Date

2004-12-10

Description

Comment: 10 pages

We present a semiclassical theory for electron drag between two parallel

two-dimensional electron systems in a strong magnetic field, which provides a

transparent picture of the most salient qualitative features of anomalous drag

phenomena observed in recent experiments, especially the striking sign reversal

of drag at mismatched densities. The sign of the drag is determined by the

curvature of the effective dispersion relation obeyed by the drift motion of

the electrons in a smooth disorder potential. Localization plays a role in

explaining activated low temperature behavior, but is not crucial for anomalous

drag per se.

two-dimensional electron systems in a strong magnetic field, which provides a

transparent picture of the most salient qualitative features of anomalous drag

phenomena observed in recent experiments, especially the striking sign reversal

of drag at mismatched densities. The sign of the drag is determined by the

curvature of the effective dispersion relation obeyed by the drift motion of

the electrons in a smooth disorder potential. Localization plays a role in

explaining activated low temperature behavior, but is not crucial for anomalous

drag per se.

Type

Identifier

doi:10.1134/1.1996757

JETP LETTERS 81 (10): 498-502 2005

Database

Link to record

Show preview

Hide preview

ar
X

iv :c

on d-

m at

/0 41

22 71

v1 [

co nd

-m at.

me s-h

all ]

10 D

ec 20

04

Semiclassical theory of electron drag in strong magnetic fields

Sergej Brener and Walter Metzner

Max-Planck-Institut fu¨r Festko¨rperforschung, D-70569 Stuttgart, Germany

(Dated: February 18, 2011)

We present a semiclassical theory for electron drag between two parallel

two-dimensional electron systems in a strong magnetic field, which provides a

transparent picture of the most salient qualitative features of anomalous drag

phenomena observed in recent experiments, especially the striking sign reversal of

drag at mismatched densities. The sign of the drag is determined by the curvature

of the effective dispersion relation obeyed by the drift motion of the electrons in

a smooth disorder potential. Localization plays a role in explaining activated low

temperature behavior, but is not crucial for anomalous drag per se.

PACS: 73.21.-b, 73.63.-b, 73.43.-f

Electron drag in double-layer two-dimensional electron systems has been established as

a valuable probe of the electronic state within each layer, and also of interlayer interactions

[1]. In a drag experiment a current is driven through one of the layers, which, via interlayer

scattering, produces a drag voltage in the other layer. Usually the drag is positive in

the sense that the drag and drive currents have the same direction, which leads to a

compensating voltage opposite to the drive current. In the absence of a magnetic field,

drag phenomena in 2D electron systems are well understood [2]. In that case the drag

signal can be expressed in terms of the density response functions of each single layer, as

long as the interlayer coupling is weak [3].

Drag experiments have also been performed in the presence of strong magnetic fields,

where the formation of Landau levels plays a crucial role. Pronounced minima in the

drag signal were observed at odd integer filling factors for magnetic fields far below the

regime where spin splitting of Landau levels is seen in the intralayer resistivity [4, 5].

Completely unexpected was the discovery of a negative drag signal in case of a suitably

chosen density mismatch between the two layers [6, 7]. Previous theoretical descriptions

[2, 8] would predict positive drag at any filling factor. In more recent work a mechanism

2 for a sign change of drag in strong magnetic fields was found [9], yielding however negative

drag for equal densities in the two layers, unlike the experimental situation.

New hints and constraints for a theory result from a recent detailed experimental

analysis of the temperature dependence of the drag resistivity by Muraki et al. [10]. At

high temperatures, kBT ≫ h¯ωc, where ωc is the cyclotron frequency, the drag resistivity

ρD follows the conventional T 2 behavior. It decreases with decreasing T down to scales

well below h¯ωc, but then, in the data shown for ν = 2n+ 3 2 with n = 2, 3, 4, 5, rises again to

form a pronounced peak at temperatures one order of magnitude below h¯ωc. At still lower

T the drag resistivity decreases rapidly, consistent with exponentially activated behavior,

ρD ∝ e −∆/(kBT ). The ν-dependence of the activation energy ∆ oscillates with minima

near half-integer filling factors. The longitudinal intralayer resistivity ρxx also exhibits

activated behavior at the lowest temperature, with an activation energy matching with

∆ for those ν where both gaps could be extracted from the data. For a density mismatch

δν = 1 between the two layers a low temperature peak with the same shape as for equal

densities, but with opposite (that is negative) sign was observed.

Muraki et al. [10] interpreted their data in terms of particle-hole asymmetry and dis-

order induced localization. Landau levels are broadened by disorder, leading thus to a

band of energies for each level. Anomalous drag is observed for parameters where the

Landau level broadening is much smaller than h¯ωc. The longitudinal resistivity ρxx of

each layer as well as the drag resistivity ρD is due to electrons in extended states of the

highest occupied Landau level. If the states with energies near the Fermi level ǫF are

localized, charge carriers in extended states can be created only by thermal activation

or scattering across the energy gap between ǫF and the nearest extended state energy

level. This explains the observation of activated behavior of ρxx and ρD at low T . Muraki

et al. [10] also realized that odd integer filling factors lead to a particle-hole symmetric

occupation of the partially filled Landau level. Since particle-hole asymmetry is known to

be crucial for drag in the absence of a magnetic field [11], it is indeed natural to relate the

minima in ρD observed at odd integer ν to this symmetry. Judging from the experiments

a necessary requirement for negative drag seems to be that the partially occupied Landau

level in one layer be more, the other less than half-filled. This was noticed already by

Feng et al. [6] and led them to speculate that electrons in a more than half-filled Landau

level should acquire a hole-like dispersion relation due to disorder.

3 A comprehensive transport theory for the intralayer and drag resistivity in a strong

magnetic field, which captures localization and extended states, is not available. In this

work we present a simple semiclassical picture which explains why Landau quantized

electrons moving in a smooth disorder potential behave effectively like band electrons

with an electron-like dispersion in the lower and a hole-like dispersion in the upper half of

a disorder broadened Landau level, and how this leads to the observed anomalous drag.

Let us first consider the relevant length and energy scales in the double-layer system.

The distance between the layers varies from 30 to 120 nm. The disorder is due to remote

donors, which leads to a smooth disorder potential with a correlation length ξ of order

50 − 100 nm. The Landau level broadening, which is related to the amplitude of the

disorder potential, has been estimated from low-field Shubnikov-de-Haas oscillations to

lie in the range 0.5-2 K [6, 12]. The magnetic fields at which drag minima at odd integer

filling and/or negative drag at mismatched densities are observed vary over a relatively

wide range from 0.1T to 1T for the cleanest samples, and up to 5T for samples with a

slightly reduced mobility. This corresponds to magnetic lengths lB between 15 and 80 nm.

Hence, ξ and lB are generally of the same order of magnitude, which makes a quantitative

theoretical analysis rather difficult. Since the anomalous drag phenomena are observed

over a wide range of fields, one may hope that qualitative insight can be gained also by

analysing limiting cases. For ξ ≪ lB a treatment of disorder within the self-consistent

Born approximation is possible [13]. This route was taken most recently by Gornyi et al.

[14], who obtained negative contributions to the drag resistivity at mismatched densities in

agreement with experiment. Localization is not captured by the Born approximation, and

consequently the resistivities obey power-laws rather than activated behavior for T → 0.

For stronger magnetic fields, on the other hand, localization will become important, and

a semiclassical approximation is a better starting point, which is the route we take here.

Applying a criterion derived by Fogler et al. [15] we estimate that (classical) localization

may set in already at 0.1T.

We now discuss the semiclassical picture of electron states and drag on a qualitative

level, ignoring spin splitting for simplicity. If the disorder potential varies smoothly,

electron states lie essentially on contours of equal energy. These contours form closed

loops, corresponding to localized states, except at a single energy ǫ0 in the center of each

Landau level, for which there is a percolating contour through the whole system [16].

4 If the Landau level broadening induced by the disorder potential and also kBT is much

smaller than h¯ωc, as is the case in the anomalous drag regime, all Landau levels except

one are either fully occupied in the bulk of the whole sample or completely empty. At

zero temperature and for ǫF < ǫ0 the sample then consists of islands where the highest

(partially) occupied Landau level is locally full, while it is locally empty in the rest of the

sample; for ǫF > ǫ0 the empty regions form islands. In reality, the percolating contour at

the center of the Landau level is broadened to a percolation region for two reasons. First,

electrons near the percolating contour can hop across saddlepoints from one closed loop to

another, by using for a moment some of their cyclotron energy [15]. Second, electrons near

the center of the Landau level can screen the disorder potential, such that the percolating

equipotential line at ǫ0 broadens to form equipotential terraces [17]. Hence, there is a

region around the percolating path, where states are extended.

The percolating region forms a two-dimensional random network consisting of links and

crossing points [18]. For simplicity we assume that the links are straight lines. The region

near the link (except near the end points) can be parametrized by a cartesian coordinate

system with a variable x following the equipotential lines parallel to the link and y for the

transverse direction. The disorder potential varies essentially only in transverse direction,

and can thus be represented by a function U(y). In the Landau gauge A = (−By, 0) the

Hamiltonian for electrons on the link is then translation invariant in x-direction and the

Landau states (h¯ = 1 from now on)

ψnk(x, y) = Cn e −(y−l2

B k)2/(2l2

B )Hn[(y − l

2 Bk)/lB] e

ikx (1)

are accurate solutions of the stationary Schro¨dinger equation. Here Hn is the n-th Hermite

polynomial and Cn a normalization constant. The corresponding energy is simply

ǫnk = ( n + 1

2

) ωc + U(l

2 Bk) . (2)

In the following we drop the Landau level index n, because only the highest occupied level

is relevant. The quantum number k is the momentum associated with the translation

invariance in x-direction. It is proportional to a transverse shift y0 = l 2 Bk of the wave

function. The potential U lifts the degeneracy of the Landau levels and makes energies

depend on the momentum along the link. The group velocity

vk = dǫk dk

= l2B U ′(y0) (3)

5 corresponds to the classical drift velocity of an electron in crossed electric and magnetic

fields. In our simplified straight link approximation U ′(y0) does not depend on x. In

general it will depend slowly on the longitudinal coordinate, but near percolating paths

away from crossing points it has a fixed sign, and hence the group velocity a fixed direction,

that is the motion on the links is chiral.

The drag between two parallel layers is dominated by electrons in the percolating

region, corresponding to states near the center of the Landau level, since electrons in

deeper localized states are not easily dragged along. In the network picture, macroscopic

drag arises as a sum of contributions from interlayer scattering processes between electrons

in different links. If no current is imposed in the drive layer, both layers are in thermal

equilibrium and the currents on the various links cancel each other on average. Now

assume that a small finite current is switched on in the drive layer such that the electrons

move predominantly in the direction of the positive x-axis (the electric current moving in

the opposite direction). This means that the current on links oriented in the positive x-

direction is typically larger than the current on links oriented in the negative x-direction.

Interlayer scattering processes lead to momentum transfers between electrons in the drive

and drag layer. The preferred direction of momentum transfers is such that the scattering

processes tend to reduce the current in the drive layer, that is the interlayer interaction

leads to friction. Now the crucial point is that electrons moving in the disorder potential

are not necessarily accelerated by gaining momentum in the direction of their motion, or

slowed down by loosing momentum (as for free electrons). The fastest electrons are those

near the center of the Landau level: they have the highest group velocity on the links of the

percolation network and they get most easily across the saddlepoints. Electrons in states

below the Landau level center are thus accelerated by gaining some extra momentum

in the direction of their motion, but electrons with an energy above ǫ0 are pushed to

still higher energy by adding momentum and are thus slowed down. To understand how

negative drag arises, consider the situation with the highest occupied Landau level of the

drive layer less than, and the one in the drag layer more than half filled. In that case the

electrons in the drag layer receive momentum transfers with a predominantly positive x-

component. As a consequence, electrons near the Fermi level of the drag layer are mostly

slowed down if they move on links toward positive x-direction, and accelerated if they

move on links in the negative x-direction, which is the opposite of what free electrons

6 would do. If no net current is allowed to flow in the drag layer, an electric field is built up

in negative x-direction which compensates the effective force generated by the scattering

processes with the drive layer electrons. The drag signal is thus negative.

To substantiate the above qualitative picture, let us analyze the drag between two links

using semiclassical transport theory. We first discuss parallel links in some detail, and

then briefly the more general case of a finite angle between the links. For a fixed Landau

level index, the electronic states in each link are fully labelled by their momentum k. The

(non-equilibrium) occupation of states in the links is described by a distribution function

fα(k), where α = 1, 2 labels the two layers. We consider the experimental standard setup

where a small current flows through the ”drive-layer” (α = 2), generating a compensating

drag voltage in the ”drag-layer” (α = 1). No net current is allowed to flow in the drag-

layer. Under these conditions, the linear response of the drag layer to the drive current

is determined by the linearized Boltzmann equation

k˙1 · ∂f 01 ∂k1

=

[ ∂f1 ∂t

] coll

(4)

with k˙1 = −eE1, where E1 is the electric field leading to the drag voltage. The interlayer

collision term is given by

[ ∂f1 ∂t

]12 coll

= −

∫ dk2 2π

∫ dk′1 2π

W 12k1,k2;k′1,k′2 [ψ1(k1) + ψ2(k2)− ψ1(k ′

1)− ψ2(k ′

2)]

f 01 (k1)f 0 2 (k2)[1− f

0 1 (k

′

1)][1− f 0 2 (k

′

2)] δ(ǫk1 + ǫk2 − ǫk′1 − ǫk′2) , (5)

where W 12k1,k2;k′1,k′2 is the rate for a single interlayer scattering event k1 → k

′

1, k2 → k ′

2 and

the deviation (from equilibrium) functions ψα are defined as usually by f − f 0 = f 0(1−

f 0)ψ. There is also an intralayer scattering term with a similar structure. The distribution

function in the drive layer is obtained from the single layer Boltzmann equation as ψ2(k) =

− pi

evF2T j2 vk , where j2 is the drive current and vF2 the equilibrium Fermi velocity. For

weak interlayer coupling, the deviation function ψ1 can be neglected in the interlayer

collision term, because it would yield a contribution of order (W 12)2. To determine the

relation between the drive current j2 and the drag field E1, we multiply the Boltzmann

equation by vk1 and integrate over k1. The left hand side yields −e ∫

dk1 2pi

f 01 ′

(ǫk1) v 2 k1 E1

which tends to e 2pi vF1E1 at low temperatures, where vF1 is the velocity at the Fermi level

of the drive layer. Using the antisymmetry of the integrand of Eq. (5) under exchange of

7 k1 and k ′

1, the right hand side can be written as

− πj2

evF2T

∫ dk1 2π

∫ dk2 2π

∫ dq

2π W 12k1,k2;k1+q,k2−q (vk2 − vk2−q) (vk1 − vk1+q)

× [f 01 (ǫk1)− f

0 1 (ǫk1+q)] [f

0 2 (ǫk2)− f

0 2 (ǫk2−q)]

4 sinh2[(ǫk1+q − ǫk1)/2T ] δ(ǫk1 + ǫk2 − ǫk1+q − ǫk2−q) . (6)

The integrated intralayer scattering contributions cancel due to the condition of vanish-

ing drag current. Note that the above integral shares several features with the general

expression for the drag response function, as obtained from the Kubo formula [11, 19].

In particular it is symmetric in the layer indices, a property that depends crucially on

the correct form of ψ2(k). For a simplified discussion of the most important points we

assume that the interlayer scattering rate W 12 depends only on momentum transfers q

and energy transfers ω = ǫk1+q − ǫk1 , and that momentum transfers are so small that one

can approximate vk+q−vk by q dvk dk . The drag resistivity ρD = −E1/j2 can then be written

as

ρD = 1

2πe2 1

vF1vF2

1

m1m2

∫ ∞

0

dq q2 ∫

∞

−∞

dω/T

sinh2(ω/2T ) W 12(q, ω) Imχ1(q, ω) Imχ2(q, ω) ,

(7)

where χα(q, ω) is the dynamical density correlation function in layer α, and the effective

masses are given by the curvature of the dispersion relations at the Fermi level

1

mα =

dvkα dk

∣∣∣∣ kFα

. (8)

The integral in Eq. (7) is always positive. The sign of ρD is thus given by the sign of the

effective masses, that is by the curvature of the dispersion at the Fermi level. Negative

drag is obtained when the dispersion in one layer is electron-like, and hole-like in the

other. The drag vanishes if the Fermi level in one of the layers is at an inflection point

of the dispersion. For a quadratic dispersion ǫk = k2

2m one has vF = kF/m and Eq.

(7) reduces to a one-dimensional version of the well-known semiclassical result for drag

between free electrons in two dimensions [2]. Returning to Eq. (6), it is not hard to

generalize the above results on the sign of ρD allowing for larger momentum transfers q

and general momentum dependences of W 12. Note that in our case of chiral electrons no

backscattering is possible, unlike the situation in quantum wires [20].

For parallel links, energy and momentum conservation restrict the allowed scattering

processes very strongly. At low temperatures, this leads to an exponential suppression

8 of the drag between parallel links. This has nothing to do with the exponential suppres-

sion of drag observed in the experiments, since the links are generically not parallel. For

non-parallel links the sum of momenta on the two links is no longer conserved in the scat-

tering process. Hence scattering processes are suppressed much less at low temperatures.

Computing the drag between non-parallel links from the linearized Boltzmann equation

(a straightforward generalization of the above steps for parallel links) yields a quadratic

temperature dependence at low T . The momentum transfers in the drag and drive links

are however still correlated for non-parallel links, especially when the angle between the

links is not very large, and the relative sign of the curvature of the dispersion in drive

and drag layer, respectively, determines the sign of the drag. The average curvature van-

ishes for states in the center of the Landau level, while it is positive for energies below

and negative for energies above ǫ0. We thus understand the observation of negative drag

when the Landau level in one layer is less than half-filled, and more than half-filled in the

other.

Spin can be easily included in the above picture. Since the interlayer interaction is

spin independent, one simply has to sum over the two spin species (up and down) in

both drive and drag layer, taking the (exchange enhanced) Zeeman spin splitting of the

Landau levels into account. If the Fermi level of one layer lies between the centers of the

highest occupied Landau levels for up and down spins, respectively, positive and negative

contributions to the drag partially cancel each other. The cancellation is complete due to

particle-hole symmetry in the case of odd integer filling, as observed in experiment.

Within our semiclassical picture anomalous drag, especially negative drag, is sup-

pressed at temperatures above the Landau level width, because then electron- and hole-

like states within the highest occupied level are almost equally populated. This agrees

with the results from the Born approximation [14], and also with experiments. For the low

temperature asymptotics of the drag, the semiclassical theory yields two different types

of behavior, depending on the filling. If the Fermi level does not hit any extended states

(for either spin species), the drag should vanish exponentially for T → 0, since thermal

activation or scattering of electrons into extended states is then suppressed by an energy

gap. By contrast, for a Fermi level within the extended states band (for at least one spin

species) the gap vanishes and the drag obeys generally quadratic low temperature behav-

ior, as obtained for the drag between non-parallel links. Within the Born approximation

9 no localization occurs and the drag resistance always vanishes quadratically in the low

temperature limit [14]. In high mobility samples localization is negligible at low magnetic

fields, while an increasing amount of states gets localized at higher fields [15].

In summary, we have presented a semiclassical theory for electron drag between two

parallel two-dimensional electron systems in a strong magnetic field, which provides a

transparent picture of the most salient qualitative features of anomalous drag phenomena

observed in recent experiments [6, 7, 10]. Localization plays a role in explaining activated

low temperature behavior, but is not crucial for anomalous (especially negative) drag per

se. A quantitative theory of drag which covers the whole range from low magnetic fields,

where the Born approximation is valid [13, 14]. to high fields, where localization becomes

important, remains an important challenge for work to be done in the future.

Acknowledgements: We gratefully acknowledge several important discussions with

Leonid Glazman, in particular on transport and drag in one-dimensional channels. He

led us to the Boltzmann equation analysis of drag between links, which substantiated our

semiclassical picture considerably. Special thanks go also to Rolf Gerhardts for his help in

the early stages of this work. We are also grateful for valuable discussions with E. Brener,

W. Dietsche, I. Gornyi, K. von Klitzing, K. Muraki, and especially Sjoerd Lok.

[1] T.J. Gramila et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 66, 1216 (1991).

[2] For a review, see A.G. Rojo, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 11, R31 (1999).

[3] A.-P. Jauho and H. Smith, Phys. Rev. B 47, 4420 (1993); L. Zheng and A.H. MacDonald,

Phys. Rev. B 48, 8203 (1993).

[4] N.P.R. Hill et al., J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 8, L557 (1996).

[5] H. Rubel et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 1763 (1997).

[6] X.G. Feng et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 3219 (1998).

[7] J.G.S. Lok et al., Phys. Rev. B 63, 041305 (2001).

[8] M.C. Bønsager et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 1366 (1996); Phys. Rev. B 56, 10314 (1997).

[9] F. von Oppen et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 106803 (2001).

10

[10] K. Muraki et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 246801 (2004).

[11] A. Kamenev and Y. Oreg, Phys. Rev. B 52, 7516 (1995).

[12] J.G.S. Lok et al., Physica E 12, 119 (2002).

[13] M.E. Raikh and T.V. Shahbazyan, Phys. Rev. B 47, 1522 (1993).

[14] I.V. Gornyi et al., cond-mat/0406176.

[15] M.M. Fogler et al., Phys. Rev. 56, 6823 (1997).

[16] M. Tsukuda, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 41, 1466 (1976); S.V. Iordanskii, Solid State Commun. 43,

1 (1982); R.F. Kararinov and S. Luryi, Phys. Rev. B 25, 7626; S.A. Trugman, ibid. 27 7539

(1983); B. Shapiro, ibid. 33, 8447 (1986).

[17] D.B. Chklovskii et al., Phys. Rev. B 46, 4026 (1992); N.R. Cooper and J.T. Chalker, Phys.

Rev. B 48, 4530 (1993).

[18] J.T. Chalker and P.D. Coddington, J. Phys. C 21, 2665 (1988).

[19] K. Flensberg et al., Phys. Rev. B 52, 14761 (1995).

[20] The role of backscattering versus small momentum transfer scattering in the drag between

quantum wires is analyzed in M. Pustilnik et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 126805 (2003).

iv :c

on d-

m at

/0 41

22 71

v1 [

co nd

-m at.

me s-h

all ]

10 D

ec 20

04

Semiclassical theory of electron drag in strong magnetic fields

Sergej Brener and Walter Metzner

Max-Planck-Institut fu¨r Festko¨rperforschung, D-70569 Stuttgart, Germany

(Dated: February 18, 2011)

We present a semiclassical theory for electron drag between two parallel

two-dimensional electron systems in a strong magnetic field, which provides a

transparent picture of the most salient qualitative features of anomalous drag

phenomena observed in recent experiments, especially the striking sign reversal of

drag at mismatched densities. The sign of the drag is determined by the curvature

of the effective dispersion relation obeyed by the drift motion of the electrons in

a smooth disorder potential. Localization plays a role in explaining activated low

temperature behavior, but is not crucial for anomalous drag per se.

PACS: 73.21.-b, 73.63.-b, 73.43.-f

Electron drag in double-layer two-dimensional electron systems has been established as

a valuable probe of the electronic state within each layer, and also of interlayer interactions

[1]. In a drag experiment a current is driven through one of the layers, which, via interlayer

scattering, produces a drag voltage in the other layer. Usually the drag is positive in

the sense that the drag and drive currents have the same direction, which leads to a

compensating voltage opposite to the drive current. In the absence of a magnetic field,

drag phenomena in 2D electron systems are well understood [2]. In that case the drag

signal can be expressed in terms of the density response functions of each single layer, as

long as the interlayer coupling is weak [3].

Drag experiments have also been performed in the presence of strong magnetic fields,

where the formation of Landau levels plays a crucial role. Pronounced minima in the

drag signal were observed at odd integer filling factors for magnetic fields far below the

regime where spin splitting of Landau levels is seen in the intralayer resistivity [4, 5].

Completely unexpected was the discovery of a negative drag signal in case of a suitably

chosen density mismatch between the two layers [6, 7]. Previous theoretical descriptions

[2, 8] would predict positive drag at any filling factor. In more recent work a mechanism

2 for a sign change of drag in strong magnetic fields was found [9], yielding however negative

drag for equal densities in the two layers, unlike the experimental situation.

New hints and constraints for a theory result from a recent detailed experimental

analysis of the temperature dependence of the drag resistivity by Muraki et al. [10]. At

high temperatures, kBT ≫ h¯ωc, where ωc is the cyclotron frequency, the drag resistivity

ρD follows the conventional T 2 behavior. It decreases with decreasing T down to scales

well below h¯ωc, but then, in the data shown for ν = 2n+ 3 2 with n = 2, 3, 4, 5, rises again to

form a pronounced peak at temperatures one order of magnitude below h¯ωc. At still lower

T the drag resistivity decreases rapidly, consistent with exponentially activated behavior,

ρD ∝ e −∆/(kBT ). The ν-dependence of the activation energy ∆ oscillates with minima

near half-integer filling factors. The longitudinal intralayer resistivity ρxx also exhibits

activated behavior at the lowest temperature, with an activation energy matching with

∆ for those ν where both gaps could be extracted from the data. For a density mismatch

δν = 1 between the two layers a low temperature peak with the same shape as for equal

densities, but with opposite (that is negative) sign was observed.

Muraki et al. [10] interpreted their data in terms of particle-hole asymmetry and dis-

order induced localization. Landau levels are broadened by disorder, leading thus to a

band of energies for each level. Anomalous drag is observed for parameters where the

Landau level broadening is much smaller than h¯ωc. The longitudinal resistivity ρxx of

each layer as well as the drag resistivity ρD is due to electrons in extended states of the

highest occupied Landau level. If the states with energies near the Fermi level ǫF are

localized, charge carriers in extended states can be created only by thermal activation

or scattering across the energy gap between ǫF and the nearest extended state energy

level. This explains the observation of activated behavior of ρxx and ρD at low T . Muraki

et al. [10] also realized that odd integer filling factors lead to a particle-hole symmetric

occupation of the partially filled Landau level. Since particle-hole asymmetry is known to

be crucial for drag in the absence of a magnetic field [11], it is indeed natural to relate the

minima in ρD observed at odd integer ν to this symmetry. Judging from the experiments

a necessary requirement for negative drag seems to be that the partially occupied Landau

level in one layer be more, the other less than half-filled. This was noticed already by

Feng et al. [6] and led them to speculate that electrons in a more than half-filled Landau

level should acquire a hole-like dispersion relation due to disorder.

3 A comprehensive transport theory for the intralayer and drag resistivity in a strong

magnetic field, which captures localization and extended states, is not available. In this

work we present a simple semiclassical picture which explains why Landau quantized

electrons moving in a smooth disorder potential behave effectively like band electrons

with an electron-like dispersion in the lower and a hole-like dispersion in the upper half of

a disorder broadened Landau level, and how this leads to the observed anomalous drag.

Let us first consider the relevant length and energy scales in the double-layer system.

The distance between the layers varies from 30 to 120 nm. The disorder is due to remote

donors, which leads to a smooth disorder potential with a correlation length ξ of order

50 − 100 nm. The Landau level broadening, which is related to the amplitude of the

disorder potential, has been estimated from low-field Shubnikov-de-Haas oscillations to

lie in the range 0.5-2 K [6, 12]. The magnetic fields at which drag minima at odd integer

filling and/or negative drag at mismatched densities are observed vary over a relatively

wide range from 0.1T to 1T for the cleanest samples, and up to 5T for samples with a

slightly reduced mobility. This corresponds to magnetic lengths lB between 15 and 80 nm.

Hence, ξ and lB are generally of the same order of magnitude, which makes a quantitative

theoretical analysis rather difficult. Since the anomalous drag phenomena are observed

over a wide range of fields, one may hope that qualitative insight can be gained also by

analysing limiting cases. For ξ ≪ lB a treatment of disorder within the self-consistent

Born approximation is possible [13]. This route was taken most recently by Gornyi et al.

[14], who obtained negative contributions to the drag resistivity at mismatched densities in

agreement with experiment. Localization is not captured by the Born approximation, and

consequently the resistivities obey power-laws rather than activated behavior for T → 0.

For stronger magnetic fields, on the other hand, localization will become important, and

a semiclassical approximation is a better starting point, which is the route we take here.

Applying a criterion derived by Fogler et al. [15] we estimate that (classical) localization

may set in already at 0.1T.

We now discuss the semiclassical picture of electron states and drag on a qualitative

level, ignoring spin splitting for simplicity. If the disorder potential varies smoothly,

electron states lie essentially on contours of equal energy. These contours form closed

loops, corresponding to localized states, except at a single energy ǫ0 in the center of each

Landau level, for which there is a percolating contour through the whole system [16].

4 If the Landau level broadening induced by the disorder potential and also kBT is much

smaller than h¯ωc, as is the case in the anomalous drag regime, all Landau levels except

one are either fully occupied in the bulk of the whole sample or completely empty. At

zero temperature and for ǫF < ǫ0 the sample then consists of islands where the highest

(partially) occupied Landau level is locally full, while it is locally empty in the rest of the

sample; for ǫF > ǫ0 the empty regions form islands. In reality, the percolating contour at

the center of the Landau level is broadened to a percolation region for two reasons. First,

electrons near the percolating contour can hop across saddlepoints from one closed loop to

another, by using for a moment some of their cyclotron energy [15]. Second, electrons near

the center of the Landau level can screen the disorder potential, such that the percolating

equipotential line at ǫ0 broadens to form equipotential terraces [17]. Hence, there is a

region around the percolating path, where states are extended.

The percolating region forms a two-dimensional random network consisting of links and

crossing points [18]. For simplicity we assume that the links are straight lines. The region

near the link (except near the end points) can be parametrized by a cartesian coordinate

system with a variable x following the equipotential lines parallel to the link and y for the

transverse direction. The disorder potential varies essentially only in transverse direction,

and can thus be represented by a function U(y). In the Landau gauge A = (−By, 0) the

Hamiltonian for electrons on the link is then translation invariant in x-direction and the

Landau states (h¯ = 1 from now on)

ψnk(x, y) = Cn e −(y−l2

B k)2/(2l2

B )Hn[(y − l

2 Bk)/lB] e

ikx (1)

are accurate solutions of the stationary Schro¨dinger equation. Here Hn is the n-th Hermite

polynomial and Cn a normalization constant. The corresponding energy is simply

ǫnk = ( n + 1

2

) ωc + U(l

2 Bk) . (2)

In the following we drop the Landau level index n, because only the highest occupied level

is relevant. The quantum number k is the momentum associated with the translation

invariance in x-direction. It is proportional to a transverse shift y0 = l 2 Bk of the wave

function. The potential U lifts the degeneracy of the Landau levels and makes energies

depend on the momentum along the link. The group velocity

vk = dǫk dk

= l2B U ′(y0) (3)

5 corresponds to the classical drift velocity of an electron in crossed electric and magnetic

fields. In our simplified straight link approximation U ′(y0) does not depend on x. In

general it will depend slowly on the longitudinal coordinate, but near percolating paths

away from crossing points it has a fixed sign, and hence the group velocity a fixed direction,

that is the motion on the links is chiral.

The drag between two parallel layers is dominated by electrons in the percolating

region, corresponding to states near the center of the Landau level, since electrons in

deeper localized states are not easily dragged along. In the network picture, macroscopic

drag arises as a sum of contributions from interlayer scattering processes between electrons

in different links. If no current is imposed in the drive layer, both layers are in thermal

equilibrium and the currents on the various links cancel each other on average. Now

assume that a small finite current is switched on in the drive layer such that the electrons

move predominantly in the direction of the positive x-axis (the electric current moving in

the opposite direction). This means that the current on links oriented in the positive x-

direction is typically larger than the current on links oriented in the negative x-direction.

Interlayer scattering processes lead to momentum transfers between electrons in the drive

and drag layer. The preferred direction of momentum transfers is such that the scattering

processes tend to reduce the current in the drive layer, that is the interlayer interaction

leads to friction. Now the crucial point is that electrons moving in the disorder potential

are not necessarily accelerated by gaining momentum in the direction of their motion, or

slowed down by loosing momentum (as for free electrons). The fastest electrons are those

near the center of the Landau level: they have the highest group velocity on the links of the

percolation network and they get most easily across the saddlepoints. Electrons in states

below the Landau level center are thus accelerated by gaining some extra momentum

in the direction of their motion, but electrons with an energy above ǫ0 are pushed to

still higher energy by adding momentum and are thus slowed down. To understand how

negative drag arises, consider the situation with the highest occupied Landau level of the

drive layer less than, and the one in the drag layer more than half filled. In that case the

electrons in the drag layer receive momentum transfers with a predominantly positive x-

component. As a consequence, electrons near the Fermi level of the drag layer are mostly

slowed down if they move on links toward positive x-direction, and accelerated if they

move on links in the negative x-direction, which is the opposite of what free electrons

6 would do. If no net current is allowed to flow in the drag layer, an electric field is built up

in negative x-direction which compensates the effective force generated by the scattering

processes with the drive layer electrons. The drag signal is thus negative.

To substantiate the above qualitative picture, let us analyze the drag between two links

using semiclassical transport theory. We first discuss parallel links in some detail, and

then briefly the more general case of a finite angle between the links. For a fixed Landau

level index, the electronic states in each link are fully labelled by their momentum k. The

(non-equilibrium) occupation of states in the links is described by a distribution function

fα(k), where α = 1, 2 labels the two layers. We consider the experimental standard setup

where a small current flows through the ”drive-layer” (α = 2), generating a compensating

drag voltage in the ”drag-layer” (α = 1). No net current is allowed to flow in the drag-

layer. Under these conditions, the linear response of the drag layer to the drive current

is determined by the linearized Boltzmann equation

k˙1 · ∂f 01 ∂k1

=

[ ∂f1 ∂t

] coll

(4)

with k˙1 = −eE1, where E1 is the electric field leading to the drag voltage. The interlayer

collision term is given by

[ ∂f1 ∂t

]12 coll

= −

∫ dk2 2π

∫ dk′1 2π

W 12k1,k2;k′1,k′2 [ψ1(k1) + ψ2(k2)− ψ1(k ′

1)− ψ2(k ′

2)]

f 01 (k1)f 0 2 (k2)[1− f

0 1 (k

′

1)][1− f 0 2 (k

′

2)] δ(ǫk1 + ǫk2 − ǫk′1 − ǫk′2) , (5)

where W 12k1,k2;k′1,k′2 is the rate for a single interlayer scattering event k1 → k

′

1, k2 → k ′

2 and

the deviation (from equilibrium) functions ψα are defined as usually by f − f 0 = f 0(1−

f 0)ψ. There is also an intralayer scattering term with a similar structure. The distribution

function in the drive layer is obtained from the single layer Boltzmann equation as ψ2(k) =

− pi

evF2T j2 vk , where j2 is the drive current and vF2 the equilibrium Fermi velocity. For

weak interlayer coupling, the deviation function ψ1 can be neglected in the interlayer

collision term, because it would yield a contribution of order (W 12)2. To determine the

relation between the drive current j2 and the drag field E1, we multiply the Boltzmann

equation by vk1 and integrate over k1. The left hand side yields −e ∫

dk1 2pi

f 01 ′

(ǫk1) v 2 k1 E1

which tends to e 2pi vF1E1 at low temperatures, where vF1 is the velocity at the Fermi level

of the drive layer. Using the antisymmetry of the integrand of Eq. (5) under exchange of

7 k1 and k ′

1, the right hand side can be written as

− πj2

evF2T

∫ dk1 2π

∫ dk2 2π

∫ dq

2π W 12k1,k2;k1+q,k2−q (vk2 − vk2−q) (vk1 − vk1+q)

× [f 01 (ǫk1)− f

0 1 (ǫk1+q)] [f

0 2 (ǫk2)− f

0 2 (ǫk2−q)]

4 sinh2[(ǫk1+q − ǫk1)/2T ] δ(ǫk1 + ǫk2 − ǫk1+q − ǫk2−q) . (6)

The integrated intralayer scattering contributions cancel due to the condition of vanish-

ing drag current. Note that the above integral shares several features with the general

expression for the drag response function, as obtained from the Kubo formula [11, 19].

In particular it is symmetric in the layer indices, a property that depends crucially on

the correct form of ψ2(k). For a simplified discussion of the most important points we

assume that the interlayer scattering rate W 12 depends only on momentum transfers q

and energy transfers ω = ǫk1+q − ǫk1 , and that momentum transfers are so small that one

can approximate vk+q−vk by q dvk dk . The drag resistivity ρD = −E1/j2 can then be written

as

ρD = 1

2πe2 1

vF1vF2

1

m1m2

∫ ∞

0

dq q2 ∫

∞

−∞

dω/T

sinh2(ω/2T ) W 12(q, ω) Imχ1(q, ω) Imχ2(q, ω) ,

(7)

where χα(q, ω) is the dynamical density correlation function in layer α, and the effective

masses are given by the curvature of the dispersion relations at the Fermi level

1

mα =

dvkα dk

∣∣∣∣ kFα

. (8)

The integral in Eq. (7) is always positive. The sign of ρD is thus given by the sign of the

effective masses, that is by the curvature of the dispersion at the Fermi level. Negative

drag is obtained when the dispersion in one layer is electron-like, and hole-like in the

other. The drag vanishes if the Fermi level in one of the layers is at an inflection point

of the dispersion. For a quadratic dispersion ǫk = k2

2m one has vF = kF/m and Eq.

(7) reduces to a one-dimensional version of the well-known semiclassical result for drag

between free electrons in two dimensions [2]. Returning to Eq. (6), it is not hard to

generalize the above results on the sign of ρD allowing for larger momentum transfers q

and general momentum dependences of W 12. Note that in our case of chiral electrons no

backscattering is possible, unlike the situation in quantum wires [20].

For parallel links, energy and momentum conservation restrict the allowed scattering

processes very strongly. At low temperatures, this leads to an exponential suppression

8 of the drag between parallel links. This has nothing to do with the exponential suppres-

sion of drag observed in the experiments, since the links are generically not parallel. For

non-parallel links the sum of momenta on the two links is no longer conserved in the scat-

tering process. Hence scattering processes are suppressed much less at low temperatures.

Computing the drag between non-parallel links from the linearized Boltzmann equation

(a straightforward generalization of the above steps for parallel links) yields a quadratic

temperature dependence at low T . The momentum transfers in the drag and drive links

are however still correlated for non-parallel links, especially when the angle between the

links is not very large, and the relative sign of the curvature of the dispersion in drive

and drag layer, respectively, determines the sign of the drag. The average curvature van-

ishes for states in the center of the Landau level, while it is positive for energies below

and negative for energies above ǫ0. We thus understand the observation of negative drag

when the Landau level in one layer is less than half-filled, and more than half-filled in the

other.

Spin can be easily included in the above picture. Since the interlayer interaction is

spin independent, one simply has to sum over the two spin species (up and down) in

both drive and drag layer, taking the (exchange enhanced) Zeeman spin splitting of the

Landau levels into account. If the Fermi level of one layer lies between the centers of the

highest occupied Landau levels for up and down spins, respectively, positive and negative

contributions to the drag partially cancel each other. The cancellation is complete due to

particle-hole symmetry in the case of odd integer filling, as observed in experiment.

Within our semiclassical picture anomalous drag, especially negative drag, is sup-

pressed at temperatures above the Landau level width, because then electron- and hole-

like states within the highest occupied level are almost equally populated. This agrees

with the results from the Born approximation [14], and also with experiments. For the low

temperature asymptotics of the drag, the semiclassical theory yields two different types

of behavior, depending on the filling. If the Fermi level does not hit any extended states

(for either spin species), the drag should vanish exponentially for T → 0, since thermal

activation or scattering of electrons into extended states is then suppressed by an energy

gap. By contrast, for a Fermi level within the extended states band (for at least one spin

species) the gap vanishes and the drag obeys generally quadratic low temperature behav-

ior, as obtained for the drag between non-parallel links. Within the Born approximation

9 no localization occurs and the drag resistance always vanishes quadratically in the low

temperature limit [14]. In high mobility samples localization is negligible at low magnetic

fields, while an increasing amount of states gets localized at higher fields [15].

In summary, we have presented a semiclassical theory for electron drag between two

parallel two-dimensional electron systems in a strong magnetic field, which provides a

transparent picture of the most salient qualitative features of anomalous drag phenomena

observed in recent experiments [6, 7, 10]. Localization plays a role in explaining activated

low temperature behavior, but is not crucial for anomalous (especially negative) drag per

se. A quantitative theory of drag which covers the whole range from low magnetic fields,

where the Born approximation is valid [13, 14]. to high fields, where localization becomes

important, remains an important challenge for work to be done in the future.

Acknowledgements: We gratefully acknowledge several important discussions with

Leonid Glazman, in particular on transport and drag in one-dimensional channels. He

led us to the Boltzmann equation analysis of drag between links, which substantiated our

semiclassical picture considerably. Special thanks go also to Rolf Gerhardts for his help in

the early stages of this work. We are also grateful for valuable discussions with E. Brener,

W. Dietsche, I. Gornyi, K. von Klitzing, K. Muraki, and especially Sjoerd Lok.

[1] T.J. Gramila et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 66, 1216 (1991).

[2] For a review, see A.G. Rojo, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 11, R31 (1999).

[3] A.-P. Jauho and H. Smith, Phys. Rev. B 47, 4420 (1993); L. Zheng and A.H. MacDonald,

Phys. Rev. B 48, 8203 (1993).

[4] N.P.R. Hill et al., J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 8, L557 (1996).

[5] H. Rubel et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 1763 (1997).

[6] X.G. Feng et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 3219 (1998).

[7] J.G.S. Lok et al., Phys. Rev. B 63, 041305 (2001).

[8] M.C. Bønsager et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 1366 (1996); Phys. Rev. B 56, 10314 (1997).

[9] F. von Oppen et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 106803 (2001).

10

[10] K. Muraki et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 246801 (2004).

[11] A. Kamenev and Y. Oreg, Phys. Rev. B 52, 7516 (1995).

[12] J.G.S. Lok et al., Physica E 12, 119 (2002).

[13] M.E. Raikh and T.V. Shahbazyan, Phys. Rev. B 47, 1522 (1993).

[14] I.V. Gornyi et al., cond-mat/0406176.

[15] M.M. Fogler et al., Phys. Rev. 56, 6823 (1997).

[16] M. Tsukuda, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 41, 1466 (1976); S.V. Iordanskii, Solid State Commun. 43,

1 (1982); R.F. Kararinov and S. Luryi, Phys. Rev. B 25, 7626; S.A. Trugman, ibid. 27 7539

(1983); B. Shapiro, ibid. 33, 8447 (1986).

[17] D.B. Chklovskii et al., Phys. Rev. B 46, 4026 (1992); N.R. Cooper and J.T. Chalker, Phys.

Rev. B 48, 4530 (1993).

[18] J.T. Chalker and P.D. Coddington, J. Phys. C 21, 2665 (1988).

[19] K. Flensberg et al., Phys. Rev. B 52, 14761 (1995).

[20] The role of backscattering versus small momentum transfer scattering in the drag between

quantum wires is analyzed in M. Pustilnik et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 126805 (2003).

Comments