Updating AQC tutorial to conform with new template#5052
Updating AQC tutorial to conform with new template#5052nathanearnestnoble wants to merge 1 commit intomainfrom
Conversation
|
Check out this pull request on See visual diffs & provide feedback on Jupyter Notebooks. Powered by ReviewNB |
|
One or more of the following people are relevant to this code:
|
| @@ -2,61 +2,109 @@ | |||
| "cells": [ | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The AQC ansatz has significantly fewer layers
Same comment as above on the term "layers"
Reply via ReviewNB
| @@ -2,61 +2,109 @@ | |||
| "cells": [ | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
quimb is stylized lowercase and we should make the name a hyperlink to https://github.com/jcmgray/quimb
Reply via ReviewNB
| @@ -2,61 +2,109 @@ | |||
| "cells": [ | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Perhaps worth noting that the starting fidelity is already quite high, and it's because this is a small example.
Reply via ReviewNB
| @@ -2,61 +2,109 @@ | |||
| "cells": [ | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's surprising that the large-scale hardware result is so much better than the small-scale simulator results, as judged by the error. It probably deserves some explanation.
- In the small-scale simulator example, we computed the reference energy exactly. Would we have gotten the same value if we used the AQC reference circuit with 32 Trotter steps to compute the expectation value? If so, then perhaps we should just do that, to keep both the simulator and hardware sections consistent.
- If the values differ, this indicates that 32 Trotter steps is not enough, and we should increase it until the values match and then some more.
Reply via ReviewNB
3 participants
updated AQC tutorial to conform to new template, and address AQC related issues (#4269, and #4270)