Cited by 101Advanced Frequency and Time StandardsCold Atom Physics and Bose-Einstein CondensatesAtomic and Subatomic Physics Research

Hyperpolarizability and Operational Magic Wavelength in an Optical Lattice Clock

Open access
Brown, R. C., Phillips, N. B., Beloy, K., McGrew, W. F., Schioppo, M., Fasano, R. J., Milani, G., Zhang, X. +6 more·2017·Physical Review Letters

Abstract

Optical clocks benefit from tight atomic confinement enabling extended interrogation times as well as Doppler- and recoil-free operation. However, these benefits come at the cost of frequency shifts that, if not properly controlled, may degrade clock accuracy. Numerous theoretical studies have predicted optical lattice clock frequency shifts that scale nonlinearly with trap depth. To experimentally observe and constrain these shifts in an ^{171}Yb optical lattice clock, we construct a lattice enhancement cavity that exaggerates the light shifts. We observe an atomic temperature that is proportional to the optical trap depth, fundamentally altering the scaling of trap-induced light shifts and simplifying their parametrization. We identify an "operational" magic wavelength where frequency shifts are insensitive to changes in trap depth. These measurements and scaling analysis constitute an essential systematic characterization for clock operation at the 10^{-18} level and beyond.

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.119.253001

Cites

55 of 55 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The thermal shields facilitate characterisation of Stark effects from blackbody radiation and provide an in-situ Faraday enclosure shielding the atoms from static electric fields.

    “This facilitates characterisation of a key systematic effect afflicting optical clocks, Stark effects from blackbody radiation bathing the ultracold atoms, and further provides an insitu Faraday enclosure shielding the atoms from static electric fields due to stray charges on the vacuum apparatus 24 .”
  • The Stark shift due to stray electric fields is consistent with zero at better than the 10^-19 level on both systems.

    “By applying voltage to the windows of the thermal shield, the Stark shift due to stray electric fields is found to be consistent with zero at better than the 10 -19 level on both systems 24 .”

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [57]C. Shi, J.-L. Robyr, U. Eismann, M. Zawada, L. Lorini, R. Le Targat, and J. Lodewyck, Phys. Rev. A 92 , 012516 (2015), URL http://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRevA.92.012516 .
  2. [58]A. P. Kulosa, D. Fim, K. H. Zipfel, S. R¨ uhmann, S. Sauer, N. Jha, K. Gibble, W. Ertmer, E. M. Rasel, M. S. Safronova, et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 115 , 240801 (2015), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRevLett.115.240801 .
  3. [59]R. Tyumenev, M. Favier, S. Bilicki, E. Bookjans, R. L. Targat, J. Lodewyck, D. Nicolodi, Y. L. Coq, M. Abgrall, J. Guna, et al., New Journal of Physics 18 , 113002 (2016), URL http://stacks.iop.org/1367-2630/18/i= 11/a=113002 .

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Brown, R. C., Phillips, N. B., Beloy, K., McGrew, W. F., Schioppo, M., Fasano, R. J., Milani, G., Zhang, X., Hinkley, N., Leopardi, H., Yoon, T. H., Nicolodi, D., Fortier, T. M., & Ludlow, A. D.
Affiliations
National Institute of Standards and Technology (US)
Venue
Physical Review Letters
Published
2017-12-19
Volume
119
Issue
25
Pages
253001-253001
ISSN
  • 0031-9007 (ISSN-L)
  • 1079-7114
OpenAlex
W2743882218
Cited by
101
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 1
FWCI
4.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Physical Review Letters (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • PORTO@Iris (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • PORTO Publications Open Repository TOrino (Politecnico di Torino) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • Bulletin of the American Physical Society
Funders
  • National Aeronautics and Space Administration
  • Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
  • National Academy of Sciences
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Advanced Frequency and Time Standards
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Cold Atom Physics and Bose-Einstein Condensates
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Atomic and Subatomic Physics Research
Keywords
optical lattice clock, hyperpolarizability, 171Yb, atomic temperature, systematic frequency shifts, clock accuracy

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