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:1905.08291 · Quantum

Contextual advantage for state-dependent cloning

Matteo Lostaglio, Gabriel Senno

Published Apr 27, 2020• 53 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

A number of noncontextual models exist which reproduce different subsets of quantum theory and admit a no-cloning theorem. Therefore, if one chooses noncontextuality as one's notion of classicality, no-cloning cannot be regarded as a nonclassical phenomenon. In this work, however, we show that there are aspects of the phenomenology of quantum state cloning which are indeed nonclassical according to this principle. Specifically, we focus on the task of state-dependent cloning and prove that the optimal cloning fidelity predicted by quantum theory cannot be explained by any noncontextual model. We derive a noise-robust noncontextuality inequality whose violation by quantum theory not only implies a quantum advantage for the task of state-dependent cloning relative to noncontextual models, but also provides an experimental witness of noncontextuality.

DOI
10.22331/q-2020-04-27-258

Related papers

Universal quantum cloning beyond noncontextual theory

Min Namkung, Hyang-Tag Lim

Quantum theory fundamentally forbids the perfect copying of an arbitrary unknown quantum state, according to a principle known as the no-cloning theorem. Nevertheless, it is possible to construct a deterministic quantum map that produces multiple approximate copies of an unknown quantum state. This task is referred to as universal quantum cloning, further facilitating numerous quantum technologies such as quantum cryptography and quantum communication. In this work, we theoretically verify that the universal quantum cloning cannot be realized within a noncontextual theory, highlighting its intrinsically nonclassical nature. Our verification first {focuses on revealing that} $1\rightarrow2$ cloning scenario {is fully contextual}, and {further covers general examples to observe the contextual behavior of} $N\rightarrow M$ scenario. We believe that our results regarding quantum cloning serve a key role for understanding both quantum foundation and application.

quant-pharXiv:2607.05959•Jul 8, 2026•0 citations

Are we witnessing non-classical phenomena when noncontextuality inequalities are violated?.

Alisson Tezzin

The view that non-classical phenomena are witnessed when noncontextuality inequalities are violated by quantum correlations has become widespread over the last decades, and many authors describe contextuality as a counter-intuitive and non-classical feature of quantum systems. In this paper we show that a classical input/output device generating contextual data (i.e., data violating noncontextuality inequalities) can easily be found if the following conditions are satisfied: (1) We only have access to a specific collection of epistemic measurements, namely measurements which do not necessarily reveal properties possessed by the system to the agent, and (2) not all these measurements can be jointly performed. The conclusion we draw from this example is twofold. Firstly, regarding model-independent contextuality, it suggests that, unlike Bell inequalities (whose violation allegedly implies non-locality), noncontextuality inequalities have no phenomenological significance per se: we cannot treat experiments as black-boxes and draw conclusions about the phenomenological status of their underlying structure based only on contextuality analysis of the data they generate. Secondly, regarding quantum theory, it indicates that one who accepts, as many interpretations suggest, that quantum theory satisfies both these conditions should not take for granted that quantum contextuality is a signature of non-classicality.

•Nov 1, 2021•0 citations

Contextuality beyond the Kochen-Specker theorem

Ravi Kunjwal

When it isn't possible to tell two distinct experimental procedures apart purely from their input/output statistics, then it seems a plausible hypothesis that the two procedures must be physically identical. We call such a hypothesis "noncontextuality", an instance of Leibniz's principle of the identity of indiscernibles. Read in the contrapositive, this hypothesis entails that any physical distinctions between two experimental procedures must necessarily lead to a difference in their operational statistics. The results I present in this thesis concern the failure of this hypothesis -- a failure dubbed "contextuality" -- when one tries to embed an operational theory (such as quantum theory) in the ontological models framework. The Kochen-Specker theorem demonstrates the failure of noncontextuality for deterministic ontological models of quantum theory, i.e., those ontological models where the ontic/physical state of the system fixes the outcome of any projective measurement on the system in a deterministic manner. This thesis goes beyond the Kochen-Specker (KS) theorem by asking what operational facts must be verified in experiments to conclude that Nature does not admit noncontextual ontological models, not even indeterministic ones. This leads to noncontextuality inequalities that are robust to noise in the preparations and measurements. In the particular case of quantum theory, these inequalities are meaningful even when unsharp measurements (or POVMs) are allowed, a feature not shared by the traditional approach to KS-noncontextuality where unsharp measurements are excluded by fiat: allowing them renders even trivial POVMs (proportional to identity) maximally KS-contextual. The sense in which trivial POVMs are indeed "trivial" (or "noncontextual") is clear in our approach: they are simply too noisy to lead to violation of our noncontextuality inequalities.

