2020
DOI: 10.1038/s41524-020-00448-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

First-principles calculations of hyperfine interaction, binding energy, and quadrupole coupling for shallow donors in silicon

Abstract: Spin qubits based on shallow donors in silicon are a promising quantum information technology with enormous potential scalability due to the existence of robust silicon-processing infrastructure. However, the most accurate theories of donor electronic structure lack predictive power because of their reliance on empirical fitting parameters, while predictive ab initio methods have so far been lacking in accuracy due to size of the donor wavefunction compared to typical simulation cells. We show that density fun… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

2
20
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1
1
1

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(22 citation statements)
references
References 57 publications
2
20
0
Order By: Relevance
“…As is shown in Figure 3, Y and Sc remain shallow donors in all three LHPs, consistent with their atomic orbitals sitting above those of the Pb 6p states. An estimated ionization energy of 0.1 eV is used for these donors in each compound (determining shallow-donor ionization energies to higher accuracy are very challenging 53 and outside the scope of this work). Since CsPbCl 3 has among the highest-lying CBM in LHPs (and FAPbI 3 among the lowest), this behavior is likely to be consistent in all LHPs.…”
Section: ■ Results and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As is shown in Figure 3, Y and Sc remain shallow donors in all three LHPs, consistent with their atomic orbitals sitting above those of the Pb 6p states. An estimated ionization energy of 0.1 eV is used for these donors in each compound (determining shallow-donor ionization energies to higher accuracy are very challenging 53 and outside the scope of this work). Since CsPbCl 3 has among the highest-lying CBM in LHPs (and FAPbI 3 among the lowest), this behavior is likely to be consistent in all LHPs.…”
Section: ■ Results and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As discussed in Section S3, quasiparticle band gaps and thus exciton binding energies from GW (+BSE) remain overestimated for these vacancy-ordered compounds, consistent with recent studies that attribute this behavior to underscreening errors within the random phase approximation (RPA) employed within GW . , As such, to avoid this issue and obtain a reasonable estimate of the exciton binding energies in these systems, we also employed a constrained-supercell approach in which an exciton state is generated by controlling spin initialization and band occupation. Here we calculate the exciton binding energy using hybrid DFT for multiple supercell sizes of ≤972 atoms and then extrapolate to the dilute limit using the relevant scaling relationship to avoid supercell-size effects. , With this approach, we obtain localized Frenkel exciton states as expected for each Cs 2 TiX 6 (Figure S13, TOC), with extrapolated binding energies of 0.44, 0.52, and 0.72 eV for X = I, Br, and Cl, respectively (Figure S14), which when subtracted from the HSE06+SOC direct-allowed transition energies in Table brings the hybrid DFT optical transition energy into agreement with the experimental values in each case. For Cs 2 SnX 6 , the electron and hole remain delocalized across the supercell with this approach [under a maximum cell length of 23.1 Å (Figure S13)], yielding extrapolated binding energies close to zero (Figure S15).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Here we calculate the exciton binding energy using hybrid DFT for multiple supercell sizes up to 972 atoms, then extrapolate to the dilute limit using the relevant scaling relationship to avoid supercell-size effects. 65,66 With this approach, we obtain localised Frenkel exciton states as expected for each Cs 2 TiX 6 (Fig. S13, TOC), with extrapolated binding energies of 0.44 eV, 0.52 eV and 0.72 eV for X = I, Br, Cl (Fig.…”
Section: Electron (Ti ) P Hole (X )mentioning
confidence: 88%