Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Assistant
AI Research Assistant
Well-researched responses based on relevant abstracts and paper content.
Custom Instructions Pro
Preferences or requirements that you'd like Emergent Mind to consider when generating responses.
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash 82 tok/s
Gemini 2.5 Pro 58 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 Medium 39 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 High 27 tok/s Pro
GPT-4o 119 tok/s Pro
Kimi K2 188 tok/s Pro
GPT OSS 120B 460 tok/s Pro
Claude Sonnet 4.5 35 tok/s Pro
2000 character limit reached

From statistical dependence to the space of possible superdeterministic theories (2509.23047v1)

Published 27 Sep 2025 in quant-ph and physics.hist-ph

Abstract: Bell's theorem demonstrates that any physical theory that is consistent with the predictions of quantum mechanics, and which satisfies some apparently innocuous assumptions, must violate the principle of local causality. It may therefore be possible to maintain local causality by rejecting one of these other assumptions instead. One possibility that has recently received significant attention involves rejecting the principle of statistical independence (SI). In this paper, we consider the frequency interpretation of SI, which states that $\rho(\lambda) \approx \rho(\lambda | Z)$, where $\rho(\lambda)$ is the relative frequency of an element of an ensemble being in the state $\lambda$, and $Z$ is a label that separates the ensemble into apparently randomly selected sub-ensembles. SI is violated when the sub-ensemble frequency $\rho(\lambda | Z)$ fails to be representative of the ensemble frequency $\rho(\lambda)$. We argue that physical theories that systematically violate SI should all be understood as superdeterministic. This perspective on SI sheds light on a number of issues that are being debated in the superdeterminism literature, especially concerning its scope and philosophical consequences. Regarding scope, we argue that superdeterministic theories fall into three categories, deterministic theories with fine-tuned initial conditions, fluke theories, and nomic exclusion theories. We also argue that retrocausal and invariant set theories need not violate SI, which is contrary to how they are normally presented. Regarding philosophical implications, we argue that superdeterminism is incompatible with free will according to some prominent compatibilist accounts. We also argue that although superdeterminism is conspiratorial, it is not unscientific, but pre-scientific.

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Lightbulb Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

List To Do Tasks Checklist Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

X Twitter Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Tweets

This paper has been mentioned in 1 post and received 1 like.