Abstract We investigate the connection between steering and contextuality in general probabilistic theories. We show that for a class of bipartite states the steerability of the state by given set of measurements is equivalent to non-existence of preparation noncontextual hidden variable model for certain restricted theory constructed from the given state and measurements. The connection between steering and contextuality is provided by the concept of incompatibility in restricted theories, which we also investigate.
Abstract We investigate the connection between steering and contextuality in general probabilistic theories. We show that for a class of bipartite states the steerability of the state by given set of measurements is equivalent to non-existence of preparation noncontextual hidden variable model for certain restricted theory constructed from the given state and measurements. The connection between steering and contextuality is provided by the concept of incompatibility in restricted theories, which we also investigate.
Abstract In a bipartite Bell scenario involving two local measurements per party and two outcomes per measurement, the measurement incompatibility in one wing is both necessary and sufficient to reveal the nonlocality. However, such a one-to-one correspondence fails when one of the observers performs more than two measurements. In such a scenario, the measurement incompatibility is necessary but not sufficient to reveal the nonlocality. In this work, within the formalism of general probabilistic theory (GPT), we demonstrate that unlike the nonlocality, the incompatibility of N arbitrary measurements in one wing is both necessary and sufficient for revealing the generalised contextuality for the sub-system in the other wing. Further, we formulate an elegant form of inequality for any GPT that is necessary for N-wise compatibility of N arbitrary observables. Moreover, we argue that any theory that violates the proposed inequality possess a degree of incompatibility that can be quantified through the amount of violation. We claim that it is the generalised contextuality that provides a restriction to the allowed degree of measurement incompatibility of any viable theory of nature and thereby super-select the quantum theory. Finally, we discuss the geometrical implications of our results.
Steering is one of the most counter intuitive non-classical features of bipartite quantum system, first noticed by Schrödinger at the early days of quantum theory. On the other hand, measurement incompatibility is another non-classical feature of quantum theory, initially pointed out by Bohr. Recently, Quintino et al. [Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 160402 (2014)] and Uola et al. [Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 160403 (2014)] have investigated the relation between these two distinct non-classical features. They have shown that a set of measurements is not jointly measurable (i.e., incompatible) if and only if they can be used for demonstrating Schrödinger-Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen steering. The concept of steering has been generalized for more general abstract tensor product theories rather than just Hilbert space quantum mechanics. In this article, we discuss that the notion of measurement incompatibility can be extended for general probability theories. Further, we show that the connection between steering and measurement incompatibility holds in a border class of tensor product theories rather than just quantum theory.
Generalized contextuality refers to our inability of explaining measurement statistics using a contextindependent probabilistic and ontological model.On the other hand, measurement statistics can also be modeled using the framework of general probabilistic theories (GPTs).Here, starting from a construction of GPTs based on a Gleason-type theorem, we fully characterize these structures with respect to their permission and rejection of generalized (non)contextual ontological models.It follows that in any GPT construction the three insistence of (i) the no-restriction hypothesis, (ii) the ontological noncontextuality, and (iii) multiple nonrefinable measurements for any fixed number of outcomes are incompatible.Hence, any GPT satisfying the no-restriction hypothesis is ontologically noncontextual if and only if it is simplicial.We give a detailed discussion of GPTs for which the no-restriction hypothesis is violated, and show that they can always be considered as subtheories (subGPTs) of GPTs satisfying the hypothesis.It is shown that subGPTs are ontologically noncontextual if and only if they are subtheories of simplicial GPTs of the same dimensionality.Finally, we establish as a corollary the necessary and sufficient condition for a single resourceful measurement or state to promote an ontologically noncontextual (i.e., classical) general probabilistic theory to an ontologically contextual (i.e., nonclassical) one under the no-restriction hypothesis.
Measurement incompatibility and bipartite quantum steering are known to display a strong connection: a set of measurements is incompatible if and only if it can lead to bipartite steering. Despite such a close link between these concepts in bipartite scenarios, little is known in the multipartite setting, where notions of genuine multipartite correlations play major roles. In this work we prove that, as in the bipartite case, incompatibility is also necessary and sufficient for genuine multipartite steering in any multipartite scenario with a single uncharacterised party. Interestingly, genuine multipartite steering can be extracted from any set of incompatible measurements using states which are not SLOCC equivalent, such as GHZ and W states. In contrast, we prove that this result does not hold in scenarios with more than one uncharacterised party, by presenting a set of incompatible measurements that can never lead to genuine multipartite steering in these cases. In order to obtain our main results, we introduce methods tailored for multipartite correlations, paving the way to understanding the role of measurement incompatibility beyond bipartite scenarios.
Generalized contextuality refers to our inability of explaining measurement statistics using a context-independent probabilistic model. On the other hand, measurement statistics can also be modeled most generally within the framework of general probabilistic theories. Here, starting from a construction of general probabilistic theories based on a Gleason-type theorem, we show that for any such theory the three insistence of (i) the no-restriction hypothesis, (ii) the ontological noncontextuality, and (iii) multiple nonrefinable measurements for any fixed number of outcomes are incompatible. In other words, requiring any two of these properties for a general probabilistic theory implies the violation of the third one. We extensively discuss general probabilistic theories for which (ii) and (iii) are met while (i) is violated, exploring the role of the no-restriction hypothesis as a sufficient condition that enforces ontological contextuality on nonsimplicial general probabilistic theories. Finally, we establish as a corollary the necessary and sufficient condition for a single resourceful measurement or state to promote an ontologically noncontextual (i.e. classical) general probabilistic theory to an ontologically contextual (i.e. nonclassical) one under the no-restriction hypothesis.
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.