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

Nonlocality and the Epistemic Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics

Yemima Ben‐Menahem

Published Jul 15, 2015• 0 citations
OpenAlex

Abstract

According to the current epistemic interpretation of quantum probabilities, the quantum correlations manifesting nonlocality can be derived from purely probabilistic and information-theoretic constraints. As such, they do not constitute a spacetime phenomenon and cannot lead to conflict between QM and any spatial-temporal constraints. This paper compares recent epistemic interpretations with earlier probabilistic interpretations, noting their merits as well as the difficulties they encounter. In particular, the implications of the recent PBR theorem are examined. While generally seen as undermining the epistemic interpretation, I argue that the PBR theorem actually suggests an epistemic position more radical than previously ones. This review of probabilistic interpretations enables reassessment of the epistemic theorist's attempt to disentangle nonlocality from spacetime considerations

Related papers

The Case for Quantum State Realism

Morgan C. Tait

I argue for a realist interpretation of the quantum state. I begin by reviewing and critically evaluating two arguments for an antirealist interpretation of the quantum state, the first derived from the so-called ‘measurement problem’, and the second from the concept of local causality. I argue that existing antirealist interpretations do not solve the measurement problem. Furthermore, I argue that it is possible to construct a local, realist interpretation of quantum mechanics, using methods borrowed from quantum field theory and based on John S. Bell’s concept of ‘local beables’.\nIf the quantum state is interpreted subjectively, then the probabilities it associates with experimental outcomes are themselves subjective. I address the prospects for developing a subjective Bayesian interpretation of quantum mechanical probabilities based on the Quantum de Finetti Representation Theorem. Epistemic interpretations of the quantum state can be divided into those that are epistemic with respect to underlying ontic states, and those that are epistemic with respect to measurement outcomes. The Pusey Barrett and Rudolph (PBR) theorem places serious constraints on the former family of interpretations. I identify an important explanatory gap in the latter sort of interpretation. In particular, if the quantum state is a subjective representation of beliefs about future experimental outcomes, then it is not clear why those experimenters who use quantum mechanics should be better able to negotiate the world than those who do not.\nI then turn to the task of articulating a positive argument for the thesis of quantum state realism. I begin by articulating a minimal set of conditions that any realist interpretation must meet. One assumption built into the PBR result is that systems prepared in a given quantum state have a well-defined set of physical properties, which may be completely or incompletely described by the quantum state. Antirealist interpretations that reject this assumption are therefore compatible with the PBR result. A compelling case for quantum state realism must therefore be made on more general grounds. I consider two concrete examples of phenomena described by quantum mechanics that strongly suggest that the quantum state is genuinely representational in character.

•Jan 1, 2012•3 citations

Characterization of Local and Nonlocal Quantum Correlations

Francesco Atzori, Salvatore Virzì, Enrico Rebufello +9 more

Quantum correlations, such as entanglement, are fundamental to quantum mechanics and a key resource for quantum technologies. However, their full quantitative description and axiomatic foundations remain unresolved. Recent studies suggest that the origin of nonlocal correlations lies in principles tied to quantum uncertainty. In particular, a recent paper [1] introduced the principle of Relativistic Independence (RI), which asserts that observers with spacelike separation cannot influence each other's uncertainty relations. This principle provides a novel bound intertwining local and nonlocal correlations:

Conference on Lasers and Electro-Optics Europe & European Quantum Electronics Conference (CLEO/Europe-EQEC)•Jun 23, 2025•0 citations

PBR, nonreality and entangled measurement

Hofer-Szabó, Gábor

In a recent paper, Cabbolet argues that the PBR theorem is nonreal since in the ensemble interpretation of quantum mechanics the entangled measurement used in the derivation of the PBR theorem is nonexisting. However, Cabbolet (1) doesn't provide any argument for the nonexistence of entangled measurements beyond the incompatibility of the existence of entangled measurements and the existence of $ψ$-epistemic models which we already know from the PBR theorem; and (2) he doesn't show why it is more reasonable to abandon entangled measurements instead of $ψ$-epistemic models. Hence, the PBR theorem remains intact.

