[abeppu]

> Among the physicists who do care about the different QM interpretations, it is my understanding that most would go with the Everett (AKA "Many Worlds) Interpretation these days.

In a small poll at a conference on the foundations of quantum mechanics in 2011, the Copenhagen interpretation was the most popular. This could differ from your definition of "these days" I suppose.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1301.1069.pdf

Update: a 2016 survey by different authors found similar popularity for the Copenhagen interpretation.

[konschubert]

I can say that this weird acceptance of the logically undefined Copenhagen interpretation was a contributor to me wanting to leave the field ...

[AstralStorm]

Logically undefined in what sense?

Paradoxical traps or thought experiments filled with holes?

MW is even more undefined in terms that we cannot even construct a measurement/singular interaction... (it is always derivative of total system state)

[nessus42]

Well, I guess I can't argue with an unscientific poll, but it kind of boggles my mind that any scientist could take the Copenhagen Interpretation seriously.

I mean it builds the term "measurement", which is an undefined and unscientific concept, right into the laws of physics. Personally, I find this to be virtually nonsensical.

[pdobsan]

The 2016 survey: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1612.00676.pdf

Both surveys are fascinating reads. They clearly give a sense that despite of the spectacular success of QM how far we still are from the final word in that field.