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

Implement optimal cutting of a single, general two-qubit unitary #531

Open
garrison opened this issue Apr 3, 2024 · 1 comment · May be fixed by #568
Open

Implement optimal cutting of a single, general two-qubit unitary #531

garrison opened this issue Apr 3, 2024 · 1 comment · May be fixed by #568
Labels
cutting QPD-based circuit cutting code enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@garrison
Copy link
Member

garrison commented Apr 3, 2024

The decomposition we currently use for cutting a general two-qubit unitary is given by https://arxiv.org/abs/2006.11174. When that work was published, it was not known whether their decomposition was optimal. More recently, the authors of https://arxiv.org/abs/2312.11638 provided a better decomposition that is provably optimal (see e.g. the intro to Sec. 3 in the current version of their paper). However, the decompositions are equivalent for all the "named" gates we care about, such as CRXGate, and even XXPlusYYGate. We should eventually implement this optimal decomposition, but it will only be relevant for arbitrary UnitaryGates and similar. All the standard gates that I have considered are already cut with optimal overhead by the existing method.

@garrison garrison added enhancement New feature or request cutting QPD-based circuit cutting code labels Apr 3, 2024
@garrison
Copy link
Member Author

The optimal decomposition will require an ancilla on each side of the cut. See #568 (comment).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
cutting QPD-based circuit cutting code enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

1 participant