Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 45 references

Superconducting diode effect in a meso-wedge geometry with Abrikosov vortices

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A wedge-shaped superconductor acts as its own diode, with critical currents differing between current directions by up to about 15 percent.

desk verdict Plausible geometry-based diode effect, but the single-mesh numerics and qualitative experimental 'validation' leave the central asymmetry unproven. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.01797 v1 pith:G64LJKOW submitted 2025-06-02 cond-mat.supr-con

C. A. Aguirre , J. Barba-Ortega , A. S. de Arruda , J. Faundez This is my paper
classification cond-mat.supr-con
keywords superconductingdiodeeffectmeso-wedgeAbrikosovvorticesGinzburg-Landautheorycriticalcurrentasymmetrynon-reciprocaltransportvortexdynamics
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

The paper claims that a wedge-shaped superconducting sample—thin on one edge, thick on the other—rectifies electric current on its own. Solving the time-dependent Ginzburg-Landau equations in three dimensions, the authors find that the critical current for one current direction differs from that for the opposite direction, with a maximal diode efficiency of about 15%. The asymmetry is traced to Abrikosov vortices—the quantized magnetic flux lines that penetrate type-II superconductors: vortices enter preferentially at the thin side, and their configurations under positive and negative applied current are visibly different. If this is right, rectification in superconductors can emerge purely from geometry, without Josephson junctions, heterostructures, or spin-orbit coupling.

What carries the argument

The mechanism is the interplay between the wedge's broken reflection symmetry and the vortices it admits. Abrikosov vortices—quantized magnetic flux tubes whose cores suppress the Cooper-pair density—enter preferentially from the thinner edge because the surface energy barrier is lower there; under a transport current, the Lorentz force pushes vortices in a direction that depends on current polarity. The paper's central object is the Cooper-pair density map $|\psi|^2$ across layers of the wedge: the patterns of suppressed density, i.e., the vortex configurations, differ between $J>0$ and $J<0$, and the magnitude of that difference tracks the asymmetry in critical currents. The quantitative handle is the diode efficiency $\gamma_d(H)=\frac{|J_c^+(H)-|J_c^-(H)||}{J_c^+(H)+|J_c^-(H)|}\times 100$.

What would settle it

Repeat the calculation with a finer mesh (for instance, halving the grid spacing in all directions) and with the current contacts mirror-reversed; if the asymmetry between $J_c^+$ and $J_c^-$ systematically shrinks, changes sign, or disappears, the diode signal is numerical. Conversely, an experimental check would be to microfabricate a wedge of a conventional type-II superconductor and measure $V(I)$ in both directions: equal critical currents would refute the claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper's central claim is that a three-dimensional superconducting meso-wedge—a slab that is thin on one edge and thick on the other—displays non-reciprocal transport when a magnetic field is applied along the slab's normal and a transport current is driven along the in-plane direction. Solving the generalized time-dependent Ginzburg-Landau equations on a 30×15×15 mesh (in units of the coherence length), the authors compute voltage-current curves for both current polarities and find the first critical currents differ, with diode efficiency reaching a maximum of about 15% at an intermediate Ginzburg-Landau parameter ($\kappa\approx 2$) and at the lower fields considered ($H=1.0$). The microscopic explanation is that vortices nucleate preferentially at the thin edge of the wedge, and reversing the current changes how vortices enter and arrange, so the two polarities encounter different effective barriers and hence different critical currents. The polarity-dependent vortex patterns are offered as a direct signature of the diode effect.

Load-bearing premise

The computed critical-current difference is taken as a property of the wedge, but it is evaluated on one numerical grid with one way of injecting current; if that grid or injection secretly breaks left-right symmetry, the diode effect is an artifact rather than a real geometric phenomenon.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If correct, a single wedge-shaped superconductor is a rectifier: no junction, heterostructure, or magnetic layer is required to get a superconducting diode.
  • The effect is tunable: diode efficiency peaks at intermediate $\kappa$ (around 2) and at lower fields, and vanishes at high $\kappa$ or high $H$, giving a practical control knob.
  • Polarity-dependent vortex patterns mean the diode state can be read out by imaging the local Cooper-pair density or magnetic flux, not just by electrical measurement.
  • Because the asymmetry originates in geometry, the same design should work in any conventional type-II superconductor, not only in special materials.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same geometric-barrier logic suggests that other shapes with a gradual thickness gradient—trapezoids, crescents, asymmetric notches—should also act as superconducting diodes, and the thin-edge profile could be engineered to tune the efficiency.
  • A mirror-symmetry test—rotating the wedge by 180° or swapping the current contacts—should reverse the sign of the critical-current difference if the effect is geometric, and wash it out if it is numerical.
  • The predicted polarity-dependent vortex patterns could be sought with local magnetic-flux imaging on a fabricated wedge; the difference in vortex arrangement should shrink as the field rises toward the value where the computed efficiency vanishes.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. This paper uses the generalized time-dependent Ginzburg-Landau (GTDGL) equations in three spatial dimensions to simulate a superconducting meso-wedge (A=30ξ, B=C=15ξ) under transport currents of both polarities and an applied field Hz. The authors report non-reciprocal voltage-current characteristics, with critical currents Jc^+ and Jc^- differing by up to about 15% (Eq. (7) and Figs. 2-6), and associate this diode effect with polarity-dependent, non-triangular Abrikosov vortex configurations (Figs. 7-8). They interpret the effect as intrinsic to the wedge geometry, claiming it does not require Josephson junctions or spin-orbit coupling. The conclusions include a qualitative comparison with SQUID-on-tip and transport experiments from Refs. [46-48].

Significance. If the reported asymmetry survives numerical scrutiny, the result would be notable: it would demonstrate a purely geometric, vortex-mediated superconducting diode in a simple single-band type-II mesoscopic sample, with a concrete prediction of up to ~15% efficiency tunable by κ and H. The modeling uses standard GTDGL equations, no parameter is fitted to the diode signal, and the reported computational cost is substantial. The main limitation is that the central quantitative claim rests entirely on one Cartesian mesh and an unspecified critical-current extraction procedure. The experimental comparison in Sec. III.B is qualitative and does not match model parameters to the cited measurements. Thus the significance is conditional: the idea is plausible and interesting, but the numerical evidence as presented is not yet conclusive.

major comments (4)
  1. [II] All simulations are performed on a single Cartesian mesh δx=δy=δz=0.1, with no convergence study and no control calculation in a mirror-symmetric geometry. Because the diode observable is a difference between two computed critical currents (Eq. (7)), and because the slanted wedge face is staircased on this mesh, the reported Jc asymmetry in Figs. 3 and 6 could in principle be a boundary or discretization artifact. Please provide at least one refined mesh (or a Richardson-type error estimate) and a symmetric-control run that restores reflection symmetry and yields γ_d→0 within numerical accuracy.
  2. [III] The paper states that Jc values are extracted from the V-J curves by determining 'the onset of resistive states' (Figs. 2-5), but it does not specify the algorithm or threshold. The V-J curves exhibit jumps and steps, so different extraction criteria (first voltage jump, fixed voltage threshold, linear extrapolation, etc.) will yield different Jc differences and hence different efficiency values in Fig. 4 and the inset of Fig. 6. Please define the criterion precisely, provide the raw V-J data, and make the code available rather than only 'upon request'.
  3. [II] The description of the current injection is ambiguous: the text says the external transport current is applied 'in −x-direction' at the lateral faces ∂Ω_i, but the paper then sweeps 'J>0' and 'J<0'. It is not clear whether the Neumann condition n̂·∇Φ = −J is applied with a sign that reverses for negative polarity, nor which faces act as current contacts in each polarity. Clarifying the exact boundary conditions and the relation between the scalar J in Eq. (7) and the applied vector current density is necessary for reproducibility and for ruling out injection-induced left-right asymmetry.
  4. [III.B] The claimed experimental validation by Refs. [46-48] is qualitative: the cited systems are Nb/EuS bilayers and niobium nitride microbridges, not wedges, and no model parameters (κ, Γ, sample dimensions, field and current scales) are matched to those experiments. The statement that these experiments 'validate the formalism and results presented in this work' overstates the support; at most they show similar qualitative features. Please soften this claim and describe the comparison as an analogy rather than a validation.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Fig. 6 caption] The inset caption reads 'for both polarities (J>0 and J>0)'; the second polarity should be J<0.
  2. [References] Ref. [41] is cited as 'Physica C213, 193 (1993)' for a 3D wedge paper whose authors and date suggest a much later publication, and the text refers to 'Taras et al.' while Ref. [48] is by Golod and Krasnov; please correct the citations and check all reference metadata.
  3. [II] The constants η, β, ζ, and ν in Eq. (5) are given numerical values, but their physical meaning is not explained; a brief definition would help readers who are not already familiar with the specific GTDGL formulation of Ref. [39].
  4. [III.A] The layer indices in Figs. 7 and 8 (n=1,4,10 versus n=1,7,13) are not defined; please state explicitly how layers are counted from the bottom or top of the wedge.
  5. [VI] Stating that the code is available upon request makes independent verification difficult; please deposit the code and representative output data in a public repository.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No circular derivation: diode efficiency is computed directly from simulated V–I curves; only a minor non-load-bearing self-citation appears.

full rationale

The central claim is a simulation output, not a quantity defined in terms of itself. The GTDGL equations (1)-(4), with Γ=10 and discretization constants from independent Ref [39], are solved for V(J) at fixed geometry; Jc+ and Jc− are read from the onset of the resistive state, and the diode efficiency γd(H) in Eq. (7) is computed from those readings. No parameter is fitted to the Jc asymmetry, and no external 'diode' value is imported. The wedge geometry is specified in the text and Fig. 1; the prior wedge paper (Ref [41], same authors) is cited only for the qualitative statement that thicker layers need stronger fields for vortex entry, which is not load-bearing for the non-reciprocity result. The experimental comparisons (Refs [46]–[48]) are external. The only substantive vulnerability is numerical: a single mesh (δx=δy=δz=0.1) with no convergence or symmetry-control run could in principle generate a spurious Jc difference, but that is a correctness/boundary-condition risk, not a circular derivation. Therefore the paper's derivation chain is self-contained and no circular step is identified.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper rests on standard TDGL equations and a set of numerical constants inherited from prior work; no new phenomenological parameter is introduced to produce the diode effect. The main unexamined input is the numerical discretization and the boundary-condition implementation, which are listed as free parameters and domain assumptions.

free parameters (3)
  • Γ (relaxation constant in GTDGL) = 10
    Chosen by hand, not fitted; taken from the GTDGL scheme in Refs [35-39]. It affects the dynamics but is not tuned to produce the diode effect.
  • GTDGL numerical constants η, β, ζ, ν = η=5.79, β=1.0, ζ=0.50, ν=0.03
    Standard constants from Ref [39] used in the triple convergence rule for time-stepping; not fitted to the target result.
  • Sample dimensions and mesh size = A=30ξ, B=C=15ξ, δ=0.1
    Hand chosen geometry and discretization; no convergence study with respect to mesh size is reported.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The generalized time-dependent Ginzburg-Landau equations (Eqs. 1-4) in the dirty limit describe the meso-wedge.
    This is the core model, taken from Refs [35-39] without derivation; all results are simulations of these equations.
  • domain assumption Boundary conditions: n̂·∇Φ = -J at current contacts, n̂·∇Φ = 0 elsewhere; Robin condition for ψ with b → ∞ at contacts and b = 0 elsewhere.
    These conditions define how current is injected and how the order parameter behaves at surfaces. The Jc asymmetry could be sensitive to these choices.
  • standard math Coulomb gauge ∇·A=0 and Maxwell's first law are used to obtain the Poisson equation for Φ.
    Standard electromagnetic gauge treatment; enters Eq. (4).
  • domain assumption The chosen κ values (1 to 5) are all in the type-II regime (κ > 1/√2).
    Required for Abrikosov vortices to form; the paper states this in Section II.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Superconducting diode effect in a meso-wedge geometry with Abrikosov vortices." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/G64LJKOW

@misc{pith2026250601797,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Superconducting diode effect in a meso-wedge geometry with Abrikosov vortices},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/G64LJKOW}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.01797}
}
abstract

In this study, we explore the behavior of a superconducting meso-wedge geometry in 3+1 dimensions (three spatial dimensions plus time) subjected to external transport currents at its boundaries and surfaces, as well as external fields applied along the $\hat{z}$-direction. The transport currents are included as two opposite polarities, $\textbf{J}>0$ and $\textbf{J}<0$. Using the generalized time-dependent Ginzburg-Landau theory and considering the order parameter $\kappa$, we focus on two scenarios: a fixed external magnetic field with variable $\kappa$, and fixed $\kappa$ with variable external magnetic field. As a result, under both scenarios, we analyze the voltage-current characteristics of the superconducting meso-wedge, finding that the critical currents differ between polarities, demonstrating the system's non-reciprocity. We further examine the efficiency of the diode as a function of $\kappa$ and the external magnetic field applied. Furthermore, our observations reveal that the current polarity strongly influences the vortex configuration, the parameter $\kappa$, and the applied magnetic field. In particular, the formation of Abrikosov-type vortices exhibits pronounced inhomogeneity depending on the direction of the transport currents. This underscores that the diode effect in the superconducting meso-wedge is intimately associated with the anisotropic nucleation of Abrikosov vortices. Notably, the emergence of polarity-dependent vortex patterns can serve as a distinctive hallmark of the diode effect in these superconducting systems.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.01797 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. (a) Schematic representation of the superconducting meso [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Voltage response ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Magnitude of the first critical current ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Voltage [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Magnitude of the first critical currents [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Cooper pair density [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Cooper pair density [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_8.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

45 extracted references · 43 canonical work pages

  1. [29]

    Sharma, H

    R. Sharma, H. K. Meena, Emerging Trends in EEG Signal Processing: A Systematic Review, SN COMPUT. SCI.5, 415 (2024)

    work page 2024

  2. [41]

    C. A. Aguirre, P. D ´ıaz, D. Laroze, A. S. Mosquera Polo and J. Barba-Ortega, V ortex state in a 3D superconducting mesoscopic wedge, Physica C213, 193 (1993)

    work page 1993

  3. [1]

    C. Ye, J. Che, T. Han, and H. Huang, Multi-Band Analysis on Physical Properties of the Quasi-Two-Dimensional Superconductor NbSe2, Coating13,3 (2023)

    work page 2023

  4. [2]

    Holmvall and A

    P. Holmvall and A. M. Black-Schaffer, Coreless vortices as direct signature of chirald-wave superconductivity, Phys. Rev. B108, L100506 (2023)

    work page 2023

  5. [3]

    Jiang, T

    K. Jiang, T. Wu, J. X. Yin, Z. Wang, M. Z. Hasan, S. D. Wilson, X. Chen, and J. Hu, Kagome superconductors A V3Sb5 (A = K, Rb, Cs), Nat Sc. Rev.10, 2 (2023)

    work page 2023

  6. [6]

    Kapustin and L

    A. Kapustin and L. Mrini, Universal time-dependent Ginzburg- Landau theory, Phys. Rev. B107, 144514 (2023)

    work page 2023

  7. [7]

    W. D. Gropp, H. G. Kaper, G. K. Leaf, D. M. Levine, M. Palumbo, and V . M. Vinokur, Numerical Simulation of V ortex Dynamics in Type-II Superconductors, J. Comput. Phys.123, 254-266, (1996)

    work page 1996

  8. [8]

    H. J. Fink and A. G. Presson, Magnetic Irreversible Solution of the Ginzburg-Landau Equations, Phys. Rev. B151219, (1967)

    work page 1967

Show all 45 references
  1. [9]

    J. J. Palacios, V ortex matter in superconducting mesoscopic disks: Structure, magnetization, and phase transitions, Phys. Rev. B58R5948(R), (1998)

    1998

  2. [10]

    Timoshuk and E

    I. Timoshuk and E. Babaev, Microscopic solutions for vortex clustering in two-band type-1.5 superconductors, Phys. Rev. B 110064509, (2024)

    2024

  3. [11]

    Talkachov, S

    A. Talkachov, S. Kaushik and E. Babaev, Microscopic approach to the problem of enhancement and suppression of superconductivity on twinning planes, Phys. Rev. B110 054513, (2025)

    2025

  4. [12]

    E. A. Teplyakov and V . G. Yarzhemsky, Space-group approach to the Ginzburg–Landau phase winding in topological superconductors: application toSr 2RuO4, J. Phys. Condens. Matter37185705, (2025)

    2025

  5. [13]

    Mootz, L

    M. Mootz, L. Luo, C. Huang, J. Wang, and l. E. Peraki. Multidimensional coherent spectroscopy of light-driven states and their collective modes in multiband superconductors, Phys. Rev. B109, 014515, (2024)

    2024

  6. [14]

    Hauser, and A

    K. Hauser, and A. Villegas, Theory of pseudospin resonance for multiband superconductors, Phys. Rev. B108, 174504 (2023)

    2023

  7. [15]

    C. A. Aguirre, J. Fa ´undez, S. G. Magalh ˜aes, J. Barba-Ortega, V ortex Matter in a Two-Band SQUID-Shaped Superconducting film, J. Low Temp. Phys.207, 85–96 (2022)

    2022

  8. [16]

    N. H. Aase, K. Maeland, and A. Sudbo, Multiband strong- coupling superconductors with spontaneously broken time- reversal symmetry, Phys. Rev. B108, 214508 (2023)

    2023

  9. [17]

    H. Xu, C. Min Chung, M. Qin, U. Schollwoc, S. R. White, and S. Zhang, Coexistence of superconductivity with partially filled stripes in the Hubbard model, Science384, 6696 (2024)

    2024

  10. [18]

    G. R. Berdiyorov, M. V . Milo ˇsevi´c, and F. M. Peeters, V ortex configurations and critical parameters in superconducting thin films containing antidot arrays: Nonlinear Ginzburg-Landau theory, Phys. Rev. B74, 174512 (2006)

    2006

  11. [19]

    M. V . Miloˇsevi´c and R. Geurts, The Ginzburg–Landau theory in application, Physica C,470, 19, 791-795, (2010)

    2010

  12. [20]

    M. V . Milo ˇsevi´c and R. Geurts, V ortex-vortex interaction in bulk superconductors: Ginzburg-Landau theory, Phys. Rev. B 83, 05451 (2011)

    2011

  13. [21]

    Gillijns, A

    W. Gillijns, A. V . Silhanek, V . V . Moshchalkov, Origin of reversed vortex ratchet motion, Phys. Rev. Lett.99, 24 (2007)

    2007

  14. [22]

    F. Liu, Y . M. Itahashi, S. Aoki, Y . D. Ziquian, N. Ogawa, T. Ideue and Y . Iwasa, Superconducting diode effect under time- reversal symmetry, Science Advances,10, 31 (2024)

    2024

  15. [24]

    F. Ando, Y . Miyasaka, T. Li, J. Ishizuka, T. Arakawa, Y . Shiota, T. Moriyama, Y . Yanase and T. Ono, Observation of superconducting diode effect, Nat. Phys.584, 373 (2020)

    2020

  16. [25]

    Ba. Pal, A. Chakraborty, P. K. Sivakumar, M. Davydova, A. K. Gopi, A. K. Pandeya, J. A. Krieger, Y . Zhang, M. Date, S. Ju, N. Yuan, N. B. M. Schr¨oter, L. Fu and S. S. P. Parkin, Josephson diode effect from Cooper pair momentum in a topological semimetal, Nat Commun15, 8014 (2024)

    2024

  17. [26]

    Jun He, Y

    J. Jun He, Y . Tanaka and N. Nagaosa, A phenomenological theory of superconductor diodes, New J. Phys.24053014 (2022)

    2022

  18. [27]

    Duc Anh, K

    L. Duc Anh, K. Ishihara, T. Hotta, K. Inagaki, H. Maki, T. Saeki, M. Kobayashi and M. Tanaka, Large superconducting diode effect in ion-beam patterned Sn-based superconductor nanowire/topological Dirac semimetal planar heterostructures, New J. Phys.24053014 (2022)

    2022

  19. [28]

    Huang, T

    H. Huang, T. de Picoli, J. I. Vayrynen, Superconducting diode effect in two-dimensional topological insulator edges and Josephson junctions, Appl. Phys. Lett.125, 032602 (2024)

    2024

  20. [30]

    Q. Du, M. and D. Gunzburger, A model for superconducting thin films having variable thickness, Physica D69, 215 (1993)

    1993

  21. [31]

    Jiang and J

    K. Jiang and J. Hu, Superconducting diode effects, Nature Physics,18, 1145 (2022)

    2022

  22. [32]

    P., Wu, C

    Hu, J. P., Wu, C. J. and Dai, X, Proposed Design of a Josephson Diode, Phys. Rev. Lett.99, 067004 (2007)

    2007

  23. [33]

    Carlstrom, E

    J. Carlstrom, E. Babaev, and M. Speight, Type-1.5 superconductivity in multiband systems: Effects of interband couplings, Phys. Rev. B83, 174509 (2011)

    2011

  24. [34]

    F. Liu, Y . M. Itahashi, S. Aoki, Y . D. Ziquian, N. Ogawa, T. Ideue and Y . Iwasa, Superconducting diode effect under time- reversal symmetry,Science Advances,10, 31 (2024)

    2024

  25. [35]

    L. Z. Deng, Z. Wu, T. Bontke, T. Habamahoro, D. Schulze, M. Gooch, T. W. Kuo, R. Fujikawa and C. W. Chu. From high-temperature superconductivity to room-temperature superconductivity: From ambient to high pressure; from very high pressure to ambient again!?, IOP Conf. Ser.: Ma...

    2023

  26. [36]

    Bekaert, A

    J. Bekaert, A. Aperis, B. Partoens, P. M. Oppeneer, and M. V . Milo ˇsevi´c, Advanced first-principles theory of superconductivity including both lattice vibrations and spin fluctuations: The case ofFeB 4, Phys. Rev. B97, 014503 (2018)

    2018

  27. [37]

    Barba-Ortega, E

    J. Barba-Ortega, E. Sardella, J. A. Aguiar, Temperature- dependent vortex matter in a superconducting mesoscopic circular sector, Physica C,4701964 (2010)

    2010

  28. [38]

    Moshchalkov, M

    V . Moshchalkov, M. Menghini, T. Nishio, Q. H. Chen, A. V . Silhanek, V . H. Dao, L. F. Chibotaru, N. D. Zhigadlo, and J. Karpinski, Type-1.5 Superconductivity, Phys. Rev. Lett.410, 10 117001 (2009)

    2009

  29. [39]

    L. R. Cadorim, A. R. de C. Romaguera, I. G. de Oliveira, R. R. Gomes, M. M. Doria, and E. Sardella, Intermediate type- I superconductors in the mesoscopic scale, Phys. Rev. B103, 014504 (2021)

    2021

  30. [40]

    Nadeem, M

    M. Nadeem, M. S. Fuhrer, and X. Wang, The superconducting diode effect, Nat. Rev. Phys.5, 558 (2023)

    2023

  31. [42]

    ˇZ. L. Jeli ´c, M. V . Miloˇsevi´c and A. V . Silhanek, Velocimetry of superconducting vortices based on stroboscopic resonances, Scientific. Reports.6, 35687 (2016)

    2016

  32. [43]

    Banerjee and M

    S. Banerjee and M. S. Scheurer, Altermagnetic superconducting diode effect, Phys. Rev. B110, 024503 (2024)

    2024

  33. [44]

    Zeldov, J

    E. Zeldov, J. R. Clem, M. McElfresh, and M. Darwin, Magnetization and transport currents in thin superconducting films, Phys. Rev. B49,9802 (1994)

    1994

  34. [45]

    Benkraouda and J

    M. Benkraouda and J. R. Clem, Magnetic hysteresis from the geometrical barrier in type-II superconducting strips, Phys. Rev. B53,5716 (1996)

    1996

  35. [46]

    Gutfreund, H

    A. Gutfreund, H. Matsuki, V . Plastovets, A. Noah, L. Gorzawski, N. Fridman, G. Yang, A. Buzdin, O. Millo, J. W. A. Robinson and Y . Anahory, Direct observation of a superconducting vortex diode, Nature Communications.14, 1630 (2023)

    2023

  36. [47]

    Castellani, O

    M. Castellani, O. Medeiros, A. Buzzi, A. Foster, M. Colangelo and K. K. Berggren, A superconducting full-wave bridge rectifier, Nat Electron. (2025)

    2025

  37. [48]

    Golod and V

    T. Golod and V . M. Krasnov, Demonstration of a superconducting diode-with- memory, operational at zero magnetic field with switchable nonreciprocity, Nat Commun. 13, 3658 (2022)

    2022

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.