text:
# Glass breaks like metals, but at the nanometer scale

## Abstract

We report in situ Atomic Force Microscopy experiments which reveal the presence of nanoscale damage cavities ahead of a stress-corrosion crack tip in glass. Their presence might explain the departure from linear elasticity observed in the vicinity of a crack tip in glass. Such a ductile fracture mechanism, widely observed in the case of metallic materials at the micrometer scale, might be also at the origin of the striking similarity of the morphologies of fracture surfaces of glass and metallic alloys at different length scales.

Glasses are the most common example of "brittle" materials which break abruptly, without first deforming in an irreversible way as metals do. In metallic alloys, cracks usually progress through the coalescence of damage cavities, which nucleate within microstrutural defects (second phase precipitates, grain boundaries…) or at the interface between the matrix and the heterogeneities. This “ductile" fracture mode, widely observed for a large variety of metallic alloys Pineau95 , leads to very rough fracture surfaces which have been extensively studied over the last eighteen years Mandelbrot84 ; Bouchaud97 . For slow crack propagation, the fracture surfaces of glass may appear very flat (in the so-called "mirror" zone) if examined with an optical microscope. However, when analysed at the nanometer scale with an Atomic Force Microscope (AFM), they reveal a roughness which is strikingly similar to the one exhibited by metallic fracture surfaces Bouchaud97 ; Daguier95 . The only difference actually resides in the length scales involved, which are several orders of magnitude smaller in the case of glass. Could it be because, despite the conventional belief, the fracture mechanisms of these two categories of materials are similar, although taking place at different length scales? We report here the first experimental evidence of a ductile fracture mode in a vitreous material at a temperature much lower than the glass transition temperature Tg. Such scenario was predicted by Molecular Dynamics simulations Nakano99 ; vanBrutzel97 , but it had never been observed experimentally up to now. The experiments reported here clearly show that slow fracture in glass progresses through the nucleation, growth and coalescence of damage cavities at the nanometer scale. These cavities are shown to be correlated to the non-linear elastic zone observed in the vicinity of the crack tip Guilloteau96 . Possible origins of the cavities’ nucleation are conjectured and the consequences of such ductile fracture mode in glass are discussed.

Experimental setup. The experimental setup is illustrated in Fig. 1. All the experiments are performed at a constant temperature of $`22.0\pm 0.5{}_{}{}^{}\mathrm{C}`$ and in a leak-proof chamber under an atmosphere composed of pure nitrogen and water vapor at a relative humidity of $`42\pm 1\%`$ after preliminary out-gassing. Fracture is performed on DCDC He95  (Double Cleavage Drilled Compression) parallelepipedic ($`4\times 4\times 40\mathrm{mm}^3`$) samples of aluminosilicate glass. A thermal treatment ($`660^{}\mathrm{C}`$) was performed before each fracture experiment in order to remove residual stresses Marliere02 . The $`4\times 40\mathrm{mm}^2`$ surfaces are optically polished (RMS roughness is $`0.25\mathrm{nm}`$ for a $`10\times 10\mu \mathrm{m}^2`$ scan size). In the centre of two parallel $`4\times 40\mathrm{mm}^2`$ surfaces and perpendicularly to them a cylindrical hole (radius $`a=0.5\mathrm{mm}`$) is drilled. Its axis defines the $`z`$-direction. The $`x`$-axis (and $`y`$-axis) are parallel to the $`40\mathrm{mm}`$ (and $`4\mathrm{mm}`$) long side of the $`4\times 40\mathrm{mm}^2`$ surface. A compressive load is applied perpendicularly to the $`4\times 4\mathrm{mm}^2`$ surfaces. The external stress $`\sigma `$ is gradually increased by the slow constant displacement ($`0.02\mathrm{mm}/\mathrm{min}`$) of the jaws of the compression machine. Once the two cracks (symmetric to the hole axis) are initiated, the jaws’displacement is stopped. The crack front then propagates along the $`x`$-axis in the symmetry plane of the sample parallel to the ($`x`$,$`z`$) plane. In this geometry, the stress intensity factor $`K_I`$ is given He95  by: $`K_I=\sigma \sqrt{a}/(0.375c/a+2)`$, where $`c`$ is the length of the crack (Fig. 1a).

At the very first moments, the crack propagates very quickly. In this regime, the crack velocity $`v`$ is independent of the chemical composition of the surrounding environment Wiederhorn67 . As the crack length $`c`$ increases, $`K_I`$ decreases, and $`v`$ decreases quickly. Under vacuum, the crack stops for $`K_I`$ smaller than a critical value $`K_{Ic}`$ referred to as the toughness of the material. But in a humid atmosphere, the corrosive action of water on glass allows for slow crack propagation at much lower values of the stress Wiederhorn67 . The crack motion within the external ($`x`$,$`y`$) sample surface is then slow enough to be monitored by our experimental system combining optical microscopy and AFM (Fig. 1b). Optical image processing gives the position of the crack tip and consequently the “instantaneous" velocity for $`v`$ ranging from $`10^6`$ to $`10^9\mathrm{m}.\mathrm{s}^1`$. By AFM measurements - performed in a high amplitude resonant mode ("tapping" mode) -, one probes the crack tip neighbourhood at magnifications ranging from $`75\times 75\mathrm{nm}^2`$ to $`5\times 5\mu \mathrm{m}^2`$ Marliere01  and the crack tip motion at velocities ranging from $`10^9`$ to $`10^{12}\mathrm{m}.\mathrm{s}^1`$. The data presented below are obtained for $`K_I=0.43\mathrm{MPa}.\mathrm{m}^{1/2}`$ and $`v=3.10^{11}\mathrm{m}/\mathrm{s}`$.

Evidence of nano-scale damage cavities. Typical topographical frames in the neighbourhood of the crack tip are presented in Fig. 2. They clearly reveal cavities of typically $`20\mathrm{nm}`$ in length and $`5\mathrm{nm}`$ in width ahead of the crack tip (Fig. 2a). These cavities grow with time (Fig. 2b) until they coalesce (Fig. 2c).

To ensure that the spots observed ahead of the crack tip are actually damage cavities which grow further and coalesce with the main crack leading to failure, we use the Fracture Surface Topography Analysis (FRASTA) technique Kobayashi87  first introduced to study damage in metallic alloys. It consists in analyzing the mismatch between the two fracture surfaces. To understand how the FRASTA technique can provide physical details on the fracture mechanism, let us now consider how a ductile material breaks: In such a medium, the load application first induces a local plastic flow before generating any local failure at the level of the stress concentrators. Then, when local failure actually occurs, the stress applied on the newly formed void surfaces vanish, the applied load is redistributed to nearby unbroken material, and plastic deformation is not undergone anymore at the level of these void surfaces. Consequently, in such a ductile scenario, each cavity initiation is accompanied by local irreversible plastic deformations printed in relief on the developing fracture surfaces (the crack lines when the method is applied in two dimensions as in the present case) that should remain visible after the cavities have coalesced and the crack has crossed.

The method consists in placing the upper fracture surface (crack line in 2D) under the lower one until no void is left. Then, the two surfaces (or lines) are pulled away from each other along the direction perpendicular to the fracture plane (or direction). This is what happens during the fracture process when the external strength is applied at a constant displacement rate. At the small length scales considered here, this assumption can be made. Cavities therefore appear in the chronological order.

The crack lines are first determined by binarising the image of the sample after fracture (Fig. 3a), and the unbroken material is reconstituted virtually by placing numerically the lower line over the upper one (Fig. 3b). The lower crack line is gradually translated in the direction of decreasing $`y`$ (Fig. 3b), and the cavities appear and grow in the chronological order. The structure obtained for a given displacement, i.e. at a given time, is superimposed on images recorded prior to failure and shown to correspond actually to cavities observed at this given time (Fig. 3c). This indicates that the spots observed prior to failure are indeed depressions which are marked in relief on the final crack, and hence, are actual damage cavities.

Displacement field. A consequence of this "nano-scale ductility" can be seen in the displacement field around the crack tip (see also references Guilloteau96  for related discussion): For a slit-like plane crack in an ideal Hookean continuum solid, the stress components $`\sigma _{ij}`$ at a given point M whose cylindrical polar coordinates are $`(r,\theta ,z)`$ in the vicinity of the crack tip take the form $`\sigma _{ij}(r,\theta ,z)=f_{ij}(\theta )K_I\sqrt{2\pi r}`$ where the functions $`f_{ij}`$ are completly determined from linear elastic theory Irwin57 . Moreover, the $`z`$-displacement $`u_z`$ of the specimen surface (flat when no load is applied) is given by $`u_z(r,\theta )=_h^0ϵ_{zz}(r,\theta ,z)\mathrm{dz}`$ where $`h=4\mathrm{mm}`$ is the thickness of the specimen and $`ϵ_{zz}`$ is the direct strain in the $`z`$-direction. If the linear elastic stress-strain relation held on the nanometer scale, one gets $`ϵ_{zz}=(\sigma _{zz}\nu (\sigma _{xx}+\sigma _{yy}))/E`$ (where $`E`$ and $`\nu `$ are respectively the Young Modulus and the Poisson coefficient of the material) and consequently $`u_z(r,\theta )=G(\theta )h\nu K_I/(E\sqrt{2\pi r})`$, where $`G(\theta )`$ is a function equal to $`G(\theta )=2\mathrm{cos}(\theta /2)`$ for mode I fractures Lawn93 .

Measurements of $`u_z`$ profiles have been performed on $`1\times 1\mu \mathrm{m}^2`$ AFM topographical frames (Fig. 4a) along the direction of crack propagation (Fig. 4b) and perpendicularly to it (Fig. 4c). For both profiles, $`u_z`$ departs from the linear elastic $`r^{1/2}`$ scaling for $`r`$ smaller than a threshold $`r_c`$ highly dependent on $`\theta `$: for $`\theta =0^{}`$, $`r_c=100\mathrm{nm}`$ while for $`\theta =90^{}`$, $`r_c=20\mathrm{nm}`$. These short-range departures from the linear elastic behaviour may be related to the presence of cavities although many other phenomena could be responsible for this discrepancy. However, the fact that the order of magnitude of the ratio $`r_c(\theta =0^{})/r_c(\theta =90^{})`$ \- much higher than the ratio of the cosine terms in the linear elastic expression of $`u_z`$ \- is close to the aspect ratio of the observed damage cavities, strongly suggests a correlation between damage and non linear elasticity.

Discussion. Similar fracture experiments performed in amorphous Silica specimens reveal similar damage cavities. This suggests that their existence does not depend on the precise chemical composition of the studied glass. The cavities’ nucleation should be found more likely in the amorphous structure, which contains inherent atomic density fluctuations at the nanometer scale. Such atomic density fluctuations have been evidenced by van Brutzel, Rountree, et al. vanBrutzel97  in the structure of simulated amorphous silica by Molecular Dynamics: The Si and O atoms are shown to form Silica tetrahedra connected together to build rings of different sizes ranging from 3 to 9 tetrahedra. At larger length scales, ranging from $`1.5\mathrm{nm}`$ to $`6\mathrm{nm}`$, the density of these rings is found to fluctuate with high density areas surrounded by low density areas. Moreover, the Molecular Dynamics of van Brutzel vanBrutzel97  show that, at this length scale, crack propagates by growth and coalescence of small cavities which appear in areas with low density of rings, ahead of the crack tip. They behave as stress concentrators and grow under the stress imposed by the presence of the main crack to give birth to the cavities actually observed in the AFM frames.

Another scenario was also proposed by Falk Falk99 ; Damien02 : A small change in the interactomic potential was shown to be sufficient to generate a ductile to brittle transition in a 2D polydisperse packing of beads interacting through Lennard-Jones potential Falk99 . This sensitivity was related to the existence of non-affine rearrangements zones (groups of atoms whose motion cannot be approximated by a linear local strain tensor) whose density depends strongly on the interatomic potential range. Unfortunalty, the AFM resolution is not presently sufficient to directly evidence these non-affine molecular rearrangements.

Moreover, two roughness regimes have been actually observed on post-mortem glass fracture surfaces Bouchaud97 ; Daguier95 . The low length scales regime (from $`1\mathrm{nm}`$ to a crossover length $`\xi _c`$ ranging from $`10`$ to $`30\mathrm{nm}`$ depending on the average crack velocity) was interpreted as the consequence of the extension of an isolated damage cavity; the regime at larger length scales (from $`\xi _c`$ to $`100\mathrm{nm}`$) is thought to be linked to the structure composed of the various correlated damage cavities Bouchaud02 . The order of magnitude of $`\xi _c`$ is in good agreement with our present observations, where cavities at coalescence are a few tens of nanometers wide.

Here, let us note that AFM observations are performed on the sample surface, where the mechanical state is different from that of the bulk. It must be remembered that the stress components at the surface are contained within the free surface plane, while the deformations are fully three-dimensional. On the contrary, the bulk is in a condition of plane strain and fully three-dimensional stresses. Hence, the observed sizes and growth rates of cavities at the surface may well differ from those in the bulk. New experiments using the FRASTA method in three dimensions applied to the post-mortem study of the fracture surfaces are currently being performed, in order to have access to the three dimensional structure of bulk damage and its evolution. Through this new set of experiments, one should be able to correlate also the damage structure to the fracture surface morphology.

Moreover, the structure of damage, which influences macroscopic mechanical properties such as fracture toughness and lifetime, should then be linked to the glass composition and nanostructure vanBrutzel97 ; Falk99 ; Benoit00 . Complementary analyses addressing the question of the chemical bonds on the fracture surface will also be performed.

Finally, the fact that glass at temperatures far below the glass transition temperature Tg, considered up to now as the archetype of pure brittle material, joins the class of damageable materials should have important consequences for its mechanical properties. In applications, the design of structures using glass might be modified to take this behaviour into account, especially for slow crack propagation processes.

The similarity between the damage modes of materials as different as glass and metallic alloys is an important clue to understand the origin of puzzling universal behaviors, hence sheding new light into the basic physical mechanisms of fracture.

###### Acknowledgements.

We thank Ian Campbell and Nick Barrett for a critical reading of the manuscript. We also acknowledge Bernard Delettre for the making of the glass samples and Jean-Marie Felio and Emmanuel Arnould for technical support. We are indebted to Rajiv Kalia and Laurent Van Brutzel for enlightning discussions, and to Jean-Marc Cavedon and Georges Lozes for their constant support.


format: text

text:
# Λ⁺_𝑐- and Λ_𝑏-hypernuclei

Alberta Thy 12-02

$`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$\- and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$-hypernuclei are studied in the quark-meson coupling (QMC) model. Comparisons are made with the results for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-hypernuclei studied in the same model previously. Although the scalar and vector potentials felt by the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$ in the corresponding hypernuclei multiplet which has the same baryon numbers are quite similar, the wave functions obtained, e.g., for $`1s_{1/2}`$ state, are very different. The $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$ baryon density distribution in $`{}_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{209}`$Pb is much more pushed away from the center than that for the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ in $`{}_{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{209}`$Pb due to the Coulomb force. On the contrary, the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$ baryon density distributions in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$-hypernuclei are much larger near the origin than those for the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ in the corresponding $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-hypernuclei due to its heavy mass. It is also found that level spacing for the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$ single-particle energies is much smaller than that for the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$.
PACS number(s): 24.85.+p, 14.20.Lq, 14.20.Mr, 21.80.+a, 21.65.+f
Keywords: $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$\- and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$-hypernuclei, Single-particle energy levels, Density distributions, Quark-meson coupling model

Recently we have made a systematic study of the changes in properties of the heavy hadrons which contain a charm or a bottom quark in nuclear matter . The results suggest that the formations of charmed and bottom hypernuclei, which were predicted first in mid 70’s , are quite likely. The experimental possibilities were also studied later . In addition, we predicted the $`B^{}`$-nuclear (atomic) bound states, based on analogy with kaonic atom , and a study made for the $`D`$\- and $`\overline{D}`$-nuclear bound states  using the quark-meson coupling (QMC) model .

The QMC model, which was used there and is used in this study, has been successfully applied to many problems associated with nuclear physics and hadronic properties in nuclear medium . For example, the model was applied to the study of $`J/\mathrm{\Psi }`$ dissociation in nuclear matter , and $`D`$ and $`\overline{D}`$ productions in antiproton-nucleus collisions . Furthermore, although only limited studies for heavy mesons (not for heavy baryons) with charm in nuclear matter were made by QCD sum rule (for $`J/\mathrm{\Psi }`$  and $`D(\overline{D})`$ ), a study  for heavy baryons with a charm or a bottom quark based on quarks was made using QMC. In particular, recent measurements of polarization transfer performed at MAMI and Jlab  support the medium modification of the proton electromagnetic form factors calculated by the QMC model. The final analysis  seems to become more in favor of QMC, although still error bars may be large to draw a definite conclusion.

Certainly, the model has shortcomings to be improved eventually. Difficulties to handle it will be increased rapidly if we adopt Hartree-Fock approximation even for nuclear matter , and the inclusion of Pauli blocking at the quark level, and the $`\mathrm{\Sigma }N\mathrm{\Lambda }N`$ channel coupling have not been implemented yet in a consistent manner with the underlying quark degrees of freedom . (It should be mentioned that in the case of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$-hypernuclei no narrow states have been observed. It is unlikely that it will be possible to find such states in the present case .) Furthermore, an application to double hypernuclei has not been attempted, although recently the existence was confirmed . Nevertheless, with its simplicity and successful applicability achieved so far, we feel some confidence that such a quark-meson coupling model will provide us with valuable glimpse into the properties of charmed- and bottom-hypernuclei.

In this article, we make a quantitative study for the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$\- and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$-hypernuclei, by solving a system of equations for finite nuclei, embedding a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$ or a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$ to the closed-shell nucleus in Hartree, mean-field, approximation. Then, the results are compared with those for the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-hypernuclei , which were studied in QMC. It is shown that, although the scalar and vector potentials felt by the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$ in the corresponding hypernuclei multiplet which has the same baryon numbers are quite similar, the wave functions obtained, e.g., for $`1s_{1/2}`$ state are very different. Namely, the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$ baryon density distribution in $`{}_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{209}`$Pb is much more pushed away from the center than that for the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ in $`{}_{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{209}`$Pb due to the Coulomb force. On the contrary, the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$ baryon density distributions in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$-hypernuclei are much more central than those for the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ in the corresponding $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-hypernuclei due to its heavy mass. In addition it turns out that the level spacing for the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$ single-particle energies is much smaller than that for the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$, which may imply many interesting new phenomena, which will be discovered in due course by experiments. We hope this study opens a new possibility for experiments, related to nuclear and hadronic physics, especially for Japan Hadron Facility (JHF).

We start to consider static, (approximately) spherically symmetric charmed and bottom hypernuclei (closed shell plus one heavy baryon configuration) ignoring small non-spherical effects due to the embedded heavy baryon. We adopt Hartree, mean-field, approximation. In this approximation, $`\rho NN`$ tensor coupling gives a spin-orbit force for a nucleon bound in a static spherical nucleus, although in Hartree-Fock it can give a central force which contributes to the bulk symmetry energy . Furthermore, it gives no contribution for nuclear matter since the meson fields are independent of position and time. Thus, we ignore the $`\rho NN`$ tensor coupling in this study as usually adopted in the Hartree treatment of quantum hadrodynamics (QHD) .

Using the Born-Oppenheimer approximation, a relativistic Lagrangian density which gives the same mean-field equations of motion for a charmed or a bottom hypernucleus, in which the quasi-particles moving in single-particle orbits are three-quark clusters with the quantum numbers of a charmed baryon, a bottom baryon or a nucleon, when expanded to the same order in velocity, is given by QMC :

$`_{QMC}^{CHY}`$ $`=`$ $`_{QMC}+_{QMC}^C,`$
$`_{QMC}`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{\psi }_N(\stackrel{}{r})\left[i\gamma M_N^{}(\sigma )(g_\omega \omega (\stackrel{}{r})+g_\rho {\displaystyle \frac{\tau _3^N}{2}}b(\stackrel{}{r})+{\displaystyle \frac{e}{2}}(1+\tau _3^N)A(\stackrel{}{r}))\gamma _0\right]\psi _N(\stackrel{}{r})`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}[(\sigma (\stackrel{}{r}))^2+m_\sigma ^2\sigma (\stackrel{}{r})^2]+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}[(\omega (\stackrel{}{r}))^2+m_\omega ^2\omega (\stackrel{}{r})^2]`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}[(b(\stackrel{}{r}))^2+m_\rho ^2b(\stackrel{}{r})^2]+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(A(\stackrel{}{r}))^2,`$
$`_{QMC}^C`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{C=\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+,\mathrm{\Lambda }_b}{}}\overline{\psi }_C(\stackrel{}{r})\left[i\gamma M_C^{}(\sigma )(g_\omega ^C\omega (\stackrel{}{r})+g_\rho ^CI_3^Cb(\stackrel{}{r})+eQ_CA(\stackrel{}{r}))\gamma _0\right]\psi _C(\stackrel{}{r}),`$ (1)
where $`\psi _N(\stackrel{}{r})`$ ($`\psi _C(\stackrel{}{r})`$) and $`b(\stackrel{}{r})`$ are respectively the nucleon (charmed and bottom baryon) and the $`\rho `$ meson (the time component in the third direction of isospin) fields, while $`m_\sigma `$, $`m_\omega `$ and $`m_\rho `$ are the masses of the $`\sigma `$, $`\omega `$ and $`\rho `$ meson fields. $`g_\omega `$ and $`g_\rho `$ are the $`\omega `$-$`N`$ and $`\rho `$-$`N`$ coupling constants which are related to the corresponding ($`u,d`$)-quark-$`\omega `$, $`g_\omega ^q`$, and ($`u,d`$)-quark-$`\rho `$, $`g_\rho ^q`$, coupling constants as $`g_\omega =3g_\omega ^q`$ and $`g_\rho =g_\rho ^q`$ . Hereafter we will use notations for the quark flavors, $`qu,d`$ and $`Qs,c,b`$.

In an approximation where the $`\sigma `$, $`\omega `$ and $`\rho `$ fields couple only to the $`u`$ and $`d`$ quarks, the coupling constants in the charmed and bottom baryons are obtained as $`g_\omega ^C=(n_q/3)g_\omega `$, and $`g_\rho ^Cg_\rho =g_\rho ^q`$, with $`n_q`$ being the total number of valence $`u`$ and $`d`$ (light) quarks in the baryon $`C`$. $`I_3^C`$ and $`Q_C`$ are the third component of the baryon isospin operator and its electric charge in units of the proton charge, $`e`$, respectively. The field dependent $`\sigma `$-$`N`$ and $`\sigma `$-$`C`$ coupling strengths predicted by the QMC model, $`g_\sigma (\sigma )`$ and $`g_\sigma ^C(\sigma )`$, related to the Lagrangian density, Eq. (1), at the hadronic level are defined by:

$`M_N^{}(\sigma )`$ $``$ $`M_Ng_\sigma (\sigma )\sigma (\stackrel{}{r}),`$ (2)
$`M_C^{}(\sigma )`$ $``$ $`M_Cg_\sigma ^C(\sigma )\sigma (\stackrel{}{r}),`$ (3)
where $`M_N`$ ($`M_C`$) is the free nucleon (charmed and bottom baryon) mass (masses). Note that the dependence of these coupling strengths on the applied scalar field must be calculated self-consistently within the quark model . Hence, unlike quantum hadrodynamics (QHD) , even though $`g_\sigma ^C(\sigma )/g_\sigma (\sigma )`$ may be 2/3 or 1/3 depending on the number of light quarks in the baryon in free space ($`\sigma =0`$)111Strictly, this is true only when the bag radii of nucleon and baryon $`C`$ are exactly the same in the present model. See the last line in Eq. (11)., this will not necessarily be the case in nuclear matter. More explicit expressions for $`g_\sigma ^C(\sigma )`$ and $`g_\sigma (\sigma )`$ will be given later. From the Lagrangian density, Eq. (1), a set of equations of motion for the charm or bottom hypernuclear system is obtained,

$`[i\gamma M_N^{}(\sigma )(g_\omega \omega (\stackrel{}{r})+g_\rho {\displaystyle \frac{\tau _3^N}{2}}b(\stackrel{}{r})+{\displaystyle \frac{e}{2}}(1+\tau _3^N)A(\stackrel{}{r}))\gamma _0]\psi _N(\stackrel{}{r})=0,`$ (4)
$`[i\gamma M_C^{}(\sigma )(g_\omega ^C\omega (\stackrel{}{r})+g_\rho I_3^Cb(\stackrel{}{r})+eQ_CA(\stackrel{}{r}))\gamma _0]\psi _C(\stackrel{}{r})=0,`$ (5)
$`(_r^2+m_\sigma ^2)\sigma (\stackrel{}{r})=[{\displaystyle \frac{M_N^{}(\sigma )}{\sigma }}]\rho _s(\stackrel{}{r})[{\displaystyle \frac{M_C^{}(\sigma )}{\sigma }}]\rho _s^C(\stackrel{}{r}),`$
$`g_\sigma C_N(\sigma )\rho _s(\stackrel{}{r})+g_\sigma ^CC_C(\sigma )\rho _s^C(\stackrel{}{r}),`$ (6)
$`(_r^2+m_\omega ^2)\omega (\stackrel{}{r})=g_\omega \rho _B(\stackrel{}{r})+g_\omega ^C\rho _B^C(\stackrel{}{r}),`$ (7)
$`(_r^2+m_\rho ^2)b(\stackrel{}{r})={\displaystyle \frac{g_\rho }{2}}\rho _3(\stackrel{}{r})+g_\rho ^CI_3^C\rho _B^C(\stackrel{}{r}),`$ (8)
$`(_r^2)A(\stackrel{}{r})=e\rho _p(\stackrel{}{r})+eQ_C\rho _B^C(\stackrel{}{r}),`$ (9)
where, $`\rho _s(\stackrel{}{r})`$ ($`\rho _s^C(\stackrel{}{r})`$), $`\rho _B(\stackrel{}{r})`$ ($`\rho _B^C(\stackrel{}{r})`$), $`\rho _3(\stackrel{}{r})`$ and $`\rho _p(\stackrel{}{r})`$ are the scalar, baryon, third component of isovector, and proton densities at the position $`\stackrel{}{r}`$ in the charmed or bottom hypernuclei . On the right hand side of Eq. (6), $`[\frac{M_N^{}(\sigma )}{\sigma }]=g_\sigma C_N(\sigma )`$ and $`[\frac{M_C^{}(\sigma )}{\sigma }]=g_\sigma ^CC_C(\sigma )`$, where $`g_\sigma g_\sigma (\sigma =0)`$ and $`g_\sigma ^Cg_\sigma ^C(\sigma =0)`$, are a new, and characteristic feature of QMC beyond QHD . The effective mass for the charmed or bottom baryon $`C`$ is defined by,

$$\frac{M_C^{}(\sigma )}{\sigma }=n_qg_\sigma ^q_{bag}𝑑\stackrel{}{y}\overline{\psi }_q(\stackrel{}{y})\psi _q(\stackrel{}{y})n_qg_\sigma ^qS_C(\sigma )=\frac{}{\sigma }\left[g_\sigma ^C(\sigma )\sigma \right],$$
(10)
with the MIT bag model quantities ,

$`M_C^{}(\sigma )={\displaystyle \underset{j=q,Q}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{n_j\mathrm{\Omega }_j^{}z_C}{R_C^{}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{4}{3}}\pi (R_C^{})^3B,`$
$`S_C(\sigma )={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_q^{}/2+m_q^{}R_C^{}(\mathrm{\Omega }_q^{}1)}{\mathrm{\Omega }_q^{}(\mathrm{\Omega }_q^{}1)+m_q^{}R_C^{}/2}},`$
$`\mathrm{\Omega }_q^{}=\sqrt{x_q^2+(R_C^{}m_q^{})^2},\mathrm{\Omega }_Q^{}=\sqrt{x_Q^2+(R_C^{}m_Q)^2},m_q^{}=m_qg_\sigma ^q\sigma (\stackrel{}{r}),`$
$`C_C(\sigma )=S_C(\sigma )/S_C(0),g_\sigma ^Cn_qg_\sigma ^qS_C(0)={\displaystyle \frac{n_q}{3}}g_\sigma S_C(0)/S_N(0){\displaystyle \frac{n_q}{3}}g_\sigma \mathrm{\Gamma }_{C/N}.`$ (11)
Quantities for the nucleon are similarly obtained by replacing the indices, $`CN`$. Here, $`z_C`$, $`B`$, $`x_{q,Q}`$, and $`m_{q,Q}`$ are the parameters for the sum of the c.m. and gluon fluctuation effects, bag pressure, lowest eigenvalues for the quarks, $`q`$ or $`Q`$, respectively, and the corresponding current quark masses. $`z_N`$ and $`B`$ ($`z_C`$) are fixed by fitting the nucleon (charmed or bottom baryon) mass in free space. Concerning the sign of $`m_q^{}`$ in (hyper)nucleus, it reflects nothing but the strength of the attractive scalar potential, and thus naive interpretation of the mass for a (physical) particle, which is positive, should not be applied.

The bag radii in-medium, $`R_{N,C}^{}`$, are obtained by the equilibrium condition
$`dM_{N,C}^{}(\sigma )/dR_{N,C}|_{R_{N,C}=R_{N,C}^{}}=0`$. The bag parameters calculated and chosen for the present study in free space are, $`(z_N,z_\mathrm{\Lambda },z_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+},z_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_b})`$ $`=(3.295,3.131,1.766,0.643)`$, $`(R_N,R_\mathrm{\Lambda },R_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_C^+},R_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_b})`$ $`=(0.800,0.806,0.846,0.930)`$ fm, $`B^{1/4}=170`$ MeV, $`(m_{u,d},m_s,m_c,m_b)`$ $`=(5,250,1300,4200)`$ MeV. The parameters associated with the $`u`$, $`d`$ and $`s`$ quarks are the same as in our previous investigations . At the hadron level, the entire information on the quark dynamics is condensed in $`C_{N,C}(\sigma )`$ of Eq. (6). The parameters at the hadron level, which are already fixed by the study of infinite nuclear matter and finite nuclei , are as follows: $`m_\omega =783`$ MeV, $`m_\rho =770`$ MeV, $`m_\sigma =418`$ MeV, $`e^2/4\pi =1/137.036`$, $`g_\sigma ^2/4\pi =3.12`$, $`g_\omega ^2/4\pi =5.31`$ and $`g_\rho ^2/4\pi =6.93`$.

We briefly discuss about the spin-orbit force in QMC . The origin of the spin orbit force for a composite nucleon moving through scalar and vector fields which vary with position was explained in detail in Ref.  – c.f. sect. 3.2. The situation for the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and also for other hyperons are discussed in detail in Ref. .

In order to include the spin-orbit potential (approximately) correctly, e.g., for the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$, we add perturbatively the correction due to the vector potential, $`\frac{2}{2M_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+}^2(\stackrel{}{r})r}\left(\frac{d}{dr}g_\omega ^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+}\omega (\stackrel{}{r})\right)\stackrel{}{l}\stackrel{}{s}`$, to the single-particle energies obtained with the Dirac equation, in the same way as that added in Ref. . This may correspond to a correct spin-orbit force which is calculated by the underlying quark model :

$$V_{S.O.}^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+}(\stackrel{}{r})\stackrel{}{l}\stackrel{}{s}=\frac{1}{2M_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+}^2(\stackrel{}{r})r}\left(\frac{d}{dr}[M_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+}^{}(\stackrel{}{r})+g_\omega ^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+}\omega (\stackrel{}{r})]\right)\stackrel{}{l}\stackrel{}{s},$$
(12)
since the Dirac equation at the hadronic level solved in usual QHD-type models leads to:

$$V_{S.O.}^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+}(\stackrel{}{r})\stackrel{}{l}\stackrel{}{s}=\frac{1}{2M_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+}^2(\stackrel{}{r})r}\left(\frac{d}{dr}[M_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+}^{}(\stackrel{}{r})g_\omega ^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+}\omega (\stackrel{}{r})]\right)\stackrel{}{l}\stackrel{}{s},$$
(13)
which has the opposite sign for the vector potential, $`g_\omega ^{\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+}\omega (\stackrel{}{r})`$. The correction to the spin-orbit force, which appears naturally in the QMC model, may also be modeled at the hadronic level of the Dirac equation by adding a tensor interaction, motivated by the quark model . Here, we should make a comment that, as was discussed by Dover and Gal  in detail, one boson exchange model with underlying (approximate) SU(3) symmetry in strong interaction, also leads to the weaker spin-orbit forces for the (strange) hyperon-nucleon ($`YN`$) than that for the nucleon-nucleon ($`NN`$).

However, in practice, because of its heavy mass ($`M_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+}^{}`$), contribution to the single-particle energies from the spin-orbit potential with or without including the correction term, turned out to be even smaller than that for the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-hypernuclei, and further smaller for the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$-hypernuclei. Contribution from the spin-orbit potential with the correction term is typically of order $`0.01`$ MeV, and even for the largest case is $`0.1`$ MeV. This can be understood when one considers the limit, $`M_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+}^{}\mathrm{}`$ in Eq. (12), where the quantity inside the square brackets varies smoothly from an order of hundred MeV to zero near the surface of the hypernucleus, and the derivative with respect to $`r`$ is finite. (See also Figs. 2 and 3.)

Now we discuss the results. First, we show in Fig. 1 the total baryon density distributions in $`{}_{j}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{41}`$Ca and $`{}_{j}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{209}`$Pb ($`j=\mathrm{\Lambda },\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+,\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$), for $`1s_{1/2}`$ configuration in each hypernucleus. Note that because of the self-consistency, the total baryon density distributions are dependent on the configurations of the embedded particles. The total baryon density distributions are quite similar for the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$\- and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$-hypernuclei multiplet which has the same baryon numbers, A, since the effect of $`\mathrm{\Lambda },\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$ is $`1/A`$ for each hypernucleus. Nevertheless, one notices that the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$-hypernuclei density near the center is slightly higher than the corresponding $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$\- and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$-hypernuclei. This is because the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$ is heavy and localized nearer the center, and contributes to the total baryon density there. The baryon (probability) density distributions for the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$ in corresponding hypernuclei will be shown later.

