4.6 Article

Quantum dot spin qubits in silicon: Multivalley physics

期刊

PHYSICAL REVIEW B
卷 82, 期 15, 页码 -

出版社

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.82.155312

关键词

-

资金

  1. EEA Financial Mechanism
  2. NSA/LPS through ARO

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Research on Si quantum dot spin qubits is motivated by the long spin coherence times measured in Si, yet the orbital spectrum of Si dots is increased as a result of the valley degree of freedom. The valley degeneracy may be lifted by the interface potential, which gives rise to a valley-orbit coupling but the latter depends on the detailed structure of the interface and is generally unknown a priori. These facts motivate us to provide an extensive study of spin qubits in Si double quantum dots, accounting fully for the valley degree of freedom and assuming no prior knowledge of the valley-orbit coupling. For single-spin qubits, we analyze the spectrum of a multivalley double quantum dot, discuss the initialization of one qubit, identify the conditions for the lowest energy two-electron states to be a singlet and a triplet well separated from other states, and determine analytical expressions for the exchange splitting. For singlet-triplet qubits, we analyze the single-dot spectrum and initialization process, the double-dot spectrum, singlet-triplet mixing in an inhomogeneous magnetic field, and the peculiarities of spin blockade in multivalley qubits. We review briefly the hyperfine interaction in Si and discuss its role in spin blockade in natural Si, including intravalley and intervalley effects. We study the evolution of the double-dot spectrum as a function of magnetic field. We address briefly the situation in which the valley-orbit coupling is different in each dot due to interface roughness. We propose a new experiment for measuring the valley splitting in a single quantum dot. We discuss the possibility of devising other types of qubits in Si QDs, and the size of the intervaley coupling due to the Coulomb interaction.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据