1

An Introduction to the Transmon Qubit for

Electromagnetic Engineers
Thomas E. Roth Member, IEEE, Ruichao Ma, and Weng C. Chew Life Fellow, IEEE

Abstract—One of the most popular approaches being pursued (also made from superconductors) [3]. At a high-level, a
to achieve a quantum advantage with practical hardware are Josephson junction can be viewed as being synonymous to
superconducting circuit devices. Although significant progress a nonlinear inductor. By engineering Josephson junctions into
arXiv:2106.11352v1 [quant-ph] 21 Jun 2021

has been made over the previous two decades, substantial

engineering efforts are required to scale these devices so they various circuit topologies, the nonlinear spectra of the resulting
can be used to solve many problems of interest. Unfortunately, circuit can be optimized to form the basis of a qubit with
much of this exciting field is described using technical jargon individually addressable quantum states. Using superconduc-
and concepts from physics that are unfamiliar to a classically tors for the surrounding microwave circuitry also leads to
trained electromagnetic engineer. As a result, this work is often close to zero dissipation. This allows the typically fragile
difficult for engineers to become engaged in. We hope to lower
the barrier to this field by providing an accessible review of quantum states involved to survive for long enough times that
one of the most prevalently used quantum bits (qubits) in planar “on-chip” realizations of the fundamental interactions
superconducting circuit systems, the transmon qubit. Most of of light and matter necessary to create and process quantum
the physics of these systems can be understood intuitively with information can be leveraged at microwave frequencies [3]–
only some background in quantum mechanics. As a result, we [5]. Using these tools and the flexibility of these architectures,
avoid invoking quantum mechanical concepts except where it is
necessary to ease the transition between details in this work and circuit QED designs have been implemented for a wide range
those that would be encountered in the literature. We believe of quantum technologies including analog quantum computers
this leads to a gentler introduction to this fascinating field, and [6], digital or gate-based quantum computers [1], [7], [8],
hope that more researchers from the classical electromagnetic single photon sources [9]–[11], quantum memories [12], [13],
community become engaged in this area in the future. and components of quantum communication systems [14].
Index Terms—Circuit quantum electrodynamics, supercon- Circuit QED systems have garnered such a high degree of
ducting circuits, transmon qubit, quantum mechanics. interest in large part because of the engineering control in the
design and operation of these systems, as well as the strength
I. I NTRODUCTION of light-matter coupling that can be achieved. The engineering
UANTUM computing and quantum communication are control is due to the many types of qubits that can be designed
Q becoming increasingly active research areas, with recent
advances in the field breaking into a “quantum advantage”
to have desirable features using different configurations of
Josephson junctions [5], [15]–[17]. Further, the operating char-
where it has been claimed that quantum hardware has outper- acteristics of these qubits can be tuned in situ by electrically
formed what is possible with the most powerful state-of-the-art biasing them, allowing for dynamic reconfiguration of the
classical hardware [1], [2]. Although many hardware platforms qubit that is not possible with fixed systems like natural atoms
are still being pursued to implement quantum information and ions [5]. Additionally, the macroscopic scale of circuit
processing, superconducting circuit architectures are one of the QED qubits and the high confinement of electric and magnetic
leading candidates [3]–[5]. These systems, also often called fields possible in planar transmission lines can be leveraged to
circuit quantum electrodynamics (QED) devices, utilize the achieve exceptionally strong coupling [18]. As a result, circuit
quantum dynamics of electromagnetic fields in superconduct- QED systems have achieved some of the highest levels of
ing circuits to generate and process quantum information. light-matter coupling strengths seen in any physical system
Circuit QED devices are most often formed by embedding a to date, providing an avenue to explore and harness untapped
special kind of superconducting device, known as a Josephson areas of physics [19]. Finally, many aspects of the fabrication
junction, into complex systems of planar microwave circuitry of these systems can follow from established semiconductor
fabrication techniques [5]. However, there remain many open
This work was supported by NSF ECCS 169195, a startup fund at Purdue challenges and opportunities related to fabrication of these
University, and the Distinguished Professorship Grant at Purdue University. devices to continue to improve their performance [20].
Thomas E. Roth is with the School of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907 USA. Ruichao Ma is with the Of the many superconducting qubits that have been designed
Department of Physics and Astronomy, Purdue University, West Lafayette, to date, the transmon has become one of the most widely
IN 47907 USA. Weng C. Chew is with the Department of Electrical used since its creation and forms a key part of many scalable
and Computer Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign,
Urbana, IL 61801 USA and the School of Electrical and Computer Engi- quantum information processing architectures using supercon-
neering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907 USA (contact e-mail: ducting circuits [1], [17]. An example of the typical on-chip
[email protected]). features needed to operate a circuit QED device with four
This work has been submitted to the IEEE for possible publication.
Copyright may be transferred without notice, after which this version may transmon qubits is shown in Fig. 1. The features of this device
no longer be accessible. will be discussed in more detail throughout this review.
 2

