## Critical current oscillation by magnetic field in semiconductor nanowire Josephson junction

## Tomohiro Yokoyama ∗

Kavli Institute of Nanoscience, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands and Center for Emergent Matter Science, RIKEN Institute, Wako, Japan

## Mikio Eto

Faculty of Science and Technology, Keio University, Yokohama, Japan

## Yuli V. Nazarov

Kavli Institute of Nanoscience, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands (Dated: August 4, 2014)

We study theoretically the critical current in semiconductor nanowire Josephson junction with strong spinorbit interaction. The critical current oscillates by an external magnetic field. We reveal that the oscillation of critical current depends on the orientation of magnetic field in the presence of spin-orbit interaction. We perform a numerical simulation for the nanowire by using a tight-binding model. The Andreev levels are calculated as a function of phase di ff erence ϕ between two superconductors. The DC Josephson current is evaluated from the Andreev levels in the case of short junctions. The spin-orbit interaction induces the e ff ective magnetic field. When the external field is parallel with the e ff ective one, the critical current oscillates accompanying the 0π like transition. The period of oscillation is longer as the angle between the external and e ff ective fields is larger.

PACS numbers:

## I. INTRODUCTION

The spin-orbit (SO) interaction has attracted a lot of interest. In narrow-gap semiconductors, such as InAs and InSb, the strong SO interaction has been reported and many phenomena based on the SO interaction are investigated intensively, e.g., spin Hall e ff ect . 1 The SO interaction has a great advantage also for the application to the spintronic devices and to quantum information processing. InAs and InSb nanowires are interesting platform for the application and studied in recent experiments, e.g., the electrical manipulation of single electron spins in quantum dots fabricated on the nanowires . 2 Nanowire-superconductor hybrid systems have been also examined for the search of Majorana fermions induced by the SO interaction and the Zeeman e ff ect . 3

In Josephson junctions, the supercurrent flows when the phase di ff erence ϕ between two superconductors is present. In this paper, we investigate theoretically the Josephson junction of semiconductor nanowires with strong SO interaction. The supercurrent in semiconductor nanowires has been reported by experiment groups 4,5 . The Josephson e ff ect with SO interaction has been studied theoretically for some materials, e.g., magnetic normal metals 6 , where the combination of SO interaction and exchange interaction results in an unconventional current-phase relation, I ( ϕ ) = I 0 sin( ϕ -ϕ 0 ). The phase shift ϕ 0 deviates the ground state of junction from ϕ = 0 or π , which is so-called ϕ 0 -state. The anomalous supercurrent is obtained at ϕ = 0. In previous studies, we have pointed out that the anomalous e ff ect is attributed to the spin-dependent channel mixing due to the SO interaction 7,8 . In the present study, we focus on the critical current oscillation when an external magnetic field is applied. The DC Josephson current is evaluated from the Andreev levels in the case of short junction. We examine a numerical calculation using a tight-binding model for the nanowire. In this model, a particular form of SO interac-

FIG. 1: Model for a semiconductor nanowire Josephson junction. A tight-binding model is applied for the normal region with hard-wall potentials for the nanowire. The nanowire is represented by a quasi-one dimensional system along the x direction. The normal region is 0 &lt; x &lt; L and the superconducting region induced by the proximity e ff ect is x &lt; 0, x &gt; L .

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0194v1-figure-46e4649a-440a-4938-88c3-eca77f75890f.jpg)

tion can be considered. When the angle between the external field and an e ff ective magnetic field due to the SO interaction is smaller, the oscillation period of critical current is shorter.

## II. MODEL

The nanowire along the x direction is connected to two superconductors (Fig. 1). At x &lt; 0 and x &gt; L , the superconducting pair potential is induced into the nanowire by the proximity e ff ect. We assume that the pair potential is ∆ ( x ) = ∆ 0 e i ϕ/ 2 at x &lt; 0 and ∆ ( x ) = ∆ 0 e -i ϕ/ 2 at x &gt; L , where ϕ is the phase di ff erence between the two superconductors. In the normal region at 0 &lt; x &lt; L , ∆ ( x ) = 0. When a magnetic field is applied to the junction, the Zeeman e ff ect is taken into account in the nanowire. The magnetic field is not too large to break the superconductivity and screened in the superconducting regions. The Hamiltonian is given by H = H 0 + H SO + H Z with H 0 = p 2 / 2 m + V conf + V imp, the

Rashba interaction H SO = ( α/ /planckover2pi1 )( py σ x -px σ y ), and the Zeeman term H Z = g µ B B · ˆ σ / 2, using e ff ective mass m g , -factor g ( &lt; 0 for InSb), Bohr magneton µ B, and Pauli matrices ˆ . σ We neglect the orbital magnetization e ff ect in the nanowire. V conf describes the confining potential for the nanowire. V imp represents the impurity potentials. We consider short junction, where the spacing between two superconductors is much smaller than the coherent length in the normal region, L /lessmuch ξ . There is no potential barrier at x = 0 , L . The Zeeman energy E Z = | g µ BB | and the pair potential ∆ 0 are much smaller than the Fermi energy E F.

The Bogoliubov-de Gennes (BdG) equation is written as

$$\left ( \begin{array} { c } H - E _ { \text{F} } & \hat { \Delta } \\ \hat { \Delta } ^ { \dagger } & - ( H ^ { * } - E _ { \text{F} } ) \end{array} \right ) \left ( \begin{array} { c } \psi _ { \text{e} } \\ \psi _ { \text{h} } \end{array} \right ) = E \left ( \begin{array} { c } \psi _ { \text{e} } \\ \psi _ { \text{h} } \end{array} \right ) \quad ( 1 )$$

with ˆ ∆ = ∆ ( x g )ˆ. ψ e = ( ψ e + , ψ e -) T and ψ h = ( ψ h + , ψ h -) T are the spinors for electron and hole, respectively. ˆ g = -i ˆ σ y . The energy E is measured from the Fermi level E F. The BdG equation determines the Andreev levels En ( | En | &lt; ∆ 0 ) as a function of ϕ .

The ground state energy of junction is given by E gs ( ϕ ) = -(1 / 2) ∑ n ′ En ( ϕ ), where the summation is taken over all the positive Andreev levels, En ( ϕ ) &gt; 0. The contribution from continuous levels ( | E | &gt; ∆ 0 ) can be disregarded for the short junctions . At zero temperature, the supercurrent is calculated 9 as I ( ϕ ) = (2 e / /planckover2pi1 )( dE gs / d ϕ ). The current is a periodic function for -π ≤ ϕ &lt; π . The maximum (or absolute value of minimum) of I ( ϕ ) yields the critical current I c .

The BdG equation in eq. (1) is expressed in terms of the scattering matrix . 9 The scattering matrix of electrons (holes) transport in the normal region is given by ˆ S e ( ˆ S h ). ˆ S e and ˆ S h are related to each other by ˆ S e = ˆ S ∗ h for the short junctions. We denote ˆ S e = ˆ S and ˆ S h = ˆ S ∗ . The Andreev reflection at x = 0 and L is described by the scattering matrix ˆhe r for the conversion from electron to hole and ˆeh r for that from hole to electron. The normal reflection can be neglected. The matrix coe ffi cients of ˆ r he and ˆeh, e.g., exp r {-i arccos( E / ∆ 0 ) -i ϕ/ 2 } for ˆhe r at x = 0, are calculated from the boundary condition at x = 0 and L . The SO interaction does not a ff ect the Andreev reflection coe ffi cients. The Andreev levels, En ( ϕ ), are obtained from the product of ˆ , S ˆ r he , and ˆeh, r

$$\det \left ( \hat { 1 } - \hat { r } _ { \text{eh} } \hat { S } ^ { * } \hat { r } _ { \text{he} } \hat { S } \right ) = 0. \quad \quad ( 2 ) \quad E _ { \text{gs} } ^ { \text{i} } \\ \theta \cdot \quad \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \end{cases}$$

Equation (2) is equivalent to the BdG equation (1).

To calculate the scattering matrix ˆ , S we adopt the tightbinding model which discretizes a two-dimensional space ( xy plane). The edges of nanowire are represented by a hard-wall potential. The width of nanowire is W = 12 a with the lattice constant a = 10nm. The Fermi wavelength is fixed at λ F = 18 a , where the number of conduction channels is unity. The length of normal region is L = 50 a . The on-site random potential by impurities is taken into account, the distribution of which potential is uniform. We set that the mean free path due to the impurity scattering is l mfp / L = 1. The SO length is l SO / L = 0 2 with . l SO = k -1 α = /planckover2pi1 2 / ( m α ). The magnetic field is B = B ˆ e θ with the angle θ from the x axis in the xy plane.

FIG. 2: Numerical results of phase di ff erence ϕ 0 at the minimum of ground-state energy when the number of conduction channel is unity and l mfp / L = 1. The SO interaction is l SO / L = 0 2. . The results are for a sample. (a) Grayscale plot of ϕ 0 in the plane of magnetic field θ B = E L Z / ( /planckover2pi1 v F ) and its direction θ . (b) Cross section of panel (a) at θ = 0 5 . π (solid), 0 3 . π (broken), 0 15 . π (dotted), and 0 (dotted broken lines).

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0194v1-figure-76a80e5c-44b2-4e9d-97a8-46d9561b1241.jpg)

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0194v1-figure-378b0cf3-1a91-42e2-b587-76bf8a9f19e9.jpg)

## III. RESULTS

We consider a sample for the nanowire. For the magnetic field, we introduce a parameter, θ B = E L Z / ( /planckover2pi1 v F), which means an additional phase due to the Zeeman e ff ect in the propagation of electron and hole. Here, v F is the Fermi velocity in the absence of SO interaction.

Figure 2 shows the phase di ff erence ϕ 0 at the minimum of E gs when the magnetic field is increased and rotated. In the absence of SO interaction, ϕ 0 takes only 0 or π exactly and clear 0π transition happens (see Ref. 8 ). In the presence of SO interaction, ϕ 0 is deviated from 0 and π , where the anomalous Josephson current is obtained. When the magnetic field is in the y direction ( θ = π/ 2), the transition between ϕ 0 ≈ 0 and ϕ 0 ≈ π takes place around θ B = π/ 2 3 , π/ 2 , · · · . The transition points are shifted gradually to large θ B with decreasing of angle θ . At θ ≈ 0, the transition is not observed in Fig. 2.

The transition points in ϕ 0 corresponds to the position of cusps of critical current. Figure 3(a) exhibits the critical current when the magnetic field increases. The critical current I c oscillates as a function of θ B . The distance of cusps is longer when the direction of magnetic field is tilted from the y axis. For the parallel magnetic field to the nanowire ( θ = 0), I c has

FIG. 3: Numerical results of critical current I c when N = 1 and l mfp / L = 1. The SO interaction is l SO / L = 0 2. . I 0 ≡ e ∆ 0 / /planckover2pi1 . The sample is the same as that in Fig. 2. (a) I c as a function of magnetic field θ B = E L Z / ( /planckover2pi1 v F ) when θ = 0 5 . π (solid), 0 3 . π (broken), 0 15 . π (dotted), and 0 (dotted broken lines). (b) I c as a function of magnetic field orientation θ when θ B = π/ 2 (solid), π (broken), and 2 π (dotted lines).

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0194v1-figure-84edace5-b73b-4ed2-96e1-9e5c2f1038de.jpg)

no cusp in accordance with no transition. The critical current decreases with increase of θ B although ϕ 0 is almost fixed at zero in Fig. 2(b). Figure 3(b) shows I c when the magnetic field is rotated in the xy plane. The strength of magnetic field is fixed for each line. We find the transition by the angle θ in Fig. 2(a). The critical current also oscillates as a function of θ . For small magnetic field ( θ B &lt; π/ 2), I c changes monotonically. The oscillation by θ is obtained for large magnetic field. If the state of junction at θ = π/ 2 is ϕ 0 ≈ π (0), the critical current shows one cusp (two cusps) in Fig. 3(b). Therefore we can estimate the state at θ = π/ 2 from the number of cusps.

