The development of superconducting electronics requires careful characterization of the components that makeup electronic circuits. Superconducting weak links are the building blocks of most superconducting electronic components and are characterized by highly nonlinear current-to-phase relations (CPRs), which are often not perfectly known. Recent research has found that the Josephson diode effect (JDE) can be related to the high harmonic content of the current-to-phase relation of the weak links embedded in superconducting interferometers. This makes the JDE a natural tool for exploring the harmonic content of weak links beyond single-harmonic CPR. In this study, we present the theoretical model and experimental characterization of a double-loop superconducting quantum interference device (DL-SQUID) that embeds all-metallic superconductor-normal metal-superconductor junctions. The proposed device exhibits the JDE due to the interference of the supercurrents of three weak links in parallel, and this feature can be adjusted through two magnetic fluxes, which act as experimental knobs. We carry out a theoretical study of the device in terms of the relative weight of the interferometer arms and the experimental characterization concerning flux tunability and temperature.

In recent years, there has been a growing interest in the development of superconducting electronics.1–4 This technology has several interesting applications, such as low energy consumption and extremely high-frequency capabilities.5–10 Additionally, superconducting electronics is a useful platform for studying fundamental physics related to condensed matter.11–16 An example of this is the Supercurrent Diode Effect (SDE), which is the property of superconducting two-terminal devices to transfer dissipationless current with different magnitudes in two directions. This phenomenon originates from a multitude of physical effects, including systems with ferromagnetic layers17 and hybrid semiconductor-superconductor junctions,18–23 superconducting quantum interference devices (SQUIDs),24–31 metallic constrictions,32–34 and metallic strips.35,36 It has been demonstrated that in SQUID-like supercurrent diodes, the harmonic content of the weak links forming the interferometer plays a significant role in the appearance of SDE when there is no substantial self-inductance.21,29 This finding opens up possibilities for exploring these nonlinearities through SDE, providing a practical tool for investigating the physics of weak links beyond the single-harmonic Current-to-Phase Relation (CPR).

In this work, we introduce a non-reciprocal supercurrent element, which is realized through a double-loop SQUID (DL-SQUID), and present its theoretical model and experimental implementation. The device can be controlled by magnetic fluxes that thread a double-loop geometry, allowing interference among its three metallic weak links and tuning of the overall CPR. The double loop structure allows us to break the inversion symmetry of the device, enabling non-reciprocal superconducting transport from reciprocal elements. The weak links are realized using superconductor-normal metal-superconductor (SNS) Josephson junctions, which carry a large amount of dissipationless current compared to conventional JJs due to their tunnel-barrier-free structure. The presented DL-SQUID realizes an all-metallic version of the SD studied in Ref. 21, with SQUIDs based on hybrid semiconductor-superconductor Josephson junctions. In that work, the authors can modify the Josephson coupling of their SQUIDs through electrostatic gating. This is an advantage with respect to our device since there they have the possibility of in situ modifying the asymmetry among the junctions, which greatly impacts the rectification performance. On the other hand, in Ref. 21, the double-loop geometry is achieved by an elaborated 4-terminal design, including a total number of six Josephson junctions. Our 2-terminal device realizes the same physical principle by only three SNS junctions, fabricated with a single-step lithography and evaporation process, at expenses of a fixed SQUID asymmetry. We demonstrate theoretically that the presented device can achieve the Josephson Diode Effect (JDE) by breaking both inversion and time-reversal symmetry using external magnetic fields only, producing a theoretical sizable rectification even for a perfectly symmetric device. In our measurement, we can fully explore the parameter space by tuning the magnetic flux of each loop singularly.

The DL-SQUID is composed of three weak links arranged in parallel forming two superconducting loops. Each loop is threaded by a magnetic flux, Φ1 and Φ2, and the supercurrents flowing through the weak links are indicated as I1, I2 (side junctions), and I0 (central junction). The weak links are supposed to have a CPR that can be described by the Kulik - Omel'yanchuk 1 (KO-1) relation:37 
(1)
where Δ(T) is the temperature-dependent BCS superconducting energy gap, T is the weak link temperature, e is the electron charge, R is the normal-state resistance of the weak link, φ is the phase difference across the weak link, and kB is the Boltzmann constant. At zero temperature (T=0), Eq. (1) can be simplified as
(2)
where I0=πΔ0eR and Δ0 is the superconducting gap at zero temperature. We can then build the total CPR of the DL-SQUID by summing the contributions of the three parallel branches. Indicating the phase drop across the ith weak link with φi and its characteristic current with Ii=πΔ0eRi, we can write
(3)
Given the loop geometry, the phase drops across the weak links are not independent but follow the fluxoid quantization relations:
(4)
(5)
which hold in the case of negligible loops self-inductance. By substituting Eqs. (4) and (5) into Eq. (3), we can recast the latter in the functional form I(φ0,Φ1,Φ2,α1,α2), where αi=IiI0, with i=1,2 the dimensionless asymmetry parameter, which takes into account differences among the three critical currents of the branches. Moreover, in order to quantitatively evaluate the non-reciprocal transport properties, we define the rectification coefficient η=Ic+IcIc++Ic, where Ic+=Maxφ0[I] and Ic=Minφ0[I] are the absolute maxima and minima of the CPR, respectively.

Figure 1 displays η(Φ1,Φ1) for four different values of α1,2. The reported asymmetry values are as follows: α1=α2=1 [panel (a)], α1=α2=1/2 [panel (b)], α1=α2=2 [panel (c)], and α1=0.8 and α2=1.5 [panel (d)]. This selection of values aims to represent some physical cases that can occur in a real device. For instance, panel (a) illustrates the rectification efficiency of a fully symmetric device, which means a device with three identical junctions. Notably, rectification is present even in a perfectly symmetrical device, with an apical value of approximately 25%. This is a remarkable fact since to achieve JDE or SDE, the inversion symmetry has to be broken, usually by introducing geometric or intrinsic asymmetries in the system. In the presented interferometer, the inversion symmetry can be broken, even for symmetrical weak links configurations, just through a non-uniform magnetic field by making Φ1 and Φ2 unequal. Furthermore, we notice two main symmetries of the system that can be found in the present plot (a). The first one is an odd symmetry with respect to the diagonal Φ1=Φ2. This means that the transformation Φ1Φ2 and Φ2Φ1 produces a CPR, which is odd with respect to the initial one, hence I(φ0,Φ1,Φ2)=I(φ0,Φ2,Φ1). The odd rectification pattern η(Φ1,Φ2)=η(Φ2,Φ1) is a direct consequence of this fact. The second appreciable symmetry is an even symmetry with respect to the line Φ1=Φ2. Now, the transformation Φ1Φ2Φ2Φ1 produces an even CPR with respect to the initial one, which, in this case, leads to I(φ0,Φ1,Φ2)=I(φ0,Φ2,Φ1). The even symmetry rectification η(Φ1,Φ2)=η(Φ2,Φ1) descends from this property. We observe a similar pattern in plots (b) and (c), where the lateral junctions are equal but have lower and higher critical current values, respectively, when compared to the central junction. In both cases, we see the same symmetries as in plot (a), but with different apical rectification values. Plot (b) shows a maximum achievable rectification of 36%, while plot (c) shows 24%. It is worth noting that the plots shown so far have been calculated for a symmetric device, where both time-reversal and inversion symmetries are achieved through specific configurations of the magnetic field. However, the last plot on the panel shows a case where all the junctions have different critical currents. This results in the loss of the above-mentioned symmetries but is closer to the physical case. It is important to note that, due to the geometrical asymmetry of the junctions, diode effects are visible even at Φ1=Φ2. In the following section, we investigate the impact of these asymmetries on device performance by evaluating the apical rectification ηMax=Maxϕ1,ϕ2[η] as a function of α1 and α2.

FIG. 1.

Calculated rectification coefficient η as a function of Φ1 and Φ2 for different asymmetries of the weak links. Plot (a), α1=α2=1; plot (b), α1=α2=1/2; plot (c), α1=α2=2; plot (d), α1=0.8 and α2=1.5.

FIG. 1.

Calculated rectification coefficient η as a function of Φ1 and Φ2 for different asymmetries of the weak links. Plot (a), α1=α2=1; plot (b), α1=α2=1/2; plot (c), α1=α2=2; plot (d), α1=0.8 and α2=1.5.

Close modal

The contour plot in Fig. 2 illustrates the apical rectification value ηmax for a particular α1 and α2 configuration in the range 0<αi<4. ηmax is calculated for each configuration of α1 and α2 by sampling η(Φ1,Φ2) with 6400 points and by extracting the maximum value in the calculated table. From the plot, we notice that the system reaches rectification as high as 42% for particular asymmetry values, while for some α1,2 values, we obtain some areas vanishing rectification. We can see one for α1=α2=0, which corresponds to the case where the lateral junctions have vanishing critical currents, representing the case of a single weak link. Other two vanishing rectification points can be found for α1=0 and α2=1 and vice versa, which corresponds to the case where one lateral junction has a vanishing critical current, while the other is identical to the central one. The latter case corresponds to the single-loop geometry treated in Ref. 29, where we show that with identical branches η=0.

FIG. 2.

Theoretical apical rectification coefficient ηmax as a function of α1,2. Inset: theoretical apical rectification coefficient calculated for symmetrical device configurations, hence for α1=α2.

FIG. 2.

Theoretical apical rectification coefficient ηmax as a function of α1,2. Inset: theoretical apical rectification coefficient calculated for symmetrical device configurations, hence for α1=α2.

Close modal

As already anticipated, the DL-SQUID shows the intriguing feature of being able to break both inversion and time-reversal symmetry using magnetic field biasing only. This feature is achieved due to the presence of the double-loop geometry, which, even in a perfectly symmetric weak-link configuration, can induce inversion symmetry breaking if Φ1Φ2. It is hence interesting to investigate ηmax on the symmetry line α1=α2=1, hence where the side weak links are equal, and the central one can vary freely. This is displayed in the inset of Fig. 2. Here, the blue curve shows the raw numerical sampling operated on each weak link configuration with 10 000 points on the η(Φ1,Φ2) function. The black dashed curve is then a moving average on three points superimposed on the raw data, to smooth out the sharp features coming from the raw numerical sampling. ηmax vanishes at α1,2=0, corresponding to a case where the side weak links are negligibly small with respect to the central one, then has an absolute maximum at α1,20.65, and, finally, a second peak at α1,21.65, then going monotonically to zero for higher asymmetry values corresponding to the limit of a single symmetric SQUID.

From this analysis, we can deduce some useful concepts. The JDE in this system stems from the high harmonic content of the CPRs used to model the weak links. As such, the harmonic interference of the three branches, together with their relative weights, determines the magnitude of ηmax and the respective α1,2 at which the effect appears. Indeed, it can be shown that in the same system, by replacing a KO-1 CPR with a sinusoidal CPR, the JDE is lost regardless of the critical current relative values. By comparing the highest rectification value theoretically obtained in this work, ηmax=42%, with the single-loop version investigated in Ref. 29, which reaches ηmax=26%, we conclude that the JDE here achieved great benefits from the addition of another weak link. This can be understood by a much more efficient harmonic combination arising from the presence of the third weak link.

Motivated by these theoretical results, we fabricated and tested a physical implementation of the above-described DL-SQUID. The device was realized using the standard Niemeyer-Dolan technique, using a double-layer lithographic mask of MMA + PMMA A4. The deposition of the metal layers was performed using a UHV e-beam evaporator with a residual base pressure of 4.6×1010 Torr. During the first evaporation, we deposited a thin Cu layer of 24 nm at an angle of 35°, with a rate of 2 Å/s and a deposition pressure of <1011 Torr. Afterward, a second deposition of 180 nm of Al at 0° and a deposition pressure of 108 Torr were performed to realize the thick Al banks and loops. The Al deposition rate was kept at 1 Å/s for the first 30 nm and then raised to 2 Å/s until the end of the evaporation. The presented fabrication steps produce devices with normal state resistance of 10Ω.

Two micrographs of the DL-SQUID are shown in Figs. 3(a) and 3(b). In image (a), the Al loops are highlighted in purple, while the Cu nanowires are indicated in red. Image (b) is a zoomed-in view of the Cu nanowire embedded into the Al banks. This image shows the high aspect ratio of the structure used to create the three-dimensional (3D) constrictions. The weak links in this device have a length between 90 and 110 nm. Figure 3(c) illustrates a sketch of the measurement setup used to control the magnetic fluxes piercing the loops and to measure the switching currents as a function of the latter. The fluxes Φ1 and Φ2 are controlled through two different magnetic fields generated by a superconducting coil, placed at the bottom of the dilution refrigerator, and an on-chip superconducting flux line. The current passing through the coil and the flux line is indicated, respectively, as Icoil and Iflux, which are our control parameters. The relation between Φ1,2 and the control parameters can be expressed through mutual inductances by the linear system,
(6)
(7)
where M1 and M2 are the mutual inductances between the flux line and the loop embracing Φ1 and Φ2, respectively. Mcoil is the mutual inductance between the superconducting coil and the two loops and can be considered equal due to the uniformity of the field and the equal size of the two loops. Figure 3(c) also shows a current generator and a voltmeter, used for the 4-wire measurements of the switching currents. By using the measurement scheme just described, one can measure the critical currents of the DL-SQUID as a function of the control parameters, and in this way test our theoretical predictions.
FIG. 3.

(a) and (b) Scanning electron micrographs of a typical real double-loop interferometer. In purple, we highlight the Al layer, while in red, the Cu nanowires. (c) Measurement setup schematics. The purple polygons represent the Al banks and loops of the DL-SQUID, while the red lines are the Cu nanowires. The 4-wire setup for the current vs voltage (IV) characterization is indicated by the sketch of the current generator plus the voltmeter. The control parameters for modifying the magnetic fluxes Φ1 and Φ2 are the current Icoil that generates a homogeneous magnetic field and Iflux that generates an inhomogeneous magnetic field through an on-chip superconducting flux line. The mutual inductance between the flux line and the two loops is indicated as M1 and M2.

FIG. 3.

(a) and (b) Scanning electron micrographs of a typical real double-loop interferometer. In purple, we highlight the Al layer, while in red, the Cu nanowires. (c) Measurement setup schematics. The purple polygons represent the Al banks and loops of the DL-SQUID, while the red lines are the Cu nanowires. The 4-wire setup for the current vs voltage (IV) characterization is indicated by the sketch of the current generator plus the voltmeter. The control parameters for modifying the magnetic fluxes Φ1 and Φ2 are the current Icoil that generates a homogeneous magnetic field and Iflux that generates an inhomogeneous magnetic field through an on-chip superconducting flux line. The mutual inductance between the flux line and the two loops is indicated as M1 and M2.

Close modal

Figure 4 displays the comparison between the measured switching currents Isw and the theoretically calculated values of the critical currents in our DL-SQUID. The panel shows on the left the experimental data representing Isw+ (a), Isw (c), and their relative color bar indicating the critical current in μA. On the right panels, the theoretically calculated values of Ic+Ic+,0 (b) and IcIc,0 (d) are reported for α1=α2=1. There, Ic+,0 and Ic,0 are the absolute maximum and minimum critical currents evaluated in the parameter space, respectively. To reproduce the experimental data shown in (a) and (c), we made use of Eqs. (6) and (7) to link Φ1 and Φ2 with the experimental control parameters Icoil and Iflux. The mutual inductance between the coil and the loops turns out to be Mcoil= 16 pH, while the mutual inductances between the flux line and the two loops result in M1= 0.9 pH and M2= 0.6 pH, respectively. The latter was estimated from the analytical formula of the mutual inductance between a strip and a square spiral, while the former from the periodicity of the interference pattern of the device. By examining the theoretical and experimental results, we can notice some aspects that deserve deeper consideration. First of all, the predictions for Ic+Ic+,0 and IcIc,0 reveal a theoretical maximum suppression of the critical currents of about Ic+Ic+,090%. This is not the case for the experimental data, where we can record a maximum suppression of about 35%. The reason for this inefficiency in suppressing the critical current may be related to the length of the weak links, which, for the present device, spans from 90 to 110 nm. The length of the weak link (L) for a SNS junction, indeed, determines the harmonic content of its CPR,38 and depending on the ratio L/ξ0, where ξ0=D/Δw,0 is the coherence length in the Cu nanowires, one can sit in the multi-harmonic or the sinusoidal CPR regime. For Cu proximitized by Al banks, we set D 80 cm2/s as the diffusion coefficient of Cu and Δw,0=1.764kBTc 200 μeV as the superconducting gap of Al, leading to a coherence length of ξ0 50 nm. Consequently, the ratio L/ξ0 spans from 1.8 to 2.2, thereby setting the frame of the intermediate-length junction regime. Our theoretical model based on the KO-1 relation [see Eq. (1)] is valid strictly in the short junction limit, i.e., L/ξ01, and, therefore, does not take into account the variation of the harmonic content, which happens when the junction is longer. A reduction in the harmonic content of the weak links, which takes place in the long regime, reflects in a reduced interference among the branches of the DL-SQUID. This said, and considering the unknown asymmetries among the branches, we can appreciate that the experimental data are qualitatively reproduced by our theoretical model if one considers the overall behavior of the curves.

FIG. 4.

Comparison between theoretically calculated and experimentally measured critical currents. Contour plots (a) and (c) are, respectively, the measured Ic+ and |Ic|, with their color bar on the left. Contour plots (b) and (d) show the theoretically calculated ratio Ic+Ic+,0 and IcIc,0, where Ic+,0 and Ic,0 are the maximum critical currents, with their color bars on the right.

FIG. 4.

Comparison between theoretically calculated and experimentally measured critical currents. Contour plots (a) and (c) are, respectively, the measured Ic+ and |Ic|, with their color bar on the left. Contour plots (b) and (d) show the theoretically calculated ratio Ic+Ic+,0 and IcIc,0, where Ic+,0 and Ic,0 are the maximum critical currents, with their color bars on the right.

Close modal

The experimental rectification η(Φ1,Φ2) as a function of the fluxes in the two loops is shown in Fig. 5. The contributions of the single fluxes were de-embedded from the experimental parameters by inverting Eqs. (6) and (7). This allows us to compare the experiment with the simulated value reported in Fig. 1. The data extend mainly around the Φ1=Φ2 line since this is in the parameter region explored by sweeping the current in the superconducting coil. Here, η ranges from +8% to 8% in the explored fluxes with a clear periodic feature in the flux quantum. Its behavior is not compatible with the symmetric configurations reported in Fig. 1, suggesting an asymmetry between the three junctions, as reported in Fig. 1(d). Again, the reduced rectification with respect to the KO-1 model is consistent with the reduced harmonic content of our weak links caused by the intermediate-length regime. In this sense, the harmonic content results to be a key ingredient to enhance the JDE.

FIG. 5.

Experimental rectification η calculated as a function of the reduced fluxes Φ1 and Φ2 in the two loops. The color bar expresses η in %.

FIG. 5.

Experimental rectification η calculated as a function of the reduced fluxes Φ1 and Φ2 in the two loops. The color bar expresses η in %.

Close modal

In conclusion, we have demonstrated a double-loop interferometer based on Al/Cu/Al superconductor-normal metal-superconductor weak links. The KO-1 formula describes these weak links, which provide a multi-harmonic CPR yielding sizable JDE when inserted into a SQUID-like structure. In our research, we used rectification η as a tool to examine the anharmonicity of the weak links within the interferometer. We explored the tunability of the device with respect to magnetic fluxes in the double-loop geometry. We hope this work will encourage the use of JDE to investigate nonlinear superconducting building blocks, leading to further developments in superconducting electronics.

We acknowledge the EU's Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Framework Programme under Grant Nos. 964398 (SUPERGATE) and 101057977 (SPECTRUM), and the PNRR MUR project PE0000023-NQSTI for partial financial support.

The authors have no conflicts to disclose.

Angelo Greco: Conceptualization (lead); Investigation (lead). Quentin Pichard: Data curation (equal); Formal analysis (equal). Elia Strambini: Investigation (supporting); Methodology (supporting). Francesco Giazotto: Conceptualization (supporting); Funding acquisition (lead).

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

1.
J.
Huang
,
R.
Fu
,
X.
Ye
, and
D.
Fan
, “
A survey on superconducting computing technology: Circuits, architectures and design tools
,”
CCF Trans. HPC.
4
,
1
22
(
2022
).
2.
A. I.
Braginski
, “
Superconductor electronics: Status and outlook
,”
J. Supercond. Nov. Magn.
32
,
23
44
(
2019
).
3.
G.
De Simoni
,
F.
Paolucci
,
C.
Puglia
, and
F.
Giazotto
, “
Josephson field-effect transistors based on all-metallic Al/Cu/Al proximity nanojunctions
,”
ACS Nano
13
,
7871
7876
(
2019
).
4.
M.
Rocci
,
G.
De Simoni
,
C.
Puglia
,
D. D.
Esposti
,
E.
Strambini
,
V.
Zannier
,
L.
Sorba
, and
F.
Giazotto
, “
Gate-controlled suspended titanium nanobridge supercurrent transistor
,”
ACS Nano
14
,
12621
12628
(
2020
).
5.
N.
Jones
, “
How to stop data centres from gobbling up the world's electricity
,”
Nature
561
,
163
(
2018
).
6.
C.
Xiaoyuan
,
J.
Shan
,
C.
Yu
,
Z.
Zhice
,
S.
Boyang
,
L.
Yi
,
Z.
Donghui
,
Z.
Mingshun
, and
H.
G
, “
Energy-saving superconducting power delivery from renewable energy source to a 100-MW-class data center
,”
Appl. Energy
310
,
118602
(
2022
).
7.
L.
Chen
,
M.
Niu
,
G.
Li
,
X.
Gao
,
W.
Xu
,
L.
Ying
,
J.
Ren
, and
Z.
Wang
, “
Research on power dissipation of ERSFQ circuits
,”
IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond.
31
(
5
),
1302005
(
2021
).
8.
K. K.
Likharev
, “
Superconductor digital electronics
,”
Physica C
482
,
6
18
(
2012
).
9.
M.
Tomita
,
Y.
Fukumoto
,
A.
Ishihara
,
Y.
Kobayashi
,
T.
Akasaka
,
K.
Suzuki
, and
T.
Onji
, “
Superconducting DC power transmission for subway lines that can reduce electric resistance and save energy
,”
Energy
281
,
128250
(
2023
).
10.
D. S.
Holmes
,
A. L.
Ripple
, and
M. A.
Manheimer
, “
Energy-efficient superconducting computing—Power budgets and requirements
,”
IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond.
23
,
1701610
(
2013
).
11.
F.
Giazotto
,
T. T.
Heikkilä
,
A.
Luukanen
,
A. M.
Savin
, and
J. P.
Pekola
, “
Opportunities for mesoscopics in thermometry and refrigeration: Physics and applications
,”
Rev. Mod. Phys.
78
,
217
(
2006
).
12.
K.
Likharev
, “
Single-electron devices and their applications
,”
Proc. IEEE
87
,
606
632
(
1999
).
13.
A.
Fornieri
and
F.
Giazotto
, “
Towards phase-coherent caloritronics in superconducting circuits
,”
Nat. Nanotechnol.
12
,
944
952
(
2017
).
14.
F.
Paolucci
,
G.
Marchegiani
,
E.
Strambini
, and
F.
Giazotto
, “
Phase-tunable thermal logic: Computation with heat
,”
Phys. Rev. Appl.
10
,
024003
(
2018
).
15.
J. P.
Pekola
and
B.
Karimi
, “
Colloquium: Quantum heat transport in condensed matter systems
,”
Rev. Mod. Phys.
93
,
041001
(
2021
).
16.
S.
Roddaro
,
A.
Pescaglini
,
D.
Ercolani
,
L.
Sorba
,
F.
Giazotto
, and
F.
Beltram
, “
Hot-electron effects in InAs nanowire Josephson junctions
,”
Nano Res.
4
,
259
265
(
2011
).
17.
E.
Strambini
,
M.
Spies
,
N.
Ligato
,
S.
Ilic
,
M.
Ruoco
,
C.
Gonzales-Orellana
,
M.
Ilyn
,
C.
Rogero
,
F.
Bergeret
,
J. S.
Moodera
,
P.
Virtanen
,
T. T.
Hikkila
, and
F.
Giazotto
, “
Superconducting spintronic tunnel diode
,”
Nat. Commun.
13
,
2431
(
2022
).
18.
M.
Valentini
,
O.
Sagi
,
L.
Baghumyan
,
T.
de Gijsel
,
J.
Jung
,
S.
Calcaterra
,
A.
Ballabio
,
J. A.
Serving
,
K.
Agarwal
,
M.
Janik
,
T.
Adletzeberger
,
R. S.
Souto
,
M.
Leijnse
,
J.
Danon
,
C.
Schrade
,
E.
Bakkers
,
E.
Chrastina
,
D.
Crastina
,
G.
Isella
, and
G.
Katsaros
, “
Parity-conserving cooper-pair transport and ideal superconducting diode in planar germanium
,”
Nat. Commun.
15
,
169
(
2024
).
19.
C.
Baumgartner
,
L.
Fuchs
,
A.
Costa
,
S.
Reinhardt
,
S.
Gronin
,
G. C.
Gardner
,
T.
Lindemann
,
M. J.
Manfra
,
P. E. F.
Junior
,
D.
Kochan
,
J.
Fabian
,
N.
Paradiso
, and
C.
Strunk
, “
Supercurrent rectification and magnetochiral effects in symmetric Josephson junctions
,”
Nat. Nanotechnol.
17
,
39
(
2022
).
20.
G. P.
Mazur
,
N.
van Loo
,
D.
van Driel
,
J.-Y.
Wang
,
G.
Badawy
,
S.
Gazibegovic
,
E. P. A. M.
Bakkers
, and
L. P.
Kouwenhoven
, “
The gate-tunable Josephson diode
,” arXiv:2211.14283 (
2022
).
21.
M.
Coraiola
,
A. E.
Svetogorov
,
D. Z.
Haxell
,
D.
Sabonis
,
M.
Hinderling
,
S. C.
Kate
,
H.
Cheah
,
F.
Frizek
,
R.
Schott
,
W.
Wegscheider
,
W.
Cuevas
,
J. C.
Belzig
, and
F.
Nichele
, “
Flux-tunable Josephson diode effect in a hybrid four-terminal Josephson junction
,” arXiv:2312.04415 (
2023
).
22.
M.
Gupta
,
G.
Graziano
,
M.
Pendharkar
,
J. T.
Dong
,
C. P.
Dempsey
,
C.
Palmstrom
, and
V. S.
Pribiag
, “
Gate-tunable superconducting diode effect in a three-terminal Josephson device
,”
Nat. Commun.
14
,
3078
(
2023
).
23.
D.
Debnath
and
P.
Dutta
, “
Gate-tunable Josephson diode effect in Rashba spin-orbit coupled quantum dot junctions
,”
Phys. Rev. B
109
,
174511
(
2024
).
24.
R. S.
Souto
,
M.
Leijnse
, and
C.
Schrade
, “
Josephson diode effect in supercurrent interferometers
,”
Phys. Rev. Lett.
129
,
267702
(
2022
).
25.
R. S.
Souto
,
M.
Leijnse
,
C.
Schrade
,
M.
Valentini
,
G.
Katsaros
, and
D.
Jeroen
, “
Tuning the Josephson diode response with an ac current
,” arXiv:2312.09204 (
2023
).
26.
G. D.
Simoni
and
F.
Giazotto
, “
Quasi-ideal feedback-loop supercurrent diode
,” arXiv:2402.14673 (
2024
).
27.
C.
Ciaccia
,
R.
Haller
,
A. C. C.
Drachmann
,
T.
Lindemann
,
M. J.
Manfra
,
C.
Schrade
, and
C.
Schönenberger
, “
Gate-tunable Josephson diode in proximitized InAs supercurrent interferometers
,”
Phys. Rev. Res.
5
,
033131
(
2023
).
28.
F.
Paolucci
,
G.
De Simoni
, and
F.
Giazotto
, “
A gate-and flux-controlled supercurrent diode effect
,”
Appl. Phys. Lett.
122
,
042601
(
2023
).
29.
A.
Greco
,
Q.
Pichard
, and
F.
Giazotto
, “
Josephson diode effect in monolithic dc-SQUIDs based on 3D Dayem nanobridges
,”
Appl. Phys. Lett.
123
,
092601
(
2023
).
30.
J. J.
Cuozzo
,
W.
Pan
,
J.
Shabani
, and
E.
Rossi
, “
Microwave-tunable diode effect in asymmetric squids with topological Josephson junctions
,”
Phys. Rev. Res.
6
,
023011
(
2024
).
31.
A. M.
Bozkurt
,
J.
Brookman
,
V.
Fatemi
, and
A. R.
Akhmerov
, “
Double-Fourier engineering of Josephson energy-phase relationships applied to diodes
,”
SciPost Phys.
15
,
204
(
2023
).
32.
D.
Margineda
,
A.
Crippa
,
E.
Strambini
,
Y.
Fukaya
,
M. T.
Mercaldo
,
M.
Cuoco
, and
F.
Giazotto
, “
Sign reversal diode effect in superconducting Dayem nanobridges
,”
Commun. Phys.
6
,
343
(
2023
).
33.
A.
Margineda
,
D.
Crippa
,
E.
Strambini
,
Y.
Fukaya
,
M. T.
Mercaldo
,
M.
Ortix
,
M.
Cuoco
, and
F.
Giazotto
, “
Back-action supercurrent diodes
,” arXiv:2311.14503 (
2023
).
34.
Y. V.
Fominov
and
D. S.
Mikhailov
, “
Asymmetric higher-harmonic squid as a Josephson diode
,”
Phys. Rev. B
106
,
134514
(
2022
).
35.
N.
Satchell
,
P. M.
Shepley
,
M. C.
Rosamond
, and
G.
Burnell
, “
Supercurrent diode effect in thin film Nb tracks
,”
J. Appl. Phys.
133
,
203901
(
2023
).
36.
Y.
Hou
,
F.
Nichele
,
H.
Chi
,
A.
Lodesani
,
Y.
Wu
,
M. F.
Ritter
,
D. Z.
Haxell
,
M.
Davydova
,
S.
Ilić
,
O.
Glezakou-Elbert
,
A.
Varambally
,
F. S.
Bergeret
,
A.
Kamra
,
L.
Fu
,
P. A.
Lee
, and
J. S.
Moodera
, “
Ubiquitous superconducting diode effect in superconductor thin films
,”
Phys. Rev. Lett.
131
,
027001
(
2023
).
37.
I. O.
Kulik
and
A. N.
Omel'yanchuk
, “
Contribution to the microscopic theory of the Josephson effect in superconducting bridges
,”
JETP Lett.
21
(
4
),
96
97
(
1975
).
38.
T. T.
Heikkilä
,
J.
Särkkä
, and
F. K.
Wilhelm
, “
Supercurrent-carrying density of states in diffusive mesoscopic Josephson weak links
,”
Phys. Rev. B
66
,
184513
(
2002
).
Published open access through an agreement with Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche Area della Ricerca di Pisa