Fock-Darwin spectrum of a single InAs/GaAs quantum dot

Physica Status Solidi (C) Current Topics in Solid State Physics

Volumn 3, Issue 11, 2006, Pages 3748-3751

  Babinski, A ^a,b   Potemski, M ^b   Raymond, S ^c   Lapointe, J ^c   Wasilewski, Z R ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WARSAW   (Poland)

^b GRENOBLE HIGH MAGNETIC FIELD LABORATORY   (France)

^c NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL CANADA   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ELECTRON INTERACTIONS; EMISSION LINES; ENERGY DIAGRAMS; FOCK-DARWIN SPECTRUM; INAS/GAAS; INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCES; OPTICAL EMISSIONS; P-SHELL; QUANTUM DOT; QUANTUM DOTS; ZERO-FIELD SPLITTING;

ELECTRIC CONDUCTIVITY; ELECTRON-ELECTRON INTERACTIONS; EMISSION SPECTROSCOPY; MAGNETIC FIELD EFFECTS; MAGNETIC FIELD MEASUREMENT; MAGNETIC FIELDS; MAGNETIC MATERIALS; OPTICAL WAVEGUIDES; QUANTUM ELECTRONICS; SEMICONDUCTOR MATERIALS; SHELLS (STRUCTURES);

SEMICONDUCTOR QUANTUM DOTS;

EID: 49549113847     PISSN: 18626351     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/pssc.200671548     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (16)

1. V. Fock, Z. Phys. 47, 446 (1928);
2. C. G. Darwin, Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 27, 86 (1930).
3. S. Raymond et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 187402 (2004).
4. R. Rinaldi et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 342 (1996);
5. P. P. Paskov et al., Phys. Rev. B 62, 7344 (2000).
6. G. W Bryant and G. S. Solomon (Eds.), Optics of Quantum Dots and Wires (Artech House Boston, London, 2005).
7. K. Kheng, L. Besombes, and H. Mariette, Physica E 26, 265 (2005),
8. P. Hawrylak, G. A. Narvaez, M. Bayer, and A. Forchel, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 389 (2000).
9. M. Bayer, O. Stern, P. Hawrylak, S. Fafard, and A. Forchel, Nature (London) 405, 923 (2000).
10. Z. R. Wasilewski, S. Fafard, and J. P. McCaffrey, J. Cryst. Growth 201/202, 1131 (1999).
11. A. Babinski et al., Physica E 26, 190 (2005).
12. It has been found that the spectrum from same dot excited with red light (λ = 730 nm) results in a different spectrum consisting of a few well-resolved emission lines over 5 meV energy range. The difference in our opinion results from different charging effect of both illumination modes.
13. M. Bayer, A. Kuther, F. Schäfer, J. P. Reithmaier, and A. Forchel, Phys. Rev. B 60, 8481 (1999).
14. W. Sheng, submitted.
15. P. Hawrylak, Phys. Rev. B 60, 5597 (1999).
16. G. Bester and A. Zunger, Phys. Rev. B 71, 045318 (2005).