You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The result types should be consistent. I think from a user perspective, the most convenient would be to capture the expectation values of a single observable over all timesteps in an array, which would allow computing averages or plotting very easily. For example, the format of the SciPyEvolvers seems like a good idea:
PVQD result seems to redefine observables from its parent class when it describes it, which I would agree is more a bug. Time evolution result says
observables (ListOrDict[tuple[np.ndarray, np.ndarray]] | None): Optional list of
observables for which expected on an evolved state are calculated at each timestep.
These values are in fact lists of tuples formatted as (mean, standard deviation).
where the ListOrDict presumably matches to input type of ListOrDict passed in
The text describing things could certaining be improved too.
Given people may have code using the results as-is we may need some transition setting to go over to something that is consistent, if its not what we currently state. In this case it seems more a feature change than a bug.
PVQDResult also does not have its Attributes documented (its parent does but new ones it adds are not listed). Also it seems to pass some of the parent attributes up through init, and some it sets directly - not sure why.
Environment
What is happening?
As noticed in #8271 (comment), the value of
TimeEvolutionResult.observables
differs for the different available implementations.How can we reproduce the issue?
Here's a snippet for comparison
which prints
What should happen?
The result types should be consistent. I think from a user perspective, the most convenient would be to capture the expectation values of a single observable over all timesteps in an array, which would allow computing averages or plotting very easily. For example, the format of the
SciPyEvolver
s seems like a good idea:Any suggestions?
No response
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: