Quantifying EPR: the resource theory of nonclassicality of common-cause assemblages
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) steering is often (implicitly or explicitly) taken to be evidence for spooky action-at-a-distance. An alternative perspective on steering is that Alice has no causal influence on the physical state of Bob's system; rather, Alice merely updates her knowledge of the state of Bob's system by performing a measurement on a system correlated with his. In this work, we elaborate on this perspective (from which the very term 'steering' is seen to be inappropriate), and we are led to a resource-theoretic treatment of correlations in EPR scenarios. For both bipartite and multipartite scenarios, we develop the resulting resource theory, wherein the free operations are local operations and shared randomness (LOSR). We show that resource conversion under free operations in this paradigm can be evaluated with a single instance of a semidefinite program, making the problem numerically tractable. Moreover, we find that the structure of the pre-order of resources features interesting properties, such as infinite families of incomparable resources. In showing this, we derive new EPR resource monotones. We also discuss advantages of our approach over a pre-existing proposal for a resource theory of 'steering', and discuss how our approach sheds light on basic questions, such as which multipartite assemblages are classically explainable.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".