Typically, quantum effects are only observable at micro-

scopic levels due to the fragility of individual quantum states.
To observe quantum behavior at a macroscopic level (e.g.,
on the size of circuit components), a strong degree of co-
herence between the individual microscopic quantum systems
must be achieved [24]. One avenue for this to occur is in
superconductors cooled to extremely low temperatures [26].
At these temperatures, electrons in the material tend to become
bound to each other as Cooper pairs, which become the
charge carriers of the superconducting system [22]–[24]. These
Cooper pairs are quasiparticles formed between two electrons
with equal and opposite momenta, including the spins of the
electrons [23]. Many of the properties of superconductivity are
able to occur due to the pairing of the electrons.
One particularly important result is that the Pauli exclusion
Fig. 1: Optical image of a typical circuit QED device with four principle does not apply to Cooper pairs, allowing them
transmon qubits and the accompanying on-chip microwave network all to “condense” into a single quantum ground state (of-
needed to operate the device. Each arm of the transmons are ~300 ten referred to as a condensate) [23]. In addition to this,
µm long and form a ~70 fF capacitance to ground. The main
operating frequencies of the transmons in this device are around 5
Cooper pairs are highly resilient to disturbances caused by
GHz, but this can be tuned in situ between approximately 4 to 6 scattering events (e.g., scattering from atomic lattices), making
GHz. The surrounding microwave transmission lines are used to the overall quantum state describing the Cooper pair very
control the transmons and monitor their quantum states through stable. It is this remarkable stability that allows the quantum
microwave spectroscopy. aspects of a superconductor to be characterized by a small
number of macroscopic quantum states [23]. As a result,
the detailed tracking of the states of individual Cooper pairs
In an effort to help the classical electromagnetic community is unnecessary and a collective wavefunction can be used
become engaged in circuit QED research, we present a review instead. Importantly, these collective wavefunctions have the
of the essential properties of the transmon qubit. Our review necessary degree of coherence over large length scales to make
is presented in a manner that should be largely accessible to observing macroscopic quantum behavior possible. Circuit
individuals with a limited background in quantum mechanics. QED systems interact with these macroscopic quantum states
However, to achieve a deeper understanding of the quantum using microwave photons and other circuitry [5].
concepts discussed in this review, readers can also consult To ensure that circuit QED systems can interact with
[21]. We begin this review by introducing the basic aspects of the desired macroscopic quantum states, the superconducting
superconductivity that are needed to understand the operation system must be cooled to an appropriately low temperature. To
of a Josephson junction, before building an intuitive picture observe basic superconducting effects, the relevant materials
for understanding the dynamics of these systems. Following typically need to be cooled to temperatures on the order
this, we present the development of the transmon qubit in a of several kelvin [24]. However, circuit QED systems must
historical context by considering how it evolved from earlier operate at even lower temperatures than this to ensure that the
qubits. We then review a common model used to describe thermal noise in the setup does not “swamp” the very low
the coupling of a transmon to other microwave circuitry. This energy microwave photons used in these systems. As a result,
model is a typical starting point for analyzing circuit QED circuit QED devices often must operate at temperatures on
systems, and appears frequently in the literature. Finally, we the order of 10 mK, which is achievable with modern dilution
conclude by mentioning a few areas where electromagnetic refrigerators [22]. Although achievable, this impacts the cost
engineers can help advance this exciting new field. of the overall system and the design constraints of auxiliary
components such as microwave sources, circulators, mixers,
II. S UPERCONDUCTIVITY FOR C IRCUIT QED and amplifiers, to name a few.

The phenomenon of superconductivity plays a central role

III. P HYSICS OF A J OSEPHSON J UNCTION
in the operation of all circuit QED systems. Fortunately,
the physical effects of superconductivity that are needed in With the basic properties of superconductors understood,
understanding circuit QED systems does not require a full we can begin to consider more complicated superconducting
microscopic theory to be used. As a result, only a minimal systems that are useful in designing qubits. Of utmost interest
knowledge of superconductivity is needed to understand the is a Josephson junction, which is typically formed by a thin
general physics of these systems. We review only the essential insulative gap (on the order of a nm thick) between two
properties of superconductivity in this section. A more detailed superconductors [26]. Although many different materials can
introduction to superconductivity in the context of circuit QED be used to form a Josephson junction, the most widely used
systems can be found in [22]–[24]. More complete details can in circuit QED systems is Al/AlOx/Al. As we will see, this
be found in common textbooks; e.g., [25]. superconductor-insulator-superconductor “sandwich” exhibits
 3

a nonlinear I-V relationship, which is a key property needed the Josephson inductance LJ (the minimum inductance of the
in designing most qubits. junction), EJ = LJ Ic2 follows a typical circuit theory form.
This nonlinearity arises because the insulative gap of the The relations given in (1) and (2) can be used to derive the
Josephson junction acts as a barrier to the flow of Cooper form of the nonlinear Josephson inductance by noting that
pairs. However, as is commonly found at potential barriers, ∂I ∂I ∂ϕ 2e
the wavefunctions of the Cooper pairs can extend into the = = Ic cos(ϕ) V. (3)
∂t ∂ϕ ∂t ~
insulative gap. By keeping the thickness of the gap small
enough, the wavefunctions between the two superconductors Rearranging this in the form of an I-V relation for an inductor
can overlap, allowing for interactions between the two su- shows that the tunneling physics results in an effective induc-
perconducting regions. Due to this interaction, it is possible tance given by L(ϕ) = LJ / cos ϕ, where LJ = ~/(2eIc ) [24].
for Cooper pairs to coherently tunnel between the two super- Overall, the energy associated with the inductance needed in
conducting regions without requiring an applied voltage [27]. the Hamiltonian for the Josephson junction is typically given
The resulting tunneling supercurrent can be shown to have a as HL = −EJ cos ϕ [24].
nonlinear dependence on the voltage over the junction that is Due to the physical arrangement of a Josephson junction,
synonymous to the behavior of a nonlinear inductor. there is also a stray “parallel plate” capacitance that impacts
the total energy of the junction. The energy is found by
first noting that the total charge Q “stored” in the junction
A. Hamiltonian Description of a Josephson Junction capacitance is 2en, where 2e is the charge of a single Cooper
pair. Considering the charging energy of a single electron
Since we will be considering quantum aspects of a Joseph-
is EC = e2 /2C, the total capacitive energy of the junction
son junction later, it is desirable to consider a Hamiltonian
capacitance, Q2 /2C, can be written as HC = 4EC n2 [24].
mechanics description of the Josephson junction (for basic
Depending on how the Josephson junction will be used in
introductions to Hamiltonian mechanics in quantum theory,
a circuit, this small stray capacitance may be negligible so
see [21], [28], [29]). This amounts to expressing the total
that the junction can be considered to be purely a nonlinear
energy of the junction in terms of conjugate variables. These
inductor. We include the stray capacitance here since a similar
conjugate variables vary with respect to each other in a manner
term will be important in considering transmon qubits later.
to ensure that the total energy of the system is conserved [21].
Combining the results for the dominant inductive and stray
For the Josephson junction system, the conjugate variables are
capacitive energy, the Hamiltonian for the Josephson junction
the Cooper pair density difference n and the Josephson phase
system is given by
ϕ. It is important to emphasize that voltage and current are not
suitable conjugate variables, which is why these variables are H = HC + HL = 4EC n2 − EJ cos ϕ. (4)
not typically found in the quantum treatments of Josephson
junctions. Initially considering the classical case, n and ϕ are From a circuit theory viewpoint, this Hamiltonian describes the
real-valued deterministic numbers. total energy of a parallel combination of a linear capacitor and
a nonlinear inductor. Since we have expressed the total energy
We will now assume that we have two isolated, finite-
of our system in terms of conjugate variables, we can use
sized superconductors that are connected to each other by a
the principle of conservation of energy encoded in Hamilton’s
Josephson junction. For the classical case, n is the net density
equations to find the equations of motion for this system (see
of Cooper pairs that have tunneled through the Josephson
[21] for an example of this process). More importantly, finding
junction relative to some equilibrium level [22]–[24]. The
this Hamiltonian plays a key role in developing a quantum
Josephson phase ϕ of the junction corresponds to the phase
theory for this system.
difference between the macroscopic condensate wavefunctions
of the two superconductors [22]–[24]. Although the circuit theory viewpoint of (4) can be useful,
the dynamical variables n and ϕ are not very intuitive for
The Hamiltonian of the Josephson junction can be found
solving circuit problems. Fortunately, there is an intuitive
by considering the total energy of the junction in terms of an
mechanical system that obeys the same dynamical equations
effective inductance and capacitance expressed in terms of n
as a Josephson junction, making it a useful analogy for
and ϕ. For most Josephson junctions, the effective inductance
understanding Josephson junction dynamics (see “Mechanical
is the dominant effect. The form of the inductance can be
Equivalent of a Josephson Junction”).
readily inferred from the two Josephson relations, given as
Before moving on, it is worth commenting on the relative
I = Ic sin ϕ, (1)
(
scales of the two energies for a Josephson junction, i.e.,
∂ϕ 2e EC and EJ . Since Josephson junctions are physically very
= V, (2)
∂t ~ small, the effective capacitance of the junction is often small
where I is the supercurrent flowing through the junction and V for qubits (in the fF to low pF range), while the effective
is the voltage across the junction [24]. Further, Ic = 2eEJ /~ is inductance will typically be in the nH to low µH range [22].
the critical current of the junction that characterizes the max- However, through careful engineering of the circuitry around
imum amount of current that can coherently tunnel through a Josephson junction, great control over both the effective
the junction (i.e., exhibiting no dissipation). Finally, EJ is EC and EJ of the qubit is possible. This can be done using
the Josephson energy, which measures the energy associated additional Josephson junctions, or by utilizing linear inductors
with a Cooper pair tunneling through the junction. In terms of and capacitors (which can be either lumped or distributed
 4

