-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 159
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
Clean up backend.run(...) interface #1297
Comments
@coruscating could you validate whether or not the LO parameters are used by |
@blakejohnson We don't use these LO parameters in experiments. Regarding only supporting single-shot memory by default: will the |
@coruscating if we only expose a memory-like interface, then I think that would imply that we only support single-shot values. I suspect that many qiskit-experiments probably expect average values, though. |
I think the LO parameters only work for schedule jobs that we don't support any more any way. I don't have a strong opinion on the I never use the online simulators, but why attach an option like |
I think the rationale is that In addition to what @blakejohnson suggested, we should also mention that one can use |
I've been looking at adding |
Yeah that's what we meant by "attached to the Backend", sorry for the confusion. By the way, these options should only be available to simulator backends. For reference, this is how it was done in ibmq-provider: https://github.com/Qiskit/qiskit-ibmq-provider/blob/master/qiskit/providers/ibmq/ibmqbackend.py#L845-L853 |
Closing since |
The
backend.run(...)
interface has accumulated a lot of cruft over the years. We need to start paring down this interface to only things which are essential.Some things that I think can go (should validate all of these):
Schedule
andList[Schedule]
from the allowed types ofcircuits
. We nominally stopped supporting these types already in January 2022.qubit_lo_freq
meas_lo_freq
schedule_los
noise_model
- should be attached to the Backend, not to the call torun()
.seed_simulator
- again should be an argument on the simulator/backendMore controversial, but I think still worthwhile:
memory
argument and only expose the behavior ofmemory=True
. Rationale: if you really want statistics, use theSampler
instead.meas_return
- if we only supportmemory=True
, then it only makes sense for this to be'single'
For future consideration:
meas_level
- OpenQASM 3 allows expressing different measurement levels with separatemeasure
commands in the OpenPulse grammar. I think it makes sense to develop equivalents in Qiskit and then read out the requested measurement level from the circuit itselfThe text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: