Relating causal and probabilistic approaches to contextuality

A primary goal in recent research on contextuality has been to extend this concept to cases of inconsistent connectedness, where observables have different distributions in different contexts. This article proposes a solution within the framework of probabi- listic causal models, which extend hidden-variables theories, and then demonstrates an equivalence to the contextuality-by-default (CbD) framework. CbD distinguishes contextuality from direct influences of context on observables, defining the latter purely in terms of probability distributions. Here, we take a causal view of direct influences, defining direct influence within any causal model as the probability of all latent states of the system in which a change of context changes the outcome of a measurement. Model-based contextuality (M-contextuality) is then defined as the necessity of stronger direct influences to model a full system than when considered individually. For consistently connected systems, M-contextuality agrees with standard contextuality. For general systems, it is proved that M-contextuality is equivalent to the property that any model of a system must contain ‘hidden influences’, meaning direct influences that go in opposite directions for different latent states, or equivalently signalling between observers that carries no information. This criterion can be taken as formalizing the ‘no-conspiracy’ principle that has been proposed in connection with CbD. M-contextuality is then proved to be equivalent to CbD-contextuality, thus providing a new interpretation of CbD-contextuality as the non-existence of a model for a system without hidden direct influences. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Contextuality and probability in quantum mechanics and beyond’.

[1]  Jay I. Myung,et al.  A Bayesian approach to testing decision making axioms , 2005 .

[2]  E. Dzhafarov Selective influence through conditional independence , 2003 .

[3]  Ehtibar N. Dzhafarov,et al.  Conversations on Contextuality , 2015 .

[4]  Ehtibar N. Dzhafarov,et al.  Context-Content Systems of Random Variables: The Contextuality-by-Default Theory , 2015, 1511.03516.

[5]  A. Shimony,et al.  Proposed Experiment to Test Local Hidden Variable Theories. , 1969 .

[6]  S. Wehner,et al.  Loophole-free Bell inequality violation using electron spins separated by 1.3 kilometres , 2015, Nature.

[7]  Ehtibar N. Dzhafarov,et al.  Snow Queen Is Evil and Beautiful: Experimental Evidence for Probabilistic Contextuality in Human Choices , 2017, Decision.

[8]  Carlos Montemayor,et al.  Quanta and Mind: Essays on the Connection Between Quantum Mechanics and Consciousness , 2019 .

[9]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Spin and Wind Directions I: Identifying Entanglement in Nature and Cognition , 2015, Foundations of Science.

[10]  Ehtibar N. Dzhafarov,et al.  A Qualified Kolmogorovian Account of Probabilistic Contextuality , 2013, QI.

[11]  S. Popescu,et al.  Quantum nonlocality as an axiom , 1994 .

[12]  Albert Einstein,et al.  Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete? , 1935 .

[13]  Moritz Grosse-Wentrup,et al.  Quantifying causal influences , 2012, 1203.6502.

[14]  P. Grangier,et al.  Experimental Tests of Realistic Local Theories via Bell's Theorem , 1981 .

[15]  C. J. Wood,et al.  The lesson of causal discovery algorithms for quantum correlations: causal explanations of Bell-inequality violations require fine-tuning , 2012, 1208.4119.

[16]  James T. Townsend,et al.  Toward the trichotomy method of reaction times: laying the foundation of stochastic mental networks , 1989 .

[17]  Clintin P Davis-Stober,et al.  Multinomial Models with Linear Inequality Constraints: Overview and Improvements of Computational Methods for Bayesian Inference. , 2018, Journal of mathematical psychology.

[18]  Akihito Soeda,et al.  Generalized monogamy of contextual inequalities from the no-disturbance principle. , 2012, Physical review letters.

[19]  Eric G. Cavalcanti,et al.  Classical Causal Models for Bell and Kochen-Specker Inequality Violations Require Fine-Tuning , 2017, 1705.05961.

[20]  A. Fine Hidden Variables, Joint Probability, and the Bell Inequalities , 1982 .

[21]  C. Davis-Stober Analysis of multinomial models under inequality constraints: Applications to measurement theory , 2009 .

[22]  Ehtibar N. Dzhafarov,et al.  Replacing Nothing with Something Special: Contextuality-by-Default and Dummy Measurements , 2017, 1703.06752.

[23]  H. Thorisson Coupling, stationarity, and regeneration , 2000 .

[24]  Michael I. Jordan Learning in Graphical Models , 1999, NATO ASI Series.

[25]  Harald Atmanspacher,et al.  Contextuality Revisited: Signaling May Differ From Communicating , 2019 .

[26]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Concepts and Their Dynamics: A Quantum-Theoretic Modeling of Human Thought , 2012, Top. Cogn. Sci..

[27]  D. Bohm A SUGGESTED INTERPRETATION OF THE QUANTUM THEORY IN TERMS OF "HIDDEN" VARIABLES. II , 1952 .

[28]  J. Pearl Causality: Models, Reasoning and Inference , 2000 .

[29]  Ehtibar N. Dzhafarov,et al.  Contextuality-by-Default 2.0: Systems with Binary Random Variables , 2016, QI.

[30]  J. Bell On the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox , 1964 .

[31]  Matt Jones,et al.  On contextuality in behavioural data , 2016, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[32]  Jan-Åke Larsson,et al.  Necessary and Sufficient Conditions for an Extended Noncontextuality in a Broad Class of Quantum Mechanical Systems. , 2014, Physical review letters.

[33]  Ehtibar N. Dzhafarov,et al.  Contextuality in canonical systems of random variables , 2017, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.