Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Currently, specifying output_qubit=-1 refers to a global measure (i.e. parity) whereas output_qubit=[0,1,2] refers to a n-local (n=3) measure.
In experiments where we scale up the number of qubits, this would require adjusting the output_qubit list accordingly which is prone to errors.
Describe the solution you'd like
As a global (parity) measure is a rare use-case I would suggest to swap the above definition, i.e.:
output_qubit=-1 -> n-local measure
`output_qubit=[0,1] -> parity between qubit 0 and 1
This decision would also allow a more straight-forward implementation of the Bell-Measurement method for estimating entangling capability, as we need the parity between individual (not all) qubits, which would not be possible with the current implementation.
Describe alternatives you've considered
Leave as is.
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe. Currently, specifying
output_qubit=-1refers to a global measure (i.e. parity) whereasoutput_qubit=[0,1,2]refers to a n-local (n=3) measure. In experiments where we scale up the number of qubits, this would require adjusting theoutput_qubitlist accordingly which is prone to errors.Describe the solution you'd like As a global (parity) measure is a rare use-case I would suggest to swap the above definition, i.e.:
output_qubit=-1-> n-local measureDescribe alternatives you've considered Leave as is.
Additional context N/A