License: CC BY 4.0
arXiv:2303.01902v3 [cond-mat.mes-hall] 06 Apr 2024

Superconducting Diode Effect Sign Change in Epitaxial Al-InAs Josepshon Junctions

Neda Lotfizadeh    William F. Schiela Center for Quantum Information Physics, Department of Physics, New York University, New York, NY 10003, USA    Barış Pekerten Department of Physics & Astronomy, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI 48201, USA Department of Physics, University at Buffalo, State University of New York, Buffalo, NY 14260, USA    Peng Yu    Bassel Heiba Elfeky    William M. Strickland Center for Quantum Information Physics, Department of Physics, New York University, New York, NY 10003, USA    Alex Matos-Abiague Department of Physics & Astronomy, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI 48201, USA    Javad Shabani [email protected] Center for Quantum Information Physics, Department of Physics, New York University, New York, NY 10003, USA
(April 6, 2024)
Abstract

Abstract

There has recently been a surge of interest in studying the superconducting diode effect (SDE) partly due to the possibility of uncovering the intrinsic properties of a material system. A change of sign of the SDE at finite magnetic field has previously been attributed to different mechanisms. Here, we observe the SDE in epitaxial Al-InAs Josephson junctions with strong Rashba spin-orbit coupling (SOC). We show that this effect strongly depends on the orientation of the in-plane magnetic field. In the presence of a strong magnetic field, we observe a change of sign in the SDE. Simulation and measurement of supercurrent suggest that depending on the superconducting widths, WSsubscript𝑊SW_{\text{S}}italic_W start_POSTSUBSCRIPT S end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, this sign change may not necessarily be related to 0–ππ\uppiroman_π or topological transitions. We find that the strongest sign change in junctions with narrow WSsubscript𝑊SW_{\text{S}}italic_W start_POSTSUBSCRIPT S end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is consistent with SOC-induced asymmetry of the critical current under magnetic-field inversion, while in wider WSsubscript𝑊SW_{\text{S}}italic_W start_POSTSUBSCRIPT S end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, the sign reversal could be related to 0–ππ\uppiroman_π transitions and topological superconductivity.

I Introduction

Nonreciprocity in non-centrosymmetric quantum systems has been well studied in semiconductors as they are essential for the rectification function in electrical diodes and solar cells. There has been a recent rise of interest in nonreciprocity in superconductors, implying a progress towards designing superconducting diodes and its possible application in modern electronic circuits, sensors, and detectors [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12]. Nonreciprocal critical currents in superconductors occur when the magnitude of the critical supercurrent, Icsubscript𝐼cI_{\text{c}}italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, depends on the direction in which the current is swept. Theoretically, the so-called diode effect can occur when both inversion and time reversal symmetries are broken, where the latter can be achieved by magnetic proximity effect, in magnetic Josephson junctions, or by applying an external magnetic field. This effect has been attributed to the presence of finite-momentum Cooper pairs and the change in the nature of superconductivity [13, 14, 7, 15, 16]. Recent studies have suggested the existence of the superconducting diode effect (SDE) in Josephson junctions (JJs) with large Rashba spin-orbit coupling (SOC) [2, 17, 18, 6, 1, 5, 19]. The magnitude of the supercurrent in JJs with SOC depends on the direction of the magnetic field, as the Rashba and Dresselhaus effects can have different contributions [20, 21]. Therefore, investigating the SDE through a JJ can provide information about the SOC in its semiconductor.

Planar JJs fabricated on epitaxial Al-InAs heterostructures are great candidates to study SDE due to their strong SOC [22, 3, 2]. Such devices have also shown signatures of topological phase transition when their time reversal symmetry is broken by an in-plane magnetic field [23, 24, 25]. Recently, Costa et al. [17] have reported a sign reversal of the AC SDE in multi-channel JJs based on Al-InAs with strong SOC subjected to a magnetic field, and related it to a 0–ππ\uppiroman_π-like transition induced by the Zeeman interaction in the device. Conversely, Banerjee et al. [25] have proposed a SDE originating from finite-momentum Cooper pairing solely due to orbital effects, without invoking SOC or Zeeman interaction.

In this work, we study epitaxial Al-InAs JJs with various superconductive contact widths, WSsubscript𝑊𝑆W_{S}italic_W start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_S end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. By applying a magnetic field perpendicular to the current and parallel to the junction, we observe nonreciprocal critical currents due to the finite-momentum Cooper pairing enabled by the coexistence of strong Rashba SOC and the Zeeman interaction. We observe a SOC-induced shift, B*subscript𝐵B_{*}italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT * end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, of the magnetic field yielding the maximum of the critical current amplitude and use it to estimate the Rashba SOC strength in the JJ. In the absence of the magnetic field, time-reversal symmetry is restored and the SDE vanishes. However, the SDE can also vanish at certain finite magnetic fields and changes sign below the superconductor critical field, Bcsubscript𝐵cB_{\text{c}}italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. We consider JJs with various superconducting widths, WSsubscript𝑊SW_{\text{S}}italic_W start_POSTSUBSCRIPT S end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, and observe zeros of the SDE, across which the critical current difference ΔIc=Ic+|Ic|Δsubscript𝐼csuperscriptsubscript𝐼csuperscriptsubscript𝐼c\Delta I_{\text{c}}=I_{\text{c}}^{+}-|I_{\text{c}}^{-}|roman_Δ italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - | italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT | characterizing the SDE exhibits sign reversals at finite values of the magnetic field. We attribute the sign reversals to i) 0–ππ\uppiroman_π-like jumps of the ground-state superconducting phase difference for wide WSsubscript𝑊SW_{\text{S}}italic_W start_POSTSUBSCRIPT S end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and ii) SOC-induced asymmetry of the critical current under magnetic-field inversion with respect to the field-shift, B*subscript𝐵B_{*}italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT * end_POSTSUBSCRIPT for narrow WSsubscript𝑊SW_{\text{S}}italic_W start_POSTSUBSCRIPT S end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. In a gated junction, we observe the SDE and SOC-induced shift at zero and positive gate voltages where the SOC is strong in our system. However, the SDE is negligible when a negative gate voltage is applied, suggesting that the Rashba strength is relatively small at negative gate voltages. This agrees with our previous studies of SOC strength measurements on gated Hall bars.

II Results and Discussion

II.1 Devices and measurement details

Our junctions are based on epitaxial superconducting Al thin films grown in-situ on InAs heterostructures by molecular beam epitaxy on a InP substrate followed by a graded buffer layer [22, 26, 27]. Typically, the critical field of thin film of Al is greater than 1 T. Fig. 1(a) shows a general schematic of our planar JJs. We study junctions with varying superconducting widths from WS=0.15 µmsubscript𝑊Stimes0.15µmW_{\text{S}}=$0.15\text{\,}\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro}\mathrm{m}$italic_W start_POSTSUBSCRIPT S end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = start_ARG 0.15 end_ARG start_ARG times end_ARG start_ARG roman_µ roman_m end_ARG to WS=1 µmsubscript𝑊Stimes1µmW_{\text{S}}=$1\text{\,}\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro}\mathrm{m}$italic_W start_POSTSUBSCRIPT S end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG times end_ARG start_ARG roman_µ roman_m end_ARG. All the junctions are W=4 µm𝑊times4µmW=$4\text{\,}\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro}\mathrm{m}$italic_W = start_ARG 4 end_ARG start_ARG times end_ARG start_ARG roman_µ roman_m end_ARG wide and are fabricated using a transene selective wet etching of Al. Fig. 1(b) shows a false colored scanning electron microscopy (SEM) image of a typical L=150 nm𝐿times150nmL=$150\text{\,}\mathrm{n}\mathrm{m}$italic_L = start_ARG 150 end_ARG start_ARG times end_ARG start_ARG roman_nm end_ARG long junction with superconducting width of WS=1 µmsubscript𝑊Stimes1µmW_{\text{S}}=$1\text{\,}\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro}\mathrm{m}$italic_W start_POSTSUBSCRIPT S end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG times end_ARG start_ARG roman_µ roman_m end_ARG. The Al induced gap in our junctions is about Δ=220 µeVΔtimes220µeV\Delta=$220\text{\,}\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V}$roman_Δ = start_ARG 220 end_ARG start_ARG times end_ARG start_ARG roman_µ roman_eV end_ARG estimated from critical temperature, Tcsubscript𝑇cT_{\text{c}}italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. The semiconductor-superconductor transparency of our junctions are reported in our previous works [28, 29, 30] and can host modes with near unity transparency. All the measurements in this study are performed at T30 mK𝑇times30mKT\approx$30\text{\,}\mathrm{m}\mathrm{K}$italic_T ≈ start_ARG 30 end_ARG start_ARG times end_ARG start_ARG roman_mK end_ARG in a dilution refrigerator equipped with a three-axis vector magnet. As shown in Fig. 1(b), the z𝑧zitalic_z-axis of the magnet is perpendicular to the sample plane, while x𝑥xitalic_x and y𝑦yitalic_y-axes are in-plane components aligned parallel to the current and junction, respectively.

