Source author record

Neil Stevens

Neil Stevens appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Catalog footprint

What is connected

3works
3topics
3close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

3 published item(s)

preprint2015arXiv

Direct tests of measurement uncertainty relations: what it takes

The uncertainty principle being a cornerstone of quantum mechanics, it is surprising that in nearly 90 years there have been no direct tests of measurement uncertainty relations. This lacuna was due to the absence of two essential ingredients: appropriate measures of measurement error (and disturbance), and precise formulations of such relations that are {\em universally valid}and {\em directly testable}. We formulate two distinct forms of direct tests, based on different measures of error. We present a prototype protocol for a direct test of measurement uncertainty relations in terms of {\em value deviation errors} (hitherto considered nonfeasible), highlighting the lack of universality of these relations. This shows that the formulation of universal, directly testable measurement uncertainty relations for {\em state-dependent} error measures remains an important open problem. Recent experiments that were claimed to constitute invalidations of Heisenberg's error-disturbance relation are shown to conform with the spirit of Heisenberg's principle if interpreted as direct tests of measurement uncertainty relations for error measures that quantify {\em distances between observables}.

preprint2013arXiv

Comparing the degrees of incompatibility inherent in probabilistic physical theories

We introduce a new way of quantifying the degrees of incompatibility of two ob- servables in a probabilistic physical theory and, based on this, a global measure of the degree of incompatibility inherent in such theories, across all observable pairs. This opens up a novel and flexible way of comparing probabilistic theories with respect to the nonclassical feature of incompatibility, raising many interesting questions, some of which will be answered here. We show that quantum theory contains observables that are as incompatible as any probabilistic physical theory can have if arbitrary pairs of observables are considered. If one adopts a more refined measure of the degree of incompatibility, for instance, by restricting the comparison to binary observables, it turns out that there are probabilistic theories whose inherent degree of incompatibility is greater than that of quantum mechanics.

preprint2013arXiv

Steering, incompatibility, and Bell inequality violations in a class of probabilistic theories

We show that connections between a degree of incompatibility of pairs of observables and the strength of violations of Bell's inequality found in recent investigations can be extended to a general class of probabilistic physical models. It turns out that the property of universal uniform steering is sufficient for the saturation of a generalised Tsirelson bound, corresponding to maximal violations of Bell's inequality. It is also found that a limited form of steering is still available and sufficient for such saturation in some state spaces where universal uniform steering is not given. The techniques developed here are applied to the class of regular polygon state spaces, giving a strengthening of known results. However, we also find indications that the link between incompatibility and Bell violation may be more complex than originally envisaged.