COVID-19 information for PI Residents and Visitors
2017 marks 50 years since the seminal 1967 article of Kochen and Specker proving that quantum theory fails to admit of a noncontextual model. Despite the fact that the Kochen-Specker theorem is one of the seminal results concerning the foundations of quantum theory, there has never been a large conference dedicated to the subject. The 50-year anniversary of the theorem seems an opportune time to remedy this oversight. Furthermore, in the last decade, there have been tremendous advances in the field. New life has been breathed into the subject as old conceptual issues have been re-examined from a new information-theoretic perspective. Importantly, there has been great progress in making the notion of noncontextuality robust to noise and therefore experimentally testable. Finally, there is mounting evidence that the resource that powers many quantum advantages for information processing is contextuality. In particular, it has been shown to underlie the possibility of universal quantum computation. Many groups worldwide are actively engaged in advancing our knowledge on each of these fronts and in deepening our understanding of the distinction between quantum and classical theories through the lens of contextuality. Through this conference, we aim to bring together leading researchers in the field in order to develop a broader perspective on the issues, draw connections between different approaches, foster a more cohesive community, and set objectives for future research.
Sponsorship for this event has been provided by:
Registration for this event is now closed.
Please note the following deadlines:
Requests for financial support must be submitted by May 15
Requests to present a poster must be made by May 22
Registration for this event will close on July 7
Perimeter Institute has launched a new program whereby child care support may be available to facilitate your participation in workshops and conferences. Please visit http://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/research/conferences/child-care-support-conference-participants for more information.
- Samson Abramsky, Oxford University
- Stephen Bartlett, University of Sydney
- Juan Bermejo-Vega, Free University of Berlin
- Dan Browne, University College London
- Adán Cabello, Universidad de Sevilla
- Eric Cavalcanti, Griffith University
- Giulio Chiribella, University of Hong Kong
- Otfried Gühne, University of Siegen
- Teiko Heinosaari, University of Turku
- Pawel Horodecki, Gdansk University of Technology
- Angela Karanjai, University of Sydney
- Simon Kochen, Princeton University
- Ravi Kunjwal, Perimetr Institute
- Jan-Åke Larsson, Linkopings University
- Matthew Leifer, Chapman University
- Shane Mansfield, University of Edinburgh
- Michael Mazurek, Institute for Quantum Computing
- Ana Belén Sainz, Perimeter Institute
- Jamie Sikora, Centre for Quantum Technologies
- William Slofstra, Institute for Quantum Computing
- Robert Spekkens, Perimeter Institute
- Mordecai Waegell, Chapman University
- Samson Abramsky, Oxford University
- Barbara Amaral, International Institute of Physics
- Roberto Baldijao, MathFoundQ/UniCamp
- Itzhak Bars, University of Southern California
- Stephen Bartlett, University of Sydney
- Juan Bermejo-Vega, Free University of Berlin
- Agata Branczyk, Perimeter Institute
- Dan Browne, University College London
- Adán Cabello, Universidad de Sevilla
- Giovanni Carù, University of Oxford
- Lorenzo Catani, University College London
- Eric Cavalcanti, Griffith University
- Giulio Chiribella, University of Hong Kong
- Michael Cuffaro, University of Western Ontario
- Nadish De Silva, University College London
- Ross Duncan, University of Strathclyde
- Eric Freda, Chapman University
- Parth Girdhar, University of Sydney
- Elizabeth Gould, Perimeter Institute
- Otfried Gühne, University of Siegen
- Teiko Heinosaari, University of Turku
- Luciana Henaut, University College London
- Pawel Horodecki, Gdansk University of Technology
- Angela Karanjai, University of Sydney
- Martti Karvonen, University of Edinburgh
- Simon Kochen, Princeton University
- Ravi Kunjwal, Perimetr Institute
- Jan-Åke Larsson, Linkopings University
- Matthew Leifer, Chapman University
