Arxiv:1802.02945V2 [Physics.Atom-Ph] 19 Jul 2018 Ited by the Dick Eﬀect [15–17] Instead, Which Results from Scattering Events

Lattice-induced photon scattering in an optical lattice clock

SörenDörscher, Roman Schwarz, Ali Al-Masoudi, Stephan Falke,∗ Uwe Sterr, and Christian Lisdat† Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt, Bundesallee 100, 38116 Braunschweig, Germany (Dated: July 20, 2018) We investigate scattering of lattice laser radiation in a strontium optical lattice clock and its implications for operating clocks at interrogation times up to several tens of seconds. Rayleigh scattering does not cause significant decoherence of the atomic superposition state near a magic wavelength. Among the Raman scattering processes, lattice-induced decay of the excited state 3 2 1 3 (5s5p) P0 to the ground state (5s ) S0 via the state (5s5p) P1 is particularly relevant, as it reduces the effective lifetime of the excited state and gives rise to quantum projection noise in spectroscopy. We observe this process in our experiment and find a decay rate of 556(15) × 10−6 s−1 per photon recoil energy Er of effective lattice depth, which agrees well with the rate we predict from atomic 3 data. We also derive a natural lifetime τ = 330(140) s of the excited state P0 from our observations. Lattice-induced decay thus exceeds spontaneous decay at typical lattice depths used by present clocks. It eventually limits interrogation times in clocks restricted to high-intensity lattices, but can be largely avoided, e.g., by operating them with shallow lattice potentials.

I. INTRODUCTION Generally, the performance of optical clocks benefits strongly from increasing interrogation time and thus Atomic clocks based on optical transitions keep ad- the quality factor. Ramsey spectroscopy with free evo- vancing the field of frequency metrology. Accuracy of lution times up to 15 s has been demonstrated in a 18 three-dimensional optical lattice clock [18]. Ultrastable few parts in 10 [1–4]√ as well as fractional frequency instability below 10−16/ τ [5] have been demonstrated, lasers achieving fractional frequency instability down to −17 where τ is the integration time in seconds. Present op- 4 × 10 and coherence times of several tens of seconds tical clocks are based either on single trapped ions or on have been reported recently [19]; such laser systems will large numbers of neutral atoms confined to optical lattice allow even longer interrogation times. However, new po- potentials, as has first been proposed in Ref. [6]. Both tential sources of atomic decoherence or frequency shifts types of clocks lend themselves to a variety of new ap- will become relevant at these timescales. plications, which range from testing fundamental physics In this article, we investigate off-resonant scattering of with laboratory experiments, such as searching for varia- lattice laser radiation by 87Sr atoms in the two states 1 3 tions of fundamental constants [7, 8], testing special rel- S0 and P0 and its effect on clock operation. As in ativity [9], or the proposed search for dark matter [10], other strontium clocks, our one-dimensional lattice op- to the measurement of geopotentials [11–13]. erates near the magic wavelength at 813 nm, where the The Allan deviation, σy(τ), which can be achieved in atomic polarizabilities of these two states are equal. Typ- a given integration time τ for an ensemble of N uncor- ical potential depths are between 50 Er and 200 Er sup- related absorbers is fundamentally limited by quantum porting four to nine longitudinally bound states, where 2 2 projection noise (QPN) to [14] Er = h /(2mλ ) is the photon recoil energy at the lattice wavelength λ for an atom of mass m. Some aspects r 1 1 1 Tc of photon scattering have previously been studied the- σy(τ) = √ , (1) K Q N τ oretically [20], but, to the best of our knowledge, these processes have not been investigated experimentally yet. where Q is the quality factor of the observed resonance, Potential effects on clock operation include decoherence Tc is the measurement cycle duration, and K is a line of the atomic superposition state during interrogation, shape factor on the order of one, which depends on the in- degradation of the signal-to-noise ratio and frequency terrogation sequence. Optical lattice clocks benefit from stability, and systematic frequency shifts. Especially for inherently low QPN due to the large number of particles short excitation pulses, atoms interact near-resonantly being probed simultaneously. In fact, they are often lim- with the interrogation laser after specific state-changing arXiv:1802.02945v2 [physics.atom-ph] 19 Jul 2018 ited by the Dick effect [15–17] instead, which results from scattering events. Observation of a resulting loss of con- the aliasing of noise due to the noncontinuous observa- trast at long interrogation times has recently been re- tion of the interrogation laser’s frequency. This effect can ported for Ramsey spectroscopy [18]. be overcome by dead time–free interrogation using two Figure 1 schematically illustrates the different types of atomics packages [5], for instance. photon scattering processes at the lattice wavelength, all of which are off-resonant. In the following, we refer to inelastic scattering events that change the internal state of ∗Present address: TOPTICA Photonics AG, Lochhamer Schlag 19, the atom as Raman scattering and to the elastic ones that 82166 Gräfelfing,Germany leave the atom’s internal state unchanged as Rayleigh †Electronic address: [email protected] scattering. As will be shown in Sec. III, the overall scat- 2

3 II. LATTICE-INDUCED DECAY OF THE (5s6s) S1 EXCITED STATE h·73 THz

3 1 We investigate the decay rate P0 → S0 experimentally by measuring the populations in each of the 1 two clock states as a function of hold time in the trap. (5s5p) P1 3 Lattice-induced scattering to the state P1 is identiﬁed and discerned from other decay mechanisms by varying h·282 THz J = 2 the depth of the optical lattice, since its rate is propor- m = 7/2 9/2 J = 1 F tional to the intensity of the lattice laser ﬁeld. J = 0

3 (5s5p) PJ A. Experimental setup h·368.6 THz

For our measurements, we operate our 87Sr lattice clock, which has been discussed in previous publications mF = 7/2 9/2 [17, 22, 23], as follows. 2 1 After two-stage laser cooling, several hundred atoms at (5s ) S0 a temperature T ≈ 2 µK are trapped in the optical lattice FIG. 1: (color online) Schematic summary of photon scatter- at an initial trap depth of about 100 Er. Population of ing near the magic wavelength λ ≈ 813 nm, i.e., a frequency of the stretched magnetic substate mF = 9/2 is enhanced 368.6 THz, in the magnetic substates mF = 9/2 of the ground by optical pumping, using a laser beam which is resonant state and excited state of a 87Sr optical lattice clock. Only with the F = F 0 = 9/2 hyperfine component of the inter- the dominant intermediate states are shown. combination transition at 689 nm, in a low bias magnetic field. In order to prepare the atoms in the lowest two ax- tering rates into each of the final fine-structure states ial vibrational states of the lattice, we reduce its depth shown in Fig. 1 are similar in magnitude. However, the to about 50 Er for 40 ms. Atoms with axial vibrational resulting effects on an optical lattice clock can be quite quantum numbers nz > 1 escape from the trap during different. this time, as these motional states are no longer trapped. 3 3 For instance, Raman scattering P0 → P1 is followed Subsequently, lattice depth is increased to its final value. by radiative decay to the ground state, since the state To prepare a pure atomic sample in the magnetic sub- 3 P1 has a lifetime of about 21 µs [2]. At typical potential state mF = 9/2 of the excited state, we apply a strong depths U0 Er, the atom is not lost from the trap in bias magnetic field of about 0.6 mT, which splits the π- the process. Thus, this off-resonant photon scattering transitions of adjacent magnetic sublevels by approxi- process effectively induces decay of the excited state, in mately 0.7 kHz, and selectively transfer atoms from the addition to other decay mechanisms such as spontaneous magnetic substate mF = 9/2 of the ground state to the emission or pumping by blackbody radiation (BBR). In excited state by a resonant π-pulse of the interrogation 3 contrast, the state P2 has an effective lifetime on the laser beam with a duration of about 35 ms. The remain- order of 100 s at room temperature, which is limited by ing ground-state population is removed from the trap by 3 3 1 1 BBR-induced decay [21]. Raman scattering P0 → P2 irradiating a laser beam on the strong transition S0– P1. thus leaves atoms shelved in the metastable state. After preparation, the sample is held in the optical 1 We study lattice-induced decay to the ground state S0 lattice for a variable amount of time th. experimentally in Sec. II and determine the rate of decay Finally, we destructively detect the populations in the 1 3 as a function of lattice depth. Rayleigh scattering and ground state, S0, and in the metastable states, P0 and 3 3 Raman scattering into the state P2 cannot be investi- P2. As described previously [17, 23], they are mea- gated experimentally with our setup, they are treated sured by collecting laser-induced fluorescence on the cy- 1 1 theoretically in Sec. III instead. There, we present a cling transition S0– P1 on a photomultiplier tube, and complementary investigation of all off-resonant scatter- atoms in the metastable states are optically pumped to ing processes, predicting their rates from atomic data. the ground state for detection. To derive the natural lifetime of the excited state from For each hold time th and lattice potential depth U0, 1 3 our measurements, we estimate the decay rate of the ex- the populations Ng in S0 and Ne in P0,2 are averaged cited state due to coupling to BBR in Sec. IV. The effects over typically thirty to forty samples. In order to reject of photon scattering on atomic coherence and the perfor- long-term fluctuations of the initial number of atoms, mance of optical lattice clocks are analyzed in Sec. V. they are also divided by the total population found in Finally, we discuss approaches to solve or avoid the po- reference measurements with th = 1 s, which are per- tential problems at long interrogation times in Sec. VI formed before and after each set of measurements, for and summarize our findings in Sec. VII. normalization. 3

Our detection scheme can neither resolve any mag- 3 netic substates nor distinguish the metastable states P0 3 and P2, because the atoms are repumped via the inter- U = 0 5 3 E r 3 3 3 1 0 0 mediate state P1 by driving the transitions P0,2– S1. U = 1 2 0 E r Therefore, only lattice-induced decay to the ground state U = 1 5 1 E g r N

(see Fig. 1) can be studied experimentally in our sys- n o i

tem, whereas the lattice-induced population redistri- t a l

bution over the Zeeman and hyperﬁne states of the u 3 p metastable P states cannot be resolved. o p

d e z i l 1 0 - 1 a

B. Optical lattice m r o n Laser light near the magic wavelength of 87Sr at 813 nm is generated by a Ti:sapphire laser. The optical lattice is formed by a single horizontal laser beam that is focused to a 1/e2-radius of about 65 µm and retroreflected. 1 3 Sideband spectra of the reference transition S0– P0 1 0 - 2 are used to determine the axial trapping frequencies νz, 0 5 1 0 1 5 2 0 2 5 fractions of atoms in excited axial vibrational states, h o l d t i m e t h ( s ) and radial temperatures Tr at each lattice depth. The lattice potential depths U0 are determined from νz. However, the effective lattice depth U experienced FIG. 2: (color online) Measured populations of samples pre- by the atoms is smaller than U0 due to the finite poten- pared in the ground state at different effective lattice depths tial energy arising from atomic motion. We account for U as a function of hold time th. The result of a combined fit the eigenenergy of the axial state with quantum number of a rate equation model (see text for details) is shown as a solid line. nz = 0 in harmonic single-site approximation and neglect atoms in excited axial vibrational states (nz > 0), which amount to a small fraction ≈ 0.05 only. For the radial degrees of freedom, we approximate the thermally averaged energy by its classical value, which is well justified The trap lifetime is about 6 s, which is probably limited for radial trapping frequencies of few 100 Hz and radial by the residual pressure in our vacuum system. Owing temperatures Tr ≈ 2 µK. Using the virial theorem, we to the decreasing signal-to-noise ratio and technical re- find strictions, we limit the hold time to th ≤ 25 s throughout our measurements. 1 1 U ≈ U − hν + 2k T . (2) 0 2 2 z B r When the samples are prepared in the excited state as described above, population dynamics as shown in Most importantly, the lattice depth U is proportional to Fig. 3 are observed instead. We clearly observe decay the average light intensity experienced by the atoms. We 3 1 P0 → S0, as, in addition to enhanced losses in the refer to it simply as the lattice depth in the following, excited state, atoms emerge in the ground state. The unless stated otherwise. population in the ground state becomes substantial after For our measurements, we operate the lattice at po- several seconds, especially for deep lattice potentials. tential depths U0 between 52 Er and 171 Er, which correspond to effective lattice depths U between 37 Er and For a quantitative analysis of our measurements, we 151 Er. model the time evolution of the two populations by a pair of coupled rate equations

C. Results ˙ 0 Ne = −ΓbgNe − (Γ0 + γLU) Ne (3a) Before studying decay from the excited state, we first ˙ investigate the loss of ground-state atoms from the trap. Ng = −ΓbgNg + (Γ0 + γLU) Ne (3b) Figure 2 shows the normalized ground-state population Ng as a function of hold time for different lattice depths. We observe an exponential decay, which is consistent that describe lattice-independent losses from the trap at 0 with density-independent losses, and no discernible in- different rates, Γbg and Γbg, as well as decay from the fluence of lattice depth. Fits allowing for a density- excited state to the ground state. The rate of the latter dependent loss rate showed no consistent results for the is the sum of a lattice-independent contribution Γ0 and a loss coefficient and were, therefore, not pursued further. lattice-induced contribution γLU. The analytic solution 4

(a) ( b ) 0 . 2 0 10 U = 037 Er U = 0 3 7 E r

U = 053 Er U = 0 5 3 E r U = 086 E U = 0 8 6 E g e r r N N U = 120 E U = 1 2 0 E

r n r o i U = 151 Er t U = 1 5 1 E r a -1 l 10 u p o p

d 0 . 1 e z i 1 l a ) g m r N o n normalized population -2 + 10 e N / ( g N 0 0 25 t (s) h 0 . 0 10-3 0 5 10 15 20 25 0 5 1 0 1 5 2 0 2 5

hold time th (s) h o l d t i m e t h ( s )

3 1 FIG. 3: (color online) Measured populations (a) in the metastable states P0,2 and (b) in the ground state S0 for samples prepared in the excited state at different effective lattice depths U as a function of hold time th. Results of a combined fit of a rate equation model (see text for details) are shown as colored lines. The inset to (a) shows the fraction of atoms in the ground state as derived from this model. For reference, the solid black line shows the decay of ground-state samples (see Fig. 2). to these rate equations reads spectroscopy at interrogation times of several seconds or more. N (t) = N (0) exp − Γ0 + Γ + γ U t (4a) 3 1 e e bg 0 L As key results, we determine the decay rate P0 → S0 1 − exp (− [∆Γbg + Γ0 + γLU] t) due to inelastic scattering of lattice laser radiation and Ng(t) = Ne(0) the rate stemming from other sources including sponta- 1 + ∆Γbg/ (Γ0 + γLU) neous decay (see Sec. IV): +N (0) exp (−Γ t) (4b) g bg −6 −1 −1 γL = 556(15) × 10 s Er −3 −1 0 Γ0 = 5.2(12) × 10 s where ∆Γbg = Γbg − Γbg. We perform a nonlinear least- squares fitting of Eqs. (4) to the entire data set as shown As a practical note, the lattice-induced rate equals Γ0 at in Figs. 2 and 3. The initial populations Ne,g(0) are a lattice depth U ≈ 9.4 Er. set to N0 if the state is occupied at th = 0 or to zero otherwise. The uncertainties of the parameters given in the remainder of this section result from this fit. We have III. CALCULATION OF SCATTERING RATES checked for potential lattice-induced losses from the trap by adding a contributionγU ˜ to the loss rates in Eqs. (3a) and (3b), but find no indication of such an effect. In addition to our experimental results, we calculate As seen most clearly in Fig. 3(b), the rate equations the off-resonant scattering rates of lattice laser radiation (3) describe the measured population dynamics and, in from atomic data in order to investigate the other pro- particular, the dependence of the rate of decay 3P → 1S cesses shown in Fig. 1, to which our experiment is not 0 0 3 3 on lattice depth very well. Our findings indicate that sensitive. The scattering rate P0 → P1 measured in lattice-induced decay is the dominant decay mechanism the previous section is used to verify the results of our at typical lattice depths. calculation. −1 We find Γbg = 0.1650(14) s and N0 = 1.204(5) for our specific apparatus and experimental procedure. Trap losses in the excited state are slightly larger than in the A. Theory 0 ground state [Γbg/Γbg = 1.101(13)]; discussion of this difference is beyond the scope of this work, however. It The rate Γi→f of an atom in an initial state i off- is straightforward to increase the lifetime of atoms in resonantly scattering linearly polarized incoming radia- the lattice by reducing background pressure to facilitate tion with intensity I and being transferred to a final state 5 f is given by the Kramers–Heisenberg formula [24] We calculate the scattering rates according to Eq. (5) using the line strengths reported in Ref. [2] for the 03 1 2 3 3 Iω 8π X (i→f) (4d5s) D states, in Ref. [27] for the state (5s6s) S1, and Γi→f = Dq (5) (4π )2 c4¯h3 3 listed in the supplement to Ref. [28] otherwise. Similar to 0 q=−1 our previous publication [28] we adjust the line strengths 3 3 with of the D continuum and of the (5s5d) D states to re- produce well-known parameters, specifically the differ- (i→f) X hk|d0|ii ential dc-Stark polarizability and the magic wavelength. Dq = hf|dq|ki + 3 3 ωki − ω For scattering processes P0 → PJ (J 6= 0), the rel- k (6) ative signs of the products of reduced matrix elements hk|dq|ii in Eq. (6) can be determined from Eq. (8). We focus hf|d0|ki 0 ωki + ω solely on the case mF = 9/2 in the following, because the scattering processes from m = −9/2 are equivalent where d = −er are the elements of the electric dipole F q q for typical bias magnetic fields. operator in spherical tensor notation, ω and ω0 are the angular frequencies of the incoming and scattered radiation, respectively, and q is the polarization state of the scat- B. Dynamic polarizability and lattice depth tered radiation in spherical tensor notation, where the polarization axis of the incoming light is used as quan- tization axis. The sum is over all intermediate states k, The scattering amplitudes in Eq. (6) are closely related to the dynamic polarizability of the state i, which is given and ωki is the frequency of the transition i → k. The specific case of linearly polarized lattice light is by [24] realized in our lattice clock as well as in many others. 2 2 X ωki |hk|d0|ii| Typically, a bias magnetic field is applied parallel to the α = (10) i ¯h ω2 − ω2 polarization vector of the lattice during spectroscopy. k ki The two terms in Eq. (6) can be interpreted physically as absorbing an incoming photon before emitting a scat- for linearly polarized light. tered photon or vice versa. Note that Eqs. (5) and (6) Note in particular that the Rayleigh scattering ampli- neglect contributions from multiphoton transitions and tudes are related to this polarizability by non–electric dipole transitions. D(i→i) =hα ¯ (11) The dependence of Eq. (6) on the magnetic substates 0 i can be separated using the Wigner–Eckart theorem [25]: if photon recoil is neglected (ω0 = ω). As a consequence, 1 0 0 0 F 0−m0 the elastic scattering amplitudes of the two states S0 hk ,F m |dq|k, F mF i = (−1) F 3 F and P0 used in lattice clocks are necessarily equal at any 0 (7) F 1 F 0 0 magic wavelength, where, by definition, the difference of × 0 hk ,F ||d||k, F i −mF q mF the dynamic polarizabilities vanishes. Furthermore, we use Eq. (11) to infer the optical po- where the term denoted by round brackets is the Wigner tential depth for a given intensity of the light field from 3j-symbol. hk0,F 0||d||k, F i is the reduced matrix element the elastic scattering rates. The optical dipole potential with respect to total angular momentum F . depth at an intensity I of the light field is given by As the electric dipole operator d acts on the subspace of orbital angular momentum L, the reduced matrix el- 1 U = αiI. (12) ement can be expressed for the decoupled angular mo- 20c menta using the well-known relation [25]

0 0 0 0 j1+j2+j3+1 C. Results hk , (j1j2)j3||d||k, (j1j2)j3i = (−1) q j0 j0 j (8) × (2j0 + 1) (2j + 1) 1 3 2 hk0, j0 ||d||k, j i The rates of all Rayleigh (i = f) and Raman (i 6= 3 3 j j 1 1 1 3 1 f) scattering processes of laser radiation at the magic 87 if the operator d acts only on part 1 of the system, where wavelength near 813 nm that occur for Sr atoms (see Fig. 1) are summarized in Table I. j3 = j1 + j2, and the curly brackets denote the Wigner 6j-symbol. Concerning Rayleigh scattering, we ﬁnd equal rates of −4 −1 1 3 The reduced matrix element hk||d||ii is related to the 5.57 × 10 s · (U/Er) in both states, S0 and P0, as expected due to Eq. (11). We infer a dynamic polar- Einstein coeﬃcient Aki for decay k → i by [26] izability α = 4.622 × 10−39 JV−2m2 (or 280.4 a.u.) of 3 hc3 these states using the same equation. These results are in |hk||d||ii|2 = 0 g A (9) 2ω3 k ki excellent agreement with previous publications [20, 29]. ki 3 3 The total rate of Raman scattering P0 → P1 is −4 −1 where gk is the degeneracy factor of the state k. 4.98 × 10 s · (U/Er), which is similar in magnitude 6

F = 7/2 F = 9/2 F = 11/2 TABLE I: Calculated off-resonant scattering rates of lattice mF = 7/2 7/2 9/2 7/2 9/2 11/2 laser radiation by an atom in the magnetic substate mF = 9/2 of the state i. The final state of the the atom is denoted by f 0 0 36 18 9 with hyperfine and magnetic quantum numbers F and mF , respectively. Rates are given for an intensity corresponding 8 49 2 18 2 to an optical dipole potential of U = 1 Er. 9 0 0 −4 −1 i → f F mF Γ/(10 s ) 1 1 1 32 1 1 −16 S0 → S0 9/2 7/2 3 × 10 9/2 5.57 36

3 3 −10 P0 → P0 9/2 7/2 5 × 10 9/2 5.57 mF’ = 5/2 7/2 9/2 3 3 P0 → P1 7/2 7/2 1.99 F’ = 9/2 9/2 7/2 0.45 −10 3 9/2 1 × 10 FIG. 4: (color online) Branching ratios of the decay P1 → 1 11/2 7/2 0.05 S0 for all hyperfine states and magnetic sublevels that are 9/2 6 × 10−10 accessible from the magnetic sublevel mF = 9/2 of the state 3 11/2 2.49 P0 by Raman scattering of linearly polarized lattice laser light. 3 3 P0 → P2 7/2 7/2 0.37 9/2 7/2 0.26 9/2 0.76 value is in agreement with previous predictions [20]. Ta- 11/2 7/2 0.08 ble I lists the individual scattering rates to the various 9/2 0.53 accessible hyperfine states and different magnetic sub- 11/2 0.50 states of the final state. 13/2 7/2 0.01 Lastly, Raman scattering into the magnetic substate 9/2 0.11 m = 7/2 of the original state, 1S or 3P , is strongly 11/2 0.22 F 0 0 suppressed by destructive interference of the different paths (see Table I). Raman scattering to final states in the (5s4d) 3D manifold has not been considered, because TABLE II: Calculated lattice-induced decay rates ΓL from it is not possible via single-photon electric-dipole tran- the magnetic substate mF = 9/2 of the excited state to the sitions. Therefore, only Rayleigh scattering and Raman accessible magnetic substates of the ground state, with mag- 3 3 87 0 scattering P0 → P1,2 are relevant in Sr lattice clocks. netic quantum numbers mF . Rates are given for an intensity corresponding to an optical dipole potential U = 1 Er.

