Bell non-local correlations cannot be naturally explained in a fixed causal structure. This serves as a motivation for considering models where no global assumption is made beyond logical consistency. The assumption of a fixed causal order between a set of parties, together with free randomness, implies device-independent inequalities—just as the assumption of locality does. It is known that local validity of quantum theory is consistent with violating such inequalities. Moreover, for three parties or more, even the (stronger) assumption of local classical probability theory plus logical consistency allows for violating causal inequalities. Here, we show that a classical environment (with which the parties interact), possibly containing loops, is logically consistent if and only if whatever the involved parties do, there is exactly one fixed-point, the latter being representable as a mixture of deterministic fixed-points. We further show that the non-causal view allows for a model of computation strictly more powerful than computation in a world of fixed causal orders.
Bell non-local correlations cannot be naturally explained in a fixed causal structure. This serves as a motivation for considering models where no global assumption is made beyond logical consistency. The assumption of a fixed causal order between a set of parties, together with free randomness, implies device-independent inequalities—just as the assumption of locality does. It is known that local validity of quantum theory is consistent with violating such inequalities. Moreover, for three parties or more, even the (stronger) assumption of local classical probability theory plus logical consistency allows for violating causal inequalities. Here, we show that a classical environment (with which the parties interact), possibly containing loops, is logically consistent if and only if whatever the involved parties do, there is exactly one fixed-point, the latter being representable as a mixture of deterministic fixed-points. We further show that the non-causal view allows for a model of computation strictly more powerful than computation in a world of fixed causal orders.
Bell scenarios are multipartite scenarios that exclude any signalling between parties. This leads to a strict hierarchy of classical, quantum, and non-signalling correlations in such scenarios. Here we consider a minimal relaxation of non-signalling: each party is allowed to receive a system once, implement any local intervention on it, and send out the resulting system once. Crucially, unlike Bell, we make no global assumption about causal relations between parties, e.g., they could be embedded in some exotic spacetime with indefinite causal order. We do make a causal assumption local to each party, i.e., the input received by it causally precedes the output it sends out. We then ask: Can we device-independently certify the nonclassicality of multipartite correlations in such scenarios, just as Bell inequality violations do so in Bell scenarios? A priori, this is not clear: without some assumptions on the underlying physics (e.g., non-signalling), parties can realize arbitrary correlations. We therefore make a minimal assumption of logical consistency on the underlying physics, i.e., it must be free of time-travel antinomies without imposing any restrictions on local interventions of the parties. We then define antinomicity as a device-independent notion of nonclassicality and prove a strict hierarchy between correlation sets based on their antinomicity. An antinomic correlation cannot be explained by a classical physical theory compatible with free local interventions on pain of logical contradictions in the theory. On the other hand, parties exchanging quantum systems can witness antinomicity while respecting logical consistency. Antinomicity reduces to Bell nonlocality for non-signalling parties. It also resolves a conceptual puzzle, namely, the failure of causal inequalities as witnesses of nonclassicality: antinomicity implies causal inequality violations, but not conversely.
Bell scenarios are multipartite scenarios that exclude any communication between parties. This constraint leads to a strict hierarchy of correlation sets in such scenarios, namely, classical, quantum, and nonsignaling. However, without any constraints on communication between the parties, they can realize arbitrary correlations by exchanging only classical systems. Here we consider a multipartite scenario where the parties can engage in at most a single round of communication, i.e., each party is allowed to receive a system once, implement any local intervention on it, and send out the resulting system once. While no global assumption about causal relations between parties is assumed in this scenario, we do make a causal assumption local to each party, i.e., the input received by it causally precedes the output it sends out. We then introduce antinomicity, a notion of nonclassicality for correlations in such scenarios, and prove the existence of a strict hierarchy of correlation sets classified by their antinomicity. Antinomicity serves as a generalization of Bell nonlocality: when all the parties discard their output systems (i.e., in a nonsignaling scenario), it is mathematically equivalent to Bell nonlocality. Like Bell nonlocality, it can be understood as an instance of fine-tuning, one that is necessary in any classical model of cyclic causation that avoids time-travel antinomies but allows antinomic correlations. Furthermore, antinomicity resolves a long-standing puzzle, i.e., the failure of causal inequality violations as device-independent witnesses of nonclassicality. Antinomicity implies causal inequality violations, but not conversely.
