Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

This paper argues that hybrid high-voltage plus non-radiative (inductive) power transfer—where a 300 K source drives a resonant coil pair into the 4 K stage, removing wire thermal load and current losses—is the most promising architecture f

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-03 21:41 UTC pith:O5ZVFL26

load-bearing objection Readable architecture survey whose quantitative case for the hybrid collapses because its own equations treat the hybrid as identical to plain non-radiative transfer. the 4 major comments →

arxiv 2511.13965 v1 pith:O5ZVFL26 submitted 2025-11-17 eess.SY cs.SY

Power Delivery for Cryogenic Scalable Quantum Applications: Challenges and Opportunities

Yating Zou , Batuhan Keskin , Gregor G. Taylor , Zenghui Li , Jie Wang , Eduard Alarcon , Fabio Sebastiano , Masoud Babaie
show 1 more author
Edoardo Charbon
This is my paper
classification eess.SY cs.SY
keywords cryogenic power deliverydilution refrigeratorquantum computingwireless power transferinductive couplinghigh-voltage distributionthermal managementcryo-CMOS
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

Quantum computing needs electronics at cryogenic temperatures, but today's room-temperature power feeds through wires impose thermal load, Joule heating, noise, and wiring bottlenecks. This paper compares four power-delivery architectures into a dilution refrigerator: high-voltage wired, radiative wireless, non-radiative (inductive) wireless, and a hybrid of high-voltage plus inductive. It argues the hybrid combines the low current losses of high-voltage distribution with the absence of a physical thermal path, giving the lowest heating at 4 K. If correct, cryogenic control electronics could be scaled to far more qubits per watt of cooling power. The quantitative case rests on a loss model in which transmitter-side coil losses are neglected because they do not heat the 4 K stage.

Core claim

The central claim is that a hybrid solution combining high-voltage wired power transfer with non-radiative (inductive) wireless transfer presents a promising candidate for scalable quantum systems. In this architecture, high voltage is supplied from room temperature and the resonant inductive transmission further reduces current-related losses, while the absence of a wired thermal path between temperature stages eliminates the dominant heat load. The comparison shows that, when delivering the same total power, the hybrid and other wireless approaches can support about three times more qubits than conventional wired transfer, which would require roughly 55 parallel wires to match their loss p

What carries the argument

The central object is the resonant inductive coupling link—a transmitter coil and capacitor resonating at MHz frequencies, magnetically coupled to a matching receiver coil at 4 K, with the received AC rectified to DC. The paper defines the loss of this link as P_loss = P_RX(1−η_coup,coil)/η_coup,coil, where η_coup,coil is the assumed 80% coil-coupling efficiency. For the hybrid, the same equation is used because the transmitter coil loss is neglected on the grounds that it does not cause heating at 4 K. This loss model, together with the removal of the wired thermal load term, is what makes the hybrid's heating performance superior in the comparison.

Load-bearing premise

The recommendation stands or falls on treating the transmitter coil's resistive loss as outside the 4 K stage (neglected in Eq. 5) and on the assumed 80% inductive coupling efficiency; if either is optimistic, the hybrid's loss advantage over wired feeds narrows or reverses.

What would settle it

Instrument a dilution fridge with both a conventional 55-wire copper feed and a hybrid HV plus inductive link delivering 1 W to a 4 K load; measure the total added 4 K heat (receiver losses plus any coil heating) and the 300 K drive input power. The claim fails if the hybrid's heat load is not lower than the wired system's, or if the drive amplifier's input power exceeds the wired system's total input.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Cryogenic quantum control electronics could be powered with far fewer or no physical wires, removing the wiring bottleneck that currently limits scaling toward millions of qubits.
  • At a fixed delivered power of 1 W, wireless and hybrid architectures support roughly three times more qubits than conventional wired power transfer.
  • Eliminating the wired thermal path reduces the 4 K heat load, lowering the cooling power required and easing the burden on the dilution refrigerator.
  • Non-radiative MHz coupling avoids direct interference with qubits operating in the 1–10 GHz range, and the absence of long wires reduces low-frequency noise coupling into the cryogenic electronics.
  • The hybrid architecture achieves very high power density by allowing electronics to be distributed at 4 K without dense interconnect wiring.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the assumed 80% coil-coupling efficiency proves hard to reach inside a real dilution refrigerator with intermediate relay coils, the hybrid's loss advantage shrinks; measuring η_coup,coil in situ with superconducting receiver coils is a testable next step.
  • The hybrid architecture could also power other cryogenic systems with large bias-current cabling needs, such as SNSPD arrays and RSFQ processors, since it removes wire count rather than merely lowering voltage.
  • The analysis neglects the wall-plug power of the 300 K drive amplifier or switching stage; a full end-to-end comparison including that energy cost could change which architecture is truly most efficient.
  • The paper's mention of an intermediate resonant coil at 50 K suggests a multi-stage magnetic relay extension of the hybrid, which could push efficiency and range further for larger cryostats.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper surveys power-delivery architectures for electronics operating in a dilution refrigerator: conventional wired transfer, high-voltage (HV) wired transfer, radiative wireless transfer, non-radiative wireless transfer, and a hybrid HV plus non-radiative approach. It derives simple loss expressions, compares the architectures across thermal load, power loss, heating, noise, power density, scalability, reliability, and complexity, and concludes that the hybrid approach is a promising candidate for scalable quantum systems. The principal quantitative claim is that the hybrid supports roughly 3 times more qubits than conventional wiring for a fixed delivered power (Fig. 4).

Significance. The paper addresses a real and increasingly important bottleneck: wiring-related thermal load and Joule loss in scaled cryogenic quantum systems. The qualitative taxonomy of architectures and the attempt to place them in a common comparison framework are useful for the community, and the paper is clearly organized. However, the quantitative support for the central conclusion is currently undercut by the model itself: the distinguishing term of the hybrid architecture is dropped in the loss derivation, so the main numerical claims do not actually test the proposed advantage. If the model is corrected and the claimed benefit survives, the paper would make a useful contribution; in its current form it supports only a qualitative conclusion.

major comments (4)
  1. [III.A, Eqs. (4)-(5) and Fig. 4] Equation (5) is presented as the power loss of the hybrid HV+non-radiative architecture, but it is identical to Eq. (4), the loss expression for plain non-radiative transfer. The only term that could distinguish the hybrid, the transmitter-coil Joule loss (P_RX/V_RX_HV)^2 R_TX_coil, is rejected because it "does not cause heating at 4 K." If the transmitter coil is at room temperature, the same rejection must apply to the non-radiative case, making the two models identical by construction. If the transmitter coil is inside the cryostat, the loss cannot be neglected. Thus the claim that HV "reduces current-related losses" is not represented in the model, and the 3x-qubit and 55-wire equivalences in Fig. 4(b) are inherited from the non-radiative curve. The authors should either include the transmitter-side loss with its thermal location made explicit, or explicitly rescope the conclusion to
  2. [III.A, III.B, Eq. (8)] The loss model omits the receiver-side power conversion losses at 4 K, even though Section III.B acknowledges that a cryogenic DC/DC buck converter introduces additional heating and Eq. (8) provides a converter efficiency expression. The heating comparison for the hybrid should include the AC/DC or DC/DC conversion stage on the receiver side; otherwise the "superior heating performance" claim is incomplete, especially when the converter is inside the fridge.
  3. [III.A and Fig. 4] The assumed efficiencies (eta_coup,ant = 70%, eta_coup,coil = 80%, eta_rad,r = 90%) are stated without a reference or sensitivity analysis. The non-radiative and hybrid loss curves scale as (1 - eta_coup,coil)/eta_coup,coil, so the claimed ~3x qubit advantage over wired transfer depends critically on the 80% coil-coupling assumption. A sensitivity sweep (e.g., eta_coup,coil from 50% to 95%) or a citation to measured/simulated coupling values for realistic cryogenic coil geometry is needed before these numbers can be considered quantitative.
  4. [III.D and Table I] There is an internal inconsistency: Table I rates "HV Non-radiative Transfer" as having "Very High" power density, while Section III.D states that "HV wired transfer exhibits the highest power density." The comparison table and the text should be reconciled, and the power-density metric should be defined quantitatively.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Abstract] Typo: "dilution frige" should be "dilution fridge." Also "siginificant" in the introduction and "diffferent" in Section III.A should be corrected.
  2. [III.A] For radiative transfer, the text says transmitter-antenna resistive loss is not considered, but Eq. (3) includes radiation efficiency and coupling efficiency; the relationship between these quantities and the omitted resistive loss should be explained more clearly.
  3. [III.C] The claim that wireless architectures achieve a 10^3-10^4 lower noise density than wired transfer is presented without derivation or reference. A citation or a brief calculation would strengthen the claim.
  4. [Fig. 4] Figure 4(a) and (b) would benefit from labeled curves and axis units; currently the reader has to infer which architecture is which from the text, and the 55-wire equivalence is not shown explicitly.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: losses are stated definitions and assumed efficiencies; the hybrid/non-radiative degeneracy is under-modeling, not circular reasoning.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular. Equations (1) and (2) are algebraic definitions of I^2R wire loss, and Eqs. (3)-(5) express losses directly in terms of explicitly stated efficiencies (eta_coup_ant = 70%, eta_coup_coil = 80%, eta_rad_r = 90%) and delivered power; these efficiencies are assumptions, not parameters fitted so that any conclusion emerges. The comparison in Fig. 4 follows arithmetically from these expressions. The coincidence Ploss,comb = Ploss,non-rad (Eq. (5) equals Eq. (4)) is an acknowledged modeling simplification: the transmitter-coil loss is excluded because it is assumed not to heat the 4 K stage. That is a modeling choice and an unsupported quantitative claim about the hybrid's advantage, but it is not circular reasoning; no fitted input is renamed as a prediction, and no result is defined in terms of the conclusion. The self-citations (e.g., [1], [2], [5]) provide domain context about cryo-CMOS systems but are not load-bearing for the power-loss comparison or the final recommendation. No uniqueness theorem or ansatz is imported via citations, and the paper does not rename a known empirical pattern as a new result. The main limitation is that Eq. (5) discards the one term that distinguishes the hybrid from non-radiative transfer, which is a correctness/validity concern rather than a circularity concern.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

