See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/228806234

Quantum Entanglement in a Graphene Sheet

Article in Journal- Korean Physical Society · March 2009

DOI: 10.3938/jkps.54.921

CITATIONS READS

9 1,197

3 authors, including:

Zhan-Ning Hu Kyung-Soo Yi
Tianjin Polytechnic University Pusan National University
38 PUBLICATIONS 229 CITATIONS 111 PUBLICATIONS 717 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Zhan-Ning Hu on 26 March 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Journal of the Korean Physical Society, Vol. 54, No. 2, February 2009, pp. 921∼925

Quantum Entanglement in a Graphene Sheet

Zhan-Ning Hu, Kee-Su Park and Kyung-Soo Yi∗

Department of Physics, Pusan National University, Busan 609-735

(Received 17 February 2008)

We present the quantum entanglement and the thermal entanglement in a graphene layer. The
model Hamiltonian is chosen within an effective-mass approximation, including the interaction
of intervalley and intravalley scattering processes. We find that the degenerate ground state is
unentangled and that the thermal concurrence decreases down to zero as the temperature increases.
A new maximally entangled quantum state is observed from the excited states of the system by
using a proper choice of the Hamiltonian parameters.

PACS numbers: 03.67.Mn, 72.15.Rn, 75.10.Jm

Keywords: Graphene, Concurrence, Quantum entanglement, Thermal entanglement

I. INTRODUCTION latter contributes a short-range potential and the inter-

The recent isolation of the two-dimensional monolayer
honeycomb crystal of carbon, called graphene, has gen-
erated tremendous interest [1, 2], partly because of its
potential applications in carbon-based nano-scale elec-
tronics [3], but also because of fundamental reasons [4,
5]. The discovery of graphene has opened new ways to
study some basic quantum relativistic phenomena that
have always been considered as very exotic. The ex-
periments have shown that the charge conductance of
2
graphene reaches a universal value 2 eh (2n + 1) at low
temperatures [6]. The electronic specific heat has re-
cently been found to show an unusual temperature be-
havior at low temperatures [5,7,8]. Furthermore, an un-
conventional half-integer quantum Hall effect has been
discovered. All these results are nicely in line with the-
oretical results based on an effective low-energy theory
of graphene in which charge carriers are massless Dirac
fermions [9,10].
One of the important aims for quantum computing
and quantum communication is to find an entangled re-
source in solid systems. The investigation of entangle-
ment has emerged in spin systems to advance quantum
information studies. As a basic type of spin interac-
tion, the Heisenberg Hamiltonian has been used for quan-
tum computation and quantum teleportation processes.
Quantum entanglement and thermal entanglement in the
Heisenberg spin model have been investigated by many
authors with different coupling parameters [11–17]. The
weak-localization correction to the conductivity for dis-
ordered electrons in a graphene sheet has been inves-
tigated by Suzuura and Ando [2] with consideration of
the intravalley scattering and intervalley scattering. The
∗ E-mail: ksyi@pusan.ac.kr
-921-
valley scattering is found to drive the system into the
orthogonal class at zero temperature. Hence, a crossover
from the symplectic class to the orthogonal class takes
place in graphene at low temperatures.
In this paper, we investigate the quantum entangle-
ment of the ground state and the thermal entanglement
of the mixed state for this single graphene sheet by in-
cluding the interaction of the intervalley scattering and
the intravalley scattering processes. The Hamiltonian of
the system is given within an effective-mass approxima-
tion by taking slowly-varying envelope functions around
the two Fermi points. The concurrence of the eigenstates
is calculated by taking into account valley scattering with
a phase shift. The thermal entanglement is studied in the
k representation. The variation of the entanglement is
discussed as functions of the band parameter γ and of
the valley scattering parameter for the ground state and
excited states in graphene.
II. GRAPHENE SHEET AND QUANTUM
ENTANGLEMENT
For a graphene sheet, a primitive unit cell of the hon-
eycomb lattice contains two sublattices. These two sub-
lattices (called A and B, respectively) are denoted by up
and down pseudospins in the representation of a Pauli
matrix −→σ = (σx , σy , σz ) . To represent the two inequiv-
alent valleys occurring at two Dirac points (K and K 0 ) in
terms of pseudospin, we introduce another Pauli matrix
−
→τ = (τx , τy , τz ). The Hamiltonian around two Dirac
points is given, within the effective-mass approximation,
by
h i
H=γ b kx (σ x ⊗ I2 ) + b
ky (σ y ⊗ τ z ) + Hint , (1)
-922- Journal of the Korean Physical Society, Vol. 54, No. 2, February 2009

where bkx and b

ky are wave number operators [1,2]. The Then, the concurrence C is defined by [17]
interaction part, Hint , is written as
  C = max {λ1 − λ2 − λ3 − λ4 , 0} , (7)
1 e−iα 0 0
 eiα 1 0 0  where λ1 , λ2 , λ3 and λ4 are the positive square roots
Hint = Ω 
0 0

