2006) arXiv:cond-mat/0506438 DOI
- [31]
- S. M. Girvin, “Circuit QED: superconducting qubits coupled to microwave photons”, Quantum Machines: Measurement and Control of Engineered Quantum Systems 113 (2014) DOI
- [32]
- C. Vuillot, A. Ciani, and B. M. Terhal, “Homological Quantum Rotor Codes: Logical Qubits from Torsion”, (2023) arXiv:2303.13723
- [33]
- M. H. Freedman and D. A. Meyer, “Projective plane and planar quantum codes”, (1998) arXiv:quant-ph/9810055
- [34]
- S. B. Bravyi and A. Yu. Kitaev, “Quantum codes on a lattice with boundary”, (1998) arXiv:quant-ph/9811052
- [35]
- N. Delfosse, P. Iyer, and D. Poulin, “Generalized surface codes and packing of logical qubits”, (2016) arXiv:1606.07116
- [36]
- M. Capalbo et al., “Randomness conductors and constant-degree lossless expanders”, Proceedings of the thiry-fourth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing - STOC ’02 (2002) DOI
- [37]
- T.-C. Lin and M.-H. Hsieh, “\(c^3\)-Locally Testable Codes from Lossless Expanders”, (2022) arXiv:2201.11369
- [38]
- T.-C. Lin and M.-H. Hsieh, “Good quantum LDPC codes with linear time decoder from lossless expanders”, (2022) arXiv:2203.03581
- [39]
- S. Vijay and L. Fu, “Quantum Error Correction for Complex and Majorana Fermion Qubits”, (2017) arXiv:1703.00459
- [40]
- A. Yu. Kitaev, “Fault-tolerant quantum computation by anyons”, Annals of Physics 303, 2 (2003) arXiv:quant-ph/9707021 DOI
- [41]
- H. Watanabe, M. Cheng, and Y. Fuji, “Ground state degeneracy on torus in a family of \(\mathbb{Z}_N\) toric code”, (2023) arXiv:2211.00299
- [42]
- J. Hoffstein, J. Pipher, and J. H. Silverman, “NTRU: A ring-based public key cryptosystem”, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 267 (1998) DOI
- [43]
- J. Cotler and A. Strominger, “The Universe as a Quantum Encoder”, (2022) arXiv:2201.11658
- [44]
- P. Faist et al., “Continuous Symmetries and Approximate Quantum Error Correction”, Physical Review X 10, (2020) arXiv:1902.07714 DOI
- [45]
- D. Bacon and A. Casaccino, “Quantum Error Correcting Subsystem Codes From Two Classical Linear Codes”, (2006) arXiv:quant-ph/0610088
- [46]
- J. M. Renes and J.-C. Boileau, “Physical underpinnings of privacy”, Physical Review A 78, (2008) arXiv:0803.3096 DOI
- [47]
- M. M. Wilde and J. M. Renes, “Quantum polar codes for arbitrary channels”, 2012 IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory Proceedings (2012) arXiv:1201.2906 DOI
- [48]
- M. M. Wilde and S. Guha, “Polar Codes for Degradable Quantum Channels”, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 59, 4718 (2013) arXiv:1109.5346 DOI
- [49]
- M. Hagiwara et al., “Spatially Coupled Quasi-Cyclic Quantum LDPC Codes”, (2011) arXiv:1102.3181
- [50]
- S. Yang and R. Calderbank, “Quantum Spatially-Coupled Codes”, (2023) arXiv:2305.00137
- [51]
- E. Rowell, R. Stong, and Z. Wang, “On classification of modular tensor categories”, (2009) arXiv:0712.1377
- [52]
- H. Bombin, M. Kargarian, and M. A. Martin-Delgado, “Interacting anyonic fermions in a two-body color code model”, Physical Review B 80, (2009) arXiv:0811.0911 DOI
- [53]
- H. Bombin, G. Duclos-Cianci, and D. Poulin, “Universal topological phase of two-dimensional stabilizer codes”, New Journal of Physics 14, 073048 (2012) arXiv:1103.4606 DOI
- [54]
- S. Roberts and D. J. Williamson, “3-Fermion topological quantum computation”, (2020) arXiv:2011.04693
- [55]
- H. Bombin, “Topological subsystem codes”, Physical Review A 81, (2010) arXiv:0908.4246 DOI
- [56]
- A. M. Steane, “Simple quantum error-correcting codes”, Physical Review A 54, 4741 (1996) arXiv:quant-ph/9605021 DOI
- [57]
- S. X. Cui, D. Gottesman, and A. Krishna, “Diagonal gates in the Clifford hierarchy”, Physical Review A 95, (2017) arXiv:1608.06596 DOI
- [58]
- A. J. Moorthy and L. G. Gunderman, “Local-dimension-invariant Calderbank-Shor-Steane Codes with an Improved Distance Promise”, (2021) arXiv:2110.11510
- [59]
- H. F. Chau, “Five quantum register error correction code for higher spin systems”, Physical Review A 56, R1 (1997) arXiv:quant-ph/9702033 DOI
- [60]
- E. M. Rains, “Nonbinary quantum codes”, (1997) arXiv:quant-ph/9703048
- [61]
- M. Vasmer and A. Kubica, “Morphing Quantum Codes”, PRX Quantum 3, (2022) arXiv:2112.01446 DOI
- [62]
- M. Barkeshli et al., “Generalized Kitaev Models and Extrinsic Non-Abelian Twist Defects”, Physical Review Letters 114, (2015) arXiv:1405.1780 DOI
- [63]
- P. H. Bonderson, Non-Abelian Anyons and Interferometry, California Institute of Technology, 2007 DOI