Universal distribution of transparencies in highly conductive Nb/AlOx/Nb junctions

Physical Review Letters

Volumn 85, Issue 25, 2000, Pages 5404-5407

  Naveh, Y ^a,b   Patel, Vijay ^a   Averin, D V ^a   Likharev, K K ^a   Lukens, J E ^a  

^a STONY BROOK UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b IBM HAIFA RESEARCH LAB   (Israel)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ALUMINA; CRITICAL CURRENT DENSITY (SUPERCONDUCTIVITY); CURRENT VOLTAGE CHARACTERISTICS; ELECTRONIC DENSITY OF STATES; MAGNETIC FIELDS; NIOBIUM; SUPERCONDUCTING MATERIALS; SUPERCONDUCTIVITY; TRANSPARENCY;

JOSEPHSON CRITICAL CURRENT; MULTIMODE THEORY OF MULTIPLE ANDREEV REFLECTIONS; SCHEP-BAUER DISTRIBUTION; SUPERCONDUCTING NIOBIUM; SUPERCURRENT; TRANSPARENCY DISTRIBUTION;

JOSEPHSON JUNCTION DEVICES;

EID: 18544410907     PISSN: 00319007     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.85.5404     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. C. W. J. Beenakker, Rev. Mod. Phys. 69, 731 (1997).
2. O. N. Dorokhov, JETP Lett. 36, 318 (1982).
3. C. W. J. Beenakker and M. Büttiker, Phys. Rev. B 46, 1889 (1992).
4. E. V. Sukhorukov and D. Loss, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 4959 (1998).
5. A. H. Steinbach, J. M. Martinis, and M. H. Devoret, Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 3806 (1996).
6. M. Henny, H. Birk, R. Huber, C. Strunk, A. Bachtold, M. Krüger, and C. Schönenberger, Appl. Phys. Lett. 71, 773 (1997).
7. R. J. Schoelkopf, P. J. Burke, A. Kozhevnikov, D. E. Prober, and M. J. Rooks, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 3370 (1997).
8. K. M. Schep and G. E. W. Bauer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 3015 (1997); Phys. Rev. B 56, 15860 (1997).
9. K. M. Schep and G. E. W. Bauer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 3015 (1997); Phys. Rev. B 56, 15860 (1997).
10. The distribution (2) was derived [10] for the first time for a system that is physically very much different from disordered interface: long ballistic double-barrier structure with symmetric uniform tunnel barriers. The reasons for coincidence between the two systems are not completely clear.
11. J. A. Melsen and C. W. J. Beenakker, Physica (Amsterdam) 203B, 219 (1994).
12. E. N. Bratus, V. S. Shumeiko, and G. Wendin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 2110 (1195).
13. D. V. Averin and A. Bardas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 75, 1831 (1995).
14. A. Bardas and D. V. Averin, Phys. Rev. B 56, R8518 (1997).
15. N. van der Post, E. T. Peters, I. K. Yanson, and J. M. van Ruitenbeek, Phys. Rev. Lett. 73, 2611 (1994).
16. E. Scheer, P. Joyez, D. Esteve, C. Urbina, and M. H. Devoret, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 3535 (1997).
17. E. Scheer, N. Agrait, J. C. Cuevas, A. Levi Yeyati, B. Ludoph, A. Martin-Rodero, G. R. Bollinger, J. M. Van Ruitenbeek, and C. Urbina, Nature (London) 394, 154 (1998).
18. M. Bhushan, Z. Bao, B. Bi, M. Kemp, K. Lin, A. Oliva, R. Rouse, S. Han, and J. E. Lukens, in Extended Abstracts of the 5th International Superconductive Electronics Conference (Nagoya, Japan, 1995), p. 17.
19. V. Patel and J. E. Lukens, IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond. 9, 3247 (1999).
20. P. H. Kes, J. G. A. Rolfes, and D. de Klerk, J. Low Temp. Phys. 17, 341 (1974).
21. A similar calculation for the double-barrier junctions was performed by A. Brinkman and A. A. Golubov, Phys. Rev. B 61, 11 297 (2000).
22. c where the junction dc I-V curves are almost linear while the junction electrodes are still superconducting. This procedure may easily give a few percent error.
23. S. N. Artemenko, A. F. Volkov, and A. V. Zaitsev, Sov. Phys. JETP 49, 924 (1979).
24. The two latter curves may be readily calculated from the current-phase relation for a single channel [24,25] by its averaging with the respective weight (1),(2) and then maximizing the current over the Josephson phase difference.
25. W. Haberkorn, H. Knauer, and J. Richter, Phys. Status Solidi A 47, K161 (1978).
26. C. W. J. Beenakker, Phys. Rev. Lett. 67, 3836 (1991).
27. I. O. Kulik and A. N. Omel'yanchuk, JETP Lett. 21, 96 (1975).
28. 3, indicating that the aluminum oxide structure is highly disordered.
29. Results of previous experiments with large-area, multimode Josephson junctions in the MAR regime could be interpreted as evidence of either a small number of high-transparency pinholes [29] or percolation paths through localized states [30]. In both cases, the samples were much less uniform than our junctions, so that apparently such explanations were adequate.
30. A. W. Kleinsasser, R. E. Miller, W. H. Mallison, and G. B. Arnold, Phys. Rev. Lett. 72, 1738 (1994).
31. A. Frydman and Z. Ovadyahu, Phys. Rev. B 55, 9047 (1997).
32. K. K. Likharev, in Applications of Superconductivity, edited by H. Weinstock (Kluwer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2000), p. 247.