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

Cryoscope related protocols #974

Draft
wants to merge 21 commits into
base: 0.2
Choose a base branch
from
Draft

Cryoscope related protocols #974

wants to merge 21 commits into from

Conversation

andrea-pasquale
Copy link
Contributor

@andrea-pasquale andrea-pasquale commented Sep 2, 2024

This PR is adding 3 protocols which are related to the cryoscope.

  1. flux_gate: to measure how the qubit population changes when playing a flux pulse of a given amplitude sweeping duration. This is not really necessary but it is a nice sanity check to have to make sure that everything is working as expected. Eventually we could use it to play a native Z gate without shifting virtual phases. Here is an example: http://login.qrccluster.com:9000/eg3G7YxYTtO-VF-B1Yk_Og==
  2. flux_amplitude_frequency: to measure how much the qubit frequency changes by playing a flux pulse of fixed duration sweeping its amplitude Add experiment for qubit frequency vs flux amplitude  #1037. Here is an example: http://login.qrccluster.com:9000/P9gI7TgvQDCGY9BI8Y8nUA==
  3. cryoscope: to reconstruct the flux waveform played on the device. For the implementation I am following both the cryoscope paper and its repository https://github.com/DiCarloLab-Delft/PycQED_py3/blob/c4279cbebd97748dc47127e56f6225021f169257/pycqed/analysis/tools/cryoscope_tools.py. Currently no post-processing is implemented. Here is an example http://login.qrccluster.com:9000/rdvfAjs4SLqmOP1nOiBNSA==

Although the plot is significantly different from #1041, the reconstructed waveform seems to more or less agree with the expected one.
(3) requires (2) to reconstruct the waveform. Currently those parameters are hardcoded in the fitting. With @Edoardo-Pedicillo we agreed on moving them in the calibration object.

Checklist:

  • Reviewers confirm new code works as expected.
  • Tests are passing.
  • Coverage does not decrease.
  • Documentation is updated.
  • Compatibility with Qibo modules (Please edit this section if the current pull request is not compatible with the following branches).
    • Qibo: master
    • Qibolab: main
    • Qibolab_platforms_qrc: main

Copy link

codecov bot commented Sep 2, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 98.97611% with 3 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 97.11%. Comparing base (c280398) to head (5544539).

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
...bocal/protocols/two_qubit_interaction/cryoscope.py 98.30% 2 Missing ⚠️
src/qibocal/web/compared_report.py 90.00% 1 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##              0.2     #974      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   97.02%   97.11%   +0.09%     
==========================================
  Files          98      101       +3     
  Lines        7893     8178     +285     
==========================================
+ Hits         7658     7942     +284     
- Misses        235      236       +1     
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 97.11% <98.97%> (+0.09%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
src/qibocal/protocols/__init__.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/qibocal/protocols/flux_amplitude_frequency.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/qibocal/protocols/flux_gate.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...ibocal/protocols/two_qubit_interaction/__init__.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...ibocal/protocols/two_qubit_interaction/optimize.py 97.68% <ø> (ø)
...rotocols/two_qubit_interaction/virtual_z_phases.py 97.48% <100.00%> (+0.01%) ⬆️
src/qibocal/web/compared_report.py 99.18% <90.00%> (-0.82%) ⬇️
...bocal/protocols/two_qubit_interaction/cryoscope.py 98.30% <98.30%> (ø)

... and 1 file with indirect coverage changes

@andrea-pasquale andrea-pasquale changed the base branch from main to 0.2-more-protocols November 13, 2024 15:46
Base automatically changed from 0.2-more-protocols to 0.2 November 15, 2024 10:57
@andrea-pasquale andrea-pasquale changed the title Cryoscope Cryoscope related protocols Nov 18, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant