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:1912.07596 · WORLD SCIENTIFIC eBooks

WHEN BERTLMANN WEARS NO SOCKS. COMMON CAUSES INDUCED BY MEASUREMENTS AS AN EXPLANATION FOR QUANTUM CORRELATIONS

Diederik Aerts, Massimiliano Sassoli de Bianchi

Published Oct 1, 2023• 4 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

It is well known that correlations produced by common causes in the past cannot violate Bell's inequalities. This was emphasized by Bell in his celebrated example of Bertlmann's socks. However, if common causes are induced by the very measurement process i.e., actualized at each run of a joint measurement, in a way that depends on the type of joint measurement that is being executed (hence, the common causes are contextually actualized), the resulting correlations are able to violate Bell's inequalities, thus providing a simple and general explanation for the origin of quantum correlations. We illustrate this mechanism by revisiting Bertlmann's socks example. In doing so, we also emphasize that Bell's inequalities, in their essence, are about demarcating 'non-induced by measurements' (non-contextual) from 'induced by measurements' (contextual) common causes, where the latter would operate at a non-spatial level of our physical reality, when the jointly measured entangled entities are microscopic in nature.

DOI
10.1142/9789811283598_0008

Related papers

EPR CORRELATIONS, BELL INEQUALITIES AND COMMON CAUSE SYSTEMS

Gábor Hofer‐Szabó

Standard common causal explanations of the EPR situation assume a so-called joint common cause system that is a common cause for all correlations. However, the assumption of a joint common cause system together with some other physically motivated assumptions concerning locality and no-conspiracy results in various Bell inequalities. Since Bell inequalities are violated for appropriate measurement settings, a local, non-conspiratorial joint common causal explanation of the EPR situation is ruled out. But why do we assume that a common causal explanation of a set of correlation consists in finding a joint common cause system for all correlations and not just in finding separate common cause systems for the different correlations? What are the \nperspectives of a local, non-conspiratorial separate common causal explanation for the EPR scenario? And finally, how do Bell inequalities relate to the weaker assumption of separate common cause systems? \n

•Mar 5, 2014•1 citation

Correlation, Entanglement and Locality of Quantum Theory

S. V. Gantsevich, V. L. Gurevich

In recent decades it was established that the measurements of physical quantities in space-time points divided by large space-like intervals can be correlated.The correlation is created by the measurements while their mutual influence requires the corresponding supraliminal velocities.This situation is commonly known as the violation of the Bell inequality in the Bohm version of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox.Nearly 40 years the question remains disputable with a variety of contradicting views.The most frequently the violation is explained by the existence of some momentary action at a distance which obliges the quantum mechanics (as well as all nature) to be nonlocal.We find the "common cause in the past" as the origin of the observed quantum correlation which so far was unnoticed either by the partisans of quantum non-locality or their opponents.The novelty of our approach is the accent on the expressions for the observed physical quantities rather than on the "entangled" two-particle wave functions.We show the crucial role of phases in the correlation process that is hard to notice using the traditional approach.

Theoretical Physics•Jun 6, 2017•1 citation

Common causes for quantum identical particles

A. Hovhannisyan, S. Weigert, A. E. Allahverdyan

Violations of Bell's inequalities imply that joint probabilities generated by non-commutative measurements on two (non-identical) quantum particles do not have a single common cause. But joint probabilities generated for such non-identical particles via commutative measurements do have non-trivial common cause variables. We focus on commutative measurements and consider two identical quantum particles, whose density matrices and observables (hermitian operators) are necessarily permutation-symmetric. It is natural to demand that the common cause describing joint probabilities is also permutation symmetric, i.e., it acts symmetrically on both particles. Looking at various ways of defining joint probabilities from the same measurement data, we conclude that either symmetric common causes need not exist (i.e., that the particles can be hiddenly distinguishable), or that symmetric screening variables exist, but they are trivial, i.e., no single common cause can explain all single-measurement correlations.

