Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33627661›Full record

ArticleNature communications2021

A superconducting switch actuated by injection of high-energy electrons.

M F Ritter, A Fuhrer, D Z Haxell, S Hart, P Gumann, H Riel, F Nichele

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature communications, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

M F RitterIBM Research Europe, Rüschlikon, Switzerland.
A FuhrerIBM Research Europe, Rüschlikon, Switzerland. afu@ibm.zurich.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3537-5737
D Z HaxellIBM Research Europe, Rüschlikon, Switzerland.
S HartIBM T. J. Watson Research Center, Yorktown Heights, NY, USA.
P GumannIBM T. J. Watson Research Center, Yorktown Heights, NY, USA.
H RielIBM Research Europe, Rüschlikon, Switzerland.
F NicheleIBM Research Europe, Rüschlikon, Switzerland. fni@ibm.zurich.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6320-5754

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent experiments with metallic nanowires devices seem to indicate that superconductivity can be controlled by the application of electric fields. In such experiments, critical currents are tuned and eventually suppressed by relatively small voltages applied to nearby gate electrodes, at odds with current understanding of electrostatic screening in metals. We investigate the impact of gate voltages on superconductivity in similar metal nanowires. Varying materials and device geometries, we study the physical mechanism behind the quench of superconductivity. We demonstrate that the transition from superconducting to resistive state can be understood in detail by tunneling of high-energy electrons from the gate contact to the nanowire, resulting in quasiparticle generation and, at sufficiently large currents, heating. Onset of critical current suppression occurs below gate currents of 100fA, which are challenging to detect in typical experiments.

Identifiers

PMID33627661
PMCPMC7904938

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.