Co-Designing Quantum Codes with Transversal Diagonal Gates via Multi-Agent Systems

Xi He, Sirui Lu, Bei Zeng · Oct 23, 2025 · Citations: 0

Multi Agent

Open arXiv Find Implementation RSS feed Shortlist (0)

How to use this page

Low trust

Use this as background context only. Do not make protocol decisions from this page alone.

Best use

Background context only

What to verify

Read the full paper before copying any benchmark, metric, or protocol choices.

Evidence quality

Low

Derived from extracted protocol signals and abstract evidence.

Abstract

Exact scientific discovery requires more than heuristic search: candidate constructions must be turned into exact objects and checked independently. We address this gap by extending TeXRA with an independent Lean 4 verification layer, turning it into a human-guided multi-agent platform for exact scientific discovery. The platform couples symbolic synthesis, combinatorial and linear-programming search, exact reconstruction of numerical candidates, and formal verification in Lean. We apply this platform to nonadditive quantum error-correcting codes with prescribed transversal diagonal gates within the subset-sum linear-programming (SSLP) framework. In the distance-2 regime where logical states occupy distinct residue classes, the platform yields a Lean-certified catalogue of 14,116 codes for $K\in\{2,3,4\}$ and up to six physical qubits, realizing cyclic logical orders 2 through 18, from which we extract closed-form infinite families. We also construct a residue-degenerate $((6,4,2))$ code implementing the logical controlled-phase gate $\mathrm{diag}(1,1,1,i)$. At distance 3, we resolve the transversal-$T$ problem for $((7,2,3))$ codes within the complementary binary-dihedral $\mathrm{BD}_{16}$ setting: among the 12 candidates surviving the SSLP filters, 10 admit exact realizations and 2 are excluded by no-go proofs. All accepted constructions, families, and no-go results are formalized and checked in Lean, illustrating how AI-assisted workflows can bridge search, exact reconstruction, and formal proof in the physical sciences.

Abstract-only analysis — low confidence

All signals on this page are inferred from the abstract only and may be inaccurate. Do not use this page as a primary protocol reference.

This paper looks adjacent to evaluation work, but not like a strong protocol reference.
The available metadata is too thin to trust this as a primary source.
The abstract does not clearly name benchmarks or metrics.

Human Eval Hub LLM-as-Judge Hub Pairwise Preference Hub

Should You Rely On This Paper?

This paper is adjacent to HFEPX scope and is best used for background context, not as a primary protocol reference.

Best use

Background context only

Use if you need

A secondary eval reference to pair with stronger protocol papers.

Main weakness

This paper looks adjacent to evaluation work, but not like a strong protocol reference.

Trust level

Low

Usefulness score

0/100 • Low

Treat as adjacent context, not a core eval-method reference.

Human Feedback Signal

Not explicit in abstract metadata

Evaluation Signal

Detected

Usefulness for eval research

Adjacent candidate

Extraction confidence 15%

If you are doing eval pipeline work, start here:

Human Eval Hub LLM-as-Judge Hub Pairwise Preference Hub Tool-Use Eval Hub

What We Could Verify

These are the protocol signals we could actually recover from the available paper metadata. Use them to decide whether this paper is worth deeper reading.