Cross-Platform MOC

Curated map of Zoo entries in the Cross-Platform family.

Entries

Entry	Type	Status
quantum-gate	concept	demonstrated
color-code-logical-qubit	encoding	demonstrated
erasure-qubit	encoding	demonstrated
surface-code-logical-qubit	encoding	demonstrated
classical-control	infrastructure	demonstrated
quantum-transduction	infrastructure	demonstrated

Composition

• concept: 1
• encoding: 3
• infrastructure: 2

Conceptual anchors

• threshold-theorem is the main bridge from surface-code-logical-qubit and color-code-logical-qubit back to hardware performance targets.
• erasure-error-vs-pauli-error separates erasure-qubit from the ordinary stabilizer-code story and explains why flagged loss can change the overhead regime.
• noise-bias-and-asymmetric-error-channels is the complementary lens when the win comes from skewed Pauli channels rather than explicit erasure detection.
• divincenzo-criteria explains why classical-control and quantum-transduction belong here even though they are not qubits.

Architecture stack

• quantum-gate is the operation layer: it stays abstract on purpose so the same gate idea can descend either into physical pulse stacks or into encoded logical actions.
• surface-code-logical-qubit and color-code-logical-qubit are the geometry-and-decoder layer: both answer the threshold problem, but with different overhead, layout, and gate-transversality tradeoffs.
• erasure-qubit is the noise-model layer: it does not replace a code family so much as change the decoder assumptions under which the other logical encodings should be judged.
• classical-control and quantum-transduction are the systems layer: one closes the real-time local feedback loop, the other opens the nonlocal modular-network loop.

Family structure

• surface-code-logical-qubit and color-code-logical-qubit are logical overlays on top of many hardware platforms, so they should point outward to code and threshold concepts rather than read like standalone modalities.
• erasure-qubit is a noise-engineering pattern that can be instantiated in multiple families, not a single device recipe.
• classical-control and quantum-transduction are scaling interfaces: one connects algorithms to physical waveforms, the other connects local processors to networked photonic links.
• quantum-gate should stay as the operation-level abstraction that ties these layers together, not become a dumping ground for platform-specific pulse details.

Routing rule: when to enter this family

• Enter here when the main comparison is decoder assumptions, logical-overhead scaling, or systems integration rather than device physics.
• Stay in a source hardware family when the central claim is hardware-shaped noise, then cross over here only after the error model is clear. In practice that means reading kerr-cat-qubit, 0-pi-qubit, or dual-rail-superconducting-qubit through noise-bias-and-asymmetric-error-channels or erasure-error-vs-pauli-error before collapsing them into surface-code-logical-qubit, color-code-logical-qubit, or erasure-qubit.
• Photonic notes should usually enter this family through erasure-qubit: stay in photonic-moc while the question is encoding choice (dual-rail-photonic-qubit, time-bin-photonic-qubit) or resource construction (linear-optical-photonic-qubit, photonic-cluster-state-mbqc-qubit, fusion-based-photonic-qubit), then cross here only once flagged loss or fusion failure becomes a decoder-overhead question.
• Use classical-control and quantum-transduction as the two stack edges: one asks whether local feedback can keep up with the code cycle, the other asks whether the logical architecture survives once the machine becomes modular.

Editorial note

This family exists for architectural glue. Keep platform-local implementation details in the source hardware families, and use this page to clarify which concepts travel across platforms.