WorksPhysics and Astronomy
Quantum state tomography through multi-frequency Josephson effect
Abstract
Macroscopic quantum effects emerge when the coherent behavior of countless microscopic quantum states manifests collectively at a visible scale, as exemplified by the supercurrent carried by innumerable finite-momentum Cooper pairs. By rigorously analyzing the time evolution of superconducting nanodevices including finite-momentum superconductors and quantum-dot Josephson junctions, we analytically derive the ubiquitous macroscopic supercurrent that originates from quantum interference between distinct many-body eigenstates, which we term as the dynamic interference supercurrent. The dynamic interference supercurrent in a system of two Andreev spin qubits exhibits multi-frequency Josephson effect in the absence of external voltage and is governed by the response of the many-body eigenfunctions () to variations in the superconducting phase , determined by the -space Berry connection . The macroscopic dynamic interference supercurrent, an inherent property of the superposition state itself, enables an advanced quantum entanglement measurement of the Andreev spin qubits. These findings open new avenues for investigating superconducting nanodevice properties from a wave-function level, with substantial implications for advancing quantum science and technology in solid-state superconducting devices, such as quantum computer, communication, memory, and sensor.
Introduction
Superconducting nanodevices, which exhibit macroscopic supercurrent, [1, 2, 3] have emerged as pivotal components in the development of quantum science and technology, such as quantum information processing [4, 5, 6, 7, 8] that relies on demanding control over operation time. Prior theories of real-time superconducting transport have mainly relied on the powerful nonequilibrium Green’s function (NEGF) [9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15] - a widely used tool in the description of mesoscopic superconductivity. [16, 17] While NEGF provides an efficient description of dynamical correlations and transport observables, it does not directly expose the amplitudes and relative phases of the underlying many-body states. Such information is essential for describing quantum interference between distinct many-body states and for accessing state-specific properties such as quantum coherence and entanglement.
This state-level information is particularly important in nonuniform superconductors, where the superconducting state is intrinsically many-body even in the absence of interactions when expressed in the electron picture, and its exponential form[21, 22, 23] makes its direct treatment challenging. Consequently, i) the exact wave functions of the superconducting condensate in nonuniform superconductors, due to its intrinsic complexity, have received limited attention, mostly related to transport properties, such as the macroscopic supercurrent; ii) both static and dynamic quantum transport in superconducting systems heavily relies on the cumbersome and often unintuitive NEGF[9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15] and density functional theory[24, 25, 26] via a numerical approach. Recently, many-body eigenfunctions of arbitrary nonuniform superconductors were rigorously derived in both Bogoliubon and electron picture,[27, 29, 30] [28] providing a direct wave-function route to macroscopic properties of superconducting nanodevices. This development opens a state-based description of superconducting transport, conceptually analogous to the role of Berry curvature in capturing intrinsic transport from the quantum geometry of Bloch states.[31]
Here, we employ a microscopic wave-function approach to quantitatively investigate the macroscopic quantum interference originating from microscopic states. Specifically, we derive an analytic expression for the supercurrent in inhomogeneous superconductors that explicitly depends on the underlying quantum state, thereby going beyond the conventional Ginzburg–Landau framework. We test our solutions in two different scenarios, including finite-momentum superconductors and quantum-dot Josephson junctions with the later realising two Andreev spin qubits. We find a dynamic interference supercurrent (DIS) that arises from the quantum interference between different many-body eigenstates and exhibits multi-frequency Josephson effect without external voltage. The simple probability amplitude and oscillation frequency dependencies of the macroscopic DIS can be used for a quantum state tomography, allowing the entanglement measurement of Andreev qubits.
Model and theory
Our methodology involves a quadratic mean-field Hamiltonian that describes an arbitrary nonuniform superconductor. We use an overcomplete basis set that contains both particle and hole operators of each electron that enables exact solvability [32, 33, 34, 35]
Here, represents the system size, and denotes pseudospin-up and -down quasiparticles in the presence of spin-flip effects from spin-orbit coupling and spin-dependent tunneling. The above Hamiltonian involves the Nambu and spin space, [33] and an additional index labels the high/low energy levels of each pseudospin species (). The Bogoliubon operator associated with energy is represented as a unit vector in the Nambu-spin space
The field operator annihilates an electron with spin and quantum number . The matrices and describe the electron and hole distributions of all Bogoliubons, respectively. The constant energy is irrelevant to the physics we concern here. Traditionally, studies of superconducting systems have focused primarily on the quasiparticle spectrum, including excitation energies, superconducting gaps, and associated low-energy excitations. The Ginzburg–Landau framework, [33, 34, 36, 37] for example, provides a highly successful description of superconductivity in terms of a macroscopic order parameter and the corresponding energy scales. However, for high-precision quantum measurement and computation, knowledge of the quasiparticle spectrum alone may be insufficient, as the superconducting state encodes substantially richer information at the wave-function level.
The rigorous time evolution of a nonuniform superconductor necessitates its precise many-body eigenfunctions. Following the logical framework of Ref. [27] we divide the overcomplete basis set into two orthonormal basis sets dual to each other – for all and as well as for all and . Defined as for all and , the effective vacuum states (EVSs) are given by
where . The superconducting pseudospin cloud operators show how the electrons pair with each other in a nonuniform superconductor
The EVS (2) is full of Bogoliubov-like singlet – a superposition of vacuum state and Cooper pair. The detailed expressions of , , and are given in Ref. 27 The superconductor has many-body eigenstates, including -Bogoliubon eigenstates, where is combination formula. The ground state is a filled sea of all negative quasiparticles in the orthonormal basis set from . The same goes for the orthonormal basis set with the EVS . Therefore, we obtain the ground state of arbitrary nonuniform superconductor
whose ground-state energy is given by
Here, is the EVS energy of the corresponding orthonormal basis set. Distinguished from other materials, the uniqueness of the nonuniform superconductor is the electrically detectable signatures of the macroscopic supercurrent - an inherent property in the flux-tunable superconducting state. Using the exact wave function of the arbitrary superconducting state, we are able to derive macroscopic quantum effects of superconducting nanodevices directly from microscopic principles. Next, we derive the rigorous time evolu tion of superconducting nanodevices and analytically derive the macroscopic supercurrent of the arbitrary superposition initial state in different scenarios, including finite-momentum superconductor and quantum-dot Josephson junction.
DIS in a finite-momentum superconductor
We begin with a simple but intuitive scenario–finite-momentum superconductor with a single- order parameter [38, 39, 40]. The momentum of Cooper pairs, denoted by , increases with the injected current before the superconducting gap closes.[39] The ground state, (4), is composed by finite-momentum Bogoliubov singlets, i.e., , where is the field operator for an electron with momentum , spin , and energy . The Bogoliubov coefficients and , relying on the order parameter , are given by and with . The ground-state energy (5) becomes , where is the Bogoliubov energy.
Now, we study the supercurrent of the finite-momentum superconductor from the wave-function perspective. Notably, the superconducting spin cloud (3) of the finite-momentum superconductor, represented by for all and , possesses a well-defined group velocity, given by . This allows for the microscopic definition of the macroscopic supercurrent of an arbitrary superconducting state () from the perspective of the superconducting spin cloud. Specifically, the total supercurrent can be expressed as , where represents the occupancy of the superconducting spin cloud with momentum and spin in . For the ground state, i.e., , we have and , recovering the Ginzburg-Landau theory result. Next, we calculate the supercurrent of the excited eigenstates with one excited quasiparticle, such as . When a positive Bogoliubov is added to the ground state, the corresponding Bogoliubov-singlet state becomes a single-electron state . This leads to a change in the supercurrent by an amount of , which is equal to . When corresponds to the eigenstates, i.e., , where , supercurrent can be equivalently expressed by the -derivative of the eigenenergy, i.e., . It is important to note that the current arising from the single-electron state also contributes to the supercurrent derived from the -derivative of the eigenenergy. Thus, the prefactor in the relation between the supercurrent and energy guarantees its equivalence to the supercurrent derived from the wave function at a microscopic level. Therefore, the macroscopic supercurrent depends on the state of the superconductor, i.e., the coherent contribution of countless superconducting pseudospin clouds (i.e., Cooper pairs) and single electrons – carrying finite momentum.
Next, we derive the supercurrent of arbitrary superposition of eigenstates . It inevitably evolves with a time-dependent probability amplitude for each eigenstate, i.e., . The normalization condition requires and the state energy is . The occupancy of the superconducting spin cloud can be decomposed into two parts: , where . The total supercurrent, beyond the Ginzburg-Landau theory, [33, 34, 36, 37] consists of a static (time-independent) supercurrent defined as the derivative of the state energy as well as a dynamic (time-dependent) supercurrent due to the quantum interference between different many-body eigenstates, i.e., with
As the central result, Eq. (6) only contains information about the energy of the state, i.e. the modulus of , while Eq. (7) also contains information about the relative phases between states. For example, let us consider a superposition state , where and for all other combinations (). In this case, we obtain the DIS , which reaches its maximum when and becomes zero when . This DIS should be ubiquitous in different nonuniform superconducting system.
DIS in a quantum-dot Josephson junction
We next study a parallel double quantum dot-superconducting lead heterostructure, [18, 42, 43, 44] [41] sketched in Figure 1. The quantum dots are gate-tunable with dot energy (), and the order parameters of the two superconducting leads, (), have a flux-tunable phase difference , and () are the Zeeman energy in quantum dot (superconducting leads) 1. The dot-lead tunnel coupling strength is parameterized by , which is chosen to be the same for left and right leads. The spin-orbit interaction in the dot-lead tunneling process induces a spin-flip effects,[45, 46, 47] which is captured by spin rotation (see detailed Hamiltonian in Ref. 48) and is a key ingredient for interference matrix element [see S1 in Supporting Information (SI) [49]].

Figure 1. Sketch of double-quantum-dot Josephson junction. [18, 19, 20] Two quantum dots are gate-formed in the middle of two parallel semiconductor nanowires and are tunnel-coupled to left and right proximitized semiconductor-superconductor leads.
We derive the supercurrent of an arbitrary superposition state of a quantum-dot Josephson junction from the wave-function perspective. The breaking of translational symmetry in our hybrid structure disables superconducting spin cloud to have a well-defined group velocity. The Josephson current of the arbitrary superposition state () is defined as the average value of the rate of change of the electron number in the left or right lead , [2, 3] with .2 A direct derivation of interference terms, i.e., (), incorporates the many-body correlation functions of electrons and/or quasiparticles and requires large-scale numerical calculations. Alternative derivation is conducted by -derivative of the eigenfunctions,[29] which becomes feasible because all many-body eigenfunctions of arbitrary nonuniform superconductors have been rigorously derived in either Bogoliubon or electron picture.[27] Different from the previous formula in Refs., [50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55] [28] the total supercurrent consists of a static supercurrent defined as the derivative of the state energy
as well as a dynamic supercurrent due to the quantum interference of different flux-tunable eigenstates[29]
When , the DIS vanishes and the total supercurrent reduces to static supercurrent, i.e., . This relation still holds when considering -dependent magnitude of order parameter[27] and a canonical ensemble at non-zero temperature.28 The DIS (9) is governed by the -modulation of the many-body eigenfunctions, encoded in the -space Berry connection , analogous to the momentum-space Berry connection that plays a central role in intrinsic transport in topological systems.[31] Its appearance underscores the crucial role of the exact superconducting wave functions in generating macroscopic quantum effects (see more details in S1 in SI[49]). Notably, the ubiquitous DIS (9) undergoes a time oscillation with multiply frequencies determined by the energy difference between states [Fig. 2(c)]. The multi-frequency Josephson effect here occurs in the absence of an external voltage and is originated by the macroscopic quantum interference. Our formalism allows us to include the effects from initial correlations in the system. This is an important extension to previous works that studied a similar problem, starting from decoupled systems and, therefore, neglected initial correlations.[13, 14, 56, 57, 58] Also, in our system, the population of the Andreev bound states do not change with time. The developed DIS expression, Eq. (9), not only highlights the significant implications of the precise many-body eigenfunctions which was paid little attention before but also offers potential for quantum state tomography, as we demonstrate in the following.
Quantum state tomography via DIS
Quantum state tomography, capable of reconstructing full information without destroying quantum states, is one of the most significant techniques in quantum information and computation. Next, we introduce the applications of our DIS in quantum tomography of the
Andreev qubits. Let us begin with two Andreev spin qubits. We focus on the low-energy space of the hybrid system, dominated by four flux-tunable Andreev levels [see Figure 1(a) in S2 of SI[49]]. The frequencies of two Andreev spin qubits, given by and , respectively, are gate-, flux-, and field-tunable. The two Andreev spin qubits acquire different frequencies by tuning the superconducting phase difference . Four logic states, defined from the EVS that has a fermionic even parity, are represented by four many-body eigenstates , , , and . Microwave photons allow to prepare an arbitrary superposition of four many-body eigenstates with , in a hybrid quantum electrodynamics architecture. [4, 5, 6, 7, 8]
Let us measure the modulus () of four probability amplitudes according to the static supercurrent (8). Note that four probability amplitudes are independent of system parameters such as , , , and . We can determine by measuring the static supercurrent of three different values of which are tuned via the adiabatic process. The three steady-state current measurements , where , together with the normalization condition lead to a complete set of equations from where the probabilities can be determined (see generalization of Andreev qubits in S3 of SI[49]). This system of equations simply determines the modulus of probability amplitudes of four logic states.
Next, we determine the phase () of the four probability amplitudes according to the DIS (9). In S1 of SI[49] we derive interference connection and with , where we have used the Bogoliubov transformation (1). This implies that the spin/rotation flip effect from the spin-orbit interaction in the dot-lead tunneling process is a key ingredient for interference connection. Notably, () reveals no interference between logic states () and (). Hence, the DIS (9), excluding the modes of oscillation frequencies and , oscillates with the frequencies of two Andreev level qubits ( and ), i.e., with . Here, we have parameterized the phase of with , i.e., . The probability amplitude dependence of the interference current are combined into and . The phase can be extracted from the above system of complex equations for , whose values can be obtained from the experimental measurements of the DIS. The time evolution of and are plotted in Figure 2 (a) and (Figure 2b), respectively. The phase also influences the amplitude of the DIS [Figure 2(b)]. In realistic experiments, the time-dependent supercurrent can be detected using a superconducting quantum interference device magnetometer (Figure 1), with its pickup coil positioned well above the Andreev qubit loop [29] (see more details in Ref. [59, 60, 61]). Consequently, we achieve an electric measurement of the entanglement between Andreev spin qubits via the inherent supercurrent inside the superposition state itself.

Figure 2. The time evolution of (a) total supercurrent and (b) DIS, where we study a superposition of four many-body eigenstates with . The dashed lines in panel (a) correspond to the static supercurrent (8). The phase of probability amplitude influences the oscillation amplitude of the DIS (9), as observed in panel (b). Other parameters are the same as Figure 1 in SM.
While the supercurrent enables nondestructive measurement of Andreev qubits, the phase of the logic state can be annihilated during the DIS measurement when the probability amplitudes of the logic states interfering with are all zero. This scenario occurs with the four maximally entangled two-qubit Bell states: and . The vanishing oscillatory DIS signal () prevents the direct measurement of the phase for these four Bell states. To address this limitation, advanced quantum state tomography techniques capable of reconstructing the full density matrix information would be required. [62, 63, 64, 65]
Conclusion
We analytically derive the macroscopic supercurrents of arbitrary quantum superposition states that capture a ubiquitous transient supercurrent due to the quantum interference of different many-body eigenstates. The simple probability amplitude dependence of the DIS unveils an advanced quantum tomography technique, enabling an electric measurement of quantum entanglement between two Andreev qubits. The key innovation of this technique is its capability to directly transform the entanglement information among Andreev qubits into electrical signals in the macroscopic supercurrents. Therefore, our results show the intimate relation between the microscopic quantum state and a macroscopic quantum effect.
Supporting Information Available
Calculation of interference connection, quantitative study of macroscopic supercurrent in a quantum-dot Josephson junction, and generalization of Andreev qubits.
Author Information
Corresponding Author
{sup}*Email: [email protected]
{sup}*Email: [email protected]
Notes
The authors declare no competing financial interest.
Acknowledgment
This work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 12505012, 12321004, W2511003, 12234003, 12475015), the China’s National Key R&D Program (Grant Nos. 2025YFA1411200), the Spanish Comunidad de Madrid (CM) "Talento Program" (Project 2022-T1/IND-24070), and the Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation, and Universities (Grants Nos. PID2022-140552NA-I00, PID2025-169814NB-I00, and CEX2024-001445-S).
References
- [1]Josephson, B. D. Possible new effects in superconductive tunnelling. Phys. Lett. 1962, 1, 251–253.DOI
- [2]Cohen, M. H.; Falicov, L. M.; Phillips, J. C. Superconductive Tunneling. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1962, 8, 316–318.DOI
- [3]Ambegaokar, V.; Baratoff, A. Tunneling between superconductors. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1963, 10, 486.
- [4]Hays, M.; De Lange, G.; Serniak, K.; Van Woerkom, D.; Bouman, D.; Krogstrup, P.; Nygård, J.; Geresdi, A.; Devoret, M. Direct microwave measurement of andreev-bound-state dynamics in a semiconductor-nanowire josephson junction. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2018, 121, 047001.DOI
- [5]Janvier, C.; Tosi, L.; Bretheau, L.; Girit, Ç.; Stern, M.; Bertet, P.; Joyez, P.; Vion, D.; Esteve, D.; Goffman, M. et al. Coherent manipulation of Andreev states in superconducting atomic contacts. Science 2015, 349, 1199–1202.DOI
- [6]Bretheau, L.; Girit, Ç.; Pothier, H.; Esteve, D.; Urbina, C. Exciting Andreev pairs in a superconducting atomic contact. Nature 2013, 499, 312–315.DOI
- [7]Van Woerkom, D. J.; Proutski, A.; Van Heck, B.; Bouman, D.; Väyrynen, J. I.; Glazman, L. I.; Krogstrup, P.; Nygård, J.; Kouwenhoven, L. P.; Geresdi, A. Microwave spectroscopy of spinful Andreev bound states in ballistic semiconductor Josephson junctions. Nat. Phys. 2017, 13, 876–881.DOI
- [8]Nichele, F.; Portolés, E.; Fornieri, A.; Whiticar, A.; Drachmann, A.; Gronin, S.; Wang, T.; Gardner, G.; Thomas, C.; Hatke, A. et al. Relating Andreev bound states and supercurrents in hybrid Josephson junctions. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2020, 124, 226801.DOI
- [9]Cuevas, J. C.; Martín-Rodero, A.; Yeyati, A. L. Hamiltonian approach to the transport properties of superconducting quantum point contacts. Phys. Rev. B 1996, 54, 7366–7379.DOI
- [10]Yeyati, A. L.; Cuevas, J. C.; López-Dávalos, A.; Martín-Rodero, A. Resonant tunneling through a small quantum dot coupled to superconducting leads. Phys. Rev. B 1997, 55, R6137–R6140.DOI
- [11]Sun, Q.-f.; Guo, H.; Wang, J. Hamiltonian approach to the ac Josephson effect in superconducting-normal hybrid systems. Phys. Rev. B 2002, 65, 075315.DOI
- [12]Perfetto, E.; Stefanucci, G.; Cini, M. Equilibrium and time-dependent Josephson current in one-dimensional superconducting junctions. Phys. Rev. B 2009, 80, 205408.DOI
- [13]Souto, R. S.; Martín-Rodero, A.; Yeyati, A. L. Quench dynamics in superconducting nanojunctions: Metastability and dynamical Yang-Lee zeros. Phys. Rev. B 2017, 96, 165444.DOI
- [14]Souto, R. S.; Martín-Rodero, A.; Yeyati, A. L. Andreev Bound States Formation and Quasiparticle Trapping in Quench Dynamics Revealed by Time-Dependent Counting Statistics. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2016, 117, 267701.DOI
- [15]Zhang, X. P.; Golovach, V. N.; Giazotto, F.; Bergeret, F. S. Phase-controllable nonlocal spin polarization in proximitized nanowires. Phys. Rev. B 2020, 101, 180502.DOI
- [16]Bergeret, F. S.; Silaev, M.; Virtanen, P.; Heikkilä, T. T. Colloquium: Nonequilibrium effects in superconductors with a spin-splitting field. Rev. Mod. Phys. 2018, 90, 041001.DOI
- [17]Bergeret, F.; Volkov, A. F.; Efetov, K. B. Odd triplet superconductivity and related phenomena in superconductor-ferromagnet structures. Rev. Mod. Phys. 2005, 77, 1321.DOI
- [18]Kürtössy, O.; Scherübl, Z.; Fülöp, G.; Lukács, I. E.; Kanne, T.; Nygård, J.; Makk, P.; Csonka, S. Andreev molecule in parallel InAs nanowires. Nano Lett. 2021, 21, 7929–7937.DOI
- [19]Debbarma, R.; Tsintzis, A.; Aspergen, M.; Souto, R. S.; Lehmann, S.; Dick, K.; Leijnse, M.; Thelander, C. Josephson Junction π−0 Transition Induced by Orbital Hybridization in a Double Quantum Dot. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2023, 131, 256001.
- [20]Herrmann, L. G.; Portier, F.; Roche, P.; Yeyati, A. L.; Kontos, T.; Strunk, C. Carbon Nanotubes as Cooper-Pair Beam Splitters. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2010, 104, 026801.
- [21]Yanagisawa, T. Lattice distortions and stripes in the underdoped region of high-Tc cuprates. J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 2003, 36, 9337.DOI
- [22]Miyazaki, M.; Yamaji, K.; Yanagisawa, T. Possible coexistence of superconductivity and static SDW stripes in the two-dimensional Hubbard model. J. Phys. Chem. Solids. 2002, 63, 1403–1407, Proceedings of the 8th ISSP International Symposium.DOI
- [23]Yanagisawa, T.; Koike, S.; Miyazaki, M.; Yamaji, K. Stripes and superconductivity in high-Tc superconductors. J. Phys. Chem. Solids 2002, 63, 1379–1383.DOI
- [24]Weston, J.; Waintal, X. Linear-scaling source-sink algorithm for simulating time-resolved quantum transport and superconductivity. Phys. Rev. B 2016, 93, 134506.DOI
- [25]Stefanucci, G.; Perfetto, E.; Cini, M. Time-dependent quantum transport with superconducting leads: A discrete-basis Kohn-Sham formulation and propagation scheme. Phys. Rev. B 2010, 81, 115446.DOI
- [26]Seoane Souto, R.; Feiguin, A. E.; Martín-Rodero, A.; Yeyati, A. L. Transient dynamics of a magnetic impurity coupled to superconducting electrodes: Exact numerics versus perturbation theory. Phys. Rev. B 2021, 104, 214506.DOI
- [27]Zhang, X.-P.; Yao, Y. Fermi sea and sky in the Bogoliubov-de Gennes equation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.07423 2024, Zhang, X.-P. Fabry-Perot superconducting diode. Phys. Rev. B 2024, 109, 184513.arxiv.org/abs/2404.07423
- [29]Zhang, X.-P.; Zeng, C.; Yang, Z.-B.; Egu̇es, J. C.; Yao, Y. Andreev qubit readout from dynamic interference supercurrent. Phys. Rev. B 2026, 114, L080502.DOI
- [30]Zhang, X.-P. Renormalized and iterative formalism of the Andreev levels within a large multiparametric space. Phys. Rev. B 2025, 111, 014520.DOI
- [31]Xiao, D.; Chang, M.-C.; Niu, Q. Berry phase effects on electronic properties. Rev. Mod. Phys. 2010, 82, 1959–2007.DOI
- [32]Bernevig, B. A. Topological Insulators and Topological Superconductors; Princeton university press, 2013.
- [33]De Gennes, P.-G.; Pincus, P. A. Superconductivity of metals and alloys; CRC Press, 2018.
- [34]Tinkham, M. Introduction to superconductivity; Courier Corporation, 2004.
- [35]Zhu, J.-X. Bogoliubov-de Gennes method and its applications; Springer, 2016; Vol. 924.DOI
- [36]Ginzburg, V. L.; Landau, L. D. On superconductivity and superfluidity: a scientific autobiography; Springer, 2009; pp 113–137.
- [37]Pujos, V. I. Microscopic derivation of the Ginzburg-Landau equations in the theory of superconductivity. Sov. Phys. JETP 1959,
- [38]Daido, A.; Ikeda, Y.; Yanase, Y. Intrinsic Superconducting Diode Effect. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2022, 128, 037001.DOI
- [39]Kaur, R.; Agterberg, D.; Sigrist, M. Helical vortex phase in the noncentrosymmetric CePt3Si. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2005, 94, 137002.pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15904019
- [40]Yuan, N. F.; Fu, L. Supercurrent diode effect and finite-momentum superconductors. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 2022, 119, e2119548119. (41) Vaitiekėnas, S.; Liu, Y.; Krogstrup, P.; Marcus, C. Zero-bias peaks at zero magnetic field in ferromagnetic hybrid nanowires. Nat. Phys. 2021, 17, 43–47.
- [42]Liu, Y.; Vaitiekėnas, S.; Martí-Sánchez, S.; Koch, C.; Hart, S.; Cui, Z.; Kanne, T.; Khan, S. A.; Tanta, R.; Upadhyay, S. et al. Semiconductor–Ferromagnetic Insulator–Superconductor Nanowires: Stray Field and Exchange Field. Nano Lett. 2019, 20, 456–462.DOI
- [43]Wendin, G.; Shumeiko, V. Coherent manipulation of a spin qubit. Science 2021, 373, 390–391.DOI
- [44]Wang, G.; Dvir, T.; Mazur, G. P.; Liu, C.-X.; van Loo, N.; ten Haaf, S. L.; Bordin, A.; Gazibegovic, S.; Badawy, G.; Bakker(s), E. P. et al. Singlet and triplet Cooper pair splitting in hybrid superconducting nanowires. Nature 2022, 612, 448–453.
- [45]Kloeffel, C.; Trif, M.; Loss, D. Strong spin-orbit interaction and helical hole states in Ge/Si nanowires. Phys. Rev. B 2011, 84, 195314.
- [46]Froning, F. N. M.; Rančić, M. J.; Hetényi, B.; Bosco, S.; Rehmann, M. K.; Li, A.; Bakker(s), E. P. A. M.; Zwanenburg, F. A.; Loss, D.; Zumbühl, D. M. et al. Strong spin-orbit interaction and g-factor renormalization of hole spins in Ge/Si nanowire quantum dots. Phys. Rev. Res. 2021, 3, 013081.DOI
- [47]Fasth, C.; Fuhrer, A.; Samuelson, L.; Golovach, V. N.; Loss, D. Direct Measurement of the Spin-Orbit Interaction in a Two-Electron InAs Nanowire Quantum Dot. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2007, 98, 266801.DOI
- [49]Supplementary Materials for detailed calculation of interference connection, quanti- tative study of macroscopic supercurrent in a quantum–dot Josephson junction, and generalization of N Andreev qubits.
- [50]Kirk, W. Nanostructures and mesoscopic systems; Academic Press, 2012.
- [51]Anderson, P. The many-body problem. Acad. Press., NY 1964, 113.
- [52]Bagwell, P. F. Suppression of the Josephson current through a narrow, mesoscopic, semiconductor channel by a single impurity. Phys. Rev. B 1992, 46, 12573.pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10003178
- [53]Riedel, R. A.; Bagwell, P. F. Low-temperature Josephson current peak in junctions with d-wave order parameters. Phys. Rev. B 1998, 57, 6084–6089.DOI
- [54]Beenakker, C. Universal limit of critical-current fluctuations in mesoscopic Josephson junctions. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1991, 67, 3836.pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10044838
- [55]Beenakker, C.; Pikulin, D.; Hyart, T.; Schomerus, H.; Dahlhaus, J. Fermion-parity anomaly of the critical supercurrent in the quantum spin-hall effect. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2013, 110, 017003.pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23383828
- [56]Taranko, R.; Domański, T. Build up and transient oscillations of Andreev quasiparticles. Phys. Rev. B 2018, 98, 075420.DOI
- [57]Taranko, R.; Kwapiński, T.; Domański, T. Transient dynamics of a quantum dot embedded between two superconducting leads and a metallic reservoir. Phys. Rev. B 2019, 99, 165419.DOI
- [58]Wrześniewski, K.; Baran, B.; Taranko, R.; Domański, T.; Weymann, I. Quench dynamics of a correlated quantum dot sandwiched between normal-metal and superconducting leads. Phys. Rev. B 2021, 103, 155420.DOI
- [59]Poole, C. P.; Prozорov, R.; Farach, H. A.; Creswick, R. J. Superconductivity (Third Edition), third edition ed.; Elsevier: London, 2014; pp 33–85.
- [60]Fagaly, R. Superconducting quantum interference device instruments and applications. Rev. of Sci. Instrum. 2006, 77, 101101.DOI
- [61]Braginsky, V. B.; Khalili, F. Y. Quantum measurement; Cambridge University Press, 1995.
- [62]Song, C.; Zheng, S.-B.; Zhang, P.; Xu, K.; Zhang, L.; Guo, Q.; Liu, W.; Xu, D.; Deng, H.; Huang, K. et al. Continuous-variable geometric phase and its manipulation for quantum computation in a superconducting circuit. Nat. Comm. 2017, 8, 1061.DOI
- [63]Ning, W.; Huang, X.-J.; Han, P.-R.; Li, H.; Deng, H.; Yang, Z.-B.; Zhong, Z.-R.; Xia, Y.; Xu, K.; Zheng, D. et al. Deterministic Entanglement Swapping in a Superconducting Circuit. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2019, 123, 060502.DOI
- [64]Xu, K.; Ning, W.; Huang, X.-J.; Han, P.-R.; Li, H.; Yang, Z.-B.; Zheng, D.; Fan, H.; Zheng, S.-B. Demonstration of a non-Abelian geometric controlled-NOT gate in a superconducting circuit. Optica 2021, 8, 972–976.DOI
- [65]Yang, Z.-B.; Han, P.-R.; Huang, X.-J.; Ning, W.; Li, H.; Xu, K.; Zheng, D.; Fan, H.; Zheng, S.-B. Experimental demonstration of entanglement-enabled universal quantum cloning in a circuit. npj Quantum Inf. 2021, 7, 44.DOI