Current distribution and transition width in superconducting transition-edge sensors
Swetz, D. S., Bennett, D. A., Irwin, K. D., Schmidt, D. R., Ullom, J. N.
arXiv:1212.3537 · DOI 10.1063/1.4771984 · 2012-12-17
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
Present models of the superconducting-to-normal transition in transition-edge sensors (TESs) do not describe the current distribution within a biased TES. This distribution is complicated by normal-metal features that are integral to TES design. We present a model with one free parameter that describes the evolution of the current distribution with bias. To probe the current distribution experimentally, we fabricated TES devices with different current return geometries. Devices where the current return geometry mirrors current flow within the device have sharper transitions, thus allowing for a direct test of the current-flow model. Measurements from these devices show that current meanders through a TES low in the resistive transition but flows across the normal-metal features by 40% of the normal-state resistance. Comparison of transition sharpness between device designs reveals that self-induced magnetic fields play an important role in determining the width of the superconducting transition. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4771984]
Source-reported materials — not catalogue approval
| Formula | Reported Tc (K) | Pressure (GPa) | Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| MoCu Archive — visibility unverified Source-occurrence policy only; no material identity or catalogue acceptance is inferred from the formula. | 0.121 | Pressure not reported | unknown |
Similar papers
Demonstration of Weak-Link Physics in the Dynamical Response of Transition-Edge Sensors
similarity 0.88Marios Kounalakis et al. · 2022 · arXiv:2212.06443
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Imaging the Superconducting Proximity Effect in S-S'-S Transition Edge Sensors
similarity 0.87Austin R. Kaczmarek et al. · 2026 · arXiv:2602.19399
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Proximity Effects and Nonequilibrium Superconductivity in Transition-Edge Sensors
similarity 0.86John E. Sadleir et al. · 2011 · arXiv:1108.4632
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Supercurrent and Conductance Quantization in a Superconducting Quantum Point Contact
similarity 0.85T. Bauch et al. · 2004 · arXiv:cond-mat/0405205
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Fluctuation superconductivity limited noise in a transition-edge sensor
similarity 0.85A. Luukanen et al. · 2003 · arXiv:cond-mat/0302367
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
A Review of X-ray Microcalorimeters Based on Superconducting Transition Edge Sensors for Astrophysics and Particle Physics
similarity 0.85Luciano Gottardi & Kenichiro Nagayoshi · 2022 · arXiv:2210.06914
Source status unknown — claims are unverified