text:
# Persistent Currents in Carbon Nanotubes

## 1 Introduction

There is a considerable research activity to explain physical properties of single-wall and multi-wall carbon nanotubes. Their remarkable magnetic and electrical properties stem from the unusual electronic structure of the graphene sheets - the quasi-2D material from which they are made. The influence of magnetic field on transport properties of carbon nanotubes has been explored, both in theory  and in experiment . In our paper we consider the influence of the magnetic field on persistent currents and structural properties of these materials induced by their topology. The strong dependence of the band structure on the magnetic field suggests large orbital magnetic response. Indeed, large magnetic susceptibilities were calculated and experimentally observed  for magnetic fields both perpendicular and parallel to the tube axis. These results suggest the existence of persistent currents.
In a nanotube the component of the momentum along the circumference of the tube is quantized owing to the periodic boundary conditions. This raises the possibility of inducing persistent currents along the circumference of the nanotube by a static magnetic field applied parallel to the tube axis. They arise due to Aharonov-Bohm effect. Such currents, but in toroidal nanotubes, have been recently discussed theoretically .
Persistent currents in nanotubes bear some resemblance with those in metallic and semiconducting rings or cylinders. It is well known that persistent currents in mesoscopic cylinders depend strongly on the correlation of currents from different channels  and on the shape of Fermi surface . The magnitude of the currents increases with increasing curvature of the Fermi surface. The current is strongest for the Fermi surface having large flat regions perpendicular to the direction in which the magnetic field changes the wave vector $`𝐤`$.
The shape of the Fermi contour expected for a 2D hexagonal lattice depends strongly on the band filling. For an undoped carbon nanotube $`E_F=0`$ and the Fermi surface reduces to two isolated Fermi points instead of a whole contour. Electron or hole doping shifts the Fermi energy upwards or downwards. As a result, the shape of the Fermi surface changes and this influences the persistent currents. A substantial Fermi level shift of (more or less) 1eV has been recently obtained  by the means of an electrochemical gating.
In the present paper we study peristent currents induced by a static magnetic field parallel to the axis of a single wall carbon nanotube. We investigate the magnitude and shape of the current as as well as their dependence on the hole doping. In particular we show that for zigzag nanotubes, for certain values of the hole doping, we can obtain a large enhancement of the persistent current. Finally, we briefly discuss the possibility of creating self-sustaining currents in multiwall nanotubes.

## 2 The structure of a nanotube

The nanotube is a rolled up strip of a graphene sheet. The rolling vector is $`𝐋_t=m_1𝐓_1+m_2𝐓_2`$ (the $`t`$ index stands for transverse direction), where $`𝐓_1`$ and $`𝐓_2`$ form the standard basis vectors of the graphene lattice . The vector of the length of the nanotube is $`𝐋_l=p_1𝐓_1+p_2𝐓_2`$ (the $`l`$ index stands for longitudinal direction). The four integers $`(m_1,m_2)\times (p_1,p_2)`$ therefore define the geometry of the tube. The number of lattice nodes of the nanotube is $`N=m_1p_2m_2p_1.`$ Note that $`𝐋_t`$ and $`𝐋_l`$ do not have to be orthogonal (the nanotube is then twisted ) but for simplicity we always take in our paper the twist angle to be 0, i.e. $`m_1,m_2,p_1,p_2`$ such that they are orthogonal.
The wave vector $`𝐤=(k_x,k_y)`$ of an electron on a surface of a 2D cylindrical tube obeys two boundary conditions. The first, periodic along the circumference of the nanotube, is

$$𝐤𝐋_t=k_t|𝐋_t|=2\pi l_t^{},$$
(1)
where, in the absence of magnetic field, $`l_t^{}`$ is an integer. The second boundary condition, which results in vanishing of the sinusoidal wave function at the ends of the nanotube, is

$$𝐤𝐋_l=k_l|𝐋_l|=\pi l_l,$$
(2)
where $`l_l`$ is an arbitrary integer. The first Brillouin zone of the whole graphene sheet is a hexagone whose vertices are $`(\pm \frac{2\pi }{3\sqrt{3}},\pm \frac{2\pi }{3})`$ and $`(0,\pm \frac{4\pi }{3})`$. The wave functions with $`l_l`$ and $`l_l`$ are linearly dependent and therefore the first Brillouin zone of the nanotube reduces to a half of the original hexagone. In our choice $`l_l`$ takes only positive values.

The energy of the $`𝐤`$-th state of the hexagonal lattice, in the tight binding approximation, is well known  to be

$$E_𝐤=\pm \gamma \sqrt{1+4\mathrm{cos}^2\frac{\sqrt{3}}{2}k_x+4\mathrm{cos}\frac{\sqrt{3}}{2}k_x\frac{3}{2}k_y},$$
(3)
where $`\gamma `$ is the resonance integral for the nearest neighbour interaction (we take $`\gamma =3.033eV,`$ typical for the carbon hexagonal lattice ). The energy may change from $`3\gamma `$ to $`3\gamma `$. At the half-filling, when half of the possible states are occupied, the Fermi level is at $`E_F=0`$ and the Fermi surface reduces to isolated points – vertices of the original hexagone. Only two of them, e.g. $`K_1=(\frac{2\pi }{3\sqrt{3}},\frac{2\pi }{3})`$ and $`K_2=(\frac{2\pi }{3\sqrt{3}},\frac{2\pi }{3})`$, are linearly independent and therefore define the whole Fermi surface of the nanotube at $`E_F=0`$. When less than a half of the states are occupied (the nanotube is hole-doped), the Fermi level lowers and becomes a set of curves (drawn as cotinuous bold lines in Fig. 2–4a, and Fig. 6a). At $`E_F=\gamma `$ the Fermi surface is a half-hexagone whose vertices are at the centre of edges of the first Brillouin zone (cf. Fig. 3a). In this case the number of occupied states $`N_e`$ is equal to 3/4 of the half-filling, i.e. $`N_e=\frac{3}{4}N`$.

After applying the magnetic field along the axis of the nanotube, all the wavefunctions acquire the Aharonov-Bohm phase factor $`e^{i2\pi \varphi /\varphi _0}`$, where $`\varphi `$ is the magnetic flux through the nanotube and $`\varphi _0=\frac{hc}{e}`$ is the flux quantum. This phase factor is equivalent to a shift in the momentum quantum number $`l_t^{}`$

$$l_t^{}=l_t+\frac{\varphi }{\varphi _0},$$
(4)
where $`l_t`$ is an arbitrary integer. The magnetic field induces persistent current along the transverse direction of the nanotube

$$I_𝐤(\varphi )=c\frac{E_𝐤}{\varphi }.$$
(5)
Summing over all momentum states within the first Brillouin zone and below the Fermi level, we obtain the overall current, induced by the magnetic flux.

$$I(\varphi )=\underset{𝐤_{occupied}}{}I_𝐤(\varphi ).$$
(6)
When all the shifted states remain within the Brillouin zone and below the Fermi level, the current is diamagnetic. If, due to the shift induced by $`\varphi `$, some states leave the Brillouin zone or cross the Fermi level, and others enter it or cross the Fermi level in the opposite direction, we witness a paramagnetic jump of the current . This total current depends also on the temperature which suppresses its amplitude , but for simplicity we assume here that $`T=0`$.

## 3 Persistent currents in zigzag nanotubes

We have performed numerical calculations for nanotubes of various geometries. First we discuss the case of a $`(14,0)\times (100,200)`$ nanotube. The Brillouin zone, at zero magnetic field, for this nanotube is shown in Fig. 1a. It is equivalent to the upper (or lower) half of the original Brillouin zone of the graphene sheet .

In the half filling case ($`E_F=0`$) there is one conduction electron per each lattice node i.e. $`N_e=N`$. (in our case $`N=2800`$). This nanotube is not metallic and there are no allowed momentum states in any of the Fermi points (the condition for metallicity of the tube is $`(m_1m_2)|_{mod\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}3}}=0`$). The persistent current in units of $`I_0=\frac{\gamma c}{\varphi _0}=1.2910^4`$ A, induced by the magnetic field is plotted in Fig. 1b. The current is periodic with period $`\varphi _0`$ and diamagnetic at small $`\varphi `$.

As the ref. shows, the Fermi energy can be lowered by binding some of the electrons (hole doping) and then $`N_e<N`$. In the following we assume that the doping lowers the number of electrons to a constant $`N_e`$, which does not depend on $`\varphi `$. Therefore, as the distribution of the momentum states in the Brillouin zone changes with $`\varphi `$, the value of $`E_F`$ must be adjusted to keep $`N_e`$ independent of $`\varphi `$. This is not the case for $`E_F=0`$, where the number of states in the first Brillouin zone is constant ($`N_e=N`$) and does not depend on $`\varphi `$.

The Fig. 2a shows the reciprocal lattice and the Fermi contour (bold line) for $`N_e=2744`$ at $`\varphi =0`$. It corresponds to the Fermi energy shift of approximately $`1eV`$, (or $`\gamma /3`$) which has been obtained experimentally . The change of Fermi energy with $`\varphi /\varphi _0`$ is shown in the Fig. 2b. We see that the oscillations are around $`\gamma /3`$ and have quite a substantial amplitude of approximately 0.07$`\gamma `$. The induced persistent current Fig. 2c has now four times higher amplitude and a different shape.

The most favourable situation for the enhancement of the current is when the Fermi level is at the value of $`\gamma `$. It corresponds to the number of electrons $`N_e=\frac{3}{4}N`$. The Fermi surface then becomes the smaller half-hexagon in the first Brillouin zone (cf Fig. 3a), with the momentum lines parallel to its vertical edges. The oscillations of the Fermi level (shown on Fig. 3b) are three orders of magnitude smaller compared to the previous case of $`N_e=2744`$. At $`\varphi =0`$, a whole momentum line crosses the Fermi surface with the change of $`\varphi `$, which results in a large paramagnetic jump of the current (Fig. 3c).

The current’s amplitude is 25-30 times higher compared with the current at the half-filling. This is the largest persistent current possible to obtain in this nanotube. By further shifting the Fermi level downwards, the Fermi surface becomes curved and again the amplitude of the current gradually decreases.

The amplitude of persistent currents, at the most favourable value of $`3/4`$ of half-filling, depends on the length and width of the tube. It is proportional to its length and decreases with its width. The reason for this is that the longer the tube is, the more dense are the states in the longitudinal direction, therefore, when a line of them crosses the Fermi surface, the effect is proportionally greater. On the other hand, the wider the tube is, the smaller are individual currents:

$$I_𝐤=c\frac{E_𝐤}{\varphi }=c\frac{E_𝐤}{k_t}\frac{2\pi }{\varphi _0|𝐋_t|}.$$
(7)
Let us notice also what happens if the $`m_1`$ parameter of the nanotube (the one which determines its diameter) changes. If $`m_1`$ is even, as in the previously discussed case, there is an even number of $`k_t=const`$ state lines inside the Fermi contour for $`N_e=\frac{3}{4}N`$ (as in Fig. 3a) and the paramagnetic jump of the current (Fig. 3c) occurs at integer values of $`\varphi /\varphi _0`$. If $`m_1`$ is odd, the number of $`k_t=const`$ state lines inside the Fermi contour is odd and the paramagnetic jump of the current occurs at half-integer values of $`\varphi /\varphi _0`$. We investigated such a situation and the result for a $`(15,0)\times (100,200)`$ nanotube is illustrated in Fig. 4. Again a strongly enhanced current is obtained, but this time it is diamagnetic at small $`\varphi `$. This behaviour of the current bears a strong resemblance to what happens in a one-dimensional metallic ring: the currents like the one in Fig. 3c (“even” nanotube) occur if the number of electrons in the ring is even and the case from the Fig. 4c (“odd” nanotube) takes place for an odd number of electrons . This analogy arises from the equivalent positions of the Fermi level with respect to the last occupied state (line of states) in these two systems.

## 4 Persistent currents in armchair nanotubes

At the half filling, the principal difference between nanotubes of different chiralities is whether they are metallic or semi-conducting. We know that if the nanotube parameters obey the relation $`(m_1m_2)|_{mod\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}3}}=0`$, the tube is metallic, otherwise it is semiconducting. This criterion follows from the specific structure of the Brillouin zone at half-filling, and is not valid for $`E_F0`$. At lower, or higher, band filling all the nanotubes are more likely to be metallic because when the Fermi points become lines, the probability that some states lie on them increases.

The important feature is the shape of the tube’s momentum spectrum. The chirality of the tube varies from $`(m,0)`$ for zigzag nanotubes (where the momentum lines are parallel to the sides of the smaller, $`E_F=\gamma `$ hexagon) to $`(m,m)`$ for armchair nanotubes (where they are parallel to one of the sides of the Brillouin zone). We now take the case of a $`(9,9)\times (150,150)`$ nanotube which is shown in Fig. 5. Its length and width are similar to the $`(14,0)\times (100,200)`$ tube and the number of electrons in the half filling case is $`N_e=N=2700`$. The momentum lines are parallel to the sides of the Brillouin zone and the resulting current (Fig. 5b) has amplitude of the order of $`2I_0`$.
The current in this case is much smaller compared to the similar distribution of $`k`$-states within the allowed region in the Fig. 3a. The reason for the attenuation of the current in this case is that the individual currents (7) corresponding to the states at the edge of the Brillouin zone are much smaller than the currents carried by the states at the edge of the Fermi surface. This can be seen by observing the equienergy lines at these edges (Fig. 3a and 5a).

Decreasing the number of electrons or lowering the Fermi level does not enhance the persistent currents in this case. The reason for that is that the momentum lines $`k_t=const`$ are not parallel to any fragment of the Fermi surface. An example of such a situation is shown in Fig. 6, where where $`N_e=\frac{3}{4}N`$. Both the attenuation and the oscillations of the current, as compared to the half filling case, are caused by the lack of correlation between the states which now travel across the Fermi surface separately.
In real systems, the temperature $`T>0`$ would smooth down the oscillations shown in Fig. 6c and the resulting current would be very small.

## 5 Conclusions

The presence of quantized, delocalized electron states in carbon nanotubes should result in persistent currents. In carbon nanotubes, which are typically almost free of defects, these currents should be substantial and can change with doping. We have investigated the changes of the shape of the Fermi surface with the hole doping and discussed the respective changes of persistent currents in zigzag as well as in armchair nanotubes.
The currents are calculated under the assumption that the number of electrons is constant in the nanotube. They can be paramagnetic or diamagnetic depending on the position of states in the first Brillouin zone and the shape of the Fermi surface. We have shown that the largest currents can be obtained if the Fermi energy is lowered from $`E_F=0`$ (half filling case) to $`E_F1\gamma `$ ($`N_e=\frac{3}{4}N`$) for zigzag nanotubes. The Fermi surface changes then from two separate points to a flat contour and the induced persistent currents increase their amplitude 25-35 times. For chiral nanotubes such that $`m_2<<m_1`$ the enhancement of the persistent current at $`E_F=\gamma `$ can also be large.
In armchair nanotubes the situation is different, namely with hole doping the amplitude the peristent current decreases because the individual currents become less correlated.

The large amplitude of the obtained currents raises the possibility of obtaining self sustaining currents which produce the magnetic flux capable to maintain themselves even in absence of external magnetic field . However, spontaneous flux in single wall nanotubes will be very small – $`\varphi /\varphi _010^3`$ only. To discuss the problem of self-sustaining currents multiwall nanotubes are more suitable. This problem will be discussed in a forthcoming paper. Below we will only briefly mention various possible cases.
In the case of multi-wall nanotubes, where many tubes are arranged in a coaxial fashion, the currents produced by all tube layers should superpose. However, the electrical properties of individual tubes have been shown to vary strongly from tube to tube . First, let us assume that all the tubes have the same Fermi energy $`E_F=\gamma `$. The most favourable case is when all (or a majority of) the tubes are of the zigzag type discussed in the section 3.
If all tubes have the same parity (even or odd) the amplitude of the total current is greatest – it can be 10-50 times larger than in a single-wall nanotube. This current is paramagnetic for even and diamagnetic for odd $`m_1`$ for small values of $`\varphi /\varphi _0`$. In such situation there is a large probability of obtaining self-sustaining currents.
When tubes belonging to the multiwall nanotube have different chiralities, the total current will be smaller due to the cancellation between currents from different tubes. However, the total current will not average to zero, and the net paramagnetic current with period halving will be obtained. The least favourable case is when none of the tubes are of the zigzag type. The cancellation is then substantial and we obtain only a very small net current.
It seems that these novel and unusual properties of carbon nanotubes may have promising applications in areas such as the magnetoelectronics, e.g. in magnetic sensors.

Work supported by KBN grant Nr 5PO3503320.


format: text

text:
# Untitled Document

hep-th/0205043

Correspondence Principle in a PP-wave Background

Miao Li

Institute of Theoretical Physics

Academia Sinica

Beijing 100080

and

Department of Physics

National Taiwan University

Taipei 106, Taiwan

mli@phys.ntu.edu.tw

We discuss the correspondence point between a string state and a black hole, in a pp-wave background, and find that the answer is considerably different from that in a flat spacetime background.

April 2002

A considerable interest in pp-wave backgrounds has been raised by the recent work , which focuses on the correspondence between string theory in such backgrounds and field theories, which was motivated partially by earlier works  as well as the observation that the string worldsheet theory is exactly soluble in the light-cone gauge . It is practically impossible to cite all relevant references in this letter-type paper, so we refer the interested reader to a recent paper  for a less than complete list.

We are interested in this work the correspondence point where a string state turns into a black hole, if the string interaction is present. This scenario was advocated by Susskind , was made more accurate by Horowitz and Polchinski , and was applied to various situations such as matrix theory . We shall work out the correspondence point in this article, and shall find that the answer is quite different from the one in a flat background.

A generic pp-wave background of interest to us assumes the form

$$ds^2=4dx^+dx^{}z^2(dx^+)^2+dz^2,$$

where $`x^\pm `$ are the light-cone coordinates, $`z`$ denotes the collection of transverse coordinates. If the whole spacetime is $`D`$ dimensional, then there are $`D2`$ components in $`z`$. Taking $`x^+`$ as time, its conjugate is the light-cone Hamiltonian $`H=2p^{}`$, a single string spectrum is given by

$$2p^{}=\underset{n}{}N_{n_i}\left(1+\frac{n_i^2}{(\alpha ^{}p^+)^2}\right)^{1/2},$$

where each integer $`n_i`$ corresponds the $`n_i`$-th Fourier mode of $`z_i`$, and the form of the above formula is due to the confining potential $`z_i^2`$ for each transverse coordinate.

The typical example is obtained from the Penrose limit of the IIB string on $`AdS_5\times S^5`$, when the radius $`R`$ is taken to infinity. There are 8 transverse directions. The formula simplifies considerably in the limit $`\alpha ^{}\mathrm{}`$ for a fixed $`p^+`$, and the light-cone energy in this limit is always an integer. On the other hand, for a finite string coupling $`g_s`$, the effective coupling of the super Yang-Mills is infinity, since we are taking the limit $`N\mathrm{}`$, so it is impossible to reproduce the result (1). When $`N`$ is finite, and $`R\mathrm{}`$ as $`\alpha ^{}\mathrm{}`$, the coupling on the super Yang-Mills side is finite. Even in this case, result (1) cannot be reproduced as long as $`g_s`$ is not vanishing.

So the basic question is, what happens to a generic string state in the large $`\alpha ^{}`$ limit, or in general, to what extent we can trust the perturbative formula (1) of the string spectrum? There are two possible answers to this question. One answer is that for a nonvanishing $`g_s`$, the Newton gravitational constant becomes large for large $`\alpha ^{}`$, so more and more string states gravitate so much that they become a black hole; another answer is obvious: for fixed $`p^+`$, as $`\alpha ^{}\mathrm{}`$, a string state is better described by a giant graviton , since in the super Yang-Mills language, $`Jp^+\sqrt{g_sN}\alpha ^{}\mathrm{}`$. We shall explore the first possibility here, in general for a finite $`\alpha ^{}`$.

In flat spacetime, Susskind proposed sometime ago that when the mass of a string state gets too large, it will become a black hole , and the degeneracy of string states roughly matches the degeneracy of black hole states at a given mass. This proposal was put on a semi-quantitative base by Horowitz and Polchinski in , in which they proposed that the turning point between a perturbative string state and a black hole is where the horizon size is comparable to the string scale, this is a place when the worldsheet theory is strongly coupled. Beyond this point, the black hole is described by a semi-classical solution to the supergravity equations of motion, and the quantum states can be no longer accounted for as perturbative string states. This transition point is called the correspondence point.

Unlike the flat spacetime, the spacetime described by metric (1) is curved, with $`R_{++}`$ nonvanishing. With our convention in (1), coordinate $`x^+`$ has no dimension, while $`x^{}`$ has the dimension of the length squared, thus the component $`R_{++}`$ has no dimension, and is of order 1. We can certainly artificially introduce a scale $`\mu `$ by rescaling $`x^\pm \mu ^{\pm 1}p^\pm `$, so the curvature $`R_{++}\mu ^2`$. But this is just an artificial scale, for physical quantities, this scale drops out eventually, thus there is no issue whether the worldsheet theory is strongly coupled or not in this background. Actually, the action in the lightcone gauge is exactly soluble. In a sense, the pp-wave background in many ways is similar to the flat background in which there is no scale. Thus, we shall be mostly concerned with the extra curvature induced by a string state, and compare the curvature scale to the string scale.

Due to the confining potential in the transverse directions, even the massless modes are massive, in the pp-wave background, as can be seen directly from formula (1). When $`n_i=0`$, some $`N_{n_i}=1`$, $`p^{}`$ is a constant, so the “invariant mass” $`p^+p^{}p^+`$ is not zero in general, thus the force mediated by these massless modes is short-ranged, this is drastically different from what happens in a flat background. In a flat background, the force is long-ranged, thus the gravitational size of a source is determined directly by the mass and the Newton constant. Here the story is different, naively we expect that the potential is Yukawa-like. This is not entirely correct. As we shall see that in the transverse directions, the force is still Coulomb-like, but with a different power than in a flat spacetime.

To solve our problem, we may start with the Einstein equations $`G_{\mu \nu }=\kappa ^2T_{\mu \nu }`$ where the stress tensor is that of the string state source. It is almost impossible to solve these equation exactly, for two reasons. 1. For an excited string, the form of the stress tensor is complicated. 2. Even for a point-like source, due to the background (1), we expect the solution be highly asymmetric between the longitudinal coordinates and the transverse coordinates. Thus we will make two simplifications, due to the above two reasons: 1. We will not try to solve the full set of Einstein equations, but pick out a typical one and replace it by a Poisson-like equation for a scalar field. 2. We will replace the stress tensor of a string source by the one of a point-particle source.

We start with a particle action with mass $`m`$ in a flat background

$$S=\frac{1}{2}𝑑t\left(e^1(4\dot{x}^+\dot{x}^{}+\dot{z}^2)m^2e\right),$$

where $`e`$ is the world-line metric. Choose the light-cone gauge $`x^+=t`$, the e.o.m. for $`x^{}`$ implies that $`e`$ is a constant, in fact its inverse is proportional to the canonical conjugate of $`x^{}`$, so we have $`p^+=\frac{1}{2}p_{}=e^1`$. With all this in mind and drop the first term which is total derivative, we have

$$S=\frac{1}{2}𝑑t(p^+\dot{z}^2\frac{m^2}{p^+}).$$

The last term is of no concern to us, except that the e.o.m. for $`e`$ induces a constraint

$$4\dot{x}^{}=\dot{z}^2+(\frac{m}{p^+})^2.$$

If the particle is coupled to a generic metric $`g_{\mu \nu }`$, we shall replace the first term in (1) by

$$\frac{1}{2}𝑑te^1g_{\mu \nu }\dot{x}^\mu \dot{x}^\nu ,$$

the light-cone gauge fixing can be proceeded in the similar fashion, if $`g_{\mu \nu }`$ is a perturbation from the flat metric. Since the spacetime volume element is $`4dx^+dx^{}dz=4dtdx^{}dz`$, where $`dz`$ denotes the volume factor of the transverse space, the energy momentum tensor is simply

$$T^{\mu \nu }=\frac{1}{4}p^+\dot{x}^\mu \dot{x}^\nu \delta (x^{}x^{}(t))\delta (zz(t)),$$

where for a free particle, $`x^{}(t),z(t)`$ are linear functions of $`t`$. For a particle moving in a pp-wave background, there is a mass term, or harmonic potential for $`z`$, this term arises from the term $`z^2(\dot{x}^+)^2`$. This term does not contribute to the energy-moment tensor, but enforces the average value of $`\dot{z}`$ vanish. Thus, to the first order approximation for a particle staying in a harmonic state we can replace $`\delta (zz(t))`$ in (1) by $`\delta (z)`$.

A string world-sheet action is a little more complicated, in a pp-wave background

$$S=\frac{1}{4\pi \alpha ^{}}d^2\sigma h^{\alpha \beta }\sqrt{h}\left(4_\alpha x^+_\beta x^{}+z^2_\alpha x^+_\beta x^+_\alpha z_\beta z\right).$$

Choose the light-cone gauge $`x^+=t`$, and $`h=1`$. Next, we can follow, say the steps in Polchinski’s book. In the end we have

$$S=\frac{l}{\pi \alpha ^{}}h_{11}\dot{x}^{}+\frac{1}{4\pi \alpha ^{}}d^2\sigma \left(h_{11}\dot{z}^2h_{11}^1(z^{})^2h_{11}z^2\right).$$

So the conjugate momentum of $`x^{}`$, $`p_{}`$, thus $`p^+`$ is proportional to $`h_{11}`$

$$p^+=\frac{l}{2\pi \alpha ^{}}h_{11}.$$

the factor $`h_{11}`$ can be absorbed into the definition of $`\sigma `$, so the dependence on $`h_{11}`$ in the above action completely disappears, and the length of $`\sigma `$ now is $`2\pi \alpha ^{}p^+`$, a dimensionless quantity in our convention. ($`x^{}`$ has the dimension of length squared.)

The e.o.m. for $`h_{\alpha \beta }`$ results in

$$h_{\alpha \beta }2_\alpha x^+_\beta x^{}+2_\alpha x^{}_\beta x^++z^2_\alpha x^+_\beta x^+_\alpha z_\beta z.$$

Taking the component $`h_{00}`$, we find

$$4\dot{x}^{}=\dot{z}^2z^2+(\frac{m}{p^+})^2,$$

where the last constant term must be similar to the mass term in (1), here $`m^2`$ is nothing but $`p^+p^{}`$ up to a numerical factor. Our next strategy is to replace a string by a particle, using the stress tensor (1) with $`z(t)=0`$, and $`x^{}(t)`$ is determined by (1).

We are ready to consider a typical string state. For simplicity, consider the case when only one transverse coordinate is excited:

$$z=a_n\mathrm{exp}(i\omega _nt+i\frac{n\sigma }{\alpha ^{}p^+})+a_n^{}\mathrm{exp}(i\omega _nti\frac{n\sigma }{\alpha ^{}p^+}),$$

with

$$\omega _n=(1+\frac{n^2}{(\alpha ^{}p^+)^2})^{1/2}.$$

Suppose the string state correspond to $`N_n`$ such quanta excited 1 A worldsheet constraint is $`N_nn=0`$, can be met by exciting mode $`n`$. This won’t affect our following discussions.. To estimate the physical size of this string state, we use the following action

$$S=𝑑tp^+(\dot{a_n}^{}\dot{a}_n\omega _n^2a_n^{}a_n).$$

The canonical momenta are $`p^+\dot{a}_n`$, $`p^+\dot{a}_n^{}`$, so due to Bohr’s quantization condition, we have

$$p^+|\dot{a}_n|\frac{N_n}{|a_n|}.$$

In a bound state, the two terms in the action (1) are approximate equal, namely, $`|\dot{a}_n|\omega _n|a_n|`$. This together with (1) gives us the physical size of the string state

$$a_n^{}a_n\frac{N_n}{p^+\omega _n}.$$

Of course if we so desire, the above formula can be obtained in a rigorous way.

We are also ready to estimate the R.H.S. of (1). The first term is about $`\omega _n^2a_n^{}a_n`$, the second term about $`a_n^{}a_n`$. The third term is about $`p^{}/p^+`$, using formula (1), is about $`N_n\omega _n/p^+`$. This is the same order of the first term, according to (1). In the end, we have

$$\dot{x}^{}\frac{N_n\omega _n}{p^+}.$$

This result is somewhat expected, it is equivalent, using the spectrum (1), to saying that $`x^{}p^{}/p^+x^+`$.

We now set out to estimate the gravitational size of the above string state. Since we are approximating the string by a particle, we need to make sure that the gravitational size obtained this way should be larger than the physical size of the string given in (1). The condition obtained, as we shall see, is not too strong. The gravitational size is defined as where the perturbation of the metric becomes of order $`1`$, if string turns into a black hole, its horizon is about this size. We will replace one of the Einstein equation $`G_+=\kappa ^2T_+`$ by the D’Alembert equation for a scalar $`^\mu _\mu \varphi =\kappa ^2T_+`$, $`\varphi `$ presumably is $`h_+`$. The relevant component of the stress tensor is

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill T_+& =p^+\dot{x}^+\dot{x}^{}\delta (x^{}x^{}(t))\delta (z)\hfill \\ & =p^+a\delta (x^{}at)\delta (z),\hfill \end{array}$$

where

$$aN_n\omega _n/p^+.$$

The D’Alembert operator in question is

$$\mathrm{\Delta }=_+_{}+\frac{1}{4}z^2_{}^2+_z^2.$$

Suppose that we know the kernel of this operator

$$\mathrm{\Delta }G(x,y)=\delta ^D(x,y),$$

then the solution to our equation $`\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi =\kappa ^2T_+`$ is given by

$$\varphi (x)=ap^+\kappa ^2𝑑y^+G(x,y^+,ay^+,0),$$

where we have identified $`y^+`$ with time $`t`$.

Let the Green’s function be

$$G(x,y)=\frac{dq_+dq_{}}{(2\pi )^2}e^{iq_+(x^+y^+)+iq_{}(x^{}y^{})}G_q(z,w),$$

where $`z`$ is the transverse part of $`x`$, and $`w`$ is the transverse part of $`y`$. Substituting this into (1) we end up with

$$(_z^2q^{+2}z^2+4q^+q^{})G_q(z,w)=\delta (z,w),$$

where we used the relations $`q^\pm =\frac{1}{2}q_{}`$. Let $`\varphi _n(z)`$ be normalized eigen-functions of the operator in the L.H.S. of the above equation, which happen to be real, the delta function can be written as

$$\delta (z,w)=\underset{n}{}\varphi _n(z)\varphi _n(w).$$

Let

$$G_q(z,w)=\underset{n}{}a_n(w)\varphi _n(z),$$

and substitute the above and (1) into (1), we find

$$\underset{n}{}\left(4q^+q^{}|q^+|\underset{i}{}(2n_i+1)\right)a_n(w)\varphi _n(z)=\underset{n}{}\varphi _n(w)\varphi _n(z),$$

this determines $`a_n(w)`$ and thus

$$G_q(z,w)=\underset{n}{}\frac{\varphi _n(w)\varphi _n(z)}{4q^+q^{}|q^+|_i(2n_i+1)iϵ}.$$

Note that $`n`$ denotes a set of integers $`n_i`$ each corresponding to the $`n_i`$-th eigen-value of the harmonic oscillator in the $`z_i`$ direction. We also introduced the $`iϵ`$ prescription to take causality into account.

Using the Green’s function obtained above in (1) and integrating over $`y^+`$

$$\varphi (x)=\frac{ap^+}{\pi }\kappa ^2𝑑q^+e^{2iq^+(ax^+x^{})}\underset{n}{}\frac{\varphi _n(0)\varphi _n(z)}{4aq^{+2}+|q^+|(2n_i+1)+iϵ},$$

where $`\varphi _n(0)`$ is a constant depending only on $`q^+`$. The above integral seems to have a pole at $`q^+`$, actually this pole is removed by factors in functions in the numerator of the fraction in (1). A normalized eigen-function is given by

$$\varphi _n(z)=(\frac{|q^+|}{\pi })^{\frac{D2}{4}}\underset{i}{}\frac{1}{\sqrt{n_i!}2^{n_i/2}}H_{n_i}(\sqrt{|q^+|}z_i)e^{\frac{1}{2}|q^+|z_i^2},$$

$`H_{n_i}`$ are Hermite polynomials. We see that there is a factor

$$(\frac{|q^+|}{\pi })^{\frac{D2}{2}}$$

in the integral of (1), as long as $`D4`$, there will be no pole at $`p^+=0`$ in this integral. Also, if $`n`$ is an odd integer, $`H_n(0)=0`$, so only even integers $`n_i`$ appear in (1). It appears impossible to perform the integral in (1), moreover, it is hard to sum up the series in $`n`$, therefore we shall be content with a rough estimate.

Let us concentrate on the region where $`x^{}ax^+=0`$, close to the trajectory of the string in the light-cone directions. Taking, for example, $`D=10`$, the first integral in the sum of (1) reads

$$I=_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑q\frac{q^3}{4aq+8}e^{\frac{1}{2}qz^2},$$

where $`z^2=z_i^2`$. To estimate this integral, we use the steepest-descent method. For fixed $`z`$, the function

$$f(q)=\frac{1}{2}z^2q3\mathrm{ln}q+\mathrm{ln}(aq+2),$$

attains the minimal value at

$$q_0=\frac{1}{z^2}\left(2\frac{z^2}{a}+[(\frac{z^2}{a})^2+8\frac{z^2}{a}+4]^{1/2}\right).$$

Up to the second order, the integral (1) is approximated by

$$I=\frac{1}{4}\sqrt{\frac{2\pi }{f^{\prime \prime }(q_0)}}e^{f(q_0)}.$$

The first term in the sum of (1) is about $`\varphi _1(z)=ap^+\kappa ^2I`$. Consider two extreme limits. In one limit, $`z^2a`$, $`q_0`$ is approximately $`6/z^2`$, and $`f^{\prime \prime }(q_0)`$ is approximately $`z^4/12`$, so

$$\varphi _1=\frac{ap^+\kappa ^2}{z^8}$$

up to a numerical coefficient. This is in contrast to the Coulomb potential $`1/z^7`$ in 9 spatial dimensions. Next consider the other extreme limit $`z^2a`$. In this case, $`q_0`$ is about $`4/z^2`$, and $`f^{\prime \prime }(q_0)`$ is about $`z^4/8`$. In this limit, we have, up to a numerical coefficient

$$\varphi _1=\frac{p^+\kappa ^2}{z^6}.$$

This is more like a Coulomb potential in 8 spatial dimensions.

To appreciate the physical meaning of the above results, let us substitute the approximate result $`aN_n\omega _n/p^+`$ into relevant formulas. In case when $`z^2a`$, we have the gravitational size

$$z^2(N_n\omega _n)^{1/4}l_p^2,$$

where we replaced $`\kappa ^2`$ by $`l_p^8`$, $`l_p`$ is the Planck length. To be consistent, this transverse gravitational size must be much greater than $`a`$, namely

$$p^+(N_n\omega _n)^{3/4}l_p^2.$$

Apparently, this is valid in the large $`p^+`$ limit. In particular, when $`\alpha ^{}p^+1`$, $`\omega _n1`$, and the above condition is a further constraint on the largeness of $`p^+`$. Also, when $`z^2a`$, the transverse gravitational size is much greater than the physical size given in (1), and our assumption that the string state can be replaced by a particle is justified. The Horowitz-Polchinski correspondence point is where when $`z^2\alpha ^{}`$. Using (1) we find

$$g_s^2\frac{1}{N_n\omega _n},$$

to be contrasted to the flat spacetime result $`g_s^21/\sqrt{N_nn}`$ . To summarize, we have found that when $`p^+`$ is sufficient large, as physically reasonable condition, the string state turns into a black hole when condition (1) is satisfied, or when the condition is turned into an inequality with the L.H.S. greater. The giant graviton condition, in terms of $`p^+`$, is

$$p^+g_s^{1/2}l_p^2.$$

At the correspondence point, it is just

$$p^+(N_n\omega _n)^{1/4}l_p^2.$$

It is certainly satisfied if (1) is satisfied. We see that the string state first turns into a giant graviton, then later when condition (1) is met, turns into a black hole.

It is straightforward to generalize the above discussion to any other dimension $`D`$.

One may start to worry whether our estimate is valid, since a string state first turns into a giant graviton, and later turns into a black hole when we dial the coupling constant. Note that the only place we have used the string property is in the estimate of the constant $`a`$, which in general for any kind of state may be replaced by $`p^{}/p^+`$. Thus, we need only to replace $`N_n\omega _n`$ in all formulas above by $`p^{}`$, we are in a save position.

Next we consider the other limit $`z^2a`$. The transverse gravitational size is

$$z^2(p^+\kappa ^2)^{1/3}.$$

In order to be consistent,

$$p^+(N_n\omega _n)^{3/4}l_p^2,$$

a small $`p^+`$ limit, just opposite to (1). Also, for our point-particle approximation to be valid, $`z^2`$ must be larger than the physical size, thus the condition

$$p^+(\frac{N}{\omega _n})^{3/4}l_p^2,$$

this is consistent with (1) if $`\omega _n`$ is sufficiently large, and is the case for small $`p^+`$, see eq.(1). The correspondence point $`z^2\alpha ^{}`$ occurs at

$$p^+\frac{1}{g_s^2\alpha ^{}}.$$

Compared to the giant graviton point (1), or $`p^+1/(g_s\alpha ^{})`$, again for small $`g_s`$, the string state turns into giant graviton first, and later becomes a black hole. Interestingly, at the correspondence point, when we apply the condition (1) to (1), we find

$$g_s^2\frac{1}{N_n\omega _n},$$

quite similar to the condition (1). It is possible, then, that the correspondence condition (1) is quite general and is not limited to extremely large $`p^+`$ or extremely small $`p^+`$.

So far we have concentrated on the first term in (1) at $`x^{}ax^+=0`$. It is harder to estimate other terms, even at $`x^{}ax^+`$. It is reasonable to assume that these terms are subleading when $`z^2`$ is large. In a WKB approximation, the dominant $`q^+`$ would behave as $`1/z^2`$, and the leading Coulomb potential $`1/z^8`$ will not be modified, as one can easily see in (1).

Away from $`x^{}ax^+=0`$, the exponential $`e^{2iq^+(ax^+x^{})}`$ plays the role of a damping factor, thus the dominant $`z`$ will be smaller. Note that $`x^{}ax^+=0`$ is the longitudinal center of the gravitational field generated by the string state. Viewing the horizon as a deformed sphere, then what we have inspected is the transverse size of the horizon along the equator of this sphere. The south pole and the north pole correspond to points where $`z=0`$. When the damping factor is included, it is not possible even to determine $`q_0`$ in the first term in (1) in the WKB method, since the function $`f(q)`$ now includes a new term $`\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{cos}(2qx^{})`$ (setting time $`x^+=0`$). We are thus content with a rough estimate. For large $`z^2>|x^{}|`$, apparently we still have $`q_01/z^2`$, the picture we have had so far is not much modified. For small $`z^2`$, namely when $`z^2|x^{}|`$, and the gravitational field behaves as

$$\varphi _1\frac{ap^+\kappa ^2}{(x^{})^4},$$

this is certainly expected. Again, the gravitational size at these poles are the same order as the one along the equator, since $`x^{}`$ has the dimension of the length squared.

Finally, the degeneracy of states at the correspondence point, or the entropy. For large $`z^2a`$, we argued above that both the transverse size and the longitudinal size are the same order of magnitude, so the entropy is, according to Bekenstein-Hawking formula, $`Sz^8/l_p^8`$. At the correspondence point, $`z^2\alpha ^{}`$, so $`S1/g_s^2`$, and by virtue of (1), we have

$$SN_n\omega _n=p^{},$$

this is greater than the entropy in the flat background at the same $`N_n`$. It would be interesting to work out this result on the super Yang-Mills side.

Acknowledgments. This work was initiated at the Isaac Newton Institute at Cambridge, England, when the author participated the M-theory workshop, the organizers of that workshop and the staff of the Newton Institute are gratefully acknowledged. This work was supported by a grant of NSC, and by a “Hundred People Project” grant of Academia Sinica and an outstanding young investigator award of NSF of China.

