Add parameter sweep support for Pauli string measurements with readout mitigation #7358
Conversation
github-actions
bot
added
size: L
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #7358 +/- ##
========================================
Coverage 98.68% 98.68%
========================================
Files 1112 1112
Lines 97588 97776 +188
========================================
+ Hits 96307 96495 +188
Misses 1281 1281 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
…ngs to be all 1000 to avoid test flakiness
|
Hey @eliottrosenberg and @NoureldinYosri, can you take a look when you have time? Thank you! |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks, @ddddddanni! I tried testing this through Quantum Engine, and I got the error ValueError: Unsupported type for serializing const sweep: value=1 and type(value)=<class 'numpy.int64'>. See this colab for details.
this issue is not related to this PR .. #7398 will fix it |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@ddddddanni I reviewed a couple of files, but this a big PR .. can it be broken down into smaller PRs?
|
|
||
|
|
||
| def _pauli_strings_to_basis_change_with_sweep( | ||
| pauli_strings: list[ops.PauliString], qid_list: list[ops.Qid] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
what happens when these pauli strings share qubits?
| if pauli_op == ops.X: | ||
| params_dict[f"phi{qid}"] = 0.0 | ||
| params_dict[f"theta{qid}"] = 1 / 2 | ||
| break |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
is the assumption is that each qubit belongs to at most one paulistring?
| pauli_measurement_circuits.extend(basis_change_circuits) | ||
| sweep_params = list[study.Sweepable]() | ||
| circuits_results: Union[Sequence[ResultDict], Sequence[Sequence[study.Result]]] = [] | ||
| # calibration_results = list[Dict[Tuple[ops.Qid, ...], SingleQubitReadoutCalibrationResult]]() |
Sure! Just send #7435 for review. #7435 only touches the readout benchmarking thing and is a lot smaller than this PR. |
Requested by @NoureldinYosri, this pr is splited from #7358. The pr adds a new function run_sweep_with_readout_benchmarking which runs the sweep circuits with readout error benchmarking (without shuffling).
|
This pull request has been automatically labeled as stale because 90 days have passed without comments or other activity. If no further activity occurs and the If you have questions or feedback about this process, we welcome your input. You can open a new issue to let us know (please also reference this issue there, for continuity), or reach out to the project maintainers at [email protected]. |
github-actions
bot
added
the
status/stale
github-actions
bot
removed
the
status/stale
|
@ddddddanni Another gentle ping, this time about this other PR. |
This is actually done. I made two separate PRs and the sweep function is added. I will abort this one. |
4 participants
#7236 and #7067 builds a tool for measuring expectation values of Pauli strings with readout error mitigation. This pr enhances the tool by providing option for sweep-based execution. The new sweep mode could make it faster for external users since for them sweep operations can be more efficient than run_batch with large circuit lists.
The changes include:
run_sweep_with_readout_benchmarkingwhich runs the sweep circuits with readout error benchmarking (without shuffling).