If noncontextuality is defined as the robustness of a system's response to a measurement against other simultaneous measurements, then the Kochen-Specker arguments do not provide an algebraic proof for quantum contextuality. Namely, for the argument to be effective, (i) each operator must be uniquely associated with a measurement and (ii) commuting operators must represent simultaneous measurements. However, in all Kochen-Specker arguments discussed in the literature either (i) or (ii) is not met. Arguments meeting (i) contain at least one subset of mutually commuting operators which do not represent simultaneous measurements and hence fail to physically justify the functional composition principle. Arguments meeting (ii) associate some operators with more than one measurement and hence need to invoke an extra assumption different from noncontextuality.
If noncontextuality is defined as the robustness of a system's response to a measurement against other simultaneous measurements, then the Kochen-Specker arguments do not provide an algebraic proof for quantum contextuality. Namely, for the argument to be effective, (i) each operator must be uniquely associated with a measurement and (ii) commuting operators must represent simultaneous measurements. However, in all Kochen-Specker arguments discussed in the literature either (i) or (ii) is not met. Arguments meeting (i) contain at least one subset of mutually commuting operators which do not represent simultaneous measurements and hence fail to physically justify the functional composition principle. Arguments meeting (ii) associate some operators with more than one measurement and hence need to invoke an extra assumption different from noncontextuality.
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.
The Bell-Kochen-Specker theorem establishes the impossibility of a noncontextual hidden variable model of quantum theory, or equivalently, that quantum theory is contextual. In this paper, an operational definition of contextuality is introduced which generalizes the standard notion in three ways: (i) it applies to arbitrary operational theories rather than just quantum theory, (ii) it applies to arbitrary experimental procedures rather than just sharp measurements, and (iii) it applies to a broad class of ontological models of quantum theory rather than just deterministic hidden variable models. We derive three no-go theorems for ontological models, each based on an assumption of noncontextuality for a different sort of experimental procedure; one for preparation procedures, another for unsharp measurement procedures (that is, measurement procedures associated with positive-operator valued measures), and a third for transformation procedures. All three proofs apply to two-dimensional Hilbert spaces, and are therefore stronger than traditional proofs of contextuality.
Quantum contextuality is one of the fundamental notions in quantum mechanics. Proofs of the Kochen–Specker theorem and noncontextuality inequalities are two means for revealing the contextuality phenomenon in quantum mechanics. It has been found that some proofs of the Kochen-Specker theorem, such as those based on rays, can be converted to a state-independent noncontextuality inequality, but it remains open whether this is true in general, i.e., whether any proof of the Kochen-Specker theorem can always be converted to a noncontextuality inequality. In this paper, we address this issue. We prove that all kinds of proofs of the Kochen-Specker theorem, based on rays or any other observables, can always be converted to state-independent noncontextuality inequalities. Besides, our constructive proof also provides a general approach for deriving a state-independent noncontextuality inequality from a proof of the KS theorem.
When a measurement is compatible with each of two other measurements that are incompatible with one another, these define distinct contexts for the given measurement. The Kochen–Specker theorem rules out models of quantum theory that satisfy a particular assumption of context-independence: that sharp measurements are assigned outcomes both deterministically and independently of their context. This notion of noncontextuality is not suited to a direct experimental test because realistic measurements always have some degree of unsharpness due to noise. However, a generalized notion of noncontextuality has been proposed that is applicable to any experimental procedure, including unsharp measurements, but also preparations as well, and for which a quantum no-go result still holds. According to this notion, the model need only specify a probability distribution over the outcomes of a measurement in a context-independent way, rather than specifying a particular outcome. It also implies novel constraints of context-independence for the representation of preparations. In this article, we describe a general technique for translating proofs of the Kochen–Specker theorem into inequality constraints on realistic experimental statistics, the violation of which witnesses the impossibility of a noncontextual model. We focus on algebraic state-independent proofs, using the Peres–Mermin square as our illustrative example. Our technique yields the necessary and sufficient conditions for a particular set of correlations (between the preparations and the measurements) to admit a noncontextual model. The inequalities thus derived are demonstrably robust to noise. We specify how experimental data must be processed in order to achieve a test of these inequalities. We also provide a criticism of prior proposals for experimental tests of noncontextuality based on the Peres–Mermin square.
A central result in the foundations of quantum mechanics is the Kochen-Specker theorem. In short, it states that quantum mechanics is in conflict with classical models in which the result of a measurement does not depend on which other compatible measurements are jointly performed. Here, compatible measurements are those that can be performed simultaneously or in any order without disturbance. This conflict is generically called quantum contextuality. In this article, we present an introduction to this subject and its current status. We review several proofs of the Kochen-Specker theorem and different notions of contextuality. We explain how to experimentally test some of these notions and discuss connections between contextuality and nonlocality or graph theory. Finally, we review some applications of contextuality in quantum information processing.
The presence of contextuality in quantum theory was first highlighted by Bell, Kochen and Specker, who discovered that for quantum systems of three or more dimensions, measurements could not be viewed as deterministically revealing pre-existing properties of the system. More precisely, no model can assign deterministic outcomes to the projectors of a quantum measurement in a way that depends only on the projector and not the context (the full set of projectors) in which it appeared, despite the fact that the Born rule probabilities associated with projectors are independent of the context. A more general, operational definition of contextuality introduced by Spekkens, which we will term 'probabilistic contextuality', drops the assumption of determinism and allows for operations other than measurements to be considered contextual. Even two-dimensional quantum mechanics can be shown to be contextual under this generalised notion. Probabilistic noncontextuality represents the postulate that elements of an operational theory that cannot be distinguished from each other based on the statistics of arbitrarily many repeated experiments (they give rise to the same operational probabilities) are ontologically identical. In this paper, we introduce a framework that enables us to distinguish between different noncontextuality assumptions in terms of the relationships between the ontological representations of objects in the theory given a certain relation between their operational representations. This framework can be used to motivate and define a 'possibilistic' analogue, encapsulating the idea that elements of an operational theory that cannot be unambiguously distinguished operationally can also not be unambiguously distinguished ontologically. We then prove that possibilistic noncontextuality is equivalent to an alternative notion of noncontextuality proposed by Hardy. Finally, we demonstrate that these weaker noncontextuality assumptions are sufficient to prove alternative versions of known 'no-go' theorems that constrain ψ -epistemic models for quantum mechanics.