Contextuality-by-Default Description of Bell Tests: Contextuality as the Rule and Not as an Exception

Contextuality and entanglement are valuable resources for quantum computing and quantum information. Bell inequalities are used to certify entanglement; thus, it is important to understand why and how they are violated. Quantum mechanics and behavioural sciences teach us that random variables ‘measuring’ the same content (the answer to the same Yes or No question) may vary, if ‘measured’ jointly with other random variables. Alice’s and BoB′s raw data confirm Einsteinian non-signaling, but setting dependent experimental protocols are used to create samples of coupled pairs of distant ±1 outcomes and to estimate correlations. Marginal expectations, estimated using these final samples, depend on distant settings. Therefore, a system of random variables ‘measured’ in Bell tests is inconsistently connected and it should be analyzed using a Contextuality-by-Default approach, what is done for the first time in this paper. The violation of Bell inequalities and inconsistent connectedness may be explained using a contextual locally causal probabilistic model in which setting dependent variables describing measuring instruments are correctly incorporated. We prove that this model does not restrict experimenters’ freedom of choice which is a prerequisite of science. Contextuality seems to be the rule and not an exception; thus, it should be carefully tested.

[1]  D. Aerts,et al.  Quantum entanglement in physical and cognitive systems: A conceptual analysis and a general representation , 2019, The European Physical Journal Plus.

[2]  A. Zeilinger,et al.  Experimental non-classicality of an indivisible quantum system , 2011, Nature.

[3]  R. Raussendorf Quantum computation, discreteness, and contextuality , 2009 .

[4]  Jan-AAke Larsson,et al.  Loopholes in Bell inequality tests of local realism , 2014, 1407.0363.

[5]  A. Winter What does an experimental test of quantum contextuality prove or disprove? , 2014, 1408.0945.

[6]  S. Miyashita,et al.  Event-by-event simulation of quantum phenomena : Application to Einstein-Podolosky-Rosen-Bohm experiments , 2007, 0712.3781.

[7]  N. Mermin Hidden variables and the two theorems of John Bell , 1993, 1802.10119.

[8]  Andrei Khrennikov Two Faced Janus of Quantum Nonlocality , 2020, Entropy.

[9]  G. Roger,et al.  Experimental Test of Bell's Inequalities Using Time- Varying Analyzers , 1982 .

[10]  Aldo Solís,et al.  Advanced Statistical Testing of Quantum Random Number Generators , 2018, Entropy.

[11]  Albert Einstein,et al.  Physics and reality , 1936 .

[12]  A. Cabello Experimentally testable state-independent quantum contextuality. , 2008, Physical review letters.

[13]  Ehtibar N. Dzhafarov,et al.  Contents, Contexts, and Basics of Contextuality , 2021, 2103.07954.

[14]  Marek Czachor,et al.  On some class of random variables leading to violations of the Bell inequality , 1988 .

[15]  Karl Hess,et al.  Hidden assumptions in the derivation of the theorem of Bell , 2011, 1108.3583.

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

[17]  N. David Mermin,et al.  Boojums All The Way Through , 1990 .

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

[19]  J. Bell On the Problem of Hidden Variables in Quantum Mechanics , 1966 .

[20]  Travis Norsen,et al.  Bell's theorem , 2011, Scholarpedia.

[21]  Armin W. Schulz,et al.  Interpretations of probability , 2003 .

[22]  Marco T'ulio Quintino,et al.  All noncontextuality inequalities for the n-cycle scenario , 2012, 1206.3212.

[23]  A. Cabello,et al.  Bell-Kochen-Specker theorem: A proof with 18 vectors , 1996, quant-ph/9706009.

[24]  A. Khrennikov Can There be Given Any Meaning to Contextuality Without Incompatibility? , 2020, International Journal of Theoretical Physics.

[25]  Robert W. Spekkens,et al.  Foundations of Quantum Mechanics , 2007 .

[26]  M. Kupczynski,et al.  Entanglement and Bell Inequalities , 2004 .

[27]  R. Spekkens Contextuality for preparations, transformations, and unsharp measurements , 2004, quant-ph/0406166.

[28]  H. De Raedt,et al.  Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm laboratory experiments: Data analysis and simulation , 2011, 1112.2629.

[29]  C. H. Oh,et al.  State-independent proof of Kochen-Specker theorem with 13 rays. , 2011, Physical review letters.

[30]  Ehtibar N. Dzhafarov,et al.  On joint distributions, counterfactual values and hidden variables in understanding contextuality , 2018, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A.

[31]  The BIG Bell Test Collaboration,et al.  Challenging local realism with human choices , 2018 .

[32]  Cristian S. Calude,et al.  Experimental Evidence of Quantum Randomness Incomputability , 2010, ArXiv.

[33]  M. Kupczynski Quantum mechanics and modeling of physical reality , 2018, Physica Scripta.

[34]  J. Bell,et al.  The Theory of Local Beables , 1975 .

[35]  Marian Kupczynski,et al.  Is Einsteinian no-signalling violated in Bell tests? , 2017, 1709.00708.

[36]  J. Kujala,et al.  Measures of contextuality and non-contextuality , 2019, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A.

[37]  Aaron J. Miller,et al.  Detection-loophole-free test of quantum nonlocality, and applications. , 2013, Physical review letters.

[38]  Victor Veitch,et al.  Contextuality supplies the ‘magic’ for quantum computation , 2014, Nature.

[39]  Marian Kupczynski,et al.  EPR paradox, quantum nonlocality and physical reality , 2016, 1602.02959.

[40]  Luigi Accardi,et al.  Some loopholes to save quantum nonlocality , 2005 .

[41]  A. Bednorz Analysis of assumptions of recent tests of local realism , 2015, 1511.03509.

[42]  A. Peres Unperformed experiments have no results , 1978 .

[43]  S. Boughn,et al.  Making Sense of Bell’s Theorem and Quantum Nonlocality , 2017, 1703.11003.

[44]  E. Knill,et al.  A strong loophole-free test of local realism , 2015, 2016 Conference on Lasers and Electro-Optics (CLEO).

[45]  Arkady Plotnitsky,et al.  Niels Bohr and Complementarity: An Introduction , 2012 .

[46]  M. Kupczynski Entanglement and quantum nonlocality demystified , 2012, 1205.4636.

[47]  E. Pothos,et al.  Violations of locality and free choice are equivalent resources in Bell experiments , 2021, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[48]  M. Czachor Arithmetic Loophole in Bell's Theorem: Overlooked Threat to Entangled-State Quantum Cryptography , 2020 .

[49]  Andrei Khrennikov,et al.  True contextuality beats direct influences in human decision making. , 2018, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[50]  Karl Hess,et al.  Extended Boole-Bell inequalities applicable to quantum theory , 2009, 0901.2546.

[51]  Marian Kupczynski On operational approach to entanglement and how to certify it , 2016 .

[52]  Kurt Jung,et al.  Violation of Bell’s inequality: Must the Einstein locality really be abandoned? , 2017 .

[53]  H. Weinfurter,et al.  Violation of Bell's Inequality under Strict Einstein Locality Conditions , 1998, quant-ph/9810080.

[54]  S. Miyashita,et al.  Event-Based Computer Simulation Model of Aspect-Type Experiments Strictly Satisfying Einstein's Locality Conditions , 2007, 0712.2565.

[55]  Arthur Fine,et al.  Joint distributions, quantum correlations, and commuting observables , 1982 .

[56]  H. De Raedt,et al.  Data analysis of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm laboratory experiments , 2013, Optics & Photonics - Optical Engineering + Applications.

[57]  Guillaume Adenier,et al.  Test of the no‐signaling principle in the Hensen loophole‐free CHSH experiment , 2016, 1606.00784.

[58]  Karl Svozil,et al.  Quantum Hocus Pocus , 2016, 1605.08569.

[59]  A Zeilinger,et al.  Hidden-variable theorems for real experiments. , 2001, Physical review letters.

