arxiv: v1 [cond-mat.mes-hall] 22 May 2008

Transcription

1 Analog information processing at the quantum limit with a Josephson ring modulator N. Bergeal 1, R. Vijay 1,2, V. E. Manucharyan 1, I. Siddiqi 2, R. J. Schoelkopf 1, S. M. Girvin 1, M. H. Devoret 1 1 Department of Physics and Applied Physics, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, USA. and 2 Department of Physics, University of California, Berkeley CA , USA. (Dated: May 22, 2008) arxiv: v1 [cond-mat.mes-hall] 22 May 2008 Amplifiers are crucial in every experiment carrying out a very sensitive measurement. However, they always degrade the information by adding noise. Quantum mechanics puts a limit on how small this degradation can be. Theoretically, the minimum noise energy added by a phase preserving amplifier to the signal it processes amounts at least to half a photon at the signal frequency ( 1 hω). In 2 this article, we show that we can build a practical microwave device that fulfills the minimal requirements to reach the quantum limit. This is of importance for the readout of solid state qubits, and more generally, for the measurement of very weak signals in various areas of science. We also discuss how this device can be the basic buiding block for a variety of practical applications such as amplification, noiseless frequency conversion, dynamic cooling and production of entangled signal pairs. The concept of quantum limited amplification was introduced in the 1950 s with the development of the first maser amplifiers [1]. Later, following the work of Haus and Mullen[2], Caves[3] reviewed the subject and introduced a general formalism which includes all linear amplifiers (i. e. an amplifier whose output signal is linearly related to its input signal). His analysis led to a fundamental theorem : a phase preserving amplifier has to add a minimum amount of noise to the signal it processes. The limit is commonly expressed in terms of the minimal value of the noise temperature of the amplifier where ω is the frequency of the signal. T n 1 hω (1) 2 k B On the other hand, a phase sensitive amplifier in which one quadrature is amplified while the other is deamplified, is submitted to only a lower limit on the product of the noise added to the two quadratures and can squeeze the quantum noise on one quadrature at the expense of extra noise in the other one. Although such amplifiers can look rather appealing because of their ability to operate potentially below the quantum limit (1), they are awkward to use in a wide number of applications where both the phase and amplitude of the signal carry the information. The non-degenerate parametric amplifier, i. e. an amplifier in which energy from a modulation source (the pump) is continuously transfered to a resonant system[4, 5] has repeatedly been suggested to be a good candidate as a phase preserving amplifier reaching the quantum limit[7, 8]. It operates with two distinct modes, conventionally called the signal at frequency ω s and the idler at frequency ω i which are coupled in a non-linear medium via a pump at frequency Ω. The device can operate as an amplifier when Ω = ω s + ω i or as a frequency converter when Ω = ω s ω i [4, 5]. Unlike SQUIDs, which are powered by a DC current bias and operate with incoherent Josephson radiations [6], parametric amplifiers involve a minimal number of modes in frequency domain. However, experimental realizations in the microwave range have so far

2 2 mainly focused on degenerate amplifiers (ω s = ω i ) which operate as phase sensitive amplifiers [9, 10, 11] and little attention has been devoted to phase preserving amplifiers. The difficulty of building a practical device matching the theoretical proposals as well as the lack of applications requiring quantum limited performances contributed to put this field on hold. However, recent progress in quantum information processing using microwave interrogation of solid states qubits [12, 13, 14, 15] gave rise to a growing need for low-noise amplifiers which are sensitive enough to measure the extremely weak signals involved in these devices and renewed the interest in parametric amplifiers [16, 17]. Minimal scattering matrix for quantum information processing Following a route similar but not identical to that pioneered by Caves, we introduced the generalized scattering matrix S of a linear microwave device which relates input and output modes at its different ports. A out = SA in Here we have introduced the mode amplitude input and output vectors A in = a in 1 a in 1. a in n a in n ; A out = The a n are normalized mode amplitudes expressed in square root of photon number per unit time. Although they are at first treated as classical scalar fields, they can, in a later quantum mechanical treatment, be formally replaced by annihilation (a n â n ) and creation (a n â n) operators. Both a n and a n have to be present in the input and output vectors because of possible phase conjugating processes coupling an a n to an a n. In the following, we consider a device with only two ports. Its most general matrix has only 8 independent complex coefficients. r 1 u 1 t 1 s 1 u S = 1 r1 s 1 t 1 t 2 s 2 r 2 u 2 s 2 t 2 u 2 r2 Our requirement of information processing at the quantum limit implies that the scattering matrix must describe a canonical transformation that preserves the commutation relations of the bosonic fields. Mathematically, this is translated by the property of symplecticity of the S matrix [18, 19] a out 1 a out 1. a out n a out n T SJS = J

3 3 where J = In order to perform phase preserving amplification, we need to impose that the reflection at each port separately preserves the phase of the signal (i.e. a phase shift of the incoming wave results in an identical phase shift of the outgoing wave). That implies that u 1 = u 1 = u 2 = u 2 = 0. Finally, without loss of generality we can impose the reflection coefficients to be identical at each port (r 1 = r 2 = r e iα ). It follows that S has the minimal form r e iα 0 t s 0 r e S = iα s t te 2iα s r e iα 0 s t e 2iα 0 r e iα where the coefficients are linked by the relation r 2 + t 2 s 2 = 1. Note that this matrix does not a priori conserve the number of photons since r 2 + t 2 + s 2 1 for s 0. We now analyze two particular situations. The case s = 0 corresponds to a conversion operation where an incoming mode at one port is partially reflected and partially converted into the second mode. This operation is analogous to the one performed by a beam splitter but with the peculiarity that the frequency of the transmitted signal is converted when modes 1 and 2 have different frequencies ω 1 and ω 2. In addition to being information conserving, the device also conserves the total number of incoming photons ( r 2 + t 2 = 1), whereas the energy is conserved only if ω 1 = ω 2. The case t = 0 corresponds to an optimal amplification operation: r and s can be written as r = G and s = G 2 1 where G can take any positive value between 1 and infinity. Then the device behaves at each port as a reflective phase preserving amplifier with amplitude gain G. Since the coefficient s couples conjugated modes a and a, it behaves between different ports as a phase conjugating converter with amplitude gain G 2 1 [7]. Note that the general form of the matrix (r 0, t 0 and s 0) allows the coexistence of the two types of operation. Let us now analyze the noise properties in these two cases. At zero temperature, the noise power emitted by each port in units of photon number per mode is N out = 1 2 ( r 2 + t 2 + s 2 ) = 1 2 (2( r 2 + t 2 ) 1) (2) In the case of amplification with large gain ( t = 0 and r 1), the noise referred back to the input is N eff in = N out/ r 2 ( N out / s 2 ) = r 2 1 (3) This is an illustration of Caves theorem [3]; at T=0 both ports are fed with half a photon of noise arising from vacuum fluctuations. Since the input vacuum noise is half a photon, the added noise in the amplification process is

4 4 only half a photon. In the pure converter case ( s = r = 0, t = 1), the noise referred back to input is N eff in = N out/ t 2 = 2 t t 2 = 1 2 (4) In this case, the photon number gain is unity and no noise is added, despite the fact that it is possible to have power gain when the frequency is up-converted. We would now like to show that we can actually build a device well described by this minimal scattering matrix using a ring of Josephson junctions coupled to two harmonic oscillators. Although our approach is valid for a broad range of frequencies, we will focus on microwave frequencies (typically from 300MHz to 40 GHz) which are of practical importance, for instance, in the field of quantum circuits such as solid state qubits but also in various areas of science (Photon detection, Superconducting Flux Quantum electronics, NMR, detection of gravitational radiation...). The Josephson ring modulator Even at zero temperature, internal dissipation inevitably adds noise to the output signals. Thus, it is important to build a completely dissipation-less circuit employing only dispersive elements. The amplifier that we describe here is based on a particularly interesting novel non-linear device, which we call the Josephson ring modulator, by analogy with the ring modulator employing Schottky diodes. The device consists of four nominally identical Josephson junctions forming a ring threaded by a magnetic flux Φ. When operated with a bias current lower than their critical current I c, Josephson junctions behave as pure non-linear inductors with inductance L J = 2πΦ0 I c cos δ gauge invariant phase of the junction and Φ 0 = h 2e where δ is the is the flux quantum. They are the only known non-linear and non-dissipative circuit elements working at microwave frequencies. The ring has three orthogonal electrical modes coupled to the junctions : two differential ones, X and Y, and a common one, Z (Fig 1a). They provide the minimum number of modes for 3-waves mixing. We introduce the node flux Φ i=1,..,4 defined by V i=1,..,4 = dφ i=1,..,4 dt where V i=1,..,4 are the potentials at nodes 1, 2, 3 and 4. Each of the three modes X, Y, Z can be excited by the corresponding generalized flux Φ X, Φ Y and Φ Z Φ X = Φ 1 Φ 2 ; Φ Y = Φ 4 Φ 3 ; Φ Z = Φ 1 + Φ 2 Φ 3 Φ 4 In the case of large area junctions, the charging energy due the intrinsic capacitance of the junctions can be neglected. Hence, the total energy of the ring E ring is only given by the sum of the Josephson energy E J cos θ of each junction. By introducing the flux Φ X, Φ Y E ring = 4E J [cos πφ X Φ 0 cos πφ Y Φ 0 and Φ Z we obtain cos πφ Z Φ 0 cos πφ + sin πφ X sin πφ Y 2Φ 0 Φ 0 Φ 0 sin πφ Z Φ 0 sin πφ 2Φ 0 ] (5)

5 5 where E J = IcΦ0 2π. In figure 1b we plot the energy of local equilibrium states of the Josephson ring modulator as a function of the magnetic flux Φ when no external currents are applied to the ring. There are 4 stable states satisfying the quantization of the flux through the loop. Although each state is 4Φ 0 periodic as a function of the flux, the envelope FIG. 1: a) Josephson ring modulator. The ring employs four nominally identical Josephson junctions (a, b, c and d) and has four orthogonal electrical modes. The two differentials modes X,Y and the common mode Z are coupled to the junctions whereas the 4th mode W remains uncoupled. b) Energy states of the ring modulator. There are 4 stable states satisfying the relation δ a + δ b + δ c + δ d = n 2πΦ Φ 0 where δ i is the gauge invariant phase of the junction i. Each state is 4Φ 0 periodic as a function of the flux Φ through the loop but the envelope (blue line) of the lowest energy remains Φ 0 periodic. At point a, the device can produce a pure non-linear coupling term Φ XΦ Y Φ Z whose contamination is only of the type Φ 2 X + Φ 2 Y + Φ 2 Z. Point a actually corresponds to two degenerate states separated by an energy E G. At point b, there is no contamination and the non-linearity is of the purest form. Although this would be a more favorable situation, it has a serious drawback since one would need to stabilize the device in an excited state.

6 6 of the lowest energy state remains Φ 0 periodic as required by gauge invariance. Let us now consider the degenerate ground state at Φ = Φ 0 /2 labeled a in figure 1b. For mode intensities Φ X, Φ Y and Φ Z much smaller than the flux quantum, we can neglect terms of order higher than three and relation (5) reduces to E ring = λφ X Φ Y Φ Z + µ[φ 2 X + Φ 2 Y + 4Φ 2 Z] (6) with λ = 2 2π 3 E J Φ 3 0 and µ = 2π 2 E J. The energy contains a pure non-linear coupling term Φ Φ 2 X Φ Y Φ Z whose 0 and therefore only renormalizes the mode frequencies. This is a contamination is only of the type Φ 2 X + Φ2 Y + Φ2 Z powerful result since it shows that the Josephson ring modulator can perform the operation of mixing 3 orthogonal field modes while producing a minimal number of spurious terms. By introducing a Wheatstone bridge type of symmetry, the ring allows to eliminate most of the contaminating terms, in particular those of the form Φ 2 X Φ Z, Φ 2 Y Φ Z, Φ 2 X Φ Y, Φ 2 Y Φ X which introduce other processes than the desired optimal 3-waves mixing. Note that although Φ = Φ 0 /2 is the optimal working point, it is not a stringent condition since the value of the flux Φ only modifies the coefficients λ and µ in front of the coupling and spurious terms. In the following, the differential modes X and Y will be used to carry the signal and the idler (in a completely symmetric way) and the Z mode will be used as the pump. The Josephson Parametric Converter We now feed the X and Y modes of the Josephson ring modulator through two superconducting resonators with FIG. 2: a) Lumped element schematic of the JPC. The device employs a ring modulator and two parallel LC resonators to excite the two differential modes X and Y. The common mode Z is driven by a current source I p. Both resonators are coupled to external drives. b) Scattering representation of the JPC in the case of amplification operation. Here the white arrows denote the conjugation operation since the non diagonal terms of the scattering matrix couples a to a. c) Scattering representation of the JPC in the case of the conversion operation.