5 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central comparison rests on standard circuit/thermal identities plus three assumed coupling efficiencies (70/80/90%), a 5 mW/qubit power model, example voltage levels, and qualitative domain assumptions about qubit-band separation, superconducting receiver losses, and fridge stability. None of the assumed efficiencies is sourced or varied. No new physical entities are introduced, and there is no fitted-to-conclusion circularity. The main structural weakness is under-modeling: Eqs. (4) and (5) are identical once the transmitter-coil loss is neglected, so the recommended hybrid inherits all its quantitative loss behavior from the pure non-radiative architecture.

free parameters (5)
  • Antenna coupling efficiency eta_coup,ant = 0.70
    Assumed 70% for radiative-transfer loss in Eq. (3) and Fig. 4; no source, measurement, or sensitivity analysis, though the loss ordering is sensitive to it.
  • Coil coupling efficiency eta_coup,coil = 0.80
    Assumed 80% in Eqs. (4)-(5); sets the loss floor for both non-radiative architectures and hence for the recommended hybrid.
  • Radiation efficiency eta_rad,r = 0.90
    Assumed 90% in Eq. (3); unsourced and unvaried.
  • Power per qubit P_qubit = ~5 mW
    Assumed for Fig. 4 ('assuming power consumption 5 mW per qubit'); Sec. II cites a 1-10 mW range for cryo-CMOS controllers.
  • HV received voltage V_RX_HV = 12 V (example)
    Example step-down '12 V to 3.3 V' in the Fig. 3 discussion; the Fig. 4 scaling comparison depends on the chosen voltage ratio.
axioms (5)
  • standard math Carnot COP with a correction factor eta_C models the fridge cooling burden (Eq. 7)
    Standard thermodynamic identity; used to translate 4K heating into effective RT electrical power demand.
  • domain assumption Moving control/readout electronics to 4K is the right scaling path (Refs. [1]-[3])
    The whole power-delivery problem is framed by the cryo-electronics movement; if RT electronics remain viable at scale, most of the compared architectures are moot.
  • domain assumption Superconducting receiver coils/antennas at 4K have negligible resistive loss
    Invoked in Sec. III.A to delete receiver-side losses without quantitative justification.
  • domain assumption Qubits operate near 1-10 GHz; radiative (>10 GHz) and non-radiative (MHz) bands avoid interference, and residual EMI can be shielded
    Stated qualitatively in Secs. II and III.E; no EMI analysis and no citation on cryogenic shielding effectiveness is provided.
  • domain assumption The dilution refrigerator structure is stable enough for precise antenna/coil alignment
    Sec. III.A: 'the stable structure of the dilution refrigerator enables precise alignment between transmitter and receiver antennas.'

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 7153 in / 17937 out tokens · 173076 ms · 2026-08-03T21:41:19.239319+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Quantum technologies offer unprecedented capabilities in computation and secure information transfer. Their implementation requires qubits to operate at cryogenic temperatures (CT) while control and readout electronics typically still remains at room temperature (RT). As systems scale to millions of qubits, the electronics should also operate at CT to avoid a wiring bottleneck. However, wired power transfer from RT for such electronics introduces severe challenges, including thermal load between cooling stages, Joule heating, noise coupling, and wiring scalability. This paper addresses those challenges by evaluating several candidate architectures for scalable power transfer in the dilution frige: high-voltage (HV) wired power transfer, radiative wireless transfer, non-radiative wireless transfer, and a hybrid HV and non-radiative transfer. These architectures are analyzed in terms of thermal load, power loss, heating, coupling noise, power density, scalability, reliability, and complexity. Comparative analysis demonstrates the trade-offs among these architectures, while highlighting HV non-radiative transfer as a promising candidate for scalable quantum systems.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2511.13965 by Batuhan Keskin, Edoardo Charbon, Eduard Alarcon, Fabio Sebastiano, Gregor G. Taylor, Jie Wang, Masoud Babaie, Yating Zou, Zenghui Li.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Existing wired power transfer in dilution fridge: (a) diagram of wired [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Different power transfer architectures in and around a dilution [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Power comparison of different architectures: (a) power loss (b) the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_4.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Wireless millikelvin interconnects for superconducting quantum hardware

    quant-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0

    First demonstration that wireless microwave delivery preserves the intrinsic response of a superconducting resonator at millikelvin temperatures, while revealing stray-radiation coupling that lowers the loaded quality factor.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

25 extracted references · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Cryo-cmos for quantum computing,

    E. Charbon, F. Sebastiano, A. Vladimirescu, H. Homulle, S. Visser, L. Songet al., “Cryo-cmos for quantum computing,” inIEEE Int. Electron Devices Meeting (IEDM), 2016, pp. 13.5.1–13.5.4

    2016

  2. [2]

    19.1 a scalable cryo-cmos 2-to-20ghz digitally intensive controller for 4×32 frequency multiplexed spin qubits/transmons in 22nm finfet technology for quantum computers,

    B. Patra, J. P. G. Van Dijk, S. Subramanian, A. Corna, X. Xue, C. Jeonet al., “19.1 a scalable cryo-cmos 2-to-20ghz digitally intensive controller for 4×32 frequency multiplexed spin qubits/transmons in 22nm finfet technology for quantum computers,” inIEEE Int. Solid- State Circuits Conf. (ISSCC) Dig. Tech. Papers, 2020, pp. 304–306

    2020

  3. [3]

    29.4 a cryo-cmos quantum computing unit interface chipset in 28nm bulk cmos with phase-detection based readout and phase-shifter based pulse generation,

    Y . Guo, K. Van Gasse, D. J. van Woerkom, A. Corna, S. Subramanian, F. Sheikhet al., “29.4 a cryo-cmos quantum computing unit interface chipset in 28nm bulk cmos with phase-detection based readout and phase-shifter based pulse generation,” inIEEE Int. Solid-State Circuits Conf. (ISSCC) Dig. Tech. Papers, 2024, pp. 476–478

    2024

  4. [4]

    Cryogenic low-drop-out regulators fully integrated with quantum dot array in 22-nm fd-soi cmos,

    D. Andrade-Miceli, K. Das, T. Tanttu, C.-H. Yang, N. Dumoulin Stuyck, S. J. Paukaet al., “Cryogenic low-drop-out regulators fully integrated with quantum dot array in 22-nm fd-soi cmos,” inIEEE MTT-S Int. Microwave Symp. (IMS), 2021, pp. 635–637

    2021

  5. [5]

    Cryo-cmos voltage references for the ultrawide temperature range from 300 k down to 4.2 k,

    J. van Staveren, P. M. Padalia, E. Charbon, C. G. Almudever, G. Scap- pucci, M. Babaieet al., “Cryo-cmos voltage references for the ultrawide temperature range from 300 k down to 4.2 k,”IEEE J. Solid-State Circuits, vol. 59, no. 9, pp. 2884–2894, Sep. 2024

    2024

  6. [6]

    A 5.6–100k, 128ppm/k cryo-cmos current reference,

    S. Ray, A. Benyamini, D. Black, D. Bonneau, S. Burgos, B. Burridge et al., “A 5.6–100k, 128ppm/k cryo-cmos current reference,” inSymp. VLSI Technology and Circuits (VLSI Technology and Circuits), 2025, pp. 1–3

    2025

  7. [7]

    Development of dilution refrigerators—a review,

    H. Zu, W. Dai, and A. T. A. M. De Waele, “Development of dilution refrigerators—a review,”Cryogenics, vol. 121, p. 103390, 2022

    2022

  8. [8]

    Engineering cryogenic setups for 100-qubit scale superconducting circuit systems,

    S. Krinner, S. Storz, P. Kurpiers, P. Magnard, J. Heinsoo, R. Kelleret al., “Engineering cryogenic setups for 100-qubit scale superconducting circuit systems,”EPJ Quantum Technol., vol. 6, p. 2, 2019

    2019

  9. [9]

    (2024) Wiring catalog

    Bluefors. (2024) Wiring catalog. [Online]. Available: https://bluefors.com/products/measurement-infrastructure/twisted- pair-wiring/

    2024

  10. [10]

    Superconducting photon detectors,

    D. V . Morozov, A. Casaburi, and R. H. Hadfield, “Superconducting photon detectors,”Contemporary Physics, vol. 62, no. 2, pp. 69–91, Apr. 2021

    2021

  11. [11]

    Superconducting nanowire single-photon detectors with 98% system detection efficiency at 1550 nm,

    D. V . Reddy, R. R. Nerem, S. W. Nam, R. P. Mirin, and V . B. Verma, “Superconducting nanowire single-photon detectors with 98% system detection efficiency at 1550 nm,”Optica, vol. 7, no. 12, p. 1649, Nov. 2020

    2020

  12. [12]

    Low-noise single-photon counting superconducting nanowire detectors at infrared wavelengths up to 29µm,

    G. G. Taylor, A. B. Walter, B. Korzh, B. Bumble, S. R. Patel, J. P. Allmaraset al., “Low-noise single-photon counting superconducting nanowire detectors at infrared wavelengths up to 29µm,”Optica, vol. 10, no. 12, p. 1672, Dec. 2023

    2023

  13. [13]

    Demonstration of sub-3 ps temporal resolution with a superconducting nanowire single-photon detector,

    B. Korzh, Q.-Y . Zhao, J. P. Allmaras, S. Frasca, T. M. Autry, E. A. Bersinet al., “Demonstration of sub-3 ps temporal resolution with a superconducting nanowire single-photon detector,”Nat. Photonics, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 250–255, Mar. 2020

    2020

  14. [14]

    RSFQ logic/memory family: A new Josephson-junction technology for sub-terahertz-clock-frequency digital systems,

    K. Likharev and V . Semenov, “RSFQ logic/memory family: A new Josephson-junction technology for sub-terahertz-clock-frequency digital systems,”IEEE Transactions on Applied Superconductivity, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 3–28, Mar. 1991

    1991

  15. [15]

    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,” in2019 IEEE International Electron Devices Meeting (IEDM). San Francisco, CA, USA: IEEE, Dec. 2019, ...

    2019

  16. [16]

    Spin-qubit control with a milli-kelvin CMOS chip,

    PsiQuantum team, S. K. AlexanderBartee, W. Gilbert, K. Zuo, A. Benyamini, D. Black, D. Bonneau, S. Burgoset al., “Spin-qubit control with a milli-kelvin CMOS chip,”Nature, vol. 643, no. 8071, pp. 382–387, Jul. 2025

    2025

  17. [17]

    Design and Characterization of a<4-mW/Qubit 28-nm Cryo-CMOS Integrated Circuit for Full Control of a Superconducting Quantum Processor Unit Cell,

    J. Yoo, Z. Chen, F. Arute, S. Montazeri, M. Szalay, C. Erickson, E. Jeffrey, R. Fatemi, M. Giustina, M. Ansmann, E. Lucero, J. Kelly, and J. C. Bardin, “Design and Characterization of a<4-mW/Qubit 28-nm Cryo-CMOS Integrated Circuit for Full Control of a Superconducting Quantum Processor Unit Cell,”IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits, vol. 58, no. 11, pp....

    2023

  18. [18]

    A 0.32×0.12 mm 2 Cryogenic BiCMOS 0.1–8.8 GHz Low Noise Amplifier Achieving 4 K Noise Temperature for SNWD Readout,

    Y . Peng, J. Benserhir, M. Castaneda, A. Fognini, C. Bruschini, and E. Charbon, “A 0.32×0.12 mm 2 Cryogenic BiCMOS 0.1–8.8 GHz Low Noise Amplifier Achieving 4 K Noise Temperature for SNWD Readout,” IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques, vol. 72, no. 4, pp. 2179–2192, Apr. 2024

    2024

  19. [19]

    A Wideband Cryogenic Readout Amplifier with Temperature-Insensitive Gain for SNSPD,

    X. Niu, L. Li, X. Wu, and D. Wang, “A Wideband Cryogenic Readout Amplifier with Temperature-Insensitive Gain for SNSPD,”Sensors, vol. 22, no. 3, p. 1225, Feb. 2022

    2022

  20. [20]

    Cryo-cmos readout of single-photon detectors for color-center quantum computers,

    G. Carboni, M. Li, M. C. van der Maas, L. Enthoven, L. Jin, J. Benserhir et al., “Cryo-cmos readout of single-photon detectors for color-center quantum computers,” inIEEE Eur . Solid-State Electron. Res. Conf. (ESSERC), 2025

    2025

  21. [21]

    Integration of a 4-Stage 4 K Pulse Tube Cryocooler Prototype With a Superconducting Integrated Circuit,

    V . Dotsenko, J. Delmas, R. Webber, T. Filippov, D. Kirichenko, S. Sar- wana, D. Gupta, A. Kadin, and E. Track, “Integration of a 4-Stage 4 K Pulse Tube Cryocooler Prototype With a Superconducting Integrated Circuit,”IEEE Transactions on Applied Superconductivity, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 1003–1007, Jun. 2009

    2009

  22. [22]

    A 0.45-mm2 3.49-tops/w cryogenic deep reinforcement learning module for end-to-end integrated circuits control,

    J. Xu, J. Kan, Y . Shen, E. Chen, and V . Chen, “A 0.45-mm2 3.49-tops/w cryogenic deep reinforcement learning module for end-to-end integrated circuits control,”IEEE Open J. Solid-State Circuits Soc., vol. 5, pp. 240– 250, 2025

    2025

  23. [23]

    Sub-µw battery-less and oscillator-less wi-fi backscattering transmitter reusing rf signal for harvesting, communications, and motion detection,

    M. Privitera, A. Ballo, K. Ali, A. D. Grasso, M. Alioto, S. Rayet al., “Sub-µw battery-less and oscillator-less wi-fi backscattering transmitter reusing rf signal for harvesting, communications, and motion detection,” IEEE J. Solid-State Circuits, vol. 60, no. 6, pp. 1947–1958, Jun. 2025

    1947

  24. [24]

    Efficiency analysis of magnetic resonance wireless power transfer with intermediate resonant coil,

    J. Kim, H.-C. Son, K.-H. Kim, and Y .-J. Park, “Efficiency analysis of magnetic resonance wireless power transfer with intermediate resonant coil,”IEEE Antennas Wireless Propag. Lett., vol. 10, pp. 389–392, 2011

    2011

  25. [25]

    Energy use in quantum data centers: Scaling the impact of computer architecture, qubit performance, size, and thermal parameters,

    M. J. Martin, A. Khosrowshahi, A. Holmes, J. Shalf, K. R. Brown, C. Monroeet al., “Energy use in quantum data centers: Scaling the impact of computer architecture, qubit performance, size, and thermal parameters,”IEEE Trans. Sustainable Comput., vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 864– 874, Oct. 2022

    2022