Slide 1

Quantum transport and its classical limit Piet Brouwer Laboratory of Atomic and Solid State Physics Cornell University Lecture 1 Capri spring school on Transport in Nanostructures, March 25-31, 2007

Slide 2

Quantum Transport About the manifestations of quantum mechanics on the electrical transport properties of conductors These lectures: signatures of quantum interference Quantum effects not covered here: Interaction effects Shot noise Mesoscopic superconductivity sample

Slide 3

Quantum Transport These lectures: signatures of quantum interference What to expect? Magnetofingerprint Nonlocality R 1+2 =R 1 +R 2 B (mT) G 1+2 (e 2 /h) G 1 =G 2 =2e 2 /h B GG B (10 -4 T) G (e 2 /h) Figures adapted from: Mailly and Sanquer (1991) Webb, Washburn, Umbach, and Laibowitz (1985) Marcus (2005)

Slide 4

Landauer-Buettiker formalism sample x y W N: number of propagating transverse modes or channels a n : electrons moving towards sample b n : electrons moving away from sample Note: |a n | 2 and |b n | 2 determine flux in each channel, not density N depends on energy , width W Ideal leads

Slide 5

Scattering Matrix: Definition sample |S mj;nk | 2 describes what fraction of the flux of electrons entering in lead k, channel n, leaves sample through lead j, channel m. Probability that an electron entering in lead k, channel n, leaves sample through lead j, channel m is |S mj;nk | 2 v nk /v mj. More than one lead: N j is number of channels in lead j Use amplitudes a nj, b nj for incoming, outgoing electrons, n = 1, , N j. Linear relationship between a nj, b nj : S: scattering matrix

Slide 6

Scattering matrix: Properties sample Linear relationship between a nj, b nj : S: scattering matrix Current conservation: S is unitary Time-reversal symmetry: If is a solution of the Schroedinger equation at magnetic field B, then * is a solution at magnetic field B.

Slide 7

Landauer-Buettiker formalism Reservoirs sample Each lead j is connected to an electron reservoir at temperature T and chemical potential j. j, T Distribution function for electrons originating from reservoir j is f( - j ).

Slide 8

Landauer-Buettiker formalism Current in leads sample j, T I j,in I j,out In one dimension: = ( nk h) -1 Buettiker (1985)

Slide 9

Landauer-Buettiker formalism Linear response sample j, T I j,in I j,out j = eV j Expand to first order in V j : Zero temperature

Slide 10

Conductance coefficients sample j = -eV j IjIj Current conservation and gauge invariance Time-reversal Note: only if B=0 or if there are only two leads. Otherwiseand in general.

Slide 11

Multiterminal measurements In four-terminal measurement, one measures a combination of the 16 coefficients G jk. Different ways to perform the measurement correspond to different combinations of the G jk, so they give different results! I V V V I I Benoit, Washburn, Umbach, Laibowitz, Webb (1986)

Slide 12

Landauer formula: spin Without spin-dependent scattering: Factor two for spin degeneracy With spin-dependent scattering: Use separate sets of channels for each spin direction. Dimension of scattering matrix is doubled. Conductance measured in units of 2e 2 /h: Dimensionless conductance.

Slide 13

Two-terminal geometry r, r: reflection matrices t, t: transmission matrices tr in out f()f() f()f() |t| 2 |r|2|r|2 t r |t|2|t|2 |r| 2 eV (meV) f()f() Anthore, Pierre, Pothier, Devoret (2003)

Slide 14

Quantum transport Landauer formula tr sample t r What is the sample? Point contact Quantum dot Disordered metal wire Metal ring Molecule Graphene sheet

Slide 15

Example: adiabatic point contact N(x)N(x) N min x g 10 6 2 4 8 0 V gate (V) -2.0-1.8-1.6-1.4-1.2 Van Wees et al. (1988)

Slide 16

Quantum interference In general: g small, random sign t nm, , t nm, : amplitude for transmission along paths ,

Slide 17

Quantum interference Three prototypical examples: Disordered wire Disordered quantum dot Ballistic quantum dot

Slide 18

Scattering matrix and Green function Recall: retarded Green function is solution of In one dimension: k = and v = h -1 d k /dk Green function in channel basis: r in lead j; r in lead k Substitute 1d form of Green function If j = k:

Slide 19

Quantum transport and its classical limit Piet Brouwer Laboratory of Atomic and Solid State Physics Cornell University Lecture 2 Capri spring school on Transport in Nanostructures, March 25-31, 2007

Slide 20

Characteristic time scales h/Fh/F erg DD HH F l L Ballistic quantum dot: ~ erg ~ L/v F, l ~ L Diffusive conductor: erg ~ L 2 /D Inverse level spacing: relevant for closed samples Elastic mean free time

Slide 21

Characteristic conductances Conductances of the contacts: g 1, g 2 Conductance of sample without contacts: g sample if g >> 1 Bulk measurement: g 1,2 >> g sample Quantum dot: g 1,2

Assumptions and restrictions Always: F > 1. This implies D

RMT: with time-reversal symmetry Quantum dot N 1 channels N 2 channels Weak localization correction is difference with classical conductance For N 1, N 2 >> 1: Same as diagrammatic perturbation theory Jalabert, Pichard, Beenakker (1994) Baranger and Mello (1994)

Slide 37

RMT: conductance fluctuations Quantum dot N 1 channels N 2 channels Without time-reversal symmetry: With time-reversal symmetry: Same as diagrammatic perturbation theory There exist extensions of RMT to deal with contacts that contain tunnel barriers, magnetic-field dependence, etc. Jalabert, Pichard, Beenakker (1994) Baranger and Mello (1994)

Slide 38

Quantum transport and its classical limit Piet Brouwer Laboratory of Atomic and Solid State Physics Cornell University Lecture 3 Capri spring school on Transport in Nanostructures, March 25-31, 2007

Slide 39

Ballistic quantum dots Past lectures: Qualitative microscopic picture of interference corrections in disordered conductors; Quantitative calculations can be done using diagrammatic perturbation theory Quantitative non-microscopic theory of interference corrections in quantum dots (RMT). This lecture: Microscopic theory of interference corrections in ballistic quantum dots Assumptions and restrictions: F > 1 Method: semiclassics, quantum properties are obtained from the classical dynamics

Slide 40

Semiclassical Green function Relation between transmission matrix and Green function Semiclassical Green function (two dimensions) : classical trajectory connection r and r S: classical action of : Maslov index A : stability amplitude r r r

Slide 41

Comparison to exact Green function Semiclassical Green function (two dimensions) Exact Green function (two dimensions) Asymptotic behavior for k|r-r| >> 1 equals semiclassical Green function

Slide 42

Semiclassical scattering matrix Insert semiclassical Green function and Fourier transform to y, y. This replaces y, y by the conjugate momenta p y, p y and fixes these to Result: Legendre transformed action y Jalabert, Baranger, Stone (1990)

Slide 43

Semiclassical scattering matrix Legendre transformed action Stability amplitude transverse momenta of fixed at y Transmission matrix Reflection matrix

Slide 44

Diagonal approximation Reflection probability Dominant contribution from terms = . probability to return to contact 1

Slide 45

Enhanced diagonal reflection Reflection probability If m=n: also contribution if time- reversed of : Without magnetic field: and have equal actions, hence Factor-two enhancement of diagonal reflection Doron, Smilansky, Frenkel (1991) Lewenkopf, Weidenmueller (1991)

Slide 46

diagonal approximation: limitations One expects a corresponding reduction of the transmission. Where is it? Note: Time-reversed of transmitting trajectories contribute to t, not t. No interference! Compare to RMT: captured by diagonal approximation missed by diagonal approximation We found The diagonal approximation gives

Slide 47

Lesson from disordered metals =+ Hikami box + permutations Weak localization correction to transmission: Need Hikami box. Weak localization correction to reflection: Do not need Hikami box.

Slide 48

Ballistic Hikami box? In a quantum dot with smooth boundaries: Wavepackets follow classical trajectories.

Slide 49

Ballistic Hikami box? Marcus group But quantum interference corrections g and var g exist in ballistic quantum dots!

Slide 50

Ballistic Hikami box? Initial uncertainty is magnified by chaotic boundary scattering. : Lyapunov exponent Aleiner and Larkin (1996) Richter and Sieber (2002) Time until initial uncertainty ~ F has reached dot size ~L: L= F exp( t) t = Ehrenfest time Interference corrections in ballistic quantum dot same as in disordered quantum dot if t E