elements). Using these tools, the characteristic ratio EJ /EC the first two non-zero terms of the Taylor series provide
can span ranges all the way from less than 0.1 up to 106 a good approximation to the overall system’s dynamics
depending on a device design [5]. This flexibility has been (this is often referred to as a weakly anharmonic oscillator
used to design many different qubits made from various [30]). As will be discussed in detail in the main text,
combinations of Josephson junctions and auxiliary circuit this regime is reached by using clever engineering to
elements, leading to a vast trade space for the optimization lower EC by increasing the effective capacitance of the
of qubits for circuit QED systems [5]. Josephson junction. From the view of the mechanical
analogue, this change is similar to making R larger while
Mechanical Equivalent of a Josephson Junction keeping g fixed.

B. Magnetic Flux-Tunable Josephson Junction

When Josephson junctions are used to make qubits, it can be
advantageous to be able to tune the operating characteristics
of the overall system. One common modification used with
transmon qubits is to use two similar Josephson junctions
in parallel as opposed to using a single junction [17], [26].
The two junctions then form a superconducting loop, which
Fig. 2: Illustrations of (a) a Josephson junction and (b) a is often referred to as a superconducting quantum interference
simple mechanical pendulum. device (SQUID). The SQUID arrangement allows the effective
There exists a simple mechanical analogue to the Josephson energy of the overall circuit to be tuned through the
Josephson junction that helps build intuition into its application of an external magnetic flux [17]. By modifying the
dynamics [30]. In particular, it can be shown that the Josephson energy, the effective inductance of the SQUID loop
Hamiltonian for a pendulum of mass m attached to its can be tuned dynamically. This makes unique qubit operations
center of rotation by a rigid, massless rod of length R possible that are not achievable with fixed qubits, such as
is mathematically equivalent to (4). The comparison of natural atoms or ions [11].
these two systems is detailed in Fig. 2. The Hamiltonian To see why this occurs, we must revisit the effective
for the pendulum system is inductance Hamiltonian HL of the Josephson junction. With
1 the second junction, this part of the Hamiltonian becomes
H= L2 − mgR cos φ, (5)
2mR2 HL = −EJ cos ϕ1 − EJ cos ϕ2 , (8)
where L is the angular momentum of the pendulum, g
where ϕi is the Josephson phase of the ith junction and we
is the gravitational acceleration, and φ is the angular
have assumed that the Josephson energy for both junctions
position of the pendulum’s mass. The resting position of
are identical. In reality, the Josephson energies are often made
the mass (which is aligned with the gravitational field) is
asymmetric on purpose to limit the tuning range of the SQUID.
given by φ = 0. Comparing (4) and (5), it is seen that the
However, junction asymmetries do not change the overall
Josephson junction variables ϕ and n can be identified
conceptual result, so they are ignored here for simplicity [17].
with the angular position of the pendulum’s mass and its
In addition to (8), the physics of superconductors places
angular momentum, respectively.
another constraint on the relationship between ϕ1 and ϕ2 . In
The Hamiltonians of these systems can be used to
particular, because the phase of the collective wavefunction
derive equations of motion for the Josephson phase and
describing the superconducting condensate is single-valued, it
the angular position of the pendulum’s mass. For the
is necessary that the total phase difference around a supercon-
Josephson junction, we have
ducting loop be an integer multiple of 2π [23]. However, it
d2 ϕ can also be shown that an applied magnetic flux intersecting
+ 8EC EJ sin ϕ = 0, (6)
dt2 the superconducting loop will affect the total phase change
while for the mechanical system we have of the condensate wavefunction around the loop (this can be
viewed in a manner similar to Faraday’s law of induction or
d2 φ g the Aharonov-Bohm effect). Overall, the result of this is that
+ sin φ = 0. (7)
dt2 R the Josephson phase difference around the SQUID is
Recalling that EC is inversely proportional to the junction
capacitance, we can see that the junction capacitance ϕ1 − ϕ2 = 2π` + 2πΦ/Φ0 , (9)
impacts the dynamics of the Josephson phase in a similar where ` is an integer, Φ is the total magnetic flux intersecting
manner to the radius of the mechanical pendulum. the loop formed by the SQUID, and Φ0 = h/2e is the
The transmon corresponds to a qubit designed to force superconducting flux quantum [17].
the dynamics of the Josephson junction to keep ϕ small. Now, we can utilize standard trigonometric identities to
In this regime, the sin ϕ term can be expanded in its rewrite (8) as
Taylor series. The transmon is operated in a regime where    
ϕ1 − ϕ2 ϕ1 + ϕ2
HL = −2EJ cos cos . (10)
2 2
 5

