text:
# Resolving the 47 Tucanae Distance Problem

## 1 Introduction

The age of the globular cluster (GC) 47 Tucanae (NGC 104) plays a fundamental role in the study of the formation mechanism of the Galaxy. 47 Tuc belongs to the ‘thick disk’ population of Galactic GCs and the comparison of its age with that of the more metal poor ‘halo’ GCs and the oldest ‘thin disk’ open clusters provides vital clues about the timescale for the formation of the various Galactic stellar populations (e.g. Salaris & Weiss 1998, Liu & Chaboyer 2000, VandenBerg 2000). In addition, 47 Tuc provides the zero point for the age determination of ‘bulge’ GCs, since their ages are most reliably determined from the differential comparison of their Colour-Magnitude Diagrams (CMDs) with that of 47 Tuc (Ortolani et al. 1995). Since the age of a stellar cluster is best determined from the comparison of the absolute magnitude of the main sequence turn off stars with their theoretical counterpart, the cluster distance modulus must be accurately known.

The two most recent empirical determinations of the 47 Tuc distance provide very different results. By applying the main sequence fitting technique in the $`V/(BV)`$ CMD, using a sample of 7 unevolved subdwarfs with accurate HIPPARCOS parallaxes, and adopting $`[Fe/H]=0.7`$ and $`E(BV)=0.055`$ for the cluster, Carretta et al. (2000) have obtained a distance modulus $`(mM)_V=13.57\pm 0.09`$ (see also Gratton et al. 1997 and Reid 1998, who obtain similar results using small numbers of HIPPARCOS subdwarfs). Zoccali et al. (2001) have applied the white dwarf fitting technique in the $`m_{814}/(m_{336}m_{814})`$, $`m_{336}/(m_{336}m_{555})`$ and $`m_{555}/(m_{555}m_{814})`$ CMDs, where $`m_{336}`$, $`m_{555}`$ and $`m_{336}`$ correspond roughly to the $`UVI`$ Johnson-Cousins filters; they used a sample of 6 local DA white dwarfs with accurate parallaxes, together with 21 WDs identified in 47 Tuc, and determined a distance modulus $`(mM)_V=13.27\pm 0.14`$, adopting $`E(BV)=0.055\pm 0.02`$. The discrepancy between these two results is significant, and causes an uncertainty of about 3 Gyr on the cluster age.

In this work we want to investigate whether this disagreement is due to inaccuracies in the MS-fitting distance determination, and provide a new, more solid estimate of 47 Tuc distance modulus. In particular, we aim to greatly improve the reliability of the MS-fitting distance by vastly increasing the number of subdwarfs included in the fitting procedure, having an homogeneous photometric dataset for all of them, and, for the first time, considering the fitting in both the $`V/(BV)`$ and $`V/(VI)`$ Johnson-Cousins planes. Because of the different sensitivities of the $`(BV)`$ and $`(VI)`$ colours to the stellar metallicities, consistency of the results derived in these two colour planes is a strong test for the reliability of the distances we obtain.

In §2 we present the photometry of our new large subdwarf sample, and discuss the adopted subdwarf metallicities, reddenings and Lutz-Kelker corrections; §3 deals with the 47 Tuc photometry, metallicity and reddening, while the MS-fitting results and related systematic errors are discussed in §4 and §5, respectively. An analysis of the results and comparison with other distance determinations appears in §6, followed by a summary in §7.

## 2 The Subdwarf Sample

### 2.1 Selection Criteria

Suitable subdwarfs were selected using 3 basic criteria - metallicity, parallax error and absolute magnitude - as described below.

Metallicities were determined from Strömgren indices, available in the literature, via the calibration of Schuster & Nissen (1989). Likely subdwarf candidates were initially identified from the catalogues of Schuster & Nissen (1988), Schuster, Parrao & Contreras Martinez (1993) and Olsen (1993), however, for the sake of consistency, the averaged indices from Hauck & Mermilliod (1998) were used in the analysis. Metallicities for the subdwarfs were placed on the scale of Carretta & Gratton (1997) (hereafter CG97) using the transformations of Clementini et al. (1999) \- note that these transformations have a dispersion of $`0.16`$ dex in the derived metallicity, which comes largely from the Schuster & Nissen calibration. Metallicities were restricted to a range within $`\pm `$0.4 dex of the cluster metallicity ($`[Fe/H]=0.7`$ is assumed for 47 Tuc - see §3.2), hence the sample stars all lie in the range $`1.0[Fe/H]0.3`$. This ensures that any uncertainties on the metallicity dependence of the main sequence location are kept to a minimum. 2 of the stars in our sample fall just outside the specified metallicity range when the Hauck & Mermilliod indices are used (HIP 27080 and HIP 43393 at $`[Fe/H]=0.255`$ and -0.252, respectively), therefore these stars were omitted from the following analysis.

All stars were required to have HIPPARCOS parallaxes with errors $`13\%`$, enabling both an accurate determination of their absolute magnitudes and an assessment of Lutz-Kelker bias in the sample (see §2.3).

The final requirement that $`M_V>5.5`$ ensures that stars are unevolved, on the lower main sequence, hence their location in the CMD does not depend on their (unknown) age.

HIPPARCOS entries for all suitable candidates were carefully checked to avoid the inclusion of any suspected binaries or variable stars. We have identified a sample of 50 local subdwarfs which meet all the above criteria and we have acquired new B, V and I-band photometric data for 43 of them.111Stars for which we did not manage to acquire new photometry are; HIP nos. 1897, 8102, 10798, 56452, 78241, 111209 and 112870

### 2.2 Observations and Data Reduction

26 stars in the southern sky sample were observed between January and May 2001 at the Sutherland site of the South African Astronomical Observatory (SAAO) using the modular photometer on the 0.5m telescope. The photometer employs a Hamamatsu R943-02 (GaAs) photomultiplier and a Johnson-Cousins $`UBV(RI)_C`$ filter set. Magnitudes were calibrated using ‘E-region’ standard stars (see e.g. Menzies et al. 1989) and data reduced using standard SAAO procedures, as described fully in Kilkenny et al. (1998) and references therein.

29 stars in the northern sample were imaged with the CCD on the 1m Jacobus Kapteyn Telescope (JKT) on La Palma, on February 9th and June 2nd 2001. The JKT employs a $`SITe2K`$ chip and a Kitt Peak $`BVI`$ filter set was used for all observations of programme and standard stars. Magnitudes were calibrated from 29 observations of 14 Landolt (1992) standard fields taken over the 2 nights. Basic data reduction was done using standard routines in the FIGARO data reduction package and aperture photometry was performed in GAIA.

A comparison of the 12 stars in common between the 2 samples shows excellent agreement in the V and I filters, the mean differences being 0.006 and -0.002 respectively (SAAO-JKT), with the B-band magnitudes displaying a slightly larger mean offset of 0.012 (the JKT magnitudes being brighter). All 3 filters have a dispersion of $`0.02`$ around the mean, and are therefore consistent with the true offsets being zero. Since several stars in the JKT data have only one observation, the dispersion in the mean offset was added in quadrature to the photometry errors for these stars. Table 1 presents the new subdwarf data and lists: HIPPARCOS number, observed V magnitudes, $`(BV)`$ and $`(VI)`$ colours, photometry errors (in $`m`$mags), parallax, parallax error, metallicity on the CG97 scale, number of observations in each filter and source of photometry (s for SAAO and j for JKT). Figure 1 shows CMDs in $`V/(BV)`$ and $`V/(VI)`$ for the absolute magnitudes calculated from the parallax, and including LK corrections, dividing the subdwarfs into 2 metallicity bins ($`1.0[Fe/H]<0.6`$ and $`0.6<[Fe/H]<0.25`$). The error bars on the colours are photometry errors only.

### 2.3 Lutz-Kelker corrections

As a consequence of selecting the subdwarfs on parallax error, their absolute magnitudes are subject to Lutz-Kelker bias, which leads to a systematic underestimate of their distances (Lutz & Kelker 1973). Lutz-Kelker corrections for the individual subdwarfs were derived from the distribution of proper motions for the whole sample, following the procedures of Hanson (1979). The proper motion distribution, identified from the HIPPARCOS catalogue, was found to be well represented by a power law of the form $`N(\mu )\mu ^x`$, where $`x=2.65\pm 0.15`$. The appropriate LK correction for each individual star, $`\mathrm{\Delta }M_{LK}`$, is then given by:

$$\mathrm{\Delta }M_{LK}=2.17\left[\left(n+\frac{1}{2}\right)\left(\frac{\sigma _\pi }{\pi }\right)^2+\left(\frac{6n^2+10n+3}{4}\right)\left(\frac{\sigma _\pi }{\pi }\right)^4\right]$$

where $`n=x+1`$ and $`(\frac{\sigma _\pi }{\pi })`$ is the fractional parallax error.

Since the parallax errors for our sample are restricted to $`13\%`$, LK corrections are small, the mean value being $`\mathrm{\Delta }M_{LK}=0.05`$ mag.

### 2.4 Reddening

The Strömgren $`H\beta `$ index offers the best method for assessing the reddening of individual subdwarfs. 17 stars in our full selected sample have $`H\beta `$ measurements (Hauck & Mermilliod 1998) from which $`E(by)`$ was derived using the calibration of Schuster & Nissen (1989). $`E(BV)`$ can then be calculated assuming $`E(BV)=1.35E(by)`$, and standard extinction laws used to determine $`E(VI)`$ and $`A_V`$ (e.g. from Cardelli, Clayton & Mathis 1989). We expect reddenings to be very low since the average distance of our sample is only 41pc, the furthest lying at 72pc, and in fact, the reddening distribution of these 17 stars peaks at around $`E(by)=0.006`$ (corresponding to $`E(BV)=0.008`$), with tails at higher and lower values (some being negative). Since the standard error on the Schuster & Nissen reddening calibration is on the order 0.01 in $`E(by)`$, this distribution is consistent with the ‘true’ reddening being zero for the sample as a whole. We note here that these 17 stars include the full distance range of the sample, from the nearest to the furthest and the derived reddenings show no correlation with distance or Galactic latitude or longitude.

Several other authors also conclude that reddening effects are negligible in a region within 75pc of the sun (see, for example, discussions in Perry, Johnston & Crawford 1982, Blackwell et al. 1990 and references therein). Therefore we chose to adopt zero reddening for the full subdwarf sample used in our main fits and note that this choice may produce a small systematic effect on the order of 0.03 mag on the derived distance moduli (see §5.1).

## 3 47 Tucanae

### 3.1 Photometry

All previous MS-fitting studies of 47 Tuc have used the $`V/(BV)`$ fiducial sequence from Hesser et al. (1987). Since one of the aims of this work is to extend the wavelength range used for MS-fitting to 47 Tuc we searched for published data which would provide a well populated lower MS, in both $`(BV)`$ and $`(VI)`$, extending to $``$ 3 magnitudes below the turn-off, from which fiducial lines could be derived. The data of Kaluzny et al. (1998) seemed ideal for this purpose, as they present B, V and I photometry for more than 22,000 stars covering the whole CMD and extending well down onto the lower MS. We derived main-lines by making 0.1 magnitude cuts in V across the main sequence and calculating the mean colour, and the dispersion around this mean. Stars lying more than 1-$`\sigma `$ from the mean were discarded, and the process repeated until the solution converged. A similar procedure utilizing the mode of the colour distribution across the MS, rather than the mean, produced essentially the same results. Comparison of the $`V/(BV)`$ main-line derived in this way from the Kaluzny et al. data showed it to be in good agreement with that of Hesser et al. (see Figure 2).

Preliminary fits using only the SAAO subdwarf data (26 stars) yielded a $`(BV)`$ distance modulus in agreement with previous studies (see section §6). However, there appeared to be a discrepancy of almost 0.3 mag in the derived distance moduli between the $`(BV)`$ and $`(VI)`$ indices (Percival et al. 2001), which prompted us to investigate further the consistency of the cluster photometry. It should be noted at this point that Hesser et al. (1987) refer specifically to a possible zero-point offset in their $`(BV)`$ data - ‘… we believe there is a reasonable possibility that our CCD-calibrated scale for 47 Tuc is correct in V but may be too blue in $`(BV)`$ by $`0.010.02`$ mag’. Since in the MS fitting procedure any error on the colour index is multiplied by the slope on the MS ($`5.5`$ in $`V/(BV)`$), this immediately suggests that any derived distance modulus may be too large by around 0.1 mag. Comparison of the Kaluzny et al. data with the photoelectrically calibrated MS data of Alcaino & Liller (1987) suggested not only that the $`(BV)`$ main-line may be too blue by $`0.020.03`$ mag, but that the $`(VI)`$ main-line may be too red by a similar amount. If real, these zero-point offsets combined together would potentially explain the discrepancy in distance moduli found above.

In order to quantify the suspected zero-point offsets in the Kaluzny data we made a comparison of Stetson’s ‘secondary’ $`BVI_C`$ standards in 47 Tuc, available through the Canadian Astronomy Data Centre web site (http://cadcwww.hia.nrc.ca/standards - see Stetson 2000 for details). A co-ordinate search reliably identified 31 stars in common with the Kaluzny et al. data, which spanned the colour range of the main sequence. Comparison of the photometries showed a constant offset in the V filter (and similar constant offset in the $`(VI)`$ colour index) and a colour dependent offset in $`(BV)`$, in exactly the sense suggested above. Specifically these derived offsets are:
$`V_{Stetson}=V_{Kaluzny}0.025`$
$`(VI)_{Stetson}=(VI)_{Kaluzny}0.026`$
$`(BV)_{Stetson}=1.091(BV)_{Kaluzny}0.048`$
(see Figure 3).

Applying these offsets, we recalibrated the Kaluzny data from the Stetson standards and rederived main-lines in $`(BV)`$ and $`(VI)`$, as previously described. The 2 sub-fields for which shorter integration times were used (F19 and F10, see Kaluzny et al. 1998 for details) were neglected as these were clearly not consistent with the remainder of the data. Fits to our preliminary subdwarf data yielded distance moduli that were consistent between the 2 colour indices and so we adopted the recalibrated main-lines for the remainder of the analysis.

Figure 2 compares the original Kaluzny main-lines with the recalibrated ones. The $`V/(BV)`$ plot also shows the main line of Hesser et al. (1987) used in all previous 47 Tuc MS-fitting studies, which is coincident with the original Kaluzny photometry. Figure 3 illustrates the derived photometry offsets between the Kaluzny and Stetson data sets.

We note here that the $`(BV)`$ plot in Figure 3 (middle panel) has one point at $`(BV)=0.57`$ which appears slightly discrepant and may be forcing the slope of the best-fit line to be too steep. If this point is neglected (or given lower weighting) the slope reduces slightly and the best-fit line becomes: $`(BV)_{Stetson}=1.071(BV)_{Kaluzny}0.029`$. Adopting this relationship for our recalibration alters the mean offset by no more than 0.003 mag in $`(BV)`$, and the effect on our overall results is negligible.

### 3.2 Metallicity and Reddening

To enable accurate distance estimates to be made from any method which compares cluster and field stars (as is the case using MS-fitting techniques) care must be taken to tie the abundance scale used for the calibrating local stars to that of the cluster. Carretta & Gratton (1997) determined metallicities for 24 globular clusters, from cluster giant stars, and find $`[Fe/H]=0.70\pm 0.07`$ for 47 Tuc, which we note is in complete agreement with the Zinn & West value of $`[Fe/H]=0.71\pm 0.08`$ and other spectroscopic studies (as discussed in Rutledge, Hesser & Stetson 1997). Hence, we adopt $`[Fe/H]=0.7\pm 0.1`$ for the cluster metallicity.

For the subdwarfs we are using the CG97 scale, as calibrated by Clementini et al. (1999) from the Schuster & Nissen metallicities and, for our fits to be valid, this scale must be consistent with the metallicity used for 47 Tuc. Metallicities for the calibrating subdwarfs used by Clementini et al. are measured according to procedures which are totally consistent with those used by Carretta & Gratton (1997) to derive the cluster metallicities (see discussion in Clementini et al. 1999), and so the 2 scales should be comparable. Reid (1998) also discusses this point and makes a comparison of the CG97 abundances for a sample of 22 local stars which also have spectroscopically derived abundances from Axer, Fuhrmann & Gehren (1994). Reid finds a mean difference of 0.008 dex in $`[Fe/H]`$, but with most of the offset coming from stars at the lowest metallicities. However, for $`[Fe/H]>1.3`$ (which applies to all of our sample, and 47 Tuc) the abundances are found to be in agreement.

From the above considerations, we make the assumption that the abundance scales we are using for the subdwarfs and the cluster are self-consistent, and therefore any systematic effects should be negligible. However, we note that any systematic change in the metallicity scales of either the subdwarfs or the cluster would affect the derived distances.

Reddening estimates for 47 Tuc from various studies, and using a variety of methods, lie in the range $`E(BV)=0.0290.064`$ (see e.g. Crawford & Snowden 1975, Dutra & Bica 2000, Gratton et al. 1997 and references therein). We chose to adopt an $`E(BV)`$ value of 0.04 for our main fits, but explored the range $`0.02E(BV)0.06`$. The potential systematic errors associated with our choice of cluster metallicity and reddening are assessed in §5.2.

## 4 Main Sequence Fitting

### 4.1 Method

The basic method employed in this work consists of using the subdwarfs to create a template main sequence for comparison with the cluster main-line. This is done by deriving the appropriate metallicity-dependent colour shifts which must be applied to the individual subdwarfs in order to ‘adjust’ their metallicity to that of the cluster, $`[Fe/H]=0.7`$ (noting that decreasing the metallicity of a main sequence star shifts it to bluer colours in a CMD).

Employing the $`\alpha `$-enhanced isochrones of Salaris & Weiss (1998) for $`[Fe/H]`$ = -1.3, -1.0, -0.7, -0.6 and solar-scaled for $`[Fe/H]=0.3`$ the procedure is as follows. For each subdwarf, at its absolute magnitude, interpolate amongst the isochrones to determine the theoretical colour of a star (either $`(BV)`$ or $`(VI)`$), at (i) the metallicity of the subdwarf and (ii) the metallicity of the cluster. The difference between these quantities, $`\mathrm{\Delta }(BV)`$ or $`\mathrm{\Delta }(VI)`$, represents the colour shift required to place the subdwarf at the metallicity of the cluster. This shift is then applied to the observed colour of the subdwarf, at its absolute magnitude, to build up the template MS. Because the metallicity range of our subdwarf sample was restricted to $`\pm `$ 0.4 dex of the cluster metallicity, the derived colour shifts are small. In $`(BV)`$, the mean shift is 0.035 mag (note that some stars shift to bluer and some to redder colours, depending on the metallicity), and the maximum shift is 0.050, whilst in $`(VI)`$ the mean and maximum shifts are 0.027 and 0.041 respectively.

In order to check whether the colour shifts are dependent on our choice of isochrones, we carried out tests using different sets of isochrones (e.g. Girardi et al. 2000, the diffusive isochrones of Salaris, Groenewegen & Weiss 2000) and colour transformations (Green, Demarque & King 1987, Castelli 1999). Since we are utilizing relative colours for these shifts, rather than absolute colours (which can vary significantly from model to model) and because we are only adjusting across a narrow metallicity range, the colour shifts produced in the different cases were virtually indistinguishable. Hence we are confident that the resulting template MS is not model dependent.

The template MS is then shifted in magnitude, V, and the best fit to the cluster main-line is found using a least-squares fitting routine (see §4.2 for details). The required magnitude shift is equal to the apparent distance modulus, $`(mM)_V`$.

Reid (1997) notes that, to be physically correct, the procedure of shifting subdwarfs to the cluster metallicity should preserve mass. This implies that both the colour and magnitude of each subdwarf should be adjusted to be appropriate to a star of equivalent mass, at the metallicity of the cluster. The main problem here is that mass also evolves along the MS so that, at a given colour, luminosity and metallicity, the mass of a star also depends on its age. Since in general we do not have reliable ages for local subdwarfs it is not possible to apply these magnitude shifts in a physically correct way. However, we did test the effect of applying colour and magnitude corrections assuming an arbitrary fixed age for the subdwarfs of 10 Gyr. The resulting template MS covers a different range of magnitudes than the one which includes colour shifts only, as shifting a star of fixed mass to a lower metallicity increases its luminosity, and vice-versa. However, since the shape of the isochrones is very similar across the metallicity range we are using, the shape of the resulting template is not changed significantly and we found that fits to these revised templates yield the same distance moduli, to within 0.01 mag, as the templates constructed using colour shifts only, in both $`(BV)`$ and $`(VI)`$.

### 4.2 Distances from MS-fitting

Using the whole sample of 41 subdwarfs, ‘shifted’ to $`[Fe/H]=0.7`$ (excluding the 2 stars with $`[Fe/H]>0.3`$), with magnitudes corrected for LK bias and assuming zero subdwarf reddening, our best-fit apparent distance modulus is $`(mM)_V=13.37\pm 0.03`$ from both the $`V/(BV)`$ and $`V/(VI)`$ fits. The quoted error includes:
i) photometry errors for the subdwarfs
ii) errors on the subdwarf magnitudes as a result of parallax errors, where $`\mathrm{\Delta }M_V=2.17(\mathrm{\Delta }\pi /\pi )`$
iii) errors on the subdwarf colours induced by errors on the metallicity calibration, where $`\mathrm{\Delta }[Fe/H]_{subdwarfs}=\pm 0.16`$ dex (the dominant error here is the dispersion in the Schuster & Nissen calibration from the Strömgren indices)
iv) error on the colour of the cluster main-line resulting from the error on the cluster metallicity determination, where $`\mathrm{\Delta }[Fe/H]_{cluster}=\pm 0.1`$ dex.

The best-fit to the cluster main-line is found by using weighted errors for the subdwarfs, and minimising $`\chi ^2`$. The fitting routine takes into account errors in both the $`x`$ and $`y`$ axes i.e. errors in both magnitude and colour are accounted for, as detailed above. Figure 4 shows the best fits to the recalibrated 47 Tuc main line, with error bars representing the errors quoted above.

## 5 Testing Our Assumptions

### 5.1 The Subdwarfs; Metallicity, LK Corrections and Reddening

In order to test the consistency of the metallicity-dependent colour shifts applied to the subdwarfs, we defined a subset of the sample with metallicities in the range $`0.9<[Fe/H]<0.5`$ (13 stars). The mean metallicity of this subset is $`[Fe/H]=0.64`$ and, since the dispersion on the metallicity calibration is of the order 0.16 dex, we performed fits to these stars without applying any metallicity corrections. The derived distance moduli are in agreement with those derived from the whole (shifted) sample, in both $`(BV)`$ and $`(VI)`$.

To check that we are making a correct assessment of the LK bias in the full sample, a subset was defined for which $`\mathrm{\Delta }\pi /\pi <4\%`$ (implying $`|\mathrm{\Delta }M_{LK}|<0.015`$) to which LK corrections were not applied (14 stars). Fits to these stars yield distance moduli in complete agreement with the full, LK corrected, sample, hence we are confident that the LK corrections are appropriate to the sample as a whole.

As a further consistency check, fits were made to a subset of the sample for which metallicities are in the range $`0.9<[Fe/H]<0.5`$ (with a mean of -0.65) and parallax errors are $`<8\%`$ (5 stars). The resultant distance moduli are again in agreement with those from the whole sample. As a result of these checks, there do not appear to be any systematic effects arising from the metallicity and LK corrections and so we assume an apparent distance modulus of $`(mM)_V=13.37`$ for the remainder of the analysis.

Table 2 lists the best fit distance moduli in $`V/(BV)`$ and $`V/(VI)`$ for the full sample and subsets described above, as follows:
1 - Full sample, LK corrected magnitudes, ‘shifted’ to $`[Fe/H]=0.7`$
2 - Subset with metallicities in the range $`0.9<[Fe/H]<0.5`$ (mean $`[Fe/H]=0.64`$), fitted without applying metallicity corrections
3 - Subset with parallax errors $`<4\%`$, no LK corrections applied
4 - Subset with metallicities in the range $`0.9<[Fe/H]<0.5`$ and parallax errors $`<8\%`$

All the above tests were made assuming zero reddening for the subdwarfs. However, if we apply reddenings derived from the $`H\beta `$ index to the stars for which this is available and use an average reddening of $`E(BV)=0.008`$ for the rest of the sample (see §2.4), distance moduli are reduced by $`0.03`$ mag in all the fits.

The referee expressed concern about the possibility of a metallicity bias in our subdwarf sample which may arise due to the underlying metallicity distribution of the parent population. Since the metallicity distribution of local subdwarfs is strongly skewed towards higher metallicities, this would cause the metallicity of individual subdwarfs to be underestimated and make MS-fitting distances appear too long. We took the underlying ‘true’ metallicity distribution to be represented by the combined samples of Schuster & Nissen (1988) and Schuster, Parrao & Contreras Martinez (1993), since most of our sample was drawn from these catalogues. There is a large peak in this distribution at $`[Fe/H]_{SN}0.2`$ due to disk stars, and another smaller peak at $`[Fe/H]_{SN}1.3`$ due to the halo population (see Schuster, Parrao & Contreras Martinez 1993, their Figure 1). To quantify the effect on our sample, we made Monte Carlo simulations of the metallicity distribution of the parent population, as described above, combined with random errors, generated assuming a Gaussian error distribution of width 0.16 dex (Schuster & Nissen 1989). Then, at the observed metallicity of each individual subdwarf in our sample, we considered all the stars within 0.16 dex of this value, and calculated the difference between the means of the ‘observed’ metallicities (after the Gaussian errors have been added) and the ‘true’ metallicities (from the initial distribution). The difference between these quantities provides an estimate of the likely bias in our sample. Offsets vary between 0.021 and 0.043 dex with a mean of 0.035 dex, in the sense that the ‘true’ metallicities are higher. Applying individual metallicity corrections to our subdwarfs and refitting the sample to the 47 Tuc main-line results in a distance modulus which is smaller by only 0.02 mag.

### 5.2 The Cluster; Reddening and Metallicity

Reddening for the cluster was taken to be $`E(BV)=0.04`$ in all our fits. Increasing or decreasing $`E(BV)`$ by 0.02 mag changes the apparent distance modulus, $`(mM)_V`$, by $`\pm 0.1`$ in the sense that larger assumed reddening produces a longer distance. Since reddening values for 47 Tuc available in the literature are not necessarily in agreement within their quoted errors and come from very disparate methods, we have no way of truly assessing the appropriate reddening to apply or of calculating the associated errors, in a statistical sense. Conservatively, we have chosen to adopt $`\pm 0.1`$ as the reddening-induced error on the apparent distance modulus, although this undoubtedly represents more than a $`1\sigma `$ error. Note, however, that this uncertainty of $`\pm 0.1`$ on the apparent distance modulus, $`(mM)_V`$, only induces an uncertainty on the true distance modulus, $`(mM)_0`$, of $`\pm 0.05`$.

Our final derived apparent distance modulus for 47 Tuc, including the uncertainties on cluster and subdwarf reddening in the total error budget, is: $`(mM)_V=13.37_{0.11}^{+0.10}`$, leading to a dereddened distance modulus of $`(mM)_0=13.25_{0.07}^{+0.06}`$.

As already discussed, the metallicities we are using for both the cluster and the subdwarfs are consistent with the CG97 scale and therefore we expect there to be no associated systematic errors. However, it should be borne in mind that there is an inherent uncertainty in any study of this kind, since there is always the implicit assumption that the cluster metallicity, generally obtained from giant stars, is the same as that which would be obtained from the cluster main sequence. Coupled with the still controversial zero-point for the absolute temperature scale of giant stars, it is possible that a systematic shift in the metallicity scale may become necessary in the future. Changing the metallicity scale of either the subdwarfs or the cluster, with respect to one another, would modify the distance moduli derived from our subdwarf sample by $`0.1`$ mag for each 0.1 dex change in metallicity, in the sense that decreasing the metallicity of the cluster would decrease the distance, whilst decreasing the metallicity of the subdwarfs would increase it. We note here that if we change the relative metallicities by more than $``$ 0.2 dex, the distance moduli we derive from the 2 colour indices are no longer consistent within their errors.

Another cause for concern may be the variation in C and N abundances which are known to exist in 47 Tuc. However, the study of Cannon et al. (1998), which measures abundance variations down onto the main sequence of 47 Tuc, indicates that these are unlikely to affect the broad-band colours used in MS-fitting studies (see their Figure 6).

## 6 Discussion

Employing our distance determination discussed in the previous section we then determined the age of the cluster. The luminosity of the turn-off was estimated by fitting a parabola to stars in the magnitude range $`17.3<V<18.0`$. This yielded a turn-off magnitude of $`V_{TO}=17.66\pm 0.1`$ which, coupled to our distance modulus and assuming $`[Fe/H]=0.7`$, provides an age of $`11.0\pm 1.4`$ Gyr when using the Salaris & Weiss (1998) isochrones (for $`[Fe/H]=0.7`$, $`Y=0.254`$, $`[\alpha /Fe]=0.4`$). The error bar on the age takes into account the error on the cluster distance and the error on the apparent magnitude of the turn off.

For direct comparison with previous MS-fitting work we followed Carretta et al. (2000) by fitting our whole subdwarf sample (LK, reddening and extinction corrected) to the $`V/(BV)`$ main-line of Hesser et al. (1987), using a cluster reddening of $`E(BV)=0.055`$. The best fit yielded an apparent distance modulus of $`(mM)_V=13.59\pm 0.03`$ (errors as in §4.2 only), which is in excellent agreement with the Carretta et al. (2000) result of $`13.57\pm 0.09`$. The reason for the lower distance modulus we have obtained in the previous section is due to both our preferred cluster reddening, and the recalibration of the 47 Tuc photometry. A reduction of $``$0.1 mag comes from the different cluster reddening, while the rest of the difference is due to the photometry recalibration, which makes the main-line redder, on average, by $`0.02`$ in $`(BV)`$ (see Figure 2 with the comparison of the main-lines).

To investigate whether our MS-fitting distance is still significantly different from that derived from white dwarf fitting, we determined the 47 Tuc distance modulus with our recalibrated cluster photometry and a reddening E(B-V)=$`0.055\pm 0.02`$, as used in Zoccali et al. (2001). We obtain $`(mM)_V=13.45\pm 0.10`$ which has to be compared with $`(mM)_V=13.27\pm 0.14`$ obtained from the white dwarf-fitting method. The two results are less discrepant than in the case of the Carretta et al. (2000) main sequence distance, especially if one takes into account the possibility of an additional systematic error of the order of 0.1 mag on the white dwarf distance, due to the uncertainty on the value of the mass and on the thickness of the hydrogen envelopes for the cluster white dwarfs (see the detailed discussion in Salaris et al. 2001).

Independent support for our main sequence distance determination comes from the use of the Red Clump (RC) as a distance indicator. The red horizontal branch of 47 Tuc is the counterpart of the RC in the solar neighbourhood discussed by Paczyinski & Stanek (1998), whose I-band absolute magnitude is very precisely determined by HIPPARCOS parallaxes as $`M_{I,RC}=0.23\pm `$ 0.03 (Stanek & Garnavich 1998). Girardi & Salaris (2001) have discussed in great depth the use of the RC as standard candle and provide evolutionary corrections to the absolute brightness of the local RC, which take into account the effect of the star formation history and age-metallicity relationship of the stellar population under scrutiny. In the case of a GC like 47 Tuc, the Girardi & Salaris (2001) method predicts a correction of only +0.03 to the absolute $`I`$-band brightness of the local RC. From the recalibrated photometry of Kaluzny et al. (1998) we obtain $`I_{RC}`$=13.18$`\pm `$0.02 which, together with $`M_{I,RC}=0.20\pm 0.03`$ appropriate for the 47 Tuc RC, provides a distance modulus of $`(mM)_{I,RC}=13.38\pm 0.04`$. Considering a reddening $`E(BV)=0.04\pm 0.02`$ and the extinction law by Cardelli et al. (1989), one gets a dereddened distance modulus from this method of $`(mM)_{0,RC}=13.31\pm 0.05`$, which agrees well with that obtained from the main sequence fits, $`(mM)_0=13.25_{0.07}^{+0.06}`$.

## 7 Summary

We have defined a sample of 50 local subdwarfs in the metallicity range $`1.0<[Fe/H]_{CG97}<0.3`$, which are suitable for main sequence fitting to the GC 47 Tuc. We have obtained new photometric data in B, V and I for 43 subdwarfs in the sample and use these the derive the 47 Tuc distance modulus in the $`V/(BV)`$ and $`V/(VI)`$ planes.

From a careful comparison with the 47 Tuc standards of Stetson (2000), we have found that the commonly used Hesser et al. (1987) main-line in $`V/(BV)`$ appears to be too blue by an average of 0.02 mag. This implies that any distance modulus derived via MS-fitting from the Hesser main-line would be too large by $`0.1`$. In order to perform MS-fitting in 2 colour indices ($`(BV)`$ and $`(VI)`$), we have derived main-lines from the photometry of Kaluzny et al. (1998), which we have recalibrated using the Stetson (2000) standards.

Theoretical isochrones are used to calculate the metallicity-dependent colour shifts required to move the subdwarfs in the CMD to match the metallicity of the cluster, and hence build up a template MS. However, we find that the particular choice of isochrones does not influence the magnitude of the derived colour shifts and so the method does not appear to be model dependent.

We have investigated the effects of metallicity scales, LK bias and reddening, for both the subdwarfs and the cluster, on the derived distance moduli. We find no appreciable errors arising from either the assumption of zero reddening for the subdwarfs or from our assessment of the LK bias in the sample. The largest single source of error is the uncertainty on the cluster reddening which propagates through to an error on the order of 0.1 mag on the distance modulus. Metallicities used for both the cluster and the subdwarfs are consistent with the CG97 scale and therefore there should be no associated systematic errors. However, any change in zero-point of the metallicity scale which altered the cluster or subdwarfs with respect to each other, would potentially alter the distance moduli by $`0.1`$ mag for every 0.1 dex change in the metallicity.

Our best-fit apparent distance modulus for 47 Tuc is $`(mM)_V=13.37_{0.11}^{+0.10}`$, with an assumed cluster reddening of $`E(BV)=0.04`$. Coupled with our assessment of the apparent magnitude of the turn-off ($`V_{TO}=17.66\pm 0.1`$), the implied age of the cluster is $`11\pm 1.4`$ Gyr. The dereddened distance modulus is $`(mM)_0=13.25_{0.07}^{+0.06}`$.

The apparent distance modulus we find for 47 Tuc is $`0.2`$ mag smaller than those derived in previous MS-fitting studies. This is due partly to our preferred cluster reddening and partly to the recalibration of the 47 Tuc photometry, which has made the main-line redder than that used by all previous studies, by an average of 0.02 mag in $`(BV)`$. Our MS-fitting distance is now plausibly consistent with that derived from white dwarf fitting.

Independent support for our MS-fitting distance is given by consideration of the Red Clump in the cluster, from which we derive a dereddened distance modulus of $`(mM)_{0,RC}=13.31\pm 0.05`$, which is in good agreement with that derived from MS-fitting.

We thank the anonymous referee for a thorough reading of the manuscript and for useful comments and suggestions. We also thank Anna Piersimoni and Giuseppe Bono for helpful discussions and Phil James for careful reading of the manuscript at various stages, which has helped to improve the clarity of this paper. SMP acknowledges financial support from PPARC. SMP and MS are Guest Users of the Canadian Astronomy Data Center, which is operated by the Dominion Astrophysical Observatory for the National Research Council of Canada’s Herzberg Institute of Astrophysics. This research has made use of the SIMBAD database, operated at CDS, Strasbourg, France.


format: text

text:
# Efficiency of Mesoscopic Detectors

\[

## Abstract

We consider a mesoscopic measuring device whose conductance is sensitive to the state of a two-level system. The detector is described with the help of its scattering matrix. Its elements can be used to calculate the relaxation and decoherence time of the system, and determine the characteristic time for a reliable measurement. We derive conditions needed for an efficient ratio of decoherence and measurement time. To illustrate the theory we discuss the distribution function of the efficiency of an ensemble of open chaotic cavities.

PACS numbers: 03.65.Ta, 05.45.-a, 73.23.-b, 03.67.Lx

\]

Mesoscopic physics is evolving toward a stage where the understanding of the measurement process becomes of increasing importance. Of interest are detectors which allow a fast determination of the state of the system but at the same time leave the coherence of the measured system as unaffected as possible. These are conflicting requirements: For instance a tunnel contact is an efficient but slow detector. Therefore, the question arises whether it is possible to develop detectors which are both fast and efficient. To answer this question we investigate mesoscopic multichannel conductors and analyze their speed and efficiency. The efficiency of a detector is determined by the ratio of the measurement time and the decoherence time of the measured system.

The effect of a detector on a phase coherent mesoscopic system has been elegantly demonstrated in recent experiments . Theoretical discussions addressed different aspects of weak measurement in mesoscopic systems: the relation to scattering theory  and screening , the measurement time and interactions  and the relation between detector noise and decoherence rate . The time evolution of system and detector has been studied using a master equation approach . Refined calculations consider the conditional evolution of the system depending on the outcome of the measurement . Tunnel contacts and single electron transistors have been identified as candidates for efficient measurement devices .

Both the measurement time and the decoherence rate depend on the scattering matrix of the conductor (detector). Consequently both of these quantities depend on the sample specific geometry and impurity distribution of the detector. It is therefore necessary to investigate the distribution of the quantities of interest (measurement time, decoherence rate and efficiency) of ensembles of macroscopically identical detectors. Here we focus on ballistic detectors for which ensemble members differ only in their geometry.

The model we consider is shown in Fig. 1. It consists of a double dot (DD) that plays the role of the system. It is an effective two-level system: The topmost electron in the DD can either occupy the upper or the lower dot. The detector is a mesoscopic two-terminal conductor (MC): Its conductance is sensitive to the charge on the upper dot. The coupling between system and detector is described by a set of capacitances $`C_1,C_2,C_i`$ that link the charge $`Q`$ on the MC to the charges on the dots $`Q_1`$ and $`Q_1`$ (we abbreviate $`C^1=C_1^1+C_2^1+C_i^1`$).

The interaction of DD and MC can be investigated from two different viewpoints. From the system side we are interested in the question of how fast a pure state prepared in the two-level system decays into a statistical mixture. We distinguish the thermal relaxation to an equilibrium distribution (described by a rate $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{rel}`$) and the often much faster decoherence of superpositions of states in the upper and lower dot (described by a rate $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{dec}`$). This decoherence depends on the temperature $`kT`$ as well as on the potential difference $`eV`$ applied at the MC. From the detector side we may ask how long it takes to measure the state of the two-level system (described by a rate $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_m`$). The decoherence rate at zero temperature $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_v`$ is intimately related to the measurement rate $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_m`$ and satisfies the inequality $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_v\mathrm{\Gamma }_m`$ .

We are interested in the conditions under which a MC turns out to be an efficient detector, i.e. fulfills $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_v\mathrm{\Gamma }_m`$. In order to be able to describe a wide class of detectors we represent the MC by a scattering matrix $`s_{\alpha \beta }`$ that connects in- and outgoing states ($`\alpha ,\beta `$ label left and right reservoir). This enables us to treat multi-channel MCs with arbitrary transmission probabilities $`T_n`$ and to include screening effects between different channels. On the other hand a minimum effort is put into the description of the coupling between system and detector. We use a standard master equation (Bloch-Redfield approach ) in lowest order perturbation theory to study the evolution of the reduced density matrix of the DD. On this level of approximation the dynamics of the DD is influenced by the charge fluctuation spectrum $`S_{QQ}`$ of the MC. A crucial role is therefore attributed to the Wigner-Smith time delay matrix ($`\beta \gamma `$ label the reservoirs)

$$N_{\beta \gamma }=\frac{1}{2\pi i}\underset{\alpha }{}s_{\beta \alpha }^{}\frac{ds_{\gamma \alpha }}{dE}.$$
(1)
that characterizes fully the low-frequency charge fluctuations . We introduce the following four constants ($`e`$ denotes the electron charge)

$$\begin{array}{cc}D=e^2\text{Tr}N,& C_\mu ^1=C^1+D^1,\\ & \\ R_q=\frac{1}{2}\frac{\left(\text{Tr}N^2\right)}{\left(\text{Tr}N\right)^2},& R_v=\frac{\left(\text{Tr}N_{12}N_{21}\right)}{\left(\text{Tr}N\right)^2}.\end{array}$$
(2)
These constants have been applied in many different contexts such as ac-transport and noise . $`D`$ corresponds to the density of states at Fermi energy in the scattering region, $`C_\mu `$ is an effective electrochemical capacitance that characterizes the strength of interaction, $`R_q`$ expresses the equilibrium contribution to the charge fluctuation spectrum $`S_{QQ}`$, and $`R_v`$ the non-equilibrium contribution.

The two-level system is conventionally represented by the Hamiltonian $`\widehat{H}_{DD}=\frac{ϵ}{2}\widehat{\sigma }_z+\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }}{2}\widehat{\sigma }_x`$ where $`\widehat{\sigma }_i`$ denote Pauli matrices. The energy difference between upper and lower dot is $`ϵ`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ accounts for tunneling between the dots. The full level splitting is thus $`\mathrm{\Omega }=\sqrt{ϵ^2+\mathrm{\Delta }^2}`$.

For the relaxation and decoherence rate in the DD we find the following expressions:

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \mathrm{\Gamma }_{rel}=& 2\pi \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }^2}{\mathrm{\Omega }^2}\left(\frac{C_\mu }{C_i}\right)^2R_q\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{2}\mathrm{coth}\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{2kT},\hfill \end{array}$$
(3)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \mathrm{\Gamma }_{dec}=& 2\pi \frac{ϵ^2}{\mathrm{\Omega }^2}\left(\frac{C_\mu }{C_i}\right)^2\left(R_qkT+R_ve|V|\right)+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{rel}/2.\hfill \end{array}$$
(4)
Eq. (3,4) are the central result of this paper. It has formally the same appearance as the rates given in . Its big virtue lies in the fact that the structure of the detector is condensed into the four parameters given in (2). An analysis of its properties reduces hence to a discussion of a few parameters. We postpone this discussion and explain first the derivation of Eqs. (3,4) in order to clarify the approximations made.

The Coulomb energy of our model can be found by circuit analysis

$$\widehat{H}_C=\frac{(\widehat{Q}_1\overline{Q}_0)^2}{2C_i}+\frac{\widehat{Q}_1\widehat{Q}}{C_i}+\frac{\widehat{Q}^2}{2C}.$$
(5)
Its first term contributes to the level splitting of the DD ($`\overline{Q}_0`$ is a background charge depending on the applied voltage $`(V_L+V_R)/2`$). The charging energy $`e^2/2C_i`$ must be large compared to $`kT,e|V|`$ to allow us to consider only two levels of the DD. The second term $`\widehat{Q}_1\widehat{Q}/C_i`$ couples system and detector. In the derivation of the master equation for the reduced density matrix of the system we assume weak coupling and treat this term perturbatively. We apply a Markov approximation which is strictly speaking only valid at long time scales (compared to the correlation time of the detector) and therefore get pure exponential relaxation and decoherence. The third term influences the fluctuation spectrum of the charge operator $`\widehat{Q}`$. In contrast to earlier work (with the exception of Ref. ) we do not completely disregard this term, but include it on the level of RPA. This Gaussian approximation restricts us to geometries, where Coulomb blockade effects are weak.

We will now discuss the meaning of the parameters given in Eq. (2) which describe the relation between detector geometry and relaxation or decoherence on the DD.

The parameter $`R_q`$ lies always in the range $`1/2>R_q>1/2N`$ where $`N`$ is the dimension of the scattering matrix. This observation indicates already that the relaxation and decoherence rates $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{rel},\mathrm{\Gamma }_{dec}`$ do not simply scale with the number of channels through the system. It is important to note that the multichannel result for the relaxation and decoherence rates cannot be obtained as a sum of rates due to each channel. For a large number $`N`$ of open channels $`R_q`$ behaves as $`\mathrm{ln}(N)/N`$ whereas the electrochemical capacitance $`C_\mu C`$ tends to a constant. The constant $`R_v`$ decreases even stronger than $`R_q`$ like $`1/N`$. We find therefore the somewhat surprising result that relaxation and decoherence decrease in the large channel limit. This result is a consequence of screening in the MC which reduces the charge fluctuations with increasing channel number $`N`$.

It is interesting to note that the charge response $`D\tau _n`$ can be expressed entirely by the dwell times $`\tau _n`$ which are eigenvalues of the matrix (1). This is also the case for the thermal relaxation parameter $`R_q\tau _n^2/(\tau _n)^2`$. For the thermal charge fluctuations it is unimportant whether a scattering state is connected to the left or the right reservoir. This is reflected by the fact that the trace in the definition of $`R_q`$ (see (2)) has to be taken over the entire matrix $`N`$.

On the contrary, $`R_v`$ does not show this symmetry. An applied voltage distinguishes the two reservoirs from one another. Thus, the trace in $`R_v`$ (see (2)) cannot be expressed by dwell times only. To clarify the origin of $`R_v`$ we apply a basis transformation in each reservoir and divide the scattering matrix in $`2\times 2`$ blocks of the form

$$s^{(n)}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}i\sqrt{R_n}e^{i(\varphi _n+\varphi _{A,n})}& \sqrt{T_n}e^{i(\varphi _n\varphi _{B,n})}\\ \sqrt{T_n}e^{i(\varphi _n+\varphi _{B,n})}& i\sqrt{R_n}e^{i(\varphi _n\varphi _{A,n})}\end{array}\right).$$
(6)
Each block is defined by its transmission probability $`T_n=1R_n`$ and three scattering phases $`\varphi _n`$,$`\varphi _{A,n}`$,$`\varphi _{B,n}`$. Using the definition of $`R_v`$ (Eq. (2) we arrive at

$$R_v=\frac{_n\left(\frac{1}{4T_nR_n}\left(\frac{dT_n}{dE}\right)^2+T_nR_n\left(\frac{d\varphi _{A,n}}{dE}+\frac{d\varphi _{B,n}}{dE}\right)^2\right)}{\left(_n\frac{d\varphi _n}{dE}\right)^2}.$$
(7)
Eq. (7) can be connected to earlier results  in the infinite capacitance limit where $`C_\mu ^2R_v`$ in Eq. (4) can be replaced by $`D_\mu ^2R_v`$. Eq. (7) has an interesting physical interpretation that gets a particularly appealing form (7) in the scattering formalism used here: The energy derivatives $`dT_n/dE`$ express the sensitivity of the conductance to a potential variation $`\mathrm{\Delta }U`$ on the MC ($`d/dE=/(eU)`$). If this sensitivity is high, the MC is a fast measuring device to determine the position of the electron on the DD. We get a large $`R_v`$ and therefore a fast decoherence rate due to the applied voltage $`|V|`$. The decoherence rate is thus coupled to the speed of the measurement process.

