-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.3k
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
Add equivalences from CR<Pauli>
to R<Paulis>
#9507
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@ | ||
--- | ||
features: | ||
- | | ||
Equivalences between the controlled Pauli rotations and translations to two-Pauli rotations | ||
are now available in the equivalence library for Qiskit standard gates. This allows, | ||
for example, to translate a :class:`.CRZGate` to a :class:`.RZZGate` plus :class:`.RZGate` | ||
or a :class:`.CRYGate` to a single :class:`.RZXGate` plus single qubit gates:: | ||
|
||
from qiskit.circuit import QuantumCircuit | ||
from qiskit.compiler import transpile | ||
|
||
angle = 0.123 | ||
circuit = QuantumCircuit(2) | ||
circuit.cry(angle, 0, 1) | ||
|
||
basis = ["id", "sx", "x", "rz", "rzx"] | ||
transpiled = transpile(circuit, basis_gates=basis) | ||
print(transpiled.draw()) |
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If this is correct then I don't like our naming convention for
RZXGate
- to me, that reads as aZX
bitstring interaction, i.e. theZ
is on qubit 1. But whatever, even if it mattered what I thought, the ship's long since sailed.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Tbh I never know which order it is and just end up trying until it fits 😅 but I agree that
RZX
should implemente^{i theta * ZX}
and in our tensor order that would beZ
onq_1
..There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think the argument is that it implements what our documentation calls$Z \otimes X$ , where I think there's some conflation of the general tensor product $\otimes$ with the Kronecker product ordering we use to make concrete matrix representations.
But anyway, the ship's sailed, and it's unrelated to this PR!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ah - Wikipedia explains:
as opposed to:
I've never used
\otimes
to refer to the Kronecker product, and wasn't aware that was something people did - to me, it's always meant the arbitrary tensor product, which isn't tied to any particular representation of linear algebra.