Correlation effects in superconducting quantum dot systems V. Pokorn´ y 1 , M. ˇ Zonda 1 , T. Novotn´ y 1 , V. Janiˇ s 2 (1) Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Charles University in Prague (2) Institute of Physics, Czech Academy of Sciences, Prague collaboration: T. Doma´ nski (UMCS Lublin, Poland) [email protected]ff.cuni.cz 11. 1. 2018, Uni Regensburg
34
Embed
Correlation effects in superconducting quantum dot systemspokornyv/pdf/pres/reg2018.pdfCorrelation e ects in superconducting quantum dot systems V. Pokorn y , M. 1 Zonda, T. Novotn
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Correlation effects in superconducting quantum dot systems
V. Pokorny 1, M. Zonda 1, T. Novotny 1, V. Janis 2
(1) Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Charles University in Prague
(2) Institute of Physics, Czech Academy of Sciences, Prague
single-level quantum dot connected to two superconducting (sc) BCS leads:
I ideal system for studying the interplay of electronic correlations andsuperconducting order
I proximity effect: Cooper pairs from the superconducor leak into the quantumdot, opening a gap in the DoS (induced pairing)
I multiple Andreev reflections on the opposite interfaces give rise to discretesubgap states (Andreev bound states)
I Josephson current can flow between the superconducting electrodes
I presence of a third normal (non-sc) electrode populates the gap with finite DoS,gives control over the Kondo effect
I experimental and theoretical results show that system can undergo a quantumphase transition from spin-singlet (BCS or Kondo) ground state to spin-doubletground state: 0− π transition known from SFS junctions
I What does it mean “single-level”?level spacing: (like a particle in a box)
δE ∼500meV
L[nm]for short carbon nanotube
is the dominant energy scale
I long sc nanotubes/nanowires: different physics (e.g. Majorana fermions)
Introduction
single-level quantum dot connected to two superconducting (sc) BCS leads:
I ideal system for studying the interplay of electronic correlations andsuperconducting order
I proximity effect: Cooper pairs from the superconducor leak into the quantumdot, opening a gap in the DoS (induced pairing)
I multiple Andreev reflections on the opposite interfaces give rise to discretesubgap states (Andreev bound states)
I Josephson current can flow between the superconducting electrodes
I presence of a third normal (non-sc) electrode populates the gap with finite DoS,gives control over the Kondo effect
I experimental and theoretical results show that system can undergo a quantumphase transition from spin-singlet (BCS or Kondo) ground state to spin-doubletground state: 0− π transition known from SFS junctions
I What does it mean “single-level”?level spacing: (like a particle in a box)
δE ∼500meV
L[nm]for short carbon nanotube
is the dominant energy scale
I long sc nanotubes/nanowires: different physics (e.g. Majorana fermions)
Introduction
I theoretical description: single-impurity Anderson model (SIAM) + BCSI analytic solvers: Hartree-Fock, NCA, 2nd order PT...I heavy numerics: ED, NRG, fRG, QMCs...
I experimental realization:I carbon nanotubeI InAs/InSb nanowireI C60 molecule in break junctionI self-assembled SiGe quantum dots
Introduction Andreev bound states and the 0 − π transition
I electron with energy E < ∆ incidenton the QD-S interface penetrates intosc, creates a Cooper pair and isreflected back as a hole - Andreevreflection
I multiple Andreev reflections lead to aformation of Andreev bound stateswithin the sc gap
Sp
ectr
al f
un
ctio
n
Energy
Exp.: evolution of ABS with gate voltage
Nat. Nano. 9, 79 (2014).
I Crosing of ABS at the Fermi energymarks QPT from spin-singlet 0-phaseto spin-doublet π-phase.
I ABS are current-carrying states
I The Josephson current jumps frompositive to negative values at 0− πtransition - can be observed incurrent-phase relations.
Introduction description of the model
left lead quantum dot right lead
normal lead
I ε - on-site energy level
I U - on-site Coulomb interaction
I ∆α - superconducting gap (we assume ∆L = ∆R = ∆)
I Φα - order parameter phase
I Γα - tunneling rate (dot-lead coupling)
Observables depend only on the phase difference Φ = ΦL − ΦR between the sc leadsnot on the absolute values of the two phases.Result: gauge invariance under ΦL,R → ΦL,R + Φsh with important consequencesA. Kadlecova, M. Zonda, T. Novotny, Phys. Rev. B 95, 195114 (2017).
Introduction description of the model
left lead quantum dot right lead
normal lead
I ε - on-site energy level
I U - on-site Coulomb interaction
I ∆α - superconducting gap (we assume ∆L = ∆R = ∆)
I Φα - order parameter phase
I Γα - tunneling rate (dot-lead coupling)
Observables depend only on the phase difference Φ = ΦL − ΦR between the sc leadsnot on the absolute values of the two phases.Result: gauge invariance under ΦL,R → ΦL,R + Φsh with important consequencesA. Kadlecova, M. Zonda, T. Novotny, Phys. Rev. B 95, 195114 (2017).
Introduction the modified single-impurity Anderson model
H = Hdot +∑
α=R,L,N
(Hαlead +Hαc )
I quantum dot (single - level):
Hdot =∑σ
εσd†σdσ + Ud†↑d↑d
†↓d↓ εσ = ε+ σB
I leads:
Hαlead =∑kσ
εσ(k)c†α,kσcα,kσ−∆α
∑k
(e iΦαc†α,k↑c†α,−k↓+H.c.) α = R, L,N
I couplings:
Hαc = −tα∑kσ
(c†α,kσdσ + H.c.) Γα = 2πρα|tα|2 − tunneling rate
I reliable description of the system: numerically exact calculations (NRG, QMC)show good agreement with experiment (ABS frequencies, Josephson current)
Introduction the modified single-impurity Anderson model
H = Hdot +∑
α=R,L,N
(Hαlead +Hαc )
I quantum dot (single - level):
Hdot =∑σ
εσd†σdσ + Ud†↑d↑d
†↓d↓ εσ = ε+ σB
I leads:
Hαlead =∑kσ
εσ(k)c†α,kσcα,kσ−∆α
∑k
(e iΦαc†α,k↑c†α,−k↓+H.c.) α = R, L,N
I couplings:
Hαc = −tα∑kσ
(c†α,kσdσ + H.c.) Γα = 2πρα|tα|2 − tunneling rate
I reliable description of the system: numerically exact calculations (NRG, QMC)show good agreement with experiment (ABS frequencies, Josephson current)
Introduction the modified single-impurity Anderson model
H = Hdot +∑
α=R,L,N
(Hαlead +Hαc )
I quantum dot (single - level):
Hdot =∑σ
εσd†σdσ + Ud†↑d↑d
†↓d↓ εσ = ε+ σB
I leads:
Hαlead =∑kσ
εσ(k)c†α,kσcα,kσ−∆α
∑k
(e iΦαc†α,k↑c†α,−k↓+H.c.) α = R, L,N
I couplings:
Hαc = −tα∑kσ
(c†α,kσdσ + H.c.) Γα = 2πρα|tα|2 − tunneling rate
I reliable description of the system: numerically exact calculations (NRG, QMC)show good agreement with experiment (ABS frequencies, Josephson current)
Introduction the modified single-impurity Anderson model
H = Hdot +∑
α=R,L,N
(Hαlead +Hαc )
I quantum dot (single - level):
Hdot =∑σ
εσd†σdσ + Ud†↑d↑d
†↓d↓ εσ = ε+ σB
I leads:
Hαlead =∑kσ
εσ(k)c†α,kσcα,kσ−∆α
∑k
(e iΦαc†α,k↑c†α,−k↓+H.c.) α = R, L,N
I couplings:
Hαc = −tα∑kσ
(c†α,kσdσ + H.c.) Γα = 2πρα|tα|2 − tunneling rate
I reliable description of the system: numerically exact calculations (NRG, QMC)show good agreement with experiment (ABS frequencies, Josephson current)
Methods Nambu Green function and Hartree-Fock approximation
I Nambu spinor: Nambu Green function:
Ψ(τ) =
(d↑(τ)
d†↓(τ)
)G(τ) = −
⟨Tτ [Ψ(τ)Ψ†(0)]
⟩I 2× 2 matrix with normal (diagonal) and anomalous (off-diagonal) components
G = −(〈d↑d
†↑〉 〈d↑d↓〉
〈d†↓d†↑〉 〈d
†↓d↓〉
)≡(Gn Ga
G∗a G∗n
)=
I equilibrium physics: Matsubara frequencies ωn = (2n + 1)π/β
Hartree - Fock approximation (spin - symmetric)
I static mean-field, simplest way how to study Coulomb interaction effects
I it maps the sc SIAM model on normal SIAM with attractive interaction:
εσ → σεσ , εσ(k)→ σεσ(k), tα → σtα, U → −U
I as εσ = ε+ σB, it maps the magnetic field B on the local energy ε and vice versa
I gauge invariance under ΦL,R → ΦL,R + Φsh used to keep the hybridizations real
I no fermionic sign problem
I finite temperatures only
I Green function is calculated in imaginary time, no direct access to spectralfunctions/ABS frequencies, only the Josephson current, filling and the inducedgap can be obtained directly
(1) E. Gull, A. J. Millis, A. I. Lichtenstein, A. N. Rubtsov, M. Troyer, and P. Werner, Rev. Mod. Phys. 83, 349 (2011).(2) O. Parcollet, M. Ferrero, T. Ayral, H. Hafermann, I. Krivenko, L. Messio, and P. Seth, Comput. Phys. Commun. 196, 398 (2015).(3) P. Seth, I. Krivenko, M. Ferrero, and O. Parcollet, Comput. Phys. Commun. 200, 74 (2016).(4) D. J. Luitz and F. F. Assaad, Phys. Rev. B 81 024509, (2010).
Methods three-terminal setup: CT-HYB
continuous-time quantum Monte Carlo [1]:
I in experiment, U > Γ, so we chose the strong-coupling, hybridization-expansionCT-QMC solver implemented in the package (ipht.cea.fr/triqs) [2,3]
I include superconducting pairing:particle-hole transformation in the σ = ↓ segment [4]:
I it maps the sc SIAM model on normal SIAM with attractive interaction:
εσ → σεσ , εσ(k)→ σεσ(k), tα → σtα, U → −U
I as εσ = ε+ σB, it maps the magnetic field B on the local energy ε and vice versa
I gauge invariance under ΦL,R → ΦL,R + Φsh used to keep the hybridizations real
I no fermionic sign problem
I finite temperatures only
I Green function is calculated in imaginary time, no direct access to spectralfunctions/ABS frequencies, only the Josephson current, filling and the inducedgap can be obtained directly
(1) E. Gull, A. J. Millis, A. I. Lichtenstein, A. N. Rubtsov, M. Troyer, and P. Werner, Rev. Mod. Phys. 83, 349 (2011).(2) O. Parcollet, M. Ferrero, T. Ayral, H. Hafermann, I. Krivenko, L. Messio, and P. Seth, Comput. Phys. Commun. 196, 398 (2015).(3) P. Seth, I. Krivenko, M. Ferrero, and O. Parcollet, Comput. Phys. Commun. 200, 74 (2016).(4) D. J. Luitz and F. F. Assaad, Phys. Rev. B 81 024509, (2010).
Methods three-terminal setup: CT-HYB
continuous-time quantum Monte Carlo [1]:
I in experiment, U > Γ, so we chose the strong-coupling, hybridization-expansionCT-QMC solver implemented in the package (ipht.cea.fr/triqs) [2,3]
I include superconducting pairing:particle-hole transformation in the σ = ↓ segment [4]:
I it maps the sc SIAM model on normal SIAM with attractive interaction:
εσ → σεσ , εσ(k)→ σεσ(k), tα → σtα, U → −U
I as εσ = ε+ σB, it maps the magnetic field B on the local energy ε and vice versa
I gauge invariance under ΦL,R → ΦL,R + Φsh used to keep the hybridizations real
I no fermionic sign problem
I finite temperatures only
I Green function is calculated in imaginary time, no direct access to spectralfunctions/ABS frequencies, only the Josephson current, filling and the inducedgap can be obtained directly
(1) E. Gull, A. J. Millis, A. I. Lichtenstein, A. N. Rubtsov, M. Troyer, and P. Werner, Rev. Mod. Phys. 83, 349 (2011).(2) O. Parcollet, M. Ferrero, T. Ayral, H. Hafermann, I. Krivenko, L. Messio, and P. Seth, Comput. Phys. Commun. 196, 398 (2015).(3) P. Seth, I. Krivenko, M. Ferrero, and O. Parcollet, Comput. Phys. Commun. 200, 74 (2016).(4) D. J. Luitz and F. F. Assaad, Phys. Rev. B 81 024509, (2010).
Methods three-terminal setup: CT-HYB
continuous-time quantum Monte Carlo [1]:
I in experiment, U > Γ, so we chose the strong-coupling, hybridization-expansionCT-QMC solver implemented in the package (ipht.cea.fr/triqs) [2,3]
I include superconducting pairing:particle-hole transformation in the σ = ↓ segment [4]:
I it maps the sc SIAM model on normal SIAM with attractive interaction:
εσ → σεσ , εσ(k)→ σεσ(k), tα → σtα, U → −U
I as εσ = ε+ σB, it maps the magnetic field B on the local energy ε and vice versa
I gauge invariance under ΦL,R → ΦL,R + Φsh used to keep the hybridizations real
I no fermionic sign problem
I finite temperatures only
I Green function is calculated in imaginary time, no direct access to spectralfunctions/ABS frequencies, only the Josephson current, filling and the inducedgap can be obtained directly
(1) E. Gull, A. J. Millis, A. I. Lichtenstein, A. N. Rubtsov, M. Troyer, and P. Werner, Rev. Mod. Phys. 83, 349 (2011).(2) O. Parcollet, M. Ferrero, T. Ayral, H. Hafermann, I. Krivenko, L. Messio, and P. Seth, Comput. Phys. Commun. 196, 398 (2015).(3) P. Seth, I. Krivenko, M. Ferrero, and O. Parcollet, Comput. Phys. Commun. 200, 74 (2016).(4) D. J. Luitz and F. F. Assaad, Phys. Rev. B 81 024509, (2010).
Results three-terminal setup: CT-HYB
Induced gap µ =U〈d†d†〉: test against NRG for Φ = 0
-0.05
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0 2 4 6 8 10
∆ = ΓS, Φ = 0
T = 0
µ
U / ΓS
NRG, ΓN / ΓS = 0
0.01
0.1
1
-0.05
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0 2 4 6 8 10
∆ = ΓS, Φ = 0
T = 0.025ΓS
µ
U / ΓS
CT-HYB, ΓN / ΓS = 0
0.01
0.1
1
Josephson current: finite ΓN vs. finite temperature
I Normal coupling ΓN and temperature have qualitatively similar effect on the system:vanishing of the π-phase (spin-doublet)
Results three-terminal setup: CT-HYB
Induced gap µ =U〈d†d†〉: test against NRG for Φ = 0
-0.05
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0 2 4 6 8 10
∆ = ΓS, Φ = 0
T = 0
µ
U / ΓS
NRG, ΓN / ΓS = 0
0.01
0.1
1
-0.05
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0 2 4 6 8 10
∆ = ΓS, Φ = 0
T = 0.025ΓS
µ
U / ΓS
CT-HYB, ΓN / ΓS = 0
0.01
0.1
1
Josephson current: finite ΓN vs. finite temperature
-0.1
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Ud = 3ΓS, ∆ = ΓS
T = 0.025ΓS
Jose
phso
n c
urr
ent
Φ / π
NRG (T = 0), ΓN = 0CT-HYB, ΓN = 0
0.010.1
1
-0.1
0
0.1
0.2
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Ud = 3ΓS, ∆ = ΓS
ΓN = 0.01ΓS
Φ / π
CT-HYB, T / ΓS = 0.025
0.050.10.2
I Normal coupling ΓN and temperature have qualitatively similar effect on the system:vanishing of the π-phase (spin-doublet)
Results CT-HYB: spectral functions
I in CT-HYB, Green function is calculated in imaginary time, no direct access tospectral functions/ABS frequencies
I analytic continuation −iτ → t of noisy data is a well-known ill-defined problem
(1) H. J. Vidberg and J. W. Serene, J. Low Temp. Phys. 29, 179 (1977).(2) M. Jarrell and J. E. Gubernatis, Phys. Rep. 269, 133 (1996).(3) A. S. Mishchenko, N. V. Prokof’ev, A. Sakamoto, and B. V. Svistunov, Phys. Rev. B 62, 6317 (2000).
Results CT-HYB: spectral functions
Experiment:J.-D. Pillet et al., Phys. Rev. B, 88045101 (2013).
I two-terminal setup, CNT with Al leads
I ∆ = 150µeV, T=35mK
I U = 13.3∆, Γ = 0.9∆
I spectral function measured via STM
I good agreement between experimentand NRG
Spectral function from CT-HYB:stochastic sampling method
NRG
2ndPT
0 2 4 6 8 10
Gate voltage
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
En
erg
y
V. Pokorny, M. Zonda, arXiv:1001.2700 (2017).
I T = 44mK (0.025∆)
I good agreement with T = 0 NRGresults in 0-phase
I good agreement aroung QCP
I ABS from CT-HYB shifted w.r.t.NRG in π-phase
Other possible applications
multiple-quantum dot systems:
R. Zitko et al, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 116803 (2010).R. Zitko, Phys. Rev. B 91, 165116 (2015).D. Sherman et al., Nat. Nanotech. 12, 212 (2017).Z. Su et al., Nat. Commun. 8, 585 (2017).
Su et al., Nat. Commun. 8, 585 (2017).
InSb nanowire with NbTiN leads∆ ≈ 400µeV , U = 1− 2meV
I singlet, doublet and triplet Andreev molecular states
I superexchange effects (tunable by interdot coupling tLR)
I fingerprints of Majorana bound states (?)
I interesting for applications in topological quantum computing
I model is solvable by the TRIQS CT-HYB implementation
Other possible applications
multiple-quantum dot systems:
R. Zitko et al, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 116803 (2010).R. Zitko, Phys. Rev. B 91, 165116 (2015).D. Sherman et al., Nat. Nanotech. 12, 212 (2017).Z. Su et al., Nat. Commun. 8, 585 (2017).
Su et al., Nat. Commun. 8, 585 (2017).
InSb nanowire with NbTiN leads∆ ≈ 400µeV , U = 1− 2meV
I singlet, doublet and triplet Andreev molecular states
I superexchange effects (tunable by interdot coupling tLR)
I fingerprints of Majorana bound states (?)
I interesting for applications in topological quantum computing
I model is solvable by the TRIQS CT-HYB implementation
Conclusions
second order of perturbation theory:
I fast, simple, charge conserving (if ∆L = ∆R) and thermodynamicallyconsistent approximation, does not break spin symmetry, direct access to spectralfunctions/ABS frequencies
I gives reliable results for 0-phase properties (spectral/transport) and phaseboundaries in realistic range of parameters (outside the Kondo region)
I present formulation not applicable to the π-phase - double degenerate groundstate - violation of the Gell-Mann - Low theorem
I not reliable in the three-terminal setup due to the mixing of 0 and π phases
hybridization-expansion CT-QMC:
I based on the TRIQS CT-HYB solver (ipht.cea.fr/triqs)
I works well in both the two-terminal and the three-terminal setups
I able to describe all phases including the π-phase and the Kondo regime
I works only for finite temperatures
I formulated in imaginary time: no direct access to spectral functions/ABSfrequencies without analytic continuation
Conclusions
second order of perturbation theory:
I fast, simple, charge conserving (if ∆L = ∆R) and thermodynamicallyconsistent approximation, does not break spin symmetry, direct access to spectralfunctions/ABS frequencies
I gives reliable results for 0-phase properties (spectral/transport) and phaseboundaries in realistic range of parameters (outside the Kondo region)
I present formulation not applicable to the π-phase - double degenerate groundstate - violation of the Gell-Mann - Low theorem
I not reliable in the three-terminal setup due to the mixing of 0 and π phases
hybridization-expansion CT-QMC:
I based on the TRIQS CT-HYB solver (ipht.cea.fr/triqs)
I works well in both the two-terminal and the three-terminal setups
I able to describe all phases including the π-phase and the Kondo regime
I works only for finite temperatures
I formulated in imaginary time: no direct access to spectral functions/ABSfrequencies without analytic continuation
Conclusions
acknowledgments:
I Czech Science Foundation grant 15-14259S
I National Grid Infrastructure MetaCentrum
I IT4Innovations National Supercomputing Center
reading:I M. Zonda, V. Pokorny, V. Janis, and T. Novotny, Sci. Rep. 5, 8821 (2015). (2ndPT)
I M. Zonda, V. Pokorny, V. Janis, and T. Novotny, PRB 93, 024523 (2016). (2ndPT)
I T. Domanski, M. Zonda, V. Pokorny, G. Gorski, V. Janis, and T. Novotny, PRB 95, 045104(2017). (3-terminal, QMC)
I V. Pokorny, M. Zonda, arXiv:1001.2700 (2017). (2-terminal, QMC)
I www.fzu.cz/∼pokornyv/pages/research (more resources, including this presentation)
codes:I 2nd order PT solver: github.com/pokornyv/SQUAD
I CT-HYB code (using TRIQS solver): github.com/pokornyv/SQUAD-CTHYB
Thank you for your attention.
Conclusions
acknowledgments:
I Czech Science Foundation grant 15-14259S
I National Grid Infrastructure MetaCentrum
I IT4Innovations National Supercomputing Center
reading:I M. Zonda, V. Pokorny, V. Janis, and T. Novotny, Sci. Rep. 5, 8821 (2015). (2ndPT)
I M. Zonda, V. Pokorny, V. Janis, and T. Novotny, PRB 93, 024523 (2016). (2ndPT)
I T. Domanski, M. Zonda, V. Pokorny, G. Gorski, V. Janis, and T. Novotny, PRB 95, 045104(2017). (3-terminal, QMC)
I V. Pokorny, M. Zonda, arXiv:1001.2700 (2017). (2-terminal, QMC)
I www.fzu.cz/∼pokornyv/pages/research (more resources, including this presentation)
codes:I 2nd order PT solver: github.com/pokornyv/SQUAD
I CT-HYB code (using TRIQS solver): github.com/pokornyv/SQUAD-CTHYB