[60]  Ehtibar N. Dzhafarov,et al.  True contextuality in a psychophysical experiment , 2018, Journal of Mathematical Psychology.

[61]  M. Kupczyński,et al.  Tests for the purity of the initial ensemble of states in scattering experiments , 1974 .

[62]  Ana María Cetto,et al.  On the Spin Projection Operator and the Probabilistic Meaning of the Bipartite Correlation Function , 2019 .

[63]  K. Hess Bell’s Theorem and Instantaneous Influences at a Distance , 2018, 1805.04797.

[64]  Dirk Aerts,et al.  A possible explanation for the probabilities of quantum mechanics , 1986 .

[65]  K. Svozil Quantum Violation of the Suppes-Zanotti Inequalities and “Contextuality” , 2021, International Journal of Theoretical Physics.

[66]  Andrei Khrennikov,et al.  Get Rid of Nonlocality from Quantum Physics , 2019, Entropy.

[67]  Samson Abramsky,et al.  The sheaf-theoretic structure of non-locality and contextuality , 2011, 1102.0264.

[68]  Emanuel Knill,et al.  Asymptotically optimal data analysis for rejecting local realism , 2011 .

[69]  Marian Kupczynski,et al.  Is quantum theory predictably complete? , 2008, 0810.1259.

[70]  M. A. Can,et al.  Simple test for hidden variables in spin-1 systems. , 2007, Physical review letters.

[71]  T. Nieuwenhuizen,et al.  Is the Contextuality Loophole Fatal for the Derivation of Bell Inequalities? , 2011 .

[72]  Andrei Khrennikov,et al.  Ubiquitous Quantum Structure , 2010 .

[73]  E. T. Jaynes,et al.  Clearing up Mysteries — The Original Goal , 1989 .

[74]  Jean-Daniel Bancal,et al.  Device-independent Point Estimation from Finite Data , 2017, 1705.09245.

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

[76]  Marian Kupczynski,et al.  Closing the Door on Quantum Nonlocality , 2018, Entropy.

[77]  T. Nieuwenhuizen,et al.  Where Bell went wrong , 2008, 0812.3058.

[78]  Caroline H. Thompson,et al.  The chaotic ball: An intuitive analogy for EPR experiments , 1996, quant-ph/9611037.

[79]  Marian Kupczynski,et al.  The Contextuality Loophole is Fatal for the Derivation of Bell Inequalities: Reply to a Comment by I. Schmelzer , 2016, 1611.05021.

[80]  Nicolas Gisin,et al.  Exploring the Limits of Quantum Nonlocality with Entangled Photons , 2015, 1506.01649.

[81]  T. Fritz,et al.  A Combinatorial Approach to Nonlocality and Contextuality , 2012, Communications in Mathematical Physics.

[82]  M. Kupczyński,et al.  Bertrand's paradox and Bell's inequalities , 1987 .

[83]  Ehtibar N. Dzhafarov,et al.  Contextuality is about identity of random variables , 2014, 1405.2116.

[84]  E. Wigner On Hidden Variables and Quantum Mechanical Probabilities , 1970 .

[85]  Andrei Khrennikov,et al.  Quantum Versus Classical Entanglement: Eliminating the Issue of Quantum Nonlocality , 2019, Foundations of Physics.

[86]  Ana María Cetto,et al.  On hidden-variable theories and Bell's inequality , 1972 .

[87]  A. Winter,et al.  Graph-theoretic approach to quantum correlations. , 2014, Physical review letters.

[88]  W. M. de Muynck,et al.  Interpretations of quantum mechanics, joint measurement of incompatible observables, and counterfactual definiteness , 1994 .

[89]  J. S. BELLt Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox , 2018 .

[90]  Marian Kupczynski Significance tests and sample homogeneity loophole , 2015 .

[91]  Rui Soares Barbosa,et al.  Contextual Fraction as a Measure of Contextuality. , 2017, Physical review letters.

[92]  I. Pitowsky,et al.  George Boole's ‘Conditions of Possible Experience’ and the Quantum Puzzle , 1994, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science.

[93]  A. Shimony,et al.  Bell’s theorem without inequalities , 1990 .

[94]  Karl Hess,et al.  From Boole to Leggett-Garg: Epistemology of Bell-Type Inequalities , 2016, 1605.04887.

[95]  Patrick Suppes,et al.  When are probabilistic explanations possible? , 2005, Synthese.

[96]  K. Jung Polarization Correlation of Entangled Photons Derived Without Using Non-local Interactions , 2020, Frontiers in Physics.

[97]  M. Kupczyński,et al.  Pitovsky model and complementarity , 1987 .

[98]  Marian Kupczynski EPR Paradox, Locality and Completeness of Quantum Theory , 2007 .

[99]  Marian Kupczynski Bell Inequalities, Experimental Protocols and Contextuality , 2014 .

[100]  Marian Kupczynski,et al.  Breakdown of statistical inference from some random experiments , 2016, Comput. Phys. Commun..

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

[102]  A. Cabello Simple explanation of the quantum violation of a fundamental inequality. , 2012, Physical review letters.

[103]  Andrei Khrennikov Bohr against Bell: complementarity versus nonlocality , 2017 .

[104]  Marian Kupczynski,et al.  Causality and local determinism versus quantum nonlocality , 2013, 1312.0636.

[105]  Garg,et al.  Quantum mechanics versus macroscopic realism: Is the flux there when nobody looks? , 1985, Physical review letters.

[106]  Andrei Khrennikov,et al.  CHSH Inequality: Quantum Probabilities as Classical Conditional Probabilities , 2014, 1406.4886.

[107]  Marian Kupczynski,et al.  Can we close the Bohr–Einstein quantum debate? , 2016, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[108]  Karl Hess,et al.  Bell’s theorem: Critique of proofs with and without inequalities , 2005 .

[109]  M. Kupczynski A comment on: the violations of locality and free choice are equivalent resources in Bell experiments , 2021, 2105.14279.

[110]  A. Zeilinger,et al.  Significant-Loophole-Free Test of Bell's Theorem with Entangled Photons. , 2015, Physical review letters.

[111]  Marian Kupczynski Seventy Years of the EPR Paradox , 2006 .

[112]  Marian Kupczynski Time Series, Stochastic Processes and Completeness of Quantum Theory , 2011 .

[114]  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.

[115]  L. Accardi Topics in quantum probability , 1981 .

[116]  Guillaume Adenier,et al.  Is the fair sampling assumption supported by EPR experiments , 2007 .

[117]  K. Michielsen,et al.  The photon identification loophole in EPRB experiments: computer models with single-wing selection , 2017, 1707.08307.

[118]  P. Pearle Hidden-Variable Example Based upon Data Rejection , 1970 .

[119]  Yeong-Cherng Liang,et al.  Bounding the Plausibility of Physical Theories in a Device-Independent Setting via Hypothesis Testing , 2018, Entropy.

[120]  Andrei Khrennikov,et al.  Bell-Boole Inequality: Nonlocality or Probabilistic Incompatibility of Random Variables? , 2008, Entropy.

[121]  Andrei Khrennikov,et al.  Contextual Approach to Quantum Formalism , 2009 .

[122]  Marek Zukowski,et al.  Quantum non-locality—it ainʼt necessarily so... , 2014, 1501.04618.

[123]  Kristel Michielsen,et al.  Event-by-Event Simulation of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm Experiments , 2007, 0712.3693.

[124]  A E Bostwick,et al.  THE THEORY OF PROBABILITIES. , 1896, Science.

[125]  R. Messi,et al.  Bell-type polarization experiment with pairs of uncorrelated optical photons , 2020, 2002.02723.

[126]  M. Kupczyński,et al.  On some new tests of completeness of quantum mechanics , 1986 .

[127]  E. T. Jaynesz,et al.  Clearing up Mysteries { the Original Goal , 1989 .

[128]  Jan-AAke Larsson,et al.  Contextuality in Three Types of Quantum-Mechanical Systems , 2014, 1411.2244.

[129]  A. Zeilinger,et al.  Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics , 1989 .