pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.24272 · v1 · pith:GOKTLM3Dnew · submitted 2026-05-22 · ⚛️ physics.ins-det · hep-ex

Characterization of Aluminum Microwave SQUID Multiplexers for CEνNS Detection

James Amidei , Antoine Armatol , Corinne Augier , Louis Bailly-Salins , Guillaume Baulieu , Laurent Berg\'e , Julien Billard , Juliette Bl\'e
show 87 more authors
Gaby Brenot Guillaume Bres Jean-Louis Bret Alexandre Broniatowski Martino Calvo Antonella Cavanna Antoine Cazes Emanuela Celi David Chaize Mohammed Chala Maurice Chapellier Luke Chaplinsky Ran Chen Ion Cojocari Jules Colas Laurent Couraud Elspeth Cudmore Maryvonne De Jesus Pierre de Marcillac Nicole Dombrowski Louis Dumoulin Alan Durnez Romain Faure Sylvain Ferriol Enectali Figueroa-Feliciano Joseph A. Formaggio Stephane Fuard Jules Gascon Clo\'e Girard-Carillo Andrea Giuliani Corinne Goy Cyrille Guerin Le\"ila Haegel Patrick M. Harrington Scott A. Hertel Cyrus F. Hirjibehedin Christophe Hoarau Ziqing Hong Daemon Howard Jean-Christophe Ianigro Yong Jin Alexandre Juillard Dimitar Karaivanov Temirlan Khussainov Andrew Kubik Jacob Lamblin Tatiana Le Bellec Laetitia Leroy Mingyu Li Alexey Lubashevskiy Stefanos Marnieros Romain Martin Nicolas Martini Julien Minet Alessandro Monfardini Franck Mounier Bethany M. Niedzielski Valentina Novati Wiliam D. Oliver Emiliano Olivieri H. Douglas Pinckney Denys V. Poda Dmitrii Ponomarev Jean-S\'ebastien Real Faith C. Reyes Alejandro Rodriguez Sergey Rozov Irina Rozova Brianna Ryan Deeksha Sabhari Silvia Scorza Kyle Serniak Renaud Serra Yegor Shevchik Torsten Soldner Hannah Stickler Caitlyn Stone-Whitehead Christian Ulysse Wouter Van De Pontseele Sergey Vasilyev Paul Vittaz Steven Weber Evan Wolfe Wayne Woods Evgeny Yakushev Jiatong Yang Daniya Zinatulina
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-30 14:05 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.ins-det hep-ex
keywords aluminummicrowave SQUID multiplexerμMUXTES readoutcryogenic detectorsflux sensitivityJosephson junctionsRICOCHET
0
0 comments X

The pith

Aluminum microwave SQUID multiplexers achieve flux sensitivity of 0.3-0.6 μΦ₀/√Hz with parametric amplification for TES readout.

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

The paper reports the design, fabrication, and testing of a six-channel aluminum-based microwave SQUID multiplexer prototype intended for transition-edge sensor readout in the RICOCHET CEνNS experiment. Measurements of scattering parameters across probe frequencies, powers, and flux biases match existing multiplexer models, while noise characterizations yield open-loop flux sensitivities of 1-1.5 μΦ₀/√Hz with a HEMT amplifier and 0.3-0.6 μΦ₀/√Hz when a JTWPA is added. Flux-ramp operation suppresses 1/f noise to reach 3-4 μΦ₀/√Hz, corresponding to 24-33 pA/√Hz at the input coil, and the overall results position aluminum μMUX devices as a workable option for low-noise cryogenic detector arrays.

Core claim

The aluminum μMUX prototype uses coplanar-waveguide resonators and RF SQUIDs with Dolan-style Al/AlOx/Al junctions. Device response agrees with multiplexer models. Open-loop flux sensitivity is 1-1.5 μΦ₀/√Hz with HEMT amplification and improves to 0.3-0.6 μΦ₀/√Hz with a JTWPA, yielding system noise temperature below 1 K. Flux-ramp modulation gives 3-4 μΦ₀/√Hz sensitivity while suppressing low-frequency noise.

