Accepted Manuscript

Binding energy of the ground and first few excited states of hydrogenic donor
impurity in a rectangular GaAs quantum dot in the presence of electric field

Sheng Wang, Kang Yun, Xian-Li Li

PII: S0749-6036(14)00376-0
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.spmi.2014.10.010
Reference: YSPMI 3445

To appear in: Superlattices and Microstructures

Received Date: 10 October 2014

Accepted Date: 11 October 2014

Please cite this article as: S. Wang, K. Yun, X-L. Li, Binding energy of the ground and first few excited states of
hydrogenic donor impurity in a rectangular GaAs quantum dot in the presence of electric field, Superlattices and
Microstructures (2014), doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.spmi.2014.10.010

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers
we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and
review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process
errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
 Binding energy of the ground and first few excited states of hydrogenic donor
impurity in a rectangular GaAs quantum dot in the presence of electric field
Sheng Wang **, Kang Yun , Xian-Li Li
College of Electronic Science, Northeastern Petroleum University, Daqing 163318, China

Abstract:

Within the quasi-one-dimensional effective potential model and effective mass

approximation, we calculate the ground and the first 9 excited-state binding energies of a
hydrogenic donor impurity in a rectangular quantum dot (RQD) in the presence of electric field.
The analytical form of the quasi-one-dimensional effective potential replacing the
three-dimensional Coulomb potential in our model is derived by Fourier transforms. We discuss
detailedly dependence of the binding energies on the impurity positions and electric fields. For the
ground-state binding energy, our results qualitatively agree with that of Ref. [13] [C. I. Mendozaet
al., Phys. Rev. B 71,0753302005] in which they only calculated the ground-state binding energies
in cubic quantum dots by variational method. However, for first 9 excited-state binding energies,
such dependence has complex manner since there are two or three peaks in the electronic
probability density distribution curves. The strengths and positions of these peaks in RQD affect
the interaction potential between electron and impurity, which appears to be the critical control on
the binding energies of impurity. The applied electric field pushes the positions of these peaks
downwards, and the strengths of peaks located at the upper half of RQD increase while the
strengths of lower peaks firstly decrease, then increase with increasing electric field. The high
peak strength can lead to increase of the binding energy while the large distance between the
position of peak and impurity center results in reduce of the energy, which is an interesting
competition. This competition is more obvious for excited-state binding energies of off-central
impurity.

PACS: 73.21.Hb

Keywords: Quasi-one-dimensional effective potential; Binding energies of the impurity;

Rectangular quantum dot; Electric field

**
Corresponding author. E-mail address: wangsheng10@126.com
I. INTRODUCTION

Hydrogenic impurity-related Stark effect in the low-dimensional semiconductor

heterostructures is an interesting subject for the nanostructure physics and applications.

Consequently, in the past few years, there has been quite a bit of work on Stark effect of an

impurity state in the nanostructures such as quantum well (QW), quantum well wire (QWW) and

quantum dot (QD) structures[1-11]. Of these systems currently under investigation, QD have

attained considerable theoretical and experimental attention due to their potential application in

microelectronics and future laser technology[12-17].

The hydrogenic impurity positions and geometry confinement of QD applied external fields

can greatly modify the binding energy of the impurity which is defined as the energy without the

impurity minus the energy with the impurity. However, due to the three-dimensional geometry

confinement and impurity-induced Coulomb potential, the analytical calculation of the eigenstates

of QDs is complicated or even insoluble. This is why one often adopts some approximate methods

such as variational method, perturbation method, envelope-function theory using the plane wave

basis and the quasi-one-dimensional effective potential model proposed in Ref. [18] . For example,

J. M. Ferreyra et al.[12] (using the perturbative approach), C. I. Mendoza et al.[13] (variational

calculation ), S. S. Li et al.[14] (envelope-function theory using the plane wave basis) and X. T.

An et al. [19](the quasi-one-dimensional effective potential model ) studied the impurity-related

binding energies of the ground state or lowest excited state in parabolic QDs, a cubic quantum box,

a rectangular parallelepiped-shaped QD and a parabolic GaAs QWW respectively, under applied

external fields(electric field or magnetic field). In previous papers[20-21], we used also the

quasi-one-dimensional effective potential model proposed by Ref. [18] and focused on the

calculation of the ground-state and lowest excited-state binding energies of a hydrogenic impurity

in QWWs [20]and the ground-state binding energies of a hydrogenic impurity in a cylindrical

quantum dot [21]with a lateral parabolic potential under an axial magnetic field and an electric

field. All the results showed that the binding energies depend highly on geometry of the QD,

impurity positions and external fields. Also, it is noticed that most theoretical works mentioned

above focus on the ground-state or lowest excited-state binding energy while it is little

investigation to the higher excited-state binding energies of hydrogenic donor impurity in a QD

due to the limitations of the calculation method. In addition, to our knowledge, there has been less
work on the Stark effect of an impurity state in a rectangular quantum dot (RQD), but also one

may find few recent studies dealing with the ground-state binding energy of impurity in a

rectangular parallelepiped-shaped QD[14].

In this paper, using the finite-difference method within the quasi-one-dimensional effective
potential model, we calculate the ground and first 9 excited state binding energies of a hydrogenic
donor impurity in a RQD within effective mass approximation in the presence of electric field, and
investigate dependence of the ground and first 9 excited-state binding energies on the impurity
positions and electric field. The rest of the paper is organized as follows: In Sec.II we describe our
theoretical model, our numerical results are discussed in Sec. III, and finally In Sec. IV
conclusions are presented.

II. THEORY AND CALCULATION

The effective-mass Hamiltonian of an electron in a RQD in the presence of a hydrogenic
impurity for an electric field applied parallel to the z-axis (see Fig. 1) can be described as
e2
H = H0 − (1)
ε ri
with the Hamiltonian in the absence of the impurity
2 2
H0 = − ∇ + e Fz + Vc ( x, y, z ) (2)
2me

where e and me are the electronic charge and the effective mass respectively, ε denotes the

dielectric constant, ri = (x - xi )2 +(y - yi )2 +(z - zi )2 gives the distance of the electron from the

impurity with xi , yi and zi coordinates of the impurity in the quantum dot, F > 0 is the

electric field, and Vc ( x, y, z ) is the confining potential which takes the value zero in the interior of
the quantum dot and it is infinity otherwise.
In the following calculation,we adopt the effective Bohr radius a* = 2ε / me e2 as the unit of
2
length, the effective electron Rydberg Ry = e as the unit of energies and F0 = e as
2ε a * ε a *2
the unit of electric field.
Solving the following SchrÖdinger equations by the method of variable separation in
Cartesian coordinates ,
H 0ψ nmk
(0)
( x, y, z ) = Enmk
(0)
ψ nmk
(0)
( x, y , z ) (3)

we can obtain the exact solution

ψ nmk
(0)
( x, y, z ) = ψ nm
(0)
( x, y )ψ k(0) ( z ) (4)

with
2 x 1 y 1
ψ nm
(0)
( x, y ) = sin[mπ ( − )] × sin[nπ ( − )] (5)
L L 2 L 2
and
ψ k(0) = CAi (z)
 + DBi ( z ) (6)
The corresponding eignvalue of the Hamiltonian operator without the impurity,
π2
(0)
Emnk = Enm
(0)
+ Ek(0) = ( )(m 2 + n 2 ) + Ek(0) (7)
L2
where 
Ai (z) and Bi ( z ) are the two independent solutions of the Airy equation,

z = ξ ( z − Ek(0) / 2 F ) with ξ = ( F )1/3 .Using the infinite confining potential well model,when

z = H / 2 , the wave functionψ k(0) ( z ) = 0 . This leads to the condition

Ek(0) H E (0) H
CAi[ξ (− + )] + DBi[ξ (− k + )] = 0 (8a)
2F 2 2F 2
Ek(0) H E (0) H
CAi[ξ (− − )] + DBi[ξ (− k − )] = 0 (8b)
2F 2 2F 2
The energy levels Ek(0) are obtained by solving the transcendental equation as follows

E0( k ) H E (k ) H E (k ) H E (k ) H
Ai[ξ (− + )] × Bi[ξ (− 0 − ) = Ai[ξ (− 0 − )] × Bi[ξ (− 0 + )] (9)
2F 2 2F 2 2F 2 2F 2
where m ,n and k are quantum numbers in the x, y and z directions respectively.
Considering the impurity effect, we can not solve exactly Eq. (1) due to the intrinsic
inseparability of the Coulomb potential. However, it is permissible to replace the Coulomb
potential with the effective interaction potential energy Veff ( z ) by using the effective potential

approximation proposed in Ref. [18] which has shown that the results given with the effective
potential are very close to the exact one. The Veff ( z ) is defined as[19]
∞
2 2
Veff ( z ) = ∫ ∫ dxdydϕ ψ
(0)
mn ( x, y ) (10)
−∞ ri
2
With the infinite confining potential well model and the help of Eq. (6a), ψ mn
(0)
( x, y) can be

obtained,
⎧4 x 1 y 1
⎪ sin [mπ ( − )]isin [nπ ( − )] x < L / 2, y < L / 2，z < H / 2
2 2
2
ψ mn
(0)
( x, y ) = ⎨ L2 L 2 L 2 (11)
⎪⎩0 elsewhere

The Veff ( z ) can be rewritten as

L/2
2 2
Veff ( z ) = ∫ ψ mn
(0)
( x, y ) dxdy (12)
−L/2 ri

The Coulomb potential 1 / ri performs Fourier transforms by introducing convergence factor

e−ur , and after integrating over the coordinates, set as u → 0 , the expression as
∞
1    4π
∫re
− uri
f (q) = e− iq i ri d 3 ri = (13)
−∞ i q2
Then, f (q ) performs inverse Fourier transform, and the Coulomb potential 1 / ri is expressed as
the integral
∞
1 1 4π iqi i ri 3
=
ri (2π )3 ∫
−∞ q
2
e dq (14)

Substituting Eq. (15) into Eq. (13) , we can obtain

 
+∞
eiq i ri
L/2
1 2
Veff ( z ) = ∫ ψ ( x, y ) ∫ d q 2 dxdy
(0) 3

π2 −L/2
mn
−∞ q
L/2 +∞ i[ qx ( x − xi ) + q y ( y − yi ) + qz ( z − zi )]
4 x 1 y 1 e
2 2 ∫
= sin 2 [mπ ( − )]isin 2 [nπ ( − )] ∫ d 3 q dxdy (15)
L π −L/2 L 2 L 2 −∞ qx 2 + q y 2 + qz 2

Integrating over coordinates x and y respectively, the following expressions can be given after a
straightforward calculation
L/2
x 1 L Lq 1 Lq Lq
∫
−L/2
sin 2 mπ ( − )eiqx x dx = {sin c( x ) − [sin c( m + x )e − imπ + sin c( m − x )eimπ ]}=f m (qx )
L 2 2 2π 2 2π 2π
(16a)

L/2
y 1 iq y L Lq y 1 Lq y − inπ Lq y inπ
∫
−L/2
sin 2 nπ ( − )e y dy = {sin c(
L 2 2 2π
) − [sin c(n +
2 2π
)e + sin c( n −
2π
)e ]}=f n (q y ) (16b)

where sin c( x) = sin π x / (π x) is sinc function。Substituting Eqs. (16) into Eq. (15) , the Veff ( z )

is expressed as follows
+∞
4 eiqz ( z − zi )] −i ( q x + q y )
Veff ( z ) =
Lπ
2 2 ∫q
−∞ x
2
+ q y 2 + qz 2
f m ( q x ) f n ( q y )e x i y i d 3 q (17)

Integrating over momenta qz ,

∞
1 π − qx + q y z − zi
∫e
iqz ( z − zi )
dqz = e
−∞
qx + q y + qz
2 2 2
qx + q y

(18)
+∞
4 π − qx + q y z − i ( qx xi + q y yi )
Veff ( z ) =
Lπ
2 2 ∫
−∞ qx + q y
e e f m (qx ) f n (q y )dqx dq y (19)

In cylindrical coordinates, the effective interaction potential Veff ( z ) is expressed as the integral
2π ∞
1
∫ dθ ∫ I
− q z − zi
Veff ( z ) = ( q , θ ) I m ( q , θ )e dq (20)
π
n
0 0

where
Lq sin θ Lq sin θ
I n (q,θ )= sin c( ) cos( yi q sin θ ) − sin c(n − ) cos( yi q sin θ − nπ ) (21a)
2π 2π
Lq cos θ Lq cos θ
I m (q,θ )= sin c( ) cos( xi q cos θ ) − sin c( m − ) cos( xi q cos θ − mπ ) (21b)
2π 2π
Therefor, the Hamiltonian (1) can be rewritten as
H = −∇ 2 + 2 Fz + Vc ( x, y, z ) − Veff ( z ) (22)
Similarly, solving the following SchrÖdinger equations by the method of variable separation in
Cartesian coordinates,
Hψ nmk ( x, y, z ) = Enmkψ nmk ( x, y, z ) (23)

We can find the eigenfuction and the eigenvalue as follows,

ψ nmk ( x, y, z ) = ψ nm
(0)
( x, y )ψ k ( z ) (24)

and
π2
Emnk = Enm
(0)
+ Ek = ( )(m2 + n 2 ) + Ek (25)
L2
Notice that the transverse eigenfuction and eigenvalue in Eq. (23) are identical with one
given in Eq. (3). We can obtain the longitudinal eigenfuction ψ k ( z ) and eigenvalue Ek , solving
numerically the following longitudinal Hamiltonian operator (26) by the finite-difference method
on a one-dimensional mesh
H z = −∇ 2 − Veff ( z ) + 2 Fz (26)
(0)
The binding energy Ebj of the impurity is defined as the energy Emnk without the impurity minus

the energy Emnk with the impurity, so the expression of the jth-state binding energy is given by

Ebj = Emnk
(0)
− Emnk (27)

III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

In GaAs the electron effective mass denotes me = 0.067m0 , where m0 is the free electron

mass and ε = 12.58 . With this set of parameters, the effective units correspond to a*  100 Α ,
Ry  5.7 meV and F0  11.5 KV/cm. In the following figures, the side of square cross section of

QD is L = a * and the The height is H = 2a * in the atomic units we are using.

At first, we take into account electron energy in the RQD for the electric field applied in the
positive z direction, when the impurity is absence. Fig. 2 shows the first 10 energy levels for an
electron in the RQD as a function of the electric field without the impurity. The states in the
following figure are labeled with the index j corresponding to the states (m, n, k), where j=1→(1, 1,
1); j=2→(1, 1, 2); j=3→(1, 1, 3); j=4→(2, 1, 1); j=5→(1, 2, 1); j=6→(2, 1, 2); j=7→(1, 2, 2);
j=8→(2, 1, 3); j=9→(1, 2, 3); j=10→(2, 2, 1). From this figure, the energy levels (j=1, 2, 3, 10)
are singlets while other energy states are doublets. The all energy levels decrease and lead to the
crossing one another (except for the ground state) with increasing electric field. The reason is that
the electric field applied along the z-axis influences only Ez component z of the energy states. For
example, the excited states (j=4,5) are lower than the excited states (j=3 and j=2) with the
increasing electric field due to Ez component z of the states (j=4,5) being lower than those of the
states (j=3 and j=2).
The existence of the impurity greatly change electron energy spectrum in the QD. The Stark
effect of an impurity state has been major subject in the semiconductor quantum physics. Below
we discuss the electron energy levels for the impurity located the center of the RQD and
investigate impact of the electric field on the energy states. As shown in Fig. 3 which the binding
energy of the impurity located the center of the RQD is as function of the electric field parallel to
z-axis. Comparing Fig. 3 with Fig. 2, we can see that the impurity effect has great influence on the
electron energy spectrum in the RQD and the different energy states (ground state and first 9
excited states) have various degree of dependence on the impurity effect. The binding energies Ebj
(j=1,4,5,10) decease monotonically with the electric field. The Ebj (j=2,6,7) firstly increase and
reach a peak value, then decrease with increasing electric field, while the Ebj (j=3,8,9) firstly
decrease and reach a peak value, then increase with the applied electric field. Most of theoretical
works think that the binding energy of the impurity depends generally on the distance between
electron and impurity position[12-13]. When the impurity is close to the position of the largest
2
probability density ψ maxj ( x, y, z ) of the electron, the binding energies increases, vice versa. With
2
the help of the distribution of probability density ψ j ( x, y, z ) in one-dimension infinite potential
2
well model, we can calculate the positions of ψ maxj ( x, y, z ) in the absence of the electric field

and impurity as shown in table 1 which lists the position coordinates (x, y, z) of the first 10
2
ψ maxj ( x, y, z ) for an electron in the RQD. From this table, the position coordinates (x, y, z) of
2
ψ max j ( x, y, z ) (j=1,4,5,10) are located on the plane z=0, and the position of ψ max1 ( x, y, z ) for the
2

ground state is the closest to that of the impurity. When the electric field is absence, the
ground-state binding energy Eb1 is the largest. An electric field applied along z-axis positive
direction leads that these positions move from the plane z=0 toward z-axis negative direction,
2
which makes the positions of ψ maxj ( x, y, z ) far from the impurity. So the increase of electric field

results in reduction of the binding energies Ebj (j=1,4,5,10). Note that the Eb4 and Eb5 ( the Eb6 and
Eb7, and Eb8 and Eb9 discussed below) are identical with the electric field because of their equal
distances between the positions of the largest probability density and the impurity. For
2
ψ max j ( x, y, z ) (j=2,6,7), the positions are located on the planes z=0.5a* (the upper of RQD)and
2
z=-0.5a* (the lower of the RQD), and the position of ψ max 2 ( x, y , z ) is closer to that of impurity

center, which leads to binding energy Eb2 larger than the Eb6 (Eb7) without the electric field. An
electric field applied along z-axis positive direction leads that these upper peaks close to the
impurity, which promotes increase of the binding energies Ebj (j=2,6,7). In such situation, the
binding energy mainly depends on the distance between the impurity center and the position of the
the upper peak. When the electric field increases to some value, the distances between the
positions of the upper peaks and the impurity reach the smallest value, and the binding energies
are the largest at the moment. Then with the continued increase of the electric field, the positions
of the upper peaks are far from the impurity center, the binding energies start to decrease with
2
electric field. For ψ max j ( x, y, z ) (j=3,8,9), the positions are located on the three planes
z=2/3a*(the upper of RQD), z=0 (the middle of RQD) and z=-2/3a* (the lower of RQD), where
the electron on the plane z=0 is the closest to the impurity with zero field. The binding energies Ebj
(j=3,8,9) depend mainly on the interaction between positions of the middle peaks and the impurity
at the moment. When an electric field is applied along the positive z axis, the positions of the
middle peaks (j=3,8,9) are far from the the impurity center. The binding energies start to decease
with the applied field. Meanwhile, the positions of the upper peaks (j=3,8,9) are move toward the
the impurity center. When the electric field increases to some value, The binding energies Ebj
(j=3,8,9) reduce to the smallest value. Then , the electric field continue to increase, and the
binding energies Ebj (j=3,8,9) are determined mainly by the distance between the positions of the
upper peaks (j=3,8,9) located at the upper half of the RQD and the impurity. The field pushes the
positions of the upper peaks (j=3,8,9) downwards , the Ebj (j=3,8,9) increase.
Above, we explain well the dependence of the binding energies of an on-center impurity state
on the electric field applied along the axis z, by analyzing the distance between the positions of
peaks in the probability density distribution curves and the impurity center. In general, the
impurity can be anywhere in the RQD or even outside. In this case, the dependence of the binding
energies of the impurity on the electric field become more complicated, especially excited-state
binding energies. As shown in Fig. 4 which depicts the binding energies Ebj (j=1,2,3,4) as function
of the electric field for the impurity located at various positions in RQD ( points o, a, a’, b, c, d
and e) that are shown in Fig. 1. From this figure, we have seen these features which can not be
well understood by only analyzing the variation of distance between peak position and impurity
center as mentioned above. In fact, the strengths of peaks in the probability density distribution
curves have also certain contribution to the binding energies, particularly the excited-state binding
energies of off-central impurity. In order to explain these phenomena in Fig. 4, we present the
ground-state (Fig. 5(a)) and excites-state(j=2 and 3)(Fig. 5(b-c)) probability density of electron as
function of z for various electric fields in the absence of the impurity in Fig. 5. There is one peak
in the probability density distribution curves for ground state in Fig. 5(a), while There are two
and three peaks for the excite states j=2 and 3 in Fig. 5(b)-(c) respectively. The corresponding
peak positions are listed in table 1 in the absence of the electric field and impurity. The electric
field applied along positive z-axis can induce changes of the peak strengths and correspond to
positions in probability density curve. For ground state (j=1), the peak strength increases as the
electric field increases in Fig. 5(a). For the excite states (j=2 and 3), the strength of the upper peak
in RQD is increasing while the strength of the lower peak firstly decreases, then increases with the
field as shown in Fig. 5(b)-(c). Also, one can conclude that the probability density distribution
curve of the excite state j=4 has two peaks and two peak strengths are still the same but increase
with the filed since the positions of peaks are symmetric in the z direction. Any of the peak
positions in Fig. 5 pushed by field toward to negative z-axis. The peak strengths and positions
affect the interaction potential between electron and impurity, which determines mainly intensity
of the binding energy of impurity. The high peak strength can lead to increase of the binding
energy while the large distance between the position of peak and impurity center results in reduce
of the energy, which is an interesting competition. For example, in Fig. 4(b), when the impurity is
located at the center point o, the strength of the upper peak becomes large and the position of the
peak closes to the impurity, which causes the binding energy increase rapidly with the field. When
the upper peak position arrives at the center of impurity, the energy is largest. When we continue
to increase the electric field, the upper peak position gets away from the impurity and the peak
strength becomes larger. In this case, it is an interesting competition between the peak position and
strength inducing change of the binding energy as mentioned above, which results in binding
energy decreasing slowly with the field. When the impurity is located at the bottom point a’, the
applied electric field make the lower peak position close to point a’, but the peak strength firstly
decreases, then increase with the field. The result is that the binding energy firstly decreases, then
increases with the field. Similarly, we can understand these curves of the binding energy as
function of the electric field for different positions of the impurities in Fig. 4(a), (c) and (d). In
addition, from all through Fig. 4, the binding energy is the largest when the impurity is located at
the center of RQD with zero field and is lowest when the impurity is located at the corner of the
RQD (point e). The impurities located on the center of the RQD faces (points a and a’) have the
same binding energy without the electric field but have different energies with the field.
By seeing carefully Fig. 3 again, we can find also the competition of this dependence induced
by the peak positions and strengths. Example for the binding energies Ebj (j=1,4,5,10), the applied
field induces the peak position far away the impurity center while enhances the strength of peak.
The result is that the binding energies decrease slowly with the field, ever the energies appear to
be tendency of increase for high electric field.
Finally, in Fig. 6, we present the binding energies Ebj (j=1,2,3,4) of hydrogenic impurities as
a function of the impurity position in the RQD for zero electric field, where A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H,
I, J, K and L are different symmetry lines within the rectangular as show Fig. 1. From Fig.6(a), the
ground state binding energy Eb1 decreases as the impurity gets further from the center of the RQD
2
due to the position of the largest probability density ψ max1 ( x, y , z ) located at the center. For these

curves, the binding energy is higher along the horizontal axis (I) than for those direction which
poss through the center of the face of the RQD (C, D, H, K and L) and the edges of the RQD (F
and G). In Fig. 6(b)-(d), the dependence of the excite-state binding energies on the positions of
impurity has complex manner in which the binding energies are not simply decreasing with the
positions of impurity far from the center. From Fig. 6(b), for these curves (A, E, G, J, K and L)
passing through the plane z=0 to the plane z=H/2, the binding energies Eb2 firstly increase and
reach a peak value, then decrease with the positions of impurity far from the center plane z=0 ,
where the binding energy is lower passing through the edges of the RQD (G). For these curves
located at the planes z=0 (B, H and I) and z=H/2 (C, D and F), the binding energies decease
monotonically with the positions of impurity, where the binding energies are higher along these
directions of curves located at the planes z=0 (B, H and I ) than these curves located at the planes
z=H/2 (C, D and F). In Fig. 6(c), the curves(A, E, J) described the binding energies Eb3 as function
of the positions of impurity show fluctuation characteristics, where the binding energy for the
curve (E) along the positive z-axis firstly decreases to the smaller value , then increases to the
higher value, and finally starts to decrease as the impurity gets far from the center of the RQD.
The binding energies along other curves decrease with the impurity positions. The binding energy
is higher along the horizontal axis (I) than along these curves poss through the center of the face of
the RQD (C, D, H, K and L ) which in turn have higher energy than passing through the edges of
the RQD (F and G). The binding energy Eb4 is shown as Fig .6(d) as function of the position of the
impurity, and along the horizontal axis (I) has a peak value at the 0.5 L/2 as expected, while the
energies along the other curves decrease as the positions of the impurity. The energies is higher
along these curves located at the center plane z=0 (B, G and I) than at the upper plane z=H/2 (C, D,
F). From all through figures, there is an identical feature that the energy is higher along the center
z-axis (curve E) than along the corresponding parallel axis (curve K) which has higher energy than
along the parallel axis (curve G). These features mentioned above are understandable. For zero
field, the binding energies are determined mainly by relative distances between positions of the
peaks in probability density curve and impurity center, For different energy states, the positions of
the peaks in probability density curve are not identical without the impurity as shown in table 1.
For the excite states, there are two or three positions of the peaks in RQD, which results in
complex effects of the binding energies on the impurity positions when the impurity moves along
different directions.

IV. CONCLUSIONS

Within the quasi-one-dimensional effective potential model,we calculate the ground and the
first 9 excited-state binding energies of a hydrogenic donor impurity in a rectangular quantum dot,
and investigate detailedly the dependence of the binding energies on the impurity positions and
electric fields. For the ground-state binding energy, compared with Ref. [13] which investigated
the binding energies in a cubic quantum box, the following results are found: (1) our results
qualitatively agree with those of Ref. [13]. In absence of electric field, the position of the largest
probability density is located at the center of the RQD. The result that the binding energy increases
when the impurity positions are close to the center of the RQD, while the energy decreases with
the impurity away from the center. In the present of the electric field , the position of the largest
probability density is pushed by the field toward the lower of the RQD, which induce decrease of
the binding energy for the impurity located at the upper of RQD and increase of the energy for the
impurity located at the lower of RQD; (2) The impurities along the curves D, F and H, the curves
B and J, the curves E and I, the curves C and L, and the curves F and G have the same binding
energy for the cubic quantum box in Ref. [13] but different energies for the RQD in zero electric
field.
We focus on discussing the dependence of the excite-state binding energies on the impurity
positions and electric field. The peaks of the excite-state probability density of an electron are not
only one position in the RQD with zero field as listed in table 1, which results in the complex
behavior for the dependence of the binding energy on the impurity positions and electric field. The
peak strength and positions of the probability density appear to be the critical control on this
complex behavior. The large strength of peak can lead to increase of the binding energy, while the
large distance between the position of peak and impurity center results in reduce of the energy.
The applied electric field affects the distribution of the peak strength and positions. The strength
of peak in the upper half of RQD is increasing while the strength of the lower peaks firstly
decreases, then increases as the field increases. Any of the peak positions pushed by field toward
to negative z-axis. For on-central impurities, the dependence of the binding energies on electric
field is determined mainly by the positions of peaks while the strength of peak takes as a small
perturbation. For off-central impurities, the strength of peak plays certain role on such dependence,
which results in obvious competition with the dependence induced by positions of peak.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This work is supported partly by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant
No. 41202146), Science and Technology Project of Education Department of Heilongjiang
Province of China (item No.12541070 and 12541064),the Natural Science Foundation of
Heilongjiang Province of China (No.A201402), and the Northeastern Petroleum University Youth
Science Foundation of China (2012QN128).
REFERENCES
[1] I. D. Mikhailov, F. J. Betancur, R. A. Escorcia, and J. Sierra-Ortega, Phys.Rev. B. 67 (2003)
115317.
[2] C. Y. Hsieh, J. Appl. Phys. 92 (2002) 484.
[3] Y. Sidor, B. Partoens, and F. M. Peeters, Phys. Rev. B. 71 (2005) 165323.
[4] P. Villamil, C. Cabra and N. Porras-Montenegro, Microelectronics Journal. 39 (2008) 466.
[5] N. Porras-Montenegro and S. T. Perez-Merchancano, Phys. Rev.B. 46 (1992) 9780.
[6] C. C. Yang, L. C. Liu, and S. H. Chang, Phys. Rev. B. 58 (1998) 1954.
[7] S.T. Perez-Merchancano, R. Franco, and J. Silva-Valencia, Microelectronics Journal. 39 (2008)
383.
[8] F. K. Boz and S. Aktas, Superlattices Microstruct. 37 (2005) 281.
[9] C. X. Xia, F. C. Jiang, S. Y. Wei, and X. Zhao, Microelectronics Journal.38 (2007) 663.
[10] F. J. Ribeiro, A. Latge, M. Pacheco, and Z. Barticevic, J. Appl. Phys. 82 (1997) 270.
[11] J. L. Zhu and Xi Chen, Phys. Rev. B 50, 4497 (1994).
[12] J. M. Ferreyra, P. Bosshard, and C. R. Proetto, Phys. B 55, 13682 (1997).
[13] C. I. Mendoza, G. J. Vazquez, M. del Castillo-Mussot, and H. N. Spector, Phys. Rev. B 71,
075330 (2005).
[14] S. S. Li, and J. B. Xia, J. Appl. Phys. 101, 093716 (2007).
[15] S. Aktas, F. K. Boz, and S. S. Dalgic, Physica E (Amsterdam) 28, 96 (2005).
[16] F. J. Ribeiro, A. Latge, M. Pacheco, and Z. Barticevic, J. Appl. Phys. 82 , 270 (1997).
[17] K. D. Zhu and S. W. Gu, Phys. Lett. A 181, 465 (1993).
[18] S. Bednarek, B. Szafran, T. Chwiej, and J. Adamowski, Phys. Rev. B. 68 (2003) 045328.
[19] X. T. An and J. J. Liu, J. Appl. Phys. 99 (2006) 123713.
[20]S. Wang, G. Z. Wei, and Y. HAN, Commun. Theor. Phys. (Beijing, China) 52 (2009) 953.
[21]S. Wang, G. Z Wei, and G.Y. Yi, Int J Mod Phys. B , 24 (2010) 4293.
Figure and table captions
2
Table 1 The positions of coordinates (x, y, z) of the greatest probability density ψ maxj ( x, y, z )

without the electric field.

Fig. 1 A schematic representation of a rectangular RQD under an electric. The symmetry lines
(A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L) show may impurity positions, the points o, a, a’, b, c,
d and e are several special impurity positions in the RQD.
Fig . 2 The first 10 energy levels for an electron in the rectangular quantum dot as a function of
the electric field without the impurity. The states in the following figure are labeled with
the index j corresponding to the states (m, n, k), where j=1→(1, 1, 1); j=2→(1, 1, 2);
j=3→(1, 1, 3); j=4→(2, 1, 1); j=5→(1, 2, 1); j=6→(2, 1, 2); j=7→(2, 1, 2); j=8→(2,
1, 3); j=9→(2, 1, 3); j=10→(2, 2, 1).
Fig . 3 The first 10 binding energies of the impurity located the center of the RQD are as
function of the electric field parallel to z-axis.
Fig . 4 The binding energies Ebj (j=1,2,3,4) are depicted as function of the electric field for the

impurity located at various positions in RQD , where the points o, a, a’, b, c, d and e are

different center points within the rectangular dot as show Fig. 1.

Fig . 5 The ground and excited-state probability densities of electron ψ 1 ( x, y , z ) (Fig. a),
2

2
ψ 2 ( x, y, z ) (Fig. b) and ψ 3 ( x, y, z ) (Fig. c) are described as function of z for different
2

fields and x=y=0.

Fig . 6 The binding energies Ebj (j=1,2,3,4) of hydrogenic impurities as a function of the
impurity
position in the rectangular quantum dot, where A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K and L are
different symmetry lines within the rectangular dot as show Fig. 1.
 2
Table 1 the positions of coordinates (x, y, z) of ψ maxj ( x, y, z )

2
ψ maxj ( x, y, z ) j=1 j=2 j=3 j=4 j=5 j=6 j=7 j=8 j=9 j=10

(0.25,0,0.5) (0,0.25,0.5) (0.25,0,2/3) (0,0.25,2/3) (0.25,0.25,0)

(0,0,2/3)
(0,0,0.5) (0.25,0,0) (0,0.25,0) (0.25,0,0) (0,0.25,0)
(0.25,0,-0.5) (0,0.25,-0.5) (0.25,-0.25,0)
(0.25,0,-2/3) (0,0.25,-2/3)
(x,y,z)/a* (0,0,0) (0,0,0)
(-0.25,0,2/3) (0,-0.25,2/3)
(-0.25,0,0.5) (0,-0.25,0.5) (-0.25,0.25,0)
(0,0,-0.5) (-0.25,0,0) (0,-0.25,0) (-0.25,0,0) (0,-0.25,0)
(0,0,-2/3)
(-0.25,0,-0.5) (0,-0.25,-0.5) (-0.25,0,-2/3) (0,-0.25,-2/3) (-0.25,-0.25,0)

Fig. 1
Fig.2

Fig. 3
Fig.44
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Highlights
The analytical form of the quasi-one-dimensional effective potential is obtained.
We calculate the higher-state binding energies of a hydrogenic impurity.
Dependence of higher-state energy on impurity and electric field has complex manner.
The peak strength of electronic probability density plays a role on binding energy.
Variation of the peak strength and position appears to control on complex manner.