WIP: leakage-aware GST #410

rileyjmurray · 2024-03-19T19:15:31Z

TODOs

Leakage analysis that's important, but out of scope for this PR.

systems with > 1 qubit.
systems with > 1 leakage level.
CPTP kite models

rileyjmurray · 2025-03-25T14:36:05Z

Text from an email Piper sent (not showing plots since they contained real data):

I was looking at the model violation tab, trying to work out why the smaller L models weren’t fitting the data as well as might be expected as quantified by Nsigma. I think this maybe be a function of how we calculate Nsigma = (2delta logl -k)/sqrt(2k). The number of non-gauge model parameters N_p is reported as 351 in the leakage-enhanced GST report (I don’t have any particular sense of whether this is correct). The number of data points N_s is 193 for L=1. This means that k (the degrees of freedom) is negative if you just calculate it as N_s-N_p. In cases like this, pyGSTi chooses k=1. k remains small until L is fairly large, which means two delta logl must be quite small for Nsigma to be small. This explains why we don’t see any red boxes in the per sequence detail for the L=1 iteration (and Nsigma is large enough that I would expect to see some or at least more dark gray squares than can be seen).

If you directly compare two delta logl between the two fits, you can see that the two delta logl is in fact smaller in the leakage-enhanced report than in the standard report.

I think the solution here is just to make sure that the first iteration of leakage-aware GST uses L=2 instead of L=1. (Or, more generally, we use the smallest L where N_s > N_p.)

rileyjmurray

Leaving file-level comments so @coreyostrove and I can figure out what to split out from this PR.

rileyjmurray · 2025-07-24T20:24:48Z

pygsti/algorithms/gaugeopt.py

Changes here ARE leakage-specific and CANNOT be moved to another PR.

rileyjmurray · 2025-07-24T20:27:32Z

pygsti/circuits/circuit.py

This change is needed for correctness; it's not leakage-specific.

rileyjmurray · 2025-07-24T20:27:52Z

pygsti/data/dataset.py

The change in 42f0cf3 (the date is misleading because I force-pushed) is not leakage-specific and seems worth keeping.

rileyjmurray · 2025-07-24T20:39:39Z

pygsti/modelmembers/operations/embeddederrorgen.py

Type annotations; not leakage-specific.

rileyjmurray · 2025-07-24T20:39:51Z

pygsti/modelmembers/operations/experrorgenop.py

Type annotations; not leakage-specific.

rileyjmurray · 2025-07-24T21:12:08Z

pygsti/tools/jamiolkowski.py

Not leakage-specific, but necessary for leakage analysis.

rileyjmurray · 2025-07-24T21:15:05Z

pygsti/tools/optools.py

Changes needed for leakage analysis, plus a handful for non-leakage-specific changes.

rileyjmurray · 2025-07-24T21:15:31Z

pygsti/tools/sdptools.py

Changes needed for leakage analysis, and useful more broadly

rileyjmurray · 2025-07-24T21:18:50Z

test/unit/algorithms/test_gaugeopt_correctness.py

Not leakage-specific

rileyjmurray · 2025-07-24T21:19:48Z

test/unit/tools/test_optools.py

Modest tests for code used in leakage analysis

…inearOperator (not just plain numpy ndarrays)

…frobenius norm computation. Bugfix in test_optools.py.

…lots of in-line comments explaining the logic.

…poses

…anch that omitted jac as a keyword argument to scipy.minimize, even if jac was None.

…nt fidelity from the calculation of that metric itself. This makes it easier to reuse the setup code in other metrics. While making this change, also make the setup more efficient by using TensorProduct bases from the beginning.

…imizers. Right now only entanglement fidelity and jtracedist have implementations that can consider leakage. (So there are no leakage-aware metrics for SPAM.)

…dded annotations to all gauage optimization objectives used in the non-LS optimizer, indicating if that particular objective has support for leakage-aware metrics.

… while. The tests only consider when no leakage is modeled. New tests wil be needed for when theres a leakage dimension

… that various gauge optimization functions don`t raise errors.

