Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 48 references

Non-equilibrium Dynamics of Two-level Systems directly after Cryogenic Alternating Bias

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-04 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A strong alternating electric field applied at millikelvin temperatures makes two-level systems in amorphous alumina jump between frequencies on a timescale of minutes, and reheating above 10 K restores their original stable spectra.

desk verdict A credible new observation of transient TLS jitter after cryogenic alternating bias, but the density claim is circular and a missing DC-only control leaves the artifact question open. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.19223 v2 pith:AAVBTHMK submitted 2025-09-23 quant-ph cond-mat.mes-hallcond-mat.supr-con

V. Iaia , E. S. Joseph , S. Im , N. Hagopian , S. O'Kelley , C. Kim , N. Materise , S. Patra
show 5 more authors
V. Lordi M. A. Eriksson P. M. Voyles K. G. Ray Y. J. Rosen
This is my paper
classification quant-phcond-mat.mes-hallcond-mat.supr-con
keywords two-levelsystemsamorphousaluminacryogenicalternatingbiasavoidedcrossingsTLSspectraldiffusionlosstangentthermalcyclingstrongcoupling
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

Two-level systems (TLSs)—tunneling defects that riddle amorphous oxides and drain energy from superconducting qubits—are usually assumed to sit in fixed configurations described by the standard tunneling model. This paper claims that a cryogenic alternating bias treatment (30 hours of ±10 V pulses creating ±100 MV/m in the oxide) drives those defects out of equilibrium: the steady-state avoided-crossing hyperbolas vanish from the resonator spectrum and are replaced by sharp avoided crossings whose frequencies jitter on minute timescales, an upper bound set by the six-minute scan. The effect is reversible: warming the sample above 10 K and cooling back restores the original hyperbolas. At the same time the low-power loss tangent stays essentially unchanged, meaning the average defect ensemble that causes loss is untouched even though the spectroscopically visible defects are scrambled. If correct, this is direct evidence that a large cryogenic alternating field injects non-equilibrium energy (proposed to come from strain-relaxation phonon bursts) that destabilizes TLS frequencies without adding loss.

What carries the argument

The experimental platform is a lumped-element LC resonator whose bias-bridge capacitors concentrate the rf field in a 5.6 µm³ amorphous alumina volume, producing strong coupling (g/2π ≈ 1.3 MHz) between individual TLSs and the oscillator. TLS energies are tuned by a DC bias through the standard tunneling-model relation ε = (Δ0² + (Δ − 2p·E_g)²)^1/2, which maps each TLS to a hyperbola in transmission versus voltage. The central observation is the disappearance of these hyperbolas after CABS and the appearance of transient avoided crossings; the six-minute scan time acts as an upper bound on the TLS frequency jitter. Thermal cycling above 10 K is the reversible switch that restores the steady-

What would settle it

Fix the bias voltage after CABS and repeatedly measure the resonator transmission at that fixed point. If the sharp features disappear or become static when the voltage is not being swept, they are likely artifacts of the sweep or of charge rearrangements induced by the bias line rather than evidence of fluctuating TLS frequencies; if the features persist and change at a fixed bias, the transient-avoided-crossing interpretation is supported. Likewise, shortening the scan to well under a minute should reveal whether the apparent jitter is actually a telegraphic switch of the TLS energy between

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that after Cryogenic Alternating Bias Stimulation (CABS), strongly coupled TLSs in a 49 nm amorphous Al2O3 parallel-plate capacitor no longer obey the standard tunneling-model expectation of stable hyperbolic avoided crossings in a transmission-versus-bias scan. Instead the post-CABS spectrum shows randomly distributed, sharp avoided crossings with coupling ~1 MHz that last less than five minutes, so each six-minute scan catches a different configuration. The authors count 122 such crossings over 500 bias points and estimate the TLS density at ~95 TLS/(µm3·GHz), statistically indistinguishable from the pre-CABS density. Thermal cycling to 10 K or room temperature

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the sharp, time-varying features seen after CABS are genuine avoided crossings of the resonator with two-level systems whose frequencies are shifting, rather than artifacts of the voltage sweep, drifting baselines, or electric-field noise from trapped charges created by the ±100 MV/m pulses.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Post-CABS TLS spectra cannot be described by the static standard tunneling model; any complete model must include TLS frequency dynamics on minute timescales.
  • CABS does not degrade the resonator: the intrinsic low-power loss tangent remains ~1.9×10−3, so alternating-bias treatment can disrupt TLS configurations without adding loss.
  • A single thermal cycle above 10 K fully restores frequency-stable TLS spectra, so the CABS-induced state is reversible rather than a permanent structural change.
  • The density of strongly coupled TLSs is approximately the same before and after CABS (~95 vs 75–93 TLS/(µm³·GHz)), meaning the effect is a redistribution of TLS frequencies rather than creation or annihilation of defects.
  • The estimated TLS density from counting transient avoided crossings matches the control within a factor of 1.3, supporting the interpretation that the same ensemble is present but moving.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Inference: the sharp distinction—loss tangent unchanged while visible TLSs scramble—suggests CABS acts only on strongly coupled, spectroscopically visible TLSs or on their local elastic environments, not on the broad ensemble that dominates low-power loss. This could be tested by measuring qubit T1 and frequency noise on a CABS-treated junction.
  • Inference: tracking a single post-CABS avoided crossing with a faster, repeated probe (scan time of seconds rather than six minutes) would convert the upper bound into an actual spectral-diffusion rate and show whether the frequency motion is continuous drift or telegraphic switching between discrete configurations.
  • Inference: the 10 K reset threshold is a natural place to look for the energy scale of the mechanism; repeating the CABS exposure at different base temperatures or measuring the time needed for hyperbolas to reappear after warming could map the barrier distribution that holds the non-equilibrium state.
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

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper reports experiments on a strongly coupled LC resonator with an amorphous Al2O3 parallel-plate capacitor, used to spectroscopically probe TLSs via avoided crossings as a function of DC bias. After an in-situ cryogenic alternating bias stimulation (CABS) protocol of ±10 V pulses at base temperature, the authors observe that the steady-state hyperbolic avoided crossings present in the control are replaced by sharp, transient features that do not persist from one six-minute scan to the next. Thermal cycling above 10 K restores the original spectral signatures, and the low-power loss tangent is reported as essentially unchanged across all treatments. The paper interprets the post-CABS features as avoided crossings of TLSs whose frequencies jitter on minute timescales, and estimates the post-CABS TLS density to be approximately 95 TLS/(µm³GHz) under the assumption of the control dipole-moment distribution. A speculative mechanism involving non-equilibrium strain energy and phonon bursts is proposed.

Significance. If the central interpretation holds, the observation that a cryogenic alternating bias reversibly destabilizes strongly coupled TLSs, while leaving the low-power loss tangent unchanged, would be an interesting contribution to the TLS dynamics literature and relevant to efforts to control TLS noise in superconducting devices. The experimental platform is well suited to this study: the small capacitor volume gives strong coupling, measurements are performed at single-photon powers, and the comparison across treatment stages including thermal cycling is a sensible protocol. The displayed control spectra and the loss-tangent saturation curves are valuable data. However, the main new claim rests on a feature identification that is not fully supported, and the post-CABS density estimate is partly circular. The paper would benefit from additional control measurements and a more cautious treatment of the transient-feature interpretation.

major comments (4)
  1. [§III.B, Table I, Discussion] The post-CABS features are identified as TLS avoided crossings solely from linecuts showing a ~1 MHz dip/peak structure. No full hyperbolas are observed and the authors state that electric dipole moments could not be fit. The preprocessing described in SM III — subtracting bias-averaged and frequency-averaged backgrounds — can produce an apparent doublet-like feature from a sudden shift of the resonator frequency, which could be caused by trapped charge or telegraphic charge switching following the ±100 MV/m pulses. The claim that these are TLS avoided crossings needs a more direct test: e.g., demonstrating the two-branch anti-crossing signature, monitoring a single feature continuously with fast repeated scans, or showing that the feature shape and position vary with bias in the way Eq. (1) predicts. A DC-only bias control or a control with unipolar pulses is also needed to isolate the
  2. [§III.B, Table I, Discussion] The post-CABS density of 95 TLS/(µm³GHz) is derived by counting transient avoided crossings and assuming (i) each counted feature corresponds to one TLS and (ii) the dipole-moment distribution is the same as in the control. Since no hyperbolas were available to extract dipole moments, this assumption is not independently verified, and it is then used in the Discussion to conclude that 'the overall TLS distribution likely remains unchanged.' This is circular for the density/conservation claim. The number also carries no error bars or statistical treatment of the counting of 122 events in 500 bias points. Please provide a confidence interval, propagate the uncertainty from the assumed dipole distribution, and discuss how the result changes if a fraction of the events are not independent TLS crossings.
  3. [§IV, Fig. 6] The loss-tangent argument is presented as evidence that the TLS population is unchanged, but the authors themselves compute in §IV that the strongly coupled TLSs visible in the control contribute tanδ0_TLS ≈ 0.12×10⁻³, an order of magnitude below the fitted low-power loss tangent of (1.88±0.07)×10⁻³. Therefore the unchanged loss tangent is largely insensitive to the strongly coupled TLSs whose dynamics are the subject of the paper. The text should explicitly acknowledge this limited sensitivity, rather than implying that the loss-tangent comparison strongly constrains the interpretation of the post-CABS features.
  4. [Abstract, §III.B, §IV] The statement that TLS frequencies 'fluctuate on the order of minutes' is stronger than the data support. The experiment establishes only that the sharp features do not persist from one six-minute scan to the next, giving an upper bound on the feature lifetime of about six minutes. No continuous tracking of an individual feature was performed, so the actual fluctuation timescale is not measured. Please rephrase to say that features are transient on timescales below the scan time, and discuss what additional time-resolved measurements would be needed to extract a fluctuation timescale.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§III.A, Fig. 3 caption] The statement 'We don’t present any data on electric dipole moments directly after CABS because there were no TLS-induced hyperbolas found in this scan' is important and should appear in the main text, not only in the figure caption.
  2. [§III.B] The ratio of avoided crossings to bias points is reported as 0.24 post-CABS versus 0.19 pre-CABS, and the density is then stated to be 'similar' and 'within a factor of 1.3.' Given the small number of events and the absence of error bars, a statistical test (e.g., a Poisson confidence interval or a chi-square comparison) is needed before concluding the densities are consistent.
  3. [§IV] The proposed phonon-burst/strain mechanism is explicitly speculative and is labeled as such, which is appropriate. However, the connection to the observed spectral changes would be clearer if the authors indicated which specific observable would distinguish the phonon-burst scenario from charge-induced frequency shifts.
  4. [§II.B] The device was measured in two different cryostats ('control' and 'control-aged'). The possibility that the difference between the control and the aged condition includes a cryostat or wiring contribution is mentioned but not discussed quantitatively. A sentence on reproducibility of the resonator frequency and loss in a test device would help.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

Secondary TLS-density claim is circular (assumes control dipole-moment distribution to conclude the distribution is unchanged); the central transient-avoided-crossing observation is empirical and independent.

  1. self definitional [Section III.B (Alternating Bias Treatments), paragraph beginning 'Although the TLS landscape is significantly altered...'; echoed in Section IV, Discussion, paragraph beginning 'After CABS, the calcul]
    "Assuming the same dipole moment distribution as the control sample, the TLS density of the CABS sample would be 95 TLS/(µm3GHz), similar to the control sample (Eq. A14, Ref. [29]). ... If each avoided-level crossing corresponds to a distinct TLS, the estimated density is approximately 95 TLS/(µm3GHz). These results indicate that, although hyperbolic features are absent from the TLS spectrum after CABS, the overall TLS distribution likely remains unchanged."

    The post-CABS TLS density (95 TLS/µm^3/GHz) is not measured from hyperbola fits—the paper states no hyperbolas and no electric dipole moments could be fitted after CABS. Instead, the density is computed by counting 122 transient features in 500 bias points and converting that count using the control sample's dipole-moment distribution and counting model. The conclusion that 'the overall TLS distribution likely remains unchanged' then cites this estimate as evidence. But the estimate already assumes the conclusion: the control p_z distribution is used as the conversion factor, and the 'each avoided-level crossing corresponds to a distinct TLS' assumption mirrors the control counting statistics. The independent element is the ratio comparison (0.24 vs 0.19 TLS per spectrum), so the density c

full rationale

The paper's central empirical content—that after CABS the steady-state avoided-crossing hyperbolas disappear and are replaced by transient, ~1 MHz-wide avoided-crossing-like features that fluctuate on minute timescales, with reversibility upon cycling above 10 K and unchanged low-power loss tangent—is self-contained and does not reduce to its inputs. The interpretation of the sharp features as TLS avoided crossings could be challenged by alternative explanations (e.g., trapped-charge resonator shifts), but that is a correctness/underdetermination concern, not a circularity. The only genuine circular step is in the secondary density claim: Section III.B assumes the control dipole-moment distribution to convert transient-feature counts into a TLS density, and then uses that estimate to conclude that the overall TLS distribution likely remains unchanged. The assumption is the conclusion for the dipole-moment part. However, the count-ratio comparison is independent, and the central transient claim retains independent content, so the circularity is partial and confined to the density corollary. There is also a minor self-citation (Ref. [39]) used only as corroboration for T1, which is not load-bearing. Score 4 reflects partial circularity in a secondary claim while the main observation stands on its own.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The standard tunneling model, the ML fitting choices, and the counting assumptions are carried over from prior literature or introduced ad hoc. The post-CABS density estimate is the main item that rests on an assumption nearly equivalent to its conclusion. No new physical entities are required beyond the hypothesized non-equilibrium strain energy.

free parameters (5)
  • tanδ0_TLS (low-power TLS loss tangent) = 1.89e-3 (control), 2.00e-3 (CABS), 2.00e-3 (10K), 1.64e-3 (353K)
    Fitted from power-saturation curves with Eq. 2 for each treatment; used to claim loss invariance.
  • nc (critical photon number) = 22e-3 (CABS), 23e-3 (10K), 17e-3 (353K)
    Fitted from the same curves; used to estimate TLS relaxation time T1.
  • TLS electric dipole moments pz (per hyperbola) = control mean 0.49 eÅ, control-aged 0.31, 10K 0.24, 300K 0.45, 353K 0.38
    Fitted to hyperbola shapes via Eq. 1; used for density and coupling calculations.
  • TLS density P0 (control, aged, 10K, 300K, 353K) = 75±10, 93±24, 92±37, 71±19, 106±27 TLS/µm3GHz
    Extracted from dipole-moment histograms using the method of Ref. [29].
  • Post-CABS TLS density (inferred) = 95 TLS/µm3GHz
    Not measured; computed from 122 transient avoided crossings in 500 bias points assuming control dipole distribution and distinct TLSs.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Standard tunneling model (Eq. 1) correctly describes TLS-oscillator coupling with parameters p, Δ0, Δ.
    Used to fit hyperbolas and extract dipole moments (Section III.A).
  • ad hoc to paper Each transient avoided crossing after CABS corresponds to a distinct TLS.
    Needed to convert 122 crossings in 500 bias points into a TLS density (Section III.B).
  • ad hoc to paper TLS density can be estimated by counting avoided crossings per bias point with Eq. A14 of Ref. [29] assuming the same dipole-moment distribution as control.
    The post-CABS density calculation in Section III.B.
  • domain assumption Low-power loss tangent is dominated by TLSs and is a proxy for total TLS density.
    Used to argue unchanged loss implies unchanged TLS population (Section III.D).
  • ad hoc to paper The observed frequency jitter is due to TLS frequency shifts rather than measurement artifacts or charge noise.
    Central interpretation of Fig. 4 (Section IV).
invented entities (1)
  • Non-equilibrium strain energy buildup / phonon bursts in the oxide film
    purpose: Proposed explanation for the scrambling of TLS frequencies after CABS
    No direct measurement of strain, stress relaxation, or phonon emission is reported; the mechanism is inferred from the transient avoided-crossing phenomenology (Section IV).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Non-equilibrium Dynamics of Two-level Systems directly after Cryogenic Alternating Bias." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/AAVBTHMK

@misc{pith2026250919223,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Non-equilibrium Dynamics of Two-level Systems directly after Cryogenic Alternating Bias},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/AAVBTHMK}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.19223}
}
read the original abstract

Two-level systems (TLSs) are tunneling states commonly found in amorphous materials that electrically couple to qubits, resonators, and vibrational modes in materials, leading to energy loss in those systems. Recent studies suggest that applying a large alternating electric field changes the oxide structure, potentially improving the performance of qubits and resonators. In this study, we probe the effect of alternating bias at cryogenic temperatures on TLS dynamics within amorphous oxide parallel-plate capacitors operating in the strongly coupled regime. We bias the TLSs in the capacitors using an electric field. This allows us to spectroscopically image TLSs and extract their densities and dipole moments. When an in-situ alternating bias is applied, the steady-state spectra from the standard TLS model disappear. Post-alternating bias TLS spectroscopy reveals transient behavior, in which the TLS frequency fluctuates on the order of minutes. Thermal cycling above 10 K reverses these effects, restoring the TLS spectrum to its original state, indicating a reversible mechanism. Importantly, the intrinsic loss tangent of the LC oscillator remains unchanged before and after the application of the alternating bias. We propose that the disappearance of the steady-state spectrum are caused by non-equilibrium energy build up from strain in the oxide film introduced by the pulsed voltage bias sequence. Understanding this non-equilibrium energy could inform future models of time-dependent TLS dynamics.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.19223 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. (a) False-colored optical microscope image of the LC [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. (b) is a measurement of the oscillator spec￾trum as the TLS energy is tuned via the applied voltage bias Vg. Each TLS spectrum required approximately 50 hours to complete, with measurements performed with an intermediate frequency bandwidth of 1 Hz to ensure suf￾ficient averaging of avoided-level crossings. These mea￾surements, conducted prior to any treatment steps and in the second dilution refrigerator (see Secti… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Extracted dipole moments for TLS spectra collected [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. (a) The transmission (S [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Measured transmission spectrum (S [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

48 extracted references · 4 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    The device was fabricated on high-resistivity silicon using three lithographic steps. The bias bridge capaci- tor structure is a trilayer consisting of a 22 nm TiN film, a 49 nm amorphous aluminum oxide (α-Al 2O3), and a ∼110 nm Al capping layer [see cross-section image in Fig. 1(d)]. The TiN layer were deposited using plasma- enhanced atomic layer deposi...

  2. [2]

    M¨ uller, J

    C. M¨ uller, J. H. Cole, and J. Lisenfeld, Reports on Progress in Physics82, 124501 (2019)

    2019

  3. [3]

    Anomalies

    C. C. Yu and H. M. Carruzzo, inLow-Temperature Thermal and Vibrational Properties of Disordered Solids: A Half-Century of Universal “Anomalies” of Glasses (World Scientific, 2023), pp. 113–139

    2023

  4. [4]

    J. M. Martinis, K. B. Cooper, R. McDermott, M. Steffen, M. Ansmann, K. Osborn, K. Cicak, S. Oh, D. P. Pappas, R. W. Simmonds, et al., Physical Review Letters95, 210503 (2005)

    2005

  5. [5]

    Klimov, J

    P. Klimov, J. Kelly, Z. Chen, M. Neeley, A. Megrant, B. Burkett, R. Barends, K. Arya, B. Chiaro, Y. Chen, et al., Physical Review Letters121, 090502 (2018)

    2018

  6. [6]

    Schl¨ or, J

    S. Schl¨ or, J. Lisenfeld, C. M¨ uller, A. Bilmes, A. Schnei- der, D. P. Pappas, A. V. Ustinov, and M. Weides, Phys- ical review letters123, 190502 (2019)

    2019

  7. [7]

    M¨ uller, J

    C. M¨ uller, J. Lisenfeld, A. Shnirman, and S. Poletto, Physical Review B92, 035442 (2015)

    2015

  8. [8]

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

    2007

Show all 48 references
  1. [9]

    Gao, Ph.D

    J. Gao, Ph.D. thesis (2008)

    2008

  2. [10]

    B. A. Mazin, inAIP Conference Proceedings(American Institute of Physics, 2009), vol. 1185, pp. 135–142

    2009

  3. [11]

    Noroozian, J

    O. Noroozian, J. Gao, J. Zmuidzinas, H. G. LeDuc, and B. A. Mazin,1185, 148 (2009)

    2009

  4. [12]

    E. J. Connors, J. Nelson, H. Qiao, L. F. Edge, and J. M. Nichol, Physical Review B100, 165305 (2019)

    2019

  5. [13]

    T. C. DuBois, S. P. Russo, and J. H. Cole, New Journal of Physics17, 023017 (2015)

    2015

  6. [14]

    T. C. DuBois, M. C. Per, S. P. Russo, and J. H. Cole, Physical Review Letters110, 077002 (2013)

    2013

  7. [15]

    A. M. Holder, K. D. Osborn, C. Lobb, and C. B. Mus- grave, Physical Review Letters111, 065901 (2013)

    2013

  8. [16]

    Gordon, H

    L. Gordon, H. Abu-Farsakh, A. Janotti, and C. G. Van de Walle, Scientific Reports4, 7590 (2014)

    2014

  9. [17]

    Faoro and L

    L. Faoro and L. B. Ioffe, Physical review letters109, 157005 (2012)

    2012

  10. [18]

    W. D. Oliver and P. B. Welander, MRS bulletin38, 816 (2013)

    2013

  11. [19]

    Barends, J

    R. Barends, J. Kelly, A. Megrant, D. Sank, E. Jeffrey, Y. Chen, Y. Yin, B. Chiaro, J. Mutus, C. Neill, et al., Physical review letters111, 080502 (2013)

    2013

  12. [20]

    C. Deng, M. Otto, and A. Lupascu, Journal of Applied Physics114(2013)

    2013

  13. [21]

    A. L. Burin, M. S. Khalil, and K. D. Osborn, Physical Review Letters110, 157002 (2013)

    2013

  14. [22]

    Matityahu, J

    S. Matityahu, J. Lisenfeld, A. Bilmes, A. Shnirman, G. Weiss, A. V. Ustinov, and M. Schechter, Physical Re- view B95, 241409 (2017)

    2017

  15. [23]

    A. Dane, K. Balakrishnan, B. Wacaser, L.-W. Hung, H. Mamin, D. Rugar, R. M. Shelby, C. Murray, K. Rod- bell, and J. Sleight, arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.12514 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Chen, K.-H

    L. Chen, K.-H. Lee, C.-H. Liu, B. Marinelli, R. K. Naik, Z. Kang, N. Goss, H. Kim, D. I. Santiago, and I. Siddiqi, arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.04702 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  17. [25]

    D. P. Pappas, M. Field, C. J. Kopas, J. A. Howard, X. Wang, E. Lachman, J. Oh, L. Zhou, A. Gold, G. M. Stiehl, et al., Communications Materials5, 150 (2024)

    2024

  18. [26]

    X. Wang, J. Howard, E. A. Sete, G. Stiehl, C. Kopas, S. Poletto, X. Wu, M. Field, N. Sharac, C. Eckberg, et al., arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.06425 (2024). 9

    2024 arXiv

  19. [27]

    O. W. Kennedy, J. H. Cole, and C. D. Shelly, arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.18304 (2025)

    2025

  20. [28]

    Sarabi, A

    B. Sarabi, A. N. Ramanayaka, A. L. Burin, F. C. Well- stood, and K. D. Osborn, Applied Physics Letters106 (2015)

    2015

  21. [29]

    Sarabi, A

    B. Sarabi, A. N. Ramanayaka, A. L. Burin, F. C. Well- stood, and K. D. Osborn, Physical review letters116, 167002 (2016)

    2016

  22. [30]

    C.-C. Hung, L. Yu, N. Foroozani, S. Fritz, D. Gerthsen, and K. D. Osborn, Physical Review Applied17, 034025 (2022)

    2022

  23. [31]

    P. W. Anderson, B. I. Halperin, and C. M. Varma, Philo- sophical Magazine25, 1 (1972)

    1972

  24. [32]

    W. A. Phillips, Journal of low temperature physics7, 351 (1972)

    1972

  25. [33]

    Khalil, S

    M. Khalil, S. Gladchenko, M. Stoutimore, F. Wellstood, A. Burin, and K. Osborn, Physical Review B90, 100201 (2014)

    2014

  26. [34]

    Kristen, J

    M. Kristen, J. Voss, M. Wildermuth, A. Bilmes, J. Lisen- feld, H. Rotzinger, and A. Ustinov, Physical Review Let- ters132, 217002 (2024)

    2024

  27. [36]

    Sarabi, Ph.D

    B. Sarabi, Ph.D. thesis, University of Maryland, College Park (2014)

    2014

  28. [37]

    W. A. Phillips, Reports on Progress in Physics50, 1657 (1987)

    1987

  29. [38]

    Lisenfeld, A

    J. Lisenfeld, A. Bilmes, S. Matityahu, S. Zanker, M. Marthaler, M. Schechter, G. Sch¨ on, A. Shnirman, G. Weiss, and A. V. Ustinov, Scientific reports6, 23786 (2016)

    2016

  30. [39]

    Lisenfeld, C

    J. Lisenfeld, C. M¨ uller, J. H. Cole, P. Bushev, A. Lukashenko, A. Shnirman, and A. V. Ustinov, Physi- cal Review Letters105, 230504 (2010)

    2010

  31. [40]

    Y. Cho, D. Jasrasaria, K. G. Ray, D. M. Tennant, V. Lordi, J. L. DuBois, and Y. J. Rosen, Quantum Sci- ence and Technology8, 045023 (2023)

    2023

  32. [41]

    De Graaf, S

    S. De Graaf, S. Mahashabde, S. Kubatkin, A. Y. Tza- lenchuk, and A. Danilov, Physical Review B103, 174103 (2021)

    2021

  33. [42]

    S. Rau, C. Enss, S. Hunklinger, P. Neu, and A. W¨ urger, Physical Review B52, 7179 (1995)

    1995

  34. [43]

    Colao Zanuz, Q

    D. Colao Zanuz, Q. Ficheux, L. Michaud, A. Orekhov, K. Hanke, A. Flasby, M. Bahrami Panah, G. J. Norris, M. Kerschbaum, A. Remm, et al., Physical Review Ap- plied23, 044054 (2025)

    2025

  35. [44]

    S. M. Meißner, A. Seiler, J. Lisenfeld, A. V. Ustinov, and G. Weiss, Physical Review B97, 180505 (2018)

    2018

  36. [45]

    ˚Astr¨ om, P

    J. ˚Astr¨ om, P. Di Stefano, F. Pr¨ obst, L. Stodolsky, J. Ti- monen, C. Bucci, S. Cooper, C. Cozzini, F. Feilitzsch, H. Kraus, et al., Physics Letters A356, 262 (2006)

    2006

  37. [46]

    Yelton, C

    E. Yelton, C. Larson, K. Dodge, K. Okubo, and B. Plourde, arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.09554 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  38. [47]

    Anthony-Petersen, A

    R. Anthony-Petersen, A. Biekert, R. Bunker, C. L. Chang, Y.-Y. Chang, L. Chaplinsky, E. Fascione, C. W. Fink, M. Garcia-Sciveres, R. Germond, et al., Nature Communications15, 6444 (2024)

    2024

  39. [48]

    Armengaud, Q

    E. Armengaud, Q. Arnaud, C. Augier, A. Beno ˆ ıt, L. Berg´ e, T. Bergmann, J. Billard, J. Bl¨ umer, T. De Boissi` ere, G. Bres, et al., Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2016, 019 (2016)

    2016

  40. [49]

    Non-equilibrium Dynamics of Two-level Systems directly after Cryogenic Alternating Bias

    R. Rafael, E. Puyoo, and C. Malhaire, Journal of Applied Physics122(2017). 1 Supplemental Material for “Non-equilibrium Dynamics of Two-level Systems directly after Cryogenic Alternating Bias” I. F ABRICA TION DET AILS The devices are fabricated on high-resistivity intrinsic S...

    2017

Pith tools

Reviewed August 4, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.