Closed ckoerber closed 4 years ago
I quickly skimmed the comments and I agree with most of your comments and concerns. Especially with the reordering of the sections though, we should talk about it more. I wrote it this way because it was how it is ordered in my head, and I wanted to push out a first draft asap. I also want to send this to either Sci Rep or Nature QIS, so they have guidelines on how the paper should be structured as well (at least Nat. QIS does). So I can explain to you a bit how this paper is put together with respect to that as well.
In any case, let's find a time to chat about this for sure.
Done
This issue addresses questions and adds comments regarding the ILP draft send out by @cchang5 08/28.
I tried to infer questions potential readers might have. Obviously, this is subjective, so feel free to point out if some thoughts are not helpful.
Btw. I am not sure how much this helps, but I did some refactoring a few months ago summarized in PR #11
General remarks
H(0) -> H_final
and run the simulation without the[H, rho]
part (which is somehow not hbar ->0)?Specific
[x] II Section B.1
[x] Embedding scaling (paragraph below 2.21)
[x] Why do we investigate different offsets (offsets are first mentioned in paragraph 2 of section A.)?
[x] Why don't we show Fig. 3 not on a log scale?
[x] Linear offset extrapolations (Sec III A. 1.)
[x] Qubit grouping due to large and small field:
[x] IIIB.
[x] Fig 4.: Why +/- in the legend? I think it might be helpful to have the same offset color coding as in the other figures.
[x] Fig. 6 (maybe somewhere else). What was the prescription for estimating temperatures? Would it make sense to mark "fitted" points in this figure?
[x] How do bars change if we change parameters?
[x] Section IV A: Which decoherence model is needed for what?
[x] Description of eq. 4.3. Can we be more precise on how the
j
label relates to thenu
mu
labels?[x] Above 4.5, why do we use this initial state?
[x] Fig 7 looks like just a single red line to me :sweat_smile:
[x] Fig.8 Can we use this as a proof of quantumnessiness? E.g., it seems like
-0.05
has a larger slope after the transition. Thus I would expectP(gs)
to be larger if it was not delayed early on. How does this curve look like if we just used thermal annealing? Or could we still find different behavior by changing parameters?