text:
# Superconducting energy gap distribution of MgB2 investigated by point-contact spectroscopy

\[

## Abstract

We performed point-contact spectroscopy on the binary superconductor MgB2. The differential conductance shows gap-related structures which vary in width and position from contact to contact. The distribution of energy gaps shows a distinct accumulation around 1.7 and 7 meV which is associated with the occurrence of a small and a large energy gap in MgB2. While with increasing $`T`$ the structure in $`dI/dV`$ associated with the small gap is present up to $`T_C`$, in magnetic field it is suppressed well below $`B_{c2}`$.

\]

The observation of superconductivity at 39 K in the simple binary compound MgB2  was a surprise for most condensed matter scientists and immediately raises the question of the mechanism of superconductivity in this material. Following a basic approach to superconductivity, two key issues have to be considered: the order-parameter symmetry and the coupling mechanism. For the latter, a significant boron isotope effect was observed in MgB2  which is consistent with a phonon-mediated BCS mechanism where the boron phonon modes are playing an important role. A moderatly strong electron-phonon coupling constant $`\lambda _{\mathrm{el}\mathrm{ph}}0.8`$ was derived from measurements of the specific heat  in good agreement with recent theoretical predictions .

The order-parameter symmetry has already been investigated by tunneling spectroscopy and point-contact spectroscopy (PCS) . Although the spectra show unambiguous features of an energy gap in the density of states, probably with $`s`$-wave symmetry of the order parameter, the results are controversal on the gap width. Values of $`2\mathrm{\Delta }/k_\mathrm{B}T_c`$ ranging from 1.2 to 4.7 have been reported, raising the possibility of an anisotropic energy gap or even multiple gaps. Careful analysis of specific-heat measurements  and photoemission spectroscopy  support this scenario as well.

We present measurements of the differential conductance $`dI/dV`$ of normal conductor/superconductor point contacts between a Pt tip and a MgB2 pellet. The MgB2 pellet was prepared in an Ar atmosphere from magnesium filings ($`>99.9`$ %, Chempure) and powdered boron (99 %, Ventron). The powders were mixed in the ratio Mg:B = 1.1:2 and pressed into a pellet. After wrapping the pellet in a Ta foil it was enclosed in an Fe cylinder and inserted in a high-pressure furnace. The pellet was then heated to 1073 K for 1.5 h and to 953 K for 2h under an Ar pressure of 58 MPa. The DC magnetization of the pellet (Fig. 1) indicates an onset superconducting transition temperature $`T_c^{onset}=38.2`$ K. Almost the full theoretical shielding signal is reached in 1 mT applied field in a zero-field cooled (zfc) – field heated (fh) temperature cycle. The Meissner signal remains weak, i. e. of the order of a few percent. Upon reducing the applied field to $`10\mu `$T, a kink in the transition curve at 35 K reveals the granular structure of the sample: below $`T_c^{onset}`$ first the individual grains become superconducting, below 35 K intergranular shielding currents cause shielding of the whole pellet.

PCS spectra were taken on as grown and polished surfaces of the MgB2 pellet. Different contacts were established in situ at low temperatures in liquid Helium. The PCS spectra, i. e. the differential resistance $`dV/dI`$ vs $`V`$ were obtained using a standard four-point lock-in technique. The zero-bias resistance $`R_0`$ of stable contacts ranges from 1 to 60 $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. $`dI/dV`$ vs $`V`$ curves are obtained by numerical inversion of the $`dV/dI`$ data. The $`dI/dV`$ curves taken at low $`TT_c`$ (between 1.7 and 5 K, cf. Fig. 3), show most often maxima at voltage $`\pm V_0`$, presumably related to the superconducting energy gap $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. The position of the maxima $`\mathrm{\Delta }=eV_0`$, varies depending on the location of the Pt needle on the polycrystalline sample where the point contact was established. The histogram depicted in Fig. 2 summarizes the position of maxima of 20 contacts. In a few cases a single maximum centered at $`V=0`$ was observed (Fig. 3e). For these cases the value of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_0=\mathrm{\Delta }(T0)`$ was derived from the modified BTK fit (see below) and is also included in Fig. 2. This histogram in nice consistency reflects the gap distribution reported in literature. One dominant feature is a maximum at about 1.7 meV, a second occurs at about 7 meV.

Following the BTK theory  of transport through a metallic microcontact between a normal metal (N) and an isotropic superconductor (S), Andreev reflection is the dominant transport process at the N-S interface. Andreev-reflected charge carriers lead to an excess current which increases the point-contact conductance. Depending on the strength of the interface barrier a characteristic double-maximum feature is expected in $`dI/dV`$, with the maxima at $`\pm \mathrm{\Delta }/e`$ where $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is the energy gap. Inelastic scattering in the contact region usually leads to a smearing and weakening of the gap-related features. This can be empirically taken into account by replacing the quasiparticle energy $`E`$ with $`E+i\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ parametrizes the finite lifetime of the quasiparticles . We observed a few contacts where the $`dI/dV`$ curves show maxima at $`\pm V_0`$ and $`\pm V_1`$. These curves can be regarded as a superposition of two double-maximum features. Consequently, the maxima are interpreted as being associated with two different energy gaps and the presence of multigap superconductivity in MgB2.

Multigap superconductivity in MgB2 has recently theoretically been suggested by Liu et al.  based on the electronic structure proposed by Kortus et al. : The Fermi surface consists of two sets of sheets, two-dimensional (2D) cylindrical sheets and three-dimensional (3D) tubular network. In the clean limit, two different superconducting order parameter are predicted: a larger one on the 2D part of the Fermi surface, a smaller one (about 1/3) on the 3D part of the Fermi surface. The multi-sheetedness of the Fermi surface should lead to a substantial difference between the in-plane and out-of-plane tunneling spectra. The effect of strong defect scattering drives the system into the dirty limit where the two energy gaps are mixed and an isotropic BCS gap is obtained. Quite remarkable is the effect on the temperature dependence of the gap in both limits. In the clean limit both energy gaps close at $`T_c`$ while in the dirty limit the resultant isotropic gap is substantially suppressed.

In the following we focus on spectra which show features associated with the small gap structure only. Fig. 3a-e show a number of spectra of this type together with theoretical curves calculated within the modified BTK theory either with thermal smearing only ($`\mathrm{\Gamma }=0`$, solid lines) or with additional finite-lifetime smearing ($`\mathrm{\Gamma }0`$, dashed lines). The fit parameters of these curves are summarized in Table I. Although the width of the spectra is almost the same, the voltage dependence is different. Curve a and d (referred to as type 1) are described very well with a pure ($`\mathrm{\Gamma }=0`$) BTK fit with an energy gap (assumed to be isotropic) $`\mathrm{\Delta }_0=1.5`$ meV (a) and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_0=2.1`$ meV (d), a barrier strength $`Z=0.5`$ (a) and $`Z=0.615`$ (d), respectively. The fits have been scaled by a factor of $`r=[dI/dV(0)dI/dV(15\mathrm{mV})]_{\mathrm{exp}}/[dI/dV(0)dI/dV(15\mathrm{mV})]_{\mathrm{theo}}=0.368`$ (a) and 0.128(d), respectively, in order to meet the absolute magnitude of the experimental conductance change $`[dI/dV(0)dI/dV(15\mathrm{mV})]_{\mathrm{exp}}`$. The common feature of curve b, c, and e (referred to as type 2) is that the decrease of the conductance for $`V\mathrm{\Delta }/e`$ is weaker than expected from a pure BTK fit, i. e. the experimental curves are much wider. Smearing due to inelastic scattering in the contact region can be one origin of wider structures which has been modelled by $`\mathrm{\Gamma }0`$. The parameters $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, and $`Z`$ are chosen in such a way that the calculated curves describe the experimental conductance change without the necessity of scaling. Introducing of $`r`$ as an additional fit parameter to improve the fit would require an unphysical value $`r>1`$. A relatively large $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ of the same order of magnitude as $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ or even larger is needed to model the curves, and the resulting description of the spectra is not really satisfactory. The failure of the model in describing curve c hints at a second, intrinsic origin, namely an apparent gap distribution due to an anisotropic small gap. This means that in addition to the occurrence of two energy gaps in MgB2, these gaps themselves might not be isotropic. Recently Giubileo et al.  pointed out that the gap width varies even in the case where spatial inhomogeneities can be ruled out as an origin of a gap distribution. It might be of interest to note that all three curves show a weak conductance maximum around zero-bias which might be caused by nodes of the gap function .

In order to further elucidate the difference of the spectra we now turn to the temperature dependence of both types depicted in Fig. 4 a and b together with theoretical curves. With increasing temperature the gap-related structure weakens in both cases. However, while gap-related features of the spectra of type 2 vanish close to the bulk $`T_c`$ and almost follow the BCS weak-coupling behavior of $`\mathrm{\Delta }(T)`$, the isotropic gap extracted from spectra of type 1 closes at $`0.7T_c`$. Without overrating the experimental facts, the results resemble the proposed multigap scenario. Bearing in mind the granular structure of the sample and the unknown microscopic structure of the point contact, it is conceivable that both clean and dirty limits are locally realized on different parts of the sample.

In an applied magnetic field $`B`$ the gap structure weakens with increasing field and vanishes around 6 T (see Fig. 5). The small gap is much more sensitive to an applied field than expected from estimates of the upper critical field $`B_{c2}(0)`$ from resistivity  and magnetization measurements . These data suggest that a field well above 12 T is necessary to suppress superconductivity at 1.7 K. Szabo et al. have recently reported an even stronger field dependence of the small gap . In line with specific-heat measurments , $`B=1`$ T substantially suppresses the small gap. The result hints at a different nature of the two energy gaps probably due to their different dimensionality.

In conclusion, we have examined point contacts on MgB2 in order to investigate the superconducting energy gap. The gap width obtained from $`dI/dV`$ vs $`V`$ spectra varies from contact to contact depending on the microscopic structure and grain orientation in the point-contact region. The result is compatible with multigap superconductivity with a small gap present up to $`T_c`$.


format: text

text:
# Trapped-Atom-Interferometer in a Magnetic Microtrap

## I Introduction

Since the first realization of magnetic traps  and guides  with current-carrying conductors on a chip, a large variety of magnetic potentials have become experimentally accessible, which would be impractical or even impossible to realize with macroscopic coils. The splitting of two-dimensionally trapped atom clouds has been demonstrated , and recently, we were able to split and unite a three-dimensionally trapped cloud of rubidium atoms in a chip trap .

Current experiments aim at populating single quantum states of such microtrap potentials with either an atomic ensemble (i.e., creating a Bose-Einstein condensate), or indeed with a single atom. One promising application of such a system would be an integrated atom interferometer on a chip . The small size and monolithic construction of such a device suggests its suitability for “real-word” applications. Moreover, the fact that magnetic potentials may be “engineered” on the chip enables novel interferometer schemes with features quite different from more traditional atom interferometers \[…\]. Here we study a scheme in which the particle wave of a single, trapped atom is coherently split up and reunited by a time-varying magnetic potential (fig. 1). Splitting occurs in one dimension, while tight confinement in the remaining two dimensions leads to an effective 1D situation. This is in contrast to  where the dynamics of the splitting is in two dimensions. As depicted in fig. 1, interference occurs between the lowest two vibrational states, $`|\phi _0`$ and $`|\phi _1`$, of the splitting potential (the internal atomic state remains unchanged). A phase-changing interaction in one “arm” (stage II in fig. 1) translates into a change of the relative populations in $`|\phi _0`$ and $`|\phi _1`$ when the potential is recombined. As in other interferometers, a longer duration of stage II leads to a larger accumulated phase (i.e., a larger arm length). However, unlike the situation in most free-atom schemes and the guided-atom scheme proposed in , in our scheme the atom does not move nor does its wave function spread during this stage: the propagation along the traditional interferometer path is replaced by the evolution in a constant potential (stage II), which leaves the position and the physical size of the wave function unchanged. This interferometer is thus particularly well suited to measure local fields and interactions, which presents an advantage over experiments with propagating atomsThere is a subtle difference between atom interferometers with beams and with trapped atoms: in spatial beam splitters atoms are slowed down when the energy of the transverse state increases. There are currently studies on the way how this effect can be explored for enhanced detection schemes of the outgoing state.. One could, for instance, measure the phase shift arising from a two-body collision  or the amount of decoherence induced from a nearby surface .

In this paper, we present a detailed analysis of this interferometer scheme, employing a realisitic magnetic potential which can be implemented with currently available microtrap technique. We consider the case of an individual trapped atom, a situation which is also targeted by experiments under way (for a study of a BEC in an idealized 1D potential, see ). The potential is created by the simple conductor configuration shown in fig. 2. The current $`I_0`$ together with the external field $`B_{0,y}`$ provides tight confinement in the $`yz`$-plane. The two currents $`I_{\text{ext}}`$ together with the homogeneous field component $`B_{0,x}`$ close this 2D trap in axial direction, completing the single-well potential (fig. 3 a, left). The current $`I_c`$ creates an adjustable “bump” in the center of this trap, and thus induces the splitting. Increasing $`I_c`$ transforms the potential from single-well to double-well (fig. 3 a, right), in loose analogy with the first passage through the beam-splitter of a Michelson-Moreley interferometer for light.

To achieve a good fringe contrast, it is essential that no higher-lying vibrational states be excited during this splitting. Therefore, the crucial part of the interferometer is the quantum dynamics during the splitting and merging process. The splitting (merging) of the wave functions occurs as the quantum states adiabatically evolve in the varying potential. We analyze these dynamics in a one-dimensional model, using analytic expressions for the microtrap magnetic field. We numerically determine the energy eigenstates of 87Rb atoms in the given potential and then trace the dynamics of an initial state, using the eigenstates as a time-dependent basis.

We show that successive vibrational levels in the initial trap evolve into pairs of degenerate states when the potential is split. In this “sensing state”, the wave functions are composed of two identical oscillator states in the left and in the right well. Either of the two parts can acquire a phase shift independent of the other one, reflecting e.g. an additional small field gradient or the presence of an additional atom in one of the wells. When the potential is transformed back into a single well, the population of the vibrational levels depends on the phase difference that is picked up in the degenerate states. Fig. 1 illustrates this process: first, the system (i.e. one or several atoms) is prepared in the vibrational ground state. Upon separation of the potential, this state evolves into a symmetric state that spreads over the two potential wells. In an analogous manner, the antisymmetric first vibrational level transforms into an antisymmetric delocalized state. As the system’s Hamilton operator is symmetric throughout the whole process, it cannot induce transitions between states of opposite symmetry, and the eigenstates can always be chosen of well-defined parity.

If the symmetric and antisymmetric state are spatially separated far enough, they degenerate, and the left (right) localized state can be constructed as sum (difference) of the symmetric and antisymmetric state. A perturbation of the potential, which does not have even parity, will lift this degeneracy in favour of the localized states. These localized states make up for the classical interferometer arms, measuring very sensitively deviations from an ideal symmetric potential or interactions with other atoms.

In the following section, we investigate the separation process using the 1D-potential taken from the microtrap device sketched in fig. 2. We establish the quantum mechanical equation of motion and use first order perturbation theory to determine the amount of vibrational excitations. Assuming a linear variation of the current $`I_c`$, we find the excitation probability lower than 2% if the separation takes 60 ms or longer. This indicates that an experimental realization should be possible, and the situation can still be improved when an arbitrary variation of $`I_c`$ is allowed. We therefore dedicate section III to a method which minimizes non-adiabatic excitations by finding the most appropriate time dependence for the shape of the potential (here controlled via $`I_c`$). Such method is of interest not only for interferometers. It applies to all cases of time-dependent potentials, and it can even be transferred to spatially varying potentials such as beam-splitters. For our interferometer, this method helps to reduce the splitting time by a factor of two, at the same time reducing the excitation probability by more than a factor ten.

## II The Trapped Atom Interferometer

The microtrap device that we propose for the interferometer is a symmetric arrangement of wires as depicted in fig. 2. Its potential is similar to the one that we used in the merging experiment with thermal atoms , but it is scaled down to a wire distance of 20$`\mu m`$ and simplified to produce a strictly symmetric potential. The quantum state computations are made for 87Rb atoms in the $`|F=2,m_F=2`$ ground state, the effective potential being $`U(x)h1.4\text{MHz}\text{B}(x)/\text{G}`$.

The current $`I_0`$ in the central wire and the homogeneous field $`B_{0,y}`$ create a two dimensional quadrupole field which strongly confines the atoms in the $`yz`$-plane. Each of the crossing wires contributes a longitudinal field modulation of Lorentzian shape (see ):

The two currents $`I_{\text{ext}}`$ together with the field component $`B_{0,x}`$ generate two valleys along the longitudinal axis, which do not appear separate if the trap is located far enough from the surface. The current $`I_c`$ with its direction opposite to the two external currents is used to split the Ioffe-Pritchard potential into two neighboring wells (fig. 3 a). Choosing the parameters as

$`I_0`$ $`=`$ $`525\text{mA}`$ (1)
$`B_{0,y}`$ $`=`$ $`20\text{G}`$ (2)
$`B_{0,x}`$ $`=`$ $`16\text{G}`$ (3)
$`I_{ext}`$ $`=`$ $`140\text{mA}+2.91\text{mA}s`$ (4)
$`I_c`$ $`=`$ $`0.25\text{mA}+4.4\text{mA}s\text{ ,}`$ (5)
the trap is located $`35\mu `$m above the surface, yielding a transversal oscillation frequency of $`\omega _{\text{trans}}2\pi \mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}53.7}`$ kHz. The parameter $`s`$ determines the shape of the trap, running from 0 for one single well to 1 for separated wells. The point $`s=1`$ has been chosen such that the two lowest vibrational levels of each well are clearly separated (i.e., the two lowest sets of states are both degenerate). The time-dependence of the system’s Hamiltonian is expressed via the function $`s(t)`$. In a simple approach, $`s`$ may be chosen to vary linearly in time, but as we will discuss in section III, an optimized function $`s(t)`$ can be found which minimizes vibrational excitations during the splitting (merging) process.

In fig. 3 a, the resulting magnetic field along the longitudinal axis ex is displayed for characteristic values of $`s`$; the transverse potential minimum is plotted against the longitudinal position. The plots below show the eigenstates of 87Rb atoms ($`|F=2,m_F=2`$) in this field as they are numerically computed from the Schroedinger equation (eq. (6) below). The corresponding energy eigenvalues, measured relative to the minimum value of the potential, are given in fig. 4.

For $`s=0`$, the four lowest levels correspond to the states of a harmonic oscillator with quantum number $`n=0,\mathrm{},3`$ and oscillation frequency $`\omega _{s=0}2\pi \mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}190}`$ Hz. We use the quantum number $`n`$ to identify the eigenstates as $`|\phi _n(s)`$ throughout the whole evolution. As the value of $`s`$ is raised, the vibrational levels evolve into symmetric and antisymmetric delocalized states. At $`s=1`$, the four lowest levels form two sets of degenerate states, their energy being $`E_{2k}=E_{2k+1}=\mathrm{}\omega _{s=1}(k+\frac{1}{2})`$, $`k=\{0,1\}`$, $`\omega _{s=1}2\pi \mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}240}`$ Hz. At each stage, the separation of the transverse levels ($`>`$ 50 kHz) is much larger than the separation of longitudinal states involved. For this reason, the longitudinal states do not intermingle with the transverse levels, even if the system’s symmetry is slightly disturbed. The quantum dynamics is therefore adequately described by a one-dimensional model.

In order to make the interferometer work properly, the atomic wave function should follow ideally the (time-dependent) eigenstates $`|\phi _k(t)`$ of the system. If the potential is varied too fast, the evolution is non-adiabatic, i.e. vibrational excitations are generated. For the investigation of these excitations, we will focus on the first half of the interferometer cycle: we use a time-dependent interaction picture to compute the time scale on which the separation process can be lead adiabatically.

The (time-dependent) basis for the computation is found by solving the time-independent Schrödinger equation

$$\widehat{H}(s)|\phi _k(s)=\mathrm{}\omega _k(s)|\phi _k(s)$$
(6)
with the Hamilton operator

$$\widehat{H}(s)=\frac{\widehat{\text{p}}^2}{2m}+\mu _Bg_Fm_F\left|\text{B}(s,\widehat{\text{r}})\right|\text{ ,}$$
(7)
where $`s`$ takes the role of a mere parameter. For the given magnetic field, the eigenfunctions have been computed numerically and are displayed in fig. 3 b.

The natural phase evolution of the eigenstates can be included into the basis and yields the ansatz

$$|\psi (t)=\underset{k}{}c_k(t)e^{i_0^t^{}\omega _k(t^{})𝑑t^{}}|\phi _k(t)\text{ .}$$
(8)
The equation of motion for the coefficients $`c_k(t)`$ is obtained when eq. (8) is inserted in the time-dependent Schrödinger-equation with the Hamiltonian (7)The time-dependence of $`\omega _k(t)`$ and $`|\phi _k(t)`$ is explicit through the control parameter $`s`$: $`\omega _k(t)\omega _k(s(t))`$ etc.:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}c_k(t)`$ $`={\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}`$ $`c_n(t)e^{i_0^t\left(\omega _k(t^{})\omega _n(t^{})\right)𝑑t^{}}`$ (10)
$`\phi _k(t)|{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}|\phi _n(t)\text{ .}`$
Given that a single eigenstate $`|\phi _i(t=0)`$ is prepared in the beginning, and further assuming that the transition probability into other vibrational states is small, first order perturbation theory can be used to determine the coefficients $`c_f`$ and the corresponding transition probabilities $`P_{if}`$:

$`c_f(t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _0^t}e^{i_0^t\left(\omega _f(t^{})\omega _i(t^{})\right)𝑑t^{}}\phi _f(t)|{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}|\phi _i(t)𝑑t`$ (11)
$`P_{if}(t)`$ $`=`$ $`\left|c_f(t)\right|^2\text{ .}`$ (12)
The coupling $`\phi _f(t)|\frac{d}{dt}|\phi _i(t)=\phi _f(s)|\frac{d}{ds}|\phi _i(s)\frac{ds}{dt}`$ to higher levels is directly proportional to the rate $`\frac{ds}{dt}`$ at which the control parameter $`s`$ is changed. Therefore, if all levels are separated by a minimum energy $`\mathrm{}\omega _0`$, the transition amplitudes can be made negligible by choosing an appropriate duration for the process. Conversely, if at certain instants some energy levels degenerate, this will create large transition amplitudes unless the coupling coefficient $`\phi _f(s)|\frac{d}{ds}|\phi _i(s)`$ between these levels vanishes at the points of degeneration. In the trapped atom interferometer presented here, we encounter such degenerate levels. But as the states that degenerate are of opposite symmetry throughout the complete evolution, the coupling coefficient remains zero for all times. Therefore, the excitation probability can be made arbitrarily small by choosing the process duration long enough.

This consideration is confirmed by numerically evaluating expressions (11) and (12) for either of the interferometer levels $`(|\phi _0,|\phi _1)`$. In a first approach, the separation parameter has been chosen linear in time $`s=t/T`$. Fig. 5 shows the transition probabilities into the neighboring interferometer levels which contribute largest to all vibrational excitations. The data indicate that the excitation probability is less than 1% if the separation process takes longer than 60 ms.

This is an encouraging result, as it seems experimentally realizable. Moreover, as the time-dependence of the potential can be freely chosen, one can adjust the speed of the separation process $`\frac{ds}{dt}`$ in order to further reduce excitations. This is of general interest, because a linear variation of the control parameter $`s`$ s not necessarily the best choice. Indeed, one wishes to find a method that optimizes the process irrespective of its parametrization.

## III Optimization

In this section, we develop a scheme which minimizes vibrational excitations in time-dependent potentials. In a slight variant, this method can equally be used to find an adequate shape for a beam-splitter potential.

In order to optimize the adiabaticity of the separation process we first take a look at the coupling term from eq. (11)

$$\phi _f(t)|\frac{d}{dt}|\phi _i(t)=\phi _f(s)|\frac{d}{ds}|\phi _i(s)\frac{ds}{dt}\text{ ,}$$
(13)
which is proportional to the process speed $`\frac{ds}{dt}`$ and to the coupling coefficient $`a(s)\phi _f(s)|\frac{d}{ds}|\phi _i(s)`$.

Intuitively, one can increase the process speed $`\frac{ds}{dt}`$ if $`a(s)`$ is small, and decrease it in the opposite case. Furthermore, the process speed should be adapted to the energy difference of the levels involved, being the more increased the further the energy levels lay apart from each other. Last not least, one has to avoid discontinuities in the process speed including the start and the end of the separation. In the following, these intuitive rules will be substantiated into a set of differential equations to yield an optimized process control $`s(t)`$.

We assume that the process is lead during $`0tT`$ and that the separation parameter at $`t=T`$ is $`s(t=T)=1`$. Indeed, we want to fix a shape of the control parameter $`s`$ which does not depend on the process duration. Therefore, we implicitly assume that $`s(t)s(t,T)`$ can be written as

$$s(t,T)=s(\frac{t}{T},1).$$
(14)
The goal is then to fix some maximum excitation probability $`ϵ^2`$ and to find an appropriate shape for the function $`s(t,T)`$ which minimizes $`T_{\text{adiab}}`$ fulfilling the condition

$$\left|c_f(T)\right|ϵTT_{\text{adiab}}\text{ .}$$
(15)
If, by some chance, the distance of energy levels $`\mathrm{\Delta }\omega \left(s(t^{})\right)\omega _f\omega _i`$ is constant throughout the process, the transition amplitude $`c_f(T)`$ appears as the Fourier transform of $`a(s)\frac{ds}{dt}`$:

$`c_f(T)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _0^T}e^{i_0^t\mathrm{\Delta }\omega (t^{})𝑑t^{}}a\left(s(t)\right){\displaystyle \frac{ds}{dt}}𝑑t`$ (16)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _0^T}e^{i\mathrm{\Delta }\omega t}a(s){\displaystyle \frac{ds}{dt}}𝑑t\text{ for }\mathrm{\Delta }\omega =const.`$ (17)
If, in addition, $`a(s)`$ happens to be constant over the process, the solution of the problem is simple: the shape of the process speed $`\frac{ds}{dt}`$ should be chosen such that it produces the least amount of side bands possible in a Fourier transformation. An appropriate shape would e.g. be a Blackman pulse :

$$\frac{ds}{dt}=\frac{1}{T}\left(1\frac{25}{21}\mathrm{cos}(2\pi \frac{t}{T})+\frac{4}{21}\mathrm{cos}(4\pi \frac{t}{T})\right),$$
(18)
which can be directly integrated to yield $`s(t)`$.

The idea of the Fourier transform can be extended to the more general case. A substitution of the time variable $`t`$ by some new variable $`\tau `$ can be made in a way that the argument of the exponential in eq. (16) becomes linear in $`\tau `$

$$_0^t\mathrm{\Delta }\omega (t^{})𝑑t^{}=\frac{T}{T_0}\tau (t)$$
(19)
and that $`\tau `$ runs from 0 to 1 during the process. The time scale $`T_0`$ will be part of the optimization result. Equation (16) then assumes the form of a Fourier transform of some new expression $`u(\tau )`$ §§§In the following equations, the index $`\tau `$ marks the fact that the functional dependence of the parameter $`s`$ is on $`\tau `$, not on $`t`$.:

$`c_f(T)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _0^1}e^{i\frac{T}{T_0}\tau }u(\tau )𝑑\tau `$ (20)
$`u(\tau )`$ $``$ $`a(s){\displaystyle \frac{ds_\tau }{d\tau }}\text{ .}`$ (21)
The expression $`u(\tau )`$ is a generalized coupling term, acting in the transformed time frame $`\tau `$. As above, one can now choose a shape for this coupling term $`u(\tau )`$ (however, not its amplitude) and will obtain the probability amplitude as its Fourier transform.

After the optimization strategy is chosen, it remains to solve the equations (19) and (21). One might be tempted to deduce the relation $`\frac{dt}{d\tau }`$ from eq. (19) and insert it into eq. (21) to solve directly for $`s(t)`$. Unfortunately, this results in an intractable problem. Instead, one can take advantage of the substitution already made and first solve for $`s_\tau (\tau )`$. The relation between $`\tau `$ and $`t`$ is then established in a second step. This way, the problem is split into two differential equations the first of which gives the amplitude of $`u(\tau )`$, and the second of which determines the time scale $`T_0`$ used in the substitution. These two values determine size and scale of the probability amplitude $`c_f(T)`$.

The first differential equation involves the shape of the function that is chosen for the generalized coupling term $`u(\tau )`$, and it is a direct consequence of eq. (21):

$$\frac{ds_\tau }{d\tau }=\frac{u(\tau )}{a(s_\tau (\tau ))}\text{ .}$$
(22)
It is important to note, that although the time $`\frac{ds_\tau }{d\tau }`$ is used to shape the coupling term $`u(\tau )`$, its amplitude does not correspond to the overall process speed. Instead, the amplitude of $`u(\tau )`$ has to be adjusted such that the solution matches the boundary conditions $`s(\tau =0)=0`$, $`s(\tau =1)=1`$. This can for instance be done by iteratively solving eq. (22) for different amplitudes of $`u(\tau )`$.

The second differential equation establishes the relation between $`t`$ and $`\tau `$ and arises from the substitution of $`t`$ (eq. (19) ), once that $`s_\tau (\tau )`$ has been determined:

$$\frac{d\tau }{dt}=\mathrm{\Delta }\omega \left(s_\tau (\tau )\right)\frac{T}{T_0}\text{ .}$$
(23)
Choosing $`T=T_0`$, this equation can be solved numerically, and one finds $`T_0`$ as the point in time, for which $`\tau (t)`$ reaches its boundary $`\tau (T_0)=1`$.

The result for the transition amplitude is now completely described by equation (20), the amplitude of $`u(\tau )`$ and the time scale resulting from the choice of the pulse shape. The optimized evolution of the control parameter is computed from the concatenation of $`s_\tau (\tau )`$ and $`\tau (t)`$:

$$s(t)=s_\tau \left(\tau (t\frac{T_0}{T})\right)\text{ .}$$
(24)
If this optimization is applied to the trapped atom interferometer, the probability for non-adiabatic excitations can be considerably reduced. Fig. 6 shows the excitation probabilities for a process speed which has been optimized to suppress the transition $`|\phi _0|\phi _1`$. With the optimized control, the separation can be done within 30 ms, thus reducing the complete interferometer cycle to 60 ms with an overall excitation probability of less then $`10^3`$.

These parameters suggest that an experimental realization of the scheme is indeed feasible. It remains, of course, a difficult task to prepare the atoms in the ground state and to detect the atoms selectively in different vibrational states. However, this seems achievable using Bose-Einstein condensates of low density. Another issue is stability against gradients of magnetic stray fields. In our case, the sensing states of the interferometer lie $`6\mu `$m apart. During a sensing time of 60 ms, a gradient $`b_x=\frac{B_x}{x}`$ would lead to an additional dephasing of $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }2\pi \mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}50}b_x/\frac{\text{G}}{\text{cm}}`$. A suppression of stray gradients to less than 1 mG/cm would therefore reduce the dephasing to $`\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi \frac{2\pi }{20}`$.

## IV Conclusion

In conclusion, we have studied a dynamic potential interferometer working with three-dimensionally trapped atoms. We have used a time-dependent interaction picture to describe the quantum state evolution and we have computed probabilities for non-adiabatic transitions into neighboring levels. For a realistic magnetic microtrap we find parameters which suggests an experimental implementation in the near future. Grounding on the theoretical results, we have developed an optimization scheme for the reduction of vibrational excitations that is independent of the system’s parametrization. Applying the optimization to our interferometer potential, we have found a cycle of duration $`T=60`$ ms with excitation probability less than $`10^3`$.


text:
# PDF uncertainties: A strong test of goodness of fit to multiple data sets

## 1 Introduction

This talk addresses the questions of quantifying how good global fits are, and of how we would know a theory is wrong; it summarizes our Ref. .

The obvious criterion is that of hypothesis testing: $`\chi ^2=N\pm \sqrt{2N}`$ for a good fit with $`N`$ degrees of freedom. One should also apply the same criterion to subsets of data (e.g., from a particular experiment or reaction), for which the normal range is $`\chi _i^2=N_i\pm \sqrt{2N_i}`$.

In fact, a much stronger criterion applies. The idea was discovered by contrasting the criteria for a one-standard-deviation effect in hypothesis testing and in parameter fitting. When fitting a single parameter, the one-sigma range of the parameter is found by increasing $`\chi ^2`$ one unit above its minimum. But the fit is good (hypothesis-testing) at the one-sigma level if $`\chi _{\mathrm{min}}^2`$ is within $`\sqrt{2N}`$ of its normal value $`N`$.

What is shown in Ref.  is that the goodness of a global fit is better tested by applying the parameter-fitting criterion in a certain way to subsets of data. This can be much more stringent than the obvious hypothesis-testing criterion.

## 2 Scenario

Suppose we have two pre-existing good global fits of parton densities, called CTEQ and MRST, and that new data arrive from two experiments, TEV and HERA. Assume that the $`\chi ^2`$s are as in Table 1, so that by the hypothesis-testing criterion, each set of pdf’s gives a good fit to each experiment.

In fact we may have a bad fit. This can be seen by constructing pdf’s that interpolate between CTEQ and MRST, $`f_p=pf^{\mathrm{CTEQ}}+(1p)f^{\mathrm{MRST}}`$, and then fitting the interpolating parameter $`p`$. If, for example, we have $`\chi _{\mathrm{TEV}}^2=85+30(1p)^2`$ and $`\chi _{\mathrm{HERA}}^2=85+30p^2`$, then the TEV data implies $`p=1\pm 0.18`$, while the HERA data implies $`p=0\pm 0.18`$.

By converting the problem to one of parameter fitting, we have found that the theory and experiments are mutually inconsistent in this case, by about $`4\sigma `$. If the forms for $`\chi ^2`$ are different, it is possible to have a good fit to both experiments, but only if neither CTEQ nor MRST fit the data. The decreases of 30 in $`\chi ^2`$ between the CTEQ and MRST values are sufficient to show that at least one of these situations arises.

## 3 General procedure and application to CTEQ5

Observe that in the hypothetical scenario, CTEQ alone obtains a good $`\chi ^2`$, and we only saw a problem when we brought in MRST. How can CTEQ alone determine that there is a problem without MRST’s assistance, and vice versa? And how can this be done without knowing which of $`30`$ parameters is the important one?

The procedure we propose  is as follows:

* Take pre-determined subsets of data (e.g., experiments).
* Explore a region of parameter-space with $`\chi ^2\chi _{\mathrm{min}}^2`$ up to about $`\sqrt{2N}`$, e.g., $`50`$ for CTEQ/MRST, and find the minimum of $`\chi _i^2`$ for each subset.
* If $`\mathrm{min}(\chi _i^2)\chi _i^2(\mathrm{global}\mathrm{fit})`$ is less than a few units, then experiment $`i`$ disagrees with global fit.
* In computing significance, allow for the number of experiments and the effective number of parameters determined by each subset of data.

The minimization of $`\chi _i^2`$ for a given $`\chi _{\mathrm{total}}^2`$ can be readily implemented by a Lagrange multiplier method: For each value of a parameter $`\lambda `$, minimize $`\chi _{\mathrm{tot}}^2(𝐩)+(\lambda 1)\chi _i^2(𝐩)`$. The result gives a curve for $`\chi _i^2`$ as a function of $`\chi _{\mathrm{tot}}^2`$.

The results of applying this procedure to the CTEQ5 fit are shown in Fig. 1. Several of the data sets can be seen to be bad fits, notably from CCFR and BCDMS. The criterion is that the $`\chi ^2`$ for the subset of data decreases by too many units as $`\chi _{\mathrm{tot}}^2`$ increases. A small decrease is normal and expected. The bad fit happens even though nothing exceptional happens according to the hypothesis-testing criterion, as can be seen in the last column of Table 2.

MRST’s plots of $`\chi ^2`$ against $`\alpha _s(M_Z)`$ in Fig. 21 of Ref.  independently confirm our physics conclusion, that current data and QCD theory (including the approximations of NLO calculations, neglect of nuclear target and higher-twist corrections, etc.) are not in good agreement.

## 4 Conclusions

We have shown that the quality of a global fit is correctly determined by testing the variation of $`\chi ^2(\mathrm{subset})`$ for subsets of data as parameters are varied. A substantial decrease is a symptom of a bad fit, and the parameter-fitting criterion is the correct one here. With this method small data sets do not get lost compared with the other $`1000`$ points. The current CTEQ5 global fit appears not to fit the data, and the same appears to apply to the MRST fit.

Statistical analysis alone cannot tell us the explanation of this inconsistency. Only a physics-based analysis can decide if the problem is in one of the experiments, if there is a technical error in a theory calculation, or if there is really new physics that has been measured. The statistics only give a diagnosis of where further investigation will be most useful.

## Acknowledgments

This work was supported in part by the U.S. Department of Energy and by the National Science Foundation. We would like to thank R. Thorne for conversations at this workshop. JCC would like to thank the Alexander von Humboldt foundation for an award.


text:
# Description of Double Giant Dipole Resonance within the Phonon Damping Model

PACS numbers: 25.70.De, 24.30.Cz, 21.60.-n

In a recent Letter , an overall agreement with the experimental data for the excitation of the giant dipole resonance (GDR) and double giant dipole resonance (DGDR) in relativistic heavy ion collision (RHIC) in 136Xe and 208Pb nuclei has been reported. The phenomenological Phonon Damping Model (PDM) has been used. The strong (about a factor two) enhancement of the DGDR cross section in 136Xe  apparently reproduced in the Letter, has been a challenge for many years and in spite of several attempts (see, e.g. ), it remains open. In this Comment, we point out that the agreement with the experimental findings in Ref.  is achieved by a wrong calculation of the DGDR excitation mechanism.

To calculate the DGDR cross section, an expression (Eq. (6)) is used which is similar to the photoabsorption cross section with the GDR strength function replaced by the one of the DGDR. Then, it is inserted in Eq. (7) which thus describes the DGDR excitation in a direct or one-step process .

An essential difference between nuclear reactions with real and virtual (as in RHIC) photons is that multi-step processes with the sequential absorption of two (three, etc.) virtual photons may take place in the last reaction. Theoretically, it is described, e.g. in the second (third, etc.) order perturbation theory . The reduction of the two-step process to the one-step one is not possible on the physical grounds.

Whether the DGDR is excited in RHIC in one- or two-step process is presently not in question. Firstly, microscopic calculations with no free parameters indicate that the two-step process is stronger by at least two-orders of magnitude or even more . Secondly, it has been proved experimentally .

Eq. (6) contains a scaling factor $`c^{(2)}`$ which determines the absolute value of the DGDR cross section. It is computed by equating first order (Eq. (7)) and second order (Eq. (8)) expressions. To equalize the values, known to be different by orders of magnitude (see, above), appears to us not correct.

In addition, we find it difficult to call “microscopic calculations” the fits performed in the frame of the PDM to obtain strength functions, as done in , when the strength parameter $`F_{ph}`$ changes by two orders of magnitude when contributions of higher-order processes to the damping of the GDR are included, as in the extension of the model in Ref. . This means that the main mechanism for the GDR and DGDR widths is missed in Ref.  and that the agreement with the data is achieved by an unrealistically large value of $`F_{ph}`$. In Ref.  they claim that the higher-order processes may be effectively accounted for by renormalization of $`F_{ph}`$. This is not correct because the diagrams of high-order graphs (see, Figs. 1b-e in Ref. ) cannot be reduced to the diagram of the lowest-order one (Figs. 1a) with a renormalized vertex. Again, as for the cross-section above, their “effective” treatment contradicts the “right physical content”.

The PDM fits yield the value of $`F_{ph}`$ in the heavier double-magic 208Pb larger than in the lighter semi-magic 136Xe, while it is clear from general arguments that it should be the opposite.

The parameter $`F_{ph}`$ also enters in the calculation of the DGDR anharmonicity, i.e. in the deviation of the DGDR energy centroid from twice the energy value of the GDR. Thus, it becomes clear why the PDM yields much larger “anharmonicities” than microscopic calculations .

In our opinion, any conclusion drawn from those calculations about the deviation of the DGDR properties from the harmonic limit expectations appears rather difficult to understand.


text:
# Driving current through single organic molecules

## Abstract

We investigate electronic transport through two types of conjugated molecules. Mechanically controlled break-junctions are used to couple thiol endgroups of single molecules to two gold electrodes. Current-voltage characteristics (IVs) of the metal-molecule-metal system are observed. These IVs reproduce the spatial symmetry of the molecules with respect to the direction of current flow. We hereby unambigously detect an intrinsic property of the molecule, and are able to distinguish the influence of both the molecule and the contact to the metal electrodes on the transport properties of the compound system.

Electronic transport through molecules has been first described theoretically in the 1970s . Since then, numerous experiments have been made where electrical current was driven through single-layer molecular films between two metallic electrodes . Transport through single or at most few molecules on a gold surface has been observed with scanning tunneling microscopes, where the tip serves as a counterelectrode . In the tunneling regime, the current-voltage characteristics (IV) reflects the electronic density of states in the molecule and the conductance depends very sensitively on the tip distance. Only few experiments, however, have been realized which target current through a single molecule while the connection to both electrodes is symmetrically realized by a well defined chemical bond, which allows mechanical stability of the junction even at room temperature . However, to identify the IVs observed in these experiments as arising from a current through indeed a single sample molecule, comparison with some theoretical assumptions is required concerning the conductance amplitude, the transport mechanisms and the electrochemical potential of the sample. The experiment described in this letter demonstrates clearly and without the necessity of any assumptions that we observe electronic transport through a single molecule and not an ensemble of molecules. This is achieved by comparing the IVs of spatially symmetric and asymmetric, but otherwise similar molecules. Further, an analysis of the IV data gives new qualitative insight concerning the crucial role of the molecule-metal contact.

The two types of organic molecules were designed specifically for the present experiment (cf. Fig. 1). Both consist of a rigid rod-like central section with additional thiol functions on both ends to form stable covalent bonds to gold electrodes. Details of the synthesis will be published elsewhere. As the molecules are very similar, comparable electronic properties are expected. However, their main difference is their spatial symmetry. While the antracene derivative (in the following referred to as ”symmetric molecule”) has a symmetry plane perpendicular to the molecule’s sulphur-to-sulphur axis, in the nitro acetyl amine derivative (”asymmetric molecule”), the mirror symmetry is absent. For the symmetric molecule the IVs may be expected to be symmetric with respect to voltage inversion, for the asymmetric molecule a current flowing in positive direction or in negative direction will not necessarily result in the same magnitude of the voltage drop along the molecule.

The length of both molecules is 2 nm. To obtain a contact to a single molecule from both electrodes, an electrode pair with a distance matching exactly this length is required. We have chosen a lithographically fabricated mechanically-controlled break junction (MCB) to provide an electrode pair with tunable distance. The same technique was used in a previous experiment . For more details on this technique see ref. . A scanning electron microscope picture of a freshly prepared junction consisting essentially of a free standing Au bridge is shown in Fig. 2. This setup is mounted in a three-point support, designed to bend the substrate mechanically by means of a threaded rod which is driven by a DC motor. To prepare the experiment, we bend the substrate in order to elongate the bridge and finally it breaks. Then the two open ends form an electrode gap which can be adjusted mechanically with sub-Ångstrom precision.

The molecules with acetyl protection groups at the ends are dissolved in tetrahydrofurane. A droplet of this solution is put on top of the opened MCB (electrode distance 10 nm). The total exposure time is 10-30 sec. When the molecules approach the surface of any of the gold electrodes, one of the acetyl protection groups splits off and a stable chemical bond between the sulphur atom and the gold surface is established . The opposite side of the molecule remains protected at this stage. The coverage of the molecules on the gold surface is expected to be far below a completed monolayer, which would be formed only after hours. This is in contrast to previous experiments . Then the solvent is evaporated and the whole setup is mounted in an electromagnetically shielded box, which is pumped to a pressure of 10-7-10-6 mbar. When the electrodes are approaching each other from large distances, the resistance decreases exponentially with distance, as expected for tunneling. At a certain distance, however, the system suddenly locks into a stable behaviour, which allows to record several IVs in the voltage range of \[-1 V,1 V\]. This stable configuration is interpreted as a metal-molecule-metal junction: when the first molecule touches the opposite Au surface, the second acetyl end-group is removed and a stable chemical bond is established from the single sample molecule to both electrodes.

Fig. 3a shows nine IVs (dashed lines) obtained for a stable configuration with the asymmetric molecule. They are clearly nonlinear, displaying some rounded step-like features which appear presumably when transport through an additional molecular orbital is enabled by the bias voltage . In addition, Coulomb blockade should be present in the system . Both effects were experimentally identified for example in tunneling through single semiconductor clusters . Our data are highly reproducible as long as the junction remains stable. The current amplitude is about $`0.7\mu `$A at 1V. All observed stable junctions show currents in range of 0.2 -1 $`\mu `$A at 1 V. Beyond $`V1.2`$V, the current rises strongly and if higher voltages are applied, the junction becomes unstable. Fig. 3a also displays the differential conductance $`dI/dV`$ (solid lines), obtained by numerical differentiation of the above current-voltage data. Here, the step-like features in the IV appear as peaks. The data are clearly asymmetric with respect to voltage inversion. Such IVs are stable within a time intervall ranging from 1 to 100 minutes. Thereafter, the system enters suddenly into a state of either considerably higher or lower conductance. When adjusting skillfully the electrode gap to a slightly different position, often another stable configuration can be established. Fig. 3b displays a data set obtained with the same MCB (and obviously an identical molecule) after the junction in Fig. 3a had become unstable. Compared to Fig. 3a, it shows similarities, but also differences. The first similarity is the total amplitude of the current, for example at $`V=1`$V, of $`0.7\mu `$A. This current is barely sensitive to variations of the electrode distance, which indicates that indeed the current through a molecule is observed, with only a minor current contribution, if any, from direct metal-to-metal tunneling.

On the other hand, considerable differences can be seen: For example, two peaks at positive voltage appear in Fig. 3a, which are not visible in Fig. 3b. There are at least three reasons why differences may appear: First, different amounts of strain may have been applied to the molecule while establishing the contact. However, we do not believe that strain plays a dominant role in our experiments, because for stable contacts we can change the electrode distance by a few Ångstroms without altering the shape of the IV. Second, the proximity of neighbouring molecules/adsorbates or inhomogeneities of the electric fields may affect transport through the molecule. Inhomogeneous fields may influence spectroscopic properties of molecules only on energy scales in the mV range , yet only little is known about its influence on transport properties. Third, the atomistic structure of the contact region between molecule and electrode, which is different from junction to junction, may strongly influence the IVs. This is probably the dominant mechanism in our samples. An important indication is given by analyzing the first peak at negative voltage, which appears at $`450`$mV in Fig. 3a and $`360`$mV in Fig. 3b. This peak shift can be explained by different contact realisations in the following way: The gold-sulphur bond is a covalent, but strongly polarized bond. When the bond is established, a fraction of an electron charge is transferred onto the molecule due to the electronegativity of the S atom. Depending on the microscopic realisation of the bond (e.g. if the sulphur atom bonds to a gold atom at corners or kinks of the irregular surface etc), this charge transfer may vary and the molecule will be charged differently, which leads to an energy shift of the molecular orbitals. Hence, the peak belonging to the same molecular orbital will appear at different bias voltages, depending on the microscopic realisation of the contact. At first sight, one would expect by the same token that the conductance is very sensitive to contact variations too, as this is where the potential drops. This was in fact predicted theoretically for molecules of similar type . Yet, the observed overall conductance seems not to be highly sensitive to these variations. We propose that our experimental procedure selects stable bonds on one side, which are limiting the conductance, while the opposite bond varies and governs the broadening as well as the charge transfer onto the molecule. The astonishing scenario that more stable bonds may yield lower conductance is in agreement with theoretical predictions, where the same tendency was observed for similar molecules .

Do we really observe individual molecules? Experimentally, the ”lock-in” behaviour described above with a stable conductance not sensitive to the electrode distance (within $`\pm 1`$Å) is a strong indication for a small discrete number of contributing molecules. The overall conductance does not vary by large amounts, therefore we deal always with approximately the same number of molecules. Indeed, when approaching the electrodes in a stable configuration further, we sometimes observe a discrete stable configuration where the conductance has roughly doubled, suggesting that we started out with a single molecule. Upon variation from one stable configuration to another peak positions of the differential conductance may shift as described above and their width may change, peaks may even appear or disappear altogether. In particular, we observe in a number of cases that the distinct asymmetry appears to be ”mirrored” with respect to the bias voltage. This latter observation indicates clearly that we are not dealing with a large ensemble of molecules in parallel, where sample-to-sample fluctuations are averaged out, but rather with individual realisations of metal-molecule-metal junctions, which differ most probably in the microscopic arrangement of the contact. Our results, by exploring a number of different contact configurations, reflect the important effect of the environment on the transport properties of a single molecule. Note that sample-to-sample fluctuations are very familiar in single molecule spectroscopy in random media . To conclude, the data reported thus far yield no definite proof, but strong indications that we observe electron transport through single molecules.

This is further confirmed by the data on symmetric molecules shown in Fig. 4a,b. The experimental procedure was the same as described above for the asymmetric molecule. The overall amplitude of the current $`I0.6\mu `$A at $`V=1`$V is similar to the values observed with the asymmetric molecule. At $`V0.35`$ V, a peak occurs in $`dI/dV`$ Fig. 4b. A similar peak in Fig. 4a is less pronounced and less symmetric. Apart from this slight asymmetry, the $`dI/dV`$ data look rather symmetric, in particular when compared with the strong asymmetry in $`dI/dV`$ of the asymmetric molecule (Fig. 3), with a very similar molecular structure along the sulphur-to-sulphur axis. More than 50% of the stable IVs of the symmetric molecule were highly symmetric, while all of the IVs we observed with the asymmetric molecule were clearly asymmetric. This may be not very surprising, but allows a very important conclusion: what we measure is indeed the sample molecule and not an artefact caused by adsorbates or anything else. The IVs we observe reflect unambiguously an intrinsic property of the sample molecule: its spatial symmetry. Some of the IVs observed with the symmetric molecule, however, were asymmetric. An asymmetric IV with a symmetric molecule was previously observed in Ref. (9). For small asymmetries, there are several possible reasons: the symmetry can be broken by additional molecules, different electrode surfaces etc. To elucidate the question of more pronounced asymmetries as well, we manipulated intentionally a junction, starting with a highly symmetric IV. By carefully increasing the gap between the electrodes, we suddenly induced an asymmetric IV (Fig. 5a) with a steep current increase at positive bias and a rather small current at negative bias. Obviously, one of the two molecule-metal contacts was altered by the applied strain inducing an asymmetric IV. This IV was within minor deviations reproducible during three bias sweeps. We then played again with the electrode distance in both directions. The intention was now to move the strained bond to the other side. Two intermediate symmetric IVs were observed (Fig. 5b), similar to the initial configuration, which were then followed by asymmetric IVs, shown in Fig. 5c: Indeed, the steep current increase now occurs at negative bias and the current is smaller at positive bias, indicating a spatial inversion of the above contact configuration. This IV could be measured four times. Note that the molecule was not ”lost” during this protocol, as no disruption of the IV measurement occurred. Hence, we apparently manipulated the contacts of only one molecule. This intentional manipulation of the IV symmetry gives further support that we observe the current through an individual molecule. In particular, the fact that asymmetric contact realisations can cause strong asymmetries in the IVs demonstrates the crucial importance of microscopic details within the contact region: although all contacts were chemically stable, different types of IVs could be observed with the same molecule.

In conclusion, we have performed conductance measurements through a self-assembled metal-molecule-metal junction. By comparison of spatially symmetric and asymmetric but otherwise similar organic molecules, we unambiguously identify an intrinsic property of the molecule: its symmetry. The body of data strongly suggest that individual molecules are observed, in particular a lock-in in stable configurations can be observed. This is further corroborated by the observation of sample-to-sample fluctuations which demonstrate the crucial importance of the coupling to the ”environment”, i.e. the electrodes.


text:
# LMA MSW Solution in the Minimal 𝑆𝑈(3)_𝐿×𝑈(1)_𝑁 Gauge Model

## Abstract

The minimal $`SU(3)_L\times U(1)_N`$ gauge model for $`(\nu ,\mathrm{},\mathrm{}^C)`$ equipped with the (approximate) $`L_eL_\mu L_\tau `$ symmetry and a discrete $`Z_4`$ symmetry is found to provide radiative neutrino masses compatible with the LMA MSW solution.

thanks: Talk given by T.K. at the International Workshop NuFACT’01, Tsukuba, Japan (May 2001).

The neutrino oscillation phenomena imply the existence of massive neutrinos . Non-zero Majorana neutrino masses are known to arise in models with lepton number violating interactions and $`SU(3)_L\times U(1)_N`$ models naturally have such interactions , which are linked to generate charged lepton masses. With this in mind, we have constructed the simplest $`SU(3)_L\times U(1)_N`$ model with for $`(\nu ,\mathrm{},\mathrm{}^C)`$ giving rise to the currently most favorable LMA solution .

We use the following three guidelines to construct our model. (1) the model accounts for $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{atm}^2\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2`$ , which will be realized by bimaximal neutrino mixings based on the (approximate) $`L^{}L_eL_\mu L_\tau `$ symmetry ; (2) the model respects the LMA solution, $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{atm}^2/\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2=10^210^1`$ ; and (3) the model provides neutrino masses as radiative effects .

The particle content is given by, for $`(U(1)_N,L^{})`$: (a) triplet leptons, $`\psi ^1=(\nu ^1,\mathrm{}^1,\mathrm{}^{c1})_L^T:(0,1),\psi ^{i=2,3}=(\nu ^i,\mathrm{}^i,\mathrm{}^{ci})_L^T:(0,1)`$; (b) triplet scalars, $`\eta =(\eta ^0,\eta ^{},\eta ^+)^T:(0,0),\rho =(\rho ^+,\rho ^0,\rho ^{++})^T:(1,0),\chi =(\chi ^{},\chi ^{},\chi ^0)^T:(1,0)`$ with $`\eta ^0,\rho ^0,\chi ^0`$ ($``$ $`v_{\eta ,\rho ,\chi }`$) and (c) antisextet scalars, $`S^{(0)}:(1,0)`$ for $`\psi ^1\psi ^{2,3}`$, $`S^{(+)}:(1,2)`$ for $`\psi ^{2,3}\psi ^{2,3}`$. If there is only one antisextet, because the antisextet yields both mass terms for $`\mathrm{}`$ and $`\nu `$, we will encounter the similar flavor mass-structure for $`\nu `$ and $`\mathrm{}`$, which, however, contradicts with the phenomenology. To avoid this ’similarity’, we introduce two antisextets of $`S^{(0,+)\alpha \beta }`$ ($`\alpha ,\beta `$=1,2,3) and study their vacuum alignment to yield, for neutrinos, $`S^{(0)11}`$ ($`v_\nu ^{(0)}`$) but without $`S^{(+)11}`$ ($`v_\nu ^{(+)}`$) and, for charged leptons, $`S^{(0,+)23}`$ ($`v_{\mathrm{}}^{(0,+)}`$) .

To realize the vacuum alignment, we use the $`L^{}`$ symmetry with a $`Z_4`$ symmetry, where $`Z_4(\psi ^1,\eta ,S^{(+)})`$=+; $`Z_4(\psi ^{2,3},S^{(0)})`$=$``$; $`Z_4(\rho ,\chi )=i`$. The interaction, $`\eta \eta S^{(+)c}S^{(+)c}`$, which is $`Z_4`$ (and $`L`$)-symmetric for $`S^{(+)11}`$, does not disturb $`v_\nu ^{(+)}`$=0 and breaks the $`L^{}`$ conservation but preserves a discrete symmetry based on exp(i$`L^{}\pi `$/2) ($``$ $`Z_L^{}`$) since $`L^{}`$ is broken by $`|L^{}|`$ = 4. Then, $`Z_4`$ and $`Z_L^{}`$ symmetries collaborate to ensure the vacuum alignment and all possible $`L`$-violating interactions that can generate $`v_\nu ^{(+)}`$ turn out to be forbidden.

The Yukawa interactions consist of $`f_{1i}\overline{\left(\psi ^1\right)^C}\psi ^iS^{(0)}`$ and $`(1/2)f_{ij}\overline{\left(\psi ^i\right)^C}\psi ^j`$ $`S^{(+)}`$ for $`i,j`$ = 2,3 (without $`\psi \psi \eta `$ forbidden by $`Z_4`$) and Higgs potentials are given by trivial self-Hermitian terms and by non self-Hermitian terms composed of $`\mu _0\rho S^{(0)}\chi `$ and $`\lambda _1\eta \eta S^{(0)C}S^{(0)C}`$ generating $`v_{\mathrm{}}^{(0)}`$0 and $`\lambda _2\eta S^{(0)C}\rho ^C\chi ^C`$ generating $`v_\nu ^{(0)}`$0, both of which conserve $`L^{}`$, and of $`\lambda _b\eta \eta S^{(+)C}S^{(+)C}`$ generating $`v_{\mathrm{}}^{(+)}`$0, which violates $`L^{}`$. These Higgs interactions support our vacuum alignment.

We obtain neutrino and charged lepton mass matrices as follows:

$$M_\nu =\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\delta m_{11}^{rad}& ϵ\delta m_{12}^{\mathrm{}}& ϵ\delta m_{13}^{\mathrm{}}\\ ϵ\delta m_{12}^{\mathrm{}}& 0& 0\\ ϵ\delta m_{13}^{\mathrm{}}& 0& 0\end{array}\right),M_{\mathrm{}}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& \delta m_{12}^{\mathrm{}}& \delta m_{13}^{\mathrm{}}\\ \delta m_{12}^{\mathrm{}}& m_{22}^{\mathrm{}}& m_{23}^{\mathrm{}}\\ \delta m_{13}^{\mathrm{}}& m_{23}^{\mathrm{}}& m_{33}^{\mathrm{}}\end{array}\right)$$
(1)
where $`\delta m_{1i}^{\mathrm{}}`$ $`(m_{ij}^{\mathrm{}})`$ = $`f_{1i}v_{\mathrm{}}^{(0)}`$ ($`f_{ij}v_{\mathrm{}}^{(+)}`$) ($`i,j`$=2,3), $`ϵ`$ = $`v_\nu ^{(0)}/v_{\mathrm{}}^{(0)}`$, $`\delta m_{11}^{rad}`$ is a radiative mass as in Fig.1: $`\delta m_{11}^{rad}2\lambda _2f_{13}^2m_\tau \mu _0v_\chi ^2/v_{weak}^3`$ ($`v_{weak}`$ 174 GeV). The hierarchical parameterization of $`m_{ij}^{\mathrm{}}`$ is used for $`m_\mu m_\tau `$ and $`\delta m_{1i}^{\mathrm{}}m_{ij}^{\mathrm{}}`$ for $`m_em_{\mu ,\tau }`$  and the bimaximal structure relies upon $`\delta m_{12}^{\mathrm{}}\delta m_{13}^{\mathrm{}}`$.

Using the phenomenologically acceptable parameter set of ($`\mu _0=m_\chi =v_\chi `$, $`v_{\eta ,\rho ,S^{(0,+)}}=m_{\rho ,S^{(0,+)}}=v_{weak}/2`$) and an estimate of $`v_\nu ^{(0)}\lambda _2v_\eta v_\rho /v_\chi `$  with $`\lambda _210^7`$ for $`m_\nu `$ $``$ $`5\times 10^3`$ eV2, we finally obtain $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2/\mathrm{\Delta }m_{atm}^2`$ $``$ $`2\delta m_{11}^{rad}/m_\nu `$ $``$ $`(10^210^1)`$ for $`v_\chi 3.56.0`$ TeV, which are consistent with the $`SU(3)_L`$ breaking scale. This model is, thus, relevant to yield the LMA solution. 111The ratio $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2/\mathrm{\Delta }m_{atm}^2`$ is also induced by the diagonalization effects of $`M_{\mathrm{}}`$ estimated to be $`\stackrel{<}{}(m_e/m_\mu )^{3/2}3.4\times 10^4`$, which can be safely neglected .

We have constructed the minimal $`SU(3)_L\times U(1)_N`$ model with the leptons placed in $`(\nu ,\mathrm{},\mathrm{}^C)`$. The approximate bimaximal mixings are based on the $`L^{}`$ symmetry and the specific emphasis is laid on the fact that the similarity of our neutrino mass matrix to the charged lepton mass matrix for the (1,2) and (1,3)-entries in the $`ϵ`$ terms of Eq.(1). We found sufficient power of symmetries that forbids neutrino mass terms in the ($`i,j`$)-entries ($`i,j`$ = 2,3) while these terms are allowed for charged leptons. The observed mass hierarchy $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{atm}^2\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2`$ is explained by the dynamical one between tree and one-loop effects and the LMA solution shows up for $`v_\chi `$a few TeV.

The work of M.Y. is supported by the Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research No 12047223 from the Ministry of Education, Science, Sports and Culture, Japan.


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Evidence for high energy (up to few hundred MeV) electrons and positrons trapped below the Inner Van Allen Belts has been published during the last 20 years. The existing experimental data in the energy range of 0.04$`÷`$200 MeV come from satellites covering a large range of adiabatic variables \[, , ,\]. Additional information, at relatively higher energies, is furnished by balloon-borne experiments \[,\]; however these data cover a more limited spatial range and have larger uncertanties due to the shorter exposure times and the presence of background from atmospheric showers. Although the magnetic trapping mechanism is well understood, a complete description of the phenomena, including the mechanisms responsable for the injection and depletion of the belts as well as those determining the energy spectra is lacking, particularly for energies above a few hundred MeV. At lower energies, models are available for leptons and protons \[,\] based on the data provided by satellite campaigns, which are continuosly updated for istance in the context of the Trapped Radiation ENvironment Development project \[\].

At higher energies the existing data come from measurements carried out by the Moscow Engineering Physics Institute. These data, taken at altitudes ranging from 300$`÷`$1000 km with different instruments placed on satellites and the Mir station \[, , \], established the existence of O(100 MeV) trapped leptons both in the Inner Van Allen Belts (stably trapped) and in the region below (quasi-trapped), and determined their charge composition \[, \]. At these altitudes, the shell structure is strongly distorted in the vicinity of the SAA, and consequently the observations are sensitive to different regions of trapped particles: the Inner Van Allen belts over the SAA and quasi-trapping belts outside of the SAA. An example of the shell structure relevant at these altitudes is shown in Fig.1: the shell evolves essentially above the atmosphere which it intercepts around the SAA.

The Russian measurements concern mainly the region of the SAA; very little data is available at the corresponding altitudes outside the SAA. The measured ratio of $`e^+`$ to $`e^{}`$ is found to depend strongly on the observed population type. In the SAA, electrons dominate the positrons by a factor $``$ 10, a ratio similar to that observed for the cosmic fluxes, while outside the SAA the two fluxes are similar and comparable to the $`e^+`$ flux inside the SAA \[\]. However, the situation is not completely clear, since other groups report a lower $`e^{}`$ excess ($``$ 2) for the SAA \[\].

In the following, we use the high statistics data sample collected by the AMS experiment in 1998, for a detailed study of the under-cutoff lepton fluxes in the O(1 GeV) energy range. The data are analyzed in terms of the canonical invariant coordinates characterizing the particle motion in the magnetic field: the L shell parameter, the equivalent magnetic equatorial radius of the shell, the equatorial pitch angle, $`\alpha _0`$, of the momentum $`\stackrel{}{p}`$ with the $`\stackrel{}{B}`$ field, and the mirror field $`B_m`$ at which the motion reflection occurs during bouncing \[, \].

## 2 AMS and the STS-91 flight

The Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer (AMS), equipped with a double-sided silicon microstrip tracker, has an analyzing power of $`BD^2`$=0.14 $`Tm^2`$, where B is the magnetic field intensity and D the typical path length in the field. A plastic scintillator time-of-flight system measures the particle velocity and an Aerogel Threshold Cerenkov counter provides the discrimination between proton and $`e^\pm `$. In the present analysis, a fiducial cone with a $`28^\mathrm{o}`$ half-angle opening aperture was defined to select the leptons entering the detector, resulting in an average acceptance of $``$160 $`cm^2`$sr. Further details on the detector performance, lepton selection and background estimation can be found in  and references therein.

The AMS was operated on the shuttle Discovery during a 10-day flight, beginning on June 2, 1998 (NASA mission STS-91). The detector, which was not magnetically stabilized, recorded data during 17, 6, 7, and 14 hours pointing respectively at 0o, 20o, 45o, and 180o from the local zenith direction. The results presented here are obtained from the data of these periods. The orbital inclination was 51.7o in geographic coordinates, at a geodesic altitude of 370$`÷`$390 Km. Trigger rates varied between 100 and 700 Hz. The data from the SAA is excluded in our analysis.

The shuttle position and the AMS orientation in geographic coordinates were provided continuously during the flight by the telemetry data. The values of L, $`\alpha _0`$ and $`B_m`$ of the detected leptons were calculated using the UNILIB package \[\] with a realistic magnetic field model, including both the internal and the external contributions \[, \].

The AMS Field of View (FoV) in the (L,$`\alpha _0`$) coordinate space is determined both by the orbit parameters (geographic locations and flying attitude) and the finite acceptance of the detector.

A simulation was developped to determine the AMS FoV along the orbit and evaluate the effects due to the finite detector acceptance. The results are shown in Fig.2.

The $`(\alpha _0,L)`$ coverage is similar for the different attitudes. The finite acceptance of the detector influences essentially the definition of the lower contour. The upper limit is imposed by the orbital altitude and is described by the relation $`\mathrm{sin}\alpha _0=\sqrt{0.311/L^3B_m}`$, where $`B_m=0.225G`$ is the minimum mirror field encountered along the AMS orbit. Since the particles which are mirroring above the AMS altitude cannot be observed, particles with large equatorial pitch angles can only be detected at low L values (L$``$1.2). At larger L, only particles with a smaller $`\alpha _0`$ can be observed. Because of the fixed flight attitudes, the azimuthal $`\beta _0`$ coverage in the local magnetic reference frame ($`\widehat{z}`$=$`\widehat{B}`$, $`\widehat{x}`$=$`(\widehat{\stackrel{}{}B})_{}`$, $`\widehat{y}`$=$`\widehat{z}\times \widehat{x}`$) was not complete, as shown in the insert plot of Fig.2.

## 3 Data Analysis

To reject the cosmic component of the measured lepton fluxes, the lepton trajectories in the Earth’s magnetic field were traced using a 4th order Runge Kutta method with adaptive step size. The equation of the motion was solved numerically and a particle was classified as trapped if its trajectory reached an altitude of 40 km \[\], taken as the dense atmosphere limit where the total probability of interaction is 50$`\%`$, before its detection in AMS. Although satisfactory in most cases, this approach is less stable when the particle rigidity falls in the penumbra region, close to the cutoff value. In this case, the trajectories become chaotic and small uncertainties in the reconstructed rigidity and in the B field can lead to a misclassification. The validity of the adiabatic approach requires the parameter $`\epsilon =\rho /R`$ to be small \[, \], where $`\rho `$ is the equatorial Larmor radius of a particle and $`R`$ the field radius of curvature at the equator. \] shows that the motion becomes cahotic if $`\epsilon `$ 0.1. The AMS data are consistent with this limit even though the detected particle energies are relatively high. To avoid such effects, we have defined an effective cutoff, $`R_{eff}`$, as the maximum rigidity value at a given magnetic latitude $`\theta _m`$ for which no traced lepton was found to be of cosmic origin. The $`R_{eff}`$ values as function of the magnetic latitude are shown as filled triangles in Fig. 3. We rejected from our sample all particles with $`R>R_{eff}`$.

The residence time, $`T_f`$, of the under-cutoff particles is computed, i.e. the total time spent by each particle in its motion above the atmosphere, before and after detection. The geographical location where the trajectories intercept the atmosphere determine the lepton’s production and impact points, defined as the position from which the particle leaves or enters the atmosphere.

The residence time distribution as a function of energy is shown for positrons in Fig.4; the same behaviour is observed for electrons. All observed leptons have residence times below $``$ 30 s, with 52$`\%`$ of the $`e^{}`$ and 38$`\%`$ of the $`e^+`$ having a $`T_f<0.3`$ s independent of their energy. The corresponding impact/production points are spread, for both $`e^+`$ and $`e^{}`$, over two bands on either side of magnetic equator, as indicated by the the yellow bands in Fig.5.

A scaling law, $`T_fE^1`$, is observed for the remaining leptons: they are disposed in two diagonal bands separated by a difference in $`T_f`$ of $`2.2/E`$ s. The impact/production points for $`e^+`$ are localized in the red/blue spots of Fig.5: the same regions describe respectively the production/impact regions of $`e^{}`$.

The data have been previously published by the AMS collaboration \[\] using the terminology of short-lived and long-lived to classify the particles with $`T_f`$ below and above 0.2 s. However, no interpretation was advanced at that time to describe the observed distributions. \] has discussed the AMS results qualitatively.

An exhaustive explanation must take into account the geometry of the shells relevant to the AMS measurements and the fact that these shells evolve partially under the atmosphere; therefore, no permanent trapping can occur. The residence times are determined by the periodicities of the drift ($`\tau _d`$) and bouncing ($`\tau _b\tau _d`$) motions, the type of motion which dominates depends on the relative fraction of the shell mirror points lying above the atmosphere.

The impact/production points correspond to the intersection of the shell surfaces with the atmosphere, as shown in Fig.6, where particles generated in interactions are injected into the shells.

Long-lived and short-lived particles move along shells with different values of $`B_m`$ or, equivalently $`\alpha _0`$, which determine the mirror height on each field line. For high $`B_m`$ values, or low $`\alpha _0`$, the mirror height is very low and the shells penetrate into the atmosphere at nearly all longitudes. Therefore particles are absorbed shortly after injection in the shells. This is shown by the yellow bands in Fig.6 corresponding to shells with $`\mathrm{B}_\mathrm{m}0.48\mathrm{L}^{0.41}`$ Gauss; they reproduce well the impact/production points for short-lived leptons. When $`B_m`$ is lower, or $`\alpha _0`$ closer to $`90^\mathrm{o}`$, the shells descend below the atmosphere only in the vicinity of the SAA, indicated by the blue regions in Fig.6, which correspond to shells with $`\mathrm{B}_\mathrm{m}0.48\mathrm{L}^{0.41}`$ Gauss, and reproduce the impact/production points of the long-lived leptons. These particles can drift nearly an entire revolution before absorption in the atmosphere. For the short-lived component, the bouncing motion is dominant; the residence time is given by $`T_f=k\tau _b`$, where $`\tau _b`$ is the bouncing motion period, and k is an integer or half-integer between $`1/2k5`$. In the dipolar field model, $`\tau _b`$ is given by $`\tau _b=f(\alpha _o)L`$, where f is a slowly varying function of $`\alpha _o`$; the upper limit is $`\tau 300ms`$ for the AMS data. The sub-structure seen in the short-lived component of Fig.4 is due to the discrete values of k and the different L shells crossed during the AMS orbits. For the long-lived component, the drift motion is dominant and $`T_f=k^{}\tau _d`$, where $`\tau _d`$ is the drift motion period, $`\tau _d=f^{}(\alpha _o)/EL`$, where f’ is a slowly varying function of $`\alpha _o`$, and k’ is a number less than one, corresponding to the fraction of a complete drift shell spanned by a particle. The two bands seen for the long-lived component of Fig.4 correspond to fractions of $``$0.65 and $``$0.25 of a complete drift.

## 4 AMS Results

For the description of under-cutoff fluxes, the energy E, the L parameter and the equatorial pitch angle $`\alpha _0`$ were used (this is preferred to $`B_m`$ since limited to $`0^\mathrm{o}÷90^\mathrm{o}`$). A three-dimensional grid (E, L, $`\alpha _0`$) was defined to build flux maps. A linear binning in $`\alpha _0`$ and logarithmic variable size for L and E bins were choosen to optimize the statistics in each bin. The interval limits and bin widths are listed in Table 1.

The flux maps in (L, $`\alpha _0`$) at constant E give the distribution of particle populations at the altitude of AMS. Nine maps at constant E have been made. Two different maps for two different energy bins of $`e^+`$ and $`e^{}`$ are shown in Fig.7.

The flux is limited by the cutoff rigidity $`R_c`$: on a given shell only particles with R $`R_c`$ are allowed to populate the shell, hence lower and lower energy particles populate higher and higher shells.

The $`e^+,e^{}`$ flux maps and their ratio in the energy interval 0.2$`÷`$2.7 GeV are shown in Fig. 8 and Fig. 9 respectively. The solid line in the two plots identifies the lower boundary in (L,$`\alpha _o`$) below which no leptons can be found with residence times larger than 0.3 s and is defined by the relation $`\mathrm{sin}\alpha _c=0.8L^{1.7}`$.

Above the curve, for increasing values of $`\alpha _o`$, the long-lived component of the fluxes becomes increasingly dominant. This is demonstrated in Fig. 10 where the same distributions, integrated over $`\alpha _o`$ (C,D) and L (A,B), are shown. The contributions of leptons with $`T_f<0.3`$ s and $`T_f>0.3`$ s are represented with dashed and solid lines respectively. Above $`\alpha _o>60^\mathrm{o}`$ the flux is due substantially to the long-lived component; the $`e^+`$ flux represents $`80\%`$ of the total leptonic flux, while at the same level or less than the $`e^{}`$ flux in the low $`\alpha _o`$ region. The long-lived component dominates only at very low L values where the positron excess is more pronounced.

This is seen clearly in the energy spectra for particles with $`\alpha _070^\mathrm{o}`$, shown in Fig. 11, which is superimposed with the lower energy measurements from MARYA \[\]. At large pitch angles, the $`e^+`$ flux is higher than $`e^{}`$ flux by a factor $``$ 4.5, in contrast with MARYA data which indicate the same level of flux for both lepton charges. The critical pitch angle $`\alpha _c`$ can explain the presence of the two well separated components in the residence time: the albedo (short-lived) and quasi-trapped (long-lived) ones. Particles inside a cone with a half-opening angle $`\alpha _c`$ around $`\stackrel{}{B}`$ will enter the atmosphere every bounce and therefore will disappear rapidly, while those outside it will enter the atmosphere only near SAA. In this context, $`\alpha _c`$ can be defined as the equatorial bouncing loss cone angle, i.e. the largest pitch angle for which particles enter the atmosphere every bounce. Taking into account $`\alpha _c`$, the residence time can be written as $`T_f=k\tau _b\theta (\alpha _o+\alpha _c)+k^{}\tau _d\theta (\alpha _o\alpha _c)`$, where $`\theta `$ is the Heavyside step function. The two terms correspond to very different components of motion ($`\tau _b\tau _d`$), according to the bounce loss cone on that field line. Furthermore, all the observed particles are in a drift loss cone angle since all of them enter the atmosphere within one revolution after injection. This explains the absence of a peak at $`90^o`$ in the pitch angle distributions of Figs. 10 A and B.

## 5 Discussion

The AMS data establish the existence of leptonic radiation belts, with particle energies in the range of several GeV, below the Inner Van Allen belts. The particles populating these belts are not stably trapped since the corresponding drift shells are not closed over above the atmosphere in the region of the SAA.

At any given L, a critical value of the equatorial pitch angle, $`\alpha _c`$, the bouncing loss cone, can be defined to distinguish the long-lived, or quasi-trapped, and the short-lived, or albedo, components of the fluxes. The same value is found to separate the regions where the $`e^+/e^{}`$ ratio is above or around unity: the charge composition shows a clear dominance of positively charged leptons in a definite region of the (L,$`\alpha _o`$) space above $`\alpha _c(L)`$.

The observed behaviour distinguishes these belts from the Inner Van Allen belts and limits the possible injection/loss mechanisms to those acting on a time scale much shorter than the typical particle residence times. Mechanisms related to Coulomb scattering, like pitch angle diffusion, are ruled out since they imply much longer time scales. Moreover, the observed charge ratio distribution provides an important constraint for potential models.

The interaction of primary cosmic rays and inner radiation belt protons with atmospheric nuclei in the regions of shell intersection with the atmosphere are a natural mechanism for the production of secondary leptons through the $`\pi \mu e`$ or $`\pi \gamma e`$ decay chains. This leads to a $`e^+`$ excess over $`e^{}`$ and seems suitable to explain the observed charge ratio for the quasi-trapped flux \[,\]. However, for the albedo flux the charge ratio is of the order of unity, as seen in Fig. 9, and other mechanisms might be present.

Recent Monte Carlo studies based on this mechanism have been able to fully reproduce the under-cutoff proton spectrum reported by AMS \[\], while a less good agreement for the under-cutoff lepton spectrum \[\] was obtained. In \] the influence of geomagnetic effects, mainly related to the East-West asymmetry for cosmic protons, is taken into account to qualitatively explain the observed charge ratio. However, more refined studies are needed to definitely exclude contributions from other mechanisms, i.e. acceleration processes acting on the leptons resulting from the decays of $`\beta `$-active secondary nuclei and neutrons of albedo and solar origin \[\].

In conclusion, the AMS under-cutoff lepton spectrum can be described naturally in terms of the canonical adiabatic variables associated with the Earth’s magnetic field taking into account the role played by the atmosphere. There are clear indications that $`\pi `$ decays can account for the quasi-trapped component of the flux, while the situation is less clear for the albedo component where other processes may contribute.

## 6 Acknowledgements

We gratefully acknowledge our collegues in AMS, in particular Z. Ren and V. Choutko. We are also grateful to P.Lipari for useful discussions on the interpretation of the AMS data. We greatly benefit of the software libraries (UNILIB,SPENVIS) developed in the context of the Trapped Radiation ENvironment Development (TREND) project for ESTEC, and we thank D.Heynderickx for his help.

This work has been partially supported by Italian Space Agency (ASI) under the contract ARS 98/47.