Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
Sequence unrolling with QM #738
Sequence unrolling with QM #738
Changes from 9 commits
96656f5
4c169d8
ecd1611
b4841f7
b935dfb
7d40211
1889424
6f85966
8e09cb0
f3aac36
555b12f
50af0a8
77d2d71
001f77f
d1c8c8a
7af1dee
4889778
72018be
ac31d56
eb853ec
d5b8b45
0aaf828
27893f8
2d0420e
5f77a71
12841b3
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
I'm not reviewing the whole module (maybe I should), but I wonder whether it is worth to have this nested structure (dictionary on names, and internally a list of keys), instead of unrolling to a single level.
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.
Of course, this depends on
.fetch_all()
requirements: if you have to call it on a given name, and it is much more efficient than individual.fetch()
(assuming it exists), then there is no wiggle room for anything else.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.
I think the structure is single level: each readout pulse is mapped to an
Acquisition
object. However multiple readout pulses may be mapped to the sameAcquisition
.We could implement it with a single dictionary
{ro_pulse: acquisition}
, I just think the current implementation which is basically the inverse of this dictionary, is more useful for the manipulations we do later on these objects. I guess it appears as nested because it is the inverse of a map that is non-invertible (in the math sense).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.
Aren't you overwriting
results[acquisition.qubit]
?acquisition
is always the same for allresult
(outer loop), and thenacquisition.qubit
as well. Isn't it?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.
Yes, but I think this is a more general problem with qibolab that extends beyond this driver.
Particularly, I am not sure how
results[qubit]
(hereresults
is what is returned byplatform.execute_pulse_sequence
) is defined if the sequence contains more than one measurements on the same qubit. I had the impression thatresults[qubit]
will only contain the last measurement and earlier measurements can only be accessed through their serial.For now, I think I would leave it as it is here, and I will open an issue (#809) for a general solution in 0.2.
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.
That's perfectly fine. I was not aware of the problem. Thanks for the issue