The word “realized” covers several distinct milestones. This ledger attaches each source to the strongest claim its protocol supports.
Measurements of Floquet Code Plaquette Stabilizers implemented measurements associated with the original honeycomb Floquet code on IBM Falcon hardware and used changes in inferred plaquette stabilizers as a noise diagnostic.
Established:
Not established:
The manuscript describes itself as a preliminary study not intended for journal submission. card.yaml records the hardware execution as demonstrated while stating the restricted claim boundary.
Majorana tetrons motivate the code because fermion-parity measurements can be native. Karzig et al. develop scalable protected parity-measurement hardware, while Paetznick et al. build planar Floquet circuits, Majorana fault models, detectors, and overhead comparisons.
These works establish detailed architecture and simulation evidence. They do not report a laboratory logical honeycomb memory. Poisoning, parity correlations, and device constraints are part of their conclusions and cannot be replaced by generic depolarizing noise.
Dessertaine et al. co-design a photonic architecture and numerically report a 6.4% photon-loss threshold for their Floquet implementation. This number is a simulated architecture threshold under a tailored loss model. It is not a laboratory threshold and does not transfer to Majorana or superconducting circuits.
McLauchlan, Gehér, and Moylett provide a schedule-preserving prescription for removing faulty hardware locations and simulate tolerance to fabrication defects. Claes proposes an ancilla-free dynamic circuit with changing data/measurement roles, leakage removal, and improved timelike distance.
Both are executable design advances. Neither is a hardware demonstration. Each changes the detector model compared with the ideal torus constructor.
The Floquet-Bacon-Shor dynamical-qubit experiment demonstrates universal logical operations with periodic measurements on superconducting hardware. It is evidence that Floquet control primitives can work experimentally, but it is a different code with different geometry, schedule, logical count, and detectors. It is intentionally absent from the Honeycomb realizations facet.
As of the fetch-verified 2026-07-26 sweep, no qualifying experiment demonstrated a full logical honeycomb memory with repeated error suppression, distance scaling, or logical gates. This negative result is part of the entry's knowledge boundary, not a missing citation.