Contextuality, Complementarity, Signaling, and Bell tests
Andrei Khrennikov

TL;DR
This review explores the interplay between contextuality, complementarity, and signaling in quantum mechanics, emphasizing how Bell inequalities serve as tests for contextuality and how signaling affects these tests.
Contribution
It clarifies the relationship between contextuality and Bell inequalities, introduces the concept of signaling in experimental data, and discusses the framework of Contextuality by Default (CbD).
Findings
Bell inequalities test for joint measurement contextuality.
Signaling can be an experimental artifact or an intrinsic feature.
Bell-Dzhafarov-Kujala inequalities quantify signaling effects.
Abstract
This is a review devoted to the complementarity-contextuality interplay with connection to the Bell inequalities. Starting discussion with complementarity, we point out to contextuality as its seed. {\it Bohr-contextuality} is dependence of observable's outcome on the experimental context, on system-apparatus interaction. Probabilistically, complementarity means that the {\it joint probability distribution} (JPD) does not exist. Instead of the JPD, one has to operate with contextual probabilities. The Bell inequalities are interpreted as the statistical tests of contextuality and, hence, incompatibility. For context dependent probabilities, these inequalities may be violated. We stress that contextuality tested by the Bell inequalities is so called {\it joint measurement contextualit}y (JMC), the special case of Bohr's contextuality. Then, we examine the role of signaling (marginal…
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.
Taxonomy
TopicsQuantum Mechanics and Applications · Statistical Mechanics and Entropy
