Encoding an oscillator into many oscillators

Kyungjoo Noh,1, 2, ∗ S. M. Girvin,1, 2 and Liang Jiang1, 2, † 1Departments of Applied Physics and Physics, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut 06520, USA 2Yale Quantum Institute, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut 06520, USA Gaussian errors such as excitation losses, thermal noise and additive Gaussian noise errors are key challenges in realizing large-scale fault-tolerant continuous-variable (CV) processing and therefore bosonic (QEC) is essential. In many bosonic QEC schemes proposed so far, a finite dimensional discrete-variable (DV) quantum system is encoded into noisy CV systems. In this case, the bosonic nature of the physical CV systems is lost at the error-corrected logical level. On the other hand, there are several proposals for encoding an infinite dimensional CV system into noisy CV systems. However, these CV-into-CV encoding schemes are in the class of Gaussian quantum error correction and therefore cannot correct practically relevant Gaussian errors due to established no-go theorems which state that Gaussian errors cannot be corrected by Gaussian QEC schemes. Here, we work around these no-go results and show that it is possible to correct Gaussian errors using GKP states as non-Gaussian resources. In particular, we propose a family of non-Gaussian quantum error-correcting codes, GKP-repetition codes, and demonstrate that they can correct additive Gaussian noise errors. In addition, we generalize our GKP-repetition codes to an even broader class of non-Gaussian QEC codes, namely, GKP-stabilizer codes and show that there exists a highly hardware-efficient GKP-, the two-mode GKP-squeezed-repetition code, that can quadratically suppress additive Gaussian noise errors in both the position and momentum quadratures. Moreover, for any GKP-stabilizer code, we show that logical Gaussian operations can be readily implemented by using only physical Gaussian operations. Finally, we also discuss how our GKP-stabilizer coding schemes can be used to correct Gaussian excitation losses and thermal noise as well as additive Gaussian noise errors.

I. INTRODUCTION DV-into-CV QEC schemes, the bosonic nature of the phys- ical oscillator modes is lost at the logical level because the Harmonic oscillator modes or continuous-variable (CV) error-corrected logical system is described by discrete vari- quantum systems are ubiquitous in various quantum com- ables such as Pauli operators. Therefore, the error-corrected puting and communication architectures [1, 2] and provide logical DV system is not itself tailored to CV quantum infor- unique advantages, for example, to quantum simulation of mation processing tasks. bosonic systems such as [3] and simulation On the other hand, if an infinite dimensional CV system of vibrational quantum dynamics of molecules [4, 5]. Since is encoded into noisy CV systems (i.e., CV-into-CV QEC), CV quantum information processing is typically implemented such an error-corrected bosonic system will still be tailored to, by using harmonic oscillator modes in photonic or phononic e.g., boson sampling [3] and simulation of vibrational quan- systems, realistic imperfections such as (or phonon) tum dynamics of molecules [4, 5]. There have been several losses, thermal noise and dephasing noise are major chal- proposals for encoding an oscillator mode into many oscil- lenges for realizing large-scale fault-tolerant CV quantum in- lators [28–34]. For example, in the case of the three-mode formation processing. For example, while an ideal bosonic Gaussian-repetition code [28, 29], an infinite dimensional os- system may be able to exhibit quantum computational advan- cillator mode is encoded into three oscillators by repeatedly tage over classical computers through boson sampling [3], it appending position eigenstates: |qˆL = qi ≡ |qˆ1 = qi|qˆ2 = is unclear whether such an advantage will still remain even qi|qˆ3 = qi. Here, q can be any real number and thus the logi- when a constant fraction of is lost [6]. cal Hilbert space is infinite dimensional. Similar to the discrete-variable (DV) case [7], bosonic quantum error correction (QEC) [8] will be essential for scal- In general, CV-into-CV QEC is more challenging than DV- able fault-tolerant CV quantum information processing. In into-CV QEC because in the former we aim to protect an in- arXiv:1903.12615v1 [quant-ph] 29 Mar 2019 many bosonic QEC schemes proposed so far, a finite dimen- finite dimensional bosonic Hilbert space against relevant er- sional DV system is encoded into an oscillator [9–12] or into rors, whereas in the latter we only aim to protect a finite many oscillators [13–20]. For example, in the case of a dimensional Hilbert space embedded in infinite dimensional Schrodinger¨ cat code [9, 11], a 2-dimensional logical is bosonic modes. Indeed, while there exist many DV-into-CV encoded into an oscillator by using even and odd Schrodinger¨ QEC schemes that can correct experimentally relevant Gaus- sian errors [8], none of the previously proposed CV-into-CV cat states: |0Li ∝ |αi + | − αi and |1Li ∝ |αi − | − αi. Thanks to the inherent hardware efficiency, various qubit-into- QEC schemes can correct Gaussian errors because they are an-oscillator schemes (including the Schrodinger¨ cat code) Gaussian quantum error correction schemes, and established have been realized experimentally [21–27]. However, in such no-go theorems state that Gaussian errors cannot be corrected by Gaussian QEC schemes [20, 35, 36]. Since Gaussian errors include excitation losses, thermal noise and additive Gaussian noise errors which are ubiquitous in many realistic CV quan- ∗ [email protected] tum systems, these no-go results set a hard limit on the prac- † [email protected] tical utility of the proposed Gaussian QEC schemes. 2

0.3

0.2

0.1

0

-0.1

-0.2

-0.3

FIG. 1: (a) An approximate√ GKP state with an average photon number n¯ = 5. (b) Measurement of the position or momentum operator modulo 2π .

In this paper, we circumvent the established no-go results Among these non-Gaussian resources, we show that GKP and provide non-Gaussian CV-into-CV QEC schemes that states are particularly useful, not only for error-corrected DV can correct Gaussian errors using GKP states [10] as non- quantum information processing, but also for error-corrected Gaussian resources. Our paper is organized as follows: In CV quantum information processing. Specifically, we use Section II, we briefly review common non-Gaussian resources GKP states as non-Gaussian resources to construct a family and summarize known properties of the GKP state that will of non-Gaussian CV-into-CV QEC codes that can correct var- be used in later sections. In Section III, we introduce a ious Gaussian errors while still preserving the bosonic char- family of non-Gaussian CV-into-CV QEC schemes, namely, acter of the encoded system. Below, we briefly review the key GKP-repetition codes and demonstrate that it is indeed pos- properties of GKP states which will be used in later sections. sible to correct Gaussian errors using GKP-repetition codes. We cast the GKP state as a tool to work around the Heisen- In Section IV, we generalize GKP-repetition codes and pro- berg uncertainty principle which states√ that the position and pose an even broader class of non-Gaussian QEC schemes, † † momentum√ operators qˆ ≡ (ˆa +a ˆ)/ 2 and pˆ ≡ i(ˆa − called GKP-stabilizer codes. In particular, in Subsection IV A, aˆ)/ 2 cannot be measured simultaneously because they do we show that there exists a highly hardware-efficient GKP- not commute with each other (i.e., [ˆq, pˆ] = i 6= 0). Despite the stabilizer code, the two-mode GKP-squeezed-stabilizer code, Heisenberg uncertainty principle, the following displacement that can quadratically suppress additive Gaussian noise er- operators rors in both the position and momentum quadratures by us- ing only one ancillary bosonic mode. In Subsection IV B, we √ √ Sˆ ≡ ei 2π qˆ and Sˆ ≡ e−i 2π pˆ (1) show that, for any GKP-stabilizer codes, logical Gaussian op- q p erations can be readily implemented by using only physical do commute with each other and therefore can be measured Gaussian operations which are available in many experimen- √ simultaneously [10]. Since measuring Sˆq = exp[i 2π qˆ] and tal systems. In Section V, we briefly discuss experimental √ Sˆ ≡ exp[−i 2π pˆ] is equivalent to measuring their expo- realization of our schemes and realistic imperfections. p √ √ nents i 2π qˆand −i 2π pˆmodulo 2πi, the commutativity of Sˆq and Sˆp implies that the position and momentum operators II. GKP STATES AS NON-GAUSSIAN RESOURCES can indeed√ be measured simultaneously if they are measured modulo 2π . The canonical GKP state (or the grid state) The established no-go theorems on Gaussian QEC schemes [10, 41] is defined as the unique (up to an overall phase) simul- [20, 35, 36] make it clear that non-Gaussian resources are taneous eigenstate of the two commuting displacement opera- ˆ ˆ necessary for correcting Gaussian errors while preserving the tors Sq and Sp with unit eigenvalues. Explicitly, the canonical bosonic nature at the error-corrected logical level. The most GKP state is given by common non-Gaussian resources are the single photon Fock X √ X √ state and photon number measurements which are useful for |GKPi ∝ |qˆ = 2π ni ∝ |pˆ = 2π ni, (2) (error-uncorrected) universal CV quantum computation via n∈Z n∈Z the KLM protocol [37] and boson sampling [3]. Other useful and thus clearly has definite values for both the position and non-Gaussian resources include Kerr non-linearity [38], cu- √ momentum operators modulo 2π , i.e., qˆ =p ˆ = 0 mod bic phase state (and gate) [10], SNAP gate [39], Schrodinger¨ √ 2π . cat states [9] and GKP states [10]. Notably, GKP states have recently been shown to be valuable non-Gaussian resources Ideally, the canonical GKP state has an infinite average pho- which, when combined with Gaussian operations, allow fault- ton number because it is superpositions of√ infinitely many (P ) infinitely squeezed states (|qˆ = 2π ni or |pˆ = tolerant universal DV quantum computation via DV-into-CV √ n∈Z GKP codes [40]. 2π ni). However, one can define an approximate GKP state 3

Encoding Additive noise

Data mode

Ancilla modes

Decoding

FIG. 2: (a) Encoding circuit of the N-mode GKP-repetition code subject to independent and identically distributed additive Gaussian noise errors. (b) Decoding circuit of the N-mode GKP-repetition code. with a finite average photon number by applying a non-unitary GKP states. operator exp[−∆2nˆ] to the canonical GKP state and then nor- 2 malizing the output state: |GKP∆i ∝ exp[−∆ nˆ]|GKPi [10]. In Fig. 1 (a), we plot the Wigner function of the canonical III. GKP-REPETITION CODES GKP state with an average photon number n¯ = 5. Negative peaks in the Wigner function clearly indicate that the canoni- Quantum error-correcting codes work by hiding the quan- cal GKP state is a non-Gaussian state. tum information from the environment by storing the logical There are many proposals for preparing a GKP state in var- state in a non-local entangled state of the physical compo- ious experimental platforms [10, 42–51]. Notably, the pro- nents. In the case of the scheme we present below, a data posal in [42] has recently been realized in a trapped ion sys- oscillator mode is entangled via Gaussian operations with an- tem [25, 26] and the one in Ref. [46] has recently been re- cilla oscillator modes, which are initially in the canonical alized in a circuit QED system [27]. We also remark that GKP states, in a manner that prevents the environment from such an ability to prepare the canonical GKP state allows√ us learning about the logically encoded state. Like DV-into-CV to measure the position (momentum) operator modulo 2π GKP codes [10], our CV-into-CV QEC schemes are specifi- when combined with the SUM (DIFFERENCE) gate and ho- cally designed to protect against random displacement errors. modyne measurement of the position (momentum) operator Also, it succeeds because we assume access to non-Gaussian (see Fig. 1 (b) and Ref. [10] for more details). Definitions resources (GKP states and modular quadrature measurements) of the SUM and DIFFERENCE gates are given below. The that are unavailable to the environment. canonical GKP state (Fig. 1 (a)) and the modular measure- More explicitly, we propose the following encoding of an R ments of the position and momentum operators (Fig. 1 (b)) arbitrary bosonic state |ψi = dqψ(q)|qˆ1 = qi into N oscil- are the key non-Gaussian resources in our CV-into-CV QEC lator modes, schemes introduced below. N In the following section, we construct a family of non- h Y i |ψLi = SUM1→k |ψi|GKP2i · · · |GKPN i, (3) Gaussian QEC codes, namely, GKP-repetition codes and k=2 demonstrate that they can correct additive Gaussian noise er- rors. That is, we circumvent the established no-go results on and call this encoding the N-mode GKP-repetition code (see Gaussian QEC schemes [20, 35, 36] by using the canonical Fig. 2 (a) for the encoding circuit). We refer to the first GKP state as a non-Gaussian resource. In Section V, we will mode as the data mode and all the other modes as the an- address issues related to the use of more realistic approximate cilla modes because the information was stored only in the 4

first mode before the application of the encoding circuit. where the reshaped quadrature noises are given by P √ |GKPki ∝ |qˆk = 2π ni is the canonical GKP state n∈Z th N in the k bosonic mode where k ∈ {2, ··· ,N}. The SUM (1) (1) (1) (1) X (k) zq ≡ ξq , zp ≡ ξp + ξp , gate SUMj→k ≡ exp[−iqˆjpˆk] (j 6= k) is a CV analog of the DV CNOT gate which, in the Heisenberg picture, transforms k=2 (k) (k) (1) (k) (k) qˆk and pˆj into qˆk +q ˆj and pˆj − pˆk and leaves all the other zq ≡ ξq − ξq , zp ≡ ξp (7) quadrature operators unchanged. By the encoding circuit, the quadrature operators are transformed into for k ∈ {2, ··· ,N}. Note that the position quadrature noise (1) of the data mode ξq is transferred to the position quadra- N (1) (k) 0 0 X tures of the ancilla modes (see −ξq in zq ), whereas the qˆ1 → qˆ ≡ qˆ1, pˆ1 → pˆ ≡ pˆ1 − pˆk, 1 1 ξ(k) k=2 momentum quadrature noises of the ancilla modes p are 0 0 transferred to the momentum quadrature of the data mode (see qˆk → qˆk ≡ qˆk +q ˆ1, pˆk → pˆk ≡ pˆk, (4) PN (k) (1) + k=2 ξp in zp ). where k ∈ {2, ··· ,N}. Note that the sequential application In the remainder of the decoding procedure, both the po- of the SUM gates in the encoding circuit is analogous to the sition and momentum quadrature noises√ of the ancilla modes sequence of the CNOT gates in the encoding circuit of the are measured simultaneously modulo 2π (using the mea- N-bit repetition code for qubit bit-flip errors: This is why we surement circuits shown in Fig. 1 (b)). By doing so, we refer to the encoding in Eq. (3) as the N-mode GKP-repetition 000 (k) 000 (k) √measure both qˆk ≡ qˆk + zq and pˆk ≡ pˆk + zp modulo code. 2π for all k ∈ {2, ···√ ,N}. Note that such measurements 000 000 of qˆk and pˆk modulo 2π are equivalent to measurements of (k) (k) (1) We then assume that the oscillator modes undergo inde- only the reshaped ancilla quadrature noises zq = ξq − ξq pendent and identically distributed (iid) additive Gaussian (k) (k) √ and z = ξ modulo 2π . This is because the ancilla noise errors (or Gaussian random displacement errors) N = p p N (k) (k) modes were initially√ in the canonical GKP state and thus N N [σ2], where N [σ2] is an additive Gaussian k=1 B2 B2 qˆk =p ˆk = 0 mod 2π holds for all k ∈ {2, ··· ,N}. The th noise error acting on the k mode which, in the Heisenberg extracted information about z(k) = ξ(k) −ξ(1) and z(k) = ξ(k) (k) (k) q q q p p picture, adds Gaussian random noises ξq and ξp to the po- will then be used to estimate the data position quadrature noise sition and momentum operators of the kth mode, i.e., (1) (k) ξq and the ancilla momentum quadrature noises ξp such 0 00 0 (k) 0 00 0 (k) that the uncertainty of the data position quadrature noise is re- qˆk → qˆk ≡ qˆk + ξq and pˆk → pˆk ≡ pˆk + ξp . (5) duced while the ancilla momentum quadrature noises (trans-

(k) (k) ferred to the data momentum quadrature) do not degrade the Here, ξq and ξp are independent Gaussian random momentum quadrature of the data mode. Below, we provide a 2 variables with zero mean and variance σ . That is, detailed description of this estimation procedure. (1) (1) (N) (N) 2 (ξq , ξp , ··· , ξq , ξp ) ∼iid N (0, σ ). The notation B2 (k) (k) From the outcomes of the measurements of zq and zp is based on the classification of one-mode Gaussian channels √ (k) (k) carried out in Ref. [52]. modulo 2π , we assume that the true values of zq and zp are the ones with the smallest length among the candidates that are compatible with the modular measurement outcomes. We emphasize that additive Gaussian noise errors are That is, generic in the sense that any excitation losses and thermal noise can be converted into an additive Gaussian noise error (k) √ (k) (k) √ (k) z¯q = R 2π (zq ) and z¯p = R 2π (zp ) (8) by applying a suitable quantum-limited amplification channel ? ? [8, 53]. For example, a pure excitation loss error with loss for k ∈ {2, ··· ,N}, where Rs(z) ≡ z − n (z)s and n (z) ≡ probability γ can be converted into an additive Gaussian noise argminn∈ |z−ns|. More concretely, Rs(z) equals a displaced 2 2 Z error NB2 [σ ] with σ = γ (see Lemma 6 and Table 1 in Ref. sawtooth function with an amplitude and period s and is given [53]). by Rs(z) = z if z ∈ [−s/2, s/2]. Then, based on these esti- mates, we further estimate that the position quadrature noise (1) The decoding procedure (shown in Fig. 2 (b)) begins of the data mode ξq and the momentum quadrature noises of (k) with the inverse of the encoding circuit, i.e., with a sequence the ancilla modes ξp are of DIFFERENCE1→k gates for k ∈ {2, ··· ,N}, where † N DIFFERENCE1→k ≡ SUM = exp[iqˆ1pˆk]. Upon the in- 1 X 1→k ξ˜(1) = − z¯(`) and ξ˜(k) =z ¯(k) (9) verse of the encoding circuit, the transformed quadrature op- q N q p p erators in Eq. (4) are transformed back to the original quadra- `=2 (1) (N) ture operators but the added quadrature noises ξq/p, ··· , ξq/p for k ∈ {2, ··· ,N}. The latter estimate was chosen sim- in Eq. (5) are reshaped, i.e., (k) (k) ply because ξp = zp and the former choice is based on 00 (k) 00 (k) a maximum likelihood estimation explained in detail in Ap- qˆk → qˆk + zq , pˆk → pˆk + zp , (6) pendix A (see also Subsection IV B). Intuitively, the former 5

