Pseudo-superconducting-diode effect in ferroelectric Josephson junctions

Artem Bondarenko; Mazhar N. Ali; Nienke ten Haaf; Yaozu Tang; Yaroslav M. Blanter

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 60 references

Pseudo-superconducting-diode effect in ferroelectric Josephson junctions

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-07-11 · grok-4.5

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

Pith's one-line read Ferroelectric polarization switching in an asymmetric Josephson junction produces unequal critical currents without a magnetic field.

desk verdict Clean dynamical prediction of history-dependent pseudo-SDE from polarization switching in FE-JJs; solid numerics, rests on the linear coupling they deliberately keep small. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.04398 v1 pith:UKYRHP3G submitted 2026-07-05 cond-mat.supr-con cond-mat.mes-hall

Yaozu Tang , Nienke ten Haaf , Artem Bondarenko , Mazhar N. Ali , Yaroslav M. Blanter This is my paper · ORCID

classification cond-mat.supr-concond-mat.mes-hall

keywords superconductingdiodeeffectferroelectricJosephsonjunctionpolarizationswitchingRCSJmodelLandau-Khalatnikov-Tanidynamicsnonreciprocalsupercurrentmagnetic-field-free

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 proposes that an inversion-asymmetric ferroelectric Josephson junction can act as a magnetic-field-free superconducting diode, but only as a history-dependent effect. When bias current is swept hard enough to reverse the ferroelectric polarization, the two polarization states set different critical currents, so the junction switches to the resistive state at unequal thresholds for positive and negative current. The diode efficiency equals the polarization-induced asymmetry factor and vanishes if the polarization never switches. Using a coupled dynamical model that joins a polarization-dependent RCSJ equation to Landau–Khalatnikov–Tani ferroelectric dynamics, the authors show the asymmetry is tunable by ferroelectric parameters and the sweep protocol, appears in both critical and retrapping currents, and survives thermal noise. The result points to electrically programmable, field-free nonreciprocal superconducting elements based on modest-polarization ferroelectrics.

What carries the argument

Coupled phase–polarization dynamics: a polarization-dependent RCSJ equation I = C_0 V̇ + (1 − θP)V/R_0 + (1 − θP)I_c sin ϕ together with Landau–Khalatnikov–Tani ferroelectric dynamics. Polarization switching in the resistive state rewrites the critical-current magnitude for the reverse sweep.

What would settle it

Fabricate an inversion-asymmetric FE-JJ with small spontaneous polarization (e.g., CuInP2S6-like), sweep bias past the polarization-switching threshold, and check whether the measured critical currents reverse with polarization history and give diode efficiency equal to the designed asymmetry factor; if polarization never switches or the critical currents remain equal, the claim fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

In an inversion-asymmetric ferroelectric Josephson junction, current-induced polarization switching during a bias sweep produces unequal critical currents |i_c^+| = 1 + θ̃ and |i_c^-| = 1 − θ̃ (and likewise asymmetric retrapping currents). The resulting nonreciprocity is a pseudo-superconducting-diode effect: it is history-dependent, equals the asymmetry factor θ̃, and disappears when polarization does not switch.

Load-bearing premise

The critical current and resistance stay linearly proportional to polarization at the modest spontaneous polarization needed for voltage-driven switching; a larger polarization would deepen the double well and block the switch that creates the diode effect.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Diode efficiency is electrically set by junction design and spontaneous polarization and equals the asymmetry factor θP0.
Materials with modest polarization and ultrathin barriers are preferred because they allow voltage-driven switching under realistic bias.
The effect remains usable at finite temperature; thermal noise broadens distributions but does not erase the directional asymmetry.
Sweep protocol itself becomes a control knob: below the switching threshold the diode vanishes; above it the device is nonreciprocal.
FE-JJs become candidates for magnetic-field-free, electrically programmable nonreciprocal superconducting circuit elements.

Reading between the lines

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

Because the diode is purely history-dependent, a single preparatory polarization-writing pulse could program the preferred current direction without continuous magnetic bias.
The same coupled dynamics should produce measurable transient voltage spikes or drops during the polarization flip, offering a real-time electrical signature of the switching event.
If resonance between Josephson and ferroelectric modes can be engineered, the diode efficiency or retrapping currents may show additional voltage-step features usable for sensing or multi-state memory.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

The punchline is simple: in an inversion-asymmetric ferroelectric Josephson junction, current-induced polarization switching during a sweep makes the critical currents unequal (|i_c^+|=1+θ̃, |i_c^-|=1-θ̃) because the junction sits in opposite polarization states on the two branches. That is the pseudo-SDE, and it vanishes if the polarization never flips. They get it from a polarization-dependent RCSJ equation coupled to LKT dynamics, derived via Lagrangian in the SM and integrated with Heun, including thermal noise with proper fluctuation-dissipation strengths.

What is actually new is the nonequilibrium, history-dependent mechanism itself—not another equilibrium CPR asymmetry or magnetochiral term. The simulations are clear: I–V and I–P hysteresis, intermediate metastable resistive branches for deeper wells (A=4), rocking potentials, finite-T histograms from 1000 sweeps that keep the asymmetry, and even an extra superconducting pocket from premature thermal escape plus switching. Parameters are taken from literature ranges or chosen for numerical convenience (small P0 ~0.1 µC/cm² so the linear correction stays valid and switching is possible). Diode efficiency equals the asymmetry factor by construction once switching occurs. Self-citations to their prior FE-JJ work are appropriate; the broader SDE literature is covered.

The soft spot is real but exactly the one they flag: everything maps through the linearized (1-θP) factor in both Ic and resistance. They pick modest P0 (CuInP2S6-like) so the approximation holds and the double well is not too deep; larger P0 kills switching. Under the voltages that actually drive LKT switching, higher-order barrier corrections could appear and spoil η=θ̃. No experiment, no shipped code, so this remains a well-specified prediction inside that window. Minor: temperature dependence of Ic is ignored, and the cosϕ shift of the double well is kept but said to be negligible.

This is for people building or modeling nonreciprocal superconducting circuits who already care about FE-JJs or field-free diodes. The math and numerics are careful enough that a serious editor should send it to referees. I would bring it to reading group if we are doing Josephson devices that week, and I would cite the mechanism when discussing electrically programmable nonreciprocity.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a magnetic-field-free pseudo-superconducting-diode effect in inversion-asymmetric ferroelectric Josephson junctions. Coupling a polarization-dependent RCSJ equation (Eq. 2) to Landau-Khalatnikov-Tani dynamics yields history-dependent asymmetric critical and retrapping currents under current sweeps once polarization switches; the diode efficiency equals the asymmetry factor hetã. The nonreciprocity is absent without switching, is tunable by ferroelectric parameters and sweep protocol, and is argued to remain robust under thermal noise via stochastic simulations.

Significance. If the modeled effect is realized, FE-JJs would offer an electrically programmable, magnetic-field-free platform for nonreciprocal superconducting transport, complementing existing SDE mechanisms that typically require broken time-reversal symmetry. The work supplies a concrete, falsifiable dynamical prediction (efficiency tracks hetã and vanishes below the switching threshold) grounded in a Lagrangian derivation of the coupled equations (SM), Heun integration of the SDEs, and 1000-sweep histograms that incorporate fluctuation-dissipation noise. These elements make the proposal a useful theoretical benchmark for ongoing experiments on polarization-controlled supercurrents.

major comments (2)

[Model, Eq. (2) and Nonreciprocity at zero temperature] The central mapping |i_c^+|=1+ hetã, |i_c^-|=1- hetã (hence heta= hetã) is obtained by construction from the linear polarization correction in Eq. (2). The authors deliberately adopt a modest P_0=0.1 µC cm^{-2} so that the linearization remains valid and note that larger P_0 deepens the double well and suppresses switching. However, the voltages that drive LKT switching are precisely the regime in which higher-order (e.g., exponential) corrections to the tunneling barrier become non-negligible. Without a quantitative estimate of the linear window or a brief nonlinear extension, it remains unclear whether heta= hetã survives outside the assumed parameter range; the finite-T histograms and intermediate-branch dynamics inherit the same linear map.
[Thermal effects, Eq. (11) and Fig. 4 caption] Finite-temperature results are presented up to T=1 K while the caption of Fig. 4 estimates T_c ≃ 0.5 K from a simple BCS relation using the chosen I_c R_0. The model keeps I_c fixed (explicitly noted as a simplification) and therefore produces unphysical supercurrents above T_c. Restricting the histograms and Fig. 5 to T ≪ T_c, or restoring a realistic I_c(T), is required before the claim of thermal robustness can be accepted.

minor comments (4)

[Fig. 2 caption] Figure 2 caption contains a duplicated sentence describing the blue/red versus gray curves.
[Introduction] The abbreviation JDE is introduced for Josephson diode effect without prior definition; SDE is used consistently elsewhere.
[Table I] Table I lists physical values for α_{1,2} and γ_p with literature citations; a one-sentence justification that these remain appropriate for the chosen 2-nm barrier and CuInP_2S_6-like P_0 would help readers assess realism.
[SM, Resonance features] In the SM, the resonance features of Fig. S3 are interesting but appear only for an artificially lowered ferroelectric frequency; a brief remark on whether they remain accessible for the main-text parameters would avoid over-interpretation.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

Diode efficiency η=θ̃ is algebraically fixed by the linear (1−θ̃P) model once P switches; the switching dynamics themselves are a non-circular numerical consequence of the coupled equations.

self definitional [Nonreciprocity at zero temperature (text after Fig. 2; also Abstract/Conclusions)]
"The positive critical current is enhanced to i+c=1+θ̃. ... The subsequent negative sweep therefore probes this opposite polarization state, for which the critical-current magnitude is reduced to |i−c|=1−θ̃. The diode efficiency, defined by η=(|i+c|−|i−c|)/(|i+c|+|i−c|), is then equal to the asymmetry factor, η=θ̃=θP0"

Given the linear map Ic(P)=(1−θ̃P)Ic of Eq. (2) and the statement that the sweep drives P from −1 to +1, the equality η=θ̃ follows by direct substitution and cancellation; it is not an independent output of the LKT dynamics. The paper correctly notes the equality, but the numerical value of the diode efficiency is fixed by the model definition rather than computed from a more microscopic tunneling calculation.

full rationale

The paper’s central nonreciprocity claim has two layers. (1) That polarization can switch under a current sweep and thereby make the two critical currents unequal is a genuine dynamical result of the coupled RCSJ–LKT system; it is obtained by integrating Eqs. (5)–(8) (and the stochastic extensions) and is not forced by definition or by a fit. (2) That the resulting diode efficiency equals exactly the input asymmetry factor, η=θ̃, is pure algebra once Eq. (2) has linearized both Ic and the shunt conductance as (1−θ̃P) and the dynamics have driven P from −1 to +1. The paper states this equality transparently rather than presenting it as an independent microscopic prediction. Parameters (βc, A, θ̃, P0, etc.) are taken from literature ranges or chosen for numerical convenience; none is fitted to force the asymmetry. Self-citations ([35] and related) supply the premise that Ic depends on P, but that premise is also supported by external work ([38]) and is not a uniqueness theorem that forbids alternatives. No fitted-input-called-prediction, uniqueness-import, or renaming pattern appears. Overall circularity is therefore minor and definitional only for the magnitude of η, not for the existence or history dependence of the effect.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard Josephson and ferroelectric dynamical models plus a linear polarization correction and a set of numerically convenient parameters chosen so that switching occurs. No new particles or forces are invented; the 'pseudo-SDE' is a named dynamical regime. Free parameters are the device and material numbers that control whether switching (and therefore the diode effect) appears.

free parameters (4)

asymmetry factor θ̃ = θ P_0 = 0.2
Sets diode efficiency η = θ̃ by construction once switching occurs; chosen as 0.2; device-dependent and not derived microscopically here.
spontaneous polarization P_0 = 0.1 μC cm^{-2}
Fixed at 0.1 μC cm^{-2} (smaller than many ferroelectrics) to keep linear approximation valid and enable current-induced switching; larger P_0 suppresses the effect.
Landau coefficient A (and α, β) = 2 or 4 (dimensionless)
Controls double-well depth; scanned at A = 2 and 4; deeper wells produce intermediate metastable resistive states and raise switching threshold.
Stewart-McCumber β_c, inertia μ, damping γ, ν = β_c=30, μ=0.018, γ=0.29, ν=76
Set to underdamped JJ (β_c = 30) and FE parameters from literature ranges so that FE frequency ≫ plasma frequency; control dynamics and retrapping asymmetry.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption Polarization-dependent RCSJ equation with linear corrections to both I_c and conductance (Eq. 2)
Taken from prior FE-JJ tunneling arguments; validity of linearity for the chosen P_0 is assumed, not re-derived.
domain assumption Landau-Khalatnikov-Tani dynamics for ferroelectric polarization with inertial and damping terms
Standard phenomenological FE dynamics; coupled back via polarization current I_p = S Ṗ.
standard math Fluctuation-dissipation theorem for independent Gaussian white noises on JJ and FE channels
Used to set σ_JJ and σ_FE; temperature dependence of I_c itself is ignored for simplicity.
domain assumption Broken inversion symmetry from asymmetric interfacial insulating layers allows a nonzero θ
Structural premise that makes the linear P correction possible; without it the pseudo-SDE vanishes.

invented entities (1)

pseudo-superconducting-diode effect
purpose: Name for the history-dependent, nonequilibrium nonreciprocity arising from polarization switching during current sweeps (distinct from equilibrium SDE).
Terminological label for the simulated dynamical regime; no new microscopic degree of freedom is introduced.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Pseudo-superconducting-diode effect in ferroelectric Josephson junctions." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/UKYRHP3G

@misc{pith2026260704398,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Pseudo-superconducting-diode effect in ferroelectric Josephson junctions},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/UKYRHP3G}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.04398}
}

read the original abstract

The superconducting diode effect (SDE), characterized by unequal critical supercurrents in opposite current directions, enables supercurrent rectification. We propose a magnetic-field-free pseudo-superconducting-diode effect in ferroelectric Josephson junctions with broken inversion symmetry. Using a coupled dynamical model that combines a polarization-dependent RCSJ description with Landau-Khalatnikov-Tani ferroelectric dynamics, we show that ferroelectric polarization switching induces asymmetric critical and retrapping currents under current sweeps. The resulting nonreciprocity is highly tunable via ferroelectric parameters and the sweep protocol and remains robust at finite temperatures. Our work identifies ferroelectric Josephson junctions as a promising platform for magnetic-field-free nonreciprocal superconducting devices.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.04398 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (1 more)

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: shows a representative current sweep at T = 1 K. Compared with the zero-temperature result, shown by the dashed gray curves, thermal fluctuations induce premature switching into the resistive state and earlier [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

60 extracted references · 1 linked inside Pith

[1]

Shockley, The Bell System Technical Journal28, 435 (1949)

W. Shockley, The Bell System Technical Journal28, 435 (1949)

1949
[2]

S. M. Sze,Semiconductor devices: physics and technology (John wiley & sons, 2008)

2008
[3]

F. Ando, Y. Miyasaka, T. Li, J. Ishizuka, T. Arakawa, Y. Shiota, T. Moriyama, Y. Yanase, and T. Ono, Nature 584, 373 (2020)

2020
[4]

H. Wu, Y. Wang, Y. Xu, P. K. Sivakumar, C. Pasco, U. Filippozzi, S. S. P. Parkin, Y.-J. Zeng, T. McQueen, and M. N. Ali, Nature604, 653 (2022)

2022
[5]

Jiang and J

K. Jiang and J. Hu, Nature Physics18, 1145 (2022)

2022
[6]

Nadeem, M

M. Nadeem, M. S. Fuhrer, and X. Wang, Nature Reviews Physics5, 558 (2023)

2023
[7]

M. A. Silaev, A. Y. Aladyshkin, M. V. Silaeva, and A. S. Aladyshkina, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter26, 095702 (2014)

2014
[8]

Bauriedl, C

L. Bauriedl, C. B¨ auml, L. Fuchs, C. Baumgartner, N. Paulik, J. M. Bauer, K.-Q. Lin, J. M. Lupton, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, C. Strunk, and N. Paradiso, Nature Communications13, 4266 (2022)

2022

Show all 60 references

[9]

Narita, J

H. Narita, J. Ishizuka, R. Kawarazaki, D. Kan, Y. Shiota, T. Moriyama, Y. Shimakawa, A. V. Ognev, A. S. Samar- dak, Y. Yanase, and T. Ono, Nature Nanotechnology17, 823 (2022)

2022
[10]

J.-X. Lin, P. Siriviboon, H. D. Scammell, S. Liu, D. Rhodes, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, J. Hone, M. S. Scheurer, and J. Li, Nature Physics18, 1221 (2022)

2022
[11]

W.-S. Du, W. Chen, Y. Zhou, T. Zhou, G. Liu, Z. Xiao, Z. Zhang, Z. Miao, H. Jia, S. Liu, Y. Zhao, Z. Zhang, T. Chen, N. Wang, W. Huang, Z.-B. Tan, J.-J. Chen, and D.-P. Yu, Physical Review B110, 174509 (2024)

2024
[12]

Baumgartner, L

C. Baumgartner, L. Fuchs, A. Costa, S. Reinhardt, S. Gronin, G. C. Gardner, T. Lindemann, M. J. Manfra, P. E. Faria Junior, D. Kochan, J. Fabian, N. Paradiso, and C. Strunk, Nature Nanotechnology17, 39 (2022)

2022
[13]

Baumgartner, L

C. Baumgartner, L. Fuchs, A. Costa, J. Pic´ o-Cort´ es, S. Reinhardt, S. Gronin, G. C. Gardner, T. Lindemann, M. J. Manfra, P. E. Faria Junior, D. Kochan, J. Fabian, N. Paradiso, and C. Strunk, Journal of Physics: Con- densed Matter34, 154005 (2022)

2022
[14]

B. 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, Nature Physics18, 1228 (2022)

2022
[15]

Golod and V

T. Golod and V. M. Krasnov, Nature Communications 13, 3658 (2022)

2022
[16]

Jeon, J.-K

K.-R. Jeon, J.-K. Kim, J. Yoon, J.-C. Jeon, H. Han, A. Cottet, T. Kontos, and S. S. P. Parkin, Nature Mate- rials21, 1008 (2022)

2022
[17]

Gupta, G

M. Gupta, G. V. Graziano, M. Pendharkar, J. T. Dong, C. P. Dempsey, C. Palmstrøm, and V. S. Pribiag, Nature Communications14, 3078 (2023)

2023
[18]

Trahms, L

M. Trahms, L. Melischek, J. F. Steiner, B. Mahendru, I. Tamir, N. Bogdanoff, O. Peters, G. Reecht, C. B. Winkelmann, F. Von Oppen, and K. J. Franke, Nature 615, 628 (2023)

2023
[19]

Wakatsuki, Y

R. Wakatsuki, Y. Saito, S. Hoshino, Y. M. Itahashi, T. Ideue, M. Ezawa, Y. Iwasa, and N. Nagaosa, Science Advances3, e1602390 (2017)

2017
[20]

Tokura and N

Y. Tokura and N. Nagaosa, Nature Communications9, 3740 (2018)

2018
[21]

Daido, Y

A. Daido, Y. Ikeda, and Y. Yanase, Physical Review Let- ters128, 037001 (2022)

2022
[22]

Davydova, S

M. Davydova, S. Prembabu, and L. Fu, Science Advances 8, eabo0309 (2022)

2022
[23]

J. J. He, Y. Tanaka, and N. Nagaosa, New Journal of Physics24, 053014 (2022)

2022
[24]

Morimoto and N

T. Morimoto and N. Nagaosa, Scientific Reports8, 2973 (2018)

2018
[25]

Misaki and N

K. Misaki and N. Nagaosa, Physical Review B103, 245302 (2021)

2021
[26]

Y. M. Itahashi, T. Ideue, S. Hoshino, C. Goto, H. Namiki, T. Sasagawa, and Y. Iwasa, Nature Communications13, 1659 (2022). vi

2022
[27]

R. S. Souto, M. Leijnse, and C. Schrade, Physical Review Letters129, 267702 (2022)

2022
[28]

Ya. V. Fominov and D. S. Mikhailov, Physical Review B 106, 134514 (2022)

2022
[29]

Seoane Souto, M

R. Seoane Souto, M. Leijnse, C. Schrade, M. Valentini, G. Katsaros, and J. Danon, Physical Review Research6, L022002 (2024)

2024
[30]

J. F. Steiner, L. Melischek, M. Trahms, K. J. Franke, and F. Von Oppen, Physical Review Letters130, 177002 (2023)

2023
[31]

F. Liu, Y. M. Itahashi, S. Aoki, Y. Dong, Z. Wang, N. Ogawa, T. Ideue, and Y. Iwasa, Science Advances10, eado1502 (2024)

2024
[32]

Nagata, M

U. Nagata, M. Aoki, A. Daido, S. Kasahara, Y. Kasa- hara, R. Ohshima, Y. Ando, Y. Yanase, Y. Matsuda, and M. Shiraishi, Physical Review Letters134, 236703 (2025)

2025
[33]

S. Qi, J. Ge, C. Ji, Y. Ai, G. Ma, Z. Wang, Z. Cui, Y. Liu, Z. Wang, and J. Wang, Nature Communications16, 531 (2025)

2025
[34]

J. Ma, H. Wang, W. Zhuo, B. Lei, S. Wang, W. Wang, X.- Y. Chen, Z.-Y. Wang, B. Ge, Z. Wang, J. Tao, K. Jiang, Z. Xiang, and X.-H. Chen, Communications Physics8, 125 (2025)

2025
[35]

Y. Tang, M. N. Ali, G. E. W. Bauer, and Y. M. Blanter, Physical Review B113, 144503 (2026)

2026
[36]

Rahmonov, N

I. Rahmonov, N. Chtchelkatchev, and Y. Sjukrinov, in 7th International Workshop on Numerical Modelling of High Temperature Superconductors (HTS 2020)(K´ evin Berger (Universit´ e de Lorraine - GREEN), Nancy (Vir- tual), France, 2021)

2020
[37]

Suleiman, M

M. Suleiman, M. F. Sarott, M. Trassin, M. Badarne, and Y. Ivry, Applied Physics Letters119, 112601 (2021)

2021
[38]

M. A. Badarne, E. G. Dalla Torre, and Y. Ivry, Physical Review Research7, 043234 (2025)

2025
[39]

W. C. Stewart, Applied Physics Letters12, 277 (1968)

1968
[40]

D. E. McCumber, Journal of Applied Physics39, 3113 (1968)

1968
[41]

Tinkham,Introduction to Superconductivity, 2nd ed

M. Tinkham,Introduction to Superconductivity, 2nd ed. (Dover Publications, 2004)

2004
[42]

Tani, Journal of the Physical Society of Japan26, 93 (1969)

K. Tani, Journal of the Physical Society of Japan26, 93 (1969)

1969
[43]

Sivasubramanian, A

S. Sivasubramanian, A. Widom, and Y. N. Srivastava, Ferroelectrics300, 43 (2004)

2004
[44]

K. A. Pitton, M. P. Dubbelman, T. M. Kyrk, H. E. M. Haje, Y. Tang, R. J. H. van der Kolk, Y. M. Blanter, and M. N. Ali, Quantum-material josephson junctions: Unconventional barriers, emerging functionality (2026), arXiv:2603.17921 [cond-mat.supr-con]

2026
[45]

Donaire and A

M. Donaire and A. Cano, Ferroelectric transmon (2026), arXiv:2606.31306 [quant-ph]

2026 arXiv
[46]

See Supplemental Material at [URL will be inserted by publisher] for additional figures, numerical details, and derivations
[47]

A. N. Morozovska, E. A. Eliseev, C. M. Scherbakov, and Y. M. Vysochanskii, Physical Review B94, 174112 (2016)

2016
[48]

D. A. Scrymgeour, V. Gopalan, A. Itagi, A. Saxena, and P. J. Swart, Physical Review B71, 184110 (2005)

2005
[49]

Hlinka and P

J. Hlinka and P. M´ arton, Physical Review B74, 104104 (2006)

2006
[50]

K. M. Rabe, C. H. Ahn, and J.-M. Triscone, eds.,Physics of Ferroelectrics: A Modern Perspective, Topics in Ap- plied Physics No. v. 105 (Springer, Berlin, 2007)

2007
[51]

P. Tang, R. Iguchi, K.-i. Uchida, and G. E. W. Bauer, Physical Review B106, L081105 (2022)

2022
[52]

Tang and G

P. Tang and G. E. W. Bauer, Physical Review Letters 136, 176702 (2026)

2026
[53]

M. D. Fontana, K. Laabidi, and B. Jannot, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter6, 8923 (1994)

1994
[54]

R¨ uemelin, SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis19, 604 (1982)

W. R¨ uemelin, SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis19, 604 (1982)

1982
[55]

Haller, M

R. Haller, M. Osterwalder, G. F¨ ul¨ op, J. Ridderbos, M. Jung, and C. Sch¨ onenberger, Physical Review B108, 094514 (2023)

2023
[56]

Zhou, J.-J

Z. Zhou, J.-J. Zhang, G. F. Turner, S. A. Moggach, Y. Lekina, S. Morris, S. Wang, Y. Hu, Q. Li, J. Xue, Z. Feng, Q. Yan, Y. Weng, B. Xu, Y. Fang, Z. X. Shen, L. Fang, S. Dong, and L. You, Applied Physics Reviews 11, 011414 (2024)

2024
[57]

Maisonneuve, V

V. Maisonneuve, V. B. Cajipe, A. Simon, R. Von Der Muhll, and J. Ravez, Physical Review B56, 10860 (1997)

1997
[58]

F. Liu, L. You, K. L. Seyler, X. Li, P. Yu, J. Lin, X. Wang, J. Zhou, H. Wang, H. He, S. T. Pantelides, W. Zhou, P. Sharma, X. Xu, P. M. Ajayan, J. Wang, and Z. Liu, Nature Communications7, 12357 (2016)

2016
[59]

M. Si, A. K. Saha, P.-Y. Liao, S. Gao, S. M. Neumayer, J. Jian, J. Qin, N. Balke Wisinger, H. Wang, P. Maksy- movych, W. Wu, S. K. Gupta, and P. D. Ye, ACS Nano 13, 8760 (2019)

2019
[60]

A. N. Morozovska, S. V. Kalinin, E. A. Eliseev, S. Kopyl, Y. M. Vysochanskii, and D. R. Evans, Physical Review Applied22, 034059 (2024). S1 Supplemental Material for ”Pseudo-superconducting-diode effect in ferroelectric Josephson junctions” DERIVATION OF THE FE-RCSJ MODEL VIA ...

2024

Pith tools

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

[1] [1]

Shockley, The Bell System Technical Journal28, 435 (1949)

W. Shockley, The Bell System Technical Journal28, 435 (1949)

1949

[2] [2]

S. M. Sze,Semiconductor devices: physics and technology (John wiley & sons, 2008)

2008

[3] [3]

F. Ando, Y. Miyasaka, T. Li, J. Ishizuka, T. Arakawa, Y. Shiota, T. Moriyama, Y. Yanase, and T. Ono, Nature 584, 373 (2020)

2020

[4] [4]

H. Wu, Y. Wang, Y. Xu, P. K. Sivakumar, C. Pasco, U. Filippozzi, S. S. P. Parkin, Y.-J. Zeng, T. McQueen, and M. N. Ali, Nature604, 653 (2022)

2022

[5] [5]

Jiang and J

K. Jiang and J. Hu, Nature Physics18, 1145 (2022)

2022

[6] [6]

Nadeem, M

M. Nadeem, M. S. Fuhrer, and X. Wang, Nature Reviews Physics5, 558 (2023)

2023

[7] [7]

M. A. Silaev, A. Y. Aladyshkin, M. V. Silaeva, and A. S. Aladyshkina, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter26, 095702 (2014)

2014

[8] [8]

Bauriedl, C

L. Bauriedl, C. B¨ auml, L. Fuchs, C. Baumgartner, N. Paulik, J. M. Bauer, K.-Q. Lin, J. M. Lupton, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, C. Strunk, and N. Paradiso, Nature Communications13, 4266 (2022)

2022