 The key challenge from Maudlin is that any retrocausal mechanism must ensure that the future behavior of the system transpires consistently with the spatiotemporal structure dictated by any potential future causes: “stochastic outcomes at a particular point in time may influence the future, but that future itself is supposed to play a role in producing the outcomes” (2011: 181). In the transactional interpretation the existence of the confirmation wave itself presupposes some determined future state of the system with retrocausal influence. However, with standard (i.e., forward-in-time) stochastic causal influences affecting the future from the present, a determined future may not necessarily be guaranteed in every such case, as shown by Maudlin’s experiment.