estimate can be roughly understood as averaging the estimated σq: STD of the logical position noise 0.5 values of the reshaped ancilla momentum quadrature noises σp: STD of the logical momentum noise (k) (k) (1) zq = ξq − ξq such that the ancilla position quadrature 0.4 (k) noises ξq are averaged out in the limit of large N. Finally, we apply counter displacement operations 0.3 ˜(1) PN ˜(k) exp[ipˆ1ξq ] and exp[−ipˆ1 k=2 ξp ] to the data mode based on the above estimates and end up with the following 0.2 logical position and momentum quadrature noises 0.1 T ftelgclnoises logical the of STD N 1 X ξ ≡ z(1) − ξ˜(1) = ξ(1) + R√ (ξ(k) − ξ(1)), q q q q N 2π q q 0.0 k=2 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 N N σ: STD of the input noise X X ξ ≡ z(1) − ξ˜(k) = ξ(1) + (ξ(k) − R√ (ξ(k))). p p p p p 2π p FIG. 3: Standard deviations of the logical quadrature noises k=2 k=2 (10) σq and σp as a function of the input standard deviation σ for the two-mode GKP-repetition code (i.e., N√= 2). The green and yellow dashed lines represent σ = σ/ 2 and σ = σ. In Appendix B, we provide explicit expressions for the q p probability density functions of ξq and ξp (which are used to obtain Fig. 3) in the most general case. Here, we in- stead focus on√ a simple (but important) case where σ is much if the standard deviation of an additive Gaussian noise error smaller than 2π . In this case, the reshaped ancilla quadra- is sufficiently small, our GKP-repetition coding scheme can (k) (k) (1) (k) (k) ture noises zq = ξq − ξq and zp = ξp lie in the un- successfully reduce the noise of the position quadrature, while ambiguously distinguishable range [−pπ/2 , pπ/2 ] with a keeping the momentum quadrature noise unchanged. That is, our (non-Gaussian) GKP-repetition codes can correct additive R√ (ξ(k) − ξ(1)) = very high probability and thus we have 2π q q Gaussian noise errors. (k) (1) √ (k) (k) ξq −ξq and R 2π (ξp ) = ξp . Then, the logical position We remark that in an analogous N-mode Gaussian- and momentum quadrature noises are given by repetition coding scheme (presented in detail in Appendix A), the variance of the position quadrature noise is reduced by √ N 2 σ 2π 1 X  σ  a factor of N (i.e., σ2 = σ2/N) as in Eq. (11) but the ξ −−−−−→ ξ(k) ∼ N 0, σ2 = , q q N q q N variance of the momentum quadrature noise is increased by k=1 2 2 √ the same factor (i.e., σp = Nσ ). This implies that, in σ 2π (1)  2 2 ξp −−−−−→ ξp ∼ N 0, σp = σ , (11) the case of Gaussian-repetition codes, the quadrature noises 2 are only squeezed (σqσp = σ ) instead of being corrected 2 That is, the variance of the logical position quadrature noise (σqσp < σ ): This reaffirms the previous no-go results on is reduced by a factor of N. This is due to the syndrome mea- Gaussian QEC schemes [20, 35, 36]. surements of the reshaped ancilla position quadrature noises The key difference between our GKP-repetition codes and (k) (k) (1) √ zq = ξq − ξq modulo 2π (for all k ∈ {2, ··· ,N}) the previous Gaussian-repetition codes is that, in the latter which are then used to reduce the uncertainty of the data posi- case, the ancilla momentum quadrature noises that are trans- (1) PN (k) (1) tion quadrature noise ξq . Moreover, the variance of the log- ferred to the data mode (see + k=2 ξp in zp ) are left com- ical momentum quadrature noise remains unchanged despite pletely undetected, whereas in the former case they are cap- (1) (1) (1) PN (k) tured by measuring the ancilla momentum quadrature opera- the temporary increase (ξp → zp = ξp + k=2 ξp ) √ during the decoding procedure. Again, this is due to the tions modulo 2π . Such a limitation of Gaussian-repetition syndrome measurements of the reshaped ancilla momentum codes is in fact a general feature of any Gaussian QEC scheme (k) (k) √ which relies on homodyne measurements of quadrature oper- quadrature noises zp = ξp modulo 2π which fully cap- (k) ators. With homodyne measurements, one can only monitor ture the transferred ancilla momentum√ quadrature noises ξp the noise of one quadrature of a bosonic mode, while the other for all k ∈ {2, ··· ,N} if σ  2π . conjugate quadrature noise is left completely undetected. In Fig. 3, we plot the standard deviations of the logi- On the other hand, we have worked around this barrier by cal quadrature noises for the two-mode GKP-repetition code using the canonical GKP state as a non-Gaussian resource (i.e., N = 2). The standard deviation of the logical√ position√ which allows simultaneous measurements of both√ the posi- quadrature noise√ is indeed reduced by a factor of N = 2 tion and momentum quadrature operators modulo 2π (see (i.e., σq = σ/ 2 ), while the standard deviation of the log- Fig. 1). In this regard, we emphasize that such non-Gaussian ical momentum quadrature noise remains unchanged (i.e., modular simultaneous measurements of both position and mo- σp = σ) for σ . 0.3. Note that the condition σ . 0.3 is mentum quadrature operators (using canonical GKP states) 2 translated to γ = σ . 0.1 in the case of pure excitation are fundamentally different from Gaussian heterodyne mea- losses, where γ is the pure-loss probability [8, 53]. Thus, surements [54] where both quadrature operators are measured 6 simultaneously but in a necessarily noisy manner. Fig. 4 (a) for the encoding circuit). Note that the squeezing Finally, we compare our GKP-repetition codes with the parameter λ is a free parameter that can be chosen at will. |0 i = |0i⊗N conventional multi-qubit repetition codes (i.e., L The action of the encoding circuit of the two-mode GKP- |1 i = |1i⊗N and L ) which can correct qubit bit-flip errors squeezed-repetition code can be described by a symplec- [55]. First, we observe that only two bosonic modes (N = 2) 0 T tic transformation xˆ = Sxˆ, where xˆ = (ˆq1, pˆ1, qˆ2, pˆ2) are sufficient to reduce the variance of the position quadrature 0 0 0 0 0 T and xˆ = (ˆq1, pˆ1, qˆ2, pˆ2) are the original and transformed noise in the case of GKP-repetition codes, whereas at least quadrature operators, and the symplectic matrix S is given by three are needed to suppress qubit bit-flip errors in the case of mutli-qubit repetition codes. However, while GKP- 1/λ 0 0 0  repetition codes can be implemented in a more hardware- 0 λ 0 −λ S =   . (13) efficient way, they do not reduce the variance of the position  λ 0 λ 0  quadrature noise quadratically but instead only reduced the 0 0 0 1/λ variance by a constant factor N. On the other hand, the three- qubit repetition code can reduce the bit-flip error probability Upon the independent and identically distributed additive 2 0 quadratically from p to pL ' 3p if p  1. Gaussian noise errors, the quadrature operator xˆ is fur- Given that such a quadratic (or even higher order) suppres- ther transformed into xˆ00 = xˆ0 + ξ, where ξ = (1) (1) (2) (2) T sion of errors was a key step towards fault-tolerant universal (ξq , ξp , ξq , ξp ) is the quadrature noise vector that sat- DV quantum computation [7], it is also highly desirable in (1) (1) (2) (2) isfies (ξ , ξ , ξ , ξ ) ∼ N (0, σ2). Then, the inverse the CV case to have such a quadratic suppression of additive q p q p iid of the encoding circuit in the decoding procedure (shown in Gaussian noise errors going way beyond the reduction by a Fig. 4 (b)) transforms the quadrature operator into xˆ000 = constant factor which was shown above. S−1xˆ00 = xˆ + z z ≡ (z(1), z(1), z(2), z(2))T Below, we introduce the two-mode GKP-squeezed- , where q p q p is the repetition code by adding single-mode squeezing operations reshaped quadrature noise vector which is given by to the two-mode GKP-repetition code and show that it can  (1)   (1) suppress the quadrature noises quadratically. In particular, the λξq zq  (1) (2)   (1) modified scheme can achieve such a quadratic noise suppres- −1  ξp /λ + λξp  zp  z = S ξ =  (1) (2)  ≡  (2) . (14) sion by using only two bosonic modes (one data mode and −λξq + ξq /λ zq  (2) (2) one ancilla mode) and therefore is hardware-efficient. In the λξp zp DV case, on the contrary, at least five qubits and high-weight multi-qubit gate operations are needed to suppress both the Similarly as in the case of GKP-repetition codes, information bit-flip and phase-flip errors quadratically [56, 57]. (2) (1) about the reshaped ancilla quadrature noises zq = −λξq + (2) (2) (2) ξq /λ and zp = λξp are extracted by simultaneously mea- suring the position and√ momentum quadrature operators of the IV. GENERALIZATIONS OF GKP-REPETITION CODES ancilla mode modulo 2π (see Fig. 4 (b)). Before elaborating the detailed estimation strategy from the In this section, we generalize our GKP-repetition codes. obtained syndrome measurement outcomes, let us briefly ex- Specifically, in Subsection IV A, we introduce the two-mode plain the key idea behind it. Assume λ > 1 and note that the GKP-squeezed-repetition code and show that it can sup- data position quadrature noise is amplified by a factor of λ press both the position and momentum quadrature noises (1) (1) quadratically. In Subsection IV B, we further generalize (i.e., zq = λξq ) after the noise reshaping in the decoding our QEC schemes and provide an even broader class of procedure. On the other hand, the data momentum quadra- (1) (2) non-Gaussian quantum error-correcting codes, namely, GKP- ture noise is shrunken by the same factor (see ξp /λ in zp ) stabilizer codes. We also show that logical Gaussian oper- but there is an added noise transferred from the ancilla mode (2) (2) ations can be readily implemented by using only physical (see +λξp in zp ). Then, by measuring the reshaped ancilla (2) (1) (2) Gaussian operations for any GKP-stabilizer code. position√ quadrature noise zq = −λξq + ξq /λ modulo 2π , we can extract information about the amplified data po- (1) √ sition quadrature noise λξq modulo 2π up to a small noise 2 2 2 A. The two-mode GKP-squeezed-repetition code ξq /λ ∼ N (0, σ /λ ). Using this information, we can then re- duce the variance of the position quadrature noise roughly by We define the two-mode GKP-squeezed-repetition code as a factor of λ2. Similarly, by measuring the reshaped ancilla (2) (2) √ follows: momentum quadrature noise zp = λξp modulo 2π , we can extract information about the amplified ancilla momentum  1  (2) |ψLi = Sq Sq (λ)SUM1→2|ψi|GKP2i, (12) quadrature noise λξ which is transferred to the data mode. 1 λ 2 p Then, based on this information we can remove the trans- R where |ψi = dqψ(q)|qˆ1 = qi is an arbitrary bosonic state ferred ancilla momentum quadrature noise and are left with (1) and Sqk(λ) is the single-mode squeezing operation acting on the shrunken data momentum quadrature noise ξp /λ. Thus, th the k mode and transforms qˆk and pˆk into λqˆk and pˆk/λ (see we can also reduce the variance of the momentum quadrature 7

Encoding Additive noise

Data mode

Ancilla mode

Decoding

FIG. 4: (a) Encoding circuit of the two-mode GKP-squeezed-repetition code subject to independent and identically distributed additive Gaussian noise errors. (b) Decoding circuit of the two-mode GKP-squeezed-repetition code. noise by a factor of λ2. The probability density functions of these logical quadrature noises are analyzed in detail in Appendix C assuming the most Since we can reduce the variances of both the position and general case. Here, we instead focus on an important spe- momentum quadrature noises by a factor of λ2, we may want p 2 2 to choose λ  1. However, we cannot increase λ indefi- cial case√ where both λ + 1/λ σ and λσ are much smaller nitely because then the reshaped ancilla quadrature noises z(2) than 2π . In this case, the reshaped ancilla quadrature noises q (2) (2) (2) (2) (2) zq = −λξq + ξq /λ and zp = λξp are confined within and zp will not be contained within the unambiguously dis- p p tinguishable range [−pπ/2 , pπ/2 ]. Therefore, we have to the unambiguously distinguishable range [− π/2 , π/2 ] choose λ such that the reshaped ancilla quadrature noises lie with a very high probability. mostly in the unambiguously distinguishable range. Below, Recall that we can freely√ choose the squeezing parameter λ. we describe this decoding strategy in more detail. Here, we choose λ = 2π c/σ where c  1 is a small con- c c = 0.1 Based on the outcomes of the measurements of the ancilla stant. For example,√ can be chosen to be . Under this √ λσ = 2π c quadrature operators modulo 2π , we estimate that the re- √choice, is guaranteed to be much smaller than 2π and therefore the reshaped ancilla momentum quadra- shaped ancilla quadrature noises are (2) (2) p p ture noise zp = λξp will lie in the range [− π/2 , π/2 ] z¯(2) = R√ (z(2)) and z¯(2) = R√ (z(2)), (15) with a very high probability, yielding R√ (λξ(2)) = λξ(2). q 2π q p 2π p √ 2π p p If σ . 2π c holds in addition to c  1, we also have (1) p √ √ similarly as in Eq. (8). Then, we further estimate that λξq λ2 + 1/λ2 σ . 4π c  2π and therefore the reshaped (2) (2) (1) (2) and λξp are ancilla position quadrature noise zq = −λξq + ξq /λ will also lie in the range [−pπ/2 , pπ/2 ] with a very high prob- λ4 λξ˜(1) = − z¯(2) and λξ˜(2) =z ¯(2). (16) ability, yielding R√ (ξ(2)/λ − λξ(1)) = ξ(2)/λ − λξ(1). q 1 + λ4 q p p 2π q q √ q q Note that, for example, the condition σ . 2π c is given by (2) (2) The latter estimate was chosen simply because λξp = zp σ . 0.25 if we choose c = 0.1. and the former estimate is based on a maximum likelyhood es- √ (2) (1) (2) (1) Since R (ξq /λ − λξq ) = ξq /λ − λξq and timation which is discussed in detail in Appendix C (see also 2π R√ (λξ(2)) = λξ(2) hold under the above conditions (i.e., Subsection IV B). Finally, applying the counter displacement 2π √ p p √ ˜(1) ˜(2) λ = 2π c/σ with c  1 and σ 2π c), the logical operations exp[ipˆ1λξq ] and exp[−iqˆ1λξp ] we end up with . the logical quadrature noises quadrature noises in Eq. (17) simplify to

(1) (2) 4 (2) λξ + λ3ξ  λ2σ2  λ ξq  c1 q q 2 (1) ˜(1) (1) √ (1) ξq −−−−−−→√ ∼ N 0, σq = , ξq ≡ zq − λξq = λξq + R 2π − λξq , 4 4 1 + λ4 λ σ. 2π c 1 + λ 1 + λ ξ(1) ξ(1)  σ2  ξ ≡ z(1) − λξ˜(1) = p + λξ(2) − R√ (λξ(2)). (17) ξ −−−→c1 p ∼ N 0, σ2 = . (18) p p p λ p 2π p p λ p λ2 8

1 σq: STD of the logical position noise cillator modes) as σp: STD of the logical momentum noise ˆ Enc 0.100 |ΨLi = UG |Ψi|GKPM+1i · · · |GKPN i, (20)

0.010 ˆ Enc where |Ψi is an arbitrary M-mode bosonic state and UG is a Gaussian unitary operation (see Fig. 6 for the encoding 0.001 circuit). For example, for the N-mode GKP-repetition code -4 ˆ Enc QN 10 we have M = 1 and UG = k=2 SUM1→k, and for the two-mode GKP-squeezed-repetition code M = 1, N = 2 -5 T ftelgclnoises logical the of STD 10 ˆ Enc and UG = Sq1(1/λ)Sq2(λ)SUM1→2. Since one can choose ˆ Enc any Gaussian operation as an encoding circuit UG , our GKP- 0.001 0.005 0.01 0.05 0.1 0.5 stabilizer formalism is at least as flexible as the stabilizer for- σ: STD of the input noise malism for DV quantum error-correcting codes [58] which en- compasses almost all conventional multi-qubit QEC schemes. FIG. 5: Standard deviations of the logical quadrature noises Therefore, our GKP-stabilizer formalism has a great deal of σ and σ as a function of the input standard deviation σ for q p potential. For example, one can concatenate the two-mode the two-mode GKP-squeezed-repetition code. λ was chosen √ GKP-squeezed-repetition codes and define a four-mode GKP- to be λ = 2π c/σ with c = 0.1. The dashed green and √ stabilizer code that can suppress additive Gaussian noise er- 4 λ1 p 2 yellow lines represent σq = λσ/ 1 + λ −−−→ π/50 σ rors to the fourth order, i.e., σ → σ4 (or even more generally, p 2 N l and σp = σ/λ = π/50 σ , respectively. σ → σ using N = 2 modes with a higher level of concate- nation where l ∈ N). In addition, it will also be interesting ˆ Enc to consider an encoding circuit UG which is analogous to the encoding circuit of a multi-qubit surface code [59, 60] and If the standard deviation of the input additive√ Gaussian noise error is sufficiently small (i.e., σ  2π c), λ  1 holds define a CV-into-CV GKP-surface code which can be imple- and the standard deviations of the logical quadrature noises in mented locally on a 2-dimensional plane (see Ref. [20] for the Eq. (18) are reduced by a factor of λ as explained informally DV-into-CV Toric-GKP code). above: We leave finding useful GKP-stabilizer codes by exploring various Gaussian encoding circuits Uˆ Enc as a future research 2 G c1 σ σ 2 direction. Here, we instead provide a general decoding strat- σq, σp −−−−−−→√ = ∝ σ . (19) σ 2π c λ 2πc egy for a general GKP-stabilizer code. Consider a general symplectic matrix S associated with the Gaussian encoding That is, the two-mode GKP-squeezed-repetition code can sup- ˆ Enc T circuit UG . Since S is a symplectic matrix, SΩS = Ω press both the position and momentum quadrature noises holds where Ω is given by quadratically. √ In Fig. 5, we choose λ = 2π c/σ with c = 0.1 and plot ω    the standard deviations σ and σ of the logical position and . 0 1 q p Ω =  ..  and ω = (21) momentum quadrature noises as a function of the input stan-   −1 0 dard deviation σ. As indicated by the agreement among the ω red, blue, dashed green and dashed yellow lines in Fig. 5, the (see, for example, Ref. [2]). Then, following the same quadratic noise suppression analytically derived in Eq. (19) √ reasoning as in Subsection IV A, we obtain the reshaped σ 2π c = 0.25 ··· do indeed hold when . . The condition (1) (1) (N) (N) T σ 0.25 γ = σ2 0.06 quadrature noise vector z ≡ (zq , zp , ··· , zq , zp ) = . corresponds to . for the pure exci- −1 tation loss errors, where γ is the loss probability. We again S ξ as a result of the encoding, additive Gaussian noise emphasize that our scheme is hardware-efficient because only errors and the inverse of the encoding circuit where ξ ≡ (1) (1) (N) (N) T two bosonic modes (one data mode and one ancilla mode) are (ξq , ξp , ··· , ξq , ξp ) is the original quadrature noise needed to achieve the quadratic suppression of both quadra- vector. Let us write z = S−1ξ more explicitly as follows: ture noises.    −1 −1    zx (S )xx (S )xy ξx = −1 −1 . (22) zy (S )yx (S )yy ξy

B. GKP-stabilizer codes Here, the subscript x is associated with the data modes (i.e., the first M modes) and the subscript y is asso- In this subsection, we further generalize GKP-repetition ciated with the ancilla modes (i.e., the last N − M (1) (1) (M) (M) T codes (Section III) and the two-mode GKP-squeezed- modes). That is, zx = (zq , zp , ··· , zq , zp ) , zy = (M+1) (M+1) (N) (N) T repetition code (Subsection IV A) to an even broader class of (zq , zp , ··· , zq , zp ) and the same applies to −1 −1 −1 non-Gaussian quantum error-correcting codes, namely, GKP- ξx and ξy. Also, (S )xx, (S )xy, (S )yx and −1 stabilizer codes: We define logical code states of a general (S )yy are 2M × 2M, 2M × 2(N − M), 2(N − M) × 2M GKP-stabilizer code (encoding M oscillator modes into N os- and 2(N − M) × 2(N − M) matrices, respectively. 9

Encoding Logical Gaussian operation

Data

Ancilla

FIG. 6: Encoding circuit of a general GKP-stabilizer code and implementation of a general logical Gaussian operation.

After applying the inverse of the encoding circuit, we mea- tion of vibrational quantum dynamics of molecules [4, 5]. sure each component of the reshaped ancilla quadrature√ noise −1 −1 vector zy = (S )yxξx + (S )yyξy modulo 2π . For now, we ignore the fact√ that we can measure each component V. DISCUSSION of zy only modulo 2π and assume that we know its exact value. Based on the extracted syndrome measurement out- In this section, we briefly discuss experimental realization come zy, we can infer that of our GKP-stabilizer codes and the effects of realistic imper- fections. Recall that the only required non-Gaussian resource ξy = −Ayxξx + Byyzy, (23) for implementing GKP-stabilizer codes is the preparation of a

−1 −1 −1 canonical GKP state. Recently, approximate GKP states have where Ayx ≡ ((S )yy) (S )yx and Byy ≡ −1 −1 been realized experimentally in a trapped ion system [25, 26] ((S )yy) . Then, since a noise vector ξ with smaller 2 T T by using a heralded preparation scheme with post-selection |ξ| = ξx ξx + ξy ξy is more likely, we estimate that ξx is [42] and also in a circuit QED system [27] by using a deter- h ministic preparation scheme without post-selection [27, 46]. ξ¯ = ξT ξ In this regard, we emphasize that our GKP-stabilizer coding x argminξx x x schemes are compatible with both the deterministic and non- T T T T i + (−ξx (Ayx) + zy (Byy) )(−Ayxξx + Byyzy) deterministic preparation schemes. This is because the re- T −1 T quired GKP states can be prepared offline and then injected = (Ix + (Ayx) Ayx) (Ayx) Byyzy, (24) into the error correction circuit in the middle of the decoding procedure (similar to the magic state and magic state injection where I is the 2M × 2M identity matrix. Finally, since we x √ for universal DV quantum computation [61]). can only measure z modulo 2π , we replace z by z¯ ≡ y y y We remark that near-term applications of our GKP- R√ (z ) and obtain the following estimate: 2π y stabilizer QEC schemes will be mainly limited by the im- ˜ T −1 T perfections in GKP states such as their finite photon number ξx = (Ix + (Ayx) Ayx) (Ayx) Byyz¯y, and limited fidelity. In this regime, since our GKP-stabilizer ξ˜y = −Ayxξ˜x + Byyz¯y. (25) coding schemes are compatible with any non-deterministic GKP state preparation scheme, it will be more advantageous We remark that the estimates in Eqs. (8),(16) are special cases to sacrifice the success probability of a GKP state prepara- of Eq. (25). We observe that this decoding procedure is com- tion scheme and aim to prepare a GKP state of higher qual- putationally efficient because it only involves multiplications ity (with a larger photon number and higher fidelity) by us- and inversions of matrices of size at most 2N × 2N, where N ing post-selection, as opposed to deterministically preparing a is the number of the physical bosonic modes. GKP state of lower quality. The imperfections in GKP states can be especially detri- Finally we remark that, for any GKP-stabilizer code, mental to the implementation of a GKP-stabilizer code involv- ˆ Gate any logical Gaussian operation (UG )L can be readily ing a large squeezing parameter because such imperfections implemented by using only physical Gaussian operations may be significantly amplified by the large squeezing opera- ˆ Enc ˆ Gate ˆ ˆ Enc † UG (UG ⊗ IN−M )(UG ) (see Fig. 6). This is because tions. With this concern in mind, let us revisit the two-mode the input GKP states |GKPM+1i, ··· , |GKPN i are the only GKP-squeezed-repetition code in Subsection IV A and√ recall non-Gaussian resources in the encoding scheme and the re- that the choice of the squeezing parameter λ = 2π c/σ ˆ Enc maining circuit UG is Gaussian. For example, logical dis- (with a small constant c  1) was essential for achieving placement operations, squeezing operations and beam splitter the quadratic suppression of additive Gaussian noise errors. interactions can be implemented by using only physical Gaus- If the standard√ deviation of the input noise is very small (i.e., sian operations. Thus, our GKP-stabilizer codes will be useful σ  2π c), we do indeed have a huge squeezing parame- for realizing error-corrected boson sampling [3] and simula- ter λ  1. However, we emphasize that we have designed 10 the two-mode GKP-squeezed-repetition code very carefully VI. CONCLUSION so that any imperfections in GKP states are not amplified by the large squeezing operations: We elaborate more on this be- We have worked around the previous no-go theorems on low. Gaussian QEC schemes [20, 35, 36] and proposed several CV- into-CV non-Gaussian QEC schemes, GKP-repetition codes and the two-mode GKP-squeezed-repetition code, that can Note that the imperfections in GKP states will introduce correct additive Gaussian noise errors. We generalized them additional noises during the syndrome extraction procedure. to an even broader class of non-Gaussian QEC codes, namely, To be more specific, the estimated reshaped ancilla quadrature GKP-stabilizer codes. We also showed that our proposed noises in Eq. (15) will be corrupted as QEC schemes can also correct excitation losses and thermal noise as well as additive Gaussian noise errors by a suit- (2) √ (2) GKP z¯q = R 2π (zq + δq ), able noise conversion through a quantum-limited amplifica- tion channel. The only required non-Gaussian resource for our z¯(2) = R√ (z(2) + δGKP), (26) p 2π p p GKP-stabilizer QEC schemes is the preparation of the canoni- cal GKP state. We showed that, for any GKP-stabilizer codes, where the additional noises δGKP and δGKP are due to, for ex- q p logical Gaussian operations can be readily implemented by ample, the finite size and infidelity of the GKP states sup- using only physical Gaussian operations. Therefore, our plied to the error correction cycle. Such additional noise will GKP-stabilizer QEC schemes will be useful for realizing then be propagated to the data mode through the miscali- error-corrected boson sampling and simulation of bosonic sys- brated counter displacement operations based on noisy esti- tems. In addition, our GKP-stabilizer QEC schemes may also mates. Note, however, that the sizes of the counter displace- be able to suppress errors for quantum metrology with bosonic ˜(1) ˜(2) ments exp[ipˆ1λξq ] and exp[−iqˆ1λξp ] sensors, avoid the need for CV-DV-CV conversion for quan- tum communication over bosonic channels and enable fault- λ4 λξ˜(1) = − z¯(2) −−−→−λ1 z¯(2), tolerant universal CV . q 1 + λ4 q q ˜(1) (2) λξp =z ¯p (27) ACKNOWLEDGMENTS do not explicitly depend on λ in the λ  1 limit (see Eq. GKP GKP (16)). Therefore, the additional GKP noises δq and δp We would like to thank Rob Schoelkopf for helpful will simply be added to the data quadrature noises without be- discussions. We acknowledge support from the ARL- ing amplified by the large squeezing parameter λ  1. This CDQI (W911NF-15-2-0067, W911NF-18-2-0237), ARO absence of the noise amplification is a feature of our scheme (W911NF-18-1-0020, W911NF-18-1-0212), ARO MURI and is generally not the case for a generic GKP-stabilizer code (W911NF-16-1-0349 ), AFOSR MURI (FA9550-14-1-0052, involving large squeezing operations. Therefore, the avoid- FA9550-15-1-0015), DOE (DE-SC0019406), NSF (EFMA- ance of the GKP noise amplification should be carefully taken 1640959, DMR-1609326), and the Packard Foundation into account in the design of GKP-stabilizer codes. (2013-39273). K.N. acknowledges support through the Ko- rea Foundation for Advanced Studies.

