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

Documentation is unclear about change of basis #3

Closed
eltrompetero opened this issue Nov 20, 2018 · 1 comment
Closed

Documentation is unclear about change of basis #3

eltrompetero opened this issue Nov 20, 2018 · 1 comment

Comments

@eltrompetero
Copy link
Owner

User contacted me about using {0,1} basis with the Pseudo solver. Was unable to make it work. In line 1277 in v1.0.3, the Pseudo._solve_ising() method assumes that all given data is in {-1,1} basis and convert it to the {0,1} basis.

Documentation could be clearer about which bases are allowed.

Code could be updated to permit choice of basis when instantiating solvers.

@eltrompetero
Copy link
Owner Author

Default basis for Ising model is now {-1,1}. Usage guide was updated for this convention. There is almost no difference in choice of basis for speed now in Enumerate approaches, which was one of the main reasons for basis choice in the past.

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

No branches or pull requests

1 participant