Refer to caption

Figure 1: Devices and measurement methods. (a) A schematic of a junction of length L𝐿Litalic_L, width W𝑊Witalic_W and superconducting width of WSsubscript𝑊SW_{\text{S}}italic_W start_POSTSUBSCRIPT S end_POSTSUBSCRIPT fabricated on the Al-InAs heterostructure. The superconducting contacts are made of Al and the quantum well (QW) consists of a layer of InAs grown between two layers of In0.810.81{}_{0.81}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 0.81 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPTGa0.190.19{}_{0.19}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 0.19 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPTAs. (b) False colored SEM image of a typical junction showing Al (blue) and QW (green) regions. The dashed line between the superconducting contacts is the W=4 µm𝑊times4µmW=$4\text{\,}\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro}\mathrm{m}$italic_W = start_ARG 4 end_ARG start_ARG times end_ARG start_ARG roman_µ roman_m end_ARG wide and L=150 nm𝐿times150nmL=$150\text{\,}\mathrm{n}\mathrm{m}$italic_L = start_ARG 150 end_ARG start_ARG times end_ARG start_ARG roman_nm end_ARG long etched gap. The magnetic field can be applied in three direction independently as shown on the SEM image. (c) Differential resistance as a function of the bias current and out-of-plane magnetic field of Josephson junction 1 (JJ1) with WS=subscript𝑊SabsentW_{\text{S}}=italic_W start_POSTSUBSCRIPT S end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0.6 µmtimes0.6µm0.6\text{\,}\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro}\mathrm{m}start_ARG 0.6 end_ARG start_ARG times end_ARG start_ARG roman_µ roman_m end_ARG at zero in-plane magnetic field. A hysteresis due to the thermal effects can be seen. White dashed line indicates the position of the maximum of the critical current. (d) A line cut of (c) showing hysteresis in voltage versus current when the bias is swept from negative to positive. The values of supercurrent on each side are different due to the thermal effects. (e) Voltage versus current when the bias is swept from negative to zero (blue) and positive to zero (red). The values of supercurrent on two sides are expected to be equal in a conventional JJ.

Fig. 1(c) presents the differential resistance as a function of the bias current and applied out-of-plane magnetic field for the junction JJ1 with WS=subscript𝑊SabsentW_{\text{S}}=italic_W start_POSTSUBSCRIPT S end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0.6 µmtimes0.6µm0.6\text{\,}\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro}\mathrm{m}start_ARG 0.6 end_ARG start_ARG times end_ARG start_ARG roman_µ roman_m end_ARG when the in-plane field is set to zero. The observed Fraunhofer pattern shows a hysteresis due to heating effects when bias is swept through zero [31, 28]. The critical current of the hot electrons branch, where the bias goes from high bias to zero, is clearly smaller than the critical current of the cold electrons branch going from zero to high bias. This is due to the difference between the effective electronic temperature of the hot and cold electrons branches before the transition to or out of the superconducting state. Such a hysteretic behavior leads to different values of critical current on each side, as can be observed in Fig. 1(d) for JJ1, and has to be avoided for accurate SDE measurements. In addition, Fig. 1(c) shows that the cold electron branch exhibits a broad switching distribution near the Fraunhofer maximum with several premature switching events. For the rest of this study, we therefore only derive the values of the critical current from the hot electrons branch, going from high bias to zero bias as shown in Fig. 1(e). These two values, i.e. the positive and negative retrap** currents, are expected to be equal in magnitude in reciprocal measurements of a conventional device without presence of in-plane magnetic field.

Refer to caption

Figure 2: Low in-plane magnetic field dependence. Absolute value of the critical currents as a function of the in-plane magnetic field for (a),(c) Josephson junction 1 (JJ1) and (b),(d) JJ2, with superconducting contact widths WSsubscript𝑊SW_{\text{S}}italic_W start_POSTSUBSCRIPT S end_POSTSUBSCRIPT indicated. (a–b) and (c–d) correspond to an in-plane magnetic field parallel and perpendicular to the current, respectively. The blue circles represent the magnitude of supercurrent when the bias is swept from negative to zero while red cross marks are for bias from positive to zero. The critical current amplitudes when the magnetic field is parallel to the current (𝑩𝒙^conditional𝑩^𝒙\bm{B}\parallel\hat{\bm{x}}bold_italic_B ∥ over^ start_ARG bold_italic_x end_ARG) are nearly equal in both directions, indicating a vanishing superconducting diode effect (SDE) [(a) and (b)]. When the magnetic field is perpendicular to the current (𝑩𝒚^conditional𝑩^𝒚\bm{B}\parallel\hat{\bm{y}}bold_italic_B ∥ over^ start_ARG bold_italic_y end_ARG), the amplitudes of the forward and reverse critical currents are different, signaling the presence of the SDE [(c) and (d)]. Note that nonreciprocity can be observed in both devices.

II.2 Low in-plane field dependence

By carefully aligning the magnet directions to Josephson junction and eliminating unwanted out-of-plane component of magnetic field (Bzsubscript𝐵𝑧B_{z}italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT), we measure the critical current in the presence of an in-plane magnetic field. Fig. 2(a) and (b) show the measured magnitude of the critical current |Ic|subscript𝐼c|I_{\text{c}}|| italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | for JJ1 with WS=subscript𝑊SabsentW_{\text{S}}=italic_W start_POSTSUBSCRIPT S end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0.6 µmtimes0.6µm0.6\text{\,}\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro}\mathrm{m}start_ARG 0.6 end_ARG start_ARG times end_ARG start_ARG roman_µ roman_m end_ARG and JJ2 with WS=subscript𝑊SabsentW_{\text{S}}=italic_W start_POSTSUBSCRIPT S end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0.15 µmtimes0.15µm0.15\text{\,}\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro}\mathrm{m}start_ARG 0.15 end_ARG start_ARG times end_ARG start_ARG roman_µ roman_m end_ARG when Bz=subscript𝐵𝑧absentB_{z}=italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0 T and the in-plane magnetic field with strength Bxsubscript𝐵𝑥B_{x}italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is parallel to the current. Blue circles and red cross marks correspond to measurement of the magnitude of the critical current when the bias is swept from negative high bias to zero and from positive high bias to zero, respectively. We find that the magnitude of the critical current in both directions is the same and there is no sign of nonreciprocity when the applied in-plane magnetic field is parallel to the current. The absence of SDE when the field is parallel to the current indicates that the dominant SOC in the junctions is of Rashba type, which is in agreement with our previous works [26, 32].

Refer to caption

Figure 3: High in-plane magnetic field dependence and sign change. Absolute value of supercurrent as a function of in-plane magnetic field perpendicular to the current in (a) Josephson junction 1 (JJ1), and (b) JJ2 at high magnetic fields, with superconducting contact widths WSsubscript𝑊SW_{\text{S}}italic_W start_POSTSUBSCRIPT S end_POSTSUBSCRIPT indicated. The blue circles represent the magnitude of supercurrent when the bias is swept from negative to zero while red cross marks are for bias from positive to zero. (c) Difference ΔIc=Ic+|Ic|Δsubscript𝐼csuperscriptsubscript𝐼csuperscriptsubscript𝐼c\Delta I_{\text{c}}=I_{\text{c}}^{+}-|I_{\text{c}}^{-}|roman_Δ italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - | italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT | between the absolute value of the critical currents measured under positive and negative biases as a function of Bysubscript𝐵𝑦B_{y}italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. Red squares and blue triangles correspond to JJ1, and JJ2, respectively. Inset: diode efficiency η=(Ic+|Ic|)/(Ic++|Ic|)𝜂superscriptsubscript𝐼csuperscriptsubscript𝐼csuperscriptsubscript𝐼csuperscriptsubscript𝐼c\eta=(I_{\text{c}}^{+}-|I_{\text{c}}^{-}|)/(I_{\text{c}}^{+}+|I_{\text{c}}^{-}|)italic_η = ( italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - | italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT | ) / ( italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + | italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT | ).

When the in-plane magnetic field is applied perpendicular to the current, in the y𝑦yitalic_y-direction, we find a difference between the forward and reverse critical currents. Fig. 2(c) and (d) show the dependence of the absolute value of critical current |Ic|subscript𝐼c|I_{\text{c}}|| italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | on Bysubscript𝐵𝑦B_{y}italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT for JJ1 and JJ2. We observe a clear nonreciprocal behavior, where the critical current is larger for positive than for negative bias when By>0subscript𝐵𝑦0B_{y}>0italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT > 0. This behaviour is reversed when the in-plane field direction is flipped to By<0subscript𝐵𝑦0B_{y}<0italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT < 0, in agreement with the theoretically expected symmetry relation Ic+(By)=|Ic(By)|superscriptsubscript𝐼csubscript𝐵𝑦superscriptsubscript𝐼csubscript𝐵𝑦I_{\text{c}}^{+}(B_{y})=|I_{\text{c}}^{-}(-B_{y})|italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = | italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( - italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) |. Details of the experimental measurements and analyses are given in Supplementary Note 1. We extract Icsubscript𝐼cI_{\text{c}}italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT at each in-plane magnetic field from the maximum of the Fraunhofer pattern at that field (Fig. S3 and S4 for more details). The same measurements were done on three additional devices with WS=0.4subscript𝑊𝑆0.4W_{S}=0.4italic_W start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_S end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0.4, 0.80.80.80.8 and 1 µmtimes1µm1\text{\,}\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro}\mathrm{m}start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG times end_ARG start_ARG roman_µ roman_m end_ARG and showed the same results, as presented in Fig. S5 and S6 of Supplementary Note 1. Those devices exhibit the same behavior as JJ1 and JJ2. In all cases we observe a shift, B*subscript𝐵B_{*}italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT * end_POSTSUBSCRIPT in the magnetic fields at which the critical currents reach their maximum values when ByIperpendicular-tosubscript𝐵𝑦𝐼B_{y}\perp Iitalic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟂ italic_I. The shift is positive for the critical current corresponding to positive bias and negative for the case of negative bias. In JJ1 and JJ2, the magnitude of shift on both negative and positive sides are the same and equal to |B*|subscript𝐵|B_{*}|| italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT * end_POSTSUBSCRIPT |=15 mT. Although the value of |Ic|subscript𝐼c|I_{\text{c}}|| italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | at few magnetic fields are very close to each other, but from the zoom-in plots of the data presented in Fig. S7, S8 and S9 for JJ1, we can see that the maximum of |Ic|subscript𝐼c|I_{\text{c}}|| italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | is at 15 mT for both positive and negative fields (dashed black line in both figures).

This observed shift is captured by our numerical tight-binding simulations (see details in Supplementary Note 2). The result of the tight-binding simulation in Fig. S13(a) for a junction with WS=0.15 µmsubscript𝑊Stimes0.15µmW_{\text{S}}=$0.15\text{\,}\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro}\mathrm{m}$italic_W start_POSTSUBSCRIPT S end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = start_ARG 0.15 end_ARG start_ARG times end_ARG start_ARG roman_µ roman_m end_ARG clearly shows the superconducting diode effect in the splitting of Ic±superscriptsubscript𝐼cplus-or-minusI_{\text{c}}^{\pm}italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ± end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, as well as the symmetry with respect to the sign of Bysubscript𝐵𝑦B_{y}italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. Moreover, B*subscript𝐵B_{*}italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT * end_POSTSUBSCRIPT indicates the presence of SOC in the junction and obeys the symmetry relation, B*(α)=B*(α)subscript𝐵𝛼subscript𝐵𝛼B_{*}(\alpha)=-B_{*}(-\alpha)italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT * end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_α ) = - italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT * end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( - italic_α ), where α𝛼\alphaitalic_α denotes the strength of the Rashba SOC. (We neglect Dresselhaus SOC for simplicity, as Rashba SOC is typically dominant in this system [32].) As an illustration, we perform numerical calculations of the magnetic field dependence of the critical currents for JJ2 and different values of the Rashba SOC strength. By tracking the fields at which the numerically calculated critical current maxima occur, we extract the α𝛼\alphaitalic_α-dependence of B*subscript𝐵B_{*}italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT * end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [see Fig. S13(b)]. The black, dashed line is just a linear fit to guide the eye. Comparing the field-shift value extracted from the experimental and the corresponding numerical simulations, we estimate the Rashba SOC strength in device JJ2 to be about 10 meV nm. This value is in overall agreement with values of α𝛼\alphaitalic_α in InAs extracted through weak antilocalization measurements [26, 32]. Although Fig. S13(b) was specifically computed for JJ2, from the fabrication process and similar composition, we expect all the samples to have similar SOC strengths.

Complementary to the numerical simulations, we provide approximate analytical expressions for the normalized critical currents at low field (see Supplementary Note 2 for detailed information),

|Ic±|I0=1b[1±csgn(ByB)](ByB)2,superscriptsubscript𝐼cplus-or-minussubscript𝐼01𝑏delimited-[]plus-or-minus1𝑐sgnminus-or-plussubscript𝐵𝑦subscript𝐵superscriptminus-or-plussubscript𝐵𝑦subscript𝐵2\frac{|I_{\text{c}}^{\pm}|}{I_{0}}=1-b\left[1\pm c\;{\rm sgn}(B_{y}\mp B_{\ast% })\right](B_{y}\mp B_{\ast})^{2},divide start_ARG | italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ± end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT | end_ARG start_ARG italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG = 1 - italic_b [ 1 ± italic_c roman_sgn ( italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∓ italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ] ( italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∓ italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , (1)

where I0subscript𝐼0I_{0}italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is the maximum absolute value of the critical current, b=(gμB/4ET)2𝑏superscriptsuperscript𝑔subscript𝜇B4subscript𝐸T2b=(g^{\ast}\mu_{\text{B}}/4E_{\text{T}})^{2}italic_b = ( italic_g start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / 4 italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT T end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, c=kso/kF𝑐subscript𝑘sosubscript𝑘Fc=k_{\text{so}}/k_{\text{F}}italic_c = italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT so end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT F end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, and B(1τ)1/4(c/b)subscript𝐵superscript1𝜏14𝑐𝑏B_{\ast}\approx(1-\tau)^{1/4}(c/\sqrt{b})italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≈ ( 1 - italic_τ ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 1 / 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_c / square-root start_ARG italic_b end_ARG ) (with τ𝜏\tauitalic_τ as the junction transparency) is the magnitude of the field at which Icsubscript𝐼cI_{\text{c}}italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is maximum. Here gsuperscript𝑔g^{\ast}italic_g start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is the effective g-factor, μBsubscript𝜇B\mu_{\text{B}}italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT the Bohr magneton, kFsubscript𝑘Fk_{\text{F}}italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT F end_POSTSUBSCRIPT the Fermi wavevector, ET=vF/(2L)subscript𝐸TPlanck-constant-over-2-pisubscript𝑣F2𝐿E_{\text{T}}=\hbar v_{\text{F}}/(2L)italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT T end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = roman_ℏ italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT F end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / ( 2 italic_L ) the Thouless energy, vFsubscript𝑣Fv_{\text{F}}italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT F end_POSTSUBSCRIPT the Fermi velocity, and kso=αm/2subscript𝑘so𝛼superscript𝑚superscriptPlanck-constant-over-2-pi2k_{\text{so}}=\alpha m^{\ast}/\hbar^{2}italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT so end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_α italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / roman_ℏ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, with msuperscript𝑚m^{\ast}italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT representing the effective mass. As discussed in Supplementary Note 2, equation (1) was obtained in the limits Lξ0much-less-than𝐿subscript𝜉0L\ll\xi_{0}italic_L ≪ italic_ξ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT where ξ0subscript𝜉0\xi_{0}italic_ξ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is the superconducting coherence length and WSsubscript𝑊SW_{\text{S}}\rightarrow\inftyitalic_W start_POSTSUBSCRIPT S end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → ∞, assuming the Zeeman interaction is sizable in the N region only, and again neglecting Dresselhaus SOC. Therefore it is not in quantitative agreement with finite WSsubscript𝑊SW_{\text{S}}italic_W start_POSTSUBSCRIPT S end_POSTSUBSCRIPT in experimental devices. However, Eq. (1) can provide a qualitative description of the main trends exhibited by the critical currents. In fact, Eq. (1) reproduces well the functional behavior of the experimental data at low field. Fig. S10 shows the experimental data of all the junctions studied fitted to Eq. (1) using b𝑏bitalic_b, c𝑐citalic_c and Bsubscript𝐵B_{\ast}italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT as fitting parameters, while Fig. S11 shows that WSsubscript𝑊SW_{\text{S}}italic_W start_POSTSUBSCRIPT S end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is not predictive of the B*subscript𝐵B_{*}italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT * end_POSTSUBSCRIPT observed in the presented devices. According to the simplified analytical model, the asymptotic behavior of B*subscript𝐵B_{*}italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT * end_POSTSUBSCRIPT at low magnetic fields does not only depend on the SOC strength but also on other system parameters, like the junction transparency (see Supplementary Note 2 and Ref. 33). Hence devices exhibiting larger values of B*subscript𝐵B_{*}italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT * end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (see bottom row of Fig. S10) may still have similar SOC strength with lower transparency.

Our experimental data together with numerical simulation suggest that the observed SDE originates from the finite-momentum Cooper pairing induced by the shift of the Fermi contours when the Zeeman interaction and the Rashba SOC coexist as illustrated in Fig. S13(c)-(e). This picture implicitly follows from the microscopic model used in the numerical simulations, which in turn are able to explain the trends observed in the experimental data. Note that the observed SDE depends on both the magnetic field strength and direction. Therefore, the non-intrisic contributions to the SDE originating from gate-dependent effective disorder in the superconducting electrodes [34], which are independent of the magnetic field, can be ruled out in our devices. Vortex asymmetric motion, another mechanism that may induce a non-reciprocal behavior [35, 36, 37], can also be disregarded as the origin of the SDE in our samples. Indeed, vortex asymmetric motion is expected to be relevant near the superconducting transition when the temperature and/or the applied field are close to their superconducting critical values. However, the SDE here reported is finite at magnetic fields as low as few mT (i.e., at fields much smaller than the critical field Bc1.6subscript𝐵c1.6B_{\text{c}}\approx 1.6italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≈ 1.6 T) and temperature of 30 mK (well below Tc1.5subscript𝑇c1.5T_{\text{c}}\approx 1.5italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≈ 1.5 K).

In the regime EZαkFmuch-less-thansubscript𝐸Z𝛼subscript𝑘FE_{\text{Z}}\ll\alpha k_{\text{F}}italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT Z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≪ italic_α italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT F end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, where EZsubscript𝐸ZE_{\text{Z}}italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT Z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, α𝛼\alphaitalic_α, and kFsubscript𝑘Fk_{\text{F}}italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT F end_POSTSUBSCRIPT denote the Zeeman energy, the Rashba SOC strength and the Fermi wave vector, respectively, the Fermi contours in the N region can be approximated as,

kλ=λkso+kF2+kso2+λκ2sin(φθ),subscript𝑘𝜆𝜆subscript𝑘sosuperscriptsubscript𝑘F2superscriptsubscript𝑘so2𝜆superscript𝜅2𝜑𝜃k_{\lambda}=-\lambda k_{\text{so}}+\sqrt{k_{\text{F}}^{2}+k_{\text{so}}^{2}+% \lambda\kappa^{2}\sin(\varphi-\theta)},italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_λ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = - italic_λ italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT so end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + square-root start_ARG italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT F end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT so end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + italic_λ italic_κ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_sin ( italic_φ - italic_θ ) end_ARG , (2)

where λ=±1𝜆plus-or-minus1\lambda=\pm 1italic_λ = ± 1, κ=2mEZ/2𝜅2superscript𝑚subscript𝐸ZsuperscriptPlanck-constant-over-2-pi2\kappa=\sqrt{2m^{\ast}E_{\text{Z}}/\hbar^{2}}italic_κ = square-root start_ARG 2 italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT Z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / roman_ℏ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG, and θ𝜃\thetaitalic_θ and φ𝜑\varphiitalic_φ determine the directions of the wave vector and magnetic field with respect to the x𝑥xitalic_x-axis, respectively. The x𝑥xitalic_x-component of the total momentum of the pairs is,

qκ2sinφkF2+kso2𝑞superscript𝜅2𝜑superscriptsubscript𝑘F2superscriptsubscript𝑘so2q\approx\frac{\kappa^{2}\sin\varphi}{\sqrt{k_{\text{F}}^{2}+k_{\text{so}}^{2}}}italic_q ≈ divide start_ARG italic_κ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_sin italic_φ end_ARG start_ARG square-root start_ARG italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT F end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT so end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG end_ARG (3)

and the Cooper pair wave function across the junction can be approximated as,

|ψ=|eiqx+|eiqx|\psi\rangle=|\uparrow\downarrow\rangle\;\text{e}^{\text{i}qx}+|\downarrow% \uparrow\rangle\;\text{e}^{-\text{i}qx}| italic_ψ ⟩ = | ↑ ↓ ⟩ e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT i italic_q italic_x end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + | ↓ ↑ ⟩ e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - i italic_q italic_x end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT (4)

and can be rewritten in terms of singlet, |S=|+||S\rangle=|\uparrow\downarrow\rangle+|\downarrow\uparrow\rangle| italic_S ⟩ = | ↑ ↓ ⟩ + | ↓ ↑ ⟩ and triplet, |T=|||T\rangle=|\uparrow\downarrow\rangle-|\downarrow\uparrow\rangle| italic_T ⟩ = | ↑ ↓ ⟩ - | ↓ ↑ ⟩ components [38],

|ψ=cos(qx)|S+isin(qx)|T.ket𝜓𝑞𝑥ket𝑆i𝑞𝑥ket𝑇|\psi\rangle=\cos(qx)|S\rangle+\text{i}\sin(qx)|T\rangle.| italic_ψ ⟩ = roman_cos ( italic_q italic_x ) | italic_S ⟩ + i roman_sin ( italic_q italic_x ) | italic_T ⟩ . (5)

For EZαkFmuch-less-thansubscript𝐸Z𝛼subscript𝑘FE_{\text{Z}}\ll\alpha k_{\text{F}}italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT Z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≪ italic_α italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT F end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, an inversion of the magnetic field orientation reverses the direction of the Fermi contours shift without affecting the spin orientation. Therefore, the coexistence of the singlet and triplet components in the presence of SOC breaks the inversion symmetry of the wave function with respect to the magnetic field direction, resulting in a non-reciprocal response with distinct forward and reverse critical currents. However, the SDE vanishes when the magnetic field is oriented along the x𝑥xitalic_x-axis (see Fig. 2(a–b)) for in this case φ=0𝜑0\varphi=0italic_φ = 0 and q=0𝑞0q=0italic_q = 0 in Eq. (3).

II.3 High in-plane field dependence

We further investigate the nonreciprocity of the critical currents at higher in-plane magnetic fields perpendicular to the current (Bysubscript𝐵𝑦B_{y}italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT) in the devices JJ1 and JJ2. Fig. 3(a) and (b) show the absolute value of the critical currents for each junction as a function of Bysubscript𝐵𝑦B_{y}italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. A dip and peak in |Ic|subscript𝐼c|I_{\text{c}}|| italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | of JJ1 is observed around By0.6 Tsimilar-tosubscript𝐵𝑦times0.6TB_{y}\sim$0.6\text{\,}\mathrm{T}$italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∼ start_ARG 0.6 end_ARG start_ARG times end_ARG start_ARG roman_T end_ARG. Previous studies have suggested such a behavior can be related to the closing and reopening of the superconducting gap [39, 24] and a topological phase transition. Our numerical simulations exhibit a phase transition at magnetic field near 0.6 T for WS=0.6 µmsubscript𝑊Stimes0.6µmW_{\text{S}}=$0.6\text{\,}\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro}\mathrm{m}$italic_W start_POSTSUBSCRIPT S end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = start_ARG 0.6 end_ARG start_ARG times end_ARG start_ARG roman_µ roman_m end_ARG as shown in Fig. S14. In contrast, JJ2 data does not show any peak or dip in the supercurrent in Fig. 3(b). Numerical simulations also do not show a phase transition for the ground state of JJ2 with WS=0.15 µmsubscript𝑊Stimes0.15µmW_{\text{S}}=$0.15\text{\,}\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro}\mathrm{m}$italic_W start_POSTSUBSCRIPT S end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = start_ARG 0.15 end_ARG start_ARG times end_ARG start_ARG roman_µ roman_m end_ARG below 1 T as shown in Fig. S15.

Refer to caption

Figure 4: Gate dependence at low in-plane magnetic field. Absolute value of the critical currents Icsubscript𝐼cI_{\text{c}}italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT as a function of the in-plane magnetic field perpendicular to the current 𝑩𝒚^conditional𝑩^𝒚\bm{B}\parallel\hat{\bm{y}}bold_italic_B ∥ over^ start_ARG bold_italic_y end_ARG) for the gated Josephson junction (JJ3) with superconducting contact width WS=subscript𝑊SabsentW_{\text{S}}=italic_W start_POSTSUBSCRIPT S end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1.0 µmtimes1.0µm1.0\text{\,}\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro}\mathrm{m}start_ARG 1.0 end_ARG start_ARG times end_ARG start_ARG roman_µ roman_m end_ARG at three different gate voltages: (a) Vg=0 Vsubscript𝑉𝑔times0VV_{g}=$0\text{\,}\mathrm{V}$italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_g end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = start_ARG 0 end_ARG start_ARG times end_ARG start_ARG roman_V end_ARG, (b) Vg=3 Vsubscript𝑉𝑔times+3VV_{g}=$3\text{\,}\mathrm{V}$italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_g end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = start_ARG 3 end_ARG start_ARG times end_ARG start_ARG roman_V end_ARG, and (c) Vg=3 Vsubscript𝑉𝑔times-3VV_{g}=$-3\text{\,}\mathrm{V}$italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_g end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = start_ARG - 3 end_ARG start_ARG times end_ARG start_ARG roman_V end_ARG. The blue circles represent the magnitude of supercurrent when the bias is swept from negative to zero while red cross marks are for bias from positive to zero. The nonreciprocity can be observed the when the gate voltage is Vg=0,+3Vsubscript𝑉𝑔03𝑉V_{g}=0,+3Vitalic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_g end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0 , + 3 italic_V, indicating the presence of the superconducting diode effect (SDE) [(a) and (b)]. When the gate voltage is Vg=3Vsubscript𝑉𝑔3𝑉V_{g}=-3Vitalic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_g end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = - 3 italic_V, the amplitudes of the forward and reverse critical currents are almost the same, indicating a vanishing of the SDE [(c)]. (d) Differential resistance of JJ3 as a function of the bias current and applied gate voltage at zero field. Here, the bias was swept from negative to positive values: the difference in positive and negative critical current observed is a hysteretic artifact, see Fig. 1(c–d) and the surrounding discussion.

Fig. 3(c) plots the difference between the absolute values of the critical currents for positive and negative biases ΔIc=Ic+|Ic|Δsubscript𝐼csuperscriptsubscript𝐼csuperscriptsubscript𝐼c\Delta I_{\text{c}}=I_{\text{c}}^{+}-|I_{\text{c}}^{-}|roman_Δ italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - | italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT |, as a function of Bysubscript𝐵𝑦B_{y}italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. The results evidence the anti-symmetric character of ΔIcΔsubscript𝐼c\Delta I_{\text{c}}roman_Δ italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, which for both junctions changes its sign when the magnetic field Bysubscript𝐵𝑦B_{y}italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is inverted. However, ΔIcΔsubscript𝐼c\Delta I_{\text{c}}roman_Δ italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT also exhibit zeros at certain values of Bysubscript𝐵𝑦B_{y}italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, across which sign reversals not related to magnetic field inversion are observed. This is particularly apparent for the device JJ2 (blue symbols) at fields By±0.35subscript𝐵𝑦plus-or-minus0.35B_{y}\approx\pm 0.35italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≈ ± 0.35 T, as shown in Fig. 3(c).

From a comparison between the experimental results and the numerical simulations, we identify two possible mechanisms responsible for the zeros of ΔIcΔsubscript𝐼c\Delta I_{\text{c}}roman_Δ italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and their associated SDE sign reversals. According to Eq. (1), the SOC induces an asymmetry in the critical currents under the magnetic field inversion with respect to B*subscript𝐵B_{*}italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT * end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, with |Ic±(B*+δB)||Ic±(B*δB)|superscriptsubscript𝐼cplus-or-minussubscript𝐵𝛿𝐵superscriptsubscript𝐼cplus-or-minussubscript𝐵𝛿𝐵|I_{\text{c}}^{\pm}(B_{*}+\delta B)|\neq|I_{\text{c}}^{\pm}(B_{*}-\delta B)|| italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ± end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT * end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_δ italic_B ) | ≠ | italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ± end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT * end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - italic_δ italic_B ) |. This asymmetry is apparent in Fig. 2(c)-(d) and Fig. 3(a)-(b). The coexistence of a finite magnetic shift, B*subscript𝐵B_{*}italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT * end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, and a strong SOC-induced critical current asymmetry can cause |Ic+|superscriptsubscript𝐼c|I_{\text{c}}^{+}|| italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT | and |Ic|superscriptsubscript𝐼c|I_{\text{c}}^{-}|| italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT | to cross at a finite magnetic field and produce a sign reversal in the SDE without involving 0–ππ\uppiroman_π-like transitions. This situation is apparent in JJ2 from Fig. 3(b) and (c), where a critical current crossing and corresponding sign reversal of ΔIcΔsubscript𝐼c\Delta I_{\text{c}}roman_Δ italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT at By0.35subscript𝐵𝑦0.35B_{y}\approx 0.35italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≈ 0.35 T are observed, respectively. The numerical simulations are in good agreement with the experimental data of JJ2, predicting a critical current crossing at By=0.4subscript𝐵𝑦0.4B_{y}=0.4italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0.4 T, which is unrelated to the 0–ππ\uppiroman_π transition at By1subscript𝐵𝑦1B_{y}\approx 1italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≈ 1 T (see Fig. S15 in Supplementary Note 2).

