MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413764826 · doi:10.22331/q-2025-07-31-1819

Connecting extended Wigner's friend arguments and noncontextuality

2025· article· en· W4413764826 on OpenAlexafffund
Laurens Walleghem, Yìlè Yīng, Rafael Wagner, David Schmid

Bibliographic record

VenueQuantum · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum Mechanics and Applications
Canadian institutionsPerimeter InstituteUniversity of Waterloo
FundersFundação para a Ciência e a TecnologiaMinistry of Colleges and UniversitiesInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueFundacja na rzecz Nauki PolskiejNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGovernment of Canada
KeywordsEnvironmental sciencePhysicsHydrology (agriculture)Geology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Local Friendliness argument is an extended Wigner's friend no-go theorem that provides strong constraints on the nature of reality – stronger even than those imposed by Bell's theorem or by noncontextuality arguments. In this work, we prove a variety of connections between Local Friendliness scenarios and Kochen-Specker noncontextuality. Specifically, we first show how one can derive new Local Friendliness inequalities using known tools and results from the literature on Kochen-Specker noncontextuality. In doing so, we provide a new derivation for some of the facets of the Local Friendliness polytope, and we prove that this polytope is equal to the Bell polytope in a wide range of extended Wigner's friend scenarios with multipartite agents and sequential measurements. We then show how any possibilistic Kochen-Specker argument can be mathematically translated into a related proof of the Local Friendliness no-go theorem. In particular, we construct a novel kind of Local Friendliness scenario where a friend implements several compatible measurements (or joint measurements of these) in between the superobserver's operations on them. We illustrate this with the well-known 5-cycle and Peres-Mermin contextuality arguments.

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 score0.095
Threshold uncertainty score0.536

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.303 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQuantumSame topicQuantum Mechanics and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207