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:2302.01805

Model-free inequality for data of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm experiments

Hans A. De Raedt, Mikhail I. Katsnelson, Manpreet Singh Jattana, Vrinda Mehta, Madita Willsch, Dennis Willsch, Kristel F. L. Michielsen, Fengping Jin

Published Feb 3, 2023• 1 citation
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

We present a new inequality constraining correlations obtained when performing Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm experiments. The proof does not rely on mathematical models that are imagined to have produced the data and is therefore ``model-free''. The new inequality contains the model-free version of the well-known Bell-CHSH inequality as a special case. A violation of the latter implies that not all the data pairs in four data sets can be reshuffled to create quadruples. This conclusion provides a new perspective on the implications of the violation of Bell-type inequalities by experimental data.

DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2302.01805

Related papers

Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen–Bohm experiments: A discrete data driven approach

Hans A. De Raedt, Mikhail I. Katsnelson, Manpreet Singh Jattana +5 more

We take the point of view that building a one-way bridge from experimental data to mathematical models instead of the other way around avoids running into controversies resulting from attaching meaning to the symbols used in the latter. In particular, we show that adopting this view offers new perspectives for constructing mathematical models for and interpreting the results of Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen–Bohm experiments. We first prove new Bell-type inequalities constraining the values of the four correlations obtained by performing Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen–Bohm experiments under four different conditions. The proof is “model-free” in the sense that it does not refer to any mathematical model that one imagines to have produced the data. The constraints only depend on the number of quadruples obtained by reshuffling the data in the four data sets without changing the values of the correlations. These new inequalities reduce to model-free versions of the well-known Bell-type inequalities if the maximum fraction of quadruples is equal to one. Being model-free, a violation of the latter by experimental data implies that not all the data in the four data sets can be reshuffled to form quadruples. Furthermore, being model-free inequalities, a violation of the latter by experimental data only implies that any mathematical model assumed to produce this data does not apply. Starting from the data obtained by performing Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen–Bohm experiments, we construct instead of postulate mathematical models that describe the main features of these data. The mathematical framework of plausible reasoning is applied to reproducible and robust data, yielding without using any concept of quantum theory, the expression of the correlation for a system of two spin-1/2 objects in the singlet state. Next, we apply Bell’s theorem to the Stern–Gerlach experiment and demonstrate how the requirement of separability leads to the quantum-theoretical description of the averages and correlations obtained from an Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen–Bohm experiment. We analyze the data of an Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen–Bohm experiment and debunk the popular statement that Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen–Bohm experiments have vindicated quantum theory. We argue that it is not quantum theory but the processing of data from EPRB experiments that should be questioned. We perform Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen–Bohm experiments on a superconducting quantum information processor to show that the event-by-event generation of discrete data can yield results that are in good agreement with the quantum-theoretical description of the Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen–Bohm thought experiment. We demonstrate that a stochastic and a subquantum model can also produce data that are in excellent agreement with the quantum-theoretical description of the Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen–Bohm thought experiment.

arXiv:2304.03962•Annals of Physics•Apr 14, 2023•12 citations

Data analysis of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm laboratory experiments

Hans A. De Raedt, Fengping Jin, Kristel F. L. Michielsen

Data sets produced by three different Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm (EPRB) experiments are tested against the hypothesis that the statistics of this data is described by quantum theory. Although these experiments generate data that violate Bell inequalities for suitable choices of the time-coincidence window, the analysis shows that it is highly unlikely that these data sets are compatible with the quantum theoretical description of the EPRB experiment, suggesting that the popular statements that EPRB experiments agree with quantum theory lack a solid scientific basis and that more precise experiments are called for.

•Jan 1, 2013•23 citations

Data analysis of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm laboratory experiments

Hans A. De Raedt, F. Jin, K. Michielsen

Data sets produced by three different Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm (EPRB) experiments are tested against the hypothesis that the statistics of this data is described by quantum theory. Although these experiments generate data that violate Bell inequalities for suitable choices of the time-coincidence window, the analysis shows that it is highly unlikely that these data sets are compatible with the quantum theoretical description of the EPRB experiment, suggesting that the popular statements that EPRB experiments agree with quantum theory lack a solid scientific basis and that more precise experiments are called for.

arXiv:1312.6361•Proceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE•Oct 1, 2013•21 citations

Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm laboratory experiments: Data analysis and simulation

Hans A. De Raedt, Kristel F. L. Michielsen, Fengping Jin

Data produced by laboratory Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm (EPRB) experiments is tested against the hypothesis that the statistics of this data is given by quantum theory of this thought experiment. Statistical evidence is presented that the experimental data, while violating Bell inequalities, does not support this hypothesis. It is shown that an event-based simulation model, providing a cause-and-effect description of real EPRB experiments at a level of detail which is not covered by quantum theory, reproduces the results of quantum theory of this thought experiment, indicating that there is no fundamental obstacle for a real EPRB experiment to produce data that can be described by quantum theory.

arXiv:1112.2629•AIP conference proceedings•Jan 1, 2012•30 citations

CHSH Inequality on a single probability space

CHRISTOPHER M. CARE

A number of papers have suggested that it is inappropriate to combine data from different experiments when undertaking experimental tests of Bell's inequalities. It has been suggested that a correct analysis, using a single probability space, leads to inequalities which are not violated by experiment. If correct, this would be contrary to the normal interpretation of such experimental data. However, in this note, a generalised Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt (CHSH) inequality is derived for a system of four experiments constructed on a single probability space which combines the data from the four experiments. It is shown that this leads to the standard CHSH inequality which is normally used to interpret experimental data. Thus the commonly accepted conclusion that experimental violations of Bell's inequality imply that local realistic models are inconsistent with the predictions of quantum mechanics has not been challenged.

arXiv:1602.02628•Feb 8, 2016•0 citations

HAS CHSH-INEQUALITY ANY RELATION TO EPR-ARGUMENT?

Andrei Yu. Khrennikov

We emphasize the role of the precise correlations loophole in attempting to connect the CHSH type inequalities with the EPR-argument. The possibility to test theories with hidden variables experimentally by using such inequalities is questioned. The role of the original Bell inequality is highlighted. The interpretation of the CHSH inequality in the spirit of Bohr, as a new test of incompatibility, is presented. The positions of Bohr, Einstein, Podolsky, Rosen, Bell, Clauser, Horne, Shimony, Holt, De Broglie, Hertz, and Boltzmann on interrelation of theory and experiment are enlightened.

arXiv:1808.03762•May 26, 2020•3 citations
We present a new inequality constraining correlations obtained when performing Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm experiments. The proof does not rely on mathematical models that are imagined to have produced the data and is therefore ``model-free''. The new inequality contains the model-free version of the well-known Bell-CHSH inequality as a special case. A violation of the latter implies that not all the data pairs in four data sets can be reshuffled to create quadruples. This conclusion provides a new perspective on the implications of the violation of Bell-type inequalities by experimental data.
We take the point of view that building a one-way bridge from experimental data to mathematical models instead of the other way around avoids running into controversies resulting from attaching meaning to the symbols used in the latter. In particular, we show that adopting this view offers new perspectives for constructing mathematical models for and interpreting the results of Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen–Bohm experiments. We first prove new Bell-type inequalities constraining the values of the four correlations obtained by performing Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen–Bohm experiments under four different conditions. The proof is “model-free” in the sense that it does not refer to any mathematical model that one imagines to have produced the data. The constraints only depend on the number of quadruples obtained by reshuffling the data in the four data sets without changing the values of the correlations. These new inequalities reduce to model-free versions of the well-known Bell-type inequalities if the maximum fraction of quadruples is equal to one. Being model-free, a violation of the latter by experimental data implies that not all the data in the four data sets can be reshuffled to form quadruples. Furthermore, being model-free inequalities, a violation of the latter by experimental data only implies that any mathematical model assumed to produce this data does not apply. Starting from the data obtained by performing Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen–Bohm experiments, we construct instead of postulate mathematical models that describe the main features of these data. The mathematical framework of plausible reasoning is applied to reproducible and robust data, yielding without using any concept of quantum theory, the expression of the correlation for a system of two spin-1/2 objects in the singlet state. Next, we apply Bell’s theorem to the Stern–Gerlach experiment and demonstrate how the requirement of separability leads to the quantum-theoretical description of the averages and correlations obtained from an Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen–Bohm experiment. We analyze the data of an Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen–Bohm experiment and debunk the popular statement that Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen–Bohm experiments have vindicated quantum theory. We argue that it is not quantum theory but the processing of data from EPRB experiments that should be questioned. We perform Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen–Bohm experiments on a superconducting quantum information processor to show that the event-by-event generation of discrete data can yield results that are in good agreement with the quantum-theoretical description of the Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen–Bohm thought experiment. We demonstrate that a stochastic and a subquantum model can also produce data that are in excellent agreement with the quantum-theoretical description of the Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen–Bohm thought experiment.
Data sets produced by three different Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm (EPRB) experiments are tested against the hypothesis that the statistics of this data is described by quantum theory. Although these experiments generate data that violate Bell inequalities for suitable choices of the time-coincidence window, the analysis shows that it is highly unlikely that these data sets are compatible with the quantum theoretical description of the EPRB experiment, suggesting that the popular statements that EPRB experiments agree with quantum theory lack a solid scientific basis and that more precise experiments are called for.
Data sets produced by three different Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm (EPRB) experiments are tested against the hypothesis that the statistics of this data is described by quantum theory. Although these experiments generate data that violate Bell inequalities for suitable choices of the time-coincidence window, the analysis shows that it is highly unlikely that these data sets are compatible with the quantum theoretical description of the EPRB experiment, suggesting that the popular statements that EPRB experiments agree with quantum theory lack a solid scientific basis and that more precise experiments are called for.
Data produced by laboratory Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm (EPRB) experiments is tested against the hypothesis that the statistics of this data is given by quantum theory of this thought experiment. Statistical evidence is presented that the experimental data, while violating Bell inequalities, does not support this hypothesis. It is shown that an event-based simulation model, providing a cause-and-effect description of real EPRB experiments at a level of detail which is not covered by quantum theory, reproduces the results of quantum theory of this thought experiment, indicating that there is no fundamental obstacle for a real EPRB experiment to produce data that can be described by quantum theory.
A number of papers have suggested that it is inappropriate to combine data from different experiments when undertaking experimental tests of Bell's inequalities. It has been suggested that a correct analysis, using a single probability space, leads to inequalities which are not violated by experiment. If correct, this would be contrary to the normal interpretation of such experimental data. However, in this note, a generalised Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt (CHSH) inequality is derived for a system of four experiments constructed on a single probability space which combines the data from the four experiments. It is shown that this leads to the standard CHSH inequality which is normally used to interpret experimental data. Thus the commonly accepted conclusion that experimental violations of Bell's inequality imply that local realistic models are inconsistent with the predictions of quantum mechanics has not been challenged.
We emphasize the role of the precise correlations loophole in attempting to connect the CHSH type inequalities with the EPR-argument. The possibility to test theories with hidden variables experimentally by using such inequalities is questioned. The role of the original Bell inequality is highlighted. The interpretation of the CHSH inequality in the spirit of Bohr, as a new test of incompatibility, is presented. The positions of Bohr, Einstein, Podolsky, Rosen, Bell, Clauser, Horne, Shimony, Holt, De Broglie, Hertz, and Boltzmann on interrelation of theory and experiment are enlightened.