- Piers Lillystone, University of Waterloo
- Matteo Lostaglio, Institute of Photonic Sciences
- Shruti Jose Maliakal, Indian Institute of Science Education and Research, Mohali
- Shane Mansfield, University of Edinburgh
- Michael Mazurek, Institute for Quantum Computing
- Fei Meng, University of Hong Kong
- Apurva Narayan, University of Waterloo
- Jaskaran Singh Nirankari, Indian Institute of Science Education and Research, Mohali
- Jitenda Prakash, University of Waterloo
- Lorenzo Procopio, CNRS - Universite Paris Sud
- Hammam Qassim, University of Waterloo
- Jess Riedel, Perimeter Institute
- Ana Belén Sainz, Perimeter Institute
- Nitica Sakharwade, Perimeter Institute
- David Schmid, Perimeter Institute
- Jamie Sikora, Centre for Quantum Technologies
- Andrew Simmons, Imperial College London
- Amandeep Singh, Indian Institute of Science Education and Research, Mohali
- John Sipe, University of Toronto
- William Slofstra, Institute for Quantum Computing
- Robert Spekkens, Perimeter Institute
- Jeremy Steeger, University of Notre Dame
- Yu-Tsung Tai, Indiana University
- Kevin Vanslette, University at Albany
- Mordecai Waegell, Chapman University
- Elie Wolfe, Perimeter Institute
Monday, July 24, 2017
Time |
Event |
Location |
8:30 – 8:55am |
Registration |
Reception |
8:55 – 9:00am |
Welcome and Opening Remarks |
Bob Room |
9:00 – 10:00am |
Simon Kochen, Princeton University |
Bob Room |
10:00 – 10:30am |
Coffee Break |
Bistro – 1^{st} floor |
10:30 – 11:30am |
Adán Cabello, Universidad de Sevilla |
Bob Room |
11:30 – 12:30 pm |
Robert Spekkens, Perimeter Institute |
Bob Room |
12:30 – 2:00pm |
Lunch |
Bistro – 1st floor |
2:00 – 3:00pm |
Samson Abramsky, Oxford University |
Bob Room |
3:00 – 3:30pm |
Coffee Break |
Bistro – 1^{st} floor |
3:30 – 4:30pm |
Ana Belén Sainz, Perimeter Institute |
Bob Room |
4:30 – 5:30pm |
Shane Mansfield, University of Edinburgh |
Bob Room |
Tuesday, July 25, 2017
Time |
Event |
Location |
9:00 – 10:00am |
Eric Cavalcanti, Griffith University |
Bob Room |
10:00 – 10:30am |
Coffee Break |
Bistro – 1^{st} floor |
10:30 – 11:30am |
Mordecai Waegell, Chapman University |
Bob Room |
11:30 – 12:30pm |
Matthew Leifer, Chapman University |
Bob Room |
12:30 – 2:00pm |
Lunch |
Bistro – 1st floor |
2:00 – 3:00pm |
Giulio Chiribella, University of Hong Kong |
Bob Room |
3:00 – 3:30pm |
Coffee Break |
Bistro – 1^{st} floor |
3:30 – 4:30pm |
William Slofstra, Institute for Quantum Computing |
Bob Room |
4:30 – 5:00pm |
Poster Session TALKS |
Bob Room |
5:00 – 7:00pm |
Poster Session |
Atrium |
Wednesday, July 26, 2017
Time |
Event |
Location |
10:00 – 10:30am |
Coffee Break |
Bistro – 1^{st} floor |
10:30 – 11:30am |
Jamie Sikor, Centre for Quantum Technologies |
Bob Room |
11:30 – 12:30pm |
Pawel Horodecki, Gdansk University of Technology |
Bob Room |
12:30 – 12:45 |
Conference Photo |
Atrium |
12:45 – 2:00pm |
Lunch |
Bistro – 1st floor |
2:00 – 3:00pm |
Teiko Heinosaari, University of Turku |
Bob Room |
3:00 – 4:00pm |
Discussion Session |
Bob Room |
Thursday, July 27, 2017
Time |
Event |
Location |
10:00 – 11:00am |
Stephen Bartlett, University of Sydney |
Bob Room |
11:00 – 11:30am |
Coffee Break |
Bistro – 1^{st} floor |
11:30 – 12:30am |
Angela Karanjai, University of Sydney |
Bob Room |
12:30 – 2:00pm |
Lunch |
Bistro – 1st floor |
2:00 – 3:00pm |
Dan Browne, University College London |
Bob Room |
3:00 – 3:30pm |
Coffee Break |
Bistro – 1^{st} floor |
3:30 – 4:30pm |
Juan Bermejo-Vega, Free University of Berlin |
Bob Room |
4:30 – 5:30pm |
Jan-Åke Larsson, Linkopings University |
Bob Room |
6:00 – 9:00pm |
Banquet |
Bistro – 2^{nd} Floor |
Friday, July 28, 2017
Time |
Event |
Location |
10:30 – 11:30am |
Otfried Gühne, University of Siegen |
Bob Room |
11:30 – 12:30pm |
Michael Mazurek, Institute for Quantum Computing |
Bob Room |
12:30 – 2:00pm |
Lunch |
Bistro – 1st floor |
2:00 – 3:00pm |
Ravi Kunjwal, Perimeter Institute |
Bob Room |
Samson Abramsky, Oxford University
Towards a mathematical theory of contextuality
The study of contextuality has progressed from sepcific examples to the beginnings of a general theory, which is both of foundational interest, and applicable to the use of contextuality as a resource in quantum information processing, among other things.
