Skip to content
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

Protocols list #1012

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Oct 17, 2024
Merged

Protocols list #1012

merged 5 commits into from
Oct 17, 2024

Conversation

Edoardo-Pedicillo
Copy link
Contributor

Checklist:

  • Reviewers confirm new code works as expected.
  • Tests are passing.
  • Coverage does not decrease.
  • Documentation is updated.
  • Compatibility with Qibo modules (Please edit this section if the current pull request is not compatible with the following branches).
    • Qibo: master
    • Qibolab: main
    • Qibolab_platforms_qrc: main

@Edoardo-Pedicillo Edoardo-Pedicillo changed the title Protocol list Protocols list Oct 16, 2024
Copy link

codecov bot commented Oct 16, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 97.50%. Comparing base (44ec734) to head (89f4ac6).
Report is 11 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #1012   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   97.50%   97.50%           
=======================================
  Files         123      123           
  Lines        9722     9722           
=======================================
  Hits         9479     9479           
  Misses        243      243           
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 97.50% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

see 2 files with indirect coverage changes

README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Comment on lines 1 to 3
# Qibocal Roadmap

## Protocols
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Are you planning to include other sections in the roadmap? (other than protocols)

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In the beginning, I was planning to add a Software section, but maybe if the issues are enough, I will remove the title.

Copy link
Member

@alecandido alecandido Oct 17, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Of course, we could even try to schedule some more relevant software feature for the future.

However, software-wise we're really moving on a need-based approach (mainly because of the lack of person power), so I'd not be so systematic in this respect, since it may end up being completely useless...

(https://escholarship.org/content/qt0g29b4p0/qt0g29b4p0.pdf?t=prk0gj par. 5.10)
- Optimal control with randomize benchmarking (https://arxiv.org/pdf/1403.0035)
- Quantum volume
- Gate Set Tomography
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Speaking of MM. Should we also add other possible implementations of Z rotations? (14.6.4)

As low priority, of course.

Not much because they may be useful as gates, but just because they are possible, and they may be used as further checks on the qubit, since they are playing with the same parameters.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I would peronally avoid them since they don't add information, maybe the only one to take into consideration is the one using the AC Stark effect to study the phenomenon itself.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

To be fair, that's the one I mostly had in mind...
(the virtual Z we already had, and the composition of other X and Y gates requires a calibration of the Y for arbitrary angles...)

Maybe, the other one I would have considered is fluxing the qubit to measure the Z rotation. As a (redundant?) way to show control over the flux.

In any case, if interesting, we could even reconsider at a later stage.

(https://escholarship.org/content/qt0g29b4p0/qt0g29b4p0.pdf?t=prk0gj par. 5.10)
- Optimal control with randomize benchmarking (https://arxiv.org/pdf/1403.0035)
- Quantum volume
- Gate Set Tomography
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is there a reason to completely exclude the process tomography?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

No, just forgotten

- Measurement tomography https://arxiv.org/pdf/1310.6448.pdf
- XY-Z timing
(https://escholarship.org/content/qt0g29b4p0/qt0g29b4p0.pdf?t=prk0gj par. 5.10)
- Optimal control with randomize benchmarking (https://arxiv.org/pdf/1403.0035)
Copy link
Contributor

@andrea-pasquale andrea-pasquale Oct 17, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Perhaps this one (Optimal control with rb) can be moved to high priority given that we are more or less working on it already?

Copy link
Member

@alecandido alecandido Oct 17, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Agreed.

Though, I'm not sure I would classify that as a protocol at all...
Instead, I would build as a protocols' composition with scripts. And, as part of this effort, I could finally work out a way to meaningfully distribute even this kind of pre-compiled applications with Qibocal, or in parallel to it (but within the repo).

In any case, this is just an opinion, and up for discussion.

(there will be an acquisition, a fit, a report, and an update generated - but the acquisition and the fit won't be really two separate phases, that's why I'd not make it a protocol itself)

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, but at the moment I would like to collect all the missing protocols in the file, so both routines and scripts, since at the moment they will be collected in this repo.

@Edoardo-Pedicillo Edoardo-Pedicillo added this pull request to the merge queue Oct 17, 2024
Merged via the queue into main with commit bb83a11 Oct 17, 2024
21 checks passed
@Edoardo-Pedicillo Edoardo-Pedicillo deleted the protocol_list branch October 17, 2024 10:58
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants