Alphabeta Math
Pipeline-generated
How statement and proof provenance work

The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.

  • Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
  • AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
  • AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.

These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.

Toric Code Anyons, Logical Operators, and Protection

1 · Prerequisites

2 · Summary

This page constructs the periodic square-lattice toric stabilizer code over F2, proves its check relations, two encoded qubits, e/m string syndromes, logical algebra, distance and recovery threshold. It also proves exact local indistinguishability in a specified contractible disk, the exact finite-volume Hamiltonian gap, and a constant upper bound on a logical-string energy barrier. These are finite-model results; no positive material-phase, small-local-perturbation-stability or thermal-lifetime conclusion is made.

3 · Logical flowchart

4 · Definitions, theorems and proofs

DefinitionDefinition: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedOpen item page →

Periodic square cellulation of the torus

Definition

Fix an integer L≥3 and write ZL=Z/LZ. The periodic square cellulation has vertices qi,j, horizontal edges hi,j from qi,j to qi+1,j, vertical edges vi,j from qi,j to qi,j+1, and faces fi,j, for i,j∈ZL. Every index is read modulo L. The boundary of fi,j consists of hi,j,vi+1,j,hi,j+1,vi,j. Equivalently, this is the quotient of the unit square tiling of R2 by translations in LZ2.

The cellulation has L2 vertices, 2L2 edges, and L2 faces. The condition L≥3 ensures that the four edges in each star and face are distinct, and that every edge has two distinct endpoints and two distinct incident faces. The vertex-edge graph joins vertices joined by an edge. The face-adjacency graph joins faces sharing an edge; both graphs are connected.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: An integer L≥3 and coordinate indices in ZL.

Verification

1.1givenalgebra

The horizontal and vertical edges are indexed by two disjoint copies of ZL2, so there are 2L2 edges; the vertex and face sets each have L2 indices. At qi,j the four incident edges are hi−1,j,hi,j,vi,j−1,vi,j. Their endpoints are distinct because L≥3.

2.1givenstep 1.1algebra

The faces adjacent to hi,j are fi,j−1 and fi,j, and the faces adjacent to vi,j are fi−1,j and fi,j. These pairs are distinct for L≥3; each displayed face boundary has four distinct edges. Thus the stated incidences define a square cellulation without repeated incidences.

3.1givenalgebra∎

Repeated horizontal and vertical steps modulo L connect any pair of vertices. The same coordinate moves connect any pair of face indices through shared edges. Therefore both graphs defined above are connected.

LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedOpen item page →

Finite square-lattice cycles are boundaries

Statement

In the infinite square lattice, every finitely supported edge chain over F2 whose incidence at each vertex is even is the boundary of a finitely supported collection of square faces. The same conclusion holds for the translated dual square lattice.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Finitely supported coefficients Hi,j,Vi,j∈F2 on the horizontal and vertical edges of the integer square lattice, satisfying the cycle equations

Hi,j+Hi−1,j+Vi,j+Vi,j−1=0

for every (i,j)∈Z2. All sums below are finite because the coefficients have finite support.

Proof

1.1givenconstructalgebra

For each row j, sum the cycle equations over i∈Z. The horizontal terms cancel in pairs, giving Sj=Sj−1, where Sj:=∑iVi,j. Finite support gives Sj=0 for all sufficiently large ∣j∣, so Sj=0 for every j. Define a face coefficient Fi,j:=∑k>iVk,j in F2. For fixed j, this coefficient is zero for i sufficiently large by finite support and for i sufficiently negative because then it equals Sj=0. It is also zero for all but finitely many rows. Hence F is a finitely supported face chain.

2.1givenstep 1.1algebra

The vertical edge vi,j belongs to the boundaries of fi−1,j and fi,j, so its coefficient in ∂F is Fi−1,j+Fi,j=Vi,j. Thus ∂F and the given chain agree on every vertical edge.

3.1givenstep 1.1step 2.1algebra∎

The horizontal edge hi,j belongs to the boundaries of fi,j−1 and fi,j. Its coefficient in ∂F is Fi,j−1+Fi,j=∑k>i(Vk,j−1+Vk,j). The cycle equation at (k,j) replaces each summand by Hk,j+Hk−1,j; summing over k>i telescopes to Hi,j because the sequence is finitely supported. Thus ∂F and the given chain agree on every horizontal edge, proving ∂F=(H,V). Translating the dual square lattice by (1/2,1/2) identifies it with the same integer grid, so the identical construction proves the dual assertion.

DefinitionDefinition: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedOpen item page →

Toric star and plaquette checks

Definition

For the periodic cellulation in Periodic square cellulation of the torus, put one qubit on each edge, ordered lexicographically by (i,j) and then with horizontal before vertical edges. The physical Hilbert space is HL=(C2)⊗E, where E is the edge set. For an edge e, write Xe and Ze for the corresponding one-qubit Pauli acting on that tensor factor and as the identity on every other factor. Define the star and plaquette checks by

Ai,j=Xhi−1,jXhi,jXvi,j−1Xvi,j,Bi,j=Zhi,jZvi+1,jZhi,j+1Zvi,j.

All indices are in ZL.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: An integer L≥3, its periodic square cellulation, and the ordered edge register.

[F1]

Periodic square cellulation of the torus: the edges incident to qi,j are hi−1,j,hi,j,vi,j−1,vi,j; the boundary of fi,j is hi,j,vi+1,j,hi,j+1,vi,j, with four distinct edges in each list.

[F2]

The Pauli matrices: X and Z are the specified Hermitian one-qubit matrices, and X2=Z2=I by direct multiplication.

[F3]

Finite registers and their ordered computational bases: the physical space is the ordered tensor product of one copy of C2 for each edge.

[F4]

Tensor products of finitely many linear maps: tensor products of maps act on elementary tensors factor by factor and extend linearly.

[F5]

The product basis is orthonormal and tensor dimensions multiply: ordered elementary computational-basis tensors span the finite register.

Verification

1.1givenF1F2F3

By [F1], each displayed check acts on four distinct edge factors. By [F2] and [F3], its factors are defined endomorphisms of the ordered physical register, so both Ai,j and Bi,j are well-defined tensor-product operators.

2.1F2F3F4F5step 1.1algebra∎

Each factor in either product is Hermitian and squares to the identity by [F2]. The factors act on distinct tensor coordinates, so [F4] makes their two compositions agree on every elementary tensor; those tensors span the register by [F5]. Therefore each full product is Hermitian and squares to the identity. These are the star and plaquette checks used below.

LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedOpen item page →

A contractible toric disk lifts to the square grid

Statement

Write the torus as TL=R2/(LZ2) with its periodic square cellulation. Let D⊂TL be a nonempty compact embedded topological disk with connected complement. Then the quotient map π:R2→TL has a lift D~⊂R2 on which it is one-to-one and maps D~ homeomorphically onto D. Consequently every finite primal or dual edge chain supported in D lifts to a finite chain in the infinite square tiling, and cycles lift to cycles.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The quotient torus TL=R2/(LZ2), the square cellulation, and a compact embedded disk D homeomorphic to the closed unit disk.

Proof

1.1givenchooseconstructalgebra

For any p~∈R2, choose an open square U about p~ of side length less than L. Its translates by distinct vectors in LZ2 are disjoint, and the quotient map restricts to a homeomorphism from each translate onto the same open neighborhood of π(p~). These neighborhoods cover the torus. For a path, pull back this cover to the compact interval, take a finite subcover and a Lebesgue number, and partition the interval into pieces of smaller length. Each piece maps into one such neighborhood; once its initial lift is fixed, the inverse on the unique sheet through that lift defines the lift on the piece. These pieces agree at endpoints, and uniqueness follows from uniqueness of the local inverse. For a homotopy square, use a finite grid of rectangles whose images each lie in one evenly covered neighborhood. Starting from a lifted corner, the local inverses extend across adjacent rectangles; on a common edge two extensions agree because they are lifts agreeing at one endpoint. Thus paths and homotopies lift after their initial data are fixed.

2.1givenstep 1.1constructalgebra

Fix p∈D and a lift p~. For each q∈D, lift a path from p to q starting at p~. Any two such paths are homotopic relative to their endpoints inside D, since the disk is contractible. By the homotopy lifting construction in step 1.1, the lifted endpoint varies continuously through the discrete fiber over q, so it is constant during the homotopy. Thus the endpoint is independent of the chosen path. These endpoints define a section s:D→R2 of π over D; local inverse charts from step 1.1 make the section continuous and one-to-one.

3.1givenstep 2.1step 1.1algebra∎

The image D~ is compact because D is compact and the section is continuous, hence it is bounded. The square and dual square tilings are locally finite, so only finitely many of their edges meet D~. The lift preserves local edge incidences by step 1.1. Therefore every finite primal or dual cycle supported in D lifts to a finite edge chain with even incidence at each lifted vertex.

LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedOpen item page →

Toric incidence maps have exactly one relation each

Statement

For L≥3, the L2 star-support vectors in F2E have span dimension L2−1, and their only relation is their total sum. The L2 face-boundary vectors have the same span dimension and their only relation is their total sum. The dual-face incidence statement has the same rank.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The periodic square cellulation with vertices qi,j, edges hi,j,vi,j, and faces fi,j.

[F1]

Periodic square cellulation of the torus: the vertex-edge graph and the face-adjacency graph are connected; every edge has two distinct endpoints and separates two distinct adjacent faces.

[F2]

Rank-nullity: dim⁡FV=nullity⁡T+rank⁡T: for a linear map with finite-dimensional domain, the dimension of its image equals the dimension of its domain minus the dimension of its kernel.

Proof

1.1givenF1F2algebra

Define S:F2V→F2E by sending a coordinate vector at a vertex to its star-support vector and extending linearly. The coefficient of an edge joining vertices q,q′ in S(a) is aq+aq′. Thus ker⁡S consists exactly of assignments constant along every edge. By [F1] the vertex graph is connected, so ker⁡S is the one-dimensional space of constant assignments. Since dim⁡F2V=L2, [F2] gives dim⁡im⁡S=L2−1. The all-vertex sum is zero because each edge has two endpoints, so this is the only star relation.

2.1givenF1F2algebra∎

Define T:F2F→F2E by sending a face coordinate vector to that face's boundary and extending linearly. An edge separating faces f,f′ has coefficient bf+bf′ in T(b). Thus ker⁡T consists exactly of assignments constant along adjacent faces. By [F1] the face-adjacency graph is connected, so ker⁡T is the one-dimensional space of constant assignments. Since dim⁡F2F=L2, [F2] gives dim⁡im⁡T=L2−1. The all-face sum is zero because each edge borders two faces, so this is the only face-boundary relation. The dual face-adjacency graph has the same square-grid incidence, proving its incidence rank is also L2−1.

DefinitionDefinition: AI-adaptedProof: Not applicableOpen item page →

Toric e and m syndromes

Definition

For a nonzero vector ψ that is a simultaneous eigenvector of all toric checks, its e syndrome is the set of vertices q for which Aqψ=−ψ, and its m syndrome is the set of faces f for which Bfψ=−ψ. A violated star is called an e defect and a violated plaquette is called an m defect. These are finite stabilizer-syndrome labels; the names do not assume that a material contains localized physical quasiparticles.

These eigenvalue labels agree with the commutation-sign syndrome of Stabilizer syndromes and logical Pauli operators when a Pauli error acts on a common +1 check eigenvector, as verified below.

The checks are Hermitian involutions, as verified below; thus their eigenvalues on any nonzero simultaneous eigenvector are indeed signs.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The toric checks on the finite edge register and their simultaneous-eigenvalue convention.

[F1]

Toric star and plaquette checks: every toric check is a Hermitian involution.

[F2]

Stabilizer syndromes and logical Pauli operators: a syndrome bit is 0 for commutation sign +1 and 1 for sign −1.

Verification

1.1givenF1algebra

A Hermitian involution has only eigenvalues +1 and −1. Therefore each check eigenvalue on the given nonzero simultaneous eigenvector is one of these two signs, so the two sets in the Definition are well-defined finite subsets of vertices and faces.

2.1F1F2step 1.1algebra∎

Let ϕ≠0 be a common +1 check eigenvector, and let E be a Pauli error. For any check g, write Eg=(−1)sgE with s∈F2. Then g(Eϕ)=(−1)sE(gϕ)=(−1)sEϕ. Since E is invertible, Eϕ≠0; its negative-check sets therefore consist exactly of the checks with commutation bit s=1. On an independent generating list these are the syndrome bits of [F2]. Thus the eigenvalue labels defined here are compatible with that error-syndrome convention, with stars and plaquettes kept separate.

LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedOpen item page →

Toric checks commute and have two global relations

Statement

All star and plaquette checks of Toric star and plaquette checks commute. The product of all stars is the identity, and the product of all plaquettes is the identity.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The periodic L×L torus with L≥3 and its star and plaquette checks.

