Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 66 references

Dual frequency calibration to build a portable vapor cell optical clock with improved stability and without a frequency comb

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper proposes a dual-interferometer vapor-cell clock that calibrates two lasers at once, drops the optical frequency comb, and reaches 1.3 × 10^-15 fractional stability at one second.

desk verdict Clever dual-MZI calibration scheme, but the clock output is a ~73 MHz beat whose fractional stability is ~5e-9, not 1.3e-15; the central claim is contradicted by the paper's own readout. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.04911 v1 pith:D4VHLBBZ submitted 2025-07-07 physics.atom-ph quant-ph

Sreeshna Subhash , Greeshma Gopinath , Sankar Davuluri This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.atom-phquant-ph
keywords opticalatomicclockfrequencycombreplacementdualMach–Zehnderinterferometerfour-wavemixingrubidiumvaporcelldouble-lambdaschemeelectromagneticallyinducedtransparencystability
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper claims that two laser frequencies can be calibrated at the same time by sending them through two rubidium vapor cells wired as a dual Mach–Zehnder interferometer, with four-wave mixing in a double-$\lambda$ level scheme. Once both lasers are locked to their atomic resonances, their difference frequency is a radio-frequency beat that can be counted directly, removing the optical frequency comb from the clock entirely. The claimed payoff is a portable vapor-cell optical clock whose one-second fractional stability reaches the standard quantum limit, $1.3\times10^{-15}\,\sqrt{\mathrm{Hz}^{-1}}$, and stays at $3.3\times10^{-15}\,\sqrt{\mathrm{Hz}^{-1}}$ after Doppler, collisional, and 1 kHz laser-linewidth broadening. This matters because existing compact vapor-cell clocks sit near $10^{-12}$–$10^{-13}$ at one second, so an order-of-magnitude improvement without a comb or cryogenic system would change what can be deployed in the field.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing element is a dual Mach–Zehnder interferometer built around two identical vapor cells, each realizing a double-$\lambda$ (four-level) four-wave-mixing scheme on the $^{87}$Rb D$_2$ line. Classical driving lasers create electromagnetically induced transparency so that weak quantum probe fields pass through the cell; the phase of the transmitted probe field is set by the single-photon detunings $\Delta$ and $\Delta_d$. Because the two interferometers are arranged with the roles of the two frequencies swapped, equality of the two output signals $S$ and $S'$ holds only when $\Delta=\Delta_d$, turning the modulator frequency $\nu_0$ into a controllable variable that the feedback loop re-calibrates. The clock stability then follows from the shot-noise-limited signal-to-noise ratio of the balanced-detection outputs, Eq. (20).

What would settle it

Build the Figure 3 setup with $^{87}$Rb on the D$_2$ line, run the $S=S'$ and $\Delta=\Delta_d\approx0$ feedback loops, and count the beat $\nu-\nu_d$ with a frequency counter; if the measured 1 s Allan deviation of this beat is orders of magnitude above the predicted $1.3\times10^{-15}$, the central timekeeping claim is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the dual-interferometer clock reaches standard quantum limited fractional frequency stability $$\frac{\Delta_s}{\nu_d} = \frac{\sqrt{1+$4e^{{-2 l d_{+r}}$}}}{\nu_d\, l\,(d_{+1}+d_{+2})\sqrt{|\bar{E}|^2}} = 1.3\$times10^{{-15}}$\,\sqrt{\mathrm{Hz}^{-1}}$$ (Eq. 20, Fig. 6). The two Mach–Zehnder interferometers, each containing a rubidium vapor cell, generate signals $S$ and $S'$; forcing $S=S'$ locks the two single-photon detunings $\Delta$ and $\Delta_d$ equal, and a second feedback loop then drives both to zero, simultaneously calibrating the two laser frequencies $\nu$ and $\nu_d$ to the $|a\rangle-|b\rangle$ and $|d\rangle-|b\rangle$ transitions. The beat at $\nu-\nu_d = \omega_{ad}$ lies in the radio-frequency range and replaces the optical frequency comb as the timekeeping signal. With Doppler and collisional broadening at 357 K and a 1 kHz laser linewidth, the claimed optimum stability degrades to $3.3\times10^{-15}\,\sqrt{\mathrm{Hz}^{-1}}$ (Fig. 9b).

