Professional Documents
Culture Documents
A. Blackburn
Department of Electronics and Computer Science, University of Southampton, SO17 1BJ, England
~Received 16 May 1996; revised manuscript received 25 November 1996!
The magnetoconductivity s (B) of two-dimensional electrons on liquid helium was measured from 0.25 to
1.3 K in the electron fluid phase in magnetic fields up to 8 T. In low magnetic fields B, s (0)/ s (B)5
11( m B) 2 as in the Drude model, where m is the zero-field mobility due to scattering by 4 He vapor atoms and
ripplons, even for m B@1. The values of mobility are in good agreement with previous measurements and with
calculations for a correlated electron fluid. At higher fields, s (0)/ s (B) deviates from the Drude model and
becomes density dependent due to many-electron effects. Only at the highest fields, or the lowest densities,
does s (B) approach the theoretical single-particle magnetoconductivity. For both vapor-atom and ripplon
scattering the results are in good agreement with a microscopic many-electron theory in which the diffusion of
the cyclotron orbits is controlled by the internal fluctuational electric fields. The density and temperature
dependence of these internal fields derived from the experiments are in excellent agreement with Monte Carlo
simulations. @S0163-1829~97!06024-4#
dependent effects were observed in cyclotron resonance.11 where a s is the surface tension and E 1 and E 2 are explicit
Recently, the damping of edge magnetoplasmons has been integrals which are functions of the temperature T and the
used to determine the magnetoconductivity s xx , 12 both in vertical pressing field E' as given in the Appendix. This
the vapor-atom and ripplon scattering regimes, in good expression is valid for \ v p /kT!1 where v p
agreement with the direct measurements reported 5(e 2 n 3/2/2« 0 m) 1/2 is the characteristic frequency of short-
previously3,4 and in this paper and confirming the influence wavelength 2D plasmons. However, the numerical values for
of many-electron effects. the mobility given by Eq. ~1! are very close to those from
Recently a comprehensive many-electron theory of trans- Saitoh’s expressions21 and also the calculations done by
port phenomena in strongly correlated classical and semi- Mehrotra et al.19 For higher densities the motion of an elec-
classical systems has been developed.13 In parallel with this tron in the field of other electrons is no longer classical. The
increased theoretical understanding we have also developed analysis of this case is beyond the scope of the present paper.
the experimental techniques based on high-precision Corbino
electrodes, fabricated using modern lithographic techniques. B. Conductivity as diffusion: The Einstein relation
These new electrodes give improved experimental resolu-
tion. The Drude model gives the magnetoconductivity of a 2D
This paper describes measurements of s xx from 0.25 to electron system ~2DES! by assuming independent electrons
1.3 K in the 2D electron fluid phase, at fields up to 8 T, in in classical orbits in a magnetic field and a field-independent
both the vapor-atom and ripplon scattering regimes. The pa- scattering time. The tensor components of the magnetocon-
per is organized as follows. In Sec. II we give an account of ductivity s and magnetoresistivity r are as follows ~the signs
the basic theoretical concepts underlying many-electron of the components given are positive for negative charges,
magnetoconductivity within the framework of the Einstein putting e5 u e u !:
diffusion relation. In Sec. III we describe the experimental
s0
cell, the Corbino electrodes, and the experimental proce- s xx 5 , s yx 5 m B s xx , ~2a!
dures. In Sec. IV we give the experimental results and ana- ~ 11 m 2 B 2 !
lyze them in terms of the internal electric fields in the 2D
system while in Sec. V we draw the main conclusions and r xx 5 r 0 , r xy 5B/ne. ~2b!
the Appendix gives some of the theoretical expressions used. These simple results act as benchmarks for our experiments
to measure s xx . A useful parameter to plot experimentally is
II. MAGNETOCONDUCTIVITY the ratio ne/ m s which for the Drude model at m B@1 be-
comes
A. Zero-field mobility
The zero-field mobility m and the zero-field conductivity ne
'B 2 . ~3!
s 0 5ne m in the 2D electron fluid have been measured by ms~ B !
many authors using rectangular electrodes ~the original
Sommer-Tanner technique14!, circular Corbino Conductivity in a 2D electron fluid is essentially a diffu-
15,16
electrodes, the plasma linewidth,17 or a resonant cavity at sion process. The Einstein relation between mobility and the
radio frequencies.18 The most detailed measurements in zero diffusion constant for a system obeying Maxwell-Boltzmann
field are those of Mehrotra et al.19 below 1 K, using frequen- statistics gives
cies up to 2 MHz and by Stan and Dahm.20 The mobility is
strongly temperature dependent and varies from 1 m2/V s ne 2 L 2
s xx 5 , ~4!
just below the l point to over 2000 m2/V s at 0.1 K ~depend- kT t B
ing on the density!. Within the single-particle approximation,
the zero-field mobility has been calculated for vapor-atom where L is the diffusion length and t 21 B is the scattering rate
and ripplon scattering by Saitoh,21 using the electron-ripplon in a field. In zero magnetic field, putting 2L 2 equal to the
interaction22 which depends strongly on the perpendicular squared mean free path reproduces s 0 5ne m . In a magnetic
electric pressing field E' . However, Buntar’ et al.18 pointed field the diffusion length is given by L 2 5R 2c /2, where R c
out that the electron-electron correlation time for n 5(2mkT) 1/2/eB is the classical cyclotron radius, for
>1012 m22 is less than the electron-ripplon relaxation time. \ v c /kT!1, while for \ v c /kT@1, only the lowest Landau
For an energy dependent interaction ~such as with ripplons, level is occupied and L 2 5l 2 /2 where l5(\/eB) 1/2 is the
but not vapor atoms! this leads to a different average in the magnetic length. The various conductivity models corre-
expression for m which can be a factor of 2 smaller than the spond to selecting the value of L and the scattering rate,23 as
single-particle result ~in Ref. 18 the effect was considered in shown in Table I. The Einstein model is, of course, equiva-
terms of occasional electron-electron collisions as if the elec- lent to the orbit-center migration theory of Kubo et al.24 and
tron system were a weakly nonideal plasma!. For a strongly Ando et al.6
correlated classical electron system the zero magnetic field The Drude model, for m B@1, is given by classical cyclo-
scattering rate t 0 21 is shown in the Appendix to be of the tron orbits and t B 5 t 0 , which leads to ne/ m s 5B 2 as shown
form in Table I. But the Drude model neglects the quantization of
electron orbits into Landau levels, which changes the scat-
t 21
0 5
e 2 E'2
4\ a s F 11
E 1 E 22
1
E' E'2 G, ~1!
tering rate via the density of states. In the self-consistent
Born approximation ~SCBA! for d-function scatterers, as dis-
cussed by Ando et al.6 for degenerate electrons, the Landau
16 282 M. J. LEA et al. 55
t0 ne
Model L2
tB ms
Drude-classical R 2c 51 5B 2
Drude-quantum l2 51 }BT
Single electron R 2c }( m B) 1/2 B 3/2
} 1/2
Landau levels m
Classical orbits
Single electron l2 }( m B) 1/2 TB 1/2
}
Landau levels m 1/2
Quantum orbits
Many-electron R 2c }\ v c /D c 5 p B 20
Landau levels @ D c 5eE f R c # 2m 3 kT ^ E 2f &
B 40 5
Classical orbits \ 2e 2 FIG. 1. The scaled mean square field F(G) from Monte Carlo
B@B 0 calculations. The asymptotic value of F58.91 for a harmonic clas-
Many-electron l2 }\ v c /D q 4B 20 sical Wigner crystal is shown dashed. Inset: the field component
@ D q 5eE f l # 5
Landau levels (\ v c /kT) 1/2 distribution.
Quantum orbits
S D
D c 5\ v c defines a characteristic magnetic field B 0
^ E 2f & 5F ~ G !
2mkT v 2p
e2
5F ~ G ! S kTn 3/2
4 p¯
««0 D
5F ~ G ! E 20 ,
59.6931026 F 1/4n 3/8T 1/2 T which is the onset field for mag-
netoresistance and for deviations from Drude-like magneto-
~5! conductivity, and lies between 0.2 and 1 T in these experi-
55 MAGNETOCONDUCTIVITY OF TWO-DIMENSIONAL . . . 16 283
ments. Only for D c <\ v c do the Landau levels influence the and the energy variations eE f ltanh(\vc/2kT) across the elec-
magnetoconductivity as the smearing of the Landau levels tron wavelength. The next two sections give more detailed
becomes less than the level separation.3 For B.B 0 , the scat- equations used in the analysis.
tering rate is then enhanced by a factor t 21 B /t0
21
F G
independent scattering, as in the quantum Drude model in
Table I. Also the energy spread across the cyclotron orbit is 2m 3 kT ^ E 2f & 1/4
B 05 ,
D q 5eEl. Hence, for D q ,\ v c , we obtain ~for short-range \ 2e 2
scatterers!
ne t 21
B B2
ne 4B 20 5 21 B 2 5 , for v c t @1. ~8b!
5 , \ v c /kT@1. ~7! ms~ B ! t0 r*
m s ~ B ! ~ \ v c /kT ! 1/2
The normalized magnetoresistance is a function of the onset
Note that ne/ m s is still proportional to the internal electric
field B 0 . For B!B 0 there is zero magnetoresistance, and the
field strength E f .
magnetoresistivity and magnetoconductivity follows the
In all cases the scattering rate increases with field and at
Drude model. Deviations from the Drude model start for B
the highest fields, the Landau level collision width D s can
'B 0 with a limiting value given by Eq. ~6!.
become greater than D q and the SCBA result for quantum
orbit diffusion should then apply, as shown in Table I. It is For (B 3 kTm/eB 40 )tanh(\vc /kT)@1 and for arbitrary
also interesting to note that the scattering rate increases with \ v c /kT the normalized many-electron quantum magnetore-
magnetic field faster than the cyclotron frequency and hence sistance is
the Hall angle5tan21(sxx /syx)5tan21(mB) in low fields, de-
creases as B increases.25 The Hall effect has been measured
in this system and there is strong experimental and theoreti-
r*
mq5
B2
4B 20
S D
\vc
kT
1/2
J, ~9a!
cal evidence that a linear Hall effect, r xy 5B/ne is always
valid in a nondegenerate 2D electron fluid.
ne 4B 20
The internal field that drives an electron during its colli- 5 , ~9b!
sion with a scatterer fully characterizes the effect of the m s ~ B ! J A\ v c /kT
electron-electron interaction on electron scattering provided
the field is uniform over the electron wavelength and does where the factor J allows for the filling of the Landau levels
not change during a collision. These conditions are met if the and is a function of \ v c /kT; J51 in the quantum limit.
electron motion is classical or semiclassical. For B50 this Equations ~8! and ~9! agree exactly for B@B 0 and \ v c /kT
requires that the change of the electron energy over a thermal !1.
wavelength | T be small compared to the thermal energy, or In the vapor-atom scattering regime above 1 K, the Lan-
eE | T !kT. 32 This corresponds to the condition \ v p !kT. dau level collision width D s is comparable with the energy
In this limit, the scattering rate ~for short-range scatterers! spread due to the internal electric fields, particularly above 3
is only slightly enhanced by a factor 11(5F/ T. The Einstein relation gives s } t 21 B in strong B. If the
384p )(\ v p /kT) 2 '110.04(\ v p /kT) 2 for v p t @1.13 How- cyclotron orbits have a spread of energies D then the scatter-
ever, the condition \ v p /kT53.43108 n 3/4/T.1 can be ing rate is enhanced, due to the concentration of the density
easily reached and this may account for some of the density of states, by a factor proportioned to \ v c /D. If we write
dependent scattering seen by Mehrotra et al.19 for D 2 5(\ t 21
B ) 1D m as the sum of collision broadening and
2 2
E. Ripplon scattering
The magnetoconductivity due to ripplon scattering differs
from the vapor-atom scattering case in that we must allow
FIG. 2. Schematic diagram of the experimental cell.
for the finite correlation length of the random potential of the
ripplons. In zero field and for \ v c /kT!1 the dominant scat-
III. EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
tering comes from ripplons whose wavelength is of the order
of ~or greater than! the thermal de Broglie wavelength, and A. Experimental cell
hence independent of B and electron density. At 1 K these The experimental cell is shown in Fig. 2. It is made of
ripplons have a wavelength >0.13 m m, a frequency OFHC copper and mounted on a dilution refrigerator inside a
<80 MHz, and an energy <0.004kT. Thus the magnetocon- 9 T superconducting magnet. The measurement electrodes h
ductivity behaves in a similar way to short-range scattering, ~see next section! are mounted in a copper base-plate i about
Eqs. ~2!, ~6!, and ~8!. For \ v c /kT!1 and for B,B 0 , the 100 mm below the surface of the superfluid helium h. Elec-
‘‘Drude’’ model is followed, Eq. ~2!, with a scattering rate trical leads f are taken into the cell using stycast lead-
and mobility given by Eq. ~1!. For B.B 0 , ne/ m s ap- throughs. All the leads to the electrodes were through 50 V
proaches an almost field-independent limit as s saturates. coaxial cables k to reduce the interlead capacitance. A top-
Explicit expressions for s in the ripplon scattering regime plate c is situated 1.6 mm above the electrodes. Free elec-
are given in the Appendix and a fuller account in Ref. 13. trons are generated using a glow discharge from a 50 mm
In the range B>B 0 the results for ripplon scattering are tungsten wire a at about 2400 V. This operates between
somewhat different from the results for short-range scatter- 1.25 and 1.6 K when the helium vapor pressure lies between
ing. But the function s 21 (B) still has a maximum. The rip- 1 and 7 mbar. A typical discharge current is 50 nA. The
plon magnetoconductivity has been analyzed in Ref. 13. In electrons are thermalized and pass through a 100 mm mesh
the range of quantizing fields grid d, set in the top plate, into the experimental space. The
4B 20 electrons are controlled by dc potentials on the electrodes,
ne
5 G ~ T,B,E' ! , \ v c /kT@1, the top plate and the base plate. The maximum, or saturated,
m s ~ B ! ~ \ v c /kT ! 1/2 electron density occurs when the potential on the electron
~12! sheet equals the top-plate voltage V T and is given by n s
where the factor G(T,B,E' ) allows for the field-dependent 5«« 0 V T /ed. In practice, the magnitude of the top-plate po-
interaction from the changing wave vector q of the scattering tential was usually increased after charging so that n was
ripplons. It is rather remarkable that this factor is relatively below the saturation density.
close to unity for a wide range of densities and fields. The Ultrapure 4 He ~Ref. 33! was used to fill the cell. The
mobility used in Eq. ~12! is the zero-field mobility, allowing 3
He content was exceptionally low. This was to avoid any
for many-electron effects and should be the mobility as mea- effects due to the formation of a 3 He-rich surface layer at
sured from the Drude relation, Eq. ~2!. The parameter low temperatures, which might alter the mobility as found
ne/ m s is again proportional to the internal electric field experimentally by Esel’son et al.34
strength E f .
In the region from 0.8 to 1.1 K both ripplon and vapor- B. The Corbino-disk electrodes
atom scattering are significant. From Eq. ~2! the total con-
ductivity is just the sum of the two separate contributions, The conductivity of the 2DES on liquid helium was mea-
s 5 s 1 1 s 2 . Allowing for the self-consistent combination of sured using the circular Corbino disk geometry. To obtain
many-electron and collision effects, as in Eq. ~10!, the con- precisely defined electrode structures, we used optical lithog-
tributions s 1 and s 2 can be estimated by solving two simul- raphy and the device fabrication techniques of the
taneous equations, where s mi is the conductivity from the Southampton University Microelectronics Centre.35 The ge-
ith scattering mechanism (i51,2) due to many-electron ef- ometry of the Corbino disk, with 6 coplanar electrodes on
fects alone, while s si is the conductivity from the indepen- polished fused quartz, is shown in Fig. 3. A central ~or drive!
dent electron theory, electrode A was surrounded by a ring electrode E which also
separated the annular receiving electrode B into three seg-
1 1 s2 ments B1, B2, and B3. Round these was a planar guard
5 1 . ~13! electrode G. Two metallic gold layers were deposited, insu-
s 2i s 2mi s 4si
lated by an intervening SiO2 layer. The electrodes were all in
Note that for many-electron effects alone this gives s the upper metal layer. Electrical contact to the inner elec-
5 s m1 1 s m2 , while for the SCBA single-particle approxi- trodes was made along strips in the lower metal layer which
mation with no many-electron fields, s 2 5 s 2s1 1 s 2s2 . ran under the guard G and electrode E. These made contact
55 MAGNETOCONDUCTIVITY OF TWO-DIMENSIONAL . . . 16 285
FIG. 12. The inverse conductivity 1/s (B) vs B at 0.7 K for n FIG. 13. The inverse conductivity 1/s (B) vs B at 0.9 ~s!, 0.8
50.5531012 m22. The lines show the Drude model ~line d!, the ~h!, 0.7 ~n!, 0.6 ~,!, and 0.4 ~L! K for n50.54, 0.57, 0.55, 0.51,
independent electron model ~line s!, the many-electron theory ~line and 0.6031012 m22 ~the mobilities are 284, 540, 980, 1130, and
m!, and the total theoretical 1/s ~line t!. 2090 m2/V s, respectively!. The lines show the full many-electron
theory ~lines t1 to t5, increasing temperature!.
theory for this mobility. The deviation between the data and
this SCBA result is greater than at 1.3 K, particularly near 1 hence is independent of random or systematic errors in the
T, though the data approaches the SCBA result at the highest conversion from phase shift to conductivity. In each case the
fields, as before. The lines t and t1 show the many-electron overall behavior is the same as already demonstrated in Fig.
theory, including a significant contribution to the scattering 13. The Drude model is initially followed ~line d!, due to
from the ripplons at this temperature. many-electron effects. The parameter ne/ m s then saturates
above the onset field B 0 . The saturation value, }B 20 , de-
C. Magnetoconductivity: Ripplon scattering creases with decreasing temperature, as predicted by Eq. ~6!.
The lines t1 to t4 show the many-electron calculations.
Below 1 K, scattering by ripplons becomes the dominant
The density dependence of 1/s at fixed temperature is
mechanism. Figure 12 shows 1/s versus B at 0.7 K for n
shown in Fig. 15 at 0.9 K for n50.54, 0.85, 1.39, and
50.5531012 m22. As at higher temperatures, the data fol-
1.8831012 m22. The mobility due to ripplon scattering is
low the Drude model ~line d! to about 0.4 T before saturating
density-dependent through the effect of the vertical electric
at about 1 T as predicted by Eq. ~6!. However, below 1 K,
pressing field E' on the electron-ripplon interaction. The
the quantum limit \ v c /kT51.344B/T.1 is soon reached,
lines t1 to t4 again show the many-electron calculations,
and the diffusion length becomes the magnetic length l,
with good agreement.
which leads to a decrease in 1/s with increasing field, as
given in Eq. ~12!. The independent electron theory ~line s!
now lies well below the data for B,5 T. The quantum
many-electron theory ~line m! is close to the experimental
result between 1 and 2 T, while at higher fields, 1/s in-
creases due to collision broadening and the calculated total
1/s is plotted as line t.
The change in 1/s (B) with temperature is shown in Fig.
13 at 0.9, 0.8, 0.7, 0.6, and 0.4 K for densities close to
0.5531012 m22. In the Drude region the mobility m in-
creases as the temperature falls, though the range of fields for
which 1/s }B 2 decreases. The lines t1 to t5 show the total
many-electron theory including ripplon and gas-atom scatter-
ing and the contribution for the collision broadening. As the
field increases, the inverse conductivity saturates and even
decreases slightly in the quantum limit, \ v c /kT.1. The
overall agreement is excellent, with no adjustable param-
eters.
In order to demonstrate the saturation of 1/s (B) with in-
creasing field as the temperature falls, Fig. 14 shows FIG. 14. The measured ne/ m s (B) vs B 2 at 0.9 ~L!, 0.8 ~h!,
ne/ m s (B) vs B 2 for n51.7131012 m22 at 0.9, 0.8, 0.7, and 0.7 ~,!, and 0.6 ~s! K for n51.7131012 m22 ~the mobilities are
0.6 K, using the empirical Drude mobilities of 250, 430, 620, 250, 430, 620, and 760 m2/V s, respectively!. The lines show the
and 760620 m2/V s. This particular plot normalizes each Drude model ~line d! and the full many-electron theory ~lines t1
data set to the Drude-like B 2 dependence at low fields and and t4, increasing temperature!.
16 290 M. J. LEA et al. 55
FIG. 15. The inverse conductivity 1/s (B) vs B at 0.9 K for n FIG. 17. Experimental values of the internal electric field E f vs
50.54 ~s!, 0.85 ~h!, 1.39 ~n!, and 1.88 ~,! 31012 m22 ~the mo- the scaling field E 0 . The line shows E f 53.1E 0 .
bilities are 284, 276, 257, and 238 m2/V s, respectively!. The lines
below 3 T!. As the field increases above 0.5 T, the experi-
show the full many-electron theory ~lines t1 to t4, increasing den-
ments crossover from the Drude model to the many-electron
sity!.
theory, which holds for \ v c /kT.2. However, at higher
fields, above 5 T, the collision time decreases and the data
To separate the density dependence due to the many- start to approach the independent-electron or SCBA result.
