-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 35
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
Unexpected output with parallel boundary edges #81
Comments
oscarhiggott
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Feb 1, 2024
…erGraph boundary nodes results in parallel boundary edges. Fixes #81.
oscarhiggott
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Feb 1, 2024
…ersion from UserGraph to MatchingGraph/SearchGraph (#86) * Ensure that parallel edge with minimum weight is kept when merging UserGraph boundary nodes results in parallel boundary edges. Fixes #81. * Update pm::UserGraph::to_search_graph to match parallel boundary edge behaviour of pm::UserGraph::to_matching_graph * Refactor by adding UserGraph::to_matching_or_search_graph_helper * Bump stim version in ci * Unpin ninja version in ci * Remove matrix.python-version in ci * Add setup-python action to build_wheels in ci * Update cibuildwheel to v2.16.5 * Specify python-version in pip_install ci * Add back macosx deployment target in build_wheels in ci
Hi Basudha, thanks for flagging this, this issue has now been fixed in PR #86 (which correctly outputs |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
When decoding this matching graph:
pymatching outputs
[1 1 0 0]
but I would have expected[0 0 0 1]
. Do you know what the reason could be for this? Thanks!The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: