1991
DOI: 10.1103/physrevlett.66.1216
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Mutual friction between parallel two-dimensional electron systems

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Citation Types

38
636
3
3

Year Published

1996
1996
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
4
4

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 498 publications
(680 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
38
636
3
3
Order By: Relevance
“…Paradigmatic examples in the field of superconductivity include the high temperature superconducting cuprates [1, 2], and the iron pnictides [3], as well as artificially created superlattices, in which the Josephson coupling between the layers can be tunable continuously using thin film control [4,5]. There have also been extensive studies of coupled bilayer 2D systems, where exotic phases arise from the interlayer interactions [6][7][8][9][10][11][12].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Paradigmatic examples in the field of superconductivity include the high temperature superconducting cuprates [1, 2], and the iron pnictides [3], as well as artificially created superlattices, in which the Josephson coupling between the layers can be tunable continuously using thin film control [4,5]. There have also been extensive studies of coupled bilayer 2D systems, where exotic phases arise from the interlayer interactions [6][7][8][9][10][11][12].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Paradigmatic examples in the field of superconductivity include the high temperature superconducting cuprates [1, 2], and the iron pnictides [3], as well as artificially created superlattices, in which the Josephson coupling between the layers can be tunable continuously using thin film control [4,5]. There have also been extensive studies of coupled bilayer 2D systems, where exotic phases arise from the interlayer interactions [6][7][8][9][10][11][12].Among the various 2D systems currently under investigation, SrTiO 3 (STO) is of particular interest since it is a rare example of a high mobility doped semiconductor that is simultaneously superconducting. By confining electrons in STO two-dimensionally using field effect gating [13], heterointerfaces with LaTiO 3 [14], or LaAlO 3 [15,16], and δ-doping [17], the interplay between subband quantization and superconductivity can be investigated.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For layer densities higher than 6 Â 10 10 cm À2 , the h-h drag approaches a q D / T 2 regime, as expected for bilayers with sufficiently high density and large interlayer separation. 34,36 However, at the lowest density, the temperature dependence becomes slightly weaker, with c in the range 1.5-1.8. This is similar to previous results for low-density h-h bilayers, where a stronger than T 2 -dependence was observed at low temperature, crossing over to a weaker than T 2 -dependence at higher temperature.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Low-frequency ac (12 Hz) four-terminal Coulomb drag and magnetotransport measurements in a constant-current (5 or 10 nA) set-up were used to investigate the state of the system as a function of the temperature and density of the layers. The usual consistency checks for a linear relationship between drag voltage and drive current, scaling of the drag voltage with the Hall bar length-to-width ratio, and the effects of interlayer leakage 16,34 have been performed to exclude the contribution of spurious signals to the measured drag voltage (normally in the range of $nV). Onsager's reciprocity theorem, applied to bilayer systems in the linear response regime, predicts that the interchanging voltage and current probes in a Coulomb drag set-up at zero magnetic field should not affect the value of the drag resistivity.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…17͒: within the vortex paradigm, vortices in one layer drag the vortices in the other, but within the percolation picture, the drag resistance is solely due to interlayer "Coulomb drag," as studied in semiconductor heterostructures. 18 The sign and the magnitude of the drag within the two paradigms are different: vortex drag implies the same sign for the voltage drops in the two layers, sign͑V 1 ͒ = sign͑V 2 ͒, but the Coulomb drag yields an opposite sign for V 2 and V 1 . In addition, a vortex drag would be much stronger than a Coulomb drag, because the films' charge carrier density is orders of magnitude larger As the magnetic field B increases, the superconducting phase is destroyed, and a possible metallic phase emerges.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%