arXiv:1612.07250•Dec 21, 2016•9 citations

No-cloning implies unalterability of the past

Arkady Bolotin

A common way of stating the non-cloning theorem -- one of distinguishing characteristics of quantum theory -- is that one cannot make a copy of an arbitrary unknown quantum state. Even though this theorem is an important part of the ongoing discussion of the nature of a quantum state, the role of the theorem in the logical-algebraic approach to quantum theory has not yet been systematically studied. According to the standard point of view (which is in line with the logical tradition), quantum cloning amounts to two classical rules of inference, namely, monotonicity and idempotency of entailment. One can conclude then that the whole of quantum theory should be described through a logic wherein these rules do not hold, which is linear logic. However, in accordance with a supervaluational semantics (that allows one to retain all the theorems of classical logic while admitting `truth-value gaps'), quantum cloning necessitates the permanent loss of the truth values of experimental quantum propositions which violates the unalterability of the past. The present paper demonstrates this.

arXiv:1905.06766•May 16, 2019•0 citations

Contextuality witness inspired by optimal state discrimination

Carles Roch i Carceller, Jonatan Bohr Brask

Many protocols and tasks in quantum information science rely inherently on the fundamental notion of contextuality to provide advantages over their classical counterparts, and contextuality represents one of the main differences between quantum and classical physics. In this work we present a witness for preparation contextuality inspired by optimal two-state discrimination. The main idea is based on finding the accessible averaged success and error probabilities in both classical and quantum models. We can then construct a noncontextuality inequality and associated witness which we find to be robust against depolarising noise and loss in the form of inconclusive events.

arXiv:2310.12716•Physical Review A•Mar 4, 2024•6 citations

Guiding our interpretation of quantum theory by principles of causation and inference

David Schmid

A key aim of quantum foundations is to characterize the sense in which nature goes beyond classical physics. Understanding nonclassicality is one of our best avenues towards finding a satisfactory interpretation of quantum theory. By determining which classical principles cannot be satisfied in any empirically adequate physical theory, we begin to see which principles can be preserved, which in turn gives us insight into the ontology of the world. These insights then guide us in determining which questions to ask and which experiments to perform next. Furthermore, it is these nonclassical aspects of nature that give rise to new technologies such as the speed-ups of quantum computation or the security of quantum key distribution. \n \nThe gold standard for establishing that a phenomenon is truly nonclassical is to prove that it violates the principle of local causality or the principle of noncontextuality. Much of this thesis reports on my research relating to these two principles. This research primarily involves (i) finding new justifications for our notions of nonclassicality; (ii) refining their fundamental definitions; (iii) quantifying and characterizing their various manifestations; and (iv) finding applications where nonclassical phenomena act as resources for information processing. \n \nUltimately, all of this work on nonclassicality is woven together into a novel framework for physical theories introduced by myself, John Selby, and Rob Spekkens. Its main advantage over preexisting frameworks is that it maintains a clear distinction between which elements of a given physical theory directly describe causal processes, and which refer only to one’s inferences about causal processes. This clarifies a number of confusions in the literature which arose precisely because previous frameworks scrambled causal and inferential concepts. Furthermore, local causality and noncontextuality emerge in this framework as the assumptions that the causal and inferential structures (respectively) that are operationally observed must be respected in the underlying ontology. This work constitutes a first step in developing a new interpretation of quantum theory—the first interpretation designed to satisfy the spirit of both local causality and noncontextuality.

