Journal of ELECTRONIC MATERIALS, Vol. 49, No.

11, 2020
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11664-020-08442-x
Ó 2020 The Author(s)

INTERNATIONAL ELECTRON DEVICES AND MATERIALS SYMPOSIUM 2019

Cryogenic Materials and Circuit Integration for Quantum

Computers

WEI-CHEN CHIEN ,1,10 SHUN-JHOU JHAN,2,11 KUEI-LIN CHIU,3,12

YU-XI LIU,4,5,6,13 ERIC KAO,7,14 and CHING-RAY CHANG8,9,15

1.—Graduate Institute of Applied Physics, National Taiwan University, Taipei City, Taiwan.
2.—Department of Physics, National Taiwan University, Taipei City, Taiwan. 3.—Department of
Physics, National Sun Yat-sen University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan. 4.—Institute of Microelectronics,
Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China. 5.—Department of Microelectronics and
Nanoelectronics, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China. 6.—Frontier Science Center for
Quantum Information, Beijing 100084, China. 7.—KYT International Ltd., Taipei City, Taiwan.
8.—Graduate Institute of Applied Physics, National Taiwan University, Taipei City, Taiwan.
9.—Department of Business Administration, Chung Yuan Christian University,
Taoyuan City, Taiwan. 10.—e-mail: aoowweenn@gmail.com. 11.—e-mail: nlriey6208@gmail.com.
12.—e-mail: eins0728@gmail.com. 13.—e-mail: yuxiliu@mail.tsinghua.edu.cn. 14.—e-mail:
erickao@kyt-international.com. 15.—e-mail: crchang@phys.ntu.edu.tw

Over the last decade, quantum computing has experienced significant changes
and captured worldwide attention. In particular, superconducting qubits have
become the leading candidates for scalable quantum computers, and a number
of cryogenic materials have scientifically demonstrated their potential uses in
constructing qubit chips. However, because of insufficient coherence time,
establishing a robust and scalable quantum platform is still a long-term goal.
Another consideration is the control circuits essential to initializing, operating
and measuring the qubits. To keep noise low, control circuits in close prox-
imity to the qubits require superior reliability in the cryogenic environment.
The realization of the quantum advantage demands qubits with appropriate
circuitry designs to maintain long coherence times and entanglement. In this
work, we briefly summarize the current status of cryogenic materials for qu-
bits and discuss typical cryogenic circuitry designs and integration techniques
for qubit chips. In the end, we provide an assessment of the prospects of
quantum computers and some other promising cryogenic materials.

Key words: Cryogenic materials, qubits, quchip, quantum processing unit,

quantum computer

materials. One possibility is to apply new concepts

INTRODUCTION
and new physics to the current technologies, as
To date, progress in conventional computing has schematically shown in Fig. 1. Quantum computing
relied heavily on the density of transistors on silicon (QC) is one of the most revolutionary computing
chips doubling every 18 months, a trend known as models, in which information is stored and pro-
Moore’s law after Intel cofounder, Gordon Moore, cessed more efficiently using switches—known as
who predicted the phenomenon in 1960s. But spi- quantum bits, or ‘‘qubits’’—that can be on and off at
raling costs and falling yields associated with the same time. The full applications of QC are
further miniaturization have stimulated the search expected to produce globally revolutionary and
for sophisticated alternative structures and new profound changes in computation. At present, QC
draws huge investments from both nations and
industries, as well as intensive studies from aca-
demic communities. A complete ecological environ-
(Received June 23, 2020; accepted August 20, 2020;
published online September 28, 2020)
ment for QC research and development (R&D) is

6844
Cryogenic Materials and Circuit Integration for Quantum Computers 6845

gradually being established. Although QC has made

rapid progress in the past decade, there are still
many unresolved problems. For example, as the
number of qubits increases, crosstalk and fan-out
issues tend to degrade the performance of the
quantum processor. To be effective, QC eventually
will require a noise level low enough to allow error
correction to be performed, which demands
improvements over the current state of both qubit
design and external circuitry.
With the rapid development and breakthroughs
being made in recent years, many industry giants
(e.g., Google, IBM) and startup companies (e.g.,
Rigetti, OriginQ) have poured increasing resources
and efforts to compete in this race. To date, some
machines, such as educational quantum instru-
Fig. 1. The strategies beyond Moore’s law. New applications with
ments and noisy intermediate-scale quantum current technology, new materials in replacement of semiconductors
(NISQ) devices, have been manufactured for com- and new computation models introduced in industry.
mercial applications. However, the large-scale and
error-corrected quantum computers, which would exchange statistics and are candidates to perform
be capable of performing useful quantum algo- fault-tolerant topological quantum computing
rithms, still require long-term effort. Over the last (TQC). Although lots of effort needs to be made
twenty years, scientists have found that cryogenic before practical QC applications are possible, these
quantum materials and cryogenic circuit designs aforementioned materials are under heavy investi-
are both important for the future of QC. Moreover, gation for use in many different QC platforms, such
the focus in upscaling qubits has gradually shifted as QDs and superconducting circuits.
from fundamental physics to engineering problems. On the other hand, external circuitry design is as
There are quite a few candidate materials for important as pursuing high-quality qubits, since QC
qubits, each of which has its own pros and cons. relies on both qubits and well-established control
Spin in semiconducting quantum dots (QDs),1 phase means to communicate with them. Solid-state
in superconducting circuits,2 and non-commutative qubits (e.g., QDs and superconducting circuits)
exchange in non-Abelian anyons3 offer promising generally operate in the 10mK environment inside
degrees of freedom for realizing solid-state qubits. a dilution refrigerator, with high electron mobility
In the pursuit of upscaling, many important devel- transistor (HEMT) amplifiers thermally anchored
opments have been reported in superconducting at 4K, and control electronic devices placed at room
qubits, thus it is generally thought that supercon- temperature. In practice, it is hard to thermally
ducting implementations are currently ahead of all isolate the qubits from the measurement elements,
other qubit implementations. In 2019, quantum thus noise cannot be completely avoided, inevitably
supermacy was demonstrated4 in a circuit of 53 introducing decoherence of the qubits. To address
working superconducting qubits with 86 couplers, this issue, a cryogenic control chip based on a
and the largest qubit number announced by Google complementary metal-oxide-semiconductor (CMOS)
is 72.5 Recently, materials with distinct band struc- ( < 10K) has been used to prevent the thermal noise
tures, two-dimensional (2D) natures and topological caused by room temperature. This highly-integrated
properties have attracted considerable attention. system-on-a-chip (SoC) will simplify system design
Apart from the ongoing development of spin qubits and replace the original bulky room temperature
in silicon, graphene is expected to be a robust instruments. For example, Google Bristlecone has
material for hosting spin qubits, owing to its weak used an integrated circuit (IC) of a pulse generator
spin-orbit and hyperfine interactions. Charge carri- in a 4K environment to directly control low-temper-
ers in few-layer transition metal dichalcogenides ature qubits.5
(TMDCs) are simultaneously valley- and spin-po- In this article, we will discuss the new opportu-
larized, providing more degrees of freedom that can nities for cryogenic materials and cryogenic cir-
be controlled as qubits.6 Topological materials, such cuitry designs for quantum computers. In
as 2D/3D topological insulators (TIs), Dirac particular, we will briefly review the current status
semimetals and Weyl semimetals, for their topolog- of quantum materials and circuit integration for
ically protected edge and surface states, are quantum computers.
immune from defect scatterings and thus can
transmit current effectively.7,8 When topological QUANTUM MATERIALS FOR QUBITS
materials are in contact with s-wave superconduc-
tors, it is possible to host a type of quasiparticles Many QC platforms have been investigated and
called Majorana bound states (MBSs).9 These quasi- developed. QC platforms can be classified into
particles obey non-Abelian (non-commutative) atomic systems, photonic systems, NMR systems
6846 Chien, Jhan, Chiu, Liu, Kao, and Chang

and solid-state systems. For solid-state systems, as H b ¼ 4EC ðn^  ng Þ2  EJ cos / ^ where n^ is the num-
superconducting quantum devices, semiconductor ber of charges across the total capacitance, ng is the
QDs and topological materials are very important effective offset charge controlled by U(t), and / is
platforms that are under heavy investigation. We the phase difference across the JJ.12 EC and EJ
will focus on solid-state platforms which work in the denote single electron charging energy and the JJ’s
microwave regime, and discuss the opportunities for coupling energy, p respectively. The qubit’s transition
new materials. ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
frequency x01 ¼ 8EC EJ = h from the ground state
j0i to excited state j1i is typically several GHz. EJ
Superconducting Qubits can be controlled by applying an external magnetic
Superconductivity happens when certain materi- flux Uext through the SQUID loop, thus making x01
als are cooled below a critical temperature Tc and tunable. The large shunt capacitor Cs reduces EC ,
electrons form pairwise (Cooper pair) condensate, thus minimizing the noise from spurious charge
switching from fermions to bosons. A wavefunction fluctuations. The cos / term introduces an anhar-
exists in macroscopic scale and governs quantities monicity necessary for assuring that energy states
such as charge density and phase in a quantum flux are not equally spaced. The anharmonicity is
across the entire superconductor. A Josephson defined as x12  x01 , which is about  200 MHz.
junction (JJ) is formed by two superconductors Coherence time of a qubit is evaluated by relax-
separated by an insulating layer, with a typical ation time T1 and dephasing time T2 . To measure
thickness of 1 nm. When a superconducting loop is T1 , a Pauli-x operator is applied to excite a qubit to
interrupted with a JJ, the phase difference / across state j1i and read it afterwards. This process is
the JJ and the number of extra charges n stored in repeated with different time periods.13 The relax-
the capacitance of the JJ obey the commutation law ation time T1 is then estimated by the equation
½/; n ¼ i. This second quantization enables the loop SðtÞ ¼ Sð0Þexpðt=T1 Þ (Fig. 3a). Dephasing can be
to be an artificial atom, thus a qubit. Superconduct- easily influenced by noise from control and readout
ing quantum integrated circuits10 usually consist of operations, so the measured dephasing time T2 is
JJs, capacitors and inductors. Common IC fabrica- usually smaller than T2 . Additionally, the period of
tion processes like optical/electron-beam lithogra- the Rabi oscillation signal can determine the p-pulse
phy and thin film deposition are used to pattern precisely for correcting phase errors, as well as
these circuit elements on a silicon substrate. The calibrating the quantum gates (Fig. 3b).
popular superconducting materials are aluminum
(Tc ¼ 1:2 K) and niobium (Tc ¼ 9:3 K). Moreover, the Semiconducting Qubits
JJ’s nonlinear inductance creates an anharmonic A semiconducting QD is an artificially structured
structure with unequal energy levels, thus making
system that can be filled with only a few electrons or
the superconducting quantum circuit a good candi-
holes. The charged carriers in this system are
date for physical qubits. Superconducting qubits generally confined in a submicron area, and the
usually operate in frequencies around 5 GHz, which
confinement potential in all directions is strong
is equivalent to  250 mK in temperature. Super-
enough that results in quantized energy levels.
conducting quantum circuits are put in dilution
These energy levels can be observed at low temper-
refrigerators of 15 mK to reduce thermal noise.
atures. The electronic properties of QDs are domi-
There are various designs of JJ-based supercon-
nated by several effects.1 First, the Coulomb
ducting qubits.11 A very popular qubit, called trans-
repulsion between electrons on the dot leads to an
mon, as shown in Fig. 2, is formed by a JJ SQUID
energy cost called charging energy EC ¼ e2 =C,
loop shunted by a large capacitor with edge size of
 200 lm. The transmon Hamiltonian can be given where C is the total capacitance of the dot, for

(a) (b)

Fig. 2. (a) Circuit diagram of an external-flux tunable transmon qubit and (b) schematic of its physical layout. It is connected via coupling
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
capacitance Cc to the cavity formed by Cr and Lr . Signal U(t), coupled by Cg , drives the cavity around the resonant frequency of 1=Lr Cr . A
transmon placed very closely to a cavity forms a capacitance coupling Cc .
Cryogenic Materials and Circuit Integration for Quantum Computers 6847

Fig. 3. (a) Spin-relaxation diagram of a single qubit. The exponential decay of the j1i density is the signature of decoherence (credit: IBM Q hub
at NTU). (b) Using a Rabi experiment to calibrate the p-pulse, which is also known as a Pauli-x gate, and can invert the population from j0i to j1i.
Assuming that j0i is the initial state of our system, a well-calibrated p-pause can create j1i with good fidelity (credit: IBM Q hub at NTU).

Fig. 4. (a) Schematic view of a lateral QD device defined by metal surface electrodes on a GaAs/AlGaAs 2DEG system. (b) Electrical network
diagram of a single QD. Adapted with permission from Ref. 1.

adding an extra electron to the dot. Because of this isotopically purified 28 Si QDs, where nuclear spin
charging energy, the tunneling of electrons to the is greatly reduced compared to GaAs-based QDs,
reservoirs can be suppressed at low temperatures the dephasing time T2 can approach 120 ls15 with a
(when EC > kB T), which leads to a phenomenon gate operation time around 100 ns.16 The single
called Coulomb blockade. Second, the tunnel barrier qubit gate fidelity in this system can surpass 99.9%
resistance Rt , which describes the coupling of the while the two-qubit gate fidelity exceeds 98%.17,18
dot to both the source and drain reservoirs, has to be While development of superconducting and semi-
sufficiently opaque such that the electrons are conducting qubits based on the aforementioned
located either in the source, in the drain, or on the composing materials continue to advance, quantum
dot. In two-dimensional electron gas (2DEG) sys- materials, for their distinct band structures and
tems, the dot is defined by a gate-depleted area topological properties, have also attracted substan-
(Fig. 4a) and is tunnel-coupled to the reservoir on tial attentions for opportunity in synthesizing new
each side, as indicated by a schematic model shown type of qubits, as will be discussed in the next
in Fig. 4b. Thus, varying the voltages on the surface section.
gates enables several important parameters, such
as the number of electrons and the tunnel barrier Novel Materials for Qubits
resistance, to be finely tuned. Qubits based on
semiconducting QDs have several forms but mainly Owing to weak spin-orbit and hyperfine interac-
utilize the spin properties of electronic states con- tions, graphene is expected to be a robust material
fined in the dots. For example, spin-up and spin- to preserve spin properties and therefore ideal for
down states in a single QD, two-electron singlet and making spin qubits. Attempts to confine and manip-
triplet states in a double QD and spin-exchange ulate single charges in graphene quantum dots
interaction in a triple QD are all candidates for use (GQDs) have been widely studied since 2008,19
in quantum information processing.1,14 In when a series of GQDs fabricated on SiO2 substrate
6848 Chien, Jhan, Chiu, Liu, Kao, and Chang

Fig. 5. Novel candidate materials for QD qubits. (a) Single electron transport in GQDs on SiO2 substrate. (b) Gate-defined QDs in suspended
bilayer graphene. The scale bar is 1 lm. (c) A 2H-phase WSe2 QD device on SiO2 substrate. The WSe2 flake (4.5 nm in thickness) is highlighted
by the white dotted line. (d) 2H-phase MoS2 QD encapsulated by hBN device with graphene contacts. (a, b, c, d) Adapted with permission from
Ref. 22,32–34 respectively.

was reported (Fig. 5a).6,20 However, early studies of oscillation, and qubit relaxation time T1 and
GQDs on SiO2 have indicated an absence of spin- dephasing time T2 at the scale of 36ns and 51ns,
related phenomena, such as spin blockade and the respectively.27 Gatemons based on other semicon-
Kondo effect. In order to reduce substrate disorder, ducting materials emerged as a branch in super-
which is one of the major sources of fast spin conducting qubit research since their first
relaxation, subsequent efforts have been focused on realization in InAs nanowire (Fig. 6b)28 and subse-
GQDs on inherently flat substrates, e.g., hexagonal quently in InGaAs/InAs-based 2DEG. (Fig. 6c).29
boron nitride (hBN),21 electrically gated suspended The corresponding relaxation and dephasing times
bilayer graphene (Fig. 5b)22 and electrically gated are T1  0:8 ls and T2  1 ls in the former and T1 
bilayer graphene on hBN.23 Although spin relax- 1 ls and T2  2 ls in the latter. Although the qubit’s
ation time has been extracted from spin injection performances are relatively low compared to the
measurements in monolayer graphene flakes,24 it state-of-the-art flux-tunable transmons,30 it pro-
has not been reported in the aforementioned GQD vides a platform for more materials to be integrated
systems. The possible causes can be resonant scat- with, and opportunity for exploring novel material-
tering of electrons off magnetic moments and inter- based superconducting qubits.31
play between the spin and pseudospin quantum Although the relatively weak spin-orbit interac-
degrees of freedom.6 On the other hand, the ballistic tion in graphene is advantageous for preserving
nature of Dirac fermions in graphene provides a spin coherence, it also implies relatively slow oper-
good weak link to transmit supercurrent efficiently ation of graphene-based spin qubits.35 In addition,
in its JJs.25 Because of graphene’s 2D and gat- the small band gaps in monolayer and bilayer
able nature, which allows the critical current and graphene also present more challenges to confining
qubit energy to be tuned by gate, several gate- particles in GQD devices. Alternatively, 2D semi-
tunable transmons (gatemons) made of graphene conductors, such as 2H-transition metal dichalco-
JJs have been recently reported (Fig. 6a).26,27 The genides (TMDCs), exhibit direct band gap in
first coherent control of such a qubit shows Rabi monolayer and broken inversion symmetry in an
Cryogenic Materials and Circuit Integration for Quantum Computers 6849

Fig. 6. Candidates for materials-based superconducting qubits. (a) Graphene-based gate-tunable qubit (gatemon) consisting of hBN
encapsulated graphene and Al leads. (b) InAs nanowire-based gatemon qubit. The gatemon is defined between the T-shaped island and the
surrounding ground plane. The inset shows a scanning electron microscope (SEM) image of the Al-InAs-Al JJ. (c) InGaAs/InAs-based 2DEG
gatemons. The right inset shows the SEM of the gate controlled 2DEG JJ of width W. (a, b, c) Adapted with permission from Refs. 27–29
respectively.

odd number of layers. In combination with TMDC’s Majorana fermions (MFs) or Majorana bound
strong spin-orbit coupling, this allows the charge states (MBSs) are a special type of excitation in
carriers to be simultaneously valley- and spin- condensed matter systems which obey non-Abelian
polarized, providing more degrees of freedom that (non-commutative) exchange statistics, i.e., particle
can be controlled as qubits.36–38 The Fock–Darwin exchange with different routes will lead to different
spectrums have shown that the lowest levels end states (Fig. 7a).42–44 By braiding a few MFs, bits
(Kramers pairs) in TMDC QDs are simultaneously of information can be encoded (final state is depen-
spin-and valley-polarized6 and can in principle dent only on the topology of the braids and not on
serve as valley or spin qubits, in which the former the specific geometry), forming the scheme of
can be manipulated by electron spin resonance TQC.45,46 Because the qubit operations are pro-
while the later can be controlled with an AC electric tected by topological symmetry, MFs are expected to
field without affecting the spin.35 The physical have a very long coherence time and very high gate
realization of TMDC-based QDs often suffers from fidelity, which is generally referred to as quantum
the high Schottky barriers existing in metal/TMDC error correction at the hardware level.43,47 With the
interfaces, which leads to high contact resistance at help of theoretical predictions,46 the signature of
low temperature. While a series of experiments has MFs has been experimentally observed in several
demonstrated successful quantum confinement and solid state systems, such as in 1D magnetic atoms
single electron transport in both 2H-TMDC single on an s-wave superconductor,48 in s-wave supercon-
QDs and double QDs (Fig. 5c and d),34,39–41 studies ductor proximatized topological insulators (TIs),49,50
on spin or valley properties of single-particle states in quantum anomalous Hall insulators,51 and in
remain unreported in these systems. semiconducting nanowire with a large g-factor and
strong spin-orbit coupling.52–55
6850 Chien, Jhan, Chiu, Liu, Kao, and Chang

Fig. 7. Majorana bound states for TQC. (a) Illustration of braiding. Top: The two elementary braid operations r1 and r2 on three particles. Middle:
Braiding showing r2 r1 6¼ r1 r2 hence the braid group is non-Abelian. Bottom: The braid relation ri riþ1 ri ¼ riþ1 ri riþ1 . (b) Shapiro steps for 2p-
and 4p-periodic supercurrent. Inset shows a topological JJ consisting of 2D TI and superconductor, for hosting 4p-periodic supercurrent. (c)
Experimentally measured Shapiro steps as a function of RF power at frequency 1.41 GHz and 4.21 GHz in a topological JJ made of Dirac
semimetal Bi1x Sbx . In both cases, the missing n ¼ 1 steps are present. (a, b, c) Adapted with permission from Refs. 46, 56, and 57 respectively.

Topological materials, such as topological insula- topological JJs consisting of topological materials
tors, Dirac semimetals and Weyl semimetals, for with helical bulk and edge states (Fig. 7c).57,59 The
their topologically protected edge and surface Td-phase of TMDC family provides many distinct
states,7,8 are also promising candidates for use in topological natures for material scientists to explore
materials-based QC devices. In 2008, Fu and Kane for MBS-related properties.62 For example, mono-
predicted that in a hybrid system consisting of 2D layer 1T0  WTe2 is a natural 2D TI63,64 and
TI edge states and an s-wave superconductor, the revealed a superconductivity upon electrical gat-
Andreev Bound states (ABS) result in an exotic 4p- ing.65 It serves as an opportunity to engineer all
periodic supercurrent, which serves as an indication gate-control topological junction in one single flake.
of the existence of MBS.58 However, such a non- On the other hand, bulk WTe2 and MoTe2 are type-
trivial phenomenon cannot be directly observed in II Weyl semimetal,66,67 as identified by their surface
DC measurement, because in a time scale of ls the Fermi arc state in Angle-resolved photoemission
occupation of ABS tends to couple with the contin- spectroscopy (ARPES)68,69 and non-saturating mag-
uum of superconductors, resulting in an averaged netoresistance in transport.70,71 The 4p-periodic
trivial 2p-periodic supercurrent.9 An alternative supercurrent has not been studied in the topological
way to circumvent this issue is to exploit the AC junctions made of these aforementioned materials.
Josephson effect, in which a JJ would respond to an Dirac semimetals, such as Cd3 As2 and Bi1x Sbx ,
applied AC bias and develop a series of voltage steps have been studied for the missing n ¼ 1 Shapiro
with step height proportional to AC frequency, a steps as a signature of MBS, as mentioned previ-
phenomenon known as Shapiro steps (Fig. 7b). ously.57,59 While the search for signatures of MBS is
Experimentally, for a pure 4p-periodic supercur- still ongoing, the ultimate goal is to exchange these
rent, only even Shapiro steps should be present and quasiparticles and confirm their non-Abelian statis-
the suppression of the n ¼ 1 step is usually more tics. There are several ways for realizing exchange
pronounced than other steps.59,60 In fact, not only of MFs, including the T-junction geometry in
the missing n ¼ 1 steps have been observed in 2D TI nanowire systems72,73 and moving vortex by tips
system,56,61 they also have been observed in other in 3D TI/superconductor systems.49,74 The 2D and
gate-controllable TI phase in 1T0  WTe2 may
Cryogenic Materials and Circuit Integration for Quantum Computers 6851

provide an easier way to design exchange geometry technologies of devices, and developing new meth-
by electrical gating, thus simplifying the fabrication ods for material engineering on the microscopic
and exchange processes. scale. Eliminations of decoherence still remain the
biggest challenges in quantum circuits.
QUBIT OPERATIONS AND CIRCUITRY The current designs of quchips usually feature
multiple qubits with different transition frequencies
Universal quantum computations are realized by
to avoid qubit crosstalk. For superconducting quan-
virtue of qubit operations which are closely related
tum circuits, the qubits on circuits can be coupled
to the quantum coherence. Scientists are trying to
either directly by capacitance and inductance or
fabricate new types of qubits for obtaining much
indirectly by SQUIDs, transmission line resonator
longer coherence time, easier controllability and
(cavity), and other means. We mention that the
connection, higher designability, and better scala-
transmission line resonator usually consists of a
bility. Taking superconducting qubits as an exam-
long ( 1 cm)78 winding superconducting metal
ple, the coherence time has been increased in the
wire with the surrounding grounded. If the trans-
past decade from initial nanoseconds for a charge
mission line resonator facilitates two-qubit opera-
qubit75 to around 100 ls for a transmon qubit76
tions as a frequency coupling agent (Fig 8), then it is
inside a 3D cavity. Single qubit operations, imple-
mented by resonant pulses applied through on-chip pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffidesigned with resonant frequency xqr ¼
usually
wires, have been improved from several times to 1=Lr Cr detuned from qubit transition frequencies
now 105  106 times within the coherence time, and xq1 and xq2 . When the transmission line resonator
the fidelities of single- and two-qubit gates can is coupled to flux or transmon qubits, the external
reach 99.92% and 99.4%.77 Scientists are making flux can control their couplings by changing qubit
efforts to further improve the coherence time such transition frequencies. Various superconducting
that it can be much longer than a threshold time for qubits can be coupled to either a transmission line
certain classes of fault-tolerant quantum error resonator or a three-dimensional resonator, which
correction codes. However, solving the decoherence are extensively applied to transfer microwave infor-
problem is not an easy task. We know that low mation or measure superconducting qubit states.
frequency noise (1/f) is a main intrinsic limitation on To achieve universal QC, arbitrary single-qubit
the coherence of superconducting qubits, and logic gates and a nontrivial two-qubit logic gates are
mainly results from the fluctuations of critical- required. Not only precise control of the qubit but
current, charge, and flux, but the microscopic origin also switch-on or -off coupling between two qubits is
and mechanism of these fluctuations are not well a very crucial issue. The mechanism of these gates
understood. High frequency noise around the qubit will be discussed in the following two paragraphs.
frequency makes energy exchange between envi- Single-qubit gate A single-qubit gate is performed
ronment and superconducting qubits, and mainly by applying a microwave signal
contributes to energy relaxations of the qubit. It is ½frequencyxd ; voltageV0 sðtÞ; phase/ with energy
believed that the coherence time can be extended by about one microwave photon to the qubit. If the
optimizing designs of circuits, removing impurities coupling capacitor Cc is relatively small comparing
and defects of materials, improving fabricating with C and Cs (Fig. 2a), the Hamiltonian can be

Fig. 8. General quchip architecture showing multiple qubits with frequencies tunable by external flux sources /ext . Qubits resonate with and
through the cavity to achieve two-qubit operation.
6852 Chien, Jhan, Chiu, Liu, Kao, and Chang

Fig. 9. Constructing a CNOT gate.

written as Hdrive ¼  12 Qd V0 sðtÞðIrx þ Qry Þ. I ¼ cos / direct current (DC) SQUID. By switching the bias
and Q ¼ sin / are components of rotation axis in x-y current applied to the SQUID to a dissipative state,
plane.79,80 By changing signal phase /, the opera- we can obtain the information of qubit states. The
tion can represent different single-qubit gates. A phase of a phase qubit is measured by using the
simple example is when / ¼ 0, the qubit can operate tunneling out of the zero-voltage state of a current-
an x-axis p rotation and transit from j0i to j1i with a biased JJ. Roughly speaking, when the bias current
proper signal time period. The signal profile s(t) is is below the value of the critical current of the JJ,
generated by an arbitrary waveform generator the qubit is in the zero-voltage state. Quantum
(AWG), which shapes the constant-amplitude base tunneling of the phase will switch the zero-voltage
signal V0 generated by a local oscillator (LO). state to a finite-voltage state when the qubit is in
Driving frequency wd is the sum of frequencies excited state.
from AWG and LO and is tuned to equal to x01 . In The measurements on superconducting qubits
the current quchip design, AWG and external can also be categorized according to quantum
magnetic flux are two tunable elements forming mechanical interpretations, such as quantum non-
the major scheme for addressing particular qubits demolition (QND) measurements,2 which is differ-
in a quchip. ent from measurements mentioned above. QND
Two-qubit gate A two-qubit gate can be realized measurement is currently considered the main way
by coupling two qubits through a common cavity to realize high-fidelity readout of qubit states. A
(Fig. 8). One possible scheme is to tune the two QND measurement is usually performed using
qubits to the same frequency x01 . In this case, the either a dispersive coupling between a qubit and a
effective Hamiltonian representing the combined cavity field or the coupling between a qubit and a
system is H ¼ 12 gðr1x r2x þ r1y r2y Þ. The propagator nonlinear resonator. This method can be applied to
UðtÞ ¼ expðiHtÞ becomes an entanglement opera- any kind of superconducting qubits that are dis-
tor coupling rotations of both qubits.2 For example, persedly coupled to a single-mode cavity field.
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi Taking QND measurement as an example, a
when t ¼ 4 g, it defines a universal gate iSWAP.81
p
readout operation is performed by applying a signal
When time lapses twice as long, it becomes a iSWAP with frequency xRD , amplitude VRD and duration
gate. A CNOT gate can be constructed with two sRD to the cavity, coupled to the qubit, with xRD
iSWAP gates and a few single-qubit gates (Fig. 9). properly detuned with the qubit frequency x01 so
In superconducting qubit circuits, experimenters that energy exchange between cavity and qubit is
have realized controlled-NOT,
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi Controlled-Z, Con- largely prohibited for QND measurement. The
trolled-R, iSWAP-like, iSWAP and other two-qubit dispersive effect from the interaction of cavity and
gates. Currently the operation time for two-qubit is qubit will cause xRD to shift þv or v depending on
around 40 ns.82 The switchable couplings are now the readout state being j0i or j1i, respectively. The
realized via various techniques, e.g., large detuning, phase of the superposition state can also be
time-dependent variable controls, dressed states, extracted by analyzing the dispersive signal. As
sideband excitations, parametric tunable couplings, shown in Fig. 10, a proper duration sRD yields a
and longitudinal field modulations. These control quality readout by producing sharp and distinguish-
techniques and methods still need to be optimized or able dispersive wave forms. The readout signal is
improved. fed through a frequency multiplier along with a
The readout or measurement of superconducting signal from LO, then the output goes through a low-
qubit states is the final step for QC. There are pass filter and results in a much lower intermediate
different categorizations for measurements. If we frequency xIF ¼ xRD  xLO . The xIF is designed
specify measured observables, such as charge, flux such that it is common to all qubit readings, thus
and phase of the charge, flux and phase qubits, made convenient for further processing. It is further
respectively, then there are three different methods amplified by parametric amplifier (PA) to enhance
to measure qubit states. The charge of a charge S/N ratio.83 The final signal is then digitized by
qubit can be detected by a single-electron transistor analog-to-digital converter (ADC) for data process-
(SET). The current in the SET indicates the qubit ing at room temperature.
states. The flux of a flux qubit can be detected by a
Cryogenic Materials and Circuit Integration for Quantum Computers 6853

Fig. 10. Dispersive readout signal with frequency xRD , amplitude VRD and duration sRD , (a) readout signal without proper time length shows an
unclear readout, and (b) a successful readout by reaching dispersive frequency 2v.

The executions of quantum algorithms rely heav- geometries have to be well managed to avoid
ily on extracting characteristics of each single-qubit crosstalk. A wide variety of noise modes generated
and two-qubit operations. Given a quchip of N by quasiparticles from material defects are also a
qubits, there are at least pq  q þ pc  c parameters major consideration for large quchip designs.
needed for the peripheral circuits to be accurately Recent progress in the area of cryogenic CMOS
calibrated for generating control and readout sig- device physics and circuit design have proposed to
nals. pq and pc are numbers of parameters of a move analog signal processing functions from room
single-qubit and two-qubit operation, respectively, temperature to 4 K. This will benefit all physical
and q is the number of qubits and c is the qubits requiring cryogenic temperature. The num-
connectivity. There are hundreds of parameters for ber of waveguides attaching to a single quchip is
near term quantum computers with about 100 getting unmanageable as a bottleneck for scale-up
qubits. This task is not only laborious, but also and noise management. The ultimate goal is to
mixed with trade-offs, consisting of circular move all waveguides to room temperature. In Feb
sequences of pulse-measure-analyze. In current 2020, Intel and QuTech announced the co-developed
practice, quantum computers are calibrated fre- Horse Ridge, a chip fabricated with Intel’s 22nm
quently due to sensitivity to environmental FFL (FinFET Low power) CMOS process for qubit
changes. control.84 This chip is composed mainly of a digital
core, an SRAM, and an analog and RF circuit. The
QUCHIP SCALE-UP AND 3D INTEGRATION RF line frequency is between 2 GHz and 20 GHz,
FOR QPU while the mainstream superconductor qubit fre-
quency is between 4 to 7 GHz, which means that
With numbers of qubits growing from 10’s to 100’s Horse Ridge is suitable for beyond superconducting
and even up to millions, problems that CPUs and qubits and it should be a universal cryogenic
GPUs have encountered in scale-up will also appear interface between qubits and data acquisition sys-
in designs of quantum processing units (QPUs). A tems. The chip has a total of 4 RF channels and uses
QPU consists of multiple quchips, where each frequency division multiple access (FDMA). Each
quchip is a monolithic substrate with qubit circuitry channel can control 32 qubits and a total of 128
patterned on one or both surfaces. Problems encoun- qubits. The information that controls the RF wave-
tered in designing a quchip can be roughly catego- form is stored in SRAM, which can be processed
rized as (1) qubit accessibility and qubit-qubit quickly with reference to a look up table. The device
connectivity, and (2) control signals and noise physics model at 4 K is different from current
management. A common superconducting quchip mainstream CMOS physics and design. However,
usually consists of the following key elements: Horse Ridge proves that the CMOS IC fabrication
tunable qubits, microwave cavities, DC bias lines can be leveraged in the QC domain. We foresee that
and microwave buses. It is desired that every qubit complicated calibration procedures can be stored in
can be individually addressed and can be connected and carried out by a small to medium size memory
to or isolated from any other qubit. With qubits and and CPU. More research resources will pour into
cavities getting gradually crowded in a quchip, this area, paralleled with 3D QPU integration.
electromagnetic interferences between conducting
6854 Chien, Jhan, Chiu, Liu, Kao, and Chang

Fig. 11. A conceptual 3D integration of QPU, (a) on the top, the input and output driving circuitry, in the middle layer, microchip with qubits and
transmission lines, and at the bottom two layers, cavities and wirings. (b) shows qubits and interface lines in a shielded space. (c) shows that
transmission line cavities are well shielded. Adapted with permission from Ref. 87.

