-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 366
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
started features list #221
Conversation
So there's good news and bad news. 👍 The good news is that everyone that needs to sign a CLA (the pull request submitter and all commit authors) have done so. Everything is all good there. 😕 The bad news is that it appears that one or more commits were authored by someone other than the pull request submitter. We need to confirm that all authors are ok with their commits being contributed to this project. Please have them confirm that here in the pull request. Note to project maintainer: This is a terminal state, meaning the |
I pushed a commit fixing the reference for the Verstraete-Cirac transform. The implementation of Bravyi-Kitaev is from arXiv:1701.07072, rather than arXiv:1208.5986, right? |
Yeah I think you're right about the BK implementation. |
For the citations I think it's fair to cite both for BK, as I've never met anyone that actually coded the transformation from the original paper. I certainly used the work in the Seeley paper when I coded mine. |
I made a few additions to the utils and ops sections. Also, I changed the reference for the BK transform. @jarrodmcc as discussed at #232, the Seeley paper gives a different definition for non-powers of two from our implementation, so I think it would be inaccurate to cite it here. |
Fair enough, I hadn't realized we completely scrubbed the Seeley
implementation for the fenwick tree version, but I see that now.
…On Sat, Mar 3, 2018 at 3:10 PM, Kevin J. Sung ***@***.***> wrote:
I made a few additions to the utils and ops sections. Also, I changed the
reference for the BK transform. @jarrodmcc <https://github.com/jarrodmcc>
as discussed at #232 <#232>,
the Seeley paper gives a different definition for non-powers of two from
our implementation, so I think it would be inaccurate to cite it here.
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#221 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AHXFPCt38BiP-8_xepmvacMGkcIzNIF1ks5tayL1gaJpZM4STwKn>
.
|
…to FEATURES.rst
…into FEATURES.rst
I'm tired of this being open and don't want to continue it right now. So I am going to close. |
To be merged once completed. Help welcome.