Home | About Journal | Web Links | E-mail Alerts | RSS RSS Icon | Browse

Orbital Stark effect and quantum confinement transition of donors in silicon

Source: Phys. Rev. B 80, 165314 (2009); doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.80.165314

Published 9 October 2009

KEYWORDS and PACS
Keywords
PACS
  • 71.70.Ej
    Spin-orbit coupling, Zeeman and Stark splitting, Jahn-Teller effect (condensed matter)
  • 03.67.Lx
    Quantum computation architectures and implementations
  • 71.55.Cn
    Impurity and defect levels in elemental semiconductors
  • YEAR: 2009
RELATED DATABASES

To view database links for this article,
you need to log in.
To view database links for this article,
you need to log in.
PUBLICATION DATA
Publisher:
AIP is a member of CrossRef APS
Rajib Rahman,1 G. P. Lansbergen,2 Seung H. Park,1 J. Verduijn,2 Gerhard Klimeck,1,3 S. Rogge,2 and Lloyd C. L. Hollenberg4
1Network for Computational Nanotechnology, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907, USA
2Kavli Institute of Nanoscience, Delft University of Technology, Delft, Lorentzweg 1, 2628 CJ Delft, The Netherlands
3Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California 91109, USA
4Center for Quantum Computer Technology, School of Physics, University of Melbourne, Victoria 3010, Australia
Adiabatic shuttling of single impurity bound electrons to gate-induced surface states in semiconductors has attracted much attention in recent times, mostly in the context of solid-state quantum computer architecture. A recent transport spectroscopy experiment for the first time was able to probe the Stark shifted spectrum of a single donor in silicon buried close to a gate. Here, we present the full theoretical model involving large-scale quantum mechanical simulations that was used to compute the Stark shifted donor states in order to interpret the experimental data. Use of atomistic tight-binding technique on a domain of over a million atoms helped not only to incorporate the full band structure of the host, but also to treat realistic device geometries and donor models, and to use a large enough basis set to capture any number of donor states. The method yields a quantitative description of the symmetry transition that the donor electron undergoes from a three-dimensional Coulomb confined state to a two-dimensional (2D) surface state as the electric field is ramped up adiabatically. In the intermediate field regime, the electron resides in a superposition between the atomic donor states and the 2D surface states. In addition to determining the effect of field and donor depth on the electronic structure, the model also provides a basis to distinguish between a phosphorus and an arsenic donor based on their Stark signature. The method also captures valley-orbit splitting in both the donor well and the interface well, a quantity critical to silicon qubits. The work concludes with a detailed analysis of the effects of screening on the donor spectrum. ©2009 The American Physical Society
History: Received 28 April 2009; revised 21 July 2009; published 9 October 2009
Permalink: http://link.aps.org/abstract/PRB/v80/e165314

REFERENCES (64)

For access to fully linked references, you need to log in. For access to fully linked references, you need to Log in.
  1. F. R. Bradbury, A. M. Tyryshkin, G. Sabouret, J. Bokor, T. Schenkel, and S. A. Lyon, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 176404 (2006).
  2. R. Vrijen, E. Yablonovitch, K. Wang, H. W. Jiang, A. Balandin, V. Roychowdhury, T. Mor, and D. DiVincenzo, Phys. Rev. A 62, 012306 (2000).
  3. R. deSousa, J. D. Delgado, and S. Das Sarma, Phys. Rev. A 70, 052304 (2004).
  4. L. C. L. Hollenberg, A. S. Dzurak, C. Wellard, A. R. Hamilton, D. J. Reilly, G. J. Milburn, and R. G. Clark, Phys. Rev. B 69, 113301 (2004).
  5. L. C. L. Hollenberg, A. D. Greentree, A. G. Fowler, and C. J. Wellard, Phys. Rev. B 74, 045311 (2006).
  6. C. D. Hill, L. C. L. Hollenberg, A. G. Fowler, C. J. Wellard, A. D. Greentree, and H.-S. Goan, Phys. Rev. B 72, 045350 (2005).
  7. S. R. Schofield, N. J. Curson, M. Y. Simmons, F. J. Ruess, T. Hallam, L. Oberbeck, and R. G. Clark, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 136104 (2003).
  8. D. N. Jamieson, C. Yang, T. Hopf, S. M. Hearne, C. I. Pakes, S. Prawer, M. Mitic, E. Gauja, S. E. Andresen, F. E. Hudson, A. S. Dzurak, and R. G. Clark, Appl. Phys. Lett. 86, 202101 (2005).
  9. F. J. Ruess, B. Weber, K. E. J. Goh, O. Klochan, A. R. Hamilton, and M. Y. Simmons, Phys. Rev. B 76, 085403 (2007).
  10. H. Sellier, G. P. Lansbergen, J. Caro, S. Rogge, N. Collaert, I. Ferain, M. Jurczak, and S. Biesemans, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 206805 (2006).
  11. F. J. Ruess, W. Pok, K. E. J. Goh, A. R. Hamilton, and M. Y. Simmons, Phys. Rev. B 75, 121303 (2007).
  12. D. Karaiskaj, J. A. H. Stotz, T. Meyer, M. L. W. Thewalt, and M. Cardona, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 186402 (2003).
  13. G. D. J. Smit, S. Rogge, J. Caro, and T. M. Klapwijk, Phys. Rev. B 68, 193302 (2003).
  14. Y. C. Fang and J. Tucker, Phys. Rev. B 66, 155331 (2002).
  15. L. M. Kettle, H.-S. Goan, S. C. Smith, C. J. Wellard, L. C. L. Hollenberg, and C. I. Pakes, Phys. Rev. B 68, 075317 (2003).
  16. G. D. J. Smit, S. Rogge, J. Caro, and T. M. Klapwijk, Phys. Rev. B 70, 035206 (2004).
  17. A. S. Martins, R. B. Capaz, and Belita Koiller, Phys. Rev. B 69, 085320 (2004).
  18. C. J. Wellard and L. C. L. Hollenberg,Phys. Rev. B 72, 085202 (2005).
  19. M. Friesen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 186403 (2005).
  20. A. Debernardi, A. Baldereschi, and M. Fanciulli, Phys. Rev. B 74, 035202 (2006).
  21. H. T. Hui, Phys. Rev. B 74, 195309 (2006).
  22. M. J. Calderon, B. Koliller, X. Hu, and S. Das Sarma, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 096802 (2006).
  23. M. J. Calderon, Belita Koiller, and S. Das Sarma, Phys. Rev. B 77, 155302 (2008).
  24. A. F. Slachmuylders, B. Partoens, W. Magnus, and F. M. Peeters, Appl. Phys. Lett. 92, 083104 (2008).
  25. R. Rahman, C. J. Wellard, F. R. Bradbury, M. Prada, J. H. Cole, G. Klimeck, and L. C. L. Hollenberg, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 036403 (2007).
  26. A. J. Skinner, M. E. Davenport, and B. E. Kane, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 087901 (2003).
  27. M. J. Calderon, B. Koiller, and S. Das Sarma, Phys. Rev. B 75, 125311 (2007).
  28. M. J. Calderon, B. Koiller, and S. Das Sarma, Phys. Rev. B 74, 081302(R) (2006).
  29. B. Koiller, X. Hu, and S. Das Sarma, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 027903 (2001).
  30. J. C. Slater and G. F. Koster, Phys. Rev. 94, 1498 (1954).
  31. T. B. Boykin, G. Klimeck, and F. Oyafuso,Phys. Rev. B 69, 115201 (2004).
  32. S. Lee, F. Oyafuso, P. von Allmen, and G. Klimeck, Phys. Rev. B 69, 045316 (2004).
  33. N. Kharche, M. Prada, T. B. Boykin, and G. Klimeck, Appl. Phys. Lett. 90, 092109 (2007).
  34. S. T. Pantelides and C. T. Sah, Phys. Rev. B 10, 621 (1974).
  35. T. B. Boykin, G. Klimeck, M. Eriksson, M. Friesen, S. N. Coppersmith, P. von Allmen, F. Oyafuso, and S. Lee, Appl. Phys. Lett. 84, 115 (2004).
  36. S. Srinivasan, G. Klimeck, and L. Rokhinson, Appl. Phys. Lett. 93, 112102 (2008).
  37. M. Friesen, P. Rugheimer, D. E. Savage, M. G. Lagally, D. W. van der Weide, R. Joynt, and M. A. Eriksson, Phys. Rev. B 67, 121301 (2003).
  38. D. Loss and D. P. DiVincenzo, Phys. Rev. A 57, 120 (1998).
  39. C. Tahan, M. Friesen, and R. Joynt, Phys. Rev. B 66, 035314 (2002).
  40. T. B. Boykin, N. Kharche, and G. Klimeck, Phys. Rev. B 77, 245320 (2008).
  41. A. L. Saraiva, M. J. Calderon, Xuedong Hu, S. Das Sarma, and Belita Koiller, Phys. Rev. B 80, 081305(R) (2009).
  42. D. B. MacMillen and U. Landman, Phys. Rev. B 29, 4524 (1984).
  43. M. Diarra, Y. Niquet, C. Delerue, and G. Allan, Phys. Rev. B 75, 045301 (2007).
ADVERTISEMENT