Quantum error correction can reduce logical error rates below physical error rates in a scalable architecture.
Physical qubit error floor at scale. Below-threshold operation at small code distances does not guarantee the behaviour continues as physical qubit count increases. Crosstalk, fabrication variability, and control complexity all tend to increase with system size. The resistance mechanism is not that below-threshold operation is unachievable — INST-004 demonstrates it is achievable — but that sustaining it as qubit count grows from hundreds to thousands to tens of thousands is an unsolved engineering problem. The claim as stated is in RESOLVING because the principle is established; this mechanism constrains how quickly the practical consequence follows.
Demonstration at d=11 and beyond. The next decisive evidence event for this record is demonstration of below-threshold scaling at code distances d=11 and higher. At d=7, the Willow result establishes the behaviour. At d=11 or d=15, the result would confirm that the scaling continues into regimes relevant for practical fault-tolerant computation. This is the specific experimental milestone that would move the claim from RESOLVING toward a fully confirmed state. The attractor is clearly defined and the trajectory toward it is visible in current hardware development roadmaps.
Does below-threshold scaling behaviour hold at code distances d=11 and above? This is the remaining decisive measurement before the claim can transition from RESOLVING to a fully confirmed state. AT-001 names this as the attractor.
Raised 2024-01-15The claim is architecture-agnostic. Current evidence is concentrated in superconducting and trapped-ion systems. If topological qubit architectures — currently tracked only as contextual evidence within the corpus, without a dedicated Frontier Record — achieve confirmed below-threshold operation, this record gains a third platform confirmation. Does architecture-agnosticism require multi-platform demonstration, or is the current two-platform evidence sufficient for the claim as stated?
Raised 2024-01-15What constitutes full confirmation of this claim — the transition from RESOLVING to a closed confirmed state? The corpus has no governed resolution criterion. The claim is precisely scoped and approaching resolution. Before another record reaches this point, the Observatory may need to address OQ-3 from FR-QE-0003: what does confirmation look like and who determines it?
Raised 2024-01-15| Mutation | Date | Field | Prior value | Current value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| M-011 | 2026-07-14 | instances_appended | — | IN-007 / IN-008 |
| M-010 | 2026-07-09 | description_restored | — | DESCRIPTION-RESTORED |
| M-009 | 2026-07-09 | description_reordered | — | DESCRIPTION-REORDERED |
| M-008 | 2026-07-03 | reference_corrected | — | REFERENCE-CORRECTED |
| M-007 | 2026-07-03 | instance_appended | — | INSTANCE-APPENDED |
| M-006 | 2024-01-15 | programme_panel_added | — | PROGRAMME-PANEL-ADDED |
| M-005 | 2024-01-15 | null_condition_met | — | NULL-CONDITION-MET |
| M-004 | 2024-01-15 | mechanisms_recorded | — | MECHANISMS-RECORDED |
| M-003 | 2024-01-15 | assessment_issued | — | ASSESSMENT-ISSUED |
| M-002 | 2024-01-15 | instances_logged | — | INSTANCES-LOGGED |
| M-001 | 2024-01-15 | record_created | — | RECORD-CREATED |