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:1704.05106 · Entropy

Ruling out Higher-Order Interference from Purity Principles

Howard Barnum, Ciarán M. Lee, Carlo Maria Scandolo, John H. Selby

Published Jun 1, 2017• 34 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

As first noted by Rafael Sorkin, there is a limit to quantum interference. The interference pattern formed in a multi-slit experiment is a function of the interference patterns formed between pairs of slits; there are no genuinely new features resulting from considering three slits instead of two. Sorkin has introduced a hierarchy of mathematically conceivable higher-order interference behaviours, where classical theory lies at the first level of this hierarchy and quantum theory theory at the second. Informally, the order in this hierarchy corresponds to the number of slits on which the interference pattern has an irreducible dependence. Many authors have wondered why quantum interference is limited to the second level of this hierarchy. Does the existence of higher-order interference violate some natural physical principle that we believe should be fundamental? In the current work we show that such principles can be found which limit interference behaviour to second-order, or “quantum-like”, interference, but that do not restrict us to the entire quantum formalism. We work within the operational framework of generalised probabilistic theories, and prove that any theory satisfying Causality, Purity Preservation, Pure Sharpness, and Purification—four principles that formalise the fundamental character of purity in nature—exhibits at most second-order interference. Hence these theories are, at least conceptually, very “close” to quantum theory. Along the way we show that systems in such theories correspond to Euclidean Jordan algebras. Hence, they are self-dual and, moreover, multi-slit experiments in such theories are described by pure projectors.

DOI
10.3390/e19060253

Related papers

Higher-Order Interference in Extensions of Quantum Theory

Ciarán M. Lee, John H. Selby

Quantum interference, manifest in the two slit experiment, lies at the heart of several quantum computational speed-ups and provides a striking example of a quantum phenomenon with no classical counterpart. An intriguing feature of quantum interference arises in a variant of the standard two slit experiment, in which there are three, rather than two, slits. The interference pattern in this set-up can be written in terms of the two and one slit patterns obtained by blocking one, or more, of the slits. This is in stark contrast with the standard two slit experiment, where the interference pattern cannot be written as a sum of the one slit patterns. This was first noted by Rafael Sorkin, who raised the question of why quantum theory only exhibits irreducible interference in the two slit experiment. One approach to this problem is to compare the predictions of quantum theory to those of operationally-defined ‘foil’ theories, in the hope of determining whether theories that do exhibit higher-order interference suffer from pathological—or at least undesirable—features. In this paper two proposed extensions of quantum theory are considered: the theory of Density Cubes proposed by Dakić, Paterek and Brukner, which has been shown to exhibit irreducible interference in the three slit set-up, and the Quartic Quantum Theory of Życzkowski. The theory of Density Cubes will be shown to provide an advantage over quantum theory in a certain computational task and to posses a well-defined mechanism which leads to the emergence of quantum theory—analogous to the emergence of classical physics from quantum theory via decoherence. Despite this, the axioms used to define Density Cubes will be shown to be insufficient to uniquely characterise the theory. In comparison, Quartic Quantum Theory is a well-defined theory and we demonstrate that it exhibits irreducible interference to all orders. This feature of Życzkowski’s theory is argued not to be a genuine phenomenon, but to arise from an ambiguity in the current definition of higher-order interference in operationally-defined theories. Thus, to begin to understand why quantum theory is limited to a certain kind of interference, a new definition of higher-order interference is needed that is applicable to, and makes good operational sense in, arbitrary operationally-defined theories.

arXiv:1510.03860•Foundations of Physics•Oct 22, 2016•50 citations

Third-order interference and a principle of `quantumness'

Gerd Niestegge

Are there physical, probabilistic or information-theoretic principles which characterize the quantum probabilities and distinguish them from the classical case as well as from other probability theories, or which reveal why quantum mechanics requires its very special mathematical formalism? The paper identifies the fundamental absence of third-order interference as such a principle of `quantumness'. Considering three-slit experiments, the concept of third-order interference was originally introduced by Sorkin in 1994.

arXiv:1103.0638•Mar 3, 2011•0 citations

Higher-order interference doesn't help in searching for a needle in a haystack

Ciarán M. Lee, John H. Selby

Grover's algorithm constitutes the optimal quantum solution to the search problem and provides a quadratic speed-up over all possible classical search algorithms. Quantum interference between computational paths has been posited as a key resource behind this computational speed-up. However there is a limit to this interference, at most pairs of paths can ever interact in a fundamental way. Could more interference imply more computational power? Sorkin has defined a hierarchy of possible interference behaviours---currently under experimental investigation---where classical theory is at the first level of the hierarchy and quantum theory belongs to the second. Informally, the order in the hierarchy corresponds to the number of paths that have an irreducible interaction in a multi-slit experiment. In this work, we consider how Grover's speed-up depends on the order of interference in a theory. Surprisingly, we show that the quadratic lower bound holds regardless of the order of interference. Thus, at least from the point of view of the search problem, post-quantum interference does not imply a computational speed-up over quantum theory.

