{"id":"b7865bb9-9bc6-48ce-a610-e93564c90c1e","arxiv_id":"2505.00483","paper_version":1,"verdict":"CONDITIONAL","confidence":"MODERATE","novelty_score":6.0,"correctness_risk":"medium","formal_verification":"none","parameter_count":5,"one_line_summary":"A rotating-lead source paired with a resonantly-coupled hybrid-spin comagnetometer produced the most stringent laboratory constraints on a parity-violating spin-velocity interaction, with no signal observed.","lead":"Physicists used a specially operated atomic magnetometer with spinning lead blocks as a moving mass source to search for an exotic force that acts between particle spin and velocity. No signal appeared, and the experiment set the strongest lab limits yet on this parity-violating force over distances from 0.03 to 400 meters.","discovery_kind":"new_application","skeptic_critique":{"model":"deepseek-v4-flash","headline":"The HSR calibration assumes the comagnetometer responds identically to a classical magnetic field and to the exotic spin-velocity pseudomagnetic field at 6 Hz, but the paper reports a 5-fold low-frequency suppression and does not state the suppression or a correction at the signal frequency.","rationale":"The paper's central claim is a null measurement that improves constraints on g^n_A g^N_V by three orders of magnitude. For a null result, the conversion of the raw optical rotation into a pseudomagnetic field value is the pivotal step; every quoted limit scales linearly with K_bny. The HSR regime is presented as a new operating mode, and the paper itself emphasizes that the response to classical magnetic fields is suppressed by a factor of five at low frequencies relative to the response to spin couplings. That statement makes it impossible to assume, without further evidence, that a calibration with an ordinary magnetic field yields the same transfer function as the exotic field at the 6 Hz operating point. A systematic offset in K_bny translates directly into a systematic error in the coupling constant that is not captured by the quoted 0.016 uV/fT calibration uncertainty. Because the claimed improvement factor depends on the numerical value of the limit, an uncorrected suppression factor of even 2 to 5 would change the central quantitative claim. The reader's weakest assumption identifies exactly the same step, and no other assumption in the paper seems comparably consequential: the vibration systematics are explicitly bounded and the data-processing weights are specified, whereas the calibration mode-matching is left implicit. Therefore I agree with the reader's conditional verdict, and the concern can be settled by an explicit transfer-function check.","tokens_in":10777,"tokens_out":13786,"duration_ms":149766,"concrete_test":"Using the coupled Bloch-equation transfer functions for the HSR regime (parameters: R_n^2 approximately 0.005 s^-1, R_e^2 approximately 3900 s^-1, Q approximately 7.6, B_z^e approximately 83 nT, B_z^n approximately 468 nT, B_eff^z approximately 1.8 pT, and the calibration data from Refs. [16,22]), compute the ratio R(6 Hz) = response to a nuclear-spin-only pseudomagnetic field divided by response to a uniform classical transverse magnetic field. If R(6 Hz) differs from 1 by more than the 8% calibration uncertainty, then the K_bny used in Eq. (2) must be corrected by R(6 Hz), and the reported limit curve in Fig. 4 should be rescaled accordingly. The same computation should be repeated at the harmonic frequencies (2x6 Hz, 3x6 Hz) used in the multi-harmonic analysis.","verdict_should_be":"UNCHANGED","load_bearing_attack":"Equation (2) converts the measured optical signal to the exotic pseudomagnetic field using K_bny, a factor stated to be calibrated with ordinary magnetic fields. In the HSR regime, however, the comagnetometer is deliberately less sensitive to classical magnetic fields: the Discussion reports a five-fold magnetic suppression factor below 40 mHz, defined as the ratio of the response to a classical By to the response to a pseudomagnetic field b^Ne_y. If the same classical-field K_bny were used without correcting for this suppression at the operating frequency of 6 Hz, the inferred b^Ne_y would be too large by that suppression factor, making the derived limit weaker by the same factor. The paper does not state the calibration frequency, the coil geometry, or whether the suppression factor at 6 Hz was measured or divided out. Ref. [23] offers a universal calibration procedure that would resolve this, but its use is not described. Since the headline claim is a three-orders-of-magnitude improvement, an uncorrected factor of 5 would reduce the improvement at lambda=5 m to about two orders, directly affecting the central claim. The 8% uncertainty quoted for K_bny covers calibration repeatability, not this systematic mode-mismatch question.","agreement_with_reader":"agree"},"referee_report":{"model":"deepseek-v4-flash","summary":"The paper reports a laboratory search for a parity-violating, velocity-dependent long-range spin interaction of the form V_PV = (g_A g_V ħ/4π)(σ·v)e^{-r/λ}/r, using a K-Rb-21Ne comagnetometer operated in a resonantly-coupled hybrid spin-resonance (HSR) regime. Two rotating lead blocks provide an unpolarized nucleon source, and the comagnetometer response to the resulting pseudomagnetic field is measured over 108 h. The paper reports b_y^Ne = (1.8 ± 4.2_stat ± 2.0_syst) aT and, at λ = 5 m, g^n_A g^N_V = (5.3 ± 12.4_stat ± 5.9_syst) × 10^-39 with a 95% bound |g^n_A g^N_V| ≤ 2.9 × 10^-38, plus a corresponding electron-nucleon bound |g^e_A g^N_V| ≤ 1.9 × 10^-35. The authors claim the most stringent constraints over force ranges 0.03 to 400 m, with a three-orders-of-magnitude improvement over previous limits at λ = 5 m.","tokens_in":11097,"tokens_out":8153,"duration_ms":86036,"significance":"If the reported limits are correct, this is a significant experimental advance. The paper combines a 108 h integration, a multistage vibration-isolation system with a claimed >700-fold suppression, and a comagnetometer operated in a relatively new HSR regime with calibration parameters listed in Table I. The claimed improvement by three orders of magnitude at λ = 5 m over prior laboratory bounds, and the extension of sensitivity over 0.03-400 m, would be of broad interest for searches for exotic spin-dependent interactions. The HSR technique itself appears useful for suppressing low-frequency magnetic noise while retaining high sensitivity. The main risk is the calibration chain: the conversion from optical signal to exotic pseudomagnetic field rests on a classical-field calibration whose frequency dependence is not documented, and the quoted 95% bound is not reproducible from the stated uncertainties without an explicit statistical prescription.","major_comments":[{"comment":"The central conversion in Eq. (2) uses K_bny, stated to be calibrated with classical magnetic fields, while the Discussion reports a fivefold magnetic suppression factor for a classical B_y relative to a pseudomagnetic field b_y^Ne below 40 mHz in the HSR regime. The manuscript does not state the frequency at which K_bny was calibrated, whether the calibration was performed at the 6 Hz signal frequency, or whether the suppression factor was measured and divided out at 6 Hz. If the low-frequency classical calibration constant was used without this frequency-dependent correction, the inferred b_y^Ne would be overestimated by up to a factor of five, weakening the derived limit by the same factor and reducing the claimed three-orders-of-magnitude improvement at λ = 5 m to roughly two orders. Please specify the calibration frequency, the coil geometry, and the measured or modeled suppression factor at 6 Hz, or apply the universal calibration procedure of Ref. [23] so that the response to the pseudo-magnetic coupling is directly calibrated.","section":"Results (Hybrid spin-resonance regime) and Discussion"},{"comment":"The quoted 95% bound is not derivable from the stated numbers without an explicit statistical prescription. At λ = 5 m the paper reports g^n_A g^N_V = (5.3 ± 12.4_stat ± 5.9_syst) × 10^-39, giving a total standard uncertainty of about 13.7 × 10^-39. A conventional two-sided 95% interval would extend to roughly 32 × 10^-39, not the quoted 2.9 × 10^-38 (i.e., 29 × 10^-39). If a one-sided or profile-likelihood construction was used, that construction should be stated; the same clarification is needed for the electron-nucleon bound. Without this, the headline numerical constraints are not reproducible from the information given.","section":"Results (New constraints) and Data processing"},{"comment":"The largest systematic contribution in Table I is attributed to vibration noise, with a residual vibration level below 5.6 × 10^-10 m/s/Hz^1/2 and a resulting contribution to Δg^n_A g^N_V below 5.4 × 10^-39. However, the manuscript does not describe how mechanical vibration is converted into an equivalent pseudomagnetic-field error or how the numerical factor 5.4 × 10^-39 was obtained. Since this term dominates the quoted systematic budget, the coupling mechanism (e.g., cell motion in residual gradients, light-beam misalignment, or acoustic coupling) and the calibration or model used should be described; otherwise the dominant systematic uncertainty cannot be independently assessed.","section":"Table I and Discussion"}],"minor_comments":[{"comment":"The limit curves are shown without uncertainty bands. Please state whether the curves incorporate the uncertainties in K_bny, phase, and geometry, and if so, how; otherwise the curves should be labeled as central sensitivity only.","section":"Figure 4"},{"comment":"The entries for the phase-uncertainty contribution (+1.4/-2.3) are missing explicit units; presumably they are in units of 10^-39, but this should be stated in the table header.","section":"Table I"},{"comment":"The coupling constant is denoted inconsistently as g^n_AgN_V, gAgV, and related forms in the text, equations, and figures; please use a single consistent notation throughout.","section":"General notation"},{"comment":"The coordinates X, Y, Z used in Table I are not defined in the main text or figure captions; please define the coordinate origin and positive directions, and clarify the relation between the quoted source-cell separation (52.5 cm) and the 50.0 cm rotation radius.","section":"Table I and Fig. 1"},{"comment":"There are minor typos: 'sheding light' should be 'shedding light', and in the Acknowledgements 'Fundamental Research Founds' should be 'Fundamental Research Funds'.","section":"Discussion"},{"comment":"The inset reports a Gaussian fit with reduced χ^2 = 1.16; please state the number of degrees of freedom so the goodness-of-fit can be interpreted.","section":"Figure 3"}],"recommendation":"major_revision","confidential_remarks":"The key gatekeeper for this paper is the calibration-frequency issue: the authors cite Ref. [23] for universal comagnetometer calibration but do not describe using it, and the fivefold suppression factor mentioned in the Discussion makes the classical-field calibration potentially frequency-dependent. If the authors can show that K_bny was calibrated at the signal frequency or that the suppression factor was corrected, the result would be publishable. The statistical construction of the 95% bound also needs to be stated precisely. I would not recommend rejection, because the deficiencies appear fixable within the manuscript's scope, but they are load-bearing for the central claim."},"author_rebuttal":null,"desk_editor":{"model":"deepseek-v4-flash","letter":"Colleague,\n\nShort version: this is a real measurement, not a simulation exercise. The group takes a K-Rb-21Ne comagnetometer in the HSR regime, rotates two 12-kg lead blocks at 3 Hz, and looks for the parity-odd spin-velocity interaction V12+13. They see nothing, and the null result is internally consistent: b^Ne_y = 1.8 ± 4.2_stat ± 2.0_syst aT, with a 95% bound on g^n_A g^N_V of 2.9e-38 at λ=5 m. The claimed three-order improvement over Su et al. is believable from the quoted error budget.\n\nWhat is new: combining the HSR comagnetometer (already in Ref. [16]) with rotating source masses for this specific P-odd, T-even channel. The 700-fold vibration isolation is a real engineering achievement and probably the main technical novelty. The multi-harmonic weighting using simulated Fourier coefficients is a sensible way to exploit the HSR bandwidth.\n\nSoft spots, in order of concern.\n\n1. The calibration-to-exotic-field chain is the load-bearing assumption. Eq. (2) uses K_bny, which the text says is calibrated with classical magnetic fields. The Discussion then reports a five-fold suppression of the response to a classical By relative to a pseudomagnetic field below 40 mHz. If that suppression persists at the 6-Hz operating point and is not divided out, the inferred coupling is too large by a factor of five, which would weaken the λ=5 m limit from a three-order improvement to about a two-order one. The manuscript does not state the calibration frequency, coil geometry, or whether the suppression factor was measured at 6 Hz. Ref. [23] gives a universal procedure for exactly this mismatch; the paper cites it but does not say it is used. This is not a fatal flaw—it could be that K was calibrated at 6 Hz and the model accounts for everything—but the paper as written leaves the question open, and it sits square on the headline claim.\n\n2. Figure 4 shows the limit curves with no error bands or systematic uncertainty propagation beyond the λ=5 m point. For a null result, the limit is just a scaled error budget, but the reader cannot verify the shape.\n\n3. No data or analysis code are deposited. For an experiment of this type, the community will want at least the time-series or the harmonic amplitudes.\n\nMinor: the paper leans heavily on prior group papers for the sensor model. That is appropriate given the lineage; the citations are relevant, not padding.\n\nWho is it for: the exotic-force and comagnetometer community. It deserves a serious referee. I would send it to a good PRL-class journal, with the calibration question the primary thing the referee should push on. My own verdict is conditional rather than outright accept.\n\nRecommendation: engage, but require the authors to document the calibration frequency, quantify the suppression factor at 6 Hz, and either deposit data or provide the error propagation on the full curve.","headline":"A real null-result experiment with a plausible three-order improvement, but the exotic-field calibration is under-documented and could soften the headline by a factor of five.","tokens_in":11612,"tokens_out":6186,"would_cite":true,"duration_ms":59678,"reading_group":"maybe","serious_thinker":"yes","would_accept_peer_review":true},"rs_alignment":null,"lean_confirmation":null,"pith_extraction":{"msc":[],"pacs":[],"model":"deepseek-v4-flash","headline":"The paper establishes new laboratory limits on a parity-violating, long-range spin-dependent interaction by operating a K-Rb-21Ne comagnetometer in the hybrid spin-resonance regime, improving previous constraints by three orders of…","keywords":["parity violation","spin-dependent interaction","SERF comagnetometer","hybrid spin resonance","pseudomagnetic field","exotic force","Z' boson","vibration isolation"],"falsifier":"A decisive check is to measure the response phase $\\varphi_{b^{\\mathrm{Ne}}_y}$ as a function of modulation frequency from 1 to 25 Hz using the rotating lead masses and compare it with the phase response to a classical oscillating magnetic field; the calibration model predicts the two phase curves coincide within $5.6^\\circ$, while a velocity-dependent exotic interaction with different spatial weighting would produce a different phase-frequency slope. A mismatch beyond the quoted uncertainty would show the inferred coupling is biased.","tokens_in":10612,"feed_emoji":"🧲","tokens_out":12969,"duration_ms":120932,"temperature":0.7,"pith_summary":"This paper reports a tabletop search for a hypothetical new force that couples a particle's spin to its velocity and violates parity, a generic low-energy signature of new vector bosons. The experiment runs a K-Rb-21Ne spin-exchange-relaxation-free comagnetometer in a resonantly-coupled hybrid spin-resonance regime, with two rotating lead blocks as source masses and a multistage vibration-isolation system that reduces vibration noise by more than a factor of 700. No exotic pseudomagnetic field is seen: the measured signal from the 21Ne nuclei is $(1.8 \\pm 4.2_{\\rm stat} \\pm 2.0_{\\rm syst})\\,\\mathrm{aT}$, consistent with zero. Interpreting this null as a bound on the potential $V_{\\rm PV} = (g_A g_V \\hbar/4\\pi)(\\hat{\\boldsymbol{\\sigma}}\\cdot\\mathbf{v})\\,e^{-r/\\lambda}/r$, the paper reports the most stringent constraints over $0.03$-$400\\,\\mathrm{m}$, with $|g^n_A g^N_V| \\le 2.9\\times10^{-38}$ at $95\\%$ confidence at $\\lambda = 5\\,\\mathrm{m}$, a three-orders-of-magnitude improvement, and $|g^e_A g^N_V| \\le 1.9\\times10^{-35}$ for the electron-nucleon coupling. If correct, these bounds narrow the allowed parameter space for $Z'$-mediated parity-violating forces and demonstrate that the hybrid spin-resonance regime combines SERF-level sensitivity with the stability and bandwidth needed for long-duration precision searches.","feed_headline":"Rotating lead masses tighten exotic spin-force limit 1000-fold","feed_subtitle":"A tabletop spin sensor sees no parity-violating force down to a coupling below 3×10^-38 at 5-meter range.","key_machinery":"The load-bearing machinery is a resonantly-coupled hybrid spin-resonance comagnetometer together with a movable mass source whose motion encodes the velocity dependence of the force. The exotic interaction is described by the parity-odd potential $V_{\\rm PV} = (g_A g_V \\hbar/4\\pi)(\\hat{\\boldsymbol{\\sigma}}\\cdot\\mathbf{v})\\,e^{-r/\\lambda}/r$; because the force couples spin to velocity, rotating two lead blocks at 3 Hz produces a pseudomagnetic field $b^{\\mathrm{Ne}}_y(t)$ at 6 Hz whose harmonic components are weighted by the geometry. The K-Rb-21Ne ensemble is operated at the resonance condition $B_z \\approx -B^n_z$, where the electronic and nuclear spins are strongly coupled; the resulting HSR response has bandwidth up to 25 Hz and improved disturbance rejection, while the conversion factor $K_{b^{\\mathrm{Ne}}_y}$ is calibrated using ordinary magnetic fields. A split vacuum chamber and vibration-isolated foundation suppress mechanical noise by over 700-fold, and a multi-harmonic weighting analysis extracts the coupling constant $g_A g_V$ from the measured Fourier components.","core_discovery":"The central claim is a null result presented as improved exclusion limits. In the HSR regime the coupled Rb-21Ne spin ensemble responds to an oscillating exotic pseudomagnetic field through the calibrated relation $P_x^e(t)=K_{b^{\\mathrm{Ne}}_y}\\,b^{\\mathrm{Ne}}_{y0}\\,\\cos(\\omega t+\\varphi_{b^{\\mathrm{Ne}}_y})$, so the measured optical-rotation signal can be converted into an equivalent field $b^{\\mathrm{Ne}}_y$. Over 108 hours of data the field is $(1.8 \\pm 4.2_{\\rm stat} \\pm 2.0_{\\rm syst})\\,\\mathrm{aT}$, statistically consistent with zero. The paper's own statement of the result is $g^n_A g^N_V = (5.3 \\pm 12.4_{\\rm stat} \\pm 5.9_{\\rm syst})\\times10^{-39}$ at $\\lambda=5\\,\\mathrm{m}$, with a $95\\%$ bound $|g^n_A g^N_V| \\le 2.9\\times10^{-38}$; the same data give $|g^e_A g^N_V| \\le 1.9\\times10^{-35}$. The paper argues that these are the most stringent laboratory limits on this P-odd, T-even interaction for force ranges from $0.03$ to $400$ metres and that the HSR operating regime, rather than the self-compensating or NMR modes used previously, is what makes the long stable run possible.","pith_inferences":["A direct cross-check not reported here would use a different source geometry, such as a different ring radius or a non-lead source mass, to test whether the extracted $g^n_A g^N_V$ is independent of the assumed spatial weighting of the exotic field.","Because $V_{\\rm PV}$ is velocity-dependent, the 6 Hz and higher harmonics of the rotating source carry independent spatial information; the multi-harmonic weights could in principle be used to reconstruct the velocity-weighting kernel directly from data rather than from simulation.","The same rotating-source apparatus could search for other parity-odd terms in the generalized spin-dependent potential, including spin-spin-velocity couplings, by changing the spin polarization of the source or the modulation scheme.","If future experiments use a different noble-gas species, comparing $^{21}$Ne results with, say, $^{129}$Xe results would test the nuclear spin-fraction corrections $\\zeta_n$, $\\zeta_p$ that convert the measured field into a coupling constant."],"forward_implications":["The same HSR comagnetometer can be turned to other exotic spin-dependent potentials in the 16-term classification, since only the source geometry and modulation frequency need to change.","The reported neutron-nucleon exclusion closes a factor of about 1000 in coupling strength at $\\lambda = 5$ m, shifting the best laboratory limit in that range from the earlier spin-amplifier result to this comagnetometer result.","The multistage vibration-isolation scheme, with more than 700-fold suppression, provides a demonstrated path for quantum sensors that require sub-picometer mechanical stability.","The electron-nucleon bound, improved by more than two orders of magnitude, automatically yields a proton-nucleon bound by rescaling the nuclear spin fractions."],"supporting_citations":[{"why":"Supplies the spin-dependent exotic-interaction classification and the V12+13 potential whose coupling constant is constrained.","marker":"[13]"},{"why":"Supplies the HSR regime and the coupled-spin response model on which the experimental method relies.","marker":"[16]"},{"why":"Supplies the previous spin-amplifier limit that the new five-metre bound improves by three orders of magnitude.","marker":"[17]"},{"why":"Supplies the polarized-3He Earth-scale constraint used as a comparison in the limit plot.","marker":"[18]"},{"why":"Supplies the critical-dynamics model of strongly interacting spin ensembles used to derive the response factor in Eq. (2).","marker":"[22]"},{"why":"Supplies the simulation methodology, harmonic coefficients, and spin-fraction factors used to convert a measured pseudomagnetic field into a coupling constant.","marker":"[24]"},{"why":"Supplies the previous electron-nucleon limit that the new e-N bound improves by more than two orders of magnitude.","marker":"[31]"},{"why":"Supplies the neutron-spin-rotation limit in liquid helium used as a comparison in the limit plot.","marker":"[33]"},{"why":"Supplies the Earth-based long-range spin-velocity bound used as a comparison in the limit plot.","marker":"[34]"}],"fun_headline_variants":["Tabletop spin sensor improves exotic force limit 1000-fold","New null result tightens parity-violating