- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review Research

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Simulating noncausality with quantum control of causal orders

Anna Steffinlongo and Hippolyte Dourdent*

  • *Contact author: hippolyte.dourdent@alumni.icfo.eu
PDF

Phys. Rev. Research 8, 013127 – Published 4 February, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/9jss-yf1c

Abstract

Logical consistency with free local operations is compatible with nontrivial classical communications, where all parties can be both in each other’s past and future—a phenomenon known as noncausality. Noncausal processes, such as the “Lugano process,” violate causal inequalities, yet their physical realizability remains an open question. In contrast, the quantum switch—a physically realizable process with indefinite causal order—can only generate causal correlations. Building on a recently established correspondence [Kunjwal and Baumeler, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 120201 (2023)] between the SHIFT measurement, which exhibits nonlocality without entanglement, and the Lugano process, we demonstrate that the SHIFT measurement can be implemented using a quantum switch of classical communications in a scenario with quantum inputs. This shows that the structure of the Lugano process can be simulated by a quantum switch and that successful SHIFT discrimination witnesses causal nonseparability rather than noncausality. Finally, we identify a broad class of “superposition of classical communications” derived from classical processes without global past capable of realizing similar causally indefinite measurements. We examine these results in relation to the ongoing debate on implementations of indefinite causal orders.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (80)

