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

Entropy

Indistinguishability and Negative Probabilities

J. Acácio de Barros, Federico Holik

Published Jul 29, 2020• 10 citations
Publisher

Abstract

In this paper, we examined the connection between quantum systems' indistinguishability and signed (or negative) probabilities. We do so by first introducing a measure-theoretic definition of signed probabilities inspired by research in quantum contextuality. We then argue that ontological indistinguishability leads to the no-signaling condition and negative probabilities.

DOI
10.3390/e22080829

Related papers

Indistinguishability and Negative Probabilities

J. Acácio de Barros, Federico Holik

In this paper, we examined the connection between quantum systems' indistinguishability and signed (or negative) probabilities. We do so by first introducing a measure-theoretic definition of signed probabilities inspired by research in quantum contextuality. We then argue that ontological indistinguishability leads to the no-signaling condition and negative probabilities.

arXiv:2007.14543•Jul 29, 2020•0 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.

arXiv:1707.04656•Entropy•Aug 23, 2017•0 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

Indistinguishability and the origins of contextuality in physics

J. Acácio de Barros, Federico Holik, Décio Krause

In this work, we discuss a formal way of dealing with the properties of contextual systems. Our approach is to assume that properties describing the same physical quantity, but belonging to different measurement contexts, are indistinguishable in a strong sense. To construct the formal theoretical structure, we develop a description using quasi-set theory, which is a set-theoretical framework built to describe collections of elements that violate Leibnitz's principle of identity of indiscernibles. This framework allows us to consider a new ontology in order to study the properties of quantum systems. This article is part of the theme issue 'Contextuality and probability in quantum mechanics and beyond'.

arXiv:1906.09041•Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences•Sep 16, 2019•1 citation

Indistinguishability and the origins of contextuality in physics

J. Acácio de Barros, Federico Holik, Décio Krause

In this work, we discuss a formal way of dealing with the properties of contextual systems. Our approach is to assume that properties describing the same physical quantity, but belonging to different measurement contexts, are indistinguishable in a strong sense. To construct the formal theoretical structure, we develop a description using quasi-set theory, which is a settheoretical framework built to describe collections of elements that violate Leibnitz’s principle of identity of indiscernibles. This framework allows us to consider a new ontology in order to study the properties of quantum systems. \nThis article is part of the theme issue ‘Contextuality and probability in quantum mechanics and beyond’.

•Nov 1, 2019•11 citations

On the individuation of physical systems in quantum theory.

Cael L. Hasse

What theoretical structures characterise our notions of what it means for a whole physical system to be the sum of its parts? We explore various aspects of this question, with emphasise on quantum theory, from the following perspective: A physical theory constitutes the definition of a set of propositions with logical relationships between them such that probabilities can be used to judge the merits of the theory, given empirical evidence. The logical relationships between the propositions characterise our semantic notions such as individuation. We distinguish between the ontological and epistemological notions of individuation. We introduce the notion of ontological individuation within the context of ontological models. A subsystem is defined as a proposition that provides necessary and sufficient information for making useful predictions. This definition to some extent generalises the notions of separability and local causality to define systems that may not be local. It highlights the unified motivations for many assumptions in the literature, such as measurement independence, and points to hidden assumptions of causality and mutual exclusivity that occur when defining systems. An epistemic no-signalling criterion gives rise to a tensor product structure for epistemic systems in quantum theory. We utilise a symmetry emergent from this structure to derive a bound on the observability of a large class of operations, dependent on only the purity of the quantum state. In particular, we derive an upper bound on the trace distance between an untransformed state and the state transformed by any trace preserving, unital operation. Our notions of epistemic systems also relate to distinguishability. It is shown that for measurements of any two (_nite outcome) particle quantum numbers on multi-fermion states, the total uncertainty, minimised over all states, is zero. This is because despite indistinguishability characterised as a constraint on the observable algebra, the appropriate correspondence between states of distinguishable and indistinguishable particles is one where the Hilbert space of indistinguishable particles relates to particles with an extra quantum number such that effective distinguishability can emerge. This Hilbert space is larger than the one for distinguishable particles and hence can (does) contain states for which the uncertainty relations for distinguishable particles are no longer valid. We conclude by arguing that in general, epistemic systems are not necessarily distinguishable; They may be only effectively distinguishable. This would imply a theory of indistinguishable modes. Several motivations are presented and the form of the theory suggested. It is hypothesised that such a theory may provide a relativistic quantum theory, alternative to quantum field theory, that satisfies cluster decomposition.

•Jan 1, 2014•1 citation
In this paper, we examined the connection between quantum systems' indistinguishability and signed (or negative) probabilities. We do so by first introducing a measure-theoretic definition of signed probabilities inspired by research in quantum contextuality. We then argue that ontological indistinguishability leads to the no-signaling condition and negative probabilities.
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.
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.
In this work, we discuss a formal way of dealing with the properties of contextual systems. Our approach is to assume that properties describing the same physical quantity, but belonging to different measurement contexts, are indistinguishable in a strong sense. To construct the formal theoretical structure, we develop a description using quasi-set theory, which is a set-theoretical framework built to describe collections of elements that violate Leibnitz's principle of identity of indiscernibles. This framework allows us to consider a new ontology in order to study the properties of quantum systems. This article is part of the theme issue 'Contextuality and probability in quantum mechanics and beyond'.
In this work, we discuss a formal way of dealing with the properties of contextual systems. Our approach is to assume that properties describing the same physical quantity, but belonging to different measurement contexts, are indistinguishable in a strong sense. To construct the formal theoretical structure, we develop a description using quasi-set theory, which is a settheoretical framework built to describe collections of elements that violate Leibnitz’s principle of identity of indiscernibles. This framework allows us to consider a new ontology in order to study the properties of quantum systems. \nThis article is part of the theme issue ‘Contextuality and probability in quantum mechanics and beyond’.
What theoretical structures characterise our notions of what it means for a whole physical system to be the sum of its parts? We explore various aspects of this question, with emphasise on quantum theory, from the following perspective: A physical theory constitutes the definition of a set of propositions with logical relationships between them such that probabilities can be used to judge the merits of the theory, given empirical evidence. The logical relationships between the propositions characterise our semantic notions such as individuation. We distinguish between the ontological and epistemological notions of individuation. We introduce the notion of ontological individuation within the context of ontological models. A subsystem is defined as a proposition that provides necessary and sufficient information for making useful predictions. This definition to some extent generalises the notions of separability and local causality to define systems that may not be local. It highlights the unified motivations for many assumptions in the literature, such as measurement independence, and points to hidden assumptions of causality and mutual exclusivity that occur when defining systems. An epistemic no-signalling criterion gives rise to a tensor product structure for epistemic systems in quantum theory. We utilise a symmetry emergent from this structure to derive a bound on the observability of a large class of operations, dependent on only the purity of the quantum state. In particular, we derive an upper bound on the trace distance between an untransformed state and the state transformed by any trace preserving, unital operation. Our notions of epistemic systems also relate to distinguishability. It is shown that for measurements of any two (_nite outcome) particle quantum numbers on multi-fermion states, the total uncertainty, minimised over all states, is zero. This is because despite indistinguishability characterised as a constraint on the observable algebra, the appropriate correspondence between states of distinguishable and indistinguishable particles is one where the Hilbert space of indistinguishable particles relates to particles with an extra quantum number such that effective distinguishability can emerge. This Hilbert space is larger than the one for distinguishable particles and hence can (does) contain states for which the uncertainty relations for distinguishable particles are no longer valid. We conclude by arguing that in general, epistemic systems are not necessarily distinguishable; They may be only effectively distinguishable. This would imply a theory of indistinguishable modes. Several motivations are presented and the form of the theory suggested. It is hypothesised that such a theory may provide a relativistic quantum theory, alternative to quantum field theory, that satisfies cluster decomposition.