arxiv: v3 [cs.it] 17 May 2017

Transcription

1 Liear Programmig Bouds for Etaglemet-Assisted Quatum Error-Correctig Codes by Split Weight Eumerators Chig-Yi Lai ad Alexei Ashikhmi arxiv: v3 [cs.t] 17 May 2017 Abstract Liear programmig approaches have bee applied to derive upper bouds o the size of classical ad quatum codes. this paper, we derive similar results for geeral quatum codes with etaglemet assistace by cosiderig a type of split weight eumerator. After derivig the MacWilliams idetities for these eumerators, we are able to prove algebraic liear programmig bouds, such as the Sigleto boud, the Hammig boud, ad the first liear programmig boud. Our Sigleto boud ad Hammig boud are more geeral tha the previous bouds for etaglemet-assisted quatum stabilizer codes. additio, we show that the first liear programmig boud improves the Hammig boud whe the relative distace is sufficietly large. O the other had, we obtai additioal costraits o the size of Pauli subgroups for quatum codes, which allow us to improve the liear programmig bouds o the miimum distace of quatum codes of small legth. particular, we show that there is o [[27, 15, 5]] or [[28, 14, 6]] stabilizer code. We also discuss the existece of some etaglemet-assisted quatum stabilizer codes with maximal etaglemet. As a result, the upper ad lower bouds o the miimum distace of maximal-etaglemet quatum stabilizer codes with legth up to 20 are sigificatly improved.. NTRODUCTON The theory of quatum error-correctig codes has bee developed over two decades for the purpose of protectig quatum iformatio from oise i computatio or commuicatio [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10]. Classical codig techiques, such as code costructios, ecodig ad decodig procedures, have bee geeralized to the quatum case i the literature [11], [12]. A importat questio i codig theory is to determie how much redudacy is eeded so that a certai amout of errors ca be tolerated [13]. The error-correctig capability of a code is usually quatified by the otio of its miimum distace, which ca be determied by the weight eumerator of the code. Delsarte applied the duality theorem of liear programmig to fid uiversal upper bouds o the size of classical codes [14]. A key step is to use the MacWilliams idetities that relate the weight eumerators of a code ad its dual code [13]. These liear programmig bouds have bee geeralized to the quatum case by Ashikhmi ad Litsy [15], based o the existece of quatum MacWilliams idetities [16], [17]. We would like to exted these results to the case of quatum codes with etaglemet assistace. Etaglemet-assisted (EA) quatum stabilizer codes are a codig scheme with a additioal resource etaglemet shared betwee the seder ad receiver [18]. These codes have some advatages over stadard stabilizer codes [19], [20], [21], [22]. the scheme of a EA stabilizer code, it is assumed that the receiver s qubits are error-free, which makes the aalysis of error correctio slightly more complicated. Previously, Lai, Bru, ad Wilde discussed the MacWilliams idetities for the case of EA stabilizer codes [23], [24], which aturally follow from the MacWilliams idetities for orthogoal groups [13]. Two dualities (see Eqs. (43) ad (44) below) are used to fid liear programmig bouds o the miimum distace of small EA stabilizer codes. However, oly oe duality (see Eq. (4) below) appears i stadard stabilizer codes, ad thus we caot directly apply the method i [15] to obtai algebraic liear programmig bouds for EA stabilizer codes. additio, examples of oadditive EA quatum codes have recetly bee foud i [25], which apparetly do ot fit the EA stabilizer formalism [18]. Cosequetly, previous upper bouds for EA stabilizer codes, such as the Sigleto boud ad Hammig boud, do ot work for oadditive EA quatum codes. this paper, we will first defie geeral EA quatum codes ad discuss their error correctio coditios. Two split weight eumerators of a EA quatum code are defied accordigly ad they are proved to obey a MacWilliams idetity, similarly to oadditive quatum codes [16], [17]. These weight eumerators bear sufficiet iformatio about the error correctio coditios of the EA code (see Theorem 2). Recetly the otio of data-ad-sydrome correctio codes is itroduced [26], ad algebraic liear programmig bouds for these codes are derived from a type of weight eumerators over the product space of F 4 ad Z 2. We use similar techiques to derive algebraic liear programmig bouds o the size of EA quatum codes of give legth, miimum distace, ad etaglemet, ad obtai the Sigleto boud, the Hammig boud, ad the first liear programmig (LP-1) boud for urestricted (degeerate or odegeerate, additive or oadditive) EA quatum codes. additio, we show that the LP-1 boud improves the Hammig boud whe the ratio of code distace to code legth (relative distace) is sufficietly large. Also the previous Sigleto boud for EA stabilizer codes i [18] does ot work for large miimum distace (i.e., d > +2 2 ; see defiitios below). Recetly examples of EA stabilizer codes that violate the Sigleto boud have bee costructed [42]. We will provide a refied Sigleto boud for the geeral case. A part of this work was preseted at the EEE teratioal Symposium o formatio Theory CYL is with the stitute of formatio Sciece, Academia Siica, No 128, Academia Road, Sectio 2 Nakag, Taipei 11529, Taiwa. ( cylai0616@iis.siica.edu.tw) AA is with the Bell Laboratories, Nokia, 600 Moutai Ave, Murray Hill, NJ ( alexei.ashikhmi@okia-bell-labs.com)

2 2 the case of EA stabilizer codes, the MacWilliams idetities for split weight eumerators provide more costraits i the liear program of a EA stabilizer code tha those i [23], ad thus the resultig upper boud o the miimum distace could be potetially tighter for EA stabilizer codes of small legth. Other tha that, we also fid additioal costraits o the weight distributios of EA stabilizer codes. Rais itroduced the otio of shadow eumerator for additive quatum codes. the case of a quatum stabilizer code, a type of MacWilliams idetity betwee the weight eumerators of a stabilizer group ad its shadow (see Eq. (48)) provides additioal costraits o the weight distributio of its stabilizer group ad hece the liear programmig boud ca be improved [27]. However, this method caot be applied to o-abelia groups, such as the ormalizer group of a stabilizer code or the simplified stabilizer group of a EA stabilizer code. We will derive additioal costraits o the weight eumerators of o-abelia Pauli groups ad improve the liear programmig bouds o the miimum distace of small EA stabilizer codes. particular, this helps to exclude the existece of [[27, 15, 5]] ad [[28, 14, 6]] quatum codes. As for EA stabilizer codes, the improved liear programmig bouds rule out the existece of several EA stabilizer codes. We also prove the oexistece of certai codes ad costruct several EA stabilizer codes with previously ukow parameters. To sum up, the table of upper ad lower bouds o the miimum distace of maximal etaglemet EA stabilizer codes of legth up to 20 give i [24] (with lower bouds improved i [28]) is greatly improved i Table. This paper is orgaized as follows. Prelimiaries are give i the ext sectio. Sec. we discuss geeral EA quatum codes ad their properties, icludig two split weight eumerators ad their MacWilliams idetities. particular, we prove a Gilbert-Varshamov type lower boud for the case of EA stabilizer codes. The we derive algebraic liear programmig bouds i Sec. V, icludig the Sigleto-type, Hammig-type, ad the first-liear-programmig-type bouds. We will compare the Hammig boud ad the first liear programmig boud i Subsec. V-C. The liear programmig bouds for small EA stabilizer codes are discussed i Sec. V, icludig the additioal costraits, ad oexistece ad existece of certai EA stabilizer codes. The the discussio sectio follows.. PRELMNARES this sectio we give otatio ad briefly itroduce Pauli operators, quatum error-correctig codes, the MacWilliams idetities for orthogoal groups, ad properties of the Krawtchouk polyomials. A. Pauli Operators A sigle-qubit state space is a two-dimesioal complex Hilbert space C 2, ad a multiple-qubit state space is simply the tesor product space of sigle-qubit spaces. The Pauli matrices [ ] [ ] [ ] =, X =, Z =, Y = ixz form a basis of the liear operators o a sigle-qubit state space. Let G = {M 1 M 2 M : M j { 2, X, Y, Z}}, which is a basis of the liear operators o the -qubit state space C 2. Let G = {i e g : g G, e {0, 1, 2, 3}} be the -fold Pauli group. The weight of g = i e M 1 M 2 M G is the umber of M j s that are oidetity matrices ad is deoted by wt (g). Note that all elemets i Ḡ have oly eigevalues ±1 ad they either commute or aticommute with each other. Sice the overall phase of a quatum state is ot importat, it suffices to cosider error operators i G. For a subgroup V G, we defie V = {g G : i e g V for e {0, 1, 2, 3}}. (1) That is, V is the collectio of the elemets i V with coefficiet +1 istead. Sometimes it is coveiet to cosider the quatum codig problem i terms of biary strigs [6]. For two biary -tuples u, v Z 2, defie Z u X v = Z [u]j X [v]j, j=1 where [u] j deotes the j-th etry of u. Thus ay elemet g G ca be expressed as g = i e Z u X v for some e {0, 1, 2, 3} ad u, v Z 2. For example, we may deote X Y Z by Z 011 X 110 up to some phase. Let deote the idetity operator of appropriate dimesios. We may also use the otatio X j to deote the operator 2 2 X 2 2 (of appropriate dimesios) with a X o the j-th qubit ad idetities o the others, ad similarly for Z j ad Y j. We defie a homomorphism τ : G Z 2 2 by i e Z u X v (u, v). (2)

3 3 Defie a ier product i G by g, h G = ([u 1 ] i [v 2 ] i + [v 1 ] i [u 2 ] i ), i=1 where g = i e Z u1 X v1, h = i e Z u2 X v2 G ad the additio is cosidered i Z 2. The g, h G = 0 if they commute, ad g, h G = 1, otherwise. B. Quatum Error-Correctig Codes A ((, M, d)) quatum code Q of legth ad size M is a M-dimesioal subspace of the -qubit state space C 2, such that ay error E G of wt (E) d 1 is detectable. The parameter d is called the miimum distace of Q. From the error correctio coditios [29], [3], E is detectable if ad oly if v E w = 0 for orthogoal codewords v, w Q. Suppose S = g 1,..., g k is a Abelia subgroup of G, where g j are idepedet geerators of S, such that the mius idetity / S. The S defies a quatum stabilizer code C(S) = { ψ C 2 : g ψ = ψ, g S} of dimesio 2 k. The vectors ψ C(S) are called the codewords of C(S) ad the operators g S are called the stabilizers of C(S). Quatum stabilizer codes are aalogues of classical additive codes. As opposed to stabilizer codes, others are called oadditive quatum codes [30], [31], [32], [33], [34], [35], [12]. Suppose a error E G occurs o a codeword ψ C(S). f E aticommutes with some g j s, it ca be detected by measurig the eigevalues of g j s without disturbig the state of E ψ. Let S = {h G : h, g G = 0, g S}, (3) which is the ormalizer group of S i G. t is clear that for E S, E caot be detected. Thus the miimum distace d of C(S) is defied as the miimum weight of ay elemet i S \ S, (4) sice errors i S are ot harmful. The C(S) is called a [[, k, d]] quatum stabilizer code. f there exists g S with wt (g) < d, C(S) is called degeerate; otherwise, it is odegeerate. The weight eumerator of a group S is W S (x, y) = B w x w y w, w=0 where B w is the umber of elemets of weight w i S. We may simply say that {B w } is the weight distributio of S. The weight eumerators of a additive group V ad its orthogoal group V are related by the MacWilliams idetities [13], [36]: W V (x, y) = 1 V W V(x + 3y, x y), (5) Thus we have the MacWilliams idetities for stabilizer codes. 1 Note that the MacWilliams idetities for oadditive quatum codes also exist [16], [17]. As a cosequece, liear programmig techiques ca be applied to fid upper bouds o the miimum distace of small quatum stabilizer codes [7], [23] or to derive Delsarte s algebraic upper bouds o the dimesio of geeral quatum codes [15]. C. Krawtchouk Polyomials The i-th quaterary Krawtchouk polyomial is defied as i ( )( ) x x K i (x; ) = ( 1) j 3 i j, (6) j i j which satisfies j=0 (1 y) x (1 + 3y) x = K i (x; )y i. 1 More precisely, whe we apply the MacWilliams idetities for orthogoal groups, we are cosiderig the stabilizer subgroup defied i the quotiet of the -fold Pauli group by its ceter: G /{±, ±i} as i [23]. Or oe ca cosider the group τ(s) ad its orthogoal group i Z 2 2 istead.

4 4 The Krawtchouk polyomials satisfy the followig orthogoality relatio K r (i; )K i (s; ) = 4 δ r,s. (7) where δ r,s is the Kroecker delta fuctio. Thus they form a basis of polyomials with fiite degree. They are especially useful i the MacWilliams theory ad algebraic liear programmig bouds. Details of Krawtchouk polyomials ca be foud i [13], [37], [15]. Here we survey some properties of the quaterary Krawtchouk polyomials. For coveiece, sometimes we may simply write K i (x) = K i (x; ) whe the uderlyig is clear from the cotext. Let {B w } ad {Bw } be the weight distributios of a stabilizer group S ad its orthogoal subset S i G, respectively. Thus Eqs. (5) ad (6) imply Bi = 1 B j K i (j; ), i = 0,...,. S j=0 A symmetry relatio is satisfied by the polyomials ( ) ( ) 3 i K s (i; ) = 3 s K i (s; ). (8) i s The followig property is eeded i the proof of Sigleto boud later (Sec. V-A) ( ) ( ) i x K i (x; ) = 4 j. (9) j j Every polyomial of degree at most has a uique expasio i the basis of Krawtchouk polyomials. f a polyomial f(x) has the expasio t f(x) = f i K i (x), the f i = 4 j=0 f(j)k j (i). The Christoffel-Darboux formula is of importace [37]: ( ) t 4(a x) K i (x)k i (a) K t+1 (x)k t (a) K t (x)k t+1 (a) = t + 1 3t t 3 i( ). (10) i The Krawtchouk polyomials satisfy a recurrece relatio, The followig equatio is derived i [15, Lemma 2] where (i + 1)K i+1 (x) = (3 2i 4x)K i (x) 3( i + 1)K i 1 (x). (11) K i (x)k j (x) = l=0 ( )( l l α(l, i, j, r) = 2l + 2r i j r r=0 l K l (x) α(l, i, j, r), (12) )( 2l + 2r i j l + r j ) 2 i+j 2r l 3 r. (13) Deote by r t the smallest root of K t (x). t is well kow that r t > r t+1 [13] ad that whe t grows liearly with we have r t = 3 4 t t 2 ( t ) + o(1). Defie f(x) = 1 a x {K t+1(x)k t (a) K t (x)k t+1 (a)} 2. (14) This polyomial yields the first liear programmig boud for classical codes over F 4 [38],[37]. To get the first liear programmig boud i the asymptotic case, for large, we choose t = δ 1 3δ(1 δ) + o(1), 2

5 5 where δ = d/, ad a so that r t+1 < a < r t ad Kt(a) K = 1. t+1(a) The Krawtchouk polyomials also form a basis for multivariate polyomials. our case, we will eed the basis of bivariate polyomials of degrees at most, c i x, y, respectively: {K i (x; )K j (y; c)}. The a polyomial f(x, y) of degree at most, c i x, y has a uique Krawtchouk expasio c f(x, y) = f i,j K i (x; )K j (y; c), where f i,j = 1 4 +c j=0 u=0 v=0 the followig we cosider Pauli operators of the form c f(u, v)k u (i; )K v (j; c). (15). ENTANGLEMENT-ASSSTED QUANTUM CODES E A F B G +c for E A G, F B G c, where the superscripts A ad B deote two parties Alice ad Bob, respectively. We may implicitly write E F for simplicity whe it is clear from the cotext. We will defie two split weight eumerators for EA quatum codes that cout weights o Alice ad Bob s qubits separately, ad the derive their MacWilliams idetities, which is a key step to prove algebraic liear programmig bouds for geeral EA quatum codes. Assume Alice ad Bob share c pairs of maximally-etagled states ( )/ 2, called ebits. additio, Alice has other c qubits i the state 0. The Alice will ecode iformatio i her qubits (a total of qubits) ad sed them to Bob through a oisy chael. Bob s c qubits are assumed to be error-free durig the whole process. Sice the qubits of Alice ad Bob are etagled, the ecoded quatum state lies i a ( + c)-qubit state space. (Details of the ecodig procedure ca be foud i [25].) Thus we defie a EA quatum code as follows. Defiitio 1. A ((, M, d; c)) EA quatum code Q is a M-dimesioal subspace of the ( + c)-qubit state space C 2+c such that 1) for ψ Q, Tr A ( ψ ψ ) = 1 2 c B ; 2) for E A G of wt ( E A) d 1, E = E A B is detectable. The first coditio i Def. 1 esures that Alice ad Bob share c ebits ad that the ecodig is locally performed by Alice. The parameter d is called the miimum distace of Q, which quatifies the maximum weight of a detectable Pauli error. Deote by R = log 2 M the code rate, by δ = d the relative distace, ad by ρ = c the etaglemet-assistace rate. f Q is defied by a stabilizer group (of G +c ) of size 2 +c k, we have M = 2 k ad Q is called a [[, k, d; c]] EA stabilizer code [18]. f, furthermore, c = k, Q is called a maximal-etaglemet EA stabilizer code. Suppose Q has a orthoormal basis { ψ i } ad P = i ψ i ψ i is the orthogoal projector oto Q. The quatum error correctio coditios [29], [3] say that a error operator E G +c is detectable by Q if ad oly if ψ i E ψ j = λ E δ i,j or P EP = λ E P for some costat λ E depedig o E. A error operator E is called a degeerate error if λ E 0; otherwise, it is odegeerate. Similarly to the case of quatum codes [16], we defie two split weight eumerators {B i,j } ad {Bi,j } of Q by B i,j = 1 M 2 (Tr ((E i E j )P )) 2, i = 0,..., ; j = 0,..., c; (16) B i,j = 1 M E i G,wt(E i )=i E j Gc,wt(E j )=j E i G,wt(E i )=i E j Gc,wt(E j )=j Tr ((E i E j )P (E i E j )P ), i = 0,..., ; j = 0,..., c. (17)

6 6 Sice P = i ψ i ψ i, we ca rewrite B i,j ad Bi,j as B i,j = 1 M 2 B i,j = 1 M E i G,wt(E i )=i E j Gc,wt(E j )=j l E i G,wt(E i )=i l,m E j Gc,wt(E j )=j ψ l E i E j ψ l 2, ψ l E i E j ψ m 2. Thus {B i,j } is a distributio of errors that do ot corrupt the code space of Q, while {Bi,j } is a distributio of errors that are udetectable by Q. Theorem 2. Suppose Q is a ((, M, d; c)) EA quatum code with projector P ad split weight eumerators {B i,j } ad {Bi,j }, defied i (16) ad (17), respectively. The 1) B 0,0 = B0,0 = 1; Bi,j B i,j 0; 2) B 0,j = 0 for j = 1,..., c; 3) { Bi,0 = Bi,0, i = 1,..., d 1; B d,0 < Bd,0 ; (18) 4) B i,j = B i,j = M 2 +c 1 2 +c M u=0 v=0 c B u,v K i (u; )K j (v; c); (19) u=0 v=0 c Bu,vK i (u; )K j (v; c). (20) Proof. 1) The first part is straightforward ad the secod part is from the Cauchy-Schwartz iequality. 2) By Defiitio 1, we have Tr A (P ) = M 2 B. The for j > 0, c B 0,j = 1 M 2 (Tr ( ( A E j )P ) ) 2 = 1 M 2 E j G c,wt(e j)=j E j G c,wt(e j)=j (Tr (E j Tr A (P ))) 2 = 0, sice Tr (E) = 0 for a oidetity Pauli operator E. 3) We have B i,0 = Bi,0 if ad oly if ψ l E A B ψ m = 0 for E G with wt (E) = i ad for all l m. 4) The proof is similar to that i [16]. The projector P ca be expressed as P = c u=0 v=0 Du G,wt(Du)=u Dv Gc,wt(Dv )=v Tr ((D u D v )P ) 2 +c D u D v, sice {D u D v } u,v is a basis of liear operators o C 2+c. For coveiece, we will simply write D u D v as the idex of summatio ad similarly for E i E j. By defiitio, B i,j = 1 M (a) = 1 M E i E j u,v u,v E i E j u,v Du Dv D u D v Tr ((D u D v )P ) Tr ((D u D v )P ) 2 2(+c) Tr ((E i E j )(D u D v )(E i E j )(D u D v )) D u D v (Tr ((D u D v )P ))2 2 2(+c) Tr ((E i E j )(D u D v )(E i E j )(D u D v )) = M (Tr ((D u D v )P ))2 2 +c M 2 u,v D u D v (b) = M 2 +c B u,v K i (u; )K j (v; c), u,v Tr (E i D u E i D u ) Tr (E j D v E j D v ) 2 2 c E i E j where (a) is because the trace of a oidetity Pauli operator is zero. To prove (b), ote that Tr (E i D u E i D u ) /2 = 1 if E i ad D u commute; ad Tr (E i D u E i D u ) /2 = 1, otherwise. The rest is simply to determie the umber of E i that commute with D u.

7 7 Eq. (20) is obtaied by applyig (7) twice to (19). Defiitio 3. A ((, M, d; c)) EA quatum code is called degeerate if its split weight eumerator B i,0 > 0 for some 0 < i < d, ad odegeerate, otherwise. Remark: The coverse of Theorem 2 is ot ecessarily true; give two distributios {B i,j } ad {Bi,j } satisfyig the coditios 1), 2), 3), ad 4) i Theorem 2, it may still be the case that o correspodig EA quatum code exists. particular, we will derive additioal costraits for the case of EA stabilizer codes i Theorem 16 later. Usually the existece of a code is show by costructio. The Gilbert-Varshamov boud provides a ocostructive proof of the existece of classical codes [13]. Next we will prove a Gilbert-Varshamov-type boud o the size of EA stabilizer codes 2 for fixed, d, c i Theorem 4. We start by defiig three Pauli subgroups associated with a EA stabilizer code. Let S be a Abelia subgroup of G +c geerated by g 1 = g A 1 Z B 1,..., g c = g A c Z B c, h 1 = h A 1 X B 1,..., h c = h A c X B c, g c+1 = g A c+1 B,..., g k = g B k B, where Z B j, XB j G c, g A j, ha j G, 0 c k, ad g j ad h j satisfy the commutatio relatios: g i, g j G = 0 for i j, (21) h i, h j G = 0 for i j, (22) g i, h j G = 0 for i j, (23) g i, h i G = 1 for all i. (24) (We say that g i ad h i are symplectic parters.) The S defies a [[, k, d; c]] EA stabilizer code C(S ) by { ψ C 2+c : g ψ = ψ, g S } of dimesio 2 k. We ca itroduce aother 2k idepedet geerators g A k+1 B,..., g A B, h A k+1 B,..., h A B G +c, where g j ad h j also satisfy the commutatio relatios. Sice these 2k geerators commute with the stabilizers i S, they operate o the logical level of the ecoded states. Thus we defie a logical subgroup L = g k+1,..., g, h k+1,..., h. Let S = g c+1,..., g k G be the isotropic subgroup, which is Abelia. Let S S = g 1, h 1,..., g c, h c G be the symplectic subgroup, which is o-abelia. Sice g i h i = h i g i, S S. Let S = {g 1 g 2 : g 1 S S, g 2 S } be the simplified stabilizer group, which is o-abelia. Sice the elemets i S S commute with the elemets i S, we ca safely deote S by the otatio S S S ad similarly i the followig. The the miimum distace d of C(S ) is the miimum weight of ay elemet i Now we prove a Gilbert-Varshamov boud for EA stabilizer codes. Theorem 4. There exists a [[, k, d; c]] EA stabilizer code provided that ( d 1 ( ) 2 +k c 2 k c) 3 j 4 1. j As becomes large, we have S \ S. (25) j=0 R = 1 + ρ δ log 2 3 H 2 (δ), where H 2 (x) = x log 2 x (1 x) log 2 (1 x) is the biary etropy fuctio. Proof. The first part is similar to the proof of the Gilbert-Varshamov boud for quatum stabilizer codes [6], [39]. Let N k be the umber of all [[, k; c]] EA stabilizer codes. Let M deote the multiset S \ S, S where the uio is over all simplified stabilizer subgroups S = S S S of [[, k; c]] EA stabilizer codes. For each S, there are ( 2 +k c 2 k c) elemets i S \ S. Recall that the -fold Clifford group is the set of uitary operators that preserve the -fold Pauli group G by cojugatio. t is kow that the -fold Clifford group is trasitive o G \ {}. That is, for 2 A similar result has bee provided i [24], but the argumet there was icomplete.

8 8 E, F G \ {}, there exists a -fold Clifford operator U such that UEU = F. f E S, the F USU, where USU {UgU : g S}. Thus each oidetity elemet E G appears N k 2+k c 2 k c 4 1 times i M. Now we delete from M those S \ S with at least oe oidetity elemet of weight less tha d. At most d 1 ( )3 j N 2+k c 2 k c j 4 1 j=0 S are removed from the uio of M. f this umber is smaller tha N k, there exists a [[, k, d; c]] EA stabilizer code. The secod part is from Stirlig s approximatio: ( ) ( ) 1 d log 2 = H 2 + o(1), (26) d where o(1) teds to 0 as icreases. The Gilbert-Varshamov boud for EA stabilizer codes suggests that etaglemet-assisted quatum codes may have higher code dimesio tha codes without etaglemet assistace for fixed ad d. V. UPPER BOUNDS FOR EA QUANTUM CODES this sectio, we will derive Delsarte s algebraic liear programmig bouds for geeral quatum codes with etaglemet assistace. We first derive the mai theorem, similar to [15, Theorem 4] ad [26, Theorem 3]. Theorem 5. Let Q be a ((, M, d; c)) EA quatum code. Let c f(x, y) = f i,j K i (x; )K j (y; c) j=0 be a polyomial with oegative coefficiets {f i,j } i the Krawtchouk expasio (15). Assume that The f Q is odegeerate, the f i,0 > 0, for 0 i d 1; (27) f(x, y) 0, for x d or y 1. (28) M 1 f(l, 0) 2 +c max. 0 l d 1 f l,0 M 1 2 +c f(0, 0) f 0,0. (29) Proof. Suppose Q is a ((, M, d; c)) EA quatum code with split weight eumerators {B i,j } ad {Bi,j }. The d 1 2 +c M f i,0 B i,0 2 +c M (a) = 2 +c M d 1 = j=0 j=0 c f i,j B i,j c f i,j Bi,0f(i, 0) + (b) d c M u=0 v=0 Bi,0f(i, 0) + i=d d 1 Bi,0f(i, 0) = B i,0 f(i, 0), c Bu,vK i (u; )K j (v; c) = j=1 c Bi,jf(i, j) u=0 v=0 c Bu,vf(u, v) where (a) is by (20) from Theorem 2; (b) follows from assumptio (28). The last equality is by (18) from Theorem 2. Thus M 1 d 1 B i,0f(i, 0) 2 +c d 1 l=0 f 1 f(l, 0) l,0b l,0 2 +c max. 0 l d 1 f l,0 f Q is odegeerate, we have its split weight eumerator B i,0 = 0 for 0 < i < d. Usig this additioal costrait i the above proof, we have (29).

9 9 t remais to fid good polyomials f(x, y) that satisfy (27) ad (28). A. Sigleto Boud for EA Quatum Codes The Sigleto boud for EA stabilizer codes was proposed i [18], which is obtaied by a iformatio-theoretical approach [40]. Herei we prove a Sigleto boud for EA quatum codes. Our boud applies to oadditive EA quatum codes as well, ad is thus more geeral tha the oe i [18]. Theorem 6. For a ((, M, d; c)) EA quatum code Q, if d ( + 2)/2, the f Q is odegeerate, the boud holds for ay d. Proof. Let f(x, y) = 4 d+1 i=d ( 1 x ) i From (15), (7), ad (9), after some calculatio, we have M 2 +c 2(d 1). ( c x ) 4 c (y j) = 4 +c d+1 d+1 ) f i,j = j=1 ( i d 1 ( d 1 ) ) 0. ( d 1 c (y j). (30) t ca be easily checked that f i,0 > 0 for 0 i d 1 ad f(x, y) = 0 if x d or y 1. Also f(0, 0)/f 0,0 f(i, 0)/f i,0 for 1 i d 1 if d ( + 2)/2. Thus by Theorem 5, we have M 1 f(0,0) 2 +c f 0,0 = 2 +c 2(d 1). The assumptio d ( + 2)/2 is reasoable for quatum codes [15] because of the o-cloig theorem [41]; however, etaglemet ca icrease the error-correctig ability of quatum codes as Grassl has proposed a costructio of EA stabilizer codes with d > ( + 2)/2 [42]. The argumet used i [18] does ot geeralize to this case of d > ( + 2)/2. Also, the polyomial f(x, y) i Eq. (30) does d 1) ot work for d > +2 2 sice f l,0 = ( l = 0 if l < d 1, which will lead to a trivial upper boud M <. To solve ( d 1) this problem, a possible way is to itroduce aother polyomial h(x, y) f(x, y) + g(x, y) such that g l,0 > 0 for those l with f l,0 = 0. A cadidate is c g a (x, y) = 4 a (x i) (y j) with coefficiet i=1 g a x,y = 4 a c i the Krawtchouk expasio, where a is some real umber chose appropriately. Apparetly, we ca apply Theorem 5 with polyomial g a (x, y) ad obtai aother trivial boud Now defie with coefficiet M 2 +c. j=1 h a (x, y) = f(x, y) + g a (x, y) h a x,y = f x,y + g a x,y. By liearity, we ca apply Theorem 5 with h a (x, y). Optimizig over appropriate real umbers a, we have the followig theorem. Theorem 7. (Refied Sigleto Boud) For a ((, M, d; c)) EA quatum code Q, the { } M 1 f(l, 0) h a (l, 0) mi max, mi max 2+c 0 l d 1 f l,0 0 a +c 0 l d 1 h a. l,0 Note that the rage 0 a + c ca be elarged. j=1

10 10 The smallest EA quatum code with d > ( + 2)/2 i [42] has parameters [[9, 1, 6; 1]]. Applyig this theorem with = 9, d = 6, c = 1, ad optimizig over a from 0 to 10 with icremet 0.001, we have M Therefore, the [[9, 1, 6; 1]] EA quatum code is optimal. Remark: The refied Sigleto boud for EA quatum codes i Theorem 7 is ot mootoic i d, while it appears to be mootoic i c. For = 9, d = 7, c = 1, we have M 5.63; for = 9, d = 8, c = 1, we have M Thus the quest for a good geeral boud remais ope. t is our future directio to fid suitable auxiliary polyomials. B. Hammig Bouds for EA Quatum Codes t is kow that a odegeerate [[, k, d; c]] EA stabilizer code satisfies the EA Hammig boud [43], [44]. Herei we derive a Hammig boud for geeral EA quatum codes. Theorem 8. For a urestricted (odegeerate or degeerate) ((, M, d; c)) EA quatum code Q, t t l M 2 +c j=0 r=0 α(l, i, j, r) max ( 0 l d 1 t ) 2, (31) K i(l; ) where t = d 1 2 ad α(l, i, j, r) is defied i (13). f Q is odegeerate, Proof. Let fl,j H = F l H, where Usig (7) ad (12), oe ca show that M t ( ) 3 j 2 +c. (32) j j=0 F H l = f H (x, y) = 4 +c ( t 2 K i (l; )). (33) t t x α(x, i, j, r) j=0 r=0 is the polyomial with coefficiets f H l,j i the Krawtchouk expasio. t ca be checked easily that f H (x, y) = 0 if x d or y 1. Thus we ca apply Theorem 5. f For degeerate ((, M, d; c)) EA quatum codes, (31) ad (32) coicide if max H (l,0) 0 l d 1 is achieved at l = 0. The fl,0 H regio of, d where the quatum Hammig boud holds for degeerate quatum stabilizer codes has bee discussed i [45], [26]. So far, there is o evidece of degeerate quatum codes that violate the odegeerate Hammig boud (32). The same aalysis ca be cosidered here. Note that for fixed, d, the value of l that maximizes f H (l,0) does ot deped o c. Fig. 1, fl,0 H we plot the degeerate ad odegeerate Hammig bouds at d = 9 ad c = 3. The two bouds coicide after = 19. We have observed similar behaviors for several values of d ad t. Thus we have the followig cojecture: Cojecture 9. The odegeerate Hammig boud (32) holds for degeerate ((, M, d; c)) EA quatum codes for N(t), where N(t) does ot deped o c. The first few values of N(t) are listed i Table. Similar results have bee observed for data-sydrome codes [26]. t N(t) TABLE : Values of N(t) for 2 t 10. Recall that Theorem 4 suggests that M ca be larger by itroducig etaglemet assistace. Also the degeerate ad odegeerate Hammig bouds diverge at low code rate from the above discussio. Cosequetly, it is likely that EA quatum codes violate the odegeerate Hammig boud, as evideces have bee provided i [46]: A family of degeerate [[ = 4t, 1, 2t + 1; 1]] EA stabilizer codes for t 2 has bee costructed, which violate (32). O the other had, the odegeerate Hammig boud is valid for quatum codes i the asymptotic case for δ = d/ < 1/3 [15], ad similarly for EA quatum codes. The applyig (26) to (32), we have the followig corollary.

11 11 Fig. 1: Plots of the degeerate ad odegeerate Hammig bouds at d = 9 ad c = 3. Corollary 10. For ay ((, M, d; c)) EA quatum code with large, where ρ = c/ ad δ = d/ < 1/3. log 2 M 1 + ρ δ 2 log 2 3 H 2 ( δ 2 ) + o(1), By itroducig etaglemet assistace, distace ca be icreased [47]. Agai cosider the family of [[ = 4t, 1, 2t + 1; 1]] EA stabilizer codes. These codes have relative distace δ = 0.5, which is beyod the workig regio of the Hammig boud. C. The First Liear Programmig Boud for EA Quatum Codes The followig polyomial is used to prove the first liear programmig boud of classical biary or obiary codes [48], [38], [37] ad also quatum codes [15] F (x) = 1 a x (K t+1(x; )K t (a; ) K t (x; )K t+1 (a; )) 2 (34) for some suitable a. Herei we will first discuss the LP-1 boud for quatum codes of fiite legths. t is straightforward to geeralize the results to EA quatum codes by choosig f(x, y) = 4 c F (x) c j=1 (y j) ad f j,l = F j. particular, we will show that the LP-1 boud is better tha the Hammig boud for large d/. 1) LP-1 boud for quatum codes of fiite legths: Theorem 11. For a urestricted (odegeerate or degeerate) ((, M, d; c)) EA quatum code Q, where F (x) is defied i (34) with t = d 1 2 M 1 2 c M 1 F (l) 2 c max, (35) 0 l d 1 F j. f Q is odegeerate, ( 3 t+1( ) t+1 Kt (a) 3 t( ) 2 t) Kt+1 (a). (36) af 0 Proof. By the Christoffel-Darboux formula (10), F (x) = 4 ( ) 3t t K i (x)k i (a) {K t+1 (x)k t (a) K t (x)k t+1 (a)} t + 1 t 3 i( ) i = 4 ( ) ( ) 3t t K i (a) t K K t (a) t + 1 t 3 i( ) i (a) K t+1 (x)k i (x) K t+1 (a) i 3 i( ) K t (x)k i (x). i Usig (12) we obtai F (x) c (y j) = 4 c F j K j (x), j=1 j=0

12 12 with F j = 4 ( ) ( 3t K t (a) t + 1 t t j K i (a) 3 i( ) α(j, t + 1, i, s) K t+1 (a) i s=0 ) t j K i (a) 3 i( ) α(j, t, i, s). (37) i From (37) it follows that by choosig appropriate a (r t+1, r t ), we ca guaratee that F j 0. The we ca apply Theorem 5 with f(x, y) = 4 c F (x) c j=1 (y j) ad f j,l = F j. Eve for small values of we have to maipulate by very large umbers durig computatio of the boud max F (j)/f j. 0 j d 1 The values of Krawtchouk polyomials ad biomial coefficiets i (37) grow very rapidly with. Though packages like Maple ad Mathematica allow oe to operate with very large umbers by icreasig the precisio of computatios, straightforward computatios of F (j) ad F j are gettig very slow eve at relatively small. The followig simple tricks allow to speed up Maple computatios sigificatly. First, the aalysis of (37) shows the limits of summatios ca be computed more accurately, leadig to the equatio: F j = 4 ( ) 3t K t (a) t + 1 t K t+1 (a) t K i (a) 3 i( ) i t K i (a) 3 i( ) i mi{ j,(t+i+1 j)/2} s=max{0,(t+i+1 2j)/2,t+1 j} mi{ j,(t+i j)/2} s=max{0,(t+i 2j)/2,t+1 j} s=0 α(j, t + 1, i, s) α(j, t, i, s). (38) Secod, i (38) the two summatios over s do ot deped o a. So, for give j ad i, we ca pre-compute ad reuse them for gettig F j for differet values of a. Third, computatio of K t (x) accordig to (11) is much faster tha accordig to (6). To get a good boud for a particular value of, we have to optimize the choice of parameters t ad a i (34). The followig procedure is used: 1. Fid the smallest t such that r t < d. order of doig this, we start with t 0 = 3 4 d d( d) ad icrease t util K t (d) < Fid r t ad r t Fid F (j) a opt = arg mi max. (39) 0 j d 1 F j a (r t+1,r t) For example, for = 50 ad d = 15, we have t = 15 ad r t , r t The behavior of max 0 j d 1 F (j)/f j as a fuctio of a is show i Fig. 2. all our computatios this fuctio was covex. So, we cojecture that this is always the case. Fig. 2: max j F (j)/f j as a fuctio of parameter a for = 50 ad d = 15 The aalysis of (37) shows that if we fix ad start icreasig d, the at a certai momet we will have F j = 0 for some j d 1. For istace, for = 30 this happes whe d 15 ad for = 60 this happes for d 25. To overcome this