quant-pharXiv:2606.21768•Jun 23, 2026•0 citations

Quantifying Causal Influences in the Presence of a Quantum Common Cause

Mariami Gachechiladze, Nikolai Miklin, Rafael Chaves

Quantum mechanics challenges our intuition on the cause-effect relations in nature. Some fundamental concepts, including Reichenbach's common cause principle or the notion of local realism, have to be reconsidered. Traditionally, this is witnessed by the violation of a Bell inequality. But are Bell inequalities the only signature of the incompatibility between quantum correlations and causality theory? Motivated by this question, we introduce a general framework able to estimate causal influences between two variables, without the need of interventions and irrespectively of the classical, quantum, or even postquantum nature of a common cause. In particular, by considering the simplest instrumental scenario-for which violation of Bell inequalities is not possible-we show that every pure bipartite entangled state violates the classical bounds on causal influence, thus, answering in negative to the posed question and opening a new venue to explore the role of causality within quantum theory.

arXiv:2007.01221•Physical Review Letters•Dec 2, 2020•29 citations

The principle of common cause and identical quantum particles

Arshak Hovhannisyan, Stefan Weigert, ARMEN E. ALLAHVERDYAN

Abstract Violations of Bell's inequalities imply that joint probabilities generated by non-commuting measurements on two (non-identical) quantum particles do not have a single common cause. However, joint probabilities generated by commuting measurements performed on non-identical particles do have non-trivial common-cause variables. We focus on commuting measurements and consider two identical quantum particles described by density matrices and observables (Hermitian operators) that are necessarily permutation-symmetric. It is natural to demand that the common cause describing joint probabilities is also permutation symmetric, i.e. , it should act symmetrically on both particles. Investigating two different ways of defining joint probabilities based on the same measurement data, we conclude that either symmetric common causes need not exist ( i.e. , there is a way to distinguish the particles, at least in principle), or that symmetric screening variables exist, but they are trivial. Hence, no single common cause can explain all correlations generated by commutative measurements.

Europhysics Letters (EPL)•Sep 16, 2026•0 citations

Measurement Dependence is not Conspiracy: A Common Cause Model of EPR Correlations

Iñaki San Pedro

In this paper I assess the adequacy of no-conspiracy conditions present in the usual derivations of the Bell inequality in the context of EPR correlations. First, I look at the EPR correlations from a purely phenomenological point of view and claim that common cause explanations of these can not be ruled out. I argue that an appropriate common cause explanation requires that no-conspiracy conditions are re-interpreted as mere common cause-measurement independence conditions. Violations of measurement independence thus need not entail any kind of conspiracy (nor backwards in time causation). This new reading of measurement dependence provides the grounds for an explicitly non-factorizable (in the sense of Bell’s factorizability) common cause model for EPR. 1

•May 26, 2009•0 citations
It is well known that correlations produced by common causes in the past cannot violate Bell's inequalities. This was emphasized by Bell in his celebrated example of Bertlmann's socks. However, if common causes are induced by the very measurement process i.e., actualized at each run of a joint measurement, in a way that depends on the type of joint measurement that is being executed (hence, the common causes are contextually actualized), the resulting correlations are able to violate Bell's inequalities, thus providing a simple and general explanation for the origin of quantum correlations. We illustrate this mechanism by revisiting Bertlmann's socks example. In doing so, we also emphasize that Bell's inequalities, in their essence, are about demarcating 'non-induced by measurements' (non-contextual) from 'induced by measurements' (contextual) common causes, where the latter would operate at a non-spatial level of our physical reality, when the jointly measured entangled entities are microscopic in nature.
Standard common causal explanations of the EPR situation assume a so-called joint common cause system that is a common cause for all correlations. However, the assumption of a joint common cause system together with some other physically motivated assumptions concerning locality and no-conspiracy results in various Bell inequalities. Since Bell inequalities are violated for appropriate measurement settings, a local, non-conspiratorial joint common causal explanation of the EPR situation is ruled out. But why do we assume that a common causal explanation of a set of correlation consists in finding a joint common cause system for all correlations and not just in finding separate common cause systems for the different correlations? What are the \nperspectives of a local, non-conspiratorial separate common causal explanation for the EPR scenario? And finally, how do Bell inequalities relate to the weaker assumption of separate common cause systems? \n
In recent decades it was established that the measurements of physical quantities in space-time points divided by large space-like intervals can be correlated.The correlation is created by the measurements while their mutual influence requires the corresponding supraliminal velocities.This situation is commonly known as the violation of the Bell inequality in the Bohm version of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox.Nearly 40 years the question remains disputable with a variety of contradicting views.The most frequently the violation is explained by the existence of some momentary action at a distance which obliges the quantum mechanics (as well as all nature) to be nonlocal.We find the "common cause in the past" as the origin of the observed quantum correlation which so far was unnoticed either by the partisans of quantum non-locality or their opponents.The novelty of our approach is the accent on the expressions for the observed physical quantities rather than on the "entangled" two-particle wave functions.We show the crucial role of phases in the correlation process that is hard to notice using the traditional approach.
Violations of Bell's inequalities imply that joint probabilities generated by non-commutative measurements on two (non-identical) quantum particles do not have a single common cause. But joint probabilities generated for such non-identical particles via commutative measurements do have non-trivial common cause variables. We focus on commutative measurements and consider two identical quantum particles, whose density matrices and observables (hermitian operators) are necessarily permutation-symmetric. It is natural to demand that the common cause describing joint probabilities is also permutation symmetric, i.e., it acts symmetrically on both particles. Looking at various ways of defining joint probabilities from the same measurement data, we conclude that either symmetric common causes need not exist (i.e., that the particles can be hiddenly distinguishable), or that symmetric screening variables exist, but they are trivial, i.e., no single common cause can explain all single-measurement correlations.
Quantum mechanics challenges our intuition on the cause-effect relations in nature. Some fundamental concepts, including Reichenbach's common cause principle or the notion of local realism, have to be reconsidered. Traditionally, this is witnessed by the violation of a Bell inequality. But are Bell inequalities the only signature of the incompatibility between quantum correlations and causality theory? Motivated by this question, we introduce a general framework able to estimate causal influences between two variables, without the need of interventions and irrespectively of the classical, quantum, or even postquantum nature of a common cause. In particular, by considering the simplest instrumental scenario-for which violation of Bell inequalities is not possible-we show that every pure bipartite entangled state violates the classical bounds on causal influence, thus, answering in negative to the posed question and opening a new venue to explore the role of causality within quantum theory.
Abstract Violations of Bell's inequalities imply that joint probabilities generated by non-commuting measurements on two (non-identical) quantum particles do not have a single common cause. However, joint probabilities generated by commuting measurements performed on non-identical particles do have non-trivial common-cause variables. We focus on commuting measurements and consider two identical quantum particles described by density matrices and observables (Hermitian operators) that are necessarily permutation-symmetric. It is natural to demand that the common cause describing joint probabilities is also permutation symmetric, i.e. , it should act symmetrically on both particles. Investigating two different ways of defining joint probabilities based on the same measurement data, we conclude that either symmetric common causes need not exist ( i.e. , there is a way to distinguish the particles, at least in principle), or that symmetric screening variables exist, but they are trivial. Hence, no single common cause can explain all correlations generated by commutative measurements.
In this paper I assess the adequacy of no-conspiracy conditions present in the usual derivations of the Bell inequality in the context of EPR correlations. First, I look at the EPR correlations from a purely phenomenological point of view and claim that common cause explanations of these can not be ruled out. I argue that an appropriate common cause explanation requires that no-conspiracy conditions are re-interpreted as mere common cause-measurement independence conditions. Violations of measurement independence thus need not entail any kind of conspiracy (nor backwards in time causation). This new reading of measurement dependence provides the grounds for an explicitly non-factorizable (in the sense of Bell’s factorizability) common cause model for EPR. 1