There are several different formulations, and a number of general results. We shall describe some recent progress on a number of topics, including: characterizations of the quantum resources required to achieve the various levels in the contextuality hierarchy; characterization of All-versus-Nothing arguments for stabilizer states; a quantum monad encapsulating quantum advantage in constraint systems and non-local games, and its correspondence to quantum witnesses for state-independent strong contextuality; and a quantitative measure for contextuality.
We shall also discuss some problems and objectives for future work.
Stephen Bartlett, University of Sydney
Contextuality and quantum simulation
Simulating quantum systems on a classical computer is typically hard. But why? And how hard is it? One standard approach to simulating quantum systems is to use phase space methods with Monte Carlo sampling of trajectories: an approach that has many similarities with the framework of ontological models. Specifically, a noncontextual ontological model of a quantum process provides an explicit efficient classical simulation of that process. Contextuality can be viewed as a potential obstruction to efficient classical simulation. I'll present some new results showing that, by appropriately incorporating contextuality into the ontological models framework, one can construct a new class of classical simulation methods in which the 'amount' of contextuality appears as a measure of the inefficiency (run time) of the simulator.
Juan Bermejo-Vega, Free University of Berlin
Contextuality as a resource for quantum computation: the trouble with qubits
Co-authors: Robert Raussendorf, Dan E. Browne, Nicolas Delfosse, and Cihan Okay
What are the physical mechanisms that power quantum computation? Recently, quantum contextuality has been shown to be a resource in the model of quantum computation via (magic) state injection (QCSI) in two restricted scenarios: namely, for QCSI models that use either “quopits” (odd-prime dimensional qudits) [1] or “rebits” (two-level systems with real wavefunctions) [2]. Yet, is contextuality a resource for QCSI for models that employ the most fundamental units of quantum information, i.e., regular qubit systems? In this talk I address this question and show how to circumvent an a priori technical obstruction towards characterizing qubit QCSI schemes, namely, the phenomenon of state-independent contextuality. I will establish that contextuality of magic states (with respect to Pauli observables) as a necessary resource for a large class of quantum computation via state-injection schemes on qubits [3,4]. I will further illustrate this result on a concrete example related to measurement-based quantum computation.
Adan Cabello, Universidad de Sevilla
What do we learn about quantum theory from Kochen-Specker quantum contextuality?
Intentionally, I define quantum contextuality as the quantum violation of inequalities involving correlations between the outcomes of compatible {\em sharp} measurements, as defined in the framework of general probabilistic theories, and satisfied by ontological models where the assumption of outcome noncontextuality for sharp measurements is made, as it is the case for the hidden variable theories considered by Bell, Kochen and Specker. These noncontextuality inequalities (specifically, some of them called tight) provide necessary and sufficient conditions for the existence of joint probability distribution. The purpose of my talk is twofold.
Firstly, explaining the reasons why focusing on this particular definition of contextuality teaches us much more about what is quantum theory than focusing on any other proposed notion of non-classicality, including other definitions of contextuality.
Secondly, introducing an alternative to the existing ways of dealing with the inevitable finite precision, imperfect compatibility, and unsharpness of the measurements in actual experiments testing contextuality on quantum systems. I will show that any experiment based on the assumptions that the measurements can have infinite precision, perfect compatibility and sharpness can be converted into a bipartite Bell inequality experiment in which none of these assumptions is needed. The interest of the method resides in that it does not only apply to state-independent experiments based on Kochen-Specker sets, in which the conversion from contextuality into nonlocality was already known, but to any state-dependent or state-independent violation of a noncontextuality inequality. The method provides a one-to-one correspondence between the initial state and the measurements tested in the contextuality experiment and the measurements used in the resulting Bell inequality test.
Eric Cavalcanti, Griffith University
Nonlocality and contextuality as fine-tuning
Nonlocality and contextuality are at the root of conceptual puzzles in quantum mechanics, and are key resources for quantum advantage in information-processing tasks. Bell nonlocality is best understood as the incompatibility between quantum correlations and the classical theory of causality, applied to relativistic causal structure. Contextuality, on the other hand, is on a more controversial foundation. In this work, I provide a common conceptual ground between nonlocality and contextuality as violations of classical causality. First, I generalise a recent work by Wood and Spekkens, who showed that all causal models for certain Bell-inequality violations require fine-tuning of its causal parameters -- regardless of the underlying causal structure. Here I show this result holds without two of the original assumptions, applies to all (bipartite) cases of Bell nonlocality, and remarkably, does not require any assumption related to "free choice", unlike all other derivations of Bell inequalities. As a consequence, it can be applied to contextuality scenarios: all causal models for violations of a Kochen-Specker-contextuality inequality (involving two measurements per context) require fine-tuning. Thus the quantum violation of classical causality goes beyond the case of space-like separated systems, and manifests already in scenarios involving single systems.
Giulio Chiribella, University of Hong Kong
A physical picture for quantum contextuality
Quantum theory is contextual, but is not the most contextual point in the space of all conceivable theories. A natural question is what physical principles, if any, are responsible for the exact amount of contextuality that we observe in nature. I propose that quantum contextuality may arise from the balance between two desiderata: the requirement that every measurement can be realized from a repeatable and minimally disturbing measurement and the requirement that every state can be generated from a pure state. Both requirements are incarnations of the same overarching principle, namely that empirical observations must be compatible with a deeper level of description characterized by maximal knowledge.
References for this talk:
G. Chiribella and X. Yuan, Measurement sharpness cuts nonlocality and contextuality in every physical theory, https://arxiv.org/abs/1404.3348
G. Chiribella and X. Yuan, Bridging the gap between general probabilistic theories and the device-independent framework for nonlocality and contextuality, Information and Computation 250, 15 (2016).
Otfried Gühne, University of Siegen
Contextuality and Temporal Correlations in Quantum Mechanics
Experimental tests of contextuality often make use of sequential measurements on single quantum systems. In this talk I will explore the temporal correlations that can arise, if a sequence of measurements on a single quantum systems is made. First, I will discuss the complexity of such correlations and the difficulty to simulate them classically. Second, I will present methods to characterize temporal correlations, allowing to compute the maximal violation of contextuality inequalities in quantum mechanics. Finally, I will discuss how contextuality tests can be implemented in continuous variable systems, using the concept of modular variables.
Teik Heinosaari, University of Turku
Revisiting quantum incompatibility
Traditionally, two quantum observables are called incompatible if they cannot be measured jointly. The existence of incompatible observables gives rise to e.g steering and measurement uncertainty relations. Incompatibility can be defined not only for observables but also for channels. It can also be defined in any general probabilistic theory. In this talk I will demonstrate how the general notion of incompatibility can be seen as a unifying concept behind several features of quantum theory. I will also comment on the special nature of incompatibility in quantum theory compared to some other probabilistic theories.
Pawel Horodecki, Gdansk University of Technology
On two quantum-information processing applications of quantum contextuality
Angela Karanjai, University of Sydney
Contextuality, the PBR theorem and their effects on simulation of quantum systems
This talk will be about constraints on any model which reproduces the qubit stabilizer sub-theory. We show that the minimum number of classical bits required to specify the state of an n-qubit system must scale as ~ n(n-3)/2 in any model that does not contradict the predictions of the quantum stabilizer sub-theory. The Gottesman-Knill algorithm, which is a strong simulation algorithm is in fact, very close to this bound as it scales at ~n(2n+1). This is a result of state-independent contextuality which puts a lower bound on the minimum number of states a model requires in order to reproduce the statistics of the qubit stabilizer sub-theory.
Simon Kochen, Princeton University
Quantum Mechanics in a New Key
We formulate a general principle that supplants a Boolean sigma-algebra of intrinsic properties of a classical system by a sigma-complex (a union of sigma-algebras) of extrinsic properties of a quantum system that are elicited by interactions with other systems. We apply the classical physics definitions of observables, states, combined systems, symmetries, and dynamics to extrinsic properties to derive the standard quantum formalism, including the Schrodinger equation and the von Neumann-Luder's Projection Rule. This reconstruction of quantum mechanics is then used to discuss and resolve dilemmas of the orthodox interpretation.