•Apr 11, 2016•5 citations

Experimental Higher-Order Interference in Quantum Mechanics Induced by Optical Nonlinearities

Peter Namdar, Irati Alonso Calafell, Alessandro Trenti +4 more

The double-slit experiment is a direct demonstration of interference between quantum objects. Of course, interference is also observed in experiments using multiple slits. However, according to quantum theory, the interference patterns produced using such multi-slits can all be explained in terms of interference between pairs of slits [1] , [2] . Interestingly, there are proposed versions of quantum theory—so-called higher-order theories—wherein this is not possible [3] . In such theories the "third-order" interference (with three or more slits open) is genuinely different from second-order interference. Here we show that standard quantum mechanics actually allows for apparent high-order interference, if one considers nonlinear effects. Note, that another mechanism for this has also recently been shown based on so-called looped trajectories [4] – [6] .

Conference on Lasers and Electro-Optics Europe & European Quantum Electronics Conference (CLEO/Europe-EQEC)•Jun 21, 2021•1 citation

Interference as an information-theoretic game

Sebastian Horvat, Borivoje Dakić

The double slit experiment provides a clear demarcation between classical and quantum theory, while multi-slit experiments demarcate quantum and higher-order interference theories. In this work we show that these experiments pertain to a broader class of processes, which can be formulated as information-processing tasks, providing a clear cut between classical, quantum and higher-order theories. The tasks involve two parties and communication between them with the goal of winning certain parity games. We show that the order of interference is in one-to-one correspondence with the parity order of these games. Furthermore, we prove the order of interference to be additive under composition of systems both in classical and quantum theory. The latter result can be used as a (semi)device-independent witness of the number of particles in the quantum setting. Finally, we extend our game formulation within the generalized probabilistic framework and prove that tomographic locality implies the additivity of the order of interference under composition. These results shed light on the operational meaning of the order of interference and can be important for the identification of the information-theoretic principles behind second-order interference in quantum theory.

arXiv:2003.12114•Quantum•Mar 8, 2021•8 citations

Violation of no-signaling in higher-order quantum measure theories

Karthik S. Joshi, R. Srikanth, Urbasi Sinha

More general probability sum-rules for describing interference found in quantum mechanics (QM) were formulated by Sorkin in a hierarchy of such rules. The additivity of classical measure theory corresponds to the second sum-rule. QM violates this rule, but satisfies the third and higher sum-rules. This evokes the question of whether there are physical principles that forbid their violation. We show that in a theory that is indistinguishable from quantum mechanics in first and second-order interferences, the violation of higher sum-rules allows for superluminal signaling, essentially because probability measures can be contextual in such theories.

