The current-phase relation in Josephson junctions

993 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Nano Superconducting Quantum Interference device: a powerful tool for nanoscale investigations (2015, background): “ies and in flux qubits [115, 116, 117, 118]. 2.4 Theoretical aspects of Dayem bridges There are several exhaustive reviews describing the theoretical aspects of Josephon junction based on nanobridges [112, 119, 120], so below we will provide just the main peculiar aspects useful to understanding the”
Proximity effect in superconductor-ferromagnet heterostructures (2005, background): “In the case of small conductivity of F layer or small interface transparency σfξs/σsξf max(1, γB ) we may use the ”rigid boundary” conditions (Golubov et al., 2004) with Fs (−df ) = ∆e−iϕ/2/ √ ω2 +∆2 and Fs (df ) = ∆eiϕ/2/ √ ω2 +∆2.”
Odd triplet superconductivity and related phenomena in superconductor-ferromagnet structures (2005, background): “Study of the proximity effect in the S/F structures started not long ago but it has already evolved into a very active field of research (for a review see Buzdin (2005a); Golubov et al. (2004); Izyumov et al. (2002); Lyuksyutov and Pokrovsky (2004)).”
Josephson and Andreev transport through quantum dots (2011, background): “The realization of a π-junction in QD systems should distinguished from the similar phenomena in SFS junctions, where F denotes a ferromagnetic material (Golubov et al., 2004).”