Here, some problems and solutions for scaling up plane on top of quchip/cavity plane with a gap of
superconductor-based quchip and QPU are few microns. In this design, dissipation by the
reviewed. silicon is reduced to less than 50%.86 Teresa Brecht
and the other co-workers proposed a full supercon-
Geometric Considerations ducting ground enclosure and suspended qubit/cav-
ity substrates with low dielectric constant so as to
A common transmon with a large shunt capacitor
mimic 3D cavity designs (Fig. 11).87
usually spans about 200 lm in size. A k=4 cavity is
usually scaled about 1cm in length. With this large
Frequency Management
different in physical scale, a coplanar cavity is
usually patterned as a highly winding supercon- Executing a gate model algorithm involves a
ducting metal line occupying an area with a rea- timely multiple stream of signals. A common band
sonable aspect ratio. Since a large percentage of of a few GHz is usually divided into many sub-bands
quchip area is occupied by cavities, the ground with enough side-band gaps for avoiding inferences
plane is divided into complicate geometries, which among neighboring qubits/cavities. Qubits and cav-
can be a source of noise. Air bridges over cavities are ities are geometrically designed to operate in differ-
proposed to connect both sides of ground planes to ent frequencies. A cavity is usually designed to
improve the distribution of current density.83,85 Air properly detune with coupled qubits for readout
bridges also facilitate two cavities crossing each operations. Frequency assignments are driven by
other and provide a geometric flexibility for quchip two criteria: (1) Geometrically adjacent qubits/cav-
layout.85 One disadvantage of coplanar cavities is ities should operate in different frequencies to avoid
that more than 80% of electrical field travels crosstalk and unwanted excitations, and (2) Fre-
through the dissipative silicon substrate resulting quencies of qubits coupling to the same cavity
in energy loss. Comparing with cylindrical 3D should operate within a tunable band so that one
cavities, the resonance lifetime is about one magni- qubit can be tuned to interact with another during
tude of order shorter. William O’Brien and the other two-qubit operations. In some designs, cavities are
co-workers proposed a superconducting ground made tunable, too, with a SQUID circuit for more
Cryogenic Materials and Circuit Integration for Quantum Computers 6855

flexible bandwidth management. The FDMA are usually 10 lm to 20 lm in diameter, which are
scheme is employed to manage simultaneous oper- very economical for area utilization.
ations of qubits attached to the same driving line. In Another stacking scheme is flip-binding two cir-
order to fully utilize limited quchip I/O points, cuitry planes face to face with  1 lm gap. With
several cavities may capacitively couple with a precise alignment, one qubit on one plane can
microwave driving bus. Readout and control signals couple with a cavity on the other. In order toensure
can address one or more qubits with the FDMA gap uniformity across the two substrates, one
scheme. substrate is etched so that hard stop pillars are
formed in multiple places.89 The results show
Control Sequence Management comparable qubit lifetime and operation fidelity as
those of 2D circuitry. STSV and flip-chip binding
During execution of a quantum algorithm, each
enable multi-layer integration of QPU, which
operation requires a varying time duration. Execu-
increases qubit counts and flexibility of connections.
tion following logical sequence defined by algo-
Layers of switching and routing circuitry for
rithms can result in poor utilization of qubit
microwave signals can be 3D-integrated with qubit
resources. Many solutions have been proposed to
layers, too.85 Control/readout signals and bias DC
solve this problem with software approaches. Quan-
lines from QPU can be connected to multi-layer
tum computer makers provide compilers that map
PCB’s for on-board signal processing or transmitted
logical sequences into packets of physical signal
to external data collectors.85 There are proposals
sequences best suited for a given qubit topology.
suggesting that some classical functions, such as
More sophisticated ones perform certain optimiza-
sequence timers be integrated inside QPU. More
tions, such as maximizing fidelity according to a
research is needed for digital circuits working in
qubit characteristics table, and inserting pulses for
qubit cryostats and thermal noise issues.
error correction. While FDMA addresses the
resource utilization in frequency space, concepts
CONCLUSIONS AND PROSPECTS
like time division multiple access (TDMA) can be
applied to improve hardware efficiency in the time QC now is related not only to fundamental
domain. Kangbo Li and co-workers proposed that a physics research but also to engineering problems.
qubit operation can be divided into a sequence of Like IC designs, quchip designs will need tools as
small pulses with precisely single flux quantum well.90 We think that there will be computer aided
(SFQ) h/2e.88 Since each SFQ pulse is about 2ps, design (CAD) tools specialized for cryogenic circuits
there is ample time margin within 40 ps when using with design parameters very different from those of
a central clock of 25 GHz (about 5 times of qubit current IC circuitry. With the great effort from
frequency) to adjust phase shifts and accommodate interdisciplinary experts, scaling qubit numbers
the different qubit frequencies. Further claims have and error reduction are both possibly following a
suggested that operations fidelities could also be similar Moore’s law for the next decades. Besides,
improved by intermixing correction signals into quantum internet represents another attempt to
SFQ pulses. Combining with FDMA, the quchip increase scalability.91 It creates a QC cluster by
mimics wireless cellular phone networks, which linking multiple QPUs together. If the QC cluster
optimize bandwidth and time utilization for the best can be applied to distributed quantum computing,
total throughput. the entire computation landscape will be signifi-
cantly changed.92
QPU-3D Integrations The ongoing superconducting qubits using Al or
Nb materials is promising. However, other gate-
For the past few years, several research groups
tunable nanostructures28,29 and topological materi-
have experimented with multi-layer 3D integration.
als with exotic surface states57,59 may play an
In addition to an obvious purpose of scaling up qubit
important role in designing new type of qubits.
numbers, connection flexibility is also an important
Although the same approach may be applied to
motivation. Many schemes have been applied to
semiconducting QDs, the current challenges of
stack multiple silicon substrates in the z direction
semiconducting QDs lie in the small number of
and form a 3D circuitry. For example, supercon-
entanglements, which is hindered by the fabrication
ducting through silicon via (STSV) connects circuits
difficulty (shorter gate separation required) result-
on both sides of a silicon substrate. A cavity can
ing from the heavy effective mass of silicon. Other
span across a STSV and still maintain very high
quantum materials, such as graphene and TMDC,
resonance quality.85 Large numbers of STSV’s are
have attracted considerable attention due to their
used to connect ground plans on both sides. A silicon
distinct band structures, but more progress must be
substrate with 200 lm thickness has proved to be
shown to justify their advantages. Layered 2D TI
thick enough to provide a proper distance so that
system, such as monolayer 1T0  WTe2 , is a newly
crosstalk between circuits on top and bottom can be
emerged material with gate-tunable
minimized. On the substrate surface, holes of STSV
6856 Chien, Jhan, Chiu, Liu, Kao, and Chang

superconductivity. The gate-tunable switching 2. P. Krantz, M. Kjaergaard, F. Yan, T.P. Orlando, S. Gus-
between TI and superconductivity may allow tavsson, and W.D. Oliver, Appl. Phys. Rev. 6(2), 021318
(2019). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5089550.
exchange structures, like T-junctions, to be 3. A. Kitaev, Ann. Phys. 321(1), 2 (2006). https://doi.org/10.10
designed by gate in a single flake to verify the 16/j.aop.2005.10.005.
non-Abelian exchange statistics of MFs. 4. F. Arute, K. Arya, R. Babbush, D. Bacon, J.C. Bardin, R.
In this review, we have focused on the current Barends, R. Biswas, S. Boixo, F.G.S.L. Brandao, D.A. Buell,
B. Burkett, Y. Chen, Z. Chen, B. Chiaro, R. Collins, W.
status and possible future development of low- Courtney, A. Dunsworth, E. Farhi, B. Foxen, A. Fowler, C.
temperature qubit materials and cryogenic CMOS Gidney, M. Giustina, R. Graff, K. Guerin, S. Habegger, M.P.
circuit designs. This is a brief summary of the basic Harrigan, M.J. Hartmann, A. Ho, M. Hoffmann, T. Huang,
physics of quantum materials and cryogenic cir- T.S. Humble, S.V. Isakov, E. Jeffrey, Z. Jiang, D. Kafri, K.
cuits. In addition to superconducting qubits and Kechedzhi, J. Kelly, P.V. Klimov, S. Knysh, A. Korotkov, F.
Kostritsa, D. Landhuis, M. Lindmark, E. Lucero, D. Lyakh,
silicon QDs, other possible two-dimensional and S. Mandrà, J.R. McClean, M. McEwen, A. Megrant, X. Mi,
topological qubits were also introduced. Moreover, K. Michielsen, M. Mohseni, J. Mutus, O. Naaman, M. Nee-
the importance of developing cryogenic peripheral ley, C. Neill, M.Y. Niu, E. Ostby, A. Petukhov, J.C. Platt, C.
electronic devices and understanding the solid-state Quintana, E.G. Rieffel, P. Roushan, N.C. Rubin, D. Sank,
K.J. Satzinger, V. Smelyanskiy, K.J. Sung, M.D. Trevithick,
physics of cryogenic CMOS circuits at deep low A. Vainsencher, B. Villalonga, T. White, Z.J. Yao, P. Yeh, A.
temperatures were also described as important Zalcman, H. Neven, and J.M. Martinis, Nature 574(7779),
R&D directions for future scale-up of quantum 505 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1666-5.
computers. Although QC is still in its early stages, 5. J. Kelly, A Preview of Bristlecone. Google’s New Quantum
educational quantum instruments and NISQ Processor (2018). https://ai.googleblog.com/2018/03/a-previe
w-of-bristlecone-googles-new.html.
devices have gradually started to be promoted for 6. K.L. Chiu, and Y. Xu, Phys. Rep. 669, 1 (2017). https://doi.
different applications and can be purchased on the org/10.1016/j.physrep.2016.12.002.
market. Cryogenic qubits and cryogenic circuitry 7. M.Z. Hasan and C.L. Kane, Rev. Mod. Phys. 82(4), 3045
design will remain the main trends for commercial (2010). https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.82.3045.
8. N. Armitage, E. Mele, and A. Vishwanath, Rev. Mod. Phys.
quantum computers in the foreseeable future. 90(1), 015001 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.9
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 0.015001.
9. D.M. Badiane, L.I. Glazman, M. Houzet, and J.S. Meyer,
CRC thanks the support of the NTU-IBM Q Hub Comptes Rendus Physique 14(9–10), 840 (2013). https://doi.
at National Taiwan University from the Ministry of org/10.1016/j.crhy.2013.10.008.
10. W.D. Oliver and P.B. Welander, MRS Bull. 38(10), 816
Science and Technology, Taiwan, under grant No. (2013). https://doi.org/10.1557/mrs.2013.229.
MOST 107-2627-E-002-001-MY3 and 108-2627-E- 11. X. Gu, A.F. Kockum, A. Miranowicz, Y.X. Liu, and F. Nori,
002-002. Phys. Rep. 718-719, 1 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.phys
rep.2017.10.002.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST 12. J. Koch, T.M. Yu, J. Gambetta, A.A. Houck, D.I. Schuster, J.
Majer, A. Blais, M.H. Devoret, S.M. Girvin, and R.J.
The authors declare that they have no conflict of Schoelkopf, Phys. Rev. A 76(4), 042319 (2007). https://doi.
interest. org/10.1103/PhysRevA.76.042319.
13. S. Haroche, M. Brune, and J.M. Raimond, Nat. Phys. 16(3),
OPEN ACCESS 243 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41567-020-0812-1.
This article is licensed under a Creative Commons 14. F.A. Zwanenburg, A.S. Dzurak, A. Morello, M.Y. Simmons,
L.C.L. Hollenberg, G. Klimeck, S. Rogge, S.N. Coppersmith,
Attribution 4.0 International License, which per- and M.A. Eriksson, Rev. Mod. Phys. 85(3), 961 (2013). h
mits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and re- ttps://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.85.961.
production in any medium or format, as long as you 15. M. Veldhorst, J.C.C. Hwang, C.H. Yang, A.W. Leenstra, B.
give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and de Ronde, J.P. Dehollain, J.T. Muhonen, F.E. Hudson, K.M.
Itoh, A. Morello, and A.S. Dzurak, Nat. Nanotechnol. 9(12),
the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons 981 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1038/nnano.2014.216.
licence, and indicate if changes were made. The 16. M. Veldhorst, C.H. Yang, J.C.C. Hwang, W. Huang, J.P.
images or other third party material in this article Dehollain, J.T. Muhonen, S. Simmons, A. Laucht, F.E.
are included in the article’s Creative Commons li- Hudson, K.M. Itoh, A. Morello, and A.S. Dzurak, Nature
cence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to 526(7573), 410 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature15263.
17. D.M. Zajac, A.J. Sigillito, M. Russ, F. Borjans, J.M. Taylor,
the material. If material is not included in the ar- G. Burkard, and J.R. Petta, Science 359(6374), 439 (2018). h
ticle’s Creative Commons licence and your intended ttps://doi.org/10.1126/science.aao5965.
use is not permitted by statutory regulation or ex- 18. W. Huang, C.H. Yang, K.W. Chan, T. Tanttu, B. Hensen,
ceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain R.C.C. Leon, M.A. Fogarty, J.C.C. Hwang, F.E. Hudson,
K.M. Itoh, A. Morello, A. Laucht, and A.S. Dzurak, Nature
permission directly from the copyright holder. To 569(7757), 532 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1
view a copy of this licence, visit http://creative- 197-0.
commons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. 19. L.A. Ponomarenko, F. Schedin, M.I. Katsnelson, R. Yang,
E.W. Hill, K.S. Novoselov, and A.K. Geim, Science
REFERENCES 320(5874), 356 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.11546
63.
1. R. Hanson, L.P. Kouwenhoven, J.R. Petta, S. Tarucha, and
20. J. Güttinger, F. Molitor, C. Stampfer, S. Schnez, A. Jacob-
L.M.K. Vandersypen, Rev. Mod. Phys. 79(4), 1217 (2007). h
sen, S. Dröscher, T. Ihn, and K. Ensslin, Rep. Prog. Phys.
ttps://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.79.1217.
75(12), 126502 (2012).https://doi.org/10.1088/0034-4885/75/
12/126502.
Cryogenic Materials and Circuit Integration for Quantum Computers 6857

21. A. Epping, S. Engels, C. Volk, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, S. 43. J. Alicea, Rep. Prog. Phys. 75(7), 076501 (2012). https://doi.
Trellenkamp, and C. Stampfer, Phys. Status Solidi B org/10.1088/0034-4885/75/7/076501.
250(12), 2692 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1002/pssb.20130029 44. M. Leijnse and K. Flensberg, Semicond. Sci. Technol.
5. 27(12), 124003 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1088/0268-1242/27/
22. M.T. Allen, J. Martin, and A. Yacoby, Nat. Commun. 3(1), 12/124003.
934 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms1945. 45. N. Read, Phys. Today 65(7), 38 (2012). https://doi.org/10.10
23. M. Eich, R. Pisoni, A. Pally, H. Overweg, A. Kurzmann, Y. 63/PT.3.1641.
Lee, P. Rickhaus, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, K. Ensslin, 46. C. Nayak, S.H. Simon, A. Stern, M. Freedman, and S. Das
and T. Ihn, Nano Lett. 18(8), 5042 (2018). https://doi.org/10. Sarma, Rev. Mod. Phys. 80(3), 1083 (2008). https://doi.org/
1021/acs.nanolett.8b01859. 10.1103/RevModPhys.80.1083.
24. N. Tombros, C. Jozsa, M. Popinciuc, H.T. Jonkman, and B.J. 47. P. Bonderson, M. Freedman, and C. Nayak, Phys. Rev. Lett.
van Wees, Nature 448(7153), 571 (2007). https://doi.org/10. 101(1), 010501 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.
1038/nature06037. 101.010501.
25. H.B. Heersche, P. Jarillo-Herrero, J.B. Oostinga, L.M.K. 48. S. Nadj-Perge, I.K. Drozdov, J. Li, H. Chen, S. Jeon, J. Seo,
Vandersypen, and A.F. Morpurgo, Nature 446(7131), 56 A.H. MacDonald, B.A. Bernevig, and A. Yazdani, Science
(2007). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature05555. 346(6209), 602 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.12593
26. J.G. Kroll, W. Uilhoorn, K.L. van der Enden, D. de Jong, K. 27.
Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, S. Goswami, M.C. Cassidy, and 49. H.H. Sun, K.W. Zhang, L.H. Hu, C. Li, G.Y. Wang, H.Y. Ma,
L.P. Kouwenhoven, Nat. Commun. 9(1), 4615 (2018). http Z.A. Xu, C.L. Gao, D.D. Guan, Y.Y. Li, C. Liu, D. Qian, Y.
s://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-07124-x. Zhou, L. Fu, S.C. Li, F.C. Zhang, and J.F. Jia, Phys. Rev.
27. J.I.J. Wang, D. Rodan-Legrain, L. Bretheau, D.L. Campbell, Lett. 116(25), 257003 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRe
B. Kannan, D. Kim, M. Kjaergaard, P. Krantz, G.O. Sa- vLett.116.257003.
mach, F. Yan, J.L. Yoder, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, T.P. 50. B. Jäck, Y. Xie, J. Li, S. Jeon, B.A. Bernevig, and A. Yaz-
Orlando, S. Gustavsson, P. Jarillo-Herrero, and W.D. Oli- dani, Science 364(6447), 1255 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1126/
ver, Nat. Nanotechnol. 14(2), 120 (2019). https://doi.org/10. science.aax1444.
1038/s41565-018-0329-2. 51. Q.L. He, L. Pan, A.L. Stern, E.C. Burks, X. Che, G. Yin, J.
28. T. Larsen, K. Petersson, F. Kuemmeth, T. Jespersen, P. Wang, B. Lian, Q. Zhou, E.S. Choi, K. Murata, X. Kou, Z.
Krogstrup, J. Nygård, and C. Marcus, Phys. Rev. Lett. Chen, T. Nie, Q. Shao, Y. Fan, S.C. Zhang, K. Liu, J. Xia,
115(12), 127001 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLet and K.L. Wang, Science 357(6348), 294 (2017). https://doi.
t.115.127001. org/10.1126/science.aag2792.
29. L. Casparis, M.R. Connolly, M. Kjaergaard, N.J. Pearson, A. 52. V. Mourik, K. Zuo, S.M. Frolov, S.R. Plissard, E.P.A.M.
Kringhøj, T.W. Larsen, F. Kuemmeth, T. Wang, C. Thomas, Bakkers, and L.P. Kouwenhoven, Science 336(6084), 1003
S. Gronin, G.C. Gardner, M.J. Manfra, C.M. Marcus, and (2012). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1222360.
K.D. Petersson, Nat. Nanotechnol. 13(10), 915 (2018). http 53. S.M. Albrecht, A.P. Higginbotham, M. Madsen, F. Kuem-
s://doi.org/10.1038/s41565-018-0207-y. meth, T.S. Jespersen, J. Nygård, P. Krogstrup, and C.M.
30. J. Gambetta and S. Sheldon, Cramming More Power Into a Marcus, Nature 531(7593), 206 (2016). https://doi.org/10.10
Quantum Device (2019). https://www.ibm.com/blogs/resear 38/nature17162.
ch/2019/03/power-quantum-device. 54. M.T. Deng, S. Vaitiekenas,
_ E.B. Hansen, J. Danon, M. Lei-
31. K.L. Chiu, arXiv:1804.02870 [cond-mat, physics:quant-ph] jnse, K. Flensberg, J. Nygård, P. Krogstrup, and C.M.
(2018). http://arxiv.org/abs/1804.02870. Marcus, Science 354(6319), 1557 (2016). https://doi.org/10.
32. M.R. Connolly, K.L. Chiu, S.P. Giblin, M. Kataoka, J.D. 1126/science.aaf3961.
Fletcher, C. Chua, J.P. Griffiths, G.A.C. Jones, V.I. Fal’ko, 55. H. Zhang, C.X. Liu, S. Gazibegovic, D. Xu, J.A. Logan, G.
C.G. Smith, and T.J.B.M. Janssen, Nat. Nanotechnol. 8(6), Wang, N. van Loo, J.D.S. Bommer, M.W.A. de Moor, D. Car,
417 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1038/nnano.2013.73. R.L.M. Op het Veld, P.J. van Veldhoven, S. Koelling, M.A.
33. X.X. Song, D. Liu, V. Mosallanejad, J. You, T.Y. Han, D.T. Verheijen, M. Pendharkar, D.J. Pennachio, B. Shojaei, J.S.
Chen, H.O. Li, G. Cao, M. Xiao, G.C. Guo, and G.P. Guo, Lee, C.J. Palmstrøm, E.P.A.M. Bakkers, S.D. Sarma, and
Nanoscale 7(40), 16867 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1039/C5N L.P. Kouwenhoven, Nature 556(7699), 74 (2018). https://doi.
R04961J. org/10.1038/nature26142.
34. K. Wang, K. De Greve, L.A. Jauregui, A. Sushko, A. High, Y. 56. E. Bocquillon, R.S. Deacon, J. Wiedenmann, P. Leubner,
Zhou, G. Scuri, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, M.D. Lukin, H. T.M. Klapwijk, C. Brüne, K. Ishibashi, H. Buhmann, and
Park, and P. Kim, Nat. Nanotechnol. 13(2), 128 (2018). h L.W. Molenkamp, Nat. Nanotechnol. 12(2), 137 (2017). htt
ttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41565-017-0030-x. ps://doi.org/10.1038/nnano.2016.159.
35. X. Liu and M.C. Hersam, Nat. Rev. Mater. 4(10), 669 (2019). 57. C. Li, J.C. de Boer, B. de Ronde, S.V. Ramankutty, E. van
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41578-019-0136-x. Heumen, Y. Huang, A. de Visser, A.A. Golubov, M.S. Gold-
36. A. Kormányos, V. Zólyomi, N.D. Drummond, and G. Bur- en, and A. Brinkman, Nat. Mater. 17(10), 875 (2018). http
kard, Phys. Rev. X 4(1), 011034 (2014). https://doi.org/10. s://doi.org/10.1038/s41563-018-0158-6.
1103/PhysRevX.4.011034. 58. L. Fu and C.L. Kane, Phys. Rev. B 79(16), 161408 (2009). h
_
37. J. Pawłowski, D. Zebrowski, and S. Bednarek, Phys. Rev. B ttps://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.79.161408.
97(15), 155412 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.97. 59. A.Q. Wang, C.Z. Li, C. Li, Z.M. Liao, A. Brinkman, and D.P.
155412. Yu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121(23), 237701 (2018). https://doi.org/
38. G. Széchenyi, L. Chirolli, and A. Pályi, 2D Mater. 5(3), 10.1103/PhysRevLett.121.237701.
035004 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1088/2053-1583/aab80e. 60. K. Le Calvez, L. Veyrat, F. Gay, P. Plaindoux, C.B.
39. K. Lee, G. Kulkarni, and Z. Zhong, Nanoscale 8(14), 7755 Winkelmann, H. Courtois, and B. Sacépé, Commun. Phys.
(2016). https://doi.org/10.1039/C5NR08954A. 2(1), 4 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s42005-018-0100-x.
40. R. Pisoni, Z. Lei, P. Back, M. Eich, H. Overweg, Y. Lee, K. 61. J. Wiedenmann, E. Bocquillon, R.S. Deacon, S. Hartinger,
Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, T. Ihn, and K. Ensslin, Appl. Phys. O. Herrmann, T.M. Klapwijk, L. Maier, C. Ames, C. Brüne,
Lett. 112(12), 123101 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5021 C. Gould, A. Oiwa, K. Ishibashi, S. Tarucha, H. Buhmann,
113. and L.W. Molenkamp, Nat. Commun. 7(1), 10303 (2016). h
41. X. Gong, M. Kargarian, A. Stern, D. Yue, H. Zhou, X. Jin, ttps://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms10303.
V.M. Galitski, V.M. Yakovenko, and J. Xia, Sci. Adv. 3(3), 62. X. Qian, J. Liu, L. Fu, and J. Li, Science 346(6215), 1344
e1602579 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1602579. (2014). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1256815.
42. A.Y. Kitaev, Phys. Usp. 44(10S), 131 (2001). https://doi.org/ 63. Z. Fei, T. Palomaki, S. Wu, W. Zhao, X. Cai, B. Sun, P.
10.1070/1063-7869/44/10S/S29. Nguyen, J. Finney, X. Xu, and D.H. Cobden, Nat. Phys.
13(7), 677 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1038/nphys4091.
6858 Chien, Jhan, Chiu, Liu, Kao, and Chang

64. S. Wu, V. Fatemi, Q.D. Gibson, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, 80. M. Hofheinz, H. Wang, M. Ansmann, R.C. Bialczak, E. Lu-
R.J. Cava, and P. Jarillo-Herrero, Science 359(6371), 76 cero, M. Neeley, A.D. O’Connell, D. Sank, J. Wenner, J.M.
(2018). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aan6003. Martinis, and A.N. Cleland, Nature 459(7246), 546 (2009). h
65. V. Fatemi, S. Wu, Y. Cao, L. Bretheau, Q.D. Gibson, K. ttps://doi.org/10.1038/nature08005.
Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, R.J. Cava, and P. Jarillo-Herrero, 81. N. Schuch and J. Siewert, Phys. Rev. A 67(3), 032301 (2003).
Science 362(6417), 926 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1126/scien https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.67.032301.
ce.aar4642. 82. M. Rol, F. Battistel, F. Malinowski, C. Bultink, B. Tarasin-
66. A.A. Soluyanov, D. Gresch, Z. Wang, Q. Wu, M. Troyer, X. ski, R. Vollmer, N. Haider, N. Muthusubramanian, A. Bru-
Dai, and B.A. Bernevig, Nature 527(7579), 495 (2015). http no, B. Terhal, and L. DiCarlo, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123(12),
s://doi.org/10.1038/nature15768. 120502 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.123.120
67. T.R. Chang, S.Y. Xu, G. Chang, C.C. Lee, S.M. Huang, B. 502.
Wang, G. Bian, H. Zheng, D.S. Sanchez, I. Belopolski, N. 83. Springer URL: https://www.springer.com/series/10039.
Alidoust, M. Neupane, A. Bansil, H.T. Jeng, H. Lin, and M. 84. B. Patra, J. P. G. van Dijk, S. Subramanian, A. Corna, X.
Zahid Hasan, Nat. Commun. 7(1), 10639 (2016). https://doi. Xue, C. Jeon, F. Sheikh, E. Juarez-Hernandez, B. Perez
org/10.1038/ncomms10639. Esparza, H. Rampurawala, B. Carlton, N. Samkharadze, S.
68. J. Jiang, Z. Liu, Y. Sun, H. Yang, C. Rajamathi, Y. Qi, L. Ravikumar, C. Nieva, S. Kim2, H-J. Lee, A. Sammak, G.
Yang, C. Chen, H. Peng, C.C. Hwang, S. Sun, S.K. Mo, I. Scappucci, M. Veldhorst, L. M. K. Vandersypen, M. Babaie,
Vobornik, J. Fujii, S. Parkin, C. Felser, B. Yan, and Y. Chen, F. Sebastiano, E. Charbon, and S. Pellerano, ISSCC. (2020).
Nat. Commun. 8(1), 13973 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1038/nc http://submissions2.mirasmart.com/ISSCC2020/PDF/ISSC
omms13973. C2020AdvanceProgram.pdf.
69. Y. Wu, D. Mou, N.H. Jo, K. Sun, L. Huang, S.L. Bud’ko, P.C. 85. D. Rosenberg, S. Weber, D. Conway, D. Yost, J. Mallek, G.
Canfield, and A. Kaminski, Phys. Rev. B 94(12), 121113 Calusine, R. Das, D. Kim, M. Schwartz, W. Woods, J.L.
(2016). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.94.121113. Yoder, and W.D. Oliver, arXiv:1906.11146 [cond-mat, phy-
70. M.N. Ali, J. Xiong, S. Flynn, J. Tao, Q.D. Gibson, L.M. sics:quant-ph] (2019). http://arxiv.org/abs/1906.11146.
Schoop, T. Liang, N. Haldolaarachchige, M. Hirschberger, 86. W. O’Brien, M. Vahidpour, J.T. Whyland, J. Angeles, J.
N.P. Ong, and R.J. Cava, Nature 514(7521), 205 (2014). h Marshall, D. Scarabelli, G. Crossman, K. Yadav, Y. Mohan,
ttps://doi.org/10.1038/nature13763. C. Bui, V. Rawat, R. Renzas, N. Vodrahalli, A. Bestwick, and
71. F.C. Chen, H.Y. Lv, X. Luo, W.J. Lu, Q.L. Pei, G.T. Lin, Y.Y. C. Rigetti, arXiv:1708.02219 [physics, physics:quant-ph] (-
Han, X.B. Zhu, W.H. Song, and Y.P. Sun, Phys. Rev. B 2017).http://arxiv.org/abs/1708.02219.
94(23), 235154 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.94. 87. T. Brecht, W. Pfaff, C. Wang, Y. Chu, L. Frunzio, M.H.
235154. Devoret, and R.J. Schoelkopf, npj Quantum Inf 2(1), 16002
72. J. Alicea, Y. Oreg, G. Refael, F. von Oppen, M.P.A. Fisher, (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/npjqi.2016.2.
Nat. Phys. 7(5), 412 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1038/nphy 88. K. Li, R. McDermott, and M.G. Vavilov, Phys. Rev. Appl.
s1915. 12(1), 014044 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevAp
73. B. van Heck, A.R. Akhmerov, F. Hassler, M. Burrello, and plied.12.014044.
C.W.J. Beenakker, New J. Phys. 14(3), 035019 (2012). http 89. B.M. Niedzielski, J.L. Yoder, D. Ruth-Yost, W.D. Oliver,
s://doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/14/3/035019. D.K. Kim, M.E. Schwartz, D. Rosenberg, G. Calusine, R.
74. X. Ma, C.J.O. Reichhardt, and C. Reichhardt, Phys. Rev. B Das, A.J. Melville, J. Plant, and L. Racz, in 2019 IEEE
101(2), 024514 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.10 International Electron Devices Meeting (IEDM) (IEEE, San
1.024514. Francisco, CA, USA, 2019), pp. 31.3.1–31.3.4. https://doi.org/
75. Y. Nakamura, Y.A. Pashkin, and J.S. Tsai, Nature 10.1109/IEDM19573.2019.8993515.
398(6730), 786 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1038/19718. 90. V. Adler, Chin-Hong Cheah, K. Gaj, D. Brock, and E.
76. C. Rigetti, J.M. Gambetta, S. Poletto, B.L.T. Plourde, J.M. Friedman, IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond. 7(2), 3294 (1997).
Chow, A.D. Córcoles, J.A. Smolin, S.T. Merkel, J.R. Rozen, https://doi.org/10.1109/77.622058.
G.A. Keefe, M.B. Rothwell, M.B. Ketchen, and M. Steffen, 91. A.S. Cacciapuoti, M. Caleffi, F. Tafuri, F.S. Cataliotti, S.
Phys. Rev. B 86(10), 100506 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1103/ Gherardini, and G. Bianchi, IEEE Network 34(1), 137
PhysRevB.86.100506. (2020). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/MNET.001.1900092.
77. R. Barends, J. Kelly, A. Megrant, A. Veitia, D. Sank, E. 92. R. Beals, S. Brierley, O. Gray, A.W. Harrow, S. Kutin, N.
Jeffrey, T.C. White, J. Mutus, A.G. Fowler, B. Campbell, Y. Linden, D. Shepherd, and M. Stather, Proc. R. Soc. A
Chen, Z. Chen, B. Chiaro, A. Dunsworth, C. Neill, P. 469(2153), 20120686 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.20
O’Malley, P. Roushan, A. Vainsencher, J. Wenner, A.N. 12.0686.
Korotkov, A.N. Cleland, and J.M. Martinis, Nature
508(7497), 500 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13171. Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with
78. J.M. Martinis, M.H. Devoret, and J. Clarke, Nat. Phys. regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institu-
16(3), 234 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41567-020-0829-5. tional affiliations.
79. A. Blais, S.M. Girvin, and W.D. Oliver, Nat. Phys. 16(3), 247
(2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41567-020-0806-z.