Preprint

Multipartite Composition of Contextuality Scenarios

Authors:
Preprints and early-stage research may not have been peer reviewed yet.
To read the file of this research, you can request a copy directly from the authors.

Abstract

Contextuality is a particular quantum phenomenon that has no analogue in classical probability theory. Given two independent systems, a natural question is how to represent such a situation as a single test space. In other words, how separate contextuality scenarios combine into a joint scenario. Under the premise that the the allowed probabilistic models satisfy the No Signalling principle, Foulis and Randall defined the unique possible way to compose two contextuality scenarios. When composing strictly-more than two test spaces, however, a variety of possible composition methods have been conceived. Nevertheless, all these formally-distinct composition methods appear to give rise to observationally equivalent scenarios, in the sense that the different compositions all allow precisely the same sets of classical and quantum probabilistic models. This raises the question of whether this property of invariance-under-composition-method is special to classical and quantum probabilistic models, or if it generalizes to other probabilistic models as well, our particular focus being Q1\mathcal{Q}_1 models. Q1\mathcal{Q}_1 models are physically important since, when applied to scenarios constructed by a particular composition rule, coincide with the well-defined "Almost Quantum Correlations". In this work we see that some composition rules, however, give rise to scenarios with inequivalent allowed sets of Q1\mathcal{Q}_1 models. We find that the non-trivial dependence of Q1\mathcal{Q}_1 models on the choice of composition method is apparently an artifact of failure of those composition rules to capture the orthogonality relations given by the Local Orthogonality principle. We prove that Q1\mathcal{Q}_1 models satisfy invariance-under-composition-method for all the constructive compositions protocols which do capture this notion of Local Orthogonality.

No file available

Request Full-text Paper PDF

To read the file of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.

ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Article
Full-text available
ly, systems with discrete superselection rules may be treated by taking projection-valued measures with values in an appropriate von Neumann algebra A. If the induced orthomodular lattice L(A) does not contain a summand of type I 2 then Gleason's theorem continues to apply: every #-additive probability measure on L(A) extends uniquely to a normal state on A [Christensen 1982; Yeadon 1983]. For further discussion see, for example, [Bunce and Hamhalter 1994; Bunce and Wright 1994; Hamhalter 1993, 1995]. 8 This development has become much more physically transparent and mathematically elegant since the seminal work of Faure and Frolicher [1993, 1994, 1995], where the construction of linear representations for projective geometries and their morphisms is carried through in a categorically natural manner. For example, an orthogonality relation determines a morphism from the projective geometry to its dual and so a quasilinear map from the underlying vector space to its dual. In this way t...
  • S Kochen
  • E P Specker
S. Kochen and E. P. Specker, J. Math. Mech. 17, pp 59-87 (1967).
  • S Abramsky
  • A Brandenburger
S. Abramsky and A. Brandenburger, New J. Phys. 13(11), 113036 (2011).
  • S Pironio
  • J.-D Bancal
  • V Scarani
S. Pironio, J.-D. Bancal and V. Scarani, J. Phys. A 44(6), 065303 (2011).
  • A Acín
  • T Fritz
  • A Leverrier
  • A B Sainz
A. Acín, T. Fritz, A. Leverrier, A. B. Sainz, Comm. Math. Phys. 334(2), pp 533-628 (2015).
  • A Cabello
  • S Severini
  • A Winter
A. Cabello, S. Severini and A. Winter, arXiv:1010.2163 (2010).
  • Y.-C Liang
  • R W Spekkens
  • H M Wiseman
Y.-C. Liang, R. W. Spekkens and H. M. Wiseman, Phys. Rep. 506(1-2), pp 1-39 (2011).
  • R W Spekkens
R. W. Spekkens, Phys. Rev. A 71(5), 052108 (2005).
Test spaces, Handbook of quantum logic and quantum structures
  • A Wilce
A. Wilce, Test spaces, Handbook of quantum logic and quantum structures, pp 443-549 (2009).
  • M Navascués
M. Navascués et al., Nat. Comm. 6, 6288 (2015).
  • A B Sainz
A. B. Sainz et al., Phys. Rev. A 89(3), 032117 (2014).
  • M L Almeida
M. L. Almeida et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 104(23), 230404 (2010).
  • C Śliwa
C.Śliwa, arXiv:quant-ph/0305190 (2003).
  • J Vallins
  • A B Sainz
  • Y.-C Liang
J. Vallins, A. B. Sainz and Y.-C. Liang, Phys. Rev. A 95(2), 022111 (2017).
  • T Fritz
T. Fritz et al., Nat. Comm. 4, 2263 (2013).
  • R Ramanathan
R. Ramanathan et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 117(5), 050401 (2016).
  • L Masanes
L. Masanes, arXiv:quant-ph/0512100 (2005).
  • E Wolfe
  • S F Yelin
E. Wolfe and S. F. Yelin, Phys. Rev. A 86(1), 012123 (2012). pg. 16