2016
DOI: 10.1038/npjqi.2016.8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Highly tunable exchange in donor qubits in silicon

Abstract: In this article we have investigated the electrical control of the exchange coupling (J) between donor-bound electrons in silicon with a detuning gate bias, crucial for the implementation of the two-qubit gate in a silicon quantum computer. We found that the asymmetric 2P-1P system provides a highly tunable exchange curve with mitigated J-oscillation, in which 5 orders of magnitude change in the exchange coupling can be achieved using a modest range of electric field (3 MV/m) for~15-nm qubit separation. Compar… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

2
57
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 51 publications
(59 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
2
57
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Tunneling and exchange in a coupled donor/QD system differs from two donors [18,19,21,[24][25][26] because the QD is a superposition of ±z valleys only, and the donor is a six-valley superposition as evidenced by latticeaperiodic components in the Fourier transforms of STM tunnel current maps ( Fig. 3c).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Tunneling and exchange in a coupled donor/QD system differs from two donors [18,19,21,[24][25][26] because the QD is a superposition of ±z valleys only, and the donor is a six-valley superposition as evidenced by latticeaperiodic components in the Fourier transforms of STM tunnel current maps ( Fig. 3c).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Experimentally measuring these oscillations is difficult since it would require to ability to change the valley phase of the QD wavefunction, or directly measuring < 0.5 meV values of exchange with direct transport, which is not possible in our scheme at 4.2 K . The QD state in the calculation was calibrated so that full configuration interaction (FCI) wavefunctions [26,77] reproduce experimentally measured spectra. A 5 nm STM tip radius was found to reproduce the bias where 0e → 1e and 1e → 2e QD transitions occur, away from the donor.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For two electrons in a single donor (D − ), ATB calculations followed by a self-consistent Hartree method were used to account for the electron-electron interaction in a mean-field way, while neglecting exchange [34,35]. A full configurationinteraction (FCI) computation has been performed for D − with single-electron wave functions obtained from the atomistic tight-binding method [36,37].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Tight-binding (TB) [36,37] and densityfunctional tight binding (DFTB) [38] methods that make use of these approximations are computationally attractive alternatives for electronic structure modeling of silicon donor qubit devices. Whereas TB methods have been used extensively for modeling silicon donor systems [31,32,[39][40][41][42][43], DFTB methods have not yet been extensively applied.…”
Section: Donor Electron Wave Function Simulationsmentioning
confidence: 99%