## Crossover from Room-temperature Double-channel Ballistic

## Transport to Single-channel Ballistic Transport in Zigzag Graphene

## Nanoribbons

Zhao-Dong Chu and Lin He* Republic of China

Department of Physics, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, 100875, People's

## Abstract

Very recently, it was demonstrated explicitly that a zigzag graphene nanoribbon (GNR) exhibits a crossover of conductance from G 0 to G 0 /2 with increasing the length ( G 0 = 2 e 2 / h is  the  quantum  of  conductance)  even  at  room-temperature  [Baringhaus,  et  al. Nature 506, 349 (2014)]. Such a result is puzzling as none of previous theories seem to  match  the  experimental  observations.  Here,  we  propose  a  model  to  explain  the crossover  from  double-channel  to  single-channel  ballistic  transport  in  zigzag  GNR. The sp 3 distortion  of  carbon  atoms  at  the  GNR  edges  induces  a  large  spin-orbit coupling on the edges atoms, which enhances spin-flip scattering of edge states of the zigzag  GNR.  With  sufficient  spin-flip  scattering,  the  wave-function  of  edge  states becomes  a  superposition  of  the  spin-up  and  spin-down  components.  Then  the coupling  of  the  two  edges  becomes  important.  This  removes  the  edge  degree  of freedom in the zigzag GNR and results in the evolution of the conductance from G 0 to G 0 /2 with increasing the length.

## Significance statement

A very recent experiment reported the observation of the crossover from double-channel  ballistic  transport  to  single-channel  ballistic  transport  in  zigzag graphene nanoribbon (GNR) with increasing the length. This result has attracted much attention,  however,  none  of  previous  theories  seem  to  match  the  experimental observations.  Here,  we  propose  a  simple  model  that  could  explain  quite  well  the puzzling experimental result. According to our analysis, the decrease of conductance from G 0 to G 0 /2 with increasing the probe spacing direct arises from the joint effect of the reduction of the spin degree of freedom and the edge-edge coupling in the GNRs. Our result  indicates  that  the  spin  degree  of  freedom  plays  an  important  role  in  the transport properties of graphene systems.

Ballistic transport of electrons has fascinated researchers across various disciplines for several decades 1-7 . Looking for systems where ballistic transport can be observed at room temperature boosts rapid developments of several leading topics in condensed matter  physics  in  the  past  few  years 8-10 .  Graphene  nanoribbon  (GNR)  with  perfect crystallography is believed to be one of the most promising candidates as a perfect conductor where electrons can travel long distances without dissipation. However, all experiments in lithographically patterned exfoliated GNRs  demonstrated that transport  is  dominated  by  diffusive  mode  rather  than  the  ballistic  mode 11,12 .  This stimulates many groups to develop different methods in the fabrication of high-quality graphene nanoribbons 13,14 .

Until very recently, a great breakthrough in the growth of GNRs  with crystallographically perfect edges is achieved and room-temperature ballistic transport with a conductance of G 0 in the GNRs is realized by Baringhaus and colleagues for the probe spacing L ≤ 160 nm (Here G 0 = 2 e 2 / h is the quantum of conductance and the factor 2 comes from the spin degree of freedom) 15 . These zigzag GNRs are grown on the slope of a terraced silicon carbide surface and the transport properties of the GNRs were  measured in situ with  variable  probe  spacing.  Figure  1  summarizes  the room-temperature conductance G versus the probe spacing L of the zigzag GNRs in a range of energies around charge neutrality 15 . For L ≤ 160 nm, a conductance of G 0 is observed. With increasing the probe spacing to L ~ 1 µ m, the conductance decreases

gradually to G 0 /2,  then it  keeps a robust value of G 0 /2 for 1 µ m ≤ L ≤  16 µ m. The most surprising result of their experiments is the observation of the single quantum mechanical channel for transport in these high-quality zigzag GNRs with 1 µ m ≤ L ≤ 16 µ m. This result is amazing since that at least an edge-degenerate channel, giving rise  to  a  conductance  of G 0 ,  should  be  involved  in  the  transport  of  the  GNRs  in  a range  of  energies  around  charge  neutrality  point 16,17 .  The  observed  conductance  of G 0 /2,  as  shown  in  Fig.  1,  is  obviously  beyond  the  description  of  any  previous theories 18 .

In this contribution, we propose how the single quantum mechanical channel can readily arise in the zigzag GNR. Even under ultraclean high vacuum conditions, there are many adatoms (impurities), such as hydrogen, that hybridize directly with carbon atoms  at  edges  of  GNRs.  This  hybridization-induced sp 3 distortion  of  the  carbon atoms  leads  to  a  strong  enhancement  of  spin-orbit  coupling 19 ,  which  consequently enhances spin-flip scattering of edge states of the zigzag GNRs. In a long zigzag GNR, the wave-function of the edge states becomes a superposition state of the spin-up and spin-down components because of sufficient spin-flip scattering. Then the edge-edge coupling becomes important, which removes the edge degree of freedom and leads to the crossover of the conductance from G 0 to G 0 /2.

## Results

Hubbard  model  of  zigzag  GNR. At  the  charge  neutrality  level  of  graphene

monolayer,  there  are  four  identical  channels,  two  from  the  spin  and  two  from  the valley  (K  and  K'),  for  ballistic  transport 20 .  In  zigzag  GNRs,  the  valley  degree  of freedom  is  removed  around  the  charge  neutrality  point  and  only  spin-polarized channels located at the two edges presenting a conductance of G0 are expected to be observed 16,17 .  To  explicitly  illustrate  this,  we  show  electronic  structures  of  a  zigzag graphene nanoribbon in Fig. 2. The electronic structures can be described quite well by a tight-binding model Hamiltonian 21-24

$$H = - t \sum _ { \sigma = \uparrow, \downarrow } \sum _ { < i, j > } [ c ^ { \dagger } _ { i, \sigma } c _ { j, \sigma } + H. c ] + U \sum _ { i } n _ { i, \uparrow } n _ { i, \downarrow } \.$$

Here, the first term is the nearest neighbor hopping term on the honeycomb lattice. The operator † , i c σ ( , j c σ ) creates (annihilates) an electron with spin σ at site i ( ), j t = 2.7 eV represents the nearest-neighbor hopping amplitude of the π electrons, and &lt; ,  &gt; i j are nearest neighbors on a honeycomb lattice. The second (Hubbard) term represents electron-electron interaction with the strength of on-site Coulomb repulsion U = 6 eV and † , , , i i i n c c σ σ σ = the  spin-resolved  electron  density  at  atom i . According  to  the Hamiltonian  (1),  the  zigzag  GNRs  feature  a  gap  with  spin-polarized  edge  states  at each edge and the spin polarizations are in opposite directions in the two edges of a GNR 21 , as shown in Fig. 2. Additionally, the states of opposite spin orientation in the zigzag GNRs are degenerate in all bands.

Conductance  of  a  zigzag  GNR  described  by  Hubbard  model. In  a  transport

measurement, an external voltage V creates a difference of chemical potential between two contacts -+ u u eV -= and generates a net current 25,26

$$I = I ^ { \cdot } - I ^ { + } = \frac { e } { L } \sum _ { k } \nu f ^ { \cdot } - \frac { e } { L } \sum _ { k } \nu f ^ { + } \.$$

Here I -and I + are the currents of left-moving and right-moving electrons respectively, and f -and f + are the corresponding Fermi-Dirac distributions describing the electron density of state. With considering

$$\sum _ { k } \rightarrow 2 \times \frac { L } { 2 \pi } \int d k \$$

the net current can be written as -+ 2 ( ) e I u u h = × -25,26 . The factor 2 in Eq. (3) comes from the spin degree of freedom. In the zigzag GNRs described by Hamiltonian (1), the factor 2 also refers to the two spin-polarized edges. Consequently we obtain the conductance around the charge neutrality as 2 2 I e G V h = = , which could explain quite well the result of the zigzag GNRs with L ≤ 160 nm, as shown in Fig. 1. An in-plane electric field applied across a zigzag GNR lifts the spin degeneracy of edge states and the GNR could be forced into a half-metallic state 21 . Then only one spin state (either spin-up or spin-down state) at the two edges contributes to the transport around the charge neutrality point. In such a case, the factor 2, referring to the two edge channels in the zigzag GNR, still plays its role in Eq. (3). Consequently, the conductance is still G 0 . Obviously, the above analysis cannot explain the result of the zigzag GNRs with

L &gt; 160 nm, not to mention the crossover of the conductance between G 0 and G 0 /2 in the GNRs as a function of the probe spacing, as shown in Fig. 1. The experimental result in Ref. [15] indicates that the probe spacing plays a vital role in the emergence of the single-channel ballistic transport in the GNRs.

Spin-orbit coupling of edge atoms in zigzag GNR. To fully understand the puzzling experimental result in Ref. [15], we propose that effect of hybridization-induced sp 3 distortion of edge atoms should be taken into account in the transport properties of the zigzag  GNRs.  The  existence  of  substantial  amounts  of  adatoms  (impurities)  is inevitable even under ultraclean high vacuum conditions. These impurities hybridize directly with carbon atoms at edges of GNRs and induce a distortion of the graphene lattice  from sp 2 to sp 3 19,27,28 .  Such  a  distortion  of  edge  atoms  results  in  a  large enhancement of the spin-orbit coupling on the edges 3,4,19,29

$$\mathcal { I }. c _ { \text{ \ } },$$

where N is the  number  of  zigzag  chains  in  the  GNR, z s ↑ ↓ , is a  Pauli  matrix representing the electron's spin, λ = 10 meV is the strength of spin-orbit coupling, and n is  the number of atoms with sp 3 orbital in the 1 st and N th zigzag chains, i.e. ,  in the two edges of the GNR. Then the total Hamiltonian of the system can be written as

$$H ^ { \prime } = H + H _ { e d g e } \.$$

The second term of Hamiltonian (5) enhances spin-flip scattering in zigzag GNRs and is  expected  to  affect  the  transport  properties  of  the  edge  states  dramatically.  As  an example, if there is an atom at site i' with the sp 3 orbital in the 1 st zigzag chain, the spin-flip scattering induced  by  this atom  will force the edge  states to be a superposition of the spin-up and spin-down components because 1 , , , , , 1, edge i i i i i i i i i i H a c c a c c ϕ λ′ ϕ ′ ′ ′ ′+ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↓ Ψ = ∑ ⋅ + ∑ ⋅ (here

1 , i i i a ϕ ↑ ↑ Ψ = Ψ = ∑ is the initial ground state of the 1 st zigzag chain).

Edge  state  in  a  zigzag  GNR  with  spin-orbit  coupling. For  generally,  the  wave functions of the edge states localized in the 1 st and N th zigzag chains can be written as a superposition of the spin-up and spin-down components:

$$\left | \Psi _ { _ { 1 } } \right \rangle = a \left | \Psi _ { _ { \uparrow } } \right \rangle + b \right | \Psi _ { _ { \downarrow } } \right \rangle,$$

$$\left | \Psi _ { _ { N } } \right \rangle = a \right | \Psi _ { _ { \downarrow } } \right \rangle + b \left | \Psi _ { _ { \uparrow } } \right \rangle \.$$

$$\Psi _ { \downarrow } \rangle, \\ \left | \Psi _ { \uparrow } \right \rangle \.$$

Here a and b are positive normalized parameters. The wave functions with a and b in opposite  signs  are  not  the  eigenstates  of  Hamiltonian  (5)  with  a  positive  spin-orbit coupling. To describe the effect of sp 3 distortion  of  edge  atoms,  we  define p as  the ratio of edge atoms with sp 3 orbital with respect to all of the edge atoms in GNR. For p =  0,  we  have a 2 =  1  and b 2 =  0  ( 1 ↑ Ψ = Ψ and N ↓ Ψ = Ψ ).  Then  Eq.  (1) describes quite well the ground state of zigzag GNR, as shown in Fig. 2. When p ≠ 0, the wave functions of edge states depend on the probe spacing and we can obtain the

coefficients of the wave functions by numerically solving the Hamiltonian (5) in real space.

