RX90 calibration implementation #1044

ElStabilini · 2024-11-20T13:07:17Z

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

codecov · 2024-11-20T13:09:10Z

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 96.98%. Comparing base (4a1251a) to head (837cc08).
Report is 83 commits behind head on 0.2.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##              0.2    #1044      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   97.04%   96.98%   -0.07%     
==========================================
  Files          98       98              
  Lines        7893     7949      +56     
==========================================
+ Hits         7660     7709      +49     
- Misses        233      240       +7

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	`96.98% <100.00%> (-0.07%)`	⬇️

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

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/qibocal/protocols/flipping.py	`98.60% <100.00%> (+0.13%)`	⬆️
src/qibocal/protocols/rabi/amplitude.py	`96.87% <100.00%> (+0.10%)`	⬆️
src/qibocal/protocols/rabi/amplitude_frequency.py	`97.95% <100.00%> (+0.02%)`	⬆️
...bocal/protocols/rabi/amplitude_frequency_signal.py	`98.46% <100.00%> (+0.08%)`	⬆️
src/qibocal/protocols/rabi/amplitude_signal.py	`97.59% <100.00%> (+0.18%)`	⬆️
src/qibocal/protocols/rabi/ef.py	`100.00% <100.00%> (ø)`
src/qibocal/protocols/rabi/length.py	`96.20% <100.00%> (+0.09%)`	⬆️
src/qibocal/protocols/rabi/length_frequency.py	`97.05% <100.00%> (+0.02%)`	⬆️
.../qibocal/protocols/rabi/length_frequency_signal.py	`97.79% <100.00%> (+0.11%)`	⬆️
src/qibocal/protocols/rabi/length_signal.py	`96.59% <100.00%> (+0.24%)`	⬆️
... and 2 more

... and 3 files with indirect coverage changes

ElStabilini · 2024-11-20T13:38:35Z

I attach here some reports where I tested the code:

rabi_amplitude routine: RX($pi$), RX($\pi/2$)
rabi_amplitude_frequency_routine: RX($\pi$), RX($\pi/2$)
rabi_length routine: RX($\pi$), RX($\pi/2$)
All $\pi/2$ routines were executed using the main platform in and the code from ec4b7ad, while $\pi$ routines were run using qibocal branch 0.2

andrea-pasquale · 2024-11-20T15:13:25Z

Thanks @ElStabilini, the results seem to make sense since for both amplitude and duration there is a factor 2. I think that rather than changing the protocol completly we could consider adding a flag to specify whether we want to calibrate the RX or RX90 pulse. We should also check the corresponding update function in the protocols to be consistent.
Eventually we can do the same for both the flipping and the drag calibration. For now let's finish first rabi.

src/qibocal/update.py

src/qibocal/protocols/rabi/length_signal.py

src/qibocal/protocols/rabi/length_frequency_signal.py

ElStabilini · 2024-11-21T07:47:31Z

Thanks @ElStabilini, the results seem to make sense since for both amplitude and duration there is a factor 2. I think that rather than changing the protocol completly we could consider adding a flag to specify whether we want to calibrate the RX or RX90 pulse. We should also check the corresponding update function in the protocols to be consistent. Eventually we can do the same for both the flipping and the drag calibration. For now let's finish first rabi.

@andrea-pasquale I see this only now, I should have done this by adding the pihalf_pulse (soon rx90) option, correct?
Regarding routines, should I change them even though I added a new RX90 native gate and left untouched the RX?

for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci

Merge branch 'pi_half' of github.com:qiboteam/qibocal into pi_half

We changed the default runcard option to False (by default will calibrate pi pulse)

andrea-pasquale

Thanks for the updates @ElStabilini.
At this point I would rename everywhere pihalf_pulse to rx90.
Everything else looks good to me.

doc/source/protocols/rabi/rabi.rst

src/qibocal/protocols/rabi/ef.py

doc/source/protocols/rabi/rabi.rst

Merge branch 'pi_half' of github.com:qiboteam/qibocal into pi_half

andrea-pasquale · 2024-11-21T14:33:35Z

Regarding routines, should I change them even though I added a new RX90 native gate and left untouched the RX?

Just to avoid too many things at the same time I suggest to focus first on rabi experiments. In another PR we can propagate these changes to the other protocols.

alecandido · 2024-11-30T07:08:32Z

@ElStabilini just to provide you some context about #1044 (comment), the clear advantage of the proposed syntax is neither saving characters nor lines.

The most prominent difference between the equivalent expressions is that one is imperative, the other functional.
In the first one, you or conditioning the entire assignment operation, as the process of defining a variable name and its associated value. In principle, you need to analyze both branches of the conditional to ensure that the variable (pulse_name in this case) is even defined.
Instead, when using the ternary operation you are not conditioning the assignment as an operation, which becomes just an alias for a given computation. The computation is an expression, that always has a value. But it's the value itself the one being conditioned.