−iα  , (2)
1 e of the eigenvalues of the matrix R in descending order.
0 0 eiα 1 Then, the concurrences of the above energy eigenstates,
|φi i, are, respectively,
where Ω is the intervalley and the intravalley scattering
processes accompanied by a phase shift α. Eigenstates |k22 |
in the k representation are accompanied by the product C (φ1 ) = C (φ2 ) = p 2 2
,
1+ k11 + 2k11 + k22
of two pseudospin states. Then, for two pseudospins,
we work in the standard basis {|00i , |01i , |10i , |11i}. |k22 |
C (φ3 ) = C (φ4 ) = p 2 − 2k 2
. (8)
Here, in writing the state |ab >, we mean that a = 0 (1) 1 + k11 11 + k22
denotes the sublattice A (B) and b = 0 (1) denotes the
Dirac point K (K’). The intravalley scattering process The ground state of the system is settled by the compe-
gives only the potential in the diagonal element in Eq. tition among the various parameters in the Hamiltonian.
(2) and the non-diagonal element comes from the inter- When the interaction parameter Ω > 0, the ground state
valley scattering process. After performing a straightfor- is |φ1 i if k11 > 0, otherwise, the ground state is |φ3 i if
ward calculation, we can write the energy eigenstates of k11 < 0. When Ω < 0, the ground state is |φ2 i if k11 > 0
the Hamiltonian, Eq. (1), as and the ground state is |φ4 i if k11 < 0. This means that
the ground state has the smaller entanglement. When
1 e−iα
|φ1 i = e−iα A+ |00i + |01i + |10i + A+ |11i , k11 = 0, the system is in a degenerate state formed by
2 2 |φ1 i and |φ3 i for Ω > 0. The ground state is represented
1 e −iα as the linear combination of the two states,
|φ2 i = −e−iα A+ |00i + |01i + |10i − A+ |11i ,
2 2
e−iα 1 1

|φ3 i = − |00i + A− |01i − e−iα A− |10i + |11i , φ+
G = √ eiβ1 |φ1 i + |φ3 i , (9)
2 2 2
e−iα 1 where β1 is the relative phase, in which the two states
|φ4 i = − |00i − A− |01i + e−iα A− |10i + |11i .
2 2 are equally likely to be, according to the principle of
(3) the maximum entropy in a microcanonical ensemble. If
Here the coefficients A± are defined by Ω < 0, the degenerate state is formed by states |φ2 i and
|φ4 i under the case of k11 = 0,
k11 ± 1 ∓ ik22
A± = − p . (4) 1

2 ± 2k
2 1 + k11 2
11 + k22 φ−
G = √ eiβ2 |φ2 i + |φ4 i , (10)
2
The corresponding energy eigenvalues are given, respec-
tively, as where β2 denotes the relative phase between states |φ2 i
 q  and |φ4 i . The concurrences of the degenerate states are,
2 2
E1 = Ω 1 − 1 + k11 + 2k11 + k22 , respectively,
 q 
|k22 cos β1 |
|k22 cos β2 |
2 2
E2 = Ω 1 + 1 + k11 + 2k11 + k22 , C φ+
G = p 2
, C φ−
G = p 2
. (11)
1 + k22 1 + k22
 q 
2 2
E3 = Ω 1 − 1 + k11 − 2k11 + k22 , The relative phase β1,2 will be discussed in the next sec-
tion.
 q 
In Figures 1(a) and 1(b), we illustrate the concurrence
2 2
E4 = Ω 1 + 1 + k11 − 2k11 + k22 , (5) of the ground state |φ1 i as a function of the band param-
eter γ and the scattering strength Ω, respectively. One
where k11 = γkx /Ω and k22 = γky /Ω. Throughout the observes a monotonic increase in the concurrence with
paper, we shall work in units such that γ, Ω, kx and ky the band parameter for a fixed Ω, kx and ky . However,
are dimensionless for convenience. the concurrence shows a monotonic decrease with the
The quantum entanglement of the eigenstates can be valley scattering strength for a fixed γ. It is very inter-
specified by the value of the concurrence [17,18]. Within esting to observe the increase in the concurrence with ky
this scheme, let us introduce a matrix R defined by and the decrease with kx . Figures 2(a) and 2(b) show the
variations of the concurrence with the band parameter
R = ρ (σy ⊗ σy ) ρ∗ (σy ⊗ σy ) (6)
and the scattering strength, respectively, for the excited
and evaluate the eigenvalues of R. Here, ρ is the den- state |φ3 i. We find that the maximally entangled quan-
sity matrix and ρ∗ indicates the complex conjugate of ρ. tum state can be obtained when the proper parameters
Quantum Entanglement in a Graphene Sheet· · · – Zhan-Ning Hu et al. -923-

