Decoder Dependence in Surface-Code Threshold Estimation under Digitized Hybrid Continuous-Variable and Discrete Noise

Abstract

Surface-code threshold estimates depend on the inference pipeline, including decoder and estimator choices. We compare decoders within a single LiDMaS+ workflow under Pauli-reference and digitized hybrid continuous-variable/discrete sweeps. In the Pauli-reference mode, the matching-style backend outperforms Union-Find and yields crossing median pc=0.0531 (bootstrap interval [0.0415,0.0572]) and collapse fit pc=0.052 (ν=1.35). For the hybrid mode, a dense transition-window sweep at d=3,5,7 uses σ∈[0.30,0.50] with step 0.01 and 3000 trials per point. After the initial exact-zero plateau is excluded from crossing localization, the matching-style backend gives interior crossing estimates σc=0.4707 for (d=3,5) and σc=0.3275 for (d=5,7); the latter lies in a low-LER region and remains estimator-sensitive. A targeted d=9 extension shows larger Union-Find LER at moderate-to-high σ and matching-fallback rates up to 0.747 at σ=0.50. In a d=5 neural-guidance sensitivity sweep, full learned reweighting reduces the sampled mean LER from 0.1773 to 0.1663 over σ∈[0.35,0.55]. These results show that estimator resolution and backend fallback diagnostics are part of an auditable decoder comparison.

0

Turn this paper into a lesson

ArcXiv compiles a structured reading guide from this paper's metadata: plain-English importance, contributions, prerequisite concepts, which sections to read first, flashcards, and a quiz. Grounded in the abstract, never invented.

Discussion (0)

Sign in to join the discussion.

Loading comments…