MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2765595974 · doi:10.1103/prxquantum.2.020302

Experimentally Bounding Deviations From Quantum Theory in the Landscape of Generalized Probabilistic Theories

2021· article· en· W2765595974 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenuePRX Quantum · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum Mechanics and Applications
Canadian institutionsPerimeter InstituteUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueRoyal Commission for the Exhibition of 1851Ontario Ministry of Research, Innovation and ScienceCanada Research ChairsGovernment of CanadaIndustry CanadaCanada Foundation for InnovationOntario Centres of Excellence
KeywordsMathematicsQuantumCorrectnessPhotonQuantum field theoryStatistical physicsProbabilistic logicQuantum mechanicsPolarization (electrochemistry)Theoretical physicsPhysicsMathematical physicsStatisticsAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many experiments in the field of quantum foundations seek to adjudicate between quantum theory and speculative alternatives to it. This requires one to analyze the experimental data in a manner that does not presume the correctness of the quantum formalism. The mathematical framework of generalized probabilistic theories (GPTs) provides a means of doing so. We present a scheme for determining which GPTs are consistent with a given set of experimental data. It proceeds by performing tomography on the preparations and measurements in a self-consistent manner, i.e., without presuming a prior characterization of either. We illustrate the scheme by analyzing experimental data for a large set of preparations and measurements on the polarization degree of freedom of a single photon. We first test various hypotheses for the dimension of the GPT vector space for this degree of freedom. Our analysis identifies the most plausible hypothesis to be dimension 4, which is the value predicted by quantum theory. Under this hypothesis, we can draw the following additional conclusions from our scheme: (i) that the smallest and largest GPT state spaces that could describe photon polarization are a pair of polytopes, each approximating the shape of the Bloch sphere and having a volume ratio of 0.977 0.001, which provides a quantitative bound on the scope for deviations from the state and effect spaces predicted by quantum theory, and (ii) that the maximal violation of the Clauser, Horne, Shimony, and Holt inequality can be at most 1.3% 0.1 greater than the maximum violation allowed by quantum theory, and the maximal violation of a particular inequality for universal noncontextuality can not differ from the quantum prediction by more than this factor on either side. The only possibility for a greater deviation from the quantum state and effect spaces or for greater degrees of supraquantum nonlocality or contextuality, according to our analysis, is if a future experiment (perhaps following the scheme developed here) discovers that additional dimensions of GPT vector space are required to describe photon polarization, in excess of the four dimensions predicted by quantum theory to be adequate to the task.

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.

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 score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.757

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.257 · 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