2003
DOI: 10.1103/physrevb.67.241309
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Role of finite layer thickness in spin polarization of GaAs two-dimensional electrons in strong parallel magnetic fields

Abstract: We report measurements and calculations of the spin-polarization, induced by a parallel magnetic field, of interacting, dilute, two-dimensional electron systems confined to GaAs/AlGaAs heterostructures. The results reveal the crucial role the non-zero electron layer thickness plays: it causes a deformation of the energy surface in the presence of a parallel field, leading to enhanced values for the effective mass and g-factor and a non-linear spin-polarization with field.PACS numbers: 71.70.Ej, 73.43.Qt Th… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

6
77
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

3
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 72 publications
(83 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
6
77
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Indeed, this increase is yet significantly larger than the increase of m * one would expect for an electron system with nominally similar values of m * and g * due to the coupling of B to the holes' orbital motion. 18 In the latter case we would expect a roughly 50% enhancement of m * (compared to its B = 0 value). On the other hand, according to recent measurements 24-27 whose results were supported by subsequent calculations, 28,29 m * is suppressed in a 2D electron system which is fully spin polarized.…”
Section: Discussion Of Effective Mass Datamentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Indeed, this increase is yet significantly larger than the increase of m * one would expect for an electron system with nominally similar values of m * and g * due to the coupling of B to the holes' orbital motion. 18 In the latter case we would expect a roughly 50% enhancement of m * (compared to its B = 0 value). On the other hand, according to recent measurements 24-27 whose results were supported by subsequent calculations, 28,29 m * is suppressed in a 2D electron system which is fully spin polarized.…”
Section: Discussion Of Effective Mass Datamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The measured m * is close to the value measured when B = 0 and does not appear to be affected by the large B which should in principle couple to the holes' orbital motion and lead to an increase in m * . 18 Finally, from the value of B at which the minority spin subband is depopulated, we deduce a value for the 2D holes' spin susceptibility which is about 50% enhanced with respect to the band value.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…10). The narrow QW 2DES should be closest to an "ideal" 2D system (except for disorder of course): (i) only one valley is occupied, (ii) the in-plane Fermi contour is circular and therefore isotropic, (iii) it is very narrow (QW width ≅ 4.5 nm) so that finite layer thickness corrections 44 should be negligible, and (iv) the dilute limit can be reached relatively easily because the electron effective mass for this system (m t * = 0.20) is reasonably large compared to, e.g., m* = 0.067 for GaAs 2D electrons, so that large values of r s , the average inter-electron distance measured in units of the effective Bohr radius, can be attained. We found that at a given r s this 2DES exhibits the largest enhancement of χ s among all the 2DESs and, even more remarkably, the enhancement is in excellent agreement with the results of quantum Monte Carlo calculations 45 without any adjustable parameters (Fig.…”
Section: Spin Susceptibility Of Alas 2d Electronsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This simply reflects the fact that, thanks to the finite thickness of the electron layer, the energies of the X and Y valleys slightly shift with respect to each other as B increases. The shift comes about because the parallel field couples to the orbital motion of the electrons [33,34] and changes the confinement energies of the X and Y valleys. Since X and Y valleys have anisotropic Fermi contours which are orthogonal to each other, the parallel field, which is applied along the major axis of one valley (X) and perpendicular to the other (Y ), couples differently to these valleys, causing a slight shift in their relative energies.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%