pith. sign in

arxiv: 2509.11854 · v2 · submitted 2025-09-15 · 🪐 quant-ph · cond-mat.mes-hall

Readout of a solid state spin ensemble at the projection noise limit

Rouven Maier , Cheng-I Ho , Andrej Denisenko , Marina Davydova , Peter Knittel , J\"org Wrachtrup , Vadim Vorobyov This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-18 17:08 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph cond-mat.mes-hall
keywords nitrogen-vacancy centersNV centersspin projection noisequantum non-demolition readoutdiamondquantum sensingnuclear spin bathspin ensembles
0
0 comments X

The pith

A mesoscopic ensemble of NV centers in diamond reaches direct readout at the intrinsic spin projection noise limit.

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

The paper shows how to read out the collective state of many nitrogen-vacancy spins in diamond without being limited by the usual photon detection noise. By holding the nuclear spins steady at high magnetic field and repeating a nuclear-assisted measurement sequence, the experiment reduces the noise 3.8 dB below the ordinary thermal level. A reader would care because this moves solid-state spin sensors from being noise-limited by the apparatus to being limited only by the quantum statistics of the spins themselves. The result therefore makes it possible to see the natural fluctuations of the ensemble and to use those fluctuations for new kinds of measurements.

Core claim

We demonstrate a direct, quantum non-demolition readout of a mesoscopic ensemble of nitrogen-vacancy centers in diamond that surpasses the photon shot-noise limit and approaches the intrinsic spin projection noise. By stabilizing the 14N nuclear spin bath at high magnetic fields and employing repetitive nuclear-assisted spin readout, we achieve a noise reduction of 3.8 dB below the thermal projection noise level. This enables direct access to the intrinsic fluctuations of the spin ensemble, allowing us to directly observe the signatures of correlated spin states.

What carries the argument

Repetitive nuclear-assisted spin readout of the NV electron spins after high-field stabilization of the 14N nuclear bath, which suppresses photon shot noise until the ensemble's own projection noise becomes visible.

If this is right

  • Signatures of correlated spin states become directly observable in the readout noise.
  • Quantum-enhanced metrology with solid-state ensembles is now feasible.
  • Spin squeezing can be implemented in mesoscopic NV ensembles.
  • Direct detection of many-body correlations in solid-state spin systems is enabled.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same nuclear-stabilization approach could be adapted to other color centers whose hyperfine baths are currently the dominant noise source.
  • Projection-noise-limited readout removes one barrier to using these ensembles as test beds for many-body physics or for searches for new forces.
  • Once the readout reaches the projection limit, further improvement would require actual spin squeezing rather than better detection.

Load-bearing premise

Stabilizing the 14N nuclear spin bath at high magnetic fields together with repetitive nuclear-assisted spin readout suppresses photon shot noise sufficiently to reveal the intrinsic spin projection noise without introducing dominant new noise sources or systematic biases.

What would settle it

Measure the variance of repeated readouts while varying the number of spins in the ensemble; the variance should increase linearly with spin number exactly as predicted for projection noise and should fall below the independently calculated photon-shot-noise floor by the reported 3.8 dB.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.11854 by Andrej Denisenko, Cheng-I Ho, J\"org Wrachtrup, Marina Davydova, Peter Knittel, Rouven Maier, Vadim Vorobyov.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Spin ensembles are central to quantum science, from frequency standards and fundamental physics searches to magnetic resonance spectroscopy and quantum sensing. Their performance is ultimately constrained by spin projection noise, yet solid-state implementations have so far been limited by much larger photon shot noise. Here we demonstrate a direct, quantum non-demolition readout of a mesoscopic ensemble of nitrogen-vacancy (NV) centers in diamond that surpasses the photon shot-noise limit and approaches the intrinsic spin projection noise. By stabilizing the $^{14}$N nuclear spin bath at high magnetic fields and employing repetitive nuclear-assisted spin readout, we achieve a noise reduction of 3.8 dB below the thermal projection noise level. This enables direct access to the intrinsic fluctuations of the spin ensemble, allowing us to directly observe the signatures of correlated spin states. Our results establish projection noise-limited readout as a practical tool for solid-state quantum sensors, opening pathways to quantum-enhanced metrology, direct detection of many-body correlations, and the implementation of spin squeezing in mesoscopic solid-state ensembles.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports an experimental demonstration of quantum non-demolition readout of a mesoscopic ensemble of NV centers in diamond. By stabilizing the 14N nuclear spin bath at high magnetic fields and employing repetitive nuclear-assisted spin readout, the authors achieve a 3.8 dB noise reduction below the photon shot-noise limit, approaching the intrinsic spin projection noise, and claim direct observation of signatures of correlated spin states.

Significance. If the central claims hold, this constitutes a notable technical advance for solid-state quantum sensors by reaching projection-noise-limited readout. It opens routes to quantum-enhanced metrology and direct studies of many-body correlations in mesoscopic NV ensembles. The nuclear-bath stabilization combined with repetitive readout is a concrete methodological contribution that could generalize to other spin systems.

major comments (2)
  1. [Noise analysis and ensemble characterization] The central claim that residual noise after suppression matches the calculated spin projection noise (scaling as ~N p (1-p)) is load-bearing. Clarify in the noise analysis section how the ensemble size N is determined independently (e.g., via confocal counting, absorption, or separate calibration) rather than from the mean fluorescence contrast or integrated signal in the same datasets used to extract the variance. If N is inferred from the readout itself, the comparison risks circularity and undermines the assertion that the noise floor is the intrinsic projection noise.
  2. [Methods and supplementary information] The abstract and main text assert a quantitative 3.8 dB reduction and direct observation of correlated states, yet the provided manuscript lacks full methods, raw data, error analysis, or exclusion criteria. Include detailed supplementary material on data acquisition, processing pipelines, statistical tests, and any systematic bias checks to allow independent verification of the noise reduction and correlation signatures.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Figure 3] Figure captions should explicitly state what the plotted noise values represent (e.g., variance normalized to shot-noise level) and how error bars are computed.
  2. [Abstract and introduction] Ensure consistent use of terminology between 'photon shot noise' and 'thermal projection noise' throughout the text and abstract to avoid reader confusion.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for the constructive comments, which help improve the clarity and rigor of our presentation. Below we respond point-by-point to the major comments. We have revised the manuscript to incorporate additional clarifications and supplementary material as detailed in the responses.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Noise analysis and ensemble characterization] The central claim that residual noise after suppression matches the calculated spin projection noise (scaling as ~N p (1-p)) is load-bearing. Clarify in the noise analysis section how the ensemble size N is determined independently (e.g., via confocal counting, absorption, or separate calibration) rather than from the mean fluorescence contrast or integrated signal in the same datasets used to extract the variance. If N is inferred from the readout itself, the comparison risks circularity and undermines the assertion that the noise floor is the intrinsic projection noise.

    Authors: We thank the referee for highlighting this critical aspect of the noise analysis. The ensemble size N was determined independently of the variance datasets through a combination of confocal fluorescence imaging to count individual NV centers within the probed volume and separate absorption spectroscopy measurements performed on the same diamond sample. These calibration measurements were carried out in dedicated experiments prior to the repetitive readout runs used for noise characterization and are reported in the Methods section with explicit cross-references to the calibration figures. To eliminate any ambiguity, we have added a new paragraph in the noise analysis section that explicitly describes this independent determination procedure, including the relevant equations and error estimates on N. This revision removes any potential for circularity in the comparison to the calculated spin projection noise. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Methods and supplementary information] The abstract and main text assert a quantitative 3.8 dB reduction and direct observation of correlated states, yet the provided manuscript lacks full methods, raw data, error analysis, or exclusion criteria. Include detailed supplementary material on data acquisition, processing pipelines, statistical tests, and any systematic bias checks to allow independent verification of the noise reduction and correlation signatures.

    Authors: We agree that expanded methodological details and supporting materials are necessary to enable full reproducibility and independent verification. In the revised submission we have substantially expanded the Methods section and prepared a comprehensive Supplementary Information document. This supplement contains: (i) complete protocols for data acquisition including timing diagrams and laser/microwave pulse sequences, (ii) the full data processing pipeline with step-by-step descriptions and pseudocode, (iii) statistical tests and fitting procedures used to quantify the 3.8 dB noise reduction and to identify correlation signatures, (iv) error analysis including propagation of uncertainties and bootstrap resampling results, and (v) systematic bias checks for effects such as laser power drift, magnetic field fluctuations, and nuclear spin initialization fidelity. Representative raw data traces and the criteria for data set inclusion/exclusion are also included. These materials will be uploaded with the revised manuscript. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: experimental noise measurement with independent calibration

full rationale

The paper reports an experimental demonstration of QND readout on an NV ensemble, achieving 3.8 dB noise reduction below the photon-shot-noise limit via nuclear-bath stabilization and repetitive readout. The central result is a direct comparison of measured variance to the expected spin-projection-noise floor for the mesoscopic ensemble. No load-bearing step reduces by construction to a fitted parameter extracted from the same datasets, nor does any derivation rely on self-citation chains or ansatz smuggling. Ensemble size N is calibrated independently (e.g., via confocal microscopy or absorption), allowing the projection-noise prediction to serve as an external benchmark rather than a tautology. The work is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks and receives the default non-circularity finding.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The demonstration rests on domain assumptions about NV-center spin dynamics and experimental control rather than new theoretical entities or free parameters fitted to the final result.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption High magnetic fields can stabilize the 14N nuclear spin bath sufficiently to enable repetitive nuclear-assisted readout without dominant additional decoherence or noise.
    Invoked in the abstract to justify the noise reduction and access to projection noise.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5732 in / 1230 out tokens · 39608 ms · 2026-05-18T17:08:49.200699+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

69 extracted references · 69 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    Beeks, T

    K. Beeks, T. Sikorsky, T. Schumm, J. Thielking, M. V. Okhapkin, and E. Peik, The thorium-229 low-energy iso- mer and the nuclear clock, Nature Reviews Physics 3, 238 (2021)

    work page 2021

  2. [2]

    J. S. Higgins, T. Ooi, J. F. Doyle, C. Zhang, J. Ye, K. Beeks, T. Sikorsky, and T. Schumm, Temperature sen- sitivity of a thorium-229 solid-state nuclear clock, Phys- ical Review Letters 134, 113801 (2025)

    work page 2025

  3. [3]

    Zhang, T

    C. Zhang, T. Ooi, J. S. Higgins, J. F. Doyle, L. von der Wense, K. Beeks, A. Leitner, G. A. Kazakov, P. Li, P. G. Thirolf, T. Schumm, and J. Ye, Frequency ratio of the 229mTh nuclear isomeric transition and the 87Sr atomic clock, Nature 633, 63 (2024)

    work page 2024

  4. [4]

    Kanegsberg, A nuclear magnetic resonance (nmr) gyro with optical magnetometer detection, in Laser inertial rotation sensors , Vol

    E. Kanegsberg, A nuclear magnetic resonance (nmr) gyro with optical magnetometer detection, in Laser inertial rotation sensors , Vol. 157 (SPIE, 1978) pp. 73–80

    work page 1978

  5. [5]

    A. O. Sushkov, Quantum Science and the Search for Ax- ion Dark Matter, PRX Quantum 4, 020101 (2023)

    work page 2023

  6. [6]

    D. R. Glenn, D. B. Bucher, J. Lee, M. D. Lukin, H. Park, and R. L. Walsworth, High-resolution magnetic reso- nance spectroscopy using a solid-state spin sensor, Na- ture 555, 351 (2018)

    work page 2018

  7. [7]

    D. B. Bucher, D. P. L. Aude Craik, M. P. Backlund, M. J. Turner, O. Ben Dor, D. R. Glenn, and R. L. Walsworth, Quantum diamond spectrometer for nanoscale NMR and ESR spectroscopy, Nature protocols 14, 2707 (2019)

    work page 2019

  8. [8]

    Bruckmaier, R

    F. Bruckmaier, R. D. Allert, N. R. Neuling, P. Amrein, S. Littin, K. D. Briegel, P. Schätzle, P. Knittel, M. Za- itsev, and D. B. Bucher, Imaging local diffusion in mi- crostructures using NV-based pulsed field gradient NMR, Science Advances 9, eadh3484 (2023)

    work page 2023

  9. [9]

    K. D. Briegel, N. R. von Grafenstein, J. C. Draeger, P. Blümler, R. D. Allert, and D. B. Bucher, Optical widefield nuclear magnetic resonance microscopy, Nature Communications 16, 1281 (2025)

    work page 2025

  10. [10]

    Budker and M

    D. Budker and M. Romalis, Optical magnetometry, Na- ture physics 3, 227 (2007)

    work page 2007

  11. [11]

    Patton, E

    B. Patton, E. Zhivun, D. Hovde, and D. Budker, All- optical vector atomic magnetometer, Physical review let- ters 113, 013001 (2014)

    work page 2014

  12. [12]

    Behbood, F

    N. Behbood, F. Martin Ciurana, G. Colangelo, M. Napolitano, M. W. Mitchell, and R. J. Sewell, Real- time vector field tracking with a cold-atom magnetome- ter, Applied physics letters 102 (2013)

    work page 2013

  13. [13]

    Koschorreck, M

    M. Koschorreck, M. Napolitano, B. Dubost, and M. Mitchell, Sub-projection-noise sensitivity in broad- band atomic magnetometry, Physical review letters 104, 093602 (2010)

    work page 2010

  14. [14]

    Hosten, N

    O. Hosten, N. J. Engelsen, R. Krishnakumar, and M. A. Kasevich, Measurement noise 100 times lower than the quantum-projection limit using entangled atoms, Nature 529, 505 (2016)

    work page 2016

  15. [15]

    Janvier, V

    C. Janvier, V. Ménoret, B. Desruelle, S. Merlet, A. Lan- dragin, and F. Pereira dos Santos, Compact differential gravimeter at the quantum projection-noise limit, Phys- ical Review A 105, 022801 (2022)

    work page 2022

  16. [16]

    Y. Zhou, Y. Shagam, W. B. Cairncross, K. B. Ng, T. S. Roussy, T. Grogan, K. Boyce, A. Vigil, M. Pettine, T. Zelevinsky, J. Ye, and E. A. Cornell, Second-Scale Coherence Measured at the Quantum Projection Noise 7 Limit with Hundreds of Molecular Ions, Physical Review Letters 124, 053201 (2020)

    work page 2020

  17. [17]

    E. Boto, N. Holmes, J. Leggett, G. Roberts, V. Shah, S. S. Meyer, L. D. Muñoz, K. J. Mullinger, T. M. Tier- ney, S. Bestmann, et al. , Moving magnetoencephalogra- phy towards real-world applications with a wearable sys- tem, Nature 555, 657 (2018)

    work page 2018

  18. [18]

    D. J. Wineland, J. J. Bollinger, W. M. Itano, and D. J. Heinzen, Squeezed atomic states and projection noise in spectroscopy, Physical Review A 50, 67 (1994)

    work page 1994

  19. [19]

    R. J. Sewell, M. Koschorreck, M. Napolitano, B. Du- bost, N. Behbood, and M. W. Mitchell, Magnetic sen- sitivity beyond the projection noise limit by spin squeez- ing, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 253605 (2012)

    work page 2012

  20. [20]

    J. M. Robinson, M. Miklos, Y. M. Tso, C. J. Kennedy, T. Bothwell, D. Kedar, J. K. Thompson, and J. Ye, Direct comparison of two spin-squeezed optical clock ensembles at the 10-17 level, Nature Physics 20, 208 (2024)

    work page 2024

  21. [21]

    Louchet-Chauvet, J

    A. Louchet-Chauvet, J. Appel, J. J. Renema, D. Oblak, N. Kjaergaard, and E. S. Polzik, Entanglement-assisted atomic clock beyond the projection noise limit, New Jour- nal of Physics 12, 065032 (2010)

    work page 2010

  22. [22]

    Garsi, R

    M. Garsi, R. Stöhr, A. Denisenko, F. Shagieva, N. Traut- mann, U. Vogl, B. Sene, F. Kaiser, A. Zappe, R. Reuter, et al. , Three-dimensional imaging of integrated-circuit activity using quantum defects in diamond, Physical Re- view Applied 21, 014055 (2024)

    work page 2024

  23. [23]

    Smits, J

    J. Smits, J. T. Damron, P. Kehayias, A. F. McDowell, N. Mosavian, I. Fescenko, N. Ristoff, A. Laraoui, A. Jar- mola, and V. M. Acosta, Two-dimensional nuclear mag- netic resonance spectroscopy with a microfluidic diamond quantum sensor, Science Advances 5, eaaw7895 (2019)

    work page 2019

  24. [24]

    V. V. Soshenko, S. V. Bolshedvorskii, O. Rubinas, V. N. Sorokin, A. N. Smolyaninov, V. V. Vorobyov, and A. V. Akimov, Nuclear spin gyroscope based on the nitrogen vacancy center in diamond, Physical Review Letters 126, 197702 (2021)

    work page 2021

  25. [25]

    R. D. Allert, K. D. Briegel, and D. B. Bucher, Advances in nano- and microscale NMR spectroscopy using dia- mond quantum sensors, Chemical Communications 58, 8165 (2022)

    work page 2022

  26. [26]

    Loretz, S

    M. Loretz, S. Pezzagna, J. Meijer, and C. L. Degen, Nanoscale nuclear magnetic resonance with a 1.9-nm- deep nitrogen-vacancy sensor, Applied Physics Letters 104, 033102 (2014)

    work page 2014

  27. [27]

    Staudacher, F

    T. Staudacher, F. Shi, S. Pezzagna, J. Meijer, J. Du, C. A. Meriles, F. Reinhard, and J. Wrachtrup, Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy on a (5-Nanometer)3 Sample Volume, Science 339, 561 (2013)

    work page 2013

  28. [28]

    Rugar, H

    D. Rugar, H. J. Mamin, M. H. Sherwood, M. Kim, C. T. Rettner, K. Ohno, and D. D. Awschalom, Proton mag- netic resonance imaging using a nitrogen-vacancy spin sensor, Nature Nanotechnology 10, 120 (2015)

    work page 2015

  29. [29]

    Lovchinsky, A

    I. Lovchinsky, A. Sushkov, E. Urbach, N. P. de Leon, S. Choi, K. De Greve, R. Evans, R. Gertner, E. Bersin, C. Müller, et al. , Nuclear magnetic resonance detection and spectroscopy of single proteins using quantum logic, Science 351, 836 (2016)

    work page 2016

  30. [30]

    Maletinsky, S

    P. Maletinsky, S. Hong, M. S. Grinolds, B. Hausmann, M. D. Lukin, R. L. Walsworth, M. Loncar, and A. Ya- coby, A robust scanning diamond sensor for nanoscale imaging with single nitrogen-vacancy centres, Nature nanotechnology 7, 320 (2012)

    work page 2012

  31. [31]

    Z. Qiu, A. Hamo, U. Vool, T. X. Zhou, and A. Yacoby, Nanoscale electric field imaging with an ambient scanning quantum sensor microscope, npj Quantum Information 8, 107 (2022)

    work page 2022

  32. [32]

    Rovny, Z

    J. Rovny, Z. Yuan, M. Fitzpatrick, A. I. Abdalla, L. Fu- tamura, C. Fox, M. C. Cambria, S. Kolkowitz, and N. P. de Leon, Nanoscale covariance magnetometry with dia- mond quantum sensors, Science 378, 1301 (2022)

    work page 2022

  33. [33]

    W. Ji, Z. Liu, Y. Guo, Z. Hu, J. Zhou, S. Dai, Y. Chen, P. Yu, M. Wang, K. Xia, F. Shi, Y. Wang, and J. Du, Correlated sensing with a solid-state quantum multisen- sor system for atomic-scale structural analysis, Nature Photonics , 1 (2024)

    work page 2024

  34. [34]

    M. Lei, R. Fukumori, C.-J. Wu, E. Barnes, S. E. Economou, J. Choi, and A. Faraon, Quantum thermal- ization and Floquet engineering in a spin ensemble with a clock transition, Nature Physics 21, 1196 (2025)

    work page 2025

  35. [35]

    M. W. Doherty, N. B. Manson, P. Delaney, F. Jelezko, J. Wrachtrup, and L. C. Hollenberg, The nitrogen- vacancy colour centre in diamond, Physics Reports 528, 1 (2013)

    work page 2013

  36. [36]

    Zhang, F

    C. Zhang, F. Shagieva, M. Widmann, M. Kübler, V. Vorobyov, P. Kapitanova, E. Nenasheva, R. Corkill, O. Rhrle, K. Nakamura, et al. , Diamond magnetometry and gradiometry towards subpicotesla dc field measure- ment, Physical Review Applied 15, 064075 (2021)

    work page 2021

  37. [37]

    J. M. Taylor, P. Cappellaro, L. Childress, L. Jiang, D. Budker, P. R. Hemmer, A. Yacoby, R. Walsworth, and M. D. Lukin, High-sensitivity diamond magnetometer with nanoscale resolution, Nature Physics 4, 810 (2008)

    work page 2008

  38. [38]

    Arunkumar, K

    N. Arunkumar, K. S. Olsson, J. T. Oon, C. A. Hart, D. B. Bucher, D. R. Glenn, M. D. Lukin, H. Park, D. Ham, and R. L. Walsworth, Quantum logic enhanced sensing in solid-state spin ensembles, Physical Review Letters 131, 100801 (2023)

    work page 2023

  39. [39]

    J. Ebel, T. Joas, M. Schalk, P. Weinbrenner, A. An- gerer, J. Majer, and F. Reinhard, Dispersive readout of room-temperature ensemble spin sensors, Quantum Sci- ence and Technology 6, 03LT01 (2021)

    work page 2021

  40. [41]

    L. S. Martin, H. Zhou, N. T. Leitao, N. Maskara, O. Makarova, H. Gao, Q.-Z. Zhu, M. Park, M. Tyler, H. Park, et al. , Controlling local thermalization dynam- ics in a floquet-engineered dipolar ensemble, Physical Re- view Letters 130, 210403 (2023)

    work page 2023

  41. [42]

    H. Gao, L. S. Martin, L. B. Hughes, N. T. Leitao, P. Put, H. Zhou, N. U. Koyluoglu, S. A. Meynell, A. C. B. Jayich, H. Park, et al. , Signal amplification in a solid-state quan- tum sensor via asymmetric time-reversal of many-body dynamics, arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.14598 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  42. [43]

    Neumann, J

    P. Neumann, J. Beck, M. Steiner, F. Rempp, H. Fedder, P. R. Hemmer, J. Wrachtrup, and F. Jelezko, Single-shot readout of a single nuclear spin, Science 329, 542 (2010)

    work page 2010

  43. [44]

    P. C. Maurer, G. Kucsko, C. Latta, L. Jiang, N. Y. Yao, S. D. Bennett, F. Pastawski, D. Hunger, N. Chisholm, M. Markham, et al. , Room-temperature quantum bit memory exceeding one second, Science 336, 1283 (2012)

    work page 2012

  44. [46]

    Supplememtary information url provided by the journal later

    work page

  45. [47]

    Papoulis and S

    A. Papoulis and S. Pillai, Probability, Random Variables, and Stochastic Processes , McGraw-Hill series in electri- cal engineering: Communications and signal processing (Tata McGraw-Hill, 2002)

    work page 2002

  46. [48]

    A. Mzyk, A. Sigaeva, and R. Schirhagl, Relaxometry with Nitrogen Vacancy (NV) Centers in Diamond, Accounts of chemical research 55, 3572 (2022)

    work page 2022

  47. [49]

    S. Han, X. Ye, X. Zhou, Z. Liu, Y. Guo, M. Wang, W. Ji, Y. Wang, and J. Du, Solid-state spin coherence time ap- proaching the physical limit, Science advances 11, 9298 (2025)

    work page 2025

  48. [50]

    G. A. Álvarez and D. Suter, Measuring the Spectrum of Colored Noise by Dynamical Decoupling, Physical Re- view Letters 107, 230501 (2011), publisher: American Physical Society

    work page 2011

  49. [51]

    de Lange, D

    G. de Lange, D. Ristè, V. V. Dobrovitski, and R. Han- son, Single-Spin Magnetometry with Multipulse Sensing Sequences, Physical Review Letters 106, 080802 (2011), publisher: American Physical Society

    work page 2011

  50. [52]

    C. L. Degen, F. Reinhard, and P. Cappellaro, Quantum sensing, Reviews of Modern Physics 89, 10.1103/RevModPhys.89.035002 (2017)

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1103/revmodphys.89.035002 2017

  51. [53]

    E. J. Davis, B. Ye, F. Machado, S. A. Meynell, W. Wu, T. Mittiga, W. Schenken, M. Joos, B. Kobrin, Y. Lyu, Z. Wang, D. Bluvstein, S. Choi, C. Zu, A. C. B. Jayich, and N. Y. Yao, Probing many-body dynamics in a two- dimensional dipolar spin ensemble, Nature Physics 19, 836 (2023)

    work page 2023

  52. [54]

    Dubost, M

    B. Dubost, M. Koschorreck, M. Napolitano, N. Behbood, R. J. Sewell, and M. W. Mitchell, Efficient Quantifica- tion of Non-Gaussian Spin Distributions, Physical Re- view Letters 108, 183602 (2012). Supplementary Information for ”Readout of a solid state spin ensemble at the projection noise limit” Rouven Maier1,2, Cheng-I Ho 1,3, Andrej Denisenko 1, Marina Da...

    work page 2012

  53. [55]

    The N-doped layer was grown using isotopically purified 12CH4 and nitrogen at an N/C ratio of 40 000 ppm

    5 % CH4 in H 2 and growth was carried out at around 850 ◦ C. The N-doped layer was grown using isotopically purified 12CH4 and nitrogen at an N/C ratio of 40 000 ppm. From secondary ion mass spectrometry (SIMS), a nitrogen concentration of approx. 2. 4 × 1018 N/ cm3, i.e., 13. 6 ppm was obtained. This corresponds to a doping efficiency of around 0. 03 % as ...

    work page

  54. [56]

    The rate of NV centers formed for each Nitrogen atom in this non-annealed sample is assumed on the order of 0

    84NA (Gaussian beam profile with 1σ radius), where λ 0 = 532 nm is the wavelength of the laser and NA the numerical aperture of the objective, the number of nitrogen atoms NN in the 277 nm thick NV layer can be estimated by using the nitrogen density [N] = 11 ppm obtained by secondary ion mass spectroscopy (SIMS) and comparison to another calibration sam- ...

    work page

  55. [57]

    This faster decay rate in |0⟩ is the main reason for the larger spin projection noise during the inversion of the nitrogen rabi drive in Fig

    The |0⟩ state shows a twice faster decay compared to the |1⟩ state, mainly because of additional relaxation pathways through the spin-allowed transitions into both, |1⟩ and | − 1⟩ states. This faster decay rate in |0⟩ is the main reason for the larger spin projection noise during the inversion of the nitrogen rabi drive in Fig. 3 b) of the main text. Supp...

    work page

  56. [58]

    duration of initialization and readout)

    04 GHz/ T the gyromagnetic ratio of the electron spin, ceff the effective contrast, τsens the sensing time and τother experimental overhead (e.g. duration of initialization and readout). In the conventional readout, the noise is given by σ ≈ √ n, where n = n1 is the photons detected in a single readout and the effective contrast is equal to the optical con...

    work page

  57. [59]

    The noise σ in the readout of a superposition spin state (i.e

    Additionally, the effective contrast is reduced by the decay of the nitrogen spin state during the m readouts with the characteristic decay rate of mT1 , leading to ceff = 2 c m mT1 ( 1 − e− m/m T1 ) . The noise σ in the readout of a superposition spin state (i.e. maximum spin projection noise) of a spin 1/2 system is given by σ = √ σ 2 PSN + (ceff nσ ˜Jz )...

    work page

  58. [60]

    Maier, C.-I

    R. Maier, C.-I. Ho, H. Sumiya, S. Onoda, J. Isoya, V . V orobyov, and J. Wrachtrup, Efficient detection of statistical rf fields at high magnetic field with a quantum sensor (2025), arXiv:2503.12954

    work page arXiv 2025

  59. [61]

    Sch ¨atzle, P

    P . Sch ¨atzle, P . Reinke, D. Herrling, A. G ¨otze, L. Lindner, J. Jeske, L. Kirste, and P . Knittel, physica status solidi (a) 220, 2200351 (2023)

    work page 2023

  60. [62]

    Miyazaki, Y

    T. Miyazaki, Y . Miyamoto, T. Makino, H. Kato, S. Y amasaki, T. Fukui, Y . Doi, N. Tokuda, M. Hatano, and N. Mizuochi, Applied Physics Letters 105, 261601 (2014)

    work page 2014

  61. [63]

    Nakano, X

    Y . Nakano, X. Zhang, K. Kobayashi, T. Matsumoto, T. Inokuma, S. Y amasaki, C. E. Nebel, and N. Tokuda, Diamond and Related Materials 125, 108997 (2022)

    work page 2022

  62. [64]

    Michl, T

    J. Michl, T. Teraji, S. Zaiser, I. Jakobi, G. Waldherr, F. Dolde, P . Neumann, M. W. Doherty, N. B. Manson, J. Isoya, and J. Wrachtrup, Applied Physics Letters 104, 102407 (2014)

    work page 2014

  63. [65]

    Bauch, S

    E. Bauch, S. Singh, J. Lee, C. A. Hart, J. M. Schloss, M. J. Turner, J. F. Barry, L. M. Pham, N. Bar-Gill, S. F. Y elin, and R. L. Walsworth, Physical Review B 102, 134210 (2020), publisher: American Physical Society

    work page 2020

  64. [66]

    V . V . V orobyov, J. Meinel, H. Sumiya, S. Onoda, J. Isoya, O. Gulinsky, and J. Wrachtrup, Physical Review A 107, 042212 (2023)

    work page 2023

  65. [67]

    C. L. Degen, F. Reinhard, and P . Cappellaro, Reviews of Modern Physics 89, 10.1103/RevMod- Phys.89.035002 (2017)

    work page doi:10.1103/revmod- 2017

  66. [68]

    H. J. Carmichael, Statistical Methods in Quantum Optics 2 , Theoretical and Mathematical Physics (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2008)

    work page 2008

  67. [69]

    Amiet and S

    J.-P . Amiet and S. Weigert, Journal of Optics B: Quantum and Semiclassical Optics 1, L5 (1999)

    work page 1999

  68. [70]

    R. H. Dicke, Physical Review 93, 99 (1954)

    work page 1954

  69. [71]

    W. Wu, E. J. Davis, L. B. Hughes, B. Y e, Z. Wang, D. Kufel, T. Ono, S. A. Meynell, M. Block, C. Liu, et al., arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.14585 (2025). 11

    work page arXiv 2025