-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 946
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
MAHOUT-468 & MAHOUT-469 Add parameter object and bind at execution #472
Conversation
On the last commit- i had to specify my fork in the install (bc I added functionality that isn't available in main), we need a more elegant solution to do this. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I've read through and left some comments; can we add a button to run the Optimization_Example.ipynb in Colab so we can show it working?
@@ -29,7 +29,7 @@ | |||
{ | |||
"cell_type": "code", | |||
"source": [ | |||
"!pip install git+https://github.com/apache/mahout.git@main" | |||
"# pip install git+https://github.com/apache/mahout.git@main" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is this supposed to be commented out?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, for notebooks to actually be tested on the code that is being checked in it does.
@@ -0,0 +1,144 @@ | |||
{ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Does this need an "Open in Colab" button?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It could, what is the standard on those? (I've seen in notebook, in a readme file, both, neither)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't have a rule of thumb but I know it's on the Simple Example and it's great. Let's just add to .ipynb
files?
"qumat_instance.create_empty_circuit(1)\n", | ||
"\n", | ||
"# Apply parameterized RX, RY, and RZ gates\n", | ||
"qumat_instance.apply_rx_gate(0, 'theta')\n", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't see where theta
, phi
, and lambda
are defined, should we add those definitions?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That's a fair call out. They're standard in rotational gates, but it wouldn't hurt to add some docs calling them out.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If this runs for you I'm good approving; I'll make a new issue to add these def'ns later.
Purpose of PR:
Please give a short description of what this PR is for.
#468 Add a parameter object
#469 Bind Parameters at execution
with bonus notebook for optimization loop external to qumat
Important ToDos
Please mark each with an "x"
A JIRA ticket exists (if not, please create this first)[https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/mahout/]
Title of PR is "MAHOUT-XXXX Brief Description of Changes" where XXXX is the JIRA number.
Created unit tests where appropriate
Assigned JIRA to self
Added documentation in scala docs/java docs, and to website
https://colab.research.google.com/drive/1QgeqKZtkC_hOmffRprxJWMcC1g9YsMOE?usp=sharing qiskit
https://colab.research.google.com/drive/1M5tT7h2wRiGNYx48g_FDGPTKuogKxEzc?usp=sharing cirq
bracket untested
Does this change break earlier versions?
no
Is this the beginning of a larger project for which a feature branch should be made?
no