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

Ungroup Z terms #125

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Feb 14, 2025
Merged

Ungroup Z terms #125

merged 5 commits into from
Feb 14, 2025

Conversation

chmwzc
Copy link
Contributor

@chmwzc chmwzc commented Feb 4, 2025

Removes the default grouping of all Z terms together when using expectation_from_samples.
Will probably add in a flag somewhere to do this optionally after some other measurement optimization schemes have been put in (e.g. the gc_to_qwc branch), but the current default is too restrictive.

Other changes:

  • Edited parameters for some tests involving a bit of randomness, they should fail a lot less frequently
  • Minor bug fixes in the example scripts

@chmwzc chmwzc added the enhancement New feature or request label Feb 4, 2025
@chmwzc chmwzc added this to the Qibochem 0.0.4 milestone Feb 4, 2025
Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 4, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 100.00%. Comparing base (43084fb) to head (7068b96).
Report is 10 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##              main      #125   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage   100.00%   100.00%           
=========================================
  Files           16        16           
  Lines          751       738   -13     
=========================================
- Hits           751       738   -13     
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

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

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@chmwzc chmwzc requested a review from damarkian February 13, 2025 02:02
@chmwzc
Copy link
Contributor Author

chmwzc commented Feb 13, 2025

@damarkian if you have time this week, could you look through this? Would be good to include it in the next minor release

@damarkian
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks @chmwzc . This is for variable number of shots per observable depending on variance, right? Sorry for troubling you, but could you put the reference here in this PR, for traceability?

@chmwzc
Copy link
Contributor Author

chmwzc commented Feb 14, 2025

Thanks @chmwzc . This is for variable number of shots per observable depending on variance, right? Sorry for troubling you, but could you put the reference here in this PR, for traceability?

No, I'm still working on that😅 This is for cleaning up the code a bit before I implement other measurement optimization schemes (e.g. the gc_to_qwc branch).

@damarkian
Copy link
Contributor

Alright. One step at a time then. 👌

@chmwzc chmwzc merged commit ccfff51 into main Feb 14, 2025
19 checks passed
@chmwzc chmwzc deleted the ungroup-terms branch February 14, 2025 01:59
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants