Can outcome communication explain Bell nonlocality?

Basic Information

• Paper ID: 2510.12886
• Title: Can outcome communication explain Bell nonlocality?
• Authors: Carlos Vieira, Carlos de Gois, Pedro Lauand, Lucas E. A. Porto, Sébastien Designolle, Marco Túlio Quintino
• Classification: quant-ph (Quantum Physics)
• Publication Date: October 14, 2025 (arXiv preprint)
• Paper Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.12886

Abstract

A fundamental characteristic of quantum information is that correlations between spacelike-separated observers sharing an entangled state cannot be reproduced by local hidden variable (LHV) models, a phenomenon known as Bell nonlocality. If one wishes to explain such correlations using classical methods, a natural possibility is to allow communication between the two parties. In particular, LHV models augmented with two classical communication bits can explain correlations in any two-qubit state. Does this remain true if communication is restricted to measurement outcomes? While the answer is affirmative in certain scenarios with finite input numbers, we prove that if the model must reproduce all projective measurements, the answer is negative for any qubit-qudit state. In fact, under projective measurements, a qubit-qudit state admits an LHV model with outcome communication if and only if it already admits an LHV model without communication. Conversely, we also demonstrate that when considering restricted measurement sets (e.g., when qubit measurements are restricted to the upper hemisphere of the Bloch sphere), outcome communication does provide an advantage.

Research Background and Motivation

Problem Background

1. The Classical Challenge of Bell Nonlocality: Correlations produced by quantum entangled states violate Bell inequalities and cannot be explained by classical models satisfying local realism. This represents one of the fundamental divergences between quantum theory and classical physics.
2. Communication-Assisted Classical Simulation: To explain quantum correlations using classical methods, researchers have explored various communication-assisted local hidden variable models. It is known that two classical bits of communication suffice to simulate projective measurements of arbitrary two-qubit states.
3. Research Gap in Restricted Communication: While the capabilities of general communication have been thoroughly studied, the case where communication is restricted to measurement outcomes has not been systematically analyzed.

Research Motivation

1. Theoretical Completeness: Understanding how different types of communication affect the ability to classically simulate quantum correlations
2. Fundamental Physics Significance: Exploring the essential boundaries of quantum nonlocality
3. Practical Application Value: Providing theoretical foundations for the design of quantum communication protocols

Core Contributions

1. Established the theoretical framework of LHV+Out models: Formally defined local hidden variable models allowing outcome communication and analyzed their relationship with standard LHV models.
2. Proved the main equivalence theorem: For qubit-qudit states under projective measurements, LHV+Out models are equivalent to LHV models (Result 1).
3. Revealed the critical role of deterministic measurements: Demonstrated the central position of deterministic measurements in establishing equivalence (Theorem 1).
4. Discovered separation in restricted measurement scenarios: Proved that under restricted measurement sets, LHV+Out models can strictly surpass LHV models (Result 3).
5. Posed important open questions: Regarding the impact of dual measurement existence on model equivalence (Open Question 1).

Methodology Details

Task Definition

Investigate which quantum state correlations can be explained by classical models when Alice is allowed to communicate measurement outcomes to Bob. Specifically, compare the capabilities of LHV+Out models with standard LHV models in reproducing quantum state statistics.

Model Architecture

LHV+Out Model Definition

A behavior $p(ab|xy)$ admits an LHV+Out model if there exist a hidden variable $\lambda$ and probability distributions $p(\lambda)$, $p_A(a|x\lambda)$, $p_B(b|ay\lambda)$ such that:

$p(ab|xy) = \sum_\lambda p(\lambda)p_A(a|x\lambda)p_B(b|ay\lambda)$

Key characteristics:

• Bob's response function $p_B(b|ay\lambda)$ depends on Alice's outcome $a$
• Allows signal transmission from Alice to Bob
• Includes standard LHV models as a special case

LHV+Out Model for Quantum States

A quantum state $\rho$ admits an LHV+Out model if for all measurement sets $\{A_{a|x}\}$ and $\{B_{b|y}\}$, the behavior $p(ab|xy) = \text{tr}[(A_{a|x} \otimes B_{b|y})\rho]$ admits an LHV+Out model.

Technical Innovations

1. Critical Insight on Deterministic Measurements

Theorem 1 establishes the conversion condition from LHV+Out to LHV:

• If Alice has a deterministic measurement and the behavior is no-signaling
• Then the LHV+Out model implies an LHV model

Proof strategy:

1. Utilize deterministic measurement constraints on Bob's response function
2. Reconstruct standard LHV decomposition through no-signaling conditions
3. The key insight is that $p_A(1|x') = 1$ implies $p_A(1|x'\lambda) = 1$ for all $\lambda$

2. Correlation Representation Method

Proposition 1 provides an equivalent correlation representation of LHV+Out models: $\langle a_x b_y \rangle = \sum_\lambda p(\lambda)\langle a_x^\lambda \rangle \langle b_{y,\langle a_x^\lambda \rangle}^\lambda \rangle$

This representation simplifies model construction and verification.

3. Extended Computational Methods

Extended the Frank-Wolfe algorithm to the LHV+Out scenario:

• Modified Bob's response function to explicitly depend on Alice's outcome
• Utilized symmetrization techniques for improved efficiency
• Combined convex hull techniques to extend finite measurement results

Experimental Setup

Theoretical Proof Verification

1. Werner State Analysis: Studied two-qubit Werner states $W(v) = v|\psi^-\rangle\langle\psi^-| + (1-v)\frac{\mathbb{I}}{4}$
2. Measurement Configurations:
   • All rank-1 projective measurements
   • Upper hemisphere restricted measurements (401 measurement directions)
3. Numerical Methods: Linear programming and Frank-Wolfe algorithms

Computational Implementation

• Implemented in Julia language
• Extended BellPolytopes.jl library to LHV+Out scenarios
• Precision control: $\epsilon \approx 2 \times 10^{-4}$

Experimental Results

Main Results

Result 1: Equivalence Theorem

For qubit-qudit states under projective measurements: $\rho \text{ admits LHV model} \Leftrightarrow \rho \text{ admits LHV+Out model}$

Result 2: Werner States under Rank-1 Measurements

Werner states under all rank-1 projective measurements show equivalence between LHV and LHV+Out models.

Result 3: Separation in Restricted Measurements

• Werner state $W(v)$ admits LHV+Out model under upper hemisphere measurements: $v \leq 0.69828$
• But known to violate Bell inequalities for $v > 0.69604$
• Demonstrates the existence of strict separation

Numerical Verification

1. Finite Scenario Verification: Computed verification of Open Question 1 for scenarios with $m_x \leq 4$
2. Random Behavior Testing: Extensive random behavior samples found no counterexamples
3. Explicit Model Construction: Constructed explicit LHV+Out models for nonlocal Werner states

Related Work

Communication-Assisted Quantum Simulation

1. Toner-Bacon Theorem: Two classical bits suffice to simulate arbitrary two-qubit states
2. Minimal Communication Research: Exploring the minimum communication required to simulate quantum correlations
3. PR Box Simulation: In CHSH scenarios, outcome communication can simulate PR boxes

Bell Nonlocality Theory

1. Fine's Theorem: Convex hull characterization of LHV behaviors
2. Locality of Quantum States: Locality conditions for Werner states, Bell-diagonal states, etc.
3. Measurement Compatibility: Distinctions between projective measurements and POVM measurements

Conclusions and Discussion

Main Conclusions

1. Limited Capability of Outcome Communication: For complete projective measurement sets, outcome communication cannot explain the nonlocality of qubit-qudit states
2. Critical Role of Deterministic Measurements: The existence of deterministic measurements is a sufficient condition for establishing LHV and LHV+Out equivalence
3. Advantages in Restricted Scenarios: Under restricted measurement sets, outcome communication does provide advantages

Limitations

1. Binary Outcome Restriction: Main results limited to Alice's binary measurement outcomes
2. Specific State Classes: Primarily focused on qubit-qudit states
3. Projective Measurement Assumption: Insufficient exploration of POVM measurements

Future Directions

1. Multi-outcome Extension: Investigating cases where Alice has more than two outcomes
2. Dual Measurement Hypothesis: Verifying the correctness of Open Question 1
3. EACC Protocol Applications: Applying results to entanglement-assisted classical communication

In-Depth Evaluation

Strengths

1. Theoretical Rigor: Provides a complete mathematical framework with rigorous proofs
2. Unexpected Discoveries: Reveals the special role of deterministic measurements in communication scenarios
3. Methodological Innovation: Successfully extends computational methods to new scenarios
4. Practical Value: Provides theoretical guidance for quantum communication protocol design

Limitations

1. Scope of Applicability: Main results limited to specific measurement and state types
2. Open Questions: Leaves important unresolved problems
3. Experimental Verification: Lacks experimental verification in actual quantum systems

Impact

1. Theoretical Contribution: Deepens understanding of the nature of quantum nonlocality
2. Methodological Value: Provides new analytical tools for related problems
3. Inspirational Significance: Reveals subtle effects of communication types on classical simulation capabilities

Applicable Scenarios

1. Quantum Information Theory: Fundamental research on Bell nonlocality and quantum correlations
2. Quantum Communication Protocols: Design and analysis of quantum communication schemes
3. Quantum Computing: Understanding the sources and boundaries of quantum advantage

References

1. Bell, J.S. (1964). On the Einstein Podolsky Rosen paradox. Physics 1, 195.
2. Toner, B.F. & Bacon, D. (2003). Communication cost of simulating Bell correlations. Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 187904.
3. Chaves, R. et al. (2015). Unifying framework for relaxations of the causal assumptions in Bell's theorem. Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 140403.
4. Designolle, S. et al. (2023). Improved local models and new Bell inequalities via Frank-Wolfe algorithms. Physical Review Research 5, 043059.

This paper makes important contributions to the theory of quantum nonlocality, particularly in understanding how communication affects the ability to classically simulate quantum correlations. While the main result shows that outcome communication provides no additional advantage for complete measurement sets, the separation results in restricted scenarios and the discovery of the role of deterministic measurements both possess significant theoretical value.