arXiv:2405.06526•May 10, 2024•0 citations

Nonlocality, Bell’s Ansatz, and probability

Aloysius F. Kracklauer

Quantum mechanics lacks an intuitive interpretation, which is the cause of a generally formalistic approach to its use. This in turn has led to a certain insensitivity to the actual meaning of many words used in its description and interpretation. Herein, we analyze carefully the possible mathematical meanings of those terms used in analysis of EPR’s contention, that Quantum Mechanics is incomplete, as well as Bell’s work descendant therefrom. As a result, many inconsistencies and errors in contemporary discussions of nonlocality, as well as in Bell’s Ansatz with respect to the laws of probability, are identified. Evading these errors precludes serious conflicts between Quantum Mechanics and both Special Relativity and Philosophy.

arXiv:quant-ph/0602080•Optics and Spectroscopy•Sep 1, 2007•8 citations

Observer-Relative Interpretations

Emily Adlam

Abstract This chapter explores a serious epistemic problem for the class of ‘orthodox interpretations’ (including QBism, neo-Copenhagen interpretations, pragmatic interpretations and some versions of relational quantum mechanics) and discusses various possible attempts at a solution. I contend that the difficulty of making sense of intersubjectivity in orthodox interpretations makes these approaches self-undermining. I argue that these approaches forbid observers from sharing information with one another or even past versions of themselves, and explain why information-sharing is an essential feature of scientific practice and scientific epistemology. I also discuss some ‘Extended Wigner’s Friend’ theorems which have recently attracted interest in quantum foundations, arguing that we must interpret these theorems in light of the social dimensions of scientific knowledge.

•Jun 12, 2025•0 citations

Quantum correlations and causal structures

Issam Ibnouhsein

Recent works in foundations of quantum (field) theory and relativistic quantum information try to better grasp the interplay between the structure of quantum correlations and the constraints imposed by causality on physical operations. Chapter 1 is dedicated to the study of the conceptual implications of quantum nonlocality, a concept that subsumes that of entanglement in a certain way. We detail the recent information-theoretic approaches to understanding the structure of nonlocal correlations, and the issues the latter raise concerning the ability of local observers to isolate a system from its environment. Chapter 2 reviews in what sense imposing Poincare invariance affects entanglement detection and quantification procedures. This invariance ultimately forces a description of all quantum systems within the framework of quantum field theory, which leads to the impossibility of localized finite-energy states and to the divergence of all entanglement measures for local observers. We provide a solution to these two problems by showing that there exists a generic equivalence between a finite spatial resolution of the measurement apparatus and the exclusion of high-energy degrees of freedom from the definition of the observed system. This equivalence allows for an epistemic interpretation of the standard quantum formalism describing nonrelativistic localized systems and their correlations, hence a clarification of the origin of the finite measures of entanglement between such systems. Chapter 3 presents a recent theoretical framework that predicts the existence of correlations with indefinite causal order. In analogy to the information-theoretic approaches to nonlocal correlations, we introduce some principles that constrain the structure of such correlations, which is a first step toward a clear understanding of their physical origin.

arXiv:1510.01309•Oct 5, 2015•1 citation
According to the current epistemic interpretation of quantum probabilities, the quantum correlations manifesting nonlocality can be derived from purely probabilistic and information-theoretic constraints. As such, they do not constitute a spacetime phenomenon and cannot lead to conflict between QM and any spatial-temporal constraints. This paper compares recent epistemic interpretations with earlier probabilistic interpretations, noting their merits as well as the difficulties they encounter. In particular, the implications of the recent PBR theorem are examined. While generally seen as undermining the epistemic interpretation, I argue that the PBR theorem actually suggests an epistemic position more radical than previously ones. This review of probabilistic interpretations enables reassessment of the epistemic theorist's attempt to disentangle nonlocality from spacetime considerations
I argue for a realist interpretation of the quantum state. I begin by reviewing and critically evaluating two arguments for an antirealist interpretation of the quantum state, the first derived from the so-called ‘measurement problem’, and the second from the concept of local causality. I argue that existing antirealist interpretations do not solve the measurement problem. Furthermore, I argue that it is possible to construct a local, realist interpretation of quantum mechanics, using methods borrowed from quantum field theory and based on John S. Bell’s concept of ‘local beables’.\nIf the quantum state is interpreted subjectively, then the probabilities it associates with experimental outcomes are themselves subjective. I address the prospects for developing a subjective Bayesian interpretation of quantum mechanical probabilities based on the Quantum de Finetti Representation Theorem. Epistemic interpretations of the quantum state can be divided into those that are epistemic with respect to underlying ontic states, and those that are epistemic with respect to measurement outcomes. The Pusey Barrett and Rudolph (PBR) theorem places serious constraints on the former family of interpretations. I identify an important explanatory gap in the latter sort of interpretation. In particular, if the quantum state is a subjective representation of beliefs about future experimental outcomes, then it is not clear why those experimenters who use quantum mechanics should be better able to negotiate the world than those who do not.\nI then turn to the task of articulating a positive argument for the thesis of quantum state realism. I begin by articulating a minimal set of conditions that any realist interpretation must meet. One assumption built into the PBR result is that systems prepared in a given quantum state have a well-defined set of physical properties, which may be completely or incompletely described by the quantum state. Antirealist interpretations that reject this assumption are therefore compatible with the PBR result. A compelling case for quantum state realism must therefore be made on more general grounds. I consider two concrete examples of phenomena described by quantum mechanics that strongly suggest that the quantum state is genuinely representational in character.
Quantum correlations, such as entanglement, are fundamental to quantum mechanics and a key resource for quantum technologies. However, their full quantitative description and axiomatic foundations remain unresolved. Recent studies suggest that the origin of nonlocal correlations lies in principles tied to quantum uncertainty. In particular, a recent paper [1] introduced the principle of Relativistic Independence (RI), which asserts that observers with spacelike separation cannot influence each other's uncertainty relations. This principle provides a novel bound intertwining local and nonlocal correlations:
In a recent paper, Cabbolet argues that the PBR theorem is nonreal since in the ensemble interpretation of quantum mechanics the entangled measurement used in the derivation of the PBR theorem is nonexisting. However, Cabbolet (1) doesn't provide any argument for the nonexistence of entangled measurements beyond the incompatibility of the existence of entangled measurements and the existence of ψψψ-epistemic models which we already know from the PBR theorem; and (2) he doesn't show why it is more reasonable to abandon entangled measurements instead of ψψψ-epistemic models. Hence, the PBR theorem remains intact.
Quantum mechanics lacks an intuitive interpretation, which is the cause of a generally formalistic approach to its use. This in turn has led to a certain insensitivity to the actual meaning of many words used in its description and interpretation. Herein, we analyze carefully the possible mathematical meanings of those terms used in analysis of EPR’s contention, that Quantum Mechanics is incomplete, as well as Bell’s work descendant therefrom. As a result, many inconsistencies and errors in contemporary discussions of nonlocality, as well as in Bell’s Ansatz with respect to the laws of probability, are identified. Evading these errors precludes serious conflicts between Quantum Mechanics and both Special Relativity and Philosophy.
Abstract This chapter explores a serious epistemic problem for the class of ‘orthodox interpretations’ (including QBism, neo-Copenhagen interpretations, pragmatic interpretations and some versions of relational quantum mechanics) and discusses various possible attempts at a solution. I contend that the difficulty of making sense of intersubjectivity in orthodox interpretations makes these approaches self-undermining. I argue that these approaches forbid observers from sharing information with one another or even past versions of themselves, and explain why information-sharing is an essential feature of scientific practice and scientific epistemology. I also discuss some ‘Extended Wigner’s Friend’ theorems which have recently attracted interest in quantum foundations, arguing that we must interpret these theorems in light of the social dimensions of scientific knowledge.
Recent works in foundations of quantum (field) theory and relativistic quantum information try to better grasp the interplay between the structure of quantum correlations and the constraints imposed by causality on physical operations. Chapter 1 is dedicated to the study of the conceptual implications of quantum nonlocality, a concept that subsumes that of entanglement in a certain way. We detail the recent information-theoretic approaches to understanding the structure of nonlocal correlations, and the issues the latter raise concerning the ability of local observers to isolate a system from its environment. Chapter 2 reviews in what sense imposing Poincare invariance affects entanglement detection and quantification procedures. This invariance ultimately forces a description of all quantum systems within the framework of quantum field theory, which leads to the impossibility of localized finite-energy states and to the divergence of all entanglement measures for local observers. We provide a solution to these two problems by showing that there exists a generic equivalence between a finite spatial resolution of the measurement apparatus and the exclusion of high-energy degrees of freedom from the definition of the observed system. This equivalence allows for an epistemic interpretation of the standard quantum formalism describing nonrelativistic localized systems and their correlations, hence a clarification of the origin of the finite measures of entanglement between such systems. Chapter 3 presents a recent theoretical framework that predicts the existence of correlations with indefinite causal order. In analogy to the information-theoretic approaches to nonlocal correlations, we introduce some principles that constrain the structure of such correlations, which is a first step toward a clear understanding of their physical origin.