Load-bearing premise

The clock's timekeeping stability assumes the radio-frequency beat between the two calibrated lasers carries the same fractional stability computed for the optical frequency in Eq. (20), even though the beat frequency is thousands of times smaller than the optical frequency.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A portable vapor-cell clock could reach $1.3\times10^{-15}$ at 1 s, roughly an order of magnitude better than the $10^{-13}$ level of current compact two-photon and CPT clocks.
  • Removing the optical frequency comb eliminates its femtosecond laser and self-referencing calibration, cutting power and size, which matters for satellite and field deployment.
  • The $S=S'$ locking loop also corrects drift or malfunction of the frequency shifter (AOM/EOM/EOFS), because it re-adjusts the modulator frequency to restore $\Delta=\Delta_d$.
  • The clock is thermally tolerant: at $T=357\pm5$ K with collisions included, the predicted stability changes only from $1.719\times10^{-15}$ to $1.728\times10^{-15}\sqrt{\mathrm{Hz}^{-1}}$.
  • Commercially available 1 kHz-linewidth lasers are sufficient for the $3.3\times10^{-15}$ level, avoiding the need for ultranarrow or cryogenic-stabilized sources.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial: The same dual-interferometer calibration should transfer to other alkali D2 lines or any four-level system with comparable decay rates; testing on Cs would check whether the $S=S'$ condition is as robust as claimed.
  • Editorial: The shot-noise scaling $1/\sqrt{|\bar{E}|^2}$ suggests that injecting squeezed light or N00N states into the probe ports could push stability below the standard quantum limit, a path the authors note but do not develop.
  • Editorial: The $S=S'$ locking condition is a self-calibrating servo for the frequency shifter, which could find use outside clocks, for example in stabilizing modulators in spectroscopy or lidar systems.
  • Editorial: Counting the radio-frequency beat directly makes the clock's long-term accuracy hinge on the absolute value of the excited-state hyperfine splitting $\omega_{ad}$; the paper gives stability but not an accuracy budget, so an absolute-frequency measurement of the beat would be a natural next experiment.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a dual Mach-Zehnder interferometer scheme using a double-lambda system in a hot 87Rb vapor cell to simultaneously calibrate two laser frequencies via electromagnetically induced transparency / four-wave mixing. The two calibrated lasers are then heterodyned to produce a radio-frequency beat at ν−νd = ω_ad, which is counted for timekeeping, eliminating the need for an optical frequency comb. The authors derive a standard-quantum-limited fractional frequency stability Δs/νd = 1.3×10^-15 sqrt(Hz^-1) at the optical frequency, worsening to 3.3×10^-15 sqrt(Hz^-1) after Doppler, collisional, and laser-linewidth broadening.

Significance. If the central claim were correct, the paper would be a substantial advance: a compact, comb-free vapor-cell clock with 1e-15 fractional stability would be significant for portable and space-based clocks. The manuscript contains a detailed quantum Langevin treatment, analytic expressions for the signal and noise, and numerical parameter scans; the explicit treatment of Doppler, collisional, and linewidth broadening is also a strength. However, as detailed in the major comments, the timekeeping readout is inconsistent with the claimed stability, so the significance as stated is not realized.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section III E and Eq. (20)] The headline stability Δs/νd = 1.3e-15 sqrt(Hz^-1) in Eq. (20) is computed at the optical frequency νd/2π = 3.84e14 Hz, but the clock output actually counted for timekeeping is the beat ν−νd = ω_ad, described in Section III E as a radio-frequency signal (about 72.9 MHz for the 5P3/2 F=0–F=1 interval). A frequency error δν in either calibrated optical field appears directly as the same absolute error in the beat; therefore the fractional stability of the counted beat is δν/ω_ad = (δν/νd)(νd/ω_ad). Using the paper's optimum δν/νd = 1.3e-15 sqrt(Hz^-1) and νd/ω_ad ≈ 5.3e6 gives approximately 6.9e-9 sqrt(Hz^-1), not 1.3e-15. The statement in Section V that the stability "is determined by laser frequency νd and not by radio frequency ν−νd" is not valid for a heterodyne beat: subtracting two optical frequencies does not divide them, and an electronic divider applied after the beat would only multiply the fractional error by the division factor. Since the elimination of the OFC rests on this beat being the timekeeping output, the central claim of the paper is unsupported.
  2. [Section III C and Section V] The calibration principle relies on the equality S = S' to enforce Δ = Δd. The derivation assumes identical vapor cells: same length l, atomic density N, coupling constant gc, decay rates, and Rabi frequency (γ = γd, |Ē|^2 = |Ē'|^2). In Section V the authors state that MZI-2 need not be identical and that similar classical properties suffice, but no quantitative analysis is given for the effect of unequal cell length, density, or field intensity on the relation S = S' ⇔ Δ = Δd. If the two cells differ, the equality of signals does not imply equality of detunings, and the proposed simultaneous calibration acquires a systematic offset. This is load-bearing for the calibration method and should be analyzed explicitly.
  3. [Section III E] The timekeeping procedure described in Section III E is to count the oscillations of the 72.9 MHz beat signal. A simple one-second count of a 72.9 MHz signal has a quantization-limited fractional resolution of about 1.4e-8, far above the claimed 1.3e-15 stability. Even if a phase-tracking or interpolating counter is intended, the manuscript does not describe how the radio-frequency readout can achieve a fractional resolution of 1e-15, and the stability of the beat itself is limited by the heterodyne issue in the first comment.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Section III D] The simplified picture is stated to be valid for |Ω|^2 >> γ^2, but the optimum condition 4|Ω|^2 = κγ_bc l is later used; the consistency of this condition with the strong-drive approximation should be stated more explicitly.
  2. [Eq. (25) and Eq. (26)] The notation d±D for the Doppler-broadened coefficients is easily confused with a differential; consider renaming the broadened coefficients (e.g., d±,th) to improve readability.
  3. [Section V] Section V contains malformed state kets, e.g., "⟩d′−⟩b′" and "⟩a−⟩b", which should read |d′⟩−|b′⟩ and |a⟩−|b⟩.
  4. [Figure 6] The caption of Figure 6 appears truncated ("Δopt/νd 10"); the axis label and units should be given in full.
  5. [References] Reference [4] is listed as "Demo Journal"; this is not a recognized journal and the citation should be verified or replaced.
  6. [Abstract] The stability unit appears inconsistently as sqrt(Hz^-1) and Hz^-1/2; one notation should be used throughout.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No circular reduction found: the stability estimate is a parameterized calculation from stated physical inputs, not a fit or self-citation chain; the only self-citation is a minor non-load-bearing aside.

full rationale

Walking the derivation chain: Eq. (16) and Eq. (19) give each Mach-Zehnder interferometer's signal and noise from the Heisenberg-Langevin equations, and Eq. (20) is the resulting SNR=1 sensitivity divided by nu_d. Equations (23)-(24) follow by explicit algebraic substitution of the stated optimum condition 4|Omega|^2 = kappa*gamma_bc*l, with the numerical 1.3e-15 obtained from stated Rb D2 parameters (gamma/2pi = 6.06 MHz, nu_d/2pi = 3.84e14 Hz, |Ebar|^2/2 = 2.13e15 Hz, cell geometry, number density). The target stability is therefore not fitted into the calculation, and the result is not a renamed input. The dual-interferometer locking condition S = S' <=> Delta = Delta_d is a derived consequence of the symmetry d+r = d'+r and d+j = d'+j under gamma ~ gamma_d, not an ansatz imported from a self-citation. The only self-citation is Ref. [51], used in a speculative aside about non-classical states, which is not load-bearing for Eq. (20). The reader-flagged beat issue is real but is not circularity: Section III E uses the counted beat nu - nu_d = omega_ad for timekeeping whereas Eq. (20) normalizes by nu_d, so the claimed fractional stability does not apply directly to the counted beat; this is a frequency-division denominator mismatch and a correctness risk, not a reduction of the prediction to its own inputs. Score 2 reflects only the minor non-load-bearing self-citation; there is no self-definitional, fitted-input, or self-citation-chain circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

All quantities in the stability estimate are inputs chosen by hand or optimized, not fitted to a target stability, so the derivation is not circular in the usual sense. The decisive problem is the false assumption that the RF difference beat inherits the optical fractional stability; the symmetry and degeneracy assumptions are additional burdens.

free parameters (6)
  • gamma_bc = gamma_da = 10^-3 gamma = about 3.8e4 s^-1
    Hand-set in the Fig. 4 caption; appears in the optimum condition and in the stability formula Eq. (20).
  • Drive Rabi frequency Omega = Optimized via 4|Omega|^2 = kappa gamma_bc l
    Chosen to minimize stability in Fig. 6; the numerical value is not stated explicitly.
  • Cell length l and atom density N = l = 0.11 m, N = 2e18 m^-3
    Set in Section III A; these determine the optical depth kappa l.
  • Probe beam intensity |Ebar|^2/2 = 2.13e15 Hz, corresponding to 0.54 mW
    Input to the shot-noise denominator of Eq. (20); chosen as the operating power.
  • Collisional pumping rate gamma_cl = gamma_cl = gamma_bc
    Assumed in Fig. 9a following Ref. [55]; affects the broadened stability.
  • Laser linewidth zeta = 1 kHz for the final broadened figure
    Varied from 10 Hz to 1 kHz; the headline broadened stability uses the 1 kHz value.
assumptions (6)
  • standard math Heisenberg-Langevin formalism with Markovian reservoirs
    Invoked in Section II and Appendix VI to write the equations of motion; standard quantum optics background.
  • standard math Rotating wave approximation and weak-field first-order perturbation
    Used to linearize the dynamics and obtain Eqs. (10)-(11); stated in Section II.
  • domain assumption Ground sublevels |b> and |c> are degenerate with no magnetic field
    The scheme drives both lower transitions with the same frequency nu_d; any Zeeman splitting would break the two-photon resonance condition. This is not explicitly discussed.
  • ad hoc to paper The two vapor cells have identical l, N, g_c, and gamma = gamma_d
    Required for S = S' implying Delta = Delta_d in Section III C; the authors only say the classical properties should be similar, without a quantitative tolerance analysis.
  • ad hoc to paper A radio-frequency difference beat nu - nu_d can serve as the clock output with optical fractional stability
    Section III E states that this beat is counted to define the second. This is the load-bearing premise, and it is false because a difference frequency does not divide the carrier.
  • domain assumption Doppler shifts cancel for co-propagating double-lambda fields
    Section IV A relies on collinear propagation to keep two-photon resonance for moving atoms.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Dual frequency calibration to build a portable vapor cell optical clock with improved stability and without a frequency comb." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/D4VHLBBZ

@misc{pith2026250704911,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Dual frequency calibration to build a portable vapor cell optical clock with improved stability and without a frequency comb},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/D4VHLBBZ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.04911}
}
abstract

This article theoretically proposes a new dual interferometer technique to accurately calibrate two laser frequencies simultaneously using four-wave mixing in an alkali metal vapor cell. The two frequency-calibrated lasers are mixed to create a beat signal at radio frequency to build a portable optical atomic clock (OAC) without an optical frequency comb (OFC). Removal of the OFC improves the portability of OAC, while the dual interferometer setup enhances the one second stability to $1.3\times 10^{-15}$, which is better than the current portable OAC. Thermal noise in the OAC is minimized by choosing the double-lambda atomic scheme with co-propagating laser fields. Using D2 transition of Rb-87, the standard quantum limited frequency sensitivity and stability of the OAC are estimated as $3.2\;\sqrt{\mbox{Hz}}$, and $1.3\times10^{-15}\sqrt{\mbox{Hz}^{-1}}$, respectively. After considering broadening effects due to $357\,$K temperature and collisions, the optimum stability of the OAC is reduced to $3.3\times10^{-15}\sqrt{\mbox{Hz}^{-1}}$ for a laser with $1\,$KHz linewidth and $0.54$ mW power at the input of the vapor cell.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.04911 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. shows an atomic scheme with energy level |x⟩ (x = a,b, c,d) and energy h¯ωx, where h¯ is the reduced Planck constant and ωx/2π is the frequency. The transitions |b⟩ − |a⟩ and |c⟩ − |a⟩ are coupled to two weak quantum fields that have mutually orthogonal circular polarizations. The propagation of each quantum field is described by using quasi mono-chromatic annihilation operators [40, 41] Σrcˆr j, j = 1,2, with wave … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2: The atomic levels are same as in Figure. 1. The transitions [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3: Schematics of the optical atomic clock. Vapor cell VC1 (VC2) containing Rb atoms simulating atom-laser interaction [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: Variation of real part of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: The quantum field entering the vapor cell in arm-3 is described as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: Variation of real part of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6: Variation of OAC stability as a function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7: Variation of (7a) real part of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8: Variation of OAC stability as a function of temperature. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9: (a) Variation of OAC stability as a function of temperature for different [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10: Variation of clock stability as a function of temperature for different [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_10.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

66 extracted references · 60 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    A. D. Ludlow, M. M. Boyd, J. Ye, E. Peik, and P. O. Schmidt, Optical atomic clocks, Rev. Mod. Phys.87, 637 (2015)