(a) kx = 1 , k y = 1
kx = 1 , k y = 1 (b)
kx = 1 , k y = 5
kx = 1 , k y = 5 kx = 5 , k y = 1
Concurrence C

Concurrence C
kx = 5 , k y = 1

Band Parameter γ Scattering Strenth Ω

Fig. 1. (Color online) Concurrence of the ground state in a graphene sheet for various wave numbers: (a) band parameter,
γ, dependence for Ω = 1 and (b) scattering strength, Ω, dependence for γ = 1.

kx = 1 , k y = 1
(a) kx = 1 , k y = 1 (b) kx = 1 , k y = 5
kx = 1 , k y = 5 kx = 5 , k y = 1
Concurrence C

Concurrence C

kx = 5 , k y = 1

Band Parameter γ Scattering Strenth Ω

Fig. 2. (Color online) Concurrence of the excited states in a graphene sheet: (a) band parameter, γ, dependence for Ω = 1
and (b) scattering strength, Ω, dependence for γ = 1.

are chosen. For example, we can get a maximally entan- depend on the band parameter, the scattering strength
gled quantum state (MEQS) and the wave numbers kx and ky in graphene. For our

Hamiltonian, Eq. (1), with valley scattering processes,
|φ3 i = −e−iα |00i − i |01i + ie−iα |10i + |11i /2 (12) the density matrix is written as
by setting γ = Ω = kx = ky = 1. Notice that the above  
r11 r12 r13 r14
MEQS can also be found with different choices of the 1  r∗ r11 r23 r24 
parameters. Hence, the excited state can repeat at the ρ (T ) =  12 , (13)
Z ∗
r13 ∗
r23 r11 r34 
MEQS for various wave numbers kx and ky , band pa- ∗ ∗ ∗
r14 r24 r34 r11
rameters γ and interaction parameters Ω.
where

III. THERMAL ENTANGLEMENT AT Z

Z = e−βE1 + e−βE2 + e−βE3 + e−βE4 , r11 = ,
FINITE TEMPERATURES 4
1 −iα  −βE1
r12 = e e A+
At finite temperature, the density operator of the sys- 2

tem is given by ρ (T ) = e−βH /Z in thermal equilib- − e−βE2 + e−βE3 − e−βE4 A∗− ,
rium, where Z = T re−βH is the partition function and 1 1 −βE2

−1
β = (kT ) with k being the Boltzmann constant. The r13 = e−βE1 A+ + e + e−βE3 − e−βE4 A∗− ,
2 2
corresponding state of the system is a mixture of en- 1 −βE1


ergy eigenstates. Accordingly, many interesting features r23 = − −e + e−βE2 + e−βE3 + e−βE4 eiα ,
4
are anticipated from this mixing of the ground state and 1