•Jul 7, 2021•1 citation
A number of noncontextual models exist which reproduce different subsets of quantum theory and admit a no-cloning theorem. Therefore, if one chooses noncontextuality as one's notion of classicality, no-cloning cannot be regarded as a nonclassical phenomenon. In this work, however, we show that there are aspects of the phenomenology of quantum state cloning which are indeed nonclassical according to this principle. Specifically, we focus on the task of state-dependent cloning and prove that the optimal cloning fidelity predicted by quantum theory cannot be explained by any noncontextual model. We derive a noise-robust noncontextuality inequality whose violation by quantum theory not only implies a quantum advantage for the task of state-dependent cloning relative to noncontextual models, but also provides an experimental witness of noncontextuality.
Quantum theory fundamentally forbids the perfect copying of an arbitrary unknown quantum state, according to a principle known as the no-cloning theorem. Nevertheless, it is possible to construct a deterministic quantum map that produces multiple approximate copies of an unknown quantum state. This task is referred to as universal quantum cloning, further facilitating numerous quantum technologies such as quantum cryptography and quantum communication. In this work, we theoretically verify that the universal quantum cloning cannot be realized within a noncontextual theory, highlighting its intrinsically nonclassical nature. Our verification first {focuses on revealing that} 1→21\rightarrow21→2 cloning scenario {is fully contextual}, and {further covers general examples to observe the contextual behavior of} N→MN\rightarrow MN→M scenario. We believe that our results regarding quantum cloning serve a key role for understanding both quantum foundation and application.
The view that non-classical phenomena are witnessed when noncontextuality inequalities are violated by quantum correlations has become widespread over the last decades, and many authors describe contextuality as a counter-intuitive and non-classical feature of quantum systems. In this paper we show that a classical input/output device generating contextual data (i.e., data violating noncontextuality inequalities) can easily be found if the following conditions are satisfied: (1) We only have access to a specific collection of epistemic measurements, namely measurements which do not necessarily reveal properties possessed by the system to the agent, and (2) not all these measurements can be jointly performed. The conclusion we draw from this example is twofold. Firstly, regarding model-independent contextuality, it suggests that, unlike Bell inequalities (whose violation allegedly implies non-locality), noncontextuality inequalities have no phenomenological significance per se: we cannot treat experiments as black-boxes and draw conclusions about the phenomenological status of their underlying structure based only on contextuality analysis of the data they generate. Secondly, regarding quantum theory, it indicates that one who accepts, as many interpretations suggest, that quantum theory satisfies both these conditions should not take for granted that quantum contextuality is a signature of non-classicality.
When it isn't possible to tell two distinct experimental procedures apart purely from their input/output statistics, then it seems a plausible hypothesis that the two procedures must be physically identical. We call such a hypothesis "noncontextuality", an instance of Leibniz's principle of the identity of indiscernibles. Read in the contrapositive, this hypothesis entails that any physical distinctions between two experimental procedures must necessarily lead to a difference in their operational statistics. The results I present in this thesis concern the failure of this hypothesis -- a failure dubbed "contextuality" -- when one tries to embed an operational theory (such as quantum theory) in the ontological models framework. The Kochen-Specker theorem demonstrates the failure of noncontextuality for deterministic ontological models of quantum theory, i.e., those ontological models where the ontic/physical state of the system fixes the outcome of any projective measurement on the system in a deterministic manner. This thesis goes beyond the Kochen-Specker (KS) theorem by asking what operational facts must be verified in experiments to conclude that Nature does not admit noncontextual ontological models, not even indeterministic ones. This leads to noncontextuality inequalities that are robust to noise in the preparations and measurements. In the particular case of quantum theory, these inequalities are meaningful even when unsharp measurements (or POVMs) are allowed, a feature not shared by the traditional approach to KS-noncontextuality where unsharp measurements are excluded by fiat: allowing them renders even trivial POVMs (proportional to identity) maximally KS-contextual. The sense in which trivial POVMs are indeed "trivial" (or "noncontextual") is clear in our approach: they are simply too noisy to lead to violation of our noncontextuality inequalities.
A common way of stating the non-cloning theorem -- one of distinguishing characteristics of quantum theory -- is that one cannot make a copy of an arbitrary unknown quantum state. Even though this theorem is an important part of the ongoing discussion of the nature of a quantum state, the role of the theorem in the logical-algebraic approach to quantum theory has not yet been systematically studied. According to the standard point of view (which is in line with the logical tradition), quantum cloning amounts to two classical rules of inference, namely, monotonicity and idempotency of entailment. One can conclude then that the whole of quantum theory should be described through a logic wherein these rules do not hold, which is linear logic. However, in accordance with a supervaluational semantics (that allows one to retain all the theorems of classical logic while admitting `truth-value gaps'), quantum cloning necessitates the permanent loss of the truth values of experimental quantum propositions which violates the unalterability of the past. The present paper demonstrates this.
Many protocols and tasks in quantum information science rely inherently on the fundamental notion of contextuality to provide advantages over their classical counterparts, and contextuality represents one of the main differences between quantum and classical physics. In this work we present a witness for preparation contextuality inspired by optimal two-state discrimination. The main idea is based on finding the accessible averaged success and error probabilities in both classical and quantum models. We can then construct a noncontextuality inequality and associated witness which we find to be robust against depolarising noise and loss in the form of inconclusive events.
A key aim of quantum foundations is to characterize the sense in which nature goes beyond classical physics. Understanding nonclassicality is one of our best avenues towards finding a satisfactory interpretation of quantum theory. By determining which classical principles cannot be satisfied in any empirically adequate physical theory, we begin to see which principles can be preserved, which in turn gives us insight into the ontology of the world. These insights then guide us in determining which questions to ask and which experiments to perform next. Furthermore, it is these nonclassical aspects of nature that give rise to new technologies such as the speed-ups of quantum computation or the security of quantum key distribution. \n \nThe gold standard for establishing that a phenomenon is truly nonclassical is to prove that it violates the principle of local causality or the principle of noncontextuality. Much of this thesis reports on my research relating to these two principles. This research primarily involves (i) finding new justifications for our notions of nonclassicality; (ii) refining their fundamental definitions; (iii) quantifying and characterizing their various manifestations; and (iv) finding applications where nonclassical phenomena act as resources for information processing. \n \nUltimately, all of this work on nonclassicality is woven together into a novel framework for physical theories introduced by myself, John Selby, and Rob Spekkens. Its main advantage over preexisting frameworks is that it maintains a clear distinction between which elements of a given physical theory directly describe causal processes, and which refer only to one’s inferences about causal processes. This clarifies a number of confusions in the literature which arose precisely because previous frameworks scrambled causal and inferential concepts. Furthermore, local causality and noncontextuality emerge in this framework as the assumptions that the causal and inferential structures (respectively) that are operationally observed must be respected in the underlying ontology. This work constitutes a first step in developing a new interpretation of quantum theory—the first interpretation designed to satisfy the spirit of both local causality and noncontextuality.