7 7 relatively high quality factors. A lumped element representation of the circuit that we have named the Josephson Parametric Converter (JPC) is shown in figure 2a. The device contains only purely dispersive elements: LC superconducting resonators and Josephson junctions. Since it has no internal dissipation, all the noises appearing at the output ports originate from the input ports. All dissipation occurs via the connection of the circuit to the external circuits connected at its two ports. When resonators are submitted to weak external drives U 1 and U 2, the JPC is described by the following Hamiltonian [20, 21] H = Φ2 X 2L 1 + Q2 X 2C 1 + Φ2 Y 2L 2 + Q2 Y 2C 2 + λφ X Φ Y Φ Z + µ[φ 2 X + Φ 2 Y + Φ 2 Z] Φ X U 1 R 1 cos(ω 1 t + φ 1 ) Φ Y U 2 R 2 cos(ω 2 t + φ 2 ) + H damp (7) where we have introduced the charges Q X and Q Y conjugated to the two mode fluxes Φ X and Φ Y. For simplicity the damping terms H damp arising from the coupling to the external source resistors are not expressed in the Hamiltonian[22]. The pump mode is assumed to be so stiffly driven that Φ Z can be regarded as a classical field which remains unaffected by its coupling to the other modes. We choose to drive the pump with two tones at frequencies Ω σ = ω 1 + ω 2 and Ω δ = ω 1 ω 2 (we assume ω 1 > ω 2 ) and corresponding current amplitude I p σ and I p δ. Using Hamilton equations, we can derive the equations of motion Φ X + κ a ΦX + ωaφ 2 X + 2Φ Y [ χ σ cos(ω σ t + ϕ σ ) + χ δ cos(ω δ t + ϕ δ )] = 2ɛ 1 cos(ω 1 t + φ 1 ) C 1 C 1 (8) Φ Y + κ b ΦY + ωb 2 Φ Y + 2Φ X [ χ σ cos(ω σ t + ϕ σ ) + χ δ cos(ω δ t + ϕ δ )] = 2ɛ 2 cos(ω 2 t + φ 2 ) C 2 C 2 (9) where χ σ = πip σ 2Φ 0 and χ δ = πip δ 1 2Φ 0. The coefficients κ a(b) = R 1(2) C 1(2) are the usual damping factors in RLC circuits, ω a(b) = 2µ 1 C 1(2) + L 1(2) C 1(2) are the resonance frequencies of resonators renormalized by the quadratic spurious terms in (6) and ɛ 1(2) = U 1(2) κ a(b). From a mechanical point of view, the circuit consists of two coupled harmonic oscillators whose mutual coupling is parametrically driven. Following the usual treatment of a parametric amplifier, we impose the resonant tuning ω 1 = ω a and ω 2 = ω b and look for solutions of the form Φ X = xe iω1t + c.c. and Φ Y = ye iω1t + c.c.. We obtain where χ δ = χ δ e iϕ δ, χ σ = χ σ e iϕσ and ɛ 1 = ɛ 1 e iφ1, ɛ 2 = ɛ 2 e iφ2. From the point of view of microwave circuits, rather than Φ X x = iκ bω 2 ɛ 1 χ δ C 1 ɛ 2 + χσ C 1 ɛ 2 (10) κ a κ b ω 1 ω 2 χ2 δ C 1C 2 + χ2 σ C 1C 2 y = iκ aω 1 ɛ 2 χ δ C 2 ɛ 1 + χ σ C 2 ɛ 1 (11) κ a κ b ω 1 ω 2 χ2 δ C 1C 2 + χ2 σ C 1C 2 and Φ Y, it is more convenient to introduce the amplitudes of the incoming and outgoing modes a in and a out at ports 1 and 2. This can be done using the following relations a in 1 = 1 2 hω C1 ɛ 1 ; 1 κ a a in 2 = 1 2 hω 2 C2 κ b ɛ 2 ; a in 1 + a out 1 = 1 hω1 C1 κ a ẋ; a in 2 + aout 2 = 1 hω2 C2 κ b ẏ (12)

8 8 We find the scattering matrix of the JPC to be r 0 t s 0 r s S JP C = t t s r 0 s t 0 r where the coefficients are given by r = 1+ ρ δ 2 ρ σ 2 1 ρ δ 2 + ρ σ 2, t 1 = t 2 = t = we have introduced ρ δ = χ δ C1C 2κ aκ b ω 1ω 2 and ρ σ = 2iρ δ 1 ρ δ 2 + ρ σ 2 and s = 2iρ σ 1 ρ δ 2 + ρ σ 2 and where χ σ C1C 2κ aκ b ω 1ω 2. This establishes that the JPC has the very same scattering matrix as the minimal one derived in the first section since the coefficients satisfy the symplectic relations r 2 + t 2 s 2 = 1. It implies that the device can perform information processing at the quantum limit. This is the consequence of (i) the dispersive nature of the operation of the device and (ii) the number of modes having been kept minimal. The case ρ δ = 0 corresponds to the amplification operation (Fig 2b). The diagonal term r can be seen as a photon cis-gain characteristic of 1-port reflection amplifier operation. The device behaves as an ideal negative resistance : the incoming wave at either port is reflected with a power gain r 2 and its phase is preserved. A circulator needs to be used to separate the outgoing wave from the incoming one. The non-diagonal term s can be seen as a photon trans-gain characteristic of the phase conjugating conversion operation. This operation can be used to mix down a signal from high frequency to low frequency. The remarkable feature here is the presence of photon number gain. SIS mixers operating from the quasiparticle branch of a tunnel junction are so far the only known practical examples of mixers with gain, and they can operate quite close to the quantum limit [23]. The JPC would be another example of this function and would use Josephson, rather than quasiparticle tunneling. Amplification is obtained when the pump current is set such that ρ σ 1. The port which is not driven is the idler port whose presence cannot be avoided when r 1. At zero temperature, when it is filled with equilibrium quantum fluctuations, the equivalent of half a photon of noise at the mode frequency is added to the input signal before amplification, again shedding light on Caves theorem. The case ρ σ = 0 correspond to the conversion mode (Fig 2c). Pure frequency conversion with unity gain can be obtained when ρ δ =1. Although both modes of operation make frequency conversion possible, there are some fundamental differences between the two processes. The pure converter case allows to convert frequency with no added noise and without any reflection. On the other hand, the phase conjugating conversion of the amplification mode has the advantage of enabling photon gain. Detuning the signal frequencies from the resonance frequencies of the resonators complicates the expression for the coefficients r, s and t but, in both cases, the matrices S JP C (ρ δ = 0) and S JP C (ρ σ = 0) conserve the minimal form derived in section one. However, in the general case (r 0 s 0 and t 0) the matrix does not retain the phase preserving property.

9 9 FIG. 3: Example of the JPC operation for ωa =10 GHz and ω b =1 GHz. a) Gain of the JPC. The figure displays the gain of the 2π 2π device (color scale) in the amplification mode as a function of the input frequency ω 1 for different values of ρ σ (from 0.6 to 0.99). The computation is done by introducing relations (12) into expressions (10) and (11) and keeping the general expression without the tuning ω 1 = ω a and ω 2 = ω b. In this example, the quality factors are set to Q a = 50 and Q b = 5. b) Bandwidth of the JPC. The color plot displays the -3dB signal bandwidth BW (color scale) of the device as a function of maximum gain G 0 = ( 1+ ρ σ 2 1 ρ σ 2 ) 2 and the quality factor Q = Q a = 10Q b. Practical issues : gain, bandwidth, dynamic range and instability. Although we mainly focus here on a theoretical proposal, we now analyze some practical issues and show that we can build a practical device, useful for many different applications. The question of gain is central; in order to be useful, an amplifier must have a minimum gain so that its amplified noise is larger than the noise of the following amplifier in the measurement chain. For a quantum limited amplifier working at GHz frequencies and assuming the

10 best state of the art commercial device as a following amplifier (with a noise temperature of a few K), this leads to a requirement of at least 20 db of power gain. According to what we have seen previously, the gain of the JPC should in principle reach any arbitrarily large value when ρ σ is sufficiently close to 1. In fact, a limitation occurs if the pump current feeding the junctions approaches their critical current. We can rewrite the expression of ρ σ by introducing the characteristic frequency ω eff = 2πI p C1Cσ 2Φ 0 10 ρ σ = ω2 eff Qa Q b 4ω 1 ω 2 where Q a = ω a /κ a and Q b = ω b /κ b are the quality factors of the resonators. If the pump current I p σ reaches the critical current I c of the junctions, ω eff can be understood as the plasma frequency of the junctions renormalized by the capacitance of the resonators. Therefore, by having resonators with quality factors larger than one and operating at frequencies well below this plasma frequency, it is possible to satisfy the condition ρ σ 1 and therefore reach gain in excess of 20 db. The point ρ σ = 1 corresponds to the onset of spontaneous self-oscillations of the system. Therefore, the JPC should be operated at a distance from this critical point safe in regards to fluctuations in pump drive power. But here, the situation is better controlled than in previous studies where optimization of gain would conflict with an increase of noise coming from the proximity with a poorly identified instability [24, 25, 26]. Because it is built with resonators, the bandwidth of the JPC is intrinsically limited by the bandwidths of its resonators. As a concrete example, in the following, we consider the case of a device having resonance frequencies ω a 2π =10 GHz and ω b 2π =1 GHz. Figure 3a shows the typical behavior of the gain as a function of input frequency ω 1 for different values of ρ σ. At very low gain, the signal bandwidth of the JPC is limited by the bandwidths of the resonators. When the gain increases, the signal bandwidth decreases dramatically and becomes very narrow at high gain. For a 35 db gain, it is reduced to only 1.8% of the bandwidth resonators. In figure 3b we computed the bandwidth of the JPC as a function of maximum gain G 0 = ( 1+ ρδ 2 1 ρ δ 2 ) 2 and quality factor Q. The device can operate as a 10 GHz 1-port amplifier with a bandwidth larger than 10 MHz and a gain larger than 20 db if the quality factor Q = Q a = 10Q b is smaller than 100. This would satisfy the requirements of superconducting qubits readout for instance. At this point, we would like to stress that the pump frequency Ω σ is an additional tuning parameter, which allows to displace the center of the signal bandwidth within the larger tuning bandwidth of the resonators. This principle is illustrated in figure 4 for different values of the pump detuning = Ωσ (ωa+ω b) 2π. By and large, the operation of the JPC will always require a compromise between the maximum value of the gain and the bandwith. If both large gain and large bandwidth are needed, it would be possible to cascade several low gain devices in series. Another important characteristic of an amplifier is its dynamic range, i. e., for a given gain, the maximum input power that the device can amplify before it starts to saturate. In the case of the JPC, when the power involved in the amplification process becomes too large, our small amplitude approximation is no longer valid and higher non-linear terms in (6) start to play a role. That will lead to a gradual detuning of the system such as a modification of the

11 resonance frequencies and of the gain as a function of input power. Therefore, within our simple model, it is not possible to predict a specific value for the dynamic range and future experiments will have to clarify this point. 11 Gain (db) =-150 MHz =-100 MHz = -50 MHz = 0 MHz = 50 MHz =100 MHz =150 MHz ω 1 /2π (GHz) FIG. 4: Effect of the pump detuning. The figure displays the gain as a function of the input frequency ω 1 for ρ σ = 0.92 and for different values of the pump detuning = Ωσ (ωa+ω b) 2π. In this study, we have assumed the four junctions to have the same critical current I c. A qualitative study shows that the operation should be only weakly sensitive to non-ideality. junctions would introduce contamination terms in the energy, of the form Φ k X Φl Y Φm Z A distribution in the critical currents of the with k + l + m 3 having a weight of (I a c I b c + I c c I d c ) or (I a c + I b c I c c I d c ). There are not strong constraints on the value of critical current and we do not need particularly small junctions to reach the quantum limit. According to the state of the art, large area junctions (I c µa) in Nb or Al can be made with a precision better than 1%, leading to a correction of second order in the energy and therefore to a negligible effect on the operation of the device, provided the initial assumption remains satisfied. Production of entangled signal pairs and dynamic cooling The gain of the JPC is high enough to potentially raise the level of quantum fluctuations much higher than the level of the noise of the second amplifier in the chain. An interesting experiment consists in turning on the pump without feeding any signals at the input ports of the JPC. Quantum-mechanically, the pump can still produce output signals, which can be seen as arising from the amplification of zero-point motion fluctuations. Moreover, since the scattering matrix conserves the volume of the phase space, the amplified noise appearing at the two ports must be entirely correlated. The function which is performed is two mode squeezing[27]. As the output signals can have many real microwave photons, such a device could be used for analog quantum encryption[28]. Another interesting feature of the pure frequency converter mode of operation is that, unlike the amplifier mode, it has no added noise at the output. The JPC device operating in this case with a unity photon number trans-gain can swap the photons at the two ports and be used as a refrigerator. Suppose that the frequency at port 2 is much

12 12 smaller than the frequency at port 1, which sees an environment cold in the sense hω 1 k B T 1. Initially port 2 is seeing an environment which is hot in the sense hω 2 k B T 2. When the JPC is operated, the photons at port 2 are shuttled to port 1 where they are evacuated, while zero-point photons from port 1 go in the other direction to replace the photons at port 2 imposing vanishing temperature. The cooling rate being q = k B T 2 κ b, the refrigeration power is only of the order of 1pW at 4K and for a bandwidth of 1GHz, but it can be very useful for a high-q resonator isolated from the thermal bath. Conclusion The Josephson Parametric Converter would fill a niche which was up to now unavailable in the landscape of microwave processing devices, that of 3-waves mixing of non-degenerate parametric amplifier operating at the quantum limit. Moreover, we would like to stress that the present level of control in the dynamics of tunnel junctions in resonant circuits, as demonstrated by recent several successful operations [12, 13, 14, 29, 30], ensures that its realization is entirely within reach. This development would bring the subject of analog rf quantum signal processing (should we nickname it quantum radioelectricity?) to a qualitatively new level. This work was supported by NSA through ARO Grant No. W911NF , the Keck foundation, and the NSF through Grant No. DMR M. H. D. acknowledges partial support from College de France. [1] Shimoda, K., Takahasi, H. and C. H. Townes, C. H. Fluctuations in Amplification of Quanta with Application to Maser Amplifiers. J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 12, 686 (1957). [2] Haus, H. A. and Mullen, J. A. Quantum Noise in Linear Amplifiers. Phys. Rev. 128, 2407 (1962). [3] Caves, C. M. Quantum limits on noise in linear amplifiers. Phys. Rev. D 26, 1817 (1982). [4] Tien, P. K. Parametric Amplification and Frequency Mixing in Propagating Circuits. J. Appl. Phys. 29, 1347 (1958). [5] Louisell, W. H. Coupled mode and parametric electronics. John Wiley, New York (1960). [6] André, M-O., Mück, M., Clarke, J., Gail, J., Heiden,C. Radio-frequency amplifier with tenth-kelvin noise temperature based on a microstrip direct current superconducting quantum interference device. Appl. Phys. Lett. 75, 698 (1999). [7] Louisell, W. H., Yariv, A. and Siegman, A. E. Quantum Fluctuations and Noise in Parametric Processes. I. Phys. Rev. 124, 1646 (1961). [8] Gordon, J. P., Louisell, W. H. and Walker, L. R. Quantum Fluctuations and Noise in Parametric Processes. II. Phys. Rev. 129, 481 (1963). [9] Yurke, B. et al. Observation of parametric amplification and deamplification in a Josephson parametric amplifier. Phys. Rev. A 39, 2519 (1989). [10] Yurke, B. Observation of 4.2-K equilibrium-noise squeezing via a Josephson-parametric amplifier. Phys. Rev. Lett. 60, 764 (1988). [11] Movshovich, R. et al. Observation of zero-point noise squeezing via a Josephson-parametric amplifier. Phys. Rev. Lett. 65, 1419 (1990).

