Spin Qubits in Quantum Dots

Daniel Loss
Department of Physics
University of Basel
Switzerland

$$: Swiss NSF, Nano Center Basel, EU (RTN), DARPA & ONR, ICORP-JST

Special thanks to many Collaborators:

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

B. Spin decoherence in GaAs quantum dots

Spin orbit interaction and spin decay
Alternative spin qubits: holes, graphene, nanotubes,...
Nuclear spins and hyperfine induced decoherence
classical spin bath vs quantum and non-Markovian behavior

C. Nuclear spin order in 2DEGs (ultra-low temp.)

Kondo lattice in marginal Fermi liquid

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,

quantum gate: unitary transformation

(is reversible!)

Quantum Computing (basics)

basic unit: qubit = state of a quantum two-level system
"natural" candidate: electron spin
quantum computation:
1) prepare N qubits (input)
2) apply unitary transformation in 2N-dim. Hilbert space
 computation
3) measure result (output)
"quantum" computation faster than "classical
factoring algorithm (Shor 1994): exp N  N2
database search (Grover 1996):
N  N1/2

Electron qubit: spin better than charge

due to longer relaxation/decoherence* times

spin >> ch arg e

10ns -1s
Awschalom et al., 97
Tarucha et al., 02
Kouwenhoven et al., 03-07
Abstreiter et al., 04
Zumbuhl & Kastner et al., '08

1 ns

GaAs
mesoscopics
Fujisawa et al. 03
Marcus et al. 01

natural choice for qubit: spin of electron

*) theory:

T2 T1

for single spin in GaAs dot (in principle)

Spin qubits in quantum dots key elements

DL & DiVincenzo, PRA 1998

Initialization

1 electron, low T, high B0

H0 ~ i zi

Read-out

convert spin to charge

then measure charge

ESR

SWAP

Coherence

pulsed microwave magnetic field

HRF ~ Ai(t) cos(i t) xi
exchange interaction
HJ ~ Jij (t) i j
spin-orbit interaction
nuclear spins

SL

SR

EZ =
g
BB

J(t)

A quantum dot as a tunable artificial atom

Delft group (L. Kouwenhoven & L. Vandersypen)

Confinement
Discrete # charges
Discrete orbitals

Electrical control and detection

Tunable # of electrons
Tunable tunnel barriers
Electrical contacts

GaAs/AlGaAs Heterostruktur
2DEG 90 nm depth, ns = 2.9 x 1011 cm-2

C. Marcus et al., PRL 2004

Temp.: 100 mK

Double Dot in Carbon Nanotube (SW)

Schnenberger group (Grber et al., Phys. Rev. B 74, 075427 (2006))

Quantum Computing with Spin-Qubits

DL & DiVincenzo, PRA 57 (1998)

SL

SR

Spin 1/2 of electron = qubit

1. Quantum gates based on exchange interaction:

H (t) = J(t) SLSR

Quantum Computing with Spin-Qubits

DL & DiVincenzo, PRA 57 (1998)

SL

H (t) = J(t) SLSR

SR

CNOT (XOR) gate

ab

1 0
=

0 x

U ( s ) = T e

i H '( t ) dt
0

J 0 during s

Quantum Computing with Spin-Qubits

DL & DiVincenzo, PRA 57 (1998)

SL

SR

H (t) = J(t) SLSR

CNOT (XOR) gate
U XOR = e

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

switching time: 180 ps

Petta et al., Science, 2005

Quantum XOR gate with 'sqrt of swap'

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 |

Quantum XOR gate with 'sqrt of swap'

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

Entanglement is crucial for quantum computing!

Note: Control of exchange interaction J and switching time

needs to be very precise (1:104)

experimental challenge

CNOT gate without interaction?
Yes: CNOT gates based on measurement:
Linear optics & single-photon detection conditional sign flip (non-deterministic) [1]
Full Bell state analyzer & GHZ state
deterministic quantum computing [2]
Partial Bell-state (parity) measurements deterministic quantum computing [3]

[1] E. Knill, R. Laflamme and G. J. Milburn, Nature 409, 46 (2001).

[2] D. Gottesman and I.L. Chuang, Nature 402, 390 (1999).
[3] C.W.J. Beenakker et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 020501 (2004).

CNOT gate can be implemented with two parity gates

Beenakker, Kindermann & DiVincenzo, PRL 04

Deterministic entangler:
b

a,b: input arms

c,d: output arms

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

Measurement-based quantum computing

with spin qubits
Engel & DL, Science 309, 586 (2005)
| + |
| - |

even parity Bell state: parallel spins

| + |
| - |

odd parity Bell state: antiparallel spins

Advantage:
parity measurement is digital (0 or 1)
quantum gate is digital

Q: Does scheme exist for electron spins to

measure parity of Bell states non-destructively?

Double Quantum Dot and QPC

Current IQPC depends on charge state1
IQPC

IQPC
L

Quantum
point contact

IQPC

odd parity: tunneling

even parity: no tunneling

[1] J.M. Elzerman et al., Nature 430, 431 (2004)

Tunneling transitions (coherent)

Single level picture

Many processes for
small level spacing
But for >> U
only transitions (a)
and (d) are relevant

(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

Detuning from resonance

increases measurement time

Finite exchange J for LL and RR

additional dynamical phase
correctable via one-qubit operations

Tunneling tS tT and/or JLJR

|S and |T0 are distinguishable decoherence!

