shot noise in mesoscopic conductors - Low Temperature Laboratory
shot noise in mesoscopic conductors - Low Temperature Laboratory
shot noise in mesoscopic conductors - Low Temperature Laboratory
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
24 Ya.M. Blanter, M. Bu( ttiker / Physics Reports 336 (2000) 1}166<br />
The current is taken to be positive if it #ows from the reservoir towards the <strong>mesoscopic</strong> structure.<br />
For the average current <strong>in</strong> the two-term<strong>in</strong>al geometry, we have I #I "0. We emphasize that<br />
<br />
current conservation must hold not only on the average but at each <strong>in</strong>stant of time. In particular,<br />
current conservation must also hold for the #uctuation spectra which we discuss subsequently. In<br />
general, for time-dependent currents, we have to consider not only contacts which permit carrier<br />
exchange with the conductor, but also other nearby metallic structures, for <strong>in</strong>stance gates, aga<strong>in</strong>st<br />
which the conductor can be polarized. The requirement that the results are gauge <strong>in</strong>variant means<br />
<strong>in</strong> this context, that no current arises if voltages at all reservoirs are simultaneously shifted by the<br />
same value (and no temperature gradient is applied). For the average currents (see Eqs. (39), (47))<br />
both properties are a direct consequence of the unitarity of the scatter<strong>in</strong>g matrix.<br />
For the conductance matrix G current conservation and gauge <strong>in</strong>variance require that the<br />
<br />
elements of this matrix <strong>in</strong> each row and <strong>in</strong> each column add up to zero,<br />
G " G "0 . (48)<br />
<br />
<br />
Note that for the two term<strong>in</strong>al case this implies G,G "G "!G "!G . In the two<br />
<br />
term<strong>in</strong>al case, it is thus su$cient to evaluate one conductance to determ<strong>in</strong>e the conductance<br />
matrix. In multi-probe samples the number of elements one has to determ<strong>in</strong>e to "nd the conductance<br />
matrix is given by the constra<strong>in</strong>ts (48) and by the fact that the conductance matrix is<br />
a susceptibility and obeys the Onsager}Casimir symmetries<br />
G (B)"G (!B) .<br />
<br />
In the scatter<strong>in</strong>g approach the Onsager}Casimir symmetries are aga<strong>in</strong> a direct consequence of the<br />
reciprocity symmetry of the scatter<strong>in</strong>g matrix under "eld reversal.<br />
In the stationary case, the current conservation and the gauge <strong>in</strong>variance of the results are<br />
a direct consequence of the unitarity of the scatter<strong>in</strong>g matrix. In general, for non-l<strong>in</strong>ear and<br />
non-stationary problems, current conservation and gauge <strong>in</strong>variance are not automatically<br />
ful"lled. Indeed, <strong>in</strong> ac-transport a direct calculation of average particle currents does not yield<br />
a current conserv<strong>in</strong>g theory. Only the <strong>in</strong>troduction of displacement currents, determ<strong>in</strong>ed by the<br />
long-range Coulomb <strong>in</strong>teraction, leads to a theory which satis"es these basic requirements. We will<br />
discuss these issues for <strong>noise</strong> problems <strong>in</strong> Section 3.<br />
2.4. General expressions for <strong>noise</strong><br />
We are concerned with #uctuations of the current away from their average value. We thus<br />
<strong>in</strong>troduce the operators IK (t),IK (t)!I .Wede"ne the correlation function S (t!t) of the<br />
<br />
current <strong>in</strong> contact and the current <strong>in</strong> contact as<br />
S (t!t),IK (t)IK (t)#IK (t)IK (t) . (49)<br />
<br />
Note that several de"nitions, di!er<strong>in</strong>g by numerical factors, can be found <strong>in</strong> the literature. The one we use<br />
corresponds to the general de"nition of time-dependent #uctuations found <strong>in</strong> Ref. [11]. We de"ne the Fourier transform<br />
with the coe$cient 2 <strong>in</strong> front of it, then our normalization yields the equilibrium (Nyquist}Johnson) <strong>noise</strong> S"4k ¹G<br />
and is <strong>in</strong> accordance with Ref. [1], see below. The standard de"nition of Fourier transform would yield the<br />
Nyquist}Johnson <strong>noise</strong> S"2k ¹G. Ref. [9] de"nes the spectral function which is multiplied by the width of the<br />
frequency <strong>in</strong>terval where <strong>noise</strong> is measured.