当前位置: X-MOL 学术Appl. Phys. B › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
On the performance of wavelength meters: Part 1—consequences for medium-to-high-resolution laser spectroscopy
Applied Physics B ( IF 2.1 ) Pub Date : 2020-04-21 , DOI: 10.1007/s00340-020-07425-4
M. Verlinde , K. Dockx , S. Geldhof , K. König , D. Studer , T. E. Cocolios , R. P. de Groote , R. Ferrer , Yu. Kudryavtsev , T. Kieck , I. Moore , W. Nörtershäuser , S. Raeder , P. Van den Bergh , P. Van Duppen , K. Wendt

Present-day laser-spectroscopy experiments increasingly rely on modern commercial devices to monitor, stabilize, and scan the wavelength of their probe laser. Recently, new techniques are capable of achieving unprecedented levels of precision on atomic and nuclear observables, pushing these devices to their performance limits. Considering the fact that these observables themselves are deduced from the frequency difference between specific atomic resonances, in the order of MHz–GHz, the uncertainty on the output of the device measuring the wavelength is often directly related to the final systematic uncertainty on the experimental results. Owing to its importance, the performance of several commercial wavelength meters was compared against different reference sources, including a Scanning Fabry–Pérot Interferometer (SFPI) and a frequency comb. Reproducible, wavelength- and device-dependent disagreements are observed, potentially skewing the experimental output at high precision. In this paper, a practical and relatively inexpensive wavelength meter characterization procedure is presented and validated. This method is capable of improving the precision on wavelength differences considerably depending on the device, while together with a second investigation that is published separately, (König et al., in Appl Phys B, 2020), it offers a full description of the expected wavelength meter performance for users.
更新日期:2020-04-21
down
wechat
bug