pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.12084 · v1 · pith:HJ7ZP772new · submitted 2026-06-10 · ⚛️ physics.atom-ph · hep-ex· nucl-ex

Limit on the nuclear Schiff moment of europium-153

Bassam Nima , Mingyu Fan , Xubo Wang , Sen Wang , En Fu Zhou , Andrew M. Jayich , Jiang Ming Yao , Lan Cheng
show 1 more author
Amar Vutha
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-27 07:41 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.atom-ph hep-exnucl-ex
keywords Schiff momenteuropium-153nuclear spin resonancetime-reversal violationnew physicsprecision measurementsolid state systems
0
0 comments X

The pith

The Schiff moment of europium-153 is limited to less than 1.7 × 10^{-8} e fm³ at 95% confidence.

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

The paper reports an experimental upper bound on the nuclear Schiff moment of ¹⁵³Eu. This moment arises from symmetry-violating nuclear forces and serves as a probe for physics beyond the Standard Model. Researchers achieved the limit by comparing spin resonance frequencies in two ensembles of oppositely polarized europium ions embedded in a crystal. A reader would care because the result directly constrains possible new interactions at energies around a tera-electronvolt.

Core claim

Using nuclear spin resonances in two ensembles of oppositely-polarized ¹⁵³Eu³⁺ ions in a Y₂SiO₅ crystal, the authors place the limit |S(¹⁵³Eu)| < 1.7 × 10^{-8} e fm³ (95% confidence) on the Schiff moment of the ¹⁵³Eu nucleus. This measurement constrains new physics at the TeV energy-scale.

What carries the argument

Comparison of nuclear spin resonance frequencies between oppositely polarized ion ensembles in a crystal to extract the Schiff moment after canceling other effects.

If this is right

  • The bound constrains new physics at the TeV energy scale.
  • It shows that octupolar nuclei in solid crystals can be used for such precision tests.
  • The method cancels many systematic effects through the use of oppositely polarized ensembles.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The solid-state approach might enable larger sample sizes or longer coherence times compared to other techniques.
  • Similar limits on other nuclei could further narrow the parameter space for beyond-Standard-Model theories.
  • Improvements in the experimental sensitivity would directly translate to stronger constraints on high-energy physics.

Load-bearing premise

The frequency difference observed is caused by the Schiff moment once all other systematic contributions have been subtracted or canceled.

What would settle it

Observation of a frequency difference that persists after all known systematics are accounted for but is inconsistent with the reported limit, or a theoretical calculation showing no Schiff moment contribution is needed to explain the data.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.12084 by Amar Vutha, Andrew M. Jayich, Bassam Nima, En Fu Zhou, Jiang Ming Yao, Lan Cheng, Mingyu Fan, Sen Wang, Xubo Wang.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_4.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The Schiff moment of a nucleus is a symmetry-violating nuclear moment that indicates new physics beyond the Standard Model. We place the limit, $|\mathscr{S}({}^{153}$Eu)$| < 1.7 \times 10^{-8}$ $e\,$fm$^3$ (95\% confidence), on the Schiff moment of the $^{153}$Eu nucleus, using nuclear spin resonances in two ensembles of oppositely-polarized $^{153}$Eu$^{3+}$ ions in a Y${}_2$SiO${}_5$ crystal. This measurement using octupolar nuclei in a mm-scale crystal constrains new physics at the TeV energy-scale.

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 / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports an experimental upper limit |S(¹⁵³Eu)| < 1.7 × 10^{-8} e fm³ (95% confidence) on the nuclear Schiff moment of ¹⁵³Eu, obtained from the difference in nuclear spin resonance frequencies between two ensembles of oppositely polarized ¹⁵³Eu³⁺ ions embedded in a Y₂SiO₅ crystal. The result is presented as a constraint on new physics at the TeV scale.

Significance. If the result holds after full validation of systematics, the work would constitute a novel solid-state approach to bounding a CP-violating nuclear moment using octupolar nuclei, offering a potentially scalable complement to existing atomic and molecular searches for beyond-Standard-Model physics.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the quoted 95% CL limit is stated without any reported value for the raw frequency difference between the two ensembles, the size of the systematic uncertainty budget, or the statistical procedure that converts the difference into the bound. These elements are required to substantiate that the difference is produced by the Schiff moment after cancellation of other effects.
  2. [Abstract (and implied methods/results)] The central claim rests on the assumption that magnetic-field gradients, residual electric fields, crystal-strain shifts, polarization-dependent light shifts, and temperature drifts are either canceled by the polarization reversal or subtracted with quantified uncertainty; the provided text supplies neither the measured difference nor the error analysis needed to verify this cancellation at the reported sensitivity level.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the notation \mathscr{S} for the Schiff moment should be checked for consistency with standard usage in the nuclear physics literature.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading and constructive comments on our manuscript. The points raised highlight the need for greater transparency in presenting the raw data, uncertainty analysis, and cancellation of systematics. We address each comment below and have revised the manuscript to incorporate the requested details.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the quoted 95% CL limit is stated without any reported value for the raw frequency difference between the two ensembles, the size of the systematic uncertainty budget, or the statistical procedure that converts the difference into the bound. These elements are required to substantiate that the difference is produced by the Schiff moment after cancellation of other effects.

    Authors: We agree that the abstract, as originally written, is too concise and omits these key elements. In the revised manuscript we have expanded the abstract to report the measured raw frequency difference between the oppositely polarized ensembles, the size of the systematic uncertainty budget, and the statistical procedure (including how the 95% CL bound is derived after accounting for cancellations). The full analysis remains in the Methods and Results sections. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract (and implied methods/results)] The central claim rests on the assumption that magnetic-field gradients, residual electric fields, crystal-strain shifts, polarization-dependent light shifts, and temperature drifts are either canceled by the polarization reversal or subtracted with quantified uncertainty; the provided text supplies neither the measured difference nor the error analysis needed to verify this cancellation at the reported sensitivity level.

    Authors: The original manuscript describes the polarization-reversal technique intended to cancel common-mode systematics, but we acknowledge that the measured frequency difference and the quantitative error budget were not presented with sufficient clarity. We have added an explicit subsection in the Methods that tabulates the residual contributions from each listed effect (magnetic-field gradients, residual electric fields, crystal-strain shifts, polarization-dependent light shifts, and temperature drifts), reports the measured frequency difference, and details the statistical procedure used to convert the difference into the quoted bound. This allows direct verification of the cancellation at the reported sensitivity. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: direct experimental bound

full rationale

The paper reports a laboratory measurement of nuclear spin resonance frequency differences between two oppositely polarized ensembles of 153Eu3+ ions in a crystal, from which an upper limit on the Schiff moment is extracted. No derivation chain, ansatz, fitted parameter renamed as prediction, or self-citation load-bearing step is present in the provided text. The result is a direct experimental constraint whose validity rests on experimental controls and systematic budgets rather than any self-referential construction. This matches the default expectation for an experimental limit paper.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim is an experimental upper bound that rests on standard techniques of nuclear magnetic resonance and atomic physics rather than new free parameters or postulated entities.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The Schiff moment produces a measurable shift in nuclear spin resonance frequencies that can be isolated by comparing oppositely polarized ensembles in the crystal host.
    This assumption links the observed resonance difference directly to the Schiff moment.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5667 in / 1197 out tokens · 28715 ms · 2026-06-27T07:41:25.929747+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

57 extracted references · 1 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    D. E. Morrissey and M. J. Ramsey-Musolf, Electroweak baryogenesis, New J. Phys.14, 125003 (2012)

    2012

  2. [2]

    A. D. Sakharov, Violation of CP Invariance, C Asymmetry, and Baryon Asymmetry of the Universe, Soviet Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Physics Letters5, 24 (1967)

    1967

  3. [3]

    Khriplovich and S

    I. Khriplovich and S. Lamoreaux,CP Violation Without Strangeness: Electric Dipole Moments of Particles, Atoms, and Molecules, Theoretical and Mathematical Physics (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2012)

    2012

  4. [4]

    D. A. Wilkening, N. F. Ramsey, and D. J. Larson, Search for𝑝and𝑡violations in the hyperfine structure of thallium fluoride, Phys. Rev. A29, 425 (1984)

    1984

  5. [5]

    Graner, Y

    B. Graner, Y. Chen, E. G. Lindahl, and B. R. Heckel, Reduced Limit on the Permanent Electric Dipole Moment of 199Hg, Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 161601 (2016)

    2016

  6. [6]

    Bishof, R

    M. Bishof, R. H. Parker, K. G. Bailey, J. P. Greene, R. J. Holt, M. R. Kalita, W. Korsch, N. D. Lemke, Z.-T. Lu, P. Mueller, T. P. O’Connor, J. T. Singh, and M. R. Dietrich, Improved limit on the 225Raelectric dipole moment, Phys. Rev. C94, 025501 (2016)

    2016

  7. [7]

    Allmendinger, I

    F. Allmendinger, I. Engin, W. Heil, S. Karpuk, H.-J. Krause, B. Niederländer, A. Offen- häusser, M. Repetto, U. Schmidt, and S. Zimmer, Measurement of the permanent electric dipole moment of the 129Xeatom, Phys. Rev. A100, 022505 (2019). 13

    2019

  8. [8]

    T. A. Zheng, Y. A. Yang, S.-Z. Wang, J. T. Singh, Z.-X. Xiong, T. Xia, and Z.-T. Lu, Mea- surement of the electric dipole moment of 171Ybatoms in an optical dipole trap, Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 083001 (2022)

    2022

  9. [9]

    L. I. Schiff, Measurability of Nuclear Electric Dipole Moments, Phys. Rev.132, 2194 (1963)

    1963

  10. [10]

    Engel, Nuclear Schiff moments and CP violation, Annual Review Nuclear and Particle Science75, 129 (2025)

    J. Engel, Nuclear Schiff moments and CP violation, Annual Review Nuclear and Particle Science75, 129 (2025)

    2025

  11. [11]

    Vutha, What is a Schiff moment anyway?, Eur

    A. Vutha, What is a Schiff moment anyway?, Eur. J. Phys.47, 035204 (2026)

    2026

  12. [12]

    Auerbach, V

    N. Auerbach, V. V. Flambaum, and V. Spevak, Collective t- and p-odd electromagnetic moments in nuclei with octupole deformations, Phys. Rev. Lett.76, 4316 (1996)

    1996

  13. [13]

    Spevak, N

    V. Spevak, N. Auerbach, and V. V. Flambaum, Enhanced𝑡-odd,𝑝-odd electromagnetic moments in reflection asymmetric nuclei, Phys. Rev. C56, 1357 (1997)

    1997

  14. [14]

    Engel, J

    J. Engel, J. L. Friar, and A. C. Hayes, Nuclear octupole correlations and the enhancement of atomic time-reversal violation, Phys. Rev. C61, 035502 (2000)

    2000

  15. [15]

    B. Nima, M. Fan, A. Radak, A. M. Jayich, and A. Vutha, Precision comagnetometry for T-violation searches in crystals, Phys. Rev. A112, L030801 (2025)

    2025

  16. [16]

    See Appendix, sections A1-A4

  17. [17]

    E. F. Zhou, J. M. Yao, J. Engel, and J. Meng, Effects of beyond-mean-field correlations on nuclear Schiff moments, arXiv:2507.01369 (2025), arXiv:2507.01369 [nucl-th]

    arXiv 2025

  18. [18]

    E. F. Zhou, X. Y. Wu, and J. M. Yao, Multireference covariant density-functional theory for the low-lying states of odd-mass nuclei, Phys. Rev. C109, 034305 (2024)

    2024

  19. [19]

    Engel, M

    J. Engel, M. J. Ramsey-Musolf, and U. van Kolck, Electric Dipole Moments of Nucleons, Nuclei, and Atoms: The Standard Model and Beyond, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.71, 21 (2013), arXiv:1303.2371 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  20. [20]

    O. P. Sushkov, Schiff moments of deformed nuclei, Phys. Rev. C110, 015501 (2024)

    2024

  21. [21]

    V. V. Flambaum and A. J. Mansour, Enhanced nuclear Schiff and electric dipole moments in nuclei with octupole deformation, Phys. Rev. C111, 055501 (2025)

    2025

  22. [22]

    F. Könz, Y. Sun, C. W. Thiel, R. L. Cone, R. W. Equall, R. L. Hutcheson, and R. M. Mac- farlane, Temperature and concentration dependence of optical dephasing, spectral-hole lifetime, and anisotropic absorption inEu 3+:Y2SiO5, Phys. Rev. B68, 085109 (2003). 14

    2003

  23. [23]

    X. Wang, S. Wang, Y. Wu, and L. Cheng, Relativistic Complete Active Space Self- Consistent-Field method with a hierarchy of exact two-component Hamiltonians, J. Chem. Theory Comput.22, 3988 (2026)

    2026

  24. [24]

    T. Chen, C. Zhang, L. Cheng, K. B. Ng, S. Malbrunot-Ettenauer, V. V. Flambaum, Z. Las- ner, J. M. Doyle, P. Yu, C. J. Conn, C. Zhang, N. R. Hutzler, A. M. Jayich, B. Augenbraun, and D. DeMille, Relativistic Exact Two-Component Coupled-Cluster Study of Molecular Sensitivity Factors for Nuclear Schiff Moments, J. Phys. Chem. A128, 6540 (2024)

    2024

  25. [25]

    Chen and M

    J. Chen and M. Afzelius, Optical pumping simulations and optical Rabi frequency mea- surements in 151Eu3+:Y2SiO5 under magnetic field, Phys. Rev. B112, 245144 (2025)

    2025

  26. [26]

    A. C. Vutha and E. A. Hessels, Frequency-offset separated oscillatory fields, Phys. Rev. A92, 052504 (2015)

    2015

  27. [27]

    K. Kato, T. D. G. Skinner, and E. A. Hessels, Ultrahigh-precision measurement of the𝑛= 2triplet𝑃fine structure of atomic helium using frequency-offset separated oscillatory fields, Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 143002 (2018)

    2018

  28. [28]

    Bezginov, T

    N. Bezginov, T. Valdez, M. Horbatsch, A. Marsman, A. Vutha, and E. Hessels, A mea- surement of the atomic hydrogen lamb shift and the proton charge radius, Science365, 1007 (2019)

    2019

  29. [29]

    Heydarizadmotlagh, T

    F. Heydarizadmotlagh, T. D. G. Skinner, K. Kato, M. C. George, and E. A. Hessels, Pre- cision measurement of the𝑛=2triplet𝑃 𝐽=1to𝐽=0fine structure of atomic helium using frequency-offset separated oscillatory fields, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 163001 (2024)

    2024

  30. [30]

    G. J. Feldman and R. D. Cousins, Unified approach to the classical statistical analysis of small signals, Phys. Rev. D57, 3873 (1998)

    1998

  31. [31]

    Mulder, R

    H. Mulder, R. Timmermans, and J. de Vries, Probing the QCD¯𝜃term with paramagnetic molecules, J. High Energ. Phys.232

  32. [32]

    Möller, A

    P. Möller, A. Sierk, T. Ichikawa, and H. Sagawa, Nuclear ground-state masses and defor- mations: Frdm(2012), Atomic Data and Nuclear Data Tables109-110, 1 (2016)

    2012

  33. [33]

    National Nuclear Data Center, NuDat 2 Database (2020),https://www.nndc.bnl.gov/ nudat2

    2020

  34. [34]

    Ring and P

    P. Ring and P. Schuck,The nuclear many-body problem(Springer-Verlag, New York, 1980). 15

    1980

  35. [35]

    E. F. Zhou and J. M. Yao, Microscopic study of low-lying states in odd-mass nuclei for atomic electric dipole moment searches, arXiv:2511.05984 (2025), arXiv:2511.05984 [nucl-th]

    arXiv 2025

  36. [36]

    V. A. Dzuba, V. V. Flambaum, J. S. M. Ginges, and M. G. Kozlov, Electric dipole moments of Hg, Xe, Rn, Ra, Pu, and TlF induced by the nuclear Schiff moment and limits on time- reversal violating interactions, Phys. Rev. A66, 12111 (2002)

    2002

  37. [37]

    L. V. Skripnikov, N. S. Mosyagin, A. V. Titov, and V. V. Flambaum, Actinide and lan- thanide molecules to search for strong CP-violation, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys.22, 18374 (2020)

    2020

  38. [38]

    M. Abe, T. Tsutsui, J. Ekman, M. Hada, and B. Das, Accurate determination of the en- hancement factor X for the nuclear Schiff moment in 205TlF molecule based on the four- component relativistic coupled-cluster theory, Mol. Phys.118, e1767814 (2020)

    2020

  39. [39]

    Hubert and T

    M. Hubert and T. Fleig, Electric dipole moments generated by nuclear Schiff moment interactions: A reassessment of the atoms 129Xe and 199Hg and the molecule 205TlF, Phys. Rev. A106, 22817 (2022)

    2022

  40. [40]

    Sunet al., Recent developments in the PySCF program package, J

    Q. Sunet al., Recent developments in the PySCF program package, J. Chem. Phys.153, 024109 (2020)

    2020

  41. [41]

    K. G. Dyall, Interfacing relativistic and nonrelativistic methods. I. Normalized elimina- tion of the small component in the modified Dirac equation, J. Chem. Phys.106, 9618 (1997)

    1997

  42. [42]

    Kutzelnigg and W

    W. Kutzelnigg and W. Liu, Quasirelativistic theory equivalent to fully relativistic theory, J. Chem. Phys.123, 241102 (2005)

    2005

  43. [43]

    Iliaš and T

    M. Iliaš and T. Saue, An infinite-order two-component relativistic Hamiltonian by a sim- ple one-step transformation, J. Chem. Phys.126, 064102 (2007)

    2007

  44. [44]

    Liu and D

    W. Liu and D. Peng, Exact two-component hamiltonians revisited, J. Chem. Phys.131, 031104 (2009)

    2009

  45. [45]

    Liu and L

    J. Liu and L. Cheng, An atomic mean-field spin-orbit approach within exact two- component theory for a non-perturbative treatment of spin-orbit coupling, J. Chem. Phys. 148, 144108 (2018)

    2018

  46. [46]

    Zhang and L

    C. Zhang and L. Cheng, Atomic Mean-Field Approach within Exact Two-Component The- ory Based on the Dirac–Coulomb–Breit Hamiltonian, J. Phys. Chem. A126, 4537 (2022). 16

    2022

  47. [47]

    Zhang, X2CAMF,https://github.com/warlocat/x2camf, accessed May 28, 2026

    C. Zhang, X2CAMF,https://github.com/warlocat/x2camf, accessed May 28, 2026

    2026

  48. [48]

    Wang, socutils,https://github.com/xubwa/socutils, accessed May 28, 2026

    X. Wang, socutils,https://github.com/xubwa/socutils, accessed May 28, 2026

    2026

  49. [49]

    Sharma, A

    S. Sharma, A. A. Holmes, G. Jeanmairet, A. Alavi, and C. J. Umrigar, Semistochas- tic heat-bath configuration interaction method: Selected configuration interaction with semistochastic perturbation theory, J. Chem. Theory Comput.13, 1595 (2017)

    2017

  50. [50]

    Wang and S

    X. Wang and S. Sharma, Relativistic semistochastic heat-bath configuration interaction, J. Chem. Theory Comput.19, 848 (2023)

    2023

  51. [51]

    J. F. Stantonet al., CFOUR, Coupled-Cluster techniques for Computational Chemistry, a quantum-chemical program package

  52. [52]

    D. A. Matthews, L. Cheng, M. E. Harding, F. Lipparini, S. Stopkowicz, T.-C. Jagau, P. G. Szalay, J. Gauss, and J. F. Stanton, Coupled-cluster techniques for computational chem- istry: The CFOUR program package, J. Chem. Phys.152, 214108 (2020)

    2020

  53. [53]

    A. Jain, S. P. Ong, G. Hautier, W. Chen, W. D. Richards, S. Dacek, S. Cholia, D. Gunter, D. Skinner, G. Ceder, and K. A. Persson, The Materials Project: A materials genome approach to accelerating materials innovation, APL Mater.1, 011002 (2013)

    2013

  54. [54]

    Materials Project, Materials data on Y 2SiO5 (mp-3520) by materials project (2020)

    2020

  55. [55]

    M. Fan, B. Nima, A. Radak, G. Alonso-Álvarez, and A. Vutha, Wideband search for axion- like dark matter using octupolar nuclei in a crystal, Phys. Rev. Lett.136, 121802 (2026)

    2026

  56. [56]

    rf (230 kHz)

    J. de Vries, E. Mereghetti, R. Timmermans, and U. van Kolck, The effective chiral la- grangian from dimension-six parity and time-reversal violation, Annals of Physics338, 50 (2013). 17 APPENDIX A1. CALCULATION OF𝒮 Figure A1 displays energy surfaces of 153Eu on the quadrupole–octupole deformation plane(𝛽 2,𝛽 3)obtained using different levels of MR-CDFT ca...

    2013

  57. [57]

    dir”) are compared with the values obtained using the additivity scheme (denoted with subscripts “add

    is related to ¯𝑔(1) 𝜋 that appears in Equation 3 as ¯𝑔1 ≈𝐹 𝜋 ¯𝑔(1) 𝜋 .) Using this relation, the bound|𝑔 (1) 𝜋 | ≤4.6×10 −10 leads to𝑀 𝑇 ≳9.7TeV. A14 Appendix: Tables TABLE A1. Electric dipole transition strengths𝐵(𝐸1)(in Weisskopf units) of 153Eucalculated with the MR-CDFT approach, in comparison with available experimental data [33]. 𝐽𝑓 →𝐽 𝑖 MR-CDFT Exp...

    1961