MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2748997175 · doi:10.13034/jsst.v10i1.164

Loophole-Free Bell Tests and the Falsification of Local Realism

2017· article· en· W2748997175 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Student Science and Technology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum Mechanics and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuantum nonlocalityRealismLocalityLocal hidden variable theoryBell test experiments

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quantum mechanics is strictly incompatible with local realism. It has been shown by Bell and others that it is possible, in principle, to experimentally differentiate between local realism and quantum mechanics. Numerous experiments have attempted to falsify local realism; however, they have consistently failed to close the detection loophole under strict locality conditions, thereby allowing local realistic explanations for their observations. In 2015, three experiments took place that tested local realism without the impediments of these significant loopholes. Between these three experiments, a substantial data set was collected. All of the collected data show a strong violation of local realism and strong support for quantum mechanics. This article reviews the theoretical basis of Bell tests and the affiliated loopholes, as well as the methods employed by these recent experiments and the implications of the results they observed. La mécanique quantique est strictement incompatible avec le réalisme local. Bell et d’autres scientifiques ont montré qu’il est possible, en théorie, de trouver la différence entre le réalisme local et la mécanique quantique expérimentalement. De nombreuses expériences ont tenté de falsifier le réalisme local; cependant, elles ont toujours échoué à combler la faille de détection dans des conditions de localité strictes, permettant ainsi des explications réalistes locales pour leurs observations. En 2015, trois expériences ont testé le réalisme local sans les entraves de ces failles importantes. Entre ces trois expériences, des données substantielles ont été recueillies. Toutes les données recueillies ont montré une forte déviation du réalisme local et un appui solid pour la mécanique quantique. Cet article examine les bases théoriques des tests de Bell et les failles af liées, ainsi que les méthodes employées par ces expériences récentes et les implications de leurs résultats.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Review
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablehigh
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Review
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Theoretical or conceptualhigh
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.001
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 score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.544

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.290 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designNot applicable · Theoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Student Science and TechnologySame topicQuantum Mechanics and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207