QISKit 0.5 status and notes

[jaygambetta]

posting this to the public so the the community can see what we want in 0.5

• 1st — backend_rework branch*
  Backend rework, adding compile and execute #376: merged
  At the end of this level 2 user will be happy with no quantumprgroam and will use qiskit.execute

  • move the auto naming in create_quantum_register, create_classical_register to QuantumRegister, ClassicalRegister creation
  • add auto naming for QuantumCircuit creation
  • finish qiskit.compile() function level 1 user
  • finish qiskit.execute() function level 2 user
  • update README and using_qiskit, hello_quantum examples. I want to have a hello world, and using_qiskit_level_0 (execute), using_qiskit_level_1 (compile and run on backends) and using_qiskit_level_2 (future pass manager and DAG compiling)
  • tests and passing old ones
  • check backward compatibility of quantum program
  • can openquantumcompiler be removed here
  • a new backend_manager (old backendutils) with a register
  • can backendutils be removed here
  • update the documentation with qiskit.compile and qiskit.execute
  • register('token', url)
  • backends (filter)
  • all_backends()
  • backend.configuration schema
  • backend.status schema
  • merge

• cpp-simulator-refactor branch*
  C++ Simulator Refactor #386: merged - for the C++ changes
  Simulator Interfaces #421: closed - for the backend naming changes (reissued in Simulator backends #435)
  Simulator backends #435: merged

  • Treat snapshot, noise, load, save as barriers in the mapper, so they don’t move around.
  • Subclass statevector simulator from qasm simulator (python and cpp)
  • Tests
  • making sure naming conventions is correct and local_qasm_simulator defualts to c++
  • update the documentation with how to use the different simulators
  • merge

• Generate new qobj format*
  [WIP] Qobj class, schema validation, and update backends to accept qobj #415: open
  Backend rework, adding compile and execute #376: closed (added schemas into the codebase)

  • Generate them according to schemas and edit schemas appropriately
  • Also make sure it is forward compatible with pulse (see document)
  • update the documentation to explain the qobj
  • merge

• Qobj object and validate against schemas
  [WIP] Qobj class, schema validation, and update backends to accept qobj #415: open
  [WIP] Introduce Qobj object and revise Result #144: closed (introduced in [WIP] Qobj class, schema validation, and update backends to accept qobj #415)

  • create a Qobj object
  • make sure all backends are using qobj and that they pass the schema
  • in the document make sure it make sense
  • check that the exp is working with this format
  • CONFIRM THAT WE HAVE FIXED THE ORDERING BUG
  • merge

• run Qobj and return instead of QuantumJob
  [WIP] Qobj class, schema validation, and update backends to accept qobj #415: open
  [WIP] Pass qobj to remote backends. Implement qobj validation. #326: closed (closed and introduced in [WIP] Qobj class, schema validation, and update backends to accept qobj #415)

  • update using_qiskit_level_2
  • can QuantumJob be removed here
  • update any documentation
  • merge

• Result object

  • remove qobj

• Introduce a Job object and make all runs async
  rework jobs #403: merged
  At the end of this level 1 user will be happy with no quantumprgroam and they have control of their jobs

  • create a Job Object
  • update using_qiskit_level_2
  • job = backend.run(qobj) where qobj is dict or object
  • job.done
  • job.status
  • job.cancel
  • job.result()
  • job.job_id (IBM Q)
  • shows examples of how users can get the status and cancel a job
  • make sure quantumprogram still works
  • merge

• backend

  • backend.jobs()
  • backend.retrieve_job(job_id)
  • backend.status
  • backend.schema
  • backend.configuration
  • backend.properties
  • update the documentation with backend uses

• remove sympy backends and projectq backends and provided them as qiskit-core-backend-plugins example

  • sympy
  • projectq

• Qconfig

  • provide a simple solution
  • merge

• parameters and calibrations go to properties and pass a schema

After the release

• backend.validation
• Remove QuantumJob as qobj should have replaced it
• Remove JobProcessor as it should be replaced with JobProcessor of the actual Job object.
• remove opencompiler as it should be obsolete
• clean ibmq provider
• start to get errors and checks against the schema in place.

Lets add below anything i forgot.

Also @ajavadia when we are finished with the spec for qobj can we add a link to this in the comments. Also @ewinston @diego-plan9 @ajavadia lets link pr's against this.

[yehuda-naveh]

Hi @jaygambetta can we help on any of these? e.g., with the qobj items, or the sympy/projectq/qconfig? we can be free for that starting Sunday

[jaygambetta]

@yehuda-naveh great. @ajavadia and @ewinston and @diego-plan9 can you let @yehuda-naveh know which parts they can help out on.

[yehuda-naveh]

@diego-plan9 @ajavadia will you be our contact on this? We'd be happy to help for 0.5 with the qobj items, or the sympy/projectq/qconfig, or elsewhere. Need your confirm, and initial pointer to discussion. Otherwise, we'd just continue our WIP on operator-sum and noise approximations

[yehuda-naveh]

@yaelbh, after discussing with @jaygambetta, let's start with the projectq item

[ajavadia]

@yehuda-naveh i think another good place to contribute would be to write some more tests. for example, if you check out PR #421, you can try to write some test circuits and compare results across simulators.

One comparison: local_qasm_simualtor_py, local_qasm_simulator_cpp, local_qasm_simulator_projectq
Another comparison: local_statevector_simulator_py, local_statevector_simulator_cpp, local_statevector_simulator_sympy.

The results, both in format and content, should be as close as possible across the simulators.

[yehuda-naveh]

Thanks @ajavadia . We're looking into both.

[yaelbh]

I've opened Issue #425 for the ProjectQ item and Issue #426 for the test-across-backends item.

[atilag]

0.5 was released some time ago. Shall we close this issue @jaygambetta ?

[jaygambetta]

I would rather rename it 0.6 or move the things we did not get done into 0.6 so we keep track of them.

[diego-plan9]

I have made an effort to move each individual checklist (the ones that still had open items) into single issues, labeled with type: meta:
https://github.com/QISKit/qiskit-core/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3A%22type%3A+meta%22

and set them for the next milestone:
https://github.com/QISKit/qiskit-core/milestone/2

I did not transfer all the items directly trying to reflect the current status and the pending items - please feel free to add more items to the existing issues, open new ones, or comment as much as possible!