-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1k
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 a convenience method that runs both RB and XEB #6471
Conversation
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #6471 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 97.75% 97.75% -0.01%
==========================================
Files 1105 1105
Lines 94897 94909 +12
==========================================
+ Hits 92771 92782 +11
- Misses 2126 2127 +1 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
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.
LGTM, although I think it would be good to add clearer documentation, either here or in InferredXEBResult
about what the different types of two-qubit error rates mean, something to explain to the user what two_qubit_pauli_error
, inferred_pauli_error
, inferred_decay_constant
, and inferred_xeb_error
all mean.
np.random.seed(0) | ||
random.seed(0) |
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.
Please remove here and in test_parallel_two_qubit_xeb above.
Both tests pass random_state=0
so the global seeds should not matter.
To the contrary if we see any flakiness w/r to global seeds here that would show something is wrong with random_state
handling.
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.
removed them, I forgot that I already figuredout why the methods produce different results for the same seed. the reason isn't treating random_state in a wrong way but that some of the subroutines are parallized. so the order of parallization changes the results. however the tests are not flaky I wrote them to be resilient to that.
gpylint run with the new configuration found following docstring issues.
|
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.
Please see comments, otherwise LGTM.
@pavoljuhas I completed the missing docstrings with the help of an LLM :D. ptal |
Looks good! :-o |
No description provided.