Universal Quantum Computing with Parity Gates

CNOT gate can be implemented with two
parity gates (Beenakker et al., PRL 04):

Parity gate for spin :

(Engel & Loss, Science 05):

1
L
R

Two qubit dots (1 and L), parity

measurement using reference dot (R)
(1, 1, 0) (0, 2, 0) (0, 0, 2)
Transfer back adiabatically to (1,1,0)

Perform parity gate (some details)

1
2

R2
QPC

3
time

Protocol for CNOT gate (1)

U CNOT c 1 t

= c 1 ct

QPC 1

R1

p1

p2

R2
QPC 2

10

11
time

Engel and DL, 05

Protocol for CNOT gate (3): Conditional operations

p1, p2, m represent the outcome of the measurements of steps 3, 7, and 10.
Detection of even parity (superposition of |00 and |11) is labeled as 0; odd parity as 1

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

CNOT-Gate in Topological Quantum Computing via Parity

(braiding of non-abelian anyons, Kitaev 03)
Ising anyons, Bravyi 06

Zilberberg, Braunecker,
and Loss, PRA 77, 012327 (2008)

Spin-Qubits in Dots are Scalable (?)

r r
r
r
H = J ij (t ) Si S j + ( g i B Bi )(t ) Si
ij

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

Spin-Qubits in Dots are Scalable (?)

r r
r
r
H = J ij (t ) Si S j + ( g i B Bi )(t ) Si
ij

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

*)

i.e. system is scalable

*) Coish & DL, PRB 75 (2007): s for single spin can be < 1ns (via exchange)

Spin-Qubits from Electrons

SL

SR

simplest spin-qubit:
spin-1/2 of 1 electron 0 = , 1 =
Many more choices for spin qubits:

'exchange only qubits' DiVincenzo et al., 2000

3 electrons:
0 = S , 1 = T+ T0
'singlet-triplet' qubits Levy 2002, Taylor et al., 2005
0 = S , 1 = T0
2 electrons:
'spin-cluster qubits' Meier, Levy & DL, `03
N coupled electrons: AF spin chains, ladders, clusters,...
molecular magnets Leuenberger & DL, 01; Affronte et al., 06
Lehmann et al., 07; Trif et al., 08

Quantum Computing with Spin-Qubits

SL

SR

CNOT (XOR) gate based on

entanglement such as
+ ei or + ei

i.e. phase coherence is crucial

Need to understand the dynamics and decoherence

mechanisms for electron spins in quantum dots

Spin decoherence in GaAs quantum dots

Two important sources of spin decay in GaAs:
1) Spin-orbit coupling (Dresselhaus & Rashba)

interaction between spin and charge fluctuations
Relaxation with rate 1/ T1

Decoherence with rate 1/ T2

= decay of coherent superposition

2) Hyperfine interaction between electron spin and nuclear spins

leads to non-exponential decay

General spin Hamiltonian:

H = g B S B + S h(t )
where h(t) is a fluctuating (internal) field with < h(t) >=0

Relaxation (T1) and decoherence (T2) times in weak coupling:

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

[if < hi(t) hj(t) >~ij,

i,j=(X,Y,Z)]
See e.g. Abragam

General spin Hamiltonian:

H = g B S B + S h(t )
where h(t) is a fluctuating (internal) field with < h(t) >=0

For SOI linear in momentum:

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

Spin Qubits in Quantum Dots

Part II
Daniel Loss
Department of Physics
University of Basel
Switzerland

$$: Swiss NSF, Nano Center Basel, EU (RTN), DARPA & ONR, ICORP-JST

Spin qubits in GaAs dots present status

See also Hanson et al., Rev. Mod. Phys. 2007
All-electrical control and read-out achieved
Initialization 1-electron, low T, high B0
duration ~ 5 T1; 99% fidelity ?
Read-out
via spin-charge conversion
duration ~ 100 s; 82-97% fidelity

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

B. Spin decoherence in GaAs quantum dots

Spin orbit interaction and spin decay
Alternative spin qubits: holes, graphene, nanotubes,...
Nuclear spins and hyperfine induced decoherence
classical spin bath vs quantum and non-Markovian behavior

C. Nuclear spin order in 2DEGs (ultra-low temp.)

Kondo lattice in marginal Fermi liquid

Spin orbit interaction in GaAs quantum dots

H SO = ( p x y p y x ) + ( p x x + p y y ) + O( p 3 )
Rashba SOI

Dresselhaus SOI

interaction between spin and charge fluctuations

SOI is weaker in quantum dots than in bulk since <Hso>dot = 0
(Khaetskii & Nazarov, `00; Halperin et al., `01; Aleiner & Falko, `01)

e.g. spin-phonon: Khaetskii & Nazarov, PRB 64 (2001)

Golovach, Khaetskii & Loss, PRL 93 (2004)
Fal'ko, Altshuler, Tsyplyatev, PRL (2005)
Bulaev & Loss, PRL `05 (hole spin)

Basics on Spin-Orbit Interaction

r
p
1 r
H so =
s V
2
m
2mc

Relativistic (Einstein) correction

from Dirac equation:

semiconductor (Zinc-blende)

free electrons

(k )

( p)

2mc2 1MeV
p

bandstructure
effects

conduction band

Eg 1eV

k
heavy holes
light holes

Rashba spin-orbit interaction in 2D

spintronics

Rashba & Dresselhaus spin-orbit in 2DEG

E. Rashba, Nature Physics 2, 149 ('06)

Rashba & Dresselhaus Spin-Orbit in 2DEG

H R = px p y

H D = px x p y y

Structure-inversion asymmetry tunable by

gates: ~ E z (Rashba, 1960)

Bulk-inversion asymmetry (Dresselhaus, 1955)

Rashba & Dresselhaus Spin-Orbit in 2DEG

H R = px p y
y

H D = px x p y y

tune Rashba term s.t.

Structure-inversion asymmetry tunable by

gates: ~ E z (Rashba, 1960)

Bulk-inversion asymmetry (Dresselhaus, 1955)

H R + H D = ( px m p y ) ( x y )

y is conserved spin (new basis) which makes

spin of electrons independent of their momentum (
spin FET ?)

Spin-Orbit Interaction in GaAs Quantum Dots (2DEG):

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

piezoelectric & deformation

acoustic

(r )

h2
~ * 2
m

U el ph (t ) = ...  any potential fluctuation, e.g., phonons

Electron-phonon interaction (2D):

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

deform. potential interaction:

1
qj =
q e( j ) (q ) + q e( j ) (q )
2q
for GaAs:

qj = 0 j ,1 and

h14 , = xyz (cyclic)

=
0, otherwise

Parameter regime:

1. << SO , SO = h m
*

2.
3.

(typically: 100 nm, and SO1-10 m)

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 )

--- the spin-orbit interaction in GaAs quantum dots causes

HSO ~ px,y
p decay
H SO pwith
0the largest possible
a spin
decoherence time,
T2=2T
p1.H p' = 0
n H n n [H , x ] n = 0
SO

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
*

(typically: 100 nm, and SO1-10 m)

2.

k BT << h 2 m* 2

3.

2
* 2
gthe
B
<<
h
m
dot staysin its orbital ground state
B

()

(typically: h2/m*2 1 meV 10 K)

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.

Spin = Kramers doublet of ground state

Note that, generally, T22T1, and, usually, one expects

T2<<2T1, due to spin dephasing.

Parameter regime:

1. << SO , SO = h m
*

2.

k BT << h 2 m* 2

3.

g B B << h 2 m* 2

(typically: 100 nm, and SO1-10 m)

(typically: h2/m*2 1 meV 10 K)

In this regime, we find effective spin Hamiltonian (~ HSO):

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

Effective Hamiltonian via Schrieffer-Wolff trafo:

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

leading order is due to Zeeman term (no orbital):

S

(1)

1 P
1 P
=
,
LZ i = g B B
Ld
Ld

giving the effective Hamiltonian:

H eff

~
= H + spin independent constant

H eff

1
= g B (B + B(t )) ,
2

where (t ) =
with

[(L ) , U
1
d

= ( y ' , x' + ,0),

el ph

B(t ) = 2B (t ),

(t )]

/ SO ,

1 = m ( ) h ,
*

x' = ( x + y ) 2

y' = (x y ) 2

Linear SO & Zeeman
transverse fluctuations only:

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:

H SO (t ) = eiH Z t H SO e iH Z t = a'+ (t ) a' '

first term commutes with HZ

Now:
with

(t ) a' ' = a' ' (t ),

a' ' (t ) n = 0,

[UU

a' ' = R a' '

since rotation is around n.

H SO (t ) = a'+ a' ' (t ) = a + [n [a' ' (t ) n ]]

i.e. Zeeman interaction induces only
fluctuations b ' ' ( t ) transverse to b

b ' ' (t )

1st order in Hso (time dependent perturbation theory):

T

d
0 dtH SO (t ) c 0 dt dt x (t ) + 0 dt [n [a' ' (t ) n]]
SO linear : a ~ p ~ dx/dt

not a total derivative

for (He-ph) n, n>0

const.
no orbital B field effect *)

Thus: if SO interaction linear in p we get only transverse

fluctuations
no pure dephasing
T2=2T1
*) note: no orbital B field effect--only Zeeman, see also
Khaetskii & Nazarov 00, Halperin et al., 01, Aleiner & Falko, 01

Derive Bloch equation for spin dynamics:

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:

(spin: Kramers doublet)

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

Golovach, Khaetski, Loss, PRL 93 (2004)

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

s1 4.7 103 m / s , s2 = s3 3.37 103 m / s

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

2 = 3 2h14 1 sin 2 cos ,

2 = 3 2h14 1 (3 cos 2 1) sin ,

2

piezo

2
1 lx'2 1 l y'2
4
l
z


+
2
2
2
2

+
+

effective SO length

Spin relaxation rate 1/T1 for GaAs Quantum Dot

1
( g B B )
T1

B B
2

2 + 2 + 1

d sin

( g B B sin )2 2 s 2j

ph ( ) 2 H SO p

power-5 law for B< 3T (GaAs)

Golovach et al., PRL 93 (2004)

Numerical value of T1 for GaAs parameters (13!):