As discussed above, the SDE originates from finite-momentum Cooper pairing qualitatively described by a wave function lacking inversion symmetry with respect to Bysubscript𝐵𝑦B_{y}italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT when both Rashba SOC and Zeeman interaction are present. However, it follows from Eq. (5) that the inversion symmetry with respect to Bysubscript𝐵𝑦B_{y}italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is reestablished when either the singlet or triplet component vanishes at the S/N interfaces located at x=0𝑥0x=0italic_x = 0 and x=L𝑥𝐿x=Litalic_x = italic_L, i.e., when |q|L=nπ/2𝑞𝐿𝑛π2|q|L=n\uppi/2| italic_q | italic_L = italic_n roman_π / 2, where n𝑛nitalic_n is an integer number. Therefore, junctions with Lξ0WSmuch-less-than𝐿subscript𝜉0much-less-thansubscript𝑊SL\ll\xi_{0}\ll W_{\text{S}}italic_L ≪ italic_ξ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≪ italic_W start_POSTSUBSCRIPT S end_POSTSUBSCRIPT exhibit zeros of ΔIcΔsubscript𝐼c\Delta I_{\text{c}}roman_Δ italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT when,

BynπgμBET(1+kso22kF2)rl.subscript𝐵𝑦𝑛πsuperscript𝑔subscript𝜇Bsubscript𝐸T1superscriptsubscript𝑘so22superscriptsubscript𝑘F2subscript𝑟𝑙B_{y}\approx n\frac{\uppi}{g^{\ast}\mu_{\text{B}}}E_{\text{T}}\left(1+\frac{k_% {\text{so}}^{2}}{2k_{\text{F}}^{2}}\right)\,r_{l}.italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≈ italic_n divide start_ARG roman_π end_ARG start_ARG italic_g start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT T end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 1 + divide start_ARG italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT so end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 2 italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT F end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG ) italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_l end_POSTSUBSCRIPT . (6)

The re-scaling factor rl=L/(2WS+L)subscript𝑟𝑙𝐿2subscript𝑊S𝐿r_{l}=L/(2W_{\text{S}}+L)italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_l end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_L / ( 2 italic_W start_POSTSUBSCRIPT S end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_L ) has been introduced to account for the fact that the Zeeman field is likely present over the whole system and not only in the semiconductor region.

The zeros (and their associated SDE sign reversals) corresponding to odd integers in Eq. (6), say n=(2m+1)𝑛2𝑚1n=(2m+1)italic_n = ( 2 italic_m + 1 ) (with m𝑚mitalic_m an integer), can be associated with 0–ππ\uppiroman_π-like transitions the junction would experience close to equilibrium. Indeed, in the absence of currents, the superconducting phase difference self-tunes to a value ϕGSsubscriptitalic-ϕGS\phi_{\text{GS}}italic_ϕ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT GS end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (referred to as the ground-state phase difference) that minimizes the free energy of the system. For cos(qL)>0𝑞𝐿0\cos(qL)>0roman_cos ( italic_q italic_L ) > 0 the singlet component of the wave function at the two superconducting leads has the same sign, indicating that ϕGS=0subscriptitalic-ϕGS0\phi_{\text{GS}}=0italic_ϕ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT GS end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0. However, when cos(qWL)=0𝑞subscript𝑊𝐿0\cos(qW_{L})=0roman_cos ( italic_q italic_W start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_L end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = 0 [i.e., qL=(2m+1)π/2𝑞𝐿2𝑚1π2qL=(2m+1)\uppi/2italic_q italic_L = ( 2 italic_m + 1 ) roman_π / 2], the ground-state phase jumps from 0 to ππ\uppiroman_π and the singlet at the two superconducting leads acquire opposite signs for cos(qL)>0𝑞𝐿0\cos(qL)>0roman_cos ( italic_q italic_L ) > 0. Therefore, SDE sign reversals corresponding to odd values of n𝑛nitalic_n in Eq. (6) are associated to 0–ππ\uppiroman_π-like (or ππ\uppiroman_π–0-like) transitions, while additional sign reversals are expected to occur between 0–ππ\uppiroman_π and ππ\uppiroman_π–0-like transitions, when n𝑛nitalic_n is even. The 0–ππ\uppiroman_π-like ground-state phase jump has been identified as a possible signature of topological phase transitions in planar JJs [39, 24]. Hence, the nodes of ΔIcΔsubscript𝐼c\Delta I_{\text{c}}roman_Δ italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT corresponding to odd n𝑛nitalic_n may indirectly signal a transition into the topological superconducting state. However, such a signature is not conclusive, especially in JJs with narrow superconducting leads, where ground-state phase jumps are not necessarily associated to topological phase transitions [40, 41].

The numerical simulations for devices JJ1 and JJ2 reveal 0–ππ\uppiroman_π-like jumps of the ground-state phase at By±0.6subscript𝐵𝑦plus-or-minus0.6B_{y}\approx\pm 0.6italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≈ ± 0.6 T and By±1subscript𝐵𝑦plus-or-minus1B_{y}\approx\pm 1italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≈ ± 1 T, respectively [see Figs. S13 and S14(b) in Supplementary Note 2], suggesting that if the ΔIcΔsubscript𝐼c\Delta I_{\text{c}}roman_Δ italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT changes sign at higher fields [see insets in Fig. 3(c)] they could be associated to 0–ππ\uppiroman_π-like transitions with n=1𝑛1n=1italic_n = 1. However, we find that the measured current difference, ΔIcΔsubscript𝐼c\Delta I_{\text{c}}roman_Δ italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, is too small in experiment and is difficult to conclusively establish the existence of these sign reversals in range of 0.6 T to 1 T.

II.4 Gate dependence

To further investigate the effect of SOC on the SDE, we make a gated device JJ3 with WS=subscript𝑊SabsentW_{\text{S}}=italic_W start_POSTSUBSCRIPT S end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1.0 µmtimes1.0µm1.0\text{\,}\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro}\mathrm{m}start_ARG 1.0 end_ARG start_ARG times end_ARG start_ARG roman_µ roman_m end_ARG by depositing 60 nm Al22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPTO33{}_{3}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 3 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT followed by 5/40nm Cr/Au on the junction. The thickness of Al in JJ3 is 8nm and the QW has the exact same structure as the QW in other junctions in this study. Fig. 4(a–c) shows the measured magnitude of the critical current of JJ3 at three different gate voltages when Bz=0subscript𝐵𝑧0B_{z}=0italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0 and the in-plane magnetic field is perpendicular to the current (Bysubscript𝐵𝑦B_{y}italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT). A clear nonreciprocal behavior can be seen when Vgsubscript𝑉𝑔V_{g}italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_g end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0 and +3V. However, the SDE is negligible when Vg=3 Vsubscript𝑉𝑔times-3VV_{g}=$-3\text{\,}\mathrm{V}$italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_g end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = start_ARG - 3 end_ARG start_ARG times end_ARG start_ARG roman_V end_ARG. It has been reported that in InSb nanowires, the SDE drastically depends on the applied gate and orientation of magnetic field and can be suppressed in the absence of SOC in the system [8]. In previous studies of SOC effects in our system with gated Hall bar measurements, we reported that the Rashba strength can be tuned by gate voltage and is smaller at low densities[32, 26]. Fig. 4(d) shows the differential resistance of JJ3 as a function of bias and gate voltage at zero magnetic field. At Vg=3 Vsubscript𝑉𝑔times-3VV_{g}=$-3\text{\,}\mathrm{V}$italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_g end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = start_ARG - 3 end_ARG start_ARG times end_ARG start_ARG roman_V end_ARG the density is much lower than Vg=subscript𝑉𝑔absentV_{g}=italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_g end_POSTSUBSCRIPT =0 and +3V. The absence of SDE in Fig. 4(c) suggests that at Vg=3subscript𝑉𝑔3V_{g}=-3italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_g end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = - 3V the Rashba parameter is significantly smaller than the SOC strength at zero and positive gate voltages.

III Conclusion

In summary, we have studied the superconducting diode effect in epitaxial InAs/Al Josephson junctions with different superconducting width and showed that the SDE depends on the orientation of the applied in-plane magnetic field in the system. By measuring the supercurrent of the junction, we observe SDE only when the in-plane field is perpendicular to the current. We observe a shift in magnetic field yielding the maximum critical current and obtain an analytical expression describing the critical current behavior at low magnetic field. We propose a method for estimating the Rashba parameter from the measurement of the magnetic field shift of the SDE and numerical simulations. The results are in good agreement with values previously reported for our system. We also measure the SDE at high magnetic fields and observe a sign change in the ΔIcΔsubscript𝐼c\Delta I_{\text{c}}roman_Δ italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT of the WS=subscript𝑊SabsentW_{\text{S}}=italic_W start_POSTSUBSCRIPT S end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0.15 µmtimes0.15µm0.15\text{\,}\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro}\mathrm{m}start_ARG 0.15 end_ARG start_ARG times end_ARG start_ARG roman_µ roman_m end_ARG junction at By±0.35subscript𝐵𝑦plus-or-minus0.35B_{y}\approx\pm 0.35italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≈ ± 0.35 T. Using our Tight binding simulation, we conclude that this sign change is not necessarily an indicator of 0–ππ\uppiroman_π or topological transitions in the system. By measuring the SDE in a gated junction at three different gate voltages, we showed that the SDE strongly depends on the applied gate voltage and the SOC strength in our system.

IV Methods

Wafers are grown by molecular beam epitaxy. Devices are fabricated using a combination of wet etching and deposition techniques after patterning polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) via electron beam lithography. Device mesa features are defined by a deep wet etch with 85% concentrated phosphoric acid, 30% concentrated hydrogen peroxide, and deionized water in a volumetric ratio of 1:1:40 after selectively etching the aluminum top layer with Transene Aluminum Etchant Type D. Junction weak links and smaller device features are defined by a subsequent aluminum etch. Gated devices subsequently undergo dielectric deposition of aluminum oxide via atomic layer deposition, and titanium/gold gates are deposited via electron beam evaporation. D.c. measurements are performed in a dilution refrigerator at a temperature of around 30 mKtimes30mK30\text{\,}\mathrm{m}\mathrm{K}start_ARG 30 end_ARG start_ARG times end_ARG start_ARG roman_mK end_ARG using standard low-frequency lock-in amplification techniques with excitation currents of at most 10 nAtimes10nA10\text{\,}\mathrm{n}\mathrm{A}start_ARG 10 end_ARG start_ARG times end_ARG start_ARG roman_nA end_ARG and frequencies of around 17 Hztimes17Hz17\text{\,}\mathrm{H}\mathrm{z}start_ARG 17 end_ARG start_ARG times end_ARG start_ARG roman_Hz end_ARG. Magnetic field is generated by a three-axis superconducting vector magnet.

V Data Availability

The transport data generated in relation to this study are available in Zenodo (doi:10.5281/zenodo.10810819) [42].

VI Code Availability

All code related to this work is available from the corresponding author upon request.

