-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 657
Docs: Clarify lack of adjoint/MCM support in default.qubit #7365
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Docs: Clarify lack of adjoint/MCM support in default.qubit #7365
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for opening this PR @KaranSinghDev .
Mind sharing what workflows you were trying that were getting errors? It might even be worth opening a bug report issue.
Hi @albi3ro , thanks for the review and your response! No specific complex workflow errored out unexpectedly. This change came about during general testing where I specifically checked the capabilities of After verifying via It didn't seem like a bug in the features themselves, just an opportunity to improve the documentation based on the device's reported capabilities. Let me know if you need more info! |
It should be able to support adjoint and native mid circuit measurements, so if that's not the case, that is a bug we need to fix. But I would agree that the docstring for |
Thanks for the clarification regarding It's interesting that it should support Adjoint and native MCM. In the testing I ran (using the Given your confirmation that these should be supported, this discrepancy definitely sounds like something worth investigating further – potentially a bug or perhaps an issue specific to the development version. I'm happy to open a new bug report issue detailing the test environment (Kaggle notebook, Python 3.11, PL 0.42.0-dev18), the test script used, and the output showing the capabilities check results. Does that sound like the best way forward? If so, I agree it probably makes sense to close this documentation PR (#7365 ) for now, as the notes are based on the currently observed (but potentially incorrect) capability reporting. I agree the docstring could use a rewrite eventually, and I'd be happy to help anyway with that once the Adjoint/MCM status is confirmed/fixed. |
Context:
While testing device capabilities using
default.qubit
(with a recent dev version installed via pip), I observed through thedevice.capabilities
property and test execution that adjoint differentiation and native mid-circuit measurements are not supported. This information wasn't immediately obvious in the main docstring for the device.Description of the Change:
This PR adds two small
.. note::
blocks to the class docstring ofpennylane.devices.DefaultQubit
(inpennylane/devices/default_qubit.py
).diff_method="adjoint"
is not supported.(Note: The PR template requests adding an entry to
doc/releases/changelog-dev.md
, but this file does not currently exist in themaster
branch. No changelog entry has been added as the correct location is unclear.)Benefits:
Improves documentation clarity for
default.qubit
users, helping them quickly understand the device's limitations regarding adjoint differentiation and mid-circuit measurements without needing to run tests or dig deep into code/capabilities dictionaries. This prevents potential confusion.Possible Drawbacks:
None anticipated for this documentation clarification.
Related GitHub Issues:
None.