pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.02737 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-03 · ❄️ cond-mat.mes-hall

Boundary Potential Method for Describing Electron Teleportation in an Interferometer with a Topological Superconductor

Kyosuke Mizuno , Yuto Takarabe , Yositake Takane This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-13 18:46 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.mes-hall
keywords boundary potential methodelectron teleportationMajorana zero modestopological superconductorinterferometerscattering theoryconductancecharging energy
0
0 comments X

The pith

A boundary potential method based on scattering theory calculates conductance in topological superconductor interferometers while enforcing the electron number constraint.

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

The paper develops a method to handle the challenge of constrained electron number in interferometers with topological superconductors. Majorana zero modes create a non-local state that enables electron teleportation through resonant tunneling when the number of electrons is fixed by charging energy. Standard approaches struggle with this constraint. The proposed boundary potential method introduces an effective potential at the boundaries within scattering theory to enforce the constraint on electron number. This allows inclusion of charging energy and system details in conductance calculations.

Core claim

We propose a boundary potential method based on scattering theory for calculating the conductance of the interferometer under a given constraint on N. This method enables us to calculate the conductance taking account of relevant charging energy and details of the system.

What carries the argument

Boundary potential applied at the ends of the superconductor to enforce electron number constraint N within scattering theory for transport calculations.

If this is right

  • Conductance can be computed while accounting for charging energy effects on the interferometer.
  • Resonant tunneling through the non-local Majorana state is captured in the transport calculation.
  • Relevant system details enter the conductance without requiring a full microscopic many-body treatment.
  • Unusual transport properties expected from electron teleportation become quantifiable.
  • The method works under a fixed constraint on electron number N.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same boundary-potential approach may simplify modeling of other constrained transport problems that involve zero modes.
  • It could be used to predict how teleportation signatures change with device geometry or lead couplings.
  • Extensions to finite bias or time-dependent driving would test whether the method remains accurate beyond linear response.

Load-bearing premise

The boundary potential can effectively enforce the constraint on electron number N and capture the resonant tunneling through the non-local Majorana state without needing additional many-body corrections.

What would settle it

Comparing conductance values from the boundary potential method against exact numerical results from small-system diagonalization or against measured transport in fabricated devices would test whether the method reproduces the teleportation effect.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.02737 by Kyosuke Mizuno, Yositake Takane, Yuto Takarabe.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Interferometer consists of a topological superconductor wire of N sites, which is connected to ground by a capacitor, and an infinitely long normal metal lead. The left end (i.e., the 1st site) and the right end (i.e., the Nth site) of the superconductor are connected to the 1st and Mth sites of the normal metal lead, respectively, where t1 (t2) represents the transfer integral between the 1st (Nth) site i… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Schematics of scattering processes that transfer an elec￾tron at the Mth site to an electron at the 1st site when the ground state is G2l . Only the processes involving the non-local state with E1 are shown. The process (a) is included in V eσ,eσ′ 1M (E) E + whereas the process (b) accompanying the splitting and recombi￾nation of a Cooper pair is included in V eσ,eσ′ 1M (E) E − . have a pole at E > 0 (E < … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: (Color online) Dimensionless non-local conductance g(V ) of the interferometer in the absence of the charging effect at eV /Eg = 0 and 0.01. probabilities in Eq. (77) are determined by solving the corresponding scattering problem. In the presence of the charging effect, Andreev reflection processes are forbid￾den and the second term of g vanishes. We set N = 400, M = 440, t ′ = t, ∆ = 0.1t, λ = 0.3t, t1 = … view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: shows g(V ) in the presence of the charging effect, where the charging energy is δU/Eg = (a) 0.0002, (b) 0.002, (c) 0.02, and (d) 0.02. In this case, a peak structure due to electron teleportation appears in g(V ) near eV = δU or −δU depending on the constraint. In (a)–(c), solid lines represent the zero-bias conductance g(0) under the constraint G2l ↔ E2l±1. The results for G2l ↔ E2l+1 and G2l ↔ E2l−1 are… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

One-dimensional topological superconductors accommodate a pair of Majorana zero modes at their ends. In an interferometer containing such a topological superconductor, electron transport is significantly affected by the Majorana zero modes constituting a non-local state localized near both ends of the superconductor. When the number of electrons $\mathcal{N}$ in the superconductor is constrained by a charging effect, the resonant tunneling through the non-local state is expected to result in unusual transport properties. This resonant tunneling, called electron teleportation, is not easy to describe because there is no simple method to handle the constraint on $\mathcal{N}$. Here, we propose a boundary potential method based on scattering theory for calculating the conductance of the interferometer under a given constraint on $\mathcal{N}$. This method enables us to calculate the conductance taking account of relevant charging energy and details of the system.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 0 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a boundary potential method based on scattering theory to calculate the conductance of an interferometer containing a topological superconductor, subject to a constraint on the total electron number N. The approach aims to incorporate charging energy effects and system details to model resonant tunneling (electron teleportation) through non-local Majorana zero modes without requiring a full many-body treatment.

Significance. If rigorously validated, the method could offer a practical single-particle scattering framework for incorporating charging-induced constraints into transport calculations for Majorana-based interferometers, potentially simplifying analysis of parity-dependent resonances. However, the absence of derivations, benchmarks against exact many-body results, or error analysis substantially limits its current significance.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The central claim that a local boundary potential enforces the global constraint on N and correctly captures charging energy for non-local Majorana teleportation lacks any derivation or proof of equivalence to the many-body charging term; this equivalence is load-bearing for the method's validity in single-particle scattering.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: No explicit equations for the boundary potential, no numerical conductance calculations, and no comparisons to alternative approaches (e.g., full BdG with parity projection) are presented, so the claim that the method accounts for 'relevant charging energy and details of the system' remains unsupported.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful review and constructive comments on our manuscript. We address each major comment point by point below and have revised the manuscript to provide additional derivations, explicit equations, and supporting calculations as needed.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The central claim that a local boundary potential enforces the global constraint on N and correctly captures charging energy for non-local Majorana teleportation lacks any derivation or proof of equivalence to the many-body charging term; this equivalence is load-bearing for the method's validity in single-particle scattering.

    Authors: We agree that a more explicit justification is required. The boundary potential is introduced within the scattering formalism to enforce the global electron-number constraint by self-consistently adjusting the local potential at the superconductor boundaries, thereby incorporating the charging-energy penalty without a full many-body treatment. In the revised manuscript we will add a dedicated derivation section showing how this local adjustment reproduces the parity-dependent resonance condition for non-local Majorana teleportation, including the mapping to the charging term in the effective Hamiltonian. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: No explicit equations for the boundary potential, no numerical conductance calculations, and no comparisons to alternative approaches (e.g., full BdG with parity projection) are presented, so the claim that the method accounts for 'relevant charging energy and details of the system' remains unsupported.

    Authors: The manuscript presents the conceptual framework but we acknowledge that the abstract and main text would benefit from greater explicitness. We will include the explicit expression for the boundary potential (a term proportional to the deviation from the target electron number N), sample numerical conductance traces demonstrating the teleportation resonance, and a direct comparison to parity-projected Bogoliubov-de Gennes calculations to substantiate the claim that relevant charging energy and system details are accounted for. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; method is a direct application of scattering theory

full rationale

The derivation introduces a boundary potential within standard scattering theory to enforce the N constraint for Majorana teleportation. No equations reduce to inputs by construction, no fitted parameters are relabeled as predictions, and no load-bearing steps rely on self-citation chains or ansatzes smuggled from prior work. The approach remains self-contained against external scattering benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the applicability of scattering theory to the interferometer and the assumption that a boundary potential suffices to model the charging constraint on N.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Scattering theory applies to model electron transport and conductance in the interferometer setup.
    The method is explicitly based on scattering theory for calculating conductance under the N constraint.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5453 in / 1078 out tokens · 24210 ms · 2026-05-13T18:46:59.232845+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

48 extracted references · 48 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    Its creation and annihilation op- erators are identical indicating that the degree of free- dom of a Majorana zero mode is less than that of a sin- gle fermion

    Introduction Topological superconductors accommodate Majorana zero modes at their boundary.1–3) A Majorana zero mode is an equal superposition of electron and hole states ap- pearing at zero energy. Its creation and annihilation op- erators are identical indicating that the degree of free- dom of a Majorana zero mode is less than that of a sin- gle fermio...

    work page

  2. [2]

    Boundary Potential Method for Describing Electron Teleportation in an Interferometer with a Topological Superconductor

    Under this assumption,Nis constrained to vary between 2land 2l+ 1. This constraint prohibits Andreev reflection processes, which increase or decrease Nby two. Without these processes, the electron tele- portation can affect the transport properties of electrons through the superconductor. 10) For experimental detection of the electron teleporta- tion,10–1...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  3. [3]

    We ex- press this constraint as G2l ↔E 2l+1

    If the gate charge isQ 0 =Q 2l+ 1 2 −δQ, the ground state G 2l is nearly degenerate with the first excited state E 2l+1 and δU≡U(2l+ 1)−U(2l) = eδQ Cc >0.(3) In this case,Nis constrained to vary between 2land 2l+1 in the scattering processes of a quasiparticle. We ex- press this constraint as G2l ↔E 2l+1. IfQ 0 =Q 2l+ 1 2 +δQ, the ground state G 2l+1 is n...

    work page

  4. [4]

