Abstract
The quantum–classical crossover of the escape rate is studied in a nanomagnetic Josephson \(\varphi _0\) junction within the framework of the spin-coherent-state path integral method. The nonlinear perturbation approach is employed to obtain the crossover boundary separating the first- and the second-order crossovers. The region for the first-order crossover is greatly suppressed by the bias current applied to the junction as well as the external magnetic field. These features can be tested using existing experimental techniques.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
L. Gunther, B. Barbara (eds.), Quantum Tunneling of Magnetization-QTM ’94 (Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, 1995)
W. Linert, M. Verdaguer (eds.), Molecular Magnets Recent Heightlights (Springer, Wien, 2003)
D. Gatteschi, R. Sessoli, J. Villain (eds.), Molecular Nanomagnets (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2006)
E.M. Chudnovsky, J. Tejada, Lectures on Magnetism (Rinton Press, Paramus, NJ, 2006)
J. Bartolomé, F. Luis, J.F. Fernández (eds.), Molecular Magnets-Physics and Applications (Springer, Heidelberg, 2014)
E.M. Chudnovsky, Phys. Rev. A 46, 8011 (1992)
E.M. Chudnovsky, D.A. Garanin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 4469 (1997)
J.-Q. Liang, H.J.W. Müller-Kirsten, D.-K. Park, F. Zimmerschied, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 216 (1998)
D.A. Garanin, X. Martínes Hidalgo, E.M. Chudnovsky, Phys. Rev. B 57, 13639 (1998)
H.J.W. Müller-Kirsten, D.K. Park, J.M.S. Rana, Phys. Rev. B 60, 6662 (1999)
G.-H. Kim, Phys. Rev. B 59, 11847 (1999)
C.-S. Park, S.-K. Yoo, D.-H. Yoon, Phys. Rev. B 61, 11618 (2000)
X. Martínes Hidalgo, E.M. Chudnovsky, J. Phys. Condens. Matter 12, 4243 (2000)
S.A. Owerre, M.B. Paranjape, Phys. Lett. A 378, 1407 (2014)
L. Bokacheva, A.D. Kent, M.A. Walters, Polyhedron 20, 1717 (2000)
K.M. Mertes, Y. Zhong, M.P. Sarachik, Y. Paltiel, H. Shtrikman, E. Zeldov, E. Rumgerger, D.N. Hendrickson, Europhys. Lett. 55, 874 (2001)
W. Wernsdorfer, M. Murugesu, G. Christou, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 057208 (2006)
G.-H. Kim, Phys. Rev. B 67, 144413 (2003)
G.-H. Kim, Phys. Rev. B 77, 104405 (2008)
G.-H. Kim, J. Korean, Phys. Soc. 53, 2079 (2008)
A. Buzdin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 107005 (2008)
F. Konschelle, A. Buzdin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 017001 (2009)
E.M. Chudnovsky, Phys. Rev. B 93, 144422 (2016)
G.-H. Kim, H.-Y. Choi, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 491, 165535 (2019)
D.A. Gorokhov, G. Blatter, Phys. Rev. B 56, 3130 (1997)
J.S. Langer, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 41, 108 (1967)
S. Coleman, Phys. Rev. D 15, 2929 (1977)
C.G. Callan, S. Coleman, Phys. Rev. D 16, 1762 (1977)
S. Coleman, Aspects of Symmetry, Chap. 7 (Cambridge University Press, New York, 1985)
H.B. Nielsen, D. Rohrlich, Nucl. Phys. B 299, 471 (1988)
K. Johnson, Ann. Phys. 192, 104 (1989)
A. Barone, A.G. Paterno, Physics and Applications of the Josephosn Effect (Wiley, New York, 1982)
K.K. Likharev, Dynamics of Josephson Junctions and Circuits (Gordon and Breach Science, Philadelphia, 1986)
C.P. Poole Jr., H.A. Farach, R.J. Creswick, Superconductivity (Academic Press, San Diego, 1995)
E.I. Rashba, Sov. Phys. Solid State 2, 1109 (1960)
YuA Bychkov, E.I. Rashba, JETP Lett. 39, 78 (1984)
The Gaussian integration is performed in the partition function (1) by noting [24] \(|\varphi | \ll 1\)
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by the Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education (NRF-2017R1D1A1B03035555).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendices
Appendix A: Expressions for the coefficients in the formulation of the problem
In this appendix, we summarize the coefficients for Eqs. (7) and (8) as:
where \(q(\theta ) = 1- \cot \theta + 2 \cot ^2\theta\), \(E_\mathrm{eff} = \tilde{E}\), \(\tilde{E}_{\theta \theta }=[\partial ^2 \tilde{E}/\partial \theta ^2]_{\theta =\theta _0,\phi =0}\), \(\tilde{E}_{\theta \phi \phi }=[\partial ^3 \tilde{E}/\partial \theta \partial \phi ^2 ]_{\theta =\theta _0,\phi =0}\), and so on.
Let us first discuss the system in which \(\delta \theta\) is real and \(\delta \phi\) is imaginary to the first order in perturbation theory. Then, we can substitute \(\delta \theta \simeq a \theta _1 \cos (\omega \tau )\) and \(\delta \phi \simeq i a \phi _1 \sin (\omega \tau )\) into Eqs. (7) and (8) and obtain the relation:
which gives the oscillation frequency \(\omega =\omega _0=\sqrt{\Phi _1 \Theta _1}/\rho\). That is, the oscillation frequency in this order dose not shift.
To find the change in the oscillation frequency, we need to investigate Eqs. (7) and (8) in terms of order higher than a. A simple analysis shows that \(\omega\) starts to change from \(\omega _0\) at the order of \(a^3\). Hence, plugging \(\delta \Omega\), which contains terms up to \(O(a^3)\), into Eqs. (7) and (8), we find Eq. (9) for the shift of the oscillation frequency, where:
which are related to the terms of order of \(a^2\) as:
with
Appendix B: Parameters in the absence of the longitudinal magnetic field
The parameters for the crossover in Sect. 3.1 can be obtained using Eqs. (15) and (A1)–(A2):
Inserting them into Eq. (A4), we have the coefficients for \(\delta \Omega\) on the order of \(a^2\) given by:
Using Eqs. (B1), (B2), and (B3), we have the expression for \(g(i_x, h_y, k, \theta _0)\) in Eq. (20) and the oscillation frequency around the top of the energy barrier, Eq. (21), to third order.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kim, GH. Quantum-classical crossover in a nanospin system embedded in a Josephson \(\varphi _0\) junction. J. Korean Phys. Soc. 78, 219–225 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40042-020-00018-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40042-020-00018-6