electron effects from the density dependence of the electron- Conversely, we can use the measured 1/s (B) at 2 T, to
ripplon interaction, we again plot ne/ m s vs B as shown in obtain experimental values of E f . At this magnetic field
Fig. 16 at 0.8 K for a range of electron densities, in magnetic 1/s (B) lies clearly between the SCBA and Drude regions,
fields up to 8 T. The parameter ne/ m s follows the Drude and is proportional to B 20 and hence the internal electric field
model, saturates above the onset field B 0 and finally de- E f . Each measurement of s at 2 T can be used to derive a
creases at higher fields. The parameter ne/ m s increases with value of E f . Figure 17 shows a plot of the experimental
electron density, as given by Eq. ~9b!. The independent elec- internal field E f vs E 0 5(n 3/2k B T/4p¯
« « 0 ) 1/2, as defined in
tron, or SCBA, theory28 for ripplons is shown ~line s! for the Eq. ~5!. The points come from over 40 combinations of den-
lowest density. At this temperature where the mobility is sity and temperature between 0.6 and 0.9 K, where a com-
very large, the SCBA overestimates s (B) by at least an or- prehensive set of experiments were performed. Within the
der of magnitude at 1 T. The quantum many-electron theory, error bars the measured field is indeed proportional to E 0
Eq. ~12! is plotted ~lines t1–t4, increasing density!, including with a constant of proportionality53.160.1. This can be
the contribution from the Landau level collision width ~small compared with AF53.0760.03 from the Monte Carlo cal-
culations where the uncertainty represents the variation for
the range of G from 20 to 70 covered by these experiments.
This good agreement confirms the interpretation of the mag-
netoconductivity in terms of the internal electric fields and
the magnitude of E f from the Monte Carlo simulations.
V. CONCLUSIONS
S D
unit of the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, U.K., and
Adrian Johnstone for advice during the design of the Corbino 2 p m 3 kT 1/4
B 05 . ~A6!
electrodes. \ 2 e 2 ^ E 21
f &
2
APPENDIX
We note that the first term in the square brackets in Eq.
~A4! is slightly smaller than the value which follows from
In the important case where the characteristic localization the theory where the corrections '\ v c /kT are taken into
length in the direction normal to the surface is small com- account,10 except in the range of extremely large \ v c /kT
pared to the thermal wavelength | T 5\(2mkT) 21/2, the co- where these corrections become small. The dependence of
efficients in Eq. ~1! for the scattering rate t 21
0 take on the this term on B is very smooth for (mkT\e).B>2B 0 ; it has
form ~cap units are used here to match Ref. 13!. been found numerically in Ref. 10. On the whole, the con-
ductivity as given by Eqs. ~6! and ~A4! is nearly independent
4 a'~ 0 ! kT of B.
E 1' ~ Y 21.018! , In the ultraquantum limit we have
e
E 22 '12 S a'~ 0 ! kT
e
D 2
~ 1.94922.703Y 1Y ! , 2
~A1! t 21
B 5
e 2 E'2 B 3/2
2\ a s
T B
1/2
B 20
F 11
Ê 1 B Ê 22 B 2
1 2 2 ,
E' B T E' B T G B@B T ,
~A7!
1
Y 5 ln
2
2\ 2 a'2
mkT
,S D a' l T !1. ~A2!
where
a'~ 0 ! kT
Ê 1 ' ~ Ŷ 21.018! ,
The parameter a' determines the decay of the electron e
wave function normal to the helium surface, and for a varia-
tional wave function of the form c (z)}z exp(2a'z) the 3 ~ a'~ 0 ! ! 2 ~ kT ! 2
equation for a' is Ê 22 ' ~ Ŷ 2 22.703Ŷ 11.949! ,
4e 2
a' 5 a'~ 0 ! s, s 3 2s 2 2
3
2
eE' m\ 22 ~ a'~ 0 ! ! 23 50, Ŷ 5
1
2
ln S D
8\ a'2
eB
~A8!
1
2D Electron Systems on Helium and Other Substrates, edited by ~1979!; E. Y. Andrei, F. I. B. Williams, D. C. Glattli, and G.
E. Y. Andrei ~Kluwer Academic, New York, 1997!. For an in- Deville, in The Physics of Low-dimensional Semiconductor
troductory review, see W. F. Vinen and A. J. Dahm, Phys. To- Structures, edited by P. Butcher et al. ~Plenum, New York,
day 40, 43 ~1987!. 1993!, Chap. 14, p. 499.
