arxiv: 2604.21732 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-23 · ❄️ cond-mat.mes-hall

Recognition: unknown

Tailoring Germanium Heterostructures for Quantum Devices with Machine Learning

Patrick Del Vecchio , Kevin Rossi , Giordano Scappucci , Stefano Bosco

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-09 20:16 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.mes-hall

keywords germanium heterostructuresspin-orbit interactionquantum wellsBayesian optimizationspin qubitssilicon spikesmachine learningepitaxial growth

0 comments

The pith

Localized strained silicon spikes in unstrained germanium channels can increase spin-orbit interaction by up to three orders of magnitude.

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

Current germanium quantum wells show weak spin-orbit interaction because their wave functions have heavy-hole character, which makes fast electrical control of spins difficult and forces complex device layouts. The authors propose adding localized, strained silicon spikes inside unstrained germanium channels and use multi-objective Bayesian optimization to shape the spike profile for maximum spin-orbit strength while respecting realistic epitaxial growth limits and parameter variations. If the optimizations hold, the new structures would raise quantum-dot spin qubit quality factors by up to two orders of magnitude over existing materials and produce gigahertz-scale spin splittings in hybrid superconducting Andreev qubits. A sympathetic reader cares because stronger, electrically tunable spin-orbit interaction removes a central bottleneck for scaling germanium-based spintronic and quantum devices.

Core claim

We demonstrate that concrete heterostructure modifications can overcome these limitations, enhancing SOI by up to three orders of magnitude. Specifically, we propose to enrich unstrained Ge channels by localized, strained silicon spikes. Leveraging a multi-objective Bayesian optimization, we optimize the spike profile to maximize SOI, while ensuring compatibility with current epitaxial growth processes and robustness against realistic variations of growth parameters. Our heterostructure substantially enhances device performance, yielding up to two orders of magnitude higher quantum-dot spin qubit quality factors than state-of-the-art materials. We also predict GHz-scale spin splittings for a

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is the localized strained silicon spike profile embedded in the germanium channel, which modifies the hole wave function to strengthen spin-orbit interaction while remaining compatible with epitaxial growth.

If this is right

Quantum-dot spin qubits would reach quality factors up to two orders of magnitude higher than current germanium devices.
Hybrid superconducting Andreev spin qubits would exhibit gigahertz-scale spin splittings suitable for fast operation.
Device layouts could be simplified because strong electrical control of spins would no longer require elaborate geometries.
The structures remain compatible with existing epitaxial growth, supporting direct transfer to scalable fabrication.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

Faster electrical spin control could reduce reliance on microwave lines and lower power dissipation in large qubit arrays.
The same spike-engineering strategy might apply to other hole-based quantum well systems facing similar spin-orbit limitations.
Coherence-time measurements on actual grown samples would test whether the predicted quality-factor gains survive real scattering mechanisms.
Integration with existing silicon-germanium foundry processes could shorten the path from design to functional quantum processors.

Load-bearing premise

The Bayesian optimization accurately models real epitaxial growth constraints and that the computed spin-orbit enhancements will appear in fabricated devices without unmodeled defects or scattering.

What would settle it

Fabricate a germanium heterostructure with the optimized silicon spike profile and measure its spin-orbit interaction strength directly, for example through gate-voltage dependence of spin relaxation or precession rates, to check whether the predicted three-order enhancement occurs.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.21732 by Giordano Scappucci, Kevin Rossi, Patrick Del Vecchio, Stefano Bosco.

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

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: (c). In contrast, in Ge and ε-Ge, for small L the spin splitting increases monotonically with L and µ, due to the prefactor of δv in Eq. (4) and since δv is also monotonically increasing with µ, respectively [green and dashed lines in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: (c). Remarkably, comparing green and orange lines in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_1.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: FIG. 2. HH envelope function [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: FIG. 3. Calculated [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4. Calculated HH-LH splitting energy as a function of the spike distances [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_4.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: shows the off-diagonal matrix element xso = | ⟨φ + 1,0,0 |x|φ − 1,0,0 ⟩ | and kso = | ⟨φ + 1,0,0 |kx|φ − 1,0,0 ⟩ | for the quantum dot ground state orbital with an in-plane magnetic field B = (0.1 T)ex, and a gate field Fz = 1.5 mV/nm. Similarly, we also plot in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_5.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: FIG. 6 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_6.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: FIG. 7. Unspiked Ge: Longitudinal (solid lines) and transverse (dashed lines) components of linear and quadratic position [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_7.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: FIG. 8. Spiked Ge: Longitudinal (solid lines) and transverse (dashed lines) components of linear and quadratic position [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_8.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 9.** Figure 9: FIG. 9. (a)-(b) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_9.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 10.** Figure 10: FIG. 10 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_10.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 11.** Figure 11: FIG. 11. Top panel illustrates the Pareto Front identified by the multi-objective Bayesian optimization of GeSi Bumps. Lower [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p034_11.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 12.** Figure 12: FIG. 12. Top panel illustrates the Pareto Front identified by the multi-objective Bayesian optimization of GeSi spikes. Lower [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p035_12.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Germanium (Ge) quantum wells are emerging as versatile platforms for quantum devices, supporting high-quality spin qubits and integration with superconducting leads. These applications benefit from strong intrinsic spin-orbit interaction (SOI), enabling efficient electrical control and engineering of spin degrees of freedom. The most advanced Ge/SiGe heterostructures to date, based on compressively strained Ge channels within strain-relaxed silicon-germanium (SiGe) barriers, exhibit weak SOI due to the heavy-hole character of the wave function, posing challenges for spin-based quantum devices and requiring complex device designs for fast qubit manipulation. In this work, we demonstrate that concrete heterostructure modifications can overcome these limitations, enhancing SOI by up to three orders of magnitude. Specifically, we propose to enrich unstrained Ge channels by localized, strained silicon spikes. Leveraging a multi-objective Bayesian optimization, we optimize the spike profile to maximize SOI, while ensuring compatibility with current epitaxial growth processes and robustness against realistic variations of growth parameters. Our heterostructure substantially enhances device performance, yielding up to two orders of magnitude higher quantum-dot spin qubit quality factors than state-of-the-art materials. We also predict GHz-scale spin splittings for hybrid superconducting Andreev spin qubits. These novel Ge heterostructures with engineered Si concentration profiles can open pathways to scalable quantum and spintronic applications.

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.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper proposes localized strained Si spikes in unstrained Ge wells, tuned via multi-objective Bayesian optimization, to claim huge SOI gains and better qubit quality factors, but those numbers sit on modeling without checks for spike-induced scattering.

read the letter

The core idea is to modify standard Ge/SiGe quantum wells by inserting thin, strained silicon spikes inside an unstrained Ge channel. They run Bayesian optimization to pick the spike width, position, and strain profile that maximizes spin-orbit interaction while staying inside what current epitaxial growth can actually do and surviving small growth variations. That specific combination and the optimization framing are new compared with the usual uniform compressive strain approach in the Ge qubit literature they cite. The work shows how the spikes change the hole wavefunction and lift the SOI, then plugs the result into simple estimates for quantum-dot quality factors and Andreev qubit splittings. The optimization itself looks reproducible and the constraints are stated plainly, which is useful for anyone who wants to try similar designs. The soft spots are the performance numbers. The abstract and the stress-test note both flag that the two-order quality-factor jump and three-order SOI boost assume the spikes add no extra scattering, roughness, or inhomogeneity. Nothing in the provided material shows a transport model that includes those terms or any sensitivity run that tests whether they stay negligible. Without that, the headline gains are predictions, not demonstrated outcomes. The paper is aimed at experimental groups growing Ge heterostructures for spin qubits who might want a concrete starting design to test. A reader who works on heterostructure band-structure modeling or on Bayesian methods for materials would find the setup worth looking at. It is coherent enough and the method is clear enough that it deserves a serious referee, mainly to check the scattering assumptions and ask for more detail on how the SOI values were computed. I would send it out for review but would expect the authors to add those checks before acceptance.

Referee Report

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes tailoring Ge/SiGe heterostructures by incorporating localized, strained silicon spikes into unstrained Ge channels. A multi-objective Bayesian optimization is used to tune the spike profile parameters to maximize spin-orbit interaction (SOI) while respecting epitaxial growth constraints and robustness to parameter variations. The authors claim this yields up to three orders of magnitude SOI enhancement relative to conventional compressively strained Ge wells, resulting in up to two orders of magnitude improvement in quantum-dot spin qubit quality factors and GHz-scale spin splittings in hybrid superconducting Andreev qubits.

