# 1 SPQB device with Andreev probe; the area 𝑆_𝑞 of the “intrinsic” loop of the qubit is equal to the area 𝑆_𝑓 of the NS-QUID loop.

Andreev Spectroscopy for Superconducting Phase Qubits  M.V. Feigel’man<sup>1</sup>, V.B. Geshkenbein<sup>1,2</sup>, L.B. Ioffe<sup>1,3</sup>, and G. Blatter<sup>2</sup>  <sup>1</sup> L. D. Landau Institute for Theoretical Physics, Moscow 117940, Russia   
<sup>2</sup> Institute fur Theoretische Physik, ETH-Hönggerberg, CH-8093, Switzerland   
<sup>3</sup> Department of Physics, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ 08855, USA 

Solid state implementations of qubits are challenging, as macroscopic devices involve a large number of degrees of freedom and thus are difficult to maintain in a coherent state. This problem is less accute in designs based on superconducting (SC) electronics, which can be divided into two broad classes: the “charge” qubits encode different states through the charge trapped on a SC island , while in the “phase” qubits the states differ *mostly* by the value of the phase $`\phi `$ of a superconducting island in a low-inductance SQUID loop . As a consequence of long-range Coulomb forces, the charge qubit interacts strongly with the environment and with other qubits. On the contrary, the phase qubit is more effectively decoupled from the environment (a *pure* phase qubit with states differing *only* by the value of $`\phi `$ has practically zero interaction with the environment). Although pure phase qubits can be fabricated from $`d`$-wave superconductors  the task is technologically demanding. Here, we concentrate on the most simple version of a superconducting phase qubit (SPQB), a Josepshon loop made from a few submicron sized SC islands connected via similar Josephson junctions and placed in a frustrating magnetic field; such a device with 4 junctions is sketched in Fig. 1. Two degenerate states naturally appear in such a loop if the flux $`\mathrm{\Phi }_q`$ of the external field through the qubit loop is exactly $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0/2=hc/4e`$. Using a gauge $`A_x=0`$, $`A_y=Hx`$, the classical minima of the Josephson energy are attained when the phase on the island $`G`$ (Fig. 1) takes the value $`\phi ^\pm =\pm \pi /2`$ (relative to the phase at the point $`O`$); below we refer to these states as $`|`$ and $`|`$.

In order to reduce any parasitic coupling to the environment, the inductance $`L`$ of the loop shall be small with $`LI_c10^3\mathrm{\Phi }_0`$. Ignoring charging effects, the system prepared in one of these states will stay there forever; quantum effects appear when the charging energies are accounted for. They are determined by the capacitances $`C`$ of the junctions and we require them to be smaller than the Josephson energy, $`e^2/C\mathrm{}I_c/e`$. The tunnelling rate between the two classically degenerate ground states is estimated as $`\mathrm{\Omega }\sqrt{eI_c/\mathrm{}C}\mathrm{exp}(a\sqrt{\mathrm{}I_cC/e^3})`$, where $`a`$ is of order 1. We assume values of $`I_c`$ between $`10100`$ nA and capacitances of order of a few fF, resulting in a characteristic Josephson plasma frequency $`\omega _{pl}100`$ GHz and a tunneling frequency $`\mathrm{\Omega }110`$ GHz. Once tunnelling is taken into account, the true eigenstates become $`|0=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(|+|)`$ and $`|1=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(||)`$, separated by an energy gap $`\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Omega }`$. A deviation of the magnetic flux $`\mathrm{\Phi }_q`$ through the loop from a value $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0/2`$ removes the degeneracy of the states $`|`$ and $`|`$. The Hamiltonian of our qubit written in the basis $`|,|`$ takes the form $`H=h_x\sigma _x+h_z\sigma _z`$, where $`h_z=\frac{\mathrm{}I_c}{2e}(2\mathrm{\Phi }_q\mathrm{\Phi }_0)`$ and $`h_x=\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Omega }`$. Varying the effective fields $`h_z`$ and $`h_x`$ we can perform all necessary operations on the qubit. Changing the external flux through the loop produces a variation in $`h_z`$. The coupling parameter $`h_x`$ can be smoothly modified through a variation of the gate potential applied to the island $`G`$ (cf. ). Alternatively, short circuiting a junction with an external capacitor $`C_{ext}10`$ $`C`$ leads to an abrupt blocking of the tunneling channel (switching off $`h_x`$).

The first task to be addressed in the study of a SPQB is the development of a convenient probe testing for coherent Rabi oscillations in the device; this can be accomplished by a measurement of the phase-sensitive subgap Andreev conductance. The low-$`T`$ conductance of a NS boundary is determined by the time the incident electron and the Andreev-reflected hole can interfere constructively . The phase coherent electron diffusion in the normal wire of a “fork” geometry  leads to periodic conductance oscillations as a function of the magnetic flux penetrating the region $`S_f`$ of the fork (with period $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0`$). This is due to the magnetic field controlling the superconducting phase difference between the two NS contacts of the fork, thus influencing the electron interference pattern.

The experiment discussed here is governed by similar physics. Consider first the subgap conductance between the active SC island of the qubit and the dirty normal metal wire, connected to the island via a high-resistance tunnel barrier with normal state conductance $`\sigma _Te^2/\mathrm{}`$. If the qubit phase $`\phi `$ does not fluctuate in time (i.e., $`\mathrm{\Phi }_q\mathrm{\Phi }_0/2`$, $`h_zh_x`$), the Andreev conductance at $`T0`$, $`V0`$ is $`\sigma _A^{cl}=\sigma _T^2R_D`$, where $`R_D=\rho L\sigma _T^1`$ is the resistance of a dirty wire of length $`L`$. At voltages $`eV\mathrm{}D/L^2`$ the differential subgap conductance $`dI_A/dV=\sigma _A^{cl}(V)\sigma _T^2\widehat{C}(2eV)`$, where $`\widehat{C}(E)`$ is the space-integrated Cooperon amplitude . In a single-wire geometry and in the absence of decoherence inside the normal wire (i.e., at $`T=0`$), the Cooperon amplitude $`\widehat{C}(E)=\rho \sqrt{\mathrm{}D/E}`$ at $`E\mathrm{}D/L^2`$. For the qubit tuned to resonance, $`h_zh_x`$, the time-dependent fluctuations of the SC order parameter destroy the coherence between multiple Andreev reflections at the NS boundary, thereby suppressing the subgap conductance. Quantitatively, their effect on the subgap conductance $`\sigma _A(V)`$ is

$$\frac{\sigma _A(V)}{\sigma _A^{cl}(V)}=\frac{_0^{2eV}𝑑EP(E)\widehat{C}(2eVE)}{\widehat{C}(2eV)}.$$
(1)   
Here, $`P(E)=\frac{1}{2\pi }e^{iEt}K(t)𝑑t`$ and $`K(t)=e^{i(\phi (0)\phi (t))}`$ is the intrinsic correlation function of the SPQB. In the case of weak decoherence, $`K(t)`$ is given by $`K(t)=e^{i\mathrm{\Omega }t}e^{\mathrm{\Gamma }|t|}`$, with $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ the tunnelling frequency and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ the intrinsic decoherence rate. The derivation of Eq. (1) parallels the one presented in . In the case of completely coherent Rabi oscillations ($`\mathrm{\Gamma }0`$), the conductance $`\sigma _A(V)`$ vanishes at $`2eV<\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Omega }`$ and exhibits a square-root singularity $`\sigma _A(V)1/\sqrt{2eV\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Omega }}`$ above the threshold, i.e., it behaves as a tunneling conductance into a BSC superconductor at $`2eV>\mathrm{\Delta }_{BCS}`$. In the opposite limit of incoherent quantum tunnelling of the phase ($`\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{\Omega }`$), the ratio (1) decreases as $`eV/\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ at low voltages.

Next, consider the full interference experiment for the device shown in Fig. 1. The idea is to measure the amplitude $`I_A^{(12)}`$ in the oscillations of the Andreev current $`I_A=I_A^{(1)}+I_A^{(2)}+I_A^{(12)}`$ as a function of the magnetic field $`H`$ (where the superscripts <sup>(i)</sup> refer to the contribution from the contacts $`i=1`$ and $`i=2`$, see Fig. 1). The total phase determining the interference current $`I_A^{(12)}`$ is equal to $`\varphi _A=2\pi HS_f/\mathrm{\Phi }_0+\phi `$. Away from the degeneracy field $`H_n=(n+1/2)\mathrm{\Phi }_0/S_q`$, the phase $`\phi `$ in our device is determined by the minimization of the Josephson energy and we obtain $`\phi =\pi (\{HS_q/\mathrm{\Phi }_0+1/2\}1/2)`$, where $`\{x\}`$ is the fractional part of $`x`$. Choosing a geometry with $`S_q=S_f`$, we find for $`HS_q/\mathrm{\Phi }_0[n,n+1/2]`$ an interference current $`I_A^{(12)}=j_{12}\mathrm{cos}(3\pi HS_q/\mathrm{\Phi }_0)`$, whereas for $`HS_q/\mathrm{\Phi }_0[n+1/2,n+1]`$ the sign changes: $`I_A^{(12)}=j_{12}\mathrm{cos}(3\pi HS_q/\mathrm{\Phi }_0)`$. Thus, the whole semiclassical $`I_A^{(12)}(H)`$ dependence has a period $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0/S_q`$, with upward cusps at $`H=H_n`$. These cusps are due to the penetration of a flux quantum $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0`$ into the qubit loop at the degeneracy points $`H_n`$. At these fields the interference contribution $`I_A^{(12)}`$ vanishes (in the geometry with $`S_q=S_f`$) and the semiclassical Andreev current is given by the sum $`I_A^{(1)}+I_A^{(2)}`$. However, at $`H=H_n`$ the quantum fluctuations in the phase $`\phi `$ become large and suppress the Andreev current $`I_A^{(2)}`$ to the “active” island G of the SPQB. This implies that close to the degeneracy points $`|HH_n|H_0\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Omega }/E_J`$ a very narrow dip is superimposed upon the above-mentioned cusp in the $`I_A(H)`$ dependence. The minimum value of the current in this dip coincides with the current $`I_A^{(1)}`$ to the “ground”. The voltage dependence of the dip $`dI_A/dV`$ can be related, via Eq. (1), to the autocorrelation function $`K(t)`$ of the SPQB.

The proposed measurement is “non invasive”, i.e., it does not, by itself, destroy the coherent dynamics of the phase $`\phi `$. This is due to the fact that at low $`V`$ this experiment does not measure the value of $`\phi `$. In order not to destroy the quantum tunneling of $`\phi `$ during the measurement, the subgap conductance should be low, i.e. $`\sigma _A^14e^2/h=6.5`$ k$`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. However, it should not be too low to be measurable with good accuracy at low temperatures (i.e., $`\sigma _A^110`$ M$`\mathrm{\Omega }`$). Well-controlled metallic thin films with a long decoherence time can be produced with a sheet resistance $`0.1`$ k$`\mathrm{\Omega }`$; the use of such films require $`\sigma _T^1`$ in the range $`330`$ k$`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ in order to place $`\sigma _A^1`$ within a range $`0.110`$ M$`\mathrm{\Omega }`$.