Continuous microwave hole burning and population oscillations in a diamond spin ensemble

Alexander Huck; Haitham A.R. El-Ella; Ulrik L. Andersen

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 37 references

Continuous microwave hole burning and population oscillations in a diamond spin ensemble

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Continuous hole burning in a diamond spin ensemble produces 4 kHz spectral holes and exposes hidden 13C couplings.

desk verdict Solid experimental demonstration of continuous hole burning resolving narrow homogeneous features in a dense NV ensemble, but the 13C line assignments are not quantitatively backed at the operating field and the modeling is mostly curve fitting. read the letter →

arxiv 1909.01050 v2 pith:WG6ZINOB submitted 2019-09-03 cond-mat.mes-hall quant-ph

Haitham A.R. El-Ella , Alexander Huck , Ulrik L. Andersen This is my paper · ORCID

classification cond-mat.mes-hallquant-ph

keywords nitrogen-vacancycentersspectralholeburningpopulationoscillationsinhomogeneousbroadeninghyperfinespectroscopy13Cnuclearspinsdiamondspinensemblecontinuous-waveODMR

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

This paper demonstrates a continuous-wave spectroscopic method for inhomogeneously broadened nitrogen-vacancy spin ensembles in diamond. By simultaneously applying a pump field tuned within the ensemble line and a modulated probe field, the authors burn spectral holes whose narrowest width is about 4 kHz, roughly three orders of magnitude below the ensemble's 7 MHz inhomogeneous line. The hole width varies with detuning, revealing a homogeneous coherence time that drops from about 40 microseconds near line centre to sub-microsecond at the wings. The paper further shows that Fourier analysis of the population oscillations produced at the pump-probe beat frequency resolves discrete 13C hyperfine couplings inside the inhomogeneous line, as well as a suspected 7Li nuclear-spin signature. The result matters because it offers a continuous, pulsed-free route to spectroscopic detail in dense ensembles where T2* is only about 50 ns.

What carries the argument

The central object is the two-frequency continuous-wave hole-burning scheme: a pump microwave field permanently saturates part of the spin ensemble while a modulated probe field is swept across it, and lock-in detection of the fluorescence records a Lorentzian hole whose width is twice the homogeneous linewidth of the addressed subensemble. The second mechanism is continuous population oscillation: at small pump-probe detuning, the ground-state populations of the addressed subensemble and of spins coupled to it oscillate at the beat frequency, and a Fourier transform of the recorded oscillation trace converts those frequencies into a spectrum of intra-line couplings. A five-level rate-equation model of the NV center, with two coherently driven ground states, two optically populated excited states, and a shelving state, reproduces the measured oscillation envelopes and fixes the effective excitation rates used in the analysis.

What would settle it

Measure the population-oscillation Fourier spectrum of the same ensemble at a different magnetic field orientation, for instance with the field aligned along a <111> NV axis, and compare the shifts of the assigned 13C peaks with the predictions of the known anisotropic hyperfine tensors; if the peaks move in ways inconsistent with those tensors, the assignments in Table I fail. Alternatively, repeat the experiment on a diamond that was annealed but not neutron-irradiated: the 16 kHz triplet attributed to 7Li should vanish.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that continuous spectral hole burning and the accompanying population oscillations can isolate and resolve spectral structure buried under the inhomogeneous line of a dense NV ensemble. Burnt holes reach full width at half maximum around 4 kHz, corresponding to a homogeneous linewidth two orders of magnitude below the detuning-dependent values seen a few megahertz away and three orders below the total 6.8 MHz inhomogeneous line. The oscillation Fourier spectrum contains discrete, detuning-independent frequency components that the authors identify, using prior 13C hyperfine measurements as reference, as families of 13C nuclear spins at different lattice separations, plus a triplet tentatively assigned to a 3/2 nuclear spin, likely 7Li produced by neutron irradiation. The detuning trend of the hole width is attributed to magnetic anisotropy: NV centers close to P1 impurities experience larger off-axis fields, shifting their frequencies and shortening their coherence. The paper concludes that continuous CW schemes can complement pulsed double-resonance spectroscopy in samples where short T2* makes pulsed methods difficult.

Load-bearing premise

The identification of the 13C hyperfine families in the population-oscillation spectrum assumes that the coupling frequencies measured by Dréau et al. at about 2 mT remain recognisable at the roughly 30 mT, ~20-degree off-axis field used here, even though the paper provides no calculation of how anisotropic hyperfine shifts move those frequencies.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

If the central claim is right, a single continuous two-tone microwave setup can recover homogeneous linewidths and T2 values in dense NV ensembles without pulsed control, which is useful where T2* is tens of nanoseconds.
The detuning-dependent hole width gives a spectroscopic map of how the local P1 environment degrades coherence, so hole burning becomes a diagnostic of spatial disorder in the spin bath.
Fourier analysis of population oscillations can identify hyperfine couplings that lie inside the inhomogeneous line and are invisible to direct CW ODMR.
The suspected 7Li signature suggests neutron-irradiated diamonds retain detectable nuclear-spin byproducts; if confirmed, this is a new internal sensor of irradiation history.

Reading between the lines

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

A testable extension would be to vary the magnetic field orientation while repeating the Fourier analysis; the known anisotropic 13C hyperfine tensors predict how each family should shift, so the assignments for families P, Q, and R could be confirmed or rejected.
A control experiment on a diamond that was annealed but not neutron-irradiated could settle the 7Li interpretation: if the roughly 16 kHz triplet disappears, the assignment is strongly supported.
The same continuous hole-burning approach might be used to map the local concentration and spatial distribution of P1 impurities by scanning the detuning-dependent hole width across the inhomogeneous line.
Because the pump and probe are phase-locked and continuous, the method could be combined with optical repolarization to perform sub-kHz spectroscopy on ensembles too dense for pulsed Ramsey or Hahn-echo protocols.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Dear [Colleague],

You should know two things about this paper. First, it contains a genuinely useful measurement: continuous microwave hole burning in a heavily P1-doped diamond resolves holes as narrow as 4 kHz inside a 7 MHz inhomogeneous line, and the detuning dependence of the hole width is a clean, reproducible observation. Second, the flashiest claim — that the Fourier spectrum of population oscillations identifies discrete 13C hyperfine families inside the inhomogeneous line — is plausible but not yet quantitatively established.

What is new: the specific sample (neutron-irradiated, P1-rich, T2*≈50 ns), the detuning-dependent hole linewidth (40 µs to 0.7 µs), and the PO Fourier maps with assignments to six 13C families (J–O) whose frequencies line up with Dréau et al. within a few tens of kHz. The authors are also honest about their five-level model: they admit the fitted effective excitation rates are orders of magnitude below the delivered power and that T1 must be set >10 s to reproduce the data. That honesty is real, and it correctly frames the model as a qualitative tool rather than a predictive one.

Where the soft spots are: the 13C identification rests on comparing low-field (2 mT, presumably aligned) hyperfine constants with data taken at ~30 mT with the field ~20° off all <111> axes. The authors give no calculation of how the anisotropic hyperfine tensor and the nuclear Zeeman term shift the observed splittings. At 30 mT the 13C Zeeman frequency is ~0.32 MHz, not negligible relative to the 0.13–1.03 MHz couplings. Without that calculation, the agreement for J–O could be partly coincidental, and the three unanchored families (P–R) are assigned only by symmetry of fluctuations and independence of detuning — features shared by mains harmonics and other spurious peaks. The highest-frequency entry (−1.0183 MHz) also sits just above the Nyquist limit for the stated 2 MHz sampling, so an aliasing check is needed. These are fixable: a few pages of spin-Hamiltonian eigenvalues for 13C at the actual field and orientation would settle it, or a pulsed double-resonance measurement at the same conditions.

Other issues are minor but should be cleaned up: the abstract says POs decay beyond 5 Hz detuning, the conclusion says 10 Hz; error bars are absent from Fig. 2 and Fig. 3; and the 7Li triplet is a reasonable speculation but is not supported beyond one example.

Who this is for: experimentalists working on dense NV ensembles, hole burning, or diamond magnetometry. It deserves a serious referee: the raw observations appear sound, and the assignment question is exactly what a referee should push on. I would accept it for review and ask for the field-dependent calculation and a few missing error bars.

Best.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper reports continuous-wave (CW) spectral hole burning and population oscillations (POs) in an inhomogeneously broadened ensemble of nitrogen-vacancy (NV) centers in neutron-irradiated diamond. The authors measure burnt-hole linewidths as narrow as ~4 kHz against a ~7 MHz inhomogeneous line, observe a detuning-dependent homogeneous linewidth attributed to the magnetic anisotropy of NV and P1 defects, and record continuous POs that decay beyond ~10 Hz pump-probe detuning. The POs are modeled with a five-level rate-equation model, and Fourier analysis of the POs yields discrete spectral components that are assigned to 13C hyperfine families (Table I) and a suspected 7Li nuclear quadrupole signature. The paper claims that CW hole burning and PO Fourier analysis can isolate sub-ensembles and identify nuclear-spin couplings that are invisible in direct CW ODMR.

Significance. If the central claims hold, the paper demonstrates a simple CW method to access homogeneous sub-ensembles and sub-linewidth nuclear-spin couplings in dense NV ensembles where T2* is only ~50 ns and pulsed methods are challenging. The direct hole-linewidth measurements (down to ~4 kHz, with T2 ~ 40 µs) are striking and appear self-consistent. The paper also makes good use of an independent benchmark: six of the nine assigned 13C families (J–O) are compared with the pulsed ODMR values of Dréau et al. [31]. The main value of the paper—identifying discrete 13C hyperfine interactions within the inhomogeneous line via PO Fourier spectra—is, however, contingent on the quantitative correctness of those assignments, and that is where the present analysis is weakest.

major comments (3)

[§V, Table I] The 13C family assignments in Table I are not quantitatively supported because they compare hyperfine couplings measured at ~2 mT (Ref. [31]) with data taken at ~30 mT with the field applied ~20° off all <111> axes, without any calculation of the field- and angle-dependent shift. At 30 mT the 13C nuclear Zeeman frequency (~0.32 MHz) is of the same order as the quoted couplings (0.13–1.03 MHz), and the observed splittings are eigenvalues of the full Hamiltonian D S_z^2 + γ_e B·S + S·A·I + γ_n B·I, not simply the near-zero-field A_parallel values. A 20° field tilt also changes the electron-spin quantization axis and can alter effective hyperfine splittings by tens of percent. The authors should either provide the required eigenvalue calculation or explicitly present the assignments as tentative. For three families (P, Q, R) there is no reference value in Ref. [31] at all, so their identification rests only on fluctuation symmetry and plausibility; this does not exclude noise or electronic interference. Because the paper's central claim of sub-linewidth nuclear-spin identification depends on this table, the assignment must be put on firmer footing, for example by measuring at a second field magnitude/angle and checking the predicted shifts.
[§V, Table I and Fig. 6] The listed family J at −1.0183 MHz exceeds the Nyquist frequency for the stated 2-MHz sampling rate used for Fig. 6 (Nyquist limit = 1 MHz). A spectral peak above 1 MHz would alias into the measured Fourier spectrum, and the paper does not discuss this possibility. The identification of the highest-frequency family is therefore questionable unless anti-aliasing was explicitly used or the sampling rate is misstated; please clarify and, if necessary, re-examine the assignment.
[§IV and Appendix] The five-level model fit requires effective rates Λ and Ω_p/b below 100 Hz (and T1 > 10 s) to reproduce the PO traces, while the experimentally delivered powers correspond to estimated rates in the MHz range. The authors interpret these as effective single-NV rates due to absorbing defects, which is a reasonable physical picture, but as presented the model is not a quantitative test of the dynamics: it has essentially four free parameters (Λ, Ω_p, Ω_b, T1) and the fitted values deviate from the experimental controls by orders of magnitude. The paper should state explicitly that the model is illustrative rather than a validated fit and should report parameter uncertainties or a sensitivity analysis. Otherwise, the claim that the envelope shape and decay of the POs are 'reproduced' is too strong.

minor comments (5)

[Eq. (1)] Equation (1) defines 2Γ_h = (πT2)^{-1}; please define Γ_h precisely and confirm the factor of two in the main text, since the text quotes Γ_h ~ 4 kHz and T2 ~ 40 µs, which gives (πT2)^{-1} ~ 8 kHz (consistent with 2Γ_h, but the notation is easy to misread).
[Fig. 5 vs Fig. 6] The text states that Fig. 5 was measured with a 10 kHz sampling rate and Fig. 6 with a 2 MHz sampling rate, but it does not explain why different acquisition modes were used or how the lock-in was bypassed in each case. Please add a sentence clarifying the two measurement configurations.
[Fig. 7] The 7Li triplet signature is described qualitatively ('peak triplet separation and their relative amplitudes are distinct'). Please provide the fitted peak positions, amplitudes, and a comparison with the expected quadrupole splitting from Eq. (4) to make the assignment testable.
[General notation] The tilde notation for the collective dephasing time (~T*2, ~T1, ~T2) is used inconsistently; define it once in Section II and use it uniformly. Also, the statement in Section III that '2Γh' equals twice the homogeneous linewidth is repeated without a clear definition of the homogeneous linewidth in the text.
[Conclusion] The conclusion states that POs were 'unresolvable beyond a 10 Hz detuning,' but Section IV says 'within 20 Hz' and Fig. 3 shows data to about 15–20 Hz. Please reconcile the numbers.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central measurements are direct, the 13C assignment is externally benchmarked, and the model fitting is explicit rather than disguised as prediction.

full rationale

The paper's central claims rest on direct measurements: the burnt-hole linewidth is extracted from lock-in ODMR spectra, the population oscillations are directly detected time traces, and the Fourier peaks are discrete spectral features of those traces. The five-level rate-equation model is explicitly fitted to the PO data by varying T1, T2*, Omega_p/b, and Lambda, and the paper openly states that these are fitting parameters rather than predictions; using the fitted model to interpret the envelope decay and the dressed-state shift is post-hoc consistency checking, not circular derivation. The identification of the Fourier components with 13C hyperfine families is anchored to external pulsed-ODMR results in Ref. [31] (Dreau et al.), not to the paper's own fitted values, and the comparison is presented as a table of measured vs. reference frequencies. The lack of a field-dependent hyperfine calculation for the 30 mT, off-axis condition is a legitimate scientific robustness concern, but it is a correctness/evidentiary issue, not a circularity under the defined criteria. The only self-citations (Refs. [28] and [29]) are used to support the general validity of the five-level model for homogeneous low-density NV ensembles; they are not load-bearing for the current experiment, where the model is fitted to the measured data, and the model itself is also referenced to standard literature. Accordingly, no derivation step reduces to its own inputs by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The core measurements are direct, but the interpretation of the PO dynamics relies on an admittedly incomplete five-level model with four fitted effective rates, and the nuclear-spin assignments depend on external calibration from prior pulsed measurements. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (4)

Effective optical excitation rate Lambda = <100 Hz (order 10 Hz used in simulations)
Fitted to reproduce the PO envelope width and decay; the delivered optical power would correspond to MHz rates, so Lambda is interpreted as an effective per-NV rate reduced by absorbing defects.
Effective probe Rabi frequency Omega_p = <100 Hz, scaled linearly in simulation across measured power steps
Fitted to match PO amplitude and asymmetry; the experimentally delivered microwave fields correspond to MHz-scale Rabi frequencies.
Effective pump Rabi frequency Omega_b = <100 Hz (same scale as Omega_p)
Fitted together with Omega_p; used to reproduce the PO shape and the dressed-state shift.
Longitudinal relaxation time T1 = >10 s (effectively excluded)
Set to a very large value because a finite T1 destroys the fit; the authors attribute this to the model's incompleteness and the continuous optical repolarization dynamics.

assumptions (6)

domain assumption The NV center dynamics are described by the five-level model with two ground-state spin sublevels, two excited spin sublevels, and a shelving state, with incoherent optical pumping and coherent microwave driving (Eqs. 2, 3, A.1-A.7).
This model is standard for single NV centers (Refs. [23,24,27-29]) and is assumed to represent the ensemble's average dynamics; the authors state it is incomplete for this inhomogeneous ensemble.
standard math The rotating-wave approximation and Heisenberg-Langevin equations of motion apply to the driven NV dynamics.
Used to derive the coupled rate equations in the Appendix; not proven but standard for this system.
standard math The measured hole linewidth Gamma_h is related to the homogeneous coherence time by 2*Gamma_h = 1/(pi*T2), which assumes operation in the linewidth-narrowing regime where power broadening is avoided (Eq. 1).
Standard spectral hole burning result from Ref. [1]; the paper asserts the experimental regime but does not quantify the excitation rates for each data point.
domain assumption The frequencies and signs of the PO Fourier peaks correspond to the 13C hyperfine families identified by Dreau et al. at low field (Ref. [31]) despite the higher and differently oriented field here.
The assignment relies on matching to prior data and on anisotropic coupling arguments, with no direct calculation of the expected field-dependent shifts.
domain assumption 7Li, produced by decay of neutron-irradiation byproduct 7Be, resides in interstitial sites with local electric-field gradients of order 10^18 V/m^2, producing the observed quadrupole-split triplet.
Used to interpret the 16 kHz triplet; explicitly speculative and supported only by dosimetry and generic references on Li mobility in diamond.
domain assumption The inhomogeneous broadening of the NV ensemble is dominated by P1-induced pure dephasing with a T2* around 50 ns, and detuning-dependent T2 is governed by the magnetic anisotropy of NV and P1 defects.
Used to explain the detuning dependence of Gamma_h; plausible but not directly verified in this work.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Continuous microwave hole burning and population oscillations in a diamond spin ensemble." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/WG6ZINOB

@misc{pith2026190901050,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Continuous microwave hole burning and population oscillations in a diamond spin ensemble},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/WG6ZINOB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1909.01050}
}

abstract

Continuous spectral hole burning and spin-level population oscillations are studied in an inhomogeneously broadened diamond-based spin ensemble composed of substitutional nitrogen and nitrogen-vacancy centres created through neutron irradiation and annealing. The burnt spectral features highlight a detuning-dependent homogeneous hole linewidth that is up to three orders of magnitude narrower than the total inhomogeneous ensemble linewidth. Continuous population oscillations are observed to quickly decay beyond a pump and probe detuning of 5 Hz, and are numerically modelled using a five-level system of coupled rate equations. Fourier analysis of these oscillations highlight discrete $^{13}$C hyperfine interactions, with energies within the inhomogeneous ensemble linewidth, as well as suspected nuclear $3/2$-spin coupled signatures likely related to the $^7$Li byproduct of neutron irradiation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1909.01050 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2. (a) Measured ODMR map using a logarithmic colour scale, as a function of the pump and probe field frequencies. (b) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** FIG. 3. (a) Detected POs of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (5 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4. ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: FIG. 5. Fourier spectrum maps at various frequency intervals as a function of detuning ∆ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: FIG. 6. Near zero-field ODMR spectrum highlighting the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png]

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: FIG. 7. Possible signature of coupled 3/2 nuclear spins, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png]

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: FIG. 8. Depiction of the five-level model described by the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

37 extracted references · 31 canonical work pages

[31]

Dr´ eau, J.-R

A. Dr´ eau, J.-R. Maze, M. Lesik, J.-F. Roch, and V. Jacques, Phys. Rev. B 85, 134107 (2012)

work page 2012
[1]

W. E. Moerner, ed., Persistent Spectral Hole-Burning: Science and Applications , Topics in Current Physics, Vol. 44 (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1988)

work page 1988
[2]

Lovchinsky, J

I. Lovchinsky, J. D. Sanchez-Yamagishi, E. K. Urbach, S. Choi, S. Fang, T. I. Andersen, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, A. Bylinskii, E. Kaxiras, P. Kim, H. Park, and M. D. Lukin, Science 355, 503 (2017)

work page 2017
[3]

D. R. Glenn, D. B. Bucher, J. Lee, M. D. Lukin, H. Park, and R. L. Walsworth, Nature 555, 351 (2018)

work page 2018
[4]

de Lange, T

G. de Lange, T. van der Sar, M. Blok, Z.-H. Wang, V. Dobrovitski, and R. Hanson, Sci. Rep. 2, 382 (2012)

work page 2012
[5]

Dr´ eau, P

A. Dr´ eau, P. Jamonneau, O. Gazzano, S. Kosen, J. F. Roch, J. R. Maze, and V. Jacques, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 1 (2014)

work page 2014
[6]

Bar-Gill, L

N. Bar-Gill, L. Pham, C. Belthangady, D. Le Sage, P. Cappellaro, J. Maze, M. Lukin, A. Yacoby, and R. Walsworth, Nat. Commun. 3, 858 (2012)

work page 2012
[7]

Mittiga, S

T. Mittiga, S. Hsieh, C. Zu, B. Kobrin, F. Machado, P. Bhattacharyya, N. Z. Rui, A. Jarmola, S. Choi, D. Budker, and N. Y. Yao, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 246402 (2018)

work page 2018

Show all 37 references

[8]

Rosenzweig, Y

Y. Rosenzweig, Y. Schlussel, and R. Folman, Phys. Rev. B 98, 014112 (2018)

2018
[9]

Bauch, C

E. Bauch, C. A. Hart, J. M. Schloss, M. J. Turner, J. F. Barry, P. Kehayias, S. Singh, and R. L. Walsworth, Phys. Rev. X 8, 031025 (2018)

2018
[10]

J. M. Taylor, P. Cappellaro, L. Childress, L. Jiang, D. Budker, P. R. Hemmer, A. Yacoby, R. Walsworth, and M. D. Lukin, Nat. Phys. 4, 810 (2008)

2008
[11]

J. D. Breeze, E. Salvadori, J. Sathian, N. M. Alford, and C. W. M. Kay, Nature 555, 493 (2018). 10

2018
[12]

V. M. Acosta, E. Bauch, M. P. Ledbetter, C. Santori, K.-M. C. Fu, P. E. Barclay, R. G. Beausoleil, H. Linget, J. F. Roch, F. Treussart, S. Chemerisov, W. Gawlik, and D. Budker, Phys. Rev. B 80, 115202 (2009)

2009
[13]

L. Chen, X. Miao, H. Ma, L. Guo, Z. Wang, Z. Yang, C. Fang, and X. Jia, CrystEngComm 20, 7164 (2018)

2018
[14]

D. F. Phillips, A. Fleischhauer, A. Mair, R. L. Walsworth, and M. D. Lukin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 783 (2001)

2001
[15]

Maynard, F

M.-A. Maynard, F. Bretenaker, and F. Goldfarb, Phys. Rev. A 90, 061801 (2014)

2014
[16]

Kehayias, M

P. Kehayias, M. Mr´ ozek, V. M. Acosta, A. Jarmola, D. S. Rudnicki, R. Folman, W. Gawlik, and D. Budker, Phys. Rev. B 89, 245202 (2014)

2014
[17]

Mrozek, A

M. Mrozek, A. M. Wojciechowski, D. S. Rudnicki, J. Zachorowski, P. Kehayias, D. Budker, and W. Gawlik, Phys. Rev. B 94, 035204 (2016)

2016
[18]

S. Putz, A. Angerer, D. O. Krimer, R. Glattauer, W. J. Munro, S. Rotter, J. Schmiedmayer, and J. Majer, Nat. Photonics 11, 36 (2017)

2017
[19]

Gatto Monticone, F

D. Gatto Monticone, F. Quercioli, R. Mercatelli, S. Soria, S. Borini, T. Poli, M. Vannoni, E. Vittone, and P. Olivero, Phys. Rev. B 88, 155201 (2013)

2013
[20]

L. T. Hall, P. Kehayias, D. A. Simpson, A. Jarmola, A. Stacey, D. Budker, and L. C. L. Hollenberg, Nat. Commun. 7, 10211 (2016)

2016
[21]

C. M. Purser, V. P. Bhallamudi, C. S. Wolfe, H. Yusuf, B. A. McCullian, C. Jayaprakash, M. E. Flatt´ e, and P. C. Hammel, J. Phys. D. Appl. Phys. 52, 305004 (2019)

2019
[22]

Bauch, S

E. Bauch, S. Singh, J. Lee, C. A. Hart, J. M. Schloss, M. J. Turner, J. F. Barry, L. Pham, N. Bar-Gill, S. F. Yelin, and R. L. Walsworth, arXiv:1904.08763 (2019)

2019 arXiv
[23]

M. W. Doherty, N. B. Manson, P. Delaney, F. Jelezko, J. Wrachtrup, and L. C. Hollenberg, Phys. Rep. 528, 1 (2013)

2013
[24]

Jensen, V

K. Jensen, V. M. Acosta, A. Jarmola, and D. Budker, Phys. Rev. B 87, 014115 (2013)

2013
[25]

P. L. Stanwix, L. M. Pham, J. R. Maze, D. Le Sage, T. K. Yeung, P. Cappellaro, P. R. Hemmer, A. Yacoby, M. D. Lukin, and R. L. Walsworth, Phys. Rev. B 82, 201201 (2010)

2010
[26]

Tetienne, L

J.-P. Tetienne, L. Rondin, P. Spinicelli, M. Chipaux, T. Debuisschert, J.-F. Roch, and V. Jacques, New J. Phys. 14, 103033 (2012)

2012
[27]

Robledo, H

L. Robledo, H. Bernien, T. V. D. Sar, and R. Hanson, New J. Phys. 13, 025013 (2011)

2011
[28]

H. A. R. El-Ella, S. Ahmadi, A. M. Wojciechowski, A. Huck, and U. L. Andersen, Opt. Express 25, 14809 (2017)

2017
[29]

Ahmadi, H

S. Ahmadi, H. A. El-Ella, J. O. Hansen, A. Huck, and U. L. Andersen, Phys. Rev. Appl. 8, 034001 (2017)

2017
[30]

Kucsko, S

G. Kucsko, S. Choi, J. Choi, P. C. Maurer, H. Zhou, R. Landig, H. Sumiya, S. Onoda, J. Isoya, F. Jelezko, E. Demler, N. Y. Yao, and M. D. Lukin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 023601 (2018)

2018
[32]

J. S. Shore, S. H. Wang, R. E. Taylor, A. T. Bell, and A. Pines, J. Chem. Phys. 105, 9412 (1996)

1996
[33]

Stone, At

N. Stone, At. Data Nucl. Data Tables 90, 75 (2005)

2005
[34]

Autschbach, S

J. Autschbach, S. Zheng, and R. W. Schurko, Concepts Magn. Reson. Part A 36A, 84 (2010)

2010
[35]

R. F. Stewart, J. Chem. Phys. 58, 4430 (1973)

1973
[36]

Restle, K

M. Restle, K. BharuthRam, H. Quintel, C. Ronning, H. Hofs¨ ass, S. G. Jahn, and U. Wahl, Appl. Phys. Lett. 66, 2733 (1995)

1995
[37]

M. Z. Othman, P. W. May, N. A. Fox, and P. J. Heard, Diam. Relat. Mater. 44, 1 (2014)

2014

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [31]

Dr´ eau, J.-R

A. Dr´ eau, J.-R. Maze, M. Lesik, J.-F. Roch, and V. Jacques, Phys. Rev. B 85, 134107 (2012)

work page 2012

[2] [1]

W. E. Moerner, ed., Persistent Spectral Hole-Burning: Science and Applications , Topics in Current Physics, Vol. 44 (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1988)

work page 1988

[3] [2]

Lovchinsky, J

I. Lovchinsky, J. D. Sanchez-Yamagishi, E. K. Urbach, S. Choi, S. Fang, T. I. Andersen, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, A. Bylinskii, E. Kaxiras, P. Kim, H. Park, and M. D. Lukin, Science 355, 503 (2017)

work page 2017

[4] [3]

D. R. Glenn, D. B. Bucher, J. Lee, M. D. Lukin, H. Park, and R. L. Walsworth, Nature 555, 351 (2018)

work page 2018

[5] [4]

de Lange, T

G. de Lange, T. van der Sar, M. Blok, Z.-H. Wang, V. Dobrovitski, and R. Hanson, Sci. Rep. 2, 382 (2012)

work page 2012

[6] [5]

Dr´ eau, P

A. Dr´ eau, P. Jamonneau, O. Gazzano, S. Kosen, J. F. Roch, J. R. Maze, and V. Jacques, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 1 (2014)

work page 2014

[7] [6]

Bar-Gill, L

N. Bar-Gill, L. Pham, C. Belthangady, D. Le Sage, P. Cappellaro, J. Maze, M. Lukin, A. Yacoby, and R. Walsworth, Nat. Commun. 3, 858 (2012)

work page 2012

[8] [7]

Mittiga, S

T. Mittiga, S. Hsieh, C. Zu, B. Kobrin, F. Machado, P. Bhattacharyya, N. Z. Rui, A. Jarmola, S. Choi, D. Budker, and N. Y. Yao, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 246402 (2018)

work page 2018