Significance. If the modeled SOI enhancements are robust and translate to fabricated devices, the work would provide a concrete, growth-compatible route to stronger electrical spin control in Ge-based quantum platforms, potentially simplifying qubit architectures and enabling new hybrid devices. The use of Bayesian optimization to balance physical performance against realistic fabrication constraints is a methodological strength that could be extended to other heterostructure systems.

major comments (3)

[Abstract] Abstract and optimization results: The headline claims of three-order SOI enhancement and two-order quality-factor improvement are stated without reported error bars, sensitivity analysis to growth-parameter variations, or explicit validation of the underlying SOI model against known experimental values for Ge/SiGe wells. This leaves the central performance predictions weakly supported.
[Optimization and transport modeling] Optimization and transport modeling sections: The multi-objective Bayesian optimization maximizes a modeled SOI quantity derived from the heterostructure band structure, but the manuscript does not appear to incorporate or bound additional scattering channels (alloy scattering, interface roughness, or strain inhomogeneity) introduced by the localized Si spikes. If these terms are comparable to or larger than the SOI-driven gains, the net quality-factor improvement does not follow.
[Device performance predictions] Device performance predictions: The mapping from enhanced SOI to qubit quality factors and Andreev spin splittings assumes that SOI dominates all decoherence and relaxation mechanisms in the optimized structures. No quantitative estimate is provided for how spike-induced disorder would alter this assumption.

minor comments (2)

[Methods] Clarify the precise definition of the SOI quantity being optimized (e.g., Rashba coefficient, effective spin-orbit field, or matrix element) and its relation to the qubit figures of merit.
[Results] Add a table or figure summarizing the optimized spike parameters, the resulting SOI values, and the predicted quality factors with uncertainty ranges.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive and detailed feedback on our manuscript. The comments have prompted us to strengthen the presentation of our results with additional quantitative support. We respond to each major comment below and have revised the manuscript to incorporate error bars, sensitivity analyses, bounds on scattering, and estimates of disorder effects.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract] Abstract and optimization results: The headline claims of three-order SOI enhancement and two-order quality-factor improvement are stated without reported error bars, sensitivity analysis to growth-parameter variations, or explicit validation of the underlying SOI model against known experimental values for Ge/SiGe wells. This leaves the central performance predictions weakly supported.

Authors: We agree that error bars, sensitivity analysis, and model validation strengthen the claims. In the revised manuscript we report error bars obtained from the Bayesian optimization posterior ensemble, confirming that SOI enhancements remain above two orders of magnitude for the majority of high-performing solutions. We add a sensitivity analysis to realistic growth-parameter variations (spike height, width, and position within experimental tolerances), demonstrating that the optimized profiles retain substantial SOI gains. The underlying k·p SOI model is calibrated against published experimental values for compressively strained Ge wells; we now include direct side-by-side comparisons showing agreement with literature baselines before the spike-induced enhancement. revision: yes
Referee: [Optimization and transport modeling] Optimization and transport modeling sections: The multi-objective Bayesian optimization maximizes a modeled SOI quantity derived from the heterostructure band structure, but the manuscript does not appear to incorporate or bound additional scattering channels (alloy scattering, interface roughness, or strain inhomogeneity) introduced by the localized Si spikes. If these terms are comparable to or larger than the SOI-driven gains, the net quality-factor improvement does not follow.

Authors: The optimization prioritizes SOI under epitaxial-growth constraints, yet we acknowledge that spike-induced scattering must be bounded. In the revision we add order-of-magnitude estimates for alloy scattering and interface-roughness contributions using established models calibrated to Ge/SiGe heterostructures. For the localized, optimized spike profiles the additional scattering rates remain sub-dominant to the SOI-driven gains, preserving a net quality-factor improvement of at least one order of magnitude. A complete microscopic transport simulation lies outside the present scope, but the provided bounds support the reported performance trends. revision: partial
Referee: [Device performance predictions] Device performance predictions: The mapping from enhanced SOI to qubit quality factors and Andreev spin splittings assumes that SOI dominates all decoherence and relaxation mechanisms in the optimized structures. No quantitative estimate is provided for how spike-induced disorder would alter this assumption.

Authors: Quality-factor and spin-splitting predictions are derived from SOI-enhanced relaxation rates while holding other mechanisms at literature values for standard Ge wells. In the revision we include finite-element estimates of the strain-induced disorder potential arising from the Si spikes. These calculations show that, for the optimized localized profiles, the disorder energy scale remains well below the enhanced SOI splitting, supporting the assumption that SOI continues to dominate. A fully microscopic treatment of all decoherence channels would require additional experimental parameters not available in the current modeling framework; we therefore present the disorder estimate as a quantitative check rather than a complete re-derivation of all rates. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in the optimization-based design chain

full rationale

The paper applies multi-objective Bayesian optimization to maximize a computed SOI quantity derived from heterostructure band-structure modeling, subject to explicit epitaxial growth constraints. This constitutes a forward search over design parameters rather than fitting to the final qubit performance metrics or quality factors. The subsequent estimates of quality-factor gains and GHz-scale spin splittings are direct evaluations of the same physical model on the optimized structures; they do not reduce to the inputs by construction. No self-definitional equations, fitted-input predictions, or load-bearing self-citation chains appear in the derivation. The underlying model parameters are drawn from standard Ge literature, which is independent external input. The central claims therefore remain self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the accuracy of the SOI calculation model for the modified structure and on domain assumptions about epitaxial growth feasibility; no new physical entities are postulated.

free parameters (1)

silicon spike profile parameters
Dimensions, strain level, and spatial distribution of the localized Si spikes are varied and optimized by the Bayesian algorithm to maximize SOI.

axioms (2)

domain assumption The proposed Si spike profiles are compatible with current epitaxial growth processes
Invoked when stating that the optimized design remains manufacturable.
domain assumption The structure is robust against realistic variations of growth parameters
Used to constrain the multi-objective optimization.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5540 in / 1503 out tokens · 63598 ms · 2026-05-09T20:16:37.303538+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

Strain engineering of Andreev spin qubits in Germanium
cond-mat.mes-hall 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

Compressive strain suppresses spin splitting in germanium Josephson junctions while tensile or unstrained heterostructures enable GHz-scale splittings for Andreev spin qubits via enhanced spin-orbit effects.
g-tensor Optimization in Ge/SiGe Quantum Dots
cond-mat.mes-hall 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 4.0

A flexible optimization framework is introduced to suppress in-plane g-tensor components in SiGe-Ge-SiGe quantum wells by tuning silicon concentration, enabling gapless single-spin qubit encoding.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

115 extracted references · 15 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers · 4 internal anchors

[1]

Loss and D

D. Loss and D. P. DiVincenzo, Phys. Rev. A57, 120 (1998)

1998
[2]

Scappucci, C

G. Scappucci, C. Kloeffel, F. A. Zwanenburg, D. Loss, M. Myronov, J.-J. Zhang, S. De Franceschi, G. Kat- saros, and M. Veldhorst, Nature Reviews Materials 10.1038/s41578-020-00262-z (2020)

work page doi:10.1038/s41578-020-00262-z 2020
[3]

Burkard, T

G. Burkard, T. D. Ladd, A. Pan, J. M. Nichol, and J. R. Petta, Rev. Mod. Phys.95, 025003 (2023). 6

2023
[4]

N. W. Hendrickx, D. P. Franke, A. Sammak, G. Scap- pucci, and M. Veldhorst, Nature577, 487 (2020)

2020
[5]

N. W. Hendrickx, W. I. L. Lawrie, M. Russ, F. van Riggelen, S. L. de Snoo, R. N. Schouten, A. Sam- mak, G. Scappucci, and M. Veldhorst, Nature591, 580 (2021)

2021
[6]

V. John, C. X. Yu, B. van Straaten, E. A. Rodr´ ıguez- Mena, M. Rodr´ ıguez, S. D. Oosterhout, L. E. A. Ste- houwer, G. Scappucci, M. Rimbach-Russ, S. Bosco, F. Borsoi, Y.-M. Niquet, and M. Veldhorst, Nature Communications16, 10560 (2025)

2025
[7]

Zhang, E

X. Zhang, E. Morozova, M. Rimbach-Russ, D. Jirovec, T.-K. Hsiao, P. C. Fari˜ na, C.-A. Wang, S. D. Oost- erhout, A. Sammak, G. Scappucci, M. Veldhorst, and L. M. K. Vandersypen, Nature Nanotechnology20, 209 (2025)

2025
[8]

Many-body interferometry with semiconductor spins

D. Jirovec, S. Reale, P. Cova-Fari˜ na, C. Ventura- Meinersen, M. T. P. Nguyen, X. Zhang, S. D. Oost- erhout, G. Scappucci, M. Veldhorst, M. Rimbach-Russ, S. Bosco, and L. M. K. Vandersypen, arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.04310 (2025)

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025
[9]

P. C. Fari˜ na, D. Jirovec, X. Zhang, E. Morozova, S. D. Oosterhout, S. Reale, T.-K. Hsiao, G. Scap- pucci, M. Veldhorst, and L. M. K. Vandersypen, ArXiv preprint arXiv:2506.08663 (2025)

work page arXiv 2025
[10]

Jakob, K

M. Jakob, K. Laubscher, P. D. Vecchio, A. Chat- terjee, V. Fatemi, and S. Bosco, arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.19762 (2025)

work page arXiv 2025
[11]

Lakic, W

L. Lakic, W. I. L. Lawrie, D. van Driel, L. E. A. Ste- houwer, Y. Su, M. Veldhorst, G. Scappucci, F. Kuem- meth, and A. Chatterjee, Nature Materials24, 552 (2025)

2025
[12]

Aggarwal, A

K. Aggarwal, A. Hofmann, D. Jirovec, I. Prieto, A. Sam- mak, M. Botifoll, S. Mart´ ı-S´ anchez, M. Veldhorst, J. Ar- biol, G. Scappucci, J. Danon, and G. Katsaros, Phys. Rev. Research3, L022005 (2021)

2021
[13]

Hinderling, S

M. Hinderling, S. C. ten Kate, M. Coraiola, D. Hax- ell, M. Stiefel, M. Mergenthaler, S. Paredes, S. Bedell, D. Sabonis, and F. Nichele, PRX Quantum5, 030357 (2024)

2024
[14]

P. D. Johannsen, H. F. Legg, S. Bosco, D. Loss, and J. Klinovaja, Phys. Rev. Res.8, 013289 (2026)

2026
[15]

Luethi, K

M. Luethi, K. Laubscher, S. Bosco, D. Loss, and J. Kli- novaja, Phys. Rev. B107, 035435 (2023)

2023
[16]

Laubscher, J

K. Laubscher, J. D. Sau, and S. Das Sarma, Phys. Rev. B109, 035433 (2024)

2024
[17]

D. M. Pino, R. S. Souto, M. J. Calder´ on, R. Aguado, and J. C. Abadillo-Uriel, Phys. Rev. B111, 235443 (2025)

2025
[18]

S. S. Babkin, B. Joecker, K. Flensberg, M. Serbyn, and J. Danon, Phys. Rev. B111, 214518 (2025)

2025
[19]

Adelsberger, H

C. Adelsberger, H. F. Legg, D. Loss, and J. Klinovaja, Phys. Rev. B108, 155433 (2023)

2023
[20]

Tosato, V

A. Tosato, V. Levajac, J.-Y. Wang, C. J. Boor, F. Bor- soi, M. Botifoll, C. N. Borja, S. Mart´ ı-S´ anchez, J. Ar- biol, A. Sammak, M. Veldhorst, and G. Scappucci, Com- munications Materials4, 23 (2023)

2023
[21]

J. A. Steele, P. J. Strohbeen, C. Verdi, A. Baktash, A. Danilenko, Y.-H. Chen, J. van Dijk, F. H. Knud- sen, A. Leblanc, D. Perconte, L. Wang, E. Demler, S. Salmani-Rezaie, P. Jacobson, and J. Shabani, Nature Nanotechnology20, 1757 (2025)

2025
[22]

Granular aluminum induced superconductivity in germanium for hole spin-based hybrid devices

G. Fabris, P. Falthansl-Scheinecker, D. Shah, D. M. Pino, M. Borovkov, A. Bubis, K. Roux, D. Sokolova, A. A. Juanes, T. Costanzo, I. Taha, A. Gen¸ c, J. Ar- biol, S. Calcaterra, A. D. C. Oliveira, D. Chrastina, G. Isella, R. S. Souto, M. J. Calderon, R. Aguado, J. C. Abadillo-Uriel, and G. Katsaros, ArXiv preprint arXiv:2602.21364 (2026)

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026
[23]

Borovkov, Y

M. Borovkov, Y. Schell, D. Sokolova, K. Roux, P. Falthansl-Scheinecker, G. Fabris, D. Shah, J. Saez- Mollejo, R. Previdi, I. Taha, A. Gen¸ c, J. Arbiol, S. Calcaterra, A. D. C. Oliveira, D. Chrastina, G. Isella, A. Bubis, and G. Katsaros, ArXiv preprint arXiv:2602.21363 (2026)

work page arXiv 2026
[24]

O. Sagi, A. Crippa, M. Valentini, M. Janik, L. Baghumyan, G. Fabris, L. Kapoor, F. Hassani, J. Fink, S. Calcaterra, D. Chrastina, G. Isella, and G. Katsaros, Nature Communications15, 6400 (2024)

2024
[25]

P. J. Strohbeen, A. M. Brook, W. L. Sarney, and J. Sha- bani, AIP Advances13, 085118 (2023)

2023
[26]

Kiyooka, C

E. Kiyooka, C. Tangchingchai, L. Noirot, A. Leblanc, B. Brun, S. Zihlmann, R. Maurand, V. Schmitt, ´E. Du- mur, J.-M. Hartmann, F. Lefloch, and S. De Franceschi, Nano Letters25, 562 (2025)

2025
[27]

Lodari, A

M. Lodari, A. Tosato, D. Sabbagh, M. A. Schubert, G. Capellini, A. Sammak, M. Veldhorst, and G. Scap- pucci, Phys. Rev. B100, 041304 (2019)

2019
[28]

Tosato, B

A. Tosato, B. M. Ferrari, A. Sammak, A. R. Hamil- ton, M. Veldhorst, M. Virgilio, and G. Scappucci, arXiv preprint arXiv:2201.06862 (2022)

work page arXiv 2022
[29]

Moutanabbir, S

O. Moutanabbir, S. Assali, A. Attiaoui, G. Daligou, P. Daoust, P. D. Vecchio, S. Koelling, L. Luo, and N. Ro- taru, Advanced Materials36, 2305703 (2024)

2024
[30]

Daoust, N

P. Daoust, N. Rotaru, D. Biswas, S. Koelling, E. Rahier, A. Dub´ e-Valade, P. D. Vecchio, M. S. Edwards, M. Tan- vir, E. Sajadi, J. Salfi, and O. Moutanabbir, Advanced Science , e23504 (2026)

2026
[31]

Fischer, W

J. Fischer, W. A. Coish, D. V. Bulaev, and D. Loss, Phys. Rev. B78, 155329 (2008)

2008
[32]

Bosco and D

S. Bosco and D. Loss, Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 190501 (2021)

2021
[33]

Winkler,Spin-orbit Coupling Effects in Two- Dimensional Electron and Hole Systems, Vol

R. Winkler,Spin-orbit Coupling Effects in Two- Dimensional Electron and Hole Systems, Vol. 191 (Springer, 2003)

2003
[34]

Moriya, K

R. Moriya, K. Sawano, Y. Hoshi, S. Masubuchi, Y. Shi- raki, A. Wild, C. Neumann, G. Abstreiter, D. Bougeard, T. Koga, and T. Machida, Phys. Rev. Lett.113, 086601 (2014)

2014
[35]

Morrison, P

C. Morrison, P. Wi´ sniewski, S. D. Rhead, J. Foronda, D. R. Leadley, and M. Myronov, Applied Physics Let- ters105, 182401 (2014)

2014
[36]

A. H. A. Hassan, R. J. H. Morris, O. A. Mironov, S. Ga- bani, A. Dobbie, and D. R. Leadley, Applied Physics Letters110, 042405 (2017)

2017
[37]

W. J. Hardy, C. T. Harris, Y.-H. Su, Y. Chuang, J. Moussa, L. N. Maurer, J.-Y. Li, T.-M. Lu, and D. R. Luhman, Nanotechnology30, 215202 (2019)

2019
[38]

N. W. Hendrickx, W. I. L. Lawrie, L. Petit, A. Sammak, G. Scappucci, and M. Veldhorst, Nature Communica- tions11, 3478 (2020)

2020
[39]

van Riggelen, W

F. van Riggelen, W. I. L. Lawrie, M. Russ, N. W. Hen- drickx, A. Sammak, M. Rispler, B. M. Terhal, G. Scap- pucci, and M. Veldhorst, npj Quantum Information8, 124 (2022)

2022
[40]

C.-A. Wang, H. E. Ercan, M. F. Gyure, G. Scappucci, M. Veldhorst, and M. Rimbach-Russ, npj Quantum In- 7 formation10, 102 (2024)

2024
[41]

Jirovec, A

D. Jirovec, A. Hofmann, A. Ballabio, P. M. Mutter, G. Tavani, M. Botifoll, A. Crippa, J. Kukucka, O. Sagi, F. Martins, J. Saez-Mollejo, I. Prieto, M. Borovkov, J. Arbiol, D. Chrastina, G. Isella, and G. Katsaros, Na- ture Materials20, 1106 (2021)

2021
[42]

K. Wang, G. Xu, F. Gao, H. Liu, R.-L. Ma, X. Zhang, Z. Wang, G. Cao, T. Wang, J.-J. Zhang, D. Culcer, X. Hu, H.-W. Jiang, H.-O. Li, G.-C. Guo, and G.-P. Guo, Nature Communications13, 206 (2022)

2022
[43]

H. Liu, K. Wang, F. Gao, J. Leng, Y. Liu, Y.-C. Zhou, G. Cao, T. Wang, J. Zhang, P. Huang, H.-O. Li, and G.-P. Guo, Nano Letters23, 3810 (2023)

2023
[44]

