Quantum nanoelectromechanics with electrons, quasi-particles and Cooper pairs: effective bath descriptions and strong feedback effects
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using a quantum noise approach, we discuss the physics of both normal metal and superconducting single electron transistors (SET) coupled to mechanical resonators. Particular attention is paid to the regime where transport occurs via incoherent Cooper-pair tunneling (either via the Josephson quasiparticle (JQP) or double Josephson quasiparticle (DJQP) process). We show that, surprisingly, the back-action of tunneling Cooper pairs (or superconducting quasiparticles) can be used to significantly cool the oscillator. We also discuss the physical origin of negative damping effects in this system, and how they can lead to a regime of strong electro-mechanical feedback, where despite a weak SET - oscillator coupling, the motion of the oscillator strongly effects the tunneling of the Cooper pairs. We show that in this regime, the oscillator is characterized by an energy-dependent effective temperature. Finally, we discuss the strong analogy between back-action effects of incoherent Cooper-pair tunneling and ponderomotive effects in an optical cavity with a moveable mirror; in our case, tunneling Cooper pairs play the role of the cavity photons.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it