Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
M. J. Lea
Department of Physics, Royal Holloway, University of London, Egham, Surrey TW20 0EX, England
~Received 29 March 1996; revised manuscript received 3 February 1997!
We consider static conductivity and cyclotron resonance in a two-dimensional electron fluid and Wigner
crystal. The theory is nonperturbative in the electron-electron interaction. It is formulated in terms of a
Coulomb force that drives an electron due to thermal fluctuations of electron density. This force is used to
describe the effect of electron-electron interaction on short-wavelength electron scattering by defects, phonons,
and ripplons, and thus on electron transport. In a broad parameter range the force is uniform over the electron
wavelength, and therefore the motion of an electron in the field of other electrons is semiclassical. In this range
we derive the many-electron quantum transport equation and develop techniques for solving it. We find the
static conductivity s . Many-electron effects may ‘‘restore’’ Drude-type behavior of s in the range from zero
to moderate classically strong magnetic fields B, whereas in quantizing fields s increases with B, i.e., the
conductivity is a nonmonotonous function of B. Many-electron effects give rise also to a substantial narrowing
of the cyclotron resonance absorption peak compared to what follows from the single-electron theory. The
shape of the peak is found for both fast and slow rate of interelectron momentum exchange as compared with
the relaxation rate. We apply the results to electrons on helium and explain why different types of B depen-
dence of s are observed. @S0163-1829~97!05924-9#
T@\V, V5 v 2p / v c ~ v c @ v p ! ~5! The condition ~7! does not mean that the magnetic field is
weak. The field may well be classically strong, i.e., there
the drift ~translational motion! is semiclassical. We note that may hold the inequality v c t @1, where t 21 is the scattering
the condition ~5! may be fulfilled in a sufficiently strong rate. In what follows we use the term ‘‘moderately strong
magnetic field v c @ v p even if T,\ v p , i.e., even if the fluid fields’’ for classically strong magnetic fields that satisfy con-
is nonclassical for B50. Since dition ~7!.
In the range ~7! an electron moves classically and has a
e ^ E 2f & 1/2| T ;\ v p , d ; | T T/\ v p , well-defined kinetic energy p 2 /2m;T and a well-defined po-
tential energy in the field of other electrons. Uncertainty of
the conditions ~4!, ~5!, which are formulated in terms of en- each of these energies is determined by smearing of the elec-
ergies, coincide with the condition ~2! formulated in terms of tron wave packet. For an electron in an electric field E f this
lengths. uncertainty is characterized by eE f | T and is small compared
The conditions ~4! and ~5! apply also to the dynamics of a to T. This means that, in spite of the electron system being
Wigner crystal and show where it is classical and semiclas- strongly correlated, the electron-electron interaction has little
sical, respectively. The spectrum of phonons of a crystal was effect on collisions with short-range scatterers in the absence
analyzed in Ref. 34; v p is the characteristic Debye frequency of a magnetic field. One can also see this from the following
of the crystal for B50. For v c @ v p the spectrum consists of arguments. The duration of a collision is determined by the
the optical branch ~that starts at v c ) and a low frequency time it takes an electron to fly past the scatterer. For short-
branch; the widths of the branches are ;V, and ~5! means range scatterers and for electrons with thermal velocities
that the low-frequency vibrations are classical. v T 5(2T/m) 1/2 this time is t coll; | T / v T ;\/T. The accelera-
We note that the melting temperature of the crystal T m tion of the electron in the field E f over this time is
as given by the condition G'127 may be greater or less ;eE f | T v T /T! v T .
than \ v p depending on the electron density (T m }n 1/2 s , The role of the field E f becomes very different in the
v p }n 3/4
s ; for electrons on helium \ v p /T m '1.3 when presence of a magnetic field, since the field E f tilts Landau
n s 5108 cm 22 ). From this perspective it is particularly im- levels and makes the electron energy spectrum continuous. It
portant that the magnetic field can be used to ‘‘switch’’ the is clear from Fig. 2 that for an electron wave packet of size
2D system, either a fluid or a crystal, from the domain of | T the discreteness of the one-electron energy spectrum due
quantum dynamics, \ v p @T, to the semiclassical domain, to Landau quantization is washed out by many-electron ef-
T@\V. fects if eE f | T @\ v c . 13 One would therefore expect that even
16 252 M. I. DYKMAN, C. FANG-YEN, AND M. J. LEA 55
t B50 e 2 n s 2 21
e 2n s s5 R t , t 21 ; z t B50
21
,
s [ s xx ~ v 50 ! 5 , 2T B
m 11 v 2c t 2 ~9!
~8!
B50
field, an electron in the magnetic field would be moving obtained using density-of-states arguments: the single-
along a trajectory of the shape of a rosette: it is a nearly electron energies are ‘‘squeezed’’ into Landau bands with
closed circle, with its center slowly rotating around the de- spacing \ v c ; the potential ~and thus also kinetic! energy
fect, so that the electron is coming back to the defect, over uncertainty of an electron wave packet of a size l B in the
and over again, with period 2 p / v c . 35 In the presence of the field E f is ;eE f l B , and therefore the overall density of
field E f the center of the electron cyclotron orbit drifts with states into which the electron may be scattered is increased
a velocity E f /B. Therefore the number of times the scatterer by a factor z ;\ v c /eE f l B compared to the single-electron
is encountered is finite. It is clear from Fig. 3 that in order of density of states for B50.# The value of R B in the domain
magnitude, this number is z 5 | T (2 p E f /B v c ) 21 for a point- \ v c *T is given by the characteristic radius of the electron
like scatterer. One would expect classical magnetoresistance wave function, whereas t coll is given by the time of flight
to arise in the many-electron system for z .1. over the wavelength | ,
The magnetoconductivity s can be estimated using the
Einstein relation between the conductivity and the diffusion R B 5l B @ coth~ \ v c /2T !# 1/2, t coll5 | B ^ E 21
f &. ~11!
55 MANY-ELECTRON TRANSPORT IN STRONGLY . . . 16 253
It follows from ~8!, ~9! that the magnetoconductivity s is on the level number n and E f . Even if all partial spectra are
nonmonotonous as a function of B. It decreases in the range Lorentzian, but with different widths, the total spectrum may
~8!, reaches a minimum for ‘‘strong’’ classically strong fields be non-Lorentzian.39
where z @1, and then, for pointlike scatterers, increases as Interelectron momentum exchange gives rise to transi-
B 1/2 in the range \ v c @T ~see Fig. 6 in Sec. VII A!. tions between the Landau levels of individual electrons. In a
Equation ~9! gives also the characteristic value of the transition one electron ‘‘jumps’’ up and another electron
halfwidth g ; t 21 of the peak of cyclotron resonance of a ‘‘jumps’’ down by one Landau level ~we neglect processes
many-electron system in a strong magnetic field. We note where the quantized cyclotron motion with the frequency
that in the classical range T@\ v c the expressions for g and v c is transformed into low-frequency motion of the centers
for the relaxation rate in Eqs. ~8!, ~9! for the static conduc- of the electron wave packets!. The transition probability can
tivity coincide with each other. This is no longer true in the be estimated by separating fast-oscillating and slowly vary-
quantum range ~see Sec. V!. ing terms in electron coordinates and momenta, as described
in Sec. V. For \ v c *T this probability is ;V[ v 2p / v c . The
D. Interelectron momentum exchange frequency V gives also the reciprocal time over which the
fluctuational field on an electron is averaged, as it is clear
The exchange of momentum between electrons does not from Fig. 1. The condition for the interelectron momentum
affect the long-wavelength conductivity directly,37 since it exchange to be faster than the momentum exchange with the
does not change the total momentum of the electron system. scatterers is then of the form
However, its role in the transport may be substantial. This is
well-known in the theory of low-density electron plasma in t 21 2 21
ex 5 v p v c ;e ^ E f & l B /\T
2 2 2 21
@ t 21 . ~13!
semiconductors29 from the analysis of the case where the
single-electron rate of collisions with scatterers t 21 s ( e ) de- For fast interelectron momentum exchange this is relaxation
pends on the electron energy e . In the single-electron ap- of the total momentum of the electron system that determines
proximation the static conductivity s ~for B50) is a sum of the shape of the cyclotron resonance spectrum, and the spec-
the conductivities of electrons with different energies and trum is Lorentzian with a width given by the appropriately
thus different scattering rates. Therefore it is given by the averaged g n (E f ) ~see Sec. V!.
appropriately averaged ~over e ) reciprocal scattering rate, In the opposite case, t 21
ex ! t
21
, the cyclotron resonance
s 5e 2 n s t s ( e )/m. The interelectron momentum exchange oc- spectrum is non-Lorentzian. For T!\ v c the conductivity is
curs via pair electron-electron collisions. If their frequency determined by the transitions from the lowest Landau level
greatly exceeds t 21 s (T), then the electron energy varies sub- ( n 50). The explicit form of the spectrum in this case for
stantially between collisions with the scatterers, and relax- Gaussian distribution of the fluctuational field E f is obtained
ation of the total momentum of the electron system is char- in Sec. VII ~see Fig. 5!.
acterized by the average collision rate t 21 s ( e ), so that
s 5e 2 n s /m t 21 s ( e ). III. MANY-ELECTRON QUANTUM TRANSPORT
From the discussion in Sec. II B one would expect that EQUATION
similar arguments apply to the static conductivity of a
strongly correlated classical electron fluid for weak magnetic We will initially formulate the many-electron transport
fields. Here, an electron exchanges its momentum with other equation for the case of electrons coupled to ~and quasielas-
electrons not via pair collisions but by being accelerated by tically scattered by! 2D vibrations of the bath ~phonons or
the Coulomb force from these electrons. The rate of inter- ripplons!. The Hamiltonian of the system is of the form
electron momentum exchange t 21 ~from now on we set \51)
ex is given by the frequency
of the electron vibrations v p , as it is clear from Fig. 1 ~this
1
frequency also characterizes time evolution of the velocity
autocorrelation function in the electron system.38! If
Ĥ5Ĥ 0 1Ĥ b 1Ĥ i , Ĥ 0 5
2m (n p̂2n 1Ĥ ee ;
~14!
t 21
ex 5 v p @ t
21
~ v p@ v c !, ~12! Ĥ b 5 (q v q b̂ 1q b̂ q ; Ĥ i 5 (q (n V qe iqr ~ b̂ q1b̂ 2q
n 1
!.
s ~ v ! [ s xx ~ v ! 5 s y y ~ v ! 5 ~ e 2 /m 2 v S !~ 12e 2 b v !
3Re E 0
`
dt e i v t ^ P̂ H
x ~ t ! P̂ x ~ 0 ! & , P̂5
H
(n p̂n . ~16!
Here, S is the area of the system, b 51/T, and the superscript FIG. 4. An electron-scatterer collision. At most one electron
H means that the operators are evaluated in Heisenberg rep- ~filled circle! collides with a short-range scatterer ~open circle! at a
resentation with a complete Hamiltonian Ĥ ~14!. It is conve- time.
nient to write the momentum correlator in the interaction
representation: Here we have taken into account that the characteristic elec-
tron momentum that may be transferred to vibrations, and
thus the characteristic values of q, are determined by the
^ P̂ Hx ~ t ! P̂ Hx ~ 0 ! & 5Tre @ e iĤ 0 t P̂ x e 2iĤ 0 t Ĝx ~ t !# ,
thermal wavelength | T ~2! or the quantum magnetic length
l B ~for | T .l B ).
Ĝx ~ t ! 5Z 21 Trb @ Ŝ ~ t ! P̂ x e 2 b Ĥ Ŝ 1 ~ t !# , ~17! The condition ~19! means also that the polaronic renor-
malization of the electron energy is small compared to elec-
ˆ
Ŝ ~ t ! 5e iĤ 0 t e 2iHt , tron damping. In what follows we ignore polaron effects @the
shift of the cyclotron resonance peak in quantizing magnetic
where Tr e and Tr b are the traces over the wave functions of fields was analyzed in Ref. 25~b!#. In this approximation the
the electron system and of the vibrations, and vibrations of the bath may be considered as creating a qua-
Z5Tre Trb exp(2bĤ) is the partition function. sistationary classical zero-mean Gaussian field.
E
grams, to the neglect of nested diagrams and diagrams with
] Ĝx t
intersecting lines.
The many-electron transport equation may be written in ]t
52 (q u V qu 2 (n 0
dt 8
the operator form as
3†exp„iqr̂n ~ t ! …, @ exp„2iqr̂n ~ t 8 ! …,Ĝx ~ t !# ‡,
] Ĝx ~ t !
]t
52Trb E 0
t
dt 8 †Ĥ i ~ t ! , @ Ĥ i ~ t 8 ! , r̂ b Ĝx ~ t !# ‡, r̂n ~ t ! 5e iĤ 0 t r̂n e 2iĤ 0 t ; Ĝx ~ 0 ! 5Z 21
e P̂ x e
2 b Ĥ 0
,
~18!
Ĥ i ~ t ! 5e i ~ Ĥ 0 1Ĥ b ! t Ĥ i e 2i ~ Ĥ 0 1Ĥ b ! t ; r̂ b 5Z 21
b exp~ 2 b Ĥ b ! ,
u V qu 2 52T v 21
q u V qu ; Z e 5Tre exp~ 2 b Ĥ 0 ! .
2
~20!
where Z b 5Trb exp(2bĤb) is the partition function of the Equation ~20! applies also if electrons are scattered by
bath. defects or helium vapor atoms. In this case u V qu 2 should be
The most substantial assumptions made in deriving ~18! replaced by the mean squared Fourier component of the ran-
are that t, t @t coll ,T 21 . The quantity t coll characterizes the dom potential of the defects.
width of the interval t2t 8 that contributes to the integral in The first step towards solution of the operator equation
~18!: this interval is supposed to be small compared to t and ~20! is transformation of this equation into a set of equations
to the relaxation time t over which Ĝx (t) varies. for the matrix elements of Ĝx . It follows from ~17!, ~20! that
In what follows we consider short-range scattering and it is convenient to evaluate these matrix elements on the
assume it to be quasielastic. The latter means that the char- wave functions of the many-electron system at t50.
acteristic frequencies v q of the vibrations of the bath are It is a distinctive feature of the transport equation ~20! that
small: the time evolution of the operators r̂n (t) is given by the
solution of a problem of many-electron dynamics which is
v q t coll!1 for q&q max5max~ | 21 21
T ,l B ! . ~19! not known. Therefore the matrix elements of the operators
55 MANY-ELECTRON TRANSPORT IN STRONGLY . . . 16 255
exp„iqr̂n (t)… in ~20! for actual t; t @t coll on the wave func- and it is convenient to use the Wigner representation for the
tions at t50 are also not known. This is in contrast to what electron operators,
E F) G
is the case for simple systems described by a transport equa-
tion, like a single electron or an oscillator, where the evolu- K ~ $ pn % , $ rn % ! 5 d zn exp~ i zn rn !
tion of the dynamical variables of the system in the absence n
KH JU UH JL
of coupling to the scatterers can be found explicitly. It is
1 1
convenient therefore to change from the operator Ĝx to the 3 kn 1 zn K̂ kn 2 zn ,
2 2
operator Ĝ x , ~24!
pn [kn 2eA„rn ).
Ĝ x ~ t ! [exp~ 2iĤ 0 t ! Ĝx ~ t ! exp~ iĤ 0 t ! ,
It follows from ~24! that the correlator ~17! that deter-
]Gx
]t
5i @ G x ~ t ! ,H 0 # 1
]Gx
]tF G ,
mines the conductivity s xx ( v ) can be written in the form
EE F ) G
coll
~21!
F G S D
^ P̂ Hx ~ t ! P̂ Hx ~ 0 ! & 5 ~ 2 p ! 22 dpn drn P x ~ $ pn % , $ rn % !
] Ĝ x ] Ĝx n
5exp~ 2iĤ 0 t ! exp~ iĤ 0 t ! .
]t coll
]t 3G x ~ t; $ pn % , $ rn % ! , ~25!
It is seen from ~20! that the collision term @ ] G x / ] t # coll where G x (t; $ pn % , $ rn % ) is the matrix element of the operator
contains the operators exp(2iĤ0t)r̂n (t)exp(iĤ0t)[r̂n (0), Ĝ x (t).
The equation for G x (t; $ pn % , $ rn % ) follows from ~21!. In
exp(2iĤ0t)r̂n (t 8 )exp(iĤ0t)[r̂n (t 8 2t). The matrix elements
writing this equation we will take into account that the char-
of the latter operators on the wave functions of the many-
acteristic values of p n are ;(mT) 1/2, and that the scale of
electron system at t50 can be evaluated taking into account
rn on which G x (t; $ pn % , $ rn % ) varies is given by the electron
that the instants of time t and t 8 in ~20!, ~21! are close to
mean free path L @L;(T/m) 1/2t in the range ~22!# and the
each other, t2t 8 ;t coll! t . In what follows we will analyze
characteristic displacement d of an electron from its quasi-
the solution of Eq. ~21! in different ranges of the parameters
equilibrium position ~cf. Fig. 1!. To lowest order in | T / d ,
of the system.
| T /L we have
IV. TRANSPORT EQUATION FOR CLASSICAL
MAGNETIC FIELDS
]Gx
]t
5 $ G xH 0% 1
]Gx
]t F G coll
, ~26!
Equations ~16!, ~17!, ~20!, ~21! reduce the calculation of
the conductivity to evaluation of the expressions that are where G x [G x (t; $ pn % , $ rn % ).
determined by dynamics of the isolated many-electron sys- The first term in ~26! is the Poisson bracket of the matrix
tem. In transforming Eq. ~21! into a set of equations for elements G x (t; $ pn % , $ rn % ),H 0 ( $ pn % , $ rn % ). It describes evolu-
tion of the classical many-electron distribution function in
matrix elements of the operator Ĝ x it is convenient to use
the absence of scatterers. In deriving the expression for
different wave functions for different ranges of the magnetic
$ G x H 0 % from Eqs. ~21!, ~24! it is convenient to write it first
field. In the present subsection we investigate the range of
in terms of the derivatives over kn ,rn ~in these variables the
B where
expression has a standard form40!, and then go over to de-
T @ v p , v c , or T @eE f | T , v c . ~22! rivatives over pn ,rn . The matrix elements H 0 ( $ pn % , $ rn % ) of
the Hamiltonian H 0 are given by the corresponding terms in
When ~22! holds an electron has a well-defined kinetic ~14! with the operators p̂n replaced by numbers pn . Finally
energy p 2 /2m;T and a well-defined potential energy in the we obtain
FS D G
field of other electrons. Uncertainty of each of these energies
is determined by the smearing of the electron wave packet pn 3B ] G x pn ] G x
| T . For an electron in an electric field E f this uncertainty is $ G x H 0 % 52 ( e En 1 1 ,
n m ] pn m ] rn
given by eE f | T , and it is small compared to T. Although the
field E f is small in a certain sense, it may still dramatically ] H ee rn 2rn 8
affect magnetotransport, as explained in Secs. II B and II C, En [2e 21
] rn
5e 8
n8
(
u rn 2rn 8 u 3
. ~27!
and the transport is qualitatively different depending on the
relation between eE f | T and the Landau level spacing v c . Here, En is the electric field that drives the nth electron
because of its interaction with other electrons.
A. Wigner representation of the transport equation
In the domain ~22! the electron dynamics are nearly clas- The collision term
sical. Therefore an appropriate set of wave functions of the To find the collision term in ~26! we have to perform
many-electron system are plane waves, integration over t 8 in ~20!, ~21!. The characteristic range of
t 8 that contributes to the integral is given by t coll . We will
u $ kn % & [ )n ~ 2 p ! 21 exp~ ikn rn ! , ~23! see that t coll is small compared to the time during which an
electron moves by the distance ; d ~see Fig. 1! and the fluc-
16 256 M. I. DYKMAN, C. FANG-YEN, AND M. J. LEA 55
and we will use for p̂n (t 8 ) the solution of the equation of G ~xs ! ~ t; $ pn % , $ rn % ! 5Z 21
e (n exp@ 2t/ t ~ s !~ e n !# p nx
F G
motion dp̂n /dt5eEn 1(e/m)p̂n 3B in a uniform time-
independent electric field En and transverse magnetic field
B,
3exp 2 ~ b /2m ! ( 2
pn 8 ,
n 8
~32!
exp@ 2iqr̂n ~ t 8 !# 'exp@ 2iqr̂n ~ t !# exp@ 2iqF„t 8 2t,p̂n ~ t ! …# p
(q q 2u V qu 2 d S qp q 2
D
F G
„t ~ s ! ~ e ! …21 5 1 ,
q2 p2 m 2m
3exp i sinv c ~ t 8 2t ! , ~28!
