Refactor simulator RNG handling

[justinpan0]

Support both numpy RandomState and Generator for RNG handling in simulators #6567

[justinpan0]

Updating the random number generation methods across various files in the cirq-core package to use the newer np.random.Generator instead of the older np.random.RandomState.

One small hack:

1. For random_state.py, directly assigning RandomState._bit_generator could not yield the same result as Generator, even though the RandomState object is created with the same seed; instead I tried to get the RandomState's seed by the following line, and construct from there:

np.random.default_rng(random_state.get_state()[1][0])

Updates to random number generation:

• cirq-core/cirq/contrib/quimb/mps_simulator.py: Changed apply_op and _measure methods to use np.random.Generator instead of np.random.RandomState. Updated the constructor to accept both np.random.Generator and np.random.RandomState.

• cirq-core/cirq/experiments/random_quantum_circuit_generation.py: Updated several methods and constructors to use np.random.Generator instead of np.random.RandomState, including random_rotations_between_two_qubit_circuit, _get_random_combinations, and new_layer.

• cirq-core/cirq/qis/clifford_tableau.py: Updated the _measure method to use np.random.Generator and changed the random number generation method from randint to integers.

• cirq-core/cirq/sim/clifford/clifford_simulator.py: Changed the apply_unitary and apply_measurement methods to use np.random.default_rng and updated the constructor to accept both np.random.Generator and np.random.RandomState.

• cirq-core/cirq/sim/simulation_state.py: Updated the constructor and property methods to use np.random.Generator and provided backward compatibility for np.random.RandomState.

[github-actions]

This pull request has been automatically labeled as stale because 90 days have passed without comments or other activity. If no further activity occurs and the status/stale label is not removed by a maintainer within 60 days, this pull request will be closed. If you would like to restore its active status, please leave a comment here; doing so will cause the staleness handler to remove the label.

If you have questions or feedback about this process, we welcome your input. You can open a new issue to let us know (please also reference this issue there, for continuity), or reach out to the project maintainers at [email protected].

[NoureldinYosri]

thanks for starting this PR, do you still want to continue working on it?

[github-actions]

This pull request has been automatically labeled as stale because 90 days have passed without comments or other activity. If no further activity occurs and the status/stale label is not removed by a maintainer within 60 days, this pull request will be closed. If you would like to restore its active status, please leave a comment here; doing so will cause the staleness handler to remove the label.

If you have questions or feedback about this process, we welcome your input. You can open a new issue to let us know (please also reference this issue there, for continuity), or reach out to the project maintainers at [email protected].