4.6 Article

Electromagnetically-induced-transparency spectra of Rydberg atoms dressed with dual-tone radio-frequency fields

期刊

PHYSICAL REVIEW A
卷 108, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.108.033712

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, we experimentally demonstrate and theoretically model various nonlinear and multiphoton phenomena in the atomic response of Rydberg atoms driven by near-resonant dual-tone radio-frequency (rf) fields under strong driving conditions. Our findings validate previous two-state models and highlight the complexity and unique excitation pathways of the rf-driven Rydberg system.
We examine spectral signatures of Rydberg atoms driven with near-resonant dual-tone radio-frequency (rf) fields in the regime of strong driving. We experimentally demonstrate and theoretically model a variety of nonlinear and multiphoton phenomena in the atomic Rydberg response that manifest in the electromagneticallyinduced-transparency spectra. Our results echo previous studies of two-level atoms driven with bichromatic optical fields. In comparison to optical studies, the rf-driven Rydberg system utilizes a more complex excitation pathway and electromagnetic fields from two different spectral regimes: a two-photon optical excitation continuously creates highly excited Rydberg atoms, while rf fields drive resonant coupling between the Rydberg levels and generate strong mixing. However, our spectra reflect nearly identical effects of the dual-tone rf fields on the atomic Rydberg observables, showing detuning-dependent splittings and Rabi-frequency-dependent peak numbers and relative strengths, and avoided crossings at subharmonic resonances. We thus validate previous two-state models in this more complex physical system. In the context of Rydberg electrometry, we use these investigations to explore a technique in which we tune a known rf field to observe spectra which give the frequency and power of an unknown rf field using the complex dual-tone spectra.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据