The Interplay Between Kondo and Quantum Zeno Effects in Quantum Dots
This article discusses Kondo and Quantum Zeno effects in monitored quantum dots.
― 6 min read
Table of Contents
Quantum Dots are tiny structures that can trap electrons and behave like artificial atoms. When placed in contact with a metal, these dots can interact with the surrounding electrons, leading to interesting phenomena. One key behavior observed in such systems is known as the Kondo Effect, which enhances the quantum dot's ability to hold onto its electron by forming a "singlet" state with surrounding electrons.
Recent advancements in measuring techniques allow us to continuously observe the charge inside these quantum dots. This constant observation can alter how the quantum dot interacts with its environment, leading to a different behavior known as the Quantum Zeno Effect. In this article, we will explore the interplay between these two effects – Kondo and Zeno – and how observation modifies their dynamics.
Quantum Dots and Their Dynamics
At the heart of our study is a quantum dot that is continuously observed as it interacts with a metallic bath. This system can be thought of as an interacting quantum spin connected to a large reservoir of electrons. When the temperature is low or the observation is carried out over a long period, the behavior of the quantum dot is heavily influenced by its interactions with the surrounding electrons.
Initially, when a quantum dot is charged, the spin of the electron in the dot can be polarized, meaning it is aligned in a specific direction. Over time, however, this polarization diminishes, influenced by its coupling to the surrounding metallic bath. The rate of this decay provides insight into the competitive dynamics of Kondo screening and the Quantum Zeno effect.
Kondo Effect
The Kondo effect is a phenomenon where the magnetic moment of a localized impurity, like a quantum dot, gets screened by the surrounding electrons at low temperatures. This screening leads to a long-lived state where the dot effectively loses its magnetic properties. The Kondo effect results in the electron spin forming a singlet with the metallic bath, leading to an increased lifetime of the spin state.
This effect was first observed in metals with dilute impurities and has been confirmed in various systems, including quantum dots and mesoscopic setups. The Kondo effect is particularly interesting because it indicates strong interactions at play, leading to fundamental changes in the behavior of the quantum dot.
Quantum Zeno Effect
On the other hand, the Quantum Zeno effect arises from continuous observation. When a quantum system is monitored closely, the act of measurement can "freeze" its dynamics, preventing it from evolving. In the context of quantum dots, when we continuously monitor the dot's charge, we can slow down or even halt the decay of the polarization in the spin state.
This effect has been demonstrated in many quantum systems, from cavity and circuit QED to ultracold atoms. The continuous nature of measurement introduces a back-action on the quantum state, leading to a "localization" effect of the dynamics.
Interplay Between Kondo and Zeno Effects
As we observe the quantum dot, we can study how the spin polarization behaves under different regimes of interaction and observation. When there is weak Monitoring, the Kondo effect dominates, leading to a long-lived spin state. However, as we increase the monitoring rate, the Quantum Zeno effect starts to take over. This crossover represents a key feature of this system, revealing the competition between these two dynamics.
When monitoring is weak, the decay rate of the spin can be characterized by the interactions in the system. In this case, the spin decays rapidly as it forms a Kondo singlet with the surrounding electrons. However, once we increase the monitoring, we observe a slowdown in the decay rate. This behavior reflects the Quantum Zeno effect, as the increased observation leads to a freezing of the dynamics.
Setup of the Experiment
To study these phenomena, we consider a quantum dot that is singly occupied and connected to a large metallic bath. The monitoring is conducted continuously, allowing us to track the total charge on the dot. We use a theoretical framework based on the Anderson impurity model to describe the quantum dot's dynamics under continuous observation.
The Lindblad master equation governs the evolution of the density matrix of the dot and bath system. By averaging over the noise introduced by the monitoring, we derive an effective model to analyze the long-term behavior of the system.
Results
By solving the dynamics of the impurity model, we find that the decay of the magnetization shows a distinct crossover behavior. For small monitoring rates, the spin relaxes rapidly due to Kondo screening, while for large monitoring rates, the decay slows down, indicating the presence of the Quantum Zeno effect. This crossover is evident in the behavior of the spin decay rate as a function of the monitoring rate.
The effective model derived through a transformation reveals that the Kondo state remains robust against weak monitoring. However, at stronger monitoring, heating effects caused by the formation of Doublons start to dominate the spin decay. The interplay between Kondo screening and the Zeno effect thus leads to intricate dynamics that are sensitive to both interaction strengths and monitoring rates.
Doublon Dynamics
In addition to monitoring the spin, we also examine the dynamics of the charge occupation in the dot. A doublon refers to a case where two electrons occupy the same site in the quantum dot, leading to distinct effects on the spin dynamics. As the monitoring increases, we observe how the production of doublons becomes significant, which contributes to the heating of the system and influences both the charge and spin dynamics.
The charge dynamics display a non-monotonic behavior as a function of the monitoring rate. Initially, the doublon fraction oscillates but eventually saturates at a steady-state, providing insight into the heating mechanisms present in the dot as we monitor it continuously.
Effective Models
Through various transformations and approximations, we can simplify our original model into an effective non-Hermitian Kondo model that captures the essence of the quantum dot's dynamics under continuous observation. This effective model describes the interplay of Kondo interactions and dissipative processes in the system.
By studying the effective model, we gain insights into how the Zeno effect and Kondo screening compete and how the system transitions from one regime to another based on the strength of monitoring. The evolution of the effective parameters reveals essential characteristics of the observed crossover.
Conclusion
The dynamics of a monitored quantum dot show a fascinating interplay between the Kondo effect and the Quantum Zeno effect. Through careful observation and analysis, we uncover how these two phenomena interact, revealing the complexities of quantum behavior in small systems.
As we increase monitoring, we see a definitive crossover from Kondo screening behavior to the localization effects characteristic of the Quantum Zeno effect. These insights suggest a rich canvas for future research, emphasizing the need to explore how changes in observation techniques can open new avenues for understanding quantum systems.
With the growing capability to manipulate and measure quantum systems, the phenomena observed in quantum dots provide valuable insights into fundamental aspects of quantum mechanics, paving the way for new developments in both theoretical and experimental physics. This work stands to impact our understanding of quantum behaviors in a variety of settings, from quantum computation to materials science.
Title: Kondo-Zeno crossover in the dynamics of a monitored quantum dot
Abstract: We study the dynamics of a quantum dot coupled to a metallic bath and subject to continuous monitoring of its charge density. The dynamics averaged over measurement noise is described by a dissipative Anderson impurity model with local Markovian dephasing, that we solve using an extension of the Non-Crossing Approximation in the vectorized Hilbert space. We show that the decay time scale of an initially polarised spin which is suddenly coupled to the bath and to the monitoring protocol displays a crossover from Kondo screening, with a lifetime controlled by interactions, to Quantum Zeno effect, with a lifetime which decreases with bare dissipation as the dephasing or monitoring rate is increased. Using a Schrieffer-Wolff transformation on the Lindbladian we derive an effective model for the long-time dynamics which is described at weak dissipation by a non-Hermitian Kondo model with complex-valued spin-spin exchange. As the dephasing is increased heating due to doublon production takes over and control the spin decay.
Authors: Matthieu Vanhoecke, Marco Schirò
Last Update: 2024-06-17 00:00:00
Language: English
Source URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.17348
Source PDF: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2405.17348
Licence: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Changes: This summary was created with assistance from AI and may have inaccuracies. For accurate information, please refer to the original source documents linked here.
Thank you to arxiv for use of its open access interoperability.
Reference Links
- https://doi.org/
- https://doi.org/10.1143/PTP.32.37
- https://arxiv.org/abs/
- https://academic.oup.com/ptp/article-pdf/32/1/37/5193092/32-1-37.pdf
- https://doi.org/DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1038/34373
- https://doi.org/10.1088/0953-8984/16/16/R01
- https://doi.org/10.1038/nature10204
- https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.89.080401
- https://doi.org/10.1038/nphys3076
- https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1259345
- https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.1259345
- https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms4194
- https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.115.140402
- https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.98.205136
- https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.122.040402
- https://doi.org/10.22331/q-2021-08-19-528
- https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.92.156801
- https://doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/9/5/121
- https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.77.081303
- https://doi.org/10.1038/nphys564
- https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevResearch.5.023028
- https://arxiv.org/abs/2111.07771
- https://arxiv.org/abs/2402.04207
- https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.143601
- https://doi.org/10.1038/s42254-020-0157-9
- https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.97.155156
- https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.82.013615
- https://doi.org/10.1038/s41567-019-0678-2
- https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1701513
- https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.130.063001
- https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.123.180402
- https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.129.056802
- https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevResearch.5.013195
- https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2304.00928
- https://arxiv.org/abs/2304.00928
- https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-5468/ab4e8e
- https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-5468/ab8118
- https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5100157
- https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.122.040604
- https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.102.100301
- https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-5468/ac8e5d
- https://arxiv.org/abs/2306.16452
- https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.121.203001
- https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.102.125124
- https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.00039
- https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevX.11.031018
- https://doi.org/10.21468/SciPostPhys.16.1.026
- https://doi.org/10.1088/0305-4470/25/21/023
- https://doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/10/4/043026
- https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3548065
- https://pubs.aip.org/aip/jcp/article-pdf/doi/10.1063/1.3548065/13788434/044121
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2008.05.003
- https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.89.165105
- https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94956-7_4
- https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.107.075119
- https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217979296000817
- https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-4916
- https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevResearch.5.033107
- https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.109.125125
- https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.59.845
- https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01470417
- https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.70.2601
- https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.83.808
- https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.82.115115
- https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.88.235426
- https://doi.org/10.21468/SciPostPhys.10.6.142
- https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.106.013707
- https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.95.196801
- https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-5468/ac729b
- https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.109.115101
- https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.86.012126
- https://doi.org/10.21468/SciPostPhys.9.6.091
- https://arxiv.org/abs/2402.09510