In the literature, there are two differing definitions of contextuality: Kochen and Specker's, and Spekkens' (or ``generalised''). However, researchers using one of these definitions rarely consider the other, meaning comparative analysis of these two notions is rare. In this paper, we advance the idea that Kochen-Specker contextuality provides a generalisation of the idea of system being fundamentally \emph{nonclassical}, while Spekkens' noncontextuality provides a generalisation of the idea of a system being \emph{classical}. This allows us to reconcile the two approaches, as different stages in a hierarchy of classicality/nonclassicality.
Comments
16+13 pages, 2+1 figures. v2. Fig 1a fixed, added brief discussion of related results for (un)steerability
In the literature, there are two differing definitions of contextuality: Kochen and Specker's, and Spekkens' (or ``generalised''). However, researchers using one of these definitions rarely consider the other, meaning comparative analysis of these two notions is rare. In this paper, we advance the idea that Kochen-Specker contextuality provides a generalisation of the idea of system being fundamentally \emph{nonclassical}, while Spekkens' noncontextuality provides a generalisation of the idea of a system being \emph{classical}. This allows us to reconcile the two approaches, as different stages in a hierarchy of classicality/nonclassicality.
Contextuality is a key distinguishing feature between classical and quantum physics. It expresses a fundamental obstruction to describing quantum theory using classical concepts. In turn, when understood as a resource for quantum computation, it is expected to hold the key to quantum advantage. Yet, despite its long recognised importance in quantum foundations and, more recently, in quantum computation, the mathematics of contextuality has remained somewhat elusive - different frameworks address different aspects of the phenomenon, yet their precise relationship often is unclear. In fact, there is a glaring discrepancy already between the original notion of contextuality introduced by Kochen and Specker on the one side [J. Math. Mech., 17, 59, (1967)], and the modern approach of studying contextual correlations on the other [Rev. Mod. Phys., 94, 045007 (2022)]. In a companion paper [arXiv:2408.16764], we introduce the conceptually new tool called ``context connections'', which allows to cast and analyse Kochen-Specker (KS) contextuality in new form. Here, we generalise this notion, and based on it prove a complete characterisation of KS contextuality for finite-dimensional systems. To this end, we develop the framework of ``observable algebras". We show in detail how this framework subsumes the marginal and graph-theoretic approaches to contextuality, and thus that it offers a unified perspective on KS contextuality. In particular, we establish the precise relationships between the various notions of ``contextuality" used in the respective settings, and in doing so, generalise a number of results on the characterisation of the respective notions in the literature.
We show that, under certain conditions, generalised contextuality, in the sense introduced by Spekkens, cannot be created from the vacuum of a quantum field. Initial noncontextual qudit states do not become contextual just by interacting with a quantum field. This is verified in two scenarios. First, in a perturbative approach where the time evolution operator is expanded in powers of the coupling constant. Second, in the limit of zero energy gap in the spectrum of the free detector Hamiltonian. Our results are at the opposite side of what has been recently obtained in the literature regarding the harvesting of Kochen-Specker contextuality. Our results demonstrate that the existing notions of contextuality can be independent of one another and that contextuality harvesting depends on which precise notion is used.
Contextuality is a key distinguishing feature between classical and quantum physics. It expresses a fundamental obstruction to describing quantum theory using classical concepts. In turn, understood as a resource for quantum computation, it is expected to hold the key to quantum advantage. Yet, despite its long recognised importance in quantum foundations and, more recently, in quantum computation, the structural essence of contextuality has remained somewhat elusive - different frameworks address different aspects of the phenomenon, yet their precise relationship often remains unclear. This issue already looms large at the level of the Bell-Kochen-Specker theorem: while traditional proofs proceed by showing the nonexistence of valuations, the notion of state-independent contextuality in the marginal approach allows to prove contextuality from seemingly weaker assumptions. In the light of this, and at the absence of a unified mathematical framework for Kochen-Specker contextuality, the original algebraic approach has been widely abandoned, in favour of the study of contextual correlations. Here, we reinstate the algebraic perspective on contextuality. Concretely, by building on the novel concept of context connections, we reformulate the algebraic relations between observables originally postulated by Kochen and Specker, and we explicitly demonstrate their consistency with the notion of state-independent contextuality. In the present paper, we focus on the new conceptual ideas and discuss them in the concrete setting of spin-1 observables, specifically those in the example of [S. Yu and C.H. Oh, Phys. Rev. Lett., 108, 030402 (2012)]; in a companion paper, we generalise these ideas, obtain a complete characterisation of Kochen-Specker contextuality and provide a detailed comparison with the related notions of contextuality in the marginal and graph-theoretic approach.
Since Bell, Kochen and Specker formulated the first notions of contextuality, a number of frameworks have been created to help make philosophical and mathematical sense of the concept. Two of the most common are the Equivalence-based approach due to Spekkens, and the Sheaf-theoretic framework of Abramsky and Brandenburger. Each of these can support a hierarchy of strengths of contextuality, which can include possibilistic concepts. This thesis will explore the differences between the two approaches, and explore what can be demonstrated by using weaker notions of noncontextuality. Notions of noncontextuality are important for proving no-go theorems which highlight that many properties that are true of classical mechanics fail to be compatible with quantum predictions. Often, the notions of noncontextuality used are very strong assumptions, and even weaker flavours of noncontextuality can be used to draw the same, or similar conclusions. An important class of such notions are, possibilistic assumptions that only care about whether or not events are possible or impossible, rather than the exact Born rule probabilities that are applied to events. Even these weaker notions are often impossible to resolve with the logical structure and predictions of quantum theory. Contextuality has been demonstrated to be a resource for many quantum computational operations, and the contextual fraction has been shown to be an important resource. We introduce a metric that can differentiate between different quantum mechanical scenarios with contextual fraction 1, and demonstrate analogues of CHSH and Tsirelson bounds for this quantity. We also investigate the computational complexity of calculating the values of some metrics for nonlocality and contextuality, completing the classification of possibilistic nonlocality scenarios, as well as other metrics of nonlocality analogous to our metric of maximal contextuality.
In this thesis we explore the questions of what should be considered a "classical" theory, and which aspects of quantum theory cannot be captured by any theory that respects our intuition of classicality. This exploration is divided in two parts: in the first we review classical results of the literature, such as the Kochen-Specker theorem, von Neumann's theorem, Gleason's theorem, as well as more recent ideas, such as the distinction between ψ-ontic and ψ-epistemic ontological models, Spekkens' definition of contextuality, Hardy's ontological excess baggage theorem and the PBR theorem. The second part is concerned with pinning down what should be the "correct" definition of contextuality. We settle down on the definition advocated by Abramsky and Branderburger, motivated by the Fine theorem, and show the connection of this definition with the work of George Boole. This definition allows us to unify the notions of locality and noncontextuality, and use largely the same tools to characterize how quantum mechanics violates these notions of classicality. Exploring this formalism, we find a new family of noncontextuality inequalities. We conclude by reviewing the notion of state-independent contextuality.
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.