Figure 3(a) shows the coefficients, a 2 and b 2 ,  as  a  function of the probe spacing, i.e. , a 2 ( L ) and b 2 ( L ), for different p . Obviously, the values of a 2 and b 2 depend on both the probe spacing and the value of p . Here we take the result of p = 0.8 as an example to illustrate the effect of Hamiltonian (4) on the transport properties of zigzag GNRs. When L is  of  the  order  100  nm  or  shorter,  we  still  have a 2 ≈  1  and b 2 ≈  0, i.e. , 1 ↑ Ψ ≈ Ψ and N ↓ Ψ ≈ Ψ .  It  indicates  that  the  effect  of  spin-flip  scattering  is negligible in such a length region even with p =  0.8.  With  increasing L from about 100 nm to about 1 μm, a 2 ( b 2 )  decreases  (increases)  gradually  towards  0.5.  For the case that L &gt;  1  μm,  we have a 2 ≈ b 2 ≈ 0.5, which means that the wave functions of edge states at the two edges become identical and can be written as 1 2 2 2 2 N ↑ ↓ Ψ ≈ Ψ ≈ Ψ + Ψ , as shown in Fig. 3(b). Then there is no spin degree of freedom in the zigzag GNR.

Edge-edge coupling in a zigzag GNR. Along with the variation of wave functions of the  edge  states,  the  coupling  strength  between  the  two  edges  also  changes  as  a function  of  the  probe  spacing.  The  metallic  probes,  with  their  size  of  the  tip  much larger than the width of the GNRs, are expected to connect the two edges of the GNRs and  therefore  act  as  a  medium  for  the  edge-edge  coupling  during  the  transport

measurements. An edge-state-only model 22 with the form

$$( 7 )$$

can capture the essential features of this effect. Here describes the  magnitude  of  edge-edge  coupling  and  I  is  the  identity  matrix.  Obvious,  the edge-edge  coupling  is  zero  for  the  zigzag  GNRs  without sp 3 orbital  in  their  edge atoms because that the two edge states are orthogonal to each other. However, for the superposition states, and , the magnitude of edge-edge coupling depends on the coefficients of the wave functions and  will  reach  its  maximum  when .  Figure  4(a) shows the relationship between t' and the probe spacing of a zigzag GNR with p = 0.8. For small probe spacing, i.e. , L &lt; 100 nm, the edge-edge coupling is rather weak and it  is expected that we could obtain the conductance G 0 around the charge neutrality. Whereas, in the strong coupling region, i.e. , L &gt; 1 µ m, the factor 2 is removed from Eq. (3) and only a conductance of G 0 /2 is expected to be observed in the zigzag GNRs around the charge neutrality. Obviously, our model not only explains the single-channel ballistic transport reported in Ref. [15], but also provides a natural and reasonable explanation in understanding the crossover of the conductance between G 0 and G 0 /2 in the GNRs. The joint effect of the reduction of the spin degree of freedom and the edge-edge coupling in the GNRs leads to the decrease of conductance from G 0 1 a b ↑ ↓ Ψ = Ψ + Ψ N a b ↓ ↑ Ψ = Ψ + Ψ 1 2 2 2 2 N ↑ ↓ Ψ ≈ Ψ ≈ Ψ + Ψ

to G 0 /2  with  increasing  the  probe  spacing,  as  shown  in  Fig.  1.  According  to  our calculation,  the  curve  of a 2 ( L ) with p =  0.7,  as  shown  in  Fig.  1,  matches  the experimental result quite well.

Spin-spin  correlation  in  a  zigzag  GNR. To  further  confirm  our  analysis,  we calculate the spin-spin correlation χ of the edge states for the zigzag GNRs described by Hamiltonian (5). The spin-spin correlation is defined as 30-33

$$\chi = \left \langle \Psi \right | F \left | \Psi \right \rangle,$$

where is  the  wave  function  of  the  ground  edge  state, n' is  the  total number of atoms in one edge (the 1 st or the N th zigzag chain), and F is the spin-spin correlation  function  between  two  lattice  sites i and j following  the  form  (here  we calculate that of the N th zigzag chain as an example) 32,33

$$\begin{smallmatrix} & & ( 9 ) \\ \vdots \end{smallmatrix} \cdot$$

Here denotes the local magnetic moments in the N th zigzag  chain, ( ) is the number of spin-up (spin-down) electrons at site i and i z i i c s c S ↓ ↑ + = , 2   .  In  Fig.  4(b),  the  solid  curve  shows  the  spin-spin  correlation  as  a function  of  the  probe  spacing  in  the N th chain  of  a  zigzag  GNR  with p =  0.8.  The value of χ decreases dramatically with increasing L because of the spin-flip scattering, and  it  approaches  zero  when L &gt;  1  μm.  The  spin-spin  correlation  between  the  two

edges is also shown in Fig. 4(b) (the dashed curve). Its value increases substantially with increasing L and approaches 1 when L &gt; 1 μm. Both the spin-spin correlation of each edge and the spin-spin correlation between the two edges show that the spin-flip scattering completely removes the spin degree of freedom of the GNR when the probe spacing is larger than 1 μm. This agrees quite well with the calculated result in Fig. 3(a).

## Discussion

Here, we should point out that all of our analyses are based on the GNRs with crystallographically  perfect  edges.  A  few  imperfections  of  the  edges  could  lead  to dissipations  of  the  edge  states,  which  may  account  for  the  further  reduction  of  the conductance in the zigzag GNRs with probe spacing larger than 16 μm (Fig. 1).

In summary, we propose a simple model that could explain quite well the puzzling result  observed  very  recently  in  the  zigzag  GNR.  According  to  our  analysis,  the decrease  of  conductance  from G 0 to G 0 /2  with  increasing  the  probe  spacing,  as observed  experimentally  in  Ref.  [15],  direct  arises  from  the  joint  effect  of  the reduction of the spin degree of freedom and the edge-edge coupling in the GNRs. The hybridization-induced sp 3 distortion of the carbon atoms enhances spin-flip scattering of edge states of the zigzag GNRs, which consequently removes the spin degree of freedom in the GNRs with sufficient long probe spacing. Then the wave function of

the edge states in these GNRs becomes a superposition of the spin-up and spin-down components.  In  the  near  future,  more  theoretical  studies  should  be  carried  out  to calculate transport properties of the superposition wave-function in zigzag GNRs. On the one hand, this could help us to quantitative understand the transport properties of the zigzag GNRs with probe spacing larger than 16 μm (as shown in Fig. 1); on the other hand, it may provide unprecedented opportunities to uncover novel electronic behaviors in zigzag GNRs.

*Email: helin@bnu.edu.cn

## References:

- 1.    Klitzing K,  Dorda  G,  Pepper  M  (1980)  New  Method  for  High-Accuracy Determination  of  the  Fine-Structure  Constant  Based  on  Quantized  Hall  Resistance. Phys Rev Lett 45(6):494-497.
- 2.    Haldane FDM (1988) Model for a Quantum Hall Effect without Landau Levels: Condensed-Matter Realization of the 'Parity Anomaly.' Phys Rev Lett 61(18):20152018.
- 3. Kane CL, Mele EJ (2005) Quantum Spin Hall Effect in Graphene. Phys Rev Lett 95(22):226801.
- 4. Kane CL, Mele EJ (2005) Z2 Topological Order and the Quantum Spin Hall Effect. Phys Rev Lett 95(14):146802.
- 5.    Bernevig  BA,  Hughes  TL,  Zhang  S-C  (2006)  Quantum  spin  Hall  effect  and topological phase transition in HgTe quantum wells. Science 314(5806):1757-61.
- 6. König M, et al. (2007) Quantum spin hall insulator state in HgTe quantum wells. Science 318(5851):766-70.

