We ask whether the operational quantum description is complete at the level of preparations: can the empirically accessible properties of a finite preparation set be reproduced exactly by a hidden-variable description, or must every such completion contain additional structure that is not operationally accessible? We formalize this through epistemic completeness, a preparation-side notion of classicality requiring exact preservation of empirical preparation-properties by the corresponding ontic quantities obtained by conditioning on the ontic state and allowing all response schemes compatible with positivity and normalization. For the canonical family of set-distinguishability tasks, we prove that every epistemically complete theory satisfies an equality: for every finite preparation set, the average pairwise distinguishability equals the average set-distinguishability. Any nonzero deviation certifies epistemic incompleteness and lower-bounds the excess ontic communication power that every ontic completion must conceal. Because unrestricted classical communication models, and more generally commuting quantum theories, are epistemically complete, every nonzero deviation also yields a quantum communication advantage and witnesses of coherence and measurement incompatibility. We formulate semidefinite-programming relaxations and see-saw lower bounds, and show that quantum theory violates the equality in both directions. The trine and tetrahedral qubit ensembles are numerically certified maximizers for the n=3 and n=4 equalities; their violations persist for arbitrarily low positive visibility and arbitrarily large leakage short of complete disclosure; and the Kochen--Specker ψ-epistemic model exactly saturates the hidden ontic excess for these maximal positive violations. Numerics suggest that the maximal positive deviation increases with the number of preparations.
We ask whether the operational quantum description is complete at the level of preparations: can the empirically accessible properties of a finite preparation set be reproduced exactly by a hidden-variable description, or must every such completion contain additional structure that is not operationally accessible? We formalize this through epistemic completeness, a preparation-side notion of classicality requiring exact preservation of empirical preparation-properties by the corresponding ontic quantities obtained by conditioning on the ontic state and allowing all response schemes compatible with positivity and normalization. For the canonical family of set-distinguishability tasks, we prove that every epistemically complete theory satisfies an equality: for every finite preparation set, the average pairwise distinguishability equals the average set-distinguishability. Any nonzero deviation certifies epistemic incompleteness and lower-bounds the excess ontic communication power that every ontic completion must conceal. Because unrestricted classical communication models, and more generally commuting quantum theories, are epistemically complete, every nonzero deviation also yields a quantum communication advantage and witnesses of coherence and measurement incompatibility. We formulate semidefinite-programming relaxations and see-saw lower bounds, and show that quantum theory violates the equality in both directions. The trine and tetrahedral qubit ensembles are numerically certified maximizers for the n=3 and n=4 equalities; their violations persist for arbitrarily low positive visibility and arbitrarily large leakage short of complete disclosure; and the Kochen--Specker ψ-epistemic model exactly saturates the hidden ontic excess for these maximal positive violations. Numerics suggest that the maximal positive deviation increases with the number of preparations.
Abstract One of the basic observations of the classical world is that physical entities are real and can be distinguished from each other. However, within quantum theory, the idea of physical realism is not well established. A framework to analyse how observations in experiments can be described using some physical states of reality was recently developed, known as ontological models framework. Different principles when imposed on the ontological level give rise to different theories, the validity of which can be tested based on the statistics generated by these theories. Using the ontological models framework, we formulate a novel notion of classicality termed ontic-distinguishability, which is based upon the physical principles that in classical theories extremal states are physical states of reality and every sharp measurement observes the state of the system perfectly. We construct a communication task in which the success probability is bounded from above for ontological models satisfying the notion of ontic-distinguishability. Contrary to previous notions of classicality which either required systems of dimension strictly greater than two or atleast three preparations, a violation of ontic-distinguishability can be observed using just a pair of qubits and a pair of incompatible measurements. We further show that violation of previously known notions of classicality such as preparation non-contextuality and Bell’s local causality is a violation of ontic-distinguishability.
In this paper we attempt to analyze the physical and philosophical meaning of quantum contextuality. In the first part we will argue that a general confusion within the literature comes from the improper "scrambling" of two different meanings of quantum contextuality. The first one is related to an epistemic interpretation of contextuality, introduced by Bohr, which stresses the incompatibility (or complementarity) of quantum measurements. The second, is related to an ontic notion of contextuality, exposed through the Kochen-Specker (KS) theorem, which focuses on the constraints to discuss about actual (definite valued) properties within the orthodox formalism of QM. We will show how these two notions have been scrambled together creating an "omelette of contextuality" which has been fully widespread through a popularized "epistemic explanation" of the KS theorem according to which: The outcome of the observable A when mea- sured together with B or together with C will necessarily differ in case [A,B] = [A,C] = 0, and [B,C] ̸= 0. We will show why this statement is not only improperly scrambling epistemic and ontic perspectives, but is also physically and philosophically meaningless. In the second part of the paper, we will analyse the relation between ‘classical contexts’ and QM. We will show that three accepted presuppositions found within the orthodox literature are, in general, false. Namely: (i) that quantum contextuality does not preclude an objective description of physical reality, (ii) that the choice of a context (or basis) restores a classical description of reality, and (iii) that the choice of a (classical) context is a necessary condition for accounting for empirical statements in QM.
Formalizing an old desire of Einstein, ``$\ensuremath{\psi}$-epistemic theories'' try to reproduce the predictions of quantum mechanics, while viewing quantum states as ordinary probability distributions over underlying objects called ``ontic states.'' Regardless of one's philosophical views about such theories, the question arises of whether one can cleanly rule them out by proving no-go theorems analogous to the Bell inequality. In the 1960s, Kochen and Specker (who first studied these theories) constructed an elegant $\ensuremath{\psi}$-epistemic theory for Hilbert space dimension d=2, but also showed that any deterministic $\ensuremath{\psi}$-epistemic theory must be ``measurement contextual'' in dimensions 3 and higher. Last year, the topic attracted renewed attention, when Pusey, Barrett, and Rudolph (PBR) showed that any $\ensuremath{\psi}$-epistemic theory must ``behave badly under tensor product.'' In this paper, we prove that even without the Kochen-Specker or PBR assumptions, there are no $\ensuremath{\psi}$-epistemic theories in dimensions $d\ensuremath{\ge}3$ that satisfy two reasonable conditions: (1) symmetry under unitary transformations and (2) ``maximum nontriviality'' (meaning that the probability distributions corresponding to any two nonorthogonal states overlap). This no-go theorem holds if the ontic space is either the set of quantum states or the set of unitaries. The proof of this result, in the general case, uses some measure theory and differential geometry. On the other hand, we also show the surprising result that without the symmetry restriction, one can construct maximally nontrivial $\ensuremath{\psi}$-epistemic theories in every finite dimension d.
The main question under investigation in this thesis was the reality of the quantum state. We approached this problem by studying a recent no-go result by Pusey, Barrett and Rudolph, namely the PBR theorem. In Section 1 we provided a short introduction to quantum theory. A few relevant examples were covered, namely decompositions of quantum states, impossibility of the ignorance interpretation and the distinguishability of pure quantum states. Section 2 developed measure theoretic tools needed in the framework of ontological models. The Radon-Nikodym theorem was proven in order to justify the use of an alternative expression of the variational distance of probability measures. In Section 3 we developed a general framework for ontological models. In short, the ontological models framework can be considered the most general framework currently available for hidden variable theories and no-go results. We used the measure theoretic tools of Section 2 to make the formalism rigorous. Original research included in Section 3 was the characterization of a property called antidistinguishability for qubit states. A necessary and sufficient condition for antidistinguishability was given. It was then proven that any set of pure qubit states that is not antidistinguishable can be made antidistinguishable by adding a single carefully chosen state into the set. In the end of Section 3, some original observations were presented. Namely, a specific connection with contextuality was proven for sometimes ψ-ontic and never ψ-ontic ontological models. However, it was then noted that these observations were not enough to exclude never ψ-ontic ontological models, a feat that would have provided a new no-go theorem on its own. Contextuality in the ontological models framework was studied in Section 4. The main results were establishing preparation contextuality from the failure of maximal ψ-epistemicity and a proof of Bell's theorem based on preparation contextuality established this way. We concluded that ψ-ontic models cannot be Bell local based on these results. Finally in Section 5 the implications of ψ-ontology were discussed. By careful analysis of the results, it was noted that accepting the reality of the quantum state exposes explanatory gaps in the formalism. Possible solutions to the challenges introduced by these explanatory gaps were discussed through interpretations of quantum mechanics and the so-called measurement problem.
We investigate the limits of epistemic models in reproducing the empirical predictions of general quantum preparations. This involves comparing the common quantum overlap determined by the anti-distinguishability of a set of preparations with the common epistemic overlap of the probability distribution over the ontic states describing these preparations. We show that no epistemic model with non-zero common overlap can reproduce the predictions of quantum theory for mixed preparations, even for qubit systems. We explicitly provide sets of distinct mixed preparations, starting from qutrit systems, that give rise to identical quantum mixed states for which the common epistemic overlap must be zero. Finally, we demonstrate the strongest form of preparation contextuality by presenting pairs of mixed preparations that yield identical quantum mixed states while their epistemic overlap must vanish.
Semi-device-independent quantum key distribution leaves the measurement devices uncharacterized while placing a trusted assumption on Alice's source. We formulate this source assumption operationally on Alice's four-preparation ensemble as a scalar bound on one of four physically motivated source tasks: full-label guessing, parity guessing, or their normalized composites with label exclusion. For the two-bit random-access code, we derive the exact classical frontier for each of the four source assumptions. Numerically, the BB84 strategy attains the maximal quantum deviation from all four frontiers, while the preparation-depolarized BB84 family and the direct-sum label-leakage family trace complementary branches of the arbitrary-dimensional quantum boundary for the two exclusion-assisted assumptions. Because all four task values are monotone under input-independent quantum channels, the same scalar source bound constrains every Bob--Eve extension compatible with the complete observed behavior. Using a three-setting extension that separates RAC testing from key generation, we obtain two dimension-independent security certificates over this feasible set: lower bounds on the conditional min-entropy and conditional von Neumann entropy, obtained respectively by direct optimization of Eve's key-guessing probability and by prepare-and-measure semidefinite relaxations based on the Brown--Fawzi--Fawzi variational bound. The exclusion-assisted assumptions certify positive key rates down to nearly vanishing preparation visibility, far beyond full-label or parity guessing alone. Under direct-sum label leakage, all four independently optimized rate bounds remain positive at every sampled incomplete-leakage point and vanish only at complete label revelation. These results show that robust semi-device-independent security depends not only on what Eve can identify, but also on what she can exclude.