arXiv:1406.0243 · Advanced series on mathematical psychology

Probabilistic Contextuality in EPR/Bohm-type Systems with Signaling Allowed

Janne V. Kujala, Ehtibar N. Dzhafarov

Published Nov 24, 2015• 35 citations

Abstract

In this chapter, we review a principled way of defining and measuring contextuality in systems with deterministic inputs and random outputs, recently proposed and developed in \citep{KujalaDzhafarovLarsson2015,DKL2015FooP}.

DOI: 10.1142/9789814730617_0012

Related papers

Generalizing Bell-type and Leggett-Garg-type Inequalities to Systems with Signaling

Ehtibar N. Dzhafarov, Janne V. Kujala

Contextuality means non-existence of a joint distribution for random variables recorded under mutually incompatible conditions, subject to certain constraints imposed on how the identity of these variables may change across these conditions. In simple quantum systems contextuality is indicated by violations of Bell-type or Leggett-Garg-type inequalities. These inequalities, however, are predicated on the assumption of no-signaling, defined as invariance of the distributions of measurement results with respect to other (e.g., earlier in time) measurements' settings. Signaling makes the inequalities inapplicable: a non-signaling system with any degree of contextuality, however high, loses any relation to this concept as soon as it exhibits any degree of signaling, however small. This is unsatisfactory. We describe a principled way of defining and measuring contextuality in arbitrary systems with random outputs, whether signaling is absent or present.

arXiv:1407.2886Jul 10, 201415 citations

A Qualified Kolmogorovian Account of Probabilistic Contextuality

Ehtibar N. Dzhafarov, Janne V. Kujala

We describe a mathematical language for determining all possible patterns of contextuality in the dependence of stochastic outputs of a system on its deterministic inputs. The central notion is that of all possible couplings for stochastically unrelated outputs indexed by mutually incompatible values of inputs. A system is characterized by a pattern of which outputs can be "directly influenced" by which inputs (a primitive relation, hypothetical or normative), and by certain constraints imposed on the outputs (such as Bell-type inequalities or their quantum analogues). The set of couplings compatible with these constraints represents a form of contextuality in the dependence of outputs on inputs with respect to the declared pattern of direct influences.

arXiv:1304.4546Apr 16, 20130 citations

Probabilistic foundations of contextuality

Ehtibar N. Dzhafarov, Janne V. Kujala

Contextuality is usually defined as absence of a joint distribution for a set of measurements (random variables) with known joint distributions of some of its subsets. However, if these subsets of measurements are not disjoint, contextuality is mathematically impossible even if one generally allows (as one must) for random variables not to be jointly distributed. To avoid contradictions one has to adopt the Contextuality‐by‐Default approach: measurements made in different contexts are always distinct and stochastically unrelated to each other. Contextuality is reformulated then in terms of the (im)possibility of imposing on all the measurements in a system a joint distribution of a particular kind: such that any measurements of one and the same property made in different contexts satisfy a specified property, . In the traditional analysis of contextuality means “are equal to each other with probability 1”. However, if the system of measurements violates the “no‐disturbance principle”, due to signaling or experimental biases, then the meaning of has to be generalized, and the proposed generalization is “are equal to each other with maximal possible probability” (applied to any set of measurements of one and the same property). This approach is illustrated on arbitrary systems of binary measurements, including most of quantum systems of traditional interest in contextuality studies (irrespective of whether the “no‐disturbance” principle holds in them).

arXiv:1604.08412Fortschritte der PhysikSep 7, 201634 citations

All-Possible-Couplings Approach to Measuring Probabilistic Context

Ehtibar N. Dzhafarov, Janne V. Kujala

From behavioral sciences to biology to quantum mechanics, one encounters situations where (i) a system outputs several random variables in response to several inputs, (ii) for each of these responses only some of the inputs may "directly" influence them, but (iii) other inputs provide a "context" for this response by influencing its probabilistic relations to other responses. These contextual influences are very different, say, in classical kinetic theory and in the entanglement paradigm of quantum mechanics, which are traditionally interpreted as representing different forms of physical determinism. One can mathematically construct systems with other types of contextuality, whether or not empirically realizable: those that form special cases of the classical type, those that fall between the classical and quantum ones, and those that violate the quantum type. We show how one can quantify and classify all logically possible contextual influences by studying various sets of probabilistic couplings, i.e., sets of joint distributions imposed on random outputs recorded at different (mutually incompatible) values of inputs.

arXiv:1209.3430PLoS ONEMay 6, 201347 citations

Contextuality, Complementarity, Signaling, and Bell Tests

Andrei Yu. Khrennikov

This is a review devoted to the complementarity–contextuality interplay with connection to the Bell inequalities. Starting the discussion with complementarity, I point to contextuality as its seed. Bohr contextuality is the dependence of an observable’s outcome on the experimental context; on the system–apparatus interaction. Probabilistically, complementarity means that the joint probability distribution (JPD) does not exist. Instead of the JPD, one has to operate with contextual probabilities. The Bell inequalities are interpreted as the statistical tests of contextuality, and hence, incompatibility. For context-dependent probabilities, these inequalities may be violated. I stress that contextuality tested by the Bell inequalities is the so-called joint measurement contextuality (JMC), the special case of Bohr’s contextuality. Then, I examine the role of signaling (marginal inconsistency). In QM, signaling can be considered as an experimental artifact. However, often, experimental data have signaling patterns. I discuss possible sources of signaling—for example, dependence of the state preparation on measurement settings. In principle, one can extract the measure of “pure contextuality” from data shadowed by signaling. This theory is known as contextuality by default (CbD). It leads to inequalities with an additional term quantifying signaling: Bell–Dzhafarov–Kujala inequalities.

arXiv:2208.07425EntropySep 28, 202236 citations

EPR-Bohm experiment, interference of probabilities, and imprecision of time

Andrei Yu. Khrennikov

We demonstrate that the EPR-Bohm probabilities can be easily obtained in the classical (but contextual) probabilistic framework by using the formula of interference of probabilities. From this point of view the EPR-Bell experiment is just an experiment on interference of probabilities. We analyze the time structure of contextuality in the EPR-Bohm experiment. The conclusion is that quantum mechanics does not contradict to a local realistic model in which probabilities are calculated as averages over conditionings/measurements for pairs of instances of time t1 < t2. If we restrict our consideration only to simultaneous measurements at the fixed instance of time t we would get contradiction with Bell’s theorem. One of implications of this fact might be the impossibility to define instances of time with absolute precision on the level of the microscopic realistic model. 1. Introduction.In a series of papers, see, e.g., [1] it was demonstrated

Feb 10, 20041 citation