Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 63 references

A carbon-nanotube charge sensor read as RF current on an unmatched RLC tank reaches 0.15 µe/√Hz sensitivity and SNR-17 single-shot readout.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

T0 review · grok-4.5

2026-07-31 11:34 UTC pith:23PMGK6Y

load-bearing objection Solid experimental methods paper: unmatched resonant current-mode CNT charge sensing hits real SOTA-level δq and single-shot SNR, with only the usual caveats on the best-bias point and the 10^{-17} extrapolation. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.28313 v1 pith:23PMGK6Y submitted 2026-07-30 cond-mat.mes-hall

Current-based RF charge sensing in a carbon nanotube

Marta Cagetti , Stefan Forstner , Victor Champain , Roger Tormo-Queralt , Christoffer B. M{\o}ller , Sergio L. De Bonis , Chandan Samanta , Elsa V\'azquez-Rodriguez
show 3 more authors
Eneko Mateos-Madinabeitia David A. Czaplewski Adrian Bachtold
This is my paper
classification cond-mat.mes-hall
keywords charge sensingcarbon nanotubeRF current readoutdouble quantum dotsingle-shot readoutRLC resonatorquantum dotscharge sensitivity
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

This paper shows that ultra-sensitive charge detection does not need an impedance-matched microwave tank or an amplifier sitting millimetres from the sample. By converting the sensor current to voltage at the 1.25 MHz resonance of a simple RLC circuit built from the line capacitance and ordinary surface-mount parts, a suspended carbon nanotube hosts both a charge sensor and a double quantum dot and still beats reported charge sensitivity and single-shot fidelity. The sensor resolves a clean honeycomb charge-stability diagram, extracts the interdot tunnel coupling from temperature, and reads the DQD charge state in 3.56 µs with SNR 17 and zero misassignments in ten million shots. The practical payoff is simpler cryostat wiring, lower heat load on the mixing chamber, and a readout path that works on devices where proximal amplifiers or custom matching networks are hard to integrate.

Core claim

A current-mode charge sensor defined in a suspended carbon nanotube, operated at the 1.25 MHz resonance of an unmatched RLC tank, achieves charge sensitivity δq ≈ 0.15 µe/√Hz and single-shot readout of a co-integrated double-quantum-dot charge state with SNR = 17 at 3.56 µs integration time, with no false assignments over 10^7 measurements—surpassing prior charge sensors at comparable speed while removing the need for impedance matching or millimetre-scale amplifier proximity.

What carries the argument

Resonant RF current-to-voltage conversion on an RLC tank (parasitic line capacitance plus series inductors and a resistor): only noise in a narrow band around resonance contributes, the cryogenic amplifier can sit at 3.2 K, and no 50 Ω impedance match is required.

Load-bearing premise

The headline sensitivity and the factor-of-six improvement claim rest on running at the largest AC bias that still leaves the Coulomb peak undistorted and treating the noise floor as Johnson–Nyquist-limited over most of the measured band.

What would settle it

A repeat measurement on the same or an equivalent nanotube sensor at the quoted bias that finds either a higher current-noise floor than the stated Johnson–Nyquist background or a Coulomb-peak slope that yields δq clearly worse than 0.15 µe/√Hz, or 3.56 µs single-shot histograms whose separation and widths give SNR well below 17.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Suspended-nanotube and other hard-to-wire quantum devices can use proximal charge sensing without custom matching networks or mixing-chamber amplifiers.
  • Few-microsecond, high-fidelity single-shot charge readout becomes available for nanotube double-dot charge and spin qubits.
  • Placing the HEMT at 3.2 K rather than the mixing chamber cuts heat load while still beating reported SNR at similar integration times.
  • The same unmatched RLC current readout is presented as directly portable to other semiconductor quantum-dot platforms.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Wiring simplicity makes multi-sensor arrays on suspended or van-der-Waals devices easier to instrument than classical RF reflectometry.
  • The secondary ~40 MHz line resonance already giving SNR 15 at 0.85 µs suggests bandwidth can be raised without redesigning a match network.
  • If the same noise floor holds under spin-to-charge conversion, nanotube spin-qubit readout above typical fault-tolerance thresholds becomes more realistic.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The manuscript demonstrates a current-mode RF charge sensor realized in a suspended carbon nanotube and read out at the 1.25 MHz resonance of an unmatched RLC tank (L = 66 µH, R_RLC = 10 kΩ, C_p ≈ 246 pF), with the cryogenic HEMT placed at the 3.2 K stage. The sensor is operated on the flank of a Coulomb blockade peak and is used both to map the charge stability diagram of a DQD defined in the same nanotube and to perform single-shot interdot charge-state readout. Headline performance figures are a charge sensitivity δq ≈ 0.15 µe/√Hz (at V_SQD = 165 µV), SNR = 17 at τ_int = 3.56 µs with zero misclassifications in 10^7 shots, and an ICT tunnel coupling 2t/h = 2.5 ± 0.4 GHz extracted from the temperature dependence of ∂M/∂ε. A secondary resonance at 39.6 MHz yields SNR = 15 at 0.85 µs. Results are split across two devices (A for readout benchmarking, B for stability diagram and ICT).

Significance. If the reported numbers hold under fair comparison, this is a practically useful advance for charge sensing in complex or suspended nanostructures. Removing the need for impedance matching and relocating the HEMT off the mixing chamber simplifies cryogenic integration and reduces heat load, which is especially relevant for CNT and other mechanically delicate platforms where proximal RF-SET engineering has been limited. The combination of a highly regular CNT DQD honeycomb, resolved ICT tunnel coupling without transport, and single-shot SNR that sits at or above recent RF-reflectometry and cryogenic-current-amplifier benchmarks is of clear interest to the spin-qubit and mesoscopic-physics communities. The experimental chain (Coulomb-peak working point, resonator response, noise floor, stability diagram, ICT temperature fit, single-shot histograms) is standard and internally consistent with the figures. Code availability on GitHub is a positive reproducibility point.

major comments (3)
  1. [Charge sensitivity paragraph (after Fig. 1e); SI §S3] The headline δq ≈ 0.15 µe/√Hz and the claim of surpassing the state of the art by a factor of ~6 are obtained at the largest AC bias that leaves the Coulomb peak unperturbed (V_SQD = 165 µV), with √S_I = 71 fA/√Hz, ΔV_GCS = 180 mV, and |dI/dV_GCS| = 2.7 µA/V (main text after Fig. 1e; SI §S3 referenced for the Johnson–Nyquist-limited bands). The text itself notes that typical operating bias is ~10 µV, giving δq ~ 0.3–1.0 µe/√Hz. For the ranking versus prior RF-SETs (Refs. 14, 42, 47–51) to be load-bearing, the manuscript should state explicitly whether literature values were taken under comparable bias, bandwidth, and temperature conditions, and should report the sensitivity used for the actual single-shot and stability-diagram measurements alongside the optimized figure. Without that, the absolute ranking is not fully substantiated even though the formula and arithmetic are standard.
  2. [Single-shot readout paragraph (Fig. 4b–c); Abstract] The Gaussian-inferred infidelity 1−F ∼ 10^{-17} (from SNR = 17) is extrapolated many orders of magnitude beyond the empirically demonstrated bound of zero errors in 10^7 shots. Non-Gaussian tails, telegraph noise, or slow drifts commonly dominate at that level in charge sensors. The measured zero-error count and SNR = 17 at τ = 3.56 µs are already strong and sufficient to support an SOTA claim at comparable integration time (Fig. 4c); the 10^{-17} figure should be clearly labeled as a Gaussian model estimate, not as an experimentally established fidelity, or removed from the abstract/conclusion emphasis.
  3. [Supporting Information statement; §§S1, S3, S6] Critical supporting material (device parameters §S1, noise-band details §S3, 39.6 MHz resonance §S6, circuit-level comparison to reflectometry) is stated as ‘will be made available with the published article’ and is not in the review package. Several quantitative claims (lever arm α_CS = 0.25 eV/V used for δE ≈ 1.5 ℏ; Johnson–Nyquist-limited bands 20–600 kHz; secondary-resonance SNR) rest on that SI. The SI should be supplied for review, or the essential numbers and raw noise spectra moved into the main text or an extended data section, so that the sensitivity and SNR claims can be independently checked.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Paragraph before Fig. 1; SI §S1] Two devices (A and B) are used without a concise comparison table in the main text. A short table of charging energies, lever arms, and sensor–DQD coupling for A vs B would help the reader assess transferability.
  2. [Figure 4c] Fig. 4c SOTA comparison would be clearer if integration bandwidth / effective noise bandwidth were annotated next to each literature point, since SNR scales with measurement bandwidth.
  3. [Circuit description (Fig. 1b–d)] Effective impedance Z_eff = 7.5 kΩ is stated as ‘determined primarily by the resistance of the RLC resonator’ (R_RLC = 10 kΩ); a one-line derivation or reference to the parallel combination with the sensor conductance would remove ambiguity.
  4. [Throughout] Typographical / formatting: ‘f RLC’, ‘V GCS’, ‘∆f’ appear with inconsistent spacing/subscripts in the compiled text; unify notation (f_RLC, V_GCS, etc.).
  5. [Charge sensitivity paragraph] The energy sensitivity δE = (δq)^2/(2C_Σ) ≈ 1.5 ℏ is interesting but briefly stated; specify whether this is meant as a quantum-limit comparison and under which definition of C_Σ.
  6. [Abstract] Abstract says ‘without any false assignments over 10^7 measurements and a signal-to-noise ratio of 17 exceeding the state of the art’ — consider splitting into the empirical zero-error result and the SNR comparison so the SOTA claim is tied to Fig. 4c conditions.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: experimental performance metrics extracted from independent measurements against standard external definitions.

full rationale

This is a measurement paper reporting charge sensitivity, DQD stability diagrams, interdot tunnel coupling, and single-shot SNR. The sensitivity formula δq = e √SI / (ΔVGCS · |dI/dVGCS|) uses independently measured noise, peak spacing, and slope; SNR is computed from histogram means and widths of single-shot traces; tunnel coupling 2t/h is fitted to the standard two-level thermal model of Petta et al. (external Ref. 52), not predicted from a self-normalized ansatz. Self-citations (fabrication Ref. 46; nanomechanics readout Refs. 39–41; code Ref. 58) supply methods only and do not force the headline performance claims. Nothing reduces by construction to its own fitted inputs. Score 0.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

5 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

Load-bearing content is experimental. The claim rests on standard mesoscopic electrostatics, a lumped RLC model of cable + SMD parts, the usual charge-sensitivity formula, and a two-level thermal occupation model for the ICT—not on new postulates. Free parameters are device- and fit-level quantities (biases, lever arm, t, noise floor) that are measured or fitted, not universal constants invented to save a theory.

free parameters (5)
  • V_SQD (AC probe amplitude for best δq) = 165 µV
    Chosen as the largest AC bias that does not distort the Coulomb peak; enters the headline 0.15 µe/√Hz figure.
  • √S_I (input-referred current noise) = 71 fA/√Hz
    Measured noise floor used directly in δq = e √S_I / (ΔV_GCS · |dI/dV_GCS|).
  • α_CS (charge-sensor gate lever arm) = 0.25 eV/V
    Measured lever arm used to convert δq into effective energy sensitivity δE ≈ 1.5 ℏ via E_c = α_CS ΔV_GCS.
  • interdot tunnel coupling 2t/h = 2.5 ± 0.4 GHz
    Extracted from least-squares fit of ∂M/∂ε|_0 vs temperature to the tanh thermal model; not assumed a priori.
  • C_p, L, R_RLC (tank elements) = L=66 µH, R=10 kΩ, C_p≈246 pF, f_RLC=1.25 MHz
    L and R are SMD values; C_p is dominated by the transmission line and sets f_RLC and Z_eff. They define the operating resonance and bandwidth.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption Charge sensitivity is δq = e √S_I / (ΔV_GCS · |dI/dV_GCS|) with ΔV_GCS the gate period for adding one electron.
    Standard RF-SET metrology formula (Schoelkopf et al. and reviews); used without re-derivation to claim 0.15 µe/√Hz.
  • domain assumption On resonance the sensor current is converted by Z_eff ≈ R_RLC and only noise in the resonator bandwidth contributes, suppressing 1/f.
    Lumped RLC circuit model plus the stated cable capacitance; justifies placing the HEMT at 3.2 K and the noise advantage over baseband current sensing.
  • domain assumption ICT occupation follows a thermally broadened two-level system with ∂M/∂ε|_0 = −(1/4t) tanh(t/k_B T_e).
    Standard DQD charge-qubit model (Petta et al. 2004 methodology); used to extract t from temperature slopes.
  • domain assumption Single-shot SNR = |µ1−µ0|/σ with Gaussian histograms implies infidelity 1−F ∼ 10^{-17} at SNR=17.
    Gaussian error-function model common in qubit readout papers; the numerical infidelity is an extrapolation beyond the 10^7 counted shots.
  • domain assumption Suspended small-bandgap CNT plus gates G1–G5 electrostatically define a DQD and a proximal sensor dot with capacitive coupling sufficient for charge sensing.
    Device physics assumed from the group’s prior fabrication (Ref. 46) and standard CNT QD electrostatics.

pith-pipeline@v1.2.0-daily-grok45 · 16869 in / 4045 out tokens · 64951 ms · 2026-07-31T11:34:06.516725+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Ultra-sensitive charge detection is a widely used tool for quantum electronics with applications in quantum information processing and in probing the physics of condensed matter systems. Existing approaches require either an impedance-matched resonant circuit, or millimeter-scale proximity between amplifier and sample, both adding complexity and constraining device design. In this work, we introduce a current-mode charge sensor in a suspended carbon nanotube, operating at the $1.25$ MHz resonance of an RLC tank circuit and achieving a charge sensitivity of $0.15~\mu e/\sqrt{\mathrm{Hz}}$. We utilize it to measure a double quantum dot (DQD) electrostatically defined in the same nanotube, revealing a highly regular charge stability diagram. We perform single-shot readout of the DQD charge state at an integration time of $3.56~\mu\mathrm{s}$, without any false assignments over $10^{7}$ measurements and a signal-to-noise ratio of 17 exceeding the state of the art.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.28313 by Adrian Bachtold, Chandan Samanta, Christoffer B. M{\o}ller, David A. Czaplewski, Elsa V\'azquez-Rodriguez, Eneko Mateos-Madinabeitia, Marta Cagetti, Roger Tormo-Queralt, Sergio L. De Bonis, Stefan Forstner, Victor Champain.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: (a) False-colored scanning electron micrograph of the device. The CNT, which is suspended over the gate electrodes GCS and G1-G5, is electrically in contact with sensor’s source (SQD), the DQD source (S), and a common drain (D). The white arrows indicate the position of the CNT. (b) Schematic of the setup. The common drain is connected to ground through an RLC resonator with resonance frequency fRLC = 1.25… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Charge stability diagram showing the effective position of the Coulomb peak, ∆Vpeak, relative to its initial position (bottom left of the stability diagram) as a function of VG2 and VG4. Inset: zoom of the interdot charge transition, highlighting the three transitions, which are illustrated schematically on the right. ∆ -0.4 -0.2 0.4 Vpeak 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.5 1.0 ε(meV) Temperature (mK) 100 mK 0 200 400 600 5 … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: (a) Normalized average charge occupation (M) of the left quantum dot as a function of detuning for cryostat temperatures between 100 and 600 mK. The inset shows the ICT and the yellow arrow indicating the detuning axis used to extract the traces. (b) Temperature dependence of the fitted slope parameter ∂M ∂ϵ , extracted from the curves shown in panel (a) at zero detuning. The dashed line is a least-squares… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: (a) Response of the charge sensor as a function of VG2 and VG4, showing the (2, 1) ↔ (3, 0) ICT. (b) Single-shot time trace of the in-phase quadrature of the demodulated lock-in output signal X, together with the corresponding histogram for an integration time of τ = 3.56 µs. The dashed line indicates the discrimination threshold. (c) Readout SNR from this work compared with state￾of-the-art charge sensors… view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

63 extracted references · 11 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    and Pei, T

    Ares, N. and Pei, T. and Mavalankar, A. and Mergenthaler, M. and Warner, J. H. and Briggs, G. A. D. and Laird, E. A. , month = oct, year =. Resonant. Physical Review Letters , publisher =. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.170801 , number =

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.117.170801

  2. [2]

    Sensitive Radio-Frequency Measurements of a Quantum Dot by Tuning to Perfect Impedance Matching , author =. Phys. Rev. Appl. , volume =. 2016 , month =. doi:10.1103/PhysRevApplied.5.034011 , url =

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevapplied.5.034011 2016

  3. [3]

    Applied Physics Letters , author =

    An in situ tunable radio-frequency quantum point contact , volume =. Applied Physics Letters , author =. 2010 , pages =. doi:10.1063/1.3517483 , number =

    work page doi:10.1063/1.3517483 2010

  4. [4]

    and Villis, B

    Apostolidis, P. and Villis, B. J. and Chittock-Wood, J. F. and Powell, J. M. and Baumgartner, A. and Vesterinen, V. and Simbierowicz, S. and Hassel, J. and Buitelaar, M. R. , month = sep, year =. Quantum paraelectric varactors for radiofrequency measurements at millikelvin temperatures , volume =. Nature Electronics , publisher =. doi:10.1038/s41928-024-0...

    work page doi:10.1038/s41928-024-01214-z

  5. [5]

    Shot Noise of a Quantum Dot Measured with Gigahertz Impedance Matching , author =. Phys. Rev. Appl. , volume =. 2015 , month =. doi:10.1103/PhysRevApplied.4.054002 , url =

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevapplied.4.054002 2015

  6. [6]

    and Lundberg, Theodor and Haigh, James A

    Ibberson, David J. and Lundberg, Theodor and Haigh, James A. and Hutin, Louis and Bertrand, Benoit and Barraud, Sylvain and Lee, Chang-Min and Stelmashenko, Nadia A. and Oakes, Giovanni A. and Cochrane, Laurence and Robinson, Jason W. A. and Vinet, Maud and Gonzalez-Zalba, M. Fernando and Ibberson, Lisa A. , journal =. Large Dispersive Interaction between...

    2021

  7. [7]

    Applied Physics Letters , volume =

    Low-temperature Tunable Radio-Frequency Resonator for Sensitive Dispersive Readout of Nanoelectronic Devices , author =. Applied Physics Letters , volume =. 2019 , month = mar, doi =

    2019

  8. [8]

    Nano Letters , volume =

    Novel Nanotube Multiquantum Dot Devices , author =. Nano Letters , volume =. 2022 , month = oct, doi =

    2022

  9. [9]

    Applied Physics Reviews , volume =

    Probing Quantum Devices with Radio-Frequency Reflectometry , author =. Applied Physics Reviews , volume =. 2023 , month = feb, doi =

    2023

  10. [10]

    and Nelson, J

    Connors, Elliot J. and Nelson, J. J. and Nichol, John M. , journal =. Rapid High-Fidelity Spin-State Readout in. 2020 , month = feb, doi =

    2020

  11. [11]

    and Parmentier, F

    Jezouin, S. and Parmentier, F. D. and Anthore, A. and Gennser, U. and Cavanna, A. and Jin, Y. and Pierre, F. , title =. Science , volume =. 2013 , doi =

    2013

  12. [12]

    and Freulon, V

    Bocquillon, E. and Freulon, V. and Berroir, J.-M. and Degiovanni, P. and Pla. Coherence and Indistinguishability of Single Electrons Emitted by Independent Sources , journal =. 2013 , doi =

    2013

  13. [13]

    and Roulleau, P

    Jullien, T. and Roulleau, P. and Roche, B. and Cavanna, A. and Jin, Y. and Glattli, D. C. , title =. Nature , volume =. 2014 , doi =

    2014

  14. [14]

    de Bonis, S. L. and Urgell, C. and Yang, W. and Samanta, C. and Noury, A. and Vergara-Cruz, J. and Dong, Q. and Jin, Y. and Bachtold, A. , title =. Nano Letters , volume =. 2018 , doi =

    2018

  15. [15]

    and Liang, Y

    Dong, Q. and Liang, Y. X. and Ferry, D. and Cavanna, A. and Gennser, U. and Couraud, L. and Jin, Y. , title =. Applied Physics Letters , year =. doi:10.1063/1.4887368 , publisher =

    work page doi:10.1063/1.4887368

  16. [16]

    Schoelkopf, R. J. and Wahlgren, P. and Kozhevnikov, A. A. and Delsing, P. and Prober, D. E. , title =. Science , volume =. 1998 , doi =

    1998

  17. [17]

    Reilly, D. J. and Marcus, C. M. and Hanson, M. P. and Gossard, A. C. , title =. Applied Physics Letters , volume =. 2007 , doi =

    2007

  18. [18]

    and Ahmed, I

    Schaal, S. and Ahmed, I. and Haigh, J. A. and Hutin, L. and Bertrand, B. and Barraud, S. and Vinet, M. and Lee, C.-M. and Stelmashenko, N. A. and Robinson, J. W. A. and Qiu, J. Y. and Hacohen-Gourgy, S. and Siddiqi, I. and Gonzalez-Zalba, M. F. and Morton, J. J. L. , title =. Physical Review Letters , volume =. 2020 , doi =

    2020

  19. [19]

    and Haigh, J

    Ahmed, I. and Haigh, J. A. and Schaal, S. and Barraud, S. and Zhu, Y. and Lee, C.-M. and Amado, M. and Robinson, J. W. A. and Rossi, A. and Morton, J. J. L. and Gonzalez-Zalba, M. F. , title =. Physical Review Applied , volume =. 2018 , doi =

    2018

  20. [20]

    Colless, J. I. and Mahoney, A. C. and Hornibrook, J. M. and Doherty, A. C. and Lu, H. and Gossard, A. C. and Reilly, D. J. , title =. Physical Review Letters , volume =. 2013 , doi =

    2013

  21. [21]

    Gonzalez-Zalba, M. F. and Barraud, S. and Ferguson, A. J. and Betz, A. C. , title =. Nature Communications , volume =. 2015 , doi =

    2015

  22. [22]

    Petersson, K. D. and Smith, C. G. and Anderson, D. and Atkinson, P. and Jones, G. A. C. and Ritchie, D. A. , title =. Nano Letters , volume =. 2010 , doi =

    2010

  23. [23]

    and Otxoa, R

    Mizuta, R. and Otxoa, R. M. and Betz, A. C. and Gonzalez-Zalba, M. F. , title =. Physical Review B , volume =. 2017 , doi =

    2017

  24. [24]

    Elzerman, J. M. and Hanson, R. and van Beveren, L. H. Willems and Witkamp, B. and Vandersypen, L. M. K. and Kouwenhoven, L. P. , title =. Nature , volume =. 2004 , doi =

    2004

  25. [25]

    and Kouwenhoven, L

    Hanson, R. and Kouwenhoven, L. P. and Petta, J. R. and Tarucha, S. and Vandersypen, L. M. K. , title =. Reviews of Modern Physics , volume =. 2007 , doi =

    2007

  26. [26]

    , title =

    Loss, Daniel and DiVincenzo, David P. , title =. Physical Review A , volume =. 1998 , doi =

    1998

  27. [27]

    and Pan, Andrew and Nichol, John M

    Burkard, Guido and Ladd, Thaddeus D. and Pan, Andrew and Nichol, John M. and Petta, Jason R. , title =. Reviews of Modern Physics , volume =. 2023 , doi =

    2023

  28. [28]

    and Mariantoni, Matteo and Martinis, John M

    Fowler, Austin G. and Mariantoni, Matteo and Martinis, John M. and Cleland, Andrew N. , title =. Physical Review A , volume =. 2012 , doi =

    2012

  29. [29]

    and Martin, J

    Ilani, S. and Martin, J. and Teitelbaum, E. and Smet, J. H. and Mahalu, D. and Umansky, V. and Yacoby, A. , title =. Nature , volume =. 2004 , doi =

    2004

  30. [30]

    and Sulpizio, J

    Honig, M. and Sulpizio, J. A. and Drori, J. and Joshua, A. and Zeldov, E. and Ilani, S. , title =. Nature Materials , volume =. 2013 , doi =

    2013

  31. [31]

    and Hamo, A

    Shapir, I. and Hamo, A. and Pecker, S. and Moca, C. P. and Legeza,. Imaging the electronic Wigner crystal in one dimension , journal =. 2019 , doi =

    2019

  32. [32]

    and Schoelkopf, Robert J

    Devoret, Michel H. and Schoelkopf, Robert J. , title =. Nature , volume =. 2000 , doi =

    2000

  33. [33]

    Yoo, M. J. and Fulton, T. A. and Hess, H. F. and Willett, R. L. and Dunkleberger, L. N. and Chichester, R. J. and Pfeiffer, L. N. and West, K. W. , title =. Science , volume =. 1997 , doi =

    1997

  34. [34]

    Pierce and Jeong Min Park and Daniel E

    Yonglong Xie and Andrew T. Pierce and Jeong Min Park and Daniel E. Parker and Eslam Khalaf and Patrick Ledwith and Yuan Cao and Seung Hwan Lee and Shaowen Chen and Patrick R. Forrester and Kenji Watanabe and Takashi Taniguchi and Ashvin Vishwanath and Pablo Jarillo-Herrero and Amir Yacoby , title =. Nature , volume =. 2021 , month =. doi:10.1038/s41586-02...

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-021-04224-9 2021

  35. [35]

    Journal of Applied Physics , year =

    Brenning, Henrik and Kafanov, Sergey and Duty, Tim and Kubatkin, Sergey and Delsing, Per , title =. Journal of Applied Physics , year =

  36. [36]

    Aassime and D

    A. Aassime and D. Gunnarsson and K. Bladh and P. Delsing and R. J. Schoelkopf , title =. Applied Physics Letters , volume =. 2001 , doi =

    2001

  37. [37]

    Fujisawa and Y

    T. Fujisawa and Y. Hirayama , title =. Applied Physics Letters , volume =. 2000 , doi =

    2000

  38. [38]

    K. W. Lehnert and K. Bladh and L. F. Spietz and D. Gunnarsson and D. I. Schuster and P. Delsing and R. J. Schoelkopf , title =. Physical Review Letters , volume =. 2003 , doi =

    2003

  39. [39]

    Roschier and P

    L. Roschier and P. Hakonen and K. Bladh and P. Delsing and K. Lehnert and L. Spietz and R. J. Schoelkopf , title =. Journal of Applied Physics , volume =. 2004 , doi =

    2004

  40. [40]

    and Lim, Wee Han and Leon, Ross C

    Huang, Jonathan Y. and Lim, Wee Han and Leon, Ross C. C. and Yang, Chih Hwan and Hudson, Fay E. and Escott, Christopher C. and Saraiva, Andre and Dzurak, Andrew S. and Laucht, Arne , title =. Nano Letters , volume =. 2021 , doi =. 2103.06433 , archivePrefix =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  41. [41]

    Petta, J. R. and Johnson, A. C. and Taylor, J. M. and Laird, E. A. and Yacoby, A. and Lukin, M. D. and Marcus, C. M. and Hanson, M. P. and Gossard, A. C. , title =. Physical Review Letters , volume =. 2004 , month =. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.186802 , url =

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.93.186802 2004

  42. [42]

    and Balestro, F

    Onac, E. and Balestro, F. and van Beveren, L. H. Willems and Hartmann, U. and Nazarov, Y. V. and Kouwenhoven, L. P. , title =. Physical Review Letters , year =

  43. [43]

    Tracy, L. A. and Luhman, D. R. and Carr, S. M. and Bishop, N. C. and Ten Eyck, G. A. and Pluym, T. and Wendt, J. R. and Lilly, M. P. and Carroll, M. S. , title =. Appl. Phys. Lett. , volume =. 2016 , doi =

    2016

  44. [44]

    Vink, I. T. and Nooitgedagt, T. and Schouten, R. N. and Vandersypen, L. M. K. and Wegscheider, W. , title =. Appl. Phys. Lett. , volume =. 2007 , doi =

    2007

  45. [45]

    and Pan, Andrew S

    Blumoff, Jacob Z. and Pan, Andrew S. and Keating, Tyler E. and Andrews, Reed W. and Barnes, David W. and Brecht, Teresa L. and Croke, Edward T. and Euliss, Larken E. and Fast, Jacob A. and Jackson, Clayton A. C. and Jones, Aaron M. and Kerckhoff, Joseph and Lanza, Robert K. and Raach, Kate and Thomas, Bryan J. and Velunta, Roland and Weinstein, Aaron J. a...

    2022

  46. [46]

    Mills, A. R. and Guinn, C. R. and Feldman, M. M. and Sigillito, A. J. and Gullans, M. J. and Rakher, M. T. and Kerckhoff, J. and Jackson, C. A. C. and Petta, J. R. , title =. Phys. Rev. Applied , volume =. 2022 , doi =

    2022

  47. [47]

    Bohuslavskyi, Heorhii and Hashisaka, Masayuki and Shimizu, Takase and Akiho, Takafumi and Muraki, Koji and Kumada, Norio , title =. Appl. Phys. Lett. , volume =. 2022 , doi =

    2022

  48. [48]

    Nano Letters , volume =

    Häkkinen, Pasi and Isacsson, Andreas and Savin, Alexander and Sulkko, Jaakko and Hakonen, Pertti , title =. Nano Letters , volume =. 2015 , doi =

    2015

  49. [49]

    Charge sensing in carbon-nanotube quantum dots on microsecond timescales , author =. Phys. Rev. B , volume =. 2006 , month =. doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.73.201402 , url =

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.73.201402 2006

  50. [50]

    Churchill, H. O. H. and Kuemmeth, F. and Harlow, J. W. and Bestwick, A. J. and Rashba, E. I. and Flensberg, K. and Stwertka, C. H. and Taychatanapat, T. and Watson, S. K. and Marcus, C. M. , journal =. Relaxation and Dephasing in a Two-Electron ^. 2009 , month =. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.102.166802 , url =

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.102.166802 2009

  51. [51]

    Chorley, S. J. and Wabnig, J. and Penfold-Fitch, Z. V. and Petersson, K. D. and Frake, J. and Smith, C. G. and Buitelaar, M. R. , title =. Phys. Rev. Lett. , volume =. 2012 , doi =

    2012

  52. [52]

    Delbecq, M. R. and Schmitt, V. and Parmentier, F. D. and Roch, N. and Viennot, J. J. and F. Coupling a Quantum Dot, Fermionic Leads, and a Microwave Cavity on a Chip , journal =. 2011 , doi =

    2011

  53. [53]

    Coupling a single spin to the motion of a carbon nanotube , volume =

    Fedele, Federico and Cerisola, Federico and Bresque, Lea and Vigneau, Florian and Monsel, Juliette and Tabanera-Bravo, Jorge and Aggarwal, Kushagra and Dexter, Jonathan and Sevitz, Sofia and Dunlop, Joe and Auffeves, Alexia and Parrondo, Juan MR and Palyi, Andras and Anders, Janet and Ares, Natalia , month = dec, year =. Coupling a single spin to the moti...

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467-025-66331-5

  54. [54]

    Nature Physics , volume=

    Cooling and self-oscillation in a nanotube electromechanical resonator , author=. Nature Physics , volume=. 2020 , publisher=

    2020

  55. [55]

    Nature Physics , volume=

    Nonlinear nanomechanical resonators approaching the quantum ground state , author=. Nature Physics , volume=. 2023 , publisher=

    2023

  56. [56]

    and Kalhor, Nima and Brousse, Delphine and Sammak, Amir and Scappucci, Giordano and Vandersypen, Lieven M

    Zheng, Guoji and Samkharadze, Nodar and Noordam, Marc L. and Kalhor, Nima and Brousse, Delphine and Sammak, Amir and Scappucci, Giordano and Vandersypen, Lieven M. K. , title =. Nature Nanotechnology , year =

  57. [57]

    and El-Homsy, Victor and Jadot, Baptiste and Nurizzo, Martin and Cardoso-Paz, Bruna and Chanrion, Emmanuel and Dartiailh, Matthieu and Klemt, Bernhard and Thiney, Vivien and B

    Niegemann, David J. and El-Homsy, Victor and Jadot, Baptiste and Nurizzo, Martin and Cardoso-Paz, Bruna and Chanrion, Emmanuel and Dartiailh, Matthieu and Klemt, Bernhard and Thiney, Vivien and B. Parity and singlet-triplet high-fidelity readout in a silicon double quantum dot at 0.5 K , journal =. 2022 , volume =

    2022

  58. [58]

    , title =

    Pozar, David M. , title =

  59. [59]

    and Cagetti, M

    Forstner, S. and Cagetti, M. , title =. 2026 , publisher =

    2026

  60. [60]

    2025 , month = may, eprint =

    Near-Unity Charge Readout in a Nonlinear Resonator without Matching , author =. 2025 , month = may, eprint =. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2505.17709 , howpublished =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2505.17709 2025

  61. [61]

    Oakes, G. A. and Ciriano-Tejel, V. N. and Wise, D. F. and Fogarty, M. A. and Lundberg, T. and Lain. Fast High-Fidelity Single-Shot Readout of Spins in Silicon Using a Single-Electron Box , journal =. 2023 , volume =

    2023

  62. [62]

    and Kobayashi, Takashi and Sammak, Amir and Scappucci, Giordano and Tarucha, Seigo , title =

    Takeda, Kenta and Noiri, Akito and Nakajima, Takashi Reef and Camenzind, Leon C. and Kobayashi, Takashi and Sammak, Amir and Scappucci, Giordano and Tarucha, Seigo , title =. npj Quantum Information , year =

  63. [63]

    Tunable Nonlinear Electromechanics at the Zero-Point Motion Scale , year =

    M. Tunable Nonlinear Electromechanics at the Zero-Point Motion Scale , year =. arXiv preprint arXiv:2607.21764 , eprint =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv