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

THEORIA An International Journal for Theory History and Foundations of Science

Explanation and Randomness

José Luis Rolleri

Published May 1, 2010• 1 citation
Publisher

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to elaborate a notion of explanation which is applicable to stochastic processes such as quantum processes. The model-theoretic approach was adopted in order to delimit appropriate classes, by defining set-theoretical predicates, of different kinds of physical transformations that quantum systems suffer, either of transitions or of transmutations, by interaction or in a spontaneous manner. To explain a singular quantum process consists in showing that it is feasible to model it as an indeterministic process of certain specified kind.

DOI
10.1387/theoria.740

Related papers

The Stochastic-Quantum Theorem

Jacob A. Barandes

This paper introduces several new classes of mathematical structures that have close connections with physics and with the theory of dynamical systems. The most general of these structures, called indivisible stochastic processes, collectively encompass many important kinds of stochastic processes, including Markov chains and random dynamical systems. This paper then states and proves a new theorem that establishes a precise correspondence between any indivisible stochastic process and a unitarily evolving quantum system. This theorem therefore leads to a new formulation of quantum theory, alongside the Hilbert-space, path-integral, and quasi-probability formulations. The theorem also provides a first-principles explanation for why quantum systems are based on the complex numbers, Hilbert spaces, linear-unitary time evolution, and the Born rule. In addition, the theorem suggests that by selecting a suitable Hilbert space, together with an appropriate choice of unitary evolution, one can simulate any indivisible stochastic process on a quantum computer, thereby potentially opening up an extensive set of novel applications for quantum computing.

arXiv:2309.03085•Sep 3, 2023•9 citations

The Quantum and the Random: Similarities, Differences, and “Contradictions”

Jan-Åke Larsson

This paper makes an attempt to present Quantum Mechanics in simple terms, but without oversimplification. It will be in essence, a comparison of the usual understanding of randomness to the more difficult notion of “quantumness.” The restricted format of this paper will unfortunately force the presentation to be very terse. But perhaps this paper can be seen as a synopsis of the approach I have in mind.

AIP conference proceedings•Jan 1, 2006•0 citations

Les observables à valeurs indéfinies, l'aléatoire, et l'imprévisibilité aux fondations de la mécanique quantique

Alastair A. Abbott

The outcomes of quantum measurements are generally considered to be random, but despite the fact that this randomness is an important element in quantum information theory, its nature is not well understood. In this thesis, we study several issues relating to the origin and certification of quantum randomness and unpredictability. One of the key results in forming our understanding of quantum mechanics as an intrinsically indeterministic theory is the Kochen-Specker theorem, which shows the impossibility to consistently assign simultaneous noncontextual definite values to all quantum mechanical observables prior to measurement. However, the theorem, under the assumption that any definite values must be noncontextual, only strictly shows that some observables must be value indefinite. We strengthen this result, proving a stronger variant of the Kochen-Specker theorem showing that, under the same assumption, if a system is prepared in an arbitrary state j i, then every observable A is value indefinite unless j i is an eigenstate of A. The indeterministic nature of quantum measurements does little to explain how the quality of quantum randomness differs from classical randomness. We show that, subject to certain physical assumptions, a sequence of bits generated by the measurement of value indefinite observables is guaranteed, in the infinite limit, to be strongly incomputable. We further discuss how this can be used to build a quantum random number generator certified by value indefiniteness. Next, we study the notion of unpredictability, which is central to the concept of (quantum) randomness. In doing so, we propose a formal model of prediction that can be used to asses the predictability of arbitrary physical experiments. We investigate how the quantum features of value indefiniteness and complementarity can be used to certify different levels of unpredictability, and show that the outcome of a single measurement of a value indefinite quantum observable is formally unpredictable. Finally, we study the relation between this notion of unpredictability and the computability-theoretic certification of quantum randomness.

•Nov 13, 2015•0 citations

Stochastic Processes in Quantum Physics

Masao Nagasawa

"Stochastic Processes in Quantum Physics" addresses the question 'What is the mathematics needed for describing the movement of quantum particles', and shows that it is the theory of stochastic (in pa

Birkhäuser Basel eBooks•Jan 1, 2000•75 citations

Causal models and quantum phenomena

Mayra Moreira da Costa

In this doctoral thesis, starting from an analysis of Bertrand Russell's famous critique of the notion of causality, I argue for the outline of a causal model applicable to the indeterministic domain of quantum physics. To support this model, I propose a generalization of Hans Reichenbach's Principle of Common Cause (PCC) and a reformulation of his Mark Transmission Criterion (CTM), along with a reformulation of Wesley Salmon's Interactive Causal Fork (ICF) and his theory of causal processes. Reichenbach's Conjunctive Causal Fork (CCF) will be maintained to explain classical phenomena. The difference between the two kinds of causal fork will be considered one of the keys to understanding the distinction between probability and causality in classical and quantum physics. I also provide an introduction to classical statistical and classical causal modeling and argue for the importance of a more precise definition of the concept of determinism, as well as its non-equivalence with the notion of causality.

