Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Loss PPT QC
Loss PPT QC
Daniel Loss
Department of Physics
University of Basel
Switzerland
$$: Swiss NSF, Nano Center Basel, EU (RTN), DARPA & ONR, ICORP-JST
G. Burkard
B. Coish
H.A. Engel
V. Golovach
D. Klauser
M. Trif
D. DiVincenzo
C. Egues
O. Gywat
M. Leuenberger
J. Levy
F. Meier
P. Recher
E. Sukhorukov
S. Tarucha
B. Altshuler
D. Awschalom
L. Glazman
L. Kouwenhoven
G. Abstreiter
L. Samuelson
L. Vandersypen
C. Marcus
B. Westervelt
C. Bruder
D. Bulaev
N. Bonesteel
M.S. Choi
K. Ensslin
A. Imamoglu
J. Lehmann
A. MacDonald
D. Saraga
J. Schliemann
C. Schnenberger
D. Stepanenko
M. Borhani
R. Hanson
J. Elzerman
F. Koppens
Outline
A. Spin qubits in quantum dots
1. Basics of quantum computing and quantum dots
2. Quantum gates: interaction based and measurement based
entanglement
Quantum Information
Classical digital computer
network of Boolean logic gates, e.g. XOR
bits:
a, b = 0,1
physical implementation:
e.g. 2 voltage levels
gate: electronic circuit
Quantum computer
qubits
a , b = 0 + 1 ,
physical implementation:
quantum 2-level-system:
+ =1
2
0,
1 ns
GaAs
mesoscopics
Fujisawa et al. 03
Marcus et al. 01
T2 T1
Initialization
Read-out
ESR
SWAP
Coherence
SL
SR
EZ =
g
BB
J(t)
Confinement
Discrete # charges
Discrete orbitals
GaAs/AlGaAs Heterostruktur
2DEG 90 nm depth, ns = 2.9 x 1011 cm-2
Temp.: 100 mK
SL
SR
SL
SR
1 0
=
0 x
U ( s ) = T e
i H '( t ) dt
0
J 0 during s
SL
SR
i S1z
2
i S 2z
2
1/ 2 iS1
1/ 2
U SW
e U SW
z
U SW :
1/ 2
U SW
: + ei
U XOR = e
1/ 2
U SW
1/ 2
U SW
i S 2z
2
i S1z
2
i ( / 2 ) S 2z
1 / 2 + iS1z
SW
U e
1/ 2
SW
|
iS1z
i ( / 2 ) S1z
i |
i |
i |
e i / 4
2
(|+i |)
(|-i |)
ie i / 4
2
i |
e i / 4
2
ie i / 4
2
(i |+ |) |
(i |- |) -i |
- |
-i |
i |
-i |
U XOR = e
i ( / 2 ) S1z
i ( / 2 ) S 2z
1 / 2 + iS1z
SW
U e
1/ 2
SW
1/ 2
U SW
Square-root-of-swap:
|+i |
= | 1 x |2
= entangler:
product state
entangled state
Deterministic entangler:
b
P
d
+ a ) (b + b ) = ( a b + a b ) + ( a b + a b )
input state
in arm a
input state
in arm b (ancilla)
a b
a
c d + c d , if p = 1
c d + c d , if p = 0, c d + c d
Projective measurement: measurement of parity p projects input state into
either parallel output state (p=1) or antiparallel output state (p=0). If p=0, then
apply x(d) on output state get always same final output state in arms c and d.
Thus, we get:
a + a c d + c d
Beenakker et al., 2004
| + |
| - |
Advantage:
parity measurement is digital (0 or 1) quantum gate is digital
IQPC
L
Quantum
point contact
IQPC
(a)
|SLi
(b)
|SLi
(c)
|SRi
(d)
|T0 Li
(e)
|T0 Li
(f)
|T0 Li
(g)
|T0 Li
Imperfections
Phases due to different Zeeman interaction
during virtual occupation of state LR
|LR vs |LR
correctable via one-qubit gates
suppression via large td and fast read-out
1
L
R
1
2
R2
QPC
3
time
= c 1 ct
QPC 1
R1
p1
p2
R2
QPC 2
10
11
time
In step 11, single-qubit gates listed on the rhs are applied to qubits c and t
I stands for identity (do nothing), X for X, Z for Z
p1
p2
Zilberberg, Braunecker,
and Loss, PRA 77, 012327 (2008)
2-qubit gate
'sqrt of swap' (s 100 ps)
Petta et al., Science '05
1-qubit gate
via ESR for single spin (s 10 ns)
Koppens et al., Nature '06, PRL '07;
via EDSR (T2 10 s), Science '07
2-qubit gate
'sqrt of swap' (s 100 ps)
Petta et al., Science '05
1-qubit gate
via ESR for single spin (s 10 ns)
Koppens et al., Nature '06, PRL '07;
via EDSR (T2 10 s), Science '07
T2 /s ~ 103 -105
*)
*) Coish & DL, PRB 75 (2007): s for single spin can be < 1ns (via exchange)
SL
SR
simplest spin-qubit:
spin-1/2 of 1 electron 0 = , 1 =
Many more choices for spin qubits:
SL
SR
H = g B S B + S h(t )
where h(t) is a fluctuating (internal) field with < h(t) >=0
1
= dt Re[ hX (0 )hX (t ) + hY (0)hY (t ) ]e i EZ t h
T1
1
1
=
+ dt Re hZ (0)hZ (t )
T2 2T1
relaxation
contribution
<<
typically
dephasing
contribution
H = g B S B + S h(t )
where h(t) is a fluctuating (internal) field with < h(t) >=0
h(t ) B = 0
(unlike spin-boson
model!)
1
1
=
+ dt Re hZ (0 )hZ (t )
T2 2T1
relaxation
contribution
<<
typically
dephasing
contribution
Golovach, Khaetskii, DL, PRL 04
$$: Swiss NSF, Nano Center Basel, EU (RTN), DARPA & ONR, ICORP-JST
1-qubit gate
electron spin resonance
gate duration ~ 25 ns; observed 8 periods
2-qubit gate
exchange interaction
gate duration ~ 0.2 ns; observed 3 periods
Energy
relaxation
T1~ 1 sec
Phase
coherence
T2* ~ 20 ns
T2 > 1 s
Outline
A. Spin qubits in quantum dots
1. Basics of quantum computing and quantum dots
2. Quantum gates: interaction based and measurement based
entanglement
Dresselhaus SOI
semiconductor (Zinc-blende)
free electrons
(k )
( p)
2mc2 1MeV
p
bandstructure
effects
conduction band
Eg 1eV
k
heavy holes
light holes
spintronics
H R = px p y
H D = px x p y y
H R = px p y
y
H D = px x p y y
H R + H D = ( px m p y ) ( x y )
H SO = ( p x x + p y y ) +
( p x y p y x )
Dresselhaus S.-O.
Rashba S.-O.
Model Hamiltonian:
H = H dot + H Z + H SO + U el ph (t )
H dot
p2
=
+ U (r )
*
2m
1
H Z = g B B
2
(r )
h2
~ * 2
m
U el ph =
q, j
F (q z )e
(e qj iq qj ) b+qj + bqj
2 c qj / h
iq r
)
q = (q , q z )
piezo-electric interaction:
2
qj = 2 q q e( j ) (q ) + q e( j ) (q )
q
1
qj =
q e( j ) (q ) + q e( j ) (q )
2q
for GaAs:
qj = 0 j ,1 and
Parameter regime:
1. << SO , SO = h m
*
2.
3.
2
* 2
2 1 meV 10 K)
(typically,
h2/m*
k
T
<<
h
m
spin-orbit
interaction
in
quantum
dot
is
weak
B
g2D
Bbulk:
B << h 2 m* 2
quantum dot:
strong spin-orbit
In this regime, we find
that
(pF=const)
T2 = 2T1
h2
m* 2
n , (r )
SO
n H SO m
~
0 : one expects << 1
Note that, generally, T22Tn1,Hand,
usually,
SO m
En Em
SO
T2<<2T1, due to spin dephasing.
Parameter regime:
1. << SO , SO = h m
*
2.
k BT << h 2 m* 2
3.
2
* 2
gthe
B
<<
h
m
dot staysin its orbital ground state
B
()
In this
h 2 regime, wefindr that
m * 2
T2 = 2T1
EZ = g B B
--- the spin-orbit interaction in GaAs quantum dots
causes
a spin decay with the largest possible decoherence time,
T2=2T1.
Parameter regime:
1. << SO , SO = h m
*
2.
k BT << h 2 m* 2
3.
g B B << h 2 m* 2
H eff
1
= g B (B + B (t )) ,
2
no dephasing!
B (t ) = 2 B (t ),
where
(t ) =
[ (L ), U
1
d
= ( y ' , x' + ,0 ),
el ph
(t ) ]
1 = m ( ) h ,
*
i.e. T2=2T1
x' = ( x + y ) 2
y ' = (x y ) 2
H = H dot + H Z + H SO + U el ph (t )
~
H = e S He S H d + H Z + U el ph (t ) + S , U el ph (t ) 1st order in HSO
with S defined by
with px=im*[Hd,x], get
[H d + H Z , S ] = H SO
H SO = i[H d , ] = iLd
1
1
L
Z
S=
iLd = 2 + ...iLd = S (0 ) + S (1) + ...
Ld + LZ
Ld Ld
S (0 ) = 1 P i ,
P A = Ann n n ,
H d n = En n
] [
(0 )
no orbital B effect to O(Hso): S , U el ph (t ) nn = i , U el ph (t ) nn = 0
(1)
1 P
1 P
=
,
LZ i = g B B
Ld
Ld
H eff
~
= H + spin independent constant
H eff
1
= g B (B + B(t )) ,
2
where (t ) =
with
[(L ) , U
1
d
el ph
B(t ) = 2B (t ),
(t )]
/ SO ,
1 = m ( ) h ,
*
x' = ( x + y ) 2
y' = (x y ) 2
H SO = a,
H Z = b,
a = n(a n ) n (n a) a'+ a' ' , n = b b
a = a (p (t ) )
go to rotating frame:
Now:
with
[UU
b ' ' (t )
d
0 dtH SO (t ) c 0 dt dt x (t ) + 0 dt [n [a' ' (t ) n]]
SO linear : a ~ p ~ dx/dt
S& = g B B S S +
c= / s=100 ps <<T1,2
& super-Ohmic spectrum
Born-Markov approx. ok
2
B
2
0
g
ij J ij (w) =
2h
2
Decay tensor:
Bi (0 )B j (t ) e iwt dt
spectral function
decay:
= r + d ,
relaxation:
+
ijr = ij ( pq l p l q ) J pq
( ) ( ip li l p ) J pj+ ( ) ij kpq l k I pq ( ) + ipq l p I qj ( ),
dephasing:
+
ijd = ij l p l q J pq
(0 ) li l p J pj+ (0 ) 0
Jij (w) = Re Jij (w) Jij ( w) , Iij (w) = Im Jij (w) Jij ( w)
Relaxation rate:
super-Ohmic: ~z3
Bose function
1
h
2 z 3 (2 N z + 1)
Re J XX ( z ) =
* 2 2 s 5
T1
j
2 + m 0
c j
3
d
sin
( z sin )2 2 s 2j
z = gB B
z
2 2 z2 2
F cos e j + 2 j 2 / 2 SO
s
s
j
j
quantum well
piezo
deformation
2 1 lx' 1 l y'
=
+
2
+ 2
2
2
1 lx'2 1 l y'2
4
l
z
+
2
2
2
2
+
+
effective SO length
Relaxation rate:
super-Ohmic: ~z3
Bose function
1
h
2 z 3 (2 N z + 1)
Re J XX ( z ) =
* 2 2 s 5
T1
j
2 + m 0
c j
3
d
sin
z
2 2 z2 2
F cos e j + 2 j 2 / 2 SO
s
s
j
j
( z sin )2 2 s 2j
z = gB B
quantum well
2j = j ,1 0 , 0 7 eV ,
2 1 lx' 1 l y'
=
+
2
+ 2
speed of sound
1,
2 = 2h14 1 sin 2 ,
2,
h14 0.16C / m 2 , 13
3,
deformation
piezo
2
1 lx'2 1 l y'2
4
l
z
+
2
2
2
2
+
+
effective SO length
B B
2
2 + 2 + 1
d sin
( g B B sin )2 2 s 2j
ph ( ) 2 H SO p
(h
*
*
,
,
,
h
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
d
=
m
h
s
s
=
s
m
=
0
0
14
1
2
3
SO
c
Theory:
T1 750 s , for B = 8T
SO / 2
2
Experiment:
T1exp . = 800 s @ 8T
Elzerman et al.,
Nature 430, 431 (2004)
d sin
( g B B sin )2 2 s 2j
Bph = s / g B B <<
phonons averaged to zero
over dot size
power-law suppression
for B > 12T
gB B = hs
gB B = hs d
T1 [ms]
3
2
phonon wavelength
matches dot size
1
0
0.0 0.2
1.4
1
f ( , , )
=
T1 T1 ( = / 2, = 0 )
f ( , , ) =
[(
)(
Special case:
= , = 2 , = 3 4
T1
exact!
1
f ( , , )
=
T1 T1 ( = / 2, = 0 )
f ( , , ) =
[(
)(
Special case:
= , = 2 , = 3 4
T1
exact!
T1 ~ 1s for B ~ 1T
Amasha et al.,
Phys. Rev. Lett. (2008)
T1 ~ 1s for B ~ 1T
From Rashba- SOI we expect T2 = 2T1
Amasha et al.,
Phys. Rev. Lett. (2008)
Golovach et al., PRL '04
Hyperfine interaction:
Major source of dynamics/decoherence
Quantum dots
NV centers in diamond
Si:P donors
Molecular magnets
Strategies:
Strategies:
r r
Lk I k
rk3 (1 + d / rk )
s-type
In the quasi-2D limit, a gap
develops between the HH and
LH sub-bands.
p-type
The HH-LH degeneracy is
lifted.
For GaAs: E g = 1.5 eV
SO = 0.3 eV
LH = 0.1 eV
(QW height of
5nm)
r r
Lk I k
rk3 (1 + d / rk )
Electrons
h1 isotropic
Holes
h2,3 Ising-like
h2,3 ~ 0.2 h1
Carbon-based Nanostructures
2D Dirac-Hamiltonian:
H = v( 3 p x x + p y y )
Folklore: 12C is light atom and thus weak spin-orbit interactionis it true?
Carbon Nanotube:
Gate-controlled confinment:
Spectrum experimentally
confirmed, see Kuemmeth, Ilani,
Ralph, McEuen, Nature 452 (2008).
Spectrum experimentally
confirmed, see Kuemmeth, Ilani,
Ralph, McEuen, Nature 452 (2008).
Strategies:
Spin-bath dynamics
Fully-polarized bath exact dynamics
Khaetskii, Loss, Glazman, PRL (2002), ...: power-law or inverse-log decay
Thermal (completely random) bath
Khaetskii, Loss, and Glazman, PRL (2002), Merkulov, Efros, and
Rosen, PRB (2002), Coish and Loss (2004), ...: Gaussian decay
Semiclassical dynamics
Erlingsson and Nazarov, PRB (2004), Yuzbashyan et al., J. Phys. A.
(2005), Al-Hassanieh et al., PRL (2006), Chen, Bergman, and Balents,
PRB (2007), ...: power-law or inverse-log decay
Spin-echo decay
de Sousa and Das Sarma, PRB (2003), Witzel and Das Sarma, PRL
(2007), Yao, Liu, and Sham, PRL (2007), ...: super-exponential decay
v v
H = Ai S I i + g B B S z + H dd
i
hyperfine interaction
is non-uniform:
v 2
Ai A (ri )
Bz
A
106 s 1 , N = 105
N
r
(r )
nuclear spin
dipole-dipole interaction
(H dd )
2 1/ 2
10 4 s 1 100nK
y
x
Khaetskii, DL, Glazman, 02; Coish & DL, 04-07; Eto 04; Sham 06; Altshuler 06;
Balents 07,...
v v
H = g B BS z + S h = H 0 + V
v
v
h = Ai I i
is a quantum operator
Separation:
H 0 = ( g B B + hz ) S z
V=
1
(h+ S + h S + )
2
h = hx ihy
longitudinal component
flip-flop terms
...
...
V
...
V
...
v
S
v
h
v
S
v
h
v
h
v
S
h =
h2
nucl
2
r
Ak I k
k =1
= A / N = 5mT = (10ns) 1
nucl
what state?
I(3) (0) = n n ,
hz n = Ak I kz n = [hz ] nn n
k
I(3) (0) = n n ,
hz n = Ak I kz n = [hz ] nn n
k
( 0) = I I ,
(1)
I
(2)
I
I =
k =1
f k + e i k 1 f k
N N
N N
(0) = f (1 f ) N N
N N
I(3) (0) = n n ,
hz n = Ak I kz n = [hz ] nn n
k
( 0) = I I ,
(1)
I
(2)
I
I =
k =1
f k + e i k 1 f k
N N
N N
(0) = f (1 f ) N N
N N
B
hz
S+
( no meas.)
t
i t t 2 2 t c2
S+ 0 e e
Gaussian decay
tc =
2h
N
5 ns
A 1 p2
GaAs, N=105
B
hz
S+
( no meas.)
t
i t t 2 2 t c2
S+ 0 e e
tc =
2h
N
5 ns
A 1 p2
Gaussian decay
GaAs, N=105
B
S+
( meas.)
t
S + 0 ei t , = g B B + [hz ] nn
Precession
g B B + hnz
= +
j/2
Quantum control of
nuclear spin bath
through measurement
of single electron spin
1.2
1.2
a) M = 50, = 0
(x)
b) M = 51, = 1
0.8
0.8
0.6
0.6
(x)
0.4
0.4
0.2
0.2
0
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0.5
1.5
-2
-1.5
-1
(x x0 )/0
-0.5
0.5
1.5
(x x0)/0
1.2
0.5
d)
c) M = 100, = 22
1
0.4
0.8
0.6
(x)
0.3
0.2
0.4
0.1
0.2
0
0
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0.5
(x x0 )/0
1.5
20
40
60
80
100
I(3) (0) = n n ,
hz n = Ak I kz n = [hz ] nn n
k
v
h
r
r
S + I k = const.
v
S
back action of S on h
Bz
flip-flops
...
...
V
...
...
v
h
r
r
S + I k = const.
v
S
back action of S on h
Bz
Dynamics (flip-flops):
...
...
V
E.g.
A2
e itA/ N
S z (t ) S z (0)
4 N (b + pIA)2 ( At / N )3 / 2
...
...
v v
z
H = BS + S K ;
Classical: Time-dependent
mean-field (TDMF)
v
v
v&
v
s (t ) = B + k (t ) s (t )
v&
v
v
k (t ) = k (t ) s (t )
Ak =
v N
A
K = Ik ; =
N
k =1
Quantum:
[ ]
[ ]
v&
v
S = i H,S
v&
v
K = i H, K
v
S
v
K
t
t
Exact solution
Exact solution
Initial Conditions
Quantum
Classical
v
k (0)
v
K
B
v
S
v
s (0)
v
k (0) = (sin k ,0, cos k )
v
s (0) = (sin s cos s , sin s sin s , cos s )
classical vectors
( 0) = s k
s = cos
k = e
s
2
iK y k
+ eis sin
2
(K )
( k ) K , m
K , K = d mK
m
(B = 0 )
TDMF:
s x (t )
quantum:
Sx
(B = 10 )
1
C (t ) =
T
t +T
dt
t
2 S x t s x (t )
Sx
2
t
; T=
2
+ s x (t )
0 .1
; =
A
N
C (t ) = 1
C (t ) < 1
Sx
s x (t )
2 N
A
v
B >> K , p <<1
xt
1 A
~
N b
c ~
N
A
b N
A A
T 2 ~ ???
t >> T 2
Time
H = S Ai I i + g B S B
i
The initial nuclear spin configuration is fully polarized. With the initial wave
function 0 we construct the exact wave function of the system for t > 0 :
paramagnon
entangled
Normalization condition is:
(1)
(t = 0)
i
Ak k (t = 0)
(u) = i
+
,
D(u)
2D(u) k iu (A + 2 z ) / 4 + Ak / 2
(A + 2 z ) 1
Ak
D(u) = iu +
4
4 k iu (A + 2 z ) / 4 + Ak / 2
2
Ak
iA 02 ( z )
= 2 [ A - 2i N dz ln (1
)]
i + A k / 2
2 N
2
self-energy
(1)
where A = k A k ;
Spin correlator: C 0 ( t ) = 0 S z ( t ) S z 0 = (1 ( t ) ) / 2
2
here
note: sums k replaced by integrals over rk3 (valid for t < N2/A),
with x,y (Gaussians) integrated out non-analyticity
The singularities are: two branch points (=0, 0= i A02(0)/ 2N), and first
order poles which lie on the imaginary axis (one pole for z > 0, two poles for
z < 0). For the contribution from the branch cut (decaying part) we obtain:
here
= 02 (0) and
z0 = z0 ( ), 02 ( z0 ) = 02 (0) .
~ 1/ N
~ 1 / ln 3 / 2
non-universal
The decay law depends on the magnetic field strength . However, the
characteristic time scale for the onset of the non-exponential decay is the same
for all cases and given by (A/N )-1 (microseconds in GaAs dot).
v v
H = Ai S I i + g B B S z
i
Bz
r
(r )
y
Coish & Loss, 04-07; Eto 04; Sham 06; Altshuler 06; Balents 07,...
LV O = [V , O]
S (t ) = TrI (t )
S (t ) = iTrI Le
QO = (1 I (0)TrI )O
iQLt
LV I (0)
hz n = [hz ]nn n
1
1
1
1
LV I (0) = iTrI L
LV I (0) TrI L
QLV
LV I (0)
s + iQL
s + iQL0
s + iQL0
s + iQL
1
( 2)
( 4)
LV I (0) = S ( s ) + S ( s ) + L
s + iQL
Lowest-order Born approximation:
S ( s ) = iTrI L
S (t ) =
+ i
1
2i
st
e
S (s)ds
( 0) = S ( 0) I ( 0)
1
S ( 0) = I S + S x 0 x + S y 0 y + S z 0 z
2
I (0) = n n , n I jz n = m j
hz n = [hz ]nn n ,
hz = Ai I iz
i
( 0) = S ( 0) I ( 0)
hz n = [hz ]nn n ,
1
S ( 0) = I S + S x 0 x + S y 0 y + S z 0 z
2
hz = Ai I iz
I (0) = n n , n I jz n = m j
Sz (s) =
Sz 0 + Nz (s)
s +izz(s)
S+(s) =
S+
n = b + [hz ]nn
s in +i++(s)
b >> IA
(h
x + hy )
2 1/ 2
hz
1
<< 1
2
p N
(S2) ( s ) = iTrI LV
( 2)
( s ) = iNc+ [I + ( s in ) + I ( s + in )]
( 2)
( s ) = iNc [I ( s in ) + I + ( s + in )]
(+2+) ( s ) = iN [c I + ( s ) + c+ I ( s )]
1
LV I (0)
s + iL0
c = I ( I + 1) m(m 1) ,
F (m) = PI (m) F (m)
m
( I = 1 / 2 : c+ = 1 f , c = f )
In d Dimensions:
1 r m
(r ) = (0) exp
2 l0
d=m=2:
1
I ( s) =
4N
Ak2
d
x ln x
d
dx
,
=
1
k
Ak
m0
s m ix
m
smi
2
1
I ( s ) = s[log(s m i ) log(s )] i
branch cuts
0.5
Re[I+(t)/I0]
1 r
(r ) = (0) exp
2 l0
Donor Impurity:
( r ) exp ( r / 2l0 )
2D Quantum Dot:
( r ) exp (r / l0 )2 / 2
R+ (t)
R+ (0)
RX (t) = SX t SX 0 , X = +, z
-0.5
in d dimensions.
10
20
-- ]
t [2 h/A
0
30
40
t [2hN / A 1 s ]
d
m
Dot:
1 iAt / N d
RX (t >> 1) e
,
< 2,
m
t
Si:P
ln t
d
RX (t >> 1) 2 , = 1 1,
t
m
A2
=
4 N (b + pIA ) 2
50
S&+
= i~ S + t i dt e in (t t ) (+2+) (t t ) S + t ,
S +
=e
i ( n +~ )t
S+
S +
= e t S +
Markov approximation
(in the rotating frame)
~ = Re (+2+) (s = i (n + ~ ) )
= Im (+2+) (s = i (n + ~ ) ) = 0 !
+ R+ (t )
non-Markovian
remainder term
R+ (0)
1
*
,
g
B Bz = 0
p2 N
Sz
1+
n2
1
p2 N
1
1
(
b
=
0
,
I
=
)
p2 N
2
Sz
-0.1
<Sz>t
Sz
1
= lim S z t dt = lim sS z ( s ) =
T T
s 0
0
+
0
-0.2
-0.3
-0.4
-0.5
10
t (2N/A)
15
20
S X 0 , X = +, z
A2
R X (t ) =
4 N ( g * B Bz + pIA) 2
A
= *
1
g B Bz + pIA
A
*
<< 1
g B Bz
1 r m
in d dimensions, and for a wave function: ( r ) = ( 0 ) exp
2 l 0
xt
1 A
~
N b
c ~
N
A
b N
A A
T 2 ~ ???
t >> T 2
Time
xt
1 A
~
N b
c ~
N
A
b N
A A
xt 1 (t / ) e
2
T 2 ~ ???
( t / ) 2
t >> T 2
Time
xt
1 A
~
N b
???
c ~
N
A
b N
A A
xt 1 (t / ) e
2
T 2 ~ ???
( t / ) 2
t >> T 2
Time
xt
~
1 A
N b
xt 1 / t 2
???
c ~
N
A
b N
A A
xt 1 (t / ) e
2
T 2 ~ ???
( t / ) 2
t >> T 2
Time
k k
z
+ z
z
H = b + h +
I I S + b k I k
z k l
2 k l b + h
k
1 +
H hf = H 0 + V , H 0 = 0 + S , V = h S + h + S
2
Schrieffer-Wolff transformation
1
1
S
S
H = e H hf e H 0 + [ S , V ], S = V
2
L0
This can be rewritten as
z
H = H S + S + H S S + = ( + X ) S z + D
diagonal
off-diagonal
H eff = ( + X ) S z + D + O(V 3 )
[ H , S z ] = 0 T1
Fixed frequency
(narrowed initial state)
Beff ~ +X
b + hz
D
Sx
z
k
1
Ak Al + 1
X
I k Il
2 k l
b
e t /T2
I (0) = n n , n = n n
Nakajima-Zwanzig GME:
d
S+
dt
= i n S +
Expand in powers of
(t ) =
i dt ' ( t t ' ) S +
1
V = XS ~
b
z
(2)
(t ) +
A
~
b
(4)
( t ) + ...
A
~
b
A
<1
b
t'
Markov Approximation
Rotating frame:
i ( n + ) t
xt = e
S + t , = Re
~
(t ) = e i ( n + ) t (t )
Markovian regime:
~
(t )
c << T 2
x& t = i
xt
~
(t )
c
T2
~
dt ' ( t ' ) x t t '
Markov Approximation
Rotating frame:
i ( n + ) t
xt = e
S + t , = Re
~
(t ) = e i ( n + ) t (t )
Markovian regime:
c << T 2
xt
T2
~
(t )
x& t =
~
(t )
~
dt ' ( t ' ) x t t '
Markov Approximation
Rotating frame:
i ( n + ) t
xt = e
S + t , = Re
~
(t ) = e i ( n + ) t (t )
Markovian regime:
c << T 2
xt
T2
~
(t )
x& t = i
~
(t )
~
dt ' ( t ' ) x t t '
1
~
= i dt ( t )
0
T2
Decoherence Rate
H = ( + X ) S z + D
Homonuclear system:
1
= Re
T2
dte i t X ( t ) X ( 0 )
Continuum limit:
i t
X (t ) X ( 0 )
1
X (t ) X ( 0 ) 2
b
1
2
b
X ( t ) = e i t Xe
k l
Ak2 Al2 e i ( Ak Al ) t
dk dl Ak2 Al2 e i ( Ak Al ) t
0
N / A
N spins
k spins
d=3
Decoherence Rate:
Homonuclear System
1
I ( I + 1) d A A
=
f
T2
3
q b N
2
~I
A
<1
b
Geometrical
factor
Coupling to
one nucleus
Geometrical factor
d
1
q 1
f =
T2
q d 3
Non-Markovian
1
T2
d
1
q
( 2 d / q 1)
[ ( d / q ) ]3
2D quantum dot
(e.g. lateral gated dot)
Ma
rk
ov i
( r ) = ( 0 ) exp
an
donor impurity
1D quantum dot (e.g. nanotube, nanowire)
a B
q
Heteronuclear system
1
=
T2
2
i
Isotopic abundance
InxGa1-xAs, x=0.05
IIn =9/2
IGa,As =3/2
*) if difference in nuclear
Zeeman energy > A/N
xt
~
1 A
N b
xt 1 / t 2
???
c ~
N
A
b N
A A
xt 1 (t / ) e
2
T 2 ~ ???
( t / ) 2
t >> T 2
Time
xt
~
1 A
N b
Exponential decay
Coish et al., PRB (2008)
xt 1 / t 2
x t e t / T2
N
~
A
b N
~
A A
x t 1 (t / ) 2
Initial quadratic decay:
Yao, Liu, Sham, PRB 06
b2 N
T2 ~ 2
A A
t >> T 2
Time
2. Thermodynamic polarization
i.e. (ferro-) magnetic phase transition?
hyperfine
interaction
A ~90eV in GaAs
A/EF ~ 10-2 << 1
separation of time scales
electrons / nuclear spins
hyperfine
interaction
Schrieffer-Wolff transformation
integrate out electron degrees of freedom
A ~90eV in GaAs
A/EF ~ 10-2 << 1
separation of time scales
electrons / nuclear spins
RKKY interaction
between nuclear spins
(overrules direct dipolar
interaction)
But if...
Ferromagnetic order would be stable up to some T > 0
if the spin wave dispersion was linear at |q| 0
Required: Non-analytic behavior
A typical diagram
0(q, )
correction to self-energy (q,)
Chubukov, Maslov, PRB 68 ('03)
Aleiner, Efetov PRB 74 ('06)
Renormalization
Backscattering strongly renormalized by Cooper channel
contribution (P 0 & presence of Fermi sea).
is possible
Renormalization
Include Cooper channel in S(q) (Kohn-Luttinger instability w.r.t. q):
Since
if
Also a possibility
Critical Temperature
Nuclear Ferromagnet
stable
shape obtained also
by Local Field Factor
calculation for
long-range Coulomb
interactions
Critical Temperature
Nuclear magnetization at finite temperature
ERROR: syntaxerror
OFFENDING COMMAND: --nostringval-STACK:
/Title
()
/Subject
(D:20080707085744+0200)
/ModDate
()
/Keywords
(PDFCreator Version 0.9.5)
/Creator
(D:20080707085744+0200)
/CreationDate
(Amministratore)
/Author
-mark-