2m v c
p2
where e~ p !5 .
2m
F~ t,p̂n ! 5f~ t,p̂n ! 2f~ t,mv~nd ! ! 1v~nd ! t, Equations ~16!,~25!,~32! result in a standard expression for
single-electron conductivity in the absence of a magnetic
p̂n p̂n 3B field, with a frequency-dependent relaxation rate,
f~ t,p̂n ! 5 sinv c t1e 2 2 ~ 12cosv c t ! , ~29!
mvc m vc
e 2n s ~s!
s ~ s !~ v ! 5 t ~ e ! / @ 11 v 2 „t ~ s ! ~ e ! …2 # ,
v~nd ! 5 ~ En 3B! /B 2 . m
where averaging over e is performed with the weighting fac-
Although the operators p̂n and p̂n 3B do not commute, the
tor } e exp(2be). In particular the low-frequency ( v t !1)
commutator of the respective terms in ~29! is small in the
range ~22!. It is seen from ~21!, ~26! that to find G x we need conductivity s (s) ( v ) is determined by t (s) ( e ), whereas the
the matrix elements of the operators high-frequency conductivity is determined by the average
exp(2iĤ0t)exp@2iqF„t 8 2t,p̂n (t)…# exp(iĤ0t) on the wave collision frequency 1/t (s) ( e ).
functions ~23!. They can be obtained in the WKB approxi- In the presence of a magnetic field the structure of the
time dependence of the exponential in the expressions ~28!–
mation simply by replacing the operators r̂n ,p̂n by the num- ~30! for the kernel j n (q,pn ) is completely changed: the func-
bers rn ,pn 5kn 2eA(rn ). Then the collision term in ~26! tion F becomes periodically oscillating in time, with a fre-
takes on the form quency v c . Therefore integration over t 8 in ~30! does not
F ] G x ~ t; $ pn % , $ rn % !
]t G coll
give a d function of the type ~31!. In fact, the integral over
t 8 explicitly depends on t and diverges with increasing t ~the
orbit of an electron is a closed circle, and therefore the elec-
tron encounters a scatterer infinitely many times!. This is an
52 (q u V qu 2 ( j n 8 ~ q,pn 8 !@ G x ~ t; $ pn % , $ rn % !
indication of the inapplicability of the transport equation in
the single-electron approximation.
n 8
j n ~ q,pn ! 52Re E
0
t
dt 8 exp@ 2iqF~ t 8 2t,pn !
1. General form of the solution of the transport equation
for strong electron-electron interaction
The interelectron momentum exchange is described by
1i ~ q 2 /2m v c ! sinv c ~ t 8 2t !# . the terms eEn ] G x / ] pn and m 21 pn ] G x / ] rn in Eqs. ~26!,
~27!. The former terms are ;eE f | T G x , and so are the latter
In ~30! we have assumed that u V qu 2 is independent of the
as is clear from ~32! if one uses the full Boltzmann factor
direction of q.
exp(2bH0) in G (s) x ~instead of retaining only kinetic energy
in H 0 ). Therefore the interelectron momentum exchange
B. Single-electron approximation for B50
may substantially affect the conductivity if eE f | T * t 21 .
Equations ~16!, ~25!–~30! give a well-known result in the The analysis of many-electron transport is simplified if
absence of a magnetic field and in the single-electron ap- the interelectron momentum exchange rate t 21 ex ;eE f | T
proximation, i.e., in the neglect of the electron-electron in- @ t 21 , or equivalently v p t @1 @cf. ~12!#. This condition may
teraction H ee in ~14!. In this case, for characteristic also be understood as the condition for the uncertainty of the
q;p n ;(mT) 1/2 and for time t@t coll51/T the function kinetic energy of an electron due to interaction with other
n in ~30! becomes a d function of the energy conser-
j n [ j (s) electrons to be much larger than the uncertainty due to col-
vation law: lisions with scatterers. In the corresponding parameter range
55 MANY-ELECTRON TRANSPORT IN STRONGLY . . . 16 257
the solution for G x may be sought in the form Þn8 @to show this one may write d (P2 ( n pn ) in the form of
a Fourier integral and then perform averaging over all mo-
G x ~ t; $ pn % , $ rn % ! 'g x „t;V̂ c P~ $ pn % ! ,H 0 ~ $ pn % , $ rn % ! …, menta pn with the Boltzmann weighting factor#. Therefore to
S D
the lowest order in the number of electrons
cosv c t sinv c t
P5 (n pn , V̂ c [V̂ c ~ t ! 5
2sinv c t cosv c t
. ~33!
P2 ' (n p2n 52NmT.
The sign of the off-diagonal terms of the matrix V̂ c (t) cor-
responds to B pointing in the positive direction of the z axis It follows from ~30!, ~35! that in the collision integral
and allows for the sign of the electron charge. @ ] g/ ] t # coll the term that depends on the direction of q is
The function g x depends on the coordinates and momenta proportional to the expression j n (q,pn ) ( n 8 (q•pn 8 ). This
of individual electrons only in terms of the total momentum term should be averaged over q directions @this is a part of
and energy of the whole system. For G x given by ~33! the the summation over q in ~30!#. Since the momenta of differ-
sum of the terms that contain En and ] G x / ] rn in ~27! is ent electrons are approximately independent from each other,
equal to zero ~because ( n En 50). Qualitatively, Eq. ~33! the major contribution to the average comes from the term in
means that, for fast interelectron momentum exchange, the the sum over n 8 with n 8 5n. According to ~31!
change of the momentum of an nth electron due to a colli-
qpn 52 21 q2. Therefore upon averaging over the directions of
sion with a scatterer is ‘‘shared’’ by other electrons before
the electron is scattered again. q ~denoted by the subscript q/q) we obtain
F G
In view of the initial conditions for G x that follow from
1
~17!, ~21!, and allowing for symmetry arguments (G x is the
x component of a vector! we will assume that g x is the x
~ qP! (n j n~ q,pn ! '2 q 2 N ^ j n ~ q,pn ! & ,
2
q/q
component of a vector g(t;V̂ c P,H 0 ), and we will seek this ~37!
vector in the form
g~ t;V̂ c P,H 0 ! 5 g̃ ~ t ! V̂ c ~ t ! PZ 21
^ j n ~ q,pn ! & ' j ~ q! [ E2`
`
dt ^ e iqr̂n ~ t ! e 2iqr̂n ~ 0 ! & .
e exp~ 2 b H 0 ! ~34!
with the initial condition g̃ (0)51. In fact, we could seek Here, we have set the limits of integration over time to be
infinite; this can be done if the duration of a collision ~the
g̃ in a more general form of a function of t and H 0 , but in the
actual range of time that contributes to the integral over t) is
case of elastic scattering the energy of a colliding electron,
much smaller than the relaxation time @which determines the
and thus the energy of the electron system as a whole, is
characteristic limit of the integral over time in the expression
conserved, and therefore the dependence of g on H 0 does not
~30! for j n (q,pn )#. The statistical averaging in ~37! is per-
vary in time and is determined by the initial conditions.
formed to zeroth order in the coupling to the scatterers.
2. Many-electron collision term Clearly, j (q) in ~37! is a dynamical structure factor of the
electron system at zero frequency evaluated in the single-site
The collision integral @ ] g/ ] t # coll for the solution of the approximation ~it should not be confused with a static struc-
kinetic equation of the form ~33!, ~34! is given by ~30! with ture factor which is the integral over the frequency!.
G x replaced by g(t;V̂ c P,H 0 ). Since the value of H 0 is not The above expressions result in the following simple form
changed in a collision, we have of the collision term for the function g:
g i „t;V̂ c P~ $ pn % ! ,H 0 ~ $ pn % , $ rn % ! …
52„V̂ c ~ t ! q…i g̃ ~ t ! Z 21 For zero magnetic field Eq. ~38! was derived in Ref. 25~c!
e exp~ 2 b H 0 ! ~ i5x,y ! .
assuming that electrons form a Wigner crystal. The relation
The only singled out direction of the transferred momen- between losses of an electron system moving above the he-
tum for the many-electron system is the direction of the total lium surface and the structure factor was considered for an
momentum P. Therefore in the last line of the above equa- electron fluid at B50 in Ref. 41 @in the case of strong mag-
tion one may replace netic fields this relation was also considered in Ref. 31~a!#,
and the problem of corrections due to simultaneous scatter-
~ q–P! P ing of several electrons by one ripplon was addressed there.
q⇒ . ~35! The solution of the kinetic equation for the function
P2
g̃ (t) in ~34! is exponential, g̃ (t)5exp(2t/t).
The characteristic values of P we are interested in are the
fluctuational ones,
V. CLASSICAL MANY-ELECTRON CONDUCTIVITY
u Pu ; @ ^ P2 & # 1/25 ~ 2NmT ! 1/2 ~ N5n s S ! . ~36!
Equations ~16!, ~25!, ~33!, ~38! provide a simple expres-
The momenta of different electrons subject to the condition sion for the frequency-dependent conductivity of the many-
that the total momentum be equal to P are basically uncor- electron system. In particular the static conductivity is of the
related for P of the order of ~36!, ^ pn pn 8 & ;N 23/2 for n Drude type,
16 258 M. I. DYKMAN, C. FANG-YEN, AND M. J. LEA 55
F G
strong magnetic fields.
In the classical limit we are considering in this section the q2
f ~ t ! 'exp 2 ~ Tt 2 1it ! , F E ~ t ! '1, t! v 21
c .
statistical averaging for the isolated electron system in Eq. 2m
~37! for j (q) is reduced to integration over electron coordi-
nates and over electron momenta with the weight The characteristic time that contributes to the integral of
exp@2bH0($pn % , $ rn % ) # ~quantum corrections are discussed in f (t)F E (t) ~the collision time! is seen to be equal to
the Appendix!. The averaging of j n (q,pn ) over pn is
straightforward with account taken of the explicit form of the t coll5T 21 , T@e ^ E 2f & 1/2| T @ v c . ~44a!
function F(t,pn ) ~29!, and the resulting expression for j (q)
contains only configuration averaging which comes to the This can be easily understood, since for e ^ E 2f & 1/2| T @ v c an
averaging over the fluctuational field E f : electron has a continuous spectrum and moves with a ther-
F
f ~ t ! 5exp 2
q 2T
m v 2c
~ 12cosv c t ! 2i
q2
2m v c
sinv c t , G electron is ‘‘blown away’’ by the fluctuational field once it
has collided with a scatterer.
