Modifying surround function #255
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The reason why I considering the node where the score is at least the same with the best score is due to the need to expand the region to at least the number of qubits that we required
Why this works: as the filtering now limit the region to what we want, the node that we assuming should satisfy the filtering and bounded by the region that we want. Therefore, by using union to take into account all regions, we hope to cover the amount of qubits that we want.
After the pair coding session: It seems that the surround function has the bug of not considering the branches that we expect as those points have been examined and had the same score with the best score so far.