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

Add condition operation and forgetting #78

Open
khosravipasha opened this issue Mar 18, 2021 · 4 comments
Open

Add condition operation and forgetting #78

khosravipasha opened this issue Mar 18, 2021 · 4 comments

Comments

@khosravipasha
Copy link
Collaborator

  1. Condition might be slightly different than what we have implemented. Maybe rename to something like conjoin_literals.

  2. In what cases this is possible? I get error when trying it on Sdds.

@khosravipasha khosravipasha changed the title Rename condition to conjoin_literals Rename condition to conjoin_literal Mar 23, 2021
@guyvdbroeck
Copy link
Member

The naming issue was resolved in e92c417 where condition is now conjoin in the transformations.
We should still consider adding a condition operation though, and a forgetting one -- leaving this issue open.

@khosravipasha
Copy link
Collaborator Author

What was the main difference with condition vs conjoin? Would be a nice example in the docs.
We already have forgetting, but maybe not for all types of circuit.

@guyvdbroeck
Copy link
Member

The function after conditioning on X no longer depends on X. The function after conjoining with X still depends on it and fixes it to one value.

@khosravipasha khosravipasha changed the title Rename condition to conjoin_literal Add condition operation and forgetting Nov 4, 2021
@khosravipasha
Copy link
Collaborator Author

renamed since original issue was resolved and other new things were suggested.

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants