-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 21
✨ Implement HHL algorithm #582
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
Conversation
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅ 📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know! |
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.
This is indeed a fairly limited application of HHL, but still a reasonable one.
In the very end, these circuits are not so different to the QPE circuits we have already. But it is still nice to see.
Random thought: at some point we should actually verify that all of the algorithms here (especially the ones we implement on our own) do the right thing. While not increasingly important from a compiler benchmarking perspective, this becomes increasingly relevant when these algorithms should actually be executed.
Signed-off-by: Nils Quetschlich <[email protected]>
…ple times Co-authored-by: Copilot Autofix powered by AI <62310815+github-advanced-security[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> Signed-off-by: Nils Quetschlich <[email protected]>
Quite some time ago, the HHL implementation based on
qiskit.algorithms
has been removed. Now, the time has come to re-add this benchmark.In this current implementation, a simplified version is implemented that solves a specific linear equation system and the
num_qubits
scale the number of QPE qubits. This gives the advantages of getting a circuit that actually has the specified number of qubits in comparison to before.However, while I think this implementation could and should be improved in the future, this might be a fair starting point.
This PR resolves #216.