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:1409.5537 · The Review of Symbolic Logic

QUANTUM TEAM LOGIC AND BELL’S INEQUALITIES

Tapani Hyttinen, Gianluca Paolini, Jouko Väänánen

Published Jun 11, 2015• 28 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

Abstract A logical approach to Bell’s Inequalities of quantum mechanics has been introduced by Abramsky and Hardy (Abramsky & Hardy, 2012). We point out that the logical Bell’s Inequalities of Abramsky & Hardy (2012) are provable in the probability logic of Fagin, Halpern and Megiddo (Fagin et al., 1990). Since it is now considered empirically established that quantum mechanics violates Bell’s Inequalities, we introduce a modified probability logic, that we call quantum team logic, in which Bell’s Inequalities are not provable, and prove a Completeness theorem for this logic. For this end we generalise the team semantics of dependence logic (Väänänen, 2007) first to probabilistic team semantics, and then to what we call quantum team semantics.

DOI
10.1017/s1755020315000192

Related papers

TEAM SEMANTICS AND INDEPENDENCE NOTIONS IN QUANTUM PHYSICS

Samson Abramsky, Joni Puljujärvi, Jouko Väänánen

Abstract We study dependence and independence concepts found in quantum physics, especially those related to hidden variables and non-locality, through the lens of team semantics and probabilistic team semantics, adapting a relational framework introduced in [1]. This also leads to new developments in independence logic and probabilistic independence logic.

arXiv:2107.10817•Bulletin of Symbolic Logic•Aug 15, 2025•4 citations

Logical Views of Bell Inequalities

Zeno Toffano

Bell's Inequalites structure can be considered in a logical-probabilistic framework, as outlined by Pitowsky [1], where the origin of the inequality was attributed to George Boole’s “conditions of possible experience”. The inequality has then been often renamed the Bell-Boole inequality. An interesting fact is that G. Boole’s method used to establish his probability inequalities stems directly from his mathematical treatment of logic using idempotent symbols (which he called “elective symbols”). The “Boolean Algebra” we consider today bears some major differences with Boole’s original method as thoroughly discussed by Hailperin [2].We proposed recently the “Eigenlogic” approach [3] where we translate Boole’s original logical method to linear algebra using idempotent and also unitary operators and outline the bridges to quantum theories in particular to quantum information [4]. Eigenlogic can thus be a framework for transposing logic in a quantum context, the probabilistic aspects are then simply derived by measurements on logical operators using the Born rule.Bell Inequalities (BI) can be expressed in an operator form where the measurement observables of an experiment are combined to form Bell operators, the outcomes are then derived by using the quantum mechanical mean value (again the Born rule). The popular form adapted for this method is the CHSH form of the BI for spin 1/2 particles or polarized photons with outcomes ±1. Using the isomorphism between idempotent and self-inverse unitary operators (Householder transform) the CHSH Bell operator transforms in Eigenlogic in a combination of idempotent operators from which by using the Born rule one gets the Fine inequality on probabilities.As stated by Khrennikov [5] the BI violation occurs only when incompatible (non-commuting) observables are used in the BI associated experiments. Particularly in the CHSH-BI experiments on an entangled state, mutually unbiased bases (MUB), representing maximally dissimilar contexts, lead to the maximum quantum violation represented by the number 2√2>2. This is the case for the couple of MUB (z,x) associated to Pauli spin operators σ_x and σ_z. In Eigenlogic these (z,x) contexts represent dual logical systems which are at interplay and have an original syntax-semantic interpretation [4]. It has to be outlined that in many quantum algorithms the MUB (z,x), linked by the Hadamard gate which represents the Fourier Transformation between the two bases, provides a quantum algorithmic advantage.The situations of the BI in the so called post-quantum regime are also analyzed by generalizing the concept of PR-Box which relates outputs (a,b) to inputs (x,y) in a two-party correlation by means of the logical equation: a⊕b=x∧y. Using Eigenlogic, families of boxes with all possible combinations of logical functions are analyzed through the equations: f(a,b)=g(x,y), where f and g correspond to the 16 different Boolean functions, giving 256 possible logical equations. The logical equations are transformed in logical operators and used to define the associated Bell operator. 16 cases of the PR-Box type (considering all the possible complementations of the variables a,b,x,y) violate the CHSH-BI maximally with the number 4>2√2 (Tsirelson’s bound). Another family of 32 logical cases gives a CHSH-BI violation of 3.33 also beyond the quantum limit; this is the case for the logical equation: a∨b=x∧y.[1] Pitowsky, I., George Boole’s ‘conditions of possible experience’ and the quantum puzzle. Brit. J. Phil. Sci., 45:95–125 (1994).[2] Hailperin, T. Boole’s Algebra isn’t Boolean algebra. A description using modern algebra, of what Boole really did create. Math. Mag. 54(4): 172–184 (1981).[3] Toffano, Z. Eigenlogic in the Spirit of George Boole. Log. Univers. 14, 175–207 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11787-020-00252-3[4] Toffano, Z.; Dubois, F. Adapting Logic to Physics: The Quantum-Like Eigenlogic Program. Entropy 2020, 22, 139. https://doi.org/10.3390/e22020139[5] Khrennikov, A. Contextuality, Complementarity, Signaling, and Bell Tests. Entropy 2022, 24, 1380. https://doi.org/10.3390/e24101380

•Jun 13, 2023•0 citations

Logical Bell inequalities

Samson Abramsky, Lucién Hardy

Bell inequalities play a central role in the study of quantum nonlocality and entanglement, with many applications in quantum information. Despite the huge literature on Bell inequalities, it is not easy to find a clear conceptual answer to what a Bell inequality is, or a clear guiding principle as to how they may be derived. In this paper, we introduce a notion of logical Bell inequality which can be used to systematically derive testable inequalities for a very wide variety of situations. There is a single clear conceptual principle, based on purely logical consistency conditions, which underlies our notion of logical Bell inequalities. We show that in a precise sense, all Bell inequalities can be taken to be of this form. Our approach is very general. It applies directly to any family of sets of commuting observables. Thus it covers not only the $n$-partite scenarios to which Bell inequalities are standardly applied, but also Kochen-Specker configurations, and many other examples. There is much current work on experimental tests for contextuality. Our approach directly yields, in a systematic fashion, testable inequalities for a very general notion of contextuality. There has been much work on obtaining proofs of Bell's theorem ``without inequalities'' or ``without probabilities.'' These proofs are seen as being in a sense more definitive and logically robust than the inequality-based proofs. On the hand, they lack the fault-tolerant aspect of inequalities. Our approach reconciles these aspects, and in fact shows how the logical robustness can be converted into systematic, general derivations of inequalities with provable violations. Moreover, the kind of strong non-locality or contextuality exhibited by the GHZ argument or by Kochen-Specker configurations can be shown to lead to maximal violations of the corresponding logical Bell inequalities. Thus the qualitative and the quantitative aspects are combined harmoniously.

arXiv:1203.1352•Physical Review A•Jun 20, 2012•110 citations

A Reexamination on Bell's Theorem

Tan Tian-rong

It is proved that Bell's inequality can be traced back to a classical probabilistic formula that is invalid clearly, while the spin correlation formula in quantum mechanics to a formula that has confirmed both by facts and quantum mechanics. Two misunderstandings about Bell's theorem are pointed out: Firstly, the hidden variable theory Bell's used is a special one, but it is regarded as a general form of such theories. Secondly, there are two outcomes obtainable from Bell's hypotheses: one is compatible with quantum mechanics and the other leads to Bell's inequality. Unfortunately, the former is regarded as a property of local hidden variable theory, while the latter as self-evident. G. Lochak has revealed the first misunderstanding, and thereby he pointed out that Bell's inequality has nothing to do with locality, but he did not find the second one, so that he still analyzed this problem starting from hidden variable theory, which is actually irrelative to Bell's inequality. (The Journal of American Science. 2005;1(2):42-50).

•Jan 1, 2005•0 citations

Stronger Hardy-type paradox based on the Bell inequality and its experimental test

Mu Yang, Hui-Xian Meng, Jie Zhou +7 more

Local realistic models cannot completely describe all predictions of quantum mechanics. This is known as Bell's theorem that can be revealed either by violations of Bell inequality, or all-versus-nothing proof of nonlocality. Hardy's paradox is an important all-versus-nothing proof and is considered as ``the simplest form of Bell's theorem.'' In this work, we advance the study of Hardy's paradox based on Bell's inequality. Our formalism is essentially equivalent to the ``logical Bell inequality'' formalism developed by Abramsky and Hardy, but ours is more easily applied to experimental tests. Remarkably, we find that not only for a two-qubit two-setting case but also for a two-qubit four-setting case, we can construct stronger Hardy-type paradoxes based on Bell's inequality, whose successful probabilities can attain four times and seven times larger than the original one, respectively, thus providing more friendly tests for experiment. Meanwhile, we experimentally test the stronger Hardy-type paradoxes in a two-qubit system. Within the experimental errors, the experimental results coincide with the theoretical predictions.

arXiv:1809.04289•Physical Review A•Mar 5, 2019•26 citations

Relation of the Bell inequalities with quantum logic, hidden variables and information theory

Emilio Santos

I review the relation of the Bell inequalities - characteristic of (classical) probabilities defined on Boolean logics - with noncontextual and local hidden variables theories of quantum mechanics and with quantum information.

arXiv:quant-ph/0207062•Jul 10, 2002•1 citation
Abstract A logical approach to Bell’s Inequalities of quantum mechanics has been introduced by Abramsky and Hardy (Abramsky & Hardy, 2012). We point out that the logical Bell’s Inequalities of Abramsky & Hardy (2012) are provable in the probability logic of Fagin, Halpern and Megiddo (Fagin et al., 1990). Since it is now considered empirically established that quantum mechanics violates Bell’s Inequalities, we introduce a modified probability logic, that we call quantum team logic, in which Bell’s Inequalities are not provable, and prove a Completeness theorem for this logic. For this end we generalise the team semantics of dependence logic (Väänänen, 2007) first to probabilistic team semantics, and then to what we call quantum team semantics.
Bell's Inequalites structure can be considered in a logical-probabilistic framework, as outlined by Pitowsky [1], where the origin of the inequality was attributed to George Boole’s “conditions of possible experience”. The inequality has then been often renamed the Bell-Boole inequality. An interesting fact is that G. Boole’s method used to establish his probability inequalities stems directly from his mathematical treatment of logic using idempotent symbols (which he called “elective symbols”). The “Boolean Algebra” we consider today bears some major differences with Boole’s original method as thoroughly discussed by Hailperin [2].We proposed recently the “Eigenlogic” approach [3] where we translate Boole’s original logical method to linear algebra using idempotent and also unitary operators and outline the bridges to quantum theories in particular to quantum information [4]. Eigenlogic can thus be a framework for transposing logic in a quantum context, the probabilistic aspects are then simply derived by measurements on logical operators using the Born rule.Bell Inequalities (BI) can be expressed in an operator form where the measurement observables of an experiment are combined to form Bell operators, the outcomes are then derived by using the quantum mechanical mean value (again the Born rule). The popular form adapted for this method is the CHSH form of the BI for spin 1/2 particles or polarized photons with outcomes ±1. Using the isomorphism between idempotent and self-inverse unitary operators (Householder transform) the CHSH Bell operator transforms in Eigenlogic in a combination of idempotent operators from which by using the Born rule one gets the Fine inequality on probabilities.As stated by Khrennikov [5] the BI violation occurs only when incompatible (non-commuting) observables are used in the BI associated experiments. Particularly in the CHSH-BI experiments on an entangled state, mutually unbiased bases (MUB), representing maximally dissimilar contexts, lead to the maximum quantum violation represented by the number 2√2>2. This is the case for the couple of MUB (z,x) associated to Pauli spin operators σ_x and σ_z. In Eigenlogic these (z,x) contexts represent dual logical systems which are at interplay and have an original syntax-semantic interpretation [4]. It has to be outlined that in many quantum algorithms the MUB (z,x), linked by the Hadamard gate which represents the Fourier Transformation between the two bases, provides a quantum algorithmic advantage.The situations of the BI in the so called post-quantum regime are also analyzed by generalizing the concept of PR-Box which relates outputs (a,b) to inputs (x,y) in a two-party correlation by means of the logical equation: a⊕b=x∧y. Using Eigenlogic, families of boxes with all possible combinations of logical functions are analyzed through the equations: f(a,b)=g(x,y), where f and g correspond to the 16 different Boolean functions, giving 256 possible logical equations. The logical equations are transformed in logical operators and used to define the associated Bell operator. 16 cases of the PR-Box type (considering all the possible complementations of the variables a,b,x,y) violate the CHSH-BI maximally with the number 4>2√2 (Tsirelson’s bound). Another family of 32 logical cases gives a CHSH-BI violation of 3.33 also beyond the quantum limit; this is the case for the logical equation: a∨b=x∧y.[1] Pitowsky, I., George Boole’s ‘conditions of possible experience’ and the quantum puzzle. Brit. J. Phil. Sci., 45:95–125 (1994).[2] Hailperin, T. Boole’s Algebra isn’t Boolean algebra. A description using modern algebra, of what Boole really did create. Math. Mag. 54(4): 172–184 (1981).[3] Toffano, Z. Eigenlogic in the Spirit of George Boole. Log. Univers. 14, 175–207 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11787-020-00252-3[4] Toffano, Z.; Dubois, F. Adapting Logic to Physics: The Quantum-Like Eigenlogic Program. Entropy 2020, 22, 139. https://doi.org/10.3390/e22020139[5] Khrennikov, A. Contextuality, Complementarity, Signaling, and Bell Tests. Entropy 2022, 24, 1380. https://doi.org/10.3390/e24101380
