- Join over
**1.5M+ people** - Join over
**100K+ communities** - Free
**without limits** - Create
**your own community**

Hello,

I am measuring in bell basis . I apply H and CNOT gate.

I measured several times and this outputs I got:

Measured CNOT · H |00? and observed (Zero, Zero)

Measured CNOT · H |00? and observed (Zero, Zero)

Measured CNOT · H |00? and observed (Zero, Zero)

Measured CNOT · H |00? and observed (One, One)

Measured CNOT · H |00? and observed (Zero, Zero)

Measured CNOT · H |00? and observed (One, One)

Measured CNOT · H |00? and observed (One, One)

Measured CNOT · H |00? and observed (Zero, Zero)

I did not get (One , Zero ) output . If input (One,One), I think output should be (One,Zero) and if input ( Zero, One ) output should be ( Zero,One) .

Why I do not get this outputs ?

@cgranade Please correct me wherever I am wrong. 1) Can't we have those cases where we don't really need to map our data into a higher dimension, i.e. we can prepare our state in a euclidean space without needing to apply any tensor product to prepare them? (This assumes that the data is simple enough that we don't really require any further mapping)

2) If the above statement is true, how is having our dataset in a limited space a bad thing? Why are we treating State Preparation step as if it is at this point that we are training our model? Isn't this analogous to zero initialization of weights in classical Machine Learning? We start at the same limited value (zero) and then learn the appropriate weights and biases.

3) If I am completely off-track here, could you please tell me some resources to get started in this part of the subject? I think that this is certainly getting too much for me.

i.e. we can prepare our state in a euclidean space without needing to apply any tensor product to prepare them

The state of a quantum system is always a vector in Hilbert space rather than Euclidian space, but that's largely a mathematical artifact of how we describe, model, and simulate quantum systems. In particular, just like with the kernel trick in traditional ML, we never write down those vectors in Hilbert space but *prepare* them implicitly.

:-)

@achieveordie The example of what I have seen for making discord really work for tech communities is the Python one: https://pythondiscord.com/

@githg22_gitlab I regularly use both slack and discord but it seems to me that discord is really keeping up with demand and adding features that basically make it a strictly nicer slack. Slack is also not bad though, I initially set this up because I didn't want people to have to create a new account to chat (assuming they had a GitHub account). I know this single thread is kinda limiting, so I am open to what would work best for the folks here

It really comes useful in this kind of huge projects

Just my 2 cents

I'll check out the python discord channel though

specifically in Q# because in the posts above mentioned how the approach taken in Q# is different from qiskit

2 replies

I think I missed the broadcast today

Sweet, I'll get something moving soon for the chat platform stuff!

In the meantime verson 0.12 is out of the QDK, I wrote up some thought/context on the release notes here: https://twitter.com/crazy4pi314/status/1280174137973981201?s=20

@/all Q# Community update!

We now have a slack setup, check out the badge on the homepage to join! https://qsharp.community/

We now have a slack setup, check out the badge on the homepage to join! https://qsharp.community/

We will continue to make use of the gitter for more transient questions/ convos but after polling at least the active folks here, there was interest in a Slack so I got that up and going!

If you want to join the slack directly, here is the link:

https://join.slack.com/t/qsharp-community/shared_invite/zt-fnsl4u42-u21wdJRzlLF9oAqYTDDtwA

https://join.slack.com/t/qsharp-community/shared_invite/zt-fnsl4u42-u21wdJRzlLF9oAqYTDDtwA

?

If there are any folks dropping by from the Azure Quantum Developer Workshop, we tend to answer quick questions here on the gitter, and if you want to work on some of our projects/learn/collaborate hop on over to our slack here: bit.ly/qsharp-slack !

does it give 8 qubits in 0 state or 8 qubits 0 and 1 randomly ?

to stablish the superposition 50/50

[true, true, false, false, true, false, false, true]

this is the bitstring which we wanted right ?

this is the bitstring which we wanted right ?

I had not been able to look into quantum programming for a long time because of professional exams. Now I have time for https://github.com/microsoft/MLADS2018-QuantumML and QuantumComputingas a High School Module

@theRomanMercury That QML tutorial is pretty old, https://github.com/microsoft/QuantumKatas/tree/master/tutorials/QuantumClassification is an improved version

1 reply

I found this video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ALa_JZvV3o . One of the writers of "Circuit-centric quantum classifiers" paper explaining Using Quantum Circuits as Machine Learning Models

(I posted this in the slack channel also)I am trying to build a rudimentary bioinformatics algorithm using Q#. The F# implementation looks like this:

let patternCount (text:string) (pattern:string) =

text

|> Seq.windowed pattern.Length

|> Seq.map(fun c -> new string(c))

|> Seq.filter(fun s -> s = pattern)

|> Seq.length

it is used like this:

let text = "ACAACTCTGCATACTATCGGGAACTATCCT"

let pattern = "ACTAT"

patternCount text pattern

How would I write in the same functional pipeline style in Q#. Is there any particular piece of the quantium library that would optimize the algorithm? (edited)

let patternCount (text:string) (pattern:string) =

text

|> Seq.windowed pattern.Length

|> Seq.map(fun c -> new string(c))

|> Seq.filter(fun s -> s = pattern)

|> Seq.length

it is used like this:

let text = "ACAACTCTGCATACTATCGGGAACTATCCT"

let pattern = "ACTAT"

patternCount text pattern

How would I write in the same functional pipeline style in Q#. Is there any particular piece of the quantium library that would optimize the algorithm? (edited)