13 13 problem oe may try to choose larger t so that it is ot the first t for which r t < d. We leave this possibility, however, for future work. this work we assume that if F j = 0, j < d, the LP-1 boud is ot applicable. the asymptotic regime, for sufficietly large δ = d/, the LP-1 boud is better tha the Hammig boud. Similarly, the LP-1 boud improves the Hammig boud for codes of fiite legth. Fig. 3, we show bouds o the code rate R, which is defied as R = log 2 M log 2 ( max 0 j d 1 F (j) F j ) 1 + ρ, where ρ = c/ ad F (j) is either the LP-1 polyomial defied i (34) or the Hammig polyomial defied i (33). this figure, we have ρ = 0 ad = Fig. 3: The LP-1 ad Hammig Upper Bouds for = 1000, ρ = 0 ad d = 200,..., 350. Oe ca see that for large values of d, the LP-1 boud visibly improves the Hammig boud. 2) LP-1 boud for large values of : Packages like Maple ad Mathematica allow oe to icrease the precisio of computatios over real umbers by icreasig the umber of digits for represetig real umbers. For example, i Maple the precisio ca be icreased by assigig larger values to the system variable DGTS (its default value is 10). For large values of, however, the eeded precisio becomes overwhelmig. To overcome the above problem, we ca compute LP-1 boud usig oly itegers as follows. Whe grows, the roots r t+1 ad r t are gettig closer ad closer to each other. Numerical computatios show that choosig a such that K t (a) = K t+1 (a) i this case, we get a value very close to a opt defied i (39). Let us deote this a by a. The we have F (j) = 1 a x K t(a ) 2 {K t+1 (j) K t (j)} 2. Next we lower boud F j by usig oly the term with i = t i (38): F j F (low.bd.) j = K t (a ) 2 4 t + 1 K t (a ) 2 4 t + 1 c j. mi{ j,(2t+1 j)/2} s=max{0,(2t+1 2j)/2,t+1 j} α(j, t + 1, t, s) + mi{ j,(2t j)/2} s=max{0,(2t 2j)/2,t+1 j} α(j, t, t, s) Fially, we fid the largest iteger a < d such that K t+1 (a ) > 0. Sice a lies somewhere betwee r t+1 ad r t, we have a a. Hece usig a i the deomiator of (34), we make our LP-1 boud larger (worse). Summarizig these argumets, we obtai that for the optimal LP-1 polyomial F (j) (with a opt ) we have F (j) F j 1 a j (K t+1(j) K t (j)) 2 c j, (41) where c j is defied i (40). Durig computatio of (41) we eed to operate oly with itegers, o operatios over real umbers are eeded util the very ed of computig: log 2 ( max 0 j d 1 1 a j {K t+1(j) K t (j)} 2 c j ) 1 + ρ. (40)

14 14 Thus we do ot lose ay precisio i computatios. Usig this approach we obtaied the results preseted i Fig. 4 for ρ = 0. We cosider the case whe the code legth grows, but the ratio d/ = 0.3 is fixed. We agai observed that startig with some small value of, LP-1 boud visibly improves the Hammig boud. Fig. 4: LP-1 ad Hammig Upper Bouds for code legths = 30,..., 1000, ρ = 0, ad d = ) Asymptotic case: Followig the same procedure (see [15], for details), we ca show that the covetioal first liear programmig boud holds for EA quatum codes asymptotically. Theorem 12. For ay ((, M, d; c)) EA quatum code Q with 0 δ , ( 3 R ρ 1 + H 2 4 δ 2 1 ) ( 3 3δ(1 δ) δ 2 1 ) 3δ(1 δ) log o(1) (42) for large. f Q is odegeerate, (42) holds for all δ. Note that this upper boud differs from that for classical quaterary codes by a costat (ρ 1). Let us cosider agai the family of degeerate [[4t, 1, 2t + 1; 1]] EA stabilizer codes. These codes have asymptotic R = 0, ρ = 0, ad δ = 0.5, which are beyod the workig regio of the first liear programmig boud. D. Bouds for Maximal-etaglemet EA Stabilizer Codes this subsectio we cosider [[, k, d; c = k]] maximal-etaglemet EA stabilizer codes, where there is o degeeracy [23]. Lai et al. proved a Plotki boud for maximal-etaglemet EA stabilizer codes [24] ad its asymptotic versio is: δ o(1). The asymptotic Gilbert-Varshamov boud, Sigleto boud, Hammig boud, first liear programmig boud are as follows: R 1 δ 2 log H 2(δ), R 1 δ, R 1 δ 4 log H 2( δ 2 ) + o(1), R 1 ( 3 2 H 2 4 δ 2 1 ) 3δ(1 δ) + 1 ( δ 2 1 ) 3δ(1 δ) log o(1). Thus we have show that covetioal bouds for classical quaterary codes hold for maximal-etaglemet EA stabilizer codes. These bouds are plotted i Fig. 5. V. UPPER BOUNDS FOR QUANTUM STABLZER CODES OF SMALL LENGTH the previous sectio we have itroduced algebraic liear programmig bouds for EA quatum codes. We will discuss liear programmig bouds o the miimum distace of EA stabilizer codes of small legth. particular, we fid additioal costraits o a stabilizer group ad its orthogoal group so that the liear programmig bouds ca be stregtheed. A table

15 15 Fig. 5: Plots of the Sigleto boud, Hammig boud, first liear programmig boud, ad the Gilbert-Varshamov boud. The x-axis rages from 0 to 0.75 because of the Plotki boud. of upper ad lower bouds for ay maximal-etaglemet EA stabilizer codes with legth up to 15 is give i [23]. However, there are may gaps betwee the upper ad lower bouds. We will improve that table i this sectio. We would like to apply liear programmig techiques to upper boud the miimum distace of EA stabilizer codes. However, sice S S, we caot use a MacWilliams idetity to coect the weight distributios of these two groups. Observe that ad (S S S ) = L S (43) S = L S S S. (44) [24], [23], these two dualities are cosidered to obtai the liear programmig bouds o the miimum distace of small EA stabilizer codes. terestigly, the split weight eumerators {B i,j } ad {Bi,j } of EA quatum codes defied i (16), (17) have eough iformatio for our liear programmig problem. Let S S = g 1, h 1,..., g c, h c, S = g c+1,..., g k, ad L = {g A B : g L}. Defie A i,j = {E 1 E 2 S S S : E 1 G, wt (E 1 ) = i, E 2 G c, wt (E 2 ) = j}, (45) A i,j = {E 1 E 2 L S S S : E 1 G, wt (E 1 ) = i, E 2 G c, wt (E 2 ) = j}. (46) Observe that B i,j = A i,j ad Bi,j = A i,j i the case of EA stabilizer codes. Thus we have the followig corollary. Corollary 13. Suppose Q is a [[, k, d; c]] EA stabilizer code with stabilizer group S S S. Let {A i,j} ad {A i,j } be the split weight distributios of S S S ad (S S S ), respectively. The A i,j = 1 2 +c k u=0 v=0 c A u,v K i (u; )K j (v; c). Furthermore, the weight distributio of S is {A i,0 } ad the weight distributio of S is {A i,0 }. Sice the miimum distace of C(S ) is d, we have A i,0 = A i,0, i = 1,..., d 1; A d,0 > A d,0. (47) Now we ca build a liear program with variables A i,j, A i,j ad costraits from Corollary 13 ad (47). The least d such that this liear program has o feasible solutio is a upper boud o the miimum distace for give, k, c, ad this is called the liear programmig boud o the miimum distace of [[, k; c]] EA stabilizer codes. The resultig liear programmig boud is at least as tight as the oe from (43) ad (44) used i [24], [23], sice this liear program has more costraits ad variables.

