Spin dynamics of the potassium magnetometer in spin-exchange relaxation free regime
Fu Ji-Qing 1 , Du Peng-Cheng 2 , Zhou Qing 2 , Wang Ru-Quan 1, †,
Institute of Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, China
School of Physical Science and Technology, Yunnan University, Kunming 650091, China

 

Project supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 61227902).

Abstract
Abstract

The laser-pumped potassium spin-exchange relaxation free (SERF) magnetometer is the most sensitive detector of magnetic field and has many important applications. We present the experimental results of our potassium SERF magnetometer. A pump–probe approach is used to identify the unique spin dynamics of the atomic ensemble in the SERF regime. A single channel sensitivity of 8 f·THz −1/2 is achieved with our SERF magnetometer.

1. Introduction

The light-pumped atomic magnetometer is one of the most important high sensitivity magnetometers, [ 1 5 ] it has a sensitivity orders of magnitude better than the fluxgate magnetometer and magnetometers based on the Hall effect [ 6 ] and the magnet GMR [ 7 ] effect. Besides the advantage of sensitivity, the atomic magnetometer does not require cryogenic cooling as the superconducting quantum interference device (SQUID) magnetometer, and offers great potential for miniaturization. [ 8 ]

In the last decade, the spin-exchange relaxation free (SERF) atomic magnetometer [ 9 , 10 ] has significantly improved the sensitivity of the atomic magnetometers. With the reported sensitivity of 0.16 f·THz −1/2 [ 11 ] and the projected fundamental limits below 2 a·THz −1/2 , [ 12 ] the sensitivity of the SERF magnetometer rivals and even surpasses that of the best low temperature SQUID magnetometer. [ 13 ] In recent years, significant progress has been witnessed in the development of the SERF magnetometer. [ 14 , 16 20 ] As a result, the SERF magnetometer has found many important applications where ultra high sensitive magnetic field measurements are required. For example, the precision measurement of the electron electric dipole moments (EDM) can provide critical constraints of parameters for theories beyond the standard model, [ 21 ] the investigation of the tiny magnetization field in ancient rocks is very important for the paleomagnetism research, [ 11 ] and the geomagnetic anomalies measurement is a powerful tool in mining and the anti-submarine warfare. [ 22 ] Furthermore, the SERF magnetometer is well suited for biomagnetic measurements, there are already successful applications of the SERF magnetometer in magnetoencephalography (MEG) [ 23 ] and magnetocardiography (MCG). [ 24 ]

In this paper, we present our experimental results of the potassium SERF magnetometer. We will first discuss the SERF mechanism, then we will describe the details of our experimental setup. Because it is very important to identify the SERF and non-SERF regimes, we will next present a pump– probe experiment for this purpose. Finally, we will show our magnetometer signal and the noise spectrum, which indicate a single channel sensitivity of 8 f·THz −1/2 .

2. The SERF mechanism

The sensitivity of the atomic magnetometer is limited by the coherence time of the atomic ensemble, and one of the most important decoherence mechanisms is the spin-exchange collisions. The spin-exchange collisions are the collisions between the alkali atoms which conserve the total spin of the colliding atoms but flip the electron spin of each of the atoms. The spin-exchange collisions lead to random transfers between the two ground state hyperfine levels of the atoms, which have the opposite directions of Larmor precession. When the atoms precess in different directions and at different angular speeds with each other, the total spin of the atomic ensemble become smaller, which leads to the spin relaxation of the atomic ensemble.

Demonstrated by Happer et al ., [ 25 , 26 ] the effects of the spin-exchange relaxation can be suppressed in the SERF regime, when the spin-exchange rate is much larger than the Larmor precession frequency. In the SERF regime, the atoms go through many spin-exchange collisions during one cycle of Larmor precession, being quickly switched between different ground states, each atom will go through the same average precession rate, so they remain synchronized in the precession process and do not suffer from the decoherence any more.

3. The experimental setup and magnetometer signal

The experimental setup of the potassium SERF magnetometer is shown in Fig.  1 . The potassium atoms are contained in a cubic glass cell, the size of the cell is 2.5 cm. The cell is filled with 450 torr of 4 He gas and 60 torr of N 2 gas. The 4 He gas works as the buffer gas, the buffer gas makes the atoms go through random walks in the glass cell and significantly reduces the wall collisions of the atoms. Since the wall collisions change the atomic spin, the use of the buffer gas can greatly reduce the decoherence rate of the atoms. The N 2 gas works as the quenching gas to absorb the energy of the states excited by the optical pumping light, so that they will not randomly emit photons which can destroy the polarization of the atomic ensemble; this is very important in an atomic ensemble with a very large optical depth because photons can be trapped in the ensemble and affect multiple atoms before they leave the ensemble. The cell is placed in an oven made by borazon and heated to 150 °C by resistive heating of a 22 kHz AC current. At this temperature, the density of the potassium gas is much higher than that at the room temperature, which leads to a much higher spin-exchange rate and ensures the working condition for the SERF magnetometer.

Experimental implementation of the K magnetometer. Transverse polarization is detected using optical rotation.

We use a five-layer μ-metal magnetic shield with an expected shielding factor of 10 9 to isolate the system from the ambient magnetic field. The geometry of the shield is optimized with both theoretical calculations and finite element numerical simulations. The diameters of the inner and outer shields are 16 cm and 35 cm, the lengths of the inner and outer shields are 53 cm and 73 cm, respectively. A set of coils inside the shields allows the control of the magnetic field in the x , y , and z directions. The potassium atoms are optically pumped by a circularly polarized light tuned to the D1 line from a diode laser (Toptica DL100). A linearly polarized light from a diode laser (Toptica DLpro) 68 GHz red detuned from the D2 line is used to probe the polarization of the atoms. Both pump and probe lasers are Gaussian beams with diameter (full width at half maximum) of 4 mm.

The atoms are polarized by the optical pumping beam along the z direction, their transverse polarization P x caused by the magnetic field along the y direction is measured from the optical rotation angle of the linear polarized probe beam propagating along the x direction.

From the Bloch equation, [ 12 , 27 29 ] the optical rotation angle of the linearly polarized probe light is a dispersive function in the regime near zero magnetic field

where l is the length of the pump–probe beams cross region, n k is the number density of the potassium atoms, r e = 2.8 × 10 −13  cm is the classical radius of the electron, c is the speed of light, f is the oscillator strength (0.324 for D1 and 0.652 for D2), P x is the polarization projection in the direction of the probe light from the steady-state solution of the Bloch equation, and D ( ν ) = ( ν ν 0 )/[(Δ ν /2) 2 + ( ν ν 0 ) 2 ] is the imaginary component of the Voigt profile with full width at half maximum Δ ν of the optical transition of frequency ν 0 .

In the experiment, we slowly scan B y from −7 nT to 7 nT, the polarization rotation angle of the probe light is shown in Fig.  2 . For a pumping beam power of 1 mW and a probe beam power of 0.5 mW, the magnetometer output is a dispersion curve with a 1.7 nT line width and a 7 mrad/nT slope in the linear response regime.

Polarization rotation angle of the probe beam as a function of B y , showing a dispersive line shape with a line width of 1.7 nT and a zero crossing slope of 7 mrad/nT.

4. Spin dynamic with pump–probe measurement

It is very important to clarify whether the magnetometer is running in the SERF regime or not in the experiment. Usually, people can find some evidence from the signal of the magnetometer such as those shown in Fig.  2 , because in the SERF regime, suppression of the spin-exchange decoherence leads to a narrower linewidth. But the linewidth, which is determined by T 2 , is related to many other experimental conditions, which makes the experimental debugging process much more complicated. Sometimes, it is hard to find which factor makes the greatest contribution to T 2 . For example, decoherence due to the wall collisions can dominate T 2 when the buffer gas pressure is inappropriate, the size of the cell is very small, or the coating of the cell does not work. The density of the atomic vapor can be different by orders of magnitude when the temperature of the glass cell changes for just tens of degrees, which will change both the spin-exchange decoherence rate and the spin-destruction decoherence rate by orders of magnitude. The impurities in the atomic gas can lead to significant broadening of the linewidth. Large ambient magnetic field noise can also cause a much broader magnetometer linewidth. So judging whether the atomic magnetometer is running in the SERF regime from the linewidth is not an ideal approach.

