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

arXiv:quant-ph/0410032 · Physical Review A

Comment on “Separability of quantum states and the violation of Bell-type inequalities”

Christoph Simon

Published Feb 22, 2005• 6 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

The statement by Loubenets [Phys. Rev. A 69, 042102 (2004)] that separable states can violate classical probabilistic constraints is based on a misleading definition of classicality, which is much narrower than Bell's concept of local hidden variables. In a Bell-type setting, the notion of classicality used by Loubenets [Phys. Rev. A 69, 042102 (2004)] corresponds to the assumption of perfect correlations if the same observable is measured on both sides. While it is obvious that most separable states do not satisfy this assumption, this does not constitute ``nonclassical'' behavior in any usual sense of the word.

DOI
10.1103/physreva.71.026102

Related papers

Reply to "Comment on 'Separability of quantum states and the violation of Bell-type inequalities'"

Elena R. Loubenets

It is stated by C. Simon, quant-ph/0410032, that the definition of "classicality" used in quant-ph/0310116 is "much narrower than Bell's concept of local hidden variables" and that, in the separable quantum case, the validity of the perfect correlation form of the original Bell inequality is necessarily linked with "the assumption of perfect correlations if the same (quantum) observable is measured on both sides". Here, I prove that these and other statements in quant-ph/0410032 are misleading.

arXiv:quant-ph/0502084•Feb 14, 2005•1 citation

Separability of quantum states and the violation of Bell-type inequalities

Elena R. Loubenets

In contrast to the widespread opinion that any separable quantum state satisfies every classical probabilistic constraint, we present a simple example where separable quantum state does not satisfy the original Bell inequality although the latter inequality, in its perfect correlation form, is valid for all joint classical measurements. In a very general setting, we discuss inequalities for joint experiments upon a bipartite quantum system. For any separable quantum state, we derive quantum analogs of the original Bell inequality and specify the conditions sufficient for a separable state to satisfy the original Bell inequality. We introduce the extended Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt inequality and prove that, for any separable quantum state, this inequality holds for a variety of linear combinations.

arXiv:quant-ph/0310116•Physical Review A•Apr 5, 2004•9 citations

Comment on “Loophole-Free Bell Test for Continuous Variables via Wave and Particle Correlations”

Daniel Cavalcanti, Valerio Scarani

The inequalities proposed in [Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 170404 (2010)] are not Bell's inequalities in the usual sense: there are local classical models that violate these inequalities. Thus, their violation demonstrates nonlocality only under assumptions about the physical implementation and moreover they cannot be used as a device-independent test of nonlocality.

arXiv:1010.5358•Physical Review Letters•May 20, 2011•7 citations

Local hidden variable modelling, classicality, quantum separability and the original Bell inequality

Elena R. Loubenets

We introduce a general condition sufficient for the validity of the original Bell inequality (1964) in a local hidden variable (LHV) frame. This condition can be checked experimentally and incorporates only as a particular case the assumption on perfect correlations or anticorrelations usually argued for this inequality in the literature. Specifying this general condition for a quantum bipartite case, we introduce the whole class of bipartite quantum states, separable and nonseparable, that (i) admit an LHV description under any bipartite measurements with two settings per site; (ii) do not necessarily exhibit perfect correlations and may even have a negative correlation function if the same quantum observable is measured at both sites, but (iii) satisfy the ‘perfect correlation’ version of the original Bell inequality for any three bounded quantum observables A 1 , A 2 = B 1 , B 2 at sites ‘ A ’ and ‘ B ’, respectively. Analysing the validity of this general LHV condition under classical and quantum correlation scenarios with the same physical context, we stress that, unlike the Clauser–Horne–Shimony–Holt inequality, the original Bell inequality distinguishes between classicality and quantum separability.

arXiv:0903.4454•Journal of Physics A Mathematical and Theoretical•Dec 16, 2010•4 citations

Correlations, Bell Inequality Violation & Quantum Entanglement

Yeong-Cherng Liang

It is one of the most remarkable features of quantum physics that measurements on spatially separated systems cannot always be described by a locally causal theory. In such a theory, the outcomes of local measurements are determined in advance solely by some unknown (or hidden) variables and the choice of local measurements. Correlations that are allowed within the framework of a locally causal theory are termed classical. Typically, the fact that quantum mechanics does not always result in classical correlations is revealed by the violation of Bell inequalities, which are constraints that have to be satisfied by any classical correlations. It has been known for a long time that entanglement is necessary to demonstrate nonclassical correlations, and hence a Bell inequality violation. However, since some entangled quantum states are known to admit explicit locally causal models, the exact role of entanglement in Bell inequality violation has remained obscure. This thesis provides both a comprehensive review on these issues as well as a report on new discoveries made to clarify the relationship between entanglement and Bell inequality violation.

arXiv:0810.5400•Oct 30, 2008•2 citations

Separable quantum states do not have stronger correlations than local realism. A comment on quant-ph/0611126 of Z. Chen