…. Correct bug in sdptools.py::cptp_superop_variable that showed up when using bases whose first element was the identity (not the case in the leakage-friendly basis)

…eadability improvements.

…elf` and make it a static method.

…eterizations on non-qubit spaces (for example, qutrit spaces) by changing the default error generator basis.

…n from ConfidenceRegionFactoryView.compute_confidence_interval(...) function, moving it to its own public instance method.

…n __eq__

rileyjmurray · 2025-07-25T18:53:38Z

pygsti/tools/optools.py

    """
-    povm_mx = compute_povm_map(model, povmlbl)
-    target_povm_mx = compute_povm_map(target_model, povmlbl)
-    return diamonddist(povm_mx, target_povm_mx, target_model.basis)
+    try:
+        povm_mx = compute_povm_map(model, povmlbl)
+        target_povm_mx = compute_povm_map(target_model, povmlbl)
+        return diamonddist(povm_mx, target_povm_mx, target_model.basis)
+    except AssertionError as e:
+        assert '`dim` must be a perfect square' in str(e)
+        return _np.NaN


This should have been included in PR #615

rileyjmurray · 2025-07-25T18:54:01Z

pygsti/tools/optools.py

-        tr = _np.sum(evals)
-        if abs(tr - 1) > __VECTOR_TOL__:
-            message = f"""
-            The PSD part of the input matrix is not trace-1 up to tolerance {__VECTOR_TOL__}.
-            Beware result!
-            """
-            _warnings.warn(message)


This should have been included in PR #615

…ed to be a classmethod; reverted to a staticmethod

rileyjmurray · 2025-07-25T23:35:00Z

pygsti/modelmembers/modelmembergraph.py

There are no subclasses of ModelMemberGraph, so the classmethod should be a staticmethod.

rileyjmurray · 2025-07-25T23:35:20Z

pygsti/modelmembers/povms/tppovm.py

readability

rileyjmurray · 2025-07-25T23:36:47Z

pygsti/modelmembers/states/densestate.py

Figuring this one out was a doozy. I'm certain that I could make a test which caused the existing code to break without doing anything leakage-specific.

rileyjmurray force-pushed the leakage branch from f422726 to 2f23347 Compare September 24, 2024 21:07

rileyjmurray changed the title ~~WIP: leakage-aware gauge optimization~~ WIP: leakage-aware gauge optimization -- bad commit history Sep 24, 2024

rileyjmurray changed the base branch from master to develop September 24, 2024 21:15

rileyjmurray changed the title ~~WIP: leakage-aware gauge optimization -- bad commit history~~ WIP: leakage-aware gauge optimization Sep 24, 2024

rileyjmurray mentioned this pull request Sep 28, 2024

Maintenance of the Basis class #493

Merged

rileyjmurray force-pushed the leakage branch from 48eac7d to 0346cca Compare January 17, 2025 16:18

rileyjmurray changed the title ~~WIP: leakage-aware gauge optimization~~ WIP: leakage-aware GST Mar 25, 2025

rileyjmurray force-pushed the leakage branch from 904c2d9 to b3aba0d Compare July 24, 2025 18:54

rileyjmurray commented Jul 24, 2025

View reviewed changes

rileyjmurray mentioned this pull request Jul 25, 2025

à la carte standard GST reports, and exception handling for computing metrics #615

Merged

rileyjmurray added 19 commits July 25, 2025 11:37

bugfix for my attemped efficiency improvement

0d2febe

extend basistools to gracefully accomodate objects that derive from L…

21b24b2

…inearOperator (not just plain numpy ndarrays)

update function in reportables to indicate API limitation. Bugfix in …

3895ee3

…frobenius norm computation. Bugfix in test_optools.py.

update implementation of state fidelity

9bf39d4

comments. About to remove.