The measurement is described by a measurement time  $`\tau _m=4S_{II}/(\mathrm{\Delta }I)^2`$ which is needed for a signal to noise ratio of 1. Here $`S_{II}`$ denotes the low frequency shot noise spectrum and $`\mathrm{\Delta }I=I_1I_2`$ is the difference of current flowing through the MC depending on the state of the two-level system. This difference is evaluated by use of the Landauer formula

$$\mathrm{\Delta }I=\mathrm{\Delta }G|V|=\frac{e^2}{2\pi }|V|\frac{dT_n}{dE}(e\mathrm{\Delta }U)$$
(8)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }G`$ is the change of conductance between the two states of the double dot and $`\mathrm{\Delta }U=eC_\mu /D(C_iC_\mu )`$ the potential change on the MC. The shot noise is as usual $`S_{II}=e|V|(e^2/2\pi )R_nT_n`$. Using weak coupling $`C_1,C_2C_i`$ one gets for the inverse measurement time

$$\tau _m^1=\mathrm{\Gamma }_m=2\pi \left(\frac{C_\mu }{C_i}\right)^2R_me|V|$$
(9)
with the dimensionless constant

$$R_m=\frac{1}{4}\frac{\left(\frac{dT_n}{dE}\right)^2}{\left(\frac{d\varphi _n}{dE}\right)^2\left(R_nT_n\right)}.$$
(10)
It is not difficult to show that $`R_mR_v`$  which leads to an important inequality between measurement rate and decoherence rate $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_m\mathrm{\Gamma }_{dec}`$. The measurement is always slower than the decoherence, the decay of the off-diagonal elements of the reduced density matrix of the two-level system.

Which conditions are needed to get the equality $`\tau _m=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{dec}^1`$? The tunneling between the two double dots during the measurement must be negligible, $`\mathrm{\Delta }0`$, and the temperature must be much smaller than the applied voltage $`kTe|V|`$. More interesting are three constraints imposed by the scattering matrix (let the MC be defined by an equilibrium electrostatic potential V(x,y,z); let the scattering states be extended in the z-direction and confined in the xy-plane):

$``$ In order to have $`d\varphi _{B,n}/dE=0`$ in Eq. (7) the scattering Hamiltonian must obey time-reversal symmetry.

$``$ Furthermore, the derivatives $`d\varphi _{A,n}/dE`$ have to vanish. This can be the case accidentally but is always fulfilled for symmetric detectors that obey an inversion symmetry $`V(x,y,z)=V(x,y,z)`$. This condition is well known, see for instance . A quantum-limited measurement can only be reached by a spacially symmetric detector. Otherwise part of the information about the state of the DD is transferred to the phase of the scattered electrons. This phase does not influence a conductance measurement.

$``$ In the multichannel case $`N>1`$ another condition is needed! The equality $`R_m=R_v`$ then implies that

$$\frac{dT_n/dE}{R_nT_n}=C(E).$$
(11)
The function $`C(E)>0`$ does not depend on the index $`n`$! This restriction is of statistical origin: The total conductance of the detector is a sum of one channel conductances that have independent uncertainties. Under condition (11) the statistical uncertainty of their sum is minimized. Eq. (11) can be interpreted as differential equations for the transmission probabilities $`T_n`$. Their solutions are all of the form $`T_n=(1+e^{\left(F(E)F(E_n)\right)})^1`$ with $`dF/dE=C`$ (The function $`F`$ is therefore monotonously increasing). The only difference allowed between the different probabilities $`T_n`$ is the offset energy $`E_n`$.

The simplest case is that of a tunnel contact: In this case the probabilities $`T_n`$ are dominated by the action in the forbidden region and Eqs. (11) are independent of the channel number. Thus a tunnel barrier is an efficient detector but has the drawback that its measurement time is long.

Detectors with shorter measurement times can be achieved in structures with higher transparencies. For such structures the condition Eq. (11) is now important. Transmission probabilities of the type (11) occur automatically if the scattering problem is separable due to a potential of shape

$$\text{V(x,y,z) = Z(z) + W(x,y)}.$$
(12)
This occurs e.g. for the case $`F=2\pi E/\omega _z`$ with a symmetric harmonic scattering potential $`Z(z)=V_0m\omega _z^2z^2/2`$.

We demonstrate the importance of our findings with a generic model that violates condition (12). This condition states that a geometry with a separable potential $`V(x,y,z)=Z(z)+Y(x,y)`$ is favorable to obtain an efficient detector in the case of more than one open channel. It is clear that a chaotic potential violates condition (12) by definition. We expect therefore that chaos reduces drastically the efficiency $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_m/\mathrm{\Gamma }_v=R_m/R_v`$ of a detector with two open channels, but has little impact on a detector with only one open channel.

To check this expectation we use a common model of a chaotic cavity coupled to a left lead with $`N_1`$ channels and a right lead with $`N_2`$ channels: it can be described by a scattering matrix belonging to the circular ensemble of random matrix theory . The distribution of the density of states matrix elements (1) is also known . Using these distributions it is straight forward to obtain the probability distribution of the measurement efficiency $`R_m/R_v`$

$$\begin{array}{c}P(R_m/R_v)=\\ \\ 𝑑s𝑑N_E\delta (R_m/R_vR_m(s,N_E)/R_v(s,N_E)).\end{array}$$
(13)
In Eq. (13) $`ds`$ is a measure for the circular ensemble of scattering matrices and $`dN_E`$ a measure for the symmetrized density of states matrix $`N_E=s^{1/2}ds/dEs^{1/2}/2\pi i`$. It turns out that the ratio $`R_m/R_v`$ depends only on the eigenvectors of $`N_E`$ and the scattering matrix, but not on the eigenvalues of $`N_E`$, the inverse dwell times $`\tau _n^1`$. The distribution of $`R_m/R_v`$ is therefore the same in the canonical ($`CD`$) and grand-canonical ensemble ($`CD`$). Their difference is explained in . Fig. 2 shows the distribution of the measurement efficiency $`R_m/R_v`$ in the orthogonal (time-reversal symmetry) and unitary ensemble (broken time-reversal symmetry). The distributions were obtained by numerical integration. The distribution for $`N_1=N_2=1`$ in the unitary ensemble can also be calculated analytically to be $`P(R_m/R_v)=(R_m/R_v(1R_m/R_v))^{1/2}`$. Surprisingly, despite the absence of inversion symmetry a chaotic dot with open single channel contacts is with high probability an efficient detector! It is clearly visible that chaos reduces strongly the efficiency of the measurement device as soon as more than one channel contributes to the electric transport. The reduction due to a broken time-reversal symmetry is much less pronounced.

In this work we have analyzed coherent multichannel mesoscopic conductors with the aim to find both fast and efficient detectors. We find a new statistical condition necessary to carry out a quantum-limited measurement. This condition relates sensitivities and shot noises of different conductance channels. It leads us to a class of detectors (defined by separable potentials) that are both fast and efficient. We have assumed that a change in the state of the system causes only a small change in the potential landscape of the detector. Only under this condition is it possible to describe the detector response with the help of small differential changes of the scattering matrix and linear screening. We leave it as a future challenging problem to develop a theory of phase-coherent, non-linear mesoscopic detectors.

This work was supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation.