format: text

text:
# After bulky brane inflation

## Abstract

Reheating or entropy production on the three-brane from a decaying bulk scalar field is studied in the brane-world picture of the Universe. It is shown that a significant amount of dark radiation is produced in this process unless only the modes which satisfy a specific relation are excited, so that subsequent entropy production within the brane is required in general before primordial nucleosynthesis.

preprint: OU-TAP

Any new theory of gravity and/or high energy physics must pass a number of cosmological tests, among which is implementation of cosmological inflation . Successful inflation must fulfill three requirements, namely, sufficiently long quasi-exponential expansion driven by vacuum-like energy density such as a potential energy of a scalar field, termination of accelerated expansion associated with entropy production or reheating to set the initial state of the classical hot Big Bang cosmology well before the primordial nucleosynthesis , and generation of primordial fluctuations with desired amplitude and spectrum . It is much more difficult to achieve the second element than the first in general, and the third one typically requires fine tuning of model parameters.

In this paper we consider reheating after inflation in the brane world picture of the Universe . In this scenario, our Universe is described on the four-dimensional boundary (three-brane) of $`Z_2`$-symmetric five-dimensional spacetime with a negative cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_56k^2`$, where $`k`$ is a positive constant. This situation not only takes into account the spirit of Horava-Witten theory , but also recovers the Einstein gravity around the brane with positive tension . Much work has been done on brane-world cosmology  including inflationary brane solutions .

We assume the five-dimensional Einstein gravity with a negative cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_5`$ and a three-brane at the fifth coordinate $`w=0`$ about which the spacetime is $`Z_2`$ symmetric. We write the metric near the brane in the following form in terms of the Gaussian normal coordinate.

$`ds_5^2`$ $`=`$ $`g_{AB}dx^Adx^B=N^2(t,w)dt^2+Q^2(t,w)a^2(t)\left(dx^2+dy^2+dz^2\right)+dw^2q_{\mu \nu }dx^\mu dx^\nu +dw^2,`$ (1)
where capital Latin indices run 0,1,2,3, and 5 while Greek indices from 0 to 3. We take $`N=Q=1`$ on the brane $`w=0`$. One can write down functional forms of $`N(t,w)`$ and $`Q(t,w)`$ explicitly as

$`Q^2(t,w)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{cosh}(2kw)+\frac{1}{2}k^2H^2\left(\mathrm{cosh}(2kw)1\right)\sqrt{1+k^2H^2+Ca^4}\mathrm{sinh}(2k|w|),`$ (2)
$`N^2(t,w)`$ $`=`$ $`Q^2(t,w)\left[\mathrm{cosh}(2kw)+\frac{1}{2}k^2\left(H^2+\dot{H}\right)\left(\mathrm{cosh}(2kw)1\right){\displaystyle \frac{1+\frac{1}{2}k^2\left(2H^2+\dot{H}\right)}{\sqrt{1+k^2H^2+Ca^4}}}\mathrm{sinh}(2k|w|)\right]^2,`$ (3)
in the case the bulk is in a vacuum state with a negative cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_5`$, where $`C`$ is an integration constant . In this solution the induced metric on the brane is nothing but the spatially flat Robertson-Walker metric with the scale factor $`a(t)`$.

The evolution equation on the brane in this case is given by

$`H^2`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{\dot{a}}{a}}\right)^2={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa _5^4\sigma }{18}}\rho _{\mathrm{tot}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }_4}{3}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa _5^4}{36}}\rho _{\mathrm{tot}}^2{\displaystyle \frac{k^2C}{a^4}},`$ (4)
$`\mathrm{\Lambda }_4`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(\mathrm{\Lambda }_5+{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa _5^2}{6}}\sigma ^2\right),`$ (5)
where $`\kappa _5^2`$ is the five dimensional gravitational constant related with the five dimensional reduced Planck scale, $`M_5`$, by $`\kappa _5^2=M_5^3`$. Here $`\sigma `$ is the brane tension, $`\rho _{\mathrm{tot}}`$ is the total energy density on the brane, and the last term of (4) represents the so-called dark radiation with $`C`$ being an integration constant . In order to recover the standard Friedmann equation with a vanishing cosmological constant at low energy scales, we require $`\sigma =6k/\kappa _5^2`$ and $`\kappa _4^2=\kappa _5^4\sigma /6=\kappa _5^2k`$, where $`\kappa _4^2`$ is the four dimensional gravitational constant related with the four dimensional reduced Planck scale, $`M_4`$, as $`\kappa _4^2=M_4^2`$. We therefore find $`M_4^2=M_5^3/k`$. That is, if we take $`k=M_4`$, all the fundamental scales in the theory take the same value, $`k=M_4=M_5`$. Note that $`k`$ also sets the scale above which the nonstandard term quadratic in $`\rho _{\mathrm{tot}}`$ is effective in (4). We assume that $`k`$ is much larger than the scale of inflation so that such quadratic corrections are negligible.

We consider the case inflation is driven by a bulk scalar field $`\varphi `$ with a five-dimensional potential $`V[\varphi ]`$  and study the evolution of $`\varphi `$ after brane inflation, because reheating is expected to proceed in the same way as in four dimensional theory if the inflaton lives only on the brane . Since $`\varphi `$ is homogenized in three space as a result of inflation, it depends only on $`t`$ and $`w`$. We consider a situation that $`\varphi `$ rapidly oscillates around $`\varphi =0`$ and assume that $`V[\varphi ]`$ is expressed as $`V[\varphi ]=m^2\varphi ^2/2`$. Then the Klein-Gordon equation reads

$$\mathrm{}_5\varphi (w,t)V^{}[\varphi (w,t)]=\frac{1}{\sqrt{g}}_t\left(\sqrt{g}g^{00}\dot{\varphi }\right)+\frac{1}{\sqrt{g}}_w\left(\sqrt{g}\varphi _{,w}\right)V^{}[\varphi ]=0,$$
(6)
where a dot denotes time differentiation. In order to express energy release of $`\varphi `$ we introduce the following dissipation term phenomenologically in (6).

$$\mathrm{}_5\varphi (w,t)V^{}[\varphi (w,t)]=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_D}{2k}\delta (w)\frac{1}{N}\dot{\varphi }+\mathrm{\Gamma }_B\frac{1}{N}\dot{\varphi }.$$
(7)
Here $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_D`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_B`$ represent energy release to the brane and to the entire space, respectively. The denominator in the right-hand-side is introduced on dimensional grounds.

From (6) and (7) together with the $`Z_2`$ symmetry, we find

$$\varphi _{,w}^+=\varphi _{,w}^{}=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_D}{4k}\dot{\varphi }(0,t),$$
(8)
where superscripts $`+`$ and $``$ imply values at $`w+0`$ and $`0`$, respectively.

The divergence of the energy-momentum tensor of the scalar field,

$$T_{MN}^{(\varphi )}=\varphi _{,M}\varphi _{,N}g_{MN}\left(\frac{1}{2}g^{PQ}\varphi _{,P}\varphi _{,Q}+V[\varphi ]\right),$$
(9)
reads,

$$T_{A;C}^{(\varphi )C}=\left\{\mathrm{}_5\varphi (w,t)V^{}[\varphi (w,t)]\right\}\varphi _{,A}=\left[\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_D}{2k}\delta (w)\frac{1}{N}\dot{\varphi }+\mathrm{\Gamma }_B\frac{1}{N}\dot{\varphi }\right]\varphi _{,A}.$$
(10)
Integrating $`A=0`$ component of (10) from $`w=ϵ`$ to $`w=+ϵ`$ near the brane, we find (8) from the zeroth order in $`ϵ`$ and

$$\frac{\rho _\varphi (0,t)}{t}=(3H+\mathrm{\Gamma }_B)\dot{\varphi }^2(0,t)J_\varphi (0,t),$$
(11)
with

$$\rho _\varphi \frac{1}{2}\dot{\varphi }^2+V[\varphi ],J_\varphi \frac{\dot{\varphi }}{\sqrt{g}}_w\left(\sqrt{g}\varphi _{,w}\right),$$
(12)
from the terms proportional to $`ϵ`$. Thus the energy dissipated by the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_D`$ term on the brane is entirely compensated by the energy flow onto the brane.

Next we study how the energy released from $`\varphi `$ affects evolution of our brane Universe by analyzing gravitational field equations . In the present situation the total energy momentum tensor including the contribution of bulk cosmological constant reads

$$T_{MN}=\kappa _5^2\mathrm{\Lambda }_5g_{MN}+T_{MN}^{(\varphi )}+S_{MN}\delta (w),$$
(13)
where $`S_{MN}`$ is the stress tensor on the brane. Its nonvanishing components can be further decomposed as

$$S_{\mu \nu }=\sigma q_{\mu \nu }+\tau _{\mu \nu }.$$
(14)
Here $`\tau _{\mu \nu }`$ represents energy momentum tensor of the radiation fields produced by decay of $`\varphi `$ and it is of the form $`\tau _\nu ^\mu =\mathrm{diag}(\rho _r,p_r,p_r,p_r)`$ with $`p_r=\rho _r/3`$.

In terms of the unit vector $`n_M=(0,0,0,0,1)`$ normal to the brane, the extrinsic curvature of a $`w=`$constant hypersurface is given by $`K_{MN}=q_M^Pq_N^Qn_{Q;P}`$ with $`q_{MN}=g_{MN}n_Mn_N`$. Then from the Codazzi equation and the five dimensional Einstein equation, we find

$$D_\nu K_\mu ^\nu D_\mu K=\kappa _5^2T_{MN}n^Nq_\mu ^M=\kappa _5^2T_{\mu w}=\kappa _5^2\dot{\varphi }\varphi _{,w}\delta _\mu ^0,$$
(15)
where $`D_\nu `$ stands for the four dimensional covariant derivative with respect to the metric $`q_{\mu \nu }`$. The above equation reads

$$D_\nu K_0^{\nu +}D_0K^+=\kappa _5^2\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_D}{4k}\dot{\varphi }^2(0,t),$$
(16)
near the brane, $`w+0`$.

From the junction condition and the $`Z_2`$-symmetry, on the other hand, we find

$$K_{\mu \nu }^+=\frac{\kappa _5^2}{2}\left(S_{\mu \nu }\frac{1}{3}q_{\mu \nu }S\right),$$
(17)
therefore

$$D_\nu K_\mu ^{\nu +}D_\mu K^+=\frac{\kappa _5^2}{2}D_\nu S_\mu ^\nu =\frac{\kappa _5^2}{2}D_\nu \tau _\mu ^\nu .$$
(18)
Combining (16) and (18), we obtain

$$D_\nu \tau _\mu ^\nu =\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_D}{2k}\dot{\varphi }^2\delta _\mu ^0,$$
(19)
namely,

$$\frac{\rho _r}{t}=3H(\rho _r+p_r)+\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_D}{2k}\dot{\varphi }^2=4H\rho _r+\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_D}{2k}\dot{\varphi }^2,$$
(20)
on the brane. Thus we find only the dissipation term proportional to $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_D`$ with the delta function is effective to reheat the brane. This equation has the same form as the reheating in perturbation theory after conventional inflation in four dimensional theory .

On the other hand, the four dimensional Einstein tensor, $`G_\mu ^{(4)\nu }`$, satisfies the following equality on the brane ,

$$G_\mu ^{(4)\nu }=\kappa _4^2\left(T_\mu ^{(s)\nu }+\tau _\mu ^\nu \right)+\kappa _5^4\pi _\mu ^\nu E_\mu ^\nu ,$$
(21)
with

$$T_\mu ^{(s)\nu }\frac{1}{6k}\left[4q^{\nu \zeta }\varphi _{,\mu }\varphi _{,\varsigma }+\left(\frac{3}{2}\varphi _{,w}^2\frac{5}{2}q^{\xi \zeta }\varphi _{,\xi }\varphi _{,\varsigma }\frac{3}{2}m^2\varphi ^2\right)q_\mu ^\nu \right].$$
(22)
Here $`\pi _\mu ^\nu `$ represents terms quadratic in $`\tau _\alpha ^\beta `$ which are higher order in $`\rho _r/(kM_4)^2`$ and are consistently neglected in our analysis. $`E_\mu ^\nu C_{\mu w}^{w\nu }`$ is a component of the five dimensional Wyel tensor $`C_{PQ}^{MN}`$, which is the origin of the dark radiation .

Now we write down the four dimensional Bianchi identity,

$$D_\nu G_\mu ^{(4)\nu }=0=\kappa _4^2\left(D_\nu T_\mu ^{(s)\nu }+D_\nu \tau _\mu ^\nu \right)D_\nu E_\mu ^\nu ,$$
(23)
to yield

$$D_\nu E_0^\nu =\frac{\kappa _4^2}{2k}\frac{}{t}\left(\frac{1}{2}\dot{\varphi }^2\frac{1}{2}\varphi _{,w}^2+\frac{1}{2}m^2\varphi ^2\right)\frac{2\kappa _4^2H}{k}\dot{\varphi }^2\frac{\kappa _4^2}{2k}\mathrm{\Gamma }_D\dot{\varphi }^2.$$
(24)
Note that $`\varphi _{,w}^2=\mathrm{\Gamma }_D^2\dot{\varphi }^2/(16k^2)`$ on the brane and is negligibly small compared with $`\dot{\varphi }^2`$, since we expect the dissipation rate $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_D`$ is at most comparable to the scale of inflation and hence much smaller than the scale $`k`$. With this approximation the quantity in the parenthesis in (24) may be replaced by $`\rho _\varphi (0,t)`$. We also find $`D_\nu E_0^\nu =_0E_0^0+4HE_0^0`$ because $`E_\mu ^\nu `$ is traceless.

As a result we obtain the following set of evolution equations in the brane universe $`w=0`$ in terms of $`\phi (t)\varphi (0,t)/\sqrt{2k}`$.

$`H^2`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{\dot{a}}{a}}\right)^2={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa _4^2}{3}}\left(\rho _\phi +\rho _r+\epsilon \right),\rho _\phi {\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\dot{\phi }^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}m^2\phi ^2={\displaystyle \frac{\rho _\varphi }{2k}},\epsilon {\displaystyle \frac{E_0^0}{\kappa _4^2}},`$ (25)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _\phi }{t}}`$ $`=`$ $`(3H+\mathrm{\Gamma }_B)\dot{\phi }^2J_\phi ,J_\phi {\displaystyle \frac{J_\varphi }{2k}},`$ (26)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _r}{t}}`$ $`=`$ $`4H\rho _r+\mathrm{\Gamma }_D\dot{\phi }^2,`$ (27)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\epsilon }{t}}`$ $`=`$ $`4H\epsilon (H+\mathrm{\Gamma }_D\mathrm{\Gamma }_B)\dot{\phi }^2+J_\phi ,`$ (28)
where we have used (11).

Here $`J_\phi `$ represents energy flow of the scalar field into the bulk and we cannot calculate it unless we solve the field equation in the bulk. It is, however, formidable to do so in the realistic situation that the bulk metric is influenced by the bulk scalar field which would be the case in brane inflation driven by a bulk scalar field. In this case the metric would be even more complicated than (3). Hence in order to obtain some insights on the form of $`J_\phi `$ we must employ several approximations and find a bulk scalar solution.

Let us assume the bulk metric is governed by $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_5`$ and further neglect terms suppressed by $`k^1`$ and $`Ca^4`$ in (3). Then the metric reads

$$ds_5^2=e^{2k|w|}dt^2+e^{2k|w|}a^2(t)\left(dx^2+dy^2+dz^2\right)+dw^2,$$
(29)
and field equations (6) and (7) become more tractable. In the time scale of the field oscillation the dissipation terms are unimportant because they are perturbatively small quantities by assumption. So let us estimate $`J_\phi `$ by solving (6) instead of (7) first. The solution of (6) under the metric (29) is easily found in the same way as Goldberger and Wise  as

$$\varphi (t,w)=\underset{n}{}c_nT_n(t)Y_n(w)+H.C.$$
(30)
with

$`T_n(t)`$ $``$ $`a^{{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{3}{2}}}(t)e^{im_nt},`$ (31)
$`Y_n(w)`$ $`=`$ $`e^{2k|w|}\left[J_\nu \left(\frac{m_n}{k}e^{k|w|}\right)+b_nN_\nu \left(\frac{m_n}{k}e^{k|w|}\right)\right],\nu =2\sqrt{1+{\displaystyle \frac{m^2}{4k^2}}}2+{\displaystyle \frac{m^2}{4k^2}},`$ (32)
under the assumption that the field oscillates rapidly in cosmic expansion time scale. Here $`m_n`$ is a separation constant which may take continuous values in the present case with a single brane, and $`b_n`$ is a constant determined by the boundary condition, $`\varphi _{,w}=0`$, at $`w=0`$ as

$$b_n=\left[2J_\nu \left(\frac{m_n}{k}\right)+\frac{m_n}{k}J_\nu ^{}\left(\frac{m_n}{k}\right)\right]\left[2N_\nu \left(\frac{m_n}{k}\right)+\frac{m_n}{k}N_\nu ^{}\left(\frac{m_n}{k}\right)\right]^1.$$
(33)
If we incorporate the effect of dissipation on the boundary condition, (8), it is modified to

$$b_n\left[\left(2+\frac{im_n\mathrm{\Gamma }_D}{2k^2}\right)J_\nu \left(\frac{m_n}{k}\right)+\frac{m_n}{k}J_\nu ^{}\left(\frac{m_n}{k}\right)\right]\left[\left(2+\frac{im_n\mathrm{\Gamma }_D}{2k^2}\right)N_\nu \left(\frac{m_n}{k}\right)+\frac{m_n}{k}N_\nu ^{}\left(\frac{m_n}{k}\right)\right]^1,$$
(34)
where use has been made of $`\dot{T_n}(t)im_nT_n(t)`$.

Hereafter let us assume only a single oscillation mode exists. This is a natural assumption because any higher mode is expected to decay earlier and the final stage of reheating would be dominated by the lowest mode that has been excited. Then we find

$$J_\phi =(m_n^2m^2)\phi \dot{\phi }.$$
(35)
Since $`\phi `$ oscillates rapidly in the expansion time scale let us average the right-hand-side of evolution equations (26)–(28) over an oscillation period. Using $`\overline{\dot{\phi }^2}(t)=m_n^2\overline{\phi ^2}(t)`$ and $`\overline{\phi \dot{\phi }}(t)=(3H+\mathrm{\Gamma }_B)\overline{\phi ^2}(t)/2`$, we obtain the following set of evolution equations in the brane universe $`w=0`$ where a bar denotes average over the oscillation period.

$`H^2`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{\dot{a}}{a}}\right)^2{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa _4^2}{3}}\left(\rho _\phi +\rho _r+\epsilon \right),`$ (36)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _\phi }{t}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(3H+\mathrm{\Gamma }_B)(m^2+m_n^2)\overline{\phi ^2},`$ (37)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _r}{t}}`$ $`=`$ $`4H\rho _r+\mathrm{\Gamma }_Dm_n^2\overline{\phi ^2},`$ (38)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\epsilon }{t}}`$ $`=`$ $`4H\epsilon (\mathrm{\Gamma }_D+H\mathrm{\Gamma }_B)m_n^2\overline{\phi ^2}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(3H+\mathrm{\Gamma }_B)(m^2m_n^2)\overline{\phi ^2},`$ (39)
with

$`\overline{\phi ^2}(t)\overline{\phi _i^2}\left({\displaystyle \frac{a(t)}{a(t_i)}}\right)^3e^{\mathrm{\Gamma }_B(tt_i)}.`$ (40)
We assume that both $`\rho _r`$ and $`\epsilon `$ are vanishingly small at the end of inflation when we set the initial condition, because they rapidly redshift during inflation and very little creation is expected in that period . We identify the reheating epoch with the time when $`\rho _\phi `$ becomes smaller than $`\rho _r`$. From (40) this occurs at $`tH^1\mathrm{\Gamma }_B^1`$, so that the dominant creation takes place during $`H\mathrm{\Gamma }_B`$. Here we qualitatively analyze the system for various values of $`m_n`$.

In this case, the creation terms of dark radiation, $`(\mathrm{\Gamma }_D+H\mathrm{\Gamma }_B)m_n^2\overline{\phi ^2}+\frac{1}{2}(3H+\mathrm{\Gamma }_B)(m^2m_n^2)\overline{\phi ^2}`$ are negative and their magnitude is larger than the creation term of radiation, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_Dm_n^2\overline{\phi ^2}`$ during the important period $`H\mathrm{\Gamma }_B`$. Hence more dark radiation is created than ordinary radiation in magnitude. Then $`\rho _r`$ and $`\epsilon `$ tend to cancel each other and the higher-order terms of the Friedmann equation, which we have neglected so far, would play an important role in the subsequent evolution of the three brane. This means that we do not recover standard cosmology on the brane after inflation.

This possibility is not excluded in the brane-world scenario with non-factorizable geometry unlike in the case of ordinary Kalza-Klein compactification with factorizable metric . In this case the last term of (39) is dominant and we find more dark radiation than ordinary radiation unless $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_B`$ is extremely small with $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_B/\mathrm{\Gamma }_D<m_n^2/m^21`$.

This is the most delicate case and the final amount of dark radiation can be either positive or negative depending on the details of the model parameters. But in order to achieve successful primordial nucleosynthesis, the amount of extra radiation-like matter is severely constrained . In order to have sufficiently small $`\epsilon `$ compared with $`\rho _r`$ after reheating without resorting to subsequent entropy production within the brane, the magnitude of creation terms of $`\epsilon `$ should be vanishingly small at the reheating epoch $`H\mathrm{\Gamma }_B`$. That is, only the mode that satisfies the inequality

$$\left|2\mathrm{\Gamma }_B(m^2m_n^2)\mathrm{\Gamma }_Dm_n^2\right|\mathrm{\Gamma }_Dm_n^2,$$
(41)
should be present.

We thus find a specific relation (41) should be satisfied for the graceful exit of brane inflation driven by a bulk scalar field $`\varphi `$. In case it is not satisfied, we must introduce some other mechanisms of entropy production within the brane before primordial nucleosynthesis which imposes stringent constraints on the exotic energy density and the expansion law at that era . One way is to assume that $`\varphi `$ predominantly decays into massive particles whose energy density redshifts less rapidly and dominates over $`\epsilon `$ soon. If these particles decay into radiation before nucleosynthesis creating an appropriate amount of baryon asymmetry, we may recover the standard cosmology. Another way is to consider second inflation which is driven by a scalar field confined on the brane  to dilute $`\epsilon `$.

In summary we have studied entropy production on the three-brane from a decaying bulk scalar field $`\varphi `$ by introducing dissipation terms to its equation of motion phenomenologically. We have shown that the so-called dark radiation is significantly produced at the same time unless the inequality (41) is satisfied. Although we have analyzed only the case with a specific form of the dissipation, we expect our conclusion is generic and applicable to other forms of dissipation, too, because it is essentially an outcome of the four dimensional Bianchi identity (23). We therefore conclude that in the brane-world picture of the Universe, it is likely that the dominant part of the entropy we observe today originates within the brane rather than in the bulk.

The authors are grateful to M. Sasaki and T. Tanaka for useful communications. The work of JY was partially supported by the Monbukagakusho Grant-in-Aid, Priority Area “Supersymmetry and Unified Theory of Elementary Particles”(#707) and the Monbukagakusho Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research Nos. 11740146 and 13640285.


text:
# Conductance Fluctuations of Open Quantum Dots under Microwave Radiation.

## Abstract

We develop a time dependent random matrix theory describing the influence of a time-dependent perturbation on mesoscopic conductance fluctuations in open quantum dots. The effect of external field is taken into account to all orders of perturbation theory, and our results are applicable to both weak and strong fields. We obtain temperature and magnetic field dependences of conductance fluctuations. The amplitude of conductance fluctuations is determined by electron temperature in the leads rather than by the width of electron distribution function in the dot. The asymmetry of conductance with respect to inversion of applied magnetic field is the main feature allowing to distinguish the effect of direct suppression of quantum interference from the simple heating if the frequency of external radiation is larger than the temperature of the leads $`\mathrm{}\omega T`$.

Introduction – Transport coefficients of disordered and chaotic electron systems fluctuate from sample to sample . These fluctuations are commonly called mesoscopic fluctuations. Mesoscopic fluctuations of conductance of non-interacting systems are universal. The universality means that the variance of the conductance $`\delta g^2`$ is of the order $`G_0^2`$, where $`G_0=e^2/\pi \mathrm{}`$ is the quantum of conductance and is weakly dependent of the sample geometry, see .

The fluctuations of transport properties of electron systems is a quantum mechanical phenomenon based on the interference of quantum states. As any other interference phenomena, conductance fluctuations are very sensitive to inelastic processes, commonly referred to as dephasing . The dephasing processes in open quantum dots were considered on the purely phenomenological basis . First microscopic consideration of the microwave radiation on the weak localization in quantum dots was performed in Ref. . In this reference, the concept of the time dependent random matrix theory (TRMT) was used.

The purpose of the present paper is to extend the results of Ref.  to describe the effect of the external microwave radiation on the mesoscopic fluctuations of the conductance. The ultimate goal is to identify observable features which allow one to distinguish the effect of the external field to the dot itself from a simple heating .

However, there is a significant difference in the calculation of the mesoscopic conductance fluctuations and the averaged conductance . Because, the dot is subjected to the external classical radiation which produces non-equilibrium in the dot, the d.c.-current $`I_0`$ through the dot is finite (though randomly changing from one configuration to another) even if the d.c.-voltage $`V=V_\mathrm{l}V_\mathrm{r}`$ across the dot is zero, see Fig. 1. This current $`I_0`$ is due either to the photovoltaic effect (see  and references therein) or to rectification of a.c.-bias across the dot, see . We are interested in the linear response to the applied d.c.-voltage across the dot:

$$I_{\mathrm{dc}}=I_0+gV+𝒪(V^2).$$
(1)
In principal, the linear in $`V`$ contribution to the current comes comes from two sources: (i) the non-equilibrium of the distribution functions in the leads, (ii) change in the photovoltaic current, correspondent to a different realization of the dot due to the finite bias. Nevertheless, we will show that due to the electro-neutrality condition the non-equilibrium current prevails .

Closing the introductory part, we note that the present paper has a certain overlap with the recent preprint by Wang and Kravtsov , where the conductance fluctuations were calculated for open quantum dots subjected to a periodic $`ac`$ pumping. Our treatment is different in several aspects. Firstly, our results are applicable for the frequencies of the external radiation $`\omega `$ smaller than the Thouless energy of the dot, $`E_T`$, whereas treatment of Ref.  is valid in the opposite regime. Secondly, unlike Ref. , we will restrict ourselves to the case of the monochromatic radiation acting on the dot. Finally, we will highlight the role of the electro-neutrality requirement in a separability of the photovoltaic effect and the mesoscopic conductance fluctuations, which was not done in Ref. .

Model— We apply the random matrix theory (RMT) to study the conductance of open quantum dots, see Ref. . All corrections to the RMT are governed by a small parameter $`N_{\mathrm{ch}}/g_{\mathrm{dot}}`$, where $`g_{\mathrm{dot}}=E_\mathrm{T}/\delta _1`$ and $`\delta _1`$ is the mean level spacing, see Ref.  for the detailed discussion. We consider the conductance fluctuations of quantum dots with a large number of open channels $`N_{\mathrm{ch}}1`$. In this approximation, we neglect the effects of the electron–electron interaction on the conductance which are as small as $`1/N_{\mathrm{ch}}^2`$, while the conductance fluctuations are proportional to $`1/N_{\mathrm{ch}}`$. The same condition also allows us to use a conventional diagrammatic technique to take the ensemble average. External microwave radiation is modeled as time dependent random part of the Hamiltonian of the dot.

The Hamiltonian of the system is :

$$(t)=_\mathrm{D}(t)+_\mathrm{L}+_{\mathrm{LD}},$$
(2)
where $`\widehat{H}_\mathrm{D}`$ is the Hamiltonian of the electrons in the dot, which is determined by the $`M\times M`$ matrix $`H_{nm}`$:

$$_\mathrm{D}(t)=\underset{n,m=1}{\overset{M}{}}\psi _n^{}H_{\mathrm{D}nm}(t)\psi _m+E_cn^2,$$
(3)
$`\psi _n`$ corresponds to the states of the dot and the thermodynamic limit $`M\mathrm{}`$ is assumed, $`E_c`$ is the charging energy, and $`n=_{m=1}^M\psi _m^{}\psi _m`$, the last term in Eq. (3) is the largest contribution to the interaction effects in quantum dot, see Ref.  for the discussion of the status of this approximation. Matrix $`\widehat{H}_\mathrm{D}(t)`$ is given by

$$\widehat{H}_\mathrm{D}(t)=\widehat{H}+\widehat{V}\phi (t).$$
(4)
Here the time independent part of the Hamiltonian $`\widehat{H}`$ is a random realization of a $`M\times M`$ matrix, which obeys the correlation function

$`H_{nm}(\mathrm{\Phi }_1)H_{n^{}m^{}}^{}(\mathrm{\Phi }_2)=M\left({\displaystyle \frac{\delta _1}{\pi }}\right)^2`$ (5)
$`\times \left[\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{N_\mathrm{d}}{4M}}\right)\delta _{nn^{}}\delta _{mm^{}}+\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{N_\mathrm{c}}{4M}}\right)\delta _{mn^{}}\delta _{nm^{}}\right],`$ (6)
where $`\delta _1`$ is the mean level spacing of the dot and parameters $`N_{d,c}`$ describe the effect of the magnetic field on the dot. These parameters can be estimated as $`N_{\mathrm{d},\mathrm{c}}g_{\mathrm{dot}}\left(\mathrm{\Phi }_1\mathrm{\Phi }_2\right)^2/\mathrm{\Phi }_0^2`$ where $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{1,2}`$ is the magnetic flux through the dot and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0=hc/e`$ is the flux quantum. The time dependent perturbation is described by symmetric $`M\times M`$ matrices $`V_{nm}`$ and function $`\phi (t)`$ of time $`t`$. We assume that the perturbation is harmonic with single frequency $`\omega `$, $`\phi (t)=\mathrm{cos}\omega t`$, even though most of the consideration \[up to Eq. (41)\] is valid for an arbitrary function. The effect of the perturbation on the system is totally determined by two parameters,

$$Z=\frac{1}{M}\mathrm{Tr}\widehat{V},C_0=\frac{\pi }{M^2\delta _1}\mathrm{Tr}\widehat{V}^2.$$
(7)
Parameter $`Z`$ has a meaning of the average velocity of the energy levels of the dot under the external perturbation and can be omitted from our consideration due to screening \[see below\]. The parameter $`C_0`$ characterizes its typical deviation, . Since all the physical responses of the system are characterized by the same parameters, the value of $`C_0`$ can be eliminated by an independent measurement.

The electron spectrum in the leads near Fermi surface can be linearized:

$$_L=\mathrm{}v_\mathrm{F}\underset{\alpha ,k}{}k\psi _\alpha ^{}(k)\psi _\alpha (k),$$
(8)
where $`\psi _\alpha (k)`$ denotes different electron states in the leads, $`k`$ labels the continuum of momentum states in each channel $`\alpha `$, $`\mathrm{}v_\mathrm{F}=1/2\pi \nu `$ is the Fermi velocity and $`\nu `$ is the density of states per channel at the Fermi surface. We put $`\mathrm{}=1`$ in all intermediate formulas below.

The coupling between the dot and the leads is

$$_{\mathrm{LD}}=\underset{\alpha ,n,k}{}(W_{n\alpha }\psi _\alpha ^{}(k)\psi _n+\mathrm{H}.\mathrm{c}.).$$
(9)
For the reflectionless point contacts, the coupling constants, $`W_{n\alpha }`$, in Eq.(9) are given by :

$$W_{n\alpha }=\{\begin{array}{cc}\sqrt{\frac{M\delta _1}{\pi ^2\nu }},\hfill & \text{if }n=\alpha N_{\mathrm{ch}}\text{,}\hfill \\ 0,\hfill & \text{otherwise.}\hfill \end{array}$$
(10)
For open dots with a large number of open channels $`N_{\mathrm{ch}}1`$ the interaction term can be treated within mean field approximation, so that the Hamiltonian (3) takes the form

$`_\mathrm{D}^{\mathrm{mf}}(t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n,m=1}{\overset{M}{}}}\psi _n^{}\left[H_{\mathrm{D}nm}(t)+eV_d(t)\delta _{nm}\right]\psi _m,`$ (12)
$`eV_d`$ $`=`$ $`2E_cn_q,`$ (13)
where $`n_q`$ stands for the quantum mechanical (but not ensemble) of the number of electrons in the dot. Corrections to mean-field treatment (12) were calculated in Ref.  and shown to be small as $`1/N_{\mathrm{ch}}^2`$.

In the mean field approximation (12), one can introduce one-particle $`S`$ \- matrix $`𝒮_{\alpha \beta }(t_1,t_2)`$ as

$`𝒮_{\alpha \beta }(t,t^{})=\delta _{\alpha \beta }\delta (tt^{})2\pi i\nu W_{\alpha n}^{}G_{nm}^{(\mathrm{R})}(t,t^{})W_{m\beta },`$ (14)
and the Green functions $`\widehat{G}^{(\mathrm{R},\mathrm{A})}(t,t^{})`$ are the solutions of:

$`\left(i{\displaystyle \frac{}{t}}\widehat{H}_\mathrm{D}(t)eV_\mathrm{d}(t)\pm i\pi \nu \widehat{W}\widehat{W}^{}\right)\widehat{G}^{(\mathrm{R},\mathrm{A})}(t,t^{})`$ (15)
$`=\delta (tt^{}),`$ (16)
where the matrices $`\widehat{H}_\mathrm{D}`$ and $`\widehat{W}`$ are defined by Eqs. (4) and (10).

The d.c.-current through the dot is given by, see :

$`I_{\mathrm{dc}}`$ $`=`$ $`e{\displaystyle _0^{T_\mathrm{p}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dt}{T_\mathrm{p}}}{\displaystyle }dt_1dt_2\mathrm{Tr}\{\widehat{f}(t_1t_2)`$ (17)
$`\times `$ $`(\widehat{𝒮}^{}(t_2,t)\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\widehat{𝒮}(t,t_1)\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\delta (t_2t_1))\}`$ (18)
where $`T_p`$ is the period of the external perturbation, $`\widehat{f}(t)`$ is related to the Fourier transform of the electron distribution function in the $`\alpha `$th channel as

$$f_{\alpha \beta }(t)=\delta _{\alpha \beta }\frac{iTe^{ieV_\alpha t}}{\mathrm{sinh}\pi Tt}$$
(19)
and

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\alpha \beta }=\delta _{\alpha \beta }\{\begin{array}{cc}\frac{N_\mathrm{r}}{N_{\mathrm{ch}}},\hfill & \text{for }1\alpha N_\mathrm{l}\text{;}\hfill \\ \frac{N_\mathrm{l}}{N_{\mathrm{ch}}},\hfill & \text{for }N_\mathrm{l}+1\alpha N_{\mathrm{ch}}\text{.}\hfill \end{array}$$
(20)
The spin degeneracy is taken into account in Eq. (18). We assume that the degeneracy is not lifted by magnetic field.

To complete the theory one needs an equation for the averaged number of particles $`n_q`$, see Eq. (13). It is found from the continuity relation as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dn(t)_q}{dt}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle }dt_1dt_2\mathrm{Tr}\{\widehat{f}(t_1t_2)`$ (21)
$`\times `$ $`(\widehat{𝒮}^{}(t_2,t)\widehat{𝒮}(t,t_1)\delta (t_2t_1))\}`$ (22)
Equations (18) — (21) are similar to those used in Ref.  for studying the frequency dependence of the conductance of mesoscopic system.

Ensemble averaging — Our goal now is to perform calculations of the conductance correlation function

$$(\mathrm{\Phi }_1,\mathrm{\Phi }_2)=g(\mathrm{\Phi }_1)g(\mathrm{\Phi }_2)g(\mathrm{\Phi }_1)g(\mathrm{\Phi }_2),$$
(23)
using the model outlined above.

We use the leading approximation in small parameter $`1/N_{\mathrm{ch}}`$. The fluctuations of the conductance are smaller than its average value and we can use instead of sample specific Eq. (21) its ensemble averaged counterpart:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dn(t)_q}{dt}}={\displaystyle \frac{N_{\mathrm{ch}}\delta _1}{2\pi }}n(t)_q`$ (24)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{eN_\mathrm{l}}{\pi }}\left(V_\mathrm{l}V_\mathrm{d}Z\phi (t)\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{eN_\mathrm{r}}{\pi }}\left(V_\mathrm{r}V_\mathrm{d}Z\phi (t)\right).`$ (25)
Equation (24) is nothing but a discrete form of the diffusion equation for the bulk system and the last two terms correspond to the divergence of the drift current. Substituting Eq. (13) into Eq. (24), solving the resulting differential equation, we find

$`eV_\mathrm{d}(t)+Z\phi (t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4eE_\mathrm{c}}{4E_\mathrm{c}+\delta _1}}{\displaystyle \frac{N_\mathrm{l}V_\mathrm{l}+N_\mathrm{r}V_\mathrm{r}}{N_{\mathrm{ch}}}}`$ (26)
$`+`$ $`Z{\displaystyle \frac{\delta _1+(2\pi /N_{\mathrm{ch}})_t}{\delta _1+4E_\mathrm{c}+(2\pi /N_{\mathrm{ch}})_t}}\phi (t).`$ (27)
We notice from Eq. (26) that the characteristic energy scale governing charge dynamics is $`E_\mathrm{c}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/2\pi `$. Usually, this scale is of the order of the Thouless energy, $`E_T`$. Because all the random matrix theory is capable to describe the energy scale only smaller than $`E_T`$, we can consider only $`\omega E_TE_\mathrm{c}N_{\mathrm{ch}}/2\pi `$. Moreover, for the small quantum dot $`E_\mathrm{c}\delta _1`$, so that Eq. (26) gives

$$V_\mathrm{d}=\frac{N_\mathrm{l}V_\mathrm{l}+N_\mathrm{r}V_\mathrm{r}}{N_{\mathrm{ch}}}$$
(28)
and the time dependent perturbation (7) can be considered as traceless, $`Z=0`$. This constant in time component of the bias of the dot can be removed from Eq. (16) for the Green function by the following gauge transformation:

$$\widehat{G}(t,t^{})=\widehat{G}|_{V_\mathrm{d}=0}(t,t^{})e^{ieV_\mathrm{d}(tt^{})}.$$
(29)
Substituting Eq. (29) into Eq. (18) and expanding up to the first power in $`V=V_\mathrm{l}V_\mathrm{r}`$, we find

$`g={\displaystyle \frac{I_{\mathrm{dc}}}{V}}=g_{\mathrm{cl}}`$ $`+`$ $`G_0{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{T_\mathrm{p}}{}}}𝑑t{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}}𝑑t_1𝑑t_2F(T(t_1t_2))`$ (30)
$`\times `$ $`\mathrm{Tr}\left\{\widehat{𝒮}(t,t_1)\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}𝒮^{}(t_2,t)\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\right\}.`$ (31)
Here

$`g_{\mathrm{cl}}=G_0{\displaystyle \frac{N_\mathrm{l}N_\mathrm{r}}{N_{\mathrm{ch}}}}`$

is the classical conductance of the dot, $`G_0=e^2/\pi \mathrm{}`$ is the quantum conductance and $`F(x)`$ is the Fourier transform of the derivative of electron distribution function:

$$F(x)=\frac{\pi x}{\mathrm{sinh}\pi x}.$$
(32)
The correlation function of the conductance (23) is given by the diagrams shown in Fig. 2 and can be found from the following analytical expression

$`R`$ $`=`$ $`2{\displaystyle \frac{g_{cl}^2\delta _1^2}{4\pi ^2}}{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{T_\mathrm{p}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dtdt^{}}{T_\mathrm{p}^2}}{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}d\tau F^2(T\tau ){\displaystyle \underset{\tau /2}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}d\theta [𝒟({\displaystyle \frac{t+t^{}}{2}}+\theta ,{\displaystyle \frac{t+t^{}}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\tau }{2}},tt^{})𝒟({\displaystyle \frac{t+t^{}}{2}}+\theta ,{\displaystyle \frac{t+t^{}}{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\tau }{2}},tt^{})`$ (34)
$`+𝒞(tt^{}+\theta +{\displaystyle \frac{\tau }{2}},tt^{}\theta {\displaystyle \frac{\tau }{2}},{\displaystyle \frac{t+t^{}}{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\tau }{4}})𝒞(t^{}t+\theta {\displaystyle \frac{\tau }{2}},t^{}t\theta +{\displaystyle \frac{\tau }{2}},{\displaystyle \frac{t+t^{}}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\tau }{4}})].`$
The diffuson and the Cooperon are defined by the following equations:

$`𝒞(\tau _1,\tau _2,t)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Theta }(\tau _1\tau _2)\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle _{\tau _2}^{\tau _1}}K_\mathrm{c}(\tau ,t)𝑑\tau \right),`$ (36)
$`𝒟(t_1,t_2,\tau )`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Theta }(t_1t_2)\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle _{t_2}^{t_1}}K_\mathrm{d}(\tau ,t)𝑑t\right),`$ (37)
where

$`K_{\mathrm{d},\mathrm{c}}`$ $`=`$ $`\gamma _{\mathrm{d},\mathrm{c}}+C_0\left(\phi (t+\tau /2)\phi (t\tau /2)\right)^2`$ (39)
$`\gamma _{\mathrm{d},\mathrm{c}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\delta _1}{2\pi }}\left(N_{\mathrm{ch}}+N_{\mathrm{d},\mathrm{c}}\right),`$ (40)
and parameters $`N_{\mathrm{d},\mathrm{c}}`$ describe the effect of the magnetic field, see Eq. (5).

Derivation of Eq. (40) deserves a little bit of additional discussion. One notices, that the diagrams of Fig. 3 does not contain any piece corresponding to the classical distribution function in the dot. We can trace it into the expression for conductance (30) which contains traceless vertices $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$, which can not be dressed by the dashed line. On the other hand, any vertex with finite trace corresponds the modified distribution function of electrons in the dot and represents the effect of heating . Since the distribution function is not dressed in the expression for conductance fluctuations, we conclude, that the effect of heating is not relevant for the conductance fluctuations and the temperature dependence of the conductance fluctuations is uniquely determined by the electron temperature in the leads. That means that contrary to the common believes, see e.g. Ref.  the amplitude of the mesoscopic fluctuations can not be used for the study of the distribution function of electrons in the dot. From the theoretical side, it is important to emphasize, that the appearance of the traceless vertices is determined solely by the electro-neutrality condition (28), any other choice of the dot bias would lead to the change in the photovoltaic current .

Limiting cases — Below we consider the limit of high ($`\mathrm{}\omega C`$) and low ($`\mathrm{}\omega \gamma _{\mathrm{d},\mathrm{c}}`$) frequencies. For the high frequencies, $`\omega C`$, we obtain

$$R=\frac{\delta _1^2g_{\mathrm{cl}}^2}{4\pi ^2}\left(\frac{1}{\gamma _\mathrm{d}^2}Q_\mathrm{d}(\frac{C_0}{\gamma _\mathrm{d}},\frac{T}{\gamma _\mathrm{d}})+\frac{1}{\gamma _\mathrm{c}^2}Q_\mathrm{c}(\frac{C_0}{\gamma _\mathrm{c}},\frac{T}{\gamma _\mathrm{c}},\frac{\mathrm{}\omega }{\gamma _\mathrm{c}})\right),$$
(41)
where dimensionless $`Q`$ functions are given by

$`Q_\mathrm{d}(x,y)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}𝑑\tau F^2(y\tau )`$ (43)
$`\times `$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{2\pi }{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{exp}\left(\tau \left(1+2x\mathrm{sin}^2\zeta /2\right)\right)}{1+2x\mathrm{sin}^2\zeta /2}}{\displaystyle \frac{d\zeta }{2\pi }},`$ (44)
$`Q_\mathrm{c}(x,y,z)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}𝑑\tau F^2(y\tau )`$ (45)
$`\times `$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{2\pi }{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{exp}\left(\tau \left(1+2x\mathrm{sin}^2\zeta /2\right)\right)}{1+x(\mathrm{sin}^2\zeta /2+\mathrm{sin}^2(\zeta /2+z\tau /2))}}{\displaystyle \frac{d\zeta }{2\pi }}.`$ (46)
Let us now consider the dependence of the functions $`Q_{\mathrm{d},\mathrm{c}}`$ and $`Q_\mathrm{c}(x,y,z)`$ from Eq. (45) on temperature $`y`$. For the limit of high temperature, $`y1`$, we obtain

$$Q_\mathrm{c}(x,y,z)Q_\mathrm{d}(x,y)\frac{\pi ^2}{3y}\frac{1}{\sqrt{1+2x}}.$$
(47)
The equality between functions $`Q_\mathrm{c}`$ and $`Q_\mathrm{d}`$ means the magnetic field symmetry of the conductance . Indeed, using Eqs.(39), (41) and (47) we observe, that

$$R(\mathrm{\Phi }_1,\mathrm{\Phi }_2)=R(\mathrm{\Phi }_1,\mathrm{\Phi }_2).$$
(48)
However, in low temperature limit $`y1`$, we obtain for $`x1`$

$`Q_\mathrm{d}(x,0)={\displaystyle \frac{1+x}{(1+2x)^{3/2}}}`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\sqrt{2x}}}.`$ (50)
$`Q_\mathrm{c}(x,0,z)`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2x}}.`$ (51)
Comparison of Eqs.(39), (41) and (50) reveals an important fingerprint of the dephasing by the external radiation — violation of the Onsager relation

$$\frac{R(\mathrm{\Phi }_1,\mathrm{\Phi }_2)}{R(\mathrm{\Phi }_1,\mathrm{\Phi }_2)}=\sqrt{\frac{2\stackrel{~}{\gamma }}{C_0}},$$
(52)
where $`\stackrel{~}{\gamma }=\gamma _\mathrm{d}(\mathrm{\Phi }_1,\mathrm{\Phi }_2)=\gamma _\mathrm{c}(\mathrm{\Phi }_1,\mathrm{\Phi }_2)`$, provided that $`\gamma _\mathrm{c}(\mathrm{\Phi }_1,\mathrm{\Phi }_2)=\gamma _\mathrm{d}(\mathrm{\Phi }_1,\mathrm{\Phi }_2)\stackrel{~}{\gamma }`$. This breakdown of the Onsager relation is a simple manifestation of the lifting of the time reversal symmetry in the system with time dependent Hamiltonian.

In the limit of low frequency $`\mathrm{}\omega \gamma _{\mathrm{d},\mathrm{c}}`$, the contribution from the Cooperon and diffuson parts are described by the same function, so that the conductance correlation function can be represented in the form

$$R=\frac{\delta _1^2g_{\mathrm{cl}}^2}{4\pi ^2}\left[\frac{1}{\gamma _\mathrm{d}^2}Q(\frac{C_0}{\gamma _\mathrm{d}},\frac{T}{\gamma _\mathrm{d}})+\frac{1}{\gamma _\mathrm{c}^2}Q(\frac{C_0}{\gamma _\mathrm{c}},\frac{T}{\gamma _\mathrm{c}})\right],$$
(53)
so the Onsager relation (48) holds. Here,

$`Q(x,y)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _0^{2\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{d\xi d\zeta }{4\pi ^2}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}F^2(y\tau )`$ (54)
$`\times `$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{exp}((1+4x\mathrm{sin}^2\xi /2\mathrm{sin}^2\zeta /2)\tau )}{1+4x\mathrm{sin}^2\xi /2\mathrm{sin}^2\zeta /2}}d\tau .`$ (55)
This expression in the limit of high temperature $`T\gamma _{\mathrm{d},\mathrm{c}}`$ has an asymptotic behavior

$$Q(x,y)=\frac{\pi }{3y}K\left(4x\right).$$
(56)
At zero temperature $`Q(x,y)`$ is given by the expression

$$Q(x,0)=\frac{1}{\pi }\frac{E\left(4x\right)+(1+4x)K(4x)}{1+4x},$$
(57)
where $`K(x)`$ and $`E(x)`$ are the elliptic integrals of the first and second kind respectively

$`K(x)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _0^{\pi /2}}{\displaystyle \frac{d\phi }{\sqrt{1x\mathrm{sin}^2\phi }}}`$
$`E(x)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _0^{\pi /2}}\sqrt{1x\mathrm{sin}^2\phi }𝑑\phi .`$
We conclude that the conductance fluctuations are suppressed by external radiation even in the limit of the low frequency, see Eq. (53). Indeed, during one period of time, the system goes along a closed loop in the parameter space and the contribution to the d.c.-conductance is effectively determined by the equilibrium conductance, correspondent to each point of the loop. The equilibrium conductance fluctuates along this loop. Thus, the observed d.c.-conductance is already partially averaged over some realizations of the quantum dot and its fluctuations decrease. The perturbation strength is related to the length of the contour in the parameter space and effectively determines how many different dot’s configurations contribute to the d.c.-conductance. Consequently, the stronger perturbation, over the larger number of the realizations the d.c.-conductance is averaged and the smaller fluctuations of the d.c.-conductance.

This should be contrasted with the suppression of the averaged magnetoresistance . There, the stationary field does not do anything because the result is already ensemble averaged. In order to suppress the average quantum correction, the field should have change on the time scale of the order of $`1/\gamma _{\mathrm{esc}}`$, where $`\gamma _{\mathrm{esc}}=\delta _1N_{\mathrm{ch}}/2\pi `$ is the escape rate from the dot. That is why the effect of the low-frequency radiation on conductance fluctuations and weak localization corrections are significantly different. At high frequency $`\mathrm{}\omega \gamma _{\mathrm{esc}}`$ the d.c.-conductance no longer can be represented in terms of the stationary conductance and the suppression of both the conductance fluctuations and the weak localization correction to the conductivity can be interpreted as dephasing.

Comparison with experiment — Our results still contains an unknown parameter $`C_0`$ characterizing the strength of the perturbation. There is a way, however, to present the results in a form not depending on this parameter, thus eliminating a need for additional fitting. Following Ref. , we represent the parametric dependence of the weak localization correction $`\delta g_{\mathrm{wl}}`$ versus $`\mathrm{var}g`$, where $`\delta g_{\mathrm{wl}}`$ is given by:

$`\delta g_{\mathrm{wl}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{e^2}{\pi \mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{N_\mathrm{l}N_\mathrm{r}}{(N_\mathrm{l}+N_\mathrm{r})^2}}P({\displaystyle \frac{C_0}{\gamma _{\mathrm{esc}}}},{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}\omega }{\gamma _{\mathrm{esc}}}})`$ (58)
$`P(x,z)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}e^{\xi x\varphi }I_0[x\varphi ]𝑑\xi ,\varphi =\xi {\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}z\xi }{z}}.`$ (59)
The conductance variance is determined from Eq. (34) for broken time-reversal symmetry $`\gamma _\mathrm{c}\mathrm{}`$. Figure 5 shows the parametric dependence for various values of the parameters $`C_0`$ and $`\omega `$ and $`T=10\gamma _{\mathrm{esc}}`$.

We observe that the shape of the curves depends on the frequency of external radiation. Particularly, in the limit of low frequency $`\mathrm{}\omega \gamma _{\mathrm{esp}}`$ the weak localization correction is not changed by the radiation, while the conductance fluctuations may be significantly suppressed. At high frequency, $`\mathrm{}\omega C_0,\gamma _{\mathrm{esc}}`$ the curves become non-sensitive to the radiation frequency.

The authors of Ref.  found that the radiation applied to their device produced curves in $`\mathrm{var}g`$ vs. $`\delta g_{\mathrm{wl}}`$ plane identical to the curve produced by increasing temperature of the device for a wide range of frequencies. This observation apparently demonstrates that the radiation produces the heating of electrons and the effect of dephasing without heating, see Ref. , is not observed in experiments. It was also suggested that the main mechanism is the increase of the temperature in the dot due to the Joule heat by induced $`ac`$ source-drain bias.

Although the present data of Ref.  support the heating mechanism of suppression of the weak localization correction to the conductance and the conductance fluctuations, we believe that more detailed analysis has to be done. According to our theory, see Eq. (30) and the paragraph below Eq. (40), (i) mesoscopic fluctuations are sensitive only to the temperature in the leads, and therefore, the notion of heating of electrons in the dot responsible for $`1/T`$ dependence of the mesoscopic fluctuations is not relevant: if there is a heating, it manifests itself only through the temperature of the leads; (ii) high frequency curves of our theoretical Fig. 5 quantitatively agrees with data on Fig. 3 of Ref. , for frequencies $`f=1`$, $`10`$ and $`25`$ GHz. An exception is the lowest frequency curve ($`f=100`$ MHz) represented in this plot, for the dot with $`\delta _1=2.4\mu eV`$, $`N_{\mathrm{ch}}=2`$ corresponds to $`hf/\gamma _{esc}0.5`$, so according to our Fig. 5 it should have observable deviations from the high frequency curves, which is not seen. However, taking into account uncertainty in determination of the level spacing $`\delta _1`$ from the geometrical area of the dot, this does not unambiguously rule out the microwave dephasing mechanism.

We believe that the “smoking gun” evidence for the mechanism considered in the present paper is the violation of the Onsager relation (52) in high frequency regime, $`\mathrm{}\omega \gamma _{\mathrm{c},\mathrm{d}},T`$. The dependence of this violation on the amplitude of the field $`C_0`$ is the main prediction of the theory.

Summary— We constructed the time dependent random matrix theory to describe the effect of the non-equilibrium external radiation on conductance fluctuations of an open quantum dot. The main experimental feature to reveal such a mechanism is the breakdown of the magnetic symmetry of the conductance by high-frequency radiation, $`\mathrm{}\omega T`$, see Eq. (52).

We thank V. Ambegaokar, P. W. Brouwer, V. E. Kravtsov and C. M. Marcus for useful discussions. This work was supported by the Cornell Center for Materials Research, under NSF grant no. DMR 0079992 (M.G.V.) and Packard Foundation Fellowship (I.L.A.).