Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 48 references

Correlated comagnetometry for precision measurements

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-01 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Two alkali species in one cell cancel magnetic noise at high frequencies and read out the signal's coupling structure.

desk verdict A genuinely new dual-alkali correlated readout that plausibly cancels high-frequency magnetic noise; the central stability assumption is untested but the proposal is honest and deserves refereeing. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.18221 v1 pith:OWLXTL3J submitted 2026-07-20 hep-ph physics.atom-ph

Yossi Rosenzweig , Yevgeny Kats , Eli Sarid , Menachem Givon , Yonathan Japha , Ron Folman This is my paper
classification hep-phphysics.atom-ph
keywords comagnetometrymagneticnoisecancellationdual-alkalicellspin-exchangeopticalpumpingWienerfilteraxiondarkmattercouplingratioprecisionmeasurement
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

Comagnetometers suppress magnetic noise by self-compensation with a noble-gas spin species, but this only works at low frequencies. This paper proposes a way to cancel the magnetic background at higher frequencies too: read out two alkali species in the same cell and subtract one channel from the other using a measured least-squares transfer function. Because both alkalis see the same magnetic field, the magnetic background is common-mode and cancels, while a non-magnetic signal that couples to the two species differently survives. In simulations of a transient axion-like dark-matter signal, the correlated background drops by about a factor of 28 in the 70–120 Hz band, the noise floor reaches the uncorrelated readout level, and the signal-to-noise ratio improves by a factor of 15. The paper also shows that the phase difference between the two alkali responses is calibration free and encodes the neutron-to-proton coupling ratio of the new field, allowing a single cell to distinguish between dark-matter model classes.

What carries the argument

The carrying mechanism is the shared magnetic transfer function of the two alkali channels, used in two observables. First, the field-referred signals are combined as r = x_K − Ĥ x_Rb, where Ĥ is a least-squares (Wiener) transfer function estimated from signal-free records; any error in the magnetic transfer functions folds into Ĥ and cancels, making the subtraction self-calibrating. Second, the inter-species phase difference Δφ is formed from the two Faraday-rotation phases; multiplicative prefactors cancel in each phase, making Δφ calibration free and independent of common-mode intensity fluctuations. The response of the coupled 87Rb–39K–3He spin system is modelled by coupled Bloch equatio

What would settle it

Run the proposed dual-alkali cell with a calibrated 70–120 Hz magnetic tone and measure the residual after Wiener subtraction over a 200 s record; if the residual floor stays above the combined readout and spin-projection noise of about 0.22 fT/√Hz because the transfer-ratio drifts by more than about 3%, the central cancellation claim fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a correlated measurement of two same-cell alkali species makes a differential readout an excellent common-mode rejection filter for the magnetic background in principle at all frequencies within the linear regime. Because 87Rb and 39K share the same magnetic field and electronic gyromagnetic ratio, a magnetic perturbation enters both channels with nearly identical transfer functions, while an exotic spin-dependent field enters through species-specific effective couplings that depend on the nuclear spin content. Subtracting the 87Rb-referred channel from the 39K-referred channel with an adaptively measured Wiener coefficient cancels the correlated magnetic background

Load-bearing premise

The cancellation only works if the ratio of the two alkali channels' magnetic transfer functions stays constant within a few percent over the time between recalibrations; the paper argues spin-exchange locking provides this stability, but it is not yet demonstrated in experiment.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the cancellation works as simulated, any magnetometer search limited by correlated magnetic noise above the noble-gas Larmor frequency becomes readout-limited instead, without needing to improve the magnetic shields.
  • A detected exotic signal would carry a calibration-free measurement of the neutron-to-proton coupling ratio R from a single vapor cell; comparing this value to model predictions can distinguish between the main axion model classes or rule both out.
  • The method is not specific to axions: any perturbation that couples to the two alkali species differently than a magnetic field does will survive the common-mode subtraction, including electron electric dipole moments and species-specific light shifts.
  • The tunable antiresonance, with its exact-null locus, provides a second experimental handle: changing the applied longitudinal field moves the null frequency, which can verify the coupling model and enhance sensitivity near the null.
  • Because the subtraction requires only modest additions to a standard comagnetometer—a second probe laser, its polarimetry chain, and a dichroic beamsplitter—existing devices could be retrofitted.

Reading between the lines

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

  • One extension the paper does not develop: the Wiener residual itself could serve as a live monitor of transfer-ratio drift, triggering recalibration when the residual floor rises, which would relax the stability requirement in practice.
  • Beyond the paper: the claimed suppression factor scales with the ratio of correlated to uncorrelated noise, so in a less shielded or noisier environment the gain could be larger; this might enable useful high-frequency sensitivity with lighter shielding.
  • As an editorial test of the model, the phase map Δφ(ω;R) could be measured with a synthetic field at several operating points and the recovered R compared across them; consistency would support the Bloch-model assumptions, and inconsistency would reveal where the model needs correction.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a dual-alkali (87Rb, 39K) comagnetometer in a single cell containing 3He, in which two alkali species are read out simultaneously and combined by a Wiener-filtered subtraction. The authors claim that this correlated measurement cancels the correlated magnetic background at high frequencies, where the usual noble-gas self-compensation fails, recovering the uncorrelated readout floor. They report a simulated ~28–30-fold background suppression and a ×15 SNR gain for a dark-matter transient, and a calibration-free inter-species phase difference Δφ that carries the neutron-to-proton coupling ratio R and enables model differentiation. The theory is based on coupled Bloch equations with literature parameters, and the results are presented as a theoretical demonstration with a detailed noise budget.

Significance. If the claims hold, this is a valuable and original contribution: it offers a path to extend comagnetometric common-mode rejection to frequencies above the noble-gas compensation point, improves the sensitivity of spin-based exotic-field searches, and, for the first time, proposes extracting the nucleon coupling ratio from a single vapor cell without inter-device comparison. The use of an experimentally measured Wiener filter rather than a model-dependent calibration is elegant, and the paper is transparent about its assumptions. The main ideas are falsifiable and the simulation setup is described in enough detail to be reproduced. The principal caveat is that the quantitative predictions rest on a Bloch model and on an assumed stability of the magnetic transfer-ratio that is not yet experimentally validated.

major comments (3)
  1. [Eq. (6) and Supplemental §2] The compensation field formula has inconsistent indices: the terms −λ_Rb,He M_Rb^0 P_Rb^z − λ_K,He M_K^0 P_K^z are alkali-induced fields on 3He, not fields on the alkalis, and no alkali–alkali Fermi-contact terms appear. The accompanying text says only the 3He-on-alkali term is interpolated, which conflicts with the equation. Because the operating point α and all subsequent results (antiresonance, phase map) depend on this formula, please correct it or clarify the intended compensation condition.
  2. [Supplemental §6, 'Response-ratio stability'] The central claim that the correlated background is cancelled to the 0.22 fT/√Hz readout floor requires δc ≲ 3% stability of c = T_B^K/T_B^Rb over the Wiener re-estimation interval. The only quantitative support is a Bloch-model derivative d ln| c |/dT ≈ 5×10^-4 K^-1 with no quoted uncertainty and no assessment of other drift channels (density, pump rate, gradients, B_z feedback). Because this is the load-bearing assumption for the headline suppression, provide a sensitivity analysis over plausible parameter drifts or explicitly state the result as conditional on this stability.
  3. [Fig. 3 and main text §5] The quantitative predictions (×28 suppression, ×15 SNR gain) are obtained from a single set of cell parameters (Table I) and a single noise model, without error bars. The retention g(f) and suppression S(f) depend on the Bloch-model parameters (λ, κ, densities), whose literature values carry few-percent uncertainties. Please propagate these uncertainties or at least demonstrate robustness of the gain to parameter variations, since the quantitative claims are a central part of the paper.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Abstract vs Fig. 3(c)] The abstract says 'thirtyfold background suppression' while Fig. 3(c) shows a factor of 28; please make the numbers consistent.
  2. [Supplemental §6, readout floor] The two-channel readout floor is quoted as 0.22 fT/√Hz, but uncorrelated 0.17 fT/√Hz per-channel noise added in quadrature gives √2×0.17 ≈ 0.24 fT/√Hz. Clarify the apparent discrepancy.
  3. [Supplemental §4] The antiresonance ranges are said to be 'tabulated in Ref. [29]'; please refer explicitly to Table III to avoid ambiguity.
  4. [Main text §4 and Supplemental §4] The synthetic-field calibration is referenced to Ref. [24] but is not summarized. Please add a sentence describing how the synthetic exotic field's coupling ratio R is set and varied, since this underpins the calibration-free claim.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the cancellation and phase readout follow from the stated Bloch dynamics and a measured Wiener transfer function, with key stability assumptions openly flagged.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained. The cancellation residual is defined by r = x_K - \hat{H} x_Rb with \hat{H} measured from exotic-signal-free records (Supplemental Eq. 10), so the filter is an input, not a fitted target; the resulting floor is the uncorrelated readout noise plus any leakage from drift in c = T_B^K/T_B^Rb, a stability condition the paper explicitly states in Supplemental §6 ('reaching the 0.22 fT/√Hz floor requires δc≲3%') rather than treating as a prediction. The response functions T_B^j and χ_j are computed from the coupled Bloch equations (Eq. 4) with literature parameters and standard spin-content values; no parameter is fit to the simulated factor-28 suppression or ×15 SNR gain, which instead follow from the declared correlated-to-uncorrelated noise ratio and the model's retention g. The 'calibration-free' phase observable is an algebraic consequence of multiplicative prefactors dropping out of arg θ̃_F, and the R-readout inverts a model-generated Δφ(ω;R) map; the optional in-situ synthetic-field calibration cites the authors' prior work (Ref. [24]) but is an auxiliary implementation, not the load-bearing derivation. The Bloch equations are also supported by independent references (Refs. [14,33]). The skeptical concern about δc stability or Bloch-model accuracy is an empirical-validation limitation, not circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new particles or forces are introduced. The central claims rest on the coupled Bloch model, the common-magnetic-environment assumption, and the stability of the transfer-function ratio. Key free parameters are the compensation weight α and the simulated noise model; spin-content factors and rate coefficients come from prior literature. The paper's contribution is a new measurement scheme built from known physics.

free parameters (4)
  • Compensation parameter α = 0.578
    The authors choose α=0.578, intermediate between the analytic estimate 0.576 and the numerically optimal values 0.579/0.570 for the two channels. This sets the antiresonance frequencies and the phase-difference map.
  • Assumed noise model (Johnson noise, readout floor, light-shift noise) = 7 fT/√Hz Johnson, 0.17 fT/√Hz readout, 1 fT/√Hz light-shift in simulation
    The claimed ×28 floor reduction and ×15 SNR gain follow from this specific correlated-to-uncorrelated noise ratio taken from the cited magnetometer literature.
  • Wiener deconvolution prior S_b = flat prior over declared band
    The recovered waveform shape and reported SNR depend on this assumed signal prior; it is not derived from data.
  • Spin-content factors σ_j^{n,p} = e.g. σ_n^He=0.87, σ_p^He=-0.027, with percent-level uncertainties
    These nuclear-structure numbers come from cited literature and directly set the species-dependent couplings ξ_j and hence the phase map and R readout.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The two alkali species in one cell see the same magnetic field and share the electronic gyromagnetic ratio up to the nuclear slowing-down factor.
    Fundamental to the common-mode cancellation claim; used throughout and in Eq. (4).
  • domain assumption The linearized coupled Bloch equations (Eq. 4) with the listed rates and parameters correctly describe the dual-alkali cell response.
    All quantitative predictions (antiresonances, phase maps, noise budgets) come from this model; no experimental verification is provided.
  • domain assumption Exotic ALP coupling is described by Eq. (5) with negligible electron-spin coupling.
    This defines the proton/neutron coupling ratio R and is the basis for model differentiation. Electron-spin couplings are assumed suppressed by shields or common-mode rejection.
  • domain assumption The correlated magnetic background is stationary over the timescales on which the Wiener transfer function is estimated and applied.
    Required for the adaptive subtraction to work as described; the paper acknowledges stationarity limits but does not test them.
  • domain assumption Optical cross-talk between the two probe channels is small and its static phase offset is correctly removed by the in-situ calibration.
    The phase-difference readout relies on this; the paper gives an estimate (~few mrad) and claims calibration, but no measurement.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Correlated comagnetometry for precision measurements." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/OWLXTL3J

@misc{pith2026260718221,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Correlated comagnetometry for precision measurements},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/OWLXTL3J}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.18221}
}
read the original abstract

Magnetometers are among the most widely used probes in science and technology. Comagnetometers increase sensitivity by self-cancellation of magnetic noise, but only at low frequencies. We suggest a correlated measurement of two alkali species in one cell to cancel the magnetic background also at high frequencies. The inter-species phase difference of the light-matter interaction response function is found to be calibration free and insensitive to common-mode intensity noise. Utilizing a dark-matter signal as a testcase, the method achieves a thirtyfold background suppression, raising the signal-to-noise ratio by an order of magnitude or more, depending on the coupling to the different subatomic particles. We show that the method also provides model differentiation. The higher sensitivity and model differentiation open a path to novel probes for precision measurements in general and exotic fields in particular.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.18221 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Experimental setup. A circularly polarized pump [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Physics of the correlated dual-alkali response. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Two-channel noise cancellation on a simulated dark [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: shows how to recover R by mapping ∆φ across the (ω, R) plane [panel (a)] and contrasts the exotic and magnetic responses along representative cross sections [panel (b)]: for the model benchmarks the exotic phase difference exceeds the magnetic baseline ∆φ B by up to th…

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

48 extracted references · 1 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Table I lists the cell parameters, rates, and field settings that enter the coupled Bloch equations [Eq

    Simulation parameters and nuclear spin content This section collects the numerical inputs used throughout the paper. Table I lists the cell parameters, rates, and field settings that enter the coupled Bloch equations [Eq. (4) in the main text] for the dual-alkali 87Rb-39K-3He system. Table II provides the fractional contributions of the neutron and proton...

  2. [2]

    The compensation optimumα ⋆ The compensation field of Eq. (6) in the main text interpolates only the 3He-on-alkali term between the Rb-optimal (α= 0) and K-optimal (α= 1) settings, because a single appliedB z cannot simultaneously compensate both alkalis whenλ Rb,He ̸=λ K,He. The optimal weight has a simple physical origin. The 87Rb–39K spin-exchange rate...

  3. [3]

    Thex-projection isP x = [P + + (P−)∗]/2, which is proportional to the observable [Eq

    The exact-null locus of the antiresonance The transverse polarization is decomposed in the Bloch ansatzP ⊥(t) =P +eiωt +P −e−iωt, withP + andP − obtained from the linearized steady state. Thex-projection isP x = [P + + (P−)∗]/2, which is proportional to the observable [Eq. (2) of the main text], and vanishes exactly whenP + =−(P −)∗. This is a single comp...

  4. [4]

    The phase-difference map and recovery of the coupling ratio FIG. 4. ∆φ(ω;R) for the dual-alkali Rb-K- 3He cell atα= 0.578. (a) Heatmap of ∆φacross the (R, ω) plane, wrapped to [−π, π) for the cyclic color bar; the black dashed line marks the central value of the KSVZ prediction,R= 0.04. (b) Unwrapped cross sections at two representative model-motivated ra...

  5. [5]

    Two-channel cancellation and Wiener recovery The field-referred channels of Eq. (7) in the main text,x j = ˜θj F /T B j , are combined asr(ω) =x K(ω)− ˆH(ω)x Rb(ω), with the transfer estimate ˆH(ω) = ⟨xK(ω)x ∗ Rb(ω)⟩ ⟨|xRb(ω)|2⟩ (10) computed by Welch averaging over exotic-signal-free records (the magnetic background is always present and is precisely wha...

  6. [6]

    Four classes are relevant

    Noise budget for the dual-channel subtraction The adaptive subtraction removes any perturbation that carries a common magnetic signature; the residual floor is therefore set by noise that is not common-mode. Four classes are relevant. Species-selective (light-shift) noise.Pump light-shift fluctuations, driven by drifts in probe intensity, detuning, or bea...

  7. [7]

    I. K. Kominis, T. W. Kornack, J. C. Allred, and M. V. Romalis, A subfemtotesla multichannel atomic magnetometer, Nature422, 596 (2003)

    2003

  8. [8]

    Budker and M

    D. Budker and M. Romalis, Optical magnetometry, Nat. Phys.3, 227 (2007)

    2007

Show all 48 references
  1. [9]

    T. W. Kornack, S. J. Smullin, S.-K. Lee, and M. V. Romalis, A low-noise ferrite magnetic shield, Appl. Phys. Lett.90, 223501 (2007)

    2007

  2. [10]

    Lee and M

    S.-K. Lee and M. V. Romalis, Calculation of magnetic field noise from high-permeability magnetic shields and conducting objects with simple geometry, J. Appl. Phys.103, 084904 (2008)

    2008

  3. [11]

    J. C. Allred, R. N. Lyman, T. W. Kornack, and M. V. Romalis, High-sensitivity atomic magnetometer unaffected by spin-exchange relaxation, Phys. Rev. Lett.89, 130801 (2002)

    2002

  4. [12]

    T. W. Kornack and M. V. Romalis, Dynamics of two overlapping spin ensembles interacting by spin exchange, Phys. Rev. Lett.89, 253002 (2002)

    2002

  5. [13]

    D. F. Jackson Kimball and K. van Bibber, eds.,The Search for Ultralight Bosonic Dark Matter(Springer, 2023)

    2023

  6. [14]

    C. B. Adamset al., Axion Dark Matter, inProceedings of Snowmass 2021(2022) arXiv:2203.14923 [hep-ex]

    2021 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Takahashiet al.(Particle Data Group), Review of Particle Physics, Int

    F. Takahashiet al.(Particle Data Group), Review of Particle Physics, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A41, 2630011 (2026), Chapter 89: Axions and Other Similar Particles

    2026

  8. [16]

    P. W. Graham and S. Rajendran, New Observables for Direct Detection of Axion Dark Matter, Phys. Rev. D88, 035023 (2013)

    2013

  9. [17]

    Pustelnyet al., The Global Network of Optical Magnetometers for Exotic physics (GNOME): A novel scheme to search for physics beyond the Standard Model, Ann

    S. Pustelnyet al., The Global Network of Optical Magnetometers for Exotic physics (GNOME): A novel scheme to search for physics beyond the Standard Model, Ann. Phys. (Berlin)525, 659 (2013)

    2013

  10. [18]

    Afachet al., Characterization of the Global Network of Optical Magnetometers to search for Exotic Physics (GNOME), Phys

    S. Afachet al., Characterization of the Global Network of Optical Magnetometers to search for Exotic Physics (GNOME), Phys. Dark Universe22, 162 (2018)

    2018

  11. [19]

    I. M. Bloch, Y. Hochberg, E. Kuflik, and T. Volansky, Axion-like Relics: New Constraints from Old Comagnetometer Data, JHEP01 (2020), 167

    2020

  12. [20]

    Padniuk, M

    M. Padniuk, M. Kopciuch, R. Cipolletti, A. Wickenbrock, D. Budker, and S. Pustelny, Response of atomic spin-based sensors to magnetic and nonmagnetic perturbations, Sci. Rep.12, 324 (2022)

    2022

  13. [21]

    Afachet al.(GNOME), What Can a GNOME Do? Search Targets for the Global Network of Optical Magnetometers for Exotic Physics Searches, Ann

    S. Afachet al.(GNOME), What Can a GNOME Do? Search Targets for the Global Network of Optical Magnetometers for Exotic Physics Searches, Ann. Phys. (Berlin)536, 2300083 (2024)

    2024

  14. [22]

    J. Lee, M. Lisanti, W. A. Terrano, and M. Romalis, Laboratory Constraints on the Neutron-Spin Coupling of feV-Scale Axions, Phys. Rev. X13, 011050 (2023)

    2023

  15. [23]

    I. M. Bloch, R. Shaham, Y. Hochberg, E. Kuflik, T. Volansky, and O. Katz (NASDUCK), Constraints on axion-like dark matter from a SERF comagnetometer, Nat. Commun.14, 5784 (2023)

    2023

  16. [24]

    Weiet al., Dark matter search with a resonantly-coupled hybrid spin system, Rep

    K. Weiet al., Dark matter search with a resonantly-coupled hybrid spin system, Rep. Prog. Phys.88, 057801 (2025)

    2025

  17. [25]

    Xuet al., Constraining ultralight dark matter through an accelerated resonant search, Commun

    Z. Xuet al., Constraining ultralight dark matter through an accelerated resonant search, Commun. Phys.7, 226 (2024)

    2024

  18. [26]

    Gavilan-Martinet al., Searching for dark matter with a spin-based interferometer, Nat

    D. Gavilan-Martinet al., Searching for dark matter with a spin-based interferometer, Nat. Commun.16, 4953 (2025)

    2025

  19. [27]

    T. Z. Wilsonet al.(GNOME), Search for a solar-bound axion halo using the global network of optical magnetometers for exotic physics searches, Phys. Rev. D113, 115027 (2026)

    2026

  20. [28]

    Afachet al.(GNOME), Search for topological defect dark matter with a global network of optical magnetometers, Nat

    S. Afachet al.(GNOME), Search for topological defect dark matter with a global network of optical magnetometers, Nat. Phys.17, 1396 (2021)

    2021

  21. [29]

    S. S. Khamiset al.(GNOME), Multimessenger Search for Exotic Field Emission with a Global Magnetometer Network, Phys. Rev. X15, 031048 (2025). 11

    2025

  22. [30]

    Rosenzweig, Y

    Y. Rosenzweig, Y. Kats, M. Givon, Y. Japha, and R. Folman, Atomic probe of dark matter differential interactions with subatomic particles, Phys. Rev. D110, 015015 (2024)

    2024

  23. [31]

    Babcock, I

    E. Babcock, I. Nelson, S. Kadlecek, B. Driehuys, L. W. Anderson, F. W. Hersman, and T. G. Walker, Hybrid spin-exchange optical pumping of 3He, Phys. Rev. Lett.91, 123003 (2003)

    2003

  24. [32]

    E. D. Babcock,Spin-Exchange Optical Pumping with Alkali-Metal Vapors, Ph.D. thesis, University of Wisconsin–Madison (2005)

    2005

  25. [33]

    T. G. Walker and W. Happer, Spin-exchange optical pumping of noble-gas nuclei, Rev. Mod. Phys.69, 629 (1997)

    1997

  26. [34]

    D. F. Jackson Kimball, Nuclear spin content and constraints on exotic spin-dependent couplings, New J. Phys.17, 073008 (2015)

    2015

  27. [35]

    See Supplemental Material

  28. [36]

    Klinger, T

    E. Klinger, T. Liu, M. Padniuk, M. Engler, T. Kornack, S. Pustelny, D. F. Jackson Kimball, D. Budker, and A. Wickenbrock, Optimization of nuclear polarization in an alkali–noble-gas comagnetometer, Phys. Rev. Appl.19, 044092 (2023)

    2023

  29. [37]

    L. Duan, J. Fang, R. Li, L. Jiang, M. Ding, and W. Wang, Light intensity stabilization based on the second harmonic of the photoelastic modulator detection in the atomic magnetometer, Opt. Express23, 32481 (2015)

    2015

  30. [38]

    S. J. Seltzer,Developments in Alkali-Metal Atomic Magnetometry, Ph.D. thesis, Princeton University (2008)

    2008

  31. [39]

    Padniuk, E

    M. Padniuk, E. Klinger, G. Lukasiewicz, D. Gavilan-Martin, T. Liu, S. Pustelny, D. F. Jackson Kimball, D. Budker, and A. Wickenbrock, Universal determination of comagnetometer response to spin couplings, Phys. Rev. Res.6, 013339 (2024)

    2024

  32. [40]

    S. R. Schaefer, G. D. Cates, T.-R. Chien, D. Gonatas, W. Happer, and T. G. Walker, Frequency shifts of the magnetic- resonance spectrum of mixtures of nuclear spin-polarized noble gases and vapors of spin-polarized alkali-metal atoms, Phys. Rev. A39, 5613 (1989)

    1989

  33. [41]

    J. L. Friar, B. F. Gibson, G. L. Payne, A. M. Bernstein, and T. E. Chupp, Neutron polarization in polarized 3He targets, Phys. Rev. C42, 2310 (1990)

    1990

  34. [42]

    Engel and P

    J. Engel and P. Vogel, Spin dependent cross-sections of weakly interacting massive particles on nuclei, Phys. Rev. D40, 3132 (1989)

    1989

  35. [43]

    Engel, M

    J. Engel, M. T. Ressell, I. S. Towner, and W. E. Ormand, Response of mica to weakly interacting massive particles, Phys. Rev. C52, 2216 (1995)

    1995

  36. [44]

    V. V. Flambaum and A. F. Tedesco, Dependence of nuclear magnetic moments on quark masses and limits on temporal variation of fundamental constants from atomic clock experiments, Phys. Rev. C73, 055501 (2006)

    2006

  37. [45]

    D. F. Jackson Kimball, J. Dudley, Y. Li, S. Thulasi, S. Pustelny, D. Budker, and M. Zolotorev, Magnetic shielding and exotic spin-dependent interactions, Phys. Rev. D94, 082005 (2016)

    2016

  38. [46]

    D. F. Jackson Kimball, D. Budker, J. Eby, M. Pospelov, S. Pustelny, T. Scholtes, Y. V. Stadnik, A. Weis, and A. Wick- enbrock, Searching for axion stars andQ-balls with a terrestrial magnetometer network, Phys. Rev. D97, 043002 (2018)

    2018

  39. [47]

    Grilli di Cortona, E

    G. Grilli di Cortona, E. Hardy, J. Pardo Vega, and G. Villadoro, The QCD axion, precisely, JHEP01 (2016), 034

    2016

  40. [48]

    Di Luzio, M

    L. Di Luzio, M. Giannotti, E. Nardi, and L. Visinelli, The landscape of QCD axion models, Phys. Rep.870, 1 (2020)

    2020

Pith tools

Reviewed August 1, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.