Abstract
In 1976, I met John Bell several times in CERN and we talked about a possible violation of optical theorem, purity tests, EPR paradox, Bell’s inequalities and their violation. In this review, I resume our discussions, and explain how they were related to my earlier research. I also reproduce handwritten notes, which I gave to Bell during our first meeting and a handwritten letter he sent to me in 1982. We have never met again, but I have continued to discuss BI-CHSH inequalities and their violation in several papers. The research stimulated by Bell’s papers and experiments performed to check his inequalities led to several important applications of quantum entanglement in quantum information and quantum technologies. Unfortunately, it led also to extraordinary metaphysical claims and speculations which in our opinion John Bell would not endorse today. BI-CHSH inequalities are violated in physics and in cognitive science, but it neither proved the completeness of quantum mechanics nor its nonlocality. Quantum computing advantage is not due to some magical instantaneous influences between distant physical systems. Therefore one has to be cautious in drawing-far-reaching philosophical conclusions from Bell’s inequalities. The true resource for quantum computing is contextuality and not nonlocality.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Accardi, L., & Regoli, M. (2000). Non-locality and quantum theory: New experimental evidence. Preprint Volterra, N 420
Accardi, L. (2006). Could one now convince Einstein? In Quantum Theory: Reconsideration of Foundations-3. American Institute of Physics, pp. 3–18.
Accardi, L. (1981). Topics in quantum probability. Physics Reports, 77, 169–192.
Accardi, L. (2005). Some loopholes to save quantum nonlocality. AIP Conference Proceedings, 750, 1–19.
Accardi, L., & Regoli, M. (2002). Locality and Bell’s inequality. In A. Khrennikov (Ed.), QP-XIII, foundations of probability and physics (pp. 1–28). World Scientific.
Aerts, D. (1985). The physical origin of the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox and how to violate Bell inequalities by macroscopical systems. In Symposium on the foundations of modern physics: 50 years of the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Gedanken Experiment: Proceedings, Lahti P. and Mittelstaedt P. eds, World Scientific.
Aerts, D. (1986). A possible explanation for the probabilities of quantum mechanics. Journal of Mathematical Physics, 27, 202–210.
Aerts, D., Aerts Arguëlles, J., Beltran, L., Geriente, S., Sassoli de Bianchi, M., Sozzo, S., & Veloz, T. (2019). Quantum entanglement in physical and cognitive systems: a conceptual analysis and a general representation. The European Physical Journal plus. https://doi.org/10.1140/epjp/i2019-12987-0
Aerts, D., Arguëlles, J. A., Beltran, L., Geriente, S., & Sozzo, S. (2023). Entanglement in cognition violating bell inequalities beyond Cirel’son’s bound. In A. Plotnitsky & E. Haven (Eds.), The quantum-like revolution: A festschrift for andrei khrennikov (pp. 299–326). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-12986-5_15
Angelidis, T. D., & Popper K. R. (1985). Towards a local explqanatory theory of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm experiment. In Symposium on the foundations of modern physics: 50 years of the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Gedanken Experiment: Proceedings, Lahti P. and Mittelstaedt P. eds, World Scientific.
Aspect, A., Dalibard, J., & Roger, G. (1982b). Experimental test of Bell’s inequalities using time-varying analyzers. Physical Review Letters, 49, 1804–1807.
Aspect, A., Grangier, P., & Roger, G. (1982a). Experimentsl realization of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm Gedankenexperiment: A new violation of Bell’s inequalities. Physical Review Letters, 49, 91–94.
Barut, A. O. (1985). Classical and quantum spin correlations: a local deterministic realistic spin model with quantum correlations. In Symposium on the foundations of modern physics: 50 years of the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Gedanken Experiment: Proceedings, Lahti P. and Mittelstaedt P. eds, World Scientific.
Basieva, I., Cervantes, V. H., Dzhafarov, E. N., & Khrennikov, A. (2019). True contextuality beats direct influences in human decision making. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 148, 1925–1937.