2
C. C. Grimes and G. Adams, Phys. Rev. Lett. 42, 795 ~1979!; D. 3
J. Frost, P. Fozooni, M. J. Lea, and M. I. Dykman, Europhys.
S. Fisher, B. I. Halperin, and P. M. Platzman, ibid. 42, 798 Lett. 16, 575 ~1991!; M. I. Dykman, M. J. Lea, P. Fozooni, and
16 292 M. J. LEA et al. 55
J. Frost, Phys. Rev. Lett. 70, 3975 ~1993!; M. I. Dykman, M. J. waard, A. Th. A. M. de Waele, H. M. Gijsman, and F. M.
Lea, P. Fozooni, and J. Frost, Physica B 197, 340 ~1994!. Peeters, Europhys. Lett. 6, 75 ~1988!.
4 26
M. J. Lea, P. Fozooni, P. J. Richardson, and A. Blackburn, Phys. J. Neuenschwander, P. Scheuzger, W. Joss, and P. Wyder,
Rev. Lett. 73, 1142 ~1994!. Physica B 165&166, 845 ~1990!; P. Scheuzger, J. Neuen-
5
A. Blackburn, K. Djerfi, M. I. Dykman, C. Fang-Yen, P. Fozooni, schwander, and P. Wyder, Helv. Phys. Acta 64, 170 ~1991!; P.
A. Kristensen, M. J. Lea, P. J. Richardson, A. Santrich-Badal, Scheuzger, J. Neuenschwander, W. Joss, and P. Wyder, ibid. 65,
and R. W. van der Heijden, Czech. J. Phys. 46, 3056 ~1996!, 325 ~1992!; Physica B 194–196, 1231 ~1994!.
27
Suppl. 56. P. J. M. Peters, P. Scheuzger, M. J. Lea, Yu. P. Monarkha, P. K.
6
T. Ando and Y. Uemura, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 36, 959 ~1974!; T. H. Sommerfeld, and R. W. van der Heijden, Phys. Rev. B 50,
11 570 ~1994!.
Ando, Y. Matsumoto, and Y. Uemura, ibid. 39, 279 ~1974!; T. 28
M. Saitoh, Solid State Commun. 52, 63 ~1984!.
Ando, A. B. Fowler, and F. Stern, Rev. Mod. Phys. 54, 437 29
M. I. Dykman, J. Phys. C 15, 7397 ~1982!.
~1982!. 30
C. Fang-Yen, M. I. Dykman, and M. J. Lea, Phys. Rev. B ~to be
7
M. I. Dykman, Phys. Status Solidi B 88, 463 ~1978!.
published!. ~PPII-BT5892!
8
P. W. Adams and M. A. Paalanen, Phys. Rev. B 37, 3805 ~1988!; 31
R. C. Gann, S. Chakravarti, and G. V. Chester, Phys. Rev. B 20,
38, 5064~E! ~1988!. 326 ~1979!; J. P. Hansen, D. Levesque, and J. J. Weiss, Phys.
9
Yu. Z. Kovdrya, V. A. Nikolayenko, O. I. Kirichek, S. S. Rev. Lett. 43, 979 ~1979!.
Sokolov, and V. N. Grigor’ev, J. Low Temp. Phys. 91, 371 32
L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz, Theoretical Physics, Vol. 2:
~1993!; J. Neuenschwander, W. Joss, and P. Wyder, Helv. Phys. Quantum Mechanics ~Pergamon, Oxford, 1977!.
Acta. 65, 325 ~1992!; Physica B 194–196, 1231 ~1994!. 33
Supplied by Professor P. V. E. McClintock, Dept. of Physics,
10
M. I. Dykman and L. S. Khazan, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 77, 1488 University of Lancaster, U.K. The 3He/4He atomic ratio was less
~1979! @Sov. Phys. JETP 50, 747 ~1979!#. than 10213.
11
S. Edel’man, Sov. Phys. JETP 50, 338 ~1979!; L. Wilen and R. 34
B. N. Eselson, A. S. Rybalko, and S. S. Sokolov, Fiz. Nizk.
Giannetta, Phys. Rev. Lett. 60, 231 ~1988!. Temp. 6, 611 ~1980! @Sov. J. Low Temp. Phys. 6, 544 ~1980!#.
12
S. Ito, K. Shiraham, and K. Kono, Czech. J. Phys. 46, Suppl. S1, 35
A. Blackburn et al. ~unpublished!.
339 ~1996!. 36
R. Mehrotra and A. J. Dahm, J. Low Temp. Phys. 67, 541 ~1987!;
13
M. I. Dykman, C. Fang-Yen and M. J. Lea, Phys. Rev. B ~to be L. Wilen and R. Giannetta, ibid. 72, 353 ~1988!; A. Thom and
published!. ~PPI-BQ5969! C. J. Apelt, Field Computations in Engineering and Physics
14
W. T. Sommer and D. J. Tanner, Phys. Rev. Lett. 27, 1345 ~van Nostrand, London, 1961!.
~1971!. 37
M. Ilino, M. Suzuki, and A. J. Ikushima, J. Low Temp. Phys. 61,
15
A. S. Rybalko, B. N. Esel’son, and Yu. Z. Kovdrya, Fiz. Nizk. 155 ~1985!.
Temp. 42, 795 ~1979!. 38
J. Neuenschwander, P. Scheuzger, W. Joss, and P. Wyder,
16
Y. Iye, J. Low Temp. Phys. 40, 441 ~1980!. Physica B 165/166, 845 ~1990!; J. Frost, M. J. Lea, and P. Fo-
17
C. C. Grimes and P. W. Adams, Phys. Rev. Lett. 36, 145 ~1976!. zooni, Cryogenics 31, 890 ~1991!.
18 39
V. A. Buntar’, Yu. Z. Kovdrya, V. N. Grigoriev, Yu. P. Monar- S. Yücel, L. Menna, and E. Y. Andrei, Phys. Rev. B 47, 12 672
hka, and S. S. Sokolov, Fiz. Nizk. Temp. 13, 789 ~1987! @Sov. J. ~1993!.
Low Temp. Phys. 13, 451 ~1987!#; V. A. Buntar’, V. N. Grig- 40
P. J. M. Peters, M. J. Lea, A. M. L. Janssen, A. O. Stone, W. P.
oriev, O. I. Kirichek, Yu. Z. Kovdrya, Yu. P. Monarhka, and S. N. M. Jacobs, P. Fozooni, and R. W. van der Heijden, Phys.
S. Sokolov, J. Low Temp. Phys. 79, 323 ~1990!; Yu. P. Monar- Rev. Lett. 67, 2199 ~1991!.
kha and S. S. Sokolov, Fiz. Nizk. Temp. 5, 1283 ~1979!; S. S. 41
P. K. H. Sommerfeld ~private communication!; K. Kono, U. Al-
Sokolov, G-Q. Hai, and N. Studart, Phys. Rev. B 51, 5977 brecht, and P. Leiderer, J. Low Temp. Phys. 82, 279 ~1991!.
~1995!. 42
M. J. Lea, A. O. Stone, P. Fozooni, and J. Frost, J. Low Temp.
19
R. Mehrotra, C. J. Guo, Y. Z. Ruan, D. B. Mast, and A. J. Dahm, Phys. 85, 67 ~1991!; M. J. Lea, P. Fozooni, and J. Frost, ibid. 92,
Phys. Rev. B 29, 5239 ~1984!. 189 ~1993!.
20
M. A. Stan and A. J. Dahm, Phys. Rev. B 40, 8995 ~1989!. 43
K. Shirahama and K. Kono, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 781 ~1995!; A.
21
M. Saitoh, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 42, 201 ~1977!. Kristensen, K. Djerfi, P. Fozooni, M. J. Lea, P. J. Richardson, A.
22
V. B. Shikin, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 60, 713 ~1971! @Sov. Phys. Santrich-Badal, A. Blackburn, and R. W. van der Heijden, ibid.
JETP 33, 387 ~1971!#; V. B. Shikin and Yu. P. Monarkha, J. 76, 1154 ~1996!; K. Kono and K. Shirahama, Surf. Sci. 361/362,
Low Temp. Phys. 16, 193 ~1974!; P. M. Platzman and G. Beni, 826 ~1996!; K. Shirahama and K. Kono, J. Low Temp. Phys.
Phys. Rev. Lett. 36, 626 ~1976!. 104, 237 ~1996!.
23
M. J. Lea and M. I. Dykman, Philos. Mag. B 69, 1059 ~1994!. 44
G. Deville, J. Low Temp. Phys. 72, 135 ~1988!.
24 45
R. Kubo, S. J. Miyake, and N. Hashitsume, Solid State Phys. 17, K. Shirahama, S. Ito, H. Suto, and K. Kono, J. Low Temp. Phys.
269 ~1965!. 101, 4349 ~1995!.
25
R. W. van der Heijden, M. C. M. van de Sanden, J. H. G. Sure- 46
R. Mehrotra, J. Low Temp. Phys. 79, 311 ~1990!.