Porting some protocols to qibolab 0.2

[andrea-pasquale]

I know that there is already #990 for updating protocols to qibolab 0.2, however after #1021 I started to play with 0.2 a bit more and I changed a few protocols to 0.2.

Regarding this PR, I'm pointing to this #1021 and I'm expecting to merge this after we merge #1021 to #990. Perhaps it is also useful to ease the review process since this PR is updating only a few protocols.

Checklist:

• Reviewers confirm new code works as expected.
• Tests are passing.
• Coverage does not decrease.
• Documentation is updated.
• Compatibility with Qibo modules (Please edit this section if the current pull request is not compatible with the following branches).
  • Qibo: master
  • Qibolab: main
  • Qibolab_platforms_qrc: main

[stavros11]

Thanks for updating more routines @andrea-pasquale! I haven't tested anything but it looks good, apart from the issue with discussed yesterday with using sequence concatenation (|) when multiple qubits are involved. This will not work well if you want to play things in parallel on different qubits. Most likely you can still get correct results as it is, but it will be using one qubit at a time which is not the same behavior as 0.1.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 94.07806% with 44 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Please upload report for BASE (0.2@8093a68). Learn more about missing BASE report.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
src/qibocal/calibration/serialize.py	73.80%	11 Missing ⚠️
src/qibocal/protocols/drag.py	78.57%	6 Missing ⚠️
...ls/randomized_benchmarking/standard_rb_2q_inter.py	25.00%	6 Missing ⚠️
src/qibocal/update.py	83.87%	5 Missing ⚠️
src/qibocal/auto/execute.py	40.00%	3 Missing ⚠️
src/qibocal/protocols/allxy/allxy.py	88.88%	2 Missing ⚠️
...bocal/protocols/flux_dependence/qubit_crosstalk.py	96.00%	2 Missing ⚠️
src/qibocal/calibration/calibration.py	93.75%	1 Missing ⚠️
...rotocols/allxy/allxy_resonator_depletion_tuning.py	95.83%	1 Missing ⚠️
src/qibocal/protocols/coherence/t1_signal.py	88.88%	1 Missing ⚠️
... and 6 more

Additional details and impacted files

@@          Coverage Diff           @@
##             0.2    #1036   +/-   ##
======================================
  Coverage       ?   94.11%           
======================================
  Files          ?       99           
  Lines          ?     7938           
  Branches       ?        0           
======================================
  Hits           ?     7471           
  Misses         ?      467           
  Partials       ?        0           

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	94.11% <94.07%> (?)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/qibocal/auto/output.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/qibocal/auto/transpile.py	91.66% <100.00%> (ø)
src/qibocal/protocols/__init__.py	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/qibocal/protocols/classification.py	94.05% <100.00%> (ø)
...rc/qibocal/protocols/coherence/spin_echo_signal.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/qibocal/protocols/coherence/t1.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/qibocal/protocols/coherence/t2.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/qibocal/protocols/coherence/t2_signal.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/qibocal/protocols/coherence/utils.py	97.33% <100.00%> (ø)
src/qibocal/protocols/coherence/zeno.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
... and 44 more

[andrea-pasquale]

A quick update on the status of this PR.

I manage to update all protocols that we want to port immediately to 0.2 and tests are passing (coverage needs to be improved).
After discussing with @Edoardo-Pedicillo, we decided to drop many of them while some others will be ported later including CHSH and Mermin.

Some of the updates, regarding the calibration section, are already done. Since qiboteam/qibolab#1086 is now merged, we could start updating also native gates/channels parameters here.

@stavros11 feel free to start adding the update whenever you have time.

[andrea-pasquale]

@stavros11 @alecandido if you agree we can merge this PR in #990 given that this PR has modified many files.
In bd9485e I've implemented the update also for the qibolab parameters. The only one missing is for the virtual z phases which I'm planning to do after testing on hardware to make sure that everything is fine.

[stavros11]

@stavros11 @alecandido if you agree we can merge this PR in #990 given that this PR has modified many files. In bd9485e I've implemented the update also for the qibolab parameters.

I agree with merging, since at this stage the review will be easier if we have one PR instead of two. Thanks for updating all the routines and including the platform updates! I had a quick look in the platform updates and it looks good to me. As for the routines, if they work on hardware there isn't much that can go wrong in the update, other than the usual issue with the sequence timing (concatenation, etc.).

The only one missing is for the virtual z phases which I'm planning to do after testing on hardware to make sure that everything is fine.

It would be good if you do that, because I believe I initially updated this routine in #990 but then there were some changes merged to main, which I am not sure if they were propagated properly after rebasing, as I have not tested on hardware after fixing conflicts.

[andrea-pasquale]

@stavros11 @alecandido if you agree we can merge this PR in #990 given that this PR has modified many files. In bd9485e I've implemented the update also for the qibolab parameters.

I agree with merging, since at this stage the review will be easier if we have one PR instead of two. Thanks for updating all the routines and including the platform updates! I had a quick look in the platform updates and it looks good to me. As for the routines, if they work on hardware there isn't much that can go wrong in the update, other than the usual issue with the sequence timing (concatenation, etc.).

The only one missing is for the virtual z phases which I'm planning to do after testing on hardware to make sure that everything is fine.

It would be good if you do that, because I believe I initially updated this routine in #990 but then there were some changes merged to main, which I am not sure if they were propagated properly after rebasing, as I have not tested on hardware after fixing conflicts.

Thanks for the feedback @stavros11. I will merge now.