Update Qibo demo snippet on v0.34 changelog

[Misty-W]

Description

Now that Qibo is integrated with Mitiq, we don't need to use convert_to_mitiq for Qibo circuits.

---

License

• I license this contribution under the terms of the GNU GPL, version 3 and grant Unitary Fund the right to provide additional permissions as described in section 7 of the GNU GPL, version 3.

Before opening the PR, please ensure you have completed the following where appropriate.

• I added unit tests for new code.
• I used type hints in function signatures.
• I used Google-style docstrings for functions.
• I updated the documentation where relevant.
• Added myself / the copyright holder to the AUTHORS file

[natestemen]

Thanks for removing this! I'm still getting an error¹ when trying to run this example:

TypeError: unsupported operand type(s) for /: 'QuantumState' and 'int'

Is it running on your side? If it's not, it looks like we will need to use a different executor.

Footnotes

1. We need to import gates from qibo as well as import mitiq to make sure it runs, but then after those issues, we still get the type error :/. ↩

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 98.28%. Comparing base (e9b750d) to head (74302fc).
Report is 3 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #2212   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   98.28%   98.28%           
=======================================
  Files          90       90           
  Lines        4259     4259           
=======================================
  Hits         4186     4186           
  Misses         73       73           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[Misty-W]

I'm looking at this and realize now there are more problems- the circuit is trivial, no noise applied, and I'm not sure where the executor error is coming from.

[cosenal]

Closing this as v0.34 has been released already, and it looks like a working version of the Qibo snippet made it into the changelog.

[natestemen]

The code snippet in the changelog is still broken (I don't think it ever worked). Whether it's worth fixing, I'm not sure, but I don't love the fact that we have code in the changelog (which, IMO, is a suggestion for users to run) which does not run.

@Misty-W do you still want to update this?

[Misty-W]

The code snippet in the changelog is still broken (I don't think it ever worked). Whether it's worth fixing, I'm not sure, but I don't love the fact that we have code in the changelog (which, IMO, is a suggestion for users to run) which does not run.

@Misty-W do you still want to update this?

I’ll remove it.

[cosenal]

Sorry, I closed this PR because I thought the snippet from the changelog had been fixed already.

Anyway, I looked at the code of the snippet. It doesn't make sense to me even before executing it, and that's neither in the original form, nor in the form of this PR.

In the original form, we are converting the circuit from Qibo to Cirq, and then using a circuit.execute() executor function, which implies that Cirq has an execute function, but it doesn't look like that's the case.

On the other hand, in the form of this PR, we are trivially using the Qibo execute() function, which does exist, but doesn't even have the signature required, i.e., it returns an object that is not Mitiq's QuantumResult.

In both cases, I don't see why this should work in the simple form of the snippet, unless we write a non-trivial executor, similar to the one in the «Error mitigation with Qibo» example.

[natestemen]

In both cases, I don't see why this should work in the simple form of the snippet

My guess is that it went untested in #2191. Maybe a good practice to help eliminate this in the future is require 2 reviewers for release notes?