Quick Navigation
Topics
Trapped Ion Quantum Computing
Quantum Simulation
Controllable electron spin dephasing due to phonon state distinguishability in a coupled quantum dot system
arXiv
Authors: Michał Gawełczyk, Mateusz Krzykowski, Krzysztof Gawarecki, Paweł Machnikowski
Year
2017
Paper ID
44524
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
148
Citations
N/A
Abstract
We predict a spin pure dephasing channel in electron relaxation between states with unequal Zeeman splittings, exemplified by a spin-preserving electron tunneling between quantum dots in a magnetic field. The dephasing is caused by a mismatch in electron g-factors in the dots leading to distinguishability of phonons emitted during tunneling with opposite spins. Combining multiband boldsymbol{k}{cdot}boldsymbol{p} modeling and dynamical simulations via a Master equation we show that this fundamental effect of spin measurement effected by the phonon bath may be widely controlled by the size and composition of the dots or on demand, via tuning of external fields. By comparing the numerically simulated degree of dephasing with the predictions of general theory based on distinguishability of environment states, we show that the proposed mechanism is the dominant phonon-related spin dephasing channel and may limit spin coherence time in tunnel-coupled structures at cryogenic temperatures.
Paper Tools
Become a member to use research tools
Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.
Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share
Cite This Paper
Copy URL
Compare
Copy DOI Add to Reading List
Category Correction Request
Category Correction Request
Help us improve classification quality by proposing a better category. Every request is reviewed by an admin.
Sign in to submit a category correction request for this paper.
Log In to SubmitReferences & Citation Signals
Community Reactions
Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.
Score:
0
Likes: 0
Dislikes: 0
Sign in to react to this paper.
Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)
Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)
No written reviews yet.