## Electron Spin Relaxation in Two Polymorphic Structures of GaN

Nam Lyong Kang

Department of Nanomechatronics Engineering, Pusan National University, Miryang 627-706, Republic of Korea

## ABSTRACT

The relaxation process of electron spin in systems of electrons interacting with piezoelectric deformation  phonons  that  are  mediated  through  spin-orbit  interactions  was  interpreted  from  a microscopic point of view using the formula for the electron spin relaxation times derived by a projection-reduction method. The electron spin relaxation times in two polymorphic structures of GaN were calculated. The piezoelectric material constant for the wurtzite structure obtained by a comparison  with  a  previously  reported  experimental  result  was 𝑃 pe = 1.5 × 10 29 eV/m .  The temperature  and  magnetic  field  dependence  of  the  relaxation  times  for  both  wurtzite  and zinc-blende structures were similar, but the relaxation times in zinc-blende GaN were smaller and decreased more rapidly with increasing temperature and magnetic field than that in wurtzite GaN. This study also showed that the electron spin relaxation for wurtzite GaN at low density could  be  explained  by  the  Elliot-Yafet  process  but  not  for  zinc-blende  GaN  in  the  metallic regime.

PACS numbers: 71.70.Ej, 72.10.Bg, 72.10.Di, 72.25.Dc, 72.25.Rb Keywords: electron spin relaxation, projection operator, reduction identity, population criterion

Gallium nitride has attracted considerable attention because of its promising applications for optical  devices,  such  as  light-emitting  diodes  and  blue  lasers,  and  electronic  devices  for  high power,  high  frequency  and  high  temperature  applications  [1-6].  GaN  exists  in  two  allotropic forms,  i.e.  wurtzite  and  zinc-blende  structures.  The  former  is  characterized  by  two  lattice constants  and  is  a  thermodynamically  stable  phase.  The  latter,  however,  is  characterized  by  a single lattice constant and is a metastable phase. The crystallographic symmetry of zinc-blende and wurtzite GaNs are also different. Therefore, the electron spin relaxation processes in both cases are expected to be different. Understanding the spin relaxation mechanisms in semiconductors is of great importance for the practical use of semiconductor spintronic devices because preserving the information injected into spin over a practical time scale is important for such devices.

Electron spin relaxations in semiconductors are governed by Yelliot-Yafet (EY) [7, 8] and Dyakonov-Perel (DP) [9] spin relaxation mechanisms. Very long electron spin relaxation times in highly 𝑛 -doped bulk zinc-blende GaN [4, 6] have been reported, whereas short electron spin relaxation times were observed in wurtzite GaN [3, 5]. Therefore, it is important to determine the dominant spin relaxation mechanism under a range of conditions, such as temperature, external field and electron density, and to understand how the phonon and electron distribution functions are included because the condition-dependence of electron spin relaxation might be affected by the distribution functions. In piezoelectric materials, such as GaN, acoustic piezoelectric phonon scattering is the dominant scattering mechanism in the middle range of temperatures (50-150 K).

This  paper  reports  that  the  formula  for  the  electron  spin  relaxation  time  derived  using Kang-Choi  projection-reduction  (KCPR)  method  can  be  interpreted  from  a  fully  microscopic point of view using a diagram, from which some intuition for the quantum dynamics of electrons in a solid can be obtained. The spin flipping and conserving processes can be explained in an organized manner because the formula includes the Planck and Fermi distribution functions in multiplicative forms (this is called the population criterion), which is relevant because phonons and electrons belong to different categories in a quantum-statistical classification. The formula is applied  to  a  system  of  electrons  interacting  with  piezoelectric  deformation  phonons  mediated through the spin-orbit interaction. The piezoelectric material constants for wurtzite structure is determined by a comparison with the previous reported experimental results, and the temperature

and  magnetic  field  dependence  of  the  electron  spin  relaxation  times  in  two  polymorphic structures of GaN were obtained.

When  an  electromagnetic  wave  of  frequency 𝜔 is applied  to  a  system  of  electrons interacting with piezoelectric deformation phonons mediated through spin-orbit interactions, the electron spin relaxation time ( 𝑇1 ) for the EY process can be derived using the KCPR method and considering the Lorentzian approximation for weak electron-phonon interaction as follows [10]:

$$\text{ng the Lorentzian approximation for weak electron-phonon interaction as follows } [ 1 0 ] \colon \\ \frac { 1 } { T _ { 1 } } = \frac { 2 \pi } { \hbar { ( } f _ { \alpha - } - f _ { \alpha + } ) } \sum _ { \gamma, q } \\ \times & \left [ \{ ( T _ { + } ( \alpha -, \gamma + ) + T _ { - } ( \alpha -, \gamma + ) \} \tilde { l } _ { z } ( \gamma +, \alpha + ) \\ + \tilde { l } _ { + } ( \alpha -, \gamma + ) \{ T _ { + } ( \gamma +, \alpha + ) + T _ { - } ( \gamma +, \alpha + ) \} \\ + \tilde { l } _ { z } ( \alpha -, \gamma - ) \{ T _ { + } ( \gamma -, \alpha + ) + T _ { - } ( \gamma -, \alpha + ) \} \\ + \{ T _ { + } ( \alpha -, \gamma - ) + T _ { - } ( \alpha -, \gamma - ) \} \tilde { l } _ { + } ( \gamma -, \alpha + ) \right ] \\ = A + B + C + D + E + F + G + H, \\ s \text{ is the Fermi distribution function for an electron with energy } \ E _ { \alpha } s, \text{ where } s = + ( - ) \\ \quad \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
 \text{ng the Lorentzian distribution function for an electron with energy } \ E _ { \alpha } s, \text{ where } s = + ( - )$$

=

where 𝑓 𝛼𝑠 is the Fermi distribution function for an electron with energy 𝐸𝛼𝑠 , where 𝑠 = +(-) for  an  up  (down)  spin,  and 𝑙 ̃ 𝑧 (𝛼±, 𝛽±) ≡ 2|[𝑙𝑧(𝑞)]𝛼𝛽| 2 and 𝑙 ̃ +(𝛼-,𝛽+) ≡ |[𝑙 + (𝑞)]𝛼𝛽| 2 are the  interaction  coupling  factors,  where [𝑙 𝑧 (𝑞)]𝛼𝛽 and [𝑙 + (𝑞)]𝛼𝛽 are  the  matrix  elements  of 𝐥(𝑞) given in Eq. (8), and 𝑙 + (𝑞) = 𝑙𝑥(𝑞) + 𝑖𝑙𝑦(𝑞) . In Eq. (1), the transition factors, 𝑇+(𝛼𝑠, 𝛽𝑠 ) ′ and 𝑇-(𝛼𝑠, 𝛽𝑠 ) ′ , are defined as

𝑇

$$T _ { + } ( \alpha s, \beta s ^ { ^ { \prime } } ) \equiv \delta ( \hbar { \omega } + E _ { \alpha s } - E _ { \beta s ^ { ^ { \prime } } } - \hbar { \omega } _ { q } ) P _ { + } ( \alpha s, \beta s ^ { ^ { \prime } } )$$

𝑇

$$T _ { - } ( \alpha s, \beta s ^ { ^ { \prime } } ) \equiv \delta ( \hbar { \omega } + E _ { \alpha s } - E _ { \beta s ^ { ^ { \prime } } } + \hbar { \omega } _ { q } ) P _ { - } ( \alpha s, \beta s ^ { ^ { \prime } } ).$$

Here 𝛿(𝑥) denotes  the Dirac  delta function, through  which  the  energy  conservation  is maintained, and the population factors, 𝑃±(𝛼𝑠, 𝛽𝑠 ) ′ , are defined as follows:

𝑃

$$P _ { + } ( \alpha s, \beta s ^ { ^ { \prime } } ) \equiv ( 1 + N _ { q } ) f _ { \alpha s } ( 1 - f _ { \beta s ^ { ^ { \prime } } } ) - N _ { q } f _ { \beta s ^ { ^ { \prime } } } ( 1 - f _ { \alpha s } )$$

𝑃

$$P _ { - } ( \alpha s, \beta s ^ { ^ { \prime } } ) \equiv N _ { q } f _ { \alpha s } ( 1 - f _ { \beta s ^ { ^ { \prime } } } ) - ( 1 + N _ { q } ) f _ { \beta s ^ { ^ { \prime } } } ( 1 - f _ { \alpha s } ),$$

where 𝑁𝑞 is the Planck  distribution  function  for  a  phonon  with  energy, ℏ𝜔𝑞 . Eq.  (4) corresponds to a transition from an (𝛼, 𝑠) state to a (𝛽, 𝑠 ) ′ state with phonon emission minus a transition from a (𝛽, 𝑠 ) ′ state to an (𝛼, 𝑠) state with phonon absorption and Eq. (5) is a reverse process. Therefore, Eqs. (4) and (5) satisfy the population criterion. The energy eigenvalue under a  static  magnetic  field 𝐵 applied  in  the 𝑧 direction  is  given  as 𝐸𝛼𝑠 = (𝑛𝛼 + 1/2)ℏ𝜔𝑐 +

ℏ 2 𝑘𝑧𝛼/2𝑚e + 𝑔𝜇𝐵𝐵𝑠/2 2 ,  where 𝑛𝛼 = 0,1,2, ⋯ , 𝜔𝑐 = 𝑒𝐵/𝑚e is  the  cyclotron  frequency, 𝑚e is the effective mass of an electron, 𝑘𝑧𝛼 is the 𝑧 component of the electron wave vector, 𝑔 is the electron g-factor, and 𝜇𝐵 is the Bohr magneton.

$$\begin{smallmatrix} ( \mathbf a ) & \widetilde { l } _ { + } ( \alpha -, \beta + ) \\ \alpha - \Delta \Delta \Delta \Delta - \beta + \\. \end{smallmatrix} \begin{smallmatrix} & ( \mathbf b ) & \widetilde { l } _ { z } ( \alpha \pm, \beta \pm ) \\ \alpha \pm - \Delta \Delta \Delta \Delta - \beta \pm \\. \end{smallmatrix}$$

FIG.  1. Diagrammatic  representation  of  the  interaction  factors, 𝑙 ̃ +(𝛼-,𝛽+) and 𝑙 ̃ 𝑧 (𝛼±, 𝛽±) . The red spring emits (outward red solid arrow) or absorbs (inward red dotted arrow) a phonon denoted  by  a  filled  purple  square,  and  the  blue  spring  emits  (outward  blue  solid  arrow)  or absorbs (inward blue dotted arrow) a phonon denoted by the empty purple square.

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0554v1-figure-3acccedd-4468-4d25-8036-1d91fef7c76d.jpg)

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0554v1-figure-7fbdc626-0fc3-4729-a7f7-47079a7bb85c.jpg)

$$& ( c ) \quad \Box \uparrow \\ & \alpha \pm \overbrace { T _ { + } ( \alpha \pm ) } ^ { \uparrow }$$

$$\begin{matrix} ( d ) & \Box \uparrow \uparrow \Delta \\ \alpha \pm \overbrace { T _ { - } ( \alpha \pm, \beta \pm ) } ^ { \uparrow } \beta \\ \Box \uparrow \uparrow \uparrow \Delta \end{matrix}$$

FIG.  2. Diagrammatic  representation  of  the  transition  factors, 𝑇±(𝛼𝑠, 𝛽𝑠 ) ′ . 𝑇+(𝛼𝑠, 𝛽𝑠 ) ′ and 𝑇-(𝛼𝑠, 𝛽𝑠 ) ′ correspond  to  the  clockwise  and  counterclockwise  loops,  respectively.  A  photon denoted by the filled green triangle is absorbed (emitted) during a forward (backward) process in the  red  loops,  and  a  photon  denoted  by  the  empty  green  triangle  is  absorbed  (emitted)  during forward (backward) process in the blue loops. The upper and lower half circles correspond to the phonon emission and absorption processes, respectively.

