On the tightness of correlation inequalities with no quantum violation
Ravishankar Ramanathan, Marco T\'ulio Quintino, Ana Bel\'en Sainz,, Gl\'aucia Murta, Remigiusz Augusiak

TL;DR
This paper investigates the structure of quantum correlations and Bell inequalities with no quantum violation, revealing that some well-known non-violation examples are not tight and exploring the geometric properties of these inequalities.
Contribution
It introduces a bound on the quantum value of linear games, shows non-local computation games are not tight Bell inequalities, and relates non-contextual inequalities to cut polytopes, advancing understanding of quantum correlation faces.
Findings
Non-local computation games do not form tight Bell inequalities.
A bound on quantum value of linear games based on game matrix norms.
Existence of tight non-contextuality inequalities with no quantum violation.
Abstract
We study the faces of the set of quantum correlations, i.e., the Bell and noncontextuality inequalities without any quantum violation. First, we investigate the question whether every proper (tight) Bell inequality for two parties, other than the trivial ones from positivity, normalization and no-signaling can be violated by quantum correlations, i.e., whether the classical Bell polytope or the smaller correlation polytope share any facets with their respective quantum sets. To do this, we develop a recently derived bound on the quantum value of linear games based on the norms of game matrices to give a simple sufficient condition to identify linear games with no quantum advantage. Additionally we show how this bound can be extended to the general class of unique games, illustrating it for the case of three outcomes. We then show as a main result that the paradigmatic examples of…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
