Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 5 cited by

Preparing two ultracold molecules in the ro-vibrational pair (0,1)+(1,0) creates a strong repulsive van der Waals interaction that suppresses collisional loss by up to seven orders of magnitude and enables evaporative cooling of Fermi mixtu

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-03 01:41 UTC pith:3SZWU6W5

load-bearing objection The ro-vibrational vdW interaction is a real and novel mechanism with solid coupled-channel support; the paper should be peer reviewed, but the abstract's evaporation claim goes beyond what is shown. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.25774 v2 pith:3SZWU6W5 submitted 2026-07-28 cond-mat.quant-gas physics.atom-phphysics.chem-phquant-ph

Ro-vibrational van der Waals interaction between ultracold polar molecules

Kang Feng , Hanwei Yang , Hubert J. J\'o\'zwiak , Tijs Karman This is my paper
classification cond-mat.quant-gas physics.atom-phphysics.chem-phquant-ph
keywords ultracold moleculesro-vibrational van der Waals interactionrotation-vibration couplingdipole-dipole interactioncollisional shieldingevaporative coolingFermi mixturecoupled-channel scattering
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

This paper identifies a new kind of van der Waals interaction between ultracold polar molecules that arises from the coupling of rotation and vibration. When one molecule sits in the vibrational ground state with one unit of rotation and the other sits in the first excited vibrational state with no rotation, the pair experiences a strong second-order dipolar force, repulsive in the upper channel, with a strength set by the simple formula C6 = de^4/(9αe). Because the rotation-vibration coupling constant αe is tiny (megahertz) compared to rotational or electronic energy gaps, this interaction is orders of magnitude stronger than previously known van der Waals forces. The repulsion suppresses inelastic collisions by several orders of magnitude (up to seven for NaK in its hyperfine ground state), making it possible to evaporatively cool a Fermi mixture of molecules without active shielding fields. If correct, the mechanism offers a new, field-free route to quantum gases of polar molecules and a versatile tuning knob for quantum simulation.

Core claim

The paper demonstrates that a pair of molecules in the ro-vibrational states (v,j)+(v',j')=(0,1)+(1,0) is coupled by the dipole-dipole interaction to the nearly degenerate pair (0,0)+(1,1). The degeneracy is broken by rotation-vibration coupling: the rotational constant is slightly smaller in v=1 because the molecule's bond is stretched, so the energy defect is 2αe. This virtual transition produces a second-order interaction ±C6 R^-6 with C6 = de^4/(9αe), repulsive in the entrance channel of interest. For NaK the coefficient is 7×10^7 a.u. and for the ultrapolar species KAg it reaches 10^10 a.u., giving van der Waals lengths of 1700 and 7400 bohr. Coupled-channel calculations including full

What carries the argument

The central object is the rotation-vibration coupling constant αe of the Dunham expansion, which measures how much the rotational constant decreases when the molecule is vibrationally excited. Its small size (roughly 1–100 MHz for assembled ultracold molecules) sets the energy denominator for the virtual dipole-allowed transition between (0,1)+(1,0) and (0,0)+(1,1), producing the strong van der Waals coefficient C6 = de^4/(9αe). The paper's quantitative engine is a coupled-channel scattering calculation that includes vibrational states in the monomer Hamiltonian, with an absorbing boundary condition modeling sticky collisions; a minimal two-channel model captures the universal scaling.

Load-bearing premise

The application to evaporative cooling assumes that vibrationally excited molecules (v=1, j=0) can be prepared, held, and rethermalized within their ~10–100 ms spontaneous-emission lifetime, so that decay-induced heating does not outpace evaporative cooling; the paper states the lifetime but does not demonstrate a cooling trajectory.

What would settle it

Measure the two-body loss rate coefficient for fermionic NaK molecules in the (0,1)+(1,0) ro-vibrational pair at a few hundred gauss and temperatures around 1 µK, with both molecules in their lowest hyperfine states; the central claim predicts a loss rate near or below 10^-14 cm^3/s with an elastic-to-inelastic ratio of order 15. Finding loss rates orders of magnitude higher (e.g., close to universal s-wave loss) would falsify the repulsive-ro-vibrational-vdW picture. A complementary test is a direct measurement of the C6 coefficient, e.g., through the position of shape resonances or photoasso

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Direct evaporative cooling of Fermi mixtures of molecules can work without microwave or electric-field shielding; the computed elastic-to-inelastic ratios are on the order of tens at 1 µK and improve at lower temperature.
  • The interaction is universal: for any linear diatomic molecule, the scattering length in units of R_d depends only on αe/E_d, so predictions transfer from NaK and KAg to other species.
  • The ro-vibrational vdW force can be combined with double microwave shielding to simultaneously suppress losses in v=0+v=0, v=0+v=1, and v=1+v=1 collisions, enabling stable pseudo-spin 1/2 mixtures with tunable dipolar interactions.
  • Because the repulsion is orders of magnitude stronger than the rotational vdW repulsion used previously, it can raise the single-molecule loading fidelity in optical tweezers beyond the ~80% limit.
  • The same mechanism can stabilize fermionic molecules in optical lattices against pair loss and provides a state-dependent interaction resource for synthetic dimensions.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The paper does not simulate a full evaporative cooling trajectory; a natural next step is a master-equation study that includes the ~10–100 ms lifetime of v=1 and spontaneous-emission heating, to check whether the favorable γ ratios survive in a realistic cooling ramp.
  • Because the energy defect 2αe can be tuned by external fields (AC Stark or microwave dressing), the C6 coefficient might be continuously tunable, turning the ro-vibrational vdW interaction into a control knob rather than a fixed property of each molecule species.
  • The mechanism should also apply to mixtures of different molecular species with matching ro-vibrational spacings; if an interspecies energy defect can be engineered, one could create repulsive interspecies vdW interactions for dual-species quantum gas experiments.
  • The asymmetry noted for microwave shielding—a v=0 molecule appearing non-polar to other v=0 molecules but polar to v=1 impurities—suggests a direct experimental probe: measuring the momentum-resolved radio-frequency spectrum of a v=0 Fermi bath in the presence of v=1 impurities should reveal the predicted strongly interacting polaron.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes and studies a ro-vibrational van der Waals interaction between ultracold polar molecules, arising from second-order dipole-dipole coupling between the pair (v,j)+(v',j')=(0,1)+(1,0) and (0,0)+(1,1). The rotation-vibration coupling constant α_e shifts the nominal degeneracy, producing an energy defect 2α_e and a state-dependent interaction ±C6/R^6, claimed to be repulsive in the upper channel with C6 = d_e^4/(9α_e). The authors tabulate α_e and related constants for bialkalis, laser-coolable molecules, and alkali-coinage-metal molecules; extend their coupled-channel methodology to include vibrational states; compute loss rates for NaK and KAg; demonstrate universal scaling of the scattering length as a function of α_e/E_d; and discuss applications, chiefly evaporative cooling of a Fermi mixture without active shielding and compatibility with double microwave shielding.

Significance. If the quantitative claims hold, the ro-vibrational vdW interaction is a new and unusually strong state-dependent interaction resource, with C6 values up to 10^10 a.u. for KAg and vdW length scales of thousands of bohr. The main strengths are that the input molecular constants are independently tabulated from spectroscopy or potential-energy-curve fits, and the universal scaling is tested against full coupled-channel calculations for two representative molecules, including hyperfine structure and, in separate calculations, microwave fields. The central interaction mechanism is physically plausible and the numerical checks are substantial. The main weakness is the evaporative-cooling application, which is supported only by a γ≈15 rate-coefficient ratio at 1 μK and lacks the density, trap, and lifetime analysis needed to justify the abstract's unqualified word 'enables.'

major comments (3)
  1. [VII/Abstract] The claim that the mechanism 'enables evaporative cooling of Fermi mixtures ... without active shielding' is not supported by the evidence presented. For NaK at T=1 μK, Fig. 6(a) gives γ≈15 for the elastic s-wave cross-state collision rate relative to the inelastic p-wave same-state rate. This is below the ratio usually required for practical forced evaporation, and the paper provides no cooling trajectory, density, trap-depth, or loss budget to show that γ≈15 suffices. It also does not include the finite lifetime of the v=1 state or the heating accompanying its decay. The text of Sec. VII is appropriately cautious ('could enable'), so the abstract's unqualified 'enables' should either be backed by a quantitative model or tempered.
  2. [III, Eq. (3)] The central quantitative result C6 = d_e^4/(9α_e) is asserted rather than derived. The reader cannot verify the angular factor 9, the sign convention for α_e, or the statement that this is the isotropic s-wave coefficient. A short derivation from Eq. (3) and the dipole-dipole operator in Eq. (6), including the sums over magnetic quantum numbers and partial waves, should be included. This is load-bearing because all quantitative predictions—the C6 values for NaK and KAg, the length scales R6, and the universal scaling in Eqs. (14)–(15)—depend on this coefficient.
  3. [VI, Eqs. (14)–(15)] The analytic expression as/R6 ≈ 0.676 for the repulsive van der Waals potential is attributed to an unpublished 'in preparation' reference [88]. This is a standard zero-energy result, but it should be derived in the paper or cited to a published source. More importantly, Eq. (14) is used in the universal model for elastic properties while the inelastic part is obtained numerically; the paper should state why the adiabatic upper-channel expression is valid when inelastic channels are open. The agreement with full coupled-channel results in Fig. 5 is reassuring, but the derivation should be self-contained.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Fig. 8 caption] Typo: 'transtition' should be 'transition'.
  2. [VIII] The sentence 'The lifetime of vibrationally excited states is tens of milliseconds' appears in the infrared-shielding discussion and seems to refer to NH. Its relevance to the bialkali molecules used in the evaporative-cooling discussion should be clarified, and quantitative lifetimes for NaK/KAg should be given if known.
  3. [Fig. 2 caption] The gray adiabatic curves are not labeled by hyperfine state or partial wave in the caption. Please specify which hyperfine states and partial waves are shown.
  4. [IV] The statement that hyperfine and microwave fields are not included simultaneously should be restated near Fig. 7 so that the domain of the simultaneous-shielding calculation is unambiguous.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the ro-vibrational vdW coefficient is computed from independent molecular constants and the suppression claim is tested by coupled-channel dynamics, not refit from its own output.

full rationale

The central result, C6 = d_e^4/(9 alpha_e) for the (v,j)+(v',j') = (0,1)+(1,0) pair, is obtained from second-order perturbation theory, Eq. (3), using the energy denominator 2 alpha_e from the Dunham expansion and the rotational transition dipole d_e. These molecular constants (alpha_e, d_e, B_e, etc.) are taken from spectroscopy, potential-energy-curve fits, or ab initio calculations (Table I), not from the collisional loss rates the paper predicts. There is no fitted parameter that is later renamed as a prediction. The paper's quantitative claims about loss suppression are outputs of coupled-channel scattering calculations with an absorbing boundary condition; the universal minimal model in Sec. VI is explicitly compared with full coupled-channel calculations for NaK and KAg (Fig. 5), and agreement is used to verify universality rather than assumed. The self-citations to prior rotational/hyperfine vdW work [36,37] and to the coupled-channel methodology [32] provide background and method, not the target conclusion; the novel ro-vibrational mechanism is derived and computed within this paper. The only mildly notable self-citation is Eq. (14), attributed to an in-preparation work with overlapping authorship [88]; however, it is a standard zero-energy scattering-length formula for a repulsive C6 potential, it is not fitted to the present results, and its use in the universal scaling is corroborated by the numerical universal curves and by the full coupled-channel markers in Fig. 5. The evaporative-cooling discussion in Sec. VII, with gamma ~15 at 1 microkelvin, may be optimistic, but that is an application-sufficiency concern, not circularity of the derivation. Overall, the paper's derivation chain is self-contained and does not reduce to its inputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 6 axioms · 0 invented entities

No free parameters are fitted to the collision data in this paper. All molecular inputs (α_e, d_e, B_e, ω_exe) come from independent spectroscopy or PEC fits. The universal scaling law's −2 exponent for the imaginary part of the scattering length is a numerical output of the minimal model, not an ad hoc input. Domain assumptions are the short-range capture model, the neglect of non-dipolar terms at long range, and the practicality of preparing and holding v=1 molecules.

axioms (6)
  • domain assumption The Dunham expansion (Eq. 1) with constant αe accurately describes ro-vibrational energies for the manifolds used.
    Sec. II. Molecular constants come from spectroscopically accurate PECs, but Eq. (2c) is approximate and fails for LiK (Table I), so αe for coinage-metal molecules is uncertain.
  • domain assumption The dipole-dipole interaction (Eq. 6) is the only important long-range interaction; electronic vdW and higher multipoles are absorbed into the short-range capture boundary.
    Sec. IV. Standard for polar molecules at the distances where the repulsive barrier acts, but it is a model assumption.
  • domain assumption Absorbing boundary conditions at short range model universal collisional loss (sticky collisions).
    Sec. IV. Follows Idziaszek & Julienne [82]; all loss-suppression claims depend on this capture model.
  • standard math Second-order perturbation theory (Eq. 3) with non-degenerate states applies to the (0,1)+(1,0) channel.
    Sec. III. The energy defect 2αe is much larger than the dipole coupling energy, justifying perturbation theory; the C6 formula depends on this.
  • domain assumption Molecules can be prepared in v=1, j=0 with sufficient lifetime (tens of ms) for evaporative cooling and collision experiments.
    Sec. I and Sec. VIII. The evaporative-cooling claim requires v=1 molecules to survive many elastic collisions, which is not quantified in the paper.
  • domain assumption The vibrational transition dipole moment is weak enough to be neglected in the universal two-level model.
    Sec. VI. The authors test this by comparing the minimal model to full coupled-channel calculations that include the vibrational dipole term.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 20477 in / 15858 out tokens · 169209 ms · 2026-08-03T01:41:55.326322+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We describe the ro-vibrational van der Waals interaction between ultracold polar molecules. This interaction is strong, leading to fast elastic collisions and orders of magnitude suppression of collisional loss. This enables evaporative cooling of Fermi mixtures of molecules in different ro-vibrational states, without active shielding by applying external fields. The scheme is compatible with microwave shielding, where it enables controlled state dependent interactions, opening up new opportunities for quantum simulation and impurity physics. The interaction can also be used to stabilize fermionic molecules in optical lattices, to control interactions in synthetic dimensions, for enhanced tweezer loading, and direct infrared shielding.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.25774 by Hanwei Yang, Hubert J. J\'o\'zwiak, Kang Feng, Tijs Karman.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_8.png] view at source ↗

Review history (2 revisions) →

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 5 Pith papers

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

  1. Deterministic loading of molecular arrays by microwave-assisted collisions

    physics.atom-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0

    Microwave-assisted collisions with repulsive van der Waals shelving are predicted to load single molecules into tweezers at 87-96% filling fractions, up from the current 30-40%.

  2. Deterministic loading of molecular arrays by microwave-assisted collisions

    physics.atom-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0

    Shelving molecules in rotationally or vibrationally excited states and driving microwave-assisted collisions can suppress loss, eject one molecule deterministically, and yield predicted filling fractions up to 96%.

  3. Tunable state-dependent interactions in collisionally stable mixtures of polar molecules

    cond-mat.quant-gas 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0

    Vibrational states v=0 and v=1 of microwave-shielded polar molecules form a collisionally stable pseudo-spin with tunable dipolar Ising, density-density, and spin-density interactions.

  4. Tunable state-dependent interactions in collisionally stable mixtures of polar molecules

    cond-mat.quant-gas 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0

    Microwave-shielded polar molecules in vibrational states v=0 and v=1 realize tunable Ising, density-density, and spin-density dipolar interactions with suppressed two-body losses.

  5. Tunable two-component ultracold molecular gases with vibrational shielding

    cond-mat.quant-gas 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0

    Vibrational-state-dependent repulsive shielding can stabilize and independently tune two-component ultracold molecular mixtures.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

96 extracted references · 7 linked inside Pith · cited by 3 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Karman, M

    T. Karman, M. Tomza, and J. P´ erez-R ´ ıos, Nature Phys. 20, 722 (2024)

    2024

  2. [2]

    N. R. Cooper and G. V. Shlyapnikov, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 155302 (2009)

    2009

  3. [3]

    A. V. Gorshkov, S. R. Manmana, G. Chen, J. Ye, E. Demler, M. D. Lukin, and A. M. Rey, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 115301 (2011)

    2011

  4. [4]

    Micheli, G

    A. Micheli, G. K. Brennen, and P. Zoller, Nature Physics 2, 341 (2006)

    2006

  5. [5]

    S. L. Cornish, M. R. Tarbutt, and K. R. Hazzard, Nature Physics20, 730 (2024)

    2024

  6. [6]

    DeMille, Phys

    D. DeMille, Phys. Rev. Lett.88, 067901 (2002)

    2002

  7. [7]

    D. K. Ruttley, T. R. Hepworth, A. Guttridge, and S. L. Cornish, Nature637, 827–832 (2025)

    2025

  8. [8]

    L. R. Picard, A. J. Park, G. E. Patenotte, S. Gebretsad- kan, D. Wellnitz, A. M. Rey, and K.-K. Ni, Nature637, 821 (2025)

    2025

  9. [9]

    C. M. Holland, Y. Lu, and L. W. Cheuk, Science382, 1143 (2023)

    2023

  10. [10]

    Y. Bao, S. S. Yu, L. Anderegg, E. Chae, W. Ketterle, K.-K. Ni, and J. M. Doyle, Science382, 1138 (2023)

    2023

  11. [11]

    DeMille, N

    D. DeMille, N. R. Hutzler, A. M. Rey, and T. Zelevinsky, 13 Nature Physics20, 741 (2024)

    2024

  12. [12]

    M. S. Safronova, D. Budker, D. DeMille, D. F. J. Kimball, A. Derevianko, and C. W. Clark, Rev. Mod. Phys.90, 025008 (2018)

    2018

  13. [13]

    Langen, G

    T. Langen, G. Valtolina, D. Wang, and J. Ye, Nature Physics20, 702 (2024)

    2024

  14. [14]

    M. L. Wall and L. Carr, Phys. Rev. A82, 013611 (2010)

    2010

  15. [15]

    Trefzger, C

    C. Trefzger, C. Menotti, B. Capogrosso-Sansone, and M. Lewenstein, J. Phys. B.44, 193001 (2011)

    2011

  16. [16]

    Capogrosso-Sansone, C

    B. Capogrosso-Sansone, C. Trefzger, M. Lewenstein, P. Zoller, and G. Pupillo, Phys. Rev. Lett.104, 125301 (2010)

    2010

  17. [17]

    Barnett, D

    R. Barnett, D. Petrov, M. Lukin, and E. Demler, Phys. Rev. Lett.96, 190401 (2006)

    2006

  18. [18]

    A. N. Carroll, H. Hirzler, C. Miller, D. Wellnitz, S. R. Muleady, J. Lin, K. P. Zamarski, R. R. Wang, J. L. Bohn, A. M. Rey,et al., Science388, 381 (2025)

    2025

  19. [19]

    Zhang, H

    W. Zhang, H. Liu, F. Deng, K. Chen, S. Yi, and T. Shi, arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.23820 (2025)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  20. [20]

    Langen, J

    T. Langen, J. Boronat, J. S´ anchez-Baena, R. Bomb ´ ın, T. Karman, and F. Mazzanti, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 053001 (2025)

    2025

  21. [21]

    Ciardi, K

    M. Ciardi, K. R. Pedersen, T. Langen, and T. Pohl, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 153401 (2025)

    2025

  22. [22]

    Mukherjee, J

    B. Mukherjee, J. M. Hutson, and K. R. Hazzard, New. J. Phys.27, 013013 (2025)

    2025

  23. [23]

    Sundar, B

    B. Sundar, B. Gadway, and K. R. Hazzard, Scientific re- ports8, 3422 (2018)

    2018

  24. [24]

    C. Feng, H. Manetsch, V. G. Rousseau, K. R. Hazzard, and R. Scalettar, Phys. Rev. A105, 063320 (2022)

    2022

  25. [25]

    De Marco, G

    L. De Marco, G. Valtolina, K. Matsuda, W. G. Tobias, J. P. Covey, and J. Ye, Science363, 853 (2019)

    2019

  26. [26]

    Valtolina, K

    G. Valtolina, K. Matsuda, W. G. Tobias, J.-R. Li, L. De Marco, and J. Ye, Nature588, 239 (2020)

    2020

  27. [27]

    Matsuda, L

    K. Matsuda, L. De Marco, J.-R. Li, W. G. Tobias, G. Valtolina, G. Qu´ em´ ener, and J. Ye, Science370, 1324 (2020)

    2020

  28. [28]

    Schindewolf, R

    A. Schindewolf, R. Bause, X.-Y. Chen, M. Duda, T. Kar- man, I. Bloch, and X.-Y. Luo, Nature607, 677 (2022)

    2022

  29. [29]

    Bigagli, W

    N. Bigagli, W. Yuan, S. Zhang, B. Bulatovic, T. Karman, I. Stevenson, and S. Will, Nature631, 289 (2024)

    2024

  30. [30]

    Z. Shi, Z. Huang, F. Deng, W.-J. Jin, S. Yi, T. Shi, and D. Wang, Bose-einstein condensate of ultracold sodium- rubidium molecules with tunable dipolar interactions (2025), arXiv:2508.20518 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  31. [31]

    W. Yuan, S. Zhang, N. Bigagli, H. Kwak, C. Warner, T. Karman, I. Stevenson, and S. Will, arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.08773 (2025)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  32. [32]

    Karman, N

    T. Karman, N. Bigagli, W. Yuan, S. Zhang, I. Stevenson, and S. Will, PRX Quantum6, 020358 (2025)

    2025

  33. [33]

    X.-Y. Chen, A. Schindewolf, S. Eppelt, R. Bause, M. Duda, S. Biswas, T. Karman, T. Hilker, I. Bloch, and X.-Y. Luo, Nature614, 59 (2023)

    2023

  34. [34]

    Zhang, W

    S. Zhang, W. Yuan, N. Bigagli, H. Kwak, T. Karman, I. Stevenson, and S. Will, Nature651, 601–606 (2026)

    2026

  35. [35]

    Schindewolf, J

    A. Schindewolf, J. Hertkorn, I. Stevenson, M. Ciardi, P. Gross, D. Wang, T. Karman, G. Quemener, S. Will, T. Pohl,et al., arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.14511 (2025)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  36. [36]

    E. F. Walraven and T. Karman, Phys. Rev. A109, 043310 (2024)

    2024

  37. [37]

    E. F. Walraven and T. Karman, Phys. Rev. A112, 032810 (2025)

    2025

  38. [38]

    X. Ye, M. Guo, M. L. Gonz´ alez-Mart ´ ınez, G. Qu´ em´ ener, and D. Wang, Science advances4, eaaq0083 (2018)

    2018

  39. [39]

    Kozyryev and N

    I. Kozyryev and N. R. Hutzler, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 133002 (2017)

    2017

  40. [40]

    N. R. Hutzler, Quantum Science & Technology5, 044011 (2020)

    2020

  41. [41]

    Anderegg, N

    L. Anderegg, N. B. Vilas, C. Hallas, P. Robichaud, A. Jadbabaie, J. M. Doyle, and N. R. Hutzler, Science 382, 665 (2023)

    2023

  42. [42]

    L. D. Augustoviˇ cov´ a and J. L. Bohn, New. J. Phys.21, 103022 (2019)

    2019

  43. [43]

    N. B. Vilas, P. Robichaud, C. Hallas, J. Tao, L. An- deregg, G. K. Li, H. Lampson, L. D. Augustoviˇ cov´ a, J. L. Bohn, and J. M. Doyle, Phys. Rev. X16, 021001 (2026)

    2026

  44. [44]

    K.-K. Ni, S. Ospelkaus, M. De Miranda, A. Pe’Er, B. Neyenhuis, J. Zirbel, S. Kotochigova, P. Julienne, D. Jin, and J. Ye, Science322, 231 (2008)

    2008

  45. [45]

    Takekoshi, L

    T. Takekoshi, L. Reichs¨ ollner, A. Schindewolf, J. M. Hut- son, C. R. Le Sueur, O. Dulieu, F. Ferlaino, R. Grimm, and H.-C. N¨ agerl, Phys. Rev. Lett.113, 205301 (2014)

    2014

  46. [46]

    P. K. Molony, P. D. Gregory, Z. Ji, B. Lu, M. P. K¨ oppinger, C. R. Le Sueur, C. L. Blackley, J. M. Hutson, and S. L. Cornish, Phys. Rev. Lett.113, 255301 (2014)

    2014

  47. [47]

    J. W. Park, S. A. Will, and M. W. Zwierlein, Phys. Rev. Lett.114, 205302 (2015)

    2015

  48. [48]

    M. Guo, B. Zhu, B. Lu, X. Ye, F. Wang, R. Vex- iau, N. Bouloufa-Maafa, G. Qu´ em´ ener, O. Dulieu, and D. Wang, Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 205303 (2016)

    2016

  49. [49]

    Stevenson, A

    I. Stevenson, A. Z. Lam, N. Bigagli, C. Warner, W. Yuan, S. Zhang, and S. Will, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 113002 (2023)

    2023

  50. [50]

    Zhelyazkova, A

    V. Zhelyazkova, A. Cournol, T. E. Wall, A. Matsushima, J. J. Hudson, E. Hinds, M. Tarbutt, and B. Sauer, Phys. Rev. A89, 053416 (2014)

    2014

  51. [51]

    E. S. Shuman, J. F. Barry, and D. DeMille, Nature467, 820 (2010)

    2010

  52. [52]

    Rockenh¨ auser, F

    M. Rockenh¨ auser, F. Kogel, T. Garg, S. A. Morales- Ram ´ ırez, and T. Langen, Phys. Rev. Res.6, 043161 (2024)

    2024

  53. [53]

    A. L. Collopy, S. Ding, Y. Wu, I. A. Finneran, L. An- deregg, B. L. Augenbraun, J. M. Doyle, and J. Ye, Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 213201 (2018)

    2018

  54. [54]

    Dunham, Phys

    J. Dunham, Phys. Rev.41, 721 (1932)

    1932

  55. [55]

    C. L. Pekeris, Phys. Rev.45, 98 (1934)

    1934

  56. [56]

    Kratzer, Zeits

    A. Kratzer, Zeits. f. Physik3, 289 (1920)

    1920

  57. [57]

    C. E. Burkhardt and J. J. Leventhal, Am. J. Phys.75, 686 (2007)

    2007

  58. [58]

    Docenko, M

    O. Docenko, M. Tamanis, R. Ferber, A. Pashov, H. Kn¨ ockel, and E. Tiemann, Eur. Phys. J. D31, 205 (2004)

    2004

  59. [59]

    Docenko, M

    O. Docenko, M. Tamanis, R. Ferber, H. Kn¨ ockel, and E. Tiemann, Phys. Rev. A

  60. [60]

    Pashov, O

    A. Pashov, O. Docenko, M. Tamanis, R. Ferber, H. Kn¨ ockel, and E. Tiemann, Phys. Rev. A72, 062505 (2005)

    2005

  61. [61]

    Pashov, O

    A. Pashov, O. Docenko, M. Tamanis, R. Ferber, H. Kn¨ ockel, and E. Tiemann, Phys. Rev. A76, 022511 (2007)

    2007

  62. [62]

    Steinke, H

    M. Steinke, H. Kn¨ ockel, and E. Tiemann, Phys. Rev. A 85, 042720 (2012)

    2012

  63. [63]

    Ferber, I

    R. Ferber, I. Klincare, O. Nikolayeva, M. Tamanis, H. Kn¨ ockel, E. Tiemann, and A. Pashov, Phys. Rev. A 80, 062501 (2009)

    2009

  64. [64]

    Ivanova, A

    M. Ivanova, A. Stein, A. Pashov, H. Kn¨ ockel, and E. Tie- mann, J. Chem. Phys.134, 024321 (2011)

    2011

  65. [65]

    Tiemann, H

    E. Tiemann, H. Kn¨ ockel, P. Kowalczyk, W. Jastrzebski, 14 A. Pashov, H. Salami, and A. Ross, Phys. Rev. A79, 042716 (2009)

    2009

  66. [66]

    ´Smia lkowski and M

    M. ´Smia lkowski and M. Tomza, Phys. Rev. A103, 022802 (2021)

    2021

  67. [67]

    Aymar and O

    M. Aymar and O. Dulieu, J. Chem. Phys.122(2005)

    2005

  68. [68]

    Ladjimi and M

    H. Ladjimi and M. Tomza, Phys. Rev. A109, 052814 (2024)

    2024

  69. [69]

    Koput, J

    J. Koput, J. Comput. Chem.36, 1286 (2015)

    2015

  70. [70]

    Radford and M

    H. Radford and M. Litvak, Chem. Phys. Lett.34, 561 (1975)

    1975

  71. [71]

    Wayne and H

    F. Wayne and H. Radford, Mol. Phys.32, 1407 (1976)

    1976

  72. [72]

    T¨ orring, W

    T. T¨ orring, W. Ernst, and S. Kindt, J. Chem. Phys.81, 4614 (1984)

    1984

  73. [73]

    Private communication from Luk´ aˇ s Paˇ steka and Anasta- sia Borshevsky, based on MRCI calculations similar to those reported in J. Chem. Phys.,151034302 (2019), but using a smaller basis set

    2019

  74. [74]

    K. P. Huber and G. Herzberg,Molecular Spectra and Molecular Structure(Springer US, 1979)

    1979

  75. [75]

    Childs, G

    W. Childs, G. Goodman, and L. Goodman, J. Mol. Spectr.115, 215 (1986)

    1986

  76. [76]

    Y. Hao, L. F. Paˇ steka, L. Visscher, P. Aggarwal, H. L. Bethlem, A. Boeschoten, A. Borschevsky, M. Denis, K. Esajas, S. Hoekstra, K. Jungmann, V. R. Marshall, T. B. Meijknecht, M. C. Mooij, R. G. E. Timmermans, A. Touwen, W. Ubachs, L. Willmann, Y. Yin, A. Za- para, and N. eEDM Collaboration), J. Chem. Phys.151, 034302 (2019)

    2019

  77. [77]

    M. A. Anderson, M. D. Allen, and L. M. Ziurys, Astro- phys. J.424, 503 (1994)

    1994

  78. [78]

    Ernst, J

    W. Ernst, J. K¨ andler, S. Kindt, and T. T¨ orring, Chem. Phys. Lett.113, 351 (1985)

    1985

  79. [79]

    R. D. Suenram, F. J. Lovas, G. T. Fraser, and K. Mat- sumura, J. Chem. Phys.92, 4724 (1990)

    1990

  80. [80]

    Staanum, A

    P. Staanum, A. Pashov, H. Kn¨ ockel, and E. Tiemann, Phys. Rev. A75, 042513 (2007)

    2007

Showing first 80 references.