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:1301.4328 · Foundations of Physics

What Is a Quantum-Mechanical “Weak Value” the Value of?

B. E. Y. Svensson

Published Sep 4, 2013• 27 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

A so called “weak value” of an observable in quantum mechanics (QM) may be obtained in a weak measurement + post-selection procedure on the QM system under study. Applied to number operators, it has been invoked in revisiting some QM paradoxes ( e.g. , the so called Three-Box Paradox and Hardy’s Paradox). This requires the weak value to be interpreted as a bona fide property of the system considered, a par with entities like operator mean values and eigenvalues. I question such an interpretation; it has no support in the basic axioms of quantum mechanics and it leads to unreasonable results in concrete situations.

DOI
10.1007/s10701-013-9740-6

Related papers

On the interpretation of quantum mechanical weak values

B. E. Y. Svensson

After a brief review of how quantum mechanical weak measurements plus post-selection give rise to the weak value concept, I criticize an interpretation of a weak value as any sort of straightforward, bona fide property of the system under investigation.

Physica Scripta•Dec 1, 2014•10 citations

Understanding weak values without new physics

Riuji Mochizuki

The physical meaning of weak values and measurements can be completely understood within the framework of a conventional quantum mechanical approach. We should not expect the weak value of an observable $\hat A$ with post-selection $\langle F|$ within the eigenvalue range of $\hat A$ because it is not an expectation value of $\hat A$.

•Apr 7, 2016•0 citations

Quantum Weak Values and Logic: An Uneasy Couple

B. E. Y. Svensson

Quantum mechanical weak values of projection operators have been used to answer which-way questions, e . g . to trace which arms in a multiple Mach–Zehnder setup a particle may have traversed from a given initial to a prescribed final state. I show that this procedure might lead to logical inconsistencies in the sense that different methods used to answer composite questions, like “Has the particle traversed the way X or the way Y ?”, may result in different answers depending on which methods are used to find the answer. I illustrate the problem by considering some examples: the “quantum pigeonhole” framework of Aharonov et al. , the three-box problem, and Hardy’s paradox. To prepare the ground for my main conclusion on the incompatibility in certain cases of weak values and logic, I study the corresponding situation for strong/projective measurements. In this case, no logical inconsistencies occur provided one is always careful in specifying exactly to which ensemble or sample space one refers. My results cast doubts on the utility of quantum weak values in treating cases like the examples mentioned.

arXiv:1605.03023•Foundations of Physics•Feb 6, 2017•10 citations

Revisiting weak values through non-normality

Lorena Ballesteros Ferraz, Riccardo Muolo, Yves Caudano +1 more

Abstract Quantum measurement is one of the most fascinating and discussed phenomena in quantum physics, due to the impact on the system of the measurement action and the resulting interpretation issues. Scholars proposed weak measurements to amplify measured signals by exploiting a quantity called a weak value, but also to overcome philosophical difficulties related to the system perturbation induced by the measurement process. The method finds many applications and raises many philosophical questions as well, especially about the proper interpretation of the observations. In this paper, we show that any weak value can be expressed as the expectation value of a suitable non-normal operator. We propose a preliminary explanation of their anomalous and amplification behavior based on the theory of non-normal matrices and their link with non-normality: the weak value is different from an eigenvalue when the operator involved in the expectation value is non-normal. Our study paves the way for a deeper understanding of the measurement phenomenon, helps the design of experiments, and it is a call for collaboration to researchers in both fields to unravel new quantum phenomena induced by non-normality.

arXiv:2306.01392•Journal of Physics A Mathematical and Theoretical•Oct 18, 2023•4 citations

The Trouble with Weak Values

Jacob A. Barandes

In quantum theory, a weak value is a complex number with a somewhat technical definition: it is a ratio whose numerator is the matrix element of a self-adjoint operator and whose denominator is the inner product of a corresponding pair of state vectors. Weak values first appeared in the research literature in a pair of papers in 1987 and 1988, and were originally defined as the results of a special kind of experimental protocol involving non-disturbing measurements combined with an explicit form of post-selection. In the years since, subsequent papers on weak values have produced a number of important practical spin-offs, including new methods for signal amplification and quantum-state tomography. The present work is not concerned with those practical spin-offs, but with historical and ongoing attempts to assign weak values a transparent, single-system interpretation, as well as efforts that invoke weak values to make a number of exotic claims about the properties and behavior of individual quantum systems. This paper challenges these interpretational claims by arguing that they involve several forms of fallacious reasoning.

quant-pharXiv:2602.09380•Feb 11, 2026•0 citations

Association between quantum paradoxes based on weak values and a realistic interpretation of quantum measurements

Alice M. Aredes, Pablo L. Saldanha

Many quantum paradoxes based on a realistic view of weak values were discussed in the last decades. They lead to astonishing conclusions such as the measurement of a spin component of a spin-1/2 particle resulting in $100\ensuremath{\hbar}$, the separation of a photon from its polarization, and the possibility of having three particles in two boxes without any two particles being in the same box, among others. Here, we show that the realistic view of the weak values present in these (and other) works is equivalent to a realistic (and highly controversial) view of quantum measurements, where a measurement reveals the underlying reality of the measured quantity. We discuss that all quantum paradoxes based on weak values simply disappear if we deny these realistic views of quantum measurements and weak values. Our work thus aims to demonstrate the strong assumptions and the corresponding problems present in the interpretation of these quantum paradoxes.

arXiv:2402.09879•Physical Review A•Feb 26, 2024•8 citations
A so called “weak value” of an observable in quantum mechanics (QM) may be obtained in a weak measurement + post-selection procedure on the QM system under study. Applied to number operators, it has been invoked in revisiting some QM paradoxes ( e.g. , the so called Three-Box Paradox and Hardy’s Paradox). This requires the weak value to be interpreted as a bona fide property of the system considered, a par with entities like operator mean values and eigenvalues. I question such an interpretation; it has no support in the basic axioms of quantum mechanics and it leads to unreasonable results in concrete situations.
The physical meaning of weak values and measurements can be completely understood within the framework of a conventional quantum mechanical approach. We should not expect the weak value of an observable A^\hat AA^ with post-selection ⟨F∣\langle F|⟨F∣ within the eigenvalue range of A^\hat AA^ because it is not an expectation value of A^\hat AA^.
Quantum mechanical weak values of projection operators have been used to answer which-way questions, e . g . to trace which arms in a multiple Mach–Zehnder setup a particle may have traversed from a given initial to a prescribed final state. I show that this procedure might lead to logical inconsistencies in the sense that different methods used to answer composite questions, like “Has the particle traversed the way X or the way Y ?”, may result in different answers depending on which methods are used to find the answer. I illustrate the problem by considering some examples: the “quantum pigeonhole” framework of Aharonov et al. , the three-box problem, and Hardy’s paradox. To prepare the ground for my main conclusion on the incompatibility in certain cases of weak values and logic, I study the corresponding situation for strong/projective measurements. In this case, no logical inconsistencies occur provided one is always careful in specifying exactly to which ensemble or sample space one refers. My results cast doubts on the utility of quantum weak values in treating cases like the examples mentioned.
Abstract Quantum measurement is one of the most fascinating and discussed phenomena in quantum physics, due to the impact on the system of the measurement action and the resulting interpretation issues. Scholars proposed weak measurements to amplify measured signals by exploiting a quantity called a weak value, but also to overcome philosophical difficulties related to the system perturbation induced by the measurement process. The method finds many applications and raises many philosophical questions as well, especially about the proper interpretation of the observations. In this paper, we show that any weak value can be expressed as the expectation value of a suitable non-normal operator. We propose a preliminary explanation of their anomalous and amplification behavior based on the theory of non-normal matrices and their link with non-normality: the weak value is different from an eigenvalue when the operator involved in the expectation value is non-normal. Our study paves the way for a deeper understanding of the measurement phenomenon, helps the design of experiments, and it is a call for collaboration to researchers in both fields to unravel new quantum phenomena induced by non-normality.
In quantum theory, a weak value is a complex number with a somewhat technical definition: it is a ratio whose numerator is the matrix element of a self-adjoint operator and whose denominator is the inner product of a corresponding pair of state vectors. Weak values first appeared in the research literature in a pair of papers in 1987 and 1988, and were originally defined as the results of a special kind of experimental protocol involving non-disturbing measurements combined with an explicit form of post-selection. In the years since, subsequent papers on weak values have produced a number of important practical spin-offs, including new methods for signal amplification and quantum-state tomography. The present work is not concerned with those practical spin-offs, but with historical and ongoing attempts to assign weak values a transparent, single-system interpretation, as well as efforts that invoke weak values to make a number of exotic claims about the properties and behavior of individual quantum systems. This paper challenges these interpretational claims by arguing that they involve several forms of fallacious reasoning.
Many quantum paradoxes based on a realistic view of weak values were discussed in the last decades. They lead to astonishing conclusions such as the measurement of a spin component of a spin-1/2 particle resulting in $100\ensuremath{\hbar}$, the separation of a photon from its polarization, and the possibility of having three particles in two boxes without any two particles being in the same box, among others. Here, we show that the realistic view of the weak values present in these (and other) works is equivalent to a realistic (and highly controversial) view of quantum measurements, where a measurement reveals the underlying reality of the measured quantity. We discuss that all quantum paradoxes based on weak values simply disappear if we deny these realistic views of quantum measurements and weak values. Our work thus aims to demonstrate the strong assumptions and the corresponding problems present in the interpretation of these quantum paradoxes.