(h

*
*
,
,
,
h
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
d
=
m

h
s
s
=
s
m
=

0
0
14
1
2
3
SO
c

1.1 meV , 32 nm , 5 nm , 9 m , 0 ,13.1, 6.7 eV , 0.16 C m 2 ,

4.73 105 cm s , 3.35 105 cm s , 5.3 103 kg m 3 , 0.067m

e

Zumbuhl ea PRL 89 (276803) 2003

g = 0.43 0.04 (0.0077 0.0020) B (T )

g = 0.29 Hanson ea PRL 91 (196802) 2003
or with linear fit:

Theory:

T1 750 s , for B = 8T

SO / 2
2

T1 = 550 1100 s due to uncertainties in g factor

T1 = 2.7 ms for SO=17m [Huibers ea PRL 83, 5090 (1999)]

Experiment:

T1exp . = 800 s @ 8T

Elzerman et al.,
Nature 430, 431 (2004)

Current record: T1 > 1 s (B 1 T) in GaAs

S. Amasha, K. MacLean, I. Radu, D. Zumbuhl,
M. Kastner, M. Hanson, A. Gossard, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 46803 (2008).

data in good agreement with theory

Golovach, Khaetskii, DL, PRL 93 (`04)

Rashba & Dresselhaus SOI Effects

well understood (?)

Spin relaxation rate 1/T1 for GaAs Quantum Dot

1
( g B B ) 5
T1

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

(note: beyond dipole approx.!)

Golovach, Khaetskii, Loss, PRL 93 (2004)

Spin relaxation rate 1/T1 for GaAs Quantum Dot

Experiment on double-dots, Meunier et al., PRL 2007

T1 [ms]

3
2

phonon wavelength
matches dot size

1
0

0.0 0.2

0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2

S-T splitting [meV]

1.4

Theory: Golovach, Khaetskii, Loss, PRB 2007

Brute force nuclear polarization with large B-field:

Chesi & DL, cm0804.3332

Note: spin phonon rate is non-monotonic function of B-field

1/T1,2 depends strongly on B-field direction (magic angles):

1
f ( , , )
=
T1 T1 ( = / 2, = 0 )

Golovach, Khaetskii, Loss

PRL 93, 016601 (2004)
ellipsoid

f ( , , ) =

[(

)(

+ 2 1 + cos 2 + 2 sin 2 sin 2

Rashba and Dresselhaus interfere! *)

Special case:

= , = 2 , = 3 4

T1
exact!

*) Schliemann, Egues, DL, PRL `03

1/T1,2 depends strongly on B-field direction(magic angles):

1
f ( , , )
=
T1 T1 ( = / 2, = 0 )

Golovach, Khaetskii, Loss

PRL 93, 016601 (2004)
ellipsoid

f ( , , ) =

[(

)(

+ 2 1 + cos 2 + 2 sin 2 sin 2

Rashba and Dresselhaus interfere! *)

Special case:

= , = 2 , = 3 4

T1
exact!

*) Schliemann, Egues, DL, PRL `03

Relaxation of spin in GaAs quantum dots dominated by

spin-orbit & phonons with ultra-long relaxation times T1:

T1 ~ 1s for B ~ 1T

Amasha et al.,
Phys. Rev. Lett. (2008)

Relaxation of spin in GaAs quantum dots dominated by

spin-orbit & phonons with ultra-long relaxation times T1:

T1 ~ 1s for B ~ 1T
From Rashba- SOI we expect T2 = 2T1

Amasha et al.,
Phys. Rev. Lett. (2008)
Golovach et al., PRL '04

But measured spin decoherence times are much

shorter: T2 ~1- 10 s Petta et al. '05; Koppens et al. '06/'07

Thus, spin decoherence in GaAs must be dominated by

other effects
hyperfine interaction with nuclear spins
Burkard, DL, DiVincenzo, PRB 99

Hyperfine interaction:
Major source of dynamics/decoherence
Quantum dots

Ono and Tarucha, PRL (2004),

Petta et al., Science (2005),
Koppens et al., Nature (2006)

NV centers in diamond

Childress et al., Science (2006),

Hanson et al., PRL (2006)

Si:P donors

E Abe et al., PRB (2004)

Molecular magnets

Ardavan et al., PRL (2007)

Barbara et al., Nature (2008)

...All are potential candidates for quantum information processing applications

Strategies:

1. Avoid nuclear spin problem: use holes or other

materials such as C, Si, Ge,...

2. Use GaAs (still best material) and deal

with nuclear spins

Strategies:

1. Avoid nuclear spin problem: use holes or other

materials such as C, Si, Ge,

2. Use GaAs (still best material) and deal

with nuclear spins

Heavy Hole Spins in Quantum Dots

flat dot
HH-LH mixing suppressed
long-lived HH
Bulaev & Loss, PRL 95, 076805 (2005)

Abstreiter/Finley group 07: T1 ~ 200 s

self-assembled InGaAs dots
Heiss et al., Phys. Rev. B 76,
2413062 (2007);
[and: Gerardot et al., Nature
451, 44108 (2008)]

Hyperfine effect on holes??

Hyperfine Interactions with Nuclear-Spins

Fermi contact hyperfine interaction
r r r
0 8
k
h1 =
S jk (rk ) S I k
4 3
Anisotropic hyperfine interaction
r r
r r r r
3(nk S )(nk I k ) S I k
0
k
h2 =
S jk
4
rk3 (1 + d / rk )
Coupling of orbital angular momentum
0
h =
S j
4
k
3

r r
Lk I k
rk3 (1 + d / rk )

Band structure of a GaAs QW

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)

Hyperfine Interactions with Nuclear-Spins

Fischer, Coish, Bulaev, Loss, arXiv:0807.0368

Fermi contact hyperfine interaction

r r r
0 8
k
h1 =
S jk (rk ) S I k
4 3
Anisotropic hyperfine interaction
r r
r r r r
3(nk S )(nk I k ) S I k
0
k
h2 =
S jk
4
rk3 (1 + d / rk )
Coupling of orbital angular momentum
0
h =
S j
4
k
3

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?

Spin Qubits in Graphene

Trauzettel, Bulaev, Loss & Burkard, Nature Physics 3, 192 (2007)

Advantages: weak SOI and

(almost) no nuclear spins;
& long-range interaction

Challenge: armchair boundaries

to lift orbital degeneracy

Carbon Nanotube Quantum Dots

Nygard, Cobden, Lindelof, Nature 408, 342-6 (2000).
Jarillo-Herrero, et al., Nature 429, 389 (2004).
Mason, et al., Science 303, 655 (2004).
Graber, et al., Phys. Rev. B 74, 075427 (2006).

Carbon Nanotube:

Gate-controlled confinment:

Dirac-like bandstructure with

small gap: semiconducting NT:

Spin orbit interaction:

H SOI = iperp 2 ( S + e i + h.c.) + 2para 3 1S z

Ando, J. Phys.Soc. Jpn., 2005;
Huertas-Hernando et al., PRB 2006

Spectrum of Nanotube Quantum-Dot in B-field

D. Bulaev, B. Trauzettel, and D. Loss, PRB 77, 235301 (2008)

Spin-Orbit Interaction leads to zero-field splitting

Spectrum of Nanotube Quantum-Dot in B-field

D. Bulaev, B. Trauzettel, and D. Loss, PRB 77, 235301 (2008)

Spectrum experimentally
confirmed, see Kuemmeth, Ilani,
Ralph, McEuen, Nature 452 (2008).

Spin-Orbit Interaction leads to zero-field splitting

Spectrum of Nanotube Quantum-Dot in B-field

D. Bulaev, B. Trauzettel, and D. Loss, PRB 77, 235301 (2008)

Spectrum experimentally
confirmed, see Kuemmeth, Ilani,
Ralph, McEuen, Nature 452 (2008).

Spin-Orbit Interaction leads to zero-field splitting

 all-electrical control of spin possible!

Spin Relaxation and Spin Decoherence Rates in Nanotubes

due to Electron-Phonon and Spin Orbit Interactions
Bulaev et al., PRB 77, 235301 (2008)

Extreme variations with

B-field: spin relaxation rate
can be varied by a factor 108 !

1/f phonon noise

due to quadratic bending modes ~ q2 in 1D

Strategies:

1. Avoid nuclear spin problem: use holes or other

materials such as C, Si, Ge,

2. Use GaAs (still best material) and deal

with nuclear spins

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

BUT: Non-exponential decay inconsistent with Markovian

quantum error-correction models!!

Hyperfine Interaction in Single Quantum Dot

v v
H = Ai S I i + g B B S z + H dd
i

hyperfine interaction
is non-uniform:

electron Zeeman energy

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,...

Separation of the Hyperfine Hamiltonian

Hamiltonian:

v v
H = g B BS z + S h = H 0 + V

Note: nuclear field

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

...

Nuclear spins provide hyperfine field h with

(quantum) fluctuations seen by electron spin:

v
S

v
h

Nuclear spins provide hyperfine field h with

(quantum) fluctuations seen by electron spin:

v
S

v
h

Nuclear spins provide hyperfine field h with

(quantum) fluctuations seen by electron spin:

v
h

v
S

With mean <h>=0 and (quantum) variance h:

h =

h2

nucl

2
r

Ak I k
k =1

= A / N = 5mT = (10ns) 1
nucl

what state?

Initial conditions for nuclear spins

Coish &DL, PRB 70, 195340 (2004)

Pure state of hz-eigenstate:

I(3) (0) = n n ,

hz n = Ak I kz n = [hz ] nn n
k

Initial conditions for nuclear spins

Coish &DL, PRB 70, 195340 (2004)

Pure state of hz-eigenstate:

I(3) (0) = n n ,

hz n = Ak I kz n = [hz ] nn n
k

Superposition (1) or mixture (2) of hz-eigenstates:

( 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

Initial conditions for nuclear spins

Coish &DL, PRB 70, 195340 (2004)

Pure state of hzz-eigenstate:

I(3) (0) = n n ,

hz n = Ak I kz n = [hz ] nn n
k

Superposition (1) or mixture (2) of hz-eigenstates:

( 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

nuclear spin bath behaves classically !

