Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 205

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Comparison of Two Independent Sr Optical Clocks with1×10−17Stability at103 s

Open access
Nicholson, T. L., Martin, M. J., Williams, J. R., Bloom, B. J., Bishof, M., Swallows, M. D., Campbell, S. L., Ye, J.·2012·Physical Review Letters

Abstract

Many-particle optical lattice clocks have the potential for unprecedented measurement precision and stability due to their low quantum projection noise. However, this potential has so far never been realized because clock stability has been limited by frequency noise of optical local oscillators. By synchronously probing two $^{87}\mathrm{Sr}$ lattice systems using a laser with a thermal noise floor of $1\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}{10}^{\ensuremath{-}15}$, we remove classically correlated laser noise from the intercomparison, but this does not demonstrate independent clock performance. With an improved optical oscillator that has a $1\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}{10}^{\ensuremath{-}16}$ thermal noise floor, we demonstrate an order of magnitude improvement over the best reported stability of any independent clock, achieving a fractional instability of $1\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}{10}^{\ensuremath{-}17}$ in 1000 s of averaging time for synchronous or asynchronous comparisons. This result is within a factor of 2 of the combined quantum projection noise limit for a 160 ms probe time with $\ensuremath{\sim}{10}^{3}$ atoms in each clock. We further demonstrate that even at this high precision, the overall systematic uncertainty of our clock is not limited by atomic interactions. For the second Sr clock, which has a cavity-enhanced lattice, the atomic-density-dependent frequency shift is evaluated to be $\ensuremath{-}3.11\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}{10}^{\ensuremath{-}17}$ with an uncertainty of $8.2\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}{10}^{\ensuremath{-}19}$.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1103/physrevlett.109.230801

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 5 references

Cited by

See all 205

Metadata

Authors
Nicholson, T. L., Martin, M. J., Williams, J. R., Bloom, B. J., Bishof, M., Swallows, M. D., Campbell, S. L., & Ye, J.
Venue
Physical Review Letters
Published
2012-12-05
Volume
109
Issue
23
Pages
230801-230801
ISSN
  • 0031-9007 (ISSN-L)
  • 1079-7114
OpenAlex
W2001026400
Cited by
205
References
5
FWCI
13.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparison of Two Independent Sr Optical Clocks with1×10−17Stability at103 s. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1103/physrevlett.109.230801
The paper
Nicholson, T. L., Martin, M. J., Williams, J. R., Bloom, B. J., Bishof, M., Swallows, M. D., Campbell, S. L., & Ye, J. (2012). Comparison of Two Independent Sr Optical Clocks with1×10−17Stability at103 s. Physical Review Letters. https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.109.230801

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.