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

Lecture notes in computer science

Quantum(-Like) Decision Making: On Validity of the Aumann Theorem

Andrei Yu. Khrennikov, Irina Basieva

Published Jan 1, 2015• 4 citations
Publisher
DOI
10.1007/978-3-319-15931-7_9

Related papers

Quantum Decision Theory

Hervé Zwirn C

arXiv:2412.02165•Jan 1, 2025•0 citations

Quantum(-like) decision making: on validity of the Aumann theorem

Andrei Yu. Khrennikov, Irina Basieva

Through set-theoretic formalization of the notion of common knowledge, Aumann proved that if two agents have the common priors, and their posteriors for a given event are common knowledge, then their posteriors must be equal. In this paper we investigate the problem of validity of this theorem in the framework of quantum(-like) decision making.

arXiv:1403.6279•Mar 25, 2014•2 citations

Quantum-like Modelling in Economics

Vikram Athalye, Emmanuel Haven

We start in this chapter arguing why quantum probability is a good candidate for modelling purposes in decision-making contexts. The quantum formalism, in this chapter, centres around the argument that such formalism can accommodate paradoxical outcomes in decision making. Quantum probability offers a response to those decision-making contexts where a consistent violation of the law of total probability occurs. Strong results have been obtained in decision-making applications and we go into some detail to discuss the so-called QQ equality and the Aumann theorem.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Dec 19, 2025•0 citations

Quantum Decision Making

Nicolai Friis

•Feb 7, 2023•0 citations

Quantum Formalism for Decision-Making

Andrei Yu. Khrennikov

Springer eBooks•Jan 1, 2023•0 citations

Aumann's theorem beyond ontology: quantum, postquantum, and indefinite causal order

Carlo Cepollaro, Andrea Di Biagio

Agreement theorems are no-go results about rational disagreement: if two agents start from a common prior and their posterior beliefs are common knowledge, they cannot assign different probabilities to the same event. Standard treatments of the result have the agents reason about an underlying state of the world, which has lead some to ask whether the result can extend to quantum or postquantum phenomena, where such a description may no longer be appropriate. We derive an operational version of Aumann's agreement theorem without assuming an objective state of the world and instead focusing only on what is observed. This allows us to establish the theorem's validity in quantum theory and even in situations with indefinite causal order or involving hypothetical postquantum phenomena. We comment on seemingly contradictory results in the literature and point to the one place where the theorem might fail: Wigner's friend-type situations.

quant-pharXiv:2603.23595•Mar 26, 2026•0 citations
We start in this chapter arguing why quantum probability is a good candidate for modelling purposes in decision-making contexts. The quantum formalism, in this chapter, centres around the argument that such formalism can accommodate paradoxical outcomes in decision making. Quantum probability offers a response to those decision-making contexts where a consistent violation of the law of total probability occurs. Strong results have been obtained in decision-making applications and we go into some detail to discuss the so-called QQ equality and the Aumann theorem.
Agreement theorems are no-go results about rational disagreement: if two agents start from a common prior and their posterior beliefs are common knowledge, they cannot assign different probabilities to the same event. Standard treatments of the result have the agents reason about an underlying state of the world, which has lead some to ask whether the result can extend to quantum or postquantum phenomena, where such a description may no longer be appropriate. We derive an operational version of Aumann's agreement theorem without assuming an objective state of the world and instead focusing only on what is observed. This allows us to establish the theorem's validity in quantum theory and even in situations with indefinite causal order or involving hypothetical postquantum phenomena. We comment on seemingly contradictory results in the literature and point to the one place where the theorem might fail: Wigner's friend-type situations.