How ψ-epistemic models fail at explaining the indistinguishability of quantum states

Abstract

We study the extent to which ψ-epistemic models for quantum measurement statistics---models where the quantum state does not have a real, ontic status---can explain the indistinguishability of nonorthogonal quantum states. This is done by comparing the overlap of any two quantum states with the overlap of the corresponding classical probability distributions over ontic states in a ψ-epistemic model. It is shown that in Hilbert spaces of dimension $d\ge 4$, the ratio between the classical and quantum overlaps in any ψ-epistemic model must be arbitrarily small for certain nonorthogonal states, suggesting that such models are arbitrarily bad at explaining the indistinguishability of quantum states. For dimensions $d$ = 3 and 4, we construct explicit states and measurements that can be used experimentally to put stringent bounds on the ratio of classical-to-quantum overlaps in ψ-epistemic models, allowing one in particular to rule out maximally ψ-epistemic models more efficiently than previously proposed.

8 pages

References in corpus (1)

• Implications of the Pusey-Barrett-Rudolph quantum no-go theorem

Cited by in corpus (8)

• Is the quantum state real? An extended review of $\psi$-ontology theorems
• Experimental minimum-error quantum-state discrimination in high dimensions
• The Meaning of the Wave Function: In Search of the Ontology of Quantum Mechanics
• How Real are Quantum States in $\psi$-ontic Models?
• Towards optimal experimental tests on the reality of the quantum state
• Detection efficiency loophole in Pusey-Barrett-Rudolph theorem
• Reality, Causality, and Quantum Theory
• Quantum Entanglement in Time