excited states with various entangled properties, which r14 = − −e−βE1 + e−βE2 + e−βE3 + e−βE4 e−iα ,
4
-924-
(a)
Concurrence C
Temperature kT
Fig. 3. (Color online) Temperature behavior of the thermal concurrence in a graphene sheet for γ = 1 and α = π/3: (a)
kx = 1 and ky = 3 and (b) Ω = 1.
1 −βE1 ∗ 1 −βE2
cesses. We find that the concurrence of the ground state
r24 = e A+ + e + e−βE3 − e−E4 A− ,
2 2
1 −iα  −βE1 ∗
r34 = e e A+
2
 nation of two energy eigenstates. A new MEQS is ob-
− e−βE2 + e−βE3 − e−βE4 A− . (14)
By using the scheme denoted by Eqs. (6) and (7), we
can calculate the thermal concurrence of the system.
When k11 = 0, in the limit of the zero temperature, we
2
k22
have λ1 = λ4 = 0 and λ2 = λ3 = 14 1+k 2 when Ω > 0,
22
and λ1 = λ2 = 0 and λ3 = λ4 = 41 , when Ω < 0. Hence,
the concurrence of the system is zero in the zero tem-
perature limit if k11 = 0. From the discussion in section
II, we note that the system is in a degenerate ground
state, that is, C (T → 0) |k11 =0 = 0. Hence, the relative
phase
angles β1,2 = nπ + π2 with n = 0, ±1, ±2, · · · and
C φ± G = 0. This means that the degenerate ground
state reveals a disentanglement property in graphene .
In Figure 3, the thermal concurrence is presented as
a function of the temperature. It is seen that the con-
currence decreases down to zero as the temperature in-
creases. We observe that the threshold temperature can
be manipulated by varying the scattering strength and
wave number operators. It is interesting that the thresh-
old temperature increases when the scattering parame-
ter Ω increases, although we know that the concurrence
decreases monotonically when Ω increases in the ground
state. The wave numbers kx and ky also affect the thresh-
old temperature, but a higher kx results in a slow de-
crease in the concurrence and a higher ky shows a rapid
decrease in the concurrence at lower temperature for a
given set of parameters.
IV. CONCLUSION
We have investigated the quantum entanglement and
the thermal entanglement of a graphene sheet by includ-
ing the intervalley and the intravalley scattering pro-
Journal of the Korean Physical Society, Vol. 54, No. 2, February 2009
Ω = 1.0 (b) kx = 1 , k y = 3
Ω = 0.5 kx = 1 , k y = 9
Ω = 0.1
Concurrence C
kx = 6 , k y = 9
Temperature kT
is not bigger than that of the excited states. The degen-
erate ground state is unentangled and is a linear combi-
tained from the excited state of the system by properly
choosing the valley scattering strength, the band param-
eter and the wave number. The system can repeat in the
MEQS when the related parameters vary, which tells us
that a new non-diagonal quantum measurement exists
in graphene. At finite temperatures, the thermal con-
currence decreases down to zero as the temperature in-
creases. The threshold temperature can be manipulated
by varying the scattering strength and the wave number
operators. The quantum entanglement and the thermal
entanglement of the system for some specific situations
will be presented elsewhere.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We acknowledge the support of the Korea Research
Foundation (KRF-2006-005-J02804).
REFERENCES
[1] E. McCann, K. Kechedzhi, Vladimir I. Fal’ko, H.
Suzuura, T. Ando and B. L. Altshuler, Phys. Rev. Lett.
97, 146805 (2006).
[2] H. Suzuura and T. Ando, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 266603
(2002).
[3] K.-S. Park and K. S. Yi, J. Korean Phys. Soc. 50, 1873
(2007).
[4] K.-S. Park and K. S. Yi, J. Korean Phys. Soc. 50, 1678
(2007).
[5] K. S. Yi, D. Kim, K.-S. Park and S. Kim, J. Korean
Phys. Soc. 50, 1674 (2007).
[6] M. Wilson, Phys. Today Jan. 51, 21 (2006).
[7] K. S. Yi, D. Kim, K.-S. Park and J. J. Quinn, Physica
E 40, 1715 (2008).
 View publication stats
Quantum Entanglement in a Graphene Sheet· · · – Zhan-Ning Hu et al.
[8] K. S. Yi, D. Kim and K.-S. Park, Phys. Rev. B 76,
115410 (2007).
[9] I. A. Lukyanchuk and Y. Kopelevich, Phys. Rev. Lett.
97, 256801 (2006).
[10] C. Berger, Z. Song, X. Li, X. Wu, N. Brown, C. Naud, D.
Mayou, T. Li, J. Hass, A. N. Marchenkov, E. H. Conrad,
P. N. First and W. A. de Heer Science 312, 1191 (2006).
[11] X. Wang, Phys. Rev. A 64, 012313 (2001).
[12] G. L. Kamta and A. F. Starace, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88,
107901 (2002).
[13] C. Anteneodo and A. M. C. Souza, J. Opt. B: Quant.
-925-
Semi. Opt. 5, 73 (2003).
[14] M. Asoudeh and V. Karimipour, Phys. Rev. A 71,022308
(2005).
[15] G. F. Zhang and S. S. Li, Phys. Rev. A 72, 034302
(2005).
[16] Z. N. Hu, S. H. Youn, K. Kang and C. S. Kim, J. Phys.
A: Math. Gen. 39, 10523 (2006).
[17] Z. N. Hu, K. S. Yi and K. S. Park, J. Phys. A: Math.
Gen. 40, 7283 (2007).
[18] W. K. Wootters, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 2245 (1998).