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

Advanced series on mathematical psychology

Reality, Contextuality, and Probability in Quantum Theory and Beyond

Arkady Plotnitsky

Published Nov 24, 2015• 1 citation
Publisher
DOI
10.1142/9789814730617_0006

Related papers

Contextuality and probability in quantum mechanics and beyond: a preface

Ehtibar N. Dzhafarov

Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences•Sep 16, 2019•8 citations

Geometric and Exotic Contextuality in Quantum Reality

Michel R. P. Planat

The frontiers collection•Jan 1, 2022•0 citations

Spooky predictions at a distance: reality, complementarity and contextuality in quantum theory

Arkady Plotnitsky

This article brings together reality, complementarity and contextuality in quantum theory. It clarifies Bohr's concept of complementarity by considering the non-realist epistemology and the corresponding interpretations of quantum mechanics, based in the concept of 'reality without realism'. Finally, as its main novel contribution, it establishes the connections between complementarity and contextuality. This article is part of the theme issue 'Contextuality and probability in quantum mechanics and beyond'.

Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences•Sep 16, 2019•17 citations

An Epistemic Interpretation of Quantum Probability via Contextuality

Claudio Garola

arXiv:1806.09125•Foundations of Science•Jul 23, 2018•7 citations

Updating the Born rule

Sally Shrapnel, Fabio Costa, Gerard J Milburn

Despite the tremendous empirical success of quantum theory there is still widespread disagreement about what it can tell us about the nature of the world. A central question is whether the theory is about our knowledge of reality, or a direct statement about reality itself. Current interpretations of quantum theory, regardless of their stance on this question, regard the Born rule as fundamental and add an independent state update (or 'collapse') rule to describe how quantum states change upon measurement. In this paper we present an alternative perspective and derive a unified probability rule that subsumes both the Born rule and the collapse rule. We show that this more fundamental probability rule can provide a rigorous foundation for informational, or 'knowledge-based', interpretations of quantum theory. Our result requires an assumption of instrument non-contextuality, a key notion that generalises previous approaches to non-contextuality. Therefore, the framework also permits one to consider non-contextuality in scenarios with arbitrary causal structure.

arXiv:1702.01845•New Journal of Physics•Apr 13, 2018•56 citations

Contextuality and Indistinguishability

J. Acácio de Barros, Federico Holik, Décio Krause

It is well known that in quantum mechanics we cannot always define consistently properties that are context independent.Many approaches exist to describe contextual properties, such as Contextuality by Default (CbD), sheaf theory, topos theory, and non-standard or signed probabilities.In this paper, we propose a treatment of contextual properties that is specific to quantum mechanics, as it relies on the relationship between contextuality and indistinguishability.In particular, we propose that if we assume the ontological thesis that quantum particles or properties can be indistinguishable yet different, no contradiction arising from a Kochen-Specker-type argument appears: when we repeat an experiment, we are in reality performing an experiment measuring a property that is indistinguishable from the first, but not the same.We will discuss how the consequences of this move may help us understand quantum contextuality.

•Jan 1, 2017•25 citations
This article brings together reality, complementarity and contextuality in quantum theory. It clarifies Bohr's concept of complementarity by considering the non-realist epistemology and the corresponding interpretations of quantum mechanics, based in the concept of 'reality without realism'. Finally, as its main novel contribution, it establishes the connections between complementarity and contextuality. This article is part of the theme issue 'Contextuality and probability in quantum mechanics and beyond'.
Despite the tremendous empirical success of quantum theory there is still widespread disagreement about what it can tell us about the nature of the world. A central question is whether the theory is about our knowledge of reality, or a direct statement about reality itself. Current interpretations of quantum theory, regardless of their stance on this question, regard the Born rule as fundamental and add an independent state update (or 'collapse') rule to describe how quantum states change upon measurement. In this paper we present an alternative perspective and derive a unified probability rule that subsumes both the Born rule and the collapse rule. We show that this more fundamental probability rule can provide a rigorous foundation for informational, or 'knowledge-based', interpretations of quantum theory. Our result requires an assumption of instrument non-contextuality, a key notion that generalises previous approaches to non-contextuality. Therefore, the framework also permits one to consider non-contextuality in scenarios with arbitrary causal structure.
It is well known that in quantum mechanics we cannot always define consistently properties that are context independent.Many approaches exist to describe contextual properties, such as Contextuality by Default (CbD), sheaf theory, topos theory, and non-standard or signed probabilities.In this paper, we propose a treatment of contextual properties that is specific to quantum mechanics, as it relies on the relationship between contextuality and indistinguishability.In particular, we propose that if we assume the ontological thesis that quantum particles or properties can be indistinguishable yet different, no contradiction arising from a Kochen-Specker-type argument appears: when we repeat an experiment, we are in reality performing an experiment measuring a property that is indistinguishable from the first, but not the same.We will discuss how the consequences of this move may help us understand quantum contextuality.