Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 43 references

Computed tomography of propagating microwave photons

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A passive cryogenic bolometer, combined with a strong reference tone and medical-imaging mathematics, reconstructs the full quantum state of traveling microwave photons without any amplifier noise.

desk verdict Genuinely new bolometer quadrature detection, honestly demonstrated for Gaussian states, but the CT and N=3 'model-free' framing overstates the method's scope. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.20318 v2 pith:ZFUIQBS5 submitted 2025-06-25 quant-ph physics.ins-det

Qi-Ming Chen , Aarne Keränen , Aashish Sah , Mikko Möttönen This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-phphysics.ins-det
keywords WignerfunctiontomographypropagatingmicrowavephotonsSNSbolometerquadraturedetectioncomputedGaussianquantumstatescompressedsensingstatereconstruction
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper reports a measurement technique that reconstructs the full quantum state—the Wigner function—of microwave photons traveling along a transmission line, without amplifying the signal at any stage. The authors show that by letting the incoming field interfere with a strong coherent reference field before it is absorbed, a superconductor–normal-metal–superconductor (SNS) bolometer—a cryogenic resistive heat detector—can be used as a noiseless quadrature detector. Sweeping the reference phase produces a set of quadrature histograms, and the mathematics of computed tomography (CT) recovers the two-dimensional phase-space distribution from these projections. The demonstration is carried out on Gaussian states at the single-photon level, and compressed sensing or a neural network reduces the required number of projections to three. If correct, this gives superconducting quantum networks a passive, broadband, full-duty-cycle way to characterize propagating microwave photons and to diagnose errors in real time.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is two-field interference in power detection. The input field $\hat a$ is combined on a $90^\circ$ hybrid with a strong coherent homodyne field $|\beta|e^{i\phi}$; the SNS bolometer then reads the photon-number mean and variance of the combined field, and in the large-$|\beta|^2$ limit these readings are affine in the input quadrature mean and variance (Eqs. (1) and (2)). Because the input is assumed Gaussian, each quadrature marginal is fully specified by those two numbers, and sweeping $\phi$ samples the Radon transform of the Wigner function. The Hilbert transform inverts the Radon transform in reciprocal space, giving a parameter-free reconstruction of $W(x,p)$ from the measured histograms.

What would settle it

Generate a non-Gaussian propagating microwave state, such as a single-photon wave packet or a photon-subtracted squeezed state, run the same phase-sweep protocol, and compare the reconstructed Wigner function with one obtained from an independent photon-number-resolving or parity measurement; the two will disagree if the Gaussian-histogram assumption is the load-bearing premise.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a passive SNS bolometer, which measures the mean photon number and photon-number variance of absorbed radiation, becomes a quadrature detector when the input field is mixed with a strong coherent homodyne field on a beam splitter. In the large-homodyne limit, the measured mean and variance of the combined field are linear in the input quadrature mean $\langle \hat X_{\phi+90}\rangle$ and variance $\langle(\Delta \hat X_{\phi+90})^2\rangle$. Assuming the input state is Gaussian, these two numbers completely determine the marginal histogram at each projection angle, so sweeping the homodyne phase and applying the Hilbert transform reconstructs the Wigner function $W(x,p)$. The paper demonstrates this protocol on thermal, coherent, and squeezed states at the single-photon level and shows that compressed sensing or a neural network reconstructs the same Wigner function from as few as three projections.

Load-bearing premise

The reconstruction assumes that every projection of the input field is Gaussian, so that measuring just the mean and variance of each quadrature histogram fully determines that histogram; for non-Gaussian light the two bolometer readings do not fix the state.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Propagating microwave photons can be fully characterized at millikelvin temperatures without any amplifier, removing the added noise that earlier propagating-photon tomography had to deconvolve statistically.
  • The detector is passive and broadband—here a 133 MHz window centered at 8.43 GHz—and measures with full duty cycle, unlike qubit-based counters that need dead time and dedicated control and readout circuitry.
  • Sweeping the homodyne phase over 0–360 degrees recovers the displacement and squeezing parameters of the state; reconstruction quality saturates at about N=12 projections, and compressed sensing gives comparable results from N=9 projections.
  • With the Gaussian-state model, three projective measurements suffice for reconstruction via linear least-squares fitting or a neural network trained on simulated states, pointing toward real-time Wigner function monitoring.
  • Because the homodyne field boosts the input power without adding noise, the same scheme could detect signals at the yocto- to zepto-joule scale and, through transduction, be extended to other particle types such as surface-acoustic-wave phonons.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The paper only validates the Gaussian-assumption protocol; a natural extension is to feed a non-Gaussian propagating state and fit the eight moments that enter the exact expressions for $\langle \hat n_c\rangle$ and $\langle(\Delta \hat n_c)^2\rangle$, which would let the same bolometer reconstruct states with Wigner negativity.
  • If the bolometer calibration curves remain valid for non-Gaussian states and other phases—checked here only for Gaussian states—the technique becomes a direct real-time monitor of photon loss and thermal contamination in a quantum network link.
  • The reconstruction-quality saturation at about 12 projections suggests that the effective information content of these Gaussian states is small; testing how the saturation point moves with homodyne power and with non-Gaussian states would separate the role of the state's Gaussianity from that of measurement noise.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper reports an experiment in which a superconducting SNS bolometer, combined with a strong coherent homodyne field at a 90° hybrid, measures the mean photon number and variance of the combined field. From these, using Eqs. (1) and (2), the authors extract the quadrature mean and variance of the input propagating microwave field. Assuming Gaussian input states, they construct Gaussian marginal histograms and apply computed tomography (Hilbert transform) to reconstruct Wigner functions. They demonstrate the method on thermal, coherent, squeezed, and general Gaussian states, and also show compressed-sensing and neural-network reconstructions with as few as three projection angles. The central claim is that this provides amplification-free, broadband Wigner function tomography of propagating microwave photons.

Significance. If the central claims hold, this would be a significant advance: a passive bolometer would serve as a noiseless quadrature detector and reconstruct Wigner functions of propagating microwave photons without the amplification noise typical of conventional heterodyne detection, with broad bandwidth and potential for multiplexed readout. The experiment is carefully executed: the derivation of Eqs. (1)-(2) is standard beam-splitter physics, the calibration of the transmissivity and insertion losses is detailed, and the data for Gaussian states (thermal, coherent, squeezed) show good agreement with theory. The connection to computed tomography and compressed sensing is interesting, and the availability of data and code is a strength. However, the demonstration is strictly limited to Gaussian states, and this limitation is understated in the title and abstract relative to the generality of the tomography claims.

major comments (3)
  1. [Wigner function CT; Methods: Computed tomography] The reconstruction procedure never measures the marginal histograms h_phi(x_phi) directly; it measures only <n_c> and <(Delta n_c)^2> and then assumes each marginal to be Gaussian. For the Gaussian states studied, the Wigner function is fully determined by five parameters (bar n_T, zeta, alpha), so the Hilbert-transform CT reduces to estimating these parameters from the measured moments. The N=3 reconstructions in Fig. 4F are linear least-squares fits to a Gaussian model or the output of a neural network trained on 32768 simulated Gaussian states; they do not constitute model-free CT. Consequently, the abstract's 'complete characterization' and the text's 'model-free' NN claim overstate what is demonstrated. The authors should either restrict the central claim to Gaussian-state tomography or add a measurement of a non-Gaussian state (e.g., a Fock state) to justify the general tomography framing.
  2. [Fig. 2C; Fig. 3H and 3L] The bolometer calibration curves (mu versus <n_c> and sigma^2 versus <(Delta n_c)^2>) are established solely from thermal-state data. Their use for coherent and squeezed states assumes that sigma^2 depends only on the photon-number variance and not on the underlying state statistics or higher moments. The comparisons in Figs. 3H and 3L use the same calibration to extract the quadrature variance, so they do not independently validate the calibration for non-thermal states. The reported squeezing of 1.6 dB and thermal population bar n_T = 0.73 in Fig. 3L are therefore not independently anchored. The authors should provide a direct calibration check with a non-thermal state of known variance, or explicitly state that the variance calibration is validated only for thermal states.
  3. [Eq. (2); Methods: Projective bolometry] The exact expression for <(Delta n_c)^2> contains terms beyond the leading-order approximation in Eq. (2). The observed 360-degree-periodic oscillations of sigma^2 for the coherent state (Fig. 3G) demonstrate that these terms are non-negligible at the employed |beta|^2 values. The text states that these oscillations 'contribute marginally' to <(Delta X_phi)^2> as |beta|^2 increases, but no quantitative error analysis is provided. Since the quadrature variance extraction for the squeezed state in Fig. 3L relies on Eq. (2), a bias in the extracted squeezing level cannot be ruled out without a systematic-error estimate. Please quantify the error from the discarded terms over the parameter range used.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Fig. 4C caption] The phrase 'Hilbert transform with no fitting parameter' is misleading because the Gaussian marginals entering the transform are constructed from fitted calibration parameters and a Gaussian assumption; please rephrase to avoid implying that no model or calibration is used.
  2. [p. 17 (ultra-sparse sampling paragraph)] The sentence 'A possible advantage of the NN-approach is the model-free architecture' is inaccurate: the neural network used here is trained on 32768 simulated Gaussian states and is therefore a Gaussian-specific regression, not a model-free estimator. Please correct the wording.
  3. [Main text, p. 5] The Gaussian-state assumption is introduced only parenthetically ('Assuming a Gaussian state of the input field, as it is the common choice...'). Given that this assumption is central to the reconstruction, it should be highlighted in the abstract and the conclusions.
  4. [Main text, p. 6] The phrase 'combing a blackbody radiator' appears to be a typo for 'combining a blackbody radiator'.
  5. [Methods: Projective bolometry] The exact expression for <(Delta n_c)^2> is written as a multi-line inline equation that is difficult to parse; a displayed equation with terms explicitly grouped would improve readability.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 3.0 of 10

Calibration loop: Γ and η1 are fitted to thermal-state theory and then 'verified' against the same theory; the central quadrature relations are independent, but the CT demonstration is Gaussian model-based.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Bolometer characterization, main text and Fig. 2C–2E; Methods, Projective bolometry]
    "By fitting these contours as a function of T and Ph, we obtain the best estimation of the transmissivity as Γ = 0.49 (0.1 dB imbalance) and an η1 = −3.4 dB correction of the homodyne power. ... The described fitting procedure also determines ⟨ˆnc⟩ and ⟨(∆ˆnc)2⟩ at the selected contours, establishing calibration curves between µ and ⟨ˆnc⟩, and σ2 and ⟨(∆ˆnc)2⟩. ... The calibration curves can be verified by comparing the extracted values of ⟨ˆnc⟩ and ⟨(∆ˆnc)2⟩ with the theoretical expectations."

    The same thermal-state data and the same theoretical model are used first to fit Γ and η1 (with thermal-state expectations ⟨X90⟩=0, ⟨(ΔX90)^2⟩=(2n̄_T+1)/2, and |β|^2=η1 P_h/(FWHM h f0)) and then to generate the 'verification' in Fig. 2E. The reported deviations ε1 and ε2 are therefore residuals of the fit, not independent confirmations of the calibration. Since this calibration is used for all subsequent quadrature extraction, the thermal-state check does not independently anchor the absolute variance scale for the coherent and squeezed results, although those results do show independent phase-dependent structure.

full rationale

The derivation of the quadrature relations, Eqs. (1)–(2), is independent and not circular: it follows from the beam-splitter input-output relation c = sqrt(Γ)a + i sqrt(1−Γ)b and a controlled large-|β|^2 expansion. The circularity found is confined to the bolometer calibration loop. Γ and η1 are fitted to thermal-state contour data using the thermal-state theory, and the same theory is then used as the 'verification' target in Fig. 2E, so the agreement is a goodness-of-fit residual rather than an independent prediction. This is a genuine but partial circularity: the coherent-state 360° phase oscillation and the squeezed-state 180° variance oscillation provide independent, non-circular checks of the quadrature response, and the reconstructions of non-thermal states go beyond the thermal calibration fit. The explicit Gaussian-histogram assumption (main text: 'Assuming a Gaussian state of the input field...') means the demonstrated 'Wigner function CT' is a Gaussian model inversion from measured means and variances rather than full CT on measured histograms; that is a scope limitation for the non-Gaussian and 'model-free' claims, not a circular step. The self-citation of Ref. 30 for the bolometer's mean-and-variance response is load-bearing but is published external experimental support and is re-characterized here, so it does not by itself create circularity. Overall score 3: one fitted-input-called-verification step with a central quadrature extraction that still carries independent content.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The reconstruction relies on six background assumptions: standard beam-splitter and CT mathematics, the bolometer response model from prior work, the Gaussian state assumption, the large-|beta| approximation, and the Voigt spectral model. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (4)
  • Beam splitter transmissivity Gamma = 0.49 (0.1 dB imbalance)
    Fitted from contours of thermometry resonance frequency and broadening as a function of blackbody temperature and homodyne power (Fig. 2B); used in Eqs. (1) and (2) to extract quadrature moments.
  • Homodyne power correction eta1 = -3.4 dB
    Fitted in the same contour procedure; used to compute |beta|^2 from applied power via |beta|^2 = eta1 Ph/(FWHM x h f0). The text calls eta1 the only free parameter.
  • Radiator-to-beam-splitter insertion loss eta0 = -6.5 dB (datasheet)
    Taken from datasheet, not fitted; sets the absolute thermal photon number nbar via the Planck formula. Paper notes a +/-0.5 dB change does not significantly alter characterization.
  • Bolometer calibration curves = cubic mu vs <nc>; linear sigma^2 vs variance
    Empirical polynomial fits of thermometry response to photon number and variance (Fig. 2C); these convert measured mu and sigma^2 into <nc> and variance for all subsequent state extraction.
assumptions (6)
  • standard math The beam splitter acts as c = sqrt(Gamma) a + i sqrt(1-Gamma) b with a coherent homodyne field
    Standard quantum optics input-output relation, stated in Methods 'Projective bolometry'.
  • domain assumption The bolometer resonance frequency mu is determined by the mean photon number <nc> and the Gaussian broadening sigma^2 by the photon-number variance
    Inherited from Ref. 30; used throughout to convert thermometry spectra to photon statistics.
  • domain assumption Input states are Gaussian, so each marginal histogram is fully described by quadrature mean and variance
    Stated in the paragraph 'Assuming a Gaussian state of the input field...'; restricts the demonstrated tomography to Gaussian states.
  • domain assumption For large enough |beta|^2, Eq. (2) approximates the variance well; the paper uses |beta|^2 > 10 nbar
    Justified empirically in Fig. 2E; the approximation drops higher-order terms in Eqs. (1)-(2).
  • domain assumption Reflection spectrum is a Voigt profile with mu and sigma^2 as parameters
    Used for all spectral fits; formula given in Methods.
  • standard math Radon transform and Hilbert transform invert to recover the Wigner function
    Standard CT mathematics, cited to Refs. 31-33 and described in Methods.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Computed tomography of propagating microwave photons." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ZFUIQBS5

@misc{pith2026250620318,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Computed tomography of propagating microwave photons},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ZFUIQBS5}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.20318}
}
read the original abstract

Propagating photons serve as essential links for distributing quantum information and entanglement across distant nodes. Knowledge of their Wigner functions not only enables their deployment as active information carriers but also provides error diagnostics when photons passively leak from a quantum processing unit. While well-established for standing waves, characterizing propagating microwave photons requires post-processing of room-temperature signals with excessive amplification noise. Here, we demonstrate amplification-free Wigner function tomography of propagating microwave photons using a superconductor--normal-metal--superconductor bolometer based on the resistive heating effect of absorbed radiation. By introducing two-field interference in power detection, the bolometer acts as a sensitive and broadband quadrature detector that samples the input field at selected angles at millikelvin with no added noise. Adapting the principles of computed tomography (CT) in medical imaging, we implement Wigner function CT by combining quadrature histograms across different projection angles and demonstrate it for Gaussian states at the single-photon level. Compressed sensing and neural networks further reduce the projections to three without compromising the reconstruction quality. These results address the long-standing challenge of characterizing propagating microwave photons in a superconducting quantum network and establish a new avenue for real-time quantum error diagnostics and correction.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.20318 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Experiment overview. A Step-by-step generation of a broadband Gaussian state. A continuous beam of thermal photons is first generated from a blackbody radiator (left), then squeezed by a Josephson traveling-wave parametric amplifier (TWPA, middle), and finally displaced by a directional coupler (right) before measurement. Shown are Wigner functions at different stages, where x and p are the position and momentum var… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Bolometry of propagating thermal photons. A Reflection amplitude of the thermometer signal, |S11|, as a function of its frequency for different indicated homodyne powers, Ph. The thermal input field is prepared at a radiation temperature of T = 50 mK. Spectra at different powers are vertically offset, and the backgrounds are subtracted using a polynomial fit. B The resonance frequency, µ, and the Gaussian broadening… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Quadrature bolometry for symmetric Gaussian states. A Reflection amplitude of the thermometer, |S11|, versus projection angle, ϕ, for a thermal input state with n¯T = 0.45, measured at a fixed homodyne photon number |β| 2 = 3.8. The background is subtracted using a polynomial fit. B Resonance frequency, µ, and the Gaussian broadening, σ 2 , of the thermometry lineshape versus ϕ and |β| 2 , obtained from Voigt-profil… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Wigner function computed tomography (CT). A Reflection amplitude of the thermometer, |S11|, versus the projection angle, ϕ, for four Gaussian states. From top to bottom, the displacement parameter α rotates linearly with steps of 90◦ . Backgrounds are subtracted using …

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

43 extracted references · 20 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Hofheinz, M. et al. Synthesizing arbitrary quantum states in a superconducting resonator. Nature 459, 546–549 (2009). URL https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08005

    doi:10.1038/nature08005 2009

  2. [2]

    Sun, L. et al. Tracking photon jumps with repeated quantum non-demolition parity measurements. Nature 511, 444–448 (2014). URL https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13436

    doi:10.1038/nature13436 2014

  3. [3]

    Kirchmair, G. et al. Observation of quantum state collapse and revival due to the single-photon kerr effect. Nature 495, 205–209 (2013). URL https://doi.org/10.1038/nature11902

    work page doi:10.1038/nature11902 2013

  4. [4]

    Menzel, E. P. et al. Dual-path state reconstruction scheme for propagating quantum microwaves and detector noise tomography. Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 100401 (2010). URL https://link.aps.org/ doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.105.100401. 23

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.105.100401 2010

  5. [7]

    Menzel, E. P. et al. Path entanglement of continuous-variable quantum microwaves. Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 250502 (2012). URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.109. 250502

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.109 2012

  6. [8]

    Zhong, L. et al. Squeezing with a flux-driven josephson parametric amplifier. New J. Phys. 15, 125013 (2013). URL https://doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/15/12/125013

    doi:10.1088/1367-2630/15/12/125013 2013

  7. [9]

    D., Mallet, F

    Flurin, E., Roch, N., Pillet, J. D., Mallet, F. & Huard, B. Superconducting quantum node for entanglement and storage of microwave radiation. Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 090503 (2015). URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.090503

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.114.090503 2015

  8. [10]

    Fedorov, K. G. et al. Displacement of propagating squeezed microwave states. Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 020502 (2016). URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.117. 020502. 24

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.117 2016

Show all 43 references
  1. [11]

    Chen, Q.-M. et al. Quantum behavior of the duffing oscillator at the dissipative phase transition. Nat. Commun. 14, 2896 (2023). URL https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-38217-x

    2023 doi

  2. [12]

    & Wallraff, A

    Eichler, C., Bozyigit, D. & Wallraff, A. Characterizing quantum microwave radiation and its entanglement with superconducting qubits using linear detectors. Phys. Rev. A 86, 032106 (2012). URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevA.86.032106

    2012 doi

  3. [13]

    Microwave photon counter based on josephson junctions.Phys

    Chen, Y .-F.et al. Microwave photon counter based on josephson junctions.Phys. Rev. Lett.107, 217401 (2011). URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.107.217401

    2011 doi

  4. [14]

    Inomata, K. et al. Single microwave-photon detector using an artificial λ-type three-level system. Nat. Commun. 7, 12303 (2016). URL https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms12303

    2016 doi

  5. [15]

    Opremcak, A. et al. Measurement of a superconducting qubit with a microwave photon counter.Science 361, 1239–1242 (2018). URL https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aat4625

    2018 doi

  6. [16]

    Lescanne, R. et al. Irreversible qubit-photon coupling for the detection of itinerant microwave photons. Phys. Rev. X 10, 021038 (2020). URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevX. 10.021038

    2020 doi

  7. [17]

    & Nakamura, Y

    Kono, S., Koshino, K., Tabuchi, Y ., Noguchi, A. & Nakamura, Y . Quantum non-demolition detection of an itinerant microwave photon. Nat. Phys. 14, 546–549 (2018). URL https://doi.org/10. 1038/s41567-018-0066-3. 25

    2018

  8. [18]

    Besse, J.-C. et al. Single-shot quantum nondemolition detection of individual itinerant microwave photons. Phys. Rev. X 8, 021003 (2018). URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRevX.8.021003

    2018

  9. [19]

    Wang, Z. et al. An ultra-high gain single-photon transistor in the microwave regime. Nat. Commun. 13, 6104 (2022). URL https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-33921-6

    2022 doi

  10. [20]

    & Huard, B

    Dassonneville, R., Assouly, R., Peronnin, T., Rouchon, P. & Huard, B. Number-resolved photocounter for propagating microwave mode. Phys. Rev. Appl. 14, 044022 (2020). URL https://link.aps. org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevApplied.14.044022

    2020 doi

  11. [21]

    Besse, J.-C. et al. Parity detection of propagating microwave fields. Phys. Rev. X 10, 011046 (2020). URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevX.10.011046

    2020 doi

  12. [22]

    Wei, J. et al. Ultrasensitive hot-electron nanobolometers for terahertz astrophysics. Nat. Nanotechnol. 3, 496–500 (2008). URL https://doi.org/10.1038/nnano.2008.173

    2008 doi

  13. [23]

    Govenius, J. et al. Microwave nanobolometer based on proximity josephson junctions.Phys. Rev. B 90, 064505 (2014). URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevB.90.064505

    2014 doi

  14. [24]

    & Pekola, J

    Karimi, B., Brange, F., Samuelsson, P. & Pekola, J. P. Reaching the ultimate energy resolution of a quantum detector. Nat. Commun. 11, 367 (2020). URL https://doi.org/10.1038/ s41467-019-14247-2. 26

    2020

  15. [25]

    Lee, G.-H. et al. Graphene-based josephson junction microwave bolometer.Nature 586, 42–46 (2020). URL https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2752-4

    2020 doi

  16. [26]

    E., Tan, K

    Govenius, J., Lake, R. E., Tan, K. Y . & M ¨ott¨onen, M. Detection of zeptojoule microwave pulses using electrothermal feedback in proximity-induced josephson junctions. Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 030802 (2016). URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.030802

    2016 doi

  17. [27]

    Kokkoniemi, R. et al. Nanobolometer with ultralow noise equivalent power. Commun. Phys. 2, 124 (2019). URL https://doi.org/10.1038/s42005-019-0225-6

    2019 doi

  18. [28]

    Kokkoniemi, R. et al. Bolometer operating at the threshold for circuit quantum electrodynamics.Nature 586, 47–51 (2020). URL https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2753-3

    2020 doi

  19. [29]

    Gunyh ´o, A. M. et al. Single-shot readout of a superconducting qubit using a thermal detector. Nat. Electron. 7, 288–298 (2024). URL https://doi.org/10.1038/s41928-024-01147-7

    2024 doi

  20. [30]

    Ker ¨anen, A. et al. Correlation measurement of propagating microwave photons at millikelvin. Nat. Commun. 16, 3875 (2025). URL https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-025-59230-2

    2025 doi

  21. [31]

    Lvovsky, A. I. & Raymer, M. G. Continuous-variable optical quantum-state tomography. Rev. Mod. Phys. 81, 299–332 (2009). URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/RevModPhys. 81.299. 27

    2009 doi

  22. [32]

    Mallet, F. et al. Quantum state tomography of an itinerant squeezed microwave field. Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 220502 (2011). URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.106. 220502

    2011 doi

  23. [33]

    Zeng, G. L. Medical Image Reconstruction: From Analytical and Iterative Methods to Machine Learning (De Gruyter, 2023), 2 edn

    2023

  24. [34]

    J., Loudon, R., Phoenix, S

    Blow, K. J., Loudon, R., Phoenix, S. J. D. & Shepherd, T. J. Continuum fields in quantum optics.Phys. Rev. A 42, 4102–4114 (1990). URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevA. 42.4102

    1990 doi

  25. [35]

    Mariantoni, M. et al. Planck spectroscopy and quantum noise of microwave beam splitters. Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 133601 (2010). URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett. 105.133601

    2010 doi

  26. [36]

    Perelshtein, M. et al. Broadband continuous-variable entanglement generation using a kerr-free josephson metamaterial. Phys. Rev. Appl. 18, 024063 (2022). URL https://link.aps.org/ doi/10.1103/PhysRevApplied.18.024063

    2022 doi

  27. [37]

    Esposito, M. et al. Observation of two-mode squeezing in a traveling wave parametric amplifier. Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 153603 (2022). URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRevLett.128.153603. 28

    2022

  28. [38]

    Qiu, J. Y . et al. Broadband squeezed microwaves and amplification with a josephson travelling- wave parametric amplifier. Nat. Phys. 19, 706–713 (2023). URL https://doi.org/10.1038/ s41567-022-01929-w

    2023

  29. [39]

    Chen, Q.-M. et al. Compact inductor-capacitor resonators at sub-gigahertz frequencies. Phys. Rev. Res. 5, 043126 (2023). URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevResearch.5. 043126

    2023 doi

  30. [40]

    Compressed sensing

    Donoho, D. Compressed sensing. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 52, 1289–1306 (2006). URL https: //doi.org/10.1109/tit.2006.871582

    2006

  31. [41]

    Candes, E. J. & Tao, T. Near-optimal signal recovery from random projections: Universal encoding strategies? IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 52, 5406–5425 (2006). URL https://doi.org/10.1109/ tit.2006.885507

    2006

  32. [42]

    Singh, P. et al. Multiplexed readout of ultrasensitive bolometers. arXiv:2411.12782 (2024). URL https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2411.12782

    2024 doi arXiv

  33. [43]

    Cheng, R. et al. A 100-pixel photon-number-resolving detector unveiling photon statistics.Nat. Photon. 17, 112–119 (2022). URL https://doi.org/10.1038/s41566-022-01119-3

    2022 doi

  34. [44]

    Forsch, M. et al. Microwave-to-optics conversion using a mechanical oscillator in its quantum ground state. Nat. Phys. 16, 69–74 (2019). URL https://doi.org/10.1038/ s41567-019-0673-7. 29

    2019

  35. [45]

    Detector of single microwave photons propagating in a guide

    Gunyh ´o, A. et al. Zeptojoule calorimetry. arXiv:2412.14079 (2024). URL https://doi.org/ 10.48550/arXiv.2412.14079. Acknowledgments We thank Joonas Govenius and Visa Vesterinen for providing their work on the SNS bolometer and TWPA used in the experiments, Gheorghe-Sorin Para...

    2024 doi arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.