Quick Navigation

Topics

Entanglement Theory Quantum Correlations Quantum Foundations

Robust self-testing with CHSH mod 3

arXiv
Authors: Igor Klep, Nando Leijenhorst, Victor Magron

Year

2026

Paper ID

45215

Status

Preprint

Abstract Read

~2 min

Abstract Words

101

Citations

N/A

Abstract

The CHSH mod 3 Bell inequality is a natural testbed for higher-dimensional quantum nonlocality, yet its maximal quantum violation and self-testing properties have remained unresolved. We determine its exact maximal quantum value and show that, up to unitary equivalence and the natural symmetries of the inequality, it admits a unique optimal irreducible strategy; equivalently, there are four symmetry-related optimal irreducible strategies. Each of these strategies uses a maximally entangled two-qutrit state. We further prove that any strategy whose value is within varepsilon of the optimum is O\(sqrt{varepsilon}\)-close, up to local isometries, to a direct sum of optimal irreducible strategies.

Why This Paper Matters

  • This paper contributes to the Quantum Foundations research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
  • It adds a 2026 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
  • The CHSH mod 3 Bell inequality is a natural testbed for higher-dimensional quantum nonlocality, yet its maximal quantum violation and self-testing properties have remained...

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 #45215 #68413 Emergent Operational Entangleme... #68467 Hong-Ou-Mandel interference of ... #68463 Full characterization of inform... #68461 Agreement and Compatibility in ...

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.