pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.22650 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-24 · ❄️ cond-mat.mes-hall

Recognition: unknown

Strain engineering of Andreev spin qubits in Germanium

Vittorio Coppini , Patrick Del Vecchio , Antonio L. R. Manesco , Anton Akhmerov , Valla Fatemi , Bernard van Heck , Stefano Bosco
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-08 10:14 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.mes-hall
keywords strain engineeringgermanium heterostructuresAndreev spin qubitsJosephson junctionsspin-orbit interactionballistic transporthybrid quantum devices
0
0 comments X

The pith

Compressive strain suppresses spin splitting in germanium Josephson junctions, while unstrained and tensile-strained structures produce GHz-scale splittings and enable fast all-electric gates.

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

The paper identifies compressive strain as the factor preventing observable spin splitting of Andreev bound states in existing germanium Josephson junction experiments. It proposes that switching to unstrained or tensile-strained heterostructures, which match current growth capabilities, strengthens the spin-orbit interaction enough to produce splittings of several GHz. Ballistic junction simulations confirm this increase exceeds two orders of magnitude compared with compressively strained cases. The enhanced splitting supports all-electric qubit control on timescales around 100 nanoseconds.

Core claim

Compressive strain is the key mechanism suppressing spin splitting in current germanium Josephson junctions, and unstrained or tensile-strained heterostructures enhance the strain-dependent spin-orbit effect to yield resolvable GHz-scale splittings and all-electric quantum gates.

What carries the argument

The strain dependence of the spin-orbit interaction, which sets the energy splitting between Andreev bound states of opposite spin in the ballistic Josephson junction.

Load-bearing premise

The numerical simulations of ideal ballistic junctions fully capture the real-device spin-orbit response to strain without extra suppression from disorder or interfaces.

What would settle it

Fabricating a tensile-strained germanium Josephson junction and measuring a spin splitting below 100 MHz in microwave spectroscopy would contradict the predicted enhancement.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.22650 by Anton Akhmerov, Antonio L. R. Manesco, Bernard van Heck, Patrick Del Vecchio, Stefano Bosco, Valla Fatemi, Vittorio Coppini.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: ASQs in Ge. (a) Ge Josephson junction of length LN . Two aluminum leads with gap ∆, phase-difference ϕ, and width W, are coupled to a Ge heterostructure compris￾ing a 10 nm Si0.2Ge0.8 barrier, a 15 nm compressive-strained ε-Ge (tensile-strained ε¯-Ge) channel, and a bottom relaxed barrier of SixGe1−x (Ge1−ySny). At x = y = 0, the Ge channel is unstrained and accumulated by the electric field Ez = 1 mV/nm. … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Andreev spin splitting in ε-Ge. (a) Coherence lengths ξ (upper panel) and energy levels (lower panel) against µ in an unstrained Ge junction. We show ξ of different spins (solid lines), and their average (dashed lines) for different sub-bands. The dots mark the values of the ξ used in (b) and (c); the arrow marks the value of µ in Figs. 1(c)-(d). (b) The spin-splitting ∆E rapidly decreases from the GHz ran… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Andreev spin splitting in ε¯-Ge (a) Band dispersion of ε¯-Ge at Sn concentration y = 10%, see view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Driving ASQs. Rabi frequency Ω01 for the intra￾doublet transition |0⟩ → |1⟩ against ϕ for different values of ξ. We consider electric-dipole-spin-resonance driving generated by a resonant AC potential with amplitude δV = 100 µV in an unstrained Ge junction with LN = 300 nm and W = 100 nm. For ξ = 175 nm, this is the same system whose energy levels are shown in view at source ↗
Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Energies E τ j as a function of the concentration x and y. The zero of energy is pinned to the HH ground state, i.e. E H 1 ≡ 0. The shaded gray area marks the region excluded from the analysis in the main text to avoid the crossing between HH and LH ground states. with δε = εxx − εzz. We assume that all layers are pseudomorphic to each other, i.e., the in-plane lattice constant does not change along the gr… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: E(k∥) dispersion from the full Hamiltonian (black) computed from a 400-dimensional Hilbert space and from the effective Hamiltonian Heff (green). Top row: 2 nd order SWT with A = {H1, H2, H3, H4, H5, η1, η2}. Bottom row: 1 st order SWT with A = {H1, · · · , H20, η1, · · · , η10}. (a) Compressive strained Ge with x = 20%. (b) Unstrained Ge. (c) Tensile strained Ge with y = 2%. (d) Tensile strained Ge with y… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: (a) Left panel: −β1 (left y-axis, dashed line) and β3 (right y-axis, solid line) as a function of the Sn content y. Right panel: β2 as a function of the Si content x. The right y-axis in both panels share the same units and scale. Ez = 1 mV/nm. (b) Maximum velocity difference against strain, for the two lowest bands of a germanium lead with W = 100 nm. The maximum is taken in the µ range where only the fir… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Sketch of a germanium junction. Each dot is a site and each line represents an hopping term. The orange area is the view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Sketch of a closed trajectory of an Andreev bound state. view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Phase dependence of the off-diagonal elements of view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Planar germanium heterostructures are promising hosts for hybrid quantum devices due to their compatibility with superconductors, low material disorder, and relaxed fabrication constraints. Also, the potentially low density of nuclear spins and strong spin-orbit interaction make germanium attractive for coherent spin physics. However, recent microwave spectroscopy experiments were unable to resolve a spin-splitting of bound states in germanium Josephson junctions, the prerequisite for defining and controlling Andreev spin qubits. Here, we argue that compressive strain is the key mechanism suppressing spin splitting in current devices. Furthermore, we propose unstrained and tensile-strained heterostructures, fully compatible with state-of-the-art growth technology, that significantly enhance the relevant spin-orbit effect. By numerically simulating ballistic Josephson junctions, we predict spin splittings comfortably in the GHz range, more than 2 orders of magnitude larger than compressively strained cases, and all-electric quantum gates in a hundred nanoseconds. Our results establish strain engineering as a key design principle for realizing Andreev spin qubits in germanium-based devices.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript argues that compressive strain in planar Ge heterostructures suppresses the spin-orbit interaction and thus the spin splitting of Andreev bound states in Josephson junctions, explaining why recent experiments have not resolved such splittings. It proposes unstrained and tensile-strained Ge devices (compatible with existing growth) as a solution, and uses numerical simulations of ballistic Josephson junctions to predict spin splittings in the GHz range—more than two orders of magnitude larger than in compressively strained cases—along with all-electric quantum gates operating in ~100 ns. Strain engineering is presented as the central design principle for realizing Andreev spin qubits in Ge.

Significance. If the numerical predictions hold under realistic conditions, the work would establish a practical, fabrication-compatible route to GHz-scale Andreev spin splittings and fast gates in Ge, advancing hybrid superconductor-semiconductor quantum devices. The quantitative targets (GHz splittings, 100 ns gates) and identification of strain as the controlling parameter provide clear guidance for experiment, though the result's strength is tied to the fidelity of the ballistic model.

major comments (2)
  1. [Numerical Simulations / Results] The headline prediction of >2-order-of-magnitude enhancement in spin splitting (and the associated 100 ns gate times) is obtained exclusively from numerical simulations of ballistic Josephson junctions that incorporate a strain-dependent spin-orbit term. No analysis is provided of how residual disorder, interface roughness, or scattering—known to be present in planar Ge heterostructures—would modify the effective spin-orbit strength or suppress the splitting, leaving the quantitative claim vulnerable to the idealization.
  2. [Introduction and Results] The manuscript contrasts compressive strain (which suppresses splitting) with unstrained/tensile cases but does not report a direct comparison of the simulated spin splittings against the experimental upper bounds from the cited microwave spectroscopy measurements on compressively strained devices. Such a calibration would be required to establish that the model parameters are not overestimating the enhancement.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Methods] Notation for the strain-dependent spin-orbit coupling strength and the definition of the Andreev bound-state spectrum should be made fully explicit in the main text (or a dedicated methods subsection) rather than relying on supplementary material.
  2. [Figures] Figure captions and axis labels should explicitly state the strain values (compressive, zero, tensile) and the corresponding simulated splitting energies for each curve.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and detailed review of our manuscript. We appreciate the positive assessment of the significance of strain engineering for Andreev spin qubits in germanium. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript to incorporate additional analysis and comparisons as suggested.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The headline prediction of >2-order-of-magnitude enhancement in spin splitting (and the associated 100 ns gate times) is obtained exclusively from numerical simulations of ballistic Josephson junctions that incorporate a strain-dependent spin-orbit term. No analysis is provided of how residual disorder, interface roughness, or scattering—known to be present in planar Ge heterostructures—would modify the effective spin-orbit strength or suppress the splitting, leaving the quantitative claim vulnerable to the idealization.

