Expected Success Probability

[flowerthrower]

This PR introduces a new figure of merit: expected_success_probability It is a slightly modified version of the original metric where only the dominant decoherence term min(T1, T2) is accounted for.

[flowerthrower]

@nquetschlich do you think it is possible the ImportError: cannot import name 'FakeGuadalupe' is due to the qiskit update?

[codecov[bot]]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 96.52174% with 4 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 81.3%. Comparing base (5a25840) to head (66e32c5).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
src/mqt/predictor/ml/predictor.py	0.0%	2 Missing :warning:
src/mqt/predictor/evaluation.py	0.0%	1 Missing :warning:
src/mqt/predictor/result.py	83.3%	1 Missing :warning:

Additional details and impacted files

```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## main #212 +/- ## ======================================= + Coverage 79.6% 81.3% +1.7% ======================================= Files 12 12 Lines 966 1078 +112 ======================================= + Hits 769 877 +108 - Misses 197 201 +4 ``` | [Flag](https://app.codecov.io/gh/cda-tum/mqt-predictor/pull/212/flags?src=pr&el=flags&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=cda-tum) | Coverage Δ | | |---|---|---| | [python](https://app.codecov.io/gh/cda-tum/mqt-predictor/pull/212/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=cda-tum) | `81.3% <96.5%> (+1.7%)` | :arrow_up: | Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. [Click here](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/carryforward-flags?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=cda-tum#carryforward-flags-in-the-pull-request-comment) to find out more.

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[burgholzer]

I'd also like to take a look at this before it is merged.