References

  • Ando et al. [2020] F. Ando, Y. Miyasaka, T. Li, J. Ishizuka, T. Arakawa, Y. Shiota, T. Moriyama, Y. Yanase, and T. Ono, Observation of superconducting diode effect, Nature 584, 373 (2020).
  • Baumgartner et al. [2022a] C. Baumgartner, L. Fuchs, A. Costa, J. Picó-Cortés, S. Reinhardt, S. Gronin, G. C. Gardner, T. Lindemann, M. J. Manfra, P. E. Faria Junior, D. Kochan, J. Fabian, N. Paradiso, and C. Strunk, Effect of Rashba and Dresselhaus spin–orbit coupling on supercurrent rectification and magnetochiral anisotropy of ballistic Josephson junctions, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 34, 154005 (2022a).
  • Baumgartner et al. [2022b] C. Baumgartner, L. Fuchs, A. Costa, S. Reinhardt, S. Gronin, G. C. Gardner, T. Lindemann, M. J. Manfra, P. E. Faria Junior, D. Kochan, J. Fabian, N. Paradiso, and C. Strunk, Supercurrent rectification and magnetochiral effects in symmetric Josephson junctions, Nature Nanotechnology 17, 39 (2022b).
  • Bauriedl et al. [2022] L. Bauriedl, C. Bäuml, L. Fuchs, C. Baumgartner, N. Paulik, J. M. Bauer, K.-Q. Lin, J. M. Lupton, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, C. Strunk, and N. Paradiso, Supercurrent diode effect and magnetochiral anisotropy in few-layer NbSe2, Nature Communications 13, 4266 (2022).
  • Wu et al. [2022] H. Wu, Y. Wang, Y. Xu, P. K. Sivakumar, C. Pasco, U. Filippozzi, S. S. P. Parkin, Y.-J. Zeng, T. McQueen, and M. N. Ali, The field-free Josephson diode in a van der Waals heterostructure, Nature 604, 653 (2022).
  • Pal et al. [2022] B. Pal, A. Chakraborty, P. K. Sivakumar, M. Davydova, A. K. Gopi, A. K. Pandeya, J. A. Krieger, Y. Zhang, M. Date, S. Ju, N. Yuan, N. B. M. Schröter, L. Fu, and S. S. P. Parkin, Josephson diode effect from Cooper pair momentum in a topological semimetal, Nature Physics 18, 1228 (2022).
  • Yuan and Fu [2022] N. F. Q. Yuan and L. Fu, Supercurrent diode effect and finite-momentum superconductors, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 119, e2119548119 (2022).
  • Mazur et al. [2022] G. P. Mazur, N. van Loo, D. van Driel, J.-Y. Wang, G. Badawy, S. Gazibegovic, E. P. A. M. Bakkers, and L. P. Kouwenhoven, The gate-tunable Josephson diode (2022), preprint at https://arxiv.longhoe.net/abs/2211.14283.
  • Sundaresh et al. [2023] A. Sundaresh, J. I. Väyrynen, Y. Lyanda-Geller, and L. P. Rokhinson, Diamagnetic mechanism of critical current non-reciprocity in multilayered superconductors, Nat. Commun. 14, 1628 (2023).
  • Gupta et al. [2023] M. Gupta, G. V. Graziano, M. Pendharkar, J. T. Dong, C. P. Dempsey, C. Palmstrøm, and V. S. Pribiag, Gate-tunable superconducting diode effect in a three-terminal Josephson device, Nature Communications 14, 3078 (2023).
  • Zhang et al. [2022] B. Zhang, Z. Li, V. Aguilar, P. Zhang, M. Pendharkar, C. Dempsey, J. S. Lee, S. D. Harrington, S. Tan, J. S. Meyer, M. Houzet, C. J. Palmstrom, and S. M. Frolov, Evidence of ϕitalic-ϕ\phiitalic_ϕ0-Josephson junction from skewed diffraction patterns in Sn-InSb nanowires (2022), preprint at https://arxiv.longhoe.net/abs/2212.00199.
  • Margineda et al. [2023] D. Margineda, A. Crippa, E. Strambini, Y. Fukaya, M. T. Mercaldo, M. Cuoco, and F. Giazotto, Sign reversal diode effect in superconducting Dayem nanobridges, Communications Physics 6, 1 (2023).
  • Davydova et al. [2022] M. Davydova, S. Prembabu, and L. Fu, Universal Josephson diode effect, Science Advances 8, eabo0309 (2022).
  • Daido et al. [2022] A. Daido, Y. Ikeda, and Y. Yanase, Intrinsic Superconducting Diode Effect, Physical Review Letters 128, 037001 (2022).
  • Ilic and Bergeret [2022] S. Ilic and F. Bergeret, Theory of the Supercurrent Diode Effect in Rashba Superconductors with Arbitrary Disorder, Physical Review Letters 128, 177001 (2022).
  • He et al. [2022] J. J. He, Y. Tanaka, and N. Nagaosa, A phenomenological theory of superconductor diodes, New Journal of Physics 24, 053014 (2022).
  • Costa et al. [2023a] A. Costa, C. Baumgartner, S. Reinhardt, J. Berger, S. Gronin, G. C. Gardner, T. Lindemann, M. J. Manfra, J. Fabian, D. Kochan, N. Paradiso, and C. Strunk, Sign reversal of the Josephson inductance magnetochiral anisotropy and 0–ππ\uppiroman_π-like transitions in supercurrent diodes, Nature Nanotechnology 18, 1266 (2023a).
  • Turini et al. [2022] B. Turini, S. Salimian, M. Carrega, A. Iorio, E. Strambini, F. Giazotto, V. Zannier, L. Sorba, and S. Heun, Josephson Diode Effect in High-Mobility InSb Nanoflags, Nano Letters 22, 8502 (2022).
  • Jeon et al. [2022] K.-R. Jeon, J.-K. Kim, J. Yoon, J.-C. Jeon, H. Han, A. Cottet, T. Kontos, and S. S. P. Parkin, Zero-field polarity-reversible Josephson supercurrent diodes enabled by a proximity-magnetized Pt barrier, Nature Materials 21, 1008 (2022).
  • Pakizer et al. [2021] J. D. Pakizer, B. Scharf, and A. Matos-Abiague, Crystalline anisotropic topological superconductivity in planar josephson junctions, Phys. Rev. Res. 3, 013198 (2021).
  • Pekerten et al. [2022] B. Pekerten, J. D. Pakizer, B. Hawn, and A. Matos-Abiague, Anisotropic topological superconductivity in josephson junctions, Phys. Rev. B 105, 054504 (2022).
  • Shabani et al. [2016] J. Shabani, M. Kjaergaard, H. J. Suominen, Y. Kim, F. Nichele, K. Pakrouski, T. Stankevic, R. M. Lutchyn, P. Krogstrup, R. Feidenhans’l, S. Kraemer, C. Nayak, M. Troyer, C. M. Marcus, and C. J. Palmstrøm, Two-dimensional epitaxial superconductor-semiconductor heterostructures: A platform for topological superconducting networks, Physical Review B 93, 155402 (2016).
  • Fornieri et al. [2019] A. Fornieri, A. M. Whiticar, F. Setiawan, E. Portoles, A. C. C. Drachmann, A. Keselman, S. Gronin, C. Thomas, T. Wang, R. Kallaher, G. C. Gardner, E. Berg, M. J. Manfra, A. Stern, C. M. Marcus, and F. Nichele, Evidence of topological superconductivity in planar Josephson junctions, Nature 569, 89 (2019).
  • Dartiailh et al. [2021a] M. C. Dartiailh, W. Mayer, J. Yuan, K. S. Wickramasinghe, A. Matos-Abiague, I. Žutić, and J. Shabani, Phase Signature of Topological Transition in Josephson Junctions, Physical Review Letters 126, 036802 (2021a).
  • Banerjee et al. [2023] A. Banerjee, M. Geier, M. A. Rahman, C. Thomas, T. Wang, M. J. Manfra, K. Flensberg, and C. M. Marcus, Phase Asymmetry of Andreev Spectra from Cooper-Pair Momentum, Physical Review Letters 131, 196301 (2023).
  • Wickramasinghe et al. [2018] K. S. Wickramasinghe, W. Mayer, J. Yuan, T. Nguyen, L. Jiao, V. Manucharyan, and J. Shabani, Transport properties of near surface InAs two-dimensional heterostructures, Applied Physics Letters 113, 262104 (2018).
  • Strickland et al. [2022] W. M. Strickland, M. Hatefipour, D. Langone, S. M. Farzaneh, and J. Shabani, Controlling Fermi level pinning in near-surface InAs quantum wells, Applied Physics Letters 121, 092104 (2022).
  • Mayer et al. [2019] W. Mayer, J. Yuan, K. S. Wickramasinghe, T. Nguyen, M. C. Dartiailh, and J. Shabani, Superconducting proximity effect in epitaxial al-InAs heterostructures, Applied Physics Letters 114, 103104 (2019).
  • Mayer et al. [2020] W. Mayer, M. C. Dartiailh, J. Yuan, K. S. Wickramasinghe, E. Rossi, and J. Shabani, Gate controlled anomalous phase shift in al/inas josephson junctions, Nature Communications 11, 212 (2020).
  • Dartiailh et al. [2021b] M. C. Dartiailh, J. J. Cuozzo, B. H. Elfeky, W. Mayer, J. Yuan, K. S. Wickramasinghe, E. Rossi, and J. Shabani, Missing shapiro steps in topologically trivial josephson junction on InAs quantum well, Nature Communications 12, 78 (2021b).
  • Courtois et al. [2008] H. Courtois, M. Meschke, J. T. Peltonen, and J. P. Pekola, Origin of Hysteresis in a Proximity Josephson Junction, Physical Review Letters 101, 067002 (2008).
  • Farzaneh et al. [2024] S. M. Farzaneh, M. Hatefipour, W. F. Schiela, N. Lotfizadeh, P. Yu, B. H. Elfeky, W. M. Strickland, A. Matos-Abiague, and J. Shabani, Observing magnetoanisotropic weak antilocalization in near-surface quantum wells, Physical Review Research 6, 013039 (2024)2208.06050 .
  • Costa et al. [2023b] A. Costa, J. Fabian, and D. Kochan, Microscopic study of the Josephson supercurrent diode effect in Josephson junctions based on two-dimensional electron gas, Physical Review B 108, 054522 (2023b).
  • Lo et al. [2013] S.-T. Lo, K. Y. Chen, S. Lin, J.-Y. Wu, T. L. Lin, M. R. Yeh, T.-M. Chen, and C.-T. Liang, Controllable disorder in a hybrid nanoelectronic system: Realization of a superconducting diode, Sci. Rep 3, 2274 (2013).
  • Lustikova et al. [2018] J. Lustikova, Y. Shiomi, N. Yokoi, N. Kabeya, N. Kimura, K. Ienaga, S.-i. Kaneko, S. Okuma, S. Takahashi, and E. Saitoh, Vortex rectenna powered by environmental fluctuations, Nat. Commun. 9, 4922 (2018).
  • Zhang et al. [2020] E. Zhang, X. Xu, Y.-C. Zou, L. Ai, X. Dong, C. Huang, P. Leng, S. Liu, Y. Zhang, Z. Jia, X. Peng, M. Zhao, Y. Yang, Z. Li, H. Guo, S. J. Haigh, N. Nagaosa, J. Shen, and F. Xiu, Nonreciprocal superconducting nbse2 antenna, Nat. Commun. 11, 5634 (2020).
  • Masuko et al. [2022] M. Masuko, M. Kawamura, R. Yoshimi, M. Hirayama, Y. Ikeda, R. Watanabe, J. J. He, D. Maryenko, A. Tsukazaki, K. S. Takahashi, M. Kawasaki, N. Nagaosa, and Y. Tokura, Nonreciprocal charge transport in topological superconductor candidate bi2te3/pdte2 heterostructure, npj Quantum Mater. 7, 104 (2022).
  • Eschrig [2015] M. Eschrig, Spin-polarized supercurrents for spintronics: a review of current progress, Rep. Prog. Phys. 78, 104501 (2015).
  • Pientka et al. [2017] F. Pientka, A. Keselman, E. Berg, A. Yacoby, A. Stern, and B. I. Halperin, Topological Superconductivity in a Planar Josephson Junction, Phys. Rev. X 7, 021032 (2017).
  • Setiawan et al. [2019] F. Setiawan, A. Stern, and E. Berg, Topological superconductivity in planar josephson junctions: Narrowing down to the nanowire limit, Phys. Rev. B 99, 220506(R) (2019).
  • Pakizer and Matos-Abiague [2021] J. D. Pakizer and A. Matos-Abiague, Signatures of topological transitions in the spin susceptibility of josephson junctions, Phys. Rev. B 104, L100506 (2021).
  • Schiela et al. [2024] W. F. Schiela, N. Lotfizadeh, B. Pekerten, P. Yu, B. H. Elfeky, W. M. Strickland, A. Matos-Abiague, and J. Shabani, Data from “Superconducting Diode Effect Sign Change in Epitaxial Al-InAs Josepshon Junctions”, 10.5281/zenodo.10810819 (2024).

VII Acknowledgments

This work is supported in part by DARPA Topological Excitations in Electronics (TEE) program under grant No. DP18AP900007, the U.S. Office of Naval Research (ONR) through Grants No. N000142112450 and MURI No. N000142212764. B.P and A.M.A. acknowledge support from ONR Grant No. N000141712793.

VIII Author contributions

W. M. S. grew the material heterostructure. N. L. and P. Y. fabricated the devices. N. L., W. F. S., and B.H.E performed the measurements. N. L. and W. F. S. performed the analysis. B. P. and A. M. performed the analytical calculations and numerical simulations. N. L., W. F. S., A. M., and B. P. wrote the manuscript. J. S. conceived the experiment.

IX Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.