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:1010.1273 · Physics Reports

Specker’s parable of the overprotective seer: A road to contextuality, nonlocality and complementarity

Yeong-Cherng Liang, Robert W. Spekkens, Howard M. Wiseman

Published May 20, 2011• 265 citations
arXivHTMLPDF
DOI
10.1016/j.physrep.2011.05.001

Related papers

Contextuality beyond the Kochen-Specker theorem[HBNI Th94]

Ravi Kunjwal

•Jan 1, 2016•0 citations

Non-contextuality, finite precision measurement and the Kochen–Specker theorem

Jonathan Barrett, Adrian Kent

arXiv:quant-ph/0309017•Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics•Mar 19, 2004•60 citations

Why the Quantum?

Jeffrey Bub

What principle excludes superquantum correlations that don’t violate the nosignaling principle? In an argument using PR boxes in a 2009 Nature paper, Pawlowski and colleagues show that the Tsirelson bound – the limit achievable in a simulation of a Popescu–Rohrlich correlation with quantum resources – follows from an information-theoretic principle they call “information causality.” For three qubits, it is now known that there are superquantum correlations that cannot be excluded by a bipartite principle like information causality, so this principle does not completely characterize quantum correlations. An intriguing principle, developed by Cabello as the “exclusivity principle” or “Specker’s principle” (from Ernst Specker’s story about a seer from Nineva), and separately by Fritz and colleagues as the principle of “local orthogonality,” yields the Tsirelson bound, and also rules out correlations beyond the quantum limit for the Klyachko correlation and other cases where contextuality or nonlocality is relevant.

Oxford University Press eBooks•Feb 11, 2016•0 citations

Nonlocality and the Kochen-Specker paradox

Peter Heywood, Michael L. G. Redhead

Foundations of Physics•May 1, 1983•194 citations

On The Notions of Causality and Complementarity

Niels Bohr•Jan 1, 1996•13 citations

A proof of Specker’s principle

Guido Bacciagaluppi

Specker's principle, the condition that pairwise orthogonal propositions must be jointly orthogonal (or rather, the 'exclusivity principle' that follows from it), has been much investigated recently within the programme of finding physical principles to characterize quantum mechanics. Specker's principle, however, largely appears to lack a physical justification. In this paper, I present a proof of Specker's principle from three assumptions (made suitably precise): the existence of 'maximal entanglement', the existence of 'non-maximal measurements' and no-signalling. I discuss these three assumptions and describe canonical examples of non-Specker sets of propositions satisfying any two of them. These examples display analogies with various approaches to the interpretation of quantum mechanics, including retrocausation. I also discuss connections with the work of Popescu & Rohrlich. The core of the proof (and the main example violating no-signalling) is illustrated by a variant of Specker's tale of the seer of Nineveh, with which I open the paper. This article is part of the theme issue 'Quantum contextuality, causality and freedom of choice'.

arXiv:2305.07917•Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences•Jan 28, 2024•1 citation
What principle excludes superquantum correlations that don’t violate the nosignaling principle? In an argument using PR boxes in a 2009 Nature paper, Pawlowski and colleagues show that the Tsirelson bound – the limit achievable in a simulation of a Popescu–Rohrlich correlation with quantum resources – follows from an information-theoretic principle they call “information causality.” For three qubits, it is now known that there are superquantum correlations that cannot be excluded by a bipartite principle like information causality, so this principle does not completely characterize quantum correlations. An intriguing principle, developed by Cabello as the “exclusivity principle” or “Specker’s principle” (from Ernst Specker’s story about a seer from Nineva), and separately by Fritz and colleagues as the principle of “local orthogonality,” yields the Tsirelson bound, and also rules out correlations beyond the quantum limit for the Klyachko correlation and other cases where contextuality or nonlocality is relevant.
Specker's principle, the condition that pairwise orthogonal propositions must be jointly orthogonal (or rather, the 'exclusivity principle' that follows from it), has been much investigated recently within the programme of finding physical principles to characterize quantum mechanics. Specker's principle, however, largely appears to lack a physical justification. In this paper, I present a proof of Specker's principle from three assumptions (made suitably precise): the existence of 'maximal entanglement', the existence of 'non-maximal measurements' and no-signalling. I discuss these three assumptions and describe canonical examples of non-Specker sets of propositions satisfying any two of them. These examples display analogies with various approaches to the interpretation of quantum mechanics, including retrocausation. I also discuss connections with the work of Popescu & Rohrlich. The core of the proof (and the main example violating no-signalling) is illustrated by a variant of Specker's tale of the seer of Nineveh, with which I open the paper. This article is part of the theme issue 'Quantum contextuality, causality and freedom of choice'.