Abstract
Since the introduction of bolometers more than a century ago, they have been used in various applications ranging from chemical sensors, consumer electronics, and security to particle physics and astronomy. However, faster bolometers with lower noise are of great interest from the fundamental point of view and to find new usecases for this versatile concept. We demonstrate a nanobolometer that exhibits roughly an order of magnitude lower noise equivalent power, \(20\,{\mathrm{zW}}/\sqrt {{\mathrm{Hz}}}\), than previously reported for any bolometer. Importantly, it is more than an order of magnitude faster than other lownoise bolometers, with a time constant of 30 μs at \(60\,{\mathrm{zW}}/\sqrt {{\mathrm{Hz}}}\). These results suggest a calorimetric energy resolution of 0.3 zJ = h × 0.4 THz with a time constant of 30 μs. Further development of this nanobolometer may render it a promising candidate for future applications requiring extremely low noise and high speed such as those in quantum technology and terahertz photon counting.
Introduction
Bolometry is one of the oldest radiationsensing techniques^{1} dating back to 1880. Yet, it remains competitive and widespread^{2,3,4,5}, mainly owing to the flexibility bolometers offer in terms of the center frequency, bandwidth, and dynamic range, as well as the possibility of energyresolving calorimetric operation^{6}. These properties render bolometers, devices that detect radiationgenerated heat in an absorber, interesting for the emerging quantum technological systems such as superconducting quantum computers^{7,8}. Bolometers could, for example, be used as broadband measurement devices^{9} for solidstate or flying qubits^{10} and for characterization of cryogenic environments, cabling, and microwave components^{11,12,13,14,15,16} at powers in the singlephoton regime. The quantum technological devices operate at such ultralow powers, and consequently call for characterization and calibration in the singlephoton regime.
Very recently, Opremcak et al.^{17} demonstrated a readout scheme for superconducting qubits where a microwave bolometer may appear useful in bringing flexibility for the frequency band of the readout signal. Although future development of the method and qubits may bring a relief on the speed (≲1 μs time constant) and energy resolution (≲100 yJ) requirements realized by Opremcak et al.^{17}, this potential application calls for improvements on the stateoftheart fast ultralownoise bolometers.
Outside quantum technology, bolometers are widely utilized by astronomers in both ground^{18} and spacebased observatories^{19,20}, and in other types of detectors^{21,22}. Although this is a mature field requiring relatively high technology readiness levels and scalability for the detectors, some of the future applications call for improvements in the intrinsic noise of the existing bolometers. Interestingly, microwave bolometers have recently emerged as a potential candidate for the detection element in the dark matter experiments^{23,24,25}, where the bolometer could either be used to directly measure the extremely low powers arising from photons generated in axion haloscopes^{26} or they could be applied to detect dark mattergenerated quasiparticles that diffuse into the bolometer. In the former case, the advantage of bolometers over microwave amplifiers is that they are resilient to quantum fluctuations, but further development in the bolometer noise level is needed to achieve reasonable integration times in the experiments.
The noise equivalent power (NEP) quantifies the input power resolution of the bolometer in a unit bandwidth. Relatively recently, thermal conductances below 1 fW/K between bolometers and their environment have been measured^{27,28}, implying that the lower bound for NEP set by thermal energy fluctuations can be reduced down to at least \(10\,{\mathrm{zW}}/\sqrt {{\mathrm{Hz}}}\). To date, however, the lowest measured NEPs for bolometers are around \(300\,{\mathrm{zW}}/\sqrt {{\mathrm{Hz}}}\)^{29,30}, achieved using transition edge sensors^{31} (TESs) in farinfrared regime. For example, the expected power level to be detected in the Axion Dark Matter Experiment^{32} is of the order of 10^{−22} W. With the current stateoftheart bolometers, the integration time to reach unit signaltonoise ratio is of an order of a thousand hours. Thus, lowering noise of bolometers to \(10\,{\mathrm{zW}}/\sqrt {{\mathrm{Hz}}}\) would bring the integration time to the reasonable singlehour time scale.
Promising NEPs have also been reported in the terahertz range for alternative device concepts, such as kinetic inductance detectors (KIDs) \((400\,{\mathrm{zW}}/\sqrt {{\mathrm{Hz}}} )\)^{33} and proofofprinciple quantumcapacitance detectors (of order \(10\,{\mathrm{zW}}/\sqrt {{\mathrm{Hz}}}\))^{34,35}. Both of these detect radiationgenerated nonequilibrium quasiparticles in a superconductor. In addition, the background rate of the random telegraph noise in semiconducting charge sensors shows potential for extremely low NEP \((1\,{\mathrm{zW}}/\sqrt {{\mathrm{Hz}}} )\)^{36,37} in the terahertz regime. However, the coupling efficiency to a radiation source is expected to be low and full experimental characterization of the efficiency has not been reported.
We recently introduced a threshold microwave detector based on superconductor–normalmetal–superconductor (SNS) junctions^{38} and showed that it can detect weak microwave pulses down to the zeptojoule level in a timegated detection mode^{28}. In this work, in contrast, we implement a continuously operating SNS bolometer. We measure an \({\mathrm{NEP}} \approx 50\,{\mathrm{zW}}/\sqrt {{\mathrm{Hz}}}\) with a time constant of 0.6 ms. We can tune the time constant, in situ, below 100 μs at the expense of increasing the NEP to \(80\,{\mathrm{zW}}/\sqrt {{\mathrm{Hz}}}\), which is nevertheless still lower than the lowest previously reported bolometer NEPs^{29,30}. By introducing a Josephson parametric amplifier^{39} (JPA) to the bolometer readout circuit, we further reduce the NEP to a record low value of \(20\,{\mathrm{zW}}/\sqrt {{\mathrm{Hz}}}\). For an NEP of \(60\,{\mathrm{zW}}/\sqrt {{\mathrm{Hz}}}\), we achieve response times down to about 30 μs using the JPA, which is one to two orders of magnitude faster than those reported for the most sensitive TESs^{30}. Although the experiments described here focus on the measurement of the input power, the achieved NEP and time constant suggest that, in a calorimetric mode of operation, the energy resolution may be well below the current 1.1zJ record for thermal detectors^{28}. Furthermore, we study the feasibility of the SNS bolometer in the terahertz regime by simulating a silicon lens with doubleslot terahertz antenna coupled to the bolometer. Our results suggest a singlephoton detection rate of 100 photons per second at 1.3 THz from a 3K thermal source.
Results
Device and measurement setup
Figure 1a, b shows the detector and its measurement scheme. We couple the detector to an 8.4GHz microwave source through a 50Ω transmission line, which allows us to calibrate the heater power P_{h} incident at the detector input with a decibel level of uncertainty. Essentially all incident heater power is absorbed by the long SNS junction between the leads H and G since the junction is long enough for its impedance to be almost entirely real, 36 Ω, and well matched to the transmission line impedance of Z_{0} = 50 Ω. The imaginary part of the impedance, arising from the capacitor C_{1}, is roughly −i0.2 Ω and an order of an ohm from parasitic series inductance at 8.4 GHz, and can be therefore neglected. Thus, an increase in P_{h} leads to an increase in the electron temperature T_{e} in the Au_{x}Pd_{1−x} (x ≈ 0.6) nanowire used as the normalmetal part in the SNS junctions. This in turn results in an increased inductance of the short SNS junctions^{40,41} between leads P and G, which implies a lower resonance frequency of the effective LC oscillator formed by the short SNS junctions, the onchip meander inductor L_{s}, and the onchip parallel plate capacitors C_{1} and C_{2}. We detect this change by measuring the reflection coefficient at the detector gate capacitor Γ(T_{e}, ω_{p}) at a fixed probe frequency f_{p} = ω_{p}/2π. See Methods for the extraction of Γ from the detector output voltage at the digitizer V. Furthermore, we have the option to amplify the readout signal with a JPA^{42} (Fig. 1c, see Methods).
Characterization experiments
Figure 1d shows the phase of the reflection coefficient at the gate capacitor (see Methods for details) as a function of probe frequency and probe power, at zero heater power. The most striking feature in Fig. 1d is the decreasing resonance frequency as the probe tone begins to significantly heat the electrons in the SNS junctions above P_{p} = −135 dBm. This electrothermal feedback^{43} can be used to optimize the sensitivity and the time constant of the detector or even induce temperature bistability^{28} (not visible in Fig. 1d).
The NEP is determined by how noisy the readout signal is relative to the responsivity of the signal to changes in P_{h} (see Methods). Thus in Fig. 1e, we show an example of the detector output voltage V, which is defined as the voltage in the quadrature providing the greatest response to the heater power after amplification (≈103 dB), demodulation, and an optimally chosen phase rotation. In Fig. 1e, we first set P_{h} to a small value (3 aW) for a period of several tens of milliseconds, then turn P_{h} off for a similar period, and finally average over repetitions of this modulation pattern. From such data we extract the quasistatic voltage response at the digitizer and the time constant using exponential fitting functions. Figure 1f, g shows the quasistatic response of the detector output voltage to the heater power up to 3 aW. We define the detector responsivity as the ratio of the voltage response and the corresponding heater power. We also employ this information to choose an appropriate power level for the heater in our experiments discussed below.
Dimensionless susceptibility
To understand the detector response at high probe power, we develop a model for the electrothermal feedback^{28,44} (see Methods for details). We define a dimensionless susceptibility as
where ΔP equals the amount of additional heat flowing from the nanowire electrons to their thermal bath. Therefore, χ is the factor by which the probeinduced electrothermal feedback enhances the heating of the bolometer relative to the externally applied power P_{h}.
Detector responsivity and noise
In Fig. 2a, b, we show the responsivity of the detector output voltage. Note that the NEP is unaffected by the calibration of the gain of the readout circuitry since the measured responsivity and noise are both amplified equally. The responsivity is maximized for probe frequencies close to the resonance. As the probe power is increased, the width of the resonance decreases, leading to a sharp increase in the responsivity. Note that the color scales are different in Fig. 2a, b, since the JPA adds gain in excess of 20 dB.
Interleaved with the measurements of the responsivity, we also record separate noise spectra for the detector output voltage and for the outofphase quadrature at each probe power and frequency. In Fig. 2c, d, we show the voltage noise spectral density across the same range of f_{p} and P_{p} as for the responsivity. Let us first discuss the lowprobepower limit (P_{p} ≲ −132 dBm) with the JPA off in Fig. 2c. In this case, the electrothermal feedback is negligible (χ ≈ 1), ΔP vanishes, and the spectrum is dominated by noise added by the amplifiers in the readout circuitry. Furthermore, the noise power assumes a similar value on and off resonance. However, with the JPA on in Fig. 2d, we consistently observe a peak in the noise near the resonant probe frequency, indicating that amplifier noise is not dominating the signal even at the lowest probe powers shown (−132.5 dB). With the JPA off, the thermal fluctuations of the detector surpass the amplifier noise only at high P_{p}.
NEP and time constant
Figure 2e, f presents the main results of this paper, that is, the measured NEP for an 8.4GHz input over a range of probe powers and frequencies. We compute the NEP by dividing the voltage spectral density by the quasistatic responsivity and multiplying the result by a factor \(\sqrt {1 + (2\pi \tau f_{\mathrm{n}})^2}\), where f_{n} is the noise frequency. This factor takes into account the fact that the thermal time constant τ decreases the responsivity of the detector with respect to the quasistatic case (see Methods). Figure 2e, f shows the NEP with the JPA on and off, respectively, averaged over noise frequencies from 20 to 100 Hz.
In Fig. 2g we show the NEP and the time constant as functions of the probe frequency at fixed P_{p} = −126 dBm with the JPA off. Figure 2h is measured in identical conditions except that the JPA is on and the probe power is set to −126.5 dBm. The electrothermal feedback is strong and positive (χ ≫ 1) at probe frequencies just below the resonance frequency. In contrast, the electrothermal feedback is strongly negative (χ ≪ 1) at probe frequencies just above the resonance. This is clearly visible in the time constant τ = χτ_{b}, which increases by nearly an order of magnitude as the probe approaches the resonance despite the fact that the bare thermal time constant τ_{b} simultaneously decreases owing to increased electron temperature. Here, τ_{b} denotes the time constant in the absence of electrothermal feedback (see Methods). The lowest NEP of \(20\,{\mathrm{zW}}/\sqrt {{\mathrm{Hz}}}\) in Fig. 2h coincides with the peak of the time constant (1 ms), suggesting that at P_{p} = −126.5 dBm the NEP is optimized at the frequency that maximizes χ.
As the probe frequency exceeds the resonance, the time constant quickly decreases by more than an order of magnitude below 100 μs. In this regime, the positive effect of the JPA is particularly clear: the NEP degrades quickly with increasing probe frequency if the JPA is disabled, but stays roughly constant when it is enabled. The fact that the NEP remains relatively flat at \(60\,{\mathrm{zW}}/\sqrt {{\mathrm{Hz}}}\) with the JPA on (Fig. 2h) is an indication that the internal fluctuations of the detector are limiting the performance instead of amplifier noise. This is an example of the convenient in situ tunability of the SNS detector, that is, we can choose a different trade off between the NEP and the time constant by a small change of the probe frequency or power. We can also tune the time constant and the dynamic range by changing the bath temperature or by applying an additional constant heating power through the heater port. However, such an optimization is left for future work.
Noise analysis
In Fig. 3a, b, we present the full noise spectrum of the output signal at P_{p} = −126 dBm and P_{p} = −126.5 dBm with the JPA off and on, respectively. Above 1 Hz and below 1 kHz, the noise increases up to 14.5 dB above the broadband background set by the amplifier noise for probe frequencies near resonance. Far offresonance we find only the broadband amplifier noise floor in addition to 1/f_{n} noise. We also observe in Fig. 3b noise peaks at multiples of 1.4 Hz, matching the frequency of vibrations caused by the pulse tube cryocooler. Note that these peaks are clearly visible only when the JPA is on and the probe is far from the resonance, suggesting that the pulse tube noise does not couple directly to the detector, but rather to the amplifiers. At operation points with low NEP, the pulse tube noise is masked by the noise generated by the detector itself.
Predicted energy resolution
In Fig. 3c, we present the NEP measured with the JPA on as a function of the noise frequency at a (f_{p}, P_{p}) point selected for short time constant and low NEP. From the NEP, we can obtain an estimate for an upper bound on the energy resolution^{45}
By restricting the above frequency integration below the thermal cutoff frequency 1/(2πτ) = 5.8 kHz, the data in Fig. 3c yields ε = 0.32 zJ = h × 480 GHz, surpassing, for example, the anticipated resolution of the TESbased Fourier transform spectrometer^{19} specified to have about an octave of resolution in the band of 1.4–9 THz. Increasing the cutoff frequency to 10 kHz yields ε = 0.26 zJ = h × 390 GHz. Here, h denotes the Planck’s constant.
Feasibility for terahertz detection
Inspired by the abovesuggested energy resolution, we theoretically study the future feasibility of the SNS bolometer as a THz detector. We simulate a complete experiment, including a possible THz antenna design, aimed at detecting individual photons from a thermal source. The THz coupling scheme is based on a substratelenscoupled planar antenna. An extended hemispherical silicon lens (diameter 1 mm) integrated with a doubleslot antenna as a feed^{46} was designed for the center frequency of 1.3 THz (see Fig. 4a). We employ electromagnetic simulations to study the performance in THz detection. Note that at the considered signal frequency range, well exceeding the Bardeen–Cooper–Schrieffer gap frequency, even a fully superconducting bolometer acts as a resistive load, and therefore no separate load resistor is needed. Thus, for simplicity, the bolometer is modeled as a 50Ω port in the simulations. We have designed bandstop filters at 1.3 THz to prevent the bolometer readout circuitry from interfering with the antenna^{47}. The radiation patterns at 1.3 THz (Fig. 4b) show −3dB beam widths of about 8°. The detector efficiency is quantified by the effective area A_{e}, peaking to 0.35 mm^{2} at 1.3 THz (Fig. 4c).
To analyze the detected power and photon count rates, we assume a blackbody thermal source represented by the Planck spectral irradiance for a single polarity expressed as B_{r}(f) = (hf^{3}/c^{2})/{exp[hf/(k_{B}T)] − 1}, where k_{B} is the Boltzmann constant, T is the temperature of the source, and c is the speed of the light. We aim at a detection band above the peak frequency at hf ~ k_{B}T. Thus, we must filter the lowfrequency tail very efficiently, as it represents orders of magnitude higher power density in comparison to the band of interest.
Such filtering between the blackbody source and the detector can be achieved, for example, by metal mesh structures acting as frequencyselective surfaces (FSSs)^{48}. Filter systems based on FSS structures have been demonstrated previously in the context of lowpower detector experiments: de Visser et al.^{33} employ a bandpassfilter system with a lowfrequency rolloff above 60 dB per octave, and a stopband rejection of more than 60 dB. For our purposes, we aim to capture the essential features of such filters by defining a highpass filter with a comparable rolloff, stopband transmission of −60 dB, and a 3dB cutoff at 1.3 THz.
The obtained frequency response η(f) is shown in Fig. 4d, along with the Planck spectral irradiance for T = 3.0 K. From these data, the detected power spectral density is obtained as S(f) = ∫ηB_{r}A_{e}Ωdf, where Ω is the solid angle corresponding to the antenna beam width. Taking the optical throughput A_{e}Ω from the antenna simulations of Fig. 4b, we show the spectral density of the detected photon count per unit bandwidth S(f)/(hf) in Fig. 4e. The total detected power and photon count are shown in Fig. 4f as functions of the blackbody temperature. In the vicinity of the blackbody temperature of T ≈ 3 K, the power level is well within the sensitivity range of the detector, and the photon rates are compatible with the speed of the detector. Thus, this seems a possible scenario to demonstrate terahertz photon counting in the future using the SNS detector.
Discussion
Our demonstration of an NEP of \(20\,{\mathrm{zW}}/\sqrt {{\mathrm{Hz}}}\) for an SNS junctionbased bolometer is an order of magnitude improvement over results reported for TESs and KIDs. In this sensitivity range, we also report response times down to 30 μs, that is, detector bandwidth of about 5 kHz. For comparison, the most sensitive TESs and KIDs operate at bandwidths of order 100 Hz^{19,33}. The observed detector speed and NEP predict an energy resolution compatible with singlephoton detection extending down to the low terahertz range, ~400 GHz.
Recently, superconducting qubits have shown great progress in detecting single microwave photons^{50,51,52,53,54}, but this technology is currently limited to frequencies below 10 GHz. Thus, the SNS detector provides a valuable complementary approach for future research.
Accommodating the SNS detector with a terahertz antenna in the future is supported by our simulations of an experimental detection scheme in the terahertz regime. Note, that the impedance of the SNS detector may be varied by the choice of the normalmetal size and aspect ratios thus providing flexibility in impedance matching. Furthermore, the radio frequency (rf) readout of SNS detectors is naturally suited for frequency multiplexing^{19,55,56}. Thus, future development of the SNS detector may render it a potential candidate for various applications.
The design of the SNS detector is naturally compatible with the integration of superconductor–insulator–normalmetal junctions to the absorber^{57}. This may allow direct cooling of the normalmetal electrons, and thus a possibility to increase the dynamic range of the detector using feedback. We estimate the achievable cooling power, and hence the dynamic range, to be well in the pW range^{57}.
Methods
Sample fabrication and measurement setup
For details of the sample fabrication methods and of the measurement setup, see Govenius et al.^{28}.
Reflection coefficient
Before feeding the probe signal into the cryostat, we split a fraction of it into a reference tone. We digitize both signals, the reference and the eventual probe signal, which is reflected from the detector gate and subsequently amplified and guided out of the cryostat. We define \({\tilde{\mathrm{\Gamma }}}\left( {T_{\mathrm{e}},\omega _{\mathrm{p}}} \right)\) as the ratio of the reflected signal and the reference signal. We obtain the reflection coefficient at the gate capacitor Γ(T_{e}, ω_{p}) by first measuring \({\tilde{\mathrm{\Gamma }}}\left( {T_{\mathrm{e}},\omega _{\mathrm{p}}} \right)\) with high probe and heating power (~−120 dBm) and dividing the subsequent measurements by this highpower reference, that is, \({\mathrm{\Gamma }}\left( {T_{\mathrm{e}},\omega _{\mathrm{p}}} \right) = {\tilde{\mathrm{\Gamma }}}\left( {T_{\mathrm{e}},\omega _{\mathrm{p}}} \right)/{\tilde{\mathrm{\Gamma }}}\left( {T \gg T_{\mathrm{e}},\omega _{\mathrm{p}}} \right)\). The high power shifts the resonance far from its lowpower position, thus providing an accurate calibration for the lowpower experiments.
Josephson parametric amplifier
The utilized JPA is that referred to as Device A by Simbierowicz et al.^{42}. It is a lumpedelement rf resonator where an array of 200 superconducting quantum interference devices (SQUIDs) forms a nonlinear inductor. The SQUIDs are direct current biased and rf pumped with magnetic flux, generating a threewave mixing process in the JPA. We use the JPA in the nondegenerate mode where the flux pump is at 2(f_{p} + 21.875 kHz). Since the pump is at approximately twice the bolometer resonance frequency, we avoid residual heating of the bolometer by the JPA.
Thermal time constant and electrothermal feedback
In the lowP_{p} limit, Γ is independent of the probe power. If the probe power is increased, however, the power (1 − Γ(T_{e}, ω_{p})^{2})P_{p} absorbed from the probe starts to significantly heat the bolometer and shifts the resonance to a lower frequency, as shown in Fig. 1c. More precisely, the nanowire electron temperature T_{e} is determined by
if we model the electrons in the nanowire using a single heat capacity C_{e} and assume that the electrical degrees of freedom relax to a quasistationary state quickly compared to the thermal relaxation time^{28}. Here, P_{e − b}(T_{e}, T_{b}) is the heat flow from the electrons to their thermal environment at temperature T_{b} and P_{x} is a constant parasitic heating term arising from uncontrolled noise sources.
Let us analyze the increase in the power flow from the nanowire electrons to their thermal environment, as compared to the case P_{h} = P_{p} = 0. We define this increase as
It is convenient to discuss ΔP rather than T_{e} because ΔP can be directly measured^{28} and it allows us to simplify Eq. (2) to
where τ_{b}(ΔP) = C(ΔP)∂_{Te}P_{e−b}[T_{e}(ΔP), T_{b}] is the bare thermal time constant^{28}, not including the effects of the electrothermal feedback, and \({\mathrm{\Delta }}\dot P\) denotes ∂_{t}ΔP.
We concentrate on the nonbistable regime where Eq. (4) has a unique stationary solution. In this regime, we can define the singlevalued dimensionless susceptibility given by Eq. (1). The susceptibility also allows us to further simplify Eq. (4) into
for small deviations around ΔP = ΔP_{0} that solves Eq. (4) in steady state^{44}. From Eq. (5) we observe that the effective thermal time constant is given by
Noise equivalent power
We define NEP^{2}(f_{n}) of a noisy bolometer as the onesided power spectral density of input power fluctuations (units: W^{2}/Hz) that yields for an ideal bolometer a noise spectral density in the output signal identical to that of the noisy bolometer. Here, the ideal bolometer refers to a noiseless conversion of input power into output signal with a responsivity equal to that of the noisy bolometer. Equivalently, \(2\sqrt {2{\mathrm{B}}} \times {\mathrm{NEP}}(f_{\mathrm{n}})\) describes, in a narrow bandwidth B centered at f_{n}, the peaktopeak amplitude by which the input power needs to be modulated at f_{n} for unit signaltonoise ratio in the output.
Specifically in this work, the NEP (shown in Fig. 2e–h) is given by
where R_{P→V}(f_{n}) is the frequencydependent responsivity (shown in Fig. 2a, b) and S_{V}(f_{n}) is the singlesided power spectral density of the output signal V (Fig. 2c, d shows \(\sqrt {S_V}\)). Note that B × S_{V}(f_{n}) equals the ensemble variance if the signal is filtered to a narrow bandwidth B centered at f_{n}.
In practice, we measure S_{V}(f_{n}) by averaging periodograms according to Bartlett’s method and determine the frequencydependent responsivity from
where \(\partial _{P_{\mathrm{h}}}V\) is the measured quasistatic responsivity and τ is the measured time constant. Based on the adequate quality of the fits used to extract τ (see Fig. 1e), this singletimeconstant approximation is justified at least up to frequencies of the order of 1/(2πτ). We note that Eqs. (7) and (6) are identical to those used for NEP in the previous literature^{33,58}.
Terahertz simulations
The simulation tool in analyzing the THz coupling was Ansys Electromagnetic Suite v. 19. The received power of an antenna can be calculated as P = A_{e}S, where A_{e} is the effective area and S is the power density of an incoming wave. The effective area is A_{e} = Gλ^{2}/4π, where G is the maximum realized gain as a function of frequency, and λ is the corresponding wavelength^{59}. The realized antenna gain can be written as G = η_{p}D, where η_{p} is the power efficiency, that is, the ratio between the radiated power and the input power, and D is directivity^{59}. Here, G includes the loss due to impedance mismatch. The directivity is defined as follows: In a given direction, the part of the radiation intensity corresponding to a given polarization divided by the total radiation intensity averaged over all directions^{49}.
Data availability
The data that support the findings of this study are available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3384598.
References
 1.
Langley, S. P. The bolometer and radiant energy. In Proc. American Academy of Arts and Sciences Vol. 16, 342–358 (JSTOR 1880).
 2.
Armengaud, E. et al. LUMINEU: a search for neutrinoless double beta decay based on ZnMoO4 scintillating bolometers. J. Phys. 718, 062008 (2016).
 3.
Karasik, B. S., McGrath, W. R., Gershenson, M. E. & Sergeev, A. V. Photonnoiselimited direct detector based on disordercontrolled electron heating. J. Appl. Phys. 87, 7586–7588 (2000).
 4.
Golubev, D. & Kuzmin, L. Nonequilibrium theory of a hotelectron bolometer with normal metalinsulatorsuperconductor tunnel junction. J. Appl. Phys. 89, 6464–6472 (2001).
 5.
Nahum, M. & Martinis, J. M. Ultrasensitivehotelectron microbolometer. Appl. Phys. Lett. 63, 3075–3077 (1993).
 6.
Gray, D. et al. The first tests of a largearea light detector equipped with metallic magnetic calorimeters for scintillating bolometers for the LUMINEU neutrinoless double beta decay search. J. Low Temp. Phys. 184, 904–909 (2016).
 7.
Wallraff, A. et al. Strong coupling of a single photon to a superconducting qubit using circuit quantum electrodynamics. Nature 431, 162–167 (2004).
 8.
Barends, R. et al. Coherent Josephson qubit suitable for scalable quantum integrated circuits. Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 080502 (2013).
 9.
Macklin, C. et al. A nearquantumlimited Josephson travelingwave parametric amplifier. Science 350, 307–310 (2015).
 10.
Govia, L. C. G. et al. Highfidelity qubit measurement with a microwavephoton counter. Phys. Rev. A 90, 062307 (2014).
 11.
Yeh, J.H., LeFebvre, J., Premaratne, S., Wellstood, F. & Palmer, B. Microwave attenuators for use with quantum devices below 100 mk. J. Appl. Phys. 121, 224501 (2017).
 12.
Naaman, O. et al. Josephson junction microwave modulators for qubit control. J. Appl. Phys. 121, 073904 (2017).
 13.
Pechal, M. et al. Superconducting switch for fast onchip routing of quantum microwave fields. Phys. Rev. Appl. 6, 024009 (2016).
 14.
Abdo, B., Brink, M. & Chow, J. M. Gyrator operation using josephson mixers. Phys. Rev. Appl. 8, 034009 (2017).
 15.
Sliwa, K. et al. Reconfigurable josephson circulator/directional amplifier. Phys. Rev. X 5, 041020 (2015).
 16.
Kokkoniemi, R. et al. Fluxtunable phase shifter for microwaves. Sci. Rep. 7, 14713 (2017).
 17.
Opremcak, A. et al. Measurement of a superconducting qubit with a microwave photon counter. Science 361, 1239–1242 (2018).
 18.
Revéret, V. et al. HERSCHEL—PACS bolometer arrays for submillimeter groundbased telescopes. J. Low Temp. Phys. 151, 32–39 (2008).
 19.
Jackson, B. D. et al. The SPICASAFARI detector system: TES detector arrays with frequencydivision multiplexed SQUID readout. IEEE Trans. THz Sci. Technol. 2, 12–21 (2011).
 20.
Karasik, B. S., Sergeev, A. V. & Prober, D. E. Nanobolometers for THz photon detection. IEEE Trans. THz Sci. Technol. 1, 97–111 (2011).
 21.
Monfardini, A. et al. NIKA: A millimeterwave kinetic inductance camera. Astron. Astrophys. 521, A29 (2010).
 22.
Baselmans, J. et al. A kilopixel imaging system for future space based farinfrared observatories using microwave kinetic inductance detectors. Astron. Astrophys. 601, A89 (2017).
 23.
Hochberg, Y., Lin, T. & Zurek, K. M. Detecting ultralight bosonic dark matter via absorption in superconductors. Phys. Rev. D. 94, 015019 (2016).
 24.
Krauss, L., Moody, J., Wilczek, F. & Morris, D. E. Calculations for cosmic axion detection. Phys. Rev. Lett. 55, 1797–1800 (1985).
 25.
Anastassopoulos, V. et al. New CAST limit on the axion–photon interaction. Nat. Phys. 13, 584–590 (2017).
 26.
McAllister, B. T. et al. The ORGAN experiment: an axion haloscope above 15 GHz. Physics of the Dark Universe 18, (67–72 (2017).
 27.
Wei, J. et al. Ultrasensitive hotelectron nanobolometers for terahertz astrophysics. Nat. Nanotechnol. 3, 496–500 (2008).
 28.
Govenius, J., Lake, R. E., Tan, K. Y. & Möttönen, M. Detection of zeptojoule microwave pulses using electrothermal feedback in proximityinduced Josephson junctions. Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 030802 (2016).
 29.
Karasik, B. S. & Cantor, R. Demonstration of high optical sensitivity in farinfrared hotelectron bolometer. Appl. Phys. Lett. 98, 193503 (2011).
 30.
Suzuki, T. et al. Performance of SAFARI shortwavelengthband transition edge sensors (TES) fabricated by deep reactive ion etching. IEEE Trans. THz Sci. Technol. 4, 171–178 (2014).
 31.
Ullom, J. N. & Bennett, D. A. Review of superconducting transitionedge sensors for xray and gammaray spectroscopy. Supercond. Sci. Technol. 28, 084003 (2015).
 32.
ADMX Collaboration et al. Search for invisible axion dark matter with the axion dark matter experiment. Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 151301 (2018).
 33.
de Visser, P. J., Baselmans, J. J. A., Bueno, J., Llombart, N. & Klapwijk, T. M. Fluctuations in the electron system of a superconductor exposed to a photon flux. Nat. Commun. 5, 3130 (2014).
 34.
Echternach, P., Pepper, B., Reck, T. & Bradford, C. Single photon detection of 1.5 THz radiation with the quantum capacitance detector. Nat. Astron. 2, 90–97 (2018).
 35.
Echternach, P. M. et al. Photon shot noise limited detection of terahertz radiation using a quantum capacitance detector. Appl. Phys. Lett. 103, 053510 (2013).
 36.
Komiyama, S., Astafiev, O., Antonov, V., Kutsuwa, T. & Hirai, H. A singlephoton detector in the farinfrared range. Nature 403, 405–407 (2000).
 37.
Komiyama, S. Singlephoton detectors in the terahertz range. IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quantum Electron. 17, 54–66 (2011).
 38.
Govenius, J. et al. Microwave nanobolometer based on proximity Josephson junctions. Phys. Rev. B 90, 064505 (2014).
 39.
Vesterinen, V. et al. Lumpedelement Josephson parametric amplifier at 650 MHz for nanocalorimeter readout. Superconductor Sci. Technol. 30, 085001 (2017).
 40.
Lake, R. E. et al. Microwave admittance of goldpalladium nanowires with proximityinduced superconductivity. Adv. Electron. Mater. 3, 1600227 (2017).
 41.
Giazotto, F. et al. Ultrasensitive proximity Josephson sensor with kinetic inductance readout. Appl. Phys. Lett. 92, 162507 (2008).
 42.
Simbierowicz, S. et al. A fluxdriven Josephson parametric amplifier for subGHz frequencies fabricated with sidewall passivated spacer junction technology. Superconductor Sci. Technol. 31, 105001 (2018).
 43.
de Visser, P. J., Withington, S. & Goldie, D. J. Readoutpower heating and hysteretic switching between thermal quasiparticle states in kinetic inductance detectors. J. Appl. Phys. 108, 114504 (2010).
 44.
Govenius, J. Towards Calorimetric Detection of Individual Itinerant Microwave Photons. Doctoral thesis, Aalto Univ., Helsinki (2016).
 45.
Moseley, S. H., Mather, J. C. & McCammon, D. Thermal detectors as xray spectrometers. J. Appl. Phys. 56, 1257–1262 (1984).
 46.
Filipovic, D. F., Gearhart, S. S. & Rebeiz, G. M. Doubleslot antennas on extended hemispherical and elliptical silicon dielectric lenses. IEEE Trans. Microw. Theory Technol. 41, 1738–1749 (1993).
 47.
Luukanen, A., Kiuru, T., Leivo, M. M., Rautiainen, A. & Varis, J. Passive threecolour submillimetrewave video camera. In Passive and Active MillimeterWave Imaging XVI, Vol. 8715, 87150F (International Society for Optics and Photonics, 2013).
 48.
Ade, P. A., Pisano, G., Tucker, C. & Weaver, S. A review of metal mesh filters. In Millimeter and Submillimeter Detectors and Instrumentation for Astronomy III, Vol. 6275, 62750U (International Society for Optics and Photonics, 2006).
 49.
IEEE Standard for Definitions of Terms for Antennas. IEEE Std 1452013 (Revision of IEEE Std 1451993) 1–50 (2014).
 50.
Inomata, K. et al. Single microwavephoton detector using an artificial λtype threelevel system. Nat. Commun. 7, 12303 (2016).
 51.
Narla, A. et al. Robust concurrent remote entanglement between two superconducting qubits. Phys. Rev. X 6, 031036 (2016).
 52.
Besse, J.C. et al. Singleshot quantum nondemolition detection of individual itinerant microwave photons. Phys. Rev. X 8, 021003 (2018).
 53.
Kono, S., Koshino, K., Tabuchi, Y., Noguchi, A. & Nakamura, Y. Quantum nondemolition detection of an itinerant microwave photon. Nat. Phys. 14, 546–549 (2018).
 54.
Lescanne, R. et al. Detecting itinerant microwave photons with engineered nonlinear dissipation. Preprint at http://arxiv.org/abs/1902.05102 (2019).
 55.
Day, P. K., LeDuc, H. G., Mazin, B. A., Vayonakis, A. & Zmuidzinas, J. A broadband superconducting detector suitable for use in large arrays. Nature 425, 817–821 (2003).
 56.
Dobbs, M. A. et al. Frequency multiplexed superconducting quantum interference device readout of large bolometer arrays for cosmic microwave background measurements. Rev. Sci. Instrum. 83, 073113 (2012).
 57.
Giazotto, F., Heikkilä, T. T., Luukanen, A., Savin, A. M. & Pekola, J. P. Opportunities for mesoscopics in thermometry and refrigeration: Physics and applications. Rev. Mod. Phys. 78, 217–274 (2006).
 58.
de Visser, P. J. Quasiparticle Dynamics in Aluminium Superconducting Microwave Resonators., Doctoral thesis, Delft Univ. Technology, Delft (2014).
 59.
Lindell, I. & K., N. Antenniteoria 4th edn (Otatieto, Helsinki, 1995).
Acknowledgements
We acknowledge the provision of facilities and technical support by Aalto University at OtaNano – Micronova Nanofabrication Center. We have received funding from the European Research Council under Consolidator Grant No. 681311 (QUESS) and under ProofofConcept Grant No. 727305 (SNABO), European Commission through H2020 program projects EFINED (grant agreement 766853) and QMiCS (grant agreement 820505, Quantum Flagship), the Academy of Finland through its Centers of Excellence Program (project nos 312300, 312059, and 312294) and grants (Nos. 314447, 314449, 276528, 305237, 308161, and 314302), the Vilho, Yrjö, and Kalle Väisälä Foundation, the Technology Industries of Finland Centennial Foundation, the Jane and Aatos Erkko Foundation, and the Finnish Cultural Foundation.
Author information
Affiliations
Contributions
R.K. participated in the measurements and data analysis. V.V. integrated the JPA to the measurement setup, and participated to the measurements and data analysis. J.G., K.Y.T. and R.E.L. developed the fabrication process for the detector sample. J.G. and R.E.L. designed and fabricated the detector sample. J.G. designed the measurement setup. A.M.G. carried out preliminary measurements with J.G. The lens antenna simulations and terahertz detection rate computations were carried out by A.L. and J.H. All authors have contributed to preparing the manuscript, although most of the work was carried out by R.K., J.G., V.V. and M.M. In addition, V.V., S.S., L.G., J.L., M.P., J.H. and O.P.S. provided the JPA and M.M. supervised the work in general.
Corresponding authors
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary information
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Kokkoniemi, R., Govenius, J., Vesterinen, V. et al. Nanobolometer with ultralow noise equivalent power. Commun Phys 2, 124 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s4200501902256
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Further reading

Electronphonon coupling of epigraphene at millikelvin temperatures measured by quantum transport thermometry
Applied Physics Letters (2021)

Optoelectronic and Nanosensors Detection Systems: A Review
IEEE Sensors Journal (2021)

Responsivity enhancement of a strained silicon fieldeffect transistor detector at 03 THz using the terajet effect
Optics Letters (2021)

Design of multiellipse broadband metamaterial absorber
Journal of Physics: Conference Series (2021)

Silicon carbide detectors for subGeV dark matter
Physical Review D (2021)
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.