Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 53 references

Gain compression in Josephson Traveling-Wave Parametric Amplifiers

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-09 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Gain compression in a Josephson traveling-wave parametric amplifier is shown to result from pump depletion plus power-induced phase mismatch, not pump depletion alone.

desk verdict First systematic P1dB-vs-frequency map of a J-TWPA with a reusable dual-VNA method; the two-mechanism claim is plausible but not fully isolated from linear phase mismatch. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.03022 v2 pith:RWWGF247 submitted 2025-02-05 quant-ph cond-mat.mes-hall

Gwenael Le Gal , Guilliam Butseraen , Arpit Ranadive , Giulio Cappelli , Bekim Fazliji , Edgar Bonet , Eric Eyraud , Luca Planat
show 1 more author
Nicolas Roch
This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-phcond-mat.mes-hall PACS 85.25.-j84.40.Dc85.25.Cp
keywords gaincompressiontraveling-waveparametricamplifierJosephsonjunctionSNAILpumpdepletionphasematchingfour-wavemixingsuperconductingcircuits
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 experimentally establishes that gain compression in a Josephson traveling-wave parametric amplifier is driven by two mechanisms, not just pump depletion. The authors simultaneously measure the complex transmission of pump and signal tones across the entire amplifier bandwidth, and compare the measured 1-dB compression point and pump depletion with two theoretical descriptions. A simplified formula that attributes compression only to pump depletion gives the right order of magnitude but fails at the edges of the amplification band. A full coupled-mode model that includes distributed losses and power-induced changes in phase matching reproduces the data without any fitting parameters.

What carries the argument

The central object is a set of coupled-mode equations for the complex envelopes of the pump, signal, and idler waves along a SNAIL transmission line, retaining self- and cross-Kerr coefficients, four-wave mixing coupling terms, the pump-depletion term, and distributed losses modeled by a loss tangent. The power-dependent total phase mismatch $\Delta\tilde{k} = 2\tilde{k}_p-\tilde{k}_s-\tilde{k}_i$, whose value shifts as the wave amplitudes change, is what decides whether gain grows monotonically with position or oscillates. The model shows that at band edges the gain becomes a periodic function of position, meaning coherent oscillatory energy exchange rather than simple irreversible pump depletion.

What would settle it

A concrete check would be to measure gain versus position inside the device, for example by comparing TWPAs of different lengths at a band-edge frequency near the 1-dB compression point: the full model predicts oscillatory gain with position from coherent energy exchange, while the depletion-only picture predicts monotonic saturation; observing which behavior occurs would settle the mechanism.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that while pump depletion occurs during gain compression, it is not the only mechanism involved in the saturation of a TWPA: power-induced phase-matching processes also take place within the device. The measured frequency dependence of the 1-dB compression point and the pump transmission at that point are matched only by the full model, which tracks the power-dependent total phase mismatch as the waves propagate. In the high-gain center of the band, pump depletion reduces the phase mismatch and improves phase matching, whereas at the band edges, where the device is already largely mismatched at low power, small power-induced shifts further degrade the matching and cause gain to saturate. The pump-depletion-only formula from prior work still supplies a good order-of-magnitude estimate for the 1-dB compression point, provided the linear gain used in it accounts for losses.

Load-bearing premise

The conclusion rests on the three-mode coupled-mode model with slowly varying envelopes, rotating-wave approximation, and power-dependent loss tangent being an adequate description of the device at high signal power; if neglected harmonics, intermodulation products, or unmodeled power-dependent losses contribute significantly, the attribution of compression to pump depletion plus phase mismatch could be wrong.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The pump-depletion-only formula (Eq. 5) remains useful as a quick quantitative estimate of the 1-dB compression point, but it cannot predict the frequency dependence of compression or the output power at the compression point.
  • Inside the amplification band, frequencies near the pump tolerate higher input power before compressing, so multiplexed readout tones should be placed closer to the pump to stay far from the compression regime and reduce intermodulation products.
  • Increasing the 1-dB compression point requires handling more pump power, for example by using junctions with larger critical current, and re-engineering the dispersion and device length to compensate the resulting weaker nonlinearity.
  • Correct modeling of saturation requires solving the full coupled-mode system rather than assuming only pump depletion, because losses and power-dependent phase mismatch alter both the gain profile and the pump transmission.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A testable extension: measure the 1-dB compression point on devices of different lengths or with internal tap points; the model predicts oscillatory gain-versus-position behavior at band edges, which would directly confirm the phase-mismatch mechanism.
  • For TWPA designs where the power-dependent mismatch always moves toward zero (such as single-junction or dispersion-engineered lines), compression may be closer to depletion-only, so the band-edge effect seen here may be specific to reversed-Kerr SNAIL devices.
  • Because the loss tangent is power-dependent and attributed to two-level systems, the saturation behavior could shift with temperature or dielectric material; tracking the 1-dB compression point versus temperature would test this link.
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

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper reports an experimental study of gain compression in a SNAIL-based Josephson traveling-wave parametric amplifier operated at half a flux quantum in the reversed-Kerr regime. The authors use a dual-VNA setup to simultaneously record the complex transmission of the pump and signal tones, measure the 1-dB compression point P1dB across the full bandwidth, and compare the data with a numerical coupled-mode model that includes distributed losses, pump depletion, and self- and cross-Kerr type phase-modulation terms. They also compare with the analytic pump-depletion-only formula of Eq. (5). The full model reproduces the measured gain and pump-transmission profiles over a wide range of signal powers, while Eq. (5) matches the central part of the band but fails at the band edges. The paper concludes that gain compression is caused by pump depletion together with power-induced phase-matching processes.

Significance. If the central claim is correct, this is a valuable contribution: it provides the first systematic experimental mapping of P1dB across the bandwidth of a J-TWPA, introduces a measurement technique that can track pump depletion and signal amplification simultaneously, and shows that a parameter-free (with respect to compression data) coupled-mode model captures the saturation behavior. The paper also gives a concrete warning that the widely used pump-depletion-only formula of Eq. (5) is insufficient at band edges, which matters for multiplexed readout and other high-input-power applications. The strengths include the careful independent calibration of input power, the open availability of the data, and the explicit discussion of loss-tangent power dependence in Appendix E. The main weakness is that the central two-mechanism conclusion is inferred from model selection rather than from a direct isolation of the power-dependent phase-matching terms.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section IV, Eq. (5)] The decisive comparison for the paper's central claim is between the full model and Eq. (5), but Eq. (5) is not a clean 'pump-depletion-only' baseline. As the authors themselves note in Section IV, Eq. (5) was derived under the additional assumptions of low input signal power and total power conversion, i.e. perfect phase matching. The SNAIL TWPA is deliberately operated in the reversed-Kerr regime and has significant linear phase mismatch at the band edges even at low signal power, so the failure of Eq. (5) at the edges could simply reflect the breakdown of its perfect-phase-matching assumption rather than the action of a distinct power-induced phase-matching mechanism. I request an ablation simulation of Eq. (3) in which the power-dependent self- and cross-Kerr phase terms (the alpha coefficients) are turned off while retaining the linear mismatch Delta_kl, the four-wave mixing coupling kappa, the distributed losses, and pump depletion, and a demonstration of whether that reduced model still reproduces the measured P1dB frequency dependence and the pump transmission at P1dB shown in Fig. 3. Without such a test, the inference that power-induced phase matching is an additional compression mechanism is underdetermined by the data as presented.
  2. [Section III/IV, Fig. 3] The paper's central claim is about power-induced phase matching, but the analysis only uses the magnitudes of the measured transmissions. Since the dual-VNA setup already records complex transmission, the authors should present the power-dependent phase of the signal and pump tones (or at least the simulated accumulated phase mismatch) and compare the full model with the reduced pump-depletion-only model on this observable. This would be a more direct test of the claimed mechanism than the gain-only P1dB comparison, and it would strengthen the conclusion in Section IV that compression at the band edges is due to a power-induced modification of the phase-matching condition.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section II, Eq. (1)] Equation (1) writes P1dB = Psig(GdB_lin - 1 dB), which mixes a power variable with a gain expression; please clarify that P1dB is defined as the input signal power at which the gain is 1 dB below the linear gain Glin.
  2. [Section III, Fig. 2 caption] The caption says the simulations contain no fitting parameters and use the same input parameters for (a) and (b). It would be more precise to say no parameters were fitted to the compression data, since the linear parameters L, Cg, r, Ic, and tan(delta) were obtained from the independent linear characterization in Appendix B.
  3. [Appendix E, Fig. 8 caption] The phrase 'for 20 mK power' is unclear; it presumably means the lowest signal-power transmission data, and should be rephrased.
  4. [Throughout] There are several typographical spacing errors, e.g. 'TWPAsasessentialamplifiers' in the Introduction and 'oftheTWPA' in the Conclusion; a careful proofreading pass is recommended.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central claim is supported by a parameter-free coupled-mode model and an external baseline formula, not by fitted inputs or load-bearing self-citation.

full rationale

All parameters entering the coupled-mode simulations are obtained from independent low-power linear characterization and setup calibration (Appendices A and B), not from the compression data. The benchmark Eq. (5) is an externally derived pump-depletion formula (Refs. [32,40]) and is explicitly acknowledged by the authors to assume perfect phase matching and total power conversion, so its failure at band edges is interpreted cautiously as a limitation of the baseline rather than smuggled into the model. The power-dependent loss tangent is extracted from pump-off transmission-versus-phase fits, and the authors state its choice has negligible impact on P1dB (Appendix E), so it is not a fitted parameter disguising the compression result. The central claim, that pump depletion alone cannot explain the frequency dependence of P1dB, rests on the parameter-free agreement of the full coupled-mode model with both gain and pump transmission data. The skeptical concern that Eq. (5) is not a clean depletion-only baseline is a scientific and mechanism-isolation issue, not a circularity: the paper does not define the mechanism in terms of the data it predicts. Self-citations to prior SNAIL-TWPA work provide device and model context but are not used as an unverified uniqueness theorem or ansatz.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

Central claim rests on the standard CME model plus linear device parameters from calibration. No new entity is introduced. The compression data are not used to fit model parameters; however, the model depends on fitted linear parameters and a power-dependent loss tangent from separate transmission fits.

free parameters (6)
  • SNAIL inductance L(Phi_ext) = 869.6 pH at Phi_ext = Phi_0/2
    Obtained from fitting dispersion relation Eq. (B5) to phase measurements; used in CME coefficients and impedance.
  • Ground capacitance Cg = 223.5 fF
    Mean of flux-dependent values from initial fit of Eq. (B5); fixed for final fits and simulations.
  • Critical current ratio r = 0.062
    Fitted from L(Phi_ext) versus flux using Eq. (B6); enters the SNAIL current-phase expansion.
  • Large junction critical current Ic = 1.4 uA
    Fitted together with r from the inductance versus flux curve; sets the nonlinear scale of the device.
  • Pump loss tangent tan(delta) at Pp = 2.19e-3
    Fitted from |S21| versus phase at the largest room-temperature VNA power, closest to the pump power; used in the pump loss term.
  • Signal and idler power-dependent loss tangent tan(delta) = Power-dependent values in Fig. 6(d)
    Fitted from reconstructed |S21| traces at each input power; used to set signal and idler losses. Authors state this choice has negligible impact on P1dB estimates.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Three-wave (pump, signal, idler) slowly-varying envelope approximation with rotating-wave approximation is sufficient to model the device.
    Section III and Appendix C: CMEs are derived assuming slowly varying envelopes and retaining only time-independent terms with 2 omega_p = omega_s + omega_i; harmonics and intermodulation products are neglected in the model.
  • domain assumption Losses are introduced phenomenologically as k'' = tan(delta) k / 2, neglecting the effect of losses on the nonlinear coupling coefficients.
    Appendix C, after Eq. (C10): this is a standard but unverified simplification.
  • ad hoc to paper Power-dependent loss tangent extracted from transmission traces is valid for signal and idler at all frequencies, with the pump saturating TLSs only within a 100 to 200 MHz span.
    Appendix E: based on estimates from Ref. [48], the authors assume the pump does not saturate TLSs far from its frequency; they also state the choice has negligible impact on P1dB.
  • domain assumption Third-order expansion of the SNAIL current-phase relation around the zero-current flux point is adequate, with second-order terms vanishing at Phi_ext = Phi_0/2 and higher-order terms neglected.
    Appendix C, Eq. (C2): the expansion drops delta-Phi^2 terms and terms of order delta-Phi^5 and higher.
  • domain assumption Linear characterization fits (L, Cg, r, Ic, tan(delta)) are accurate and transportable to the high-power nonlinear regime.
    The 'no fitting parameters' claim for the compression comparison depends on these independently fitted device parameters being valid at all signal powers studied.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Gain compression in Josephson Traveling-Wave Parametric Amplifiers." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/RWWGF247

@misc{pith2026250203022,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Gain compression in Josephson Traveling-Wave Parametric Amplifiers},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/RWWGF247}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.03022}
}
read the original abstract

Superconducting traveling-wave parametric amplifiers (TWPAs) are increasingly used in various applications, including quantum computing, quantum sensing, and dark matter detection. However, one important characteristic of these amplifiers, gain compression, has not received much attention. As a result, there is a lack of comprehensive experimental exploration of this phenomenon in the existing literature. In this study, we present an experimental investigation of gain compression in a Josephson traveling-wave parametric amplifier based on a four-wave mixing process. We have implemented a novel setup to monitor the complex transmission of both the pump and signal tones, which allows us to simultaneously track pump depletion and signal amplification as functions of signal power and frequency across the entire bandwidth of the device. Our findings indicate that, while pump depletion occurs during gain compression, it is not the only mechanism involved in the saturation of a TWPA. Power-induced phase-matching processes also take place within the device. This study provides valuable insights for optimizing TWPAs for applications that require high total input power, such as multiplexed qubit readout or broadband photon emission.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.03022 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. 1-dB compression in a TWPA. (a) The de￾vice consists in a chain of SNAIL forming a 50 Ω matched non-linear transmission line. The device is flux biased at Φext = Φ0/2. A strong pump tone (blue) at frequency ωp provides the energy to amplify the signal tone (red) at fre￾quency ωs and generate an idler tone (orange) at frequency ωi = 2ωp − ωs. The tones can experience a phase shift as they propagate due to self and cr… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Comparison between experimental data and theory. (a) Measured (left panel) and simulated (right panel) signal gain as a function of the signal frequency and input signal power. (b) Measured (left panel) and simulated (right panel) pump transmission as a function of the signal frequency and input signal power. The vertical lines correspond to the signal powers shown in (c). The simulations contain no fitting paramete… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Frequency dependence of the 1-dB compres￾sion point and pump transmission at P1dB. (a) P1dB vs signal frequency. The red curve shows the experimentally measured P1dB across the bandwidth of the TWPA. The or￾ange curve shows the theoretical P1dB obtained from simu￾lations with the model presented in Appendix C. The green curve shows P1dB extracted from equation (5) where Glin cor￾responds to the simulated gain with t… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Stability of gain build-up at high signal power. Simulated signal gain as a function of the position inside the TWPA in unit cell number N and signal frequency. The input signal power is Psig = -94.6 dBm. The horizon￾tal dotted line indicates the actual length of the d…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Experimental setup and system calibration. (a) Full experimental setup. ‘DUT’ (device under test) corresponds to the different configurations depicted on the right and explained in the main text. BP: band-pass, SA: spectrum analyzer, SC: superconducting, TNS: thermal n…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Linear characterization of the device. (a) Dispersion relation of the device extracted from phase measurements at two external magnetic fluxes along with the corresponding fits using Eq. (B5) with only L(Φext) as fitting parameters. (b) Fitted ground capacitance Cg ver…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Data processing scattering. (a) Examples of input signal powers across the whole measurement bandwidth and their averages (horizontal plain lines) used to define the input signal powers in this work. (b) Examples of raw (plain lines) and smoothed (dashed lines) signal …
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Effect of the choice of tan(δ) for modeling the TWPA gain. Simulated signal gain and pump attenuation as a function of pump frequency for the same input signal powers as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_8.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

53 extracted references · 47 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    This allows calibrating the system gain of output line A and the base reflection of out- put line B

    Thermal noise source at output A and an open ca- ble at output B. This allows calibrating the system gain of output line A and the base reflection of out- put line B

    work page

  2. [2]

    This is the reciprocal of the first cooldown

    Open cable at output A and thermal noise source on output B. This is the reciprocal of the first cooldown

    work page

  3. [3]

    It is an on-chip 50 Ω matched copper coplanar-waveguide transmission line

    Dummy ‘PCB’ sample in between the two direc- tional couplers. It is an on-chip 50 Ω matched copper coplanar-waveguide transmission line. The packaging used is the same as for the TWPA (cop- per box, connectors and wire-bonding). It is used to calibrate the transmission of the lines and pro- vides a reference for the linear characterization of the TWPA as ...

    work page

  4. [4]

    In between all these cooldowns, nothing else than the different devices facing the two directional couplers was modified

    SNAIL TWPA in between the two directional cou- plers with its coil to apply DC magnetic flux to the sample. In between all these cooldowns, nothing else than the different devices facing the two directional couplers was modified. In order to obtain the input line attenuation of our in- put line and estimate accurately the powers at the input of the TWPA, ...

    work page

  5. [5]

    However, one needs to simulate the entire system beyond some of the approximations yield- 8 ing Eq

    already obtained previously [32] with the hypothesis that solely pump depletion causes compression—an irre- versible energy conversion argument, gives the good or- der of magnitude to model the 1-dB compression point of such a TWPA. However, one needs to simulate the entire system beyond some of the approximations yield- 8 ing Eq. (5) to capture more deta...

    work page 2020

  6. [6]

    Ho Eom, P

    B. Ho Eom, P. K. Day, H. G. LeDuc, and J. Zmuidzinas, Nature Physics8, 623 (2012), number: 8

    work page 2012

  7. [7]

    Esposito, A

    M. Esposito, A. Ranadive, L. Planat, and N. Roch, Ap- plied Physics Letters119, 120501 (2021), number: 12

    work page 2021

  8. [8]

    A. A. Clerk, M. H. Devoret, S. M. Girvin, F. Marquardt, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Reviews of Modern Physics 82, 1155 (2010), number: 2

    work page 2010

Show all 53 references
  1. [9]

    Macklin, K

    C. Macklin, K. O’Brien, D. Hover, M. E. Schwartz, V. Bolkhovsky, X. Zhang, W. D. Oliver, and I. Siddiqi, Science 350, 307 (2015), number: 6258

    2015

  2. [10]

    Leroux, C

    S.Krinner, N.Lacroix, A.Remm, A.DiPaolo, E.Genois, C. Leroux, C. Hellings, S. Lazar, F. Swiadek, J. Her- rmann, G.J.Norris, C.K.Andersen, M.Müller, A.Blais, C. Eichler, and A. Wallraff, Nature605, 669 (2022). 15 4 6 8 10 fsig (GHz) □10 0 10 20 S21 (dB) Signal Pump Figure 8.Eff...

    2022

  3. [11]

    Ardati, S

    W. Ardati, S. Léger, S. Kumar, V. N. Suresh, D. Nico- las, C. Mori, F. D’Esposito, T. Vakhtel, O. Buisson, Q. Ficheux, and N. Roch, Physical Review X14, 041014 (2024)

    2024

  4. [12]

    Heinsoo, C

    J. Heinsoo, C. K. Andersen, A. Remm, S. Krinner, T. Walter, Y. Salathé, S. Gasparinetti, J.-C. Besse, A. Potočnik, A. Wallraff, and C. Eichler, Physical Re- view Applied10, 034040 (2018)

    2018

  5. [13]

    Keller, J

    S.Krinner, S.Storz, P.Kurpiers, P.Magnard, J.Heinsoo, R. Keller, J. Lütolf, C. Eichler, and A. Wallraff, EPJ Quantum Technology6, 2 (2019)

    2019

  6. [14]

    Ranzani, M

    L. Ranzani, M. Bal, K. C. Fong, G. Ribeill, X. Wu, J. Long, H.-S. Ku, R. P. Erickson, D. Pappas, and T. A. Ohki, Applied Physics Letters113, 242602 (2018)

    2018

  7. [15]

    Gaikwad, D

    C. Gaikwad, D. Kowsari, C. Brame, X. Song, H. Zhang, M. Esposito, A. Ranadive, G. Cappelli, N. Roch, E. M. Levenson-Falk, and K. W. Murch, Physical Review Let- ters 132, 200401 (2024)

    2024

  8. [16]

    De Jong, C

    D. De Jong, C. G. Prosko, D. M. A. Waardenburg, L. Han, F. K. Malinowski, P. Krogstrup, L. P. Kouwen- hoven, J. V. Koski, and W. Pfaff, Physical Review Ap- plied 16, 014007 (2021)

    2021

  9. [17]

    Elhomsy, L

    V. Elhomsy, L. Planat, D. J. Niegemann, B. Cardoso- Paz, A. Badreldin, B. Klemt, V. Thiney, R. Lethiecq, E. Eyraud, M. C. Dartiailh, B. Bertrand, H. Niebo- jewski, C. Bäuerle, M. Vinet, T. Meunier, N. Roch, and M. Urdampilleta, Broadband parametric amplifica- tion for multiple...

    2023 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Fraudet, I

    D. Fraudet, I. Snyman, D. M. Basko, S. Leger, T. Sepul- cre, A. Ranadive, G. Le Gal, A. Torras-Coloma, W. Guichard, S. Florens, and N. Roch, Physical Review Letters 134, 013804 (2025)

    2025

  11. [19]

    O’Sullivan, K

    J. O’Sullivan, K. Reuer, A. Grigorev, X. Dai, A. Hernandez-Anton, M. H. Munoz-Arias, C. Hellings, A. Flasby, D. C. Zanuz, J.-C. Besse, A. Blais, D. Malz, C. Eichler, and A. Wallraff, Deterministic generation of a 20-qubit two-dimensional photonic cluster state (2024), arXiv:24...

    2024 arXiv

  12. [20]

    A. Remm, S. Krinner, N. Lacroix, C. Hellings, F. Swiadek, G. J. Norris, C. Eichler, and A. Wallraff, Physical Review Applied20, 034027 (2023)

    2023

  13. [21]

    Aumentado, IEEE Microwave Magazine21, 45 (2020), number: 8

    J. Aumentado, IEEE Microwave Magazine21, 45 (2020), number: 8

    2020

  14. [22]

    Liu, T.-C

    G. Liu, T.-C. Chien, X. Cao, O. Lanes, E. Alpern, D. Pekker, and M. Hatridge, Applied Physics Letters 111, 202603 (2017)

    2017

  15. [23]

    Planat, R

    L. Planat, R. Dassonneville, J. Puertas Martínez, F. For- oughi, O. Buisson, W. Hasch-Guichard, C. Naud, R. Vi- jay, K. Murch, and N. Roch, Physical Review Applied 11, 034014 (2019), number: 3

    2019

  16. [24]

    Naaman, D

    O. Naaman, D. G. Ferguson, and R. J. Epstein, High Saturation Power Josephson Parametric Amplifier with GHz Bandwidth (2017), arXiv:1711.07549 [physics]

    2017 arXiv

  17. [25]

    White, A

    T. White, A. Opremcak, G. Sterling, A. Korotkov, D. Sank, R. Acharya, M. Ansmann, F. Arute, K. Arya, J. C. Bardin, A. Bengtsson, A. Bourassa, J. Bo- vaird, L. Brill, B. B. Buckley, D. A. Buell, T. Burger, B. Burkett, N. Bushnell, Z. Chen, B. Chiaro, J. Co- gan, R. Collins, A. ...

    2023

  18. [26]

    Kaufman, C

    R. Kaufman, C. Liu, K. Cicak, B. Mesits, M. Xia, C. Zhou, M. Nowicki, J. Aumentado, D. Pekker, and M. Hatridge, Simple, High Saturation Power, Quantum- limited, RF SQUID Array-based Josephson Parametric Amplifiers (2024), arXiv:2402.19435 [quant-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Eichler and A

    C. Eichler and A. Wallraff, EPJ Quantum Technology1, 2 (2014), number: 1

    2014

  20. [28]

    N. E. Frattini, V. V. Sivak, A. Lingenfelter, S. Shankar, and M. H. Devoret, Physical Review Applied10, 054020 (2018), number: 5

    2018

  21. [29]

    Devoret, Physical Review Applied 13, 024014 (2020), number: 2

    V.V.Sivak, S.Shankar, G.Liu, J.Aumentado,andM.H. Devoret, Physical Review Applied 13, 024014 (2020), number: 2

    2020

  22. [30]

    B. A. Kochetov and A. Fedorov, Physical Review B92, 224304 (2015)

    2015

  23. [31]

    Boutin, D

    S. Boutin, D. M. Toyli, A. V. Venkatramani, A. W. Ed- dins, I. Siddiqi, and A. Blais, Physical Review Applied 8, 054030 (2017)

    2017

  24. [32]

    Liu, T.-C

    C. Liu, T.-C. Chien, M. Hatridge, and D. Pekker, Phys- ical Review A101, 042323 (2020)

    2020

  25. [33]

    Planat, A

    L. Planat, A. Ranadive, R. Dassonneville, J. Puer- tas Martínez, S. Léger, C. Naud, O. Buisson, W. Hasch- Guichard, D. M. Basko, and N. Roch, Physical Review X 10, 021021 (2020), number: 2. 16

    2020

  26. [34]

    Ranadive, M

    A. Ranadive, M. Esposito, L. Planat, E. Bonet, C. Naud, O. Buisson, W. Guichard, and N. Roch, Nature Commu- nications 13, 1737 (2022)

    2022

  27. [35]

    Malnou, M

    M. Malnou, M. Vissers, J. Wheeler, J. Aumentado, J. Hubmayr, J. Ullom, and J. Gao, PRX Quantum2, 010302 (2021)

    2021

  28. [36]

    Yaakobi, L

    O. Yaakobi, L. Friedland, C. Macklin, and I. Siddiqi, Physical Review B87, 144301 (2013), number: 14

    2013

  29. [37]

    O’Brien, C

    K. O’Brien, C. Macklin, I. Siddiqi, and X. Zhang, Phys- ical Review Letters113, 157001 (2014)

    2014

  30. [38]

    C. Kow, V. Podolskiy, and A. Kamal, Self phase-matched broadband amplification with a left-handed Josephson transmission line (2022), arXiv:2201.04660 [cond-mat, physics:quant-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  31. [39]

    A. Y. Levochkina, H. G. Ahmad, P. Mastrovito, I. Chat- terjee, G. Serpico, L. Di Palma, R. Ferroiuolo, R. Satari- ano, P. Darvehi, A. Ranadive, G. Cappelli, G. Le Gal, L. Planat, D. Montemurro, D. Massarotti, F. Tafuri, N. Roch, G. P. Pepe, and M. Esposito, Superconductor Scie...

    2024

  32. [40]

    J. L. B. Walker, ed., Handbook of RF and microwave power amplifiers, The Cambridge RF and microwave en- gineering series (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge ; New York, 2012)

    2012

  33. [41]

    H. R. Nilsson, D. Shiri, R. Rehammar, A. F. Roud- sari, and P. Delsing, Peripheral circuits for ideal perfor- mance of a travelling-wave parametric amplifier (2024), arXiv:2310.11909 [quant-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Planat,Resonant and traveling-wave parametric am- plification near the quantum limit, Ph.D

    L. Planat,Resonant and traveling-wave parametric am- plification near the quantum limit, Ph.D. thesis, Univer- sité Grenoble Alpes, Grenoble (2020)

    2020

  35. [43]

    N. E. Frattini, U. Vool, S. Shankar, A. Narla, K. M. Sliwa, and M. H. Devoret, Applied Physics Letters110, 222603 (2017), number: 22

    2017

  36. [44]

    Fadavi Roudsari, D

    A. Fadavi Roudsari, D. Shiri, H. Renberg Nilsson, G. Tancredi, A. Osman, I.-M. Svensson, M. Kudra, M. Rommel, J. Bylander, V. Shumeiko, and P. Delsing, Applied Physics Letters122, 052601 (2023)

    2023

  37. [45]

    Kylemark, H

    P. Kylemark, H. Sunnerud, M. Karlsson, and P. A. Andrekson, Journal of Lightwave Technology24, 3471 (2006)

    2006

  38. [46]

    Chen, Journal of the Optical Society of America B6, 1986 (1989)

    Y. Chen, Journal of the Optical Society of America B6, 1986 (1989)

    1989

  39. [47]

    Cappellini and S.Trillo, Journalof the Optical Society of America B8, 824 (1991)

    G. Cappellini and S.Trillo, Journalof the Optical Society of America B8, 824 (1991)

    1991

  40. [48]

    Zorin, Physical Review Applied 6, 034006 (2016), number: 3

    A. Zorin, Physical Review Applied 6, 034006 (2016), number: 3

    2016

  41. [49]

    10.5281/zenodo.15519034

    doi

  42. [50]

    Planat, E

    L. Planat, E. Al-Tavil, J. P. Martínez, R. Dasson- neville, F. Foroughi, S. Léger, K. Bharadwaj, J. De- laforce, V. Milchakov, C. Naud, O. Buisson, W. Hasch- Guichard, and N. Roch, Physical Review Applied 12, 064017 (2019), number: 6

    2019

  43. [51]

    D. M. Pozar,Microwave Engineering, fourth edition ed. (John Wiley & Sons, Inc, Hoboken, NJ, 2012)

    2012

  44. [52]

    Ranadive,Nonlinear quantum optics with Josephson meta-materials, Ph.D

    A. Ranadive,Nonlinear quantum optics with Josephson meta-materials, Ph.D. thesis, Université Grenoble Alpes (2023)

    2023

  45. [53]

    Capelle, E

    T. Capelle, E. Flurin, E. Ivanov, J. Palomo, M. Ros- ticher, S. Chua, T. Briant, P.-F. Cohadon, A. Heidmann, T. Jacqmin, and S. Deleglise, Physical Review Applied 13, 034022 (2020)

    2020

Pith tools

Reviewed August 9, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.