首页> 外文OA文献 >Andreev bound states versus Majorana bound states in quantum dot-nanowire-superconductor hybrid structures: Trivial versus topological zero-bias conductance peaks
【2h】

Andreev bound states versus Majorana bound states in quantum dot-nanowire-superconductor hybrid structures: Trivial versus topological zero-bias conductance peaks

机译:andreev约束状态与majorana绑定状态的量子   点纳米线 - 超导体混合结构:平凡与拓扑   零偏压电导峰值

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Motivated by an important recent experiment [Deng et al., Science 354, 1557(2016)], we theoretically consider the interplay between Andreev boundstates(ABSs) and Majorana bound states(MBSs) in quantum dot-nanowiresemiconductor systems with proximity-induced superconductivity(SC), spin-orbitcoupling and Zeeman splitting. The dot induces ABSs in the SC nanowire whichshow complex behavior as a function of Zeeman splitting and chemical potential,and the specific question is whether two such ABSs can come together forming atopological MBS. We consider physical situations involving the dot beingnon-SC, SC, or partially SC. We find that the ABSs indeed tend to coalescetogether producing near-zero-energy midgap states as Zeeman splitting and/orchemical potential are increased, but this mostly happens in thenon-topological regime although there are situations where the ABSs could cometogether forming a topological MBS. The two scenarios(two ABSs forming anear-zero-energy non-topological ABS or a zero-energy topological MBS) aredifficult to distinguish by tunneling conductance spectroscopy due toessentially the same signatures. Theoretically we distinguish them by knowingthe critical Zeeman splitting for the topological quantum phase transition orby calculating the topological visibility. We find that the "sticking together"propensity of ABSs to produce a zero-energy midgap state is generic in class Dsystems, and by itself says nothing about the topological nature of theunderlying SC nanowire. One must use caution in interpreting tunnelingconductance measurements where the midgap sticking-together behavior of ABSscannot be construed as definitive evidence for topological SC with non-AbelianMBSs. We also suggest some experimental techniques for distinguishing betweentrivial and topological ZBCPs.
机译:受近期一项重要实验的推动[Deng等,Science 354,1557(2016)],我们在理论上考虑了具有邻近感应超导性的量子点-纳米线半导体系统中Andreev束缚态(ABSs)和Majorana束缚态(MBSs)之间的相互作用。 (SC),自旋轨道耦合和塞曼分裂。该点在SC纳米线中诱导ABS,这些ABS显示出与Zeeman分裂和化学势有关的复杂行为,具体问题是两个这样的ABS是否可以结合在一起形成拓扑MBS。我们考虑涉及点为非SC,SC或部分SC的物理情况。我们发现随着Zeeman分裂和/或化学势的增加,ABS确实趋于合并在一起产生接近零能量的中间能隙状态,但这主要发生在非拓扑结构中,尽管在某些情况下ABS可能会一起形成拓扑MBS。由于本质上相同的特征,很难通过隧道电导光谱法来区分这两种情况(形成零零能非拓扑ABS的两个ABS或零能拓扑MBS)。从理论上讲,我们通过了解拓扑量子相变的临界塞曼分裂或通过计算拓扑可见性来区分它们。我们发现,ABS产生零能量中能隙态的“粘在一起”倾向在D类系统中很普遍,其本身并没有说明基础SC纳米线的拓扑性质。在解释隧道电导测量时,必须谨慎行事,其中不能将ABS的中间间隙粘在一起的行为解释为非AbelianMBS拓扑SC的确定证据。我们还建议了一些区分平凡和拓扑ZBCP的实验技术。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号