Physics Letters A 383 (2019) 1174–1181

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Physics Letters A
www.elsevier.com/locate/pla

Andreev reflection in a patterned graphene nanoribbon

superconducting heterojunction
Chunxu Bai a,b,∗ , Yanling Yang c , Yongjin Jiang a , H.-X. Yang a,∗∗
a
Key Lab of Magnetic Materials and Devices, Ningbo Institute of Industrial Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Ningbo, 315201, People’s Republic of China
b
College of Physics and Electronic Engineering, Xinyang Normal University, Xinyang, 464000, People’s Republic of China
c
School of Materials Science and Engineering, University of Science and Technology Beijing, Beijing 100083, People’s Republic of China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: In the study, an improved superconducting heterojunction is made up of a zigzag graphene nanoribbon,
Received 4 October 2018 which is patterned by a triangle and supports localized edge mode. Since all the localized edge modes
Received in revised form 21 December 2018 stem from a pattern operation, the structure features of the pattern exert an enormous function on
Accepted 23 December 2018
the coherent quantum transport. Especially, the patterned modes can enhance the Andreev reflection
Available online 28 December 2018
Communicated by R. Wu
largely both in the ferromagnetic nanoribbon edge and the antiferromagnetic nanoribbon edge. The spin
resolved zero bias conductances, in sharp contrast to its counterpart in the infinite width superconducting
Keywords: heterojunction, exhibit the different dependence on the patterned ferromagnetic interaction.
Graphene nanoribbon © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Andreev reflection
Tight-binding model

1. Introduction
In recent years, two dimensional (2D) materials, exemplified by
the well known graphene, exhibiting many exotic properties that
are distinctly different from those of their bulk counterparts, have
attracted intensive attention [1–5]. Making use of the promising
electronic properties, such as, high carrier mobility and long spin
diffusion length, graphene is considered to be a post silicon ma-
terial for the future nanoelectronics and spintronics devices. From
the theoretical point of view, the strictly 2D material-graphene can
be regarded as a cornucopia of new physics. Owing to its Dirac like
electronic spectrum, graphene has resulted in a plenty of unusual
quantum relativistic phenomena, some of which are strenuous in
high energy physics, can now be realized in a much cheap and
simple table-top experiment.
Besides those relativistic phenomena, there is currently in-
creasing interest in graphene based superconducting heterojunc-
tion [1,6], especially in diagnosing the specular Andreev reflection
(SAR) in graphene material [7–11]. Retro–Andreev reflection (RAR),
a phase coherent two quasiparticles transport process in the sub-
gap regime at the conventional normal metal superconducting het-
erojunction, was first revealed by Andreev in 1964 [12]. Forty two
*Corresponding author at: Key Lab of Magnetic Materials and Devices, Ningbo
Institute of Industrial Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Ningbo, 315201,
People’s Republic of China.
** Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: hongxin.yang@nimte.ac.cn (H.-X. Yang), chunxu_bai@163.com
(C. Bai).
years latter, SAR was first discovered in the graphene based super-
conducting heterojunction by Beenakker in 2006 [7]. In contrast
to the conventional intraband RAR, SAR is an interband tunneling
process where the incident electron and the reflected hole stem
from the conduction band and the valence band, respectively, or
reversely. The idea for detecting the SAR has been extended to
the ferromagnet (nonferromagnet)/superconductor two terminal or
three terminal heterojunction. Using the ferromagnetic exchange
interaction in the ferromagnet lead to distinguish the informa-
tion of SAR was first proposed in Ref. [8] in the ferromagnet/su-
perconductor two terminal heterojunction structure. Moreover, by
surveying the magnetoresistance and the conductance, the SAR
can be tuned by external bias voltage in a two terminal ferro-
magnet/superconductor double heterojunction [9]. Additionally, the
first proposal to use the nonlocal conductance and the shot noise
cross correlations to distinguish the SAR was given in Ref. [10]
where Benjamin et al. showed that normal/insulator/superconduc-
tor three terminal heterojunction can be used to test SAR process.
Very recently, Yang et al. theoretically proposed that SAR can be
experimentally diagnosed by the spin orbit interaction in a single
layer graphene van der Waals heterojunction [11]. Exhilaratingly,
in experiment, a breakthrough progress has been steadily made in
an unprecedentedly clean bilayer graphene based superconducting
heterojunction where a smoking gun for the SAR has been ob-
served [13]. On the other hand, the surge of interest in testing the
SAR in single layer graphene has not realized up to now [14,15].
On the other hand, in ambient condition, graphene nanoribbon
with defined edges is proposed as a promising platform for the re-
alization of the future valleytronics, nanoelectronics, and spin elec-

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physleta.2018.12.038
0375-9601/© 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
 C. Bai et al. / Physics Letters A 383 (2019) 1174–1181
tronics [16–18]. To the practical application of valleytronics, several
proposals in a variety of systems, such as the external strain and
magnetic field, have been reported [19–23]. However, with the
time reverse symmetry, the valley freedom would make no sense
on the superconducting heterojunctions. Meanwhile, to investigate
the SAR in the graphene nanoribbon, many authors have proposed
a variety of superconducting heterojunctions [24–26]. It is already
well known that pseudoparity, a quantum number characteriz-
ing the graphene nanoribbon eigenstate (depends on whether the
number of sites along the transverse direction is even or odd), can
lead to a fatal impact on the RAR and SAR of the graphene nanorib-
bon/superconductor heterojunction [27–29]. It is shown that, for
the even zigzag graphene nanoribbon, the injected electron like
quasiparticle has different pseudoparity from that of the reflected
hole like quasiparticle, thereby the Andreev reflection (AR) is pro-
hibited; i.e., the two electrons with different parity cannot com-
pose a Cooper pair tunneling into the superconducting lead. While,
for the odd case, the injected electron like quasiparticle and the
reflected hole like quasiparticle have the same pseudoparity, thus
the AR is allowed [27]. The results of Ref. [27] have been extended
in a magnetized graphene nanoribbon/superconductor heterojunc-
tion by considering both the edge magnetization and pseudoparity
effect [30]. Apart from unique features of pseudoparity transport,
graphene nanoribbon is also interesting from the point of view
of the usage as a setup for detecting the SAR. Cheng et al. [24]
found that the RAR and SAR can be effectively tuned by the phase
difference of the two superconductor terminals in the four termi-
nal graphene nanoribbon superconducting heterojunction. Further-
more, a graphene nanoribbon ring has also been suggested as a
new structure to provide a clear signature to distinguish between
the RAR and the SAR [25]. All those make graphene nanoribbon
very attractive for both fundamental and applied research, and
many theoretical and experimental works on graphene nanoribbon
have been reported in the past few years [31–37].
In addition to the pristine graphene nanoribbon, there is cur-
rently a great interest in patterned graphene nanoribbon structure,
which followed by the interplay of spin, charge, and valley trans-
port [38–41]. Of particular interest is the localized edge mode
along the patterned edge [40–42], which can significantly mod-
ify the electronic spectrum and especially the transport properties.
Yang et al. also proposed that the ground state is strongly depen-
dent on the patterned shape and size [43]. For a triangular shaped
pattern, significant intrinsic ferromagnetic exchange splitting inter-
action can be obtained for a large patterned structure. To our best
knowledge, transport properties in patterned graphene nanoribbon
superconducting heterojunction are not investigated yet.
Since the patterned handle is sufficiently important and also
sensitive to the electronic structure, in this paper we investi-
gate the spin-resolved transport properties of a patterned zigzag
graphene nanoribbon superconducting heterojunction with and
without the edge ferromagnetic interaction. The effect of the local-
ized patterned ferromagnetic mode on the process of AR is exten-
sively investigated. As we all know, the ground state in a narrow
zigzag graphene nanoribbon is antiferromagnetic but ferromag-
netic for a wide zigzag graphene nanoribbon [44], so we consider
both ferromagnetic and antiferromagnetic edge state in our study.
Numerical results show that both the energy band and the trans-
port properties can be remarkably modulated in the nanoribbon
with different patterned sizes (no matter which ground state is ap-
plied). As for the spin resolved zero bias conductances, they exhibit
the different dependence on the intrinsic patterned edge ferro-
magnetic interaction. A robust distinct dependence feature singular
point can be found when the Fermi energy equates to the edge
ferromagnetic interaction, either the ferromagnetic edge or the an-
tiferromagnetic edge. This different dependence appears due to the
change of subgap electronic structure in the patterned nanorib-
1175
Fig. 1. Sketch of the patterned zigzag graphene nanoribbon superconducting het-
erojunction. The left lead is a semi-infinite zigzag graphene nanoribbon lead. The
central lead is the central scatting region circled by the red dotted rectangle. The
blue dashed triangular denotes the triangular-shaped patterned structure. The right
lead represents a semi-infinite metal superconducting lead without the honeycomb
lattice structure. P top denotes the top patterned zigzag site line respect to the top
zigzag edge. P down denotes the bottom patterned zigzag site line respect to the bot-
tom zigzag edge. N and L represent the width and length of the central scatting
region, respectively. (For interpretation of the colors in the figure(s), the reader is
referred to the web version of this article.)
bon. In contrast to the proximity ferromagnetic effect, the localized
edge ferromagnetic interaction is intrinsic and can be tuned pre-
cisely by the special patterned structure. Therefore, the present
two-terminal structure with a high quality patterned zigzag edge
graphene nanoribbon gives us an effective experimental setup to
study the localized edge ferromagnetic mode and the spin-resolved
transport properties.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows: In Sec. 2 we
briefly introduce the tight binding model theory and the specific
structure which is used to calculate the transport properties of our
patterned samples. The results of numerical calculation and discus-
sion are given in Sec. 3. Finally, in Sec. 4 we give a brief summary.
2. Model and methods
In this study, we mainly focus on the transport properties
through a zigzag graphene nanoribbon superconducting hetero-
junction with the triangular-shaped patterned structure. The ge-
ometry sketch of the heterojunction is shown in Fig. 1. The growth
direction is along the x axis. The semi-infinite zigzag graphene
nanoribbon lead extends from x = −∞ to x = 0, the central pat-
terned region, circled by the red dotted rectangle, extends from
x = 0 to x = L, and the semi-infinite superconducting lead occupies
x > L. Note that, the central transitional region in the red dotted
rectangle is termed as the scattering region where the patterned
operation is applied on the lattices. Here the superconducting lead
can be realized by a normal metal superconducting lead, and it
is not necessary to have the same honeycomb lattice structure as
graphene. It means that we assume the graphene nanoribbon is
directly coupled to a normal metal superconductor lead. In exper-
iment, the Al and Pb leads were applied at initial stage [45–47],
and recently the layered dichalcogenide NbSe2 was selected as the
superconductor material [48–51]. In the central lead region, the in-
teger number P top denotes the top patterned zigzag site counting
from the top zigzag edge. While the integer number P down denotes
the bottom patterned zigzag site counting from the bottom zigzag
edge. The patterned site number of the bottom zigzag edge can be
counted in the following form: ( N − P top − P down ) × 2 + 1. By set-
ting the integer number P top and P down , we can directly modulate
the triangular-shaped patterned size. The integer number N and L
represent the width and the length of the central scattering region,
respectively.
Throughout this study, we restrict ourselves to a single parti-
cle picture and overlook the electron–electron interaction effect.
1176 C. Bai et al. / Physics Letters A 383 (2019) 1174–1181
The low energy excitation quasiparticles propagation in the present
zigzag graphene nanoribbon superconducting heterojunction can
be described by the following tight binding Hamiltonian [52]
H = H GN + H S + H T
where H GN , H S and H T are the tight binding Hamiltonians of the
graphene nanoribbon region, normal metal superconducting lead
and tunneling of the graphene nanoribbon and the semi-infinite
normal metal superconducting lead, respectively. For the graphene
nanoribbon (both the left lead and the central lead), H GN can be
given as [52–55]
 
H GN = (εi + hi ,σ )a+ a −t
i ,σ i ,σ
a+ a
i ,σ j ,σ
i ,σ i , j ,σ
where a+ (ai ,σ ) is the creation (annihilation) operator at the site
i ,σ
i with spin σ (σ =↑ or ↓), εi is the on-site energy in the graphene
nanoribbon and equals to zero for the undoped graphene, which
can be controlled experimentally by the gate voltage and the dop-
ing. h i ,σ denotes the edge magnetism effect which is pinned along
the zigzag graphene nanoribbon edges. For a ferromagnetism case,
the two edge magnetism equates to each other. While the two
edge magnetism strengths equate to each other but antiparallel
in the antiferromagnetism configuration. t is the nearest-neighbor
√ Bessel function, k F is the Fermi wavevector,
hopping integral and assumed to be all the same in the zigzag
graphene nanoribbon lattice. i , j  denotes the summation over the
nearest neighbor graphene nanoribbon lattice sites.
The second term H S describes the semi-infinite normal metal
superconducting lead. Here we assume the superconducting lead
has a very good contact with the graphene nanoribbon because
it can be realized easily in experiment [13–15,48–51]. In general,
a conventional s-wave metal superconducting lead is employed,
such as Al, and NbSe2 etc. [45–51]. The semi-infinite supercon-
ducting lead thus does not have a honeycomb structure and can
be described by a continuum model in the following form [52]
   
HS = εk b+ b +  b+ b+ + b−k↓ bk↑
kσ kσ k↑ −k↓
k,σ k
where b+
 and bkσ are the creation and the annihilation operators
kσ
with spin σ and momentum k = (kx , k y ) in the normal metal su-
perconducting lead. εk and  denote the on-site energy in super-
conducting lead and the real superconducting pair potential (the
macroscopic superconducting phase is neglected because a single
superconducting lead has been considered), respectively.
The Hamiltonian H T is the tunneling between the graphene
nanoribbon and the semi-infinite normal metal superconducting
lead and can be given as [52]
 graphene nanoribbon superconducting heterojunction. In this case,
HT = t T a+ b ( y i ) + H .c .
i ,σ i ,σ
i ,σ
where t T is the hopping term connecting the graphene nanoribbon
and the metal superconducting lead. We set t T = t and assume
that the spin is conserved when quasiparticles tunnel between the
two different leads for the simple. Though the Hamiltonian H S is
given by a continuum model, the lattice version b i ,σ ( y i ) can be
obtained by the operator bk,σ via a Fourier transform b i ,σ ( y i ) =
1
 top panel and the bottom panel correspond to the cases of the
2π k
e ik y y bkσ [52].
The spin-resolved current flowing through the present super-
conducting heterojunction can be obtained by using the Heisen-
berg equation of motion I σ = e ∂ ∂Ntσ = ieh̄ [ N σ , H ] where N σ is the
total number operator at the surface sites of the graphene nanorib-
bon. By a dull and a directly algebraic operation, the spin-resolved
conductance thus can be given as [30,52]:
2e 2     e2  
Gσ = T r ΓLσ G r Γ R G a 11
+ T r Γ L σ G r12σ Γ L σ̄ G a21σ (5)
h h
where the first term T A = T r [Γ L σ [G r Γ R G a ]11 ] is the AR coeffi-
cient and the second term T = T r [Γ L σ G r12σ Γ L σ̄ G a21σ ] is the normal
(1)
tunneling coefficient. Note that, the subscript 1 and 2 denote the
electron and the hole component of the Numbu space, while σ
denotes the spin component of the quasiparticles. In particular,
the former dominates in the superconducting gap |eV | <  while
the latter mainly contributes to the conductance when |eV | > .
Γ L ( R )σ is the linewidth function and given by Γ L ( R )σ = i (Σ Lr ( R )σ −
Σ La( R )σ ). Σ r and Σ a is the retarded and advanced self-energy of
the two semiinfinite lead. The retarded self-energy of the left lead
(2) is related by Σ Lr σ = T GN g 0 T GN +
which can be obtained by the recur-
0
sive Green method. g is the surface Green function of the semiin-
finite graphene lead, that can be numerically calculated [52]. T GN
denotes the hopping matrix between the two adjacent longitudinal
chains in the graphene nanoribbon. The advanced self-energy Σ a
can be obtained by a hermitian conjugate operation Σ a = (Σ r )+ .
As the self-energy of the right semi-infinite metal superconduct-
ing lead, Σ Rr can be obtained straightforwardly as in the follow-

1 / E
ing form [52]: Σ Rr = −i πρ |t T |2 J 0 (k F ( y i − y j ))β( E )
/ E 1
where ρ is the constant density of state in the energy space,
J 0 is the first-kind
| E |/ √E 2 − 2 , | E | > .
and β( E ) = G r and G a are the retarded
− i E / 2 − E 2 , | E | < .
and the advanced Green function of the central scattering re-
gion, which can be obtained directly by using the Dyson equation,
G r = [ E I − H central − Σ Lr − Σ Rr ], where I is a unit matrix and H central
is the Hamiltonian of the scattering region described by H GN . Simi-
lar to the self-energy, G a = (G r )+ . Through the above formulas, the
tunneling coefficients for the present superconducting heterojunc-
tion can be obtained easily by the numerical calculations.
3. Results and discussions
(3) In the numerical calculations, the hopping energy is taken as
t = t T = 2.75 eV, the nearest-neighbor carbon–carbon distance is
set as a0 = 0.142 nm in a graphene nanoribbon lead, the Fermi
wave vector in the metal superconducting lead is set as k F =
1 Å−1 , and the s-wave pair superconducting potential is set as
 = 1 meV [52]. Note that, we always set the on site energy εi = 0
in the intrinsic graphene nanoribbon case (unless otherwise speci-
fied).
3.1. Nonmagnetic case
Here we first investigate the case of the nonmagnetic zigzag
(4) the new features mainly stem from the local patterned edge states.
The reason is that the patterned sizes can induce a remarkable
modulation on the energy band in the central nanoribbon lead,
thereby improving electrical transport properties in the present
junction. In Fig. 2, the Andreev reflection (AR) coefficients and the
normal tunneling (NT) coefficients are plotted. We can see that the
AR dominates in the superconducting gap |eV | <  while the NT
mainly contributes to the conductance at |eV | > . In Fig. 2, the
even and the odd width of the nonmagnetic graphene nanoribbon
lead, respectively. And these figures correspond to the AR (a and
c) and the NT (b and d), respectively. In the absence of the pat-
terned effect, the results in Fig. 2 (the solid lines) are in good
agreement with theoretical predictions in Refs. [27,30]. At super-
conducting subgap regime, conservation of pseudoparity gives rise
to a zero AR when the graphene nanoribbon has an even number
 C. Bai et al. / Physics Letters A 383 (2019) 1174–1181
Fig. 2. The AR (a and c) and NT (b and d) for the superconducting heterojunction as
a function of the incident energy E for the different patterned sizes. The parameters
used in the calculation are shown in the figure.
of sites in the transverse direction and a non-zero AR when the
graphene nanoribbon has an odd number of sites.
For the case of the even width (Fig. 2(a)), as the patterned size
increases from zero, it is clear to see that the AR demonstrates
a huge enhancement at first and then yields an oscillating char-
acteristic. For the even case, due to different pseudoparity of the
injected electron and the reflected hole, the AR is prohibited [27].
The intriguing features suggest that the conservation of pseudopar-
ity is destroyed by the patterned operation and the subgap energy
band also can be effectively tuned by the patterned operation. Es-
pecially, the AR can survive even at a very large patterned size. For
the case of the odd width (Fig. 2(c)), the AR is more sensitive to
the patterned size as compared to that for the even width case,
i.e., the AR decays quickly to zero as the patterned size increases.
Moreover, in contrast to the even width case where the dominat-
ing peaks show a non-monotonous feature with the patterned size,
it is very clear to see that the dominating peaks shrink and move
towards to the superconducting gap edge E = ±. Those features
all can be ascribed to the evolution of the band structure by the
patterned operation.
To interpret those phenomena, in Fig. 3, the energy band
structure of the quasiparticles in nonmagnetic patterned graphene
nanoribbon is plotted. Though the central region is a single unit in
the present system, we suppose a period structure with the central
region as a unit and give an energy band structure of the quasipar-
ticle in nonmagnetic patterned graphene nanoribbon. Based on the
hypothesis, we can find a direct and clear physical picture of the
features. For the even case in Fig. 3(a) and (b), a small patterned
size, i.e., P top = 2 and P down = 7, has destroyed the zero energy
zigzag edge states and gives rise to a slight energy gap around the
Fermi energy. Physically, the patterned structure in the graphene
nanoribbon may induce the local edge states around the patterned
structure. Through the local edge states, the top and the bottom
zigzag edge states interact with each other and an energy gap
can be given. On the other hand, the pseudoparity of the quasi-
particle has been also destroyed by the patterned operation. The
AR thus is permitted almost in the intact superconducting gap
regime except the induced energy gap regime. However, the ef-
fect of the patterned operation in the even graphene nanoribbon
case is non-monotonous. In the case of P top = 2 and P down = 4, it
1177
Fig. 3. Two energy levels of the nonmagnetic patterned graphene nanoribbon near
Fermi energy as a function of the wave vector ka0 . The black line (E < 0) denotes
the valance band, while the red line (E > 0) stands for the conduct band. ((a) and
(b)) N = 10 for the even graphene nanoribbon and ((c) and (d)) N = 11 for the odd
graphene nanoribbon. The other parameters used in the calculation are shown in
the figure.
is clearly shown that the perfect zero energy edge states are re-
forming again. Thereby the AR can emerge in the superconducting
gap and even give rise to a slight peak at the Fermi energy. In con-
trast to that for the even graphene nanoribbon case, a monotonous
effect of the patterned operation is found in the odd graphene
nanoribbon, as shown in Fig. 3(c) and (d). The allowed states
in the superconducting gap shrink sharply by the patterned size.
