fix: Allow circuits containing CnZ gates to run on AerBackend
#369
Conversation
Fixed the bug for #368
I change the gate name with `mcz` for CnZ and edit test functions. https://github.com/CQCL/pytket-qiskit/blob/49816251a059db704a40a50e61e00742fe85c361/pytket/extensions/qiskit/qiskit_convert.py#L706
| @@ -702,7 +702,9 @@ def append_tk_command_to_qiskit( | |||
| if optype == OpType.CnY: | |||
| return qcirc.append(qiskit_gates.YGate().control(len(qargs) - 1), qargs) | |||
| if optype == OpType.CnZ: | |||
| return qcirc.append(qiskit_gates.ZGate().control(len(qargs) - 1), qargs) | |||
| new_gate = qiskit_gates.ZGate().control(len(qargs) - 1) | |||
| new_gate.name = "mcz" | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you freely choose this name? Could we do cnz?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Unfortunately 'cnz' doesn't work because AerSimulater accepts the name 'mcz'.
In general, AerSimulater accepts the gete list on blow
#368 (comment)
|
Maybe the changelog should be updated as well for this fix? https://github.com/CQCL/pytket-qiskit/blob/main/docs/changelog.rst |
docs/changelog.rst
Outdated
| @@ -13,6 +13,7 @@ Unreleased | |||
| * Add conversion of controlled unitary gates from qiskit to tket. | |||
| * Initialize `TketAutoPass` with a `BackendV2`. | |||
| * Update `TketBackend` to derive from `BackendV2`. | |||
| * Fix to allow `AerBackend` to work with multi-controlled Y and Z gates. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think the handling of multi-controlled-Y gates has been changed in this PR. I think its just multi-controlled-Z gates that are given a different name.
tests/backend_test.py
Outdated
| compilation_pass = b.default_compilation_pass(i) | ||
| compilation_pass.apply(circ) | ||
| unitary_after = circ.get_unitary() | ||
| assert compare_unitaries(unitary_before, unitary_after) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is unitary comparision needed in this test? I guess we just want to verify that the circuit containing the CnZ is runable on AerBackend. Not sure what the purpose of checking that the unitary is the same before/after compilation is for. Guess it does no harm.
I don't think the handling of the other multi-controlled gates has changed at all
There was a problem hiding this comment.
True, it would be more useful to have a test that the circuit ran correctly, to confirm that the conversion was correct. I'll change the test.
CalMacCQ
changed the title
AerBackend
CalMacCQ
changed the title
AerBackendAerBackend
|
Changed the PR title for clarity |
Description
Replace CnY and CnZ in qiskit gates
519a512?diff=split&w=1
Make a test function
9412856?diff=split&w=0
Related issues
#368
Checklist