Comment on "New physics constraints from atomic parity violation in 133-Cs"

Abstract

In a recent Letter [B. K. Sahoo, B. P. Das, and H. Spiesberger, Phys. Rev. D 103, L111303 (2021)], a calculation of the parity violating 6S-7S E1 amplitude in Cs is reported, claiming an uncertainty of just 0.3%. In this Comment, we point out that key contributions have been omitted, and the theoretical uncertainty has been significantly underestimated. In particular, the contribution of missed QED radiative corrections amounts to several times the claimed uncertainty.

References in corpus (5)

• Parity and Time-Reversal Violation in Atomic Systems
• Ground-state hyperfine structure of H-, Li-, and B-like ions in middle-Z region
• Ground-state hyperfine splitting for Rb, Cs, Fr, Ba^+, and Ra^+
• Atomic parity violation and the standard model
• Constraints on new physics from an improved calculation of parity violation in ${}^{133}$Cs

Cited by in corpus (9)

• Constraints on the dark photon from parity violation and the $W$ mass
• Empirical determination of the Bohr-Weisskopf effect in cesium and improved tests of precision atomic theory in searches for new physics
• Precision theoretical determination of electric-dipole matrix elements in atomic cesium
• Electric dipole transition amplitudes for atoms and ions with one valence electron
• QED radiative corrections to electric dipole amplitudes in heavy atoms
• Parity-mixed coupled-cluster formalism for computing parity-violating amplitudes
• Deciphering Core, Valence and Double-Core-Polarization Contributions to Parity Violating Amplitudes in ${}^{133}$Cs using Different Methods
• Theoretical characterisation of the barium II and radium II ions
• Reply to Comment on "New physics constraints from atomic parity violation in ${}^{133}$Cs"