Postselected amplification applied to atomic magnetometers

Yazhi Niu Center for Joint Quantum Studies and Department of Physics, School of Science,
Tian** University, Tian** 300072, China
   Jialin Li Center for Joint Quantum Studies and Department of Physics, School of Science,
Tian** University, Tian** 300072, China
   Lupei Qin [email protected] Center for Joint Quantum Studies and Department of Physics, School of Science,
Tian** University, Tian** 300072, China
   Xin-Qi Li [email protected] Center for Quantum Physics and Technologies, School of Physical Science and Technology, Inner Mongolia University, Hohhot 010021, China Center for Joint Quantum Studies and Department of Physics, School of Science,
Tian** University, Tian** 300072, China
(May 24, 2024)
Abstract

We propose to embed

the atomic magnetometer (AM) into an optical Mach-Zehnder interferometer (MZI). We analyze the effect of amplification of the Faraday rotation angle of the probe laser light, by properly postselecting the path-information state of the laser photons when passing through the MZI. The proposed scheme provides a postselected metrological protocol of probing weak magnetic fields, having a potential to further enhance the sensitivity of the nowadays state-of-the-art optical AM.

Introduction

.— Detection of weak magnetic fields plays important role in diverse fields of fundamental science PXH21 ; PXH23 ; Rom22 and practical technologies such as in geology Ger20 , aeromagnetic investigation Fot20 , medical and military studies Bow22 ; Kaz20 , etc. Accordingly, various techniques and instruments have been developed, including such as fluxgate sensors Rip92 ; Rip22 , superconducting quantum interference devices (SQUIDs) Fag06 , Hall effect magnetic sensors Kar20 , and atomic magnetometers (AMs) Bud07 ; PXH21-b . Among these, SQUID may be the most popular and advanced one. However, it works under extremely low temperatures, requiring thus cryogenic maintenance which causes, inevitably, expensive apparatus and operational costs. In contrast, the full optical AM Bud07 , has the advantage of operating at or above room temperature and getting smaller in volume with the potential for miniaturization.

Actually, the AMs have been developed for longer than half a century Kas50 ; Deh57 ; Bloom57 ; Bloom62 . In particular, along with the advent of tunable diode lasers and progress of optical pum** techniques and producing dense atomic vapours with long ground-state spin relaxation times (in some cases similar-to\sim 1 sec), the atomic magnetometers have achieved sensitivities comparable to or even surpassing that of most SQUID-based magnetometers, having thus become a leading magnetometry of ultrasensitive magnetic field measurements Bud17 . By constantly improving, the most advanced atomic magnetometers have stepped at the precision level of subfemtotesla Bud00 ; Rom02 ; Rom10 .

In recent experiments PXH21 ; PXH23 ; Rom22 , the performance of the 87Rb AM was improved by mixing 129Xe gas into the 87Rb gas in the same vapor cell, with the 129Xe nuclear spins playing a role of a pre-amplifier of weak magnetic fields. The amplified effective magnetic field acting onto the electron spins of the 87Rb atoms can be two orders of magnitude larger than the original field. This new technique has also been discussed to probe signals from such as Goldstone bosons of new high-energy symmetries, CP-violating long-range forces, and axionic dark matter, etc.

Refer to caption
Figure 1: (a) Schematics of principle of the atomic magnetometer (AM). Atoms (e.g. 87Rb) in the vapor cell are polarized under the illumination of a pump laser light (circularly polarized), and a linearly polarized probe laser light is propagated along the x𝑥xitalic_x-direction. The probe light suffers an optical Faraday rotation (FR) when passing through the vapor cell. Measuring the FR angle allows to infer an unknown magnetic field. (b) Proposal to insert the AM into one of the arms of an optical Mach-Zehnder interferometer (MZI). Proper postselection for the “path-state” of the probe light can realize the effect of postselected amplification (PSA) for the FR angle. Abbreviations of device elements in the setup: LP (linear polarizer), BS (beam splitter), PBS (polarizing beam splitter), PS (phase shifter), PD (photodiode), M (mirror), and DAQ(data acquisition).

In this work, we propose a postselected metrological scheme to further enhance the probe sensitivity of the 87Rb AM (the principle is also applicable for other AMs). The idea of postselection was recently reanalyzed in a broader context Llo20 ; Shu22 ; Yang23 , as a generalization of the weak-value amplification (WVA) AAV1 ; AAV2 . The technique of WVA has been successfully demonstrated in precision measurements Kwi08 ; How09a ; How10a ; How10b ; How13 ; Sto12 ; Lun17 ; ZLJ20 , showing profound advantages in the presence of detector’s saturation, technical noises, and some environmental disturbances. Our proposal is suggesting to insert the AM into an optical Mach-Zehnder interferometer (MZI) (see Fig. 1), which renders the photons of the probe laser light having a path-information (“which path”) degree of freedom in addition to the optical polarization degree of freedom. Then, by properly postselecting the path information from the path-and-polarization entangled state (owing to path-dependent Faraday rotation), we will show the effect of postselected amplification (PSA) of the Faraday rotation (FR) angle. This technique is anticipated to benefit the nowadays AM in probing tiny magnetic fields.