In this paper, we use a pump–probe approach to study the spin dynamics in the magnetometer. By observing the time-dependent damped precession signal, we can find direct evidence for whether the magnetometer works in the SERF regime or not. The time sequence of the experiment is shown in Fig.  3(a) . We first apply a 50 ms pump beam to polarize the atom spins along the z direction, then a 9 nT magnetic field is turned on in the y direction, the atomic ensemble would go through free precession in this field. The linear polarized probe beam can measure the spin projection of the atomic ensemble in the x direction, just as done in the SERF magnetometer. The time-dependent solution to the Bloch equation is [ 30 ]

where ω y is the precession rate. In the non-SERF regime, ω y = ω L , where ω L is the Larmor precession rate of the free atoms, while in the SERF regime, the spin precession rate is a factor of 3(2 I + 1)/[3 + 4 I ( I +1)] smaller than that in the non-SERF regime. [ 12 ] For potassium, with nuclear spin I = 3/2, ω y = (2/3) ω L . The transverse relaxation rate τ = 1/ T 2 is dominated by the spin-exchange rate in the non-SERF regime and by the spin-destruction rate in the SERF regime. [ 31 , 32 ]

Fig. 3. The pump–probe signal. (a) Atomic spin is first polarized by a 50 ms pump laser pulse and then goes through free precession in a 9 nT bias field. The polarization rotation angles of the detection beam at vapor cell temperatures of (b) 85 °C and (c) 150 °C. The red lines are fitted lines with the Bloch equation. From the fit, the precession frequencies are 63 Hz and 42 Hz, and the relaxation rates are 54 s −1 and 77 s −1 in panels (b) and (c), respectively.

The difference of the spin precession rate in the SERF and non-SERF regimes gives the best evidence of SERF regime in the experiment, because the precession rate is only related to the nuclear spin of the atoms which is precisely known, and the external magnetic field which can be easily measured. The experiment can also be done in the SERF and non-SERF regimes under the same external magnetic field by changing only the temperature of the vapor cell, the ratio of the precession rate is thus not related to the magnetic field, making the result even clearer.

In our experiment, we measure the spin precession rate at the temperatures of 85 °C (Fig.  3(b) ) and 150 °C (Fig.  3(c) ), and the time-dependent signal is fitted to Eq. ( 2 ) to obtain the precession rate and the decay time.

From the fit, in the presence of 9 nT magnetic field, the precession frequency is 63 Hz at 85 °C, which is in good agreement with the Larmor precess frequency of free atoms, but at 150 °C, the precession frequency is 42 Hz, which is clearly slower than the former and in good agreement with the prediction from the SERF theory (Eq. ( 2 )). This is direct evidence for the magnetometer running in the SERF regime. The relaxation rate of the spin polarization does not have a significant difference from 85 °C to 150 °C, even when the spin-exchange rate is increased by 75 times. For n k ≈ 1.8 × 10 13  cm −3 at 150 °C, obtained from the saturated vapor pressure curve, the spin-exchange rate is about R SE = 15818 s −1 , which corresponds to a lifetime of 63 μs. From Fig.  3(c) , we obtain a relaxation rate of 77 s −1 and a lifetime of T 2 = 21 ms, which indicate that the spin-exchange relaxation effect is eliminated.

5. Sensitivity

In order to calibrate the sensitivity of the SERF magnetometer, a sinusoidal calibration field of B rms = 120 pT at 20 Hz is applied, the sensitivity data are obtained by recording the output of the magnetometer for 100 s, performing a fast Fourier transform (FFT) without windowing, and calculating the r.m.s. amplitudes in 1 Hz bins, [ 9 ] as shown in Fig.  4 .

Noise spectrum of the magnetometer signal with B y = 120 pT applied at 20 Hz, giving a sensitivity of 8 f·THz −1/2 .

Apart from several peaks from technical noise, the magnetic sensitivity is 8 f·THz −1/2 at 20 Hz. Further improvement of the sensitivity can be achieved by improving the performance of the magnetic shield and reducing the noise from the electronics and optical system.

6. Conclusion

In summary, we have successfully set up a potassium atomic SERF magnetometer and achieved a magnetometer sensitivity of 8 f·THz −1/2 . A pump and probe experiment is conducted to measure the spin precession frequency and relaxation time, which clearly prove that our magnetometer is working in the SERF regime. The sensitivity of our magnetometer ranks among the best in the world, further research and application of the SERF magnetometer will be possible in the near future.

Reference
1 Kastler A 1950 J. Phys. Radium. 11 255
2 Dehmelt H 1957 Phys. Rev. 105 1924
3 Bell W Bloom A 1957 Phys. Rev. 107 1559
4 Budker D Gawlik W Kimball D F Rochester S M Yashchuk V V Weis A 2002 Rev. Mod. Phys. 74 1153
5 Li S G Xu Y F Wang Z Y Liu Y X Lin Q 2009 Chin. Phys. Lett. 26 067805
6 Edward R 2006 Hall-effect Sensors: Theory and Applications New York Elsevier 10.1016/B978-075067934-3/50000-4
7 Hirota E Sakakima H Inomata K 2002 Giant Magneto-Resistance Devices Berlin Springer 23 10.1007/978-3-662-04777-4
8 Liew L Knappe S Moreland J Robinson H Hollberg L Kitching J 2004 Appl. Phys. Lett. 84 2694
9 Kominis I K Kornack T W Allred J C Romalis M V 2003 Nature 422 596
10 Budker D Romalis M V 2007 Nat. Phys. 3 227
11 Dang H B Maloof A C Romalis M V 2010 Appl. Phys. Lett. 97 151110
12 Allred J C Lyman R N Kornack T W Romalis M V 2002 Phys. Rev. Lett. 89 130801
13 Clarke J Braginski A I 2004 The SQUID Handbok New York Wiley-VCH, Weinheim
14 Lee H J Shim J H Moon H S Kim K 2014 Opt. Express 22 17
15 Fang J C Wan S G Qin J Zhang C Quan W 2014 J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 31 3
16 Wyllie R Kauer M Smetana G S Wakai R T Gwalker T 2012 Phys. Med. Biol. 57 2619
17 Romalis M V 2010 Phys. Rev. Lett. 105 243001
18 Yosuke I Hiroyuki O Keigo K Tetsuo K 2012 AIP Adv. 2 032127
19 Fang J C Wang T Zhang H Li Y Zou S 2014 Rev. Sci. Inst. 85 123104
20 Griffith W C Knappe S Kitching J 2010 Opt. Express 18 26
21 Kornack T W Vasilakis G Romalis M V 2008 CPT and Lorentz Symmetry IV pp. 206�?13
22 Billings S Shubitidze F Pasion L Beran L Foley J 2010 Requirements for Unexploded Ordnance Detection and Discrimination in the Marine Environment Using Magnetic and Electromagnetic Sensors (Proceedings of OCEANS, IEEE-Sidney) p. 18
23 Xia H Baranga A B Hoffman D Romails M V 2006 Appl. Phys. Lett. 89 211104
24 Bison G Wynands R Weis A 2003 Appl. Phys. B 76 325
25 Happer W Tang H 1973 Phys. Rev. Lett. 31 273
26 Happer W Tam A C 1977 Phys. Rev. A 16 1877
27 Bloch F 1946 Phys. Rev. 70 460
28 Appelt S Ben-Amar B A Erickson C J Romalis M V Young A R Happer W 1998 Phys. Rev. A 58 1412
29 Budker D Kimball D F 2013 Optical Magnetometry New York Cambridge University Press
30 Gusarov A Levron D Baranga A B Paperno E Shuker R 2011 J. Appl. Phys. 109 07E507 10.1063/1.3536673
31 Erickson C J Levron D Happer W Kadlecek S Chann B Anderson L W Walker T G 2000 Phys. Rev. Lett. 85 4237
32 Kadlecek S Anderson L W Walker T G 1998 Phys. Rev. Lett. 80 5512