- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review Research

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Letter
  • Open Access

Accurate and efficient Bloch-oscillation-enhanced atom interferometry

F. Fitzek1,2,*, J.-N. Kirsten-Siemß1,2, E. M. Rasel2, N. Gaaloul2, and K. Hammerer1,†

  • *Contact author: fitzek@iqo.uni-hannover.de
  • †Contact author: klemens.hammerer@itp.uni-hannover.de
PDF

Phys. Rev. Research 6, L032028 – Published 5 August, 2024

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevResearch.6.L032028

Abstract

Bloch oscillations of atoms in optical lattices are a powerful technique that can dramatically boost the sensitivity of atom interferometers to a wide range of signals by large momentum transfer. To leverage this method to its full potential, an accurate theoretical description of losses and phases is required, going beyond existing treatments. Here, we present a comprehensive theoretical framework for Bloch-oscillation-enhanced atom interferometry and verify its accuracy through comparison with a numerical solution of the Schrödinger equation. Our approach establishes design criteria to reach the fundamental efficiency and accuracy limits of large momentum transfer using Bloch oscillations and allows us, in a broader context, to define the fundamental efficiency limit of the transport of neutral atoms using optical lattices. We compare these limits to the capabilities of current state-of-the-art experiments and make projections for the next generation of quantum sensors.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

Supplemental Material

References (57)

  1. R. H. Parker, C. Yu, W. Zhong, B. Estey, and H. Müller, Measurement of the fine-structure constant as a test of the Standard Model, Science 360, 191 (2018) .
  2. L. Morel, Z. Yao, P. Cladé, and S. Guellati-Khélifa, Determination of the fine-structure constant with an accuracy of 81 parts per trillion, Nature (London) 588, 61 (2020).
  3. G. Rosi, F. Sorrentino, L. Cacciapuoti, M. Prevedelli, and G. M. Tino, Precision measurement of the Newtonian gravitational constant using cold atoms, Nature (London) 510, 518 (2014).
  4. S. Dimopoulos, P. W. Graham, J. M. Hogan, and M. A. Kasevich, General relativistic effects in atom interferometry, Phys. Rev. D 78, 042003 (2008).
  5. P. Asenbaum, C. Overstreet, M. Kim, J. Curti, and M. A. Kasevich, Atom-interferometric test of the equivalence principle at the 10−12 level, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 191101 (2020).
  6. K. Bongs, M. Holynski, J. Vovrosh, P. Bouyer, G. Condon, E. Rasel, C. Schubert, W. P. Schleich, and A. Roura, Taking atom interferometric quantum sensors from the laboratory to real-world applications, Nat. Rev. Phys. 1, 731 (2019).
  7. R. Geiger et al., Detecting inertial effects with airborne matter-wave interferometry, Nat. Commun. 2, 474 (2011).
  8. P. Cheiney, L. Fouché, S. Templier, F. Napolitano, B. Battelier, P. Bouyer, and B. Barrett, Navigation-compatible hybrid quantum accelerometer using a Kalman filter, Phys. Rev. Appl. 10, 034030 (2018).
  9. R. Geiger, A. Landragin, S. Merlet, and F. Pereira Dos Santos, High-accuracy inertial measurements with cold-atom sensors, AVS Quantum Sc. 2, 024702 (2020).
  10. M. Ben Dahan, E. Peik, J. Reichel, Y. Castin, and C. Salomon, Bloch oscillations of atoms in an optical potential, Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 4508 (1996).
  11. S. R. Wilkinson, C. F. Bharucha, K. W. Madison, Q. Niu, and M. G. Raizen, Observation of atomic Wannier-Stark ladders in an accelerating optical potential, Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 4512 (1996).
  12. C. D. Panda, M. Tao, J. Egelhoff, M. Ceja, V. Xu, and H. Müller, Coherence limits in lattice atom interferometry at the one-minute scale, Nat. Phys. (2024), doi:10.1038/s41567-024-02518-9.
  13. M. Gebbe et al., Twin-lattice atom interferometry, Nat. Commun. 12, 2544 (2021).
  14. Z. Pagel, W. Zhong, R. H. Parker, C. T. Olund, N. Y. Yao, and H. Müller, Symmetric Bloch oscillations of matter waves, Phys. Rev. A 102, 053312 (2020).
  15. P. W. Graham, J. M. Hogan, M. A. Kasevich, and S. Rajendran, New method for gravitational wave detection with atomic sensors, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 171102 (2013).
  16. B. Canuel, A. Bertoldi, L. Amand et al., Exploring gravity with the MIGA large scale atom interferometer, Sci. Rep. 8, 14064 (2018).
  17. B. Canuel et al., ELGAR—a European laboratory for gravitation and atom-interferometric research, Classical Quantum Gravity 37, 225017 (2020).
  18. M.-S. Zhan et al., ZAIGA: Zhaoshan long-baseline atom interferometer gravitation antenna, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 29, 1940005 (2020).
  19. L. Badurina et al., AION: An atom interferometer observatory and network, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 05 (2020) 011.
  20. M. Abe et al., Matter-wave atomic gradiometer interferometric sensor (MAGIS-100), Quantum Sci. Technol. 6, 044003 (2021).
  21. F. Bloch, Über die Quantenmechanik der Elektronen in Kristallgittern, Z. Phys. 52, 555 (1929).
  22. C. Zener, A theory of the electrical breakdown of solid dielectrics, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A 145, 523 (1934).
  23. See Supplemental Material at http://link.aps.org/supplemental/10.1103/PhysRevResearch.6.L032028 for additional information concerning the discussion of LMT Bloch pulses and the WS model as developed in the main article. We first summarize the application of the widely-used description of LMT Bloch pulses using instantaneous Bloch states. Second, we provide a rigorous definition and construction of WS states and describe a numerical algorithm to compute the complex WS spectrum, including the case of arbitrarily small lattice accelerations. Next, we connect the WS model to relevant topics in the field of quantum sensing and atom interferometry such as the influence of spontaneous emission and the occurrence nonadiabatic losses.
  24. E. Peik, M. Ben Dahan, I. Bouchoule, Y. Castin, and C. Salomon, Bloch oscillations of atoms, adiabatic rapid passage, and monokinetic atomic beams, Phys. Rev. A 55, 2989 (1997).
  25. M. Holthaus, Bloch oscillations and Zener breakdown in an optical lattice, J. Opt. B: Quantum Semiclassical Opt. 2, 589 (2000).
  26. C. Sias, A. Zenesini, H. Lignier, S. Wimberger, D. Ciampini, O. Morsch, and E. Arimondo, Resonantly enhanced tunneling of Bose-Einstein condensates in periodic potentials, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 120403 (2007).
  27. P. Cladé, M. Andia, and S. Guellati-Khélifa, Improving efficiency of Bloch oscillations in the tight-binding limit, Phys. Rev. A 95, 063604 (2017).
  28. For nonvanishing τramp, T is determined by integrating aL(t) and solving for the final velocity 2NℏkL/m.
  29. G. H. Wannier, Wave functions and effective Hamiltonian for Bloch electrons in an electric field, Phys. Rev. 117, 432 (1960).
  30. G. Nenciu, Dynamics of band electrons in electric and magnetic fields: Rigorous justification of the effective Hamiltonians, Rev. Mod. Phys. 63, 91 (1991).
  31. M. Glück, A. R. Kolovsky, and H. J. Korsch, Wannier–Stark resonances in optical and semiconductor superlattices, Phys. Rep. 366, 103 (2002).
  32. J. Zak, Stark Ladder in solids? Phys. Rev. Lett. 20, 1477 (1968).
  33. G. H. Wannier, Stark Ladder in solids? A reply, Phys. Rev. 181, 1364 (1969).
  34. J. Zak, Stark Ladder in solids? A reply to a reply, Phys. Rev. 181, 1366 (1969).
  35. We discuss excited-band Bloch oscillations proposed by [57] in [23].
  36. A. Mondragón and E. Hernández, Berry phase of a resonant state, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 29, 2567 (1996).
  37. F. Keck, H. J. Korsch, and S. Mossmann, Unfolding a diabolic point: A generalized crossing scenario, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 36, 2125 (2003).
  38. S. Ibáñez and J. G. Muga, Adiabaticity condition for non-Hermitian Hamiltonians, Phys. Rev. A 89, 033403 (2014).
  39. M. D. Feit, J. A. Fleck, and A. Steiger, Solution of the Schrödinger equation by a spectral method, J. Comput. Phys. 47, 412 (1982).
  40. F. Fitzek, J.-N. Siemß, S. Seckmeyer, H. Ahlers, E. M. Rasel, K. Hammerer, and N. Gaaloul, Universal atom interferometer simulation of elastic scattering processes, Sci. Rep. 10, 22120 (2020).
  41. We discuss the lattice-shift method proposed by [27] in [23].
  42. C. Brif, R. Chakrabarti, and H. Rabitz, Control of quantum phenomena: Past, present and future, New J. Phys. 12, 075008 (2010).
  43. G. E. Karniadakis, I. G. Kevrekidis, L. Lu, P. Perdikaris, S. Wang, and L. Yang, Physics-informed machine learning, Nat. Rev. Phys. 3, 422 (2021).
  44. M. H. Goerz, M. A. Kasevich, and V. S. Malinovsky, Robust optimized pulse schemes for atomic fountain interferometry, Atoms 11, 36 (2023).
  45. J. C. Saywell et al., Enhancing the sensitivity of atom-interferometric inertial sensors using robust control, Nat. Commun. 14, 7626 (2023).
  46. G. Louie, Z. Chen, T. Deshpande, and T. Kovachy, Robust atom optics for Bragg atom interferometry, New J. Phys. 25, 083017 (2023).
  47. Z. Chen, G. Louie, Y. Wang, T. Deshpande, and T. Kovachy, Enhancing strontium clock atom interferometry using quantum optimal control, Phys. Rev. A 107, 063302 (2023).
  48. M. Kim, R. Notermans, C. Overstreet, J. Curti, P. Asenbaum, and M. A. Kasevich, 40 W, 780 nm laser system with compensated dual beam splitters for atom interferometry, Opt. Lett. 45, 6555 (2020).
  49. We present a comparison of the phase evolution between the WS model in Eq. (4) and a corresponding numerical solution in [23].
  50. L. Morel, High sensitivity matter-wave interferometry: Towards a determination of the fine structure constant below 10-10, Ph.D. thesis, Sorbonne Université, 2019.
  51. B. Canuel et al., Technologies for the ELGAR large scale atom interferometer array, arXiv:2007.04014.
  52. P. J. Martin, B. G. Oldaker, A. H. Miklich, and D. E. Pritchard, Bragg scattering of atoms from a standing light wave, Phys. Rev. Lett. 60, 515 (1988).
  53. D. M. Giltner, R. W. McGowan, and S. A. Lee, Theoretical and experimental study of the Bragg scattering of atoms from a standing light wave, Phys. Rev. A 52, 3966 (1995).
  54. H. Pichler, A. J. Daley, and P. Zoller, Nonequilibrium dynamics of bosonic atoms in optical lattices: Decoherence of many-body states due to spontaneous emission, Phys. Rev. A 82, 063605 (2010).
  55. M. Glück, F. Keck, A. R. Kolovsky, and H. J. Korsch, Wannier-Stark states of a quantum particle in 2D lattices, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 3116 (2001).
  56. T. Rahman, A. Wirth-Singh, A. Ivanov, D. Gochnauer, E. Hough, and S. Gupta, Bloch oscillation phases investigated by multipath Stückelberg atom interferometry, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, L022012 (2024).
  57. K. E. McAlpine, D. Gochnauer, and S. Gupta, Excited-band Bloch oscillations for precision atom interferometry, Phys. Rev. A 101, 023614 (2020).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Research 6, L032028– Published 5 August, 2024
  • Received 21 July 2023
  • Accepted 23 May 2024
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation