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

Bulletin of the American Physical Society

Quantum-Bayesian Coherence

Christopher A. Fuchs

Published Mar 18, 2010• 0 citations
OpenAlex

Abstract

In a quantum-Bayesian take on quantum mechanics, the Born Rule cannot be interpreted as a rule for setting measurement-outcome probabilities from an objective quantum state. But if not, what is the role of the rule? In this paper, we argue that it should be seen as an empirical addition to Bayesian reasoning itself. Particularly, we show how to view the Born Rule as a normative rule in addition to usual Dutch-book coherence. It is a rule that takes into account how one should assign probabilities to the consequences of various intended measurements on a physical system, but explicitly in terms of prior probabilities for and conditional probabilities consequent upon the imagined outcomes of a special counterfactual reference measurement. This interpretation is seen particularly clearly by representing quantum states in terms of probabilities for the outcomes of a fixed, fiducial symmetric informationally complete (SIC) measurement. We further explore the extent to which the general form of the new normative rule implies the

Related papers

Quantum-Bayesian Coherence

Christopher A. Fuchs, Ruediger Schack

In a quantum-Bayesian take on quantum mechanics, the Born Rule cannot be interpreted as a rule for setting measurement-outcome probabilities from an objective quantum state. But if not, what is the role of the rule? In this paper, we argue that it should be seen as an empirical addition to Bayesian reasoning itself. Particularly, we show how to view the Born Rule as a normative rule in addition to usual Dutch-book coherence. It is a rule that takes into account how one should assign probabilities to the consequences of various intended measurements on a physical system, but explicitly in terms of prior probabilities for and conditional probabilities consequent upon the imagined outcomes of a special counterfactual reference measurement. This interpretation is seen particularly clearly by representing quantum states in terms of probabilities for the outcomes of a fixed, fiducial symmetric informationally complete (SIC) measurement. We further explore the extent to which the general form of the new normative rule implies the full state-space structure of quantum mechanics. It seems to get quite far.

arXiv:0906.2187•Jun 11, 2009•28 citations

Quantum-Bayesian coherence

Christopher A. Fuchs, Rüdiger Schack

In the quantum-Bayesian interpretation of quantum theory (or QBism), the Born rule cannot be interpreted as a rule for setting measurement-outcome probabilities from an objective quantum state. But if not, what is the role of the rule? In this paper, the argument is given that it should be seen as an empirical addition to Bayesian reasoning itself. Particularly, it is shown how to view the Born rule as a normative rule in addition to usual Dutch-book coherence. It is a rule that takes into account how one should assign probabilities to the consequences of various intended measurements on a physical system, but explicitly in terms of prior probabilities for and conditional probabilities consequent upon the imagined outcomes of a special counterfactual reference measurement. This interpretation is exemplified by representing quantum states in terms of probabilities for the outcomes of a fixed, fiducial symmetric informationally complete measurement. The extent to which the general form of the new normative rule implies the full state-space structure of quantum mechanics is explored.

arXiv:1301.3274•Reviews of Modern Physics•Dec 27, 2013•320 citations

From Quantum Interference to Bayesian Coherence and Back Round Again

Christopher A. Fuchs, Rüdiger Schack, Luigi Accardi +6 more

In the quantum Bayesian understanding of quantum states being developed by the authors and collaborators, the Born Rule cannot be interpreted as a rule for setting measurement‐outcome probabilities from an objective quantum state. But if not, what is the role of the rule? In this paper, we argue that it should be seen as an empirical addition to Bayesian reasoning itself. Particularly, we show how to view the Born Rule as a normative rule beyond Dutch‐book coherence, which takes into account how one should assign probabilities to the consequences of various intended interactions with a physical system, but explicitly in terms of prior probabilities for and conditional probabilities consequent upon the imagined outcomes of a special counterfactual reference interaction. This interpretation is seen particularly clearly by representing quantum states in terms of probabilities for the outcomes of a fixed, fiducial symmetric informationally complete (SIC) measurement. We further explore the extent to which the general form of the new normative rule implies the full state space structure of quantum mechanics.

AIP conference proceedings•Jan 1, 2009•5 citations

A Quantum-Bayesian Route to Quantum-State Space

Christopher A. Fuchs, Rüdiger Schack

In the quantum-Bayesian approach to quantum foundations, a quantum state is viewed as an expression of an agent's personalist Bayesian degrees of belief, or probabilities, concerning the results of measurements. These probabilities obey the usual probability rules as required by Dutch-book coherence, but quantum mechanics imposes additional constraints upon them. In this paper, we explore the question of deriving the structure of quantum-state space from a set of assumptions in the spirit of quantum Bayesianism. The starting point is the representation of quantum states induced by a symmetric informationally complete measurement or SIC. In this representation, the Born rule takes the form of a particularly simple modification of the law of total probability. We show how to derive key features of quantum-state space from (i) the requirement that the Born rule arises as a simple modification of the law of total probability and (ii) a limited number of additional assumptions of a strong Bayesian flavor.

•Jan 1, 2011•107 citations

Born's rule as a quantum extension of Bayesian coherence

John B. DeBrota, Christopher A. Fuchs, Jacques Pienaar +1 more

The authors use Bayesian probability theory to extend the ``QBism'' interpretation of quantum mechanics by showing how one may derive Born's rule from a set of assumptions where the state and measurement are described relative to a ``reference measurement.'' The result gives insight into Born's rule, even if one does not support the subjective interpretation of quantum mechanics underlying QBism.

arXiv:2012.14397•Physical Review A•Aug 13, 2021•19 citations

The Born rule and logical inference in quantum mechanics

Tsubasa Ichikawa

Abstract Logical inference leads to one of the major interpretations of probability theory called logical interpretation, in which the probability is seen as a measure of the plausibility of a logical statement under incomplete information. Assuming that our usual inference procedure is working rationally for every set of logical propositions represented in terms of commuting projectors on a given Hilbert space, we extend the logical interpretation to quantum mechanics and derive the Born rule. Our result implies that, from epistemological viewpoints, we can regard quantum mechanics as a natural extension of classical probability theory.

arXiv:1804.10067•Progress of Theoretical and Experimental Physics•Oct 19, 2021•3 citations
In a quantum-Bayesian take on quantum mechanics, the Born Rule cannot be interpreted as a rule for setting measurement-outcome probabilities from an objective quantum state. But if not, what is the role of the rule? In this paper, we argue that it should be seen as an empirical addition to Bayesian reasoning itself. Particularly, we show how to view the Born Rule as a normative rule in addition to usual Dutch-book coherence. It is a rule that takes into account how one should assign probabilities to the consequences of various intended measurements on a physical system, but explicitly in terms of prior probabilities for and conditional probabilities consequent upon the imagined outcomes of a special counterfactual reference measurement. This interpretation is seen particularly clearly by representing quantum states in terms of probabilities for the outcomes of a fixed, fiducial symmetric informationally complete (SIC) measurement. We further explore the extent to which the general form of the new normative rule implies the
In a quantum-Bayesian take on quantum mechanics, the Born Rule cannot be interpreted as a rule for setting measurement-outcome probabilities from an objective quantum state. But if not, what is the role of the rule? In this paper, we argue that it should be seen as an empirical addition to Bayesian reasoning itself. Particularly, we show how to view the Born Rule as a normative rule in addition to usual Dutch-book coherence. It is a rule that takes into account how one should assign probabilities to the consequences of various intended measurements on a physical system, but explicitly in terms of prior probabilities for and conditional probabilities consequent upon the imagined outcomes of a special counterfactual reference measurement. This interpretation is seen particularly clearly by representing quantum states in terms of probabilities for the outcomes of a fixed, fiducial symmetric informationally complete (SIC) measurement. We further explore the extent to which the general form of the new normative rule implies the full state-space structure of quantum mechanics. It seems to get quite far.
In the quantum-Bayesian interpretation of quantum theory (or QBism), the Born rule cannot be interpreted as a rule for setting measurement-outcome probabilities from an objective quantum state. But if not, what is the role of the rule? In this paper, the argument is given that it should be seen as an empirical addition to Bayesian reasoning itself. Particularly, it is shown how to view the Born rule as a normative rule in addition to usual Dutch-book coherence. It is a rule that takes into account how one should assign probabilities to the consequences of various intended measurements on a physical system, but explicitly in terms of prior probabilities for and conditional probabilities consequent upon the imagined outcomes of a special counterfactual reference measurement. This interpretation is exemplified by representing quantum states in terms of probabilities for the outcomes of a fixed, fiducial symmetric informationally complete measurement. The extent to which the general form of the new normative rule implies the full state-space structure of quantum mechanics is explored.
In the quantum Bayesian understanding of quantum states being developed by the authors and collaborators, the Born Rule cannot be interpreted as a rule for setting measurement‐outcome probabilities from an objective quantum state. But if not, what is the role of the rule? In this paper, we argue that it should be seen as an empirical addition to Bayesian reasoning itself. Particularly, we show how to view the Born Rule as a normative rule beyond Dutch‐book coherence, which takes into account how one should assign probabilities to the consequences of various intended interactions with a physical system, but explicitly in terms of prior probabilities for and conditional probabilities consequent upon the imagined outcomes of a special counterfactual reference interaction. This interpretation is seen particularly clearly by representing quantum states in terms of probabilities for the outcomes of a fixed, fiducial symmetric informationally complete (SIC) measurement. We further explore the extent to which the general form of the new normative rule implies the full state space structure of quantum mechanics.
In the quantum-Bayesian approach to quantum foundations, a quantum state is viewed as an expression of an agent's personalist Bayesian degrees of belief, or probabilities, concerning the results of measurements. These probabilities obey the usual probability rules as required by Dutch-book coherence, but quantum mechanics imposes additional constraints upon them. In this paper, we explore the question of deriving the structure of quantum-state space from a set of assumptions in the spirit of quantum Bayesianism. The starting point is the representation of quantum states induced by a symmetric informationally complete measurement or SIC. In this representation, the Born rule takes the form of a particularly simple modification of the law of total probability. We show how to derive key features of quantum-state space from (i) the requirement that the Born rule arises as a simple modification of the law of total probability and (ii) a limited number of additional assumptions of a strong Bayesian flavor.
Abstract Logical inference leads to one of the major interpretations of probability theory called logical interpretation, in which the probability is seen as a measure of the plausibility of a logical statement under incomplete information. Assuming that our usual inference procedure is working rationally for every set of logical propositions represented in terms of commuting projectors on a given Hilbert space, we extend the logical interpretation to quantum mechanics and derive the Born rule. Our result implies that, from epistemological viewpoints, we can regard quantum mechanics as a natural extension of classical probability theory.