arXiv:1308.6065•International Journal of Quantum Information•Aug 1, 2016•0 citations
As first noted by Rafael Sorkin, there is a limit to quantum interference. The interference pattern formed in a multi-slit experiment is a function of the interference patterns formed between pairs of slits; there are no genuinely new features resulting from considering three slits instead of two. Sorkin has introduced a hierarchy of mathematically conceivable higher-order interference behaviours, where classical theory lies at the first level of this hierarchy and quantum theory theory at the second. Informally, the order in this hierarchy corresponds to the number of slits on which the interference pattern has an irreducible dependence. Many authors have wondered why quantum interference is limited to the second level of this hierarchy. Does the existence of higher-order interference violate some natural physical principle that we believe should be fundamental? In the current work we show that such principles can be found which limit interference behaviour to second-order, or “quantum-like”, interference, but that do not restrict us to the entire quantum formalism. We work within the operational framework of generalised probabilistic theories, and prove that any theory satisfying Causality, Purity Preservation, Pure Sharpness, and Purification—four principles that formalise the fundamental character of purity in nature—exhibits at most second-order interference. Hence these theories are, at least conceptually, very “close” to quantum theory. Along the way we show that systems in such theories correspond to Euclidean Jordan algebras. Hence, they are self-dual and, moreover, multi-slit experiments in such theories are described by pure projectors.
Quantum interference, manifest in the two slit experiment, lies at the heart of several quantum computational speed-ups and provides a striking example of a quantum phenomenon with no classical counterpart. An intriguing feature of quantum interference arises in a variant of the standard two slit experiment, in which there are three, rather than two, slits. The interference pattern in this set-up can be written in terms of the two and one slit patterns obtained by blocking one, or more, of the slits. This is in stark contrast with the standard two slit experiment, where the interference pattern cannot be written as a sum of the one slit patterns. This was first noted by Rafael Sorkin, who raised the question of why quantum theory only exhibits irreducible interference in the two slit experiment. One approach to this problem is to compare the predictions of quantum theory to those of operationally-defined ‘foil’ theories, in the hope of determining whether theories that do exhibit higher-order interference suffer from pathological—or at least undesirable—features. In this paper two proposed extensions of quantum theory are considered: the theory of Density Cubes proposed by Dakić, Paterek and Brukner, which has been shown to exhibit irreducible interference in the three slit set-up, and the Quartic Quantum Theory of Życzkowski. The theory of Density Cubes will be shown to provide an advantage over quantum theory in a certain computational task and to posses a well-defined mechanism which leads to the emergence of quantum theory—analogous to the emergence of classical physics from quantum theory via decoherence. Despite this, the axioms used to define Density Cubes will be shown to be insufficient to uniquely characterise the theory. In comparison, Quartic Quantum Theory is a well-defined theory and we demonstrate that it exhibits irreducible interference to all orders. This feature of Życzkowski’s theory is argued not to be a genuine phenomenon, but to arise from an ambiguity in the current definition of higher-order interference in operationally-defined theories. Thus, to begin to understand why quantum theory is limited to a certain kind of interference, a new definition of higher-order interference is needed that is applicable to, and makes good operational sense in, arbitrary operationally-defined theories.
Are there physical, probabilistic or information-theoretic principles which characterize the quantum probabilities and distinguish them from the classical case as well as from other probability theories, or which reveal why quantum mechanics requires its very special mathematical formalism? The paper identifies the fundamental absence of third-order interference as such a principle of `quantumness'. Considering three-slit experiments, the concept of third-order interference was originally introduced by Sorkin in 1994.
Grover's algorithm constitutes the optimal quantum solution to the search problem and provides a quadratic speed-up over all possible classical search algorithms. Quantum interference between computational paths has been posited as a key resource behind this computational speed-up. However there is a limit to this interference, at most pairs of paths can ever interact in a fundamental way. Could more interference imply more computational power? Sorkin has defined a hierarchy of possible interference behaviours---currently under experimental investigation---where classical theory is at the first level of the hierarchy and quantum theory belongs to the second. Informally, the order in the hierarchy corresponds to the number of paths that have an irreducible interaction in a multi-slit experiment. In this work, we consider how Grover's speed-up depends on the order of interference in a theory. Surprisingly, we show that the quadratic lower bound holds regardless of the order of interference. Thus, at least from the point of view of the search problem, post-quantum interference does not imply a computational speed-up over quantum theory.
The double-slit experiment is a direct demonstration of interference between quantum objects. Of course, interference is also observed in experiments using multiple slits. However, according to quantum theory, the interference patterns produced using such multi-slits can all be explained in terms of interference between pairs of slits [1] , [2] . Interestingly, there are proposed versions of quantum theory—so-called higher-order theories—wherein this is not possible [3] . In such theories the "third-order" interference (with three or more slits open) is genuinely different from second-order interference. Here we show that standard quantum mechanics actually allows for apparent high-order interference, if one considers nonlinear effects. Note, that another mechanism for this has also recently been shown based on so-called looped trajectories [4] – [6] .
The double slit experiment provides a clear demarcation between classical and quantum theory, while multi-slit experiments demarcate quantum and higher-order interference theories. In this work we show that these experiments pertain to a broader class of processes, which can be formulated as information-processing tasks, providing a clear cut between classical, quantum and higher-order theories. The tasks involve two parties and communication between them with the goal of winning certain parity games. We show that the order of interference is in one-to-one correspondence with the parity order of these games. Furthermore, we prove the order of interference to be additive under composition of systems both in classical and quantum theory. The latter result can be used as a (semi)device-independent witness of the number of particles in the quantum setting. Finally, we extend our game formulation within the generalized probabilistic framework and prove that tomographic locality implies the additivity of the order of interference under composition. These results shed light on the operational meaning of the order of interference and can be important for the identification of the information-theoretic principles behind second-order interference in quantum theory.
More general probability sum-rules for describing interference found in quantum mechanics (QM) were formulated by Sorkin in a hierarchy of such rules. The additivity of classical measure theory corresponds to the second sum-rule. QM violates this rule, but satisfies the third and higher sum-rules. This evokes the question of whether there are physical principles that forbid their violation. We show that in a theory that is indistinguishable from quantum mechanics in first and second-order interferences, the violation of higher sum-rules allows for superluminal signaling, essentially because probability measures can be contextual in such theories.