Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

arXiv:0711.2653

Non-locality, Contextuality and Transition sets

Westman, Hans

Published Nov 16, 2007• 1 citation
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

We discuss quantum non-locality and contextuality using the notion of transition sets. This approach provides a way to obtain a direct logical contradiction with locality/non-contextuality in the EPRB gedanken experiment as well as a clear graphical illustration of what violations of Bell inequalities quantify. In particular, we show graphically how these violations are related to measures of non-local transition sets. We also introduce a new form of contextuality, {\em measurement ordering contextuality}, i.e. there exists commuting operators $\hat{\mathcal{A}}$ and $\hat{\mathcal{B}}$ such that the outcome for $\hat{\mathcal{A}}$ depends on whether we measured $\hat{\mathcal{B}}$ before or after $\hat{\mathcal{A}}$. It is shown (excluding retro-causal and/or conspiratorial theories) that any hidden variable theory capable of reproducing the quantum statistics has to have this property. This generalizes yet another feature of the hidden variable theory of deBroglie and Bohm.

DOI
10.48550/arxiv.0711.2653

Related papers

A Stronger Bell Argument for Quantum Non-Locality

Paul M. Näger

It is widely accepted that the violation of Bell inequalities excludes local theories of the quantum realm. This paper presents a stronger Bell argument which even forbids certain non-local theories. Among these excluded non-local theories are those whose only non-local connection is a probabilistic (or functional) dependence between the space-like separated measurement outcomes of EPR/B experiments (a subset of outcome dependent theories). In this way, the new argument shows that the result of the received Bell argument, which requires just any kind of non-locality, is inappropriately weak. Positively, the remaining non-local theories, which can violate Bell inequalities (among them quantum theory), are characterized by the fact that at least one of the measurement outcomes in some sense probabilistically depends both on its local as well as on its distant measurement setting (probabilistic Bell contextuality). Whether an additional dependence between the outcomes holds, is irrelevant for the question whether a certain theory can violate Bell inequalities. This new concept of quantum non-locality is considerably tighter and more informative than the one following from the usual Bell argument. We prove that (given usual background assumptions) the result of the stronger Bell argument presented here is the strongest possible consequence from the violation of Bell inequalities on a qualitative probabilistic level.

•Aug 15, 2013•7 citations

Underpinning quantum theory by a non-local hidden variable theory: the contextuality loophole?

Bryan J. Dalton

Abstract Quantum theory has accounted for a wide range of physical effects in systems ranging from microscopic to macroscopic. However, it is associated with various paradoxes—such as the well-known EPR example. Einstein’s suggestion that the theory was incomplete has led to numerous attempts to underpin quantum theory by a hidden variable theory, including the Bell approach. This approach was originally based on certain assumptions: (i) realism (ii) locality and (iii) non-contextuality. In its developed form, the theory involved only probabilities for outcome values of system observables. For systems involving two sub-systems, the hidden variable theory predicted that correlations between measurement outcomes of observable pairs of from different sub-systems would satisfy certain—such as the CHSH Bell inequality. The inequality was inconsistent with quantum theory predictions and with experiment. Hence, the question arose: Which of the three assumptions was invalid? A widely held view is that a non-local theory is needed—another is that hidden variable theory should be contextual. In this article, derivations of the CHSH Bell inequality based on various combinations of locality/non-locality and non-contextuality/contextuality assumptions are outlined, leading to the conclusion that for a hidden variable theory to underpin quantum theory, it must be both non-local and contextual. Non-locality or contextuality alone is insufficient. However, it is also concluded that the realism assumption is questionable. At present an alternative approach of augmenting quantum theory by adding additional features—such as the deterministic trajectories of Bohmian mechanics (also a non-local theory) may be a better route for completeness.

The European Physical Journal Special Topics•Jul 4, 2025•1 citation

Quantum nonlocality: How does nature do it?

Adán Cabello

In a recent note, Hance and Hossenfelder (arXiv:2211.01331) recall that "locally causal completions of quantum mechanics are possible, if they violate the assumption [called statistical independence or measurement independence] that the hidden variables do not in any way depend on measurement settings" and that, consequently, the experimental violations of Bell inequalities "show that maintaining local causality requires violating statistical independence". However, Hance and Hossenfelder also argue that "we should (...) look for independent experimental evidence that can distinguish the two different options: non-locality and statistical independence, or locality and violations of statistical independence" and that "the unwillingness to consider theories without statistical independence may be the reason we do not yet have a locally causal theory for the foundations of physics that is consistent with general relativity". Here, we recall that there is a third option, namely, rejecting that measurement outcomes are governed in any way by hidden variables. Moreover, we argue that some recent results in the search for principles singling out the sets of quantum correlations for Bell and Kochen-Specker contextuality scenarios point out that this third option is scientifically more plausible and answers the question of why and how nature produces quantum nonlocality.