The functional approach makes the computation flow clearer, since it is somehow more rigid (you're not even thinking about operations, and possibly memory, but just values manipulation), and makes the analysis simpler and more effective. In languages which are actually functional, this may empower the compiler to act more aggressively. In Python, it makes the linters more effective[*], leading to fewer errors and more helpful messages :)

[*]: since it optimizes the simplicity of the code, it makes it also more human-readable in general

ElStabilini · 2024-11-30T07:10:37Z

@ElStabilini just to provide you some context about #1044 (comment), the clear advantage of the proposed syntax is neither saving characters nor lines.

The most prominent difference between the equivalent expressions is that one is imperative, the other functional. In the first one, you or conditioning the entire assignment operation, as the process of defining a variable name and its associated value. In principle, you need to analyze both branches of the conditional to ensure that the variable (pulse_name in this case) is even defined. Instead, when using the ternary operation you are not conditioning the assignment as an operation, which becomes just an alias for a given computation. The computation is an expression, that always has a value. But it's the value itself the one being conditioned.

The functional approach makes the computation flow clearer, since it is somehow more rigid (you're not even thinking about operations, and possibly memory, but just values manipulation), and makes the analysis simpler and more effective. In languages which are actually functional, this may empower the compiler to act more aggressively. In Python, it makes the linters more effective[*], leading to fewer errors and more helpful messages :)

[*]: since it optimizes the simplicity of the code, it makes it also more human-readable in general

It definitely makes sense, thank you!

alecandido

Generally good, and pretty much ready to go.

The main suggestions are about the docs. The other ones are very minor refactor requests, which could even be neglected.

alecandido · 2024-12-03T16:27:38Z

doc/source/protocols/flipping.rst

+	- id: flipping
+	  operation: flipping
+	  parameters:
+	    delta_amplitude: 0.05
+	    nflips_max: 30
+	    nflips_step: 1
+	    rx90: True


Try to indent with spaces, not tabs (you can set your editor to do that)

alecandido · 2024-12-03T16:27:47Z

doc/source/protocols/rabi/rabi.rst

+        pulse_length: 40
+        nshots: 1024
+        relaxation_time: 50000
+	rx90: True


Another tab here ^^

Still present...

alecandido · 2024-12-03T16:32:02Z

doc/source/protocols/rabi/rabi.rst

+In all the previous examples we run Rabi experiments for calibrating the amplitude (duration) of the drive pulse
+to excite the qubit from the ground state up to state :math:`\ket{1}`.
+All these example runcards can be modified to calibrate the amplitude (duration) of the drive pulse
+to excite the qubit from the ground state up to state :math:`\frac{\ket{0}-i\ket{1}}{\sqrt{2}}` by simply setting the `rx90` parameter to `True`.


Instead of mentioning the experiment in the general section, and describe it only in the example, you may move this description up, and just cite here you're performing the pi/2 described above.

Moreover, a description of the sequence (i.e. "same, but replace each pi with two pi/2") and a brief motivation may be appreciated. Then, you may cite this section in the flipping, instead of repeating it.

Even a reference to the literature you consulted may be appreciated as well :)

alecandido · 2024-12-03T16:45:10Z

src/qibocal/protocols/flipping.py

+    if rx90:
+        sequence |= natives.RX90()

-        qd_channel, rx_pulse = natives.RX()[0]
+        for _ in range(flips):
+            qd_channel, qd_pulse = natives.RX90()[0]

-        rx_detuned = update.replace(
-            rx_pulse, amplitude=rx_pulse.amplitude + delta_amplitude
-        )
-        sequence.append((qd_channel, rx_detuned))
-        sequence.append((qd_channel, rx_detuned))
+            qd_detuned = update.replace(
+                qd_pulse, delta_amplitude=qd_pulse.amplitude + delta_amplitude
+            )
+
+            sequence.append((qd_channel, qd_detuned))
+            sequence.append((qd_channel, qd_detuned))
+            sequence.append((qd_channel, qd_detuned))
+            sequence.append((qd_channel, qd_detuned))
+
+        sequence |= natives.MZ()
+
+    else:
+        sequence |= natives.R(theta=np.pi / 2)

-    sequence |= natives.MZ()
+        for _ in range(flips):
+            qd_channel, qd_pulse = natives.RX()[0]
+
+            qd_detuned = update.replace(
+                qd_pulse, amplitude=qd_pulse.amplitude + delta_amplitude
+            )
+            sequence.append((qd_channel, qd_detuned))
+            sequence.append((qd_channel, qd_detuned))
+
+        sequence |= natives.MZ()


A good chunk of code is duplicated between the two branches. You may try to scope further the if within the sequence definition, to minimize duplication.

(In general, there is no exact solution about how to make code "minimal" or "simplest" - but here there is some room for improvements ^^)

src/qibocal/protocols/flipping.py

alecandido · 2024-12-03T16:54:17Z

src/qibocal/protocols/rabi/utils.py

+        if rx90:
+            qd_channel, qd_pulse = natives.RX90()[0]
+        else:
+            qd_channel, qd_pulse = natives.RX()[0]


In case you like code golf as well, you may try to deduplicate even this one (but it's absolutely not needed)

alecandido · 2024-12-03T16:57:02Z

tests/test_protocols.py

+        extract_rabi(RabiAmplitudeEFData)
+
+
+def test_extract_rabi():


This is redefining the former, thus shadowing it.

You have to use two different names in order to be able to access both, and thus also to run both in Pytest.

While a redefinition is not an error, it is unlikely that you want to define a function that already exists. Consequently, your editor may have warned you about this (or better, Ruff should have done it).

Co-authored-by: Alessandro Candido <[email protected]>

for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci

Co-authored-by: Alessandro Candido <[email protected]>

Merge branch 'pi_half' of github.com:qiboteam/qibocal into pi_half

change syntax

doc/source/protocols/rabi/rabi.rst

Co-authored-by: Alessandro Candido <[email protected]>

alecandido

I did not test the current status, but I trust you did.

Other than some formatting, and tiny (and irrelevant) potential deduplication, this PR should be ready to go :)

alecandido · 2024-12-09T08:52:22Z

doc/source/protocols/flipping.rst

+	- id: flipping
+	  operation: flipping
+	  parameters:
+	    delta_amplitude: 0.05
+	    nflips_max: 30
+	    nflips_step: 1


Still plenty of tabs, instead of spaces...

alecandido · 2024-12-09T08:52:35Z

doc/source/protocols/rabi/rabi.rst

+        pulse_length: 40
+        nshots: 1024
+        relaxation_time: 50000
+	rx90: True


Still present...

andrea-pasquale

Thanks @ElStabilini for all the updates. I just have a few comments.
I still need to run the code on hardware myself but everything looks good so far.

andrea-pasquale · 2024-12-09T08:30:58Z

doc/source/protocols/flipping.rst

+	- id: flipping
+	  operation: flipping
+	  parameters:
+	    delta_amplitude: 0.05
+	    nflips_max: 30
+	    nflips_step: 1


Tab to be fixed

andrea-pasquale · 2024-12-09T08:36:14Z

src/qibocal/protocols/flipping.py

+    if rx90:
+        sequence |= natives.RX90()
+    else:
+        sequence |= natives.R(theta=np.pi / 2)


Here it is not clear to me why we need to differentiate these two lines. I think we can just add the second version, since the fit is not "considering" the first RX90 since we extract the amplitude from the number of flips (which doesn't include the first one).

src/qibocal/protocols/flipping.py

Merge branch 'pi_half' of github.com:qiboteam/qibocal into pi_half

Co-authored-by: Andrea Pasquale <[email protected]>

ElStabilini added 2 commits November 19, 2024 11:19

first test for swittching from pi to pi-half

14f80b4

fixed pi half calibration sequence

ec4b7ad

ElStabilini requested review from alecandido, andrea-pasquale and Edoardo-Pedicillo November 20, 2024 13:07

andrea-pasquale changed the base branch from main to 0.2 November 20, 2024 13:08

modified classes and methods for running rabi for RX90

9f63c69

andrea-pasquale reviewed Nov 20, 2024

View reviewed changes

src/qibocal/update.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

src/qibocal/protocols/rabi/length_signal.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

src/qibocal/protocols/rabi/length_frequency_signal.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

ElStabilini added 2 commits November 21, 2024 08:37

added option to save duration of RX90 pulse

33db217

started modifying rabi ef for using RX90

32cceda

ElStabilini and others added 10 commits November 21, 2024 11:56

modified pihalf_pulse to rx90 in parameters

7661361

Update rabi.rst

d03f383

[pre-commit.ci] auto fixes from pre-commit.com hooks

d0c1228

for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci

set pi calibration as default and change rx90 dtype

e6a2395

Saving modified documentation

144f468

Merge branch 'pi_half' of github.com:qiboteam/qibocal into pi_half

fix ordering error

c112748

moved all pihalf_pulses in Rabi-Data class

f083434

moved all pihalf_pulses in Rabi-Data class

f52765f

fixed errors

efcb55a

Update rabi.rst

66f0b71

We changed the default runcard option to False (by default will calibrate pi pulse)

andrea-pasquale reviewed Nov 21, 2024

View reviewed changes

doc/source/protocols/rabi/rabi.rst Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

src/qibocal/protocols/rabi/ef.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

doc/source/protocols/rabi/rabi.rst Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

andrea-pasquale changed the title ~~RX$\pi/2$ calibration implementation~~ RX90 calibration implementation Nov 21, 2024

ElStabilini added 2 commits November 21, 2024 18:17

fixed amplitude_sequence and length_sequence inputs

1f16f50

Sync remote and local branches

f8e9021

Merge branch 'pi_half' of github.com:qiboteam/qibocal into pi_half

fixed acquisition error

a08cf3c

ElStabilini added 4 commits December 3, 2024 10:34

fix compatibility with qibo v0.2.14

7660fde

fix conflict with pyproject.toml for branch 0.2

2d8c8f7

fix error in flipping sequence construction for rx90

1bac594

Merge branch '0.2' into pi_half

af82fec

ElStabilini marked this pull request as ready for review December 3, 2024 15:31

ElStabilini requested a review from alecandido December 3, 2024 17:40

alecandido reviewed Dec 3, 2024

View reviewed changes

ElStabilini and others added 7 commits December 6, 2024 07:25

Update src/qibocal/protocols/flipping.py

228a02e

Co-authored-by: Alessandro Candido <[email protected]>

[pre-commit.ci] auto fixes from pre-commit.com hooks

35c7178

for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci

Update src/qibocal/protocols/flipping.py

8950008

Co-authored-by: Alessandro Candido <[email protected]>

fix test definition and improve code for flipping with rx90 gate

b90f887

'sync remote and local fixes'

23ee280

Merge branch 'pi_half' of github.com:qiboteam/qibocal into pi_half

Update utils.py

01a4d1a

change syntax

improve documentation for flipping and rabi protocols

c5bb28f

alecandido reviewed Dec 6, 2024

View reviewed changes

doc/source/protocols/rabi/rabi.rst Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

Update doc/source/protocols/rabi/rabi.rst

f62bbc3

Co-authored-by: Alessandro Candido <[email protected]>

ElStabilini requested review from alecandido and andrea-pasquale December 9, 2024 08:02

alecandido approved these changes Dec 9, 2024

View reviewed changes

andrea-pasquale reviewed Dec 9, 2024

View reviewed changes

ElStabilini and others added 4 commits December 11, 2024 17:17

create first RX90 of the sequence always using R.(theta=pi/2)

832d0e9

fix tabs

05c2886

sync remote and local update

478c864

Merge branch 'pi_half' of github.com:qiboteam/qibocal into pi_half

Update src/qibocal/protocols/flipping.py

837cc08

Co-authored-by: Andrea Pasquale <[email protected]>

andrea-pasquale approved these changes Dec 11, 2024

View reviewed changes

ElStabilini merged commit 7b23156 into 0.2 Dec 12, 2024
21 checks passed

ElStabilini deleted the pi_half branch December 12, 2024 14:14

andrea-pasquale mentioned this pull request Dec 12, 2024

RX90 calibration #1042

Closed

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

RX90 calibration implementation #1044

RX90 calibration implementation #1044

ElStabilini commented Nov 20, 2024 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Nov 20, 2024 •

edited

Loading

ElStabilini commented Nov 20, 2024

andrea-pasquale commented Nov 20, 2024

ElStabilini commented Nov 21, 2024 •

edited

Loading

andrea-pasquale left a comment

andrea-pasquale commented Nov 21, 2024

alecandido commented Nov 30, 2024

ElStabilini commented Nov 30, 2024

alecandido left a comment

alecandido Dec 3, 2024

alecandido Dec 3, 2024

alecandido Dec 9, 2024

alecandido Dec 3, 2024

alecandido Dec 3, 2024

alecandido Dec 3, 2024

alecandido Dec 3, 2024

alecandido Dec 3, 2024

alecandido Dec 3, 2024

alecandido left a comment

alecandido Dec 9, 2024

alecandido Dec 9, 2024

andrea-pasquale left a comment

andrea-pasquale Dec 9, 2024

andrea-pasquale Dec 9, 2024

RX90 calibration implementation #1044

RX90 calibration implementation #1044

Conversation

ElStabilini commented Nov 20, 2024 • edited Loading

codecov bot commented Nov 20, 2024 • edited Loading

Codecov Report

ElStabilini commented Nov 20, 2024

andrea-pasquale commented Nov 20, 2024

ElStabilini commented Nov 21, 2024 • edited Loading

andrea-pasquale left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

andrea-pasquale commented Nov 21, 2024

alecandido commented Nov 30, 2024

ElStabilini commented Nov 30, 2024

alecandido left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

alecandido left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

andrea-pasquale left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ElStabilini commented Nov 20, 2024 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Nov 20, 2024 •

edited

Loading

ElStabilini commented Nov 21, 2024 •

edited

Loading