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

Journal of Physics A Mathematical and Theoretical

Context-independent mapping and free choice are equivalent: a general proof

Ehtibar N. Dzhafarov

Published Jun 29, 2022• 4 citations
Publisher

Abstract

Abstract Free choice (or statistical independence) assumption in a hidden variable model (HVM) means that the settings chosen by experimenters do not depend on the values of the hidden variable. The assumption of context-independent (CI) mapping in an HVM means that the results of a measurement do not depend on settings for other measurements. If the measurements are spacelike separated, this assumption is known as local causality. Both free choice and CI mapping assumptions are considered necessary for derivation of the Bell-type criteria of contextuality/nonlocality. It is known, however, for a variety of special cases, that the two assumptions are not logically independent. We show here, in complete generality, for any system of random variables with or without disturbance/signaling, that an HVM that postulates CI mapping is equivalent to an HVM that postulates free choice. If one denies the possibility that a given empirical scenario can be described by an HVM in which measurements depend on other measurements’ settings, free choice violations should be denied too, and vice versa.

DOI
10.1088/1751-8121/ac7d20

Related papers

Context-independent mapping and free choice are equivalent

Ehtibar N. Dzhafarov

Free choice (or statistical independence) assumption in a hidden variable model (HVM) means that the settings chosen by experimenters do not depend on the values of the hidden variable. The assumption of context-independent (CI) mapping in an HVM means that the results of a measurement do not depend on settings for other measurements. If the measurements are spacelike separated, this assumption is known as local causality. Both free choice and CI mapping assumptions are considered necessary for derivation of the Bell-type criteria of contextuality/nonlocality. It is known, however, for a variety of special cases, that the two assumptions are not logically independent. We show here, in complete generality, for any system of random variables with or without disturbance/signaling, that an HVM that postulates CI mapping is equivalent to an HVM that postulates free choice. If one denies the possibility that a given empirical scenario can be described by an HVM in which measurements depend on other measurements' settings, free choice violations should be denied too, and vice versa. KEYWORDS: Contextuality; context-independent mapping; free choice; local causality; nonlocality.

arXiv:2110.15910•Oct 29, 2021•1 citation

Hidden variables, free choice, context-independence and all that

Ehtibar N. Dzhafarov

This paper provides a systematic account of the hidden variable models (HVMs) formulated to describe systems of random variables with mutually exclusive contexts. Any such system can be described either by a model with free choice but generally context-dependent mapping of the hidden variables into observable ones, or by a model with context-independent mapping but generally compromised free choice. These two types of HVMs are equivalent, one can always be translated into another. They are also unfalsifiable, applicable to all possible systems. These facts, the equivalence and unfalsifiability, imply that freedom of choice and context-independent mapping are no assumptions at all, and they tell us nothing about freedom of choice or physical influences exerted by contexts as these notions would be understood in science and philosophy. The conjunction of these two notions, however, defines a falsifiable HVM that describes non-contextuality when applied to systems with no disturbance or to consistifications of arbitrary systems. This HVM is most adequately captured by the term 'context-irrelevance', meaning that no distribution in the model changes with context. This article is part of the theme issue 'Quantum contextuality, causality and freedom of choice'.

arXiv:2305.16132•Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences•Jan 28, 2024•0 citations

Assumption-free derivation of the Bell criteria of contextuality/nonlocality

Ehtibar N. Dzhafarov

Traditional Bell criteria of contextuality/nonlocality can be derived without any falsifiable assumptions, such as context-independent mapping (or local causality), free choice, or no-fine-tuning. This is achieved by deriving Bell criteria for systems with disturbance, based on the generalized definition of contextuality in the Contextuality-by-Default approach, and then specializing these criteria to systems with no disturbance. Context-independent mapping and no-fine-tuning are derived rather than assumed, and free choice follows from context-independent mapping. KEYWORDS: Bell criteria; contextuality; context-independent mapping; free choice; local causality; no-fine-tuning; nonlocality.

•Aug 12, 2021•0 citations

Comment on Causal Networks and Freedom of Choice in Bell's Theorem

Marian Kupczyński

Bell inequalities may only be derived, if hidden variables do not depend on the experimental settings. The stochastic independence of hidden and setting variables is called: freedom of choice, free will, measurement independence or no conspiracy. By imbedding the Bell causal structure in a larger causal network the authors correctly prove, that one can explain and quantify possible violation of measurement independence without evoking the super-determinism. They assume the independence of the variables that causally determine the settings and investigate how they might become correlated with hidden variables. Using their extended causal networks they derive a contextual probabilistic model on which their further correct results are based. The authors seem to ignore that contextual probabilistic model may be derived directly using only probabilistic concepts and incorporating correctly setting dependent variables describing measuring instruments. In these contextual probabilistic models experimenters freedom of choice is not compromised and the results of Bell Tests including an apparent violation of Einsteinian nonsignaling may be explained in a locally causal way. Talking about freedom of choice is misleading and is rooted in incorrect understanding of Bayes Theorem. We explain why freedom of choice should be called noncontextuality and why its violation in Bell Tests confirms only the contextual character of quantum observables. Therefore, contextuality and not experimenters freedom of choice are important resources in quantum information.

arXiv:2201.08483•Jan 20, 2022•6 citations

Assumption-Free Derivation of the Bell-Type Criteria of Contextuality/Nonlocality

Ehtibar N. Dzhafarov

Bell-type criteria of contextuality/nonlocality can be derived without any falsifiable assumptions, such as context-independent mapping (or local causality), free choice, or no-fine-tuning. This is achieved by deriving Bell-type criteria for inconsistently connected systems (i.e., those with disturbance/signaling), based on the generalized definition of contextuality in the contextuality-by-default approach, and then specializing these criteria to consistently connected systems.

arXiv:2108.05480•Entropy•Nov 19, 2021•9 citations

Contextuality or Nonlocality: What Would John Bell Choose Today?

Marian Kupczyński

A violation of Bell-CHSH inequalities does not justify speculations about quantum non-locality, conspiracy and retro-causation. Such speculations are rooted in a belief that setting dependence of hidden variables in a probabilistic model (called a violation of measurement independence (MI)) would mean a violation of experimenters’ freedom of choice. This belief is unfounded because it is based on a questionable use of Bayes Theorem and on incorrect causal interpretation of conditional probabilities. In Bell-local realistic model, hidden variables describe only photonic beams created by a source, thus they cannot depend on randomly chosen experimental settings. However, if hidden variables describing measuring instruments are correctly incorporated into a contextual probabilistic model a violation of inequalities and an apparent violation of no-signaling reported in Bell tests can be explained without evoking quantum non-locality. Therefore, for us, a violation of Bell-CHSH inequalities proves only that hidden variables have to depend on settings confirming contextual character of quantum observables and an active role played by measuring instruments. Bell thought that he had to choose between non-locality and the violation of experimenters’ freedom of choice. From two bad choices he chose non-locality. Today he would probably choose the violation of MI understood as contextuality.

arXiv:2202.09639•Entropy•Feb 2, 2023•20 citations
Abstract Free choice (or statistical independence) assumption in a hidden variable model (HVM) means that the settings chosen by experimenters do not depend on the values of the hidden variable. The assumption of context-independent (CI) mapping in an HVM means that the results of a measurement do not depend on settings for other measurements. If the measurements are spacelike separated, this assumption is known as local causality. Both free choice and CI mapping assumptions are considered necessary for derivation of the Bell-type criteria of contextuality/nonlocality. It is known, however, for a variety of special cases, that the two assumptions are not logically independent. We show here, in complete generality, for any system of random variables with or without disturbance/signaling, that an HVM that postulates CI mapping is equivalent to an HVM that postulates free choice. If one denies the possibility that a given empirical scenario can be described by an HVM in which measurements depend on other measurements’ settings, free choice violations should be denied too, and vice versa.
Free choice (or statistical independence) assumption in a hidden variable model (HVM) means that the settings chosen by experimenters do not depend on the values of the hidden variable. The assumption of context-independent (CI) mapping in an HVM means that the results of a measurement do not depend on settings for other measurements. If the measurements are spacelike separated, this assumption is known as local causality. Both free choice and CI mapping assumptions are considered necessary for derivation of the Bell-type criteria of contextuality/nonlocality. It is known, however, for a variety of special cases, that the two assumptions are not logically independent. We show here, in complete generality, for any system of random variables with or without disturbance/signaling, that an HVM that postulates CI mapping is equivalent to an HVM that postulates free choice. If one denies the possibility that a given empirical scenario can be described by an HVM in which measurements depend on other measurements' settings, free choice violations should be denied too, and vice versa. KEYWORDS: Contextuality; context-independent mapping; free choice; local causality; nonlocality.
This paper provides a systematic account of the hidden variable models (HVMs) formulated to describe systems of random variables with mutually exclusive contexts. Any such system can be described either by a model with free choice but generally context-dependent mapping of the hidden variables into observable ones, or by a model with context-independent mapping but generally compromised free choice. These two types of HVMs are equivalent, one can always be translated into another. They are also unfalsifiable, applicable to all possible systems. These facts, the equivalence and unfalsifiability, imply that freedom of choice and context-independent mapping are no assumptions at all, and they tell us nothing about freedom of choice or physical influences exerted by contexts as these notions would be understood in science and philosophy. The conjunction of these two notions, however, defines a falsifiable HVM that describes non-contextuality when applied to systems with no disturbance or to consistifications of arbitrary systems. This HVM is most adequately captured by the term 'context-irrelevance', meaning that no distribution in the model changes with context. This article is part of the theme issue 'Quantum contextuality, causality and freedom of choice'.
Traditional Bell criteria of contextuality/nonlocality can be derived without any falsifiable assumptions, such as context-independent mapping (or local causality), free choice, or no-fine-tuning. This is achieved by deriving Bell criteria for systems with disturbance, based on the generalized definition of contextuality in the Contextuality-by-Default approach, and then specializing these criteria to systems with no disturbance. Context-independent mapping and no-fine-tuning are derived rather than assumed, and free choice follows from context-independent mapping. KEYWORDS: Bell criteria; contextuality; context-independent mapping; free choice; local causality; no-fine-tuning; nonlocality.
Bell inequalities may only be derived, if hidden variables do not depend on the experimental settings. The stochastic independence of hidden and setting variables is called: freedom of choice, free will, measurement independence or no conspiracy. By imbedding the Bell causal structure in a larger causal network the authors correctly prove, that one can explain and quantify possible violation of measurement independence without evoking the super-determinism. They assume the independence of the variables that causally determine the settings and investigate how they might become correlated with hidden variables. Using their extended causal networks they derive a contextual probabilistic model on which their further correct results are based. The authors seem to ignore that contextual probabilistic model may be derived directly using only probabilistic concepts and incorporating correctly setting dependent variables describing measuring instruments. In these contextual probabilistic models experimenters freedom of choice is not compromised and the results of Bell Tests including an apparent violation of Einsteinian nonsignaling may be explained in a locally causal way. Talking about freedom of choice is misleading and is rooted in incorrect understanding of Bayes Theorem. We explain why freedom of choice should be called noncontextuality and why its violation in Bell Tests confirms only the contextual character of quantum observables. Therefore, contextuality and not experimenters freedom of choice are important resources in quantum information.
A violation of Bell-CHSH inequalities does not justify speculations about quantum non-locality, conspiracy and retro-causation. Such speculations are rooted in a belief that setting dependence of hidden variables in a probabilistic model (called a violation of measurement independence (MI)) would mean a violation of experimenters’ freedom of choice. This belief is unfounded because it is based on a questionable use of Bayes Theorem and on incorrect causal interpretation of conditional probabilities. In Bell-local realistic model, hidden variables describe only photonic beams created by a source, thus they cannot depend on randomly chosen experimental settings. However, if hidden variables describing measuring instruments are correctly incorporated into a contextual probabilistic model a violation of inequalities and an apparent violation of no-signaling reported in Bell tests can be explained without evoking quantum non-locality. Therefore, for us, a violation of Bell-CHSH inequalities proves only that hidden variables have to depend on settings confirming contextual character of quantum observables and an active role played by measuring instruments. Bell thought that he had to choose between non-locality and the violation of experimenters’ freedom of choice. From two bad choices he chose non-locality. Today he would probably choose the violation of MI understood as contextuality.