Comment on "Experimentally adjudicating between different causal accounts of Bell-inequality violations via statistical model selection"

TL;DR

This paper critiques a recent claim that superdeterministic models are disfavored in Bell experiments, highlighting that overfitting alone is insufficient to judge a model's validity and providing context on the limited scope of models analyzed.

Contribution

It offers additional context on superdeterministic models and emphasizes the limitations of using overfitting as the sole criterion for model evaluation.

Findings

Few superdeterministic models are analyzed in the original study.

Overfitting is not a definitive measure of a model's overall validity.

The scope of models considered in the original critique is limited.

Abstract

In a recent paper (Phys. Rev. A 105, 042220 (2022)), Daley et al claim that some superdeterministic models are disfavoured against standard quantum mechanics, because such models overfit the statistics of a Bell-type experiment which the authors conducted. We add to the discussion by providing additional context about how few superdeterministic models fall into the category they analyse, and by emphasising that overfitting, while better as a measure of finetuning than other measures given in the literature, does not necessarily indicate a model is universally bad.