M. P. Seevinck

Chen (quant-ph/0611126) has recently claimed ``exponential violation of local realism by separable states", in the sense that multi-partite separable quantum states are supposed to give rise to correlations and fluctuations that violate a Bell-type inequality that Chen takes to be satisfied by local realism. However, this can not be true since all predictions (including all correlations and fluctuations) that separable quantum states give rise to have a local realistic description and thus satisfy all Bell-type inequalities, and this holds for all number of parties. Since Chen claims otherwise by presenting a new inequality, claimed to be a Bell-type one, which separable states supposedly can violate, there must be a flaw in the argumentation. I will expose this flaw, not merely for clarification of this issue, but perhaps even more importantly since it re-teaches us an old lesson John Bell taught us over 40 years ago. I will argue that this lesson provides us with a new morale especially relevant to modern research in Bell-type inequalities.

arXiv:quant-ph/0701003•Jan 2, 2007•0 citations
The statement by Loubenets [Phys. Rev. A 69, 042102 (2004)] that separable states can violate classical probabilistic constraints is based on a misleading definition of classicality, which is much narrower than Bell's concept of local hidden variables. In a Bell-type setting, the notion of classicality used by Loubenets [Phys. Rev. A 69, 042102 (2004)] corresponds to the assumption of perfect correlations if the same observable is measured on both sides. While it is obvious that most separable states do not satisfy this assumption, this does not constitute ``nonclassical'' behavior in any usual sense of the word.
It is stated by C. Simon, quant-ph/0410032, that the definition of "classicality" used in quant-ph/0310116 is "much narrower than Bell's concept of local hidden variables" and that, in the separable quantum case, the validity of the perfect correlation form of the original Bell inequality is necessarily linked with "the assumption of perfect correlations if the same (quantum) observable is measured on both sides". Here, I prove that these and other statements in quant-ph/0410032 are misleading.
In contrast to the widespread opinion that any separable quantum state satisfies every classical probabilistic constraint, we present a simple example where separable quantum state does not satisfy the original Bell inequality although the latter inequality, in its perfect correlation form, is valid for all joint classical measurements. In a very general setting, we discuss inequalities for joint experiments upon a bipartite quantum system. For any separable quantum state, we derive quantum analogs of the original Bell inequality and specify the conditions sufficient for a separable state to satisfy the original Bell inequality. We introduce the extended Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt inequality and prove that, for any separable quantum state, this inequality holds for a variety of linear combinations.
We introduce a general condition sufficient for the validity of the original Bell inequality (1964) in a local hidden variable (LHV) frame. This condition can be checked experimentally and incorporates only as a particular case the assumption on perfect correlations or anticorrelations usually argued for this inequality in the literature. Specifying this general condition for a quantum bipartite case, we introduce the whole class of bipartite quantum states, separable and nonseparable, that (i) admit an LHV description under any bipartite measurements with two settings per site; (ii) do not necessarily exhibit perfect correlations and may even have a negative correlation function if the same quantum observable is measured at both sites, but (iii) satisfy the ‘perfect correlation’ version of the original Bell inequality for any three bounded quantum observables A 1 , A 2 = B 1 , B 2 at sites ‘ A ’ and ‘ B ’, respectively. Analysing the validity of this general LHV condition under classical and quantum correlation scenarios with the same physical context, we stress that, unlike the Clauser–Horne–Shimony–Holt inequality, the original Bell inequality distinguishes between classicality and quantum separability.
It is one of the most remarkable features of quantum physics that measurements on spatially separated systems cannot always be described by a locally causal theory. In such a theory, the outcomes of local measurements are determined in advance solely by some unknown (or hidden) variables and the choice of local measurements. Correlations that are allowed within the framework of a locally causal theory are termed classical. Typically, the fact that quantum mechanics does not always result in classical correlations is revealed by the violation of Bell inequalities, which are constraints that have to be satisfied by any classical correlations. It has been known for a long time that entanglement is necessary to demonstrate nonclassical correlations, and hence a Bell inequality violation. However, since some entangled quantum states are known to admit explicit locally causal models, the exact role of entanglement in Bell inequality violation has remained obscure. This thesis provides both a comprehensive review on these issues as well as a report on new discoveries made to clarify the relationship between entanglement and Bell inequality violation.
Chen (quant-ph/0611126) has recently claimed ``exponential violation of local realism by separable states", in the sense that multi-partite separable quantum states are supposed to give rise to correlations and fluctuations that violate a Bell-type inequality that Chen takes to be satisfied by local realism. However, this can not be true since all predictions (including all correlations and fluctuations) that separable quantum states give rise to have a local realistic description and thus satisfy all Bell-type inequalities, and this holds for all number of parties. Since Chen claims otherwise by presenting a new inequality, claimed to be a Bell-type one, which separable states supposedly can violate, there must be a flaw in the argumentation. I will expose this flaw, not merely for clarification of this issue, but perhaps even more importantly since it re-teaches us an old lesson John Bell taught us over 40 years ago. I will argue that this lesson provides us with a new morale especially relevant to modern research in Bell-type inequalities.