# Analysis of assumptions in BIG Bell Test experiments

## TL;DR

This paper critically examines assumptions in recent Bell test experiments involving human-generated randomness, highlighting loopholes and emphasizing the need for improved experimental calibration to reliably test local realism.

## Contribution

It provides a detailed analysis of anomalies in existing experiments, identifying loopholes caused by assumptions like fair sampling and no signaling, and suggests improvements for future tests.

## Key findings

- Identified anomalies related to signaling and sampling assumptions
- Highlighted the need for better setup calibration in Bell tests
- Analyzed data from 9 experiments to assess assumption validity

## Abstract

Recently, a group of experiments tested local realism with random choices prepared by humans. These various tests were subject to additional assumptions, which lead to loopholes in the interpretations of almost all of the experiments. Among these assumptions are fair sampling, no signaling, and faithful reproduction of a Bell-type quantum model. We examined the data from 9 of 13 experiments and analyzed occurring anomalies in view of the above assumptions. We conclude that further tests of local realism need better setup calibration to avoid apparent signaling or necessity of the complicated underlying quantum model.