pith. sign in

arxiv: 2502.14843 · v2 · pith:CNHMQ5TGnew · submitted 2025-02-20 · ❄️ cond-mat.mes-hall · cond-mat.str-el· cond-mat.supr-con

Slave-spin approach to the Anderson-Josephson quantum dot

Andriani Keliri , Marco Schir\`o This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-23 02:33 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.mes-hall cond-mat.str-elcond-mat.supr-con
keywords quantum dotsuperconducting leadsKondo effectslave-spin methodAndreev bound statesJosephson current0-pi transition
0
0 comments X

The pith

Slave-spin mean-field theory maps the Anderson-Josephson quantum dot to a resonant level model that yields the 0-pi transition between Kondo singlet and local-moment phases.

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

The paper develops a slave-spin representation for a strongly interacting quantum dot connected to superconducting leads. At mean field the model reduces to a resonant level coupled to an auxiliary spin-1/2 that tracks dot parity, producing a phase diagram with a Kondo singlet to local-moment doublet transition. This mean-field solution reproduces the non-trivial interaction dependence of Andreev bound states in the singlet regime for weak BCS gaps. Adding fluctuations through random-phase approximation generates high-energy Hubbard bands together with a coherent Kondo peak that is gapped by the superconducting pairing, and permits calculation of the Josephson current and microwave response.

Core claim

The slave-spin representation of the dot maps the Anderson-Josephson problem to a resonant level model with an auxiliary spin-1/2 variable that enforces parity; its mean-field solution locates the 0-pi transition while fluctuations on the auxiliary spin restore high-energy Hubbard bands and a gapped low-energy Kondo peak in the spectral function.

What carries the argument

The slave-spin representation of the dot, which accounts for parity via an auxiliary spin-1/2 variable.

If this is right

  • The mean-field theory produces a transition between Kondo singlet and local-moment regimes that corresponds to the 0-pi transition of the junction.
  • In the singlet phase the Andreev bound states exhibit a non-trivial dependence on interaction strength.
  • Fluctuations produce high-energy Hubbard bands and a coherent Kondo peak carrying a BCS gap at low energies.
  • The Josephson current and induced superconducting correlations on the dot become accessible in the strongly interacting Kondo regime.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The approach could be used to compute finite-frequency response functions beyond the static Josephson current.
  • The documented failure of mean field in the doublet regime indicates that parity constraints need fluctuation corrections whenever the dot enters a local-moment state.
  • Similar slave-spin mappings might be applied to other hybrid impurity models that combine strong interactions with superconducting pairing.

Load-bearing premise

The slave-spin representation of the dot, which accounts for the parity via an auxiliary spin-1/2 variable, is appropriate for capturing the strongly interacting regime in the presence of superconducting leads and allows a valid mean-field mapping.

