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:1902.02413 · Physical Review A

Characterizing and quantifying extended contextuality

Bárbara Amaral, Cristhiano Duarte

Published Dec 2, 2019• 11 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

In an ideal contextuality scenario it is assumed that, whenever two contexts overlap, the marginal distribution obtained for the intersection of these contexts must be the same. Although this nondisturbance idealization has been extremely useful in investigating the limitations of physical theories, in this paper, we will work out a more robust and possibly more experimentally friendly framework for contextuality. Simply put, we will restate the extended definition of noncontextuality provided by the noncontextuality by default and show that in this extended perspective it is possible to avoid weakening the nondisturbance hypothesis. By doing so, we also show how standard tools for characterizing and quantifying contextuality can also be applied to this extended scenario. In particular, we came up with a linear program to check whether or not a behavior is contextual in the extended sense. The connection with the usual definition of contextuality is also established because whenever nondisturbance is fully satisfied the extended conditions reduce to the original ones.

DOI
10.1103/physreva.100.062103

Related papers

Necessary conditions for extended noncontextuality in general sets of random variables

Bárbara Amaral, Cristhiano Duarte, Roberto I. Oliveira

In this paper, we explore the graph approach to contextuality to restate the extended definition of noncontextuality as given by Kujala et al. [Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 150401 (2015)] using graph-theoretical terms. This extended definition avoids the assumption of the pre-sheaf or non-disturbance condition, which states that if two contexts overlap, then the marginal distribution obtained for the intersection must be the same, a restriction that will never be perfectly satisfied in real experiments. With this, we are able to derive necessary conditions for extended noncontextuality for any set of random variables based on the geometrical aspects of the graph approach, which can be tested directly with experimental data in any contextuality experiment and which reduce to traditional necessary conditions for noncontextuality if the non-disturbance condition is satisfied.

arXiv:1710.01318•Journal of Mathematical Physics•Jul 1, 2018•14 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:1604.08412•Fortschritte der Physik•Sep 7, 2016•34 citations

On possible explanations for quantum contextuality

Alisson Tezzin

Recent research on quantum contextuality has been strongly centered on device-independent frameworks, such as the many graph approaches to contextuality and the celebrated sheaf-theoretical approach. Contextuality is described in these frameworks as a property of data only, making it possible to characterize and quantify the phenomena regardless of the reasons why it occurs. In this paper we look beyond the data and focus on possible explanations for this experimental fact. We show that a classical system generating contextual data can easily be found if the following conditions are satisfied (1) We only have access to a specific collection of epistemic measurements (which, all things considered, is basically Bohr's view on quantum measurements) and (2) There is a limitation on which of these measurements can be jointly performed. The way we see it, this example indicates that contextuality may be a consequence of the type of measurement taken into account, instead of an intrinsic feature of the system upon which these measurements are performed; if this is correct, the widespread idea that quantum contextuality is a non-classical feature can be avoided.

•Sep 16, 2021•0 citations

Contextuality is about identity of random variables

Ehtibar N. Dzhafarov, Janne V. Kujala

Contextual situations are those in which seemingly ‘the same’ random variable changes its identity depending on the conditions under which it is recorded. Such a change of identity is observed whenever the assumption that the variable is one and the same under different conditions leads to contradictions when one considers its joint distribution with other random variables (this is the essence of all Bell-type theorems). In our Contextuality-by-Default approach, instead of asking why or how the conditions force ‘one and the same’ random variable to change ‘its’ identity, any two random variables recorded under different conditions are considered different ‘automatically.’ They are never the same, nor are they jointly distributed, but one can always impose on them a joint distribution (probabilistic coupling). The special situations when there is a coupling in which these random variables are equal with probability 1 are considered noncontextual. Contextuality means that such couplings do not exist. We argue that the determination of the identity of random variables by conditions under which they are recorded is not a causal relationship and cannot violate laws of physics.

arXiv:1405.2116•Physica Scripta•Dec 1, 2014•59 citations

Inability of contextuality analysis of disturbing data to preserve core Kochen-Specker principles

Alisson Tezzin, Elie Wolfe, Bárbara Amaral +1 more

We address the challenge of extending the criterion for Kochen-Specker contextuality to data with disturbance, to accommodate experimental imperfections or applications to macroscopic settings beyond quantum physics. We find that any such extension must abandon one or more principles that are core to the concept of contextuality. Specifically, we prove that no extended criterion agreeing with Kochen-Specker contextuality in the absence of disturbance can simultaneously satisfy the following: (1) any deterministic system is noncontextual; (2) discarding information cannot turn a noncontextual system into a contextual one; (3) classical post-processing cannot create contextuality; and (4) the joint realization of two statistically independent noncontextual systems is noncontextual. From the standpoint of resource theories, the obstruction arises because free operations can turn noncontextual disturbing behaviors into contextual non-disturbing ones. We suggest that future work on extended contextuality needs to move beyond the standard model-independent framework and account for the causal structure responsible for disturbance.

arXiv:2212.06976•Physical Review A•Oct 27, 2026•4 citations

Is there contextuality in behavioural and social systems?

E. N. Dzhafarov, Ru Zhang, Janne Kujala

Most behavioural and social experiments aimed at revealing contextuality are confined to cyclic systems with binary outcomes. In quantum physics, this broad class of systems includes as special cases Klyachko-Can-Binicioglu-Shumovsky-type, Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bell-type and Suppes-Zanotti-Leggett-Garg-type systems. The theory of contextuality known as contextuality-by-default allows one to define and measure contextuality in all such systems, even if there are context-dependent errors in measurements, or if something in the contexts directly interacts with the measurements. This makes the theory especially suitable for behavioural and social systems, where direct interactions of 'everything with everything' are ubiquitous. For cyclic systems with binary outcomes, the theory provides necessary and sufficient conditions for non-contextuality, and these conditions are known to be breached in certain quantum systems. We review several behavioural and social datasets (from polls of public opinion to visual illusions to conjoint choices to word combinations to psychophysical matching), and none of these data provides any evidence for contextuality. Our working hypothesis is that this may be a broadly applicable rule: behavioural and social systems are non-contextual, i.e. all 'contextual effects' in them result from the ubiquitous dependence of response distributions on the elements of contexts other than the ones to which the response is presumably or normatively directed.

arXiv:1504.07422•Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences•Nov 30, 2015•85 citations
In an ideal contextuality scenario it is assumed that, whenever two contexts overlap, the marginal distribution obtained for the intersection of these contexts must be the same. Although this nondisturbance idealization has been extremely useful in investigating the limitations of physical theories, in this paper, we will work out a more robust and possibly more experimentally friendly framework for contextuality. Simply put, we will restate the extended definition of noncontextuality provided by the noncontextuality by default and show that in this extended perspective it is possible to avoid weakening the nondisturbance hypothesis. By doing so, we also show how standard tools for characterizing and quantifying contextuality can also be applied to this extended scenario. In particular, we came up with a linear program to check whether or not a behavior is contextual in the extended sense. The connection with the usual definition of contextuality is also established because whenever nondisturbance is fully satisfied the extended conditions reduce to the original ones.
In this paper, we explore the graph approach to contextuality to restate the extended definition of noncontextuality as given by Kujala et al. [Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 150401 (2015)] using graph-theoretical terms. This extended definition avoids the assumption of the pre-sheaf or non-disturbance condition, which states that if two contexts overlap, then the marginal distribution obtained for the intersection must be the same, a restriction that will never be perfectly satisfied in real experiments. With this, we are able to derive necessary conditions for extended noncontextuality for any set of random variables based on the geometrical aspects of the graph approach, which can be tested directly with experimental data in any contextuality experiment and which reduce to traditional necessary conditions for noncontextuality if the non-disturbance condition is satisfied.
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).
Recent research on quantum contextuality has been strongly centered on device-independent frameworks, such as the many graph approaches to contextuality and the celebrated sheaf-theoretical approach. Contextuality is described in these frameworks as a property of data only, making it possible to characterize and quantify the phenomena regardless of the reasons why it occurs. In this paper we look beyond the data and focus on possible explanations for this experimental fact. We show that a classical system generating contextual data can easily be found if the following conditions are satisfied (1) We only have access to a specific collection of epistemic measurements (which, all things considered, is basically Bohr's view on quantum measurements) and (2) There is a limitation on which of these measurements can be jointly performed. The way we see it, this example indicates that contextuality may be a consequence of the type of measurement taken into account, instead of an intrinsic feature of the system upon which these measurements are performed; if this is correct, the widespread idea that quantum contextuality is a non-classical feature can be avoided.
Contextual situations are those in which seemingly ‘the same’ random variable changes its identity depending on the conditions under which it is recorded. Such a change of identity is observed whenever the assumption that the variable is one and the same under different conditions leads to contradictions when one considers its joint distribution with other random variables (this is the essence of all Bell-type theorems). In our Contextuality-by-Default approach, instead of asking why or how the conditions force ‘one and the same’ random variable to change ‘its’ identity, any two random variables recorded under different conditions are considered different ‘automatically.’ They are never the same, nor are they jointly distributed, but one can always impose on them a joint distribution (probabilistic coupling). The special situations when there is a coupling in which these random variables are equal with probability 1 are considered noncontextual. Contextuality means that such couplings do not exist. We argue that the determination of the identity of random variables by conditions under which they are recorded is not a causal relationship and cannot violate laws of physics.
We address the challenge of extending the criterion for Kochen-Specker contextuality to data with disturbance, to accommodate experimental imperfections or applications to macroscopic settings beyond quantum physics. We find that any such extension must abandon one or more principles that are core to the concept of contextuality. Specifically, we prove that no extended criterion agreeing with Kochen-Specker contextuality in the absence of disturbance can simultaneously satisfy the following: (1) any deterministic system is noncontextual; (2) discarding information cannot turn a noncontextual system into a contextual one; (3) classical post-processing cannot create contextuality; and (4) the joint realization of two statistically independent noncontextual systems is noncontextual. From the standpoint of resource theories, the obstruction arises because free operations can turn noncontextual disturbing behaviors into contextual non-disturbing ones. We suggest that future work on extended contextuality needs to move beyond the standard model-independent framework and account for the causal structure responsible for disturbance.
Most behavioural and social experiments aimed at revealing contextuality are confined to cyclic systems with binary outcomes. In quantum physics, this broad class of systems includes as special cases Klyachko-Can-Binicioglu-Shumovsky-type, Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bell-type and Suppes-Zanotti-Leggett-Garg-type systems. The theory of contextuality known as contextuality-by-default allows one to define and measure contextuality in all such systems, even if there are context-dependent errors in measurements, or if something in the contexts directly interacts with the measurements. This makes the theory especially suitable for behavioural and social systems, where direct interactions of 'everything with everything' are ubiquitous. For cyclic systems with binary outcomes, the theory provides necessary and sufficient conditions for non-contextuality, and these conditions are known to be breached in certain quantum systems. We review several behavioural and social datasets (from polls of public opinion to visual illusions to conjoint choices to word combinations to psychophysical matching), and none of these data provides any evidence for contextuality. Our working hypothesis is that this may be a broadly applicable rule: behavioural and social systems are non-contextual, i.e. all 'contextual effects' in them result from the ubiquitous dependence of response distributions on the elements of contexts other than the ones to which the response is presumably or normatively directed.