Finally, we outline several open questions. First, contin- uing the discussion of imperfect GKP states, it remains to Appendix A: Gaussian-repetition codes be answered if there exists a family of fault-tolerant GKP- stabilizer codes where the added noise from GKP states men- Here, we introduce and analyze the N-mode Gaussian- tioned above can be suppressed arbitrarily as the system size repetition code, which is a straightforward generalization of increases when the imperfections are below a certain noise the three-mode Gaussian-repetition code introduced in Refs. threshold. Moreover, it will be an interesting research avenue [28, 29]. In particular, we introduce the maximum likelihood to search for a family of efficient GKP-stabilizer codes by ex- (1) estimation of the data position quadrature noise ξ for the ˆ Enc q ploring various encoding circuits UG . For example, one can N-mode Gaussian-repetition code, which is a key motivation look for GKP-stabilizer codes that can be implemented locally behind our choice of the estimate ξ˜(1) given in Eq. (9). in a low dimensional space, or for ones with low resource q |ψi = R dqψ(q)|qˆ = overheads, or ones with high fault-tolerant threshold, if any. Consider an arbitrary oscillator state 1 qi |ψi N In addition, while logical Gaussian operations can be readily . The state can be embedded in oscillator modes via N implemented by using only Gaussian operations for any GKP- the -mode Gaussian-repetition code as follows: stabilizer codes, implementation of logical non-Gaussian op- Z N erations will require some non-Gaussian resources. Thus, O |ψLi = dqψ(q) |qˆk = qi, (A1) it will also be interesting to explore whether logical non- k=1 Gaussian operations can be implemented efficiently by us- ing, e.g., GKP states or cubic phase states as non-Gaussian where the first mode is the data mode and the rest are the an- resources. cilla modes. Note that the data position eigenstate |qˆ1 = qi is 11

Encoding Additive noise Decoding

FIG. 7: Encoding and decoding circuits of the N-mode GKP-repetition code, subject to independent and identically distributed additive Gaussian noise errors.

NN mapped into k=1 |qˆk = qi through the encoding procedure. erators, we can exactly extract the values of As shown in Fig. 7, this encoding can be realized by applying (k) (k) (1) a sequence of Gaussian SUM gates SUM1→k ≡ exp[−iqˆ1pˆk] zq = ξq − ξq (A5) where k ∈ {2, ··· ,N}. Upon the encoding circuit, the quadrature operators are transformed into for all k ∈ {2, ··· ,N}. This is because the ancilla modes are initially in the position eigenstates |qˆk = 0i and thus mea- N 000 (k) (k) 0 0 X suring qˆk =q ˆk + zq is equivalent to measuring zq for all qˆ1 → qˆ1 ≡ qˆ1, pˆ1 → pˆ1 ≡ pˆ1 − pˆk, k ∈ {2, ··· ,N}. Note, however, that we cannot extract any k=2 information about the reshaped momentum quadrature noises qˆ → qˆ0 ≡ qˆ +q ˆ , pˆ → pˆ0 ≡ pˆ , (A2) (1) (N) k k k 1 k k k zp , ··· , zp . This will later turn out to be the key limitation of Gaussian-repetition codes. as in Eq. (4) where k ∈ {2, ··· ,N}. We then assume that the oscillator modes undergo independent and identically dis- tributed additive Gaussian noise errors N = NN N (k)[σ2], k=1 B2 (k) (k) (1) i.e., From the extracted values of zq = ξq − ξq , we ~ can infer that position quadrature noises are given by ξq ≡ qˆ0 → qˆ00 ≡ qˆ0 + ξ(k) and pˆ0 → pˆ00 ≡ pˆ0 + ξ(k), (A3) (1) (2) (N) (1) (1) (2) (1) (N) k k k q k k k p (ξq , ξq , ··· , ξq ) = (ξq , ξq + zq , ··· , ξq + zq ). (1) (1) (N) Then, the undetermined data position quadrature noise ξq as in Eq. (5). The added noises ξq/p, ··· , ξq/p follow an can be estimated by a maximum likelihood estimation: Since independent and identically distributed Gaussian random dis- ~ 2 PN (k) 2 noises with smaller |ξq| ≡ (ξq ) are more likely, we (1) (1) (N) (N) 2 k=1 tribution (ξq , ξp , ··· , ξq , ξp ) ∼iid N (0, σ ). (1) estimate that ξq is

N ¯(1) h (1) 2 X (1) (k) 2i ξq = argmin (1) (ξq ) + (ξq + zq ) The goal of the decoding procedure (shown in Fig. 7) is ξq (k) k=2 to extract some information about the added noises ξq and N (k) 1 X (k) ξp (k ∈ {1, ··· ,N}) through a set of syndrome measure- = − z (A6) N q ments. The decoding procedure begins with the inverse of the k=2 encoding circuit, i.e., by a sequence of DIFFERENCE gates (2) (N) DIFFERENCE1→k ≡ exp[iqˆ1pˆk] for k ∈ {2, ··· ,N}. Upon from the syndrome measurement outcomes zq , ··· , zq . the inverse of the encoding circuit, the quadrature operators (1) This is the main reason why we chose ξ˜q in Eq. (9) in the 00 (k) 00 (k) are transformed into qˆ → qˆk + zq and pˆ → pˆk + zp , (1) k k main text as the estimate of ξq . Finally, the decoding pro- where the reshaped quadrature noises are given by cedure ends with an application of the counter displacement ¯(1) N operation exp[ipˆ1ξq ] to the data oscillator mode (see Fig. (1) (1) (1) X (k) 7). zq ≡ ξq , zp ≡ ξp , k=1 (k) (k) (1) (k) (k) zq ≡ ξq − ξq , zp ≡ ξp , (A4) As a result of the encoding and decoding procedures, we as in Eq. (7) where k ∈ {2, ··· ,N}. Then, by performing ho- end up with a logical additive noise error qˆ1 → qˆ1 + ξq and modyne measurements of the ancilla position quadrature op- pˆ1 → pˆ1 + ξp of the data oscillator mode, where the logical 12 quadrature noises are given by for the N-mode GKP-repetition code, which are given in Eq. (10) in the main text. Recall that the logical quadrature noises N 1 X ξq and ξp for the N-mode GKP-repetition are given by ξ ≡ z(1) − ξ¯(1) = ξ(k), q q q N q k=1 N 1 X N (1) √ (k) (1) ξq = ξq + R 2π (ξq − ξq ), (1) X (k) N ξp ≡ zp = ξp . (A7) k=2 k=1 N (1) X (k) √ (k) ξp = ξp + (ξp − R 2π (ξp )), (B1) (1) (1) (N) (N) 2 Since (ξq , ξp , ··· , ξq , ξp ) ∼iid N (0, σ ), we have k=2 (1) (1) (N) (N) 2 where (ξq , ξp , ··· , ξq , ξp ) ∼ N (0, σ ) and N iid 1 X  1  R (z) ≡ z − n?(z)s and n?(z) ≡ argmin |z − ns|. Let (k) 2 2 s n∈Z ξq = ξq ∼ N 0, σq ≡ σ , N N pσ(z) denote the probability density function of a Gaussian k=1 2 distribution with zero mean and variance σ , i.e., pσ(z) ≡ N √ 2 2 2 X (k)  2 2 (1/ 2πσ ) exp[−z /(2σ )]. Then, the probability density ξp = ξp ∼ N 0, σp ≡ Nσ . (A8) functions Q(ξq) and P (ξp) of the logical quadrature noises ξq k=1 and ξp are given by Thus, the variance of the position quadrature noise is reduced Z ∞ Z ∞ N by a factor of N, but the variance of the momentum quadra- (1) (N)h Y (k) i ture noise is increased by the same factor. The latter increase Q(ξq) ≡ dξq ··· dξq pσ(ξq ) −∞ −∞ is due to the fact that the ancilla momentum quadrature noises k=1 which are transferred to the data momentum quadrature (see  N  (1) 1 X √ (k) (1) PN (k) (1) × δ ξq − ξq − R 2π (ξq − ξq ) , (B2) + k=2 ξp in zp ) are left completely undetected by the N position homodyne measurements during the syndrome ex- k=2 traction stage. As a result, the product of the noise standard and deviations remains unchanged at the end of the error correc- tion procedure (i.e., σ σ = σ2). This implies that Gaussian- Z ∞ Z ∞ N q p (1) (N)h Y (k) i repetition codes can only squeeze the Gaussian quadrature P (ξp) ≡ dξp ··· dξp pσ(ξp ) noises but cannot actually correct them. This reaffirms the −∞ −∞ k=1 previous no-go results [20, 35, 36].  N  (1) X (k) √ (k) In Section III in the main text, we modify these Gaussian- × δ ξp − ξp − (ξp − R 2π (ξp )) , (B3) repetition codes and introduce a family of GKP-repetition k=2 codes that can indeed correct additive Gaussian noise er- δ(x) R (z) rors. Specifically, we replace several Gaussian elements in where is the Dirac delta function. Note that s can the Gaussian-repetition code by non-Gaussian ones involving be expressed as the canonical GKP state, such that we can only benefit from X n h 1  1 io the decreased position noise variance by a factor of N, while Rs(z) ≡ (z − ns) · I z ∈ n − s, n + s , 2 2 preventing the momentum noise variance from increasing by n∈Z the same factor. (B4)

where I{C} is an indicator function, i.e., I{C} = 1 if C is Appendix B: Probability density of the logical quadrature true I{C} = 0 if C is false. Then, using Eq. (B4), we can noises: GKP-repetition codes make Q(ξq) and P (ξp) in Eqs. (B2),(B3) more explicit as follows: Here, we provide explicit expressions for the probability density functions of the logical quadrature noises ξq and ξp 13

