Paper detail

Bell inequality violations with random mutually unbiased bases

We examine the problem of exhibiting Bell nonlocality for a two-qudit entangled pure state using a randomly chosen set of mutually unbiased bases (MUBs). Interestingly, even if we employ only two-setting Bell inequalities, we find a significant chance of obtaining a Bell violation if the two parties are individually allowed to measure a sufficient number of MUBs. In particular, for the case of maximally entangled qutrits and ququarts, our numerical estimates indicate that we can obtain near-guaranteed Bell violation by considering only such Bell inequalities. The case of maximally entangled ququints is similar, albeit the chance of ending up with a successful trial decreases somewhat to approximately $99.84\%$. Upon a closer inspection, we find that even all these no-violation instances violate some more-setting Bell inequalities. These results suggest that the experimental tests of Bell nonlocality for these higher-dimensional entangled states remain viable even if the two parties do not share a common reference frame.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.