Gaussian decay and narrowing

Zeroth order in flip-flop terms:

S+ t = S+ 0 TrI [ei ( gB B+hz )t I (0)]

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

E. Laird et al., PRL '06: free induction decay

(tunneling)

Coherent singlet- triplet

oscillations due to hyperfine
mixing with Gaussian distribution

reasonable agreement
between theory and experiment

Theory (full lines): Coish & DL,

PRB 72, 125337 (2005)

Koppens et al., PRL 2007: driven Rabi oscillations

Gaussian Hyperfine field :

(Klauser, Coish & DL)

Gaussian decay and narrowing

Zeroth order in flip-flop terms:

S+ t = S+ 0 TrI [ei ( gB B+hz )t I (0)]

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

Prepare nuclear spin system with a measurement of the Overhauser field

B. Coish and D. Loss (PRB 2004), G. Giedke et al. (PRB 2006)
D. Klauser et al. (PRB, 2006), D. Stepanenko et al. (PRL 2006)

B
S+

( meas.)
t

S + 0 ei t , = g B B + [hz ] nn

Precession

Narrowing of nuclear spins in double dots with ESR

Klauser, Coish & DL, PRB 73, 205302 (2006)
ESR: oscillating exchange J(t)=J0+j cos(t) leads to Rabi oscillations:
=

g B B + hnz

= +

ESR at frequency = g B B + hnz measures eigenvalue hn

nuclear spins projected into corresponding eigenstate |n>

If quantum measurement is ideal, then Gaussian superposition

collapses to a single Lorentzian (ESR linewidth):

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

Klauser, Coish & DL, PRB 73, 205302 (2006)

 Consider now nuclear spins in pure state of hz-eigenstates:

I(3) (0) = n n ,

hz n = Ak I kz n = [hz ] nn n
k

Narrowed initial nuclear spin state
h=0 at t=0

v
h

r
r
S + I k = const.

v
S

back action of S on h

Bz

flip-flops

t>0: quantum dynamics

...

...
V

...

...

changes hyperfine field in time by 1/N
spin precesses in

fluctuating hyperfine field
spin dephases (power law decay)
Khaetskii, DL, Glazman, PRL 02 & PRB 03
Coish &DL, PRB 70, 195340 (2004)

Narrowed initial nuclear spin state
h=0 at t=0

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

...

...

power law decay

Time scale is N/A = 1s (GaAs) and decay is bounded

Khaetskii, DL, Glazman, PRL 02 & PRB 03, Coish &DL, PRB 04

Quantum vs. Classical Dynamics

Special case: Uniform hyperfine coupling

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

cf. Yuzbashyan and Altshuler,

J. Phys. A (2005)

cf. Coish, Yuzbashyan, Altshuler, Loss

J. Appl. Phys. 101, 081715 (2007);

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

spin coherent states

('minimum uncertainty')

Classical vs. Quantum Dynamics

(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

Time-dependent mean-field (TDMF) = exact quantum solution

C (t ) < 1

Sx

s x (t )

for times t > c =

2 N
A

v
B >> K , p <<1

Free-induction decay: Big picture

Power law:
Khaetskii, Loss, Glazman, PRL (2002)
Coish and Loss, PRB (2004)

xt
1 A
~

N b

c ~

N
A

b N
A A

T 2 ~ ???

t >> T 2

Time

Fully polarized nuclei: exactly solvable case

Khaetskii, DL, Glazman, PRL `02 & PRB `03

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:

, and we assume that

From the Schrdinger equation we obtain:

(1)

Laplace transform of (1) gives:

(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

Introducing iu = i + (A + 2 z ) / 4 , using (t=0)=1, k (t=0)=0,

and replacing the sum over k by an integral

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 ;

l=1,, N  set of N+1 coupled differential eqs. (N>>N)

Spin correlator: C 0 ( t ) = 0 S z ( t ) S z 0 = (1 ( t ) ) / 2
2

Laplace transform of (1) gives:

here

note: sums k replaced by integrals over rk3 (valid for t < N2/A),
with x,y (Gaussians) integrated out  non-analyticity

integration contour and singularities

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) Large Zeeman field |z| >> A :

Asymptotic behavior ( = t/(N/A) >>1) determined by nuclei at dot center:

~ 1/ N

i.e. power law decay and bounded by 1/N and (A/z)2

2) No external magnetic field (z = 0):
Asymptotic behavior ( >> 1) determined by weakest coupled nuclear spins:

~ 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).

General case: below full polarization

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,...

Generalized Master Equation

Bill Coish &DL, PRB 70, 195340 (2004)
LO = [H , O] Liouville op.
L0O = [H 0 , O]

Generalized Master Equation (exact):

LV O = [V , O]

& S (t ) = iL0 S (t ) i S (t t ) S (t )dt

S (t ) = TrI (t )

S (t ) = iTrI Le

QO = (1 I (0)TrI )O

iQLt

(0) = S (0) I (0)

I (0) = n n

LV I (0)

hz n = [hz ]nn n

Laplace transform, expand self-energy in the transverse coupling LV :

iTrI L

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( 2) ( s ) = [s + iL0 + i (S2) ( s )] S (0)

1

S (t ) =

+ i
1
2i

st
e
S (s)ds

Initial conditions and perturbative regime

Initial State:
Electron spin:
Nuclear spins:

( 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

Initial conditions and perturbative regime

Initial State:
Electron spin:
Nuclear spins:

( 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

longitudinal and transverse electron spin dynamics decouple to all orders:

Sz (s) =

Sz 0 + Nz (s)
s +izz(s)

S+(s) =

S+

n = b + [hz ]nn

s in +i++(s)

b >> IA

Perturbative regime for all electron spin dynamics given by:

To determine long-time average spin, with b=0:

(h

x + hy )

2 1/ 2

hz

1
<< 1
2
p N

p nuclear system polarization

Self energy in Born approximation

Born approximation:

(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

Dependence on the envelope wave function

1

Envelope wave function:

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)

Decaying fraction of the spin:

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

Spin dynamics is `non-Markovian (for t~N/A)

Born-Markov Approximation not valid:

S&+

= i~ S + t i dt e in (t t ) (+2+) (t t ) S + t ,

S +

=e

i ( n +~ )t

S+

From the exact GME:

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

i.e. vanishing decay rate!

Stationary Limit & Decaying Fraction

Longitudinal spin: Stationary limit within the Born approximation (I=1/2):

Sz

1+

n2

1
p2 N

1
1
(
b
=
0
,
I
=
)
p2 N
2

Decaying fraction for b=0 is of order

independent of
dimensionality or specific form of the electron envelope wavefunction.
This result is confirmed by exact diagonalization of
small systems, e.g., Ntot=15:
0.1

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

Summary of electron spin dynamics

RX (t ) = S X

S X 0 , X = +, z

A2
R X (t ) =
4 N ( g * B Bz + pIA) 2

Exact when p=1,

Born approximation valid in
the weakly perturbative regime.

A
= *
1
g B Bz + pIA

Valid in the strongly

perturbative limit
Fourth-order
corrections

A
*
<< 1
g B Bz

1 r m
in d dimensions, and for a wave function: ( r ) = ( 0 ) exp
2 l 0

Free-induction decay: Big picture

Power law:
Khaetskii, Loss, Glazman, PRL (2002)
Coish and Loss, PRB (2004)

xt
1 A
~

N b

c ~

N
A

b N
A A

T 2 ~ ???

t >> T 2

Time

Free-induction decay: Big picture

Power law:
Khaetskii, Loss, Glazman, PRL (2002)
Coish and Loss, PRB (2004)

xt
1 A
~

N b

c ~

N
A

b N
A A

xt 1 (t / ) e
2

T 2 ~ ???
( t / ) 2

Initial quadratic (Gaussian?) decay:

Yao, Liu, Sham, PRB 06, PRL 07, NJP 07

t >> T 2

Time

Free-induction decay: Big picture

Power law:
Khaetskii, Loss, Glazman, PRL (2002)
Coish and Loss, PRB (2004)

xt
1 A
~

N b

???
c ~

N
A

b N
A A

xt 1 (t / ) e
2

T 2 ~ ???
( t / ) 2

Initial quadratic (Gaussian?) decay:

Yao, Liu, Sham, PRB 06, PRL 07, NJP 07

t >> T 2

Time

Free-induction decay: Big picture

Power law:
Khaetskii, Loss, Glazman, PRL (2002)
Coish and Loss, PRB (2004)

xt
~

1 A

N b

Long-time power law:

Deng and Hu, PRB (2006)

xt 1 / t 2

???
c ~

N
A

b N
A A

xt 1 (t / ) e
2

T 2 ~ ???
( t / ) 2

Initial quadratic (Gaussian?) decay:

Yao, Liu, Sham, PRB 06, PRL 07, NJP 07

t >> T 2

Time

Consider now times t >> N/A

Coish, Fischer, and Loss, Phys. Rev. B 77, 125329 (2008)

Coherence of an electron spin can exhibit exponential

decay for large magnetic field and narrowed initial
bath-state
1 +
z
z
z
Hyperfine
Hamiltonian
H = (b + h ) S + b I + (h S + h + S )
hf

k k

2nd order effective

Hamiltonian
trafo)
Ak Al (Schrieffer-Wolff
1

z
+ z
z
H = b + h +
I I S + b k I k
z k l
2 k l b + h
k

Reproduces 4th-order rates when expanded to 2nd order in flip-flops

only

Details of the Transformation

Write the hyperfine Hamiltonian as

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

(with respect to product eigenbasis of I kz )

Hyperfine-Mediated Nuclear-Field Fluctuations
Heff

H eff = ( + X ) S z + D + O(V 3 )
[ H , S z ] = 0 T1
Fixed frequency
(narrowed initial state)

Beff ~ +X

b + hz
D

Effective (fluctuating) field leads to

pure dephasing of electron spin

Sx

z
k

1
Ak Al + 1
X
I k Il
2 k l
b

(small for large b)

e t /T2

Generalized Master Equation (GME)

Initial conditions:

(0) = s (0) I (0) ,

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 ' = x t t ' x& 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 t ' = x t t ' x& 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

Distribution of coupling constants

d=1

(e.g. nanotube, nanowire)

N spins
k spins

volume occupied by one spin

d=2

d=3

(e.g. lateral quantum dot)

(e.g. Self-assembled dot, defect)

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

(Assumed: uniform distribution of nuclear polarization (over dot size))

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

(neglecting interspecies flip-flops*)

Isotopic abundance
InxGa1-xAs, x=0.05
IIn =9/2

IGa,As =3/2

explains strong isotope

dependence seen in transport
measurements (Ono+Tarucha,
04; Yacoby 07)

*) if difference in nuclear
Zeeman energy > A/N

Free-induction decay due to Hyperfine

Power law:
Khaetskii, Loss, Glazman, PRL (2002)
Coish and Loss, PRB (2004)

xt
~

1 A

N b

Long-time power law:

Deng and Hu, PRB (2006)

xt 1 / t 2

???
c ~

N
A

b N
A A

xt 1 (t / ) e
2

T 2 ~ ???
( t / ) 2

Initial quadratic (Gaussian?) decay:

Yao, Liu, Sham, PRB 06, PRL 07, NJP 07

t >> T 2

Time

Free-induction decay due to Hyperfine

Power law:
Khaetskii, Loss, Glazman, PRL (2002)
Coish and Loss, PRB (2004)

xt
~

1 A

N b

Long-time power law:

Deng and Hu, PRB (2006)

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

Summary of Part A&B

spin qubits and entanglement: all-electrical control
spins in GaAs dots: long relaxation times (secs!)
due to SOI & phonons
but short decoherence due to hyperfine interaction
alternative systems: holes, graphene, nanotubes,...
power law decay for times up to N/A
exponential decoherence with strong isotope
dependence ( for t > N/A, and large B)

C. Polarization of nuclear spins

1. Dynamical polarization
ESR & optical pumping: <65%, Dobers et al. '88, Salis et al. '01, Bracker et al. '04
transport through dots: 5-60%, Ono & Tarucha, '04/ '07, Koppens et al., '06,...
projective measurements: experiments?

2. Thermodynamic polarization
i.e. (ferro-) magnetic phase transition?

Simon & Loss, PRL '07

Q: Is it possible in a 2DEG? What is Curie temperature?

Problem is quite old and was first studied in 1940
by Frhlich & Nabarro for bulk metals!

2D Kondo Lattice Model

Simon & DL, PRL 98, 156401 (2007)
interacting
electrons
in 2DEG

hyperfine
interaction

A ~90eV in GaAs
A/EF ~ 10-2 << 1
separation of time scales
electrons / nuclear spins

2D Kondo Lattice Model

Simon & DL, PRL 98, 156401 (2007)
interacting
electrons
in 2DEG

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)

electron spin susceptibility

What is required for magnetic order?



Assume a ferromagnetic ground state

(ensured by Weiss mean field theory)
Look at stability by considering spin wave excitations
2D

electron spin susceptibility

for noninteracting Fermi gas

What is required for magnetic order?



Assume a ferromagnetic ground state

(ensured by Weiss mean field theory)
Look at stability by considering spin wave excitations
2D

spin wave excitation

spectrum

What is required for magnetic order?



Assume a ferromagnetic ground state

(ensured by Weiss mean field theory)
Look at stability by considering spin wave excitations
2D

spin wave excitation

spectrum

continuum of zero energy excitations

nuclear order unstable

no magnetization!

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

Many-body corrections from electron-electron

interaction beyond standard Fermi-liquid theory?

Non-analyticities in Spin Susceptibility in 2DEG

Consider screened Coulomb U and 2nd order pert. theory in U:

A typical diagram

0(q, )
correction to self-energy (q,)
Chubukov, Maslov, PRB 68 ('03)
Aleiner, Efetov PRB 74 ('06)

s (q)= 4 q | s ( 0 )| s2 / 3kF < 0 , q << 2kF ,

s ~ - Um / 4 : backscattering amplitude
linear, non-analytic |q|-dependence!

But it has the wrong sign!

Negative spin wave dispersion.

Possibility of spiral order

But it has the wrong sign!

Negative spin wave dispersion.

Possibility of spiral order

But is this generally true?

Based on perturbation theory &

screened Coulomb interaction

NO! Renormalization important in 2D!

Shekhter & Finkelstein, PRB`06;

Braunecker, Simon, Loss, PRB08
Chesi, Zak, DL, in preparation

Renormalization
Backscattering strongly renormalized by Cooper channel
contribution (P 0 & presence of Fermi sea).

Leads to renormalization of scattering amplitude: ()  (,q)

Saraga, Altshuler, Loss, Westervelt, PRB 05;
Chesi, Zak, Loss, 08

is possible

Renormalize lowest order diagrams

Chesi, Zak, DL, in preparation

Chubukov, Maslov, PRB 68, 155113 (2003)

Renormalization
Include Cooper channel in S(q) (Kohn-Luttinger instability w.r.t. q):

renormalized scattering dominating Cooper channel: = Saraga, Altshuler,

amplitude (: angle between incident electrons) Loss, Westervelt
PRB 05

Since

if

for small |q|

Braunecker, Simon, Loss, PRB08

Ferromagnetic order is possible

Nuclear Ferromagnet
stable

Also a possibility

Possibly spiral order

Critical Temperature
Nuclear Ferromagnet
stable
shape obtained also
by Local Field Factor
calculation for
long-range Coulomb
interactions

Finite magnetization at low temperatures value of Critical Temperature?

Critical Temperature
Nuclear magnetization at finite temperature

with the Curie Temperature

valid at

Finite magnetization at finite temperature in 2D!

Estimate for GaAs 2DEG: Tc ~ 25 K 1 mK, for rs ~ 0.8 - 8

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-