∗ E-mail me at: T.Yokoyama@tudelft.nl

1 Kato Y K, Myers R C, Gossard A C, and Awschalom D D 2004 Science 306 1910

## IV. CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION

We have studied the DC Josephson e ff ect in the semiconductor nanowire with strong SO interaction. We have examined a numerical simulation using the tight-binding model in the case of short junction. The combination of SO interaction and Zeeman e ff ect in the nanowire results in the anomalous Josephson e ff ect. The critical current oscillates as a function of magnetic field. In the presence of SO interaction, the oscillation of critical current depends on the magnetic field orientation. The oscillation period is shorter when the magnetic field is perpendicular to the nanowire. For a parallel magnetic field to the nanowire, the transition and the cusp of critical current are not found.

In this numerical model, we have considered the Rashba interaction. In the quasi-one-dimensional nanowire, the e ff ective magnetic field induced by the Rashba interaction is in the y direction. The anisotropy of critical current oscillation is understood intuitively by the spin precession in the propagation of electron and hole. When the external magnetic field is parallel to the e ff ective field (the y direction), the spin quantization axis is fixed in that direction. The electron and hole receive the additional phase in the propagation. On the other hand, when the external field is in the x direction, the spin quantization axes for electron and hole are not parallel with each other since the e ff ective fields for electron and hole are antiparallel. The spin of electron and hole forming the Andreev bound state is rotated, which rotation cancels out the phase θ B due to the Zeeman splitting. As a result, the critical current oscillation disappears. In the case of general SO interaction, the e ff ective field would be deviated from the y axis. By measuring the anisotropy of critical current oscillation, we can evaluate the direction of e ff ective field due to the SO interaction.

## Acknowledgments

We acknowledge financial support by the Motizuki Fund of Yukawa Memorial Foundation. We acknowledge fruitful discussions about experiments with Professor L. P. Kouwenhoven, A. Geresdi, V. Mourik, K. Zuo of Delft University of Technology. T.Y. is a JSPS Postdoctoral Fellow for Research Abroad.

## References

2 Nadj-Perge S, Pribiag V S, van den Berg J W G, Zuo K, Plissard S R, Bakkers E P A M, Frolov S M, and Kouwenhoven L P 2012 Phys. Rev. Lett. 108 166801

- 3 Mourik V, Zuo K, Frolov S M, Plissard S R, Bakkers E P A M, and Kouwenhoven L P 2012 Science 336 1003
- 4 Doh Y-J, van Dam J A, Roest A L, Bakkers E P A M, Kouwenhoven L P, and Franceschi S De 2005 Science 309 272
- 5 Kouwenhoven L P, Geresdi A, Mourik V, and Zuo K (private communications)
- 6 Buzdin A 2008 Phys. Rev. Lett. 101 107005
- 7 Yokoyama T, Eto M, and Nazarov Yu V 2013 J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 82 054703
- 8 Yokoyama T, Eto M, and Nazarov Yu V 2014 Phys. Rev. B 89 195407
- 9 Beenakker C W J 1991 Phys. Rev. Lett 67 3836; 1992 Phys. Rev. Lett 68 1442(E)
Tomohiro Yokoyama Mikio Eto Yuli V. Nazarov
Critical current oscillation by magnetic field in semiconductor nanowire Josephson junction
We study theoretically the critical current in semiconductor nanowire
Josephson junction with strong spin-orbit interaction. The critical current
oscillates by an external magnetic field. We reveal that the oscillation of
critical current depends on the orientation of magnetic field in the presence
of spin-orbit interaction. We perform a numerical simulation for the nanowire
by using a tight-binding model. The Andreev levels are calculated as a function
of phase difference $\varphi$ between two superconductors. The DC Josephson
current is evaluated from the Andreev levels in the case of short junctions.
The spin-orbit interaction induces the effective magnetic field. When the
external field is parallel with the effective one, the critical current
oscillates accompanying the $0$-$\pi$ like transition. The period of
oscillation is longer as the angle between the external and effective fields is
larger.