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:1812.00985 · Foundations of Physics

Consistent Descriptions of Quantum Measurement

Jianhao M. Yang

Published Oct 24, 2019• 7 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

Abstract The Wigner’s friend type of thought experiments manifest the conceptual challenge on how different observers can have consistent descriptions of a quantum measurement event. In this paper, we analyze the extended version of Wigner’s friend thought experiment (Frauchiger and Renner in Nat Commun 3711:9, 2018) in detail and show that the reasoning process from each agent that leads to the no-go theorem is inconsistent. The inconsistency is with respect to the requirement that an agent should make use of updated information instead of outdated information. We then apply the relational formulation of quantum measurement to resolve the inconsistent descriptions from different agents. In relational formulation of quantum mechanics, a measurement is described relative to an observer. Synchronization of measurement result is a necessary requirement to achieve consistent descriptions of a quantum system from different observers. Thought experiments, including EPR, Wigner’s Friend and it extended version, confirm the necessity of relational formulation of quantum measurement when applying quantum mechanics to composite system with entangled but space-like separated subsystems.

DOI
10.1007/s10701-019-00305-8

Related papers

A No-Go Theorem for Observer-Independent Facts

Časlav Brukner

In his famous thought experiment, Wigner assigns an entangled state to the composite quantum system made up of Wigner's friend and her observed system. While the two of them have different accounts of the process, each Wigner and his friend can in principle verify his/her respective state assignments by performing an appropriate measurement. As manifested through a click in a detector or a specific position of the pointer, the outcomes of these measurements can be regarded as reflecting directly observable "facts". Reviewing arXiv:1507.05255, I will derive a no-go theorem for observer-independent facts, which would be common both for Wigner and the friend. I will then analyze this result in the context of a newly-derived theorem arXiv:1604.07422, where Frauchiger and Renner prove that "single-world interpretations of quantum theory cannot be self-consistent". It is argued that "self-consistency" has the same implications as the assumption that observational statements of different observers can be compared in a single (and hence an observer-independent) theoretical framework. The latter, however, may not be possible, if the statements are to be understood as relational in the sense that their determinacy is relative to an observer.

arXiv:1804.00749•Entropy•May 8, 2018•196 citations

Consistency in the description of quantum measurement: Quantum theory can consistently describe the use of itself

Joseph M. Renes

Recent extended formulations of the Wigner's friend thought experiment throw the measurement problem of quantum mechanics into sharper relief. Here I respond to an invitation by Renner to provide a consistent and concrete set of rules for quantum mechanics which can avoid the apparent paradox formulated by Frauchiger and Renner [Nat. Comm. 9, 3711 (2018)]. I propose a slight addition to standard textbook quantum mechanics, in the form of two rules, which avoids the paradox. The first specifies when a given quantum dynamics can be interpreted as a measurement. Potentially any dynamics can, but doing so depends on the context of other performed operations. The second requires that a joint context be used to determine whether several different dynamical evolutions can all be interpreted as measurement. The paradox is then avoided because not every participant in the Frauchiger-Renner thought experiment regards the stated dynamical descriptions of the experiment as measurements.

arXiv:2107.02193•Jul 5, 2021•34 citations

How Single-World Quantum Mechanics is Consistent

Dustin Lazarovici, Mario Hubert

We discuss the no-go theorem of Frauchiger and Renner based on an extended Wigner's friend thought experiment which is supposed to show that any single-world interpretation of quantum mechanics leads to inconsistent predictions if it is applicable on all scales. We show that no such inconsistency occurs if one considers a complete description of the physical situation. We then discuss implications of the thought experiment that have not been clearly addressed in the original paper, including a tension between relativity and nonlocal effects predicted by quantum mechanics. Our discussion applies in particular to Bohmian mechanics.

•Sep 21, 2018•0 citations

How Quantum Mechanics can consistently describe the use of itself

Dustin Lazarovici, Mario Hubert

We discuss the no-go theorem of Frauchiger and Renner based on an "extended Wigner's friend" thought experiment which is supposed to show that any single-world interpretation of quantum mechanics leads to inconsistent predictions if it is applicable on all scales. We show that no such inconsistency occurs if one considers a complete description of the physical situation. We then discuss implications of the thought experiment that have not been clearly addressed in the original paper, including a tension between relativity and nonlocal effects predicted by quantum mechanics. Our discussion applies in particular to Bohmian mechanics.

