arXiv:quant-ph/0206110quant-ph
Conditions for compatibility of quantum state assignments
Early discovery. Linked by one identifiable commenter. This paper is outside the main ranking; a mention is not an endorsement.
Abstract
Suppose N parties describe the state of a quantum system by N possibly different density operators. These N state assignments represent the beliefs of the parties about the system. We examine conditions for determining whether the N state assignments are compatible. We distinguish two kinds of procedures for assessing compatibility, the first based on the compatibility of the prior beliefs on which the N state assignments are based and the second based on the compatibility of predictive measurement probabilities they define. The first procedure leads to a compatibility criterion proposed by Brun, Finkelstein, and Mermin [BFM, Phys. Rev. A 65, 032315 (2002)]. The second procedure leads to a hierarchy of measurement-based compatibility criteria which is fundamentally different from the corresponding classical situation. Quantum mechanically none of the measurement-based compatibility criteria is equivalent to the BFM criterion.
Perhaps it would help to note that in QBism, reality is not denied. Rather, the objective reality of the quantum state is denied. Not sure what you mean by incompatible results. Certainly QBism is incompatible with Many Worlds! The latter states that the quantum state is real…
n4r9View on HNParent context