[F1]

Toric star and plaquette checks: Ai,j is X on the four edges incident to qi,j, and Bi,j is Z on the four edges of fi,j.

[F2]

Pauli commutator is symplectic pairing: two Pauli operators commute when the mod-two symplectic pairing of their binary supports is zero; for an X-support and a Z-support, this pairing is their overlap parity.

[F3]

Periodic square cellulation of the torus: every edge has two distinct endpoints and borders two distinct faces, with all incidences read modulo L.

Proof

1.1givenF1F2algebra

For a fixed vertex qi,j, the only faces sharing its incident edges are fi,j,fi−1,j,fi,j−1,fi−1,j−1. Their boundaries overlap the star support respectively in {hi,j,vi,j}, {hi−1,j,vi,j}, {hi,j,vi,j−1}, and {hi−1,j,vi,j−1}; every other face has empty overlap. Hence every star-plaquette overlap has even size. By [F2], each star commutes with each plaquette. Two stars commute because all their nonidentity factors are X; two plaquettes commute because all their nonidentity factors are Z.

2.1F1F3algebra∎

By [F3], every edge has exactly two endpoints, so in the product of all stars its X factor occurs twice. Since X2=I, the total product is I. Every edge borders exactly two faces, so the same argument with Z2=I gives ∏i,jBi,j=I. The first total product is also ∏i,jAi,j=I.

LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedOpen item page →

Toric cycle classes are determined by two winding parities

Statement

Let Z1 be the space of primal edge chains with even incidence at every vertex, and let B1 be the span of the face boundaries. Then B1⊆Z1, the quotient Z1/B1 has dimension two, and the two winding parities give coordinates on that quotient. The same statement holds for dual edge chains, with dual face boundaries (the stars around primal vertices) in place of primal face boundaries. The horizontal loop γh=∑ihi,0 has winding pair (1,0), and the vertical loop γv=∑jv0,j has pair (0,1); their dual counterparts give the corresponding basis of the dual quotient.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The periodic square cellulation for L≥3. Here F2={0,1} with addition modulo two, and F2S is the coordinate vector space on a finite set S.

[F1]

Periodic square cellulation of the torus: there are L2 vertices and faces and 2L2 edges, with horizontal and vertical edges indexed periodically.

[F2]

Toric incidence maps have exactly one relation each: the span of face boundaries has dimension L2−1, and the vertex-edge and dual incidence graphs are connected.

Proof

1.1givenF1constructalgebra

The primal vertex-edge graph has the explicit spanning tree T={hi,0:0≤i<L−1}∪{vi,j:i∈ZL, 0≤j<L−1}. The horizontal edges form a path through row zero, and each other row is attached to that path by one vertical column path; hence T is connected and has no cycle. For each edge e∉T, add e to the unique tree path between its endpoints. This gives a cycle γe containing e and no other edge outside T. These cycles are independent because the coefficient of each non-tree edge in a linear combination is its own coefficient. They span Z1: subtract from any cycle the γe corresponding to its non-tree edges; the remainder is an even-incidence chain supported on the tree, and a nonempty finite forest has a leaf of odd degree, so the remainder is zero. Thus dim⁡Z1=∣E∣−(∣V∣−1)=L2+1.

2.1givenF1F2step 1.1algebra

Every face boundary has even incidence at each vertex, so B1⊆Z1. By [F2], dim⁡B1=L2−1. For a cycle c, define whk(c)=∑jc(hk,j) and wvℓ(c)=∑ic(vi,ℓ), with all sums in F2. Summing the even-incidence equations over column k shows whk=whk−1; summing over row ℓ shows wvℓ=wvℓ−1. Thus the two parities wh,wv are independent of the chosen cuts. Each face boundary crosses every such cut zero or two times, so both parities vanish on B1.

3.1F1F2step 1.1step 2.1algebra∎

The horizontal fundamental loop γh=∑ihi,0 has (wh,wv)=(1,0), and the vertical fundamental loop γv=∑jv0,j has (wh,wv)=(0,1). Therefore no nonzero combination of these loops lies in B1. A basis of B1 together with γh,γv is an independent family of (L2−1)+2=L2+1 cycles, which is the dimension of Z1 from step 1.1. It is therefore a basis of Z1, proving that the winding map identifies Z1/B1 with F22. The dual square cellulation has the same coordinate graph and incidence counts, so the identical argument proves its two winding coordinates.

DefinitionDefinition: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedOpen item page →

Finite toric-code Hamiltonian

Definition

For L≥3 and couplings Je,Jm>0, the finite toric-code Hamiltonian on HL is

HL=−Je∑i,j∈ZLAi,j−Jm∑i,j∈ZLBi,j.

The energy unit is fixed by Je,Jm. This is a finite-volume operator defined from the stabilizer checks; its definition makes no claim about a material realization or a thermodynamic phase.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The finite register and commuting checks from Toric star and plaquette checks.

[F1]

Toric star and plaquette checks: every star and plaquette is a Hermitian involution supported on four edges.

Verification

1.1givenF1algebra

Each coefficient −Je and −Jm is real, and each summand is self-adjoint by [F1]. Their finite sum is therefore self-adjoint.

2.1F1F2step 1.1∎

The terms commute pairwise by [F2], so HL is a finite sum of commuting local check operators. Its locality follows from the four-edge supports in [F1].

LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedOpen item page →

Toric checks decompose into joint syndrome eigenspaces

Statement

Delete the star A0,0 and plaquette B0,0 from the full check list, and call the remaining r=2L2−2 checks g1,…,gr. They are independent commuting Hermitian involutions. For each sign string s∈F2r, the operator

Ps=∏a=1rI+(−1)saga2

is the orthogonal projection onto the corresponding joint eigenspace; the Ps are pairwise orthogonal and sum to the identity. The omitted checks are determined by the retained ones, so every nonzero syndrome sector has an even number of e defects and an even number of m defects.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The periodic toric checks for L≥3 and the physical Hilbert space on 2L2 qubits.

[F1]

Toric star and plaquette checks: every check is a Hermitian involution supported on four distinct edge qubits.

[F2]

Toric checks commute and have two global relations: all checks commute, and the product of all stars and the product of all plaquettes are both I.

[F3]

Toric incidence maps have exactly one relation each: after deleting one fixed star and one fixed plaquette, the remaining star and face-boundary supports are independent within their respective X and Z coordinates.

[F4]

Toric e and m syndromes: e and m defects are exactly the negative star and plaquette checks, respectively.

Proof

1.1F1F2F3givenalgebra

A product of retained checks with identity binary support must have zero X support and zero Z support separately. By [F3], this forces the selected star subset and plaquette subset both to be empty, so the retained checks are independent. By [F1] and [F2] they are commuting Hermitian involutions. For a retained check ga and sign sa, put pa,sa=(I+(−1)saga)/2. Direct expansion using ga∗=ga and ga2=I gives pa,sa∗=pa,sa and pa,sa2=pa,sa. The checks commute, so their factors commute; hence Ps is a self-adjoint idempotent, thus an orthogonal projection.

2.1F1step 1.1algebra

If s≠t, choose an index a with sa≠ta. Then pa,sapa,ta=(I−ga2)/4=0, so PsPt=0. Summing over all sign strings and distributing the finite product gives ∑sPs=∏a(pa,0+pa,1)=I. Thus the ranges are pairwise orthogonal and their direct sum is the whole Hilbert space; zero projections are allowed.

3.1F2F4step 2.1algebra∎

By [F2], the omitted star is the product of all retained stars, so on ran⁡Ps its eigenvalue is the product of their signs; the product of the eigenvalues over all stars is therefore +1. A finite list of signs in {+1,−1} has product +1 exactly when it contains an even number of minus signs. The same argument for the omitted plaquette gives even parity for the negative plaquette checks. By [F4], these are the e and m defect parities. The projectors therefore decompose the register into the stated full-check syndrome sectors.

LemmaStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedOpen item page →

Open toric strings have endpoint syndromes

Statement

Let P be a primal edge trail with no repeated edge and distinct endpoints q0,q1. The Pauli string Z(P) has commutation syndrome 1 at exactly the two endpoint stars and 0 at every other star or plaquette. Let Q be a dual edge trail with no repeated edge and distinct endpoint faces f0,f1. The string X(Q) has commutation syndrome 1 at exactly those two endpoint plaquettes and 0 at every other plaquette or star.

If either kind of edge-simple trail is closed, its corresponding string has zero syndrome at every check.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The toric checks, an edge-simple primal or dual trail, and the finite check-eigenvalue convention for syndromes.

[F1]

Toric star and plaquette checks: stars are X on incident primal edges, and plaquettes are Z on boundary edges.

[F2]

Toric e and m syndromes: an e or m defect is a check with eigenvalue −1; the corresponding commutation sign specifies whether a string creates that defect when applied to a common +1 check eigenvector.

[F3]

The Pauli matrices: on one qubit, XZ=−ZX, while X commutes with X and Z commutes with Z.

Proof

1.1givenF1F3algebra

In the mod-two support of a primal trail, each internal visit to a vertex contributes one incoming and one outgoing edge, hence even incidence. After pairing arrivals and departures at every visit, the distinct endpoints have odd incidence and every other vertex has even incidence. By [F3], a Z string anticommutes with a star exactly when the number of shared edges is odd. Thus it anticommutes with exactly Aq0 and Aq1. It commutes with every plaquette because both use only Z factors.

1.2givenF1F2F3algebra

In the dual graph, the same incidence count gives odd overlap exactly at the two endpoint faces. A dual edge crosses the primal edge carrying the same qubit, so [F3] makes the X string anticommute with exactly the two endpoint plaquettes. It commutes with all stars because both use only X factors. By [F2], these signs are precisely the stated e and m endpoint syndromes.

2.1F1F3constructalgebra∎

For a closed edge-simple primal trail, every vertex has even degree in its mod-two edge support: arrivals and departures pair at every visit, including the common initial and final vertex. Thus every star overlap is even, and every plaquette overlap is even because both strings use only Z. For a closed dual trail, the same incidence count gives even overlap with every plaquette, and its X string commutes with all stars. Hence both closed strings have zero syndrome.

TheoremStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedOpen item page →

The periodic toric code encodes two qubits

Statement

For the periodic L×L toric checks with L≥3, the common +1 eigenspace is a valid stabilizer code on n=2L2 qubits. Its independent check rank is r=2L2−2, so its dimension is 2n−r=4=22 and it encodes two logical qubits.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: An integer L≥3, the periodic toric checks, and the common +1 eigenspace convention.

[F1]

Toric checks commute and have two global relations: the checks are commuting Hermitian involutions; the product of all stars and the product of all plaquettes are both I.

[F2]

Toric incidence maps have exactly one relation each: the star supports have rank L2−1 and their only relation is the total star sum; the face boundaries have rank L2−1 and their only relation is the total face sum.

[F3]

Stabilizer code space: a stabilizer code is the common +1 eigenspace of an abelian subgroup of Hermitian Pauli operators that does not contain −I.

[F4]

Stabilizer syndromes and logical Pauli operators: the binary Pauli label records the X and Z support vectors separately.

[F5]

Stabilizer projector and code dimension: an n-qubit stabilizer subgroup with r independent generators has a nonzero code space of dimension 2n−r.

[F6]

Periodic square cellulation of the torus: the periodic lattice has L2 vertices and faces and 2L2 edges.

Proof

1.1F1F2F4givenalgebra

Omit the fixed star A0,0 and fixed plaquette B0,0. By [F2], the remaining L2−1 stars are independent, and the remaining L2−1 plaquettes are independent; [F1] expresses each omitted check as the product of the retained checks of its type. Their combined binary supports are independent because an X-support and a Z-support occupy separate coordinates by [F4]. Thus these checks generate all checks with r=2L2−2 independent generators.

2.1F1F2F3F4step 1.1algebra

Let S be their generated subgroup. By [F1] it is abelian and generated by Hermitian Paulis. If a product of selected generators had zero binary label, its X-support and Z-support would each be zero by [F4]. The two independent families in [F2] then force both selected subsets to be empty, so that product is I. In particular, no product is −I, and −I∉S. Hence S satisfies the stabilizer hypotheses in [F3].

3.1F3F5F6step 1.1step 2.1algebra∎

There are n=2L2 edge qubits by [F6]. The dimension theorem [F5] therefore gives dim⁡C(S)=22L2−(2L2−2)=4=22; [F3] and step 2.1 ensure that its hypotheses hold, and step 1.1 supplies the independent rank. The code is nonzero and encodes exactly two qubits.

DefinitionDefinition: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedOpen item page →

Noncontractible toric logical loops

Definition

On the periodic torus, define four Pauli representatives

Zˉ1=∏i∈ZLZhi,0,Zˉ2=∏j∈ZLZv0,j,Xˉ1=∏j∈ZLXh0,j,Xˉ2=∏i∈ZLXvi,0.

