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:1404.4329

On Bell-Like Inequalities for Testing Local Realism

Donald A. Graft

Published Apr 16, 2014• 1 citation
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

Objections to the use of inequalities to address foundational issues are considered and shown to be invalid. The Clauser-Horne (CH) inequality is considered and interpreted in this light. It is shown that, applied correctly, the CH inequality can validly test aspects of locality. This paper establishes a firm methodological ground for a following paper analyzing a recent CH experiment.

DOI
10.48550/arxiv.1404.4329

Related papers

A Bell inequality which can be used to test locality more simply than Clauser-Horne inequality and which is violated by a larger magnitude of violation than Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt inequality

M. Ardehali

A correlation inequality is derived from local realism and a supplementary assumption. Unlike Clauser-Horne (CH) inequality [or Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt (CHSH) inequality] which is violated by quantum mechanics by a factor of $\sqrt 2$, this inequality is violated by a factor of 1.5. Thus the magnitude of violation of this inequality is approximately 20.7% larger than the magnitude of violation of previous inequalities. Moreover, unlike CH (or CHSH) inequality which requires the measurement of five detection probabilities, the present inequality requires the measurement of only two detection probabilities. This inequality can therefore be used to test locality more simply than CH or CHSH inequality.

arXiv:quant-ph/9709043•Sep 19, 1997•0 citations

Analysis of the Christensen et al. Test of Local Realism

Donald A. Graft

The Clauser-Horne (CH) inequality can validly test aspects of locality when properly applied. This paper analyzes a recent CH-based EPRB experiment, the Christensen et al. experiment. Full details of the data analysis applied to the experiment are given. An alternative analysis is also presented that considers the role of accidental coincidences and confirms and justifies the main analysis. It is shown that the experiment confirms locality and disconfirms the quantum joint prediction. To make sense of this surprising finding, the conclusion presents a new rational interpretation of the EPR paradox. The paper also contributes to promulgation of robust and correct data analysis by describing the important degrees of freedom that affect the analysis, and that must be addressed in the analysis of any EPRB experiment.

arXiv:1409.5158•Journal of Advanced Physics•Jun 3, 2015•5 citations

Bell Inequalities

Reinhold A. Bertlmann, Nicolai Friis

Abstract This chapter presents a detailed discussion of Bell inequalities and their experimental tests. Starting from the Aharonov-Bohm version of the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) paradox, we review EPR’s criteria for realism and completeness and Bell’s locality condition, before deriving the Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt (CHSH) inequality. This is followed by an exposition on Bell’s original inequality and other Bell inequalities by Wigner, as well as Clauser and Horne. We then discuss the milestones in the experimental violation of Bell inequalities, from the experiment of Freedman and Clauser in the 1970s, to the efforts of Aspect et al. in the 1980s, the experiments by the teams of Zeilinger and Gisin in the 1990s, and culminating the loophole-free tests in 2015. Finally we turn to a brief discussion of the interpretations of quantum mechanics, focusing on contrasting the realist views held by, e.g., Einstein and Bell, and the informational views with proponents such as Brukner and Zeilinger

•Sep 7, 2023•1 citation

Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt correlation and Clauser-Horne correlation do not lead to the largest violations of Bell’s inequality

M. Ardehali

An inequality is deduced from Einstein's locality and a supplementary assumption. This inequality defines an experiment that can actually be performed with present technology to test local realism. Quantum mechanics violates this inequality a factor of 1.5. In contrast, quantum mechanics violates previous inequalities [for example, those of J. F. Clauser, M. A. Horne, A. Shimony, and R. A. Holt, Phys. Rev. Lett. 23, 880 (1969); S. J. Freedman and I. F. Clauser ibid. 28, 938 (1972); and J. F. Clauser and M. A. Horne, Phys. Rev. D 10, 526 (1974)] by a factor of $\sqrt{2}.$ Thus the magnitude of violation of the inequality derived in this paper is approximately 20.7% larger than the magnitude of violation of previous inequalities. This result can be particularly important for the experimental test of locality.

arXiv:quant-ph/9701032•Physical Review A•Jan 1, 1998•5 citations

Are Bell's conditions for local realism general enough?

Emilio Santos

Bell conditions for local realism are critically revisited. In particular for optical experiments I criticize Bell's proposed response of detectors to signals as extremely idealized. More physical conditions are proposed, whence a realistic local model of an optical experiment is possible which violates the Clauser-Horne (Bell) inequality. The possibility rests on the existence of a coincidence-time loophole in the experiments.

quant-pharXiv:2601.22833•The European Physical Journal Plus•Feb 2, 2026•2 citations

Bayesian Analysis of Bell Inequalities

Asher Peres

Statistical tests are needed to determine experimentally whether a hypothetical theory based on local realism can be an acceptable alternative to quantum mechanics. It is impossible to rule out local realism by a single test, as often claimed erroneously. The “strength” of a particular Bell inequality is measured by the number of trials that are needed to invalidate local realism at a given confidence level. Various versions of Bell's inequality are compared from this point of view. It is shown that Mermin's inequality for Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger states requires fewer tests than the Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt inequality or than its chained variants applied to a singlet state, and also than Hardy's proof of nonlocality.

arXiv:quant-ph/9905084•Fortschritte der Physik•May 1, 2000•25 citations
Objections to the use of inequalities to address foundational issues are considered and shown to be invalid. The Clauser-Horne (CH) inequality is considered and interpreted in this light. It is shown that, applied correctly, the CH inequality can validly test aspects of locality. This paper establishes a firm methodological ground for a following paper analyzing a recent CH experiment.
A correlation inequality is derived from local realism and a supplementary assumption. Unlike Clauser-Horne (CH) inequality [or Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt (CHSH) inequality] which is violated by quantum mechanics by a factor of 2\sqrt 22​, this inequality is violated by a factor of 1.5. Thus the magnitude of violation of this inequality is approximately 20.7% larger than the magnitude of violation of previous inequalities. Moreover, unlike CH (or CHSH) inequality which requires the measurement of five detection probabilities, the present inequality requires the measurement of only two detection probabilities. This inequality can therefore be used to test locality more simply than CH or CHSH inequality.
The Clauser-Horne (CH) inequality can validly test aspects of locality when properly applied. This paper analyzes a recent CH-based EPRB experiment, the Christensen et al. experiment. Full details of the data analysis applied to the experiment are given. An alternative analysis is also presented that considers the role of accidental coincidences and confirms and justifies the main analysis. It is shown that the experiment confirms locality and disconfirms the quantum joint prediction. To make sense of this surprising finding, the conclusion presents a new rational interpretation of the EPR paradox. The paper also contributes to promulgation of robust and correct data analysis by describing the important degrees of freedom that affect the analysis, and that must be addressed in the analysis of any EPRB experiment.
Abstract This chapter presents a detailed discussion of Bell inequalities and their experimental tests. Starting from the Aharonov-Bohm version of the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) paradox, we review EPR’s criteria for realism and completeness and Bell’s locality condition, before deriving the Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt (CHSH) inequality. This is followed by an exposition on Bell’s original inequality and other Bell inequalities by Wigner, as well as Clauser and Horne. We then discuss the milestones in the experimental violation of Bell inequalities, from the experiment of Freedman and Clauser in the 1970s, to the efforts of Aspect et al. in the 1980s, the experiments by the teams of Zeilinger and Gisin in the 1990s, and culminating the loophole-free tests in 2015. Finally we turn to a brief discussion of the interpretations of quantum mechanics, focusing on contrasting the realist views held by, e.g., Einstein and Bell, and the informational views with proponents such as Brukner and Zeilinger
An inequality is deduced from Einstein's locality and a supplementary assumption. This inequality defines an experiment that can actually be performed with present technology to test local realism. Quantum mechanics violates this inequality a factor of 1.5. In contrast, quantum mechanics violates previous inequalities [for example, those of J. F. Clauser, M. A. Horne, A. Shimony, and R. A. Holt, Phys. Rev. Lett. 23, 880 (1969); S. J. Freedman and I. F. Clauser ibid. 28, 938 (1972); and J. F. Clauser and M. A. Horne, Phys. Rev. D 10, 526 (1974)] by a factor of 2.\sqrt{2}.2​. Thus the magnitude of violation of the inequality derived in this paper is approximately 20.7% larger than the magnitude of violation of previous inequalities. This result can be particularly important for the experimental test of locality.
Statistical tests are needed to determine experimentally whether a hypothetical theory based on local realism can be an acceptable alternative to quantum mechanics. It is impossible to rule out local realism by a single test, as often claimed erroneously. The “strength” of a particular Bell inequality is measured by the number of trials that are needed to invalidate local realism at a given confidence level. Various versions of Bell's inequality are compared from this point of view. It is shown that Mermin's inequality for Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger states requires fewer tests than the Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt inequality or than its chained variants applied to a singlet state, and also than Hardy's proof of nonlocality.