Scientific Reports•Jan 24, 2019•113 citations

Probing measurement problem of quantum theory with an operational approach

Shubhayan Sarkar, Debashis Saha

Exploiting the tension between the two dynamics of quantum theory (QT) or the so-called problem of QT within a modified version of Wigner's Friend thought experiment, we point out that two different descriptions of Friend's lab by two different observers, Wigner and his Student, applying the same textbook QT can lead to inconsistency in observed probabilities. To avoid such inconsistent predictions of QT, we hypothesize two distinct solutions inspired by the perspectives of Wigner and Student, which we term as Absoluteness of measurement (AoM), and Non-absoluteness of measurement (NoM). To test the validity of these two perceptions in an operational approach, we construct an extended Wigner's Friend scenario and probe two sets of empirical probabilities inferred from these two perceptions without assuming the details of the experiment. We show that the set of probabilities obtainable for NoM is strictly larger than the set obtainable for AoM. We then further extend our scenario for two spatially separated Friends and propose an operational task with a suitable figure of merit to single out quantum correlations achievable with NoM but cannot be achieved using AoM. Notably, the optimal value of the figure of merit in QT with AoM is the same as in classical theory. We also analyze whether different interpretations of QT are compatible with these two perceptions and provide consistent predictions or not. Finally, we point out that the recent no-go theorems of QT provided by Frauchiger-Renner [Nat. Commun. 9, 3711 (2018)], by Brukner [Entropy 20, 350 (2018)], and by K.W. Bong et al., [Nat. Phys. 16, 1199 (2020)] are particular instances of the violation of AoM.

•Jul 18, 2021•0 citations

Conventional Quantum Theory Does Not Support a Coherent Relational Account

Ruth E. Kastner

Quantum theory in its conventional formulation is notoriously subject to various measurement-related paradoxes, as exemplified by the “Schrödinger’s Cat” and “Wigner’s Friend” thought experiments. It has been shown, for example, by Frauchiger and Renner, that nested measurements such as those occurring in the Wigner’s Friend experiment can lead to inconsistencies concerning the putative outcomes of measurements. Such inconsistencies are commonly presumed to remain private and incommensurable, but this is not the case. A counterexample, in which the inconsistencies can be revealed among the observers, is reviewed. The implications for a recent attempt to shield Relational Quantum Mechanics from such inconsistencies are considered, and it is concluded that the attempt is not successful. Further implications for the state of the debate concerning the viability of quantum theory in its various formulations are discussed.

arXiv:2406.17290•Philosophy of Physics•Jan 1, 2024•3 citations
Abstract The Wigner’s friend type of thought experiments manifest the conceptual challenge on how different observers can have consistent descriptions of a quantum measurement event. In this paper, we analyze the extended version of Wigner’s friend thought experiment (Frauchiger and Renner in Nat Commun 3711:9, 2018) in detail and show that the reasoning process from each agent that leads to the no-go theorem is inconsistent. The inconsistency is with respect to the requirement that an agent should make use of updated information instead of outdated information. We then apply the relational formulation of quantum measurement to resolve the inconsistent descriptions from different agents. In relational formulation of quantum mechanics, a measurement is described relative to an observer. Synchronization of measurement result is a necessary requirement to achieve consistent descriptions of a quantum system from different observers. Thought experiments, including EPR, Wigner’s Friend and it extended version, confirm the necessity of relational formulation of quantum measurement when applying quantum mechanics to composite system with entangled but space-like separated subsystems.
In his famous thought experiment, Wigner assigns an entangled state to the composite quantum system made up of Wigner's friend and her observed system. While the two of them have different accounts of the process, each Wigner and his friend can in principle verify his/her respective state assignments by performing an appropriate measurement. As manifested through a click in a detector or a specific position of the pointer, the outcomes of these measurements can be regarded as reflecting directly observable "facts". Reviewing arXiv:1507.05255, I will derive a no-go theorem for observer-independent facts, which would be common both for Wigner and the friend. I will then analyze this result in the context of a newly-derived theorem arXiv:1604.07422, where Frauchiger and Renner prove that "single-world interpretations of quantum theory cannot be self-consistent". It is argued that "self-consistency" has the same implications as the assumption that observational statements of different observers can be compared in a single (and hence an observer-independent) theoretical framework. The latter, however, may not be possible, if the statements are to be understood as relational in the sense that their determinacy is relative to an observer.
Recent extended formulations of the Wigner's friend thought experiment throw the measurement problem of quantum mechanics into sharper relief. Here I respond to an invitation by Renner to provide a consistent and concrete set of rules for quantum mechanics which can avoid the apparent paradox formulated by Frauchiger and Renner [Nat. Comm. 9, 3711 (2018)]. I propose a slight addition to standard textbook quantum mechanics, in the form of two rules, which avoids the paradox. The first specifies when a given quantum dynamics can be interpreted as a measurement. Potentially any dynamics can, but doing so depends on the context of other performed operations. The second requires that a joint context be used to determine whether several different dynamical evolutions can all be interpreted as measurement. The paradox is then avoided because not every participant in the Frauchiger-Renner thought experiment regards the stated dynamical descriptions of the experiment as measurements.
We discuss the no-go theorem of Frauchiger and Renner based on an extended Wigner's friend thought experiment which is supposed to show that any single-world interpretation of quantum mechanics leads to inconsistent predictions if it is applicable on all scales. We show that no such inconsistency occurs if one considers a complete description of the physical situation. We then discuss implications of the thought experiment that have not been clearly addressed in the original paper, including a tension between relativity and nonlocal effects predicted by quantum mechanics. Our discussion applies in particular to Bohmian mechanics.
We discuss the no-go theorem of Frauchiger and Renner based on an "extended Wigner's friend" thought experiment which is supposed to show that any single-world interpretation of quantum mechanics leads to inconsistent predictions if it is applicable on all scales. We show that no such inconsistency occurs if one considers a complete description of the physical situation. We then discuss implications of the thought experiment that have not been clearly addressed in the original paper, including a tension between relativity and nonlocal effects predicted by quantum mechanics. Our discussion applies in particular to Bohmian mechanics.
Exploiting the tension between the two dynamics of quantum theory (QT) or the so-called problem of QT within a modified version of Wigner's Friend thought experiment, we point out that two different descriptions of Friend's lab by two different observers, Wigner and his Student, applying the same textbook QT can lead to inconsistency in observed probabilities. To avoid such inconsistent predictions of QT, we hypothesize two distinct solutions inspired by the perspectives of Wigner and Student, which we term as Absoluteness of measurement (AoM), and Non-absoluteness of measurement (NoM). To test the validity of these two perceptions in an operational approach, we construct an extended Wigner's Friend scenario and probe two sets of empirical probabilities inferred from these two perceptions without assuming the details of the experiment. We show that the set of probabilities obtainable for NoM is strictly larger than the set obtainable for AoM. We then further extend our scenario for two spatially separated Friends and propose an operational task with a suitable figure of merit to single out quantum correlations achievable with NoM but cannot be achieved using AoM. Notably, the optimal value of the figure of merit in QT with AoM is the same as in classical theory. We also analyze whether different interpretations of QT are compatible with these two perceptions and provide consistent predictions or not. Finally, we point out that the recent no-go theorems of QT provided by Frauchiger-Renner [Nat. Commun. 9, 3711 (2018)], by Brukner [Entropy 20, 350 (2018)], and by K.W. Bong et al., [Nat. Phys. 16, 1199 (2020)] are particular instances of the violation of AoM.
Quantum theory in its conventional formulation is notoriously subject to various measurement-related paradoxes, as exemplified by the “Schrödinger’s Cat” and “Wigner’s Friend” thought experiments. It has been shown, for example, by Frauchiger and Renner, that nested measurements such as those occurring in the Wigner’s Friend experiment can lead to inconsistencies concerning the putative outcomes of measurements. Such inconsistencies are commonly presumed to remain private and incommensurable, but this is not the case. A counterexample, in which the inconsistencies can be revealed among the observers, is reviewed. The implications for a recent attempt to shield Relational Quantum Mechanics from such inconsistencies are considered, and it is concluded that the attempt is not successful. Further implications for the state of the debate concerning the viability of quantum theory in its various formulations are discussed.