Josephson effect×Nanotechnology

The Frontier Brief for this collision is still being written. The evidence below already reflects the current model run.

Pre-company space. No named players have staked this collision yet — an emerging pairing where the field, not a firm, is the story so far.

59 researchers publish on both sides of this collision without the fields themselves having met. Every name below is counted from papers in the corpus — not inferred.

• Kenji WatanabeRWTH Aachen University
  3/5
• Takashi TaniguchiUniversity of the Basque Country
  2/5
• S. ParkinHarvard University
  2/2
• C. J. PalmstrømCity College of New York
  2/1
• David A. MullerResearch Center for Applied Science, Academia Sinica
  1/2
• Jürgen LisenfeldThe University of Queensland
  2/1
• Mihir PendharkarMicrosoft (United States)
  2/1
• Daniel Pérez LozanoKU Leuven
  2/1
• Erik P. A. M. BakkersUniversité Fédérale de Toulouse Midi-Pyrénées
  1/1
• Michael S. FuhrerARC Centre of Excellence in Future Low-Energy Electronics Technologies
  1/1

• Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyUS
  13/378
• Harvard UniversityUS
  11/352
• Chinese Academy of SciencesCN
  7/524
• Stanford UniversityUS
  9/360
• Centre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueFR
  16/202
• ETH ZurichCH
  14/180

• Path toward manufacturable superconducting qubits with relaxation times exceeding 0.1 ms2022 · 46 citations · DOI ↗
  3
• Two-Dimensional Material Tunnel Barrier for Josephson Junctions and Superconducting Qubits2019 · 41 citations · DOI ↗
  3
• Cryogenic Qubit Integration for Quantum Computing2018 · 46 citations · DOI ↗
  2
• Overlap junctions for high coherence superconducting qubits2017 · 49 citations · DOI ↗
  1

Counted from the corpus. Institution counts use best-effort affiliation (every author on a paper is paired with every institution on it), so read them as presence, not headcount.