Contextuality of quantum and classical systems is examined. Differing definitions of events result in a range of violations of non-contextual hidden-variable models. This highlights classical-correlation resources and the quantum-classical divide.
Contextuality is thought of as an intrinsic signature of non-classicality, and a crucial resource for achieving unique advantages of quantum information processing. However, recently there have been debates on whether classical fields may also demonstrate contextuality. Here we experimentally test a fundamental non-contextual (NC) inequality with both quantum and classical optical systems. In particular, we apply identical measurements on both systems, therefore provide a unified comparison between them. The results show that although the quantum system provides a clear violation of the NC inequality, the violations with the classical system strongly depend on the specific definition of the measurement event which is equivalent to filtering the non-classical component of the input state. Our results link the contextual correlations to non-classical quasi-distributions of optical states, and elucidate the resources required for classical systems to achieve the quantum bound.
Contextuality is considered as an intrinsic signature of nonclassicality and a crucial resource for achieving unique advantages of quantum information processing. However, recently, there have been debates on whether classical fields may also demonstrate contextuality. Here, we experimentally configure a contextuality test for optical fields, adopting various definitions of measurement events, and analyze how the definitions affect the emergence of nonclassical correlations. The heralded single-photon state, which is a typical nonclassical light field, manifests contextuality in our setup; whereas contextuality for classical coherent fields strongly depends on the specific definition of measurement events, which is equivalent to filtering the nonclassical component of the input state. Our results highlight the importance of the definition of measurement events to demonstrate contextuality, and they link the contextual correlations to nonclassicality defined by quasiprobabilities in phase space.
Contextuality is a feature of quantum correlations. It is crucial from a foundational perspective as a non-classical phenomenon, and from an applied perspective as a resource for quantum advantage. It is commonly defined in terms of hidden variables, for which it forces a contradiction with the assumptions of parameter-independence and determinism. The former can be justified by the empirical property of non-signalling or non-disturbance, and the latter by the empirical property of measurement sharpness. However, in realistic experiments neither empirical property holds exactly, which leads to possible objections to contextuality as a form of non-classicality, and potential vulnerabilities for supposed quantum advantages. We introduce measures to quantify both properties, and introduce quantified relaxations of the corresponding assumptions. We prove the continuity of a known measure of contextuality, the contextual fraction, which ensures its robustness to noise. We then bound the extent to which these relaxations can account for contextuality, via corrections terms to the contextual fraction (or to any non-contextuality inequality), culminating in a notion of genuine contextuality, which is robust to experimental imperfections. We then show that our result is general enough to apply or relate to a variety of established results and experimental set-ups. This article is part of the theme issue 'Quantum contextuality, causality and freedom of choice'.
The view that non-classical phenomena are witnessed when noncontextuality inequalities are violated by quantum correlations has become widespread over the last decades, and many authors describe contextuality as a counter-intuitive and non-classical feature of quantum systems. In this paper we show that a classical input/output device generating contextual data (i.e., data violating noncontextuality inequalities) can easily be found if the following conditions are satisfied: (1) We only have access to a specific collection of epistemic measurements, namely measurements which do not necessarily reveal properties possessed by the system to the agent, and (2) not all these measurements can be jointly performed. The conclusion we draw from this example is twofold. Firstly, regarding model-independent contextuality, it suggests that, unlike Bell inequalities (whose violation allegedly implies non-locality), noncontextuality inequalities have no phenomenological significance per se: we cannot treat experiments as black-boxes and draw conclusions about the phenomenological status of their underlying structure based only on contextuality analysis of the data they generate. Secondly, regarding quantum theory, it indicates that one who accepts, as many interpretations suggest, that quantum theory satisfies both these conditions should not take for granted that quantum contextuality is a signature of non-classicality.
The circumstances of measurement have more direct significance in quantum than in classical physics, where they can be neglected for well-performed measurements. In quantum mechanics, the dispositions of the measuring apparatus-plus-environment of the system measured for a property are a non-trivial part of its formalization as the quantum observable. A straightforward formalization of context, via equivalence classes of measurements corresponding to sets of sharp target observables, was recently given for sharp quantum observables. Here, we show that quantum contextuality, the dependence of measurement outcomes on circumstances external to the measured quantum system, can be manifested not only as the strict exclusivity of different measurements of sharp observables or valuations but via quantitative differences in the property statistics across simultaneous measurements of generalized quantum observables, by formalizing quantum context via coexistent generalized observables rather than only its subset of compatible sharp observables. Here, the question of whether such quantum contextuality follows from basic quantum principles is then addressed, and it is shown that the Principle of Indeterminacy is sufficient for at least one form of non-trivial contextuality. Contextuality is thus seen to be a natural feature of quantum mechanics rather than something arising only from the consideration of impossible measurements, abstract philosophical issues, hidden-variables theories, or other alternative, classical models of quantum behavior.
Recently a new impulse has been given to the experimental investigation of contextuality. In this paper we show that for a widely used definition of contextuality there can be no decisive experiment on the existence of contextuality. To this end, we give a clear presentation of the hidden variable models due to Meyer, Kent and Clifton (MKC), which would supposedly nullify the Kochen-Specker Theorem. Although we disagree with this last statement, the models play a significant role in the discussion on the meaning of contextuality. In fact, we introduce a specific MKC-model of which we show that it is non-contextual and completely in agreement with quantum mechanical predictions. We also investigate the possibility of other definitions of non-contextuality --with an emphasis on operational definitions-- and argue that any useful definition relies on the specification of a theoretical framework. It is therefore concluded that no experimental test can yield any conclusions about contextuality on a metaphysical level.