- 7. Chang C-Z, et al. (2013) Experimental observation of the quantum anomalous Hall effect in a magnetic topological insulator. Science 340(6129):167-70.
- 8. Liang W, et al. (2001) Fabry - Perot interference in a nanotube electron waveguide. Nature 411(6838):665-9.
- 9. Li X, Wang X, Zhang L, Lee S, Dai H (2008) Chemically derived, ultrasmooth graphene nanoribbon semiconductors. Science 319(5867):1229-32.
- 10.    Qi X-L, Zhang S-C (2011) Topological insulators and superconductors. Rev Mod Phys 83(4):1057-1110.
- 11.    Han M, Özyilmaz B, Zhang Y, Kim P (2007) Energy Band-Gap Engineering of Graphene Nanoribbons. Phys Rev Lett 98(20):206805.
- 12.    Wang  X,  et  al.  (2011)  Graphene  nanoribbons  with  smooth  edges  behave  as quantum wires. Nat Nanotechnol 6(9):563-7.
- 13.    Kosynkin D V, et al. (2009) Longitudinal unzipping of carbon nanotubes to form graphene nanoribbons. Nature 458(7240):872-6.
- 14.    Cai J, et al. (2010)  Atomically  precise  bottom-up  fabrication  of  graphene nanoribbons. Nature 466(7305):470-3.
- 15.    Baringhaus  J,  et  al.  (2014)  Exceptional  ballistic  transport  in  epitaxial  graphene nanoribbons. Nature 506(7488):349-54.
- 16.    Nakada K, Fujita M, Dresselhaus G, Dresselhaus M (1996) Edge state in graphene ribbons: Nanometer size effect and edge shape dependence. Phys Rev B 54(24):1795417961.
- 17.    Wakabayashi  K,  Fujita  M,  Ajiki  H,  Sigrist  M  (1999)  Electronic  and  magnetic properties of nanographite ribbons. Phys Rev B 59(12):8271-8282.
- 18.    Palacios JJ (2014)  Graphene  nanoribbons:  Electrons  go  ballistic. Nat  Phys 10(3):182-183.
- 19.    Castro Neto  A,  Guinea  F  (2009)  Impurity-Induced  Spin-Orbit  Coupling  in Graphene. Phys Rev Lett 103(2):026804.

- 20.    Gusynin V, Sharapov S (2005) Unconventional Integer Quantum Hall Effect in Graphene. Phys Rev Lett 95(14):146801.
- 21.    Son  Y-W,  Cohen  ML,  Louie  SG  (2006)  Half-metallic  graphene  nanoribbons. Nature 444(7117):347-9.
- 22.    Jung  J,  MacDonald  AH  (2010)  Magnetoelectric  coupling  in  zigzag  graphene nanoribbons. Phys Rev B 81(19):195408.
- 23.    Wimmer M, Adagideli İ, Berber S, Tománek D, Richter K (2008) Spin Currents in Rough Graphene Nanoribbons: Universal Fluctuations and Spin Injection. Phys Rev Lett 100(17):177207.
- 24.    Wang ZF, Jin S, Liu F (2013) Spatially Separated Spin Carriers in Spin-Semiconducting Graphene Nanoribbons. Phys Rev Lett 111(9):096803.
- 25.  Ruan  M  (2012)  Structured  Epitaxial  Graphene  for  Electronics.  PhD  thesis, Georgia Inst.Technol. available at http://hdl.handle.net/1853/45596.
- 26.    Datta S (1995) Electronic Transport in Mesoscopic Systems (Cambridge University Press).
- 27.    Duplock E, Scheffler M, Lindan P (2004) Hallmark of Perfect Graphene. Phys Rev Lett 92(22):225502.
- 28.    Hong  X,  Zou  K,  Wang  B,  Cheng  S-H,  Zhu  J  (2012)  Evidence  for  Spin-Flip Scattering  and  Local  Moments  in  Dilute  Fluorinated  Graphene. Phys  Rev  Lett 108(22):226602.
- 29.    Dugaev VK, Katsnelson MI (2014) Spin relaxation related to the edge scattering in graphene. arXiv:1404.6740v1.
- 30.    Meng ZY, Lang TC, Wessel S, Assaad FF, Muramatsu A (2010) Quantum spin liquid emerging in two-dimensional correlated Dirac fermions. Nature 464(7290):84751.
- 31.    Hikihara T,  Hu  X,  Lin  H-H,  Mou  C-Y  (2003)  Ground-state  properties  of nanographite systems with zigzag edges. Phys Rev B 68(3):035432.

- 32.    Hirsch  J  (1985)  Two-dimensional Hubbard model: Numerical simulation study. Phys Rev B 31(7):4403-4419.
- 33.    Liang S, Doucot B, Anderson PW (1988) Some New Variational Resonating-Valence-Bond-Type  Wave  Functions  for  the  Spin-½  Antiferromagnetic Heisenberg Model on a Square Lattice. Phys Rev Lett 61(3):365-368.

## Acknowledgments

We thank Prof. Yugui Yao and Prof. Hua Jiang for helpful discussions. We are grateful to  National Key Basic Research Program of China (Grant No. 2014CB920903, No. 2013CBA01603), National Science Foundation (Grant No. 11422430, No. 11374035, No. 11004010), the program for New Century Excellent Talents in University of the Ministry  of  Education  of  China  (Grant  No.  NCET-13-0054),  and  Beijing  Higher Education Young Elite Teacher Project (Grant No. YETP0238).

## Author contributions

Z.D.C. performed the theoretical calculations. L.H. conceived and provided advice on the analysis and theoretical calculation. L.H. and Z.D.C. wrote the paper.

Competing financial interests: The authors declare no competing financial interests.

## Figure Legends:

FIG. 1. Room-temperature conductance G versus the probe spacing L in zigzag GNRs (the solid  circles). The  experimental  data  are  reproduced  from  Ref.  [15].  The  zigzag  GNRs  are 40-nanometer-wide  and  have  crystallographically  perfect  edges.  There  is  a  spin-degenerate channel exhibiting a conductance G = G0 for L ≤ 160 nm. With increasing the probe spacing from

160  nm  to  1 µ m,  the  conductance  decreases  gradually  from G0 to G0 /2,  then,  the  conductance keeps a robust value of G0 /2 for 1 µ m ≤ L ≤ 16 µ m. The solid curve is the valve of a 2 (right-Y axis) calculated according to our model (Eq. (5)), which is explained in main text.

FIG. 2. Band structure of a zigzag GNR. (a)  The spatial distribution of the charge difference between spin-up and spin-down for the ground states of an ideal zigzag GNR. The red and green balls represent the charge density of spin-down and spin-up electrons, respectively, and the radius of the circle reflects the magnitude of the charge density. (b) The band structure of a zigzag GNR obtained from Eq. (1). It is reproduced from Refs. [21,23].

FIG.  3.  Spatial  distribution  of  wave  functions  of  edge  states  in  zigzag  GNR . (a)  The relationship  between  coefficients, a 2 and b 2 ,  of  edge  wave  functions  and  the  probe  spacing  of zigzag GNR for different p . (b) The schematic spatial distribution of wave functions of edge states in zigzag GNR with p ≠ 0. The red and green balls represent the charge density of spin-down and spin-up electrons, respectively, the purple balls represent the superposition state of the spin-up and spin-down components. The radius of the circle reflects the magnitude of the charge density.

FIG. 4. The edge-edge coupling and spin-spin correlation in zigzag GNR. (a) The relationship between the magnitude of the edge-edge coupling (normalized) and the probe spacing in a zigzag GNR with p = 0.8. (b) The solid curve refers to the relationship between the spin-spin correlation and the probe spacing in a zigzag GNR with p = 0.8.  The dashed curve represents the spin-spin correlation between the two edges of the same zigzag GNR.

Figure 1

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0327v3-figure-b2dd9c8b-cbed-4bd4-907f-096f7f930b9b.jpg)

Figure 2

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0327v3-figure-43ae70c2-e98c-4ad1-aa33-267380e0c24c.jpg)

Figure 3

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0327v3-figure-33ca3909-cb6b-4a68-93e8-78b98abcef8e.jpg)

Figure 4

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0327v3-figure-1c7d4df4-d2fc-41a3-abf8-e357e2f04190.jpg)
Zhao-Dong Chu Lin He
Crossover from Room-temperature Double-channel Ballistic Transport to Single-channel Ballistic Transport in Zigzag Graphene Nanoribbons
Very recently, it was demonstrated explicitly that a zigzag graphene
nanoribbon (GNR) exhibits a crossover of conductance from G0 to G0/2 with
increasing the length (G0 = 2e2/h is the quantum of conductance) even at
room-temperature [Baringhaus, et al. Nature 506, 349 (2014)]. Such a result is
puzzling as none of previous theories seem to match the experimental
observations. Here, we propose a model to explain the crossover from
double-channel to single-channel ballistic transport in zigzag GNR. The sp3
distortion of carbon atoms at the GNR edges induces a large spin-orbit coupling
on the edges atoms, which enhances spin-flip scattering of edge states of the
zigzag GNR. With sufficient spin-flip scattering, the wave-function of edge
states becomes a superposition of the spin-up and spin-down components. Then
the coupling of the two edges becomes important. This removes the edge degree
of freedom in the zigzag GNR and results in the evolution of the conductance
from G0 to G0/2 with increasing the length.