Contextuality is an indicator of non-classicality, and a resource for various quantum procedures. In this paper, we use contextuality to evaluate the variational quantum eigensolver (VQE), one of the most promising tools for near-term quantum simulation. We present an efficiently computable test to determine whether or not the objective function for a VQE procedure is contextual. We apply this test to evaluate the contextuality of experimental implementations of VQE, and determine that several, but not all, fail this test of quantumness.
Main idea: A set of operators is noncontextual if commuting is transitive among the subset that do not commute with all other operators.
Noncontextuality is an extension of a classicality (where all operators pairwise commute).
It is easy to test for noncontextuality by checking if commuting is transitive.
This also means that noncontextuality implies commutativity is an equivalence relation (i.e. if operators commute, they are in a clique)
“Strongly contextual” means you can’t assign a consistent outcome to combinations of operators! The measurement set is not closed under multiplication.
For example: \((XI * IX) * (ZI * IZ)\) is YY, but \((XI * IZ) * (ZI * IX)\) is -YY
“Weakly contextual” means joint distributions don’t match a hidden variable theory: \(v(A)v(B) \ne v(AB)\)
Things to clarify:
How does the PBR proof work, exactly?
When can you tell if something is weakly contextual?
What do these things mean quantitatively, outside of Pauli operators?
What about computability (things can be classically hard but still noncontextual)