(Hypothetical) Negative Probabilities Can Speed Up Uncertainty Propagation Algorithms

  • Andrzej Pownuk
  • Vladik Kreinovich
Part of the Studies in Big Data book series (SBD, volume 33)


One of the main features of quantum physics is that, as basic objects describing uncertainty, instead of (non-negative) probabilities and probability density functions, we have complex-valued probability amplitudes and wave functions. In particular, in quantum computing, negative amplitudes are actively used. In the current quantum theories, the actual probabilities are always non-negative. However, there have been some speculations about the possibility of actually negative probabilities. In this paper, we show that such hypothetical negative probabilities can lead to a drastic speed up of uncertainty propagation algorithms.



This work was supported in part:

\(\bullet \) by the National Science Foundation grants

\(\quad \bullet \) HRD-0734825 and HRD-1242122 (Cyber-ShARE Center of Excellence) and

\(\quad \bullet \) DUE-0926721, and

\(\bullet \) by the award “UTEP and Prudential Actuarial Science Academy and Pipeline Initiative” from Prudential Foundation.


  1. 1.
    Aczél, J.: Lectures on Functional Equations and Their Applications. Dover, New York (2006)MATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dirac, P.A.M.: The physical interpretation of quantum mechanics. Proc. Royal Soc. A: Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 180(980), 1–39 (1942)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Feynman, R.P.: Negative probability. In: Peat, F.D., Hiley, B. (eds.) Quantum Implications: Essays in Honour of David Bohm, pp. 235–248. Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd., Abingdon-on-Thames, UK (1987)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Feynman, R., Leighton, R., Sands, M.: The Feynman Lectures on Physics. Addison Wesley, Boston, Massachusetts (2005)MATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fishburn, P.C.: Utility Theory for Decision Making. Wiley, New York (1969)MATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kreinovich, V., Ferson, S.: A new Cauchy-based black-box technique for uncertainty in risk analysis. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 85(1–3), 267–279 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Luce, R.D., Raiffa, R.: Games and Decisions: Introduction and Critical Survey. Dover, New York (1989)MATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Nguyen, H.T., Kosheleva, O., Kreinovich, V.: Decision making beyond Arrow’s ‘impossibility theorem’, with the analysis of effects of collusion and mutual attraction. Int. J. Intell. Syst. 24(1), 27–47 (2009)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nielsen, M.A., Chuang, I.L.: Quantum Computation and Quantum Information. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K. (2000)MATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rabinovich, S.G.: Measurement Errors and Uncertainty. Theory and Practice. Springer Verlag, Berlin (2005)MATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Raiffa, H.: Decision Analysis. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts (1970)MATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Samorodnitsky, G., Taqqu, M.S.: Stable Non-Gaussian Random Proceses Stochastic Models with Infinite Variance. Chapman & Hall, New York (1994)MATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sheskin, D.J.: Handbook of Parametric and Nonparametric Statistical Procedures. Chapman and Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, Florida (2011)MATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Computational Science ProgramUniversity of Texas at El PasoEl PasoUSA

Personalised recommendations