pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 0903.4964 · v3 · submitted 2009-03-28 · 🪐 quant-ph

Recognition: unknown

Reexamination of a multisetting Bell inequality for qudits

Authors on Pith no claims yet
classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords inequalitiesclassicalcorrelationbellgivenprobabilityupperbounds
0
0 comments X
read the original abstract

The class of d-setting, d-outcome Bell inequalities proposed by Ji and collaborators [Phys. Rev. A 78, 052103] are reexamined. For every positive integer d > 2, we show that the corresponding non-trivial Bell inequality for probabilities provides the maximum classical winning probability of the Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt-like game with d inputs and d outputs. We also demonstrate that the general classical upper bounds given by Ji et al. are underestimated, which invalidates many of the corresponding correlation inequalities presented thereof. We remedy this problem, partially, by providing the actual classical upper bound for d less than or equal to 13 (including non-prime values of d). We further determine that for prime value d in this range, most of these probability and correlation inequalities are tight, i.e., facet-inducing for the respective classical correlation polytope. Stronger lower and upper bounds on the quantum violation of these inequalities are obtained. In particular, we prove that once the probability inequalities are given, their correlation counterparts given by Ji and co-workers are no longer relevant in terms of detecting the entanglement of a quantum state.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Robust self-testing with CHSH mod 3

    math.OC 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 8.0

    CHSH mod 3 reaches its exact maximal quantum value only with maximally entangled qutrit pairs (unique up to symmetry) and any strategy within ε of the optimum is O(√ε)-close to a direct sum of those optimal strategies.