Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Classifying Causal Structures: Ascertaining when Classical Correlations are Constrained by Inequalities

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2308.02380 v1 pith:W2QLITZ2 submitted 2023-08-04 quant-ph math.STstat.MLstat.TH

Classifying Causal Structures: Ascertaining when Classical Correlations are Constrained by Inequalities

classification quant-ph math.STstat.MLstat.TH
keywords constraintscausalscenariosinequalityobservedthosevariablesclassical
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

The classical causal relations between a set of variables, some observed and some latent, can induce both equality constraints (typically conditional independences) as well as inequality constraints (Instrumental and Bell inequalities being prototypical examples) on their compatible distribution over the observed variables. Enumerating a causal structure's implied inequality constraints is generally far more difficult than enumerating its equalities. Furthermore, only inequality constraints ever admit violation by quantum correlations. For both those reasons, it is important to classify causal scenarios into those which impose inequality constraints versus those which do not. Here we develop methods for detecting such scenarios by appealing to d-separation, e-separation, and incompatible supports. Many (perhaps all?) scenarios with exclusively equality constraints can be detected via a condition articulated by Henson, Lal and Pusey (HLP). Considering all scenarios with up to 4 observed variables, which number in the thousands, we are able to resolve all but three causal scenarios, providing evidence that the HLP condition is, in fact, exhaustive.

discussion (0)

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