Allow measurements and resets into Gemini noise model.

[tcochran-quera]

To simulate some operations, for example multiple rounds of syndrome extraction, it is useful to be able to measure and reuse the measurement qubits in the cirq simulation to save on RAM (even if on Gemini we will actually use different measurement atoms for each round of syndrome extraction).

Here is a minimum fix to allow for measurement and reset gates in the noise models. The next step would be to add error in the measurement that is proportional to the number of gate operations left in the circuit, since in Gemini we will have to wait until the end of the circuit to measure any atom.

@david-pl what do you think is the right course of action?

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 76.92308% with 3 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
src/bloqade/cirq_utils/noise/model.py	76.92%	3 Missing ⚠️

📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know!

[github-actions]

☂️ Python Coverage

current status: ✅

Overall Coverage

Lines	Covered	Coverage	Threshold	Status
9504	8383	88%	0%	🟢

New Files

No new covered files...

Modified Files

File	Coverage	Status
src/bloqade/cirq_utils/noise/model.py	89%	🟢
TOTAL	89%	🟢

updated for commit: 419233b by action🐍

[david-pl]

You can just add that to the allowed gates with e.g.

reset_family = cirq.GateFamily(gate=cirq.ResetChannel, ignore_global_phase=True)
allowed_target_gates: frozenset[cirq.GateFamily] = cirq.CZTargetGateset(additional_gates=[reset_family]).gates

Your approach here works as well though.

[david-pl]

@tcochran-quera This looks like a good approach here. Could you also add a unit test?

Regarding adding errors: do we know the length of remaining operations? Or does that mean we'd have to iterate over the entire circuit another time?

[tcochran-quera]

@tcochran-quera This looks like a good approach here. Could you also add a unit test?

Regarding adding errors: do we know the length of remaining operations? Or does that mean we'd have to iterate over the entire circuit another time?

Probably we could have something reasonable that wouldn't require looping over the entire circuit for each measurement moment. I'll play with it some when i get the chance.

[david-pl]

I'll play with it some when i get the chance.

@tcochran-quera cool! In the meantime, would you want to have this change merged in?

[tcochran-quera]

I'll play with it some when i get the chance.

@tcochran-quera cool! In the meantime, would you want to have this change merged in?

I'm okay waiting until this is finalized before we merge, but I don't feel strongly about it.

[david-pl]

I'm okay waiting until this is finalized before we merge, but I don't feel strongly about it.

I see. Well, since there's a lot of changes going in right now, it might make sense not to rush this one here. I'll just wait until you ping me again.