Paper detail

On the equivalence of Clauser-Horne and Eberhard inequality based tests

Recently, the results of the first experimental test for entangled photons closing the detection loophole (also referred to as the fair sampling loophole) were published (Vienna, 2013). From the theoretical viewpoint the main distinguishing feature of this long-aspired experiment was that the Eberhard inequality was used. Almost simultaneously another experiment closing this loophole was performed (Urbana-Champaign, 2013) and it was based on the Clauser-Horne inequality (for probabilities). The aim of this note is to analyze the mathematical and experimental equivalence of tests based on the Eberhard inequality and various forms on the Clauser-Horne inequality. The structure of the mathematical equivalence is nontrivial. In particular, it is necessary to distinguish between algebraic and statistical equivalence. Although the tests based on these inequalities are algebraically equivalent, they need not be equivalent statistically, i.e., theoretically the level of statistical significance can drop under transition from one test to another (at least for finite samples). Nevertheless, the data collected in the Vienna-test implies not only a statistically significant violation of the Eberhard inequality, but also of the Clauser-Horne inequality (in the ratio-rate form): for both a violation $>60σ.$

preprint2014arXivOpen 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.