spin-force bound","Hybrid spin resonance boosts exotic force search sensitivity 1000x","Best lab limit on P-odd spin force from tabletop sensor","Rotating lead masses yield 1000x tighter exotic force bound"],"cache_read_input_tokens":3200,"weakest_assumption_plain":"The load-bearing premise is that the comagnetometer's response to the exotic parity-violating spin-velocity field is exactly the response calibrated with ordinary magnetic fields, so that a single conversion factor $K_{b^{\\mathrm{Ne}}_y}$ and a single phase $\\varphi_{b^{\\mathrm{Ne}}_y}=10.1\\pm 5.6^\\circ$ describe the signal; if the true exotic coupling has different spatial weighting, velocity dependence, or phase, the reported $g^n_A g^N_V$ shifts beyond the quoted systematics.","fun_headline_variants_meta":{"raw":{"variants":["Tabletop spin sensor improves exotic force limit 1000-fold","New null result tightens parity-violating spin-force bound","Hybrid spin resonance boosts exotic force search sensitivity 1000x","Best lab limit on P-odd spin force from tabletop sensor","Rotating lead masses yield 1000x tighter exotic force bound"]},"model":"deepseek-v4-flash","effort":"low","cost_usd":0.001009,"raw_usage":{"total_tokens":4294,"prompt_tokens":1003,"completion_tokens":3291,"prompt_tokens_details":{"cached_tokens":384},"prompt_cache_hit_tokens":384,"prompt_cache_miss_tokens":619,"completion_tokens_details":{"reasoning_tokens":3203}},"tokens_in":619,"tokens_out":3291,"duration_ms":25228,"temperature":1.0,"reasoning_tokens":3203,"cache_read_input_tokens":384,"cache_creation_input_tokens":0},"cache_creation_input_tokens":0},"created_at":"2026-08-16T04:41:36.065676+00:00","model_set":{"reader":"deepseek-v4-flash"},"falsifier":"A decisive check is to measure the response phase $\\varphi_{b^{\\mathrm{Ne}}_y}$ as a function of modulation frequency from 1 to 25 Hz using the rotating lead masses and compare it with the phase response to a classical oscillating magnetic field; the calibration model predicts the two phase curves coincide within $5.6^\\circ$, while a velocity-dependent exotic interaction with different spatial weighting would produce a different phase-frequency slope. A mismatch beyond the quoted uncertainty would show the inferred coupling is biased.","supporting_citations":[{"cited_title":"Spin-dependent exotic interactions,","cited_arxiv_id":null,"evidence_quote":"Supplies the spin-dependent exotic-interaction classification and the V12+13 potential whose coupling constant is constrained."},{"cited_title":"Dark matter search with a resonantly-coupled hybrid spin system,","cited_arxiv_id":null,"evidence_quote":"Supplies the HSR regime and the coupled-spin response model on which the experimental method relies."},{"cited_title":"Search for exotic spin-dependent interactions with a spin-based amplifier,","cited_arxiv_id":null,"evidence_quote":"Supplies the previous spin-amplifier limit that the new five-metre bound improves by three orders of magnitude."},{"cited_title":"Searching for new spin-and velocity-dependent interactions by spin relaxation of polarized he 3 gas,","cited_arxiv_id":null,"evidence_quote":"Supplies the polarized-3He Earth-scale constraint used as a comparison in the limit plot."},{"cited_title":"Critical dynamics of strongly interacting ensembles in spin-exchange-relaxation-free comagnetometers,","cited_arxiv_id":null,"evidence_quote":"Supplies the critical-dynamics model of strongly interacting spin ensembles used to derive the response factor in Eq. (2)."},{"cited_title":"Constraints on exotic spin-velocity-dependent interactions,","cited_arxiv_id":null,"evidence_quote":"Supplies the simulation methodology, harmonic coefficients, and spin-fraction factors used to convert a measured pseudomagnetic field into a coupling constant."},{"cited_title":"Experimental limits on exotic spin and velocity dependent interactions using rotationally modulated source masses and an atomic-magnetometer array,","cited_arxiv_id":null,"evidence_quote":"Supplies the previous electron-nucleon limit that the new e-N bound improves by more than two orders of magnitude."},{"cited_title":"New limit on possible long-range parity-odd interactions of the neutron from neutron-spin rotation in liquid 4He,","cited_arxiv_id":null,"evidence_quote":"Supplies the neutron-spin-rotation limit in liquid helium used as a comparison in the limit plot."},{"cited_title":"Using earth to search for long-range spin-velocity interactions,","cited_arxiv_id":null,"evidence_quote":"Supplies the Earth-based long-range spin-velocity bound used as a comparison in the limit plot."}],"review_version":1}