Skip to content
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

Consider updating the fractional gates tutorial #2479

Open
yaelbh opened this issue Dec 16, 2024 · 1 comment
Open

Consider updating the fractional gates tutorial #2479

yaelbh opened this issue Dec 16, 2024 · 1 comment
Assignees

Comments

@yaelbh
Copy link
Contributor

yaelbh commented Dec 16, 2024

Regarding this tutorial: https://github.com/Qiskit/documentation/blob/main/docs/guides/fractional-gates.ipynb
We recently added a new feature: transpilation of circuits with a backend that supports fractional gates will automatically transform the circuits, such that all rzz numeric angles are in the valid range of 0 - pi/2.

I think we should add a comment about it in the tutorial, because:

  1. Users may be confused that their circuit ran successfully, in spite of invalid angles therein.
  2. To inform users about a modification of their circuit during transpilation.

But I also hesitate, having the concern that this will make the tutorial too detailed and complex. In particular note that the transformation applies to numeric angles but not to parametric ones.

Discussion a bit of discussion in Qiskit/qiskit-ibm-runtime#2043.

cc: @nkanazawa1989 @wshanks @kaelynj

@wshanks
Copy link
Contributor

wshanks commented Dec 16, 2024

I agree it would be good to mention that the qiskit-ibm-runtime transpiler plugin can handle the rzz angles when they are numeric, but I would rather let the docs team decide where that level of detail goes. Maybe it could be a footnote on the angle range given at the beginning of the document. Or maybe it could be a section near the end or in a separate linked document if there is another document on transpilation that is more appropriate.

@kaelynj kaelynj added content 📄 needs triage 🤔 this issue needs to be prioritized by the docs team labels Dec 16, 2024
@abbycross abbycross removed the needs triage 🤔 this issue needs to be prioritized by the docs team label Dec 19, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
Status: No status
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants