Add randomized clifford+T benchmarking circuits. #2118

FarLab · 2023-12-08T21:35:40Z

Description

This PR adds the feature requested here #1230.

closes #1230

License

I license this contribution under the terms of the GNU GPL, version 3 and grant Unitary Fund the right to provide additional permissions as described in section 7 of the GNU GPL, version 3.

Before opening the PR, please ensure you have completed the following where appropriate.

I added unit tests for new code.
I used type hints in function signatures.
I used Google-style docstrings for functions.
I updated the documentation where relevant.
Added myself / the copyright holder to the AUTHORS file

github-actions

Hello @FarLab, thank you for submitting a PR to Mitiq! We will respond as soon as possible, and if you have any questions in the meantime, you can ask us on the Unitary Fund Discord.

codecov · 2023-12-11T09:12:20Z

Codecov Report

Attention: 2 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (6e9351d) 98.31% compared to head (5bdc4ee) 98.19%.
Report is 12 commits behind head on master.

Files	Patch %	Lines
mitiq/benchmarks/randomized_clifford_t_circuit.py	93.33%	2 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #2118      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   98.31%   98.19%   -0.12%     
==========================================
  Files          87       88       +1     
  Lines        4142     4166      +24     
==========================================
+ Hits         4072     4091      +19     
- Misses         70       75       +5

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

andreamari · 2023-12-11T11:23:11Z

The function compute_eavy_bitstrings is already in quantum_volume_circuits.py. So, if necessary, we can use that function instead of re-defining it in the new file.

Moreover, even if it was originally suggested in the issue, now I wonder if we should simply return the circuit without the associated heavy bitstrings. Heavy bitstrings are important for quantum volume circuits and I am not sure if the are important in this case. Moreover the user can always call the function compute_heavy_bitstrings() by themselves, if necessary.

So, I would suggest to simply don't consider heavy bitstrings in this new benchmark.

But please wait for a second opinion by @natestemen about this. I don't want to make you remove some code that other people think it is instead useful.

Further unrelated comment: please add the new function in the API docs in this file https://github.com/unitaryfund/mitiq/blob/master/docs/source/apidoc.md . You can look for the Benchmarks section in that file and see how other similar functions are listed.

co-authored-by: Farrokh Labib <farrokh@unitary.fund> co-authored-by: Misty Wahl <misty@unitary.fund>

FarLab · 2023-12-13T09:21:27Z

Thanks Andrea for your comments. I will probably remove the heavy bitstring function since it already exists. I will also add the function in the API docs.

natestemen

Really nice work here Farrokh! A great first addition to Mitiq.

I've left a few small comments, but my biggest is a small concern that in order to appease mypy, we've made the code quite a bit more complicated by shifting everything to manipulating indices. I feel like a simpler approach would be to cast all the objects that get passed to np.random.choice as np.ndarrays. WDYT?

natestemen · 2023-12-15T00:02:25Z

mitiq/benchmarks/randomized_clifford_t_circuit.py

+
+    Returns:
+        A quantum circuit acting on ``num_qubits`` qubits.
+        A list of the heavy bitstrings for the returned circuit.


I think this line should be removed now that we don't return bitstrings.

good catch, will remove!

natestemen · 2023-12-15T00:37:18Z

mitiq/benchmarks/randomized_clifford_t_circuit.py

+    oneq_idx_list = [
+        rnd_state.choice(list(range(len(oneq_cliffords)))) for _ in range(3)
+    ]
+    twoq_idx_list = [
+        rnd_state.choice(list(range(len(twoq_cliffords)))) for _ in range(3)
+    ]


I think the range functions here should be range(num_oneq_cliffords) and range(num_twoq_cliffords) respectively. I think the 3 might be a magic number.

yes, you are right, that should not be 3 (which was probably hardcoded for some reason)

natestemen · 2023-12-15T00:55:09Z

mitiq/benchmarks/randomized_clifford_t_circuit.py

+    oneq_idx_list = [
+        rnd_state.choice(list(range(len(oneq_cliffords)))) for _ in range(3)
+    ]
+    twoq_idx_list = [
+        rnd_state.choice(list(range(len(twoq_cliffords)))) for _ in range(3)
+    ]


If we have to keep all the indices, this is a little cleaner.