Scheme of Postselected Amplification

.— The basic principle of an AM (e.g., the 87Rb AM) consists of two operations, as schematically shown in Fig. 1(a). First, the 87Rb atoms in the vapor cell are polarized under the illumination of a pump laser light (circularly polarized). The pump laser couples the outmost valence electron of the 87Rb atom to resonant transition between 52S1/2superscript52subscript𝑆125^{2}S_{1/2}5 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 / 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and 52P1/2superscript52subscript𝑃125^{2}P_{1/2}5 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 / 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (i.e., the D1 line at 794.98 nm). After experiencing a few dynamic processes, most or all of the atoms are transferred to the mJ=+1/2subscript𝑚𝐽12m_{J}=+1/2italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_J end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = + 1 / 2 state along the z^^𝑧\hat{z}over^ start_ARG italic_z end_ARG-axis, with the 87Rb atoms in the vapor cell having a polarization vector P=Pz,0ezPsubscript𝑃𝑧0subscripte𝑧\textbf{P}=P_{z,0}\textbf{e}_{z}P = italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z , 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. Second, let the polarization vector P precess around a magnetic field B, and propagate a linearly polarized probe laser light along the x^^𝑥\hat{x}over^ start_ARG italic_x end_ARG direction, which is detuned from the D2 transition line at 780.2 nm between 52S1/2superscript52subscript𝑆125^{2}S_{1/2}5 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 / 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and 52P3/2superscript52subscript𝑃325^{2}P_{3/2}5 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 3 / 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. The probe light will suffer an optical FR after passing through the atom vapor cell. The FR angle is proportional to the x𝑥xitalic_x-component of P. Then, measuring the FR angle allows us to infer the unknown magnetic field, which is contained in B.

Now, consider to insert the AM into one of the arms of an optical MZI, as schematically shown in Fig. 1(b). The polarized probe light is an ensemble of photons with the same polarization and the same frequency. We thus adopt the quantum mechanical description of single photon for the probe light. For the setup under consideration, the transverse spatial wavefunction of the light beam is irrelevant to the problem, therefore each single photon has two degrees of freedom: one is the polarization, which can be described using the basis states |Hket𝐻|H\rangle| italic_H ⟩ and |Vket𝑉|V\rangle| italic_V ⟩; another is its path information when passing through the MZI, using |1ket1|1\rangle| 1 ⟩ and |2ket2|2\rangle| 2 ⟩ to denote it. We assume that the probe light is prepared initially with the polarization of |Hket𝐻|H\rangle| italic_H ⟩. After entering the MZI through the first beam splitter (BS1), the path state of the photon is |i=(|1+|2)/2ket𝑖ket1ket22|i\rangle=(|1\rangle+|2\rangle)/\sqrt{2}| italic_i ⟩ = ( | 1 ⟩ + | 2 ⟩ ) / square-root start_ARG 2 end_ARG. Only propagating along path “1”, the photon’s polarization |Hket𝐻|H\rangle| italic_H ⟩ will suffer a Faraday rotation of angle θ𝜃\thetaitalic_θ, owing to magnetic polarization of the electron spins of the atomic medium in the vapor cell. In contrast, if the photon propagates along path “2”, its polarization remains unchanged. This path-dependent Faraday rotation can be elegantly described as

|Ψ(θ)=eiθA^σ^x|i|H.ketΨ𝜃superscript𝑒𝑖𝜃^𝐴subscript^𝜎𝑥ket𝑖ket𝐻\displaystyle|\Psi(\theta)\rangle=e^{-i\theta\hat{A}\hat{\sigma}_{x}}|i\rangle% |H\rangle\,.| roman_Ψ ( italic_θ ) ⟩ = italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_i italic_θ over^ start_ARG italic_A end_ARG over^ start_ARG italic_σ end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT | italic_i ⟩ | italic_H ⟩ . (1)

Here we introduced A^=|11|^𝐴ket1bra1\hat{A}=|1\rangle\langle 1|over^ start_ARG italic_A end_ARG = | 1 ⟩ ⟨ 1 |, and σ^xsubscript^𝜎𝑥\hat{\sigma}_{x}over^ start_ARG italic_σ end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is the Pauli operator defined in the Hilbert space expanded by {|H,|V}ket𝐻ket𝑉\{|H\rangle,|V\rangle\}{ | italic_H ⟩ , | italic_V ⟩ }.

To realize the effect of PSA, let us assume to measure only the light outgoing from the exit port along x𝑥xitalic_x-direction through the second beam-splitter of the MZI (BS2, see Fig. 1(b)), and to extract the FR angle by a difference-signal data analyzer (i.e., the DAQ shown in Fig. 1(b)). This one-exit-port measurement (discarding the light in the other exit port) corresponds to a postselection of the path state. More specifically, the state of postselection is |f=(|1+eiβ|2)/2ket𝑓ket1superscript𝑒𝑖𝛽ket22|f\rangle=(|1\rangle+e^{i\beta}|2\rangle)/\sqrt{2}| italic_f ⟩ = ( | 1 ⟩ + italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_i italic_β end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT | 2 ⟩ ) / square-root start_ARG 2 end_ARG. Here the phase factor eiβsuperscript𝑒𝑖𝛽e^{i\beta}italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_i italic_β end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is introduced by a phase shifter which is inserted in path “2”, as shown in Fig. 1(b). Via modulating β𝛽\betaitalic_β, one can realize an effect of PSA for the FR angle. Below we outline the key treatment for achieving this desired effect.

After postselection with |fket𝑓|f\rangle| italic_f ⟩, the polarization state of the postselected photon becomes

|Φf(θ)=12pf[(eiβ+cosθ)|Hisinθ|V].ketsubscriptΦ𝑓𝜃12subscript𝑝𝑓delimited-[]superscript𝑒𝑖𝛽𝜃ket𝐻𝑖𝜃ket𝑉\displaystyle|\Phi_{f}(\theta)\rangle=\frac{1}{2\sqrt{p_{f}}}\left[(e^{-i\beta% }+\cos\theta)|H\rangle-i\sin\theta|V\rangle\right]\,.| roman_Φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_θ ) ⟩ = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 square-root start_ARG italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG end_ARG [ ( italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_i italic_β end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + roman_cos italic_θ ) | italic_H ⟩ - italic_i roman_sin italic_θ | italic_V ⟩ ] . (2)

Mathematically, the postselection is described by |Φ~f(θ)=f|Ψ(θ)ketsubscript~Φ𝑓𝜃inner-product𝑓Ψ𝜃|\widetilde{\Phi}_{f}(\theta)\rangle=\langle f|\Psi(\theta)\rangle| over~ start_ARG roman_Φ end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_θ ) ⟩ = ⟨ italic_f | roman_Ψ ( italic_θ ) ⟩. |Φf(θ)ketsubscriptΦ𝑓𝜃|\Phi_{f}(\theta)\rangle| roman_Φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_θ ) ⟩ is the normalized version of |Φ~f(θ)ketsubscript~Φ𝑓𝜃|\widetilde{\Phi}_{f}(\theta)\rangle| over~ start_ARG roman_Φ end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_θ ) ⟩, where the normalization factor is associated with the postselection probability pfsubscript𝑝𝑓p_{f}italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, which is given by pf=Φ~f(θ)|Φ~f(θ)=(1+cosθcosβ)/2subscript𝑝𝑓inner-productsubscript~Φ𝑓𝜃subscript~Φ𝑓𝜃1𝜃𝛽2p_{f}=\langle\widetilde{\Phi}_{f}(\theta)|\widetilde{\Phi}_{f}(\theta)\rangle=% (1+\cos\theta\cos\beta)/2italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ⟨ over~ start_ARG roman_Φ end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_θ ) | over~ start_ARG roman_Φ end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_θ ) ⟩ = ( 1 + roman_cos italic_θ roman_cos italic_β ) / 2.

It would be instructive to get a preliminary insight for the effect of amplification through postselection, by computing first the quantum Fisher information (QFI) about θ𝜃\thetaitalic_θ, contained in |Ψ(θ)ketΨ𝜃|\Psi(\theta)\rangle| roman_Ψ ( italic_θ ) ⟩ and |Φf(θ)ketsubscriptΦ𝑓𝜃|\Phi_{f}(\theta)\rangle| roman_Φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_θ ) ⟩, respectively. For |Ψ(θ)ketΨ𝜃|\Psi(\theta)\rangle| roman_Ψ ( italic_θ ) ⟩, simple calculation gives the QFI about θ𝜃\thetaitalic_θ Cra16 ; Rao92 , as (θ)=2𝜃2{\cal I}(\theta)=2caligraphic_I ( italic_θ ) = 2. However, remarkably, for |Φf(θ)ketsubscriptΦ𝑓𝜃|\Phi_{f}(\theta)\rangle| roman_Φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_θ ) ⟩, the QFI is obtained as

ps(θ)=4pfsin2θ4pf2.superscriptps𝜃4subscript𝑝𝑓superscript2𝜃4subscriptsuperscript𝑝2𝑓\displaystyle{\cal I}^{\rm ps}(\theta)=\frac{4p_{f}-\sin^{2}\theta}{4p^{2}_{f}% }\,.caligraphic_I start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_ps end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_θ ) = divide start_ARG 4 italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - roman_sin start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_θ end_ARG start_ARG 4 italic_p start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG . (3)

One can check that, ps(θ)superscriptps𝜃{\cal I}^{\rm ps}(\theta)caligraphic_I start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_ps end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_θ ) can be anomalously larger than 2222. This means that each postselected photon carries more QFI than the photon before postselection, in the entangled state |Ψ(θ)ketΨ𝜃|\Psi(\theta)\rangle| roman_Ψ ( italic_θ ) ⟩. This result reflects the key feature of the recently advocated postselection filtering technique, which has been termed as postselected metrology Llo20 . The origin of the anomalous QFI has been profoundly connected with the unique quantum nature of negativeness of the Kirkwood-Dirac quasiprobability, and it was pointed out that the postselected metrology can outperform the optimal postselection-free experiment Llo20 . Indeed, in a subsequent experiment Shu22 , the metrological advantage of this technique was demonstrated, showing that it can amplify the information by two orders of magnitude, in per postselected photon.

Refer to caption
Figure 2: (a) The QFI ps(θ)superscriptps𝜃{\cal I}^{\rm ps}(\theta)caligraphic_I start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_ps end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_θ ), carried by per postelected photon in state |Φf(θ)ketsubscriptΦ𝑓𝜃|\Phi_{f}(\theta)\rangle| roman_Φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_θ ) ⟩, under different choices of the postselection parameter β𝛽\betaitalic_β, compared with the QFI encoded in the entangled state |Ψ(θ)ketΨ𝜃|\Psi(\theta)\rangle| roman_Ψ ( italic_θ ) ⟩ given by Eq. (1) (plotted here by the black line). (b) The PSA-FR angle θ~~𝜃\widetilde{\theta}over~ start_ARG italic_θ end_ARG versus the true FR angle θ𝜃\thetaitalic_θ, under different choices of β𝛽\betaitalic_β. The slope of each curve in the small θ𝜃\thetaitalic_θ regime characterizes the amplification factor, say, θ~/θ~𝜃𝜃\widetilde{\theta}/\thetaover~ start_ARG italic_θ end_ARG / italic_θ. Compared with the black line (result without postselection), the PSA effect is evident.

In Fig. 2(a), for our setup, we display the QFI ps(θ)superscriptps𝜃{\cal I}^{\rm ps}(\theta)caligraphic_I start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_ps end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_θ ) carried by per postelected photon under different choice of the postselection parameter (say, the phase shift parameter β𝛽\betaitalic_β). We see that, drastically, ps(θ)superscriptps𝜃{\cal I}^{\rm ps}(\theta)caligraphic_I start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_ps end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_θ ) can exceed the QFI encoded in the entangled state |Ψ(θ)ketΨ𝜃|\Psi(\theta)\rangle| roman_Ψ ( italic_θ ) ⟩, i.e., (θ)=2𝜃2{\cal I}(\theta)=2caligraphic_I ( italic_θ ) = 2. ps(θ)superscriptps𝜃{\cal I}^{\rm ps}(\theta)caligraphic_I start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_ps end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_θ ) can exceed also the QFI associated with the conventional measurement (CM), shown in Fig. 1(a), which encodes the FR angle θ𝜃\thetaitalic_θ in the polarization state of a probing photon through the transformation |Φcm(θ)=eiθσ^x|HketsuperscriptΦcm𝜃superscript𝑒𝑖𝜃subscript^𝜎𝑥ket𝐻|\Phi^{\rm cm}(\theta)\rangle=e^{-i\theta\hat{\sigma}_{x}}|H\rangle| roman_Φ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_cm end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_θ ) ⟩ = italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_i italic_θ over^ start_ARG italic_σ end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT | italic_H ⟩, which carries the QFI cm(θ)=4superscriptcm𝜃4{\cal I}^{\rm cm}(\theta)=4caligraphic_I start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_cm end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_θ ) = 4. Notice that, (θ)𝜃{\cal I}(\theta)caligraphic_I ( italic_θ ) is only a half of cm(θ)superscriptcm𝜃{\cal I}^{\rm cm}(\theta)caligraphic_I start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_cm end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_θ ). The reason is that, when a photon transmits through the MZI, it is affected by the parameter θ𝜃\thetaitalic_θ with only a half probability.

Measurement and Signal Analysis

.— Below we continue our analysis for practical measurement of the amplified signal of the FR angle. In conventional measurement, the FR angle θ𝜃\thetaitalic_θ is extracted from the probability PV=sin2θsubscript𝑃𝑉superscript2𝜃P_{V}=\sin^{2}\thetaitalic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_V end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = roman_sin start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_θ, of the |Vket𝑉|V\rangle| italic_V ⟩ component in the state |Φcm(θ)ketsuperscriptΦcm𝜃|\Phi^{\rm cm}(\theta)\rangle| roman_Φ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_cm end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_θ ) ⟩, which is generated by the FR transformation. In the postselected measurement, based on Eq. (2), the probability of the |Vket𝑉|V\rangle| italic_V ⟩ component in the postselected state |Φf(θ)ketsubscriptΦ𝑓𝜃|\Phi_{f}(\theta)\rangle| roman_Φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_θ ) ⟩ is given by

P~V(θ)=sin2θ/4pfsin2θ~.subscript~𝑃𝑉𝜃superscript2𝜃4subscript𝑝𝑓superscript2~𝜃\displaystyle\widetilde{P}_{V}(\theta)=\sin^{2}\theta/4p_{f}\equiv\sin^{2}% \widetilde{\theta}\,.over~ start_ARG italic_P end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_V end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_θ ) = roman_sin start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_θ / 4 italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≡ roman_sin start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT over~ start_ARG italic_θ end_ARG . (4)

Here, by analogy with conventional measurement, we define an effective angle θ~~𝜃\widetilde{\theta}over~ start_ARG italic_θ end_ARG, which is termed as PSA-FR angle hereafter in this work. This result indicates that, with the decrease of pfsubscript𝑝𝑓p_{f}italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, θ~~𝜃\widetilde{\theta}over~ start_ARG italic_θ end_ARG can be much larger than the true FR angle θ𝜃\thetaitalic_θ, realizing thus a remarkable amplification effect. In Fig. 2(b), we illustrate how the FR angle θ𝜃\thetaitalic_θ is amplified to θ~~𝜃\widetilde{\theta}over~ start_ARG italic_θ end_ARG, by modulating the postselection parameter β𝛽\betaitalic_β. For smaller θ𝜃\thetaitalic_θ, the amplification effect can be more prominent, for instance, it can be amplified by several orders of magnitude.

In practice, P~Vsubscript~𝑃𝑉\widetilde{P}_{V}over~ start_ARG italic_P end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_V end_POSTSUBSCRIPT can be obtained by measurement as follows. That is, the postselected photons are guided to a PBS (polarizing beam splitter), as shown in Fig. 1(b), which is set to allow the |Hket𝐻|H\rangle| italic_H ⟩-component to transmit through it, and the |Vket𝑉|V\rangle| italic_V ⟩-component to be reflected. Then, measure the photon flux intensities of the |Hket𝐻|H\rangle| italic_H ⟩ and |Vket𝑉|V\rangle| italic_V ⟩ polarizations, by two photo-detectors, which yield photo-currents IH=I0P~Hsubscript𝐼𝐻subscript𝐼0subscript~𝑃𝐻I_{H}=I_{0}\widetilde{P}_{H}italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT over~ start_ARG italic_P end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and IV=I0P~Vsubscript𝐼𝑉subscript𝐼0subscript~𝑃𝑉I_{V}=I_{0}\widetilde{P}_{V}italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_V end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT over~ start_ARG italic_P end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_V end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, respectively. The difference-signal data analyzer, i.e., the DAQ shown in Fig. 1(b), gives the ratio

R=(IVIH)/(IV+IH)=2P~V1,𝑅subscript𝐼𝑉subscript𝐼𝐻subscript𝐼𝑉subscript𝐼𝐻2subscript~𝑃𝑉1\displaystyle R=(I_{V}-I_{H})/(I_{V}+I_{H})=2\widetilde{P}_{V}-1\,,italic_R = ( italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_V end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) / ( italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_V end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = 2 over~ start_ARG italic_P end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_V end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - 1 , (5)

from which we straightforwardly obtain the key quantity P~Vsubscript~𝑃𝑉\widetilde{P}_{V}over~ start_ARG italic_P end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_V end_POSTSUBSCRIPT.

Below we further specify our consideration to connect with the real 87Rb atomic magnetometer, which was improved in a recent experiment PXH21 , by mixing 129Xe gas into the 87Rb gas in the same vapor cell, and exploiting the 129Xe nuclear spins playing role of a pre-amplifier to measure weak magnetic field. It was demonstrated in Ref. PXH21 that the amplified effective magnetic field acting onto the electron spins of the 87Rb atoms can be two orders of magnitude larger than the original field. Thus, roughly speaking, the FR of polarization of the probe light is amplified by two orders of magnitude. This amplification technique has been discussed to be useful in probing extremely weak magnetic effects, including such as searching dark matters.

Below, using the real parameters of the 87Rb AM, let us carry out an estimation for the time dependent FR angle θ(t)𝜃𝑡\theta(t)italic_θ ( italic_t ). We assume that the electron spins of the 87Rb atoms are polarized in the z𝑧zitalic_z-direction, see Fig. 1(a), by the pump laser light, and that a bias magnetic field (relatively large) is applied along the z𝑧zitalic_z-direction. Then, in the absence of any other magnetic fields, the polarization vector P does not precess around the bias magnetic field. However, if a weak magnetic field (to be estimated) is present, e.g., in the y𝑦yitalic_y-direction, the polarization vector P will precess around the total magnetic field. As a result, the component Px(t)subscript𝑃𝑥𝑡P_{x}(t)italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) of P(t)P𝑡\textbf{P}(t)P ( italic_t ) in the x𝑥xitalic_x-direction will cause an optical rotation of the linearly polarized probe laser light after transmitting through the vapor cell (along the x𝑥xitalic_x-direction), with the FR angle proportional to Px(t)subscript𝑃𝑥𝑡P_{x}(t)italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) as PXH21

θ(t)=14lrecfnD(ν)Px(t).𝜃𝑡14𝑙subscript𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑓𝑛𝐷𝜈subscript𝑃𝑥𝑡\theta(t)=\frac{1}{4}lr_{e}cfnD(\nu)P_{x}(t)\,.italic_θ ( italic_t ) = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 4 end_ARG italic_l italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_f italic_n italic_D ( italic_ν ) italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) . (6)

In this result, l𝑙litalic_l is the optical path length of the probe light transmitting through the vapor cell; re=e2(4πε0mec2)1=2.8subscript𝑟𝑒superscript𝑒2superscript4𝜋subscript𝜀0subscript𝑚𝑒superscript𝑐212.8r_{e}=e^{2}(4\pi\varepsilon_{0}m_{e}c^{2})^{-1}=2.8italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( 4 italic_π italic_ε start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = 2.8 fm is the classical radius of electron; c𝑐citalic_c is the speed of light; and f𝑓fitalic_f is the oscillator strength of electron (about 1/3 for the D1 transition and 2/3 for the D2 transition). The Lorentzian lineshape function, D(ν)=(νν0)/[(νν0)2+(Δν/2)2]𝐷𝜈𝜈subscript𝜈0delimited-[]superscript𝜈subscript𝜈02superscriptΔ𝜈22D(\nu)=(\nu-\nu_{0})/{[(\nu-\nu_{0})^{2}+(\Delta\nu/2)^{2}]}italic_D ( italic_ν ) = ( italic_ν - italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) / [ ( italic_ν - italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + ( roman_Δ italic_ν / 2 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ], characterizes the effect of detuning between ν𝜈\nuitalic_ν (frequency of the probe light) and ν0subscript𝜈0\nu_{0}italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (frequency of the D2 transition). In the real experiment PXH21 , the probe light is blue-detuned by 110 GHz from the D2 transition. ΔνΔ𝜈\Delta\nuroman_Δ italic_ν is the full-width at half-maximum (FWHM), owing to level broadening, or the dam** rate of oscillating dipole in classical treatment. The off-resonance D2 transition, or the respective classical electric polarization of the atoms, causes a change of the refractive index n(ν)𝑛𝜈n(\nu)italic_n ( italic_ν ) of the atomic medium to the light interacting with it. If Px0subscript𝑃𝑥0P_{x}\neq 0italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≠ 0, which indicates the electron spin probabilities p+1/2p1/2subscript𝑝12subscript𝑝12p_{+1/2}\neq p_{-1/2}italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 1 / 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≠ italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT - 1 / 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (the spin component is projected along the x𝑥xitalic_x direction), then the left (L𝐿Litalic_L) and right (R𝑅Ritalic_R) circularly polarized lights will cause different electric polarizations of the atoms (owing to the selection rule of angular momentum conservation), resulting thus in different refractive indices, n+(ν)n(ν)subscript𝑛𝜈subscript𝑛𝜈n_{+}(\nu)\neq n_{-}(\nu)italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT + end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ν ) ≠ italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT - end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ν ). From θ=πνlc[n+(ν)n(ν)]𝜃𝜋𝜈𝑙𝑐delimited-[]subscript𝑛𝜈subscript𝑛𝜈\theta=\frac{\pi\nu l}{c}[n_{+}(\nu)-n_{-}(\nu)]italic_θ = divide start_ARG italic_π italic_ν italic_l end_ARG start_ARG italic_c end_ARG [ italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT + end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ν ) - italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT - end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ν ) ], one obtains the result of Eq. (6).

To carry out specific result of the FR angle, we need to obtain Px(t)subscript𝑃𝑥𝑡P_{x}(t)italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ), from the Bloch equation

ddtP=γeB×P+Rop(ezP)RrelP.𝑑𝑑𝑡Psubscript𝛾𝑒BPsubscript𝑅opsubscripte𝑧Psubscript𝑅relP\frac{d}{dt}\textbf{P}=\gamma_{e}\textbf{B}\times\textbf{P}+R_{\rm op}(\textbf% {e}_{z}-\textbf{P})-R_{\rm rel}\textbf{P}\,.divide start_ARG italic_d end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_t end_ARG P = italic_γ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT B × P + italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_op end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - P ) - italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_rel end_POSTSUBSCRIPT P . (7)

In this equation, P is the Bloch vector of the electron spin; γe=gsμBsubscript𝛾𝑒subscript𝑔𝑠subscript𝜇𝐵\gamma_{e}=g_{s}\mu_{B}italic_γ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_g start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, with gs2subscript𝑔𝑠2g_{s}\approx 2italic_g start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≈ 2 the electron’s Lande´´𝑒\acute{e}over´ start_ARG italic_e end_ARG g𝑔gitalic_g factor and μBsubscript𝜇𝐵\mu_{B}italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT the Bohr magneton; Ropsubscript𝑅opR_{\rm op}italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_op end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is the optical pum** rate and Rrelsubscript𝑅relR_{\rm rel}italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_rel end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is the spin relaxation rate. Moreover, ezsubscripte𝑧\textbf{e}_{z}e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is the unit vector in the direction of the pum** light, and B is the total magnetic field. Following the experiment PXH21 , we assume a relatively large constant bias field Bz(t)=Bzsubscript𝐵𝑧𝑡subscript𝐵𝑧B_{z}(t)=B_{z}italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) = italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT applied in the z𝑧zitalic_z-direction, and a weak alternating field, By(t)=Bycos(2πνt)subscript𝐵𝑦𝑡subscript𝐵𝑦2𝜋𝜈𝑡B_{y}(t)=B_{y}\cos(2\pi\nu t)italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) = italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_cos ( 2 italic_π italic_ν italic_t ), to be measured, in the y𝑦yitalic_y-direction. Under the condition RopγeBymuch-greater-thansubscript𝑅opsubscript𝛾𝑒subscript𝐵𝑦R_{\rm op}\gg\gamma_{e}B_{y}italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_op end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≫ italic_γ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, one can first obtain the approximate solution Pz(t)Pz,0=Rop/(Rop+Rrel)similar-to-or-equalssubscript𝑃𝑧𝑡subscript𝑃𝑧0subscript𝑅opsubscript𝑅opsubscript𝑅relP_{z}(t)\simeq P_{z,0}=R_{\rm op}/(R_{\rm op}+R_{\rm rel})italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) ≃ italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z , 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_op end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / ( italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_op end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_rel end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ), then obtain Px(t)=Pz,0Bycos(2πνt+θy)subscript𝑃𝑥𝑡subscript𝑃𝑧0subscript𝐵𝑦2𝜋𝜈𝑡subscript𝜃𝑦P_{x}(t)={\cal M}P_{z,0}B_{y}\cos(2\pi\nu t+\theta_{y})italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) = caligraphic_M italic_P start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z , 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_cos ( 2 italic_π italic_ν italic_t + italic_θ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ). Both the amplitude modulation factor {\cal M}caligraphic_M and the phase delay factor θysubscript𝜃𝑦\theta_{y}italic_θ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT are Bzsubscript𝐵𝑧B_{z}italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT dependent, but have lengthy expressions (thus not shown here).

Refer to caption
Figure 3: Time dependent FR signals, by comparing the true FR angle θ𝜃\thetaitalic_θ (dark-green curve, left coordinate) with the PSA-FR angle θ~~𝜃\widetilde{\theta}over~ start_ARG italic_θ end_ARG (purple curves, right coordinate). The results are simulated using parameters referred to Ref. PXH21 , which are summarized in the main text of present work.

In Fig. 3, we display the numerical result of PSA of the FR angle, for a few choices of the postselection parameter β𝛽\betaitalic_β, using parameters referred to the experiment PXH21 . Some parameters not specified below Eq. (6) are: the optical path length l=1𝑙1l=1italic_l = 1 cm, the density of atom numbers n=14cm3𝑛14superscriptcm3n=14~{}{\rm cm}^{-3}italic_n = 14 roman_cm start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, and the FWHM Δν=59Δ𝜈59\Delta\nu=59roman_Δ italic_ν = 59 Hz. The values of the quantities in the Bloch equation are: the gyromagnetic ratio γe=2π×28Hz/nTsubscript𝛾e2𝜋28HznT\gamma_{\rm e}=2\pi\times 28~{}{\rm Hz/nT}italic_γ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_e end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 2 italic_π × 28 roman_Hz / roman_nT, the pum** rate Rop=2800sec1subscript𝑅op2800superscriptsec1R_{\rm op}=2800~{}{\rm sec}^{-1}italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_op end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 2800 roman_sec start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and the relaxation rate Rrel=1000sec1subscript𝑅rel1000superscriptsec1R_{\rm rel}=1000~{}{\rm sec}^{-1}italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_rel end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1000 roman_sec start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, the magnetci fields Bz=759nTsubscript𝐵𝑧759nTB_{z}=759~{}{\rm nT}italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 759 roman_nT and By=30×cos(2π×8.96t)pTsubscript𝐵𝑦302𝜋8.96𝑡pTB_{y}=30\times\cos(2\pi\times 8.96t)~{}{\rm pT}italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 30 × roman_cos ( 2 italic_π × 8.96 italic_t ) roman_pT. Using these parameters, our simulation gives the result shown in Fig. 3. The effect of amplification is prominent. For example, for the postselection using β=0.997π𝛽0.997𝜋\beta=0.997\piitalic_β = 0.997 italic_π, the amplification factor η=θ~/θ𝜂~𝜃𝜃\eta=\widetilde{\theta}/\thetaitalic_η = over~ start_ARG italic_θ end_ARG / italic_θ is larger than 100.

Discussion and Summary

.— The precision of an AM is largely affected by shot noise of the discrete photon numbers of the probe light beam. Let us consider the quantity R𝑅Ritalic_R, measured in real experiment, given by Eq. (5). We may denote the collected photon numbers in the two photo-detectors as N1=pfNcos2θ~subscript𝑁1subscript𝑝𝑓𝑁superscript2~𝜃N_{1}=p_{f}N\cos^{2}\widetilde{\theta}italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N roman_cos start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT over~ start_ARG italic_θ end_ARG and N2=pfNsin2θ~subscript𝑁2subscript𝑝𝑓𝑁superscript2~𝜃N_{2}=p_{f}N\sin^{2}\widetilde{\theta}italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N roman_sin start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT over~ start_ARG italic_θ end_ARG. Then, we have R=(N1N2)/(N1+N2)𝑅subscript𝑁1subscript𝑁2subscript𝑁1subscript𝑁2R=(N_{1}-N_{2})/(N_{1}+N_{2})italic_R = ( italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) / ( italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ). In general, the shot noise (uncertainty of the photon numbers) is δN1=N1𝛿subscript𝑁1subscript𝑁1\delta N_{1}=\sqrt{N_{1}}italic_δ italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = square-root start_ARG italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG and δN2=N2𝛿subscript𝑁2subscript𝑁2\delta N_{2}=\sqrt{N_{2}}italic_δ italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = square-root start_ARG italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG. The error of R𝑅Ritalic_R, originated from δN1𝛿subscript𝑁1\delta N_{1}italic_δ italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and δN2𝛿subscript𝑁2\delta N_{2}italic_δ italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, is determined by δR=[(RN1δN1)2+(RN2δN2)2]1/2𝛿𝑅superscriptdelimited-[]superscript𝑅subscript𝑁1𝛿subscript𝑁12superscript𝑅subscript𝑁2𝛿subscript𝑁2212\delta R=[(\frac{\partial R}{\partial N_{1}}\delta N_{1})^{2}+(\frac{\partial R% }{\partial N_{2}}\delta N_{2})^{2}]^{1/2}italic_δ italic_R = [ ( divide start_ARG ∂ italic_R end_ARG start_ARG ∂ italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG italic_δ italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + ( divide start_ARG ∂ italic_R end_ARG start_ARG ∂ italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG italic_δ italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ] start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 1 / 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. Simple algebra gives δR=sin2θ~/pfN𝛿𝑅2~𝜃subscript𝑝𝑓𝑁\delta R=\sin 2\widetilde{\theta}/\sqrt{p_{f}N}italic_δ italic_R = roman_sin 2 over~ start_ARG italic_θ end_ARG / square-root start_ARG italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_ARG. Based on Eqs. (5) and (4), we further obtain δθ~=1/(2pfN)𝛿~𝜃12subscript𝑝𝑓𝑁\delta\widetilde{\theta}=1/(2\sqrt{p_{f}N})italic_δ over~ start_ARG italic_θ end_ARG = 1 / ( 2 square-root start_ARG italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_ARG ).

We see that the signal-to-noise ratio of the PSA scheme, ~S/N=θ~/δθ~subscript~𝑆𝑁~𝜃𝛿~𝜃\widetilde{\cal R}_{S/N}=\widetilde{\theta}/\delta\widetilde{\theta}over~ start_ARG caligraphic_R end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_S / italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = over~ start_ARG italic_θ end_ARG / italic_δ over~ start_ARG italic_θ end_ARG, remains the same as the conventional measurement, S/N=θ/δθsubscript𝑆𝑁𝜃𝛿𝜃{\cal R}_{S/N}=\theta/\delta\thetacaligraphic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_S / italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_θ / italic_δ italic_θ, by noting that θ~θ/(2pf)similar-to-or-equals~𝜃𝜃2subscript𝑝𝑓\widetilde{\theta}\simeq\theta/(2\sqrt{p_{f}})over~ start_ARG italic_θ end_ARG ≃ italic_θ / ( 2 square-root start_ARG italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG ) (in the case of small θ𝜃\thetaitalic_θ and θ~~𝜃\widetilde{\theta}over~ start_ARG italic_θ end_ARG) and δθ1/Nsimilar-to𝛿𝜃1𝑁\delta\theta\sim 1/\sqrt{N}italic_δ italic_θ ∼ 1 / square-root start_ARG italic_N end_ARG. This implies that the small number of postselected photons contain almost all the metrological information of all the photons before postselection. As a result, the PSA provides an approach to ensure that the detector operates under the saturation threshold even for a large number of input photons, leading thus to remarkably outperforming the conventional measurement, as analyzed in theory Lun17 and demonstrated by experiment ZLJ20 .

For the case of AM, in the presence of saturation of the two photo-detectors (PD1 and PD2 in Fig. 1), one can expect that increasing the intensity of the probe light can make the PSA scheme remarkably outperform the conventional measurement without postselection. Moreover, the PSA metrology has been proposed and demonstrated to amplify miniscule physical effects, holding the potential for enhancing measurement sensitivity and overcoming technical noises and some environmental disturbances. For the setup of AM considered in this work, we may remain the full analysis of its performance in the presence of practical imperfections and technical noises for future investigation.

To summarize, we analyzed in this work the effect of amplification of the FR angle via properly postselecting the path state, by considering to embed the optical AM into an MZI. Physically speaking, this is because the postselected photon, compared with the photon in the conventional measurement without postselection, contains much more information about the FR angle, while the FR angle is related with (proportional to) the weak magnetic field to be estimated. Therefore, the scheme proposed in this work provides a postselected amplification metrology of probing tiny magnetic fields, holding the advantage of further enhancing the sensitivity of the nowadays optical AM.

Acknowledgements.

— This work was supported by the NNSF of China (Nos. 11675016, 11974011 & 61905174).

References

  • (1) M. Jiang, H. Su, A. Garcon, X. H. Peng, and D. Budker, Search for axion-like dark matter with spin-based amplifiers, Nat. Phys. 17, 1402 (2021).
  • (2) Y. H. Wang, Y. Huang, C. Guo, M. Jiang, X. Kang, H. W. Su, Y. S. Qin, W. Ji, D. D. Hu, X. H. Peng, and D. Budker, Search for exotic parity-violation interactions with quantum spin amplifiers, Sci. Adv. 9, eade0353 (2023).
  • (3) W. A. Terrano, and M. V. Romalis, Comagnetometer probes of dark matter and new physics, Quantum Sci. Technol. 7, 014001 (2022).
  • (4) P. Le Maire, L. Bertrand, M. Munschy, M. Diraison, and Y. Géraud, Aerial magnetic map** with an unmanned aerial vehicle and a fluxgate magnetometer: a new method for rapid map** and upscaling from the field to regional scale, Geophys. Prospect. 68, 2307 (2020).
  • (5) C. Walter, A. Braun, and G. Fotopoulos, High-resolution unmanned aerial vehicle aeromagnetic surveys for mineral exploration targets, Geophys. Prospect. 68, 334 (2020).
  • (6) M. J. Brookes, J. Leggett, M. Rea, R. M. Hill, N. Holmes, E. Boto, and R. Bowtell, Magnetoencephalography with optically pumped magnetometers (OPM-MEG): the next generation of functional neuroimaging, Trends Neurosci. 45, 621 (2022).
  • (7) A. Modi, and F. Kazi, Magnetic-Signature Prediction for Efficient Degaussing of Naval Vessels, IEEE Trans. Magn. 56, 6000606 (2020).
  • (8) P. Ripka, Review of fluxgate sensors, Sens. Actuator A-Phys. 33, 129 (1992).
  • (9) D. Hrakova, P. Ripka, and M. Butta, Sensitivity and noise of parallel fluxgate sensor with amorphous wire cores, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 563, 169981 (2022).
  • (10) R. L. Fagaly, Superconducting quantum interference device instruments and applications, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 77, 101101 (2006).
  • (11) A. Karsenty, A Comprehensive Review of Integrated Hall Effects in Macro-, Micro-, Nanoscales, and Quantum Devices, Sensors 20, 4163 (2020).
  • (12) D. Budker, and M. Romalis, Optical Magnetometry, Nat. Phys. 3, 227 (2007).
  • (13) M. Jiang, J. Bian, Q. Li, Z. Wu, H. Su, M. Xu, Y. Wang, X. Wang, and X. H. Peng, Zero- to ultralow-field nuclear magnetic resonance and its applications, Fundamental Res. 1, 68 (2021).
  • (14) A. Kastler, Some suggestions concerning the production and detection by optical means of inequalities in the populations of levels of spatial quantization in atoms. Application to the Stern and Gerlach and magnetic resonance experiments, J. Phys. Radium 11, 255 (1950).
  • (15) H. G. Dehmelt, Modulation of a light beam by precessing absorbing atoms, Phys. Rev. 105, 1924 (1957).
  • (16) W. E. Bell, and A. L. Bloom, Optical detection of magnetic resonance in alkali metal vapor, Phys. Rev. 107, 1559 (1957).
  • (17) A. L. Bloom, Principles of Operation of the Rubidium Vapor Magnetometer, Appl. Opt. 1, 61 (1962).
  • (18) M. C. D. Tayler, T. Theis, T. F. Sjolander, J. W. Blanchard, A. Kentner, S. Pustelny, A. Pines, and D. Budker, Invited Review Article: Instrumentation for nuclear magnetic resonance in zero and ultralow magnetic field, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 88, 091101 (2017).
  • (19) D. Budker, D. F. Kimball, S. M. Rochester, and V. V. Yashchuk, Nonlinear magneto-optical rotation via alignment-to-orientation conversion, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 2088 (2000).
  • (20) J. C. Allred, R. N. Lyman, T. W. Kornack, and M. V. Romalis, High-sensitivity atomic magnetometer unaffected by spin-exchange relaxation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 130801 (2002).
  • (21) H. B. Dang, A. C. Maloof, and M. V. Romalis, Ultrahigh sensitivity magnetic field and magnetization measurements with an atomic magnetometer, Appl. Phys. Lett. 97, 151110 (2010).
  • (22) D. R. M. Arvidsson-Shukur, N. Y. Halpern, H. Lepage, A. A. Lasek, C. H. W. Barnes, and S. Lloyd, Quantum advantage in postselected metrology, Nat. Commun. 11, 3775 (2020).
  • (23) N. Lupu-Gladstein, Y. B. Yilmaz, D. R. M. Arvidsson-Shukur, A. Brodutch, A. O. T. Pang, A. M. Steinberg, and N. Y. Halpern, Negative Quasiprobabilities Enhance Phase Estimation in Quantum-Optics Experiment, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 220504 (2022).
  • (24) J. Yang, Theory of Compression Channels for Post-selected Quantum Metrology, arXiv:2311.06679v2.
  • (25) Y. Aharonov, D. Z. Albert, and L. Vaidman, How the result of a measurement of a component of the spin of a spin-1/2 particle can turn out to be 100, Phys. Rev. Lett. 60, 1351 (1988).
  • (26) Y. Aharonov and L. Vaidman, Properties of a quantum system during the time interval between two measurements, Phys. Rev. A 41, 11 (1990).
  • (27) O. Hosten and P. G. Kwiat, Observation of the Spin Hall Effect of Light via weak measurements, Science 319, 787 (2008).
  • (28) P. B. Dixon, D. J. Starling, A. N. Jordan, and J. C. Howell, Ultrasensitive beam deflection measurement via interferometric weak value amplification, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 173601 (2009).
  • (29) D. J. Starling, P. B. Dixon, N. S.Williams, A. N. Jordan, and J. C. Howell, Continuous phase amplification with a sagnac interferometer, Phys. Rev. A 82, 011802 (2010).
  • (30) D. J. Starling, P. B. Dixon, A. N. Jordan, and J. C. Howell, Precision frequency measurements with interferometric weak values, Phys. Rev. A 82, 063822 (2010).
  • (31) G. I. Viza, J. Martínez-Rincón, G. A. Howland, H. Frostig, I. Shomroni, B. Dayan, and J. C. Howell, Weak-values technique for velocity measurements, Opt. Lett. 38, 2949 (2013).
  • (32) P. Egan and J. A. Stone, Weak-value thermostat with 0.2 mK precision, Opt. Lett. 37, 4991 (2012).
  • (33) J. Harris, R. W. Boyd,and J. S. Lundeen, Weak value amplification can outperform conventional measurement in the presence of detector saturation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118 070802 (2017).
  • (34) L. Xu, Z. Liu, A. Datta, G. C. Knee, J. S. Lundeen, Y. Lu, and L. Zhang, Approaching quantum-limited metrology with imperfect detectors by using weak-value amplification, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 080501 (2020).
  • (35) H. Cramér, Mathematical Methods of Statistics (PMS-9) (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 2016), Vol. 9.
  • (36) C. R. Rao, in Breakthroughs in Statistics (Springer, New York, 1992), pp. 235-247