4.6 Article

Current flow paths in deformed graphene: from quantum transport to classical trajectories in curved space

期刊

NEW JOURNAL OF PHYSICS
卷 18, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/1367-2630/18/5/053016

关键词

electronic transport in graphene; quantum fields in curved spacetime; classical and semiclassical techniques

资金

  1. DGAPA-UNAM
  2. CONACyT [219993]
  3. PAPIIT-DGAPA-UNAM [IG101113, IN114014]
  4. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this work we compare two fundamentally different approaches to the electronic transport in deformed graphene: (a) the condensed matter approach in which current flow paths are obtained by applying the non-equilibrium Green's function(NEGF) method to the tight-binding model with local strain, (b) the general relativistic approach in which classical trajectories of relativistic point particles moving in a curved surface with a pseudo-magnetic field are calculated. The connection between the two is established in the long-wave limit via an effective Dirac Hamiltonian in curved space. Geometrical optics approximation, applied to focused current beams, allows us to directly compare the wave and the particle pictures. We obtain very good numerical agreement between the quantum and the classical approaches for a fairly wide set of parameters, improving with the increasing size of the system. The presented method offers an enormous reduction of complexity from irregular tight-binding Hamiltonians defined on large lattices to geometric language for curved continuous surfaces. It facilitates a comfortable and efficient tool for predicting electronic transport properties in graphene nanostructures with complicated geometries. Combination of the curvature and thepseudo-magnetic field paves the way to new interesting transport phenomena such as bending or focusing (lensing) of currents depending on the shape of the deformation. It can be applied in designing ultrasensitive sensors or in nanoelectronics.

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