Both the magnetic field and the fluctuational electric field
~41! drop out from j (q) in the above approximation. They give
K F
F E ~ t ! 5 exp i
qv~f d !
vc
~ v c t2sinv c t ! 2ie
B
m v 2c
rise only to quantum corrections. These corrections are found
in the Appendix. With account taken of them the expression
for j (q) takes on the form
S D
v~f d ! 5 .
B2 \2 e2
F5 2 vc1
2
^ E 2& . ~45!
48T 2mT f
The probability density distribution of the fluctuational
field r (E f ) to be used for the averaging in F E (t) is the
probability density of the field En on an nth electron: It is clear from Eq. ~45! that not only are the quantum
E F) G
corrections parametrically small, but that they also contain a
small numerical factor. This means that in the range ~7!,
r ~ E f ! [Z 21
conf drn 8 d ~ E f 2En ! e 2 b H ee~ $ rn 8 % ! , although the electron system is strongly correlated, the
n8
E F) G
electron-electron interaction only weakly affects the rate of
1 ] H ee short-range scattering t 21 ,
En 52 , Z conf5 drn 8 e 2 b H ee~ $ rn 8 % !
e ] rn n8
(43) t 21 ' t B50
21
, for T@e ^ E 2f & 1/2| T @ v c . ~46!
55 MANY-ELECTRON TRANSPORT IN STRONGLY . . . 16 259
The fact that the correlator j (q), and thus t 21 , are nearly relaxation rate depends explicitly on the many-electron fluc-
independent of the magnetic field, is an indication of the tuational field. This dependence becomes particularly simple
extremely important role of electron-electron interaction: it is in sufficiently high magnetic fields where the inequality ~47!
because of this interaction, and only in the range ~7! where is strong. In this case the exponent in ~48! varies only
this interaction is in a certain sense stronger than the mag- slightly when s is changed by 1, and therefore one may go
netic field, that the magnetic field just drops out of the ex- from the sum over s to the integral,
pression for a static conductivity, even when the field is clas-
sically strong, v c t @1. As explained in Sec. II B, in the
range ~7! electron-electron interaction ‘‘restores’’ a simple-
minded Drude model of conductivity which shows no mag-
j ~ q! 5 S D F
2pm
Tq 2
1/2
exp 2 G
q 2 v c B 21
8mT p q
^E f &,
~49!
E
netoresistance. We notice that the peak of the cyclotron reso-
nance may be very sharp in the range ~7!, and its halfwidth is ^ E 21 E 21
f &[ f dE f r ~ E f ! , v c @ ~ 2 p e ^ E f & | T T ! .
2 1/2 1/2
approximately given by the scattering rate t 21 calculated for
B50 and in the neglect of the effect of the fluctuational
field. Equation ~49! corresponds to the case where an electron
collides with one and the same scatterer many times.
B. ‘‘Strong’’ classically strong magnetic fields
The encountering factor z is given by the coefficient
( v c B/ p q) ^ E 21
f & in ~49! for characteristic q
21
; | T , and
It follows from the qualitative arguments given in Sec. II this factor coincides with the estimate of z in Eq. ~9!. We
C that scattering by short-range scatterers should change and notice that each ‘‘individual’’ collision event is an elastic
magnetoresistance in classical magnetic fields should arise collision, and in this collision the electron kinetic energy is
when the displacement of cyclotron orbit center over the conserved: qpn 52q 2 /2 where q is the transferred momen-
time 2 p / v c due to the electron drift in fluctuational field tum. This can be seen from Eq. ~30! for j (q,pn ) if instead of
becomes smaller than the thermal wavelength, averaging over pn @made to obtain ~41!# one first performed
integration over time. In the range ~47! the major contribu-
v c * ~ 2 p e ^ E 2f & 1/2| T T ! 1/2. ~47! tion to the integral over time comes from the integrals over
In this case an electron collides with the same scatterers sev- the intervals which are centered at t52 p s/ v c and have
eral times @the encountering factor z is estimated in Eq. ~9!#. characteristic widths that exceed T 21 but are small compared
We note that the occurrence of magnetoresistance in the to v 21c . Each of these integrals gives the d function of the
range ~47!, predicted based on the picture of an electron energy conservation ~31!. The total duration of a collision in
spiralling along a semiclassical orbit, is consistent with the the range ~47! is
quantum picture. Indeed, it follows from the condition
e ^ E 2f & 1/2| T !T @which, in turn, follows from ~2!# that in the t coll5B | T ^ E 21
f & ; v c / v p T. ~44b!
range ~47! we have
It is small compared to the time V 21 ~5! over which the
v c @e ^ E 2f & 1/2| T , fluctuational field driving an electron noticeably varies,
which provides justification of the approach in which this
and therefore the Landau level spacing exceeds the uncer- field is assumed to be time independent.
tainty of the kinetic energy of an electron wave packet in the We notice also that, in contrast to the case of moderately
fluctuational field. strong magnetic fields ~7! where the E f -dependent correction
To calculate the correlator j (q) and thus the relaxation to the relaxation rate in ~45! contains ^ E 2f & , Eq. ~49! contains
rate in the domain ~47! we will evaluate the integral over a different moment of the probability density distribution of
time in ~41! by the steepest descent method. This is justified, the fluctuational field, the mean reciprocal fluctuational field
since for characteristic q;(mT) 1/2 the exponent in f (t) ~41! ^ E 21
f &.
is a large negative number ;(T/ v c ) 2 everywhere except for
comparatively narrow (;T 21 ) time intervals around the
points v c t52 p s with integer s. For the same q the param- VI. MANY-ELECTRON CONDUCTIVITY
AND CYCLOTRON RESONANCE
f / v c in F E (t) is ;eE f | T T/ v c &1. Therefore the
eter qv(d) 2
IN QUANTIZING MAGNETIC FIELDS
positions of the saddle points of the integrand f (t)F E (t) are
determined by the function f (t) and are given by In quantizing magnetic fields,
t s 52 p s v 21
c 2i(2T)
21
, and the result of the integration over
t in ~41! reads v c *T, ~50!
S D F G( K F GL
`
2pm 1/2
q2 2ps the band structure of the electron energy spectrum should be
j ~ q! 5 exp 2 exp iqE f taken into account explicitly. The qualitative picture of elec-
Tq 2 8mT s52` v cB
~48! tron scattering in this case was described in Sec. II C.
For v c @T electrons occupy the lowest Landau level,
@averaging over E f is done with the probability distribution whereas for higher T higher Landau levels are occupied. The
r (E f ) defined in ~43!#. characteristic wavelength of an electron ~the distance be-
It follows from ~48! that in the range of comparatively tween the nodes of the wave functions! is given in order of
strong ~but still classical! magnetic fields ~47! the electron magnitude by the expression
16 260 M. I. DYKMAN, C. FANG-YEN, AND M. J. LEA 55
| 5 @ m v c ~ 2 n̄ 11 !# 21/2, n̄ 5 @ exp~ v c /T ! 21 # 21 \e 2 n s
~51!
s [ s xx ~ 0 ! 5 ~ 2 n̄ 11 ! t 21 , v c t @1,
2mT v c
21
~54!
@cf. ~9!#. The value of | determines the momentum that
may be transferred to a short-range scatterer in the collision. 1
The total scattering probability would be expected to be pro- t 21 5 | 2 \ 22 ( q 2 u V qu 2 j ~ q!
2 q
portional to the ‘‘encountering factor’’ discussed in Sec. II C
and given by Eq. ~9!.
The quantitative many-electron theory in quantizing mag- ~for clarity, we have explicitly incorporated \). Here, u V qu 2
netic fields should be formulated in a different way for static is the mean square Fourier component of the potential of the
conductivity and for cyclotron resonance. This is clear from scatterers, and j (q) is the ~Fourier transformed! electron
the fact that, e.g., for T! v c static conductivity is determined density correlator defined in Eq. ~37!.
by the scattering within the lowest Landau level, whereas Equation ~54! has the form of Eq. ~9! which gives the
broadening of the cyclotron resonance peak is determined by conductivity in terms of phenomenologically introduced dif-
the scattering both in the lowest and first excited levels. In fusion length R B and scattering rate t 21 , with R B given by
more formal terms, the conductivity s ( v ) is determined by the estimate ~11!. In the limit of classically strong magnetic
the polarization operator P( v ). The difference of P( v ) for fields, v c !T but v c @ t 21 , Eq. ~54! goes over into Eqs. ~38!,
v 50 and v 5 v c becomes substantial when the duration of a ~39! obtained before in a different way.
collision exceeds v 21 c , as it does in the range ~50!.
1. Operators of the centers of the electron wave packets
A. Static conductivity To evaluate the electron density correlator j (q) for a
In the range of strong magnetic fields, v c t @1, it is con- many-electron system in the quantum range ~50! it is conve-
venient to transform Eq. ~16! when evaluating static conduc- nient to introduce the operators r̃ˆn of the positions of the
tivity. One may first multiply the Heisenberg equation of centers of the electron wave packets:
motion
s~ v !5
e2
2m 2 v 2c TS
Re E 0
`
dte i v t
in | / d one can express the operator Ĥ ee( $ r̂n % ) in terms of the
operators r̃ˆ and p̂ and retain only the zeroth-order terms in
n n
p̂n in the expansion of Ĥ ee :
3 ( ^ „¹n Ĥ Hi ~ t ! …•„¹n 8 Ĥ Hi ~ 0 ! …& , v !T, v c .
nn 8 Ĥ ee~ $ r̂n % ! 'Ĥ ee~ $ r̃ˆn % ! ~56!
~53!
To lowest order in ( v c t ) 21 the correlation function of the ~cf. Ref. 31!. It follows from ~55! and also from ~2!, ~3! that
the terms dropped in ~56! are
operators ¹n Ĥ H
i can be calculated in the neglect of interac-
tion between the electrons and the scatterers, i.e., one can
replace ;eE f p n /m v c ;eE f l 2B / | <eE f l B !T& v c .
i ~ Ĥ 0 1Ĥ b ! t
i ~ t ! ⇒e
Ĥ H Ĥ i e 2i ~ Ĥ 0 1Ĥ b ! t [Ĥ i ~ t ! .
In the approximation ~56! the electron motion is a super-
In the case of short-range scattering, as is clear from Fig. 4, position of quantum cyclotron motion and semiclassical drift
one should keep only diagonal terms with n5n 8 in the of the orbit centers. The cyclotron motion has much in com-
double sum in ~53!. If one further assumes that electrons are mon with vibrations of a harmonic oscillator. It is described
scattered by defects or by 2D vibrations of the bath ~phonons by the raising and lowering operators p̂ n a that move the elec-
or ripplons! with typical frequencies small compared to T, tron to an upper ~for a 51) or lower ~for a 52) Landau
t 21
coll , the expression for the static conductivity can be written level, and by the wave functions u n n & in the occupation num-
in the form ber representation:
55 MANY-ELECTRON TRANSPORT IN STRONGLY . . . 16 261
p̂ n a 5 ~ 2m v c ! 21/2~ p̂ nx 2i ak p ny ! , a 56, taken over u n n & and over the eigenfunctions of the operators
ˆỹ ~or x̃ˆ ), but the latter is reduced to the integral over
n n
@ p̂ n2 , p̂ n1 # 51 ~ u k u 51 ! , $ r̃ n % in the semiclassical range!. With the account taken of
S D
1
1 3exp 2i l 2B q 2 sinv c t . ~61!
Ĥ 0 ' v c (n p̂ n1 p̂ n2 1 1Ĥ ee~ $ r̃ˆn % ! .
2
~58! 2
exp„iqr̂n ~ t ! …'exp F( a
a l B q 2 a p̂ n a ~ 0 ! e i a v c t G M̂ n ~ A 1 A 2 ;0 ! 5 (
`
s50
~ 2A 1 A 2 ! s s
~ s! ! 2
p̂ n1 ~ 0 ! p̂ sn2 ~ 0 ! , ~62!
S D
d En ~ $ r̃ˆn 8 % ! 3B q x 2i ak q y nn
ṽ~nd ! [ r̃ˆn 5
ˆ , q a5 . ~59! ~ 2uAu2!s nn
dt B 2
A2 ^ n n u M̂ n ~ u A u 2 ;0 ! u n n & 5 (
s50 s! s
~62a!
The field En here is the fluctuational field driving the nth
should be multiplied by exp(2bvcnn), and then the summa-
electron. It is given by Eq. ~27!, with rn 8 replaced by r̃ˆn 8 . In
tion over n n should be done @it is convenient to sum over
deriving the expression for the drift velocity
n n prior to taking the sum over s in ~62a!#. Finally we arrive
dr̃ˆ /dt52i @ r̃ˆ ,Ĥ # we used the commutation relations
n n ee at the expression
~55! and dropped the higher-order commutators } @ r̃ˆn 8 ,Ẽn #
~or } @ r̃ˆn 8 ,v(d) ˆ
n # ), so that, in fact, the operators r̃n 8 in ~59!
should be considered as c numbers. This is justified provided
K F(
exp
a
a l B q 2 a p̂ n a ~ 0 !@ exp~ i a v c t ! 21 # GL
the field En is smooth on the characteristic wavelength |
~51!, i.e.,
1
F
5exp 2 l 2B q 2 ~ 2 n̄ 11 !~ 12cosv c t !
2 G ~63!
phasize that it is only the drift of the centers of the wave ^ P̂ H2 ~ t ! P̂ H1 ~ 0 ! & 5Tre @ P̂ 2 ~ 0 ! Ĝ 1 ~ t !# ,
packets that is classical: fast cyclotron motion of the elec- ~68!
trons is quantized. We notice also that, although the distri-
Ĝ 1 ~ t ! 5e 2iĤ 0 t
Ĝ1 ~ t ! e iĤ 0 t
, Ĝ1 ~ 0 ! 5Z 21
e P̂ 1 e
2 b Ĥ 0
,
bution of E f may be anisotropic for a Wigner monocrystal,
the anisotropy dropped out of ~64!, since we consider scat- where the operator Ĝ1 (t) satisfies the kinetic equation ~20!
tering which is isotropic in q, and we performed averaging with the initial conditions specified in ~68!. As in Sec. III B,
over the directions of q in ~64!.
in Eq. ~68! we introduced the operator Ĝ 1 (t) instead of
Equation ~64! is the condition of energy conservation for
elastic scattering: the scattered electron remains on the same Ĝ1 (t), because the matrix elements of the operators in the
Landau level, and the recoil is such that the cyclotron orbit collision integral for Ĝ 1 (t) on the wave functions of the
center moves transverse to the fluctuational field E f . many-electron system are determined by the evolution of the
The resulting expression for the correlator j (q) is of the system during the time ;t coll . This evolution can be de-
form scribed explicitly in the range where the drift of the cyclo-
tron orbit centers is semiclassical @in contrast, the collision
F 1
j ~ q! 52 ~ l B q ! 21 t e exp 2 l 2B q 2 ~ 2 n̄ 11 !
2 G integral for Ĝ1 (t) is determined by the evolution of the elec-
tron variables during the time ; t which is not known#.
(S D 1 2 2 2m
@ n̄ ~ n̄ 11 !# m 2. The solution of the kinetic equation for fast interelectron
3 l q , t e 5Bl B ^ E 21
f &.
m50 2 B ~ m! ! 2 momentum exchange
If one expands r̂n 8 in l 2B p̂n 8 using ~55!, one finds that the rate
s~ v !'
e 2 ~ n̄ 11 ! 21
2mS
Re E 0
`
dte ivt
^ P̂ H2 ~ t ! P̂ H1 ~ 0 ! & , of the momentum amplitude change is ;e(¹ n En )l 2B ~for the
mean occupation number of the Landau levels n̄ &1). There-
fore it follows from ~A2! that the interlevel transitions occur
~ u v 2 v c u ! v c ! , P̂ a [ (n p̂ n a . ~67! more frequently than collisions with scatterers provided
@we have used here the estimate of the fluctuational field ~3! tially. Consequently we may assume the field to be constant,
and the expression for the characteristic plasma frequency and then write the operators in ~21a! in the form similar to
v p ~4!#. The criterion ~69! justifies the condition ~13! and, as that used in Eq. ~59!:
explained in the discussion of ~13!, is also sufficient for the
fluctuational field that drives an electron to be randomized
between successive collisions with scatterers.
We notice that ~69! is not necessary for applicability of
exp@ iqr̂n ~ t !# 5exp F(
a 56
G
a l B q 2 a p̂ n a ~ t ! exp@ iqr̃ˆn ~ t !# ,
F G
exp@2iqr̂n (t 8 ) # are fast oscillating for t2t 8 ;t coll@ v 21
E
c .
] Ĝ 1 t
]t
52 (q u V qu 2 (n 0
dt 8 e 2iH 0 t Therefore one should keep only diagonal terms in the expan-
sion of exp@2iqr̂n (t 8 ) # in exp@6ivc(t82t)#, which means
coll
that the corresponding operator may be expressed in terms of
3†exp„iqr̂n ~ t ! …, @ exp„2iqr̂n ~ t 8 ! …,Ĝ1 ~ t !# ‡e iH 0 t
the operator M̂ n introduced in ~62! @with
~21a! A a 5l B q a exp„2i a v c (t 8 2t)…#. At the same time, in the
derivation of the kinetic equation ~20! it has been assumed
is the first term which is linear in the electron-electron that both the operator Ĝ itself and the collision term as a
interaction H ee @Eq. ~21a! is similar to Eqs. ~20!, ~21!#. whole are smooth functions of time @it is seen from ~68!, ~70!
Therefore the major term in the solution of ~21a! is a
that time evolution of Ĝ1 (t) is given by that of g̃ 1 (t), i.e.,
function of the total electron momentum P̂ 6 (t)
Ĝ1 (t) is indeed smooth#. It follows from these arguments,
[exp@iĤ0t#P̂6(0)exp@2iĤ0t# and of the energy Ĥ 0 @cf. Eq.
~33!#. In view of the initial condition ~68! and taking into with account taken of the fact that the operators p̂ n a (t) os-
cillate approximately as exp(iavct), that the substitution ~62!
account that ~i! the operator Ĝ 1 (t) has a symmetry of the
momentum operator, and ~ii! we are considering elastic scat- should be applied to the p̂ n6 -dependent terms not only in
tering, and therefore the total electron energy and distribu- exp@2iqr̂n (t 8 ) # , but also in exp@iqr̂n (t) # ~in the latter case
tion over the energy do not change, we will seek Ĝ 1 (t) in A a 52l B q a ).
the form With Eq. ~62! taken into account we can rewrite the col-
lision term in ~21a! in the form
F G
Ĝ 1 ~ t ! 5 g̃ 1 ~ t ! Z 21
e e
2i v c t
P̂ 1 ~ 0 ! exp@ 2 b Ĥ 0 # . ~70!
] Ĝ 1
(q u V qu 2 e 2 ~ 1/2 ! l q (n d „qṽˆ~nd !~ 0 ! …
2 2
'2 p B
The function g̃ 1 (t) is slowly varying; it accounts for relax- ]t coll
F S DF S D GG
ation. Fast oscillating terms in g̃ 1 are small and nonreso-
1 2 2 1
nant, and they have been dropped. In fact, even in the neglect 3 M̂ n l B q ;0 , M̂ n l 2B q 2 ;0 ,Ĝ 1 ~ t ! .
of fast oscillating terms g̃ 1 still may be an arbitrary function 2 2
of the operator P̂ 1 (0) P̂ 2 (0)[ P̂ 1 (t) P̂ 2 (t); however, it fol- ~71!
lows from the form of the collision integral derived below
@see Eq. ~71!# that the terms „P̂ 1 (0) P̂ 2 (0)…m in g̃ 1 that We notice that all operators here @including the ones in
have different m are decoupled from each other in the statis- Ĝ 1 (t), cf. ~70!# are evaluated at the same time t50.
tical limit of the large number of electrons. Therefore from In deriving ~71! we took into account that in the semiclas-
the initial condition ~68! it follows that g̃ 1 (t) is a c number. sical domain ~5!, different components of r̃ˆ ,ṽˆ(d) commute n n
not only with p̂ n6 but also with each other, and hence with
3. The collision term exp(2bH0) and with Ĝ 1 (t) as a whole. In the same semi-
Time evolution of the function g̃ 1 (t) in ~70! is deter- classical approximation the operator Ĥ 0 in Eq. ~70! for
mined by the collision term in ~21a!. To find it we notice that Ĝ 1 (t) can be written in the form ~58! of the sum of the
the duration of a collision is given by the time of flight t coll terms that correspond to quantized cyclotron motion and to
~66! of an electron past a scatterer in the fluctuational field.
semiclassical drift of the centers of electron orbits r̃ˆ . There-
Therefore, in the collision integral in ~21a! the actual time n
difference t2t 8 ;t coll . Although t2t 8 largely exceeds fore the operators M̂ n in ~71! commute with exp(2bH0) in
v 21
c , it is still small compared to the time ; v c / v p over
2 Ĝ 1 (t), and the only term in Ĝ 1 (t) they do not commute
which the electric field driving an electron varies substan- with is P̂ 1 (0).