Ravi Kunjwal, Perimeter Institute
How to go from the KS theorem to experimentally testable noncontextuality inequalities
The purpose of this talk is twofold: one, to acquaint the wider community working mostly on Bell-Kochen-Specker contextuality with recent work on Spekkens’ contextuality that quantitatively demonstrates the sense in which Bell-Kochen-Specker contextuality is subsumed within Spekkens’ approach, and two, to argue that one can test for contextuality without appealing to a notion of sharpness which can needlessly restrict the scope of operational theories that could be considered as candidate explanations of experimental data. Testing contextuality in Spekkens’ approach therefore extends the range of experimental scenarios in which contextuality can be witnessed, and refines what it means to witness contextuality in the presence of inevitable noise in KS-type experiments. We will see this for both KS-uncolourability based logical contradiction type proofs of the KS theorem a la Kochen-Specker and statistical proofs on KS-colourable scenarios a la KCBS or Yu-Oh. While Bell-KS contextuality can be mathematically understood as an instance of the classical marginal problem, the same is not true of Spekkens' contextuality. The latter reduces to the classical marginal problem only under very specific conditions, being more general otherwise. All in all, we will argue that all you really need is Leibniz, i.e. identity of indiscernables, to make sense of contextuality in the most general context.
Jan-Åke Larsson, Linkopings University
Maximal noncontextuality; and qubit contextuality as a resource for Quantum Computation
Testing noncontextuality inequalities in experiment is possible as long as the marginal probabilities of a measurement outcome does not change with the context, because then the assumption of noncontextuality is reasonable. It is much more difficult to motivate the assumption when the marginals change. In this talk, the notion of noncontextuality will be extended to cover changing marginals, which in turn results in adjustments of the relevant noncontextuality inequalities. It is an open question whether qubit contextuality can be thought to be a resource for quantum computation. Using an extended variant of Spekkens' toy theory, still noncontextual, we have constructed and built a physical realization that is capable of running three quantum computational algorithms. Our realization efficiently runs Deutsch-Jozsa and Simon's algorithm with zero error, and Shor's algorithm with smaller error than any other state-of-the-art realization. This suggests that there is no strong evidence for qubit contextuality being a resource for quantum computation.
Matthew Leifer, Chapman University
Aharonov vs. Spekkens round II: Contextuality in Pre- and Post-Selection Paradoxes
Yakir Aharonov and collaborators have proposed a number of seemingly counter-intuitive effects involving pre- and post-selected quantum systems, but there has been controversy over the degree to which these effects are "guenuinely quantum" with some authors arguing that they have classical analogues. In this talk, I review progress in showing that many of these effects cannot occur within a noncontextual ontological model. This includes anomalous weak values, and logical pre- and post-selection paradoxes such as the three box paradox. The proofs highlight some important features of these effects that are not usually emphasized, such as the non-orthogonality of pre- and post-selection vectors, and the precise amount of disturbance to the ontic state that can be caused by a measurement in a noncontextual model.
Shane Mansfield, University of Edinburgh
The contextual fraction as a measure of contextuality
We consider the contextual fraction as a quantitative measure of contextuality of empirical models, i.e. tables of probabilities of measurement outcomes in an experimental scenario. It provides a general way to compare the degree of contextuality across measurement scenarios; it bears a precise relationship to violations of Bell inequalities; its value, and a witnessing inequality, can be computed using linear programming; it is monotone with respect to the "free" operations of a resource theory for contextuality; and it measures quantifiable advantages in informatic tasks, such as games and a form of measurement based quantum computing.
Michael Mazurek, Institue for Quantum Computing
Experimental state and measurement tomography for generalised probabilistic theories: bounding deviations from quantum theory via noncontextuality inequality violations
Ana Belen Sainz, Perimeter Institute
Kochen-Specker contextuality: a hypergraph approach with operational equivalences
Most work on contextuality so far has focused on specific examples and concrete proofs of the Kochen-Specker theorem, while general definitions and theorems about contextuality are sparse. For example, it is commonly believed that nonlocality is a special case of contextuality, but what exactly does this mean? In this work, that builds on the graph-theoretic approach of Cabello, Severini and Winter, we develop a hypergraph approach to study Kochen-Specker contextuality and Bell nonlocality in a unified manner. In this talk I will further focus on the relation between some sets of probabilistic models and graph invariants, and discuss principles to characterise quantum predictions.
