The platform will undergo maintenance on Sep 14 at about 9:30 AM EST and will be unavailable for approximately 1 hour.
2010
DOI: 10.1103/physreva.81.022121
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Compatibility and noncontextuality for sequential measurements

Abstract: A basic assumption behind the inequalities used for testing noncontextual hidden variable models is that the observables measured on the same individual system are perfectly compatible. However, compatibility is not perfect in actual experiments using sequential measurements. We discuss the resulting "compatibility loophole" and present several methods to rule out certain hidden variable models that obey a kind of extended noncontextuality. Finally, we present a detailed analysis of experimental imperfections … Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2

Citation Types

0
157
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 104 publications
(165 citation statements)
references
References 58 publications
(121 reference statements)
0
157
0
Order By: Relevance
“…It should be remarked how the falsification of a KS inequality faces rather challenging hurdles related to the feasibility of tests that, while are capable of maintaining state independence, also guarantee that all the necessary observables are measured in a context-independent way [7]. Cabello [8] has recently addressed these points by providing inequalities that strictly meet the criteria mentioned above.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It should be remarked how the falsification of a KS inequality faces rather challenging hurdles related to the feasibility of tests that, while are capable of maintaining state independence, also guarantee that all the necessary observables are measured in a context-independent way [7]. Cabello [8] has recently addressed these points by providing inequalities that strictly meet the criteria mentioned above.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It adopts two forms: (i) that there is no operational definition of compatibility, and (ii) that there is no experimental way to guarantee that the sequential measurements are perfectly compatible-the so-called compatibility loophole [15]. However, there is an operational definition of compatibility [16]; the problem lies in experimentally testing it, since it is difficult to implement the sharp repeatable quantum measurements assumed in the textbooks.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, none of these experiments on SIQC is free of the compatibility loophole [11]. With the imperfections in the sequential measurements of these experiments we would need an inequality tolerating ε ≈ 0.48.…”
Section: Resistance To Imperfectionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This correction takes the form b → b ′ = b + N i=1 φ i , where φ i > 0 can be obtained from additional experiments [11].…”
Section: Resistance To Imperfectionsmentioning
confidence: 99%