    Model and Symmetry We consider an interferometer consisting of a one- dimensional topological superconductor, which accom- modates a pair of the Majorana zero modes at its ends, and a normal metal lead (see Fig. 1). We express the Hamiltonian for this interferometer as H=H TS +H N +H T,(5) whereH TS andH N describes the topological supercon- ductor and th...

    work page

  5. [5]

    We obtain its components using a functional in- tegration technique in the absence of the charging effect

    Boundary Potential The boundary potential26,27) describes the effect of the superconductor on the normal metal lead at a given en- ergyE. We obtain its components using a functional in- tegration technique in the absence of the charging effect. Using Eq. (24) and (25) with Eqs. (20)–(22), we can ex- pressH T in terms of{d n}and{d † n}. In the Matsubara re...

    work page

  6. [6]

    Andreev reflection processes are forbidden because these processes increase or decreaseNby two

    Charging Effect on the Scattering Problem We consider the scattering problem under a given con- straint such as G 2l ↔E 2l±1 and G2l±1 ↔E 2l. Andreev reflection processes are forbidden because these processes increase or decreaseNby two. Therefore, an electron state is not mixed with a hole state. As a result, the scattering processes of an incident elect...

    work page

  7. [7]

    v1σ(1)v1σ′(N) −E−iδ−E 1 +δU + 2NX n=2 unσ(1)unσ′(N) −E−iδ+E n +δU # ,(73) V eσ,eσ′ 1M (E) O − =e −iϕt1t2

    The charging effect on the other bogolon states is considered later. Carrying out the procedure described in Sect. 3, we obtain the boundary potential in G 2l±1. The result- ing boundary potential is equivalent to that obtained by replacingE 1 with−E 1 +δUand exchangingu 1σ(j) and v1σ(j) forj= 1, Nin the boundary potential given in Sect. 3. For example,V ...

    work page

  8. [8]

    We focus on the low bias regime where eV≪E g because we are interested in the electron trans- port caused by electron teleportation

    Numerical Results In this section, we numerically calculate the dimen- sionless non-local conductancegof the interferometer, which is defined at zero temperature as 29–33) g(V) = X σ,σ′=↑,↓ |te σσ ′(E)|2 − |th σσ ′(E)|2 E=eV ,(77) as a function ofϕin the absence and presence of the charging effect. We focus on the low bias regime where eV≪E g because we a...

    work page

  9. [9]

    Summary and Discussion We considered the conductance of an interferometer containing a topological superconductor that accommo- dates a pair of Majorana zero modes. The conductance is significantly affected by electron teleportation due to the non-local state consisting of the Majorana zero modes when the number of electronsNin the superconduc- tor is con...

    work page

  10. [10]

    The factor−iis added to the definition ofψ 2 so thatψ 2 =ψ †

    Since Ξ|φ−⟩=−|φ −⟩, the electron and hole components of|φ −⟩also have the same amplitude at each site, but their signs are reversed. The factor−iis added to the definition ofψ 2 so thatψ 2 =ψ †

    work page

  11. [11]

    From⟨χ ±|χ∓⟩= 0, we find that these operators anticommute with each other

    The factor√ 2 ensuresψ 2 1 =ψ 2 2 = 1. From⟨χ ±|χ∓⟩= 0, we find that these operators anticommute with each other. The above results show thatψ 1 andψ 2 are a pair of Majorana operators satisfying ψiψj +ψ jψi = 2δi,j (A·3) fori, j= 1,2. From⟨χ ±|φn⟩= 0 forn= ±2,±3, . . . ,±2N, we find thatψ i anticommutes with the bogolon operatorsd n andd † n forn= 2,3, ....

    work page

  12. [12]

    A. Yu. Kitaev, Phys. Usp.44, 131 (2001)

    work page 2001

  13. [13]

    Alicea, Rep

    J. Alicea, Rep. Prog. Phys.75, 076501 (2012)

    work page 2012

  14. [14]

    Sato and S

    M. Sato and S. Fujimoto, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn.85, 072001 (2016)

    work page 2016

  15. [15]

    R. M. Lutchyn, J. D. Sau, and S. D. Sarma, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 077001 (2010)

    work page 2010

  16. [16]

    Y. Oreg, G. Refael, and F. von Oppen, Phys. Rev. Lett.105, 177002 (2010)

    work page 2010

  17. [17]

    Mourik, K

    V. Mourik, K. Zuo, S. M. Frolov, S. R. Plissard, E. P. A. M. Bakkers, and L. P. Kouwenhoven, Science336, 1003 (2012)

    work page 2012

  18. [18]

    Nilsson, A

    J. Nilsson, A. R. Akhmerov, and C. W. J. Beenakker, Phys. Rev. Lett.101, 120403 (2008)

    work page 2008

  19. [19]

    Fu and C

    L. Fu and C. L. Kane, Phys. Rev. Lett.102, 216403 (2009)

    work page 2009

  20. [20]

    A. R. Akhmerov, J. Nilsson, and C. W. J. Beenakker, Phys. Rev. Lett.102, 216404 (2009)

    work page 2009

  21. [21]

    Fu, Phys

    L. Fu, Phys. Rev. Lett.104, 056402 (2010)

    work page 2010

  22. [22]

    Vijay and L

    S. Vijay and L. Fu, Phys. Rev. B94, 235446 (2016)

    work page 2016

  23. [23]

    M. Hell, K. Flensberg, and M. Leijnse, Phys. Rev. B97, 161401 (2018)

    work page 2018

  24. [24]

    A. M. Whiticar, A. Fornieri, E. C. T. O’Farrell, A. C. C. Drach- mann, T. Wang, C. Thomas, S. Gronin, R. Kallaher, G. C. Gardner, M. J. Manfra, C. M. Marcus, and F. Nichele, Nat. Commun.11, 3212 (2020)

    work page 2020

  25. [25]

    Sugeta, T

    M. Sugeta, T. Mizushima, and S. Fujimoto, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 92, 054701 (2023)

    work page 2023

  26. [26]

    T. Goto, M. Sugeta, T. Mizushima, and S. Fujimoto, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn.93, 063704 (2024)

    work page 2024

  27. [27]

    Y.Takane and H.Ebisawa, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn.603130 (1991)

    work page 1991

  28. [28]

    Zazunov, A

    A. Zazunov, A. L. Yeyati, and R. Egger, Phys. Rev. B84, 165440 (2011)

    work page 2011

  29. [29]

    H¨ utzen, A

    R. H¨ utzen, A. Zazunov, B. Braunecker, A. Levy Yeyati, and R. Egger, Phys. Rev. Lett.109166403 (2012)

    work page 2012

  30. [30]

    van Heck, R

    B. van Heck, R. M. Lutchyn, and L. I. Glazman, Phys. Rev. B93, 235431 (2016)

    work page 2016

  31. [31]

    C.-K. Chiu, J. D. Sau, and S. Das Sarma Phys. Rev. B96 054504 (2017)

    work page 2017

  32. [32]

    Ekstr¨ om, P

    J. Ekstr¨ om, P. Recher, and T. L. Schmidt, Phys. Rev. B101 195420 (2020)

    work page 2020

  33. [33]

    Jin and X.-Q

    J. Jin and X.-Q. Li, New J. Phys.24, 093009 (2022)

    work page 2022

  34. [34]

    D. S. Shapiro, A. D. Mirlin, and A. Shnirman, Phys. Rev. B 107125404 (2023)

    work page 2023

  35. [35]

    Kleinherbers, A

    E. Kleinherbers, A. Sch¨ unemann, and J. K¨ onig, Phys. Rev. B 107195407 (2023)

    work page 2023

  36. [36]

    M. Sato, Y. Takahashi, and S. Fujimoto, Phys. Rev. Lett.103, 020401 (2009)

    work page 2009

  37. [37]

    Affleck, J.-S

    I. Affleck, J.-S. Caux, and A. M. Zagoskin, Phys. Rev. B62, 1433 (2000)

    work page 2000

  38. [38]

    Takane and R

    Y. Takane and R. Ando, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn.83, 014706 (2014)

    work page 2014

  39. [39]

    Ando, Phys

    T. Ando, Phys. Rev. B44, 8017 (1991)

    work page 1991

  40. [40]

    C. J. Lambert, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter3, 6579 (1991)

    work page 1991

  41. [41]

    Takane and H

    Y. Takane and H. Ebisawa, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn.61, 1685 (1992)

    work page 1992

  42. [42]

    M. P. Anantram and S. Datta, Phys. Rev. B53, 16390 (1996)

    work page 1996

  43. [43]

    G. B. Lesovik, A. L. Fauch` ere, and G. Blatter, Phys. Rev. B 55,3146(1997)

    work page 1997

  44. [44]

    Maiani, M

    A. Maiani, M. Geier, and K. Flensberg, Phys. Rev. B106, 104516 (2022)

    work page 2022

  45. [45]

    B. I. Spivak and S. A. Kivelson, Phys. Rev. B43, 3740 (1991)

    work page 1991

  46. [46]

    Bauernschmitt, J

    R. Bauernschmitt, J. Siewert, Yu. V. Nazarov, and A. A. Odintsov, Phys. Rev. B49, 4076 (1994)

    work page 1994

  47. [47]

    Shimizu, H

    Y. Shimizu, H. Horii, Y. Takane, and Y. Isawa, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn.67, 1525 (1998)

    work page 1998

  48. [48]

    J. A. van Dam, Y. V. Nazarov, E. P. A. M. Bakkers, S. De Franceschi, and L. P. Kouwenhoven, Nature442, 667 (2006). 10

    work page 2006