arXiv:2211.06476•Nov 11, 2022•2 citations

Contextual Inferences, Nonlocality, and the Incompleteness of Quantum Mechanics

Philippe Grangier

It is known that "quantum non locality", leading to the violation of Bell's inequality and more generally of classical local realism, can be attributed to the conjunction of two properties, which we call here elementary locality and predictive completeness. Taking this point of view, we show again that quantum mechanics violates predictive completeness, allowing the making of contextual inferences, which can, in turn, explain why quantum non locality does not contradict relativistic causality. An important question remains: if the usual quantum state ψ is predictively incomplete, how do we complete it? We give here a set of new arguments to show that ψ should be completed indeed, not by looking for any "hidden variables", but rather by specifying the measurement context, which is required to define actual probabilities over a set of mutually exclusive physical events.

arXiv:2012.09736•Entropy•Dec 10, 2021•20 citations

Quantum non-locality—it ainʼt necessarily so...

Marek Żukowski, Časlav Brukner

Bell's theorem is 50 years old. Still there is a controversy about its implications. Much of it has its roots in confusion regarding the premises from which the theorem can be derived. Some claim that a derivation of Bell's inequalities requires just locality assumption, and nothing more. Violations of the inequalities are then interpreted as ``nonlocality'' or ``quantum nonlocality''. We show that such claims are unfounded and that every derivation of Bell's inequalities requires a premise -- in addition to locality and freedom of choice -- which is either assumed tacitly, or unconsciously, or is embedded in a single compound condition (like Bell's ``local causality''). The premise is equivalent to the assumption of existence of additional variables which do not appear in the quantum formalism (in form of determinism, or joint probability for outcomes of all conceivable measurements, or ``additional causes`'', or ``hidden variables'', ``complete description of the state'' or counterfactual definiteness, etc.). A certain irony is that perhaps the main message of violation of Bell's inequalities is that our notion of locality should be based on an operationally well-defined no-signalling condition, rather than on local causality.

arXiv:1501.04618•Journal of Physics A Mathematical and Theoretical•Oct 9, 2014•100 citations

Conditions for logical contextuality and nonlocality

Leonardo Santos, Bárbara Amaral

Contextuality and nonlocality are nonclassical properties exhibited by quantum statistics whose implications profoundly impact both the foundations and applications of quantum theory. In this paper we provide some insights into logical contextuality and inequality-free proofs. The former can be understood as the possibility version of contextuality, while the latter refers to proofs of quantum contextuality and nonlocality that are not based on violations of some noncontextuality (or Bell) inequality. By ``possibilistic'' we mean a description in terms of possibilities for the outcomes, which are Boolean variables assuming value one when the corresponding probability is strictly larger than zero and zero otherwise. The present work aims to build a bridge between these two concepts from what we call possibilistic paradoxes, which are sets of possibilistic conditions whose occurrence implies contextuality and nonlocality. As the main result, we demonstrate the existence of possibilistic paradoxes whose occurrence is a necessary and sufficient condition for logical contextuality in a very important class of scenarios. Finally, we discuss some interesting consequences arising from the completeness of these possibilistic paradoxes.

