Paper detail

Two-setting multi-site Bell inequalities for loophole-free tests with up to 50% loss

We consider Bell experiments with N spatially separated qubits where loss is present and restrict to two measurement settings per site. We note the Mermin-Ardehali-Belinskii-Klyshko (MABK) Bell inequalities do not present a tight bound for the predictions of local hidden variable (LHV) theories. The Holder-type Bell inequality derived by Cavalcanti, Foster, Reid and Drummond provides a tighter bound, for high losses. We analyse the actual tight bound for the MABK inequalities, given the measure W=\prod_{k=1}^{N}η_{k} of overall detection efficiency, where η_{k} is the efficiency at the site k . Using these inequalities, we confirm that the maximally entangled Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger state enables loophole-free falsification of LHV theories provided \prod_{k=1}^{N}η_{k}>2^{(2-N)}, which implies a symmetric threshold efficiency of η\rightarrow50%, as N\rightarrow\infty . Furthermore, loophole-free violations remain possible, even when the efficiency at some sites is reduced well below 0.5, provided N>3 .

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author1 topic

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.

Authors

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 map preview

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.