4.8 Article

Effects of Parity and Symmetry on the Aharonov-Bohm Phase of a Quantum Ring

期刊

NANO LETTERS
卷 22, 期 1, 页码 334-339

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.nanolett.1c03882

关键词

quantum ring; Aharonov-Bohm effect; quantum dot; symmetry; parity

资金

  1. Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation
  2. Swedish Research Council
  3. Crafoord Foundation
  4. NanoLund
  5. Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF) [P2ELP2_178221]
  6. Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) [P2ELP2_178221] Funding Source: Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The experimental investigation on one-dimensional quantum rings near the surface of nanowire quantum dots confirms theoretical predictions, showing the appearance of forbidden gaps and the grouping of orbital states as the symmetry of the quantum ring is reduced. Additionally, the study reveals exceptionally large orbital contributions to the effective g-factor in rings with higher symmetry, indicating that nanostructure symmetry and wave function parity play a significant role in altering the properties of a phase-coherent system.
We experimentally investigate the properties of one-dimensional quantum rings that form near the surface of nanowire quantum dots. In agreement with theoretical predictions, we observe the appearance of forbidden gaps in the evolution of states in a magnetic field as the symmetry of a quantum ring is reduced. For a twofold symmetry, our experiments confirm that orbital states are grouped pairwise. Here, a p-phase shift can be introduced in the Aharonov-Bohm relation by controlling the relative orbital parity using an electric field. Studying rings with higher symmetry, we note exceptionally large orbital contributions to the effective g-factor (up to 300), which are many times higher than those previously reported. These findings show that the properties of a phase-coherent system can be significantly altered by the nanostructure symmetry and its interplay with wave function parity.

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

4.8
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