← Back to search

Why Shot Noise Does Not Generally Detect Pairing in Mesoscopic Superconducting Tunnel Junctions

Jiasen Niu, Koen M. Bastiaans, Jian-Feng Ge, Ruchi Tomar, John Jesudasan, Pratap Raychaudhuri, Max Karrer, Reinhold Kleiner, Dieter Koelle, Arnaud Barbier, Eduard F. C. Driessen, Yaroslav M. Blanter, Milan P. Allan

DOI 10.1103/PhysRevLett.132.076001 · Physical Review Letters

T1

Active bibliographic source — not scientific approval

Bibliographic access preserves source history; it does not approve extracted materials or validate reported claims. Review warnings on each occurrence separately.

Abstract

The shot noise in tunneling experiments reflects the Poissonian nature of the tunneling process. The shot-noise power is proportional to both the magnitude of the current and the effective charge of the carrier. Shot-noise spectroscopy thus enables us, in principle, to determine the effective charge q of the charge carriers of that tunnel. This can be used to detect electron pairing in superconductors: In the normal state, the noise corresponds to single electron tunneling (q=1e), while in the paired state, the noise corresponds to q=2e. Here, we use a newly developed amplifier to reveal that in typical mesoscopic superconducting junctions, the shot noise does not reflect the signatures of pairing and instead stays at a level corresponding to q=1e. We show that transparency can control the shot noise, and this q=1e is due to the large number of tunneling channels with each having very low transparency. Our results indicate that in typical mesoscopic superconducting junctions, one should expect q=1e noise and lead to design guidelines for junctions that allow the detection of electron pairing.

Source-reported materials — not catalogue approval

FormulaReported Tc (K)Pressure (GPa)Type
Nb

Archive — visibility unverified

Source-occurrence policy only; no material identity or catalogue acceptance is inferred from the formula.

8Pressure not reportedzero_resistance
NbN

Archive — visibility unverified

Source-occurrence policy only; no material identity or catalogue acceptance is inferred from the formula.

15Pressure not reportedunknown

Similar papers