Suggested change

oneq_idx_list = [

rnd_state.choice(list(range(len(oneq_cliffords)))) for _ in range(3)

]

twoq_idx_list = [

rnd_state.choice(list(range(len(twoq_cliffords)))) for _ in range(3)

]

oneq_idx_list = rnd_state.choice(2, num_oneq_cliffords)

twoq_idx_list = rnd_state.choice(2, num_twoq_cliffords)

I like this solution more that casting the objects that go into np.random.choice as np.ndarray. also, I think the 2 should be len(oneq_cliffords) and len(twoq_cliffords), right?

That's right!

natestemen · 2023-12-15T05:52:58Z

mitiq/benchmarks/tests/test_randomized_clifford_t_circuit.py

+)
+
+
+def test_generate_model_circuit_with_seed():


I think this test name is copied from another file, and I know we use it in other places, but I think we can make it a little more descriptive of what the actual intention is. Maybe something like test_seed_circuit_equality? I don't love that name either, but I'm sure we can come up something better than "model circuit".

test_seed_circuit_equality sounds good to me. we can change it if we find a better name :)

natestemen · 2023-12-15T05:53:37Z

mitiq/benchmarks/tests/test_randomized_clifford_t_circuit.py

+"""Tests for quantum volume circuits. The Cirq functions that do the main work
+are tested here:
+cirq-core/cirq/contrib/quantum_volume/quantum_volume_test.py
+
+Tests below check that generate_quantum_volume_circuit() works as a wrapper and
+fits with Mitiq's interface.
+"""


comment needs removal, or updating.

natestemen · 2023-12-15T05:54:24Z

mitiq/benchmarks/tests/test_randomized_clifford_t_circuit.py

+        num_twoq_cliffords=2,
+        num_t_gates=2,
+        return_type=return_type,
+        seed=3,


Let's remove this line just so it's running the test with random circuit each time.

Suggested change

seed=3,

natestemen

One small comment needs updating, and we'll need to add a line into mitiq/benchmarks/__init__.py to make these functions importable like

from mitiq.benchmarks import generate_random_clifford_t_circuit

Once those two things are done, we are good to go!

natestemen · 2023-12-15T15:32:01Z

mitiq/benchmarks/randomized_clifford_t_circuit.py

+# This source code is licensed under the GPL license (v3) found in the
+# LICENSE file in the root directory of this source tree.
+
+"""Functions for generating rotated randomized benchmarking circuits."""


Needs update.

good catch, I will update these two last points now

…in mitiq/benchmarks/__init__.py to make the functions importable

natestemen · 2023-12-15T15:51:48Z

mitiq/benchmarks/__init__.py

@@ -14,3 +14,4 @@
 )
 from mitiq.benchmarks.w_state_circuits import generate_w_circuit
 from mitiq.benchmarks.qpe_circuits import generate_qpe_circuit
+from mitiq.benchmarks import generate_random_clifford_t_circuit


We need to add the full path here so that when importing this from mitiq.benchmarks is possible. I think it's going to look something like this (there might be a formatting change, I'm not 100% sure).

Suggested change

from mitiq.benchmarks import generate_random_clifford_t_circuit

from mitiq.benchmarks.randomized_clifford_t_circuit import (

generate_random_clifford_t_circuit,

)

thanks, als checked the formatting and it didn't complain :)

