• Christina GiarmatziEmail author
Part of the Springer Theses book series (Springer Theses)


What happened to causality? This is the notion with which we understand nature: some event A causes another event B. According to general relativity, such relations are only feasible through a spacetime, in that it has to allow information to travel from A to B, and spacetimes are dynamical—they are shaped by nearby massive objects. At first sight, it seems that quantum mechanics is consistent with causality: something that happened in a quantum system at point A (say preparation) can be the cause of what happens at a later point B (say measurement). But what happens when we create a superposition of such scenarios?


  1. 1.
    Hardy L (2007) Towards quantum gravity: a framework for probabilistic theories with non-fixed causal structure 40:3081–3099Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hardy L, Myrvold WC, Christian J (2009) Quantum gravity computers: on the theory of computation with indefinite causal structure. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 379–401Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chiribella G, D’Ariano GM, Perinotti P, Valiron B (2013) Quantum computations without definite causal structure. Phys Rev A 88:022318. arXiv:0912.0195
  4. 4.
    Chiribella G, D’Ariano GM, Perinotti P (2008) Transforming quantum operations: quantum supermaps 83:30004ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chiribella G (2012) Perfect discrimination of no-signalling channels via quantum superposition of causal structures. Phys Rev A 86:040301. arXiv:1109.5154
  6. 6.
    Oreshkov O, Costa F, Brukner Č (2012) Quantum correlations with no causal order. Nat Commun 3:1092Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Costa F, Shrapnel S (2016) Quantum causal modelling. New J Phys 18:063032CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Giarmatzi C, Costa F (2018) A quantum causal discovery algorithm. npj Quantum Inf 4:17Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pearl J (2009) Causality. Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Allen J-MA, Barrett J, Horsman DC, Lee CM, Spekkens RW (2016) Quantum common causes and quantum causal models 1609:09487Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Araújo M, Costa F, Brukner Č (2014) Computational advantage from quantum-controlled ordering of gates. Phys Rev Lett 113:250402. arXiv:1401.8127
  12. 12.
    Zhao X, Giulio C (2019) Advantage of indefinite causal order in quantum metrology. In: Quantum information and measurement (QIM) V: Quantum Technologies, F5A.23, Optical Society of America, RomeGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Feix A, Araújo M, Brukner Č (2015) Quantum superposition of the order of parties as a communication resource. Phys Rev A 92:052326ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Guérin PA, Feix A, Araújo M, Brukner Č (2016) Exponential communication complexity advantage from quantum superposition of the direction of communication. Phys Rev Lett 117:100502ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Giulio C (2018) Indefinite causal order enables perfect quantum communication with zero capacity channel 1810:10457Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ebler D, Salek S, Chiribella G (2018) Enhanced communication with the assistance of indefinite causal order. Phys Rev Lett 120:120502ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sina S (2018) Quantum communication in a superposition of causal orders 1809:06655Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Oreshkov O, Giarmatzi C (2016) Causal and causally separable processes. New J Phys 18:093020CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Oreshkov O (2018) Time-delocalized quantum subsystems and operations: on the existence of processes with indefinite causal structure in quantum mechanics 1801:07594Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Oreshkov O, Cerf NJ (2015) Operational formulation of time reversal in quantum theory. Nat Phys 11:853 EPADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Oreshkov O, Cerf NJ (2016) Operational quantum theory without predefined time 18:073037ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Araújo M et al (2015) Witnessing causal nonseparability. New J Phys 17:102001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Milz S, Pollock FA, Le TP, Chiribella G, Modi K (2018) Entanglement, non-markovianity, and causal non-separability 20:033033ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Giarmatzi C, Costa F (2018) Witnessing quantum memory in non-Markovian processes. arXiv:1811.03722 [quant-ph]
  25. 25.
    Ho CTM, Costa F, Giarmatzi C, Ralph TC (2018) Violation of a causal inequality in a spacetime with definite causal order. arXiv:1804.05498 [quant-ph]
  26. 26.
    Wechs J, Abbott AA, Branciard C (2019) On the definition and characterisation of multipartite causal (non)separability 21:013027Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Friis N, Dunjko V, Dür W, Briegel HJ (2014) Implementing quantum control for unknown subroutines. Phys Rev A 89:030303Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Procopio LM et al (2015) Experimental superposition of orders of quantum gates. Nat Commun 6:7913 EPGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Friis N, Melnikov AA, Kirchmair G, Briegel HJ (2015) Coherent controlization using superconducting qubits. Sci Rep 5:18036 EPGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Rubino G et al (2017) Experimental verification of an indefinite causal order. Sci Adv 3:e1602589ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Goswami K et al (2018) Indefinite causal order in a quantum switch. Phys Rev Lett 121:090503Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Abbott AA, Giarmatzi C, Costa F, Branciard C (2016) Multipartite causal correlations: polytopes and inequalities. Phys Rev A 94:032131ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ringbauer M et al (2016) Experimental test of nonlocal causality. Sci Adv 2.
  34. 34.
    Chaves R, Kueng R, Brask JB, Gross D (2015) Unifying framework for relaxations of the causal assumptions in bell’s theorem. Phys Rev Lett 114:140403ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Mathematics and PhysicsThe University of QueenslandBrisbaneAustralia

Personalised recommendations