Olivia Di Matteo

@trbromley I just noticed your message and merged it in :+1:

Hi @00alia00 , thank you for the suggestion, I will make a note of it! Just to confirm, you mean basically some way of better differentiating the two panels? ...

Thanks for the quick reply, @erick-xanadu ! Some more info for you: upon further testing, in a script, if I import packages in the following order, ``` import catalyst import...

Copying the library in does work, but feels a little sketchy :sweat_smile: I ended up with multiple versions of the library during the installation process. In particular, despite having `clang`...

Original qRAM proposals: - [ ] https://arxiv.org/abs/0708.1879 - [ ] https://arxiv.org/pdf/0807.4994

Two papers about efficient state preparation (first one I know well and we should definitely implement, the second I have to read still): - [ ] https://arxiv.org/abs/1812.00954 - [ ]...

There is a quite efficient qROM in III.C of this paper as well: https://arxiv.org/abs/1805.03662

Note: [https://arxiv.org/abs/2002.09340](https://arxiv.org/abs/2002.09340) has been updated to the journal version.

In our application we're working with quite a large circuit (>25 qubits), so deferred measurement isn't an option. But as @albi3ro notes, it works for multiple shots, so it's not...

Thanks for getting this started @vincentmr ! :rocket: My student @bnishanth16 found a good test case. The example below works: ```python dev = qml.device('default.mixed', wires=1, shots=100) @qml.qnode(dev) def test(): qml.Hadamard(0)...