•May 30, 2023•0 citations

On the relation between quantum theory and probability

‎Louis Marchildon

The theory of probability and the quantum theory, the one mathematical and the other physical, are related in that each admits a number of very different interpretations. It has been proposed that the conceptual problems of the quantum theory could be, if not resolved, at least mitigated by a proper interpretation of probability. We rather show, through a historical and analytical overview of probability and quantum theory, that if some interpretations of the one and the other go along particularly well, none follows in a unique way.

arXiv:2108.08848•Aug 19, 2021•0 citations
The aim of this paper is to elaborate a notion of explanation which is applicable to stochastic processes such as quantum processes. The model-theoretic approach was adopted in order to delimit appropriate classes, by defining set-theoretical predicates, of different kinds of physical transformations that quantum systems suffer, either of transitions or of transmutations, by interaction or in a spontaneous manner. To explain a singular quantum process consists in showing that it is feasible to model it as an indeterministic process of certain specified kind.
This paper introduces several new classes of mathematical structures that have close connections with physics and with the theory of dynamical systems. The most general of these structures, called indivisible stochastic processes, collectively encompass many important kinds of stochastic processes, including Markov chains and random dynamical systems. This paper then states and proves a new theorem that establishes a precise correspondence between any indivisible stochastic process and a unitarily evolving quantum system. This theorem therefore leads to a new formulation of quantum theory, alongside the Hilbert-space, path-integral, and quasi-probability formulations. The theorem also provides a first-principles explanation for why quantum systems are based on the complex numbers, Hilbert spaces, linear-unitary time evolution, and the Born rule. In addition, the theorem suggests that by selecting a suitable Hilbert space, together with an appropriate choice of unitary evolution, one can simulate any indivisible stochastic process on a quantum computer, thereby potentially opening up an extensive set of novel applications for quantum computing.
The outcomes of quantum measurements are generally considered to be random, but despite the fact that this randomness is an important element in quantum information theory, its nature is not well understood. In this thesis, we study several issues relating to the origin and certification of quantum randomness and unpredictability. One of the key results in forming our understanding of quantum mechanics as an intrinsically indeterministic theory is the Kochen-Specker theorem, which shows the impossibility to consistently assign simultaneous noncontextual definite values to all quantum mechanical observables prior to measurement. However, the theorem, under the assumption that any definite values must be noncontextual, only strictly shows that some observables must be value indefinite. We strengthen this result, proving a stronger variant of the Kochen-Specker theorem showing that, under the same assumption, if a system is prepared in an arbitrary state j i, then every observable A is value indefinite unless j i is an eigenstate of A. The indeterministic nature of quantum measurements does little to explain how the quality of quantum randomness differs from classical randomness. We show that, subject to certain physical assumptions, a sequence of bits generated by the measurement of value indefinite observables is guaranteed, in the infinite limit, to be strongly incomputable. We further discuss how this can be used to build a quantum random number generator certified by value indefiniteness. Next, we study the notion of unpredictability, which is central to the concept of (quantum) randomness. In doing so, we propose a formal model of prediction that can be used to asses the predictability of arbitrary physical experiments. We investigate how the quantum features of value indefiniteness and complementarity can be used to certify different levels of unpredictability, and show that the outcome of a single measurement of a value indefinite quantum observable is formally unpredictable. Finally, we study the relation between this notion of unpredictability and the computability-theoretic certification of quantum randomness.
In this doctoral thesis, starting from an analysis of Bertrand Russell's famous critique of the notion of causality, I argue for the outline of a causal model applicable to the indeterministic domain of quantum physics. To support this model, I propose a generalization of Hans Reichenbach's Principle of Common Cause (PCC) and a reformulation of his Mark Transmission Criterion (CTM), along with a reformulation of Wesley Salmon's Interactive Causal Fork (ICF) and his theory of causal processes. Reichenbach's Conjunctive Causal Fork (CCF) will be maintained to explain classical phenomena. The difference between the two kinds of causal fork will be considered one of the keys to understanding the distinction between probability and causality in classical and quantum physics. I also provide an introduction to classical statistical and classical causal modeling and argue for the importance of a more precise definition of the concept of determinism, as well as its non-equivalence with the notion of causality.
The theory of probability and the quantum theory, the one mathematical and the other physical, are related in that each admits a number of very different interpretations. It has been proposed that the conceptual problems of the quantum theory could be, if not resolved, at least mitigated by a proper interpretation of probability. We rather show, through a historical and analytical overview of probability and quantum theory, that if some interpretations of the one and the other go along particularly well, none follows in a unique way.