798b4af

extend implementation to support bases other than pauli-product. Add …

3d5f898

…lots of in-line comments explaining the logic.

remove unused and broken function that I only added for debugging pur…

40d694d

…poses

comment clarification

9b11390

clean up implementation of ExplicitOpModelCalc.residuals

584683f

slightly simplify minimize(...) function. There was an unnecessary br…

e68d297

…anch that omitted jac as a keyword argument to scipy.minimize, even if jac was None.

add implementation of leaky jtracedist

3c9fc32

enable gauge optimization with leakage-aware metrics using non-LS opt…

3bc1325

…imizers. Right now only entanglement fidelity and jtracedist have implementations that can consider leakage. (So there are no leakage-aware metrics for SPAM.)

support for leakage-aware Frobenius distance with non-LS optimizer. A…

b1be463

…dded annotations to all gauage optimization objectives used in the non-LS optimizer, indicating if that particular objective has support for leakage-aware metrics.

left out a function needed for code in the last commit to work

e69136a

tests for the leaky_entanglement_fidelity function that Ive had for a…

518da43

… while. The tests only consider when no leakage is modeled. New tests wil be needed for when theres a leakage dimension

fix syntax mistake

825644a

rename test_gauageopt.py file to indicate that its contents only test…

1692ef1

… that various gauge optimization functions don`t raise errors.

correctness test for gauge optimization (ls-based and L-BFGS-based)

f555827

rileyjmurray and others added 20 commits July 25, 2025 11:46

bugfixes

a138f13

improve warning messages

2042416

remove MOSEK hard dependency for diamond norm

aaa44f2

riley fix whoops

734ff5a

bugfix

91176a5

remove rounding of gate metrics that created problems with error bars…

4659ae3

…. Correct bug in sdptools.py::cptp_superop_variable that showed up when using bases whose first element was the identity (not the case in the leakage-friendly basis)

new DirectSumUnitaryGroup for gauge optimization, type annotations, r…

a63f1fd

…eadability improvements.

take an instance method for GSTGaugeOptSuite that never referenced `s…

f25e053

…elf` and make it a static method.

update the povm.convert(...) free function to work with CPTPLND param…

b24da36

…eterizations on non-qubit spaces (for example, qutrit spaces) by changing the default error generator basis.

readability and changing of absolute constant used in an assertion

0df49cc

factor out functionality for computing the gradient of a ModelFunctio…

ada773f

…n from ConfidenceRegionFactoryView.compute_confidence_interval(...) function, moving it to its own public instance method.

revert hacky change in __hash__. Remove commented-out invalid lines i…

3dc24d9

…n __eq__

comments

303e3f2

fix undefined variable; update comments

87049f2

revert changes

68c3364

left out of last commit

75c8c65

remove resolved TODO

895f3ac

revert one-line change

0f236b5

remove unused OuterProdBasis class

c427d9b

remove commented-out code that isnt on develop

7b38788

rileyjmurray force-pushed the leakage branch from 2608cdd to 7b38788 Compare July 25, 2025 18:49

rileyjmurray commented Jul 25, 2025

View reviewed changes

rileyjmurray mentioned this pull request Jul 25, 2025

New gauge group, plus minor changes to error generator classes #616

Open

rileyjmurray added 3 commits July 25, 2025 16:27

ModelMemberGraph.load_modelmembers_from_serialization_dict did not ne…

b31d068

…ed to be a classmethod; reverted to a staticmethod

readability

03a31d4

justify try-catch in DenseState._from_memoized_dict

f5f068a

rileyjmurray commented Jul 25, 2025

View reviewed changes

pygsti/modelmembers/povms/tppovm.py

Copy link

Contributor Author

rileyjmurray Jul 25, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

readability

rileyjmurray commented Jul 25, 2025

View reviewed changes

WIP: leakage-aware GST #410

Are you sure you want to change the base?

WIP: leakage-aware GST #410

Conversation

rileyjmurray commented Mar 19, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

rileyjmurray commented Mar 25, 2025

Uh oh!

rileyjmurray left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

rileyjmurray Jul 24, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

rileyjmurray Jul 24, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

rileyjmurray commented Mar 19, 2024 •

edited

Loading

rileyjmurray Jul 24, 2025 •

edited

Loading

rileyjmurray Jul 24, 2025 •

edited

Loading