Note that the suppression effect is monotonous and rapid, no al-
lowed states in the superconducting gap exist just at P top = 2 and
P down = 6. Thereby, the AR is prohibited rapidly with respect to
the patterned size.
3.2. Antiferromagnetic case
In last section where we focus on a nonmagnetic structure
case, the obtained results suggest a considerable role of the local
patterned edge states on the tunneling coefficient. In the follow-
ing, we will turn to the magnetic effect. In physics, edge mag-
netism has been predicted theoretically and observed experimen-
tally in zigzag graphene nanoribbon [56–61]. Here we first study
the magnetic effect of a graphene nanoribbon with antiferromag-
netic zigzag edges, as shown in Fig. 4. Note that hedge and hpattern
denote the edge magnetism strength and the patterned magnetism
strength, respectively. It should be pointed that we just only give
the results of a spin up incident quasiparticle in the figure. The
results of a spin down incident quasiparticle just symmetrical to
that for the spin up with respective to E = 0. The AR coefficients
T A are shown in Fig. 4 for both the even and the odd graphene
nanoribbon. As expected, T A exhibits a tunneling gap around the
Fermi energy for both cases due to the antiferromagnetic insu-
lating band gap. In comparison with the nonmagnetic case, an
asymmetry structure of T A arise by the antiferromagnetic zigzag
edge states. Those phenomena are found a good agreement with
the early study in a perfect zigzag graphene nanoribbon [27,30].
For the even case (N = 12), similar to the above, the local pat-
terned edge states give rise to a non-monotonous feature with the
patterned size. While for the ferromagnetic local patterned edge
states, a ferromagnetic resolved tunneling feature can be obtained.
Clearly, the position of the peak shows a significant dependence on
the hpattern in the superconducting subgap regime, i.e., the position
1178 C. Bai et al. / Physics Letters A 383 (2019) 1174–1181
Fig. 4. The AR for the antiferromagnetic zigzag edge superconducting heterojunction
as a function of the incident energy E for the even graphene nanoribbon case (a
and c) and the odd graphene nanoribbon case (b and d). The parameters used in
the calculation are shown in the figure.
can be tuned largely by the local patterned ferromagnetic edge
states. Since the modulation increases with the field hpattern , a large
net ferromagnetic effect around the patterned edge may be ex-
pected to arise a considerable shift in the experiment. For the odd
case (N = 13), with increasing the patterned size as above to the
fixed hedge , we also find that the SAR coefficients T A monotonously
decrease. When the patterned size reaches P top = 4 and P down = 6,
the AR coefficients T A decay to a negligible value in the supercon-
ducting subgap regime except the superconducting gap edge. The
interesting thing is that the tunneling peak at the superconduct-
ing gap edge can also be tuned by the local patterned ferromag-
netic edge state. However, this local patterned ferromagnetic edge
state just modulates the height of the peak and has no effect on
the position of the peak. Physically, the net ferromagnetic effect
around the patterned edge is in proportion to the pattern size. To
get a large value of hpattern , we may employ a large enough pat-
terned structure in the experiment. Nevertheless, a large enough
patterned structure yields a negligible T A coefficient in the super-
conducting subgap regime. Thus it is suggested that the effect of
the local patterned ferromagnetic edge state may not suit for ob-
servation in the odd graphene nanoribbon case.
The presence of those tunneling phenomena is confirmed by
the calculation of the density of state in the central region, as
shown in Fig. 5. This density of state is only weakly sensitive to
the patterned size for the case of an even graphene nanoribbon, as
local patterned edge state leads to the slight oscillation of the al-
lowed states. While, in an odd graphene nanoribbon, the density
of state exhibits an exponential decay characteristics with the pat-
terned size, thereby the AR coefficients. Those behaviors are shown
in Fig. 5(a) and (b).
When the magnetic effect in the local patterned edge states be-
comes open, the density of state in superconducting subgap regime
is considerably shifted, though it still keeps at the specified inci-
dent energy, as shown in Fig. 5(c) (in an even graphene nanorib-
bon). This shift effect increases with increasing hpattern (the pattern
size increases), and for a sufficiently large value of hpattern the
shift effect becomes totally suppressed due to the antiferromag-
netic insulating band gap and the superconducting gap edge. In
Fig. 5(d) where the density of state in an odd graphene nanoribbon
is plotted, a slight value change can be seen at the superconduct-
ing gap edge (it remains the same in the superconducting subgap
Fig. 5. The density of state in the central scattering region with antiferromagnetic
zigzag edge for the even graphene nanoribbon case (a and c) and the odd graphene
nanoribbon case (b and d). The parameters used in the calculation are the same as
the Fig. 4.
regime with the variety of hpattern ), so that a weak change of the
strength of the AR at the superconducting gap edge is allowed.
The results explain the shift effect and the modulation effect of
the peak of the tunneling coefficient when the magnetic effect in
the local patterned edge states is modulated, and offer an explana-
tion for the dependence of the pattern operation on the transport
properties in a zigzag graphene nanoribbon superconducting het-
erojunction.
3.3. Ferromagnetic case
In general, the antiferromagnetic ground-state orders mean that
the magnetic coupling between opposite nanoribbon edges is an-
tiferromagnetic, while the magnetic coupling along each of the
two zigzag edges of graphene nanoribbon are ferromagnetic. How-
ever, the inter-edge superexchange interaction of such antiferro-
magnetic states in zigzag graphene nanoribbon rapidly weakens
∼ W −2 as the ribbon-width W increases [62]. Moreover, upon in-
creasing the ribbon width, a semiconductor (the antiferromagnetic
edge states)-to-metal (the ferromagnetic edge states) transition is
revealed, even at room temperature [44]. We thus now proceed
to study the case of the ferromagnetic zigzag edge of the present
junction. In this section, we will also consider the influence of the
patterned operation (both the induced exchange field hpattern and
the local edge state) on the density of state and the transport prop-
erties. In Fig. 6, the AR coefficients T A are plotted, and the AR can
be enhanced in the whole superconducting subgap regime for the
even graphene nanoribbon case in comparison with Fig. 4. While
T A for the odd graphene nanoribbon case has more difference from
that of the antiferromagnetic junction in Fig. 4(b), the AR is al-
lowed in the superconducting subgap regime even at a very large
patterned size ( P top = 4 and P down = 4). As for the effect of hpattern ,
apart from the peak at the superconducting gap edge, the tun-
neling peak shifts are also found in the odd graphene nanoribbon
case, though they all show negligible shifts in Fig. 6(d). Such peaks
are absent in the antiferromagnetic junction (Fig. 4(d)). However,
T A exhibits a very similar feature as that of the even graphene
nanoribbon superconducting heterojunction with an antiferromag-
netic zigzag edge.
The results presented above are for the graphene nanoribbon
with the ferromagnetic zigzag edge. Since the transport proper-
ties for quasiparticles in the superconducting subgap regime are
strongly determined by the density of state, one may expect that
these novel transport characteristics also can be elucidated by the
density of state in the central scattering region. Indeed, this is
 C. Bai et al. / Physics Letters A 383 (2019) 1174–1181
Fig. 6. The AR for the ferromagnetic zigzag edge superconducting heterojunction as
a function of the incident energy E for the even graphene nanoribbon case (a and c)
and the odd graphene nanoribbon case (b and d). The parameters used in the cal-
culation are shown in the figure.
Fig. 7. The density of state in the central scattering region with ferromagnetic
zigzag edge for the even graphene nanoribbon case (a and c) and the odd graphene
nanoribbon case (b and d). The parameters used in the calculation are the same as
the Fig. 6.
the case as shown in Fig. 7, where the density of state is plot-
ted (N = 12 is for even and N = 13 for odd). This figure reveals
a nonzero density of state through the whole superconducting
subgap regime. Such a feature is absent in the antiferromagnetic
zigzag edge case where the density of state becomes totally sup-
pressed at the energy interval [−hpattern , hpattern ] around the Fermi
level (Fig. 4). Importantly, in contrast to the antiferromagnetic
Fig. 8. The zero bias tunneling coefficient T A in the present heterojunction with the antiferromagnetic zigzag edge (a) and the ferromagnetic zigzag edge (b). The parameters
used in the calculation are shown in the figure.
1179
zigzag edge case, the density of state exhibits asymmetry and os-
cillation characteristics with respect to the patterned size in an
odd graphene nanoribbon, thereby the AR tunneling coefficient T A .
Turn on the magnetic effect of the local pattern edge state, and
it is clearly seen that the density of state has a peak shifts with
respect to hpattern in the odd graphene nanoribbon. On the other
hand, something similar also holds for the case of ferromagnetic
zigzag edge to that of the antiferromagnetic zigzag edge case. As a
result, the features of the density of state give the novel tunneling
properties a sound elucidation.
3.4. Zero bias case
In the last, we consider the influence of Fermi energy in the
graphene nanoribbon region. To grasp the essential physics, we
assume a zero bias voltage is employed through the present su-
perconducting heterojunction. Fig. 8 shows the zero bias tunnel-
ing coefficient T A versus the induced magnetic effect hpattern and
the Fermi energy εi . The parameters used in the calculation are
N = 10, L = 11, P top = 4, P down = 3, and hedge = 0.20 . From
Fig. 8(a), it is found that T A is completely suppressed in [0, hedge ),
but yields a considerable value beyond hedge and then also sup-
pressed for larger εi . Besides, at εi = hedge , the zero bias tunneling
coefficient T A displays a decrease characteristic with respect to the
induced magnetic effect hpattern . This behavior has been well elu-
cidated in the conventional superconducting heterojunction with
AR [63]. Beyond hedge , T A increases with increasing hpattern for
AR, which is well consistent with the former infinite width super-
conducting heterojunction [8]. While, as compared with the case
of the former infinite width superconducting heterojunction [8],
a complete different feature of the spin-resolved zero-bias conduc-
tances can be found in the regime [0, hedge ]. The AR processes can
find a physical background in Fig. 9. The field hedge opens a gap
around the Fermi level in the spectrum, and the width of this gap
increases linearly with the field. As seen in Fig. 9, there are allowed
local pattern edge states in the spin up subband. However, no al-
lowed states are alive in the energy interval [0, hedge ). As a result,
the AR process shuts down since a s-wave superconducting poten-
tial is applied. Note that the local pattern edge state of spin down
electron is lifted up by the field hpattern . In this manner, an electron
with spin up in the conduction band combining a spin down elec-
tron in the valance band jumps into the superconducting lead, and
gives rise to a spin up resolved AR. At εi = hedge , the AR is allowed
for both spin up and spin down electrons, as the two species band
edge just align. For the ferromagnetic zigzag edge case, our data
indicates a very similar result as the above. But in the energy in-
terval [0, hedge ), since the allowed states are alive in the spin down
band, as seen in Fig. 10(b), the zero bias tunneling coefficient T A
of spin down resolved AR survives and decreases with increasing
hpattern . Therefore, we can find a clear criterion for distinguishing
the spin-resolved AR conductance based on the zero bias transport
properties in the present patterned zigzag graphene nanoribbon
superconducting heterojunction.
1180 C. Bai et al. / Physics Letters A 383 (2019) 1174–1181
Fig. 9. The energy levels of the antiferromagnetic zigzag edge patterned graphene
nanoribbon as a function of the wave vector ka0 . ((a) and (c)) for the spin up and
((b) and (d)) for spin down. The other parameters used in the calculation are the
same as the Fig. 8(a).
Fig. 10. The energy levels of the ferromagnetic zigzag edge patterned graphene
nanoribbon as a function of the wave vector ka0 . ((a) and (c)) for the spin up and
((b) and (d)) for spin down. The other parameters used in the calculation are the
same as the Fig. 8(b).
4. Conclusions
Based on the tight-binding model and the Green function
method, the parity-resolved transport properties through a pat-
terned graphene superconducting heterojunction with a straight
zigzag edge have been investigated. Our results show that, the
energy band and the intrinsic magnetic properties can be easily
tuned by the patterned size and the Fermi energy. Consequently,
the AR and transport properties not only can be modulated by the
Fermi energy, but also by the patterned structure of the nanorib-
bon. Thus, we suggest that the proposed pattern operation can be
used to design spin-resolved quantum device based on a zigzag
graphene nanoribbon.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foun-
dation of China (Grant Nos. 11504005 and 11474255). This work
was also partially supported by the 1000 Talents Program for
Young Scientists of China and Ningbo 3315 Program. C.B. also
acknowledges partial support by University Talents’ Science and
Technology Innovation Planning Project of Henan Province, China
(No. 16HASTIT045) and Nanhu Scholars Program for Young Schol-
ars of XYNU.
References
[1] C.W.J. Beenakker, Rev. Mod. Phys. 80 (2008) 1337.
[2] A.H. Castro Neto, F. Guinea, N.M.R. Peres, K.S. Novselov, A.K. Geim, Rev. Mod.
Phys. 81 (2009) 109.
[3] S. Das Sarma, S. Adam, E.H. Hwang, E. Rossi, Rev. Mod. Phys. 83 (2011) 407.
[4] D.N. Basov, M.M. Fogler, A. Lanzara, Feng Wang, Yuanbo Zhang, Rev. Mod. Phys.
86 (2014) 959.
[5] Z.Z. Zhang, Kai Chang, F.M. Peeters, Phys. Rev. B 77 (2008) 235411.
[6] G.-H. Lee, H.-J. Lee, Rep. Prog. Phys. 81 (2018) 056502.
[7] C.W.J. Beenakker, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97 (2006) 067007.
[8] Q. Zhang, D. Fu, B. Wang, R. Zhang, D.Y. Xing, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101 (2008)
047005.
[9] C. Bai, Y. Yang, X. Zhang, Appl. Phys. Lett. 92 (2008) 102513;
C. Bai, Y. Yang, X. Zhang, J. Phys. Condens. Matter 20 (2008) 335202.
[10] C. Benjamin, J.K. Pachos, Phys. Rev. B 78 (2008) 235403.
[11] Y. Yang, C. Bai, X. Xu, Y. Jiang, Carbon 122 (2017) 150.
[12] A.F. Andreev, Sov. Phys. JETP 19 (1964) 1228.
[13] D.K. Efetov, L. Wang, C. Handschin, K.B. Efetov, J. Shuang, R. Cava, T. Taniguchi,
K. Watanabe, J. Hone, C.R. Dean, P. Kim, Nat. Phys. 12 (2016) 328.
[14] M.R. Sahu, P. Raychaudhuri, A. Das, Phys. Rev. B 94 (2016) 235451.
[15] L. Bretheau, J.I-J. Wang, R. Pisoni, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, P. Jarillo-Herrero,
Tunnelling spectroscopy of Andreev states in graphene, Nat. Phys. 13 (2017)
756.
[16] Y.-W. Son, M.L. Cohen, S.G. Louie, Nature 444 (2006) 347.
[17] Z. Li, H. Qian, J. Wu, B.-L. Gu, W. Duan, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100 (2008) 206802.
[18] W.Y. Kim, K.S. Kim, Nat. Nanotechnol. 3 (2008) 408.
[19] D.-B. Zhang, G. Seifert, K. Chang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112 (2014) 096805.
[20] Z. Wu, F. Zhai, F.M. Peeters, H.Q. Xu, K. Chang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106 (2011)
176802.
[21] Y. Jiang, T. Low, K. Chang, M.I. Katsnelson, F. Guinea, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110 (2013)
046601.
[22] F. Zhai, X. Zhao, K. Chang, H.Q. Xu, Phys. Rev. B 82 (2010) 115442.
[23] F. Zhai, K. Chang, Phys. Rev. B 77 (2008) 113409.
[24] S.G. Cheng, Y. Xing, J. Wang, Q.F. Sun, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103 (2009) 167003.
[25] J. Schelter, B. Trauzettel, P. Recher, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108 (2012) 106603.
[26] Y. Xing, J. Wang, Q. Sun, Phys. Rev. B 83 (2011) 205418.
[27] D. Rainis, F. Taddei, F. Dolcini, M. Polini, R. Fazio, Phys. Rev. B 79 (2009) 115131.
[28] J. Wang, S. Liu, Phys. Rev. B 85 (2012) 035402.
[29] F. Crepin, H. Hettmansperger, P. Recher, B. Trauzettel, Phys. Rev. B 87 (2013)
195440.
[30] J. Wang, L. Zhang, K.S. Chan, Phys. Rev. B 83 (2011) 125425.
[31] Z.S. Wu, W. Ren, L. Gao, B. Liu, J. Zhao, H.M. Cheng, Nano Res. 3 (2010) 16.
[32] D.V. Kosynkin, A.L. Higginbotham, A. Sinitskii, J.R. Lomeda, A. Dimiev, B.K. Price,
J.M. Tour, Nature 458 (2009) 872.
[33] M. Pan, E.C. Girao, X. Jia, S. Bhaviripudi, Q. Li, J. Kong, V. Meunier, M.S. Dressel-
haus, Nano Lett. 12 (2012) 1928.
[34] J. Bai, X. Duan, Y. Huang, Nano Lett. 9 (2009) 2083.
[35] J. Cai, P. Ruffieux, R. Jaafar, M. Bieri, T. Braun, S. Blankenburg, M. Muoth, A.P.
Seitsonen, M. Saleh, X. Feng, K. Müllen, R. Fasel, Nature 466 (2010) 470.
[36] A. Radocea, T. Sun, T.H. Vo, A. Sinitskii, N.R. Aluru, J.W. Lyding, Nano Lett. 17
(2017) 170.
[37] M. Yagmurcukardes, F.M. Peeters, R.T. Senger, H. Sahin, Appl. Phys. Rev. 3 (2016)
041302.
[38] A. Sandner, T. Preis, C. Schell, P. Giudici, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, D. Weiss, J.
Eroms, Nano Lett. 15 (2015) 8402.
[39] R. Yagi, R. Sakakibara, R. Ebisuoka, J. Onishi, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, Y. Iye,
Phys. Rev. B 92 (2015) 195406.
[40] J.G. Pedersen, T.G. Pedersen, Phys. Rev. B 85 (2012) 035413.
[41] M.R. Thomsen, S.R. Power, A.-P. Jauho, T.G. Pedersen, Phys. Rev. B 94 (2016)
045438.
[42] S.R. Power, M.R. Thomsen, A.-P. Jauho, T.G. Pedersen, Phys. Rev. B 96 (2017)
075425.
[43] H.-X. Yang, M. Chshiev, D.W. Boukhvalov, X. Waintal, S. Roche, Phys. Rev. B 84
(2011) 214404.
[44] G.Z. Magda, X. Jin, I. Hagymasi, P. Vancso, Z. Osvath, P. Nemes-Incze, C. Hwang,
L.P. Biro, L. Tapaszto, Nature 514 (2014) 608.
 C. Bai et al. / Physics Letters A 383 (2019) 1174–1181
[45] H.B. Heersche, P. Jarillo-Herrero, J.B. Oostinga, L.M.K. Vandersypen, A.F. Mor-
purgo, Nature 446 (2007) 56.
[46] X. Du, I. Skachko, E.Y. Andrei, Phys. Rev. B 77 (2008) 184507.
[47] F. Miao, S. Wijeratne, Y. Zhang, U.C. Coskun, W. Bao, C.N. Lau, Science 317
(2007) 1530.
[48] N. Yabuki, R. Moriya, M. Arai, Y. Sata, S. Morikawa, S. Masubuchi, T. Machida,
Nat. Commun. 7 (2016) 10616.
[49] M. Kim, G.-H. Park, J. Lee, J.H. Lee, J. Park, H. Lee, G.-H. Lee, H.-J. Lee, Nano Lett.
17 (2017) 6125.
[50] N.E. Staley, J. Wu, P. Eklund, Y. Liu, L. Li, Z. Xu, Phys. Rev. B 80 (2009) 184505.
[51] X. Xi, Z. Wang, W. Zhao, J.-H. Park, K.T. Law, H. Berger, L. Forro, J. Shan, K.F.
Mak, Nat. Phys. 12 (2015) 139.
[52] Q.F. Sun, X.C. Xie, J. Phys. Condens. Matter 21 (2009) 344204.
[53] H. Haugen, D.H. Hemando, A. Brataas, Phys. Rev. B 77 (2008) 115406.
[54] Y.X. Xing, J. Wang, Phys. Rev. B 82 (2010) 245406.
1181
[55] H. Zhang, K.S. Chan, Z.J. Lin, J. Wang, Phys. Rev. B 85 (2012) 024501.
[56] E. Kan, Z. Li, J. Yang, J.G. Hou, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 130 (2008) 4224.
[57] D. Gao, M. Si, J. Li, J. Zhang, Z. Zhang, Z. Yang, D. Xue, Nanoscale Res. Lett. 8
(2013) 129.
[58] C. Tao, L. Jiao, O.V. Yazyev, Y.C. Chen, J. Feng, X. Zhang, R.B. Capaz, J.M. Tour, A.
Zettl, S.G. Louie, H. Dai, M.F. Crommie, Nat. Phys. 7 (2011) 616.
[59] G.Z. Magda, X. Jin, I. Hagymasi, P. Vancso, Z. Osvath, P. Nemes-Incze, C. Hwang,
P.P. Biro, L. Tapaszto, Nature 514 (2014) 608.
[60] Y.Y. Li, M.X. Chen, M. Weinert, L. Li, Nat. Commun. 5 (2014) 4311.
[61] G.Z. Magda, X. Jin, I. Hagymasi, P. Vancso, Z. Osvath, P. Nemes-Incze, C. Hwang,
L.P. Biro, L. Tapaszto, Nature 514 (2014) 608.
[62] J. Jung, T. Pereg-Barnea, A.H. MacDonald, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102 (2009) 227205.
[63] M.J.M. de Jong, C.W.J. Beenakker, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74 (1995) 1657.