Z ∞ Z ∞ N N √ X (1) (N)h Y (k) i  (1) 1 X (k) (1)  Q(ξq) = dξq ··· dξq pσ(ξq ) δ ξq − ξq − ξq − ξq − 2π nk −∞ −∞ N n2,··· ,nn∈Z k=1 k=2 N h Y n h 1√  1√ ioi × I ξ(k) − ξ(1) ∈ n − 2π , n + 2π q q k 2 k 2 √ k=2 N Z π/2 N N N √ X h Y (k)i  1 X (k)h Y  (k) 1 X (`) i = √ dξq pσ ξq − ξq pσ ξq + ξq − ξq + 2π nk , (B5) − π/2 N N n2,··· ,nn∈Z k=2 k=2 k=2 `=2 and

Z ∞ Z ∞ N √ N X (1) (N)h Y (k) i  (1) X  P (ξp) = dξp ··· dξp pσ(ξp ) δ ξp − ξp − 2π nk −∞ −∞ n2,··· ,nn∈Z k=1 k=2 N h Y n h 1√  1√ ioi × I ξ(k) ∈ n − 2π , n + 2π p k 2 k 2 k=2 √ N 1 N Z 2π (nk+ 2 ) √ X h Y (k) (k) i  X  = √ dξp · pσ(ξp ) pσ ξp − 2π nk . (B6) 1 2π (nk− ) n2,··· ,nn∈Z k=2 2 k=2

~ 2 (1) Fig. 3 in the main text is obtained by numerically comput- smaller |ξq| are more likely, we estimate that ξq is ing these probability density functions and then evaluating the standard deviations of the obtained probability density func- ¯(1) h (1) 2 2 (1) (2) 2i ξq = argmin (1) (ξq ) + (λ ξq + λzq ) tions. ξq λ3 = − z(2). (C1) 1 + λ4 q

(2) √ Since we only know the value of zq modulo 2π , we can (2) (2) √ (2) replace zq in Eq. (C1) by z¯q = R 2π (zq ) and end up (1) with the estimate λξ˜q given in Eq. (16). Appendix C: Probability density of the logical quadrature Now we provide explicit expression for the probability den- noises: The two-mode GKP-squeezed-repetition code sity functions of the logical quadrature noises ξq and ξp for the two-mode GKP-squeezed-repetition code. Recall Eq. (17):

Here, we first show that the maximum likelihood argu- 4 (2) λ ξq  ˜(1) ξ = λξ(1) + R√ − λξ(1) , ment yields the estimate λξq in Eq. (16) for the two-mode q q 1 + λ4 2π λ q GKP-squeezed-repetition code. Recall that we extract the √ (1) (2) (1) (2) ξp (2) √ (2) value of zq = −λξq + ξq /λ modulo 2π . For now, ξp = + λξp − R 2π (λξp ), (C2) (2) λ let us√ ignore the fact that we can measure zq only mod- (1) (1) (2) (2) 2 ulo 2π and assume that we know its exact value. Then, where (ξq , ξp , ξq , ξp ) ∼iid N (0, σ ). Similarly as in we can infer that the position quadrature noises are given by Appendix B, using Eq. (B4), we find that the probability den- ~ (1) (2) (1) 2 (1) (2) ξq = (ξq , ξq ) = (ξq , λ ξq + λzq ). Since noises with sity functions of the quadrature noises are given by 14

Z ∞ Z ∞  4  (2)  (1) (2) (1) (2) (1) λ √ ξq (1) Q(ξq) ≡ dξq dξq pσ(ξq )pσ(ξq )δ ξq − λξq − 4 R 2π − λξq −∞ −∞ 1 + λ λ Z ∞ Z ∞ 4 (2) √ X (1) (2) (1) (2)  (1) λ ξq (1)  = dξq dξq pσ(ξq )pσ(ξq )δ ξq − λξq − 4 − λξq − 2π n2 −∞ −∞ 1 + λ λ n2∈Z (2) √ √ nξq (1) h 1  1 io × I − λξq ∈ n2 − 2π , n2 + 2π √ λ 2 2 Z π/2 3 5 √ X (2) ξq λ (2)  (2) λ (2)  = √ dξq pσ − 4 ξq pσ λξq + λξq − 4 ξq + 2π λn2 , (C3) − π/2 λ 1 + λ 1 + λ n2∈Z and

Z ∞ Z ∞  (1)  (1) (2) (1) (2) ξp (2) √ (2) P (ξp) ≡ dξp dξp pσ(ξp )pσ(ξp )δ ξp − − (λξp − R 2π (λξp )) −∞ −∞ λ Z ∞ Z ∞ (1) √ X (1) (2) (1) (2)  ξp  = dξp dξp pσ(ξp )pσ(ξp )δ ξp − − 2π n2 −∞ −∞ λ n2∈Z n h 1√  1√ io × I λξ(2) ∈ n − 2π , n + 2π p 2 2 2 2 √ 1 (2) Z 2π (n2− 2 ) √ X h (2) ξp i   = √ dξp pσ pσ λξp − 2π λn2 . (C4) 1 − 2π (n2− ) λ n2∈Z 2

Fig. 5 in the main text is obtained by numerically comput- standard deviations of the obtained probability density func- ing these probability density functions and then evaluating the tions.

[1] S. L. Braunstein and P. van Loock, “Quantum information with [9] P. T. Cochrane, G. J. Milburn, and W. J. Munro, “Macroscop- continuous variables,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 77, 513–577 (2005). ically distinct quantum-superposition states as a bosonic code [2] C. Weedbrook, S. Pirandola, R. Garc´ıa-Patron,´ N. J. Cerf, T. C. for amplitude damping,” Phys. Rev. A 59, 2631–2634 (1999). Ralph, J. H. Shapiro, and S. Lloyd, “Gaussian quantum infor- [10] D. Gottesman, A. Kitaev, and J. Preskill, “Encoding a qubit in mation,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 84, 621–669 (2012). an oscillator,” Phys. Rev. A 64, 012310 (2001). [3] S. Aaronson and A. Arkhipov, “The computational complexity [11] M. Mirrahimi, Z. Leghtas, V. V. Albert, S. Touzard, R. J. of linear optics,” in Proceedings of the Forty-third Annual ACM Schoelkopf, L. Jiang, and M. H. Devoret, “Dynamically pro- Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC ’11 (ACM, New tected cat-qubits: a new paradigm for universal quantum com- York, NY, USA, 2011) pp. 333–342. putation,” New Journal of Physics 16, 045014 (2014). [4] J. Huh, G. G. Guerreschi, B. Peropadre, J. R. McClean, and [12] M. H. Michael, M. Silveri, R. T. Brierley, V. V. Albert, A. Aspuru-Guzik, “Boson sampling for molecular vibronic J. Salmilehto, L. Jiang, and S. M. Girvin, “New class of quan- spectra,” Nature Photonics 9, 615–620 (2015). tum error-correcting codes for a bosonic mode,” Phys. Rev. X [5] C. Sparrow, E. Mart´ın-Lopez,´ N. Maraviglia, A. Neville, 6, 031006 (2016). C. Harrold, J. Carolan, Y. N. Joglekar, T. Hashimoto, N. Mat- [13] I. L. Chuang, D. W. Leung, and Y. Yamamoto, “Bosonic quan- suda, J. L. O’Brien, D. P. Tew, and A. Laing, “Simulating the tum codes for amplitude damping,” Phys. Rev. A 56, 1114– vibrational quantum dynamics of molecules using photonics,” 1125 (1997). Nature 557, 660–667 (2018). [14] J. Harrington and J. Preskill, “Achievable rates for the Gaussian [6] S. Aaronson and D. J. Brod, “Bosonsampling with lost pho- ,” Phys. Rev. A 64, 062301 (2001). tons,” Phys. Rev. A 93, 012335 (2016). [15] M. Bergmann and P. van Loock, “Quantum error correction [7] D. Gottesman, “An Introduction to Quantum Error Correc- against photon loss using NOON states,” Phys. Rev. A 94, tion and Fault-Tolerant Quantum Computation,” arXiv e-prints 012311 (2016). , arXiv:0904.2557 (2009), arXiv:0904.2557 [quant-ph]. [16] K. Fukui, A. Tomita, and A. Okamoto, “Analog quantum error [8] V. V. Albert, K. Noh, K. Duivenvoorden, D. J. Young, R. T. correction with encoding a qubit into an oscillator,” Phys. Rev. Brierley, P. Reinhold, C. Vuillot, L. Li, C. Shen, S. M. Girvin, Lett. 119, 180507 (2017). B. M. Terhal, and Liang J., “Performance and structure of [17] M. Y. Niu, I. L. Chuang, and J. H. Shapiro, “Hardware-efficient single-mode bosonic codes,” Phys. Rev. A 97, 032346 (2018). bosonic quantum error-correcting codes based on symmetry op- 15

erators,” Phys. Rev. A 97, 032323 (2018). states with Gaussian operations is impossible,” Phys. Rev. Lett. [18] K. Fukui, A. Tomita, A. Okamoto, and K. Fujii, “High- 89, 137903 (2002). threshold fault-tolerant quantum computation with analog [36] J. Niset, J. Fiura´sek,ˇ and N. J. Cerf, “No-go theorem for Gaus- quantum error correction,” Phys. Rev. X 8, 021054 (2018). sian quantum error correction,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 120501 [19] K. Fukui, A. Tomita, and A. Okamoto, “Tracking quantum er- (2009). ror correction,” Phys. Rev. A 98, 022326 (2018). [37] E. Knill, R. Laflamme, and G. J. Milburn, “A scheme for ef- [20] C. Vuillot, H. Asasi, Y. Wang, L. P. Pryadko, and B. M. Terhal, ficient quantum computation with linear optics,” Nature 409, “Quantum Error Correction with the Toric-GKP Code,” arXiv 46–52 (2001). e-prints , arXiv:1810.00047 (2018), arXiv:1810.00047 [quant- [38] S. Lloyd and S. L. Braunstein, “Quantum computation over ph]. continuous variables,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 1784–1787 (1999). [21] Z. Leghtas, S. Touzard, I. M. Pop, A. Kou, B. Vlastakis, A. Pe- [39] S. Krastanov, V. V. Albert, C. Shen, C.-L. Zou, R. W. Heeres, trenko, K. M. Sliwa, A. Narla, S. Shankar, M. J. Hatridge, B. Vlastakis, R. J. Schoelkopf, and L. Jiang, “Universal control M. Reagor, L. Frunzio, R. J. Schoelkopf, M. Mirrahimi, and of an oscillator with dispersive coupling to a qubit,” Phys. Rev. M. H. Devoret, “Confining the state of light to a quantum man- A 92, 040303 (2015). ifold by engineered two-photon loss,” Science 347, 853–857 [40] B. Q. Baragiola, G. Pantaleoni, R.l N. Alexand er, A. Karanjai, (2015). and N. C. Menicucci, “All-Gaussian universality and fault toler- [22] N. Ofek, A. Petrenko, R. Heeres, P. Reinhold, Z. Leghtas, ance with the Gottesman-Kitaev-Preskill code,” arXiv e-prints , B. Vlastakis, Y. Liu, L. Frunzio, S. M. Girvin, L. Jiang, M. Mir- arXiv:1903.00012 (2019), arXiv:1903.00012 [quant-ph]. rahimi, M. H. Devoret, and R. J. Schoelkopf, “Extending the [41] K. Duivenvoorden, B. M. Terhal, and D. Weigand, “Single- lifetime of a quantum bit with error correction in superconduct- mode displacement sensor,” Phys. Rev. A 95, 012305 (2017). ing circuits,” Nature 536, 441–445 (2016). [42] B. C. Travaglione and G. J. Milburn, “Preparing encoded states [23] S. Touzard, A. Grimm, Z. Leghtas, S. O. Mundhada, P. Rein- in an oscillator,” Phys. Rev. A 66, 052322 (2002). hold, C. Axline, M. Reagor, K. Chou, J. Blumoff, K. M. Sliwa, [43] S. Pirandola, S. Mancini, D. Vitali, and P. Tombesi, “Construct- S. Shankar, L. Frunzio, R. J. Schoelkopf, M. Mirrahimi, and ing finite-dimensional codes with optical continuous variables,” M. H. Devoret, “Coherent oscillations inside a quantum mani- EPL (Europhysics Letters) 68, 323 (2004). fold stabilized by dissipation,” Phys. Rev. X 8, 021005 (2018). [44] S. Pirandola, S. Mancini, D. Vitali, and P. Tombesi, “Gener- [24] L. Hu, Y. Ma, W. Cai, X. Mu, Y. Xu, W. Wang, Y. Wu, ating continuous variable quantum codewords in the near-field H. Wang, Y. P. Song, C.-L. Zou, S. M. Girvin, L.-M. Duan, atomic lithography,” Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and L. Sun, “Quantum error correction and universal gate set and Optical Physics 39, 997 (2006). operation on a binomial bosonic logical qubit,” Nature Physics [45] H. M. Vasconcelos, L. Sanz, and S. Glancy, “All-optical gen- (2019), 10.1038/s41567-018-0414-3. eration of states for “encoding a qubit in an oscillator”,” Opt. [25] C. Fluhmann,¨ V. Negnevitsky, M. Marinelli, and J. P. Home, Lett. 35, 3261–3263 (2010). “Sequential modular position and momentum measurements of [46] B. M. Terhal and D. Weigand, “Encoding a qubit into a cavity a trapped ion mechanical oscillator,” Phys. Rev. X 8, 021001 mode in circuit QED using phase estimation,” Phys. Rev. A 93, (2018). 012315 (2016). [26] C. Fluhmann,¨ T. L. Nguyen, M. Marinelli, V. Negnevitsky, [47] K. R. Motes, B. Q. Baragiola, A. Gilchrist, and N. C. K. Mehta, and J. P. Home, “Encoding a qubit in a trapped-ion Menicucci, “Encoding qubits into oscillators with atomic en- mechanical oscillator,” Nature 566, 513–517 (2019). sembles and squeezed light,” Phys. Rev. A 95, 053819 (2017). [27] S. Touzard, A. Eickbusch, P. Campagne-Ibarcq, E. Zalys- [48] D. J. Weigand and B. M. Terhal, “Generating grid states from Geller, N. Frattini, V. Sivak, S. Puri, M. Mirrahimi, S. Shankar, Schrodinger-cat¨ states without postselection,” Phys. Rev. A 97, and M. Devoret, “Grid states for encoding and stabilizing a log- 022341 (2018). ical qubit in superconducting circuits (part 2),” Bulletin of the [49] J. M. Arrazola, T. R. Bromley, J. Izaac, C. R. Myers, K. Bradler,´ American Physical Society (2019). and N. Killoran, “Machine learning method for state prepara- [28] S. Lloyd and J.-J. E. Slotine, “Analog Quantum Error Correc- tion and gate synthesis on photonic quantum computers,” Quan- tion,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 4088–4091 (1998). tum Science and Technology 4, 024004 (2019). [29] S. L. Braunstein, “Error correction for continuous quantum [50] D. Su, C. R.. Myers, and K. K. Sabapathy, “Conversion of variables,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 4084–4087 (1998). Gaussian states to non-Gaussian states using photon number- [30] Samuel L. Braunstein, “Quantum error correction for commu- resolving detectors,” arXiv e-prints , arXiv:1902.02323 (2019), nication with linear optics,” Nature 394, 47–49 (1998). arXiv:1902.02323 [quant-ph]. [31] T. Aoki, G. Takahashi, T. Kajiya, J. Yoshikawa, S. L. Braun- [51] M. Eaton, R. Nehra, and O. Pfister, “Gottesman-Kitaev- stein, P. van Loock, and A. Furusawa, “Quantum error correc- Preskill state preparation by photon catalysis,” arXiv e-prints tion beyond qubits,” Nature Physics 5, 541 EP – (2009). , arXiv:1903.01925 (2019), arXiv:1903.01925 [quant-ph]. [32] P. Hayden, S. Nezami, G. Salton, and B. C. Sanders, “Space- [52] A. S. Holevo, “One-mode quantum Gaussian channels: Struc- time replication of continuous variable quantum information,” ture and ,” Problems of Information Transmis- New J. Phys. 18, 083043 (2016). sion 43, 1–11 (2007). [33] P. Hayden, S. Nezami, S. Popescu, and G. Salton, “Error [53] K. Noh, V. V. Albert, and L. Jiang, “Quantum capacity bounds Correction of Quantum Reference Frame Information,” arXiv of Gaussian thermal loss channels and achievable rates with e-prints , arXiv:1709.04471 (2017), arXiv:1709.04471 [quant- Gottesman-Kitaev-Preskill codes,” IEEE Transactions on Infor- ph]. mation Theory 65, 2563–2582 (2019). [34] P. Faist, S. Nezami, V. V. Albert, G. Salton, F. Pastawski, [54] J. Shapiro, H. Yuen, and A. Mata, “Optical communication P. Hayden, and J. Preskill, “Continuous symmetries and with two-photon coherent states–part ii: Photoemissive detec- approximate quantum error correction,” arXiv e-prints , tion and structured receiver performance,” IEEE Transactions arXiv:1902.07714 (2019), arXiv:1902.07714 [quant-ph]. on Information Theory 25, 179–192 (1979). [35] J. Eisert, S. Scheel, and M. B. Plenio, “Distilling Gaussian [55] M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and 16

Quantum Information, Cambridge Series on Information and [59] A. Kitaev, “Quantum error correction with imperfect gates,” the Natural Sciences (Cambridge University Press, 2000). in Quantum Communication, Computing, and Measurement, [56] R. Laflamme, C. Miquel, J. P. Paz, and W. H. Zurek, “Perfect edited by O. Hirota, A. S. Holevo, and C. M. Caves (Springer quantum error correcting code,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 198–201 US, Boston, MA, 1997) pp. 181–188. (1996). [60] A. G. Fowler, M. Mariantoni, J. M. Martinis, and A. N. Cle- [57] C. H. Bennett, D. P. DiVincenzo, J. A. Smolin, and W. K. Woot- land, “Surface codes: Towards practical large-scale quantum ters, “Mixed-state entanglement and quantum error correction,” computation,” Phys. Rev. A 86, 032324 (2012). Phys. Rev. A 54, 3824–3851 (1996). [61] S. Bravyi and A. Kitaev, “Universal quantum computation with [58] D. Gottesman, Stabilizer codes and quantum error correction, ideal and noisy ancillas,” Phys. Rev. A 71, 022316 Ph.D. thesis, California Institute of Technology (1997). (2005).