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

[OpRefactor] Add custom decomposition context manager to device #1900

Merged
merged 45 commits into from
Nov 22, 2021

Conversation

glassnotes
Copy link
Contributor

@glassnotes glassnotes commented Nov 16, 2021

Context: Operator overhaul

Description of the Change: Adds custom decompositions at the device level by creating a custom_expand_fn and context manager. Also adds a context manager to enable custom decompositions to be temporarily used by devices. Subsumes PR #1872.

Example: suppose we are running on a trapped-ion machine, and would like to implement a decomposition of the CNOT gate into IsingXX. We can do so by defining a decomposition (which has the same signature as that of the normal operation), and passing the device a dictionary detailing the custom decompositions.

def ion_trap_cnot(wires):
    return [
        qml.RY(np.pi/2, wires=wires[0]),
        qml.IsingXX(np.pi/2, wires=wires),
        qml.RX(-np.pi/2, wires=wires[0]),
        qml.RY(-np.pi/2, wires=wires[0]),
        qml.RY(-np.pi/2, wires=wires[1])
    ]

dev = qml.device('default.qubit', wires=2, custom_decomps={"CNOT" : ion_trap_cnot})

Now, we can see the decomposition get applied by drawing a QNode using the device expansion strategy.

>>> @qml.qnode(dev)
... def run_cnot():
...     qml.CNOT(wires=[0, 1])
...     return qml.expval(qml.PauliX(wires=1))
>>> print(qml.draw(run_cnot, expansion_strategy="device")())
 0: ──RY(1.57)──╭IsingXX(1.57)──RX(-1.57)──RY(-1.57)──┤     
 1: ────────────╰IsingXX(1.57)──RY(-1.57)─────────────┤ ⟨X⟩ 

Benefits: Provides an intuitive means of implementing an arbitrary number of custom decompositions at runtime. There is minimal modification to the code of the device, and no modification of any operator code, since everything is done via context managers.

Possible Drawbacks: Currently, this works by over-riding the decompose method of the specified operations within a given context. However this may not work for templates, which implement expand.

Related GitHub Issues: N/A

# within the context.
def custom_decomp_expand(self, circuit, max_expansion=10):
with self.custom_decomp_context():
return self.custom_fn(circuit, max_expansion)
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The with statement does seem to alter the decomposition; if you do something like print(qml.CNOT.decomposition(wires=[0, 1]) with the new decomposition, it will show up correctly as the custom function, however when the custom expand function is later called, the decomposition is not overridden.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 16, 2021

Codecov Report

Merging #1900 (e5769b8) into master (d4c98a1) will increase coverage by 0.00%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #1900   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   98.83%   98.83%           
=======================================
  Files         222      222           
  Lines       16989    17036   +47     
=======================================
+ Hits        16791    16838   +47     
  Misses        198      198           
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
pennylane/transforms/__init__.py 100.00% <ø> (ø)
pennylane/__init__.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
pennylane/transforms/tape_expand.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update d4c98a1...e5769b8. Read the comment docs.


original_decomp_method = obj.decompose

# This is the method that will override the current .decompose method of
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The reason why we have to override decompose instead of decomposition here is because in the default operator expand function, this is what is called to perform the decomposition (see here).

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

nice! this is more general as well

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The one disadvantage I can see is that, if a user wanted to define a custom decomposition for a template, this wouldn't work, because many of them don't have a decomposition, just expand. But this is maybe not so much the intended use case.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

this will be changed shortly though, right? (@mariaschuld?)

Copy link
Member

@josh146 josh146 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

the prototype seems to work really well 🎉

Comment on lines +58 to +63
```pycon
>>> print(qml.draw(decomp_qnode, expansion_strategy="device")(weights))
0: ──RX(0.4)──────────────────────╭C──RZ(3.14)──RY(1.57)──────────────────────────╭Z──RZ(3.14)──RY(1.57)──┤ ⟨Z⟩
1: ──RX(0.5)──RZ(3.14)──RY(1.57)──╰Z──RZ(3.14)──RY(1.57)──╭C──────────────────────│───────────────────────┤
2: ──RX(0.6)──RZ(3.14)──RY(1.57)──────────────────────────╰Z──RZ(3.14)──RY(1.57)──╰C──────────────────────┤
```
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I spent a long time looking at this, but it works out the recursive relationship between the custom CNOT and the custom Hadamard really well! 🎉

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

That's so wonderful @glassnotes, it feels right to throw this into the device!

Comment on lines 151 to 155
custom_decomp_condition = qml.BooleanFn(
lambda obj: not isinstance(obj, qml.tape.QuantumTape) # Expand templates
and obj.name not in custom_op_names # Expand things that don't have custom decomp
and self.supports_operation(obj.name) # Expand things until supported on device
)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@glassnotes did

custom_decomp_condition = qml.BooleanFn(lambda obj: obj.name not in custom_op_names)
custom_decomp_condition &= self.stopping_condition

not work?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

this is the same as the following:

condition = qml.BooleanFn(lambda obj: obj.name not in custom_op_names)
custom_fn = qml.transforms.create_expand_fn(depth=10, stop_at=condition, device=self)

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actually I had a weird amount of trouble with the stopping condition. It seemed like if I did not include that first condition there, it would not expand the templates 😕 Let me give this another go, though.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

oh, the first one is included within the devices stopping condition though 🤔

image

Copy link
Contributor Author

@glassnotes glassnotes Nov 17, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ahhh I found the problem I had originally. I was including both obj.name not in custom_op_names and self.supports_operation(obj.name) in the stopping condition I was passing to the create_expand_fn, and the second one was being cancelled out in the &= with the device criteria. Thanks!


original_decomp_method = obj.decompose

# This is the method that will override the current .decompose method of
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

nice! this is more general as well

@glassnotes glassnotes marked this pull request as ready for review November 17, 2021 18:26

assert len(decomp_ops) == 2

assert decomp_ops[0].name == "CRZ"
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Honestly I was kind of surprised this worked out-of-the-box. It seems like the operation being controlled gets decomposed first, and then each gate in the decomposition gets the control applied.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@glassnotes I'm trying to think of any other tests cases, but it sounds like you've covered pretty much all! Only other thing I can think of is a decomposition where:

  • template A is decomposed into template B
  • gate C is decomposed into gate D

and then decomposing a circuit that has template A?

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 also have to add gradient tests, which I just totally forgot about 😅

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

sure! Although my gut feeling is that this is one of the parts of the codebase where gradient tests aren't needed, since this PR doesn't introduce any classical processing.

custom_decomps (Dict[Union(str, qml.operation.Operation), Callable]): Custom
decompositions to be applied by the device at runtime. When specified, the
device will create a custom expand function by combining the regular expansion
criteria with those specified by the custom decompositions.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Sorry to be a pain, but could we add an example to the docstring? Although the description is accurate, it is so much quicker to see it!

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actually, it might make more sense to add the example to the device loader, since that is the more user-facing docstring? E.g., here: https://pennylane.readthedocs.io/en/stable/code/api/pennylane.device.html

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Oh, looks like we need to update that docstring anyway to match our latest conventions!

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 meant to ask about this actually, I wasn't sure where it made sense to add this to the docs! Sure, I'll put it on qml.device page. @josh146 what do you mean by "update that docstring anyway to match our latest conventions"?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Oh, just following https://pennylane.readthedocs.io/en/latest/development/guide/documentation.html#functions-and-methods, e.g., having the example after the arguments etc.

@@ -121,7 +125,7 @@ def _scatter(indices, array, new_dimensions):
"Projector",
}

def __init__(self, wires=1, shots=None, cache=0, analytic=None):
def __init__(self, wires=1, shots=None, cache=0, analytic=None, custom_decomps=None):
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@mlxd just thought I'd tag you because we are adding stuff to the QubitDevice class that may have to be ported to Device one day

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Great, thanks for the heads-up @mariaschuld !

def __init__(self, wires, *, shots=None, cache=0, analytic=None, custom_decomps=None):
super().__init__(
wires, shots, cache=cache, analytic=analytic, custom_decomps=custom_decomps
)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

If custom_decomps is used with external devices (that do not pass it to super), will nothing happen? Is this a problem?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ah, this is a very good point. I changed the changelog example to use lightning.qubit, and got

TypeError: __init__() got an unexpected keyword argument 'custom_decomps'

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

However, this works fine:

dev = qml.device("lightning.qubit", wires=3)

custom_decomps = {qml.CNOT : custom_cnot, "Hadamard" : custom_hadamard}
custom_decomps = qml.transforms.create_custom_decomp_expand_fn(custom_decomps, dev)
dev.custom_expand(custom_decomps)

@qml.qnode(dev)
def circuit(weights):
    qml.BasicEntanglerLayers(weights, wires=[0, 1, 2])
    return qml.expval(qml.PauliX(0))

print(qml.draw(circuit, expansion_strategy="device")(weights))

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@glassnotes you could create a utility function that combines the calls to create_custom_decomp_expand_fn and dev.custom_expand:

@contextlib.contextmanager
def decomposition_context(dev, decomps: dict = None):
    expand_fn = create_custom_decomp_expand_fn(decomps, dev)
    
    try:
        dev.custom_expand(expand_fn)
        yield
    finally:
        dev.custom_expand_fn = None

Since dev.custom_expand will globally change the state of the device, I am always concerned about having that be user-facing without wrapping it in a context manager (which provides a context where the change of state is explicit).

This then simplifies the above down to

dev = qml.device("lightning.qubit", wires=3)

@qml.qnode(dev)
def circuit(weights):
    qml.BasicEntanglerLayers(weights, wires=[0, 1, 2])
    return qml.expval(qml.PauliX(0))

custom_decomps = {qml.CNOT : custom_cnot, "Hadamard" : custom_hadamard}

with decomposition_context(dev, custom_decomps):
    print(qml.draw(circuit, expansion_strategy="device")(weights))

which will work on every device without modification. What do you think?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I must admit I am very much in favour of the latter approach, since it feels more maintainable. Changes to the decomposition API do not require changes to the device API, and vice versa.

It also provides a place in the documentation for documentation and examples.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ooh this gives me an idea :) In the device loader, you could do

def device(name, *args, **kwargs):
    custom_decomp = kwargs.pop("custom_decomp", None)

    dev = ... # load the device

    if custom_decomp is not None:
      custom_decomp_expand_fn = qml.transforms.create_custom_decomp_expand_fn(
          custom_decomps, dev
      )
      dev.custom_expand(custom_decomp_expand_fn)
 
    ...

and the subclasses never have to worry :)

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

with decomposition_context(dev, custom_decomps):
print(qml.draw(circuit, expansion_strategy="device")(weights))

This is like what was implemented in #1872 .

Since dev.custom_expand will globally change the state of the device, I am always concerned about having that be user-facing without wrapping it in a context manager (which provides a context where the change of state is explicit).

In this case though, if the argument is passed upon creation of the device, I would expect the behaviour to be global, and that any time that device is used, the custom decomposition is used.

I do really like the idea of putting this in the device loader though; way more flexible, plus we were going to put the docs there anyways.

@@ -25,6 +27,11 @@
not_tape,
)

# Needed for custom decomposition context manager
from pennylane.transforms.qfunc_transforms import NonQueuingTape
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I only learnt about this recently :)

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The NonQueuingTape is something we should definitely move out of the transforms folder! we should put it in tape/ lol

Copy link
Member

@josh146 josh146 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

this feels so natural and intuitive @glassnotes!

I still have to think about this, because my hope here was to eliminate the need for the user to work with the contexts at all, and have everything handled by the device (well, now, the device loader).

Yeah, I guess I just wanted some secret advanced context manager somewhere, just in case I need to help someone with code and an existing device that has already been instantiated/used 😆

the following always works:

expand_fn = qml.transforms.create_decomp_expand_fn(custom_decomps, dev)
dev.custom_expand(expand_fn)

but I was thinking that

with set_decompositions(custom_decomp, dev):
    # existing models and executions

could be really nice to whip out in advanced situations/debugging, and a lot safer than calling dev.custom_expand(), which will cause global state issues

Comment on lines +261 to +263
dev = qml.device(
'default.qubit', wires=2, custom_decomps={"CNOT" : ion_trap_cnot}
)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

this feels very natural and intuitive 🙌

pennylane/__init__.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
pennylane/transforms/tape_expand.py Show resolved Hide resolved
Comment on lines +568 to +570
def test_custom_decomp_template_to_template(self):
"""Test that decomposing a template into another template and some
gates yields the correct results."""
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🙌

@glassnotes
Copy link
Contributor Author

Yeah, I guess I just wanted some secret advanced context manager somewhere, just in case I need to help someone with code and an existing device that has already been instantiated/used laughing

Ohhhh I see. I misunderstood, I interpreted this as being the way a user would implement this, and not just an alternative method. This is a very easy utility function to add :)

if self.num_params == 0:
return fn(self.wires)
return fn(*self.parameters, self.wires)
return tape
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I am momentarily confused, will this line ever be used? Since there is a return function above without an if fork? Maybe this is why the coverage complains?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Whoa!! No, it won't be, removing it has absolutely no effect. I swear, when I checked the coverage yesterday everything was passing 😕

Copy link
Contributor

@mariaschuld mariaschuld left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Sorry, just one tiny last thing - the one line that is not covered by tests, would you be able to add a test? I'm particularly asking because I am unsure if the line is ever used?

@glassnotes
Copy link
Contributor Author

[sc-7225]

@glassnotes glassnotes merged commit 854d4b4 into master Nov 22, 2021
@glassnotes glassnotes deleted the custom_decomposition_device_expansion branch November 22, 2021 13:22
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.

None yet

4 participants