Nonclassical causal modeling was developed in order to explain violations of Bell inequalities while adhering to relativistic causal structure and faithfulness ---that is, avoiding fine-tuned causal explanations. Recently, a no-go theorem that can be viewed as being stronger than Bell's theorem has been derived, based on extensions of the Wigner's friend thought experiment: the Local Friendliness (LF) no-go theorem. Here we show that the LF no-go theorem poses formidable challenges for the field of causal modeling, even when nonclassical and/or cyclic causal explanations are considered. We first recast the LF inequalities, one of the key elements of the LF no-go theorem, as special cases of monogamy relations stemming from a statistical marginal problem. We then further recast LF inequalities as causal compatibility inequalities stemming from a nonclassical causal marginal problem, for a causal structure implied by well-motivated causal-metaphysical assumptions. We find that the LF inequalities emerge from this causal structure even when one allows the latent causes of observed events to admit post-quantum descriptions, such as in a generalized probabilistic theory or in an even more exotic theory. We further prove that no nonclassical causal model can explain violations of LF inequalities without violating the No Fine-Tuning principle. Finally, we note that these obstacles cannot be overcome even if one appeals to cyclic causal models, and we discuss potential directions for further extensions of the causal modeling framework.
Nonclassical causal modeling was developed in order to explain violations of Bell inequalities while adhering to relativistic causal structure and faithfulness ---that is, avoiding fine-tuned causal explanations. Recently, a no-go theorem that can be viewed as being stronger than Bell's theorem has been derived, based on extensions of the Wigner's friend thought experiment: the Local Friendliness (LF) no-go theorem. Here we show that the LF no-go theorem poses formidable challenges for the field of causal modeling, even when nonclassical and/or cyclic causal explanations are considered. We first recast the LF inequalities, one of the key elements of the LF no-go theorem, as special cases of monogamy relations stemming from a statistical marginal problem. We then further recast LF inequalities as causal compatibility inequalities stemming from a nonclassical causal marginal problem, for a causal structure implied by well-motivated causal-metaphysical assumptions. We find that the LF inequalities emerge from this causal structure even when one allows the latent causes of observed events to admit post-quantum descriptions, such as in a generalized probabilistic theory or in an even more exotic theory. We further prove that no nonclassical causal model can explain violations of LF inequalities without violating the No Fine-Tuning principle. Finally, we note that these obstacles cannot be overcome even if one appeals to cyclic causal models, and we discuss potential directions for further extensions of the causal modeling framework.
A recent paper by two of us and co-workers \cite{CQD20}, based on an extended Wigner's friend scenario, demonstrated that certain empirical correlations predicted by quantum theory (QT) violate inequalities derived from a set of metaphysical assumptions we called "Local Friendliness" (LF). These assumptions are strictly weaker than those used for deriving Bell inequalities. Crucial to the theorem was the premise that a quantum system with reversible evolution could be an observer (colloquially, a "friend"). However, that paper was noncommittal on what would constitute an observer for the purpose of an experiment. Here, we present a new LF no-go theorem which takes seriously the idea that a system's having thoughts is a sufficient condition for it to be an observer. Our new derivation of the LF inequalities uses four metaphysical assumptions, three of which are thought-related, including one that is explicitly called "Friendliness". These four assumptions, in conjunction, allow one to derive LF inequalities for experiments involving the type of system that "Friendliness" refers to. In addition to these four metaphysical assumptions, this new no-go theorem requires two assumptions about what is technologically feasible: Human-Level Artificial Intelligence, and Universal Quantum Computing which is fast and large scale. The latter is often motivated by the belief that QT is universal, but this is not an assumption of the theorem. The intent of the new theorem is to give a clear goal for future experimentalists, and a clear motivation for trying to achieve that goal. We review various approaches to QT in light of our theorem. The popular stance that "quantum theory needs no interpretation" does not question any of our assumptions and so is ruled out. Finally, we quantitatively discuss how difficult the experiment we envisage would be, and briefly discuss milestones on the paths towards it.
We provide a new formulation of the Local Friendliness no-go theorem of Bong et al. [Nat. Phys. 16, 1199 (2020)] from fundamental causal principles, providing another perspective on how it puts strictly stronger bounds on quantum reality than Bell's theorem. In particular, quantum causal models have been proposed as a way to maintain a peaceful coexistence between quantum mechanics and relativistic causality while respecting Leibniz's methodological principle. This works for Bell's theorem but does not work for the Local Friendliness no-go theorem, which considers an extended Wigner's Friend scenario. More radical conceptual renewal is required; we suggest that cleaving to Leibniz's principle requires extending relativity to events themselves.
Recently, the local friendliness (LF) no-go theorem has attracted considerable interest due to its deep foundational implications. This no-go theorem applies to scenarios which combine Bell experiments with Wigner's friend-type setups, containing spacelike separated superobservers assumed to be capable of performing quantum operations on a local observer, also known as their ``friend.'' The theorem shows that a set of assumptions termed ``local friendliness''---weaker than the set of assumptions required for proving Bell's theorem---constrains the space of probabilistic behaviors in extended Wigner's friend scenarios to the ``local friendliness (LF) polytope,'' and that quantum correlations can, in principle, violate those constraints. In this work, we extend the study of local friendliness to multipartite scenarios---with arbitrary but finite numbers of superobservers, friends, measurements, and outcomes---and fully characterize the corresponding LF polytopes, their relationships with each other, with the Bell polytope, the no-signaling polytope, and the quantum set of correlations. In particular, we identify, via constructive proofs, all the canonical LF scenarios where the LF polytope coincides with the Bell polytope---hence identifying all the scenarios where ``genuine LF inequalities'' may arise. Among other results, we also show that whenever the LF polytope is distinct from the Bell and the no-signaling polytope, it also is neither contained in nor contains the quantum set of correlations. Apart from the foundational motivation of better understanding the constraints from local friendliness, our results may also find use in a priori unrelated contexts of device-independent information processing, where the LF polytopes have also been shown to arise, under the name of ``partially deterministic polytopes.''
Abstract The famous ‘Wigner’s friend’ paradox highlights the difficulty of modelling the evolution of quantum systems under measurement in situations where observers themselves are considered to be subject to the laws of quantum mechanics. In recent years, variations of the original Wigner’s friend paradox have been recognized as fruitful arenas for probing the foundations of quantum theory. In particular (Bong et al 2020 Nat. Phys. 16 1199) demonstrated a contradiction between a set of intuitive assumptions called ‘Local Friendliness’ (LF) and certain quantum phenomena on an extended version of the Wigner’s friend paradox. The LF assumptions can be understood as the conjunction of two independent assumptions: Absoluteness of Observed Events requires that any event observed by any observer has an absolute, rather than relative, value; Local Agency is the assumption that an intervention cannot be correlated with relevant events outside its future light cone. These assumptions are weaker than the assumptions that lead to Bell’s theorem, and thus while the LF result may be considered to be conceptually comparable to Bell’s result, its implications are even deeper. The proof of the LF no-go theorem, however, relies on probability theory, and a fundamental question remained whether or not LF is an inherently statistical concept. Here we present a probability-free version of the LF theorem, building upon Hardy’s no-go theorem for local hidden variables. The argument is phrased in the language of possibilities, which we make formal by using a modal logical approach. It relies on a weaker version of Local Agency, which we call ‘Possibilistic Local Agency’: the assumption that an intervention cannot affect the possibilities of events outside its future light cone.
The renowned Local Friendliness no-go theorem demonstrates the incompatibility of quantum theory with the combined assumptions of Absoluteness of Observed Events - the idea that observed outcomes are singular and objective - and Local Agency - the requirement that the only events correlated with a setting choice are in its future light cone. Granted that the Local Friendliness scenario can be realized, this result is stronger than Bell's theorem because the assumptions of Local Friendliness are weaker than those of Bell's theorem: Local Agency is less restrictive than local causality, and Absoluteness of Observed Events is encompassed within the notion of realism assumed in Bell's theorem. Drawing inspiration from the correspondence between nonlocality proofs in Bell scenarios and generalized contextuality proofs in prepare-and-measure scenarios, we present the Noncontextual Friendliness no-go theorem. This theorem demonstrates the inconsistency of quantum theory with the joint assumptions of Absoluteness of Observed Events and Noncontextual Agency, the latter being a weaker version of noncontextuality, in the same way that Local Agency is a weaker version of local causality. Our result generalizes the Local Friendliness no-go theorem and, granted that the scenario can be realized, is stronger than no-go theorems based on generalized noncontextuality.
Extended Wigner's friend no-go theorems provide a modern lens for investigating the measurement problem, by making precise the challenges that arise when one attempts to model agents as dynamical quantum systems. Most such no-go theorems studied to date, such as the Frauchiger-Renner argument and the Local Friendliness argument, are explicitly constructed using quantum correlations that violate Bell inequalities. In this work, we show that such correlations are not necessary for having extended Wigner's friend paradoxes, by constructing a no-go theorem utilizing a proof of the failure of noncontextuality. The argument hinges on a novel metaphysical assumption (which we term Commutation Irrelevance) that is a natural extension of a key assumption going into the Frauchiger and Renner's no-go theorem.