arxiv: 2602.12227 · v2 · submitted 2026-02-12 · 🪐 quant-ph · physics.atom-ph

Recognition: no theorem link

Parameter Estimation from Amplitude Collapse in Correlated Matter-Wave Interference

Daniel Derr , Dominik Pfeiffer , Ludwig Lind , Gerhard Birkl , Enno Giese

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-16 02:16 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph physics.atom-ph

keywords atom interferometryparameter estimationamplitude collapsecorrelated signalsmatter-wave interferencequantum sensingphase estimationbias reduction

0 comments

The pith

Statistical inference on amplitude collapse in atom interferometers yields estimates with substantially reduced bias for correlated signals.

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

The paper introduces Parameter Estimation from Amplitude Collapse, or PEAC, a method that applies statistical inference to the amplitude behavior of signals from different magnetically sensitive substates in a matter-wave interferometer. Standard evaluation techniques suffer from bias when extracting parameters such as differential phase from correlated sensors, especially when the signals lack phase stability. PEAC instead examines how the amplitudes collapse across substates to infer the underlying parameters. This produces higher trueness and markedly lower bias than conventional approaches for perfectly correlated cases, while keeping precision competitive even close to zero amplitude. The result implies that operating at vanishing signal strength is not the best choice for high-accuracy work, with direct relevance to quantum clock interferometry and other correlated sensing setups.

Core claim

The paper claims that applying statistical inference to the amplitude-collapse statistics of magnetically sensitive substates in an atom interferometer produces parameter estimates with higher trueness and substantially reduced bias compared with standard methods, provided the signals remain perfectly correlated, while maintaining competitive precision near vanishing amplitudes; this shows that zero-amplitude operation is not optimal for accuracy and supplies a general evaluation route for phase-unstable correlated interferometers.

What carries the argument

PEAC (Parameter Estimation from Amplitude Collapse), the statistical inference procedure that extracts parameters from the observed distribution of amplitude collapses across magnetically sensitive substates.

If this is right

For perfectly correlated signals, PEAC delivers higher trueness and substantially lower bias than standard estimation methods.
Precision stays competitive near vanishing amplitudes, showing that zero-signal points are not optimal for accuracy.
The approach works for any correlated interferometer lacking phase stability and raises overall accuracy.
Applications extend beyond atom-based interferometry to other correlated quantum sensors.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

Choosing working points away from vanishing amplitude could improve sensitivity in quantum clock interferometry without sacrificing trueness.
The method could be adapted to partially correlated signals by adding explicit noise terms to the inference model.
Similar amplitude-collapse statistics might appear in other multi-state quantum systems, allowing the same inference technique in non-atomic platforms.

Load-bearing premise

The signals from the different magnetically sensitive substates remain perfectly correlated, with no residual differential noise or state-preparation errors that would change the amplitude-collapse statistics.

What would settle it

An experiment that measures significant residual differential noise between substates and finds that the amplitude statistics deviate from the predicted collapse behavior, eliminating the reported bias reduction, would falsify the central performance claim.

read the original abstract

Operating matter-wave interferometers as quantum detectors for fundamental physics or inertial sensors with unprecedented accuracies relies on noise rejection, often implemented by correlating multiple sensors. They can be spatially separated (gradiometry or gravitational-wave detection) or consist of different internal states (magnetometry or quantum clock interferometry), with a signal-amplitude modulation serving as a signature of a differential phase. In this work, we introduce Parameter Estimation from Amplitude Collapse (PEAC) by applying statistical inference techniques for different magnetically sensitive substates of an atom interferometer. We demonstrate that PEAC provides higher trueness, resulting in a substantially reduced bias compared to standard methods for perfectly correlated signals, while achieving competitive precision near, but not at, vanishing amplitudes. This indicates that vanishing signals do not constitute the most favourable working point for high-accuracy sensing, relevant to quantum clock interferometry. PEAC presents a generally applicable complementary evaluation method for correlated interferometers without phase stability, increasing the overall accuracy and enabling applications beyond atom-based interferometry.

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.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

PEAC gives a bias-reduced estimation route for perfectly correlated atom-interferometer channels but rests on an ideal-correlation assumption that needs robustness checks.

read the letter

The paper's core move is to treat amplitude collapse across magnetically sensitive substates as the observable for statistical inference rather than fitting fringes or extracting phase directly. For signals that are exactly correlated, this yields lower bias than standard methods while keeping competitive precision even near zero amplitude. That part is cleanly stated and directly relevant to clock interferometry and gradiometry, where phase stability is often unavailable and vanishing signals are sometimes treated as optimal. The authors also note that the method is complementary and can be applied beyond atom optics, which is a fair claim given the framing. What stands out is the explicit link between substate correlations and parameter trueness; that connection is not the usual starting point in the cited literature. The limitation is the lack of any reported test against residual differential noise. The derivation assumes zero uncorrelated component from state preparation, magnetic gradients, or detection, yet real setups always have some. Without a quantitative sensitivity analysis or even a simple perturbation check, it is unclear how quickly the bias advantage erodes once that assumption is relaxed. The abstract and stress-test note both flag this, and nothing in the visible material contradicts it. Readers working on multi-state atom interferometers for sensing will find the idea worth trying on their own data, especially if they already have access to the substate populations. For a broader audience the paper is too narrow and the evidence too preliminary. I would send it to review because the central claim is falsifiable and the application area is active, but the referees will need to see the robustness section expanded before acceptance.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper introduces Parameter Estimation from Amplitude Collapse (PEAC), a statistical inference technique applied to amplitude-modulated signals from different magnetically sensitive substates in matter-wave interferometers. For signals that are perfectly correlated across substates, PEAC is claimed to deliver higher trueness with substantially reduced bias relative to standard methods while maintaining competitive precision near (but not at) vanishing amplitudes; this is positioned as a complementary evaluation approach for correlated interferometers lacking phase stability, with relevance to quantum clock interferometry.

Significance. If the bias-reduction result holds under the perfect-correlation regime, PEAC would offer a practical route to improved accuracy in atom-interferometric sensors and fundamental-physics measurements where differential-phase signatures are extracted from amplitude collapse. The method could be especially useful in setups with multiple internal states or spatially separated sensors, complementing existing correlation techniques without requiring phase stability.

major comments (2)

[Methods / statistical model for amplitude collapse] The central claim of substantially reduced bias rests on the assumption of perfect inter-substate correlation (zero differential variance). The statistical model for amplitude collapse implicitly treats the joint distribution as having no residual uncorrelated component; once small differential noise from imperfect state preparation, magnetic gradients, or detection is present, the collapse statistics shift and the bias-reduction advantage is no longer guaranteed by the same derivation. No quantitative robustness analysis against such perturbations is reported.
[Abstract and Results] Abstract and results: the claims of higher trueness and competitive precision are stated without accompanying derivation details, explicit error propagation, or tabulated bias/precision values for the PEAC estimator versus standard methods. This makes it impossible to verify the magnitude of the reported improvement or to assess whether the advantage persists away from the ideal correlation limit.

minor comments (1)

[Notation] Notation for the substate amplitudes and the collapse parameter should be defined explicitly at first use, with a clear distinction between the observed fringe amplitude and the inferred differential phase.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive feedback. We address the two major comments point by point below. The manuscript focuses on the ideal perfect-correlation regime, but we agree that additional clarity and discussion are warranted.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: The central claim of substantially reduced bias rests on the assumption of perfect inter-substate correlation (zero differential variance). The statistical model for amplitude collapse implicitly treats the joint distribution as having no residual uncorrelated component; once small differential noise from imperfect state preparation, magnetic gradients, or detection is present, the collapse statistics shift and the bias-reduction advantage is no longer guaranteed by the same derivation. No quantitative robustness analysis against such perturbations is reported.

Authors: We agree that the derivation of PEAC assumes perfect inter-substate correlation, as stated throughout the manuscript (e.g., in the abstract and Methods). The joint distribution is modeled without residual uncorrelated variance precisely because the paper targets this ideal regime for correlated matter-wave interferometers. We will add a new paragraph in the Discussion section providing an analytical approximation for how small differential noise perturbs the amplitude-collapse statistics and reduces the bias advantage. A full quantitative Monte-Carlo robustness study across multiple noise amplitudes is beyond the present scope and will be noted as future work. revision: partial
Referee: Abstract and results: the claims of higher trueness and competitive precision are stated without accompanying derivation details, explicit error propagation, or tabulated bias/precision values for the PEAC estimator versus standard methods. This makes it impossible to verify the magnitude of the reported improvement or to assess whether the advantage persists away from the ideal correlation limit.

Authors: The full derivations appear in the Methods and supplementary material, but we accept that the main text would benefit from greater transparency. In the revised version we will insert a compact table in the Results section listing bias and precision (standard deviation) for both PEAC and the conventional estimator at several representative amplitudes, together with a short inline derivation of the leading-order bias terms and the explicit error-propagation expressions used. These additions will allow direct verification of the reported improvement within the perfect-correlation limit. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in derivation chain

full rationale

The abstract introduces PEAC as a statistical inference method applied to amplitude collapse in perfectly correlated signals from magnetically sensitive substates. No equations, fitting procedures, or self-citations are shown that would reduce the claimed bias reduction or trueness improvement to a fitted parameter or input by construction. The central demonstration is conditioned on the explicit assumption of perfect inter-substate correlation, which is stated as a premise rather than derived from the method itself. The derivation chain remains self-contained against external benchmarks, with no load-bearing self-citation chains, ansatz smuggling, or renaming of known results visible. This matches the default expectation for non-circular papers.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Review performed on abstract only; full text unavailable in provided context. Ledger therefore contains only the minimal domain assumption extractable from the abstract.

axioms (1)

domain assumption Signals from different magnetically sensitive substates are perfectly correlated
Invoked to claim substantially reduced bias for perfectly correlated signals.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5477 in / 1146 out tokens · 56534 ms · 2026-05-16T02:16:11.073974+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

96 extracted references · 96 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

[1]

in one dimension, a benchmark application well-suited to typical vibration-prone environments and compact devices, even when state-selective interferometry is unavailable. Ultracold87Rb atoms from a Bose–Einstein condensate (BEC) provide a suitable point source (32) with sub-recoil momentum width, coherence, and access to efficient Bragg diffraction (56)....

work page
[2]

Morel, Z

L. Morel, Z. Yao, P. Clad ´e, S. Guellati-Kh ´elifa, Determination of the fine-structure constant with an accuracy of 81 parts per trillion.Nature588(7836), 61–65 (2020), doi:10.1038/ s41586-020-2964-7, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2964-7

work page doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2964-7 2020
[4]

Arvanitaki, P

A. Arvanitaki, P. W. Graham, J. M. Hogan, S. Rajendran, K. Van Tilburg, Search for light scalar dark matter with atomic gravitational wave detectors.Phys. Rev. D97, 075020 (2018), doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.97.075020, https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevD.97.075020

work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.97.075020 2018
[5]

D. Derr, E. Giese, Clock transitions versus Bragg diffraction in atom-interferometric dark- matter detection.AVS Quantum Sci.5(4), 044404 (2023), doi:10.1116/5.0176666, https: //doi.org/10.1116/5.0176666

work page doi:10.1116/5.0176666 2023
[6]

Abend,et al., Terrestrial very-long-baseline atom interferometry: Workshop summary

S. Abend,et al., Terrestrial very-long-baseline atom interferometry: Workshop summary. AVS Quantum Sci.6(2), 024701 (2024), doi:10.1116/5.0185291, https://doi.org/10.1116/5. 0185291

work page doi:10.1116/5.0185291 2024
[7]

A. Abdalla,et al., Terrestrial Very-Long-Baseline Atom Interferometry: summary of the second workshop.EPJ Quantum Technol.12(1), 42 (2025), doi:10.1140/epjqt/s40507-025-00344-3, https://doi.org/10.1140/epjqt/s40507-025-00344-3

work page doi:10.1140/epjqt/s40507-025-00344-3 2025
[8]

G. Rosi, F. Sorrentino, L. Cacciapuoti, M. Prevedelli, G. M. Tino, Precision measurement of the Newtonian gravitational constant using cold atoms.Nature510(7506), 518–521 (2014), doi:10.1038/nature13433, https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13433

work page doi:10.1038/nature13433 2014
[9]

Lamporesi, A

G. Lamporesi, A. Bertoldi, L. Cacciapuoti, M. Prevedelli, G. M. Tino, Determination of the Newtonian Gravitational Constant Using Atom Interferometry.Phys. Rev. Lett.100, 050801 (2008), doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.050801, https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett. 100.050801. 29

work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.100.050801 2008
[10]

J. B. Fixler, G. T. Foster, J. M. McGuirk, M. A. Kasevich, Atom Interferometer Measurement of the Newtonian Constant of Gravity.Science315(5808), 74–77 (2007), doi:10.1126/science. 1135459, https://www.science.org/doi/abs/10.1126/science.1135459

work page doi:10.1126/science 2007
[11]

Pikovski, M

I. Pikovski, M. Zych, F. Costa, ˇC. Brukner, Universal decoherence due to gravitational time dilation.Nature Phys.11(8), 668–672 (2015), doi:10.1038/nphys3366, https://doi.org/10.1038/ nphys3366

work page doi:10.1038/nphys3366 2015
[12]

Schlippert,et al., Quantum Test of the Universality of Free Fall.Phys

D. Schlippert,et al., Quantum Test of the Universality of Free Fall.Phys. Rev. Lett.112, 203002 (2014), doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.203002, https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett. 112.203002

work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.112.203002 2014
[13]

Asenbaum, C

P. Asenbaum, C. Overstreet, M. Kim, J. Curti, M. A. Kasevich, Atom-Interferometric Test of the Equivalence Principle at the 10 −12 Level.Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 191101 (2020), doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.125.191101, https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.125.191101

work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.125.191101 2020
[14]

Barrett,et al., Dual matter-wave inertial sensors in weightlessness.Nat

B. Barrett,et al., Dual matter-wave inertial sensors in weightlessness.Nat. Commun.7(1), 13786 (2016), doi:10.1038/ncomms13786, https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms13786

work page doi:10.1038/ncomms13786 2016
[15]

Schaffrath, D

S. Schaffrath, D. St ¨ork, F. Di Pumpo, E. Giese, Unified laboratory-frame analysis of atomic gravitational-wave sensors.AVS Quantum Sci.7(4), 044402 (2025), doi:10.1116/5.0304468, https://doi.org/10.1116/5.0304468

work page doi:10.1116/5.0304468 2025
[16]

N. Yu, M. Tinto, Gravitational wave detection with single-laser atom interferometers.Gen. Relativ. Gravitation43(7), 1943–1952 (2011), doi:10.1007/s10714-010-1055-8, https://doi. org/10.1007/s10714-010-1055-8

work page doi:10.1007/s10714-010-1055-8 1943
[17]

Chaibi,et al., Low frequency gravitational wave detection with ground-based atom in- terferometer arrays.Phys

W. Chaibi,et al., Low frequency gravitational wave detection with ground-based atom in- terferometer arrays.Phys. Rev. D93, 021101 (2016), doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93.021101, https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevD.93.021101

work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.93.021101 2016
[18]

Barrett,et al., Correlative methods for dual-species quantum tests of the weak equivalence principle.New J

B. Barrett,et al., Correlative methods for dual-species quantum tests of the weak equivalence principle.New J. Phys.17(8), 085010 (2015), doi:10.1088/1367-2630/17/8/085010, https: //doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/17/8/085010. 30

work page doi:10.1088/1367-2630/17/8/085010 2015
[19]

B. Barrett,et al., Testing the universality of free fall using correlated 39K–87Rb atom interferometers.AVS Quantum Sci.4(1), 014401 (2022), doi:10.1116/5.0076502, https: //doi.org/10.1116/5.0076502

work page doi:10.1116/5.0076502 2022
[20]

Bongs,et al., Taking atom interferometric quantum sensors from the laboratory to real- world applications.Nat

K. Bongs,et al., Taking atom interferometric quantum sensors from the laboratory to real- world applications.Nat. Rev. Phys.1(12), 731–739 (2019), doi:10.1038/s42254-019-0117-4, https://doi.org/10.1038/s42254-019-0117-4

work page doi:10.1038/s42254-019-0117-4 2019
[21]

E. R. Elliott,et al., Quantum gas mixtures and dual-species atom interferometry in space. Nature623(7987), 502–508 (2023), doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06645-w, https://doi.org/10. 1038/s41586-023-06645-w

work page doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06645-w 2023
[22]

Meister,et al., Space magnetometry with a differential atom interferometer (2025), https: //arxiv.org/abs/2505.23532

M. Meister,et al., Space magnetometry with a differential atom interferometer (2025), https: //arxiv.org/abs/2505.23532

work page arXiv 2025
[23]

K. S. Hardman,et al., Simultaneous Precision Gravimetry and Magnetic Gradiometry with a Bose-Einstein Condensate: A High Precision, Quantum Sensor.Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 138501 (2016), doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.138501, https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett. 117.138501

work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.117.138501 2016
[24]

Zhou,et al., Precisely mapping the magnetic field gradient in vacuum with an atom interferometer.Phys

M.-K. Zhou,et al., Precisely mapping the magnetic field gradient in vacuum with an atom interferometer.Phys. Rev. A82, 061602 (2010), doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.82.061602, https: //link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevA.82.061602

work page doi:10.1103/physreva.82.061602 2010
[25]

Hu,et al., Simultaneous differential measurement of a magnetic-field gradient by atom interferometry using double fountains.Phys

Z.-K. Hu,et al., Simultaneous differential measurement of a magnetic-field gradient by atom interferometry using double fountains.Phys. Rev. A84, 013620 (2011), doi:10.1103/PhysRevA. 84.013620, https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevA.84.013620

work page doi:10.1103/physreva 2011
[26]

T. L. Gustavson, A. Landragin, M. A. Kasevich, Rotation sensing with a dual atom- interferometer Sagnac gyroscope.Classical Quantum Gravity17(12), 2385 (2000), doi: 10.1088/0264-9381/17/12/311, https://doi.org/10.1088/0264-9381/17/12/311

work page doi:10.1088/0264-9381/17/12/311 2000
[27]

Berg,et al., Composite-Light-Pulse Technique for High-Precision Atom Interferometry

P. Berg,et al., Composite-Light-Pulse Technique for High-Precision Atom Interferometry. Phys. Rev. Lett.114, 063002 (2015), doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.063002, https://link.aps. org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.063002. 31

work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.114.063002 2015
[28]

Canuel,et al., Six-Axis Inertial Sensor Using Cold-Atom Interferometry.Phys

B. Canuel,et al., Six-Axis Inertial Sensor Using Cold-Atom Interferometry.Phys. Rev. Lett.97, 010402 (2006), doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.97.010402, https://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRevLett.97.010402

work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.97.010402 2006
[29]

M. M. Beydler, E. R. Moan, Z. Luo, Z. Chu, C. A. Sackett, Guided-wave Sagnac atom interferometer with large area and multiple orbits.AVS Quantum Sci.6(1), 014401 (2024), doi:10.1116/5.0173769, https://doi.org/10.1116/5.0173769

work page doi:10.1116/5.0173769 2024
[30]

Sorrentino,et al., Sensitivity limits of a Raman atom interferometer as a gravity gradiometer

F. Sorrentino,et al., Sensitivity limits of a Raman atom interferometer as a gravity gradiometer. Phys. Rev. A89, 023607 (2014), doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.89.023607, https://link.aps.org/doi/ 10.1103/PhysRevA.89.023607

work page doi:10.1103/physreva.89.023607 2014
[31]

M. J. Snadden, J. M. McGuirk, P. Bouyer, K. G. Haritos, M. A. Kasevich, Measurement of the Earth’s Gravity Gradient with an Atom Interferometer-Based Gravity Gradiometer.Phys. Rev. Lett.81, 971–974 (1998), doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.81.971, https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRevLett.81.971

work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.81.971 1998
[32]

Bertoldi,et al., Atom interferometry gravity-gradiometer for the determination of the Newtonian gravitational constant G.Eur

A. Bertoldi,et al., Atom interferometry gravity-gradiometer for the determination of the Newtonian gravitational constant G.Eur. Phys. J. D40(2), 271–279 (2006), doi:10.1140/epjd/ e2006-00212-2, https://doi.org/10.1140/epjd/e2006-00212-2

work page doi:10.1140/epjd/ 2006
[33]

S. M. Dickerson, J. M. Hogan, A. Sugarbaker, D. M. S. Johnson, M. A. Kasevich, Mul- tiaxis Inertial Sensing with Long-Time Point Source Atom Interferometry.Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 083001 (2013), doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.111.083001, https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRevLett.111.083001

work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.111.083001 2013
[34]

G. T. Foster, J. B. Fixler, J. M. McGuirk, M. A. Kasevich, Method of phase extraction between coupled atom interferometers using ellipse-specific fitting.Opt. Lett.27(11), 951 (2002), doi:10.1364/ol.27.000951

work page doi:10.1364/ol.27.000951 2002
[35]

Zhang,et al., Dependence of the ellipse fitting noise on the differential phase between interferometers in atom gravity gradiometers.Opt

X. Zhang,et al., Dependence of the ellipse fitting noise on the differential phase between interferometers in atom gravity gradiometers.Opt. Express31(26), 44102–44112 (2023), doi:10.1364/OE.507695, https://opg.optica.org/oe/abstract.cfm?URI=oe-31-26-44102. 32

work page doi:10.1364/oe.507695 2023
[36]

Fitzgibbon, M

A. Fitzgibbon, M. Pilu, R. Fisher, Direct least square fitting of ellipses.IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence21(5), 476–480 (1999), doi:10.1109/34.765658

work page doi:10.1109/34.765658 1999
[37]

Z. L. Szpak, W. Chojnacki, A. van den Hengel, Guaranteed Ellipse Fitting with the Sampson Distance, inComputer Vision – ECCV 2012, A. Fitzgibbon, S. Lazebnik, P. Perona, Y. Sato, C. Schmid, Eds. (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg) (2012), pp. 87–100

work page 2012
[38]

Joint Committee for Guides in Metrology, International Vocabulary of Metrology – Basic and general concepts and associated terms (VIM), 3rd edition, JCGM 200:2012 (2012), doi: 10.59161/JCGM200-2012, https://doi.org/10.59161/JCGM200-2012

work page doi:10.59161/jcgm200-2012 2012
[39]

Accuracy (trueness and precision) of measurement methods and results — Part 1: General principles and definitions (2023), https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso:5725:-1:ed-2:v1:en, 2nd edition, July 2023

work page 2023
[40]

Roura, Gravitational Redshift in Quantum-Clock Interferometry.Phys

A. Roura, Gravitational Redshift in Quantum-Clock Interferometry.Phys. Rev. X 10, 021014 (2020), doi:10.1103/PhysRevX.10.021014, https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRevX.10.021014

work page doi:10.1103/physrevx.10.021014 2020
[41]

Di Pumpo,et al., Gravitational Redshift Tests with Atomic Clocks and Atom Interferometers

F. Di Pumpo,et al., Gravitational Redshift Tests with Atomic Clocks and Atom Interferometers. PRX Quantum2, 040333 (2021), doi:10.1103/PRXQuantum.2.040333, https://link.aps.org/ doi/10.1103/PRXQuantum.2.040333

work page doi:10.1103/prxquantum.2.040333 2021
[42]

Rosi,et al., Quantum test of the equivalence principle for atoms in coherent superposition of internal energy states.Nat

G. Rosi,et al., Quantum test of the equivalence principle for atoms in coherent superposition of internal energy states.Nat. Commun.8(1), 15529 (2017), doi:10.1038/ncomms15529, https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms15529

work page doi:10.1038/ncomms15529 2017
[43]

Borregaard, I

J. Borregaard, I. Pikovski, Testing quantum theory on curved spacetime with quantum networks. Phys. Rev. Res.7, 023192 (2025), doi:10.1103/PhysRevResearch.7.023192, https://link.aps. org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevResearch.7.023192

work page doi:10.1103/physrevresearch.7.023192 2025
[44]

Fromonteil,et al., Non-local mass superpositions and optical clock interferometry in atomic ensemble quantum networks (2025), https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.19501

C. Fromonteil,et al., Non-local mass superpositions and optical clock interferometry in atomic ensemble quantum networks (2025), https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.19501. 33

work page arXiv 2025
[45]

G¨ undo˘gan, R

M. G¨ undo˘gan, R. Barzel, D. R¨atzel, Gravitational time dilation in quantum clock interferometry with entangled multi-photon states and quantum memories.arXiv(2026), https://doi.org/10. 48550/arXiv.2601.02470

work page arXiv 2026
[46]

M. Zych, F. Costa, I. Pikovski, ˇC. Brukner, Quantum interferometric visibility as a witness of general relativistic proper time.Nat. Commun.2(1), 505 (2011), doi:10.1038/ncomms1498, https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms1498

work page doi:10.1038/ncomms1498 2011
[47]

J. P. Covey, I. Pikovski, J. Borregaard, Probing Curved Spacetime with a Distributed Atomic Processor Clock.PRX Quantum6, 030310 (2025), doi:10.1103/q188-b1cr, https://link.aps. org/doi/10.1103/q188-b1cr

work page doi:10.1103/q188-b1cr 2025
[48]

Loriani,et al., Interference of clocks: A quantum twin paradox.Sci

S. Loriani,et al., Interference of clocks: A quantum twin paradox.Sci. Adv.5(10), eaax8966 (2019), doi:10.1126/sciadv.aax8966, https://www.science.org/doi/abs/10.1126/ sciadv.aax8966

work page doi:10.1126/sciadv.aax8966 2019
[49]

which path

Y. Margalit,et al., A self-interfering clock as a “which path” witness.Science349(6253), 1205– 1208 (2015), doi:10.1126/science.aac6498, https://www.science.org/doi/abs/10.1126/science. aac6498

work page doi:10.1126/science.aac6498 2015
[50]

Geiger,et al., Detecting inertial effects with airborne matter-wave interferometry.Nat

R. Geiger,et al., Detecting inertial effects with airborne matter-wave interferometry.Nat. Commun.2(1), 474 (2011), doi:10.1038/ncomms1479, https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms1479

work page doi:10.1038/ncomms1479 2011
[51]

Abend,et al., Atom-Chip Fountain Gravimeter.Phys

S. Abend,et al., Atom-Chip Fountain Gravimeter.Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 203003 (2016), doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.203003, https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.203003

work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.117.203003 2016
[52]

Pelluet,et al., Atom interferometry in an Einstein Elevator.Nat

C. Pelluet,et al., Atom interferometry in an Einstein Elevator.Nat. Commun.16(1), 4812 (2025), doi:10.1038/s41467-025-60042-7, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-025-60042-7

work page doi:10.1038/s41467-025-60042-7 2025
[53]

Z. Zhou, S. C. Carrasco, C. Sanner, V. S. Malinovsky, R. Folman, Geometric phase amplification in a clock interferometer for enhanced metrology.Sci. Adv.11(18), eadr6893 (2025), doi: 10.1126/sciadv.adr6893, https://www.science.org/doi/abs/10.1126/sciadv.adr6893

work page doi:10.1126/sciadv.adr6893 2025
[54]

Zheng, J

X. Zheng, J. Dolde, M. C. Cambria, H. M. Lim, S. Kolkowitz, A lab-based test of the grav- itational redshift with a miniature clock network.Nat. Commun.14(1), 4886 (2023), doi: 10.1038/s41467-023-40629-8, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-40629-8. 34

work page doi:10.1038/s41467-023-40629-8 2023
[55]

Bothwell,et al., Resolving the gravitational redshift across a millimetre-scale atomic sam- ple.Nature602(7897), 420–424 (2022), doi:10.1038/s41586-021-04349-7, https://doi.org/10

T. Bothwell,et al., Resolving the gravitational redshift across a millimetre-scale atomic sam- ple.Nature602(7897), 420–424 (2022), doi:10.1038/s41586-021-04349-7, https://doi.org/10. 1038/s41586-021-04349-7

work page doi:10.1038/s41586-021-04349-7 2022
[56]

Struckmann,et al., Platform and environment requirements of a satellite quantum test of the weak equivalence principle at the 10 −17 level.Phys

C. Struckmann,et al., Platform and environment requirements of a satellite quantum test of the weak equivalence principle at the 10 −17 level.Phys. Rev. D109, 064010 (2024), doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.109.064010, https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevD.109.064010

work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.109.064010 2024
[57]

Hartmann,et al., Regimes of atomic diffraction: Raman versus Bragg diffraction in retrore- flective geometries.Phys

S. Hartmann,et al., Regimes of atomic diffraction: Raman versus Bragg diffraction in retrore- flective geometries.Phys. Rev. A101, 053610 (2020), doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.101.053610, https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevA.101.053610

work page doi:10.1103/physreva.101.053610 2020
[58]

Lauber, J

T. Lauber, J. K¨ uber, O. Wille, G. Birkl, Optimized Bose-Einstein-condensate production in a dipole trap based on a 1070-nm multifrequency laser: Influence of enhanced two-body loss on the evaporation process.Phys. Rev. A84(4), 043641 (2011), doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.84. 043641, https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevA.84.043641

work page doi:10.1103/physreva.84 2011
[59]

Pfeiffer, M

D. Pfeiffer, M. Dietrich, P. Schach, G. Birkl, E. Giese, Dichroic mirror pulses for opti- mized higher-order atomic Bragg diffraction.Phys. Rev. Res.7, L012028 (2025), doi:10.1103/ PhysRevResearch.7.L012028, https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevResearch.7.L012028

work page doi:10.1103/physrevresearch.7.l012028 2025
[60]

R. B. Blackman, J. W. Tukey, The Measurement of Power Spectra from the Point of View of Communications Engineering — Part I.Bell System Technical Journal37(1), 185–282 (1958), doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1538-7305.1958.tb03874.x, https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ abs/10.1002/j.1538-7305.1958.tb03874.x

work page doi:10.1002/j.1538-7305.1958.tb03874.x 1958
[61]

Weisstein, Blackman Function,MathWorld–A Wolfram Resource, https://mathworld

E. Weisstein, Blackman Function,MathWorld–A Wolfram Resource, https://mathworld. wolfram.com/BlackmanFunction.html

work page
[62]

Chiow, T

S.-w. Chiow, T. Kovachy, H.-C. Chien, M. A. Kasevich, 102ℏ𝑘Large Area Atom In- terferometers.Phys. Rev. Lett.107, 130403 (2011), doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.107.130403, https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.107.130403. 35

work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.107.130403 2011
[63]

Berrada,et al., Integrated Mach–Zehnder interferometer for Bose–Einstein conden- sates.Nat

T. Berrada,et al., Integrated Mach–Zehnder interferometer for Bose–Einstein conden- sates.Nat. Commun.4(1), 2077 (2013), doi:10.1038/ncomms3077, https://doi.org/10.1038/ ncomms3077

work page doi:10.1038/ncomms3077 2077
[64]

Bertoldi, F

A. Bertoldi, F. Minardi, M. Prevedelli, Phase shift in atom interferometers: Corrections for nonquadratic potentials and finite-duration laser pulses.Phys. Rev. A99, 033619 (2019), doi: 10.1103/PhysRevA.99.033619, https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevA.99.033619

work page doi:10.1103/physreva.99.033619 2019
[65]

Gerlach, O

W. Gerlach, O. Stern,Der experimentelle Nachweis der Richtungsquantelung im Mag- netfeld(Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg), pp. 26–29 (1989), doi:10.1007/ 978-3-642-74813-4 4, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-74813-4 4

work page doi:10.1007/978-3-642-74813-4 1989
[66]

Der experimentelle Nachweis der Richtungsquantelung im Magnetfeld

M. Bauer, The Stern-Gerlach Experiment, Translation of: “Der experimentelle Nachweis der Richtungsquantelung im Magnetfeld” (2023), https://arxiv.org/abs/2301.11343

work page arXiv 2023
[67]

Efron, R

B. Efron, R. J. Tibshirani,An introduction to the bootstrap(Chapman and Hall/CRC) (1994)

work page 1994
[68]

Efron, The Bootstrap and Modern Statistics.J

B. Efron, The Bootstrap and Modern Statistics.J. Am. Stat. Assoc.95(452), 1293– 1296 (2000), doi:10.1080/01621459.2000.10474333, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/ 10.1080/01621459.2000.10474333

work page doi:10.1080/01621459.2000.10474333 2000
[69]

Zoubir, B

A. Zoubir, B. Boashash, The bootstrap and its application in signal processing.IEEE Signal Processing Magazine15(1), 56–76 (1998), doi:10.1109/79.647043

work page doi:10.1109/79.647043 1998
[70]

Rosi,et al., Measurement of the Gravity-Field Curvature by Atom Interferometry.Phys

G. Rosi,et al., Measurement of the Gravity-Field Curvature by Atom Interferometry.Phys. Rev. Lett.114, 013001 (2015), doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.013001, https://link.aps.org/doi/ 10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.013001

work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.114.013001 2015
[71]

Jiang, D.-C

X. Jiang, D.-C. Cheng, Fitting of 3D circles and ellipses using a parameter decomposition approach, inFifth International Conference on 3-D Digital Imaging and Modeling (3DIM’05) (2005), pp. 103–109, doi:10.1109/3DIM.2005.46

work page doi:10.1109/3dim.2005.46 2005
[72]

Chiow, S

S.-w. Chiow, S. Herrmann, S. Chu, H. M¨ uller, Noise-Immune Conjugate Large-Area Atom Interferometers.Physical Review Letters103(5), 050402 (2009), doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett. 103.050402, https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.103.050402. 36

work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett 2009
[73]

Halır, J

R. Halır, J. Flusser, Numerically stable direct least squares fitting of ellipses, inProc. 6th International Conference in Central Europe on Computer Graphics and Visualization. WSCG (Citeseer), vol. 98 (1998), pp. 125–132

work page 1998
[74]

Hill, Ellipse Fitting Algorithm, scipython.com, https://scipython.com/blog/ direct-linear-least-squares-fitting-of-an-ellipse/

C. Hill, Ellipse Fitting Algorithm, scipython.com, https://scipython.com/blog/ direct-linear-least-squares-fitting-of-an-ellipse/

work page
[75]

Ridley, A

K. Ridley, A. Rodgers, An investigation of errors in ellipse-fitting for cold-atom interferometers. EPJ Quantum Technol.11(1), 79 (2024), doi:10.1140/epjqt/s40507-024-00292-4, https://doi. org/10.1140/epjqt/s40507-024-00292-4

work page doi:10.1140/epjqt/s40507-024-00292-4 2024
[76]

Gander, G

W. Gander, G. H. Golub, R. Strebel, Least-squares fitting of circles and ellipses.BIT34(4), 558–578 (1994), doi:10.1007/bf01934268, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01934268

work page doi:10.1007/bf01934268 1994
[77]

S. J. Ahn, W. Rauh, H.-J. Warnecke, Least-squares orthogonal distances fitting of cir- cle, sphere, ellipse, hyperbola, and parabola.Pattern Recognit.34(12), 2283–2303 (2001), doi:10.1016/S0031-3203(00)00152-7, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/ pii/S0031320300001527

work page doi:10.1016/s0031-3203(00)00152-7 2001
[78]

Chen,et al., Proportional-scanning-phase method to suppress the vibrational noise in non- isotope dual-atom-interferometer-based weak-equivalence-principle-test experiments.Phys

X. Chen,et al., Proportional-scanning-phase method to suppress the vibrational noise in non- isotope dual-atom-interferometer-based weak-equivalence-principle-test experiments.Phys. Rev. A90, 023609 (2014), doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.90.023609, https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRevA.90.023609

work page doi:10.1103/physreva.90.023609 2014
[79]

M¨ uller, S.-w

H. M¨ uller, S.-w. Chiow, Q. Long, S. Herrmann, S. Chu, Atom Interferometry with up to 24-Photon-Momentum-Transfer Beam Splitters.Phys. Rev. Lett.100, 180405 (2008), doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.180405, https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.180405

work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.100.180405 2008
[80]

Kovachy,et al., Quantum superposition at the half-metre scale.Nature528(7583), 530–533 (2015), doi:10.1038/nature16155, https://doi.org/10.1038/nature16155

T. Kovachy,et al., Quantum superposition at the half-metre scale.Nature528(7583), 530–533 (2015), doi:10.1038/nature16155, https://doi.org/10.1038/nature16155

work page doi:10.1038/nature16155 2015
[81]

d’ Armagnac de Castanet,et al., Atom interferometry at arbitrary orientations and rotation rates.Nat

Q. d’ Armagnac de Castanet,et al., Atom interferometry at arbitrary orientations and rotation rates.Nat. Commun.15(1), 6406 (2024), doi:10.1038/s41467-024-50804-0, https://doi.org/ 10.1038/s41467-024-50804-0. 37

work page doi:10.1038/s41467-024-50804-0 2024

Showing first 80 references.