BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Robert W. Spekkens

Robert W. Spekkens contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
quant-phmath.STStatistics Theory

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 19 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
5works
0followers
3topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

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

Published work

5 published item(s)

preprint2026arXiv

The resource theory of causal influence and knowledge of causal influence

Understanding and quantifying causal relationships between variables is essential for reasoning about the physical world. In this work, we develop a resource-theoretic framework to do so. Here, we focus on the simplest nontrivial setting -- two variables that are causally ordered, meaning that the first has the potential to influence the second, without hidden confounding. First, we introduce the resource theory that directly quantifies causal influence of a functional dependence in this setting and show that the problem of deciding convertibility of resources and identifying a complete set of monotones has a relatively straightforward solution. Following this, we introduce the resource theory that arises naturally when one has uncertainty about the functional dependence. We describe a linear program for deciding the question of whether one resource (i.e., state of knowledge about the functional dependence) can be converted to another. Then, we focus on the case where the variables are binary. In this case, we identify a triple of monotones that are complete in the sense that they capture the partial order over the set of all resources, and we provide an interpretation of each.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

Experimentally adjudicating between different causal accounts of Bell inequality violations via statistical model selection

Bell inequalities follow from a set of seemingly natural assumptions about how to provide a causal model of a Bell experiment. In the face of their violation, two types of causal models that modify some of these assumptions have been proposed: (i) those that are parametrically conservative and structurally radical, such as models where the parameters are conditional probability distributions (termed 'classical causal models') but where one posits inter-lab causal influences or superdeterminism, and (ii) those that are parametrically radical and structurally conservative, such as models where the labs are taken to be connected only by a common cause but where conditional probabilities are replaced by conditional density operators (these are termed 'quantum causal models'). We here seek to adjudicate between these alternatives based on their predictive power. The data from a Bell experiment is divided into a training set and a test set, and for each causal model, the parameters that yield the best fit for the training set are estimated and then used to make predictions about the test set. Our main result is that the structurally radical classical causal models are disfavoured relative to the structurally conservative quantum causal model. Their lower predictive power seems to be due to the fact that, unlike the quantum causal model, they are prone to a certain type of overfitting wherein statistical fluctuations away from the no-signalling condition are mistaken for real features. Our technique shows that it is possible to witness quantumness even in a Bell experiment that does not close the locality loophole. It also overturns the notion that it is impossible to experimentally test the plausibility of superdeterminist models of Bell inequality violations.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Quantifying Bell: the Resource Theory of Nonclassicality of Common-Cause Boxes

We take a resource-theoretic approach to the problem of quantifying nonclassicality in Bell scenarios. The resources are conceptualized as probabilistic processes from the setting variables to the outcome variables having a particular causal structure, namely, one wherein the wings are only connected by a common cause. We term them "common-cause boxes". We define the distinction between classical and nonclassical resources in terms of whether or not a classical causal model can explain the correlations. One can then quantify the relative nonclassicality of resources by considering their interconvertibility relative to the set of operations that can be implemented using a classical common cause (which correspond to local operations and shared randomness). We prove that the set of free operations forms a polytope, which in turn allows us to derive an efficient algorithm for deciding whether one resource can be converted to another. We moreover define two distinct monotones with simple closed-form expressions in the two-party binary-setting binary-outcome scenario, and use these to reveal various properties of the pre-order of resources, including a lower bound on the cardinality of any complete set of monotones. In particular, we show that the information contained in the degrees of violation of facet-defining Bell inequalities is not sufficient for quantifying nonclassicality, even though it is sufficient for witnessing nonclassicality. Finally, we show that the continuous set of convexly extremal quantumly realizable correlations are all at the top of the pre-order of quantumly realizable correlations. In addition to providing new insights on Bell nonclassicality, our work also sets the stage for quantifying nonclassicality in more general causal networks.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

The Characterization of Noncontextuality in the Framework of Generalized Probabilistic Theories

To make precise the sense in which the operational predictions of quantum theory conflict with a classical worldview, it is necessary to articulate a notion of classicality within an operational framework. A widely applicable notion of classicality of this sort is whether or not the predictions of a given operational theory can be explained by a generalized-noncontextual ontological model. We here explore what notion of classicality this implies for the generalized probabilistic theory (GPT) that arises from a given operational theory, focusing on prepare-measure scenarios. We first show that, when mapping an operational theory to a GPT by quotienting relative to operational equivalences, the constraint of explainability by a generalized-noncontextual ontological model is mapped to the constraint of explainability by an ontological model. We then show that, under the additional assumption that the ontic state space is of finite cardinality, this constraint on the GPT can be expressed as a geometric condition which we term simplex-embeddability. Whereas the traditional notion of classicality for a GPT is that its state space be a simplex and its effect space be the dual of this simplex, simplex-embeddability merely requires that its state space be embeddable in a simplex and its effect space in the dual of that simplex. We argue that simplex-embeddability constitutes an intuitive and freestanding notion of classicality for GPTs. Our result also has applications to witnessing nonclassicality in prepare-measure experiments.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2007arXiv

Einstein, incompleteness, and the epistemic view of quantum states

Does the quantum state represent reality or our knowledge of reality? In making this distinction precise, we are led to a novel classification of hidden variable models of quantum theory. Indeed, representatives of each class can be found among existing constructions for two-dimensional Hilbert spaces. Our approach also provides a fruitful new perspective on arguments for the nonlocality and incompleteness of quantum theory. Specifically, we show that for models wherein the quantum state has the status of something real, the failure of locality can be established through an argument considerably more straightforward than Bell's theorem. The historical significance of this result becomes evident when one recognizes that the same reasoning is present in Einstein's preferred argument for incompleteness, which dates back to 1935. This fact suggests that Einstein was seeking not just any completion of quantum theory, but one wherein quantum states are solely representative of our knowledge. Our hypothesis is supported by an analysis of Einstein's attempts to clarify his views on quantum theory and the circumstance of his otherwise puzzling abandonment of an even simpler argument for incompleteness from 1927.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access