arXiv:2011.04111•Physical Review A•Aug 4, 2021•7 citations
We discuss quantum non-locality and contextuality using the notion of transition sets. This approach provides a way to obtain a direct logical contradiction with locality/non-contextuality in the EPRB gedanken experiment as well as a clear graphical illustration of what violations of Bell inequalities quantify. In particular, we show graphically how these violations are related to measures of non-local transition sets. We also introduce a new form of contextuality, {\em measurement ordering contextuality}, i.e. there exists commuting operators A^\hat{\mathcal{A}}A^ and B^\hat{\mathcal{B}}B^ such that the outcome for A^\hat{\mathcal{A}}A^ depends on whether we measured B^\hat{\mathcal{B}}B^ before or after A^\hat{\mathcal{A}}A^. It is shown (excluding retro-causal and/or conspiratorial theories) that any hidden variable theory capable of reproducing the quantum statistics has to have this property. This generalizes yet another feature of the hidden variable theory of deBroglie and Bohm.
It is widely accepted that the violation of Bell inequalities excludes local theories of the quantum realm. This paper presents a stronger Bell argument which even forbids certain non-local theories. Among these excluded non-local theories are those whose only non-local connection is a probabilistic (or functional) dependence between the space-like separated measurement outcomes of EPR/B experiments (a subset of outcome dependent theories). In this way, the new argument shows that the result of the received Bell argument, which requires just any kind of non-locality, is inappropriately weak. Positively, the remaining non-local theories, which can violate Bell inequalities (among them quantum theory), are characterized by the fact that at least one of the measurement outcomes in some sense probabilistically depends both on its local as well as on its distant measurement setting (probabilistic Bell contextuality). Whether an additional dependence between the outcomes holds, is irrelevant for the question whether a certain theory can violate Bell inequalities. This new concept of quantum non-locality is considerably tighter and more informative than the one following from the usual Bell argument. We prove that (given usual background assumptions) the result of the stronger Bell argument presented here is the strongest possible consequence from the violation of Bell inequalities on a qualitative probabilistic level.
Abstract Quantum theory has accounted for a wide range of physical effects in systems ranging from microscopic to macroscopic. However, it is associated with various paradoxes—such as the well-known EPR example. Einstein’s suggestion that the theory was incomplete has led to numerous attempts to underpin quantum theory by a hidden variable theory, including the Bell approach. This approach was originally based on certain assumptions: (i) realism (ii) locality and (iii) non-contextuality. In its developed form, the theory involved only probabilities for outcome values of system observables. For systems involving two sub-systems, the hidden variable theory predicted that correlations between measurement outcomes of observable pairs of from different sub-systems would satisfy certain—such as the CHSH Bell inequality. The inequality was inconsistent with quantum theory predictions and with experiment. Hence, the question arose: Which of the three assumptions was invalid? A widely held view is that a non-local theory is needed—another is that hidden variable theory should be contextual. In this article, derivations of the CHSH Bell inequality based on various combinations of locality/non-locality and non-contextuality/contextuality assumptions are outlined, leading to the conclusion that for a hidden variable theory to underpin quantum theory, it must be both non-local and contextual. Non-locality or contextuality alone is insufficient. However, it is also concluded that the realism assumption is questionable. At present an alternative approach of augmenting quantum theory by adding additional features—such as the deterministic trajectories of Bohmian mechanics (also a non-local theory) may be a better route for completeness.
In a recent note, Hance and Hossenfelder (arXiv:2211.01331) recall that "locally causal completions of quantum mechanics are possible, if they violate the assumption [called statistical independence or measurement independence] that the hidden variables do not in any way depend on measurement settings" and that, consequently, the experimental violations of Bell inequalities "show that maintaining local causality requires violating statistical independence". However, Hance and Hossenfelder also argue that "we should (...) look for independent experimental evidence that can distinguish the two different options: non-locality and statistical independence, or locality and violations of statistical independence" and that "the unwillingness to consider theories without statistical independence may be the reason we do not yet have a locally causal theory for the foundations of physics that is consistent with general relativity". Here, we recall that there is a third option, namely, rejecting that measurement outcomes are governed in any way by hidden variables. Moreover, we argue that some recent results in the search for principles singling out the sets of quantum correlations for Bell and Kochen-Specker contextuality scenarios point out that this third option is scientifically more plausible and answers the question of why and how nature produces quantum nonlocality.
It is known that "quantum non locality", leading to the violation of Bell's inequality and more generally of classical local realism, can be attributed to the conjunction of two properties, which we call here elementary locality and predictive completeness. Taking this point of view, we show again that quantum mechanics violates predictive completeness, allowing the making of contextual inferences, which can, in turn, explain why quantum non locality does not contradict relativistic causality. An important question remains: if the usual quantum state ψ is predictively incomplete, how do we complete it? We give here a set of new arguments to show that ψ should be completed indeed, not by looking for any "hidden variables", but rather by specifying the measurement context, which is required to define actual probabilities over a set of mutually exclusive physical events.
Bell's theorem is 50 years old. Still there is a controversy about its implications. Much of it has its roots in confusion regarding the premises from which the theorem can be derived. Some claim that a derivation of Bell's inequalities requires just locality assumption, and nothing more. Violations of the inequalities are then interpreted as ``nonlocality'' or ``quantum nonlocality''. We show that such claims are unfounded and that every derivation of Bell's inequalities requires a premise -- in addition to locality and freedom of choice -- which is either assumed tacitly, or unconsciously, or is embedded in a single compound condition (like Bell's ``local causality''). The premise is equivalent to the assumption of existence of additional variables which do not appear in the quantum formalism (in form of determinism, or joint probability for outcomes of all conceivable measurements, or ``additional causes`'', or ``hidden variables'', ``complete description of the state'' or counterfactual definiteness, etc.). A certain irony is that perhaps the main message of violation of Bell's inequalities is that our notion of locality should be based on an operationally well-defined no-signalling condition, rather than on local causality.
Contextuality and nonlocality are nonclassical properties exhibited by quantum statistics whose implications profoundly impact both the foundations and applications of quantum theory. In this paper we provide some insights into logical contextuality and inequality-free proofs. The former can be understood as the possibility version of contextuality, while the latter refers to proofs of quantum contextuality and nonlocality that are not based on violations of some noncontextuality (or Bell) inequality. By ``possibilistic'' we mean a description in terms of possibilities for the outcomes, which are Boolean variables assuming value one when the corresponding probability is strictly larger than zero and zero otherwise. The present work aims to build a bridge between these two concepts from what we call possibilistic paradoxes, which are sets of possibilistic conditions whose occurrence implies contextuality and nonlocality. As the main result, we demonstrate the existence of possibilistic paradoxes whose occurrence is a necessary and sufficient condition for logical contextuality in a very important class of scenarios. Finally, we discuss some interesting consequences arising from the completeness of these possibilistic paradoxes.