    2015

  2. [2]

    Assuming the quantum fields are weak, they are treated perturbatively up to first order (represented by the superscript ‘(1)’) in Eq. (3). In this work, we further assume an undepleted drive approximation. The output quantum fields from the vapor cell are determined by the atomic operators ˆσ (1) ba and ˆσ (1) ca . The dynamics of ˆσxy can be obtained fro...

    work page

  3. [3]

    All the primed variables have the same meaning as the unprimed variables but for the atom-laser interaction shown in Figure. 2. We further assumed that the sample length l, atomic number density, and coupling constant gc are same in Figure. 1 and Figure. 2. III. CLOCK DESIGN FIG. 3: Schematics of the optical atomic clock. Vapor cell VC1 (VC2) containing R...

    work page

  4. [4]

    N. Poli, C. W. Oates, P. Gill, and G. M. Tino, Optical atomic clocks, La Rivista del Nuovo Cimento 36, 555 (2013)

    work page 2013

  5. [5]

    J. D. Roslund, A. Cing ¨oz, W. D. Lunden, G. B. Partridge, A. S. Kowligy, F. Roller, D. B. Sheredy, G. E. Skulason, J. P. Song, J. R. Abo-Shaeer, and M. M. Boyd, Optical clocks at sea, Nature 628, 736 (2024)

    work page 2024

  6. [6]

    T. N. Bandi, A comprehensive overview of atomic clocks and their applications, Demo Journal 1, 40 (2024)

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    Schioppo, R

    M. Schioppo, R. C. Brown, W. F. McGrew, N. Hinkley, R. J. Fasano, K. Beloy, T. H. Yoon, G. Milani, D. Nicolodi, J. A. Sherman, N. B. Phillips, C. W. Oates, and A. D. Ludlow, Ultrastable optical clock with two cold-atom ensembles, Nature Photonics11, 48 (2017)

    2017

  8. [8]

    Bothwell, D

    T. Bothwell, D. Kedar, E. Oelker, J. M. Robinson, S. L. Bromley, W. L. Tew, J. Ye, and C. J. Kennedy, Jila sri optical lattice clock with uncertainty of 2.0 ×10−18, Metrologia 56, 065004 (2019)

    work page 2019

Show all 66 references
  1. [9]

    W. F. McGrew, X. Zhang, R. J. Fasano, S. A. Sch ¨affer, K. Beloy, D. Nicolodi, R. C. Brown, N. Hinkley, G. Milani, M. Schioppo, T. H. Yoon, and A. D. Ludlow, Atomic clock performance enabling geodesy below the centimetre level, Nature564, 87 (2018)

    2018

  2. [10]

    S. M. Brewer, J.-S. Chen, A. M. Hankin, E. R. Clements, C. W. Chou, D. J. Wineland, D. B. Hume, and D. R. Leibrandt,27al+ quantum- logic clock with a systematic uncertainty below 10−18, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 033201 (2019)

    2019

  3. [11]

    Derevianko, V

    A. Derevianko, V . A. Dzuba, and V . V . Flambaum, Highly charged ions as a basis of optical atomic clockwork of exceptional accuracy, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 180801 (2012). 17

    2012

  4. [12]

    Lange, N

    R. Lange, N. Huntemann, J. M. Rahm, C. Sanner, H. Shao, B. Lipphardt, C. Tamm, S. Weyers, and E. Peik, Improved limits for violations of local position invariance from atomic clock comparisons, Phys. Rev. Lett.126, 011102 (2021)

    2021

  5. [13]

    C. A. Holliman, M. Fan, A. Contractor, S. M. Brewer, and A. M. Jayich, Radium ion optical clock, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 033202 (2022)

    2022

  6. [14]

    Zheng, J

    X. Zheng, J. Dolde, V . Lochab, B. N. Merriman, H. Li, and S. Kolkowitz, Differential clock comparisons with a multiplexed optical lattice clock, Nature 602, 425 (2022)

    2022

  7. [15]

    D. Yu, J. Zhang, S. Zhang, and J. Chen, Prospects for an active optical clock based on cavityless lasing, Advanced Quantum Technologies 7, 2300308 (2024)

    2024

  8. [16]

    Ushijima, M

    I. Ushijima, M. Takamoto, M. Das, T. Ohkubo, and H. Katori, Cryogenic optical lattice clocks, Nature Photonics 9, 185 (2015)

    2015

  9. [17]

    C. W. Chou, D. B. Hume, T. Rosenband, and D. J. Wineland, Optical clocks and relativity, Science 329, 1630 (2010)

    2010

  10. [18]

    Z. L. Newman, V . Maurice, T. Drake, J. R. Stone, T. C. Briles, D. T. Spencer, C. Fredrick, Q. Li, D. Westly, B. R. Ilic, B. Shen, M.-G. Suh, K. Y . Yang, C. Johnson, D. M. S. Johnson, L. Hollberg, K. J. Vahala, K. Srinivasan, S. A. Diddams, J. Kitching, S. B. Papp, and M. T. ...

    2019

  11. [19]

    H. N. Hausser, J. Keller, T. Nordmann, N. M. Bhatt, J. Kiethe, H. Liu, I. M. Richter, M. von Boehn, J. Rahm, S. Weyers, E. Benkler, B. Lipphardt, S. D ¨orscher, K. Stahl, J. Klose, C. Lisdat, M. Filzinger, N. Huntemann, E. Peik, and T. E. Mehlst ¨aubler, 115in+−172yb+ coulomb ...

    2025

  12. [20]

    C. W. Chou, D. B. Hume, J. C. J. Koelemeij, D. J. Wineland, and T. Rosenband, Frequency comparison of two high-accuracy al+ optical clocks, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 070802 (2010)

    2010

  13. [21]

    Huang, B

    Y . Huang, B. Zhang, M. Zeng, Y . Hao, Z. Ma, H. Zhang, H. Guan, Z. Chen, M. Wang, and K. Gao, Liquid-nitrogen-cooled Ca+ optical clock with systematic uncertainty of 3 × 10−18, Phys. Rev. Appl. 17, 034041 (2022)

    2022

  14. [22]

    K. W. Martin, G. Phelps, N. D. Lemke, M. S. Bigelow, B. Stuhl, M. Wojcik, M. Holt, I. Coddington, M. W. Bishop, and J. H. Burke, Compact optical atomic clock based on a two-photon transition in rubidium, Phys. Rev. Appl. 9, 014019 (2018)

    2018

  15. [23]

    T. Shi, Q. Wei, X. Qin, Z. Liu, K. Chen, S. Cao, H. Shi, Z. Liu, and J. Chen, Dual-frequency optical-microwave atomic clocks based on cesium atoms, Photon. Res. 12, 1972 (2024)

    2024

  16. [24]

    Q. Hao, S. Yang, J. Ruan, P. Yun, and S. Zhang, Integrated pulsed optically pumped rb atomic clock with frequency stability of 10 −15, Phys. Rev. Appl. 21, 024003 (2024)

    2024

  17. [25]

    Phelps, N

    G. Phelps, N. Lemke, C. Erickson, J. Burke, and K. Martin, Compact optical clock with 5 × 10−13 instability at 1 s, NA VIGATION65, 49 (2018)

    2018

  18. [26]

    Z. L. Newman, V . Maurice, C. Fredrick, T. Fortier, H. Leopardi, L. Hollberg, S. A. Diddams, J. Kitching, and M. T. Hummon, High- performance, compact optical standard, Opt. Lett. 46, 4702 (2021)

    2021

  19. [27]

    Callejo, A

    M. Callejo, A. Mursa, R. Vicarini, E. Klinger, Q. Tanguy, J. Millo, N. Passilly, and R. Boudot, Short-term stability of a microcell optical reference based on the rb atom two-photon transition at 778 nm, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 42, 151 (2025)

    2025

  20. [28]

    K. W. Martin, B. Stuhl, J. Eugenio, M. S. Safronova, G. Phelps, J. H. Burke, and N. D. Lemke, Frequency shifts due to stark effects on a rubidium two-photon transition, Phys. Rev. A 100, 023417 (2019)

    2019

  21. [29]

    Yudin, M

    V . Yudin, M. Y . Basalaev, A. Taichenachev, J. Pollock, Z. Newman, M. Shuker, A. Hansen, M. Hummon, R. Boudot, E. Donley, and J. Kitching, General methods for suppressing the light shift in atomic clocks using power modulation, Phys. Rev. Appl. 14, 024001 (2020)

    2020

  22. [30]

    Gerginov and K

    V . Gerginov and K. Beloy, Two-photon optical frequency reference with active ac stark shift cancellation, Phys. Rev. Appl. 10, 014031 (2018)

    2018

  23. [31]

    M. A. Hafiz, G. Coget, E. D. Clercq, and R. Boudot, Doppler-free spectroscopy on the cs d1 line with a dual-frequency laser, Opt. Lett. 41, 2982 (2016)

    2016

  24. [32]

    N. D. Lemke, K. W. Martin, R. Beard, B. K. Stuhl, A. J. Metcalf, and J. D. Elgin, Measurement of optical rubidium clock frequency spanning 65 days, Sensors 22, 10.3390/s22051982 (2022)

    2022 doi

  25. [33]

    V . I. Yudin, M. Y . Basalaev, A. V . Taichenachev, O. N. Prudnikov, D. A. Radnatarov, S. M. Kobtsev, S. M. Ignatovich, and M. N. Skvortsov, Frequency shift caused by the line-shape asymmetry of the resonance of coherent population trapping, Phys. Rev. A 108, 013103 (2023)

    2023

  26. [34]

    Abdel Hafiz and R

    M. Abdel Hafiz and R. Boudot, A coherent population trapping Cs vapor cell atomic clock based on push-pull optical pumping, Journal of Applied Physics 118, 124903 (2015)

    2015

  27. [35]

    V . I. Yudin, A. V . Taichenachev, M. Y . Basalaev, and D. V . Kovalenko, Dynamic regime of coherent population trapping and optimization of frequency modulation parameters in atomic clocks, Opt. Express 25, 2742 (2017)

    2017

  28. [36]

    R. Fang, C. Han, X. Jiang, Y . Qiu, Y . Guo, M. Zhao, J. Huang, B. Lu, and C. Lee, Temporal analog of fabry-p´erot resonator via coherent population trapping, npj Quantum Information 7, 143 (2021)

    2021

  29. [37]

    S. F. Huelga, C. Macchiavello, T. Pellizzari, A. K. Ekert, M. B. Plenio, and J. I. Cirac, Improvement of frequency standards with quantum entanglement, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 3865 (1997). 18

    1997

  30. [38]

    Perrella, P

    C. Perrella, P. Light, J. Anstie, F. Baynes, R. White, and A. Luiten, Dichroic two-photon rubidium frequency standard, Phys. Rev. Appl. 12, 054063 (2019)

    2019

  31. [39]

    Holzwarth, M

    R. Holzwarth, M. Zimmermann, T. Udem, and T. Hansch, Optical clockworks and the measurement of laser frequencies with a mode- locked frequency comb, IEEE Journal of Quantum Electronics 37, 1493 (2001)

    2001

  32. [40]

    Fortier and E

    T. Fortier and E. Baumann, 20 years of developments in optical frequency comb technology and applications, Communications Physics 2, 153 (2019)

    2019

  33. [41]

    N. B. Phillips, A. V . Gorshkov, and I. Novikova, Light storage in an optically thick atomic ensemble under conditions of electromagneti- cally induced transparency and four-wave mixing, Phys. Rev. A83, 063823 (2011)

    2011

  34. [42]

    Abram, Quantum theory of light propagation: Linear medium, Phys

    I. Abram, Quantum theory of light propagation: Linear medium, Phys. Rev. A 35, 4661 (1987)

    1987

  35. [43]

    K. J. Blow, R. Loudon, S. J. D. Phoenix, and T. J. Shepherd, Continuum fields in quantum optics, Phys. Rev. A 42, 4102 (1990)

    1990

  36. [44]

    P. D. Drummond and S. J. Carter, Quantum-field theory of squeezing in solitons, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 4, 1565 (1987)

    1987

  37. [45]

    Fleischhauer and M

    M. Fleischhauer and M. O. Scully, Quantum sensitivity limits of an optical magnetometer based on atomic phase coherence, Phys. Rev. A 49, 1973 (1994)

    1994

  38. [46]

    Gardiner and P

    C. Gardiner and P. Zoller, Quantum noise: a handbook of Markovian and non-Markovian quantum stochastic methods with applications to quantum optics (Springer Science & Business Media, 2004)

    2004

  39. [47]

    Boller, A

    K.-J. Boller, A. Imamo ˘glu, and S. E. Harris, Observation of electromagnetically induced transparency, Phys. Rev. Lett.66, 2593 (1991)

    1991

  40. [48]

    L. E. Drain and B. C. Moss, The frequency shifting of laser light by electro-optic techniques, Opto-electronics 4, 429 (1972)

    1972

  41. [49]

    Z. Zeng, Z. Zhang, L. Zhang, S. Zhang, Y . Zhang, B. Sun, and Y . Liu, Stable and finely tunable optoelectronic oscillator based on stimulated brillouin scattering and an electro-optic frequency shift, Appl. Opt. 59, 589 (2020)

    2020

  42. [50]

    R. J. Jones, K. D. Moll, M. J. Thorpe, and J. Ye, Phase-coherent frequency combs in the vacuum ultraviolet via high-harmonic generation inside a femtosecond enhancement cavity, Phys. Rev. Lett.94, 193201 (2005)

    2005

  43. [51]

    Schulte, C

    M. Schulte, C. Lisdat, P. O. Schmidt, U. Sterr, and K. Hammerer, Prospects and challenges for squeezing-enhanced optical atomic clocks, Nature Communications 11, 5955 (2020)

    2020

  44. [52]

    D. M. Farkas, A. Zozulya, and D. Z. Anderson, A compact microchip atomic clock based on all-optical interrogation of ultra-cold trapped rb atoms, Applied Physics B 101, 705 (2010)

    2010

  45. [53]

    Gopinath, Y

    G. Gopinath, Y . Li, and S. Davuluri, Continuous variable entanglement between propagating optical modes using optomechanics, EPJ Quantum Technology 11, 41 (2024)

    2024

  46. [54]

    Pezz `e, A

    L. Pezz `e, A. Smerzi, M. K. Oberthaler, R. Schmied, and P. Treutlein, Quantum metrology with nonclassical states of atomic ensembles, Rev. Mod. Phys. 90, 035005 (2018)

    2018

  47. [55]

    J. D. Weinstein, K. Beloy, and A. Derevianko, Entangling the lattice clock: Towards heisenberg-limited timekeeping, Phys. Rev. A 81, 030302 (2010)

    2010

  48. [56]

    Finkelstein, S

    R. Finkelstein, S. Bali, O. Firstenberg, and I. Novikova, A practical guide to electromagnetically induced transparency in atomic vapor, New Journal of Physics 25, 035001 (2023)

    2023

  49. [57]

    L.-C. Ha, X. Zhang, N. Dao, and K. R. Overstreet, D1 line broadening and hyperfine frequency shift coefficients for 87Rb and 133Cs in ne, ar, and n2, Phys. Rev. A 103, 022826 (2021)

    2021

  50. [58]

    C. J. McKinstrie, T. J. Stirling, and A. S. Helmy, Laser linewidths: tutorial, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 38, 3837 (2021)

    2021

  51. [59]

    M. O. Scully and M. S. Zubairy, Quantum Optics (Cambridge University Press, 1997)

    1997

  52. [60]

    M. J. McDonnell, D. N. Stacey, and A. M. Steane, Laser linewidth effects in quantum state discrimination by electromagnetically induced transparency, Phys. Rev. A70, 053802 (2004)

    2004

  53. [61]

    L. Yang, B. Wei, H. Xu, Z. Wang, and X. Jin, Linewidth compression of dfb laser with a high ratio based on sil and pdh, IEEE Photonics Technology Letters 36, 23 (2024)

    2024

  54. [62]

    Zhang, D

    J. Zhang, D. Wei, C. Xie, and K. Peng, Characteristics of absorption and dispersion for rubidium d2 lines with the modulation transfer spectrum, Opt. Express 11, 1338 (2003)

    2003

  55. [63]

    J. Ye, L. S. Ma, and J. L. Hall, Molecular iodine clock, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 270801 (2001)

    2001

  56. [64]

    Nevsky, R

    A. Nevsky, R. Holzwarth, J. Reichert, T. Udem, T. H¨ansch, J. Zanthier, H. Walther, H. Schnatz, F. Riehle, P. Pokasov, M. Skvortsov, and S. Bagayev, Frequency comparison and absolute frequency measurement of i2-stabilized lasers at 532 nm, Optics Communications 192, 263 (2001)

    2001

  57. [65]

    Lurie, F

    A. Lurie, F. N. Baynes, J. D. Anstie, P. S. Light, F. Benabid, T. M. Stace, and A. N. Luiten, High-performance iodine fiber frequency standard, Opt. Lett. 36, 4776 (2011)

    2011

  58. [66]

    Perrella, P

    C. Perrella, P. S. Light, J. D. Anstie, F. N. Baynes, F. Benabid, and A. N. Luiten, Two-color rubidium fiber frequency standard, Opt. Lett. 38, 2122 (2013)

    2013

Pith tools

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