@eliottrosenberg I added the ability to plot both single and two qubit pauli errors

The issue with a single function that runs both 2Q XEB and 1Q RB is the number of arguments which is not the best thing to have. That method will have 10+ arguments. alternatively I could group them into an RBOptions and XEBOptions classes, what do you think?

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (c3de706) 97.82% compared to head (9f7d628) 97.82%.

❗ Current head 9f7d628 differs from pull request most recent head f14bf7e. Consider uploading reports for the commit f14bf7e to get more accurate results

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##             main    #6455    +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage   97.82%   97.82%            
========================================
  Files        1115     1115            
  Lines       97337    97448   +111     
========================================
+ Hits        95216    95327   +111     
  Misses       2121     2121            

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@eliottrosenberg I added the ability to plot both single and two qubit pauli errors

The issue with a single function that runs both 2Q XEB and 1Q RB is the number of arguments which is not the best thing to have. That method will have 10+ arguments. alternatively I could group them into an RBOptions and XEBOptions classes, what do you think?

I'm thinking that most of the parameters would be shared. It could be something like this:

Shared parameters:

• sampler
• qubits
• repetitions
• num_circuits
• random_state (seed for rng)

RB:

• num_clifford_range (call this depths_rb or something)

XEB:

• entangling gate
• cycle_depths (call this depths_xeb or something)

We can get rid of the use_xy_basis option for RB here, since we will always want that to be its default value, I think. So that's 8 parameters, and all of them will have default values except sampler, so it will be easy to use.

@eliottrosenberg sg, I will add that method in a followup PR