Scanned potential microscopy of edge and bulk currents in the quantum hall regime

Physical Review B - Condensed Matter and Materials Physics

Volumn 59, Issue 7, 1999, Pages 4654-4657

  McCormick, KentL ^a   Woodside, MichaelT ^a   Huang, Mike ^a   Wu, Mingshaw ^a   McEuen, PaulL ^a   Duruoz, Cem ^b   Harris, J S ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b Stanford University   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0000597132     PISSN: 10980121     EISSN: 1550235X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.59.4654     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. K. von Klitzing, G. Dorda, and M. Pepper, Phys. Rev. Lett. 45, 494 (1980).
2. B. I. Halperin, Phys. Rev. B 25, 2185 (1982).
3. A. H. MacDonald, T. M. Rice, and W. F. Brinkman, Phys. Rev. B 28, 3648 (1983).
4. M. Buttiker, Phys. Rev. B 38, 9375 (1988).
5. D. B. Chklovskii, B. I. Shlovskii, and L. I. Glazman, Phys. Rev. B 46, 4026 (1992).
6. G. Diener and J. Collazo, J. Phys. C 21, 305 (1988).
7. H. Hirai and S. Komiyama, Phys. Rev. B 49, 14 012 (1994).
8. K. Tsemekhman, V. Tsemekhman, C. Wexler, and D. J. Thouless, Solid State Commun. 101, 549 (1997).
9. P. F. Fontein, J. A. Kleinen, P. Hendricks, F. A. P. Blom, J. H. Wolter, H. G. M. Lochs, F. A. J. M. Driessen, L. J. Giling, and C. W. J. Beenakker, Phys. Rev. B 43, 12 090 (1991).
10. R. Knott, W. Dietsche, K. von Klitaing, K. Eberl, and K. Ploog, Semicond. Sci. Technol. 10, 117 (1995).
11. W. Dietsche, K. von Klitzing, and K. Ploog, Surf. Sci. 361, 289 (1996).
12. R. J. F. van Haren, F. A. P. Blom, and J. H. Wolter, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 1198 (1995).
13. A. A. Shashkin, A. J. Kent, J. R. Owers-Bradley, A. J. Cross, P. Hawker, and M. Henini, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 5114 (1997).
14. U. Meirav, N. Q. Balaban, and H. Shtrikman, in 11th International Conference, High Magnetic Fields in the Physics of Semiconductors, Cambridge, MA, 1994, edited by D. Heiman (World Scientific, Singapore, 1995), p. 114.
15. E. Yahel, D. Orgad, A. Palevski, and M. Shtrikman, Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 2149 (1996).
16. S. Takaoka, K. Oto, H. Kurimoto, K. Murase, K. Gamo, and S. Nishi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 72, 3080 (1994).
17. G. Ebert, K. von Klitzing, and G. Weimann, J. Phys. C 18, L257 (1985).
18. Similar measurements have recently been made with a scanned SET (Ref. 26) and a scanned capacitance microscope [S. H. Tessmer, P. I. Glicofridis, R. C. Ashoori, and L. S. Levitov, Nature (London) 392, 51 (1998)].
19. M. Nonnenmacher, M. P. O’Boyle, and H. K. Wickramasinghe, Appl. Phys. Lett. 58, 2921 (1991).
20. This picture may be too simplistic: we find a difference in the Hall voltage measured by AFM on QH plateaus and in the transition regions (Fig. 33) for which this model cannot account. We do not understand this discrepancy, although it may be partially due to nonequilibrium current flow in the low-(Formula presented) edge state, which is too narrow to show up in such a wide scan.
21. S. Belaidi, P. Girard, and G. Leveque, J. Appl. Phys. 81, 1023 (1997).
22. M. Tortonese, R. C. Barrett, and C. F. Quate, Appl. Phys. Lett. 62, 834 (1993).
23. T. R. Albrecht, P. Grütter, D. Horne, and D. Rugar, J. Appl. Phys. 69, 668 (1991).
24. K. L. McCormick, Ph.D. thesis, University of California, Berkeley, 1998.
25. M. A. Eriksson, R. G. Beck, M. Topinka, J. A. Katine, R. M. Westervelt, K. L. Campman, and A. C. Gossard, Appl. Phys. Lett. 69, 671 (1996).
26. M. J. Yoo, T. A. Fulton, H. F. Hess, R. L. Willett, L. N. Dunkleberger, R. J. Chichester, L. N. Pfeiffer, and K. W. West, Science 267, 579 (1997).
27. D. J. Thouless, J. Phys. C 18, 6211 (1985).
28. B. J. van Wees, E. M. M. Williams, C. J. P. M. Harmans, C. W. J. Beenakker, H. van Houten, J. G. Williamson, C. T. Foxon, and J. J. Harris, Phys. Rev. Lett. 62, 1181 (1989).
29. P. L. McEuen, A. Szafer, C. A. Richter, B. W. Alphenaar, J. K. Jain, A. D. Stone, R. G. Wheeler, and R. N. Sacks, Phys. Rev. Lett. 64, 2062 (1990).
30. With a truly insulating bulk, the potential profile is set by the charge at the sample edges (Ref. 27). AFM would be unable to measure the potential in this limit, because no charge would be able to migrate under the tip in the time scale of the measurement. Our measurements are not in this limit: we have (Formula presented) at (Formula presented) allowing us to operate even on the QH plateaus.