The Generalized Scattering Matrix Approach: An Efficient Technique for Modeling Quantum Transport in Relatively Large and Heavily Doped Structures

  • S. Bandyopadhyay
  • M. Cahay
Chapter
Part of the The Springer International Series in Engineering and Computer Science book series (SECS, volume 113)

Abstract

Over the past few years, a number of theoretical techniques have appeared in the literature for simulating phase-coherent electron transport through disordered meso-scopic structures. Notable among these are the Green’s function methods [1] and transfer matrix approaches [2]. In this paper, we discuss an alternate technique the generalized scattering matrix approach — which is ideal for studying transport through relatively large and heavily doped structures. Unlike the Green’s function method which has a computational cost proportional to (NL)4 and a storage requirement proportional to (NL)2 (N is the number of dopants or scattering centers in the structure and L is the structure’s length), the scattering matrix technique has a computational cost proportional to (NL)3 and a storage requirement proportional to (NL) [3]. The reduced storage requirement is a highly desirable feature in a supercomputing environment since it decreases the number of small page faults and input/output operations which then reduces the real time of computation1. Consequently, the scattering matrix technique is optimal for treating those problems that require simulating transport in relatively large and heavily doped structures.

Keywords

Localization Length Anderson Localization Evanescent Mode Wide Structure Dope Structure 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1].
    P. A. Lee and D. S. Fisher, Phys. Rev. Lett., 47, 882 (1981).MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2].
    E. Abrahams and M. Stephens, J. Phys. C, 13, L377 (1980);CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [2a].
    M. Ya Azbel, Phys. Rev. B y 28, 4106 (1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [3].
    D. S. Fisher and P. A. Lee, Phys. Rev. B, 23, 6851 (1981).MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [4].
    S. Datta, M. Cahay and M. McLennan, Phys. Rev. B, 36, 5655 (1987);CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [4a].
    M. Cahay, M. McLennan and S. Datta, Phys. Rev. B, 37, 10125 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [5].
    R. J. Haug, K. v. Klitzing and K. Ploog, Phys. Rev. B, 35, 5933 (1987).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [6].
    P. F. Bagwell (preprint; also to appear in Phys. Rev. B). Google Scholar
  9. [7].
    M. Cahay, S. Bandyopadhyay, M. A. Osman and H. L. Grubin, (to appear in Surface Science. Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. Bandyopadhyay
    • 1
  • M. Cahay
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Electrical and Computer EngineeringUniversity of Notre DameNotre DameUSA
  2. 2.Nanoelectronics Laboratory and Department of Electrical and Computer EngineeringUniversity of CincinnatiCincinnatiUSA

Personalised recommendations