Jamie Sikora, Centre for Quantum Technologies
Large non-contextuality inequality violations via parity-oblivious random access codes
William Slofstra, Institute for Quantum Computing
Group theory and contextuality
Mermin-Peres-type contextuality scenarios are easy to write down, but can we determine when a scenario has a quantum model? It turns out that contextuality scenarios of this type can encode the word problem of an arbitrary finitely-presented group. As a result, determining whether a scenario has a (possibly infinite-dimensional) quantum model is undecidable in general. We can also use this connection with group theory to construct scenarios with interesting properties, including examples of scenarios which do not have finite-dimensional models, but do have infinite-dimensional models. In this talk, I will give an overview of these results, along with some stronger results which imply that it is undecidable to determine if a contextuality scenario has a finite-dimensional model.
Mordecai Waegell, Chapman University
Confined Contextuality and Weak Measurement
It is shown that by using both pre-selection and post-selection, the explicit disagreement between the predictions of quantum mechanics and noncontextual hidden variable theories (NCHVTs) can be confined to a specific measurement context. If the contradictory values assigned by the NCHVT are interpreted as facts about nature during the time interval between the pre-selection and post-selection, then we obtain the class of logical pre- and post-selection (PPS) paradoxes, which include the 3-box paradox, the quantum Cheshire Cat, and the quantum pigeonhole effect. We argue here that this interpretation is dubious because the only physical experiment that can probe the observables in the contradictory context --- a weak measurement, reveals weak values that manifestly disagree with some values assigned by the NCHVT. Furthermore, we show that projectors with anomalous weak values are necessary for the existence of any PPS paradox, and for particular cases where the contextuality is confined within a Bell-Kochen-Specker set, the algebraic structure of the set forces some weak values in the contradictory context to be anomalous. Using these facts, we derive a contextuality witness observable for an entire context, whose weak value is positive for any non-contradictory NCHVT assignment to that context.
How to go from the KS theorem to experimentally testable noncontextuality inequalities
The purpose of this talk is twofold: one, to acquaint the wider community working mostly on Bell-Kochen-Specker contextuality with recent work on Spekkens’ contextuality that quantitatively demonstrates the sense in which Bell-Kochen-Specker contextuality is subsumed within Spekkens’ approach, and two, to argue that one can test for contextuality without appealing to a notion of sharpness which can needlessly restrict the scope of operational theories that could be considered as candidate explanations of experimental data.
Experimental state and measurement tomography for generalised probabilistic theories: bounding deviations from quantum theory via noncontextuality inequality violations
In order to perform foundational experiments testing the correctness of quantum mechanics, one requires data analysis tools that do not assume quantum theory. We introduce a quantum-free tomography technique that fits experimental data to a set of states and measurement effects in a generalised probabilistic theory (GPT). (This is in contrast to quantum tomography, which fits data to sets of density operators and POVM elements.) We perform an experiment on the polarization degree of freedom of single photons, and find GPT descriptions of the states and measurements in our experiment.
Contextuality and Temporal Correlations in Quantum Mechanics
Maximal noncontextuality; and qubit contextuality as a resource for Quantum Computation
Contextuality as a resource for quantum computation: the trouble with qubits
Contextuality and non-contextuality in (qudit) quantum computation
Contextuality, the PBR theorem and their effects on simulation of quantum systems
This talk will be about constraints on any model which reproduces the qubit stabilizer sub-theory. We show that the minimum number of classical bits required to specify the state of an n-qubit system must scale as ~ n(n-3)/2 in any model that does not contradict the predictions of the quantum stabilizer sub-theory. The Gottesman-Knill algorithm, which is a strong simulation algorithm is in fact, very close to this bound as it scales at ~n(2n+1).
Contextuality and quantum simulation
Revisiting quantum incompatibility
Large non-contextuality inequality violations via parity-oblivious random access codes
Pages
Scientific Organizers:
- Lucien Hardy, Perimeter Institute
- Ravi Kunjwal, Perimeter Institute
- Ana Belén Sainz, Perimeter Institute
- David Schmid, Perimeter Institute
- Robert Spekkens, Perimeter Institute
- Elie Wolfe, Perimeter Institute