MichaelBroughton

I think this would be very useful to have! It might be worth writing a little design doc / RFC for how you envision this feature would fit into TFQ....

Hey @ethankoch4 welcome! There's lots to do, I can give you a short list of issues/projects that are going on right now: 1. We are currently adding more math ops...

With the additions of https://github.com/quantumlib/Cirq/pull/4364 in the latest release of Cirq. We are now able to work on this issue. 1. Upgrade to the latest version of Cirq. 2. Implement...

Perhaps there is a nice way we could work this in throughout the entire stack in TFQ. Maybe we can define an op flag for the op returned by `get_sampled_expectation_op`...

Currently there isn't support for **explicit channel placement** in circuits in TFQ. There are two alternatives though: 1. You could place errors into your circuits manually (in the form of...

Sure thing. I will say that the first method does not allow for as rich a set of errors as the second method. Here's a simple problem where I might...

These are really open ended question so I can't give you very specific answers: > How should I go about adding a PQC before/after this noise layer ? I don't...

Looks like there is a substantial interest in adding support for these features. @matibilkis you're snippet is 100% correct and that is the intended way to use non standard simulators...

Interesting, @zaqqwerty do you think would we be able to incorporate a good number of the channels provided here: https://github.com/quantumlib/Cirq/blob/master/cirq/ops/common_channels.py on existing qsim wavefunction simulators in both the analytical and...

Good news! We have found time to move forward on implementing noisy versions of our existing TFQ ops in a new `tfq.noise` module. This is mostly because our backend "qsim"...