Comparative Analysis of Logical Error Rate Scaling in the Three-Qubit Bit-Flip Code and the Distance-3 Surface Code Under Depolarizing Noise: A Simulation Study Using Qiskit Aer and a Validated Stabilizer-Formalism Engine

Quantum error correction (QEC) is a prerequisite for fault-tolerant quantum computation, yet the overhead cost—the number of physical qubits required to encode and protect a single logical qubit—varies substantially across QEC code families. This paper presents a systematic simulation-based comparison of two paradigmatic QEC codes: the three-qubit bit-flip repetition code and the distance-3 surface code. The bit-flip code is simulated by literal Qiskit Aer circuit execution (encoding, injected depolarizing noise, and dynamic classical feed-forward correction). The distance-3 surface code is instead simulated with a custom, vectorized stabilizer-formalism engine, because its 17-qubit noisy circuit would be far more expensive to run shot-by-shot in Aer at the scale needed here. This engine implements the same Aaronson-Gottesman algorithm underlying Aer's stabilizer backend and is cross-validated against genuine Aer circuit execution at a representative operating point; no surface-code result in this paper comes from literal Aer execution. We apply an independent single-qubit depolarizing channel at physical error rates p ∈ [0.001, 0.30] and measure the resulting logical error rate P_L for each code across 200,000 independent trials per data point (95% Wilson confidence intervals reported throughout). We identify the pseudo-threshold p*—the physical error rate at which a code's logical error rate equals the uncorrected physical error rate, and compare simulated crossover points against closed-form analytical predictions. Our results reveal a more nuanced picture than the naive threshold-theorem intuition suggests. The three-qubit bit-flip code cannot correct phase-type errors under any circumstance: under a full quantum-state-protection criterion its logical error rate exceeds the physical error rate for every physically meaningful p, with the two curves crossing only at p ≈ 0.75 deep in the maximally-mixed regime and of no practical relevance. Under the narrower, but operationally standard, "bit-observable" criterion (protection of a definite computational-basis value only), the code is unconditionally beneficial (P_L < p) across the entire tested range, because the 2/3 fraction of depolarizing weight that manifests as a detectable bit-flip is compressed further by majority-vote correction. These two results are not contradictory: they evaluate different protection goals—preservation of a classical bit value versus preservation of an arbitrary quantum state—and every comparison in this paper that mixes the two is labeled accordingly. Under this study's idealized, single-round setup, the distance-3 surface code achieves a simulated finite-size pseudo-threshold of p*_SC ≈ 0.083 (8.3%)—a result specific to noiseless syndrome extraction, a single correction round, and an exact minimum weight decoder, and not a hardware representative or asymptotic threshold. That figure is roughly three orders of magnitude higher than an order-of-magnitude literature extrapolation of ≈ 5.6 × 10⁻⁵ (substituting the asymptotic literature threshold p_th ≈ 0.75% into a power law fit for a different, many-round, measurement noisy regime, not a dedicated prediction for our exact setup); the gap is attributable to precisely those idealizations. The surface code requires 17 physical qubits per logical qubit in our implementation (9 data + 8 ancilla) versus 3 for the bit-flip code, a ≈ 5.7× overhead, quantitatively illustrating the overhead-versus-protection tradeoff fundamental to near-term fault-tolerant architectures. All simulation code is available at https://github.com/shanjeev-b-u/qec-code-comparison-depolarizing-noise