superconducting island [26]. The basic circuit diagram of

this qubit is shown in Fig. 3(a). Although the circuit is
changed somewhat compared to a simple Josephson junction,
the resulting Hamiltonian still has a very similar form to (4).
In particular, the CPB Hamiltonian is
(a) (b) (c)
H = 4EC (n − ng )2 − EJ cos ϕ, (12)
Fig. 3: Circuit schematics for the evolution of a CPB to a transmon.
(a) CPB, (b) split CPB, and (c) transmon. A pure Josephson where ng is the offset charge induced by the voltage source
junction tunneling element is represented schematically as an “X”. and EC must be modified to account for the effect of Cg [24].
Often, to simplify the schematics the small junction capacitance CJ
is absorbed into the Josephson tunneling element symbol and is At this point, it is useful to consider the quantum description
represented as a box with an “X” through it, as seen in (b) and (c). of the CPB (for an introduction to quantum mechanical
principles, see [21]). Since we have a Hamiltonian description
of the system already expressed in terms of conjugate variables
Defining a new Josephson phase as ϕ = (ϕ1 + ϕ2 )/2 and in (12), finding a quantum description of the system is quite
using (9), we can simplify the above to be simple [21]. In particular, the two conjugate variables are
HL = −EJΦ cos ϕ, (11) elevated to be non-commuting quantum operators denoted as
n̂ and ϕ̂, which can be viewed as being synonymous with
where EJΦ = 2EJ cos(πΦ/Φ0 ). infinite-dimensional matrix operators. These operators must
From this, we see that the effective inductance of the SQUID always satisfy the commutator [ϕ̂, n̂] = ϕ̂n̂ − n̂ϕ̂ = i [22].
has the same form as that of a single Josephson junction. Combined with a complex-valued quantum state function,
The main change is that the effective Josephson energy EJΦ denoted as |ψi in Dirac notation, these quantum operators take
is now tunable due to an applied magnetic flux. Although on a statistical interpretation and share an uncertainty principle
this added control mechanism has many advantages, it also relationship [21]. In particular, the uncertainty principle for n̂
introduces a new way for a qubit with a SQUID to decohere and ϕ̂ gives that the standard deviations of the two operators
due to interactions with a “noisy environment”. As a result, must follow σn σϕ ≥ 1/2. As a result, measurements of
the loop size of the SQUID is often extremely small (typically observables associated with these quantum operators (e.g.,
O(10 µm) on each side of the loop) and the qubits are kept the number of Cooper pairs that have tunneled through the
inside a shielded enclosure to minimize the sensitivity to junction) cannot be measured simultaneously with arbitrary
environmental flux noise [10]. precision [21].
Now, in transitioning to a quantum description the classical
IV. D EVELOPMENT OF THE T RANSMON Q UBIT Hamiltonian for the CPB given in (12) becomes a Hamiltonian
One of the earliest qubits used to observe macroscopic operator given by
quantum behavior in circuit QED systems was the Cooper
Ĥ = 4EC (n̂ − ng )2 − EJ cos ϕ̂, (13)
pair box (CPB) [31], which can be viewed as a predecessor to
the transmon. Hence, to better understand the transmon, it is where it is noted that ng remains a classical variable that
useful to consider it in the context of how it evolved from the describes the offset charge induced by an applied DC voltage.
simpler CPB qubit. This evolution is shown in terms of circuit This Hamiltonian can be used in the quantum state equation
schematics in Fig. 3. We will review each of these different (a generalization of the Schrödinger equation) to determine
qubits in the coming sections. the time evolution of a quantum state [21]. In particular, the
quantum state equation is
A. Introduction to the Cooper Pair Box Ĥ|ψi = i~∂t |ψi. (14)
The traditional CPB is formed by a Josephson junction that
connects a superconducting “island” and “reservoir” [26]. For In the process of solving (14), it is often useful to identify the
the CPB, the island is not directly connected to other circuitry, stationary states of the Hamiltonian by converting (14) into a
while the reservoir can be in contact with external circuit time-independent eigenvalue problem. This is
components (if desired). Since the superconducting island is Ĥ|Ψi = E|Ψi, (15)
isolated from other circuitry, the CPB is very sensitive to
the number of Cooper pairs that have tunneled through the where E is the energy associated with stationary state (or
Josephson junction (down to a single Cooper pair). Due to eigenvector) |Ψi.
this sensitivity, the CPB is also called a charge qubit [26]. For a typical CPB, EJ /EC < 1. As a result, it becomes
Typically, it is advantageous to be able to control the useful to write the qubit Hamiltonian given in (13) in terms
operating point of the CPB system. For instance, this can help of charge states. These are eigenstates of n̂, and are often
with initializing the state of the CPB before conducting an denoted as |N i (in this notation, |N i can be viewed like
experiment. Generally, the operating point of the CPB is set by a column vector, with hN | being its conjugate transpose).
a voltage source capacitively coupled to the superconducting The eigenvalue associated with this eigenstate is N , which
island. This voltage can be tuned to induce a certain number is always a discrete number that counts how many Cooper
of “background” Cooper pairs that have tunneled onto the pairs have tunneled through the Josephson junction relative to
 6

the energy levels strongly depend on ng . Beginning with

ng having an integer value, it is seen that there is a very
large separation between the ground and excited states. This
large spacing makes it highly unlikely that the CPB can be
spontaneously excited, making this operating point useful for
quickly initializing the CPB to its ground state.
Although this operating point can establish a good ground
state, it is not useful for qubit operations because the first two
excited states have similar energies. This makes it difficult to
prevent the system from unintentionally transitioning into and
out of the second excited state once the first excited state has
Fig. 4: First three energy levels of the qubit Hamiltonian given in
been populated. Hence, a different operating point is needed
(13) for EJ /EC = 1. Energy levels are normalized by the to perform qubit operations.
transition energy between the first two states evaluated at Considering the energy level diagram of Fig. 4 again, it is
half-integer values of ng . seen that half-integer values of ng are ideal for performing
qubit operations. At these values, there is large separation
between the energy levels of the first two excited states.
the equilibrium state. In terms of charge states, the effective Further, it is seen that the energy levels exhibit a high degree
capacitance term of the CPB Hamiltonian becomes of anharmonicity here (i.e., they are not evenly spaced like a
X
4EC (n̂ − ng )2 = 4EC (N − ng )2 |N ihN |. (16) harmonic oscillator or linear resonator). As a result of these
N two properties, the transition between the ground and first ex-
cited state can be selectively driven with fast microwave pulses
The combination |N ihN | can be viewed as an outer product
(on the order of 10 ns [17], [32]) without requiring significant
between the states |N i and |N i. Hence, the operator |N ihN |
filtering of the pulse. This allows for qubit operations to be
can be viewed like a matrix in a more familiar linear algebra
performed very quickly, which is one factor that has made
notation. Since the charge states are all orthogonal, the sum
these devices attractive for building a quantum computer.
of operators |N ihN | can be viewed as “diagonalizing” this
The flexibility of operating a CPB can be increased further
term of the Hamiltonian. Now, in terms of charge states the
by replacing the single Josephson junction with a SQUID.
effective nonlinear inductance term of the CPB Hamiltonian
This configuration is known as a split CPB, and is shown
becomes [22]
schematically in Fig. 3(b). By applying a magnetic flux, the EJ
EJ X
of the split CPB can be tuned dynamically. Since the energy
−EJ cos ϕ̂ = |N ihN + 1| + |N + 1ihN | . (17)
2 difference between different states seen in Fig. 4 depends on
N
EJ , the SQUID can be used to tune the operating frequency
Due to the orthogonality of the charge states, the operator
of the split CPB in situ.
|N ihN +1| represents the coherent transfer of a single Cooper
A further benefit to operating at half-integer values of ng
pair from the island to the reservoir. Correspondingly, the
is that the two lowest energy levels are locally flat near this
operator |N + 1ihN | has a similar interpretation, but with the
operating point (i.e., the slope is approximately 0). As a result,
Cooper pair being transferred from the reservoir to the island.
the qubit transition frequency is less sensitive to noise in
Hence, this representation clearly shows the tunneling physics
the ng variable (often referred to as charge fluctuations or
involved in the effective inductance of the CPB.
charge noise). The improved coherence of the CPB at this
operating point has led to it being known as the “sweet spot”
B. Cooper Pair Box as a Qubit for CPBs [17]. Using these strategies, CPBs with coherence
To determine how a CPB can be used as a qubit, it is useful times on the nanosecond to microsecond scale were able to be
to consider its operating characteristics as a function of the achieved [33]. Although this was sufficient to replicate various
offset charge ng (for a discussion on the needed properties of quantum phenomena observed in quantum optical systems [5],
a qubit see “Essential Properties of a Qubit”). As we will the CPB was still too sensitive to charge noise to form a
see shortly, it is advantageous to set ng to either integer part of a scalable quantum information processing system. The
or half-integer values for typical qubit operations [26]. For transmon was introduced to address this issue.
this discussion, the primary benefits of operating at these ng
Essential Properties of a Qubit
points can be best understood by considering the energy level
diagram of a CPB as a function of ng . This diagram plots the For a physical system to be used as a qubit it must have
energy eigenvalues Ei of (15) for different eigenvectors (or two distinct quantum states that can be “isolated” from
stationary states) |Ψi i. The operating frequency of the CPB other states in the system. Further, it is necessary to be
qubit (i.e., what frequencies of microwave radiation can be able to selectively drive transitions between the two states
absorbed or emitted) is based on the energy difference between that form the qubit without accidentally exciting other
two adjacent energy levels. states of the physical system. For the qubits discussed in
The energy level diagram is shown for the first three this review, a qubit is formed by the two lowest energy
energy levels of the CPB in Fig. 4, where it is seen that
 7

levels of the system. The difference in energy levels

dictates what frequencies of microwave radiation can be
absorbed or emitted from the qubit. As a result, it is
necessary for the energy levels to be unevenly spaced for
the physical system to act as a qubit.
Oftentimes, this is expressed as needing the qubit to
be nonlinear. The nonlinearity is in reference to the
“restoring force” due to the potential energy term of the
Hamiltonian. Physical systems with a quadratic potential
lead to linear restoring forces, and are characterized by
having evenly spaced energy levels (these are referred
to as quantum harmonic oscillators). Linear transmission
lines and LC resonators have these characteristics, and Fig. 6: Images of a frequency tunable transmon qubit. (a) The
as a result cannot be used as qubits. In contrast to entire transmon consisting of a large capacitance (the “+” shape) in
this, the CPB and transmon have a cosine potential parallel with a SQUID to ground. A zoom in of the SQUID and a
energy term that leads to a nonlinear restoring force and single Josephson junction are in (b) and (c), respectively.
unevenly spaced energy levels (see Fig. 5). Hence, they
are candidates to be used as qubits.
It is also necessary to be able to reliably initialize 6), allowing the operating frequency of the transmon to be
the state of the qubit to a known value, often the tuned via an applied magnetic flux.
qubit’s ground state. Generally, this requires the qubit It is instructive to see how the first few energy levels of (13)
to be isolated from any environments that could provide change as a function of EJ /EC to understand the impact of
enough energy to the qubit to spontaneously raise it to adding the large shunting capacitance around the Josephson
its excited state. One prevalent source of this is thermal junction. This is shown for four different values of EJ /EC in
energy, and is one of the driving reasons for why circuit Fig. 7. These demonstrate the transition from a traditional CPB
QED systems must be operated at such low temperatures. in Fig. 7(a) to a transmon in Fig. 7(d). From Fig. 7, it is seen
that as EJ /EC is increased, the energy levels flatten out as a
function of ng while simultaneously becoming more harmonic
(closer to equally spaced like a quantum harmonic oscillator).
Fortunately, the sensitivity to charge noise reduces at an
exponential rate, while the anharmonicity reduces following a
weak power law [17]. This leads to a qubit that is insensitive
to charge noise for practical purposes, but is still able to
Fig. 5: Potential energies and corresponding energy level
spacing for (a) a quadratic potential (e.g, that of a linear LC provide sufficient anharmonicity to effectively perform qubit
resonator) and (b) a cosine potential (e.g., that of a nonlinear operations with short-duration microwave pulses. Typically,
resonator like the CPB or transmon). In (b), the corresponding the main operating frequencies of transmons range from a few
levels of a harmonic oscillator are included as dashed lines to GHz to 10 GHz, with anharmonicities of ~100 to 300 MHz.
highlight the anharmonicity of the cosine potential.
From the view of a mechanical equivalent, the transmon
case is analogous to the rigid pendulum with dynamics dom-
C. Transmon inated by a gravitational field (see “Mechanical Equivalent of
The transmon qubit is best viewed as a CPB shunted by a a Josephson Junction”) [17]. This forces the angular values
capacitor that is large relative to the stray capacitance of the of the pendulum to small values. For this operating point, the
Josephson junction [17]. This is shown schematically in Fig. dynamics correspond to a weakly anharmonic oscillator, which
3(c), where CB is the large shunting capacitance. Recalling leads to the energy level separation seen in Fig. 7(d). The
that EC is inversely proportional to capacitance, this results in flatness of the energy levels in Fig. 7(d) can be understood
the characteristic ratio EJ /EC transitioning from EJ /EC < 1 from the transmon Hamiltonian (13), where it is seen that ng
for a traditional CPB to EJ /EC  1 for a transmon. is multiplied by EC . Since EC is made small for a transmon,
Originally, the large shunting capacitance was made using ng can only have a small role in the dynamics. Due to this, the
interdigital capacitors [17]. Now, the shunting capacitance is voltage source seen in Fig. 3(c) is no longer a useful control
more commonly implemented as a large “cross” shape (this is mechanism, and so is omitted for practical designs.
shown in Fig. 6, and is sometimes also referred to as an “Xmon As a result of the transmon’s resilience to charge noise
qubit”) [8]. This newer shape is typically favored as it provides (and other manufacturing and experimental advances), the
better interconnectivity between different parts of a design. coherence times of modern transmons are able to achieve
Although the physical implementation of the transmon qubit values in the hundreds of microseconds range, representing
is different from more traditional CPB qubits, a Hamiltonian an orders of magnitude improvement over the best CPB qubits
with the same form as (13) can still be used to describe its [33], [34]. However, other sources of decoherence still persist,
behavior [17]. Similarly, a SQUID can be used to connect the making the identification and reduction of decoherence still an
different superconductors that make up the transmon (see Fig. important research topic [20].
 8

(a) (b) (a)

(b) (c)
Fig. 8: (a) Illustration of a typical single transmon device.
(c) (d) Microwave pulses are applied to the qubit drive line to modify the
state of the transmon. The flux bias line is used to dynamically tune
Fig. 7: First three energy levels of the qubit Hamiltonian given in the operating frequency of the transmon. The state of the transmon
(13) for values of EJ /EC ranging from the CPB regime in (a) to (e.g., if it is in its ground or excited state) can be monitored via
the transmon regime in (d). Energy levels are normalized by the microwave transmission measurements made between the two
transition energy between the first two states evaluated at readout ports. (b) Equivalent lumped element circuit model of the
half-integer values of ng . device in (a). (c) Transmon state-dependent transmission spectra
between the readout ports.

V. I NTERFACING T RANSMON Q UBITS WITH OTHER

C IRCUITRY The qubit drive line is used to modify the state of the
qubit by applying a microwave drive pulse with a center fre-
A completely isolated qubit cannot be controlled or mea- quency that matches the transmon’s operating frequency. If the
sured, and so is of little use. Further, to implement many kinds transmon starts in its ground state, an appropriately designed
of quantum information processing operations, multiple qubits microwave drive pulse can be used to raise the transmon to
that are spatially separated need to interact with each other to its excited state or to place it in some superposition of the
generate entanglement. Circuit QED systems address this by transmon’s ground and excited states [4]. Further microwave
coupling qubits to transmission line structures. Often, these drive pulses can be applied along the qubit drive line to
transmission lines will be resonators that can be used as a modify the transmon’s state as needed throughout the course
quantum “bus” to connect different qubits to each other or as of executing a quantum algorithm.
part of a measurement chain to read out the quantum states of Finally, it is necessary to be able to determine the state of
the qubits (e.g., see Fig. 1) [3]–[5]. the transmon after executing a quantum algorithm. The most
An example of the typical on-chip features needed to common way to do this is known as dispersive readout, with a
operate a single transmon and the corresponding approximate simple setup to achieve this shown in Fig. 8 [4]. This approach
circuit model are shown in Fig. 8. As is common in the leverages that the state of the transmon (e.g., if it is in its
circuit QED community, a single mode of the transmission ground or excited state) modifies the resonant frequencies of
line resonator is modeled in a lumped element approximation the readout resonator, as shown in Fig. 8(c). These changes
as an LC tank circuit in Fig. 8(b). [17]. More modes of the can be monitored via microwave spectroscopy in the form of
resonator often must be considered to provide more accurate transmission measurements made between the readout ports.
predictions of experimental results, and can be accounted for All of these effects (and many more) can be studied for
by including additional LC tank circuits [35], [36]. Regardless, circuit QED systems using a generalization of the famous
the lumped element approximation can make it difficult to Jaynes-Cummings Hamiltonian, which is one of the most
optimize the design of these systems. Hence, developing full- widely studied models in quantum optics and cavity QED [38].
wave numerical modeling methods that can rigorously analyze This is also the starting point for many applied circuit QED
these systems is an area of future research interest [37]. studies. To help transition between this work and the modern
The main features to operate the transmon shown in Fig. 8 literature, we now provide a brief introduction to how this
are the flux bias line, the qubit drive line, and the state readout Hamiltonian can be used for circuit QED systems.
features. The flux bias line is used to apply a magnetic flux
to the SQUID loop of the transmon to change its operating
A. Generalized Jaynes-Cummings Hamiltonian
frequency. This can help correct for manufacturing variability
and can also be a key capability in executing certain quantum To simplify the development, we will only focus on describ-
information processing algorithms [8]. ing the case of a single transmon qubit capacitively coupled to
 9

p
a single resonator. More qubits and resonators can be handled where Vrms = ~ωr /2Cr . To further simplify the analysis,
as simple extensions of the model discussed here. n̂ can be rewritten in terms of transmon eigenstates and a
A rigorous development of the Hamiltonian description of number of standard approximations can be applied to finally
this circuit is tedious, and so will be omitted for brevity (for arrive at an interaction Hamiltonian of
X
details, see [24, Appx. A]). Here, we will focus on an intuitive gj |j − 1ihj|↠+ |jihj − 1|â ,


(24)
development only. As is often possible for coupled systems, j
we can write the total Hamiltonian as a sum of uncoupled
(or “free”) Hamiltonians and an interaction Hamiltonian that where gj = 2eβVrms hj − 1|n̂|ji [17].
accounts for the coupling. Considering this, we will have Putting all of these results together, the complete system
Hamiltonian of (18) becomes
Ĥ = ĤT + ĤR + ĤI , (18) X
Ĥ = ~ωj |jihj| + ~ωr ↠â
where ĤT (ĤR ) denotes the free transmon (resonator) Hamil- j
tonian and ĤI is the interaction Hamiltonian. The free trans- X
gj |j − 1ihj|↠+ |jihj − 1|â . (25)


mon Hamiltonian has already been given in (13). However, +
j
to further simplify the analysis, the transmon Hamiltonian is
typically diagonalized in terms of its eigenstates [17]. Using This is a generalized form of the Jaynes-Cummings Hamilto-
these eigenstates, (13) can be rewritten as nian, which can be used to study many practical effects related
X to quantum information processing [3]–[5]. In (25), the terms
~ωj |jihj|, (19) multiplied by gj represent the coherent exchange of excitations
j
between the transmon and resonator. This “swapping” of
where ωj is the eigenvalue associated with eigenstate |ji and excitations is particularly prevalent when ωj and ωr are nearly
the operator |jihj| can be viewed as part of an eigenmode equal, and is usually referred to as vacuum Rabi oscillations.
decomposition of the Hermitian “matrix” ĤT . However, when ∆ = |ωj − ωr |  gj , the transmon and
The free resonator Hamiltonian is simple to write since it resonator are said to be in the dispersive regime of circuit
is the total energy contained in the LC tank circuit elements QED [5]. In this regime, the Hamiltonian of (25) can be
Cr and Lr . From basic circuit theory, this will be approximated as
1 Ĥ ≈ ~ ωr − χ|1ih1| + χ|0ih0| ↠â


Ĥr = [Lr Iˆr2 + Cr V̂r2 ], (20)
2 ~


+ ω1 + χ |0ih0| − |1ih1| , (26)
where Iˆr and V̂r are the current and voltage in the LC tank 2
circuit, respectively. Typically, it is advantageous to express where only the two lowest transmon states have been used for
the voltage and current in terms of ladder operators that clarity and χ = g12 /|ω1 − ωr | [5]. One important property of
diagonalize Ĥr [17]. In particular, ↠(â) is known as the (26) is that the resonator frequency depends on the state of the
creation (annihilation) operator, and when it operates on the transmon (this is seen in the first set of parentheses in (26)). In
quantum state of the resonator it increases (decreases) the particular, the resonator frequency shifts to ωr +χ or ωr −χ if
photon number by one [38]. Using the properties of the ladder the transmon is in its ground or excited state, respectively. For
operators, (20) can be rewritten as this reason, χ is often referred to as the dispersive shift. This
shift in the resonant frequency can be measured via microwave
Ĥr = ~ωr ↠â, (21)
spectroscopy of the readout resonator. This technique is known
where ωr is the resonant frequency of the transmission line as dispersive readout because there is no energy transfer
resonator and a constant term (known as the zero point energy) between the transmon and the resonator, and is one of the
has been removed since it does not affect the dynamics. most common ways to monitor the state of a transmon [5].
One way to approach determining ĤI is to recognize that
because it is a capacitive coupling it will be sensible to write VI. C ONCLUSIONS AND O UTLOOK
the interaction in terms of the voltages and charges. Now, for
many circuit QED systems the resonator voltage as seen from Circuit QED systems have emerged as one of the most
the transmon can be approximately viewed as coming from an promising candidates for quantum information processing on
ideal voltage source. Considering this, the interaction between the scale needed to achieve a quantum advantage in practical
the resonator and transmon can be given by applications. Although many different qubits have been used in
circuit QED systems, the transmon has become the workhorse
ĤI = 2eβ V̂r n̂, (22) qubit in superconducting circuit systems.
where n̂ is the charge operator of the transmon and β = In this work, we presented a review of the essential proper-
Cg /(Cg + Cq ) is a capacitive voltage divider that places the ties of the transmon qubit in a manner that is largely accessible
correct ratio of the resonator voltage on the transmon [17]. In to the classical electromagnetic engineering community who
terms of the resonator ladder operators, this becomes have a limited background in quantum mechanics. These
systems require a significant amount of classical engineering
ĤI = 2eβVrms (â + ↠)n̂, (23) to be successful, such as designing the classical control and
 10

readout systems for the qubits and developing compact elec- [18] M. Devoret, S. Girvin, and R. Schoelkopf, “Circuit-QED: How strong
trical components that can operate at the various cryogenic can the coupling between a Josephson junction atom and a transmission
line resonator be?” Annalen der Physik, vol. 16, no. 10-11, pp. 767–779,
stages of a dilution refrigerator, to name a few. There is 2007.
also a need for improved classical simulation tools to assist [19] A. F. Kockum, A. Miranowicz, S. De Liberato, S. Savasta, and
in the design process of these systems. We firmly believe F. Nori, “Ultrastrong coupling between light and matter,” Nature Reviews
Physics, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 19–40, 2019.
that members of the classical electromagnetic engineering [20] P. Krantz, M. Kjaergaard, F. Yan, T. P. Orlando, S. Gustavsson, and
community can play a vital role in the advancement of this W. D. Oliver, “A quantum engineer’s guide to superconducting qubits,”
new era of electromagnetic devices, and look forward to seeing Applied Physics Reviews, vol. 6, no. 2, p. 021318, 2019.
[21] W. C. Chew, D. Y. Na, P. Bermel, T. E. Roth, C. J. Ryu, and E. Kudeki,
this happen. “Quantum Maxwell’s equations made simple: Employing scalar and vec-
tor potential formulation,” IEEE Antennas and Propagation Magazine,
R EFERENCES vol. 63, no. 1, pp. 14–26, 2021.
[22] U. Vool and M. Devoret, “Introduction to quantum electromagnetic
[1] F. Arute, K. Arya, R. Babbush, D. Bacon, J. C. Bardin, R. Barends, circuits,” International Journal of Circuit Theory and Applications,
R. Biswas, S. Boixo, F. G. Brandao, D. A. Buell et al., “Quantum vol. 45, no. 7, pp. 897–934, 2017.
supremacy using a programmable superconducting processor,” Nature, [23] N. K. Langford, “Circuit QED – Lecture notes,” arXiv preprint
vol. 574, no. 7779, pp. 505–510, 2019. arXiv:1310.1897, 2013.
[2] H.-S. Zhong, H. Wang, Y.-H. Deng, M.-C. Chen, L.-C. Peng, Y.-H. Luo, [24] S. M. Girvin, “Circuit QED: Superconducting qubits coupled to mi-
J. Qin, D. Wu, X. Ding, Y. Hu et al., “Quantum computational advantage crowave photons,” in Quantum Machines: Measurement and Control
using photons,” Science, vol. 370, no. 6523, pp. 1460–1463, 2020. of Engineered Quantum Systems. Oxford University Press, 2014, pp.
[3] A. Blais, R.-S. Huang, A. Wallraff, S. M. Girvin, and R. J. Schoelkopf, 113–256.
“Cavity quantum electrodynamics for superconducting electrical circuits: [25] M. Tinkham, Introduction to Superconductivity. Dover Publications,
An architecture for quantum computation,” Physical Review A, vol. 69, Inc., 2004.
no. 6, p. 062320, 2004. [26] A. F. Kockum and F. Nori, “Quantum bits with Josephson junctions,” in
[4] A. Blais, J. Gambetta, A. Wallraff, D. I. Schuster, S. M. Girvin, M. H. Fundamentals and Frontiers of the Josephson Effect. Springer, 2019,
Devoret, and R. J. Schoelkopf, “Quantum-information processing with pp. 703–741.
circuit quantum electrodynamics,” Physical Review A, vol. 75, no. 3, p. [27] F. Tafuri, “Introductory notes on the Josephson effect: Main concepts
032329, 2007. and phenomenology,” in Fundamentals and Frontiers of the Josephson
[5] X. Gu, A. F. Kockum, A. Miranowicz, Y.-X. Liu, and F. Nori, “Mi- Effect. Springer, 2019, pp. 1–61.
crowave photonics with superconducting quantum circuits,” Physics [28] W. C. Chew, A. Y. Liu, C. Salazar-Lazaro, and W. E. I. Sha, “Quantum
Reports, vol. 718, pp. 1–102, 2017. electromagnetics: A new look–Part I,” IEEE Journal on Multiscale and
[6] R. Ma, B. Saxberg, C. Owens, N. Leung, Y. Lu, J. Simon, and D. I. Multiphysics Computational Techniques, vol. 1, pp. 73–84, 2016.
Schuster, “A dissipatively stabilized Mott insulator of photons,” Nature, [29] ——, “Quantum electromagnetics: A new look–Part II,” IEEE Journal
vol. 566, no. 7742, pp. 51–57, 2019. on Multiscale and Multiphysics Computational Techniques, vol. 1, pp.
[7] A. Kandala, A. Mezzacapo, K. Temme, M. Takita, M. Brink, J. M. 85–97, 2016.
Chow, and J. M. Gambetta, “Hardware-efficient variational quantum [30] H. Goldstein, C. Poole, and J. Safko, Classical Mechanics, 3rd ed.
eigensolver for small molecules and quantum magnets,” Nature, vol. Addison-Wesley.
549, no. 7671, pp. 242–246, 2017. [31] Y. Nakamura, Y. A. Pashkin, and J. S. Tsai, “Coherent control of
[8] R. Barends, J. Kelly, A. Megrant, A. Veitia, D. Sank, E. Jeffrey, T. C. macroscopic quantum states in a single-Cooper-pair box,” Nature, vol.
White, J. Mutus, A. G. Fowler, B. Campbell et al., “Superconducting 398, no. 6730, pp. 786–788, 1999.
quantum circuits at the surface code threshold for fault tolerance,” [32] F. Motzoi, J. M. Gambetta, P. Rebentrost, and F. K. Wilhelm, “Simple
Nature, vol. 508, no. 7497, pp. 500–503, 2014. pulses for elimination of leakage in weakly nonlinear qubits,” Physical
[9] A. A. Houck, D. I. Schuster, J. M. Gambetta, J. A. Schreier, B. R. Review Letters, vol. 103, no. 11, p. 110501, 2009.
Johnson, J. M. Chow, L. Frunzio, J. Majer, M. H. Devoret, S. M. Girvin [33] M. H. Devoret and R. J. Schoelkopf, “Superconducting circuits for
et al., “Generating single microwave photons in a circuit,” Nature, vol. quantum information: an outlook,” Science, vol. 339, no. 6124, pp.
449, no. 7160, pp. 328–331, 2007. 1169–1174, 2013.
[10] Y. Zhou, Z. Peng, Y. Horiuchi, O. Astafiev, and J. Tsai, “Tunable [34] A. P. M. Place, L. V. H. Rodgers, P. Mundada, B. M. Smitham, M. Fitz-
microwave single-photon source based on transmon qubit with high patrick, Z. Leng, A. Premkumar, J. Bryon, A. Vrajitoarea, S. Sussman
efficiency,” Physical Review Applied, vol. 13, no. 3, p. 034007, 2020. et al., “New material platform for superconducting transmon qubits with
[11] C. Lang, C. Eichler, L. Steffen, J. Fink, M. J. Woolley, A. Blais, coherence times exceeding 0.3 milliseconds,” Nature Communications,
and A. Wallraff, “Correlations, indistinguishability and entanglement vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 1–6, 2021.
in Hong–Ou–Mandel experiments at microwave frequencies,” Nature [35] A. A. Houck, J. A. Schreier, B. R. Johnson, J. M. Chow, J. Koch,
Physics, vol. 9, no. 6, pp. 345–348, 2013. J. M. Gambetta, D. I. Schuster, L. Frunzio, M. H. Devoret, S. M.
[12] M. Reagor, W. Pfaff, C. Axline, R. W. Heeres, N. Ofek, K. Sliwa, Girvin, and R. J. Schoelkopf, “Controlling the spontaneous emission of
E. Holland, C. Wang, J. Blumoff, K. Chou et al., “Quantum memory a superconducting transmon qubit,” Physical Review Letters, vol. 101,
with millisecond coherence in circuit QED,” Physical Review B, vol. 94, no. 8, p. 080502, 2008.
no. 1, p. 014506, 2016. [36] S. E. Nigg, H. Paik, B. Vlastakis, G. Kirchmair, S. Shankar, L. Frunzio,
[13] K. Sardashti, M. C. Dartiailh, J. Yuan, S. Hart, P. Gumann, and M. H. Devoret, R. J. Schoelkopf, and S. M. Girvin, “Black-box su-
J. Shabani, “Voltage-tunable superconducting resonators: a platform perconducting circuit quantization,” Physical Review Letters, vol. 108,
for random access quantum memory,” IEEE Transactions on Quantum no. 24, p. 240502, 2012.
Engineering, vol. 1, pp. 1–7, 2020. [37] T. E. Roth and W. C. Chew, “Circuit quantum electrodynamics: A new
[14] N. Leung, Y. Lu, S. Chakram, R. K. Naik, N. Earnest, R. Ma, K. Jacobs, look toward developing full-wave numerical models,” arXiv preprint
A. N. Cleland, and D. I. Schuster, “Deterministic bidirectional commu- arXiv:2104.06996, 2021.
nication and remote entanglement generation between superconducting [38] C. Gerry and P. Knight, Introductory Quantum Optics. Cambridge
qubits,” npj Quantum Information, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 1–5, 2019. University Press, 2005.
[15] D. Vion, A. Aassime, A. Cottet, P. Joyez, H. Pothier, C. Urbina,
D. Esteve, and M. H. Devoret, “Manipulating the quantum state of an
electrical circuit,” Science, vol. 296, no. 5569, pp. 886–889, 2002.
[16] V. E. Manucharyan, J. Koch, L. I. Glazman, and M. H. Devoret,
“Fluxonium: Single Cooper-pair circuit free of charge offsets,” Science,
vol. 326, no. 5949, pp. 113–116, 2009.
[17] J. Koch, M. Y. Terri, J. Gambetta, A. A. Houck, D. Schuster, J. Majer,
A. Blais, M. H. Devoret, S. M. Girvin, and R. J. Schoelkopf, “Charge-
insensitive qubit design derived from the Cooper pair box,” Physical
Review A, vol. 76, no. 4, p. 042319, 2007.