Our system is currently under heavy load due to increased usage. We're actively working on upgrades to improve performance. Thank you for your patience.
2015
DOI: 10.1103/physrevb.92.104508
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Kerr coefficients of plasma resonances in Josephson junction chains

Abstract: We present an experimental and theoretical analysis of the self-and cross-Kerr effect of extended plasma resonances in Josephson junction chains. We calculate the Kerr coefficients by deriving and diagonalizing the Hamiltonian of a linear circuit model for the chain and then adding the Josephson non-linearity as a perturbation. The calculated Kerr-coefficients are compared with the measurement data of a chain of 200 junctions. The Kerr effect manifests itself as a frequency shift that depends linearly on the n… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

3
87
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 63 publications
(90 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
3
87
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In fact, the parameters of Ref. [30] do not match well our assumptions for a single junction (we assumedhω p E J , ), so our theory is valid for somewhat larger junctions with larger C J and E J , and TABLE II. Energy scales for a Josephson junction coupled to a transmission line, derived from the parameters in Table I. Josephson energy E J 160 μeV = 2πh × 40 GHz Charging energy e 2 /(2C J ) 2 0 μeV = 2πh × 4.6 GHz Plasma frequencyhω p 160 μeV = 2πh × 40 GHz Mean level spacing δ 3.6 neV = 2πh × 0.9 MHz Photon emission rateh tl 1.7 μeV = 2πh × 0.4 GHz Quasiparticle rateh 0 0.4 neV = 2πh × 90 kHz Phonon rateh/τ ph ( =hω p ) 0 .9 neV = 2πh × 0.2 MHz FIG.…”
Section: Transmission Coefficient and Quality Factorsmentioning
confidence: 80%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…In fact, the parameters of Ref. [30] do not match well our assumptions for a single junction (we assumedhω p E J , ), so our theory is valid for somewhat larger junctions with larger C J and E J , and TABLE II. Energy scales for a Josephson junction coupled to a transmission line, derived from the parameters in Table I. Josephson energy E J 160 μeV = 2πh × 40 GHz Charging energy e 2 /(2C J ) 2 0 μeV = 2πh × 4.6 GHz Plasma frequencyhω p 160 μeV = 2πh × 40 GHz Mean level spacing δ 3.6 neV = 2πh × 0.9 MHz Photon emission rateh tl 1.7 μeV = 2πh × 0.4 GHz Quasiparticle rateh 0 0.4 neV = 2πh × 90 kHz Phonon rateh/τ ph ( =hω p ) 0 .9 neV = 2πh × 0.2 MHz FIG.…”
Section: Transmission Coefficient and Quality Factorsmentioning
confidence: 80%
“…For numerical estimates, we use structure parameters from Tables I and II, corresponding to the experiment of Ref. [30]. For these parameters, the junction is well in the qubit limit E C h tl .…”
Section: Transmission Coefficient and Quality Factorsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…A very recent experiment [40] reports the measurement of 14 resonant frequencies in an array of 200 junctions without shunting capacitor (C b J = 0). We can again compare our calculated frequencies with the measured ones: setting C a g = 98 aF and optimizing the other parameters, we find again differences of less than 1% except for the third mode, whose measured frequency is about 7% higher than the calculated one; this larger difference is likely due to the presence near the frequency of that mode of a spurious resonance [40].…”
Section: Broken P T Symmetry: An Examplementioning
confidence: 99%