Is the quantum dot at large bias a weak-coupling problem?

Physical Review Letters

Volumn 86, Issue 18, 2001, Pages 4088-4091

  Coleman, P ^a   Hooley, C ^a,b   Parcollet, O ^a  

^a RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BIRMINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ELECTRON ENERGY LEVELS; ELECTRON TRANSPORT PROPERTIES; ELECTRONIC DENSITY OF STATES; FREQUENCIES; MAGNETIC FIELD EFFECTS; MAGNETIC SUSCEPTIBILITY; PERTURBATION TECHNIQUES; PHASE EQUILIBRIA; SPECTROSCOPIC ANALYSIS; TEMPERATURE; THRESHOLD VOLTAGE;

COULOMB BLOCKADE REGIME; KONDO TEMPERATURE; RENORMALIZATION GROUP; STRONG COUPLING STATE; VOLTAGE DEPENDENCE;

SEMICONDUCTOR QUANTUM DOTS;

EID: 0035971901     PISSN: 00319007     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.86.4088     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. M. Kastner, Phys. Today 46, 24 (1993).
2. U. Meirav and E. B. Foxman, Semicond. Sci. Technol. 11, 255 (1996).
3. R. C. Ashoori, Nature (London) 379, 413 (1996).
4. T. K. Ng and P. A. Lee, Phys. Rev. Lett. 61, 1768 (1988).
5. L. I. Glazman and M. E. Raikh, Pis'ma Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 47, 378 (1988) [JETP Lett. 47, 452 (1988)].
6. L. I. Glazman and M. E. Raikh, Pis'ma Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 47, 378 (1988) [JETP Lett. 47, 452 (1988)].
7. Y. Meir and N. S. Wingreen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 68, 2512 (1992).
8. Y. Meir, N. S. Wingreen, and P. A. Lee, Phys. Rev. Lett. 70, 2601 (1993).
9. N. Wingreen and Y. Meir, Phys. Rev. B 49, 11 040 (1994).
10. J. König, J. Schmid, H. Schoeller, and G. Schön, Phys. Rev. B 54, 16 820 (1996).
11. D. Goldhaber-Gordon et al., Nature (London) 391, 156 (1998).
12. S. M. Cronenwett, T. H. Oosterkamp, and L. P. Kouwenhoven, Science 281, 540 (1998).
13. J. Schmid, J. Weis, K. Eberl, and K. von Klitzing, Physica (Amsterdam) 258B, 182 (1998).
14. W. G. van der Wiel et al., Science 289, 2105 (2000).
15. A. Kaminski, Yu. V. Nazarov, and L. I. Glazman, Phys. Rev. B 62, 8154 (2000).
16. M. Plihal, D. C. Langreth, and P. Nordlander, Phys. Rev. B 61, R13 341 (2000).
17. A. Schiller and S. Hershfield, Phys. Rev. B 58, 14 978 (1998).
18. Y. Goldin and Y. Avishai, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 5394 (1998).
19. J. R. Schrieffer and P. A. Wolff, Phys. Rev. 149, 491 (1966).
20. A. Kaminski, Yu. V. Nazarov, and L. I. Glazman, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 384 (1999).
21. For a review of the Keldysh method, see, for example, J. Rammer and H. Smith, Rev. Mod. Phys. 58, 323 (1986). Since this method involves only real-time evolution, it is necessary to couple the spin to a bath to allow relaxation of its magnetization at long times. We achieve this by endowing the Majorana fermions with a fictitious dispersion, which is removed at the end of the calculation. This may be shown to reproduce the known equilibrium results in the limit V → 0.
22. A third order analysis in the coupling constants restores the √g prefactor to this expression.
23. H. Schoeller and J. König, Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 3686 (2000); H. Schoeller, Lect. Notes Phys. 544, 137-166 (2000).
24. H. Schoeller and J. König, Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 3686 (2000); H. Schoeller, Lect. Notes Phys. 544, 137-166 (2000).
25. P. W. Anderson, Comments Solid State Phys. 5, 73 (1973).
26. X.-G. Wen, cond-mat/9812431.
27. I. Affleck and A. W. W. Ludwig, Phys. Rev. B 48, 7297 (1993); A. M. Sengupta and A. Georges, Phys. Rev. B 49, 10020 (1994).
28. I. Affleck and A. W. W. Ludwig, Phys. Rev. B 48, 7297 (1993); A. M. Sengupta and A. Georges, Phys. Rev. B 49, 10020 (1994).