MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2329459680 · doi:10.1103/physreva.87.032105

Experimental violation of three families of Bell's inequalities

2013· article· en· W2329459680 on OpenAlexaff
L. Vermeyden, Madeleine Bonsma, Crystal Noel, John M. Donohue, Elie Wolfe, K. J. Resch

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review A · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum Mechanics and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsHidden variable theoryQuantum nonlocalityQuantumLocal hidden variable theoryBell test experimentsBell's theoremPhotonQuantum mechanicsWork (physics)Statistical physicsTheoretical physicsQuantum entanglement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bell's inequalities are important to our understanding of quantum foundations and critical to several quantum technologies. A recent work [E. Wolfe and S. F. Yelin, Phys. Rev. A 86, 012123 (2012)] derived three parametrized families of two-particle, two-setting Bell inequalities. These inequalities are important as they theoretically explore a larger volume of allowed quantum correlations over local hidden-variable models than previous results [A. Cabello, Phys. Rev. A 72, 012113 (2005)] by exploiting marginal, or single particle measurements. In this work we subject those predictions to experimental test using nonmaximally entangled photon pairs to optimize the expected violation. We find excellent agreement with the upper bounds predicted by quantum mechanics with violations of the limits imposed by local hidden-variable models as large as almost 30$\ensuremath{\sigma}$ for the optimal parameters and a significant violation over a wide range of parameters.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.138
Threshold uncertainty score0.266

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.284 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review ASame topicQuantum Mechanics and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207