kren_2011

P. Kren, Appl. Opt. 50, 6484 (2011)

Source record · Catalogue · Review register

No DOI is recorded.

Source kind: fit

Recorded technique: Comment on Zhang, Lu and Wang (2008): a dispersion formula for molecular oxygen derived, not measured, from Bonsch and Potulski’s standard dry-air formula minus the other constituents (mainly Zhang et al.’s formulas), through Lorentz-Lorenz summation.

Materials in structured entries: O2

Dataset quantities: refractivity

Contents: 1 dataset; 1 formula.

Curation notes

The library record is unverified; the citation is from the page (Applied Optics Vol. 50, No. 35, 10 December 2011, pp. 6484-6485; P. Kren, Czech Metrology Institute). Standard conditions 20 degrees C and 101 325 Pa, ‘in accordance with’ Zhang et al.; lambda the vacuum wavelength in micrometers; valid 400-1800 nm (the range of the air formula). Kren argues that Zhang et al.’s O2 formula is distorted by fitting across the oxygen A band, where a 30 m path at 101 325 Pa absorbs almost fully: its dispersion between 633 and 800 nm, 1851 ppb, differs by about 33 ppb (at 20 kPa partial pressure) from the 1683 ppb consistent with the air formula (p. 1). The Birch (1991) oxygen value quoted on p. 2 is recorded as a reproduction; the library flags one unmapped glyph on p. 2 (UNMAPPED_GLYPHS), the +- of that value, read from the page image.

Recorded bibliographic identity status: VALIDATED_WITH_WARNINGS. This concerns identification of the source; it does not establish the scientific correctness of its contents.

Datasets

kren_2011/birch_1991_O2

{
  "id": "birch_1991_O2",
  "material": "O2",
  "table": "text",
  "quantity": "refractivity",
  "abscissa_unit": "nm",
  "wavelength_medium": "vacuum",
  "state": "1atm_15C",
  "density": "unknown",
  "use": "reproduced",
  "reproduced_from": [
    "K. P. Birch, J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 8, 647 (1991)"
  ],
  "uncertainty": {
    "column": true,
    "level": "not stated"
  }
}

1 inline points in the source record.

p. 2: ‘the absolute value of the refractive index published in [5] for oxygen equal to 1.000255720 +- 0.000000050 at 15 degrees C’ (at 633 nm, standard pressure); stored as n - 1 = 0.000255720 (the printed n minus 1). Level of the +- not stated. Zhang et al. 2008 quote the same measurement converted to 20 degrees C (2513.43 +- 0.5 x 10^-7 at 632.99 nm; zhang_2008/birch_1991_O2). The original is not in the library.

Formulas

kren_2011/kren_O2

{
  "id": "kren_O2",
  "form": "dn_sigma2",
  "terms": {
    "scale": "1e-8",
    "A": "11814.94",
    "B": [
      "970893.1"
    ],
    "C": [
      "75.4"
    ]
  },
  "range_nm": [
    400.0,
    1800.0
  ],
  "material": "O2",
  "equation": "Eq. (1), p. 1",
  "printed": "(n_O2 - 1)_S x 10^8 = 11,814.94 + 970,893.1/(75.4 - 1/lambda^2)",
  "variable": "lambda: vacuum wavelength in micrometers",
  "state": "1atm_20C",
  "density": "real",
  "range": "400-1800 nm",
  "coefficients": {
    "A0": "11814.94",
    "A1": "970893.1",
    "B1": "75.4"
  },
  "check": "Gives 1.000251323 at 633 nm, the value printed on p. 2 for standard conditions (Kren's 15 degrees C value, 1.000255700, needs a density ratio the paper does not give). Zhang et al.'s O2 formula gives 1.000251401 at 633 nm, as Kren quotes. Checked 2026-09-24."
}

Derived from the air formula and the other constituents, not measured; a model value, not data. Its 15 degrees C value is ‘consistent within the uncertainty’ of Birch’s measurement (p. 2).

Corrections

No dataset errata are recorded in this source record.

Formula corrections, where recorded, appear with their formulas above. Curation notes may also discuss corrections or unresolved interpretation. Consult the review register for the checks and decisions.