Next, in Figs. 2 and 3, we show the scalar and vector potentials felt by the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$ for $`1s_{1/2}`$ state in $`{}_{j}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{41}`$Ca and $`{}_{j}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{209}`$Pb ($`j=\mathrm{\Lambda },\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+,\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$), and the corresponding probability density distributions in Fig. 4. In Figs. 2 and 3 ”Pauli” stands for the effective, repulsive, potential representing the Pauli blocking at the quark level plus the $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{c,b}N\mathrm{\Lambda }_{c,b}N`$ channel coupling, introduced at the baryon level phenomenologically . For the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$, the Coulomb potentials are also shown. As for the case of the nuclear matter , the scalar and vector potentials felt by these particles in hypernuclei multiplet which has the same baryon numbers are also quite similar. Thus, as far as the total baryon density distributions and the scalar and vector potentials are concerned, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$\- and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$-hypernuclei show quite similar features within the multiplet. However, as shown in Fig. 4, the wave functions obtained for $`1s_{1/2}`$ state are very different. The $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$ baryon density distribution in $`{}_{\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{209}`$Pb is much more pushed away from the center than that for the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ in $`{}_{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{209}`$Pb due to the Coulomb force. On the contrary, the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$ baryon density distributions in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$-hypernuclei are much larger near the origin than those for the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ in the corresponding $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-hypernuclei due to its heavy mass.

Having obtained reasonable ideas about the potentials felt by $`\mathrm{\Lambda },\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$, we show the calculated single-particle energies in Tables 1 and 2. Results for the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-hypernuclei are from Ref. . In these calculations, effective Pauli blocking, the effect of the $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{c,b}N\mathrm{\Lambda }_{c,b}N`$ channel coupling, and correction to the spin-orbit force based on the underlying quark structure are included in the same way as adopted in Ref. . (However, recall that the negligibly small contribution from the correction terms for the spin-orbit force, and also contributions from the spin-orbit force itself.) Note that since the mass difference of the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_c`$ is larger than that of the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, and it is probably also true for the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_b`$, we expect the effect of the channel coupling for the charmed and bottom hypernuclei is smaller than those for the strange hypernuclei, although the same parameters were used in the present calculation. In addition, we searched for the single-particle states up to the same highest state as that of the core neutrons in each hypernucleus, since the deeper levels are usually easier to observe in experiment.

In Tables 1 and 2, it is clear that the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$ single-particle energy levels are higher than the corresponding levels for the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$. This is a consequence of the Coulomb force. This feature becomes stronger as the proton number in the core nucleus increases.

Second, the level spacing for the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$ single-particle energies is much smaller than that for the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$. This may be ascribed to its heavy mass (or $`M_b^{}`$). In the Dirac equation for the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$, the mass term dominates more than that of the term proportional to Dirac’s $`\kappa `$, which classifies the states, or single-particle wave functions. (See Refs.  for detail.) This small level spacing would make it very difficult to distinguish the states in experiment, or to achieve such high resolution. On the other hand, this may imply also many new phenomena. It will have a large probability to trap a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$ among one of those many states, especially in heavy nucleus such as lead (Pb). What are the consequences ? May be the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$ weak decay happens inside a heavy nucleus with a very low probability ? Does it emit many photons when the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$ gradually makes transitions from a deeper state to a shallower state ? All these questions raise a flood of speculations.

To summarize, we have made a quantitative study for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$\- and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$-hypernuclei in a quark-meson coupling model. We have solved a system of equations in a self-consistent approach for several finite nuclei with closed shell plus a hyperon ($`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$ or $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$), embedding a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$ or $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$ in the nucleus. Results are compared with those for the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-hypernuclei. It is shown that, although the scalar and vector potentials felt by the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$\- and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$ are quite similar in corresponding hypernuclei multiplet which has the same baryon numbers, the single-particle wave functions, and single-particle energy level spacings are quite different. For the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$-hypernuclei, the Coulomb force plays a crucial role, and so does the heavy $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$ mass for the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$-hypernuclei. It should be emphasized that we have used the values for the coupling constants of $`\sigma `$ (or $`\sigma `$-field dependent strength), $`\omega `$ and $`\rho `$ to the $`\mathrm{\Lambda },\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$ determined automatically based on the underlying quark model, as for the nucleon and other baryons. (Recall that the values for the vector $`\omega `$ fields to any baryons can be obtained by the number of light quarks in a baryon, but those for the $`\sigma `$ are different as shown in Eqs. (10) and (11).) Phenomenology would determine ultimately if the coupling constants (strengths) determined by the underlying quark model actually work for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$ or not. Although implications of the present results can be speculated a great deal, we would like to emphasize that, what we showed is that the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$\- and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$-hypernuclei would exist in realistic experimental conditions. Experiments at facilities like JHF would provide further inputs to gain a better understanding of the interaction of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$ with the nuclear matter. Additional studies are needed to investigate the semi-leptonic weak decay of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$ hyperons. The role of Pauli blocking and density in influencing the decay rates as compared to the free hyperons would be highly useful. Such study can have an impact on the hadronization of the quark-gluon plasma and the transport of hadrons in nuclear matter of high density. Will the high density lead to a slower decay and that a higher probability to survive its passage through the material ? At present the study of the presence of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$ in finite nuclei is its infancy. Careful investigations, both theoretical and experimental, would lead to a much better understanding of the role of heavy quarks in finite nuclei.

Acknowledgment
The authors would like to thank Prof. A.W. Thomas for the hospitality at the CSSM, Adelaide, where this work was initiated. K.T. acknowledges support and warm hospitality at University of Alberta, where this work was completed. K.T. is supported by the Forschungszentrum-Jülich, contract No. 41445282 (COSY-058). The work of F.K. is supported by NSERCC.


text:
# Dynamical bistability in quantum dot structures: The role of Auger processes

## I Introduction

Semiconductor quantum dots (QDs) formed by self-organized growth processes Bimberg et al. (1999) allow for the spatial confinement of electrons on a scale of 10 nm. This suggests that these structures may serve as extremely small memory devices. A first step in this direction is the investigation of specially grown structures where the charging of a layer of QDs could be detected via its influence on the conductivity of a two dimensional electron gas Yusa and Sakaki (1997); Finley et al. (1998). These experiments showed a pronounced bistability (up to room temperature Koike et al. (2000)) depending on the history of the bias sweep. The sensitivity to light illumination suggests a variety of applications in photoelectronic devices Bödefeld et al. (1999); Shields et al. (1999).

A key issue towards a detailed understanding of these experiments is the question if the observed bistability is of transient nature, and the order of the time scales involved. In order to elucidate this point we performed a simulation of the experiment from Ref. Yusa and Sakaki, 1997 applying a drift-diffusion model combined with the generation-recombination (GR) kinetics of the QDs. Our results show that the experiments can be well described if Auger processes constitute the dominant GR-processes. Therefore this type of experiments may serve as an additional tool to shed light into the controversial issue on the nature of electron capture in quantum dots Feldmann et al. (2001); Raymond et al. (2000); Heitz et al. (1997).

## II The Model

Here we consider the structure used in the experiment of Ref. Yusa and Sakaki, 1997 as sketched in Fig. 1. From the experimentally determined size of the QDs (height $`h=5\mathrm{nm}`$ and diameter $`20\mathrm{nm}`$) we estimate a ground state binding energy of $`E_\mathrm{b}=250\mathrm{meV}`$ Stier et al. (1999). We use a QD density $`N_{\mathrm{QD}}=7.5\times 10^{10}/\mathrm{cm}^2`$ .

We model the transport in the conduction band by a drift-diffusion approach assuming a stationary state similar to Ref. Wetzler et al., 2000, which is justified if the dielectric relaxation time is short compared to other dynamical features. This provides us with the one-dimensional continuity equation

$$\frac{}{z}\left[\mu n(z)\frac{}{z}E_F(z)\right]=ef[n(z_{\mathrm{QD}}),n_{\mathrm{QD}}^{2\mathrm{D}}(t)]\chi _{\mathrm{QD}}(z)$$
(1)
with the characteristic function

$`\chi _{\mathrm{QD}}(z):=\{\begin{array}{c}1/h(z\text{QD layer})\\ 0(z\text{QD layer})\end{array}`$ (4)
and the electron capture rate $`f`$ which determines the electron density in the QD layer (in units $`\mathrm{sec}^1\mathrm{cm}^2`$)

$$\frac{}{t}n_{\mathrm{QD}}^{2\mathrm{D}}(t)=f[n(z_{\mathrm{QD}}),n_{\mathrm{QD}}^{2\mathrm{D}}(t)].$$
(5)
Here, $`e>0`$ is the elementary charge, $`\mu =2\times 10^5\mathrm{cm}^2/\mathrm{Vs}`$ is the electron mobility (at 77 K) and $`n_{\mathrm{QD}}^{2\mathrm{D}}`$ is the density per unit area of the electrons trapped within the QDs at position $`z_{QD}`$, $`E_F`$ is the Quasi-Fermi level of the electrons, which is related to the free electron density $`n`$ by

$$\begin{array}{cc}& n(z)=N_c(z)F_{1/2}\left(\frac{E_F(z)E_{c0}(z)+e\varphi (z)}{k_BT}\right)\hfill \\ & \mathrm{with}N_c=2\left(\frac{m_ek_BT}{2\pi \mathrm{}^2}\right)^{3/2}\hfill \end{array}$$
(6)
and the Fermi integral $`F_{1/2}`$. Here $`m_e`$ is the effective mass, $`E_{c0}`$ the intrinsic band edge of the conduction band (we set $`E_{c0}=0`$ for GaAs and use $`E_{c0}=0.198`$ meV for the Al0.25Ga0.75As layer), $`T`$ the lattice temperature, $`k_B`$ Boltzmann’s constant, and $`\varphi `$ denotes the electric potential. Quantization effects in the two dimensional electron gas are neglected for simplicity.

The electron capture rate $`f`$ is assumed to be a combination of Auger processes and single electron processes (like multi-phonon capture and emission) in the following way:

$$f[n(z_{\text{QD}}),n_{\mathrm{QD}}^{2\mathrm{D}}]=(Cn^{2\mathrm{D}}+\sigma )(n^{2\mathrm{D}}p_{\mathrm{QD}}^{2\mathrm{D}}n_1^{2\mathrm{D}}n_{\mathrm{QD}}^{2\mathrm{D}})$$
(7)
Here $`n^{2\mathrm{D}}=n(z_{\text{QD}})h`$ is the effective free electron density at the QDs per unit area (which may be related to a wetting layer density of the same order of magnitude), $`p_{\mathrm{QD}}^{2\mathrm{D}}=2N_{\mathrm{QD}}n_{\mathrm{QD}}^{2\mathrm{D}}`$ is the density of unoccupied QD states for twofold degeneracy. $`C`$ and $`\sigma `$ are the rate coefficients for the Auger and multi-phonon process, respectively (see also Ref. Raymond et al., 2000). For the Auger process, electron capture requires the presence of two electrons in the vicinity of the QD, as well as an empty dot state. Thus the capture rate is proportional to $`(n^{2\mathrm{D}})^2p_{\mathrm{QD}}^{2\mathrm{D}}`$. In contrast, for single electron processes the energy is transfered to different degrees of freedom (such as phonons) and the rate is proportional to $`n^{2\mathrm{D}}p_{\mathrm{QD}}^{2\mathrm{D}}`$. The respective electron emission rates (with negative sign) are obtained from the principle of detailed balance for equilibrium distributions Schöll (1987). Assuming nondegeneracy in the conduction band, we find $`n^{2\mathrm{D}}=N_ch\mathrm{exp}[(E_F+e\varphi )/k_BT]`$ and $`n_{\mathrm{QD}}^{2\mathrm{D}}/p_{\mathrm{QD}}^{2\mathrm{D}}=\mathrm{exp}[(E_F+E_b+e\varphi )/k_BT]`$ in equilibrium. Thus $`n^{2\mathrm{D}}p_{\mathrm{QD}}^{2\mathrm{D}}/n_{\mathrm{QD}}^{2\mathrm{D}}=N_ch\mathrm{exp}(E_b/k_BT)n_1^{2\mathrm{D}}`$, and the prefactor $`n_1^{2\mathrm{D}}`$ in Eq. (7) ensures the vanishing of the rates in thermodynamic equilibrium.

The continuity equation (1) has to be combined with the one-dimensional Poisson equation

$$\begin{array}{cc}& ϵ_0\frac{}{z}\left[ϵ_r(z)\frac{}{z}\varphi (z)\right]=\rho (z)\hfill \\ \hfill \mathrm{with}& \rho (z)=e[N_D^+(z)n(z)n_{\mathrm{QD}}^{2\mathrm{d}}(t)\chi _{\mathrm{QD}}(z)]\hfill \end{array}$$
(8)
where $`N_D^+`$ is the density of ionized donors resulting from the $`\delta `$-doping and $`ϵ_0`$ and $`ϵ_r`$ are the absolute and relative permittivity.

The boundary condition for the quasi-Fermi level is $`E_F=0`$ at the AlGaAs/GaAs interface due the contact with the two dimensional electron gas (2DEG) and $`E_F=eV_g`$ at the GaAs/Al interface. Here the Schottky barrier height $`E_S=1.0`$ eV determines the difference between the conduction band edge and the Fermi level in the metal. Thus $`e\varphi (z_{\text{Schottky}})=E_SeV_g`$ provides a Dirichlet boundary condition for $`\varphi `$. The second boundary condition of Neumann type results from the charge of the ionized donors at the $`\delta `$-doping. All calculations are performed at 77 K.

## III Results

At first we consider only Auger processes. We use $`C=2\times 10^{12}\mathrm{cm}^4/s`$, which was calculated in Ref. Uskov et al., 1998. Fig. 2(a) shows the density $`N_s`$ of the 2DEG versus the gate voltage for a bias sweep from $`V_g=0`$ V to 1 V and back to 0 V (indicated by the arrows) with a constant sweep rate and a total sweep duration of 1 hour Yusa (2002). The findings are in excellent agreement with the corresponding experimental data, see the broken line of Fig. 1 in Ref. Yusa and Sakaki, 1997, except for an overall shift of the densities by $`2\times 10^{10}/\text{cm}^2`$ (larger density in the experiment). Fig. 2(b) shows the corresponding occupation probability of the QDs, demonstrating that the charging state of the QDs discriminates between the different conducting states. For a comparison we have also shown the result for the stationary situation $`f[n,n_{\mathrm{QD}}^{2\mathrm{D}}]=0`$. This shows that both during the up- and down-sweep nonequilibrium distributions persist, as the GR rates are not fast enough to establish thermodynamic equilibrium.

The dynamical nature of the bistability manifests itself in the time dependence of the bias sweep, see Fig. 3. This shows that the behavior is robust against changes in the time scales by several orders of magnitude albeit the plateau density where the dots are charged is slightly changing with the sweep duration. Below this density the charge on the QDs is hardly changed even for the slowest sweep rate. This result indicates that the branches are stable on rather long time scales, an important feature for possible applications. Time scales of 100 h have been demonstrated in Ref. Koike et al. (2000) at room temperature where a more complicated structure was used.

The rather long relaxation times are due to the fact that Auger rates depend quadratically on the electron density $`n`$, see Eq. (7). Indeed the potential profile provides rather low electron densities at the QDs for biases below $`0.7V`$, leading to a very small capture rate.

The $`N_s(V_g)`$ characteristic can be understood as follows: Starting from equilibrium at $`V_g=0`$, the quantum dots are essentially unoccupied. This implies a linear potential distribution over the entire GaAs layer with a potential $`\varphi (z_{\text{QD}})(V_gE_S/e)W/L`$ at the QDs. Here $`L`$ is the distance between the 2DEG and the Schottky contact and $`W`$ is the distance between the 2DEG and the QDs. (We used $`e\varphi (z_{2\mathrm{D}\mathrm{E}\mathrm{G}})0`$ as the Fermi level $`E_F=0`$ is close to the band edge at the 2DEG.) Assuming that the electrons are in equilibrium with the 2DEG, we have

$$n(z_{\text{QD}})N_c\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{E_SeV_g}{k_BT}\frac{W}{L}\right).$$
(9)
For biases below $`V_{\text{crit}}`$ this density is so small that the corresponding capture rates hardly change the occupation of the QDs on the time scale of the bias sweep. Therefore the linear potential drop in the GaAs layer persists and the density of the 2DEG increases with $`V_g`$. At $`V_g=V_{\text{crit}}`$ the capture rate becomes

$$f[n(z_{\text{QD}}),0]=\frac{}{t}n_{\mathrm{QD}}^{2\mathrm{D}}(t)=\frac{ϵ_rϵ_0}{e(LW)}\frac{\mathrm{d}V_g}{\mathrm{d}t}.$$
(10)
Then the charge captured in the quantum dots just screens any further increase of the bias, so that the field on the left side of the dots (as well as the density of the 2DEG) remains constant. Sweeping down the bias, the electron density $`n(z_{\text{QD}})`$ decreases and so do the capture rates. Therefore the charge in the QDs remains almost constant during the down sweep, explaining the linear decrease of the 2DEG electron density.

The magnitude of the Auger coefficient is controversial. E.g., in Ref. Raymond et al., 2000 a value of $`C=10^8\mathrm{cm}^4/s`$ was deduced from experimental data. The corresponding $`N_s(V_g)`$ curve is given in Fig. 4 (dashed curve). The result differs only slightly but agrees less well with the experimental data. This indicates that the findings are not very sensitive to the magnitude of $`C`$ which just rescales the time scales. \[This follows directly from Eq. (10): Only the ratio between the capture coefficients and $`\mathrm{d}V_g/\mathrm{d}t`$ matters.\] The analysis of Ref. Raymond et al., 2000 provides additionally a single electron capture coefficient $`\sigma =1\mathrm{cm}^2/\mathrm{s}`$ in Eq. (7). The corresponding result is shown by the dash-dotted line in Fig. 4. The presence of the single electron term strongly changes the behavior. Regarding the large plateau width and its low electron density, this result is not compatible with the experiment Yusa and Sakaki (1997).

In Fig. (5) the result is given for different single electron capture coefficients $`\sigma `$ while Auger processes are neglected (i.e. $`C=0`$). Good agreement with the experiment is found for $`\sigma =2\times 10^8\mathrm{cm}^2/\mathrm{s}`$ while values above $`\sigma 10^4\mathrm{cm}^2/\mathrm{s}`$ are in strong disagreement with the experimental findings.

Experimentally, electron capture times of the order of $`10100`$ ps for high carrier densities have been observed, see, e.g. Ref. Feldmann et al. (2001) and references cited therein. For dot densities of $`10^{10}10^{11}/\mathrm{cm}^2`$ this implies $`\sigma 10^2\mathrm{cm}^2/\mathrm{s}`$ if single electron processes are dominating. From our study of the dynamical bistability this seems to be too large. On the other hand the Auger coefficient $`C=2\times 10^{12}\mathrm{cm}^4/\mathrm{s}`$ gives capture times of 25 ps for a (wetting) layer density of $`10^{11}/\mathrm{cm}^2`$ and a dot density of $`10^{11}/\mathrm{cm}^2`$. The times become even shorter for larger values of $`C<10^8\mathrm{cm}^4/\mathrm{s}`$, which are also consistent with our study.

## IV Conclusion

We have shown that the bistability observed in quantum dot structures is of dynamical nature with time scales of the order of months under appropriate conditions. The long time scales result from the dependence of the Auger capture and emission rate on the conduction band electron densities. For not too large gate biases, the densities are low and thus the kinetics is extremely slow. The analysis of this kind of experiments allows for additional information to study the relevance of Auger capture in comparison to single electron processes as multi-phonon emission. Our findings suggest an upper bound for single electron processes $`\sigma <10^4\mathrm{cm}^2/\mathrm{s}`$. Such values are not compatible with observed capture rates at high electron densities. In contrast, Auger capture coefficients in the range of $`10^{12}\mathrm{cm}^4/\mathrm{s}<C<10^8\mathrm{cm}^4/\mathrm{s}`$ agree well with the fast dynamics for high carrier densities and explain the slow dynamics for low carrier densities where the dynamical bistability is observed.

This work was supported by DFG in the framework of SFB 296.