Bell, J. S. (1965). On the Einstein Podolsky Rosen paradox. Physics Physique Fizika, 1(3), 195–200. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysicsPhysiqueFizika.1.195
Bell, J. S. (1966). On the problem of hidden variables in quantum theory. Reviews of Modern Physics, 38, 450.
Bell, J. S. (1971). Introduction to the hidden-variable question, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics (pp. 171–181). Academic.
Birkhoff, G., & von Neumann, J. (1936). The logic of quantum mechanics. Annals of Mathematics, 37, 823.
Bohr, N. (1987). The Philosophical Writings of Niels Bohr. Ox Bow Press.
Boughn, S. (2017). Making sense of Bell’s theorem and quantum non-locality. Foundations of Physics, 47, 640–657. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10701-017-0083-6
Boughn, S. (2022). There is no spooky action at a distance in quantum mechanics. Entropy, 24(4), 560. https://doi.org/10.3390/e24040560
Cervantes, V. H., & Dzhafarov, E. N. (2018). Snow Queen is evil and beautiful: Experimental evidence for probabilistic contextuality in human choices. Decision, 5, 193–204.
Chew, G. (1961). The S-matrix theory of strong interaction. W. A. Benjamin Inc.
Christensen, B. G., McCusker, K. T., Altepeter, J. B., Calkins, B., Lim, C. C. W., Gisin, N., & Kwiat, P. G. (2013). Detection-loophole-free test of quantum nonlocality, and applications. Physical Review Letters, 111, 130406.
Clauser, J. F., & Shimony, A. (1883). Bell’s theorem: Experimental tests and im-plications. Reports on Progress in Physics, 1978, 41.
De la Peña, L., Cetto, A. M., & Brody, T. A. (1972). On hidden variable theories and Bell’s inequality. Lettere Al Nuovo Cimento, 5, 177.
De Muynck, V. M., De Baere, W., & Martens, H. (1994). Interpretations of quantum mechanics, joint measurement of incompatible observables and counterfactual definiteness. Foundations of Physics, 24, 1589–1664.
De Raedt, H., et al. (2023). Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen–Bohm experiments: A discrete data driven approach. Annals of Physics, 453, 169314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aop.2023.169314
De Raedt, H., De Raedt, K., Michielsen, K., Keimpema, K., & Miyashita, S. (2007a). Event-based computer simulation model of Aspect-type experiments strictly satisfying Einstein’s locality conditions. Journal of the Physical Society of Japan, 76, 104005.
De Raedt, H., De Raedt, K., Michielsen, K., Keimpema, K., & Miyashita, S. (2007b). Event-by-event simulation of quantum phenomena: Application to Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm experiments. Journal of Computational and Theoretical Nanoscience, 4, 957–991.
De Raedt, H., Hess, K., & Michielsen, K. (2011). Extended Boole-Bell inequalities applicable to quantum theory. Journal of Computational and Theoretical Nanoscience, 8, 10119.
De Raedt, H., Michielsen, K., & Hess, K. (2017). The photon identification loophole in EPRB experiments:Computer models with single-wing selection. Open Physics, 15, 713–733. https://doi.org/10.1515/phys-2017-0085
De Raedt, H., Michielsen, K., & Jin, F. (2012). Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm laboratory experiments: Data analysis and simulation. AIP Conference Proceedings, 1424, 55–66.
Dzhafarov, E. N. (2019). On joint distributions, counterfactual values, and hidden variables in understanding contextuality. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, 377, 20190144.
Dzhafarov, E. N. (2021). Assumption-free derivation of the bell-type criteria of contextuality/nonlocality. Entropy, 23(11), 1543. https://doi.org/10.3390/e23111543
Dzhafarov, E. (2023). Contextuality and Random Variables. In A. Plotnitsky & E. Haven (Eds.), The quantum-like revolution: A festschrift for andrei khrennikov (pp. 339–360). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-12986-5_17
Dzhafarov, E. N., Kujala, J. V., & Larsson, J. -Å. (2015). Contextuality in three types of quantum-mechanical systems. Foundations of Physics, 7, 762–782.
