[CQT-235] Add support for gate modifiers #367
Open
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
Add GateModifierLibrary to opensquirrel/instruction_library.py. Add test_gate_modifiers test to test/parser/libqasm/test_libqasm.py. Implement gate_modifier decorator in opensquirrel/ir.py. Implement inv, pow, and ctrl gate modifiers in default_gate_modifiers.py. Gate modifiers: - Take a Callable that returns a BlochSphereRotation. - Invoke the Callable, together with a QubitLike argument, to obtain a BlochSphereRotation. - Then return either a new BlochSphereRotation with a new angle (inv and pow), or a ControlledGate. TODO: test.
…_set parameters back to Parser. Update test_gate_modifiers. TODO: fix parser.
TODO: from libqasm 0.6.8 (gate modifiers) gate parameters are no longer operands. They are parameters of the Gate node. We could turn all the @named_gate into functors, like InverseGateModifier. A functor is an instance of a class, with some members, e.g., theta for Rx, and a __call__operation to invoke them with some operand arguments, e.g., Rx(q).
Update Int and Float classes so that they can be constructed from another Int or Float, respectively. Update _get_expanded_gate_args so that it does not deal with parameters anymore. Add test_named_gates.
opensquirrel/default_gates.py
Outdated
|
|
||
|
|
||
| default_bloch_sphere_rotations_without_params: list[Callable[[QubitLike], BlochSphereRotation]] | ||
| default_bloch_sphere_rotations_without_params: list[type[NamedGateFunctor]] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Would this not also include multi-qubit gates?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good point. We may still have BlochSphereRotations as subclasses of NamedGateFunctors.
|
|
||
|
|
||
| @named_gate | ||
| def CNOT(control: QubitLike, target: QubitLike) -> ControlledGate: | ||
| return ControlledGate(control, X(target)) | ||
| class CNOT(NamedGateFunctor): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If gates are now classes, would the matrix representation of the gate be contained in the class itself?
|
|
||
|
|
||
| @named_gate | ||
| def Ry(q: QubitLike, theta: Float) -> BlochSphereRotation: | ||
| return BlochSphereRotation(qubit=q, axis=(0, 1, 0), angle=theta.value, phase=0) | ||
| class Ry(NamedGateFunctor): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Will gates possess hash, eq, contains_ etc?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If needed, I don't see why not.
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.
Notes
test_gate_modifiersandtest_named_gates, attest_libqasm.py.Goal
The semantic AST that is now passed onto OpenSquirrel has this form:
X), or combinations of gate modifiers acting on a (named) gate (such asctrl.pow(2).inv.X).measureorreset.Gateand a list of operands. The operands are ofQubittype.Gatecan have, optionally, anotherGate, and also optionally, a parameter.Examples:
inv.X,invis a gate (modifier) that has anXgate and no parameter.pow(2).Y,powis a gate (modifier) that has aYgate and a2parameter (an exponent of type float).Xhas neither gate nor parameter, andRxhas no gate but a parameter (an angle of type float).Changes
In order to address the 2 main changes mentioned above, the current implementation of this PR has experimented with the following changes:
default_gate_modifiers.py. They are called{Inverse,Power,Control}GateModifier.The idea behind this change from functions to functors is, basically, not to treat parameters as arguments but as members of a given instruction.
For example, for
Rx, we won't be calling anymoreRx(qubit: Qubit, theta: Float). Instead, we will have anRx(theta: Float)object, and we will callRx(qubit).The same applies to
PowerGateModifier.TODO
As commented in the Notes above, the current PR has only been tested with a couple of parametrized tests.
It could be that, in many parts of the code, we are just using a simple syntax such as
X(q0), and this needs now a syntaxX()(q0), i.e., instantiate theXfunctor and then invokeX.__call__(q0).In case it does, we should investigate if the current implementation can be improved so that a syntax such as
X(q0)still works with functors.Or, even, we may rethink the reimplementation to not use functors.