  1. E. Chitambar, D. Leung, L. Mančinska, M. Ozols, and A. Winter, Everything you always wanted to know about LOCC (but were afraid to ask), Commun. Math. Phys. 328, 303 (2014).
  2. J. Pauwels, A. Pozas-Kerstjens, F. D. Santo, and N. Gisin, Classification of joint quantum measurements based on entanglement cost of localization, Phys. Rev. X 15, 021013 (2025).
  3. C. H. Bennett, D. P. DiVincenzo, C. A. Fuchs, T. Mor, E. Rains, P. W. Shor, J. A. Smolin, and W. K. Wootters, Quantum nonlocality without entanglement, Phys. Rev. A 59, 1070 (1999).
  4. S. Akibue, M. Owari, G. Kato, and M. Murao, Entanglement-assisted classical communication can simulate classical communication without causal order, Phys. Rev. A 96, 062331 (2017).
  5. H. D. Politzer, Path integrals, density matrices, and information flow with closed timelike curves, Phys. Rev. D 49, 3981 (1994).
  6. C. H. Bennett and B. Schumacher, Simulated Time Travel, Teleportation without communication, and How to conduct a Romance with Someone who has fallen into a black hole, Talk in QUPON (2005), http://web.archive.org/web/20060207123032/http://www.research.ibm.com/people/b/bennetc/QUPONBshort.pdf.
  7. G. Svetlichny, Time travel: Deutsch vs teleportation, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 50, 3903 (2011).
  8. T. A. Brun and M. M. Wilde, Perfect state distinguishability and computational speedups with postselected closed timelike curves, Found. Phys. 42, 341 (2012).
  9. M. Araújo, P. A. Guérin, and A. Baumeler, Quantum computation with indefinite causal structures, Phys. Rev. A 96, 052315 (2017).
  10. Ä. Baumeler, Causal loops: Logically consistent correlations, time travel, and computation, Ph.d., Università della Svizzera italiana, 2017.
  11. A. Baumeler and E. Tselentis, Equivalence of grandfather and information antinomy under intervention, Electron. Proc. Theor. Comput. Sci. 340, 1 (2021).
  12. O. Oreshkov, F. Costa, and Č. Brukner, Quantum correlations with no causal order, Nat. Commun. 3, 1092 (2012).
  13. A. Baumeler and S. Wolf, Device-independent test of causal order and relations to fixed-points, New J. Phys. 18, 035014 (2016).
  14. Ä. Baumeler, F. Costa, T. C. Ralph, S. Wolf, and M. Zych, Reversible time travel with freedom of choice, Class. Quantum Grav. 36, 224002 (2019).
  15. G. Tobar and F. Costa, Reversible dynamics with closed time-like curves and freedom of choice, Class. Quantum Grav. 37, 205011 (2020).
  16. A. Baumeler and S. Wolf, The space of logically consistent classical processes without causal order, New J. Phys. 18, 013036 (2016).
  17. M. Araújo and A. Feix, private communication to Baumeler and Wolf (2014).
  18. C. Branciard, M. Araújo, A. Feix, F. Costa, and Č. Brukner, The simplest causal inequalities and their violation, New J. Phys. 18, 013008 (2016).
  19. R. Kunjwal and A. Baumeler, Trading causal order for locality, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 120201 (2023).
  20. M. Araújo, A. Feix, M. Navascués, and Č. Brukner, A purification postulate for quantum mechanics with indefinite causal order, Quantum 1, 10 (2017).
  21. O. Oreshkov, Time-delocalized quantum subsystems and operations: On the existence of processes with indefinite causal structure in quantum mechanics, Quantum 3, 206 (2019).
  22. J. Wechs, C. Branciard, and O. Oreshkov, Existence of processes violating causal inequalities on time-delocalised subsystems, Nat. Commun. 14, 1471 (2023).
  23. P. A. Guérin and Č. Brukner, Observer-dependent locality of quantum events, New J. Phys. 20, 103031 (2018).
  24. A. Vanrietvelde, N. Ormrod, H. Kristjánsson, and J. Barrett, Consistent circuits for indefinite causal order, Quantum 9, 1923 (2025).
  25. V. Vilasini and R. Renner, Embedding cyclic information-theoretic structures in acyclic space-times: No-go results for indefinite causality, Phys. Rev. A 110, 022227 (2024).
  26. V. Vilasini and R. Renner, Fundamental limits for realizing quantum processes in spacetime, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 080201 (2024).
  27. J. Wechs, H. Dourdent, A. A. Abbott, and C. Branciard, Quantum circuits with classical versus quantum control of causal order, PRX Quantum 2, 030335 (2021).
  28. G. Chiribella, G. M. D’Ariano, P. Perinotti, and B. Valiron, Quantum computations without definite causal structure, Phys. Rev. A 88, 022318 (2013).
  29. M. Araújo, C. Branciard, F. Costa, A. Feix, C. Giarmatzi, and Č. Brukner, Witnessing causal nonseparability, New J. Phys. 17, 102001 (2015).
  30. O. Oreshkov and C. Giarmatzi, Causal and causally separable processes, New J. Phys. 18, 093020 (2016).
  31. T. Purves and A. J. Short, Quantum theory cannot violate a causal inequality, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 110402 (2021).
  32. L. Hardy, Probability theories with dynamic causal structure: A new framework for quantum gravity, arXiv:gr-qc/0509120.
  33. L. Hardy, Towards quantum gravity: A framework for probabilistic theories with non-fixed causal structure, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 40, 3081 (2007).
  34. H. Dourdent, A. A. Abbott, N. Brunner, I. Šupić, and C. Branciard, Semi-device-independent certification of causal nonseparability with trusted quantum inputs, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 090402 (2022).
  35. I. Šupić, P. Skrzypczyk, and D. Cavalcanti, Measurement-device-independent entanglement and randomness estimation in quantum networks, Phys. Rev. A 95, 042340 (2017).
  36. M. J. Hoban and A. B. Sainz, A channel-based framework for steering, non-locality and beyond, New J. Phys. 20, 053048 (2018).
  37. H. Dourdent, A. A. Abbott, I. Šupić, and C. Branciard, Network-device-independent certification of causal nonseparability, Quantum 8, 1514 (2024).
  38. E. B. Davies and J. T. Lewis, An operational approach to quantum probability, Commun. Math. Phys. 17, 239 (1970).
  39. M.-D. Choi, Completely positive linear maps on complex matrices, Linear Algebra Appl. 10, 285 (1975).
  40. The considered process is slightly different from the standard version of the quantum switch  [28]. In the standard case, all communications between the parties are identity channels. Such standard quantum switch could also be used here, with a slight modification on Bob’s operation [Eq.  (6)], who would then need to send |b⊕1〉〈b⊕1|BO back in the process instead of b.
  41. |01〉 is common to the two bipartite bases: |00〉,|01〉,|1+〉,|1−〉, where Alice is in the causal past of Bob, and |+0〉,|01〉,|−0〉,|11〉, where Bob is in the causal past of Alice.
  42. Assuming the measurement is implemented in a causal LOPF scenario, ξ=7/8. Indeed, there is always a well-defined global past in a causal process function. This means that one of the inputs, (x,y,z), must be constant, e.g., set to 0. Then, at most six out of the eight SHIFT states can be perfectly distinguished, while the remaining two must be guessed randomly.
  43. D. DiVincenzo, D. Leung, and B. Terhal, Quantum data hiding, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 48, 580 (2002).
  44. L. Procopio, A. Moqanaki, M. Araújo, F. Costa, I. Alonso Calafell, E. Dowd, D. Hamel, L. Rozema, Č. Brukner, and P. Walther, Experimental superposition of orders of quantum gates, Nat. Commun. 6, 7913 (2015).
  45. J. Rubino, L. Rozema, A. Feix, M. Araújo, J. Zeuner, L. Procopio, Č. Brukner, and P. Walther, Experimental verification of an indefinite causal order, Sci. Adv. 3, e1602589 (2017).
  46. K. Goswami, C. Giarmatzi, M. Kewming, F. Costa, C. Branciard, J. Romero, and A. G. White, Indefinite causal order in a quantum switch, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 090503 (2018).
  47. K. Wei, N. Tischler, S.-R. Zhao, Y.-H. Li, J. M. Arrazola, Y. Liu, W. Zhang, H. Li, L. You, Z. Wang, Y.-A. Chen, B. C. Sanders, Q. Zhang, G. J. Pryde, F. Xu, and J.-W. Pan, Experimental quantum switching for exponentially superior quantum communication complexity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 120504 (2019).
  48. G. Rubino, L. A. Rozema, F. Massa, M. Araújo, M. Zych, Č. Brukner, and P. Walther, Experimental entanglement of temporal order, Quantum 6, 621 (2022).
  49. K. Goswami, Y. Cao, G. A. Paz-Silva, J. Romero, and A. G. White, Increasing communication capacity via superposition of order, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 033292 (2020).
  50. Y. Guo, X.-M. Hu, Z.-B. Hou, H. Cao, J.-M. Cui, B.-H. Liu, Y.-F. Huang, C.-F. Li, G.-C. Guo, and G. Chiribella, Experimental transmission of quantum information using a superposition of causal orders, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 030502 (2020).
  51. M. M. Taddei, J. Cariñe, D. Martínez, T. García, N. Guerrero, A. A. Abbott, M. Araújo, C. Branciard, E. S. Gómez, S. P. Walborn, L. Aolita, and G. Lima, Computational advantage from the quantum superposition of multiple temporal orders of photonic gates, PRX Quantum 2, 010320 (2021).
  52. G. Rubino, L. A. Rozema, D. Ebler, H. Kristjánsson, S. Salek, P. Allard Guérin, A. A. Abbott, C. Branciard, C. Brukner, G. Chiribella, and P. Walther, Experimental quantum communication enhancement by superposing trajectories, Phys. Rev. Res. 3, 013093 (2021).
  53. H. Cao, J. Bavaresco, N.-N. Wang, L. A. Rozema, C. Zhang, Y.-F. Huang, B.-H. Liu, C.-F. Li, G.-C. Guo, and P. Walther, Semi-device-independent certification of indefinite causal order in a photonic quantum switch, Optica 10, 561 (2023).
  54. T. Strömberg, P. Schiansky, R. W. Peterson, M. T. Quintino, and P. Walther, Demonstration of a quantum switch in a Sagnac configuration, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 060803 (2023).
  55. M. Antesberger, M. T. Quintino, P. Walther, and L. A. Rozema, Higher-order process matrix tomography of a passively-stable quantum switch, PRX Quantum 5, 010325 (2024).
  56. L. A. Rozema, T. Strömberg, H. Cao, Y. Guo, B.-H. Liu, and P. Walther, Experimental aspects of indefinite causal order in quantum mechanics, Nat. Rev. Phys. 6, 483 (2024).
  57. J.-P. W. MacLean, K. Ried, R. W. Spekkens, and K. J. Resch, Quantum-coherent mixtures of causal relations, Nat. Commun. 8, 15149 (2017).
  58. N. Paunković and M. Vojinović, Causal orders, quantum circuits and spacetime: Distinguishing between definite and superposed causal orders, Quantum 4, 275 (2020).
  59. N. Ormrod, A. Vanrietvelde, and J. Barrett, Causal structure in the presence of sectorial constraints, with application to the quantum switch, Quantum 7, 1028 (2023).
  60. T. van der Lugt, J. Barrett, and G. Chiribella, Device-independent certification of indefinite causal order in the quantum switch, Nat. Commun. 14, 5811 (2023).
  61. T. van der Lugt and N. Ormrod, Possibilistic and maximal indefinite causal order in the quantum switch, Quantum 8, 1543 (2024).
  62. S. Gogioso and N. Pinzani, The geometry of causality, arXiv:2303.09017.
  63. Ä. Baumeler, A. S. Gilani, and J. Rashid, Unlimited non-causal correlations and their relation to non-locality, Quantum 6, 673 (2022).
  64. G. Chiribella, G. M. D’Ariano, and P. Perinotti, Quantum circuit architecture, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 060401 (2008).
  65. G. Chiribella, G. M. D’Ariano, and P. Perinotti, Theoretical framework for quantum networks, Phys. Rev. A 80, 022339 (2009).
  66. In general, this choice cannot be arbitrary, as shown in Appendix  pp4 However, in the specific case of the Lugano process, because it is perfectly symmetric, the choice does not matter here.
  67. H. Dourdent, Causal and logical loops from quantum theory, Theses, Université Grenoble Alpes, 2022.
  68. J. Wechs, A. A. Abbott, and C. Branciard, On the definition and characterisation of multipartite causal (non)separability, New J. Phys. 21, 013027 (2019).
  69. C. Branciard, Witnesses of causal nonseparability: An introduction and a few case studies, Sci. Rep. 6, 26018 (2016).
  70. L. Hardy, Quantum gravity computers: On the theory of computation with indefinite causal structure, in Quantum Reality, Relativistic Causality, and Closing the Epistemic Circle (Springer, Netherlands, 2009), p. 379.
  71. M. Fellous-Asiani, R. Mothe, L. Bresque, H. Dourdent, P. A. Camati, A. A. Abbott, A. Auffèves, and C. Branciard, Comparing the quantum switch and its simulations with energetically constrained operations, Phys. Rev. Res. 5, 023111 (2023).
  72. M. Zych, F. Costa, I. Pikovski, and Č. Brukner, Bell’s theorem for temporal order, Nat. Commun. 10, 3772 (2019).
  73. N. S. MÓller, B. Sahdo, and N. Yokomizo, Quantum switch in the gravity of Earth, Phys. Rev. A 104, 042414 (2021).
  74. N. S. Móller, B. Sahdo, and N. Yokomizo, Gravitational quantum switch on a superposition of spherical shells, Quantum 8, 1248 (2024).
  75. M. Salzger and V. Vilasini, Mapping indefinite causal order processes to composable quantum protocols in a spacetime, New J. Phys. 27, 023002 (2025).
  76. V. Vilasini, L.-Q. Chen, L. Ye, and R. Renner, Events and their localisation are relative to a lab, arXiv:2505.21797.
  77. A.-C. de la Hamette, V. Kabel, M. Christodoulou, and Č. Brukner, Quantum diffeomorphisms cannot make indefinite causal order definite, Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 141402 (2025).
  78. A. Grinbaum, On epistemological modesty, Philosophica 83, 139 (2010).
  79. A.-C. de la Hamette, V. Kabel, and Č. Brukner, What an event is not: Unravelling the identity of events in quantum theory and gravity, arXiv:2404.00159.
  80. J. Bavaresco, S. Yoshida, T. Odake, H. Kristjánsson, P. Taranto, M. Murao, and M. T. Quintino, Can the quantum switch be deterministically simulated? Nat. Commun. 16, 10216 (2025).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Research 8, 013127– Published 4 February, 2026
  • Received 16 May 2025
  • Accepted 13 January 2026
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation