Negative-resistance models for parametrically flux-pumped superconducting quantum interference devices
K. M. Sundqvist, P. Delsing
arXiv:1311.2063 · DOI 10.1140/epjqt6 · 2013-11-08 · EPJ Quantum Technology
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
A Superconducting QUantum Interference Device (SQUID) modulated by a fast oscillating magnetic flux can be used as a parametric amplifier, providing gain with very little added noise. Here, we develop linearized models to describe the parametrically flux-pumped SQUID in terms of an impedance. An unpumped SQUID acts as an inductance, the Josephson inductance, whereas a flux-pumped SQUID develops an additional, parallel element which we have coined the ``pumpistor.'' Parametric gain can be understood as a result of a negative resistance of the pumpistor. In the degenerate case, the gain is sensitive to the relative phase between the pump and signal. In the nondegenerate case, gain is independent of this phase. We develop our models first for degenerate parametric pumping in the three-wave and four-wave cases, where the pump frequency is either twice or equal to the signal frequency, respectively. We then derive expressions for the nondegenerate case where the pump frequency is not a multiple of the signal frequency, where it becomes necessary to consider idler tones which develop. For the nondegenerate three-wave case, we present an intuitive picture for a parametric amplifier containing a flux-pumped SQUID where current at the signal frequency depends upon the load impedance at an idler frequency. This understanding provides insight and readily testable predictions of circuits containing flux-pumped SQUIDs.
Similar papers
Universal bound on microwave dissipation in superconducting circuits
similarity 0.92Thibault Charpentier et al. · 2025 · arXiv:2507.08953
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Stochastic dynamics of the resistively shunted superconducting tunnel junction system under the impact of thermal fluctuations
similarity 0.91Shenglan Yuan · 2024 · arXiv:2403.02143
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Decoherence benchmarking of superconducting qubits
similarity 0.91Jonathan Burnett et al. · 2019 · arXiv:1901.04417
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Flux-Floquet instability in fluctuating superconductors
similarity 0.91Marios H. Michael et al. · 2026 · arXiv:2410.12919
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Current Induced Resistive State in Fe(Se,Te) Superconducting Nanobridges
similarity 0.90C. Nappi et al. · 2016 · arXiv:1610.00437
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
The physics of superconductor-ferromagnet hybrid structures
similarity 0.90A. A. Golubov et al. · 2025 · arXiv:2509.16387
Source status unknown — claims are unverified