Quick Navigation
Topics
Quantum Foundations
Analytic quantification of the singlet nonlocality for the first Bell's inequality
arXiv
Authors: Fernando Parisio
Year
2015
Paper ID
26330
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
127
Citations
N/A
Abstract
Recently an alternative way to quantify Bell nonlocality has been proposed \[Phys. Rev. A {\bf 92}, 030101(R) (2015)\]. In this work we further develop this concept, the volume of violation, and analytically calculate its value for the spin-singlet state with respect to the settings of the first Bell's inequality. These settings correspond to three directions in space, or three arbitrary points on the unit sphere. It is shown that the triples of directions that lead to violations in local causality correspond to 1/3 of all possible configurations. From the perspective of quantum communications, this means that two distant parties that were capable of align their measurements in one direction only (the remaining direction in each site being random), have a probability of about 33.3\% to be able to certify their entanglement.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Quantum Foundations research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2015 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- Recently an alternative way to quantify Bell nonlocality has been proposed [Phys.
Paper Tools
Become a member to use research tools
Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.
Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share
Cite This Paper
Copy URL
Compare
Copy DOI Add to Reading List
Category Correction Request
Category Correction Request
Help us improve classification quality by proposing a better category. Every request is reviewed by an admin.
Sign in to submit a category correction request for this paper.
Log In to SubmitReferences & Citation Signals
Community Reactions
Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.
Score:
0
Likes: 0
Dislikes: 0
Sign in to react to this paper.
Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)
Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)
No written reviews yet.