# The Status of Determinism in Proofs of the Impossibility of a Noncontextual Model of Quantum Theory

- 391 Downloads
- 15 Citations

## Abstract

In order to claim that one has experimentally tested whether a noncontextual ontological model could underlie certain measurement statistics in quantum theory, it is necessary to have a notion of noncontextuality that applies to unsharp measurements, i.e., those that can only be represented by positive operator-valued measures rather than projection-valued measures. This is because any realistic measurement necessarily has some nonvanishing amount of noise and therefore never achieves the ideal of sharpness. Assuming a generalized notion of noncontextuality that applies to arbitrary experimental procedures, it is shown that the outcome of a measurement depends deterministically on the ontic state of the system being measured if and only if the measurement is sharp. Hence for every unsharp measurement, its outcome necessarily has an *in*deterministic dependence on the ontic state. We defend this proposal against alternatives. In particular, we demonstrate why considerations parallel to Fine’s theorem do not challenge this conclusion.

## Keywords

Quantum contextuality Kochen–Specker theorem Quantum foundations Positive operator valued measures Quantum measurement theory## Notes

### Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank John Sipe and Howard Wiseman for their insistence that the topic of outcome-determinism for unsharp measurements deserved a better treatment. Thanks also to Ernesto Galvão, Ben Toner, Howard Wiseman, and Ravi Kunjwal for discussions, and to an anonymous referee for suggesting a simplification of the proof of Theorem 1. Research at Perimeter Institute is supported in part by the Government of Canada through NSERC and by the Province of Ontario through MRI.

## References

- 1.Bell, J.S.: On the problem of hidden variables in quantum mechanics. Rev. Mod. Phys.
**38**, 447 (1966). (Reprinted in Ref. [3], chap. 1.)Google Scholar - 2.Kochen, S., Specker, E.P.: The problem of hidden variables in quantum mechanics. J. Math. Mech.
**17**, 59 (1967)MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar - 3.Bell, J.S.: Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics. Cambridge University Press, New York (1987)MATHGoogle Scholar
- 4.Cabello, A., Garcia-Alcaine, G.: Proposed experimental tests of the Bell-Kochen-Specker theorem. Phys. Rev. Lett.
**80**, 1797 (1998)CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar - 5.Simon, C., Brukner, C., Zeilinger, A.: Hidden variable theorems for real experiments. Phys. Rev. Lett.
**86**, 4427–4430 (2001)CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar - 6.Larsson, J.-A.: A Kochen-Specker inequality. Europhys. Lett.
**58**, 799–805 (2002)CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar - 7.Spekkens, R.W.: Contextuality for preparations, transformations, and unsharp measurements. Phys. Rev. A
**71**, 052108 (2005)CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar - 8.Bell, J.S.: On the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox. Physics
**1**, 195 (1964). (Reprinted in Ref. [3], chap. 2.)Google Scholar - 9.Busch, P.: Quantum states and generalized observables: a simple proof of Gleason’s theorem. Phys. Rev. Lett.
**91**, 120403 (2003)MathSciNetCrossRefADSGoogle Scholar - 10.Cabello, A.: Kochen-Specker theorem for a single Qubit using positive operator-valued measures. Phys. Rev. Lett.
**90**, 190401 (2003)MathSciNetCrossRefADSGoogle Scholar - 11.Caves, C.M., Fuchs, C.A., Manne, K., Renes, J.M.: Gleason-type derivations of the quantum probability rule for generalized measurements. Found. Phys.
**34**, 193 (2004)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHADSGoogle Scholar - 12.Aravind, P.K.: The generalized Kochen-Specker theorem. Phys. Rev. A
**68**, 052104 (2003)MathSciNetCrossRefADSGoogle Scholar - 13.Methot, A.A.: Minimal Bell-Kochen-Specker proofs with POVMs on qubits. Int. J. Quantum Inf.
**5**, 353 (2007)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar - 14.Zhang, Q., Li, H., Yang, T., Yin, J., Du, J., Pan, J.W.: Experimental test of the Kochen-Specker theorem for single qubits using positive operator-valued measures. arXiv:0412049v2 (2004)
- 15.Mancinska, L., Scarpa, G., Severini, S.: New separations in zero-error channel capacity through projective Kochen-Specker sets and quantum coloring. IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory
**59**, 4025 (2013)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 16.Fine, A.: Hidden variables, joint probability, and the Bell inequalities. Phys. Rev. Lett.
**48**, 291 (1982)MathSciNetCrossRefADSGoogle Scholar - 17.Simon, C., Brukner, C., Zeilinger, A.: Hidden-variable theorems for real experiments. Phys. Rev. Lett.
**86**, 4427 (2001)CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar - 18.Peres, A.: Quantum Theory: Concepts and Methods. Kluwer Academic, Boston (1995)MATHGoogle Scholar
- 19.Harrigan, N., Spekkens, R.W.: Einstein, incompleteness, and the epistemic view of quantum states. Found. Phys.
**40**, 125 (2010)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHADSGoogle Scholar - 20.Spekkens, R.W.: The paradigm of kinematics and dynamics must yield to causal structure. arXiv:1209.0023 (2012)
- 21.Harrigan, N., Rudolph, T.: Ontological models and the interpretation of contextuality. arXiv:0709.4266 (2007)
- 22.Hardy, L.: Nonlocality for two particles without inequalities for almost all entangled states. Phys. Rev. Lett.
**71**, 1665 (1993)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHADSGoogle Scholar - 23.Greenberger, D.M., Horne, M.A., Zeilinger, A.: Going beyond Bells theorem. In Bells theorem, quantum theory and conceptions of the universe (pp. 69–72). Springer, Netherlands (1989).Google Scholar
- 24.Spekkens, R.W., Buzacott, D.H., Keehn, A.J., Toner, B., Pryde, G.J.: Preparation contextuality powers parity-oblivious multiplexing. Phys. Rev. Lett.
**102**, 010401 (2009)CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar - 25.Howard, M., Wallman, J., Veitch, V., Emerson, J.: Contextuality supplies the magic for quantum computation. Nature
**510**, 351 (2014)ADSGoogle Scholar - 26.Bartlett, S.D., Rudolph, T., Spekkens, R.W.: Reconstruction of Gaussian quantum mechanics from Liouville mechanics with an epistemic restriction. Phys. Rev. A
**86**, 012103 (2012)CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar - 27.Gross, D.: Hudsons theorem for finite-dimensional quantum systems. J. Math. Phys.
**47**, 122107 (2006)MathSciNetCrossRefADSGoogle Scholar - 28.Spekkens, R.W.: Negativity and contextuality are equivalent notions of nonclassicality. Phys. Rev. Lett.
**101**, 020401 (2008)MathSciNetCrossRefADSGoogle Scholar - 29.Grudka, A., Kurzynski, P.: Is there contextuality for a single qubit? Phys. Rev. Lett.
**100**, 160401 (2008)MathSciNetCrossRefADSGoogle Scholar - 30.Toner, B.F., Bacon, D., Ben-Or, M.: Kochen-Specker theorem for generalized measurements. Unpublished manuscript (2005).Google Scholar
- 31.Kunjwal, R., Ghosh, S.: A minimal state-dependent proof of measurement contextuality for a qubit. arXiv:1305.7009 (2013)
- 32.Liang, Y.C., Spekkens, R.W., Wiseman, H.M.: Specker’s parable of the overprotective seer: a road to contextuality, nonlocality and complementarity. Phys. Rep.
**506**, 1 (2011)MathSciNetCrossRefADSGoogle Scholar - 33.Spekkens, R.W., Kunjwal, R.: In preparation.Google Scholar