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

Springer eBooks

Joint Probability Distributions in Quantum Mechanics

Leon W. Cohen

Published Jan 1, 1973• 7 citations
Publisher
DOI
10.1007/978-94-010-2534-8_2

Related papers

Joint probability distributions of observables in quantum mechanics

Kazimierz Urbanik

Studia Mathematica•Jan 1, 1961•50 citations

Simultaneous measurement and joint probability distributions in quantum mechanics

Willem M. de Muynck, Peter A. E. M. Janssen, Alexander Santman

Foundations of Physics•Feb 1, 1979•25 citations

Quantum mechanics and the concept of joint probability

Michael J. W. Hall

Foundations of Physics•Feb 1, 1989•3 citations

A Remark on Joint Probability Distributions for Quantum Observables

Slawomir Bugajski

A simple formal result concerning joint probability distributions in quantum mechanics is obtained. It is shown that some relatively weak properties of the joint distributions cannot be satisfied in the scope of standard quantum mechanics.

Zeitschrift für Naturforschung A•Nov 1, 1978•4 citations

Contrasting Implications of the Frequentist and Bayesian Interpretations of Probability when Applied to Quantum Mechanics Theory

James L. Beck

An examination is made of the differing implications from applying the two mainstream interpretations of probability, frequentist and Bayesian, to QM (quantum mechanics) theory for the Bohm-EPR experiment. The joint probability distribution for the possible spin outcomes for two particles with coupled spins is examined. Contrasting conclusions are made: (i) Under the frequentist interpretation, the QM spin distribution implies a widely-discussed non-locality because probabilistic conditioning on a spin measurement is viewed as corresponding to a causal influence. Under the Bayesian interpretation, this conditioning is viewed as providing information relevant to the spin probabilities and the argument for non-locality loses its force. (ii) The frequentist interpretation leads to the locality condition used by John Bell in 1964 to establish conditions for the existence of hidden variables behind the spin probability distribution but this condition is not consistent with the product (Bayes) rule of probability theory. Under the Bayesian interpretation, there is no motivation for this locality condition and a new stochastic hidden-variable model is given that reproduces the spin distribution. (iii) Bell's original 1964 inequality provides a necessary condition for the existence of a third-order joint probability distribution for three spin variables that is compatible through marginalization with the second-order joint distributions for the three possible spin pairs. Bell's inequality is logically equivalent to the 1969 CHSH inequality that involves expectations of four pairs of four spin variables; the CHSH inequality must be satisfied in order for a fourth-order joint probability distribution for the four spin variables to exist. When any of these inequalities are violated, a joint probability distribution for three spin outcomes fails to be valid because some probabilities are negative.

arXiv:1804.02106•Apr 6, 2018•1 citation

Joint distributions, the uncertainty principle and positive distributions

Leon W. Cohen

We examine the construction of joint probabilities for non-commuting observables. We show that there are indications in standard quantum mechanics that imply the existence of conditional expectation values, which in turn implies the existence of a joint distribution. We also argue that the uncertainty principle has no bearing on the existence of joint distributions but only constrains the marginal distributions. In addition, we show that within classical probability theory there are mathematical quantities that are similar to quantum mechanical wave functions. This is shown by generalising a theorem of Khinchin on the necessary and sufficient conditions for a function to be a characteristic function.

Mathematical Structures in Computer Science•Mar 28, 2014•0 citations
An examination is made of the differing implications from applying the two mainstream interpretations of probability, frequentist and Bayesian, to QM (quantum mechanics) theory for the Bohm-EPR experiment. The joint probability distribution for the possible spin outcomes for two particles with coupled spins is examined. Contrasting conclusions are made: (i) Under the frequentist interpretation, the QM spin distribution implies a widely-discussed non-locality because probabilistic conditioning on a spin measurement is viewed as corresponding to a causal influence. Under the Bayesian interpretation, this conditioning is viewed as providing information relevant to the spin probabilities and the argument for non-locality loses its force. (ii) The frequentist interpretation leads to the locality condition used by John Bell in 1964 to establish conditions for the existence of hidden variables behind the spin probability distribution but this condition is not consistent with the product (Bayes) rule of probability theory. Under the Bayesian interpretation, there is no motivation for this locality condition and a new stochastic hidden-variable model is given that reproduces the spin distribution. (iii) Bell's original 1964 inequality provides a necessary condition for the existence of a third-order joint probability distribution for three spin variables that is compatible through marginalization with the second-order joint distributions for the three possible spin pairs. Bell's inequality is logically equivalent to the 1969 CHSH inequality that involves expectations of four pairs of four spin variables; the CHSH inequality must be satisfied in order for a fourth-order joint probability distribution for the four spin variables to exist. When any of these inequalities are violated, a joint probability distribution for three spin outcomes fails to be valid because some probabilities are negative.
We examine the construction of joint probabilities for non-commuting observables. We show that there are indications in standard quantum mechanics that imply the existence of conditional expectation values, which in turn implies the existence of a joint distribution. We also argue that the uncertainty principle has no bearing on the existence of joint distributions but only constrains the marginal distributions. In addition, we show that within classical probability theory there are mathematical quantities that are similar to quantum mechanical wave functions. This is shown by generalising a theorem of Khinchin on the necessary and sufficient conditions for a function to be a characteristic function.