Quick Navigation
Topics
Open Quantum Systems Decoherence
Entanglement Theory Quantum Correlations
Quantum Foundations
Requirements for a loophole-free photonic Bell test using imperfect setting generators
arXiv
Authors: Johannes Kofler, Marissa Giustina, Jan-Åke Larsson, Morgan W. Mitchell
Year
2014
Paper ID
46397
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
91
Citations
N/A
Abstract
Experimental violations of Bell inequalities are in general vulnerable to so-called "loopholes." In this work, we analyse the characteristics of a loophole-free Bell test with photons, closing simultaneously the locality, freedom-of-choice, fair-sampling (i.e. detection), coincidence-time, and memory loopholes. We pay special attention to the effect of excess predictability in the setting choices due to non-ideal random number generators. We discuss necessary adaptations of the CH/Eberhard inequality when using such imperfect devices and - using Hoeffding's inequality and Doob's optional stopping theorem - the statistical analysis in such Bell tests.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Quantum Foundations research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2014 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- Experimental violations of Bell inequalities are in general vulnerable to so-called "loopholes." In this work, we analyse the characteristics of a loophole-free Bell test with...
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.