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

Fitch's knowability axioms are incompatible with quantum theory

Patrick Thomas Fraser, Nuriya Nurgalieva, Lídia del Rio

Published Sep 1, 2020• 2 citations
OpenAlex

Abstract

How can we consistently model the knowledge of the natural world provided by physical theories? Philosophers frequently use epistemic logic to model reasoning and knowledge abstractly, and to formally study the ramifications of epistemic assumptions. One famous example is Fitch's paradox, which begins with minimal knowledge axioms and derives the counter-intuitive result that agent knows every true statement. Accounting for knowledge that arises from physical theories complicates matters further. For example, quantum mechanics allows observers to model other agents as quantum systems themselves, and to make predictions about measurements performed on each others' memories. Moreover, complex thought experiments in which agents' memories are modelled as quantum systems show that multi-agent reasoning chains can yield paradoxical results. Here, we bridge the gap between quantum paradoxes and foundational problems in epistemic logic, by relating the assumptions behind the recent Frauchiger-Renner quantum thought experiment and the axioms for knowledge used in Fitch's knowability paradox. Our results indicate that agents' knowledge of quantum systems must violate at least one of the following assumptions: it cannot be distributive over conjunction, have a kind of internal continuity, and yield a constructive interpretation all at once. Indeed, knowledge provided by quantum mechanics apparently contradicts traditional notions of how knowledge behaves; for instance, it may not be possible to universally assign objective truth values to claims about agent knowledge. We discuss the relations of this work to results in quantum contextuality and explore possible modifications to standard epistemic logic that could make it consistent with quantum theory.

Related papers

Inadequacy of Modal Logic in Quantum Settings

Nuriya Nurgalieva, Lídia del Rio

We test the principles of classical modal logic in fully quantum settings. Modal logic models our reasoning in multi-agent problems, and allows us to solve puzzles like the muddy children paradox. The Frauchiger-Renner thought experiment highlighted fundamental problems in applying classical reasoning when quantum agents are involved; we take it as a guiding example to test the axioms of classical modal logic. In doing so, we find a problem in the original formulation of the Frauchiger-Renner theorem: a missing assumption about unitarity of evolution is necessary to derive a contradiction and prove the theorem. Adding this assumption clarifies how different interpretations of quantum theory fit in, i.e., which properties they violate. Finally, we show how most of the axioms of classical modal logic break down in quantum settings, and attempt to generalize them. Namely, we introduce constructions of trust and context, which highlight the importance of an exact structure of trust relations between agents. We propose a challenge to the community: to find conditions for the validity of trust relations, strong enough to exorcise the paradox and weak enough to still recover classical logic.

arXiv:1804.01106•Electronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science•Jan 31, 2019•27 citations

Inadequacy of Modal Logic in Quantum Settings

Nuriya Nurgalieva, Lídia del Rio

We test the principles of classical modal logic in fully quantum settings. Modal logic models our reasoning in multi-agent problems, and allows us to solve puzzles like the muddy children paradox. The Frauchiger-Renner thought experiment highlighted fundamental problems in applying classical reasoning when quantum agents are involved; we take it as a guiding example to test the axioms of classical modal logic. In doing so, we find a problem in the original formulation of the Frauchiger-Renner theorem: a missing assumption about unitarity of evolution is necessary to derive a contradiction and prove the theorem. Adding this assumption clarifies how different interpretations of quantum theory fit in, i.e., which properties they violate. Finally, we show how most of the axioms of classical modal logic break down in quantum settings, and attempt to generalize them. Namely, we introduce constructions of trust and context, which highlight the importance of an exact structure of trust relations between agents. We propose a challenge to the community: to find conditions for the validity of trust relations, strong enough to exorcise the paradox and weak enough to still recover classical logic.

Electronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science•Jan 31, 2019•9 citations

Logic Meets Wigner’s Friend (and their Friends)

Alexandru Baltag, Sonja Smets

Abstract We take a fresh look at Wigner’s Friend thought-experiment and some of its more recent variants and extensions, such as the Frauchiger-Renner (FR) Paradox. We discuss various solutions proposed in the literature, focusing on a few questions: What is the correct epistemic interpretation of the multiplicity of state assignments in these scenarios? Under which conditions can one include classical observers into the quantum state descriptions, in a way that is still compatible with traditional Quantum Mechanics? Under which conditions can one system be admitted as an additional ‘observer’ from the perspective of another background observer? When can the standard axioms of multi-agent Epistemic Logic (that allow “knowledge transfer” between agents) be applied to quantum-physical observers? In the last part of the paper, we propose a new answer to these questions, sketch a particular formal implementation of this answer, and apply it to obtain a principled solution to Wigner Friend-type paradoxes.

arXiv:2307.01713•International Journal of Theoretical Physics•Apr 23, 2024•0 citations

Toys can’t play: physical agents in Spekkens’ theory

Ladina Hausmann, Nuriya Nurgalieva, Lídia del Rio

Abstract Information is physical(Landauer 1961IBM J. Res. Dev.5183–91), and for a physical theory to be universal, it should model observers as physical systems, with concrete memories where they store the information acquired through experiments and reasoning. Here we address these issues in Spekkens’ toy theory (Spekkens 2005Phys. Rev.A71052108), a non-contextual epistemically restricted model that partially mimics the behaviour of quantum mechanics. We propose a way to model physical implementations of agents, memories, measurements, conditional actions and information processing. We find that the actions of toy agents are severely limited: although there are non-orthogonal states in the theory, there is no way for physical agents to consciously prepare them. Their memories are also constrained: agents cannot forget in which of two arbitrary states a system is. Finally, we formalize the process of making inferences about other agents’ experiments and model multi-agent experiments like Wigner’s friend. Unlike quantum theory (Nurgalieva and del Rio Lidia 2019Electron. Proc. Theor. Comput. Sci.287267–97; Fraseret al2020 Fitch’s knowability axioms are incompatible with quantum theory arXiv: 2009.00321 ; Frauchiger and Renner 2018Nat. Commun.93711; Nurgalieva and Renner 2021Contemp. Phys.611–24; Brukner 2018Entropy20350) or box world (Vilasiniet al2019New J. Phys.21113028), in toy theory there are no inconsistencies when physical agents reason about each other’s knowledge.

arXiv:2207.07445•New Journal of Physics•Jan 17, 2023•2 citations

Multi-agent paradoxes beyond quantum theory

V. Vilasini, Nuriya Nurgalieva, Lídia del Rio

Which theories lead to a contradiction between simple reasoning principles and modelling observers’ memories as physical systems? Frauchiger and Renner have shown that this is the case for quantum theory (Frauchiger and Renner 2018 Nat. Commun. 9 3711). Here we generalize the conditions of the Frauchiger–Renner result so that they can be applied to arbitrary physical theories, and in particular to those expressed as generalized probabilistic theories (GPTs) (Hardy 2001 arXiv: quant-ph/0101012 ; Barrett 2007 Phys. Rev. A 75 032304). We then apply them to a particular GPT, box world, and find a deterministic contradiction in the case where agents may share a PR box (Popescu and Rohrlich 1994 Found. Phys. 24 379–85), which is stronger than the quantum paradox, in that it does not rely on post-selection. Obtaining an inconsistency for the framework of GPTs broadens the landscape of theories which are affected by the application of classical rules of reasoning to physical agents. In addition, we model how observers’ memories may evolve in box world, in a way consistent with Barrett’s criteria for allowed operations (Barrett 2007 Phys. Rev. A 75 032304; Gross et al 2010 Phys. Rev. Lett. 104 080402). Ordinary readers, forgive my paradoxes: one must make them when one reflects; and whatever you may say, I prefer being a man with paradoxes than a man with prejudices. Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Emile or On Education

arXiv:1904.06247•New Journal of Physics•Oct 21, 2019•17 citations

Multi-agent paradoxes beyond quantum theory

V. Vilasini, Nuriya Nurgalieva, Lídia del Rio

Which theories lead to a contradiction between simple reasoning principles and modelling observers' memories as physical systems? Frauchiger and Renner have shown that this is the case for quantum theory (Frauchiger and Renner 2018 Nat. Commun. 9 3711). Here we generalize the conditions of the Frauchiger–Renner result so that they can be applied to arbitrary physical theories, and in particular to those expressed as generalized probabilistic theories (GPTs) (Hardy 2001 arXiv:quant-ph/0101012; Barrett 2007 Phys. Rev. A 75 032304). We then apply them to a particular GPT, box world, and find a deterministic contradiction in the case where agents may share a PR box (Popescu and Rohrlich 1994 Found. Phys. 24 379–85), which is stronger than the quantum paradox, in that it does not rely on post-selection. Obtaining an inconsistency for the framework of GPTs broadens the landscape of theories which are affected by the application of classical rules of reasoning to physical agents. In addition, we model how observers' memories may evolve in box world, in a way consistent with Barrett's criteria for allowed operations (Barrett 2007 Phys. Rev. A 75 032304; Gross et al 2010 Phys. Rev. Lett. 104 080402).

