pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.20790 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-22 · 🪐 quant-ph · cond-mat.mes-hall

Reflections on Quantum Reflectometry: Quantum and Tunneling capacitances as well as Sisyphus and Hermes resistances

O. Yu. Kitsenko , S. N. Shevchenko , L. Peri , Franco Nori This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 00:27 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph cond-mat.mes-hall
keywords quantum reflectometryquantum capacitancetunneling capacitanceSisyphus resistanceHermes resistancedriven-dissipative quditCooper-pair boxresonator coupling
0
0 comments X

The pith

A rigorous model for a qudit coupled to a resonator allows exact definitions of quantum and tunneling capacitances plus Sisyphus and Hermes resistances, including when their dynamics mutually influence each other.

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

The paper develops a complete theoretical framework for quantum electronic devices interacting with electrical resonators. It shows how to precisely define additional capacitive contributions arising from quantum and tunneling effects, as well as resistive terms tied to relaxation and decoherence processes. Normally these are only considered when the quantum system settles quickly compared to the resonator oscillation, but the new description handles cases where the two systems influence each other's time evolution. This matters because it enables accurate modeling of reflectometry measurements in more realistic, coupled scenarios for devices like superconducting qubits and quantum dots.

Core claim

The effective admittance of the combined system incorporates geometric, quantum, and tunneling reactances along with Sisyphus and Hermes resistances. These quantities are derived strictly from the driven-dissipative dynamics of the qudit-resonator Hamiltonian and Lindblad terms, and they acquire corrections when the characteristic times of the qudit become comparable to the resonator period. The approach applies to a Cooper-pair box, a single-Cooper-pair transistor, a double quantum dot, and a single-electron box, and extends to any quantum system coupled to any classical resonator.

What carries the argument

The master equation for the driven-dissipative qudit-resonator system, from which the effective admittance is extracted via the linear response of the quantum charge operator to the resonator field.

If this is right

  • Explicit expressions for quantum capacitance and Sisyphus resistance become available for the Cooper-pair box, single-Cooper-pair transistor, double quantum dot, and single-electron box.
  • These capacitances and resistances receive corrections when the device's relaxation and decoherence times become comparable to the resonator period.
  • The stationary-state formulas are recovered exactly as the limit where all device times are much shorter than the resonator period.
  • The framework extends directly to describe the reflectometry response of arbitrary quantum systems coupled to classical resonators.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The dynamic corrections could improve predictions of back-action and noise in circuit-based quantum readout schemes.
  • Similar decompositions of effective circuit elements might apply to other open quantum systems, such as those in optomechanics.
  • Experiments could test the claims by varying the resonator frequency across the device's decoherence rates and checking for the predicted shifts.
  • The method suggests a path toward a general effective-circuit theory for time-dependent open quantum systems.

Load-bearing premise

The quantum electronic device can be modeled accurately as a driven-dissipative qudit whose characteristic times can be compared directly to the resonator period to separate stationary from mutually dependent regimes.

What would settle it

If measurements of the resonator frequency shift for a Cooper-pair box show no deviation from stationary predictions even when the qubit relaxation time is tuned to approach the resonator period, the predicted modifications from mutual dependence would be falsified.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.20790 by Franco Nori, L. Peri, O. Yu. Kitsenko, S. N. Shevchenko.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: (d)]. The resulting dynamics traces the cyclic excitation–relaxation Sisyphus cycle (1)–(4) in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. As an example, (a) shows a Cooper-pair box built [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: , as in Refs. [6, 73]. The corresponding gate voltage Vg = Vg0 +Vd cos(ωdt) contains a dc component Vg0 that sets the qubit operating point and an ac component that resonantly excites the system. Note that alternatively to the RLC circuit, a quantum system can be probed via a nanomechanical resonator [70, 74]. We start by writing the classical Lagrange func￾tion L(φi , φ˙ i) for the electrical circuit in … view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Dependence of the effective capacitance full width [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Dependence of the effective capacitance full width [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Dependence of the effective conductance [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. (a) The Sisyphus (red curve) and Hermes (blue [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Dependence of the effective conductance [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. (a) Energy levels of a charge qu [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12. (a) Any quantum system (“black box”) coupled [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_12.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

When a quantum electronic device is coupled to an electrical resonator, admittance changes of the quantum subsystem may be detected. The effective reactance may include capacitive and inductive terms that incorporate geometric, quantum, and tunneling components; while the effective resistance may be composed of Sisyphus and Hermes terms linked to relaxation and decoherence, respectively. Such reflectometry is usually studied when all characteristic times of the quantum system are much shorter than the resonator's period, in which case only stationary quantum states are probed. We present a rigorous description of a driven-dissipative qudit-resonator system. Our approach demonstrates how to strictly introduce quantum and tunneling capacitances as well as Hermes and Sisyphus resistances, and how these values are modified when the dynamics of the subsystems becomes mutually dependent. We present the cases of a Cooper-pair box, a single-Cooper-pair transistor, a double quantum dot, and a single-electron box. Our approach can be applied to describe any quantum system coupled to any classical resonator.

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

1 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper claims to provide a rigorous description of a driven-dissipative qudit coupled to a classical electrical resonator. It shows how to strictly introduce quantum and tunneling capacitances along with Sisyphus and Hermes resistances from the admittance response, and derives their modifications when the characteristic times of the qudit and resonator become comparable so that the subsystems' dynamics are mutually dependent. The approach is illustrated for a Cooper-pair box, single-Cooper-pair transistor, double quantum dot, and single-electron box, with the assertion that it applies to any quantum system coupled to any classical resonator.

Significance. If the derivations are correct, the work supplies a systematic framework for extracting effective circuit parameters in reflectometry beyond the usual stationary-state limit. This could improve modeling of admittance changes in hybrid quantum-classical circuits and clarify the separation between stationary and interdependent regimes for the four example devices.

major comments (1)
  1. [section discussing mutually dependent dynamics and regime separation] The central claim of a rigorous, strict introduction of the modified capacitances and resistances in the mutually dependent regime rests on treating the resonator as strictly classical while the qudit is driven-dissipative. When characteristic times become comparable, the back-action of the qudit on the resonator field can introduce quantum fluctuations (vacuum noise, photon statistics) that shift levels or add decoherence channels not captured by a classical admittance picture. This directly affects the regime separation used to distinguish stationary versus dependent dynamics and therefore the claimed modifications. A concrete justification or extension showing why the classical approximation remains valid in this regime is required.
minor comments (1)
  1. [abstract] The abstract is dense and would benefit from a single sentence clarifying the key technical advance (e.g., the explicit mapping from the driven-dissipative master equation to the modified circuit parameters).

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for identifying an important point regarding the classical resonator approximation. We address the comment in detail below and outline the revisions we will make.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The central claim of a rigorous, strict introduction of the modified capacitances and resistances in the mutually dependent regime rests on treating the resonator as strictly classical while the qudit is driven-dissipative. When characteristic times become comparable, the back-action of the qudit on the resonator field can introduce quantum fluctuations (vacuum noise, photon statistics) that shift levels or add decoherence channels not captured by a classical admittance picture. This directly affects the regime separation used to distinguish stationary versus dependent dynamics and therefore the claimed modifications. A concrete justification or extension showing why the classical approximation remains valid in this regime is required.

    Authors: We thank the referee for this observation. Our derivations treat the resonator explicitly as a classical circuit element whose voltage evolves according to the effective admittance obtained from the driven-dissipative qudit. The modifications to quantum/tunneling capacitances and Sisyphus/Hermes resistances in the interdependent regime follow from solving the coupled classical equations for the resonator field and the qudit master equation, without assuming timescale separation. This framework is consistent with standard reflectometry modeling where the resonator is macroscopic. We agree, however, that a fully quantum resonator could introduce additional vacuum-noise effects not captured here. In the revised manuscript we will add an explicit paragraph in the section on mutually dependent dynamics stating the conditions under which the classical approximation holds (sufficiently large mean photon number so that zero-point fluctuations are negligible relative to the drive) and noting that a quantum-resonator treatment would require a different formalism. This addition qualifies the regime separation without changing the core results. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation of effective parameters from driven-dissipative dynamics is self-contained

full rationale

The paper presents a rigorous description of the driven-dissipative qudit-resonator system by solving the coupled dynamics and extracting modified quantum/tunneling capacitances and Sisyphus/Hermes resistances from the resulting admittance changes. This extraction follows from comparing characteristic times to separate stationary versus mutually dependent regimes, without the target quantities being defined in terms of themselves or obtained by fitting to the same response functions they explain. No load-bearing self-citation chain or ansatz smuggling is required for the central claim, and the model remains independent of the final effective values.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review; no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are stated. The model appears to rest on standard driven-dissipative quantum optics assumptions and the classical-resonator approximation.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5497 in / 1111 out tokens · 44822 ms · 2026-05-10T00:27:52.946049+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

113 extracted references · 113 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    kinetic” energy and the energy of an inductorE φ = 2e ℏ 2 φ2 2L is associated with the “potential

    Toy example: quantumLCoscillator To better understand the meaning of the quantum con- tributions in Eq. (A5), consider a simpleLCcircuit as an illustrative example. We start from the Lagrangian approach to the problem in which the energy of a ca- pacitorE ˙φ= 2e ℏ 2 C˙φ2 2 is associated with the “kinetic” energy and the energy of an inductorE φ = 2e ℏ 2 φ...

    work page

  2. [2]

    Perturbation theory for the evolution operator Consider the Schr ¨odinger equation with the Hamilto- nian (27) and the biasε(t) =ε 0 +δε rf cos(ωrft). This detuning leads to the Hamiltonian ˆH= ˆH0 + ˆV, with ˆH0 =− ∆ 2 σx − ε0 2 σz (C1) and ˆV=− δεrf cos(ωrft) 2 σz (C2) being the unperturbed Hamiltonian and the perturba- tion, respectively. It is benefic...

    work page

  3. [3]

    (28) and (30) determine the quan- tum capacitance

    First-order corrections to the quantum current As a next step we need to find the first-order correc- tions to the expectation value of the rate of change of the Cooper-pair numbers on the superconducting island d⟨ˆn⟩/dt, and from Eqs. (28) and (30) determine the quan- tum capacitance. We note that only terms∝exp(±iω rft) ind⟨ˆn⟩/dtwill contribute to the ...

    work page

  4. [4]

    Therefore, we expand the initial state|ψ 0⟩in the energy eigenstates |E ±⟩of ˆH0

    Quantum capacitance Since ˆ˙n(1) 0 ∝ ˆH0, it is convenient to work in the eigen- basis of the unperturbed Hamiltonian ˆH0. Therefore, we expand the initial state|ψ 0⟩in the energy eigenstates |E ±⟩of ˆH0. At the initial moment of time the state|ψ 0⟩ can be written as |ψ 0⟩= r 1 +χ 2 |E −⟩+ r 1−χ 2 eiϑ|E +⟩.(C14) Finally with the use of Eqs. (28), (34), an...

    work page

  5. [5]

    GKSL equation We will start from solving the GKSL equation which has to be written in the instantaneous energy representa- tion. By introducing the unitary transformation ˆSsuch that|ψ⟩= ˆS|ψ ′⟩: ˆS=λ +ˆ1+iλ −ˆσy (D1) with λ± =± 1√ 2 s 1± ε(t)p ∆2 +ε 2(t) ,(D2) which results in the instantaneous Hamiltonian (39). The GKSL equation for the density matrix i...

    work page

  6. [6]

    (28) is realized through the quantum current ∝d⟨∂ ˆH/∂˙φcl⟩/dt=d⟨∂ ˆH/∂ε⟩/dt·∂ε/∂˙φcl [see Eq

    Quantum current operator The impact of the quantum subsystem on the classical one in Eq. (28) is realized through the quantum current ∝d⟨∂ ˆH/∂˙φcl⟩/dt=d⟨∂ ˆH/∂ε⟩/dt·∂ε/∂˙φcl [see Eq. (30)], where ˙φcl = 2eV /ℏ. From Eq. (27) d dt D ∂ ˆH ∂ε E = ∂2Egeom ∂ε2 ˙ε−1 2 d⟨ˆσz⟩ dt ,(D8) so that the first term results in a geometric capaci- tance (46). The Pauli m...

    work page

  7. [7]

    The instantaneous Hamiltonian can be decomposed as in Eq

    Perturbation theory In this subsection we will develop a perturbation the- ory for a small classical probeδε rf at long timest→ ∞. The instantaneous Hamiltonian can be decomposed as in Eq. (43), with ˆH(0) inst =E (0) geomˆ1− ∆E0 2 ˆσz,(D10) ˆVδε = ∂E (0) geom ∂ε0 ˆ1− ε0 2∆E0 ˆσz, ˆVδ˙ε= ℏ∆ 2∆E2 0 ˆσy, while the relaxation rates can be written as γ± = 1±χ...

    work page

  8. [8]

    Effective capacitance and resistance By substituting the density matrix up to the first order into Eq. (D9), and also by expanding this equation up to first order we obtain − d dt D ∂ ˆH ∂V E =C eff ˙V+ V Reff (D15) with the effective capacitance Ceff =C geom +C Q0 ( ∆3 ∆E3 0 tanh ∆E0 2kBT + ε2 0 2kBT∆E 2 0(1 +T 2 1 ω2 rf) cosh−2 ∆E0 2kBT −(D16) − ∆3 ∆E3 ...

    work page

  9. [9]

    Good and bad qubits Further, in the limitω rf ≪ω q0 ≪T −1 1 , T −1 2 we obtain the effective capacitance of a bad qubit C(bad) eff =C geom +C Q0 " ∆3 ∆E3 0 tanh ∆E0 2kBT + (D21) + ε2 0 2kBT∆E 2 0 cosh−2 ∆E0 2kBT # , As we show in Sec. V, this result can be written in a general form as C(bad) eff =− ∂ε ∂V 2 ∂ ∂ε ∂E ∂ε th =− ∂ ∂V ∂E ∂V th ,(D22) For a good ...

    work page

  10. [10]

    Hellmann-Feynman theorem We start from the Hellmann-Feynman theorem, which states that ∂εEk := ∂Ek ∂ε =⟨E k|∂ε ˆH|Ek⟩.(E1) This relation can be obtained by differentiating the eigenenergyE k, written in the formE k(ε) = ⟨Ek(ε)| ˆH(ε)|Ek(ε)⟩, with respect to the biasε, using the fact that ∂ ∂ε ⟨Ek(ε)|Ek(ε)⟩= 0.(E2) We are now interested in obtaining expres...

    work page

  11. [11]

    Instantaneous energy representation Now we consider the Hamiltonian ˆH(ε) with a time- dependent parameterε=ε(t). We transform the Hamil- tonian into the instantaneous representation using the unitary matrix ˆS= X m |Em⟩⟨m|,(E12) where|m⟩denotes the standard orthonormal basis vec- tor, i.e., a column vector with a single nonzero entry 1 at them-th positio...

    work page

  12. [12]

    The energy bias in the Hamilto- nianε(t) =ε 0 +δε rf cos(ωrft) contains a stationary point ε0 and a small classical probing term

    Perturbation theory for the evolution operator In this subsection, we build a general perturbation the- ory ford-level systems. The energy bias in the Hamilto- nianε(t) =ε 0 +δε rf cos(ωrft) contains a stationary point ε0 and a small classical probing term. Since both the probing amplitudeδε rf and the probing frequencyω rf are small [see Eq. (60)], we ca...

    work page

  13. [13]

    (E17) itself consists of both zeroth- and first-order terms: (∂ε ˆ˙H)inst = (∂ε ˆ˙H)(0) inst + (∂ε ˆ˙H)(1) inst,(E23) where the zeroth-order term arises from the second term of Eq

    First-order corrections to the quantum current We note that (∂ ε ˆ˙H)inst from Eq. (E17) itself consists of both zeroth- and first-order terms: (∂ε ˆ˙H)inst = (∂ε ˆ˙H)(0) inst + (∂ε ˆ˙H)(1) inst,(E23) where the zeroth-order term arises from the second term of Eq. (E17): (∂ε ˆ˙H)(0) inst = X n,l iω(0) nl (∂ε ˆH)(0) nl |n⟩ ⟨l|,(E24) while the first-order te...

    work page

  14. [14]

    Effective capacitance From Eqs. (29) and (E38), we obtain Ceff ¨φcl =− 2e ℏ ∂ε ∂V ∂2E ∂ε2 S δ˙εrf.(E39) Since ¨φcl = 2e ˙V /ℏandδ˙ε rf = ˙V(∂ε/∂V), the effective capacitance of anarbitrary isolated quditis Ceff =− ∂ε ∂V 2 ∂2E ∂ε2 S =− ∂2E ∂V 2 S .(E40) This can be split into the geometric capacitance Cgeom =− ∂2Egeom ∂V 2 (E41) and the quantum capacitance...

    work page

  15. [15]

    GKSL master equation in the instantaneous energy representation Let us write the quantum master equation (40) in the instantaneous energy representation, where the instanta- neous Hamiltonian ˆHinst is defined in Eq. (E14). In the absence of microwave driving and classical prob- ing, the instantaneous Hamiltonian ˆHinst is diagonal, and we expect the syst...

    work page

  16. [16]

    The motivation for working in Liou- ville space is to construct a perturbative expansion and obtain the first-order correction to the density matrix

    Liouville space It is convenient to work with the GKSL equation in the Liouville space [81]. The motivation for working in Liou- ville space is to construct a perturbative expansion and obtain the first-order correction to the density matrix. The ansatz (45) leads to two coupled operator equations for ˆAand ˆB, which in Liouville space reduce to a linear ...

    work page

  17. [17]

    The Liouvillian superoperatorL 0 is generally non- Hermitian

    Important properties of the GKSL equation in the Liouville space In this subsection, we summarize several important properties of the GKSL Liouvillian superoperatorL[81] that will be used throughout the rest of the Appendices. The Liouvillian superoperatorL 0 is generally non- Hermitian. As a result, the right and left eigenvectors are not related by Herm...

    work page

  18. [18]

    Time derivative of an operator For an arbitrary operator ˆAinst in the instantaneous energy representation, its time derivative can be ob- tained by differentiating the expectation value⟨ ˆAinst⟩= Tr (ˆρˆAinst) and using the GKSL equation for ˆ˙ρ. The re- sulting time-derivative operator reads ˆ˙Ainst = ∂ ˆAinst ∂t + i ℏ[ ˆHinst, ˆAinst] + X α γα ˆL† α ˆA...

    work page

  19. [19]

    Id2 + L0 ωrf 2#−1 −ω−2 rf L0Lδε +L δ˙ε |ρ(0)⟩ ⟩, |B⟩ ⟩=−ω −2 rf

    Perturbation theory Now we construct a perturbative solution for the den- sity matrix. In principle, the evolution superoperator can be constructed following the procedure outlined in Appendix E 3. Its detailed investigation will be reported elsewhere [82]. However, the same results for the effec- tive capacitance and resistance can be derived using an al...

    work page

  20. [20]

    (30), the quantum current⟨ ˆI⟩con- tributes to both the effective reactanceC eff and the effec- tive resistanceR eff for open quantum systems

    First-order corrections to the quantum current As shown in Eq. (30), the quantum current⟨ ˆI⟩con- tributes to both the effective reactanceC eff and the effec- tive resistanceR eff for open quantum systems. Here, the 32 calculations are performed in the Liouville space. The expression for the quantum current operator, Eq. (E17), must be modified accordingl...

    work page

  21. [21]

    Id2 + L0 ωrf 2#−1 |ρ(0) δε ⟩ ⟩+ +L0

    Effective capacitance and resistance From Eqs. (29), and (F35), for anarbitrary dissipa- tive quditwe obtain the final expressions for the effective capacitance Ceff =− ∂ε ∂V 2h ⟨ ⟨∂ε(∂εH)(0) inst |ρ (0)⟩ ⟩+ +⟨ ⟨(∂εH)(0) inst |L δ˙ε|ρ(0)⟩ ⟩+⟨ ⟨(∂εH)(0) inst |L 0|B⟩ ⟩ i (F36) and the effective conductance R−1 eff =− ∂ε ∂V 2h ⟨ ⟨(∂εH)(0) inst |L δε|ρ(0)⟩ ⟩+...

    work page

  22. [22]

    (F40) can be readily com- puted

    Geometric, quantum and tunneling capacitances The first two terms in Eq. (F40) can be readily com- puted. The first term is obtained by differentiating Eq. (E16) with respect toε, using Eqs. (E9–E11). Ap- plying identity (F9) and noting that ˆρ(0) is diagonal, only the diagonal elements∂ ε(∂ε ˆH)inst,nn, which are just the second derivatives of the energi...

    work page

  23. [23]

    To compute the inverse of the superoperator in Eqs

    Good qudit For a good qudit, we consider the regime of very small relaxation rates,γ qd ≪ω rf ≪ω qd. To compute the inverse of the superoperator in Eqs. (F40) and (F41), we note thatH 0 can be decomposed in the basis ˆPk ⊗ ˆPl, where ˆPk =|k⟩⟨k|. Indeed, we can write the unperturbed instantaneous Hamiltonian as ˆH(0) inst = X k E(0) k ˆPk,(G4) and the ide...

    work page

  24. [24]

    Id2 + D0 ωrf 2#−1 =|ρ (0)⟩ ⟩⟨ ⟨1|+O ω2 rf γ2 qd ! (G13) and D0

    Bad qudit For a bad qudit, we consider the regime ωrf ≪ω qd ≪γ qd. To compute the effective capaci- tance and resistance, we need the eigen-decomposition ofD 0. As discussed in Appendix F 3, there is only one zero eigenvalued 0 = 0 [see Eqs. (F14) and (F15)]. Thus, for any function ofD 0 we can write f(D0) = X n f(d n)|DR,n⟩ ⟩⟨ ⟨DL,n|= =f(0)|ρ (0)⟩ ⟩⟨ ⟨1|...

    work page

  25. [25]

    (F40) and (F41) with the known struc- ture of the Hamiltonian, relaxation rates, and jump op- erators

    Super-bras, -kets, and -operators for a two-level system In this Appendix, we show how to obtain expressions for the effective capacitance and resistance of a two-level system from Eqs. (F40) and (F41) with the known struc- ture of the Hamiltonian, relaxation rates, and jump op- erators. For a two-level system, the Hamiltonian is given by Eq. (27). Relaxa...

    work page

  26. [26]

    Since the eigenenergies of the Hamiltonian (27) areE i = Egeom ±∆E 0/2, the sum of the geometric and quantum capacitances from Eq

    Effective capacitance Let us now calculate the effective capacitance. Since the eigenenergies of the Hamiltonian (27) areE i = Egeom ±∆E 0/2, the sum of the geometric and quantum capacitances from Eq. (71) is Cgeom+CQ =− ∂2Egeom ∂V 2 + ∂ε ∂V 2 ∆2 2∆E3 0 tanh ∆E0 2kBT , (I10) which with the previous definition of theC Q0 (48) per- fectly coincides with Eqs...

    work page

  27. [27]

    Effective resistance Now we calculate the effective resistance from Eq. (F41). The Hermes conductance (75) is R−1 Hrm = ∂ε ∂V 2 ∆2T2ω2 rf 2∆E3 0 tanh ∆E0 2kBT ·(I12) · 1 +T 2 2 (ω2 q0 +ω 2 rf) 1 +T 4 2 (ω2 q0 −ω 2 rf)2 + 2T2 2 (ω2 q0 +ω 2 rf) , while the Sisyphus conductance (76) is R−1 Sis = ∂ε ∂V 2 ε2 0γ 4kBT∆E 2 0 ω2 rf ω2 rf +γ 2 cosh−2 ∆E0 2kBT . (I1...

    work page

  28. [28]

    Haroche and J.-M

    S. Haroche and J.-M. Raimond,Exploring the Quantum: Atoms, Cavities, and Photons(Oxford University Press, 2006)

    work page 2006

  29. [29]

    A. M. Zagoskin,Quantum Engineering(Cambridge Uni- versity Press, 2011)

    work page 2011

  30. [30]

    Huard, L

    B. Huard, L. F. Cugliandolo, M. H. Devoret, and R. Schoelkopf, eds.,Quantum machines(Oxford Univer- sity Press, Oxford, 2014) lecture notes

    work page 2014

  31. [31]

    S. N. Shevchenko,Mesoscopic Physics meets Quantum Engineering(World Scientific Pub Co Inc, 2019)

    work page 2019

  32. [32]

    Boutin, T

    S. Boutin, T. Karzig, T. E. Dandachi, R. V. Mishmash, J. Gukelberger, R. M. Lutchyn, and B. Bauer, Predic- tive simulations of the dynamical response of mesoscopic devices, (2025), arXiv:2502.12960 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

    work page arXiv 2025

  33. [33]

    Johansson, L

    G. Johansson, L. Tornberg, V. S. Shumeiko, and G. Wendin, Readout methods and devices for Josephson- junction-based solid-state qubits, J. Phys. Cond. Matt. 18, S901 (2006)

    work page 2006

  34. [34]

    Sillanp ¨a¨a, T

    M. Sillanp ¨a¨a, T. Lehtinen, A. Paila, Y. Makhlin, and P. Hakonen, Continuous-time monitoring of Landau- Zener interference in a Cooper-pair box, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 187002 (2006)

    work page 2006

  35. [35]

    Vigneau, F

    F. Vigneau, F. Fedele, A. Chatterjee, D. Reilly, F. Kuem- meth, M. F. Gonzalez-Zalba, E. Laird, and N. Ares, Prob- ing quantum devices with radio-frequency reflectometry, Appl. Phys. Rev.10, 021305 (2023)

    work page 2023

  36. [36]

    D. V. Averin and K. K. Likharev, Coulomb blockade of single-electron tunneling, and coherent oscillations in small tunnel junctions, J. Low Temp. Phys.62, 345 (1986)

    work page 1986

  37. [37]

    K. K. Likharev,Dynamics of Josephson junctions and circuits, 3rd ed. (Gordon and Breach, New York, N.Y. [u.a.], 1996)

    work page 1996

  38. [38]

    D. V. Averin, A. N. Korotkov, and K. K. Likharev, The- ory of single-electron charging of quantum wells and dots, Phys. Rev. B44, 6199 (1991)

    work page 1991

  39. [39]

    Likharev, Single-electron devices and their applica- tions, Proc

    K. Likharev, Single-electron devices and their applica- tions, Proc. IEEE87, 606 (1999)

    work page 1999

  40. [40]

    Sch¨on and A

    G. Sch¨on and A. Zaikin, Quantum coherent effects, phase transitions, and the dissipative dynamics of ultra small tunnel junctions, Phys. Rep.198, 237 (1990)

    work page 1990

  41. [41]

    Schoeller and G

    H. Schoeller and G. Sch ¨on, Mesoscopic quantum trans- port: Resonant tunneling in the presence of a strong Coulomb interaction, Phys. Rev. B50, 18436 (1994)

    work page 1994

  42. [42]

    Makhlin, G

    Y. Makhlin, G. Sch ¨on, and A. Shnirman, Quantum-state engineering with Josephson-junction devices, Rev. Mod. Phys.73, 357 (2001)

    work page 2001

  43. [43]

    M. H. Devoret and R. J. Schoelkopf, Amplifying quantum 38 signals with the single-electron transistor, Nature406, 1039 (2000)

    work page 2000

  44. [44]

    J. Q. You and F. Nori, Superconducting circuits and quantum information, Phys. Today58, 42 (2005)

    work page 2005

  45. [45]

    J. Q. You and F. Nori, Atomic physics and quantum optics using superconducting circuits, Nature474, 589 (2011)

    work page 2011

  46. [46]

    S. E. Nigg, H. Paik, B. Vlastakis, G. Kirchmair, S. Shankar, L. Frunzio, M. H. Devoret, R. J. Schoelkopf, and S. M. Girvin, Black-box superconducting circuit quantization, Phys. Rev. Lett.108, 240502 (2012)

    work page 2012

  47. [47]

    X. Gu, A. F. Kockum, A. Miranowicz, Y.-X. Liu, and F. Nori, Microwave photonics with superconducting quantum circuits, Phys. Rep.718-719, 1 (2017)

    work page 2017

  48. [48]

    Krantz, M

    P. Krantz, M. Kjaergaard, F. Yan, T. P. Orlando, S. Gus- tavsson, and W. D. Oliver, A quantum engineer's guide to superconducting qubits, Appl. Phys. Rev.6, 021318 (2019)

    work page 2019

  49. [49]

    A. F. Kockum and F. Nori, Quantum bits with Josephson junctions, inFundamentals and Frontiers of the Joseph- son Effect(Springer International Publishing, 2019) pp. 703–741

    work page 2019

  50. [50]

    Kjaergaard, M

    M. Kjaergaard, M. E. Schwartz, J. Braum ¨uller, P. Krantz, J. I.-J. Wang, S. Gustavsson, and W. D. Oliver, Superconducting qubits: Current state of play, Ann. Rev. Cond. Matt. Phys.11, 369 (2020)

    work page 2020

  51. [51]

    Blais, A

    A. Blais, A. L. Grimsmo, S. M. Girvin, and A. Wallraff, Circuit quantum electrodynamics, Rev. Mod. Phys.93, 025005 (2021)

    work page 2021

  52. [52]

    F. A. Zwanenburg, A. S. Dzurak, A. Morello, M. Y. Sim- mons, L. C. L. Hollenberg, G. Klimeck, S. Rogge, S. N. Coppersmith, and M. A. Eriksson, Silicon quantum elec- tronics, Rev. Mod. Phys.85, 961 (2013)

    work page 2013

  53. [53]

    Burkard, T

    G. Burkard, T. D. Ladd, A. Pan, J. M. Nichol, and J. R. Petta, Semiconductor spin qubits, Rev. Mod. Phys.95, 025003 (2023)

    work page 2023

  54. [54]

    R. J. Schoelkopf, P. Wahlgren, A. A. Kozhevnikov, P. Delsing, and D. E. Prober, The radio-frequency single- electron transistor (rf-set): A fast and ultrasensitive elec- trometer, Science280, 1238 (1998)

    work page 1998

  55. [55]

    House, I

    M. House, I. Bartlett, P. Pakkiam, M. Koch, E. Peretz, J. van der Heijden, T. Kobayashi, S. Rogge, and M. Sim- mons, High-sensitivity charge detection with a single-lead quantum dot for scalable quantum computation, Phys. Rev. Appl.6, 044016 (2016)

    work page 2016

  56. [56]

    T. A. Zirkle, M. J. Filmer, J. Chisum, A. O. Orlov, E. Dupont-Ferrier, J. Rivard, M. Huebner, M. Sanquer, X. Jehl, and G. L. Snider, Radio frequency reflectometry of single-electron box arrays for nanoscale voltage sensing applications, Appl. Sci.10, 8797 (2020)

    work page 2020

  57. [57]

    M. J. Filmer, M. Huebner, T. A. Zirkle, X. Jehl, M. San- quer, J. D. Chisum, A. O. Orlov, and G. L. Snider, Gate reflectometry of single-electron box arrays using cal- ibrated low temperature matching networks, Sci. Rep.12, 3098 (2022)

    work page 2022

  58. [58]

    J. C. Frake, S. Kano, C. Ciccarelli, J. Griffiths, M. Sakamoto, T. Teranishi, Y. Majima, C. G. Smith, and M. R. Buitelaar, Radio-frequency capacitance spec- troscopy of metallic nanoparticles, Sci. Rep.5, 10858 (2015)

    work page 2015

  59. [59]

    Zhang, H

    Y. Zhang, H. Guan, T. Sheng, R. Chen, S. Rogge, J. Du, and C. Yin, Fast thermodynamic study on a silicon nan- otransistor at cryogenic temperatures, Nano Letters24, 8859 (2024)

    work page 2024

  60. [60]

    van Loo, F

    N. van Loo, F. Zatelli, G. O. Steffensen, B. Roovers, G. Wang, T. Van Caekenberghe, A. Bordin, D. van Driel, Y. Zhang, W. D. Huisman, G. Badawy, E. P. A. M. Bakkers, G. P. Mazur, R. Aguado, and L. P. Kouwen- hoven, Single-shot parity readout of a minimal Kitaev chain, Nature650, 334 (2026)

    work page 2026

  61. [61]

    van Driel, B

    D. van Driel, B. Roovers, F. Zatelli, A. Bordin, G. Wang, N. van Loo, J. C. Wolff, G. P. Mazur, S. Gazibegovic, G. Badawy, E. P. Bakkers, L. P. Kouwenhoven, and T. Dvir, Charge sensing the parity of an Andreev molecule, PRX Quantum5, 020301 (2024)

    work page 2024

  62. [62]

    V. I. Shnyrkov, T. Wagner, D. Born, S. N. Shevchenko, W. Krech, A. N. Omelyanchouk, E. Il’ichev, and H. G. Meyer, Multiphoton transitions between energy levels in a phase-biased Cooper-pair box, Phys. Rev. B73, 024506 (2006)

    work page 2006

  63. [63]

    S. N. Shevchenko, S. H. W. van der Ploeg, M. Grajcar, E. Il’ichev, A. N. Omelyanchouk, and H.-G. Meyer, Reso- nant excitations of single and two-qubit systems coupled to a tank circuit, Phys. Rev. B78, 174527 (2008)

    work page 2008

  64. [64]

    T. Frey, P. J. Leek, M. Beck, J. Faist, A. Wallraff, K. En- sslin, T. Ihn, and M. B ¨uttiker, Quantum dot admittance probed at microwave frequencies with an on-chip res- onator, Phys. Rev. B86, 115303 (2012)

    work page 2012

  65. [65]

    V. I. Shnyrkov, A. A. Soroka, and W. Krech, Signal char- acteristics of charge-phase qubit detector with parametric energy conversion, Low Temp. Phys.35, 652 (2009)

    work page 2009

  66. [66]

    V. I. Shnyrkov, A. A. Soroka, and O. G. Turutanov, Quantum superposition of three macroscopic states and superconducting qutrit detector, Phys. Rev. B85, 224512 (2012)

    work page 2012

  67. [67]

    Persson, C

    F. Persson, C. M. Wilson, M. Sandberg, G. Johansson, and P. Delsing, Excess dissipation in a single-electron box: The Sisyphus resistance, Nano Lett.10, 953 (2010)

    work page 2010

  68. [68]

    M. F. Gonzalez-Zalba, S. Barraud, A. Ferguson, and A. Betz, Probing the limits of gate-based charge sensing, Nature Comm.6, 6084 (2015)

    work page 2015

  69. [69]

    S. N. Shevchenko, D. G. Rubanov, and F. Nori, Delayed- response quantum back action in nanoelectromechanical systems, Phys. Rev. B91, 165422 (2015)

    work page 2015

  70. [70]

    L. Peri, M. Benito, C. J. B. Ford, and M. F. Gonzalez- Zalba, Unified linear response theory of quantum dot cir- cuits, npj Quantum Inf.10, 114 (2024)

    work page 2024

  71. [71]

    Grajcar, S

    M. Grajcar, S. H. W. van der Ploeg, A. Izmalkov, E. Il’ichev, H.-G. Meyer, A. Fedorov, A. Shnirman, and G. Sch¨on, Sisyphus cooling and amplification by a super- conducting qubit, Nature Phys.4, 612 (2008)

    work page 2008

  72. [72]

    F. K. Malinowski, R. K. Rupesh, L. Paveˇ si´ c, Z. Guba, D. de Jong, L. Han, C. G. Prosko, M. Chan, Y. Liu, P. Krogstrup, A. P´ alyi, R. Zitko, and J. V. Koski, Quantum capacitance of a superconducting subgap state in an electrostatically floating dot-island, (2022), arXiv:2210.01519 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

    work page arXiv 2022

  73. [73]

    C. N. Cohen-Tannoudji and W. D. Phillips, New mecha- nisms for laser cooling, Physics Today43, 33 (1990)

    work page 1990

  74. [74]

    N. N. Bogolyubov and Y. A. Mitropol’skii,Asymptotic Methods in the Theory of Nonlinear Oscillations(Gordon and Breach, 1962)

    work page 1962

  75. [75]

    S. N. Shevchenko, A. N. Omelyanchouk, and E. Il’ichev, Multiphoton transitions in Josephson-junction qubits (Review Article), Low Temp. Phys.38, 283 (2012)

    work page 2012

  76. [76]

    M. F. Gonzalez-Zalba, S. N. Shevchenko, S. Barraud, J. R. Johansson, A. J. Ferguson, F. Nori, and A. C. Betz, Gate-sensing coherent charge oscillations in a sili- 39 con field-effect transistor, Nano Lett.16, 1614 (2016)

    work page 2016

  77. [77]

    Mizuta, R

    R. Mizuta, R. M. Otxoa, A. C. Betz, and M. F. Gonzalez- Zalba, Quantum and tunneling capacitance in charge and spin qubits, Phys. Rev. B95, 045414 (2017)

    work page 2017

  78. [78]

    Esterli, R

    M. Esterli, R. M. Otxoa, and M. F. Gonzalez-Zalba, Small-signal equivalent circuit for double quantum dots at low-frequencies, Appl. Phys. Lett.114, 253505 (2019)

    work page 2019

  79. [79]

    M. A. Sillanp ¨a¨a, T. Lehtinen, A. Paila, Y. Makhlin, L. Roschier, and P. J. Hakonen, Direct observation of Josephson capacitance, Phys. Rev. Lett.95, 206806 (2005)

    work page 2005

  80. [80]

    T. Duty, G. Johansson, K. Bladh, D. Gunnarsson, C. Wilson, and P. Delsing, Observation of quantum ca- pacitance in the Cooper-pair transistor, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 206807 (2005)

    work page 2005

Showing first 80 references.