16 264 M. I. DYKMAN, C. FANG-YEN, AND M. J. LEA 55
F G
Lorentzian in the case where the duration of the collision
1 1 t coll is small compared to the reciprocal scattering rate t , but
g 5 t e ( ~ l B q ! 3 u V qu 2 exp 2 l 2B q 2 ~ 2 n̄ 11 ! ~72!
4 q 2 the latter is small compared to the time t ex over which the
S D
correlations in the electron system decay,
1 2 2 2m
@ n̄ ~ n̄ 11 !# m
3 (
m50
l q
2 B m! ~ m11 ! !
. t 21
ex 5 v p / v c ! t
2 21
!t 21
coll . ~75!
In this case the electron momentum is randomized because
Both P̂ 2 (0) and the collision term ~71! are sums over the of collisions with scatterers faster than it is exchanged with
electrons; the contribution to ~72! comes from the diagonal other electrons ~cf. the discussion in Sec. II D!.
terms in the trace of their product ~the terms that refer to the Since the collisions are short compared to the intervals
same electrons!. Averaging over the occupation numbers of between successive collisions, the many-electron kinetic
the Landau levels n n of the term in the double commutator in
equation ~21a! still applies, but now the term i @ Ĝ 1 ,Ĥ ee# in
~71! with a given n multiplied by p̂ n2 (0) may be performed ~21a! is small compared to the collision term, and to zeroth
using Eq. ~62! ~in fact, it can be simplified using some op- order in v 2p t / v c it can be neglected. A solution of the kinetic
erator identities, but the details go beyond the scope of this equation can be obtained in the extreme quantum limit where
paper!.
electrons occupy only the lowest Landau level, n̄ !1. One
It follows from Eqs. ~67!, ~68!, ~72! that in the range ~69!
can seek it in a quasi-single-electron form ~‘‘quasi’’ here
the conductivity s ( v ) near the cyclotron frequency has a
means that we take into account that collisions with scatter-
Lorentzian peak:
ers are strongly affected by the electron-electron interaction!,
e 2n s g
s~ v !' ~73!
2m ~ v 2 v c ! 2 1 g 2
. Ĝ 1 ~ t ! 5e 2i v c t (n g̃ n1 ~ t ! p n1 Z 21
e exp~ 2 b Ĥ 0 ! .
the field has to be done in the final expression for the con-
ductivity, and therefore we get
s~ v !'
e 2n s
K g 0~ Ef !
2m ~ v 2 v c ! 2 1 g 20 ~ E f ! L
, n̄ !1,
1
f ( ~ l B q ! u V qu exp~ 2l B q /2 ! .
g 0 ~ E f ! 5 l B BE 21 ~76!
3 2 2 2
4 q
The expressions for the static conductivity s and for the cussed in Sec. III B is ;B 2 /B 20 in classical magnetic fields#.
parameters of the cyclotron resonance spectrum are simpli- The field B T ‘‘separates’’ the regions of quantizing and non-
fied for specific scattering mechanisms. In the analysis we quantizing magnetic fields for a given temperature
will assume that the distribution of the fluctuational field (\ v c 5T for B5B T ).
E f is Gaussian, The ratio B 0 /B T 5(2e ^ E 2f & 1/2| T /T) 1/2 , and therefore if
the electron motion is classical in the absence of magnetic
r ~ E f ! 5 ~ p ^ E 2f & ! 21 exp~ 2E 2f / ^ E 2f & ! . ~77! field ~see Sec. II A!, then B 0 !B T . In this case the decrease
of the static many-electron conductivity with increasing B,
Equation ~77! has been shown 33~b!
to describe the substantial which is described by the Drude law ~39! for B!B 0 , satu-
central part of the distribution r (E f ) in the broad range rates for B 0 !B!B T . The conductivity becomes nearly in-
20&G&200. In particular, to an accuracy better than 10% dependent from magnetic field, and according to ~39!, ~49! is
the mean reciprocal field, given by the expression
^ E 21 2 21/2
S D
f &5p ^E f &
1/2
.
mn s 1 2\ 2 q 2
Equation ~77! makes it possible to characterize the effect of s sat5
B 20 2\T (q u V qu 2 exp 8mT
,
the electron-electron interaction on the conductivity and cy- ~79!
clotron resonance by one parameter, the mean square fluc-
tuational field ^ E 2f & . The dependence of ^ E 2f & on electron B 0 !B!B T .
density and temperature is given by Eq. ~3! with F being The conductivity ~79! is determined by the fluctuational elec-
nearly a constant.33~b! tric field. Its dependence on the electron density is strongly
One of the results that immediately follows from ~77! is
sublinear and, in fact, very weak, s sat}n 1/4
s , according to ~3!.
the explicit shape of the cyclotron resonance peak ~76! in the
The value ~79! provides the scaling factor for the conductiv-
range of quantizing magnetic fields for the case where the
ity in strong magnetic fields.
relaxation rate exceeds the interelectron momentum ex-
In the range B!B T the expression for the scaled static
change rate, t 21
ex ! t
21
!t 21
coll . It is seen from Fig. 5 that this
shape is noticeably different from Lorentzian. conductivity s̃ for Gaussian distribution of the field E f is of
In the range of fast interelectron momentum exchange, the form
which is of central interest for the present paper, the depen-
dence of the conductivity and cyclotron resonance on the s
s̃ 5 ,
magnetic field is characterized by two parameters, B/B 0 and s sat
B/B T where
S D F S DG
`
B 20 2\ 2 q 2 B4
2 p m 3T (q q u V qu s52`
(
1/4 2 2 0
mT s̃ 5 p 1/2
|T 2
exp 114 p s 4
B 05 , B T5 . ~78! B2 8mT B
\ 2 e 2 ^ E 21
f &
2
\e
The parameter B 0 gives the magnetic field for which there
arises magnetoresistance @the encountering factor z ~9! dis-
3 F( q
u V qu 2 exp S 2\ 2 q 2
8mT DG 21
, B!B T ~80!
16 266 M. I. DYKMAN, C. FANG-YEN, AND M. J. LEA 55
~clearly, s̃ →1 for B/B 0 →`). The explicit expression for B@B T ~i.e., slower than in the range B 0 @B@B T ). The pa-
the reduced conductivity s̃ for quantizing fields, B*B T , rameter g explicitly depends on electron density for
follows from ~54!, ~65!, ~79!. We note that the fluctuational B*B 0 .
field drops out of s̃ in quantizing fields.
B. Electrons on helium surface
A. Delta-correlated random potential For electrons on helium surface with a density n s 5108
cm 22 and T51 K the fluctuational field is
The analysis of the conductivity becomes particularly
simple in the important case of a d -correlated random poten- ^ E 2f & 1/25F 1/2(G)n 3/4
s T '11 V/cm, and the characteristic
1/2
S D
` 23/2
surface.
B 20 B 40
s̃ 5 p (
B 2 s52`
114 p 2 s 2
B4
, B!B T , ~83!
Since in the limit of weak coupling to the scatterers the
scattering events are independent from each other, the relax-
ation rates for scattering by vapor atoms and by ripplons add
whereas in the range up, and they will be analyzed separately. In the analysis we
S D
will imply the standard variational form of the wave function
B 40 1
n̄ 1 !1, n̄ [ @ exp~ B/B T ! 21 # 21 ~84! of the electron motion transverse to the surface ~in the z
3
B BT 2 direction!
~which includes the range of quantizing fields! we obtain c ~ z ! 52 g'3/2zexp~ 2 g'z ! . ~87!
from ~54!, ~65!
S D 1. Vapor scattering
F G
1
F G 1/2 ` 2m1 ! m
pB 2 n̄ ~ n̄ 11 ! The cross section of a helium atom b 2He'5 Å 2 , and so
s̃ 5
4B T ~ 2 n̄ 11 ! 3
(
m50 ~ m! ! 2
~ 2 n̄ 11 ! 2
helium vapor atoms create a nearly ideal d -correlated poten-
tial. Therefore the magnetoconductivity and cyclotron reso-
~85!
nance in the case of vapor scattering are described by the
@ s̃ as given by ~85! approaches 1 for n̄ @1; we note that the expressions ~81!–~86!. The explicit form of the squared ma-
condition ~84! coincides with the condition v c t coll@1 ~66!#. trix elements of the coupling to the vapor atoms is44
It is seen from ~83!, ~85! that the conductivity has a mini-
mum as a function of B in the range B;B 0 : it decays as
B 22 for B!B 0 , and for B@B T it increases as B 1/2. The
dependence of the reduced conductivity on B is shown in
Fig. 6.
The halfwidth of the cyclotron resonance absorption peak
g in the range of classically strong fields is seen from ~40! to
be given by m v 2c s /e 2 n s . It is independent of electron den-
sity and of B for B!B 0 . As B approaches B 0 the halfwidth
starts increasing with B; for B T @B@B 0 we have g }B 2 . In
the range ~84! g is given by Eq. ~72!. It can be easily evalu-
ated for the d -correlated potential ~81!:
21
g 5 t B50 F B 3B T
4 p B 40 ~ 2 n̄ 11 ! 5
G 1/2
3 (
`
m50
~ 2m1 32 ! !
F n̄ ~ n̄ 11 !
m! ~ m11 ! ! ~ 2 n̄ 11 ! 2 G m
. ~86!
FIG. 6. Reduced conductivity s̃ 5 s / s sat as a function of
B/B 0 for classical fields and of B/B T [\ v c /T for B 3 @(B 40 /
It is seen from Eq. ~86! that the halfwidth of the cyclotron B T )( n̄ 11/2), for a d -correlated random potential and for Gaussian
resonance peak increases with the magnetic field as B 3/2 for distribution of the fluctuational field.
55 MANY-ELECTRON TRANSPORT IN STRONGLY . . . 16 267
F G
Te 2 2
u V qu 2r 5S 21 @ E 12E' E pol1E 2pol# ,
aq2 '
~89!
j ~ q! 5 E2`
` 1
dtexp 2 l 2B q 2 W ~ v c t ! ,
2
S D
~93!
\ 2 g'~ 0 !
q
E pol[E pol~ q ! 5 q w , 2
1 B 40
2me 2 g' W ~ x ! 5 ~ n̄ 11 !~ 12e 2ix ! 1 n̄ ~ 12e ix ! 1 x 2.
3
4 B BT
where a is the surface tension, g'(0) 5(me 2 /4\ 2 )(«21)/
(«11) is the value of the variational parameter g' for In deriving ~93! we used Eqs. ~37!, ~59!, ~61!, ~63!; averag-
E' 50, « is the dielectric constant of ing over fluctuational field was done using ~77!. Equations
helium, and ~54!, ~93! make it possible to write the reduced conductivity
s̃ E' in the form
w ~ x ! 5 ~ x 2 21 ! 21 1 ~ 12x 2 ! 23/2ln F 11 ~ 12x 2 ! 1/2
x
, x,1, G B 20
`
~90a! s̃ E' 5 p
B2
Im (
s52`
@ W 8 ~ x s !# 21 ,
e 2
E'2 mn s
w j~ z !5 E
0
`
dx x j21 e 2x w j @~ zx ! 1/2# ~ j51,2! . ~95!
s E' 5 s̃ E' s ~E0'! , s ~E0'! 5 ,
4 a \ p B 20 The functions w 1,2 depend on temperature and, through
the variational parameter g' , on the pressing field E' . In
F G (F
1/2 `
G m
pBT n̄ ~ n̄ 11 ! ~ 2m2 21 ! ! the actual case where the thermal wavelength | T is large
s̃ E' 5 . compared to the localization length in the direction trans-
B ~ 2 n̄ 11 ! m50 ~ 2 n̄ 11 ! 2 ~ m! ! 2
~92! verse to the helium surface we obtain from ~89!, ~95!
It follows from ~92! that s E' does not display saturation with
the increasing B. Its dependence on B is monotonous. In
w j ~ 2mT/\ 2 g'2 ! ' F 1
2
ln~ \ 2 g'2 /mT ! G j
~ j51,2! .
16 268 M. I. DYKMAN, C. FANG-YEN, AND M. J. LEA 55
In the range B*B T the conductivities s cr , s pol increase so that the fluctuational field does not vary in time during a
with the magnetic field. In the limit B@B T we have s cr collision and is uniform over the electron wavelength. Both
}B 1/2, s pol}B 3/2 to an accuracy of a factor that smoothly these two conditions are met in the classical domain,
depends on B ~approximately as a logarithm of g'l B ). The T@e ^ E 2f & 1/2| T , \ v c , and the specific for many-electron
explicit expressions for the relaxation rate t 21 in the case systems semiclassical domain, \ v c *T@e ^ E 2f & 1/2l B (2 n̄
g'l B @1 are given in Ref. 45. The reduced conductivities 11) 21/2, where the electron motion is a superposition of a
s cr , s pol as functions of B obtained from ~54!, ~65!, ~80!, quantized cyclotron motion and a nearly classical drift of the
~89! are shown in Figs. 8 and 9. centers of cyclotron orbits.
The overall conductivity s ~91! due to the ripplon scat- The analysis is based on the many-electron quantum
tering has a minimum as a function of magnetic field. The transport equation. We derive this equation and develop
position of the minimum depends on temperature, electron techniques for solving it, for classical and semiclassical do-
density ~in terms of the mean square fluctuational field mains. The solutions are obtained in the limiting cases of
^ E 2f & ), and the pressing field E' . The occurrence of the large and small ratios between the rate t 21 ex of interelectron
minimum is a many-electron effect. Figures 6–9 refer to the momentum exchange due to electron-electron interaction and
case where the saturation of s 21 with the increasing B oc- the relaxation rate t 21 due to collisions with the scatterers.
curs in classical magnetic fields, i.e., for B 0 !B T . However, For t ex! t the general expression for the conductivity coin-
the theory applies for an arbitrary ratio between the field
B 0 ~78! and B T [mT/\e provided there holds the inequality
S DF
B0
BT
2
BT
B ~ 2 n̄ 11 !
G 1/2
!1
VIII. CONCLUSIONS
cides with the expression which can be formally written in tuational electric field @which have been taken into account
terms of the memory function @cf. Eq. ~74!#. We emphasize in ~28!# as well as the acceleration due to the electric field
that, in evaluating the electron structure factor, we do not use being time-dependent itself:
the random phase approximation: the major effects come
1
from strong electron correlations. It follows from the results
that, in the classical and semiclassical domains, polaronic
Ên ~ t ! 'Ên ~ 0 ! 1t (
m n8
„p̂n 8 ~ 0 ! ¹n 8 …Ên ~ 0 ! ~A1!
effects of the mass renormalization due to short-wavelength
scattering are small. @the explicit form of the operator Ên is given by Eq. ~27!
If t ex! t then, because of the many-electron effects, up to with rn 8 replaced by r̂n 8 ; to the lowest approximation in the
moderately strong B ~including classically strong fields, acceleration of the electrons we have set the velocity of an
v c t @1, but \ v c ,e ^ E 2f & 1/2| T ), the frequency-dependent n 8 th electron equal to its value p̂n 8 (0)/m at t50#. An esti-
conductivity s ( v ) is described by the single-electron Drude mate of ¹n En for a classical system follows from the esti-
formula. mate ~3! of ^ E 2f & and from the relation ~cf. Ref. 46!
For higher magnetic fields the scattering rate starts to in-
crease with B, and in quantizing fields the conductivity as a e 2 ^ E 2f & [ ^ ~ ¹n H ee! 2 & 52eT ^ ¹n En & . ~A2!
whole increases with B, i.e., s is a nomonotonous function
Allowing for this estimate we see that, for the characteristic
of B. The dependence of the conductivity on the magnetic
p n ;(mT) 1/2, t;T 21 , the time-dependent term in ~A1! gives
field has a simple form for a d -correlated random potential
rise to a correction to the reduced electron displacement
~cf. Fig. 6!. A detailed comparison of the results on the static
conductivity with the experiment is given in Ref. 45. d r n / | T of the order of e 2 ^ E 2f & | 2T /T 2 . This is the quantum
If coupling to the scatterers is comparatively strong, so correction we are looking for.
that for B50 there holds the inequality t 21 21 With account taken of ~A1! the expressions ~28!, ~29! are
ex & t , the static
modified:
conductivity of the classical strongly correlated many-
electron system is still given by the single-electron theory
e iqr̂n ~ t ! 'exp@ iqF̃„t,p̂n ~ 0 ! …# e iqr̂n ~ 0 !
provided T@\ t 21 . The many-electron effects may come
into play in a certain range of classically strong magnetic
fields, t 21 ! v c !T/\, but the range of classically strong B
where there is no magnetoresistance disappears. With further
3exp 2i F q2
2m S
1
t 12 v 2c t 2 1
6
e
~ ¹ E !t2
12m n n DG ,
S D
the idea of successive collisions no longer applies. The
crossover to effectively strong coupling occurs in strong p̂n 1 p̂n 3B e
F̃~ t,p̂n ! 5 t 12 v 2c t 2 1e v ct 21 Ê t 2
enough quantizing fields even if t 21 ex @ t
21
for B50, since, m 6 2m v c
2
2m n
for \ v c .T and for short-range scattering, t coll}B 1/2 and
t 21 }B 3/2. These arguments explain why in some cases the e 3
1 t ~ p̂n ¹n ! Ên . ~A4!
single-electron theory which ignores correlations in the non- 6m 2
degenerate electron system is in reasonable agreement with In the last term in ~A3!, which will be evaluated to the lowest
experiment,11,12 whereas in other cases many-electron effects order of the perturbation theory, we replaced (q¹n )(qEn ) by
are dominating.7,8,13,14,17,45 (1/2)q 2 (¹n En ). In the last term in ~A4! we dropped the
terms with n 8 Þn in ~A1!, because for a classical electron
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS system the momenta of different electrons are uncorrelated.
We are grateful to P. M. Platzman for valuable discus- The evaluation of the correlator j (q) ~37! comes to sta-
sions. tistical averaging of exp(iqF̃) and further integration over
time. In doing averaging we have to retain terms
APPENDIX: QUANTUM CORRECTIONS ; v 2c t 2 ; v 2c /T 2 and ;e 2 ^ E 2f & | 2T /T 2 ~clearly, there may be
TO THE MANY-ELECTRON CLASSICAL no corrections of first order in v c or in E f ). Therefore the
RELAXATION RATE commutator
K Fexp i
e
2m
qÊn t 2 2i
e 3 2
6m 2 t q ~ ¹n En ! 1i
e 3
6m 2
t ~ p̂n ¹n !~ qÊn ! GL conf
'exp 2 F m2
S
e 2 ^ E 2f & q 2 t 4
16
2i
q 2t 3
6T
1i
qp̂n t 3 qp̂n t 2
12T
1
8T 2
DG .
~A5!
Here we have allowed for the fact that, to zeroth order in \/T ~the expansion parameter, Ref. 46!, the configuration averaging
^ K̂( $ rn 8 % ) & conf comes to integration over the coordinates rn 8 with the weight exp(2bHee). To first order in \/T one should add
the configuration average of the commutator (\/2T) @ K̂,H 0 # . In ~A5! we used
1 1 1
2
@~ qÊn ! ,e 2 b H 0 # '2
2m
ib
n8
(
~ pn 8 ¹n 8 !~ qEn ! e 2 b H 0 ⇒2i
4mT
~ qpn ! ^ ~ ¹n En ! &
T⇒T * , T * 5T 11 1
v 2c
24mT 3 12T 2
. F e 2 ^ E 2f &
G ~A6!
The evaluation of the corresponding Gaussian integral over pn is straightforward, and the result is
F~ t ! 5 S v 2c
T21
e
2mT
2
^ E 2f &
3 DS 1 4 4 2 3 3 1 2 2
3
t T 1 it T 2 t T .
3 3 D
The value of the function j (q) is given by the integral of the expression ~A7! over time. In doing integration the function
F(t) should be considered as a perturbation. The resulting expression for j (q) is of the form ~45!, and the parameter F in ~45!
is given by the value of F(t) for t52i/2T @where the exponent in ~A7! has a saddle point, to zeroth order in F(t)#.
*Also at Department of Physics, MIT, Cambridge, MA 02139. der, and P. Wyder, Physica B 165&166, 845 ~1990!; 194-196,
1
M.W. Cole and M.H. Cohen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 23, 1238 ~1969!. 1231 ~1994!; P.J.M. Peters, P. Scheuzger, M.J. Lea, Yu.P.
2
~a! T. Ando, A.B. Fowler, and F. Stern, Rev. Mod. Phys. 54, 437 Monarkha, P.K.H. Sommerfeld, and R.W. van der Heijden,
~1982!; ~b! 2D Electron Systems on Helium and Other Sub- Phys. Rev. B 50, 11 570 ~1994!.
strates, edited by E.Y. Andrei ~Kluwer Academic, New York, 13
M.I. Dykman, M.J. Lea, P. Fozooni, and J. Frost, Phys. Rev. Lett.
1997!; ~c! for an introductory review, see A.J. Dahm and W.F. 70, 3975 ~1993!; Physica B 197, 340 ~1994!.
Vinen, Phys. Today 40, 43 ~1987!. 14
M.J. Lea, P. Fozooni, P.J. Richardson, and A. Blackburn, Phys.
3
C.C. Grimes and G. Adams, Phys. Rev. Lett. 42, 795 ~1979!. Rev. Lett. 73, 1142 ~1994!.
4 15
D.S. Fisher, B.I. Halperin, and P.M. Platzman, Phys. Rev. Lett. E.Y. Andrei, S. Yücel, and L. Menna, Phys. Rev. Lett. 67, 3704
42, 798 ~1979!. ~1991!; G.F. Saville, J.M. Goodkind, and P.M. Platzman, ibid.
5
G. Deville, J. Low Temp. Phys. 72, 135 ~1988!. 70, 1517 ~1993!; L. Menna, S. Yücel, and E.Y. Andrei, ibid. 70,
6
M.A. Stan and A.J. Dahm, Phys. Rev. B 40, 8995 ~1989!. 2154 ~1993!; E.Y. Andrei, Physica B 197, 335 ~1994! and ref-
7
Y. Iye, J. Low Temp. Phys. 40, 441 ~1980!. erences therein.
8
V.S. Edel’man, JETP 50, 338 ~1980!; L. Wilen and R. Giannetta, 16
K. Shirahama and K. Kono, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 781 ~1995!.
Phys. Rev. Lett. 60, 231 ~1988!; Surf. Sci. 196, 24 ~1988!. 17
K. Kono and K. Shirahama, J. Low Temp. Phys. 104, 237 ~1996!.
9 18
R. Mehrotra, C.J. Guo, Y.Z. Ruan, D.B. Mast, and A.J. Dahm, A. Kristensen, K. Djerfi, P. Fozooni, M.J. Lea, P.J. Richardson,
Phys. Rev. B 29, 5239 ~1984!. A. Santrich-Badal, A. Blackburn, and R.W. van der Heijden,
10
V.A. Buntar’, Yu.Z. Kovdrya, V.N. Grigoriev, Yu.P. Monarkha, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 1350 ~1996!.
and S.S. Sokolov, Sov. J. Low Temp. Phys 13, 451 ~1987!; V.A. 19
See, e.g., I.V. Kukushkin, V.I. Fal’ko, R.J. Haug, K. von Klitzing,
Buntar’, V.N. Grigoriev, O.I. Kirichek, Yu.Z. Kovdrya, Yu.P. K. Eberl, and K. Tötemayer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 72, 3594 ~1994!;
Monarkha, and S.S. Sokolov, J. Low Temp. Phys. 79, 323 A.A. Shashkin, V.T. Dolgopolov, G.V. Kravchenko, M. Wen-
~1990!. del, R. Schuster, J.P. Kotthaus, R.J. Haug, K. von Klitzing, K.
11
R.W. van der Heijden, M.C.M. van de Sanden, J.H.G. Surewaard, Ploog, H. Nickel, and W. Schlapp, ibid. 73, 3141 ~1994! and
A.T.A.M. de Waele, H.M. Gijsman, and F.M. Peeters, Euro- references therein.
phys. Lett. 6, 75 ~1988!. 20
C.C. Grimes and G. Adams, Phys. Rev. Lett. 36, 145 ~1976!; C.C.
12
P.W. Adams and M.A. Paalanen, Phys. Rev. B 37, 3805 ~1988!; Grimes, Surf. Sci. 73, 379 ~1978!.
21
A.O. Stone, P. Fozooni, M.J. Lea, and M. Abdul-Gader, J. Phys. D.B. Mast, A.J. Dahm, and A.L. Fetter, Phys. Rev. Lett. 54, 1706
Condens. Matter 1, 2743 ~1989!; P. Scheuzger, J. Neuenschwan- ~1985!; D.C. Glattli, E. Andrei, G. Deville, J. Pointrenaud, and
55 MANY-ELECTRON TRANSPORT IN STRONGLY . . . 16 271
F.I.B. Williams, ibid. 54, 1710 ~1985!; P.J.M. Peters, M.J. Lea, Yen, and A. Blackburn, J. Phys. Condens. Matter 8, L215
A.M.L. Janssen, A.O. Stone, W.P.N.M. Jacobs, P. Fozooni, and ~1996!; ~b! C. Fang-Yen, M.I. Dykman, and M.J. Lea, following
R.W. van der Heijden, ibid. 67, 2199 ~1991!; O.I. Kirichek, paper, Phys. Rev. B 55, 16 272 ~1997!.
P.K.H. Sommerfeld, Yu.P. Monarkha, P.J.M. Peters, Yu.Z. 34
L. Bonsall and A.A. Maradudin, Phys. Rev. B 15, 1959 ~1977!.
35
Kovdrya, P.P. Steijaert, R.W. van der Heijden, and A.T.A.M. de E.M. Baskin, L.N. Magarill, and M.V. Entin, JETP 48, 365
Waele, ibid. 74, 1190 ~1995!. ~1978!.
22
A.L. Fetter, Phys. Rev. B 32, 7676 ~1985!; 33, 3717 ~1986!; 33, 36
R. Kubo, S.J. Miyake, and N. Hashitsume, Solid State Phys. 17,
5221 ~1986!; S.S. Nazin and V.B. Shikin, Sov. Phys. JETP 67, 269 ~1965!.
288 ~1988!; V.A. Volkov and S.A. Mikhailov, ibid. 67, 1639 37
W. Kohn, Phys. Rev. 123, 1242 ~1961!.
~1988!; I.L. Aleiner and L.I. Glazman, Phys. Rev. Lett. 72, 2935 38
J.P. Hansen, D. Levesque, and J.J. Weis, Phys. Rev. Lett. 43, 979
~1994!. ~1979!; R.K. Kalia, P. Vashishta, S.W. de Leeuw, and A. Rah-
23
R.S. Crandall and R. Williams, Phys. Lett. 34A, 404 ~1971!; A.V. man, J. Phys. C 14, L991 ~1981!.
Chaplik, Sov. Phys. JETP 35, 395 ~1972!. 39
For systems with equidistant or nearly equidistant energy levels
24
A.-M. Tremblay and V. Ambegaokar, Phys. Rev. B 20, 2190 the shape of the spectrum is not given just by the superposition
~1979!. of the lines that correspond to individual transitions, with the
25
~a! M.I. Dykman, Solid State Commun. 35, 753 ~1980!; ~b! J. widths calculated using the results for two-level systems. This is
Phys. C 15, 7397 ~1982!; ~c! JETP 55, 766 ~1982!. called the harmonic oscillator ‘‘paradox’’ @V. Weisskopf and E.
26
A.G. Eguiluz, A.A. Maradudin, and R.J. Elliott, Phys. Rev. B 24, Wigner, Z. Phys. B 65, 18 ~1930!#. The theory of the spectra of
197 ~1981!. such systems is reviewed by M.I. Dykman and M.A. Krivoglaz,
27
A.J. Dahm and R. Mehrotra, J. Low Temp. Phys. 50, 201 ~1983!; in Soviet Physics Reviews, edited by I.M. Khalatnikov ~Har-
R. Mehrotra and A.J. Dahm, ibid. 50, 235 ~1983!. wood, New York, 1984!, Vol. 5, p. 265.
28
M. Saitoh, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 55, 1311 ~1986!; 56, 706 ~1987!. 40
L.D. Landau and E.M. Lifshitz, Mechanics ~Pergamon, London,
29
E.M. Conwell, High Field Transport in Semiconductors ~Aca- 1976!.
41
demic Press, New York, 1967!; K. Seeger, Semiconductor Phys- Yu.M. Vil’k and Yu.P. Monarkha, Sov. J. Low Temp. Phys. 15,
ics. An Introduction, 5th ed. ~Springer, Berlin, 1991!. 131 ~1989!.
30
R. Mehrotra, J. Low. Temp. Phys. 68, 161 ~1987!; 79, 311 ~1990!. 42
P.W. Anderson, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 9, 316 ~1954!.
31
~a! M.I. Dykman and L.S. Khazan, JETP 50, 747 ~1979!; ~b! M.I. 43
See A. Isihara, Solid State Phys. 42, 271 ~1989!.
Dykman, Sov. J. Low Temp. Phys. 6, 268 ~1980!. 44
M. Saitoh, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 42, 201 ~1977!.
32
N.A. Krall and A.W. Trivelpiece, Principles of Plasma Physics 45
M.J. Lea et al., this issue, Phys. Rev. B 55, 16 280 ~1997!.
~McGraw-Hill, New York, 1973!. 46
L.D. Landau and E.M. Lifshitz, Statistical Physics, 3rd ed., Pt. 1
33
~a! P. Fozooni, P.J. Richardson, M.J. Lea, M.I. Dykman, C. Fang- ~Pergamon, New York, 1980!.