Quantum theory in a global spacetime gives rise to nonlocal correlations, which cannot be explained causally in a satisfactory way; this motivates the study of theories with reduced global assumptions. Oreshkov, Costa, and Brukner [Nat. Commun. 3, 1092 (2012)] proposed a framework in which quantum theory is valid locally but where, at the same time, no global spacetime, i.e., predefined causal order, is assumed beyond the absence of logical paradoxes. It was shown for the two-party case, however, that a global causal order always emerges in the classical limit. Quite naturally, it has been conjectured that the same also holds in the multiparty setting. We show that, counter to this belief, classical correlations locally compatible with classical probability theory exist that allow for deterministic signaling between three or more parties incompatible with any predefined causal order.
Bell nonlocality is the experimentally testable incompatibility between quantum correlations and explanations based on local hidden variables. Its significance now extends beyond the foundations of quantum mechanics: a Bell-inequality violation can certify entanglement, randomness, measurement incompatibility, and cryptographic security without requiring a detailed model of the devices producing the observed data. This article develops the mathematical structure of Bell experiments and explains its role in device-independent quantum information. Conditional probability distributions are classified into local, quantum, and no-signalling sets; the Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt inequality is derived, and its classical, quantum, and algebraic limits are distinguished. Tsirelson’s bound is obtained from the CHSH operator, while Popescu-Rohrlich correlations demonstrate that no-signalling alone does not identify the quantum set. The relation between entanglement and nonlocality is examined through local entangled states, hidden nonlocality, and activation. Nonlocal games, semidefinite relaxations, self-testing, certified randomness, and device-independent quantum key distribution are treated as operational consequences of Bell violation. Particular attention is given to entropy accumulation, finite-data security, loophole-free experiments, and the limitations of device independence. Bell nonlocality emerges as both a foundational separation between classical and quantum causal models and a quantitative resource for cryptographic and informational tasks.
In classical physics, events follow a definite causal order: the past influences the future, but not the reverse. Quantum theory, however, permits superpositions of causal orders—the so-called indefinite causal orders (ICOs)—which can provide operational advantages over classical scenarios. Verifying such phenomena has sparked significant interest, much like earlier efforts devoted to refuting local realism and confirming quantum entanglement. To date, demonstrations of ICO have all been based a process called the quantum switch and have relied on device-dependent or semi-device-independent protocols. Achieving a device-independent verification of ICO would imply that nature allows for correlations that do not respect causality, independent of any experimental assumptions or underlying theoretical description of the experiment. To this end, a recent theoretical development introduced a Bell-like inequality that allows for fully device-independent verification of ICO in a quantum switch. Here we implement this verification by experimentally violating this inequality. In particular, we measure a value of 1.8328 ± 0.0045 , which is 18 standard deviations above the definite causal order bound of 1.75 . Our work presents the first implementation of a device-independent protocol to verify ICO, albeit in the presence of experimental loopholes. This represents an important step toward the device-independent verification of an ICO and provides a context in which to identify loopholes specifically related to the verification of ICO.
Classical correlations without predefined causal order arise from processes where parties manipulate random variables, and where the order of these interactions is not predefined. No assumption on the causal order of the parties is made, but the processes are restricted to be logically consistent under any choice of the parties’ operations. It is known that for three parties or more, this set of processes is larger than the set of processes achievable in a predefined ordering of the parties. Here, we model all classical processes without predefined causal order geometrically and find that the set of such processes forms a polytope. Additionally, we model a smaller polytope—the deterministic-extrema polytope—where all extremal points represent deterministic processes. This polytope excludes probabilistic processes that must be—quite unnaturally— fine-tuned , because any variation of the weights in a decomposition into deterministic processes leads to a logical inconsistency.