Cited by 1,450Advanced Frequency and Time StandardsScientific Measurement and Uncertainty EvaluationAtomic and Subatomic Physics Research

Frequency Ratio of Al+and Hg+Single-Ion Optical Clocks; Metrology at the 17th Decimal Place

Open access
Rosenband, T., Hume, D. B., Schmidt, P. O., Chou, C. W., Brusch, A., Lorini, L., Oskay, W. H., Drullinger, R. E. +8 more·2008·Science

Abstract

Time has always had a special status in physics because of its fundamental role in specifying the regularities of nature and because of the extraordinary precision with which it can be measured. This precision enables tests of fundamental physics and cosmology, as well as practical applications such as satellite navigation. Recently, a regime of operation for atomic clocks based on optical transitions has become possible, promising even higher performance. We report the frequency ratio of two optical atomic clocks with a fractional uncertainty of 5.2 × 10–17. The ratio of aluminum and mercury single-ion optical clock frequencies ν Al+/ν Hg+is 1.052871833148990438(55), where the uncertainty comprises a statistical measurement uncertainty of 4.3 × 10–17, and systematic uncertainties of 1.9 × 10–17 and 2.3 × 10–17 in the mercury and aluminum frequency standards, respectively. Repeated measurements during the past year yield a preliminary constraint on the temporal variation of the fine-structure constant α of\batchmode \documentclass[fleqn,10pt,legalpaper]{article} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amsmath} \pagestyle{empty} \begin{document} \({\dot{{\alpha}}}{/}{\alpha}=(-1.6{\pm}2.3){\times}10^{-17}{/}\mathrm{year}\) \end{document}.

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 · 10.1126/science.1154622

Cites

31 of 32 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?

  • Atomic clock experiments constrain the current variation of the fine structure constant to |αdot/α0| < 10^-17 yr^-1.

    “Atomic clock experiments constrain the current variation of the fine structure constant, | α/α 0 | < 10 -17 yr -1 [13]”

    From Stress-energy tensor of a scalar field on a product spacetime with a time-dependent compact dimension (2026) · cites this paper as [13]

    The Rosenband et al. passage in the indexed copy (Additional information; page not provided) reports a preliminary estimate of α̇/α = (−1.6 ± 2.3) × 10^-17 yr^-1. Its central value and uncertainty do not establish the claimed upper bound of |α̇/α₀| < 10^-17 yr^-1. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The comparison of 27Al+ and 199Hg+ optical clocks sets d/dt ln(m_Hg/m_Al) = (5.3 ± 7.9) × 10^-17 yr^-1.

    “d dt ln m Hg m Al ¼ ð5:3 Æ 7:9Þ Â 10 À17 yr À1 :ð131Þ”
  • The aluminium-mercury clocks comparison translates to _a_EM/a_EM = (-1.6 ± 2.3) × 10^-17 yr^-1 on a_EM alone.

    “_ a EM =a EM ¼ ðÀ1:6 Æ 2:3Þ Â 10 À17 yr À1 on a EM alone”

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. C. Salomon, D. Hils, J. L. Hall, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B5, 1576 (1988).
  2. T. Rosenband et al . http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0611125. · arXiv
  3. E. Peik et al . http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0611088v1. · arXiv

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rosenband, T., Hume, D. B., Schmidt, P. O., Chou, C. W., Brusch, A., Lorini, L., Oskay, W. H., Drullinger, R. E., Fortier, T. M., Stalnaker, J. E., Diddams, S. A., Swann, W. C., Newbury, N. R., Itano, W. M., Wineland, D. J., & Bergquist, J. C.
Affiliations
National Institute of Standards and Technology (US)
Corresponding author
  • Rosenband, T.
  • Schmidt, P. O.
  • Lorini, L.
  • Oskay, W. H.
  • Stalnaker, J. E.
Venue
Science
Published
2008-03-28
Volume
319
Issue
5871
Pages
1808-1812
ISSN
  • 0036-8075 (ISSN-L)
  • 1095-9203
OpenAlex
W1997269293
Cited by
1,450
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 27 · 2025: 62 · 2024: 52 · 2023: 44 · 2022: 43 · 2021: 50 · 2020: 60 · 2019: 78 · 2018: 65 · 2017: 76 · 2016: 85 · 2015: 96 · 2014: 129 · 2013: 99 · 2012: 99
FWCI
73.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • CINECA IRIS Institutional Research Information System (IRIS Istituto Nazionale di Ricerca Metrologica) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Advanced Frequency and Time Standards
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Scientific Measurement and Uncertainty Evaluation
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Atomic and Subatomic Physics Research
Keywords
optical atomic clocks, aluminum ions, mercury ions, frequency ratio, frequency metrology, fine-structure constant variation, systematic uncertainties

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