The counterfactual account of Lüders' rule is sufficient to rule out ontological models of quantum mechanics

Basic Information

• Paper ID: 2502.15615
• Title: The counterfactual account of Lüders' rule is sufficient to rule out ontological models of quantum mechanics
• Authors: Alisson Tezzin, Bárbara Amaral, Jonte R. Hance
• Classification: quant-ph math-ph math.MP physics.hist-ph
• Publication Date: October 16, 2025 (arXiv preprint)
• Paper Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.15615

Abstract

This paper investigates the framework of ontological models in the foundations of quantum mechanics. The authors demonstrate that the counterfactual interpretation of Lüders' rule—an interpretation naturally implied by the mathematical structure of the rule itself—renders ontological models fundamentally incompatible with quantum formalism. This incompatibility arises because counterfactual updating requires ontological models to update their states according to conditional probabilities, which in turn makes predictions for sequential measurements independent of order. This means that ontological models, even context-dependent ones, must either operate in a manner fundamentally different from our expectations for quantum state update rules, or fail to simulate quantum behavior.

Research Background and Motivation

Core Problem

The core problem addressed in this paper is: Can the ontological model framework (OMF) be compatible with the standard formalism of quantum mechanics?

Problem Significance

1. Foundational Importance: Ontological models play a central role in quantum foundations research, providing a framework for defining classicality, constructing classical analogues of quantum phenomena, and testing quantum state ontology
2. Theoretical Unification: This problem relates to how we understand the completeness of quantum mechanics and the possibility of hidden variable theories
3. Conceptual Clarification: It involves fundamental understanding of quantum measurement processes and state update mechanisms

Limitations of Existing Approaches

1. Traditional Hidden Variable Theories: Bell's theorem and the Kochen-Specker theorem have ruled out local non-contextual hidden variable theories
2. Generalized Contextuality Studies: Existing research primarily focuses on ontological representation of operational equivalence
3. Deterministic Model Restrictions: Previous results mainly target deterministic ontological models

Research Motivation

The authors' core insight is: if we accept the counterfactual interpretation of Lüders' rule (i.e., quantum state updates ensure the validity of counterfactual propositions), then ontological models must update states through conditional probabilities, which creates a fundamental conflict with the existence of incompatible observables.

Core Contributions

1. Establishes a counterfactual interpretation framework: Provides a mathematically rigorous interpretation of Lüders' rule based on counterfactual propositions
2. Proves fundamental incompatibility: Demonstrates that under the counterfactual interpretation, the existence of ontological models is equivalent to pairwise compatibility of all observables
3. Extends Fine-Malley results: Extends previous results on deterministic models to stochastic ontological models
4. Provides a new impossibility theorem: Offers new criteria for ruling out ontological models, independent of generalized contextuality considerations

Detailed Methodology

Task Definition

Input: A set of observables $O_S$ in a finite-dimensional quantum system Output: Determine whether this set admits a state-update ontological model Constraints: The model must satisfy quantum predictions and perform state updates via conditional probabilities

Theoretical Framework

Counterfactual Proposition Interpretation

For an observable $\hat{A}$ and a set of eigenvalues $\Delta$, the counterfactual proposition $[\hat{A} \in \Delta]$ represents "if a measurement of $\hat{A}$ is performed, the result will be found in $\Delta$."

Counterfactual Reconstruction of Lüders' Rule

The authors prove that Lüders' rule is essentially an optimal reconstruction mechanism: $T_{[\hat{A} \in \Delta]}(\hat{\rho}) = \frac{\sum_{\alpha \in \Delta} \hat{\Pi}(\hat{A} = \alpha)\hat{\rho}\hat{\Pi}(\hat{A} = \alpha)}{P_{\hat{\rho}}[\hat{A} \in \Delta]}$

This update ensures the validity of the counterfactual proposition $[\hat{A} \in \Delta]$.

State Update in Ontological Models

In ontological models, state updates must translate to conditional probabilities: $\mu_{\hat{\rho}}[\lambda \in \Omega|\hat{A} \in \Delta] = \int_{\Omega} \frac{\kappa_\lambda[\hat{A} \in \Delta]}{P_{\hat{\rho}}[\hat{A} \in \Delta]} \mu_{\hat{\rho}}(d\lambda)$

Core Theorems

Proposition 1 (Compatibility and Ontic States): Let $S$ be a finite-dimensional quantum system and $O_S$ a non-empty set of observables. The following are equivalent:

1. $O_S$ admits a (state-update) ontological model
2. $O_S$ admits a deterministic (state-update) ontological model
3. The observables in $O_S$ are pairwise compatible

Corollary 2 (Incompatibility Exclusion Theorem): No finite-dimensional quantum system admits a state-update ontological model.

Technical Innovations

1. Mathematization of Counterfactual Interpretation: Rigorously formalizes the philosophical concept of counterfactuals and proves its equivalence to Lüders' rule
2. Necessity of Conditional Probabilities: Derives the necessity of conditional probability updates from fundamental assumptions of ontological models
3. Application of Kolmogorov Extension Theorem: Utilizes fundamental theorems of probability theory to construct deterministic models
4. Connection to Bayes' Rule: Establishes deep connections between quantum compatibility and Bayes' rule in classical probability theory

Theoretical Analysis

Compatibility Criteria

Lemma 1 (Compatibility): Two observables $\hat{A}$ and $\hat{B}$ are compatible if and only if for any state $\hat{\rho}$ and sets $\Delta \subset \sigma(\hat{A})$, $\Sigma \subset \sigma(\hat{B})$: $P_{\hat{\rho}}[\hat{A} \in \Delta]P_{\hat{\rho}}[\hat{B} \in \Sigma|\hat{A} \in \Delta] = P_{\hat{\rho}}[\hat{B} \in \Sigma]P_{\hat{\rho}}[\hat{A} \in \Delta|\hat{B} \in \Sigma]$

This is precisely the form of Bayes' rule, indicating that compatibility is equivalent to order-independence of sequential measurements.

Consistency Conditions for Ontological Models

Lemma 2 (State-Update Ontological Models): Ontological models satisfying Definition 1 possess the following properties:

1. Correctly predict expectation values and functional relationships
2. Satisfy Kochen-Specker non-contextuality
3. Provide correct joint distributions for compatible observables

Superiority of Deterministic Models

Lemma 3 (State Update in Deterministic Models): Only deterministic ontological models satisfy consistency conditions for conditional probabilities across all probability measures, including:

• Repeatability: $P_\mu[\hat{A} \in \Delta'|\hat{A} \in \Delta] = \frac{P_\mu[\hat{A} \in \Delta' \cap \Delta]}{P_\mu[\hat{A} \in \Delta]}$
• Associativity: $(\tau_{[\hat{A} \in \Delta']} \circ \tau_{[\hat{A} \in \Delta]})(\mu) = \tau_{[\hat{A} \in \Delta' \cap \Delta]}(\mu)$

Experimental Verification

Constructive Proof

The authors provide a constructive proof via the Kolmogorov extension theorem:

1. State Space Construction: $\Lambda = \prod_{\hat{A} \in O_S} \sigma(\hat{A})$
2. Measure Definition: Constructs probability measures using joint distributions of compatible observables
3. Consistency Verification: Proves that the constructed model satisfies all quantum predictions

Optimality Analysis

Lemma 4 (Optimal Approximation): Conditional probability updates in deterministic models are optimal: $\|\tau_{[\hat{A} \in \Delta]}(\mu) - \mu\| = \min\{\|\nu - \mu\| : \nu \in S_\Lambda, P_\nu[\hat{A} \in \Delta] = 1\}$

Here, total variation distance measures the distance between probability measures.

Related Work

Historical Development

1. Bell's Theorem: Rules out local hidden variable theories
2. Kochen-Specker Theorem: Rules out non-contextual hidden variable theories
3. Fine-Malley Work: Proves incompatibility between incompatibility and deterministic hidden variables

Relationship to Generalized Contextuality

This paper's results are independent of Spekkens' generalized contextuality framework, providing a new perspective on understanding quantum non-classicality. It contrasts with work by Selby et al., who claim that measurement incompatibility is neither necessary nor sufficient.

Distinction from Other Hidden Variable Theories

This paper does not directly apply to ruling out collapse-assumption theories (such as de Broglie-Bohm theory), as these theories do not adopt Lüders' rule.

Conclusions and Discussion

Main Conclusions

1. Fundamental Incompatibility: Under the counterfactual interpretation, ontological models are fundamentally incompatible with quantum mechanics
2. Compatibility Equivalence: The existence of ontological models is equivalent to pairwise compatibility of all observables
3. New Impossibility Theorem: Provides new criteria for ruling out ontological models, independent of contextuality

Philosophical Implications

1. New Perspective on the Measurement Problem: Shifts focus from physical collapse to theoretical reconstruction
2. Challenge to Realism: Raises new questions about quantum state realism
3. Redefinition of Classicality: May require reassessing the universality of generalized contextuality as a criterion for classicality

Limitations

1. Interpretation Dependence: Results depend on a specific interpretation of Lüders' rule
2. Finite-Dimensional Restriction: Currently proven only for finite-dimensional cases
3. Framework Specificity: Applies only to standard quantum mechanics formalism with collapse assumptions

Future Directions

1. Infinite-Dimensional Extension: Extend results to infinite-dimensional quantum systems
2. Negative Probability Theories: Investigate intersections with negative quasi-probability hidden variable models
3. Theory-Independent Nonlocality: Explore implications for theory-independent nonlocality concepts
4. Classical Incompatibility: Seek instances of incompatible observables in classical theories employing counterfactual updates

In-Depth Evaluation

Strengths

1. Theoretical Rigor: Mathematical proofs are rigorous with clear logical chains
2. Conceptual Innovation: Counterfactual interpretation provides new perspective on understanding quantum state updates
3. Result Strength: Provides stronger impossibility theorems than previous work
4. Methodological Unification: Organically combines concepts from quantum mechanics and classical probability theory

Weaknesses

1. Interpretation Controversy: Counterfactual interpretation may not be accepted by all researchers
2. Limited Scope: Does not apply to certain quantum mechanical interpretations (e.g., Bohm theory)
3. Experimental Verification Difficulty: Primarily theoretical results lacking direct experimental verification schemes

Impact

1. Foundational Contribution: Provides new theoretical tools for quantum foundations research
2. Interdisciplinary Value: Connects quantum mechanics, probability theory, and philosophy
3. Future Research Directions: Opens new pathways for quantum non-classicality research

Application Scenarios

1. Quantum Foundations Research: Provides new perspectives for understanding quantum mechanics' nature
2. Hidden Variable Theory Analysis: Offers criteria for evaluating various hidden variable theories
3. Quantum Information Theory: May have implications for quantum computing and quantum communication theory

References

The paper cites 91 related references, covering multiple important research areas including quantum foundations, hidden variable theories, and contextuality theory, reflecting the depth and breadth of the research. Key references include seminal works by Bell, Kochen-Specker, Spekkens, Fine, Malley, and others.