W. I. L. Lawrie, M. Rimbach-Russ, F. v. Riggelen, N. W. Hendrickx, S. L. d. Snoo, A. Sammak, G. Scap- pucci, J. Helsen, and M. Veldhorst, Nature Communi- cations14, 3617 (2023)

2023
[45]

L. E. A. Stehouwer, C. X. Yu, B. van Straaten, A. Tosato, V. John, D. Degli Esposti, A. Elsayed, D. Costa, S. D. Oosterhout, N. W. Hendrickx, M. Veld- horst, F. Borsoi, and G. Scappucci, Nature Materials 24, 1906 (2025)

1906
[46]

Saez-Mollejo, D

J. Saez-Mollejo, D. Jirovec, Y. Schell, J. Kukucka, S. Calcaterra, D. Chrastina, G. Isella, M. Rimbach- Russ, S. Bosco, and G. Katsaros, Nature Communica- tions16, 3862 (2025)

2025
[47]

Jirovec, P

D. Jirovec, P. C. Fari˜ na, S. Reale, S. D. Oosterhout, X. Zhang, S. de Snoo, A. Sammak, G. Scappucci, M. Veldhorst, and L. M. K. Vandersypen, Phys. Rev. Appl.24, 034051 (2025)

2025
[48]

A. S. Ivlev, D. R. Crielaard, M. Meyer, W. I. L. Lawrie, N. W. Hendrickx, A. Sammak, Y. Matsumoto, L. M. K. Vandersypen, G. Scappucci, C. D´ eprez, and M. Veld- horst, Phys. Rev. X15, 031042 (2025)

2025
[49]

D. V. Bulaev and D. Loss, Phys. Rev. Lett.98, 097202 (2007)

2007
[50]

Bosco, M

S. Bosco, M. Benito, C. Adelsberger, and D. Loss, Phys. Rev. B104, 115425 (2021)

2021
[51]

Valvo, M

E. Valvo, M. Jakob, P. Del Vecchio, M. Rimbach-Russ, and S. Bosco, arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.12702 (2025)

work page arXiv 2025
[52]

Martinez and Y.-M

B. Martinez and Y.-M. Niquet, Phys. Rev. Appl.25, 014018 (2026)

2026
[53]

Martinez and Y.-M

B. Martinez and Y.-M. Niquet, Phys. Rev. Appl.17, 024022 (2022)

2022
[54]

L. E. A. Stehouwer, A. Tosato, D. Degli Esposti, D. Costa, M. Veldhorst, A. Sammak, and G. Scappucci, Applied Physics Letters123, 092101 (2023)

2023
[55]

Sangwan, E

N. Sangwan, E. Jutzi, C. Olsen, S. Vogel, A. Nigro, I. Zardo, and A. Hofmann, ACS Applied Electronic Ma- terials7, 8844 (2025)

2025
[56]

De Palma, F

F. De Palma, F. Oppliger, W. Jang, S. Bosco, M. Jan´ ık, S. Calcaterra, G. Katsaros, G. Isella, D. Loss, and P. Scarlino, Nature Communications15, 10177 (2024)

2024
[57]

Bosco, P

S. Bosco, P. Scarlino, J. Klinovaja, and D. Loss, Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 066801 (2022)

2022
[58]

Jan´ ık, K

M. Jan´ ık, K. Roux, C. Borja-Espinosa, O. Sagi, A. Baghdadi, T. Adletzberger, S. Calcaterra, M. Bo- tifoll, A. Garz´ on Manj´ on, J. Arbiol, D. Chrastina, G. Isella, I. M. Pop, and G. Katsaros, Nature Com- munications16, 2103 (2025)

2025
[59]

C. X. Yu, S. Zihlmann, J. C. Abadillo-Uriel, V. P. Michal, N. Rambal, H. Niebojewski, T. Bedecarrats, M. Vinet, ´E. Dumur, M. Filippone, B. Bertrand, S. De Franceschi, Y.-M. Niquet, and R. Maurand, Na- ture Nanotechnology18, 741 (2023)

2023
[60]

Padurariu and Y

C. Padurariu and Y. V. Nazarov, Phys. Rev. B81, 144519 (2010)

2010
[61]

Pita-Vidal, R

M. Pita-Vidal, R. S. Souto, S. Goswami, C. K. Ander- sen, G. Katsaros, J. Shabani, and R. Aguado, ArXiv preprint arXiv:2512.23336 (2025)

work page arXiv 2025
[62]

M. Hays, V. Fatemi, D. Bouman, J. Cerrillo, S. Di- amond, K. Serniak, T. Connolly, P. Krogstrup, J. Nyg˚ ard, A. L. Yeyati, A. Geresdi, and M. H. Devoret, Science373, 430 (2021)

2021
[63]

Hoffman, M

S. Hoffman, M. Hays, K. Serniak, T. Hazard, and C. Tahan, ArXiv preprint arXiv:2403.00710 (2024)

work page arXiv 2024
[64]

Pita-Vidal, A

M. Pita-Vidal, A. Bargerbos, R. ˇZitko, L. J. Splitthoff, L. Gr¨ unhaupt, J. J. Wesdorp, Y. Liu, L. P. Kouwen- hoven, R. Aguado, B. van Heck, A. Kou, and C. K. Andersen, Nature Physics19, 1110 (2023)

2023
[65]

Bargerbos, M

A. Bargerbos, M. Pita-Vidal, R. ˇZitko, J. ´Avila, L. J. Splitthoff, L. Gr¨ unhaupt, J. J. Wesdorp, C. K. Ander- sen, Y. Liu, L. P. Kouwenhoven, R. Aguado, A. Kou, and B. van Heck, PRX Quantum3, 030311 (2022)

2022
[66]

van Loo, F

N. van Loo, F. Zatelli, G. O. Steffensen, B. Roovers, G. Wang, T. Van Caekenberghe, A. Bordin, D. van Driel, Y. Zhang, W. D. Huisman, G. Badawy, E. P. A. M. Bakkers, G. P. Mazur, R. Aguado, and L. P. Kouwenhoven, Nature650, 334 (2026)

2026
[67]

Bordin, C.-X

A. Bordin, C.-X. Liu, T. Dvir, F. Zatelli, S. L. D. ten Haaf, D. van Driel, G. Wang, N. van Loo, Y. Zhang, J. C. Wolff, T. Van Caekenberghe, G. Badawy, S. Gaz- ibegovic, E. P. A. M. Bakkers, M. Wimmer, L. P. Kouwenhoven, and G. P. Mazur, Nature Nanotechnol- ogy20, 726 (2025)

2025
[68]

S. L. D. ten Haaf, Y. Zhang, Q. Wang, A. Bordin, C.-X. Liu, I. Kulesh, V. P. M. Sietses, C. G. Prosko, D. Xiao, C. Thomas, M. J. Manfra, M. Wimmer, and S. Goswami, Nature641, 890 (2025)

2025
[69]

Nayak, S

C. Nayak, S. H. Simon, A. Stern, M. Freedman, and S. Das Sarma, Rev. Mod. Phys.80, 1083 (2008)

2008
[70]

J. D. Sau, R. M. Lutchyn, S. Tewari, and S. Das Sarma, Phys. Rev. Lett.104, 040502 (2010)

2010
[71]

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

2010
[72]

S. D. Sarma, M. Freedman, and C. Nayak, npj Quantum Information1, 15001 (2015)

2015
[73]

Schrade, S

C. Schrade, S. Hoffman, and D. Loss, Phys. Rev. B95, 195421 (2017)

2017
[74]

Rainis, L

D. Rainis, L. Trifunovic, J. Klinovaja, and D. Loss, Phys. Rev. B87, 024515 (2013)

2013
[75]

Buried unstrained germanium channels: a lattice-matched platform for quantum technology

D. Costa, P. D. Vecchio, K. Hudson, L. E. A. Stehouwer, A. Tosato, D. D. Esposti, M. Lodari, S. Bosco, and G. Scappucci, arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.04724 (2025)

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025
[77]

McJunkin, Thomasand Harpt, Y

B. McJunkin, Thomasand Harpt, Y. Feng, M. P. Losert, R. Rahman, J. P. Dodson, M. A. Wolfe, D. E. Savage, M. G. Lagally, S. N. Coppersmith, M. Friesen, R. Joynt, and M. A. Eriksson, Nature Communications13, 7777 (2022)

2022
[78]

B. D. Woods, M. A. Eriksson, R. Joynt, and M. Friesen, Phys. Rev. B107, 035418 (2023)

2023
[79]

B. D. Woods, H. Soomro, E. S. Joseph, C. C. D. Frink, R. Joynt, M. A. Eriksson, and M. Friesen, npj Quantum Information10, 54 (2024). 8

2024
[80]

J. M. Luttinger and W. Kohn, Phys. Rev.97, 869 (1955)

1955
[81]

Voon and M

L. Voon and M. Willatzen,Thek·pMethod: Electronic Properties of Semiconductors(Springer Berlin Heidel- berg, 2009)

2009

Showing first 80 references.