Journal of Physics Conference Series

An investigation on probabilistic relations in measurement

Francesco Crenna, Giovanni Battista Rossi, Vittorio Belotti

Published Sep 6, 2013• 0 citations

Abstract

In the representational approach, measurement is defined on the basis of primitive (in the context) notion of empirical relation. To account for measurement uncertainty, it is quite natural to consider probabilistic (or, more generally, non deterministic) empirical relations. Here the notion of probabilistic relation is investigated. After a brief historical outline, we point out that probabilistic relations appear in everyday measurement situation. To demonstrate this, a simple illustrative experiment has been developed, whose results are presented and discussed.

DOI: 10.1088/1742-6596/459/1/012061

Related papers

Probability as a logic for measurement representations

Giovanni Battista Rossi, Francesco Crenna

Measurement can be defined on the basis of the notion of empirical relation, which appears as a primitive term in the representational theory. Here a language is introduced for dealing with empirical relations and a probabilistic logic is applied to statements concerning them.

Journal of Physics Conference SeriesSep 6, 20133 citations

Toward a probabilistic theory of the measuring systems

Giovanni Battista Rossi, Francesco Crenna, Alice Palazzo

In the current debate on measurement science, there is growing interest in identifying some generic framework for the modelling of the measurement system. Recently, we have proposed sufficient conditions for an empirical system to qualify as a measuring system, and have proposed a deterministic framework based on that. Here we consider turning that framework into a corresponding probabilistic one, in other to properly accounting for measurement uncertainty.

Journal of Physics Conference SeriesAug 1, 20180 citations

3. Uncertainty, statistics, probability

Arnold Neumaier

In this chapter, we consider the way quantum theory represents deterministic, statistical, and probabilistic aspects of Nature. After a discussion in Section 3.1 of uncertainty in general, we discuss in Sections 3.2-3.4 several formal notions of classical probability, their relation to the probability concept used in applied statistics, and their dependence on the description used. Section 3.5 briefly discusses various examples, where probabilistic features emerge from fully deterministic situations-a theme to be taken up in much more detail in Chapter 11. Section 3.6 then shows how the statistical aspects of the quantum formalism naturally follow from the weak law of large numbers. The notions of c-probability in the classical case and of q-probability in the quantum case are formally defined in Section 3.7. Historically, the concept of classical probability (including its use in stochastic processes) was given an undisputed formal mathematical foundation in 1933 in terms of the measure-theoretic setting of Kolmogorov [164]. Apart from this traditional axiomatic foundation of classical probability theory, there is a less well-known equivalent axiomatic treatment by Whittle [302] in terms of expectations. Here probabilities appear as the expectations of statements, {0, 1}-valued random variables. von Plato [240] discusses the history of the concept of probability. Krüger et al. [169] discuss the history of probability in the various fields of application. Sklar [275] discusses the philosophical problems of the probability concept, with an emphasis on statistical mechanics.

De Gruyter eBooksOct 24, 20190 citations

On the uncertainty relations and quantum measurements: conventionalities, shortcomings, reconsiderations

Spiridon Dumitru

Unsolved controversies about uncertainty relations and quantum measurements still persists nowadays. They originate around the shortcomings regarding the conventional interpretation of uncertainty relations. Here we show that the respective shortcomings disclose veridic and unavoidable facts which require the abandonment of the mentioned interpretation. So the primitive uncertainty relations appear as being either thought fictions or fluctuations formulae. Subsequently we reveal that the conventional approaches of quantum measurements are grounded on incorrect premises. We propose a new approach in which : (i) the quantum observables are considered as generalized stochastic variables, (ii) the view is focused only on the pre-existent state of the measured system, without any interest for the collapse of the respective state, (iii) a measurement is described as an input-output transformation which modify the probability density and current but preserve the expressions of the operators. The measuring uncertainties are evaluated as changes in the probabilistic estimators of observables. Related to different observables we do not find reasons of principle neither for uncertainties-connections nor for measuring compatibility/incompatibility.

arXiv:quant-ph/0504058Apr 8, 20052 citations

Uncertainty, joint uncertainty, and the quantum uncertainty principle

Varun Narasimhachar, Alireza Poostindouz, Gilad Gour

Historically, the element of uncertainty in quantum mechanics has been expressed through mathematical identities called uncertainty relations, a great many of which continue to be discovered. These relations use diverse measures to quantify uncertainty (and joint uncertainty). In this paper we use operational information-theoretic principles to identify the common essence of all such measures, thereby defining measure-independent notions of uncertainty and joint uncertainty. We find that most existing entropic uncertainty relations use measures of joint uncertainty that yield themselves to a small class of operational interpretations. Our notion relaxes this restriction, revealing previously unexplored joint uncertainty measures. To illustrate the utility of our formalism, we derive an uncertainty relation based on one such new measure. We also use our formalism to gain insight into the conditions under which measure-independent uncertainty relations can be found.

arXiv:1505.02223New Journal of PhysicsMar 10, 201626 citations

Macroscopic realism and quantum measurement: measurers as a natural kind

Gregg S. Jaeger

The notion of macroscopic realism has been used in attempts to achieve consistency between physics and everyday experience and to locate some boundary between the realms of classical mechanics and quantum meachanics. Its ostensibly underlying conceptual components, realism and macroscopicity, have most often appeared in the foundations of physics in relation to quantum measurement: reality became a prominent topic of discussion in quantum physics after the notion of element of reality was defined and used by Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen in that context, and macroscopicity is often explicitly assumed to be an essential property of any measuring apparatus. However, macroscopicity turns out to be a rather vaguer and less consistently understood notion than typically assumed by physicists who have not explicitly explored the notion themselves. For this reason, it behooves those investigating the foundations of quantum mechanics from a realist perspective to look for alternative notions for grounding quantum measurement. Here, the merits of treating the measuring instrument as a ‘natural kind’ as a means of avoiding anthropocentrism in the foundations of quantum measurement are pointed out as a means of advancing quantum measurement theory.

Physica ScriptaDec 1, 20146 citations