PHYSICAL REVIEW APPLIED 11, 014062 (2019)

Planar Superconductor-Ferromagnet-Superconductor Josephson Junctions as

Scanning-Probe Sensors
T. Golod,1 O.M. Kapran,1 and V.M. Krasnov1,2,*
1
Department of Physics, Stockholm University, AlbaNova University Center, Stockholm SE-106 91 Sweden
2
Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology, State University, 9 Institutsiy per., Dolgoprudny, Moscow Region
141700 Russia

(Received 9 July 2018; revised manuscript received 28 September 2018; published 30 January 2019)

We propose a magnetic scanning-probe sensor based on a single-planar Josephson junction with a mag-
netic barrier. The planar geometry together with the high magnetic permeability of the barrier facilitates a
double flux-focusing effect, which helps to guide magnetic flux into the junction and thus enhances field
sensitivity of the sensor. We fabricate and analyze experimentally sensor prototypes with a superpara-
magnetic Cu-Ni and a ferromagnetic Ni barrier. We demonstrate that the planar geometry allows easy
miniaturization to nanometer scale and facilitates an effective utilization of the self-field phenomenon for
amplification of sensitivity and a simple implementation of a control line for feedback operation over a
broad dynamic range. We argue that the proposed sensor can outperform equally sized superconducting
quantum-interference devices (SQUIDs) both in terms of magnetic-field sensitivity and spatial resolution,
which makes it advantageous for scanning-probe microscopy.

DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevApplied.11.014062

I. INTRODUCTION
Superconducting quantum-interference devices (SQU-
IDs) are the most sensitive magnetic sensors, capa-
ble of measuring a small fraction of the flux quantum
0 = h/2e  2.07 10−15 Wb [1,2]. In recent decades,
SQUIDs have been successfully employed in scanning-
probe microscopes with a variety of different designs and
operational modes [2–9]. The main challenge in scanning
SQUID microscopy is a trade-off between field sensitivity
and spatial resolution. For a SQUID with a pickup loop of
area W × L, the magnetic-field sensitivity is determined by
the flux-quantization field H = 0 /WL, while the spatial
resolution is determined by the loop size and the distance
to the sample (L, W, z).
For increasing spatial resolution, nano-SQUIDs can be
used [3,5–9], but miniaturization is accompanied by var-
ious difficulties. In the conventional flat geometry of the
SQUID, miniaturization is limited by the required min-
imum critical current Ic ∼ 10 μA for avoiding thermal
fluctuations in Josephson junctions at the operating tem-
perature of several kelvins [10]. Since Ic scales with the
junction area, this limits the smallest junction size for a
given critical current density and operating temperature.
This restriction can be obviated in a three-dimensional
SQUID-on-a-tip geometry [8,9]. The complexity of the full
scanning-probe SQUID-sensor design [2,4,6], including
*
vladimir.krasnov@fysik.su.se
the SQUID loop with two junctions and a feedback loop, is
also a hindrance for miniaturization. Although the pickup
loop plays the main role in imaging, if it is made too
small, inductances from other larger components will
become dominant. In Ref. [11], a single overlap junction
(sandwich-type, different from a planar junction, which is
discussed below) was proposed as a scanning-probe sen-
sor. This could greatly reduce the geometrical inductance,
compared to SQUIDs, and improve spatial resolution in
one direction. Yet, in all mentioned cases, the improved
spatial resolution due to miniaturization is accompanied by
the reduction of magnetic-field sensitivity.
In recent years, hybrid superconductor-ferromagnet
(SF) devices have been actively studied. The competi-
tion between superconductivity and magnetism in SF het-
erostructures leads to new phenomena and functionality,
which can be used advantageously for a variety of novel
electronic and spintronic components [12], such as phase
shifters [13–16], superconducting spin valves [17–22], and
memory cells [23–26].
In this work, we propose a magnetic sensor based
on a single superconductor-ferromagnet-superconductor
(SFS) Josephson junction (JJ) with a planar geometry. We
fabricate and analyze experimentally Nb/Cu-Ni/Nb and
Nb/Ni/Nb sensor prototypes with paramagnetic Cu-Ni and
ferromagnetic Ni barriers. We show that the field sensitiv-
ity of such a sensor may exceed that for an equally sized
SQUID due to a double flux-focusing effect: (i) a large
demagnetization factor of superconducting electrodes in a

2331-7019/19/11(1)/014062(9) 014062-1 © 2019 American Physical Society

GOLOD, KAPRAN, and KRASNOV
perpendicular field and (ii) a large magnetic permeability
of the ferromagnetic barrier. Furthermore, we argue that
its spatial resolution is not limited by the size of the sen-
sor and in this respect is also better than a SQUID. The
simple two-dimensional (2D) geometry allows straightfor-
ward miniaturization to nanometer scale, small inductance
and flux noise, and a flexible design for the improve-
ment of sensor operation. We test the scaling of the device
down to a size of 200 nm and verify several modifications
for enhancement of the sensor performance, including uti-
lization of the self-field phenomenon for amplification of
the sensitivity, the use of several junctions in series for
increasing the readout signal Ic Rn , and a control line for
feedback operation at the point of maximum sensitivity,
over a broad dynamic range. We argue that the combina-
tion of a field sensitivity and spatial resolution better than
those of a SQUID, together with a simple and flexible 2D
design, makes planar SFS junctions beneficial for use as
scanning-probe sensors.
II. THE PLANAR SFS JUNCTION
We propose the use of a planar SFS junction as a
scanning-probe sensor. All three factors—(i) the planar
geometry, (ii) the magnetic barrier, and (iii) a Josephson
junction instead of a pickup loop—are of key importance
for our proposal and offer major differences and advantages
compared to standard SQUID sensors.
A. The advantage of planar geometry
Planar geometry enables flux focusing. Planar JJs are
formed at the edge between two superconducting films
[see Fig. 1(a)]. They differ significantly from conventional
overlap junctions. In particular, the electrodynamics of pla-
nar junctions is nonlocal when the electrode thickness is
less than the London penetration depth [27–30]. When a
magnetic field is applied perpendicular to the film plane,
Meissner screening leads to the spreading of magnetic-
field lines along the surface, as sketched in Fig. 1(a). This
causes flux focusing in the junction barrier [31,32], which
greatly enhances the sensitivity to the magnetic field. The
figure of merit for a sensor is the flux-quantization field
H . For a symmetric planar junction with electrode sizes
W × L (width × length) [32],
0
H  1.8 , L > W, (1)
W2
0
H  2 , L < W. (2)
WL
This has to be compared to the quantization field of the
SQUID, which is approximately 0 /WL. Here, W
and L are the effective width and length of the SQUID
pickup loop. This comparison indicates that the quanti-
zation field of a planar junction is comparable to that
014062-2
PHYS. REV. APPLIED 11, 014062 (2019)
for equally sized SQUID sensors. Note, however, that the
effective sizes W and L of the SQUID pickup loop
are around the midpoints of the inner and outer edges of
the electrode, while in planar junctions the full width and
length play role. The relative difference W, L > W, L
increases with decreasing sizes. In the case of nanoscale
sensors, this can be an additional factor in favor of planar
junctions. Thus, for nanoscale devices, the field sensitiv-
ity of planar junctions can even be superior to that for
similarly sized SQUIDs.
Another important advantage of the 2D planar geometry
is that it allows simple and flexible modification of sensor
design—which, as we will show below, allows the imple-
mentation of various improvements in both sensitivity and
operation (such as flux-feedback operation).
B. The advantage of a magnetic barrier
The magnetic barrier enables additional flux focusing in
the junction [33]. The high magnetic permeability μF of
the ferromagnetic barrier guides flux into the junction and,
thus, further enhances the field sensitivity of the junction.
C. The advantage of a Josephson junction
The use of a Josephson junction allows enhanced spatial
resolution, better than the size of the sensor. The SQUID
measures only the total flux and carries no information
about the flux distribution in the pickup loop. This in turn
restricts the spatial resolution of the scanning SQUID to
the size of the pickup loop. For a SFS planar junction, the
enhanced spatial resolution in the direction perpendicular
to the junction line is caused by the flux-focusing effect.
However, compared to the SQUID, there is another prin-
ciple difference: the SQUID readout depends only on the
total flux in the loop. The critical current of the Joseph-
son junction depends on the spatial integral of the local
magnetic field in the junction barrier. Therefore, the infor-
mation about this spatial distribution B(y) is not lost and
could, in principle, be reconstructed from analysis of the
junction characteristics. This means that the spatial res-
olution of a planar SFS Josephson junction is not lim-
ited by the size of the junction, neither in the direction
perpendicular to nor along the junction line.
III. SAMPLES
We study two types of planar junction: the micron-size
Nb/Cu-Ni/Nb junction with a diluted Cu-Ni magnetic alloy
in a superparamagnetic state and the submicron Nb/Ni/Nb
junction with a strong Ni ferromagnet. Thin Cu-Ni films
have perpendicular magnetic anisotropy [34], which in
combination with a high magnetic permeability μF , helps
to focus the out-of-plane magnetic field in the junction.
The superparamagnetic Cu1−x Nix alloy with a Ni con-
centration close to the critical x  0.4 is chosen to avoid
PLANAR SUPERCONDUCTOR-FERROMAGNET... PHYS. REV. APPLIED 11, 014062 (2019)

(a) (c) (e)

(d)

(b)

(f) (g) (h)

FIG. 1. (a) A sketch of a planar SFS junction in a perpendicular magnetic field. Double flux focusing in the junction slit occurs due
to (i) the large demagnetization factor of the superconducting electrodes and (ii) the large magnetic permeability of the ferromagnetic
barrier. (b) A sketch of a cross section of a Nb/Cu-Ni/Nb junction (a side view along the junction line). (c),(d) Scanning electron
microscope (SEM) images of the studied Nb/Cu-Ni/Nb sample with two (top and bottom) planar junctions, seen as horizontal lines,
and four (top, bottom, left, and right) electrodes: (c) before and (d) after making a separating cut (marked by a yellow arrow). (e) The
current-voltage (I -V) characteristics of a Nb/Cu-Ni/Nb junction at different out-of-plane magnetic fields. (f) Fraunhofer-type Ic vs H
modulation for the top junction at T  6 K, measured with uniform bias from the top to the bottom electrodes, as sketched in the inset.
The absence of hysteresis confirms the superparamagnetic state of the Cu-Ni. (g),(h) Ic (H ) modulation of the same junction with a
bias current making a 90◦ turn (g) left-to-top and (h) right-to-top, as indicated in the insets. The self-field effect leads to distortion with
a sharp Ic (H ) slope at one side, corresponding to high field sensitivity.

magnetic hysteresis, which leads to deterioration in the
detector performance [33]. Furthermore, the Cu-Ni alloy
has high resistivity, which lifts the junction resistances to
comfortably measurable values.
The junction characteristics are measured in a cryogen-
free cryostat using a four-probe configuration. The
magnetic field is applied perpendicular to the films, as
illustrated in Fig. 1(a).
A. Junction fabrication
SFS planar junctions are made by focused-ion-beam
(FIB) etching of a narrow (approximately 20 nm) groove
through a SF bilayer film [35,36], as sketched in Fig. 1(b).
The Nb layer, with Tc = 8.3 K, is deposited at room
temperature on oxidized Si substrates by dc-magnetron
sputtering at a base pressure of approximately 10−8 Torr
and a processing Ar pressure of 5 mTorr. The London
penetration depth λ of our Nb films is estimated from the
junction characteristics [14,19,30]. It varies in the range
λ(T = 0) = 100–150 nm, depending on the film thickness
and structure. The Cu57 Ni43 layer is deposited by cosput-
tering from Cu and Ni targets with controlled Ni and Cu
deposition rates. The bilayer film is patterned by pho-
tolithography and ion etching (CF4 reactive ion etching
for Nb and Ar milling for Cu-Ni). The junction proper-
ties can be tuned by varying the film thicknesses and the
depth and width of the FIB cut [36]. In total, we fabri-
cate and test approximately 100 junctions, all of which
show similar behavior. The fabrication procedure is simple
and reproducible. The junctions are very stable: no deteri-
oration occurs over five years’ storage in ambient condi-
tions. Additional details about the junction fabrication and
characterization can be found in Refs. [10,14,25,36].

014062-3
GOLOD, KAPRAN, and KRASNOV PHYS. REV. APPLIED 11, 014062 (2019)

Figure 1(c) shows a scanning electron microscope the left to the top electrode and (h) from the right to the
(SEM) image of one of the devices, made from a Nb/Cu-Ni top electrode, as sketched in the insets. It can be seen that
(70/50 nm) bilayer. The device contains two Nb/Cu-Ni/Nb the Ic (H ) patterns are distorted compared to the straight
JJs with similar characteristics (horizontal lines marked uniform-bias case in Fig. 1(e). The distortion is caused by
as “Top JJ” and “Bottom JJ”). The junction width is the self-field effect induced by the unevenly distributed
W  5.6 μm and the separation between them is L = bias current [37–39]. The sign of the self-field depends
1.3 μm. There are four electrodes (top, bottom, left, and on the direction of the bias current and reverts between
right) with two bonding pads each, allowing independent Figs. 1(g) and 1(h), demonstrating the in situ tunability
as well as serial biasing in the four-probe configura- of the junction characteristics. Importantly, the self-field
tion. After initial tests, an additional separating FIB cut effect leads to a significant sharpening of Ic (H ) at one of
down to the substrate was made between the junctions, the slopes of the central lobe. This is a well-known trick
marked by an arrow in Fig. 1(d). The cut is made to for enhancement of field sensitivity.
test possible improvements of the sensor. It can be seen
that the Nb/Cu-Ni/Nb junctions have dissimilar electrodes. C. Nanoscale Nb/Ni/Nb junctions
The outer one is much longer than the width and the
The simple 2D geometry of our sensors allows straight-
inner electrode between the junctions is shorter: L < W.
forward miniaturization to the nanoscale. To demonstrate
Each of them should provide half of the flux from Eqs.
this and the effect of ferromagnetism in the junction, we
(1) and (2), correspondingly, because those equations are
fabricate a junction with W  200 nm, containing pure Ni,
obtained for symmetric junctions, with additive contribu-
which is a strong ferromagnet. The SEM image is shown
tions from two equal electrodes. Therefore, the anticipated
in the inset in Fig. 2. The main panel in Fig. 2 shows
effective quantization area A = 0 /H for these junctions
the zero-bias ac resistance of the Nb/Ni/Nb junction for
is A  (W2 /1.8 + WL/2)/2  10.4 μm2 .
upward and downward sweeps of the magnetic field at
T = 1.7 K (measured with 5 μA current amplitude at a fre-
B. Characteristics of Nb/Cu-Ni/Nb junctions quency of a few hertz). Hysteresis due to the coercivity of
Ni can be clearly seen. The R(H ) modulation reflects the
Figure 1(e) shows the current-voltage (I -V) characteris-
Ic (H ) modulation: minima (maxima) of R(H ) correspond
tics for one of the junctions at T = 6.8 K and at different
to maxima (minima) of Ic (H ) (for clarification, see, e.g.,
magnetic field strengths. It can be seen that the I -V char-
acteristics are nonhysteretic and that the critical current
is modulated by a small out-of plane field. The temper-
ature dependencies of the I -V characteristics for similar
junctions have already been reported in Refs. [10,36].
Figure 1(f) shows the field dependence of the critical
current Ic (H ) for the top junction (the bottom JJ exhibits
similar characteristics). Measurements are carried out at
T  6 K, before making the separating FIB cut. In this
case, the current is sent uniformly through both junc-
tions, straight from the top to the bottom electrode, as
sketched in the inset. A regular Fraunhofer-like modula-
tion indicates good uniformity of the JJs. The Ic (H ) does
not exhibit hysteresis, confirming that the Cu-Ni layer is
in the superparamagnetic state. Note that the values of the
critical current and of Ic (H ) for the two junctions are very
similar, reflecting the reproducibility of the junction fabri-
cation. The flux-quantization field is H  1 Oe, yielding
the effective quantization area A = 0 /H  21 μm2 . All
the magnetic field from such an area is collected inside the
junction. Note that this area is twice as large as the
value anticipated above from the junction geometry alone
(10.4 μm2 ). We ascribe the corresponding improvement in
sensitivity to the additional field-focusing contribution of
the Cu-Ni barrier with high μF . FIG. 2. R vs H modulation for a Nb/Ni/Nb junction of width
The 2D planar geometry allows a flexible design and W = 200 nm. The strong ferromagnetism in the Ni leads to
in situ tunability. Figures 1(g) and 1(h) show the Ic (H ) pat- the hysteresis in R(H ). The inset shows a SEM image of the
terns of the top junction with the bias current sent (g) from structure.

014062-4
PLANAR SUPERCONDUCTOR-FERROMAGNET...
Ref. [19]). The Fraunhofer-type modulation of R(H ) can
be seen. The period H  0.9 kOe is in agreement with
Eq. (1) for W = 200 nm. This confirms that miniaturization
of a planar sensor to nanometer scale is indeed simple but
is accompanied by the inevitable deterioration of the field
sensitivity. It is also clear that the ferromagnetic barrier
introduces hysteresis, which is detrimental for sensor oper-
ation [33]. Therefore, below we focus on the analysis of
a micron-sized planar sensor with the superparamagnetic
Cu-Ni barrier.
IV. MODELLING OF THE OPERATION OF THE
PLANAR-JUNCTION SENSOR
To clarify the advantages of planar SFS junctions as
scanning-probe sensors, we perform numerical modelling
of their response to a point object, e.g., a single Abrikosov
vortex.
A. An image of a vortex
The response of our junctions to an Abrikosov vortex
in the electrode has been studied in Refs. [14,25]. Those
results correspond to zero distance, z = 0, between the sen-
sor and the sample. It has been shown that the stray field
from the vortex spreads along the surface of the junction
electrodes and is guided into the junction at the junction
line. The fraction of the guided flux corresponds to the
polar angle of the vortex within the junction. The mag-
netic field B(y) in the junction induces the Josephson phase
gradient,
∂ϕ 2π A
= B(y), (3)
∂y W0
where A is the effective quantization area of the junction.
Therefore, the vortex-induced Josephson phase shift in the
junction can be approximated by the polar angle
 
y − yV
ϕV (y)  arctan . (4)
xV
Here, xV , yV are the coordinates of the vortex with the
y axis along the junction line and with x perpendicular
to the junction along the electrodes. Thus, xV is the dis-
tance between the vortex and the junction line and yV is the
position of the vortex with respect to the midpoint of the
junction.
B. Asymmetry with respect to the scanning direction
Figure 3(a) shows a simulated scan image of a vortex
by a planar-junction sensor, i.e., the induced flux versus
the position of the junction midpoint. Naturally, it has a
maximum when the junction is on top of the vortex. The
red dashed lines in Fig. 3(a) mark the edges of the junc-
tion electrodes in this case. In the simulation, we assume
014062-5
PHYS. REV. APPLIED 11, 014062 (2019)
that there is flux focusing (guided flux) according to Eqs.
(3) and (4) when the vortex is placed beneath the planar
electrodes. In addition, we include a scattered dipole field,
which exists at any position of the vortex.
Figures 3(b) and 3(c) show linear scans (b) along and
(c) across the junction line at different offset distances. It
can be seen that the total induced flux is asymmetric with
respect to the scanning direction. For scans along the junc-
tion, it is parabolic (flat at y = 0), which means that the
sensor is not sensitive to small displacements y  W,
similar to that for a pickup loop of a scanning SQUID
[2,6]. However, the scans in the perpendicular direction
are linear with a cusp at x = 0. Therefore, in this scanning
direction the planar-junction detector has better spatial res-
olution than the size of the sensor (W, L), i.e., better than a
similar-sized SQUID.
The asymmetry of the spatial sensitivity of a conven-
tional overlap-type Josephson junction with respect to the
scanning direction has been also predicted in Ref. [11].
However, in that case it was due to the difference in the
size of the junction in the two directions. The overlap junc-
tion represents a sandwich with a barrier layer between two
thin superconducting films. The effective size of the corre-
sponding sensor in the direction perpendicular to the plane
of the junction is equal to the total thickness of the sand-
wich, which is typically much smaller than the width of
the junction L  W. This leads to the asymmetry, which
is similar in origin to that for a SQUID with an elongated
pickup loop. The asymmetry of the planar-junction sen-
sor is different. Note that the simulation in Fig. 3 is made
for long electrodes with L  W. Therefore, the only length
scale in the problem is the electrode width W. The scan-
ning direction asymmetry in our case is associated with the
asymmetry of the flux-focusing phenomenon (guided flux).
This leads to a different functional dependence in the two
scanning directions, as described by Eq. (4), rather than
a simple scaling of the spatial resolution with the corre-
sponding size, as in the SQUID or overlap junction cases.
Importantly, unlike an overlap junction or a SQUID with a
squeezed loop L  W, which have reduced field sensitiv-
ity H ∼ 0 /WL, the asymmetry of the spatial resolution
in a planar-junction detector is achieved without losing the
field sensitivity H ∼ 0 /W2 .
V. DISCUSSION OF SENSOR PERFORMANCE
A. Analysis of noise
The total (frequency-integrated) flux noise of a SQUID
is determined by the net inductance Ln [1,37]:
δ2 = kB TLn , (5)
where T is the operating temperature. For a typical scan-
ning SQUID sensor [6] with Ln = 40 pH and T = 4.2 K,
it is δ  2.3 × 10−2 0 . It should not be confused with
GOLOD, KAPRAN, and KRASNOV PHYS. REV. APPLIED 11, 014062 (2019)

(a)

(b) (c)

FIG. 3. (a) A simulated scan image of a vortex by a planar-junction sensor. The color scale represents the total induced flux in the
junction versus the position of the junction midpoint. Naturally, it has a maximum when the junction is on top of the vortex. The
red dashed lines mark the edges of the junction electrodes in this case. (b),(c) Linear scans (b) along and (c) across the junction line
at different offset distances. Note the asymmetry of the sensor response: for scans parallel to the junction (b), the total flux changes
parabolically, while for scans perpendicular to the junction line (c), it changes linearly with distance, leading to a resolution that is
better than the size of the electrode.

high-frequency (104 –106 Hz) spectral noise,√ which is typ-
ically much lower, at approximately μ0 / Hz [4,6]. The
total noise given by Eq. (5) corresponds to the actual noise
in the dc measurements. Thus it should be compared with
the presented dc data for our devices. For the bias con-
figuration in Figs. 1(g) and 1(h), a detectable dc-current
variation δIc = 1 μA at the sharp slope corresponds to
more than an order of magnitude better number δ 
10−3 0 compared to a typical SQUID sensor, despite a
higher T = 6 K. This is not surprising because geometrical
inductance and this type of flux noise are usually negligi-
ble for Josephson junctions [11]. In general, it can be said
that the noise performance of a SQUID is no better than
that of its junctions.
The reported dc (total) flux noise of approximately
10−3 0 is most likely caused by thermal fluctuations of
the switching (critical) current. An analysis of such fluc-
tuations in our junctions has been presented in Ref. [10]
(see Fig. 16 there). It has been shown that high damping in
those SFS junctions leads to the collapse of thermal fluc-
tuations at elevated T, which greatly reduces this type of
noise. Using the reported maximum width of the switching
current histograms, δIc  60 nA [10] and for Ic = 100 μA
we obtain δ/0  δIc /Ic  6 × 10−4 , which is compa-
rable to the experimentally observed value.
The high-frequency junction
√ noise is dominated by
Johnson noise [37], δI = 4kB T/R, which for our √ junc-
tions and T = 4.2 K is approximately 100 pA/ Hz.
At the highest
√ slope Ic (), this corresponds to δ 
10−7 0 / Hz.
B. Enhancement of the voltage readout by serial
junction connection
Our junctions have a rather small Ic Rn  20 μV, which
determines the voltage readout. It is possible to tune Ic Rn

014062-6
PLANAR SUPERCONDUCTOR-FERROMAGNET... PHYS. REV. APPLIED 11, 014062 (2019)

(a) (b) (c)

(d) (e) (f)

FIG. 4. (a) A scanning-probe-sensor design with three junctions in series (the vertical orange lines) and two separating cuts for
inducing the self-field effect. (b) Ic (H ) patterns for both junctions on a Nb/Cu-Ni/Nb sample with a separating cut. The inset shows the
bias configuration: although the bias current is sent from the top to the bottom, as in case of Fig. 1(f), the cut leads to current flow along
the junction and thus induces the self-field distortion of Ic (H ). (c) The I -V characteristics of both Nb/Cu-Ni/Nb junctions and their
serial connection, demonstrating doubling of the readout voltage. (d) A sensor design with a single junction and an additional electrode
for feedback (control-line) operation. (e) A demonstration of the offset of the Ic (H ) patterns of the bottom Nb/Cu-Ni/Nb junction at
four control currents along the junction. (f) The position of the central lobe in Ic (H ) for positive and negative Ic as a function of
the control current. It represents the dynamic range for feedback operation ±6 Oe, corresponding to ±50 . The inset shows the bias
configuration corresponding to the offset demonstrated in (e).

over a broad range by changing the FIB cut depth [36].
Alternatively, it can be multiplied by the serial arrange-
ment of several junctions, as sketched in Fig. 4(a). A
self-field can be induced by the separating cuts between
the junctions. In this case, the bias current from the left
to the right electrode will have to flow vertically along
the junction lines, generating a self-field in JJs. The stud-
ied sample allows this idea to be tested, since it contains
two junctions. Figure 4(b) shows the Ic (H ) patterns of both
junctions at T  6 K, measured after making the separat-
ing cut, which is marked in Fig. 1(d). The bias current is
sent from the top to the bottom electrode, just as in the case
of Fig. 1(f) [see the sketch in Fig. 4(b)]. However, the pres-
ence of the cut induces the desired self-field distortion of
the Ic (H ) patterns. At the same time, this does not cause
substantial deterioration of the sensitivity: H remains
at  1 Oe. The spatial resolution should not deteriorate
significantly either, because the distance between the junc-
tions, L  1.3 μm, is significantly smaller than the width,
W  5.6 μm. Figure 4(c) shows the corresponding I -V
characteristics of an individual junction and their serial
sum at H corresponding to the maximum positive value
of Ic . It can be seen that the Ic Rn value of the two junc-
tions in series indeed doubles. The multiplication of the
output is a consequence of the high reproducibility of the
fabrication technique, which leads to nearly identical Ic (H )
patterns for the two junctions [see Fig. 4(b)].
C. Improving field sensitivity by means of the
self-field effect
The planar geometry allows simple adjustment of the
self-field effect and, thus, the field sensitivity. It increases

014062-7
GOLOD, KAPRAN, and KRASNOV
with a decrease in the angle and the gap between elec-
trodes. With proper design, dIc /dH can be made infinitely
large (with a limitation that the width of the lobe should be
larger than the current noise, discussed above). In Fig. 4(d),
we sketch the simplest design for the sensor, with two
almost parallel electrodes and a small gap between them
for enhancement of the self-field. The best sensitivity is
achieved in a narrow field range with the maximum Ic (H )
slope. Therefore, for optimal operation, the sensor should
be kept at this point. In SQUIDs, this is achieved by a sep-
arate feedback loop [1,4,6]. In our planar JJs, this can be
done in a simpler way by adding one additional electrode,
as sketched in Fig. 4(d). The third electrode, attached to
the bottom right-hand side of the JJ, facilitates current flow
along the junction (from the top right to the bottom right
electrode). In this case, the electrode itself acts as a control
line for offsetting the sensor.
D. Feedback operation using the junction electrode as
a control line
The studied Nb/Cu-Ni/Nb sensor has four electrodes
[see Fig. 1(d)]. Therefore, we can use two of them (top
and bottom) for sending the bias current and the other
two (left and right) for sending the control current, Icontrol .
Figure 4(e) shows the Ic (H ) of the bottom Nb/Cu-Ni/Nb
junction, measured at four control currents. The bias- and
control-current configurations are sketched in the inset in
Fig. 4(f). It can be seen that the Ic (H ) patterns are shifted
by the control current. This allows feedback operation of
the sensor at the maximum sensitivity point. Figure 4(f)
shows the corresponding shift of the maxima at the cen-
tral lobes Ic ( = 0) for positive (circles) and negative
(squares) bias currents as a function of the control cur-
rent. The linear shift demonstrates the dynamic range of
the feedback operation of ±6 Oe, corresponding to ±50
for this particular device. This means that upon scanning of
a sample, the sensor will be able to measure signals in the
broad range ±50 in a feedback mode with the maximum
field sensitivity.
VI. CONCLUSIONS
To conclude, we propose and study a magnetic sen-
sor based on a single-planar SFS Josephson junction. We
verify it experimentally using a superparamagnetic Cu-Ni
alloy and a ferromagnet Ni as a barrier material. The sim-
ple planar geometry facilitates flexible design of the sensor
and in situ tuning of its characteristics. This allows utiliza-
tion of the self-field effect for amplification of sensitivity,
feedback operation over a broad dynamic range using junc-
tion electrodes as a control line, and the employment of
several junctions in series for enhancing the voltage read-
out. We demonstrate downscaling of the device to 200 nm.
We conclude that the planar SFS junction may outperform
similar-sized SQUIDs both in terms of spatial resolution
014062-8
PHYS. REV. APPLIED 11, 014062 (2019)
in the scanning direction perpendicular to the junction line
and in terms of field sensitivity, due to the double flux-
focusing effects: a large demagnetization factor for the
superconducting films and a large μF for the ferromag-
netic barrier. We argue that the combination of high field
sensitivity, low flux noise due to a small inductance, high
spatial resolution in one direction, and simple and flexible
2D design makes planar SFS junctions beneficial for use
as scanning-probe sensors.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The work was supported by the European Union H2020-
WIDESPREAD-05-2017-Twinning project “SPINTECH”
under Grant Agreement No. 810144. The final version of
the manuscript was prepared during a sabbatical period of
V.M.K. at Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology.
V.M.K. is grateful to MIPT for hospitality.
[1] D. Koelle, R. Kleiner, F. Ludwig, E. Dantsker, and J.
Clarke, High-transition-temperature superconducting quan-
tum interference devices, Rev. Mod. Phys. 71, 631 (1999).
[2] J. R. Kirtley, and J. P. Wikswo, Jr., Scanning SQUID
microscopy, Annu. Rev. Mater. Sci. 29, 117 (1999).
[3] P. Josephs-Franks, L. Hao, A. Tzalenchuk, J. Davies, O.
Kazakova, J. C. Gallop, L. Brown, and J. C. Macfarlane,
Measurement of the spatial sensitivity of miniature
SQUIDs using magnetic-tipped STM, Supercond. Sci.
Technol. 16, 1570 (2003).
[4] M. E. Huber, N. C. Koshnick, H. Bluhm, L. J. Archuleta,
T. Azua, P. G. Björnsson, B. W. Gardner, S. T. Halloran, E.
A. Lucero, and K. A. Moler, Gradiometric micro-SQUID
susceptometer for scanning measurements of mesoscopic
samples, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 79, 053704 (2008).
[5] V. Bouchiat, Detection of magnetic moments using a
nano-SQUID: Limits of resolution and sensitivity in near-
field SQUID magnetometry, Supercond. Sci. Technol. 22,
064002 (2009).
[6] J. R. Kirtley, L. Paulius, A. J. Rosenberg, J. C. Palmstrom,
C. M. Holland, E. M. Spanton, D. Schiessl, C. L. Jermain,
J. Gibbons, Y.-K.-K. Fung, M. E. Huber, D. C. Ralph, M.
B. Ketchen, G. W. Gibson, and K. A. Moler, Scanning
SQUID susceptometers with sub-micron spatial resolution,
Rev. Sci. Instrum. 87, 093702 (2016).
[7] C. Granata, and A. Vettoliere, Nano superconducting quan-
tum interference device: A powerful tool for nanoscale
investigations, Phys. Rep. 614, 1 (2016).
[8] D. Vasyukov, Y. Anahory, L. Embon, D. Halbertal, J.
Cuppens, L. Neeman, A. Finkler, Y. Segev, Y. Myasoedov,
M. L. Rappaport, M. E. Huber, and E. Zeldov, A scanning
superconducting quantum interference device with single
electron spin sensitivity, Nat. Nanotechnol. 8, 639 (2013).
[9] A. Uri, A. Y. Meltzer, Y. Anahory, L. Embon, E. O.
Lachman, D. Halbertal, H. R. Naren, Y. Myasoedov, M. E.
Huber, A. F. Young, and Eli Zeldov, Electrically tunable
multiterminal SQUID-on-Tip, Nano Lett. 16, 6910 (2016).
PLANAR SUPERCONDUCTOR-FERROMAGNET...
[10] V. M. Krasnov, T. Golod, T. Bauch, and P. Delsing, Anticor-
relation between temperature and fluctuations of the switch-
ing current in moderately damped Josephson junctions,
Phys. Rev. B 76, 224517 (2007).
[11] B. L. T. Plourde, and D. J. Van Harlingen, Design of a
scanning Josephson junction microscope for submicron-
resolution magnetic imaging, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 70, 4344
(1999).
[12] I. I. Soloviev, N. V. Klenov, S. V. Bakurskiy, M. Yu.
Kupriyanov, A. L. Gudkov, and A. S. Sidorenko, Beyond
Moore’s technologies: Operation principles of a super-
conductor alternative, Beilstein J. Nanotechnol. 8, 2689
(2017).
[13] A. K. Feofanov, V. A. Oboznov, V. V. Bol‘ginov, J.
Lisenfeld, S. Poletto, V. V. Ryazanov, A. N. Rossolenko,
M. Khabipov, D. Balashov, A. B. Zorin, P. N. Dmitriev, V.
P. Koshelets, and A. V. Ustinov, Implementation of super-
conductor/ferromagnet/superconductor π -shifters in super-
conducting digital and quantum circuits, Nat. Phys. 6, 593
(2010).
[14] T. Golod, A. Rydh, and V. M. Krasnov, Detection of the
Phase Shift from a Single Abrikosov Vortex, Phys. Rev.
Lett. 104, 227003 (2010).
[15] D. M. Heim, N. G. Pugach, M. Yu. Kupriyanov, E.
Goldobin, D. Koelle, and R. Kleiner, Ferromagnetic pla-
nar Josephson junction with transparent interfaces: A φ
junction proposal, J. Phys. Condens. Matter 25, 215701
(2013).
[16] E. C. Gingrich, B. M. Niedzielski, J. A. Glick, Y. Wang,
D. L. Miller, R. Loloee, W. P. Pratt, Jr., and N. O. Birge,
Controllable 0 − π Josephson junctions containing a ferro-
magnetic spin valve, Nat. Phys. 12, 564 (2016).
[17] T. S. Khaire, M. A. Khasawneh, W. P. Pratt, Jr., and N.
O. Birge, Observation of Spin-Triplet Superconductivity
in Co-Based Josephson Junctions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104,
137002 (2010).
[18] P. V. Leksin, N. N. Garifyanov, I. A. Garifullin, J.
Schumann, V. Kataev, O. G. Schmidt, and B. Büch-
ner, Manifestation of New Interference Effects in a
Superconductor-Ferromagnet Spin Valve, Phys. Rev. Lett.
106, 067005 (2011).
[19] A. Iovan, T. Golod, and V. M. Krasnov, Controllable gen-
eration of a spin-triplet supercurrent in a Josephson spin
valve, Phys. Rev. B 90, 134514 (2014).
[20] N. Banerjee, C. B. Smiet, R. G. J. Smits, A. Ozaeta, F. S.
Bergeret, M. G. Blamire, and J. W. A. Robinson, Evidence
for spin selectivity of triplet pairs in superconducting spin
valves, Nat. Commun. 5, 3048 (2014).
[21] Y. Zhu, A. Pal, M. G. Blamire, and Z. H. Barber, Super-
conducting exchange coupling between ferromagnets, Nat.
Mater. 16, 195 (2017).
[22] K. Lahabi, M. Amundsen, J. A. Ouassou, E. Beukers, M.
Pleijster, J. Linder, P. Alkemade, and J. Aarts, Controlling
supercurrents and their spatial distribution in ferromagnets,
Nat. Commun. 8, 2056 (2017).
[23] T. E. Golikova, F. Huebler, D. Beckmann, I. E.
Batov, T. Yu. Karminskaya, M. Yu. Kupriyanov, A. A.
Golubov, and V. V. Ryazanov, Double proximity effect in
014062-9
PHYS. REV. APPLIED 11, 014062 (2019)
hybrid planar superconductor-(normal metal/ferromagnet)-
superconductor structures, Phys. Rev. B 86, 064416
(2012).
[24] B. Baek, W. H. Rippard, S. P. Benz, S. E. Russek, and P.
D. Dresselhaus, Hybrid superconducting-magnetic memory
device using competing order parameters, Nat. Commun. 5,
3888 (2014).
[25] T. Golod, A. Iovan, and V. M. Krasnov, Single Abrikosov
vortices as quantized information bits, Nat. Commun. 6,
8628 (2015).
[26] B. M. Niedzielski, T. J. Bertus, J. A. Glick, R. Loloee, W. P.
Pratt, Jr., and N. O. Birge, Spin-valve Josephson junctions
for cryogenic memory, Phys. Rev. B 97, 024517 (2018).
[27] Y. M. Ivanchenko, and T. K. Soboleva, Nonlocal interaction
in Josephson junctions, Phys. Lett. A 147, 65 (1990).
[28] R. G. Mints, Nonlocal Josephson electrodynamics, J. Low
Temp. Phys. 106, 183 (1997).
[29] V. G. Kogan, V. V. Dobrovitski, J. R. Clem, Y. Mawatari,
and R. G. Mints, Josephson junction in a thin film, Phys.
Rev. B 63, 144501 (2001).
[30] A. A. Boris, A. Rydh, T. Golod, H. Motzkau, A. M.
Klushin, and V. M. Krasnov, Evidence for Nonlocal Elec-
trodynamics in Planar Josephson Junctions, Phys. Rev. Lett.
111, 117002 (2013).
[31] M. Moshe, V. G. Kogan, and R. G. Mints, Edge-type
Josephson junctions in narrow thin-film strips, Phys. Rev.
B 78, 020510(R) (2008).
[32] J. R. Clem, Josephson junctions in thin and narrow rect-
angular superconducting strips, Phys. Rev. B 81, 144515
(2010).
[33] S. A. Gudoshnikov, Y. V. Deryuzhkina, P. E. Rudenchik, Y.
S. Sitnov, S. I. Bondarenko, A. A. Shablo, P. P. Pavlov, A.
S. Kalabukhov, O. V. Snigirev, and P. Seidel, Magnetic flux
guide for high-resolution SQUID microscope, IEEE Trans.
Appl. Supercond. 11, 219 (2001).
[34] I. S. Veshchunov, V. A. Oboznov, A. N. Rossolenko, A.
S. Prokofiev, L. Ya. Vinnikov, A. Yu. Rusanov, and D. V.
Matveev, Observation of the magnetic domain structure in
Cu0.47 Ni0.53 thin films at low temperatures, JETP Lett. 88,
758 (2008).
[35] R. W. Moseley, W. E. Booij, E. J. Tarte, and M. G. Blamire,
Direct Writing of Low Superconductor-Normal Metal-
Superconductor Junctions Using a Focused Ion Beam,
Appl. Phys. Lett. 75, 262 (1999).
[36] V. M. Krasnov, O. Ericsson, S. Intiso, P. Delsing, V. A.
Oboznov, A. S. Prokofiev, and V. V. Ryazanov, Planar
S-F-S Josephson junctions made by focused ion beam
etching, Physica C 418, 16 (2005).
[37] A. Barone, and G. Paterno, Physics and Applications of the
Josephson Effect (A Wiley Intersc. Publ., New York, 1982),
ISBN 0-471-01469-9.
[38] S. A. Vasenko, K. K. Likharev, and V. K. Semenov, Static
properties of distributed inhomogeneous Josephson junc-
tions, Sov. Phys. JETP 54, 766 (1981).
[39] V. M. Krasnov, V. A. Oboznov, and N. F. Pedersen, Fluxon
dynamics in long Josephson junctions in the presence of a
temperature gradient or spatial nonuniformity, Phys. Rev. B
55, 14486 (1997).