Articulo
Articulo
Articulo
The finite quantum grand canonical ensemble and temperature from single-electron statistics
This article has been downloaded from IOPscience. Please scroll down to see the full text article.
(http://iopscience.iop.org/1742-5468/2010/01/P01003)
Download details:
IP Address: 193.205.155.31
The article was downloaded on 23/03/2010 at 09:33
Online at stacks.iop.org/JSTAT/2010/P01003
doi:10.1088/1742-5468/2010/01/P01003
2010
c IOP Publishing Ltd and SISSA 1742-5468/10/P01003+9$30.00
The finite quantum grand canonical ensemble and temperature
Contents
1. Introduction 2
2. The finite quantum grand canonical ensemble of a (1 ↔ 2) fermionic system 3
3. The single-electron temperature in a quantum dot with a small N electron
reservoir 6
4. Conclusion 8
1. Introduction
There is a deep connection between the nature of the elementary objects described by
quantum mechanics and the emerging properties of thermodynamical quantities. Bohr
clarified that the complementarity principle should apply to energy and temperature
measurements. Indeed, the determination of the former is incompatible with knowledge
of the latter when they refer to elementary objects [1]. After the creation of solid state
quantum dots [2], it became possible to explore confined fermionic systems constituted
of just a few electrons [3], down to a single localized electron [4]–[7]. Such systems are
electrically probed by means of accurate charge sensing capable of determining current
fluctuations corresponding to a variation of charge far below the charge unit [8]–[11]. The
experimental determination of the electron temperature in a nanostructure is a difficult
task [12], but it becomes a major issue when the system consists of a (1 ↔ 2) electron
system in particle exchange with a few electron bath. Even if the definition of temperature
T = (δS/δU)−1 in terms of the energy U and the entropy S holds independently of the size
of the ensemble [13], the systems considered here are far from bearing out the conventional
assumptions for deriving thermodynamics from statistical physics. Apparently, it should
not be possible to associate a temperature with such small systems. The reduction of the
size of the system down to one electron in thermal and particle exchange with a finite
electron system (small number of electrons N) implies a twofold change of perspective
for determining the thermodynamical quantities. The first major change is the shift from
space to time ensembles. Statistics can be recovered for a few particle open system only by
considering the average of measurable quantities in the time domain. The second change
consists in the generalization of the thermodynamics by removing the limit of large N,
which implies that the terms at the order 1/N are relevant in the determination of the
physical quantities. The equivalence under the first change of perspective is guaranteed
by the ergodicity, while the second change is granted by the orthodicity. In section 2,
I define the finite quantum grand partition ensemble in the limit of small N. Next, I
determine the probability of occupation of an electronic system capable of containing
either one or two electrons. The state equation is derived and it surprisingly depends
on the heat capacity per area unit cA . In section 3, the determination of the generalized
doi:10.1088/1742-5468/2010/01/P01003 2
The finite quantum grand canonical ensemble and temperature
The grand canonical ensemble consists of a large open ensemble made of identical systems,
which is in thermal equilibrium with a reservoir at a given temperature. The ensemble
under investigation and the thermal reservoir may exchange energy and particles. In this
2
= tr(e−βH1 ) tr(e−βH2 ) (2)
N1 =1
doi:10.1088/1742-5468/2010/01/P01003 3
The finite quantum grand canonical ensemble and temperature
Since tr(ρ) is the canonical partition function times Z(Σ2 , N2 , T )/Z(Σ, N, T ), in the
following such a ratio is calculated by means of the Helmholtz potential Ψ = −β −1 log Z,
which gives
Z(Σ2 , N2 , T )
= eβΨ(Σ1 +Σ2 ,N1 +N2 ,T )−βΨ(Σ2 ,N2 ,T ) . (5)
g π2
U(M, A) = Aμ2F + gA(kB T )2 (8)
2 6
M = gAμF. (9)
The inversion of equation (9) gives the chemical potential
M
μ(M, A) = (10)
gA
so the internal energy U can be equivalently written as
1 M 2 π2
U(M) = + gA(kB T )2 . (11)
2 gA 6
The above relations are valid for M = N2 electrons with A = Σ2 and for M = N1 +N2
with A = Σ1 + Σ2 , while U(N1 ) is treated separately because of the dependence of the
nature of confinement when N1 = 1, 2. The polynomial shape of U(M) = aM,A + bA T 2 ,
where aM,A = 12 (M 2 /gA) and bA = (π 2 /6)gA(kB)2 , as a function of the temperature T
implies that Ψ(M, A) = aM,A − bA T 2 , so
1 M 2 π2
Ψ(M, A) = − gA(kB T )2 . (12)
2 gA 6
doi:10.1088/1742-5468/2010/01/P01003 4
The finite quantum grand canonical ensemble and temperature
It is useful to calculate the heat capacity per area unit at constant surface area:
1 ∂U(M, A) π2
cA = = gkB2 T, (13)
A ∂T A 3
and the pressure:
∂Ψ(M, A) 1 M2 π2
P (M, A) = − = + g(kB T )2 . (14)
∂A T 2 gA2 6
Since the island which traps the electron has a very small spatial extent, the
approximation Σ ∼= Σ2 holds, which simplifies the analysis. It is now possible to evaluate
doi:10.1088/1742-5468/2010/01/P01003 5
The finite quantum grand canonical ensemble and temperature
holds that
ZQG · e−(cA Σ1 /2kB ) = 1 (24)
or, equivalently, if one considers the logarithm of both sides,
cA Σ1
log ZQG = + . (25)
2kB
The generalized temperature of a (1 ↔ 2) system is therefore given by inversion:
p(1) z 1+(1/2N2 ) tr(e−βH1 (1) )
= 2(1+(1/N2 )) . (26)
p(2) z tr(e−βH1 (2) )
In this section the physical parameters involved in the electron occupation probability of
a realistic quantum dot and the consequent experimental determination of the generalized
temperature are discussed. The study of the electron occupation of a quantum dot can
be realized by measuring its charge state via the current in a channel electrically coupled
to the electron charges confined to the dot [8, 16]. In the case of a natural quantum dot
like a donor or a lattice point defect close to the Si/SiO2 interface, the channel is provided
by the two-dimensional gas formed at the interface by applying a gate voltage [9, 11]. In
the case of lithographically defined quantum dots, a current flows in the proximity of the
island which confines the localized charges [14]. Let us consider as simple a system as we
can, like a point defect close to the Si/SiO2 interface. Typically the 2DES is confined in
(50–300) × (50–300) nm2 , while the electron wavefunction is spread along a few nm in
the direction perpendicular to the 2DES [18]. The point defect can only accept one extra
electron. When the defect is paramagnetic (it switches from N1 = 1 to 2 and vice versa),
the first electron fills the ground state of a hydrogen-like shell, at energy E(1) = ET .
Indeed, the high extraction energy of the unpaired electron makes it impossible to achieve
the ionization of the first localized electron, unless a metal gate is used to manually
modify the charge state from N1 = 1 to N1 = 0, which is not the case for the situation
considered here. Because of the spin degeneracy, a second √ electron can be captured at the
same energy level ET , to constitute a singlet state 1/ 2(|↑|↓ − |↓|↑), with two extra
contributions due to the Coulomb charging energy ΔEC and to the lattice relaxation ΔEL .
While the origin of the first contribution is straightforward, the second requires a short
discussion. The presence of the second electron involves in fact a rearrangement of the
lattice [17]. At the low temperature considered here, the 2DES is weakly coupled with
the crystal [19]. Phonons are involved in the emission and capture of one electron from
the defect and the relaxation of the crystal implies a change of energy of SHR ω where
SHR is the Huang–Rhys factor and ω is the average phonon frequency in the configuration
coordinate picture [20]. In the following we consider ΔEL = SHR ω, the energy gain of
the lattice when an electron is captured. It is not possible for a natural quantum dot to
capture a third electron because the energy of the system would exceed the conduction
band edge energy.
doi:10.1088/1742-5468/2010/01/P01003 6
The finite quantum grand canonical ensemble and temperature
doi:10.1088/1742-5468/2010/01/P01003 7
The finite quantum grand canonical ensemble and temperature
The factor 2 takes into account the spin degeneracy of the ground state. The values of
p(1) and p(2) are experimentally obtained as the average occupation times for the states
1 and 2 respectively. Such identification is possible by virtue of the ergodic hypothesis.
The complete experimental determination of the parameters involved in equation (30)
provides the generalized temperature T shared by the electrons in the quantum dot and
the electrons in the 2DES. The generalized temperature of the electron(s) localized in the
dots in thermal equilibrium with the small N2 -electron bath may consequently be defined:
2τ (2) 3
4. Conclusion
The finite quantum grand canonical ensemble (E, ρ) has been defined for a fermionic
system constituted by a cell capable of confining either one or two electrons, and a
thermal bath of finite and small size made from a two-dimensional system of a few
electrons. The state equation is governed by the heat capacity per unit surface cA
rather than the pressure. Averaging over a time ensemble replaces the average over
space ensembles for the determination of the thermodynamical quantities. The ensemble
approach has been applied for a quantum dot constituted by a natural point defect
at the Si/SiO2 interface and it holds for a general (1 ↔ 2) system. The ratio of the
characteristic times monitored via the current two-state fluctuations is given by the ratio
of the occupation probabilities calculated with the approach presented. Therefore, the
generalized temperature of such a small time ensemble can be defined and extracted from
the ratio of the average characteristic times of the two current states. Such a definition
of temperature returns the usual temperature on taking the limit N → ∞ of the electron
bath.
Acknowledgment
The author would like to thank Sergio Servadio (Universita di Pisa) for a careful reading
of the manuscript and useful suggestions and criticisms.
References
[1] Rosenfeld L, Foundations of quantum theory and complementarity, 1961 Nature 190 384
[2] Beenakker C W J, 1991 Phys. Rev. B 44 1646
[3] Sanquer M, Specht M, Ghenim L, Deleonibus S and Guegan G, 2000 Phys. Rev. B 61 7249
[4] Sellier H, Lansbergen G P, Caro J, Rogge S, Collaert N, Ferain I, Jurczak M and Biesemans S, 2006 Phys.
Rev. Lett. 97 206805
doi:10.1088/1742-5468/2010/01/P01003 8
The finite quantum grand canonical ensemble and temperature
doi:10.1088/1742-5468/2010/01/P01003 9