Improved documentation for Quantum Arithmetic #6136
Conversation
|
Hello. You may have forgotten to update the changelog!
|
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## v0.38.0-rc0 #6136 +/- ##
==============================================
Coverage ? 99.66%
==============================================
Files ? 445
Lines ? 42359
Branches ? 0
==============================================
Hits ? 42217
Misses ? 142
Partials ? 0 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
As name says. Had to open a new PR due to merge conflicts.
As name says. Making myself a reviewer for the daily RC sync.
Automatic sync from the release candidate to master during a feature freeze. --------- Co-authored-by: Astral Cai <astral.cai@xanadu.ai> Co-authored-by: GitHub Actions Bot <> Co-authored-by: Mudit Pandey <mudit.pandey@xanadu.ai>
gmlejarza
changed the title
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thank you for adding this documentation! 🙌🚀
Here I leave some comments
Make sure the changes I suggest are applied to all templates if necessary.
On the other hand, this PR should point to v0.38.0-rc0 instead of master. You may get several new files when you make the change, let me know if you have problems.
| to encode the integer :math:`x < mod` in the Fourier basis. Therefore, we need at least | ||
| :math:`\lceil \log_2(x)\rceil` ``x_wires`` to represent :math:`x`. After performing the modular addition operation, the resulting integer | ||
| encoded in the Fourier basis can be as large as :math:`mod-1`. Hence, we need at least | ||
| :math:`\lceil \log_2(mod)\rceil` ``x_wires`` | ||
| to represent all the possible results. Since :math:`x < mod` by definition, we just need at least :math:`\lceil \log_2(mod)\rceil` ``x_wires``. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I found this paragraph difficult to follow and repetitive, could you try to simplify it?
Co-authored-by: Guillermo Alonso-Linaje <65235481+KetpuntoG@users.noreply.github.com>
|
|
||
| The implementation is based on the quantum Fourier transform method presented in | ||
| `arXiv:2311.08555 <https://arxiv.org/abs/2311.08555>`_. | ||
| This operation can be represented in a quantum circuit as: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am not sure adding the image here is helpful. The equation is clear enough.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would leave it if possible. Although in the equation it is clear, it seems to me more visual the in-place / out-place difference seen in this way
| \text{Adder}(k, mod) |x \rangle = | x+k \; \text{modulo} \; mod \rangle. | ||
| \text{Adder}(k, mod) |x \rangle = | x+k \; (mod) \rangle. |
| k (int): the number that needs to be added | ||
| x_wires (Sequence[int]): the wires the operation acts on | ||
| mod (int): the modulus for performing the addition, default value is :math:`2^{\text{len(x_wires)}}` | ||
| work_wires (Sequence[int]): the two auxiliary wires to be used for performing the addition when :math:`mod \neq 2^{\text{len(x_wires)}}` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I suggest mentioning the default, instead of the math equation and referring the user to check "usage details".
|
|
||
| The first one is ``x_wires`` which is used | ||
| to encode the integer :math:`x < mod` in the computational basis. Therefore, we need at least | ||
| :math:`\lceil \log_2(x)\rceil` ``x_wires`` to represent :math:`x`. After performing the modular addition operation, the resulting integer |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| :math:`\lceil \log_2(x)\rceil` ``x_wires`` to represent :math:`x`. After performing the modular addition operation, the resulting integer | |
| :math:`\lceil \log_2(x)\rceil` ``x_wires`` to represent :math:`x`. However, after performing the modular addition operation, the resulting integer |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've rewritten this paragraph to be more concise and clear
| :math:`\lceil \log_2(x)\rceil` ``x_wires`` to represent :math:`x`. After performing the modular addition operation, the resulting integer | ||
| encoded in the computational basis can be as large as :math:`mod-1`. Hence, we need at least | ||
| :math:`\lceil \log_2(mod)\rceil` ``x_wires`` | ||
| to represent all the possible results. Since :math:`x < mod` by definition, we just need at least :math:`\lceil \log_2(mod)\rceil` ``x_wires``. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| to represent all the possible results. Since :math:`x < mod` by definition, we just need at least :math:`\lceil \log_2(mod)\rceil` ``x_wires``. | |
| to represent all the possible results. Since :math:`x < mod` by definition, we need at least :math:`\lceil \log_2(mod)\rceil` ``x_wires``. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've rewritten this paragraph to be more concise and clear
isaacdevlugt
added
the
do not merge ⚠️
| Note that :math:`x` must be smaller than :math:`mod` to get the correct result. | ||
| :math:`x` must be smaller than :math:`mod` to get the correct result. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I see that "Note that" sounded repititive here but starting with a math symbol, x, is also not ideal.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've changed to: "To obtain the correct result, :math:x must be smaller than :math:mod"
Context:
Adding extra documentation of arithmetic templates
Description of the Change:
Adding a detailed explanation of the templates' usage details, pictures and a dedicated folder in the templates section.