natestemen · 2023-12-15T15:52:13Z

docs/source/apidoc.md

@@ -241,8 +267,15 @@ See Ref. {cite}`Czarnik_2021_Quantum` for more details on these methods.
   :members:
 ```

+#### Randomized Clifford+T benchmarking Circuits


Suggested change

#### Randomized Clifford+T benchmarking Circuits

#### Randomized Clifford+T Circuits

…rrectly and a small change in the apidoc.md

natestemen

Nice work Farrokh! Can't wait to do some more testing with these circuits!

🚢

added randomized clifford+T circuits in benchmarks

0397d63

FarLab requested a review from andreamari December 8, 2023 21:35

FarLab added this to the 0.32.0 milestone Dec 8, 2023

FarLab requested a review from natestemen December 8, 2023 21:36

github-actions bot reviewed Dec 8, 2023

View reviewed changes

Farrokh Labib added 4 commits December 10, 2023 20:00

some changes in the tests

93fab2c

more fixes in test_randomized_clifford_t_circuit.py

3dd9dc5

more fixes in test_randomized_clifford_t_circuit.py

0684655

removed testing the length of the circuit, since it depends on the seed.

319267d

natestemen and others added 3 commits December 12, 2023 09:09

run isort

275f1c1

co-authored-by: Farrokh Labib <farrokh@unitary.fund> co-authored-by: Misty Wahl <misty@unitary.fund>

run black formatter

d76fabe

co-authored-by: Farrokh Labib <farrokh@unitary.fund> co-authored-by: Misty Wahl <misty@unitary.fund>

format according to flake8

0b6e4ac

co-authored-by: Farrokh Labib <farrokh@unitary.fund> co-authored-by: Misty Wahl <misty@unitary.fund>

Farrokh Labib and others added 2 commits December 14, 2023 15:28

removed heavy bitstring function from randomized_clifford_t_circuit.py

7d69993

fixed check-types error

adc08fb

natestemen removed this from the 0.32.0 milestone Dec 14, 2023

natestemen requested changes Dec 15, 2023

View reviewed changes

FarLab added 2 commits December 15, 2023 10:51

made some changes according to the review by Nate Stemen

47fa532

added Randomized Clifford+T benchmarking Circuits entry in the apidoc

b7258a5

FarLab requested a review from natestemen December 15, 2023 15:34

natestemen approved these changes Dec 15, 2023

View reviewed changes

removed a comment in randomized_clifford_t_circuit.py and added line …

111876c

…in mitiq/benchmarks/__init__.py to make the functions importable

natestemen reviewed Dec 15, 2023

View reviewed changes

fix __init__.py for importing generate_random_clifford_t_circuit() co…

5bdc4ee

…rrectly and a small change in the apidoc.md

natestemen approved these changes Dec 15, 2023

View reviewed changes

FarLab merged commit e2fb5cd into master Dec 15, 2023
14 of 16 checks passed

FarLab deleted the fl-random_clifford_t_circuits branch December 15, 2023 19:28

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Add randomized clifford+T benchmarking circuits. #2118

Add randomized clifford+T benchmarking circuits. #2118

FarLab commented Dec 8, 2023 •

edited by natestemen

Loading

github-actions bot left a comment

codecov bot commented Dec 11, 2023 •

edited

Loading

andreamari commented Dec 11, 2023

FarLab commented Dec 13, 2023

natestemen left a comment

natestemen Dec 15, 2023

FarLab Dec 15, 2023

natestemen Dec 15, 2023

FarLab Dec 15, 2023

natestemen Dec 15, 2023

FarLab Dec 15, 2023

natestemen Dec 15, 2023

natestemen Dec 15, 2023

FarLab Dec 15, 2023

natestemen Dec 15, 2023

FarLab Dec 15, 2023

natestemen Dec 15, 2023

FarLab Dec 15, 2023

natestemen left a comment

natestemen Dec 15, 2023

FarLab Dec 15, 2023

natestemen Dec 15, 2023

FarLab Dec 15, 2023

natestemen Dec 15, 2023

natestemen left a comment

-from mitiq.benchmarks import generate_random_clifford_t_circuit
+from mitiq.benchmarks.randomized_clifford_t_circuit import (
+    generate_random_clifford_t_circuit,
+)

	#### Randomized Clifford+T benchmarking Circuits
	#### Randomized Clifford+T Circuits

		)


		def test_generate_model_circuit_with_seed():

Add randomized clifford+T benchmarking circuits. #2118

Add randomized clifford+T benchmarking circuits. #2118

Conversation

FarLab commented Dec 8, 2023 • edited by natestemen Loading

Description

License

github-actions bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

codecov bot commented Dec 11, 2023 • edited Loading

Codecov Report

andreamari commented Dec 11, 2023

FarLab commented Dec 13, 2023

natestemen left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

natestemen left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

natestemen left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

FarLab commented Dec 8, 2023 •

edited by natestemen

Loading

codecov bot commented Dec 11, 2023 •

edited

Loading