Check for gate parameter #12439
Check for gate parameter #12439
Conversation
|
Thank you for opening a new pull request. Before your PR can be merged it will first need to pass continuous integration tests and be reviewed. Sometimes the review process can be slow, so please be patient. While you're waiting, please feel free to review other open PRs. While only a subset of people are authorized to approve pull requests for merging, everyone is encouraged to review open pull requests. Doing reviews helps reduce the burden on the core team and helps make the project's code better for everyone. One or more of the following people are relevant to this code:
|
Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 9136334258Details
💛 - Coveralls |
|
@1ucian0 , pulse features are being deprecated in Qiskit, and being moved to Qiskit Dynamics, is this PR required anymore? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hi @MozammilQ , thanks for working on this! Yes, although Pulse is being deprecated in Qiskit 1.3 and will be removed in 2.0, it would still be good to have this as part of the extended support window for the 1.x series.
For moving forward please note the following:
- Update your branch to include all the recent changes including the move
Targetto Rust. We still haveTargetclass intarget.pywithhas_calibrationandget_calibrationthere so your changes are still valid. - Once this PR is ready we will want to merge it into the 1.4 branch and not 2.0.
I also left some line comments after partially reviewing this.
releasenotes/notes/Fixed-param-gate-target-has-and-get_calibration-d2b9e38d63592b3c.yaml
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
releasenotes/notes/Fixed-param-gate-target-has-and-get_calibration-d2b9e38d63592b3c.yaml
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
releasenotes/notes/Fixed-param-gate-target-has-and-get_calibration-d2b9e38d63592b3c.yaml
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 11995012388Details
💛 - Coveralls |
ddc9411 to
6aa011f
Compare
|
Thank you for opening a new pull request. Before your PR can be merged it will first need to pass continuous integration tests and be reviewed. Sometimes the review process can be slow, so please be patient. While you're waiting, please feel free to review other open PRs. While only a subset of people are authorized to approve pull requests for merging, everyone is encouraged to review open pull requests. Doing reviews helps reduce the burden on the core team and helps make the project's code better for everyone. One or more of the following people are relevant to this code:
|
|
@eliarbel , please have a look :) |
|
Thank you for opening a new pull request. Before your PR can be merged it will first need to pass continuous integration tests and be reviewed. Sometimes the review process can be slow, so please be patient. While you're waiting, please feel free to review other open PRs. While only a subset of people are authorized to approve pull requests for merging, everyone is encouraged to review open pull requests. Doing reviews helps reduce the burden on the core team and helps make the project's code better for everyone. One or more of the following people are relevant to this code:
|
Summary
This PR aims to fix an issue with
Target.has_calibration()andTarget.get_calibration()when passed with parameterized gates didn't work as expected.Refer to issues for more information.
#11658
#11657
Details and comments
To be precise,
Target.has_calibration()didn't check if the calibration if present is present for a particular gate with a particular parameter,and,
Target.get_calibration()didn't get the calibration for the gate if present is present for a particular gate with a particular parameter, when passed as a parameter asargs, the method tried to bind thisargswith a parameter in the schedule, which was not the intention of this particularargs.So, the signature of
Target.has_calibrationincludes a new argumentoperation_paramswhich has to be passed with the parameter of theGateif the Gate is parameterized.Similarly, the signature of
Target.get_calibrationalso includes a new argumentoperation_paramswhich has to be passed with the parameter of theGateif the Gate is parameterized. In the case ofargsargument in this function, it should be passed with the values to be bound with the parameter of the schedule which has been attached to this particular gate as its calibration.fixes #11658
fixes #11657