The Zˉ supports are the two fixed fundamental primal cycles. The Xˉ supports are the dual cycles crossing them. These operators are called the toric logical loops. As verified below, each is a nontrivial logical Pauli class in the periodic toric code.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The periodic toric checks and the four specified Pauli loop representatives.

[F1]

Toric star and plaquette checks: stars are X on the four incident edges and plaquettes are Z on the four boundary edges.

[F2]

Pauli commutator is symplectic pairing: a Pauli commutes with a check exactly when its binary symplectic pairing with that check is zero; for these pure X/Z checks this is the parity of the shared support.

[F3]

Toric cycle classes are determined by two winding parities: the two primal fundamental loops have winding pairs (1,0) and (0,1); the two dual loops have the corresponding nonzero dual winding classes; a cycle is a boundary exactly when both winding parities vanish.

[F4]

Toric incidence maps have exactly one relation each: the only star-support relation and the only face-boundary relation are their respective total sums.

[F5]

The periodic toric code encodes two qubits: the common check eigenspace is nonzero and has dimension four.

[F6]

Stabilizer syndromes and logical Pauli operators: logical Pauli classes are normalizer elements modulo scalar phases and stabilizers.

[F7]

Periodic square cellulation of the torus: indices are modulo L; horizontal edges join consecutive vertices in their first coordinate and vertical edges join consecutive vertices in their second coordinate. The dual edges cross the corresponding primal edges and join the adjacent faces.

[F8]

Toric checks commute and have two global relations: the product of all stars and the product of all plaquettes are identity, and all checks commute.

Verification

1.1givenF1F2F3F4F6F7F8algebra

The supports of Zˉ1 and Zˉ2 close because their successive horizontal and vertical edges meet at vertices modulo L, by [F7]. The supports of Xˉ1 and Xˉ2 close on the dual graph because the crossed edges join successive adjacent faces modulo L, also by [F7]. By [F1] and [F2], a primal Z cycle commutes with every star and plaquette, and a dual X cycle commutes with every plaquette and star. Their winding pairs are nonzero by [F3], so none is a boundary. If a pure Z loop were in the stabilizer, its X support would be zero; by [F4] the selected star factors would either be empty or the full star family, and [F8] makes that full product I. The loop would therefore be a product of plaquettes, contrary to its nonzero winding. Interchanging X and Z gives the same conclusion for the dual loops. Hence all four lie in N(S)∖ZnS and define nontrivial logical classes by [F6].

2.1F5step 1.1∎

The code is nonzero by [F5], so these normalizer classes act on its four-dimensional code space. The four formulas fix the representatives whose pairings are calculated in the subsequent logical-algebra result.

Remarks

The commutation pairings for these fixed representatives are listed in Two anticommuting toric logical Pauli pairs. This is an orientation-only forward reference; the verification above does not depend on that theorem.

TheoremStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedOpen item page →

Exact finite-volume toric-code gap

Statement

For the finite toric-code Hamiltonian HL=−Je∑qAq−Jm∑fBf with Je,Jm>0, the ground space is the four-dimensional toric code space and the ground energy is Eg=−L2(Je+Jm). The exact spectral gap above it is ΔL=4min⁡(Je,Jm).

Facts & Assumptions

Given: L≥3, fixed couplings Je,Jm>0, the Hamiltonian, the toric code space, and the joint-check syndrome labels.

[F1]

Finite toric-code Hamiltonian: HL is the finite sum −Je∑qAq−Jm∑fBf.

[F2]

Toric checks decompose into joint syndrome eigenspaces: the check eigenvalue sectors are an orthogonal decomposition of the Hilbert space; each defect parity is even.

[F3]

The periodic toric code encodes two qubits: the common +1 eigenspace has dimension four.

[F4]

Open toric strings have endpoint syndromes: a one-edge primal Z string creates exactly two e defects, and a one-edge dual X string creates exactly two m defects.

[F5]

Toric e and m syndromes: e and m defect counts are the numbers of star and plaquette checks with eigenvalue −1.

Proof

1.1givenF1F2F5algebra

On a joint-check eigenspace with Ne negative star signs and Nm negative plaquette signs, each star sum is L2−2Ne and each plaquette sum is L2−2Nm. By [F1] the Hamiltonian acts there by the scalar −L2(Je+Jm)+2JeNe+2JmNm.

2.1F2F3step 1.1algebra

The all-positive sector is the code space by definition, is nonzero by [F3], and has energy Eg=−L2(Je+Jm). Every other nonzero sector has at least one defect species present; by [F2] its defect count is even, hence at least two. Step 1.1 then places its energy at least 4min⁡(Je,Jm) above Eg.

3.1F1F4step 2.1algebra∎

If Je≤Jm, choose a one-edge primal path and apply its Z string to a nonzero code vector. By [F4] the result is a nonzero joint eigenvector with exactly two e defects, so its energy is Eg+4Je. If Jm<Je, use a one-edge dual path and its X string instead; it yields a nonzero joint eigenvector with exactly two m defects and energy Eg+4Jm. These states attain the lower bound from step 2.1, proving ΔL=4min⁡(Je,Jm).

TheoremStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedOpen item page →

Exact indistinguishability in a contractible disk

Statement

Let C be the periodic toric code and let Π be its orthogonal code projector. Let D be a compact embedded disk in the torus with connected complement. Let S⊆EL be a set of edge qubits such that D contains both the primal edge segment and its crossing dual edge segment for every e∈S. Then every operator O supported on S has scalar compression to the code:

ΠOΠ=c(O)Π

for some c(O)∈C.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The periodic toric checks, a disk region D as in the Statement, and an operator supported on its edge set S.

[F1]

Toric star and plaquette checks: stars are X on the four edges incident to a vertex and plaquettes are Z on the four edges in a face boundary.

[F2]
[F3]

Stabilizer code space: the code is their common +1 eigenspace.

[F4]

Stabilizer projector and code dimension: Π is the orthogonal projector onto the stabilizer code space. Together with [F3], this means every check g satisfies gΠ=Πg=Π.

[F5]

Support and weight of an operator on a finite register: support on S means, after the declared wire permutation, the operator is OS⊗ISc.

[F6]

The Pauli matrices: the one-qubit matrix units are ∣0⟩⟨0∣=(I+Z)/2, ∣1⟩⟨1∣=(I−Z)/2, ∣0⟩⟨1∣=(X+iY)/2, and ∣1⟩⟨0∣=(X−iY)/2, by direct substitution.

[F7]

The product basis is orthonormal and tensor dimensions multiply: ordered elementary computational-basis tensors form a basis of the finite register.

[F8]

Tensor products of finitely many linear maps: tensor products of one-qubit maps act factor by factor on elementary tensors and extend linearly.

[F9]

Pauli commutator is symplectic pairing: a Pauli commutes with every check exactly when its binary symplectic pairing with each check label is zero.

[F10]

Stabilizer syndromes and logical Pauli operators: a phase-aware Pauli label records its X and Z supports separately; equal binary labels differ only by a scalar phase.

[F11]

Finite square-lattice cycles are boundaries: every finite primal or dual cycle in the infinite square tiling is a sum of face boundaries.

[F12]

A contractible toric disk lifts to the square grid: primal and dual cycles supported in D lift to finite cycles in the infinite square tiling.

[F13]

Periodic square cellulation of the torus: the quotient sends each unit face to the correspondingly indexed torus face and sends its four boundary edges to the displayed periodic edge boundary; the same incidence identity holds for translated dual squares and star supports. By linearity the quotient therefore sends finite primal and dual boundaries to torus boundaries.

[F14]

The periodic toric code encodes two qubits: the code projector is nonzero.

Proof

1.1F5F6F7F8algebra

The basis matrix units ∣x⟩⟨y∣ span all operators on the finite register by [F7]. Each is the tensor product of one-qubit matrix units by [F8]. The four identities in [F6] therefore express every global matrix unit as a linear combination of tensor Pauli operators. Hence tensor Paulis span the full operator space. If O is supported on S, apply the same expansion to OS in [F5] and tensor with identity outside S; every resulting Pauli term is supported on a subset of S.

2.1F1F2F3F4F9F10F11F12F13step 1.1algebra

Consider one tensor Pauli E from this expansion. If it anticommutes with a check g, then the commutation fact [F2] and the common-+1 code definition [F3] make the projector relation [F4] applicable. It gives ΠEΠ=ΠgEΠ=−ΠEgΠ=−ΠEΠ, so ΠEΠ=0. If E commutes with all checks, write it as a phase times XxZz. By [F1] and [F9], z has even incidence at every primal vertex and x has even incidence at every dual vertex. They are therefore primal and dual cycles. Their supports lie among the qubits in S; by [F12] both cycles lift to finite square-grid cycles. By [F11], the lifted Z cycle is a sum of square face boundaries and the lifted X cycle is a sum of dual face boundaries. Projecting these finite face chains to the torus gives products of plaquette checks and star checks with exactly the original support labels. Indeed, the quotient is a chain map because the boundary of each unit face maps to the stated four-edge torus boundary by [F13]; repeated image faces cancel in pairs over F2. Thus E differs by a scalar phase from a product of checks, by [F10], and ΠEΠ is a scalar multiple of Π by [F3] and [F4].

3.1F14step 1.1step 2.1algebra∎

Every term in the Pauli expansion of O from step 1.1 has either zero compression or scalar compression by step 2.1. Summing these finitely many terms gives ΠOΠ=c(O)Π. The code projector is nonzero by [F14], so the scalar can be chosen as the sum of the scalar coefficients of those terms.

Remarks

The disk and support hypotheses are finite-cellulation statements. This theorem proves exact local indistinguishability for the specified toric stabilizer model; it makes no perturbation-stability or finite-temperature lifetime claim.

TheoremStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedOpen item page →

A single primal-dual crossing anticommutes

Statement

Let P be a primal path and Q a dual path whose edge supports share exactly one physical qubit. Then their string Paulis anticommute: Z(P)X(Q)=−X(Q)Z(P). This is the algebraic mutual e/m string sign.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A primal Z string and a dual X string with exactly one shared edge-qubit.

[F1]

Open toric strings have endpoint syndromes: Z(P) is Z on the primal path edges and X(Q) is X on the primal edge-qubits crossed by the dual path.

[F2]

Pauli commutator is symplectic pairing: two Pauli strings commute with sign (−1)ω, where ω is the parity of their X/Z support overlap.

Proof

1.1givenF1F2algebra

The X and Z supports meet at exactly one qubit, so their binary symplectic pairing is 1∈F2. By [F2], Z(P)X(Q)=(−1)1X(Q)Z(P)=−X(Q)Z(P).

2.1givenstep 1.1∎

The sign is obtained from the finite Pauli commutator alone. No trajectory, Hamiltonian evolution, or dynamical exchange is part of the hypotheses, so the result asserts the mutual string algebra and no braiding experiment.

Remarks

The sign matches the conventional e/m mutual-statistics label for the toric code. The theorem proves the finite operator identity only.

DefinitionDefinition: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedOpen item page →

Pauli-path energy barrier

Definition

Fix L≥3, Je,Jm>0, a unit vector ψ in the toric code space, and a specified nontrivial logical Pauli representative Q. An elementary Pauli path to Q is a finite sequence E0,…,ET with E0=I, ET a scalar-phase multiple of Q, and Er+1=PrEr, where each Pr is X, Y, or Z on a single edge and the identity on every other edge.

For any prefix Pauli E, define its energy excess ε(E):=⟨Eψ,HLEψ⟩−Ecode, where Ecode:=−L2(Je+Jm) is the energy of every code vector. The Pauli-path energy barrier of Q is

BL(Q):=min⁡(E0,…,ET)max⁡0≤r≤Tε(Er),

where the minimum ranges over elementary Pauli paths to Q. This is a finite-code energy quantity; it is not a thermal lifetime.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The finite Hamiltonian, a nonzero toric code space, a unit code vector, and a specified logical Pauli representative.

[F1]

Finite toric-code Hamiltonian: HL is the stated finite sum of star and plaquette checks.

[F2]

The periodic toric code encodes two qubits: the code space has dimension four and every code vector has every check eigenvalue +1.

[F3]

Stabilizer syndromes and logical Pauli operators: every Pauli is a phase-aware tensor product of one-qubit Pauli factors and its logical class is defined modulo scalar phase and stabilizers.

[F4]

The Pauli matrices: the one-qubit Pauli factors are I,X,Y,Z, all unitary.

[F5]

Pauli commutator is symplectic pairing: conjugating a check by a Pauli changes its sign by a value in {+1,−1} determined by their binary supports.

Verification

1.1F1F2F5givenalgebra

For any unit code vector ψ, each check has eigenvalue +1 by [F2], so [F1] gives ⟨ψ,HLψ⟩=−L2(Je+Jm)=Ecode. For any Pauli prefix E and any check g, [F5] gives gEψ=±Egψ=±Eψ. Thus Eψ has a joint check syndrome, and each term of HL has a fixed expectation on it. The sign pattern depends on E and the checks, not on the choice of code vector ψ. Therefore ε(E) is well-defined and independent of that choice.

1.2F3F4construct

Every Q in [F3] is a finite tensor product of one-edge Pauli factors I,X,Y,Z from [F4], up to scalar phase. Applying its nonidentity factors one edge at a time gives at least one elementary path, so the set of paths in the Definition is nonempty.

2.1F1F2step 1.2algebra∎

By [F1] and [F2], the energy excess of any prefix is 2Jea+2Jmb, where a,b∈{0,…,L2} count its violated stars and plaquettes. This is a finite set of possible real values. Hence the set of peak excesses over the nonempty path family is a nonempty subset of a finite set, and its minimum exists.

TheoremStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedOpen item page →

Toric code distance is L

Statement

For the periodic L×L toric stabilizer code with L≥3, the minimum weight of a normalizer Pauli outside the scalar-phase stabilizer is d(S)=L.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: L≥3, the toric checks on 2L2 edge qubits, their binary Pauli support convention, and their logical Pauli quotient.

[F1]

Toric star and plaquette checks: stars are X on incident primal edges and plaquettes are Z on face-boundary edges.

[F2]

Toric cycle classes are determined by two winding parities: a primal or dual cycle is a boundary exactly when both winding parities vanish; every nonboundary cycle has nonzero winding in one of the two coordinate directions.

[F3]

Stabilizer syndromes and logical Pauli operators: the binary label of a Pauli records its X and Z supports, and normalizer Paulis are those commuting with all checks; logical classes are modulo phases and stabilizers.

[F4]

Pauli commutator is symplectic pairing: a Pauli commutes with a check exactly when their binary symplectic pairing is zero.

[F5]

Noncontractible toric logical loops: Zˉ1 is a nontrivial logical Pauli supported on the L horizontal edges hi,0.

[F6]

Stabilizer distance: when the code encodes at least one qubit, distance is the minimum weight in N(S)∖ZnS.

[F7]

Support and weight of an operator on a finite register: the weight of a Pauli is the number of edge qubits on which it is nonidentity.

[F8]

The periodic toric code encodes two qubits: the code has dimension 4 and encodes two qubits.

Proof

1.1givenF1F3F4construct

Let E=iaXxZz be a Pauli in the normalizer. Commuting with every star forces the Z-support z to have even incidence at every primal vertex; commuting with every plaquette forces the X-support x to have even incidence at every dual vertex, by [F1] and [F4]. Thus z is a primal cycle and x is a dual cycle.

2.1F1F2F3F7step 1.1algebra

If both cycles were boundaries, their supports would be products of plaquette and star checks respectively, so E would be a scalar-phase stabilizer. Hence a nontrivial logical Pauli has at least one nonboundary cycle by [F2] and [F3]. That cycle has a nonzero winding parity. For a horizontal winding, each of the L disjoint vertical cuts is crossed an odd number of times; for a vertical winding, each of the L disjoint horizontal cuts is crossed an odd number of times. In either case its support contains at least one distinct edge from each cut, hence at least L edges. The Pauli support contains the support of each nonzero X or Z chain, even when both bits occur on one qubit, so [F7] gives wt⁡(E)≥L.

3.1F5F6F8step 2.1algebra∎

The operator Zˉ1 from [F5] has exactly L distinct edge factors and is logically nontrivial. Thus the set defining [F6] is nonempty and contains a weight-L element. The code encodes two qubits by [F8], so [F6] applies; combining this upper bound with step 2.1 gives d(S)=L.

TheoremStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedOpen item page →

Two anticommuting toric logical Pauli pairs

Statement

The representatives Zˉ1,Zˉ2,Xˉ1,Xˉ2 of Noncontractible toric logical loops obey ZˉiXˉj=(−1)δijXˉjZˉi and commute within each Z pair and each X pair. Their four classes form a basis of the logical Pauli quotient of the two-qubit toric code.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The four specified normalizer representatives and the two-qubit toric stabilizer code.

[F1]

Noncontractible toric logical loops: Zˉ1 uses the horizontal primal row hi,0, Zˉ2 the vertical primal column v0,j, Xˉ1 uses h0,j, and Xˉ2 uses vi,0.

[F2]

Pauli commutator is symplectic pairing: the commutator sign of two Pauli strings is (−1)ω, where ω is their binary symplectic pairing; for pure X/Z supports it is the overlap parity.

[F3]

Stabilizer syndromes and logical Pauli operators: logical Paulis are classes in N(S)/(ZnS), with scalar phases and stabilizers identified.

[F4]

The periodic toric code encodes two qubits: the code encodes two qubits.

[F5]

Dimension of the logical Pauli quotient: an n-qubit stabilizer code encoding k qubits has a binary logical Pauli quotient of dimension 2k.

[F6]

A single primal-dual crossing anticommutes: primal Z and dual X strings with exactly one shared physical edge anticommute.

Proof

1.1givenF1F2F6algebra

By [F1], Zˉ1 and Xˉ1 share only h0,0, while Zˉ2 and Xˉ2 share only v0,0. [F6] gives anticommutation for these equal-index pairs. The cross pairs (Zˉ1,Xˉ2) and (Zˉ2,Xˉ1) have disjoint physical-edge supports, so [F2] gives commutation for unequal indices. Two Z strings commute with one another and two X strings commute with one another because their factors have the same Pauli type.

2.1F3step 1.1algebra

Suppose a product Zˉ1aZˉ2bXˉ1cXˉ2d, with a,b,c,d∈F2, represented the identity class in [F3]. It would then commute with every normalizer representative. Commuting with Xˉ1,Xˉ2,Zˉ1,Zˉ2 in turn and using step 1.1 forces a=b=c=d=0. Hence the four classes are independent.

3.1F4F5step 2.1algebra∎

By [F4] the code has k=2, and [F5] gives logical quotient dimension 2k=4. The four independent classes from step 2.1 therefore form a basis of that quotient.

TheoremStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedOpen item page →

A toric logical string has constant energy barrier

Statement

If Je≤Jm, the horizontal logical string Zˉ1 has BL(Zˉ1)≤4Je. If Jm<Je, the dual horizontal logical string Xˉ2 has BL(Xˉ2)≤4Jm. In either case a noncontractible logical loop of the cheaper species has barrier at most 4min⁡(Je,Jm), independently of L.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: L≥3, fixed Je,Jm>0, the finite toric Hamiltonian, and the specified logical loops.

[F1]

Pauli-path energy barrier: the barrier is the minimum peak energy excess over all paths of single-edge Pauli errors ending at the specified logical operator.

[F2]

Exact finite-volume toric-code gap: the ground energy is Eg=−L2(Je+Jm).

[F3]

Open toric strings have endpoint syndromes: an edge-simple open primal Z trail or dual X trail has the respective defects at exactly its two endpoints; a closed such trail has no defects.

[F4]

Noncontractible toric logical loops: Zˉ1 is the horizontal primal loop with edges hi,0, and Xˉ2 is the dual horizontal loop with crossed edges vi,0.

[F5]

Finite toric-code Hamiltonian: HL is the finite sum of star terms −JeAi,j and plaquette terms −JmBi,j.

Proof

1.1givenF1F2F3F4F5constructalgebra

Suppose Je≤Jm. Apply Zh0,0,Zh1,0,…,ZhL−1,0 in that order. After k factors with 1≤k<L, the partial string is a primal trail from q0,0 to qk,0; these endpoints are distinct, so [F3] gives exactly two e defects and no m defects. By [F5], changing one star eigenvalue from +1 to −1 changes its energy contribution from −Je to +Je, an increase of 2Je; the excess is therefore 4Je. After the last factor the path is closed and has zero syndrome by [F3]. This is an elementary path in [F1] whose peak excess is at most 4Je.

1.2givenF1F2F3F4F5constructalgebra

Suppose Jm<Je. Apply Xv0,0,Xv1,0,…,XvL−1,0 in that order. The crossed dual edges form a closed horizontal dual loop. After k factors with 1≤k<L, the dual trail has distinct endpoint faces fL−1,0 and fk−1,0; [F3] gives exactly two m defects and no e defects. By [F5], each m defect raises the energy by 2Jm, so the excess is 4Jm. The final closed trail has zero syndrome by [F3] and ends at Xˉ2. This is an elementary path in [F1] with peak excess at most 4Jm.

2.1step 1.1step 1.2algebra∎

If Je≤Jm, step 1.1 gives 4Je=4min⁡(Je,Jm). If Jm<Je, step 1.2 gives 4Jm=4min⁡(Je,Jm). The bound is independent of L.

TheoremStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-generatedOpen item page →

Toric code corrects Pauli errors below half the distance

Statement

Let t∈Z≥0 satisfy 2t<L. Every finite Pauli error channel whose Kraus operators lie in the span of Pauli operators of weight at most t has an exact recovery on the periodic L×L toric code. In particular, every unknown Pauli error of weight at most t is exactly correctable.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The periodic toric code on n=2L2 qubits and an integer t≥0 with 2t<L.

[F1]

Toric code distance is L: the code has stabilizer distance d(S)=L.

[F2]

Stabilizer distance detection and correction: a finite stabilizer error channel with Kraus operators in the span of Paulis of weight at most t has an exact recovery whenever 2t<d(S).

[F3]

The periodic toric code encodes two qubits: the toric code is a nonzero finite-dimensional stabilizer code.

Proof

1.1givenF3

By [F3], the common toric code space is nonzero and finite-dimensional; it is the stabilizer code defined by the commuting toric checks.

2.1givenF1F2step 1.1algebra∎

By [F1], its distance is d(S)=L. The hypothesis 2t<L is therefore exactly the strict condition 2t<d(S) in [F2]. Applying [F2] gives one finite exact recovery for every error channel in the stated Pauli span, and hence for each Pauli error of weight at most t. No circuit-level noisy procedure or hardware threshold is asserted.

CounterexampleConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-generatedOpen item page →

A finite toric gap does not imply arbitrary perturbation stability

Statement

For each finite L≥3, the toric Hamiltonian has an exact positive gap, contractible-disk local indistinguishability, and a constant upper bound on a logical-string energy barrier. These unperturbed facts alone do not imply stability under arbitrary perturbations: the explicit global-projector perturbation VL=−ΔL(I−ΠL) closes the gap above the original code space and enlarges the ground space, where ΠL is the ground projector and ΔL=4min⁡(Je,Jm). This does not refute stability theorems for sufficiently small local perturbations, and it makes no claim about thermal dynamics or a material realization.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The finite periodic toric Hamiltonian with L≥3, couplings Je,Jm>0, and its code projector ΠL.

[F1]

Exact finite-volume toric-code gap: the code is the ground space, the ground energy is Eg=−L2(Je+Jm), and the exact gap is ΔL=4min⁡(Je,Jm)>0.

[F2]

Exact indistinguishability in a contractible disk: every operator supported in the stated contractible disk has scalar compression to the code.

[F3]

A toric logical string has constant energy barrier: one noncontractible logical string has an unperturbed Pauli-path energy barrier at most 4min⁡(Je,Jm).

[F4]

The periodic toric code encodes two qubits: ΠL has rank four, while the full Hilbert space has dimension 22L2>4.

[F5]

Finite toric-code Hamiltonian: HL is a finite self-adjoint operator on the 22L2-dimensional register.

Counterexample

1.1F1F2F3F4F5givenalgebra

Since [F1] identifies the code as the ground eigenspace of the self-adjoint finite operator [F5], its orthogonal projector ΠL commutes with HL: for ψ in the code and η⊥C, ⟨ψ,HLη⟩=⟨HLψ,η⟩=Eg⟨ψ,η⟩=0. The complement is nonzero by [F4], so the restriction of HL to it has a least eigenvalue. By [F1] that eigenvalue is Eg+ΔL. The other finite-volume properties [F2] and [F3] concern this same unperturbed Hamiltonian and code.

2.1F1F4F5step 1.1constructalgebra

Define VL=−ΔL(I−ΠL). The operator I−ΠL is a nonzero orthogonal projection by [F4], so VL is self-adjoint and ∥VL∥=ΔL. It vanishes on the code and subtracts ΔL from every eigenvalue on the orthogonal complement. The construction uses the global code projector and is not asserted to belong to a local perturbation class.

3.1F1F2F3step 2.1algebra∎

The code eigenvalue remains Eg after adding VL. Every excited eigenvalue E≥Eg+ΔL becomes E−ΔL≥Eg, and a nonzero eigenspace with E=Eg+ΔL now also has eigenvalue Eg. Thus the original code is no longer the full ground space: the energy gap above that four-dimensional code space is zero and the perturbed ground space is strictly larger. The finite unperturbed gap, local indistinguishability, and barrier statements therefore do not by themselves prove stability against arbitrary perturbations. No thermal evolution or material model was specified, so no memory-lifetime or physical-phase conclusion follows from these finite operator facts.

5 · Examples, counterexamples and false statements

None yet.

Sources