Bell inequalities play a central role in the study of quantum nonlocality and entanglement, with many applications in quantum information. Despite the huge literature on Bell inequalities, it is not easy to find a clear conceptual answer to what a Bell inequality is, or a clear guiding principle as to how they may be derived. In this paper, we introduce a notion of logical Bell inequality which can be used to systematically derive testable inequalities for a very wide variety of situations. There is a single clear conceptual principle, based on purely logical consistency conditions, which underlies our notion of logical Bell inequalities. We show that in a precise sense, all Bell inequalities can be taken to be of this form. Our approach is very general. It applies directly to any family of sets of commuting observables. Thus it covers not only the nnn-partite scenarios to which Bell inequalities are standardly applied, but also Kochen-Specker configurations, and many other examples. There is much current work on experimental tests for contextuality. Our approach directly yields, in a systematic fashion, testable inequalities for a very general notion of contextuality. There has been much work on obtaining proofs of Bell's theorem ``without inequalities'' or ``without probabilities.'' These proofs are seen as being in a sense more definitive and logically robust than the inequality-based proofs. On the hand, they lack the fault-tolerant aspect of inequalities. Our approach reconciles these aspects, and in fact shows how the logical robustness can be converted into systematic, general derivations of inequalities with provable violations. Moreover, the kind of strong non-locality or contextuality exhibited by the GHZ argument or by Kochen-Specker configurations can be shown to lead to maximal violations of the corresponding logical Bell inequalities. Thus the qualitative and the quantitative aspects are combined harmoniously.
It is proved that Bell's inequality can be traced back to a classical probabilistic formula that is invalid clearly, while the spin correlation formula in quantum mechanics to a formula that has confirmed both by facts and quantum mechanics. Two misunderstandings about Bell's theorem are pointed out: Firstly, the hidden variable theory Bell's used is a special one, but it is regarded as a general form of such theories. Secondly, there are two outcomes obtainable from Bell's hypotheses: one is compatible with quantum mechanics and the other leads to Bell's inequality. Unfortunately, the former is regarded as a property of local hidden variable theory, while the latter as self-evident. G. Lochak has revealed the first misunderstanding, and thereby he pointed out that Bell's inequality has nothing to do with locality, but he did not find the second one, so that he still analyzed this problem starting from hidden variable theory, which is actually irrelative to Bell's inequality. (The Journal of American Science. 2005;1(2):42-50).
Local realistic models cannot completely describe all predictions of quantum mechanics. This is known as Bell's theorem that can be revealed either by violations of Bell inequality, or all-versus-nothing proof of nonlocality. Hardy's paradox is an important all-versus-nothing proof and is considered as ``the simplest form of Bell's theorem.'' In this work, we advance the study of Hardy's paradox based on Bell's inequality. Our formalism is essentially equivalent to the ``logical Bell inequality'' formalism developed by Abramsky and Hardy, but ours is more easily applied to experimental tests. Remarkably, we find that not only for a two-qubit two-setting case but also for a two-qubit four-setting case, we can construct stronger Hardy-type paradoxes based on Bell's inequality, whose successful probabilities can attain four times and seven times larger than the original one, respectively, thus providing more friendly tests for experiment. Meanwhile, we experimentally test the stronger Hardy-type paradoxes in a two-qubit system. Within the experimental errors, the experimental results coincide with the theoretical predictions.