{
  "annotation_id": "26ebeb34-4239-4cde-87ee-a95a799a9cd1",
  "date_created": "2026-03-02T18:01:52.495000Z",
  "date_modified": "2026-03-02T18:01:52.495000Z",
  "file_hash": "941b28d82ff1d9802e8420741c570285f44bbe149e0d7fdbc408fdd301a0f950",
  "private": false,
  "record": {
    "abstract": "Suppose N parties describe the state of a quantum system by N possibly\ndifferent density operators. These N state assignments represent the beliefs of\nthe parties about the system. We examine conditions for determining whether the\nN state assignments are compatible. We distinguish two kinds of procedures for\nassessing compatibility, the first based on the compatibility of the prior\nbeliefs on which the N state assignments are based and the second based on the\ncompatibility of predictive measurement probabilities they define. The first\nprocedure leads to a compatibility criterion proposed by Brun, Finkelstein, and\nMermin [BFM, Phys. Rev. A 65, 032315 (2002)]. The second procedure leads to a\nhierarchy of measurement-based compatibility criteria which is fundamentally\ndifferent from the corresponding classical situation. Quantum mechanically none\nof the measurement-based compatibility criteria is equivalent to the BFM\ncriterion.",
    "arxiv_id": "quant-ph/0206110",
    "authors": [
      "Carlton M. Caves",
      "Christopher A. Fuchs",
      "Ruediger Schack"
    ],
    "categories": [
      "quant-ph"
    ],
    "doi": "10.1103/PhysRevA.66.062111",
    "journal_ref": "Phys. Rev. A 66, 062111 (2002)",
    "title": "Conditions for compatibility of quantum state assignments",
    "url": "https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0206110"
  },
  "schema_id": "dorsal/arxiv",
  "source": {
    "execution_id": "f96f8ee8-ba0d-4897-bfa6-ec233681a453",
    "id": "arXiv Dataset IDs",
    "type": "Model",
    "variant": "snapshot-2026-03-01",
    "version": "0.1.0"
  },
  "user_id": 1000002
}