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

Physics World

Illustrative bias

Alexandre M. Zagoskin

Published Aug 1, 2017• 0 citations
Publisher

Abstract

In response to Rebecca Holmes' feature "Local realism is dead, long live local realism?" (June pp21–25), which describes the experiments that finally closed the long-standing loopholes in Bell tests, suggesting the end of the road for local realism.
DOI
10.1088/2058-7058/30/8/33

Related papers

Local realism is dead, long live local realism?

Rebecca M. Holmes

Rebecca Holmes describes groundbreaking experiments that finally closed the long-standing loopholes in Bell tests, suggesting the end of the road for local realism. But could local realism yet live on?

Physics World•Jun 1, 2017•11 citations

The Failure to Perform a Loophole-Free Test of Bell?s Inequality Supports Local Realism

Emilio Santos

Foundations of Physics•Nov 1, 2004•45 citations

Bell's theorem and the experiments: Increasing empirical support for local realism?

Emilio Santos

arXiv:quant-ph/0410193•Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics•Jul 29, 2005•53 citations

The "Chaotic Ball" model,local realism and the Bell test loopholes

Caroline H. Thompson, H. Holstein

It has long been known that the "detection loophole", present when detector efficiencies are below a critical figure, could open the way for alternative "local realist" explanations for the violation of Bell tests. It has in recent years become common to assume the loophole can be ignored, regardless of which version of the Bell test is employed. A simple model is presented that illustrates that this may not be justified. Two of the versions -- the standard test of form -2 <= S <= 2 and the currently-popular "visibility" test -- are at grave risk of bias. Statements implying that experimental evidence "refutes local realism" or shows that the quantum world really is "weird" should be reviewed. The detection loophole is on its own unlikely to account for more than one or two test violations, but when taken in conjunction with other loopholes (briefly discussed) it is seen that the experiments refute only a narrow class of "local hidden variable" models, applicable to idealised situations, not to the real world. The full class of local realist models provides straightforward explanations not only for the publicised Bell-test violations but also for some lesser-known "anomalies".

arXiv:quant-ph/0210150•Oct 22, 2002•3 citations

The "Chaotic Ball" model: local realism and the Bell test "detection loophole"

Caroline H. Thompson, H. Holstein

It has long been known that the "detection loophole", present when detector efficiencies are below a critical figure, could open the way for alternative "local realist" explanations for the violation of Bell tests. It has in recent years become common to assume the loophole can be ignored, regardless of which version of the Bell test is employed. A simple model is presented that illustrates that this may not be justified. Two of the versions -- the standard test of form -2 <= S <= 2 and the currently-popular "visibility" test -- are at grave risk of bias. Statements implying that experimental evidence "refutes local realism" or shows that the quantum world really is "weird" should be reviewed. The detection loophole is on its own unlikely to account for more than one or two test violations, but when taken in conjunction with other loopholes (briefly discussed) it is seen that the experiments refute only a narrow class of "local hidden variable" models, applicable to idealised situations, not to the real world. The full class of local realist models provides straightforward explanations not only for the publicised Bell-test violations but also for some lesser-known "anomalies".

•Oct 22, 2002•2 citations

Homodyne detection and optical parametric amplification: a classical approach applied to proposed "loophole-free" Bell tests

Caroline H. Thompson

Recent proposed ``loophole-free'' Bell tests are discussed in the light of classical models for the relevant features of optical parametric amplification and homodyne detection. The Bell tests themselves are uncontroversial: there are no obvious loopholes that might cause bias and hence, if the world does, after all, obey local realism, no violation of a Bell inequality will be observed. Interest centres around the question of whether or not the proposed criterion for ``non-classical'' light is valid. If it is not, then the experiments will fail in their initial concept, since both quantum theorists and local realists will agree that we are seeing a purely classical effect. The Bell test, though, is not the only criterion by which the quantum-mechanical and local realist models can be judged. It is suggested that the quantum-mechanical models given in the proposals will also fail in their detailed predictions. If the experiments are extended by including a range of parameter values and by analysing, in addition to the proposed digitised voltage differences, the raw voltages, the models can be compared in their overall performance and plausibility.

arXiv:quant-ph/0512141•Dec 17, 2005•0 citations
It has long been known that the "detection loophole", present when detector efficiencies are below a critical figure, could open the way for alternative "local realist" explanations for the violation of Bell tests. It has in recent years become common to assume the loophole can be ignored, regardless of which version of the Bell test is employed. A simple model is presented that illustrates that this may not be justified. Two of the versions -- the standard test of form -2 <= S <= 2 and the currently-popular "visibility" test -- are at grave risk of bias. Statements implying that experimental evidence "refutes local realism" or shows that the quantum world really is "weird" should be reviewed. The detection loophole is on its own unlikely to account for more than one or two test violations, but when taken in conjunction with other loopholes (briefly discussed) it is seen that the experiments refute only a narrow class of "local hidden variable" models, applicable to idealised situations, not to the real world. The full class of local realist models provides straightforward explanations not only for the publicised Bell-test violations but also for some lesser-known "anomalies".
It has long been known that the "detection loophole", present when detector efficiencies are below a critical figure, could open the way for alternative "local realist" explanations for the violation of Bell tests. It has in recent years become common to assume the loophole can be ignored, regardless of which version of the Bell test is employed. A simple model is presented that illustrates that this may not be justified. Two of the versions -- the standard test of form -2 <= S <= 2 and the currently-popular "visibility" test -- are at grave risk of bias. Statements implying that experimental evidence "refutes local realism" or shows that the quantum world really is "weird" should be reviewed. The detection loophole is on its own unlikely to account for more than one or two test violations, but when taken in conjunction with other loopholes (briefly discussed) it is seen that the experiments refute only a narrow class of "local hidden variable" models, applicable to idealised situations, not to the real world. The full class of local realist models provides straightforward explanations not only for the publicised Bell-test violations but also for some lesser-known "anomalies".
Recent proposed ``loophole-free'' Bell tests are discussed in the light of classical models for the relevant features of optical parametric amplification and homodyne detection. The Bell tests themselves are uncontroversial: there are no obvious loopholes that might cause bias and hence, if the world does, after all, obey local realism, no violation of a Bell inequality will be observed. Interest centres around the question of whether or not the proposed criterion for ``non-classical'' light is valid. If it is not, then the experiments will fail in their initial concept, since both quantum theorists and local realists will agree that we are seeing a purely classical effect. The Bell test, though, is not the only criterion by which the quantum-mechanical and local realist models can be judged. It is suggested that the quantum-mechanical models given in the proposals will also fail in their detailed predictions. If the experiments are extended by including a range of parameter values and by analysing, in addition to the proposed digitised voltage differences, the raw voltages, the models can be compared in their overall performance and plausibility.