quantum-computing

Several katas could have better error messaging:

• Superposition : the test harness could log the actual state of the system after prep vs the expected state before asserting that they are the same (the change would add state prep and logging using DumpMachine to AssertEqualOnZeroState)
• BasicGates : a similar improvement, but a bit more extra code to write a unified test wrapper

Here are some examples:

• Root README is missing machine learning category of samples
• README in algorithms is missing repeat-until-success and sudoku-grover
• [README in diagnostics](https://github.com/microsoft/Quantum/blob/main/samples/diagnostics/RE

What is the expected enhancement?

Qiskit/qiskit-terra#7643 implemented mocked IBM Quantum Systems backends using the new BackendV2 interface.

However, noisy simulation of pulse job using FakeBackendV2 is not possible because Aer doesn't support generating PulseSystemModel from V2 backends yet. This issue has been raised in Aer: https://github.com/Qiskit/qiskit-ae

Is your feature request related to a use case or problem? Please describe.
Right now a lot of modules (in particular tests) are pretty free form with how they do imports. It's a good practice to import modules wherever possible.

bad:

from cirq.devices import GridQubit

good:

from cirq import devices

devices.GridQubit(whatever)

**Describe the soluti

To get this codebase up to standard, we need to add type hints. At the very least, perhaps we should start insisting that all new code has type hints added, but moreover we need to add typing to the code that currently exists.

This is a pretty large project, but luckily it can be done incrementally - I believe at this point it's a stretch goal for v1, if anyone wants to help it would be much ap

Feature details

Due to the similarity, it is easy to confuse qml.X and qml.PauliX, especially since other methods of specifying circuits, e.g., QASM, use x for PauliX. But if a user uses qml.X in their circuit on a qubit device, nothing happens to inform them that the incorrect operation is being used:

@qml.qnode(dev)
def circ():
    qml.PauliX(wires=0)
    qml.Hada

The LaTeX code generated for the following simple circuit is invalid, and trying to plot the circuit results in a RuntimeError:

qc = QubitCircuit(1, num_cbits=1, reverse_states=False)
qc.add_measurement("M0", targets=0, classical_store=0)
qc.png

Setting reverse_states=True works fine.

The following line in QubitCircuit.latex_code() needs to include a sign dependent on the va

What is the expected enhancement?

The openQASM project should have release notes associated with each tagged release (see #321). These should contain a summary of all changes included in the prepared release (or the development branch). For ease (and distribution) of maintenance, we should consider using reno which has been used with success in Qiski

Describe the Issue

1. In section 2.4.3 on Controlled Rotations, the line "A controlled R_x(θ) could similarly be made using CNOT gates." seems incorrect.
2. I assume that the line claims that replacing R_y(θ/2) by R_x(θ/2) (similarly for the -θ case), in the circuit above, we would get a controlled R_x(θ). This is incorrect.
3. Passing |1> through q_0, we get X R_x(-θ/2) X R_x(θ/2)q_1, fo

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Adding concrete examples to API documentation comments can help clarify how Q# functions and operations are to be used. For example, the documentation for Microsoft.Quantum.Arrays.ElementsAt lists how the function acts on a variety of arrays:

right now, absolute jumps are conflated in the label object here. I'd prefer we instead introduce a new object called absolute-program-location or something like that. (I don't want to use "address" only because it feels too dishonest.) If we do this, then we'd change patch-labels to not overwrite these label objects, and we'