Double Quantum Dot Charge Stability Diagrams

• Double-Quantum-Dot CSDs are two-dimensional maps that plot electron occupations using plunger-gate voltages to reveal distinct charge domains.
• They exhibit a honeycomb pattern whose geometry details capacitive couplings, lever arms, and tunnel coupling essential for quantum device control.
• The methodology provides precise extraction of charging energies and quantum hybridization parameters, critical for advancing quantum computing applications.

A double-quantum-dot charge stability diagram (CSD) is a two-dimensional map—typically of current, conductance, or charge-sensor signal—plotted as a function of two plunger-gate voltages that independently tune the chemical potentials of two quantum dots. These diagrams reveal distinct domains of fixed electron occupation, with boundaries tracing charge-transition conditions, and encode all relevant electrostatic parameters and tunnel couplings of the double-dot system. The characteristic topological feature is a “honeycomb” pattern of hexagonal cells, whose geometry and distortions directly report the capacitive couplings, lever-arm factors, and quantum hybridization between the dots and their reservoirs. CSDs are the foundational experimental and theoretical tool for the precise characterization, control, and modeling of coupled quantum-dot devices, including those utilized in quantum information, sensing, and hybrid nanocircuits.

1. Physical Principles and Capacitance Network

In the standard constant-interaction model, each dot is treated as a metallic island described by a self-capacitance $C_L$ or $C_R$ and a mutual (interdot) capacitance $C_m$. Control gates (e.g., “GL” and “GR” in graphene devices, or plunger gates in semiconductor systems) apply voltages $V_{g1}, V_{g2}$, capacitively coupled through $C_{g1}, C_{g2}$, and a global back gate sets the overall carrier density.

The electrostatic energy for the charge configuration $(N_L, N_R)$ is given by: $$E(N_L, N_R) = E_{C,L}(N_L - n_{g1})^2 + E_{C,R}(N_R - n_{g2})^2 + E_{C,m}(N_L - n_{g1})(N_R - n_{g2}),$$ where lever arms and effective gate charges are defined as: $$n_{g1} = \frac{C_{g1} V_{g1} + C_m V_{g2}}{e}, \quad n_{g2} = \frac{C_{g2} V_{g2} + C_m V_{g1}}{e}.$$ The charging energies are: $$E_{C,L} = \frac{e^2 C_R}{2(C_L C_R - C_m^2)}, \quad E_{C,R} = \frac{e^2 C_L}{2(C_L C_R - C_m^2)}, \quad E_{C,m} = \frac{e^2 C_m}{C_L C_R - C_m^2}.$$ This formalism applies to broad materials platforms, including graphene, silicon, InAs, PbTe, and vertical double-well structures (Wang et al., 2010, Tidjani et al., 2023, Wang et al., 2011, Rao et al., 31 Dec 2025, Byard et al., 3 Sep 2025).

2. Honeycomb Stability Diagram Geometry

Boundaries between charge-stable configurations emerge wherever the system energy to add or remove an electron to either dot matches the chemical potential of the reservoirs or the other dot. For fixed $N_{R}$, the boundary between $(N_L, N_R)$ and $(N_L+1, N_R)$ is a straight line in the $(V_{g1}, V_{g2})$ plane: $$V_{g2} = -\left( \frac{C_{g1} C_R}{C_m C_{g2}} \right) V_{g1} + \frac{e}{C_{g2}} (N_L+1/2) - \frac{C_m}{C_{g2}} N_R,$$ with analogous expressions for $(N_L, N_R)$ and $(N_L, N_R+1)$ (Wang et al., 2010, Wang et al., 2011).

The intersections of these line families form the honeycomb tiling. Each hexagonal cell is labeled by the integer occupation numbers $(N_L, N_R)$. The vertices where three domains meet—“triple points”—mark degeneracy between three charge states, enabling resonant electron tunneling through the double-dot system. In finite bias, triple points expand into bias triangles, whose size and orientation encode lever arms and conversion ratios between voltage and energy (Wang et al., 2010, Wang et al., 2011, Wang et al., 2011, Tidjani et al., 2023, Crippa et al., 2016).

The precise cell sizes, slopes, and vertex splitting provide direct access to all device capacitances, lever arms ($\alpha_{g1}, \alpha_{g2}$), and mutual coupling energies. Physical quantities can be extracted from measured voltage spacings and bias triangle extents: $$C_{g1} = \frac{e}{\Delta V_{GL}}, \quad C_{g2} = \frac{e}{\Delta V_{GR}}, \quad \alpha_{g1} = \frac{|V_{sd}|}{\delta V_{GL}},$$ with self- and mutual capacitances from higher-level fits and physical models (Wang et al., 2010).

3. Quantum Effects: Tunnel Coupling and Molecular States

Finite interdot tunnel coupling $t$ hybridizes the localized charge configurations into delocalized “molecular” bonding and antibonding eigenstates. The energy splitting between these molecular states as a function of detuning $\epsilon = E_L - E_R$ is: $$\Delta E(\epsilon) = E' + \sqrt{\epsilon^2 + (2t)^2},$$ where $E' = 2e^2 C_m / (C_L C_R - C_m^2)$ (Wang et al., 2010). This hybridization manifests in the CSD as a rounding of the triple-point vertices—sharp in the weak-coupling regime (small $t$), smoothly curved and merged in the strong-coupling regime. The anticrossing gap at zero detuning ($\epsilon = 0$) directly yields $2t$.

Extracted values in high-quality graphene DQDs show large tunnel coupling (e.g., $t \approx 0.73\,\text{meV}$), considerably exceeding those of GaAs ($\sim 0.08\,\text{meV}$) or nanotube dots, thus enabling faster quantum operations in the graphene platform (Wang et al., 2010). A comprehensive breakdown of coupling strengths and energy scales for contrasting materials appears in the referenced studies.

4. Experimental Extraction and Parameterization

Key CSD-derived parameters relevant for device quantification are summarized in the table below:

Quantity	Symbol	Typical Value (Graphene DQD)
Left gate-dot capacitance	$C_{g1}$	1.27 aF
Right gate-dot capacitance	$C_{g2}$	1.49 aF
Left self-capacitance	$C_L$	44.8 aF
Right self-capacitance	$C_R$	44.1 aF
Mutual capacitance	$C_m$	9.2 aF
Charging energy (L)	$E_{C,L}$	3.6 meV
Charging energy (R)	$E_{C,R}$	3.7 meV
Mutual charging energy	$E_{C,m}$	0.21 meV
Lever arms	$\alpha_{g1}$, $\alpha_{g2}$	0.029, 0.035
Interdot tunnel coupling	$t$	0.727 meV
Electrostatic offset	$U'$	0.209 meV

The process of mapping voltage spacings, lever arms, and conductance features to device parameters is systematic and rooted in the quantitative relation between CSD geometry and capacitance network (Wang et al., 2010, Wang et al., 2011, Fringes et al., 2011, Luo et al., 2024).

5. Materials Platforms and Device Engineering

The essential principles above are platform-agnostic but realized across a range of materials. In graphene, devices are defined via lithographic patterning and controlled by in-plane gates (GL, GR, GM, BG), producing large $t$ owing to low disorder and high carrier mobility (Wang et al., 2010, Wang et al., 2011, Fringes et al., 2011). Similar analyses apply to semiconductor heterostructures, InAs nanowires, PbTe nanowires, and vertical double quantum wells, with appropriate modification of capacitance architectures and lever arms (Tidjani et al., 2023, Luo et al., 2024, Byard et al., 3 Sep 2025). The underlying CSD topology persists, while the charge addition and tunnel coupling energies can be tuned via gate design, device dimensions, and material properties.

In all systems, the honeycomb CSD provides a universal diagnostic tool for extracting the full electrostatic, capacitive, and quantum-mechanical parameters, essential for qubit initialization, coupling engineering, and device benchmarking.

6. Measurement Methodologies and State-of-the-Art Extensions

CSDs are measured via low-temperature transport (current, differential conductance) or via fast charge sensing using proximal quantum-point contacts, single-electron transistors, or radio-frequency reflectometry. Video-rate sensing and high-fidelity acquisition have enabled real-time tuning, automated control, and machine-learning-based device identification (Stehlik et al., 2015, Moreno et al., 27 Nov 2025, Rao et al., 31 Dec 2025, Hader et al., 11 Aug 2025). Finite-bias triangles and excited-state spectra can be resolved within the CSD, providing spectroscopy of single-particle and collective excitations.

Further, nontrivial effects such as strong-coupling anticrossings, anomalous charge degeneracy in high-dielectric materials, hysteresis with single-reservoir coupling, and time-dependent drift/noise have all been observed and directly interpreted from CSD analysis (Biesinger et al., 2015, Yang et al., 2014, Byard et al., 3 Sep 2025, Rao et al., 31 Dec 2025).

7. Theoretical Modeling and Quantum Simulations

Full quantitative modeling of CSDs uses not only capacitance or linear Hubbard descriptions but also advanced multi-band, multi-electron configuration-interaction approaches. Such frameworks enable ab initio calculation of Hubbard parameters (onsite U, interdot V, and tunnel $t$) and prediction of multi-electron enhancement of tunnel coupling, especially for high-occupancy dots with delocalized valence orbitals (Foulk et al., 2024, Wang et al., 2011). The shape and periodicity of Coulomb diamonds, degree of triple-point rounding, and impact of dot pitch/barrier are accurately captured only by these fully quantum-mechanical approaches.

Advances in simulation frameworks now permit the rapid generation of realistic CSDs with controlled noise, distortions, and multi-class labeling, supporting robust device-tuning algorithms and benchmarking of machine-learning models (Hader et al., 11 Aug 2025, Moreno et al., 27 Nov 2025).

---

References

• Molecule States in a Gate Tunable Graphene Double Quantum Dot (Wang et al., 2010)
• Gates controlled parallel-coupled double quantum dot on both single layer and bilayer graphene (Wang et al., 2011)
• Tunable capacitive inter-dot coupling in a bilayer graphene double quantum dot (Fringes et al., 2011)
• Quantum theory of the charge stability diagram of semiconductor double quantum dot systems (Wang et al., 2011)
• Charge susceptibility and conductances of a double quantum dot (Talbo et al., 2018)
• Towards autonomous time-calibration of large quantum-dot devices: Detection, real-time feedback, and noise spectroscopy (Rao et al., 31 Dec 2025)
• Simulation of Charge Stability Diagrams for Automated Tuning Solutions (SimCATS) (Hader et al., 11 Aug 2025)
• Theory of charge stability diagrams in coupled quantum dot qubits (Foulk et al., 2024)