Statistical tests are needed to determine experimentally whether a hypothetical theory based on local realism can be an acceptable alternative to quantum mechanics. It is impossible to rule out local realism by a single test, as often claimed erroneously. The “strength” of a particular Bell inequality is measured by the number of trials that are needed to invalidate local realism at a given confidence level. Various versions of Bell's inequality are compared from this point of view. It is shown that Mermin's inequality for Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger states requires fewer tests than the Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt inequality or than its chained variants applied to a singlet state, and also than Hardy's proof of nonlocality.
Statistical tests are needed to determine experimentally whether a hypothetical theory based on local realism can be an acceptable alternative to quantum mechanics. It is impossible to rule out local realism by a single test, as often claimed erroneously. The “strength” of a particular Bell inequality is measured by the number of trials that are needed to invalidate local realism at a given confidence level. Various versions of Bell's inequality are compared from this point of view. It is shown that Mermin's inequality for Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger states requires fewer tests than the Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt inequality or than its chained variants applied to a singlet state, and also than Hardy's proof of nonlocality.
Statistical tests are needed to determine experimentally whether a hypothetical theory based on local realism can be an acceptable alternative to quantum mechanics. It is impossible to rule out local realism by a single test, as often claimed erroneously. The “strength” of a particular Bell inequality is measured by the number of trials that are needed to invalidate local realism at a given confidence level. Various versions of Bell's inequality are compared from this point of view. It is shown that Mermin's inequality for Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger states requires fewer tests than the Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt inequality or than its chained variants applied to a singlet state, and also than Hardy's proof of nonlocality.
There exist numerous proofs of Bell's theorem, stating that quantum mechanics is incompatible with local realistic theories of nature. Here the strength of such nonlocality proofs is defined in terms of the amount of evidence against local realism provided by the corresponding experiments. Statistical considerations show that the amount of evidence should be measured by the Kullback-Leibler (KL) or relative entropy divergence. The statistical strength of the following proofs is determined: Bell's original proof and Peres' optimized variant of it, and proofs by Clauser, Horne, Shimony, and Holt (CHSH), Hardy, Mermin, and Greenberger, Horne, and Zeilinger (GHZ). The GHZ proof is at least four and a half times stronger than all other proofs, while of the two-party proofs, the one of CHSH is the strongest.
The assumption of local realism imposes constraints, such as Bell inequalities, on quantities obtained from measurements. In recent years, various tests of local realism have gained popularity in undergraduate laboratories, giving students the exciting opportunity to experimentally contradict this philosophical assumption. The standard test of the CHSH (Clauser–Horne–Shimony–Holt) Bell inequality requires 16 measurements, whereas a test of Freedman's inequality requires only three measurements. The calculations required to test Freedman's inequality are correspondingly simpler and the theory is less abstract. We suggest that students may benefit from testing Freedman's inequality before proceeding to the CHSH inequality and other more complicated experiments. Our measured data violated Freedman's inequality by more than six standard deviations.
A correlation inequality is derived from local realism and a supplementary assumption. Unlike Clauser-Horne (CH) inequality [or Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt (CHSH) inequality] which is violated by quantum mechanics by a factor of 2, this inequality is violated by a factor of 1.5. Thus the magnitude of violation of this inequality is approximately 20.7% larger than the magnitude of violation of previous inequalities. Moreover, unlike CH (or CHSH) inequality which requires the measurement of five detection probabilities, the present inequality requires the measurement of only two detection probabilities. This inequality can therefore be used to test locality more simply than CH or CHSH inequality.
Abstract This chapter presents a detailed discussion of Bell inequalities and their experimental tests. Starting from the Aharonov-Bohm version of the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) paradox, we review EPR’s criteria for realism and completeness and Bell’s locality condition, before deriving the Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt (CHSH) inequality. This is followed by an exposition on Bell’s original inequality and other Bell inequalities by Wigner, as well as Clauser and Horne. We then discuss the milestones in the experimental violation of Bell inequalities, from the experiment of Freedman and Clauser in the 1970s, to the efforts of Aspect et al. in the 1980s, the experiments by the teams of Zeilinger and Gisin in the 1990s, and culminating the loophole-free tests in 2015. Finally we turn to a brief discussion of the interpretations of quantum mechanics, focusing on contrasting the realist views held by, e.g., Einstein and Bell, and the informational views with proponents such as Brukner and Zeilinger
Reliable and loophole-free demonstrations of the violation of local realism (LR) are highly desirable not only for understanding the foundation of quantum mechanics but also for facilitating quantum information processing, such as quantum key distribution and randomness expansion. To date, LR has been experimentally violated, but with loopholes, by testing predetermined Bell inequalities. This thesis presents a framework for verifying and quantifying the violation of LR without relying on a particular Bell inequality.\nFirst, the experimental resources, such as the quantum state, measurement settings, detection effciency, and visibility required for a violation of LR, are studied via a measure called the statistical strength. The higher the statistical strength, the more confidence in a violation of LR one has after a suffciently large number of experimental data. Particularly, we study the minimum detection effciency required to achieve any given statistical strength level in tests of LR with entangled states created from two independent polarized photons passing through a polarizing beam splitter. It is shown that, compared with photon detectors, photon counters make violations of LR easier to detect for any nonzero probability of multiple photons in an output beam of the polarizing beam splitter.\nSecond, to quantify the statistical evidence against LR obtained from a finite number of experimental data, one can choose a test statistic, such as a Bell-inequality violation, to measure the amount of violation of LR. It is desirable to bound the probability, according to LR, of obtaining a test statistic at least as extreme as that observed. This probability is known as a p-value for the hypothesis test of LR. We propose a protocol to bound such a p-value. The bound provided is asymptotically tight, if the prepared quantum state and measurement settings are stable during an experiment. Therefore, the proposed protocol is asymptotically optimal, and the bound provided is a standardized measure of success for experimental tests of LR. One can quantitatively compare different experimental tests based on this bound. Moreover, the bound provided is valid even if the quantum state varies arbitrarily and local realistic models depend on previous measurement settings and outcomes. Hence, this bound facilitates device-independent and nonlocality-based quantum information processing. For comparison, bounds of p-values derived from Bell-inequality violations using the number of standard deviations of violation of a Bell inequality or using martingale theory are studied. It is found that putative bounds derived from the number of standard deviations of violation are not valid and bounds from martingale theory are not tight.\nFinally, a simplified and effcient data analysis protocol using a set of Bell inequalities is proposed and compared with the above optimal and martingale-based protocols. The simplified protocol provides as good as and typically tighter p-value bounds than the martingale-based protocol, and the bounds provided can even be asymptotically tight. Moreover, the simplified protocol can be applied to any test with linear witnesses, such as tests for verifying entanglement, system dimensionality, or steering.