Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

A Room-Temperature Extreme High Vacuum System for Trapped-Ion Quantum Information Processing

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-03 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper claims a room-temperature vacuum system reaches an ion-location pressure of 3.9×10⁻¹² mbar, roughly ten times lower than typical room-temperature ion traps, giving an average 1.9 hours between background-gas collisions per trappe

desk verdict Genuine engineering achievement — a room-temperature ion-trap chamber at the XHV boundary — but the headline pressure number is internally inconsistent with Eq. 7, and the qualitative claim survives either way. read the letter →

arxiv 2512.11794 v2 pith:QPFNT5DM submitted 2025-12-12 quant-ph

Lewis Hahn , Nikhil Kotibhaskar , Fabien Lefebvre , Sakshee Patil , Sainath Motlakunta , Mahmood Sabooni , Rajibul Islam This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph
keywords trappedionsextremehighvacuumiontrapbackgroundgascollisionshydrogenoutgassingnon-evaporablegetterpumpspressuremeasurementquantuminformationprocessing
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 tries to establish that a trapped-ion quantum processor can run for hours between background-gas collisions without any cryogenic hardware, by engineering the vacuum system rather than cooling it. It claims the local pressure at the ion chain is (3.9±0.3)×10⁻¹² mbar, inferred from 111 collision-induced reorderings in a 20-ion mixed-isotope Yb⁺ chain, with a hot-cathode gauge reading 1.5×10⁻¹² mbar, the gauge's stated measurement floor. A sympathetic reader cares because background-gas collisions interrupt algorithms, eject ions, and force recalibration; a collision interval of about two hours per ion would let long ion chains operate continuously at room temperature. The central quantitative step is the conversion from observed reordering events to pressure, which rests on several stated assumptions about gas composition and collision energetics.

What carries the argument

The key machinery is the metrology loop that connects three elements: (1) Monte-Carlo molecular-flow simulations used to choose a large-aperture chamber and wide pump housings, maximizing effective pumping speed at the ions; (2) a diffusion-limited hydrogen outgassing model, in which the outgassing rate is proportional to the hydrogen diffusion coefficient divided by wall thickness, used to set heat-treatment targets by extrapolating from high-temperature pressure to room-temperature outgassing; and (3) the trapped-ion chain itself as a local pressure sensor. For the last element, the barrier energy for swapping two neighboring ions is computed by constrained energy minimization, giving 0.35

What would settle it

Measure the residual gas composition with a calibrated mass spectrometer at the same chamber while repeating the ion-chain reordering measurement; if the ion-inferred hydrogen pressure disagrees with the sum of measured partial pressures, the conversion chain is wrong. A second check: vary chain length and ion number and confirm the extracted collision rate per ion is independent of both; a third check is to compare reordering rates at two different radial trap frequencies to test the computed 0.35 meV barrier. A specific target number: if heavier molecules such as N2 or CO dominate, the same

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a room-temperature ion-trap chamber can reach extreme high vacuum—pressures in the low 10⁻¹² mbar range—through geometry optimization, prolonged high-temperature heat treatment of stainless steel, and high-speed non-evaporable getter pumping. The paper reports a gauge pressure of 1.5×10⁻¹² mbar and a local pressure of (3.9±0.3)×10⁻¹² mbar at the ion location, corresponding to an average background-collision interval of (1.9±0.1) hours per ion. The local pressure is obtained from the rate of collision-induced reorderings in a mixed-isotope chain, using the standard kinetic-theory relation between collision rate and pressure under the assumption that hydrogen molecule

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that every observed chain reordering is caused by a room-temperature hydrogen molecule and that exactly 75% of hydrogen collisions deposit enough energy to reorder the chain; if the residual gas contains heavier molecules, or the energy fraction is wrong, the same measured reordering rate corresponds to a different local pressure. The paper's text is also ambiguous about whether the reported 1.9-hour interval already includes the 0.75 correction, w

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Background-gas interruptions in a 20-ion chain are spaced by about 1.9 hours per ion on average, so many multi-hour algorithms can run before a reload is needed.
  • Room-temperature operation keeps full optical access and avoids cryostat vibrations, with the collision interval roughly an order of magnitude longer than in typical room-temperature ion traps.
  • The quantitative heat-treatment recipe—prolonged 400°C vacuum firing plus an air bake—reduces stainless-steel outgassing to the 10⁻¹⁵ mbar l s⁻¹ cm⁻² level, so the method can transfer to other chambers.
  • Because the non-getterable partial pressure is below 10⁻¹² mbar, the residual load is dominated by getterable hydrogen, meaning further increases in effective pumping speed could push pressures lower.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Inference: A mass-resolved residual gas measurement would be the cleanest check; if the dominant collision partner is not hydrogen, the same 1.9-hour interval implies a higher true pressure by up to about 2.5×.
  • Inference: The reported gauge pressure may already be limited by the gauge's x-ray floor rather than the chamber, so the actual gauge-location pressure could be in the low 10⁻¹³ mbar range, with the ion-based number being the conservative estimate.
  • Inference: The same geometry-and-outgassing methodology could be extended to compact or portable trapped-ion processors, where cryogenic service is impractical, or to modestly cooled traps where hydrogen outgassing drops further.
  • Inference: The paper's own statement that the text is ambiguous about whether the 1.9-hour interval already includes the 0.75 reordering correction is worth resolving; if the correction was not applied, the inferred pressure becomes about 5.4×10⁻¹² mbar.
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 / 6 minor

Summary. The paper reports the design, construction, and room-temperature characterization of a vacuum system intended for trapped-ion quantum information processing. Using MolFlow+ molecular-flow simulations, the authors optimize chamber geometry, pump placement, and conductance paths, and use high-temperature heat treatment of stainless steel to reduce H2 outgassing to the 10^-15 mbar l s^-1 cm^-2 level. The hot-cathode gauge reads 1.5e-12 mbar, stated to be the gauge's x-ray limit. The local pressure at the ion location is inferred from collision-induced reordering events in a 20-ion Yb+ chain: 111 events give a mean interval of (1.9 ± 0.1) hrs/ion, converted via Eq. 7 to (3.9 ± 0.3)e-12 mbar assuming all collisions are due to room-temperature H2. The authors claim this represents an order-of-magnitude improvement over typical room-temperature ion-trap systems and extends continuous processor operation without cryogenics.

Significance. If the quantitative claim holds, the work is a useful engineering advance for trapped-ion quantum processors: it demonstrates a room-temperature vacuum system with a local pressure in the low 10^-12 mbar range, long collision-free intervals, and good optical access, without cryogenic infrastructure. The paper has concrete strengths: it uses Monte-Carlo vacuum simulations for geometry optimization, a quantitative bulk-diffusion outgassing model to guide heat treatment, and an ion-chain-based local pressure diagnostic that is complementary to the gauge reading. The approach and the reported collision intervals are directly relevant to scalable trapped-ion systems. However, the central quantitative conversion from observed reordering rates to pressure contains an internal consistency question and unquantified systematic uncertainties, so the headline pressure should be treated cautiously until those points are resolved.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section IV, Eq. 7] There is an apparent internal inconsistency in the reported values. Eq. 7 defines gamma = gamma_obs/(p_obs * p_reorder), with p_reorder = 0.75. If the quoted (1.9 ± 0.1) hrs/ion is the observed reordering interval gamma_obs^-1, then gamma = 1/(1.9 h)/0.75 = 1/(1.425 h), and Eq. 7 gives P ≈ 5.4e-12 mbar, not 3.9e-12 mbar. The quoted pair (1.9 h, 3.9e-12 mbar) is only consistent if 1.9 h already denotes the corrected collision interval gamma^-1. The text in Section IV and the abstract say 'observed reordering frequency' and Fig. 4e shows 'observed reordering intervals,' so the natural reading is that 1.9 h is raw. Please clarify which quantity 1.9 h represents and, if necessary, recompute the pressure and the error bar. This is not merely cosmetic: the factor-1.36 change moves the headline result from 3.9e-12 to 5.4e-12 mbar.
  2. [Section IV, Eq. 11 and Appendix II] The p_reorder conversion is model-dependent, and the quoted uncertainty does not reflect it. Eq. 11 evaluates a Maxwell-Boltzmann tail probability using a temperature 'calculated using the average energy transfer' ⟨ΔE⟩ = 0.87 meV taken from Ref. [13]. The mapping from an average transferred energy to a single temperature is not derived in the manuscript, and the actual distribution of energies imparted by Langevin collisions to a trapped ion may differ. In addition, the barrier energy Eb = 0.35 meV is estimated from a constrained-energy calculation in Appendix II; the choice to take the maximum over all ion pairs is acknowledged as an overestimate, but no sensitivity analysis is given. Since gamma is proportional to 1/p_reorder, a 10% error in p_reorder translates to an ~13% error in pressure. The quoted ±0.3e-12 mbar is only the standard error of the mean of the intervals and does not i
  3. [Abstract and Appendix I] The ion-pressure estimate assumes all collisions arise from H2. The conditional nature is stated in the abstract, but the conclusion and title do not carry the same caveat, and the non-getterable load estimate in Appendix I provides a quantitative path to a bound. From Eq. 9, Q_NG ≈ 6.15e-12 mbar L/s; with the ion pump speed of ~10 L/s the partial pressure of non-getterable gases is below 1e-12 mbar. If those non-getterable species are heavier than H2 (e.g., N2 or CO), the same collision rate would correspond to a higher pressure by up to a factor of roughly 2.5 for N2. Even at the stated <1e-12 mbar level, the contribution to the reordering rate could be non-negligible if the local partial pressure at the ion location is higher than at the gauge. I suggest adding a quantitative statement of the maximum possible systematic shift from non-H2 species, or, if available, a residual gas analy
minor comments (6)
  1. [Appendix II] Typo: 'berrier energy' should be 'barrier energy'.
  2. [References] Ref. [17] is cited as 'Thermal outgassing, 1961. Unpublished or nonstandard source as cited.' This is not a usable citation; please provide a full bibliographic reference or remove it.
  3. [Title and Introduction] The formal definition of XHV is usually P < 1e-12 mbar. The reported local pressure of 3.9e-12 mbar is in the UHV range, and the gauge reading of 1.5e-12 mbar is at the x-ray limit rather than a proven pressure. The phrase 'at the boundary of XHV' is acceptable, but the title 'Extreme High Vacuum System' may overstate the achieved pressure unless the authors explicitly define their usage.
  4. [Figure 5] The vertical axis label '1e 9' appears to lack a minus sign ('1e-9'); please correct.
  5. [Figure 4e and Section IV] Clarify how the mean interval and its standard error were computed: were intervals censored at the end of each data set, and does the histogram include all intervals or only fully observed ones? This matters for reproducibility.
  6. [Eq. 9] Define P_base explicitly; from context it is the steady-state pressure with the ion pump off and the gauge pumping, but this should be stated.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the ion-location pressure estimate uses direct observations, external collision physics, and an independent barrier-energy simulation; self-citations are auxiliary and not load-bearing.

full rationale

The derivation chain from observed ion-chain reordering events to local pressure is self-contained rather than circular. Equation (7) combines the directly measured reordering rate with external physical constants (Langevin theory [22], H2 polarizability [23]) and an external average energy transfer value [13]. The reordering probability p_reorder is obtained from a barrier-energy calculation performed in this paper (Appendix II, Eqs. 10–11) on the actual 20-ion chain, not from the pressure being claimed. The gauge pressure is an independent measurement, and the comparison between gauge reading and ion-derived pressure is a consistency check, not a fitted output. The only self-citation to the same group's PhD thesis (Ref. [9]) supports auxiliary statements—conductance scaling, gauge saturation level, and detailed procedures—that are also stated or measured in the present manuscript, so it is not load-bearing. The two-parameter fit in Appendix I (Q_NG, S_g) is explicitly labeled as a fit and is not repackaged as a prediction. None of the enumerated circularity patterns is exhibited: no quantity is defined in terms of the result, no fitted parameter is called a prediction, and no self-citation is used to force the central claim. We note an internal reproducibility ambiguity in Section IV: the reported (1.9 h, 3.9e-12 mbar) pair is consistent with Eq. 7 only if 1.9 h already incorporates the p_reorder correction, whereas the text describes 1.9 h as the observed reordering interval; applying Eq. 7 as written to a raw 1.9 h interval would give about 5.3e-12 mbar. This is an arithmetic/consistency issue, not circularity, and therefore does not affect the circularity score.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities are invented. The central claim rests on standard vacuum-science models (diffusion-limited outgassing, Knudsen flow) and a chain of modeling choices for the ion-based pressure assay: H₂-only background, Langevin capture, the z_i = z_{i+1} barrier proxy, and ⟨ΔE⟩ borrowed from Ref. [13]. The heat-treatment q estimates contain an implicit, unmeasured initial hydrogen concentration c₀. The non-getterable load is derived from a two-parameter fit to the authors' own pressure-rise data.

free parameters (6)
  • p_reorder = 0.75 = 0.75
    Fraction of collisions energetic enough to reorder the chain; computed from Eq. 11 with a temperature derived from ⟨ΔE⟩ = 0.87 meV and E_b = 0.35 meV. Directly scales the reported pressure (P ∝ 1/p_reorder); the text does not show the ⟨ΔE⟩-to-T mapping.
  • E_b = 0.35 meV (reordering barrier) = 0.35 meV
    Maximum swap barrier from constrained energy minimization (Appendix II) for a 20-ion chain at the stated trap frequencies; load-bearing through p_reorder.
  • ⟨ΔE⟩ = 0.87 meV = 0.87 meV
    Average energy imparted per elastic H₂-ion collision, taken from Ref. [13]; not measured in this work.
  • S_g (gauge pumping speed) = 1.6×10⁻³ L/s
    Fitted to the pressure-rise curve of Fig. 5 via Eq. 9; used for the non-getterable partial-pressure estimate.
  • Q_NG (non-getterable load) = 6.15×10⁻¹² mbar L/s
    Fitted simultaneously with S_g to the same pressure-rise data; used to argue P_NG < 1×10⁻¹² mbar.
  • c₀ (initial dissolved H₂ concentration) = not stated
    Implicit in the diffusion model (Eq. 2); the heat-treatment target pressure (5×10⁻⁸ mbar) and the inferred q values (Eq. 6) are backed out of it rather than measured independently.
assumptions (7)
  • standard math Knudsen cosine-law diffuse reflection models molecular flow in the conductance-limited regime (MolFlow+ simulations)
    Invoked in Section II for all pressure/pumping-speed simulations.
  • domain assumption H₂ outgassing of stainless steel follows the diffusion-limited model of Eq. 2 with D_H2(T) = 4.7×10⁻³ exp(−0.56 eV/k_B T)
    Basis of the heat-treatment protocol and the q estimates (Eq. 6); parameters from Refs. [16,17].
  • domain assumption The background gas at the ions is dominated by H₂; all collisions are assumed to be H₂ for the pressure conversion
    Stated in the abstract and Section IV; if heavier molecules dominate, the same collision rate implies ~2.5× higher pressure.
  • standard math Langevin capture theory gives the collision rate in Eq. 7
    Standard theory (Ref. [22]); used to convert collision interval to pressure.
  • ad hoc to paper The reordering barrier equals the energy needed to constrain two neighboring ions to the same axial position (Appendix II)
    Follows the structure of Ref. [13] but the specific z_i = z_{i+1} proxy is this paper's modeling choice; the computed E_b feeds p_reorder.
  • standard math p_obs = 1 − n!(N−n)!/N! gives the probability that a reordering is distinguishable on camera
    Combinatorics stated in Section IV; all datasets satisfy p_obs > 0.99.
  • domain assumption Dissolved H₂ concentration stays constant during temperature ramp-down (Eq. 4)
    Timescale argument (26-day decay constant at 400 °C vs 1-day ramp); used to backward-extrapolate outgassing from high-temperature pressure.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A Room-Temperature Extreme High Vacuum System for Trapped-Ion Quantum Information Processing." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/QPFNT5DM

@misc{pith2026251211794,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A Room-Temperature Extreme High Vacuum System for Trapped-Ion Quantum Information Processing},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/QPFNT5DM}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2512.11794}
}
abstract

We present a room-temperature Extreme High Vacuum (XHV) system engineered to support the long-duration operation of a trapped-ion quantum processor. Background-gas collisions impose limitations on trapped-ion performance and scalability by interrupting algorithmic execution and, in some cases, ejecting ions from the trap. Using molecular-flow simulations, we optimize the chamber geometry, conductance pathways, and pumping configuration to maximize the effective pumping speed at the ion location. We perform high-temperature heat treatment of stainless steel vacuum components to achieve the desired outgassing rate, guided by quantitative relations of bulk diffusive processes, allowing us to reduce the $\mathrm{H_2}$ outgassing load to the $10^{-15}\,\mathrm{mbar\,l\,s^{-1}\,cm^{-2}}$ level. The final pressure in our chamber, measured by a hot cathode gauge, is $1.5\times10^{-12}\,\mathrm{mbar}$, corresponding to the gauge's measurement limit. We measure the local pressure at the ion location by observing collision-induced reordering events in a long ion chain of mixed-isotope Yb$^+$. From the observed reordering frequency, we extract the average interval between collisions to be $(1.9 \pm 0.1)\,\mathrm{hrs/ion}$. This corresponds to a local pressure of $(3.9 \pm 0.3)\times10^{-12}\,\mathrm{mbar}$ at the ion location, assuming that all collisions arise from background H$_2$ molecules at room temperature. Our demonstration extends the continuous operation time of a quantum processor while maintaining the simplicity of a room-temperature system that does not require cryogenic apparatus.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2512.11794 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. ) is significantly higher than that of the 4.5-Inch Spherical Cube (right in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Pressure readings from the UHV24p gauge after turning off the ion pump. The pressure does not rise indefinitely due [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Barrier energy i(in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Long-lived metastable states in the 4f$^{13}$5d6s configuration of Yb$^+$

    physics.atom-ph 2026-03 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    First measurements of second-scale metastable lifetimes in the 4f13 5d6s configuration of Yb+: 0.92(8) s, 9.8(+2.9,-2.0) s, plus evidence for >30 s.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

23 extracted references · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [13]

    Aikyo, G

    Y. Aikyo, G. Vrijsen, T. W. Noel, A. Kato, M. K. Ivory, and J. Kim. Vacuum characterization of a compact room- temperature trapped ion system.Applied Physics Letters, 117(23):234002, 2020

    2020

  2. [1]

    D. J. Wineland et al. Experimental issues in coherent quantum-state manipulation of trapped atomic ions.J. Res. Natl. Inst. Stand. Technol., 1998

    1998

  3. [2]

    Single ion qubit with estimated coherence time exceeding one hour.Nature Communica- tions, 12(1):233, Jan 2021

    Pengfei Wang, Chun-Yang Luan, Mu Qiao, Mark Um, Junhua Zhang, Ye Wang, Xiao Yuan, Mile Gu, Jingning Zhang, and Kihwan Kim. Single ion qubit with estimated coherence time exceeding one hour.Nature Communica- tions, 12(1):233, Jan 2021

    2021

  4. [3]

    Blatt and D

    R. Blatt and D. Wineland. Entangled states of trapped atomic ions.Nature, 453:1008–1015, 2008

    2008

  5. [4]

    H¨ affner, C

    H. H¨ affner, C. F. Roos, and R. Blatt. Quantum comput- ing with trapped ions.Phys. Rep., 469:155–203, 2008

    2008

  6. [5]

    Pagano, P

    G. Pagano, P. W. Hess, H. Kaplan, W. L. Tan, P. Richerme, P. Becker, A. Kyprianidis, J. Zhang, E. Bir- ckelbaw, M.-L. Hernandez, Y. Wu, and C. Monroe. Cryo- genic ion trap system for large scale quantum simulation. Quantum Science and Technology, 4(1):014004, 2018

    2018

  7. [6]

    D. Edwards. Methane outgassing from a Ti sublima- tion pump.Journal of Vacuum Science and Technology, 17(1):279–281, 1 1980

    1980

  8. [7]

    J. F. O’Hanlon.A User’s Guide to Vacuum Technology. Wiley, 4 edition, 2003

    2003

Show all 23 references
  1. [8]

    Zanini and C

    A. Zanini and C. Reinhold. Molflow+: Monte carlo vacuum simulator. CERN Software, 2013.https:// molflow.github.io

    2013

  2. [9]

    Kotibhaskar.Towards Large Scale Quantum Simula- tions with Trapped Ions: Programmable XY model, Pre- cise Light Sensing, and Extreme High Vacuum

    N. Kotibhaskar.Towards Large Scale Quantum Simula- tions with Trapped Ions: Programmable XY model, Pre- cise Light Sensing, and Extreme High Vacuum. PhD the- sis, University of Waterloo, 2024

    2024

  3. [10]

    Outgassing properties of vacuum ma- terials for particle accelerators.Glumslov, 6 2020

    Paolo Chiggiato. Outgassing properties of vacuum ma- terials for particle accelerators.Glumslov, 6 2020

    2020

  4. [11]

    Fedchak, and Julia Scher- schligt

    Makfir Sefa, James A. Fedchak, and Julia Scher- schligt. Investigations of medium-temperature heat treat- ments to achieve low outgassing rates in stainless-steel ultrahigh-vacuum chambers.Journal of Vacuum Sci- ence & Technology A: Vacuum, Surfaces, and Films, 35(4):041601, Jul 2017

    2017

  5. [12]

    Calder and G

    R. Calder and G. Lewin. Reduction of stainless-steel out- gassing in ultra-high vacuum.British Journal of Applied Physics, 18(10):1459–1470, Oct 1967

    1967

  6. [14]

    A. M. Hankin, E. R. Clements, Y. Huang, S. M. Brewer, J.-S. Chen, C. W. Chou, D. B. Hume, and D. R. Leibrandt. Systematic uncertainty due to background- gas collisions in trapped-ion optical clocks.Phys. Rev. A, 100:033419, Sep 2019

    2019

  7. [15]

    Tito Sasaki

    Y. Tito Sasaki. Reducing ss 304/316 hydrogen outgassing to 2×10 −15 torr l cm−2 s−1.Journal of Vacuum Science & Technology A, 25(4):1309–1311, July 2007

    2007

  8. [16]

    Wiley, 2 edition, 2016

    Karl Jousten, editor.Handbook of Vacuum Technology. Wiley, 2 edition, 2016

    2016

  9. [17]

    Thermal outgassing, 1961

    Karl Jousten. Thermal outgassing, 1961. Unpublished or nonstandard source as cited

    1961

  10. [18]

    Westerberg, B

    L. Westerberg, B. Hj¨ orvarsson, E. Wall´ en, and A. Math- ewson. Hydrogen content and outgassing of air-baked and vacuum-fired stainless steel.Vacuum, 48(7–9):771– 773, September 1997

    1997

  11. [19]

    Fedchak, and Julia Scherschligt

    Makfir Sefa, James A. Fedchak, and Julia Scherschligt. Investigations of medium-temperature heat treatments to achieve low outgassing rates in stainless steel ultrahigh vacuum chambers.Journal of Vacuum Science & Tech- nology A: Vacuum, Surfaces, and Films, 35(4):041601, July 2017

    2017

  12. [20]

    Phd thesis, Leopold-Franzens-Universit¨ at Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria, August 2014

    Cornelius Hempel.Digital quantum simulation, Schr¨ odinger cat state spectroscopy and setting up a lin- ear ion trap. Phd thesis, Leopold-Franzens-Universit¨ at Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria, August 2014

    2014

  13. [21]

    Phd thesis, Universiteit van Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands, January 2019

    Henning Alexander F¨ urst.Trapped ions in a bath of ul- tracold atoms. Phd thesis, Universiteit van Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands, January 2019

    2019

  14. [22]

    Langevin

    P. Langevin. Une formule fondamentale de th´ eorie cin´ etique.Ann. Chim. Phys., 5:245, 1905

    1905

  15. [23]

    Sun, Cun-Feng Cheng, Yan Tan, and Shui-Ming Hu

    Zhong-Liang Nie, Jin Wang, Chang-Le Hu, Yu R. Sun, Cun-Feng Cheng, Yan Tan, and Shui-Ming Hu. Polariz- ability of molecular hydrogen and gas metrology.Phys. Rev. A, 111:012801, Jan 2025

    2025

Pith tools

Reviewed August 3, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.