Addressing some common objections to generalized noncontextuality
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2302.07282v2
- Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2024 08:45:16 GMT
- Title: Addressing some common objections to generalized noncontextuality
- Authors: David Schmid, John H. Selby, Robert W. Spekkens
- Abstract summary: We respond to criticisms about the definition of generalized noncontextuality and the possibility of testing it experimentally.
One objection is that the existence of a classical record of which laboratory procedure was actually performed in each run of an experiment implies that the operational equivalence relations that are a necessary ingredient of any proof of the failure of noncontextuality do not hold.
- Score: 0.0
- License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
- Abstract: When should a given operational phenomenology be deemed to admit of a
classical explanation? When it can be realized in a generalized-noncontextual
ontological model. The case for answering the question in this fashion has been
made in many previous works, and motivates research on the notion of
generalized noncontextuality. Many criticisms and concerns have been raised,
however, regarding the definition of this notion and of the possibility of
testing it experimentally. In this work, we respond to some of the most common
of these objections. One such objection is that the existence of a classical
record of which laboratory procedure was actually performed in each run of an
experiment implies that the operational equivalence relations that are a
necessary ingredient of any proof of the failure of noncontextuality do not
hold, and consequently that conclusions of nonclassicality based on these
equivalences are mistaken. We explain why this concern in unfounded. Our
response affords the opportunity for us to clarify certain facts about
generalized noncontextuality, such as the possibility of having proofs of its
failure based on a consideration of the subsystem structure of composite
systems. Similarly, through our responses to each of the other objections, we
elucidate some under-appreciated facts about the notion of generalized
noncontextuality and experimental tests thereof.
Related papers
- Shadows and subsystems of generalized probabilistic theories: when tomographic incompleteness is not a loophole for contextuality proofs [0.0]
We show that proofs of the failure of noncontextuality are robust to a very broad class of failures of tomographic completeness.
We also introduce the notion of a shadow of a GPT fragment, which captures the information lost when one's states and effects are unknowingly not tomographic for one another.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-09-19T18:00:42Z) - Know your exceptions: Towards an Ontology of Exceptions in Knowledge
Representation [1.6574413179773757]
Defeasible reasoning is a kind of reasoning where some generalisations may not be valid in all circumstances.
Various formalisms have been developed to model this kind of reasoning.
It is not easy for a modeller to choose among these systems the one that better fits its domain from an ontological point of view.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-03-01T17:19:35Z) - UNcommonsense Reasoning: Abductive Reasoning about Uncommon Situations [62.71847873326847]
We investigate the ability to model unusual, unexpected, and unlikely situations.
Given a piece of context with an unexpected outcome, this task requires reasoning abductively to generate an explanation.
We release a new English language corpus called UNcommonsense.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-11-14T19:00:55Z) - Abductive Commonsense Reasoning Exploiting Mutually Exclusive
Explanations [118.0818807474809]
Abductive reasoning aims to find plausible explanations for an event.
Existing approaches for abductive reasoning in natural language processing often rely on manually generated annotations for supervision.
This work proposes an approach for abductive commonsense reasoning that exploits the fact that only a subset of explanations is correct for a given context.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-05-24T01:35:10Z) - How Do In-Context Examples Affect Compositional Generalization? [86.57079616209474]
In this paper, we present CoFe, a test suite to investigate in-context compositional generalization.
We find that the compositional generalization performance can be easily affected by the selection of in-context examples.
Our systematic experiments indicate that in-context examples should be structurally similar to the test case, diverse from each other, and individually simple.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-05-08T16:32:18Z) - On the system loophole of generalized noncontextuality [0.0]
We introduce the concept of the noncontextuality graph of a prepare-and-measure scenario.
We argue that whether or not an experiment is noncontextual is not as absolute as often perceived.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-09-09T18:00:38Z) - Observing Interventions: A logic for thinking about experiments [62.997667081978825]
This paper makes a first step towards a logic of learning from experiments.
Crucial for our approach is the idea that the notion of an intervention can be used as a formal expression of a (real or hypothetical) experiment.
For all the proposed logical systems, we provide a sound and complete axiomatization.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-11-25T09:26:45Z) - Violating the KCBS inequality with a toy mechanism [0.0]
We show a thought experiment'' where a classical object obeying the laws of classical physics is used to generate experimental data violating the KCBS inequality.
We give special attention to the distinction between classical realism and classicality, and to the contrast between contextuality within and beyond quantum theory.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-09-16T00:36:31Z) - Nested Counterfactual Identification from Arbitrary Surrogate
Experiments [95.48089725859298]
We study the identification of nested counterfactuals from an arbitrary combination of observations and experiments.
Specifically, we prove the counterfactual unnesting theorem (CUT), which allows one to map arbitrary nested counterfactuals to unnested ones.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-07-07T12:51:04Z) - Contextuality without incompatibility [0.7421845364041001]
We show that measurement incompatibility is neither necessary nor sufficient for proofs of the failure of generalized noncontextuality.
We show that every proof of the failure of generalized noncontextuality in a quantum prepare-measure scenario can be converted into a proof of the failure of generalized noncontextuality in a corresponding scenario with no incompatible measurements.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-06-16T18:00:04Z) - In Search of Robust Measures of Generalization [79.75709926309703]
We develop bounds on generalization error, optimization error, and excess risk.
When evaluated empirically, most of these bounds are numerically vacuous.
We argue that generalization measures should instead be evaluated within the framework of distributional robustness.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-10-22T17:54:25Z)
This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.
This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.