Eberhard, P. H. (1972). Tests of the optical theorem. Nuclear Physics B, 48(2), 333–342. https://doi.org/10.1016/0550-3213(72)90173-3
Fine, A. (1982a). Hidden variables, joint probability and the Bell inequalities. Physical Review Letters, 48, 291–295.
Fine, A. (1982b). Joint distributions, quantum correlations, and commuting observables. Journal of Mathematics and Physics, 23, 1306–1310.
Frembs, M., Roberts, S., & Bartlett, S. D. (2018). Contextuality as a resource for measurement-based quantum computation beyond qubits. New Journal of Physics, 20, 103011.
Gajewski, J., & Kupczynski, M. (1977). Purity tests for π-d charge multiplicity distributions. Lettere Al Nuovo Cimento Series, 2(26), 81–87.
Giustina, M., Versteegh, M. A. M., Wengerowsky, S., Handsteiner, J., Hochrainer, A., Phelan, K., et al. (2015). Significant-loophole-free test of Bell’s theorem with entangled photons. Physical Review Letters, 115, 250401.
Hance, J. R., & Hossenfelder, S. (2022). Bell’s theorem allows local theories of quantum mechanics. Nature Physics, 18, 1382.
Hance, J. R., Hossenfelder, S., & Palmer, T. N. (2022). Supermeasured: Violating Bell-Statistical Independence without violating physical statistical independence. Foundations of Physics, 52, 81.
Handsteiner, J., et al. (2017). Cosmic Bell test measurement settings from Milky Way stars. Physical Review Letters, 118, 060401.
Hensen, B., Bernien, H., Dreau, A. E., Reiserer, A., Kalb, N., Blok, M. S., et al. (2015). Loopholefree Bell inequality violation using electron spins separated by 1.3 kilometres. Nature, 526, 15759.
Hess, K. (2022). A critical review of works pertinent to the Einstein-Bohr debate and Bell’s theorem. Symmetry, 14(1), 163. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym14010163
Hess, K., De Raedt, H., & Michielsen, K. (2012). Hidden assumptions in the derivation of the theorem of Bell. Physica Scripta, T151, 014002.
Hess, K., Michielsen, K., & De Raedt, H. (2016). From Boole to Leggett-Garg: Epistemology of Bell-type inequalities. Advances in Mathematical Physics. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/4623040
Hess, K., & Philipp, W. (2005). Bell’s theorem: Critique of proofs with and without inequalities. AIP Conference Proceedings, 750, 150–157.
Hossenfelder, S., & Palmer, T. (2020). Rethinking Superdeterminism. Frontiers in Physics, 8, 139.
Howard, M., et al. (2014). Contextuality supplies the “magic” for quantum computation. Nature, 510(7505), 351–355.
Jung, K. (2017). Violation of Bell’s inequality: Must the Einstein locality really be abandoned? Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 880, 012065. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/880/1/012065
Jung, K. (2020). Polarization correlation of entangled photons derived without using non-local interactions. Frontiers of Physics. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphy.2020.00170
Khrennikov, A. (1999). Interpretations of Probability. VSP Int. Tokyo: Sc. Publishers.
Khrennikov, A., & Volovich, I. (2002). Quantum nonlocality, EPR model, and Bell‘s theorem. In Proceedings of the 3nd Sakharov Conference on Physics (Moscow); WSP, pp. 269–276.
Khrennikov, A. (2007). 2007 Bell’s inequality: Nonlocality, ‘death of reality‘, or incompatibility of random variables. AIP Conference Proceedings, 962, 121–131. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.2827294
Khrennikov, A. (2008). Bell-Boole Inequality: Nonlocality or probabilistic incompatibility of random variables? Entropy, 10, 19–32.
Khrennikov, A. (2009a). Violation of Bell’s inequality and non-Kolmogorovness. AIP Conference Proceedings, 1101, 86–99. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3109976
Khrennikov, A. (2009b). Nonlocality as well as rejection of realism are only sufficient (but nonnecessary!) conditions for violation of Bell’s inequality. Information Sciences, 179, 492–504. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2008.08.021
Khrennikov, A. (2009c). Contextual approach to quantum formalism. Springer.
Khrennikov, A. (2010). Ubiquitous quantum structure. Springer.
Khrennikov, A. (2015). CHSH inequality: Quantum probabilities as classical conditional probabilities. Foundations of Physics, 45, 711.
Khrennikov, A. (2017). Bohr against Bell: Complementarity versus nonlocality. Open Physics, 15, 734–738.
Khrennikov, A. (2019). Get rid of nonlocality from quantum physics. Entropy, 21, 806.
Khrennikov, A. (2020a). Two faced Janus of quantum nonlocality. Entropy, 22(3), 303. https://doi.org/10.3390/e22030303
Khrennikov, A. (2020b). Can there be given any meaning to contextuality without incompatibility? International Journal of Theoretical Physics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10773-020-04666-z
Khrennikov, A. (2022). Contextuality, complementarity, signaling, and Bell tests. Entropy, 24(10), 1380. https://doi.org/10.3390/e24101380-28Sep2022
Khrennikov, A., & Alodjants, A. (2019). Classical (local and contextual) probability model, for Bohm-Bell type experiments: No-signaling as independence of random variables. Entropy, 21, 157. https://doi.org/10.3390/e21020157
Khrennikov, A., & Volovich, I. (2002a). Local realism, contextualism and loopholes in Bell‘s experiments. Found. Prob. Phys. Math. Modell., 5, 325–344.
Kielanowski, P., & Kupczyński, M. (1971a). Generalized statistical tensors and their applications. Acta Physica Polonica B, 2, 191.
Kielanowski, P., & Kupczyński, M. (1971b). Relativistic quark-model predictions for the transversity amplitudes. Nuclear Physics B, 29, 504–514.
Kochen, S., & Specker, E. P. (1967). The problem of hidden variables in quantum mechanics. Journal of Mathematics and Mechanics, 17, 59–87.
Kujala, J. V., & Dzhafarov, E. N. (2015). Larsson, J-Å Necessary and sufficient conditions for extended noncontextuality in a broad class of quantum mechanical systems. Physical Review Letters, 115, 150401.
Kujala, J. V., & Dzhafarov, E. N. (2019). Measures of contextuality and noncontextuality. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, 377, 20190149.
Kupczynski, M. (1973). Is Hilbert Space Language too Rich? International Journal of Theoretical Physics, 79, 319. Reprinted in: Physical Theory as Logico-Operational Structure, ed. C. A. Hooker, Dordrecht, Reidel, 1978, p. 89–113.
Kupczynski, M. (1984). New tests of completeness of quantum mechanics. Preprint: IC/84/242.
Kupczynski, M. (2002). On the completeness of quantum mechanics. arXiv:quant-ph/028061.
Kupczynski, M. (2004) Contextual observables and quantum information. arXiv:quant-ph/0408002. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.quant-ph/0408002
Kupczynski, M. (2020) Contextual as a key to understand quantum paradoxes. arXiv:2005.06864. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2005.06864.
Kupczynski, M. (2021). A comment on: the violations of locality and free choice are equivalent resources in Bell experiments. arXiv:2105.14279. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2105.14279.
Kupczyński, M. (1970). Quark model predictions for the transversity amplitudes. Acta Physica Polonica B, 1, 301.
Kupczynski, M. (1973b). Is the optical theorem violated. Physics Letters B, 47, 215–227.
Kupczynski, M. (1974a). New description of the initial states. Lettere Al Nuovo Cimento Series 2, 11, 117–120.
Kupczynski, M. (1974b). Unitarity without the optical theorem. Lettere Al Nuovo Cimento Series 2, 9, 134–136.
Kupczynski, M. (1974c). Tests for the purity of the initial ensemble of states in scattering experiments. Lettere Al Nuovo Cimento Series 2, 11, 121–124.
Kupczynski, M. (1977a). The optical theorem, a purity of the initial states and the rising total cross-sections Czech. Journal of Physics B, 27, 17–28.
Kupczynski, M. (1977b). On some important statistical tests. La Rivista Del Nuovo Cimento Series 2, 7, 134–136.
Kupczynski, M. (1986a). Scattering of extended hadrons and time-reversal invariance. Hadronic Journal, 9, 215–218.
Kupczynski, M. (1986b). On some new tests of completeness of quantum mechanics. Physics Letters A, 116, 417–419.
Kupczynski, M. (1987a). Bertrand’s paradox and Bell’s inequalities. Physics Letters A, 121, 205–207.
Kupczynski, M. (1987b). Pitovsky model and complementarity. Physics Letters A, 121, 51–53.
Kupczynski, M. (2005a). Entanglement and Bell inequalities. Journal of Russian Laser Research, 26, 514–523.
Kupczynski, M. (2006). Seventy years of the EPR paradox. AIP Conference Proceedings, 861, 516–523.
Kupczynski, M. (2007). EPR paradox, locality and completeness of quantum. AIP Conference Proceedings, 962, 274–285.
Kupczynski, M. (2009). Is quantum theory predictably complete? Physica Scripta, T135, 014005. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-8949/2009/T135/014005
Kupczynski, M. (2011). Time series, stochastic processes and completeness of quantum theory. AIP Conference Proceedings, 1327, 394–400.
Kupczynski, M. (2012). Entanglement and quantum nonlocality demystified. AIP Conference Proceedings, 1508, 253–264.
Kupczynski, M. (2014a). Possible violation of the optical theorem in LHC experiments. Physica Scripta, T163, 014021. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-8949/2014/T163/014021
Kupczynski, M. (2014b). Causality and local determinism versus quantum nonlocality. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 504, 012015. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/504/1/012015
Kupczynski, M. (2015). Bell Inequalities, experimental protocols and contextuality. Foundations of Physics, 45, 735–753.
Kupczynski, M. (2016a). EPR paradox, quantum nonlocality and physical reality. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 701, 012021.
Kupczynski, M. (2016b). On operational approach to entanglement and how to certify it. International Journal of Quantum Information, 14, 1640003.
Kupczynski, M. (2017a). Can we close the Bohr-Einstein quantum debate? Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2016,0392
Kupczynski, M. (2017b). Is Einsteinian no-signalling violated in Bell tests? Open Physics, 2017(15), 739–753. https://doi.org/10.1515/phys-2017-0087
Kupczynski, M. (2018a). Quantum mechanics and modeling of physical reality. Physica Scripta, 93, 123001. https://doi.org/10.1088/1402-4896/aae212
Kupczynski, M. (2018b). Closing the door on quantum nonlocality. Entropy. https://doi.org/10.3390/e20110877
Kupczynski, M. (2020a). Is the moon there if nobody looks: Bell inequalities and physical reality. Frontiers in Physics. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphy.2020.00273
Kupczynski, M. (2021b). Contextuality-by-default description of Bell tests: Contextuality as the rule and not as an exception. Entropy, 23(9), 1104. https://doi.org/10.3390/e23091104
Kupczynski, M. (2022). Comment on causal networks and freedom of choice in Bell’s theorem. International Journal of Quantum Foundations, 8(2), 117–124. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2201.08483
Kupczynski, M. (2023). Contextuality or nonlocality; what would John Bell choose today? Entropy, 25, 280. https://doi.org/10.3390/e25020280
Kupczynski, M. (2024). Quantum nonlocality: How does nature do it? Entropy, 26(3), 191. https://doi.org/10.3390/e26030191
Kupczynski, M., & De Raedt, H. (2016). Breakdown of statistical inference from some random experiments. Computer Physics Communications, 200, 168.
Lahti, P., & Mittelstaedt P. (1985). Symposium on the foundations of modern physics: 50 years of the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Gedanken Experiment. Proceedings, World Scientific.
Mielnik, B. (1968). Geometry of quantum states. Communications in Mathematical Physics, 9, 55.
Mielnik, B. (1969). Theory of filters. Communications in Mathematical Physics, 15, 1.
Nieuwenhuizen, T. M. (2009). Where Bell went wrong. AIP Conference Proceedings, 1101, 127–133.
Nieuwenhuizen, T. M. (2011). Is the contextuality loophole fatal for the derivation of Bell inequalities. Foundations of Physics, 41, 580–591.
Nieuwenhuizen, T. M., & Kupczynski, M. (2017). The contextuality loophole is fatal for derivation of Bell inequalities: Reply to a comment by I. Schmelzer. Foundations of Physics, 47, 316–319. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10701-017-0062-y
Peres, A. (1978). Unperformed experiments have no results. American Journal of Physics, 46, 745–747. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.11393
Pitovsky, I. (1982a). Resolution of the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen and Bell Paradoxes. Physical Review Letters, 49, 1216.
Pitovsky, I. (1982b). Deterministic model of spin statistics. Physical Review D, 27, 2316–2326.
Pitovsky, I. (1994). George Boole’s conditions of possible experience the quantum puzzle. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 45, 95–125. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjps/45.1.95
Plotnitsky, A. (2012). Niels Bohr and complementarity: An introduction. Springer.
De Raedt, H., Jin, F., & Michielsen, K. (2013). Data analysis of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm laboratory experiments. Proceedings of SPIE, 8832.
Raussendorf, R. (2013). Contextuality in measurement-based quantum computation. Physical Review A. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.88.022322
Rosenfeld, W., et al. (2017). Event-ready Bell test using entangled atoms simultaneously closing detection and locality loopholes. Physical Review Letters, 119, 010402.
Shalm, L. K., Meyer-Scott, E., Christensen, B. G., Bierhorst, P., Wayne, M. A., Stevens, M. J., et al. (2015). Strong loophole-free test of local realism. Physical Review Letters, 115, 250402.
Storz, S., et al. (2023). Loophole-free Bell inequality violation with superconducting circuits. Nature. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-05885-0
Svozil, K. (2016). Quantum hocus-pocus. Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, 16(1), 25–30. https://doi.org/10.3354/esep00171
The BIG Bell Test Collaboration. (2018). Challenging local realism with human choices. Nature, 557, 212–216. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-018-0085-3
Weihs, G., Jennewein, T., Simon, C., Weinfurther, H., & Zeilinger, A. (1998). Violation of Bell’s inequality under strict Einstein locality conditions. Physical Review Letters, 81, 5039–5043.
Werle, J. (1966). Relativistic theory of reactions. North Holland-Amsterdam, PWN-Warsaw.
Zhang, W., et al. (2022). A device-independent quantum key distribution system for distant users. Nature, 607, 687.
Zhao, S., De Raedt, H., & Michielsen, K. (2008). Event-by-event simulation model of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm experiments. Foundations of Physics, 38, 322–347.
Żukowski, M., & Brukner, Č. (2014). Quantum non-locality—It ain’t necessarily so. Journal of Physics a: Mathematical and Theoretical, 47, 424009.
Funding
This research received no external findings.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
The author confirms being the sole contributor of this article.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Kupczynski, M. My Discussions of Quantum Foundations with John Stewart Bell. Found Sci (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10699-024-09946-z
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10699-024-09946-z