4.8 Article

Probing Two-Electron Multiplets in Bilayer Graphene Quantum Dots

期刊

PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS
卷 127, 期 25, 页码 -

出版社

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.256802

关键词

-

资金

  1. European Union [881603]
  2. European Research Council (ERC) [820254]
  3. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation) under Germany's Excellence Strategy-Cluster of Excellence Matter and Light for Quantum Computing (ML4Q) through DFG [EXC 2004/1-390534769, STA1146/11-1]
  4. Helmholtz Nano Facility
  5. EC-FET Core 3 European Graphene Flagship Project
  6. EC-FET Quantum Flagship Project 2D-SIPC
  7. Lloyd Register Foundation Nanotechnology Grant
  8. NSF [DMR-2002275]
  9. Elemental Strategy Initiative by theMEXT, Japan [JPMXP0112101001]
  10. JSPS KAKENHI [JP20H00354]
  11. CREST, JST [JPMJCR15F3]
  12. European Research Council (ERC) [820254] Funding Source: European Research Council (ERC)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study finds that in bilayer graphene, orbital symmetric states have lower energy than orbital antisymmetric states, and there is a significant energy difference between them. Furthermore, the symmetric multiplet also exhibits energy splitting of its states due to lattice scale interactions.
We report on finite bias spectroscopy measurements of the two-electron spectrum in a gate defined bilayer graphene (BLG) quantum dot for varying magnetic fields. The spin and valley degree of freedom in BLG give rise to multiplets of six orbital symmetric and ten orbital antisymmetric states. We find that orbital symmetric states are lower in energy and separated by approximate to 0.4-0.8 meV from orbital antisymmetric states. The symmetric multiplet exhibits an additional energy splitting of its six states of approximate to 0.15-0.5 meV due to lattice scale interactions. The experimental observations are supported by theoretical calculations, which allow to determine that intervalley scattering and current-current interaction constants are of the same magnitude in BLG.

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