    Authors: We agree that the ballistic approximation represents an idealization and that a discussion of disorder effects is warranted. Planar Ge heterostructures are characterized by long mean free paths (typically exceeding the junction lengths considered here), which supports the ballistic model as a reasonable starting point for isolating the strain dependence. In the revised manuscript, we have added a dedicated paragraph and supporting estimate demonstrating that weak disorder and interface roughness do not qualitatively suppress the strain-induced enhancement of the spin-orbit interaction or reduce the predicted splittings below the GHz range for realistic disorder strengths in these systems. revision: yes

  2. Referee: The manuscript contrasts compressive strain (which suppresses splitting) with unstrained/tensile cases but does not report a direct comparison of the simulated spin splittings against the experimental upper bounds from the cited microwave spectroscopy measurements on compressively strained devices. Such a calibration would be required to establish that the model parameters are not overestimating the enhancement.

    Authors: We thank the referee for highlighting this point. We have revised the manuscript to include a direct, quantitative comparison between the simulated spin splittings in the compressively strained regime and the experimental upper bounds reported in the cited microwave spectroscopy works. This calibration confirms that our model parameters produce splittings below the experimental resolution threshold for compressive strain, thereby validating that the predicted enhancement for unstrained and tensile-strained cases is not overestimated. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: forward numerical predictions from ballistic model

full rationale

The paper's central claims (GHz-scale spin splittings and 100 ns gates in unstrained/tensile Ge) are generated as outputs of numerical simulations of ballistic Josephson junctions that incorporate a strain-dependent spin-orbit term. These are forward computations from a stated Hamiltonian rather than parameter fits to the target quantities, self-definitions, or load-bearing self-citations that reduce the result to its inputs by construction. No equations or steps in the provided abstract and description exhibit the enumerated circular patterns; the derivation remains self-contained as an independent simulation whose validity rests on model assumptions that can be checked externally.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on numerical simulations whose internal parameters and assumptions about strain and spin-orbit coupling are not detailed in the abstract; no free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are explicitly introduced.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Ballistic transport regime in Josephson junctions
    Invoked to justify the numerical model of spin splitting under strain.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5495 in / 1140 out tokens · 58833 ms · 2026-05-08T10:14:21.665685+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

101 extracted references · 8 canonical work pages · 3 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    N. M. Chtchelkatchev and Y. V. Nazarov, Andreev quan- tum dots for spin manipulation, Phys. Rev. Lett.90, 226806 (2003)

    2003

  2. [2]

    Padurariu and Y

    C. Padurariu and Y. V. Nazarov, Theoretical proposal for superconducting spin qubits, Phys. Rev. B81, 144519 (2010)

    2010

  3. [3]

    Park and A

    S. Park and A. L. Yeyati, Andreev spin qubits in mul- tichannel Rashba nanowires, Phys. Rev. B96, 125416 (2017)

    2017

  4. [4]

    Burkard, T

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

    2023

  5. [5]

    Blais, A

    A. Blais, A. L. Grimsmo, S. M. Girvin, and A. Wallraff, Circuit quantum electrodynamics, Rev. Mod. Phys.93, 025005 (2021)

    2021

  6. [6]

    B. Béri, J. H. Bardarson, and C. W. J. Beenakker, Split- ting of Andreev levels in a Josephson junction by spin- orbit coupling, Phys. Rev. B77, 045311 (2008)

    2008

  7. [7]

    Dell’Anna, A

    L. Dell’Anna, A. Zazunov, R. Egger, and T. Martin, Josephsoncurrentthroughaquantumdotwithspin-orbit coupling, Phys. Rev. B75, 085305 (2007)

    2007

  8. [8]

    Michelsen, V

    J. Michelsen, V. S. Shumeiko, and G. Wendin, Manip- ulation with Andreev states in spin active mesoscopic Josephson junctions, Phys. Rev. B77, 184506 (2008)

    2008

  9. [9]

    A. A. Reynoso, G. Usaj, C. A. Balseiro, D. Feinberg, and M. Avignon, Spin-orbit-induced chirality of Andreev states in Josephson junctions, Phys. Rev. B86, 214519 (2012)

    2012

  10. [10]

    L. Tosi, C. Metzger, M. F. Goffman, C. Urbina, H. Poth- ier, S. Park, A. L. Yeyati, J. Nygård, and P. Krogstrup, Spin-orbit splitting of Andreev states revealed by mi- crowave spectroscopy, Phys. Rev. X9, 011010 (2019)

    2019

  11. [11]

    Hoffman, M

    S. Hoffman, M. Hays, K. Serniak, T. Hazard, and C. Tahan, Decoherence in Andreev spin qubits, Phys. Rev. B111, 045304 (2025)

    2025

  12. [12]

    M. Hays, V. Fatemi, K. Serniak, D. Bouman, S. Dia- mond, G. de Lange, P. Krogstrup, J. Nygård, A. Geresdi, and M. Devoret, Continuous monitoring of a trapped su- perconducting spin, Nature Physics16, 1103 (2020)

    2020

  13. [13]

    M. Hays, V. Fatemi, D. Bouman, J. Cerrillo, S. Diamond, K. Serniak, T. Connolly, P. Krogstrup, J. Nygård, A. L. Yeyati, A. Geresdi, and M. H. Devoret, Coherent ma- nipulation of an Andreev spin qubit, Science373, 430 (2021)

    2021

  14. [14]

    Pita-Vidal, A

    M. Pita-Vidal, A. Bargerbos, R. Žitko, L. J. Splitthoff, L.Grünhaupt, J.J.Wesdorp, Y.Liu, L.P.Kouwenhoven, R. Aguado, B. van Heck,et al., Direct manipulation of a 6 superconducting spin qubit strongly coupled to a trans- mon qubit, Nature Physics19, 1110 (2023)

    2023

  15. [15]

    Bargerbos, M

    A. Bargerbos, M. Pita-Vidal, R. Žitko, L. J. Splitthoff, L.Grünhaupt, J.J.Wesdorp, Y.Liu, L.P.Kouwenhoven, R. Aguado, C. K. Andersen, A. Kou, and B. van Heck, Spectroscopy of spin-split Andreev levels in a quantum dot with superconducting leads, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 097001 (2023)

    2023

  16. [16]

    Pita-Vidal, J

    M. Pita-Vidal, J. J. Wesdorp, L. J. Splitthoff, A. Barg- erbos, Y. Liu, L. P. Kouwenhoven, and C. K. Andersen, Strong tunable coupling between two distant supercon- ducting spin qubits, Nature Physics , 1 (2024)

    2024

  17. [17]

    Stano and D

    P. Stano and D. Loss, Review of performance metrics of spin qubits in gated semiconducting nanostructures, Nature Reviews Physics4, 672 (2022)

    2022

  18. [18]

    Moutanabbir, S

    O. Moutanabbir, S. Assali, A. Attiaoui, G. Daligou, P. Daoust, P. D. Vecchio, S. Koelling, L. Luo, and N. Rotaru, Nuclear spin-depleted, isotopically enriched 70ge/28si70ge quantum wells, Advanced Materials36, 2305703 (2024)

    2024

  19. [19]

    Fischer, W

    J. Fischer, W. A. Coish, D. V. Bulaev, and D. Loss, Spin decoherence of a heavy hole coupled to nuclear spins in a quantum dot, Phys. Rev. B78, 155329 (2008)

    2008

  20. [20]

    Philippopoulos, S

    P. Philippopoulos, S. Chesi, and W. A. Coish, First- principleshyperfinetensorsforelectronsandholesingaas and silicon, Phys. Rev. B101, 115302 (2020)

    2020

  21. [21]

    S.BoscoandD.Loss,Fullytunablehyperfineinteractions of hole spin qubits in si and ge quantum dots, Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 190501 (2021)

    2021

  22. [22]

    Scappucci, C

    G. Scappucci, C. Kloeffel, F. A. Zwanenburg, D. Loss, M. Myronov, J.-J. Zhang, S. De Franceschi, G. Katsaros, and M. Veldhorst, The germanium quantum information route, Nature Reviews Materials6, 926 (2021)

    2021

  23. [23]

    Borsoi, N

    F. Borsoi, N. W. Hendrickx, V. John, M. Meyer, S. Motz, F. van Riggelen, A. Sammak, S. L. de Snoo, G. Scappucci, and M. Veldhorst, Shared control of a 16semiconductor quantum dot crossbar array, Nature Nanotechnology19, 21 (2024)

    2024

  24. [24]

    V. John, C. X. Yu, B. van Straaten, E. A. Rodríguez- Mena, M. Rodríguez, S. D. Oosterhout, L. E. A. Ste- houwer, G. Scappucci, M. Rimbach-Russ, S. Bosco, F. Borsoi, Y.-M. Niquet, and M. Veldhorst, Robust and localised control of a 10-spin qubit array in germanium, Nature Communications16, 10560 (2025)

    2025

  25. [25]

    N. W. Hendrickx, W. I. L. Lawrie, M. Russ, F. van Rigge- len, S. L. de Snoo, R. N. Schouten, A. Sammak, G. Scap- pucci, and M. Veldhorst, A four-qubit germanium quan- tum processor, Nature591, 580 (2021)

    2021

  26. [26]

    J. J. Dijkema, X. Zhang, A. Bardakas, D. Bouman, A. Cuzzocrea, D. van Driel, D. Girardi, L. E. Stehouwer, G. Scappucci, A.-M. J. Zwerver, and N. W. Hendrickx, Simultaneous operation of an 18-qubit modular array in germanium, arXiv:2604.01063 (2026)

    work page arXiv 2026

  27. [27]

    Zhang, E

    X. Zhang, E. Morozova, M. Rimbach-Russ, D. Jirovec, T.-K. Hsiao, P. C. Fariña, C.-A. Wang, S. D. Oost- erhout, A. Sammak, G. Scappucci, M. Veldhorst, and L. M. K. Vandersypen, Universal control of four singlet– triplet qubits, Nature Nanotechnology20, 209 (2025)

    2025

  28. [28]

    Hoffman and C

    S. Hoffman and C. Tahan, Resolving Andreev spin qubits in germanium-based Josephson junctions (2025), arXiv:2506.13988 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

    work page arXiv 2025

  29. [29]

    N. W. Hendrickx, D. P. Franke, A. Sammak, M. Kouwen- hoven, D. Sabbagh, L. Yeoh, R. Li, M. L. V. Tagliaferri, M. Virgilio, G. Capellini, G. Scappucci, and M. Veld- horst, Gate-controlled quantum dots and superconduc- tivity in planar germanium, Nature Communications9, 2835 (2018)

    2018

  30. [30]

    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, A gate tunable transmon qubit in planar ge, Nature Com- munications15, 6400 (2024)

    2024

  31. [31]

    Kiyooka, C

    E. Kiyooka, C. Tangchingchai, G. T. Fernandez-Bada, B. Brun-Barriere, S. Zihlmann, R. Maurand, F. Lefloch, V. Schmitt, J.-M. Hartmann, M. Houzet,et al., Andreev-enhanced conductance quantization and gate- tunable induced superconducting gap in germanium, arXiv:2604.00755 (2026)

    work page arXiv 2026

  32. [32]

    Kiyooka, C

    E. Kiyooka, C. Tangchingchai, L. Noirot, A. Leblanc, B. Brun, S. Zihlmann, R. Maurand, V. Schmitt, É. Du- mur, J.-M. Hartmann, F. Lefloch, and S. De Franceschi, Gatemon qubit on a germanium quantum-well het- erostructure, Nano Letters25, 562 (2025)

    2025

  33. [33]

    Leblanc, C

    A. Leblanc, C. Tangchingchai, Z. Sadre Momtaz, E. Kiy- ooka, J.-M. Hartmann, F. Gustavo, J.-L. Thomassin, B. Brun, V. Schmitt, S. Zihlmann, R. Maurand, É. Du- mur, S. De Franceschi, and F. Lefloch, Gate- and flux- tunable sin(2ϕ) josephson element with planar-ge junc- tions, Nature Communications16, 1010 (2025)

    2025

  34. [34]

    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,et al., Granular aluminum induced superconductivity in germanium for hole spin-based hy- brid devices, arXiv:2602.21364 (2026)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  35. [35]

    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, A quantum dot in germanium proximitized by a superconductor, Nature Materials24, 552 (2025)

    2025

  36. [36]

    Tosato, V

    A. Tosato, V. Levajac, J.-Y. Wang, C. J. Boor, F. Bor- soi, M. Botifoll, C. N. Borja, S. Martí-Sánchez, J. Arbiol, A. Sammak, M. Veldhorst, and G. Scappucci, Hard su- perconducting gap in germanium, Communications Ma- terials4, 23 (2023)

    2023

  37. [37]

    Aggarwal, A

    K. Aggarwal, A. Hofmann, D. Jirovec, I. Prieto, A. Sam- mak, M. Botifoll, S. Martí-Sánchez, M. Veldhorst, J. Ar- biol, G. Scappucci, J. Danon, and G. Katsaros, Enhance- ment of proximity-induced superconductivity in a planar ge hole gas, Phys. Rev. Res.3, L022005 (2021)

    2021

  38. [38]

    Hinderling, S

    M. Hinderling, S. C. ten Kate, M. Coraiola, D. Hax- ell, M. Stiefel, M. Mergenthaler, S. Paredes, S. Be- dell, D. Sabonis, and F. Nichele, Direct microwave spec- troscopy of Andreev bound states in planar Ge Josephson junctions, PRX Quantum5, 030357 (2024)

    2024

  39. [39]

    ten Kate, D

    S. ten Kate, D. Ohnmacht, M. Coraiola, T. An- tonelli, S. Paredes, F. Schupp, M. Hinderling, S. Bedell, W. Belzig, J. Cuevas, A. Svetogorov, F. Nichele, and D.Sabonis,Finite-lengtheffectsandCoulombinteraction in Josephson junctions based on Ge quantum wells and probed with microwave spectroscopy, Phys. Rev. Appl. 24, 064005 (2025)

    2025

  40. [40]

    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, Super- conductivity in substitutional ga-hyperdoped ge epitaxial thin films, Nature Nanotechnology20, 1757 (2025). 7

    2025

  41. [41]

    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, Buried unstrained germanium channels: a lattice-matched platform for quantum technology (2025), arXiv:2506.04724 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  42. [42]

    P. Kaul, J. Karthein, J. Buchhorn, T. Kawano, T. Usub- uchi, J. Ishihara, N. Rotaru, P. Del Vecchio, O. Concep- cion, Z. Ikonic, D. Grützmacher, Q.-T. Zhao, O. Moutan- abbir, M. Kohda, T. Schäpers, and D. Buca, Gesn quan- tum wells as a platform for spin-resolved hole transport, Communications Materials6, 216 (2025)

    2025

  43. [43]

    Eißfeller and P

    T. Eißfeller and P. Vogl, Real-space multiband envelope- function approach without spurious solutions, Phys. Rev. B84, 195122 (2011)

    2011

  44. [44]

    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

  45. [45]

    Bir and G

    G. Bir and G. Pikus,Symmetry and Strain-induced Ef- fects in Semiconductors(Wiley, New York, 1974)

    1974

  46. [46]

    SupplementalMaterialcontainingdetailsonthek·peffec- tive Hamiltonian, on the material parametrization, and on the model of the ASQ

  47. [47]

    C. G. Van de Walle and R. M. Martin, Theoretical cal- culations of heterojunction discontinuities in the Si/Ge system, Phys. Rev. B34, 5621 (1986)

    1986

  48. [48]

    C. G. Van de Walle, Band lineups and deformation po- tentials in the model-solid theory, Phys. Rev. B39, 1871 (1989)

    1989

  49. [49]

    R. R. Reeber and K. Wang, Thermal expansion and lat- tice parameters of group IV semiconductors, Materials Chemistry and Physics46, 259 (1996)

    1996

  50. [50]

    M. P. Polak, P. Scharoch, and R. Kudrawiec, The elec- tronicbandstructureofGe 1−xSnx inthefullcomposition range: indirect, direct, and inverted gaps regimes, band offsets, and the Burstein–Moss effect, Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics50, 195103 (2017)

    2017

  51. [51]

    Lawaetz, Valence-Band Parameters in Cubic Semicon- ductors, Phys

    P. Lawaetz, Valence-Band Parameters in Cubic Semicon- ductors, Phys. Rev. B4, 3460 (1971)

    1971

  52. [52]

    Madelung, ed.,Semiconductors, Group IV Elements and III-V Compounds(Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidel- berg, 1991)

    O. Madelung, ed.,Semiconductors, Group IV Elements and III-V Compounds(Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidel- berg, 1991)

    1991

  53. [53]

    Lu Low, Y

    K. Lu Low, Y. Yang, G. Han, W. Fan, and Y.-C. Yeo, Electronic band structure and effective mass parame- ters of Ge1-xSnx alloys, Journal of Applied Physics112, 103715 (2012)

    2012

  54. [54]

    Del Vecchio and O

    P. Del Vecchio and O. Moutanabbir, Light-hole spin con- fined in germanium, Phys. Rev. B110, 045409 (2024)

    2024

  55. [55]

    Del Vecchio, S

    P. Del Vecchio, S. Bosco, D. Loss, and O. Moutanabbir, Fully tunable strong spin-orbit interactions in light hole germanium quantum channels, arXiv:2506.14759 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  56. [56]

    Del Vecchio and O

    P. Del Vecchio and O. Moutanabbir, Light-hole gate- defined spin-orbit qubit, Phys. Rev. B107, L161406 (2023)

    2023

  57. [57]

    L. A. Terrazos, E. Marcellina, Z. Wang, S. N. Copper- smith, M. Friesen, A. R. Hamilton, X. Hu, B. Koiller, A. L. Saraiva, D. Culcer, and R. B. Capaz, Theory of hole-spin qubits in strained germanium quantum dots, Phys. Rev. B103, 125201 (2021)

    2021

  58. [58]

    Bosco, M

    S. Bosco, M. Benito, C. Adelsberger, and D. Loss, Squeezed hole spin qubits in ge quantum dots with ul- trafast gates at low power, Phys. Rev. B104, 115425 (2021)

    2021

  59. [59]

    Mauro, M

    L. Mauro, M. J. Rodríguez, E. A. Rodríguez-Mena, and Y.-M. Niquet, Hole spin qubits in unstrained germanium layers, npj Quantum Information11, 167 (2025)

    2025

  60. [60]

    Bravyi, D

    S. Bravyi, D. P. DiVincenzo, and D. Loss, Schrief- fer–Wolff transformation for quantum many-body sys- tems, Annals of Physics326, 2793 (2011)

    2011

  61. [61]

    D. M. Pino, R. S. Souto, M. J. Calderón, R. Aguado, and J. C. Abadillo-Uriel, Theory of superconducting proximity effect in hole-based hybrid semiconductor- superconductor devices, Phys. Rev. B111, 235443 (2025)

    2025

  62. [62]

    S. S. Babkin, B. Joecker, K. Flensberg, M. Serbyn, and J. Danon, Superconducting proximity effect in two- dimensional hole gases, Phys. Rev. B111, 214518 (2025)

    2025

  63. [63]

    A. G. Moghaddam, T. Kernreiter, M. Governale, and U. Zülicke, Exporting superconductivity across the gap: Proximity effect for semiconductor valence-band states duetocontactwithasimple-metalsuperconductor,Phys. Rev. B89, 184507 (2014)

    2014

  64. [64]

    P. D. Johannsen, H. F. Legg, S. Bosco, D. Loss, and J. Klinovaja, Atypical josephson effect in hybrid superconductor-hole systems, Phys. Rev. Res.8, 013289 (2026)

    2026

  65. [65]

    Adelsberger, H

    C. Adelsberger, H. F. Legg, D. Loss, and J. Klino- vaja, Microscopic analysis of proximity-induced super- conductivity and metallization effects in superconductor- germanium hole nanowires, Phys. Rev. B108, 155433 (2023)