References

relax D. Berenstein, J. Maldacena and H. Nastase, “Strings in flat space and pp waves from $`𝒩=4`$ Super Yang Mills,” hep-th/0202021. relax R. Penrose, “Any spacetime has a plane wave as a limit,” in Differential Geometry and Relativity, Reidel, Dordrecht, 1976; J. Figueroa-O’Farrill and G. Papadopoulos, “Homogeneous fluxes, branes and a maximally supersymmetric solution of M-theory,” JHEP 0108 (2001) 036, hep-th/0105308; M. Blau, J. Figueroa-O’Farrill, C. Hull and G. Papadopoulos, “Penrose limits and maximal supersymmetry,” hep-th/0201081. relax R. R. Metsaev, “Type IIB Green-Schwarz superstring in plane wave Ramond-Ramond background,” Nucl.Phys. B625 (2002) 70-96, hep-th/0112044. relax V. Balasubramanian, M. Huang, T. S. Levi and A. Naqvi, “Open Strings from N=4 Super Yang-Mills,” hep-th/0204196. relax L. Susskind, “Some Speculations about Black Hole Entropy in String Theory,” hep-th/9309145; E. Halyo, A.Rajaraman and L.Susskind, “Braneless Black Holes,” Phys.Lett. B392 (1997) 319-322, hep-th/9605112; E. Halyo, B. Kol, A. Rajaraman and L. Susskind, “Counting Schwarzschild and Charged Black Holes,” Phys.Lett. B401 (1997) 15-20, hep-th/9609075. relax G. T. Horowitz and J. Polchinski, “A Correspondence Principle for Black Holes and Strings,” Phys.Rev. D55 (1997) 6189-6197, hep-th/9612146; “Self Gravitating Fundamental Strings,” Phys.Rev. D57 (1998) 2557-2563, hep-th/9707170. relax M. Li, E. Martinec and V. Sahakian, “Black Holes and the SYM Phase Diagram,” Phys.Rev. D59 (1999) 044035, hep-th/9809061. relax J. McGreevy, L. Susskind and N. Toumbas, “Invasion of the Giant Gravitons from Anti-de Sitter Space,” JHEP 0006 (2000) 008, hep-th/0003075.


text:
# The Kondo effect and weak localization

## I Introduction

The word Kondo means battle in Swahili. This coincidence is fortuitous because in the Kondo effect, a battle inevitably ensues anytime a magnetic impurity is placed in a non-magnetic metal. Below some energy scale, the Kondo temperature ($`T_k`$) a lone magnetic impurity is robbed of its spin. Above the Kondo temperature, rapid spin-flip scattering produces a temperature-dependent correction to the resistivity of the form, $`B_k\mathrm{ln}T`$. Until recently, both the Kondo resistivity and $`T_k`$ were thought to be determined solely by the host metal and the magnetic impurity. However, numerous presentations in this volume attest, there is now overwhelming evidence that both are affected by the size of the samples1 ; s2 ; s3 ; s4 ; s5  as well as non-magnetic random scattering d1 ; d2 ; d3 ; yanson . In this paper, I will focus on the theoretical workivar  we have performed on the experiments revealing that non-magnetic scattering suppresses the Kondo resistivity in thin Kondo alloys.

In Kondo alloys of the form Cu(Mn), Cu(Fe) and Au(Fe), Giordano and colleagues d1 ; d2 ; d3  observed that introducing non-magnetic impurities suppressed the coefficient of the Kondo logarithm. The Kondo slope, $`B_k`$, is a monotonically decreasing function as the mean-free path is decreased. This result is surprising for two reasons. First, disorder gives rise to diffusive motion. Hence, relative to a clean sample, conduction electrons spend more time around a given magnetic impurity in the presence of disorder. Naively, this effect would result in an enhancement of the Kondo resistivity. Second, at the time of these experiments, the leading theoretical view was that disorder eliminates the Kondo logarithm and leads to a stronger algebraic divergence of the form $`T^{d/22}`$ in the resistivity. Everts and Kellereverts  were the first to argue for the emergence of a $`1/\sqrt{T}`$ in the Kondo self-energy for a d=2 system in the presence of random non-magnetic scattering. A few years lataer, Bohnen and Fisherbf  argued, however, that such a term would not survive in the conductivity. More recently, Ohkawa and Fukuyamaohk  and Vladar and Zimanyivladar  have developed an extensive diagrammatic scheme to re-investigate this problem and also concluded that the algebraic singularity dominates the Kondo $`\mathrm{ln}T`$. As a result, these groups conclude that static disorder can mask the Kondo resistivity as $`T0`$. The experiments show no singularity of this sort, however. This complete lack of agreement between theory and experiment led us to re-evaluate the interplay between disorder and Kondo spin-flip scattering.

As our work is based heavily on the previous diagrammatic expansion of Fukuyama and colleagues ohk , it is first important to understand how the algebaric divergence emerges from their analysis. When non-magnetic impurities are present, the diffusive propagator that describes the resultant motion

$`D(Q,\omega ){\displaystyle \frac{1}{(DQ^2i\omega )}}`$ (1)
has a diffusion pole. Here, $`Q`$ and $`\omega `$ are the net momentum and energy transfer and $`D=2\mathrm{}ϵ_F\tau /dm`$. When such diffusive propagators are used to decorate the spin-flip vertices in the Kondo self-energy, the singular dependence found by Ohkawa and Fukuyamaohk  obtains as can be seen from the following argument. The most divergent contribution to the Kondo self-energy arises from the two-diffuson decoration of the Kondo spin-flip vertices. Diagrams of this form involve an integration over the internal momentum line:

$`{\displaystyle \underset{𝐐}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(D𝐐^\mathrm{𝟐}+|\omega |)^\mathrm{𝟐}}}{\displaystyle \frac{Q^{d1}dQ}{(DQ^2+|\omega |)^2}}|\omega |^{d/22}.`$ (2)
The absolute value of the frequency appears here because we work in the finite-temperature Matsubara formalism. The Matsubara frequency $`\omega `$ is proportional to temperature $`T`$. Therefore, the temperature dependence due to diffusons and Cooperons is indeed $`T^{d/22}`$, as can be also verified by a more careful calculation ohk , and is a direct consequence of the diffusion poles.

The argument leading to the new algebraic dependence is certainly clear. However, it is well-known that spin-flip scattering can cut off the diffusion pole. Should this occur then the algebraic dependence will only be valid above a certain temperature, not as $`T0`$. Of course, this requires that the feedback effect of spin-flip scattering on localization physics be included. It is this effect that has been absent from all previous treatments of the disorder/Kondo problem. Inclusion of the feedback effect of spin-flip scattering on localization has been the primary focus of our workivar . A key difference that the feedback effect introduces is a nontrivial density dependence into the Kondo problem. This difference arises because diffusive propagators which include the spin-flip scattering rate decorate the bare spin-flip vertices in the Kondo self-energy. The spin scattering rate is proportional to the concentration of magnetic impurities. Consequently, a non-zero spin-flip scattering rate arises only if all the magnetic impurities are averaged over. Hence, the feedback effect represents a departure from the single-impurity physics typically associated with the Kondo problem. That this state of affairs obtains naturally when disorder is present can be seen from considering the standard weak-localization correctionalt

$`\delta \sigma ={\displaystyle \frac{e^2}{2\pi ^2\mathrm{}}}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{\tau _\varphi }{\tau _o}}`$ (3)
to the conductivity in a thin film, with $`\tau _\varphi `$ the dephasing time oand $`\tau _o`$ the elastic scattering time. Whenever localization physics is relevant, one has to decide which is the dominant dephasing process. Experiments show that the dephasing time is weakly dependent on temperatured1 ; d2 ; d3 . This is consistent with a dephasing rate that is determined solely by spin-flip scattering. Hence, $`\mathrm{}/\tau _sn_s\mathrm{}J^2>\mathrm{}/\tau _T`$, where $`\tau _T`$ is the dephasing time due to all other processes in the system. Consequently, if spin-flip scattering is the dominant dephasing process, the number of impurities has a lower bound. Our treatment does not include impurity-impurity effects, however. What is crucial here is that the contribution from each impurity must be averaged over to describe the dominant dephasing process. Our central result that is used to compare with the experiments can be derived simply from Eq.(3). In the presence of the Kondo logarithm, the spin-flip scattering rate is given by

$`1/\tau _s=2/3\sqrt{3}\tau _s^o\left(14J_0N(0)\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{T_F}{T}}+\mathrm{}\right).`$ (4)
Substitution of this result into Eq. (3) and expansion of the logarithm for $`T>T_k`$ yields the contribution of spin-flip scattering to the conductivity

$`\delta \sigma \sigma _0\left(\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{\tau _s^0}{\tau _o}}N(0)J_0\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{T_F}{T}}\right)`$ (5)
for a $`d=2`$ sample, with $`\sigma _0`$ the Drude conductivity. Because $`J_0<0`$, the Kondo logarithmic term enhances the spin-scattering time and in turn reduces the magnitude of the weak-localization correction. That is, spin-flip scattering produces an ‘antiloclization’ effect. Further, this correction is opposite in sign to the zeroth-order Kondo logarithm. Consequently, disorder leads to a suppression of the Kondo resistivity. The suppression of the Kondo resistivity follows immediately from three principles: 1) spin-flip scattering feeds back into the Kondo self-energy to regularize the algebraic divergence, 2) weak localization appears as a negative correction to the conductivity and 3) spin-flip scattering weakens the weak-localization effect. Hence, the net effect is a positive correction logarithmic correction to the conductivity which when added to the negative bare Kondo logarithm leads to a diminished logarithmic conductivity.

## II Formulation of Problem

The starting point for our analysis is a model Hamiltonian $`H=H_o+H_{sd}`$ that contains both normal impurities

$$H_o=\underset{k\sigma }{}\left(\epsilon _k\epsilon _F\right)a_{k\sigma }^{}a_{k\sigma }+\frac{v}{\mathrm{\Omega }}\underset{k,k^{},i}{}e^{𝐢(𝐤𝐤^{})𝐑_𝐢}a_{k\sigma }^{}a_{k^{}\sigma }$$
(6)
as well as magnetic scatterers

$`H_{sd}={\displaystyle \frac{J}{\mathrm{\Omega }}}{\displaystyle \underset{R_n,k,k^{},\sigma ,\sigma ^{}}{}}e^{𝐢(𝐤𝐤^{})𝐑_𝐧}\sigma _{\sigma ,\sigma ^{}}𝐒_𝐧a_{k\sigma }^{}a_{k^{}\sigma ^{}}.`$ (7)
where $`v`$ measures the strength of the scattering with the non-magnetic disorder, $`R_n`$ denotes the position of the impurities, magnetic or otherwise, $`𝐒_n`$ is the spin operator for the magnetic impurity at site $`n`$, and $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is the volume. The two natural timescales in this problem are, $`\tau _s^o`$ and $`\tau _o`$, the bare magnetic and non-magnetic scattering times. In terms of the density of states of the host metal, $`\rho _o`$ and the concentrations of magnetic and non-magnetic scatterers, $`n_s`$ and $`n_o`$, respectively, we have that $`\mathrm{}/2\tau _s^o=3\pi n_s\rho _o|J|^2/4`$ and $`\mathrm{}/2\tau _o=\pi n_o\rho _o|v|^2`$. The total scattering rate is $`1/\tau =1/\tau _s^o+1/\tau _o`$. To measure the strength of the non-magnetic disorder, we define $`\lambda =\mathrm{}/(2\pi \epsilon _F\tau _o)`$. We assume that the concentration of localized spins is dilute so that long-range spin glass effects are irrelevant. Also, we work in the regime in which normal impurity scattering dominates, $`1/\tau _o1/\tau _s^o`$.

Describing scattering in the presence of a weakly disordered potential requires Cooperon and diffuson propagators. The traditional form of such propagators, $`C(Q,\omega )=D(Q,\omega )(DQ^2i\omega )^1`$, was used extensively in the early treatmentsohk  of the disordered Kondo problem. However, as remarked in the introduction, such a procedure assumes that diffusive motion with a diffusion pole remains intact even in the presence of oscillating fields created by spin-flip scattering. It is this assumption that leads to the divergence found earlier by Fukuyama and co-workersohk . To alleviate this problem, we include the all-important feedback effect spin-flip scattering has on such diffusive processes. If all scattering processes are treated in the first Born approximation, the Dyson-like integral equation,

$`D_{\alpha \beta \delta \gamma }=\delta _{\alpha \beta }\delta _{\delta \gamma }+\overline{U_{\alpha \mu }U_{\nu \gamma }}{\displaystyle G_\mu ^RG_\nu ^AD_{\mu \beta \delta \nu }}`$ (8)
describes all ladder diagrams with the spin-dependent potential

$`\overline{U_{\alpha \mu }U_{\nu \gamma }}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\tau _o}}\delta _{\alpha \mu }\delta _{\nu \gamma }+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3\tau _s}}\sigma _{\alpha \mu }\sigma _{\nu \gamma }.`$ (9)
The Greek letters denote the spin indices on the upper and lower electron lines in the diffuson ladder and repeated indices are summed over. The advanced and retarded Green functions are given by $`\left(G_\mu ^A\right)^1=ϵ_Fp_{}^2/2mi/2\tau +\nu h`$ and $`\left(G_\mu ^R\right)^1=ϵ_F+\omega p_+^2/2m+i/2\tau +\mu h`$ respectively. Noting that

$`{\displaystyle G_\mu ^RG_\nu ^A}={\displaystyle \frac{G_\mu ^RG_\nu ^A}{(G_\mu ^R)^1(G_\mu ^A)^1}}`$ (10)
we arrive at the solution for the diffuson,

$`D_{\alpha \beta \gamma \delta }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}}{4\tau (DQ^2i\omega )}}\left(\delta _{\alpha \beta }\delta _{\gamma \delta }+\sigma _{\alpha \beta }\sigma _{\gamma \delta }\right)`$ (11)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}}{4\tau (DQ^2i\omega +4/3\tau _s^0)}}\left(3\delta _{\alpha \beta }\delta _{\gamma \delta }\sigma _{\alpha \beta }\sigma _{\gamma \delta }\right).`$
The analogous integral equation for the Cooperon

$`C_{\alpha \beta \gamma \delta }=\delta _{\alpha \beta }\delta _{\delta \gamma }+\overline{U_{\alpha \mu }U_{\gamma \nu }}{\displaystyle G_\mu ^RG_\nu ^AC_{\mu \beta \nu \delta }}`$ (12)
can be solved analogously to yield,

$`C_{\alpha \beta \gamma \delta }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}}{4\tau (DQ^2i\omega +2/\tau _s^0)}}\left(\delta _{\alpha \beta }\delta _{\gamma \delta }\sigma _{\alpha \beta }\sigma _{\gamma \delta }\right)`$ (13)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}}{4\tau (DQ^2i\omega +2/3\tau _s^0)}}\left(3\delta _{\alpha \beta }\delta _{\gamma \delta }+\sigma _{\alpha \beta }\sigma _{\gamma \delta }\right).`$
where $`\alpha \beta `$ and $`\gamma \delta `$ are spin indices. The dot-product $`\sigma _{\alpha \beta }\sigma _{\gamma \delta }=\sigma _{\alpha \beta }^x\sigma _{\gamma \delta }^x+\sigma _{\alpha \beta }^y\sigma _{\gamma \delta }^y+\sigma _{\alpha \beta }^z\sigma _{\gamma \delta }^z`$.

## III Self Energy

As is evident, even in the presence of spin-flip scattering, the diffuson still retains its diffusion pole in the $`S=0`$ channel. Hence, we will be back to where we started if the $`S=0`$ diffuson still contributes to the self-energy. We now show that this contribution vanishes identically to all orders of perturbation theory. Consider the self-energy diagrams shown in Fig.(1).

To illustrate how the self-energy diagrams in Fig. 1 are evaluated let’s focus on the first two diagrams with the diffuson vertex decorations. The sum of the two self-energy diagrams is

$`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{3q}^D(𝐤,iϵ_n)`$ $`=`$ $`n_sJ^3T{\displaystyle \underset{\omega _{\mathrm{}},\omega _m,𝐐,𝐪}{}}\mathrm{\Theta }(ϵ_n(ϵ_n+\omega _{\mathrm{}}))V_{\alpha \beta \nu \eta }(i\omega _{\mathrm{}},i\omega _m)`$ (14)
$`\times G(iϵ_n+i\omega _m,𝐪)G(iϵ_n+i\omega _{\mathrm{}},𝐤+𝐐)`$
$`\times D_{\sigma \alpha \beta \gamma }(i\omega _{\mathrm{}},𝐐)𝐃_{\gamma \nu \eta \sigma }(𝐢\omega _{\mathrm{}},𝐐)`$
where $`G(iϵ,q)`$ is the electron Green function

$`G(iϵ,q)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{iϵ+ϵ_F\mathrm{}^2q^2/2m+i(\mathrm{}/2\tau )\mathrm{sign}(ϵ)}},`$ (15)
and the electron energies are given by the Matsubara frequencies, $`ϵ_n=(2n+1)\pi T`$. The pseudofermion energies are defined in terms of $`z_k=(2k+1)\pi T`$ and $`\omega _{\mathrm{}}=2l\pi T`$. The range of summation over the momentum $`𝐐`$ and energy $`\omega _{\mathrm{}}`$ transfers is limited by the range of validity of the diffusion approximation, $`DQ^2<\mathrm{}/\tau `$ and $`\omega _{\mathrm{}}<\mathrm{}/\tau `$. The step function $`\mathrm{\Theta }(x)`$ appears in the expression because the diffusion propagators are only non-zero if the impurity ladders connect electrons on different sides of the Fermi surface. The summation over momenta $`𝐤^{}`$ and $`𝐤^{\prime \prime }`$ in the Green functions adjacent to the spin vertices is already included in the definition of the diffuson. The Green functions in Eq. (14) can be simplified using

$`{\displaystyle \underset{𝐪}{}}G(iϵ_n+i\omega _m,𝐪)`$ $``$ $`i\pi \rho _0(\epsilon _F)\mathrm{sign}(ϵ_n+\omega _m),`$
$`G(iϵ_n+i\omega _{\mathrm{}},𝐤+𝐐)`$ $``$ $`i{\displaystyle \frac{2\tau }{\mathrm{}}}\mathrm{sign}(ϵ_n+\omega _{\mathrm{}})=i{\displaystyle \frac{2\tau }{\mathrm{}}}\mathrm{sign}(ϵ_n).`$ (16)
The first approximation can be obtained by integration around the Fermi surface. The second approximation makes use of the fact that the momentum $`𝐤`$ and energy $`ϵ_n`$ are close to the Fermi surface (within the energy shell of width $`T`$), and the momentum and energy transfers allowed by the diffusion propagator are less than $`\mathrm{}/\tau `$.

The pseudofermion part,

$`V_{\alpha \beta \nu \eta }(\omega _{\mathrm{}},\omega _m)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{16}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\delta _{m0}}{i\omega _{\mathrm{}}}}(1\delta _\mathrm{}0)+{\displaystyle \frac{\delta _\mathrm{}0}{i\omega _m}}(1\delta _{m0}){\displaystyle \frac{\delta _\mathrm{}m}{i\omega _{\mathrm{}}}}(1\delta _\mathrm{}0)\right](\sigma _{\alpha \beta }\sigma _{\nu \eta }).`$ (17)
involves a trace over the impurity spin states. The internal spin indices are not summed over because the electron spin can be flipped by the diffusons. After substituting all the ingredients into Eq. (14) and performing the summation over the spin indices, the self-energy becomes

$`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{3q}^D(𝐤,iϵ_n)=6n_s\pi \rho _0J^3\tau T{\displaystyle \underset{𝐐,\omega _{\mathrm{}}}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Theta }(ϵ_n(ϵ_n+\omega _{\mathrm{}}))}{i\omega _{\mathrm{}}}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}/\tau }{D𝐐^\mathrm{𝟐}+|\omega _{\mathrm{}}|+\mathrm{𝟒}\mathrm{}/\mathrm{𝟑}\tau _𝐬^\mathrm{𝟎}}}\right]^2\mathrm{sign}(ϵ_n).`$
Remarkably, the divergent $`S=0`$ part of the diffuson drops out, and as a result the singular temperature dependence in the resistivity disappears.

But what is the source of this cancellation and is it exact? By careful examination of the pseudofermion contribution Eq. (17), we see that the sum over the spin indices in the self-energy \[Eq. (14)\] separates into two identical sums of the form, $`_{\alpha \beta }D_{\sigma \alpha \beta \gamma }\sigma _{\alpha \beta }^a`$. If we use the identity $`_{\alpha \beta }(\sigma _{\nu \alpha }\sigma _{\beta \gamma })\sigma _{\alpha \beta }^a=\sigma _{\nu \gamma }^a`$, we find immediately that the cancellation of the $`S=0`$ diffuson

$`{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha \beta }{}}D_{\nu \alpha \beta \gamma }^{S=0}\sigma _{\alpha \beta }^a`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha \beta }{}}(\delta _{\nu \alpha }\delta _{\beta \gamma }+\sigma _{\nu \alpha }\sigma _{\beta \gamma })\sigma _{\alpha \beta }^a=0`$ (18)
from the $`3^{rd}`$ order Kondo self-energy is exact. To any order in $`J`$ in the most divergent approximation, the cancellation of the $`S=0`$ diffuson can be seen as follows. Within this scheme, each diffuson encircles a vertex that is exactly equal to the Abrikosov abr1965  vertex function $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=J_{\mathrm{eff}}\sigma 𝐒`$, with $`J_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ defined within the parquet summation. When this function is now multiplied by $`D^{S=0}`$ and summed over the spin indices, the cancellation to all orders follows immediately from Eq. (18). Note that this cancellation relies on the spin algebra and hence is not tied to the approximations used to obtain $`D^{S=0}`$. Consequently, the cancellation of the $`S=0`$ component of the diffuson is fundamentally tied to the fact that the Kondo interaction does not conserve the electron’s spin. This cancellation theorem which signifies that the Kondo logarithm remains in tact is in the spirit of Anderson’s theorem that non-magnetic impurities do not affect $`T_c`$ for s-wave superconductors. Recently, Chakravarty and Nayakchak  have shown that in the very weak-disorder limit, a true Anderson theorem exists in which disorder does scale out of the Kondo problem.

As advertised, the cancellation of the diffusion pole suppresses the algebraic divergence of the self-energy. To see how this emerges, we continue with our analysis of the first two diagrams in Fig.(1). We limit ourselves to 2D case, and hence

$`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{3q}^D(𝐤,iϵ_n)`$ $`=`$ $`6in_s\pi ^2\rho _0^2J^3\lambda {\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}}{\tau }}T{\displaystyle \underset{\omega _{\mathrm{}}}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Theta }(ϵ_n(ϵ_n+\omega _{\mathrm{}}))}{\omega _{\mathrm{}}(|\omega _{\mathrm{}}|+4\mathrm{}/3\tau _s^0)}}\mathrm{sign}(ϵ_n)`$
$`=`$ $`i{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}n_s\rho _0^2J^3\lambda {\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}}{\tau T}}{\displaystyle \underset{m=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\left(m+\frac{\epsilon _n}{2\pi T}+\frac{1}{2}\right)\left(m+\frac{\epsilon _n}{2\pi T}+\frac{1}{2}+\frac{2\mathrm{}}{3\pi T\tau _s^0}\right)}}\mathrm{sign}(ϵ_n).`$
where $`\lambda `$ is the dimensionless disorder defined earlier. From this self energy, we define the scattering rate as follows:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}}{2\tau _D^q}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \left(\frac{f}{ϵ}\right)(\mathrm{Im}\mathrm{\Sigma }_{3q}^D(𝐤,ϵ+i0))𝑑ϵ}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle f(ϵ)\frac{\mathrm{Im}\mathrm{\Sigma }_{3qD}(𝐤,ϵ+i0)}{ϵ}𝑑ϵ}.`$
Clearly, one cannot evaluate this expression just by setting $`ϵ=0`$ because of the singular temperature dependence in the self-energy. We will compute this expression by contour integration in the complex $`ϵ`$-plane. The self-energy has two poles in the upper half-plane. Hence if we close the contour in the lower half-plane, then the integral will be equal to the sum of the residues in the points where the Fermi function $`f(ϵ)`$ has poles, $`ϵ_k=i(2k+1)\pi T`$:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}}{2\tau _D^q}}`$ $`=`$ $`2\pi iT{\displaystyle \underset{k}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{Im}\mathrm{\Sigma }_{3qD}(𝐤,ϵ+i0)}{ϵ}}|_{ϵ=ϵ_k}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k,m=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(m+k+1)(m+k+1+\eta )}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(m+k+1)}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(m+k+1+\eta )}}\right]`$
where $`A`$ is the coefficient of the self-energy and $`\eta =2\mathrm{}/3\pi T\tau _s^0`$. In the double sum over $`m`$ and $`k`$ there are $`(m+k+1)N`$ identical elements. Therefore, the sum can be transformed to a sum over $`N`$ times $`N`$. Now if we use the series expansion for the digamma, $`\psi (x)=d\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{\Gamma }(x)/dx`$, and trigamma, $`\psi ^{}(x)=d^2\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{\Gamma }(x)/dx^2`$ functions,

$`\psi (1+x)`$ $`=`$ $`\gamma +z{\displaystyle \underset{N=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N(N+x)}}`$
$`\psi ^{}(1+x)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{N=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(N+x)^2}},`$
and define a new function

$$F(x)\frac{\psi (1+x)+\gamma }{x}+\psi ^{}(1+x)$$

then the result for the contribution to the scattering rate becomes

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}}{2\tau _D^q}}={\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}n_s\rho _0^2J^3\lambda {\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}}{\tau T}}F\left({\displaystyle \frac{2\mathrm{}}{3\pi T\tau _s^0}}\right).`$ (19)
For small argument, $`x1`$, $`F(x)\zeta (2)=\pi ^2/6`$; for large argument $`x1`$, $`F(x)\mathrm{ln}(x)/x`$. Hence we conclude that there are two regimes, corresponding to “high” ($`\mathrm{}/\tau _s^0>T`$) and “low” ($`\mathrm{}/\tau _s^0<T`$) impurity concentrations, in which the diffuson corrections behave logarithmically in temperature and as $`1/T`$, respectively. In other words, the $`1/T`$ behavior is cut-off at the temperatures below $`\mathrm{}/\tau _s^0`$. Now let us consider the rest of the diagrams, namely the diagrams that involve Cooperon propagators, and the diagrams with the external single impurity line.

$`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{3q}^D(𝐤,iϵ_n)`$ $`=`$ $`n_sJ^3T{\displaystyle \underset{\omega _{\mathrm{}},\omega _m,𝐐,𝐪}{}}\mathrm{\Theta }(ϵ_n(ϵ_n+\omega _{\mathrm{}}))V_{\alpha \beta \nu \eta }(i\omega _{\mathrm{}},i\omega _m)`$ (20)
$`\times G(iϵ_n+i\omega _m,𝐪)G(iϵ_n+i\omega _{\mathrm{}},𝐤+𝐐)`$
$`\times C_{\sigma \alpha \gamma \nu }(i\omega _{\mathrm{}},𝐐)𝐂_{\beta \gamma \eta \sigma }(𝐢\omega _{\mathrm{}},𝐐).`$
The only difference compared to the diffuson self-energy contribution is the different spin indexing of the Cooperons compared to the diffusons. This is because the Cooperon propagators need to be “crossed” in order to have the same momentum transfers without phase space restrictions. Summing over the spin indices reduces the problem to one in which the product of the Cooperons is spin independent and equal to:

$`\stackrel{~}{C}^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2\tau ^2}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(DQ^2i\omega +2/\tau _s^0)^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(DQ^2i\omega +2/3\tau _s^0)^2}}\right].`$ (21)
Now we can continue in exactly the same way as in the diffuson case to obtain for the scattering rate correction

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}}{2\tau _C^q}}={\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}n_s\rho _0^2J^3\lambda {\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}}{\tau T}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}F\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}}{\pi T\tau _s^0}}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}F\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}}{3\pi T\tau _s^0}}\right)\right].`$ (22)
At high temperatures, $`T>\mathrm{}/\tau _s^0`$ we again recover the $`1/T`$ behavior, and for low temperatures, $`T<\mathrm{}/\tau _s^0`$, the logarithmic behavior obtains.

Finally, we need to consider the set of diagrams that contain one external impurity line (the rainbow diagrams). We will prove now that such diagrams are equal to the corresponding diagrams without the impurity line times the factor of (-1/2). Unlike the diagrams that we considered before, the internal Green function $`G(iϵ_n+i\omega _{\mathrm{}},𝐤+𝐐)`$ can no longer be replaced by its value at the Fermi surface, $`2i\tau /\mathrm{}`$. Instead, a sum over the intermediate momentum of a product of three Green functions needs to be computed:

$`|v|^2{\displaystyle \underset{𝐤^{}}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(iϵ_n+ϵ_Fϵ_𝐤^{}+i\mathrm{}/2\tau )^2(iϵ_n+i\omega _{\mathrm{}}+ϵ_Fϵ_{𝐤^{}+𝐐}i\mathrm{}/2\tau )}}`$
$`|v|^2{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _0d(x)}{(x+i\mathrm{}/2\tau )^2(xi\mathrm{}/2\tau )}}=2\pi i\rho _0|v|^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(2i\mathrm{}/2\tau )^2}}=i\tau /\mathrm{}.`$ (23)
In deriving this relation, we set $`𝐐`$ and $`\omega _{\mathrm{}}`$ to zero, since they are small. Therefore the sum of the diagrams with and without the external impurity lines is two times smaller that sum of the diffuson and Cooperon diagrams that we derived before. However, there is a factor of 2 that comes from two possible internal electron lines to which the diffusion propagators can be attached. As a result, the sum of all diagrams happens to be exactly equal to the sum of two contributions that we already computed. Hence the total quantum correction to the scattering time due to the Kondo diagrams in Fig. 1 is

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\tau ^q}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\tau _D^q}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\tau _C^q}},`$
with $`1/\tau _D^q`$ and $`1/\tau _C^q`$ given by Eq. (19) and Eq. (22), respectively.

## IV Conductivity

The total conductivity is a sum of the Drude contribution with the transport scattering time, and the weak localization correction. The transport scattering rate is composed of elastic scattering, the second order in $`J`$ spin scattering, the third order in $`J`$ (Kondo) scattering and the quantum corrections computed above.

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\tau _{tr}}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\tau _0}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\tau _s^0}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\tau _s^K}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\tau _D^q}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\tau _C^q}}.`$ (24)
Of these contributions, only the last three have non-trivial temperature dependence. The total conductivity is

$`\sigma (T)={\displaystyle \frac{e^2n\tau _{tr}}{m}}+\delta \sigma _{WL}=\sigma _0\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{\tau }{\tau _s^K}}{\displaystyle \frac{\tau }{\tau _D^q}}{\displaystyle \frac{\tau }{\tau _C^q}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\delta \sigma _{WL}}{\sigma _0}}\right),`$ (25)
where $`\sigma _0`$ is the temperature-independent part of the conductivity. There are also more complex conductivity diagrams that involve both the spin-dependent pseudofermion part and the diffusion propagators, but they can be shown to cancel out ohk .

The derived expressions for $`\tau _D^q`$ and $`\tau _C^q`$ have simple asymptotic behavior. For $`d=2`$ in the limit $`T\mathrm{}/\tau _S^0`$, we recover the inverse temperature dependence

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}}{2\tau ^C}}={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}}{2\tau ^D}}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi \mathrm{}\rho _0\lambda J}{3\tau }}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}}{\tau _s^0T}}\rho _0\lambda J{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}}{\tau }}`$ (26)
of Refs. (vladar ; ohk ). Without the diffusion pole cancellation, the lower bound in temperature for the $`1/T`$ behavior would be set by $`\mathrm{max}[\mathrm{}/\tau _\varphi ,T_K]`$, where $`\tau _\varphi `$ is the inelastic scattering time. We find here that by explicitly including spin-scattering in the diffusion propagators, the algebraic behavior occurs when $`\mathrm{}/(\tau _s^0T)1`$. We will see later that as a result of this restriction, the contribution of the $`1/T`$ term to the conductivity is negligible. In the opposite regime, $`T\mathrm{}/\tau _S^0`$, the scattering rates

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}}{2\tau ^D}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\rho _0\lambda J{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}}{\tau }}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}}{T\tau _s^0}}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}}{2\tau ^C}}`$ $`=`$ $`2\rho _0\lambda J{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}}{\tau }}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}}{T\tau _s^0}}`$ (27)
are both logarithmic functions of temperature.

The weak-localization contribution is given in Eq.(5. We collect all the contributions discussed above to determine the temperature-dependent conductivity. In the temperature range $`T_K<T<\mathrm{}/\tau _s^0`$, Cooperon, diffuson, and weak-localization corrections are all logarithmic in temperature. Combining the results from Eq. (IV) with the weak-localization correction, we find that the magnitude of the logarithmic part of the conductivity

$`\sigma ^T=\sigma _0{\displaystyle \frac{4\tau \rho _0J}{\tau _s^0}}\left(1+0.75\lambda {\displaystyle \frac{\tau _s^0}{\tau }}\right)\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ_F}{T}}.`$ (28)
The first term in this expression arises from the unperturbed Kondo effect and the latter from the interplay with disorder. Inclusion of disorder in the self-energy, even after inclusion of the negative WL correction, enhances the Kondo resistivity relative to a clean system result.

For temperatures $`T\mathrm{}/\tau _s^0`$, the self-energy contribution to the relaxation time scales as $`1/T`$, whereas the weak-localization correction is proportional to $`\mathrm{ln}T`$. However, comparison of the magnitude of these corrections reveals that the weak-localization term dominates, and the magnitude of the resultant temperature-dependent conductivity

$`\sigma ^T=\sigma _0{\displaystyle \frac{4\tau \rho _0J}{\tau _s^0}}\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda \tau _s^0}{\tau }}\right)\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{\epsilon _F}{T}}`$ (29)
is suppressed by the disorder. Let us now apply our results to thin films with a thickness, $`L`$. We are interested in thin films, such that $`\mathrm{}<LL_\varphi `$. Because $`\mathrm{}<L`$, the electron gas is characterized by a 3-dimensional density of states $`\rho _0=1/(2\pi )^2(2m/\mathrm{}^2)^{3/2}ϵ_F^{1/2}`$ and diffusion constant given by $`D=2\mathrm{}ϵ_F\tau /3m`$. Since the dephasing length $`L_\varphi `$ exceeds the film thickness, such a film should be treated as quasi-2D with respect to weak localization. That means that the momentum-transfer summation in the diffusion propagators must be restricted to the plane, or $`_𝐐(1/L)_{𝐐(\mathrm{𝟐}𝐃)}`$. The density of states that arises from converting this sum into an integral is the two-dimensional density of states, $`\rho _0^{2D}=\pi \rho _0/k_F`$. Hence, the self-energy diagrams with the diffusion propagators will generate a size-dependence to the conductivity of the form $`1/(k_FL)`$. The explicit finite-size weak-localization correction is volkov

$$\delta \sigma _{WL}=\frac{e^2}{2\pi ^2\mathrm{}L}\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{3\sqrt{3}\tau _s}{2\tau }\mathrm{sinh}\left(\frac{L}{\mathrm{}}\right)\frac{\mathrm{}}{L}\right)$$

. The size-dependence under the logarithm yields an effective size dependence in the spin-relaxation time. This size dependence should be observable in the standard WL magnetoresistance measurements in the weak magnetic fields. However, it will not affect the temperature dependence of the conductivity. The only size dependence that is coupled to the temperature is the $`1/L`$ prefactor of the weak-localization correction.

We now combine these results in the low and high-temperature limits discussed earlier. In the two limits, we obtain conductivities

$$\sigma ^T=\{\begin{array}{cc}\sigma _0\frac{4\tau \rho _0J}{\tau _s^0}\left(1+\frac{0.25\mathrm{}\tau _s^0}{mk_FL\mathrm{}^2}\right)\mathrm{ln}\frac{ϵ_F}{T}\hfill & \mathrm{if}T_KT<\mathrm{}/\tau _s^0\hfill \\ \sigma _0\frac{4\tau \rho J}{\tau _s^0}\left(1\frac{1.5\mathrm{}\tau _s^0}{mk_FL\mathrm{}^2}\right)\mathrm{ln}\frac{ϵ_F}{T}\hfill & \mathrm{if}T_K,\mathrm{}/\tau _s^0T\hfill \end{array}$$
(30)
that have an explicit size and disorder correction that scales as $`1/(\mathrm{}^2L)`$. The fact that only the coefficient of $`\mathrm{ln}T`$, but not the form of the temperature dependence, is modified is a direct consequence of the diffusion pole cancellation theorem. When magnetic impurity density is high, we find and enhancement of the Kondo logarithm. This is an intuitive result since, qualitatively, diffusive motion of electrons is expected to enhance the probability of repeated scattering that generates the Kondo effect. The surprising finding is that in the other regime, an overall suppression of the logarithmic correction in the conductivity is obtained. While the self-energy enhancement is always present, as it can be seen from the positive self-energy corrections to the transport scattering rate \[Eqs. (19) and (22)\], this effect is completely overwhelmed in the conductivity by the WL correction which also acquires $`\mathrm{ln}T`$ dependence due to the Kondo contribution to the dephasing rate.

## V Experimental Applications

In the experiments of Blachly and Giordano d1 , the impurity concentration was such that, $`\mathrm{}/\tau _s^00.1`$ K, which is much less than the Kondo temperature for Cu(Fe), $`T_K3`$ K. Therefore, the second of Eqs. (30) should apply. Figure 2 shows a comparison between the experimental data of Blachly and Giordanod1  and the theoretical predictions. Each black square corresponds to one sample. The best fit to the data was obtained with $`\tau _s^0=1.3\times 10^{10}`$ s, whereas experimentally the spin scattering time is on the order of $`10\times 10^{11}`$. This discrepancy also persists for the Cu(Mn) alloys for thicknesses of order $`750400`$Å. However, for the thinnest Cu(Mn) alloysd3  Jacobs and Giordano have shown that excellent agreement exists between theory and experiment for $`\tau _s^o=6\times 10^{11}`$, which is well within the experimental uncertainty of the measured value, $`\tau _s^o=6\times 10^{11}`$.

While theory and experiment are in good agreement for thin samples, there is a key experimental ambiguity that surrounds these results, namely is there a well-defined Kondo temperature for the thinnest samples and for those with mean free paths of order $`250`$Å. This question is most relevant in light of the experiments of Yanson and colleaguesyanson  who have shown that in point contacts, huge fluctuations in the Kondo temperature occur for contact diameters of order $`100`$Å. For an inhomogeneous system, the density of states becomes position dependent: $`\rho _0(x)=\rho _0+\delta \rho _0(x)`$. Consequently, the position-dependent Kondo temperature will be

$`T_K(x)=\epsilon _F\mathrm{exp}[1/2\rho _0(x)J]\epsilon _F\mathrm{exp}[1/2\rho _0(x)J]=T_K\mathrm{exp}[\delta \rho _0(x)/2\rho _0^2J].`$ (31)
Typically $`\rho _0J0.1`$, which means that even a 10% change in the density of states can produce 100% change in the Kondo temperature. The effect is even stronger for alloys with lower Kondo temperatures. From elementary scattering theory, $`\delta \rho _0(x)=\rho _01/\sqrt{k_F\lambda }`$, where $`\lambda `$ is the smaller of the mean-free path and the sample thickness. For $`\mathrm{}=100`$Å, $`\delta \rho _0(x)/\rho _0=.1`$. Hence, we expect a 100$`\%`$ change in the Kondo temperature for such samples. Those impurities having high Kondo temperatures will not contribute to the Kondo resistivity. Consequently, fluctuations in the density of states can effectively decrease the concentration of active spin-flip scattering centers that could contribute to the Kondo logarithm. This will lead to an enhancement in the spin-scattering rate over the bulk value. Hence, the question as to how well-defined the Kondo temperature is in the thinnest and most disordered samples should be resolved before a complete experimental understanding of the Kondo effect in dirty alloys can be reached.

###### Acknowledgements.

This work was funded by the DMR of the NSF.