Driving the single-electron device with a magnetic field (invited)

Journal of Applied Physics

Volumn 93, Issue 10 3, 2003, Pages 8259-8264

  Shimada, Hiroshi ^a   Ono, Keiji ^a   Ootuka, Youiti ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TOKYO   (Japan)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TSUKUBA   (Japan)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ELECTRIC CONDUCTANCE; ELECTRODES; FERROMAGNETIC MATERIALS; MAGNETIC COUPLINGS; MAGNETIC FIELD EFFECTS; MAGNETOELECTRIC EFFECTS; OSCILLATIONS;

SINGLE-ELECTRON DEVICES;

ELECTRON DEVICES;

EID: 0038316632     PISSN: 00218979     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1063/1.1557828     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (17)

1. Single Charge Tunneling, edited by H. Grabert and M. H. Devoret (Plenum, New York, 1992).
2. K. Ono, H. Shimada, and Y. Ootuka, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 66, 1261 (1997).
3. H. Shimada, K. Ono, and Y. Ootuka, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 67, 1359 (1998).
4. R. M. White, Quantum Theory of Magnetism (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1970).
5. In reality repopulation of electrons between the two subbands causes a change in the effective potential that an electron feels in the metal and this modifies the Fermi-energy shift. This modification corresponds to an exchange-correlation correction in the one-electron approximation. This effect and also a contribution by the orbital magnetic moment have been calculated in Ref. 3 based on the LSDA and an expression of an effective spin polarization has been given. Including these corrections the restriction |P| ≤ 1 may not be always the case depending on the material. In the case of 3d transition metals, however, these corrections are rather small. Thus we use the bare spin polarization P in this paper for simplicity. An attempt to determine the effective spin polarization experimentally is found in Ref. 6.
6. K. Ono, H. Shimada, and Y. Ootuka, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 67, 2852 (1998).
7. Y. Ootuka, K. Ono, R. Matsuda, and H. Shimada, Microelectron. Eng. 47, 409 (1999).
8. C. W. J. Beenakker, Phys. Rev. B 44, 1646 (1991).
9. H. Shimada (unpublished).
10. M. Julliere, Phys. Lett. 54A, 225 (1975); S. Maekawa and D. Gäfvert, IEEE Trans. Magn. 18, 707 (1982).
11. M. Julliere, Phys. Lett. 54A, 225 (1975); S. Maekawa and D. Gäfvert, IEEE Trans. Magn. 18, 707 (1982).
12. Co=2 kOe, which is inconsistent with the text.
13. D. Esteve, Ref. 1, p. 109.
14. I. M. Ruzin, V. Chandrasekhar, E. J. Levin, and L. I. Glazman, Phys. Rev. B 45, 13469 (1992).
15. W. Wernsdorfer, B. Doudin, D. Mailly, K. Hasselbach, A. Benoit, J. Meier, J.-Ph. Ansermet, and B. Barbara, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 1873 (1996).
16. Considering possible limiting processes on the operation frequency, the expected pumped current is at the most ≅ 1 pA. So there will be no need to think about the effect of spin accumulation in the islands because the spin relaxation time is expected to be much smaller that the transfer time of a single electron [see F. J. Jedema et al., Nature (London) 410, 345 (2001); 416, 713 (2002), for the spin relaxation time].
17. Considering possible limiting processes on the operation frequency, the expected pumped current is at the most ≅ 1 pA. So there will be no need to think about the effect of spin accumulation in the islands because the spin relaxation time is expected to be much smaller that the transfer time of a single electron [see F. J. Jedema et al., Nature (London) 410, 345 (2001); 416, 713 (2002), for the spin relaxation time].