Crystal Fields and Zeeman Effect for Thulium in Solid Argon

Anthony Semenova; Colin V. Parker; Jason Marfey

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 50 references

Crystal Fields and Zeeman Effect for Thulium in Solid Argon

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Neutral thulium embedded in solid argon splits its 1140 nm transition into 22 sharp crystal-field lines from two stable sites, and the same lines resolve millitesla magnetic fields all-optically.

desk verdict Solid experimental paper on Tm:Ar spectroscopy; the axial-crystal-field story is convincing for Site I, but Site II needs either independent validation or a more cautious claim. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.08140 v1 pith:2LCUZFXV submitted 2025-07-10 physics.atom-ph

Jason Marfey , Anthony Semenova , Colin V. Parker This is my paper · ORCID

classification physics.atom-ph

keywords thuliummatrixisolationsolidargoncrystalfieldStevensoperatorhyperfinestructureZeemaneffectopticalmagnetometry

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper reports laser spectroscopy of the 1140 nm inner-shell transition of neutral thulium atoms embedded in a solid argon matrix. Pump-probe measurements separate the spectrum into two thermally stable trapping sites, each producing eleven crystal-field-split lines. The authors show that a single axial Stevens operator $O_2^0$ with a fitted parameter $\beta_2^0$ reproduces the level spacings in both sites, and that the transition becomes magnetic-electric (M1 mixed with forced-dipole or pseudoquadrupole components) in the argon host. Hyperfine-resolved Zeeman shifts are used to demonstrate all-optical detection of millitesla magnetic fields with a DC sensitivity of $330\ \mu\mathrm{T}/\sqrt{\mathrm{Hz}}$. This matters because matrix-isolated atoms are candidate nanoscale sensors and identical quantum emitters, and this is the first all-optical magnetometry in a rare-gas matrix that avoids microwave or radio-frequency radiation.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the axial Stevens operator $O_2^0 = 3L_z^2 - L(L+1)$ acting with $L=3$ for the f-electron shell, whose single coefficient $\beta_2^0$ sets the crystal-field splittings. This operator preserves $m_J$ as a good quantum number and yields the observed 9/5 scaling between the $J=7/2$ and $J=5/2$ manifolds and the interval rule. The paper combines this operator with pump-probe saturation spectroscopy to separate sites, with ab initio hyperfine structure (from Tm constants measured in an optical lattice) to confirm assignments, and with a model of M1, forced-dipole, and pseudoquadrupole amplitudes to identify the transition's magnetic-electric character.

What would settle it

Resolve the hyperfine structure of Site II (or of a single crystal axis) at sub-100 MHz resolution and compare the number of lines and relative intensities with the M1+PQ model; the appearance of a $|\Delta m_J|=3$ transition, or a mismatch of the 9/5 interval rule beyond the fitted uncertainties, would rule out the purely axial single-parameter model.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the $^2F_{7/2}\to{}^2F_{5/2}$ ground spin-orbit transition of Tm in solid Ar is not a single line but a superposition of two site-specific crystal-field manifolds. In each site the degeneracy is fully lifted into Kramers doublets, producing eleven allowed lines (one $|\Delta m_J|=3$ transition forbidden), and the measured level structure is reproduced by a purely axial crystal field with $\beta_2^0=0.3142$ (Site I) and $-0.1433$ (Site II). The paper further claims that the host turns the gas-phase magnetic-dipole transition into a mixed magnetic-electric transition, most plausibly M1 with pseudoquadrupole (PQ) contributions plus some forced-dipole (FD) character, as inferred from selection rules, hyperfine amplitudes, and polarized spectroscopy. Ab initio hyperfine predictions using constants from optical-lattice measurements confirm the $m_J$ assignments for Site I. Finally, Zeeman shifts of the narrow hyperfine lines at fields of order 10 mT are resolved directly by fluorescence, giving a calibration-free ratiometric magnetometer with an estimated DC sensitivity of $330\ \mu\mathrm{T}/\sqrt{\mathrm{Hz}}$.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that each trapping site's local environment is accurately described by a single axial Stevens term, with the f-electron spin decoupled from the crystal; if the true site symmetry is lower or spin coupling is significant, the fitted parameters, level assignments, and hyperfine comparison all collapse.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

If the axial crystal-field model is right, each trapping site's local symmetry is lower than tetrahedral, and a single parameter predicts all line positions to within the stated uncertainties.
The confirmed $m_J$ assignments and hyperfine structure make the 1140 nm line a usable spectroscopic probe of the argon matrix's local order and annealing state.
Because Zeeman shifts are resolved directly in fluorescence, DC magnetic fields in the millitesla range can be measured without applying microwaves or radio-frequency fields, a first for matrix-isolated atoms.
The measured 129 MHz ensemble linewidth, if reduced toward the 30 Hz transform limit by annealing and cooling, would improve the estimated $330\ \mu\mathrm{T}/\sqrt{\mathrm{Hz}}$ sensitivity by orders of magnitude.
The same pump-probe method can be extended to other thulium-doped rare-gas solids and to selective bleaching, potentially isolating a single crystal axis for vector magnetometry.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

If the magnetic-electric character comes mainly from the dielectric pseudoquadrupole channel, then the same transition in heavier or denser rare-gas hosts (neon, krypton) should show a systematically different M1/PQ ratio, offering a clean test of the dielectric-coupling mechanism.
The two-site structure suggests a route to monitor crystal growth and annealing by tracking the relative site populations; a future experiment could correlate the Site I/Site II fluorescence ratio with annealing temperature and time.
Because the Zeeman response depends on the angle between the field and crystal axis, an ensemble with random axes acts as a distributed set of vector probes; extracting the full field direction from the line shapes might be possible without isolating a single site.
The reported sensitivity is shot-noise limited at 330 $\mu$T/$\sqrt{\mathrm{Hz}}$; cavity enhancement or optical pumping out of the lower $J=5/2$ level could plausibly reach the nT/$\sqrt{\mathrm{Hz}}$ class while retaining the all-optical, RF-free advantage.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Colleague, this is a genuinely good experimental paper, with one real soft spot that the authors should fix. The new capabilities are real: pump-probe spectroscopy separates two trapping sites for Tm in solid Ar, the axial O2^0 crystal field with a single parameter per site accounts for most of the level structure, and the hyperfine comparison for Site I is parameter-free and convincing. The Zeeman and magnetometry demonstration is a credible proof of principle, even if the sensitivity is far from NV centers.

The strongest part is Sec. IV. Using hyperfine constants from Mishin et al. to predict the resolved hyperfine structure with no fit parameters is exactly the kind of independent check that makes an assignment trustworthy. That check lands for Site I, and it gives me confidence the overall picture is not a coincidence.

Now the soft spots. The stress-test note is right: Site II does not get the same hyperfine validation, and the 2F7/2 spacings deviate from the single-parameter O2^0 model by more than the quoted uncertainties. The top spacing is 0.28(9) cm^-1 observed versus 0.59 predicted—roughly three times the uncertainty. That means the claim that both sites are 'nearly axial' is not equally supported. The authors should either provide a Site II hyperfine measurement, or explicitly weaken the abstract and conclusion to say the axial model is well established for Site I and approximate for Site II. Related, Table I labels the model energies as 'Predicted' when beta_2^0 was fit to exactly those levels. That is misleading; they should be called 'fit' or cross-validated. The transition-type conclusion is also softer than the text suggests: the M1+FD and M1+PQ fits are degenerate, and neither reproduces the relative amplitudes exactly. That is not fatal, but the 'magnetic-electric' claim should be stated as consistent with the data rather than determined.

Minor: the data repository has no URL or hash, and the Monte Carlo parameters are not fully specified. Both are easily fixed.

Verdict: this deserves a serious referee. It is a solid advance in matrix-isolated atom spectroscopy, and the hyperfine confirmation for Site I is the kind of result that should be in the literature. I would accept for review with the expectation of moderate revision, mainly to relabel the fits and to bring the Site II claims in line with the evidence.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports a high-resolution laser spectroscopy study of the 1140 nm 2F7/2 → 2F5/2 transition of neutral thulium atoms implanted in solid argon. Pump-probe spectroscopy is used to separate two stable trapping sites, each showing 11 spectral lines. The authors model both sites with a single axial Stevens operator O2^0, fit the parameter beta_2^0 separately for each site, and assign mJ labels. For Site I, resolved hyperfine structure is compared with a parameter-free prediction based on hyperfine constants from Ref. [37], confirming the assignments. Selection rules and polarized spectra are interpreted as magnetic-electric character from forced-dipole and/or pseudoquadrupole admixtures. Zeeman-resolved spectra and a two-color fluorescence ratio are used to demonstrate all-optical detection of mT-level DC magnetic fields, with an estimated sensitivity of 330 muT/sqrt(Hz).

Significance. If the two-site axial crystal-field model is correct, this is the first site-resolved crystal-field and Zeeman characterization of Tm in a rare-gas matrix and the first demonstration of microwave-free all-optical magnetometry in a matrix-isolated atom. The paper's strengths are substantial: the Site I hyperfine comparison in Sec. IV is a genuine external check with no adjustable parameters; the measured ensemble linewidths of 129 MHz are impressively narrow; and the data are openly available. The significance is conditional, however, because the second site lacks the same independent validation and because the intensity decomposition underlying the 'magnetic-electric' conclusion is not uniquely determined.

major comments (3)

[Section III, Table I] The single-O2^0 model is not equally supported for Site II. The observed 2F7/2 spacings for Site II are 1.98, 1.51, and 0.28(9) cm^-1, while the fitted beta_2^0 = -0.1433 predicts 1.7839, 1.1893, and 0.5946 cm^-1; the uppermost spacing disagrees by about 0.31 cm^-1, roughly three times the quoted uncertainty. Because no independent hyperfine check is presented for Site II, the mJ assignments and beta_2^0 value for that site rest on the same combinatoric fit that generated the 'observed' levels. The abstract and conclusion state that the crystal field is nearly axial in both sites; this claim needs either additional Site II validation or a more cautious statement of the confidence in the Site II parameters.
[Section III and Table I] The agreement between observed and predicted energies in Table I is partly self-consistent by construction. The 'observed' crystal-field levels are obtained from a combinatoric fit to the line positions, and the predicted levels are recomputed from beta_2^0 values fitted to those same observed energies. This circularity should be stated explicitly in the methods; the genuinely independent confirmation is the Site I hyperfine comparison in Sec. IV, not the energy-level agreement in Table I. The paper should clarify which comparisons are independent tests and which are fitting diagnostics.
[Section IV and Figure 2] The identification of the electric admixture is not unique. The low-power fluorescence fit yields a M1/FD mixture of 70/30 with T = 8.12 K, while the M1/PQ fit yields 86/14 with T = 6.99 K, and the text then concludes that a combination of M1 and PQ 'best explain' the selection rules without a quantitative model-comparison or reported uncertainties. This matters because the 'magnetic-electric' transition-type claim and the interpretation of the polarized spectra in Sec. V depend on the decomposition. The authors should either provide a model-selection criterion with uncertainties and a common temperature treatment, or state the conclusion as 'M1 with forced-dipole and/or pseudoquadrupole admixture'.

minor comments (4)

[Sections I and II] The text contains small typographical errors ('detection protols' in the Introduction and 'A single sampled held at base temperature' in Sec. II) that should be corrected.
[Header/DOI] The DOI printed in the header, '10.1103/x5zx-ykff', appears malformed or incomplete; the correct publisher DOI should be used.
[Section III] The units of beta_2^0 are not stated in the text or Table I; since the predicted energies are in cm^-1, the values 0.3142 and -0.1433 should be explicitly labeled as cm^-1.
[Section V] The phrase 'calibration-free estimate' for the ratiometric field measurement should be qualified: the Monte Carlo simulations use fitted linewidths, amplitudes, and background, so the ratio is not calibration-free in an absolute sense; the authors should define precisely what they mean by calibration-free.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

The 'predicted' crystal-field levels in Table I are recomputed from the beta_2^0 parameters fitted to the same observed levels, making the agreement partly by construction; an independent hyperfine check supports Site I but no such check exists for Site II.

fitted input called prediction [Sec. III, Table I]
"A single parameter fit to the O0 2 perturbation produces the crystal field parameters β0 2 = 0.3142 for Site I and β0 2 = −0.1433 for Site II, and the predicted level structure is shown alongside observed values in Table I."

The 'Predicted (cm^-1)' column of Table I is generated by evaluating the O0_2 crystal-field Hamiltonian at beta_2^0 values that were themselves obtained by a least-squares fit to the very same observed level energies ('A single parameter fit ... produces the crystal field parameters ... and the predicted level structure'). The residuals between the observed and predicted columns therefore measure the imperfection of the fit, not the success of an independent prediction. This is not fully forced, because one parameter is used to describe seven relative spacings per site, and Sec. IV supplies a parameter-free external check for Site I using hyperfine constants from Ref. [37].

full rationale

The paper is mostly self-contained. The citations to the authors' earlier work (Refs. [17,18]) support sample-growth procedures and prior linewidth observations; they are procedural and not load-bearing for the crystal-field model, so they do not constitute circularity. The main circular step is in Sec. III/Table I: the beta_2^0 values are fit to the observed crystal-field levels, and the same beta_2^0 values are then used to produce the 'Predicted' column. Thus the agreement between the observed and predicted columns in Table I is partly a display of the fit rather than an independent confirmation. This is mitigated by the Sec. IV hyperfine comparison, which is genuinely parameter-free: it uses hyperfine constants measured in an optical lattice (Ref. [37]) and confirms the Site I assignments and the axial model without fitting. No equivalent check is offered for Site II, whose best-fit O0_2 model deviates in the top 2F7/2 spacing by about 0.31 cm^-1 relative to the quoted uncertainty, so the 'nearly axial in both sites' conclusion leans more on the fitted model than the abstract suggests. The Zeeman and magnetometry sections do not exhibit circularity: the Monte Carlo simulations are acknowledged to use parameters chosen to match the data, and the 330 uT/sqrt(Hz) sensitivity is an experimental estimate, not a prediction derived from the fit. Overall, the central claim retains independent content through the Site I hyperfine check, but the labeled 'predicted level structure' is by construction a refit, warranting a partial-circularity score of 6.

Assumptions & free parameters 7 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central quantitative results are a two-parameter crystal-field fit (one beta_2^0 per site) plus two intensity-mixture fits that cannot be distinguished by the data. The model relies on standard Stevens-operator angular momentum theory and on several domain assumptions about site symmetry, spin decoupling, hyperfine constants transferring from free-space measurements, and negligible Jahn-Teller coupling. No new physical entities are postulated.

free parameters (7)

Axial crystal field parameter beta_2^0 for Site I = 0.3142
Fit to the seven observed crystal-field level positions of Site I (Table I).
Axial crystal field parameter beta_2^0 for Site II = -0.1433
Fit to the seven observed level positions of Site II (Table I).
Transition intensity mixture fraction, M1 vs forced dipole = M1 70%, FD 30%
Multi-parameter fit to the low-power fluorescence spectrum (Sec. IV); degeneracy with the PQ alternative shows the mixture is not uniquely determined.
Transition intensity mixture fraction, M1 vs pseudoquadrupole = M1 86%, PQ 14%
Alternative fit to the same spectrum; authors note the best fit cannot reproduce relative line strengths exactly.
Sample temperature in intensity fits = 8.12 K (FD fit), 6.99 K (PQ fit)
Free parameter in the Boltzmann factor used in the low-power spectrum fits.
Zeeman Monte Carlo linewidth = 270 MHz FWHM
Chosen to match the ratiometric magnetometry data (Sec. V).
Zeeman Monte Carlo amplitudes and background = not specified uniquely
Simulations fail to match data exactly due to imperfect linewidth, amplitude, and background choices; these are effectively free parameters.

assumptions (7)

standard math Stevens operator equivalents and angular momentum algebra describe crystal-field splittings of f-electron levels.
Used throughout Sec. III to build the O2^0 Hamiltonian and predict relative splittings.
domain assumption The f-electron spin does not couple to the crystal symmetry, so L=3 can be used in the Stevens operator.
Stated in Sec. III: the O2^0 operator is defined with L=3 for f electrons whose spin does not couple to the crystal.
domain assumption mJ is a good quantum number under the axial crystal field.
Assumed to assign the mJ labels in Table I and interpret the hyperfine and Zeeman spectra.
domain assumption Hyperfine constants measured for Tm in an optical lattice apply unchanged in solid argon.
Used in Sec. IV for the parameter-free hyperfine prediction; explicitly relies on Ref. [37].
domain assumption Judd-Ofelt forced-dipole and pseudoquadrupole dynamic-coupling mechanisms describe the matrix-induced electric-dipole intensity.
Adopted in Sec. IV to model M1/FD and M1/PQ mixtures; both mechanisms are standard in the lanthanide spectroscopy literature.
domain assumption Each observed site is a single neutral thulium atom.
Inferred in Sec. III from line positions being close to the gas-phase transition and from site-selective pump-probe behavior.
domain assumption Jahn-Teller effects are negligible for these levels.
Argued in Sec. III because splittings are ~cm^-1 while the Debye energy in Ar is ~30 cm^-1 and no phonon sidebands were observed.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Crystal Fields and Zeeman Effect for Thulium in Solid Argon." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/2LCUZFXV

@misc{pith2026250708140,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Crystal Fields and Zeeman Effect for Thulium in Solid Argon},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/2LCUZFXV}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.08140}
}

read the original abstract

Optically active defects suspended in an inert solid are an interesting system for sensing and magnetometry at the nanometer scale, in addition to being a potential source of high-density, identical quantum emitters for quantum information. Beyond their response to external fields, the optical absorption and emission spectra also reflect information about the host matrix, which is critical to understand for either application. For the particular system of thulium atoms implanted in solid argon, high resolution laser spectroscopy reveals narrow ensemble linewidths of the 1140 nm f to f ground state spin-orbit transition, which is split due to crystal field effects and hyperfine coupling. Pump-probe spectroscopy is used to identify crystal field levels in at least two stable trapping sites, and the crystal field is determined to be nearly axial in both sites. Strong selection rules indicate that this transition becomes magnetic-electric in the argon host, most likely due to dielectric effects. In the presence of mT magnetic fields, Zeeman shifts are resolvable by laser fluorescence, allowing crystal axis selective polarized spectroscopy. These results show that all-optical detection schemes for DC magnetic fields are already possible with thulium-doped argon, and point towards more informed strategies for monitoring and improving crystal growth and annealing.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.08140 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2. Measured hyperfine spectra along with predicted hy [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** FIG. 4. Ratiometric measurement between fluorescence am [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

50 extracted references · 46 canonical work pages

[37]

Crepin-Gilbert and A

C. Crepin-Gilbert and A. Tramer, Photophysics of metal atoms in rare-gas complexes, clusters and matrices, International Reviews in Physical Chemistry 18, 485 (1999)

work page 1999
[1]

E. D. Becker and G. C. Pimentel, Spectroscopic studies of reactive molecules by the matrix isolation method, The Journal of Chemical Physics 25, 224 (1956)

1956
[2]

M. E. Fajardo, C. M. Lindsay, and T. Momose, Crys- tal ﬁeld theory analysis of rovibrational spectra of car- bon monoxide monomers isolated in solid parahydrogen, The Journal of Chemical Physics 130, 244508 (2009)

work page 2009
[3]

Observed line amplitudes from po- larized excitation provide further evidence that the total transition includes FD or PQ components. We also investigate the system’s use as a magnetome- ter using a two color measurement scheme at the cen- ter (1140.0149 nm) and inﬂection point (1140 .0141 nm) of the mF : 0 ↔ ±1 transition within the |mF | : 1/2 ↔ 1/2 hyp...

work page arXiv
[4]

Simulations fail to match observed data exactly, likely due to imperfect choice of parameters (line widths, ampli- tudes, background) and ignorance of nearby background features

Trends from Monte Carlo simulations with pa- rameters chosen to closely match the data are also shown. Simulations fail to match observed data exactly, likely due to imperfect choice of parameters (line widths, ampli- tudes, background) and ignorance of nearby background features. In the range of 10 mT and near the shot-noise limit, we estimate the DC sen...

work page
[5]

Braggio, R

C. Braggio, R. Calabrese, G. Carugno, G. Fiscelli, M. Guarise, A. Khanbekyan, A. Noto, R. Passante, L. Rizzuto, and G. Ruoso, Spectroscopy of alkali atoms in solid matrices of rare gases: experimental results and theoretical analysis, Applied Sciences 12, 6492 (2022)

work page 2022
[6]

Arndt, S

M. Arndt, S. I. Kanorsky, A. Weis, and T. W. H¨ ansch, Can paramagnetic atoms in superﬂuid helium be used to search for permanent electric dipole moments?, Physics Letters A 174, 298 (1993)

work page 1993
[7]

A. C. Vutha, M. Horbatsch, and E. A. Hessels, Oriented polar molecules in a solid inert-gas matrix: A proposed method for measuring the electric dipole moment of the electron, Atoms 6, 3 (2018)

work page 2018

Show all 50 references

[8]

D. M. Lancaster, U. Dargyte, and J. D. Weinstein, Opti- cal spin readout of single rubidium atoms trapped in solid neon, Physical Review Research 6, L012048 (2024)

2024
[9]

M. E. Fajardo, P. G. Carrick, and I. Kenney, John W., Matrix isolation spectroscopy of metal atoms generated by laser ablation. i. the li/ar, li/kr, and li/xe systems, The Journal of Chemical Physics 94, 5812 (1991)

1991
[10]

Tam and M

S. Tam and M. E. Fajardo, Matrix isolation spec- troscopy of metal atoms generated by laser ab- lation. iii. the na/ar, na/kr, and na/xe systems, The Journal of Chemical Physics 99, 854 (1993)

1993
[11]

Battard, S

T. Battard, S. Lahs, C. Cr´ epin, and D. Com- parat, Cesium atoms in a cryogenic argon matrix, Physical Review A 108, 042820 (2023)

2023
[12]

D. M. Lancaster, U. Dargyte, S. Upadhyay, and J. D. Weinstein, Radiative properties of rubidium atoms trapped in solid neon and parahydrogen, Physical Review A 103, 052614 (2021)

2021
[13]

M. A. Collier, O. Byrne, C. Murray, and J. G. Mc- Caﬀrey, Luminescence spectroscopy of matrix-isolated atomic manganese: Site size and orbital occupancy de- pendence of crystal ﬁeld splitting, The Journal of Chem- ical Physics 132, 10.1063/1.3374030 (2010)

2010 doi
[14]

V. A. Bracken, P. G¨ urtler, and J. G. McCaﬀrey, Lumi- nescence spectroscopy of atomic zinc in rare-gas solids. i, The Journal of Chemical Physics 107, 5290 (1997)

1997
[15]

C. Y. Xu, S. M. Hu, J. Singh, K. Bailey, Z. T. Lu, P. Mueller, T. P. O’Connor, and U. Welp, Optical excitation and decay dynamics of ytter- bium atoms embedded in a solid neon matrix, Physical Review Letters 107, 093001 (2011)

2011
[16]

Byrne and J

O. Byrne and J. G. McCaﬀrey, Site-selected lumi- nescence of atomic europium in the solid rare gases, The Journal of Chemical Physics 135, 024507 (2011)

2011
[17]

Golovizin, E

A. Golovizin, E. Fedorova, D. Tregubov, D. Sukachev, K. Khabarova, V. Sorokin, and N. Ko- lachevsky, Inner-shell clock transition in atomic thulium with a small blackbody radiation shift, Nature Communications 10, 1724 (2019)

2019
[18]

Ishikawa, A

K. Ishikawa, A. Hatakeyama, K. Gosyono-o, S. Wada, Y. Takahashi, and T. Yabuzaki, Laser spectroscopy of thulium atoms implanted in liquid and solid 4he, Physical Review B 56, 780 (1997)

1997
[19]

Gaire, C

V. Gaire, C. S. Raman, and C. V. Parker, Subnanometer optical linewidth of thulium atoms in rare-gas crystals, Physical Review A 99, 022505 (2019)

2019
[20]

Gaire, M

V. Gaire, M. Y. Do, Y. Pei, A. Semenova, and C. V. Parker, High resolution spectroscopy of thulium atoms implanted in solid noble gas crystals, Physical Review B 108, 214101 (2023)

2023
[21]

Rondin, J

L. Rondin, J. P. Tetienne, T. Hingant, J. F. Roch, P. Maletinsky, and V. Jacques, Magnetom- etry with nitrogen-vacancy defects in diamond, Reports on Progress in Physics 77, 056503 (2014)

2014
[22]

Schirhagl, K

R. Schirhagl, K. Chang, M. Loretz, and C. L. Degen, Nitrogen-vacancy centers in diamond: Nanoscale sensors for physics and biology, Annual Review of Physical Chemistry 65, 83 (2014)

2014
[23]

Kinoshita, Y

T. Kinoshita, Y. Takahashi, and T. Yabuzaki, Op- tical pumping and optical detection of the magnetic resonance of alkali-metal atoms in superﬂuid helium, Physical Review B 49, 3648 (1994)

1994
[24]

Moroshkin, A

P. Moroshkin, A. Hofer, S. Ulzega, and A. Weis, Spectroscopy of atomic and molecular defects in solid he4 using optical, microwave, radio frequency, and static magnetic and electric ﬁelds (review), Low Temperature Physics 32, 981 (2006)

2006
[25]

Upadhyay, U

S. Upadhyay, U. Dargyte, V. D. Dergachev, R. P. Prater, S. A. Varganov, T. V. Tscherbul, D. Patter- son, and J. D. Weinstein, Spin coherence and optical properties of alkali-metal atoms in solid parahydrogen, Physical Review A 100, 063419 (2019)

2019
[26]

B¨ urgler, T

B. B¨ urgler, T. F. Sjolander, O. Brinza, A. Tallaire, J. Achard, and P. Maletinsky, All-optical nuclear quan- tum sensing using nitrogen-vacancy centers in diamond, npj Quantum Information 9, 56 (2023) . 7

2023
[27]

Horsthemke, J

L. Horsthemke, J. Pogorzelski, D. Stiegek¨ otter, F. Hoﬀ- mann, L. Langguth, R. Staacke, C. Laube, W. Knolle, M. Gregor, and P. Gl¨ osek¨ otter, Excited-state lifetime of nv centers for all-optical magnetic ﬁeld sensing, Sensors 24, 2093 (2024)

2024
[28]

Rondin, J.-P

L. Rondin, J.-P. Tetienne, P. Spinicelli, C. Dal Savio, K. Karrai, G. Dantelle, A. Thiaville, S. Rohart, J.-F. Roch, and V. Jacques, Nanoscale magnetic ﬁeld mapping with a single spin scanning probe magnetometer, Applied Physics Letters 100, 10.1063/1.3703128 (2012)

2012 doi
[29]

Wickenbrock, H

A. Wickenbrock, H. Zheng, L. Bougas, N. Leefer, S. Afach, A. Jarmola, V. M. Acosta, and D. Budker, Microwave-free magnetometry with nitrogen-vacancy centers in diamond, Applied Physics Letters 109, 10.1063/1.4960171 (2016)

2016 doi
[30]

N. N. Kleshchina, I. S. Kalinina, R. Lambo, A. A. Buchachenko, D. S. Bezrukov, and S.-M. Hu, Triplet emission of atomic ytterbium isolated in a xenon matrix, Low Temperature Physics 45, 707 (2019)

2019
[31]

G. K. Ozerov, D. S. Bezrukov, and A. A. Buchachenko, Generic accommodations of an atom in the lennard- jones fcc and hcp rare-gas solids: A computational study, Physical Review B 103, 184110 (2021)

2021
[32]

L. A. Heimbrook, M. Rasanen, and V. E. Bondy- bey, Production of clusters by laser vaporiza- tion and their trapping in rare gas matrices, The Journal of Physical Chemistry 91, 2468 (1987)

1987
[33]

K. W. H. Stevens, Matrix elements and operator equivalents connected with the magnetic properties of rare earth ions, Proceedings of the Physical Society. Section A 65, 209 (1952)

1952
[34]

L.-G. Tao, N. N. Kleshchina, R. Lambo, A. A. Buchachenko, X.-G. Zhou, D. S. Bezrukov, and S.-M. Hu, Heat- and light-induced transformations of yb trapping sites in an ar matrix, The Journal of Chemical Physics 143, 10.1063/1.4934999 (2015)

2015 doi
[35]

G. K. Ozerov, D. S. Bezrukov, and A. A. Buchachenko, Computational study of the stable atomic trapping sites in ar lattice, Low Temperature Physics 45, 301 (2019)

2019
[36]

Byrne and J

O. Byrne and J. G. McCaﬀrey, Eu/rg absorption and ex- citation spectroscopy in the solid rare gases: State depen- dence of crystal ﬁeld splitting and jahn–teller coupling, The Journal of Chemical Physics 134, 10.1063/1.3564947 (2011)

2011 doi
[38]

Healy and J

B. Healy and J. G. McCaﬀrey, Luminescence spectroscopy of matrix-isolated atomic cadmium, The Journal of Chemical Physics 110, 3903 (1999)

1999
[39]

Mishin, D

D. Mishin, D. Tregubov, N. Kolachevsky, and A. Golovizin, Combined microwave and optical spec- troscopy for hyperﬁne structure analysis in thulium atoms, Physical Review A 110, 032817 (2024)

2024
[40]

B. R. Judd, Optical absorption intensities of rare-earth ions, Physical Review 127, 750 (1962)

1962
[41]

G. S. Ofelt, Intensities of crystal spectra of rare-earth ions, The Journal of Chemical Physics 37, 511 (1962)

1962
[42]

C. K. Jørgensen and B. R. Judd, Hypersensi- tive pseudoquadrupole transitions in lanthanides, Molecular Physics 8, 281 (1964)

1964
[43]

S. F. Mason, R. D. Peacock, and B. Stew- art, Dynamic coupling contributions to the in- tensity of hypersensitive lanthanide transitions, Chemical Physics Letters 29, 149 (1974)

1974
[44]

G¨ orller-Walrand and K

C. G¨ orller-Walrand and K. Binnemans, Chap- ter 167 spectral intensities of f-f transitions, in Handbook on the Physics and Chemistry of Rare Earths , Vol. 25 (Elsevier, Amsterdam, NL, 1998) pp. 101–264

1998
[45]

A. A. Golovizin, E. S. Kalganova, D. O. Tregubov, G. A. Vishnyakova, D. D. Sukachev, and V. N. Sorokin, Measurement of the upper clock level lifetime in 169tm, Journal of Physics: Conference Series 941, 012114 (2017)

2017
[46]

G. L. J. A. Rikken and Y. A. R. R. Kessener, Local ﬁeld eﬀects and electric and magnetic dipole transitions in di- electrics, Physical Review Letters 74, 880 (1995)

1995
[47]

A. C. Sinnock and B. L. Smith, Refrac- tive indices of the condensed inert gases, Physical Review 181, 1297 (1969)

1969
[48]

Binnemans, Interpretation of europium(iii) spectra, Coordination Chemistry Reviews 295, 1 (2015)

K. Binnemans, Interpretation of europium(iii) spectra, Coordination Chemistry Reviews 295, 1 (2015)

2015
[49]

A. N. Kanagin, S. K. Regmi, P. Pathak, and J. D. Wein- stein, Optical pumping of rubidium atoms frozen in solid argon, Physical Review A 88, 063404 (2013)

2013
[50]

Github data for TmCrystalFieldZeeman

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [37]

Crepin-Gilbert and A

C. Crepin-Gilbert and A. Tramer, Photophysics of metal atoms in rare-gas complexes, clusters and matrices, International Reviews in Physical Chemistry 18, 485 (1999)

work page 1999

[2] [1]

E. D. Becker and G. C. Pimentel, Spectroscopic studies of reactive molecules by the matrix isolation method, The Journal of Chemical Physics 25, 224 (1956)

1956

[3] [2]

M. E. Fajardo, C. M. Lindsay, and T. Momose, Crys- tal ﬁeld theory analysis of rovibrational spectra of car- bon monoxide monomers isolated in solid parahydrogen, The Journal of Chemical Physics 130, 244508 (2009)

work page 2009

[4] [3]

Observed line amplitudes from po- larized excitation provide further evidence that the total transition includes FD or PQ components. We also investigate the system’s use as a magnetome- ter using a two color measurement scheme at the cen- ter (1140.0149 nm) and inﬂection point (1140 .0141 nm) of the mF : 0 ↔ ±1 transition within the |mF | : 1/2 ↔ 1/2 hyp...

work page arXiv

[5] [4]

Simulations fail to match observed data exactly, likely due to imperfect choice of parameters (line widths, ampli- tudes, background) and ignorance of nearby background features

Trends from Monte Carlo simulations with pa- rameters chosen to closely match the data are also shown. Simulations fail to match observed data exactly, likely due to imperfect choice of parameters (line widths, ampli- tudes, background) and ignorance of nearby background features. In the range of 10 mT and near the shot-noise limit, we estimate the DC sen...

work page

[6] [5]

Braggio, R

C. Braggio, R. Calabrese, G. Carugno, G. Fiscelli, M. Guarise, A. Khanbekyan, A. Noto, R. Passante, L. Rizzuto, and G. Ruoso, Spectroscopy of alkali atoms in solid matrices of rare gases: experimental results and theoretical analysis, Applied Sciences 12, 6492 (2022)

work page 2022

[7] [6]

Arndt, S

M. Arndt, S. I. Kanorsky, A. Weis, and T. W. H¨ ansch, Can paramagnetic atoms in superﬂuid helium be used to search for permanent electric dipole moments?, Physics Letters A 174, 298 (1993)

work page 1993

[8] [7]

A. C. Vutha, M. Horbatsch, and E. A. Hessels, Oriented polar molecules in a solid inert-gas matrix: A proposed method for measuring the electric dipole moment of the electron, Atoms 6, 3 (2018)

work page 2018