0 mF 5/2 7/2 9/2 IV. RADIATIVE LIFETIME OF THE EXCITED 0 −4 −1 ΓL(mF )/(10 s ) 0.22 0.59 4.17 STATE

The observed lattice intensity–independent rate Γ0 of to the Rayleigh scattering rate. This value agrees well excited-state decay (see Sec. II C) stems from the natural with our experimental observations (see Sec. II) as well lifetime of the excited state and other lattice-independent as previous predictions [20]. Moreover, our calculation processes. Since care is taken to block out any laser ra- yields the individual scattering rates to the different hy- diation, apart from the lattice laser beam and the in- perfine states and magnetic substates, which are listed in terrogation laser beam driving the reference transition, Table I. while the atoms are held in the trap, optical pumping on 3 3 The effective rates of lattice-induced decay to the the transition P0– D1 by BBR followed by spontaneous 3 three accessible magnetic substates of the ground state, decay to the ground state via the state P1 is the most mF = 5/2, 7/2, and 9/2, are listed in Table II. We de- likely process to compete with direct spontaneous decay termine them by combining the rates in Table I with the of the excited state. branching ratios of the subsequent radiative decay to the The quenching rate ΓBBR due to BBR can be es- ground state, which are shown in Fig. 4 and result from timated [21] from the BBR-induced rate of excitation Eqs. (7) through (9). We find that lattice-induced decay and the branching ratio R1 of spontaneous decay to the 3 to the ground state mainly populates the original mag- state P1. The former can be described by the lifetime 3 −6 3 netic substate, mF = 9/2. τ( D1) = 2.18(1) × 10 s [2] of the state D1, its degen- 3 3 For Raman scattering P0 → P2, we predict a total eracy 2J + 1, and the branching ratio R0 of spontaneous −4 −1 3 rate of 2.84 × 10 s · (U/Er), which is about a factor decay to the state P0, assuming Russell–Saunders cou- 3 3 of two smaller than for Rayleigh scattering. Again, this pling. Since the frequencies of the transitions D1– PJ 7 vary significantly due to fine-structure splitting of the Moreover, atoms transferred to the ground state and, 3 multiplet [27], the cubic frequency dependence of the possibly, to the metastable state P2 are still registered spontaneous emission rates must be taken into account during state detection. Owing to the stochastic nature when determining any of the branching ratios RJ us- of the scattering process, this typically results in intrin- ing Eq. (8). This results in branching ratios of 59.65 %, sic noise of the detected atomic populations and thus 38.52 %, and 1.82 % to J = 0, 1, and 2, respectively. We reduces the signal-to-noise ratio. For the metastable 3 thus find a quenching rate state P2, this can be avoided by using a more sophisti- cated detection scheme to discern atoms in the two states 3R R 1 3 3 Γ (T ) = 0 1 (13) P0 and P2, e.g., by selective repumping on the transi- BBR 3 3 3 τ( D1) exp (¯hω/kBT ) − 1 tion P0– D1 as demonstrated in ytterbium lattice clocks [32, 33]. at a temperature T , where ω is the transition frequency 3 3 −3 −1 The populations created, through Raman scattering, P0– D1. This results in ΓBBR = 2.23(14) × 10 s 3 1 in the states P2 and S0 themselves may also disturb at the temperature T = 294.5(10) K of our experimental an optical lattice clock. In particular, atoms having de- apparatus. cayed to the ground state are highly susceptible to the We attribute the remaining rate 3 interrogation laser, whereas the metastable state P2 can −3 −1 effectively be considered a dark state in this respect. Γs = Γ0 − ΓBBR = 3.0(13) × 10 s Our calculations in Sec. III have shown that lattice- 3 to spontaneous decay of the state P0. The correspond- induced decay to the ground state most likely returns an 3 ing lifetime τ( P0) = 330(140) s is marginally in agree- atom to the magnetic sublevel mF = ±9/2 (see Table II). ment with the value of 145(40) s predicted in Ref. [30]. The consequences on spectroscopy are quite similar to To the best of our knowledge, this is the first direct ex- those of decoherence and depopulation of the superposi- perimental measurement of the lifetime of this state in tion state. For Ramsey spectroscopy, the atoms having 87Sr. decayed during the free evolution time are resonantly excited by the final π/2-pulse, resulting in reduced fringe contrast. In case of Rabi spectroscopy with long excita- V. EFFECTS ON LATTICE CLOCKS tion pulses, coherently driving the reference transition in those atoms after decay modifies the line shape further. The relevant off-resonant scattering processes of laser Likewise, this degrades the slope of the error signal and, radiation at the magic wavelength near 813 nm, which in some cases, the observable line width, but does not have been identified in Sec. III, affect lattice clocks in give rise to systematic frequency shifts. several different ways. In contrast, population of the other magnetic substates Although Rayleigh scattering is elastic, it may still (mF 6= ±9/2) in the ground state does cause line pulling lead to damping of the coherence of the atomic super- if the laser detuning is varied to derive an error signal. position state. It has been shown previously that the It can be reduced by choosing the spectral bandwidth rate of coherence damping depends on the difference of of the excitation pulse or pulses either much smaller or the elastic scattering amplitudes [31], and the situation much larger than the frequency detuning of the transi- in optical lattice clocks has been discussed in Ref. [20]. tions from adjacent magnetic substates due to the bias 87 We point out that the difference of the Rayleigh scat- magnetic field. Moreover, Sr lattice clocks typically 1 3 monitor the transition frequencies from both stretched tering amplitudes between the two states S0 and P0 is proportional to their differential dynamic polarizability magnetic substates [34]; center frequency and frequency and vanishes at the magic wavelengths (see Sec. III B). splitting are used to stabilize the frequency of the inter- Therefore, Rayleigh scattering of lattice laser radiation rogation laser and monitor the bias magnetic field, re- does not cause significant decoherence in optical lattice spectively. For reasons of symmetry, line pulling due to clocks. populating different magnetic substates by Raman scat- The two Raman scattering processes result in deco- tering mainly affects the frequency splitting rather than herence of the atomic superposition state, as well as de- the center frequency. The linear Zeeman splitting is also 3 used in correcting for the quadratic Zeeman effect in our population of the excited state P0. They do not cause systematic frequency shifts directly, as they are not sen- clock [35], but the effect of Raman scattering on this cor- sitive to the phase of the superposition state. However, rection of the