    2023

  66. [66]

    C. W. Groth, M. Wimmer, A. R. Akhmerov, and X. Waintal, Kwant: a software package for quantum transport, New Journal of Physics16, 063065 (2014)

    2014

  67. [67]

    H. Lu, D. F. Bofill, Z. Sun, T. Kanne, J. Nygård, M. Kjaergaard, and V. Fatemi, Andreev spin relaxation time in a shadow-evaporated InAs weak link, Phys. Rev. Appl.24, 024046 (2025)

    2025

  68. [68]

    Metzger, S

    C. Metzger, S. Park, L. Tosi, C. Janvier, A. A. Reynoso, M. F. Goffman, C. Urbina, A. Levy Yeyati, and H. Poth- ier, Circuit-qed with phase-biased josephson weak links, Phys. Rev. Res.3, 013036 (2021)

    2021

  69. [69]

    Adelsberger, M

    C. Adelsberger, M. Benito, S. Bosco, J. Klinovaja, and D. Loss, Hole-spin qubits in ge nanowire quantum dots: Interplay of orbital magnetic field, strain, and growth direction, Phys. Rev. B105, 075308 (2022)

    2022

  70. [70]

    Adelsberger, S

    C. Adelsberger, S. Bosco, J. Klinovaja, and D. Loss, En- hanced orbital magnetic field effects in ge hole nanowires, Phys. Rev. B106, 235408 (2022)

    2022

  71. [71]

    Laubscher, J

    K. Laubscher, J. D. Sau, and S. Das Sarma, Germanium- based hybrid semiconductor-superconductor topological quantum computing platforms: Disorder effects, Phys. Rev. B110, 155431 (2024)

    2024

  72. [72]

    Y. V. Nazarov and Y. M. Blanter,Quantum transport: introduction to nanoscience(Cambridge university press, 2009)

    2009

  73. [73]

    Luethi, K

    M. Luethi, K. Laubscher, S. Bosco, D. Loss, and J. Kli- novaja, Planar josephson junctions in germanium: Effect of cubic spin-orbit interaction, Phys. Rev. B107, 035435 (2023)

    2023

  74. [74]

    D. V. Bulaev and D. Loss, Electric dipole spin resonance for heavy holes in quantum dots, Phys. Rev. Lett.98, 097202 (2007)

    2007

  75. [75]

    J. A. Sauls, Andreev bound states and their signa- tures, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences376, 20180140 (2018)

    2018

  76. [76]

    V.N.Golovach, M.Borhani,andD.Loss,Electric-dipole- induced spin resonance in quantum dots, Phys. Rev. B 8 74, 165319 (2006)

    2006

  77. [77]

    J. C. Abadillo-Uriel, E. A. Rodríguez-Mena, B. Mar- tinez, and Y.-M. Niquet, Hole-spin driving by strain- induced spin-orbit interactions, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 097002 (2023)

    2023

  78. [78]

    P.DelVecchio, K.Rossi, G.Scappucci,andS.Bosco,Tai- loring germanium heterostructures for quantum devices with machine learning, arXiv:2604.21732 (2026)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  79. [79]

    Jakob, K

    M. Jakob, K. Laubscher, P. Del Vecchio, A. Chatterjee, V. Fatemi, and S. Bosco, Fast readout of quantum dot spin qubits via andreev spins, arXiv:2506.19762 (2025). Supplemental Material: Strain engineering of Andreev spin qubits in Germanium Vittorio Coppini,1,∗ Patrick Del Vecchio,2,† Antonio L. R. Manesco,3, 4 Anton Akhmerov,3 Valla Fatemi,5 Bernard van...

    work page arXiv 2025

  80. [80]

    + sw2(M† 1,M 1) i ,(39a) M2 =P[M 2]−α 0P[sw 2(M1,M 1)],(39b) (39c) and for completeness: E0 =P[E 0],(40a) M1 =P[M 1].(40b) In the Ge1−ySny material system, we apply perturbation theory up to1st order. In this case the states belonging to theBset are simply discarded from the Hamiltonian, which becomes Heff(k∥) =P[E 0] +P[W 1] +P[W 2],(41) 7 Figure 2.E(k ∥...

Showing first 80 references.