Quick Navigation

Topics

Quantum Readout Measurement Hardware

Bell and EPR experiments with signalling data

arXiv
Authors: Lucas Maquedano, Sophie Egelhaaf, Amro Abou-Hachem, Jef Pauwels, Armin Tavakoli, Ana C. S. Costa, Roope Uola

Year

2026

Paper ID

2812

Status

Preprint

Abstract Read

~2 min

Abstract Words

105

Citations

N/A

Abstract

The no-signalling principle is a fundamental assumption in Bell-inequality and quantum-steering experiments. Nonetheless, experimental imperfections can lead to apparent violations beyond those expected from finite-sample statistics. Here, we propose extensions of local hidden variable and local hidden state theories that allow for bounded, operationally quantifiable, amounts of signalling. We show how non-classicality tests can be developed for these models, both through exact methods based on the full set of observed statistics and through corrections to the standard Bell and steering inequalities. We demonstrate the applicability of these methods via two scenarios that feature apparent signalling: an IBM quantum processor and post-selected data from inefficient detectors.

Why This Paper Matters

  • This paper contributes to the Quantum Readout & Measurement Hardware research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
  • It adds a 2026 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
  • The no-signalling principle is a fundamental assumption in Bell-inequality and quantum-steering experiments.

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

References & Citation Signals

Local Citation Graph (Related-Paper Links)

Current Paper #2812

External citation index: OpenAlex citation signal

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.