•Nov 13, 2019•4 citations
How can we consistently model the knowledge of the natural world provided by physical theories? Philosophers frequently use epistemic logic to model reasoning and knowledge abstractly, and to formally study the ramifications of epistemic assumptions. One famous example is Fitch's paradox, which begins with minimal knowledge axioms and derives the counter-intuitive result that agent knows every true statement. Accounting for knowledge that arises from physical theories complicates matters further. For example, quantum mechanics allows observers to model other agents as quantum systems themselves, and to make predictions about measurements performed on each others' memories. Moreover, complex thought experiments in which agents' memories are modelled as quantum systems show that multi-agent reasoning chains can yield paradoxical results.
Here, we bridge the gap between quantum paradoxes and foundational problems in epistemic logic, by relating the assumptions behind the recent Frauchiger-Renner quantum thought experiment and the axioms for knowledge used in Fitch's knowability paradox. Our results indicate that agents' knowledge of quantum systems must violate at least one of the following assumptions: it cannot be distributive over conjunction, have a kind of internal continuity, and yield a constructive interpretation all at once. Indeed, knowledge provided by quantum mechanics apparently contradicts traditional notions of how knowledge behaves; for instance, it may not be possible to universally assign objective truth values to claims about agent knowledge. We discuss the relations of this work to results in quantum contextuality and explore possible modifications to standard epistemic logic that could make it consistent with quantum theory.
We test the principles of classical modal logic in fully quantum settings. Modal logic models our reasoning in multi-agent problems, and allows us to solve puzzles like the muddy children paradox. The Frauchiger-Renner thought experiment highlighted fundamental problems in applying classical reasoning when quantum agents are involved; we take it as a guiding example to test the axioms of classical modal logic. In doing so, we find a problem in the original formulation of the Frauchiger-Renner theorem: a missing assumption about unitarity of evolution is necessary to derive a contradiction and prove the theorem. Adding this assumption clarifies how different interpretations of quantum theory fit in, i.e., which properties they violate. Finally, we show how most of the axioms of classical modal logic break down in quantum settings, and attempt to generalize them. Namely, we introduce constructions of trust and context, which highlight the importance of an exact structure of trust relations between agents. We propose a challenge to the community: to find conditions for the validity of trust relations, strong enough to exorcise the paradox and weak enough to still recover classical logic.
We test the principles of classical modal logic in fully quantum settings. Modal logic models our reasoning in multi-agent problems, and allows us to solve puzzles like the muddy children paradox. The Frauchiger-Renner thought experiment highlighted fundamental problems in applying classical reasoning when quantum agents are involved; we take it as a guiding example to test the axioms of classical modal logic. In doing so, we find a problem in the original formulation of the Frauchiger-Renner theorem: a missing assumption about unitarity of evolution is necessary to derive a contradiction and prove the theorem. Adding this assumption clarifies how different interpretations of quantum theory fit in, i.e., which properties they violate. Finally, we show how most of the axioms of classical modal logic break down in quantum settings, and attempt to generalize them. Namely, we introduce constructions of trust and context, which highlight the importance of an exact structure of trust relations between agents. We propose a challenge to the community: to find conditions for the validity of trust relations, strong enough to exorcise the paradox and weak enough to still recover classical logic.
Abstract We take a fresh look at Wigner’s Friend thought-experiment and some of its more recent variants and extensions, such as the Frauchiger-Renner (FR) Paradox. We discuss various solutions proposed in the literature, focusing on a few questions: What is the correct epistemic interpretation of the multiplicity of state assignments in these scenarios? Under which conditions can one include classical observers into the quantum state descriptions, in a way that is still compatible with traditional Quantum Mechanics? Under which conditions can one system be admitted as an additional ‘observer’ from the perspective of another background observer? When can the standard axioms of multi-agent Epistemic Logic (that allow “knowledge transfer” between agents) be applied to quantum-physical observers? In the last part of the paper, we propose a new answer to these questions, sketch a particular formal implementation of this answer, and apply it to obtain a principled solution to Wigner Friend-type paradoxes.
Abstract Information is physical(Landauer 1961IBM J. Res. Dev.5183–91), and for a physical theory to be universal, it should model observers as physical systems, with concrete memories where they store the information acquired through experiments and reasoning. Here we address these issues in Spekkens’ toy theory (Spekkens 2005Phys. Rev.A71052108), a non-contextual epistemically restricted model that partially mimics the behaviour of quantum mechanics. We propose a way to model physical implementations of agents, memories, measurements, conditional actions and information processing. We find that the actions of toy agents are severely limited: although there are non-orthogonal states in the theory, there is no way for physical agents to consciously prepare them. Their memories are also constrained: agents cannot forget in which of two arbitrary states a system is. Finally, we formalize the process of making inferences about other agents’ experiments and model multi-agent experiments like Wigner’s friend. Unlike quantum theory (Nurgalieva and del Rio Lidia 2019Electron. Proc. Theor. Comput. Sci.287267–97; Fraseret al2020 Fitch’s knowability axioms are incompatible with quantum theory arXiv: 2009.00321 ; Frauchiger and Renner 2018Nat. Commun.93711; Nurgalieva and Renner 2021Contemp. Phys.611–24; Brukner 2018Entropy20350) or box world (Vilasiniet al2019New J. Phys.21113028), in toy theory there are no inconsistencies when physical agents reason about each other’s knowledge.
Which theories lead to a contradiction between simple reasoning principles and modelling observers’ memories as physical systems? Frauchiger and Renner have shown that this is the case for quantum theory (Frauchiger and Renner 2018 Nat. Commun. 9 3711). Here we generalize the conditions of the Frauchiger–Renner result so that they can be applied to arbitrary physical theories, and in particular to those expressed as generalized probabilistic theories (GPTs) (Hardy 2001 arXiv: quant-ph/0101012 ; Barrett 2007 Phys. Rev. A 75 032304). We then apply them to a particular GPT, box world, and find a deterministic contradiction in the case where agents may share a PR box (Popescu and Rohrlich 1994 Found. Phys. 24 379–85), which is stronger than the quantum paradox, in that it does not rely on post-selection. Obtaining an inconsistency for the framework of GPTs broadens the landscape of theories which are affected by the application of classical rules of reasoning to physical agents. In addition, we model how observers’ memories may evolve in box world, in a way consistent with Barrett’s criteria for allowed operations (Barrett 2007 Phys. Rev. A 75 032304; Gross et al 2010 Phys. Rev. Lett. 104 080402). Ordinary readers, forgive my paradoxes: one must make them when one reflects; and whatever you may say, I prefer being a man with paradoxes than a man with prejudices. Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Emile or On Education
Which theories lead to a contradiction between simple reasoning principles and modelling observers' memories as physical systems? Frauchiger and Renner have shown that this is the case for quantum theory (Frauchiger and Renner 2018 Nat. Commun. 9 3711). Here we generalize the conditions of the Frauchiger–Renner result so that they can be applied to arbitrary physical theories, and in particular to those expressed as generalized probabilistic theories (GPTs) (Hardy 2001 arXiv:quant-ph/0101012; Barrett 2007 Phys. Rev. A 75 032304). We then apply them to a particular GPT, box world, and find a deterministic contradiction in the case where agents may share a PR box (Popescu and Rohrlich 1994 Found. Phys. 24 379–85), which is stronger than the quantum paradox, in that it does not rely on post-selection. Obtaining an inconsistency for the framework of GPTs broadens the landscape of theories which are affected by the application of classical rules of reasoning to physical agents. In addition, we model how observers' memories may evolve in box world, in a way consistent with Barrett's criteria for allowed operations (Barrett 2007 Phys. Rev. A 75 032304; Gross et al 2010 Phys. Rev. Lett. 104 080402).