transition frequency is well below one part 18 the maximum slope of the spectroscopic signal is reduced. in 10 at typical bias field strengths. Line pulling can In Ramsey spectroscopy, these effects manifest as a re- be avoided entirely for Ramsey spectroscopy by varying duction of fringe contrast if the duration of an excitation the relative phase of the final pulse [36, 37] rather than pulse is small compared to the inverse scattering rate. the laser detuning to generate an error signal. For excitation with a single, long pulse, the line shape is In either case, atoms excited by the interrogation laser modified more intricately; it is broadened, but remains after Raman scattering give rise to quantum projection symmetric with respect to the detuning of the interroga- noise, especially for Ramsey spectroscopy. tion laser from resonance. Aside from the scattering processes shown in Fig. 1, 8 we do not investigate changes of the motional state of an adjacent lattice sites, which allows control of the resulting atom in the optical lattice by off-resonant scattering in frequency shifts to below 1 mHz at a potential depth of detail in this work. They may lead to line pulling and only 5 Er for strontium lattice clocks [39]. At this lattice systematic frequency shifts due to the increased tunnel- depth, the induced photon scattering rates are compara- ing in excited axial motional states. However, their rel- ble to the natural decay rate of the excited state, with ative strength is small in the Lamb–Dicke regime. They time constants of a few 100 s (see Secs. II and IV). are not expected to cause substantial decoherence them- Lattice clocks in microgravity environments or us- selves, as the external potential is nearly identical for the ing multidimensional lattices require more intense lattice two clock states near the magic wavelength. light fields and thus suffer from increased off-resonant Last but not least, atoms that are incoherently trans- scattering rates. For these systems, in particular, further ferred to different states by Raman scattering may cause investigations into controlling motional effects in lattice systematic shifts of the transition frequency by disturb- clocks or alternative solutions are required. ing the remaining atoms. For instance, interactions with Off-resonant scattering rates are generally different if atoms in the original superposition state at the same the optical lattice is operated at a magic wavelength other lattice site are generally no longer suppressed by the than the widely used one near 813 nm, which is studied Pauli principle and lead to collision-induced systematic here. The relative strengths of the scattering processes frequency shifts at high atom density. can be quite different [20], although the dependence of Eq. (5) and the recoil energy Er on laser wavelength is generally not favorable to shorter wavelengths. VI. DISCUSSION However, the light intensity experienced by the atoms can be greatly reduced by operating the lattice at a blue- Systematic frequency shifts of the reference transition detuned magic wavelength [40, 41], e.g., near 390 nm [42], due to off-resonant photon scattering from the lattice where the atoms are trapped in the nodes of the light need to be evaluated under actual operating conditions, field. This provides a highly interesting option to avoid but they are not expected to become a fundamental prob- off-resonant scattering of lattice laser radiation and mer- lem at long interrogation times. As discussed in the pre- its further study. vious section, such shifts may be caused by the scattering atoms indirectly, e.g., by atomic interactions, or by differences of the scattering rates between the magnetic VII. CONCLUSION substates mF = ±9/2, which are small at typical bias magnetic fields for linear polarization of the lattice. On- Off-resonant photon scattering from the lattice be- site atomic interactions can be avoided by using a three- comes relevant if optical lattice clocks, with typical lat- dimensional lattice to suppress double occupancy [38] or tice depths of several 10 Er, are operated at interrogation by operating in a low-density regime as in our clock. times of several seconds or more. Relevant scattering pro- Collapse of the atomic superposition state as well as cesses near the magic wavelength of 813 nm are Rayleigh 3 3 quantum projection noise arising from atoms excited by scattering and Raman scattering P0 → P1,2. The for- 3 3 the interrogation laser after decay to the ground state mer Raman scattering process, P0 → P1, gives rise to reduce the signal-to-noise ratio substantially at long in- lattice-induced decay to the ground state, which we have terrogation times or in deep lattice potentials. Our inves- observed experimentally. These observations and com- tigations have shown that off-resonant photon scattering plementary predictions based on atomic data show that from the lattice gives rise to time constants of few 10 s at all of these processes occur at rates of several 10−2 s−1 typical lattice depths of several 10 Er, which well exceeds at typical lattice depths, exceeding the rates of natu- contributions from other sources, such as spontaneous ral and BBR-induced decay of the excited state. Fur- decay or pumping by BBR. This ultimately degrades the thermore, our measurements yield an experimental value minimum frequency instability and may prevent lattice τ = 330(140) s for the natural lifetime of the excited state 3 clocks from reaching the QPN limit given by Eq. (1) and P0, which is in marginal agreement with predictions [30]. from exploiting squeezing, or entanglement in general, to To the best of our knowledge, this is the first experimen- achieve frequency instability below that limit under these tal measurement of the natural lifetime of this state. conditions. Therefore, the decreasing signal-to-noise ra- In optical lattice clocks, Rayleigh scattering does not tio is the most important problem for the operation of cause significant decoherence of the atomic superposition lattice clocks at interrogation times of several seconds state used for spectroscopy, because the optical lattice is and beyond. operated near a magic wavelength. However, collapse of Operating a clock with a shallow lattice potential ob- the atomic superposition state and transfer of popula- viously reduces the scattering rates, but increases other tion to different internal states due to Raman scattering systematic effects such as frequency shifts due to tunnel- eventually limit the achievable frequency instability and ing. However, it has been shown previously that gravity thus useful interrogation times in optical lattice clocks at can be exploited in vertically oriented lattice geometries the presently used lattice depths. Lattice-induced decay to greatly reduce tunneling by lifting the degeneracy of to the ground state, in particular, modifies the observed 9