What would settle it

Spectroscopic measurement of the interaction dependence of Andreev bound states in the weak-gap singlet regime, or detection of a coherent Kondo peak split by the BCS gap together with high-energy Hubbard bands, would test the central predictions.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.14843 by Andriani Keliri, Marco Schir\`o.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: Solution to the self-consistent mean-field equa [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2: Phase diagram of the superconducting AIM at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3: Double occupancy of the QD, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: b shows the dependence of the energies of the subgap states EABS on the interaction. The energies start from their non-interacting value and progressively approach zero with increasing interaction, reaching zero at the boundary of the 0 − π transition. It is, however, expected that the ABS cross at the 0 − π transition. In￾deed, the ABS represent excitations that change the par￾ticle number by 1, i.e. tran… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: Random phase approximation (RPA) for the spin [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6: (a) Dot spectral function after including RPA [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7: Josephson current for various interaction values [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8: (a) Superconducting correlations as a function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_8.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We study a strongly interacting quantum dot connected to two superconducting leads using a slave-spin representation of the dot. At the mean-field level, the problem maps to a resonant level model with superconducting leads, coupled to an auxiliary spin-1/2 variable accounting for the parity of the dot. We obtain the mean-field phase diagram, showing a transition between a Kondo (singlet) and a local moment (doublet) regime, corresponding to the $0-\pi$ transition of the junction. The mean-field theory qualitatively captures the Kondo singlet phase and its competition with superconductivity for weak values of the BCS gap, including the non-trivial dependence of the Andreev bound states on the interaction, but fails in the doublet regime where it predicts a dot decoupled from the bath. Using diagrammatic techniques and a random phase approximation, we include fluctuations on top of the mean-field theory to describe finite-frequency dynamics of the effective spin variable. This leads to the formation of high-energy Hubbard bands in the spectral function and a coherent Kondo peak with a BCS gap at low energies. We compute the Josephson current and the induced superconducting correlations on the dot. Finally, we evaluate the microwave response in the strongly interacting Kondo regime.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript develops a slave-spin representation for the Anderson-Josephson quantum dot coupled to superconducting leads. At mean-field level the interacting dot maps to a resonant-level model coupled to an auxiliary spin-1/2 that tracks parity; the resulting phase diagram exhibits a Kondo-singlet to local-moment-doublet transition identified with the 0-π junction transition. The mean-field theory is shown to capture qualitative features of the singlet regime and its competition with superconductivity for weak BCS gap, including the interaction dependence of Andreev bound states, but decouples the dot from the leads in the doublet regime. Fluctuations are restored via diagrammatic perturbation theory and RPA on the auxiliary spin, producing high-energy Hubbard bands, a gapped Kondo resonance, the Josephson current, induced pairing correlations, and the microwave response.

Significance. If the fluctuation-corrected results prove robust, the work supplies an analytic route to the interplay of Kondo screening and induced superconductivity in strongly correlated quantum dots, including finite-frequency spectral features and transport quantities that are otherwise accessible only numerically. The explicit acknowledgment of mean-field limitations and the attempt to correct them via RPA constitute a constructive step beyond pure mean-field treatments.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract and the description of the mean-field solution: the reported decoupling of the dot from the bath in the doublet regime is load-bearing for the central claim. The 0-π transition and the competition between Kondo screening and superconductivity are controlled precisely by this regime; an unphysical mean-field starting point raises the question whether the subsequent diagrammatic/RPA corrections remain controlled or merely mask the underlying failure of the auxiliary-spin representation once pairing terms are present.
  2. [Method / mean-field section] The slave-spin mapping and its mean-field decoupling (implicit in the resonant-level plus auxiliary-spin construction): no independent validation (exact diagonalization on small clusters, comparison with NRG, or parity-sector benchmarks) is provided to confirm that the auxiliary spin-1/2 faithfully encodes the dot parity in the presence of superconducting leads. Without such a check the fluctuation treatment rests on an uncontrolled saddle point whose failure is already stated in the abstract.
minor comments (1)
  1. Notation for the auxiliary spin and its coupling to the resonant level should be introduced with an explicit equation early in the text to avoid ambiguity when fluctuations are later discussed.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading and constructive comments on our manuscript. We address each major comment point by point below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract and the description of the mean-field solution: the reported decoupling of the dot from the bath in the doublet regime is load-bearing for the central claim. The 0-π transition and the competition between Kondo screening and superconductivity are controlled precisely by this regime; an unphysical mean-field starting point raises the question whether the subsequent diagrammatic/RPA corrections remain controlled or merely mask the underlying failure of the auxiliary-spin representation once pairing terms are present.

    Authors: We agree that the mean-field decoupling in the doublet regime is a limitation of the saddle-point treatment, as already stated in the abstract. This decoupling arises because the auxiliary spin condenses in a manner that suppresses the effective hybridization in that phase. The RPA is introduced precisely to restore fluctuations of the auxiliary spin and thereby re-couple the dot to the leads at the level of the spectral function and response functions. The 0-π transition itself is identified at mean-field level, where the singlet regime is qualitatively captured; the RPA corrections are applied on top of that saddle point in the regime where the mean-field starting point remains reasonable. We will add a paragraph clarifying the expected range of validity of the RPA and the regimes in which the corrections are controlled. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Method / mean-field section] The slave-spin mapping and its mean-field decoupling (implicit in the resonant-level plus auxiliary-spin construction): no independent validation (exact diagonalization on small clusters, comparison with NRG, or parity-sector benchmarks) is provided to confirm that the auxiliary spin-1/2 faithfully encodes the dot parity in the presence of superconducting leads. Without such a check the fluctuation treatment rests on an uncontrolled saddle point whose failure is already stated in the abstract.

    Authors: The slave-spin representation is an exact operator identity that rewrites the dot Hamiltonian with an auxiliary spin-1/2 whose eigenvalue directly tracks the dot parity; the constraint is enforced at the mean-field level in the standard manner for slave-particle approaches. The mean-field decoupling is therefore the usual saddle-point approximation, whose shortcomings in the doublet regime are explicitly noted. While direct numerical benchmarks (NRG, ED, or parity-sector checks) against the superconducting case are not included, the mean-field phase diagram reproduces the expected qualitative features of the 0-π transition reported in the literature. We maintain that the analytic construction remains useful as a complementary method, but acknowledge that additional benchmarks would be desirable; performing a full NRG study lies outside the scope of the present work. revision: no

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity detected; derivation self-contained

full rationale

The paper introduces the slave-spin representation as a standard mapping for the interacting dot (accounting for parity via auxiliary spin-1/2), performs mean-field decoupling to a resonant-level model, explicitly acknowledges the mean-field failure in the doublet regime, and then applies standard diagrammatic techniques plus RPA to include fluctuations. No quoted equations show a prediction reducing to a fitted parameter by construction, no load-bearing self-citations, and no ansatz or uniqueness imported circularly. The central claims rest on the method's application rather than tautological redefinition of inputs, making the chain self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The approach rests on standard many-body approximations without new free parameters or invented entities; relies on validity of mean-field and RPA for this model.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Mean-field decoupling in the slave-spin model is valid for describing the phase transition and Andreev bound states.
    Central to obtaining the phase diagram and qualitative capture of singlet phase.
  • domain assumption Random phase approximation sufficiently captures fluctuations for finite-frequency dynamics and spectral features.
    Used to obtain Hubbard bands and Kondo peak beyond mean-field.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5753 in / 1319 out tokens · 36336 ms · 2026-05-23T02:33:11.974366+00:00 · methodology

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

100 extracted references · 100 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    In- serting Eq

    Expectation values of spin operators The average values of spin operators can be easily cal- culated using the relation σi = X αβ ψ† ασi αβψβ = Trσ(σiGψ(0−)), (B5) where the trace is over the spin degrees of freedom. In- serting Eq. (B4) in the above expression we get, e.g. for the magnetization along x: ⟨σx⟩ = 1 β X iω eiω0+ Trσ(σxGψ(iω)) = 1 β X iω eiω0...

    work page

  2. [2]

    (B9) In the non-interacting case we can use Wick’s theorem to write B0 ij(τ) = σi σj − Trσ σiG0 ψ(τ)σjG0 ψ(−τ)

    Spin-spin correlation function in mean-field The spin-spin correlation function is defined as Bij(τ) = X αβγδ D Tτ ψ† α(τ)σi αβψβ(τ)ψ† γσj γδ ψδ E . (B9) In the non-interacting case we can use Wick’s theorem to write B0 ij(τ) = σi σj − Trσ σiG0 ψ(τ)σjG0 ψ(−τ) . (B10) The Fourier expansion in Matsubara frequencies turns the product of the two Green’s funct...

    work page

  3. [3]

    Kondo, Resistance Minimum in Dilute Magnetic Al- loys, Progress of Theoretical Physics 32, 37 (1964)

    J. Kondo, Resistance Minimum in Dilute Magnetic Al- loys, Progress of Theoretical Physics 32, 37 (1964)

    work page 1964

  4. [4]

    A. C. Hewson, The Kondo problem to heavy fermions , 2 (Cambridge university press, 1997)

    work page 1997

  5. [5]

    Bardeen, L

    J. Bardeen, L. N. Cooper, and J. R. Schrieffer, Theory of superconductivity, Phys. Rev. 108, 1175 (1957)

    work page 1957

  6. [6]

    L. N. Cooper, Bound electron pairs in a degenerate Fermi gas, Phys. Rev. 104, 1189 (1956)

    work page 1956

  7. [7]

    De Franceschi, L

    S. De Franceschi, L. Kouwenhoven, C. Sch¨ onenberger, and W. Wernsdorfer, Hybrid superconductor–quantum dot devices, Nature nanotechnology 5, 703 (2010)

    work page 2010

  8. [8]

    M. R. Buitelaar, T. Nussbaumer, and C. Sch¨ onenberger, Quantum Dot in the Kondo Regime Coupled to Super- conductors, Physical Review Letters 89, 256801 (2002)

    work page 2002

  9. [9]

    Cleuziou, W

    J.-P. Cleuziou, W. Wernsdorfer, V. Bouchiat, T. On- dar¸ cuhu, and M. Monthioux, Carbon nanotube supercon- ducting quantum interference device, Nature Nanotech- nology 1, 53 (2006)

    work page 2006

  10. [10]

    Jarillo-Herrero, J

    P. Jarillo-Herrero, J. A. Van Dam, and L. P. Kouwen- hoven, Quantum supercurrent transistors in carbon nan- otubes, Nature 439, 953 (2006)

    work page 2006

  11. [11]

    J. A. van Dam, Y. V. Nazarov, E. P. A. M. Bakkers, S. De Franceschi, and L. P. Kouwenhoven, Supercurrent reversal in quantum dots, Nature 442, 667 (2006)

    work page 2006

  12. [12]

    Buizert, A

    C. Buizert, A. Oiwa, K. Shibata, K. Hirakawa, and S. Tarucha, Kondo Universal Scaling for a Quantum Dot Coupled to Superconducting Leads, Physical Review Let- ters 99, 136806 (2007)

    work page 2007

  13. [13]

    H. I. Jørgensen, T. Novotn´ y, K. Grove-Rasmussen, K. Flensberg, and P. E. Lindelof, Critical current 0 − π transition in designed Josephson quantum dot junctions, Nano Letters 7, 2441 (2007)

    work page 2007

  14. [14]

    Eichler, R

    A. Eichler, R. Deblock, M. Weiss, C. Karrasch, V. Meden, C. Sch¨ onenberger, and H. Bouchiat, Tuning the Joseph- son current in carbon nanotubes with the Kondo effect, Physical Review B 79, 161407 (2009)

    work page 2009

  15. [15]

    R. S. Deacon, Y. Tanaka, A. Oiwa, R. Sakano, K. Yoshida, K. Shibata, K. Hirakawa, and S. Tarucha, Tunneling Spectroscopy of Andreev Energy Levels in a Quantum Dot Coupled to a Superconductor, Physical Review Letters 104, 076805 (2010)

    work page 2010

  16. [16]

    E. J. H. Lee, X. Jiang, R. Aguado, G. Katsaros, C. M. Lieber, and S. De Franceschi, Zero-Bias Anomaly in a Nanowire Quantum Dot Coupled to Superconductors, Physical Review Letters 109, 186802 (2012)

    work page 2012

  17. [17]

    Maurand, T

    R. Maurand, T. Meng, E. Bonet, S. Florens, L. Marty, and W. Wernsdorfer, First-order 0 − π quantum phase transition in the Kondo regime of a superconducting carbon-nanotube quantum dot, Physical Review X 2, 011009 (2012)

    work page 2012

  18. [18]

    Pillet, P

    J.-D. Pillet, P. Joyez, R. ˇZitko, and M. F. Goffman, Tun- neling spectroscopy of a single quantum dot coupled to a superconductor: From Kondo ridge to Andreev bound states, Physical Review B 88, 045101 (2013)

    work page 2013

  19. [19]

    Delagrange, D

    R. Delagrange, D. J. Luitz, R. Weil, A. Kasumov, V. Meden, H. Bouchiat, and R. Deblock, Manipulating the magnetic state of a carbon nanotube Josephson junc- tion using the superconducting phase, Physical Review B 91, 241401 (2015)

    work page 2015

  20. [20]

    Delagrange, R

    R. Delagrange, R. Weil, A. Kasumov, M. Ferrier, H. Bouchiat, and R. Deblock, 0−π quantum transition in a carbon nanotube Josephson junction: Universal phase dependence and orbital degeneracy, Physical Review B 93, 195437 (2016)

    work page 2016

  21. [21]

    Jellinggaard, K

    A. Jellinggaard, K. Grove-Rasmussen, M. H. Madsen, and J. Nyg˚ ard, Tuning Yu-Shiba-Rusinov states in a 14 quantum dot, Physical Review B 94, 064520 (2016)

    work page 2016

  22. [22]

    E. J. H. Lee, X. Jiang, R. ˇZitko, R. Aguado, C. M. Lieber, and S. De Franceschi, Scaling of subgap excitations in a superconductor-semiconductor nanowire quantum dot, Physical Review B 95, 180502 (2017)

    work page 2017

  23. [23]

    M. A. Kastner, Artificial atoms, Physics Today 46, 24 (1993)

    work page 1993

  24. [24]

    L. P. Kouwenhoven, D. G. Austing, and S. Tarucha, Few- electron quantum dots, Reports on Progress in Physics 64, 701 (2001)

    work page 2001

  25. [25]

    P. W. Anderson, Localized Magnetic States in Metals, Physical Review 124, 41 (1961)

    work page 1961

  26. [26]

    S. M. Cronenwett, T. H. Oosterkamp, and L. P. Kouwen- hoven, A Tunable Kondo Effect in Quantum Dots, Sci- ence 281, 540 (1998)

    work page 1998

  27. [27]

    Goldhaber-Gordon, H

    D. Goldhaber-Gordon, H. Shtrikman, D. Mahalu, D. Abusch-Magder, U. Meirav, and M. A. Kastner, Kondo effect in a single-electron transistor, Nature 391, 156 (1998)

    work page 1998

  28. [28]

    Kouwenhoven and L

    L. Kouwenhoven and L. Glazman, Revival of the Kondo effect, Physics World 14, 33 (2001)

    work page 2001

  29. [29]

    Pustilnik and L

    M. Pustilnik and L. Glazman, Kondo effect in quantum dots, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 16, R513 (2004)

    work page 2004

  30. [30]

    Mart´ ın-Rodero and A

    A. Mart´ ın-Rodero and A. Levy Yeyati, Josephson and Andreev transport through quantum dots, Advances in Physics 60, 899 (2011)

    work page 2011

  31. [31]

    Benjamin, T

    C. Benjamin, T. Jonckheere, A. Zazunov, and T. Martin, Controllable π junction in a Josephson quantum-dot de- vice with molecular spin, The European Physical Journal B 57, 279 (2007)

    work page 2007

  32. [32]

    T. Meng, S. Florens, and P. Simon, Self-consistent de- scription of Andreev bound states in Josephson quantum dot devices, Physical Review B 79, 224521 (2009)

    work page 2009

  33. [33]

    M. A. Desp´ osito and A. Levy Yeyati, Controlled dephas- ing of Andreev states in superconducting quantum point contacts, Phys. Rev. B 64, 140511(R) (2001)

    work page 2001

  34. [34]

    Zazunov, V

    A. Zazunov, V. S. Shumeiko, E. N. Bratus’, J. Lantz, and G. Wendin, Andreev level qubit, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 087003 (2003)

    work page 2003

  35. [35]

    Janvier, L

    C. Janvier, L. Tosi, L. Bretheau, C ¸ . ¨O. Girit, M. Stern, P. Bertet, P. Joyez, D. Vion, D. Esteve, M. F. Goffman, H. Pothier, and C. Urbina, Coherent manipulation of An- dreev states in superconducting atomic contacts, Science 349, 1199 (2015)

    work page 2015

  36. [36]

    N. M. Chtchelkatchev and Y. V. Nazarov, Andreev quan- tum dots for spin manipulation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 226806 (2003)

    work page 2003

  37. [37]

    Padurariu and Y

    C. Padurariu and Y. V. Nazarov, Theoretical proposal for superconducting spin qubits, Phys. Rev. B81, 144519 (2010)

    work page 2010

  38. [38]

    M. Hays, V. Fatemi, D. Bouman, J. Cerrillo, S. Diamond, K. Serniak, T. Connolly, P. Krogstrup, J. Nyg˚ ard, A. L. Yeyati, A. Geresdi, and M. H. Devoret, Coherent ma- nipulation of an Andreev spin qubit, Science 373, 430 (2021)

    work page 2021

  39. [39]

    Bargerbos, M

    A. Bargerbos, M. Pita-Vidal, R. ˇZitko, J. ´Avila, L. J. Splitthoff, L. Gr¨ unhaupt, J. J. Wesdorp, C. K. Andersen, Y. Liu, L. P. Kouwenhoven, R. Aguado, A. Kou, and B. van Heck, Singlet-doublet transitions of a quantum dot Josephson junction detected in a transmon circuit, PRX Quantum 3, 030311 (2022)

    work page 2022

  40. [40]

    Pita-Vidal, A

    M. Pita-Vidal, A. Bargerbos, R. ˇZitko, L. J. Splitthoff, L. Gr¨ unhaupt, J. J. Wesdorp, Y. Liu, L. P. Kouwenhoven, R. Aguado, B. van Heck, A. Kou, and C. K. Ander- sen, Direct manipulation of a superconducting spin qubit strongly coupled to a transmon qubit, Nature Physics19, 1110 (2023)

    work page 2023

  41. [41]

    J. D. Sau and S. D. Sarma, Realizing a robust practical Majorana chain in a quantum-dot-superconductor linear array, Nature communications 3, 964 (2012)

    work page 2012

  42. [42]

    Leijnse and K

    M. Leijnse and K. Flensberg, Parity qubits and poor man’s Majorana bound states in double quantum dots, Phys. Rev. B 86, 134528 (2012)

    work page 2012

  43. [43]

    T. Dvir, G. Wang, N. van Loo, C.-X. Liu, G. P. Mazur, A. Bordin, S. L. D. ten Haaf, J.-Y. Wang, D. van Driel, F. Zatelli, X. Li, F. K. Malinowski, S. Gazibegovic, G. Badawy, E. P. A. M. Bakkers, M. Wimmer, and L. P. Kouwenhoven, Realization of a minimal Kitaev chain in coupled quantum dots, Nature 614, 445 (2023)

    work page 2023

  44. [44]

    A. Y. Kitaev, Unpaired Majorana fermions in quantum wires, Physics-uspekhi 44, 131 (2001)

    work page 2001

  45. [45]

    Bretheau, C ¸

    L. Bretheau, C ¸ . ¨O. Girit, C. Urbina, D. Esteve, and H. Pothier, Supercurrent spectroscopy of Andreev states, Phys. Rev. X 3, 041034 (2013)

    work page 2013

  46. [46]

    Griesmar, R

    J. Griesmar, R. H. Rodriguez, V. Benzoni, J.-D. Pillet, J.-L. Smirr, F. Lafont, and C ¸ .¨O. Girit, Superconducting on-chip spectrometer for mesoscopic quantum systems, Physical Review Research 3, 043078 (2021)

    work page 2021

  47. [47]

    Peugeot, H

    A. Peugeot, H. Riechert, S. Annabi, L. Balembois, M. Villiers, E. Flurin, J. Griesmar, E. Arrighi, J.-D. Pillet, and L. Bretheau, Two-tone spectroscopy of high- frequency quantum circuits with a Josephson emitter, Physical Review Applied 22, 064027 (2024)

    work page 2024

  48. [48]

    Fatemi, P

    V. Fatemi, P. Kurilovich, M. Hays, D. Bouman, T. Connolly, S. Diamond, N. Frattini, V. Kurilovich, P. Krogstrup, J. Nyg˚ ard, A. Geresdi, L. Glazman, and M. Devoret, Microwave Susceptibility Observation of In- teracting Many-Body Andreev States, Physical Review Letters 129, 227701 (2022)

    work page 2022

  49. [49]

    P. D. Kurilovich, V. D. Kurilovich, V. Fatemi, M. H. Devoret, and L. I. Glazman, Microwave response of an Andreev bound state, Physical Review B 104, 174517 (2021)

    work page 2021

  50. [50]

    F. J. Matute-Ca˜ nadas, C. Metzger, S. Park, L. Tosi, P. Krogstrup, J. Nyg˚ ard, M. F. Goffman, C. Urbina, H. Pothier, and A. L. Yeyati, Signatures of interactions in the Andreev spectrum of nanowire Josephson junctions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 197702 (2022)

    work page 2022

  51. [51]

    M. R. Sahu, F. J. Matute-Ca˜ nadas, M. Benito, P. Krogstrup, J. Nyg˚ ard, M. F. Goffman, C. Urbina, A. L. Yeyati, and H. Pothier, Ground-state phase di- agram and parity-flipping microwave transitions in a gate-tunable Josephson junction, Physical Review B109, 134506 (2024)

    work page 2024

  52. [52]

    C. P. Moca, I. Weymann, M. A. Werner, and G. Zar´ and, Kondo cloud in a superconductor, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 186804 (2021)

    work page 2021

  53. [53]

    Paveˇ si´ c, R

    L. Paveˇ si´ c, R. Aguado, and R. ˇZitko, Strong-coupling theory of quantum-dot Josephson junctions: Role of a residual quasiparticle, Phys. Rev. B 109, 125131 (2024)

    work page 2024

  54. [54]

    Paveˇ si´ c, M

    L. Paveˇ si´ c, M. P. Vidal, A. Bargerbos, and R.ˇZitko, Im- purity Knight shift in quantum dot Josephson junctions, SciPost Phys. 15, 070 (2023)

    work page 2023

  55. [55]

    Keliri and B

    A. Keliri and B. Dou¸ cot, Driven Andreev molecule, Phys. Rev. B 107, 094505 (2023). 15

    work page 2023

  56. [56]

    Keliri and B

    A. Keliri and B. Dou¸ cot, Long-range coupling between superconducting quantum dots induced by periodic driv- ing, Phys. Rev. B 108, 184516 (2023)

    work page 2023

  57. [57]

    Huang, J

    M.-Z. Huang, J. Mohan, A.-M. Visuri, P. Fabritius, M. Talebi, S. Wili, S. Uchino, T. Giamarchi, and T. Esslinger, Superfluid signatures in a dissipative quan- tum point contact, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 200404 (2023)

    work page 2023

  58. [58]

    Visuri, J

    A.-M. Visuri, J. Mohan, S. Uchino, M.-Z. Huang, T. Esslinger, and T. Giamarchi, DC transport in a dis- sipative superconducting quantum point contact, Phys. Rev. Res. 5, 033095 (2023)

    work page 2023

  59. [59]

    Meden, The Anderson–Josephson quantum dot—a theory perspective, Journal of Physics: Condensed Mat- ter 31, 163001 (2019)

    V. Meden, The Anderson–Josephson quantum dot—a theory perspective, Journal of Physics: Condensed Mat- ter 31, 163001 (2019)

    work page 2019

  60. [60]

    Seoane Souto and R

    R. Seoane Souto and R. Aguado, Subgap States in Semiconductor-Superconductor Devices for Quantum Technologies: Andreev Qubits and Minimal Majorana Chains, in New Trends and Platforms for Quantum Tech- nologies, edited by R. Aguado, R. Citro, M. Lewenstein, and M. Stern (Springer Nature Switzerland, Cham, 2024) pp. 133–223

    work page 2024

  61. [61]

    L. I. Glazman and K. A. Matveev, Resonant Josephson current through Kondo impurities in a tunnel barrier, JETP Lett 49, 659 (1989)

    work page 1989

  62. [62]

    Vecino, A

    E. Vecino, A. Mart´ ın-Rodero, and A. L. Yeyati, Joseph- son current through a correlated quantum level: Andreev states and π junction behavior, Physical Review B 68, 035105 (2003)

    work page 2003

  63. [63]

    ˇZonda, V

    M. ˇZonda, V. Pokorn´ y, V. Janiˇ s, and T. Novotn´ y, Per- turbation theory for an Anderson quantum dot asymmet- rically attached to two superconducting leads, Physical Review B 93, 024523 (2016)

    work page 2016

  64. [64]

    A. V. Rozhkov and D. P. Arovas, Josephson coupling through a magnetic impurity, Physical Review Letters 82, 2788 (1999)

    work page 1999

  65. [65]

    L. S. Borkowski and P. J. Hirschfeld, Low-temperature properties of anisotropic superconductors with Kondo impurities, Journal of Low Temperature Physics 96, 185 (1994)

    work page 1994

  66. [66]

    Schwab and R

    P. Schwab and R. Raimondi, Andreev tunneling in quan- tum dots: A slave-boson approach, Physical Review B 59, 1637 (1999)

    work page 1999

  67. [67]

    A. V. Rozhkov and D. P. Arovas, Interacting-impurity Josephson junction: Variational wave functions and slave-boson mean-field theory, Physical Review B 62, 6687 (2000)

    work page 2000

  68. [68]

    A. A. Clerk and V. Ambegaokar, Loss of π-junction be- havior in an interacting impurity Josephson junction, Physical Review B 61, 9109 (2000)

    work page 2000

  69. [69]

    Sellier, T

    G. Sellier, T. Kopp, J. Kroha, and Y. S. Barash, π junc- tion behavior and Andreev bound states in Kondo quan- tum dots with superconducting leads, Physical Review B 72, 174502 (2005)

    work page 2005

  70. [70]

    Yoshioka and Y

    T. Yoshioka and Y. Ohashi, Numerical renormalization group studies on single impurity Anderson model in su- perconductivity: A unified treatment of magnetic, non- magnetic impurities, and resonance scattering, Journal of the Physical Society of Japan 69, 1812 (2000)

    work page 2000

  71. [71]

    M.-S. Choi, M. Lee, K. Kang, and W. Belzig, Kondo effect and Josephson current through a quantum dot between two superconductors, Physical Review B 70, 020502 (2004)

    work page 2004

  72. [72]

    Tanaka, A

    Y. Tanaka, A. Oguri, and A. C. Hewson, Kondo effect in asymmetric Josephson couplings through a quantum dot, New Journal of Physics 9, 115 (2007)

    work page 2007

  73. [73]

    Bauer, A

    J. Bauer, A. Oguri, and A. C. Hewson, Spec- tral properties of locally correlated electrons in a Bardeen–Cooper–Schrieffer superconductor, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 19, 486211 (2007)

    work page 2007

  74. [74]

    Karrasch, A

    C. Karrasch, A. Oguri, and V. Meden, Josephson cur- rent through a single Anderson impurity coupled to BCS leads, Physical Review B 77, 024517 (2008)

    work page 2008

  75. [75]

    D. J. Luitz and F. F. Assaad, Weak-coupling continuous- time quantum Monte Carlo study of the single impurity and periodic Anderson models with s -wave supercon- ducting baths, Physical Review B 81, 024509 (2010)

    work page 2010

  76. [76]

    D. J. Luitz, F. F. Assaad, T. Novotn´ y, C. Karrasch, and V. Meden, Understanding the Josephson current through a Kondo-correlated quantum dot, Physical Review Let- ters 108, 227001 (2012)

    work page 2012

  77. [77]

    de’Medici, A

    L. de’Medici, A. Georges, and S. Biermann, Orbital- selective Mott transition in multiband systems: Slave- spin representation and dynamical mean-field theory, Physical Review B 72, 205124 (2005)

    work page 2005

  78. [78]

    S. D. Huber and A. R¨ uegg, Dynamically generated dou- ble occupancy as a probe of cold atom systems, Physical Review Letters 102, 065301 (2009)

    work page 2009

  79. [79]

    R¨ uegg, S

    A. R¨ uegg, S. D. Huber, and M. Sigrist,Z2-slave-spin the- ory for strongly correlated fermions, Physical Review B 81, 155118 (2010)

    work page 2010

  80. [80]

    Schir´ o and M

    M. Schir´ o and M. Fabrizio, Quantum quenches in the Hubbard model: Time-dependent mean-field theory and the role of quantum fluctuations, Physical Review B 83, 165105 (2011)

    work page 2011

Showing first 80 references.