-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 200
Add PEC with SLC tutorial #5218
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: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Changes from all commits
fc53848
20d2cac
d3ce799
e74bfe8
695c0d7
3569fb9
743c238
938c8f5
d693794
317009a
8d4ee0a
2999e59
81e38b3
51b4486
b92bf70
779592d
67d083c
4692921
d19ff9c
43a9baa
1fde7c6
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
|
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I suggest typesetting
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Very much a nit-pick, but: we are bouding the susceptibility of the observable's expectation value to that error. In the backward bounds case, that also depends on the chosen initial state of the circuit (all-zero in typical workflows and sufficient for the purposes of this tutorial).
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I find it a bit odd, that the first time this gets mentioned is during the
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Nit-pick: this is the only dependency that is typeset with surrounding quotes although that is not strictly necessary
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Similar nit-pick as before: the phrasing is misleading since not the observable is 1, but its expectation value.
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think this whole paragraph can be improved. We motivate that the mirror circuit is what gives us the known exp val of All that is to say: I feel like the argument in this paragraph is a bit reversed. Can this be rewritten somewhat to more clearly motivate this:
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. The code blocks
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The intro claims to run on a Heron device, but this does not get enforced. Is this of concern to you?
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is unlikely to be accurate given that the backend gets fetched based on Instead, we should comment on the importance of layouting and suggest hand-picking (ideally point to a resource/tutorial where users can learn on how to run some quick experiments to inform their selection) but for the purposes of this tutorial it is probably best to rely on the Qiskit transpiler to select a layout, given the chosen backend's coupling map and current calibration data.
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
These meta-texts for the images are probably useless. Is there no way of adjusting these?
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. For Also be aware of
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think this is unintentional formatting in the
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is the explanation of
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I think it is improtant that these settings be explained in more detail. Also:
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think it may be useful to be more concrete and refer to the bound exploiting the limited speed at which information can spread.
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This feels a bit redundant to the previous paragraph.
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, but at this point our |
Large diffs are not rendered by default.
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.
Technically speaking, it is possible to retain a zero-bias estimate and still reduce the sampling overhead (geometric lightcone). But it is true that the shading is what allows you a further trading. Might be worth pointing out though.
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.
I see that this gets mentioned further down, but am wondering if this single line needs some adjusting. Up to you