−1/2 line shape and contributes to quantum projection noise. σy ∝ Ti according to Eq. (1). However, frequency Raman scattering also counteracts suppression of atomic instability scales with atom number in the same way, −1/2 interactions and may thus lead to systematic frequency σy ∝ N . Lattice clocks easily exceed ion clocks by shifts. We have pointed out several ways to overcome factors of more than 100 in the number of atoms being in- these problems. Most importantly, vertical lattice ge- terrogated at the same time. To achieve comparable fre- ometries allow operating clocks with 10−18 fractional ac- quency instability, the interrogation time in an ion clock curacy at lattice depths as shallow as 5 Er [39], which must be extended by that same factor. This would re- reduces the photon scattering rates to levels comparable quire interrogation times of several hours or more, which to those of natural decay or BBR-induced pumping. seems to be well beyond reach in the foreseeable future. One may wonder whether a limit on the interrogation Therefore, we think that, although oﬀ-resonant scatter- time set by the scattering of lattice photons, which may ing of lattice laser radiation cannot be avoided in optical be expected at around 100 s in a strontium lattice clock, lattice clocks and may cause limitations, it is unlikely to will give ion clocks an intrinsic advantage over lattice pose a strong disadvantage compared to single-ion clocks. clocks once interrogation lasers achieve comparable coherence times. This can only be the case for ions that have much narrower transitions, such as the Yb+ oc- tupole transition with an excited-state lifetime of several Acknowledgments years [43, 44] or B+ [45], but not for systems like the Al+ ion with an excited-state lifetime of only several tens of This work is supported by QUEST, by DFG within seconds [46]. In ion clocks, there are other limitations CRC 1227 (DQ-mat, project B02) and RTG 1729. The of the interrogation time, including heating in the trap, results in this contribution partly come from the project which must be overcome. Longer interrogation times Ti EMPIR 15SIB03 OC18. This project has received fund- increase not only the observed line quality factor Q ∝ Ti ing from the EMPIR programme co-ﬁnanced by the Par- (up to its natural value) but also the measurement cycle ticipating States and from the European Union’s Horizon duration Tc ≈ Ti, thus leading to a frequency instability 2020 research and innovation programme.

[1] I. Ushijima, M. Takamoto, M. Das, T. Ohkubo, and [11] T. Takano, M. Takamoto, I. Ushijima, N. Ohmae, H. Katori, Nat. Photonics 9, 185 (2015). T. Akatsuka, A. Yamaguchi, Y. Kuroishi, H. Munekane, [2] T. L. Nicholson, S. L. Campbell, R. B. Hutson, G. E. B. Miyahara, and H. Katori, Nat. Photonics 10, 662 Marti, B. J. Bloom, R. L. McNally, W. Zhang, M. D. (2016). Barrett, M. S. Safronova, G. F. Strouse, et al., Nat. Com- [12] C. Lisdat, G. Grosche, N. Quintin, C. Shi, S. Rau- mun. 6, 6896 (2015). pach, C. Grebing, D. Nicolodi, F. Stefani, A. Al-Masoudi, [3] N. Nemitz, T. Ohkubo, M. Takamoto, I. Ushijima, S. Dörscher, et al., Nat. Commun. 7, 12443 (2016). M. Das, N. Ohmae, and H. Katori, Nat. Photonics 10, [13] J. Grotti, S. Koller, S. Vogt, S. Häfner,U. Sterr, C. Lis- 258 (2016). dat, H. Denker, C. Voigt, L. Timmen, A. Rolland, et al., [4] N. Huntemann, C. Sanner, B. Lipphardt, C. Tamm, and Nat. Phys. 14, 437 (2018). E. Peik, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 063001 (2016). [14] F. Riehle, Frequency Standards: Basics and Applications [5] M. Schioppo, R. C. Brown, W. F. McGrew, N. Hinkley, (Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, 2004). R. J. Fasano, K. Beloy, T. H. Yoon, G. Milani, D. Ni- [15] G. J. Dick, in Proceedings of 19th Annu. Precise Time colodi, J. A. Sherman, et al., Nat. Photonics 11, 48 and Time Interval Meeting, Redendo Beach, 1987 (U.S. (2017). Naval Observatory, Washington, DC, 1988), pp. 133–147, [6] H. Katori, in Proceedings of the Sixth Symposium on Fre- [16] A. Quessada, R. P. Kovacich, I. Courtillot, A. Clairon, quency Standards and Metrology, 9–14 September 2001, G. Santarelli, and P. Lemonde, J. Opt. B: Quantum St. Andrews, Scotland, edited by P. Gill (World Scientific, Semiclass. Opt. 5, S150 (2003). Singapore, 2002), pp. 323–330. [17] A. Al-Masoudi, S. Dörscher, S. Häfner,U. Sterr, and [7] N. Huntemann, B. Lipphardt, C. Tamm, V. Gerginov, C. Lisdat, Phys. Rev. A 92, 063814 (2015). S. Weyers, and E. Peik, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 210802 [18] G. E. Marti, R. B. Hutson, A. Goban, S. L. Campbell, (2014). N. Poli, and J. Ye, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 103201 (2018). [8] R. M. Godun, P. B. R. Nisbet-Jones, J. M. Jones, S. A. [19] D. G. Matei, T. Legero, S. Häfner, C. Grebing, King, L. A. M. Johnson, H. S. Margolis, K. Szymaniec, R. Weyrich, W. Zhang, L. Sonderhouse, J. M. Robinson, S. N. Lea, K. Bongs, and P. Gill, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, J. Ye, F. Riehle, et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 263202 210801 (2014). (2017). [9] P. Delva, J. Lodewyck, S. Bilicki, E. Bookjans, G. Vallet, [20] M. J. Martin, Ph.D. thesis, University of Colorado R. Le Targat, P.-E. Pottie, C. Guerlin, F. Meynadier, (2013), C. Le Poncin-Lafitte, et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 221102 [21] M. Yasuda and H. Katori, Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 153004 (2017). (2004). [10] A. Derevianko and M. Pospelov, Nat. Phys. 10, 933 [22] C. Grebing, A. Al-Masoudi, S. Dörscher, S. Häfner, (2014). V. Gerginov, S. Weyers, B. Lipphardt, F. Riehle, 10

U. Sterr, and C. Lisdat, Optica 3, 563 (2016). [34] M. Takamoto, F.-L. Hong, R. Higashi, Y. Fujii, M. Imae, [23] S. Falke, N. Lemke, C. Grebing, B. Lipphardt, S. Wey- and H. Katori, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 75, 104302 (2006). ers, V. Gerginov, N. Huntemann, C. Hagemann, A. Al- [35] S. Falke, H. Schnatz, J. S. R. Vellore Winfred, T. Mid- Masoudi, S. Häfner, et al., New J. Phys. 16, 073023 delmann, S. Vogt, S. Weyers, B. Lipphardt, G. Grosche, (2014). F. Riehle, U. Sterr, et al., Metrologia 48, 399 (2011). [24] B. Bransden and C. Joachain, Physics of Atoms and [36] N. F. Ramsey and H. B. Silsbee, Phys. Rev. 84, 506 Molecules, Pearson Education (Prentice Hall, New York, (1951). 2003), ISBN 9780582356924. [37] V. Letchumanan, P. Gill, E. Riis, and A. G. Sinclair, [25] A. Edmonds, Angular Momentum in Quantum Mechan- Phys. Rev. A 70, 033419 (2004). ics, Investigations in Physics (Princeton University Press, [38] S. L. Campbell, R. B. Hutson, G. E. Marti, A. Goban, Princeton, 1996), ISBN 9780691025896. N. Darkwah Oppong, R. L. McNally, L. Sonderhouse, [26] R. C. Hilborn, arXiv:physics/0202029 [physics.atom-ph] J. M. Robinson, W. Zhang, B. J. Bloom, et al., Science (2002), this is a revised (February, 2002) version of a 358, 90 (2017). paper that originally appeared in Am. J. Phys. 50, 982- [39] P. Lemonde and P. Wolf, Phys. Rev. A 72, 033409 (2005). 986 (1982). [40] F. Gerbier and Y. Castin, Phys. Rev. A 82, 013615 [27] J. E. Sansonetti and G. Nave, J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data (2010). 39, 033103 (2010). [41] H. Pichler, A. J. Daley, and P. Zoller, Phys. Rev. A 82, [28] T. Middelmann, S. Falke, C. Lisdat, and U. Sterr, Phys. 063605 (2010). Rev. Lett. 109, 263004 (2012). [42] M. Takamoto, H. Katori, S. I. Marmo, V. D. Ovsian- [29] C. Shi, J.-L. Robyr, U. Eismann, M. Zawada, L. Lorini, nikov, and V. G. Pal’chikov, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, R. Le Targat, and J. Lodewyck, Phys. Rev. A 92, 012516 063002 (2009). (2015). [43] M. Roberts, P. Taylor, G. P. Barwood, P. Gill, H. A. [30] M. M. Boyd, T. Zelevinsky, A. D. Ludlow, S. Blatt, Klein, and W. R. C. Rowley, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 1876 T. Zanon-Willette, S. M. Foreman, and J. Ye, Phys. (1997). Rev. A 76, 022510 (2007). [44] E. Biémont and P. Quinet, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 3345 [31] H. Uys, M. J. Biercuk, A. P. VanDevender, C. Ospelkaus, (1998). D. Meiser, R. Ozeri, and J. J. Bollinger, Phys. Rev. Lett. [45] A. D. Ludlow, M. M. Boyd, J. Ye, E. Peik, and P. O. 105, 200401 (2010). Schmidt, Rev. Mod. Phys. 87, 637 (2015). [32] Z. Barber, Ph.D. thesis, University of Colorado (2007), [46] T. Rosenband, P. O. Schmidt, D. B. Hume, W. M. Itano, [33] N. D. Lemke, A. D. Ludlow, Z. W. Barber, T. M. Fortier, T. M. Fortier, J. E. Stalnaker, K. Kim, S. A. Diddams, S. A. Diddams, Y. Jiang, S. R. Jefferts, T. P. Heavner, J. C. J. Koelemeij, J. C. Bergquist, et al., Phys. Rev. T. E. Parker, and C. W. Oates, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, Lett. 98, 220801 (2007). 063001 (2009).