13 13 [12] Wallraff, A. et al. Strong coupling of a single photon to a superconducting qubit using circuit quantum electrodynamics Nature 431, 162 (2004). [13] Lupascu, A., Saito, S., Picot, T., de Groot, P. C., Harmans, C. J. P. M., Mooij, J. E. Quantum non-demolition measurement of a superconducting two-level system. Nature Physics 3, 119 (2007). [14] Mika A. Sillanpää, M. A., Park, J. I., Simmonds, R. W. Coherent quantum state storage and transfer between two phase qubits via a resonant cavity. Nature 449, 438 (2007). [15] Majer, J. et al. Coupling superconducting qubits via a cavity bus. Nature, 449, 443 (2007). [16] Castellanos-Beltrana, M. A. and Lehnert, K. W. Widely tunable parametric amplifier based on a superconducting quantum interference device array resonator. Appl. Phys. Rev 91, (2007). [17] Tholeń, E. A. Nonlinearities and parametric amplification in superconducting coplanar waveguide resonators. Appl. Phys. Lett. 90, , (2007). [18] Arvind, Dutta Jawaharlal, B., Mukunda N. and Simon, R. The Real Symplectic Groups in Quantum Mechanics and Optics Xiv:quant-ph/ v3 (1995). [19] Guillemin, V. and Sternberg, S. Symplectic Techniques in Physics. Cambridge University Press, (1984). [20] Yurke, B. and Denker, J. S. Quantum network theory. Phys. Rev. A 29, 1419 (1984). [21] Devoret, M. H. Quantum fluctuations in electrical circuits, Quantum Fluctuations : Les Houches Session LXIII, Elsevier, Amsterdam (1997). [22] Formally, the damping terms can be expressed using the Caldeira-Legget model [Caldeira, A. O. and Legget, A. J. Ann. Phys. (N. Y.) 149, 374 (1983)] but this is not of fundamental interest here. [23] Mears, C. A Quantum-limited heterodyne detection of millimeter waves using superconducting tantalum tunnel junctions. Appl. Phys. Lett. 57, 2487 (1990). [24] Wahlstein, S., Rudner, S., and Claeson, T. Arrays of Josephson tunnel junctions as parametric amplifiers. J. Appl. Phys. 49, 4248 (1979). [25] Mygind, N., Perdersen, F., Soerensen, O. H., Dueholm, B., Levinsen, M. T. Low-noise parametric amplification at 35 GHz in a single Josephson tunnel junction. Appl. Phys. Lett. 35, 91 (1979). [26] Bryant, P., Wiesenfeld, K. and McNamara, B. Noise rise in parametric amplifiers. Phys. Rev. B 36, 752 (1987). [27] Bjork, G. and Yamamoto, Y. Generation of nonclassical photon states using correlated photon pairs and linear feedforward. Phys. Rev. A 37, 4229 (1984). [28] Grosshans, F. and Grangier, P. Continuous Variable Quantum Cryptography Using Coherent States. Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, (2002). [29] Siddiqi I et al. RF-Driven Josephson Bifurcation Amplifier for Quantum Measurement. Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, (2004). [30] Metcalfe, M. et al. Measuring the decoherence of a quantronium qubit with the cavity bifurcation amplifier. Phys. Rev. B 76, (2007).