For a diagrammatic interpretation of Eq. (1), the following are introduced [11]. 𝑙 ̃ +(𝛼-,𝛽+) and 𝑙 ̃ 𝑧 (𝛼±, 𝛽±) are represented by red and blue springs, respectively (Fig. 1). The red spring emits (outward red solid arrow) or absorbs (inward red dotted arrow) a phonon that is denoted by a filled purple square, and the blue spring emits (outward blue solid arrow) or absorbs (inward blue dotted arrow) a phonon that is denoted by an empty purple square. The filled and empty symbols  are  involved  in  spin  flipping  and  conserving  processes,  respectively.  Clockwise  and counterclockwise loops are used to represent 𝑇+(𝛼𝑠, 𝛽𝑠 ) ′ and 𝑇-(𝛼𝑠, 𝛽𝑠 ) ′ , respectively (Fig. 2). A photon denoted by a filled green triangle is absorbed (emitted) during the forward (backward) process in the red loops and a photon denoted by an empty green triangle is absorbed (emitted) during  the  forward  (backward)  process  in  the  blue  loops.  The  upper  and  lower  half  circles correspond to phonon emission and absorption processes, respectively.

Figure 3 presents a diagrammatic interpretation of the first (A) and third (C) terms in Eq. (1). The physical meaning of the first term (A) in Eq. (1) or Fig. 3 is as follows. The empty and filled black circles denote electrons with spin down and up, respectively. In a process from stages (1) to  (2), 𝑇+(𝛼-,𝛾+) means that an electron with spin down transits from  an initial spin down state, 𝛼 ,  to  an  implicit  spin  up  state, 𝛾 + ,  absorbing  a  photon  and  emitting  a  phonon  to  a lower spring and 𝑙 ̃ 𝑧 (𝛾+,𝛼+) means that the implicit state is coupled with a final spin up state, 𝛼 + ,  by  a  phonon  with  wave vector 𝑞 emitted from a lower spring. The 𝛾 + and 𝛾 states are created by local fluctuations and are called the implicit states because they are contained in the relaxation time, not in the susceptibility tensor. A process from stages (2) to (3) is an inverse process  that  the  electron  transits  from  the  final  state  to  the  implicit  state  absorbing  a  phonon emitted from the lower spring and emitting a photon. Combinations of the distribution functions in  Eqs.  (4)  and  (5)  are  different  and  the  energies  of  the  implicit  states  are  determined  by  the energies of the final (or initial) state, photon and phonon. Therefore, a net transition is possible and  the  electron  transition  process  forms  a  loop  because  phonon  absorption  and  emission processes maintain a balance. The other processes in Eq. (1) can be interpreted from diagrams in a similar manner

FIG. 3. Diagrammatic interpretation of processes A and C in Eq. (1). The black circle,  green triangle and purple square denote the electron, photon and phonon. The filled (empty) triangles and squares are involved in the spin flipping (conserving) processes and the empty (filled) circles denote electrons with down (up) spins, respectively.

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0554v1-figure-7e7e0851-8cce-427b-9734-9aa760f806f0.jpg)

The electron spin relaxation times in two polymorphic structures of GaN are calculated using Eq. (1) for 𝑛𝛼 = 0 at the subband edge ( 𝑘𝑧𝛼 = 0 ) in the quantum limit. Only the cases 𝑛𝛾 = 0 and 𝑛𝛾 = 1 need  to be  considered  in Eq.  (1). A  system  of  electrons  interacting with piezoelectric deformation phonons through phonon-modulated spin-orbit interactions are considered, in which the interaction Hamiltonian is given as [8, 12]

𝑉

$$V = \frac { \hbar } { 4 m _ { e } ^ { 2 } c ^ { 2 } } \left [ \nabla V _ { \text{ep} } \times ( \mathbf p + e \mathbf A ) \right ] \cdot \mathbf \sigma,$$

where 𝑐 is the  speed  of  light, 𝑉 ep is the  electron-phonon  interaction  potential, 𝐩 is the momentum operator of an electron, 𝐀 is the vector potential, and 𝛔 is the Pauli spin matrix. In a crystal whose lattice lacks inversion symmetry, such as GaN, the acoustic strain by pressure gives rise to a macroscopic electric field, which is assumed to be proportional to the derivative of the atomic displacement. Eq. (6) can then be expressed as

𝑉

$$V = \sum _ { \alpha, \beta } \sum _ { s _ { \alpha } s _ { \beta } } \sum _ { q } \, [ \mathrm I ( q ) ] _ { \alpha \beta } a ^ { + } _ { \beta, s _ { \beta } } a _ { \alpha, s _ { \alpha } } ( b ^ { + } _ { - q } + b _ { q } ) \cdot ( \chi _ { s _ { \alpha } } \mathbf \sigma \chi _ { s _ { \beta } } ).$$

Here, 𝑎𝛼,𝑠𝛼 + (𝑎𝛼,𝑠𝛼 ) is  the  creation  (annihilation) operator  for an electron in the state, |𝛼, 𝑠 𝛼 &gt; , with a spin, 𝑠𝛼 ( = -or + ), 𝑏𝑞 (𝑏𝑞) + is the creation (annihilation) operator for a phonon in the state, |𝑞 &gt; , with  energy, ℏ𝜔𝑞 , |𝑞 &gt;≡ |𝐪, 𝑙 &gt; , 𝐪 is the phonon  wave  vector, 𝑙 is the polarization index, 𝜒𝑠𝛼 is the spinor, and

𝐥(𝑞)

$$\mathbf I ( q ) = \frac { \hbar { D } _ { q } } { 4 m _ { e } ^ { 2 } c ^ { 2 } } \left [ \nabla e ^ { i q \cdot r } \times ( \mathbf p + e \mathbf A ) \right ],$$

where 𝐷𝑞 = 𝑃 pe𝑞�ℏ/(2𝜌m Ω 0𝜔𝑞)/(𝑞 2 +𝑞d) 2 , 𝜌m is the mass density,  Ω 0 is the volume of the system, and 𝑞d = �𝑛e𝑒 2 /𝜅𝜀0𝑘B𝑇 is the reciprocal of the Debye screening length, where 𝜅 is the static  dielectric  constant  and 𝑛e is  the  density  of  electrons.  In  this  paper,  the  proportional constant  (piezoelectric  material  constant), 𝑃 pe ,  is  used  as  a  fitting  parameter.  This  constant affects  only  the  magnitude  of  the  spin  relaxation  time,  i.e.,  it  does  not  affect  the  temperature dependence of the spin relaxation time because it is not contained in the distribution functions for electrons and phonons.

𝑃 pe = 1.5 × 10 29 eV/m for  wurtzite  GaN  was  obtained  from  Fig.  4  by  fitting  the  present theoretical  result  to  the  experimental  result  reported  by  Ishiguro  et  al.  [5]  for 𝑛e = 1 × 10 20 m -3 .  This  theory  was  fitted  to  the  experimental  data  at  high  temperatures  (above 40 K ) because the piezoelectric phonon scattering is dominant at these temperatures. The discrepancy at  low  temperatures  (below 40 K )  may  be  corrected  if  the  impurity  and  acoustic  deformation phonon  scatterings  or  the  DP  mechanism  are  considered.  The  relaxation  times  increase  with increasing  electron  density  because  the  effect  of  phonon  scattering  decreases  with  increasing screening effect as the electron density is increased. Note that the relaxation time is an inverse of the scattering effect (or relaxation rate). The effect of phonon scattering increases with increasing number of phonons as the temperature is increased. Therefore, the relaxation times decrease with increasing temperature. Moreover, this decrease occurs sharply at high electron densities because the reciprocal of the Debye screening length decreases more rapidly with increasing temperature as  the  electron  density  is  increased.  The  temperature  dependence  of  the  relaxation  time  for 𝑛e = 10 × 10 20 m -3 , 𝑇 -1.31 , is similar to the result reported by Kuroda et al., 𝑇 -1.4 [3].

FIG.  4. Temperature  dependence  of  the  electron  spin  relaxation  times  in  wurtzite  GaN  for 𝑃 pe = 1.5 × 10 29 eV/m and various electron densities at 𝐵 = 0.1 T .  The  black  circles  are  the results reported by Ishiguro et al. [5].

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0554v1-figure-de6b01ed-5723-477d-884d-49f7a6901931.jpg)

Figure  5  presents  the  relaxation  times  for  zinc-blende  GaN,  where  the  same  piezoelectric material constant was used because there was no comparative experimental data. As mentioned above, the constant does not affect the temperature dependence of the relaxation time. Zeeman splitting in zinc-blende GaN is larger than that in wurtzite GaN because the effective mass of an electron in wurtzite GaN is larger than that in zinc-blende GaN. Therefore, the relaxation time in zinc-blende GaN is smaller and decreases more sharply with increasing temperature than that in wurtzite  GaN  because  the  electrons  in  zinc-blende  GaN  are  scattered  by  phonons  with  high energies, and the number of phonons with higher energies increase more rapidly with increasing temperature than those with lower energies.

FIG. 5. Temperature dependence of the electron spin relaxation times in zinc-blende GaN for 𝑃 pe = 1.5 × 10 29 eV/m and various electron densities at 𝐵 = 0.1 T .

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0554v1-figure-5238aa52-d173-4e5a-96e4-287d8fa4bef1.jpg)

Figures 6 and 7 present the magnetic field dependence of the relaxation times in the wurtzite and zinc-blende GaNs at 100 K .  The  relaxation  times  decrease  with increasing magnetic field because electrons are scattered by phonons with high energies as the spacing between the energy levels increase with increasing magnetic field. The relaxation time in zinc-blende GaN decreases more rapidly than that in wurtzite GaN with increasing magnetic field for the same reason shown in Figs. 4 and 5. Table I lists the temperature and magnetic field dependence of the relaxation times in the wurtzite and zinc-blende GaNs.

FIG.  6. Magnetic  field  dependence  of  the  electron  spin  relaxation  times  in  wurtzite  GaN  for 𝑃 pe = 1.5 × 10 29 eV/m and various electron densities at 𝑇 = 100 K .

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0554v1-figure-1918ae8b-8454-4ab6-9628-3f3222542ef7.jpg)

FIG. 7. Magnetic field dependence of the electron spin relaxation times in zinc-blende GaN for 𝑃 pe = 1.5 × 10 29 eV/m and various electron densities at 𝑇 = 100 K .

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0554v1-figure-bff3db6e-9858-4ffe-92e7-3d12f5150254.jpg)

TABLE  I: Temperature  and  magnetic  field  dependence  of  the  spin  relaxation  times  in  two polymorphic structures of GaN. The temperature dependence and the magnetic field dependence were  obtained  at 𝐵 = 0.1 T and 𝑇 = 100 K ,  respectively  [ 𝑇 :  temperature, 𝐵 :  magnetic  field, 𝑇1 : relaxation time, 𝑛e : electron density].

| 𝑛 e [ m -3 ]   | wurtzite      | zinc-blende   |
|----------------|---------------|---------------|
| 1 ×10 20       | 𝑇 1 ∝ 𝑇 -1.06 | 𝑇 1 ∝ 𝑇 -1.07 |
| 1 ×10 20       | 𝑇 1 ∝ 𝐵 -1.99 | 𝑇 1 ∝ 𝐵 -2.16 |
| 5 ×10 20       | 𝑇 1 ∝ 𝑇 -1.20 | 𝑇 1 ∝ 𝑇 -1.21 |
| 5 ×10 20       | 𝑇 1 ∝ 𝐵 -2.08 | 𝑇 1 ∝ 𝐵 -2.31 |
| 10 ×10 20      | 𝑇 1 ∝ 𝑇 -1.31 | 𝑇 1 ∝ 𝑇 -1.33 |
| 10 ×10 20      | 𝑇 1 ∝ 𝐵 -2.18 | 𝑇 1 ∝ 𝐵 -2.45 |

In conclusion, this paper showed that the formula for the electron spin relaxation time derived using  the  Kang-Choi  projection-reduction  method  for  a  system  of  electrons  interacting  with piezoelectric  phonons  mediated  through  spin-orbit  interaction  can  explain  the  electron  spin flipping  and  conserving  processes  from  a  macroscopic  point  of  view  by  diagrams.  The piezoelectric material constant ( 𝑃 pe ) for wurtzite GaN obtained by fitting the present theoretical result  to  the  previous  reported  experimental  data  for 𝑛e = 1 × 10 20 m -3 was 𝑃 pe = 1.5 × 10 29 eV/m .  The  respective  temperature  and  magnetic  field  dependence  of  the  electron  spin relaxation  times  for 𝑛e = 1 × 10 20 m -3 were 𝑇1 ∝ 𝑇 -1.06 and 𝑇1 ∝ 𝐵 -1.99 in  wurtzite  GaN, and 𝑇1 ∝ 𝑇 -1.07 and 𝑇1 ∝ 𝐵 -2.16 in  zinc-blende  GaN.  The  electron  spin  relaxation  times  for zinc-blend GaN are smaller and decrease more rapidly with increasing temperature and magnetic field than those for wurtzite GaN. Although this paper attributed these to the effective mass of an electron  and  the  number  of  phonons, 𝑃 pe may  be  another  reason.  Nevertheless,  this  was  not confirmed because the experimental data for zinc-blende GaN was unavailable, and thus 𝑃 pe for this material could not be obtained. The long electron spin lifetimes in highly doped cubic GaN by  Buß  et  al.  [6]  could  not  be  explained  by  the  present  formula  including  the  Elliot-Yafet mechanism. Therefore, the relaxation of electron spin in metallic regime cannot be caused by the

Elliot-Yafet mechanism. This phenomenon may be explained by the D'yakonov-Perel mechanism or electron-electron interaction, which will be studied in the future using the present projection- reduction method.

## References

- [1] M. Fanciulli, T. Lei, and T. D. Moustakas, Phys. Rev. B 48 , 15144 (1993-II).
- [2] S. Nakamura, T. Mukai, and M. Senoh, Appl. Phys. Lett. 64 , 1687 (1994).
- [3] T. Kuroda, T. Yabushita, T. Kosuge, A. Tackeuchi, K. Taniguchi, T. Chinone, and N. Horio, Appl. Phys. Lett. 85 , 3116 (2004).
- [4] A. Tackeuchi, H. Otake, Y. Ogawa, F. Takano, and H. Akinaga, Appl. Phys. Lett. 88 , 162114 (2006).
- [5] T. Ishiguro, Y. Toda, and S. Adachi, Appl. Phys. Lett. 90 , 011904 (2007).
- [6] J. H. Buß, J. Rudolph, T. Schupp, D. J. As, K. Lischka, and D. H ä gele, Appl. Phys. Lett. 97 , 062101 (2010).
- [7] R. J. Elliott, Phys. Rev. 96 , 266 (1954).
- [8] Y. Yafet, in 𝑆𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑑 𝑆𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑃ℎ𝑦𝑠𝑖𝑐𝑠 , ed. F. Seitz and D. Turnbull (Academic, New York, 1963), Vol. 14, pp. 1-98.
- [9] M. I. D'yakonov and V.I. Perel', Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 60 , 1954 (1971).
- [10] N. L. Kang and S. D. Choi, Chin. Phys. B 22 , 087102 (2014).
- [11] N. L. Kang and S. D. Choi, Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 53 , in press (2014).
- [12] O. D. Restrepo and W. Windl, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109 , 166604 (2012).
Nam Lyong Kang
Electron Spin Relaxation in Two Polymorphic Structures of GaN
The relaxation process of electron spin in systems of electrons interacting
with piezoelectric deformation phonons that are mediated through spin-orbit
interactions was interpreted from a microscopic point of view using the formula
for the electron spin relaxation times derived by a projection-reduction
method. The electron spin relaxation times in two polymorphic structures of GaN
were calculated. The piezoelectric material constant for the wurtzite structure
obtained by a comparison with a previously reported experimental result was
P_pe=1.5 x 10^29 eV/m. The temperature and magnetic field dependence of the
relaxation times for both wurtzite and zinc-blende structures were similar, but
the relaxation times in zinc-blende GaN were smaller and decreased more rapidly
with increasing temperature and magnetic field than that in wurtzite GaN. This
study also showed that the electron spin relaxation for wurtzite GaN at low
density could be explained by the Elliot-Yafet process but not for zinc-blende
GaN in the metallic regime.