![]()
landscape of generalized probabilistic theories”,
arXiv:1710.05948 [quant-ph] (2017).
[38] M. F. Pusey, L. del Rio, and B. Meyer, “Contex-
tuality without access to a tomographically com-
plete set”, arXiv:1904.08699 (2019).
[39] Y. C. Liang, R. W. Spekkens, H. M. Wiseman,
“Specker’s parable of the overprotective seer: A
road to contextuality, nonlocality and complemen-
tarity”, Phys. Rep. 506, 1 (2011).
[40] R. Kunjwal and S. Ghosh, “Minimal state-
dependent proof of measurement contextuality for
a qubit”, Phys. Rev. A 89, 042118 (2014).
[41] R. Kunjwal, C. Heunen, and T. Fritz, “Quantum
realization of arbitrary joint measurability struc-
tures”, Phys. Rev. A 89, 052126 (2014).
[42] R. Kunjwal, “A note on the joint measurabil-
ity of POVMs and its implications for contextual-
ity”,arXiv:1403.0470 [quant-ph] (2014).
[43] S. Popescu and D. Rohrlich, “Quantum nonlocal-
ity as an axiom”, Found. Phys. 24, 379-385 (1994).
[44] T. Heinosaari, D. Reitzner, and P. Stano, “Notes
on Joint Measurability of Quantum Observables”,
Found. Phys. 38, 1133-1147 (2008).
[45] R. Kunjwal, “How to go from the KS theorem to
experimentally testable noncontextuality inequal-
ities”, PIRSA:17070059 (2017).
[46] Konrad Engel, “Sperner theory: Encyclopedia of
Mathematics and its Applications”, Vol. 65, Cam-
bridge University Press, Cambridge (1997).
[47] A. A. Klyachko, M. A. Can, S. Binicio˘glu, and
A. S. Shumovsky, “Simple Test for Hidden Vari-
ables in Spin-1 Systems”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101,
020403 (2008).
[48] C. Held, “The Kochen-Specker Theorem”, The
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2018
Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.).
[49] T. Gonda, R. Kunjwal, D. Schmid, E. Wolfe, and
A. B. Sainz, “Almost Quantum Correlations are
Inconsistent with Specker’s Principle”, Quantum
2, 87 (2018).
[50] M. Navascu´es, Y. Guryanova, M. J. Hoban,
and A. Ac´ın, “Almost quantum correlations”,
Nat. Commun. 6, 6288 (2015).
[51] A. Cabello, Adan, J. Estebaranz, and G. Garcia-
Alcaine, “Bell-Kochen-Specker theorem: A proof
with 18 vectors,” Phys. Lett. A 212, 183 (1996).
[52] E. G. Beltrametti and S. Bugajski, “A classical
extension of quantum mechanics”, J. Phys. A 28,
3329 (1995).
[53] X. Zhan, E. G. Cavalcanti, J. Li, Z. Bian,
Y. Zhang, H. M. Wiseman, and P. Xue, “Ex-
perimental generalized contextuality with single-
photon qubits”, Optica 4, 966-971 (2017).
[54] R. Kunjwal, “Contextuality beyond the Kochen-
Specker theorem”, arXiv:1612.07250 [quant-ph]
(2016).
[55] T. Fritz, A. B. Sainz, R. Augusiak, J. B. Brask,
R. Chaves, A. Leverrier, and A. Ac´ın, “Local or-
thogonality: a multipartite principle for correla-
tions”, Nat. Commun. 4, 2263 (2013).
[56] R. W. Spekkens, “Nonclassicality as the failure of
noncontextuality”, PIRSA:15050081 (2015) (see
the slide at 41:43 minutes).
[57] R. W. Spekkens, “Quasi-Quantization: Classi-
cal Statistical Theories with an Epistemic Re-
striction”, In: Chiribella G., Spekkens R. (eds)
Quantum Theory: Informational Foundations and
Foils. Fundamental Theories of Physics, vol 181.
Springer, Dordrecht.
[58] T. Vidick and S. Wehner, “Does Ignorance of the
Whole Imply Ignorance of the Parts? Large Vio-
lations of Noncontextuality in Quantum Theory”,
Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 030402 (2011).
[59] R. Raussendorf, “Contextuality in measurement-
based quantum computation”, Phys. Rev. A 88,
022322 (2013).
[60] M. Howard, J. Wallman, V. Veitch, and J. Emer-
son, “Contextuality supplies the ‘magic’ for quan-
tum computation”, Nature 510, 351 (2014).
[61] N. Delfosse, P. A. Guerin, J. Bian, and
R. Raussendorf, “Wigner Function Negativity
and Contextuality in Quantum Computation on
Rebits”, Phys. Rev. X 5, 021003 (2015).
[62] J. Bermejo-Vega, N. Delfosse, D. E. Browne,
C. Okay, R. Raussendorf, “Contextuality as a re-
source for qubit quantum computation”, Phys.
Rev. Lett. 119, 120505 (2017).
[63] J. Singh, K. Bharti, and Arvind, “Quantum
key distribution protocol based on contextuality
monogamy”, Phys. Rev. A 95, 062333 (2017).
[64] A. Cabello, “Kochen-Specker Theorem for a Sin-
gle Qubit using Positive Operator-Valued Mea-
sures”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 190401 (2003).
[65] A. Grudka and P. Kurzy´nski, “Is There Contex-
tuality for a Single Qubit?”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100,
160401 (2008).
[66] P. Busch, “Quantum States and Generalized Ob-
servables: A Simple Proof of Gleason’s Theorem”,
Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 120403 (2003).
[67] C. M. Caves, C. A. Fuchs, K. Manne, and
J. M. Renes, “Gleason-Type Derivations of the
Quantum Probability Rule for Generalized Mea-
surements”, Found. Phys. 34, 193 (2004).
[68] A. M. Gleason, “Measures on the closed sub-
spaces of a Hilbert space”, J. Math. Mech. 6, 885
(1957). Also available at JSTOR.
[69] P. K. Aravind, “The generalized Kochen-Specker
theorem”, Phys. Rev. A 68, 052104 (2003).
[70] A. A. Methot, “Minimal Bell-Kochen-Specker
proofs with POVMs on qubits”, Int. J. Quantum
Inf. 5, 353 (2007).
[71] Q. Zhang, H. Li, T. Yang, J. Yin, J. Du,
J. W. Pan, “Experimental Test of the Kochen-
Specker Theorem for Single Qubits using Pos-
itive Operator-Valued Measures”, arXiv:quant-
ph/0412049 (2004).
Accepted in Quantum 2019-09-01, click title to verify. Published under CC-BY 4.0. 43