Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 4 cited by

Single-shot parity readout of a minimal Kitaev chain

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A global quantum-capacitance measurement through the superconducting lead discriminates the two fermionic-parity ground states of a minimal two-dot Kitaev chain in real time, while a local charge sensor cannot.

desk verdict A strong experimental advance showing that a global quantum capacitance probe resolves a two-state signal where local charge sensing cannot, with the honest caveat that the two states are not directly calibrated as fermionic parity. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.01606 v1 pith:BGWM4DNR submitted 2025-07-02 cond-mat.mes-hall cond-mat.supr-con

Nick van Loo , Francesco Zatelli , Gorm O. Steffensen , Bart Roovers , Guanzhong Wang , Thomas Van Caekenberghe , Alberto Bordin , David van Driel
show 7 more authors
Yining Zhang Wietze D. Huisman Ghada Badawy Erik P.A.M. Bakkers Grzegorz P. Mazur Ramón Aguado Leo P. Kouwenhoven
This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mes-hallcond-mat.supr-con
keywords MajoranazeromodesminimalKitaevchainparityreadoutquantumcapacitancesingle-shotmeasurementchargesensingquasiparticlepoisoningdots
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

The paper reports a single-shot, real-time readout of the fermionic parity of a minimal Kitaev chain—two quantum dots coupled through a superconductor—by measuring the quantum capacitance seen from the superconducting lead. This global probe couples to both Majorana-like modes at once, so it responds to the joint even/odd parity state, whereas a local charge sensor coupled to one dot gives no signal at the sweet spot. The authors observe random telegraph switching between the two parity ground states, extract parity lifetimes of about 1.8 ms with roughly 6% readout error, and map how the signal evolves as the device is detuned. If correct, this supplies the missing readout step for time-domain control of Majorana-based qubits and for detecting quasiparticle poisoning.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the quantum capacitance $C_n = (\alpha^2 e^2/4)\, d^2E_n/d\delta^2$ of the chain state $n$ with respect to the common-mode potential $\delta=(\mu_{LD}+\mu_{RD})/2$. Because the even states $|00\rangle$ and $|11\rangle$ hybridize by crossed Andreev reflection with amplitude $\Delta$, their energy disperses nonlinearly in $\delta$ and gives finite curvature; the odd states $|01\rangle$ and $|10\rangle$ hybridize by elastic co-tunneling with amplitude $t$ and move linearly, giving zero quantum capacitance. The resulting parity-dependent resonator frequency shift is what the experiment records. The complementary object is the local charge $\langle d_R^\dagger d_R\rangle$ on the right dot, whose even/odd difference vanishes along $\mu_{LD}=\frac{\Delta-t}{\Delta+t}\,\mu_{RD}$, the horizontal line at the sweet spot where the charge sensor goes blind.

What would settle it

If a simultaneous second global probe (for example another resonator coupled to both dots) recorded switching events not aligned with the quantum-capacitance telegraph, or if the measured switching rate changed monotonically with RF power well below the amplitude where SNR degrades, the assignment to intrinsic parity transitions would be falsified. A sharper test: at the sweet spot with high charge-sensor SNR, any residual parity-correlated switching in the local signal would contradict the claimed local indistinguishability.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the fermionic parity of a minimal Kitaev chain can be read out by a global quantum-capacitance measurement: the RF-modulated superconducting lead probes the joint state of both dots, and the curvature of the even parity branch produces a capacitance signal while the odd branch produces none. Near the sweet spot $t=\Delta$, the parity ground states are degenerate and locally indistinguishable, and the charge sensor sees nothing, while the global signal resolves the two states. The time traces show switching with lifetimes $\tau_e\approx 1.82$ ms and $\tau_o\approx 1.88$ ms, and the readout error reaches 6% at 150 $\mu$s integration. The paper further shows that the correlation between global and local signals vanishes along a line whose slope is set by $(\Delta-t)/(\Delta+t)$, providing an in-situ sweet-spot diagnostic.

Load-bearing premise

The observed two-level telegraph in the global quantum-capacitance signal is assumed to be transitions between the even and odd parity ground states of the chain; this requires the device to sit near the sweet spot $t\approx\Delta$, only the two lowest states per parity sector to matter, and the RF drive not to trigger the switching itself.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Two Kitaev chains sharing a superconductor each contribute a parity-dependent quantum capacitance, so all four parity states of a two-qubit system could be distinguished in single shots, enabling detection of leakage out of the computational subspace.
  • Because the readout does not rely on precise tuning, residual splitting $E_M=|t-\Delta|$ should appear as coherent parity oscillations rather than readout failure, allowing sweet-spot fine-tuning through Ramsey-type spectroscopy.
  • The method extends to longer chains by using base-band pulses to keep only two dots resonant during readout, reducing the chain to a minimal configuration without disturbing the encoded state.
  • The observation that the resonator drive can bias the parity distribution suggests a route to parity initialization via dynamical polarization.
  • Simultaneous charge sensing verifies the local charge-neutrality of the parity states, a Majorana signature not accessible in interferometric readout geometries.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the zero-correlation line in the Pearson map is a robust sweet-spot marker, its slope and width could serve as a fast, transport-free tuning diagnostic on every device, not just near the particular hybrid-gate voltage reported here.
  • The amplitude-dependent lifetime saturation at high readout power implies an optimal probe-strength window; a natural test is to interleave readout and idle periods and check whether the extracted average switching time changes, which would separate drive-induced switching from intrinsic quasiparticle poisoning.
  • Because only the even sector carries quantum capacitance at the sweet spot, the technique may double as a parity filter: measurement projects the system, and the sign of the deflection could be used for active feedback or initialization in future qubit loops.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports single-shot parity readout of a two-site (minimal) Kitaev chain using the quantum capacitance of the two dots as seen through the superconducting lead. The authors show that a global probe coupled to both Majorana modes yields a two-level telegraph signal with SNR ≈ 2, while a simultaneously measured local charge sensor is insensitive to the parity state near the sweet spot. They extract parity lifetimes around 1.8 ms with a hidden Markov model, map the parity polarization around the joint charge degeneracy, and correlate the global and local signals across the charge-stability diagram. The zero-correlation line between the two measurements is horizontal at the sweet spot and tilts when the CAR/ECT balance is detuned, consistent with a model of an ABS-mediated minimal Kitaev chain. Transport spectroscopy after reconnection shows a zero-bias peak and a gap of about 30 μeV, supporting the sweet-spot interpretation.

Significance. If the central claim holds, the work resolves a key experimental bottleneck for time-domain control of Majorana qubits in quantum-dot Kitaev chains: fast, non-local parity readout that is compatible with existing device layouts. The paper is strong in its use of complementary, simultaneous measurements: global quantum capacitance, local charge sensing, transport spectroscopy, and theory. It also provides publicly available data and analysis code, reports SNR and readout-error trade-offs, and tests a specific theoretical prediction (the tilt of the zero-correlation line). The main weakness is that the identification of the two observed telegraph states as even/odd fermionic parity is indirect and rests on model-dependent state-assignment conventions; the local sensor is insensitive exactly where the claim is made, so it cannot serve as a direct parity label there.

major comments (3)
  1. [Methods V and Fig. 3] The central claim is that the two states resolved by the global quantum capacitance signal are the even and odd parity ground states of the minimal Kitaev chain. The assignment of hidden-Markov states to 'even' and 'odd' is based on corner-of-the-stability-diagram conventions and an SNR threshold that the authors themselves call 'somewhat arbitrary' (Methods V). Because the local charge sensor is insensitive at the sweet spot, it cannot independently label the two global states there. This is a load-bearing point for the title and abstract claim of parity readout. I ask the authors to provide a direct calibration of the two states as even/odd parity, for example by pulsing to a known charge configuration and returning, or by a quantitative cross-validation with the local sensor in a regime where both signals have high SNR and the parity label is unambiguous.
  2. [Methods VI, Eq. (23) and Fig. 4c] The zero-correlation line is the main quantitative test of the sweet spot, but the comparison with theory is qualitative. The predicted slope (Δ−t)/(Δt+t) should be extracted from the data for each VH value and compared with the model, with uncertainties on the fitted slope and on the sweet-spot condition. In addition, the derivation of the zero-correlation line assumes αLS ≈ αRS (Methods VI, after Eq. (17)); if this assumption fails, the odd-state quantum capacitance is no longer zero and the line shifts. Please quantify the sensitivity of the line position to this approximation and to the phenomenological parameters used in the model.
  3. [Abstract, Fig. 3c and Methods IV] The manuscript quotes a parity lifetime of 1.85 ± 0.03 ms, but Methods IV and Fig. ED4f,g show that the integration time of 150 μs introduces a systematic bias in lifetime estimation, and that a different estimator (Lorentzian PSD fit) gives 1.51 ± 0.07 ms. Because the abstract asserts 'parity lifetimes exceeding one millisecond,' the quoted uncertainty should include this systematic bias, or the manuscript should report a bias-corrected value. This is not a challenge to the existence of two-level switching, but it affects the quantitative lifetime claim.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Methods V] There is a typo: 'quantum capcitance' should be 'quantum capacitance'.
  2. [Methods VI] The sentence 'other choices yields a titled line' should be 'other choices yield a tilted line'.
  3. [Fig. ED5 caption] The gate-voltage values '1.685 mV', '1.665 mV', and '1.645 mV' should almost certainly be volts, matching the main text (VH = 1.665 V).
  4. [Fig. 3 and Fig. 4 captions] The quantities SNRM, SNR R, PM, and ρMR are used in captions; for readers skipping the main text, a short definition in the captions would improve clarity.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central readout observation is measured directly and the theoretical comparisons are cross-checks, not fitted inputs.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is that a global quantum-capacitance signal through the superconducting lead resolves two switching states while a local charge sensor does not, near the sweet spot. This claim rests on directly measured time traces and simultaneous two-resonator readout, not on a quantity defined by the theory. The quantum-capacitance equations (Eqs. 1, 2, 20 and Methods VI A) are derived from a minimal Hamiltonian and used to interpret the signal, but the bimodal histogram, the exponential dwell times, and the local-vs-global correlation map are experimental outputs rather than consequences of fitting. The zero-correlation line prediction, μ_LD = (Δ−t)/(Δ+t) μ_RD, is tested after the sweet spot is identified through separate diagnostics (parity-polarization morphology and post-run transport spectroscopy), so it is not forced by construction. The Methods V state-assignment procedure is admittedly approximate ('Although the threshold choice is somewhat arbitrary'), but this affects only the even/odd labeling, not the existence of two switching states or the measured local insensitivity. Self-citations to prior work by the same group [5,38] are used for device tuning procedures and platform context, not as the load-bearing evidence for the parity-readout claim. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors' own prior work. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained and the observed two-state signal is not equivalent to the model input by construction.

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

The central experimental result, that quantum capacitance resolves parity while local charge cannot at the sweet spot, is supported directly by data. The interpretive model introduces several domain assumptions and hand-chosen parameters for the supporting simulations; none of the free parameters is fitted to produce the central claim.

free parameters (5)
  • Phenomenological temperature Tp = 0.2 * Delta_P in theory plots (Fig. ED10)
    Introduced ad hoc to smooth the parity polarization maps; not independently measured.
  • Poisoning rate Gamma_p
    Sets the timescale for the parity lifetime curves; theory plots normalize lifetimes by 1/Gamma_p.
  • Lever arm alpha
    Appears as an overall proportionality factor in the quantum capacitance formula; not independently calibrated, only the qualitative shape is compared.
  • Spin-orbit tunnel angle theta = pi/8
    Chosen to maximize the gap; the paper notes the ratios tj↑/tj↓ are geometrically set and not gate-tunable in experiment.
  • ABS chemical potential mu_C and pairing Delta_P = mu_C = 0.75 Delta_P, 2.5 Delta_P, 0.3 Delta_P in Fig. ED10
    Chosen to illustrate different regimes in the theory model; not fitted to the experimental data.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The two-dot system is described by the minimal Kitaev chain Hamiltonian with spinless fermionic sites, ECT amplitude t and CAR amplitude Delta.
    Invoked in the Introduction and derived via perturbation theory in Methods VI (Eq. 10).
  • domain assumption The superconducting segment can be modeled as a single spinful resonant level (ABS) with pairing Delta_P, neglecting the rest of the superconducting continuum.
    Methods VI, Eqs. 4-9, following Refs. [38, 40].
  • domain assumption Both quantum dots are spin-polarized and only the spin-down channel couples; Zeeman splitting of the ABS is neglected.
    Methods VI, text after Eq. 7.
  • domain assumption The lever arms of the two quantum dots to the superconductor are approximately equal (alpha_LS ≈ alpha_RS).
    Used to derive Eq. 18; the paper notes the absence of odd-state quantum capacitance in the data supports this assumption.
  • domain assumption Parity-changing processes (quasiparticle poisoning) are the slowest rates; intra-parity relaxation is fast; poisoning rates follow Fermi functions with a phenomenological temperature Tp.
    Methods VI B, Eqs. 25-26; motivated by three observational facts listed there.
  • domain assumption The charge sensor couples only capacitively to QDR and does not directly tunnel to the chain.
    Methods III and Fig. ED7; needed for the local probe interpretation.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Single-shot parity readout of a minimal Kitaev chain." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/BGWM4DNR

@misc{pith2026250701606,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Single-shot parity readout of a minimal Kitaev chain},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/BGWM4DNR}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.01606}
}
read the original abstract

Protecting qubits from noise is essential for building reliable quantum computers. Topological qubits offer a route to this goal by encoding quantum information non-locally, using pairs of Majorana zero modes. These modes form a shared fermionic state whose occupation -- either even or odd -- defines the fermionic parity that encodes the qubit. Crucially, this parity cannot be accessed by any measurement that probes only one Majorana mode. This reflects the non-local nature of the encoding and its inherent protection against noise. A promising platform for realizing such qubits is the Kitaev chain, implemented in quantum dots coupled via superconductors. Even a minimal chain of two dots can host a pair of Majorana modes and store quantum information in their joint parity. Here we introduce a new technique for reading out this parity, based on quantum capacitance. This global probe senses the joint state of the chain and enables real-time, single-shot discrimination of the parity state. By comparing with simultaneous local charge sensing, we confirm that only the global signal resolves the parity. We observe random telegraph switching and extract parity lifetimes exceeding one millisecond. These results establish the essential readout step for time-domain control of Majorana qubits, resolving a long-standing experimental challenge.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

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

  1. Hybrid superinductance with Al/InAs

    cond-mat.mes-hall 2026-01 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Al/InAs Josephson-junction chains exhibit superinductance with linear dispersion to 12 GHz, while internal loss increases roughly as 1/frequency.

  2. Machine-learned tuning to protected states by probing noise resilience

    cond-mat.mes-hall 2025-11 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Minimizing the average ground-state splitting under injected random noise tunes short quantum-dot Kitaev chains to Majorana sweet spots.

  3. Distinct Lifetimes for $X$ and $Z$ Loop Measurements in a Majorana Tetron Device

    cond-mat.mes-hall 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A tetron device shows X and Z parity loops switching at 14.5 microseconds and 12.4 milliseconds, with assignment errors of 16% and 0.5%.

  4. Entanglement dynamics in minimal Kitaev chains

    quant-ph 2025-07 reject novelty 5.0 of 10

    Two- and three-site Kitaev chains can dynamically generate maximally entangled two-qubit and GHZ-type three-qubit states, while a pure W state is forbidden by parity conservation.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

42 extracted references · 40 canonical work pages · cited by 4 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Kitaev, A. Y. Unpaired Majorana fermions in quantum wires. Physics-uspekhi 44, 131 (2001)

    work page 2001

  2. [2]

    Kitaev, A. Y. Fault-tolerant quantum computation by anyons. Annals of physics303, 2–30 (2003)

    work page 2003

  3. [3]

    H., Stern, A., Freedman, M

    Nayak, C., Simon, S. H., Stern, A., Freedman, M. & Das Sarma, S. Non-Abelian anyons and topological quantum computation. Reviews of Modern Physics80, 1083–1159 (2008)

    work page 2008

  4. [4]

    D., Freedman, M

    Sarma, S. D., Freedman, M. & Nayak, C. Majorana zero modes and topological quantum computation. npj Quantum Information1, 1–13 (2015)

    work page 2015

  5. [5]

    Dvir, T. et al. Realization of a minimal Kitaev chain in coupled quantum dots. Nature 614, 445–450 (2023)

    work page 2023

  6. [6]

    ten Haaf, S. L. et al.A two-site Kitaev chain in a two-dimensional electron gas. Nature 630, 329–334 (2024)

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    Sau, J. D. & Sarma, S. D. Realizing a robust practical Majorana chain in a quantum-dot- superconductor linear array. Nature communications3, 964 (2012)

    work page 2012

  8. [8]

    & Flensberg, K

    Leijnse, M. & Flensberg, K. Parity qubits and poor man’s Majorana bound states in double quantum dots. Physical Review B86, 134528 (2012)

    work page 2012

Show all 42 references
  1. [9]

    & Sau, J

    Liu, C.-X., Pan, H., Setiawan, F., Wimmer, M. & Sau, J. D. Fusion protocol for Majorana modes in coupled quantum dots. Physical Review B108, 085437 (2023)

    2023

  2. [10]

    & P´ alyi, A

    Boross, P. & P´ alyi, A. Braiding-based quantum control of a Majorana qubit built from quantum dots. Physical Review B109, 125410 (2024)

    2024

  3. [11]

    S., Flensberg, K., Danon, J

    Tsintzis, A., Souto, R. S., Flensberg, K., Danon, J. & Leijnse, M. Majorana qubits and non-abelian physics in quantum dot–based minimal Kitaev chains. PRX Quantum 5, 010323 (2024)

    2024

  4. [12]

    & Aguado, R

    Seoane Souto, R. & Aguado, R. Subgap states in semiconductor-superconductor devices for quantum technologies: Andreev qubits and minimal Majorana chains, 133–223 (Springer Nature Switzerland, 2024)

    2024

  5. [13]

    & Nayak, C

    Bonderson, P., Freedman, M. & Nayak, C. Measurement-only topological quantum computation. Physical Review Letters101, 010501 (2008). 30

    2008

  6. [14]

    Vijay, S. & Fu, L. Teleportation-based quantum information processing with Majorana zero modes. Physical Review B94, 235446 (2016)

    2016

  7. [15]

    & Flensberg, K

    Plugge, S., Rasmussen, A., Egger, R. & Flensberg, K. Majorana box qubits. New Journal of Physics 19, 012001 (2017)

    2017

  8. [16]

    Steiner, J. F. & von Oppen, F. Readout of Majorana qubits. Physical Review Research2, 033255 (2020)

    2020

  9. [17]

    & Loss, D

    Rainis, D. & Loss, D. Majorana qubit decoherence by quasiparticle poisoning. Physical Review B 85, 174533 (2012)

    2012

  10. [18]

    W., Martinis, J

    Aumentado, J., Keller, M. W., Martinis, J. M. & Devoret, M. H. Nonequilibrium Quasiparticles and 2e Periodicity in Single-Cooper-Pair Transistors. Physical Review Letters92, 066802 (2004)

    2004

  11. [19]

    J., Devoret, M

    Catelani, G., Schoelkopf, R. J., Devoret, M. H. & Glazman, L. I. Relaxation and frequency shifts induced by quasiparticles in superconducting qubits. Physical Review B84, 064517 (2011)

    2011

  12. [20]

    Hays, M. et al. Direct Microwave Measurement of Andreev-Bound-State Dynamics in a Semiconductor-Nanowire Josephson Junction. Physical Review Letters121, 047001 (2018)

    2018

  13. [21]

    Karzig, T., Cole, W. S. & Pikulin, D. I. Quasiparticle Poisoning of Majorana Qubits. Physical Review Letters 126, 057702 (2021)

    2021

  14. [22]

    Aghaee, M. et al. Interferometric single-shot parity measurement in InAs–Al hybrid devices. Nature 638, 651–655 (2025)

    2025

  15. [23]

    C., Delbecq, M

    Contamin, L. C., Delbecq, M. R., Dou¸ cot, B., Cottet, A. & Kontos, T. Hybrid light-matter networks of Majorana zero modes. npj Quantum Information7, 1–9 (2021)

    2021

  16. [24]

    Badawy, G. et al. High Mobility Stemless InSb Nanowires. Nano Letters 19, 3575–3582 (2019)

    2019

  17. [25]

    Hornibrook, J. M. et al. Frequency multiplexing for readout of spin qubits. Applied Physics Letters 104, 103108 (2014)

    2014

  18. [26]

    & Delsing, P

    Persson, F., Wilson, C., Sandberg, M., Johansson, G. & Delsing, P. Excess dissipation in a single- electron box: The Sisyphus resistance. Nano letters 10, 953–957 (2010)

    2010

  19. [27]

    Bruhat, L. et al. Cavity Photons as a Probe for Charge Relaxation Resistance and Photon Emission in a Quantum Dot Coupled to Normal and Superconducting Continua. Physical Review X6, 021014 31 (2016)

    2016

  20. [28]

    van Driel, D. et al. Charge sensing the parity of an Andreev molecule. PRX Quantum 5, 020301 (2024)

    2024

  21. [29]

    Vigneau, F. et al. Probing quantum devices with radio-frequency reflectometry. Applied Physics Reviews 10 (2023)

    2023

  22. [30]

    R., Johnson, A

    Petta, J. R., Johnson, A. C., Marcus, C. M., Hanson, M. P. & Gossard, A. C. Manipulation of a Single Charge in a Double Quantum Dot. Physical Review Letters93, 186802 (2004)

    2004

  23. [31]

    Nguyen, H. Q. et al. Electrostatic control of quasiparticle poisoning in a hybrid semiconductor- superconductor island. Phys. Rev. B108, L041302 (2023)

    2023

  24. [32]

    et al.Flip-chip-based fast inductive parity readout of a planar superconducting island

    Hinderling, M. et al.Flip-chip-based fast inductive parity readout of a planar superconducting island. PRX Quantum 5, 030337 (2024)

    2024

  25. [33]

    F., Loss, D

    Luethi, M., Legg, H. F., Loss, D. & Klinovaja, J. From perfect to imperfect poor man’s Majoranas in minimal Kitaev chains. Physical Review B110, 245412 (2024)

    2024

  26. [34]

    & Liu, C.-X

    Pan, H., Das Sarma, S. & Liu, C.-X. Rabi and Ramsey oscillations of a Majorana qubit in a quantum dot-superconductor array. Physical Review B111, 075416 (2025)

    2025

  27. [35]

    Wesdorp, J. et al. Dynamical polarization of the fermion parity in a nanowire Josephson junction. Physical Review Letters131, 117001 (2023)

    2023

  28. [36]

    et al.Shadow-wall lithography of ballistic superconductor–semiconductor quantum devices

    Heedt, S. et al.Shadow-wall lithography of ballistic superconductor–semiconductor quantum devices. Nature Communications 12, 4914 (2021)

    2021

  29. [37]

    Mazur, G. P. et al. Spin-mixing enhanced proximity effect in aluminum-based superconductor– semiconductor hybrids. Advanced Materials34, 2202034 (2022)

    2022

  30. [38]

    Zatelli, F. et al. Robust poor man’s Majorana zero modes using Yu-Shiba-Rusinov states. Nature Communications 15, 7933 (2024)

    2024

  31. [39]

    & Aumentado, J

    Naaman, O. & Aumentado, J. Poisson Transition Rates from Time-Domain Measurements with a Finite Bandwidth. Physical Review Letters96, 100201 (2006)

    2006

  32. [40]

    & Wimmer, M

    Liu, C.-X., Wang, G., Dvir, T. & Wimmer, M. Tunable superconducting coupling of quantum dots via Andreev bound states in semiconductor-superconductor nanowires. Physical Review Letters129, 32 267701 (2022)

    2022

  33. [41]

    & Troiani, F

    Secchi, A. & Troiani, F. Theory of multidimensional quantum capacitance and its application to spin and charge discrimination in quantum dot arrays. Physical Review B107, 155411 (2023)

    2023

  34. [42]

    Peri, L., Benito, M., Ford, C. J. & Gonzalez-Zalba, M. F. Unified linear response theory of quantum electronic circuits. npj Quantum Information10, 114 (2024). 33

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.