Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 74 references

Towards novel tunability schemes for hybrid ferromagnetic transmon qubits

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read On-chip superconducting Helmholtz coils can generate the in-plane magnetic fields needed to tune ferromagnetic transmon qubits, and fabricated prototypes carry enough current to deliver them.

desk verdict A credible engineering step toward on-chip field generation for ferrotransmons, but the measured critical current does not confirm the simulated field and the operating margin is thin. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.06562 v1 pith:OUA6GQLE submitted 2024-12-09 cond-mat.supr-con quant-ph

Halima Giovanna Ahmad , Raffaella Ferraiuolo , Giuseppe Serpico , Roberta Satariano , Anna Levochkina , Antonio Vettoliere , Carmine Granata , Domenico Montemurro
show 7 more authors
Martina Esposito Giovanni Ausanio Loredana Parlato Giovanni Piero Pepe Alessandro Bruno Francesco Tafuri Davide Massarotti
This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.supr-conquant-ph PACS 85.25.Cp03.67.Lx
keywords ferromagneticJosephsonjunctionsSIsFStransmonqubitsfluxtunabilityon-chipmagneticfieldgenerationHelmholtzcoilsuperconductingcoplanarwaveguidecryogenicmicrowavequantumcircuits
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper argues that the frequency of a transmon qubit can be tuned without the usual current-carrying flux lines, by embedding a tunnel ferromagnetic Josephson junction (SIsFS) as the qubit's nonlinear element and switching its magnetization with a brief in-plane magnetic field pulse. Because the ferromagnetic barrier retains its magnetization, the qubit's critical current sits at one of two levels at zero applied field, so the qubit can be set while the field is off. The central practical step treated here is generating the required in-plane field on-chip: simulations of a superconducting Helmholtz-like flux coil with 1 µm loop height give 1.2–1.4 mT at 10 mA bias, and fabricated coils show cryogenic critical currents of 11.5–14 mA, above that bias. A superconducting coplanar waveguide flux line is also simulated as an alternative, but needs roughly twice the bias current for comparable field and risks extra decoherence. If the coil field matches simulation, the ferrotransmon becomes a scalable route to qubit-frequency control with reduced heating and reduced flux-noise exposure.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing element is the SIsFS Josephson junction, a superconductor–insulator–thin-superconductor–ferromagnet–superconductor stack in the tunnel limit, whose critical current versus in-plane field is a hysteretic Fraunhofer-like pattern: after a field pulse the ferromagnet keeps a residual magnetization and shifts the pattern, giving two distinct critical currents at zero field. To produce the field, the paper introduces an on-chip Helmholtz flux coil: two series-connected spiral coils with three-dimensional rounded bridges, spaced 10 µm apart, with the junction in the central gap; a 1 µm loop height and 2.5 µm line width are simulated to deliver 1.2–1.4 mT at 10 mA. That field-generating coil, rather than external coils or power-hungry flux lines, is what would make the ferrotransmon locally tunable.

What would settle it

Measure the magnetic field at the junction location of a fabricated Helmholtz coil at cryogenic temperature—for instance with a scanning Hall or SQUID sensor—while ramping the coil current toward 10 mA; if the observed field at 10 mA is below the simulated range, or the coil switches to the resistive state before reaching 10 mA, the central claim is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central discovery is that on-chip superconducting Helmholtz flux coils—two spirals connected through three-dimensional bridges, with the junction placed in the gap between them—can supply the in-plane magnetic field needed to operate a ferrotransmon. Finite-element simulations including the silicon substrate show that a coil with 1 µm loop height produces 1.2–1.4 mT at a bias current of 10 mA, a factor of two lower than the 25 mA implied for the coplanar waveguide alternative, and enough to shift the SIsFS junction's Fraunhofer-like critical-current pattern so that the zero-field critical current changes by roughly 25%. The fabricated NbTiN/Al bridges, characterized at room temperature by resistance and at cryogenic temperature by critical current (11.5–14 mA), are reported to confirm that the coil can carry the simulated input current, thereby supporting the claim that localized, low-current on-chip field generation is feasible.

Load-bearing premise

The fabricated on-chip Helmholtz coil generates the simulated 1.2–1.4 mT in-plane field at the junction when biased at 10 mA, and it stays superconducting and quiet at that bias.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A single ferrotransmon can in principle be frequency-set by a short coil pulse, then operated at zero applied field, so the qubit idle point is not continuously exposed to flux-line bias noise.
  • On-chip coils draw roughly half the bias current of a coplanar-waveguide flux line for comparable field, reducing localized heating in large processors.
  • Because each coil is local to one junction, arrays of ferrotransmons could be tuned individually, unlike a global external coil that affects all qubits.
  • The measured critical current margin (11.5–14 mA vs 10 mA simulated) leaves headroom for the coil to operate below its superconducting limit, provided the field mapping to the junction is confirmed.
  • Combining the coil with doped ferromagnetic barriers (lower coercive and saturation fields) could bring the required bias current down further.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the simulated field is confirmed by direct magnetometry, the ferrotransmon tuning scheme would eliminate the need for persistent flux lines, offering a possible path to reduced crosstalk and lower dissipation, though qubit coherence would still need demonstration in a fully integrated device.
  • A natural next experiment is to integrate the coil with an SIsFS junction and measure the zero-field critical-current separation as the coil current is pulsed to 10 mA; observing the predicted ~25% separation would close the simulation-to-device loop.
  • The same coil geometry could be adapted to other in-plane-field-sensitive devices, such as magnetic Josephson junctions for cryogenic memory, where localized field generation is also needed.
  • The room-temperature resistance spread across nominally identical coils suggests that fabrication uniformity of the 3D bridges is a key variable; automated inspection of bridge geometry could tighten the correlation between design and field.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes and characterizes two on-chip approaches for generating the in-plane magnetic fields needed to tune hybrid ferromagnetic transmon qubits based on SIsFS Josephson junctions. The first approach is a superconducting coplanar waveguide flux line placed beneath the junction; the second is a 3D 'Helmholtz' flux coil with two loops and bridging top layer. The authors report Maxwell3D simulations of the coil, showing in-plane fields of about 1.2-1.4 mT at 10 mA for a 1 µm loop height, and they fabricate NbTiN/AlTi/Al prototypes. Room-temperature resistances and cryogenic critical currents (11.5-14 mA) are measured, from which the paper concludes that the coils can provide the in-plane field required by simulation. The manuscript frames this as a preliminary engineering step toward a proof-of-concept ferrotransmon.

Significance. If the field-generation claims were established, this would be a useful contribution to a scalable, on-chip tuning scheme for ferromagnetic Josephson-junction qubits, addressing a real bottleneck in flux-tunable transmon architectures. The paper's strengths are its detailed Maxwell3D simulations, the fabrication of the 3D bridge structures with SEM verification, the room-temperature resistance scaling across loop geometries, and the cryogenic critical-current measurements. The proposed Helmholtz-coil geometry is a plausible way to localize in-plane fields while avoiding the decoherence risk of a directly coupled flux line. However, the central experimental conclusion—that the fabricated coils are confirmed to generate the simulated field—is only partially supported, because the magnetic field itself was never measured and the operating margin near Ic is thin. The manuscript is better read as a design-and-preliminary-characterization report than as a demonstration of the required field delivery.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. III, final paragraph] The sentence 'measurements at cryogenic temperatures have established the flux coils' critical current value ranging from 11.5 to 14 mA, confirming the ability to provide the in-plane magnetic field from the simulation's input current' overstates what the data show. A critical-current measurement establishes only that the coil can carry 10 mA without a global resistive transition; it does not measure the magnetic field at the junction location. The simulated field depends on the detailed current distribution in the NbTiN base layer, the shape of the 3D bridges, and the substrate and boundary conditions, none of which is verified by a resistance check or by the single SEM image. To support the claim, the authors should either measure the generated field directly (e.g., with a Hall sensor, NV magnetometry, or a SQUID pickup loop) or demonstrate the field through the Fraunhofer response of a reference Josephson junction, and the text should be rephrased to say the Ic data are consistent with the simulation rather than confirming it.
  2. [Sec. III, Fig. 4 and operating point] The operating point is too close to the measured critical-current range for the present claim. The simulation calls for 10 mA to produce 1.2-1.4 mT, while the measured Ic values are 11.5-14 mA, so the margin is only about 15-30%. This margin is even less relevant for fast (ns-scale) current pulses, which can trigger premature resistive transitions or local hotspot formation. The paper does not report pulsed-bias or continuous-bias tests near 10 mA, nor any measurement of dissipation or heating. The claim that the coil can bias at 10 mA 'while avoiding significant dissipation on the chip' is therefore not established. Please add pulsed critical-current measurements, a discussion of the required pulse shape and duty cycle, or at least a clear statement that margin under transient operation remains untested.
  3. [Sec. III, Maxwell3D simulations] The simulations lack an uncertainty or sensitivity analysis. The computed field of 1.2-1.4 mT at 10 mA depends on the assumed loop height, bridge profile, film thickness, and substrate properties, but no parameter variations or error estimates are reported. Since the target field for qubit tuning is about 5 mT (Fig. 1 discussion) and the simulated field is lower, even a moderate geometric deviation could alter the generated field substantially. A sensitivity study around the nominal dimensions would strengthen the paper and help justify the later Ic-based inference.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Sec. IV] The word 'Helmotz' in the concluding section is a typo and should read 'Helmholtz'.
  2. [Table I] The text states that the measured resistance 'correlates well' with geometric dimension sweeps, but the table shows noticeable chip-to-chip variability (e.g., sample #3 loop III is 1.62 kΩ while sample #4 loop III is 1.82 kΩ). Reporting the mean and standard deviation across the four repetitions would quantify the reproducibility more clearly.
  3. [Sec. III] The room-temperature resistance values of 0.5-2 kΩ come from a 2-point probe station, which includes contact resistance; the text should mention this caveat when interpreting the resistance as purely geometric.
  4. [Fig. 1] The Fraunhofer simulation assumes a saturation magnetization of μ0M = 0.9 T, but no justification or reference is given for this value; a brief note on the origin of this parameter would help the reader assess the 20-30% level-separation estimate.
  5. [Sec. II] The phrase 'the fundamental timescale is given by the Josephson switching speed τ ∝ IcRN' is a standard statement, but it would benefit from a reference to the specific model or measurement that supports its use for SIsFS junctions with hysteresis.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity; the simulated Helmholtz-coil field and the measured critical current are independent quantities.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is not circular. The SIsFS junction physics (hysteretic Fraunhofer pattern, required 5 mT fields, 20-30% critical-current level separation) is imported from prior experimental work (Refs. 41, 47, 51-54), not rederived from the present measurements. The central new contribution is the on-chip field-line design: Ansys/Maxwell3D simulations convert the coil geometry and a 10 mA bias current into an in-plane field of 1.2-1.4 mT at the junction location (Sec. III, Fig. 4), and fabricated coils are then characterized by room-temperature resistance and cryogenic critical current. The only sentence that could superficially resemble a circular step is: 'measurements at cryogenic temperatures have established the flux coils' critical current value ranging from 11.5 to 14 mA, confirming the ability to provide the in-plane magnetic field from the simulation's input current.' This is not a fitted input renamed as a prediction: the measured quantity Ic is an independent current-carrying capability, and the predicted field value is not computed from Ic in any equation of the paper. The measurement supports the assumption that 10 mA can be biased without a resistive transition, while whether the simulated field is actually realized at the junction remains an unverified empirical claim. That is a correctness/validation limitation, not a definitional circularity. No load-bearing result rests solely on a self-citation chain, and no equation reduces the prediction to its inputs by construction. Hence the paper is self-contained with respect to circularity, and the appropriate score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central feasibility claims rest on assumed material properties (saturation magnetization), prior experimental/theoretical results on SIsFS junctions from the same group, and unvalidated electromagnetic simulations. The only new experimental data are room-temperature resistances and cryogenic critical currents of the coil, which do not directly measure magnetic field.

free parameters (1)
  • Saturation magnetization mu0_M = 0.9 T (assumed)
    Used in the Figure 1 simulation of the Fraunhofer pattern of a 300 nm square SIsFS junction to obtain the ~25% critical-current separation; assumed from material expectations, not measured in this paper.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption SIsFS junction acts as a series connection of a tunnel SIs junction and a ferromagnetic sFS junction, with Ic_sFS >> Ic_SIs, so dissipation is controlled by the tunnel part.
    Invoked in Sec. II to justify low-dissipation, underdamped behavior needed for a transmon; based on prior theory and experiments (Refs. [51]-[54], [59]-[61]) but not re-derived here.
  • domain assumption For the superconducting interlayer thickness ds < lambda_s, the SIsFS junction behaves as a single junction in an in-plane magnetic field.
    Used in Sec. II to justify Fraunhofer-like Ic(H) modulation of the whole junction; taken from Refs. [54], [62], [63].
  • domain assumption The ferromagnetic barrier retains a hysteretic magnetization state that shifts the Fraunhofer pattern, so that the junction has two critical-current values at zero field.
    Central to the ferrotransmon tuning scheme; supported by prior cryogenic memory work (Refs. [42]-[48]) but assumed here.
  • standard math Electromagnetic simulations with Ansys Maxwell 3D correctly model the field distribution and current capacity of the on-chip lines.
    Standard computational electromagnetics; no experimental verification of the simulated field magnitude is reported.
  • domain assumption The fabricated superconducting coil can be biased at 10 mA while remaining superconducting and without producing qubit-degrading noise.
    Measured critical currents are 11.5-14 mA, so 10 mA is below but close to Ic; stable operation at 10 mA is assumed, not demonstrated.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Towards novel tunability schemes for hybrid ferromagnetic transmon qubits." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/OUA6GQLE

@misc{pith2026241206562,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Towards novel tunability schemes for hybrid ferromagnetic transmon qubits},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/OUA6GQLE}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.06562}
}
read the original abstract

Flux tuning of qubit frequencies in superconducting quantum processors is fundamental for implementing single and multi-qubit gates in quantum algorithms. Typical architectures involve the use of DC or fast RF lines. However, these lines introduce significant heat dissipation and undesirable decoherence mechanisms, leading to a severe bottleneck for scalability. Among different solutions to overcome this issue, we propose integrating tunnel Superconductor-Insulating-thin superconducting interlayer-Ferromagnet-Superconductor Josephson junctions (SIsFS JJs) into a novel transmon qubit design, the so-called ferrotransmon. SIsFS JJs provide memory properties due to the presence of ferromagnetic barriers and preserve at the same time the low-dissipative behavior of tunnel-insulating JJs, thus promoting an alternative tuning of the qubit frequency. In this work, we discuss the fundamental steps towards the implementation of this hybrid ferromagnetic transmon. We will give a special focus on the design, simulations, and preliminary experimental characterization of superconducting lines to provide in-plane magnetic fields, fundamental for an on-chip control of the qubit frequencies in the ferrotransmon.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.06562 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Simulation for normalized Fraunhofer patterns of a square SIsFS [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. CAD designs of flux coil representing the substrate (in pink), the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Maxwell3D simulation of the on-chip flux coil design with the Silicon (Si) substrate (in brown) and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: a) SEM image of Helmholtz flux coil design; b) SEM image with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

74 extracted references · 46 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Tafuri, Fundamentals and frontiers of the Josephson effect

    F. Tafuri, Fundamentals and frontiers of the Josephson effect . Springer Nature, 2019, vol. 286

    work page 2019

  2. [2]

    Charge-insensitive qubit design derived from the Cooper pair box,

    J. Koch, T. M. Yu, J. Gambetta, A. A. Houck, D. I. Schuster, J. Majer, A. Blais, M. H. Devoret, S. M. Girvin, and R. J. Schoelkopf, “Charge-insensitive qubit design derived from the Cooper pair box,” Phys. Rev. A , vol. 76, p. 042319, Oct 2007. [Online]. Available: https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevA.76.042319

    doi:10.1103/physreva.76.042319 2007

  3. [3]

    Superconducting quantum bits,

    J. Clarke and F. K. Wilhelm, “Superconducting quantum bits,” Nature, vol. 453, pp. 1031–1042, 2008

    work page 2008

  4. [4]

    Demonstration of two-qubit algorithms with a superconducting quantum processor,

    L. DiCarlo, J. M. Chow, J. M. Gambetta, L. S. Bishop, B. R. Johnson, D. I. Schuster, J. Majer, A. Blais, L. Frunzio, S. M. Girvin, and R. J. Schoelkopf, “Demonstration of two-qubit algorithms with a superconducting quantum processor,” Nature, vol. 460, no. 7252, pp. 240–244, Jul 2009. [Online]. Available: https: //doi.org/10.1038/nature08121

    doi:10.1038/nature08121 2009

  5. [5]

    Superconducting circuits for quantum information: an outlook,

    M. H. Devoret and R. J. Schoelkopf, “Superconducting circuits for quantum information: an outlook,” Science, vol. 339, p. 1169, 2013

    work page 2013

  6. [6]

    A. F. Kockum and F. Nori, Quantum Bits with Josephson Junctions . Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2019, pp. 703–741. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20726-7 17

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-030-20726-7 2019

  7. [7]

    A quantum engineer’s guide to superconducting qubits,

    P. Krantz, M. Kjaergaard, F. Yan, T. P. Orlando, S. Gustavsson, and W. D. Oliver, “A quantum engineer’s guide to superconducting qubits,” Applied Physics Reviews , vol. 6, no. 2, p. 021318, 2019. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5089550

    doi:10.1063/1.5089550 2019

  8. [8]

    Systematic improvements in transmon qubit coherence enabled by niobium surface encapsulation,

    M. Bal, A. A. Murthy, S. Zhu, F. Crisa, X. You, Z. Huang, T. Roy, J. Lee, D. v. Zanten, R. Pilipenko, I. Nekrashevich, A. Lunin, D. Bafia, Y . Krasnikova, C. J. Kopas, E. O. Lachman, D. Miller, J. Y . Mutus, M. J. Reagor, H. Cansizoglu, J. Marshall, D. P. Pappas, K. Vu, K. Yadavalli, J.-S. Oh, L. Zhou, M. J. Kramer, F. Lecocq, D. P. Goronzy, C. G. Torres-...

    2024

Show all 74 references
  1. [9]

    Fluxonium: Single Cooper-pair circuit free of charge offsets,

    V . E. Manucharyan, J. Koch, L. I. Glazman, and M. H. Devoret, “Fluxonium: Single Cooper-pair circuit free of charge offsets,” Science, vol. 326, no. 5949, pp. 113–116, 2009. [Online]. Available: https://science.sciencemag.org/content/326/5949/113

    2009

  2. [10]

    Qubit architecture with high coherence and fast tunable coupling,

    C. Yu, C. Neill, P. Roushan, N. Leung, M. Fang, R. Barends, J. Kelly, B. Campbell, Z. Chen, B. Chiaro, A. Dunsworth, E. Jeffrey, A. Megrant, J. Y . Mutus, P. J. J. O’Malley, C. M. Quintana, D. Sank, A. Vainsencher, J. Wenner, T. C. White, M. R. Geller, Clel, A. N., and J. M. M...

    2014 doi

  3. [11]

    Superconducting qubits: Current state of play,

    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,” Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 369–395, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.11...

    2020 doi

  4. [12]

    Imple- mentation of superconductor/ferromagnet/ superconductor π-shifters in superconducting digital and quantum circuits,

    A. K. Feofanov, V . A. Oboznov, V . V . Bol’ginov, J. Lisenfeld, S. Poletto, V . V . Ryazanov, A. N. Rossolenko, M. Khabipov, D. Balashov, A. B. Zorin, P. N. Dmitriev, V . P. Koshelets, and A. V . Ustinov, “Imple- mentation of superconductor/ferromagnet/ superconductor π-shift...

    2010

  5. [13]

    Materials in superconducting quantum bits,

    W. D. Oliver and P. B. Welander, “Materials in superconducting quantum bits,” MRS Bulletin , vol. 38, no. 10, pp. 816–825, Oct 2013. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1557/mrs.2013.229

    2013 doi

  6. [14]

    Two-dimensional material tunnel barrier for Josephson junctions and superconducting qubits,

    K.-H. Lee, S. Chakram, S. E. Kim, F. Mujid, A. Ray, H. Gao, C. Park, Y . Zhong, D. A. Muller, D. I. Schuster, and J. Park, “Two-dimensional material tunnel barrier for Josephson junctions and superconducting qubits,” Nano Letters , vol. 19, no. 11, pp. 8287–8293, 2019, pMID: 3...

    2019 doi

  7. [15]

    New material platform for superconducting transmon qubits with coherence times exceeding 0.3 milliseconds,

    A. P. M. Place, L. V . H. Rodgers, P. Mundada, B. M. Smitham, M. Fitzpatrick, Z. Leng, A. Premkumar, J. Bryon, A. Vrajitoarea, S. Sussman, G. Cheng, T. Madhavan, H. K. Babla, X. H. Le, Y . Gang, B. J ¨ack, A. Gyenis, N. Yao, R. J. Cava, N. P. de Leon, and A. A. Houck, “New mat...

    2021 doi

  8. [16]

    The physical implementation of quantum computation,

    D. P. DiVincenzo, “The physical implementation of quantum computation,” Fortschritte der Physik , vol. 48, no. 9-11, pp. 771–783, 2000. [Online]. Available: https: //onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/1521-3978%28200009% 2948%3A9/11%3C771%3A%3AAID-PROP771%3E3.0.CO%3B2-E

    doi

  9. [17]

    Engineering high-coherence superconducting qubits,

    I. Siddiqi, “Engineering high-coherence superconducting qubits,” Nature Reviews Materials , vol. 6, no. 10, pp. 875–891, Oct 2021. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41578-021-00370-4

    2021 doi

  10. [18]

    Quantum–classical interface based on single flux quantum digital logic,

    R. McDermott, M. G. Vavilov, B. L. T. Plourde, F. K. Wilhelm, P. J. Liebermann, O. A. Mukhanov, and T. A. Ohki, “Quantum–classical interface based on single flux quantum digital logic,” Quantum Science and Technology, vol. 3, no. 2, p. 024004, jan 2018. [Online]. Available: ht...

    2018 doi

  11. [19]

    Scalable quantum com- puting infrastructure based on superconducting electronics,

    O. Mukhanov, A. Kirichenko, C. Howington, J. Walter, M. Hutchings, I. Vernik, D. Yohannes, K. Dodge, A. Ballard, B. L. T. Plourde, A. Opremcak, C.-H. Liu, and R. McDermott, “Scalable quantum com- puting infrastructure based on superconducting electronics,” in 2019 IEEE Interna...

    2019

  12. [20]

    Barone and G

    A. Barone and G. Patern `o, Physics and Application of the Josephson Effect. John Wiley and Sons, 1982

    1982

  13. [21]

    Intrinsic and extrinsic d-wave effects in YBa2Cu3O7−δ grain boundary Josephson junctions: Implications for π circuitry,

    F. Tafuri, J. R. Kirtley, F. Lombardi, and F. M. Granozio, “Intrinsic and extrinsic d-wave effects in YBa2Cu3O7−δ grain boundary Josephson junctions: Implications for π circuitry,” Phys. Rev. B , vol. 67, p. 174516, May 2003. [Online]. Available: https://link.aps.org/doi/10.11...

    2003 doi

  14. [22]

    Tunable superconducting qubits with flux-independent coherence,

    M. D. Hutchings, J. B. Hertzberg, Y . Liu, N. T. Bronn, G. A. Keefe, M. Brink, J. M. Chow, and B. L. T. Plourde, “Tunable superconducting qubits with flux-independent coherence,” Phys. Rev. Applied , vol. 8, p. 044003, Oct 2017. [Online]. Available: https://link.aps.org/doi/10...

    2017 doi

  15. [23]

    Independent, extensible control of same-frequency superconducting qubits by selective broadcasting,

    S. Asaad, C. Dickel, N. K. Langford, S. Poletto, A. Bruno, M. A. Rol, D. Deurloo, and L. DiCarlo, “Independent, extensible control of same-frequency superconducting qubits by selective broadcasting,” npj Quantum Information , vol. 2, no. 1, p. 16029, Aug 2016. [Online]. Availa...

    2016 doi

  16. [24]

    Realizing repeated quantum error correction in a distance-three surface code,

    S. Krinner, N. Lacroix, A. Remm, A. Di Paolo, E. Genois, C. Leroux, C. Hellings, S. Lazar, F. Swiadek, J. Herrmannet al., “Realizing repeated quantum error correction in a distance-three surface code,” Nature, vol. 605, no. 7911, pp. 669–674, 2022

    2022

  17. [25]

    High-fidelity, high- scalability two-qubit gate scheme for superconducting qubits,

    Y . Xu, J. Chu, J. Yuan, J. Qiu, Y . Zhou, L. Zhang, X. Tan, Y . Yu, S. Liu, J. Li, F. Yan, and D. Yu, “High-fidelity, high- scalability two-qubit gate scheme for superconducting qubits,” Phys. Rev. Lett. , vol. 125, p. 240503, Dec 2020. [Online]. Available: https://link.aps.o...

    2020 doi

  18. [26]

    Realization of high-fidelity cz and zz-free iswap gates with a tunable coupler,

    Y . Sung, L. Ding, J. Braum ¨uller, A. Veps ¨al¨ainen, B. Kannan, M. Kjaergaard, A. Greene, G. O. Samach, C. McNally, D. Kim, A. Melville, B. M. Niedzielski, M. E. Schwartz, J. L. Yoder, T. P. Orlando, S. Gustavsson, and W. D. Oliver, “Realization of high-fidelity cz and zz-fr...

    2021 doi

  19. [27]

    Mitigating errors on superconducting quantum processors through fuzzy clustering,

    H. G. Ahmad, R. Schiattarella, P. Mastrovito, A. Chiatto, A. Levochkina, M. Esposito, D. Montemurro, G. P. Pepe, A. Bruno, F. Tafuri, A. Vitiello, G. Acampora, and D. Massarotti, “Mitigating errors on superconducting quantum processors through fuzzy clustering,” Advanced Quant...

    2024 doi

  20. [28]

    Towards noise engineering: Recent insights in low-frequency excess flux noise of superconducting quantum devices,

    S. Kempf, A. Ferring, and C. Enss, “Towards noise engineering: Recent insights in low-frequency excess flux noise of superconducting quantum devices,” Applied Physics Letters, vol. 109, no. 16, p. 162601, oct 2016

    2016

  21. [29]

    Observation of classical-quantum crossover of 1/f flux noise and its paramagnetic temperature dependence,

    C. M. Quintana, Y . Chen, D. Sank, A. G. Petukhov, T. C. White, D. Kafri, B. Chiaro, A. Megrant, R. Barends, B. Campbell, Z. Chen, A. Dunsworth, A. G. Fowler, R. Graff, E. Jeffrey, J. Kelly, E. Lucero, J. Y . Mutus, M. Neeley, C. Neill, P. J. J. O’Malley, P. Roushan, A. Shaban...

    2017

  22. [30]

    Investigating the individual performances of coupled superconducting transmon qubits,

    H. G. Ahmad, C. Jordan, R. van den Boogaart, D. Waardenburg, C. Zachariadis, P. Mastrovito, A. L. Georgiev, D. Montemurro, G. P. Pepe, M. Arthers, A. Bruno, F. Tafuri, O. Mukhanov, M. Arzeo, and D. Massarotti, “Investigating the individual performances of coupled superconducti...

  23. [31]

    The flux qubit revisited to enhance coherence and reproducibility,

    F. Yan, S. Gustavsson, A. Kamal, J. Birenbaum, A. P. Sears, D. Hover, T. J. Gudmundsen, D. Rosenberg, G. Samach, S. Weber, J. L. Yoder, T. P. Orlando, J. Clarke, A. J. Kerman, and W. D. Oliver, “The flux qubit revisited to enhance coherence and reproducibility,” Nature Communi...

    2016 doi

  24. [32]

    Rapid single-shot measurement of a singlet-triplet qubit,

    C. Barthel, D. J. Reilly, C. M. Marcus, M. P. Hanson, and A. C. Gossard, “Rapid single-shot measurement of a singlet-triplet qubit,” Phys. Rev. Lett. , vol. 103, p. 160503, Oct 2009. [Online]. Available: https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.103.160503

    2009 doi

  25. [33]

    Semiconductor-nanowire- based superconducting qubit,

    T. W. Larsen, K. D. Petersson, F. Kuemmeth, T. S. Jespersen, P. Krogstrup, J. Nyg ˚ard, and C. M. Marcus, “Semiconductor-nanowire- based superconducting qubit,” Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 115, p. 127001, Sep

  26. [34]

    Realization of microwave quantum circuits using hybrid superconducting-semiconducting nanowire Josephson elements,

    G. de Lange, B. van Heck, A. Bruno, D. J. van Woerkom, A. Geresdi, S. R. Plissard, E. P. A. M. Bakkers, A. R. Akhmerov, and L. DiCarlo, “Realization of microwave quantum circuits using hybrid superconducting-semiconducting nanowire Josephson elements,” Phys. Rev. Lett. , vol. ...

    2015 doi

  27. [35]

    4 π- periodic Josephson supercurrent in HgTe-based topological Josephson junctions,

    J. Wiedenmann, E. Bocquillon, R. S. Deacon, S. Hartinger, O. Herrmann, T. M. Klapwijk, L. Maier, C. Ames, C. Br ¨une, C. Gould, A. Oiwa, K. Ishibashi, S. Tarucha, H. Buhmann, and L. W. Molenkamp, “4 π- periodic Josephson supercurrent in HgTe-based topological Josephson junctio...

    2016 doi

  28. [36]

    Majorana qubits in a topological insulator nanoribbon architecture,

    J. Manousakis, A. Altland, D. Bagrets, R. Egger, and Y . Ando, “Majorana qubits in a topological insulator nanoribbon architecture,” Phys. Rev. B , vol. 95, p. 165424, Apr 2017. [Online]. Available: https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevB.95.165424

    2017 doi

  29. [37]

    Ballistic Majorana nanowire devices,

    ¨O. G ¨ul, H. Zhang, J. D. S. Bommer, M. W. A. de Moor, D. Car, S. R. Plissard, E. P. A. M. Bakkers, A. Geresdi, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, and L. P. Kouwenhoven, “Ballistic Majorana nanowire devices,” Nature Nanotechnology, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 192–197, Mar 2018. [Online]. Ava...

    2018 doi

  30. [38]

    Magnetic field compatible circuit quantum electrodynamics with graphene Josephson junctions,

    J. G. Kroll, W. Uilhoorn, K. L. van der Enden, D. de Jong, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, S. Goswami, M. C. Cassidy, and L. P. Kouwenhoven, “Magnetic field compatible circuit quantum electrodynamics with graphene Josephson junctions,” Nature Communications , vol. 9, no. 1, p. 4615...

    2018

  31. [39]

    Superconducting gatemon qubit based on a proximitized two-dimensional electron gas,

    L. Casparis, M. R. Connolly, M. Kjaergaard, N. J. Pearson, A. Kringhøj, T. W. Larsen, F. Kuemmeth, T. Wang, C. Thomas, S. Gronin, G. C. Gardner, M. J. Manfra, C. M. Marcus, and K. D. Petersson, “Superconducting gatemon qubit based on a proximitized two-dimensional electron gas...

    2018 doi

  32. [40]

    Topological insulator nanoribbon Josephson junctions: Evidence for size effects in transport properties,

    G. Kunakova, A. P. Surendran, D. Montemurro, M. Salvato, D. Golubev, J. Andzane, D. Erts, T. Bauch, and F. Lombardi, “Topological insulator nanoribbon Josephson junctions: Evidence for size effects in transport properties,” Journal of Applied Physics , vol. 128, no. 19, p. 194304,

  33. [41]

    Hybrid ferromagnetic transmon qubit: Circuit design, feasibility, and detection protocols for magnetic fluctuations,

    H. G. Ahmad, V . Brosco, A. Miano, L. Di Palma, M. Arzeo, D. Montemurro, P. Lucignano, G. P. Pepe, F. Tafuri, R. Fazio, and D. Massarotti, “Hybrid ferromagnetic transmon qubit: Circuit design, feasibility, and detection protocols for magnetic fluctuations,” Phys. Rev. B , vol....

    2022 doi

  34. [42]

    Ferromagnetic Josephson switching device with high characteristic voltage,

    T. Larkin, V . V . Bol’ginov, V . S. Stolyarov, V . V . Ryazanov, I. V . Vernik, S. K. Tolpygo, and O. A. Mukhanov, “Ferromagnetic Josephson switching device with high characteristic voltage,” Applied Physics Letters, vol. 100, no. 22, p. 222601, 2012. [Online]. Available: htt...

    2012 doi

  35. [43]

    Field modulation of the critical current in magnetic Josephson junctions,

    M. G. Blamire, C. B. Smiet, N. Banerjee, and J. W. A. Robinson, “Field modulation of the critical current in magnetic Josephson junctions,” Superconductor Science and Technology , vol. 26, no. 5, p. 055017, 7 apr 2013. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1088%2F0953-2048% ...

    2013

  36. [44]

    Magnetic Josephson Junctions with superconducting interlayer for cryogenic memory,

    I. V . Vernik, V . V . Bol’ginov, S. V . Bakurskiy, A. A. Golubov, M. Y . Kupriyanov, V . V . Ryazanov, and O. A. Mukhanov, “Magnetic Josephson Junctions with superconducting interlayer for cryogenic memory,” IEEE Transactions on Applied Superconductivity , vol. 23, no. 3, pp....

    2013

  37. [45]

    High quality ferromagnetic 0 and π Josephson tunnel junctions,

    M. Weides, M. Kemmler, E. Goldobin, D. Koelle, R. Kleiner, H. Kohlstedt, and A. Buzdin, “High quality ferromagnetic 0 and π Josephson tunnel junctions,” Applied Physics Letters , vol. 89, no. 12, p. 122511, 2006. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1063/1.2356104

    2006 doi

  38. [46]

    RF assisted switching in magnetic Josephson junctions,

    R. Caruso, D. Massarotti, V . V ., A. Ben-Hamida, N. Karelina, A. Miano, I. Vernik, F. Tafuri, V . Ryazanov, O. Mukhanov, and G. P. Pepe, “RF assisted switching in magnetic Josephson junctions,” Journal of Applied Physics, vol. 123, p. 133901, 04 2018

    2018

  39. [47]

    Characterization of scalable Josephson memory element containing a strong ferromagnet,

    L. Parlato, R. Caruso, A. Vettoliere, R. Satariano, H. G. Ahmad, A. Miano, D. Montemurro, D. Salvoni, G. Ausanio, F. Tafuri, G. P. Pepe, D. Massarotti, and C. Granata, “Characterization of scalable Josephson memory element containing a strong ferromagnet,” Journal of Applied P...

    2020 doi

  40. [49]

    Macroscopic quantum tunnelling in spin filter ferromagnetic Josephson junctions,

    D. Massarotti, A. Pal, G. Rotoli, L. Longobardi, M. G. Blamire, and F. Tafuri, “Macroscopic quantum tunnelling in spin filter ferromagnetic Josephson junctions,” Nature Communications, p. 7376, 2015. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms8376

    2015 doi

  41. [50]

    Electrodynamics of highly spin-polarized tunnel Josephson junctions,

    H. Ahmad, R. Caruso, A. Pal, G. Rotoli, G. Pepe, M. Blamire, F. Tafuri, and D. Massarotti, “Electrodynamics of highly spin-polarized tunnel Josephson junctions,” Phys. Rev. Applied, vol. 13, p. 014017, Jan 2020. [Online]. Available: https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevAppl...

    2020 doi

  42. [51]

    Phase dynamics of tunnel Al-based ferromagnetic Josephson junctions,

    H. G. Ahmad, R. Satariano, R. Ferraiuolo, A. Vettoliere, C. Granata, D. Montemurro, G. Ausanio, L. Parlato, G. P. Pepe, F. Tafuri, and D. Massarotti, “Phase dynamics of tunnel Al-based ferromagnetic Josephson junctions,” Applied Physics Letters , vol. 124, no. 23, p. 232601, 0...

    2024 doi

  43. [52]

    High-quality ferromagnetic Josephson junctions based on aluminum electrodes,

    A. Vettoliere, R. Satariano, R. Ferraiuolo, L. Di Palma, H. G. Ahmad, G. Ausanio, G. P. Pepe, F. Tafuri, D. Massarotti, D. Montemurro et al., “High-quality ferromagnetic Josephson junctions based on aluminum electrodes,” Nanomaterials, vol. 12, no. 23, p. 4155, 2022

    2022

  44. [53]

    Aluminum-ferromagnetic Josephson tunnel junctions for high quality magnetic switching devices,

    A. Vettoliere, R. Satariano, R. Ferraiuolo, L. Di Palma, H. G. Ahmad, G. Ausanio, G. P. Pepe, F. Tafuri, D. Montemurro, C. Granata, L. Parlato, and D. Massarotti, “Aluminum-ferromagnetic Josephson tunnel junctions for high quality magnetic switching devices,” Applied Physics L...

    2022 doi

  45. [54]

    Nanoscale spin ordering and spin screening effects in tunnel ferromagnetic josephson junctions,

    R. Satariano, A. F. V olkov, H. G. Ahmad, L. Di Palma, R. Ferraiuolo, A. Vettoliere, C. Granata, D. Montemurro, L. Parlato, G. P. Pepe, F. Tafuri, G. Ausanio, and D. Massarotti, “Nanoscale spin ordering and spin screening effects in tunnel ferromagnetic josephson junctions,” C...

    2024 doi

  46. [55]

    Evidence of the inverse proximity effect in tunnel magnetic josephson junctions,

    R. Satariano, A. F. V olkov, H. G. Ahmad, L. Di Palma, R. Ferraiuolo, Z. Iqbal, A. Vettoliere, C. Granata, D. Montemurro, L. Parlato, G. P. Pepe, F. Tafuri, G. Ausanio, and D. Massarotti, “Evidence of the inverse proximity effect in tunnel magnetic josephson junctions,” Low Te...

    2024 doi

  47. [56]

    Measurements of macroscopic quantum tunneling out of the zero-voltage state of a current-biased Josephson junction,

    M. H. Devoret, J. M. Martinis, and J. Clarke, “Measurements of macroscopic quantum tunneling out of the zero-voltage state of a current-biased Josephson junction,” Phys. Rev. Lett. , vol. 55, pp. 1908–1911, Oct 1985. [Online]. Available: https://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysR...

    1908

  48. [57]

    Experimental tests for the quantum behavior of a macroscopic degree of freedom: the phase difference across a Josephson junction,

    J. M. Martinis, M. H. Devoret, and J. Clarke, “Experimental tests for the quantum behavior of a macroscopic degree of freedom: the phase difference across a Josephson junction,” Phys. Rev. B , vol. 35, pp. 4682–4698, Apr 1987. [Online]. Available: https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1...

    1987 doi

  49. [58]

    Inverse magnetic hysteresis of the Josephson supercurrent: Study of the magnetic properties of thin niobium/permalloy (Fe20Ni80) interfaces,

    R. Satariano, L. Parlato, A. Vettoliere, R. Caruso, H. G. Ahmad, A. Miano, L. Di Palma, D. Salvoni, D. Montemurro, C. Granata, G. Lamura, F. Tafuri, G. P. Pepe, D. Massarotti, and G. Ausanio, “Inverse magnetic hysteresis of the Josephson supercurrent: Study of the magnetic pro...

    2021 doi

  50. [59]

    Theoretical model of superconducting spintronic SIsFS devices,

    S. V . Bakurskiy, N. V . Klenov, I. I. Soloviev, V . V . Bol’ginov, V . V . Ryazanov, I. V . Vernik, O. A. Mukhanov, M. Y . Kupriyanov, and A. A. Golubov, “Theoretical model of superconducting spintronic SIsFS devices,” Applied Physics Letters , vol. 102, no. 19, p. 192603,

  51. [60]

    Density of states and current-voltage characteristics in SIsFS junctions,

    S. V . Bakurskiy, A. A. Neilo, N. V . Klenov, I. I. Soloviev, A. A. Golubov, and M. Y . Kupriyanov, “Density of states and current-voltage characteristics in SIsFS junctions,” 2020

    2020

  52. [61]

    Josephson junction with a ferromagnetic layer,

    A. I. Buzdin and M. Y . Kupriyanov, “Josephson junction with a ferromagnetic layer,” JETP Lett, vol. 53, no. 6, p. 321, 1991

    1991

  53. [62]

    Spin polarization and orbital effects in superconductor-ferromagnet structures,

    A. F. V olkov, F. S. Bergeret, and K. B. Efetov, “Spin polarization and orbital effects in superconductor-ferromagnet structures,” Phys. Rev. B , vol. 99, p. 144506, Apr 2019. [Online]. Available: https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevB.99.144506

    2019 doi

  54. [63]

    Phase-dependent spin polarization of Cooper pairs in magnetic Josephson junctions,

    S. M. Dahir, A. F. V olkov, and I. M. Eremin, “Phase-dependent spin polarization of Cooper pairs in magnetic Josephson junctions,” Phys. Rev. B , vol. 100, p. 134513, Oct 2019. [Online]. Available: https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevB.100.134513

    2019 doi

  55. [64]

    Supercurrent enhancement in bloch domain walls,

    J. W. A. Robinson, F. Chiodi, M. Egilmez, G. B. Hal ´asz, and M. Blamire, “Supercurrent enhancement in bloch domain walls,” Scientific reports , vol. 2, p. 699, 2012. [Online]. Available: https://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3458244

    2012

  56. [65]

    The interface between superconductivity and magnetism: understanding and device prospects,

    M. G. Blamire and J. W. A. Robinson, “The interface between superconductivity and magnetism: understanding and device prospects,” Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter , vol. 26, no. 45, p. 453201, oct 2014. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1088/0953-8984/26/45/ 453201

    2014 doi

  57. [66]

    Scalable memory elements based on rectangular SIsFS junctions,

    L. N. Karelina, R. A. Hovhannisyan, I. A. Golovchanskiy, V . I. Chichkov, A. Ben Hamida, V . S. Stolyarov, L. S. Uspenskaya, S. A. Erkenov, V . V . , and V . V . Ryazanov, “Scalable memory elements based on rectangular SIsFS junctions,” Journal of Applied Physics, vol. 130, no...

    2021 doi

  58. [67]

    Two- component magnetization in Pd99Fe01 thin films,

    V . V . Bol’ginov, O. A. Tikhomirov, and L. S. Uspenskaya, “Two- component magnetization in Pd99Fe01 thin films,” JETP Letters , vol. 105, no. 3, pp. 169–173, Feb 2017. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1134/S0021364017030055

    2017 doi

  59. [68]

    S/f/s josephson junctions with single-domain ferromagnets for memory applications,

    B. M. Niedzielski, E. C. Gingrich, R. Loloee, W. P. Pratt, and N. O. Birge, “S/f/s josephson junctions with single-domain ferromagnets for memory applications,” Supercond. Sci. Technol. , vol. 28, no. 8, p. 085012, 2015

    2015

  60. [69]

    Switching at small magnetic fields in josephson junctions fabricated with ferromagnetic barrier layers,

    M. Abd El Qader, R. K. Singh, S. N. Galvin, L. Yu, J. M. Rowell, and N. Newman, “Switching at small magnetic fields in josephson junctions fabricated with ferromagnetic barrier layers,” Appl. Phys. Lett., vol. 104, no. 2, p. 022602, 2014

    2014

  61. [70]

    Noise and decoherence in quantum two-level systems,

    A. Shnirman, Y . Makhlin, Y . Makhlin, G. Sch?n, and G. Sch?n, “Noise and decoherence in quantum two-level systems,” Physica Scripta, vol. T102, no. 1, p. 147, 2002. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1238/physica.topical.102a00147

    2002 doi

  62. [71]

    Second-order decoherence mechanisms of a transmon qubit probed with thermal microwave states,

    J. Goetz, F. Deppe, P. Eder, M. Fischer, M. M ¨uting, J. P. Mart ´ınez, S. Pogorzalek, F. Wulschner, E. Xie, K. G. Fedorov, A. Marx, and R. Gross, “Second-order decoherence mechanisms of a transmon qubit probed with thermal microwave states,” Quantum Science and Technol- ogy, ...

    2017

  63. [2013]

    Available: https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4805032

    [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4805032

    doi

  64. [2015]

    Available: https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett

    [Online]. Available: https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett. 115.127001

    doi

  65. [2020]

    Available: https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0022126

    [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0022126

    doi

  66. [2023]

    Available: https://www.mdpi.com/2410-3896/8/1/29

    [Online]. Available: https://www.mdpi.com/2410-3896/8/1/29

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.