What carries the argument

Aluminum coplanar-waveguide resonators coupled to RF SQUIDs that enable frequency-domain multiplexing of multiple TES channels.

If this is right

  • Resonator scattering parameters match model predictions across the tested range of probe conditions.
  • Flux-ramp modulation suppresses 1/f noise and delivers usable current sensitivity at the input coil.
  • Inserting a JTWPA between the μMUX and HEMT reduces effective system noise temperature below 1 K.
  • The demonstrated performance supports extension of aluminum μMUX technology to larger channel counts in cryogenic arrays.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The aluminum fabrication route may reduce complexity when scaling to arrays with hundreds of channels compared with other superconducting materials.
  • Lab results at selected bias points leave open whether additional environmental noise appears once the full RICOCHET cryostat and wiring are used.
  • The same resonator-SQUID architecture could be adapted for other low-temperature sensing applications that require multiplexed readout of many sensors.

Load-bearing premise

The noise and scattering measurements taken at the tested frequencies, powers, and bias points represent performance under actual RICOCHET operating conditions.

What would settle it

A measurement of flux sensitivity worse than 5 μΦ₀/√Hz or clear mismatch with model predictions when the device is operated at RICOCHET temperatures and signal levels would undermine the viability conclusion.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.24272 by Alan Durnez, Alejandro Rodriguez, Alessandro Monfardini, Alexandre Broniatowski, Alexandre Juillard, Alexey Lubashevskiy, Andrea Giuliani, Andrew Kubik, Antoine Armatol, Antoine Cazes, Antonella Cavanna, Bethany M. Niedzielski, Brianna Ryan, Caitlyn Stone-Whitehead, Christian Ulysse, Christophe Hoarau, Clo\'e Girard-Carillo, Corinne Augier, Corinne Goy, Cyrille Guerin, Cyrus F. Hirjibehedin, Daemon Howard, Daniya Zinatulina, David Chaize, Deeksha Sabhari, Denys V. Poda, Dimitar Karaivanov, Dmitrii Ponomarev, Elspeth Cudmore, Emanuela Celi, Emiliano Olivieri, Enectali Figueroa-Feliciano, Evan Wolfe, Evgeny Yakushev, Faith C. Reyes, Franck Mounier, Gaby Brenot, Guillaume Baulieu, Guillaume Bres, Hannah Stickler, H. Douglas Pinckney, Ion Cojocari, Irina Rozova, Jacob Lamblin, James Amidei, Jean-Christophe Ianigro, Jean-Louis Bret, Jean-S\'ebastien Real, Jiatong Yang, Joseph A. Formaggio, Jules Colas, Jules Gascon, Julien Billard, Julien Minet, Juliette Bl\'e, Kyle Serniak, Laetitia Leroy, Laurent Berg\'e, Laurent Couraud, Le\"ila Haegel, Louis Bailly-Salins, Louis Dumoulin, Luke Chaplinsky, Martino Calvo, Maryvonne De Jesus, Maurice Chapellier, Mingyu Li, Mohammed Chala, Nicolas Martini, Nicole Dombrowski, Patrick M. Harrington, Paul Vittaz, Pierre de Marcillac, Ran Chen, Renaud Serra, Romain Faure, Romain Martin, Scott A. Hertel, Sergey Rozov, Sergey Vasilyev, Silvia Scorza, Stefanos Marnieros, Stephane Fuard, Steven Weber, Sylvain Ferriol, Tatiana Le Bellec, Temirlan Khussainov, Torsten Soldner, Valentina Novati, Wayne Woods, Wiliam D. Oliver, Wouter Van De Pontseele, Yegor Shevchik, Yong Jin, Ziqing Hong.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Schematic of the microwave SQUID multiplexer [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Photos of the multiplexer device. (a) Photo of the whole multiplexer chip. (b) Left: Zoom-in of one channel. (c) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Schematic of the homodyne measurement setup. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The |S21| trace of all resonances taken at Pexc = −104 dBm. The S21 values in this figure are of the entire RF chain. Using the circle fit algorithm detailed in [43], we ex￾tract the quality factors of the resonators. The resulting values of Qi , Qc, and Ql are summarized in table II. The internal quality factors Qi are above 7 × 104 for most channels, with the exception of channels 2 and 6. The coupling q… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The heatmap shows the resonator |S21| of channel 1 as a function of flux bias through the SQUID (Φext) measured with a VNA. The S21 is rotated with circle fit parameters to the canonical value given by equation (9). The black dots are the resonant frequencies extracted with the circle fit. The red line is the best fit of the multiplexer model in equation (13) to the black dots. The gray lines are the flux … view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The power dependence of the resonant frequency as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Resonant frequency at different external flux and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Open-loop and FRM noise spectra of channel 1 in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Transmission coefficient of the RF chain with and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Open-loop noise of channel 1 with and without [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Parametric gain of the JTWPA near the µMUX resonances at different probe tone powers. The parametric gain is defined as the ratio of the transmissions in JTWPA pump on and off configurations. Our JTWPA is not optimized to operate at the opti￾mal probe tone power of the present multiplexer device (≈ −76 dBm). Therefore, we must select a power that somewhat preserves the µMUX noise sensitivity while avoidin… view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: FRM noise of channel 1 with and without the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Variation of Qi with external flux bias on channel 5 measured at Pexc ≈ −104 dBm. The blue points are Qi values obtained from circle fits. The red line is best fit to equation (A5). loss through the flux bias line and dissipation originating from the Josephson junction itself. The first possible dissipation pathway is through the flux bias line. The wiring to room temperature con￾tributes approximately RF… view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Linearity check of channel 1 at its optimal probe [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_15.png] view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Spectrum of the output signal from the JTWPA [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_16.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We present the design, fabrication, and characterization of an aluminum-based six-channel microwave SQUID multiplexer ($\mu$MUX) prototype for transition-edge sensor (TES) readout in the RICOCHET experiment. The device consists of aluminum coplanar-waveguide resonators and RF SQUIDs with Dolan-style Al/AlO$_x$/Al Josephson junctions. By measuring the resonator scattering parameters at a range of probe tone frequencies, powers, and flux bias points, we demonstrate agreement between the device response and existing multiplexer models. We also characterize the noise performance in both open-loop and flux-ramping modes. With a high electron mobility transistor (HEMT) amplifier, open-loop measurements yield a flux sensitivity of 1-1.5 $\mu\Phi_0/\sqrt{Hz}$. With flux-ramp modulation, low-frequency 1/f noise is suppressed, and the flux sensitivity is around 3-4 $\mu\Phi_0/\sqrt{Hz}$, corresponding to a current sensitivity of 24-33 $pA/\sqrt{Hz}$ at the input coil. We further demonstrate a reduction in readout noise by incorporating a Josephson traveling-wave parametric amplifier (JTWPA) between the $\mu$MUX and the HEMT. This achieves an open-loop flux sensitivity of 0.3-0.6 $\mu\Phi_0/\sqrt{Hz}$ and an effective system noise temperature below 1 K. These results establish aluminum $\mu$MUX devices as a viable and extensible readout technology for low-noise cryogenic detector arrays.

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 / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents the design, fabrication, and experimental characterization of a six-channel aluminum-based microwave SQUID multiplexer (μMUX) prototype with coplanar-waveguide resonators and RF SQUIDs using Dolan-style Josephson junctions, intended for TES readout in the RICOCHET CEνNS experiment. Measurements of scattering parameters over ranges of probe frequencies, powers, and flux biases are reported to agree with existing multiplexer models. Noise performance is characterized in open-loop (1-1.5 μΦ₀/√Hz with HEMT) and flux-ramped modes (3-4 μΦ₀/√Hz, or 24-33 pA/√Hz at input coil), with further improvement to 0.3-0.6 μΦ₀/√Hz using a JTWPA, yielding system noise temperature below 1 K. The work concludes that these results establish aluminum μMUX devices as viable and extensible for low-noise cryogenic detector arrays.

Significance. If the reported sensitivities prove representative of RICOCHET conditions, the work supplies a concrete experimental benchmark for aluminum μMUX technology, including the first reported JTWPA integration for this application and direct model comparisons. This strengthens the case for scalable, low-noise readout in CEνNS and related cryogenic experiments. The provision of specific numerical sensitivities in multiple operating modes is a positive feature that enables direct comparison with other readout approaches.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The viability claim for RICOCHET rests on the measured sensitivities being representative, yet the text provides no explicit mapping or table comparing the tested probe frequencies, powers, and flux bias points to RICOCHET parameters such as resonator frequencies, expected TES signal amplitudes, or environmental conditions (temperature stability, magnetic field). Without this, the quantitative noise figures cannot be directly tied to the target operating regime.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract and characterization results: The flux sensitivities are stated as ranges (1-1.5, 3-4, 0.3-0.6 μΦ₀/√Hz) without accompanying error budgets, standard deviations from repeated measurements, or details on data exclusion criteria. This absence limits evaluation of whether the data fully support the quantitative agreement and viability assertions.
minor comments (2)
  1. The manuscript would benefit from a dedicated methods subsection or supplementary table listing the exact resonator frequencies, probe powers, and flux bias ranges used, to allow readers to assess coverage of the RICOCHET regime.
  2. Notation for flux sensitivity units is consistent, but the transition from open-loop to flux-ramped current sensitivity (pA/√Hz) would be clearer with an explicit statement of the input coil mutual inductance value used for conversion.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful review and constructive comments. We respond point-by-point to the major comments below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The viability claim for RICOCHET rests on the measured sensitivities being representative, yet the text provides no explicit mapping or table comparing the tested probe frequencies, powers, and flux bias points to RICOCHET parameters such as resonator frequencies, expected TES signal amplitudes, or environmental conditions (temperature stability, magnetic field). Without this, the quantitative noise figures cannot be directly tied to the target operating regime.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit mapping would strengthen the connection between the reported measurements and RICOCHET operating conditions. While the tested parameters were selected to be representative of the target cryogenic environment, the revised manuscript will include a new table (or expanded paragraph in the device design or results section) that directly compares probe frequencies, powers, and flux bias points to expected RICOCHET resonator frequencies, TES signal amplitudes, temperature stability, and magnetic field requirements. This addition will make the applicability of the noise figures explicit. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract and characterization results: The flux sensitivities are stated as ranges (1-1.5, 3-4, 0.3-0.6 μΦ₀/√Hz) without accompanying error budgets, standard deviations from repeated measurements, or details on data exclusion criteria. This absence limits evaluation of whether the data fully support the quantitative agreement and viability assertions.

    Authors: The reported ranges reflect observed variation across the six channels and multiple bias conditions. We acknowledge that including statistical details would improve transparency. In the revision we will add error estimates (standard deviations where repeated measurements exist), state the number of measurements performed, and describe any data exclusion criteria applied during noise analysis. These changes will be incorporated into the characterization results section. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in experimental characterization

full rationale

This paper is a direct experimental report of fabricated device measurements (scattering parameters, flux sensitivity, noise spectra) compared against pre-existing multiplexer models. No derivations, predictions, or parameter fits are claimed as novel outputs; the viability conclusion follows from the reported empirical values without any reduction to self-defined quantities or self-citation chains. The central claims rest on external benchmarks (HEMT/JTWPA performance, standard SQUID models) rather than internal redefinitions.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The viability claim rests on the domain assumption that standard multiplexer models apply without significant unmodeled effects in the aluminum implementation and that the laboratory measurements translate to the target experiment.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Existing multiplexer models accurately describe the scattering parameters and noise behavior of the aluminum μMUX device.
    The paper states agreement between measured response and these models across tested conditions.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 6279 in / 1150 out tokens · 67092 ms · 2026-06-30T14:05:16.751922+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

59 extracted references · 4 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    The coupling quality factorsQ c are approximately 1.4×10 4 across all channels, placing the device close to theQ i ≫Q c regime that is generally desirable. These Qi values are reduced relative to other resonators con- structed from high-quality superconductors, likely due to 7 the geometry near the termination and coupling to many potentially lossy compon...

    2024

  2. [2]

    Armengaudet al., Journal of Cosmology and As- troparticle Physics2016, 019 (2016)

    E. Armengaudet al., Journal of Cosmology and As- troparticle Physics2016, 019 (2016)

    2016

  3. [3]

    Agneseet al., Physical Review Letters121, 051301 (2018)

    R. Agneseet al., Physical Review Letters121, 051301 (2018)

    2018

  4. [4]

    Angloheret al., Physical Review D107, 122003 (2023)

    G. Angloheret al., Physical Review D107, 122003 (2023)

    2023

  5. [5]

    Alloniet al., Physical Review D111, 103050 (2025)

    D. Alloniet al., Physical Review D111, 103050 (2025)

    2025

  6. [6]

    Angloheret al., The European Physical Journal C79, 1018 (2019)

    G. Angloheret al., The European Physical Journal C79, 1018 (2019)

    2019

  7. [7]

    Augieret al., Journal of Low Temperature Physics 212, 127 (2023)

    C. Augieret al., Journal of Low Temperature Physics 212, 127 (2023)

    2023

  8. [8]

    LEGEND Collaboration, Legend-1000 preconceptual de- sign report (2021), arXiv:2107.11462 [physics.ins-det]

    work page arXiv 2021

  9. [9]

    The CUORE Collaboration, Nature604, 53 (2022)

    2022

  10. [10]

    Agrawalet al., The European Physical Journal C85, 172 (2025)

    A. Agrawalet al., The European Physical Journal C85, 172 (2025)

    2025

  11. [11]

    CUPID Collaboration, The European Physical Journal C85, 737 (2025)

    2025

  12. [12]

    Gastaldoet al., Journal of Low Temperature Physics 176, 876 (2014)

    L. Gastaldoet al., Journal of Low Temperature Physics 176, 876 (2014)

    2014

  13. [13]

    Faverzaniet al., Journal of Low Temperature Physics 184, 922 (2016)

    M. Faverzaniet al., Journal of Low Temperature Physics 184, 922 (2016)

    2016

  14. [14]

    McCammon, inCryogenic Particle Detection, Vol

    D. McCammon, inCryogenic Particle Detection, Vol. 99, edited by C. E. Ascheron, H. J. K¨ olsch, W. Skolaut, and C. Enss (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg,

  15. [15]

    K. D. Irwin, Applied Physics Letters66, 1998 (1995)

    1998

  16. [16]

    Irwin and G

    K. Irwin and G. Hilton, inCryogenic Particle Detection, Vol. 99, edited by C. E. Ascheron, H. J. K¨ olsch, W. Sko- laut, and C. Enss (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2005) pp. 63–150, series Title: Topics in Ap- plied Physics

    2005

  17. [17]

    C. Enss, A. Fleischmann, K. Horst, J. Sch¨ onefeld, J. Soll- ner, J. S. Adams, Y. H. Huang, Y. H. Kim, and G. M. Seidel, Journal of Low Temperature Physics121, 137 (2000)

    2000

  18. [18]

    Kempf, A

    S. Kempf, A. Fleischmann, L. Gastaldo, and C. Enss, Journal of Low Temperature Physics193, 365 (2018)

    2018

  19. [19]

    Haller, Infrared Physics & Technology35, 127 (1994)

    E. Haller, Infrared Physics & Technology35, 127 (1994)

    1994

  20. [20]

    P. K. Day, H. G. LeDuc, B. A. Mazin, A. Vayonakis, and J. Zmuidzinas, Nature425, 817 (2003)

    2003

  21. [21]

    Zmuidzinas, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics3, 169 (2012)

    J. Zmuidzinas, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics3, 169 (2012)

    2012

  22. [22]

    Catelani and J

    G. Catelani and J. P. Pekola, Materials for Quantum Technology2, 013001 (2022)

    2022

  23. [23]

    Armatolet al., Physical Review D112, 112019 (2025)

    A. Armatolet al., Physical Review D112, 112019 (2025)

    2025

  24. [24]

    Augieret al., Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrome- ters, Detectors and Associated Equipment1057, 168765 (2023)

    C. Augieret al., Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrome- ters, Detectors and Associated Equipment1057, 168765 (2023)

    2023

  25. [25]

    D. A. Bennett, J. A. B. Mates, J. D. Gard, A. S. Hoover, M. W. Rabin, C. D. Reintsema, D. R. Schmidt, L. R. Vale, and J. N. Ullom, IEEE Transactions on Applied Superconductivity25, 1 (2015)

    2015

  26. [26]

    J. A. B. Mateset al., Applied Physics Letters111, 062601 (2017)

    2017

  27. [27]

    Beckeret al., Journal of Instrumentation14, P10035 (2019)

    D. Beckeret al., Journal of Instrumentation14, P10035 (2019)

    2019

  28. [28]

    Szyprytet al., IEEE Transactions on Applied Super- conductivity33, 1 (2023)

    P. Szyprytet al., IEEE Transactions on Applied Super- conductivity33, 1 (2023)

    2023

  29. [29]

    T. P. Satterthwaiteet al., inMillimeter, Submillimeter, and Far-Infrared Detectors and Instrumentation for As- tronomy XII, Vol. 13102, edited by J. Zmuidzinas and J.-R. Gao, International Society for Optics and Photon- ics (SPIE, 2024) p. 1310223

    2024

  30. [30]

    Kempf, M

    S. Kempf, M. Wegner, L. Deeg, A. Fleischmann, L. Gastaldo, F. Herrmann, D. Richter, and C. Enss, Su- perconductor Science and Technology30, 065002 (2017)

    2017

  31. [31]

    Neidig, T

    M. Neidig, T. Muscheid, R. Gartmann, L. E. A. Perez, M. Wegner, O. Sander, and S. Kempf, Full-scale mi- crowave squid multiplexer readout system for magnetic microcalorimeters (2025), arXiv:2509.07671 [physics.ins- det]

    work page arXiv 2025

  32. [32]

    Mates,The Microwave SQUID Multiplexer, Ph.D

    J. Mates,The Microwave SQUID Multiplexer, Ph.D. the- sis, University of Colorado (2011)

    2011

  33. [33]

    Nakashima, F

    Y. Nakashima, F. Hirayama, S. Kohjiro, H. Yamamori, S. Nagasawa, N. Y. Yamasaki, and K. Mitsuda, IEICE Electronics Express14, 20170271 (2017)

    2017

  34. [34]

    Songet al., Design, fabrication and characteriza- tion of microwave multiplexing squid prototype (2026), arXiv:2603.29613 [physics.ins-det]

    M. Songet al., Design, fabrication and characteriza- tion of microwave multiplexing squid prototype (2026), arXiv:2603.29613 [physics.ins-det]

    work page arXiv 2026

  35. [35]

    Melvilleet al., Applied Physics Letters117, 124004 (2020)

    A. Melvilleet al., Applied Physics Letters117, 124004 (2020)

    2020

  36. [36]

    M. A. Gingraset al., Improving transmon qubit per- formance with fluorine-based surface treatments (2025), arXiv:2507.08089 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  37. [37]

    Steer,Microwave and RF Design: Volume 2: Trans- mission Lines(North Carolina State University Li- braries, Raleigh, North Carolina, 2019)

    M. Steer,Microwave and RF Design: Volume 2: Trans- mission Lines(North Carolina State University Li- braries, Raleigh, North Carolina, 2019)

    2019

  38. [38]

    Wegner, C

    M. Wegner, C. Enss, and S. Kempf, Superconductor Sci- ence and Technology35, 075011 (2022)

    2022

  39. [39]

    J. A. B. Mates, K. D. Irwin, L. R. Vale, G. C. Hilton, J. Gao, and K. W. Lehnert, Journal of Low Temperature Physics167, 707 (2012)

    2012

  40. [40]

    Yuet al., Journal of Low Temperature Physics209, 589 (2022)

    C. Yuet al., Journal of Low Temperature Physics209, 589 (2022)

    2022

  41. [41]

    Schuster, M

    C. Schuster, M. Wegner, and S. Kempf, Journal of Ap- plied Physics133, 044503 (2023)

    2023

  42. [42]

    M. E. Garc´ ıa Redondoet al., Journal of Applied Physics 136, 114401 (2024)

    2024

  43. [43]

    COMSOL Multiphysics ®, COMSOL AB, Stockholm, Sweden

  44. [44]

    Probst, F

    S. Probst, F. B. Song, P. A. Bushev, A. V. Ustinov, and M. Weides, Review of Scientific Instruments86, 024706 17 (2015)

    2015

  45. [45]

    Ambegaokar and A

    V. Ambegaokar and A. Baratoff, Physical Review Letters 10, 486 (1963)

    1963

  46. [46]

    J. Gao, J. Zmuidzinas, B. A. Mazin, H. G. LeDuc, and P. K. Day, Applied Physics Letters90, 102507 (2007)

    2007

  47. [47]

    Kumar, J

    S. Kumar, J. Gao, J. Zmuidzinas, B. A. Mazin, H. G. LeDuc, and P. K. Day, Applied Physics Letters92, 123503 (2008)

    2008

  48. [48]

    F. C. Wellstood, C. Urbina, and J. Clarke, Applied Physics Letters50, 772 (1987)

    1987

  49. [49]

    D. A. Roweret al., Physical Review Letters130, 220602 (2023)

    2023

  50. [50]

    Malnou, J

    M. Malnou, J. A. B. Mates, M. R. Vissers, L. R. Vale, D. R. Schmidt, D. A. Bennett, J. Gao, and J. N. Ullom, Applied Physics Letters122, 214001 (2023)

    2023

  51. [51]

    Chen,Design, Fabrication and Optimization of a Novel TES-Based Detector for CEνNS Process, Ph.D

    R. Chen,Design, Fabrication and Optimization of a Novel TES-Based Detector for CEνNS Process, Ph.D. thesis, Northwestern University (2025)

    2025

  52. [52]

    Macklin, K

    C. Macklin, K. O’Brien, D. Hover, M. E. Schwartz, V. Bolkhovsky, X. Zhang, W. D. Oliver, and I. Siddiqi, Science350, 307 (2015)

    2015

  53. [53]

    J. A. B. Mates, D. T. Becker, D. A. Bennett, B. J. Dober, J. D. Gard, G. C. Hilton, D. S. Swetz, L. R. Vale, and J. N. Ullom, Applied Physics Letters115, 202601 (2019)

    2019

  54. [54]

    Bartramet al., Review of Scientific Instruments94, 044703 (2023)

    C. Bartramet al., Review of Scientific Instruments94, 044703 (2023)

    2023

  55. [55]

    Malnou, M

    M. Malnou, M. Vissers, J. Wheeler, J. Aumentado, J. Hubmayr, J. Ullom, and J. Gao, PRX Quantum2, 010302 (2021)

    2021

  56. [56]

    Faramarzi, R

    F. Faramarzi, R. Stephenson, S. Sypkens, B. H. Eom, H. LeDuc, and P. Day, APL Quantum1, 036107 (2024)

    2024

  57. [57]

    Yuet al., Review of Scientific Instruments94, 014712 (2023)

    C. Yuet al., Review of Scientific Instruments94, 014712 (2023)

    2023

  58. [58]

    J. C. Grohet al., Applied Physics Letters127, 152602 (2025)

    2025

  59. [59]

    Analog Devices, IP3 and Intermodulation Guide (2013)

    2013