16 16 A. Additioal Costraits o the Weight Eumerator Associated with a No-Abelia Pauli Subgroup Rais itroduced the idea of shadow eumerators to obtai additioal costraits i the liear program of quatum codes [27]. The shadow Sh(V) of a group V( G ) is the set f V is Abelia, Rais showed that {E G : E, g G = wt (g) mod 2, g V}. W Sh(V) (x, y) = 1 V W V(x + 3y, y x), (48) where W V (x, y) ad W Sh(V) (x, y) are the weight eumerators of V ad Sh(V), respectively [27]. For a EA stabilizer code, the isotropic subgroup S is Abelia. Thus W Sh(S)(x, y) = 1 S W S (x + 3y, y x). Recall that {A i,0 } is the weight distributio of S. This implies ( 1) w A w,0k w (w ; ) 0, i = 0,...,. (49) w =0 However, the situatio is more complicated whe V is ot Abelia, which is the case of the simplified stabilizer group S = S S S ad its orthogoal group. Herei we derive additioal costraits for a o-abelia Pauli subgroup. Suppose V G is o-abelia ad V ca be decomposed as V = V S V, where V S = g 1, h 1,..., g c, h c ad V = g c+1,..., g c+r for some c such that the commutatio relatios (21)-(24) hold [49]. We categorize differet V s ito the followig three types:. All the geerators of V are of eve weight.. wt (g c+1 ) is odd ad all the other geerators of V ad V S are of eve weight.. wt (g 1 ) ad wt (h 1 ) are odd ad all the other geerators of V S ad V are of eve weight. For coveiece, we have the followig lemma, which ca be easily verified. Lemma 14. For g, h G, wt (gh) wt (g) + wt (h) + g, h G mod 2. This lemma shows that the weight of the product of two operators depeds o their ier product. Lemma 15. Suppose V = V S V, where V S = g 1, h 1,..., g c, h c ad V = g c+1,..., g c+r for some c such that (21)-(24) hold. The the geerators are of type,, or. Proof. Suppose V cotais some elemets of odd weight, say g c+1 without loss of geerality. f g j or h j is of odd weight for j c + 1, it is replaced by g j g c+1 or h j g c+1, which is of eve weight by (21), (23), ad Lemma 14. Eqs. (21)-(24) hold for the ew set of geerators. This is type. Next, suppose V cotais o elemets of odd weight. Cosider the geerators of V S. We kow that V S has some elemets of odd weight, because oe of g 1, h 1, ad g 1 h 1 must be of odd weight. Assume g 1 is of odd weight without loss of geerality. f g i is of odd weight for i = 2,..., c, we replace it with g i g c+1, which is of eve weight by (21) ad Lemma 14. Notice that h 1 has to be replaced by h 1 h i at the same time to maitai the commutatio relatio i (23). Thus wt (g 1 ) is odd ad wt (g 2 ),..., wt (g c ) are eve. f h i has odd weight for i = 2,..., c, we replace it with h i g 1, which is of eve weight by (22) ad Lemma 14. Similarly, h 1 has to be replaced by h 1 g i to maitai the commutatio relatio i (22). Therefore, we ca assume h 2,..., h c are of eve weight. t remais to check whether h 1 is of odd weight or ot. f wt (h 1 ) is odd, this is type. f wt (h 1 ) is eve, we replace g 1 with g 1 h 1, which is of eve weight by Eq. (24) ad Lemma 14. This case is type. Suppose V G is geerated by c pairs of symplectic parters ad r isotropic geerators of type i. Let Ni eve (c, r) ad Ni odd (c, r) be the umber of elemets i V of eve ad odd weight, respectively. Below we derive formulas for these two umbers for the three types of geerators i Lemma 15.

17 17 Theorem 16. For c, r 0, For c 0 ad r > 0, N eve (c, r) = 2 r 1 (4 c + 2 c ), N odd (c, r) = 2 r 1 (4 c 2 c ), N eve (c, r) = 2r 1 (4 c 2 c ), N odd (c, r) = 2r 1 (4 c + 2 c ). N eve (c, r) = N odd (c, r) = 22c+r 1. Proof. These formulas ca be derived by recursio. We first cosider the case of type. t is obvious that N eve (0, 0) = 1 ad N odd (0, 0) = 0. ( this case, V is the trivial subgroup.) For c = 1, we have two geerators g 1 ad h 1 of eve weight such that g 1, h 1 G = 1. Thus wt (g 1 h 1 ) wt (g 1 ) + wt (h 1 ) + g 1, h 1 G 1 mod 2. We have N eve (1, 0) = 3 ad N odd (1, 0) = 1. Sice V VS ad the geerators of V are of eve weight (hece every elemet of V is of eve weight), it follows that N eve (1, r) = 3 2 r ad N odd (1, r) = 2 r. Let S c deote a group geerated by c pairs of symplectic parters. Now we add a ew pair of symplectic parters g ad h of eve weight ad g, h Sc. A elemet E i the ew group S c+1 is of eve weight if oe of the followig cases hold: E S c ad wt (E) 0 mod 2 ; E = g E for some E S c ad wt (E ) 0 mod 2 ; E = h E for some E S c ad wt (E ) 0 mod 2 ; or E = g h E for some E S c ad wt (E ) 1 mod 2. Therefore Similarly, we have N eve (c + 1, r) = 3N eve (c, r) + N odd (c, r). N odd (c + 1, r) = 3N odd (c, r) + N eve (c, r). Solvig this system of two recursive equatios, we have (c, r) = 2 r 1 (4 c + 2 c ), N odd (c, r) = 2 r 1 (4 c 2 c ). N eve We ca fid the formula for the geerators of type alog the same lies. Now we cosider the case of type for r > 0. Let S c deote a group geerated by c pairs of symplectic parters of eve weight. From above, we have N eve (c, 0) ad N odd (c, 0). Now we add a ew geerator g Sc ad wt (g) is odd. A elemet E i the ew group g S c is of eve weight if oe of the followig two cases hold: E S c ad wt (E) 0 mod 2; or E = ge for some E S c ad wt (E ) 1 mod 2. Thus Similarly, N odd N eve t implies N odd odd (c, 1) = N (c, 1) = 2c. Therefore, we have (c, 1) = N eve (c, 0) + N odd (c, 0). eve (c, 1) = N (c, 0) + N odd eve (c, 0) = N (c, 1). N eve (c, r) = N odd (c, r) = 22c+r 1. These formulas serve as costraits o the weight distributios of subgroups that are Abelia or o-abelia. Note that N i eve (c, 0) Ni odd (c, 0) = 2 c for i =,. the case of stadard stabilizer codes, we have Abelia stabilizer group S ad o-abelia ormalizer group S. Thus we have the followig corollary. Corollary 17. Suppose S is a Abelia subgroup of G with k geerators. Let {A j } ad {A j } be the weight distributios of S ad S, respectively. The oe of the followig three cases holds: 1. j:j eve A j = 2 k 1, j:j eve A j = 2+k 1 ; 2. j:j eve A j = 2 k, j:j eve A j = ( 2 k 1 4 k + 2 k) ; 3. j:j eve A j = 2 k, j:j eve A j = ( 2 k 1 4 k 2 k).

18 18 B. Liear Program for EA Stabilizer Codes Now we provide a liear program for EA stabilizer codes i this subsectio. Let, k, d, c be itegers. Defie iteger variables A i,j, A i,j, i = 0,...,, j = 0,..., c. The followig costraits are from Theorem 2, Corollary 13, Eq. (49), ad Theorem 16: A 0,0 = A 0,0 = 1, A i,j A i,j 0; A i,0 = A i,0, i = 1,..., d 1; A 0,j = A 0,j = 0, j = 1,..., c; c A w,0 = 2 k c, A w,w = 2 k+c, A w,0 = 2 +k c, w=0 A i,j = 1 2 +c k u=0 v=0 w=0 w =0 c A u,v K i (u; )K j (v; c); ( 1) w A w,0k w (w ; ) 0, i = 0,..., ; w =0 w=0 w=0 w =0 c A w,w = 2+k+c ; ( A w,w = N i eve (c, k c), for i = or, A w,0 = N i eve (k, k c), w:eve w w:eve A w,w = N i eve (k + c, k c), for i = or, ad ) A w,0 = 2 k c w:eve w w:eve ( or A w,w = N eve (c, k c), A w,0 = N eve (k, k c), w:eve w w:eve A w,w = N eve (k + c, k c), ad ) A w,0 = 2 k c 1. w:eve w w:eve for i = or, f there is o solutio to the iteger program with variables A i,j, A i,j ad the above costraits for give, k, d, ad c, the there is o [[, k, d; c]] EA stabilizer code. We ca itroduce additioal costraits from MacWilliams idetities for geeral split weight eumerators [36]. the followig, we use the otatio i [36]. Let H G1 be the complex Hilbert space with a orthoormal basis, X, Y, Z. Let H G = H. The S G G has a exact weight geerator 1 g E S = g S g H G. The MacWilliams idetity says that g E S = 1 S F g E S, (50) where F is the Fourier trasform operator o H G1 ad its matrix represetatio i the ordered basis, X, Y, Z is F = (51) Let γ : H G C be a liear fuctioal. The applyig γ to (50), we have the MacWilliams idetities for geeral split weight eumerators defied by γ. (See [36] for more details.) For example, let γ H (x, y) = x + y α, α {X,Y,Z} where x, y C. The the geeral Hammig weight eumerator of S ad its MacWilliams idetity are defied by γ H (x, y). The split weight eumerators (45), (46) are defied by γ H (x, y) γ c H (u, v). geeral, a arbitrary γ ad its iduced MacWilliams idetity will lead to more costraits o the coefficiets of S ad S. However, these geeral split weight eumerators usually itroduce too may variables to solve i a computer program. f we kow more about a stabilizer group, we ca desig a effective γ. [7], the idea of refied weight eumerator is

19 19 itroduced whe S is kow to have a elemet of weight u. Let The a refied weight eumerator is defied as γ u H Suppose {A i } is the weight distributio of S. The γ re (y 0, y 1, y 2 ) = y 0 + y 1 X + α {Y,Z} y 2 α. (x 0, x 1 ) γre u (y 0, y 1, y 2 )gs E = A i,j,l x0 u i x i 1y u j l 0 y j 1 yl 2. (52) i,j,l A w = i,j,l:i+j+l=w Without loss of geerality, we may assume S has the elemet u X u of weight u. Sice S is Abelia, we must have A i,j,l = 0 for l 0 mod 2. Similar costraits ca be foud for the distributio A i,j,l of S. From (50), we have additioal costraits from the MacWilliams idetities o A i,j,l ad A i,j,l. Next we use Mathematica [50] to see if the iteger program has a feasible solutio for some parameters. Sice Mathematica is a symbolic maipulatio program, the results are reliable. Example 1. (Noexistece of [[27,15,5]] quatum codes.) the case of c = 0, S S is trivial ad it reduces to the case of stadard stabilizer codes. Solvig the liear program for stabilizer codes [7] with additioal costraits from Corollary 17, we foud that a [[27, 15, 5]] stabilizer code, if it exists, must have S geerated by type geerators ad the oly possible weight distributio of S is A i,j,l. A 0 = 1, A 16 = 81, A 18 = 1800, A 22 = 1944, A 24 = 270, ad A w = 0, otherwise. Usig refied weight eumerators with respect to u = 24, we have additioal costraits from the MacWilliams idetities for the refied weight eumerators, which produce a liear program with o feasible solutio. Thus we improved the quatum code table at = 27, k = 15 [51]. Example 2. (Noexistece of [[28,14,6]] quatum codes.) We foud that a [[28, 14, 6]] stabilizer code, if it exists, must have S geerated by type geerators ad the oly possible weight distributio of S is A 0 = 1, A 16 = 189, A 18 = 5040, A 22 = 9072, A 24 = 1890, A 28 = 192, ad A w = 0, otherwise. This implies that a [[28, 14, 6]] code must be odegeerate. By the propagatio rule that the existece of a odegeerate [[, k, d]] code implies the existece of a [[ 1, k + 1, d 1]] code [7, Theorem 6], if we have a odegeerate [[28, 14, 6]] code, there is a [[27, 15, 5]] code. However, the existece of a [[27, 15, 5]] code has bee excluded i Example 1. Thus there is o [[28, 14, 6]] code. Example 3. Similarly, a [[23, 1, 9]] stabilizer code, if it exists, must have S geerated by type geerators ad the oly possible weight distributio of S is A 0 = 1, A 10 = 10626, A 12 = 78246, A 14 = , A 16 = , A 18 = , A 20 = , A 22 = ad A w = 0, otherwise. Ufortuately, we do ot kow how to exclude these possibilities. Some other techiques are eeded. We also foud that several quatum codes, such as the parameters [[14, 3, 5]], [[17, 3, 6]], [[17, 6, 5]], [[19, 5, 6]], [[21, 7, 6]], [[23, 3, 8]] ad so o, must have S with geerators of type, if they exist. Next we cosider maximal-etaglemet EA stabilizer codes, where S is trivial, i the followig example. Example 4. Solvig the iteger program, we elimiate the existece of [[4, 2, 3; 2]], [[5, 3, 3; 2]], [[5, 2, 4; 3]], [[6, 3, 4; 3]], [[9, 2, 7; 7]], [[10, 2, 8; 8]], [[10, 3, 7; 7]], [[11, 3, 8; 8]], [[14, 2, 11; 12]], [[14, 3, 10; 11]], [[15, 2, 12; 13]], [[15, 3, 11; 12]], [[15, 8, 7; 7]], [[15, 9, 6; 6]],[[16, 4, 11; 12]], [[17, 4, 12; 13]],[[20, 3, 15; 17]] EA stabilizer codes. The costraits from Theorem 16 are effective i the case of maximal-etaglemet EA stabilizer codes. C. Noexistece of [[5, 3, 3; 2]], [[4, 2, 3; 2]], [[5, 2, 4; 3]], ad [[6, 3, 4; 3]] EA stabilizer Codes A geeral method to prove or disprove the existece of a code of certai parameters is to use computer search over all possibilities. t is applicable whe the search space is small. Here we cosider a geeral form of the check matrix of quatum codes ad use computer search to rule out the existece of some small EA stabilizer codes.